Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCitrus Ave Storm Drain Final Engineering Report /Z7-07.7 FINAL ENGINEERING REPORT FOR THE CITRUS AVENUE STORM DRAIN (Fontana Master Plan Line DZ-8) Prepared For: CITY OF FONTANA 8353 Sierra Avenue Fontana, California 92335 Prepared By: L.D. KING, INC. v. 2151 Convention Center Way, Suite 100 . ' .S it. Ontario, California 91764 Telephone: (909) 937-0200 f C Z1082 Fax: (909) 937-0202 A1:7 43 ' Cr/t. ,;1 li • o r ,ci e w fee, (7//,'„ • Dougl H. Mays, P.E. R.C.E. 2 062 c I Y 0 kjNAt Graciela Martinez Assistant Engineer lay, 2000 ,„N? Voice (909) 350-6522 Fax (909) 350-6618 Li ornartinez@tontana.ora 4 - www fontaria.om ,11-)11 Ex-pally:1cm California 92335 Table of Contents • • CITY OF FONTANA South Fontana Sewers Preliminary Engineering Report May, 2000 DESCRIPTION PAGE I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 II. INTRODUCTION 2 A. Study Area 2 B. Existing Runoff Patterns 4 F - C. Existing Land Usage 5 D. Existing Storm Drainage Facilities 5 E. Ultimate Land Usage 5 F. Other Proposed Improvements 6 G. Design Criteria 6 III. STUDY 7 A. Hydrology 7 1. Rainfall 7 2. Infiltration 8 3. Runoff 8 B. Hydraulics 9 1. Storm Drain 9 2. Streets 10 3. Connector Piping 10 4. Inlets 11 • IV. TABLE Table Ia - Storm Drain Summary 12 Table lb - Inlet and Connector Piping Summary 13 1 Table II - Rainfall Data 14 Table IIIa - Hydrologic Analysis Data 15 Table Illb - Hydrologic Analysis Results - - 16 r ' Table IV - Hydraulic Analysis Data 17 Table V - Street Hydrologic Capacity Calculations 18 Table VI - Connector Piping Calculations 19 Table VII - Inlet Hydraulic Calculations 20 V. FIGURES Figure 1 - Location Map 21 Figure 2 - Aerial Photograph (Feb. `99) • 22 Figure 3 - Land Use Map 23 Figure 4 - Citrus Avenue Typical Cross Section 24 Figure 5 - Hydrologic Soil Map 25 Figure 6 - Drainage Subareas Map 26 • • Table of Contents (continued) VI. APPENDICES APPENDIX `A' Figure B -3 (Valley Area Isohyetals 10 -Year 1 -Hour) 27 Figure B-4 (Valley Area Isohyetals 100 -Year 1 -Hour) 28 Figure D -2 (Rainfall Depth Versus Return Period for Partial Duration Series) 29 Figure C -15 (Hydrologic Soils Group Map for Southwest — C Area) 30 APPENDIX `B' 25 -Year Storm Event Rational Method Hydrology Data 31 APPENDIX `C' 100 -Year Storm Event Rational Method Hydrology Data 42 APPENDIX `D' Water Surface Profile Data 53 APPENDIX `E' Figure F -01 (Los Angeles County Flood Control District Factors for Closed Conduits Flowing Full) 60 Willdan and Associates' Street Capacity Table, Version 1.2 61 Figure D -26 (Los Angeles County Flood Control District Catch Basin for Sump Condition) 63 Figure D -10B (Los Angeles County Flood Control District Curb Opening Catch Basin Capacities) 64 APPENDIX `F' - Storm Drain Construction Drawings (Reduced to 11 " x 17") 65 F .ry • • CITY OF FONTANA May, 2000 CITRUS AVENUE STORM DRAIN — PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Fontana (City) proposes to construct a storm drain system along Citrus Avenue from . Jurupa Avenue to Slaver Avenue. At the downstream end of the system, the proposed storm drain will connect to an existing 72" diameter storm drain located at the intersection of Citrus • Avenue and Jurupa Avenue. The proposed storm drain will be designed to convey runoff from a • 100 -year storm event (together with hydraulic capacity of ultimate street improvements for Citrus Avenue) for ultimate development conditions. • The purpose of the study was to determine appropriate storm drain diameters, connector pipe diameters, and inlet opening sizes to convey runoff from areas tributary to Citrus Avenue to downstream existing drainage facilities. The results of the study are presented in Table Ia and lb. • f ' ' 1 CITY OF FONTANA CITRUS AVENUE STORM DRAIN— PRELIMINARYENGINEERING REPORT II. INTRODUCTION Cl id2 1 1 1 1 May, 2000 The City proposes to construct a storm drain system along Citrus Avenue, from Jurupa Avenue to Slover Avenue, to