Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHANSEN FARM - FDP190010 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - DRAINAGE REPORTMay 23, 2019 FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR HANSEN SUBDIVISION Fort Collins, Colorado Prepared for: Jeff Mark Lorson South Land Corp 212 N. Wahsatch Ave, Suite 301 Colorado Springs, CO 80903 Prepared by: 301 N. Howes, Suite 100 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Phone: 970.221.4158 Fax: 970.221.4159 www.northernengineering.com Project Number: 911-015  This Drainage Report is consciously provided as a PDF. Please consider the environment before printing this document in its entirety. When a hard copy is absolutely necessary, we recommend double-sided printing. May 23, 2019 City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 RE: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for HANSEN SUBDIVISION Dear Staff: Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for your review. This report accompanies the Project Development Plan submittal for the proposed Hansen Subdivision. This report has been prepared in accordance to Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM), and serves to document the stormwater impacts associated with the proposed project. We understand that review by the City is to assure general compliance with standardized criteria contained in the FCSCM. If you should have any questions as you review this report, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. Frederick S. Wegert, PE Project Engineer Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report TABLE OF CONTENTS I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ................................................................... 1 A. Location ............................................................................................................................................. 1 B. Description of Property ..................................................................................................................... 2 C. Floodplain.......................................................................................................................................... 3 II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS ....................................................................... 4 A. Major Basin Description .................................................................................................................... 4 B. Sub-Basin Description ....................................................................................................................... 5 III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA ................................................................................... 5 A. Regulations........................................................................................................................................ 5 B. Four Step Process .............................................................................................................................. 5 C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints ............................................................................ 6 D. Hydrological Criteria ......................................................................................................................... 6 E. Hydraulic Criteria .............................................................................................................................. 6 F. Modifications of Criteria ................................................................................................................... 6 IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN .................................................................................... 6 A. General Concept ............................................................................................................................... 6 B. Specific Details .................................................................................................................................. 8 V. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................ 9 A. Compliance with Standards .............................................................................................................. 9 B. Drainage Concept ............................................................................................................................ 10 APPENDICES: APPENDIX A – Hydrologic Computations APPENDIX B – Hydraulic Computations APPENDIX C – SWMM Modeling & Detention Computations APPENDIX D – Water Quality/LID Design Computations APPENDIX E – Erosion Control Report APPENDIX F - USDA Soils Information Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report LIST OF FIGURES: Figure 1 -- Vicinity Map ....................................................................................................... 1 Figure 2 – Aerial Photograph ................................................................................................ 2 Figure 3– Proposed Site Plan ................................................................................................ 3 Figure 4 –Area Floodplain Mapping ....................................................................................... 4 MAP POCKET: Proposed Drainage Exhibit Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report 1 I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. Location 1. Vicinity Map Figure 1 -- Vicinity Map 2. The project site is located in the northeast quarter of Section 7, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. 3. The proposed development site is located northwest of the intersection of South Timberline Road and Zephyr Road in Fort Collins, Colorado. The site is bounded to the north by the Mail Creek Ditch, to the south and west by a lateral of the Mail Creek Ditch, and the east by South Timberline Road. 4. The project site is in the City of Fort Collins Fossil Creek Master Drainage Basin. The required onsite detention is typically the runoff volume difference between the 100- year developed inflow rate and the historic 2-year release rate. However, flows are also limited by the capacity of the outfall ditch to the Timbers. Additionally, the site must provide water quality treatment. Water quality treatment methods are proposed for the site, and are described in further detail below. 5. The area to the north, west, and southeast of the site is fully developed. The area to the east is partially developed. The area to the immediate south is undeveloped, but the Linden Park Subdivision is approximately 1,000 feet to the south. Zoning across the site includes Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (LMN), Neighborhood Commercial (NC), and Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (MMN). 6. Because of the Mail Creek Ditch, there are no offsite flows that impact the site. Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report 2 B. Description of Property 1. The development area is roughly 69.8 net acres. Figure 2 – Aerial Photograph 2. The subject property is currently composed of irrigated farmland, with ground cover consisting of grass. Existing ground slopes are mild to moderate (i.e., 1 - 3±%) through the interior of the property. General topography slopes from the exterior of the property towards a depressed area in the center. 3. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, the site consists of Nunn clay loam and Caruso clay loam, which fall into Hydrologic Soil Groups C and D, respectively. 4. The proposed project site plan is composed of the development of single-family homes; multi-family apartment in the north-central of the site and towards the east; and commercial buildings towards southeast. Associated site work, water, and sewer lines will be constructed with the development. Onsite detention water quality treatment is proposed and will consist of several features which are discussed in Section IV, below. Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report 3 Figure 3– Proposed Site Plan 5. There are no known irrigation laterals crossing the site, but the Mail Creek Ditch bounds the site to the north, and an irrigation lateral bounds the site to the south. 6. The proposed land use is single-family homes; multi-family apartment in the north- central of the site and towards the east; and commercial buildings towards southeast C. Floodplain 1. According to the Overall Drainage Report for the Hansen Overall Development Plan, the project site is not encroached by any floodplains 2. A 50’ natural habitat buffer along the Mail Creek Ditch and the irrigation lateral to the south exists on the site. All drainage improvements will be located outside this 50’ natural habitat buffer. Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report 4 Figure 4 –Area Floodplain Mapping II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS A. Major Basin Description 1. The project site is in the City of Fort Collins Fossil Creek Master Basin. Detention requirements for this basin are to detain the difference between the 100-year developed inflow rate and the historic 2-year release rate, specified as 0.20 cfs/ac. 2. However, outflow from this property is limited by an existing outfall ditch, located on the southern property line of The Timbers subdivision, to The Timbers. Basins A and B of The Timbers (Final Drainage Report prepared by TST, Inc.) and Bacon Elementary School (Final Drainage Report prepared by Nolte Associates, Inc.) were included in the attached SWMM model (see Appendix C). According to the SWMM Model, the peak discharge from the proposed ponds for the Hansen Subdivision will occur 2 hours after the peak from The Timbers PD, but it will coincide with the release from the Bacon Elementary School detention pond. Therefore, the outflow from the Hansen Subdvision is limited by the peak discharge within The Timbers outfall ditch of 139.4 cfs minus the flow from The Timbers and Bacon Elementary School. The Bacon Elementary School detention pond will release 17.10 cfs during the peak flow from Hansen. Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report 5 B. Sub-Basin Description 1. The subject property historically drains towards the east side of the of the property at a low point in Timberline Road. 2. A more detailed description of the project drainage patterns is provided below. III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. Regulations There are no optional provisions outside of the FCSCM proposed with the proposed project. B. Four Step Process The overall stormwater management strategy employed with the proposed project utilizes the “Four Step Process” to minimize adverse impacts of urbanization on receiving waters. The following is a description of how the proposed development has incorporated each step. Step 1 – Employ Runoff Reduction Practices Several techniques have been utilized with the proposed development to facilitate the reduction of runoff peaks, volumes, and pollutant loads as the site is developed from the current use by implementing multiple Low Impact Development (LID) strategies including: Conserving existing amenities in the site including the existing vegetated areas. Providing vegetated open areas throughout the site to reduce the overall impervious area and to minimize directly connected impervious areas (MDCIA). Routing flows, to the extent feasible, through vegetated swales to increase time of concentration, promote infiltration and provide initial water quality. Step 2 – Implement BMPs That Provide a Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) with Slow Release The efforts taken in Step 1 will facilitate the reduction of runoff; however, urban development of this intensity will still generate stormwater runoff that will require additional BMPs and water quality. The majority of stormwater runoff from the site will ultimately be intercepted and treated using detention and LID treatment methods prior to exiting the site. Step 3 – Stabilize Drainageways There are no major drainageways within the subject property. While this step may not seem applicable to proposed development, the project indirectly helps achieve stabilized drainageways nonetheless. By providing water quality treatment, where none previously existed, sediment with erosion potential is removed from downstream drainageway systems. Furthermore, this project will pay one-time stormwater development fees, as well as ongoing monthly stormwater utility fees, both of which help achieve City-wide drainageway stability. Step 4 – Implement Site Specific and Other Source Control BMPs. The proposed project will improve upon site specific source controls compared to historic conditions: The proposed development will provide LID and water quality treatment; thus, eliminating sources of potential pollution previously left exposed to weathering and runoff processes. Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report 6 C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints The subject property is surrounded by currently developed properties. Thus, several constraints have been identified during the course of this analysis that will impact the proposed drainage system including: Existing elevations along the property lines will generally be maintained. As previously mentioned, overall drainage patterns of the existing site will be maintained. Elevations of existing downstream facilities that the subject property will release to will be maintained. D. Hydrological Criteria 1. The City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves, as depicted in Figure 3.4-1 of the FCSCM, serve as the source for all hydrologic computations associated with the proposed development. Tabulated data contained in Table 3.4-1 has been utilized for Rational Method runoff calculations. 2. The Rational Method has been employed to compute stormwater runoff utilizing coefficients contained in Tables 3.2-2 and 3.2-3 of the FCSCM. 3. Three separate design storms have been utilized to address distinct drainage scenarios. A fourth design storm has also been computed for comparison purposes. The first design storm considered is the 80th percentile rain event, which has been employed to design the project’s water quality features. The second event analyzed is the “Minor,” or “Initial” Storm, which has a 2-year recurrence interval. The third event considered is the “Major Storm,” which has a 100-year recurrence interval. The fourth storm computed, for comparison purposes only, is the 10-year event. 4. No other assumptions or calculation methods have been used with this development that are not referenced by current City of Fort Collins criteria. E. Hydraulic Criteria 1. As previously noted, the subject property maintains historic drainage patterns. 2. All drainage facilities proposed with the project are designed in accordance with criteria outlined in the FCSCM and/or the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. 3. As stated above, the subject property is not located in a City designated floodplain. The proposed project does not propose to modify any natural drainageways. F. Modifications of Criteria 1. The proposed development is not requesting any modifications to criteria at this time. IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. General Concept 1. The main objectives of the project drainage design are to maintain existing drainage patterns, and to ensure no adverse impacts to any adjacent properties. 2. LID treatment will be provided in pre-treatment areas upstream of detention ponds for Basin 1. Multi-family and commercial areas within Basins 2, 3, and 4 will be required to provide their own site-specific LID treatment prior to discharging into the detention ponds. Thus, the “treatment train” philosophy will be followed, with Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report 7 stormwater treatment occurring through a variety of in-series methods prior to ultimate discharge into the Fossil Creek drainageway. 3. Drainage patterns anticipated for drainage basins shown in the Drainage Exhibit are described below. Drainage basins have been defined for preliminary design purposes and are subject to change at Final design; however, general drainage patterns and concepts are not expected to be significantly altered. Basins 1A to 1N (Detention Pond 1) Basins 1A to 1F and 1G to 1N consist of single-family homes, local streets, and landscaped areas. Basins 1A, 1G and 1H consist of multi-family apartments, parking lots, and landscaped areas. Detention Pond 1 is in Basin 1A, and rain gardens are located in Basins 1B and 1L to intercept the surface runoff from Basins 1C to 1K prior to entering Detention Pond 1. These basins will generally drain via overland flow and street curb and gutter first into the proposed LID features as shown on the Drainage Exhibit, and ultimately into Detention Pond 1. Basin 2A to 2G (Detention Pond 2) Basin 2A consists of Detention Pond 2. Basins 2B, 2C, 2D, 2E, and 2F consist of single-family homes, local streets, and landscaped areas. Basin 2G consist of multi- family apartments, parking lots, and landscaped area. We anticipate some form of LID pre-treatment for Basin 2G, when these basins develop in the future. These basins will generally drain via overland flow and street and parking lot curb and gutter into Detention Pond 2. Basins 2H to 2L (Detention Pond 3) Basins 2H, 2I, 2J, and 2K consist of multi-family apartments, parking, local streets, and landscaped areas. Basin 2L consists of a proposed neighborhood park. We anticipate some form of LID pre-treatment and onsite detention for Basins 2H and 2K, when these basins develop in the future. These basins will generally drain via overland flow and street and parking lot curb and gutter into Detention Pond 3. Basins 3A and 3C (Detention Pond 4) Basin 3A is anticipated to be developed in the future in accordance to the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning requirements. Basins 3B and 3C consist of local street runoff. We anticipate some form of LID pre-treatment and onsite detention for Basins 3A, 3B and 3C, when these basins develop in the future. If the discharge from Detention Pond 4 increases the total discharge from Ponds 1, 2, 3, and 4 beyond 13.58 cfs, then the developer for Basin 3 would need to demonstrate the additional flows do not exceed the capacity of the outfall ditch for Timbers. Basin 4 (Detention Pond 5) Basin 4 is anticipated to be developed in the future in accordance to the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning requirements. We anticipate some form of LID pre-treatment and onsite detention for Basin 4, when this basin develops in the future. The development of Basin 4 will be required to negotiate with neighboring property owners for a drainage easement to discharge stormwater. Detention Pond 5, per the Overall Development Drainage Plan, assumes an impervious area of 90%, a pond size of 35,250 ft3, and a release rate of 0.60 cfs. However, any future development within Basin 4 will be required to insure future drainage complies with Fort Collins stormwater regulations. Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report 8 A full-size copy of the Drainage Exhibit can be found in the Map Pocket at the end of this report. B. Specific Details 1. Five detention ponds are proposed within the site and will detain up to the 100-year storm event and release at or below the allowable (for Fossil Creek Basin) runoff rate of 0.20 cfs per acre. The ponds have been modeled utilizing the computer program EPA SWMM 5.1. Please see SWMM modeling results provided in Table 2, below, and SWMM modeling output provided in Appendix C. The release rates for Ponds 1, 2, 3, and 4 were adjusted to insure the total flowrate at the Timbers outfall ditch is less than 139.4 cfs. Basins A and B from The Timbers and Bacon Elementary School were included in the SWMM model. According to the SWMM model in Appendix C, the flowrate at The Timbers outfall ditch is 136.83 cfs. In addition, the minimum release rates for Ponds 1, 2, 3, and 4 are limited by Colorado State Statue 37-92-602. 2. LID pre-treatment with rain gardens are currently proposed to treat storm runoff for the single-family homes on this project. Stormwater from Basins 1B through 1L will first enter a rain garden prior to discharging into Detention Pond 1. The 100-Year Storm Event is expected to overtop the rain gardens and discharge directly into Pond 1. In addition, the lots with rear yards facing Detention Pond 1 (south side of Street A, east side of Street C, and north side of Street E) will have a 3’ to 12’ wide grass buffer prior to the edge of the detention pond. The slope of the grass buffer varies from 2% to 6% with an average slope of 3%. Basins 1M and 1N were not included in the LID calculation because a rain garden was not provided at their discharge point into Detention Pond 1. See Table 1 for further detail regarding LID treatment. We intend to meet or exceed the LID treatment requirement of 50% of residential areas. Table 1 – 50% On-Site LID Treatment for Single-Family Residences 50% On-Site Treatment by LID Summary Table for Single-Family Residences Basin(s) LID Treatment Total Basin(s) Area (Ac.) Rain Garden Req'd Min. Vol. (Cu.