draft potter and codornices watersheds hydrology … · 7/26/2011 · figure 4-1. potter watershed...

Consultant Report Prepared by:

DRAFT POTTER AND CODORNICES WATERSHEDS HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULCS REPORT

DRAFT ~ July 26, 2011


Balance Hydrologics, Inc. - i -

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

1 INTRODUCTION 2 1.1 Purpose of this Report 2 1.2 Objectives and Approach of the Hydrology and Hydraulics Study 2 1.3 Data Collection 3

2 HYDROLOGIC SETTING 5 2.1 Overview ofWatersheds and Drainage Patterns in Berkeley 5 2.2 Topography and Land Use 6 2.3 Climate Characteristics 8 2.4 Soil Characteristics 10 2.5 Tidal Conditions Impacting Drainage 11

3 HYDRODYNAMIC MODELING TECHNICAL APPROACH 13 3.1 Model Platform Considerations 13 3.2 Design Storms 13 3.3 Hydrologic Modeling (Rainfall-Runoff) 14 3.4 Hydraulic Modeling (Runoff Routing) 15 3.5 Design Criteria 17 3.6 Green Infrastructure Modeling Considerations 17

4 POTTER WATERSHED MODELING AND RESULTS 19 4.1 Existing Conditions Hydrodynamic Model 19 4.2 Traditional Retrofit Hydrodynamic Model 21 4.3 Modeling of Potential Green Infrastructure Retrofits 22 4.4 Additional Modeling of Outfall Routing Options 23

5 CODORNICES WATERSHED MODELING AND RESULTS 26 5.1 Existing Conditions Hydrodynamic Model 26 5.2 Traditional Retrofit Hydrodynamic Model 27 5.3 Modeling of Potential Green Infrastructure Retrofits 28 5.4 Additional Modeling of Lower Watershed Routing Options 29 5.5 Combination of Lower Watershed and Non-traditional Storage Options 30

6 REFERENCES 31


Balance Hydrologics, Inc. - ii -

TABLE OF TABLES

Table 2-1. Topographic Characteristics for the Potter and Codornices Watersheds ......... 7 Table 2-2. Land Use and Drainage Pathway Characteristics for the Study Watersheds ... 7 Table 2-3. Predicted 10-year and 100-year Storm Total Depths ............................................ 9 Table 2-4. Hydrologic Properties of Soils in the Potter and Codornices Watersheds ........ 11 Table 2-5. Tidal Datums for the City of Berkeley ..................................................................... 12 Table 3-1. 10-year Design Storm Rainfall Distribution for 24 inch Mean Annual

Precipitation Areas ................................................................................................... 14 Table 3-2. Identification Numbering Convention, City of Berkeley ..................................... 16

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1. Overview Map of Potter and Codornices Watersheds

Figure 2-2. Gauging Locations and Mean Annual Precipitation

Figure 4-1. Potter Watershed Design Storm Hydrographs, Trunkline Downstream of King Street

Figure 4-2. Potter Watershed Design Storm Hydrographs, Trunkline Downstream of San Pablo Avenue

Figure 4-3. Potter Watershed Design Storm Hydrographs, Trunkline at Outlet to San Francisco Bay

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Potter Catchment Exhibits

Appendix B. Potter Existing Conditions Exhibits

Appendix C. Potter Traditional Retrofit Results (to be compiled)

Appendix D. Potter Green Infrastructure Retrofit Exhibits

Appendix E. Codornices Creek Catchment Exhibits

Appendix F. Codornices Creek Existing Conditions Exhibits

Appendix G. Codornices Creek Traditional Retrofit Results (to be compiled)


Balance Hydrologics, Inc. - iii -

APPENDICES (CONTINUED)

Appendix H. Codornices Creek Green Infrastructure Retrofit Exhibits

Appendix I. Codornices Creek Green Infrastructure Possibilities Exhibits


Balance Hydrologics, Inc. - 1 -

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

--- To be developed when all review completed ---



1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose of this Report The City of Berkeley is in the process of developing a watershed management plan (WMP) for the drainages within its boundaries.

A key component of the assessments and analyses underpinning the WMP is a thorough understanding of the hydrology and hydraulics of the respective drainages. Therefore, the City commissioned a detailed hydrology and hydraulics study for the Potter and Codornices watersheds. These watersheds were selected based on a number of criteria that indicate they are generally representative of the range of conditions that exist within the City. Therefore, detailed study of these two watersheds can provide information and insights that, with proper consideration, can be extrapolated to the remaining watersheds.

This report summarizes the objectives, technical analyses, and results of the hydrology and hydraulics study. It is intended to serve as a guidance document for watershed planning by identifying existing constraints as well as any retrofits and upgrades that maximize benefits to the community as a whole. This report also serves as the primary technical reference for the detailed hydrodynamic models of the two watersheds that were completed as part of the study. These models will be archived, maintained, and updated by the City as integral tools in the overall watershed management program.

1.2 Objectives and Approach of the Hydrology and Hydraulics Study The objectives of the hydrology and hydraulics study were:

1. Utilize the City’s geographic information system (GIS) database of utility infrastructure, land use, and topography to compile a data set to support modeling of the respective watersheds. Where appropriate, identify data gaps and acquire supplementary information.

2. Use the assembled data to construct non-steady state hydrodynamic models of the Codornices and Potter watersheds. The structure of the models must be such that they can be used to assess runoff volumes and rates for a wide range of meteorological inputs including extreme and design storm events and long-term continuous simulations based on historical data.

3. Carry out simulations using the hydrodynamic models to characterize existing conditions in the two watersheds with respect to stormwater conveyance for large design storms. These simulations quantify existing conveyance capacity and identify constraints contributing to observed and predicted localized flooding problems.

4. Use the hydrodynamic models to identify the size and location of infrastructure improvements necessary to meet the 10-year design storm performance criteria



through increased conveyance capacity and evaluate main trunklines or the 25-year design storm. This approach, defined herein as the “traditional retrofit” approach, would rely solely on increasing pipe sizes to reduce flooding risks. The anticipated capital costs for the required traditional retrofits would be compiled as well.

5. Extend the hydrodynamic modeling efforts to assess the potential for meeting stormwater conveyance goals through the inclusion of green infrastructure approaches such as rainwater harvesting (such as rain barrels, cisterns), infiltration (such as permeable pavements), and bio-retention areas (such as rain gardens) that provide important corollary watershed management benefits. Identify the size and location of appropriate green infrastructure improvements and compile anticipated capital costs estimates for their construction.

Two aspects of the objectives enumerated above are interrelated and distinguish the study from previous planning efforts. The first of these is the extent of the storm water conveyance networks modeled and scale of the watershed sub-catchments. The decision to include conveyance lines down to 18-inch diameter allows for delineation and simulation of watershed sub-catchments at a small scale (several city blocks) where differences in land use and neighborhood-level variations in stormwater management techniques can be assessed. This is directly related to the second distinguishing aspect of the study, namely using the respective watershed models to assess the potential efficacy of green infrastructure stormwater management approaches to reduce flood risks by controlling the volume and rate of runoff, either limiting or reducing the need for traditional retrofit improvements that are designed simply to move runoff to the Bay as quickly as possible.

1.3 Data Collection Information collected for the study was obtained from available sources for soils, regional rainfall intensity mapping, and historical tide records. Additional information sources included the Storm Drainage Master Plan prepared by CH2M Hill in 1994, the Alameda County Hydrology Manual, and the City’s GIS database.

To augment the data available for the current study, a monitoring network was installed to measure rainfall and flow at critical locations within the watersheds. These efforts included the installation of two flow gauges in the Potter watershed, one at a local runoff scale at the intersection of Channing Way and California Street and one at the near-total watershed scale in the trunkline at Potter Street and 7th Street. Long-term gauging at the near-total watershed scale for Codornices has been ongoing with a flow gauge at Cornell Avenue. Codornices data collection has now been augmented with an upper-watershed flow gauge in the South Fork of Codornices Creek at Codornices Park (above Euclid Avenue).

Detailed tip-bucket rainfall data is available for recent years from a number of locations in the City including rain gauges operated by Balance Hydrologics:



• In the Codornices watershed at Cornell Street,

• just north of the lower portion of the Potter watershed at Bancroft Way and 5th Street, and

• an upper watershed gauge at City Fire Station 7 on Shasta Road just east of Grizzly Peak Boulevard.



2 HYDROLOGIC SETTING

Careful consideration of the specific hydrologic setting is critical in formulating an effective and sustainable watershed management strategy. This applies to the detailed watershed modeling as well, which needs to appropriately represent diverse hydrologic factors such as elevation, slope, land cover, and soils if stormwater runoff volumes and rates are to be simulated successfully.

This section discusses the hydrologic setting of both the Potter and Codornices watersheds, allowing for a direct comparison of the factors that are similar and those that are disparate between the two watersheds. Later sections of this report focus on specific aspects of stormwater conveyance in each watershed.

2.1 Overview of Watersheds and Drainage Patterns in Berkeley Stormwater runoff within the City of Berkeley drains to San Francisco Bay through ten different watersheds, with each having a distinct outfall point to the Bay. These watersheds include (from south to north): Temescal, Potter, Aquatic Park, Strawberry, Schoolhouse, Gilman, Codornices, Marin, Wildcat, and Cerrito. There are several additional outfalls along the Bay shore, but they handle runoff from small localized drainages or represent circulation connections for the various Aquatic Park lagoons. The outfalls for the southernmost (Temescal) and three northernmost watersheds (Codornices, Marin, and Cerrito) are located outside of the City boundaries.

Berkeley watersheds (except Wildcat) drain in a generally westerly direction, conveying runoff from the Berkeley Hills across the intervening East Bay Plain to the Bay. The Bay shore has been highly altered in the past, with the former extensive beach and marsh environments replaced by fill and armored banks in most cases.

The Potter and Codornices watershed boundaries used in this study are shown in Figure 2-1. The Potter watershed is the largest watershed in the City. The watershed as analyzed is a combination of the lands that historically fed Potter and Derby Creeks. Runoff in this watershed is conveyed by pipes which drain to the Bay via the storm drain trunkline that passes along the southern edge of Aquatic Park and under I-80/580.

By contrast the Codornices watershed includes the most extensive open watercourse of any watershed within the city limits. There are numerous (but generally discontinuous) creek culverts at road crossings and under private property. The creek channel largely follows its historic course while inside the city limits. Storm drain infrastructure is generally limited to short runs of pipe carrying lateral inflows to the creek.



2.2 Topography and Land Use

Topography With a total area of 2,053 acres, the Potter watershed is the largest in the City of Berkeley (see Table 2-1). With respect to topography it is most representative of the lower-lying watersheds in the City (Potter plus Schoolhouse and Gilman). This reflects the fact that the headwaters of the watershed are located well below the crest of the Berkeley Hills, with only a small portion extending upslope of the Hayward Fault that marks the upper limit of the East Bay Plain. The maximum elevation is 1,185 feet. Very little of the watershed is located above an elevation of 400 feet (roughly 8 percent), and its centroid is at an elevation of 145 feet. The overall watershed slopes to the southwest in a relatively uniform manner, with steeper grades as one approaches the hills. There is a marked difference in street slopes as east-west trending streets generally have 3 to 4 times the slope of north south trending streets.

The Codornices watershed is much smaller in size, having a total area of 796 acres at the point where it leaves the City at the I-80 freeway.1 The Codornices watershed is markedly different in topography, being much more representative of the higher-

1 The watershed is considerably larger at the outlet to the Bay in the City of Albany, totaling 1,065 acres. This reflects the fact that the Village Creek watershed joins the Codornices downstream of the Berkeley city limit.



elevation, steeper slope watersheds (including Strawberry, Marin, and Cerrito). The maximum elevation is 1,330 feet and roughly 44 percent of the watershed is located above 400 feet. The watershed centroid is located at an elevation of 250 feet.

Table 2-1. Topographic Characteristics for the Potter and Codornices Watersheds

POTTER CODORNICES

Total Area (acres) 2,053 796

Maximum Elevation (feet) 1,185 1,332

Elevation of Centroid (feet) 145 250

Area above 200 feet (acres) 736 (36%) 516 (65%)

Area above 400 feet (acres) 159 (8%) 354 (44%)

Land Cover and Drainage Pathways Table 2-2 summarizes key hydrologic metrics for land cover and the drainage pathways in the two watersheds. The Potter watershed, with much less land area in the steep Berkeley Hills and large areas of commercial and industrial land use has a relatively high impervious cover of 55 percent. In this respect the watershed is, again, more similar to the Schoolhouse and Gilman watersheds. With a larger portion of its area in the steeper hills and a relatively high percentage of park space, the Codornices watershed has a significantly lower impervious cover of 35 percent.

Table 2-2. Land Use and Drainage Pathway Characteristics for the Study Watersheds

POTTER CODORNICES

Impervious Cover (%) 55 34

Mean Annual Precipitation (inches) 22.4 24.0

Longest Flow Path (feet) 20,175 20,525

Flow Path from Centroid (feet) 13,810 15,115



The nature of the drainage pathways in the two watersheds includes other distinguishing hydrologic characteristics. One of these is watershed shape. The Potter watershed is roughly rectangular in shape, with a much higher percentage of the drainage area located near its outfall into the Bay. The Codornices watershed has a distinctly different overall shape, with a larger headwaters area tapering down to a narrower watershed corridor across the East Bay Plain, typical of natural creek channels crossing alluvial fan landforms. One measure of this is the fact that the longest flow path in the Potter watershed (20,175 feet) is nearly the same as that for the Codornices watershed (20,525 feet) even though its watershed area is over 2.5 times as large.

2.3 Climate Characteristics The area encompassing the study watersheds is located in the Mediterranean climate zone typical of coastal, central California. This climate zone is characterized by cool, wet winters and dry summers tempered, in this case, by their proximity to San Francisco Bay and by the occurrence of coastal fog, especially in late spring and summer.

Average rainfall conditions are the statistical mean of rainfall totals that show a wide range of values strongly influenced by global weather patterns such as the El Niño Southern Oscillation and prolonged periods of drought. Additionally, the location of the watersheds adjacent to and/or on the western slopes of the Berkeley Hills strongly influences storm event and annual rainfall totals. The elevations and aspects typical of the Berkeley Hills produce orographic (mountain-induced) precipitation that can be markedly higher than the rainfall that is measured along the edges of San Francisco Bay only several miles to the west. Maps prepared by the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District show a that mean annual precipitation (MAP) ranges from a low of 20 inches along the Bay shore to a high of approximately 28 inches along the crest of the Berkeley Hills as shown in Figure 2-2 (ACPWA, 2003).



Long-term meteorological data from the National Weather Service Berkeley gauge (COOP Station 040693, period of 1919 to 2006) show a MAP of 23.6 inches at an elevation of roughly 300 feet. This can be considered typical of the uppermost reaches of the Potter watershed and generally representative of an overall average for the Codornices watershed. A more representative value for the Potter watershed is an area-weighted average of 22.4 inches, scaled off the rainfall mapping prepared by Alameda County Flood Control (see Table 2-2). The Codornices watershed has an area-weighted mean annual precipitation of 24.0 inches.

For the purposes of flood analyses, storm event precipitation totals are more important than annual averages. The watersheds in the City can experience relatively large single event rainfall totals. For example, the maximum daily rainfall recorded at the Berkeley gauge was 6.98 inches on January 4, 1982. This compares to a predicted 100-year, 24-hour rainfall total of 5.7 inches per the calculation framework presented in the Alameda County Hydrology and Hydraulics Manual.2 The modeling presented in this report is based on a 6-hour “balanced” storm distribution with 10-year peak rainfall intensities for the highest 15-minute time step ranging from 1.80 inches/hour for a MAP of 20 inches to 2.26 inches/hour for MAP of 26 inches (see Table 2-3). Storm totals for the 10-year, 6-hour design storm range from 1.8 inches to 2.3 inches for the same range of mean annual precipitation.

Table 2-3. Predicted 10-year and 100-year Storm Total Depths

STORM EVENTS

MEAN ANNUAL PRECIPITATION 10-YEAR, 6-HOUR 25-YEAR, 6-HOUR 100-YEAR, 24-HOUR

(inches) (inches) (inches) (inches)

20 1.81 2.17 4.95

22 1.96 2.36 5.36

24 2.12 2.54 5.78

26 2.27 2.73 6.20

2 The term “100-year storm” is used to describe the storm event that has a 100-year return period, with return period defined as the inverse of the annual probability that the event occurs. Many experts in the field have advocated abandoning this terminology since it is often mistakenly interpreted as implying that this event will only happen once in any 100-year period. In reality this event has a 1-percent (1/100) chance of occurring in any given year, even if such a storm occurred the year before. Similarly the “10-year flood” has a 10-percent (1/10) chance of occurring in any given year.



2.4 Soil Characteristics Soils in the two study watersheds are predominately clay loams and/or urban fill and are almost exclusively characterized by low infiltration capacity. In fact, the published soil survey information for the area (NRCS 2009a, and NRCS 2009b) places all soil groups into either hydrologic soil group (HSG) C or D where designations have been made.3 Distribution and properties of the major soil types are summarized in Table 2-4.

The Potter watershed is dominated by three major soil types that combined underlie roughly 90 percent its area. One of these three is the Urban land – Tierra complex, classified in HSG D, which covers approximately 60 percent of the watershed area. The other two soil types are the Urban land – Clear Lake complex and Urban land. Neither of the latter two is assigned an HSG rating in the soil survey, but both are characterized by low maximum and minimum infiltration rates. Overall, the soil data indicates that the entire watershed is prone to high volumes and rates of runoff.

The Codornices watershed has a somewhat more differentiated variation in soil types with the three most-widely distributed types encompassing roughly 75 percent of the watershed. Given the less developed nature of this watershed, it is not surprising to note a more limited distribution of “urban land” soils. The most common soil type in the watershed is the Xerorthents – Millsholm complex underlying approximately one-third of the area, but not assigned an HSG rating. Roughly one-quarter of the area is in the Urban land – Tierra complex (HSG D) with another eighth in the Xerorthents – Los Osos complex (also not given an HGS rating). Soil properties for the unrated soils show that they would likely be classified as HSG C or D if classifications were assigned.

3 The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) hydrologic soil groups divide all soil types into one of four categories on the basis of potential to produce runoff, ranging from group A to Group D. Group A soils have the lowest runoff potential and typically have high infiltration rates. Group D soils have the highest runoff potential and typically have low infiltration rates and/or are shallow.



