Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFLATS AT RIGDEN FARM - FDP - FDP140021 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - DRAINAGE REPORTFINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT September 17, 2014 THE FLATS AT RIGDEN FARM RIGDEN FARM 14TH FILING REPLAT Fort Collins, Colorado Prepared for: Landmark Construction Solutions 1170 W. Ash Street #100 Windsor, CO 80550 970-330-4316 Prepared by: 301 N. Howes Street, Suite 100 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Phone: 970.221.4158 www.northernengineering.com Project Number: 374-012  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. RE: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Dear Staff: Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for your review. This report accompanies Project Development Plan submittal for the proposed Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat 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 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. Stephanie Thomas, PE Project Engineer Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report TABLE OF CONTENTS I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ................................................................... 1 A. Location ............................................................................................................................................. 1 B. Description of Property ..................................................................................................................... 1 C. Floodplain.......................................................................................................................................... 3 II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS ....................................................................... 4 A. Major Basin Description .................................................................................................................... 4 B. Sub-Basin Description ....................................................................................................................... 4 III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA ................................................................................... 4 A. Regulations........................................................................................................................................ 4 B. Four Step Process .............................................................................................................................. 4 C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints ............................................................................ 5 D. Hydrological Criteria ......................................................................................................................... 5 E. Hydraulic Criteria .............................................................................................................................. 6 F. Floodplain Regulations Compliance .................................................................................................. 6 G. Modifications of Criteria ................................................................................................................... 6 IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN .................................................................................... 6 A. General Concept ............................................................................................................................... 6 B. Specific Details .................................................................................................................................. 8 V. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................ 8 A. Compliance with Standards .............................................................................................................. 8 B. Drainage Concept .............................................................................................................................. 8 References ......................................................................................................................... 9 APPENDICES: APPENDIX A – Hydrologic Computations APPENDIX B – Hydraulic Computations B.1 – Storm Sewers B.2 – Inlets APPENDIX C – Erosion Control Report APPENDIX D – Reference Drainage Plans Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES: Figure 1 – Aerial Photograph ................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2 – Proposed Site Plan ............................................................................................... 3 Figure 3 – Existing Floodplains ............................................................................................. 3 MAP POCKET: DR1 - Drainage Exhibit Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report 1 I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. Location 1. Vicinity Map 2. Located in the Northwest ¼ of Section 29, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Prime Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. The site is a part of the Rigden Farm Subdivision. 3. Bounded to the north by Limon Drive, to the west by Illinois Drive, to the south by Custer Drive, and to the east by Iowa Drive. 4. No significant offsite flows are directed into the site. The majority of off-site flows are collected in existing inlets or are prevented from entering the site by curb and gutter. 5. The Flats were originally platted as Rigden Farm 14th Filing. Storm Drainage to convey runoff from Rigden Farm 8th Filing, west of the site, was designed with Rigden Farm-Northwest Roads. B. Description of Property 1. The site is approximately 4.08 acres. Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report 2 Figure 1 – Aerial Photograph 2. The existing site is comprised of mostly vacant land with bare soils, natural grasses and vegetation. 3. The majority of the site slopes to the center, while a north portion slopes to the north, and a south portion slopes to the south. 