-Ft.) 1A None (Pond) 10.43 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, & 1F NE Rain Garden 11.34 6,794 1G, 1H, 1I, 1J, 1K, & 1L NW Rain Garden 16.08 9,506 1M & 1N None 5.46 2A None (Pond) 2.81 2B, 2C, 2D, 2E, 2I, & 2J None 3.92 2F, 2G, 2H, 2K, & 2L Site Specific 13.22 3A Site Specific 3.09 3B & 3C None 0.33 4 Site Specific 3.10 Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report 9 Total Site Area 69.78 Areas Requiring Site Specific LID Treatment Multi-family lots (Tract D) 5.39 Acres Multi-family lots (Tract E) 4.21 Acres Local Commerical (Tract C) 4.55 Acres Detention Pond (Tract L) 0.78 Acres Detention Pond (Tract M) 0.50 Acres Neighborhood Park (Tract B) 3.00 Acres Total Newly Developed Area less Site Specific Areas & Ponds 38.11 Acres Total Newly Developed Area Treated 27.42 Acres Percent of Newly Developed Area Treated 71.9% 3. Future development within Basins 2F, 2G, 2H, 2K, 2L, 3A, and 4 will be required to provide their own site-specific LID treatment. These basins consist of large multi-family and sites zoned as MMF and NC. We anticipate these large multi-family and commercial sites will be required to provide their own site-specific LID treatment during the individual site design process. See Table 1 for further detail regarding LID treatment. 4. Please see LID information and Water Quality Capture Volume (Extended Detention) computations provided in Appendix D. Table 2 - SWMM Modeling Output and Detention Volume Summary Pond ID Pond Volume (CF) Pond Volume (AC-FT) Peak Release (CFS) 1 435,893 10.01 3.08 2 80,589 1.85 3.48 3 97,373 2.24 9.89 4 41,958 0.96 0.47 5 35,250 0.81 0.60 5. Final design details, and construction documentation are provided to the City of Fort Collins for review during the Final Development Plan approval. 6. Stormwater facility Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) are provided by the City of Fort Collins in the Development Agreement. V. CONCLUSIONS A. Compliance with Standards 1. The drainage design proposed with the proposed project complies with the City of Fort Collins’ Stormwater Criteria Manual. 2. The drainage design proposed with this project complies with requirements for Fossil Creek Basin. 3. The drainage plan and stormwater management measures proposed with the Hansen Subdivision Final Drainage Report 10 proposed development are compliant with all applicable State and Federal regulations governing stormwater discharge. B. Drainage Concept 1. The drainage design proposed with this project will effectively limit any potential damage associated with its stormwater runoff by providing detention and water quality mitigation features. 2. The drainage concept for the proposed development is consistent with requirements for the Fossil Creek Basin. References 1. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, as adopted by Ordinance No. 174, 2011, and referenced in Section 26-500 (c) of the City of Fort Collins Municipal Code. 2. Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, Adopted January 2, 2001, Repealed and Reenacted, Effective October 1, 2002, Repealed and Reenacted, Effective April 1, 2007. 3. Soils Resource Report for Larimer County Area, Colorado, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. 4. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes 1-3, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Wright-McLaughlin Engineers, Denver, Colorado, Revised April 2008. 5. Final Drainage Report for The Timbers PD, TST, Inc.; Fort Collins, Colorado, June 28, 2002. 6. 2003 Prototype Elementary School: Timberline Site: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Poudre School District, Nolte Associates, Inc.; Fort Collins, Colorado, May 28, 2002. 7. Overall Drainage Report for Hansen Overall Development Plan, Northern Engineering; Fort Collins, Colorado, August 29, 2017. Appendix A Hydrologic Computations Hansen Development Runoff Coefficient 1 Percentage Impervious 2 Project: LMN Zoning 0.55 60% Calculations By: MMN Zoning 0.65 70% Date: NC Zoning 0.95 90% Asphalt ………………… ................... .............................................................................. ....................... 0.95 100% Concrete ………………. ................... .............................................................................. ....................... 0.95 90% Gravel (packed) ………. ................... .............................................................................. ....................... 0.50 40% Roofs………………….. ................... .............................................................................. ....................... 0.95 90% Pavers…………………. ................... .............................................................................. ....................... 0.40 22% Undeveloped Open Lands, Transition ................... .............................................................................. ....................... 0.20 2% Greenbelts, Agriculture ................... .............................................................................. ....................... 0.20 2% 2-year C f = 1.00 10-year C f = 1.00 USDA SOIL TYPE: C Sub-Basin ID Sub-Basin Area (sq. ft.) Sub-Basin Area (ac.) Area of Asphalt (ac.) Area of Roofs (ac.) Area of SF Homes 3 (ac.) Area of Landscaping 2% to 7% (ac) Area of MMN (ac.) Area of NC (ac.) 2-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 10-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 100-year Composite Hansen Development Project: Hansen Calculations By: Date: Is Length >500' ? C*C f (2-yr C f =1.00) C*C f (10-yr C f =1.00) C*C f (100-yr C f =1.25) Length, L (ft) Up Stream Elevation Down Stream Elevation Slope, S (%) T i 2-yr (min) T i 10-yr (min) T i 100-yr (min) Length, L (ft) Up Stream Elevation Down Stream Elevation Slope, S (%) Velocity, V Hansen Development Project: Calculations By: Date: h1 H1 65.01 58 58 57 0.20 0.20 0.25 0.84 1.43 2.98 10.92 0.17 18.59 48.35 h3 H3 1.71 19 19 18 0.24 0.24 0.30 1.65 2.82 6.01 0.68 0.40 1.17 3.10 h4 H4 3.08 26 26 25 0.20 0.20 0.25 1.40 2.39 4.98 0.86 0.28 1.47 3.83 F. Wegert Hansen HISTORIC RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS C 100 Design Point Flow, Q 100 (cfs) Flow, Q 2 (cfs) 10-yr T c (min) 2-yr T c (min) C 2 Flow, Q 10 (cfs) Intensity, i 100 (in/hr) Sub-Basin(s) Rational Method Equation: Rainfall Intensity: Rainfall Intensity taken from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM), Tables RA-7 and RA-8 April 17, 2019 Flow/Acre, Q 2 (cfs/acre) Intensity, i 10 (in/hr) C 10 Area, A (acres) Intensity, i Hansen Development Runoff Coefficient 1 Percentage Impervious 2 LMN Zoning 0.55 60% MMN Zoning 0.65 70% NC Zoning 0.95 90% .......................................................... ...................... 0.95 100% .......................................................... ...................... 0.95 90% .......................................................... ...................... 0.50 40% .......................................................... ...................... 0.95 90% .......................................................... ...................... 0.40 22% .......................................................... ...................... 0.10 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.15 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.20 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.20 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.25 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.35 0% 2-year C f = 1.00 10-year C f = 1.00 Sub-Basin ID Sub-Basin Area (sq. ft.) Sub-Basin Area (ac.) Area of Asphalt (ac.) Area of Roofs (ac.) Area of SF Homes 3 (ac.) Area of Landscaping 2% to 7% (ac) Area of MMN (ac.) Area of NC (ac.) 2-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 10-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 100-year Hansen Development Runoff Coefficient 1 Percentage Impervious 2 LMN Zoning 0.55 60% MMN Zoning 0.65 70% NC Zoning 0.95 90% .......................................................... ...................... 0.95 100% .......................................................... ...................... 0.95 90% .......................................................... ...................... 0.50 40% .......................................................... ...................... 0.95 90% .......................................................... ...................... 0.40 22% .......................................................... ...................... 0.10 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.15 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.20 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.20 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.25 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.35 0% 2-year C f = 1.00 10-year C f = 1.00 Sub-Basin ID Sub-Basin Area (sq. ft.) Sub-Basin Area (ac.) Area of Asphalt (ac.) Area of Roofs (ac.) Area of SF Homes 3 (ac.) Area of Landscaping 2% to 7% (ac) Area of MMN (ac.) Area of NC (ac.) 2-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 10-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 100-year Hansen Development Runoff Coefficient 1 Percentage Impervious 2 LMN Zoning 0.55 60% MMN Zoning 0.65 70% NC Zoning 0.95 90% .......................................................... ...................... 0.95 100% .......................................................... ...................... 0.95 90% .......................................................... ...................... 0.50 40% .......................................................... ...................... 0.95 90% .......................................................... ...................... 0.40 22% .......................................................... ...................... 0.10 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.15 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.20 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.20 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.25 0% .......................................................... ...................... 0.35 0% 2-year C f = 1.00 10-year C f = 1.00 Sub-Basin ID Sub-Basin Area (sq. ft.) Sub-Basin Area (ac.) Area of Asphalt (ac.) Area of Roofs (ac.) Area of SF Homes 3 (ac.) Area of Landscaping 2% to 7% (ac) Area of MMN (ac.) Area of NC (ac.) 2-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 10-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 100-year Hansen Development Is Length >500' ? C*C f (2-yr C f =1.00) C*C f (10-yr C f =1.00) C*C f (100-yr C f =1.25) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) T i 2-yr (min) T i 10-yr (min) T i 100-yr (min) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) Velocity, V (ft/s) T t (min) 2-yr T c (min) 10-yr T c (min) 100-yr Hansen Development Is Length >500' ? C*C f (2-yr C f =1.00) C*C f (10-yr C f =1.00) C*C f (100-yr C f =1.25) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) T i 2-yr (min) T i 10-yr (min) T i 100-yr (min) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) Velocity, V (ft/s) T t (min) 2-yr T c (min) 10-yr T c (min) 100-yr Hansen Development Project: Calculations By: Date: 1a 1A 10.43 17 17 15 0.43 0.43 0.54 1.78 3.04 6.52 7.96 13.57 36.43 1b 1B 0.49 9 9 8 0.48 0.48 0.59 2.30 3.93 8.59 0.54 0.92 2.52 1c 1C 0.39 6 6 5 0.79 0.79 0.99 2.76 4.72 9.95 0.85 1.45 3.81 1d 1D 0.97 9 9 7 0.80 0.80 1.00 2.35 4.02 9.06 1.82 3.10 8.75 1e 1E 1.33 13 13 10 0.61 0.61 0.76 2.02 3.45 7.88 1.63 2.79 7.97 1f 1F 8.16 24 24 21 0.61 0.61 0.77 1.46 2.49 5.46 7.30 12.44 34.11 1g 1G 2.27 14 14 12 0.59 0.59 0.74 1.95 3.34 7.29 2.62 4.49 12.24 1h 1H 2.36 11 11 8 0.81 0.81 1.00 2.17 3.71 8.59 4.15 7.08 20.29 1i 1I 9.80 24 24 21 0.58 0.58 0.72 1.48 2.52 5.53 8.34 14.25 39.10 1j 1J 0.73 5 5 5 0.67 0.67 0.84 2.85 4.87 9.95 1.39 2.37 6.05 1k 1K 0.33 5 5 5 0.80 0.80 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.75 1.28 3.27 1l 1L 0.60 9 9 8 0.44 0.44 0.55 2.35 4.02 8.59 0.62 1.06 2.84 1m 1M 2.70 11 11 8 0.65 0.65 0.82 2.17 3.71 8.38 3.84 6.55 18.51 1n 1N 2.76 13 13 10 0.66 0.66 0.83 2.02 3.45 7.88 3.67 6.28 17.95 1a Basin 1 43.32 32 32 29 0.58 0.58 0.72 1.24 2.12 4.60 31.13 53.22 144.35 2a 2A 2.81 15 15 14 0.28 0.28 0.35 1.87 3.19 6.71 1.46 2.49 6.55 2b 2B 0.99 5 5 5 0.78 0.78 0.98 2.85 4.87 9.95 2.20 3.77 9.62 2c 2C 0.43 6 6 5 0.73 0.73 0.92 2.76 4.72 9.95 0.87 1.49 3.94 2d 2D 0.62 8 8 7 0.82 0.82 1.00 2.40 4.10 8.80 1.21 2.06 5.42 2e 2E 0.21 5 5 5 0.81 0.81 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.48 0.83 2.08 2f 2F 0.26 5 5 5 0.82 0.82 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.61 1.05 2.60 2g 2G 1.36 16 16 11 0.66 0.66 0.83 1.84 3.14 7.57 1.66 2.83 8.53 2h 2H 6.17 9 9 7 0.65 0.65 0.81 2.30 3.93 9.06 9.23 15.76 45.40 2i 2I 1.22 7 7 5 0.89 0.89 1.00 2.60 4.44 9.95 2.82 4.83 12.12 2j 2J 0.46 5 5 5 0.80 0.80 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 1.04 1.78 4.53 2k 2K 1.74 12 12 8 0.69 0.69 0.87 2.09 3.57 8.59 2.52 4.30 12.96 2l 2L 3.68 19 19 17 0.35 0.35 0.44 1.68 2.86 6.20 2.18 3.72 10.08 2a Basin 2 19.95 12 12 8 0.64 0.64 0.80 2.09 3.57 8.38 26.76 45.65 134.12 3a 3A 2.06 6 6 5 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.76 4.72 9.95 5.41 9.24 20.53 F. Wegert Hansen PROPOSED RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS C 100 Design Point Flow, Q 100 (cfs) Flow, Q 2 (cfs) 10-yr T c (min) 2-yr T c (min) C 2 Hansen Development Project: Calculations By: Date: F. Wegert Hansen PROPOSED RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS C 100 Design Point Flow, Q 100 (cfs) Flow, Q 2 (cfs) 10-yr T c (min) 2-yr T c (min) C 2 Flow, Q 10 (cfs) Intensity, i 100 (in/hr) Sub-Basin(s) Rational Method Equation: Rainfall Intensity: Rainfall Intensity taken from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM), Tables RA-7 and RA-8 April 17, 2019 Intensity, i 10 (in/hr) C 10 Area, A (acres) Intensity, i 2 (in/hr) 100-yr T c (min) Q = C f ( C )( i )( A ) 3b 3B 1.02 15 15 13 0.86 0.86 1.00 1.90 3.24 6.92 1.67 2.85 7.08 Appendix B Hydraulic Calculations Storm A Storm A1 Storm A3-1 Storm B Storm B1 Storm C Storm D Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 Storm F - 10 Year Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 57.95 Pipe Length (ft) = 40.00 Slope (%) = 0.50 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 58.15 Rise (in) = 18.0 Shape = Circular Span (in) = 18.0 No. Barrels = 2 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Circular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Square edge w/headwall (C) Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.0098, 2, 0.0398, 0.67, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 60.60 Top Width (ft) = 10.00 Crest Width (ft) = 24.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 12.17 Qmax (cfs) = 12.17 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 12.17 Qpipe (cfs) = 12.17 Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 5.14 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 5.12 HGL Dn (ft) = 58.90 HGL Up (ft) = 59.11 Hw Elev (ft) = 59.63 Hw/D (ft) = 0.98 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 Storm F - 100 Year Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 57.95 Pipe Length (ft) = 40.00 Slope (%) = 0.50 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 58.15 Rise (in) = 18.0 Shape = Circular Span (in) = 18.0 No. Barrels = 2 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Circular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Square edge w/headwall (C) Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.0098, 2, 0.0398, 0.67, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 60.60 Top Width (ft) = 10.00 Crest Width (ft) = 24.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 34.65 Qmax (cfs) = 34.65 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 34.65 Qpipe (cfs) = 23.29 Qovertop (cfs) = 11.36 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 7.16 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 6.59 HGL Dn (ft) = 59.25 HGL Up (ft) = 59.77 Hw Elev (ft) = 60.88 Hw/D (ft) = 1.82 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Storm G Storm H Q2 Q10 Q100 Q2 Q10 Q100 Minor Major Inlet B1-1 Type-R 5' 2b & 2f 2.82 4.81 12.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.82 12.22 Inlet designed for 10-year flow Inlet B1-2 Type-R 5' 2c & 2g 2.53 4.32 12.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.53 12.47 Inlet designed for 10-year flow Inlet B2 Curb 5' 2d 1.21 2.06 5.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.21 5.42 Inlet designed for 100-year flow Inlet B3 Curb Single 2e 0.48 0.83 2.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.83 2.08 Inlet designed for 100-year flow Inlet C1 Type-R 5' 2j 1.04 1.78 4.54 0.00 n/a 7.21 1.78 11.75 Inlet designed for 100-year flow Inlet C2 Type-R 5' 2k 2.52 4.30 12.96 0.30 n/a 6.20 2.82 11.95 Major storm will bypass into Inlet C1 Inlet C3 Type-R 5' 2l 2.18 3.72 10.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.18 10.08 Minor & major storms will bypass into Inlet C2. Inlet D2 Type-R 5' 2i 2.82 4.83 12.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.82 12.12 Inlet designed for 100-year flow Inlet E1 Curb Single 3b 1.67 2.85 7.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.67 7.08 Inlet designed for 100-year flow Inlet E2 Curb Single 3c 0.82 1.40 3.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.82 3.30 Inlet designed for 100-year flow Inlet G1 Type-C n/a 1l 13.32 22.72 66.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.32 n/a Inlet designed for 2-year flow. 100- year will overtop rain garden into Pond 1. Inlet H1 Type-C n/a 1b 18.26 22.72 7.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.26 n/a Inlet designed for 2-year flow. 100- year will overtop rain garden into Pond 1. Inlet Summary Notes Qdesign Base Flow (cfs) Bypass Flow (cfs) (cfs) Inlet Inlet Type Inlet Size Design Point Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK = 0.012 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 4.75 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 18.0 ft Gutter Width W = 1.17 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.023 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW = 0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 12.0 18.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 4.8 12.0 inches Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs Version 4.05 Released March 2017 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Hansen Inlet B1-1 (10-Yr) UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet B1-1 (10-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:06 PM Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal = 4.25 4.25 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 4.2 5.8 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 1.17 1.17 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.67 0.67 Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = N/A N/A ft Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.25 0.39 ft Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.53 0.74 Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00 Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = N/A N/A MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 2.9 5.5 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 2.8 4.8 cfs Warning 5: The width of unit is greater than the gutter width. CDOT Type R Curb Opening INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Version 4.05 Released March 2017 H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP CDOT Type R Curb Opening Override Depths UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet B1-1 (10-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:06 PM Inlet B1-1 Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK = 0.012 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 4.75 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 18.0 ft Gutter Width W = 1.17 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.023 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW = 0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 12.0 18.