Table 2-4. Hydrologic Properties of Soils in the Potter and Codornices Watersheds

SOIL TYPE WATERSHED COVERAGE (%)

HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP

INFILTRATION RATE (inches/hour)

Maximum Minimum

Potter Watershed Urban land – Tierra (2 to 5 %

Sl ) 60 D 1.00 0.06

Urban land – Clear Lake 18 n.a. 0.20 0.06 Urban land 12 n.a. 0.10 0.01

Codornices Watershed

Xerorthents – Millsholm 36 n.a. 1.00 0.10 Urban land – Tierra (2 to 5 %

Sl ) 27 D 1.00 0.06

Xerorthents – Los Osos 12 n.a. 0.40 0.06

2.5 Tidal Conditions Impacting Conveyance Both of the study watersheds experience tidal effects at and near their outlets to the Bay, with high tide levels and storm surge effects often directly impacting hydraulic conveyance capacity and leading to increased potential for localized flooding.

Statistics from the long-term tidal gauging station operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration at the Golden Gate are generally applicable to the shore area in the City of Berkeley and are summarized in Table 2-5. Mean higher high water is approximately 0.0 feet in the Berkeley datum, while mean tide level is -2.6 feet. 4 As noted, maximum tide levels can be much higher due to a number of factors most often associated with storm surge effects. For example, the highest observed tide for the reference data set was 2.8 feet recorded in January of 1983.

4 Unless otherwise noted, all elevations referenced in this report are in the City of Berkeley datum, which is the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 + 5.9 feet (NAVD + 5.9).



Table 2-5. Tidal Datums for the City of Berkeley

TIDAL DATUM ELEVATION (feet, City of Berkeley datum)

Mean Higher High Water 0.02

Mean High Water -0.59

Mean Tide Level -2.64

Mean Low Water -4.69

Mean Lower Low Water -5.82

North American Vertical Datum -5.88

Highest Observed Tide (01/27/1983) 2.84



3 HYDRODYNAMIC MODELING TECHNICAL APPROACH

3.1 Model Platform Considerations A number of considerations were involved in the selection of the modeling software for the study. Primary among these was the City of Berkeley’s interest in developing watershed models that had the greatest flexibility for planning and design purposes for a wide range of potential uses. These uses include green infrastructure and detention storage modeling that called for a platform capable of non-steady state hydrodynamic simulations. The need to represent both channel and pipe hydraulics at a detailed scale was another consideration as was the additional ongoing interest in capabilities for continuous simulation modeling of long-term precipitation records in addition to single, discrete storm events. Low ongoing model maintenance costs were another factor, so that the final models could be archived by the City and updated with ease as needed.

Based on these considerations, the primary modeling tool selected was the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Storm Water Management Model (SWMM). This model met all of the criteria cited above, although it is worth noting that there are limitations in the rainfall-runoff modeling capabilities (see below). All modeling for the highly urbanized Potter watershed was carried out using SWMM through the Mike Urban software platform by DHI Software and Environment. However, final modeling of the Codornices watershed was completed using the XP-Storm platform from XP Software. This model was chosen for its integrated ability to model 2-D overland flow as well as using the SWMM engine to simulate channel/pipe flow, an important consideration given the flooding issues known to exist in the lowermost part of the watershed.

Each watershed was modeled separately to reduce complexity and run times.

3.2 Design Storms A number of potential design storm types and durations were assessed in the initial phases of the study. These included storm events with durations from three to 24 hours with several different rainfall distributions. The result of this review was the selection of a 6-hour duration for the base design storm. This storm duration provides a reasonable balance between longer shorter duration events, where peak intensities might be higher and longer duration events, which by their nature produce a higher runoff volume that may be a consideration in detention or storage assessments. The 6-hour event also provides continuity with the 1994 CH2M Hill Report and the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District that also use a 6-hour duration design storm.

Noting that a major objective of the study is identification of locations with conveyance restrictions and that time lag values are likely to be small along lateral lines, a design rainfall distribution that embeds short duration rainfall intensities was also considered to be essential. Therefore, a “balanced” rainfall distribution was selected that includes 15-minute intervals for the hyetograph and preserves rainfall intensity probabilities for all durations around a peak centered at the 15-minute interval ending at 3 hours after the



start of rain (see Table 3-1 for intensities and depths for this design storm for 24 inch mean annual precipitation areas). This is quite conservative rainfall distribution, as it assumes that the 10-year 6-hour storm also includes the 10-year 15-minute peak, the 10-year 30-minute peak, etc.

Table 3-1. 10-year Design Storm Rainfall Distribution for 24 inch Mean Annual Precipitation Areas

TIME INTERVAL RAINFALL DEPTH (inches) INTENSITY (in/hr)

15-minute 0.53 2.11

30-minute 0.72 1.43

60-minute 0.97 0.97

2-hour 1.31 0.65

4-hour 1.77 0.44

6-hour 2.11 0.35

3.3 Hydrologic Modeling (Rainfall-Runoff) A number of hydrologic variables were needed as input values to the hydrodynamic models. A full tabulation of these values is included in the attached appendices for the various model runs. Nonetheless, a brief description of the most important variables is warranted.

Catchments The overall area of each watershed was subdivided into catchments (sub-watershed) for modeling purposes. Catchments were generally selected to best simulate lateral inflows along the drainage pathways, with additional consideration given to maintaining a relatively uniform distribution in catchment size to avoid scale effects in the rainfall-runoff modeling. Catchment boundaries were digitized In GIS using the City’s comprehensive LiDAR-derived5 18-inch contour base supplemented by field investigations where drainage pathways were ambiguous. Impervious area for each catchment was assessed using the City’s color orthophoto base in GIS. Flow path length and slope were also calculated using the LiDAR topo base. Specific aspects of the catchment delineations are discussed in the Section 4 and 5 of this report for the Potter and Codornices watersheds respectively.

The Potter watershed model includes catchments that drain directly to Aquatic Park and tie into the Potter trunk storm drain line via the so-called “Transite” pipe. These

5 LiDAR is the acronym for Light Detection and Ranging.



catchments were included in the modeling to allow for an assessment of how much runoff enters the lagoons from the Transite pipe and to provide a modeling base to simulate alternative configurations for the pipe that would eliminate or greatly reduce runoff to Aquatic Park.

Analogously, the Codornices model includes additional catchments to simulate the complex flow patterns downstream of San Pablo Avenue. These catchments include those for Village Creek in the City of Albany (to account for tailwater effects in the reach through the City of Albany to the Bay and to allow simulation of the Codornices-Village bypass structure) and those for the Gilman Street watershed (to allow for modeling of Codornices overflows to the south).

Rainfall-Runoff Transform Function Design storm rainfall is converted to runoff in the hydrologic model through use of a rainfall-runoff transform function. In all cases, the rainfall-runoff transform used was the SWMM runoff function. This function is discussed in detail in a number of SWMM reference documents (e.g. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2010). Although the XP-Storm platform allows for numerous other transform functions to be used, the SWMM runoff function was selected for continuity with the modeling done on the SWMM platform.

Init ial Abstraction and Infiltration Rainfall losses were represented using depression storage for initial abstraction and Horton’s equation for infiltration. Soil properties were extracted from soil mapping prepared in GIS using NRCS soil survey data (NRCS 2009a and b) based on area weighted averaging. Decay rates for infiltration rate (rate at which the soil infiltration capability decreases during a storm) were uniformly set at 2 inches per hour per hour. Depression storage was applied to 75 percent of directly connected impervious areas.

Time Lag Time lag is not specifically an input variable in the SWMM runoff function. Rather, catchment width is used. The modeling in this study calculated catchment width as the catchment area in square feet divided by the length of the longest representative flow path within the catchment in feet.

3.4 Hydraulic Modeling (Runoff Routing) As discussed previously all hydraulic modeling, irrespective of software platform, is based on the SWMM engine. Tables of pertinent input hydraulic variables are also included in the attached appendices with discussion of specific variable considerations below.

Storm Drain P ipe Hydraulics Pipe geometry information (including such variables as length, size, shape, etc.) was exported from the City’s GIS database and then imported into the respective



watershed model. Similar export and import routines were used to load node information (rim elevation, invert elevation, etc.) into the models. Where node rim elevation data was in obvious conflict with the LiDAR topo base or missing, an appropriate estimate was made using the pertinent contour information from the LiDAR. Invert information was found to be missing for many nodes, particularly for “YT” junctions, which generally represent pipe junctions that do not have an associated manhole access. Where invert information was missing, estimates were made by extrapolating downstream pipe slope information and/or assuming a constant slope for pipe segments between nodes with known invert elevations.

Almost all pipe segments within the study watersheds date from the first half of the last century. Therefore, pipe roughness values can reasonably be expected to reflect decades of wear and abrasion. On this basis a Manning’s roughness of 0.015 was used for all concrete pipe sections. This was increased to 0.025 in the few cases where the GIS database indicated corrugated metal pipe exists.

Node and pipe link names for the Potter watershed were taken directly from the City’s GIS database, which uses a numbering system taken from the 1994 CH2M Hill Report. The nomenclature system identifies the type of node and associates each pipe with its respective upstream and downstream nodes as described in Table 3-2. This numbering convention includes creek culverts as well.

Table 3-2. Identification Numbering Convention, City of Berkeley

INFRASTRUCTURE TYPE NUMBERING

Manhole 000-099

Catch basin 100-299

Cross inlets/outlets 300-699

Inlets and outlets 700-799

Wyes and tees (YTs) 800-899

Structures owned by others 900-999

Open Channel Hydraulics Open creek channels (primarily found in the Codornices watershed) were modeled using the open channel functionality in SWMM. Channel cross-section information was developed from a variety of sources including previously surveyed sections assembled as part of the City’s creek setback ordinance work, previous hydraulic studies of the lower reaches of the creek and from the LiDAR topo base where needed.

Roughness values were adjusted to account for bed and bank conditions as well as the type and extent of vegetation along the open channel reaches. Typical roughness



values ranged from 0.05 in moderately vegetated reaches to 0.10 in selected reaches with dense vegetation.

Ponding and Storage As discussed in ensuing sections of this report, there are numerous locations where the modeling predicts overflow due to inadequate conveyance capacity. The SWMM model allows for overflows to be treated as lost to the model or to be held as locally ponded runoff that drains back into the model when total flow falls back below storm drain pipe or creek capacity. The latter approach was used in the modeling for this study so that overall runoff volume is conserved. Ponding is occurs at the nodes where overflow is predicted and the ponded water is assumed to flow back into the network at the same node. This is a generalization that does not account for the potential for alternative overland flow paths (typically in streets) that could divert overflows to other inlets. Future 2-dimensional overland flow modeling can be used to resolve this issue in more detail.

Being a true hydrodynamic modeling engine, SWMM does account for storage within the pipes and channels used in the models. However, specific storage nodes were used where appropriate. Examples in this regard include the lagoons at Aquatic Park in the Potter models and storage pipes used to simulate green infrastructure improvements.

Tailwater Considerations As discussed previously, the lower reaches of both study watersheds are subject to tidal influences. To account for this, all modeling in this study used a constant tailwater elevation of 0.0 feet. This is equivalent to mean higher high water and is somewhat more conservative (by approximately 0.6 feet) than the mean high water standard typically applied in floodplain mapping work by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Conveyance and capacity in the lowermost part of the watersheds would be expected to be greater for lower tidal conditions and substantially greater at low tides. Nonetheless, the use of mean higher high water was deemed appropriate as an initial accounting of potential future sea level rise over the near-term.

3.5 Design Criteria The City of Berkeley uses the design criteria recommended in the 1994 CH2M Hill Report. This includes a 10-year design standard for watershed areas of less than 1,000 acres and a 25-year standard for those of greater size, with no allowance for freeboard (e.g. surcharging to ground level allowed). In the City, only the Potter and Strawberry watersheds have infrastructure serving areas greater than 1,000 acres.

3.6 Green Infrastructure Modeling Considerations A range of potential green infrastructure (GI) elements was evaluated as part of the Potter watershed model development process. These elements included storage systems of various scales (rain barrels, cisterns), porous pavement options for streets (porous asphalt, pavers), and biofiltration features (such as rain gardens, planter strips).



The initial modeling results showed that the key factor in green infrastructure selection with respect to stormwater runoff for large events is storage. The soil and terrain characteristics within the City limits were not deemed conducive for infiltration type best management practices (BMPs) that relied on deep percolation of runoff as a primary control mechanism. Therefore, even in the case of porous pavement options and biofiltration features, any infiltrated runoff was assumed to eventually drain to the existing creek, creek culvert, or storm drain pipeline.6 In such a case, the effectiveness of these treatment measures is predicated by the available storage for the infiltrated runoff. Thus they function, from a peak flow control perspective, analogously to simple storage elements such as cisterns.

Based on this observation, modeling of green infrastructure components was shifted to generic representations of storage volume in catchments within each watershed. The volume in this case can be considered as the sum of the various storage elements that may be included in any catchment. Detailed design of the elements is beyond the scope of this study, but the storage volumes that have been used were selected based on a preliminary assessment of constraints that included factors such as street width and slope, right-of-way availability (e.g. without mature trees) and potential utility conflicts (e.g. water and sewer laterals).

6 The effectiveness of infiltration based BMPs at controlling peak stormwater flows would be expected to be markedly improved in areas with suitable (high infiltration rate) soils and low water tables.



4 POTTER WATERSHED MODELING AND RESULTS

In general four main models were run for each of the study watersheds. These include the following:

1. Existing Conditions Model. A baseline model of the existing conditions in each watershed was created to identify and quantify capacity limitations.

2. Traditional Retrofit Model. The term “traditional” retrofit refers to the hydrodynamic model created to identify and quantify conveyance capacity improvements only. This represents the traditional, but now significantly disfavored, “capture and convey” approach to stormwater management and does not include any green infrastructure improvements.

3. Green Infrastructure Retrofit Model. A series of models used to assess the amount of green infrastructure that would be necessary to eliminate the need for all, or a significant portion, of the conveyance capacity enhancements identified in the traditional retrofit model. The final green infrastructure model includes the preferred maximum utilization of GI storage for peak flow control.

4. Special Considerations Model. For both watersheds additional modeling was carried out to evaluate other peak flow controls (in addition to green infrastructure) that can be used to address localized flooding issues.

4.1 Existing Conditions Hydrodynamic Model Model Framework and Special Considerations The Potter watershed was divided into a total of 74 catchments for hydrologic modeling purposes. The model routes stormwater runoff through a network that includes 488 storm drain pipes with a total length of roughly 80,500 feet. The catchments delineations for the Potter watershed model are illustrated in Figure A-1 and summarized in Table A-1 in Appendix A.

In most respects the Potter storm drain network is conventional, though there are many now non-standard pipe shapes (e.g. horseshoe, egg) and sizes that reflect the age of the infrastructure in most locations. The longest flow path through the modeled network originates near Panoramic Way just southeast of Memorial Stadium. The overall watershed is divided into two major areas (east and west) along the storm drain branch that runs south along Shattuck-Adeline to the Ashby BART Station. Catchments to the east are steeper and are generally a mix of residential and open space areas with the larger storm drain pipes running east-west (Dwight Way, Derby Street, Woolsey Street). Catchments to the west are much gentler in slope and include a mix of residential, commercial, light industrial land uses with branch storm drain lines running north to south (Grant Street and Ellis Street, Sacramento Street and San Pablo Avenue) to meet the trunkline line along Woolsey Street or Ashby Avenue. As mentioned earlier there are only a few open channel segments, essentially all of which are located in the most upstream reaches of the watershed and are not included in the modeling.



The notable complexity in the Potter watershed is the interflow that occurs with the Aquatic Park lagoons. The lower end of the Potter trunk line conveys water to the Bay just north of the Ashby Avenue / I-80 interchange. However, the trunk pipe also includes a cross-connection to the Model Yacht Basin (MYB), which is itself connected by pipes to the Main Lagoon (ML). This cross-connection is one of the primary means for circulating Bay water into and out of the two lagoons during non-storm periods. During storm periods, runoff from the trunk line flows into the MYB whenever the hydraulic grade line in the Potter trunk line is higher than the water surface in the MYB. After the storm peak passes, flow reverses and the MYB drains out to the Bay via the Potter trunk line. In combination, the two lagoons provide a very large detention capacity for excess stormwater flows in the lowermost portions of the watershed. In fact, substantial overflows of the trunkline occur west of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks resulting in overland flows to the lagoons, especially during high tides, which create a high tailwater condition and raise hydraulic gradelines in the trunkline pipes.

Additional flow enters the lagoon from the “Transite” storm drain line that was installed to intercept low flows from a number of storm drains serving a 178-acre almost completely industrial area stretching from Heinz Avenue north to roughly Dwight Way. The connections to the Transite line include weir structures to direct low flows to the Potter trunkline near the intersection of Shellmound Street and Bolivar Drive, with high flows allowed to pass to the MYB or ML.

Existing P ipe Capacities, Conveyance Limitations, and Localized Flooding The complete existing conditions modeling results for the 10-year design storm in the Potter watershed are included in Appendix B, with the modeled pipes and location of predicted network overflow shown in Figure B-1. The modeling results also include the 25-year storm routing for the main trunkline. The model output reveals a number of issues that merit consideration, including the following:

1. Storm drain pipe capacities. The modeling shows many of the storm drain pipes are under capacity for the 10-year design storm. A total of 271 pipes are predicted to flow at or beyond full capacity, with the average pipe at roughly 150% of full flow. Under capacity pipes are widespread throughout the watershed, but tend to be located along the lower slope north-south streets.

2. Predicted flooding. The modeling predicts that a large volume of stormwater would either be unable to enter the pipe network or would overflow at catch basins and manholes. Total overflow volume is estimated to be on the order of 36 acre-feet or roughly 15 percent of the total runoff of 236 acre-feet. Particularly high risks of overflow are noted along Woolsey just west of the Ashby BART Station where several major lines combine and land slope decreases west of Adeline Street.

3. Tailwater flooding. Significant overflow issues are predicted along the north-south branch lines located along Ellis Street and along San Pablo Avenue. In



large part these overflows are caused by the high hydraulic grade lines in the trunkline line (in Woolsey Street and Ashby Avenue respectively).

4. Flow to Aquatic Park. The lowermost reaches of the pipe network west of the UPRR tracks are markedly under capacity due to their size, very shallow slope and susceptibility to tidal backwater. This is reflected in the very large volume of stormwater predicted to flow to the Aquatic Park lagoons, either directly as piped flow through inter-connections or as overflow in the local vicinity. The modeling indicates this volume could be as high as 68 acre-feet or nearly 29 percent of the total runoff.

