Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBUCKING HORSE SECOND FILING - FDP - FDP120018 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - DRAINAGE REPORTFINAL DRAINAGE REPORT BUCKING HORSE FILING TWO Fort Collins, Colorado October 31, 2012 Prepared for: Bucking Horse LLC 3702 Manhattan Avenue, Suite 201 Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 Prepared by: 200 South College Avenue, Suite 10 Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Phone: 970.221.4158 Fax: 970.221.4159 www.northernengineering.com Project Number: 687-002 3 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. October 31, 2012 City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 RE: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for BUCKING HORSE FILING TWO Dear Staff: Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for your review. This report accompanies the 10.31.12 Final Development Plan (FDP) submittal for the proposed Bucking Horse Filing Two development. 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 Bucking Horse Filing Two 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. Nicholas W. Haws, PE Andrew G. Reese Project Manager Project Engineer Herman Feissner, PE Project Engineer FILING TWO Final Drainage Report TABLE OF CONTENTS I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ........................................................................ 1 A. Location ...................................................................................................................................... 1 B. Floodplain ................................................................................................................................... 2 II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS ............................................................................ 3 A. Compliance with Drainage Master Plan ....................................................................................... 3 B. Additional Considerations ........................................................................................................... 4 III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA ........................................................................................ 5 IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN ......................................................................................... 6 A. General Concept ......................................................................................................................... 6 B. Specific Details ............................................................................................................................ 6 V. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................. 8 A. Compliance with Standards ......................................................................................................... 8 References ......................................................................................................................... 9 APPENDICES: APPENDIX A – Hydrologic Computations APPENDIX B – Hydraulic Computations B.1 – Storm Sewers B.2 – Street Flow B.3 – Swales B.4 – Culverts B.5 – Inlets B.6 – Detention Facilities APPENDIX C – Water Quality Design Computations APPENDIX D – StormWater Management Model (SWMM) MAP POCKET: DR1 – Overall Drainage Exhibit FILING TWO Final Drainage Report 1 I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. Location 1. Vicinity Map 2. Bucking Horse Filing Two is comprised of ±76.3 acres and primarily consists of Outlots A and B from Sidehill – Filing Two. Portions of other rights-of-way and residential lots will be replatted with this subdivision as well. In general, Bucking Horse Filing Two is bound to the northwest by Gooseberry Street, to the east/northeast by the Great Western Railroad, to the west by Cargill and to the south by Drake Road and Environmental Drive. The large regional detention pond (Pond 215) serving most of Sidehill – Filing Two, and both First and Filing Two of Bucking Horse, exists at the southeast corner of the property. This pond outfalls into the Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet Ditch. While this southern “urban estate” portion of the master development was previously lacking any site-specific plans, developed runoff from this area has always been assumed to drain to FILING TWO Final Drainage Report 2 the major drainage facilities already designed and constructed. 3. A soils report (EEC Project No. 1122025C) was completed by Earth Engineering Consultants, Inc. (EEC) on July 19, 2012. The report contains the results of a complete geotechnical subsurface exploration as well as pertinent geotechnical recommendations. The boring logs show that USCS soil group CL is predominant on-site. These soils are inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays and lean clays. B. Floodplain The portion of Bucking Horse Filing Two generally located south of Palomino Court and east of Miles House Avenue is located within a FEMA Moderate Risk Flood Hazard Area for the Cache la Poudre River. This area is designated as Zone X on FIRM Panel 0992G, Revised May 2, 2012. Therefore, it falls outside of the regulated 100-year floodway and floodplain fringe. Chapter 10 of the City of Fort Collins Municipal Code does regulate critical facilities within this Moderate Risk Flood Hazard Zone. However, no life-safety or emergency response critical facilities are proposed with Bucking Horse Filing Two. While the area referenced above does fall outside of the 100-year floodplain, it should be noted that this particular area is protected from the 1% annual chance or greater flood hazard by a levee system. Overtopping or failure of any levee system is possible. Current and future land owners should check with the local Floodplain FILING TWO Final Drainage Report 3 Administrator at the City of Fort Collins to obtain more information, such as the estimated level of protection provided (which may exceed the 1% annual chance level) and Emergency Action Plan, on the levee system(s) providing protection for this area. To mitigate flood risk in residual risk areas, property owners and residents are encouraged to consider flood insurance and floodproofing or other protective measures. For more information on flood insurance, interested parties should visit the FEMA Website at http:/www.fema.gov/business/nfip/index.shtm. II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS A. Compliance with Drainage Master Plan Bucking Horse Filing Two is located in the Foothills Drainage Basin. All of Bucking Horse Filing Two drains to Detention Pond 215. This pond currently provides approximately 32.4 ac-ft of storage volume at an elevation of roughly 4885.3-feet. The pond is also designed as a 40-hour dry extended detention basin (EDB), providing approximately 3.4 ac-ft of water quality capture volume (WQCV) at an elevation of roughly 4882.1-feet. Both the detention storage volume, as well as the WQCV, have been reanalyzed using updated acreages and impervious values from the proposed Bucking Horse development. The composite runoff coefficient and percent impervious calculations included in Appendix A show that the proposed development (i.e., SWMM 107) has an imperviousness of approximately 27.1%. The MODSWMM analysis was not re-run with this submittal because the imperviousness for Basin 107 is negligibly lower than the imperviousness of 28.9% shown in the MODSWMM Proposed Effective Model (July 2012). With the Preliminary Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Bucking Horse Filing Two, the imperviousness was updated to 28.9%, along with the basin area increase previously conducted with Bucking Horse First Filing. The resultant required detention storage volume increased from 28.0 ac-ft to 28.8 ac-ft with a new peak discharge from Pond 215 of 83.0 cfs. The SWMM basins were also utilized to update the overall water quality calculations for Pond 215. This pond was originally designed to treat nearly 216 acres with an assumed imperviousness of 31%. However, since that time, two major modifications have been made to the original SWM model. The first change has to do with upstream Basins 108 and 109, which are off-site and west of Timberline Road. While runoff volumes from these basins are still routed through Pond 215 in the SWMM, upstream detention ponds now provide water quality treatment for these basins; therefore, their respective areas have been removed from the WQCV calculations. The second major revision to the SWM model comes with the Bucking Horse First and Filing Two developments. Basin areas and percent imperviousness have been updated to be consistent with the development plan(s) currently proposed. This includes the addition of Basin 100 and Pond 3 to correctly model the development now proposed on the Jessup Farm parcel. The required detention storage volume for Pond 3 can be found with the Bucking Horse First Filing documents. However, the water quality requirements for Basin 100 have now been shifted from Pond 3 to Pond 215. With all of the above changes taken into consideration, the new watershed area to be treated is roughly 178.1 acres with an approximate imperviousness of 46%. The resultant WQCV for a 40-hour dry extended detention basin is 3.48 ac-ft at WSEL 4882.1. The change is WQCV (i.e., 3.34 ac-ft to 3.48 ac-ft) resulted in no change to the WSEL. FILING TWO Final Drainage Report 4 Therefore, the existing outlet structure will not need to be adjusted. Combined with the necessary detention storage volume of 28.8 ac-ft, the total new required volume in Pond 215 is roughly 32.3 ac-ft. With 32.4 ac-ft of volume currently provided at an elevation of 4885.25-ft, the existing pond is sufficient. This water surface level will be utilized as the new spillway crest elevation. The emergency overflow weir will be revised accordingly with a wider length and lower top of pond. One foot of freeboard will still be provided above the 4885.25 WSEL; however, lowering the top of pond offers substantial improvement to the site grading design and earthwork condition. B. Additional Considerations While the minimum water quality requirements for stormwater runoff from Bucking Horse Filing Two are technically met with the existing WQCV within Detention Pond 215, additional consideration has been given to the proposed agricultural uses. In particular, the working farm and horse areas may warrant additional stormwater management measures. A draft Working Farm Manure Management Plan has been developed. The primary objective is to prevent animal waste and similar pollutants from traveling across private residential property, and to minimize the potential for any such pollutants to enter the downstream receiving waters. Therefore, interceptor swales, bio-filter sand buffer strips and/or vegetated filter strips are suggested to bolster the overall stormwater management and treatment strategies and address the specific concerns related to animal waste runoff. The later has proven more effective at removing pollutants from animal waste runoff. Said measures are envisioned to consist of roughly a 2’ wide by 1’ deep sand section surrounded by “bio-swale” plantings. This filter mechanism would be installed in low-gradient interceptor swales downstream of the Working Farm and two horse areas. Vegetated filter strips are widely cited as an effective measure for treating animal waste runoff. Common configurations include: channelized flow systems and overland flow systems. An ideal application of the overland flow system would be upstream from the outlet structures in Pond 215. The horse riding and grazing areas and vegetated filter strip locations need to be coordinated to insure that animal waste occurs up-gradient. The overall effectiveness of the vegetated filter strip is determined by: soil type, tributary area, treatment frequency and loading characteristics. The aforementioned treatment measures are above and beyond the minimum requirements already satisfied with the EDB in Pond 215. These concepts are preliminary in nature at this time, and the Project Team is currently refining the details of the system during the final design process. FILING TWO Final Drainage Report 5 III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. There are no optional provisions outside of the FCSCM proposed with Bucking Horse Filing Two. B. Hydrological Criteria 1. The City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves, as depicted in Figure RA-16 of the FCSCM, serve as the source for all hydrologic computations associated with the Bucking Horse Filing Two Fort Collins development. Tabulated data contained in Table RA-7 has been utilized for Rational Method runoff calculations. 