The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFOX GROVE PHASE ONE - FDP - FDP140030 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - DRAINAGE REPORTNovember 26, 2013 FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR FOX GROVE Fort Collins, Colorado Prepared for: Imago Enterprises 140 Palmer Dr. Fort Collins, CO 80525 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: 335-008  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. November 26, 2013 City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 RE: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Fox Grove Dear Staff: Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for your review. This report accompanies the Project Development Plan submittal for the proposed Fox Grove 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. Aaron Cvar, PE Project Engineer Fox Grove Final Drainage Report TABLE OF CONTENTS I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ................................................................... 1 A. Location ............................................................................................................................................. 1 B. Description of Property ..................................................................................................................... 2 C. Floodplain.......................................................................................................................................... 4 II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS ....................................................................... 4 A. Major Basin Description .................................................................................................................... 4 B. Sub-Basin Description ....................................................................................................................... 5 III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA ................................................................................... 5 A. Regulations........................................................................................................................................ 5 B. Four Step Process .............................................................................................................................. 5 C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints ............................................................................ 6 D. Hydrological Criteria ......................................................................................................................... 6 E. Hydraulic Criteria .............................................................................................................................. 6 F. Modifications of Criteria ................................................................................................................... 7 IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN .................................................................................... 7 A. General Concept ............................................................................................................................... 7 B. Specific Details .................................................................................................................................. 8 V. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................ 9 A. Compliance with Standards .............................................................................................................. 9 B. Drainage Concept .............................................................................................................................. 9 References ....................................................................................................................... 10 APPENDICES: APPENDIX A.1 -Hydrologic Computations APPENDIX A.2 -Street Capacity Calculations APPENDIX A.3 -Inlet Calculations APPENDIX A.4 -Storm Line and Culvert Calculations APPENDIX A.5 -Riprap Calculations APPENDIX B -Water Quality Design Computations APPENDIX C -Stormwater Management Model (SWMM) APPENDIX D -Erosion Control Report APPENDIX E -FIRMette Fox Grove Final Drainage Report LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES: Figure 1 – Aerial Photograph ................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2– Proposed Site Plan ................................................................................................ 3 Figure 3 – Existing Floodplains ............................................................................................. 4 MAP POCKET: Proposed Drainage Exhibit Fox Grove Final Drainage Report 1 I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. Location 1. Vicinity Map 2. The project site is located in the northwest quarter of Section 15, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado . 3. The proposed development site is located southeast of the I-25/Mulberry (State Highway 14) interchange in Fort Collins, Colorado. The site is situated along the existing I-25 east frontage road, just south of the existing Interchange Business Park development. 4. The proposed development site is in the City of Fort Collins Boxelder Creek Basin. Detention requirements for this basin are to detain the difference between the 100- year developed inflow rate and the historic 2-year release rate. 5. The existing Interchange Business Park site is located just north of the project site. Boxelder Creek runs along the west property boundary. 6. Minimal offsite flows from the north are received by the project site. Two offsite basins to the north of the site have been identified and are shown on the Drainage Fox Grove Final Drainage Report 2 Exhibit. There is an existing drainage channel located along the southern boundary of the site which receives discharge from an existing detention pond and conveys flows west into Boxelder Creek. Drainage from these offsite basins is discussed further in Section IV, below. B. Description of Property 1. The development area is roughly 36 net acres, which includes future development area within drainage basin “F” as identified on the Drainage Exhibit. Figure 1 – Aerial Photograph 2. The subject property is currently leased for farming purposes. The ground cover generally consists of row crops. Existing ground slopes are mild to moderate (i.e., 1 - 6±%) through the interior of the property. General topography slopes from north to south. 3. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, the site consists of Kim Loam (Hydrologic Soil Group B) and Nunn Clay Loam (Hydrologic Soil Group C). 4. The proposed project site plan is composed of residential development. Associated roadways, water and sewer lines will be constructed with the development. Detention/Water Quality will be placed near the southeast corner of the site and will treat the majority of developed runoff prior to discharge into the adjacent Boxelder Creek. Fox Grove Final Drainage Report 3 Figure 2– Proposed Site Plan 5. Boxelder Creek runs along the west property boundary. 6. The proposed land use is residential. Fox Grove Final Drainage Report 4 C. Floodplain Figure 3 –Area Floodplain Mapping 1. A portion of the subject property is encroached by the FEMA 100-year floodplain (Boxelder Creek). 2. FEMA FIRM Panel Number 1003G for Larimer County, Dated May 2, 2012 is referenced in this study. A FIRMette of the area is provided in Appendix E. 3. Base (100-year) flood elevations in the vicinity of the proposed project range from 4925.0 to 4930.5 (elevations referenced to the City of Fort Collins NAVD-88). 4. The project is located outside of the 100-year floodplain but a portion of the project is within the 500-year floodplain. 5. The Boxelder Creek floodway is located near the north and west boundaries of the property. No fill is proposed within the floodway. Proposed grading will tie-in with existing grades outside of the floodway boundary. 6. The benchmark for site survey work is listed as “Found 2.5-inch aluminum cap, stamped LS7839, at the corner of the Northwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 7 North Range 68 West of the 6th P.M.” (Elevation=4922.50, NGVD 29). II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS A. Major Basin Description 7. The proposed development site is in the City of Fort Collins Boxelder Creek Basin. Detention requirements for this basin are to detain the difference between the 100- year developed inflow rate and the historic 2-year release rate. A historic 2-year release rate of 7.2 cfs (Please see Appendix A) has been calculated for the overall site Fox Grove Final Drainage Report 5 (35.84 acres), which is inclusive of both the current development area and the future development area. B. Sub-Basin Description 8. The subject property historically drains overland from north to south. There is an existing drainage channel that runs along the southern boundary of the site, which has historically collected the majority of onsite runoff and has directed runoff west, into Boxelder Creek. The existing drainage channel receives discharge from an existing offsite detention pond just to the east of the project site. 9. Design of the offsite detention pond just to the east of the project site is detailed in the report entitled, “Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Clydesdale Park PUD” (Ref. 6).The report specifies a release rate from the offsite detention pond of 12.7 cfs. 10. The project site will now direct the majority of runoff into onsite Detention/Water Quality ponds, which will discharge into the existing drainage channel and then into Boxelder Creek at no greater than the historic 2-year rate. A more detailed description of the project drainage patterns follows in Section