5. Peak flow rates. The model predicts that the maximum peak flow out to The Bay to be approximately 445 cfs due to various constrictions and inter-connections to Aquatic Park.

4.2 Traditional Retrofit Hydrodynamic Model

Model Framework and Special Considerations The traditional retrofit model was developed by systematically increasing pipe sizes where additional conveyance needs had been identified. Standard pipe sizes were used, with round reinforced concrete pipe as the preferred section except where cover issues were identified or a box pipe sections was needed for capacity reasons. The trunkline and Transite pipe connections to Aquatic Park were not changed, although pipe capacity was increase such that overland flows to the lagoons were generally eliminated.

Retrofit Requirements and Projected Costs The results of the traditional retrofit modeling are included in Appendix C. The associated map for this scenario has not been included as all pipes shown would have sufficient capacity to avoid overflows. Key points to note include:

1. Pipe capacities. Table C-1 summarizes the required pipe sizes for this scenario and shows that very large pipes would be needed in many locations, especially on the trunkline line in Ashby Avenue, Potter Street, and west through Aquatic Park. For example, the trunkline line west of San Pablo Avenue is currently 9-foot egg-shaped pipe. For a traditional retrofit this would have to be replaced with 10-foot X 10-foot box pipe to convey the full 10-year discharge.

2. Predicted flooding. Only a very small amount of residual flooding is predicted, on the order of 2 acre-feet. Complete elimination of flooding could be accomplished with even larger pipes, but was not modeled as the marginal cost of eliminating the last overflow was deemed prohibitively high.

3. Tailwater flooding. Although the trunkline retrofit pipe sizes would be very large, they would have sufficient capacity to reduce tailwater flooding in the north-



south storm drain branches, reducing the need for, or size of, retrofits in those lines.

4. Flow diversion to Aquatic Park. Even with the markedly increased capacity, water surface elevations in Aquatic Park with respect to high tide are such that there would still be stormwater diversion to the lagoons. However, the total predicted diversion volume to the lagoons would be reduced by somewhat more than half to roughly 30 acre-feet.

5. Peak flow rates. The increased conveyance and reduced transient detention effects due to overflow and diversion to the Aquatic Park lagoons would markedly increase peak discharge at the Bay outfall to 1,110 cfs.

Estimated capital costs for a full traditional retrofit of the Potter watershed network are also included in Appendix C. Unit cost data for pipe replacement was estimated for the densely urbanized setting and adjusted for full capital cost requirements. The preliminary estimate for full retrofit is on the order of $55 million and entails the replacement of approximately 35,000 linear feet of pipe.

Several distinct disadvantages are associated with of the traditional retrofit approach in addition to the very high capital costs. These include the fact that there are few auxiliary benefits, such as enhanced water quality, associated with upsizing pipes. Equally of concern is the sequencing of implementation, as increases in conveyance capacity cannot legitimately be made in one location if they result in higher peak flows (and more overflow risk) elsewhere in the City.

4.3 Modeling of Potential Green Infrastructure Retrofits

Green Infrastructure Scenarios and Limitations The green infrastructure modeling was developed from the existing conditions model. Sections of under capacity pipe were identified and then an assessment was made whether there was enough public-right-of way of suitable characteristics in the respective catchments to provide sufficient stormwater storage within a generalized green infrastructure implementation. If so, representative storage elements were added to the model, which was then re-run to assess the need for further incremental storage additions. Detailed siting of specific features was beyond the scope of the study, but efforts were made to model green infrastructure storage only where physical factors such as street slope, depth of downstream storm drain lines, etc. indicate that such installations would be practical.

Green Infrastructure Retrofit for Flood Control and Projected Costs The modeling demonstrated that appropriate implementation of green infrastructure in the public right-of-way can have a significant impact on the need for storm drain retrofits. As with most methods that detain and release stormwater over a period of time, green infrastructure can reduce peak flows both by metering runoff that is handled directly and, importantly, by affecting the timing of flow such that different



storm drain pipelines in the network are not contributing peak rates at the same time. The latter reason, in particular, explains why the modeling found the highest efficiency in peak flow reduction using GI was in the upper reaches of the watershed, particularly east of Shattuck-Adeline.

The required amount of storage to completely obviate the need for increasing pipe capacity is quite high, as is to be expected in a watershed such as Potter that is subject to extensive network overflows in its existing condition. However, the hydrodynamic modeling shows that selective placement of green infrastructure storage can cost-effectively reduce the expenditures needed by allowing smaller diameter storm drain pipes to be installed. For example, installation of approximately 50 green infrastructure projects could reduce the need to upsize existing storm drain pipes so that $33 million in retrofit costs could be avoided. However, a green infrastructure implementation on this order would be roughly the same cost as at traditional network retrofit, while providing substantial additional benefits for stormwater runoff quality and reduction of trash flows to the Bay.

Another important consideration is that green infrastructure storage can be installed incrementally almost wherever desired in the watershed without creating adverse flooding impacts elsewhere.

4.4 Additional Modeling of Outfall Routing Options The modeling results indicated tailwater conditions in the lower trunkline were a significant influence on drainage conveyance. Thus, additional options for stormwater routing were examined. These included means of reducing or preventing stormwater diversions to the lagoons through relocation of the Transite pipe, construction of pump stations, or the construction of a pressure pipe segment to convey runoff through the park.

The various options examined are summarized in Table D-1 in Appendix D. The preferred option identified was construction of a new 8-foot diameter pressure pipe to the Bay from a new weir/trash rack structure at the western end of Potter Street. The weir structure would divert flows to the lagoons only in the infrequent case when the capacity of the pressure pipe was exceeded, generally only for storms approaching a 10-year magnitude. The existing lower Potter trunkline would be left in place and used as circulation enhancement for the lagoons. The existing Transite pipe would be replaced with a new storm drain line following the UPRR right-of-way to the weir/trash rack structure.

These outlet modifications would allow increased flow rates to be discharged to the Bay (compared to existing conditions) without diversion to Aquatic Park, making conveyance enhancements in the upper watershed possible. A primary candidate in this regard would be the trunkline line along Potter Street and Ashby Avenue. The modeling confirms that such a system would almost completely eliminate stormwater diversions to Aquatic Park if a suitable number of green infrastructure installations were constructed in the upper watershed. Model output files and network maps for the latter



configuration of pressure pipe, weir with trash rack, relocated Transite line, selective pipe upsizing and green infrastructure are included in Appendix D.

Representative hydrographs of peak flow at several locations in the Potter watershed for the primary options models are shown in Figures 4-1 to 4-3.



5 CODORNICES WATERSHED MODELING AND RESULTS

Modeling of the Codornices watershed proceeded in a similar manner to that for the Potter watershed, with the only significant differences being the much larger number of open channel segments (and associated road crossings termed “creek culverts” here) and the use of the XP-Storm modeling platform.

5.1 Existing Conditions Hydrodynamic Model Model Framework and Special Considerations The Codornices watershed was divided into a total of 61 catchments for hydrologic modeling purposes. The model routes stormwater runoff through a total of 388 culverts and storm drain pipes with a total length of approximately 39,000 feet. The model also includes open channel segments with a total length of 24,100 feet. The catchments delineations for the watershed model are illustrated in Figure E-1 and summarized in Appendix E.

Substantial estimation of creek culvert and channel inverts, and channel cross section shapes was necessary due to lack of information in the GIS database. The creek passes through numerous private property parcels, and the tree canopy prevents effective aerial imagery or surveying, so a large portion of the channel is undefined, necessitating best estimates for missing data.

The creek channel crosses numerous streets as it makes its way west through Berkeley. Based on the topographic survey data, runoff will most often flow over such streets and back into the channel when the creek culvert capacity at the crossing is exceeded. Overstreet flows at creek culverts were typically modeled as trapezoidal cross sections with a bottom width of 20 to 60 feet and shallow side slope of 20 to 30 ft/ft, depending on the topography. The profile was measured and input directly in some cases where a sag in the road was clearly defined in the topography. Overstreet flow links were not included for locations where a clear flow path over the road was not evident.

Existing P ipe Capacities, Conveyance Limitations, and Localized Flooding The results of the existing conditions model are included in Appendix F with the watershed capacity map shown in Figure F-1.

The upper watershed drainage pathways include three main branches above Codornices Park, including: 1) storm drain pipes in Euclid Avenue, 2) the north fork of Codornices Creek up to Shasta Road, and 3) the south fork of Codornices Creek up past La Loma Park. The modeling shows numerous undersized storm drain pipes along Euclid Avenue. Only a few storm drain pipes are indicated as undersized on the north fork, although significant overflow is predicted on Shasta Road above Queens Road. No undersized pipes are shown for the south fork above Codornices Park. The confluence of these upper lines at Codornices Park is an important location where the majority of the upper watershed area concentrates into the main channel and flows into the notably steep creek culvert through the Rose Garden.



Below the Rose Garden the drainage primarily consists of the main channel with a few small tributary lines coming in, three of which are in the City of Albany. The model predicts flooding at the creek culverts under Glen Avenue and under 6th Street. It also shows overflow at nodes in many of the tributary lines coming into the main channel and in some reaches of the channel itself.

Overbank flooding and flow south down 2nd Street west of the UPRR tracks is perhaps the most frequent and visible problem in the Codornices watershed. Overflow is predicted at numerous locations along the lower portion of the Gilman storm drain line, which is included in the model as it is the ultimate route to the Bay for runoff that flows down 2nd Street and south on the east and west railroad rights-or-way. The capacity limitations are tabulated in Appendix F.

Table F-1 summarizes the peak flow rates at key points in the watershed as well as the overflow volume at 2nd Street, and the total overflow in the watershed.

5.2 Traditional Retrofit Hydrodynamic Model

Model Framework and Special Considerations The traditional retrofit model uses increased pipe sizes as needed to eliminate the risk of overflow. This leads to increased peak flow rates as ponded water is no longer stored, but flows through the watershed uninhibited. Upsized pipes were not modeled in locations where creek culverts are undersized but excess water can directly flow over the road.

Retrofit Requirements and Projected Costs The model output, retrofit requirements, and projected costs for the traditional retrofit are summarized in Appendix G. The retrofit cost table shows few retrofits would be needed for the three lines above Codornices Park, most of those needed would be on the Euclid Avenue line. Capital improvement costs for traditional retrofits above Codornices Park are on the order of $1.6 million.

Additional information is provided retrofit costs for the mainstem of the creek, with the laterals tabulated at the end. The total costs of upsizing the creek culverts within the creek mainstem is estimated to be $1.2 million. The table also shows that one or more pipes would have to be upsized in every lateral line to the mainstem except for 9th Street, resulting in a total cost of an additional $1.2 million. Significant capacity improvements are needed in the Santa Fe and Dartmouth laterals, however these are in the City of Albany, so the cost of these retrofits is not included in the total. The resulting total cost for traditional retrofit in the Codornices watershed within the City of Berkeley is on the order of $4.0 million.

It is worth noting that this cost is over an order of magnitude less than the estimated capital improvement costs to retrofit the Potter watershed. The primary reasons for this include:



1. The Potter watershed has over three times the length of pipe than the Codornices watershed, and the pipes in the Codornices watershed that require replacement are generally smaller, shorter, and easier to access and construct.

2. Essentially all conveyance throughout the entire Potter watershed is significantly undersized.

It is also important to note, that the Codornices traditional retrofits modeled do not eliminate all the flooding in the watershed. That would require a new creek culvert under I-80/580, and the additional cost would significantly increase the Codornices retrofit cost.

5.3 Modeling of Potential Green Infrastructure Retrofits

Non-traditional Retrofit Scenario Components The installation of non-traditional subsurface storage features or pipes was deemed to be infeasible in the branches above Codornices Park due to steep slopes of the streets and terrain, and concerns about slope stability. Further, preliminary model runs indicated that the addition of these features provided a fairly minimal reduction to flow rates or overflow potential.

Codornices Park, however, is well situated for the installation of sub-surface storage features due to its location at the downstream end of the three upper branches and due to the open field area where storage units could be installed. Therefore, hydrodynamic modeling was carried out to assess the effectiveness of an array of 8-foot diameter storage pipes with a total length of 550 feet at this location.

An additional option was evaluated using pipe storage under Henry Street between the creek channel and Eunice Street. This scenario included the interception of the Euclid Avenue line, which presently comes into Codornices Park and joins with the other branches, and re-routing the flow in a new line down Eunice Street to Henry Street. The storage option was based on four 550-foot long sections of 8-foot diameter pipe and associated orifice to meter outflow to the creek channel.

Green Infrastructure Retrofit and Projected Costs The addition of storage at Codornices Park and Henry Street as modeled would provide a total of roughly 4.5 acre-feet of storage and was shown to be effective at reducing both peak flows in the creek mainstem and overflow in the watershed. While the reduction in flooding at 2nd Street from approximately 31 acre feet to 29 acre-feet was modest, the overflow reduction from 10.8 to approximately 7 acre-feet elsewhere in the watershed is notable. The improvements are significant relative to the traditional retrofit results, which the modeling shows would cause increased peak flows and increased risk of overflow. The estimated cost for the storage options is on the order of $4.5 million. The storage features would also help to moderate abrupt changes in discharge that result from brief, high intensity storms on the small, steep watershed, which can reduce



the potential for erosion of the bed and banks of the creek channel, as well as wash-out of in-stream habitat and biota.

5.4 Additional Modeling of Lower Watershed Routing Options Modeling results and City experiences indicate significant flooding occurs in the lower watershed. Thus, additional options for stormwater routing were examined. The two most readily available options in the lower watershed to reduce the frequency and volume of flooding at 2nd Street are: 1) constructing a wall or berm at the end of 2nd Street to raise the spill level of the channel, and 2) to open the Village Creek bypass and route water to Village Creek.

Configuration of Scenarios The first configuration tested in the model was to increase the release elevation at 2nd Street by constructing an earthen berm or low flood wall. This berm or wall would tie into the existing high bank and K-rail to the east and the side slope of the East Shore Highway at the downstream creek culvert headwall. The structure was assumed to have a 40-foot long low section at an elevation of 6.7 feet that would control the release of overflow from the channel. The remaining portion of the structure would be set to a elevation of 7.3 feet, so that above this elevation flow would occur over the full length of the wall, thus minimizing further increases in water surface elevation. For this analysis the water surface elevation was kept below the low point (7.8 feet) at the body shop on the north side of the channel at the East Shore Highway culvert headwall.

The inlet to the Codornices/Village Creek bypass is located on the north bank (City of Albany) of the Codornices Creek channel just upstream of the end of 5th Street. The bypass allows water from Codornices Creek to be diverted to a channel along the east side of the railroad and into Village Creek just upstream of the UPRR bridge. This bypass consists of a 4-foot wide flashboard weir that ranges from a minimum (fully open) elevation of 10.3 to a maximum (closed) elevation of 13.8. This weir discharges into a 54-inch (4.5-foot) diameter pipe that extends north past the soccer fields and then west along the soccer fields into an open channel, which turns at the railroad tracks and goes north to the Village Creek channel. This bypass has remained closed since it was installed, but may provide a means of ameliorating flooding problems further downstream in Codornices Creek.

Results and Projected Costs The model results show that constructing a berm at 2nd Street could reduce overflow rates and volumes down 2nd Street, increase flows through the I-80 culvert and slightly increase the flow along the UPRR tracks to Village Creek. The predicted peak flow down 2nd Street would decrease from 180 cfs under existing conditions to 131 cfs with the berm in place. Likewise the predicted flood volume would decrease from 16 to 9.5 acre-feet. The increase in the water surface elevation from 6.3 to 7.7 feet at the I-80 culvert headwall would increase the flow through the culvert from 195 to 212 cfs. Flows along the UPRR tracks would also be affected, with the flow north to Village Creek increasing from 16 cfs to 28 cfs, and the flow south to Gilman increasing from 16 to 28 cfs.



Fully opening the Village Creek bypass would divert 25 cfs from the Codornices Creek channel north to Village Creek. This would reduce the peak flow down 2nd Street from 180 to 165 cfs and the volume from 16 to 14 acre-feet. The peak flow rates north and south along the railroad tracks would decrease by approximately 30 percent. However, the estimated Village Creek peak flow rate is predicted to only increase by 2 cfs, which is most likely because the peak of the diverted flow from Codornices Creek arrives after the peak flow from the Village Creek watershed.

Opening the bypass and raising the berm elevation at 2nd Street would compound the individual benefits of these measures. The estimated flow rate down 2nd Street would decrease approximately 30 percent to 120 cfs and the flood volume would decease approximately 50 percent to 8.2 acre-feet. Estimated flows north and south along the UPRR tracks increase from 16 to 24 cfs.

5.5 Combination of Lower Watershed and Non-traditional Storage Options Additional modeling was completed to assess the effectiveness of combining the lower watershed options with sub-surface storage infrastructure at Codornices Park and Henry Street. The model output for this scenario is presented in Appendix H and shows that this combination would provide substantial benefits at all locations in the watershed below Euclid Avenue. Overflow discharge down 2nd Street would decrease over 75 percent to 48 cfs, with the volume decreasing 77 percent to 3.5 acre-feet. An additional benefit to this scenario is that the overflows along the UPRR right-of-way would remain constant at 16 cfs for both the north and the south directions. Peak flow through the I-80 culvert would be 212 cfs (increased from 195 cfs).



6 REFERENCES

CH2M Hill, 1994, City of Berkeley Storm Drain Master Plan, 160 p. + Appendices

Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), 2009a, Custom Resource Report for Alameda County, California, Western Part; and Contra Costa County California. 75 p.

Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), 2009b, Custom Resource Report for Alameda County, California, Western Part; and Contra Costa County California, Potter Creek Upper Watershed. 75 p.

Sowers, J. M., C. M. Richard, 2009, Creek and Watershed Map of Oakland and Berkeley (Fourth Edition): Oakland Museum of California, Oakland, CA, 1:25,800 scale.