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 4.8 12.0 inches Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs Version 4.05 Released March 2017 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Hansen Inlet B1-2 (10-Yr) UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet B1-2 (10-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:07 PM Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal = 4.25 4.25 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 4.2 5.8 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 1.17 1.17 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.67 0.67 Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = N/A N/A ft Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.25 0.39 ft Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.53 0.74 Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00 Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = N/A N/A MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 2.9 5.5 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 2.5 4.3 cfs CDOT Type R Curb Opening INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Version 4.05 Released March 2017 H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP CDOT Type R Curb Opening Override Depths UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet B1-2 (10-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:07 PM Inlet B1-2 Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK = 0.012 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 18.0 ft Warning 1 Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.023 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW = 0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 12.0 18.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 6.0 12.0 inches Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs Version 4.05 Released March 2017 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Hansen Inlet B2 (100-Yr) UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet B2 (100-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:04 PM Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 4.8 6.4 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = 6.00 6.00 feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = 1.73 1.73 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = 0.43 0.43 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = 3.30 3.30 Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = 0.60 0.60 Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Warning 1 Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 6.00 6.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.50 6.50 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 5.25 5.25 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 0.00 0.00 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = 0.419 0.557 ft Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.23 0.37 ft Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.56 0.75 Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00 Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = 0.56 0.75 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 2.4 5.6 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 1.2 5.4 cfs Warning 1: Dimension entered is not a typical dimension for inlet type specified. CDOT/Denver 13 Combination INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Version 4.05 Released March 2017 H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP CDOT/Denver 13 Combination Override Depths UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet B2 (100-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:04 PM Inlet B2 Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK = 0.012 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 18.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.023 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW = 0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 12.0 18.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 6.0 12.0 inches Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs Version 4.05 Released March 2017 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Hansen Inlet B3 (100-Yr) UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet B3 (100-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:03 PM Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 4.8 6.4 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = 3.00 3.00 feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = 1.73 1.73 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = 0.43 0.43 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = 3.30 3.30 Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = 0.60 0.60 Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 3.00 3.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.50 6.50 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 5.25 5.25 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 0.00 0.00 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = 0.419 0.557 ft Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.23 0.37 ft Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.74 1.00 Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00 Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = 0.74 1.00 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 1.9 4.3 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 0.8 2.1 cfs CDOT/Denver 13 Combination INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Version 4.05 Released March 2017 H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP CDOT/Denver 13 Combination Override Depths UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet B3 (100-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:03 PM Inlet B3 Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK = 0.012 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 18.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.023 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW = 0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 12.0 18.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 6.0 12.0 inches Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs Version 4.05 Released March 2017 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Hansen Inlet C1 (100-Yr) UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet C1 (100-Yr) 4/16/2019, 2:16 PM Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal = 3.00 3.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 4.8 11.5 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.67 0.67 Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = N/A N/A ft Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.23 0.79 ft Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.61 1.00 Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00 Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = N/A N/A MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 3.1 12.0 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 1.0 11.8 cfs CDOT Type R Curb Opening INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Version 4.05 Released March 2017 H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP CDOT Type R Curb Opening Override Depths UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet C1 (100-Yr) 4/16/2019, 2:16 PM Inlet C1 Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK = 0.012 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 18.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.023 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW = 0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 12.0 18.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 6.0 12.0 inches Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs Version 4.05 Released March 2017 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Hansen Inlet C2 (100-Yr) UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet C2 (100-Yr) 4/16/2019, 2:17 PM Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal = 3.00 3.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 4.8 11.5 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.67 0.67 Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = N/A N/A ft Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.23 0.79 ft Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.61 1.00 Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00 Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = N/A N/A MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 3.1 12.0 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 2.9 11.9 cfs CDOT Type R Curb Opening INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Version 4.05 Released March 2017 H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP CDOT Type R Curb Opening Override Depths UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet C2 (100-Yr) 4/16/2019, 2:17 PM Inlet C2 Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK = 0.012 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 18.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.023 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW = 0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.005 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 12.0 18.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 6.0 12.0 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Qallow = 4.1 11.0 cfs Version 4.05 Released March 2017 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Hansen Inlet C3 (100-Yr) Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than the design flow given on sheet 'Inlet Management' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than the design flow given on sheet 'Inlet Management' UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet C3 (100-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:23 PM Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a') aLOCAL = 3.0 3.0 inches Total Number of Units in the Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Length of a Single Unit Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) Lo = 5.00 5.00 ft Width of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W, Gutter Width) Wo = N/A N/A ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical min. value = 0.5) Cf-G = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical min. value = 0.1) Cf-C = 0.10 0.10 Street Hydraulics: OK - Q < Allowable Street Capacity' MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity Q = 1.8 3.9 cfs Total Inlet Carry-Over Flow (flow bypassing inlet) Qb = 0.3 6.2 cfs Capture Percentage = Qa/Qo = C% = 84 39 % INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE Version 4.05 Released March 2017 CDOT Type R Curb Opening CDOT Type R Curb Opening UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet C3 (100-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:23 PM Inlet C3 Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK = 0.012 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 50.3 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.018 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW = 0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 38.3 48.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 6.0 12.0 inches Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs Version 4.05 Released March 2017 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Hansen Inlet D2 (100-Yr) UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet D2 (100-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:10 PM Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal = 3.00 3.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 6.0 11.9 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.67 0.67 Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = N/A N/A ft Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.33 0.83 ft Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.77 1.00 Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00 Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = N/A N/A MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 5.4 12.2 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 2.8 12.1 cfs CDOT Type R Curb Opening INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Version 4.05 Released March 2017 H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP CDOT Type R Curb Opening Override Depths UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet D2 (100-Yr) 4/15/2019, 12:10 PM Inlet D2 Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK = 0.012 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 27.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.023 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW = 0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 21.0 27.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 6.0 12.0 inches Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs Version 4.05 Released March 2017 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Hansen Inlet E1 (100-Yr) UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet E1 (100-Yr) 4/16/2019, 1:56 PM Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 6.0 9.0 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = 3.00 3.00 feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = 1.73 1.73 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = 0.43 0.43 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = 3.30 3.30 Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = 0.60 0.60 Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 3.00 3.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.50 6.50 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 5.25 5.25 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 0.00 0.00 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = 0.523 0.773 ft Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.33 0.58 ft Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.94 1.00 Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00 Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = 0.94 1.00 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 3.6 7.2 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 1.7 7.1 cfs CDOT/Denver 13 Combination INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Version 4.05 Released March 2017 H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP CDOT/Denver 13 Combination Override Depths UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet E1 (100-Yr) 4/16/2019, 1:56 PM Inlet E1 Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK = 0.012 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 27.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.023 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW = 0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 21.0 27.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 6.0 12.0 inches Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs Version 4.05 Released March 2017 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Hansen Inlet E2 (100-Yr) UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet E2 (100-Yr) 4/16/2019, 1:56 PM Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 6.0 8.9 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = 3.00 3.00 feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = 1.73 1.73 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = 0.43 0.43 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = 3.30 3.30 Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = 0.60 0.60 Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 3.00 3.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.50 6.50 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 5.25 5.25 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 0.00 0.00 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = 0.523 0.764 ft Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.33 0.58 ft Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.94 1.00 Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00 Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = 0.94 1.00 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 3.6 7.0 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 0.8 3.3 cfs CDOT/Denver 13 Combination INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Version 4.05 Released March 2017 H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP CDOT/Denver 13 Combination Override Depths UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, Inlet E2 (100-Yr) 4/16/2019, 1:56 PM Inlet E2 Area Inlet Performance Curve: Hansen Farm - Inlet G1 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: CDOT Type C Close Mesh Grate Shape Rectangular Length of Grate (ft): 3.33 Width of Grate (ft): 2.75 Open Area of Grate (ft2): 7.54 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4960.500 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4960.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4960.60 0.58 6.41 0.58 0.20 4960.70 1.63 9.06 1.63 0.30 4960.80 3.00 11.10 3.00 0.40 4960.90 4.61 12.81 4.61 0.50 4961.000 6.45 14.33 6.45 0.60 4961.10 8.48 15.69 8.48 0.70 4961.20 10.68 16.95 10.68 0.80 4961.30 13.05 18.12 13.05 0.81 4961.31 13.30 18.23 13.30 0.90 4961.40 15.57 19.22 15.57 1.00 4961.500 18.24 20.26 18.24 Q2 2-Year Design Flow = 13.32 cfs 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 Discharge (cfs) Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 Q = 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Area Inlet Performance Curve: Hansen Farm - Inlet H1 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: CDOT Type C Close Mesh Grate Shape Rectangular Length of Grate (ft): 3.33 Width of Grate (ft): 2.75 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 7.54 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4959.600 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4959.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4959.70 0.58 6.41 0.58 0.20 4959.80 1.63 9.06 1.63 0.30 4959.90 3.00 11.10 3.00 0.40 4960.00 4.61 12.81 4.61 0.50 4960.100 6.45 14.33 6.45 0.60 4960.20 8.48 15.69 8.48 0.70 4960.30 10.68 16.95 10.68 0.80 4960.40 13.05 18.12 13.05 0.90 4960.50 15.57 19.22 15.57 1.00 4960.600 18.24 20.26 18.24 Q2 2-Year Design Flow = 18.26 cfs 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 Discharge (cfs) Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 Q = 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 4' Sidewalk Culvert at DP 1m & 1n (2-Year) Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 100.00 Pipe Length (ft) = 5.50 Slope (%) = 0.55 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 100.03 Rise (in) = 8.5 Shape = Box Span (in) = 48.0 No. Barrels = 1 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Rectagular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Side tapered, less favorable edges Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.56, 0.667, 0.0446, 0.85, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 101.24 Top Width (ft) = 4.50 Crest Width (ft) = 15.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 7.11 Qmax (cfs) = 12.17 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 7.11 Qpipe (cfs) = 7.11 Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 4.04 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 3.84 HGL Dn (ft) = 100.44 HGL Up (ft) = 100.49 Hw Elev (ft) = 100.85 Hw/D (ft) = 1.16 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 4' Sidewalk Culvert at DP 1m & 1n (10-Year) Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 100.00 Pipe Length (ft) = 5.50 Slope (%) = 0.55 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 100.03 Rise (in) = 8.5 Shape = Box Span (in) = 48.0 No. Barrels = 1 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Rectagular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Side tapered, less favorable edges Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.56, 0.667, 0.0446, 0.85, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 101.24 Top Width (ft) = 4.50 Crest Width (ft) = 15.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 12.17 Qmax (cfs) = 12.17 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 12.17 Qpipe (cfs) = 11.15 Qovertop (cfs) = 1.02 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 4.73 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 4.47 HGL Dn (ft) = 100.59 HGL Up (ft) = 100.65 Hw Elev (ft) = 101.32 Hw/D (ft) = 1.82 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 4' Sidewalk Culvert at DP 1m & 1n (Max Flow without Overtopping) Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 100.00 Pipe Length (ft) = 5.50 Slope (%) = 0.55 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 100.03 Rise (in) = 8.5 Shape = Box Span (in) = 48.0 No. Barrels = 1 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Rectagular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Side tapered, less favorable edges Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.56, 0.667, 0.0446, 0.85, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 101.24 Top Width (ft) = 4.50 Crest Width (ft) = 15.