HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARMONY SAFEWAY, BLOCKBUSTER - FINAL - 33-94C - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - DRAINAGE REPORT•
FROUDE NUMBER=0 INDICATES THAT A PRESSURED FLOW OCCURS
SEWER
SLOPE
INVERT ELEVATION
BURIED
DEPTH
COMMENTS
ID NUMBER
UPSTREAM DNSTREAM
UPSTREAM
DNSTREAM
%
(FT)
(FT)
(FT)
(FT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
12.00
0.36
70.16
70.07
1.34
1.93
OK
23.00
0.71
70.82
70.16
1.38
2.84
OK
34.00
0.54
70.82
70.82
1.38
1.38
OK
56.00
0.48
71.73
71.40
1.27
0.90
NO
67.00
1.37
71.93
71.73
1.57
1.27
OK
78.00
0.90
71.93
71.93
1.57
1.57
OK
29.00
0.25
70.18
70.16
1.57
1.34
OK
95.00
1.58
70.57
69.35
1.90
2.57
OK
OK MEANS BURIED DEPTH
IS GREATER
THAN REQUIRED SOIL COVER OF
1 FEET
*** SUMMARY OF HYDRAULIC GRADIENT LINE ALONG SEWERS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEWER SEWER SURCHARGED CROWN ELEVATION WATER ELEVATION FLOW
ID NUMBER LENGTH LENGTH UPSTREAM DNSTREAM UPSTREAM DNSTREAM CONDITION
FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12.00 25.60 25.60 73.16 73.07 73.26 72.61 PRSS'ED
23.00 93.00 93.00 72.32 71.66 74.40 73.26 PRSS'ED
34.00 0.10 0.10 72.32 72.32 74.50 74.40 PRSS'ED
56.00 69.23 69.23 74.73 74.40 74.85 73.93 PRSS'ED
67.00 14.60 14.60 74.93 74.73 75.19 74.85 PRSS'ED
78.00 0.10 0.10 74.93 74.93 76.07 75.19 PRSS'ED
29.00 8.00 8.00 73.18 73.16 73.49 73.26 PRSS'ED
95.00 77.21 71.78 73.40 72.18 73.93 73.49 JUMP
PRSS'ED=PRESSURED FLOW; JUMP=POSSIBLE HYDRAULIC JUMP; SUBCR=SUBCRITICAL FLOW
*** SUMMARY OF ENERGY GRADIENT LINE ALONG SEWERS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPST MANHOLE SEWER JUNCTURE LOSSES DOWNST MANHOLE
SEWER MANHOLE ENERGY FRCTION BEND BEND LATERAL LATERAL MANHOLE ENERGY
ID NO ID NO. ELEV FT FT K COEF LOSS FT K COEF LOSS FT ID .FT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12.0 2.00 74.28 1.67 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 72.61
23.0 3.00 74.48 0.14 0.78 0.07 0.00 0.00 .2.00 74.28
34.0 4.00 74.59 0.00 1.25 0.10 0.00 0.00 3.00 74.48
56.0 6.00 75.73 0.44 0.28 0.25 0.00 0.00 5.00 75.05
67.0 7.00 76.07 0.09 0.28 0.25 0.00 0.00 6.00 75.73
78.0 8.00 76.95 0.00 1.00 0.88 0.00 0.00 7.00 76.07
29.0 9.00 74.37 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.00 2.00 74.28
95.0 5.00 75.05 0.62 0.05 0.06 0.00 0.00 9.00 74.37
BEND'LOSS =BEND K* FLOWING FULL VHEAD IN SEWER.
LATERAL LOSS= OUTFLOW FULL VHEAD-JCT LOSS K*INFLOW FULL VHEAD
FRICTION LOSS=O MEANS IT IS NEGLIGIBLE OR POSSIBLE ERROR DUE TO JUMP.
FRICTION LOSS INCLUDES SEWER INVERT DROP AT MANHOLE
NOTICE: VHEAD DENOTES THE VELOCITY HEAD OF FULL FLOW CONDITION.
A MINIMUM JUNCTION LOSS OF 0.05 FT WOULD BE INTRODUCED UNLESS LATERAL K=O.
FRICTION LOSS WAS ESTIMATED BY BACKWATER CURVE COMPUTATIONS.
40
STORM SEWER SYSTEM DESIGN USING UDSEWER MODEL
Developed by Dr. James Guo, Civil Eng. Dept, U. of Colorado at Denver
Metro Denver Cities/Counties & UDFCD Pool Fund Study
-acccoccacaaa=caaocaac-ao-caocac=ccaa=acaacccaaaaocaaaao=ccacaoccaacccaaacccaa
USER:NORTHERN ENG SERVICES INC-FT COLLINS COLORADO ...........................