Far West Restoration Engineering, Urban Creeks Council, 2005, Codornices Creek Fish Passage and Habitat Improvement Project



A report prepared for:

July 26, 2011 The City of Berkeley

1947 Center Street Berkeley, California 94704-1169

(510) 981-6330 [email protected]

by

DRAFT Edward D. Ballman, P.E., CFM Principal Civil Engineer

DRAFT Greg Guensch, P.E. Civil Engineer

DRAFT Katy Thompson, P.E. Civil Engineer

DRAFT Erik Moreno, E.I.T. Civil Engineer © 2011 Balance Project Assignment: 209022 800 Bancroft Way, Suite 101 ~ Berkeley, California 94710-2800 ~ (510) 704-1000 ~ [email protected]

Table A-1: Subcatchments for Potter Model

MUID Tag Raingage IDDrainage Area

(ac) Width (ft)Ground slope

(ft/ft)Imperviousness

(%)Impervious

ManningPervious Manning

Impervious d. storage

Pervious d. storage

% DCIA w/o d. storage

10 Potter & 7th MAP20_10YR 50.1 820 1.0 75 0.02 0.425 0.07 0.15 2513 Carleton & UPRR MAP20_10YR 16.2 530 1.0 80 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2523 Derby & Shattuck MAP22_10YR 28.1 520 3.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2538 Carrison & San Pablo MAP20_10YR 23 600 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 25

11_A Heinz & 5th MAP20_10YR 20.4 840 1.0 80 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2511_B Heinz & 7th MAP20_10YR 29.3 750 1.0 75 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2512_A Grayson & 5th MAP20_10YR 22.8 1010 1.0 75 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2512_B Pardee & 8th MAP20_10YR 22.1 680 1.0 75 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2514_A Parker & 5th MAP20_10YR 32.2 1180 1.0 80 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2514_B Dwight & 8th MAP20_10YR 34.5 1170 1.0 70 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2520_A Oregon & Grant MAP22_10YR 20.1 580 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2520_B Ward & Grant MAP22_10YR 26 630 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2520_C Carleton & Grant MAP22_10YR 28 650 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2520_D Blake & Grant MAP22_10YR 24.9 610 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2520_E Dwight & MLK MAP22_10YR 33.6 960 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2521_A Ashby & Mabel MAP20_10YR 24.4 740 1.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2521_B Russell & Wallace MAP20_10YR 10.1 570 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2521_C Russell & Mabel MAP20_10YR 13.801 410 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2521_D Oregon & Park MAP20_10YR 21.7 610 1.0 45 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2521_E Ward & Mabel MAP20_10YR 16.808 410 1.0 35 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2521_F Carleton & Mabel MAP20_10YR 21 740 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2521_G Blake & Mabel MAP20_10YR 19.6 700 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2521_H Dwight & Mabel MAP20_10YR 16.152 440 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2522_A Stuart & Sacramento MAP22_10YR 29.4 720 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2522_B Derby & Sacramento MAP22_10YR 27.5 690 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2522_C Parker & Sacramento MAP22_10YR 43.78 930 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 25

24_A1 Tyler & Sacramento MAP20_10YR 26.362 540 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2524_A2 Woolsey & California MAP20_10YR 13.8 610 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2524_A3 Harmon & California MAP20_10YR 34.6 920 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2524_A4 Prince & Ellis MAP20_10YR 6.5 460 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2524_A5 Woolsey & Harper MAP20_10YR 6.682 410 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2524_B1 Ashby & California MAP20_10YR 8.902 300 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2524_B2 Ashby & King MAP22_10YR 22.757 400 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2524_C1 Julia & Sacramento MAP20_10YR 10.904 290 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2524_C2 Russell & California MAP20_10YR 18.8 520 1.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2525_A Dwight & California MAP22_10YR 31.4 920 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2525_B Channing & Califonria MAP22_10YR 28.4 780 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2525_C Bancroft & Sacramento MAP22_10YR 30.263 600 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2526_A Oregon & San Pablo MAP20_10YR 14.322 300 1.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2526_B Derby & San Pablo MAP20_10YR 23.886 650 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2526_C Blake & San Pablo MAP20_10YR 17.2 720 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2526_D Dwight & Byron MAP20_10YR 22.6 720 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2527_A Channing & MLK MAP22_10YR 31 840 2.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2527_B Bancroft & Milvia MAP22_10YR 30.7 1040 2.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2529_A Ashby & Adeline MAP22_10YR 59.3 1140 3.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2529_B Oregon & Adeline MAP22_10YR 55.4 1060 3.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.01 2530_A Blake & Shattuck MAP22_10YR 34.7 830 2.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2530_B Channing & Shattuck MAP22_10YR 29.3 780 2.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2530_C Bancroft & Shattuck MAP22_10YR 31.8 770 2.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 25

31_A-1 Dwight & Bowditch MAP26_10YR 13.5 810 4.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2531_A-2 Haste & College MAP26_10YR 15.2 890 4.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2531_B Bancroft & Bowditch MAP26_10YR 28.4 700 4.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2531_C Channing & Piedmont MAP26_10YR 21.7 760 6.0 45 0.02 0.425 0.08 15 2531_D Dwight & Prospect MAP26_10YR 94.26 1190 10.0 35 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2532_A Derby & Regent MAP24_10YR 30.7 660 4.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2532_B Derby & Etna MAP24_10YR 30.6 870 4.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2532_C Derby & Piedmont MAP26_10YR 23.2 580 6.0 45 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2532_D Derbry & Claremont MAP26_10YR 99.8 1370 10.0 30 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2533_A Ashby BART MAP22_10YR 7.6 350 1.0 75 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2533_B Essex & Adeline MAP22_10YR 16.3 530 1.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2533_C Woolsey & Adeline MAP22_10YR 7 450 1.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2533_D Woolsey & Tremont MAP22_10YR 15.339 650 2.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2533_E Prince & Wheeler MAP22_10YR 31.3 810 2.0 55 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2534_A Ashby & Benvenue MAP24_10YR 32.4 520 4.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2534_B Russell & College MAP24_10YR 48.3 1020 4.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2535_A Parker & Ellsworth MAP24_10YR 36.8 970 3.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.8 2535_B Channing & Ellsworth MAP24_10YR 29.6 700 3.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2535_C Parker & Ellsworth MAP24_10YR 22.9 570 3.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2535_D Telegraph & Dwight MAP24_10YR 33.2 790 3.0 60 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2536_A Woolsey & Dana MAP22_10YR 31.9 790 4.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2536_B Ashby & Telegraph MAP22_10YR 32.2 720 4.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2536_C Stuart & Telegraph MAP22_10YR 37.3 820 4.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2537_A Woolsey & College MAP26_10YR 40.9 700 3.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 2537_B Webster & College MAP26_10YR 27.6 610 3.0 50 0.02 0.425 0.08 0.15 25

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

#!(

!(!( !( !(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !( !(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(!(!( !(

!(

!(!(!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

MA

RTI N

LUT

HER

KIN

G J

R W

AY

MA

RTI N

LUT

HER

KIN

G J

R W

AY

SHA

TTUC

K A

V ESH

ATT

UCK

AV E

CEDAR STCEDAR ST

10

32_D

31_D

23

29_A

29_B

38

34_B

22_C

37_A

36_C

35_A

13

30_A14_B

20_E

35_D

34_A36_B

14_A

33_E36_A

30_C

25_A

27_A

27_B

32_A

32_B

25_C

11_B

35_B30_B

22_A

25_B

31_B

24_A3

20_C

37_B

22_B

20_B

20_D

21_A

26_B

32_C

35_C

12_A

26_D

21_D

12_B

21_F

31_C

24_A1

11_A

20_A

21_G

24_B2

21_E

26_C

33_B

21_H

33_D

24_C2

26_A

21_C

24_A2

31_A-2

21_B

31_A-1

24_C1

33_A

24_B1

33_C24_A524_A4

RD

CT

CT

ST

ST

DR

CT

RD

ST

AVE

AVE

WAY

WAY

THE

AVE

THE

CT.

BLV

D

Park

PANO

HILL

ACTO

N

CO

URT

CLARE

DRIVE

LUTH

ERM

ARTI

N

SQ

UARE

CRESC.

AVALON

OAKLAND

OAKLANDOAKLAND

OAKLAND

OAKLAND

OAKLAND

OAKLANDOAKLA

ND

KING

JR

WES

T S

T

CHIL

TON

DAN

A S

T

DAN

A S

T

UPLANDS

EOLA

ST

GARD

ENS

ELM

WO

OD CLAREM

T

UPL

ANDS

LA L

OM

A

ARC

H S

T

BERKELEYHEN

RY

ST

A CTO

N S

T

ATH

ERTO

N

SH

ORT

ST

CO

LBY

ST

RIDGE RD

SH

ORT

ST

A CTO

N S

T

67TH ST

66TH ST67TH ST

ACTO

N S

T

WES

T S

T

BO

NAR S

T

HASTE ST

GRANT S

T

OTI

S S

T

KING

ST

ELLI

S S

T

HASTE ST

PARK

ST

65TH ST

66TH ST

67TH ST

62ND ST

63RD ST

WARD STWARD STWARD STWARD STWARD ST

CEDAR STCEDAR STCEDAR STCEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

GARBER RD

MIL

VIA

ST

ACROFT CT

FULT

ON S

T

HIL LC

RES

T

CU

RTI

S S

T

9TH

ST

5TH

ST

PRINCE ST

REG

ENT

ST

ENCI

NA P

L

BYR

ON S

TBYR

ON S

T

K AIN

S A

VE

CU

RTIS

ST

BO

ISE S

T

LA V

ERED

A

PINE

AV

E

DW

IGHT

WY

DWIG

HT P

L

ARD

EN

RD

HAZEL RD

PLAZA DR

ETON AV

E

GRANT

ST

8TH

ST

7TH

ST

4TH

ST

6TH

ST

5TH

ST

GRANT

ST

DO

HR S

T

DWIGHT WY

9TH

ST

7TH

ST

9TH

ST

4TH

ST

2ND

ST

3RD

ST

4TH

ST

5TH

ST

6TH

ST

7TH

ST

8TH

ST

9TH

ST

9TH

ST

8TH

ST

7TH

ST

6TH

ST

5TH

ST

4TH

ST

3RD

ST

2ND S

T

ESSEX ST

MABEL

S

T

JULIA ST

DERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY ST

DERBY STDERBY ST

BLAKE STBLAKE ST

HASTE ST

(Pat

h_1

27)

EMER

Y VILLE

BO

NI T

A A

VE

CENTER ST

STA

NTO

N S

T

DO

VER

S

T

BAT

EMAN S

T

EUC

ALY

PTU

S

LINCOLN ST

CU

RTI

S S

T

HARO

LD W

AY

OREGON ST

STUART ST

BAKER

ST

HARMON ST

PRINCE ST

EDW

ARD

S S

T

VALL

EY S

T

WOOLSEY ST

BRID

GE

RD

SC

ENIC

AVE

MLK

Jr

WAY

GRANT

ST

LORIN

A

ST

MABEL S

T

ACTO

N S

T

SPR

UCE

ST

DURANT AVE

ETNA

ST

KELS

EY

ST

10

TH S

T

8TH

ST

10TH

ST

10

TH S

T

10

TH S

T

MIL

VI A

S

T

MIL

VI A

S

T

OREGON ST

STUART ST

ACTO

N

ST

MURRAY ST

ASHBY AVE

ASHBY AVEASHBY AVE

TUNNEL RD

ASHBY AVEASHBY AVE

ASHBY AVE

ASHBY AVE

STUART ST

PRINCE ST

OREGON ST

HEINZ AVE

PARKER STPARKER ST

CENTER ST

PARKER ST

HEARST AVE

ACTON CRESC

RUSSELL ST

OXF

ORD

S

T

DURANT AVE

FRANK L

IN S

T

WEBSTER STWEBSTER ST

HILGARD AVE

CO

RNELL A

VE

CH

E STN

UT

ST LINCOLN STLINCOLN ST

CH

E STN

UT

ST

F RANK L

IN S

T

WALN

UT

ST

LIND

ON AVE

MOSSWOOD RD

NEW

BU

RY

ST

WOOLSEY ST

WH

EELE

R

ST

OXF

ORD

ST

CH

ERRY

S

T

DWIGHT WAY

MIL

VIA

S

TAD

ELIN

E S

T

WOOLSEY ST

DURANT AVE

RUSSELL ST

ANTHONY ST

FOLGER AVE

RUSSELL ST

GRAYSON ST

CARLETON ST

DURANT AVE

DWIGHT WAYDWIGHT WAYDWIGHT WAY

DWIGHT WAY

ADDISON STADDISON STADDISON STADDISON STADDISON ST

LINCOLN ST

HEARST AVEHEARST AVE

HEARST AVE

VIRGINIA STVIRGINIA STVIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

DELAWARE ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

REG

ENT

S

T

OREGON ST

ALLSTON WAY

KITTREDGE ST

LE CONTE AVE

STA

NNA

GE A

VE

BELV

EDE R

E ST

FAIRVIEW ST

NORTH

VAL

LEY

BRO

WNIN

G

ST

MAG

NO

LIA A

VE

OAK

KNO

LL T

R

PRO

SPE

CT

ST

ALVARAD

O RD

DO

MIN

GO

AV

E

HILLCREST RD

MCG

EE

AVE

TREM

ONT

ST

MC

GEE

AVE

STA

NT O

N S

T

CHANNING WAY

RUSSELL ST

FOREST AVE

BURNETTE ST

FAIRVIEW ST

PARDEE ST

CARLETON STCARLETON STCARLETON STCARLETON STCARLETON ST

ALLSTON WAY

ALLSTON WAY

DELAWARE STDELAWARE STDELAWARE ST

ALLSTON WAY

ALLSTON WAY

HEARST AVE

CO

LLEG

E

AVE

CHABOLYN TERR

LEW

ISTO

N AVE

OAK RIDGE RD

HILLCREST RD

EUC

LID

AVE

MC

K INLE

Y A

VE

FULT

ON

S

TFU

LTO

N

S

TFU

LTO

N

S

T

MC

K INLE

Y A

VE

WARRI N

G

S

T

CO

LLEG

E

AVE

GARBER ST

SH

ATTU

CK

AVE

SH

ATTU

CK

AVE

ALCATRAZ AVE

MABEL

ST

DWIGHT WAY

CHANNING WAY

CHANNING WAY

CHANNING WAY

BANCROFT WAYBANCROFT WAYBANCROFT WAY

BANCROFT WAY

FRANCISCO STFRANCISCO ST

BANCROFT WAY

BANCROFT WAY

HEARST AVE

ELLS

WO

RTH

S

TEL

LSW

ORTH

S

T

SAN PA

BLO

AVE

SPA

ULD

ING

AV

E

CLA

REM

ONT

BLV

D

OAK VALE AVE

EL CAMINO

REAL

SPA

ULD

ING

AV

E

CO

LLEG

E

AVE

SAN

P ABLO

AVE

SAN P A

BLO

AVE

SAN P A

BLO

AVE

SAN

PABLO

AVE

SAC

RAM

ENTO

S

T

SAC

RAM

ENTO

S

T

BERKELEY WAYBERKELEY WAY

BERKELEY WAY

LA L

OM

A

A

VE

HIG

HLA

ND

PL

ROO

SEV

ELT

AV

E

ROO

SEV

ELT

AV

E

CALI FO

RNI A

ST

SAC

REM

ENTO

ST

TELE

GRAP

H

AVE

PIED

MO

NT

A

VE

CLAR

EMON

T A

VE

BERKELEY WAY

UNIVERSITY AVEUNIVERSITY AVEUNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

CALI

FORNIA

ST

CALI

FORNIA

ST

TELE

GRA

PH AV

E

UNIVERSITY AVE

(OLD

G

RO

VE

S

T)( O

LD

GRO

VE

S

T)

I NTERS

TATE 8

0 C

ORRID

OR

HIL

LEG

ASS

AVE

CLAREMONT RD (FISHRANCH RD)

S O

U T H

E R N

P A C

F I C R

I G H

T O F W

A Y

\\World\gis\Projects\209022 Berkeley Modeling\209022 Cordonices MIKEURBAN.mxd 2011 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

LEGEND!( Node

Storage# Outlet

Existing Links

FIGURE A-1:

Potter Catchment Map

o0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Feet

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!( !(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!( !( !(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !( !(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!( !(!(

!( !( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

#

MA

RTI N

LUT

HER

KIN

G J

R W

AY

MA

RTI N

LUT

HER

KIN

G J

R W

AY

SHA

TTUC

K A

V ESH

ATT

UCK

AV E

CEDAR STCEDAR ST

RD

CT

CT

ST

ST

DR

CT

RD

ST

AVE

AVE

WAY

WAY

THE

AVE

THE

CT.

BLV

D

Park

PANO

HILL

ACTO

N

CO

URT

CLARE

DRIVE

LUTH

ERM

ARTI

N

SQ

UARE

CRESC.

