Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 05/15/1992 (2), SO Final Approve' ������ SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR BRITTANY KNOLLS P.U.D. FILING 2 STOFtMWATER RECEIVED MAY 11 1992 SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR BRITTANY KNOLLS P.U.D. FILING 2 PREPARED FOR: - CITY OF FORT COLLINS STORMWATER UTILITY 235 MATTHEWS FORT COLLINS, CO 80521 PREPARED BY: LIDSTONE & ANDERSON, INC. 736 WHALERS WAY, SUITE F-200 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 IN SUPPORT OF: TST, INC. 748 WHALERS WAY FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 MAY 8, 1992 IINTRODUCTION This supplement presents the results of a drainage evaluation of Brittany Knolls P.U.D. Filing 2. The evaluation consisted of the following: (a) a detailed review of the final ' drainage report for Brittany Knolls P.U.D. Filing 2 dated July, 1990 and prepared by Engineering Professional, Inc. (EPI) of Fort Collins, Colorado, and (b) preparation of revisions to the analysis documented by EPI in the July 1990 Final Drainage Report. This supplement consists of this text, 2 revised sheets illustrating the drainage plan for Filing 2, revised tables associated with the hydrologic analysis and design, and technical documentation for the analysis. Also enclosed with this supplement are copies of the initial ' and final submittals by EPI entitled "Final Drainage Report for Brittany Knolls P.U.D. Filing 2". The overall master plan for Brittany Knolls P.U.D. was approved in 1987 and consisted of ' three initial residential phases and one commercial phase. In conjunction with the submittal and approval of the master plan, a final drainage study for Filing 1 was submitted and approved (Kellogg Engineering, Inc., September 29, 1986). The final drainage study for Filing 2 was submitted by EPI in July of 1990 but was not formally approved. Hence, with the recent re -submittal of the Brittany Knolls P.U.D. Filing 2, the final drainage report prepared by EPI is hereby resubmitted with the revisions noted in the following paragraphs. DESIGN CRITERIA The drainage plan prepared by Lidstone & Anderson, Inc. (LA) follows the guidelines set forth in the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards Manual (SDDC) dated May, 1984. To be consistent with the EPI final drainage report, the ' Rational Method was utilized for the hydrologic analysis with the minor and major storm events selected to be the 2-year and 100-year storms, respectively. Furthermore, procedures utilized by EPI to design storm inlets and storm sewers as well as evaluate the capacity of ' the proposed streets were also duplicated.. DRAINAGE PLAN ' The drainage plan for Filing 2 identified eleven (11) subbasins which are impacted by the proposed development and increase the historic flows from the property. These subbasins are delineated on Sheets 1 and 2. It should be noted that the EPI Final Drainage Report identified two additional subbasins (presented as Subbasins L and M). These subbasins do ' not contribute to an increase in runoff associated with proposed development of Filing 2 and were not included in this analysis. The grading proposed for each lot is presented on the FHA grading plan in Sheets 3 and 4. This information along with data obtained from the previous drainage reports was U ' utilized to delineate drainage subbasins and determine the flow paths for storm runoff. The drainage system is designed to remove the major storm (100-year) runoff via inlets and ' storm sewer pipelines. Overflow swales will be included at all locations where the storm drainage system conveys runoff to Stone Creek. These swales will be maintained to ensure ' the conveyance of storm flows in the event of plugging of the storm inlets with debris. A discussion of the storm runoff from each subbasin follows. Subbasin A (Design Point 1 Subbasin A consists of 2.92 acres with a 2-year and 100-year peak discharge of 2.3 ' cfs and 8.9 cfs, respectively. The street capacity near Design Point 1 is 6.8 cfs and 13.4 cfs for the minor and major storms. Although a storm inlet is not necessary at this point, a 15-foot continuous grade inlet is recommended to alleviate potential flooding problems near Subbasins F (Design Point 6) and G (Design Point 7). Subbasin B (Design Point 2 ' The 2-year and 100-year peak discharges at Design Point 2 are 5.8 cfs and 22.1 cfs, respectively. These peak discharges include the runoff from Subbasins A and B. ' After the reduction of the peak flows by the inlet at Design Point 1, the design discharges at Design Point 2 become 3.9 cfs and 16.9 cfs for the minor and major storms. At this point, the capacity of the street during the 100-year event is t exceeded; consequently a storm inlet is needed. To reduce the potential for downstream flooding, a 15-foot continuous grade inlet is recommended. Subbasin C (Design Point 3 Subbasin C consists of 4.53 acres which are distinctly separate from Subbasins A and ' B. Runoff from this subbasin results in 2-year and 100-year peak discharges of 4.4 cfs and 16.6 cfs, respectively at Design Point 3. The street capacity at this location exceeds the peak runoff for both the minor and major storm events; however, a 15- ' foot continuous grade inlet is recommended at Design Point 3 to prevent downstream flooding. Subbasin D (Design Point 4) Design Point 4 includes the storm runoff from Subbasins A, B, C and D. The developed condition peak discharges at this location are 9.8 cfs and 37.4 cfs for the minor and major storms. After reduction by upstream inlets at Design Points 1, 2 and 3, the peak discharges at Design Point 4 become 2.1 cfs (2-year) and 13.3 cfs (100-year). Although these values are less than the capacity of the street, it is recommended that an additional 15-foot continuous grade inlet be installed at this location. 2 Subbasin E (Design Point 5) Subbasin E consists of the northern half of Buchanan Street. The FHA grading plan does not permit contribution of runoff from Lots 18 to 29 which are immediately adjacent to the street. The runoff from this subbasin is estimated to be 0.6 cfs and 2.2 cfs, respectively for the minor and major storm events. These values are much less than the street capacity of 6.8 cfs (2-year) and 13.4 cfs (100-year); consequently, a storm inlet is not required at this location. Subbasin F (Design Point 6) Subbasin A, B, C, D and F contribute runoff to Design Point 6; these subbasins generate a peak discharge of 11.6 cfs and 44.5 cfs for the minor and major storms. Upstream inlets at Design Points 1, 2, 3 and 4 reduce the storm runoff at Design Point 6 to 2.3 cfs (2-year) and 12.6 cfs (100-year). The corresponding street capacity at this location is 6.0 cfs and 11.9 cfs; hence, a 10-foot continuous grade storm inlet is proposed for Design Point 6. Subbasin G (Design Point 7) Design Point 7 includes the storm runoff from Subbasin A, B, C D, F and G. The developed condition peak discharges at this location are 12.4 cfs and 47.2 cfs for the minor and major storms. After reduction by upstream inlets at Design Points 1, 2, 3 and 4, the peak discharges at Design Point 7 become 1.6 cfs (2-year) and 9.4 cfs (100-year). These values correspond to a street capacity of 6.0 cfs and 11.9 cfs. It is necessary to install a 10-foot sump inlet at this location to convey the runoff from the upstream subbasin to the open channel located north of Filing 2. It is recommended that a 10-foot sump inlet be installed. Subbasin H (Design Point 8) Similar to Subbasin E, this subbasin consists of the northern half of Buchanan Street. The combined peak discharges of Subbasin E and H at Design Point 8 are 0.8 cfs and 2.7 cfs, respectively for the minor and major storm events. These values correspond to a street capacity of 6.8 cfs and 13.4 cfs at this location; consequently, no storm inlet is necessary. Subbasin I (Design Point 9) Design Point 9 combines the runoff from Subbasin E, H and I and results in a peak discharge of 1.1 cfs and 3.8 cfs, respectively for the 2-year and 100-year storm events. The corresponding street capacity at this location is 6.0 cfs for the minor storm and 11.9 cfs for the major storm. To remove the runoff at Design Point 9, it is necessary to install a 5-foot sump inlet. 