2. The Rational Method has been employed to compute stormwater runoff utilizing coefficients contained in Tables RO-11 and RO-12 of the FCSCM. 3. Two separate design storms have been utilized to address distinct drainage scenarios. The first event analyzed is the “Minor,” or “Initial” Storm, which has a 2-year recurrence interval. The second event considered is the “Major Storm,” which has a 100-year recurrence interval. C. Hydraulic Criteria 1. The drainage facilities proposed with the Bucking Horse Filing Two project are designed in accordance with criteria outlined in the FCSCM and/or the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District’s (UDFCD) Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. 2. As stated in Section I.B, above, the subject property is not located in a FEMA regulatory or a City of Fort Collins designated floodplain. F. Floodplain Regulations Compliance 1. As previously mentioned, this project is not subject to any floodplain regulations. G. Modifications of Criteria 1. No modifications are requested at this time. FILING TWO Final Drainage Report 6 IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. General Concept 1. This report is intended to address the stormwater impacts associated with the proposed Bucking Horse Filing Two project. Bucking Horse Filing Two is a mixed-use development consisting of five distinct sub-areas: single-family (detached) residential homes on urban estate lots, a new Working Farm, the historic Johnson Farm to be repurposed as an office park, a future City of Fort Collins public park and a tract reserved for future multi- family development. The “Final Drainage & Erosion Control Report, Sidehill – Filing Two” dated May 27, 2005 by JR Engineering documented the final design and analysis of the stormwater infrastructure at Sidehill – Filing Two (SF2). The drainage facilities included therein were sized to accommodate runoff from the build-out of the entire subdivision. Stormwater conveyance, peak flow attenuation, as well as water quality treatment have already been established for the subject property. The Phase 1 infrastructure, as outlined in the approved construction plans for SF2, has already been installed and certified by others. Bucking Horse First Filing will complete the Phase 2 stormwater improvements originally identified with SF2, as modified per the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Bucking Horse First Filing by Northern Engineering. The Bucking Horse First Filing drainage study updated the master SWMM and addressed deviations from the initial Sidehill stormwater designs and improvements. However, proposed modifications to the Bucking Horse Filing Two area have yet to be addressed. Therefore, this Final Drainage Report for Bucking Horse Filing Two will focus on documenting conformance with existing design assumptions and drainage improvements relative to the urban estate area only. 2. Appendix A contains detailed Rational Method calculations (i.e., composite runoff coefficients, Tc and developed runoff) for the 2- and 100-year storm events (i.e., minor and major) reflective of the proposed Bucking Horse Filing Two development plan. These areas and impervious values were then input into MODSWMM, the results of which can be found in Appendix D. Additionally, WQCV computations were also updated in Appendix C utilizing Best Management Practices criteria outlined by the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. 3. Detailed street capacity computations, inlet sizing, and storm sewer analyses were also performed and are included i Appendix B. 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. On-site sub-basins are designated A through G. Sub-basins A through E account for most of the proposed single-family developed area. Sub-basins F1, F2, and G include the future City of Fort Collins park area, the working farm and Detention Pond 215, respectively. Off-site runoff affecting the development comes from sub-basins OS-1 through OS-4. OS-1 and OS-2 are received by sub-basins B1 and B2 respectively. Sub-basins OS-3 and OS-4 are received by sub-basins E4 and E5, respectively. FILING TWO Final Drainage Report 7 The balance of the sub-basins, A - E, are similar in composition, design and prevailing flow patterns. In general, sheet flow from the developed lots will drain into the adjoining street section (i.e., local with roll-over curb and gutter or collector with vertical curb and gutter). Most sub-basin series drain to CDOT Type 13 combination inlets. Exceptions are as follows: B4 and B5: Currently shown draining into the swale that runs parallel to the Great Western Railroad. These basins will drain to the Northeast when Nancy Gray Avenue is extended. D2 and D3: Sub-basin D2 drains to an area inlet that outfalls into a swale along the north portion of sub-basin D3. A similar swale is situated in the eastern portion of sub- basin D3 and just down gradient from the horse area. The area between the horse area and this swale is an ideal location for a vegetated filter strip. F1 and F2: These sub-basins are shown draining northeast and into sub-basin G (Pond 215). The drainage patterns in sub-basin F1 are likely to remain as shown. Developed runoff and drainage patterns in Sub-basin F2, which is the working farm, will be more fully developed during this final design process. 2. The inlet at design points E4 and E5 are designed to receive and convey the 10-year storm event. During the 100-year storm event, developed runoff will overtop the east curb line and drain to Pond 215. 3. The submitted design shows rip-rap designed at each outfall point. In lieu of rip-rap, is Scour Stop an acceptable alternative? FILING TWO Final Drainage Report 8 V. CONCLUSIONS A. Compliance with Standards 1. The drainage design proposed with the Bucking Horse Filing Two development complies with the City of Fort Collins’ Stormwater Criteria Manual, as well as previous drainage studies from which downstream stormwater infrastructure was constructed. 2. The drainage design proposed with the Bucking Horse Filing Two development complies with the City of Fort Collins’ Master Drainage Plan for the Foothills Drainage Basin. 3. There are no life-safety or emergency response critical facilities proposed within the Moderate Risk Flood Hazard Area (Zone X); therefore, this development complies will all federal and local floodplain regulations. 4. The drainage plan and stormwater management measures proposed with the Bucking Horse Filing Two development are compliant with all applicable state and federal regulations governing stormwater discharge. 5. Additional information and detail will be provided with future submittals, as is customary during the Final Plan review and approval process. FILING TWO Final Drainage Report 9 References 1. City of Fort Collins Landscape Design Guidelines for Stormwater and Detention Facilities, November 5, 2009, BHA Design, Inc. with City of Fort Collins Utility Services. 2. Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Bucking Horse First Filing, July 5, 2012, Northern Engineering. (NE Proj. No. 687-002) 3. Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Spring Creek Farms, September 28, 2005, Stantec Consulting Inc. 4. 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. 5. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report, Sidehill – Filing Two, May 27, 2005, JR Engineering LLC. (JR Job No. 39350.06). 6. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Timberline Center Subdivision, Revised April 12, 2006, North Star Design (NSD Job No. 114-37 & 114-38) 7. Geologic and Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Sidehill Subdivision, Filing 2, Fort Collins, Colorado, April 25, 2006, CTL | Thompson, Inc. (CTL Project No. FC03741-115) 8. Geotechnical Exploration Report, Proposed Townhomes at Bucking Horse, Fort Collins, Colorado, April 19, 2012, Earth Engineering Consultants, Inc. (EEC Project No. 1122025A) 9. Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, Adopted January 2, 2001, Repealed and Reenacted, Effective October 1, 2002, Repealed and Reenacted, Effective April 1, 2007. 10. Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration Report, Bucking Horse Development, Fort Collins, Colorado, April 23, 2012, Earth Engineering Consultants, Inc. (EEC Project No. 1122025B) 11. Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration Report, Bucking Horse Development - Southeast (Johnson Farm, Working Farm, Urban Estate), Fort Collins, Colorado, July 19, 2012, Earth Engineering Consultants, Inc. (EEC Project No. 1122025C) 12. Soils Resource Report for Larimer County Area, Colorado, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. 13. Stormwater Pipe Reduction Due to Decrease in Offsite Flow Release Rate, March 30, 2007, JR Engineering LLC. 14. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes 1-3, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Wright-McLaughlin Engineers, Denver, Colorado, Revised April 2008. APPENDIX A HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS Bucking Horse - Filing Two CHARACTER OF SURFACE: Runoff Coefficient Percentage Impervious Project: Bucking Horse - Filing Two Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: Calculations By: H. Feissner Asphalt ……....……………...……….....…...……………….…………………………………..0.95 100 Date: Concrete …….......……………….….……….………………..….…………………………………0.95 90 Gravel ……….…………………….….…………………………..………………………………..0.50 40 Roofs …….…….………………..……………….…………………………………………….. 0.95 90 General Single Family…………………………...………………..…………………………………………….0.60 . 50 Lawns and Landscaping Sandy Soil ……..……………..……………….…………………………………………….. 0.15 0 Clayey Soil ….….………….…….…………..………………………………………………. 0.25 0 2-year Cf = 1.00 100-year Cf = 1.25 Basin ID Basin Area (s.f.) Basin Area (ac) Area of Asphalt (ac) Area of Concrete (ac) Area of Roofs (ac) Area of Gravel (ac) Area of Single Family (ac) Area of Lawns and Landscaping (ac) 2-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 10-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 100-year Composite Runoff Coefficient Composite % Imperv. A1 127,032 2.92 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 1.21 1.29 0.50 0.50 0.62 33.6 B1 71,551 1.64 0.68 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.26 0.74 0.74 0.93 68.6 B2 154,708 3.55 0.69 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.62 0.43 0.43 0.54 25.6 B3a 115,058 2.