Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRAIRIE VILLAGE - MAJOR AMENDMENT - MJA140002 - REPORTS - DRAINAGE REPORTDrainage Memorandum Date: August 27, 2014 Project: Prairie Village Project No. 1013-001 Project Development Plan/Final Plan Fort Collins, Colorado Attn: Mr. Wes Lamarque City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Dear Wes: This letter serves to address the stormwater impacts of the Prairie Village project. The existing site consists of vacant land, situated southwest of the Seneca Center Development. The site is bounded by an existing parking lot to the northeast, Fromme Prairie Way on the south, and Overlook at Woodbridge Subdivision lots on the west. The proposed development will consist of 8 townhome units, sidewalks, paver driveways, and utility services. The project is expected to disturb approximately 0.73 acres of land. This project site was originally a part of the Overlook/Seneca Center P.U.D. As such, drainage facilities were planned for this area and were built with the Seneca Center Development. This letter is intended to show compliance with the original drainage plan “Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report – Overlook/Seneca Center P.U.D.” dated April 17, 2000 by North Star Design and the Fort Collins Amendments to the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Criteria Manual. The site is located within the Mail Creek Stormwater Basin. Existing site drainage overland flows to Fromme Prairie Way. A web soil survey indicates a soils rated as Hydrologic Soil Group B, which has a moderate infiltration rate. The proposed site has a percent impervious of 59%, which is lower than the previous Overlook/Seneca Center P.U.D. at 64% impervious. As such, detention will not be required for this site. Both the previous study and this study used the most recent Fort Collins Intensity-Duration- Frequency in their calculations. Rational method calculations were used to determine the proposed runoff for sizing storm facilities. These calculations are attached to this letter, as is a drainage exhibit. There are no regulatory floodplains associated with the project. Page 2 Although stormwater quantity detention is not required, stormwater quality mitigation will be addressed by both temporary and permanent Best Management Practices (BMPs). During construction, the Contractor will follow the appropriate and applicable City of Fort Collins standards for erosion and sediment control. Since the approximately 0.73 acre area of disturbance for the project is less than one acre, a comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan will not be prepared for this project. Post construction water quality and erosion control will be achieved by a fully established and stabilized site. All areas disturbed during construction will receive permanent hardscape, landscape, or building structure. There are no existing stormwater BMP’s currently on-site. In order to bring the site into compliance with the Low Impact Development Standards adopted by the city, bio-retention/rain gardens and bioswales will be provided on-site. Water quality treatment will occur through a variety of methods. The first method is the use of a bio-retention area along the north side of the proposed buildings that intercepts runoff from Basin A. This area will have an engineered section designed to remove particulates and contaminants from the runoff. While most minor events are expected to infiltrate into the ground, a subdrain is provided to drain the bio-retention area should it become overburdened. The underdrain will outfall directly into an existing storm sewer. The runoff from the south side (Basin B) of the proposed building will be treated within a bioswale. This bioswale will convey flows to a proposed inlet, outfalling into the existing storm sewer. The City LID requirements specify that no less than 25% of all new paving shall be treated using permeable paving technique. The City LID requirements also specify that no less than 50% of any new impervious areas must be treated using LID techniques. Unfortunately, the site configuration and drainage patterns for this project do not lend themselves to the use of permeable pavers. In lieu of permeable pavers, 100% of the new impermeable areas will be treated for water quality. The combination of treatment provided by the bio-retention area and bioswale far exceeds the amount required for LID treatment, and provides water quality treatment equal to or better than meeting the requirement for 25% permeable pavements. To summarize, the proposed grading concept closely is in compliance with previous drainage studies. On-site detention is proven to be unnecessary. Stormwater quality has been provided, and exceeds the city requirements for Low Impact Development treatment. Therefore, it is my professional opinion that the Prairie Village project satisfies all applicable stormwater criteria. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Stephanie Thomas, PE Nicholas W. Haws, PE Project Engineer Project Manager enc. Prairie Village CHARACTER OF SURFACE 1 : Runoff Coefficient Percentage Impervious Project: Prairie Village Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: Calculations By: S. Thomas Asphalt ……....……………...……….....…...……………….………………………………………………………….0.95 . 100% Date: July 9, 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 A 0.42 0.01 0.12 0.00 0.16 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.130 0.73 0.73 0.92 62% Prairie Village Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: Prairie Village 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) A Basin A No 0.73 0.73 0.92 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 150 3.40% 2.77 0.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 B Basin B No 0.67 0.67 0.84 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 302 1.85% 2.04 2.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Total Basins A and B No 0.71 0.71 0.88 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 302 1.85% 2.04 2.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 OS OS No 0.28 0.28 0.35 79 2.00% 10.8 10.8 9.9 340 2.00% 2.12 2.7 13.5 13.5 12.6 * Time of Concentrations are calculated for the entire basin and used for both the Impervious and Pervious portions of the basins. Prairie Village Rational Method Equation: Project: Prairie Village Calculations By: Date: Rainfall Intensity: A Basin A 0.42 5 5 5 0.73 0.73 0.92 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.87 1.49 3.81 B Basin B 0.31 5 5 5 0.67 0.67 0.84 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.60 1.02 2.61 Total Basins A and B 0.73 5 5 5 0.71 0.71 0.88 2.85 4.87 9.95 1.47 2.51 6.41 OS OS 0.80 14 14 13 0.28 0.28 0.35 1.95 3.34 7.04 0.43 0.74 1.96 July 9, 2014 Intensity, i10 (in/hr) C10 Area, A (acres) Intensity, i2 (in/hr) 100-yr Tc (min) 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 Q C f C i A 7/9/2014 11:46 AM D:\Projects\1013-001\Drainage\Hydrology\1013-001_Proposed_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Runoff Prairie Village CHARACTER OF SURFACE 1 : Runoff Coefficient Percentage Impervious Project: Prairie Village Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: Calculations By: S. Thomas Asphalt ……....……………...……….....…...……………….………………………………………………………….0.95 . 100% Date: August 26, 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. Prarie Village 0.73 0.01 0.16 0.00 0.30 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.254 0.71 0.71 0.88 59% Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia = 62.0 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100) i = 0.620 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 0.19 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 18,192 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV = 295 cu ft Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in Average Runoff Producing Storm G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER = 0.0 cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER = cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum) DWQCV = 9 in B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical) Z = 4.00 ft / ft (Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls) Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) Stephanie Thomas Northern Engineering July 9, 2014 Prarie Village Harmony and Seneca C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin = 197 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual = 460 sq ft E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area) ATop = 600 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT= 398 cu ft (VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth) 3. Growing Media 4. Underdrain System A) Are underdrains provided? B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y = 1.8 ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 = 295 cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO = 0.41 in Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO 1013-001_UD-BMP_v3.02.xls, RG 7/9/2014, 11:47 AM Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity of structures or groundwater contamination? 