IV.A.4., below. III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. Regulations There are no optional provisions outside of the FCSCM proposed with the proposed project. B. Four Step Process The overall stormwater management strategy employed with the proposed project utilizes the “Four Step Process” to minimize adverse impacts of urbanization on receiving waters. The following is a description of how the proposed development has incorporated each step. Step 1 – Employ Runoff Reduction Practices Several techniques have been utilized with the proposed development to facilitate the reduction of runoff peaks, volumes, and pollutant loads as the site is developed from the current use by implementing multiple Low Impact Development (LID) strategies including: Conserving existing amenities in the site including the existing vegetated areas. Providing vegetated open areas throughout the site to reduce the overall impervious area and to minimize directly connected impervious areas (MDCIA). Routing flows, to the extent feasible, through vegetated swales to increase time of concentration, promote infiltration and provide initial water quality. Step 2 – Implement BMPs That Provide a Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) with Slow Release The efforts taken in Step 1 will facilitate the reduction of runoff; however, urban development of this intensity will still generate stormwater runoff that will require additional BMPs and water quality. The majority of stormwater runoff from the site will ultimately be intercepted and treated using extended detention methods prior to exiting the site. Fox Grove Final Drainage Report 6 Step 3 – Stabilize Drainageways There are no major drainageways within the subject property. While this step may not seem applicable to proposed development, the project indirectly helps achieve stabilized drainageways nonetheless. By providing water quality where none previously existed, sediment with erosion potential is removed from the downstream drainageway systems. Furthermore, this project will pay one-time stormwater development fees, as well as ongoing monthly stormwater utility fees, both of which help achieve City-wide drainageway stability. Step 4 – Implement Site Specific and Other Source Control BMPs. The proposed project will improve upon site specific source controls compared to historic conditions: Trash, waste products, etc. that were previously left exposed with the historic trailer park will no longer be allowed to exposure to runoff and transport to receiving drainageways. The proposed development will eliminate these sources of potential pollution. C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints The subject property is surrounded by currently developed properties. Thus, several constraints have been identified during the course of this analysis that will impact the proposed drainage system including: Existing elevations along the property lines will generally be maintained. As previously mentioned, overall drainage patterns of the existing site will be maintained. Elevations of existing downstream facilities that the subject property will release to will be maintained. D. Hydrological Criteria 1. The City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves, as depicted in Figure RA-16 of the FCSCM, serve as the source for all hydrologic computations associated with the proposed 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. Three separate design storms have been utilized to address distinct drainage scenarios. A fourth design storm has also been computed for comparison purposes. The first design storm considered is the 80th percentile rain event, which has been employed to design the project’s water quality features. The second event analyzed is the “Minor,” or “Initial” Storm, which has a 2-year recurrence interval. The third event considered is the “Major Storm,” which has a 100-year recurrence interval. The fourth storm computed, for comparison purposes only, is the 10-year event. 4. No other assumptions or calculation methods have been used with this development that are not referenced by current City of Fort Collins criteria. E. Hydraulic Criteria 1. As previously noted, the subject property maintains historic drainage patterns. 2. All drainage facilities proposed with the project are designed in accordance with criteria outlined in the FCSCM and/or the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Fox Grove Final Drainage Report 7 (UDFCD) Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. 3. As stated above, portions of the subject property are located in a FEMA regulatory floodplain and floodway. 4. The proposed project does not propose to modify any natural drainageways. F. Modifications of Criteria 1. The proposed development is not requesting any modifications to criteria at this time. IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. General Concept 1. The main objectives of the project drainage design are to maintain existing drainage patterns, and to ensure no adverse impacts to any adjacent properties. 2. Onsite detention and water quality treatment will be provided within the four onsite ponds. The ponds will treat the majority of developed runoff prior to discharge into Boxelder Creek. PLD features will also be incorporated in three of the ponds and will provide further water quality treatement. 3. The drainage patterns anticipated for proposed drainage basins are described below. Basins A – C, and E Basins A through C, and E consist of residential development. These basins will drain generally via street curb and gutter to a storm drain system which will direct developed runoff to detention/water quality ponds. Basin A drains directly into Pond 2, Basin B drains directly into Pond 3, and Basin C drains directly into Pond 4. Basin E discharges into Pond 1. Basin D Basins consists of open space and a small portion of proposed roadway. This basin will drain undetained into the existing drainage swale that runs along the southern boundary of the site, which has historically collected the majority of onsite runoff. This swale then conveys runoff west, into Boxelder Creek. We are requesting a variance for this undetained flow based on the fact that this basin is composed primarily of vegetated open space. Basin F Basin F consists of future residential and commercial development. It is anticipated that this basin will drain generally via street curb and gutter to a storm drain system which will direct developed runoff to detention/water quality pond 1. A percent imperviousness value of 70% has been assumed for this basin and must be confirmed when this portion of the site undergoes final site planning. Basins OS1, OS2 Offsite Basins OS1 and OS2 are located to the north of the proposed development and consist of the existing Sunflower Subdivision. These basins have historically drained through the property, and will be routed through the site with the proposed design. Discharge from these basins will be directed via sheet flow and street flow into Pond 3 Fox Grove Final Drainage Report 8 and then be routed through the emergency spillway of Pond 3. Flows will be directed via surface flow southwest in Fox Grove Drive. Flows will be directed to the low point in Fox Grove Drive and then received by the existing drainage channel running along the southern boundary of the development. From this point, flows will be directed west into Boxelder Creek. 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. Detention and water quality treatment in the form of extended detention will be provided for the proposed development within the lower stages of Ponds 1,3, and 4. Additionally, LID features (in the form of off-line PLD treatment) will be provided in Ponds 1 through 4. Table 1, below outlines preliminary detention, extended detention, and PLD volume requirements. We have assumed a ratio of 50% of each basin to be treated by PLD, and the remainder to be treated by extended detention. We have assumed the extended detention volume to be present prior to a 100-year storm event, and the PLD volume to be dry prior to a 100-year event; thus, the total required volume for each pond is composed of the detention volume required plus extended detention volume. Further documentation of treatment volumes and removal rates of stormwater BMPs will be documented with the Final Drainage Report prepared during the City FCP process. 2. The combined release rate from Ponds 1 through 4 is 4.8 cfs, which does not exceed the allowable release rate for the overall site of 7.2 cfs. 3. Detention is being provided for the current development plan which involves construction within Basins A through E. In the future, it is anticipated that Basin F will be developed. When this occurs, Pond 1 will be increased in size to accommodate developed flows from this basin. We have completed an ultimate condition SWMM model (provided in Appendix C), which shows a future anticipated required volume of 4.98 acre-feet). With current development the total required pond volume is 1.753 acre-feet as shown in Table 1, below. 4. Ultimate condition SWMM model (provided in Appendix C), shows a combined release rate from Ponds 1 through 4 is 7.0 cfs, which does not exceed the allowable release rate for the overall site of 7.2 cfs. TABLE 1 –Pond Summary Pond Detention Vol. (Ac-Ft) PLD (50%) Vol. (Ac- Ft) Ext.Det. (50%) Vol. (Ac- Ft) Total Req'd. Vol. (Ac- Ft) 100-Yr WSEL (Ft) Peak 100- Yr Release (cfs) 1 1.502 0.138 0.251 1.753 4917.000 2.80 2 0.390 0.038 N/A 0.390 4918.600 16.10 Fox Grove Final Drainage Report 9 5. LID features have been incorporated into the design of Ponds 2 through 4 in the form of Porous Landscape Detention (PLD). Basins A, B, and C which compose 17.3 acres of the currently proposed development area will be treated by PLD facilities within Ponds 2, 3 and 4. The currently proposed development area (Basins A through E) composes 22.4 acres. Thus, 77.1% of the development area will be treated by an LID feature, which exceeds the City requirement of 50% LID treatment. 