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.86 1.68 0.37 0.37 0.47 17.8 B3b 105,539 2.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 2.38 0.25 0.25 0.32 0.7 B3c 43,595 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.68 0.36 0.36 0.45 15.8 B4 19,883 0.46 0.28 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.83 0.83 1.00 80.3 Bucking Horse - Filing Two Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: Project: Bucking Horse - Filing Two Calculations By: Date: Gutter/Swale Flow, Time of Concentration: Tt = L / 60V Tc = Ti + Tt (Equation RO-2) Velocity (Gutter Flow), V = 20·S½ Velocity (Swale Flow), V = 15·S½ NOTE: C-value for overland flows over grassy surfaces; C = 0.25 Is Length >500' ? C*Cf (2-yr Cf=1.00) C*Cf (10-yr Cf=1.00) C*Cf (100-yr Cf=1.25) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) Ti 2-yr (min) Ti 10-yr (min) Ti 100-yr (min) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) Velocity, V (ft/s) Tt (min) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) Velocity, V (ft/s) Tt (min) 2-yr Bucking Horse - Filing Two Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: Project: Bucking Horse - Filing Two Calculations By: Date: Gutter/Swale Flow, Time of Concentration: Tt = L / 60V Tc = T i + Tt (Equation RO-2) Velocity (Gutter Flow), V = 20·S ½ Velocity (Swale Flow), V = 15·S ½ NOTE: C-value for overland flows over grassy surfaces; C = 0.25 COMBINED DEVELOPED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS H. Feissner October 30, 2012 (Equation RO-4) 3 1 1 . 87 1 . 1 * S Ti C Cf L  NOTE: C-value for overland flows over grassy surfaces; C = 0.25 Ti 2-yr (min) Ti 10-yr (min) Ti 100-yr (min) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) Velocity, V (ft/s) Tt (min) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) Velocity, V (ft/s) Tt (min) 2-yr Tc (min) Bucking Horse - Filing Two Rational Method Equation: Project: Bucking Horse - Filing Two Calculations By: Date: From Section 3.2.1 of the CFCSDDC Rainfall Intensity: A1 A1 2.92 6 6 5 0.50 0.50 0.62 2.76 4.72 9.95 4.0 6.8 18.0 B1 B1 1.64 10 10 9 0.74 0.74 0.93 2.21 3.78 8.21 2.7 4.6 12.5 B2 B2 3.55 10 10 10 0.43 0.43 0.54 2.21 3.78 7.88 3.4 5.8 15.2 B3a B3a 2.64 11 11 11 0.37 0.37 0.47 2.17 3.71 7.57 2.1 3.7 9.3 B3b B3b 2.42 8 8 8 0.25 0.25 0.32 2.40 4.10 8.59 1.5 2.5 6.6 B3c B3c 1.00 17 17 17 0.36 0.36 0.45 1.75 2.99 6.20 0.6 1.1 2.8 B4 B4 0.46 6 6 6 0.83 0.83 1.00 2.67 4.56 9.31 1.0 1.7 4.2 B5 B5 0.34 5 5 5 0.82 0.82 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.8 1.4 3.4 DEVELOPED RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS C100 Design Point Flow, Q100 (cfs) Flow, Q2 (cfs) 10-yr Tc (min) 2-yr Tc (min) C2 Flow, Q10 (cfs) Intensity, i100 (in/hr) Basin(s) H. Feissner October 30, 2012 Intensity, i10 (in/hr) Rainfall Intensity taken from the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria (CFCSDDC), Figure 3.1 C10 Area, A (acres) Intensity, i2 (in/hr) 100-yr Tc (min) Q C f C i A B5 B5 0.34 5 5 5 0.82 0.82 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.8 1.4 3.4 B6 B6 0.85 15 15 14 0.45 0.45 0.56 1.87 3.19 6.71 0.7 1.2 3.2 C1 C1 2.62 19 19 19 0.65 0.65 0.81 1.65 2.82 5.84 2.8 4.8 12.4 C2 C2 4.33 27 27 26 0.64 0.64 0.80 1.37 2.34 4.93 3.8 6.5 17.1 C3 C3 1.88 13 13 13 0.70 0.70 0.87 1.98 3.39 7.04 2.6 4.4 11.5 D1 D1 0.20 5 5 5 0.48 0.48 0.60 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.3 0.5 1.2 Bucking Horse - Filing Two Rational Method Equation: Project: Bucking Horse - Filing Two Calculations By: Date: From Section 3.2.1 of the CFCSDDC Rainfall Intensity: COMBINED RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS H. Feissner October 30, 2012 Rainfall Intensity taken from the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria (CFCSDDC), Figure 3.1 Q C f C i A B1 B1 & OS1 2.48 19.6 19.6 18.6 0.65 0.65 0.81 56.0 1.63 2.78 5.84 2.6 4.5 11.8 B2 B2 & OS2 5.01 20.31 20.3 19.3 0.49 0.49 0.62 33.7 1.61 2.74 5.75 4.0 6.8 17.7 B3c B1-B3c, OS1 & OS2 13.56 25.2 25.2 24.3 0.45 0.45 0.56 27.5 1.43 2.44 5.09 8.7 14.8 38.5 B6 B1-B3c, B6, OS1 & OS3 14.40 30.7 30.7 29.7 0.45 0.45 0.56 27.6 1.29 2.19 4.56 8.3 14.1 36.7 C2 C1 & C2 6.94 27.4 27.4 25.9 0.64 0.64 0.80 55.6 1.37 2.34 4.93 6.1 10.5 27.5 E2 E1 & E2 5.20 22.8 22.8 22.0 0.64 0.64 0.80 55.3 1.51 2.58 5.32 5.0 8.6 22.2 E4 E1-E4 & OS-3 11.36 23.9 23.9 23.1 0.63 0.63 0.79 53.4 1.48 2.52 5.20 10.5 18.0 46.4 E5 E5 & OS-4 0.55 5.0 5.0 5.0 Rainfall Intensity taken from the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria (CFCSDDC), Figure 3.1 Design Point Basin(s) Area, A (acres) 2-yr Tc (min) 10-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) Flow, Q2 (cfs) Flow, Q10 (cfs) Flow, Q100 (cfs) Composite % Imperv. C2 C 10 C100 Intensity, i2 (in/hr) Intensity, i10 (in/hr) Intensity, i100 (in/hr) 10/30/20127:49 PM D:\Projects\687-002\Drainage\Filing Two\Hydrology\687-002_FT_Rational-Calcs\Combined Runoff APPENDIX B HYDRAULIC COMPUTATIONS B.1 – Storm Sewers B.2 – Street Flow B.3 – Inlets B.4 – Detention Facilities APPENDIX B.1 STORM SEWERS APPENDIX B.2 STREET FLOW Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Wednesday, Oct 31 2012 Street Capacity - Vertical Curb and Gutter (Major Storm Event) User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 4999.25 Slope (%) = 0.60 N-Value = Composite Calculations Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 30 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 5000.00) -(5.00, 4999.90, 0.016) -(12.50, 4999.75, 0.025) -(13.00, 4999.75, 0.016) -(13.00, 4999.25, 0.016) -(15.00, 4999.42, 0.016) -(38.00, 4999.88, 0.016) -(61.00, 4999.42, 0.016) -(63.00, 4999.25, 0.016) -(63.00, 4999.75, 0.016) -(63.50, 4999.75, 0.016) -(71.00, 4999.90, 0.025) -(76.00, 5000.00, 0.016) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.62 Q (cfs) = 30.45 Area (sqft) = 13.42 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.27 Wetted Perim (ft) = 64.05 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.60 Top Width (ft) = 63.02 EGL (ft) = 0.71 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Elev (ft) Section Depth (ft) 4998.50 -0.75 4999.00 -0.25 4999.50 0.25 5000.00 0.75 5000.50 1.25 5001.00 1.75 Sta (ft) Hydraflow Express - Street Capacity - Vertical Curb and Gutter (Major Storm Event) - 10/30/12 1 Depth Q Area Veloc Wp Yc TopWidth Energy (ft) (cfs) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 0.03 0.003 0.007 0.37 0.64 0.02 0.59 0.03 0.05 0.017 0.029 0.58 1.28 0.05 1.17 0.06 0.08 0.051 0.067 0.76 1.93 0.07 1.77 0.08 0.10 0.109 0.118 0.92 2.57 0.09 2.36 0.11 0.13 0.197 0.184 1.07 3.20 0.12 2.94 0.14 0.15 0.320 0.264 1.21 3.84 0.14 3.53 0.17 0.18 0.459 0.361 1.27 4.85 0.16 4.49 0.20 0.20 0.609 0.507 1.20 7.44 0.19 7.03 0.22 0.23 0.884 0.713 1.24 9.98 0.21 9.52 0.25 0.25 1.293 0.981 1.32 12.52 0.24 12.01 0.28 0.28 1.854 1.311 1.41 15.07 0.27 14.50 0.31 0.30 2.585 1.703 1.52 17.61 0.29 16.99 0.34 0.33 3.523 2.167 1.63 20.20 0.32 19.53 0.37 0.35 4.652 2.684 1.73 22.74 0.34 22.02 0.40 0.38 6.005 3.263 1.84 25.28 0.37 24.51 0.43 0.40 7.597 3.905 1.95 27.82 0.39 27.00 0.46 0.43 9.446 4.608 2.05 30.36 0.42 29.49 0.49 0.45 11.61 5.389 2.15 32.95 0.44 32.03 0.52 0.48 14.03 6.218 2.26 35.49 0.47 34.52 0.55 0.50 16.74 7.108 2.36 38.03 0.50 37.01 0.59 0.53 18.29 8.117 2.25 44.01 0.51 42.99 0.60 0.55 20.62 9.249 2.23 49.00 0.54 47.98 0.63 0.58 23.46 10.53 2.23 54.08 0.56 53.06 0.65 0.60 26.72 11.92 2.24 59.06 0.58 58.04 0.68 0.62 30.45 13.42 2.27 64.05 0.60 63.02 0.71 0.65 35.15 15.03 2.34 67.03 0.63 66.00 0.73 0.67 41.08 16.71 2.46 69.51 0.66 68.49 0.77 0.70 47.64 18.48 2.58 72.05 0.68 71.02 0.80 0.72 54.58 20.28 2.69 74.54 0.71 73.51 0.84 0.75 62.03 22.14 2.80 77.03 0.74 76.00 0.87 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Oct 30 2012 Street Capacity - Drive Over Curb and Gutter (Major Storm Event) User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 4999.40 Slope (%) = 0.60 N-Value = Composite Calculations Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 30 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 5000.00) -(4.50, 4999.91, 0.016) -(10.08, 4999.80, 0.025) -(11.50, 4999.40, 0.016) -(12.67, 4999.51, 0.016) -(26.50, 4999.79, 0.016) -(40.33, 4999.51, 0.016) -(41.50, 4999.40, 0.016) -(42.92, 4999.80, 0.016) -(48.50, 4999.91, 0.025) -(53.00, 5000.00, 0.016) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.58 Q (cfs) = 33.47 Area (sqft) = 13.08 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.56 Wetted Perim (ft) = 51.12 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.56 Top Width (ft) = 50.99 EGL (ft) = 0.68 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Elev (ft) Section Depth (ft) 4998.50 -0.90 4999.00 -0.40 4999.50 0.10 5000.00 0.60 5000.50 1.10 5001.00 1.60 Sta (ft) Hydraflow Express - Street Capacity - Drive Over Curb and Gutter (Major Storm Event) - 10/30/12 1 Depth Q Area Veloc Wp Yc TopWidth Energy (ft) (cfs) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 0.02 0.002 0.006 0.33 0.58 0.02 0.57 0.02 0.04 0.012 0.023 0.53 1.15 0.04 1.14 0.04 0.06 0.035 0.051 0.69 1.73 0.06 1.71 0.07 0.08 0.076 0.091 0.84 2.30 0.08 2.27 0.09 0.10 0.138 0.142 0.97 2.88 0.10 2.84 0.11 0.12 0.202 0.209 0.97 4.25 0.11 4.20 0.13 0.14 0.304 0.314 0.97 6.37 0.13 6.32 0.15 0.16 0.478 0.462 1.03 8.50 0.15 8.44 0.18 0.18 0.731 0.652 1.12 10.62 0.17 10.56 0.20 0.20 1.077 0.885 1.22 12.74 0.19 12.68 0.22 0.22 1.525 1.160 1.32 14.87 0.21 14.79 0.25 0.24 2.088 1.477 1.41 16.99 0.23 16.91 0.27 0.26 2.776 1.837 1.51 19.12 0.25 19.03 0.30 0.28 3.600 2.239 1.61 21.24 0.27 21.15 0.32 0.30 4.569 2.684 1.70 23.36 0.29 23.27 0.35 0.32 5.663 3.158 1.79 25.44 0.31 25.33 0.37 0.34 6.947 3.687 1.88 27.56 0.33 27.45 0.40 0.36 8.404 4.257 1.97 29.68 0.35 29.57 0.42 0.38 10.04 4.871 2.06 31.81 0.38 31.69 0.45 0.40 12.09 5.521 2.19 32.97 0.40 32.84 0.47 0.42 13.59 6.199 2.19 34.99 0.41 34.86 0.49 0.44 15.25 6.917 2.20 37.02 0.43 36.89 0.52 0.46 17.05 7.676 2.22 39.04 0.45 38.91 0.54 0.48 19.01 8.475 2.24 41.07 0.46 40.94 0.56 0.50 21.13 9.315 2.27 43.09 0.48 42.96 0.58 0.52 23.67 10.20 2.32 45.11 0.50 44.98 0.60 0.54 26.70 11.12 2.40 47.11 0.52 46.98 0.63 0.56 29.97 12.08 2.48 49.12 0.54 48.99 0.66 0.58 33.47 13.08 2.56 51.12 0.56 50.99 0.68 0.60 37.23 14.12 2.64 53.13 0.58 53.00 0.71 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Project: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Bucking Horse - Filing Two (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet ID: Design Point C2 (INLET 4-2) Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 12.5 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n = BACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line H = 6.00 inches CURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 25.