The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutREPLAT OF EAST RIDGE - MAJOR AMENDMENT - MJA150005 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - DRAINAGE REPORTPRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT East Ridge Fort Collins, Colorado Prepared for: Hartford Homes 4801 Goodman Road Timnath, Colorado 80547 Phone: (970) 674-1109 Prepared by: Galloway & Company, Inc. 3760 East 15th Street, Suite 202 Loveland, Colorado 80538 Phone: (970) 800-3300 Contact: James Prelog, P.E. Original Preparation: September 9, 2015 Revised: N/A 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS.......................................................................................................................... 1 I. CERTIFICATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 2 II. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .................................................................................. 3 V. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS ........................................................................................ 4 III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA ..................................................................................................... 5 IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN ...................................................................................................... 9 V. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES ................................................................... 11 VI. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................ 13 VII. REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 13 APPENDIX A - REFERENCE MATERIALS VICINITY MAP NRCS SOILS MAP FEMA FIRMETTE APPENDIX B - HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS PROPOSED COMPOSITE RUNOFF CALCULATIONS PROPOSED STANDARD FORM SF-2 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS PROPOSED STANDARD FORM SF-3 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN 2-YEAR PROPOSED STANDARD FORM SF-3 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN 100-YEAR APPENDIX C - HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS UDFCD INLET CALCULATIONS STREET CAPACITY CALCULATIONS SWALE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS STORM DRAIN SIZING CALCULATIONS PRELMINARY DETENTION POND SIZING (EPA SWMM 5.0) PRELIMINARY EDB AND LID SIZING CALCULATIONS APPENDIX D – SUPPORTING DOCUMENTION LAKE CANAL AGREEMENT BARKER AGREEMENT APPENDIX D – DRAINAGE MAPS DEVELOPED CONDITION DRAINAGE MAP 2 I. CERTIFICATIONS CERTIFICATION OF ENGINEER “I hereby certify that this report for the preliminary drainage design of East Ridge was prepared by me (or under my direct supervision) in accordance with the provisions of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual for the owners thereof.” ______________________________________ James Prelog, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State Of Colorado No.39373 For and on behalf of Galloway & Company, Inc. CERTIFICATION OF OWNER “Hartford Homes, hereby certifies that the drainage facilities for the East Ridge shall be constructed according to the design presented in this report. We understand that the City of Fort Collins does not and will not assume liability for drainage facilities designed and/or certified by our engineer. We also understand that the City of Fort Collins relies on the representation of others to establish that drainage facilities are designed and constructed in compliance with City of Fort Collins guidelines, standards, or specifications. Review by the City of Fort Collins can therefore in no way limit or diminish any liability, which we or any other party may have with respect to the design or construction of such facilities.” ____________________________________ Hartford Homes Attest: ___________________________________ (Name of Responsible Party) __________________________________ Notary Public __________________________________ Authorized Signature 3 II. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION LOCATION East Ridge (referred to herein as “the site” or “project site”) will be located southeast of the intersection of East Vine Drive and Timberline Road. The project site is bounded on north by the Burlington Northern Railroad and East Vine Drive; on the south by an existing gravel mining operation, on the east by undeveloped agricultural land; and on the west by Timberline Road and Collins Aire Park – a mobile home park. The Larimer-Weld Canal is located north of the site and the Lake Canal is located to the south. More specifically, the site is located in the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 7 North, Range 68 West in the City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer and State of Colorado. Refer to Appendix A for a Vicinity Map. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY The project site consists of approximately 153.29 acres. It is currently a vacant and undeveloped tract of land. Existing grades in the north half of the site average one percent. The existing grades in the south half are steeper and average three percent. The existing runoff generally flows to an existing low lying wetland area in the south central region of the site. This sump area has no natural outfall. There are no major drainage ways passing through the project site. According to the USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey, ‘Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes’ covers roughly two-thirds of the project site. This soil is associated with Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) ‘C’. HSG ‘C’ soils have a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These soils consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. The remainder of the site consists of a mix of HSG ‘B’ and ‘C’ soils. Refer to Appendix A for more soils information. The site is situated south of the Larimer-Weld Canal and north of the Lake Canal. The Barker Property, which is situated to the south of the site, currently receives irrigation water through the No. 10 Ditch (Ditch). The irrigation water currently runs south from the intersection of East Vine Drive and Timberline Road through the site along the east edge and to the Barker Property (Refer to Appendix C for a copy of an Agreement dated 12/06/2002). The Ditch will 4 be relocated with this project. In addition to providing irrigation water to the Barker Property, the relocated irrigation infrastructure will service an on-site irrigation pond. East Ridge Subdivision will be developed in several phases. During the initial phase, approximately 114.73 acres (75 %) of the total project area will be developed. Subsequent phases will develop Tract A, Tract B and Tract C as multi-family, single-family attached and single-family attached, respectively. The current phase will include a mix of single-family attached, single-family alley loaded and duplex construction. The development will surround a proposed neighborhood park and wetland/natural area. On-site detention will be provided within the wetland area. Developed runoff will be pre-treated before it enters the detention pond. V. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS MAJOR BASIN DESCRIPTION The project site is located within the Cooper Slough/Boxelder Basin along the west edge where East Vine Drive and Timberline Road intersect. According to the CoFC website, the basins “encompass 265 square miles, beginning north of the Colorado/Wyoming border and extend southward into east Fort Collins, where they end at the Cache la Poudre River. The basins are primarily characterized by farmland with isolated areas of mixed-use residential development and limited commercial development.” The basin hydrology was studied as part of the Boxelder Creek/Cooper Slough watershed by the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County in 1981 and 2002. In addition, a drainage master plan was prepared for the portion of the basin owned by Anheuser-Busch, Inc. in 1984 in conjunction with development of the brewery site. The 2003 update to the CoFC stormwater master plans adopted improvements for the Lower Cooper Slough Basin and identified the need for the Upper Cooper Slough as an area to be further studied. Per conversations with the CoFC Stormwater Utility staff we understand the off-site flows that would have spilled from the Larimer-Weld Canal and were reported in a previous Final Drainage Report for East Ridge Subdivision (TST, Inc. Consulting Engineers | Dated: May 6, 2008) are out of date. In consideration of new information available and the changes that will be made to the Upper Cooper Slough Master Plan, it has been determined by the CoFC the 5 spill from the Larimer-Weld Canal has been reduced to 0 cfs. Therefore, the off-site flow accounted for in the previously mentioned study for the site, no longer affects the project site. The project site is shown on FEMA Map Numbers 08069C0982F and 080690982H (refer to Appendix A for FEMA Firmettes). Neither map shows the project impacted by an existing floodplain/floodway. Refer to Appendix A for a copy of each Firmette. SUB- BASIN DESCRIPTION There are no major off-site flows affecting the proposed site design. Between the site’s north property boundary and the existing railroad tracks an area, of approximately one and a half acres, drains south and onto the site. This runoff should have a negligible impact on the proposed drainage design and will be accounted for at Final Design. III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA REGULATIONS This preliminary drainage design presented herein was prepared in accordance with the Fort Collins Amendments to the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Criteria Manual (i.e., Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals Volumes 1, 2 and 3 [Manual]). Together, the requirements are referred to as the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual [FCSCM]. DIRECTLY CONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA (DCIA) At this preliminary stage of the design process, we’ve developed a strategy for implementing ‘The Four-Step Process’ for stormwater quality management. Each step is listed below and includes a brief narrative that describes our strategy for implementing it. Step 1 - Employ runoff reduction practices Current and future developed runoff from the A and B series of basins will drain through Grass Swales (GS) prior to entering the on-site detention facility. The proposed grass swales have low longitudinal and side slopes (e.g., 0.25% and 8:1, respectively). They are designed to convey 2-year storm event runoff in a slow (i.e., <1 ft/sec) and shallow manner (i.e., normal depth <1 foot). This design encourages settling and infiltration. 