Loading...
35845iNmNnu _26 IE PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS FOR LA QUINTA RETAIL CENTER LOCATED AT U6, NEC CALLE TAMPICO AND DESERT CLUB DRIVE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 80 South Lake Ave, Suite 660 Pasadena, CA 91101 Ul Prepared B P Y DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE CONSULTANTS, INC. Q 8175 E. Kaiser Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92808 (714) 685 -6860 Brandon Willnecker P.E., Principal Project No. 07 -559 August 6, 2007 November 23, 2007 ♦ r April 22, 2008 V Revised On: May 19, 2008 t 00 �D l� lzva 0 PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS FOR LA QUINTA RETAIL CENTER LOCATED AT NEC CALLE TAMPICO AND DESERT CLUB DRIVE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY • 80 South Lake Ave, Suite 660 Pasadena, CA 91101 Prepared By., DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE CONSULTANTS, INC. 8175 E. Kaiser Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92808 \� n (714) 685 -6860 Brandon Willnecker P.E., Principal G, Q Project No. 07 -559 August 6, 2007 November 23, 2007 April 22, 2008 Revised On: May 19, 2008 u HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 NARRATIVE Introduction Project Description Hydrology /Hydraulic Methodology Water Quality/Nuisance Water Summary SECTION 2.0 SITE INFORMATION Location Map Reference Documentation Site I -D -F Curve Proposed Hydrology Map Overland Release Exhibit CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA SECTION 3.0 PROPOSED SITE HYDROLOGIC/ HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Pipe Index Map 10 -Year Rational Analysis 100 -Year Rational Analysis • CNuisance Flow /Mitigation - Analysis; SECTION 4.0 OFF - SITE /CALLE TAMPICO FLOOD ANALYSIS Tributary Watershed Map 100 -Year Watershed Rational Analysis Eisenhower SD Flow Analysis Calle Tampico SD Flow Analysis Calle Tampico Street Flow Analysis 0 uRC all 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc • • HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA SECTION 1, 0 NARRATIVE Introduction Project Description Hydrology /Hydraulic Methodology Water Quality/Nuisance Water Summary HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA • Introduction The project is located on approximately 3.4 acres of vacant land at the NEC of Calle Tampico and Desert Club Drive, in the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. The proposed project will include the construction of three retail /commercial buildings. Additional improvements will include parking lots, landscape areas, and underground sewer, water and storm drain facilities. This report has been prepared to calculate the post developed condition for the on -site storm water runoff and the drainage received from the adjoining property and the conveyance of these flows to public facilities. Project Description Existing Site Conditions: The majority of the project site consists of barren, vegetated land that drains in the westerly and southerly directions. The remaining project site consists of paved parking that drains into an existing storm water inlet. Proposed Site Development: The proposed site consists of three retail /commercial buildings, sidewalks, parking areas, and landscaping. The completed project will total approximately 3.4 acres. On -Site stormwater runoff drains overland into catch basins and grated inlets, flows into a private underground storm drain network, and connects to a private catch basin with dry well near the entrance along Calle Tampico. Once the dry well becomes inundated, the storm water will rise to the flow line elevation of the catch basin. As the runoff leaves the catch basin, the stormwater will flow into the public right -of -way in Calle Tampico. In addition to the on -site storm water runoff, approximately 0.23 acres of off -site area is tributary to the project. This off - site runoff will also be collected and conveyed to the public right -of -way through the on -site • storm water facilities. A public catch basin will also be installed in Calle Tampico that will drain into the on -site private dry well in order to percolate public nuisance water and help mitigate the flooding conditions in Calle Tampico. The design of this development does not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels, or frequencies in any area outside the development. The proposed development is consistent with the city zoned use and utilizes a drywell and on -site ponding to mitigate the generated runoff prior to entering the flood plane elevation. The amount of on -site storage below the flood plane will not be impacted by our development. Hydro logy /Hydraulic Methodology The hydrology calculations for the project are based on the Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD) Hydrology Manual /Procedure (April, 1978 edition), City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06 -16, and City of La Quinta Conditions of Approval for Village Use Permit 2006 -035. Location maps, precipitation values, slope intensity curve values, and rainfall depth values have all been interpolated from the RCFC manual or referenced from the La Quinta Engineering Bulletins regarding hydrology and can be found in Section 2.0 of this report. The project is located in Zone 3 for NOAA data info. Intelisolve Hydroflow Storm Sewer (2008, Version 12.05) is used to perform a rational analysis of each subarea. A rational method analysis is being used in conformance with the City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06 -16 (EB 06 -16) for non - retention storm water analysis. The software calculates the subarea runoff by multiplying the area by the runoff coefficient by the rainfall intensity (Q =ACI). The rainfall intensity is determined by the time of concentration for 0 uRC A 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA the subarea and the Intensity- Duration - Frequency (IDF) curve for the project area. For each • subarea, the time of concentration (Tc) is assumed as a worst case scenario to be 5 minutes. The IDF curve is generated by using NOAA precipitation data, RCFCD data, and RCFCD tables. Data used to generate the IDF curve are located in Section 2.0 of this report. The project site is located in a soil classification zone of type "C ". The runoff coefficient used for this site is 0.90, standard for developed commercial retail use. . The Storm Sewer software then models the conveyance and confluence of these subareas based upon the proposed storm drain design and downstream hydraulic constraints. The proposed storm drain system is designed per EB 06 -16 for the conditions in the 10 year storm event and the 100 year storm event. In the 10 year storm event, the flows will be non - pressurized flows and the HGLio is at least 6" below catch basin flow line. For the 100 year storm event, the pipes can become pressurized and the HGLioo shall be a minimum of 1' below the finished floors and less than 7' above the top of pipe. For the downstream hydraulic constraint, the outflow of the system in the drywell catch basin is assumed to be at the top of pipe. Proposed Conditions: In conformance with EB 06 -16 and discussions with city staff, the proposed site will collect on- site runoff and discharge the runoff into the public right -of -way un- detained. In addition to the on -site runoff, the storm drain network will also accept flows from the adjacent parcel and nuisance flow from Calle Tampico. The combined proposed site and offsite tributary flow generates 11.34 cfs in the 10 year storm event and 20.77 cfs in the 100 year storm event. The on -site storm drain pipes have been sized to convey these flows in accordance with EB 06 -16 when the downstream drywell is not full. Once the drywell becomes inundated, the drywell catch basin discharges into the public right -of -way at an elevation of 39.78. This "overflow" elevation • is at least 1.22' below the finished floor of any on -site building. Should the "overflow" catch basin fail to discharge the runoff into the public right -of -way, the site's overland flow path will release the stormwater into Calle Tampico as shown inction 2.0. The overland flow path has irelease elevation of 40.00 (1' below adjace ()inis�; or) and a maximum ponding depth of To demonstrate the impacts of th on -site tormwater discharge into Calle Tampico, and the impacts of the 100 -year storm flo64 el tion on the site, an analysis was performed on the upstream tributary land and the existing flood facilities that impact the tributary area. All calculations and maps used in 'this analysis are included in Section 4.0 of this report. A tributary area was estimated based upon existing city analysis and site observation. A total of 92 acres Cod as found to be tributary to Calle Tampico along the site frontage (this includes the proposed development of the site). Observations of the area show the entire water shed to be best scribed as large area residential lots. The soil type was estimated to be under the classification of soil type "A ". The hydrologic flow path use or the rational analysis begins at Eisenhower Drive ana a Sinaloa and runs along Eisenhower Drive and down Calle Tampico to the % proposed site. This flow path is approximately 4,300' and runs at an average slope of 0.47 %. The tributary drainage area results in a peak 100 -year flow along the project frontage of 142 cfs. C;�� Tributary to this drainage area is a 54" storm drain located at Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico. A capacity calculation of this 54" storm drain running at full flow capacity results in an JS Y additional 68 cfs of tributary runoff. The total tributary runoff for the watershed is 210 cfs. .�` Conveying this total runoff are three devices. First, there is an existing 7' wide catch basin along Calle Tampico that drains to a retention basin located north of Calle Tampico. This catch basin is assumed to collect 14 cfs (2 cfs per linear foot). The second mode of conveyance is a 6'x3' RCB 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA located in Calle Tampico. A capacity calculation of this 6'x3' RCB running at full flow capacity • results in 94 cfs of conveyance capacity. Subtracting these two modes of conveyance from the gross tributary runoff results in 102 cfs that must be conveyed by the third mode of conveyance, the surface of Calle Tampico. A capacity calculation was performed to determine the maximum 100 -year flood elevation in Calle Tampico along the project frontage. Based upon the known Calle Tampico street section and slopes, the 100 -year flood elevation was found to be 39.87. The limits of flooding is shown in the Overland Release Exhibit in Section 2.0 for the 100 -yr-7 storm. Water Qua lity/ Nuisance Water Prior to discharging into the public storm drain system, the storm water will be treated in accordance with Riverside County and City of La Quinta adoption of the state's general permit. The proposed treatment system is a combination of a CDS model PMSU 20_15 unit located at the downstream end of the private storm drain network and an infiltration device /drywell. Due to the on -site acceptance of existing off -site tributary flow, the water treatment device will be upsized to accommodate the additional untreated flows created by the adjacent property that is currently untreated. The nuisance water generated on -site will be retained and infiltrated on -site through the use of the Maxwell Plus Drywell system or city approved equivalent. Calculations for the mitigation of the nuisance water flows are included in Section 3.0 of this report and are based upon city standard criteria. The drywell will be located at the downstream end of the on -site storm drain system prior to reaching the public right -of -way. The drywell will act as a flow - through drywell that will retain low flows (nuisance water) and become inundated at greater flows. The inundated drywell will bypass the higher flow to the public right -of -way. • Summary • The proposed project is required to adhere to City of La Quinta standards, as well as the conditions set by the City. of La Quinta Planning Commission for Village Use Permit 2006 -035. The proposed storm drain system outlined in this report adheres to these requirements for discharge to the public facilities located adjacent to the project. This project will convey on -site and off -site tributary runoff to the public right -of -way in a manner agreed upon by the city. This report also demonstrates that the hydraulic grade line in the 10 -year and 100 -year storm events meet the city requirements, that the on -site nuisance flow is detained on -site, and that the city flood plane elevation will not be affected by this development. 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA C7 • SECTION 2, O SITE INFORMATION Location Map Reference Documentation Site I -D -F Curve Proposed Hydrology Map Overland Release Exhibit 0 DRC A 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc • � is Tihf 4 4 a" P.O. Box 1504 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92247 -1504 PUBLIC WORKS /ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 78 -495 CALLS TAMPICO (760) 777 -7075 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 FAX (760) 777 -7155 ENGINEERING BULLETIN #06 -16 TO: All Interested Parties FROM: Amothy R. Jonasson, Public Works Director /City' Engineer EFFECTIVE DATE: December 19, 2006 SUBJECT: Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems This bulletin establishes storm drain study specifications. All hydrology and preliminary hydraulic reports for the City of La Quinta should follow these criteria. Hydrology studies for the City of La Quinta shall be performed for projects when required by the conditions of approval or as requested by the City Engineer. Reference material used for city plan checking purposes is as follows: 1. Plan Check Checklist Storm drain plan checks are guided by the documents found in the following; hyperlink: http!//www.la-guinta.orn/publicworks/tractl/-z onlinelibrary /olancheck checklist%20NEW.htm 2. Archive Plans Example City plans can be found at the following hyperlink: httu• / /www la- auinta ora /olancheck /m search aso A useful method of quickly searching archive plans is to load the plan type and current year (e.g. 2006) and then search the archive by clicking the GO button. Hydrology Report Guidelines (General) All hydrology reports shall follow the general guidelines set forth by Riverside County Flood Control (RCFC) and Water Conservation District's Hydrology Manual. (quick drawdown) large storm events. Use of walls as a top ring of the retention • basin is prohibited. Retaining walls will require approval from both the Public Works Department Director /City Engineer and Community Development Department Director. 10. Retention Basin Width Retention basins shall have a minimum width of 20 feet as measured from the lowest elevation contour. Previously, retention basin widths were governed by City guidance for aspect ratios for basins depths greater than 6 feet. 11. Overflow Routes Retention basins should be designed to overflow to City arterial streets or the adjacent local street as applicable. Historical flow route should be followed and not changed on a regional perspective but re- grading and import to achieve an immediate route to the adjacent street should be considered for projects which concentrate flows to adjacent open land or off -site developments. Overflow routes shall be designed using an open channel flow (surface flow). Closed conduit emergency overflow must be approved by the City Engineer. 12. Rainfall Intensity Rainfall intensity for hydrological report preparation is regionally zoned within the City pursuant to available NOAA data. A regional rainfall intensity map of the City should be referenced to confirm rainfall amount assumptions provided in the following table. *The design storm for the City is 100 -year storm (worst case of • 24 hour, 6 hour, 3 hour or 1 hour duration). The 500 -year storm is only used to review for problematic secondary overflows which do not drain to a public arterial street, creating a trapped water condition. 13. Hydrograph Loss Rates According to the Riverside County Flood Control Hydrology Manual, the loss rates generally range from 0.10 to 0.40 in /hr with most falling between 0.20 and 0.25 in /hr. Three and six hour duration storms may use a constant loss rate; however, the 24 hour duration storm shall obtain a variable loss rate using the equation found on page E -9 of the manual, which is Ft = C(D -T) -1.55 + Fm. Variable loss • rates are not required for the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Analysis (Shortcut Method). Additionally, developed condition low loss rate calculations on 24 hour 100 yr storm (inches) Zones 1 h 3hr 6hr 24hr Zone 1 - Southwest mountains 2.50 3.40 4.00 6.00 Zone 2 - Southwest mountains 2.30 3.00 3.701 5.00 Zone 3 - West mountains and areas south of 2.20 2.80 3.40 4.50 Hwy 111 and west of Washington Zone 4 - West of Jefferson and areas east of 2.10 2.70 3.20 4.25 Washington including the Cove Zone 5 - East of Jefferson and west of a 2.00 2.60 3.10 4.00 staggered line trending south west of Calhoun Street and Avenue 50 Zone 6 - West of a staggered line trending sou-tF 1.90 2.50 3.00 3.75• west of Calhoun Street and Avenue 50 13. Hydrograph Loss Rates According to the Riverside County Flood Control Hydrology Manual, the loss rates generally range from 0.10 to 0.40 in /hr with most falling between 0.20 and 0.25 in /hr. Three and six hour duration storms may use a constant loss rate; however, the 24 hour duration storm shall obtain a variable loss rate using the equation found on page E -9 of the manual, which is Ft = C(D -T) -1.55 + Fm. Variable loss • rates are not required for the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Analysis (Shortcut Method). Additionally, developed condition low loss rate calculations on 24 hour large area, shallow retention basin configurations. Historical City maximum • freeboard specifications are now eliminated. 