provide drainage service to the proposed Citrus Continuation High School and Fontana Adult School, to promote development, and to encourage annexation to the City. The proposed storm drain system will complete the DZ -8 master storm drainage plan system. A portion to the system was constructed in 1990 as part of the residential development of the Southridge Village. I -10, Oleander Avenue, Jurupa Avenue, and Citrus Avenue generally bound the drainage area. In order to determine the required facilities to adequately provide the drainage service to areas tributary to Citrus Avenue Storm Drain, areas tributary to the proposed storm drain were identified. In the following paragraphs, a description and limits of the study area, existing runoff patterns, existing land usage, existing storm drainage facilities, ultimate land usage, other proposed improvements, and design criteria are presented. A. STUDYAREA To establish the limits of the study area, records were assembled including the City's Master Storm Drainage Plan prepared by Hall & Foreman, Inc., dated June 23, 1992, USGS topographic 2 f CITY OF FONTANA CITRUSAVENUE STORM DRAIN— PRELIMINARYENGINEERING REPORT May, 2000 maps, and Caltrans freeway construction drawings. In addition, field reviews of the study area were performed to ensure the study area limits are correctly identified. i 1 Data from the City's Master Storm Drainage Plan is presented on the Location Map Enclosed as Figure 1. The study area is located in both the incorporated areas of City and unincorporated areas of the County. The area is generally bounded by Interstate 10 (San Bernardino Freeway) to the north, Jurupa Avenue to the south, Oleander Avenue to the east, and Citrus Avenue to the west. The study area is shown on the attached Location Map and the Aerial Photograph enclosed as Figure 2. The study area consists of approximately 263 acres. It was determined from field study and verified with research of Caltrans freeway plans that portions of runoff from Interstate 10 will not enter the study area. Runoff from the westbound lanes of Interstate 10 drains to a trapezoidal channel north of and adjacent to Interstate 10 and flows in a westerly direction towards the San Sevaine Channel west of the study area. Runoff from the eastbound lanes may be tributary to the proposed storm drain and is therefore included. All areas south of Interstate 10, which includes Union Pacific Railroad right -of: way, are also included. Portions of the Citrus Avenue/Interstate 10 interchange will runoff to the study area. The City is currently preparing a Project Study Report for the interchange and it was assumed that only drainage from the south side of the interchange will runoff to the study area. 3 r�l 0 r �j i� E� II n i t t 1 CITY OF FONTANA May, 2000 CITR US A VENUE STORM DRAIN — PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT The City's Master Storm Drainage Plan shows a future storm drain along Oleander Avenue between Jurupa Avenue and Slover Avenue. Runoff from areas east of Oleander Avenue will be collected by future storm drain and, therefore, is not included. The southern boundary of the study site is Jurupa Avenue. Storm drain inlets exist at the intersections of Jurupa Avenue and Citrus Avenue and at the intersection of Jurupa Avenue and Oleander Avenue. B. EXISTING R UNOFF PATTERNS All existing runoff from the study area currently is routed, through streets which have curbs, and by surface flow in a southeasterly direction towards the intersection of Citrus Avenue and Jurupa Avenue. Runoff from properties on the north side of Boyle Avenue flows in a westerly direction towards eet. This runoff then flows in a southerly direction along a graded the cul -de -sac end of the str.. flow path to be combined with runoff flowing along Citrus Avenue. Runoff for the south properties along Boyle Avenue appears to flow in a southwesterly direction. There are currently no curbs and gutters along Boyle Avenue. Runoff from properties along the north side of Slover Avenue between Oleander Avenue and Citrus Avenue generally flows in a southwesterly direction. Slover Avenue currently has no curb to divert or contain runoff. Runoff from properties along the south side of Slover Avenue between Oleander Avenue and Citrus Avenue also flow in a southwesterly direction. 