3 utilized to delineate drainage subbasins and determine the flow paths for storm runoff. A discussion of the storm runoff from each subbasin follows. Subbasin A (Design Point 1 Subbasin A consists of 2.92 acres with a 2-year and 100-year peak discharge of 2.3 cfs and 8.9 cfs, respectively. The street capacity near Design Point 1 is 6.8 cfs and ' 13.4 cfs for the minor and major storms. Although a storm inlet is not necessary at this point, a 15-foot continuous grade inlet is recommended to alleviate potential flooding problems near Subbasins F (Design Point 6) and G (Design Point 7). Subbasin B (Design Point 2) The 2-year and 100-year peak discharges at Design Point 2 are 5.8 cfs and 22.1 cfs, respectively. These peak discharges include the runoff from Subbasins A and B. After the reduction of the peak flows by the inlet at Design Point 1, the design discharges at Design Point 2 become 3.9 cfs and 16.9 cfs for the minor and major storms. At this point, the capacity of the street during the 100-year event is exceeded; consequently a storm inlet is needed. To reduce the potential for downstream flooding, a 15-foot continuous grade inlet is recommended. Subbasin C (Design Point 3) Subbasin C consists of 4.53 acres which are distinctly separate from Subbasins A and B. Runoff from this subbasin results in 2-year and 100-year peak discharges of 4.4 cfs and 16.6 cfs, respectively at Design Point 3. The street capacity at this location exceeds the peak runoff for both the minor and major storm events; however, a 15- foot continuous grade inlet is recommended at Design Point 3 to prevent downstream flooding. Subbasin D (Design Point 4) Design Point 4 includes the storm runoff from Subbasins A, B, C and D. The developed condition peak discharges at this location are 9.8 cfs and 37.4 cfs for the . minor and major storms. After reduction by upstream inlets at Design Points 1, 2 and 3, the peak discharges at Design Point 4 become 2.1 cfs (2-year) and 13.3 cfs (100-year). Although these values are less than the capacity of the street, it is recommended that an additional 15-foot continuous grade inlet be installed at this location. Subbasin E (Design Point 5) Subbasin E consists of the northern half of Buchanan Street. The FHA grading plan does not permit contribution of runoff from Lots 18 to 29 which are immediately 2 adjacent to the street. The runoff from this subbasin is estimated to be 0.6 cfs and 2.2 cfs, respectively for the minor and major storm events. These values are much ' less than the street capacity of 6.8 cfs (2-year) and 13.4 cfs (100-year); consequently, a storm inlet is not required at this location. ' Subbasin F (Design Point 6) Subbasins A, B, C, D and F contribute runoff to Design Point 6; these subbasins ' generate a peak discharge of 11.6 cfs and 44.5 cfs for the minor and major storms. Upstream inlets at Design Points 1, 2, 3 and 4 reduce the storm runoff at Design ' Point 6 to 2.3 cfs (2-year) and 12.6 cfs (100-year). The corresponding street capacity at this location is 6.0 cfs and 11.9 cfs; hence, a 10-foot continuous grade storm inlet is proposed for Design Point 6. ' Subbasin G (Design Point 7) ' Design Point 7 includes the storm runoff from Subbasins A, B, C D, F and G. The developed condition peak discharges at this location are 12.4 cfs and 47.2 cfs for the minor and major storms. After reduction by upstream inlets at Design Points 1, 2, ' 3 and 4, the peak discharges at Design Point 7 become 1.6 cfs (2-year) and 9.4 cfs (100-year). These values correspond to a street capacity of 6.0 cfs and 11.9 cfs. It is necessary to install a 10-foot sump inlet at this location to convey the runoff from ' the upstream subbasins to the open channel located north of Filing 2. It is recommended that a 10-foot sump inlet be installed. Subbasin H (Design Point 8 Similar to Subbasin E, this subbasin consists of the northern half of Buchanan Street. ' The combined peak discharges of Subbasins E and H at Design Point 8 are 0.8 cfs and 2.7 cfs, respectively for the minor and major storm events. These values correspond to a street capacity of 6.8 cfs and 13.4 cfs at this location; consequently, ' no storm inlet is necessary. Subbasin I (Design Point 9) ' Design Point 9 combines the runoff from Subbasins E, H and I and results in a peak discharge of 1.1 cfs and 3.8 cfs, respectively for the 2-year and 100-year storm events. ' The corresponding street capacity at this location is 6.0 cfs for the minor storm and 11.9 cfs for the major storm. To remove the runoff at Design Point 9, it is necessary to install a 5-foot sump inlet. 1 3 Subbasin J (Design Point 10 The runoff from Subbasin J is conveyed to Design Point 10. The peak discharge from this subbasin is 0.5 cfs and 1.9 cfs, respectively during the minor and major storm events. At this location, this runoff is combined with runoff contributed from Filing 1 in the amount of 10.0 cfs (2-year storm) and 39.3 cfs (100-year storm). An existing 10-foot Type R inlet has been installed at Design Point 10 .to convey approximately 8.9 cfs (minor storm) and 18.5 cfs (major storm) from Filing 1; consequently, no contribution to the existing storm sewer has been assumed for the drainage plan for Filing 2. Alternatively, the runoff from Subbasin J will be ' conveyed in Brittany Street. Bypass flows from Filing 1 contribute to the street flow within Brittany Street in the amounts of 1.1 cfs and 20.8 cfs for the minor and major storms. The combined street flow at Design Point 10 (contributed from both Filing ' 1 and 2) is conservatively estimated to be 1.6 cfs (1.1 cfs + 0.5 cfs) for the 2-year event and 22.7 cfs (20.8 cfs + 1.9 cfs) for the 100-year event. This corresponds to a street capacity of 12.9 cfs and 172 cfs. Subbasin K (Design Point 11 The runoff from both Subbasins J and K is conveyed to Design Point 11 via Brittany Street and South Lemay Avenue. The combined peak discharge from these subbasins is estimated to be 4.7 cfs for the 2-year storm event and 17.7 cfs for the ' 100-year storm event. Upstream bypass flows from Filing 1 will contribute runoff to Design Point 11 and result in a combined peak discharge of 5.8 cfs and 38.5 cfs, respectively for the minor and major storm events. An existing curb chase (10-foot sump inlet) at Design Point 11 conveys runoff collected along the west half of South Lemay Avenue to the open channel immediately north of Filing 2. In the vicinity of Design Point 11, the existing street capacity of South Lemay Avenue is estimated to ' be 8.5 cfs during the minor storm and 269 cfs during the major storm; consequently, the street capacity is not exceeded at this location. The existing curb chase has an estimated capacity of 9.8 cfs and 150 cfs, respectively for the minor and major storms. ' Comparison with the peak discharges at Design Point 11 (5.8 cfs and 38.5 cfs) indicate adequate conveyance capability associated with the existing curb chase. ' The results of analysis are presented in Tables 1, 2 and 3. Table 4 (obtained from the EPI Final Drainage Report) presents design data utilized to determine the capacity of the ' proposed streets. The procedures utilized to design the riprap at the storm inlets are presented in the technical documentation. A riprap blanket with a median diameter of approximately 9 inches is proposed at all storm outlets. Additional information is provided ' in Sheets 1, 2, 3 and 4 which illustrate the detailed drainage plan for Filing 2. 