19. Hydraulic Grade Line (HGL) Starting Points Projects within the City of La Quinta that are required to contain their 100 year storm flows shall show two (2) separate HGLs for maximum flow rate (HGL,o) and maximum volume (HGL,QO). The first HGL (HGL,o) will reflect the values from the 10 year frequency design storm. Values of Q,o and V,o will be determined from the Rational Method. Conduit sizing shall be based on non pressure type flow (HGL shall not be located above the crown of a pipe). The second HGL (HGL,00) will reflect values based on the maximum 100 year frequency design storm. The HGL,00 shall show that the maximum 100 year storm can be retained within the project and the use of the project's infrastructure shall be maintained. 20. 10 Year Frequency Design Storm HGL Calculation This HGL shall start at or above an elevation in the downstream retention basin that is equal to the % depth of the retention elevation caused by the 100 year frequency design storm event. The piping system shall be designed based on open channel flow as opposed to pressure flow. This HGL should indicate the hydraulic conditions at the maximum storm water flow rate. Requirements: • • Pressure pipe flow not allowed • Identify this HGL as the HGL,o on the hydraulic calculations and storm drain plan profile • Velocity not less than 2.5 fps • Pipe sized based on Rational Method • Head losses shall be based on HEC 22 Ch 7. • HGL freeboards: 6" or greater below CB flow line 21. 100 Year Frequency Design Storm HGL Calculation This HGL shall start at a location at the top of the retention basin water level caused by the 100 year design storm determined using the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph. This HGL should indicate the hydraulic conditions at the maximum storm water volume with a full basin or channel. Requirements: • Velocity (no requirement) • Identify this HGL as the HGL,00 on the hydraulic calculations and storm drain plan profile • Pressure pipe flow allowed. • Pipe size based on Rational Method. • No part of the emergency route shall obtain a water depth greater than 1.5 feet. V1 • • HGL Freeboards and Elevations • Difference in elevation between CB flow line and HGL in retention basin shall be between 0 and 12 inches. • 1ft min from top of manhole cover • Not to exceed 7ft above the top of pipe • HGL must be located 1 ft below the adjacent Pad Elevation 22. Whitewater Channel HGL Assuming major storm coincidental occurrences are taken into consideration already (see page 7 -8 of HEC -22 Storm Drains), the projects HGL100 shall be located 2 feet below Whitewater Channel's estimated HGL500 (this is also equal to 1 foot below the existing Whitewater Concrete Channel Lining). Time of concentration for channel discharge will assume a full channel. Flap gate installation may be applicable based on project elevations. 23. La Quinta Evacuation Channel HGL The Evacuation Channel obtains an HGL,op with an approximate elevation of 48.0 pursuant to information provided by CVWD to the City. Additional elevation information for the Evacuation Channel is currently under review at CVWD. The elevation is based on NGVD 1929. Elevations showing on the plan should be based on the same. Flap gate installation may be applicable based on project elevations. • 24. Retention Basin Landscape Requirements Retention basins shall be landscaped and properly irrigated. The retention basin landscape plans must be approved by the City Engineer /Public Works Director. The retention basin must be capable of draining the 100 year storm within 72 hours. Project incapable of draining the 100 year storm within 72 hours will be reviewed by the City for enhancement options to promote drainage conveyance. In basins with depths exceeding 8ft, trees shall be planted in the 8 -foot wide terraces. The number of trees shall be calculated by multiplying the basin lot. boundary length by the number of 8 -foot wide terraces in the basin and then dividing by 100. 25. Typical Storm Drain Pipe Gradients & Velocity Primary street storm drains, designers should assume minimum grade = 0.3% based on minimum flow velocity of 2.5 ft /sec. For local area drains, 4 " -6" pipe minimum grade = 1 %, larger pipe diameters = 0.5% should be assumed. 26. Typical Street Flows Street flows shall meet the design requirements of FHWA HEC -22. When gutters obtain small slopes, or where sediment may accumulate, or when parking is allowed on the side of the street, the designer should increase the n value by 0.02. 27. Storm Drain Easement Width Requirements is The City of La Quinta requirements for minimum widths (generally 20 feet, excepting deep drainage systems) of storm drain easements is found in easement requirement charts from the Riverside County Transportation Department. Ten 411% • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007 -042 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2006 -035 FORWARD ARCHITECTURE/ HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT OCTOBER 9, 2007 DRAINAGE 44. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of per approved methods contained in Engineering Bulletin No. 06 -16 — Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06 -015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. 45. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right -of -way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to LQMC Section 9.100.040(B)(7). 46. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water • (through underground piping and /or retention facilities) from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. 47. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 48. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 49. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 50. As Preliminary Precise Grading Plans and Preliminary Hydrology Report have not been provided and /or approved for this Village Use Permit, the applicant shall have the option of the following Scenarios for stormwater handling for the site. 51. The Planning Director shall review any proposed plan modifications due to drainage and hydrology to determine if the proposed modification is minor, will not result in significant changes in the project, and complies with the spirit and • intent of the original approving action. If the director determines the modification may result in a significant change in the project, the Director shall Page 15 of 24 41 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007 -042 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2006 -035 FORWARD ARCHITECTURE/ HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT OCTOBER 9, 2007 refer the change to the Planning Commission. Scenario No. 1 — On -Site Storm Water Directed Off -Site to New Catch Basins constructed by the applicant on Desert Club Drive and Calle Tampico 52. The applicant will be allowed to utilize acceptable surface drainage facility designs to drain stormwater from the site on to Desert Club Drive. The applicant shall construct catch basins and underground storm drain system to pipe water to the existing system along Desert Club Drive. In addition, the applicant shall construct catch basins along Calle Tampico to collect storm water to transport it to the existing system in Calle Tampico and Desert Club Drive as approved by the City Engineer. Scenario No. 2 — On -Site Storm Water Captured On -Site and Directed Off -Site Through On -Site Underground Storm Drainage System to Existing Off -Site Underground • Drainage System 53. The applicant shall be allowed to direct stormwater from the Village Use Permit site through the on -site underground drainage network to the existing storm drain system off site as approved by the City Engineer. 54. Pursuant to all scenarios listed above, the Applicant is hereby notified that future site modifications may be necessary including, but not limited to building layouts and parking lot and drive aisle configuration. If, in the event, the proposed retention capacity or pass through storm water flow is found to be inadequate during final design, the applicant shall make adjustments to the site layout as needed to accommodate the increased retention /detention or pass through capacity required to satisfy safety issues. Pursuant to the afore mentioned, the applicant may be required to construct additional underground and aboveground drainage facilities to convey on site and off site stormwater through the project site. UTILITIES 55. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110 (Utilities). 56. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all • utility lines within any right -of -way, and all above - ground utility structures Page 16 of 24 11 • • • PI ATF fl- 4 R Stor Sewer OF Curves • OF file: La QuinFdlDF Curve.IDF Int. (in /hr) 14.00 12.00 10.00 : M AM 4.00 2.00 Csb� (3,> (3.3) 0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 14.00 100 -Yr 10.00 4.00 2.00 n nn 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Time (min) Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 r� U � 0 � 0 LEGEND CATCH BASIN SUBAREA BOUNDARY FLOW DIRECTION NOTE: ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE BASED UPON NAVD 29 DATUM 05 -15 -08 PROPOSED 1\ i HYDROLOGY MAP 1 �l CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA r DRC Development Resource ing - Land Inc. C Civil Engineering land Surveying Lond Plonning SCALE 1"=60' 8175 EAST KAISER BOULEVARD ANAHEIM HILLS. CA 92808 (714) 685 -6860 5 MIN TC I v.UJIAU vrr —JIIL Tc Q,o= 1.88CFS I f Q,o 1.115CFS 0.02AC OFF—SITE OFF -SITE TRIBUTARY Q10o= 3.03CFS Q,00= 1.85CFS I I nR�Aj I I I I I I C ,r .0 SHOPS 2 I 42.50 FF 1 I I A6 LEGEND CATCH BASIN SUBAREA BOUNDARY FLOW DIRECTION NOTE: ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE BASED UPON NAVD 29 DATUM 05 -15 -08 PROPOSED 1\ i HYDROLOGY MAP 1 �l CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA r DRC Development Resource ing - Land Inc. C Civil Engineering land Surveying Lond Plonning SCALE 1"=60' 8175 EAST KAISER BOULEVARD ANAHEIM HILLS. CA 92808 (714) 685 -6860 0.02AC OFF—SITE i� - C ,r .0 as I' �, j � I iii: � � • � 0• IN 1 . . , . ��� AREA LEGEND CATCH BASIN SUBAREA BOUNDARY FLOW DIRECTION NOTE: ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE BASED UPON NAVD 29 DATUM 05 -15 -08 PROPOSED 1\ i HYDROLOGY MAP 1 �l CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA r DRC Development Resource ing - Land Inc. C Civil Engineering land Surveying Lond Plonning SCALE 1"=60' 8175 EAST KAISER BOULEVARD ANAHEIM HILLS. CA 92808 (714) 685 -6860 um 101 ...... . ..... . SPRINGTIME WAY RIGHT O F WAY ---- ----------- .............. .................. .......... .......... ......... ............................. —7 r ............ :4 T OVERFLOW POINT I 4 . ..... TO ... BLIC -WAY .7 L 41. 7 41 -------- ------- 4 j SHOPS 2 1 1 40 42.50 FF 17 LAJ _ __1 i i _(" � :.� is •.'.'." '".': 1 I 41.4 1 PROPERTY j4 0 H4 :/.71NE 41 jt> .......... __ _ 4 LJ "T RL J 0 MAJOR ... 42-00 FF R_ RI H T F i 39.6 WAY - ----- 0 SHOPS 1 41.60 FIF OVERF4QW PQINT EI PROPERTY JU PU8LI MAXWELL JR 4 4 RIGHT—OF—WAY H 39.60 OVERFLOW LINE ... ....... ........... ... ... .... ...... Sj ELEVATION RIGHT OF WAY _2 ..................... ....... .............................. ...................... ... .......... ................. T- v- rrrrrrrrrr NT- ........... �MP LEGEND LIMITS OF PONDING OVERFLOW- PATH NOTE: ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE BASED UPON NAVID 29 DATUM 05-19-08 N OVERLAND RELEASE EXHIBIT CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA Development Resource Consultants, Inc. Civil Engineering - Land Surveying - Land Planning SCALE 1"=60' DRm_2a8175 EAST KAISER BOULEVARD ANAHEIM HILLS, CA 92808 (714) 685-6860 • • r� HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA SECTION 3, 0 PROPOSED SITE RATIONAL ANALYSIS Pipe Index Map 10 -Year Rational Analysis 100 -Year Rational Analysis WilIsance F/owJMitigafion Analysis C7 0 0 HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA PIPE INDEX MAP 07-&-j La Qu i nta Al A5 38 37 36 27 34 A2 26 25 A6 4 33 23 22 32 21 17 15 0 19 20 A3 A4 9 31 A7 30 29 11 12 8 7 13 6 14 5 16 4 A11 A10 18 2 A9 1 Outfall Project File: La Quinta Site Study.stm Number of lines: 38 Date: 05 -19 -2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 v12.05 • • • HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA 10- YEAR STORM ANAL YSIS • • Page 1 0 -Yr Hy Line Line Inlet Drng Runoff i Flow Invert Invert Vel Vel Depth Depth HGL HGL Gnd /Rim Gnd /Rim J -Loss No. Span ID Area Coeff Inlet Rate Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up El Dn El Up Coeff (in) (ac) (C) (in /hr) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.26 31.21 31.76 2.70 3.30 2.50 1.91 33.71 33.67 39.71 40.15 0.75 2 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.34 31.76 32.30 3.04 5.10 2.09 1.31 33.85 33.61 40.15 40.10 2.00 3 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.38 32.30 32.58 3.74 5.57 1.71 1.23 ** 34.01 33.81 40.10 40.05 0.75 qha 4 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.96 32.58 33.99 3.13 5.54 1.96 1.20 ** 34.54 35.19 j 40.05 40.70 0.75 5 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.02 33.99 34.44 4.01 5.55 1.57 1.21** 35.56 35.65 j 40.70 40.65 0.75 �..�E°.� rt I` +\,< 6 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.11 34.44 34.53 4.03 4.39 1.57 1.47 36.01 36.00 40.65 40.00 0.75 7 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.17 34.53 34.58 3.53 3.64 1.78 1.73 36.31 36.31 40.00 40.00 0.75 8 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.16 34.58 34.85 2.20 2.58 1.98 1.70 36.56 36.55 40.00 40.00 1.00�,t- 9 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.97 34.85 35.48 2.30 3.85 1.85 1.20 36.70 36.68 40.00 40.90 1.00 10 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.74 35.48 35.60 2.21 2.21 1.00 1.00 36.68 36.69 40.90 40.80 0.75 11 18 A8 0.78' 0.90 5.79 5.31 34.58 35.50 3.00 4.72 1.50 0.91 36.53 36.41 40.00 39.00 0.75, 12 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 34.85 35.54 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 36.74 36.75 40.00 40.15 0.75 13 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 35.54 36.14 1.01 1.59 1.00 0.61 36.76 36.75 40.15 40.50 0.75 14 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 36.14 36.30 1.52 2.38 0.64 0.44 36.78 36.74 40.50 40.70 0.75 15 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.68 35.48 35.88 3.29 4.64 1.20 0.93 ** 36.68 36.81 j 40.90 40.90 0.75 16 ` 12 • A10 0.06 0.90 5.79 0.82 36.30 36.87 1.73 2.95 0.58 0.38 ** 36.88 37.25 j 40.70 41.37 0.75 17 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.59 35.88 36.23 2.30 3.88 1.24 0.84 37.12 37.07 40.90 41.10 0.75 18 12 A9 0.10 0.90 5.79 0.52 36.87 37.37 1.19 2.56 0.54 0.31** 37.41 37.68 j 41.37 41.37 0.75 19 C-20 18 A3 0.73 0.90 5.79 3.80 36.23 36.75 2.56 4.35 1.17 0.74** 37.40 37.49 j 41.10 40.25 1.00 15 " A4` - 0.51 0.90 5.79 2.66 35.88 37.00 2..21 4.10 1.19 0.65 ** 37.07 37.65 j 40.90 40.25 1.00 21 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.25 36.23 36.38 1.49 1.71 1.19 1.04 37.42 37.42 41.10 40.90 0.75 22 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.28 36.38 36.54 1.68 2.02 1.08 0.92 37.46 37.46 40.90 40.90 0.75 07 -559 La Quinta Number of lines: 38 Date: 05 -19 -2008 NOTES: Intensity = 16.60 / (Inlet time + 0.60) ^ 0.61 - Return period = 10 Yrs. ; i Inlet control; - Critical depth Hydranow Storm Sewers 2008 • • • Page 2 0 -Yr Hy g Line Line Inlet Drng Runoff i Flow Invert Invert Vol Vol Depth Depth HGL HGL Gnd /Rim Gnd /Rim J -Loss No. Span ID Area Coeff Inlet Rate Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up El Dn El Up Coeff (in) (ac) (C) (In /hr) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (fUs) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 23 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.34 36.54 36.77 1.95 2.77 0.96 0.72 37.50 37.49 40.90 41.60 1.00 24 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.62 36.77 37.37 0.80 2.69 0.95 0.33 ** 37.72 37.70 41.60 40.84 1.00 25- 12 A2' 0.12 0.90 5.79' 0.63' 37.37.. 37.50 1.90 2.68 0.44' 0.34** 37.81 37.84 40.84 40.50 1.00 26 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.83 36.77 37.14 2.50 3.63 0.88 0.61 37.65 37.75 41.60 41.20 0.75 27 12 0.00 0.90 0.00 1.85 37.14 37.22 2.66 2.87 0.83 0.76 37.97 37.98 41.20 40.90 1.00 28 15 All 0.16 0.90 5.79 0.83 32.58 35.80 0.68 2.79 1.25 0.37 ** 34.65 36.17 40.05 39.80 1.00 29 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.37 35.50 35.56 1.74 1.74 1.00 1.00 36.86 36.86 39.00 39.10 0.75 30 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.39 35.56 36.04 1.77 1.90 1.00 0.88 36.89 36.92 39.10 39.75 0.75 31 12 A7 0.27 0.90 5.79 1.41 36.04 36.30 1.86 2.72 0.92 0.63 36.96 36.93 39.75 39.80 0.75 32 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.77 35.60 35.96 2.25 2.56 1.00 0.82 36.75 36.78 40.80 40.82 0.75 33 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.83 35.96 36.68 2.43 3.92 0.91 0.57 ** 36.87 37.25 j 40.82 41.00 1.00 34 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.13 36.68 37.40 1.71 3.29 0.78 0.45 ** 37.46 37.85 j 41.00 41.50 0.75 '35 i12 - `A6 0.15 0.90 5.79 0.78 36.68 36.90 1.24 2.02 0.75 0.49 37.43 37.39 41.00 40.90 0.75 36 12 0.00 0.90 0.00 1.14 37.40 37.56 2.38 3.30 0.59 0.45 ** 37.99 38.01 j 41.50 41.00 0.75 37- --- 12 A5 0.22 0.90 5.79 1.15 37.56 37.70 2.39 3.28. 