6. The drainage features associated with the proposed project are all private facilities, located on private property. V. CONCLUSIONS A. Compliance with Standards 1. The drainage design proposed with the proposed project complies with the City of Fort Collins’ Stormwater Criteria Manual. 2. The drainage design proposed with this project complies with the Boxelder Creek Master Plan. 3. The drainage plan and stormwater management measures proposed with the proposed development are compliant with all applicable State and Federal regulations governing stormwater discharge. 4. The proposed development will be designed at Final in compliance with Chapter 10 of City Code. B. Drainage Concept 1. The drainage design proposed with this project will effectively limit any potential damage associated with its stormwater runoff by providing detention and extended detention. 2. The drainage concept for the proposed development is consistent with the Boxelder Creek Master Plan. Fox Grove Final Drainage Report 10 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. 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. 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. 6. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Clydesdale Park, PUD, JR Engineering, October 27, 2000 APPENDIX A.1 HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS CHARACTER OF SURFACE: Runoff Coefficient Percentage Impervious Project: 335-008 Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: Calculations By: ATC Asphalt ……....……………...……….....…...……………….………………………………… 0.95 100% Date: Concrete …….......……………….….……….………………..….…………………………… 0.95 90% Gravel ……….…………………….….…………………………..…………………………… 0.50 40% Roofs …….…….………………..……………….……………………………………………. 0.95 90% Pavers…………………………...………………..……………………………………………. 0.40 22% 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 Lawns and Landscaping (ac) 2-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 10-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 100-year Composite Runoff Coefficient Composite % Imperv. A 258746 5.94 1.020 0.247 1.827 0.000 2.846 0.49 0.49 0.62 49% B 308405 7.08 1.138 0.228 1.763 0.000 3.951 0.42 0.42 0.52 41% C 185130 4.25 1.027 0.176 0.620 0.000 2.428 0.41 0.41 0.51 41% D 155074 3.56 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.560 0.25 0.25 0.31 0% E 69696 1.60 0.648 0.125 0.216 0.000 0.612 0.59 0.59 0.73 60% F 584140 13.41 0.300 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.73 0.73 0.91 70% OS1 74923 1.72 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.35 0.35 0.44 N/A OS2 291852 6.70 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.55 0.55 0.69 N/A 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. Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: Project: 335-008 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 Tc Rational Method Equation: Project: 335-008 Calculations By: Date: From Section 3.2.1 of the CFCSDDC Rainfall Intensity: A A 5.94 14 14 12 0.49 0.49 0.62 1.92 3.29 7.16 5.6 9.7 26.3 B B 7.08 14 14 13 0.42 0.42 0.52 1.92 3.29 7.04 5.7 9.8 26.2 C C 4.25 15 15 13 0.41 0.41 0.51 1.90 3.24 6.92 3.3 5.6 15.0 D D 3.56 35 35 34 0.25 0.25 0.31 1.18 2.02 4.20 1.1 1.8 4.7 E E 1.60 12 12 9 0.59 0.59 0.73 2.09 3.57 8.03 2.0 3.3 9.4 F F 13.41 15 15 12 0.73 0.73 0.91 1.87 3.19 7.29 18.3 31.2 89.2 OS1 OS1 1.72 25 25 23 0.35 0.35 0.44 1.43 2.44 5.26 0.9 1.5 4.0 OS2 OS2 6.70 22 22 16 0.55 0.55 0.69 1.55 2.64 6.30 5.7 9.7 29.0 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) 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) ATC November 1, 2014 Q  C f  C i  A APPENDIX A.2 STREET CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Project: 335‐008 By: ATC Date: 11/1/2014 Design Basin Street Street 2‐Yr 2‐Yr Comment Point Name Slope Flow Capacity (CFS) (CFS) STREET CAPACITY SUMMARY (CFS) (CFS) 1 Portion Basin A Fox Grove Dr. 0.60% 1.70 5.40 Capacity Not Exceeded 2 Portion Basin B Fox Grove Dr. 0.65% 2.95 5.70 Capacity Not Exceeded 3 Basin C Carriage Pkwy. 0.55% 3.30 5.20 Capacity Not Exceeded 4 Basin D Vixen Dr. 0.70% 1.10 5.90 Capacity Not Exceeded Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 10.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb nBACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 4.75 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 15.0 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 = 0.098 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.006 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 14.0 15.0 ft Warning 02 Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 5.6 12.3 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Qallow = 5.4 6.5 cfs Warning 02: Max Allowable Depth for Minor Storm is greater than the Curb Height. WARNING: MAJOR STORM max. allowable capacity is less than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 2-YR STREET CAPACITY Design Pt. 1 (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD Inlet 3.1-strt cap.xlsm, Q-Allow 11/24/2014, 12:33 PM Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 10.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb nBACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 4.75 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 15.0 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 = 0.098 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.007 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 14.0 15.0 ft Warning 02 Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 5.6 12.3 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Qallow = 5.7 6.7 cfs Warning 02: Max Allowable Depth for Minor Storm is greater than the Curb Height. WARNING: MAJOR STORM max. allowable capacity is less than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 2-YR STREET CAPACITY Design Pt. 2 (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD Inlet 3.1-strt cap.xlsm, Q-Allow 11/24/2014, 12:34 PM Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 10.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb nBACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 4.75 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN = 15.0 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 = 0.098 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.006 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 14.0 15.0 ft Warning 02 Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 5.6 12.3 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Qallow = 5.2 6.2 cfs Warning 02: Max Allowable Depth for Minor Storm is greater than the Curb Height. WARNING: MAJOR STORM max. allowable capacity is less than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 2-YR STREET CAPACITY Design Pt. 3 (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD Inlet 3.1-strt cap.xlsm, Q-Allow 11/24/2014, 12:40 PM Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells) Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK = 10.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK = 0.020 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb nBACK = 0.016 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB = 4.75 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 = 0.098 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO = 0.007 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section nSTREET = 0.016 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX = 14.0 15.0 ft Warning 02 Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 5.6 12.3 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) check = yes MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Qallow = 5.9 7.0 cfs Warning 02: Max Allowable Depth for Minor Storm is greater than the Curb Height. WARNING: MAJOR STORM max. allowable capacity is less than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 2-YR STREET CAPACITY Design Pt. 4 (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' UD Inlet 3.1-strt cap.xlsm, Q-Allow 11/24/2014, 12:45 PM APPENDIX A.3 INLET CALCULATIONS Project: 335‐008 By: ATC Date: 11/1/2014 Inlet Basin Inlet Inlet Design Design ID Type Condition Storm Flow Inlet Capacity (CFS) (CFS) INLET CAPACITY SUMMARY 2‐2 Portion of Basin B Double Combination Sump 100‐yr 10.10 16.80 2‐3 Portion of Basin B Triple Combination Sump 100‐yr 19.20 23.90 4‐7 Portion of Basin C Single Combination Sump 100‐yr 1.20 7.90 4‐8 Portion of Basin C Double Combination Sump 100‐yr 9.10 16.80 5‐3 Portion of Basin C Single Combination Sump 100‐yr 3.00 7.90 5‐4 Portion of Basin C Single Combination Sump 100‐yr 1.50 7.90 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) Flow Depth = 6.0 9.2 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = 3.00 3.00 feet Warning 1 Width of a Unit Grate Wo = 2.00 2.00 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = 0.31 0.31 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) = 3.60 3.60 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 = 4.0 7.3 cfs WARNING: Inlet Capacity less than Q Peak for Minor and Major Storms Q PEAK REQUIRED = 6.0 16.0 cfs Warning 1: Dimension entered is not a typical dimension for inlet type specified. INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION 335-008 Combo Inlet - Single Denver No. 16 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD Inlet 3.1-comboinlet-double.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 11/25/2014, 2:09 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) Flow Depth = 6.0 10.0 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = 3.00 3.00 feet Warning 1 Width of a Unit Grate Wo = 2.00 2.00 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = 0.31 0.31 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) = 3.60 3.60 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 = 4.0 7.9 cfs WARNING: Inlet Capacity less than Q Peak for Minor and Major Storms Q PEAK REQUIRED = 6.0 16.0 cfs Warning 1: Dimension entered is not a typical dimension for inlet type specified. INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION 335-008 Combo Inlet - Single-Parkway Denver No. 16 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD Inlet 3.1-comboinlet-double.