6 The future developed areas associated with the G, H and I series basins will need to address the LID requirement when they develop and treat at least 50% of the newly added impervious area. The following table is a preliminary and albeit conservative estimate of the newly added impervious area based on the proposed product types and consideration for treating at least 50% of the newly added impervious area with a LID technique (e.g., Grass Swale). With this design, we propose to route the A-Basins (includes future development), B- Basins (includes future development) and portions of the G- and H-Basins through grass swales. The 50% LID treatment requirement can be met if the future developed areas treat, at a local level, 50% of their newly added impervious area. Area, acres Preliminary Proposed Imperviousness, % Newly added Impervious Area, acres Total Site Area: 153.29 Neighborhood Park/Detention Area: 22.49 6.5 1.5 Current Developed Area: 92.24 65.0 60.0 Future Developed Area: 38.56 80.0 30.8 Total: 153.29 Total: 92.3 50% to EDB 46.1 50% to LID 46.1 (Includes future LID) Step 2 - Implement BMPs that provide a Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Current and future developed runoff associated with the C, D, E, F, G, H, I and J series of basins will pass through Extended Detention Basins (EDBs) prior to entering the on-site detention facility. Step 3 - Stabilize drainageways Steps will be taken at final design to stabilize Grass Swales and prevent erosion during storm events exceeding the 2-year recurrence level. Additionally, measures will be implemented to protect the section of the Lake Canal receiving outflow from the on-site detention pond. Step 4 – Implement site specific and other source control BMPS Site specific considerations such as material storage and other site operations are addressed in the Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP). 7 DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA REFERENCE AND CONSTRAINTS The non-existent natural outfall affects the proposed drainage design. In the interim, we propose to pump water from the on-site detention pond, at a maximum rate of 5 cfs, into the Lake Canal. In the future, we anticipate an outfall will be built to receive outflow from the on- site detention pond. We expect, at that time, to replace the pump with a more traditional passive outfall structure. HYDROLOGICAL CRITERIA For urban catchments that are not complex and are generally 160 acres or less in size, it is acceptable that the design storm runoff be analyzed by the Rational Method. The Rational Method is often used when only the peak flow rate or total volume of runoff is needed (e.g., storm sewer sizing or simple detention basin sizing). The Rational Method was used to estimate the peak flow at each design point. For preliminary design, no routing calculations were done; this work will occur at Final Design. The Rational Method is based on the Rational Formula: Q = CiA Where: Q = the maximum rate of runoff, cfs C = a runoff coefficient that is the ratio between the runoff volume from an area and the average rate of rainfall depth over a given duration for that area i = average intensity of rainfall in inches per hour for a duration equal to the Time of Concentration (Tc) A = area, acres The one-hour rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency tables for use with the Rational Method of runoff analysis are provided in Table RA-7 and Table RA-8 (refer to Appendix B). The 2-year and 100-year storm events are the basis for the preliminary drainage system design. The 2-year storm is considered the minor storm event. It has a fifty percent probability 8 of exceedance during any given year. The 100-year storm is considered the major storm event. It has a one percent probability of exceedance during any given year. The 2-year drainage system, at a minimum, must be designed to transport runoff from the 2- year recurrence interval storm event with minimal disruption to the urban environment. The 100-year drainage system, as a minimum, must be designed to convey runoff from the 100- year recurrence interval flood to minimize life hazards and health, damage to structures, and interruption to traffic and services. The preliminary detention storage was estimated with EPA SWMM 5.0. Various input parameters were provided by Table RO-13 and Table RO-14. The interim detention discharge is 5 cfs. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA On-site excess developed runoff will travel overland from the residential lot areas to the adjacent street section. Either drive-over or vertical curb and gutter will capture the runoff and convey it to sump Type ‘R’ curb inlets. The inlets discharge to one of several the on-site storm drain systems. The storm drain systems discharge into Grass Swales (LID) or Extended Detention Basins (EDBs), and ultimately the on-site detention pond. Street Capacity Analysis The maximum encroachment of gutter flow within the street for the minor storm event was used to estimate the capacity of the local and collector street sections. These maximum encroachments do not exceed the criteria given in Table ST-2. For example, minor storm flows within local streets cannot overtop the curb (dmax=0.395’) or the crown of the street. For the major storm event, street capacities were estimated based on the maximum street encroachment given in Table ST-3. For example, the depth of water at the street crown shall not exceed six (6) inches for local streets. Generic street capacity calculations for four (4) different proposed street sections and a range of longitudinal grades are presented in Appendix B. · Alley (Local) · Drive-Over 15’ CL to FL (Local) · Vertical C&G 15’ CL to FL (Local) 9 · Vertical C&G 25’ CL to FL (Collector) Street capacity calculations for the minor storm event were estimated with the Modified Manning Equation and Excel. The major storm event street capacity calculations were completed within Bentley FlowMaster. Inlet Capacity Analysis CDOT Type ‘R’ inlets are proposed throughout the project for removing 2- and 100-year developed runoff from the street sections. In general, the inlet capacities for the minor and major storm event were estimated using UD-Inlet_v3.14. More specifically, the local and collector street section geometry and storm event encroachment limits were accounted for in the estimated capacity calculations. Appendix B includes capacity calculations for proposed Type ‘R’ curb inlets, which range in length from 5’ to 20’, using the 15’ CL to FL drive-over section. A 25’ Type ‘R’ curb inlet capacity was estimated for the 25’ CL to FL section. The preliminary calculations included in Appendix B are based on the more conservative ponding depths (i.e., encroachment of gutter flow) associated with the drive-over curb and gutter. Storm Drain Capacity Analysis The preliminary storm drain system is sized to convey the sum of the 100-year developed runoff at each design point draining into the system (e.g., Storm Drain System A: ΣQ100=A1Q100 + A2Q100 + . . . + A13Q100). The pipes are sized to convey this runoff without surcharging (i.e., full-flow capacity). This method should provide a conservative estimate of total runoff and pipe sizes. At Final Design, the developed flows will be routed through the proposed storm drain system and a hydraulic grade-line analysis will be completed. IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN GENERAL CONCEPT This preliminary design is the initial step in developing a system for collecting and conveying developed runoff from current and future development at East Ridge to the on-site detention pond. The existing site runoff drains to an existing wetland area in the south central region of the project site. The wetland area has no natural outfall. The proposed design will match this existing drainage pattern. 10 Typically, the on-site excess developed runoff will travel overland from residential lot areas into the adjacent street section. Most of the residential lots drain to a 15’ CL to FL section with either drive-over or vertical curb and gutter. The street section will convey developed runoff to sump Type ‘R’ curb inlets. These inlets discharge to one of several the on-site storm drain systems which then discharge into Grass Swales (LID) or Extended Detention Basins (EDBs), and ultimately, the on-site detention pond. SPECIFIC DETAILS The proposed detention pond was sized using a simplified SWMM model. At this stage of the design, the model does not account for the effects of routing flows through any conveyance from the developed basins to the on-site detention pond - the developed basins connect directly to the detention pond. We used the width parameter to adjust the runoff from each basin to a target unit release rate of approximately 7.0 cfs/acre. In the interim, there is no passive outfall from the detention pond. In the future, an outfall will be constructed that will receive flows from this pond. In the interim, the on-site detention pond will function as a retention facility. Since the retention facility is expected to be temporary, the CoFC requires that it be sized to capture two time the two hour 100-year storm plus one foot of freeboard. The interim design releases flows to the south at 5 cfs into the Lake Canal. Refer to Appendix C for a copy of the release agreement. A-Basins These basins comprise approximately 21.32 acres. This area includes the north area (Tract B) set aside for future single-family attached development. The developed runoff within these basins drains into Storm Drain System A (SDS A). The system will discharge into a grass swale before entering the detention pond. B-Basins These basins comprise approximately 31.31 acres. This area includes the north area set aside for future single-family attached (Tract B) and multi-family (Tract A) development. The developed runoff within these basins drains into Storm Drain System B (SDS B). 11 C-Basins These basins comprise approximately 22.63 acres. The developed runoff within these basins drains to Storm Drain System C (SDS C). The system will discharge to an EDB before entering the detention pond. D-, E- and F-Basins These basins comprise 7.23 acres. The developed runoff within these basins drains to a storm drain system for each unique basin series (i.e., SDS D, SDS E and SDS F). These systems discharge into two different EDBs before entering the detention pond. G- and H-Basins These basins comprise approximately 29.94 acres. This area includes the area set aside for future single-family attached (Tract E) and multi-family (Tract A) development. The developed runoff within these basins drains into Storm Drain System G-H (SDS G-H). This system will discharge into a grass swale or EDB before entering the detention pond. In the interim, runoff from the future developed areas was accounted for in the EDB design. These areas will need to treat at least 50% of the newly added impervious area. I-Basins These basins comprise approximately 12.00 acres. The developed runoff within these basins drains to Storm Drain System I (SDS I). The system will discharge to an EDB before entering the detention pond. Future Timberline Road Basins (e.g., Fut-TL1) These basins were included in LID/EDB and detention pond design. The future design for this area is undetermined. The Final Design will account for potential future design. V. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES A General Permit for Stormwater Discharge Associated with Construction Activities issued by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Water Quality Control Division (WQCD), will be acquired for the site. A Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) should be prepared to identity the Best Management Practices (BMPs) which, when 12 implemented, will meet the requirements of said General Permit. Below is a summary of SWMP requirements which may be implemented on-site. The following temporary BMPs may be installed and maintained to control on-site erosion and prevent sediment from traveling off-site during construction: · Silt Fence – a woven synthetic fabric that filters runoff. The silt fence is a temporary barrier that is placed at the base of a disturbed area. · Vehicle Tracking Control – a stabilized stone pad located at points of ingress and egress on a construction site. The stone pad is designed to reduce the amount of mud transported onto public roads by construction traffic. · Straw Wattles – wattles act as a sediment filter. They are a temporary BMP and require proper installation and maintenance to ensure their performance. · Inlet protection – Inlet protection will be used on all existing and proposed storm inlets to help prevent debris from entering the storm sewer system. Inlet protection generally consists of straw wattles or block and gravel filters. CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL & EQUIPMENT The contractor shall store all construction materials and equipment and shall provide maintenance and fueling of equipment in confined areas on-site from which runoff will be contained and filtered. MAINTENANCE The temporary BMPs will be inspected by the contractor at a minimum of once every two weeks and after each significant storm event. The property owner will be responsible for routine and non-routine maintenance of the temporary BMPs. Routine maintenance includes: · Remove sediment from the bottom of the temporary sediment basin when accumulated sediment occupies about 20% of the design volume or when sediment accumulation results in poor drainage. · Lawn mowing-maintain height of grass depending on aesthetic requirements. · Debris and litter removal-remove debris and litter to minimize outlet clogging and improve aesthetics as necessary. 13 · Inspection of the facility-inspect the facility annually to ensure that it functions as initially intended. · Cleaning and repair of BMP’s is required when sediment has built up or the BMP is not working properly. VI. CONCLUSIONS COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS The design presented in this final drainage report for East Ridge has been prepared in accordance with the design standards and guidelines presented in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. VARIANCES No variance(s) requested at this time. DRAINAGE CONCEPT The proposed East Ridge storm drainage improvements should provide adequate protection for the developed site. The proposed drainage design for the site should not negatively impact the existing downstream storm drainage system. VII. REFERENCES 1. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (Addendum to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals Volumes 1, 2 and 3), prepared by City of Fort Collins 2. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Drainage Criteria Manual Volumes 1 and 2, prepared by Wright-McLaughlin Engineers, dated June 2001 (revised April 2008), and the Volume 3, prepared by Wright-McLaughlin Engineers, dated September 1992 and revised November 2010. ` APPENDIX A REFERENCE MATERIAL ` VICINITY MAP Vicinity Map - East Ridge Not to Scale Larimer-Weld Canal Lake Canal East Ridge Project Site Barker Property ` NRCS SOILS MAP Hydrologic Soil Group—Larimer County Area, Colorado (East Ridge Subdivision) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/24/2015 Page 1 of 4 4492900 4493000 4493100 4493200 4493300 4493400 4493500 4493600 4493700 4493800 4493900 4494000 4494100 4492900 4493000 4493100 4493200 4493300 4493400 4493500 4493600 4493700 4493800 4493900 4494000 4494100 497500 497600 497700 497800 497900 498000 498100 498200 498300 497500 497600 497700 497800 497900 498000 498100 498200 498300 40° 35' 52'' N 105° 1' 49'' W 40° 35' 52'' N 105° 1' 8'' W 40° 35' 10'' N 105° 1' 49'' W 40° 35' 10'' N 105° 1' 8'' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 300 600 1200 1800 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:6,220 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit — Larimer County Area, Colorado (CO644) Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 5 Aquepts, loamy A/D 11.7 6.4% 7 Ascalon sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes B 5.8 3.2% 34 Fort Collins loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes B 6.0 3.3% 35 Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes C 109.7 60.3% 42 Gravel pits A 10.8 5.9% 53 Kim loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes B 17.2 9.5% 73 Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes C 6.8 3.7% 74 Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes C 6.4 3.5% 94 Satanta loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes B 0.1 0.0% 102 Stoneham loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes B 7.3 4.0% Totals for Area of Interest 181.8 100.0% Hydrologic Soil Group—Larimer County Area, Colorado East Ridge Subdivision Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/24/2015 Page 3 of 4 Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Hydrologic Soil Group—Larimer County Area, Colorado East Ridge Subdivision Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/24/2015 Page 4 of 4 ` FEMA FIRMETTE ` APPENDIX B HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS Tributary Area tc | 2-Year tc | 100-Year Q2 Q100 Sub-basin (acres) C2 C100 (min) (min) (cfs) (cfs) A1 0.52 0.77 0.96 7.4 6.3 1.0 4.6 A2 0.83 0.68 0.85 9.2 6.7 1.3 6.4 A3 1.45 0.67 0.83 11.0 8.6 2.1 10.1 A4 2.11 0.66 0.83 12.4 10.0 2.9 13.7 A5 1.96 0.67 0.84 10.3 9.2 2.9 13.3 A6 2.20 0.62 0.77 11.9 9.5 2.9 13.7 A7 0.96 0.65 0.82 10.8 8.3 1.4 6.6 A8 2.18 0.58 0.72 14.1 12.6 2.4 11.2 A9 0.46 0.67 0.84 7.3 5.5 0.8 3.8 A10 1.31 0.68 0.85 8.0 6.1 2.2 10.4 A11 1.08 0.68 0.85 8.7 6.9 1.7 8.3 A12 0.76 0.59 0.74 8.0 6.3 1.1 5.2 A13 0.36 0.58 0.73 6.4 5.3 0.6 2.6 B1 0.61 0.77 0.96 9.7 8.5 1.1 4.9 B2 2.56 0.63 0.78 14.5 12.3 3.1 14.4 B3 2.73 0.63 0.79 14.5 12.4 3.3 15.4 B4 2.16 0.63 0.79 12.6 10.2 2.8 13.3 B5 1.35 0.68 0.85 8.5 6.8 2.2 10.5 B6 2.39 0.62 0.77 12.5 10.1 3.0 14.5 B7 1.06 0.57 0.71 10.1 8.0 1.4 6.5 B8 1.39 0.58 0.73 10.3 8.9 1.8 8.3 B9 1.34 0.64 0.80 10.4 7.9 1.9 9.2 B10 1.81 0.65 0.81 10.7 9.1 2.6 11.9 B11 0.99 0.66 0.82 9.2 7.4 1.5 7.2 B12 1.32 0.65 0.81 8.2 6.2 2.1 10.0 B13 1.43 0.53 0.66 12.6 11.7 1.6 7.0 B14 1.18 0.66 0.83 9.8 7.2 1.8 8.7 B15 0.99 0.68 0.85 8.4 6.5 1.6 7.8 B16 0.98 0.66 0.83 10.0 8.1 1.5 6.9 B17 0.82 0.61 0.76 9.1 7.3 1.2 5.5 B18 0.38 0.67 0.83 7.1 5.9 0.7 3.0 C1 1.39 0.66 0.83 10.8 8.4 2.0 9.7 C2 1.25 0.66 0.82 10.3 7.8 1.8 8.9 C3 1.53 0.67 0.83 11.1 9.4 2.2 10.3 C4 0.53 0.68 0.85 5.9 5.0 1.0 4.5 C5 1.04 0.69 0.86 6.8 5.0 1.9 8.9 C6 0.82 0.70 0.88 7.0 5.0 1.5 7.2 C7 0.77 0.70 0.88 5.3 5.0 1.5 6.7 C8 1.01 0.68 0.85 7.4 5.5 1.7 8.4 C9 1.50 0.65 0.82 7.6 6.3 2.4 11.4 C10 1.02 0.67 0.84 7.6 6.3 1.7 8.0 C11 1.41 0.62 0.78 10.3 7.9 2.0 9.5 C12 1.75 0.64 0.80 9.4 8.1 2.6 12.1 C13 1.42 0.62 0.78 10.6 8.3 1.9 9.4 C14 2.29 0.64 0.80 9.6 8.3 3.4 15.6 C15 1.21 0.65 0.82 8.9 7.0 1.9 8.9 C16 0.87 0.73 0.92 10.0 8.6 1.4 6.7 C17 0.21 0.78 0.97 7.6 5.0 0.4 2.1 BASIN SUMMARY TABLE H:\Hartford Homes\HFHLV0001.01 Timberline Vine Dr\3. Permit Const Docs\3.04 Grading-Drainage Studies\3.04.2 Proposed Drainage Reports- Info\Hydrology\Rational\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls C18 2.57 0.41 0.51 12.0 12.0 2.2 9.6 D1 0.95 0.69 0.86 9.2 6.6 1.5 7.5 D2 0.19 0.77 0.97 5.0 5.0 0.4 1.8 E1 1.09 0.66 0.82 10.1 7.6 1.6 7.8 E2 2.15 0.61 0.76 12.7 10.4 2.7 12.7 E3 0.24 0.77 0.96 5.0 5.0 0.5 2.3 F1 0.66 0.69 0.86 7.5 5.5 1.2 5.5 F2 1.77 0.67 0.84 8.6 6.6 2.9 13.8 F3 0.18 0.79 0.98 5.4 5.0 0.4 1.7 G1 0.53 0.78 0.97 8.7 7.5 1.0 4.6 G2 1.50 0.66 0.82 11.1 8.6 2.1 10.2 G3 1.19 0.69 0.87 7.2 5.3 2.1 10.1 G4 1.06 0.69 0.86 8.0 6.1 1.8 8.6 G5 1.69 0.71 0.89 8.3 6.4 2.9 13.9 G6 0.57 0.77 0.96 9.2 6.7 1.0 5.0 H1 0.46 0.79 0.99 7.2 6.0 0.9 4.2 H2 1.72 0.72 0.90 7.9 6.8 3.1 14.1 H3 1.41 0.75 0.94 6.3 5.0 2.8 13.2 H4 1.62 0.73 0.92 8.7 6.6 2.8 13.7 H5 1.20 0.72 0.90 8.6 6.6 2.1 9.9 H6 1.70 0.73 0.91 7.7 5.6 3.1 14.9 I1 1.13 0.73 0.92 8.1 6.0 2.0 9.8 I2 1.28 0.75 0.93 9.5 7.5 2.2 10.5 I3 0.91 0.74 0.92 10.0 8.0 1.5 7.2 I4 0.79 0.72 0.90 9.7 7.8 1.3 6.1 I5 1.57 0.73 0.91 8.1 6.0 2.8 13.6 J1 0.12 0.80 1.00 5.0 5.0 0.3 1.2 J2 0.28 0.68 0.86 6.3 5.0 0.5 2.4 Wetland 22.49 0.38 0.47 66.6 63.7 6.4 28.6 Fut-A 5.15 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 9.3 40.6 Fut-B 5.81 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 10.5 45.8 Fut-G1 8.08 0.85 1.00 10.0 10.0 15.5 63.6 Fut-G2 2.43 0.90 1.00 10.0 10.0 4.9 19.1 Fut-H 4.79 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 8.7 37.7 Fut-I1 3.92 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 7.1 30.8 Fut-I2 1.25 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 2.3 9.8 Fut-I3 1.15 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 2.1 9.1 Fut-TL1 2.62 0.90 1.00 10.0 10.0 5.3 20.6 Fut-TL2 1.10 0.90 1.00 10.0 10.0 2.2 8.7 Fut-TL3 0.83 0.90 1.00 10.0 10.0 1.7 6.5 Fut-TL4 1.42 0.90 1.00 10.0 10.0 2.9 11.2 H:\Hartford Homes\HFHLV0001.01 Timberline Vine Dr\3. Permit Const Docs\3.04 Grading-Drainage Studies\3.04.2 Proposed Drainage Reports- Info\Hydrology\Rational\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls ` PROPOSED COMPOSITE RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS 41 Table RO-11 Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis Character of Surface Runoff Coefficient Streets, Parking Lots, Drives: Asphalt 0.95 Concrete 0.95 Gravel 0.5 Roofs 0.95 Recycled Asphalt 0.8 Lawns, Sandy Soil: Flat <2% 0.1 Average 2 to 7% 0.15 Steep >7% 0.2 Lawns, Heavy Soil: Flat <2% 0.2 Average 2 to 7% 0.25 Steep >7% 0.35 (4) A new Section 2.9 is added, to read as follows: 2.9 Composite Runoff Coefficient Drainage sub-basins are frequently composed of land that has multiple surfaces or zoning classifications. In such cases a composite runoff coefficient must be calculated for any given drainage sub-basin. The composite runoff coefficient is obtained using the following formula: ( ) t n i i i A C A C ∑ = = 1 * (RO-8) Where: C = Composite Runoff Coefficient Ci = Runoff Coefficient for Specific Area (Ai) Ai = Area of Surface with Runoff Coefficient of Ci, acres or feet2 n = Number of different surfaces to be considered At = Total Area over which C is applicable, acres or feet2 (5) A new Section 2.10 is added, to read as follows: 42 2.10 Runoff Coefficient Adjustment for Infrequent Storms The runoff coefficients provided in tables RO-10 and RO-11 are appropriate for use with the 2-year storm event. For storms with higher intensities, an adjustment of the runoff coefficient is required due to the lessening amount of infiltration, depression retention, evapo-transpiration and other losses that have a proportionally smaller effect on storm runoff. This adjustment is applied to the composite runoff coefficient. These frequency adjustment factors are found in Table RO-12. Table RO-12 Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis Storm Return Period (years) Frequency Factor Cf 2 to 10 11 to 25 26 to 50 51 to 100 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.25 Note: The product of C times Cf cannot exceed the value of 1, in the cases where it does a value of 1 must be used (6) Section 3.1 is deleted in its entirety. (7) Section 3.2 is deleted in its entirety. (8) Section 3.3 is deleted in its entirety. (9) A new Section 4.3 is added, to read as follows: 4.3 Computer Modeling Practices (a) For circumstances requiring computer modeling, the design storm hydrographs must be determined using the Stormwater Management Model (SWMM). Basin and conveyance element parameters must be computed based on the physical characteristics of the site. (b) Refer to the SWMM Users’ Manual for appropriate modeling methodology, practices and development. The Users’ Manual can be found on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) website (http://www.epa.gov/ednnrmrl/models/swmm/index.htm). (c) It is the responsibility of the design engineer to verify that all of the models used in the design meet all current City criteria and regulations. 