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.020 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 S = 0.005 ft/ft O = 0.005 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 18.65 25.00 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm d = 6.0 8.2 inches MAX = 6.0 8.2 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 Depth Criterion Q = 9.7 27.7 cfs allow = 9.7 27.7 cfs Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPC2.xls, Q-Allow 10/31/2012, 12:09 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Project: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Bucking Horse - Filing Two (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet ID: Design Point C3 (INLET 4-1) Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 12.5 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n = BACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line H = 6.00 inches CURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 25.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.020 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 S = 0.005 ft/ft O = 0.005 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 18.65 25.00 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm d = 6.0 8.2 inches MAX = 6.0 8.2 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 Depth Criterion Q = 9.7 27.7 cfs allow = 9.7 27.7 cfs Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPC3.xls, Q-Allow 10/31/2012, 12:10 PM APPENDIX B.3 SWALES Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Oct 30 2012 Design Point B3a (Q100=9.3cfs, 1.33*Q100=12.37cfs) Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 2.00 Invert Elev (ft) = 4991.67 Slope (%) = 1.00 N-Value = 0.035 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 12.37 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 1.07 Q (cfs) = 12.37 Area (sqft) = 4.58 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.70 Wetted Perim (ft) = 8.82 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.91 Top Width (ft) = 8.56 EGL (ft) = 1.18 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Elev (ft) Section Depth (ft) 4991.00 -0.67 4991.50 -0.17 4992.00 0.33 4992.50 0.83 4993.00 1.33 4993.50 1.83 4994.00 2.33 Reach (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Oct 30 2012 Design Point B3c (Q100=38.5cfs, 1.33*Q100=51.20cfs) Trapezoidal Bottom Width (ft) = 4.00 Side Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 4.00 Invert Elev (ft) = 4986.95 Slope (%) = 0.60 N-Value = 0.035 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 51.20 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 1.57 Q (cfs) = 51.20 Area (sqft) = 16.14 Velocity (ft/s) = 3.17 Wetted Perim (ft) = 16.95 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 1.19 Top Width (ft) = 16.56 EGL (ft) = 1.73 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Elev (ft) Section Depth (ft) 4985.00 -1.95 4986.00 -0.95 4987.00 0.05 4988.00 1.05 4989.00 2.05 4990.00 3.05 4991.00 4.05 Reach (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Oct 30 2012 Design Point B6 (Q100=36.7cfs, 1.33*Q100=48.8cfs) Trapezoidal Bottom Width (ft) = 4.00 Side Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 2.00 Invert Elev (ft) = 4986.95 Slope (%) = 0.40 N-Value = 0.035 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 48.80 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 1.69 Q (cfs) = 48.80 Area (sqft) = 18.18 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.68 Wetted Perim (ft) = 17.94 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 1.16 Top Width (ft) = 17.52 EGL (ft) = 1.80 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Elev (ft) Section Depth (ft) 4986.00 -0.95 4986.50 -0.45 4987.00 0.05 4987.50 0.55 4988.00 1.05 4988.50 1.55 4989.00 2.05 Reach (ft) Hydraflow Express - Design Point B6 (Q100=36.7cfs, 1.33*Q100=48.8cfs) - 10/30/12 1 Depth Q Area Veloc Wp Yc TopWidth Energy (ft) (cfs) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 0.08 0.164 0.346 0.47 4.66 0.04 4.64 0.08 0.16 0.536 0.742 0.72 5.32 0.09 5.28 0.17 0.24 1.089 1.190 0.92 5.98 0.13 5.92 0.25 0.32 1.821 1.690 1.08 6.64 0.18 6.56 0.34 0.40 2.736 2.240 1.22 7.30 0.23 7.20 0.42 0.48 3.839 2.842 1.35 7.96 0.28 7.84 0.51 0.56 5.139 3.494 1.47 8.62 0.34 8.48 0.59 0.64 6.643 4.198 1.58 9.28 0.39 9.12 0.68 0.72 8.361 4.954 1.69 9.94 0.45 9.76 0.76 0.80 10.30 5.760 1.79 10.60 0.50 10.40 0.85 0.88 12.47 6.618 1.88 11.26 0.56 11.04 0.94 0.96 14.88 7.526 1.98 11.92 0.62 11.68 1.02 1.04 17.53 8.486 2.07 12.58 0.67 12.32 1.11 1.12 20.44 9.498 2.15 13.24 0.73 12.96 1.19 1.20 23.61 10.56 2.24 13.90 0.79 13.60 1.28 1.28 27.06 11.67 2.32 14.56 0.85 14.24 1.36 1.36 30.78 12.84 2.40 15.21 0.91 14.88 1.45 1.44 34.79 14.05 2.48 15.87 0.97 15.52 1.54 1.52 39.10 15.32 2.55 16.53 1.03 16.16 1.62 1.60 43.72 16.64 2.63 17.19 1.09 16.80 1.71 1.68 48.64 18.01 2.70 17.85 1.16 17.44 1.79 1.76 53.88 19.43 2.77 18.51 1.22 18.08 1.88 1.84 59.46 20.90 2.84 19.17 1.28 18.72 1.97 1.92 65.36 22.43 2.91 19.83 1.34 19.36 2.05 2.00 71.61 24.00 2.98 20.49 1.40 20.00 2.14 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Oct 30 2012 Design Point D3 - North Swale (Q100=18.4cfs, Q100*1.33=24.47cfs) Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 1.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 4990.00 Slope (%) = 1.40 N-Value = 0.035 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 24.47 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 1.30 Q (cfs) = 24.47 Area (sqft) = 6.76 Velocity (ft/s) = 3.62 Wetted Perim (ft) = 10.72 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 1.19 Top Width (ft) = 10.40 EGL (ft) = 1.50 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Elev (ft) Section Depth (ft) 4989.50 -0.50 4990.00 0.00 4990.50 0.50 4991.00 1.00 4991.50 1.50 4992.00 2.00 Reach (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Oct 30 2012 Design Point D3 - East Swale (Q100-11.2cfs, Q100*1.33=14.9cfs) Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 60.00 Total Depth (ft) = 1.00 Invert Elev (ft) = 4990.00 Slope (%) = 1.20 N-Value = 0.035 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 14.90 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.51 Q (cfs) = 14.90 Area (sqft) = 8.32 Velocity (ft/s) = 1.79 Wetted Perim (ft) = 32.71 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.43 Top Width (ft) = 32.64 EGL (ft) = 0.56 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Elev (ft) Section Depth (ft) 4989.50 -0.50 4990.00 0.00 4990.50 0.50 4991.00 1.00 4991.50 1.50 4992.00 2.00 Reach (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Oct 30 2012 Design Point E4 (Q100=7.67cfs, 1.33*Q100=10.21cfs) Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 1.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 4989.00 Slope (%) = 1.00 N-Value = 0.035 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 10.21 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 1.00 Q (cfs) = 10.21 Area (sqft) = 4.00 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.55 Wetted Perim (ft) = 8.25 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.84 Top Width (ft) = 8.00 EGL (ft) = 1.10 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Elev (ft) Section Depth (ft) 4988.50 -0.50 4989.00 0.00 4989.50 0.50 4990.00 1.00 4990.50 1.50 4991.00 2.00 Reach (ft) APPENDIX B.4 CULVERTS 0 2012 Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. 0 2012 Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Oct 30 2012 Design Point B6 (Storm 1) Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 4884.92 Pipe Length (ft) = 50.57 Slope (%) = 0.55 Invert Elev Up (ft) = 4885.20 Rise (in) = 36.0 Shape = Circular Span (in) = 36.0 No. Barrels = 1 n-Value = 0.012 Culvert Type = Circular Concrete Culvert Entrance = Groove end projecting (C) Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.0045, 2, 0.0317, 0.69, 0.2 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) = 4890.25 Top Width (ft) = 40.00 Crest Width (ft) = 40.00 Calculations Qmin (cfs) = 0.00 Qmax (cfs) = 36.70 Tailwater Elev (ft) = 4885.25 Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) = 36.70 Qpipe (cfs) = 36.70 Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00 Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 8.07 Veloc Up (ft/s) = 7.46 HGL Dn (ft) = 4886.76 HGL Up (ft) = 4887.17 Hw Elev (ft) = 4888.15 Hw/D (ft) = 0.98 Flow Regime = Inlet Control APPENDIX B.5 INLETS ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Project: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Bucking Horse - Filing Two (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet ID: Design Point B1 (INLET 3-2) Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 12.5 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n = BACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line H = 6.00 inches CURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 25.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.020 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 S = 0.000 ft/ft O = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 18.65 25.00 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm d = 6.0 9.0 inches MAX = 6.0 9.0 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Q = SUMP SUMP cfs allow = SUMP SUMP cfs Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPB1.xls, Q-Allow 10/31/2012, 12:05 PM Project = Inlet ID = Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from 'Q-Allow') alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 2 2 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 2.3-3.6) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 5.3 15.1 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 2.6 11.8 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Bucking Horse - Filing Two Design Point B1 (INLET 3-2) CDOT/Denver 13 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPB1.xls, Inlet In Sump 10/31/2012, 12:06 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Project: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Bucking Horse - Filing Two (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet ID: Design Point B2 (INLET 3-1) Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 12.5 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n = BACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line H = 6.00 inches CURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 25.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.020 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 S = 0.000 ft/ft O = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 18.65 25.00 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm d = 6.0 9.0 inches MAX = 6.0 9.0 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Q = SUMP SUMP cfs allow = SUMP SUMP cfs Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPB2.xls, Q-Allow 10/31/2012, 12:07 PM Project = Inlet ID = Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from 'Q-Allow') alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 3 3 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 2.3-3.6) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 6.4 19.5 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 4.0 17.7 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Bucking Horse - Filing Two Design Point B2 (INLET 3-1) CDOT/Denver 13 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPB2.xls, Inlet In Sump 10/31/2012, 2:59 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Project: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Bucking Horse - Filing Two (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet ID: Design Point C2 (INLET 4-2) Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 12.5 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n = BACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line H = 6.00 inches CURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 25.