Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Drainage Report - Brimhall Frontage Road
Table of Contents 1.0 General .................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Introduction...................... ..................................................................................1 1.2 Description of Watershed ..................................................................................2 1.2.1 Watershed Limits ..................................................................................2 1.2.2 Existing Land Use .................................................................... .............2 1.2.3 Existing Drainage Patterns ....................................................................2 1.2.4 Proposed Drainage Patterns ................................................ ..................4 1.3 Study Methodology............................................................................................4 2.0 Hydrology .................................................. ...............................................................................6 2.1 Design Standards & Criteria ..............................................................................6 2.2 Rainfall Characteristics......................................................................................6 2.2.1 Climate ..................................................................... .............................6 2.2.2 Intensity Frequency Duration................................................................6 2.4 Hydrologic Calculations ........................................ ............................................8 2.4.1 Surface Runoff Conditions....................................................................8 2.4.2 Time of Concentration ........................ ..................................................8 2.4.3 Rational Method..................................................................................10 2.5 Drainage Inlet Sizing .......................................................................................10 2.6 Retention Basin Design................................................................................... .12 2.6.1 Required Storage Capacity..................................................................12 2.6.2 Basin Elevation ......................................................................... ..........12 2.6.3 Infiltration............................................................................................12 2.7 Floodplain & Ground Water Table ..................................... .............................13 3.0 Hydraulics ...............................................................................................................................14 3.1 Design Standards & Criteria ...................... ......................................................14 3.2 Existing Facilities.............................................................................................14 3.3 Proposed Roadway Profile...............................................................................14 3.4 Proposed Roadway Drainage Inlet Spacing.....................................................14 3.5 Pipe Flow Calculations ....................................................................................17 3.6 Hydraulic Grade Line Calculations ............................................... ..................18 4.0 Water Quality..........................................................................................................................19 5.0 Summary ........................ .......................................................................................................19 Appendix .................................................................................... ...........................................20 Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 1 AECOM 16811.00-0003-005 1.0 General 1.1 Introduction Thomas Roads Improvement Program (TRIP) was created in 2005 and named in honor of former congressman William M. Thomas. The program exists to improve the transportation infrastructure of the greater Bakersfield area. TRIP is a cooperative effort between City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, California Department of Transportation, and Kern Council of Governments. Westside Parkway (Parkway) is a proposed TRIP freeway project through western Bakersfield, for which City of Bakersfield (City) is the lead agency (see Figure 1 below). When fully constructed, the Parkway will connect Heath Road at Stockdale Highway to State Route 99; approximately eight miles in length. The alignment follows roughly along and north of the Kern River. For funding and construction purposes, the Parkway is divided into six phases. -Phase 1 is the extension of Mohawk Street from Truxtun Extension to Rosedale Highway (State Route 58). -Phase Phase 2 is the main Parkway alignment from and including the Mohawk Street interchange to and including the Coffee Road interchange. -Phase 3 is the main Parkway alignment from just west of Coffee Road to Calloway Drive. -Phase 3A is the interchange at Calloway Drive. -Phase 4 is the main Parkway alignment east of Mohawk Road to Truxtun Extension. -Phase 5 is the main Parkway alignment from Calloway Drive to Allen Road. -Phase 6 is the main alignment from Allen Road to Heath Road. Phases 2, 3, 3A, 5 and 6 are being designed for the City by AECOM Transportation. Runoff generated from within the Parkway right-of-way is addressed in separate reports, one for each phase. This report addresses runoff generated from outside of Parkway right-of-way. This report describes the storm water collection and retention design parameters and requirements for Drainage System No. 250 (Brimhall Frontage Road), which is part of Phase 2. This drainage systemswill collect storm water runoff from City roadways. Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 2 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 Figure 1. Westside Parkway location shown in relation to the greater Bakersfield area. 1.2 Description of Watershed 1.2.1 Watershed Limits Drainage System No. 250 generally encompasses the northeast corner of the intersection of Coffee Road and Brimhall Road (roughly the limits of Parcel Map No. 4975). The watershed boundaries are defined to the west by the centerline of Coffee Road, to the south by Parkway right-of-way (roughly the north face of curb for existing Brimhall Road), to the east by the Friant Kern Canal right-of-way, and to the north by an existing mini storage facility. The east half of Coffee Road for approximately 600 feet north of the aforementioned limits also drains to the system. The watershed encompasses a total of approximately 9.9 acres. 