0.59 0.46 ** 38.15 38.16 j 41.00 40.70 0.75 38 12 Al _0.36, -0.90 5.79 1:88 -37.22 37.35- . 2.54. 2.83 0.89- -0.79. 38.11 38.14 40.90 40.35 0.75 07 -559 La Quinta Number of lines: 38 Date: 05 19 -2008 NOTES: Intensity = 16.60 / (Inlet time + 0.60) ^ 0.61 - Return period = 10 Yrs. ; i Inlet control; " Critical depth Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linepofile (Line 1) -A • • Pagel of l Elev (ft) Line I - A 43.00 _....v.. None..._.... 43.00 ............ . 40.00 40.00 37.00 37.00 34 .00 34.00 31.00 31.00 28.00 28.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (fus) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 1 11.34 31.21 31.76 2.50 1.92 2.01 33.71 33.68 33.77 2.31 2.80 6.00 5.89 07-559 La Quinta --TNo. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line Profile (Line 2) - A • •Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 2 -A 43.00 43.00 --------------- 40.00 40.00 37.00 Mims 37.00 34.00 .............. .......... 34.00 31.00 31.00 M128.00 28.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (fus) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 2 11.39 31.76 32.30 2.01 1.30 1.44 33.77 33.60 33.74 i 2.69 4.41 5.89 5.30 07-569 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 nyu-- Linelprofile (Line 3) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 3- A 44.00 44.00 41.00 41.00 38.00 38.00 35.00 - 35.00 32.00 - 32.00 Lf-m-301i @,--3.-. 503/6---=--- 29.00 29.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (Ofs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft1s) (ft) (ft) 3 11.42 32.30 32.58 1.44 1.13 1.13 33.74 33.71 j 33.71 3.91 5.30 5.30 4.97 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line'Rofile (Line 4) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 4 -A 44.00 44.00 41.00 41.00 38.00 30.00 35.00 __r - 35.00 32.00 Line 5--- 32.00 r, 29.00 28.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 4 11.04 32.58 33.99 1.49 1.11 1.11 34.07 35.10 j _T 35.10 3.63 5.24 4.97 4.21 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05 -19 -2008 Hydrailow Storm Sewers 2008 Line Profile (Line 5) - A • • Pagel of 1 nyaramow Dmrm Dowers cwo Linepofile (Line 6) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) None Line 6 -A None 41.00 - 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 35.00 33.00 33.00 31.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 6 11.16 34.44 34.53 1.46 1.35 1.55 35.90 35.88 36.08 3.74 4.11 3.71 2.97 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 'Profile (Line 7) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 7 -A None None 41.00 4 1.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 5.00 3 ....... --- ----- --------- f -g- L-4 33.00 33.00 31.00 31.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up I (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (fus) (fus) (ft) (ft) 7 11.20 34.53 34.58 1.62 1.56 1.70 36.15 36.14 36.28 3.32 3.46 2.97 2.92 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 1YU-..VW 0....O . 4VVO Linef0file (Line 8) - A • 0 Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 8 -A None Manhole 41.00 41.00 39.00 .. ......... 39.00 37.00 .............. 37.00 35.00 35.00 Line 9 33.00 33.00 31.00 — 31.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (fus) (fus) (ft) (ft) 8 7.82 34.58 34.85 1.79 1.51 1.61 36.37 36.36 36.46 2.08 2.52 2.92 2.65 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow, Storm Sewers 2008 Line 00file (Line 9) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Hydreflow Storm Sewers 2008 Manhole Elev (ft) Line 9- A N-lanhole 41.00 — 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 — 35.00 Lii ie 10 33.00 33.00 31.00 — 31.00 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft1s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 9 7.78 34.85 35.48 1.67 1.01 1.22 36.52 36.49 36.70 i 2.23 4.21 2.65 2.92 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydreflow Storm Sewers 2008 U ne 00fi le (Line 10) - A3 • • Page I of I Elev (ft) Line 10 - A3 43.00 — 43.00 ------ None ---- -- .. . ........ - 41.00 — 41.00 39.00 — 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 2.06% 35.00 .Line-32 ,.-- 33.00 ------------------------ 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 10 1.63 35.48 35.60 1.00 1.00 1.16 36.70 36.71 36.76 2.08 2.08 4.42 4.20 077559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 0ofile (Line 11) - Al • • Page I of I E►ev (ft) Line 11 -Al None 41.00 41.00 AE 39.00 39.00 37.00 ................ 37.00 35.00 — ------ P ------- 35.00 --L--Line 29 33.00 — - 33.00 31.00 — — 31.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn U . P Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 11 5.20 34.58 35.50 1.50 0.87 1.40 -(ft) 36.34 36.37 j 36.90 i 2.95 4.89 3.92 2.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 'Profile (Line 12) - A2 • • Page 1 of I Elev (ft) Line 12 - A2 None anhole 41.00 4 1.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 ..... ....... . ...... 37.00 35.00 P ....... P- 35.00 leb Lf--1 2"---Ca -2-.65% 33.00 33.00 31.00 3 1.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (fus) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 12 0.70 34.85 35.54 1.00 1.00 1.02 36.55 36.55 36.56 0.90 0.90 4.15 3.61 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hyaranow worm sewers zwo • •Page 1 of 1 Line lorofile (Line 13) - A2 Line 00file (Line 14) -A2 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 14 - A2- 44.00 — 44.00 42.00 — NnnW 42.00 40.00 — 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 36.00 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft1s) (ft) (ft) 14 0.73 36-14 36.30 0.56 0.37 0.46 36.70 36.67 j 36.76 1.61 2.82 3.36 3.40 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line flofile (Line 15) - A 40 • Page 1 of 1 Elea (ft) Line 15 -A 43.00 — 43.00 --40an hole — 41.00 — 41.00 39.00 — 39.00 37.00 3 7.00 35.00 rul J; J 1L- rl - 3E" ------ 17 AX0 1.7 33.00 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 15 6.80 35.48 35.88 1.22 I 0.87 0.87 36.70 36.75 j 36.75 2.86 4.47 2.92 2.52 07-559 La Quints No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 1Profile (Line 16) - A2 • 0 Page 1 of 1 Eley (ft) Line 16 - A2 44.00 — 44.00 --Al 0----- 42.00 — 42.00 40.00 -------------- 40.00 38.00 — 38.00 36.00 — ------- PW 35 ff LIAIJO 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 16 0.77 36.30 36.87 0.57 0.37 0.53 36.87 37.24 j 37.40 i 1.68 2.90 3.40 3.50 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 iyurauow atumi o—e- zwo Line'"ofile (Line 17) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 17 -A Ni.-ine None — 42.00 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 36.00 00/,Cq-�- L it 19 34.00 34.00 32.00 32.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 17 5.16 35.88 36.23 1.16 0.77 0.96 37.04 37.00 j 37.19 2.30 4.05 2.52 2.37 07-559 La Quinta f No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linetofile (Line 18) - A2 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 18 - A2 44.00 44.00 42.00 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 F- - ------ 29ff --1-2'--1-72%"-- 36.00 — 36.00 Unal t, 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft1s) (ft) (ft) 18 0.52 36.87 37.37 0.53 0.31 0.42 37.40 37.68 j 37.79 i 1.25 2.56 3.50 3.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line Profile (Line 19) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 19 -A 44.00 44.00 None 42.00 5 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 . .............. ------ 36.00 ne 17 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 19 3.80 36.23 36.75 1.14 0.74 1.14 37.37 37.49 j 37.89 i 2.64 4.35 3.37 2.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linelprofile (Line 20) - A5 • • Pagel of 1 Elev (ft) Line 20 - A5 43.00 43.00 41.00 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 777' 37.00 47- 35.00 - 35.00 33.00 w 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (fus) (ft) M 20 2.66 35.88 37.00 1.11 0.65 1.01 36.99 37.65 j 38.01 i 2.31 4.10 3.77 2.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 'Rofile (Line 21) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 21 -A 44.00 44.00 None 42.00 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 36.00 22 ne 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up I (cfs) M (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 21 2.11 36.23 36.38 1.16 1.01 1.04 37.39 37.39 37.42 1 1.44 1.66 - 3.37 3.02 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linelprofile (Line 22) - A • • Page 1 of I Elev (ft) 44.00 Line 22 -A 44.00 42.00 40.00 38.00 36.00 e- 42.00 40.00 38.00 36.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 34.00 40 45 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 22 2.18 36.38 36.54 1.04 0.88 0.93 37.42 37.42 37.47 1.66 2.03 3.02 2.86 07-559 La Quinta FNo. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 LineqRofile (Line 23) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 23 -A 44.00 44.00 ... . ......... .. None _ -None.. 42.00 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 -40LI 10 .01 Oto in AM 34.00 — 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (fus) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 23 2.3E[36.54 36.77 0.97 0.73 0.84 37.51 37.50 37.61 1.91 2.71 2.86 3.33 07.-5-59 La Quinta F No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 I-- Line0ofile (Line 24) - A7 • Page I of 1 Elev (ft) Line 24 - A7 44.00 44.00 42.00 — 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 —'-1-2 Lf --­2 5-00 0/(— 36.00 36.00 Lime 23 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 24 0.59 36.77 37.37 0.95 0.33 0.33 37.72 37.70 37.70 0.77 2.66 3.83 2.47 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linef0file (Line 25) - A7 is0 Pagel of 45.00 45.00 43.00 43.00 39.00 39.00 35.00 35.00 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line profile (Line 26) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Eley (ft) Line 26 -A 44.00 44.00 OFe 42.00 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 ............ . 36.00 -ir"%W00 Une 27 m. — ----- 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) R 26 1.82 36.77 37.14 0.87 0.61 0.76 37.64 37.75 37.90 1 2.50 ---Run 3.65 — 3.83 3.06 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 0file (Line 27) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 27 -A 45.00 — 45.00 43.00 — 43.00 None 41.00 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 6tJ--;-1-2'@-O. 0% 'JiDe:_33 35.00 35.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 27 1.84 37.14 37.22 0.83 0.76 0.89 37.97 37.98 38.11 2.65 2.88 3.06 2.68 07-559 La QuInta I No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 mycratiow worm sewers zwo Linelprofile (Line 28) - A9 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 28 - A9 44.00 44.00 41.00 — 41.00 38.00 — 38.00 35.00 — 32.00 — 35.00 32.00 — — I - - 29.00 — 29.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 28 0.83 32.58 35.80 1.25 0.37 0.50 34.14 36.17 36.30 i 0.68 2.79 6.22 2.75 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line'Rofile (Line 29) - Al • • Page 1 of I Elev (ft) Line 29 - Al 43.00 43.00 41.00 — 41.00 None ------ 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 -1'2* 2.00% 35.00 U 33.00 - 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 29 1.34 35.50 35.56 1.00 1.00 1.38 36.90 36.91 36.94 1.71 1.71 2.50 2.54 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 myoraTIOW worm sewers zuuo Linelprofile (Line 30) - Al • • Page 1 of 1 Elea (ft) Line 30 - Al 43.00 43.00 None 41.00 41.00 None 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 211 f 1:X 35.00 33.00 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (fus) (ft) (ft) 30 1.38 35.56 36.04 1.00 0.93 0.97 36.94 36.97 37.01 1.76 1.82 2.54 2.71 077559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line4ofile (Line 31) - Al • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 31 - Al 44.00 44.00 42.00 42.00 -A7- 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 - 36.00 34.00 34.00 0 5 .10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 31 1.41 36.04 36.30 0.97 0.69 0.76 37.01 36.99 37.06 1.81 2.44 2.71 2.50 07-559 La Quints --7No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 00file (Line 32) -A3 • • Page 1 of 1 Elea (ft) Line 32 - A3 43.00 — 43.00 —None NonE 41.00 — 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 11 21 f 1 1) A A 1-1 A, 11Z J-1 35.00 33.00 — 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft1s) (ft) (ft) 32 1.66 35.60 35.96 1.00 0.83 0.90 36.76 36.79 36.86 2.12 2.39 4.20 3.86 07-559 La Quinta TNo, Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line "Profile (Line 33) - A3 0 • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 33 - A3 None None 42.00 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 F 38.00 36.00 ........ . ..... __ .00 Lf-­1_;2'—'@__1 -.44.916- ------T=Lin(! 3�6 bne--32- 34.00 34.00 32.00 32.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft1s) (ft1s) (ft) (ft) 33 1.73 35.96 36.68 0.91 0.56 0.56 36.87 37.24 j 37.24 2.31 3.84 3.86 3.32 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line Profile (Line 34) - A3 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 34 - A3 44.00 44.00 .7,None =.Noni 42.00 .. ........ 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 . ....... . ...... —;;;M� .. F—W- 38.00 -6 - -5-1113 4 LF 1 2 0% Li ne -1.00 36.00 _J=1ine-33, 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft1s) (ft) (ft) 34 1.11 36.68 37.40 0.76 0.45 0.45 37.44 37.85 j 37.85 1.74 3.26 3.32 3.10 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line Profile (Line 35) - A4 • • Page 1 of I Elev (ft) Line 35 - A4 44.00 44.00 42.00 - 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 A 36.00 36.00 - 34.00 -F 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 35 0.78 36.68 36.90 0.72 0.44 0.44 37.40 37.34 37.34 i 1.30 2.34 —Run 3.32 3.00 -- 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Date: 05-19-2008 LinelRofile (Line 36) - A3 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 36 - A3 45.00 — 45.00 43.00 — ana 43.00 41.00 — 41.00 39.00 — 39.00 37.00 — 37.00 35.00 35.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 36 1.13 37.40 37.56 0.58 0.45 0.45 37.98 38.01 j 38.01 2.39 3.29 3.10 2.44 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 00file (Line 37) - A3 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 37 - A3 45.00 45.00 43.00 — 43.00 41.00 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 A111 1'_ A011 37.00 1 JU 1.� 35.00 35.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (fus) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 37 1.15 37.56 37.70 0.59 0.45 0.67 38.15 38.15 j 38.37 i 2.40 3.30 2.44 2.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line"Profile (Line 38) - A • • Page I of I Elev (ft) Line 38 - A 45.00 45.00 43.00 43.00 Al 41.00 39.00 37.00 - 41.00 39.00 37.00 3 35.00 5.