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.020 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 S = 0.000 ft/ft O = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 18.65 25.00 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm d = 6.0 8.2 inches MAX = 6.0 8.2 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Q = SUMP SUMP cfs allow = SUMP SUMP cfs Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPC2.xls, Q-Allow 10/31/2012, 12:11 PM Project = Inlet ID = Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from 'Q-Allow') alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 5 5 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 2.3-3.6) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 10.9 32.9 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 6.1 27.5 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Bucking Horse - Filing Two Design Point C2 (INLET 4-2) CDOT/Denver 13 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPC2.xls, Inlet In Sump 10/31/2012, 3:00 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Project: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Bucking Horse - Filing Two (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet ID: Design Point C3 (INLET 4-1) Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 12.5 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n = BACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line H = 6.00 inches CURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 25.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.020 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 S = 0.000 ft/ft O = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 18.65 25.00 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm d = 6.0 8.2 inches MAX = 6.0 8.2 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Q = SUMP SUMP cfs allow = SUMP SUMP cfs Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPC3.xls, Q-Allow 10/31/2012, 12:13 PM Project = Inlet ID = Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from 'Q-Allow') alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 3 3 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 2.3-3.6) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 6.4 19.5 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 3.0 13.4 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Bucking Horse - Filing Two Design Point C3 (INLET 4-1) CDOT/Denver 13 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPC3.xls, Inlet In Sump 10/31/2012, 3:01 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Project: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Bucking Horse - Filing Two (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet ID: Design Point D4 (INLET 5-4) Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 12.5 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n = BACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line H = 6.00 inches CURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 25.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.020 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 S = 0.000 ft/ft O = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 18.65 25.00 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm d = 6.0 8.2 inches MAX = 6.0 8.2 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Q = SUMP SUMP cfs allow = SUMP SUMP cfs Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPD4.xls, Q-Allow 10/31/2012, 12:14 PM Project = Inlet ID = Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from 'Q-Allow') alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 2 2 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 2.3-3.6) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 5.3 15.1 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 3.0 13.6 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Bucking Horse - Filing Two Design Point D4 (INLET 5-4) CDOT/Denver 13 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPD4.xls, Inlet In Sump 10/31/2012, 12:14 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Project: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Bucking Horse - Filing Two (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet ID: Design Point D5 (INLET 5-3) Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 12.5 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n = BACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line H = 6.00 inches CURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 25.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.020 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 S = 0.000 ft/ft O = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 18.65 25.00 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm d = 6.0 8.2 inches MAX = 6.0 8.2 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Q = SUMP SUMP cfs allow = SUMP SUMP cfs Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPD5.xls, Q-Allow 10/31/2012, 12:14 PM Project = Inlet ID = Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from 'Q-Allow') 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 2.3-3.6) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 3.6 7.1 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 1.3 5.7 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Bucking Horse - Filing Two Design Point D5 (INLET 5-3) CDOT/Denver 13 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPD5.xls, Inlet In Sump 10/31/2012, 12:15 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Project: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Bucking Horse - Filing Two (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet ID: Design Point E4 (INLET 6-2) Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 12.5 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n = BACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line H = 6.00 inches CURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 25.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.020 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 S = 0.000 ft/ft O = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 18.65 25.00 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm d = 6.0 8.2 inches MAX = 6.0 8.2 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Q = SUMP SUMP cfs allow = SUMP SUMP cfs Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPE4.xls, Q-Allow 10/31/2012, 12:15 PM Project = Inlet ID = Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from 'Q-Allow') alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 3 3 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 2.3-3.6) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 6.4 19.5 cfs WARNING: Inlet Capacity less than Q Peak for Minor Storm Q PEAK REQUIRED = 10.5 18.0 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Bucking Horse - Filing Two Design Point E4 (INLET 6-2) CDOT/Denver 13 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPE4.xls, Inlet In Sump 10/31/2012, 12:16 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Project: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) Bucking Horse - Filing Two (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet ID: Design Point E5 (INLET 6-1) Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 12.5 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n = BACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line H = 6.00 inches CURB = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 25.0 ft Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX = 0.020 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 S = 0.000 ft/ft O = 0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 18.65 25.00 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm d = 6.0 8.2 inches MAX = 6.0 8.2 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Q = SUMP SUMP cfs allow = SUMP SUMP cfs Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPE5.xls, Q-Allow 10/31/2012, 12:16 PM Project = Inlet ID = Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from 'Q-Allow') alocal = 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 3 3 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 2.3-3.6) Cw (C) = 3.70 3.70 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.66 0.66 MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 6.4 19.5 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 1.2 2.0 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Bucking Horse - Filing Two Design Point E5 (INLET 6-1) CDOT/Denver 13 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD-Inlet_v3.11_DPE5.xls, Inlet In Sump 10/31/2012, 12:16 PM APPENDIX B.6 DETENTION FACILITIES Bucking Horse - Second Filing POND RATING CURVE PROJECT: Bucking Horse Second Filing POND: 215 DATE: 10/31/12 BY: H. Feissner STAGE DEPTH INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE STORAGE STORAGE (FT) (FT) (AC-FT) (AC-FT) 4878.3 0.0 0.00 0.00 4879.3 1.0 0.02 0.02 4880.3 2.0 0.14 0.16 4881.3 3.0 0.70 0.86 WQCV = 3.5 ac-ft 4882.3 4.0 3.19 4.05 @ 4882.1 ft 4883.3 5.0 6.92 10.97 4884.3 6.0 10.17 21.14 4885.3 7.0 11.28 32.42 100-yr WSEL* = 32.3 ac-ft @ 4885.25 ft * = 3.5 ac-ft WQCV plus 28.8 ac-ft req'd detention storage volume per SWMM 10/31/20128:48 AM APPENDIX C WATER QUALITY DESIGN COMPUTATIONS Project Tittle Date: Project Number Calcs By: Client Pond Designation 1 WQCV = Watershed inches of Runoff (inches) 46.00% a = Runoff Volume Reduction (constant) i = Total imperviouness Ratio (i = Iwq/100) 0.196 in Bucking Horse - Filing Two October 31, 2012 687-002 H. Feissner Bellisimo Pond 215 Drain Time a = i = WQCV = 0.196 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 WQCV (watershed inches) Water Quality Capture Volume 6 hr 12 hr 24 hr WQCV a 0.91 i 3  1 . 19 i 2  0 . 78 i WQCV a 0.91 i 3  1 . 19 i 2  0 . 