1.2.2 Existing Land Use The east quarter of the watershed is a cleared and vacant parcel owned by the City. The adjacent quarter to the west is a mini storage facility. West of the mini storage is a retention basin, parking lot, dance studio, and indoor skating rink. The western most quarter includes a gas station to the south and a restaurant to the north. 1.2.3 Existing Drainage Patterns All storm water currently drains to a City owned and maintained retention basin. The basin was built in 1985 with the existing mini storage facility and originally had a capacity of 0.41 acre-feet. The basin was deepened in 1990 to accommodate additional runoff and now has a total capacity of 1.31 acre-feet. Water from Coffee Road is conveyed to the basin by the east curb and gutter of Coffee Road and the north curb and gutter of Brimhall Road. Water from Brimhall Road is captured by a City Type-A catch basin on the north side of Brimhall Road approximately 330 feet east of Coffee Road. Water from the mini storage facility is conveyed by concrete v-gutters to the bottom of the basin. Water from the existing restaurant, gas station, skating rink, dance studio, and parking lots is conveyed by by concrete v-gutters to the catch basin on the north side of Brimhall Road (see Figure 2). Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 4 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 1.2.4 Proposed Drainage Patterns The westbound off-ramp of the Parkway onto Coffee Road will be located within the existing limits of Brimhall Road east of Coffee Road. Access from the off-ramp onto private property will not be allowed. As the Parkway will ultimately be a Caltrans facility, drainage from outside of Parkway right-of-way will not be allowed to drain onto the right-of-way. To allow access, a frontage road (herein referred to as Brimhall Frontage Road) will be constructed along the north part of the watershed, through the existing restaurant and over the existing retention basin. Drainage from the existing properties will be conveyed to a new City owned and maintained retention basin to be located on the City owned property adjacent to the Friant Kern Canal. Access to the Friant Kern Canal as well as the proposed drainage basin will be provided by a non-public paved access road. The Drainage Area Map (Figure 3) is provided on the following page. Layouts, profiles, and cross sections of the proposed roadways and City standard details are included in the Appendix for reference. 1.3 Study Methodology All design calculations, assumptions, procedures, and references in this study are done per Division Two “Standards for Drainage” of the City of Bakersfield Subdivision and Engineering Design Manual, dated July 1989; hereinafter referred to as “Design Manual.” Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 6 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 2.0 Hydrology 2.1 Design Standards & Criteria Chapter 2.3 of the Design Manual governs hydrologic design. The project limits are less than one square mile and the project is thus defined as a “Local Waterway” (§2.3.1.4c). Local waterways are designed for an average recurrence interval of 10-years. 2.2 Rainfall Characteristics 2.2.1 Climate This section adapted from NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS WR-281 “The Climate of Bakersfield, California” by Chris Stachelski and Gary Sanger, dated February 2008. The climate of Bakersfield is heavily influenced by the mountain ranges that border the San Joaquin Valley. The Diablo Range rises to elevations as high as 2,000 to 3,000 feet and is located roughly 65 miles to the west of the city and the Tehachapi Mountains are located roughly 15 miles to the east and range in elevation from 4,000 to 8,500 feet high. Both of these ranges act to create a rain shadow effect on the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley. The Diablo Range blocks a considerable amount of moisture from flowing into the San Joaquin Valley from the Pacific while influxes of tropical moisture from the south are reduced by the Tehachapi Mountain range. As a result, the climate of Bakersfield is dry. The location of the City at the base of the Sierra Nevada (foothills 10 miles east; highest peaks 70 miles east) and Tehachapi Mountains and its proximity to these ranges also enables it to be impacted by downslope winds from the south or southeast. As air descends downward over these ranges, it warms and dries out, allowing temperatures in the City and adjacent areas of the southeastern San Joaquin Valley to run warmer than areas further north and help to further reduce precipitation totals in the area. During the six month period from November through April, Bakersfield receives 90 percent of its normal annual precipitation, which is 6.49 inches. Often this precipitation falls in association with largescale frontal systems. 2.2.2 Intensity Frequency Duration Rainfall intensities to be used for hydrologic design are provided by the City on Sheet D-1 of the Design Manual (Figure 4) for 5-year, 10-year, 25-year, 50-year, and 100-year storm events. Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 7 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 Figure 4. Rainfall Intensity-Duration Chart (City of Bakersfield Std. D-1). Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 8 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 2.4 Hydrologic Calculations The rational method (§2.3.2) is used for all hydrologic calculations. 2.4.1 Surface Runoff Conditions Runoff coefficients are defined by Sheet D-2 of the Design Manual (see Figure 5). Because of uncertainties in defining landscaped areas verses paved areas, for the purposes of this analysis all subareas are assumed to be paved and have a runoff coefficient of 0.95 (the maximum value specified by the Design Manual). Because the entire watershed is assumed, for the purposes of this report, to be paved, changes in future land use will not increase the design runoff into the proposed drainage system. 2.4.2 Time of Concentration The time of concentration is the total time required for water to flow from the farthest point of each subarea to the drainage inlet. The longest time governs (§2.3.2.1c). The initial time of concentration, which represents the roof to gutter time, is defined by the Design Manual based upon land use. Existing land use for the watershed is primarily commercial and industrial, for which the initial time of concentration is 10-minutes (§2.3.2.1b). Subareas that are primarily roadway, are assumed to have an initial time of concentration of 5-minutes. Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 9 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 Figure 5. Rational Method Urban Runoff Coefficients (City of Bakersfield Std. D-2). Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 10 AECOM 16811.00-0003-005 2.4.3 Rational Method The Design Manual states that the rational method (§2.3.2) is used for all hydrologic calculations. The formula is outlined as follows: Q = C ⋅ i ⋅ A (§2.3.2.1f) Where: C = runoff coefficient i = rainfall intensity in inches per hour A = drainage area in acres Q = Design runoff in cubic feet per second Using the formula above, flow at each inlet was calculated for both 5-year and 10-year storm events (see Table 1). Gutter flow velocities are calculated from Figures 8 and 9. Table 1. Gutter runoff flow at inlets. Drainage Area Time of Concentration Flow at Inlet Development Slope Flow Path Velocity Initial Tc Btwn Pnts Tc I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Subarea Acres Type C CA (%) Length (ft) (ft/s) (min) (min) (min) 5-year 10-year 5-year 10-year 1 0.8 C-1 & Road 0.95 0.76 0.20% 100 1.5 10 1.1 11 1.45 1.72 1.10 1.31 2 0.9 Road 0.95 0.86 0.20% 700 1.5 0 7.8 8 1.50 1.80 1.28 1.54 3 0.8 Road 0.95 0.76 0.64% 335 2.4 0 2.3 2 1.50 1.80 1.11.14 1.37 4 2.5 C-1 0.95 2.38 0.20% 300 1.6 10 3.1 13 1.32 1.58 3.14 3.75 5 2.3 C-1 0.95 2.19 0.20% 300 1.8 10 2.8 13 1.32 1.58 2.88 3.45 6 0.7 Road 0.95 0.67 0.38% 450 1.9 0 3.9 4 1.50 1.80 1.00 1.20 2.5 Drainage Inlet Sizing The City requires that drainage inlets be curb inlet catch basins, specified as “Type-A Catch Basin” (City Std. D-14) with a 2-inch depression at curb opening (City Std. D-17); see Appendix for both details. These inlets are cast-in-place concrete structures with a minimum curb opening of 3.5 feet. The City requires that inlets be designed for a 10-year storm event. The capacity of the inlet, per foot of opening, is calculated for sump conditions at 1.6 cfs/ft (see Figure 6 nomograph). The capacity of the inlets on grade is calculated using “FHWA Urban Drainage Design Program, HY-22.” See the Appendix for detailed calculation sheets for each inlet. See Table 2 for curb opening design. Table 2. Drainage inlet sizing table. Q (cfs) Gutter Opening Required Opening Inlet Provided 10 -year year Slope (ft) (ft) a 1.31 0.20% 3.84 4.00 e 1.54 0.20% 4.24 4.50 k 1.37 Sag 0.86 3.50 o 3.75 Sag 2.35 3.50 h 1.20 Sag 0.75 3.50 Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 11 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 Figure 6. Nomograph for capacity of curb opening inlet at low points. Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 12 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 2.6 Retention Basin Design The Design Manual defines a retention basin as a terminal drainage facility which is used for the storage of runoff (§2.8.1.1). Stored water then infiltrates into the soil or evaporates. Retention basins are required to store runoff from a 24-hour, 100-year storm event (§2.8.2.1a) and must completely infiltrate within seven days (§2.8.5.1). 2.6.1 Required Storage Capacity The equation used to determined required storage capacity is as follows: V = 0.15×Σ(C ⋅ A) (§2.8.2.1a) V = design volume in acre-feet 0.15 = rainfall volume (24-hr, 100-yr) C = runoff coefficient A = drainage area in acres Design Calculation: C = 0.95 (assumed for entire watershed) A = 9.9 acres (includes the vacant parcel east of the mini storage) V = 0.15 * 0.95 * 9.9 = 1.41 acre-feet (required storage capacity) 2.6.2 Basin Elevation The existing ground elevation at the proposed basin is 387±, top of basin. The Design Manual requires that water surface elevation be a minimum of one-foot below the lowest gutter inlet (§2.8.2.1b). The lowest inlet is in Subarea 3 (Inlet “g”) with a gutter elevation of 383.31. Because of this, the water surface elevation is at 382.31. Without a slope stability analysis being performed, the maximum overall depth a basin can be is 10-feet (§2.8.5.2). Because of this, the bottom of the basin is set at an elevation of 377.00. Proposed Basin Characteristics: Top of Basin = 387.00 Water Surface = 382.31 Bottom of Basin = 377.00 Overall Depth = 10.00 feet Max. Water Depth = 5.31 feet See Figure 7 for complete basin design details. 2.6.3 Infiltration At present, no soil permeability data is available for the proposed basin to demonstrate that it will drain within seven days. As the proposed basin is only several hundred feet of the existing basin, which does drain in seven days, there is a reasonable expectation that it will function similarly. Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 13 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 Figure 7. Proposed drainage basin design. 2.7 Floodplain & Ground Water Table The proposed basin will be located outside the floodplain of the Kern River. Groundwater was not encountered in the geotechnical investigation by Kleinfelder (see Appendix for Log of Boring). Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 14 AECOM 16811.00-0003-005 3.0 Hydraulics 3.1 Design Standards & Criteria Chapter 2.4 of the Design Manual governs hydraulic design. Inlets are spaced so that depth of flow in gutters does not exceed the top of a 6-inch curb for a 5-year storm event (§2.4.1.6). Storm drain pipes and inlets are designed to convey 10-year flows (§2.4.1.6). Storm drain pipes are designed to flow full and under pressure (§2.4.4.2). The hydraulic grade line for all closed conduits must be a minimum of 0.5-foot below all inlet or lid elevations (§2.4.4.3). The minimum size of storm drain pipes is 18-inches in diameter (§2.5.3.1) and are required to be reinforced concrete pipe (§2.5.3.4). The Manning’s roughness coefficient for concrete pipe is defined as n = 0.013 (§2.4.2). 3.2 Existing Facilities Storm water is currently conveyed to the existing retention basin by means of a City Type-A catch basin and approximately 300 feet of 18-inch diameter reinforced concrete storm drain. As part of of this project, existing storm drain facilities will be removed and replaced. 3.3 Proposed Roadway Profile See Appendix for centerline profiles of Brimhall Frontage Road (“G7” Line) and the Friant Kern Canal Access Road (“FK1” Line). 