1 4 r4 d 1 1 1 1 Y � U MM MMM 1 N, �-r-�- I ter• 1 II 1 O u. !f1 t U .-• e- r- �- , N 1 N N N 1 �t �t 1 mva■_d 1 1 1 1 Y c�Xli 1 1 1 i a 11 1 1 1 1 d 1 1 1 1 L■ II O O O O C:I NNA au .<. �. Y 10 10 .� .� P � In � M It O �v 0000 / N , 000 / ON / uO 11 �-r• / / / . n mm 1 / A Idl M`O Nam^ 1 O 1 N W! I r% i If r-M.O/O CO 1 N 1 000 , ON 1 ciN un 1 :.: n / / II N N N N N I N i N N N I N N 1 . / . . / u Y • n cl o o n u O 11 u • 1 / 1 11 n0000bl0000lool 11 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 1 999 , . 0 1 1r L n / / / , u Y O N u u -- It 1► 11 In In In In In 1 n1 1 In In In 1 In It 1 qw i1 vvvvv 1 v 1 vvv 1 vIn 1 i" 11 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 O[ u II 11 ■ II NA MMN • M I A o. 1 Av 1 It O. 1 aft O In IA I 1A A r 1 't In I m N 11 m Y Y It NCO^ COP , v , 00 L L II r I I a u u I I I 1 m II I I I I v 11 1 I • 1 U 11 I I I I n I I I 11 1 I I I m II M1� , I d n P NCO N It I N, N 1 �t I A A I �t I �t (Q • L u n 1 1 4 m II NN M J 1 000 I O M , v 11 r • I 1 II • • I 1 11 I I I I C V U (T C 11 I I I I 11 O 1 N O II .-N It BOA , M , NCOP 00. II I 1 I I C 11 I I I I 11 1] •m 11 Q m O IL V l u, W 2 .-. 1� Y , 7 m 11 1 I 1 I N m 11 1 • , 11 11 I ■ I • I .� 'm d � ■ M v 1 .. m II ■ 1 C m n I =1 I I G u .O NACO PA 11 CO NA �t1, I O i NNM I �A m O u on, N M �t 't i^ 1 u n 1 1 I r m II r O ••• U M CO co .O �t i It i 1000, 1 N A i OOr• 1 O v i Y 1 u 11 .-• r , 1 1 O. CY v 11 r 1 I 1 �. 0 At p I O I CD 0 1 0 sr, v CONMM r In 1 O.tA 1 M O 1 L It N �t V �t �t , 10 r A 10 N. A •O 1 r r Y 11 1 1 1 1 M V n 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 r 1 % 1 O A O M N, N O 0 1 0 1 ` II ANUr 't 't I 1 vNO , v0 , ..C-. N• NNN . N N 1 K IN v 0 to 6 �� 11 �MIf1 �t 1 M N•ON 1 Mr 1 1-HOB n CO M%AP. 00 I N I ONTO , O.' / O E It �- N cm N cm1 r- 1 r• r ; U •" Y v v 10 P A i N i f, N i 0 It i lowo.=� 1 1 1 V1--TC nNNNMH, 1 O N E I d 1 1 1 1 > •O.t N AIA r P 1 m 1'•-.t I I 11 N A 0: C4 , M, A Or4 L .. u � .- • 1 1 1 6 400000 1, 1 MU Ur 1 NUl I h O• 11 •O •O 10 10 .0 i 01 i N N N i pO .0 i n , 1• V 11 1 , 1 . g n , I n In In In O• 0 0 0, 0. InI m L C 0 0100:0:0: MMM i PCO i L H i+r If .- .- a• r l r 1 1 1 41 N v n b n , u , • 1 it MCO 1p MIn 1 A PPP i A1p i L• O�IIV N N N N I MMN, Y r O If C7 Y V II I , 1 i Y L 11 COAA 1 •O ; NM01 1 10 ep 1 PPP I 1 M I I M F Y {.2 11 1 1 i i 1 .7 < 1 Y it Ot If �0 11 OOpp NO , N r )c OO , 00 I 11 NP10 AIA.O , CO art�t I I(� , N N 1 u I , U 7 11 O 11 C 1.• 11 •O 11 1 1 1 0 m ^ 1 Y O. 11 .-• N .t •O A 1 M 1 In IO P .- 1 C 11 • 1 , , 11 1 m I t Q m 0 1t, 0 • u, W S, -. ,� Y • C 11 , a ri ■ 1 I ■ , M m It N I 1 u ..C. m O w tl m YAONAO : •.O b �. n V yYy m s b10: . A: O: 1 T r Y e . Ly Y b n N P AV; P: P: M: O GYYY � 1 Y C n n a n m .+nVONmO.N 1 O L O 0 On L Y m n N Y L•F Y � N � � �: N: 1 G Y Y 11 � 4 C tl n tl tl000000 o yx� a v Yn �i IL 1 ac tl e pp \ L\ ISO V V N�: V. • � 1 . 0 0 b L Y TV_ vV^.PP�...... 2. O ••. u p d CgCp Z6 064ml :.O : N' m09 v O o m ^ N P: • N N M: S V � p Y p f L C p O s \M\TPMO:: M•10 : J : •O iO� : N\ : L P 8 • C C Ea C Ea C _ H tl U U U U N. U• , N• U U. L C J v u' . O • Y O ymYo p T T. TTT. TT. O qY' p Jt m P m V Y p Y m Y T Y Oml Y C GG CC• Y. Y Y Y. Y Y: r Y N n T T° C C • T. T T T. T T. n r p Y f b m N A J A r•Y • N N M. N m: L O Y b N M J J • N M. � C O v Y u Y�Tw-nNNP�^.J•C; ci n L TO Y tl M � � �^. N. M �'. N •O . Yq r• Y L .. u m m m O O: A: m m 0. P N: OYTmn N Y tl v n mLYpY�1 gNNNNN.A.N N11/n�.Om• P P^� v 0: Y _.,n00000: :000. < O e mC tl n O Y p p O q C p tl b p< m C V. m• U• W S r • l bL . m n N m Y C tl e m p 'VC CpO Kyp 6`> 51 1 TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF STORM SEWER PIPE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN. aaaa=asaaaasaaaaa 7-e:asaaass I I Design I 7p"eaaaa:a:asasaasaaasaSari;aaasaaaaas'waasasasaaaaaaasaaaaaaa:a:aaaaasaaaaaa Pipe I Pipe I full Pipe (Flow depthlFlow velocity) I I I Discharge I Grade I Diameter I Flow Capacity Ifor designlfor design a I Remarks I I Pipe Segment I (cfs)** I (X) I (in)*** I (cfs) I a (ft) I (fps) I I aaaa_ aaaaaaa===I=a====aa==I=aasaaaaslaaaa==aaaalsa=aaaaaaaaaaaalaaaaaaasaalaaaaaaaaaaaaalaaaaaaaaaaaaaaal ' I DP1* - outlet I 5.8 I 0.5 I 18 I 7.4 I 0.98 I 4.6 I I I I I 8.1 I 18 I 29.9 I 0.45 I 13.2 I I I I I I--------------- I ----------- I --------- 2.5 I I 18 I ---------- I --------------- 16.6 I ---------- 0.62 I 8.5 I pipe outlet I I DP2 - DP5 I 11.0 I 0.5 I 21 I I 11.2 I I ------------- 1.36 I I ------= -------- I 5.3 I I I---------------- I----------- I --------- I DP5 - outlet I 11.0 I I---------- 7.7 I I--------------- 21 I I ---------- 44.0 I I------------- 0.60 I I--------------- I 15.3 I I I I I I---------------- i----------- I ---------I---------- 1.6 I 21 I I ---------------I---------- 20.0 I 0.93 I 8.5 I pipe outlet I I DP3 - DP4 I 10.0 I 1.00 I 18 I 10.5 I I------------- 1.13 I ------- I---------------I 6.7 I I I DP4 - outlet I 18.7 .I 1.00 I 24 I 22.6 I 1.37 I 8.0 I I I I 8.57 I 24 I 66.2 ( 0.74 I 18.2 I I I ---------------- I ----------- I --------- 1.20 I I ---------- 24 I --------------- 24.8 I ---------- 1.28 I 8.6 I pipe outlet I DP6 - outlet I 6.9 I 0.6 1 I 18 I I 8.1 I I------------- 1.04 I I---------------I 5.1 I I I I 12.4 I 18 I 37.0 I 0." I 16.1 I I I I i---------------- -------------------- 2.5 I --- 18 I ------I---------------I----------I-------------I---------------I 16.6 I 0.68 I 9.0 I pipe outlet I II I DP7 - DP9 I 9.4**** I I 0.75 I 21 I 13.7 I 1.06 I 6.1 I I I---------------- I----------- I--------- DP9 - outlet 113.2**** I I---------- 9.10 I I--------------- 21 I I ---------- 47.8 I I------------- 0.63 I I--------------- I 17.0 I I I I---------------- I----------- I --------- 1.50 I I---------- 21 I I--------------- 19.4 I 1.05 I 8.6 I pipe outlet I I existing pipes I 18.5 I 4.77 I 18 I I---------- 22.9 I I ------------- 1.01 I I--------------- I 11.6 I I I I I 3.32 I 18 I 19.1 I 1.16 I 11.8 I I I I 1.42 I 30 I 48.9 I 1.08 I 3.5 I I I I 28.0 I 0.50 I 30 I 29.0 I 1.93 -I 6.4 I pipe outlet I 1(=18.5+9.5)1 II I I _I _ _ _I = a as a * DP = Design Point ** Sum of theoretical inlet discharges **• Minimum commercial size ' **** Based on 100-year peak discharge conveyed to sump inlet TABLE 4.' SUMMARY OF STREET CAPACM S (FROM EPL 1990). LOCAL STREET CLASSIFICATION 36' FL -FL TWO YEAR 100 YEAR ROLLOVER CURB 8 GUTTER +*Y****NO CURB TOPPING; IE: DEPTH=.391******lINC SW TOPPING; IE: DEPTH = .51 fYfrr+r+rrf**•f*Yrx++*rYYtYrrxrt*rrrxr+wtrrwYfrrrrrxrrrYY*YrxfYrr**rtrfrrfx*frY *GRADE I THEOR. 2yr RED. I ALLOW. 2yr THEOR. 100yr I ALLOW. 100yr * * % (CAPACITY; CFS FACTOR [CAPACITY; CFS CAPACITY; CFS CAPACITY; CFS * irffrrt+rrtt+rff*rwrxrfrfe+rw+tflrtfttfrrYffrtrxYYrtff tfYY*Yffffrrr*tt rYYYt*YYr 0.40 5.49 0.500 1 2.75 10.83 5.41 1 0.50 6.14 0.650 3.99 12.10 7.87 1 0.60 6.73 0.800 5.38 13.26 10.61 0.70 7.26 0.800 5.81 14.32 11.46 0.80 7.77 0.800 6.21 15.31 12.25 0.90 8.24 0.800 6.59 16.24 12.99 1.00 8.68 0.800 6.95 17.12 13.69 1.10 9.11 0.800 7.29 17.95 14.36 1.20 9.51 0.800 7.61 18.75 15.00 1.30 9.90 0.800 7.92 19.52 15.61 1.40 10.27 0.800 8.22 20.25 16.20 1.50 10.63 0.800 8.51 20.96 16.77 1.60 10.98 0.800 8.79 21.65 17.32 1.70 11.32 0.800 9.06 22.32 17.85 1.80 11.65 0.800 9.32 22.96 18.37 1.90 11.97 0.800 1 9.57 23.59 18.87 2.00 12.28 0.800 1 9.82 24.21 19.37 2.10 12.58 0.800 10:07 24.30 19.84 2.20 12.88 0.791 10.19 25.39 20.08 2.30 13.17 0.782 10.30 25.96 20.31 2.40 13.45 0.773 10.40 26.52 20.51 2.50 13.73 0.764 10.49 27.06 20.69 2.60 14.00 0.756 10.58 27.60 20.85 1 2.70 14.27 0.747 10.65 28.13 21.00 2.80 14.53 0.738 10.72 28.64 21.13 2.90 14.79 0.729 10.78 29.15 21.25 3.00 15.04 0.720 10.83 29.65 21.35 3.10 15.29 0.708 10.82 30.14 21.34 3.20 15.53 0.696 10.81 30.62 21.31 3.30 15.77 0.684 10.79 31.09 21.27 3.40 16.01 0.672 10.76 31.56 21.21 3.50 16.24 0.660 10.72 32.02 21.13 3.60 16.47 0.648 10.68 32.48 21.04 3.70 16.70 0.636 10.62 32.92 20.94 3.30 1 16.93 0.624 10.56 33.37 20.82 3.90 1 17.15 0.612 10.49 33.80 20.69 4.00 1 17.37 0.600 10.42 34.23 20.54 0 TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION �i `Gno��.5 Dry 1 ri� 9 Z , rafn 2; Ifb r.fi Y2�t_��'_ I � 12 4= I 11S•l' ----, - . - -- - 1 MOO Co ... 