AVALON

OAKLAND

OAKLANDOAKLAND

OAKLAND

OAKLAND

OAKLAND

OAKLANDOAKLA

ND

DAN

A S

T

KING

JR

WES

T S

T

CHIL

TON

DAN

A S

T

DAN

A S

T

UPLANDS

EOLA

ST

GARD

ENS

ELM

WO

OD CLAREM

T

UPL

ANDS

LA L

OM

A

ARC

H S

T

BERKELEYHEN

RY

ST

A CTO

N S

T

ATH

ERTO

N

SH

ORT

ST

CO

LBY

ST

RIDGE RD

SH

ORT

ST

A CTO

N S

T

67TH ST

66TH ST67TH ST

ACTO

N S

T

WES

T S

T

BO

NAR S

T

HASTE ST

GRANT S

T

OTI

S S

T

KING

ST

ELLI

S S

T

HASTE ST

BLAKE ST

PIED

MO

NT

PARK

ST

65TH ST

66TH ST

67TH ST

62ND ST

63RD ST


CEDAR STCEDAR STCEDAR STCEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

GARBER RD

MIL

VIA

ST

ACROFT CT

FULT

ON S

T

HIL LC

RES

T

CU

RTI

S S

T

9TH

ST

5TH

ST

PRINCE ST

REG

ENT

ST

ENCI

NA P

L

BYR

ON S

TBYR

ON S

T

K AIN

S A

VE

CU

RTIS

ST

BO

ISE S

T

LA V

ERED

A

PINE

AV

E

DW

IGHT

WY

DWIG

HT P

L

ARD

EN

RD

HAZEL RD

PLAZA DR

ETON AV

E

GRANT

ST

8TH

ST

7TH

ST

4TH

ST

6TH

ST

5TH

ST

GRANT

ST

DO

HR S

T

HA R

PER

ST

DWIGHT WY

9TH

ST

7TH

ST

9TH

ST

4TH

ST

2ND

ST

3RD

ST

4TH

ST

5TH

ST

6TH

ST

7TH

ST

8TH

ST

9TH

ST

9TH

ST

8TH

ST

7TH

ST

6TH

ST

5TH

ST

4TH

ST

3RD

ST

2ND S

T

ESSEX ST

DO

HR

ST

MABEL

S

T

TYLER ST

JULIA ST

DERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY ST

BLAKE STBLAKE STBLAKE ST

HASTE ST

BLAKE ST

(Pat

h_1

27)

EMER

Y VILLE

BO

NI T

A A

VE

CENTER ST

STA

NTO

N S

T

DO

VER

S

T

BAT

EMAN S

T

EUC

ALY

PTU

S

LINCOLN ST

CU

RTI

S S

T

HARO

LD W

AY

OREGON ST

STUART ST

BAKER

ST

HARMON ST

PRINCE ST

EDW

ARD

S S

T

VALL

EY S

T

PRINCE ST

WOOLSEY ST

BRID

GE

RD

SC

ENIC

AVE

MLK

Jr

WAY

GRANT

ST

LORIN

A

ST

MABEL S

T

ACTO

N S

T

MLK

JR

WAY

MLK

Jr

Way

SPR

UCE

ST

DURANT AVE

ETNA

ST

KELS

EY

ST

10

TH S

T

8TH

ST

10TH

ST

10

TH S

T

10

TH S

T

MIL

VI A

S

T

MIL

VI A

S

T

PRINCE ST

EMERSON ST

OREGON ST

STUART ST

ACTO

N

ST

POTTER ST

MURRAY ST

ASHBY AVE

ASHBY AVEASHBY AVE

TUNNEL RD

ASHBY AVEASHBY AVE

ASHBY AVE

ASHBY AVE

OREGON ST

STUART ST

HARMON ST

PRINCE ST

ASHBY AVE

OREGON ST

STUART ST

HEINZ AVE

PARKER STPARKER STPARKER ST

CENTER ST

PARKER ST

PARKER ST

HEARST AVE

ACTON CRESC

RUSSELL ST

OXF

ORD

S

T

DURANT AVE

FRANK L

IN S

T

WEBSTER STWEBSTER ST

HILGARD AVE

CO

RNELL A

VE

CH

E STN

UT

ST LINCOLN STLINCOLN ST

CH

E STN

UT

ST

F RANK L

IN S

T

WALN

UT

ST

LIND

ON AVE

WEBSTER ST

MOSSWOOD RD

NEW

BU

RY

ST

WOOLSEY ST

WH

EELE

R

ST

DEA

KIN S

T

OXF

ORD

ST

CH

ERRY

S

T

DWIGHT WAY

MIL

VIA

S

TAD

ELIN

E S

T

ADEL

INE

ST

WOOLSEY ST

DURANT AVE

RUSSELL ST

MATH

EWS

ST

WALL

AC

E S

T

ANTHONY ST

FOLGER AVE

RUSSELL ST

WOOLSEY ST

RUSSELL ST

GRAYSON ST

CARLETON ST

DURANT AVE

DWIGHT WAYDWIGHT WAYDWIGHT WAY

DWIGHT WAY

ADDISON STADDISON STADDISON STADDISON STADDISON ST

LINCOLN ST


HEARST AVE


VIRGINIA ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

DELAWARE ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

REG

ENT

S

T

PARKER ST

OREGON ST

ALLSTON WAY

KITTREDGE ST

LE CONTE AVE

STA

NNA

GE A

VE

BELV

EDE R

E ST

FAIRVIEW ST

NORTH

VAL

LEY

BRO

WNIN

G

ST

MAG

NO

LIA A

VE

OAK

KNO

LL T

R

PRO

SPE

CT

ST

ALVARAD

O RD

DO

MIN

GO

AV

E

HILLCREST RD

MCG

EE

AVE

TREM

ONT

ST

MC

GEE

AVE

STA

NT O

N S

T

RUSSELL ST

FOREST AVE

BURNETTE ST

CARRISON ST

FAIRVIEW ST

PARDEE ST

CARLETON STCARLETON STCARLETON STCARLETON STCARLETON ST

ALLSTON WAY

ALLSTON WAY

DELAWARE STDELAWARE STDELAWARE ST

ALLSTON WAY

ALLSTON WAY

HEARST AVE

CO

LLEG

E

AVE

CHABOLYN TERR

LEW

ISTO

N AVE

OAK RIDGE RD

HILLCREST RD

EUC

LID

AVE

MC

K INLE

Y A

VE

FULT

ON

S

TFU

LTO

N

S

TFU

LTO

N

S

T

MC

K INLE

Y A

VE

WARRI N

G

S

T

CO

LLEG

E

AVE

GARBER ST

SH

ATTU

CK

AVE

SH

ATTU

CK

AVE

ALCATRAZ AVE

MABEL

ST

KITTREDGE ST

DWIGHT WAY

CHANNING WAY

CHANNING WAY

CHANNING WAY

BANCROFT WAYBANCROFT WAY

BANCROFT WAYBANCROFT WAYBANCROFT WAY

FRANCISCO STFRANCISCO ST

BANCROFT WAY

BANCROFT WAY

HEARST AVE

ELLS

WO

RTH

S

TEL

LSW

ORTH

S

T

SAN PA

BLO

AVE

SPA

ULD

ING

AV

E

CLA

REM

ONT

BLV

D

OAK VALE AVE

EL CAMINO

REAL

SPA

ULD

ING

AV

E

(OLD

GRO

VE

ST)

CO

LLEG

E

AVE

SAN

P ABLO

AVE

SAN P A

BLO

AVE

SAN P A

BLO

AVE

SAN

PABLO

AVE

SAC

RAM

ENTO

S

T

SAC

RAM

ENTO

S

T


BERKELEY WAY

LA L

OM

A

A

VE

HIG

HLA

ND

PL

ROO

SEV

ELT

AV

E

ROO

SEV

ELT

AV

E

JEF F

ERS

ON

AVE

CALI FO

RNI A

ST

SAC

REM

ENTO

ST

CALI FO

RNI A

ST

TELE

GRAP

H

AVE

PIED

MO

NT

A

VE

CLAR

EMON

T A

VE

BERKELEY WAY

UNIVERSITY AVEUNIVERSITY AVEUNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

CALI

FORNIA

ST

CALI

FORNIA

ST

TELE

GRA

PH AV

E

UNIVERSITY AVE

(OLD

G

RO

VE

S

T)( O

LD

GRO

VE

S

T)

SANTA FE RAILRO

AD

INTERS

TATE 8

0 C

ORRID

OR

HIL

LEG

ASS

AVE


S O

U T H

E R N

P A C

F I C R

I G H

T O F W

A Y


LEGENDInfrastructure

Storage# Outlet

Spilled Volume (AF)!( 0.00 - 0.05

0.06 - 0.500.51 - 1.001.01 - 3.003.01 - 5.00

Percent Capacity0.11 - 0.700.71 - 0.800.81 - 1.001.01 - 2.002.01 - 50.00

FIGURE B-1:

Potter Existing System Results

o0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Feet

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!! !

! !!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!( !(!( !(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !( !(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(!( !(!(

!( !( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

#

!(

!(

IN

TERS

TATE

80

CO

RRID

OR

IN

TERS

TATE

80

CO

RRID

OR

POTTER STPOTTER ST

WOOLSEY ST WOOLSEY STAD

ELIN

E ST

ADEL

INE

ST

DWIGHT WAY DWIGHT WAY

CHANNING WAYCHANNING WAY

BANCROFT WAY BANCROFT WAY

CA

LIFO

RNIA

ST

CA

LIFO

RNIA

ST

TELE

GRA

PH A

VE

TELE

GRA

PH A

VE

7TH

ST7T

H ST

ALCATRAZ AVEALCATRAZ AVE

ASHBY AVE ASHBY AVE

MA

RTI N

LU T

HER

KIN

G J

R W

AY

MA

RTI N

LU T

HER

KIN

G J

R W

AY

SHA

TTUC

K A

VESH

ATT

UCK

AVE

SAN

PA

BLO

AVE

SAN

PA

BLO

AVE

SAC

R AM

ENTO

ST

SAC

R AM

ENTO

ST

SOUT

HERN

PA

CIF

IC R

RSO

UTHE

RN P

AC

IFIC

RR

RD

RDCT

CT

ST

ST

DR

CT

RD

ST

CT

CT

AVE

AVE

AVE

WAY

WAY

THE

AVE

THE

CT.

BLV

DPark

PANO

HILL

AC

TON

CO

UR

T

CLARE

DRIVE

LUT H

ERM

AR

TIN

CRESC.

AVALON

OAKLAND

OAKLANDOAKLAND

OAKLAND

OAKLAND

OAKLAND

OAKLAND

OA

KLAN

D

DA

NA

ST

WE

ST

ST

CH

ILTO

N

DA

NA

ST

DA

NA

ST

UPLANDS

EO

LA S

TGA

RD

EN

S

EL M

WO

OD CLAREMT

UPL

AND

S

LA L

OM

A

AR

CH

ST

BERKELEY

BERKELEY

HE

NR

Y S

T

AC

T ON

ST

ATH

ER

TON

SH

OR

T S

T

CO

LBY

ST

RIDGE RD

SH

OR

T S

T

AC

T ON

ST

CEDAR ST

67TH ST

66TH ST67TH ST

AC

TON

ST

WE

ST

ST

HASTE ST

GR

AN

T ST

OTI

S S

T

KI N

G S

T

ELL

I S S

T

BLAKE ST

PIE

DM

ON

T

PAR

K S

T

65TH ST

66TH ST

67TH ST

62ND ST

63RD ST


CEDAR STCEDAR ST

CEDAR STCEDAR STCEDAR ST

CEDAR STCEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

JONES ST

GARBER RD

MIL

VIA

ST

ACROFT CT

FULT

ON

ST

HILLC

RE

ST

CU

RT I

S S

T

9TH S

T

5TH S

T

PRINCE ST

RE

GE

NT

ST

ENCINA

PL

BY

RO

N S

TB

YR

ON

ST

KAI N

S AVE

CU

RTIS

ST

BOIS

E ST

LA V

ER

ED

A

PIN

E A

VE

DW

IGHT

WY

DWIG

HT PL

AR

DEN

RD

HAZEL RD

PLAZA DR

ETON

AVE

RO

BLE

RD

GR

AN

T S

T

8TH S

T

7TH S

T

4TH S

T

6TH S

T

5TH S

T

GR

AN

T S

T

DO

HR

ST

HA

RP

ER

ST

DWIGHT WY

9TH ST

9TH S

T

4TH S

T

2ND

ST

3RD

ST

4TH ST

5TH ST

6TH ST

7TH ST

8TH ST

9TH ST

9TH S

T

8TH S

T

7TH S

T

6TH S

T

5TH S

T

4TH S

T

3RD

ST

2ND

ST

ESSEX ST

DO

HR

S

T

MA

BE

L S

T

TYLER ST

JULIA ST

DERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY STDERBY ST

BLAKE STBLAKE STBLAKE ST

HASTE ST

BLAKE ST

(Pat

h_12

7)

EM

ER

YV

I LLE

BO

NIT

A AV

E

CENTER ST

STA

NTO

N S

T

DO

VE

R

ST

BAT

EM

AN

ST

EU

CA

LYP

T US

LINCOLN ST

CU

RTI

S S

T

HA

RO

LD W

AY

OREGON ST

STUART ST

BAK

ER

ST

HARMON ST

PRINCE ST

ED

WA

RD

S S

T

VALL

EY

ST

PRINCE ST

WOOLSEY ST BR

IDG

E R

D

SC

EN

IC A

VE

ML K

Jr W

AY

GR

AN

T S

T

LOR

INA

ST

MAB

EL S

T

IDA

HO

S

T

AC

TON

ST

MLK

JR

WAY

MLK

Jr W

ay

SP

RU

CE

ST

DURANT AVE

ETN

A

ST

KE

L SE

Y S

T10TH S

T

8TH ST

10TH S

T

10TH S

T

10TH S

T

MI L

VIA

ST

MI L

VIA

ST

PRINCE ST

EMERSON ST

OREGON ST

STUART ST

AC

TON

S

T

MURRAY ST

ASHBY AVE

ASHBY AVE ASHBY AVE

TUNNEL RD

ASHBY AVEASHBY AVEASHBY AVE

ASHBY AVE

OREGON ST

STUART ST

HARMON ST

PRINCE ST

OREGON ST

STUART ST

HEINZ AVE

PARKER STPARKER STPARKER ST

CENTER ST

PARKER ST

PARKER ST

ACTON CRESC

RUSSELL ST

OX

FOR

D

ST

FRA

NK

LIN

ST

HOPKINS ST

WEBSTER ST

HILGARD AVE

CO

RN

ELL AV

E

CH

ES

TNU

T S

T LINCOLN STLINCOLN ST

CH

ES

TNU

T S

T

FRA

NK

LIN

ST

WA

LNU

T S

T

LIN

DO

N A

VE

WEBSTER ST

MOSSWOOD RD

NE

WB

UR

Y S

T

WH

EE

LER

ST

DE

AK

IN

ST

OX

FOR

D

ST

CH

ER

RY

ST

DWIGHT WAY

MIL

VI A

S

TAD

ELIN

E S

T

ADEL

INE

ST

WOOLSEY ST

DURANT AVE

MAT

HE

WS

ST

WA

LLA

CE

ST

ANTHONY ST

FOLGER AVE

RUSSELL ST

WOOLSEY ST

RUSSELL ST

CARLETON ST

DURANT AVE

DWIGHT WAYDWIGHT WAYDWIGHT WAYDWIGHT WAY

DWIGHT WAY

ADDISON STADDISON STADDISON STADDISON ST

LINCOLN ST


HEARST AVE


VIRGINIA ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

DELAWARE ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

RE

GEN

T

ST

PARKER ST

OREGON ST

ALLSTON WAY

KITTREDGE ST

LE CONTE AVE

STAN

NA

GE

AVE

BELV

ED

ERE

ST

KEONCREST DR

FAIRVIEW ST

NO

RTH

VA

LLE

Y

BR

OW

NIN

G S

T

MA

GN

OLI

A AV

E

PIE

DM

ON

T AV

E

OA

K K

NO

LL T

R

PR

OS

PE

CT

ST

ALVARAD

O R

D

DO

MIN

GO

AV

E

MC

GE

E

AV

E

TRE

MO

NT

ST

MC

GE

E

AV

E

STA

NTO

N S

T

RUSSELL ST

FOREST AVE

BURNETTE ST

CARRISON ST

FAIRVIEW ST

PARDEE ST

CARLETON STCARLETON STCARLETON STCARLETON ST

ALLSTON WAYALLSTON WAY

DELAWARE STDELAWARE STDELAWARE STDELAWARE ST

ALLSTON WAY

ALLSTON WAY

HEARST AVE

CO

LLE

GE

AV

E

HI L

LEG

AS

S A

VE

CHABOLYN TERR

LEW

ISTO

N A

VE

OAK RIDGE RD

HILLCREST RD

EU

CLI

D

AV

E

MC

KIN

LEY

AV

E

FULT

ON

S

TFU

LTO

N

ST

MC

KIN

LEY

AV

E

CO

LLE

GE

AV

E

GARBER ST

SH

ATTU

CK

AV

ES

HAT

TUC

K A

VE

ALCATRAZ AVE

MA

BE

L

ST

DWIGHT WAY

CHANNING WAY

CHANNING WAY

CHANNING WAY

BANCROFT WAYBANCROFT WAYBANCROFT WAYBANCROFT WAY

FRANCISCO STFRANCISCO STFRANCISCO ST

BANCROFT WAY

BANCROFT WAY

HEARST AVE

ELL

SW

OR

TH

ST

ELL

SW

OR

TH

ST

SPA

ULD

ING

AV

E

OAK VALE AVE EL CAMINO

REAL

SPA

ULD

ING

AV

E

CO

LLE

GE

A

VE

SAN

PAB

LO AV

ES

AN

PABLO

AVE

SA

N PA

BLO

AVE

SAN

PAB

LO AV

E

SA

CR

AM

EN

TO S

T

SA

CR

AM

EN

TO S

T

UNIVERSITY AVEUNIVERSITY AVE


LA L

OM

A

AV

E

HIG

HLA

ND

P

L

RO

OS

EV

ELT

AV

E

RO

OS

EV

ELT

AV

E

JEFF

ER

SO

N

AVE

CA

L I FOR

NIA S

T

SA

CR

EM

EN

TO S

TPI

ED

MO

NT

AV

E

CLAREMONT

AVE

BERKELEY WAY

UNIVERSITY AVEUNIVERSITY AVE

CA

LIFO

RN

IA

ST

CAL

IFO

RN

IA

ST

TELE

GR

APH

A

VE

(OLD

G

RO

VE

S

T)(O

LD

GR

OV

E

ST)

SANTA FE R

AILRO

AD

BE

NV

EN

UE

A

VE

INT E

RS

TAT E 80 C

OR

RID

OR

HI L

LEG

AS

S

A

VE


086-809


LEGENDInfrastructure

GI Unit# Outlet!( Storage

OrificesSpilled Volume (AF)

!( 0.00 - 0.050.06 - 0.500.51 - 1.001.01 - 3.003.01 - 5.00

Percent Capacity0.11 - 0.700.71 - 0.800.81 - 1.001.01 - 2.002.01 - 15.00

ScenarioGI Units No 1-10GI Units No 11-20GI Units No 21-30GI Units No 31-40GI Units No 41-45GI Units No 46-55EG GI Units No 1-4

FIGURE D-1:

Potter Green RetrofitSystem Results

o0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Feet

Table E-1: Codornices Creek Watershed Summary Table (Pre-Henry GI Retrofit)

Catchment Name Rainfall Reference Area (ac) Max Flow (cfs)

Total Runoff Depth (in) Width (ft) Slope

Impervious Percentage

(%)Total Rainfall

(in)034-700 10YR 6HR 20IN 7.13 9.22 1.66 385.37 0.01 67.20 1.81034-703 10YR 6HR 20IN 8.63 10.70 1.47 516.32 0.02 57.40 1.81034-705 10YR 6HR 20IN 10.45 11.83 1.52 344.54 0.02 68.60 1.81034-110 10YR 6HR 20IN 2.98 4.01 1.64 140.85 0.01 83.20 1.81

ALB-REDO 10YR 6HR 20IN 8.47 8.86 1.42 354.54 0.01 56.10 1.81Village_in 10YR 6HR 20IN 102.00 85.72 1.49 1600.00 0.01 70.00 1.81Gilman_in 10YR 6HR 20IN 168.00 141.00 1.68 2000.00 0.01 91.00 1.81