6. Inlet / Outlet Control A) Inlet Control 7. Vegetation 8. Irrigation A) Will the rain garden be irrigated? Notes: Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) Stephanie Thomas Northern Engineering July 9, 2014 Prarie Village Harmony and Seneca Choose One Choose One Choose One Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided Plantings Seed (Plan for frequent weed control) Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod Choose One YES NO YES NO 1013-001_UD-BMP_v3.02.xls, RG 7/9/2014, 11:47 AM Project: Basin ID: WQCV Design Volume (Input): Catchment Imperviousness, Ia = 62.0 percent Diameter of holes, D = 0.277 in. Time to Drain the Pond = 40 hours Catchment Area, A = 0.42 acres Number of holes per row, N = 1 Depth at WQCV outlet above lowest perforation, H = 1 feet OR Vertical distance between rows, h = 6.00 inches ** Number of rows, NL = 2 Height of slot, H = in. Orifice discharge coefficient, Co = 0.60 Width of slot, W = in. Slope of Basin Trickle Channel, S = 0.003 ft / ft Outlet Design Information (Output): Water Quality Capture Volume (1.0 * (0.91 * I^3 - 1.19 * I^2 + 0.78 * I)), WQCV = 0.243 watershed inches Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) = 0.009 acre-feet 1.00 Design Volume (WQCV / 12 * Area * 1.2) Vol = 0.010 acre-feet Outlet area per row, Ao = 0.06 square inches Total opening area at each row based on user-input above, Ao = 0.06 square inches Total opening area at each row based on user-input above, Ao = 0.000 square feet Calculation of Collection Capacity: Stage Row 1 Row 2 Row 3 Row 4 Row 5 Row 6 Row 7 Row 8 Row 9 Row 10 Row 11 Row 12 Row 13 Row 14 Row 15 Row 16 Row 17 Row 18 Row 19 Row 20 Row 21 Row 22 Row 23 Row 23 6 ft 5144.70 5145.20 Flow (input) 5144.70 0.0000 0.0000 0.00 5144.80 0.0006 0.0000 0.00 5144.90 0.0009 0.0000 0.00 5145.00 0.0011 0.0000 0.00 5145.10 0.0013 0.0000 0.00 5145.20 0.0014 0.0000 0.00 5145.30 0.0016 0.0006 0.00 5145.40 0.0017 0.0009 0.00 5145.50 0.0018 0.0011 0.00 5145.60 0.0019 0.0013 0.00 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A Area Inlet Performance Curve: Prarie Village - Design Point A 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): 5145.450 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 5145.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 5145.54 0.31 1.21 0.31 0.18 5145.63 0.87 1.71 0.87 Q2 0.27 5145.72 1.60 2.09 1.60 0.36 5145.81 2.46 2.42 2.42 0.45 5145.900 3.44 2.70 2.70 0.54 5145.99 4.52 2.96 2.96 0.63 5146.08 5.70 3.20 3.20 0.72 5146.17 6.96 3.42 3.42 0.81 5146.26 8.31 3.63 3.63 0.90 5146.350 9.73 3.82 3.82 Q100 Inlet at Design Point A is designed to intercept the full 100-yr of 3.81 at 0.90 ft above the inlet 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 Discharge (cfs) Area Inlet Performance Curve: Prarie Village - Design Point B 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: Nyloplast 12" H-20 Shape Circular Length of Grate (ft): 1 Width of Grate (ft): 1 Open Area of Grate (ft 2 ): 0.39 Flowline Elevation (ft): 5142.230 Allowable Capacity: 50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 5142.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 5142.28 0.05 0.24 0.05 0.10 5142.33 0.15 0.33 0.15 0.15 5142.38 0.27 0.41 0.27 0.20 5142.43 0.42 0.47 0.47 0.25 5142.480 0.59 0.53 0.53 0.30 5142.53 0.77 0.58 0.58 Q2 0.35 5142.58 0.98 0.62 0.62 0.40 5142.63 1.19 0.67 0.67 0.45 5142.68 1.42 0.71 0.71 0.50 5142.730 1.67 0.75 0.75 Inlet at Design Point B is designed to intercept the full 2-yr of 0.60 cfs at 0.33 feet above the inlet 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 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 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A Central Elevations of Rows of Holes in feet Collection Capacity for Each Row of Holes in cfs STAGE-DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME (WQCV) OUTLET Prairie Village A UD-Detention_v2.33.xls, WQCV 7/9/2014, 11:47 AM Seneca Center P.U.D. 0.73 0.11 0.13 0.00 0.28 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.219 0.74 0.74 0.92 64% 1. Table RO-11 | Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis PROPOSED COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS Composite Runoff Coefficient with Adjustment 8/26/2014 8:49 AM D:\Projects\1013-001\Drainage\Hydrology\1013-001_Impervious_Calcs.xlsx\Composite C PROPOSED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS S. Thomas July 9, 2014 Design Point Sub-Basin Overland Flow Channelized Flow (Swale or Gutter) Time of Concentration (Equation RO-4) 3 1 1 . 87 1 . 1 * S Ti C Cf L  7/9/2014 11:46 AM D:\Projects\1013-001\Drainage\Hydrology\1013-001_Proposed_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Tc Basin B 0.31 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.15 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.124 0.67 0.67 0.84 54% Total Basins A and B 0.73 0.01 0.16 0.00 0.30 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.254 0.71 0.71 0.88 59% OS 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 Clayey | Average 2% to 7% 0.767 0.28 0.28 0.35 4% 1. Table RO-11 | Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis PROPOSED COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS Composite Runoff Coefficient with Adjustment 7/9/2014 11:44 AM D:\Projects\1013-001\Drainage\Hydrology\1013-001_Proposed_Rational_Calcs.xlsx\Composite C