4.3.1 Surface Storage, Resistance Factors, and Infiltration Table RO-13 provides values for surface storage for pervious and impervious surfaces and the infiltration rates to be used with SWMM. Table RO-13 also lists the appropriate infiltration decay rate, zero detention depth and resistance factors, or Manning’s “n” values, for pervious and impervious surfaces to be used for SWMM modeling in the city of Fort Collins. Subdivision: East Ridge Subdivision Project Name: East Ridge Subdivision Location: CO, Fort Collins Project No.: Calculated By: H. Feissner Checked By: J. Prelog INPUT User Input Date: 9/7/15 INPUT User Input A1 0.52 95 0.39 72 20 0.13 5 60 0.00 0 0.77 A2 0.83 95 0.25 29 20 0.06 1 60 0.52 38 0.68 A3 1.45 95 0.37 24 20 0.09 1 60 0.99 41 0.67 A4 2.11 95 0.51 23 20 0.12 1 60 1.48 42 0.66 A5 1.96 95 0.52 25 20 0.12 1 60 1.33 41 0.67 A6 2.20 95 0.43 19 20 0.27 2 60 1.50 41 0.62 A7 0.96 95 0.20 20 20 0.05 1 60 0.71 44 0.65 A8 2.18 95 0.34 15 20 0.42 4 60 1.42 39 0.58 A9 0.46 95 0.14 28 20 0.04 2 60 0.28 37 0.67 A10 1.31 95 0.40 29 20 0.10 1 60 0.82 37 0.68 A11 1.08 95 0.28 25 20 0.03 1 60 0.77 43 0.68 A12 0.76 95 0.18 23 20 0.18 5 60 0.40 31 0.59 A13 0.36 95 0.18 48 20 0.18 10 60 0.00 0 0.58 B1 0.61 95 0.46 72 20 0.15 5 60 0.00 0 0.77 B2 2.56 95 0.47 18 20 0.25 2 60 1.84 43 0.63 B3 2.73 95 0.47 16 20 0.22 2 60 2.04 45 0.63 B4 2.16 95 0.43 19 20 0.20 2 60 1.53 42 0.63 B5 1.35 95 0.42 29 20 0.09 1 60 0.84 37 0.68 B6 2.39 95 0.44 18 20 0.28 2 60 1.67 42 0.62 B7 1.06 95 0.22 20 20 0.27 5 60 0.56 32 0.57 B8 1.39 95 0.34 23 20 0.37 5 60 0.68 29 0.58 B9 1.34 95 0.25 18 20 0.09 1 60 1.00 45 0.64 B10 1.81 95 0.40 21 20 0.14 2 60 1.27 42 0.65 B11 0.99 95 0.28 27 20 0.11 2 60 0.60 37 0.66 B12 1.32 95 0.25 18 20 0.05 1 60 1.02 46 0.65 Area (ac) Area Weighted Asphalt + Concrete Walks Lawns, Heavy Soil: Flat <2% Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Area (ac) HFHLV0001.01 COMPOSITE RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS Area Weighted Basin ID Total Area (ac) Runoff C2 Coefficient Area (ac) Lots (e.g., Single-Family) Runoff Coefficient Page 1 of 4 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls Area (ac) Area Weighted Asphalt + Concrete Walks Lawns, Heavy Soil: Flat <2% Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Area (ac) Area Weighted Basin ID Total Area (ac) Runoff C2 Coefficient Area (ac) Lots (e.g., Single-Family) Runoff Coefficient B13 1.43 95 0.38 25 20 0.58 8 60 0.47 20 0.53 B14 1.18 95 0.28 23 20 0.06 1 60 0.84 43 0.66 B15 0.99 95 0.33 31 20 0.09 2 60 0.58 35 0.68 B16 0.98 95 0.33 32 20 0.13 3 60 0.51 32 0.66 B17 0.82 95 0.22 26 20 0.18 4 60 0.42 31 0.61 B18 0.38 95 0.24 59 20 0.14 8 60 0.00 0 0.67 C1 1.39 95 0.33 23 20 0.08 1 60 0.98 42 0.66 C2 1.25 95 0.28 21 20 0.07 1 60 0.90 43 0.66 C3 1.53 95 0.39 24 20 0.09 1 60 1.05 41 0.67 C4 0.53 95 0.17 30 20 0.05 2 60 0.32 36 0.68 C5 1.04 95 0.27 25 20 0.02 0 60 0.75 43 0.69 C6 0.82 95 0.34 39 20 0.08 2 60 0.40 29 0.70 C7 0.77 95 0.28 35 20 0.05 1 60 0.43 34 0.70 C8 1.01 95 0.38 36 20 0.13 3 60 0.50 29 0.68 C9 1.50 95 0.34 21 20 0.10 1 60 1.06 42 0.65 C10 1.02 95 0.34 32 20 0.12 2 60 0.56 33 0.67 C11 1.41 95 0.26 17 20 0.14 2 60 1.01 43 0.62 C12 1.75 95 0.42 23 20 0.18 2 60 1.15 39 0.64 C13 1.42 95 0.26 17 20 0.14 2 60 1.01 43 0.62 C14 2.29 95 0.51 21 20 0.21 2 60 1.58 41 0.64 C15 1.21 95 0.34 27 20 0.14 2 60 0.73 36 0.65 C16 0.87 95 0.62 68 20 0.25 6 60 0.00 0 0.73 C17 0.21 95 0.15 65 20 0.03 3 60 0.04 10 0.78 C18 2.57 95 0.24 9 20 1.44 11 60 0.90 21 0.41 D1 0.95 95 0.32 31 20 0.07 2 60 0.56 36 0.69 D2 0.19 95 0.14 73 20 0.04 5 60 0.00 0 0.77 E1 1.09 95 0.24 21 20 0.06 1 60 0.79 43 0.66 E2 2.15 95 0.34 15 20 0.24 2 60 1.58 44 0.61 E3 0.24 95 0.19 72 20 0.06 5 60 0.00 0 0.77 F1 0.66 95 0.24 34 20 0.06 2 60 0.36 33 0.69 F2 1.77 95 0.47 25 20 0.08 1 60 1.23 42 0.67 Page 2 of 4 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls Area (ac) Area Weighted Asphalt + Concrete Walks Lawns, Heavy Soil: Flat <2% Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Area (ac) Area Weighted Basin ID Total Area (ac) Runoff C2 Coefficient Area (ac) Lots (e.g., Single-Family) Runoff Coefficient F3 0.18 95 0.14 74 20 0.04 4 60 0.00 0 0.79 G1 0.53 95 0.41 73 20 0.12 5 60 0.00 0 0.78 G2 1.50 95 0.35 22 20 0.10 1 60 1.05 42 0.66 G3 1.19 95 0.42 33 20 0.09 1 60 0.69 35 0.69 G4 1.06 95 0.35 32 20 0.07 1 60 0.64 36 0.69 G5 1.69 95 0.81 45 20 0.23 3 60 0.65 23 0.71 G6 0.57 95 0.43 72 20 0.14 5 60 0.00 0 0.77 H1 0.46 95 0.36 75 20 0.10 4 70 0.00 0 0.79 H2 1.72 95 0.64 35 20 0.25 3 70 0.83 34 0.72 H3 1.41 95 0.30 20 20 0.00 0 70 1.11 55 0.75 H4 1.62 95 0.57 33 20 0.17 2 70 0.88 38 0.73 H5 1.20 95 0.42 34 20 0.16 3 70 0.61 36 0.72 H6 1.70 95 0.39 22 20 0.10 1 70 1.21 50 0.73 I1 1.13 95 0.22 18 20 0.04 1 70 0.88 54 0.73 I2 1.28 95 0.63 46 20 0.19 3 70 0.47 26 0.75 I3 0.91 95 0.35 36 20 0.11 2 70 0.45 35 0.74 I4 0.79 95 0.25 30 20 0.10 2 70 0.44 39 0.72 I5 1.57 95 0.34 20 20 0.08 1 70 1.16 51 0.73 J1 0.12 95 0.10 76 20 0.02 4 70 0.00 0 0.80 J2 0.28 95 0.10 33 20 0.06 4 70 0.12 31 0.68 Wetland 22.49 95 0.05 0 35 19.97 31 60 2.46 7 0.38 Fut-A 5.15 0.80 Fut-B 5.81 0.80 Fut-G1 8.08 0.85 Fut-G2 2.43 0.90 Fut-H 4.79 0.80 Fut-I1 3.92 0.80 Fut-I2 1.25 0.80 Fut-I3 1.15 0.80 Page 3 of 4 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls Area (ac) Area Weighted Asphalt + Concrete Walks Lawns, Heavy Soil: Flat <2% Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Area (ac) Area Weighted Basin ID Total Area (ac) Runoff C2 Coefficient Area (ac) Lots (e.g., Single-Family) Runoff Coefficient Fut-TL1 2.62 0.90 Fut-TL2 1.10 0.90 Fut-TL3 0.83 0.90 Fut-TL4 1.42 0.90 Page 4 of 4 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls ` PROPOSED STANDARD FORM SF-2 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS Subdivision: East Ridge Subdivision Project Name: East Ridge Subdivision Location: CO, Fort Collins Project No.: Calculated By: H. Feissner Checked By: J. Prelog Date: 9/7/15 BASIN D.A. Hydrologic C2 C5 C100 L S Ti | 2-Year Ti | 100-Year L S Cv VEL. Tt COMP. Tc | 2-Year COMP. Tc | 100-Year TOTAL Urbanized Tc Tc | 2-Year Tc | 100-Year ID (AC) Soils Group Cf=1.00 Cf=1.00 Cf=1.25 (FT) (%) (MIN) (MIN) (FT) (%) (FPS) (MIN) (MIN) (MIN) LENGTH(FT) (MIN) (MIN) (MIN) A1 0.52 C 0.77 0.77 0.96 15 2.00 1.9 0.8 573 0.75 20 1.7 5.5 7.4 6.3 588 13.3 7.4 6.3 A2 0.83 C 0.68 0.68 0.85 110 2.00 6.4 3.8 282 0.70 20 1.7 2.8 9.2 6.7 392 12.2 9.2 6.7 A3 1.45 C 0.67 0.67 0.83 100 2.00 6.3 3.9 486 0.75 20 1.7 4.7 11.0 8.6 586 13.3 11.0 8.6 A4 2.11 C 0.66 0.66 0.83 100 2.00 6.4 4.0 646 0.80 20 1.8 6.0 12.4 10.0 746 14.1 12.4 10.0 A5 1.96 C 0.67 0.67 0.84 100 20.00 2.9 1.8 716 0.65 20 1.6 7.4 10.3 9.2 816 14.5 10.3 9.2 A6 2.20 C 0.62 0.62 0.77 114 2.00 7.5 5.1 475 0.80 20 1.8 4.4 11.9 9.5 589 13.3 11.9 9.5 A7 0.96 C 0.65 0.65 0.82 111 2.00 6.8 4.3 369 0.60 20 1.5 4.0 10.8 8.3 480 12.7 10.8 8.3 A8 2.18 C 0.58 0.58 0.72 111 2.00 8.0 5.8 634 0.60 20 1.5 6.8 14.8 12.6 745 14.1 14.1 12.6 A9 0.46 C 0.67 0.67 0.84 58 2.00 4.8 2.9 256 0.70 20 1.7 2.5 7.3 5.5 314 11.7 7.3 5.5 A10 1.31 C 0.68 0.68 0.85 58 2.00 4.7 2.8 396 1.00 20 2.0 3.3 8.0 6.1 454 12.5 8.0 6.1 A11 1.08 C 0.68 0.68 0.85 57 2.00 4.6 2.7 383 0.60 20 1.5 4.1 8.7 6.9 440 12.4 8.7 6.9 A12 0.76 C 0.59 0.59 0.74 60 2.00 5.7 4.1 209 0.60 20 1.5 2.2 8.0 6.3 269 11.5 8.0 6.3 A13 0.36 C 0.58 0.58 0.73 27 2.00 3.9 2.8 261 0.75 20 1.7 2.5 6.4 5.3 288 11.6 6.4 5.3 B1 0.61 C 0.77 0.77 0.96 16 2.00 1.9 0.8 718 0.60 20 1.5 7.7 9.7 8.5 734 14.1 9.7 8.5 B2 2.56 C 0.63 0.63 0.78 101 2.00 6.9 4.6 710 0.60 20 1.5 7.6 14.6 12.3 811 14.5 14.5 12.3 B3 2.73 C 0.63 0.63 0.79 110 2.00 7.2 4.8 708 0.60 20 1.5 7.6 14.8 12.4 818 14.5 14.5 12.4 B4 2.16 C 0.63 0.63 0.79 111 2.00 7.2 4.8 503 0.60 20 1.5 5.4 12.6 10.2 614 13.4 12.6 10.2 B5 1.35 C 0.68 0.68 0.85 45 2.00 4.1 2.4 408 0.60 20 1.5 4.4 8.5 6.8 453 12.5 8.5 6.8 B6 2.39 C 0.62 0.62 0.77 111 2.00 7.4 5.0 697 1.30 20 2.3 5.1 12.5 10.1 808 14.5 12.5 10.1 B7 1.06 C 0.57 0.57 0.71 99 2.00 7.7 5.6 266 0.85 20 1.8 2.4 10.1 8.0 365 12.0 10.1 8.0 B8 1.39 C 0.58 0.58 0.73 45 2.00 5.1 3.7 509 0.65 20 1.6 5.3 10.3 8.9 554 13.1 10.3 8.9 B9 1.34 C 0.64 0.64 0.80 111 2.00 7.1 4.6 307 0.60 20 1.5 3.3 10.4 7.9 418 12.3 10.4 7.9 B10 1.81 C 0.65 0.65 0.81 48 2.00 4.6 2.9 599 0.65 20 1.6 6.2 10.7 9.1 647 13.6 10.7 9.1 B11 0.99 C 0.66 0.66 0.82 58 2.00 4.9 3.1 395 0.60 20 1.5 4.2 9.2 7.4 453 12.5 9.2 7.4 B12 1.32 C 0.65 0.65 0.81 66 2.00 5.3 3.4 350 1.05 20 2.0 2.8 8.2 6.2 416 12.3 8.2 6.2 B13 1.43 C 0.53 0.53 0.66 165 1.65 11.3 8.7 301 0.70 20 1.7 3.0 14.3 11.7 466 12.6 12.6 11.7 B14 1.18 C 0.66 0.66 0.83 111 2.00 6.7 4.2 307 0.70 20 1.7 3.1 9.8 7.2 418 12.3 9.8 7.2 B15 0.99 C 0.68 0.68 0.85 58 2.00 4.6 2.8 423 0.90 20 1.9 3.7 8.4 6.5 481 12.7 8.4 6.5 B16 0.98 C 0.66 0.66 0.83 58 2.00 4.8 3.0 534 0.75 20 1.7 5.1 10.0 8.1 592 13.3 10.0 8.1 B17 0.82 C 0.61 0.61 0.76 62 2.00 5.6 3.9 423 1.05 20 2.0 3.4 9.1 7.3 485 12.7 9.1 7.3 B18 0.38 C 0.67 0.67 0.83 27 2.00 3.3 2.0 360 0.60 20 1.5 3.9 7.1 5.9 387 12.2 7.1 5.9 C1 1.39 C 0.66 0.66 0.83 98 2.00 6.3 3.9 505 0.90 20 1.9 4.4 10.8 8.4 603 13.4 10.8 8.4 C2 1.25 C 0.66 0.66 0.82 111 2.00 6.8 4.3 479 1.30 20 2.3 3.5 10.3 7.8 590 13.3 10.3 7.8 C3 1.53 C 0.67 0.67 0.83 47 2.00 4.3 2.7 701 0.75 20 1.7 6.7 11.1 9.4 748 14.2 11.1 9.4 C4 0.53 C 0.68 0.68 0.85 58 2.00 4.7 2.8 191 1.85 20 2.7 1.2 5.9 4.0 249 11.4 5.9 5.0 C5 1.04 C 0.69 0.69 0.86 65 2.00 4.9 2.9 302 1.65 20 2.6 2.0 6.8 4.8 367 12.0 6.8 5.0 C6 0.82 C 0.70 0.70 0.88 60 2.00 4.5 2.5 376 1.50 20 2.4 2.6 7.0 5.0 436 12.4 7.0 5.0 C7 0.77 C 0.70 0.70 0.88 30 2.00 3.2 1.8 260 1.00 20 2.0 2.2 5.3 3.9 290 11.6 5.3 5.0 C8 1.01 C 0.68 0.68 0.85 63 2.00 4.9 2.9 378 1.50 20 2.4 2.6 7.4 5.5 441 12.5 7.4 5.5 C9 1.50 C 0.65 0.65 0.82 31 2.00 3.6 2.3 506 1.10 20 2.1 4.0 7.6 6.3 537 13.0 7.6 6.3 C10 1.02 C 0.67 0.67 0.84 30 2.00 3.4 2.1 499 1.00 20 2.0 4.2 7.6 6.3 529 12.9 7.6 6.3 C11 1.41 C 0.62 0.62 0.78 111 2.00 7.3 4.9 355 1.00 20 2.0 3.0 10.3 7.9 466 12.6 10.3 7.9 C12 1.75 C 0.64 0.64 0.80 35 2.00 3.9 2.5 593 0.80 20 1.8 5.5 9.4 8.1 628 13.5 9.4 8.1 C13 1.42 C 0.62 0.62 0.78 110 2.00 7.3 4.9 352 0.75 20 1.7 3.4 10.6 8.3 462 12.6 10.6 8.3 C14 2.29 C 0.64 0.64 0.80 35 2.00 3.9 2.6 592 0.75 20 1.7 5.7 9.6 8.3 627 13.5 9.6 8.3 C15 1.21 C 0.65 0.65 0.82 61 2.00 5.1 3.2 352 0.60 20 1.5 3.8 8.9 7.0 413 12.3 8.9 7.0 C16 0.87 C 0.73 0.73 0.92 30 2.00 2.9 1.5 976 1.30 20 2.3 7.1 10.0 8.6 1006 15.6 10.0 8.6 C17 0.21 C 0.78 0.78 0.97 184 2.00 6.3 2.5 184 1.50 20 2.4 1.3 7.6 3.7 368 12.0 7.6 5.0 C18 2.57 C 0.41 0.41 0.51 184 2.00 13.6 11.6 184 1.50 20 2.4 1.3 14.9 12.9 368 12.0 12.0 12.0 D1 0.95 C 0.69 