042-712 10YR 6HR 22IN 6.31 9.93 1.69 444.22 0.02 70.10 1.94ALB-519 10YR 6HR 22IN 1.39 2.12 1.57 120.88 0.04 65.00 1.94ALB-518 10YR 6HR 22IN 9.04 10.57 1.46 282.25 0.04 57.90 1.94040-704 10YR 6HR 22IN 14.98 14.23 1.48 357.88 0.01 54.40 1.94026-004 10YR 6HR 22IN 21.98 25.85 1.45 813.98 0.07 50.20 1.94026-100 10YR 6HR 22IN 13.03 13.33 1.35 496.14 0.04 46.20 1.94046-127 10YR 6HR 22IN 18.97 14.94 1.19 448.81 0.04 37.60 1.94040-708 10YR 6HR 22IN 18.02 19.64 1.43 394.35 0.06 55.60 1.94044-820 10YR 6HR 22IN 22.62 24.35 1.45 529.47 0.05 52.60 1.94026-707 10YR 6HR 22IN 19.01 15.59 1.23 402.30 0.03 43.00 1.94046-122 10YR 6HR 22IN 23.30 23.24 1.40 470.12 0.04 55.60 1.94

ALB-420.3 10YR 6HR 22IN 15.12 19.50 1.53 508.65 0.05 63.50 1.94ALB-422 10YR 6HR 22IN 5.36 7.67 1.55 282.09 0.07 60.00 1.94

ALB-418.1 10YR 6HR 22IN 22.11 25.74 1.51 547.33 0.04 62.40 1.94ALB-512 10YR 6HR 22IN 2.38 2.54 1.42 127.57 0.01 52.30 1.94ALB-509 10YR 6HR 22IN 12.81 12.28 1.50 300.87 0.01 60.70 1.94

044-ALBI2 10YR 6HR 22IN 12.64 13.08 1.36 437.92 0.06 44.10 1.94028-012 10YR 6HR 24IN 12.15 12.37 1.50 262.99 0.12 36.80 2.11028-734 10YR 6HR 24IN 22.66 18.67 1.34 382.33 0.07 34.40 2.11028-008 10YR 6HR 24IN 12.04 14.32 1.53 364.56 0.07 48.80 2.11028-732 10YR 6HR 24IN 24.45 23.20 1.42 461.62 0.08 39.60 2.11030-001 10YR 6HR 24IN 3.72 3.60 1.40 253.51 0.21 7.30 2.11028-823 10YR 6HR 24IN 14.83 11.90 1.37 429.76 0.12 23.60 2.11028-736 10YR 6HR 24IN 16.24 15.24 1.39 409.98 0.04 40.00 2.11026-105 10YR 6HR 24IN 12.85 12.84 1.43 448.37 0.05 38.40 2.11028-002 10YR 6HR 24IN 15.55 13.46 1.38 338.73 0.05 35.00 2.11028-728 10YR 6HR 24IN 1.66 2.26 1.54 158.25 0.14 25.20 2.11028-013 10YR 6HR 24IN 14.63 15.10 1.51 433.45 0.14 31.30 2.11030-120 10YR 6HR 24IN 5.05 6.04 1.54 196.06 0.09 40.50 2.11028-902 10YR 6HR 24IN 23.08 21.44 1.45 635.36 0.08 31.90 2.11028-903 10YR 6HR 24IN 17.44 18.09 1.47 425.91 0.04 47.20 2.11030-728 10YR 6HR 26IN 19.36 7.62 1.05 361.77 0.16 8.50 2.27030-025 10YR 6HR 26IN 10.93 9.28 1.18 637.09 0.37 7.30 2.27030-205 10YR 6HR 26IN 13.99 6.76 1.07 427.16 0.15 9.30 2.27030-711 10YR 6HR 26IN 24.26 13.27 1.08 390.78 0.17 16.60 2.27030-020 10YR 6HR 26IN 8.40 9.72 1.29 635.32 0.36 15.50 2.27030-018 10YR 6HR 26IN 14.29 10.17 1.17 612.76 0.28 10.30 2.27030-015 10YR 6HR 26IN 6.25 4.53 1.20 302.59 0.13 14.90 2.27030-014 10YR 6HR 26IN 6.11 5.07 1.25 367.16 0.13 16.50 2.27030-010 10YR 6HR 26IN 25.13 17.92 1.27 662.61 0.18 17.60 2.27030-043 10YR 6HR 26IN 20.40 14.53 1.19 562.80 0.18 18.60 2.27030-037 10YR 6HR 26IN 14.88 10.12 1.19 472.70 0.16 16.90 2.27030-029 10YR 6HR 26IN 1.07 0.82 1.18 78.95 0.14 9.30 2.27032-147 10YR 6HR 26IN 14.66 10.89 1.17 343.62 0.14 22.60 2.27032-015 10YR 6HR 26IN 10.36 8.17 1.25 280.19 0.13 24.30 2.27032-025 10YR 6HR 26IN 22.73 11.08 1.04 382.34 0.15 14.20 2.27032-031 10YR 6HR 26IN 1.19 1.67 1.35 163.21 0.19 19.30 2.27032-115 10YR 6HR 26IN 4.67 3.25 1.17 235.74 0.18 10.50 2.27032-107 10YR 6HR 26IN 28.71 15.32 1.01 455.08 0.13 16.90 2.27030-749 10YR 6HR 26IN 27.20 14.04 1.05 435.19 0.14 16.10 2.27032-038 10YR 6HR 26IN 4.83 3.74 1.23 190.42 0.20 16.90 2.27032-161 10YR 6HR 26IN 1.39 1.45 1.29 113.28 0.18 16.90 2.27032-162 10YR 6HR 26IN 4.72 3.49 1.22 137.06 0.12 21.70 2.27032-163 10YR 6HR 26IN 3.74 2.25 1.13 163.54 0.18 8.70 2.27

030-729.1 10YR 6HR 26IN 13.87 6.81 1.13 441.18 0.20 6.00 2.27030-037.2 10YR 6HR 26IN 4.74 5.31 1.30 472.70 0.16 16.90 2.27

Ref Area MAP Impervious %20.00 37.66 20.00 332.50 500.0022.00 239.07 22.00 931.20 1700.0024.00 196.34 24.00 480.00 1400.0026.00 307.87 26.00 372.30 2500.00

780.93

Weighted MAP = 23.98 (no Gillman & VC) Weighted Impervious % = 0.3447 (no Gillman & VC)22.96 (with Gillman & VC) 0.4387 (with Gillman & VC)

030-749

030-005030-711

028-201

032-107

046-122

028-800

032-025

028-804044-820

026-004

030-043

030-127

026-113030-730

046-127040-705

028-902

ALB-417.1

028-174

028-002

040-709

028-130

032-147

028-013

030-018

030-153030-729ALB-420

046-702

026-105

044-819

028-012028-147

ALB-507

XS-3900 034-708

032-012

034-703

030-020

ALB-518

030-014

ALB-REDO030-025

034-701

030-015

ALB-900030-118

ALB-422

030-159032-162

032-007

032-002

030-001

034-110

ALB-512

028-728

032-161

ALB-519

032-031

030-029

Gilman_in

Village_in

E

ST DR

RD

RD

ST

ST

RD

ST

RD

LY

VD

ID

EU

RD

SC

LA

ST

DR

NO

RDR

DLY

ON

ER

LN

RD

ST

CT

ST

ST

RD

LN

ST

CT

ST

THE

AVE

AVE

AVE

WA Y

WAY

AVE

AVE

AVE

SAN

GRI

THE

AVE

GRIAVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AMA

SAN

AVE

AVE

SAN

AVE

THE

AVE

AVE

SET

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

SANAVE

SAN

AVEAVE

LAN

E

TWIN

BLVD

BRET

Lane

Lane

LANE

ROAD

VIEW

WO

OD

PANO

SIDE

ROAD

ROSE

GATE

BRET

LANE

BLVD

PEAKSTEV

WHIT

HILL

PEAK

ROAD

BLVD

BLVD

COURT

ACTO

N

NO

RTH

PLAC

E

SANTA

DRIVE

REGAL

VIS

TA

BUENA

VISTA

BUENA

TER

R.

QUAIL

POSEN

MARIN

NORTH

SANTA

SOUT

H

SOU

TH

ALAMO

COST

A

SAN

TA

PLACE

ALBANY

CIR

CL E

QU

EEN

S

CIRCLE

TOMLEE

ADA ST

CAN

YON

SQU

ARE

SENIO

R

MILLER

LATHAM

LATH

AM

FOR

EST

MILLER

LASSEN

IND

IAN

KEELER

ALTA RD

WES

T ST

INYO

ST

BARB

ARA

AJAX RD

HILL RD

EOLA ST

GA

RD

ENS

STO

DDERMUIR

WY

WILD

CA T

LA LOMA

AVENIDA

OAK ST

HAMPTON

ANTO

NIO

LA LOM

A

ARC

H S

T

WATKINS

FRANCIS

TERRACE

PARK WY CYPRESS

PAGE ST

PAGE ST

PAGE ST

BERKELEY

ACTO

N ST

HEN

RY S T

VINE ST

ACTO

N S

TVIRG

INI A

SHO

RT ST

NAPA AV

E

MO

DO

C S

T

RIDGE RD

ROSE ST

COLUMBIA

SHO

RT ST

HO

LLY ST

ACTO

N S

T

BARTD

RW

CEDAR ST

ROSE ST

CRAGMONT

STERLING

HILLDALE

HIG

H C

T

ROSE ST

ROSE ST

MICHIGAN

AVIS

RD

VINCENTE

CATALINA

VINC

ENTE

3RD

ST

VINE ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR STCEDAR ST

ROSE ST

ROSE ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

JONES ST

JONES ST

JONES ST

CROSSWAYS

MILVIA S

T

MIRAM

ONTE

ACROFT CT

FULTO

N ST

CU

RTIS

ST

CORONA CT

BYRO

N S

T

ATLAS PLC

SUMMIT RD

KAINS AVE

CU

RTIS ST

LA V

ER

EDA

A RD

EN

RD

LERO

Y AVE

GR

EEN

WO

OD

SHASTA RD

FOREST LN

BENITO RD

ROSE ST

SAN LUIS

JUAN AVE

SAN RAM

ON

ARLI

NGTO

N

MENLO PL

KEY RO

UTE

GR

AN

T ST

HEN

RY ST

2ND

ST

3RD

ST

4TH ST

5TH ST

6TH ST

7TH ST

8TH ST

9TH ST

9TH ST

8TH ST

7TH ST

6TH ST

5TH ST

4T H ST

9TH ST

8TH ST

7TH ST

6TH ST

5TH ST

4TH ST

3RD

ST

2ND

ST

2ND

ST

MCG

EE AVE

GR

AN

T ST

HEN

RY ST

BON

ITA AVE

CENTER ST

ACACIA AVE

VALLEJO ST

FRESN

O AVE

CO

LUSA AVE

TULAR

E AV

E

LINCOLN ST

EUNICE ST

TALBOT AVE

KAINS AVE

MLK JR

WAY

HAR

OLD

WAY

KEITH AVE

SANTA R

OSA

PARK HILLS

CAM

PU

S DR

MILLER AVETWAINE AVE

POPPY PATH

MARIN AVE

LAUR

EL S

T

YOLO AVE

SIER

RA

ST

MADERA ST

HALKIN LN.

MARIN AVEOXFORD ST

SPRUCE

ST

CU

RTIS ST

SCEN

IC AVE

MLK Jr W

AY

GR

ANT S

T

MLK JR

WAY

SPRU

CE S

T

S PRU

CE S

TS PR

UC

E ST

DURANT AVE

ACTO

N

ST

10TH ST

10TH ST

10T H S

T

JAYNES ST

EDITH

ST

MILV IA ST

MILV IA ST

MILV IA ST

KAINS AVE

CENTER ST

SUTT

ER S

T

CAMELIA ST

CAMELIA ST

GILMAN ST

GILMAN ST

GILMAN ST

CU

RTIS

ST

MLA Path_95

OR

DW

AY ST

ACTON CRESC

MIR

AMAR

AVE

OX

FOR

D S T

ADDISON ST

DURANT AVE

FRA

NKL I N

S T

THE A

LAMED

A

HOPKINS ST

CO

RN

ELL AVE

HILGARD AVE

CO

RN

ELL AVE

CH

EST N

UT S T

LINCOLN ST

LINCOLN ST

CH

ESTN

UT S T

F RA

NK L I N

S T

WA L N

UT S

T

NEI

LSO

N S

T

CU

RTI

S A

VE

CAR

ME

L A

VE

(in Albany)

EUC

LI D AV

E

TULA

RE

AVE

MER

CED

ST

CO

LUSA AVE

COLUSA AVE

BARBARA RD

EUC

LID

AV

E

SPRUCE ST

COLUSA AVE

THE ALAMEDA

NEI

LSO

N S

T

CU

RTI

S A

VE

CAR

ME

L A

VE

NEILS

ON

ST

CAR

MEL AVE

RAM

ON

A AVE

POM

ON

A AVE

BON

ITA AVE

WALN

UT S

T

OX

FOR

D ST

OXFO

RD

ST

ARC

H ST

OX

FOR

D ST

OR

DW

AY

STAL

BINA

AVE

ORD

WAY

ST

CU

RTIS

ST

BUENA AVE

MILVIA S T

DURANT AVE

EVELYN AV

E

TALBOT AV

E

DURANT AVE

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

HOPKINS ST

HOPKINS ST

LINCOLN ST

HEARST AVE

HEARST AVE

HEARST AVE

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

HOPKINS ST

VIRGINIA ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

DELAWARE ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

HARRISON ST

HARRISON ST

HARRISON ST

NEI

LSO

N

ST

SAN

MAT

EO R

D

ALLSTON WAY

KITTREDGE ST

MC

GEE AV E

ENSEN

ADA AVE

VENTU

RA AV

E

DARTMOUTH ST

LE CONTE AVE

STANN

AGE

AVE

BELVEDE

RE ST

KEON

CR

EST D

R

RA M

ON

A A

V E

POM

ON

A A

VE

NO

RTH

VALLEY

MARIN AVE

MARIN AVE

SOLANO AVE

SOLANO AVE

SOLANO AVE

YOSEM

ITE RD

BOYNTON AVE

VERMONT AVE

FLORIDA AVE

YOSEMITE RD

THE

AL A

ME D

AVISALIA AVE

RAM

ON

A A

VE

POM

ON

A A

VE

PERALTA AVE

LE C

ONTE AV

E

MC

GEE AV E

EUC

LID AV

E

SCEN

I C AVE

CHANNING WAY

PER

ALTA

AVE

NEI

LSO

N

ST

MASO

NIC

AVE

CO

RN

ELL AVE

ALLSTON WAY

ALLSTON WAY

ALLSTON WAY

ALLSTON WAY

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

HEARST AVE

CR

AGM

ON

T AVE

STANN

AGE

AVE

ENSENADA AVE

MONTEREY AVE

ENSENADA AVE

CR

AGM

ON

T AVE

SHATTUCK AVE

KENTUCKY AVE

SAN LUIS RD

TACOMA AVE

PER

ALT

A A

VE

SANTA FE AVE

EUC

L ID AVE

MC

K INLE Y AVE

SHATTU

CK

AVE

JOSE

PHIN

E ST

PER

ALTA

AV

E

JOSE

PHIN

E ST

SHATTU

CK

AVE

SHATTU

CK

AVE

STANN

AGE AVE

CHANNING WAY

BANCROFT WAY

BANCROFT WAY

BANCROFT WAY

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

HEARST AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

CRESTON RD

S PAU

LDIN

G AVE

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

THOUSAND OAKS

SANTA ROSA AVE

SAN MIGUEL AVE

MIDDLEFIELD R

D

BERRYMAN ST

PORTLAND AVE

ARLIN

GTO

N AVE

CAPISTRANO AVE

MENDO

CINO AVE

ARLINGTO

N AVE

THOUSAND OAKS

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

SAN PABLO

AVE

SAN PAB

LO AVE

SAN PAB

LO AVE

SAN PABLO

AVE

SACR

AME

NTO

STSAC

RAM

EN

TO STUNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

BERKELEY WAY

BERKELEY WAY

BERKELEY WAYJE

FFER

SON

AVE

S AN

CAR

LOS

AV

E

SAN PEDRO AVE

CO

LUSA AV

E

S AN

CAR

LOS

AV

E

LA LOM

A AVE

HIG

HLAN

D PL

RO

OSE

VELT AV

E

GILMAN ST

NO

RTH

SID

E A

VE

BERKELEY WAY

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

CALIFO

RN

I A ST

LOS ANGELES AVE

CRESTON RD

UNIVERSITY AVE

SANTA BARBARA RD

CAPISTRANO AVE

LERO

Y AVE

(OLD

GR

OVE

ST )

(OLD

GR

OVE

ST )

SANTA BARBARA RD

SACR

AME

NTO

ST

SAN LORENZO AVE

HAW

THO

RN

E TE

RR

ACE

THOUSAND OAKS BLVD

WOODMONT AVE

INTER

STATE 80 CO

RR

IDO

R

BEVERLY PLACE

VIRGINIA ST [unimproved connection]


LEGEND

Berkeley City Limit

Existing Links

Existing Nodes

FIGURE E-1:

Codornices CreekCatchment Map

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Feet

o

Table E-2: Codornices Creek Watershed Summary Table (Post-Henry GI Retrofit)

Catchment Name Rainfall Reference Area (ac) Max Flow (cfs)Total Runoff Depth (in) Width (ft) Slope

Impervious Percentage

(%)Total Rainfall

(in)034-700 10YR 6HR 20IN 7.13 9.22 1.66 385.37 0.01 67.20 1.81034-703 10YR 6HR 20IN 8.63 10.70 1.47 516.32 0.02 57.40 1.81034-705 10YR 6HR 20IN 10.45 11.83 1.52 344.54 0.02 68.60 1.81034-110 10YR 6HR 20IN 2.98 4.01 1.64 140.85 0.01 83.20 1.81

ALB-REDO 10YR 6HR 20IN 8.47 8.86 1.42 354.54 0.01 56.10 1.81Village_in 10YR 6HR 20IN 102.00 85.72 1.49 1600.00 0.01 70.00 1.81Gilman_in 10YR 6HR 20IN 168.00 141.00 1.68 2000.00 0.01 91.00 1.81