4. A report by Earth Engineering Consultants dated May 5, 2005 lists the soils for the area as consisting of layers of sandy clay (CS) and clayey sand (SS). These soils are classified as Hydrologic Soil Group C and have a low infiltration rate. 5. The proposed project site plan is composed of 3-Story Multi-Family Housing (condos). This site will employ many water quality features and runoff reduction facilities including porous pavers, drywells, and subsurface infiltration galleries. Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report 3 Figure 2– Proposed Site Plan 6. No existing irrigation facilities are known at this time. 7. The project site is within the Rigden Farm Subdivision Master Plan. The proposed project is not requesting a change in the land use. C. Floodplain 1. The subject property is not located in a FEMA or City regulatory floodplain. Figure 3 – Existing Floodplains Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report 4 II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS A. Major Basin Description 1. The Rigden Farm project is located within the Foothills Drainage Basin, which is located between Prospect Road and Horsetooth Road from north to south and approximately between Shields Street and Zeigler Road from west to east. B. Sub-Basin Description 1. The north section of the site drains to a storm sewer within Limon Drive. This storm sewer flows to a stormwater system within Drake Street. The flows are routed into Pond 216 of the Overall Drainage Plan for Rigden Farm, which outfalls in the Cache La Poudre River. 2. The center section of the site drains to an existing inlet and storm sewer bisecting the site (installed as a part of Rigden Farm 8th Filing) that flows east to an existing swale that connects to a series of water quality ponds that is a part of the Overall Drainage Plan for Rigden Farm. The ponds are numbered 212, 217, and 218 by the Rigden Farm 1st and 6th Filing reports by JR Engineering. 3. The south section of the site drains to an existing inlet in Custer Drive. This inlet is a part of an existing storm sewer system that outfalls into a water quality pond that releases to the Foothills Regional Channel. The water quality pond is labeled Water Quality Pond 2 in the Rigden Farm 1st Filing Drainage Plan. 4. The proposed plan will generally maintain these existing flow patterns. III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. Regulations There are no optional provisions outside of the FCSCM proposed with the Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat project. B. Four Step Process The overall stormwater management strategy employed with the Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat project utilizes the “Four Step Process” to minimize adverse impacts of urbanization on receiving waters. The following is a description of how the proposed development has incorporated each step. Step 1 – Employ Runoff Reduction Practices Several techniques have been utilized with the proposed development to facilitate the reduction of runoff peaks, volumes, and pollutant loads as the site is developed from the current use by implementing multiple Low Impact Development (LID) strategies including: Providing large vegetated open areas throughout the site to reduce the overall impervious area and to minimize directly connected impervious areas (MDCIA). Providing permeable paver areas with underground detention area to increase time of concentration promote infiltration and provide water quality. Providing Drywells to promote infiltration and water quality throughout the site. Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report 5 Step 2 – Implement BMPs That Provide a Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) with Slow Release The efforts taken in Step 1 will facilitate the reduction of runoff; however, this development will still generate stormwater runoff that will require additional BMPs and water quality. The majority of stormwater runoff from the site will ultimately be intercepted and treated in existing downstream water quality ponds. These ponds have been designed and built with Filing No. 1 and Filing No. 6. Step 3 – Stabilize Drainageways There are no major drainageways within the subject property. This property discharges to existing drainageways that have been designed to accommodate runoff from this project as a part of the Rigden Farm Master Plan. Step 4 – Implement Site Specific and Other Source Control BMPs. The proposed project will improve upon site specific source controls compared to historic conditions: Localized trash enclosures within the development will allow for the disposal of solid waste. Snouts and settling basins for water treatment prior to flows entering the subsurface infiltration galleries and storm systems. Water Quality measures to protect and prolong the design life of the BMPs delineated in Step 1. C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints 1. The proposed site is has been a part of many different drainage plans and studies in the past. These plans include Rigden Farm Filing No. 1, Rigden Farm Filing No. 6, Rigden Farm Filing No. 8 and Rigden Farm – Northwest Roads. 2. The most recent drainage plans (Rigden Farm Filing No. 8 and Rigden Farm – Northwest Roads) were referenced in the drainage design for this site. 3. The subject property is a part of many drainage plans. As such, several constraints have been identified during the course of this analysis that will impact the proposed drainage system including: Maximum runoff allowable into existing inlets and drainageways based on previous drainage plans and studies. Specifically, the Rigden Farm-Northwest Roads Drainage Plan divided the site into two basins. The north basin was planned to drain to a storm sewer bisecting the site. The south basin was planned to drain to an existing storm sewer in Custer Drive. This Drainage Plan defined the maximum allowable runoff generated from the Flats site to these storm sewers. D. 