13. -!2 :.- •mil -- - �►� -. 7-17 _/_ °Q --L -• I —F f fit jk -i - �-71-- -+-j - t- - it 17 : : , � .1_ �, l._..-. _.f..-. ..._�_-•-�_-__-' -,-.-. +-. _lam.-�.!__ 1 L A lfre Ll Walm Mese�rts$ "d lnvkemenlal CWvft�s a7l7e,41645 ,I naao_I IDATE PROJECT NO. lly -SO l5 Mar . I CHK'D BY I DATE I SHEE-OLOF WNW 11••w•t• •M [••Ir••u•N•r Cwi•M• OWNER -PR ECT lido isa� BY S DATE 9 MarcL�9z PROJECT NO. FEATU/qE f �f.Y I�'eG� ��� U(I,GII ✓� � i CHK'D BY DATE SHEET �'OF . ti�S ;t1nLe.. JVv\o c r• SL.tAS �f i� .(wOIA. �eAuw-d lro-k �� I..t��S( CIUG . -- ICI — l sip overla,-d o� (e.•kJ ' av9 O.L. -4op / `}. • . - ---._... — -- -- - -- - -. -- -- - - -- --- --- - - --- - - - - - --.. - ----.. ------- 9 ; �(o�' 1 Pe- , , , ' oc,J fG q �r , 1CcsD I , 1 i i V add oo : 11 :__+_ ..►.. ' ; i.. � eP. 6 imOIL� { 7 ec . v :intone & Andersc wsl" me w os W 4NrwuW CWvmalb ONMER•PROJECi 0.` BY DATE a QZ PROJECT NO. FEATURE CHK'D BY DATE 7 1 ISHEETcJOF , --�—:--� tom• . � :-�-o:�a-� _�_-h _-.._ ' c.e,�ce.�-ra��.'r',�'c�r_ ►�; . _ _ } ! tint v1 J�ES T� WO far Pam/•-1 . w� 1.1.J7P Tke- .ra }nal1 �� fen f Tcs - ,' ! fie— cA>,f J'U D1T -- f , _. r r j ; (601� IV, ,s r L4 M.t.I 14iuin.. W lntntr..t4 co"whaa. OWNER -PROJECT BY DATE PROJECT NO. FEATURE CHK'D BY E DATE SHEET�OF i { I 0imr , - _ ((oiD t i. • I Tooy� _.. __.._.. I I i i _ I ela z i f ' , , i .a.- — ��- - - . ,• - " , Ito j� - - , i l t t It IL ! 1 1 1 1 J IA ' t watw I ol~kn W h.&t eatUt 6wMYb OWNER-PRQIEOT BY DATE PROJECT NO. FEATURE CHWD BY DATE SHE iN� fi- ' � 4. :..��W � !� _ .. C> .(_ wool - - - i�►' � ' - - -- _ I' �b� lloo i av puer- Slo}-gyp I 5.9% . J iouJ � Ge,� f 1 I ; : le- i . C.JOt�J lC0 J�- - ira 4 -1 pre- r 4 1 �Yrt I f I t I t M.IN tNW.Y W bdr000stal O4palN1.N. OWNER•PROJECT BY DATE PROJECT NO. FEATURE 1 CHK'D BY DATE SHEET�F • I + 1, 1 .i 1 .. 1. : , ICY}' - h � _ 1 : rt _ � ._. _ • = ifs .- .. : -- - I ^, I : ��� t I i I t ca - ' __Y. .. .j. __` - _�_• � _. _. III -_ ..--_i __i_'_. .-_' -_ - "I ._^_ T.T ' ._ � � �---� 1 i •,�I � � Ir I I � i I 1 _ , , I ._V'� Vl� .iI� -.- _ 1 �J. ��_ _ ....JIY/.•IV ,V�WM ' {�/ Y ��._ _�� i -- . � r e r J%tonp R. Andprsc W414ii Ile;awaaa 4" amvka emlal co"Nftsa OWNEXPROJE . CT BY DATE PROJECT NO. C 0 T FEATURE CHK'D BY DATE SHEETIOF ...... EE pao * IF i(su okLY 1-7- Upa� * %01 *r Ilk. a Eco <: CUYV1 7 -------- —7-----, —T--7-- 7-t -A. 9 walm �en msll lw valvemial ce"vks tA OWNER -PROJECT BY DATE PROJECT NO. FEATURE CHILD BY DATE SHEETqlOF 4q. I.. ... . . I D, .9 --- ----- ---- IMMUGHTWOM L4 W•IN 11d• " W !••U•r•m't•1 OW11u s OWNER -PROJECT BY DATE PROJECT NO. FEATURE CHK'D BY DATE SHEET OF 1-7 i - a�9 , ©Jer off_ . 510 4 • �. l� _ _ -i Go ' =how ��► . i - �� i 1 i�2st v, 1 1 I I ; , 1.8 ._ 18 L' t�f�e e�iec•� _I�l. ' I _-' - �•.,B0.51n. _:.Cow s: �ro� ...:£»p&!Cj Tc.:_ s In etido of too OC jT-� '�!o eL• 'Thus _;iL'.�s_._.Ce I 4 _ ... i . ' 1 I 1 i _ I} , 1 1, 1 I tl LY� x b i i i i > q N v■ 1 I I I <� ■ I I 1 1 G � ■MMMMM 1 � 1 I �� 1 L r V Y 1 1 1 1 1V •F tl 1 1 I 1 J v M 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 1 Y tl �}p IO 1 1 1 1 ' ti tl• st::!8 1 Y1 1 MIN 1 EOM 1 < L r �O .O P 1 1R I M d �O 1 N P 1 q 'I- 6 Y •-d 0O'O N i 000 . ON 1 v0 u ur ■ I 1 1 1 r I 1 I 1 u r pp pp I tl a 1 1 d 1 Y M•01f �"f� � M6 Y'M•O COO N 000 ON a q A L ■ I I 1 I ' v CN ■ 1 I I 1.7 p 1 1 I I CCC..i11 p i i i i u In In intoy1 i U1 Ln UU11 Y1 U% UU11 i tl N N N N N I N I CON N I N N l W L� Y ■ • I • 1 I • 1 Wr r r r r• 1 r r r 1 r r 1 W 1 On I 1 1 1 Ii O tl 1 I I 1 r tl 1 I 1 I Y 1 1 p pp 1 p 1 w L p O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Y. •F tl r 1 1 r 1 r r I %i ON Y 1 I 1 1 Lf tl 1 1 I • tl I I I I V °n NM Lnin i N i NNaA i in i I d 1 ddd 1 d1n 1 W ■ 1 • I I 1 ar u tl o 0 0 0 0 l 0 1 0 0 0 l o 0 1 tl I 1 1 I K Li YY 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 > } u NPMMN i M I, Pam? i . Y P�-1nON 1 U! 1 W! 1 NA U! 1 d d p 4c64COP i v 1 O O i O. i L L ■ r r r. -1 1 1 < a u Y q N u N P I M I P. c0 1N A 1 L Y L II PNC01nd I N I N�� 1 dC0 1 Z L < Um u NY1 In i d i o00 OMI .. u p 1 1 I 1 u p 1 I I 1 aC ii i i i i 7a O u IM41ON � M i moo. i Ool^ i CO. u C n 1 1 1 I N Ctl ■ I 1 1 1 cc i• i M i d i q 9 a0 tl i �1 i i i S OC �p P.-d v1N i •O i NPCO i PP i Yr 'ACp N N1V• I� P i •O i N L o I IF N M d I r 1 1 r 1 q gU v 1 1 I l I I 1 1 r I 1 1 I mm I 1 1 1 O MCO CO 0a n1 YfP 00� Od i I I 1 1 I�PO NOO i 1 d Cp NMM 1 0 1 O COS M� 1 C•f �C ■ Ndddd i •O i A.O in i P•O i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 tl I 1 I 1 �+ qqpp UNOM i N i NCCpppp i pp i ANY1dd I r 1 dN0 1 d0 1 WO N NNN NN v 1 1 1 1 ■ i i i i p L M U1d 1 M N•ON rn 1 T �G r m InPCO i N i ONTO Pd HHO+ o@ ■r-NNNN 1 � I r 1 1 ��� I � 1 1 I V r V Y Y 1 1 M 1 1 1 I 1 1 Irl dd•O PP i N i r- i Od i L� u •0•O c00 1 i d i OM•O i s i q— >. ■NNN rcR M F 1 O N@■ ■ I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 H v p■ I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ■ I 1 1 1 � �`�-d•Od N � PAP .-P > q � NAPN I M I i i POM 1 .-9 1 A.I'• 0 M ■ 1 1 1 I M 1 1 1 1 p■ u i i i i YO 00000 I r 1 61 1U1 1 N1n i H T Y •O4•O'•O i P i NNN i W•O i U 1 C p ... . 1 1 1 I p p > r v 11 q 1 1 ■ I 1 1 1 I 1 L n 1 I 1 1 H 1I11 .^� M1MM Mf M1O 00o �01 in PPPPO• 1 MMM 1 P.co I L H • E �1 N ■■tl 1 I 1 I vz I 1 I I 1 1 1 L M A McO.Om n i P i PPP i N-4 i Y U u d N N N N i M i i M N i g O� Y V tl I I 1 1 tl 1 1 1 1 pu d � CO N N i %O 000 i aat r dN�-•-� i In PPP i In 000 +� at L Y r v 1 1 I 1 1 I l f�7fA < 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 tl1 � > tl I I I 1 p� OppQQv1Qq 1 N I InOpo 1 00 I 11 V LLL Yl P•OM`O I r l YY U1���Ti ff��lcGO 1 IL I u•M•O 1 Y1d 1 CD�U1 L M n 1 1 1 I ~ V J II p 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 u; u 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 C� pppn to C b 0 �Nd•OP i M i U1 co O &q@ 1 1 1 1 C m p< m O IL O i U i W S •+ i� Y I q 1�11 '1 1 I 1 m Y 1 1 1 1 c I 1 1 1 CCCccc111111 q 1 1 1 1 {■ 1 1 1 1 M}I WNR— R /7� 12 rrq-"v -9 kp..j 0 L t s BY DATE PROJECT N. FEATURE CHECKED By DAY ELI SHEET OF AJ 7--7 4 Y�-a e- L----------- ab C f'T 4e 7r- 01/ . 5:51 1 eo 0 nn o tL 01 ga D L5 r«« Il..wn•. •�• 4•••w•IY er,ur• WN — J BY DATEJ NO. FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF 2 i i I r ; Oe.V I I 1 I 1 I i r- ; • i I I , ; 1 j I ! HT • i 1 ' , C I 1 cr izz - K — - �- - --- 3 r ' � ' ' I 1 _ y lit,1 l3� _ .►0.�.1 BZ I wd l I, -;Y- I _- � �TT lot) 1-4 _ + i {- � �l'3 •tu% .` ,rC d S �r_.-tK.l, �ij. t I �'t� Y � � dow I lei lip -; -- 1 zi- IA M.IM MWNM W �wYwwr.l CM.1�W. OWNER —PROJECT A J . FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF 3 Vo /+--t T; �p - i A- -r---- I , � �S"I�M_ I �s •I � - T��s�-,7r -�-,--��-��—--^�----`fib--�-'�—e _ +-, � '� �1�_.. �.— �\ Z �-}/.r �__J!.__�_ .. j. _i/���. u.��aj : Q. ! ���' 1 ,Cie ` i--r--- �?,� ' 3 7 .ry ; ��(J` �j'///� -� v i_�• v3. y � ���•a�,c �. � ' -1-----�----. _�_ _ = _jc .�I__.—_- I _- I W - JBy DATEJ N. FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF y I i 0, U rF- tv ' t I ♦ : ! ! _: Bi,- !+._5 ' CP '✓ - Z ._dam _. qq s fG. �- % ; S I K _.�-�_-�C�111 �1V ' �1{� i Y i i_{-i -I -i-- ( ! ' .I~_:-•-- ` I - I I L_�.__.._ ' . i vO - I , f V t -r �i _. .. — ` I I ; �— ; -i - � _i - --- --j i � i ; k I ? _ i — 1 ! l:J-.tune & ll ndeltion. Inc. OWNER -PROJECT A FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF 'Ty 111 --mot---- : ! pp r - > 04� ��y. 7 3 ox .t •-- .- ___.i--Y __ r -f- •,� .J-�-._ i -: Ft �t j i 46'w* OWNER -PROJECT By DATE PROJECT NO. FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF j.1 4611 s 4-i I [I rl Li ------ L4 ------- -- t4r • _7 It .