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 38 1.88 37.22 37.35 0.89 0.78 0.88 38.11 38.13 38.23 2.54 2.84 2.68 2.00 -- 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 I Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hyaranow worm sewers zwo HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT • • ®RC A 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA 100- YEAR STORM ANALYSIS Page 100 -Yr Hy Line Line Inlet Drng Runoff I Flow Invert Invert Vel Vel Depth Depth HG L HGL Gnd /Rim Gnd /Rim J -Loss No. Span ID Area Coeff Inlet Rate Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up El Dn El Up Coeff (in) (ac) (C) (in /hr) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.20 31.21 31.76 4.32 5.71 2.50 1.77 33.71 33.53 39.71 40.15 0.75 2 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.33 31.76 32.30 4.44 6.70 2.36 1.54 ** 34.12 33.84 40.15 40.10 2.00 3 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.39 32.30 32.58 4.36 4.53 2.50 2.30 34.89 34.88 40.10 40.05 0.75 4 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.72 32.58 33.99 4.22 6.63 2.50 1.52** 35.16 35.51 j 40.05 40.70 0.75 5 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.83 33.99 34.44 5.14 6.64 1.92 1.53** 35.91 35.97 40.70 40.65 0.75 6 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.98 34.44 34.53 5.17 5.43 1.93 1.83 36.37 36.36 40.65 40.00 0.75 7 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.06 34.53 34.58 4.44 4.50 2.31 2.27 36.84 36.85 40.00 40.00 0.75 8 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.65 34.58 34.85 2.99 3.00 2.50 2.45 37.26 37.30 40.00 40.00 1.00 9 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.37 34.85 35.48 2.93 3.35 2.50 2.04 37.45 37.52 40.00 40.90 1.00 10 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.79 35.48 35.60 3.55 3.55 1.00 1.00 37.69 37.72 40.90 40.80 0.75 11 18 A8 0.78 0.90 9.35 8.56 34.58 35.50 4.84 4.84 1.50 1.50 37.09 37.24 40.00 39.00 0.75 12 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.27 34.85 35.54 1.62 1.62 1.00 1.00 37.54 37.57 40.00 40.15 0.75 13 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28 35.54 36.14 1.63 1.63 1.00 1.00 37.60 37.61 40.15 40.50 0.75 14 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.29 36.14 36.30 1.65 1.65 1.00 1.00 37.64 37.66 40.50 40.70 0.75 15 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.31 35.48 35.88 2.67 3.20 2.22 1.83 37.70 37.71 40.90 40.90 0.75 16 12 A10 0.06 0.90 9.35 1.32 36.30 36.87 1.68 1.87 1.00 0.84 37.69 37.71 40.70 41.37 0.75 17 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.97 35.88 36.23 2.14 2.63 1.99 1.64 37.87 37.87 40.90 41.10 0.75 18 12 A9 0.10 0.90 9.35 0.84 36.87 37.37 1.11 2.95 0.92 0.39 ** 37.79 37.76 j 41.37 41.37 0.75 19 18 A3 0.73 0.90 9.35 6.14 36.23 36.75 3.48 3.86 1.50 1.27 37.95 38.02 41.10 40.25 1.00 20 15 A4 0.51 0.90 9.35 4.29 35.88 37.00 3.50 4.89 1.25 0.84 37.83 37.84 40.90 40.25 1.00 21 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.61 36.23 36.38 2.04 2.04 1.50 1.50 37.99 38.01 41.10 40.90 0.75 22 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.67 36.38 36.54 2.08 2.08 1.50 1.50 38.06 38.09 40.90 40.90 0.75 07 -559 La Quinta Number of lines: 38 Date: 05-19 -2008 NOTES: Intensity = 24.29 / (Inlet time + 0.10) ^ 0.59 - Return period = 100 Yrs. ; i Inlet control; ** Critical depth Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Page 2 100 -Yr Hy Line Line Inlet Drng Runoff I Flow Invert Invert Vel Vel Depth Depth HGL HGL Gnd /Rim Gnd /Rim J -Loss No. Span ID Area Coeff Inlet Rate Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up El Dn El Up Coeff (in) (ac) (C) (in /hr) (cfs) (ft) (ft) ON (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 23 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.77 36.54 36.77 2.13 2.19 1.50 1.41 38.14 38.18 40.90 41.60 1.00 24 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.99 36.77 37.37 1.27 1.30 1.00 0.93 38.30 38.30 41.60 40.84 1.00 25 12 A2 0.12 0.90 9.35 1.01 37.37 37.50 1.30 1.44 0.96 0.84 38.33 38.34 40.84 40.50 1.00 26 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.95 36.77 37.14 3.76 3.76 1.00 1.00 38.25 38.62 41.60 41.20 0.75 27 12 0.00 0.90 0.00 2.98 37.14 37.22 3.80 3.80 1.00 1.00 38.78 38.86 41.20 40.90 1.00 28 15 All 0.16 0.90 9.35 1.35 32.58 35.80 1.10 3.24 1.25 0.46- 35.42 36.26 40.05 39.80 1.00 29 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.20 35.50 35.56 2.81 2.81 1.00 1.00 37.75 37.76 39.00 39.10 0.75 30 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.25 35.56 36.04 2.86 2.86 1.00 1.00 37.85 37.94 39.10 39.75 0.75 31 12 A7 0.27 0.90 9.35 2.27 36.04 36.30 2.89 2.89 1.00 1.00 38.04 38.09 39.75 39.80 0.75 32 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.84 35.60 35.96 3.61 3.61 1.00 1.00 37.87 38.01 40.80 40.82 0.75 33 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.94 35.96 36.68 3.75 3.74 1.00 1.00 38.16 38.47 40.82 41.00 1.00 34 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.82 36.68 37.40 2.31 2.31 1.00 1.00 38.82 38.94 41.00 41.50 0.75 35 12 A6 0.15 0.90 9.35 1.26 36.68 36.90 1.61 1.61 1.00 1.00 38.87 38.87 41.00 40.90 0.75 36 12 0.00 0.90 0.00 1.84 37.40 37.56 2.34 2.34 1.00 1.00 39.00 39.03 41.50 41.00 0.75 37 12 A5 0.22 0.90 9.35 1.85 37.56 37.70 2.36 2.36 1.00 1.00 39.10 39.12 41.00 40.70 0.75 38 12 Al 0.36 0.90 9.35 3.03 37.22 37.35 3.86 3.86 1.00 1.00 39.09 39.22 40.90 40.35 0.75 07 -559 La Quinta Number of lines: 38 Date: 05 -19 -2008 NOTES: Intensity = 24.29 / (Inlet time + 0.10) A 0.59 - Return period = 100 Yrs. ; i Inlet control; *' Critical depth Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line0ofile (Line 1) -A 0 is Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 1 -A 43.00 40.00 — 43.00 40.00 37.00 37.00 34.00 — 34.00 31.00 31.00 28.00 — 0 5 10 15 20 25 28.00 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 1 20.77 31.21 31.76 2.50 1.79 2.14 33.71 33.55 33.90 4.23 5.53 6.00 5.89 07-559 La Quinta --7No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow, Storm Sewers 2008 Lineiprofile (Line 2) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) 43.00' 40.00 — Line 2 -A 43.00 40.00 37.00 37.00 34.00 — 31.00 — 34.00 31.00 UE .- 4 Wj L i i I rj Ll e JU kLU_:�I -qf L 28.00 0 5 10 15 20 28.00 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) D . n (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft1s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 2 20.86 31.76 32.30 2.34 1.53 2.55 34.10 33.83 34.85 i 4.37 6.64 5.89 5.30 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line Rofile (Line 3) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) 44.00 Line 3 -A 1 lone-- 44.00 41.00 4 1.00 38.00 38.00 35.00 35.00 32.00 32 .00 0 5 10 15 20 29.00 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 3 20.90 32.30 32.58 2.50 2.25 2.49 34.85 34.83 35.07 4.26 4.49 5.30 4.97 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow, Storm Sewers 2008 Line 'Profile (Line 4) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) 44.00 41.00 Mne- Line 4 -A 44.00 41.00 38.00 35.00 32.00 38.00 3 5.00 32.00 ...... 7- 29.00 - 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 29.00 55 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft1s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 4 20.15 32.58 33.99 2.50 1.50 1.50 35.12 35.49 j 35.49 4.11 6.55 4.97 4.21 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 riyuraTIOW aw"11 OU-1b zwo Line 1profile (Line 5) - A • • Page 1 of I Elev (ft) Line 5 -A 45.00 45.00 42.00 — 42-.00 39.00 39.00 36.00 6.00 3 33.00 — 33.00 30.00 - 30.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 5 20.22 33.99 34.44 1.90 1.50 1.50 35.89 35.94 35.94 5.04 6.56 4.21 3.71 07-559 La Quints 7 No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line'Rofile (Line 6) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) 41.00 39.00 None Line 6 -A F— None 41.00 39.00 37.00 35.00 33.00 37.00 35.00 33.00 bi –t f RU-3E A. a 50 -Une-7-- 31.00 0 5 10 15 20 31.00 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 6 20.31 34.44 34.53 1.91 1.81 2.14 36.35 36.34 36.67 5.06 5.35 3.71 2.97 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Lineflofile (Line 7) - A Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 7 -A No ne None 41.00 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 35.00 ie 33.00 33.00 31.00 31.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 7 20.36 34.53 34.58 2.27 2.23 2.46 36.80 36.81 37.04 4.34 4.40 2.97 2.92 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line i*Ofile (Line 8) - A • 0 Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) None Line 8 -A Manhole 41.00 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 33.00 35.00 Line 9 33.00 irie-7-- 31.00 31.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 8 14.15 34.58 34.85 2.50 2.38 2.51 37.19 37.23 37.36 2.88 2.94 2.92 2.65 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linelprofile (Line 9) - A is • Page 1 of 1 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Manhole Elev (ft) Lille 9 Lin - A Nlanhole 41.00 — 41.00 39.00 P. 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 — 35.00 L.fit —1-2 53t-f-- 33.00 33.00 31.00 31.00 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 9 13.86 34.85 35.48 2.50 1.95 2.12 37.37 37.43 37.60 2.82 3.38 2.65 2.92 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 0file (Line 10) - A3 40 is Page I oft Elev (ft) Line 10 - A3 43.00 .None-- 43.00 41.00 39.00 41.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 33.00 0 5 @ 2.0)% Line 10 15 20 25 35.00 33.00 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 10 2.7E[35.48 1 35.60 1.00 1.00 2.18 37.60 37.63 1 37.78 3.54 3.54 4.42 4.20 07-559 La Quinta I No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linelooffle (Line 11) - Al • 49 Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 11 - Al None 41.00 41.00 AMEE 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 - ---------- 35.00 0 -Line-29 33.00 33.00 31.00 31.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 11 8.54 34.58 35.50 1.50 1.50 1.70 37.04 37.19 37.20 i 4.84 4.83 3.92 2.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linelprofile (Line 12) - A2 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Manhole Line 12 - A2 F— None 41.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 35.00 --f-1-2'-- Ca — '16L 33.00 33.00 31.00 31.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 12 1.20 34.85 35.54 1.00 1.00 1.97 37.46 37.48 37.51 1.53 1.53 4.15 3.61 07-569 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 7Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linelprofile (Line 13) - A2 • • Page 1 of I Elev (ft) Line 13 - A2 43.00 43.00 41.00 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 -=Fk 37.00 35.00 1011 1 14 35.00 33.00 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 13 1.22 35.54 36.14 1.00 1.00 1.41 37.51 37.52 37.55 1.55 1.55 3.61 3.36 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linelprofile (Line 14) - A2 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 14 -142 44.00 44.00 42.00 r T- one ........... 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 — 36.00 -0 ine 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 14 1.24 36.14 36.30 1.00 1.00 1.29 37.55 37.56 37.59 1.57 1.57 3.36 3.40 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line Profile (Line 15) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 15 -A 43.00 43.00 —Mai ihole- None— 41.00 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 F U I 1 37.00 35.00 U" Ll -,JU �LV U.H I N I -InA PO 33.00 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 15 11.93 35.48 35.88 2.12 1.73 1.86 37.60 37.61 37.74 2.68 3.29 2.92 2.52 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line lProfile (Line 16) - A2 • • Page I of 1 Elev (ft) 44.00 42.00 40.00 Line 16 - A2 44.00 _ _x-10. 42.00 40.00 38.00 36.00 38.00 it JOLT I . j 70 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 34.00 40 45 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 16 1.28 36.30 36.87 1.00 0.73 0.78 37.59 37.60 37.65 1.63 2.08 3.40 3.50 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 21 Lineft0file (Line 17) - A • • Page 1 of I Elea (ft) Line 17 -A N one None 42.00 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 ..... .... . .. 38.00 36.00 36.00 --00 Une -19 34.00 34.00 32.00 32.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 17 8.87 35.88 36.23 1.90 1.54 1.63 37.78 37.77 37.86 2.22 2.79 2.52 2.37 07-559 La Quinta -- No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linetofile (Line 18) - A2 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 18 -A2 44.00 44.00 42.00 — 42.00 40.00 — 40.00 38.00 — 38.00 29 Lf --12 "--((D--1772 O/c`-- --- ---- . ...... 36.00 — Unq '16 36.00 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (fus) (ft) (ft) 18 0.84 36.87 37.37 0.83 0.39 0.55 37.70 37.76 j 37.92 i 1.20 2.98 3.50 3.00 07-569 La Quinta _7 No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linepofile (Line 19) - A 40 • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 19 -A 44.00 44.00 None 42.00 42.00 . . . ........ 40.00 40.00 38.00 1. F- 38.00 36.00 1 36.00 -AtUt--- 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) R (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (fus) (ft) (ft) 19 6.14 36.23 36.75 1.50 1.14 1.30 37.86 37.89 38.05 i 3.48 4.24 3.37 2.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 —�Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linetofile (Line 20) - A5 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 20 - A5 43.00 — 43.00 41.00 — ------ ...... 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 -6 AZ U = 1 D ENE- 35.00 L ine I S 35.00 33.00 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 20 4.29 35.88 37.00 1.25 0.83 1.41 37.74 37.83 j 38.41 i 3.50 4.97 3.77 2.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 —[Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linef0file (Line 21) -A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 21 -A 44.00 — 44.00 None —None—.---- 42.00 — 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 36.00 22 34.00 ------------------ 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 21 3.60 36.23 36.38 1.50 I 1.50 1.61 37.92 37.94 37.99 2.04 2.04 3.37 3.02 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines:.38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 'Profile (Line 22) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 22 - A 44.00 — 44.00 —None-- --F—None 42.00 — 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 — 36.00 .-Line -23­- 34.00 — 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 22 3.68 36.38 36.54 1.50 1.48 1.53 37.99 38.02 38.07 2.08 2.09 3.02 2.86 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line I*ofile (Line 23) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 23 -A 44.00 — 44.00 ..None- 42.00 — 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 1 "to ine `400 34.00 — 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 23 3.82 36.54 36.77 1.50 1.33 1.41 38.07 38.10 38.18 2.16 2.31 2.86 3.33 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linelprofile (Line 24) - A7 • • Page I of 1 Elev (ft) Line 24 - A7 44.00 44.00 t%lone 42.00 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 36.00 L4 ie 23 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 24 0.97 36.77 37.37 1.00 0.87 0.90 38.24 38.24 38.27 1.24 1.34 3.83 2.47 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Linelprofile (Line 25) - A7 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 25 - A7 45.00 45.00 43.00 43.00 41.00 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 — 37.00 35.00 3 5.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 25 1.01 37.37 37.50 0.90 0.77 0.81 38.27 38.27 38.31 1.36 1.55 2.47 2.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line profile (Line 26) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 26 -A 44.00 44.00 42.00 — 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 — le�% 00 Une. 2- 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft1s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 26 2.97 36.77 37.14 1.00 1.00 1.58 38.18 38.55 38.72 3.78 3.78 3.83 3.06 07-559 La Quinta T—No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 myuraww 010rm sewers zvv Line 0ofile (Line 27) - A • • Page 1 of 1 Bev (ft) Line 27 -A 45.00 — 45.00 43.00 — 43.00 None 41.00 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 35.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 27 2.99 37.14 37.22 1.00 1.00 1.81 38.72 38.80 39.03 3.81 3.81 3.06 2.68 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydrallow Storm sewers tuna Line $Wrofile (Line 28) - A9 • • 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 28 - A9 44.00 44.00 41 .00 — 41.00 38.00 — 38.00 35.00 — 35.00 32.00 — 32.00 29.00 29.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 28 1.35 32.58 35.80 1.25 0.46 0.66 35.36 36.26 36.46 i 1.10 3.24 6.22 2.75 07-559 La Quinta rNo. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 mycranow storm hewers zuva Line0ofile (Line 29) - Al • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 29 - Al 43.00 43.00 41.00 — 41.00 None 39.00 37.00 39.00 37.00 35.00 35.00 1 ZA Qv 2.0 - -' Line -30 — . . ......... 33.00 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft/s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 29 2.20 35.50 35.56 1.00 1.00 1.74 37.20 37.20 37.30 2.80 2.80 2.50 2.54 07-559 La Quinta -7 No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow, Storm Sewers 2008 Line iVrofile (Li . ne 30) - Al • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 30 - Al 43.00 — 43.00 41.00 — 41.00 None 39.00 r 39.00 37.00 ....... . 37.00 35.00 3 1 V 12 1 6 r- 0) 35.00 33.00 — -- 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 30 2.25 35.56 36.04 1.00 1.00 1.44 37.30 37.38 — 37.48 2.86 --T07-559 2.86 2.54 2.71 La Quinta FNo. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow, Storm Sewers 2008 Line *ofile (Line 31) - Al • • Page 1 of I Elev (ft) Line 31 - Al 44.00 — 44.00 42.00 — 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 38.00 36.00 — 36.00 34.00 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 31 2.27 36.04 36.30 1.00 1.00 1.33 37.48 37.53 37.63 2.89 2.89 2.71 2.50 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 --i1profile (Line . 0 0 Page 1of1 43.00 41.00 43.00 41.00 37.00 37.00 33.00 0 5 10 15 20 33.00 25 30 35 40 45 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover --TNo. 07-659 La Quinta Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Line 0file (Line 33) - A3 • • Page 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 33 - A3 None None 42.00 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 .................. 38.00 F- 36.00 P- �6.00 - 3 _ _...Lin 34.00 34.00 32.00 32.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 33 2.90 35.96 36.68 1.00 1.00 1.89 38.06 38.36 —TNo. 38.57 3.69 3.69 3.86 3.32 07-559 La Quinta Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line 1profile (Line 34) - A3 • • Page 1 of I Elev (ft) Line 34 - A3 44.00 — 44.00 one, 42.00 42.00 40.00 0.00 4 38.00 ....... . ..... 38.00 —1 L:Z[i -i 4'Lf 2"-B-l-.l-3N— e 36.00 — .00 34.00 — 34.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up I (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 34 1.81 36.68 37.40 1.00 1.00 1.48 38.70 38.82 38.88 2.30 2.30 3.32 3.10 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 1yu..".. Q ...... �-' . 4 Line 'Profile (Line 35) - A4 • • Page I of 1 Elev (ft) Line 35 - A4 44.00 44.00 42.00 — 42.00 40.00 40.00 38.00 — 38.00 36.00 36.00 — --- - -------- 34.00 4.00 — 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (fus) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) 35 1.26 36.68 36.90 1.00 1.00 1.88 38.75 38.75 38.78 1.61 1.61 3.32 3.