3.4 Proposed Roadway Drainage Inlet Spacing Inlet “a” is proposed at the curb return on Coffee Road to capture runoff before it enters Parkway rightof-way (Subarea 1). Because cross gutters are not allowed by the City for local streets intersecting with arterials, Inlet “e” is proposed at the curb return on Coffee Road north of the Frontage Road (Subarea 2). Two inlets (Inlets “g” and “k”) are proposed for the Frontage Road at the low point at Station 4+30.56 “G7” (Subarea 3). Inlet “o” is proposed for the mini storage at the location of the existing spillway (Subarea 4). Inlet “t” is proposed for the skating rink, dance studio, and parking lots at the location of the existing catch basin (Subarea 5). See Figure 2 for the Drainage Area Exhibit. The Design Manual requires that gutter depth of flow cannot exceed the top of a 6-inch curb for a 5-year storm event (§2.4.1.6). To verify maximum depth of flow for each subarea (which occurs at the inlet) meets this requirement, gutter flow charts from the Kern County Hydrology Manual were used (see Figures 7 and 8) the results of which are shown in Table 3. Table 3. Depth of gutter flow at inlet. Q (cfs) Slope Depth of Subarea Figure Used 5-year (%) Flow (in) 1 6 1.10 0.20% 3.5 2 6 1.28 0.20% 3.7 3 6 1.14 0.64% 3.5 4 7 3.14 0.20% 4.8 5 7 2.88 0.20% 5.0 6 5 1.00 0.38% 3.1 Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 15 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 Figure 8. Gutter flow chart for half-width commercial street (KCHM Figure D-2c). Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 16 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 Figure 9. Gutter flow chart for half-width arterial street (KCHM Figure D-2d). Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 17 AECOM 16811.00-0003-005 3.5 Pipe Flow Calculations Flow through pipes is calculated per the rational method for a 10-year storm. All proposed facilities are designated by alphabetical letters, in accordance with the Caltrans naming convention. Storm drain pipes are assumed to flow full (§2.4.4.2). Velocities are computed per Manning’s Equation with n = 0.013. The proposed storm drain layout is shown on “Drainage Area Exhibit,” Figure 2. See Table 4 for pipe flow calculations. Table 4. Pipe flow calculations. 10-year Flow Pipeline Type Element Tc I Qtotal Qpipe Length Dia. Pipe Velocity Tpipe (min) (in/hr) ΣCA (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (in) Slope (ft/s) (min) Inlet a 11 1.72 0.76 1.31 Pipe b 1.31 230 18 0.11% 1.6 2.5 Junction c 14 1.52 1.62 2.45 Pipe f 2.45 385 18 0.11% 1.9 3.4 Junction i 17 1.35 2.38 3.21 Pipe l 3.21 160 18 0.11% 2.0 1.3 Pipe n 3.21 160 18 0.11% 2.0 1.3 Junction q 20 1.22 4.75 5.80 Pipe r 5.80 100 24 0.11% 2.3 0.7 Junction s 20 1.22 6.94 8.46 Pipe v 8.46 440 24 0.08% 2.0 3.6 Junction w 24 1.06 6.94 7.35 Pipe z 7.35 50 24 1.00% 5.4 0.2 Inlet e 8 1.58 0.86 1.35 Pipe d 1.35 45 18 0.11% 1.6 0.5 Junction c Inlet j 2 1.80 0.76 1.37 Pipe k 1.37 35 18 0.11% 1.6 0.4 Junction i Inlet o 13 1.58 2.38 3.75 Pipe p 3.75 10 18 0.11% 2.0 0.1 Junction q Inlet t 13 1.58 2.19 3.45 Pipe u 3.45 310 18 0.11% 2.0 10.2 Junction s Inlet h 4 1.80 0.67 1.20 Pipe g 1.20 20 18 1.00% 3.3 1.1 Junction s Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 18 AECOM 16811.00-0003-005 3.6 Hydraulic Grade Line Calculations Storm drain pipes are designed to flow full and under pressure (§2.4.4.2). The hydraulic grade line for all closed conduits must be a minimum of 0.5-foot below all inlet or lid elevations (§2.4.4.3). Hydraulic grade line is calculated assuming drainage basin is half full (§2.4.4.8). Entrance, exit, and friction losses are also considered (§2.4.4.5). See Table 5 for hydraulic grade line calculations. Table 5. Hydraulic grade line calculations. Station Length Dia. Area Q Veloctiy Friction Exit Friction Entrance HGL Flowline Free-(ft) (in) (ft2) (cfs) (ft/s) Slope Loss Loss Loss Elev. board Basin 379.66 387.00 7.34 z 50 24 3.142 7.35 2.34 0.11% 0.38 0.05 0.09 380.18 391.70 11.52 v 440 24 3.142 8.46 2.69 0.14% 0.06 0.62 0.11 380.96 385.90 4.94 r 100 24 3.142 5.80 1.84 0.07% 0.01 0.07 0.01 381.05 384.90 3.85 n 160 18 1.767 3.21 1.81 0.09% 0.03 0.15 0.05 381.28 385.00 3.72 l 160 18 1.767 3.21 1.81 0.09% 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.01 381.45 383.86 2.41 f 385 18 1.767 2.45 1.39 0.05% 0.01 0.21 0.01 381.67 385.40 3.73 b 230 18 1.767 1.31 0.74 0.02% 0.00 0.04 0.00 381.71 384.98 3.27 380.96 385.90 4.94 u 310 18 1.767 3.45 1.95 0.11% 0.01 0.33 0.01 381.32 384.30 2.98 381.05 384.90 3.85 p 10 18 1.767 3.75 2.12 0.13% 0.01 0.01 0.01 381.09 385.50 4.41 381.45 383.86 2.41 k 35 18 1.767 1.37 0.77 0.02% 0.00 0.01 0.00 381.46 384.69 3.23 381.67 385.40 3.73 d 45 18 1.767 1.35 0.76 0.02% 0.00 0.01 0.00 381.68 385.50 3.82 381.05 384.90 3.85 g 20 18 1.767 1.20 0.68 0.01% 0.00 0.00 0.00 381.06 385.29 4.23 Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 19 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 4.0 Water Quality Per City requirements, a Continuous Deflection Separation (CDS) unit will be installed at the final junction upstream of the basin; junction “w”. The unit chosen by the City is Contech CDS 3020-6, or equal. Design calculations were provided by the manufacturer and are provided in the Appendix. The unit treats the “first flush” which equals a rainfall intensity of 0.2 in/hr. Headloss through the unit equals 0.34 feet. 5.0 Summary This study shows that adequate drainage can be provided for Drainage System No. 250 with the storm drain system that has been designed, a summary of which is provided below. 1. Inlet Considerations: a. For each inlet location, top of 6-inch curb is not exceeded in 5-year flows. b. Drainage inlet widths are sufficient for 10-year flows. 2. Pipe Considerations: a. Storm drain pipes are designed for 10-year flows. b. Hydraulic grade line established from half full water depth of basin. c. c. Hydraulic grade line remains a minimum of 1-foot below all inlets and lids. 3. Basin Consideration: a. Retention basin designed for 24-hour, 100-year flow. b. Overall basin depth does not exceed 10-feet. c. Maximum water depth does not exceed 8-feet. d. Basin design provides for 12-foot wide access road around top of basin and 12-foot wide, 15% access ramp to bottom of basin. e. Basin design provides for fencing per City details. Drainage Study for Brimhall Frontage Road 20 BOYLE ENGINEERING 16811.00-0003-005 Appendix ASPH ASPH ASPH ASPH ASPH CONC ASPH ASPH ASPH ASPH ASPH CONCCONC ASPH ASPH REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER PLANS APPROVAL DATE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA 93301 Prepared for: Prepared by: Engineer: Drawn: Date: File Name: Job No.: Checked by: SHEET N0. OF X Revision: Date: Description: No. Exp. CIVIL 5001 E. COMMERCENTER DR. SUITE 100 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93309 661-325-7253 95% DESIGN SUBMITTAL E. BINGGELI D. GHILARDUCCI M. ROBERTS D-12A REMOVE EXISTING INLET ASPH ASPH ASPH ASPH REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER PLANS APPROVAL DATE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA 93301 Prepared for: Prepared by: Engineer: Drawn: Date: File Name: Job No.: Checked by: SHEET N0. OF X Revision: Date: Description: No. Exp. CIVIL 5001 E. COMMERCENTER DR. SUITE 100 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93309 661-325-7253 95% DESIGN SUBMITTAL D-5A E. BINGGELI D. GHILARDUCCI M. ROBERTS R/W 10/8/2008 2:17:37 PM PLOT DRIVER => PEN TABLE => PDF_Half_BW.plt TIME PLOTTED => P2_WSP_BW.tbl DATE PLOTTED => USERNAME =>USER=dghilarducci DGN FILE => S:\DMJM Harris\16811.0012\Subs_CD\29866227\CADD \Civil\Sheet\S2ib012.plg REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER PLANS APPROVAL DATE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA 93301 Prepared for: Prepared by: Engineer: Drawn: Date: File Name: Job No.: Checked by: SHEET N0. OF X Revision: Date: Description: E T R E I LA E No. Exp. CIVIL R G IS E RED P OF SS ONA ENG INEER ST T OF CALIFORNIA 5001 E. COMMERCENTER DR. SUITE 100 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93309 661-325-7253 95% DESIGN SUBMITTAL 370 380 390 400 410 370 380 390 400 410 DRAINAGE PROFILES THIS PLAN ACCURATE FOR DRAINAGE WORK ONLY. D. CRONQUIST D. GHILARDUCCI M. ROBERTS 360 370 380 390 400 410 360 360 370 390 400 410 360 DP-12 DRAINAGE SYSTEM No.2 5 0 IDENTICAL POINT 250 MATCH LINE A-A FL 379.48 FL 379.19 a c FL 379.19 380 MATCH LINE A-A FL 378.68 FL 378.55 FL 378.37 i m q FL 378.29s FL 378.68 FL 378.55 FL 378.37 90^ FL 381.00 c FL 379.19 b f f l n r d e d i FL 378.68 FL 379.96 j k 31.12’ Lt STA "G3" 285+25.50 GRATE 385.50 IDENTICAL POINT OG FG FG OG 370 380 390 400 410 360 q FL 381.43 p 0.11% 0.11% 0.11% o FL 381.68 IDENTICAL POINT 52.72 Rt STA "G" 50+78.51 50.06 Rt STA "G" 53+20.75 RIM 386.04 RIM 385%%p 50.06 Rt STA "G" 53+20.75 49.69 Rt STA "G" 53+53.42 5.00 Lt STA "G7" 15+28.62 RIM 383.91 31.75 Lt STA "G7" 16+27.28 17.50 Rt STA "G7" 15+28.62 6.10% 6.00% 0.11% 0.11% 0.08% 9.64 Lt STA "G7" 17+77.52 RIM 385.41 2.00% RIM 385.41 RIM 385.8%%p 9.64 Lt STA "G7" 17+77.52 90^ IDENTICAL SEE SHEET DP-13 abcdSYSTEM No. 250 18" x 30.00 LF RCP DRAINAGE SYSTEM No.2 5 0 CONTINUED 18" x 240.00 LF RCP e fij 18" x 21.00 LF RCP 18" x 460.00 LF RCP kl mn 18" x 120.00 LF RCP opq r 18" x 160.00 LF RCP 18" x 11.00 LF RCP 24" x 100.00 LF RCP s 370 380 390 400 410 360 DANIEL S. CRONQUIST73077 12/31/08 34.43 Lt STA "FK1" 11+09.04 RIM 384.38 TYPE-A CATCH BASIN, H=5.50’ W/4.0’ WIDE OPENING MANHOLE, H=6.85’ TYPE-A CATCH BASIN, H=4.50’ W/W/4.0’ WIDE OPENING MANHOLE, H=5.23’ TYPE-A CATCH BASIN, H=3.50’ W/3.5’ WIDE OPENING MANHOLE, H=5.83’ TYPE-A CATCH BASIN, H=3.50’ W/3.5’ WIDE OPENING MANHOLE, H=7.04’ MANHOLE, H=7.5’%%p 1 DD-3 1 DD-3 1 DD-2 1 DD-3 1 DD-3 1 DD-2 1 DD-2 1 DD-2 1 DD-2 FLOWLINE 384.98 FLOWLINE 383.46 FLOWLINE 385.50 FLOWLINE 385.18 21.71 Lt STA "G7" 17+74.68 10/8/2008 2:53:58 PM PLOT DRIVER => PEN TABLE => PDF_Half_BW.plt TIME PLOTTED => P2_WSP_BW.tbl DATE PLOTTED => USERNAME =>USER=dghilarducci DGN FILE => S:\DMJM Harris\16811.0012\Subs_CD\29866227\CADD \Civil\Sheet\S2ib013.plg REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER PLANS APPROVAL DATE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA 93301 Prepared for: Prepared by: Engineer: Drawn: Date: File Name: Job No.: Checked by: SHEET N0. OF X Revision: Date: Description: E T R E I LA E No. Exp. CIVIL R G IS E RED P OF SS ONA ENG INEER ST T OF CALIFORNIA 5001 E. COMMERCENTER DR. SUITE 100 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93309 661-325-7253 95% DESIGN SUBMITTAL 370 380 390 400 370 380 390 400 DRAINAGE PROFILES THIS PLAN ACCURATE FOR DRAINAGE WORK ONLY. D. CRONQUIST D. GHILARDUCCI M. ROBERTS 360 370 380 390 400 360 360 370 390 400 360 DP-13 DRAINAGE SYSTEM No.2 5 0 250 380 FL 379.06s OG 0.11% RIM 385.8%%p IDENTICAL SEE SHEET DP-12 tuvwSYSTEM No. 250 DRAINAGE SYSTEM No.2 5 0 CONTINUED z DANIEL S. CRONQUIST73077 12/31/08 31.60 Lt STA "FK1" 10+56.86 FL 380.47 t GRATE 384.26 MATCH LINE A-A u MATCH LINE A-A FL 377.94w RIM 387.6%%p 32.45 Lt STA "FK1" 16+10.08 FL 377.00 FL 378.29 FL 377.94 0.08% 0.08% 2.00% OG FG 90^ v v z aa 66.34 Lt STA "G3" 281+96.37 69.28 Lt STA "FK1" 16+13.43 aa 24" x 50.00 LF RCP 24" x 440.00 LF RCP r EXISTING INLET, H=4.50’ EXISTING 18" x 310.00 LF RCP 2 DD-3 OUTLET STRUCTURE PER FL 378.29s RIM 385.8%%p 31.60 Lt STA "FK1" 10+56.86 FL 378.31 r h 15.92 Lt STA "FK1" 11+17.62 FLOWLINE 385.29 370 390 400 380 0.11% g 370 390 400 380 IDENTICAL POINT gh TYPE-A CATCH BASIN, H=6.98 W/4.0’ WIDE OPENING 18" x 19.56 LF RCP 1 DD-3 8" HP GAS STORM WATER SEPERATOR. CONTECH CDS 3020-6 OR APPROVED EQUAL CDS3020-6 1.88 cfs 8.06 cfs 0.65 ft 2.0 ft 0.0100 ft/ft 2.0 ft 0.0080 ft/ft 1.42 ft 4.83 ft 0 1 Pipe Invert El d/s of CDS 377.94 2 Finished Grade El @CDS 381.70 EGL El d/s of CDS 379.98 HGL El d/s of CDS 379.88 4 Hcont 0.02 ft EGL El d/s of Baffle 380.00 HGL El d/s of Baffle 379.98 6 Baffle Loss 0.07 ft EGL El d/s of Weir 380.07 HGL El d/s of Weir 380.06 8 Hweir 0.20 ft EGL El u/s of Weir 380.31 HGL El u/s of Weir 380.26 10 Hexp 0.01 ft EGL u/s of CDS Unit 380.32 HGL El u/s of CDS Unit 380.22 0.00 0.34 ft 1.48 ft 440.00 ft 385.9 0.56 ft 380.78 5.12 ft Loss of Head Due to Contractions For Higher Velocities with H > 1.0 foot: Hcont = (1/c -1)2 * [v2/2g] c = 0.582 + 0.0418/(1.1 -r) r = ratio of pipe diameters For Lower Velocities with H < 1.0 foot: Hcont = 0.7*(v1 -v2)2 /2g Loss of Head Due to Baffle For Baffle/Orifice (pressure): Hbaffle = [Q /c Aor]2 /2g c = 0.6 Loss of Head Due to Weir For Weir (free discharge): Hweir = [Q /cL]2/3 c = 3.08 For Submerged Weir: Hweir = Hu/s -Hd/s Hu/s = [Q /Ks * cL]2/3 c = 3.08 Ks = [1 -(Hd/s /Hu/s)1.5]0.385 Loss of Head Due to Expansion/Enlargement: For All Situations: Hexp = 1.098 [(v1 -v2)1.919] /2g BRIMHALL STORMDRAIN RELOCATION 6-Oct-08 BAKERSFIELD, CA UPSTREAM CONVEYANCE SYSTEM CHECK AT SYSTEM FLOW Length to U/S Manhole/CB Rim Elevation at U/S Manhole/CB Friction Loss to U/S Manhole/CB Loss Through Baffle Orifice 4 in Contraction Loss from CDS Manhole to d/s Pipe From Plans Loss From Flow Over Submerged Weir Expansion Loss from u/s Pipe to CDS Manhole Total Flow in Storm Drain PROJECT PARAMETERS CDS Model Q treat Q system Required Head Difference to Process Q treat SD Station U/S of CDS SD Station D/S of CDS 39 11 7 HGL El at U/S Manhole/CB