-t - - - - - --- - - r- tics = 011 7t10 j lu F7 I -A 4-- 47 WN - By DATE PROJECT NO. FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF Li L 4&r i i !�--� -Tam Su ' Po �!i� l a--�-r -� -�---� :--� _ -r-�-r..__� _�-' _ �---T--� --<-- �---- it --4 76 T7! It 461! r P T45 f T- :t 1-4 7s- L (1,4one & Aiwe3soll Inc NAM OWNER -PROJECT By DATE PROJECT NO. FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF/t/ 7 r�cEl f 4A ji rz V• JL ............. Me jY t7 nAf Imay ke Z .......... IL OWNER -PROJECT ByDATE . FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF G4 - 71 �oU `f�Z MRX i 1,trDlll I �.c�_. i r i �1_o -`-----'-- - --46 - -=-- -- -- i - - - -- - -- —'- - -- - T :- -- - - 4-1 wT _ ; _ _. L- -�-' IP-I-==;! 0 3 _ __��1��s' �_' � _2,.� _ �w_o.n I ✓ .► o,s,� �5.so6; - ik — I - "I -I Z 1 •,, __'7-- �-I ! i i I ��.�yQ}-^O�V'1'✓ F•' I {- �y --I i � � � 1. I � � 1 DW t. r<op�iF�r,�. "d_..54�! e.ik drsc�kar^ _ i I�s.7/.: j cc - I i I I i r F IA wYw Ww��� W 4�I,N�N1�1 Cw,ww� OWNER -PROJECT By A J N. FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF �s�i A 44 , I • s, �` A91 �- Y —..}p'7j.—� _ 1 ._ r r 1 - i 1 I /,A' � r ; 7 _iE)el 5n1 cc t c��!—L- _ , T- IT1 T i ff I I I I- ppp ..4 1 ..w77/_�G,��%s- �fv,Z< 8-•7+�.� �Fs ii:l� _._. -_•- _ �-, I I � �• � I fG J'j"' .J --- 4 ���� .�. � G�-1 �� �Z 30 _fir s a � ��j '�= /s?�� �-���Sc� I • G1,4--i--� , I 4 6.m.n W 1wY w O . OWNER -PROJECT BY A J NO. FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF ,d Ag i -- , �NLE- 1�__i 15 X OL L._l 1 1 _�� ' •--L--� � _,_// O ' ' 1-r•G!'!.-,y,9._I- I �L I I. i I , 1 i I f r {- L , / 3 8 `3'i� 38 aot� ��IT'�' ' •f ! � � I , I ! , f �-r-�r--i— I i i ` ; , ;, i t--t-7---i�--r- � -� —}— t I ! 1 � I t N N \ 0 0 O d d d N d �� ^ tl M V V V \ : V• • \ a-^�'S•' s. O 3 W■ A O+� g v N v v V• V. /f • o 6�vs00000:0 •O . YY P O f P P 0 6 CC f A g P P•• i. d• N A m. P<. u O' e m d " It d: N N M: r i Y • f L C O ■ N M N N �. V• 0 0 �` : O Z. O G Y • • Y ■ U U U U N:Y. , N.: U U. L Y �1 V Y N � � O O . � . • • C v n' N: o• J Y P r O TO Y O p p p p pmY it : Y o it 4 Y o .L. $ i Y N e O r A. M P r V N N. d. N A m• A N. Y ..• tl m N A V A: d: N N M: N m Y=Ov: NYIVV. .NY1. V O tl � M r V� •+ • M m m d V. V: d O �: d m: a u u 3 N v Y rpL • V V V P P: O: V v P :/ ryOy O: N z Y r O m t Y S U •� • d d d d d: O: d d d: N m: N Y v Y O 1pa • yy�� ••//�� NN NN .•//�� ••//�� Ny� O M N v s 0 0 0 0 0: : O C: O < V O C i a 0 A � N V d A: M: N m P:��• Y p tl O Y C P . A< m O .� V: U: W S r. 'f 1• . . • N m Y C Y . • � • N : M V : m Y '1HRflftflRfiftffRfffffffffffffffllffffffrfff * HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES ' i f * Version 4.6.0; February 1991 • • f ' RUN DATE 07MAY92 TINE 04:49:28 fffffrflfitllffffffff►ffffffffffrfmffffff► x x XXXXXXX )OOM )OO= x x x x x x x x x x x x IOOD0O0( )000( x )xXXX XX)OO( x x x x x ' x x x x x x x x XX)OOOO( )0000( xxxxxxx t 07MAY92 04:49:30 1 ffltiffffltltltlflttR!!!rlrmmfft! 'HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.0; February 1991 ifRtfffmrffHfmfflffrfrfffffefffr T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point #1 (100-year discharge) ' J1 ICHECK ING NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS 0 ' 0 2 0 1 .0095 0 0 0 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FM ALLDC IBW 1 0 -1 13 VARIABLE CODES FOR SUMMARY PRINTOUT ' 38 1 3 43 26 8 4 NC 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.1 0.3 CT 3 8.9 2.3 3.9 1 5 0 23.2 0 0 0 'X1 GR 0.51 0 .39 3.75 0 5.17 .11 ' 1 07MAY92 04:49:30 fltffffrffffffffrrrfliffftfiififRffff tt * U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS * HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING CENTER * 609 SECOND STREET, SUITE D * DAVIS, CALIFORNIA 95616-4687 * (916) 756-1104 fff fflflffmfffifffff f fffffrf ftfllff►t JPS16AJ �Pz T141 PAGE 1 THIS RUN EXECUTED 07MAY92 04:49:30 WSEL F0 0.3 CHNIN ITRACE 25 42 6.34 0.45 39 23.2 PAGE 2 01 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG HV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV * GLOB *CH *ROB ALOE AC" AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WTN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 1 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 1.000 .42 .42 .45 .30 .54 .12 .00 .00 .51 8.9 .0 8.9 .0 .0 3.2 .0 .0 .0 .45 00 .00 2.76 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 2.68 .009586 0. 0. 0. 0 14 7 .00 19.25 21.93 1 07MAY92 04:49:30 T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 1 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point #1 (2-year discharge) 1 J1 ICHECK IN* NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS * WSEL FO ' 0 3 0 1 .0095 0 0 0 0.3 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM (TRACE ' 2 0 -1 1 ' 07MAY92 04:49:30 $ECHO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG HV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV ' * *LOB *CH *ROB ALOE ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WTN ELMIN SSTA ' SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 2 ' CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 1.000 .28 .28 .29 .30 .34 .06 .00 .00 .51 2.3 .0 2.3 .0 .0 1.1 .0 .0 .0 .45 ' .00 .00 2.01 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 4.14 .009337 0. 0. 0. 0 11 5 .00 10.72 14.86 '1 07KAY92 04:49:30 ' T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Inlet #2 (2-year discharge) PAGE 3 PAGE 4 PAGE 5 J1 ICHECK ING NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS G WSEL FG 0 4 0 1 .017 0 0 0 0.3 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FM ALLDC 1BW CHNIM ITRACE 15 0 -1 1 07MAY92 04:49:30 PAGE 6 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG HV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV G GLOB GCH GROB ALOE ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WIN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 3 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 1.000 .30 .30 .34 .30 .43 .13 .00 .00 .51 3.9 .0 3.9 .0 .0 1.4 .0 .0 .0 45 .00 .00 2.87 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 4.07 .016999 0. 0. 0. 0 8 5 .00 11.75 15.82 1 07KAY92 04:49:30 Hfft*►t►tttffftft►ftf►NHfffflltttt HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.0; February 1991 fffttrtttftftftfetetttettttffftefftff PAGE 7 THIS RUN EXECUTED 07MAY92 04:49:31 NOTE- ASTERISK M AT LEFT OF CROSS-SECTION NUMBER INDICATES MESSAGE IN SUMMARY OF ERRORS LIST Street topuidths and at SUMMARY PRINTOUT SECNO CWSEL EG G VCH DEPTH TOPWiD AREA ELMIN XLCH 1.000 .42 .54 8.90 ' 2.76 .42 19.25 3.23 .00 .00 1.000 .28 .34 2.30 .- 2.01 .28 10.72,% 1.14 .00 .00 1.000 .30 .43 3.90 2.87 .30 11.75 1.36 .00 .00 1 07KAY92 04:49:30 SUMMARY OF ERRORS AND SPECIAL NOTES PAGE 8 1 f1f11tfft111tlNffflfffliffwlfffftlffifHwif • HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES • f • * Version 4.6.0; February 1991 r * RUN DATE 07MAY92 TIME 04:56:56 • ffffrfflflwtftmtitfwfmwrrr:rrfriffrfr♦♦♦ X X )DODO x xl000( )xxxX X x X x x X X X xx x x l00000D( )xXx x IOO(D( XX)0(( X x x x x X x x x x x X X XX)OOOO( X)ooa )000000( 1 07KAY92 04:56:56 ifffffffffiftrtrmfiff11w1f1rfmflr HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.0; February 1991 itffflttffififfififffff♦tfwrffmfm T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point #2 (100-year discharge) J1 ICHECK INg NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS 0 0 2 0 1 .0095 0 0 0 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC low 1 0 -1 J3 VARIABLE CODES FOR SUMMARY PRINTOUT 38 1 3 43 26 8 4 NC 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.1 0.3 OT 3 3.9 16.9 2.3 X1 1 5 0 23.2 0 0 0 GR 0.51 0 .39 3.75 0 5.17 .11 1 07MAY92 04:56:56 fffftitltrfffftiiffiiffflflffrfiffiffff * U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS * HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING CENTER * 609 SECOND STREET, SUITE D ' * DAVIS, CALIFORNIA 95616-4687 • (916) 756-1104 ' femfi♦1H♦Htff♦t♦ttrfffrffftffffriff �EStC�nl (Q� T. Y4 PAGE 1 THIS RUN EXECUTED 07KAY92 04:56:56 WSEL F0 0.3 CHNIM ITRACE 25 42 39 6.34 0.45 23.2 PAGE 2 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG HV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV G GLOB GCH GROB ALOB ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WTN ELKIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 1 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 1.000 .33 .33 .34 .30 .41 .08 .00 .00 .51 3.9 .0 3.9 .0 .0 1.7 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 2.30 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 3.98 .009529 0. 