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 7.00 Qmax (cfs) = 12.00 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 10.50 Qpipe (cfs) = 10.50 Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 4.61 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 4.38 HGL Dn (ft) = 100.57 HGL Up (ft) = 100.63 Hw Elev (ft) = 101.24 Hw/D (ft) = 1.71 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 4' Sidewalk Culvert at DP 1c & 1d (2-Year) Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 100.00 Pipe Length (ft) = 5.50 Slope (%) = 0.55 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 100.03 Rise (in) = 8.5 Shape = Box Span (in) = 48.0 No. Barrels = 2 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Rectagular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Side tapered, less favorable edges Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.56, 0.667, 0.0446, 0.85, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 101.24 Top Width (ft) = 4.50 Crest Width (ft) = 15.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 10.18 Qmax (cfs) = 10.18 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 10.18 Qpipe (cfs) = 10.18 Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 3.64 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 3.43 HGL Dn (ft) = 100.35 HGL Up (ft) = 100.40 Hw Elev (ft) = 100.69 Hw/D (ft) = 0.93 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 4' Sidewalk Culvert at DP 1c & 1d (10-Year) Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 100.00 Pipe Length (ft) = 5.50 Slope (%) = 0.55 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 100.03 Rise (in) = 8.5 Shape = Box Span (in) = 48.0 No. Barrels = 2 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Rectagular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Side tapered, less favorable edges Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.56, 0.667, 0.0446, 0.85, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 101.24 Top Width (ft) = 4.50 Crest Width (ft) = 15.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 17.37 Qmax (cfs) = 17.37 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 17.37 Qpipe (cfs) = 17.37 Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 4.34 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 4.11 HGL Dn (ft) = 100.50 HGL Up (ft) = 100.56 Hw Elev (ft) = 101.05 Hw/D (ft) = 1.44 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 4' Sidewalk Culvert at DP 1c & 1d (Max Flow without Overtopping) Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 100.00 Pipe Length (ft) = 5.50 Slope (%) = 0.55 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 100.03 Rise (in) = 8.5 Shape = Box Span (in) = 48.0 No. Barrels = 2 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Rectagular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Side tapered, less favorable edges Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.56, 0.667, 0.0446, 0.85, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 101.24 Top Width (ft) = 4.50 Crest Width (ft) = 15.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 10.00 Qmax (cfs) = 25.00 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 21.00 Qpipe (cfs) = 21.00 Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 4.61 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 4.38 HGL Dn (ft) = 100.57 HGL Up (ft) = 100.63 Hw Elev (ft) = 101.24 Hw/D (ft) = 1.71 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 4' Sidewalk Culvert at DP 1j & 1k (2-Year) Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 100.00 Pipe Length (ft) = 5.50 Slope (%) = 0.55 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 100.03 Rise (in) = 8.5 Shape = Box Span (in) = 48.0 No. Barrels = 2 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Rectagular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Side tapered, less favorable edges Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.56, 0.667, 0.0446, 0.85, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 101.24 Top Width (ft) = 4.50 Crest Width (ft) = 15.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 14.64 Qmax (cfs) = 14.64 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 14.64 Qpipe (cfs) = 14.64 Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 4.07 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 3.88 HGL Dn (ft) = 100.45 HGL Up (ft) = 100.50 Hw Elev (ft) = 100.87 Hw/D (ft) = 1.18 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 4' Sidewalk Culvert at DP 1j & 1k (10-Year) Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 100.00 Pipe Length (ft) = 5.50 Slope (%) = 0.55 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 100.03 Rise (in) = 8.5 Shape = Box Span (in) = 48.0 No. Barrels = 2 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Rectagular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Side tapered, less favorable edges Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.56, 0.667, 0.0446, 0.85, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 101.24 Top Width (ft) = 4.50 Crest Width (ft) = 15.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 25.01 Qmax (cfs) = 25.01 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 25.01 Qpipe (cfs) = 22.93 Qovertop (cfs) = 2.08 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 4.78 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 4.51 HGL Dn (ft) = 100.60 HGL Up (ft) = 100.67 Hw Elev (ft) = 101.36 Hw/D (ft) = 1.88 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 4' Sidewalk Culvert at DP 1j & 1k (Max Flow without Overtopping) Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 100.00 Pipe Length (ft) = 5.50 Slope (%) = 0.55 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 100.03 Rise (in) = 8.5 Shape = Box Span (in) = 48.0 No. Barrels = 2 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Rectagular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Side tapered, less favorable edges Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.56, 0.667, 0.0446, 0.85, 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 101.24 Top Width (ft) = 4.50 Crest Width (ft) = 15.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 12.00 Qmax (cfs) = 25.00 Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 21.00 Qpipe (cfs) = 21.00 Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 4.61 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 4.38 HGL Dn (ft) = 100.57 HGL Up (ft) = 100.63 Hw Elev (ft) = 101.24 Hw/D (ft) = 1.71 Flow Regime = Inlet Control Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 Swale 1 (Overflow from B1-1 to Pond 2) - 100-Year Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 10.00, 11.00 Total Depth (ft) = 2.00 Invert Elev (ft) = 4955.00 Slope (%) = 2.90 N-Value = 0.250 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 8.69 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 1.11 Q (cfs) = 8.690 Area (sqft) = 12.94 Velocity (ft/s) = 0.67 Wetted Perim (ft) = 23.42 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.54 Top Width (ft) = 23.31 EGL (ft) = 1.12 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 4954.50 -0.50 4955.00 0.00 4955.50 0.50 4956.00 1.00 4956.50 1.50 4957.00 2.00 4957.50 2.50 4958.00 3.00 Reach (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 Swale 2 10-Yr Storm User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 59.20 Slope (%) = 0.50 N-Value = 0.028 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 17.37 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 60.67)-(14.00, 59.20, 0.030)-(16.00, 59.20, 0.012)-(24.00, 60.55, 0.030)-(30.00, 60.67, 0.012) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.87 Q (cfs) = 17.37 Area (sqft) = 7.59 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.29 Wetted Perim (ft) = 15.56 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.68 Top Width (ft) = 15.44 EGL (ft) = 0.95 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 58.50 -0.70 59.00 -0.20 59.50 0.30 60.00 0.80 60.50 1.30 61.00 1.80 Sta (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 Swale 2 100-Yr Storm User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 59.20 Slope (%) = 0.50 N-Value = 0.029 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 47.35 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 60.67)-(14.00, 59.20, 0.030)-(16.00, 59.20, 0.012)-(24.00, 60.55, 0.030)-(30.00, 60.67, 0.012) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 1.33 Q (cfs) = 47.35 Area (sqft) = 16.32 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.90 Wetted Perim (ft) = 22.73 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 1.07 Top Width (ft) = 22.55 EGL (ft) = 1.46 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 58.50 -0.70 59.00 -0.20 59.50 0.30 60.00 0.80 60.50 1.30 61.00 1.80 Sta (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 Swale 3 10-Yr Storm User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 59.89 Slope (%) = 0.50 N-Value = 0.028 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 25.01 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 62.08)-(14.00, 59.89, 0.030)-(16.00, 59.89, 0.012)-(24.00, 61.96, 0.030)-(30.00, 62.08, 0.012) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 1.14 Q (cfs) = 25.01 Area (sqft) = 8.95 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.80 Wetted Perim (ft) = 13.93 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.91 Top Width (ft) = 13.69 EGL (ft) = 1.26 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 58.00 -1.89 59.00 -0.89 60.00 0.11 61.00 1.11 62.00 2.11 63.00 3.11 Sta (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 Swale 3 100-Yr Storm User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 59.89 Slope (%) = 0.50 N-Value = 0.028 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 68.59 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 62.08)-(14.00, 59.89, 0.030)-(16.00, 59.89, 0.012)-(24.00, 61.96, 0.030)-(30.00, 62.08, 0.012) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 1.76 Q (cfs) = 68.59 Area (sqft) = 19.41 Velocity (ft/s) = 3.53 Wetted Perim (ft) = 20.41 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 1.44 Top Width (ft) = 20.05 EGL (ft) = 1.95 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 58.00 -1.89 59.00 -0.89 60.00 0.11 61.00 1.11 62.00 2.11 63.00 3.11 Sta (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 Swale 4 10-Yr Storm User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 58.93 Slope (%) = 0.50 N-Value = 0.027 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 12.17 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 60.78)-(14.00, 58.93, 0.030)-(16.00, 58.93, 0.012)-(24.00, 60.66, 0.030)-(30.00, 60.78, 0.012) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.79 Q (cfs) = 12.17 Area (sqft) = 5.38 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.26 Wetted Perim (ft) = 11.77 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.62 Top Width (ft) = 11.63 EGL (ft) = 0.87 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 58.00 -0.93 58.50 -0.43 59.00 0.07 59.50 0.57 60.00 1.07 60.50 1.57 61.00 2.07 Sta (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Apr 16 2019 Swale 4 100-Yr Storm User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 58.93 Slope (%) = 0.50 N-Value = 0.028 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 34.65 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 60.78)-(14.00, 58.93, 0.030)-(16.00, 58.93, 0.012)-(24.00, 60.66, 0.030)-(30.00, 60.78, 0.012) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 1.25 Q (cfs) = 34.65 Area (sqft) = 12.02 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.88 Wetted Perim (ft) = 17.46 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 1.00 Top Width (ft) = 17.24 EGL (ft) = 1.38 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 58.00 -0.93 58.50 -0.43 59.00 0.07 59.50 0.57 60.00 1.07 60.50 1.57 61.00 2.07 Sta (ft) Project Number: 911-015 Project: Date: 4/17/2019 Prepared By: Storm Outlet Pipe Dia. (in) Flowrate (cfs) Velocity (ft/s) Protection 1 Dimensions 1 # of Mats 1 FES B 24 15.10 6.43 ScourStop 8' x 8' 4 FES C 30 27.57 7.33 ScourStop 8' x 12' 6 FES D 18 12.12 7.36 ScourStop 8' x 8' 4 FES E 18 10.38 6.65 ScourStop 8' x 8' 4 FES F (2) 18 23.47 7.2 ScourStop 12' x 8' 6 FES G 24 18.24 7.03 ScourStop 8' x 8' 4 FES H 24 18.24 7.03 ScourStop 8' x 8' 4 STORM OUTLET PROTECTION Hansen F. Wegert Notes: 1) ScourStop dimensions and number of mats are per the ScourStop Design Guide for Circular Culvert Outlet Protection provided by Hanes Geo Components (https://hanesgeo.com/Catalog/Product?id=2879). ScourStop® DESIGN GUIDE Circular Culvert Outlet Protection scourstop.com PERFORMANCE AESTHETICS NPDES-COMPLIANT COST-EFFECTIVE the green solution to riprap ® ScourStop transition mats protect against erosion and scour at culvert outlets with a vegetated solution in areas traditionally protected with rock or other hard armor. ScourStop is part of a system that includes semi-rigid transition mats installed over sod or turf reinforcement mats. Each 4’ x 4’ x 1/2” mat is made of high-density polyethylene and secured tightly to the ground with anchors. why use the SCOURSTOP SYSTEM? - If velocity is greater than 16 fps, contact manufacturer for design assistance. - ScourStop mats have been shown to at least double the effectiveness of turf reinforcement mats. - ScourStop fully vegetated channel (2:1 slope): velocity = 31 fps, shear stress = 16 psf. PIPE DIAMETER VELOCITY < 10 FT/SEC 10 < VELOCITY < 16 FT/SEC TRANSITION MAT W x L QUANTITY OF MATS TRANSITION MAT W x L QUANTITY OF MATS 12” 4’ x 4’ 1 4’ x 8’ 2 24” 8’ x 8’ 4 8’ x 12’ 6 36” 8’ x 12’ 6 12’ x 20’ 15 48” 12’ x 16’ 12 12’ x 24’ 18 60” 12’ x 20’ 15 16’ x 32’ 32 72” 16’ x 24’ 24 20’ x 36’ 45 Circular Culvert Outlet Protection These are minimum recommendations. More ScourStop protection may be needed depending upon site and soil conditions, per project engineer. 1. ScourStop mats must be installed over a soil cover: sod, seeded turf reinforcement mat (TRM), geotextile, or a combination thereof. 2. For steep slopes (>10%) or higher velocities (>10 ft/sec), sod is the recommended soil cover. 3. Follow manufacturer’s ScourStop Installation Guidelines to ensure proper installation. 4. Install ScourStop mats at maximum 1-2” below flowline of culvert or culvert apron. (No waterfall impacts onto ScourStop mats.) 5. Performance of protected area assumes stable downstream conditions. Transition mat apron protects culvert outlet. *Width of protection: Bottom width of channel and up both side slopes to a depth at least half the culvert diameter. Protect bare/disturbed downstream soils from erosion with appropriate soil cover. Use normal-depth calculator to compute for downstream protection. Install anchors per ScourStop Installation Guidelines. Minimum depth 24” in compacted, cohesive soil. Minimum depth 30” in loose, sandy, or wet soil. Extra anchors as needed to secure mat tightly over soil cover. Abut transition mats to end of culvert or culvert apron. Adjacent mats abut together laterally and longitudinally. Minimum 8 anchors per mat. Extra anchors as needed for loose or wet soils. Extra anchors as needed for uneven soil surface. ScourStop® Installation Recommendations A A MAX. 1"-2" DROP FROM CULVERT FLOWLINE CULVERT FLOWLINE ONTO SCOURSTOP MATS PROFILE VIEW A LEADER in the GEOSYNTHETIC and EROSION CONTROL industries Learn more about our products at: HanesGeo.com | 888.239.4539 the green solution to riprap ©2014 Leggett & Platt, Incorporated | 16959_1114 AA Appendix C SWMM Modeling & Detention Computations Hansen FDP with A3.txt [TITLE] ;;Project Title/Notes [OPTIONS] ;;Option Value FLOW_UNITS CFS INFILTRATION HORTON FLOW_ROUTING KINWAVE LINK_OFFSETS DEPTH MIN_SLOPE 0 ALLOW_PONDING NO SKIP_STEADY_STATE NO START_DATE 03/15/2016 START_TIME 00:00:00 REPORT_START_DATE 03/15/2016 REPORT_START_TIME 00:00:00 END_DATE 03/20/2016 END_TIME 06:00:00 SWEEP_START 01/01 SWEEP_END 12/31 DRY_DAYS 0 REPORT_STEP 00:05:00 WET_STEP 00:05:00 DRY_STEP 00:30:00 ROUTING_STEP 0:00:15 INERTIAL_DAMPING PARTIAL NORMAL_FLOW_LIMITED BOTH FORCE_MAIN_EQUATION H-W VARIABLE_STEP 0.75 LENGTHENING_STEP 0 MIN_SURFAREA 12.557 MAX_TRIALS 8 HEAD_TOLERANCE 0.005 SYS_FLOW_TOL 5 LAT_FLOW_TOL 5 MINIMUM_STEP 0.5 THREADS 1 [EVAPORATION] ;;Data Source Parameters ;;-------------- ---------------- CONSTANT 0.0 DRY_ONLY NO [RAINGAGES] ;;Name Format Interval SCF Source ;;-------------- --------- ------ ------ ---------- FORTCOLLINS INTENSITY 0:05 1.0 TIMESERIES 100-YR [SUBCATCHMENTS] ;;Name Rain Gage Outlet Area %Imperv Width %Slope CurbLen SnowPack Page 1 Hansen FDP with A3.txt ;;-------------- ---------------- ---------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ---------------- SUB1A FORTCOLLINS POND1 43.32 45 1100 0.5 0 SUB2 FORTCOLLINS POND2 6.68 44 400 1 0 SUB3 FORTCOLLINS POND3 13.27 57 600 .5 0 SUB4 FORTCOLLINS POND4 3.42 88 250 2 0 TimbersAC FORTCOLLINS J4 13.41 50 325 0.5 0 School FORTCOLLINS SchoolPond 11.84 50 400 0.5 0 TimbersB FORTCOLLINS J3 9.05 50 325 0.5 0 [SUBAREAS] ;;Subcatchment N-Imperv N-Perv S-Imperv S-Perv PctZero RouteTo PctRouted ;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- SUB1A .016 .025 .1 .3 0 OUTLET SUB2 .016 .025 .1 .3 0 OUTLET SUB3 .016 .025 .1 .3 0 OUTLET SUB4 .016 .025 .1 .3 0 OUTLET TimbersAC .016 .025 .1 .3 0 OUTLET School .016 .025 .1 .3 0 OUTLET TimbersB .016 .025 .1 .3 0 OUTLET [INFILTRATION] ;;Subcatchment MaxRate MinRate Decay DryTime MaxInfil ;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- SUB1A 0.51 0.5 0.0018 7 0 SUB2 0.51 0.5 0.0018 7 0 SUB3 0.51 0.5 0.0018 7 0 SUB4 0.51 0.5 0.0018 7 0 TimbersAC 0.51 0.5 0.0018 7 0 School 3.0 0.5 4 7 0 TimbersB .51 0.5 4 7 0 [JUNCTIONS] ;;Name Elevation MaxDepth InitDepth SurDepth Aponded ;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- MH_A1 51.04 5 0 0 0 J2 50.45 5 0 0 0 J4 39.25 5 0 0 0 J3 42.65 5 0 0 0 MH_A3 52.03 0 0 0 0 [OUTFALLS] ;;Name Elevation Type Stage Data Gated Route To ;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------------- -------- ---------------- O1 39.11 FREE NO [STORAGE] ;;Name Elev. MaxDepth InitDepth Shape Curve Name/Params N/A Fevap Psi Ksat IMD ;;-------------- -------- ---------- ----------- ---------- ---------------------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- POND1 54.6 5 1.2 TABULAR POND1 0 0 POND2 52.94 7 3.44 TABULAR POND2 0 0 POND3 53.18 6.3 1.5 TABULAR POND3 0 0 Page 2 Hansen FDP with A3.txt POND4 55.10 6 1.3 TABULAR POND4 0 0 SchoolPond 43.75 8.25 0 TABULAR SchoolPond 0 0 [CONDUITS] ;;Name From Node To Node Length Roughness InOffset OutOffset InitFlow MaxFlow ;;-------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- Hansen_Out MH_A1 J2 231 .012 0 0 0 0 Timber_Out J4 O1 34 0.012 0 0 0 0 ExPipe1 J2 J3 1370.63 0.01 0 0 0 0 ExPipe2 J3 J4 849.17 0.012 0 0 0 0 Conduit_A1-3 MH_A3 MH_A1 495 0.012 0 0 0 0 [OUTLETS] ;;Name From Node To Node Offset Type QTable/Qcoeff Qexpon Gated ;;-------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------- --------------- ---------------- ---------- -------- OUT1 POND1 POND2 0 TABULAR/DEPTH OUT1 NO Pond_Outlet4 POND4 MH_A1 0 TABULAR/DEPTH OUT4 NO SchoolOut SchoolPond J3 0 TABULAR/DEPTH OutSchool NO Pond_Outlet_2 POND2 MH_A3 0 TABULAR/DEPTH OUT2 NO Pond_Outlet_3 POND3 MH_A3 0 TABULAR/DEPTH OUT3 NO [XSECTIONS] ;;Link Shape Geom1 Geom2 Geom3 Geom4 Barrels Culvert ;;-------------- ------------ ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- Hansen_Out CIRCULAR 3 0 0 0 1 Timber_Out CIRCULAR 5 0 0 0 1 ExPipe1 CIRCULAR 5 0 0 0 1 ExPipe2 CIRCULAR 5 0 0 0 1 Conduit_A1-3 CIRCULAR 3 0 0 0 1 [CURVES] ;;Name Type X-Value Y-Value ;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- OUT1 Rating 0 0 OUT1 5 3.75 ; OUT2 Rating 0 0 OUT2 2.8 .1 OUT2 7 4 Page 3 Hansen FDP with A3.txt ; OUT3 Rating 0 0 OUT3 1.5 .1 OUT3 6.3 10 ; OUT4 Rating 0 0 OUT4 1 .05 OUT4 6 .5 ; OutSchool Rating 0 0 OutSchool 5.5 17.1 ; POND1 Storage 0 2261 POND1 0.5 13271 POND1 1 37606 POND1 1.5 69931 POND1 2 106654 POND1 2.5 142619 POND1 3.0 167936 POND1 3.5 187749 POND1 4.0 202173 POND1 4.5 217076 POND1 5.0 241871 ; POND2 Storage 0 17 POND2 0.5 765 POND2 1 1652 POND2 1.5 2846 POND2 2 4339 POND2 2.5 6202 POND2 3 8430 POND2 3.5 11067 POND2 4.0 14137 POND2 4.5 17678 POND2 5.0 21717 POND2 5.5 26297 POND2 6.0 31452 POND2 6.5 37262 POND2 7.0 43976 ; POND3 Storage 0 245 POND3 0.5 2022 POND3 1 4421 POND3 1.5 7411 POND3 2.0 9960 POND3 2.5 12353 POND3 3.0 14763 POND3 3.5 17207 POND3 4.0 19750 POND3 4.5 22398 POND3 5.0 25150 POND3 5.5 28004 POND3 6.0 30960 Page 4 Hansen FDP with A3.txt POND3 6.3 32784 ; POND4 Storage 0 313 POND4 0.5 1769 POND4 1.0 2890 POND4 1.5 4012 POND4 2.0 5493 POND4 2.5 6654 POND4 3.0 7853 POND4 3.5 9089 POND4 4.0 10365 POND4 4.5 11678 POND4 5.0 13034 POND4 5.5 14430 POND4 6.0 15866 ; SchoolPond Storage 0 0 SchoolPond 0.25 567 SchoolPond 1.25 2954 SchoolPond 2.25 7041 SchoolPond 3.25 8866 SchoolPond 4.25 10198 