4 CITY OF FONTANA CITRUSAYENUE STORM DRAIN — PRELIMINARYENGINEERING REPORT LI C F�� i i t May, 2000 Runoff from the areas between Slover Avenue and Jurupa Avenue, not mentioned in the previous section, flows in southwesterly direction. C. EXISTING LAND USAGE The study area currently consists of low - density residential, industrial and open space usages. Most areas include sparse vegetation coverage with little to no asphalt or concrete coverage. Current land usages are shown on Figure 2. D. EXISTING STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES The proposed Citrus Avenue Storm Drain will connect to an existing 72" RCP storm drain located at the intersection of Citrus Avenue and Jurupa Avenue. Two 3 -foot diameter grate inlets, flush with the ground surface, are located on the northwest and northeast comers of the intersection. The inlets connect to the existing 72" storm drain, which conveys drainage southerly to the Declez Channel. E. ULTIMATE LAND USAGE Ultimate land usage assumed for this study is shown on the attached Land Use Map (Figure 3). The land usages shown are based on the City's Land Use Policy Map, dated June 1998 and aerial f photographs, dated June 25, 1999. 5 CITY OF FONTANA CITRUS AVENUE STORM DRAIN- PRELIMINARYENGINEERING REPORT F. OTHER PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS 1 May, 2000 In addition to the storm drain improvements, the City will construct sewer improvements along Citrus Avenue from Jurupa Avenue to Slover Avenue. The City also proposes to construct street improvements along Citrus Avenue between Slover Avenue and Jurupa Avenue. Citrus Avenue street widening will include a 92 -foot street right -of -way section. A typical cross - section of the future street is included as Figure 4. Also, longer term improvements include a future interchange improvement at Interstate 10. Interchange improvements include widening of Valley Boulevard and Slover Avenue near Citrus Avenue. In addition to Citrus Avenue improvements, the City proposes to construct sewer improvements along Slover Avenue and the County proposes to construct street improvements along Slover Avenue. a i G. DESIGN CRITERIA The storm drain, connector pipes, and inlets will be designed to convey runoff from a 100 -year storm event utilizing the hydraulic capacity of the future Citrus Avenue for ultimate land usages. lr�.� May, 2000 CITY OF FONTANA CITR US A VENUE STORM DRAIN — PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT L� III. STUDY n To determine the appropriate diameters for storm drains and connector pipes and appropriate inlet opening dimensions for the Citrus Avenue Storm Drain, study area hydrology and system hydraulic calculations were prepared. Each are described in the following paragraphs: A. HYDROLOGY Hydrology calculations are performed to estimate runoff quantities and are prepared in accordance with Standards and Practices outlined in the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual (1986) (Hydrology Manual). To estimate runoff quantities, rainfall and infiltration estimates must be prepared, each together with runoff are discussed in the following -paragraphs: 1. Rainfall Rainfall data for the study area was based on the Hydrology Manual's Isohyetal Maps (Figure B- 3 and Figure B-4). The isohyetal maps are attached in Appendix W. Since the study area is considered relatively small, -one -hour storm event will provide the largest peak runoff quantity. Therefore, 10 -year 1 -hour event and 100 -year 1 -hour event are used. Using the 10 -year and 100- year rainfall intensities, together