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 11/25/2014, 2:11 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 = 2 2 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Flow Depth = 6.0 9.2 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = 3.00 3.00 feet Warning 1 Width of a Unit Grate Wo = 2.00 2.00 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = 0.31 0.31 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) = 3.60 3.60 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 = 6.2 16.8 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 6.0 16.0 cfs Warning 1: Dimension entered is not a typical dimension for inlet type specified. INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION 335-008 Combo Inlet - Double Denver No. 16 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD Inlet 3.1-comboinlet-double.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 11/25/2014, 2:12 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) Flow Depth = 6.0 9.2 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = 3.00 3.00 feet Warning 1 Width of a Unit Grate Wo = 2.00 2.00 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = 0.31 0.31 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) = 3.60 3.60 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 = 7.5 23.9 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 6.0 16.0 cfs Warning 1: Dimension entered is not a typical dimension for inlet type specified. INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION 335-008 Combo Inlet - Triple Denver No. 16 Combination H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP UD Inlet 3.1-comboinlet-double.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 11/25/2014, 2:14 PM APPENDIX A.4 STORM LINE AND CULVERT CALCULATIONS Hydraflow Plan View Project File: storm1.stm No. Lines: 7 11-24-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Pipe - (117) 19.00 24 c 161.8 4911.60 4912.82 0.754 4913.07 4914.36 0.00 4914.36 End 2 STRM PIPE 1 1.60 15 c 38.4 4912.96 4913.34 0.989 4915.17* 4915.19* 0.00 4915.19 1 3 STRM PIPE 1-1 1.60 15 c 138.9 4913.38 4913.83 0.324 4915.19* 4915.26* 0.00 4915.26 2 4 STRM PIPE 1-2 1.60 15 c 41.8 4913.83 4913.97 0.335 4915.26* 4915.28* 0.00 4915.28 3 5 STRM PIPE 1-3 1.60 15 c 278.7 4913.97 4914.89 0.330 4915.28 4915.54 0.00 4915.54 4 6 STRM PIPE 1-4 1.60 15 c 42.3 4914.89 4915.03 0.330 4915.61 4915.65 0.00 4915.65 5 7 Pipe - (116) 17.40 24 c 115.3 4912.82 4913.69 0.755 4914.72 4915.17 n/a 4915.17 j 1 Project File: storm1.stm Number of lines: 7 Run Date: 11-24-2014 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 2 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; j - Line contains hyd. jump. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 24 19.00 4911.60 4913.07 1.47 2.48 7.65 0.91 4913.99 0.678 162 4912.82 4914.36 1.54** 2.60 7.30 0.83 4915.19 0.678 0.678 n/a 0.00 0.00 2 15 1.60 4912.96 4915.17 1.25 1.23 1.30 0.03 4915.19 0.052 38.4 4913.34 4915.19 1.25 1.23 1.30 0.03 4915.21 0.052 0.052 0.020 0.00 0.00 3 15 1.60 4913.38 4915.19 1.25 1.23 1.30 0.03 4915.21 0.052 139 4913.83 4915.26 1.25 1.23 1.30 0.03 4915.29 0.052 0.052 0.073 0.00 0.00 4 15 1.60 4913.83 4915.26 1.25 1.23 1.30 0.03 4915.29 0.052 41.8 4913.97 4915.28 1.25 1.23 1.30 0.03 4915.31 0.052 0.052 0.022 0.00 0.00 5 15 1.60 4913.97 4915.28 1.25 1.23 1.30 0.03 4915.31 0.052 279 4914.89 4915.54 0.65 0.64 2.48 0.10 4915.64 0.184 0.118 0.329 0.00 0.00 6 15 1.60 4914.89 4915.61 0.72 0.73 2.19 0.07 4915.68 0.132 42.3 4915.03 4915.65 0.62 0.61 2.63 0.11 4915.76 0.214 0.173 0.073 0.00 0.00 7 24 17.40 4912.82 4914.72 1.90 3.08 5.65 0.50 4915.21 0.436 115 4913.69 4915.17 j 1.48** 2.49 6.99 0.76 4915.93 0.629 0.532 n/a 0.00 0.00 Project File: storm1.stm Number of lines: 7 Run Date: 11-24-2014 Notes: ; ** Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraflow Plan View Project File: storm2.stm No. Lines: 2 11-25-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 STRM PIPE 2-1 29.31 24 c 14.0 4915.00 4915.07 0.500 4916.85* 4917.13* 0.00 4917.13 End 2 STRM PIPE 2-2 19.16 18 c 30.0 4915.10 4915.19 0.299 4917.13* 4917.99* 0.00 4917.99 1 Project File: storm2.stm Number of lines: 2 Run Date: 11-25-2014 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 24 29.31 4915.00 4916.85 1.85 3.04 9.64 1.45 4918.30 1.239 14.0 4915.07 4917.13 2.00 3.14 9.33 1.35 4918.49 1.431 1.335 0.186 0.00 0.00 2 18 19.16 4915.10 4917.13 1.50 1.77 10.84 1.83 4918.96 2.838 30.0 4915.19 4917.99 1.50 1.77 10.84 1.83 4919.81 2.837 2.837 0.851 0.00 0.00 Project File: storm2.stm Number of lines: 2 Run Date: 11-25-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraflow Plan View Project File: storm3.stm No. Lines: 4 11-24-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 STRM PIPE 3 15.10 24 c 61.4 4915.90 4916.16 0.424 4917.28 4917.74 0.00 4917.74 End 2 STRM PIPE 3-1w 14.70 24 c 32.6 4916.16 4916.30 0.428 4917.90 4917.99 0.00 4917.99 1 3 STRM PIPE 3-1n 0.40 15 c 148.8 4916.14 4916.59 0.302 4918.24* 4918.24* 0.00 4918.24 1 4 STRM PIPE 3-2 0.40 15 c 87.8 4916.59 4916.85 0.296 4918.24* 4918.25* 0.00 4918.25 3 Project File: storm3.stm Number of lines: 4 Run Date: 11-24-2014 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 2 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 24 15.10 4915.90 4917.28 1.38 2.31 6.55 0.67 4917.94 0.567 61.4 4916.16 4917.74 1.58 2.66 5.67 0.50 4918.24 0.407 0.487 0.299 0.00 0.00 2 24 14.70 4916.16 4917.90 1.74 2.90 5.07 0.40 4918.30 0.328 32.6 4916.30 4917.99 1.69 2.83 5.19 0.42 4918.41 0.342 0.335 0.109 0.00 0.00 3 15 0.40 4916.14 4918.24 1.25 1.23 0.33 0.00 4918.24 0.003 149 4916.59 4918.24 1.25 1.23 0.33 0.00 4918.25 0.003 0.003 0.005 0.00 0.00 4 15 0.40 4916.59 4918.24 1.25 1.23 0.33 0.00 4918.25 0.003 87.8 4916.85 4918.25 1.25 1.23 0.33 0.00 4918.25 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.00 0.00 Project File: storm3.stm Number of lines: 4 Run Date: 11-24-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraflow Plan View Project File: storm4.stm No. Lines: 8 11-25-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 STRM PIPE 4 10.31 24 c 26.3 4917.00 4917.08 0.305 4918.14 4918.36 0.00 4918.36 End 2 STRM PIPE 4-1 10.31 24 c 44.1 4917.08 4917.21 0.295 4918.56 4918.64 0.00 4918.64 1 3 STRM PIPE 4-2 10.31 24 c 52.1 4917.21 4917.37 0.307 4918.76 4918.84 0.00 4918.84 2 4 STRM PIPE 4-3 10.31 18 c 15.7 4917.37 4917.42 0.317 4918.84 4918.92 0.00 4918.92 3 5 STRM 4-4 10.31 18 c 21.3 4917.42 4917.48 0.283 4918.92* 4919.10* 0.00 4919.10 4 6 STRM PIPE 4-5 10.31 15 c 75.8 4917.48 4917.71 0.303 4919.10* 4920.74* 0.00 4920.74 5 7 STRM PIPE 4-6 10.31 15 c 16.5 4916.54 4916.59 0.302 4920.74* 4921.10* 0.00 4921.10 6 8 STRM PIPE 4-7 9.14 15 c 30.0 4916.59 4916.68 0.301 4921.34* 4921.85* 0.00 4921.85 7 Project File: storm4.stm Number of lines: 8 Run Date: 11-25-2014 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 2 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 24 10.31 4917.00 4918.14 1.14 1.84 5.59 0.49 4918.62 0.464 26.3 4917.08 4918.36 1.28 2.12 4.86 0.37 4918.73 0.324 0.394 0.104 0.00 0.00 2 24 10.31 4917.08 4918.56 1.48 2.49 4.14 0.27 4918.83 0.220 44.1 4917.21 4918.64 1.43 2.40 4.29 0.29 4918.93 0.240 0.230 0.101 0.00 0.00 3 24 10.31 4917.21 4918.76 1.55 2.61 3.95 0.24 4919.00 0.199 52.1 4917.37 4918.84 1.47 2.47 4.17 0.27 4919.11 0.224 0.211 0.110 0.00 0.00 4 18 10.31 4917.37 4918.84 1.47 1.76 5.86 0.53 4919.37 0.734 15.7 4917.42 4918.92 1.50 1.77 5.83 0.53 4919.45 0.813 0.774 0.122 0.00 0.00 5 18 10.31 4917.42 4918.92 1.50* 1.77 5.84 0.53 4919.45 0.822 21.3 4917.48 4919.10 1.50 1.77 5.83 0.53 4919.62 0.821 0.822 0.175 0.00 0.00 6 15 10.31 4917.48 4919.10 1.25 1.23 8.40 1.10 4920.19 2.173 75.8 4917.71 4920.74 1.25 1.23 8.40 1.10 4921.84 2.172 2.173 1.647 0.00 0.00 7 15 10.31 4916.54 4920.74 1.25 1.23 8.40 1.10 4921.84 2.173 16.5 4916.59 4921.10 1.25 1.23 8.40 1.10 4922.20 2.172 2.173 0.358 0.00 0.00 8 15 9.14 4916.59 4921.34 1.25 1.23 7.45 0.86 4922.20 1.708 30.0 4916.68 4921.85 1.25 1.23 7.45 0.86 4922.71 1.707 1.707 0.512 0.00 0.00 Project File: storm4.stm Number of lines: 8 Run Date: 11-25-2014 Notes: * Critical depth assumed. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraflow Plan View 5 No. Lines: 4 11-25-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 STRM PIPE 5 11.41 18 c 21.6 4917.00 4917.07 0.323 4918.29* 4918.63* 0.00 4918.63 End 2 Pipe - (107) 4.50 15 c 105.2 4917.07 4917.38 0.295 4919.06* 4919.50* 0.00 4919.50 1 3 STRM PIPE 5-2 4.50 15 c 18.0 4917.55 4917.60 0.280 4919.50* 4919.57* 0.00 4919.57 2 4 STRM PIPE 5-3 1.50 15 c 50.0 4917.60 4917.75 0.300 4919.76* 4919.78* 0.00 4919.78 3 5 Number of lines: 4 Run Date: 11-25-2014 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 18 11.41 4917.00 4918.29 1.29 1.62 7.04 0.77 4919.06 0.929 21.6 4917.07 4918.63 1.50 1.77 6.46 0.65 4919.27 1.006 0.967 0.209 0.00 0.00 2 15 4.50 4917.07 4919.06 1.25 1.23 3.67 0.21 4919.27 0.414 105 4917.38 4919.50 1.25 1.23 3.67 0.21 4919.71 0.414 0.414 0.435 0.00 0.00 3 15 4.50 4917.55 4919.50 1.25 1.23 3.67 0.21 4919.71 0.414 18.0 4917.60 4919.57 1.25 1.23 3.67 0.21 4919.78 0.414 0.414 0.074 0.00 0.00 4 15 1.50 4917.60 4919.76 1.25 1.23 1.22 0.02 4919.78 0.046 50.0 4917.75 4919.78 1.25 1.23 1.22 0.02 4919.81 0.046 0.046 0.023 0.00 0.00 5 Number of lines: 4 Run Date: 11-25-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraflow Plan View Project File: storm6.stm No. Lines: 3 11-24-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 STRM PIPE 6 16.10 24 c 225.3 4914.22 4915.42 0.532 4915.64 4916.97 0.00 4916.97 End 2 STRM PIPE 6-1 16.10 18 c 39.1 4915.42 4915.63 0.537 4916.97* 4917.75* 0.00 4917.75 1 3 STRM PIPE 6-1 (1) 16.10 18 c 25.7 4915.63 4915.76 0.506 4917.75* 4918.27* 0.00 4918.27 2 Project File: storm6.stm Number of lines: 3 Run Date: 11-24-2014 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 2 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 24 16.10 4914.22 4915.64 1.42 2.39 6.74 0.71 4916.35 0.593 225 4915.42 4916.97 1.55 2.61 6.17 0.59 4917.56 0.484 0.538 1.213 0.00 0.00 2 18 16.10 4915.42 4916.97 1.50 1.77 9.11 1.29 4918.26 2.004 39.1 4915.63 4917.75 1.50 1.77 9.11 1.29 4919.04 2.003 2.003 0.784 0.00 0.00 3 18 16.10 4915.63 4917.75 1.50 1.77 9.11 1.29 4919.04 2.004 25.7 4915.76 4918.27 1.50 1.77 9.11 1.29 4919.56 2.003 2.003 0.514 0.00 0.00 Project File: storm6.stm Number of lines: 3 Run Date: 11-24-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraflow Plan View Project File: storm9.stm No. Lines: 1 11-24-2014 Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 STRM PIPE 8 5.00 18 c 102.3 4911.28 4913.12 1.799 4911.87 4913.97 0.00 4913.97 End Project File: storm9.stm Number of lines: 1 Run Date: 11-24-2014 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 2 Yrs. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 18 5.00 4911.28 4911.87 0.59 0.65 7.69 0.92 4912.79 0.505 102 4913.12 4913.97 0.85** 1.04 4.82 0.36 4914.33 0.505 0.505 n/a 0.00 0.00 Project File: storm9.stm Number of lines: 1 Run Date: 11-24-2014 Notes: ; ** Critical depth. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 CULVERT MODELING OUTPUT HY-8 Culvert Analysis Report Table 1 - Summary of Culvert Flows at Crossing: Storm 7 Headwater Elevation (Total ft) Discharge (cfs)Culvert 1 Discharge (cfs) Roadway Discharge (cfs) Iterations 4916.76 5.00 5.00 0.00 1 4917.37 14.50 14.50 0.00 1 4917.78 24.00 24.00 0.00 1 4918.14 33.50 33.50 0.00 1 4918.49 43.00 43.00 0.00 1 4918.85 52.50 52.50 0.00 1 4919.28 62.00 62.00 0.00 1 4919.77 71.50 71.50 0.00 1 4920.02 75.90 75.90 0.00 1 4920.89 90.50 90.50 0.00 1 4921.51 100.00 100.00 0.00 1 4922.20 109.76 109.76 0.00 Overtopping Rating Curve Plot for Crossing: Storm 7 Table 2 - Culvert Summary Table: Culvert 1 Total Discharg e (cfs) Culvert Discharg e (cfs) Headwate r Elevation (ft) Inlet Control Depth (ft) Outlet Control Depth (ft) Flow Type Normal Depth (ft) Critical Depth (ft) Outlet Depth (ft) Tailwater Depth (ft) Outlet Velocity (ft/s) Tailwater Velocity (ft/s) 5.00 5.00 4916.76 0.700 0.0* 1-S2n 0.469 0.514 0.473 0.967 3.843 1.529 14.50 14.50 4917.37 1.221 1.308 1-S1t 0.811 0.886 1.441 1.441 2.475 1.995 24.00 24.00 4917.78 1.638 1.720 1-S1t 1.068 1.156 1.741 1.741 3.289 2.262 33.50 33.50 4918.14 1.980 2.083 1-S1t 1.297 1.378 1.973 1.973 4.035 2.459 43.00 43.00 4918.49 2.293 2.430 1-S1t 1.517 1.572 2.166 2.166 4.772 2.618 52.50 52.50 4918.85 2.612 2.788 5-S1t 1.745 1.746 2.335 2.335 5.538 2.751 62.00 62.00 4919.28 2.962 3.219 7-M1t 2.020 1.890 2.485 2.485 6.320 2.868 71.50 71.50 4919.77 3.358 3.713 4-FFf 2.500 2.023 2.500 2.622 7.283 2.972 75.90 75.90 4920.02 3.559 3.957 4-FFf 2.500 2.069 2.500 2.681 7.731 3.017 90.50 90.50 4920.89 4.310 4.830 4-FFf 2.500 2.223 2.500 2.864 9.218 3.153 100.00 100.00 4921.51 4.865 5.453 4-FFf 2.500 2.324 2.500 2.973 10.186 3.232 * theoretical depth is impractical. Depth reported is corrected. ******************************************************************************** Inlet Elevation (invert): 4916.06 ft, Outlet Elevation (invert): 4915.70 ft Culvert Length: 72.00 ft, Culvert Slope: 0.0050 ******************************************************************************** Culvert Performance Curve Plot: Culvert 1 Water Surface Profile Plot for Culvert: Culvert 1 Site Data - Culvert 1 Site Data Option: Culvert Invert Data Inlet Station: 0.00 ft Inlet Elevation: 4916.06 ft Outlet Station: 72.00 ft Outlet Elevation: 4915.70 ft Number of Barrels: 2 Culvert Data Summary - Culvert 1 Barrel Shape: Circular Barrel Diameter: 2.50 ft Barrel Material: Concrete Embedment: 0.00 in Barrel Manning's n: 0.0120 Inlet Type: Conventional Inlet Edge Condition: Grooved End in Headwall Inlet Depression: NONE Table 3 - Downstream Channel Rating Curve (Crossing: Storm 7) Flow (cfs) Water Surface Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Shear (psf) Froude Number 5.00 4916.67 0.97 1.53 0.22 0.39 14.50 4917.14 1.44 1.99 0.32 0.41 24.00 4917.44 1.74 2.26 0.39 0.43 33.50 4917.67 1.97 2.46 0.44 0.44 43.00 4917.87 2.17 2.62 0.49 0.44 52.50 4918.03 2.33 2.75 0.52 0.45 62.00 4918.19 2.49 2.87 0.56 0.45 71.50 4918.32 2.62 2.97 0.59 0.46 75.90 4918.38 2.68 3.02 0.60 0.46 90.50 4918.56 2.86 3.15 0.64 0.46 100.00 4918.67 2.97 3.23 0.67 0.47 Tailwater Channel Data - Storm 7 Tailwater Channel Option: Triangular Channel Side Slope (H:V): 3.50 (_:1) Channel Slope: 0.0036 Channel Manning's n: 0.0350 Channel Invert Elevation: 4915.70 ft Roadway Data for Crossing: Storm 7 Roadway Profile Shape: Constant Roadway Elevation Crest Length: 100.00 ft Crest Elevation: 4922.20 ft Roadway Surface: Paved Roadway Top Width: 50.00 ft HY-8 Culvert Analysis Report Table 1 - Summary of Culvert Flows at Crossing: Storm 8 Headwater Elevation (Total ft) Discharge (cfs)Culvert 1 Discharge (cfs) Roadway Discharge (cfs) Iterations 4917.05 5.00 5.00 0.00 1 4917.65 14.50 14.50 0.00 1 4918.18 24.00 24.00 0.00 1 4918.68 33.50 33.50 0.00 1 4919.30 41.00 41.00 0.00 1 4920.40 52.50 52.50 0.00 1 4921.49 62.00 62.00 0.00 1 4922.62 71.50 70.70 0.61 24 4922.71 81.00 70.42 10.39 6 4922.77 90.50 69.96 20.45 5 4922.82 100.00 69.46 30.40 4 4922.60 70.66 70.66 0.00 Overtopping Rating Curve Plot for Crossing: Storm 8 Table 2 - Culvert Summary Table: Culvert 1 Total Discharg e (cfs) Culvert Discharg e (cfs) Headwate r Elevation (ft) Inlet Control Depth (ft) Outlet Control Depth (ft) Flow Type Normal Depth (ft) Critical Depth (ft) Outlet Depth (ft) Tailwater Depth (ft) Outlet Velocity (ft/s) Tailwater Velocity (ft/s) 5.00 5.00 4917.05 0.745 0.0* 1-S2n 0.526 0.543 0.533 0.967 3.690 1.529 14.50 14.50 4917.65 1.352 0.0* 1-S2n 0.941 0.953 0.943 1.441 4.976 1.995 24.00 24.00 4918.18 1.807 1.876 3-M1t 1.291 1.241 1.541 1.741 4.620 2.262 33.50 33.50 4918.68 2.264 2.378 7-M1t 1.749 1.470 1.773 1.973 5.688 2.459 41.00 41.00 4919.30 2.692 2.996 7-M2t 2.000 1.619 1.928 2.128 6.601 2.587 52.50 52.50 4920.40 3.503 4.104 4-FFf 2.000 1.789 2.000 2.335 8.356 2.751 62.00 62.00 4921.49 4.313 5.189 4-FFf 2.000 1.929 2.000 2.485 9.868 2.868 71.50 70.70 4922.62 5.149 6.317 4-FFf 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.622 11.252 2.972 81.00 70.42 4922.71 5.121 6.408 4-FFf 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.747 11.207 3.067 90.50 69.96 4922.77 5.074 6.470 4-FFf 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.864 11.134 3.153 100.00 69.46 4922.82 5.025 6.520 4-FFf 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.973 11.055 3.232 * theoretical depth is impractical. Depth reported is corrected. ******************************************************************************** Inlet Elevation (invert): 4916.30 ft, Outlet Elevation (invert): 4915.90 ft Culvert Length: 93.60 ft, Culvert Slope: 0.0043 ******************************************************************************** Culvert Performance Curve Plot: Culvert 1 Water Surface Profile Plot for Culvert: Culvert 1 Site Data - Culvert 1 Site Data Option: Culvert Invert Data Inlet Station: 0.00 ft Inlet Elevation: 4916.30 ft Outlet Station: 93.60 ft Outlet Elevation: 4915.90 ft Number of Barrels: 2 Culvert Data Summary - Culvert 1 Barrel Shape: Circular Barrel Diameter: 2.00 ft Barrel Material: Concrete Embedment: 0.00 in Barrel Manning's n: 0.0120 Inlet Type: Conventional Inlet Edge Condition: Grooved End in Headwall Inlet Depression: NONE Table 3 - Downstream Channel Rating Curve (Crossing: Storm 8) Flow (cfs) Water Surface Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Shear (psf) Froude Number 5.00 4916.67 0.97 1.53 0.22 0.39 14.50 4917.14 1.44 1.99 0.32 0.41 24.00 4917.44 1.74 2.26 0.39 0.43 33.50 4917.67 1.97 2.46 0.44 0.44 41.00 4917.83 2.13 2.59 0.48 0.44 52.50 4918.03 2.33 2.75 0.52 0.45 62.00 4918.19 2.49 2.87 0.56 0.45 71.50 4918.32 2.62 2.97 0.59 0.46 81.00 4918.45 2.75 3.07 0.62 0.46 90.50 4918.56 2.86 3.15 0.64 0.46 100.00 4918.67 2.97 3.23 0.67 0.47 Tailwater Channel Data - Storm 8 Tailwater Channel Option: Triangular Channel Side Slope (H:V): 3.50 (_:1) Channel Slope: 0.0036 Channel Manning's n: 0.0350 Channel Invert Elevation: 4915.70 ft Roadway Data for Crossing: Storm 8 Roadway Profile Shape: Constant Roadway Elevation Crest Length: 100.00 ft Crest Elevation: 4922.60 ft Roadway Surface: Paved Roadway Top Width: 50.00 ft APPENDIX A.5 RIPRAP CALCULATIONS Circular D or Da, Pipe Diameter (ft) H or Ha, Culvert Height (ft) W, Culvert Width (ft) Yt/D Q/D 1.5 Q/D 2.5 Y t/H Q/WH 1.5 Storm Line 3 15.10 2.00 0.80 0.40 5.34 2.67 N/A N/A 4.80 2.67 3.02 8.52 Type M 10.00 10.00 1.5 Storm Line 4 10.30 2.00 0.80 0.40 3.64 1.82 N/A N/A 5.90 1.82 2.06 3.39 Type M 5.00 8.00 1.5 Storm Line 5 11.40 1.50 0.60 0.40 6.21 4.14 N/A N/A 3.30 4.14 2.28 7.59 Type M 8.00 10.00 1.5 Storm Line 6 16.10 2.00 0.80 0.40 5.69 2.85 N/A N/A 4.50 2.85 3.22 9.11 Type M 10.00 10.00 1.5 Storm Line 7 75.90 2.50 5.00 1.00 0.40 N/A N/A 0.40 3.84 2.20 3.84 15.18 33.40 Type M 35.00 20.00 1.5 Storm Line 8 41.00 2.00 4.00 0.80 0.40 N/A N/A 0.40 3.62 2.70 3.62 8.20 27.68 Type M 30.00 20.00 1.5 Storm Line 9 5.00 1.50 0.60 0.40 2.72 1.81 N/A N/A 6.10 1.81 1.00 1.02 Type M 5.00 12.00 1.5 By: ATC CALCULATE Date: 11/1/14 INPUT Storm Line/Culvert Label Design Discharge (cfs) Expansion Factor 1/(2tanq) (From Figure MD‐23 or MD‐24) OUTPUT Spec Length of Riprap (ft) Box Culvert Yt, Tailwater Depth (ft) Culvert Parameters At=Q/V (ft) CALCULATIONS FOR RIPRAP PROTECTION AT PIPE OUTLETS Circular Pipe (Figure MD‐21) DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) MAJOR DRAINAGE Figure MD-21—Riprap Erosion Protection