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 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. As of this report, pervious pavers have not been added to Table RO-11. A coefficient of runoff of 0.40 Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report 6 was assumed for the pervious pavers. This is a value published by Advanced Pavement Technology. 3. The Rational Formula-based Modified Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) procedure has been utilized for detention storage calculations. Detention storage calculations were not necessary for this site. 4. Three 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. The third storm computed, for comparison purposes only, is the 10-year event. 5. No other assumptions or calculation methods have been used with this development that are not referenced by current City of Fort Collins criteria. E. Hydraulic Criteria 1. As previously noted, the subject property historically drains to the north, east, and south. The north flows are collected in an existing inlet on Limon Drive then conveyed to an existing 42” storm sewer that continues down Drake Avenue, the center flows are collected in a series of water quality ponds designed with the Rigden Farm Filing No. 1 and No. 6, and the south flows are collected into an existing inlet on Custer Drive that ultimately discharges to an existing water quality pond designed with Rigden Farm Filing No. 1. 2. All drainage facilities proposed with the Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat 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. 3. As stated previously, the subject property is not located within a FEMA regulatory floodplain. 4. The Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat project does not propose to modify any natural drainageways. F. Floodplain Regulations Compliance 1. As previously mentioned, all structures are located outside of any FEMA 100-year floodplain, and thus are not subject to any floodplain regulations. G. Modifications of Criteria 1. The proposed development is not requesting any modifications to criteria at this time. IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. General Concept 1. The main objectives of the Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat drainage design are to maintain the allowable storm runoffs as outlined within the “Rigden Farm – Northwest Roads” Utility Plans by JR Engineering, June 29, 2005. 2. A list of tables and figures used within this report can be found in the Table of Contents at the front of the document. The tables and figures are located within the sections to which the content best applies. Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report 7 3. The Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat project divided the site into three (3) major drainage basins, designated as Basins A, B, and C. The project further subdivided Basin B in to twelve (12) sub-basins, designated as Basins B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, B-5, B-6, B-7, B-8, B-9, B-10, B-11, and B-12. The drainage patterns anticipated for each basin and sub-basin are further described below. Basin A Basin A consists of proposed multi-family condos, sidewalk, and landscaped areas. A portion of the runoff from Basin A is collected in an on-site inlet, and a portion of the runoff from this basin is intercepted by an existing inlet at Iowa Drive and Limon Drive. The onsite inlet will convey flows from Basin A into the existing inlet at Iowa Drive and Limon Drive. This existing inlet conveys flows to the existing 42” storm sewer in Limon Drive. No previous studies had accounted for flows from this lot into the existing sewer. Calculations based on the upstream flows from Rigden Farm Filing No. 8 and Rigden Farm – Northwest Roads were conducted to ensure that the existing storm sewer and existing inlet could handle the increased flows from Basin A. Routed Hydrologic calculations show an increase from 31.10 cfs to 31.69 cfs during a 100-yr event. This equates to maximum increase of 0.59 cfs within the 42” storm sewer. This is considered within the range of error for the pipe. Basin B Basin B consists of proposed multi-family condos, sidewalks, landscaped areas, porous pavers, and asphalt. Basin B is collected in the existing 42” storm sewer that bisects the site. This storm sewer conveys flows to a series of existing water quality ponds designed with Filing No. 1. The Drainage Plan for Rigden Farm – Northwest Roads was referenced to determine the total allowable flows to the existing water quality ponds. The 2-yr and 10-yr flows from Basin B were calculated at 5.59 cfs and 9.54 cfs, respectively. These are within the range shown by the Rigden Farm- Northwest Roads Drainage Plan for the 2- yr and 10-yr events of 5.60 cfs and 9.56 cfs, respectively. The 100-yr event is calculated to produce 30.29 cfs of runoff, this is more than the 23.68 cfs allowed in the previous drainage plan. As such, the inlet at Design Point 6 will be restricted to receive only allow 1.75 cfs (of the 100-yr flow of 3.88 cfs) during a 100-yr storm, and the storm system from Basins B-6, B-7, and B-8 will be restricted to conveying the 2 year flows. This will restrict the flows from Basin B to 21.94 cfs below the allowable as stated in the Rigden Farm – Northwest Roads Drainage Plan (23.68 cfs). Additional 8.35 cfs flows will back up in the system and release at Design Point 8 down a concrete rundown to the existing inlet in Custer Drive. The sub-basins B-9, B-10, and B-11 are collected by existing inlets designed in the Filing No. 8 Drainage Plan. The existing storm sewer was designed with additional capacity. As such, all 100-yr flows generated by sub-basins B-9, B-10, and B-11 were shown as being intercepted by the existing inlets. Basin C Basin C consists of proposed multi-family condos, sidewalks, and landscaped areas. All runoff in Basin C-1 is collected in the curb and gutter in Iowa Drive, Custer Drive, or Illinois Drive, and is conveyed to the existing inlet at Iowa Drive and Custer Drive. The 2-yr and 100-yr flow calculated for Basin C-1 are 0.65 cfs and 3.24 cfs, respectively. These flows are well below the 2-yr and 100-yr flows allowed by the Rigden Farm – Northwest Roads Drainage Report for the existing inlet, 2.74 cfs and 10.96 cfs. During a 100-yr event 8.35 cfs of additional flows will be directed from Basin B to the concrete rundown from Basin C. The combined flows from Basin B and Basin C during a 100-yr storm are calculated as 11.59 cfs. This is 0.63 cfs Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report 8 above what planned based on the Northwest Roads Drainage Report. This difference is considered negligible. If the flows from the upstream basin were routed, this difference would disappear or be minimized to almost nothing. The existing inlet conveys flows to the existing storm sewer system in Custer Drive, ultimately outfalling into Water Quality Pond 2 (see Rigden Farm Filing One Drainage Plan) that releases to the Foothills Regional Channel. 