with the Hydrology Manual's Rainfall Depth Versus Return Period for Partial Duration Series Chart (Figure D -2), the 25 -year 1 -hour storm event rainfall intensity was estimated. Figure D -2 is attached in Appendix W. The rainfall intensities are presented in Table H. r 7 May, 2000 CITY OF FONTANA CITRUSA YENUE STORM DRAIN — PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT 2. Infiltration The Hydrology Manual bases infiltration rate on land usage, Antecedent Moisture Content (AMC), and soil type. As specified by. the Manual, AMC Type II was used. The Manual categorizes es soils into one of four different hydrologic soils groups based on the soil's infiltration characteristics. The hydrologic soil groups are shown on the attached Figure 5. As shown, the entire study area consists of Type "A" soil. Figure 5 is based on the Hydrology Manuals, "Hydrologic Soils Group Map for Southwest Area" (Figure C-15). Figure C -15 is attached in Appendix W. 3. Runoff Runoff quantities are estimated using the Rational Method Hydrologic Analysis Software prepared by Advanced Engineering Software (AES). 25 -Year and 100 -Year storm events were estimated, Input data for the hydrologic analysis is presented on the attached Table III. In addition, results (runoff quantities) from the analysis are presented on Table IIIb. ■ The following assumptions were used for the computerized analysis: 1 24 °' Minimum Storm Drain Diameter for all storm drains per San Bernardino County Standards. 2. 0.6 Intensity Duration Log -Log Slope per Hydrology Manual. Output data from t h e Hydrologic Analysis is attached in Appendices `B' and `C'. 1 CITY OF FONTANA CITRUS AVENUE STORM DRAIN - PRELIMINARYENGINEERING REPORT B. HYD"ULICS CI u F, I. t t May, 2000 Hydraulic calculations are performed to estimate storm drain diameters, street hydraulic capacities, connector pipe diameters, and inlet sizes. Each are discussed in the following paragraphs: 1. Storm Drain Hydraulic calculations were performed using the Water Surface Pressure Gradient (WSPG) computerized software prepared by CIVILDESIGN . Corporation to establish water surface elevations. Storm drain diameters were adjusted as required to determine the most efficient system. Diameters were adjusted to establish pressurized flow and to maintain a water surface elevations below ground surface elevations to ensure runoff will enter the system. In addition to the proposed storm drain, the existing storm drain between Jurupa Avenue and the Declez Channel was included in the model. The downstream water surface elevation was obtained from Southridge Village Storm Drain construction drawing (Drawing No. 1803). Input data for the WSPG analysis is presented in Table IV. The construction drawings show the proposed storm drain diameters and water surface elevation. Output data is attached in Appendix P 4Y. --- The downstream drainage system (storm drain and street) will not convey the entire 100 -year storm event runoff to the Declez Channel. A portion of the runoff will flow westerly along Jurupa Avenue. The proposed system (storm drain and street) will convey 100 -year storm event runoff. 1 n R n 1 1 1 i' CITY OF FONTANA CITRUSAVENUE STORM DR AIN— PRELIMINARYENGINEERING REPORT 2. Streets May, 2000 Ultimate street section for Citrus Avenue is presented on Figure 4. Street hydraulic capacity calculations for the ultimate street section are presented on Table V. Table V demonstrates that the drainage system (storm drain and ultimate street) will have adequate capacity to convey 100- year runoff. The combined capacity of the existing Citrus Avenue Storm Drain and street downstream of Jurupa Avenue does not contain the necessary capacity to convey 100 -year runoff to the Declez Channel. Therefore, a portion of the runoff will flow westerly along Jurupa Avenue. Table V demonstrates that this portion of the runoff will be contained in Jurupa Avenue Street right -of- way. 3. Connector Piping Connector piping hydraulic calculations are presented on Table VI. Losses for friction, entrance and exit were computed. To estimate friction losses, Los Angeles County Flood Control District Figure F -01 was used. The Figure is attached in Appendix `l'. Total losses were added to the storm drain water surface elevation to determine water surface elevations within the inlet structures. Inlet water surface elevations were compared to estimate ultimate ground surface elevations to ensure runoff will enter the system during 25 -year storm events. 