SchoolPond 5.25 14047 SchoolPond 6.25 21193 SchoolPond 7.25 34812 SchoolPond 8.25 49094 [TIMESERIES] ;;Name Date Time Value ;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- 100-YR 0:05 1 100-YR 0:10 1.14 100-YR 0:15 1.33 100-YR 0:20 2.23 100-YR 0:25 2.84 100-YR 0:30 5.49 100-YR 0:35 9.95 100-YR 0:40 4.12 100-YR 0:45 2.48 100-YR 0:50 1.46 100-YR 0:55 1.22 100-YR 1:00 1.06 100-YR 1:05 1 100-YR 1:10 .95 100-YR 1:15 .91 100-YR 1:20 .87 100-YR 1:25 .84 100-YR 1:30 .81 100-YR 1:35 .78 100-YR 1:40 .75 100-YR 1:45 .73 100-YR 1:50 .71 100-YR 1:55 .69 Page 5 Hansen FDP with A3.txt 100-YR 2:00 .67 ; 5-YR 0:05 .40 5-YR 0:10 .45 5-YR 0:15 .53 5-YR 0:20 .89 5-YR 0:25 1.13 5-YR 0:30 2.19 5-YR 0:35 3.97 5-YR 0:40 1.64 5-YR 0:45 .99 5-YR 0:50 .58 5-YR 0:55 .49 5-YR 1:00 .42 5-YR 1:05 .28 5-YR 1:10 .27 5-YR 1:15 .25 5-YR 1:20 .24 5-YR 1:25 .23 5-YR 1:30 .22 5-YR 1:35 .21 5-YR 1:40 .20 5-YR 1:45 .19 5-YR 1:50 .19 5-YR 1:55 .18 5-YR 2:00 .18 ; 2-YR 0:05 0.29 2-YR 0:10 0.33 2-YR 0:15 0.38 2-YR 0:20 0.64 2-YR 0:25 0.81 2-YR 0:30 1.57 2-YR 0:35 2.85 2-YR 0:40 1.18 2-YR 0:45 0.71 2-YR 0:50 0.42 2-YR 0:55 0.35 2-YR 1:00 0.30 2-YR 1:05 0.20 2-YR 1:10 0.19 2-YR 1:15 0.18 2-YR 1:20 0.17 2-YR 1:25 0.17 2-YR 1:30 0.16 2-YR 1:35 0.15 2-YR 1:40 0.15 2-YR 1:45 0.14 2-YR 1:50 0.14 2-YR 1:55 0.13 2-YR 2:00 0.13 [REPORT] Page 6 Hansen FDP with A3.txt ;;Reporting Options INPUT NO CONTROLS NO SUBCATCHMENTS ALL NODES ALL LINKS ALL [TAGS] [MAP] DIMENSIONS -2541.296 0.000 12541.296 10000.000 Units None [COORDINATES] ;;Node X-Coord Y-Coord ;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------ MH_A1 9689.800 641.430 J2 10457.413 630.915 J4 13496.320 -262.881 J3 12549.947 672.976 MH_A3 9721.346 2702.419 O1 13633.018 -1703.470 POND1 5959.206 5005.513 POND2 9174.553 4574.132 POND3 9258.675 2996.845 POND4 9027.340 231.335 SchoolPond 12518.402 1640.379 [VERTICES] ;;Link X-Coord Y-Coord ;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------ ExPipe2 13412.198 515.247 OUT1 6730.981 4807.056 OUT1 6742.007 4509.372 Pond_Outlet_2 9721.346 4384.858 [Polygons] ;;Subcatchment X-Coord Y-Coord ;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------ SUB1A 3556.271 5891.295 SUB1A 2887.578 5957.151 SUB1A 2978.763 6453.605 SUB1A 3637.324 6387.749 SUB2 8738.872 5232.443 SUB2 8738.872 5835.806 SUB2 8214.639 5845.697 SUB2 8224.530 5242.334 SUB3 8273.986 2957.468 SUB3 8293.769 3531.157 SUB3 8758.655 3531.157 SUB3 8738.872 2957.468 SUB4 8827.893 118.694 SUB4 8837.784 -425.321 Page 7 Hansen FDP with A3.txt SUB4 8333.333 -435.213 SUB4 8333.333 108.803 TimbersAC 15257.171 158.259 TimbersAC 15276.954 -534.125 TimbersAC 14653.808 -524.233 TimbersAC 14673.591 148.368 School 12713.974 2396.821 School 12709.124 2813.892 School 12248.406 2804.192 School 12233.857 2416.219 TimbersB 11557.864 -524.233 TimbersB 12052.423 -534.125 TimbersB 12072.206 187.933 TimbersB 11567.755 168.150 [SYMBOLS] ;;Gage X-Coord Y-Coord ;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------ FORTCOLLINS 11046.267 5415.352 Page 8 Project: Date: Calculations By: Pond ID Pond Volume (CF) Pond Volume (AC- FT) Peak Release (CFS) 1 113,059 2.60 1.67 2 31,049 0.71 1.78 3 27,754 0.64 3.97 4 15,092 0.35 0.26 Pond ID Pond Volume (CF) Pond Volume (AC- FT) Peak Release (CFS) 1 435,893 10.01 3.08 2 80,589 1.85 3.48 3 97,373 2.24 9.89 4 41,958 0.96 0.47 SWMM Detention Summary (5-YR) SWMM Detention Summary (100-YR) Detention Pond Summary Hansen April 17, 2019 F. Wegert SWMM Results 100-Yr.rpt EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - VERSION 5.1 (Build 5.1.012) -------------------------------------------------------------- ********************************************************* NOTE: The summary statistics displayed in this report are based on results found at every computational time step, not just on results from each reporting time step. ********************************************************* **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units ............... CFS Process Models: Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES RDII ................... NO Snowmelt ............... NO Groundwater ............ NO Flow Routing ........... YES Ponding Allowed ........ NO Water Quality .......... NO Infiltration Method ...... HORTON Flow Routing Method ...... KINWAVE Starting Date ............ 03/15/2016 00:00:00 Ending Date .............. 03/20/2016 06:00:00 Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0.0 Report Time Step ......... 00:05:00 Wet Time Step ............ 00:05:00 Dry Time Step ............ 00:30:00 Routing Time Step ........ 15.00 sec ************************** Volume Depth Runoff Quantity Continuity acre-feet inches ************************** --------- ------- Total Precipitation ...... 30.879 3.669 Evaporation Loss ......... 0.000 0.000 Infiltration Loss ........ 6.611 0.786 Surface Runoff ........... 24.030 2.855 Final Storage ............ 0.418 0.050 Continuity Error (%) ..... -0.586 ************************** Volume Volume Flow Routing Continuity acre-feet 10^6 gal ************************** --------- --------- Dry Weather Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000 Wet Weather Inflow ....... 24.030 7.831 Groundwater Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000 RDII Inflow .............. 0.000 0.000 External Inflow .......... 0.000 0.000 Page 1 SWMM Results 100-Yr.rpt External Outflow ......... 25.104 8.181 Flooding Loss ............ 0.000 0.000 Evaporation Loss ......... 0.000 0.000 Exfiltration Loss ........ 0.000 0.000 Initial Stored Volume .... 1.089 0.355 Final Stored Volume ...... 0.000 0.000 Continuity Error (%) ..... 0.059 ******************************** Highest Flow Instability Indexes ******************************** Link SchoolOut (3) Link ExPipe2 (1) ************************* Routing Time Step Summary ************************* Minimum Time Step : 15.00 sec Average Time Step : 15.00 sec Maximum Time Step : 15.00 sec Percent in Steady State : 0.00 Average Iterations per Step : 1.01 Percent Not Converging : 0.00 *************************** Subcatchment Runoff Summary *************************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Total Total Total Total Total Peak Runoff Precip Runon Evap Infil Runoff Runoff Runoff Coeff Subcatchment in in in in in 10^6 gal CFS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUB1A 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.84 2.80 3.29 225.92 0.763 SUB2 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.79 2.87 0.52 53.94 0.781 SUB3 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.62 3.02 1.09 93.77 0.823 SUB4 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.16 3.45 0.32 31.11 0.940 TimbersAC 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.76 2.87 1.05 70.18 0.783 School 3.67 0.00 0.00 1.01 2.64 0.85 62.46 0.718 TimbersB 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.73 2.91 0.72 56.97 0.794 ****************** Node Depth Summary ****************** --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max Reported Depth Depth HGL Occurrence Max Depth Node Type Feet Feet Feet days hr:min Feet Page 2 SWMM Results 100-Yr.rpt --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MH_A1 JUNCTION 0.35 1.34 52.38 0 01:43 1.34 J2 JUNCTION 0.34 1.27 51.72 0 01:46 1.27 J4 JUNCTION 0.28 3.24 42.49 0 00:41 3.12 J3 JUNCTION 0.27 2.20 44.85 0 00:40 2.16 MH_A3 JUNCTION 0.35 1.34 53.37 0 01:42 1.34 O1 OUTFALL 0.28 3.24 42.35 0 00:41 3.12 POND1 STORAGE 1.37 4.11 58.71 0 02:35 4.11 POND2 STORAGE 3.44 6.45 59.39 0 02:21 6.45 POND3 STORAGE 0.44 6.25 59.43 0 01:30 6.25 POND4 STORAGE 1.32 5.63 60.73 0 02:21 5.63 SchoolPond STORAGE 0.08 5.78 49.53 0 01:04 5.78 ******************* Node Inflow Summary ******************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Maximum Lateral Total Flow Lateral Total Time of Max Inflow Inflow Balance Inflow Inflow Occurrence Volume Volume Error Node Type CFS CFS days hr:min 10^6 gal 10^6 gal Percent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MH_A1 JUNCTION 0.00 13.67 0 01:45 0 5.57 0.000 J2 JUNCTION 0.00 13.67 0 01:46 0 5.57 0.000 J4 JUNCTION 70.18 136.62 0 00:41 1.05 8.18 0.000 J3 JUNCTION 56.97 71.24 0 00:40 0.716 7.14 0.000 MH_A3 JUNCTION 0.00 13.23 0 01:42 0 5.23 0.000 O1 OUTFALL 0.00 136.62 0 00:41 0 8.18 0.000 POND1 STORAGE 225.92 225.92 0 00:40 3.29 3.48 0.003 POND2 STORAGE 53.94 55.54 0 00:40 0.52 4.11 0.003 POND3 STORAGE 93.77 93.77 0 00:40 1.09 1.13 0.041 POND4 STORAGE 31.11 31.11 0 00:40 0.32 0.34 0.006 SchoolPond STORAGE 62.46 62.46 0 00:40 0.847 0.847 0.019 ********************* Node Flooding Summary ********************* No nodes were flooded. ********************** Storage Volume Summary ********************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Average Avg Evap Exfil Maximum Max Time of Max Maximum Volume Pcnt Pcnt Pcnt Volume Pcnt Occurrence Outflow Storage Unit 1000 ft3 Full Loss Loss 1000 ft3 Full days hr:min CFS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 3 SWMM Results 100-Yr.rpt POND1 96.761 15 0 0 435.893 69 0 02:35 3.08 POND2 24.828 24 0 0 80.589 78 0 02:21 3.48 POND3 3.226 3 0 0 97.373 98 0 01:30 9.89 POND4 6.544 14 0 0 41.958 88 0 02:21 0.47 SchoolPond 0.475 0 0 0 44.858 36 0 01:04 17.10 *********************** Outfall Loading Summary *********************** ----------------------------------------------------------- Flow Avg Max Total Freq Flow Flow Volume Outfall Node Pcnt CFS CFS 10^6 gal ----------------------------------------------------------- O1 95.50 2.52 136.62 8.180 ----------------------------------------------------------- System 95.50 2.52 136.62 8.180 ******************** Link Flow Summary ******************** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Time of Max Maximum Max/ Max/ |Flow| Occurrence |Veloc| Full Full Link Type CFS days hr:min ft/sec Flow Depth ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hansen_Out CONDUIT 13.67 0 01:46 4.79 0.37 0.42 Timber_Out CONDUIT 136.62 0 00:41 10.13 0.75 0.65 ExPipe1 CONDUIT 13.67 0 01:48 6.92 0.05 0.16 ExPipe2 CONDUIT 69.25 0 00:42 8.55 0.39 0.43 Conduit_A1-3 CONDUIT 13.23 0 01:43 4.34 0.41 0.45 OUT1 DUMMY 3.08 0 02:35 Pond_Outlet4 DUMMY 0.47 0 02:21 SchoolOut DUMMY 17.10 0 00:52 Pond_Outlet_2 DUMMY 3.48 0 02:21 Pond_Outlet_3 DUMMY 9.89 0 01:30 ************************* Conduit Surcharge Summary ************************* No conduits were surcharged. Analysis begun on: Tue Apr 16 08:21:26 2019 Analysis ended on: Tue Apr 16 08:21:27 2019 Total elapsed time: 00:00:01 Page 4 Pond 1 5-Year Pond 2 5-Year Pond 3 5-Year Pond 4 5-Year Pond 1 100-Year Pond 2 100-Year Pond 3 100-Year Pond 4 100-Year Project: Date: 4954.61 10.01 ac-ft 4959.0 10.04 ac-ft 4960.0 4959.0 Not Applicable Not Applicable Maximum Elevation Minimum Elevation cu. ft. acre ft cu. ft. acre ft 4953.7 N/A 10,047.8 0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 4954.0 4953.7 10,322.9 0.3 3,055.6 0.07 3,055.6 0.07 4954.5 4954.0 10,785.8 0.5 5,277.2 0.12 8,332.8 0.19 4955.0 4954.5 13,118.1 0.5 5,976.0 0.14 14,308.8 0.33 4955.5 4955.0 21,059.9 0.5 8,544.5 0.20 22,853.2 0.52 4956.0 4955.5 41,341.8 0.5 15,600.4 0.36 38,453.7 0.88 4956.5 4956.0 70,962.0 0.5 28,076.0 0.64 66,529.6 1.53 4957.0 4956.5 106,613.3 0.5 44,393.8 1.02 110,923.5 2.55 4957.5 4957.0 142,603.8 0.5 62,304.3 1.43 173,227.7 3.98 4958.0 4957.5 167,936.5 0.5 77,635.1 1.78 250,862.8 5.76 4958.5 4958.0 187,749.4 0.5 88,921.5 2.04 339,784.3 7.80 4959.0 4958.5 202,173.2 0.5 97,480.7 2.24 437,264.9 10.04 4959.5 4959.0 217,075.8 0.5 104,812.3 2.41 542,077.2 12.44 4960.0 4959.5 220,660.6 0.5 109,434.1 2.51 651,511.3 14.96 Pond Stage Storage Curve 911-015 Fort Collins, Colorado F. Wegert Pond 1 Elev at Design Volume: Hansen 4/17/2019 Pond Outlet and Volume Data Design Volume: Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By: Pond No.: Contour Contour Surface Area (ft 2 ) Depth Incremental Volume Cummalitive Volume Detention Pond Stage Storage Curve Water Quality Volume: Outlet Elevation: Grate Elevation: Crest of Pond Elev.: Water Quality Elev.: Volume at Grate: 4/15/2019 5:55 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Detention\FDP Detention\ 911-015_Stage-Storage_Pond1.xlsx\Pond Project Number: Project: Date: Prepared By: Pond Data 100-yr WSEL 4959.00 Pipe Invert Elev. 4954.61 Orifice Plate Outflow Q 3.08 cfs Orifice Coefficient Cd 0.62 Gravity Constant g 32.2 ft/s^2 100-year head H 4.39 ft Orifice Area Ao 0.30 ft^2 Orifice Area Ao 42.54 in^2 Calculated Radius r 3.7 in Calculated Diameter d 7.4 in Orifice Curve Stage (ft) H (ft) Q (cfs) SWMM Stage Note 4954.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond Invert 4955.00 0.39 0.92 0.39 4955.50 0.89 1.39 0.89 4956.00 1.39 1.73 1.39 4956.50 1.89 2.02 1.89 4957.00 2.39 2.27 2.39 4957.50 2.89 2.50 2.89 4958.00 3.39 2.71 3.39 4958.50 3.89 2.90 3.89 4959.00 4.39 3.08 4.39 100-yr WSEL / Emergency Overflow 4959.50 4.89 3.25 4.89 4960.00 5.39 3.41 5.39 4960.20 5.59 3.48 5.59 Overtopping Berm ORIFICE RATING CURVE Pond 1 Outlet 100-yr Orifice 911-015 Hansen 4/17/2019 F. Wegert 4/15/2019 6:24 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Detention\FDP Detention\911-015_Orifice_Pond1.xlsx\Orifice Size Area Inlet Performance Curve: Pond 1 Overflow Outlet Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 3.1416*Dia.of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Pond Outlet Diameter of Grate (ft): 4 Open Area of Grate (ft2): 16.00 Rim Elevation (ft): 4959.000 Reduction Factor: 25% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4959.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 4959.05 0.32 14.42 0.32 0.10 4959.10 0.89 20.39 0.89 0.15 4959.15 1.64 24.98 1.64 0.20 4959.20 2.53 28.84 2.53 0.25 4959.25 3.53 32.25 3.53 0.30 4959.30 4.65 35.32 4.65 0.35 4959.35 5.85 38.15 5.85 0.40 4959.40 7.15 40.79 7.15 0.45 4959.45 8.54 43.26 8.54 0.50 4959.50 10.00 45.60 10.00 100-Year Design Flow = 3.08 cfs Q = 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q = 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 Discharge (cfs) Stage (ft) Project: Date: 4953 1.85 ac-ft 4959.5 1.87 ac-ft 4960.1 4959.4 4956.4 0.330 ac-ft Maximum Elevation Minimum Elevation cu. ft. acre ft cu. ft. acre ft 4953.0 N/A 16.8 0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 4953.5 4953.0 766.2 0.5 195.8 0.00 195.8 0.00 4954.0 4953.5 1,656.3 0.5 605.6 0.01 801.4 0.02 4954.5 4954.0 2,853.8 0.5 1,127.5 0.03 1,928.9 0.04 4955.0 4954.5 4,351.9 0.5 1,801.4 0.04 3,730.3 0.09 4955.5 4955.0 6,221.0 0.5 2,643.2 0.06 6,373.5 0.15 4956.0 4955.5 8,456.2 0.5 3,669.3 0.08 10,042.8 0.23 4956.5 4956.0 11,102.8 0.5 4,889.8 0.11 14,932.6 0.34 4957.0 4956.5 14,196.8 0.5 6,324.9 0.15 21,257.5 0.49 4957.5 4957.0 17,766.0 0.5 7,990.7 0.18 29,248.2 0.67 4958.0 4957.5 21,834.5 0.5 9,900.1 0.23 39,148.3 0.90 4958.5 4958.0 26,445.6 0.5 12,070.0 0.28 51,218.4 1.18 4959.0 4958.5 31,636.3 0.5 14,520.5 0.33 65,738.9 1.51 4959.5 4959.0 37,489.1 0.5 17,281.3 0.40 83,020.2 1.91 4960.0 4959.5 44,263.4 0.5 20,438.1 0.47 103,458.3 2.38 Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By: Pond No.: Detention Pond Stage Storage Curve Contour Contour Surface Area (ft 2 ) Depth Incremental Volume Cummalitive Volume Pond Stage Storage Curve 911-015 Fort Collins, Colorado F. Wegert Pond 2 Elev at Design Volume: Hansen 4/17/2019 Pond Outlet and Volume Data Design Volume: Water Quality Elev.: Water Quality Volume: Crest of Pond Elev.: Grate Elevation: Outlet Elevation: Volume at Grate: 4/15/2019 5:55 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Detention\FDP Detention\ 911-015_Stage-Storage_Pond2.xlsx\Pond Project Number: Project: Date: Prepared By: Pond Data 100-yr WSEL 4959.40 Pipe Invert Elev. 4952.94 Orifice Plate Outflow Q 3.48 cfs Orifice Coefficient Cd 0.62 Gravity Constant g 32.2 ft/s^2 100-year head H 6.46 ft Orifice Area Ao 0.28 ft^2 Orifice Area Ao 39.63 in^2 Calculated Radius r 3.6 in Calculated Diameter d 7.1 in Orifice Curve Stage (ft) H (ft) Q (cfs) SWMM Stage Note 4952.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond Invert 4953.00 0.06 0.34 0.06 4953.50 0.56 1.02 0.56 4954.00 1.06 1.41 1.06 4954.50 1.56 1.71 1.56 4955.00 2.06 1.97 2.06 4955.50 2.56 2.19 2.56 4956.00 3.06 2.40 3.06 4956.44 3.50 2.56 3.50 Water Quality WSEL 4956.50 3.56 2.58 3.56 4957.00 4.06 2.76 4.06 4957.50 4.56 2.92 4.56 4958.00 5.06 3.08 5.06 4958.50 5.56 3.23 5.56 4959.00 6.06 3.37 6.06 4959.40 6.46 3.48 6.46 100-yr WSEL 4959.45 6.51 3.49 6.51 Emergency Overflow 4959.50 6.56 3.51 6.56 4960.00 7.06 3.64 7.06 4960.30 7.36 3.71 7.36 Overtopping Berm ORIFICE RATING CURVE Pond 2 Outlet 100-yr Orifice 911-015 Hansen 4/17/2019 F. Wegert 4/15/2019 6:27 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Detention\FDP Detention\911-015_Orifice_Pond2.xlsx\Orifice Size Area Inlet Performance Curve: Pond 2 Overflow Outlet Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 3.1416*Dia.of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Pond Outlet Diameter of Grate (ft): 5 Open Area of Grate (ft2): 25.00 Rim Elevation (ft): 4959.500 Reduction Factor: 25% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4959.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 4959.55 0.40 22.53 0.40 0.10 4959.60 1.12 31.87 1.12 0.15 4959.65 2.05 39.03 2.05 0.20 4959.70 3.16 45.06 3.16 0.25 4959.75 4.42 50.38 4.42 0.30 4959.80 5.81 55.19 5.81 0.35 4959.85 7.32 59.61 7.32 0.40 4959.90 8.94 63.73 8.94 0.45 4959.95 10.67 67.60 10.67 0.50 4960.00 12.50 71.25 12.50 100-Year Design Flow = 3.48 cfs Q = 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q = 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 Discharge (cfs) Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Project: Date: Outlet Elevation: 4953.4 2.24 ac-ft Grate Elevation: 4959.0 1.69 ac-ft Crest of Pond Elev.: 4959.8 4959.8 4955.0 0.121 ac-ft Maximum Elevation Minimum Elevation cu. ft. acre ft cu. ft. acre ft 4953.4 N/A 61.5 0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 4953.5 4953.4 245.0 0.1 15.3 0.00 15.3 0.00 4954.0 4953.5 2,022.0 0.5 566.8 0.01 582.1 0.01 4954.5 4954.0 4,420.6 0.5 1,610.7 0.04 2,192.7 0.05 4955.0 4954.5 7,411.3 0.5 2,958.0 0.07 5,150.7 0.12 4955.5 4955.0 9,960.4 0.5 4,342.9 0.10 9,493.6 0.22 4956.0 4955.5 12,353.4 0.5 5,578.4 0.13 15,072.1 0.35 4956.5 4956.0 14,763.3 0.5 6,779.2 0.16 21,851.3 0.50 4957.0 4956.5 17,207.5 0.5 7,992.7 0.18 29,843.9 0.69 4957.5 4957.0 19,749.7 0.5 9,239.3 0.21 39,083.2 0.90 4958.0 4957.5 22,398.1 0.5 10,536.9 0.24 49,620.2 1.14 4958.5 4958.0 25,149.7 0.5 11,887.0 0.27 61,507.1 1.41 4959.0 4958.5 28,004.0 0.5 13,288.4 0.31 74,795.6 1.72 4959.5 4959.0 30,959.7 0.5 14,740.9 0.34 89,536.5 2.06 4959.8 4959.5 32,784.0 0.3 9,561.6 0.22 99,098.1 2.27 Water Quality Elev.: Water Quality Volume: Detention Pond Stage Storage Curve Contour Contour Surface Area (ft 2 ) Depth Incremental Volume Cummalitive Volume Pond Stage Storage Curve 911-015 Fort Collins, Colorado F. Wegert Pond 3 Elev at Design Volume: Hansen 4/17/2019 Pond Outlet and Volume Data Design Volume: Volume at Grate: Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By: Pond No.: 4/15/2019 6:13 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Detention\FDP Detention\ 911-015_Stage-Storage_Pond3.xlsx\Pond Project Number: Project: Date: Prepared By: Pond Data 100-yr WSEL 4958.90 Pipe Invert Elev. 4953.40 Orifice Plate Outflow Q 9.89 cfs Orifice Coefficient Cd 0.62 Gravity Constant g 32.2 ft/s^2 100-year head H 5.50 ft Orifice Area Ao 0.85 ft^2 Orifice Area Ao 122.05 in^2 Calculated Radius r 6.2 in Calculated Diameter d 12.5 in Orifice Curve Stage (ft) H (ft) Q (cfs) SWMM Stage Note 4953.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond Invert 4953.50 0.10 1.33 0.10 4954.00 0.60 3.27 0.60 4954.50 1.10 4.42 1.10 4954.85 1.45 5.08 1.45 4955.00 1.60 5.33 1.60 Water Quality WSEL 4955.50 2.10 6.11 2.10 4956.00 2.60 6.80 2.60 4956.50 3.10 7.42 3.10 4957.00 3.60 8.00 3.60 4957.50 4.10 8.54 4.10 4958.00 4.60 9.04 4.60 4958.50 5.10 9.52 5.10 4958.80 5.40 9.80 5.40 100-yr WSEL/Emergency Overflow 4959.00 5.60 9.98 5.60 Overtopping Berm ORIFICE RATING CURVE Pond 3 Outlet 100-yr Orifice 911-015 Hansen 4/15/2019 F. Wegert 4/15/2019 6:30 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Detention\FDP Detention\911-015_Orifice_Pond3.xlsx\Orifice Size Area Inlet Performance Curve: Pond 3 Overflow Outlet Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 3.1416*Dia.of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Pond Outlet Diameter of Grate (ft): 5 Open Area of Grate (ft2): 25.00 Rim Elevation (ft): 4959.000 Reduction Factor: 25% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4959.