Freeboard at U/S Manhole/CB Freeboard U/S of CDS Unit Increase in HGL H cds D/S Pipe Size D/S Pipe Slope U/S Pipe Size U/S Pipe Slope 5 PMSU Weir Height HYDRAULIC IMPACT OF CDS UNIT AT SYSTEM FLOW PMSU WEIR SUMMARY PMSU Weir Length SHEET 1 OF 2 STORM WATER TREATMENT UNIT Performance & Design Specifications The Contractor shall install a precast storm water treatment unit (SWTU) in accordance with the notes and details shown on the Drawings and in conformance with these Specifications. The precast storm water treatment units shall be a continuous deflective separator (CDS®) unit, model PMSU30_20 unit as manufactured by CDS Technologies or proven equivalent. Acceptable SWTU unit(s) shall be non-mechanical and gravity driven, requiring no external power requirements. The SWTU unit shall be capable of capturing and permanently retaining settleable, floatable, and neutrally buoyant particles and contaminants in accordance with the sizing criteria of these specifications. The SWTU unit shall be equipped with a stainless steel expanded metal screen having a screen opening of 4700 microns (4.7 mm or 0.185 inches). The separation screen shall be self-cleaning and nonblocking for all flows diverted to it, even when flows within the storm drain pipeline exceed the SWTU unit’s design treatment flow capacity. A bypass structure shall be provided to allow conveyance of design flows in excess of the SWTU treatment capacity. Alternative SWTUs shall only be considered equivalent when all conditions of the Storm Water Treatment BMP Equivalency Approval Process portion of these specifications listed below have been satisfied and subject to the complete submittal, review and approved process. Storm Water Treatment Unit Design Solids Removal Performance Requirements: The SWTU shall remove oil and sediment from storm water during frequent wet weather events. The SWTU shall treat a minimum of 75 to 90 percent of the annual runoff volume and be capable of removing 80 percent of the total suspended sediment load (TSS) and greater than 90 percent of the floatable free oil. The SWTU must be capable of trapping silt and clay size particles in addition to large particles. The SWTU units shall capture 100% of the floatables and 100% of all particles equal to or greater than 4.7 millimeter (mm) for all flow conditions up to unit’s design treatment flow capacity, regardless of the particle’s specific gravity. The SWTU unit shall capture 100% of all neutrally buoyant material greater than 4.7 mm for all flow conditions up to its design treatment flow capacity. There shall be no flow conditions up to the design treatment flow capacity of the SWTU unit in which a flow path through the SWTU unit can be identified that allows the passage of a 4.7-mm or larger neutrally buoyant object. The SWTU unit shall permanently retain all captured material for all flow conditions of the storm drains to include flood conditions. The SWTU unit shall not allow materials that have been captured within the unit to be flushed through or out of the unit during any flow condition to include flood and/or tidal influences. SWTU Performance & Design Specifications Minimum Treatment Flow Capacity: The Model PMSU30_20 storm water treatment unit shall have a minimum treatment flow capacity of 2.0-cfs (56.6-liters/sec). This treatment capacity shall be achieved without any flow bypassing the overflow weir of the treatment unit. The hydraulic loading rate (gpm/ft2) of the unit shall not exceed recommended loadings when calculated using the peak runoff rate of the water quality storm event. Storm Water Treatment Unit Structure: The structure shall be designed to withstand H20 traffic and earth loadings to be experienced during the life of the treatment unit. Minimum Sump Design: The Model PMSU30_20 shall be furnished with a sump that has a minimum volume of 1.6 cubic yards (1.2 cubic meters) for storage of sediment, organic solids, and other settleable trash and debris. This sump zone shall be separated from the swirl chamber by a constricting access-way for both physical and hydraulic shear separation. The storm water filtration unit shall be furnished with a sump to store settleable materials and pollutants. The sump shall be below the invert of the separation swirl concentrating or vortexing zone or chamber. Units without sumps or units in which settleable material is deposited within the separation or vortexing chamber shall not be allowed. The unit shall have the volumetric sump capacities list above which is materially separated from the separation or vortex chamber to ensure that settled material does not reside in the treatment flow path and thus subject to re-suspension. Oil and Grease Removal Performance: The SWTU unit is equipped with a conventional oil baffle to capture and retain oil and grease and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) pollutants as they are transported through the storm drain system during dry weather (gross spills) and wet weather flows. The conventional oil baffle within a unit assures satisfactory oil and grease removal from typical urban storm water runoff. Minimum Oil Storage Capacity: The Model PMSU30_20 shall be furnished with a baffle that provides a minimum gross oil storage volume of 146 gallons (552-liters). The SWTUs shall be equipped with a conventional oil baffle to capture and retain oil and grease and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) pollutants as they are transported through the storm drain system during dry weather (gross spills) and wet weather flows. The SWTU units shall also be capable of receiving and retaining the addition of Oil Sorbents within their separation chambers. The addition of the oil sorbents can ensure the permanent removal of 80% to 90% of the free oil and grease from the storm water runoff. The addition of sorbents enables increased oil and grease capture efficiencies beyond that obtainable by conventional oil baffle systems. Sorbent material shall be added in accordance with the “USE OF OIL SORBENTS” specifications provided by CDS Technologies. 