10 CITY OF FONTANA May, 2000 CITRUS AVENUE STORM DRAIN — PRELIMINARYENGINEERING REPORT 4. Inlets Inlet hydraulic calculations are presented on Table VII. To estimate water depth in streets at various runoff quantities, Willdan and Associate's Street Capacity Table, Version 1.2 was used. To determine inlet widths for sump condition inlets, Los Angeles County Flood Control District's Plat 2.6 -0651 was used. To determine inlet widths for non sump conditions, Los Angeles County Flood Control District's Figure D -101 was used. Each are attached in Appendix `E'. Reduced storm drain construction drawings are attached in Appendix `F'. �: IL-j 1 11 Table la City of Fontana Citrus Avenue Storm Drain Preliminary Engineering Storm Drain Summary Subarea 25 -Yr Tributary Area Runoff 25 -Yr Total Runoff 100 -Yr Tributary Area Runoff 100 -Yr Total Runoff (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 1 13.3 13.3 16.8 17.0 2 14.1 25.6 17.9 32.8 3 22.9 43.6 29.7 56.9 4 40.6 83.0 52.7 108.6 5 2.0 85.0 2.6 111.2 6 40.1 121.1 52.7 158.8 7 27.8 146.6 39.6 195.5 8 1.7 148.2 2.4 197.9 9 26.9 171.8 38.6 232.3 10 1,26.0 194.3 37.4 265.4 11 1.6 195.9 2.2 267.6 12 26.6 218.2 38.4 300.7 13 25.9 241.0 37.6 334.8 14 1.6 241.0 2.3 334.8 - 15 25.2 261.1 36.6 365.2 16 24.6 281.8 35.9 396.5 17 1.5 281.8 2.2 396.5 Citrus Report Tables.xls Table la ` 6/28/00 Page 12 Table lb City of Fontana Citrus Avenue Storm Drain Preliminary Engineering Inlets & Connector Piping Summary Notes: " Data from Table 1116 Citrus Report Tabies.xis 2 -) Data from Table VII Table lb 3'1 Connector Piping Length for Ultimate Street Section 6/28/00 4') Data from Table VI Page 13 Connector Piping Connector Piping At Node Side of Node Design Flow'* Total Inlet Length 2,) Length 3,) Diametee) (cfs) (feet) (in) 6 West 2.0 10' Inlet 100 24 East 43.6 2 -14' Inlet 100 24 182 30 7 East 40.1 21'& 14' Inlets 55 30 8 West 1.7 10' inlet 41 24 East 27.8 28' Inlet 55 30 9 East 26.9 - 39 30 10 West 1.6 • 10' Inlet 41 24- East 26.0 2 -10' Inlets 55 24 82 30 11 East, 26.6 21' Inlet 55 .24 12 West 1.6 10' Inlet 41 24 . East 25.9 21' Inlets 55 30 13 East 25.2 21' Inlets 55 24 14 West 1.5 10' inlet 34 24 East 62.0 14'& 21' lnlets 62 24 85 48 Notes: " Data from Table 1116 Citrus Report Tabies.xis 2 -) Data from Table VII Table lb 3'1 Connector Piping Length for Ultimate Street Section 6/28/00 4') Data from Table VI Page 13 Table II City of Fontana Citrus Avenue Storm Drain Preliminary Engineering Rainfall Data Storm Event Rainfall Intensity (yr) (In/hr) 10 0.93 25 1.10 100 1.40 h Citrus Report Tables.xis Table II 6/15/00 Page 14 Table Ilia City of Fontana Citrus Avenue Storm Drain Preliminary Engineering Hydrologic Analysis Input [data r From Node To Node Description Upstream Elevation" (feet) Downstream Elevation (feet) Length Between Nodes (feet) Runoff Course . Assumptions Ultimate Land Usage Soil Group Tributary Subarea (Acres) Side 1 2 Initial Area 1092 1083 990 Overland Flow Commercial A 5.3 North of Boyle 1053 666 7 8 Subarea 7 - Street Flow (60' Width, 8 - 6 8 Subarea 8 - - - 8 9 Pipe Flow Curb, 2% Street Cross -Slope 1047 666 8 9 Subarea 9 - Street Flow and - 9 10 (n=0.015),2% Parkway Cross - 1047 1039 666 9 2 3 Subarea 2 1083 1082 394 Slope(n= 0.020)) Commercial A 6.5 North of Boyle 10 11 Pipe Flow 1039 1032 692 Street Flow (60' Width, 8" 11 Subarea 1.2 - - - 11 12 Pipe Flow 1032 1025 Curb, 2% Street Cross -Slope 11 12 Subarea 