0.69 0.86 110 2.00 6.3 3.7 273 0.60 20 1.5 2.9 9.2 6.6 383 12.1 9.2 6.6 D2 0.19 C 0.77 0.77 0.97 15 2.00 1.8 0.7 191 0.50 20 1.4 2.3 4.1 3.0 206 11.1 5.0 5.0 E1 1.09 C 0.66 0.66 0.82 111 2.00 6.8 4.3 335 0.70 20 1.7 3.3 10.1 7.6 446 12.5 10.1 7.6 E2 2.15 C 0.61 0.61 0.76 111 2.00 7.5 5.2 505 0.65 20 1.6 5.2 12.7 10.4 616 13.4 12.7 10.4 Subdivision: East Ridge Subdivision Project Name: East Ridge Subdivision Location: CO, Fort Collins Project No.: Calculated By: H. Feissner Checked By: J. Prelog Date: 9/7/15 BASIN D.A. Hydrologic C2 C5 C100 L S Ti | 2-Year Ti | 100-Year L S Cv VEL. Tt COMP. Tc | 2-Year COMP. Tc | 100-Year TOTAL Urbanized Tc Tc | 2-Year Tc | 100-Year ID (AC) Soils Group Cf=1.00 Cf=1.00 Cf=1.25 (FT) (%) (MIN) (MIN) (FT) (%) (FPS) (MIN) (MIN) (MIN) LENGTH(FT) (MIN) (MIN) (MIN) DATA INITIAL/OVERLAND FINAL (Ti) STANDARD FORM SF-2 TIME OF CONCENTRATION SUB-BASIN Tc CHECK HFHLV0001.01 (URBANIZED BASINS) TRAVEL TIME (Tt) G1 0.53 C 0.78 0.78 0.97 16 2.00 1.9 0.7 631 0.60 20 1.5 6.8 8.7 7.5 647 13.6 8.7 7.5 G2 1.50 C 0.66 0.66 0.82 111 2.00 6.8 4.3 400 0.60 20 1.5 4.3 11.1 8.6 511 12.8 11.1 8.6 G3 1.19 C 0.69 0.69 0.87 58 2.00 4.5 2.6 361 1.25 20 2.2 2.7 7.2 5.3 419 12.3 7.2 5.3 G4 1.06 C 0.69 0.69 0.86 59 2.00 4.6 2.6 489 1.40 20 2.4 3.4 8.0 6.1 548 13.0 8.0 6.1 G5 1.69 C 0.71 0.71 0.89 56 2.00 4.2 2.3 509 1.05 20 2.0 4.1 8.3 6.4 565 13.1 8.3 6.4 G6 0.57 C 0.77 0.77 0.96 80 2.00 4.3 1.8 525 0.80 20 1.8 4.9 9.2 6.7 605 13.4 9.2 6.7 H1 0.46 C 0.79 0.79 0.99 17 2.00 1.9 0.7 497 0.60 20 1.5 5.3 7.2 6.0 514 12.9 7.2 6.0 H2 1.72 C 0.72 0.72 0.90 18 2.00 2.3 1.2 516 0.60 20 1.5 5.6 7.9 6.8 534 13.0 7.9 6.8 H3 1.41 C 0.75 0.75 0.94 71 2.00 4.2 1.9 267 1.20 20 2.2 2.0 6.3 4.0 338 11.9 6.3 5.0 H4 1.62 C 0.73 0.73 0.92 63 2.00 4.2 2.1 528 0.95 20 1.9 4.5 8.7 6.6 591 13.3 8.7 6.6 H5 1.20 C 0.72 0.72 0.90 57 2.00 4.2 2.2 408 0.60 20 1.5 4.4 8.6 6.6 465 12.6 8.6 6.6 H6 1.70 C 0.73 0.73 0.91 63 2.00 4.3 2.2 332 0.65 20 1.6 3.4 7.7 5.6 395 12.2 7.7 5.6 I1 1.13 C 0.73 0.73 0.92 63 2.00 4.2 2.1 450 0.95 20 1.9 3.8 8.1 6.0 513 12.9 8.1 6.0 I2 1.28 C 0.75 0.75 0.93 56 2.00 3.8 1.8 574 0.70 20 1.7 5.7 9.5 7.5 630 13.5 9.5 7.5 I3 0.91 C 0.74 0.74 0.92 56 2.00 4.0 2.0 565 0.60 20 1.5 6.1 10.0 8.0 621 13.5 10.0 8.0 I4 0.79 C 0.72 0.72 0.90 57 2.00 4.2 2.2 515 0.60 20 1.5 5.5 9.7 7.8 572 13.2 9.7 7.8 I5 1.57 C 0.73 0.73 0.91 63 2.00 4.3 2.2 451 0.95 20 1.9 3.9 8.1 6.0 514 12.9 8.1 6.0 J1 0.12 C 0.80 0.80 1.00 28 2.00 2.3 0.8 192 0.60 20 1.5 2.1 4.4 2.8 220 11.2 5.0 5.0 J2 0.28 C 0.68 0.68 0.86 54 2.00 4.4 2.6 178 0.60 20 1.5 1.9 6.3 4.5 232 11.3 6.3 5.0 Wetland 22.49 C 0.38 0.38 0.47 360 1.40 22.4 19.5 831 0.20 7 0.3 44.2 66.6 63.7 1191 16.6 66.6 63.7 Fut-A 5.15 C 0.80 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-B 5.81 C 0.80 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-G1 8.08 C 0.85 0.85 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-G2 2.43 C 0.90 0.90 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-H 4.79 C 0.80 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-I1 3.92 C 0.80 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-I2 1.25 C 0.80 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-I3 1.15 C 0.80 0.80 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-TL1 2.62 C 0.90 0.90 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-TL2 1.10 C 0.90 0.90 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-TL3 0.83 C 0.90 0.90 1.00 10.0 10.0 Fut-TL4 1.42 C 0.90 0.90 1.00 10.0 10.0 NOTES: Ti = (0.395*(1.1 - C5)*(L)^0.5)/((S)^0.33), S in ft/ft Tt=L/60V (Velocity From Fig. 501) Velocity V=Cv*S^0.5, S in ft/ft Tc Check = 10+L/180 For Urbanized basins a minimum Tc of 5.0 minutes is required. For non-urbanized basins a minimum Tc of 10.0 minutes is required Future Timberline Road Right-of-Way Future Timberline Road Right-of-Way Future Timberline Road Right-of-Way Future Timberline Road Right-of-Way ` PROPOSED STANDARD FORM SF-3 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN 2-YEAR STORM EVENT 33 (11) Section 4.0 is amended to read as follows: 4.0 Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves for Rational Method: The one-hour rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency tables for use the Rational Method of runoff analysis are provided in Table RA-7 and in Table RA-8. Table RA-7 -- City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table for Use with the Rational Method (5 minutes to 30 minutes) 2-Year 10-Year 100-Year Duration (min) Intensity (in/hr) Intensity (in/hr) Intensity (in/hr) 5 2.85 4.87 9.95 6 2.67 4.56 9.31 7 2.52 4.31 8.8 8 2.4 4.1 8.38 9 2.3 3.93 8.03 10 2.21 3.78 7.72 11 2.13 3.63 7.42 12 2.05 3.5 7.16 13 1.98 3.39 6.92 14 1.92 3.29 6.71 15 1.87 3.19 6.52 16 1.81 3.08 6.3 17 1.75 2.99 6.1 18 1.7 2.9 5.92 19 1.65 2.82 5.75 20 1.61 2.74 5.6 21 1.56 2.67 5.46 22 1.53 2.61 5.32 23 1.49 2.55 5.2 24 1.46 2.49 5.09 25 1.43 2.44 4.98 26 1.4 2.39 4.87 27 1.37 2.34 4.78 28 1.34 2.29 4.69 29 1.32 2.25 4.6 30 1.3 2.21 4.52 34 Table RA-8 -- City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table for Use with the Rational Method (31 minutes to 60 minutes) 2-Year 10-Year 100-Year Duration (min) Intensity (in/hr) Intensity (in/hr) Intensity (in/hr) 31 1.27 2.16 4.42 32 1.24 2.12 4.33 33 1.22 2.08 4.24 34 1.19 2.04 4.16 35 1.17 2.0 4.08 36 1.15 1.96 4.01 37 1.16 1.93 3.93 38 1.11 1.89 3.87 39 1.09 1.86 3.8 40 1.07 1.83 3.74 41 1.05 1.8 3.68 42 1.04 1.77 3.62 43 1.02 1.74 3.56 44 1.01 1.72 3.51 45 0.99 1.69 3.46 46 0.98 1.67 3.41 47 0.96 1.64 3.36 48 0.95 1.62 3.31 49 0.94 1.6 3.27 50 0.92 1.58 3.23 51 0.91 1.56 3.18 52 0.9 1.54 3.14 53 0.89 1.52 3.1 54 0.88 1.5 3.07 55 0.87 1.48 3.03 56 0.86 1.47 2.99 57 0.85 1.45 2.96 58 0.84 1.43 2.92 59 0.83 1.42 2.89 60 0.82 1.4 2.86 36 RAINFALL INTENSITY-DURATION-FREQUENCY CURVE 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 STORM DURATION (minutes) RAINFALL INTENSITY (inches/hour) 2-Year Storm 10-Year Storm 100-Year Storm Figure RA-16 City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves (13) Section 5.0 is deleted in its entirety. (14) Section 6.0 is deleted in its entirety. (15) Section 7.0 is deleted in its entirety. (16) Section 7.1 is deleted in its entirety. (17) Section 7.2 is deleted in its entirety. (18) Section 7.3 is deleted in its entirety. (19) Section 8.0 is deleted in its entirety. (20) Table RA-1 is deleted in its entirety. Project Name: East Ridge Subdivision Subdivision: East Ridge Subdivision Project No.: HFHLV0001.01 Location: CO, Fort Collins Calculated By: H. Feissner Design Storm: Checked By: J. Prelog Date: TRAVEL TIME STREET Design Point Basin ID Area (Ac) Runoff Coeff. | C 2 Tc | 2-Year (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Tc (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Slope (%) Street Flow (cfs) Design Flow (cfs) Slope (%) Pipe Size (inches) Length (ft) Velocity (fps) Tt (min) REMARKS A1 0.52 0.77 7.4 0.40 2.53 1.0 A2 0.83 0.68 9.2 0.56 2.33 1.3 A3 1.45 0.67 11.0 0.96 2.17 2.1 A4 2.11 0.66 12.4 1.39 2.06 2.9 A5 1.96 0.67 10.3 1.31 2.23 2.9 A6 2.20 0.62 11.9 1.36 2.10 2.9 A7 0.96 0.65 10.8 0.63 2.19 1.4 A8 2.18 0.58 14.1 1.26 1.93 2.4 A9 0.46 0.67 7.3 0.31 2.54 0.8 A10 1.31 0.68 8.0 0.89 2.46 2.2 A11 1.08 0.68 8.7 0.73 2.38 1.7 A12 0.76 0.59 8.0 0.45 2.46 1.1 A13 0.36 0.58 6.4 0.21 2.66 0.6 B1 0.61 0.77 9.7 0.47 2.29 1.1 B2 2.56 0.63 14.5 1.60 1.91 3.1 B3 2.73 0.63 14.5 1.72 1.91 3.3 B4 2.16 0.63 12.6 1.36 2.04 2.8 B5 1.35 0.68 8.5 0.92 2.41 2.2 B6 2.39 0.62 12.5 1.48 2.05 3.0 B7 1.06 0.57 10.1 0.60 2.25 1.4 B8 1.39 0.58 10.3 0.80 2.23 1.8 B9 1.34 0.64 10.4 0.86 2.22 1.9 B10 1.81 0.65 10.7 1.17 2.19 2.6 B11 0.99 0.66 9.2 0.65 2.34 1.5 B12 1.32 0.65 8.2 0.86 2.44 2.1 B13 1.43 0.53 12.6 0.76 2.04 1.6 B14 1.18 0.66 9.8 0.78 2.28 1.8 B15 0.99 0.68 8.4 0.68 2.42 1.6 B16 0.98 0.66 10.0 0.65 2.26 1.5 B17 0.82 0.61 9.1 0.50 2.35 1.2 B18 0.38 0.67 7.1 0.26 2.56 0.7 C1 1.39 0.66 10.8 0.92 2.19 2.0 Project Name: East Ridge Subdivision Subdivision: East Ridge Subdivision Project No.: HFHLV0001.01 Location: CO, Fort Collins Calculated By: H. Feissner Design Storm: Checked By: J. Prelog Date: TRAVEL TIME STREET Design Point Basin ID Area (Ac) Runoff Coeff. | C 2 Tc | 2-Year (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Tc (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Slope (%) Street Flow (cfs) Design Flow (cfs) Slope (%) Pipe Size (inches) Length (ft) Velocity (fps) Tt (min) REMARKS DIRECT RUNOFF TOTAL RUNOFF STREET PIPE STANDARD FORM SF-3 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN (RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURE) 2-Year 9/7/15 C17 0.21 0.78 7.6 0.17 2.51 0.4 C18 2.57 0.41 12.0 1.05 2.08 2.2 D1 0.95 0.69 9.2 0.65 2.33 1.5 D2 0.19 0.77 5.0 0.15 2.86 0.4 E1 1.09 0.66 10.1 0.71 2.24 1.6 E2 2.15 0.61 12.7 1.31 2.03 2.7 E3 0.24 0.77 5.0 0.19 2.86 0.5 F1 0.66 0.69 7.5 0.46 2.52 1.2 F2 1.77 0.67 8.6 1.20 2.40 2.9 F3 0.18 0.79 5.4 0.14 2.80 0.4 G1 0.53 0.78 8.7 0.41 2.39 1.0 G2 1.50 0.66 11.1 0.98 2.16 2.1 G3 1.19 0.69 7.2 0.83 2.56 2.1 G4 1.06 0.69 8.0 0.73 2.46 1.8 G5 1.69 0.71 8.3 1.20 2.42 2.9 G6 0.57 0.77 9.2 0.44 2.34 1.0 H1 0.46 0.79 7.2 0.36 2.55 0.9 H2 1.72 0.72 7.9 1.24 2.47 3.1 H3 1.41 0.75 6.3 1.06 2.68 2.8 H4 1.62 0.73 8.7 1.19 2.38 2.8 H5 1.20 0.72 8.6 0.86 2.40 2.1 H6 1.70 0.73 7.7 1.24 2.49 3.1 I1 1.13 0.73 8.1 0.83 2.45 2.0 I2 1.28 0.75 9.5 0.96 2.30 2.2 I3 0.91 0.74 10.0 0.67 2.25 1.5 I4 0.79 0.72 9.7 0.56 2.28 1.3 Project Name: East Ridge Subdivision Subdivision: East Ridge Subdivision Project No.: HFHLV0001.01 Location: CO, Fort Collins Calculated By: H. Feissner Design Storm: Checked By: J. Prelog Date: TRAVEL TIME STREET Design Point Basin ID Area (Ac) Runoff Coeff. | C 2 Tc | 2-Year (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Tc (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Slope (%) Street Flow (cfs) Design Flow (cfs) Slope (%) Pipe Size (inches) Length (ft) Velocity (fps) Tt (min) REMARKS DIRECT RUNOFF TOTAL RUNOFF STREET PIPE STANDARD FORM SF-3 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN (RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURE) 2-Year 9/7/15 Fut-TL4 1.42 0.90 10.0 1.28 2.26 2.9 Page 3 of 3 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls ` PROPOSED STANDARD FORM SF-3 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN 100-YEAR STORM EVENT STANDARD FORM SF-3 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN (RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURE) Project Name: East Ridge Subdivision Subdivision: East Ridge Subdivision Project No.: HFHLV0001.01 Location: CO, Fort Collins Calculated By: H. Feissner Design Storm: Checked By: J. Prelog Date: TRAVEL TIME STREET Design Point Basin ID Area (Ac) Runoff Coeff. | C 100 Tc | 100-Year (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Tc (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Slope (%) Street Flow (cfs) Design Flow (cfs) Slope (%) Pipe Size (inches) Length (ft) Velocity (fps) Tt (min) REMARKS A1 0.52 0.96 6.3 0.49 9.32 4.6 A2 0.83 0.85 6.7 0.70 9.15 6.4 A3 1.45 0.83 8.6 1.20 8.37 10.1 A4 2.11 0.83 10.0 1.74 7.88 13.7 A5 1.96 0.84 9.2 1.64 8.15 13.3 A6 2.20 0.77 9.5 1.70 8.05 13.7 A7 0.96 0.82 8.3 0.78 8.47 6.6 A8 2.18 0.72 12.6 1.57 7.11 11.2 A9 0.46 0.84 5.5 0.39 9.72 3.8 A10 1.31 0.85 6.1 1.11 9.41 10.4 A11 1.08 0.85 6.9 0.92 9.06 8.3 A12 0.76 0.74 6.3 0.56 9.31 5.2 A13 0.36 0.73 5.3 0.26 9.81 2.6 B1 0.61 0.96 