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. All storm sewers were modeling using Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk AutoCAD. 2. The concrete rundown was modeled in Hydraflow Express. V. CONCLUSIONS A. Compliance with Standards 1. The drainage design proposed with the Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat project complies with the City of Fort Collins’ Stormwater Criteria Manual. 2. The drainage design proposed with the Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat project complies with the City of Fort Collins’ Master Drainage Plan for the Foothills Drainage Basin. 3. There are no regulatory floodplains associated with the development. 4. The drainage plan and stormwater management measures proposed with the development are compliant with all applicable State and Federal regulations governing stormwater discharge. 5. The site achieves the requirements set forth by the City of Fort Collins for Low Impact Development (LID) by providing 37% of total paved areas as permeable pavers and providing 50% of total impervious areas as being treated through an LID treatment, drywells. B. Drainage Concept 1. The drainage design proposed with this project will effectively comply with previous studies and will limit any potential damage or erosion associated with its stormwater runoff. All existing downstream drainage facilities are expected to not be impacted negatively by this development 2. The proposed development will not have any impact on the Master Drainage Plan recommendations for Rigden Farm. 3. The drainage design is anticipated to be very conservative. We have omitted any runoff reduction that will manifest due to infiltration from drywells and pervious pavement. This is currently unable to be calculated with available soils data. Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Drainage Report 9 References 1. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, as adopted by Ordinance No. 174, 2011, and referenced in Section 26-500 (c) of the City of Fort Collins Municipal Code. 2. Preliminary Subsurface Exploration Report, Rigden Farm Northwest Fort Collins, Colorado, May 5, 2005, Earth Engineering Consultants, Inc.(EEC Project No. 1052053). 3. Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, Adopted January 2, 2001, Repealed and Reenacted, Effective October 1, 2002, Repealed and Reenacted, Effective April 1, 2007. 4. Soils Resource Report for Larimer County Area, Colorado, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. 5. 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 Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat CHARACTER OF SURFACE 1 : Runoff Coefficient Percentage Impervious Project: Rigden Farm - 14th Filing Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: Calculations By: S. Thomas Asphalt ……....……………...……….....…...……………….………………………………………………………….0.95 . 100% Date: September 12, 2014 Concrete …….......……………….….……….………………..….…………………………………………………….0.95 . 90% Gravel (packed) ……….…………………….….…………………………..………………………………………….0.50 . 40% Roofs …….…….………………..……………….……………………………………………………………………… 0.95 90% Pavers…………………………...………………..……………………………………………………………………… 0.40 22% Lawns and Landscaping Sandy Soil Flat <2% ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 0.10 0% Average 2% to 7% ………………………………………………………………………………………………….0.15 . 0% Steep >7% …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 0.20 0% Clayey Soil Flat <2% ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 0.20 0% Average 2% to 7% ………………………………………………………………………………………………….0.25 . 0% Steep >7% …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 0.35 0% 2-year Cf = 1.00 10-year Cf = 1.00 100-year Cf = 1.25 Runoff Coefficients are taken from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Table RO-11 Sub-Basin ID Sub- BasinBasin Area (ac) Area of Asphalt (ac) Area of Concrete (ac) Area of Pavers (ac) Area of Roofs (ac) Soil Type and Average Slope Area of Lawns and Landscaping (ac) 2-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 10-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 100-year Composite Runoff Coefficient Composite % Imperv. Basin Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: Rigden Farm - 14th Filing 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) 2-yr Tc (min) 10-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) 1 A-1 No 0.76 0.76 0.94 81 2.31% 4.4 4.4 2.0 47 0.94% 1.94 0.4 5.0 5.0 5.0 2 B-1 No 0.89 0.89 1.00 102 1.56% 3.4 3.4 1.6 0 N/A N/A N/A 5.0 5.0 5.0 3 B-2 No 0.88 0.88 1.00 38 0.74% 2.9 2.9 1.3 32 0.44% 1.32 0.4 5.0 5.0 5.0 4 B-3 No 0.85 0.85 1.00 89 1.53% 3.8 3.8 1.5 48 0.52% 1.44 0.6 5.0 5.0 5.0 5 B-4 No 0.72 0.72 0.90 70 2.07% 4.6 4.6 2.4 151 0.87% 1.87 1.3 6.0 6.0 5.0 Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Rational Method Equation: Project: Rigden Farm - 14th Filing Calculations By: Date: Rainfall Intensity: 1 A-1 0.11 5 5 5 0.76 0.76 0.94 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.23 0.40 1.02 2 B-1 0.37 5 5 5 0.89 0.89 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.95 1.62 3.71 3 B-2 0.12 5 5 5 0.88 0.88 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.31 0.53 1.23 4 B-3 0.16 5 5 5 0.85 0.85 