78 i 40 hr A = 178.10 ac V = 3.48 ac-ft V = Water Quality Design Volume (ac-ft) WQCV = Water Quality Capture Volume (inches) A = Watershed Area (acres) 1.2 = 20% Additional Volume (Sediment Accumulation) Figure EDB-2 - Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV), 80th Percentile Runoff Event 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 WQCV (watershed inches) Total Imperviousness Ratio (i = Iwq /100) 24 hr 40 hr APPENDIX D STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MODEL (SWMM) PROPOSED EFFECTIVE MODEL – BUCKINGHORSE 4&$0/%'*-*/( NORTHERN ENGINEERING, JU-: 2012 100-YEAR STORM EVENT Page 1 of 7 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY - STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - VERSION PC.1 DEVELOPED BY METCALF + EDDY, INC. UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA WATER RESOURCES ENGINEEERS, INC. (SEPTEMBER 1970) UPDATED BY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA (JUNE 1973) HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING CENTER, CORPS OF ENGINEERS MISSOURI RIVER DIVISION, CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEPTEMBER 1974) BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION (MARCH 1985, JULY 1985) TAPE OR DISK ASSIGNMENTS JIN(1) JIN(2) JIN(3) JIN(4) JIN(5) JIN(6) JIN(7) JIN(8) JIN(9) JIN(10) 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 JOUT(1) JOUT(2) JOUT(3) JOUT(4) JOUT(5) JOUT(6) JOUT(7) JOUT(8) JOUT(9) JOUT(10) 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NSCRAT(1) NSCRAT(2) NSCRAT(3) NSCRAT(4) NSCRAT(5) 3 4 0 0 0 WATERSHED 1/PROGRAM CALLED *** ENTRY MADE TO RUNOFF MODEL *** SIDEHILL FILING 2 & 3 SWMM ANALYSIS INPUT, JR ENGINEERING, 10-27-04, ES 3.67" RAINFALL DATA, 100 YEAR STORM EVENT NUMBER OF TIME STEPS 480 INTEGRATION TIME INTERVAL (MINUTES) 1.00 1.0 PERCENT OF IMPERVIOUS AREA HAS ZERO DETENTION DEPTH FOR 24 RAINFALL STEPS, THE TIME INTERVAL IS 5.00 MINUTES FOR RAINGAGE NUMBER 1 RAINFALL HISTORY IN INCHES PER HOUR 1.00 1.14 1.33 2.23 2.84 5.49 9.95 4.12 2.48 1.46 1.22 1.06 1.00 .95 .91 .87 .84 .81 .78 .75 .73 .71 .69 .67 SIDEHILL FILING 2 & 3 SWMM ANALYSIS INPUT, JR ENGINEERING, 10-27-04, ES 3.67" RAINFALL DATA, 100 YEAR STORM EVENT SUBAREA GUTTER WIDTH AREA PERCENT SLOPE RESISTANCE FACTOR SURFACE STORAGE(IN) INFILTRATION RATE(IN/HR) GAGE NUMBER OR MANHOLE (FT) (AC) IMPERV. (FT/FT) IMPERV. PERV. IMPERV. PERV. MAXIMUM MINIMUM DECAY RATE NO 100 3 1742.0 12.0 70.0 .0260 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 101 1 2265.0 15.6 49.8 .0040 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 102 2 4705.0 32.4 53.9 .0220 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 103 302 1350.0 9.3 50.9 .0220 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 104 303 1343.0 9.6 55.4 .0300 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 105 304 3049.0 21.0 75.0 .0210 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 106 0 1.0 .1 1.0 .0260 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 107 306 11340.0 78.1 28.9 .0150 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 108 4 3150.0 21.7 55.0 .0010 .035 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 109 4 2076.0 14.3 55.0 .0010 .035 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 TOTAL NUMBER OF SUBCATCHMENTS, 10 TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA (ACRES), 214.10 SIDEHILL FILING 2 & 3 SWMM ANALYSIS INPUT, JR ENGINEERING, 10-27-04, ES 3.67" RAINFALL DATA, 100 YEAR STORM EVENT PROPOSED EFFECTIVE MODEL – BUCKINGHORSE 4&$0/%'*-*/( NORTHERN ENGINEERING, JU-: 2012 100-YEAR STORM EVENT Page 2 of 7 HYDROGRAPHS ARE LISTED FOR THE FOLLOWING 9 SUBCATCHMENTS - AVERAGE VALUES WITHIN TIME INTERVALS TIME(HR/MIN) 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 0 1. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 6. .0 .1 .0 .0 .1 .0 .2 .0 .0 0 11. 3.0 11.6 3.2 3.7 8.3 .0 18.8 1.2 .8 0 16. 7.9 23.4 6.4 7.3 19.0 .0 32.9 4.2 2.7 0 21. 15.1 39.3 10.7 12.1 33.6 .0 53.0 10.6 7.0 0 26. 24.5 64.0 17.6 19.8 53.7 .0 90.9 21.0 13.8 0 31. 52.2 142.2 39.3 44.1 113.4 .0 216.9 48.0 31.6 0 36. 85.7 216.9 60.3 66.2 166.5 .0 358.9 93.7 61.8 0 41. 56.1 131.4 37.3 39.3 89.4 .0 266.8 79.4 52.3 0 46. 41.1 89.8 25.9 26.4 56.2 .0 210.4 62.7 41.4 0 51. 30.6 61.5 17.9 17.8 36.3 .0 161.4 48.7 32.1 0 56. 25.1 47.8 14.0 13.8 28.0 .0 132.0 39.8 26.3 1 1. 21.3 39.2 11.4 11.3 23.3 .0 110.4 33.7 22.2 1 6. 18.8 34.0 9.9 9.8 20.8 .0 95.2 29.5 19.4 1 11. 17.0 30.4 8.8 8.8 19.1 .0 83.6 26.4 17.4 1 16. 15.5 27.6 8.0 8.0 17.8 .0 74.5 24.0 15.8 1 21. 14.2 25.4 7.3 7.4 16.8 .0 67.0 22.1 14.6 1 26. 13.2 23.7 6.8 6.9 16.0 .0 60.9 20.5 13.5 1 31. 12.3 22.2 6.3 6.5 15.2 .0 55.7 19.2 12.7 1 36. 11.5 20.8 5.9 6.1 14.5 .0 51.2 18.0 11.9 1 41. 10.8 19.6 5.6 5.8 13.9 .0 47.3 17.0 11.2 1 46. 10.2 18.6 5.3 5.5 13.4 .0 44.0 16.1 10.6 1 51. 9.6 17.8 5.0 5.2 12.9 .0 41.0 15.3 10.1 1 56. 9.1 16.9 4.8 5.0 12.5 .0 38.4 14.5 9.6 2 1. 8.3 14.8 4.2 4.3 11.0 .0 33.7 13.6 9.0 2 6. 5.3 7.1 2.0 2.0 4.9 .0 21.2 10.8 7.1 2 11. 3.9 4.6 1.3 1.2 2.8 .0 16.6 8.8 5.8 2 16. 3.1 3.3 1.0 .9 1.8 .0 13.8 7.4 4.9 2 21. 2.6 2.6 .8 .7 1.3 .0 11.8 6.3 4.1 2 26. 2.2 2.1 .6 .5 .9 .0 10.2 5.4 3.6 2 31. 1.9 1.7 .5 .4 .7 .0 8.9 4.7 3.1 2 36. 1.6 1.4 .4 .4 .5 .0 7.8 4.2 2.8 2 41. 1.4 1.2 .4 .3 .4 .0 6.9 3.7 2.5 2 46. 1.3 1.0 .3 .2 .3 .0 6.1 3.3 2.2 2 51. 1.1 .8 .3 .2 .3 .0 5.4 3.0 2.0 2 56. 1.0 .7 .2 .2 .2 .0 4.9 2.7 1.8 3 1. .9 .6 .2 .1 .2 .0 4.3 2.5 1.6 3 6. .8 .5 .2 .1 .1 .0 3.9 2.3 1.5 3 11. .8 .5 .1 .1 .1 .0 3.5 2.1 1.4 3 16. .7 .4 .1 .1 .1 .0 3.1 1.9 1.3 3 21. .6 .3 .1 .1 .1 .0 2.8 1.8 1.2 3 26. .6 .3 .1 .1 .1 .0 2.5 1.6 1.1 3 31. .5 .2 .1 .1 .1 .0 2.3 1.5 1.0 3 36. .5 .2 .1 .0 .0 .0 2.1 1.4 .9 3 41. .4 .2 .1 .0 .0 .0 1.9 1.3 .9 3 46. .4 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.7 1.2 .8 3 51. .4 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.5 1.1 .7 3 56. .3 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.4 1.0 .7 4 1. .3 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.2 1.0 .6 4 6. .3 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.1 .9 .6 4 11. .3 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.0 .9 .6 4 16. .2 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .9 .8 .5 4 21. .2 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .8 .8 .5 4 26. .2 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .7 .7 .5 PROPOSED EFFECTIVE MODEL – BUCKINGHORSE 4&$0/%'*-*/( NORTHERN ENGINEERING, JU-: 2012 100-YEAR STORM EVENT Page 3 of 7 7 11. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 7 16. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 7 21. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 7 26. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .0 7 31. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .0 7 36. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .0 7 41. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .0 7 46. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .0 7 51. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7 56. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 SIDEHILL FILING 2 & 3 SWMM ANALYSIS INPUT, JR ENGINEERING, 10-27-04, ES 3.67" RAINFALL DATA, 100 YEAR STORM EVENT *** CONTINUITY CHECK FOR SUBCATCHMEMT ROUTING IN UDSWM2-PC MODEL *** WATERSHED AREA (ACRES) 214.100 TOTAL RAINFALL (INCHES) 3.669 TOTAL INFILTRATION (INCHES) .604 TOTAL WATERSHED OUTFLOW (INCHES) 2.886 TOTAL SURFACE STORAGE AT END OF STROM (INCHES) .179 ERROR IN CONTINUITY, PERCENTAGE OF RAINFALL .000 SIDEHILL FILING 2 & 3 SWMM ANALYSIS INPUT, JR ENGINEERING, 10-27-04, ES 3.67" RAINFALL DATA, 100 YEAR STORM EVENT WIDTH INVERT SIDE SLOPES OVERBANK/SURCHARGE GUTTER GUTTER NDP NP OR DIAM LENGTH SLOPE HORIZ TO VERT MANNING DEPTH JK NUMBER CONNECTION (FT) (FT) (FT/FT) L R N (FT) 201 302 0 2 PIPE 4.0 266. .0040 .0 .0 .013 4.00 0 202 1 0 1 CHANNEL 7.0 55. .0050 .0 .0 .013 7.00 0 203 303 0 1 CHANNEL 20.0 505. .0040 3.0 3.0 .030 6.00 0 204 304 0 1 CHANNEL 20.0 482. .0040 3.0 3.0 .030 6.00 0 205 305 0 1 CHANNEL 20.0 260. .0040 3.0 3.0 .030 6.00 0 206 306 0 1 CHANNEL 14.0 95. .0040 1.0 1.0 .013 4.00 0 301 3 0 3 .0 0. .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 302 203 0 3 .0 0. .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 303 204 0 3 .0 0. .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 304 205 0 3 .0 0. .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 305 206 0 3 .0 0. .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 306 215 0 3 .0 0. .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 1 201 4 2 PIPE .1 1000. .0050 .0 .0 .100 .10 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .4 30.0 1.9 60.0 4.9 140.0 2 202 7 2 PIPE .1 1000. .0050 .0 .0 .100 .10 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW PROPOSED EFFECTIVE MODEL – BUCKINGHORSE 4&$0/%'*-*/( NORTHERN ENGINEERING, JU-: 2012 100-YEAR STORM EVENT Page 4 of 7 41.5 92.1 52.7 102.0 64.3 111.1 TOTAL NUMBER OF GUTTERS/PIPES, 17 SIDEHILL FILING 2 & 3 SWMM ANALYSIS INPUT, JR ENGINEERING, 10-27-04, ES 3.67" RAINFALL DATA, 100 YEAR STORM EVENT ARRANGEMENT OF SUBCATCHMENTS AND GUTTERS/PIPES GUTTER TRIBUTARY GUTTER/PIPE TRIBUTARY SUBAREA D.A.(AC) 1 202 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 96.0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32.4 3 301 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 109 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36.0 201 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 96.0 202 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32.4 203 302 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105.3 204 303 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 114.9 205 304 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 135.9 206 305 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 135.9 215 306 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 214.0 SIDEHILL FILING 2 & 3 SWMM ANALYSIS INPUT, JR ENGINEERING, 10-27-04, ES 3.67" RAINFALL DATA, 100 YEAR STORM EVENT HYDROGRAPHS ARE LISTED FOR THE FOLLOWING 6 CONVEYANCE ELEMENTS THE UPPER NUMBER IS DISCHARGE IN CFS THE LOWER NUMBER IS ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CASES: ( ) DENOTES DEPTH ABOVE INVERT IN FEET (S) DENOTES STORAGE IN AC-FT FOR DETENTION DAM. DISCHARGE INCLUDES SPILLWAY OUTFLOW. (I) DENOTES GUTTER INFLOW IN CFS FROM SPECIFIED INFLOW HYDROGRAPH (D) DENOTES DISCHARGE IN CFS DIVERTED FROM THIS GUTTER (O) DENOTES STORAGE IN AC-FT FOR SURCHARGED GUTTER TIME(HR/MIN) 201 202 203 204 205 206 0 1. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .00( ) .00( ) .00( ) .00( ) .00( ) .00( ) 0 6. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .01( ) .01( ) .00( ) .00( ) .00( ) .00( ) 0 11. .8 5.6 .4 .6 3.9 2.6 .26( ) .26( ) .05( ) .06( ) .19( ) .11( ) 0 16. 7.7 16.8 5.7 5.5 19.7 18.6 .79( ) .51( ) .24( ) .23( ) .49( ) .36( ) 0 21. 20.8 31.3 21.1 21.9 49.3 45.9 1.30( ) .76( ) .51( ) .52( ) .85( ) .62( ) 0 26. 32.3 49.4 42.0 49.5 94.5 87.5 1.65( ) 1.02( ) .77( ) .85( ) 1.23( ) .92( ) 0 31. 41.1 68.6 69.4 96.6 197.7 181.2 1.89( ) 1.27( ) 1.03( ) 1.25( ) 1.87( ) 1.42( ) 0 36. 58.5 99.3 112.5 170.8 334.5 347.5 2.34( ) 1.63( ) 1.36( ) 1.73( ) 2.51( ) 2.10( ) PROPOSED EFFECTIVE MODEL – BUCKINGHORSE 4&$0/%'*-*/( NORTHERN ENGINEERING, JU-: 2012 100-YEAR STORM EVENT Page 5 of 7 1.09(O) .76( ) 1.31( ) 1.36( ) 1.48( ) 1.17( ) 1 26. 97.7 25.2 104.6 111.7 127.9 128.0 1.19(O) .66( ) 1.31( ) 1.36( ) 1.47( ) 1.16( ) 1 31. 97.7 22.9 104.1 110.8 126.2 126.3 1.24(O) .62( ) 1.30( ) 1.35( ) 1.45( ) 1.15( ) 1 36. 97.7 21.4 103.7 110.0 124.7 124.8 1.25(O) .59( ) 1.30( ) 1.34( ) 1.44( ) 1.14( ) 1 41. 97.7 20.1 103.3 109.3 123.3 123.4 1.21(O) .57( ) 1.30( ) 1.34( ) 1.43( ) 1.13( ) 1 46. 97.7 19.1 103.0 108.7 122.2 122.2 1.14(O) .55( ) 1.29( ) 1.33( ) 1.43( ) 1.12( ) 1 51. 97.7 18.1 102.8 108.1 121.1 121.2 1.03(O) .53( ) 1.29( ) 1.33( ) 1.42( ) 1.12( ) 1 56. 97.7 17.3 102.5 107.6 120.2 120.2 .89(O) .52( ) 1.29( ) 1.33( ) 1.41( ) 1.11( ) 2 1. 97.7 16.2 102.1 106.9 118.4 118.7 .73(O) .50( ) 1.29( ) 1.32( ) 1.40( ) 1.11( ) 2 6. 97.7 9.8 100.1 103.0 108.8 109.1 .54(O) .36( ) 1.27( ) 1.29( ) 1.34( ) 1.05( ) 2 11. 97.7 5.8 99.2 100.8 104.0 104.1 .32(O) .26( ) 1.27( ) 1.28( ) 1.30( ) 1.02( ) 2 16. 97.7 4.0 98.8 99.8 101.8 101.9 .06(O) .21( ) 1.26( ) 1.27( ) 1.29( ) 1.01( ) 2 21. 55.3 3.0 65.5 79.1 87.1 88.3 2.25( ) .17( ) 1.00( ) 1.11( ) 1.18( ) .93( ) 2 26. 51.9 2.3 54.6 58.6 62.1 62.6 2.17( ) .15( ) .90( ) .93( ) .97( ) .75( ) 2 31. 48.8 1.9 50.7 52.7 54.4 54.6 2.09( ) .13( ) .86( ) .88( ) .89( ) .69( ) 2 36. 45.8 1.5 47.5 49.2 50.4 50.6 2.01( ) .12( ) .83( ) .84( ) .86( ) .66( ) 2 41. 43.1 1.3 44.7 46.1 47.2 47.3 1.94( ) .10( ) .80( ) .81( ) .82( ) .64( ) 2 46. 40.6 1.1 42.0 43.4 44.3 44.5 1.87( ) .09( ) .77( ) .78( ) .79( ) .61( ) 2 51. 38.3 .9 39.6 40.9 41.7 41.8 1.81( ) .09( ) .74( ) .76( ) .77( ) .59( ) 2 56. 36.2 .8 37.4 38.5 39.3 39.4 1.75( ) .08( ) .72( ) .73( ) .74( ) .57( ) 3 1. 34.2 .7 35.3 36.4 37.1 37.2 1.70( ) .07( ) .70( ) .71( ) .72( ) .55( ) 3 6. 32.4 .6 33.5 34.4 35.1 35.1 1.65( ) .06( ) .67( ) .68( ) .69( ) .53( ) 3 11. 30.8 .5 31.7 32.6 33.2 33.3 1.60( ) .06( ) .65( ) .66( ) .67( ) .51( ) 3 16. 27.2 .4 29.4 30.7 31.4 31.5 1.50( ) .05( ) .62( ) .64( ) .65( ) .50( ) 3 21. 