2 SWTU Performance & Design Specifications Manufacturers Performance Certificate The manufacturer of the SWTU unit shall submit details and shop drawings of sufficient detail for the Engineer to confirm that no available flow paths exist that would allow the passage of an object greater than 4.7 mm and that the hydraulic loading rate at the peak runoff of the water quality storm event is with in does not exceed recommendations. Additionally, the manufacturer shall submit a “Manufacturers Performance Certificate” certifying that the SWTU unit shall achieve the specified removal efficiencies listed in these specifications. This Manufacturer’s Performance Certification of removal efficiencies shall clearly and unequivocally state that the listed removal efficiency shall be achieved throughout the entire treatment flow processed by the SWTU unit with no attenuation of removal efficiency as the flow increase up to the minimum treatment flow capacity specified above. Warranty The manufacturer of the SWTU unit shall shall guarantee the filtration unit free from defects in materials and workmanship for a period one year following installation. Equipment supplied by the manufacturer shall be installed and used only in the particular application for which it was specifically designed. Storm Water Treatment BMP Equivalency Approval Process It is the responsibility of the Project Civil Engineer to design a post-construction treatment control BMP system that conforms to storm water treatment unit these product and performance specifications. When considering equivalencies of previously approved postconstruction treatment control BMPs, the project Civil Engineer of Record shall provide a stamped BMP Treatment Report that includes that following: Sizing Storm Water Treatment Unit for Treatment Efficiency and Conveyance Treatment Efficiency: Submit stamped project specific SWTU sizing calculations that explicitly state that the proposed SWTU has been sized in conformance with either of the following: 1. The alternative unit’s treatment hydraulic loading rate does not exceed 24-gallons/square foot of separator chamber area at the peak of the design Minimum Treatment Flow Capacity listed in the following paragraph(s). This is the (horizontal) plan area of the separator zone within the vortex separation chamber, not the total footprint area of the unit. 2. Alternative solid separators whose treatment process is primary based on particle settling in vaults or tanks shall only be considered equivalent when the unit’s treatment hydraulic loading rate does not exceed 2-gallons/square foot of separator chamber footprint at the peak of the design Minimum Treatment Flow Capacity3 SWTU Performance & Design Specifications listed in the SWTU performance specifications. This is the (horizontal) internal area of the settling tank or vault, not the total footprint area of the unit. This portion of the submittal shall also include an explicit listing of design criteria and/or methodology used to develop the minimum flow-based treatment capacities. Hydraulic Analysis: Submit stamped project specific hydraulic calculations stamped by professional engineer registered with the state where the project is located. This Hydraulic Analysis shall provide the following. 1. The Hydraulic Gradeline (HGL) through the diversion structure and proposed storm water treatment system for the water quality storm event shall be calculated and plotted on a detail of the storm water treatment system. This hydraulic analysis shall explicitly show that the water quality volume or water quality runoff flow rate calculated in accordance with the best practices of hydraulic analysis performed by civil engineers. 2. The HGL for the design flood event (e.g., Q10, Q15, Q25, etc.) shall also be calculated and plotted through the Treatment Control BMP. Reference: Section 5.5 BMP Design Criteria for Flow and Volume of the California Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook New Development and Redevelopment published by California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook for New Development and Redevelopment. 4 VURBAN.TXT FHWA Urban Drainage Design Program, HY-22 Drainage of Highway Pavements Inlets on Grade Date: 11/25/2008 Project No. : 16811.00-0005-003 Project Name.: Westside Parkway Computed by : DSC Brimhall Frontage Road Drainage Report Inlet "e" Inlets on Grade: Curb Opening Inlet Roadway and Discharge Data ____________________________________________________________ Cross Slope Composite S Longitudinal Slope (ft/ft) 0.0020 Sx Pavement Cross Slope (ft/ft) 0.0250 Sw Gutter Cross Slope (ft/ft) 0.0833 n Manning's Coefficient 0.013 W Gutter Width (ft) 2.00 a Gutter Depression (inch) 4.00 Q Discharge (cfs) 1.540 T Width of Spread (ft) 8.33 Gutter Flow ____________________________________________________________ Eo Gutter Flow Ratio 0.635 d Depth of Flow (ft) 0.32 V Average Velocity (ft/sec) 1.56 Inlet Interception ____________________________________________________________ Inlet Type Curb-Opening LT Length for 100% Inteception (ft) 4.40 L Curb-Opening Length (ft) 4.24 e Inlet Efficiency 1.000 Qi Intercepted Flow (cfs) 1.540 Qb By-pass Flow (cfs) 0.000 D Page 1 REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER PLANS APPROVAL DATE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA 93301 Prepared for: Prepared by: Engineer: Drawn: Date: File Name: Job No.: Checked by: SHEET N0. OF X Revision: Date: Description: No. Exp.CIVIL 300 SOUTH GRAND AVE, 2ND FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA. 90071 XX MM/DD/YY XX X xxxxx Xxxxx xxxxx Xxxxx xxxxx Xxxxx 95% DESIGN SUBMITTAL C-7A "FK1" LINE REMOVE FENCE 1 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS NO L 11^44’51" T CURVE DATA 1 82.30’ R 800.00’ 164.02’ "FK1" 15+42.67 BC "FK1" 17+06.69 EC HMA DIKE (TYPE A) CL FENCE (CL-6) 33.50’ Lt "G3" 289+29.94 END CB (TYPE 60) REMOVE Pvmt CB (TYPE 60) REMOVE FENCE REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER PLANS APPROVAL DATE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA 93301 Prepared for: Prepared by: Engineer: Drawn: Date: File Name: Job No.: Checked by: SHEET N0. OF X Revision: Date: Description: No. Exp.CIVIL 300 SOUTH GRAND AVE, 2ND FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA. 90071 XX MM/DD/YY XX X xxxxx Xxxxx xxxxx Xxxxx xxxxx Xxxxx 95% DESIGN SUBMITTAL C-6A 384.91 FL 385.45 FL 58.93’ Lt "G3" 284+40.84 1/4 1/4 1/4 7 5 6 4 385.51 EP 2 385.49 EP 385.47 EP RP 32.00’ Lt "FK1" 11+15.46 REMOVE FENCE 17+44.59 BCR "FK1" 11+07.46 EC "FK1" 10+60.36 BC 33.50’ Lt "G3" 286+00.00 384.50 FL Beg REMOVE FENCE 384.66 FL END CB (TYPE 60C) Beg CB (TYPE 60) 12.00’ Lt "FK1" 11+15.46 ECR 18.00’ Lt "FK1" 10+58.37 BCR 385.53 EP 33.25’ Rt 17+94.35 PRC 384.72 FL S 0^13’03" W 11.08’ REMOVE Exist Dwy 385.84 EP 13 RP 53.00’ Rt "G7" 17+44.59 HMA DIKE (TYPE A) CB (TYPE 60) CB (TYPE 60C) CL FENCE (CL-6) "G7" 18+24.88 "FK1" 10+42.00 RELOCATE DETENTION BASIN 47.97’ Rt "G7" 10+01.62 EC 385.66 EP 385.09 FL 385.27 FL 18.00’ Rt "FK1" 10+37.95 Beg HMA DIKE (TYPE A) JOIN CURB (TYPE A2-6) 385.31 FL CURB (TYPE A2-6) END REMOVE Exist C&G END CURB (TYPE A2-6) JOIN Exist EP 385.46 EP END CURB (TYPE A1-6) Beg CURB (TYPE A2-6) 385.96 FL JOIN Exist SW 18.00’ Rt "FK1" 10+61.60 BCR 385.46 EP 12.75’ Rt "FK1" 11+01.81 ECR CROSS GUTTER 12’ C-4A RP 1/4 1/4 1/4 385.95 FL 385.76 FL 385.61 FL 385.51 FL 385.57 FL RP 1/4 1/4 R=12.50’ R=1’ RP 56.00’ Rt "G3" 279+55.66 36.00’ Lt "G7" 10+68.16 1/4 62.21’ Lt "G3" 279+45.37 JOIN Exist SW "G7" 10+69.42 36.00’ Rt 385.54 FL Beg REMOVE Exist MEDIAN REMOVE Exist Dwy REMOVE LIGHT 56.98’ Lt "G3" 279+45.36 Beg REMOVE Exist C&G Beg CURB (TYPE A1-6) JOIN Exist TC & SW 16.00’ Rt "G3" 279+55.66 BCR END CURB (TYPE A2-8) 384.68 FL CURB (TYPE A1-6) 51.00’ Rt "G" 51+23.66 Beg CURB (TYPE A2-6) JOIN Exist TC & SW CURB RAMP (TYPE A88A, CASE A) 48.23’ Rt "G" 53+51.71 BCR JOIN Exist C&G (385.57 FL) CURB (TYPE A1-6) CURB (TYPE A2-6) 49.36’ Rt "G" 52+79.71 BCR JOIN Exist C&G (385.48 FL) CURB RAMP (TYPE A88A, CASE A) BSD CURB (TYPE M) COFFEE ROAD 63.30’ Rt "G" 51+79.64 BSD CURB (TYPE M) JOIN Exist 50.20’ Rt "G" 52+36.74 COMMERCIAL Dwy PER BSD ST-2 (W=36) 63.30’ Rt "G" 51+23.66 BSD CURB (TYPE M) JOIN Exist 51.00’ Rt "G" 51+79.64 END CURB (TYPE A2-6) JOIN Exist TC & SW REMOVE STRIPING REMOVE RAISED ISLAND 50.73’ Rt "G" 52+09.70 BSD CURB (TYPE M) JOIN Exist TC & SW 51.01’ Rt "G" 49+32.00 ECR 385.09 EP 384.92 FL CURB (TYPE A2-8) 16.00’ Rt "G7" 10+69.42 ECR 385.60 FL 16.00’ Lt "G7" 10+68.16 ECR 386.13 FL CROSS GUTTER (BSD ST-7) REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER PLANS APPROVAL DATE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA 93301 Prepared for: Prepared by: Engineer: Drawn: Date: File Name: Job No.: Checked by: SHEET N0. OF X Revision: Date: Description: No. Exp.CIVIL 300 SOUTH GRAND AVE, 2ND FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA. 90071 XX MM/DD/YY XX X xxxxx Xxxxx xxxxx Xxxxx xxxxx Xxxxx 95% DESIGN SUBMITTAL A A A C A C A C A C C A C A 50’ VC 70’ VC 100’ VC A C A C C A C A CA 50’ VC 50’ VC 50’ VC A C A C C A C A C A C A C A 30’ VC 30’ VC 50’ VC 50’ VC 370 380 390 400 OG PG 410 PROFILE "FK1" LINE 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 370 380 390 400 410 420 PROFILE P-22 PG OG PROFILE "FK2" LINE 370 380 390 400 410 420 110+00 111+00 112+00 113+00 114+00 115+00 PROFILE "FK3" LINE PG OG 380 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 NOTES: 1. SEE SHEETS C-6, C-7 AND C-8 FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS. 1. NOTES: 1. NOTES: SEE SHEETS C-8 AND C-9 FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS. SEE SHEET C-9 FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS. 370 380 390 400 41 0REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER PLANS APPROVAL DATE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA 93301 Prepared for: Prepared by: Engineer: Drawn: Date: File Name: Job No.: Checked by: SHEET N0. OF X Revision: Date: Description: No. Exp.CIVIL 300 SOUTH GRAND AVE, 2ND FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA. 90071 XX MM/DD/YY XX X xxxxx Xxxxx xxxxx Xxxxx xxxxx Xxxxx 95% DESIGN SUBMITTAL A C A 200’ VC 200’ VC A C A C A A C A A A C A C C A C A 50’ VC 60’ VC 50’ VC 360 370 380 390 400 P-16 380 390 400 410 420 OG PG 410 420 PROFILE "G8" LINE 360 370 380 390 400 OG PROFILE PG PROFILE "G7" LINE 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 360 370 380 390 400 360 370 NOTES: SEE SHEETS C-4, C-5 AND C-6 FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS. 1. SEE SHEETS C-4, C-6 AND C-10 FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS. NOTES: 1. 19+00 PPP P PP P ASPH ASPH ASPH ASPH ASPH CONC ASPH TS TS TS TS ASPH ASPH ASPH ASPH CONCCONC ASPH ASPH PLANS APPROVAL DATE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA 93301 Prepared for: Prepared by: Engineer: Drawn: Date: File Name: Job No.: Checked by: Revision: Date: Description: No. Exp.CIVIL 300 SOUTH GRAND AVE, 2ND FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA. 90071 95% DESIGN SUBMITTAL SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS XXX REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER LAYOUT NO R L CURVE DATA T 4^53’51" 85.53’ 170.96’ 137^40’00" 348.65’ 324.37’ 89^20’00" 133.44’ 210.49’ 404 405 414 404 405 414 406 406 3^40’00" 144.04’ 287.98’ L-12 135’ 135’ 4500’ 2000’ NOTES: 1. FOR COMPLETE R/W AND ACCURATE ACCESS DATA, SEE R/W RECORD MAPS AT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 2. SEE CONSTRUCTION DETAIL SHEETS FOR INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HEREON. 12’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 1’ Var SEE "G3" TYP SECTIONS 1’ Var SEE "G3" TYP SECTIONS C "FK2" LINE 7.5’ 7.5’ OG C "FK2" LINE 7.5’ 7.5’ C "FK2" LINE 7.5’ 7.5’ C "FK3" LINE 7.5’ 7.5’ C "FK3" LINE 7.5’ 7.5’ C "CVC2" LINE 8’ & Var 8’ & Var C "CVC1" LINE 8’ & Var 8’ & Var VARVAR "G6" LINE "G6" LINE 6’ 6’ 5’ 16’ & Var 14’ & Var Var L S "G5" LINE "G4" LINE "G5" LINE 16’ & Var 14’ & Var REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER PLANS APPROVAL DATE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA 93301 Prepared for: Prepared by: Engineer: Drawn: Date: File Name: Job No.: Checked by: SHEET N0. OF X Revision: Date: Description: No. Exp.CIVIL 300 SOUTH GRAND AVE, 2ND FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA. 90071 XX MM/DD/YY XX X xxxxx Xxxxx xxxxx Xxxxx xxxxx Xxxxx 95% DESIGN SUBMITTAL 9’ Typ C-10 REMOVE ISLAND REMOVE Bldg REMOVE Pvmt 17.81’ Lt 16+61.75 ECR 16.00’ Rt Dwy PER BSD ST-2 15+64.95 BCR 14+38.47 (W=36’) Dwy PER BSD ST-2 12+20.98 (W=36’) 16.00’ Rt 16+89.62 ECR 15+79.76 BC 16+74.81 EC R=2.5’ R=2.5’ R=2.5’ R=6’ Dwy PER BSD ST-2 17+33.16 (W=26’) END REMOVE STRIPING REMOVE Exist ISLAND R=3’ NO L 89^16’33" T CURVE DATA 1 60.23’ R 23 60.00’ 89^16’33" 59.25’ 60.00’ 89^16’33" 59.25’ 93.49’ 93.45’ 61.00’ CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 95.05’ END REMOVE FENCE 6’ PLANTER Beg REMOVE Exist STRIPING END REMOVE STRIPING R=20’ BSD CURB (TYPE M) BSD CURB (TYPE M) BSD CURB (TYPE M) BSD CURB (TYPE M)CURB (TYPE A2-6) BSD CURB (TYPE M) CURB (TYPE A1-6) BSD CURB (TYPE M) BSD CURB (TYPE M) R=2.5’ REMOVE RAISED ISLAND 17.81’ Lt 15+92.85 BCR R=2.5’ R=3.0’ R=3.0’ R=3.0’ BSD CURB (TYPE M) CURB (TYPE A1-6) CO-2 CO-3 CO-1 RB-13 RB-14 FKC-1 FKC-2 ROW-17 ROW-16 REW-22 REW-21 ROW-15 REW-20 COCV-1 COCV-2 COCV-3 COCV-5 COCV-4 COCV-6 ROW-14 13.1-1© 2007, Kleinfelder, Inc. Westside Parkway Kern County, California 0 100 200 300 400 Feet I1:4800 A Approximate boring locations SITE MAP 1410 F. Street, Fresno, California, 93706 (559) 486-0750 • Fax: (559) 442-5081 Project Number: 83597 Date: May 21, 2007 Coffee Rd. Truxtun Ave.