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.39 0.67 1.61 5 B-4 0.77 6 6 5 0.72 0.72 0.90 2.76 4.72 9.95 1.53 2.61 6.89 6 B-5 0.39 5 5 5 0.94 0.94 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 1.05 1.79 3.88 7 B-6 0.23 5 5 5 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.63 1.08 2.34 8 B-7 0.42 12 12 8 0.62 0.62 0.78 2.05 3.50 8.38 0.53 0.91 2.71 9 B-8 0.30 6 6 5 0.83 0.83 1.00 2.67 4.56 9.95 0.67 1.14 3.00 10 B-9 0.06 5 5 5 0.77 0.77 0.96 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.13 0.23 0.58 11 B-10 0.11 5 5 5 0.74 0.74 0.92 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.23 0.39 1.01 12 B-11 0.08 5 5 5 0.66 0.66 0.82 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.14 0.24 0.62 13 B-12 0.42 6 6 5 0.65 0.65 0.81 2.67 4.56 9.95 0.72 1.22 3.34 TOTAL BASIN B 3.43 12 12 7 0.78 0.78 0.98 2.09 3.57 9.06 5.59 9.54 30.29 14 C-1 0.54 15 15 11 0.63 0.63 0.79 1.90 3.24 7.57 0.65 1.11 3.24 PROPOSED 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) Sub-Basin(s) S. Thomas Rainfall Intensity taken from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM), Tables RA-7 and RA-8 September 12, 2014 Intensity, i10 (in/hr) C10 Area, A (acres) Intensity, i2 (in/hr) 100-yr Tc (min) Q C f C i A Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat CHARACTER OF SURFACE 1 : Runoff Coefficient Percentage Impervious Project: Rigden Farm-14th Fil. & 8th Fil. Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: Calculations By: S. Thomas Asphalt ……....……………...……….....…...……………….………………………………………………………….0.95 . 100% Date: July 15, 2014 Concrete …….......……………….….……….………………..….…………………………………………………….0.95 . 90% Gravel (packed) ……….…………………….….…………………………..………………………………………….0.50 . 40% Roofs …….…….………………..……………….……………………………………………………………………… 0.95 90% Pavers…………………………...………………..……………………………………………………………………… 0.40 22% Lawns and Landscaping Sandy Soil Flat <2% ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 0.10 0% Average 2% to 7% ………………………………………………………………………………………………….0.15 . 0% Steep >7% …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 0.20 0% Clayey Soil Flat <2% ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 0.20 0% Average 2% to 7% ………………………………………………………………………………………………….0.25 . 0% Steep >7% …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 0.35 0% 2-year Cf = 1.00 10-year Cf = 1.00 100-year Cf = 1.25 Runoff Coefficients are taken from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Table RO-11 Sub-Basin ID Sub- BasinBasin Area (ac) Area of Asphalt (ac) Area of Concrete (ac) Area of Pavers (ac) Area of Roofs (ac) Soil Type and Average Slope Area of Lawns and Landscaping (ac) 2-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 10-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 100-year Composite Runoff Coefficient Composite % Imperv. A-1 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.07 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.030 0.76 0.76 0.94 65% Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: Rigden Farm-14th Fil. & 8th Fil. 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 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) Up Stream Elevation Down Stream Elevation Slope, S (%) Ti 2-yr (min) Ti 10-yr (min) Ti 100-yr (min) Length, L (ft) Up Stream Elevation Down Stream Elevation Slope, S (%) Velocity, V (ft/s) Tt Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Rational Method Equation: Project: Rigden Farm-14th Fil. & 8th Fil. Calculations By: S. Thomas Date: Rainfall Intensity: 1 TOTAL BASIN TO LIMON STORM SEWER WITHOUT A-1 5.80 21 21 19 0.83 0.83 0.93 1.59 2.71 5.75 7.62 13.01 31.10 1 TOTAL BASIN TO LIMON STORM SEWER WITH A-1 5.91 21 21 19 0.83 0.83 0.93 1.59 2.71 5.75 7.75 13.23 31.69 Area, A (acres) Intensity, i2 (in/hr) 100-yr Tc (min) July 15, 2014 PROPOSED 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) Sub-Basin(s) Rainfall Intensity taken from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM), Tables RA-7 and RA-8 Intensity, i10 (in/hr) C10 Q C f C i A 7/15/2014 10:17 AM D:\Projects\374-012\Drainage\Hydrology\374-012_Design Point 1 - Filing 8th and 14th and NW.xlsx\Runoff APPENDIX B HYDRAULIC COMPUTATIONS B.1 – Storm Sewers B.2 – Inlets APPENDIX B.1 STORM SEWERS Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Wednesday, Sep 17 2014 Basin C Concrete Rundown Rectangular Bottom Width (ft) = 2.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 4927.02 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.012 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 8.35 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.50 Q (cfs) = 8.350 Area (sqft) = 1.00 Velocity (ft/s) = 8.35 Wetted Perim (ft) = 3.00 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.50 Top Width (ft) = 2.00 EGL (ft) = 1.58 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Elev (ft) Section Depth (ft) 4926.75 -0.27 4927.00 -0.02 4927.25 0.23 4927.50 0.48 4927.75 0.73 4928.00 0.98 Reach (ft) APPENDIX B.2 INLETS Area Inlet Performance Curve: Rigden Farm Filing 14 - Design Point 2/Inlet B4 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Neenah R-3409 Shape Rectangular Length of Grate (ft): 2.4 Width of Grate (ft): 1.4 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 1.50 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4930.410 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4930.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 4930.46 0.13 0.90 0.13 0.10 4930.51 0.36 1.27 0.36 0.15 4930.56 0.66 1.56 0.66 0.20 4930.61 1.02 1.80 1.02 Q2 0.25 4930.660 1.43 2.02 1.43 0.30 4930.71 1.87 2.21 1.87 0.35 4930.76 2.36 2.38 2.36 0.40 4930.81 2.88 2.55 2.55 0.45 4930.86 3.44 2.70 2.70 0.50 4930.910 4.03 2.85 2.85 Inlet at Design Point 2 is designed to intercept the full 2-yr flow of 0.95 cfs at the elevation 4930.61. 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 Discharge (cfs) Stage (ft) Area Inlet Performance Curve: Rigden Farm Filing 14 - Design Point 3/Inlet B2-1 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Neenah R-3409 Shape Rectangular Length of Grate (ft): 2.4 Width of Grate (ft): 1.4 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 1.50 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4931.220 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4931.