Laserfiche WebLink
JD-9 Responses to Drainage Comments of 11/26/13 <br /> Responses to: <br /> Attachment "A" Redline Comments <br /> 10AAA: A new section is shown here for the steep drop into the large open drain <br /> channel. This shows that the channel will need to be regraded (pulled back) to a <br /> maximum slope of 3:1 (33%) and reshaped and armored. Flow analysis is in <br /> Attachment 2, armor size calcs in Attachment 3, and drawings have been revised <br /> (Attachment 4) <br /> 20-1 and 20-3A (East Side Access Roadway): A new analysis was performed for <br /> these sections due to the adjusted Q's resulting from reduced basin areas contributing <br /> to them. It shows that armoring is not necessary (using maximum slope & minimum "N" <br /> values for the entire section of roadway). Reshaping/regrading of the channel to a <br /> standard V-ditch (12" depth and 3:1 sides) is required, however, and shown on revised <br /> Sheet 3 (Attachment 4). Calculations are in Attachment 2. <br /> 20-3A: The suggested location for this has been provided but the section is now <br /> labeled 204A. Although contours seem to indicate a steep drop to the road, there is <br /> actually no such thing along the channel alignment from the shop to the road. The road <br /> ditch itself is fairly steep (17% in that area), but that is addressed in the previous <br /> response. Section 20-4A analysis is included in Attachment 2. <br /> 20-3: Manning's N values originally proposed are appropriate. <br /> 30-1: Reference to Section 30P removed. <br /> 30-1A: Armoring sizes and ditch geometries are color labeled on Sheet 3 (Drawings). <br />