at Circular Conduit Outlet Valid for Q/D 2.5 ≤ 6.0 Rev. 04/2008 MD-107 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District MAJOR DRAINAGE DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) Figure MD-22—Riprap Erosion Protection at Rectangular Conduit Outlet Valid for Q/WH 1.5 ≤ 8.0 MD-108 04/2008 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) MAJOR DRAINAGE Figure MD-23—Expansion Factor for Circular Conduits Rev. 04/2008 MD-109 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District MAJOR DRAINAGE DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) Figure MD-24—Expansion Factor for Rectangular Conduits MD-110 04/2008 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District APPENDIX B WATER WAWAWATER QUALITY DESIGN COMPUTATIONS EXTENDED DETENTION WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS Pond 1 Project: 335-008 By: ATC Date: 11/1/14 REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS: BASIN AREA = 20.960 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 64.00 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = 0.6400 <-- CALCULATED WQCV (watershed inches) = 0.250 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.525 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WQ Depth (ft) = 1.700 <-- INPUT from stage-storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in 2 ) = 1.489 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING: dia (in) = 1 3/8 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of columns = 1 EXTENDED DETENTION WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS Pond 3 Project: 335-008 By: ATC Date: 11/1/14 REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS: BASIN AREA = 3.540 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs (50% OF BASIN AREA; REMAINDER TREATED VIA PLD) BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 41.00 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = 0.4100 <-- CALCULATED WQCV (watershed inches) = 0.182 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.065 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WQ Depth (ft) = 1.200 <-- INPUT from stage-storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in 2 ) = 0.248 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING: dia (in) = 1/2 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of columns = 1 EXTENDED DETENTION WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS Pond 4 Project: 335-008 By: ATC Date: 11/1/14 REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS: BASIN AREA = 2.130 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs (50% OF BASIN AREA; REMAINDER TREATED VIA PLD) BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 41.00 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = 0.4100 <-- CALCULATED WQCV (watershed inches) = 0.182 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.039 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WQ Depth (ft) = 1.000 <-- INPUT from stage-storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in 2 ) = 0.162 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING: dia (in) = 1/2 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of columns = 1 APPENDIX C STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MODEL (SWMM) B2 B3 B4 B1 C1 O2 O3 O1 O4 J1 BoxelderCreek P2 P3 P1 P4 FtCollins-100yr 11/21/2012 00:15:00 SWMM 5 Page 1 EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - VERSION 5.0 (Build 5.0.022) -------------------------------------------------------------- ********************************************************* NOTE: The summary statistics displayed in this report are based on results found at every computational time step, not just on results from each reporting time step. ********************************************************* **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units ............... CFS Process Models: Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES Snowmelt ............... NO Groundwater ............ NO Flow Routing ........... YES Ponding Allowed ........ NO Water Quality .......... NO Infiltration Method ...... HORTON Flow Routing Method ...... KINWAVE Starting Date ............ NOV-21-2012 00:00:00 Ending Date .............. NOV-21-2012 06:00:00 Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0.0 Report Time Step ......... 00:15:00 Wet Time Step ............ 00:05:00 Dry Time Step ............ 01:00:00 Routing Time Step ........ 30.00 sec ************************** Volume Depth Runoff Quantity Continuity acre-feet inches ************************** --------- ------- Total Precipitation ...... 5.770 3.669 Evaporation Loss ......... 0.000 0.000 Infiltration Loss ........ 1.268 0.806 Surface Runoff ........... 4.466 2.840 Final Surface Storage .... 0.071 0.045 Continuity Error (%) ..... -0.619 ************************** Volume Volume Flow Routing Continuity acre-feet 10^6 gal ************************** --------- --------- Dry Weather Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000 Wet Weather Inflow ....... 4.466 1.455 Groundwater Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000 RDII Inflow .............. 0.000 0.000 External Inflow .......... 0.000 0.000 External Outflow ......... 1.952 0.636 Internal Outflow ......... 0.000 0.000 Storage Losses ........... 0.000 0.000 Initial Stored Volume .... 0.000 0.000 Final Stored Volume ...... 2.513 0.819 Continuity Error (%) ..... 0.037 ******************************** SWMM 5 Page 1 Highest Flow Instability Indexes ******************************** Link O2 (16) Link C1 (2) ************************* Routing Time Step Summary ************************* Minimum Time Step : 30.00 sec Average Time Step : 30.00 sec Maximum Time Step : 30.00 sec Percent in Steady State : 0.00 Average Iterations per Step : 1.00 *************************** Subcatchment Runoff Summary *************************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Total Total Total Total Total Peak Runoff Precip Runon Evap Infil Runoff Runoff Runoff Coeff Subcatchment in in in in in 10^6 gal CFS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- B2 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.75 2.90 0.47 44.00 0.790 B3 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.87 2.78 0.53 47.91 0.757 B4 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.87 2.78 0.32 28.77 0.757 B1 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.56 3.08 0.13 14.14 0.839 ****************** Node Depth Summary ****************** --------------------------------------------------------------------- Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max Depth Depth HGL Occurrence Node Type Feet Feet Feet days hr:min --------------------------------------------------------------------- J1 JUNCTION 0.18 0.21 101.21 0 02:10 BoxelderCreek OUTFALL 0.18 0.21 100.21 0 02:10 P2 STORAGE 0.17 0.96 105.96 0 00:51 P3 STORAGE 4.52 5.56 111.56 0 02:09 P4 STORAGE 3.71 4.35 111.35 0 02:15 P1 STORAGE 2.01 2.56 104.56 0 02:10 ******************* Node Inflow Summary ******************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Maximum Lateral Total Lateral Total Time of Max Inflow Inflow Inflow Inflow Occurrence Volume Volume Node Type CFS CFS days hr:min 10^6 gal 10^6 gal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- J1 JUNCTION 0.00 4.85 0 02:10 0.000 0.636 BoxelderCreek OUTFALL 0.00 4.85 0 02:10 0.000 0.636 P2 STORAGE 44.00 44.00 0 00:40 0.467 0.467 SWMM 5 Page 2 P3 STORAGE 47.91 47.91 0 00:40 0.534 0.534 P4 STORAGE 28.77 28.77 0 00:40 0.320 0.320 P1 STORAGE 14.14 27.06 0 00:40 0.134 0.600 ********************** Node Surcharge Summary ********************** Surcharging occurs when water rises above the top of the highest conduit. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Max. Height Min. Depth Hours Above Crown Below Rim Node Type Surcharged Feet Feet --------------------------------------------------------------------- P2 STORAGE 6.01 0.963 9.037 P3 STORAGE 6.01 5.563 4.437 P4 STORAGE 6.01 4.349 5.651 P1 STORAGE 6.01 2.563 7.437 ********************* Node Flooding Summary ********************* No nodes were flooded. ********************** Storage Volume Summary ********************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Average Avg E&I Maximum Max Time of Max Maximum Volume Pcnt Pcnt Volume Pcnt Occurrence Outflow Storage Unit 1000 ft3 Full Loss 1000 ft3 Full days hr:min CFS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- P2 2.151 0 0 18.548 1 0 00:50 16.85 P3 45.871 27 0 61.498 36 0 02:09 1.60 P4 32.700 19 0 40.391 24 0 02:14 0.40 P1 44.431 4 0 65.719 7 0 02:09 2.85 *********************** Outfall Loading Summary *********************** ----------------------------------------------------------- Flow Avg. Max. Total Freq. Flow Flow Volume Outfall Node Pcnt. CFS CFS 10^6 gal ----------------------------------------------------------- BoxelderCreek 97.09 4.05 4.85 0.636 ----------------------------------------------------------- System 97.09 4.05 4.85 0.636 ******************** Link Flow Summary ******************** SWMM 5 Page 3 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Time of Max Maximum Max/ Max/ |Flow| Occurrence |Veloc| Full Full Link Type CFS days hr:min ft/sec Flow Depth ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- C1 CONDUIT 4.85 0 02:10 12.57 0.00 0.02 O2 DUMMY 16.85 0 00:51 O3 DUMMY 1.60 0 00:48 O4 DUMMY 0.40 0 01:25 O1 DUMMY 2.85 0 02:10 ************************* Conduit Surcharge Summary ************************* No conduits were surcharged. Analysis begun on: Tue Nov 25 12:45:24 2014 Analysis ended on: Tue Nov 25 12:45:24 2014 Total elapsed time: < 1 sec SWMM 5 Page 4 POND 1 ‐ INTERIM CONDITION STAGE STORAGE TABLE ELEV AREA DEPTH VOLUME VOLUME (ft) (sq ft) (ft) (cu ft) (ac ft) 4,912.40 72.44 N/A 0 0 4,912.60 514.75 0.2 52.02 0.001194 4 4,912.912 80 1 1,344.344 91 02 0.2 231 231.47 0 0.005314 4,913.00 2,549.50 0.2 614.54 