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 4931.24 0.03 0.57 0.03 0.04 4931.26 0.09 0.81 0.09 0.06 4931.28 0.17 0.99 0.17 0.08 4931.30 0.26 1.14 0.26 Q2 0.10 4931.320 0.36 1.27 0.36 0.12 4931.34 0.47 1.40 0.47 0.14 4931.36 0.60 1.51 0.60 0.16 4931.38 0.73 1.61 0.73 0.18 4931.40 0.87 1.71 0.87 0.20 4931.420 1.02 1.80 1.02 Inlet at Design Point 3 is designed to intercept the full 2-yr flow of 0.31 cfs at the elevation 4931.31 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 Discharge (cfs) Area Inlet Performance Curve: Rigden Farm Filing 14 - Design Point 4/Inlet B1-1 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Neenah R-3409 Shape Rectangular Length of Grate (ft): 2.4 Width of Grate (ft): 1.4 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 1.50 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4930.390 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4930.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 4930.41 0.03 0.57 0.03 0.04 4930.43 0.09 0.81 0.09 0.06 4930.45 0.17 0.99 0.17 0.08 4930.47 0.26 1.14 0.26 0.10 4930.490 0.36 1.27 0.36 Q2 0.12 4930.51 0.47 1.40 0.47 0.14 4930.53 0.60 1.51 0.60 0.16 4930.55 0.73 1.61 0.73 0.18 4930.57 0.87 1.71 0.87 0.20 4930.590 1.02 1.80 1.02 Inlet at Design Point 4 is designed to intercept the full 2-yr flow of 0.39 cfs at the elevation 4930.50 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 Discharge (cfs) Area Inlet Performance Curve: Rigden Farm Filing 14 - Design Point 5/Inlet C4 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: CDOT Type C Close Mesh Grate Shape Rectangular Length of Grate (ft): 3.33 Width of Grate (ft): 2.75 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 7.54 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4929.160 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4929.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4929.26 0.58 6.41 0.58 0.20 4929.36 1.63 9.06 1.63 0.30 4929.46 3.00 11.10 3.00 0.40 4929.56 4.61 12.81 4.61 0.50 4929.660 6.45 14.33 6.45 0.60 4929.76 8.48 15.69 8.48 0.70 4929.86 10.68 16.95 10.68 0.80 4929.96 13.05 18.12 13.05 0.90 4930.06 15.57 19.22 15.57 Q100 1.00 4930.160 18.24 20.26 18.24 Inlet at Design Point 5 full 100-yr flow of 15.13 cfs at the elevation 0.88 above the inlet elevation. 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Discharge (cfs) Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow Area Inlet Performance Curve: Rigden Farm Filing 14 - Design Point 6/Inlet A2-1A Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Neenah R-3409 Shape Rectangular Length of Grate (ft): 1.4 Width of Grate (ft): 2.4 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 1.50 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4929.650 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4929.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 4929.69 0.09 0.81 0.09 0.08 4929.73 0.26 1.14 0.26 0.12 4929.77 0.47 1.40 0.47 0.16 4929.81 0.73 1.61 0.73 0.20 4929.850 1.02 1.80 1.02 0.24 4929.89 1.34 1.97 1.34 0.28 4929.93 1.69 2.13 1.69 1.75 cfs 0.32 4929.97 2.06 2.28 2.06 0.36 4930.01 2.46 2.42 2.42 0.40 4930.050 2.88 2.55 2.55 Inlet at Design Point 6 is designed to intercept a flow of 1.75 cfs at the elevation 4929.94 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 Discharge (cfs) Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Area Inlet Performance Curve: Rigden Farm Filing 14 - Design Point 7/Inlet A10-1 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Neenah R-3409 Shape Rectangular Length of Grate (ft): 1.4 Width of Grate (ft): 2.4 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 1.50 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4928.800 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4928.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 4928.82 0.03 0.57 0.03 0.04 4928.84 0.09 0.81 0.09 0.06 4928.86 0.17 0.99 0.17 0.08 4928.88 0.26 1.14 0.26 0.10 4928.900 0.36 1.27 0.36 0.12 4928.92 0.47 1.40 0.47 0.14 4928.94 0.60 1.51 0.60 Q2 0.16 4928.96 0.73 1.61 0.73 0.18 4928.98 0.87 1.71 0.87 0.20 4929.000 1.02 1.80 1.02 Inlet at Design Point 7 is designed to intercept the 2-yr flow of 0.63 cfs at the elevation 4928.95 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 Discharge (cfs) Area Inlet Performance Curve: Rigden Farm Filing 14 - Design Point 8/Inlet A8 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Neenah R-3409 Shape Rectangular Length of Grate (ft): 1.4 Width of Grate (ft): 2.4 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 1.50 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4928.300 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4928.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 4928.32 0.03 0.57 0.03 0.04 4928.34 0.09 0.81 0.09 0.06 4928.36 0.17 0.99 0.17 0.08 4928.38 0.26 1.14 0.26 0.10 4928.400 0.36 1.27 0.36 0.12 4928.42 0.47 1.40 0.47 Q2 0.14 4928.44 0.60 1.51 0.60 0.16 4928.46 0.73 1.61 0.73 0.18 4928.48 0.87 1.71 0.87 0.20 4928.500 1.02 1.80 1.02 Inlet at Design Point 8 is designed to intercept a the 2-yr flow of 0.53 cfs at the elevation 4928.43 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 Discharge (cfs) Area Inlet Performance Curve: Rigden Farm Filing 14 - Design Point 9/Inlet A6 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Neenah R-3409 Shape Rectangular Length of Grate (ft): 1.4 Width of Grate (ft): 2.4 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 1.50 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4929.800 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4929.