8.5 0.59 8.38 4.9 B2 2.56 0.78 12.3 2.00 7.20 14.4 B3 2.73 0.79 12.4 2.15 7.17 15.4 B4 2.16 0.79 10.2 1.70 7.82 13.3 B5 1.35 0.85 6.8 1.15 9.08 10.5 B6 2.39 0.77 10.1 1.85 7.84 14.5 B7 1.06 0.71 8.0 0.75 8.59 6.5 B8 1.39 0.73 8.9 1.01 8.24 8.3 B9 1.34 0.80 7.9 1.07 8.62 9.2 B10 1.81 0.81 9.1 1.46 8.17 11.9 B11 0.99 0.82 7.4 0.81 8.85 7.2 B12 1.32 0.81 6.2 1.07 9.35 10.0 B13 1.43 0.66 11.7 0.95 7.37 7.0 B14 1.18 0.83 7.2 0.98 8.90 8.7 B15 0.99 0.85 6.5 0.84 9.24 7.8 B16 0.98 0.83 8.1 0.81 8.54 6.9 STANDARD FORM SF-3 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN (RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURE) Project Name: East Ridge Subdivision Subdivision: East Ridge Subdivision Project No.: HFHLV0001.01 Location: CO, Fort Collins Calculated By: H. Feissner Design Storm: Checked By: J. Prelog Date: TRAVEL TIME STREET Design Point Basin ID Area (Ac) Runoff Coeff. | C 100 Tc | 100-Year (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Tc (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Slope (%) Street Flow (cfs) Design Flow (cfs) Slope (%) Pipe Size (inches) Length (ft) Velocity (fps) Tt (min) REMARKS PIPE 100-Year DIRECT RUNOFF TOTAL RUNOFF STREET 9/7/15 C16 0.87 0.92 8.6 0.80 8.37 6.7 C17 0.21 0.97 5.0 0.21 9.98 2.1 C18 2.57 0.51 12.0 1.31 7.27 9.6 D1 0.95 0.86 6.6 0.81 9.16 7.5 D2 0.19 0.97 5.0 0.18 9.98 1.8 E1 1.09 0.82 7.6 0.89 8.73 7.8 E2 2.15 0.76 10.4 1.64 7.75 12.7 E3 0.24 0.96 5.0 0.23 9.98 2.3 F1 0.66 0.86 5.5 0.57 9.72 5.5 F2 1.77 0.84 6.6 1.49 9.20 13.8 F3 0.18 0.98 5.0 0.17 9.98 1.7 G1 0.53 0.97 7.5 0.52 8.78 4.6 G2 1.50 0.82 8.6 1.23 8.36 10.2 G3 1.19 0.87 5.3 1.03 9.83 10.1 G4 1.06 0.86 6.1 0.91 9.43 8.6 G5 1.69 0.89 6.4 1.50 9.27 13.9 G6 0.57 0.96 6.7 0.55 9.15 5.0 H1 0.46 0.99 6.0 0.45 9.45 4.2 H2 1.72 0.90 6.8 1.55 9.10 14.1 H3 1.41 0.94 5.0 1.33 9.98 13.2 H4 1.62 0.92 6.6 1.49 9.17 13.7 H5 1.20 0.90 6.6 1.08 9.19 9.9 H6 1.70 0.91 5.6 1.55 9.65 14.9 I1 1.13 0.92 6.0 1.03 9.48 9.8 I2 1.28 0.93 7.5 1.20 8.78 10.5 STANDARD FORM SF-3 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN (RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURE) Project Name: East Ridge Subdivision Subdivision: East Ridge Subdivision Project No.: HFHLV0001.01 Location: CO, Fort Collins Calculated By: H. Feissner Design Storm: Checked By: J. Prelog Date: TRAVEL TIME STREET Design Point Basin ID Area (Ac) Runoff Coeff. | C 100 Tc | 100-Year (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Tc (min) C*A (Ac) I (in/hr) Q (cfs) Slope (%) Street Flow (cfs) Design Flow (cfs) Slope (%) Pipe Size (inches) Length (ft) Velocity (fps) Tt (min) REMARKS PIPE 100-Year DIRECT RUNOFF TOTAL RUNOFF STREET 9/7/15 Fut-TL2 1.10 1.00 10.0 1.10 7.87 8.7 Fut-TL3 0.83 1.00 10.0 0.83 7.87 6.5 Fut-TL4 1.42 1.00 10.0 1.42 7.87 11.2 Page 3 of 3 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls ` APPENDIX C HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS ` UDFCD INLET CALCULATIONS 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 = 4.25 4.25 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 4.75 7.17 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 1.17 1.17 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.67 0.67 Grate Flow Analysis (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = N/A N/A Grate Capacity as a Weir (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qwi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qwa = N/A N/A cfs Grate Capacity as a Orifice (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qoi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qoa = N/A N/A cfs Grate Capacity as Mixed Flow MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qmi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qma = N/A N/A cfs Resulting Grate Capacity (assumes clogged condition) QGrate = N/A N/A cfs Curb Opening Flow Analysis (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.10 0.10 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 = 4.25 4.25 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 2 2 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 4.75 7.17 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 1.17 1.17 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.67 0.67 Grate Flow Analysis (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = N/A N/A Grate Capacity as a Weir (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qwi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qwa = N/A N/A cfs Grate Capacity as a Orifice (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qoi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qoa = N/A N/A cfs Grate Capacity as Mixed Flow MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qmi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qma = N/A N/A cfs Resulting Grate Capacity (assumes clogged condition) QGrate = N/A N/A cfs Curb Opening Flow Analysis (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.25 1.25 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.06 0.06 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 = 4.25 4.25 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 3 3 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 4.75 7.17 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 1.17 1.17 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.67 0.67 Grate Flow Analysis (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = N/A N/A Grate Capacity as a Weir (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qwi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qwa = N/A N/A cfs Grate Capacity as a Orifice (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qoi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qoa = N/A N/A cfs Grate Capacity as Mixed Flow MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qmi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qma = N/A N/A cfs Resulting Grate Capacity (assumes clogged condition) QGrate = N/A N/A cfs Curb Opening Flow Analysis (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.31 1.31 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.04 0.04 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 = 4.25 4.25 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 4 4 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 4.75 7.17 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 1.17 1.17 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.67 0.67 Grate Flow Analysis (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = N/A N/A Grate Capacity as a Weir (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qwi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qwa = N/A N/A cfs Grate Capacity as a Orifice (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qoi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qoa = N/A N/A cfs Grate Capacity as Mixed Flow MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qmi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qma = N/A N/A cfs Resulting Grate Capacity (assumes clogged condition) QGrate = N/A N/A cfs Curb Opening Flow Analysis (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.33 1.33 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.03 0.03 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 = 3.00 3.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 5 5 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 6.00 9.00 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf (G) = N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw (G) = N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co (G) = N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert = 6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat = 6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp = 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf (C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw (C) = 3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co (C) = 0.67 0.67 Grate Flow Analysis (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = N/A N/A Grate Capacity as a Weir (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qwi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qwa = N/A N/A cfs Grate Capacity as a Orifice (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qoi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qoa = N/A N/A cfs Grate Capacity as Mixed Flow MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qmi = N/A N/A cfs Interception with Clogging Qma = N/A N/A cfs Resulting Grate Capacity (assumes clogged condition) QGrate = N/A N/A cfs Curb Opening Flow Analysis (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.33 1.33 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.03 0.03 ` STREET CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Project: East Ridge Subdivision Calculations By: H. Feissner Date: 9/7/2015 Manning's Formula for flow in shallow triangular channels: Q = 0.56(Z/n)S0 1/2 y 8/3 Where: Q Theoretical Gutter Capacity, cfs y Depth of Flow at Face of Gutter, ft n Roughness Coefficient, see below S0 Longitudinal Channel Slope, ft/ft Sa Cross-Slope of Gutter Pan, ft/ft Sb Cross-Slope of Gutter Pan, ft/ft Sc Cross-Slope of Asphalt, ft/ft Z Reciprocal of Cross-Slope, ft/ft n 0.016 Sa 27.94% Za = 1/Sa 3.58 Za/n 223.69 Sb 9.82% Zb = 1/Sb 10.18 Zb/n 636.46 Sc 2.00% Zc = 1/Sc 50.00 Zc/n 3125.00 FL to FL Distance 15' CL to FL (DO) Select y 0.3915 water depth at flowline, ft `` 0.2766 water depth at EOP, ft S0 = See Below longitudinal slope of street, % a b b' c 0.56(Z/n)y 8/3 = 84.77 10.27 29.23 11.58 56.84 Longitudinal Reduction Factor Street Name Grade Calculated Allowable Determination S0, % Q, cfs (See Figure ST-2) Q, cfs TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 0.50% 5.99 1.00 5.99 Okay TBS TBD 15 Local 1.00 0.60% 6.57 1.00 6.57 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 0.70% 7.09 1.00 7.09 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 0.80% 7.58 1.00 7.58 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 0.90% 8.04 1.00 8.04 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.00% 8.48 1.00 8.48 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.10% 8.89 1.00 8.89 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.20% 9.29 1.00 9.29 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.30% 9.67 1.00 9.67 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.40% 10.03 1.00 10.03 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.50% 10.38 1.00 10.38 Okay Street Capacity Calculations Drive-Over Curb & Gutter - 15' CL to FL | 2-Year Storm Event Design Point Width FL to CL, ft Street Classification Inputs Results Developed Q2, cfs Sa Sb Sc Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Discharge Input Data Channel Slope 0.00600 ft/ft Normal Depth 0.60 ft Section Definitions Station (ft) Elevation (ft) 0+00 100.00 0+04.5 99.91 0+10.0833 99.80 0+11.5 99.40 0+12.6667 99.52 0+26.5 99.80 Roughness Segment Definitions Start Station Ending Station Roughness Coefficient (0+00, 100.00) (0+04.5, 99.91) 0.016 (0+04.5, 99.91) (0+10.0833, 99.80) 0.025 (0+10.0833, 99.80) (0+26.5, 99.80) 0.016 Channel Slope (ft/ft) Discharge (ft³/s) Velocity (ft/s) Flow Area (ft²) Wetted Perimeter (ft) Top Width (ft) 0.00500 16.28 2.34 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.00600 17.83 2.57 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.00700 19.26 2.77 