23.3 .4 25.3 27.2 28.3 28.4 1.38( ) .05( ) .57( ) .60( ) .61( ) .47( ) 3 26. 20.9 .3 22.3 23.9 24.8 24.9 1.30( ) .04( ) .53( ) .55( ) .56( ) .43( ) 3 31. 19.3 .3 20.3 21.4 22.1 22.2 1.25( ) .04( ) .50( ) .52( ) .53( ) .40( ) 3 36. 18.2 .2 19.0 19.8 20.3 20.3 1.22( ) .04( ) .48( ) .49( ) .50( ) .38( ) 3 41. 17.4 .2 18.0 18.6 18.9 19.0 PROPOSED EFFECTIVE MODEL – BUCKINGHORSE 4&$0/%'*-*/( NORTHERN ENGINEERING, JU-: 2012 100-YEAR STORM EVENT Page 6 of 7 .98( ) .00( ) .37( ) .37( ) .37( ) .28( ) 5 11. 11.8 .0 11.9 12.0 12.1 12.1 .97( ) .00( ) .37( ) .37( ) .37( ) .28( ) 5 16. 11.6 .0 11.7 11.8 11.9 11.9 .96( ) .00( ) .36( ) .36( ) .37( ) .28( ) 5 21. 11.4 .0 11.5 11.7 11.7 11.7 .96( ) .00( ) .36( ) .36( ) .36( ) .28( ) 5 26. 11.2 .0 11.3 11.5 11.5 11.6 .95( ) .00( ) .36( ) .36( ) .36( ) .27( ) 5 31. 11.0 .0 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.4 .94( ) .00( ) .35( ) .35( ) .36( ) .27( ) 5 36. 10.9 .0 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.2 .93( ) .00( ) .35( ) .35( ) .35( ) .27( ) 5 41. 10.7 .0 10.8 10.9 11.0 11.0 .93( ) .00( ) .35( ) .35( ) .35( ) .26( ) 5 46. 10.5 .0 10.7 10.8 10.8 10.9 .92( ) .00( ) .34( ) .34( ) .35( ) .26( ) 5 51. 10.4 .0 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.7 .91( ) .00( ) .34( ) .34( ) .34( ) .26( ) 5 56. 10.2 .0 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.5 .91( ) .00( ) .34( ) .34( ) .34( ) .26( ) 6 1. 10.0 .0 10.1 10.3 10.3 10.4 .90( ) .00( ) .33( ) .33( ) .34( ) .26( ) 6 6. 9.8 .0 9.9 10.1 10.2 10.2 .89( ) .00( ) .33( ) .33( ) .33( ) .25( ) 6 11. 9.6 .0 9.8 9.9 10.0 10.0 .88( ) .00( ) .32( ) .33( ) .33( ) .25( ) 6 16. 9.4 .0 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.8 .87( ) .00( ) .32( ) .32( ) .33( ) .25( ) 6 21. 9.2 .0 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.6 .86( ) .00( ) .32( ) .32( ) .32( ) .24( ) 6 26. 9.0 .0 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.4 .85( ) .00( ) .31( ) .32( ) .32( ) .24( ) 6 31. 8.8 .0 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.2 .84( ) .00( ) .31( ) .31( ) .31( ) .24( ) 6 36. 8.7 .0 8.8 8.9 9.0 9.0 .83( ) .00( ) .31( ) .31( ) .31( ) .23( ) 6 41. 8.5 .0 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.8 .83( ) .00( ) .30( ) .30( ) .31( ) .23( ) 6 46. 8.3 .0 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.7 .82( ) .00( ) .30( ) .30( ) .30( ) .23( ) 6 51. 8.1 .0 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.5 .81( ) .00( ) .29( ) .30( ) .30( ) .23( ) 6 56. 8.0 .0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.3 .80( ) .00( ) .29( ) .29( ) .29( ) .22( ) 7 1. 7.8 .0 7.9 8.1 8.1 8.1 .79( ) .00( ) .29( ) .29( ) .29( ) .22( ) 7 6. 7.6 .0 7.8 7.9 8.0 8.0 .78( ) .00( ) .28( ) .29( ) .29( ) .22( ) 7 11. 7.5 .0 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.8 .78( ) .00( ) .28( ) .28( ) .28( ) .22( ) 7 16. 7.3 .0 7.5 7.6 7.6 7.7 .77( ) .00( ) .28( ) .28( ) .28( ) .21( ) 7 21. 7.2 .0 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.5 .76( ) .00( ) .27( ) .28( ) .28( ) .21( ) 7 26. 7.0 .0 7.2 7.3 7.3 7.4 PROPOSED EFFECTIVE MODEL – BUCKINGHORSE4&$0/%'*-*/( NORTHERN ENGINEERING, JU-: 2012 100-YEAR STORM EVENT Page 7 of 7 ELEMENT:TYPE (CFS) (FT) (AC-FT) (HR/MIN) 1:2 126.7 .1 4.4:D 1 6. 2:2 108.0 .1 1.8:D 0 42. 3:2 26.8 .1 1.5:D 0 47. 4:2 16.1 .1 6.1:D 2 8. 201:2 97.7 4.0 1.3:S 1 34. 202:1 108.0 1.7 0 42. 203:1 121.0 1.4 0 46. 204:1 170.8 1.7 0 36. 205:1 338.9 2.5 0 35. 206:1 347.5 2.1 0 36. 215:2 83.0 .1 28.8:D 2 23. 301:3 .0 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 0. 302:3 123.5 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 46. 303:3 182.8 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 35. 304:3 349.9 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 35. 305:3 338.9 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 35. 306:3 708.4 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 35. ENDPROGRAM PROGRAM CALLED MAP POCKET DR1 – OVERALL DRAINAGE EXHIBIT X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X F GREAT WESTERN RAILROAD DRAKE ROAD PALOMINO DRIVE PALOMINO COURT PALOMINO DRIVE WALKALOOSA WAY A A ENVIRONMENTAL DRIVE FUTURE CITY PARK HORSE AREA OFFICE COMPLEX WORKING FARM EXISTING DETENTION POND 215 PROSPECT INDUSTRIAL PARK WATER / WASTE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES HORSE STABLES & RIDING AREA CARGILL, INC. SIDEHILL - FILING ONE B4 B5 F1 F2 D4 D5 G B1 B2 A1 B6 C3 D3 E5 D1 E1 B5 B4 B6 C3 C1 B3b B2 A1 OS1 OS2 C2 F1 E1 D4 D5 D2 D3 D1 OS3 E4 OS4 E5 E3 F2 G B3a B3c E2 E3 C C B B D D E E F F G G DR1 NORTH CALL 2 BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE BEFORE YOU DIG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATE FOR THE MARKING OF UNDERGROUND MEMBER UTILITIES. CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF COLORADO R FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LEGEND: A 1 1 B2 1.45 ac - Filing Two 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 200 South College Avenue, Suite 010 Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 N O R T H E RN PHONE: 970.221.4158 FAX: 970.221.4159 www.northernengineering.com DETENTION POND SUMMARY SWALE SECTIONS SWALE SUMMARY TABLE EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR SUMMARY TABLE POND EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR DESIGN POINT BASIN ID TOTAL AREA (acres) C2 C10 C100 2-yr Tc (min) 10-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) Q2 (cfs) Q10 (cfs) Q100 (cfs) A1 A1 2.92 0.50 0.50 0.62 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.0 6.8 18.0 B1 B1 1.64 0.74 0.74 0.93 10.3 10.3 8.9 2.7 4.6 12.5 B2 B2 3.55 0.43 0.43 0.54 10.2 10.2 9.9 3.4 5.8 15.2 B3a B3a 2.64 0.37 0.37 0.47 11.0 11.0 10.6 2.1 3.7 9.3 B3b B3b 2.42 0.25 0.25 0.32 8.3 8.3 7.7 1.5 2.5 6.6 B3c B3c 1.00 0.36 0.36 0.45 17.5 17.5 16.6 0.6 1.1 2.8 B4 B4 0.46 0.83 0.83 1.00 6.4 6.4 6.1 1.0 1.7 4.2 B5 B5 0.34 0.82 0.82 1.00 5.1 5.1 5.0 0.8 1.4 3.4 B6 B6 0.85 0.45 0.45 0.56 15.1 15.1 14.3 0.7 1.2 3.2 C1 C1 2.62 0.65 0.65 0.81 19.5 19.5 18.6 2.8 4.8 12.4 C2 C2 4.33 0.64 0.64 0.80 27.4 27.4 25.9 3.8 6.5 17.1 C3 C3 1.88 0.70 0.70 0.87 13.3 13.3 12.6 2.6 4.4 11.5 D1 D1 0.20 0.48 0.48 0.60 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.3 0.5 1.2 D2 D2 0.84 0.69 0.69 0.87 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.7 2.8 7.2 D3 D3 5.72 0.39 0.39 0.49 9.6 9.6 9.2 5.0 8.6 22.4 D4 D4 2.85 0.60 0.60 0.75 18.2 18.2 17.2 2.9 4.9 13.0 D5 D5 0.59 0.82 0.82 1.00 6.0 6.0 5.7 1.3 2.3 5.7 E1 E1 1.79 0.65 0.65 0.82 22.8 22.8 21.4 1.8 3.0 8.0 E2 E2 3.41 0.64 0.64 0.79 22.8 22.8 22.0 3.3 5.6 14.4 E3 E3 2.35 0.65 0.65 0.81 19.7 19.7 19.0 2.5 4.3 11.0 E4 E4 3.41 0.64 0.64 0.79 22.8 22.8 22.0 3.3 5.6 14.4 E5 E5 0.50 0.82 0.82 1.00 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.2 2.0 5.0 F1 F1 7.71 0.31 0.31 0.38 28.0 28.0 26.0 3.2 5.4 14.6 F2 F2 2.45 0.50 0.50 0.62 14.8 14.8 10.4 2.3 4.0 11.8 G G 20.53 0.25 0.25 0.31 5.0 5.0 5.0 14.6 25.0 63.8 OS1 OS1 0.84 0.48 0.48 0.60 14.0 14.0 13.0 0.8 1.3 3.5 OS2 OS2 1.46 0.64 0.64 0.80 14.7 14.7 13.8 1.8 3.0 7.9 OS3 OS3 1.13 0.76 0.76 0.95 6.2 6.2 5.9 2.3 3.9 10.3 OS4 OS4 0.05 0.85 0.85 1.00 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 B1 B1 & OS1 2.48 0.65 0.65 0.8 19.6 19.6 18.6 2.6 4.5 11.8 B2 B2 & OS2 5.01 0.49 0.49 0.6 20.3 20.3 19.3 4.0 6.8 17.7 B3c B1-B3c, OS1 & OS2 13.56 0.45 0.45 0.6 25.2 25.2 24.3 8.7 14.8 38.5 C2 C1 & C2 6.94 0.64 0.64 0.8 27.4 27.4 25.9 6.1 10.5 27.5 E2 E1 & E2 5.20 0.64 0.64 0.8 22.8 22.8 22.0 5.0 8.6 22.2 DEVELOPED RUNOFF SUMMARY .75( ) .00( ) .27( ) .27( ) .27( ) .21( ) 7 31. 6.9 .0 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.2 .75( ) .00( ) .27( ) .27( ) .27( ) .21( ) 7 36. 6.8 .0 6.9 7.0 7.0 7.1 .74( ) .00( ) .26( ) .27( ) .27( ) .20( ) 7 41. 6.6 .0 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.9 .73( ) .00( ) .26( ) .26( ) .26( ) .20( ) 7 46. 6.5 .0 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.8 .72( ) .00( ) .26( ) .26( ) .26( ) .20( ) 7 51. 6.4 .0 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 .72( ) .00( ) .25( ) .26( ) .26( ) .20( ) 7 56. 6.2 .0 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.5 .71( ) .00( ) .25( ) .25( ) .26( ) .19( ) THE FOLLOWING CONVEYANCE ELEMENTS WERE SURCHARGED DURING THE SIMULATION. THIS COULD LEAD TO ERRORS IN THE SIMULATION RESULTS!! 201 THE FOLLOWING CONVEYANCE ELEMENTS HAVE NUMERICAL STABILITY PROBLEMS THAT LEAD TO HYDRAULIC OSCILLLATIONS DURING THE SIMULATION. 206 SIDEHILL FILING 2 & 3 SWMM ANALYSIS INPUT, JR ENGINEERING, 10-27-04, ES 3.67" RAINFALL DATA, 100 YEAR STORM EVENT *** PEAK FLOWS, STAGES AND STORAGES OF GUTTERS AND DETENTION DAMS *** *** NOTE :S IMPLIES A SURCHARGED ELEMENT AND :D IMPLIES A SURCHARGED DETENTION FACILITY CONVEYANCE PEAK STAGE STORAGE TIME 1.19( ) .03( ) .47( ) .48( ) .48( ) .37( ) 3 46. 16.8 .2 17.2 17.7 18.0 18.0 1.16( ) .03( ) .46( ) .46( ) .47( ) .36( ) 3 51. 16.3 .1 16.6 17.0 17.2 17.3 1.15( ) .03( ) .45( ) .45( ) .46( ) .35( ) 3 56. 15.8 .1 16.1 16.5 16.7 16.7 1.13( ) .02( ) .44( ) .44( ) .45( ) .34( ) 4 1. 15.4 .1 15.7 16.0 16.2 16.2 1.12( ) .02( ) .43( ) .44( ) .44( ) .33( ) 4 6. 15.1 .1 15.3 15.6 15.7 15.7 1.10( ) .02( ) .42( ) .43( ) .43( ) .33( ) 4 11. 14.7 .1 15.0 15.2 15.3 15.3 1.09( ) .02( ) .42( ) .42( ) .42( ) .32( ) 4 16. 14.4 .0 14.6 14.8 15.0 15.0 1.08( ) .01( ) .41( ) .42( ) .42( ) .32( ) 4 21. 14.1 .0 14.3 14.5 14.6 14.6 1.07( ) .01( ) .41( ) .41( ) .41( ) .31( ) 4 26. 13.8 .0 14.0 14.2 14.3 14.3 1.05( ) .01( ) .40( ) .41( ) .41( ) .31( ) 4 31. 13.6 .0 13.7 13.9 14.0 14.0 1.04( ) .01( ) .40( ) .40( ) .40( ) .31( ) 4 36. 13.3 .0 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 1.03( ) .01( ) .39( ) .40( ) .40( ) .30( ) 4 41. 13.1 .0 13.2 13.4 13.5 13.5 1.02( ) .01( ) .39( ) .39( ) .39( ) .30( ) 4 46. 12.8 .0 13.0 13.1 13.2 13.2 1.02( ) .01( ) .38( ) .39( ) .39( ) .30( ) 4 51. 12.6 .0 12.7 12.9 13.0 13.0 1.01( ) .01( ) .38( ) .38( ) .39( ) .29( ) 4 56. 12.4 .0 12.5 12.7 12.8 12.8 1.00( ) .00( ) .38( ) .38( ) .38( ) .29( ) 5 1. 12.2 .0 12.3 12.5 12.5 12.5 .99( ) .00( ) .37( ) .38( ) .38( ) .29( ) 5 6. 12.0 .0 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.3 0 41. 81.1 107.6 114.6 155.0 247.4 252.9 2.95( ) 1.73( ) 1.38( ) 1.63( ) 2.12( ) 1.74( ) 0 46. 97.7 106.9 121.0 147.5 205.2 205.7 3.74( ) 1.72( ) 1.42( ) 1.59( ) 1.91( ) 1.54( ) 0 51. 97.7 101.0 116.8 137.3 175.8 176.5 .07(O) 1.65( ) 1.39( ) 1.53( ) 1.75( ) 1.40( ) 0 56. 97.7 93.2 112.4 128.0 157.5 157.9 .20(O) 1.56( ) 1.36( ) 1.47( ) 1.65( ) 1.31( ) 1 1. 97.7 83.5 109.6 122.1 146.3 146.5 .38(O) 1.45( ) 1.34( ) 1.43( ) 1.58( ) 1.25( ) 1 6. 97.7 72.1 107.9 118.5 139.8 140.0 .58(O) 1.31( ) 1.33( ) 1.40( ) 1.54( ) 1.22( ) 1 11. 97.7 58.5 106.7 116.0 135.5 135.6 .77(O) 1.14( ) 1.32( ) 1.39( ) 1.51( ) 1.20( ) 1 16. 97.7 48.3 105.8 114.3 132.4 132.5 .95(O) 1.01( ) 1.31( ) 1.37( ) 1.49( ) 1.18( ) 1 21. 97.7 31.7 105.1 112.9 129.9 130.0 .0 .0 .2 46.9 .6 72.1 .9 82.9 1.2 92.3 1.5 101.2 1.9 111.0 3 1 4 2 PIPE .1 1000. .0050 .0 .0 .100 .10 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .4 5.0 1.0 15.0 1.4 25.0 4 1 4 2 PIPE .1 1000. .0050 .0 .0 .100 .10 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 1.0 4.0 3.0 10.0 6.0 16.0 215 0 9 2 PIPE .1 1000. .0050 .0 .0 .100 .10 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .1 .0 2.3 37.0 6.2 54.4 15.6 68.7 26.3 81.2 4 31. .2 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .6 .7 .4 4 36. .2 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .5 .6 .4 4 41. .2 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .5 .6 .4 4 46. .