13 - - - Street Flow and 12 Subarea 14 - (n=0.015), 2 Parkway Cross - - 12 13 Pipe Flow 3 5 Subarea 3 1082 1080 776 Slope(n= 0.020)) Commercial A 13.1 North of Boyle 5 6 Pipe Flow 1080 1067 674 Storm Drain (n= 0.013) - - - - 5 6 Subarea 4 - - - Overland Flow Commercial A 23.8 East of Citrus 4 6 Subarea 5 - - - 6 7 Pipe Flow 1067 1062 666 6 7 Subarea 6 - - - 7 8 Pipe Flow 1062 1053 666 7 8 Subarea 7 - - - 6 8 Subarea 8 - - - 8 9 Pipe Flow 1053 1047 666 8 9 Subarea 9 - - - 9 10 Pipe Flow 1047 1039 666 9 10 Subarea 10 - - - 8 10 Subarea 11 - - - 10 11 Pipe Flow 1039 1032 692 10 11 Subarea 1.2 - - - 11 12 Pipe Flow 1032 1025 692 11 12 Subarea 13 - - - 10 12 Subarea 14 - - - 12 13 Pipe Flow 1025 1018 692 12 13 Subarea 15 - - - 13 14 Pipe Flow 1018 1011 692 13 14 Subarea 16 - - - 12 14 Subarea 17 - - - 14 15 Pipe Flow 1011 1010 610 14 15 Subarea 18 - - - 15 16 Pipe Flow 1010 1009 177 ") From June '99 Topographic Data Prepared byAPS Overland Flow Storm Drain (n=0.013) Overiand Flow Storm Drain (n=0.013) Overland Flow Overland Flow Storm Drain (n= 0.013) Overland Flow Overland Flow Storm Drain (n=0.013) Overland Flow Overland Flow Storm Drain (n= 0.013) Overland Flow Storm Drain (n= 0.013) Overland Flow Overland Flow Storm Drain (n=0.013) Overland Flow Storm Drain (n= 0.013) Overland Flow Overland Flow Storm Drain (n=0.013) Overland Flow Storm Drain (n=0.013) Commercial Commercial Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Commercial Low Density Residential Low Density Residential School Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Love Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Density Residential A 1.2 West of Citrus A 23.6 East of Citrus A 1.1 East of Citrus A 23.7 East of Citrus A 0.7 West of Citrus A 0.7 West of Citrus A 12.6 East of Citrus A 11.1 East of Citrus A 23.5 East of Citrus A 1.4 West of Citrus A 24.7 East of Citrus A 24.7 East of Citrus A 1.5 West of Citrus A 24.6 East of Citrus A 24.6 East of Citrus A 1.5 West of Citrus A 12.9 East of Citrus Total: 263 Citrus Report Tables -ds Table Ilia Page 15 6115100 '. .r a .,3s� Table Illb City of Fontana Citrus Avenue Storm Drain Preliminary Engineering Hydrologic Analysis Results Subarea Total Area 25 -Year Runoff 100 -Year Runoff (ac) (cfs) (cfs) 11 5.3 13.3 16.8 2 6.5 14.1 17.9 3 13.1 22.9 29.7 4 23.8 40.6 52.7 5 1.2 2.0 2.6 6 23.6 40.1 52.7 7 23.7 27.8 39.6 8 1.4 1.7 2.4 9 23.7 26.9 38.6 10 23.5 26.0 37.4 11 1.4 1.6 2.2 12 24.7 26.6 38.4 13 24.7 25.9 37.6 14 1.5 1.6 2.3 15 24.6 25.2 36.6 16 24.6 24.6 35.9 17 1.5 1.5 2.2 18 12.9 12.4 18.2 Total: 261.7 307.9 436.3 1.) Combined Flow = 43.6 cfs Citrus Report Tables.xls Table Illb 6/15/00 Page 16 FroPrIbm Node Description Statw Ydtial Flow (cis) 16 System Outlet - Reach 03 +99 Reach 04 +34 - %� Reach 04 +79 Reach 04 +88 ( 15 Junction 05+72 - Reach 05+76 - Reach 06 +26 - Reach 10 +08 - 14 Junction 10 +54 - Reach 10 +56 - Jurxfion 10+64 - Reach 10+66 - Reach 10 +93 - Reach 11 +14 - Reach 11 +35 - 13 Junction 16 +87 - Reach 16 +92 - 12 Junction 23+69 - Reach 23 +74 - 11 Junction 30+51 - Reach 30 +56 - 10 Junction 37 +33 - Reach 37 +38 - Junction 37 +84 ' a. Reach 37 +86 ' Ju notion 37 +94 - Y - Reach 37 +96 - 9 Junction 44 +10 - Reach 44+14 8 Junction 51 +07. Reach 51 +12 - 7 Junction 57 +72. Reach 57 +77. 6 Junction 63+27. - :� Reach 63 +31. - Junction 64 +28. Reach 64 +30. - Junction 64 +38. Reach 64 +40. - System Headworks 65 +60. 