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 r1yuramw 010" sewers zvvo Line fProfile (Line 36) - A3 • • Page I of 1 Elea (ft) Line 36 -143 45.00 — 45.00 Nnnp 43.00 43.00 — N 41.00 — 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 -12-4CO -1 37.0.0 35.00 35.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (fus) (ft) (ft) 36 1.83 37.40 37.56 1.00 1.00 1.42 38.88 38.91 38.98 2.33 2.33 3.10 2.44 07-569 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Line Profile (Line 37) - A3 • •Pa 9 e 1 of 1 Elev (ft) Line 37 -143 45.00 — 45.00 43.00 — 43.00 41.00 — 41.00 39.00 39.00 37.00 — 37.00 1211 'ah 4 L4 13 Ll I ie-�36--- UU 10 35.00 35.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q (cfs) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Hw (ft) Dn (ft) Up (ft) Jnct (ft) Dn (ft/s) Up (ft1s) Dn (ft) Up (ft) 37 1.85 37.56 37.70 1.00 1.00 1.37 38.98 39.00 39.07 2.36 2.36 2.44 2.00 07-559 La Quinta FNo. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2008 Line iprofile (Line 38) - A • • Pagel of I Elev (ft) Line 38 -A 45.00 — 45.00 43.00 — 43.00 41.00 41.00 39.00 — 39.00 37.00 37.00 35.00 35.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Reach (ft) Invert Elevation Depth of Flow Hydraulic Grade Line Velocity Cover Line # Q Dn Up Dn Up Hw Dn Up Jnct Dn Up Dn Up I (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (fus) (ft) (ft) 38 3.03 37.22 37.35 1.00 1.00 1.98 39.03 39.16 39.33 3.86 3.86 2.68 2.00 07-559 La Quinta No. Lines: 38 Run Date: 05-19-2008 • • • HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA NUISANCE FLOW /MITIGATIONANAL PSIS � `-u--L SA�1c,F r LoI,J Side, L.zv,@scjc�p%, = i9)5oo s4. CA� C),((Ows d LA)d w' L� �� St�� �►n�0v� �w� S�.,tice, �i �w . 13 .7 0- HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT CALLE TAMPICO PLAZA 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc SECTION 4, O OFF - SITE /CALLS TAMPICO FLOOD Aft YSIS Tributary Watershed Map 100 -Year Watershed Rational Analysis Eisenhower SD Flow Analysis Calle Tampico SD Flow Analysis Calle Tampico Street Flow Analysis 0 S Z LLI v) w litOf F 0 : EC 0 Z i N r W A { — 1 CC O R. •1 3 0 x Z W w • • • LEGEND / HYDROLOGIC DATA STORM FREQUENCY: 10 YEARS TOTAL DRAINAGE STUDY AREA: 74 Acres DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY — — DRAINAGE SUB -AREA BOUNDARY FLOW DIRECTIONAL ARROW EXISTING STORM DRAIN ® DRY WELL 0 GRATE INLET CATCH BASIN / WIDTH 7' SOIL GROUP(S): A & B SANDY LOAM, LOAMY SAND AND FINE SAND LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ID 10 YEAR STORM FLOW Tc TIME OF CONCENTRATION B -11" AREA 1.4 Ac SUBA A ACREAGE �$ CFS CALLE — TAMPICO ' - — Q N........... . ............._ ... ... ...... ... _........... 0 _ ff 0 Z _ Z — a B• DI. (NUISANCE FLOW) EXISTING RETENTION BASH �- B" RCP ORYWEIl RlMP STARON PO > O U ° °T 0 T d —4 U W ?ffi TQ, 71 CFS o TC=28.02 MIN Ix AREA "A" =48.5 AC >z ' Co A 009RT CLUB DRIVE 26.5 CFS COLLECTED B E ISTING CA CH BASIN Q,C -41.5 C17S t L• l Z TC =23.45 IN O..r �a. Q AREA "B" 25.6 AC _ TOTAL Q1086 _ —� 16 7CALLE TAMPICO b TO EXISTIN B �. z'Nmw DBI. RCB T 2.l11slap Del. RCB 2H.B'W OSL ROT RI ' _ s- n-uaii O A -17 s-aaarz amlz 38 62 RECORINIENDEM 61.0 Ac CA SAM 7mMNNB f RECOMMENDED` — — —�— — _ f BUE A �AASI V j RECOMMENDED TORA1 DRAIN STORM °R "'� ,� RA ' RECOMMEND RECOMMENDED CATCH BASIN— \ / J1 STORM ORAI \ 0 f A -1B [%ISI)NG DRYWE L Ix 2.1 Ac Tm. z A -13 A-B / B -6 Ac 2-A f t - _ 4.0 Ac — - -- fz -- .\ . Q } ~ AVE�•a FONDA I f I AVENIDA LA FONDA / SMNC RETENTION BASIN \\ _ z a RECOMMENDED AVE. MONTEZUMA 3 — — — — — — I CATCH BAS It \�\ f RECOMMENDED DRY M1B1 26 \ RECOMMENDED STORM DRAIN CALLS ESTADO f RECOMMENDED f 4 " CATCH BA9 ' C[ f Q T • �\ y o, m 4 c 2 -- -- w - -- - —_ -- —_ f f A -B f f — F 2-A - 1.B -Ac a 4 v CALLE �� _ C -- A-0 3.8 Ai 6.4 Ac g -3 56 t t ff t 31 Ac �'I - f Z W ➢ STING SAND FILTER 1 f A G RETEMrxn,i - f _CII LLE ALGO —► 12 3 �� �w ,- c —� —� —► HW 4 6 . 8 — 0 — f f A CEL A —� CALLS —� f Li N Q CY —► Z _ -- F Q N —► CQ C f B -2 EXISTING SAND Fit FER Q 5'1 AC EXISRNO LEACH EL D Z J W Z f 0 0 0 0 -'a -- — Z Z 1 —� �— —► —► W f- —► Z t— Q • Is a A -1 a A -2 a A= a - =6 f f f f f .B Ac S? • f f 3.B Ac f B B Ac 2.6 A f f it CALL' AMIGO � � '^^�•• f B -1 r f f 4.0 Ac - �:L_' 3 50 P 80 R T 7• City of La Quinta 100' SO' 100' 200" GRAPHIC SCALE Nola: For reduced sized prints, original scale Is in Inches BASINS II \�n1I Downtown Drainage Study Hydrology Map i PS O M A S DATE: 12 -04 -07 REVISED ON: JOB No:1LA0010102 p SHEET 1 OF 1 s ]1 1 0 RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC &WCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982 -2006 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) (Rational Tabling Version 6.OD) Release Date: 06/01/2005 License ID 1510 Analysis prepared by: Development Resource Consultants 8175 E. Kaiser Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92808 (714) 685 -6860 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * 07 -559 LA QUINTA - THE PLAZA AT CALLE TAMPICO * 100 YEAR OFF -SITE TRIBUTARTY ANALYSIS ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FILE NAME: 7559PR.DAT TIME /DATE OF STUDY: 16:00 05/14/2008 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: GLOBAL STREET FLOW -DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow -Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top -of -Curb) 2. (Depth) *(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT *FT /S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* ********************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- » »> RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM • DEVELOPMENT IS SINGLE FAMILY(1 -ACRE LOTS) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 12.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.90 10 -YEAR STORM 10- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 4.000 • 10 -YEAR STORM 60- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 1.350 100 -YEAR STORM 10- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 6.500 100 -YEAR STORM 60- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 2.200 SLOPE OF 10 -YEAR INTENSITY - DURATION CURVE = 0.6062139 SLOPE OF 100 -YEAR INTENSITY - DURATION CURVE = 0.6046261 COMPUTED RAINFALL INTENSITY DATA: STORM EVENT = X100.00 \ 1 -HOUR INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = C2.200j SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE = 0.6046 ]] RCFC &WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C "- VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NCTE: CONSIDER ALL CONFLUENCE STREAM COMBINATIONS FOR ALL DOWNSTREAM ANALYSES *USER- DEFINED STREET - SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET- CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER - GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT - /PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) - -- - - - -- --- - - - - -- ----------- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- (n) - - - - - -- --- - - - -- --- - - - - -- ----------- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 - - - - - -- 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW -DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow -Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top -of -Curb) 2. (Depth) *(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT *FT /S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* ********************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 1.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- » »> RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM • DEVELOPMENT IS SINGLE FAMILY(1 -ACRE LOTS) END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS is 0 1 r TC = K *[(LENGTH * *3) /(ELEVATION CHANGE , INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW- LENGTH (FEET) 4300.00 p G�G 4 t . ! (� - �.. ve 1 [l4yo► 7 rJ� • UPSTREAM ELEVATION (FEET) = 158. 0 ; ` • .`' 's DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION (FEET) = 138.00 'f ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 20.00 *[( * *3) * *.2 •�v TC = 0.469 4300.00 /( 20.00)] = 39.023����� 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 2.854 SINGLE- FAMILY(1 -ACRE LO F COEFFICIENT = SOIL CLASSIFICATION S 11 .5413 �* SUBAREA RUNOFF (CFS ) - 1 Wk-0) f. C oY t►� , S O d �i �/ Sa TOTAL AREA(ACRES) - 92.00 TAL RUNOFF(CFS) - 142.10 ►`i 4 ---------- _ ------------- END OF STUDY SUMMARY: - TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 92. TC(MIN.) = 39.02 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 142.1 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS is 0 1 • Project Description Worksheet Circular Channel Flow Element Circular Channel— Method Manning's Formu Solve For Discharge Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.013 Channel Slope 001200 ft/ft Depth 4.50 ft Diameter 54.0 in Results Discharge 68.12 cfs Flow Area 15.9 ft2 Wetted Perime 14.14 ft Top Width 0.00 ft Critical Depth 2.41 ft Percent Full 100.0 % Critical Slope 0.003840 ft/ft Velocity 4.28 ft/s Velocity Head 0.29 ft Specific Energ: 4.79 ft Froude Numbe 0.00 Maximum Disc 73.27 cfs • Discharge Full 68.12 cfs Slope Full 0.001200 ft/ft Flow Type 3ubcritical • Worksheet Worksheet for Circular Channel c,cn4 I Project Engineer. Development Resource Consultants c : \... \chris \desktop\project1.fm2 Development Resource Consultants FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 05/14/08 03:53:23 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1- 203 - 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 1E • Worksheet Worksheet for Rectangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Rectangular Chann Flow Element Rectangular Chann Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.013 Channel Slope 001200 ft/ft Depth 3.00 ft Bottom Width 6.00 ft Results Discharge 93.39 cfs Flow Area 18.0 ft2 Wetted Perimi 12.00 ft Top Width 6.00 ft Critical Depth 1.96 ft Critical Slope 0.003847 ft/ft Velocity 5.19 ft/s Velocity Head 0.42 ft Specific Enerc 3.42 ft Froude Numb$ 0.53 Flow Type 3ubcritical 7IZ5�4 cp4C�4 Project Engineer. Development Resource Consultants c:\ .. \chds\desktop\projectl.fm2 Development Resource Consultants FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 05/14/08 03:53:36 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1- 203 - 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Irregular Channel • Project Description Worksheet Calle Tampico Flow Element Irregular Chani Method Manning's Forr Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Channel Slc 001500 Yft Discharge Options Current Roughness Metho ved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting wed Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weightinc Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficiei 0.01 Water Surface Elev. 39.87 ft Elevation Range 1.43 to 41.00 Flow Area 32.2 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 53.25 ft Top Width 52.66 ft Actual Depth 1.44 ft Critical Elevation 39.72 ft Critical Slope 0.003073 ft/ft Velocity • 3.17 ft/s Velocity Head 0.16 ft Specific Energy 40.03 ft Froude Number 0.71 Flow Type Subcritical Calculation Messages: Flow is divided. Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0 +00 1+00 0.013 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0 +00 40.25 0 +10 39.10 0 +11 38.43 0 +29 39.90 0 +43 40.30 0 +44 40.80 0 +50 41.00 0 +54 40.80 0 +55 40.30 • ,0\ C� Cac, -Tc>P`\C.0 �� q,cy, 44- ,7 V1 ^0� � J � t I6yJ r46 Yew Project Engineer. Development Resource Consultants c: \... \chds \desktop\projectl .fm2 Development Resource Consultants FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 05/14/08 04:02:09 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1 -203- 755 -1666 Page 1 of 2 Worksheet Worksheet for Irregular Channel • Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) • • 0 +67 40.00 0 +89 38.59 0 +90 39.26 1 +00 40.25 Project Engineer. Development Resource Consultants c: \... \ch6s \desktop\projectl .fm2 Development Resource Consultants FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 05/14/08 04:02:09 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1- 203 - 755 -1666 Page 2 of 2 . Project Description Worksheet Calle Tampico Flow Element Irregular Chani Method Manning's Fon Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.013 Channel Slope 0.001500 ft/ft Water Surface Elev. 39.87 ft Elevation Range 1.43 to 41.00 Discharge 102.00 cfs • • 41.00 40.00 39.00 38.00 0 +00 Cross Section Cross Section for Irregular Channel 0 +20 0 +40 0 +60 0 +80 1 +00 V:4.0N H:1 NTS Project Engineer. Development Resource Consultants c : \... \chris \desktop\projectl.fm2 Development Resource Consultants FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 05/14/08 04:02:20 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1 -203- 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 Paul Goble Subject: PCN 08035 HIGHLAND LA QUINTA PM 35845 PRECISE GRADING PLAN Due Date: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 Status: Waiting on someone else Percent Complete: 0% Total Work: 0 hours Actual Work: 0 hours Owner: Angelica Zarco Requested By: Angelica Zarco FEES: 2/4/2008 - $6000.00 PAID IN FULL (AZ) CONTACT: BRANDON WILLNECKER DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES CONSULTANTS 8175 E. Kaiser Blvd. Anaheim Hills,CA. 92808 (714) 685 -6801 fax (714) 685 -6860 . pborovilos @dre- eng.com SEND VIA FEDEX ACCT # 2221 - 1941 -3 INVOICES: " �gIf_= ,, _S/`�1 NOTES: 2/4/2008 -'RECEIVED PLAN CHECK ITEM FROM DRC. SENT'TO PAUL FOR BV REVIEW (AZ) 2/12/2008 - Paul forwarded plans to BV (Dave C000per) for preliminary check. BV to charge staff augmentation rate for check. Copy of plan to Angelica to route to Planning Department for comment. BV to return check to City on 2/27/2008. 2/12/2008 - COPY OF PLANS TRANSMITTED TO PLANNING FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT (AZ) 2/20/2008 - CONTACTED BV'FOR PLAN. CHECK ITEM PICK. UP FOR REVIEW (AZ) 2/20/2008 - SENT DUPLICATE HYDRO REPORT TO CENTRAL FILE. FIRST COPY WENT TO BV ON 1/31/2008 FOR REVIEW.(TS) 2/28/2008 -. RECEIVED PLANNING DEPARTMENT REDLINES AND COMMENTS FROM ANDY MOGENSEN AS FOLLOWS: Re: Precise Grading Plan Review for 35845, Plaza at Calle Tampico Conditions of Approveal from Village Use Permit 2006 -035 apply to the submitted plans. Please contact Andrew Mogensen (760) 777 -7068 or Jay Wuu at (760) 777 -7067 with any questions: 1. Certain portions of sidewalk shall be removed to accomodate landscaping around decorative columns (see Sheet 4 redlines and landscaping plans). 2. This plan check may be subject to further conditions of approval under TPM 35845. Jay Wuu is currently processing Tentative Parcel Map 35845. VUP 06 -035 has existing conditions of approval (see attached). 3. Building and Safety is currently reviewing building plans for this site. 4. Planning has conditionally approved the Precise Grading Plans (with #1 addressed, if necessary). With Public Works approval, a mylar be submitted for final review and signature. Shoud you have any questions, please contact me at (760) 777 -7125. 2/28/2008 - RECEIVED PLAN CHECK ITEM FROM BV. SENT TO PAUL FOR FURTHER PROCESSING (AZ) 3/4/2008 - Paul reviewed and annotated preliminary check comments from BV. BV advises plans incomplete and not ready for full check. Please refer to City plan review checklists (completed by BV) for additional information. Signing /striping sheet not provided in submittal. ADA ramps do not meet current building code requirements with radius ramps problematic. Horizontal control line and curve data table not provided. Hydrology and hydraulics report has been extensively redlined. Freeboard requirements not met with bend and junction losses not accounted for. Various site layout/circulation questions remain. Please submit correction package to BV directly (provide 5 copies of precise grading plans) to allow for distribution to City departments and PW Traffic Division following BV review. Redlines to Angelica /Ed for return to FOR for full correction. 