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .4 .5 .4 4 51. .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .4 .5 .3 4 56. .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .3 .5 .3 5 1. .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .3 .5 .3 5 6. .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .4 .3 5 11. .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .4 .3 5 16. .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .4 .3 5 21. .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .4 .2 5 26. .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .3 .2 5 31. .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .3 .2 5 36. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .3 .2 5 41. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .3 .2 5 46. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .3 .2 5 51. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .3 .2 5 56. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .2 6 1. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .1 6 6. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .1 6 11. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .1 6 16. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .1 6 21. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .1 6 26. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .1 6 31. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .1 6 36. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 6 41. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 6 46. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 6 51. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 6 56. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 7 1. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 7 6. .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 * * 1 . 2 12 V WQCV A ¸ ¹ · ¨ © § D2 D2 0.84 5 5 5 0.69 0.69 0.87 2.85 4.87 9.95 1.7 2.8 7.2 D3 D3 5.72 10 10 9 0.39 0.39 0.49 2.26 3.86 8.03 5.0 8.6 22.4 D4 D4 2.85 18 18 17 0.60 0.60 0.75 1.70 2.90 6.10 2.9 4.9 13.0 D5 D5 0.59 6 6 6 0.82 0.82 1.00 2.76 4.72 9.63 1.3 2.3 5.7 E1 E1 1.79 23 23 21 0.65 0.65 0.82 1.51 2.58 5.46 1.8 3.0 8.0 E2 E2 3.41 23 23 22 0.64 0.64 0.79 1.51 2.58 5.32 3.3 5.6 14.4 E3 E3 2.35 20 20 19 0.65 0.65 0.81 1.63 2.78 5.75 2.5 4.3 11.0 E4 E4 2.67 19 19 19 0.53 0.53 0.66 1.65 2.82 5.84 2.3 4.0 10.3 E5 E5 0.50 5 5 5 0.82 0.82 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 1.2 2.0 5.0 F1 F1 7.71 28 28 26 0.31 0.31 0.38 1.34 2.29 4.93 3.2 5.4 14.6 F2 F2 2.45 15 15 10 0.50 0.50 0.62 1.90 3.24 7.72 2.3 4.0 11.8 G G 20.53 5 5 5 0.25 0.25 0.31 2.85 4.87 9.95 14.6 25.0 63.8 OS1 OS1 0.84 14 14 13 0.48 0.48 0.60 1.95 3.34 7.04 0.8 1.3 3.5 OS2 OS2 1.46 15 15 14 0.64 0.64 0.80 1.90 3.24 6.82 1.8 3.0 7.9 OS3 OS3 1.13 6 6 6 0.76 0.76 0.95 2.67 4.56 9.63 2.3 3.9 10.3 OS4 OS4 0.05 5 5 5 0.85 0.85 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.1 0.2 0.5 10/30/20127:49 PM D:\Projects\687-002\Drainage\Filing Two\Hydrology\687-002_FT_Rational-Calcs\Direct-Runoff 10-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) B1 B1 & OS1 14.0 14.0 13.0 1041 2.35 3.07 5.7 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 19.6 19.6 18.6 B2 B2 & OS2 14.7 14.7 13.8 1070 2.55 3.19 5.6 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 20.3 20.3 19.3 B3c B1-B3c, OS1 & OS2 20.3 20.3 19.3 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 343 0.6 1.16 4.9 25.2 25.2 24.3 B6 B1-B3c, B6, OS1 & OS3 25.2 25.2 24.3 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 310 0.4 0.95 5.4 30.7 30.7 29.7 C2 C1 & C2 27.4 27.4 25.9 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 27.4 27.4 25.9 E2 E1 & E2 22.8 22.8 22.0 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 22.8 22.8 22.0 E4 E1-E4 & OS-3 22.8 22.8 22.0 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 84 0.8 1.30 1.1 23.9 23.9 23.1 E5 E5 & OS-4 5.0 5.0 5.0 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 0 0.0 0.00 N/A 5.0 5.0 5.0 Additional Gutter Flow Additional Swale Flow Design Point Basins Tc Calculated at Upstream Design Point Time of Concentration 10/30/20127:48 PM D:\Projects\687-002\Drainage\Filing Two\Hydrology\687-002_FT_Rational-Calcs\Combined-Tc Tc (min) 10-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) A1 A1 No 0.60 0.60 0.75 161 10.00 5.5 5.5 3.9 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 5.5 5.5 5.0 B1 B1 No 0.60 0.60 0.75 42 2.15 4.7 4.7 3.3 1035 2.35 3.07 5.6 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 10.3 10.3 8.9 B2 B2 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 78 25.00 4.8 4.8 4.4 1038 2.55 3.19 5.4 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 10.2 10.2 9.9 B3a B3a No 0.25 0.25 0.31 94 33.00 4.8 4.8 4.5 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 554 1.00 1.50 6.2 11.0 11.0 10.6 B3b B3b No 0.25 0.25 0.31 200 20.00 8.3 8.3 7.7 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 8.3 8.3 7.7 B3c B3c No 0.25 0.25 0.31 82 1.50 12.6 12.6 11.6 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 343 0.60 1.16 4.9 17.5 17.5 16.6 DEVELOPED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS Gutter Flow Swale Flow Design Point Basin Overland Flow H. Feissner October 30, 2012 Time of Concentration (Equation RO-4) 3 1 1 . 87 1 . 1 * S Ti C Cf L  B3c B3c No 0.25 0.25 0.31 82 1.50 12.6 12.6 11.6 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 343 0.60 1.16 4.9 17.5 17.5 16.6 B4 B4 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 13 2.00 0.8 0.8 0.5 520 0.60 1.55 5.6 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 6.4 6.4 6.1 B5 B5 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 34 3.00 1.1 1.1 0.8 372 0.60 1.55 4.0 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 5.1 5.1 5.0 B6 B6 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 103 4.15 10.0 10.0 9.3 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 287 0.40 0.95 5.0 15.1 15.1 14.3 C1 C1 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 110 3.00 11.6 11.6 10.7 736 0.60 1.55 7.9 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 19.5 19.5 18.6 C2 C2 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 195 1.50 19.4 19.4 18.0 740 0.60 1.55 8.0 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 27.4 27.4 25.9 C3 C3 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 45 2.00 8.5 8.5 7.8 530 0.85 1.84 4.8 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 13.3 13.3 12.6 D1 D1 No 0.60 0.60 0.75 1 2.00 0.7 0.7 0.5 1 0.50 1.41 0.0 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 5.0 5.0 5.0 D2 D2 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 100 3.00 1.9 1.9 1.3 106 0.50 1.41 1.2 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 5.0 5.0 5.0 D3 D3 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 92 33.00 4.8 4.8 4.4 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 516 1.40 1.77 4.8 9.6 9.6 9.2 D4 D4 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 120 2.20 13.4 13.4 12.4 446 0.60 1.55 4.8 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 18.2 18.2 17.2 D5 D5 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 13 2.00 0.8 0.8 0.5 482 0.60 1.55 5.2 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 6.0 6.0 5.7 E1 E1 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 195 1.50 19.4 19.4 18.0 318 0.60 1.55 3.4 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 22.8 22.8 21.4 E2 E2 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 93 3.00 10.6 10.6 9.8 1177 0.65 1.61 12.2 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 22.8 22.8 22.0 E3 E3 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 68 2.50 9.7 9.7 8.9 1010 0.70 1.67 10.1 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 19.7 19.7 19.0 E4 E4 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 116 2.40 12.8 12.8 11.8 193 1.35 2.32 1.4 478 1.00 1.50 5.3 19.5 19.5 18.5 E5 E5 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 13 2.00 0.8 0.8 0.5 377 0.65 1.61 3.9 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 5.0 5.0 5.0 F1 F1 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 370 1.30 28.0 28.0 26.0 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 28.0 28.0 26.0 F2 F2 No 0.60 0.60 0.75 267 1.10 14.8 14.8 10.4 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 14.8 14.8 10.4 G G No 0.25 0.25 0.31 0 2.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 5.0 5.0 5.0 OS1 OS1 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 215 5.50 13.2 13.2 12.2 104 1.30 2.28 0.8 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 14.0 14.0 13.0 OS2 OS2 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 108 2.00 13.1 13.1 12.1 362 3.50 3.74 1.6 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 14.7 14.7 13.8 OS3 OS3 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 20 2.00 1.0 1.0 0.7 1115 3.20 3.58 5.2 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 6.2 6.2 5.9 OS4 OS4 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 46 2.00 1.5 1.5 1.0 49 2.76 3.32 0.2 0 0.00 0.00 N/A 5.0 5.0 5.0 10/30/20127:47 PM D:\Projects\687-002\Drainage\Filing Two\Hydrology\687-002_FT_Rational-Calcs\Tc-2-yr_&_100-yr B5 14,883 0.34 0.21 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.82 0.82 1.00 79.5 B6 36,870 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.36 0.45 0.45 0.56 28.6 C1 114,112 2.62 0.43 0.18 0.00 0.01 1.74 0.25 0.65 0.65 0.81 56.0 C2 188,410 4.33 0.68 0.30 0.00 0.02 2.87 0.46 0.64 0.64 0.80 55.3 C3 82,082 1.88 0.63 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.33 0.70 0.70 0.87 62.6 D1 8,570 0.20 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.48 0.48 0.60 31.1 D2 36,394 0.84 0.47 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.69 0.69 0.87 62.7 D3 249,072 5.72 0.00 0.15 0.12 0.22 1.61 3.63 0.39 0.39 0.49 19.8 D4 124,146 2.85 0.36 0.12 0.00 0.02 1.86 0.49 0.60 0.60 0.75 49.3 D5 25,828 0.59 0.36 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.82 0.82 1.00 78.8 E1 78,150 1.79 0.24 0.12 0.00 0.00 1.34 0.09 0.65 0.65 0.82 56.9 E2 148,483 3.41 0.39 0.20 0.00 0.01 2.58 0.23 0.64 0.64 0.79 54.5 E3 102,549 2.35 0.34 0.17 0.00 0.01 1.67 0.17 0.65 0.65 0.81 56.5 E4 116,426 2.67 0.30 0.11 0.00 0.12 1.24 0.92 0.53 0.53 0.66 39.5 E5 21,867 0.50 0.30 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.82 0.82 1.00 78.8 F1 335,684 7.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 1.18 6.42 0.31 0.31 0.38 8.2 F2 106,718 2.45 0.27 0.53 0.07 0.00 0.00 1.58 0.50 0.50 0.62 32.9 G 894,243 20.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.53 0.25 0.25 0.31 0.0 TOTAL ONSITE 3,321,852 76.259 6.66 3.43 0.21 0.66 20.13 45.16 0.44 0.44 0.55 26.6 OS1 36,563 0.84 0.19 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.48 0.48 0.60 31.4 OS2 63,593 1.46 0.26 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.34 0.64 0.64 0.80 53.6 SWMM 107 3,422,008 78.56 7.11 3.75 0.21 0.66 20.76 46.07 0.35 0.35 0.44 27.1 OS3 49,166 1.13 0.60 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.76 0.76 0.95 71.1 OS4 2,091 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.85 0.85 1.00 84.1 DEVELOPED COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS Runoff Coefficients are taken from the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards, Table 3-3. % Impervious taken from UDFCD USDCM, Volume I. 10-year Cf = 1.00 October 30, 2012 10/30/20127:47 PM D:\Projects\687-002\Drainage\Filing Two\Hydrology\687-002_FT_Rational-Calcs\C-Values