0.014108 4,913.20 4,236.59 0.2 1286.05 0.029524 4,913.40 6,558.62 0.2 2357.15 0.054113 4,913.60 9,499.85 0.2 3953.94 0.09077 4,913.80 13,144.51 0.2 6208.53 0.142528 4,, 914.00 15,, 525.72 0.2 9072.25 0.20827 4,914.20 17,150.59 0.2 12338.54 0.283254 4,914.40 18,346.76 0.2 15887.6 0.364729 4,914.60 19,178.53 0.2 19639.82 0.450868 4,914.80 19,947.03 0.2 23552.13 0.540683 4,915.00 20,718.98 0.2 27618.49 0.634033 4,915.20 21,494.37 0.2 31839.58 0.730936 4 4,915.915 40 22 22,273.273 20 02 0.2 36216 36216.11 0 0.831407 4,915.60 23,055.48 0.2 40748.75 0.935463 4,915.80 23,841.20 0.2 45438.2 1.043118 4,916.00 24,630.37 0.2 50285.14 1.154388 4,916.20 25,422.98 0.2 55290.27 1.26929 4,916.40 26,219.03 0.2 60454.27 1.387839 4,916.60 27,018.53 0.2 65777.82 1.510051 4,916.80 27,821.47 0.2 71261.63 1.635942 4,917.00 28,627.85 0.2 76906.36 1.765527 4,917.20 29,437.68 0.2 82712.73 1.898823 4,917.40 30,250.95 0.2 88681.41 2.035845 4,917.60 31,067.67 0.2 94813.09 2.176609 4,917.80 31,887.83 0.2 101108.5 2.321131 4 4,918 918.00 32 32,711 711.43 02 0.2 107568 107568.2 2 2.469426 4,918.20 33,538.48 0.2 114193 2.621511 4,918.40 34,368.97 0.2 120983.6 2.777402 4,918.60 35,202.91 0.2 127940.6 2.937113 4,918.80 36,040.29 0.2 135064.8 3.100661 4,919.00 36,881.11 0.2 142356.8 3.268062 4,919.20 37,725.37 0.2 149817.3 3.439331 4,919.40 38,573.09 0.2 157446.9 3.614484 4,919.60 39,424.24 0.2 165246.5 3.793538 4,919.80 40,278.84 0.2 173216.7 3.976508 4,920.00 41,136.88 0.2 181358.1 4.163409 POND 2 STAGE STORAGE TABLE ELEV AREA DEPTH VOLUME VOLUME (ft) (sq ft) (ft) (cu ft) (ac ft) 4,915.80 3.52 N/A 0 0 4,916.00 149.99 0.2 11.77 0.00027 4,916.20 506.05 0.2 73.87 0.001696 4,916.40 1,087.67 0.2 229.58 0.00527 4,916.60 1,938.33 0.2 528.11 0.012124 4,916.80 2,997.78 0.2 1017.88 0.023367 4,917.00 4,068.39 0.2 1721.78 0.039527 4,917.20 4,889.73 0.2 2616.34 0.071042 4,917.40 5,668.42 0.2 3671.19 0.107015 4,917.60 6,532.24 0.2 4890.24 0.147542 4,917.80 7,301.45 0.2 6272.9 0.192629 4,918.00 8,040.89 0.2 7806.54 0.242003 4,918.20 12,173.21 0.2 9813.72 0.288079 4,918.40 13,394.42 0.2 12369.51 0.346752 4,918.60 14,708.41 0.2 15178.77 0.411244 4,918.80 15,915.22 0.2 18240.34 0.481528 4,919.00 16,998.29 0.2 21531.09 0.557073 POND 3 STAGE STORAGE TABLE ELEV AREA DEPTH VOLUME VOLUME (ft) (sq ft) (ft) (cu ft) (ac ft) 4,915.20 19.98 N/A 0 0 4,915.40 208.02 0.2 19.5 0.000448 4,915.60 564.33 0.2 93.83 0.002154 4,915.80 1,055.44 0.2 253.27 0.005814 4,916.00 1,690.09 0.2 525.34 0.01206 4,916.20 2,475.76 0.2 939.43 0.029326 4,916.40 3,205.57 0.2 1506 0.051352 4,916.60 4,012.37 0.2 2226.28 0.078175 4,916.80 4,865.15 0.2 3112.67 0.110101 4,917.00 5,820.34 0.2 4179.79 0.147485 4,917.20 10,045.54 0.2 5747.28 0.183455 4,917.40 11,355.15 0.2 7886.01 0.232553 4,917.60 12,783.83 0.2 10298.5 0.287936 4,917.80 13,838.52 0.2 12960.04 0.349037 4,918.00 14,984.43 0.2 15841.58 0.415188 4,918.20 16,262.81 0.2 18965.43 0.486902 4,918.40 17,635.81 0.2 22354.36 0.564701 4,918.60 18,910.45 0.2 26008.24 0.648582 4,918.80 20,126.33 0.2 29911.29 0.738184 4,919.00 21,394.16 0.2 34062.69 0.833487 4,919.20 22,686.63 0.2 38470.14 0.934668 4,919.40 23,705.36 0.2 43108.97 1.041161 4,919.60 24,510.19 0.2 47930.3 1.151843 4,919.80 25,346.52 0.2 52915.74 1.266293 4,920.00 26,214.36 0.2 58071.58 1.384655 4,920.20 27,113.71 0.2 63404.14 1.507074 ULTIMATE CONDITION SWMM MODEL OUTPUT B2 B3 B4 B1 C1 O2 O3 O1 O4 J1 BoxelderCreek P2 P3 P1 P4 FtCollins-100yr 11/21/2012 00:15:00 SWMM 5 Page 1 EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - VERSION 5.0 (Build 5.0.022) -------------------------------------------------------------- ********************************************************* NOTE: The summary statistics displayed in this report are based on results found at every computational time step, not just on results from each reporting time step. ********************************************************* **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units ............... CFS Process Models: Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES Snowmelt ............... NO Groundwater ............ NO Flow Routing ........... YES Ponding Allowed ........ NO Water Quality .......... NO Infiltration Method ...... HORTON Flow Routing Method ...... KINWAVE Starting Date ............ NOV-21-2012 00:00:00 Ending Date .............. NOV-21-2012 06:00:00 Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0.0 Report Time Step ......... 00:15:00 Wet Time Step ............ 00:05:00 Dry Time Step ............ 01:00:00 Routing Time Step ........ 30.00 sec ************************** Volume Depth Runoff Quantity Continuity acre-feet inches ************************** --------- ------- Total Precipitation ...... 9.870 3.669 Evaporation Loss ......... 0.000 0.000 Infiltration Loss ........ 1.723 0.640 Surface Runoff ........... 8.062 2.997 Final Surface Storage .... 0.151 0.056 Continuity Error (%) ..... -0.667 ************************** Volume Volume Flow Routing Continuity acre-feet 10^6 gal ************************** --------- --------- Dry Weather Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000 Wet Weather Inflow ....... 8.062 2.627 Groundwater Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000 RDII Inflow .............. 0.000 0.000 External Inflow .......... 0.000 0.000 External Outflow ......... 3.108 1.013 Internal Outflow ......... 0.000 0.000 Storage Losses ........... 0.000 0.000 Initial Stored Volume .... 0.000 0.000 Final Stored Volume ...... 4.952 1.614 Continuity Error (%) ..... 0.024 ******************************** SWMM 5 Page 1 Highest Flow Instability Indexes ******************************** Link O2 (16) ************************* Routing Time Step Summary ************************* Minimum Time Step : 30.00 sec Average Time Step : 30.00 sec Maximum Time Step : 30.00 sec Percent in Steady State : 0.00 Average Iterations per Step : 1.00 *************************** Subcatchment Runoff Summary *************************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Total Total Total Total Total Peak Runoff Precip Runon Evap Infil Runoff Runoff Runoff Coeff Subcatchment in in in in in 10^6 gal CFS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- B2 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.75 2.90 0.47 44.00 0.790 B3 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.87 2.78 0.53 47.91 0.757 B4 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.87 2.78 0.32 28.77 0.757 B1 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.42 3.20 1.31 133.11 0.873 ****************** Node Depth Summary ****************** --------------------------------------------------------------------- Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max Depth Depth HGL Occurrence Node Type Feet Feet Feet days hr:min --------------------------------------------------------------------- J1 JUNCTION 0.22 0.24 101.24 0 01:25 BoxelderCreek OUTFALL 0.22 0.24 100.24 0 01:26 P2 STORAGE 0.17 0.96 105.96 0 00:51 P3 STORAGE 4.52 5.56 111.56 0 02:09 P4 STORAGE 3.71 4.35 111.35 0 02:15 P1 STORAGE 3.78 4.55 106.55 0 02:11 ******************* Node Inflow Summary ******************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Maximum Lateral Total Lateral Total Time of Max Inflow Inflow Inflow Inflow Occurrence Volume Volume Node Type CFS CFS days hr:min 10^6 gal 10^6 gal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- J1 JUNCTION 0.00 7.00 0 01:25 0.000 1.013 BoxelderCreek OUTFALL 0.00 7.00 0 01:26 0.000 1.013 P2 STORAGE 44.00 44.00 0 00:40 0.467 0.467 P3 STORAGE 47.91 47.91 0 00:40 0.534 0.534 SWMM 5 Page 2 P4 STORAGE 28.77 28.77 0 00:40 0.320 0.320 P1 STORAGE 133.11 146.03 0 00:40 1.305 1.772 ********************** Node Surcharge Summary ********************** Surcharging occurs when water rises above the top of the highest conduit. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Max. Height Min. Depth Hours Above Crown Below Rim Node Type Surcharged Feet Feet --------------------------------------------------------------------- P2 STORAGE 6.01 0.963 9.037 P3 STORAGE 6.01 5.563 4.437 P4 STORAGE 6.01 4.349 5.651 P1 STORAGE 6.01 4.546 5.454 ********************* Node Flooding Summary ********************* No nodes were flooded. ********************** Storage Volume Summary ********************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Average Avg E&I Maximum Max Time of Max Maximum Volume Pcnt Pcnt Volume Pcnt Occurrence Outflow Storage Unit 1000 ft3 Full Loss 1000 ft3 Full days hr:min CFS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- P2 2.151 0 0 18.548 1 0 00:50 16.85 P3 45.871 27 0 61.498 36 0 02:09 1.60 P4 32.700 19 0 40.391 24 0 02:14 0.40 P1 155.391 16 0 206.659 21 0 02:10 5.00 *********************** Outfall Loading Summary *********************** ----------------------------------------------------------- Flow Avg. Max. Total Freq. Flow Flow Volume Outfall Node Pcnt. CFS CFS 10^6 gal ----------------------------------------------------------- BoxelderCreek 97.23 6.44 7.00 1.013 ----------------------------------------------------------- System 97.23 6.44 7.00 1.013 ******************** Link Flow Summary ******************** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- SWMM 5 Page 3 Maximum Time of Max Maximum Max/ Max/ |Flow| Occurrence |Veloc| Full Full Link Type CFS days hr:min ft/sec Flow Depth ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- C1 CONDUIT 7.00 0 01:26 13.92 0.00 0.02 O2 DUMMY 16.85 0 00:51 O3 DUMMY 1.60 0 00:48 O4 DUMMY 0.40 0 01:25 O1 DUMMY 5.00 0 01:09 ************************* Conduit Surcharge Summary ************************* No conduits were surcharged. Analysis begun on: Fri Nov 21 11:20:52 2014 Analysis ended on: Fri Nov 21 11:20:52 2014 Total elapsed time: < 1 sec SWMM 5 Page 4 POND 1 ‐ ULTIMATE CONDITION (CONCEPTUAL) STAGE STORAGE TABLE ELEV AREA DEPTH VOLUME VOLUME (ft) (sq ft) (ft) (cu ft) (ac ft) 4,912.40 164.64 N/A 0 0 4,912.60 