44 Citrus Report Tables -Oz Table IV Page 17 6115100 , Notes: 1.) Combined Manning's Roughness Coefficient Citrus Report TBbles.xls Table V 6/15/00 Page 18 Table V City of Fontana Citrus Avenue Storm Drain Preliminary Engineering Street Hydraulic Capacity Calculations Maximum Manning Hydraulic Calculated Half- Cumulative 25- Cumulative 100- Required Half - From To Depth Slope Coefficlene'l Area Wetted Perimeter Radius Street Capacity year Flow year Flow Street Capacity Comments Node Node d, nm S n A P R Q an 0100 Q4 (ft) Mn (ft (ft) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Citrus Avenue 6 7 0.91 0.0110 0.016 20.82 46.67 0.45 119 121 159 38 SD Design 0 =025 7 8 0.91 0.0108 0.016 20.82 46.67 0.45 118 148 198 50 SD Design Q =Q25 8 9 0.91 0.0118 0.016 20.82 46.67 0.45 123 172 232 60 SD Design 0=025 9 10 0.91 0.0105 0.016 20.82 46.67 0.45 116 196 268 72 SD Design 0 -025 10 11 0.91 0.0100 0.016 20.82 46.67 0.45 113 218 301 83 SD Design Q -025 11 12 0.91 0.0114 0.016 20.82 46.67 0.45 121 241 335 94 SD Design 0=025 12 13 0.91 0.0114 0.016 20.82 46.67 0.45 121 261 365 104 SD Design Q =Q25 13 14 0.91 0.0114 0.016 20.82 46.67 0.45 121 282 397 115 SD Design 0 =025 Jurupa Avenue i - - 0.91 0.0048 0.016 20.82 46.67 0.45 78 - - 61 61 cfs is excess flow that will overflow during 100-yr storm event. Notes: 1.) Combined Manning's Roughness Coefficient Citrus Report TBbles.xls Table V 6/15/00 Page 18 q , •.s�..i illy glib A i�• ® r.� Table VI City of Fontana Citrus Avenue Storm Drain Preliminary Engineering Connector Piping Calculations i� Notes: " Data from WSPG 2.) S = ( Q / K ) , per LACFCD Figure &11 3 ' ) h =S - L 4.) V- Q /(7tD214) 5.) V= Q /(aDZ /4) 7.) h =N+h. s ' ) WSE in Inlet = WSE in SD + h °) Existing Street Centerline Elevation with Ultimate Street Section and 1% Cross Slopes Citrus Report Tables.xls Table VI 6/15/00 Page 19 Water Proposed Entrance Water Street Fiowline Surface Lateral Connector Assumed Friction Friction Pipe and Exit Total Surface Elevation at Node Elevation " Side Length Flow' Pipe Diameter Coefficent Slope" Loss Velocity Losses" Loss In Inlet ° ' ) Inlet!' Comments L 0 D K S h V h h (ft) (cfs) (in) (ft/ft) (ft) (fps) (ft) (ft) 14 1011.2 East 85 57 48 1436 0.00158 0.13 4.54 0.38 0.52 1011.7 1011.6 OK 14 1011.7 East 62 8 24 226 0.00125 0.08 2.55 0.12 0.20 1011.9 1011.6 OK 14 1011.8 West 34 2 24 226 0.00008 0.00 0.64 0.01 0.01 1011.8 1011.6 OK 13 1016.0 East 55 20 24 226 0.00783 0.43 6.37 0.76 1.19 1017.1 1018.3 OK 12 1023.2 West 41 2 24 226 0.00008 0.00 0.64 0.01 0.01 1023.2 1024.2 OK 12 1023.2 East 55 27 30 410 0.00434 0.24 5.50 0.56 0.80 1024.0 1024.2 OK 11 1027.9 East 55 22 24 226 0.00948 0.52 7.00 0.91 1.43 1029.4 1033.2 OK 10 1035.6 East 82 16 30 410 0.00152 0.12 3.26 0.20 0.32 1035.9 1039.1 OK 10 1036.3 East 55 6 24 226 0.00070 0.04 1.91 0.07 0.11 1036.4 1039.6 OK 10 1036.4 West 41 2 24 226 0.00008 0.00 0.64 0.01 0.01 1036.4 1039.7 OK 9 1040.6 East 39 24 30 410 0.00343 0.13 4.89 0.45 0.58 1041.2 1046.4 OK 8 1050.7 East 55 25 30 410 0.00372 0.20 5.09 0.48 0.69 1051.4 1054.5 OK 8 1050.7 West 41 2' 24 226 0.00008 0.00 0.64 0.01 0.01 1050.7 1054.5 OK 7 1056.2 East 55 36 30 410 0.00771 0.42 7.33 1.00 1.43 1057.6 1061.2 OK 6 1062.0 East 182 37 30 410 0.00814 1.48 7.54 1.06 2.54 1064.5 1067.8 OK 6 1062.2 East 100 2 24 226 0.00008 0.01 0.64 0.01 0.02 1062.2 1068.4 OK 6 1062.3 West 100 2 .24 226 0.00008 0.01 0.64 0.01 0.02 1062.3 1068.4 OK Notes: " Data from WSPG 2.) S = ( Q / K ) , per LACFCD Figure &11 3 ' ) h =S - L 4.) V- Q /(7tD214) 5.) V= Q /(aDZ /4) 7.) h =N+h. s ' ) WSE in Inlet = WSE in SD + h °) Existing Street Centerline Elevation with Ultimate Street Section and 1% Cross Slopes Citrus Report Tables.xls Table VI 6/15/00 Page 19 K. Table VII City of Fontana Citrus Avenue Storm Drain Preliminary Engineering Inlet Hydraulic Calculations Inlet Calculations (w/ Sum Inlet Calculations (w /o Sum Node Design Street Side Flow Slope Q S Q/S Me) Wit) Design Street Design Width Capacity' Qd (cfs) Revised Design Flow Q (cfs) Design Revised Water Depth " Q/S'"' d Inlet Design Width Capacity'' Q (cfs) Use (ft) Node Side Flow Slope 4.0 Water Depth" Width Use Flow Differential Q Comments 6 East 10.1 0.0110 96.34 Q S Q/S 11e d W - - Q - 14' Inlet 7 East 40.1 0.0110 382.34 ( (ft/ft) 31.0 (ft) (ft) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) 21' and 14' Inlets 6 East 43.6 0.0110 415.71 0.76 18.22 14 33.5 10.1 Will be collected In Inlet below 10 East 26.0 0.0105 253.73 0.64 12.05 10 21.6 4.4 Will be collected in Inlet below 14 