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 4959.05 0.40 22.53 0.40 0.10 4959.10 1.12 31.87 1.12 0.15 4959.15 2.05 39.03 2.05 0.20 4959.20 3.16 45.06 3.16 0.25 4959.25 4.42 50.38 4.42 0.30 4959.30 5.81 55.19 5.81 0.35 4959.35 7.32 59.61 7.32 0.40 4959.40 8.94 63.73 8.94 0.45 4959.45 10.67 67.60 10.67 0.50 4959.50 12.50 71.25 12.50 100-Year Design Flow = 9.89 cfs Q = 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q = 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 Discharge (cfs) Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Project: Date: Outlet Elevation: 4955.2 0.96 ac-ft Grate Elevation: 4961.2 0.97 ac-ft Crest of Pond Elev.: 4961.5 4961.1 4956.5 0.038 ac-ft Maximum Elevation Minimum Elevation cu. ft. acre ft cu. ft. acre ft 4955.2 N/A 17.4 0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 4955.5 4955.2 311.9 0.3 49.4 0.00 49.4 0.00 4956.0 4955.5 1,766.8 0.5 519.7 0.01 569.1 0.01 4956.5 4956.0 2,883.6 0.5 1,162.6 0.03 1,731.7 0.04 4957.0 4956.5 4,000.6 0.5 1,721.0 0.04 3,452.8 0.08 4957.5 4957.0 5,474.1 0.5 2,368.7 0.05 5,821.4 0.13 4958.0 4957.5 6,626.8 0.5 3,025.2 0.07 8,846.6 0.20 4958.5 4958.0 7,817.1 0.5 3,611.0 0.08 12,457.6 0.29 4959.0 4958.5 9,045.1 0.5 4,215.5 0.10 16,673.2 0.38 4959.5 4959.0 10,311.1 0.5 4,839.0 0.11 21,512.2 0.49 4960.0 4959.5 11,616.2 0.5 5,481.8 0.13 26,994.1 0.62 4960.5 4960.0 12,960.6 0.5 6,144.2 0.14 33,138.3 0.76 4961.0 4960.5 14,344.7 0.5 6,826.3 0.16 39,964.6 0.92 4961.5 4961.0 15,480.7 0.5 7,456.4 0.17 47,421.0 1.09 Water Quality Elev.: Water Quality Volume: Volume at Grate: Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By: Pond No.: Detention Pond Stage Storage Curve Contour Contour Surface Area (ft 2 ) Depth Incremental Volume Cummalitive Volume Pond Stage Storage Curve 911-015 Fort Collins, Colorado F. Wegert Pond 4 Elev at Design Volume: Hansen 4/17/2019 Pond Outlet and Volume Data Design Volume: 4/15/2019 5:56 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Detention\FDP Detention\ 911-015_Stage-Storage_Pond4.xlsx\Pond Project Number: Project: Date: Prepared By: Pond Data 100-yr WSEL 4961.10 Pipe Invert Elev. 4955.20 Orifice Plate Outflow Q 0.47 cfs Orifice Coefficient Cd 0.62 Gravity Constant g 32.2 ft/s^2 100-year head H 5.90 ft Orifice Area Ao 0.04 ft^2 Orifice Area Ao 5.60 in^2 Calculated Radius r 1.3 in Calculated Diameter d 2.7 in Orifice Curve Stage (ft) H (ft) Q (cfs) SWMM Stage Note 4955.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond Invert 4955.50 0.30 0.11 0.30 4956.00 0.80 0.17 0.80 4956.47 1.27 0.22 1.27 Water Quality WSEL 4956.50 1.30 0.22 1.30 4957.00 1.80 0.26 1.80 4957.50 2.30 0.29 2.30 4958.00 2.80 0.32 2.80 4958.50 3.30 0.35 3.30 4959.00 3.80 0.38 3.80 4959.50 4.30 0.40 4.30 4960.00 4.80 0.42 4.80 4960.50 5.30 0.45 5.30 4961.00 5.80 0.47 5.80 4961.10 5.90 0.47 5.90 100-yr WSEL 4961.15 5.95 0.47 5.95 Emergency Overflow 4961.50 6.30 0.49 6.30 Overtopping Berm ORIFICE RATING CURVE Pond 4 Outlet 100-yr Orifice 911-015 Hansen 4/17/2019 F. Wegert 4/15/2019 6:32 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Detention\FDP Detention\911-015_Orifice_Pond4.xlsx\Orifice Size Area Inlet Performance Curve: Pond 4 Overflow Outlet Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 3.1416*Dia.of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Pond Outlet Diameter of Grate (ft): 4 Open Area of Grate (ft2): 16.00 Rim Elevation (ft): 4961.200 Reduction Factor: 25% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4961.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 4961.22 0.08 9.12 0.08 0.04 4961.24 0.23 12.90 0.23 0.06 4961.26 0.42 15.80 0.42 0.08 4961.28 0.64 18.24 0.64 0.10 4961.30 0.89 20.39 0.89 0.12 4961.32 1.18 22.34 1.18 0.14 4961.34 1.48 24.13 1.48 0.16 4961.36 1.81 25.80 1.81 0.18 4961.38 2.16 27.36 2.16 0.20 4961.40 2.53 28.84 2.53 100-Year Design Flow = 0.47 cfs Q = 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q = 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 Discharge (cfs) Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow Project: Date: Pond 1 Pond 2 4953.7 4953.0 4960.2 4960.1 5.3 6.4 4959.0 4959.4 Elevation Depth Height (ft) Width (ft) Flow Rate (cfs) Elevation Depth Height (ft) Width (ft) Flow Rate (cfs) 4960.7 7 0.5 42 44.55 4960.6 7.6 0.4 80 60.72 4961.2 7.5 1.0 42 126.00 4961.1 8.1 0.9 80 204.92 4961.7 8 1.5 42 231.48 4961.6 8.6 1.4 80 397.56 4962.2 8.5 2.0 42 356.38 4962.1 9.1 1.9 80 628.55 Elevation Height (ft) Width (ft) 100-Year Flow Rate (cfs) Elevation Height (ft) Width (ft) 100-Year Flow Rate (cfs) 4960.65 0.05 80 2.62 Pond 3 Pond 4 4953.4 4955.2 4960.8 4961.5 5.5 5.9 4958.9 4961.1 Elevation Depth Height (ft) Width (ft) Flow Rate (cfs) Elevation Depth Height (ft) Width (ft) Flow Rate (cfs) 4961.3 7.9 0.5 80 84.85 4962 6.8 0.5 125 132.58 4961.8 8.4 1.0 80 240.00 4962.5 7.3 1.0 125 375.00 Appendix D Water Quality/LID Design Computations Project Number: 911-015 Project: Hansen Date: 4/17/2019 Prepared By: F. Wegert 22.570 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs 38.38 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs 0.3838 <-- CALCULATED 0.176 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD Figure 3-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.330 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 3.0 WQ Depth (ft) = 3.440 <-- INPUT from stage-storage table 0.713 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 dia (in) = 15/16 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of holes = 10 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 t (in) = 0.500 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of rows = 1.000 <-- CALCULATED from WQ Depth and row spacing WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS Ponds 1 & 2 REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS: BASIN AREA = CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING: BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = WQCV (watershed inches) = AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in 2 ) = Project Number: 911-015 Project: Hansen Date: 4/17/2019 Prepared By: Frederick S. Wegert 3.623 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs 90.00 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs 0.9000 <-- CALCULATED 0.401 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD Figure 3-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.121 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 3.0 WQ Depth (ft) = 1.450 <-- INPUT from stage-storage table 0.417 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 dia (in) = 3/4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of holes = 4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 t (in) = 0.500 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of rows = 1.000 <-- CALCULATED from WQ Depth and row spacing WQCV (watershed inches) = AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in 2 ) = CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING: WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS Pond 3 REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS: BASIN AREA = BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = Project Number: 911-015 Project: Hansen Date: 4/17/2019 Prepared By: Frederick S. Wegert 1.170 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs 88.00 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs 0.8800 <-- CALCULATED 0.385 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD Figure 3-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.038 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 3.0 WQ Depth (ft) = 1.270 <-- INPUT from stage-storage table 0.147 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 dia (in) = 7/16 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of holes = 4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 t (in) = 0.500 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of rows = 1.000 <-- CALCULATED from WQ Depth and row spacing WQCV (watershed inches) = AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in 2 ) = CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING: WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS Pond 4 REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS: BASIN AREA = BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = Basin(s) LID Treatment Total Basin(s) Area (Ac.) Rain Garden Req'd Min. Vol. (Cu.-Ft.) 1A None (Pond) 10.43 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, & 1F NE Rain Garden 11.34 8,773 1G, 1H, 1I, 1J, 1K, & 1L NW Rain Garden 16.08 9,506 1M & 1N None 5.46 2A None (Pond) 2.81 2B, 2C, 2D, 2E, 2I, & 2J None 3.92 2F, 2G, 2H, 2K, & 2L Site Specific 13.22 3A Site Specific 3.09 3B None 0.33 4 Site Specific 3.10 69.78 5.39 Acres 4.21 Acres 4.55 Acres 0.78 Acres 0.50 Acres 3.00 Acres 38.11 Acres 27.42 Acres 71.9% 50% On-Site Treatment by LID Summary Table for Single-Family Residences Total Site Area Detention Pond (Tract L) Detention Pond (Tract M) Total Newly Developed Area less Site Specific Areas & Ponds Neighborhood Park (Tract B) Total Newly Developed Area Treated Percent of Newly Developed Area Treated Areas Requiring Site Specific LID Treatment Multi-family lots (Tract D) Multi-family lots (Tract E) Local Commerical (Tract C) Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia = 50.0 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100) i = 0.500 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 0.17 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 494,088 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV = 6,794 cu ft Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in Average Runoff Producing Storm G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER = cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER = cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum) DWQCV = 12.00 in B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical) Z = 4.00 ft / ft (Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls) C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin = 4941 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual = 6637 sq ft E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area) ATop = 8030 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT= 7,334 cu ft (VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth) 3. Growing Media 4. Underdrain System A) Are underdrains provided? B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y = ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 = N/A cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO = N/A in Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) F. Wegert Northern Engineering April 17, 2019 Hansen Northeast Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO Rain Garden Northeast.xlsm, RG 4/15/2019, 5:24 PM Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity of structures or groundwater contamination? 6. Inlet / Outlet Control A) Inlet Control 7. Vegetation 8. Irrigation A) Will the rain garden be irrigated? Notes: Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) F. Wegert Northern Engineering April 17, 2019 Hansen Northeast Choose One Choose One Choose One Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided Plantings Seed (Plan for frequent weed control) Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod Choose One YES NO YES NO Rain Garden Northeast.xlsm, RG 4/15/2019, 5:24 PM Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia = 50.0 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100) i = 0.500 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 0.17 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 700,567 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV = 9,633 cu ft Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in Average Runoff Producing Storm G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER = cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER = cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum) DWQCV = 12.00 in B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical) Z = 4.00 ft / ft (Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls) C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin = 7006 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual = 9295 sq ft E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area) ATop = 10951 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT= 10,123 cu ft (VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth) 3. Growing Media 4. Underdrain System A) Are underdrains provided? B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y = ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 = N/A cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO = N/A in Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) F. Wegert Northern Engineering April 17, 2018 Hansen Northwest Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO Rain Garden Northwest.xlsm, RG 4/15/2019, 5:22 PM Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity of structures or groundwater contamination? 6. Inlet / Outlet Control A) Inlet Control 7. Vegetation 8. Irrigation A) Will the rain garden be irrigated? Notes: Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) F. Wegert Northern Engineering April 17, 2018 Hansen Northwest Choose One Choose One Choose One Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided Plantings Seed (Plan for frequent weed control) Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod Choose One YES NO YES NO Rain Garden Northwest.xlsm, RG 4/15/2019, 5:22 PM Appendix E Erosion Control Report Final Drainae Report April 17, 2019 Lorson South Land Corp Erosion Control Report Erosion Control Report A comprehensive Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (along with associated details) has been included with the final construction drawings. It should be noted, however, that any such Erosion and Sediment Control Plan serves only as a general guide to the Contractor. Staging and/or phasing of the BMPs depicted, and additional or different BMPs from those included may be necessary during construction, or as required by the authorities having jurisdiction. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure erosion control measures are properly maintained and followed. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is intended to be a living document, constantly adapting to site conditions and needs. The Contractor shall update the location of BMPs as they are installed, removed or modified in conjunction with construction activities. It is imperative to appropriately reflect the current site conditions at all times. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall address both temporary measures to be implemented during construction, as well as permanent erosion control protection. Best Management Practices from the Volume 3, Chapter 7 – Construction BMPs will be utilized. Measures may include, but are not limited to, silt fencing and/or wattles along the disturbed perimeter, gutter protection in the adjacent roadways and inlet protection at existing and proposed storm inlets. Vehicle tracking control pads, spill containment and clean-up procedures, designated concrete washout areas, dumpsters, and job site restrooms shall also be provided by the Contractor. Grading and Erosion Control Notes can be found on Sheet CS2 of the Utility Plans. The Final Utility Plans will also contain a full-size Erosion Control Plan as well as a separate sheet dedicated to Erosion Control Details. In addition to this report and the referenced plan sheets, the Contractor shall be aware of, and adhere to, the applicable requirements outlined in any existing Development Agreement(s) of record, as well as the Development Agreement, to be recorded prior to issuance of the Development Construction Permit. Also, the Site Contractor for this project may be required to secure a Stormwater Construction General Permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Water Quality Control Division – Stormwater Program, before commencing any earth disturbing activities. Prior to securing said permit, the Site Contractor shall develop a comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) pursuant to CDPHE requirements and guidelines. The SWMP will further describe and document the ongoing activities, inspections, and maintenance of construction BMPs. Appendix F USDA Soils Report United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Larimer County Natural Area, Colorado Resources Conservation Service September 12, 2017 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface.................................................................................................................... 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Larimer County Area, Colorado...................................................................... 14 5—Aquepts, loamy......................................................................................14 22—Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slope............................................... 15 34—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes.............................................. 16 35—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes.............................................. 17 36—Fort Collins loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes.............................................. 19 37—Fort Collins loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes.............................................. 20 55—Kim loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes.......................................................... 21 63—Longmont clay, 0 to 3 percent slopes.................................................. 23 73—Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes.................................................24 74—Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes.................................................25 76—Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to 3 percent slopes.........................................27 79—Otero sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes.............................................28 Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................30 Soil Properties and Qualities.............................................................................. 30 Soil Qualities and Features.............................................................................30 Hydrologic Soil Group................................................................................. 30 References............................................................................................................35 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report 6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 4483300 4483400 4483500 4483600 4483700 4483800 4483900 4484000 4484100 4484200 4484300 4484400 4484500 4483300 4483400 4483500 4483600 4483700 4483800 4483900 4484000 4484100 4484200 4484300 4484400 4484500 495900 496000 496100 496200 496300 496400 496500 496600 496700 495900 496000 496100 496200 496300 496400 496500 496600 496700 40° 30' 41'' N 105° 2' 58'' W 40° 30' 41'' N 105° 2' 16'' W 40° 29' 58'' N 105° 2' 58'' W 40° 29' 58'' N 105° 2' 16'' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 300 600 1200 1800 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:6,420 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more Map Unit Legend Larimer County Area, Colorado (CO644) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 5 Aquepts, loamy 15.4 8.8% 22 Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slope 4.0 2.3% 34 Fort Collins loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 1.9 1.1% 35 Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 8.6 4.9% 36 Fort Collins loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes 30.9 17.6% 37 Fort Collins loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes 1.1 0.6% 55 Kim loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes 4.4 2.5% 63 Longmont clay, 0 to 3 percent slopes 6.6 3.8% 73 Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 23.5 13.4% 74 Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes 67.6 38.5% 76 Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to 3 percent slopes 3.8 2.2% 79 Otero sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes 7.7 4.4% Totals for Area of Interest 175.6 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Custom Soil Resource Report 11 Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion Custom Soil Resource Report 12 of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report 13 Larimer County Area, Colorado 5—Aquepts, loamy Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpws Elevation: 4,500 to 6,700 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 80 to 140 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Aquepts and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Aquepts Setting Landform: Depressions, draws, stream terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, tread, dip Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loamy alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 60 inches: variable Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Runoff class: Negligible Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to very high (0.60 to 99.90 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 6 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 5w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Hydric soil rating: Yes Minor Components Fort collins Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Nunn Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 14 Stoneham Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Kim Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No 22—Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slope Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpvt Elevation: 4,800 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Caruso and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Caruso Setting Landform: Flood-plain steps, stream terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Mixed alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 35 inches: clay loam H2 - 35 to 44 inches: fine sandy loam, sandy loam H2 - 35 to 44 inches: sand, gravelly sand H3 - 44 to 60 inches: H3 - 44 to 60 inches: Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 24 to 48 inches Frequency of flooding: Occasional Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Custom Soil Resource Report 15 Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: D Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Loveland Percent of map unit: 9 percent Landform: Terraces Hydric soil rating: Yes Fluvaquents Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Terraces Hydric soil rating: Yes 34—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpw7 Elevation: 4,800 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Fort collins and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Fort Collins Setting Landform: Terraces, fans Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 8 inches: loam H2 - 8 to 18 inches: loam, clay loam H2 - 8 to 18 inches: loam, silt loam, fine sandy loam H3 - 18 to 60 inches: Custom Soil Resource Report 16 H3 - 18 to 60 inches: H3 - 18 to 60 inches: Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 26.