ON DATA 10-06-1998 AT TIME 13:36:44 VERSION=03-26-1994
*** PROJECT TITLE :HARMONY SAFEWAY
*** SUMMARY OF HYDRAULICS AT MANHOLES
----------------------------------------------------------------------r--------
MANHOLE
CNTRBTING
RAINFALL RAINFALL
DESIGN
GROUND
WATER
COMMENTS
ID NUMBER
AREA * C
DURATION
INTENSITY
PEAK FLOW
ELEVATION
ELEVATION
MINUTES
INCH/HR
CFS
FEET
FEET
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
57.30
75.00
72.61
OK
2.00
11.69
5.32
4.90
57.30
74.50
73.26
OK
3.00
0.84
5.00
4.90
4.10
73.70
74.40
NO
4.00
0.84
5.00
4.90
4.10
73.70
74.50
NO
5.00
10.86
5.17
4.90
53.20
75.30
73.93
OK
10.86
5.02
4.90
53.20
76.00
74.85
OK
.6.00
7.00
10.86
5.00
4.90
53.20
76.50
75.19
OK
8.00
10.86
5.00
4.90
53.20
76.50
76.07
OK
9.00
10.86
5.28
4.90
53.20
74.75
73.49
OK
OK MEANS WATER ELEVATION IS LOWER THAN GROUND ELEVATION
*** SUMMARY OF SEWER HYDRAULICS
NOTE:
THE GIVEN
FLOW DEPTH -TO -SEWER SIZE RATIO= .8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEWER
MANHOLE
NUMBER
SEWER
REQUIRED
SUGGESTED
EXISTING
ID NUMBER
UPSTREAM
DNSTREAM
SHAPE
DIA(RISE)
DIA(RISE)
DIA(RISE)
WIDTH
ID NO.
ID NO.
(IN) (FT)
(IN) (FT)
(IN) (FT)
(FT)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12.00
2.00
1.00
ROUND
41.19
42.00
36.00
0.00
23.00
3.00
2.00
ROUND
13.49
15.00
18.00
0.00
34.00
4.00
3.00
ROUND
14.20
15.00
18.00
0.00
56.00
6.00
5.00
ROUND
37.96
42.00
36.00
0.00
_
67.00
7.00
6.00
ROUND
31.18
33.00
36.00
0.00
78.00
8.00
7.00
ROUND
33.74•
36.00
36.00
0.00
29.00
9.00
2.00
ROUND
42.90
48.00
36.00
0.00
95.00
5.00
9.00
ROUND
30.36
33.00
33.95
0.00
DIMENSION UNITS FOR ROUND AND ARCH SEWER ARE IN INCHES
DIMENSION UNITS FOR BOX SEWER ARE IN FEET
REQUIRED DIAMETER WAS DETERMINED BY SEWER HYDRAULIC CAPACITY.
SUGGESTED DIAMETER WAS DETERMINED BY COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE SIZE.
FOR A NEW SEWER, FLOW WAS ANALYZED BY THE SUGGESTED SEWER SIZE; OTHERWISE,
EXISTING SIZE WAS USED
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEWER
DESIGN
FLOW
NORMAL
NORMAL
CRITIC
CRITIC
FULL
FROUDE
COMMENT
ID
FLOW Q
FULL Q
DEPTH
VLCITY
DEPTH
VLCITY
VLCITY
NO.
NUMBER
CFS
CFS
FEET
FPS
FEET
FPS
FPS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12.0
57.3
40.1
3.00
8.11
2.45
9.29
8.11
0.00
V-OK
23.0
4.1
8.9
0.72
4.92
0.79
4.36
2.32
1.16
V-OK
34.0
4.1
7.7
0.78
4.44
0.79
4.38
2.32
1.00
V-OK
56.0
53.2
46.3
3.00
7.53
2.37
8.89
7.53
0.00
V-OK
67.0
53.2
78.3
1.81
11.91
2.37
8.89
7.53
1.70
V-OK
78.0
53.2
63.4
2.10
10.06
2.37
8.89
7.53
1.28
V-OK
29.0
53.2
33.4
3.00
7.53
2.37
8.89
7.53
0.00
V-OK
95.0
53.2
71.9
1.81
12.52
2.37
9.45
8.46
1.76
V-OK
Ll
a
C>= �53.Z=+
u..,. - -7-l:. 4fl
czc)w -j - Z3- 40
?- -75.3
I -I I .7 3
GroujQ - 74.-73 \
J bP - -i C�,o :7\-\\
UPS f---W Ea �S 4'FEKAdTIO, M a o i>ar
34 l QV. - 7D. 8Z
0
1Z DS - Z
GPoujw a-'75.16_
-m P - -74-. So
Cz ` e;7.3
52
.= E5.3. Z
V�!4M --14_T5.
[►JV. - 7a. (S
Ge-4C>W,.1- -13.18
COMPOSITE RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS FOR THE SAFEWAY P.U.D.