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 4929.82 0.03 0.57 0.03 0.04 4929.84 0.09 0.81 0.09 0.06 4929.86 0.17 0.99 0.17 0.08 4929.88 0.26 1.14 0.26 0.10 4929.900 0.36 1.27 0.36 0.12 4929.92 0.47 1.40 0.47 0.14 4929.94 0.60 1.51 0.60 Q2 0.16 4929.96 0.73 1.61 0.73 0.18 4929.98 0.87 1.71 0.87 0.20 4930.000 1.02 1.80 1.02 Inlet at Design Point 9 is designed to intercept the 2-yr flow of 0.67 cfs at the elevation 4929.95 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 Discharge (cfs) Area Inlet Performance Curve: Rigden Farm Filing 14 - Design Point 13/Inlets C1, C2, C3 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: Neenah R-2510 Shape Circular Length of Grate (ft): 1.25 Width of Grate (ft): 1.25 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 0.40 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4929.160 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4929.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 4929.21 0.07 0.24 0.07 0.10 4929.26 0.19 0.34 0.19 Q2 0.15 4929.31 0.34 0.42 0.42 0.20 4929.36 0.53 0.48 0.48 0.25 4929.410 0.74 0.54 0.54 0.30 4929.46 0.97 0.59 0.59 0.35 4929.51 1.22 0.64 0.64 0.40 4929.56 1.49 0.68 0.68 0.45 4929.61 1.78 0.72 0.72 0.50 4929.660 2.08 0.76 0.76 Inlets at Design Point 13 are designed to capture full 2-yr flow of 0.72 cfs at the elevation 0.16 above the inlet elevation. Design Point 13 is divided among 3 small inlets each collecting 0.24 cfs 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 APPENDIX C EROSION CONTROL REPORT Rigden Farm 14th Filing Replat Preliminary Erosion Control Report A comprehensive Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (along with associated details) will be included with the final construction drawings. It should be noted, however, that any such Erosion and Sediment Control Plan serves only as a general guide to the Contractor. Staging and/or phasing of the BMPs depicted, and additional or different BMPs from those included may be necessary during construction, or as required by the authorities having jurisdiction. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure erosion control measures are properly maintained and followed. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is intended to be a living document, constantly adapting to site conditions and needs. The Contractor shall update the location of BMPs as they are installed, removed or modified in conjunction with construction activities. It is imperative to appropriately reflect the current site conditions at all times. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall address both temporary measures to be implemented during construction, as well as permanent erosion control protection. Best Management Practices from the Volume 3, Chapter 7 – Construction BMPs will be utilized. Measures may include, but are not limited to, silt fencing along the disturbed perimeter, gutter protection in the adjacent roadways and inlet protection at existing and proposed storm inlets. Vehicle tracking control pads, spill containment and clean-up procedures, designated concrete washout areas, dumpsters, and job site restrooms shall also be provided by the Contractor. Grading and Erosion Control Notes can be found on Sheet CS2 of the Utility Plans. The Utility Plans at final design will also contain a full-size Erosion Control Plan as well as a separate sheet dedicated to Erosion Control Details. In addition to this report and the referenced plan sheets, the Contractor shall be aware of, and adhere to, the applicable requirements outlined in any existing Development Agreement(s) of record, as well as the Development Agreement, to be recorded prior to issuance of the Development Construction Permit. Also, the Site Contractor for this project will be required to secure a Stormwater Construction General Permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Water Quality Control Division – Stormwater Program, before commencing any earth disturbing activities. Prior to securing said permit, the Site Contractor shall develop a comprehensive StormWater Management Plan (SWMP) pursuant to CDPHE requirements and guidelines. The SWMP will further describe and document the ongoing activities, inspections, and maintenance of construction BMPs. APPENDIX D REFERENCE DRAINAGE PLANS This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jan-02-2014 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact Engineering Office 281 North College Fort Collins, CO 80521 USA This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jan-02-2014 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact Engineering Office 281 North College Fort Collins, CO 80521 USA This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jan-02-2014 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact Engineering Office 281 North College Fort Collins, CO 80521 USA MAP POCKET DR1 – OVERALL DRAINAGE EXHIBIT 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 Discharge (cfs) Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow Q 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow Q 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow Q 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow Q 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 Orifice Flow Q 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 Q 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow Q 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow Q 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow Q 3 . 0 P H 1 . 5 Q 0 . 67 A ( 2 gH ) 0 . 5 (min) 2-yr Tc (min) 10-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) 1 TOTAL BASIN TO LIMON STORM SEWER WITHOUT A-1 No 0.83 0.83 0.93 50 2.00% 2.8 2.8 1.8 1232 29.34 25.20 0.34% 1.16 17.7 20.6 20.6 19.5 1 TOTAL BASIN TO LIMON STORM SEWER WITH A-1 No 0.83 0.83 0.93 50 2.00% 2.9 2.9 1.8 1232 29.34 25.20 0.34% 1.16 17.7 20.6 20.6 19.5 * Time of Concentrations are calculated for the entire basin and used for both the Impervious and Pervious portions of the basins. PROPOSED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS S. Thomas July 15, 2014 Design Point Sub-Basin Overland Flow Pipe Flow Time of Concentration (Equation RO-4) 3 1 1 . 87 1 . 