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3c Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067XY002CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Stoneham Percent of map unit: 6 percent Hydric soil rating: No Larim Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Ascalon Percent of map unit: 4 percent Hydric soil rating: No 35—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tlnc Elevation: 4,020 to 6,730 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 143 to 154 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Fort collins and similar soils: 85 percent Custom Soil Resource Report 17 Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Fort Collins Setting Landform: Interfluves Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Pleistocene or older alluvium derived from igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock and/or eolian deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 4 inches: loam Bt1 - 4 to 9 inches: clay loam Bt2 - 9 to 16 inches: clay loam Bk1 - 16 to 29 inches: loam Bk2 - 29 to 80 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 12 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.1 to 1.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 0.5 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nunn Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) Hydric soil rating: No Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interfluves Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, base slope Custom Soil Resource Report 18 Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) Hydric soil rating: No 36—Fort Collins loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpw9 Elevation: 4,800 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Fort collins and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Fort Collins Setting Landform: Terraces, fans Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, riser Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 9 inches: loam H2 - 9 to 20 inches: loam, clay loam H2 - 9 to 20 inches: loam, silt loam, fine sandy loam H3 - 20 to 60 inches: H3 - 20 to 60 inches: H3 - 20 to 60 inches: Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Custom Soil Resource Report 19 Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 25.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067XY002CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Ascalon Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Kim Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Stoneham Percent of map unit: 2 percent Hydric soil rating: No 37—Fort Collins loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpwb Elevation: 4,800 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Fort collins and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Fort Collins Setting Landform: Terraces, fans Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, riser Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 6 inches: loam H2 - 6 to 18 inches: loam, clay loam H2 - 6 to 18 inches: loam, silt loam, fine sandy loam H3 - 18 to 60 inches: Custom Soil Resource Report 20 H3 - 18 to 60 inches: H3 - 18 to 60 inches: Properties and qualities Slope: 5 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 26.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067XY002CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Larimer Percent of map unit: 8 percent Hydric soil rating: No Kim Percent of map unit: 4 percent Hydric soil rating: No Stoneham Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No 55—Kim loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpwz Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Kim and similar soils: 85 percent Custom Soil Resource Report 21 Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kim Setting Landform: Fans Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Mixed alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: loam H2 - 7 to 60 inches: loam, clay loam, sandy clay loam H2 - 7 to 60 inches: H2 - 7 to 60 inches: Properties and qualities Slope: 5 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 26.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067XY002CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Thedalund Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Stoneham Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 22 63—Longmont clay, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpx8 Elevation: 4,800 to 5,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated and reclaimed of excess salts and sodium Map Unit Composition Longmont and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Longmont Setting Landform: Flood plains, valleys Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Clayey alluvium derived from shale Typical profile H1 - 0 to 60 inches: clay Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 24 to 30 inches Frequency of flooding: Occasional Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Gypsum, maximum in profile: 5 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to strongly saline (4.0 to 16.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 20.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Salt Meadow (R067BY035CO) Custom Soil Resource Report 23 Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Dacono Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Aquolls Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Swales Hydric soil rating: Yes Heldt Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No 73—Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tlng Elevation: 4,100 to 5,700 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 152 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Nunn and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Nunn Setting Landform: Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Pleistocene aged alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 6 inches: clay loam Bt1 - 6 to 10 inches: clay loam Bt2 - 10 to 26 inches: clay loam Btk - 26 to 31 inches: clay loam Bk1 - 31 to 47 inches: loam Bk2 - 47 to 80 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Custom Soil Resource Report 24 Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 7 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.1 to 1.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 0.5 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Clayey Plains (R067BY042CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Heldt Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey Plains (R067BY042CO) Hydric soil rating: No Wages Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) Hydric soil rating: No 74—Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tlpl Elevation: 3,900 to 5,840 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 17 inches Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 160 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Custom Soil Resource Report 25 Map Unit Composition Nunn and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Nunn Setting Landform: Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Pleistocene aged alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 9 inches: clay loam Bt - 9 to 13 inches: clay loam Btk - 13 to 25 inches: clay loam Bk1 - 25 to 38 inches: clay loam Bk2 - 38 to 80 inches: clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 7 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.1 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 0.5 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Clayey Plains (R067BY042CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Heldt Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Clayey Plains (R067BY042CO) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 26 Satanta Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) Hydric soil rating: No 76—Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpxq Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Nunn, wet, and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Nunn, Wet Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 10 inches: clay loam H2 - 10 to 47 inches: clay loam, clay H2 - 10 to 47 inches: clay loam, loam, gravelly sandy loam H3 - 47 to 60 inches: H3 - 47 to 60 inches: H3 - 47 to 60 inches: Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.60 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Custom Soil Resource Report 27 Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 19.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Heldt Percent of map unit: 6 percent Hydric soil rating: No Dacono Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Mollic halaquepts Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Swales Hydric soil rating: Yes 79—Otero sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpxt Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Otero and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Otero Setting Landform: Fans Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium and/or eolian deposits Custom Soil Resource Report 28 Typical profile H1 - 0 to 14 inches: sandy loam H2 - 14 to 60 inches: sandy loam, fine sandy loam, loamy very fine sand H2 - 14 to 60 inches: H2 - 14 to 60 inches: Properties and qualities Slope: 5 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (2.00 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 15.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Kim Percent of map unit: 9 percent Hydric soil rating: No Nelson Percent of map unit: 6 percent Hydric soil rating: No Tassel Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 29 Soil Information for All Uses Soil Properties and Qualities The Soil Properties and Qualities section includes various soil properties and qualities displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in the selected area of interest. A single value or rating for each map unit is generated by aggregating the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This aggregation process is defined for each property or quality. Soil Qualities and Features Soil qualities are behavior and performance attributes that are not directly measured, but are inferred from observations of dynamic conditions and from soil properties. Example soil qualities include natural drainage, and frost action. Soil features are attributes that are not directly part of the soil. Example soil features include slope and depth to restrictive layer. These features can greatly impact the use and management of the soil. Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. 30 Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Custom Soil Resource Report 31 32 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Hydrologic Soil Group 4483300 4483400 4483500 4483600 4483700 4483800 4483900 4484000 4484100 4484200 4484300 4484400 4484500 4483300 4483400 4483500 4483600 4483700 4483800 4483900 4484000 4484100 4484200 4484300 4484400 4484500 495900 496000 496100 496200 496300 496400 496500 496600 496700 495900 496000 496100 496200 496300 496400 496500 496600 496700 40° 30' 41'' N 105° 2' 58'' W 40° 30' 41'' N 105° 2' 16'' W 40° 29' 58'' N 105° 2' 58'' W 40° 29' 58'' N 105° 2' 16'' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 300 600 1200 1800 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:6,420 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as Table—Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit — Larimer County Area, Colorado (CO644) Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 5 Aquepts, loamy A/D 15.4 8.8% 22 Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slope D 4.0 2.3% 34 Fort Collins loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes B 1.9 1.1% 35 Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes C 8.6 4.9% 36 Fort Collins loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes B 30.9 17.6% 37 Fort Collins loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes B 1.1 0.6% 55 Kim loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes B 4.4 2.5% 63 Longmont clay, 0 to 3 percent slopes D 6.6 3.8% 73 Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes C 23.5 13.4% 74 Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes C 67.6 38.5% 76 Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to 3 percent slopes C 3.8 2.2% 79 Otero sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes A 7.7 4.4% Totals for Area of Interest 175.6 100.0% Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Custom Soil Resource Report 34 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 35 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report 36 Map Pocket DR1 –Drainage Exhibit LID – Overall LID Exhibit X X X X X MM M F.O. T S T S T S T S NORTHWEST RAIN GARDEN DETENTION POND 2 100-YR VOL=1.85 ac-ft NORTHEAST PEAK RELEASE=3.48 cfs RAIN GARDEN DETENTION POND 3 100-YR VOL=2.24 ac PEAK RELEASE=9.89 cfs 2l 4 2k 2h 1n 1a 2j 1m 2d 2e 1j 1c 2c 2g 2b 2f 2i 3c 4 3A 2H 2J 2L 2K 2E 1A 2A 1N 1M 1L 1J 1B 2D 2F 2G 2I 3C FUTURE DETENTION POND 5 100-YR VOL=0.81 ac-ft PEAK RELEASE=0.60 cfs DETENTION POND 1 100-YR VOL=10.01 ac-ft X X X X X T S T S T S X X B M X X X X X M X X X F .O. MM M F.O. T S LID LID EXHIBIT OVERALL 35 Sheet of 69 HANSEN SUBDIVISION These drawings are instruments of service provided by Northern Engineering Services, Inc. and are not to be used for any type of construction unless signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer in the employ of Northern Engineering Services, Inc. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION REVIEW SET 301 North Howes Street, Suite 100 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 E NGINEER ING N O R T H E RN PHONE: 970.221.4158 www.northernengineering.com CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF COLORADO Know what'sbelow. Call before you dig. R KEYMAP B M VAULT ELEC TIMBERLINE RD ZEPHYR RD 1. EXISTING UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES AS SHOWN ARE INDICATED ACCORDING TO THE BEST INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE ENGINEER. THE ENGINEER DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY OF SUCH INFORMATION. EXISTING UTILITY MAINS AND SERVICES MAY NOT BE STRAIGHT LINES OR AS INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO CALL ALL UTILITY COMPANIES (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE) PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION TO VERIFY EXACT UTILITY LOCATIONS. 2. REFER TO THE "FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR HANSEN PROPERTY" BY NORTHERN ENGINEERING, DATED APRIL 17, 2019 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 3. ALL PROJECT DATA IS ON THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS VERTICAL DATUM; NAVD88. SEE COVER SHEET FOR BENCHMARK REFERENCES. 4. REFER TO THE PLAT FOR LOT AREAS, TRACT SIZES, EASEMENTS, LOT DIMENSIONS, UTILITY EASEMENTS, OTHER EASEMENTS, AND OTHER SURVEY INFORMATION. NOTES: LEGEND: ST PROPOSED EASEMENT EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY PROPOSED LOT LINE PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER PROPOSED SWALE EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR PROPOSED STORM INLET PROPOSED STORM SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY ( IN FEET ) 0 1 INCH = 150 FEET 150 150 300 450 NORTH PROPOSED AREA OF LID TREATMENT PROPOSED AREA OF SITE-SPECIFIC LID TREATMENT 50% On-Site Treatment by LID Summary Table for Single-Family Residences Basin(s) LID Treatment Total Basin(s) Area (Ac.) Rain Garden Req'd Min. Vol. (Cu.-Ft.) 1A None (Pond) 10.43 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, & 1F NE Rain Garden 11.34 6,794 1G, 1H, 1I, 1J, 1K, & 1L NW Rain Garden 16.08 9,506 1M & 1N None 5.46 2A None (Pond) 2.81 2B, 2C, 2D, 2E, 2I, & 2J None 3.92 2F, 2G, 2H, 2K, & 2L Site Specific 13.22 3A Site Specific 3.09 3B None 0.33 4 Site Specific 3.10 Total Site Area 69.78 Areas Requiring Site Specific LID Treatment Multi-family lots (Tract D) 5.39 Acres Multi-family lots (Tract E) 4.21 Acres Local Commerical (Tract C) 4.55 Acres Detention Pond (Tract L) 0.78 Acres Detention Pond (Tract M) 0.50 Acres Neighborhood Park (Tract B) 3.00 Acres Total Newly Developed Area less Site Specific Areas & Ponds 38.11 Acres Total Newly Developed Area Treated 27.42 Acres Percent of Newly Developed Area Treated 71.9% PEAK RELEASE=3.08 cfs STORM SEWER A SEE SHEET ST1 STORM SEWER A SEE SHEET ST1 2a OUTLET A3-4 SEE SHEET ST1 STORM SEWER B1 SEE SHEET ST3 OUTLET B1-4 SEE SHEET ST3 STORM SEWER A1 SEE SHEET ST2 3a DETENTION POND 4 100-YR VOL=0.96 ac-ft PEAK RELEASE=0.47 cfs OUTLET A1-1 SEE SHEET ST2 3B 3b STORM SEWER E SEE SHEET ST4 STORM SEWER D SEE SHEET ST4 STORM SEWER A3-1 SEE SHEET ST2 OUTLET A3-1.1 SEE SHEET ST2 STORM SEWER B SEE SHEET ST2 STORM SEWER C SEE SHEET ST2 1 1 2 3 4 4 STORM SEWER G SEE SHEET ST5 STORM SEWER H SEE SHEET ST5 STORM SEWER F SEE SHEET ST5 1l 1b X X B M X X X X X M X X X F.O. NORTHWEST 1f 1e 1j 1i 1h 1g 1c 1k 1d 1I 1H 1G 1D 1F 1C 1K 1E 2B 2C 2 3 3 STORM SEWER I SEE SHEET ST6 STORM SEWER J SEE SHEET ST7 DR1 DRAINAGE EXHIBIT OVERALL 56 Sheet of 69 HANSEN SUBDIVISION These drawings are instruments of service provided by Northern Engineering Services, Inc. and are not to be used for any type of construction unless signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer in the employ of Northern Engineering Services, Inc. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION REVIEW SET 301 North Howes Street, Suite 100 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 E NGINEER ING N O R T H E RN PHONE: 970.221.4158 www.northernengineering.com CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF COLORADO Know what'sbelow. Call before you dig. R KEYMAP B M VAULT ELEC TIMBERLINE RD ZEPHYR RD LEGEND: ST PROPOSED EASEMENT EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY PROPOSED LOT LINE PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER PROPOSED SWALE EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR PROPOSED STORM INLET PROPOSED STORM SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY A DRAINAGE BASIN LABEL DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY B2 1.45 ac DESIGN POINT FLOW ARROWS 1. EXISTING UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES AS SHOWN ARE INDICATED ACCORDING TO THE BEST INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE ENGINEER. THE ENGINEER DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY OF SUCH INFORMATION. EXISTING UTILITY MAINS AND SERVICES MAY NOT BE STRAIGHT LINES OR AS INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO CALL ALL UTILITY COMPANIES (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE) PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION TO VERIFY EXACT UTILITY LOCATIONS. 