797.66 0.2 88.31 0.002027 4,912.80 1,969.32 0.2 356.33 0.00818 4,913.00 3,691.15 0.2 913.44 0.02097 4,913.20 5,933.91 0.2 1867.11 0.042863 4,913.40 8,036.74 0.2 3258.87 0.074813 4,913.60 10,278.85 0.2 5085.84 0.116755 4,913.80 12,797.46 0.2 7388.88 0.169625 4,914.00 15,515.61 0.2 10215.82 0.234523 4,914.20 18,331.01 0.2 13596.58 0.312135 4,914.40 21,226.90 0.2 17548.83 0.402866 4,914.60 24,231.64 0.2 22091.37 0.507148 4,914.80 26,743.70 0.2 27186.84 0.624124 4,915.00 28,890.91 0.2 32748.92 0.751812 4,915.20 31,014.03 0.2 38738.16 0.889306 4,915.40 33,139.67 0.2 45152.35 1.036555 4,915.60 35,287.35 0.2 51993.93 1.193616 4,915.80 37,486.04 0.2 59270.16 1.360656 4,916.00 39,711.63 0.2 66988.86 1.537853 4,916.20 41,936.31 0.2 75152.64 1.725267 4,916.40 44,167.17 0.2 83762.03 1.922912 4,916.60 46,189.31 0.2 92796.92 2.130324 4,916.80 48,082.79 0.2 102223.5 2.346729 4,917.00 49,760.48 0.2 112007.3 2.571335 4,917.20 51,036.55 0.2 122086.8 2.802727 4,917.40 52,316.99 0.2 132421.9 3.039988 4,917.60 53,601.80 0.2 143013.5 3.283138 4,917.80 54,890.98 0.2 153862.5 3.532197 4,918.00 56,184.53 0.2 164969.8 3.787186 4,918.20 57,482.45 0.2 176336.3 4.048124 4,918.40 58,784.73 0.2 187962.7 4.315031 4,918.60 60,091.39 0.2 199850.1 4.587927 4,918.80 61,402.42 0.2 211999.3 4.866833 4,919.00 62,717.82 0.2 224411.1 5.151769 4,919.20 64,037.59 0.2 237086.4 5.442754 4,919.40 65,361.72 0.2 250026.1 5.739809 4,919.60 67,987.62 0.2 263360.1 6.045917 4,919.80 72,587.42 0.2 277415.1 6.368575 4,920.00 77,883.69 0.2 292459.1 6.713938 POND 2 STAGE STORAGE TABLE ELEV AREA DEPTH VOLUME VOLUME (ft) (sq ft) (ft) (cu ft) (ac ft) 4,915.80 3.52 N/A 0 0 4,916.00 149.99 0.2 11.77 0.00027 4,916.20 506.05 0.2 73.87 0.001696 4,916.40 1,087.67 0.2 229.58 0.00527 4,916.60 1,938.33 0.2 528.11 0.012124 4,916.80 2,997.78 0.2 1017.88 0.023367 4,917.00 4,068.39 0.2 1721.78 0.039527 4,917.20 4,889.73 0.2 2616.34 0.071042 4,917.40 5,668.42 0.2 3671.19 0.107015 4,917.60 6,532.24 0.2 4890.24 0.147542 4,917.80 7,301.45 0.2 6272.9 0.192629 4,918.00 8,040.89 0.2 7806.54 0.242003 4,918.20 12,173.21 0.2 9813.72 0.288079 4,918.40 13,394.42 0.2 12369.51 0.346752 4,918.60 14,708.41 0.2 15178.77 0.411244 4,918.80 15,915.22 0.2 18240.34 0.481528 4,919.00 16,998.29 0.2 21531.09 0.557073 POND 3 STAGE STORAGE TABLE ELEV AREA DEPTH VOLUME VOLUME (ft) (sq ft) (ft) (cu ft) (ac ft) 4,915.20 19.98 N/A 0 0 4,915.40 208.02 0.2 19.5 0.000448 4,915.60 564.33 0.2 93.83 0.002154 4,915.80 1,055.44 0.2 253.27 0.005814 4,916.00 1,690.09 0.2 525.34 0.01206 4,916.20 2,475.76 0.2 939.43 0.029326 4,916.40 3,205.57 0.2 1506 0.051352 4,916.60 4,012.37 0.2 2226.28 0.078175 4,916.80 4,865.15 0.2 3112.67 0.110101 4,917.00 5,820.34 0.2 4179.79 0.147485 4,917.20 10,045.54 0.2 5747.28 0.183455 4,917.40 11,355.15 0.2 7886.01 0.232553 4,917.60 12,783.83 0.2 10298.5 0.287936 4,917.80 13,838.52 0.2 12960.04 0.349037 4,918.00 14,984.43 0.2 15841.58 0.415188 4,918.20 16,262.81 0.2 18965.43 0.486902 4,918.40 17,635.81 0.2 22354.36 0.564701 4,918.60 18,910.45 0.2 26008.24 0.648582 4,918.80 20,126.33 0.2 29911.29 0.738184 4,919.00 21,394.16 0.2 34062.69 0.833487 4,919.20 22,686.63 0.2 38470.14 0.934668 4,919.40 23,705.36 0.2 43108.97 1.041161 4,919.60 24,510.19 0.2 47930.3 1.151843 4,919.80 25,346.52 0.2 52915.74 1.266293 4,920.00 26,214.36 0.2 58071.58 1.384655 4,920.20 27,113.71 0.2 63404.14 1.507074 35 (12) A new Section 4.1 is added, to read as follows: 4.1 Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves for SWMM: The hyetograph input option must be selected when creating SWMM input files. Hyetographs for the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year City of Fort Collins rainfall events are provided in Table RA-9. Table RA-9 – City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table for Use with SWMM 2-Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year Duration (min) Intensity (in/hr) Intensity (in/hr) Intensity (in/hr) Intensity (in/hr) Intensity (in/hr) Intensity (in/hr) 5 0.29 0.40 0.49 0.63 0.79 1.00 10 0.33 0.45 0.56 0.72 0.90 1.14 15 0.38 0.53 0.65 0.84 1.05 1.33 20 0.64 0.89 1.09 1.41 1.77 2.23 25 0.81 1.13 1.39 1.80 2.25 2.84 30 1.57 2.19 2.69 3.48 4.36 5.49 35 2.85 3.97 4.87 6.30 7.90 9.95 40 1.18 1.64 2.02 2.61 3.27 4.12 45 0.71 0.99 1.21 1.57 1.97 2.48 50 0.42 0.58 0.71 0.92 1.16 1.46 55 0.35 0.49 0.60 0.77 0.97 1.22 60 0.30 0.42 0.52 0.67 0.84 1.06 65 0.20 0.28 0.39 0.62 0.79 1.00 70 0.19 0.27 0.37 0.59 0.75 0.95 75 0.18 0.25 0.35 0.56 0.72 0.91 80 0.17 0.24 0.34 0.54 0.69 0.87 85 0.17 0.23 0.32 0.52 0.66 0.84 90 0.16 0.22 0.31 0.50 0.64 0.81 95 0.15 0.21 0.30 0.48 0.62 0.78 100 0.15 0.20 0.29 0.47 0.60 0.75 105 0.14 0.19 0.28 0.45 0.58 0.73 110 0.14 0.19 0.27 0.44 0.56 0.71 115 0.13 0.18 0.26 0.42 0.54 0.69 120 0.13 0.18 0.25 0.41 0.53 0.67 43 Table RO-13 SWMM Input Parameters Depth of Storage on Impervious Areas 0.1 inches Depth of Storage on Pervious Areas 0.3 inches Maximum Infiltration Rate 0.51 inches/hour Minimum Infiltration Rate 0.50 inches/hour Decay Rate 0.0018 inches/sec Zero Detention Depth 1% Manning’s n Value for Pervious Surfaces 0.025 Manning’s n Value for Impervious Surfaces 0.016 4.3.2 Pervious-Impervious Area Table RO-14 should be used to determine preliminary percentages of impervious land cover for a given land-use or zoning. The final design must be based on the actual physical design conditions of the site. Table RO-14 Percent Imperviousness Relationship to Land Use* LAND USE OR ZONING PERCENT IMPERVIOUS (%) Business: T CCN, CCR, CN E, RDR, CC, LC C, NC, I, D, HC, CS 20 70 80 90 Residential: RF,UE RL, NCL LMN,NCM MMN, NCB 30 45 50 70 Open Space: Open Space and Parks (POL) Open Space along foothills ridge (POL,RF) RC 10 20 20 *For updated zoning designations and definitions, please refer to Article Four of the City Land Use Code, as amended APPENDIX D EROSION CONTROL REPORT Erosion Control Report EROSION CONTROL REPORT A comprehensive Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (along with associated details) HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY SEPARATE DOCUMENT. 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 the Utility Plans. The Final Plans contain a full-size Erosion Control sheet 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 the Development Agreement for the development. 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, prior to any earth disturbance 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 E FIRMETTE MAP POCKET DRAINAGE EXHIBITS POND 1 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X OHE OHE OHE X G 6 2 5 OS2 OS1 D OS1 OS2 F POND 2 POND 3 POND 4 1 3 4 4922.09FT NAVD 88 4926.89FT NAVD 88 XS#: 1185 CW SUBTRUST C/O AGUR FOUNDATION INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (UNDEVELOPED) SUNFLOWER SUBDIVISION (SINGLE FAMILY) LOT 1 LEE MLD (UNDEVELOPED) FOX GROVE DRIVE HUNTSMAN DRIVE HUNTSMAN DRIVE CARRIAGE PARKWAY (76' ROW) CARRIAGE PARKWAY FOX GROVE DRIVE FOX GROVE DRIVE HUNTSMAN DRIVE HUNTSMAN DRIVE KIT DEN DRIVE CARRIAGE PARKWAY (76' ROW) CARRIAGE PARKWAY TOD DRIVE FOX GROVE DRIVE 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 301 N. Howes Street, Suite 100 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 N O R T H E RN PHONE: 970.221.4158 www.northernengineering.com DR1 KEYMAP 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 DR1 LEGEND: PROPOSED CONTOUR PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED SWALE EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPOSED INLET DESIGN POINT A FLOW ARROW DRAINAGE BASIN LABEL DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY PROPOSED SWALE SECTION 1 1 B2 1.45 ac BIORETENTION SWALE FLOODPLAIN NOTES: FEMA CROSS-SECTION (CSL) XS#: ELEV. NAVD 88 PROJECT BENCHMARKS: FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRAINAGE SUMMARY TABLE DESIGN POINT BASIN ID TOTAL AREA (acres) C10 C100 10-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) Q10 (cfs) Q100 (cfs) A A 5.94 0.55 0.69 13.3 11.0 11.1 30.3 B B 7.08 0.55 0.69 12.4 10.3 13.6 37.6 C C 4.25 0.55 0.69 12.7 10.5 8.1 22.6 D D 3.56 0.55 0.69 31.2 29.6 4.2 11.2 E E 1.60 0.55 0.69 12.5 10.3 3.0 8.5 F F 13.41 0.77 0.96 14.4 11.0 34.0 97.7 OS1 OS1 1.72 0.35 0.44 25.5 22.5 1.5 4.0 OS2 OS2 6.70 0.55 0.69 21.5 16.1 9.7 29.0 Pond Detention Vol. (Ac-Ft) PLD (50%) Vol. (Ac-Ft) Ext.Det. (50%) Vol. (Ac-Ft) Total Req'd. Vol. (Ac-Ft) 100-Yr WSEL (Ft) Peak 100-Yr Release (cfs) 1 1.502 0.138 0.251 1.753 4917.000 2.80 2 0.390 0.038 N/A 0.390 4918.600 16.10 3 1.407 0.046 0.068 1.475 4920.100 1.60 4 0.927 0.028 0.041 0.968 4921.200 0.40 POND SUMMARY Rectangular Pipe (Figure MD‐22) Spec Width of Riprap (ft) 2*d50, Depth of Riprap (ft) for L/2 Froude Parameter Q/D 2.5 Max 6.0 or Q/WH 1.5 Max 8.0 Riprap Type (From Figure MD‐21 or MD‐22) Project: 335‐008 Urban Drainage pg MD‐107 L= 1/(2tanq)* [At/Yt)‐W] (ft) (min) 10-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) AANo0.49 0.49 0.62 120 2.00% 9.8 9.8 7.8 520 1.00% 2.00 4.3 0 0.00% N/A N/A 14 14 12 BBNo0.42 0.42 0.52 110 2.00% 10.6 10.6 9.0 460 1.00% 2.00 3.8 0 0.00% N/A N/A 14 14 13 CCNo0.41 0.41 0.51 115 2.00% 11.0 11.0 9.4 470 1.00% 2.00 3.9 0 0.00% N/A N/A 15 15 13 DDNo0.25 0.25 0.31 60 2.00% 9.8 9.8 9.1 0 0.00% N/A N/A 1584 0.50% 1.06 24.9 35 35 34 EENo0.59 0.59 0.73 125 2.00% 8.5 8.5 6.1 410 1.00% 2.00 3.4 0 0.00% N/A N/A 12 12 9 FFNo0.73 0.73 0.91 140 2.00% 6.5 6.5 3.3 1030 1.00% 2.00 8.6 0 0.00% N/A N/A 15 15 12 OS1 OS1 No 0.35 0.35 0.44 352 1.10% 25.5 25.5 22.5 0 1.00% N/A N/A 0 0.00% N/A N/A 25 25 23 OS2 OS2 No 0.55 0.55 0.69 408 0.90% 21.5 21.5 16.1 0 1.00% N/A N/A 0 0.00% N/A N/A 22 22 16 DEVELOPED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS Gutter Flow Swale Flow Design Point Basin Overland Flow ATC November 1, 2014 Time of Concentration (Equation RO-4)  3 1 1 . 87 1 . 1 * S Ti C Cf L   10-year Cf = 1.00 November 1, 2014 3 1.407 0.046 0.068 1.475 4920.100 1.60 4 0.927 0.028 0.041 0.968 4921.200 0.40