1 * S Ti C Cf L  7/15/2014 10:17 AM D:\Projects\374-012\Drainage\Hydrology\374-012_Design Point 1 - Filing 8th and 14th and NW.xlsx\Tc Rigden Farm 8th Filing 01-15-04 C1 0.04 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.15 0.15 0.19 C2 0.03 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.15 0.15 0.19 C3 0.27 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.31 0.31 0.35 C4 1.53 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.95 0.95 1.00 C5 0.21 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.76 0.76 0.81 C6 0.09 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.95 0.95 1.00 C7 0.10 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.95 0.95 1.00 C8 0.18 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.95 0.95 1.00 C9 0.09 0.95 0.95 1.00 C10 0.61 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.70 0.70 0.85 OC1 0.23 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.83 0.83 0.88 OC2 0.23 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.95 0.95 1.00 OC3 0.06 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.95 0.95 1.00 OC4 0.02 0.95 0.95 1.00 Rigden Farm Northwest Roads 06-29- 05 103b 0.93 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.85 0.85 1.00 104 0.41 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.81 0.81 1.00 105 0.69 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.82 0.82 1.00 OS-2 0.04 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.81 0.81 1.00 OS-3 0.04 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.81 0.81 1.00 TOTAL BASIN TO LIMON STORM SEWER WITHOUT A-1 5.80 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.83 0.83 0.93 TOTAL BASIN TO LIMON STORM SEWER WITH A-1 5.91 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.83 0.83 0.93 1. Table RO-11 | Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis PROPOSED COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS Composite Runoff Coefficient with Adjustment 7/15/2014 10:16 AM D:\Projects\374-012\Drainage\Hydrology\374-012_Design Point 1 - Filing 8th and 14th and NW.xlsx\Composite C 9/12/2014 2:36 PM D:\Projects\374-012\Drainage\Hydrology\374-012_Proposed_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Runoff 6 B-5 No 0.94 0.94 1.00 70 1.87% 2.0 2.0 1.3 73 0.47% 1.36 0.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 7 B-6 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 56 1.84% 1.7 1.7 1.1 37 0.51% 1.43 0.4 5.0 5.0 5.0 8 B-7 No 0.62 0.62 0.78 182 0.92% 12.4 12.4 8.4 0 N/A N/A N/A 12.4 12.4 8.4 9 B-8 No 0.83 0.83 1.00 132 1.16% 5.5 5.5 2.0 81 0.90% 1.90 0.7 6.2 6.2 5.0 10 B-9 No 0.77 0.77 0.96 46 2.35% 3.2 3.2 1.3 31 0.65% 1.61 0.3 5.0 5.0 5.0 PROPOSED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS S. Thomas September 12, 2014 Design Point Sub-Basin Overland Flow Gutter/Pipe Flow Time of Concentration (Equation RO-4) 3 1 1 . 87 1 . 1 * S Ti C Cf L  9/12/2014 2:36 PM D:\Projects\374-012\Drainage\Hydrology\374-012_Proposed_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Tc 10 B-9 No 0.77 0.77 0.96 46 2.35% 3.2 3.2 1.3 31 0.65% 1.61 0.3 5.0 5.0 5.0 11 B-10 No 0.74 0.74 0.92 55 3.51% 3.3 3.3 1.6 31 2.06% 2.87 0.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 12 B-11 No 0.66 0.66 0.82 70 3.19% 4.7 4.7 2.9 17 2.94% 3.43 0.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 13 B-12 No 0.65 0.65 0.81 64 1.16% 6.5 6.5 4.2 0 N/A N/A N/A 6.5 6.5 5.0 TOTAL BASIN B No 0.78 0.78 0.98 182 0.92% 8.3 8.3 3.2 407 1.01% 2.01 3.4 11.7 11.7 6.6 14 C-1 No 0.63 0.63 0.79 130 0.79% 10.7 10.7 7.1 406 0.79% 1.78 3.8 14.5 14.5 10.9 * Time of Concentrations are calculated for the entire basin and used for both the Impervious and Pervious portions of the basins. 3 1 1 . 87 1 . 1 * S Ti C Cf L  9/12/2014 2:36 PM D:\Projects\374-012\Drainage\Hydrology\374-012_Proposed_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Tc Treated thru LID? LID Treated Impervious Area (ac) A-1 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.07 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.030 0.76 0.76 0.94 65% NO 0.00 B-1 0.37 0.08 0.10 0.00 0.16 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.033 0.89 0.89 1.00 84% NO 0.00 B-2 0.12 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.06 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.013 0.88 0.88 1.00 83% NO 0.00 B-3 0.16 0.03 0.05 0.00 0.05 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.022 0.85 0.85 1.00 80% NO 0.00 B-4 0.77 0.13 0.15 0.18 0.20 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.105 0.72 0.72 0.90 67% YES 0.52 B-5 0.39 0.14 0.06 0.00 0.18 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.005 0.94 0.94 1.00 93% NO 0.00 B-6 0.23 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.13 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.001 0.95 0.95 1.00 92% YES 0.22 B-7 0.42 0.06 0.05 0.12 0.09 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.102 0.62 0.62 0.78 55% YES 0.23 B-8 0.30 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.12 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.009 0.83 0.83 1.00 81% YES 0.24 B-9 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.016 0.77 0.77 0.96 67% NO 0.00 B-10 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.07 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.034 0.74 0.74 0.92 63% NO 0.00 B-11 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.031 0.66 0.66 0.82 53% NO 0.00 B-12 0.42 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.17 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.181 0.65 0.65 0.81 51% YES 0.21 TOTAL BASIN B 3.43 0.61 0.59 0.36 1.32 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.552 0.78 0.78 0.98 72% C-1 0.54 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.23 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.242 0.63 0.63 0.79 49% NO 0.00 1. Table RO-11 | Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis Permeable Pavement LID Treatment Total Pavement (ac)= 1.94 Total Impermeable Area(ac)= 2.81 Total Permeable Pavement (ac)= 0.72 Total Impermeable Area Treated with LID(ac)= 1.42 Percent Permeable Pavement= 37% Percent Treated with LID= 50% LID Requirements Composite Runoff Coefficient with Adjustment LID Treatment PROPOSED COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS 9/12/2014 2:36 PM D:\Projects\374-012\Drainage\Hydrology\374-012_Proposed_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Composite C