2. REFER TO THE "FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR HANSEN PROPERTY" BY NORTHERN ENGINEERING, DATED APRIL 17, 2019 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 3. ALL PROJECT DATA IS ON THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS VERTICAL DATUM; NAVD88. SEE COVER SHEET FOR BENCHMARK REFERENCES. 4. REFER TO THE PLAT FOR LOT AREAS, TRACT SIZES, EASEMENTS, LOT DIMENSIONS, UTILITY EASEMENTS, OTHER EASEMENTS, AND OTHER SURVEY INFORMATION. 5. SEE SHEET D4 FOR INLET SCHEDULE. NOTES: BASIN DESIGNATION BASIN AREA (AC) ( IN FEET ) 0 1 INCH = 150 FEET 150 150 300 450 NORTH DRAINAGE SUMMARY TABLE DESIGN POINT BASIN ID TOTAL AREA (acres) C2 C100 2-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) Q2 (cfs) Q100 (cfs) 1a 1A 10.43 0.43 0.54 17.0 15.2 7.96 36.43 1b 1B 0.49 0.48 0.59 9.4 8.0 0.54 2.52 1c 1C 0.39 0.79 0.99 5.8 5.0 0.85 3.81 1d 1D 0.97 0.80 1.00 8.9 6.9 1.82 8.75 1e 1E 1.33 0.61 0.76 12.8 9.6 1.63 7.97 1f 1F 8.16 0.61 0.77 24.2 21.1 7.30 34.11 1g 1G 2.27 0.59 0.74 13.9 11.8 2.62 12.24 1h 1H 2.36 0.81 1.00 10.8 7.7 4.15 20.29 1i 1I 9.80 0.58 0.72 23.6 20.7 8.34 39.10 1j 1J 0.73 0.67 0.84 5.0 5.0 1.39 6.05 1k 1K 0.33 0.80 1.00 5.2 5.0 0.75 3.27 1l 1L 0.60 0.44 0.55 8.9 8.0 0.62 2.84 1m 1M 2.70 0.65 0.82 10.8 8.2 3.84 18.51 1n 1N 2.76 0.66 0.83 12.8 9.7 3.67 17.95 2a 2A 2.81 0.28 0.35 15.1 14.1 1.46 6.55 2b 2B 0.99 0.78 0.98 5.0 5.0 2.20 9.62 2c 2C 0.43 0.73 0.92 6.0 5.0 0.87 3.94 2d 2D 0.62 0.82 1.00 8.4 7.4 1.21 5.42 2e 2E 0.21 0.81 1.00 5.0 5.0 0.48 2.08 2f 2F 0.26 0.82 1.00 5.0 5.0 0.61 2.60 2g 2G 1.36 0.66 0.83 15.7 10.9 1.66 8.53 2h 2H 6.17 0.65 0.81 9.2 6.7 9.23 45.40 2i 2I 1.22 0.89 1.00 6.7 5.5 2.82 12.12 2j 2J 0.46 0.80 1.00 5.5 5.0 1.04 4.53 2k 2K 1.74 0.69 0.87 11.9 7.7 2.52 12.96 2l 2L 3.68 0.35 0.44 18.6 16.6 2.18 10.08 3a 3A 2.06 0.95 1.00 5.7 5.0 5.41 20.53 3b 3B 1.02 0.86 1.00 14.5 13.1 1.67 7.08 3c 3C 0.33 0.86 1.00 5.0 5.0 0.82 3.30 4 4 3.10 0.95 1.00 6.7 5.3 7.60 30.80 50% On-Site Treatment by LID Summary Table for Single-Family Residences Basin(s) LID Treatment Total Basin(s) Area (Ac.) Rain Garden Req'd Min. Vol. (Cu.-Ft.) 1A None (Pond) 10.43 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, & 1F NE Rain Garden 11.34 6,794 1G, 1H, 1I, 1J, 1K, & 1L NW Rain Garden 16.08 9,506 1M & 1N None 5.46 2A None (Pond) 2.81 2B, 2C, 2D, 2E, 2I, & 2J None 3.92 2F, 2G, 2H, 2K, & 2L Site Specific 13.22 3A Site Specific 3.09 3B None 0.33 4 Site Specific 3.10 Total Site Area 69.78 Areas Requiring Site Specific LID Treatment Multi-family lots (Tract D) 5.39 Acres Multi-family lots (Tract E) 4.21 Acres Local Commerical (Tract C) 4.55 Acres Detention Pond (Tract L) 0.78 Acres Detention Pond (Tract M) 0.50 Acres Neighborhood Park (Tract B) 3.00 Acres Total Newly Developed Area less Site Specific Areas & Ponds 38.11 Acres Total Newly Developed Area Treated 27.42 Acres Percent of Newly Developed Area Treated 71.9% Pond Summary Table Pond ID 100-Yr Detention Vol. (AC.-Ft.) Peak Release (cfs) 1 10.01 3.08 2 1.85 3.48 3 2.24 9.89 4 0.96 0.47 5 0.81 0.60 PROPOSED SWALE 1 1 of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado Survey Area Data: Version 11, Sep 23, 2016 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 20, 2015—Oct 15, 2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 33 accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado Survey Area Data: Version 11, Sep 23, 2016 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 20, 2015—Oct 15, 2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 10 4962.3 8.9 1.5 80 440.91 4963.0 7.8 1.5 125 688.92 4962.8 9.4 2.0 80 678.82 4963.5 8.3 2.0 125 1060.66 Elevation Height (ft) Width (ft) 100-Year Flow Rate (cfs) Elevation Height (ft) Width (ft) 100-Year Flow Rate (cfs) 4961.28 0.48 80 80.03 4961.70 0.20 125 34.01 4/17/2019 911-015 F. Wegert SWMM Outlet Flowrate Depth from Blocked Outlet (Weir Eq.) SWMM Outlet Flowrate SWMM Outlet Flowrate Depth from Blocked Outlet (Weir Eq.) Depth from Blocked Outlet (Weir Eq.) SWMM Outlet Flowrate Depth from Blocked Outlet (Weir Eq.) Pond 3 Pond 4 Pond Name: w/ Blocked Orifice w/ Blocked Orifice Bottom Elev: Crest Elev: Depth: Emergency Overflow Spillway Design Pond 1 Pond 2 Pond Name: w/ Blocked Orifice Project Number: Calculations By: Hansen Bottom Elev: Crest Elev: Depth: Water Surface Elev: Pond Name: Bottom Elev: Crest Elev: Depth: Water Surface Elev: w/ Blocked Orifice Water Surface Elev: Pond Name: Bottom Elev: Crest Elev: Depth: Water Surface Elev: According to SWMM, Pond 1 contains the entirety of the 100-Year Storm during a blocked outlet scenerio. Pond 2 is large enough to contain the majority of the 100- Year Storm during a blocked outlet scenerio. Only 2.62 cfs will overtop the pond. Orifice Flow Orifice Flow Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow Q = 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 Q = 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 3c 3C 0.33 5 5 5 0.86 0.86 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.82 1.40 3.30 3a Basin 3 3.42 5 5 5 0.91 0.91 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 8.91 15.23 34.01 4 Basin 4 3.10 7 7 5 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.60 4.44 9.95 7.60 13.00 30.80 1b NE Rain Garden 11.34 15 15 11 0.63 0.63 0.78 1.87 3.19 7.42 13.32 22.72 66.05 1l NW Rain Garden 16.08 16 16 12 0.62 0.62 0.77 1.84 3.14 7.29 18.26 31.11 90.42 1a Pond 1 43.32 32 32 29 0.58 0.58 0.72 1.24 2.12 4.60 31.13 53.22 144.35 2a Pond 2 6.68 20 20 16 0.55 0.55 0.68 1.61 2.74 6.30 5.89 10.03 28.82 2h Pond 3 13.27 13 13 9 0.60 0.60 0.75 2.02 3.45 8.03 16.07 27.47 80.03 3a Pond 4 3.42 5 5 5 0.91 0.91 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 8.91 15.23 34.01 1b CB-1C 11.34 25 25 22 0.63 0.63 0.78 1.43 2.44 5.32 10.18 17.37 47.35 1l CB-1K 16.08 24 24 21 0.62 0.62 0.77 1.48 2.52 5.53 14.64 25.01 68.59 1n CB-1M 5.46 13 13 10 0.66 0.66 0.82 1.98 3.39 7.72 7.11 12.17 34.65 Combined & Routed Basins 4/15/2019 5:39 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Hydrology\911-015_FDP_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Runoff Flow, Q 10 (cfs) Intensity, i 100 (in/hr) Sub-Basin(s) Rational Method Equation: Rainfall Intensity: Rainfall Intensity taken from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM), Tables RA-7 and RA-8 April 17, 2019 Intensity, i 10 (in/hr) C 10 Area, A (acres) Intensity, i 2 (in/hr) 100-yr T c (min) Q = C f ( C )( i )( A ) 4/15/2019 5:39 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Hydrology\911-015_FDP_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Runoff T c (min) NOTE: C-value for overland flows over grassy surfaces; C = 0.25 Design Point Sub-Basin Overland Flow Gutter Flow Time of Concentration PROPOSED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: Velocity (Swale Flow), V = 15·S ½ Gutter/Swale Flow, Time of Concentration: Project: Velocity (Gutter Flow), V = 20·S ½ T t = L / 60V T c = T i + T t (Equation RO-2) Date: Calculations By: April 17, 2019 F. Wegert Hansen (Equation RO-4) ( ) 3 1 1 . 87 1 . 1 * S C Cf L Ti − = 2j 2J No 0.80 0.80 1.00 41 2.51% 2.6 2.6 0.9 430 1.58% 2.52 2.8 5.5 5.5 5.0 2k 2K No 0.69 0.69 0.87 175 1.13% 9.7 9.7 5.6 219 0.70% 1.67 2.2 11.9 11.9 7.7 2l 2L No 0.35 0.35 0.44 322 3.03% 17.3 17.3 15.3 50 0.10% 0.63 1.3 18.6 18.6 16.6 2a Basin 2 No 0.64 0.64 0.80 322 3.03% 10.6 10.6 6.9 50 0.10% 0.63 1.3 11.9 11.9 8.2 3a 3A No 0.95 0.95 1.00 200 0.49% 5.0 5.0 3.3 169 4.57% 4.28 0.7 5.7 5.7 5.0 3b 3B No 0.86 0.86 1.00 53 2.32% 2.5 2.5 1.0 487 0.11% 0.67 12.1 14.5 14.5 13.1 3c 3C No 0.86 0.86 1.00 41 2.51% 2.1 2.1 0.9 271 2.12% 2.91 1.6 5.0 5.0 5.0 3a Basin 3 No 0.91 0.91 1.00 200 2.30% 3.7 3.7 2.0 231 1.79% 2.67 1.4 5.1 5.1 5.0 4 Basin 4 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 200 1.00% 4.1 4.1 2.6 485 2.27% 3.01 2.7 6.7 6.7 5.3 1b NE Rain Garden No 0.63 0.63 0.78 200 1.00% 12.5 12.5 8.3 486 2.06% 2.87 2.8 15.3 15.3 11.2 1l NW Rain Garden No 0.62 0.62 0.77 200 1.00% 12.8 12.8 8.7 487 1.85% 2.72 3.0 15.8 15.8 11.7 1a Pond 1 No 0.58 0.58 0.72 186 2.03% 10.5 10.5 7.6 2309 0.79% 1.78 21.6 32.1 32.1 29.2 2a Pond 2 No 0.55 0.55 0.68 200 0.76% 16.0 16.0 12.0 593 1.36% 2.33 4.2 20.2 20.2 16.3 2h Pond 3 No 0.60 0.60 0.75 322 3.03% 11.6 11.6 8.1 50 0.10% 0.63 1.3 12.9 12.9 9.4 3a Pond 4 No 0.91 0.91 1.00 200 2.30% 3.7 3.7 2.0 231 1.79% 2.67 1.4 5.1 5.1 5.0 1b CB-1C No 0.63 0.63 0.78 186 2.03% 9.5 9.5 6.3 1724 0.83% 1.82 15.8 25.3 25.3 22.1 1l CB-1K No 0.62 0.62 0.77 186 2.03% 9.7 9.7 6.6 1562 0.85% 1.85 14.1 23.8 23.8 20.7 1n CB-1M No 0.66 0.66 0.82 180 2.46% 8.2 8.2 5.2 544 0.83% 1.82 5.0 13.2 13.2 10.2 Combined & Routed Basins 4/15/2019 5:39 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Hydrology\911-015_FDP_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Tc T c (min) 1a 1A No 0.43 0.43 0.54 81 1.06% 11.1 11.1 9.3 730 1.06% 2.06 5.9 17.0 17.0 15.2 1b 1B No 0.48 0.48 0.59 74 2.30% 7.6 7.6 6.2 205 0.88% 1.87 1.8 9.4 9.4 8.0 1c 1C No 0.79 0.79 0.99 53 2.70% 3.0 3.0 1.1 260 0.59% 1.54 2.8 5.8 5.8 5.0 1d 1D No 0.80 0.80 1.00 55 2.62% 3.1 3.1 1.1 573 0.66% 1.63 5.9 8.9 8.9 6.9 1e 1E No 0.61 0.61 0.76 231 2.34% 10.5 10.5 7.3 245 0.79% 1.78 2.3 12.8 12.8 9.6 1f 1F No 0.61 0.61 0.77 186 2.03% 9.8 9.8 6.7 1579 0.84% 1.83 14.4 24.2 24.2 21.1 1g 1G No 0.59 0.59 0.74 80 1.82% 6.9 6.9 4.9 890 1.15% 2.15 6.9 13.9 13.9 11.8 1h 1H No 0.81 0.81 1.00 81 1.10% 4.8 4.8 1.6 805 1.22% 2.21 6.1 10.8 10.8 7.7 1i 1I No 0.58 0.58 0.72 186 2.03% 10.5 10.5 7.6 1417 0.81% 1.80 13.1 23.6 23.6 20.7 1j 1J No 0.67 0.67 0.84 47 15.83% 2.2 2.2 1.3 280 0.77% 1.76 2.7 5.0 5.0 5.0 1k 1K No 0.80 0.80 1.00 67 3.28% 3.1 3.1 1.1 206 0.67% 1.63 2.1 5.2 5.2 5.0 1l 1L No 0.44 0.44 0.55 65 5.98% 5.5 5.5 4.5 160 0.15% 0.77 3.4 8.9 8.9 8.0 1m 1M No 0.65 0.65 0.82 180 4.13% 7.0 7.0 4.4 446 0.95% 1.95 3.8 10.8 10.8 8.2 1n 1N No 0.66 0.66 0.83 180 2.46% 8.2 8.2 5.1 454 0.66% 1.63 4.6 12.8 12.8 9.7 1a Basin 1 No 0.58 0.58 0.72 186 2.03% 10.5 10.5 7.6 2309 0.79% 1.78 21.6 32.1 32.1 29.2 2a 2A No 0.28 0.28 0.35 109 2.40% 12.0 12.0 11.0 545 2.11% 2.90 3.1 15.1 15.1 14.1 2b 2B No 0.78 0.78 0.98 33 8.30% 1.7 1.7 0.6 288 0.68% 1.65 2.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 2c 2C No 0.73 0.73 0.92 53 2.70% 3.6 3.6 1.8 252 0.77% 1.76 2.4 6.0 6.0 5.0 2d 2D No 0.82 0.82 1.00 42 8.31% 1.7 1.7 0.6 346 0.18% 0.85 6.8 8.4 8.4 7.4 2e 2E No 0.81 0.81 1.00 12 5.75% 1.0 1.0 0.4 186 0.45% 1.34 2.3 5.0 5.0 5.0 2f 2F No 0.82 0.82 1.00 19 1.47% 2.0 2.0 0.7 255 0.55% 1.49 2.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 2g 2G No 0.66 0.66 0.83 200 0.76% 12.7 12.7 7.9 255 0.51% 1.43 3.0 15.7 15.7 10.9 2h 2H No 0.65 0.65 0.81 150 3.17% 7.0 7.0 4.5 389 2.20% 2.97 2.2 9.2 9.2 6.7 2i 2I No 0.89 0.89 1.00 69 2.22% 2.5 2.5 1.2 405 0.62% 1.58 4.3 6.7 6.7 5.5 NOTE: C-value for overland flows over grassy surfaces; C = 0.25 Design Point Sub-Basin Overland Flow Gutter Flow Time of Concentration PROPOSED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: Velocity (Swale Flow), V = 15·S ½ Gutter/Swale Flow, Time of Concentration: Project: Velocity (Gutter Flow), V = 20·S ½ T t = L / 60V T c = T i + T t (Equation RO-2) Date: Calculations By: April 17, 2019 F. Wegert Hansen (Equation RO-4) ( ) 3 1 1 . 87 1 . 1 * S C Cf L Ti − = 4/15/2019 5:39 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Hydrology\911-015_FDP_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Tc Composite Runoff Coefficient Composite % Imperv. Steep >7% …………………… USDA SOIL TYPE: C Project: Calculations By: Date: Composite Runoff Coefficient with Adjustment Flat <2% ……………………… Sandy Soil Clayey Soil Average 2% to 7% ……………. Lawns and Landscaping Flat <2% ……………………. Average 2% to 7% ………….. Steep >7% …………………… Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: CHARACTER OF SURFACE: PROPOSED % IMPERVIOUSNESS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS Hansen F. Wegert April 17, 2019 100-year C f = 1.25 Asphalt ………………………….. Concrete …………………………. Gravel (packed) …………………. Roofs…………………………….. Pavers……………………………. NE Rain Garden 494,088 11.34 2.02 0.00 5.47 3.85 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.78 50% NW Rain Garden 700,567 16.08 3.99 1.57 3.83 6.69 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.62 0.77 50% Pond 1 1,886,826 43.32 7.38 1.57 13.88 18.68 1.80 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.72 45% Pond 2 290,974 6.68 1.43 0.00 1.00 3.09 1.15 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.68 44% Pond 3 578,061 13.27 2.41 0.00 0.00 3.44 7.43 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.75 57% Pond 4 148,888 3.42 1.18 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 2.06 0.91 0.91 1.00 89% CB-1C 494,088 11.34 2.02 0.00 5.47 3.85 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.78 50% CB-1K 700,567 16.08 3.99 1.57 3.83 6.69 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.62 0.77 50% CB-1M 238,038 5.46 1.02 0.00 2.88 1.57 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.82 54% Total Development 3,039,609 69.8 12.5 1.6 14.9 25.4 12.2 5.0 0.63 0.63 0.79 53% Combined & Routed Basins 3) Assume single-family residences are 3/4 roof & driveways (C = 0.95) and 1/4 lawn (C=0.25) 2) Runoff coefficients are taken from the Overall Drainage Report for Hansen Overall Development Plan prepared by Northern Engineering dated 8/29/2017. 1) Runoff coefficients are taken from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manaual, Table 3.2.1 and Table 3.2.2. 4/15/2019 5:34 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Hydrology\911-015_FDP_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Runoff C Composite Runoff Coefficient Composite % Imperv. Steep >7% …………………… USDA SOIL TYPE: C Project: Calculations By: Date: Composite Runoff Coefficient with Adjustment Flat <2% ……………………… Sandy Soil Clayey Soil Average 2% to 7% ……………. Lawns and Landscaping Flat <2% ……………………. Average 2% to 7% ………….. Steep >7% …………………… Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: CHARACTER OF SURFACE: PROPOSED % IMPERVIOUSNESS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS Hansen F. Wegert April 17, 2019 100-year C f = 1.25 Asphalt ………………………….. Concrete …………………………. Gravel (packed) …………………. Roofs…………………………….. Pavers……………………………. 2C 18,802 0.43 0.14 0.00 0.21 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.73 0.92 65% 2D 26,807 0.62 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.82 1.00 81% 2E 9,086 0.21 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 1.00 81% 2F 11,382 0.26 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.82 1.00 82% 2G 59,274 1.36 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.07 1.15 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.83 70% 2H 268,814 6.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.17 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.81 70% 2I 53,058 1.22 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.89 0.89 1.00 92% 2J 19,834 0.46 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 1.00 79% 2K 75,924 1.74 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.10 1.26 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.87 72% 2L 160,432 3.68 0.54 0.00 0.00 3.14 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.35 0.44 15% Total Basin 2 869,035 19.95 3.84 0.00 1.00 6.53 10.38 0.00 0.64 0.64 0.80 59% 3A 89,861 2.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.06 0.95 0.95 1.00 90% 3B 44,571 1.02 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.86 1.00 87% 3C 14,456 0.33 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.86 1.00 88% Total Basin 3 148,888 3.42 1.18 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 2.06 0.91 0.91 1.00 89% 4 (Pond 5) 134,860 3.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 2.98 0.95 0.95 1.00 90% 4/15/2019 5:34 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Hydrology\911-015_FDP_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Runoff C Composite Runoff Coefficient Composite % Imperv. 1A 454,134 10.43 0.36 0.00 1.70 6.57 1.80 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.54 27% 1B 21,514 0.49 0.01 0.00 0.20 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.59 29% 1C 16,870 0.39 0.14 0.00 0.21 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.99 73% 1D 42,294 0.97 0.36 0.00 0.53 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 1.00 74% 1E 57,948 1.33 0.20 0.00 0.65 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.76 48% 1F 355,462 8.16 1.31 0.00 3.88 2.96 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.77 48% 1G 98,794 2.27 0.70 0.41 0.00 1.16 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.74 47% 1H 102,899 2.36 1.12 0.77 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 1.00 77% 1I 426,998 9.80 1.71 0.39 3.31 4.40 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.72 44% 1J 31,582 0.73 0.30 0.00 0.18 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.84 58% 1K 14,337 0.33 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 1.00 75% 1L 25,957 0.60 0.01 0.00 0.20 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.55 25% 1M 117,764 2.70 0.50 0.00 1.41 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.82 54% 1N 120,273 2.76 0.52 0.00 1.47 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.83 55% Total Basin 1 1,886,826 43.32 7.38 1.57 13.88 18.68 1.80 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.72 45% 2A 122,608 2.81 0.11 0.00 0.00 2.71 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.35 4% 2B 43,016 0.99 0.16 0.00 0.79 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.78 0.98 70% Steep >7% …………………… USDA SOIL TYPE: C Project: Calculations By: Date: Composite Runoff Coefficient with Adjustment Flat <2% ……………………… Sandy Soil Clayey Soil Average 2% to 7% ……………. Lawns and Landscaping Flat <2% ……………………. Average 2% to 7% ………….. Steep >7% …………………… Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: CHARACTER OF SURFACE: PROPOSED % IMPERVIOUSNESS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS Hansen F. Wegert April 17, 2019 100-year C f = 1.25 Asphalt ………………………….. Concrete …………………………. Gravel (packed) …………………. Roofs…………………………….. Pavers……………………………. 4/15/2019 5:34 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Hydrology\911-015_FDP_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Runoff C 2 (in/hr) 100-yr T c (min) Q = C f ( C )( i )( A ) 4/15/2019 5:30 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Hydrology\911-015_FDP_Hist_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Runoff (ft/s) T t (min) 2-yr T c (min) 10-yr T c (min) 100-yr T c (min) h1 H1 No 0.20 0.20 0.25 275 4975.00 4972.00 1.09% 27.1 27.1 25.6 2560 4972.00 4960.00 0.47% 1.37 31.2 58.3 58.3 56.8 h3 H3 No 0.24 0.24 0.30 200 67.00 63.00 2.00% 18.0 18.0 16.7 229 63.00 56.87 2.68% 3.27 1.2 19.2 19.2 17.9 h4 H4 No 0.20 0.20 0.25 200 67.00 65.00 1.00% 23.8 23.8 22.5 485 65.00 54.00 2.27% 3.01 2.7 26.5 26.5 25.2 HISTORIC TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS F. Wegert April 17, 2019 Design Point Sub-Basin Overland Flow Gutter Flow Time of Concentration Velocity (Gutter Flow), V = 20·S ½ T t = L / 60V T c = T i + T t (Equation RO-2) Velocity (Swale Flow), V = 15·S ½ NOTE: C-value for overland flows over grassy surfaces; C = 0.25 Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: Gutter/Swale Flow, Time of Concentration: (Equation RO-4) ( ) 3 1 1 . 87 1 . 1 * S C Cf L Ti − = 4/15/2019 5:30 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Hydrology\911-015_FDP_Hist_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Tc Runoff Coefficient Composite % Imperv. H1 2,832,002 65.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 65.01 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.25 2% H3 74,352 1.71 0.00 0.10 0.00 1.61 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.30 7% H4 134,123 3.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.08 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.25 2% 3) Assume single-family residences are 3/4 roof & driveways (C = 0.95) and 1/4 lawn (C=0.25) Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: CHARACTER OF SURFACE: Composite Runoff Coefficient with Adjustment HISTORIC COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS Hansen F. Wegert April 17, 2019 2) Runoff coefficients are taken from the Overall Drainage Report for Hansen Overall Development Plan prepared by Northern Engineering dated 8/29/2017. 1) Runoff coefficients are taken from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manaual, Table 3.2.1 and Table 3.2.2. 100-year C f = 1.25 4/15/2019 5:29 PM D:\Projects\911-015\Drainage\Hydrology\911-015_FDP_Hist_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Composite C