3/4/2008 - SENT FAXED NOTICE TO DRC OF PLANS BEING SENT VIA FEDEX FOR DELIVERY.3 /6/2008 (AZ) PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS FOR LA QUINTA RETAIL CENTER LOCATED AT NEC CALLE TAMPICO AND DESERT CLUB DRIVE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA � 3S$Li C- Prepared for HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 80 South Lake Ave, Suite 660 Pasadena, CA 91101 Prepared By., DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE CONSULTANTS, INC. 8175 E. Kaiser Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92808 (714) 685 -6860 Brandon Willnecker P.E., Principal Project No. 07 -559 August 6, 2007 Revised On: November 23, 2007 PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT LA QUINTA RETAIL SECTION 1.0 SECTION 2.0 DRC a0s 07 -559 Hydrology ReporLdoc TABLE OF CONTENTS NARRATIVE Introduction Project Description Hydrology Methodology SITE INFORMATION Location Map Reference Documentation PROPOSED SITE RATIONAL ANALYSIS r PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT LA QUINTA RETAIL SECTION 1, 0 NARRATIVE Introduction Project Description Hydrology Methodology Water Quality Nuisance Water summary ®RC IL 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc G, 1 t I 1 t t PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT LA QUINTA RETAIL Introduction The project is located on approximately 3.4 acres of vacant land at the NEC of Calle Tampico and Desert Club Drive, in the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. The proposed project will include the. construction of three retail /commercial buildings. Additional improvements will include parking lots, landscape areas, and underground sewer, water and storm drain facilities. This report has been prepared to calculate the post developed condition for the on -site storm water runoff and the drainage received from the adjoining property. Project Description Existing Site Conditions: The majority of the project site consists of barren, vegetated land that drains in the westerly and southerly directions. The remaining project site consists of paved parking the drains into an existing storm water inlet. Proposed Site Development: The proposed site consists of three retail /commercial buildings, sidewalks, parking areas, and landscaping. The completed project will total approximately 3.4 acres. On -Site stormwater runoff drains overland into catch basins and grated inlets, flows into a private underground storm drain network, and connects into the public storm drain facilities located in Desert Club Dr. In addition to the on -site storm water runoff, approximately 1.0 acre of off -site area is tributary to the project. This off -site runoff will also be collected and conveyed to the public storm drain through the on -site storm water facilities. Hydrology Methodology The hydrology calculations for the project are based on the Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFC) Hydrology Manual /Procedure (April, 1978 edition), City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06 -16, and City of La Quinta Conditions of Approval for Village Use Permit 2006 -035. Location maps, precipitation values, slope intensity curve values, and rainfall depth values have all been interpolated from the RCFC manual or referenced from the La Quinta Engineering Bulletins regarding hydrology and can be found in Section 2.0 of this report. The project is located in Zone 3 for NOAA data info. Advanced Engineering Software (AES 2006 Version) was used to perform:a rational method analysis on the proposed site. A rational method analysis is being used in conformance with the City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06 -16 (EB 06 -16) for non - retention storm water analysis. The project site is located in a soil classification zone of type "C. For standard commercial projects, the Runoff Coefficient for a type "C" soil is 0.8921. Proposed Conditions: Per the Final Conditions of Approval for Village Use Permit 2006 -035 Condition #53: "The applicant shall be allowed to direct stormwater from the Village Use Permit site through the on -site underground drainage network to the existing storm drain system off site as approved by the City Engineer." In conformance with Condition #53, the on -site stormwater will be collected and discharged undetained into the existing 60" public storm drain in Desert Club Dr. A 30" diameter storm drain will convey on -site, and off -site, flows to the existing 60" diameter public storm drain. 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc 3 t t r] iJ t t t t t 1 PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT LA QUINTA RETAIL The total peak runoff to the public main is based upon a rational method analysis of the proposed site and requirements outlined in EB 06 -16. The results of the rational method analysis are located in Section 3 of this report. The on -site peak 100 -year flow is equal to 18.79 cfs and is based upon 100 -year rainfall intensity data from EB 06 -16 and an on -site flow path as shown in the Proposed Hydrology Map in Section 3. The off -site flow is estimated by prorating the calculated on site flows for 3.4 acres and applying to the 1.0 acre of off -site area. This proration yields an off -site flow of 5.53 cfs. The total peak flow conveyed to the public storm drain is 24.32 cfs. The sizing of the connection to the public storm drain is based upon the requirements set in EB 06 -16, EB 06 -16 requires that the on -site storm drain system must convey the peak 10 -year storm through unpressurized pipes, and for the 100 -year storm the pipes can become pressurized at peak flow. Based upon the Manning equation for pipe flow, the unpressurized capacity of a 30" HDPE pipe (Manning's coefficient of 0.011) running at a slope of 0.5% is 34.28 cfs. Taking a conservative approach, the connection pipe to the existing public storm drain is sized for the 100 -year storm peak flow of 24.32 cfs. It is anticipated that a 24" to 30" storm drain lateral will need to be constructed depending on final design calculations. Water Quality Prior to discharging into the public storm drain system, the storm water will be treated in accordance with Riverside County and City of La Quinta adoption of the state's general permit stormwater. The proposed treatment device is a low -flow media filtration device located at the downstream end of the private storm drain network. Due to the on -site acceptance of existing off -site tributary flow, the water treatment device will be upsized to accommodate the additional untreated flows created by the adjacent property that is currently untreated. Nuisance Water The nuisance water generated on -site will be retained and infiltrated on -site through the use of the Maxwell IV Drywell system or city approved equivalent. The drywell will be located at the downstream end of the on -site storm drain system prior to reaching the public right -of -way. The drywell will act as.a flow - through drywell that will retain low flows (nuisance water) and become inundated at greater flows. The inundated drywell will bypass the higher flow to the public storm drain connection. Summary The proposed project is required to adhere to City of La Quinta standards, as well as the conditions set by the City of La Quinta Planning Commission for Village Use Permit 2006 -035. The proposed system outlined in this report adheres to these requirements for discharge to the public storm drain facilities located adjacent to the project. The conditions for this project outline a scenario of non - detained stormwater discharging into the public storm drain system. 1 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc LA QUINTA RETAIL SECTION.2.0 SITEINFORMATION Location Map Reference Documentation 5 0 P.O. Box 1504 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92247 -1504 PUBLIC WORKS /ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 78 -495 CALLE TAMPICO (760) 777 -7075 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 FAX (760) 777 -7155 ENGINEERING BULLETIN #06 -16 TO: All Interested Parties ' FROM: Amothy R. Jonasson, Public Works Director /City Engineer EFFECTIVE DATE: December 19, 2006 SUBJECT: Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems This bulletin establishes storm drain study specifications. All hydrology and preliminary hydraulic reports for the City of La Quinta should follow these criteria. Hydrology studies for the City of La Quinta shall be performed for projects when required by the conditions of approval or as requested by the City Engineer. Reference material used for city plan checking purposes is as follows: 1. Plan Check Checklist Storm drain plan checks are guided by the documents found in the following hyperlink: httw //www la- auinta org /oublicworks /tractl /z onlinelibrary /olancheck checklist %20NEW.htm 2. Archive Plans Example City plans can be found at the following hyperlink: htto: / /www.la- auinta.ora /olancheck /m search asp A useful method of quickly searching archive plans is to load the plan type and current year (e.g. 2006) and then search the archive by clicking the GO button. Hydrology Report Guidelines (General) All hydrology reports shall follow the general guidelines set forth by Riverside County Flood Control (RCFC) and Water Conservation District's Hydrology Manual. fl i t (quick drawdown) large storm events. Use of walls as a top ring basin is prohibited. Retaining walls will require approval from Works Department Director /City Engineer and Community Department Director. 10. Retention Basin Width of the retention both the Public Development Retention basins shall have a minimum width of 20 feet as measured from the lowest elevation contour. Previously, retention basin widths were governed by City guidance for aspect ratios for basins depths greater than 6 feet. 11. Overflow Routes Retention basins should be designed to overflow to City arterial streets or the adjacent local street as applicable. Historical flow route should be followed and not changed on a regional perspective but re- grading and import to achieve an immediate route to the adjacent street should be considered for projects which concentrate flows to adjacent open land or off -site developments. Overflow routes shall be designed using an open channel flow (surface flow). Closed conduit emergency overflow must be approved by the City Engineer. 12. Rainfall Intensity Rainfall intensity for hydrological report preparation is regionally zoned within the City pursuant to available NOAA data. A regional rainfall intensity map of the City should be referenced to confirm rainfall amount assumptions provided in the following table. *The design storm for the City is 100 -year storm (worst case of 24 hour, 6 hour, 3 hour or 1 hour duration). The 500 -year storm is only used to review for problematic secondary overflows which do not drain to a public arterial street, creating a trapped water condition. 13. Hydrograph Loss Rates According to the Riverside County Flood Control Hydrology Manual, the loss rates generally range from 0.10 to 0.40 in /hr with most falling between 0.20 and 0.25 in /hr. Three and six hour duration storms may use a constant loss rate; however, the 24 hour duration storm shall obtain a variable loss rate using the equation found on page E -9 of the manual, which is Ft = C(D- T)"'-" + Fr,. Variable loss rates are not required for the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Analysis (Shortcut Method). Additionally, developed condition low loss rate calculations on 24 hour I 100 yr storm (inches) Zones 1hr 3hr 6hr 24hr Zone 1 - Southwest mountains 2.50. 3.40 4.00 6.00 Zone 2 - Southwest mountains 2.30, 3.00 3.70• 5.00 Zone 3 - West mountains and are_ as south of Hwy 111 and west of Washington 2.20 2.80 340 4.50 Zone 4 - West of Jefferson and areas east of Washington including the Cove 2.10 2.70 3.20 4.25 Zone 5 - East of Jefferson and west . of a staggered line. trending south west of Calhoun Street and Avenue 50 2.00• 2.60 3.10 4.00 Zone 6 - West of a staggered line trending south west of Calhoun Street and Avenue 50 1.90 2.50 3.00 3.75 13. Hydrograph Loss Rates According to the Riverside County Flood Control Hydrology Manual, the loss rates generally range from 0.10 to 0.40 in /hr with most falling between 0.20 and 0.25 in /hr. Three and six hour duration storms may use a constant loss rate; however, the 24 hour duration storm shall obtain a variable loss rate using the equation found on page E -9 of the manual, which is Ft = C(D- T)"'-" + Fr,. Variable loss rates are not required for the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Analysis (Shortcut Method). Additionally, developed condition low loss rate calculations on 24 hour I large area, shallow retention basin configurations. Historical City maximum freeboard specifications are now eliminated. 19. Hydraulic Grade Line (HGL) Starting Points Projects within the City of La Quinta that are required to contain their 100 year storm flows shall show two (2) separate HGLs for maximum flow rate (HGL,o) and maximum volume (HGL,00)• The first HGL (HGL,o) will reflect the values from the 10,year frequency design storm. Values of Q,o and V,o will be determined from the Rational Method. Conduit sizing shall be based on non pressure type flow (HGL shall not be located ' above the crown of a pipe). The second HGL (HGL,ao) will reflect values based on the maximum 100 year ' frequency design storm. The HGL100 shall show that the maximum 100 year storm can be retained within the project and the use of the project's infrastructure shall be maintained. ' 20. 10 Year Frequency Design Storm HGL Calculation s This HGL shall start at or above an elevation in the downstream retention basin that is equal to the %2 depth of the retention elevation caused by the 100 year frequency design storm event. The piping system shall be designed based on open channel flow as opposed to pressure flow. This HGL should indicate the hydraulic conditions at the maximum storm water flow rate. Requirements: • Pressure pipe flow not allowed • Identify this HGL as the HGL,o on the hydraulic calculations and storm drain plan profile • Velocity not less than 2.5 fps • Pipe sized based on Rational Method • Head losses shall be based on HEC 22 Ch 7. • HGL freeboards: 6" or greater below CB flow line 21. 100 Year Frequency Design Storm HGL Calculation This HGL shall start at a location at the top of the retention basin water level caused by the 100 year design storm determined using the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph. This HGL should indicate the hydraulic conditions at the maximum storm water volume with a full basin or channel. Requirements: • Velocity (no requirement) • Identify this HGL as the HGL,00 on the hydraulic calculations and storm drain plan profile • Pressure pipe flow allowed. • Pipe size based on Rational Method. • No part of the emergency route shall obtain a water depth greater than 1.5 feet. Q • HGL Freeboards and Elevations • Difference in elevation between CB flow line and HGL in retention basin shall be between 0 and 12 inches. • 1 ft min from top of manhole cover Not to exceed 7ft above the top of pipe • HGL must be located 1 ft below the adjacent Pad Elevation 22. Whitewater Channel HGL Assuming major storm coincidental occurrences are taken into consideration already (see page 7 -8 of HEC -22 Storm Drains), the projects HGL100 shall be located 2 feet below Whitewater Channel's estimated HGL500 (this is also equal to 1 foot below the existing Whitewater Concrete Channel Lining). Time of concentration for channel discharge will assume a full channel. Flap gate installation may be applicable based on project elevations. 23. La Quinta Evacuation Channel HGL The Evacuation Channel obtains an HGL,00 with an approximate elevation of 48.0 pursuant to information provided by CVWD to the City. Additional elevation information for the Evacuation Channel is currently under review at CVWD. The elevation is based on NGVD 1929. Elevations showing on the plan should be based on the same. Flap gate installation may be applicable based on project elevations. 24. Retention Basin Landscape Requirements Retention basins shall be landscaped and properly irrigated. The retention basin landscape plans must be approved by the City Engineer /Public Works Director. The retention basin must be capable of draining the 100 year storm within 72 hours. Project incapable of draining the 100 year storm within 72 hours will be reviewed by the City for enhancement options to promote drainage conveyance. In basins with depths exceeding 8ft, trees shall be planted in the 8 -foot wide terraces. The number of trees shall be calculated by multiplying the basin lot. boundary length by the number of 8 -foot wide terraces in the basin and then dividing by 100. 25. Typical Storm Drain Pipe Gradients & Velocity Primary street storm drains, designers should assume minimum grade = 0.3% based on minimum flow velocity of 2.5 ft /sec. For local area drains, 4 " -6" pipe minimum grade = 1 %, larger pipe diameters = 0.5% should be assumed. 26. Typical Street Flows Street flows shall meet the design requirements of FHWA HEC -22. When gutters obtain small slopes, or where sediment may accumulate, or when parking is allowed on the side of the street, the designer should increase the n value by 0.02. 27. Storm Drain Easement Width Requirements The City of La Quinta requirements for minimum widths (generally 20 feet, excepting deep drainage systems) of storm drain easements is found in easement requirement charts from the Riverside County Transportation Department. Ten In t PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007 -042 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL ' VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2006 -035 FORWARD ARCHITECTURE/ HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT OCTOBER 9, 2007 i DRAINAGE 44. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of per approved methods contained in Engineering Bulletin No. 06 -16 — Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06 -015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. 45. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right -of -way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to LQMC Section 9.100.040(B)(7). 46. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and /or retention facilities) from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. 47. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 48. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention ' capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 49. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 50. As Preliminary Precise Grading Plans and Preliminary Hydrology Report have not. been provided and /or approved for this Village Use Permit, the applicant shall have the option of the following Scenarios for stormwater handling for the site. 51. The Planning Director shall review any proposed plan modifications due to drainage and hydrology to determine if the proposed modification is minor, will not result in significant changes in the project, and complies with the spirit and intent of the original approving action. If the director determines the modification may result in a significant change in the project, the Director shall Page 15 of 24 11 ' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007 -042 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2006 -035 FORWARD ARCHITECTURE/ HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT OCTOBER 9, 2007 refer the change to the Planning Commission. Scenario No. 1 — On -Site Storm Water Directed Off -Site to New Catch Basins constructed by the applicant on Desert Club Drive and Calle Tampico �. 52. The applicant will be allowed to utilize acceptable surface drainage facility designs to drain stormwater from the site on to Desert Club Drive. The applicant shall construct catch basins and underground storm drain system to pipe water to the existing system along Desert Club Drive. In addition, the applicant shall construct catch basins along Calle Tampico to collect storm water to transport it to the existing system in Calle Tampico and Desert Club Drive as approved by the City Engineer. Scenario No. 2 — On -Site Storm Water Captured On -Site and Directed Off -Site Through On -Site Underground Storm Drainage System to Existing Off -Site Underground Drainage System 53. The applicant shall be allowed to direct stormwater from the Village Use Permit site through the on -site underground drainage network to the existing storm drain system off site as approved by the City Engineer. 54. Pursuant to all scenarios listed above, the Applicant is hereby notified that future site modifications may be necessary including, but not limited to building layouts and parking lot and drive aisle configuration. If, in the event, the proposed retention capacity or pass through storm water flow is found to be inadequate during final design, the applicant shall make adjustments to the site ' layout as needed to accommodate the increased retention /detention or pass through capacity required to satisfy safety issues. Pursuant to the afore mentioned, the applicant may be required to construct additional underground and aboveground drainage facilities to convey on site and off site stormwater through the project site. ' UTILITIES 55. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110 '(Utilities). 56. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all Iutility lines within any right -of -way, and all above - ground utility structures Page 16 of 24 PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT LA QUINTA RETAIL SECTION 3,0 PROPOSED SITE RATIONAL ANAL YSIS Proposed Hydrology Map 100 -Year Rational Analysis 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc 12, t fl 1 1 1 1 U I RIGHT OF WAY SPRINGTIME WAY I I Q ui ui L wQ I� Cf R Rya---- - - -� -- _ -- LEGEND SHOPS 2 O LJ 12,025 SF m 42.5 FF o � FLOW PATH 41.90 ELEV. EX. BLDG 42.0 FF PROPERTY I p -R_ LINE MAX RY I \ Z�� STORMWA R � �- - �-- - - - - -- FmJECT EATMEN UNIT 0 I - - EXIS r. 60 PUNIC 3 INV. 33.2 2 . t 01 � 0 O O O O uj I■ � I O O I-� ■ 3.40 im EX. BLDG �� 41.0 FF I ■ A R ES C I ' MAJOR 1 II I■ 13,969 SF RIGHT OF 42.0 FF WAY I■ ❑ ❑ - - - - -- S 0 S 1 1-- 641.0 SF ❑ ❑ FF PROPERTY LINE L 0 0 0 0 10 -23 -07 — — — — — — PROPOSED HYDROLOGY MAP RIGHT OF WAY CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA Y Development Resource Consultants InG I C A L L E T A M P I C O C � Engineering • Land 6urveyinq . Land Planning D R SCALE 1"=60" 8175 EAST KAISER BOULEVARD ANAHEIM HILLS, CA 92808 (714) 685 -6860 1 U 1 ********************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ' RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC &WCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982 -2006 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) (Rational Tabling Version 6.OD) Release Date: 06/01/2005 License ID 1510 Analysis prepared by: Development Resource Consultants 8175 E. Kaiser Blvd. Anaheim Hills, CA 92808 (714) 685 -6860 * * * * *. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** .DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * 07 -559 LA QUINTA * PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY * ******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FILE NAME: 7559PR.DAT TIME /DATE OF STUDY: 10:34 10/23/2007 --------------------=------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 12.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.85 10 -YEAR STORM 10- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 4.000 10 -YEAR STORM 60- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 1.350 100 -YEAR STORM 10- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 6.500 100 -YEAR STORM 60- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 2.200 SLOPE OF 10 -YEAR INTENSITY - DURATION CURVE = 0.6062139 SLOPE OF 100 -YEAR INTENSITY - DURATION CURVE = 0.6046261 COMPUTED RAINFALL INTENSITY DATA: STORM EVENT = 100.00 1 -HOUR INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 2.200 SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE— 0.6046 RCFC &WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C "- VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: COMPUTE CONFLUENCE VALUES ACCORDING TO RCFC &WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL AND IGNORE OTHER CONFLUENCE COMBINATIONS FOR DOWNSTREAM ANALYSES *USER- DEFINED STREET - SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET- CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER - GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT- /PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW -DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow -Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top -of -Curb) 2. (Depth) *(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT *FT /S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* 1Q +--------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -+ I SITE,AREA I I � I I +---------------------------------------------------=----------------- - - - - -+ ********************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS ««< ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS COMMERCIAL TC = K *[(LENGTH * *3) /(ELEVATION CHANGE)] * *.2 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW- LENGTH(FEET) = 795.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 41.90 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 33.25 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 8.65 TC = 0.303 *[( 795.00 * *3) /( 8.65)] * *.2 = 10.824 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 6.196 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8921 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "C" SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 18.79 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.40 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 18.79 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.40 TC(MIN.) = 10.82 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 18.79 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS U Q PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS FOR LA QUINTA RETAIL CENTER . LOCATED AT NEC CALLE TAMPICO AND DESERT CLUB DRIVE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 80 South Lake Ave, Suite 660 Pasadena, CA 91101 Prepared By., DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE CONSULTANTS, INC. 8175 E. Kaiser Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92808 (714)685-6 860 Brandon Willnecker P.E., Principal Project No. 07 -559 Cl) o �Y, p. b� August 6, 2007 5 Revised On: November 23 2 07 \p� 5- a L°' -r . . / PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT LA QUINTA RETAIL TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 NARRATIVE Introduction Project Description Hydrology Methodology SECTION 2.0 SITE INFORMATION Location Map Reference Documentation SECTION 3.0 PROPOSED SITE RATIONAL ANALYSIS ®Rc K 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc r PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc LA QUINTA RETAIL SECTION 1, O NARRATIVE Introduction Project Description Hydrology Methodology Water Quality Nuisance Water Summary Z PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT LA QUINTA RETAIL Introduction The project is located on approximately 3.4 acres of vacant land at the NEC of Calle Tampico and Desert Club Drive, in the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. The proposed project will include the construction of three retail /commercial buildings. Additional improvements will include parking lots, landscape areas, and underground sewer, water and storm drain facilities. This report has been prepared to calculate the post developed condition for the on -site storm water runoff and the drainage received from the adjoining property. ' Project Description Existing Site Conditions: The majority of the project site consists of barren, vegetated land that drains in the westerly and southerly directions. The remaining project site consists of paved parking the drains into an existing storm water inlet. Proposed Site Development: The proposed site consists of three retail /commercial buildings, sidewalks, parking areas, and landscaping. The completed project will .total approximately 3.4"' ' acres. On -Site stormwater runoff drains overland into catch basins and grated inlets, flows into a private underground storm drain network and connects into the public storm d located i esert Club Dr a dition to the on -site storm wa er runo , approximately 1.0 acre ' o -site area Is ry to the project. This off -site runoff will also be collected and conveyed:' C�to the public storm drain through the on -site storm water facilities. ' Hydrology Methodology The hydrology calculations for the project are based on the Riverside County Flood Control"¢" District (RCFC) Hydrology Manual /Procedure (April, 1978 edition), City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06 -16, and City of La Quinta Conditions of Approval for Village Use Permit 2006 -035. Location maps, precipitation values, slope intensity curve values, and rainfall depth values have all been interpolated from the RCFC manual or referenced from the La Quinta Engineering Q ' Bulletins regarding hydrology and can be found in Section 2.0 of this report. The project is� located in Zone 3 for NOAA data info. Advanced Engineering Software (AES 2006 Version) was C �" used to perform'a rational method analysis on the proposed site. A rational method analysis is� ' u being used in conformance with the City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06 -16 (EB 06 -16) for non - retention storm water analysis. The project site is located in a soil classification zone of type "C". For standard commercial projects, the Runoff Coefficient for a type "C" soil is 0.8921. %41 ' Proposed Conditions: Per the Final Conditions of Approval for Village Use Permit 2006 -035 '�e� •'(V► Condition #53: � �� "The applicant shall be allowed to direct stormwater from the Village Use Permit site through the on -site underground drainage network to the existing storm drain system off site as approved by the City Engineer." ' In conformance with Condition #53, the on -site stormwater will be collected and discharged undetained into the existing 60" public storm drain in Desert Club Dr. A 30" diameter storm drain will convey on -site, and off -site, flows to the existing 60" diameter public storm drain. G ' DR c a� ' 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc 3 I� A t ' � ru i � �. � f v 1 R t . ., ,�. d PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT LA QUINTA RETAIL The total peak runoff to the public main is based upon a rational method analysis of the proposed site and requirements outlined in EB 06 -16. The results of the rational method analysis are located in Section 3 of this report. The on -site peak 100 -year flow is equal to 18.79 cfs and is based upon 100 -year rainfall intensity data from EB 06 -16 and an on -site flow path as shown o►' in the Proposed Hydrology Map in Section 3. The off -site flow is estimated by prorating the �c.( calculated on site flows for 3.4 acres and applying to the 1.0 acre of off -site area. This proration yields an off -site flow of 5.53 cfs. The total peak flow conveyed to the public storm drain is . 24.32 cfs. The sizing of the connection to the public storm drain is based upon the requirements set in EB 06 -16. EB 06 -16 requires that the on -site storm drain system must convey the peak 10��ear storm through unpressurized pipes, and for the 100 -year storm the pipes can become pressurized at peak flow. Based upon the Manning equation for pipe flow, the unpressurized capacity of a 30" HDPE pipe (Manning's coefficient of 0.011) running at a slope of 0.5% is 34.28 �r'►�� cfs. Taking a conservative approach, the c ion pipe to the existing public storm drain is sized for the 100 -year storm peak flow 24.32 s. It is anticipated that a 24" to 30" storm drain lateral will need to be constructed de p ng on final design calculations. Water Qualify f Prior to discharging into the public storm drain system, the storm water will be treated in accordance with Riverside County and City of La Quinta adoption of the state's general permit stormwater. The proposed treatment device is a low -flow media filtration device located at the downstream end of the private storm drain network. Due to the on -site acceptance of existing off -site tributary flow, the water treatment device will be upsized to accommodate the additional untreated flows created by the adjacent property that is currently untreated. Nuisance Water The nuisance water generated on -site will be retained and infiltrated on -site through the use of the Maxwell IV Drywell system or city approved equivalent. The drywell will be located at the downstream end of the on -site storm drain system prior to reaching the public right -of -way. The drywell will act as.a flow - through drywell that will retain low flows (nuisance water) and become inundated at greater flows. The inundated drywell will bypass the higher flow to the public storm drain connection. Summary The proposed project is required to adhere to City of La Quinta standards, as well as the conditions set by the City of La Quinta Planning Commission for Village Use Permit 2006 -035. The proposed system outlined in this report adheres to these requirements for discharge to the public storm drain facilities located adjacent to the project. The conditions for this project outline a scenario of non - detained stormwater discharging into the public storm drain system. ®RC 4L ' 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc 5 PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT LA QUINTA RETAIL ' SECTION 2, 0 ' SITE MFORMA TION Location Map. Reference Documentation 1 ®Rc11 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc 5 �1 i I Tait °F �wQ�rw P.O. Box 1504 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92247 -1504 PUBLIC WORKS /ENGINEERINO DEPARTMENT 78 -495 CALLE TAMPICO (760) 777 -7075 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 FAX (760) 777 -7155 ENGINEERING BULLETIN #06 -16 TO: All Interested Parties ' FROM: lih>lothy R. Jonasson, Public Works Director /City Engineer ' EFFECTIVE DATE: December 19, 2006 I SUBJECT: Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems ' This bulletin establishes storm drain study specifications. All hydrology and preliminary hydraulic reports for the City of La Quinta should follow these criteria. Hydrology studies for the City of La Quinta shall be performed for projects when required by the conditions of approval or as requested by the City Engineer. Reference material used for city plan checking purposes is as follows: 1. Plan Check Checklist ' Storm drain plan checks are guided by the documents found in the following hyperlink: ' http•/ /www la- auinta org /publicworks /tractl /z onlinelibrary /olancheck checklist o2ONEW.htm 2. Archive Plans Example City plans can be found at the following Yp h erlink: 'http://www.le-quinta.orci/r)lancheckim search asp A useful method of quickly searching archive plans is to load the plan type and ' current year (e.g. 2006) and then search the archive by clicking the GO button. Hydrology Report Guidelines (General) All hydrology reports shall follow the general guidelines set forth by Riverside County Flood Control (RCFC) and Water Conservation. District's Hydrology Manual. `'7 1 i fi i 1 (quick drawdown) large storm events. Use of walls as a top ring of the retention basin is prohibited. Retaining walls will require approval from both the Public Works Department Director /City Engineer and Community Development Department Director. 10. Retention Basin Width Retention basins shall have a minimum width of 20 feet as measured from the lowest elevation contour. Previously, retention basin widths were governed by City guidance for aspect ratios for basins depths greater than 6 feet. 11. Overflow Routes Retention basins should be designed to overflow to City arterial streets or the adjacent local street as applicable. Historical flow route should be followed and not changed on a regional perspective but re- grading and import to achieve an immediate route to the adjacent street should be considered for projects which concentrate flows to adjacent open land or off -site developments. Overflow routes shall be designed using an open channel flow (surface flow). Closed conduit emergency overflow must be approved by the City Engineer. 