042-712 10YR 6HR 22IN 6.31 9.93 1.69 444.22 0.02 70.10 1.94ALB-519 10YR 6HR 22IN 1.39 2.12 1.57 120.88 0.04 65.00 1.94ALB-518 10YR 6HR 22IN 9.04 10.57 1.46 282.25 0.04 57.90 1.94040-704 10YR 6HR 22IN 14.98 14.23 1.48 357.88 0.01 54.40 1.94026-004 10YR 6HR 22IN 21.98 25.85 1.45 813.98 0.07 50.20 1.94026-100 10YR 6HR 22IN 13.03 13.33 1.35 496.14 0.04 46.20 1.94046-127 10YR 6HR 22IN 18.97 14.94 1.19 448.81 0.04 37.60 1.94040-708 10YR 6HR 22IN 18.02 19.64 1.43 394.35 0.06 55.60 1.94044-820 10YR 6HR 22IN 22.62 24.35 1.45 529.47 0.05 52.60 1.94026-707 10YR 6HR 22IN 19.01 15.59 1.23 402.30 0.03 43.00 1.94046-122 10YR 6HR 22IN 23.30 23.24 1.40 470.12 0.04 55.60 1.94

ALB-420.3 10YR 6HR 22IN 15.12 19.50 1.53 508.65 0.05 63.50 1.94ALB-422 10YR 6HR 22IN 5.36 7.67 1.55 282.09 0.07 60.00 1.94

ALB-418.1 10YR 6HR 22IN 22.11 25.74 1.51 547.33 0.04 62.40 1.94ALB-512 10YR 6HR 22IN 2.38 2.54 1.42 127.57 0.01 52.30 1.94ALB-509 10YR 6HR 22IN 12.81 12.28 1.50 300.87 0.01 60.70 1.94

044-ALBI2 10YR 6HR 22IN 12.64 13.08 1.36 437.92 0.06 44.10 1.94028-012 10YR 6HR 24IN 6.70 7.93 1.55 262.99 0.12 36.80 2.11028-734 10YR 6HR 24IN 13.15 12.28 1.40 382.33 0.07 34.40 2.11028-008 10YR 6HR 24IN 7.57 9.86 1.56 364.56 0.07 48.80 2.11028-732 10YR 6HR 24IN 12.02 13.38 1.49 461.62 0.08 39.60 2.11030-001 10YR 6HR 24IN 3.72 3.60 1.40 253.51 0.21 7.30 2.11028-823 10YR 6HR 24IN 14.83 11.90 1.37 429.76 0.12 23.60 2.11028-736 10YR 6HR 24IN 16.24 15.24 1.39 409.98 0.04 40.00 2.11026-105 10YR 6HR 24IN 12.85 12.84 1.43 448.37 0.05 38.40 2.11028-002 10YR 6HR 24IN 15.55 13.46 1.38 338.73 0.05 35.00 2.11028-728 10YR 6HR 24IN 1.66 2.26 1.54 158.25 0.14 25.20 2.11028-013 10YR 6HR 24IN 14.63 15.10 1.51 433.45 0.14 31.30 2.11030-120 10YR 6HR 24IN 5.05 6.04 1.54 196.06 0.09 40.50 2.11028-902 10YR 6HR 24IN 23.08 21.44 1.45 635.36 0.08 31.90 2.11028-903 10YR 6HR 24IN 17.44 18.09 1.47 425.91 0.04 47.20 2.11

Node2226 10YR 6HR 24IN 5.45 6.80 1.57 262.00 0.12 36.80 2.11Node2228 10YR 6HR 24IN 14.63 15.10 1.51 433.45 0.14 31.30 2.11Node2229 10YR 6HR 24IN 12.43 13.72 1.49 460.00 0.08 39.60 2.11Node2238 10YR 6HR 24IN 9.51 9.57 1.44 380.00 0.07 34.40 2.11Node2239 10YR 6HR 24IN 4.47 6.45 1.58 364.00 0.07 48.80 2.11

030-728 10YR 6HR 26IN 19.36 7.62 1.05 361.77 0.16 8.50 2.27030-025 10YR 6HR 26IN 10.93 9.28 1.18 637.09 0.37 7.30 2.27030-205 10YR 6HR 26IN 13.99 6.76 1.07 427.16 0.15 9.30 2.27030-711 10YR 6HR 26IN 24.26 13.27 1.08 390.78 0.17 16.60 2.27030-020 10YR 6HR 26IN 8.40 9.72 1.29 635.32 0.36 15.50 2.27030-018 10YR 6HR 26IN 14.29 10.17 1.17 612.76 0.28 10.30 2.27030-015 10YR 6HR 26IN 6.25 4.53 1.20 302.59 0.13 14.90 2.27030-014 10YR 6HR 26IN 6.11 5.07 1.25 367.16 0.13 16.50 2.27030-010 10YR 6HR 26IN 25.13 17.92 1.27 662.61 0.18 17.60 2.27030-043 10YR 6HR 26IN 20.40 14.53 1.19 562.80 0.18 18.60 2.27030-037 10YR 6HR 26IN 14.88 10.12 1.19 472.70 0.16 16.90 2.27030-029 10YR 6HR 26IN 1.07 0.82 1.18 78.95 0.14 9.30 2.27032-147 10YR 6HR 26IN 14.66 10.89 1.17 343.62 0.14 22.60 2.27032-015 10YR 6HR 26IN 10.36 8.17 1.25 280.19 0.13 24.30 2.27032-025 10YR 6HR 26IN 22.73 11.08 1.04 382.34 0.15 14.20 2.27032-031 10YR 6HR 26IN 1.19 1.67 1.35 163.21 0.19 19.30 2.27032-115 10YR 6HR 26IN 4.67 3.25 1.17 235.74 0.18 10.50 2.27032-107 10YR 6HR 26IN 28.71 15.32 1.01 455.08 0.13 16.90 2.27030-749 10YR 6HR 26IN 27.20 14.04 1.05 435.19 0.14 16.10 2.27032-038 10YR 6HR 26IN 4.83 3.74 1.23 190.42 0.20 16.90 2.27032-161 10YR 6HR 26IN 1.39 1.45 1.29 113.28 0.18 16.90 2.27032-162 10YR 6HR 26IN 4.72 3.49 1.22 137.06 0.12 21.70 2.27032-163 10YR 6HR 26IN 3.74 2.25 1.13 163.54 0.18 8.70 2.27

030-729.1 10YR 6HR 26IN 13.87 6.81 1.13 441.18 0.20 6.00 2.27030-037.2 10YR 6HR 26IN 4.74 5.31 1.30 472.70 0.16 16.90 2.27

MAP Area MAP Impervious %20.00 37.66 20.00 332.50 500.0022.00 239.07 22.00 931.20 1700.0024.00 210.96 24.00 670.90 1900.0026.00 307.87 26.00 372.30 2500.00

795.56

Weighted MAP = 23.98 (no Gillman & VC) Weighted Impervious = 0.3473 (no Gillman & VC)22.97 (with Gillman & VC) 0.4394 (with Gillman & VC)

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!( !(

!(!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

E

ST

DR

RD

RD

RD

ST

ST

RD

ST

RD

LY

VD

ID

EU

RD

SC

LA

DR

NO

RDR

D

TA

SH

LY

ON

ER

LN

RD

ST

CT

ST

ST

RD

LN

ST

CT

ST

THE

AVE

AVE

AVE

WA Y

WAY

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVESA

N

GRI

THE

GRIAVE

AVE

AVE

AVEAVE

AVE

AMA

SANAVE

AVE

AVE

SAN

AVE

THE

AVE

AVE

SET

AVE

CAT

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

SANAVE

SAN

AVEAVE

LAN

E

TWIN

BLVD

BRET

Lane

Lane

LANE

ROAD

VIEW

WO

OD

ROAD

ROSE

GATE

PATH

FAIR

BRET

LANE

BLVD

PEAKSTEV

WHIT

Y LN

HILL

PEAK

ROAD

BLVD

PEA

K

BLVD

COURT

NO

RTH

RU

GBY

PLAC

E

SANTA

DRIVE

REGAL

VIS

TA

BUENA

VISTA

BUENA

TER

R.

QUAIL

POSEN

MARIN

NORTH

SANTA

SOUT

H

SOU

TH

ALAMO

COST

A

SAN

TA

PLACE

ALBANY

QU

EEN

S

SHAS

TA

KEELER

Arca

de

CIRCLE

TOMLEE

ADA ST

CANYO

N

SQU

ARE

QU

EEN

S

SENIOR

MILLER

LATHAM

LATH

AM

FOR

EST

MILLER

LASSEN

IND

IAN

KEELER

CANYON

VASS

AR

ALTA RD

WES

T ST

INYO

ST

BARBAR

A

AJAX RD

HILL RD

EOLA ST

GA

RD

ENS

HILL RD

STO

DDERMUIR

WY

WILD

CA T

LA LOMA

GRIZZLY

AVENIDA

OLYMPUS

OAK ST

VEN

TUR

A

HAMPTON

GR

I ZZLY

VERMONT

ANTO

NIO

LA LOM

A

ARC

H ST

WATKINS

FRANCIS

TERRACE

PARK WY CYPRESS

PAGE ST

PAGE ST

PAGE ST

BERKELEY

ACTO

N S

T

HEN

RY S T

VINE ST

ACTO

N S

TVIRG

INI A

SHO

RT ST

NAPA AV

E

MO

DO

C S

T

RIDGE RD

ROSE ST

COLUMBIA

SHO

RT ST

HO

LLY S T

A CT O

N S

T

BARTD

RW

CEDAR ST

ROSE ST

CRAGMONT

STERLING

HILLDALE

HIG

H C

T

ARC

H S

T

ROSE ST

ROSE ST

MICHIGAN

AVIS

RD

VINCENTE

CATALINA

VINC

EN

TE

3RD

ST

VINE ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR STCEDAR ST

ROSE ST

ROSE ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

JONES ST

JONES ST

JONES ST

CROSSWAYS

MILVIA ST

MIRAM

ONTE

CU

RTIS

ST

EL DORADO

CORONA CT

ATLAS PLC

SUMMIT RD

KAINS AVE

CU

RTIS ST

LA V

ER

EDA

LERO

Y AVE

GR

EEN

WO

OD

SHASTA RD

CAMPUS DR

KEITH AVE

SHASTA RD

FOREST LN

DEL Norte

BENITO RD

ROSE ST

SAN LUIS

VISTAMONT

JUAN AVE

SAN R

AMO

N

ARLI

NGTO

N

MENLO PL

KEY RO

UTE

GR

AN

T ST

HE N

RY S T

2ND

ST

3RD

ST

4TH ST

5TH ST

6TH ST

7TH ST

8TH ST

9TH ST

9TH ST

8TH ST

7TH ST

6TH ST

5TH ST

4T H ST2N

D S

T

MCG

EE AVE

GR

AN

T ST

GR

OVE

ST

HE N

RY S T

B ON

IT A A VE

CENTER ST

ACACIA AVE

VALLEJO ST

FRE

SNO

AVE

CO

LUSA AVE

TULAR

E AVE

SONOMA AVE

LINCOLN ST

CO

DO

RN

ICES

EUNICE ST

EUNICE ST

TALBOT AVE

KAINS AVE

MLK JR

WAY

KEITH AVE

SANTA R

OSA

PARK HILLS

SHASTA RD

CAM

PU

S DR

MILLER AVE

TWAINE AVE

POPPY PATH

MARIN AVE

LAUR

EL S

T

SUMMER STYOLO AVE

FRE

SNO

AVE

SIER

RA

ST

MADERA ST

HALKIN LN.

MARIN AVE

OXFORD ST

SPRUCE

ST

SPR

UC

E S

T

CU

RTIS

ST

SCEN

IC AV

E

MLK Jr W

AY

GR

AN

T ST

MLK JR

WAY

SPRU

CE S

T

S PRU

CE S

TS PR

UC

E ST

CU

RTIS

ST

ACTO

N

ST

10TH ST

10TH ST

JAYNES ST

EDITH

ST

MILV IA ST

MILV IA ST

KAINS AVE

CENTER ST

SUTT

ER S

T

CAMELIA ST

CAMELIA ST

CAMELIA ST

GILMAN ST

GILMAN ST

GILMAN ST

CU

RTIS

ST

MLA Path_95

OR

DW

AY ST

MI R

AMAR

AVE

OX

FOR

D S T

ADDISON ST

FRA

NKL I N

S T

THE

ALAM

EDA

HOPKINS ST

EUC

LID

AVE

EVELYN

AVE

CO

RN

ELL AVE

HILGARD AVE

HOPKINS ST

CO

RN

ELL AVE

CH

EST N

UT S T

LINCOLN ST

LINCOLN ST

CH

ESTN

UT S T

F RA

NK L I N

S T

WA L N

UT S

T

NEI

LSO

N S

T

CU

RTI

S A

VE

CAR

ME

L A

VE

(in Albany)

EUC

LI D AV

E

TULA

RE

AVE

MER

CED

ST

CO

LUSA

AVE

CO

LUSA AVE

COLUSA AVE

BARBARA RD

EUC

LID

AV

E

SPRUCE ST

COLUSA AVE

THE ALAMEDA

NEI

LSO

N S

T

CU

RTI

S A

VE

CAR

ME

L A

VE

NEILS

ON

ST

CAR

MEL AVE

RAM

ON

A AVE

POM

ON

A AVE

BON

ITA AVE

WALN

UT S

T

OX

FOR

D ST

OX

FOR

D ST

ARC

H ST

WALN

UT S

T

OX

FOR

D ST

NEI

LSO

N S

T

TEVL

IN

ST

OR

DW

AY

STAL

BIN

A A

VE

OR

DW

AY

ST

CU

RTIS

ST

BUENA AVE

BON

ITA AVE

MI LVIA S T

EVELYN AVE

TALBO

T AVE

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

HOPKIN

S S

T

HOPKINS ST

HOPKINS ST

LINCOLN ST

HEARST AVE

HEARST AVE

HEARST AVE

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

HOPKINS ST

VIRGINIA ST

DELAWARE ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

HARRISON ST

HARRISON ST

HARRISON ST

NEI

LSO

N

ST

SAN

MAT

EO R

D

ALLSTON WAY

ENSEN

ADA AV

E

VENTU

RA AV

E

DARTMOUTH ST

MAS

ON

IC AVE

LE CONTE AVE

STANN

AG

E AVE

BELVEDER

E ST

KEON

CR

EST D

R

RA M

ON

A A

V E

POM

ON

A A

VE

GLEND

ALE AVE

GLENDALE AVE

THE ALAM

EDA

MARIN AVE

MARIN AVE

SOLANO AVE

SOLANO AVE

SOLANO AVE

YOSEM

ITE RD

BOYNTON AVE

VERMONT AVE

FLORIDA AVE

YOSEMITE RD

THE

AL A

ME D

AVISALIA AVE

RAM

ON

A A

VE

POM

ON

A A

VE

PERALTA AVE

LE C

ONTE AV

E

MC

GEE AV E

EUC

LID AV

E

SCEN

I C AVE

PER

ALTA

AVE

NEI

LSO

N

ST

MASO

NIC

AVE

CO

RN

ELL AVE

ALLSTON WAY

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

HEARST AVE

CR

AGM

ON

T AVE

STANN

AG

E AVE

ENSENADA AVE

TAMALPAIS RD

MAR

IPO

SA A

VE

BAY VIEW PL

MO

NTE

REY

AVE

MONTEREY AVE

ENSENADA AVE

CR

AGM

ON

T AVE

SHATTUCK AVE

KENTUCKY AVE

SAN LUIS RD

TACOMA AVE

PER

ALT

A A

VE

SANTA FE AVE

EUC

L ID AVE

MC

K INLE Y AVE

SHATTU

CK

AVE

JOSE

PHIN

E ST

PER

ALTA

AV

E

CARLOTTA AVE

JOSE

PHIN

E ST

SHATTU

CK

AVE

STANN

AGE AVE

BANCROFT WAY

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

HEARST AVE

CRESTON RD

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

THOUSAND OAKS

SANTA ROSA AVE

SAN MIGUEL AVE

MIDDLEFIELD R

D

BERRYMAN ST

PORTLAND AVE

ARLIN

GTO

N AVE

CAPISTRANO AVE

MENDO

CINO AVE

ARLINGTO

N AVE

THOUSAND OAKS

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

SAN PABLO

AVE

SAN PAB

LO AVE

SAN PABLO

AVE

SAN PABLO

AVE

SACR

AME

NTO

ST

BERKELEY WAY

BERKELEY WAY

BERKELEY WAY

SAN

CAR

LOS

AV

E

SAN PEDRO AVE

CO

LUSA AV

E

S AN

CAR

LOS

AV

E

LA LOM

A AVE

HIG

HLAN

D PL

GILMAN ST

NO

RTH

SID

E A

VE

BERKELEY WAY

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

LOS ANGELES AVE

CRESTON RD

UNIVERSITY AVE

POSEN A

VE

SANTA BARBARA RD

CAPISTRANO AVE

LERO

Y AVE

(OLD

GR

OVE

ST )

(OLD

GR

OVE S

T )

SANTA BARBARA RD

SACR

AMEN

TO S

T

SAN LORENZO AVE

HAW

THO

RN

E TE

RR

ACE

THOUSAND OAKS BLVD

WOODMONT AVE

INTE

RSTATE

80 CO

RR

IDO

R

BEVERLY PLACEG

LEN

A VE



LEGEND

Berkeley City Limit

Percent Capacity

0.00 - 0.70

0.71 - 0.80

0.81 - 0.90

0.91 - 1.50

1.51 - 25.00

Spilled Volume (AF)

!( 0.00 - 0.05!( 0.06 - 0.25!( 0.26 - 0.50

!( 0.51 - 1.00

!( 1.01 - 3.00

FIGURE F-1:

Codornices CreekExisting Conditions

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Feet

o

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!( !(

!(!( !(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

Henry StExisting downstream flow = 220 cfs

Post Retrofit flow = 143 cfs

Codornices ParkExisting downstream flow = 178 cfs

Post Retrofit flow = 79 cfs

VC BypassExisting Village Creek flow = 0 cfs

Post Retrofit Village Creek flow = 27 cfs

2nd St BermExisting Total Volume onto 2nd St = 16.27 AF

Post Retrofit Total Volume onto 2nd St = 3.23 AF

Upper WatershedTraditional Retrofit eliminates flooding.

E

ST

DR

RD

RD

RD

ST

ST

RD

LY

VD

RD

LA

DR

NO

RDR

D

TA

SH

CT

ST

ST

CT

ST

AVE

AVE

AVE

WA Y

WAY

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

SAN

GRI

GRIAVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

SAN

AVE

AVE

SET

AVE

CAT

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

SANAVE

SAN

AVEAVE

LAN

E

TWIN

BLVD

Lane

Lane

LANE

ROAD

VIEW

ROSE

GATE

PEAK

PE AK

PATH

FAIR

PEAK

ROAD

BLVD

PEA

K

BLVD

COURT

NO

RTH

RU

GBY

PLAC

E

DRIVE

VIS

TA

BUENA

VISTA

TER

R.