Prepared by Bud Curtiss - Northem Engineering Date: December 11, 1998
File: BLOCKBUSTER.WB3
Basin
No
S-1
S-2
S-3
S-4
S-5
S-6
NET S
Area
(ac)
BLOCKBUSTER & FARMERS BANK
Imperv. Pervious C Imper C Pery Comp C
Area (ac) Area (ac)
ORIGINAL ASSUMPTIONS
Imperv. Pervious C Imper C Pery Comp C
Area (ac) Area (ac)
1.18
0.55 0.63 0.95
0.35 0.63
0.78 0.40 0.95 0.35
0.75
0.82
0.57 0.25 0.95
0.35 0.77
0.49 0.33 0.95 0.35
0.71
2.00
1.12
0.69
1.27
0.73
Wi
iW
'AWAMM
No Text
r. r
AP
N-ioc
0.14
P
8-3
." AC
OD
8-4
." AC
AP
P
II
II
�
II
II
11
I�
II
N-16
II
n
u
i
�
—
II
u
u
OM AC
u
II
i
u
II
II
I
C.B2 AC
(l
II
I�
I
;
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
-
�
;
-
u
II
II
it
II
II
'
II
II
II
Those portions of this project located within basins N-13,14 and 15 are small, and the developed
nmoff coefficient, as assumed are essentially identical. Those portions of the project located
within subbasins S-5 and S-6 have been reevaluated.
I have attached a copy of the calculations for the composite runoff coefficient for basins S-5 and
S-6, as approved, as well as the revised calculations. As you can see, are assumptions were for a
composite C value of 0.75 for basin S-5 and 0.71 for basin S-6. Given the revised site plan for
lots 4 and 5, the proposed composite runoff coefficient for basin S-5 is approximately 0.63 and
the proposed C value for basin S-6 is approximately 0.77. The assumed combined C value for
both basins was 0.73, and the proposed C value would be 0.69. Therefore, the anticipated
downstream runoff from basins S-5 and S-6 will be less than the original study anticipated.
With final design, site grading for the revised site should comply with the original basin
boundary lines, and that the site is graded so as not to disturb the interception swale and culverts
to the south of the site. Downstream capacity should also be verified during the design process.
As you recall, the storm sewer crossing of McMurray has also been modified from the original
design. A copy of the UDSEWER analysis for this crossing has also been attached to this letter.
The modified design is on record with the City. The attached Overall Utility plan for the
Harmony Safeway Marketplace also reflects this storm sewer modification.
Please call if you have any questions regarding this project, or require additional information.
Sincerely,
m o�
Roger Curtiss P.E. - Northern Engineering Serviss$Inc27362
a
cc: Michael Davison - Wyatt & Associates
NORTHERN
E N
G I N E E R
I N G
December 11, 1998
Mr. Basil Harridan
City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility
Development Review Division
235 Mathews
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-0580
RE: Harmony Safeway Marketplace
Proposed Blockbuster Video & Farmers Bank
Dear Basil,
As a part of the approved plan set for the Harmony Safeway Marketplace, there are two lots
located in the southeast corner of the property, designated as Lots 4 and 5 . A proposed
Blockbuster Video is proposed for Lot 5, and a Farmers Bank is proposed for Lot 4. This letter
is intended to provide you with an overview of what the impacts development of these two lots
will have on the existing drainage design, approved for the site.
As is typically the case with pad sites designed with this type of project, the ultimate user
generally likes to make minor changes to the approved plan. I have attached copies of the plan
which was the basis of our original runoff calculations, and what the proposed site modifications
include. As you can see, the changes they are requesting are minor in nature, and the original
intent of our engineering and drainage design has remained in tact. Our original runoff design
calculations did account for areas of imperviousness at these location. The differences are listed
below.
Attached is a copy of a portion of the drainage basins that were associated with the Harmony
Safeway Marketplace site. As you can see Lots 4 and 5 are located within subbasins N-13,
N —14, N-15, S-5, and S-6. I have also attached copies of the proposed improvements to Lots' 4
and 5, which served as the basis of our original calculations with the impervious areas
highlighted. Also attached is a copy of the proposed improvements for Blockbuster and Farmers
Bank, with the impervious areas highlighted.
To recap, subbasins designated with an N prefix were designed such that developed runoff
would be directed towards the northeast corner of the site to a proposed detention pond, and then
ultimately to the Golden Meadows Regional detention pond. Basins designated with a S prefix
were design to release into an open channel, through proposed culverts under McMurray and
Innovation Drive, and also ultimately to the Golden Meadows regional detention facility.
Subbasins with an S prefix were not designed to be detained on -site, should sufficient capacity
exist in the downstream conveyance system.
420 SOUTH HOWES, SUITE 202, FORE (OL(INS, (OLORADO 80571, (970) 121-4158, FAX (970) 221.4159