East 62.0 0.0114 580.68 0.83 24.58 21 53.0 9.0 Will be collected In Inlet below Inlet Calculations (w /o Sum Node Design Street Side Flow Slope Q S Q/S Me) Wit) Water Depth" d (ft) Design Width L (ft) Design Width Capacity' Qd (cfs) Revised Design Flow Q (cfs) Street Slope S Revised Water Depth " Q/S'"' d Design Width L (ft) Design Width Capacity'' Q (cfs) Use (ft) 6 West 2.0 0.0110 19.07 0.31 10 4.0 - - - - - - 10' Inlet 6 East 10.1 0.0110 96.34 0.48 14 10.0 - - - - - - 14' Inlet 7 East 40.1 0.0110 382.34 0.73 21 31.0 9.1 0.0110 86.77 0.47 14.00 11.00 21' and 14' Inlets 8 East 27.8 0.0108 267.51 0.q5 28 30.0 - - - - - - 28' Inlet 8 West 1.7 0.0108 16.36 0.10 10 3.2 - - - - - - 10' Inlet 9 No inlet, School collecting drainage onsite. 10 East 4.4 0.0105 43.12 0.38 10 5.0 - - - - - - 10' Inlet 10 West. 1.6 0.0105 15.61 0.30 10 3.2 - - - - - - 10' lnlet 11 East 26.6 0.0105 259.59 0.64 Al 24.0 - - - - - - 21' Inlet 12 East 25.9 0.0100 259.00 0.64 21 24.0 - - - - - - 21' inlet 12 West 1.6 0.0100 16.00 0.30 10 3.2 - - - - - - 10' Inlet 13 East 25.2 0.0100 252.00 0.64 21 24.0 - - - - - - 21' Inlet 14 East 9.0 0.0114 84.56 0.46 14 9.0 - - - - - - 14' Inlet 14 W est 1.5 0.0114 14.14 0.29 10 3.0 - - - - - - 10' Inlet Notes: " Willdan and Associates "Street Capecity' Table, Version 1.2 2.) From LACFCD Plate D-10B, Catch Basin Capacities for Sump Condition 'a From LACFCD Plate D -26, Catch Basin Capacities for Sump Conditions Citrus Report Tables.xis Table VII 6/15/00 Page 20 PROJECT LOCATION 1 1 > > W > W a a a a a a a a a a ¢ a M LOS ANGELES INT RSTATE 10 SLOVER LEGEND .ismismosm EXISTING CHANNEL =�• —• EXISTING S7+ORY DRAIN nummmummmum FUTURE STORY DRAIN / Y BOYLE ii //////l// A / W W ci OC J = LEGEND .ismismosm EXISTING CHANNEL =�• —• EXISTING S7+ORY DRAIN nummmummmum FUTURE STORY DRAIN :j a oe W N N.T.S. Page 21 / TO SAN HERNAMM BOYLE ii //////l// AVE / AVE 1111 .1.111// 1111////// / V J W J A a q H q////////♦ n W d W NII AVE 1//11/1/1/1 U "l DECLEZ CHANNEL �11�11�11�11�11�11�11���11�11�11�11� � :j a oe W N N.T.S. Page 21 j . I Page G - 33 SUMP- FORMULA j Q= 4.3AD ° ' 6 (COMPLETE SUBMERGEh10E)� A = AREA OF OPENING . (W x 0.656). • • �•_�.�.�..�► -• • .. ®I.r>siv��a 400 W= LENGTH (FEET) OF CATCH BASIN __—°_= . • . . OPENING I • . . D= DEPTH (FEET) OF FLOW ABOVE - - -I 300 =�o N ORMAL GUTTER GRADE • °.•- I.d ►�� :10►i. �� ��1� !7 Gov m. .: - $ NORMAL C.F. , a 9 C. F AT C.B. • ,v �.a�IIAAM arm • . _ MS Annal irr-Ya ®' 200 . • iliiiiMilliMPWEIMEINIPIM . OS/I1.11111%1111110t3:Al71111111i : t . :0•__4i %IMI!® • . : I MOP anifi/J ® ®�� ! : - : t i ©M'�®lM©Mil ! _ —sue= =° r 9 0 reraaaa. - =moll =OM =aa.■•• al•■■.aa.a_a��ao.=Oomaal Q a. ... 11 0 .aliaa••■asaI..ra • • • INNIMIN -- iMMIIIMI - 111■0- -fir = mmera� ® O>ff ms W:= • ��■>���a ® ®MomaM rssA�r�►® ®motes F U - • I ILMIXE ssQmMMo�>s®era®M � ��mma� . 1 • U � = IMIMMININIIS r_•�aaaaa ao�a�vaa. as �a�. aav � ...MM∎ailMIZ∎=M.va,m. . ii � aoo aaaa. . •■■•a MESS IIMMIN■•■• MIMM __ .aaa.�aaa�� aaaa. . 30 • Z olonismei-∎ev11■aIIIP aanali.MINIMIIMIS O■11:111ININI /MENEM MO! MIMS ®nom sam:wem • • : QiIIm mom woo ®malanza7rGi ® -INIM111•111:11 11111•11111oOIMMItIIMI® ASH -fir lJ00- ®- ®[mI ®f� • - r ����YO� Fib madno ��7 :. i� (J) . :... ®>� ®d��AEM1DIJ� asEZ��� • 2 a - - .:.: O ® ®�fLIESIU lEII LL • ®�® @!sue ®YSt® r ®)C ® ®S� ®Iilrac® ® • ' • V . EISZI!!;® ® ®Ei>m ®IIIII I -- y . samma®®m®ntimmiuma o • ... eeID® ®® ®111JHEttE ' ® ® ® ® ®:.' I Mall] PO • ! I I I i• I i 1 L. 's t: ® ®® 1 i ®® ®®® RWIEllll Ill i NUM ! . - Itj ® ®® i • iiiiIIIMUNIMME ®I1111il;l I I I i I I:! UW)t ® ill WHO l0 - _ 9 • s - =�� = 8 . -- .._.� -ate = 7 • a.� ..a..a.aa ..aa. aaaa .:∎. so...va.......:a.:... � - •_ -- - • . .a....��..�e..�...� MM. ma_ _ • .3 4 .5 .6 7.8 .9 LO 2 3 4 5. D= DEPTH OF FLOW (FT.) ABOVE NORMAL GUTTER GRADE • Los Angeles County Flood Control; , DistriICt • CATCH BASIN CAPACITIES - sue �i "_ t.- . - - s FOR SUMP CONDITIO "' TO BE USED FOR C.B. - NOS: I- 2' :8:3 . Page 63 • •