12. Rainfall Intensity. Rainfall intensity for hydrological report preparation is regionally zoned within the City pursuant to available NOAA data. A regional rainfall intensity map of the City should be referenced to confirm rainfall amount assumptions provided in the following table. *The design storm for the City is 100 -year storm (worst case of 24 hour, 6 hour, 3 hour or 1 hour duration). The 500 -year storm is only used to review for problematic secondary overflows which do not drain to a public arterial street, creating a trapped water condition. 13. Hydrograph Loss Rates According to the Riverside County Flood Control Hydrology Manual, the loss rates generally range from 0.10 to 0.40 in /hr with most falling between 0.20 and 0.25 in /hr. Three and six hour duration storms may use a constant loss rate; however, the 24 hour duration storm shall obtain a variable loss rate using the equation found on page E -9 of the manual, which is Ft = C(D- T)"''S5 + Fm. Variable loss rates are not required for the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Analysis (Shortcut Method). Additionally, developed condition low loss rate calculations on 24 hour I 100 yr storm (inches) Zones 1hr 3hr 6hr 24hr Zone 1 - Southwest mountains 2.50- 3.40 4.00- 6.00 Zone 2 - Southwest mountains 2.30 3.00 3.70. 5.00 Zone 3 - West mountains and areas south of Hwy 111 and west of Washington 2.20 2.80 3.40 4.50 Zone 4 - West of Jefferson and areas east of Washington including the Cove 2.10 2.70 3.20 4.25 Zone 5 - East of Jefferson and west . of a staggered line trending south west of Calhoun Street and Avenue 50 2.00, 2.60 3.10 4.00 Zone 6 - West of a staggered line trending south west of Calhoun Street and Avenue 50 1.90 2.50 3.00 3.75. 13. Hydrograph Loss Rates According to the Riverside County Flood Control Hydrology Manual, the loss rates generally range from 0.10 to 0.40 in /hr with most falling between 0.20 and 0.25 in /hr. Three and six hour duration storms may use a constant loss rate; however, the 24 hour duration storm shall obtain a variable loss rate using the equation found on page E -9 of the manual, which is Ft = C(D- T)"''S5 + Fm. Variable loss rates are not required for the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Analysis (Shortcut Method). Additionally, developed condition low loss rate calculations on 24 hour I large area, shallow retention basin configurations. Historical City maximum freeboard specifications are now eliminated. 19. Hydraulic Grade Line (HGL) Starting Points Projects within the City of La Quinta that are required to contain their 100 year storm flows shall show two (2) separate HGLs for maximum flow rate (HGL,o) and maximum volume (HGL,00). ' The first HGL (HGL,o) will reflect the values from the 10 year frequency design storm. Values of Q,o and V,o will be determined from the Rational Method. Conduit sizing shall be based on non pressure type flow (HGL shall not be located above the crown of a pipe). The second HGL (HGL,ao) will reflect values based on the maximum 100 year ' frequency design storm. The HGL,00 shall show that the maximum 100 year storm can be retained within the project and the use of the project's infrastructure shall be maintained. ' 20. 10 Year Frequency Design Storm HGL Calculation 1 ri n This HGL shall start at or above an elevation in the downstream retention basin that is equal to the '/z depth of the retention elevation caused by the 100 year frequency design storm event. The piping system shall be designed based on open channel flow as opposed to pressure flow. This HGL should indicate the hydraulic conditions at the maximum storm water flow rate. Requirements: • Pressure pipe flow not allowed • Identify this HGL as the HGL,o on the hydraulic calculations and storm drain plan profile • Velocity not less than 2.5 fps • Pipe sized based on Rational Method • Head losses shall be based on HEC 22 Ch 7. • HGL freeboards: 6" or greater below CB flow line 21. 100 Year Frequency Design Storm HGL Calculation This HGL shall start at a location at the top of the retention basin water level caused by the 100 year design storm determined -using the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph. This HGL should indicate the hydraulic conditions at the maximum storm water volume with a full basin or channel. Requirements: • Velocity (no requirement) • Identify this HGL as the HGL,00 on the hydraulic calculations and storm drain plan profile • Pressure pipe flow allowed. • Pipe size based on Rational Method. • No part of the emergency route shall obtain a water depth greater than 1.5 feet. 0 25. Typical Storm Drain Pipe Gradients & Velocity ' Primary street storm drains, designers should assume minimum grade = 0.3% based on minimum flow velocity of 2.5 ft /sec. For local area drains, 4 " -6" pipe ' minimum grade = 1 %, larger pipe diameters = 0.5% should be assumed. 26. Typical Street Flows Street flows shall meet the design requirements of FHWA HEC -22. When gutters obtain small slopes, or where sediment may accumulate, or when parking is allowed on the side of the street, the designer should increase the n value by 0.02. 27. Storm Drain Easement Width Requirements ' The City of La Quinta requirements for minimum widths (generally 20 feet, excepting deep drainage systems) of storm drain easements is found in easement requirement charts from the Riverside County Transportation Department. Ten In • HGL Freeboards and Elevations ' • Difference in elevation between CB flow line and HGL in retention basin shall be between 0 and 12 inches. • 1ft min from'top of manhole cover • Not to exceed 7ft above the top of pipe • HGL must be located 1 ft below the adjacent Pad Elevation 22. Whitewater Channel HGL Assuming major storm coincidental occurrences are taken into consideration already (see page 7 -8 of HEC -22 Storm Drains), the projects HGL100 shall be ' located 2 feet below Whitewater Channel's estimated HGL500 (this is also equal to 1 foot below the existing Whitewater Concrete Channel Lining). Time of concentration for channel discharge will assume a full channel. Flap gate installation may be applicable based on project elevations. ' 23. La Quinta Evacuation Channel HGL The Evacuation Channel obtains an HGL,00 with an approximate elevation of 48.0 pursuant to information provided by CVWD to the City. Additional elevation information for the Evacuation Channel is currently under review at CVWD. The elevation is based on NGVD 1929. Elevations showing on the plan should be based on the same. Flap gate installation may be applicable based on project elevations. 24. Retention Basin Landscape Requirements ' Retention basins shall be landscaped and properly irrigated. The retention basin landscape plans must be approved by the City Engineer /Public Works Director. The retention basin must be capable of draining the 100 year storm within 72 hours. ' Project incapable of draining the 100 year storm within 72 hours will be reviewed by the City for enhancement options to promote drainage conveyance. In basins with depths exceeding 8ft, trees shall be planted in the 8 -foot wide terraces. The number of trees shall be calculated by multiplying the basin lot. boundary length by ' the number of 8 -foot wide terraces in the basin and then dividing by 100. 25. Typical Storm Drain Pipe Gradients & Velocity ' Primary street storm drains, designers should assume minimum grade = 0.3% based on minimum flow velocity of 2.5 ft /sec. For local area drains, 4 " -6" pipe ' minimum grade = 1 %, larger pipe diameters = 0.5% should be assumed. 26. Typical Street Flows Street flows shall meet the design requirements of FHWA HEC -22. When gutters obtain small slopes, or where sediment may accumulate, or when parking is allowed on the side of the street, the designer should increase the n value by 0.02. 27. Storm Drain Easement Width Requirements ' The City of La Quinta requirements for minimum widths (generally 20 feet, excepting deep drainage systems) of storm drain easements is found in easement requirement charts from the Riverside County Transportation Department. Ten In r � L PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007 -042 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2006 -035 FORWARD ARCHITECTURE/ HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT OCTOBER 9, 2007 DRAINAGE ' 44. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of per approved methods contained in Engineering Bulletin No. 06 -16 — Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and ' Engineering Bulletin No. 06 -015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. ' 45. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will. be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The tperimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right -of -way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to LQMC Section 9.100.040(B)(7). 46. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and /or retention facilities) from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a ' requirement for development of this property. 47 The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, ' levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. L48. The development shall be graded to permit' storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. ' 49. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. ' 50. As Preliminary Precise Grading Plans and Preliminary Hydrology Report have not. been provided and /or approved for this Village Use Permit, the applicant shall ' have the option of the following Scenarios for stormwater handling for the site. 51. The Planning Director shall review any proposed plan modifications due to ' drainage and hydrology to determine if the proposed modification is minor, will not result in significant changes in the project, and complies with the spirit and intent of the original approving action. If the director determines the ' modification may result in a significant change in the project, the Director shall 1 Page 15 of 24 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007 -042 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL ' VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2006 -035 FORWARD ARCHITECTURE/ HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT OCTOBER 9, 2007 refer the change to the Planning Commission. ' Scenario No. 1 — On -Site Storm Water Directed Off -Site to New Catch Basins constructed by the applicant on Desert Club Drive and Calle Tampico 52. The applicant will be allowed to utilize acceptable surface drainage facility designs to drain stormwater from the site on to Desert Club Drive. The applicant shall construct catch basins and underground storm drain system to pipe water ' to the existing system along Desert Club Drive. In addition, the applicant shall construct catch basins along Calle Tampico to collect storm water to transport it to the existing system in Calle Tampico and Desert Club Drive as approved by the City Engineer. Scenario No. 2 — On -Site Storm Water Captured On -Site and Directed Off -Site Through ' On -Site Underground Storm Drainage System to Existing Off -Site Underground Drainage System 1 53. The applicant shall be allowed to direct stormwater from the Village Use Permit site through the on -site underground drainage network to the existing storm drain system off site as approved by the City Engineer. 54. Pursuant to all scenarios listed above, the Applicant is hereby notified that future site modifications may be necessary including, but not limited to building layouts and parking lot and drive aisle configuration. If, in the event, the proposed retention capacity or pass through storm water flow is found to be inadequate during final design, the applicant shall make adjustments to the site layout as needed to accommodate the increased retention /detention or pass through capacity required to satisfy safety issues. Pursuant to the afore mentioned, the applicant may be required to construct additional underground and aboveground drainage facilities to convey on site and off site stormwater through the project site. UTILITIES. 55. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110 (Utilities). 56. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right -of -way, and all above - ground utility structures Page 16 of 24 �i 0 PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC REPORT 07 -559 Hydrology Report.doc LA QUINTA RETAIL SECTION 3, 0 PROPOSED SITE RATIONAL ANALYSIS Proposed Hydrology Map 100 -Year Rationa /Ana /ysis I� n J I L RIGHT OF WAY S P R I N G T I M E 5OrS-Y—GrL D G W Iui a �} I R R I 0� - -- ° LEGEND SHOPS 2 m 12,025 SF 42.5 FF o FLOW PATH I 41.90 V. EX. BLDG 42.0 FF I PROPERTY LINE / `/ MAXI RYW _R— ( D — — — — — — — — CP \ i STORMWA IER TREATMENT UNIT\- J v 60' ce ��� r PUB ICS I INV. 33.2 i 10, ! 10 O 1 O O O O _ 1 - - - - _ - - - m J,LC'\ �� v r 3.40 �: EX. BLDG � f 41.0 FF � ACRES `F-. MAJOR 1 j 13,969 SF II p RIGHT WAY OF I� r 42.0 FF ° ° s o s 1 I --- - - - - -- I 6, SF ❑ ❑ 41.0 F PROPERTY 1 LINE L 0 0 0 0 10 -23 -07 — — — — — — PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY HYDROLOGY MAP ITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA Development Resource tang Inc. C A L L E T A M P I C O Cnrq Engineering Land $ureymq .Land Planning ing - L D RC SCALE 1 " =60' " 8175 EAST KAISER BOULEVARD ANAHEIM HILLS. CA 92808 (714) 685 -6860 ********************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC &WCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL ' (c) Copyright 1982 -2006 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) (Rational Tabling Version 6.OD) Release Date: 06/01/2005 License ID 1510 Analysis prepared by: Development Resource Consultants ' 8175 E. Kaiser Blvd. Anaheim Hills, CA 92808 (714) 685 -6860 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * 07 -559 LA QUINTA * PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY * * FILE NAME: 7559PR.DAT ' -- TIME /DATE -OF- STUDY: 10:34 10/23/2007 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: n L J L F�� 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 12.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.85 10 -YEAR STORM 10- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 4.000 10 -YEAR STORM 60- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 1.350 100 -YEAR STORM 10- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 6.500 100 -YEAR STORM 60- MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 2.200 SLOPE OF 10 -YEAR INTENSITY - DURATION CURVE = 0.6062139 SLOPE OF 100 -YEAR INTENSITY- DURATION'CURVE = 0.6046261 COMPUTED RAINFALL INTENSITY DATA: STORM EVENT = 100.00 1 -HOUR INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 2.200 SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE = 0.6046 RCFC &WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"- VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: COMPUTE CONFLUENCE VALUES ACCORDING TO RCFC &WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL AND IGNORE OTHER CONFLUENCE COMBINATIONS FOR DOWNSTREAM ANALYSES *USER- DEFINED STREET - SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET- CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER - GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT- /PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) SIDE SIDE / (FT)- -WAY- -(FT)- -/- -(FT) --- -- 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 -(FT) -(FT)- 2.00 0.0313 0.167 - -(n) -- 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW -DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow -Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top -of -Curb) 2. (Depth) *(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT *FT /S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* 1Q t t t � 11 � I Fi +------------------------------------------------------------- =------- - - - - -+ I SITE AREA I I I I I +----------------------------------------------------------------=---- - - - - -+ ********************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - >>>>> RATIONAL- METHOD- INITIAL - SUBAREA - ANALYSIS «« <------------------------ ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS COMMERCIAL TC = K *[(LENGTH * *3) /(ELEVATION CHANGE) * . INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW- LENGTH(FEET) = 795.'00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 41.90 ` DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 33.25 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 8.65 TC = 0.303 *[( 795.00 * *3) /( 8.65)] * *.2 = 10.824 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH /HOUR) = 6.196 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8921 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "C" SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 18.79 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 3.40 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 18.79 END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) _ 40 TC (MIN.) _ ------------------ ------------------ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS W G`ov� Z �t5 10.82 ► 5 r Z0- 6V '05 G9 /-- joll �e� \.JV) e� lx s ' \AV ?� a. J ,' �, _ s' .� .� .