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.00800 20.59 2.96 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.00900 21.84 3.14 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.01000 23.02 3.31 6.95 26.77 26.50 100-Year Storm Event - Drive Over Curb C&G | 15' CL to FL 9/8/2015 4:20:25 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 100-Year Storm Event - Drive Over Curb C&G | 15' CL to FL Input Data Channel Slope (ft/ft) Discharge (ft³/s) Velocity (ft/s) Flow Area (ft²) Wetted Perimeter (ft) Top Width (ft) 0.01100 24.14 3.47 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.01200 25.22 3.63 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.01300 26.25 3.78 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.01400 27.24 3.92 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.01500 28.19 4.06 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.01600 29.12 4.19 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.01700 30.01 4.32 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.01800 30.88 4.45 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.01900 31.73 4.57 6.95 26.77 26.50 0.02000 32.55 4.69 6.95 26.77 26.50 9/8/2015 4:20:25 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 Project: East Ridge Subdivision Calculations By: H. Feissner Date: 9/7/2015 Manning's Formula for flow in shallow triangular channels: Q = 0.56(Z/n)S0 1/2 y 8/3 Where: Q Theoretical Gutter Capacity, cfs y Depth of Flow at Face of Gutter, ft n Roughness Coefficient, see below S0 Longitudinal Channel Slope, ft/ft Sa Cross-Slope of Gutter Pan, ft/ft Sb Cross-Slope of Gutter Pan, ft/ft Sc Cross-Slope of Asphalt, ft/ft Z Reciprocal of Cross-Slope, ft/ft n 0.016 Sa 0.00% Za = 1/Sa 0.00 Za/n 0.00 Sb 8.33% Zb = 1/Sb 12.00 Zb/n 750.30 Sc 2.00% Zc = 1/Sc 50.00 Zc/n 3125.00 FL to FL Distance 15' CL to FL (Vert.) Select y 0.4266 water depth at flowline, ft y' 0.2600 water depth at EOP, ft S0 = See Below longitudinal slope of street, % a b b' c 0.56(Z/n)y 8/3 = 79.95 0.00 43.33 11.57 48.19 Longitudinal Reduction Factor Street Name Grade Calculated Allowable Determination S0, % Q, cfs (See Figure ST-2) Q, cfs TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 0.50% 5.65 1.00 5.65 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 0.60% 6.19 1.00 6.19 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 0.70% 6.69 1.00 6.69 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 0.80% 7.15 1.00 7.15 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 0.90% 7.59 1.00 7.59 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.00% 8.00 1.00 8.00 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.10% 8.39 1.00 8.39 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.20% 8.76 1.00 8.76 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.30% 9.12 1.00 9.12 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.40% 9.46 1.00 9.46 Okay TBD TBD 15 Local 1.00 1.50% 9.79 0.87 8.52 Okay Street Capacity Calculations Vertical Curb & Gutter - 15' CL to FL | 2-Year Storm Event Inputs Results Design Point Width FL to CL, ft Street Classification Developed Q2, cfs Sc Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Discharge Input Data Channel Slope 0.00600 ft/ft Normal Depth 0.72 ft Section Definitions Station (ft) Elevation (ft) 0+00 100.00 0+04.5 99.91 0+11 99.78 0+11.5 99.78 0+11.5 99.28 0+13.5 99.45 0+26.5 99.71 Roughness Segment Definitions Start Station Ending Station Roughness Coefficient (0+00, 100.00) (0+04.5, 99.91) 0.016 (0+04.5, 99.91) (0+11, 99.78) 0.025 (0+11, 99.78) (0+26.5, 99.71) 0.016 Channel Slope (ft/ft) Discharge (ft³/s) Velocity (ft/s) Flow Area (ft²) Wetted Perimeter (ft) Top Width (ft) 0.00500 20.40 2.52 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.00600 22.35 2.76 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.00700 24.14 2.98 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.00800 25.80 3.19 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.00900 27.37 3.38 8.10 27.31 26.50 100-Year Storm Event - Vertical C&G | 15' CL to FL 9/8/2015 4:21:29 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 100-Year Storm Event - Vertical C&G | 15' CL to FL Input Data Channel Slope (ft/ft) Discharge (ft³/s) Velocity (ft/s) Flow Area (ft²) Wetted Perimeter (ft) Top Width (ft) 0.01000 28.85 3.56 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.01100 30.26 3.74 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.01200 31.60 3.90 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.01300 32.89 4.06 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.01400 34.13 4.22 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.01500 35.33 4.36 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.01600 36.49 4.51 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.01700 37.61 4.65 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.01800 38.70 4.78 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.01900 39.76 4.91 8.10 27.31 26.50 0.02000 40.80 5.04 8.10 27.31 26.50 9/8/2015 4:21:29 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 Project: East Ridge Subdivision Calculations By: H. Feissner Date: 9/7/2015 Manning's Formula for flow in shallow triangular channels: Q = 0.56(Z/n)S0 1/2 y 8/3 Where: Q Theoretical Gutter Capacity, cfs y Depth of Flow at Face of Gutter, ft n Roughness Coefficient, see below S0 Longitudinal Channel Slope, ft/ft Sa Cross-Slope of Gutter Pan, ft/ft Sb Cross-Slope of Gutter Pan, ft/ft Sc Cross-Slope of Asphalt, ft/ft Z Reciprocal of Cross-Slope, ft/ft n 0.016 Sa 0.00% Za = 1/Sa 0.00 Za/n 0.00 Sb 8.33% Zb = 1/Sb 12.00 Zb/n 750.30 Sc 2.00% Zc = 1/Sc 50.00 Zc/n 3125.00 FL to FL Distance 25' CL to FL (Vert.) Select y 0.5000 water depth at flowline, ft y' 0.3334 water depth at EOP, ft S0 = See Below longitudinal slope of street, % a b b' c 0.56(Z/n)y 8/3 = 137.25 0.00 66.17 22.46 93.53 Longitudinal Reduction Factor Street Name Grade Calculated Allowable Determination S0, % Q, cfs (See Figure ST-2) Q, cfs TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 0.50% 9.70 1.00 9.70 Okay TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 0.60% 10.63 1.00 10.63 Okay TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 0.70% 11.48 1.00 11.48 Okay TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 0.80% 12.28 1.00 12.28 Okay TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 0.90% 13.02 1.00 13.02 Okay TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 1.00% 13.72 1.00 13.72 Okay TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 1.10% 14.39 1.00 14.39 Okay TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 1.20% 15.03 1.00 15.03 Okay TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 1.30% 15.65 1.00 15.65 Okay TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 1.40% 16.24 1.00 16.24 Okay TBD TBD #N/A Local 1.00 1.50% 16.81 0.87 14.62 Okay Street Capacity Calculations Vertical Curb & Gutter - 25' CL to FL | 2-Year Storm Event Inputs Results Design Point Width FL to CL, ft Street Classification Developed Q2, cfs Sc Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Discharge Input Data Channel Slope 0.00600 ft/ft Normal Depth 0.75 ft Section Definitions Station (ft) Elevation (ft) 0+00 100.00 0+05 99.90 0+12.5 99.75 0+13 99.75 0+13 99.25 0+15 99.42 0+38 99.88 Roughness Segment Definitions Start Station Ending Station Roughness Coefficient (0+00, 100.00) (0+05, 99.90) 0.016 (0+05, 99.90) (0+12.5, 99.75) 0.025 (0+12.5, 99.75) (0+38, 99.88) 0.016 Channel Slope (ft/ft) Discharge (ft³/s) Velocity (ft/s) Flow Area (ft²) Wetted Perimeter (ft) Top Width (ft) 0.00500 28.25 2.53 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.00600 30.95 2.78 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.00700 33.43 3.00 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.00800 35.73 3.21 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.00900 37.90 3.40 11.15 38.64 38.00 100-Year Storm Event - Vertical C&G | 25' CL to FL 9/8/2015 4:22:34 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 100-Year Storm Event - Vertical C&G | 25' CL to FL Input Data Channel Slope (ft/ft) Discharge (ft³/s) Velocity (ft/s) Flow Area (ft²) Wetted Perimeter (ft) Top Width (ft) 0.01000 39.95 3.58 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.01100 41.90 3.76 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.01200 43.76 3.93 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.01300 45.55 4.09 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.01400 47.27 4.24 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.01500 48.93 4.39 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.01600 50.54 4.53 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.01700 52.09 4.67 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.01800 53.60 4.81 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.01900 55.07 4.94 11.15 38.64 38.00 0.02000 56.50 5.07 11.15 38.64 38.00 9/8/2015 4:22:34 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 Project: East Ridge Subdivision Calculations By: H. Feissner Date: 9/7/2015 Manning's Formula for flow in shallow triangular channels: Q = 0.56(Z/n)S0 1/2 y 8/3 Where: Q Theoretical Gutter Capacity, cfs y Depth of Flow at Face of Gutter, ft n Roughness Coefficient, see below S0 Longitudinal Channel Slope, ft/ft Sa Cross-Slope of Gutter Pan, ft/ft Sb Cross-Slope of Gutter Pan, ft/ft Sc Cross-Slope of Asphalt, ft/ft Z Reciprocal of Cross-Slope, ft/ft n 0.016 Sa 27.94% Za = 1/Sa 3.58 Za/n 223.69 Sb 9.82% Zb = 1/Sb 10.18 Zb/n 636.46 Sc 2.00% Zc = 1/Sc 50.00 Zc/n 3125.00 FL to FL Distance 18.5833' EOC to FL Select y 0.40 water depth at flowline, ft y' 0.28 water depth at EOP, ft S0 = See Below longitudinal slope of street, % a b b' c 0.56(Z/n)y 8/3 = 87.87 10.58 30.11 12.07 59.25 Longitudinal Reduction Factor Street Name Grade Calculated Allowable Determination S0, % Q, cfs (See Figure ST-2) Q, cfs TBD TBD 17.58 Local 1.00 0.50% 6.21 1.00 6.21 Okay TBD TBD 17.58 Local 1.00 0.60% 6.81 1.00 6.81 Okay TBD TBD 17.58 Local 1.00 0.70% 7.35 1.00 7.35 Okay TBD TBD 17.58 Local 1.00 0.80% 7.86 1.00 7.86 Okay TBD TBD 17.58 Local 1.00 0.90% 8.34 1.00 8.34 Okay TBD TBD 17.58 Local 1.00 1.00% 8.79 1.00 8.79 Okay TBD TBD 17.58 Local 1.00 1.25% 9.82 1.00 9.82 Okay TBD TBD 17.58 Local 1.00 1.50% 10.76 1.00 10.76 Okay TBD TBD 17.58 Local 1.00 2.00% 12.43 1.00 12.43 Okay Street Capacity Calculations Drive-Over Curb & Gutter - ALLEY | 2-Year Storm Event Design Point Width FL to CL, ft Street Classification Inputs Results Developed Q2, cfs Sa Sb Sc ` SWALE CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Normal Depth Input Data Roughness Coefficient 0.035 Channel Slope 0.00250 ft/ft Left Side Slope 8.00 ft/ft (H:V) Right Side Slope 8.00 ft/ft (H:V) Bottom Width 20.00 ft Discharge 231.90 ft³/s Results Normal Depth 2.21 ft Flow Area 83.42 ft² Wetted Perimeter 55.68 ft Hydraulic Radius 1.50 ft Top Width 55.40 ft Critical Depth 1.34 ft Critical Slope 0.01800 ft/ft Velocity 2.78 ft/s Velocity Head 0.12 ft Specific Energy 2.33 ft Froude Number 0.40 Flow Type Subcritical GVF Input Data Downstream Depth 0.00 ft Length 0.0000 ft Number Of Steps 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Depth 0.00 ft Profile Description Profile Headloss 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Normal Depth 2.21 ft Critical Depth 1.34 ft Channel Slope 0.00250 ft/ft 100-Year Storm Event | A-Basins Swale 9/8/2015 4:30:56 