0. 0. 0 8 6 .00 13.17 17.15 1 07MAY92 04:56:56 T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and at' -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point 92 (2-year discharge) J1 ICHECK ING NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS G WSEL FG 0 3 0 1 .0095 0 0 0 0.3 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC low CHNIM ITRACE 2 0 -1 1 07KAY92 04:56:56 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG HV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV G GLOB GCH GROB ALOB ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOS VCH VROS XNL XNCH XNR WTN ELKIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 2 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 3280 CROSS SECTION 1.00 EXTENDED .06 FEET 1.000 .51 .51 .54 .30 .68 .17 .00 .00 .51 16.9 .0 16.9 .0 .0 5.1 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 3.29 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 .00 .009433 0. 0. 0. 0 17 8 .00 23.20 23.20 1 0714AY92 04:56:56 T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Inlet #1 (2-year discharge) PAGE 3 PAGE 4 PAGE 5 J1 ICHECK INO NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HV1NS 0 WSEL FO 0 4 0 1 .017 0 0 0 0.3 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FM ALLDC 1BW CHNIM ITRACE 15 0 -1 1 07MAY92 04:56:56 PAGE 6 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG NV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV 0 OLDS OCH OROB ALOB ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOS VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WTN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 3 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 1.000 .26 .26 .29 .30 .36 .10 .00 .00 .51 2.3 .0 2.3 .0 .0 .9 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 2.52 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 4.23 .016810 0. 0. 0. 0 11 6 .00 9.51 13.74 1 07MAY92 04:56:56 mttexxtxxmxxxx»xx:mmmmxx HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.0; February 1991 xtf•ttttxxfxxtxxttxxxxxxxxxxxmxxxtx PAGE 7 THIS RUN EXECUTED 07MAY92 04:56:58 NOTE- ASTERISK M*) AT LEFT OF CROSS-SECTION NUMBER INDICATES MESSAGE IN SUMMARY OF ERRORS LIST Street topwidths and at SUMMARY PRINTOUT SECNO CWSEL EG 0 VCH DEPTH TOPWID AREA ELMIN XLCH 1.000 .33 .41 3.90 '• 2.30 .33 . _13.17 1.69 .00 .00 1.000 .51 .68 06.90 3.29 41..-:.23.20 5.14 .00 .00 1.000 .26 .36 2.36 2.52 .26 9.51 .91 .00 .00 1 07MAY92 04:56:56 PAGE 8 SUMMARY OF ERRORS AND SPECIAL NOTES 1 Rf1RR\!RlfY•YYf•►fR•!ftlR\ffffffflfN►fNYf\ * HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES • ' Version 4.6.0; February 1991 ' f f • RUN DATE 07MAY92 TIME 05:25:44 ' x x )00000 ( )xxx( )OO= x x x x x x x x xx x x )00000( )xxx x xxxxx )OOM x x x x x x x x x x x x x )OOOO x )OO= )OOOO oc 1 07MAY92 05:25:45 f\f4Nf!►Ntf4Nf4\•t!!tf•Yf tff fNlt!!R * U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS * HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING CENTER ' * 609 SECOND STREET, SUITE D * DAVIS, CALIFORNIA 95616-4687 • (916) 756-1104 \fff f4NN4N•NNN►4N4►4fNtNN\!!f �e—si4�1 �D�wrT v -3 �2 7-1 1 epiti ziyeei w PAGE 1 THIS RUN EXECUTED 07MAY92 05:25:45 tY•YYf►l►lNl4R:►►►1f►N•ffffiNf4Nf HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.0; February 1991 ffNNllRflif\tNH►1►NYfflfflff4fH T7 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Fiting 2 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point #3 (100-year discharge) J1 ICHECK IND MINV ID)R STRT METRIC HVINS O WSEL FO 0 2 0 1 .017 .0 0 0 0.3 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 1 0 -1 J3 VARIABLE CODES FOR SUMMARY PRINTOUT 38 1 3 43 26 8 4 25 42 39 NC 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.1 0.3 OT 3 16.6 4.4 13.3 xi 1 5 0 23.2 0 0 0 GR 0.51 0 .39 3.75 0 5.17 .11 6.34 0.45 23.2 1 0714AY92 05:25:45 PAGE 2 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG HV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV 0 OLOB OCH OROS ALOE ACH ARDS VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WIN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR (TRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 1 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 - 3280 CROSS SECTION 1.00 EXTENDED .02 FEET 1.000 .47 .47 .54 .30 .72 .25 .00 .00 .51 16.6 .0 16.6 .0 .0 4.2 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 3.99 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 1.27 .016981 0. 0. 0. 0 17 8 .00 21.93 23.20 1 07KAY92 - 05:25:45 PAGE 3 T1 Checking correctness of•drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point #3 (2-year discharge) J1 ICNECK INO NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS O WSEL FO 0 3 0 1 .017 0 0 0 0.3 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 2 0 -1 1 07KAY92 05:25:45 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG HV - HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV 0 OLOB OCH OROB ALOB ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WTN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC 1CONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 2 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 1.000 .31 .31 .35 .30 .45 .13 .00 .00 .51 4.4 .0 4.4 .0 .0 1.5 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 2.94 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 4.03 .016862 0. 0. 0. 0 11 5 .00 12.34 '16.38 1 07MAY92 05:25:45 T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point 04 (100-year discharge) PAGE 4 PAGE 5 J1 ICHECK INM NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HV1NS a WSEL FO 0 4 0 i Om 0 0 0 0.3 ' J2 NPROF (PLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FM ALLDC IBW CHNIM ]TRACE 15 0 -1 1 ' 07MAY92 05:25:45 PAGE 6 ' SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG HV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV a MLOB MCH GR08 ALOE ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WIN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL MDC 1CONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 3 ' CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 - *SECNO 1.000 3280 CROSS SECTION 1.00 EXTENDED .03 FEET ' 1.000 .48 .48 .50 .30 .62 .14 00 .00 .51 13.3 .0 13.3 .0 .0 4.4 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 3.05 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 .99 .0094,14 0. 0. 0. 0 17 8 00 22.21 23.20 1 07NAY92 05:25:45 PAGE 7 ' THIS RUN EXECUTED 07MAY92 05:25:46 #fH#/wff*lfl/fffHfff/fllfff#f fifif f HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES ' Version 4.6.0; February 1991 !#w!wlffwfltf#fffffff!lffffffffffHff ' NOTE- ASTERISK (*) AT LEFT OF CROSS-SECTION NUMBER INDICATES MESSAGE 1N SUMMARY OF ERRORS LIST ' Street topwidths and at SUMMARY PRINTOUT ' SECNO CWSEL EG M VCH DEPTH TOPWID AREA ELMIN XLCH 1.000 .47 .72 16.60:> 3.99 ..47 '' 21.93 4.16 .00 .00 1.000 .31 .45 4.40 2.94 .31 12.34 1.49 .00 .00 ' 1.000 .48 .62 13.30 3.05 .48 22.21 4.36 .00 .00 1 ' 07KAY92 05:25:45 PAGE 8 ' SUMMARY OF ERRORS AND SPECIAL NOTES lfffffflffflffftlliff\!■f}f1flYflfiff\fi!