QUAIL

POSEN

MARIN

NORTH

SANTA

SOUT

H

SOU

TH

ALAMO

SAN

TA

PLACE

ALBANY

QU

EEN

S

SHAS

TA

KEELER

Arca

de

CIRCLE

TOMLEE

ADA ST

CAN

YON

SQU

ARE

QU

EEN

S

SENIOR

KEELER

CANYON

VASS

AR

ALTA RD

WES

T ST

INYO

ST

AJAX RD

HILL RD

EOLA ST

GA

RD

ENS

HILL RD

WILD

CA T

LA LOMA

GRIZZLY

AVENIDA

OLYMPUS

OAK ST

VEN

TUR

A

HAMPTON

GR

I ZZLY

VERMONT

ANTO

NIO

LA LOM

A

ARC

H ST

WATKINS

FRANCIS

TERRACE

CYPRESS

PAGE ST

PAGE ST

BERKELEY

ACTO

N S

T

HEN

RY S T

VINE ST

ACTO

N S

TVIRG

INI A

SHO

RT ST

NAPA AV

E

MO

DO

C S

T

RIDGE RD

ROSE ST

COLUMBIA

SHO

RT ST

HO

LLY S T

A CT O

N S

T

BARTD

RW

CEDAR ST

ROSE ST

CRAGMONT

HIG

H C

T

ARC

H S

T

ROSE ST

MICHIGAN

AVIS

RD

VINCENTE

CATALINA

VINC

EN

TE

VINE ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR STCEDAR ST

ROSE ST

ROSE ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

JONES ST

JONES ST

MILVIA S

T

MIRAM

ONTE

CU

RTIS

ST

EL DORADO

ATLAS PLC

SUMMIT RD

KAINS AVE

CU

RTIS

ST

LA V

ER

EDA

LERO

Y AVE

GR

EEN

WO

OD

SHASTA RD

CAMPUS DR

KEITH AVE

SHASTA RD

VISTAMONT

JUAN AVE

SAN R

AMO

N

ARLI

NGTO

N

MENLO PL

KEY RO

UTE

HE N

RY S T

2ND

ST

3RD

ST

4TH ST

5TH ST

6TH ST

7TH ST

8TH ST

9TH ST

2ND

ST

MCGEE AVE

GR

AN

T ST

GR

OVE

ST

B ON

IT A A VE

CENTER ST

ACACIA AVE

VALLEJO ST

FRE

SNO

AVE

CO

LUSA AVE

TULAR

E AVE

SONOMA AVE

LINCOLN ST

CO

DO

RN

ICES

EUNICE ST

TALBOT AVE

MLK JR

WAY

SANTA R

OSA

SHASTA RD

CAM

PU

S DR

LAUR

EL S

T

SUMMER STYOLO AVE

FRE

SNO

AVE

SIER

RA

ST

MADERA ST

HALKIN LN.

SPRUCE

ST

SPR

UC

E S

T

CU

RTIS

ST

SCEN

IC AV

E

MLK Jr W

AY

GR

AN

T ST

MLK JR

WAY

SPRU

CE S

T

CU

RTIS

ST

ACTO

N

ST

10TH S

T

JAYNES ST

EDITH

ST

MILV IA ST

MILV IA ST

CAMELIA ST

GILMAN ST

CU

RTIS

ST

MLA Path_95

MLA Path_96

OR

DW

AY ST

MI R

AMAR

AVE

OX

FOR

D S T

ADDISON ST

FRA

NKL I N

S T

THE

ALAM

EDA

HOPKINS ST

EVELYN

AVE

HILGARD AVE

HOPKINS ST

CO

RN

ELL AVE

CH

EST N

UT S T

LINCOLN ST

LINCOLN ST

CH

ESTN

UT S T

F RA

NK L I N

S T

WA L N

UT S

T

NEI

LSO

N S

T

CU

RTI

S A

VE

CAR

ME

L A

VE

(in Albany)

TULA

RE

AVE

MER

CED

ST

CO

LUSA

AVE

CO

LUSA AVE

COLUSA AVE

BARBARA RD

EUC

LID

AV

E

COLUSA AVE

THE ALAMEDA

NEI

LSO

N S

T

CU

R TIS

AV

E

CAR

ME

L A

VE

NEILS

ON

ST

CAR

MEL AVE

RAM

ON

A AVE

POM

ON

A AVE

BON

ITA AVE

OX

F OR

D S T

NEI

LSO

N S

T

TEVL

IN

ST

ORD

WAY

ST

ALBI

NA

AVE

OR

DW

AY

ST

CURT

IS

ST

BUENA AVE

BON

ITA AVE

MI LVIA S T

ADDISON ST

HOPKIN

S S

T

HOPKINS ST

HOPKINS ST

LINCOLN ST

HEARST AVE

HEARST AVE

HEARST AVE

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

HOPKINS ST

VIRGINIA ST

DELAWARE ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

HARRISON ST

HARRISON ST NEI

LSO

N

ST

ENSEN

ADA AV

E

VENTU

RA AV

E

DARTMOUTH ST

MAS

ON

IC AVE

LE CONTE AVE

STANN

AG

E AVE

BELVEDER

E ST

KEON

CR

EST D

R

RA M

ON

A A

VE

POM

ON

A A

VE

GLEND

ALE AVE

GLENDALE AVE

THE ALAM

EDA

MARIN AVE

SOLANO AVE

SOLANO AVE

YOSEM

ITE RD

BOYNTON AVE

VERMONT AVE

FLORIDA A

VE

YOSEMITE RD

THE

ALA

ME D

AVISALIA AVE

RAM

ON

A A

VE

POM

ON

A A

VE

PERA

LTA AVE

LE C

ONTE

AVE

MC

GEE A V E

PER

ALTA

AVE

NEI

LSO

N

ST

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

HEARST AVE

ENSENADA AVE

TAMALPAIS RD

MO

NTE

REY

AVE

MONTEREY AVE

ENSENADA AVE

KENTUCKY AVE

SAN LUIS RD

TACOMA AVE

PER

ALT

A A

VE

SANTA FE AV

E

EUC

L ID AVE

SHATT U

CK

A VE

JOS E

P HIN

E ST

PER

ALTA

AV

E

CARLOTTA AVE

JOSE

PHIN

E ST

SHATT U

CK

A VE

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

THOUSAND OAKS

SANTA ROSA AVE

SAN MIGUEL AVE

BERRYMAN ST

PORTLAND AVE

ARLIN

GTO

N AVE

CAPISTRANO AVE

THOUSAND OAKS

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

SAN PABLO

AVE

SACR

AME

NT O

S T

BERKELEY WAY

BERKELEY WAY

BERKELEY WAY

SAN

CAR

LOS

AV

E

SAN PEDRO AVE

CO

LUSA AV

E

S AN

CAR

LOS

AV

E

LA LOM

A AVE

HIG

HLAN

D PL

GILMAN ST

NO

RTH

SID

E A

VE

BERKELEY WAY

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

CRESTON RD

UNIVERSITY AVE

POSEN A

VE

SANTA BARBARA RD

CAPISTRANO AVE

LERO

Y AVE

(OLD

GR

OV E

ST )

SACR

AME

NTO

ST

SAN LORENZO AVE

THOUSAND OAKS BLVD

WOODMONT AVE

INTE

RSTATE

80 CO

RR

IDO

R

BEVERLY PLACE


0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Feet

\\World\gis\Projects\209022 Berkeley Modeling\209022 Cordonices MIKEURBAN.mxd

FIGURE H-1:

Codornices Creek GreenRetrofit Results

2011 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

LEGENDBerkeley City Limit

Percent Capacity

0.00 - 0.70

0.71 - 0.80

0.81 - 0.90

0.91 - 1.50

1.51 - 16.50

Volume Flooded (AF)

!( 0.00 - 0.05!( 0.06 - 0.25!( 0.26 - 0.50!( 0.51 - 1.00

!( 1.01 - 2.00

o

") ")")

")

")

")

")")

") ")

")

")")")")

$+")

$+

$+

Intersection across from Monterey Market:Possible location for sidewalk planter boxes

or CDS units next to the bus stops.(See Figure I-5)

Eunice St:Possible location for six rain gardens or bulb outs

Between Codornices Park & Rose Garden:Red curbs on both sides of the street provide

possible location for two rain gardens.(See Figure I-8)

Dead end at 9th St:Possible location for a CDS unit.

(See Figure I-3)

Dead end at 10th St:Possible location for

two rain gardens.

University Village (8th St):Possible location for two rain gardens

by red curbs at enterance.(See Figure I-2)

Hopkins St (between Colusa & Beverly):Red curbs provide possible

locations for multiple rain gardens.

Josephine St and Hopkins St:Possible location for rain gardens and

concrete pavers or a bulb out.(See Figure I-6)

Mid-block creek crossings:Possible location for street-wide concrete pavers

and small rain gardens at crossing.(See Figure I-4)

Posen Ave and Monterey Ave:Possible location for a CDS unit

The Alameda and Napa Ave:Possible location for a CDS unit.

Berryman St:Possible location to divert storm water from

the Henry St storage pipes to MLK Middle School.

E

ST

RD

RD

RD

ST

ST

ID

EU

RD

SC

DR

NO

RDR

D

TA

SH

LY

ON

ER

ST

ST

RD

LN

CT

ST

THE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

SAN

THE

GRIAVE

AVE

AVE

AVEAVE

AVE

SAN

AVE

AVE

CAT

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

AVE

SANAVE

SAN

AVEAVE

BLVD

BRET

Lane

Lane

LANE

ROAD

VIEW

WO

OD

GATE

PEAK

FAIR

BRET

LANE

BLVD

PEAKSTEV

WHIT

ROAD

BLVD

PEA

K

BLVD

NO

RTH

RU

GBY

REGAL

QUAIL

NORTH

SANTA

SOUT

H

SOU

TH

ALAMO

COST

A

SAN

TA

ALBANY

QU

EEN

S

SHAS

TA

KEELER

Arca

de

CIRCLE

CANYO

N

SQU

ARE

QU

EEN

S

SENIOR

MILLER

LATHAM

LATH

AM

CANYON

VASS

AR

ALTA RD

WES

T ST

AJAX RD

HILL RD

EOLA ST

HILL RD

STO

DDERMUIR

WY

WILD

CA T

GRIZZLY

AVENIDA

OLYMPUS

OAK ST

HO

PKINS

HAMPTON

GR

I ZZLY

VERMONT

ANTO

NIO

LA LOM

A

ARC

H ST

WATKINS

FRANCIS

CYPRESS

PAGE ST

BERKELEY

HEN

RY S T

VINE ST

SHO

RT ST

RIDGE RD

ROSE ST

COLUMBIA

ACTO

N S

T

CRAGMONT

STERLING

HILLDALE

HIG

H C

T

ARC

H S

T

MICHIGAN

AVIS

RD

VINC

EN

TE

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

CEDAR ST

JONES ST

JONES ST

JONES ST

CROSSWAYS

MILVIA ST

CU

RTIS

ST

ATLAS PLC

SUMMIT RD

KAINS AVE

CU

RTIS ST

LA V

ER

EDA

SHASTA RD

KEITH AVE

SHASTA RD

SAN LUIS

VISTAMONT

JUAN AVE

SAN R

AMO

N

ARLI

NGTO

N

MENLO PL

GR

AN

T ST

2ND

ST

3RD

ST

4TH ST

5TH ST

6TH ST

7TH ST

8TH ST

9TH ST

9TH ST

2ND

ST

MCGEE AVE

GR

AN

T ST

BON

ITA AVE

CENTER ST

ACACIA AVE

VALLEJO ST

EUNICE ST

EUNICE ST

TALBOT AVE

KAINS AVE

SANTA R

OSA

PARK HILLS

CAM

PU

S DR

MILLER AVE

TWAINE AVE

POPPY PATH

LAUR

EL S

T

SUMMER STYOLO AVE

HALKIN LN.

SPRUCE

ST

SPR

UC

E S

T

SCEN

IC AV

E

MLK Jr W

AY

GR

AN

T ST

SPRU

CE S

T

S PRU

CE S

T

10TH ST

10TH ST

JAYNES ST

EDITH

ST

CENTER ST

CAMELIA ST

GILMAN ST

CU

RTIS

ST

MLA Path_95

OX

FOR

D S T

ADDISON ST

FRA

NKL I N

S T

HOPKINS ST

EUC

LID

AVE

EVELYN

AVE

CO

RN

ELL AVE

HILGARD AVE

HOPKINS ST

CO

RN

ELL AVE

CH

EST N

UT S T

WA L N

UT S

T

NEI

LSO

N S

T

CU

RTI

S A

VE

CAR

ME

L A

VE

MOSSWOOD RD

BARBARA RD

EUC

LID

AV

E

SPRUCE ST

COLUSA AVE

THE ALAMEDA

CAR

ME

L A

VE

OX

F OR

D S T

WAL N

UT S

T

OX

F OR

D S T

TEVL

IN

ST

OR

DW

AY

ST

CU

RTIS

ST

BUENA AVE

MILVIA S T

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

ADDISON ST

HOPKINS ST

LINCOLN ST

HEARST AVE

HEARST AVE

HEARST AVE

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

DELAWARE ST

VIRGINIA ST

VIRGINIA ST

HARRISON ST

NEI

LSO

N

ST

SAN

MAT

EO R

D

ALLSTON WAY

MAS

ON

IC AVE

LE CONTE AVE

STANN

AG

E AVE

BELVEDER

E ST

RA M

ON

A A

VE

POM

ON

A A

VE

GLENDALE AVE

THE ALAM

EDA

YOSEM

ITE RD

BOYNTON AVE

VERMONT AVE

FLORIDA AVE

YOSEMITE RD

THE

AL A

ME D

AVISALIA AVE

RAM

ON

A A

VE

LE C

ONTE AV

E

MC

GEE A V E

NEI

LSO

N

ST

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

DELAWARE ST

HEARST AVE

STANN

AG

E AVE

CR

AGM

ON

T AVE

KENTUCKY AVE

SAN LUIS RD

EUC

L ID AVE

MC

K INL E Y A V E

PER

ALTA

AV

E

CARLOTTA AVE

SHATTU

CK

AVE

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

FRANCISCO ST

HEARST AVE

CRESTON RD

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

THOUSAND OAKS

SANTA ROSA AVE

SAN MIGUEL AVE

MIDDLEFIELD R

D

PORTLAND AVE

ARLIN

GTO

N AVE

CAPISTRANO AVE

THOUSAND OAKS

SAN

TA F

E A

VE

SAN PAB

LO AVE

SAN PABLO

AVE

SAN PABLO

AVE

SACR

AME

NT O

S T

BERKELEY WAY

BERKELEY WAY

BERKELEY WAY

SAN

CAR

LOS

AV

E

CO

LUSA AV

E

S AN

CAR

LOS

AV

E

LA LOM

A AVE

HIG

HLAN

D PL

BERKELEY WAY

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

CRESTON RD

UNIVERSITY AVE

SANTA BARBARA RD

LERO

Y AVE

(OLD

GR

OVE S

T )

SANTA BARBARA RD

THOUSAND OAKS BLVD

WOODMONT AVE

INTE

RSTATE

80 CO

RR

IDO

R

GL E

N A V

E



LEGEND

Berkeley City Limit

")

Potential Rain Garden/Bulb Out Location

")

Potential Sidewalk Planter Box Location

$+

Potential Continuous Deflective Separation(CDS) Unit Location

Potential Berrmyman StGreen InfrastructureRetrofit

FIGURE I-1:

Green InfrastructurePossibilities

o0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Feet

The existing rain gardens at the end of 6th Street provide an attractive entrance for residents, while filtering trash and other debris before storm water enters Codornices Creek, which passes under the street. The narrow lane encourages drivers to slow down without the need for a speed bump.

The entrance to University Village at the end of 10th Street is an ideal location for a similar feature. The rain gardens could filter trash and debris out of the storm water before it enters Codornices Creek, which passes under the street, and the narrow entrance would reduce the need for the speed bump.

Figure I-2: Example of implementing Rain Gardens in the Codornices Creek Lower Watershed.

209022 Report Figures 06-02-2011.xlsx © 2011 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

The dead end at 9th Street is an existing depression that receives a high amount of industrial traffic that requires space to move around when loading/unloading goods. A Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS) unit in this location would help prevent trash and debris from entering the creek while using a minimal foot print to not block the industrial traffic. The main concern with this idea is whether there will be enough elevation difference between the buried CDS unit and the creek.

Figure I-3: Example of implementing a CDS Unit in the Codornices Creek Watershed.


When Codornices Creek passes under streets in the middle of a block, the GI options are more limited. There are few existing mid-block catchments near the creek, and even fewer red curbs (infrastructure would need to be installed and parking spots would need to be used). However, concrete pavers could be placed along with small rain gardens to clean storm water before entering the creek.

Figure I-4: Example of limited options when Codornices Creek passes under streets in the middle of a block.


Across from Monterey Market (at the corner of Hopkins Street and Monterey Street) is a prime example of a location to install sidewalk planter boxes. Where rain gardens would create obstacles for buses and patrons, and concrete pavers would not support the heavy loads, a sidewalk planter box would beautify the area while preventing trash and debris from entering Codornices Creek.

Figure I-5: Example of implementing Sidewalk Planter Boxes in the Codornices Creek Watershed.


Paver Blocks over creek alignment

The elevated island within the Hopkins and Josephine intersection is not a feasible location for a rain garden. However, the south easterly corner of Josephine and Hopkins is a possible location for a rain garden bulb out or rain gardens with a small area of concrete pavers over the creek alighnment. As an additional benefit, any corner improvement in this locationwould be visible to the pubilc due to its close proximity to the library.

Figure I-6: Example of implementing a Rain Garden with Concrete Pavers in the Codornices Watershed


Approximate alignment of 550-ft long, 8-ft

diameter pipe

Henry Street is an excellent location to install a major stormwater storage feature. The wide street could contain four 550-ft long barrels, each with 8-ft diameters. The location is relatively flat, meaning excavation costs would be limited. However, the side slope adjacent to the street is steep and may require a new retaining wall to support the street when the barrels are full.

Figure I-7: Example of implementing a large storage feature under a city street.


Euclid Avenue between the entrances to Codornices Park and the Rose Garden has two red curbs that could potentially be used as rain gardens.

Figure I-8: Example of implementing Rain Gardens in the Codornices Creek Upper Watershed.


Figure I-9: Photographs of existing berm at 2nd Street.


draft potter and codornices watersheds hydrology … · 7/26/2011 · figure 4-1. potter watershed...

Documents