■f\f • HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES f ■ • Version 4.6.0; February 1991 • f i * RUN DATE 07MAY92 TIME 05:29:51 • ifHlff ff HH##iff1HlHtfHftfff Hffffff\ff x x )0000 x )OO= xxxxx x x x x x x x x x x x x )000000( )Om x )DOOO( )OO= x x x x x x x x x x x x x )000000( )OO= )000000( 1 07MAY92 05:29:52 Yf f f ftf f ff!!}ff Hf}fHHf■ff►\HfffH HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.0; February 1991 ftf}f f 1fllff}if\\tHf►H}\1ftH\NtH T1 Checking Correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point #4 (100-year discharge) J1 ICHECK INO NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS O 0 2 0 1 .0095 0 0 0 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FM ALLDC IBW 1 0 -1 J3 VARIABLE CODES FOR SUMMARY PRINTOUT 38 1 3 43 26 8 4 NC 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.1 0.3 OT 3 13.3 2.1 13.3 X1 1 5 0 23.2 0 0 0 GR 0.51 0 .39 3.75 0 5.17 .11 fH/fHf1\tfltHYff fif tf#ff Hf f tf f f fff i * U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS * HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING CENTER * 609 SECOND STREET, SUITE D • DAVIS, CALIFORNIA 95616-4687 * (916) 756-1104 Hfffff►fiifffHfHfftffftHf ffffHRflf -r v,c m 5ireet (0..r PAGE 1 THIS RUN EXECUTED 07MAY92 05:29:52 WSEL FO 0.3 CHNIM (TRACE 25 42 39 6.34 0.45 23.2 1 07KAY92 05:29:52 PAGE 2 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG HV HL GLOSS - L-BANK ELEV G GLOB DCH GROB ALOB ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WIN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 1 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 3280 CROSS SECTION 1.00 EXTENDED .03 FEET 1.000 .48 .48 .50 .30 .62 .14 .00 .00 .51 13.3 .0 13.3 .0 .0 4.4 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 3.05 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 .99 .009484 0. 0. 0. 0 17 8 .00 22.21 23.20 1 _ 07KAY92 05:29:52 T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point S4 (2-year discharge) J1 iCHECK ING NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS G WSEL FG 0 3 0 1 .0095 0 0 0 0.3 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC law CHNIM (TRACE 2 0 -1 1 07MAY92 05:29:52 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG NY HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV O GLOB GCH GROB ALOE ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WTN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 2 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 1.000 .27 .27 .28 .30 .33 .06 .00 .00 .51 2.1 .0 2.1 .0 .0 1.1 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 1.98 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 4.17 .009477 0. 0. 0. 0 12 6 .00 10.30 14.47 1 07MAY92 05:29:52 T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point U4 (100-year discharge) PAGE 3 PAGE 4 PAGE 5 J1 ICHECK ING NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS p WSEL FC 0 4 0 1 .0095 0 0 0 0.3 J2 NPROF ]PLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FM ALLDC 18W CHNIM (TRACE 15 0 -1 1 07MAY92 05:29:52 PAGE 6 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG NV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV G OLOB GCH CROS ALOB ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL- XNCH XNR WTN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 3 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 3280 CROSS SECTION 1.00 EXTENDED .03 FEET 1.000 .48 .48 .50 .30 .62 .14 .00 .00 .51 13.3 .0 13.3 .0 .0 4.4 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 3.05 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 .99 .009484 0. 0. 0. 0 17 8 .00 22.21 23.20 1 07MAY92 05:29:52 ifllfffii#tlftitffifffflfffffflffffff HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.0; February 1991 PAGE 7 THIS RUN EXECUTED 07MAY92 05:29:53 NOTE- ASTERISK M AT LEFT OF CROSS-SECTION NUMBER INDICATES MESSAGE IN SUMMARY OF ERRORS LIST Street topwidths and at SUMMARY PRINTOUT SECNO CWSEL EG 0 VCH DEPTH TOPWID AREA ELMIN XLCH 1.000 .48 .62 13.30 '•, 3.05 .48 22.21 4.36 .00 .00 1.000 .27 .33 2.10 1.98 .27 10.30 1.06 .00 .00 1.000 .48 .62 13.30 3.05 .48 22.21 4.36 .00 .00 1 07KAY92 05:29:52 PAGE 8 SUMMARY OF ERRORS AND SPECIAL NOTES fff►fffiffffllf!►frilfflffllffffffllffffffff► • HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES ' f f • Version 4.6.0; February 1991 ' i • RUN DATE 07MAY92 TIME 06,12:58 • f ff ffff fttif f rifiri►rifmmrififfiffririri x x XxOOOO( )xxxx xxXXx x x x x x x x x x x x x XxxxxXx XxXx x )0000( )0= x x x x x x x x x x x x x )OOOO x xxxx( )ODO0O x 1 07MAY92 06:12:58 trf rifrif ff R:ritri!!flriimimffrir HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.0; February 1991 !f ftfriflfriff fffflmff ff fff ffmm Tl Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point #6 (100-year discharge) J1 ICHECK INO NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS 0 0 2 0 1 .0075 0 0 0 J2 NPROF (PLOT PRFVS KSECV XSECH FM ALLDC IBW 1 0 -1 J3 VARIABLE CODES FOR SUMMARY PRINTOUT 38 1 3 43 26 8 4 NC 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.1 0.3 OT 3 12.6 2.3 12.6 X1 1 5 0 23.2 0 0 0 GR 0.51 0 .39 3.75 0 5.17 .11 1 07MAY92 06:12:58 f ri!f f f if f f f ►H! H!►! 1ri f f f i f f f f f ri f R b * U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ' ' HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING CENTER ' * 609 SECOND STREET, SUITE D * DAVIS, CALIFORNIA 95616-4687 • (916) 756-1104 ' f!i*fff iffmrifffrif f•fritf/flf ff ffit Y `�i vd sVY'l ' f - WOW S PAGE 1 THIS RUN EXECUTED 07MAY92 06:12:58 WSEL FO 0.3 CHNIM ITRACE 25 42 39 6.34 0.45 23.2 PAGE 2 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG HV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV 0 GLOB OCH GROB ALOE ACH ARDS VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WTN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR ITRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 1 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 3280 CROSS SECTION 1.00 EXTENDED .04 FEET 1.000 .49 .49 .50 .30 .61 .12 .00 .00 .51 12.6 .0 12.6 .0 .0 4.6 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 2.76 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 .72 .007484 0. 0. 0. 0 17 8 .00 22.48 23.20 1 07KAY92 - 06:12:58 T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and at -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point S6 (2-year discharge) J1 ICHECK 1ND NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS O WSEL FO 0 3 0 1 .0075 0 0 0 0.3 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FM ALLDC IBW CHNIN ITRACE 2 0 -1 1 07MAY92 06:12:58 SECHO DEPTH CWSEL CR1WS WSELK EG HV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV 0 GLOB OCH GROB ALOB ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WTH ELMIN - SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR (TRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 2 CCHV= .100 CEHV= .300 *SECNO 1.000 3720 CRITICAL DEPTH ASSUMED 1.000 .29 .29 .29 .30 .34 .06 .00 .00 .51 2.3 .0 2.3 .0 .0 1.2 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 1.92 .00 .000 .016 .000 .000 .00 4.13 .008274 0. 0. 0. 0 11 5 .00 10.98 15.11 1 07KAY92 06:12:58 T1 Checking correctness of drainage analysis T2 Brittany Knolls, Filing 2 T3 Street topwidths and et -curb depths for design flows T4 Design Point 96 (100-year discharge) PAGE 3 PAGE 4 PAGE 5 J1 ICHECK INO NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS O WSEL FO 0 4 0 1 .0075 0 0 0 0.3 J2 NPROF 1PLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FM ALLDC IBW CHN1N (TRACE 15 0 -1 1 07MAY92 06:12:58 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL CRIWS WSELK EG NV HL OLOSS L-BANK ELEV O OLOB OCH OROB ALOE ACH AROB VOL TWA R-BANK ELEV TIME VLOB VCH VROB XNL XNCH XNR WTN ELMIN SSTA SLOPE XLOBL XLCH XLOBR (TRIAL IDC ICONT CORAR TOPWID ENDST *PROF 3 CCHV= .100 CENV= .300 ' *SECNO 1.000 3280 CROSS SECTION 1.00 EXTENDED .04 FEET 1.000 .49 .49 .50 .30 .61 .12 .00 .00 .51 12.6 .0 12.6 .0 ._ .0 4.6 .0 .0 .0 .45 .00 .00 2.76 .00 000 .016 .000 .000 .00 .72 .007484 0. 0. 0. 0 17 8 .00 22.48 23.20 1 , 07MAY92 06:12:58 ►:rfr»rrfmmf:mfffffffmmm NEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.0; February 1991 fffffmffffffrfffffrffrifffffflfmf PAGE 6 PAGE 7 THIS RUN EXECUTED 07MAY92 06:13:00 NOTE- ASTERISK (*) AT LEFT OF CROSS-SECTION NUMBER INDICATES MESSAGE IN SUMMARY OF ERRORS LIST Street topuidths and at SUMMARY PRINTOUT SECNO CWSEL EG 0 VCH DEPTH TOPWID AREA ELMIN XLCH 1.000 .49 .61 12.60 2.76 .49 22.48 ' 4.56 .00 .00 * 1.000 .29 .34 2.30 1.92 .29 10.98 1.20 .00 .00 1.000 .49 .61 12.60 2.76 .49 22.48 4.56 .00 .00 1 07MAY92 06:12:58 PAGE 8 maaaaaaasaanaaaaaaaaanaanananaanasanaaanananaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa-aaaaaasaasaaaaaaaaaaaannaaasaamaaaaaasaaaar Design I Pipe I Pipe I Full Pipe IFlow depthlFlow velocityl I Discharge I Grade I Diameter I Flow Capacity Ifor designlfor design o i Remarks I Pipe Segment I (cfs)'* I M I (in)*** I (cfs) I o (ft) I (fps) I I I DP1* - outlet I 5.8 I 0.5 I 18 I 7.4 I 0.98 I 4.6 I I I 8.1 I 1s I 29.9 I 0.45 I 13.2 I I I 2.5 I 18 I 16.6 I 0.62 I 8.5 I pipe outlet I i---------------- DP2 - DP5 I----------- I I 11.0 I --------- I---------- 0.5 I 21 I.....:--------- I 11.2 i---------- I ------------- I 1.36 I --------------- 5.3 I ---------------- DP5 - outlet I----------- I--------- I 11.0 I I---------- 7.7 I 21 I I--------------- 44.0 ---------- ------------- I 0.60 I I--------------- 15.3 I I I I 1.6 I 21 I 20.0 I 0.93 I 8.5 I pipe outlet I ---------------- DP3 - DP4 I ----------- I I 10.0 I --------- I---------- 1.00 I I 18 I --------------- 10.5 I ---------- I------------- I 1.13 I I--------------- 6.7 I I I I---------------- DP4 - outlet I ----------- I I 18.7 I --------- I 1.00 I ---------- I 24 I --------------- 22.6 I ---------- I------------- I 1.37 I I --------------- 8.0 I I I I 8.57 I 24 I 66.2 I 0.74 I 18.2 I I I I 1.20 I 24 I 24.8 I 1.28 I 8.6 I pipe outlet I I---------------- DP6 - outlet I ----------- I I 6.9 I --------- I---------- 0.6 I I--------------- 18 I 8.1 i ---------- I-----------" I 1.04 I I --------------- 5.1 I I I I 12.4 I 18 I 37.0 I 0." I 16.1 I I I 2.5 I 18 I 16.6 I 0.68 I 9.0 I pipe outlet I i---------------- DP7 - DP9 I ----------- I I 9.4**** I ---------I---------- 0.75 I I 21 I --------------- 13.7 --------------- I ---------- I-------------I---------------I I 1.06 I 6.1 I --------------- I I---------------- DP9 - outlet I ----------- I------- 113.2**** I -- I---------- 9.10 I I 21 I 47.8 I---------- I..-.--------- I 0.63 I I 17.0 I i I I 1.50 I 21 I 19.4 I 1.05 I 8.6 I --------------- pipe outlet I ---------------- I existing Pipes I----------- I--------- I 18.5 I I---------- 4.77 I I--------------- 18 I 22.9 I---------- I------------- I 1.01 I I 11.6 I I I I 3.32 I 18 I 19.1 I 1.16 I 11.8 I I I 1.42 I 30 I 48.9 I 1.08 I 3.5 I I I 28.0 I 0.50 I 30 i 29.0 I 1.93 I 6.4 I pipe outlet I I 1(=18.5+9.5)I I I I I I I * DP = Design Point ** Sum of theoretical inlet discharges Minimue commercial size *'** Based on 100-year peak discharge conveyed to sump inlet ENNE M M� NEENWOM 0 FAMMINE 0 Emmm a 0 OEM lk ENNUI MEN IN ow 0 MEN M 0 Ell NONE in _j p o p p p O O O O O -j rn O ti cfl to qq* co N .- U- a/p aetewela 01 Moll 10 41dea jo of;ea ch N T T T r' O Q oco T _ LL CO 0) L c ,V _a) O O R y i U o =cu O v �p E U o` m r- •— s a ca 0) d N W •� U V W D ca I M i 4 m L 7 vs EMMEMEN Ill wo i NEI sliSkmom am= 1111111111111110011 molsom SHE m m am molom =MN MENEM ME mollooll _I O O O O O O O O O O J O co ti co LO of M N .— LL a/p aa}aweia 01 Mold 10 y;daa jo of}ea CM N T r• T d Q O ui T U. Q) L O w cu V •� cm C; ~ U V O U O (p U C O L O � s LO c a o Ea) 0) W � V �3 � U V W 2 M d 7 LL EMMEMEMEME NEEMOMMMMIM la MENEM ork orm MENEM M�M Mon. MEMO J cOo � co tU) � M N O LL Q/p aa}aweia 01 MON 10 y}daa ;o oi;eb eM N T T T � Q d n. O ui T U. N L c0 U O cq 75p O � O L L _ co O U �p U E 0 L Q LO � a p co m c 2aD a) W j V �3 � U cc 5 N ca A 2 � n 4 m L 3 LL ENOMESEENE SEEN "ho-mmomm ommillml No 0 MEN LITAM mkm mom mul MEM11 momill MENEM In ME Emoll IN MENIII ENRON IN mail -1 O O O O O O O O O O O co to er c7 N V- LL a/p je;eweia of MOW 10 41de(3 jo oijea cr) N T T T c Q a . o w 5 T 7 U. O i � O V •/II O ca O co O L � O U O _ (C U p cp i U O LO �•' C L CL tC 0) O E C N N +� W j V •� N U V � O A M m LL MEN Ah� N � ONES! Mimm Muni MINE MEESE WE MONISM EIREE MENISMI MEMIS 11 skill MONISM I In LN lblE LAI MOORE J CD 000 0 1%- w V) v M N U- a/p JOIGWB!a 01 Mojd 10 y;daa ;o oi;ed s M N T T c• C. T LL o� O i .. U O 2 cz cz p U o E o 0 o. H c � s C- cm ,q. �E m W u 5 �n m 7 am E Emomm ONE mmmomm =MIN bob MENNEN ml, _i O O O O O O O O p J O c0 1` co W) C7 N �— L (I/p JOIGWBia o; MOW 10 41daa ;o oiled Cm7 a) N T T T r" !~ d T 7 L O � •lQ co O L � O O ca U C co U O E O 0 Lq p C L Q co d) ... O � � D E C O N M W D V O V L 5 ca j^ m 7 OWNER -PROJECT By DA E (�74714- 5l8 hz Qo-TSr=il FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF �217e!?P �lae•1 — US'Ddr^ MG'T�'� 1 C. �6..t Q - 5•a eFs Tt _ r %Lz 4 = 5 a z a I�- � zl�a• I.aS Fr J. FrnM newem 6= �, T-r�c �- R�wR, _bso - 914 I eKrmca wb, �.4 ) OWNER -PROJECT Y Ca71L DATE S�$/ i2 PROJECT. Lb:T�T�II FEATURE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF IZSPQyFi'° �G�S►6w! 2 (� ' ` ' 1 �-. i-- 1 I • � �-.�. -1-�.- 1 1 -I_ 1-t-'--y' ♦ .. --ti-. }' I _T` i i ��_�_ j---�--_-- 1 70. •-�-'!--1._-i'� ' � �U r i-__�-+�__ may_ _ 1 �-.__�___T_.L--T-r� I -1-� I I 19 r j 1 , r . r r I I -I ; -+-t--r- � i I . -.t �t =:-:0•(�8� 1 �--{-_-�-�i ; -�--r}--t- � 1-i-� ' I . i `�� 1 ! 1 I 1 1 �- r I,�if� --r-- - - - -r- '---r----- --- • I I , , I 1 -_�_ _.fit- i->_.-...-�---.._...-' i _•__L._� -i __..-:-_.[_ ._-�__'--1•--?--_ _44-t-T- -1- --r -j-' i i i 1 Czlne- CHECKED BY 'i�iarrfR ac ;t6,J ��i- 9 oc.sttE'r 1775 Fr Yt 1.75 _ Gb TST- 11 3 Le F¢ar� Fiaow- 6-1 exi-tM AG buTt>=T J�esI del Yt yt v /.93 s 0'7-7 a L6 Fzvm .-F-, 5=1, ysc —rYaE .L 1?��rtz/�, �� `91a. LhTTAO mal, e) DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL RIPRAP �4( 0 0 2( ■ ■ ■ ■■ jV�"/_ ■■ �i MW. MEN '/_■umm _./I��W._, - .MOW CI ."L b 4 Yt/D . .0 Use Do instead of D whenever flow is supercritical in the barrel. **Use Type L for o distance of 3D downstream. 1.0 FIGURE 5-7. RIPRAP EROSION PROTECTION AT CIRCULAR CONDUIT OUTLET. 11-15-82 URBAN DRAINAGES FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL RIPRAP 1 r 1 1 1 1 n 4C 0 O 01 ■ MENS■ VAEVAA I , ■0 ./SEA ME . /e% ME WARA,O�� 2 A Y /D .6 .8 1.0 t Use Da instead of D whenever flow is supercritical in the barrel. **Use Type L for a distance of 3D downstream. FIGURE 5-7. RIPRAP EROSION PROTECTION AT CIRCULAR CONDUIT OUTLET. 11-15-82 URBAN DRAINAGE 9 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL MAJOR DRAINAGE Table 5-1 CLASSIFICATION AND GRADATION OF ORDINARY RIPRAP Riprap % Smaller Than Intermediate Rock * d50 Designation Given Size Dimension By Weight (Inches) (Inches) Type VL 70-100 12 50-70 9 35-50 6 6** 2-10 2 Type L 70-100 15 50-70 12 35-50 9 9** 2-10 3 Type M 70-100 21 50-70 18 35-50 12 12 2-10 4 Type H 100 30 50-70 24 35-50 18 18 _ 2-10 6 Type VH 100 42 50-70 33 35-50 24 24 2-10 9 *d50 = Mean particle size ** Bury types-VL and L with native top soil and revegetate to protect from vandalism. 5.2 Wire Enclosed Rock Wire enclosed rock refers to rocks that are bound together in a wire basket so that they act as a single unit. One of the major advantages of wire enclosed rock is that it provides an alternative in situations where available rock sizes are too small for ordinary riprap. Another advantage is the versatility that results from the regular geometric shapes.,of wire enclosed rock. The rectangular blocks and mats can be fashioned into almost any shape that can be 11-15-82