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 100-Year Storm Event | A-Basins Swale GVF Output Data Critical Slope 0.01800 ft/ft 9/8/2015 4:30:56 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Normal Depth Input Data Roughness Coefficient 0.035 Channel Slope 0.00250 ft/ft Left Side Slope 10.00 ft/ft (H:V) Right Side Slope 10.00 ft/ft (H:V) Bottom Width 25.00 ft Discharge 429.30 ft³/s Results Normal Depth 2.68 ft Flow Area 138.75 ft² Wetted Perimeter 78.85 ft Hydraulic Radius 1.76 ft Top Width 78.58 ft Critical Depth 1.67 ft Critical Slope 0.01691 ft/ft Velocity 3.09 ft/s Velocity Head 0.15 ft Specific Energy 2.83 ft Froude Number 0.41 Flow Type Subcritical GVF Input Data Downstream Depth 0.00 ft Length 0.0000 ft Number Of Steps 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Depth 0.00 ft Profile Description Profile Headloss 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Normal Depth 2.68 ft Critical Depth 1.67 ft Channel Slope 0.00250 ft/ft 100-Year Storm Event | B-Basins Swale (Includes G and H-Basins) 9/8/2015 4:32:30 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 100-Year Storm Event | B-Basins Swale (Includes G and H-Basins) GVF Output Data Critical Slope 0.01691 ft/ft 9/8/2015 4:32:30 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 ` STORM DRAIN SIZING CALCULATIONS Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Full Flow Capacity Input Data Roughness Coefficient 0.013 Channel Slope 0.00500 ft/ft Normal Depth 1.50 ft Diameter 1.50 ft Discharge 7.43 ft³/s Diameter (ft) Channel Slope (ft/ft) Normal Depth (ft) Discharge (ft³/s) Velocity (ft/s) Flow Area (ft²) Wetted Perimeter (ft) Top Width (ft) 1.50 0.00500 1.50 7.43 4.20 1.77 4.71 0.00 1.50 0.00750 1.50 9.10 5.15 1.77 4.71 0.00 1.50 0.01000 1.50 10.50 5.94 1.77 4.71 0.00 2.00 0.00500 2.00 16.00 5.09 3.14 6.28 0.00 2.00 0.00750 2.00 19.59 6.24 3.14 6.28 0.00 2.00 0.01000 2.00 22.62 7.20 3.14 6.28 0.00 2.50 0.00500 2.50 29.00 5.91 4.91 7.85 0.00 2.50 0.00750 2.50 35.52 7.24 4.91 7.85 0.00 2.50 0.01000 2.50 41.01 8.36 4.91 7.85 0.00 3.00 0.00500 3.00 47.16 6.67 7.07 9.42 0.00 3.00 0.00750 3.00 57.76 8.17 7.07 9.42 0.00 3.00 0.01000 3.00 66.69 9.44 7.07 9.42 0.00 3.50 0.00500 3.50 71.14 7.39 9.62 11.00 0.00 3.50 0.00750 3.50 87.13 9.06 9.62 11.00 0.00 3.50 0.01000 3.50 100.60 10.46 9.62 11.00 0.00 4.00 0.00500 4.00 101.57 8.08 12.57 12.57 0.00 4.00 0.00750 4.00 124.39 9.90 12.57 12.57 0.00 4.00 0.01000 4.00 143.64 11.43 12.57 12.57 0.00 4.50 0.00500 4.50 139.04 8.74 15.90 14.14 0.00 4.50 0.00750 4.50 170.29 10.71 15.90 14.14 0.00 4.50 0.01000 4.50 196.64 12.36 15.90 14.14 0.00 5.00 0.00500 5.00 184.15 9.38 19.63 15.71 0.00 5.00 0.00750 5.00 225.54 11.49 19.63 15.71 0.00 5.00 0.01000 5.00 260.43 13.26 19.63 15.71 0.00 Preliminary Storm Drain Pipe Sizing 9/8/2015 4:16:23 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 Preliminary Storm Drain Pipe Sizing Input Data Diameter (ft) Channel Slope (ft/ft) Normal Depth (ft) Discharge (ft³/s) Velocity (ft/s) Flow Area (ft²) Wetted Perimeter (ft) Top Width (ft) 5.50 0.00500 5.50 237.44 9.99 23.76 17.28 0.00 5.50 0.00750 5.50 290.80 12.24 23.76 17.28 0.00 5.50 0.01000 5.50 335.79 14.13 23.76 17.28 0.00 6.00 0.00500 6.00 299.45 10.59 28.27 18.85 0.00 6.00 0.00750 6.00 366.75 12.97 28.27 18.85 0.00 6.00 0.01000 6.00 423.49 14.98 28.27 18.85 0.00 9/8/2015 4:16:23 PM Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution BentleCyenter FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 ` PRELIMINARY DETENTION POND SIZING (EPA SWMM 5.0) 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 Project: East Ridge Subdivision Project Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Date: 9/9/2015 Calculations By: H. Feissner Pond Description: Detention Pond User Input Cell: Blue Text Design Point: Outfall Design Storm: WQCV Required Volume: 0 ft3 4928.00 ft Design Storm: 10-year Required Volume: 0 ft3 4928.00 ft Design Storm: 1st 100-year Required Volume: 1612561 ft3 4936.11 ft Design Storm1: 2nd 100-year Required Volume: 3225122 ft3 4939.69 ft 1. 2 nd 100-year storm required per Section 3.3.4 Retention Facilities of the FCSCM Contour Elevation Contour Area Depth Incremental Volume Cummulative Volume Incremental Volume Cummulative Volume Cummulative Volume ft ft2 ft ft3 ft3 ft3 ft3 ac-ft 4928.00 3780 0.0 0 0 0 0 4929.00 63583 1.0 33681 33681 27622 27622 0.6 4930.00 75419 1.0 69501 103182 69417 97039 2.2 4931.00 183977 1.0 129698 232881 125730 222769 5.1 4932.00 218001 1.0 200989 433870 200749 423518 9.7 4933.00 254754 1.0 236377 670247 236139 659657 15.1 4934.00 287989 1.0 271371 941618 271201 930858 21.4 4935.00 320258 1.0 304124 1245742 303981 1234839 28.3 4936.00 352867 1.0 336563 1582304 336431 1571270 36.1 4937.00 388203 1.0 370535 1952839 370394 1941664 44.6 4938.00 442122 1.0 415162 2368001 414870 2356534 54.1 4939.00 521366 1.0 481744 2849745 481200 2837734 65.1 4940.00 607936 1.0 564651 3414396 564097 3401831 78.1 Detention Pond Stage-Storage Calculations Average End Area Method: Required Volume Water Surface Elevation Conic Volume Method: 1st 100-year 2nd 100-year 4926 4928 4930 4932 4934 4936 4938 4940 B-Basins A-Basins G-Basins_H-Basins C-Basins I-Basins Park/Wetland F-Basins E-Basins D-Basins C1 TemporaryOutfall J1 Out1 DetentionPond FortCollins,CO SWMM 5.1 | East Ridge Subdivision SWMM.txt EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - VERSION 5.1 (Build 5.1.009) -------------------------------------------------------------- ********************************************************* NOTE: The summary statistics displayed in this report are based on results found at every computational time step, not just on results from each reporting time step. ********************************************************* **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units ............... CFS Process Models: Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES RDII ................... NO Snowmelt ............... NO Groundwater ............ NO Flow Routing ........... YES Ponding Allowed ........ NO Water Quality .......... NO Infiltration Method ...... HORTON Flow Routing Method ...... DYNWAVE Starting Date ............ SEP-02-2015 00:00:00 Ending Date .............. SEP-07-2015 00:00:00 Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0.0 Report Time Step ......... 00:01:00 Wet Time Step ............ 00:05:00 Dry Time Step ............ 01:00:00 Routing Time Step ........ 30.00 sec Variable Time Step ....... YES Maximum Trials ........... 8 Number of Threads ........ 1 Head Tolerance ........... 0.005000 ft ************************** Volume Depth Runoff Quantity Continuity acre-feet inches ************************** --------- ------- Total Precipitation ...... 46.871 3.669 Evaporation Loss ......... 0.000 0.000 Infiltration Loss ........ 7.859 0.615 Surface Runoff ........... 38.563 3.019 Final Storage ............ 0.813 0.064 Continuity Error (%) ..... -0.778 ************************** Volume Volume Flow Routing Continuity acre-feet 10^6 gal ************************** --------- --------- Dry Weather Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000 Wet Weather Inflow ....... 38.563 12.566 Groundwater Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000 RDII Inflow .............. 0.000 0.000 External Inflow .......... 0.000 0.000 External Outflow ......... 29.830 9.721 Flooding Loss ............ 8.733 2.846 Evaporation Loss ......... 0.000 0.000 Exfiltration Loss ........ 0.000 0.000 Initial Stored Volume .... 0.000 0.000 Final Stored Volume ...... 0.000 0.000 Page 1 SWMM.txt Continuity Error (%) ..... -0.001 *************************** Time-Step Critical Elements *************************** Link C1 (94.36%) ******************************** Highest Flow Instability Indexes ******************************** All links are stable. ************************* Routing Time Step Summary ************************* Minimum Time Step : 5.33 sec Average Time Step : 7.61 sec Maximum Time Step : 30.00 sec Percent in Steady State : 0.00 Average Iterations per Step : 2.00 Percent Not Converging : 0.00 *************************** Subcatchment Runoff Summary *************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- Total Total Total Total Total Total Peak Runoff Precip Runon Evap Infil Runoff Runoff Runoff Coeff Subcatchment in in in in in 10^6 gal CFS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- B-Basins 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.52 3.11 2.65 216.78 0.849 A-Basins 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.51 3.12 1.81 156.32 0.850 G-Basins_H-Basins 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.42 3.21 3.00 278.12 0.874 C-Basins 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.51 3.11 1.91 158.85 0.849 I-Basins 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.42 3.21 1.20 113.30 0.875 Park/Wetland 3.67 0.00 0.00 1.42 2.24 1.37 68.82 0.611 F-Basins 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.42 3.21 0.23 23.80 0.875 E-Basins 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.50 3.13 0.30 30.13 0.854 D-Basins 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.42 3.21 0.10 11.03 0.876 ****************** Page 2 SWMM.txt Node Depth Summary ****************** --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max Reported Depth Depth HGL Occurrence Max Depth Node Type Feet Feet Feet days hr:min Feet --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- J1 JUNCTION 0.94 1.00 4929.00 0 00:11 1.00 Out1 OUTFALL 0.79 0.84 4927.84 0 00:15 0.84 DetentionPond STORAGE 5.02 8.09 4936.09 0 02:59 8.09 ******************* Node Inflow Summary ******************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------- Maximum Maximum Lateral Total Flow Lateral Total Time of Max Inflow Inflow Balance Inflow Inflow Occurrence Volume Volume Error Node Type CFS CFS days hr:min 10^6 gal 10^6 gal Percent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------- J1 JUNCTION 0.00 5.00 0 00:12 0 12.6 -0.000 Out1 OUTFALL 0.00 3.87 0 00:15 0 9.72 0.000 DetentionPond STORAGE 1057.16 1057.16 0 00:40 12.6 12.6 -0.001 ********************** 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------- J1 JUNCTION 93.31 0.000 0.000 DetentionPond STORAGE 120.00 8.085 3.915 ********************* Node Flooding Summary ********************* Flooding refers to all water that overflows a node, whether it ponds or not. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Maximum Maximum Time of Max Flood Ponded Hours Rate Occurrence Volume Depth Node Flooded CFS days hr:min 10^6 gal Feet Page 3 SWMM.txt -------------------------------------------------------------------------- J1 93.31 1.13 0 00:12 2.846 0.000 ********************** Storage Volume Summary ********************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- Average Avg Evap Exfil Maximum Max Time of Max Maximum Volume Pcnt Pcnt Pcnt Volume Pcnt Occurrence Outflow Storage Unit 1000 ft3 Full Loss Loss 1000 ft3 Full days hr:min CFS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- DetentionPond 777.690 23 0 0 1612.561 47 0 02:59 5.00 *********************** Outfall Loading Summary *********************** ----------------------------------------------------------- Flow Avg Max Total Freq Flow Flow Volume Outfall Node Pcnt CFS CFS 10^6 gal ----------------------------------------------------------- Out1 94.39 3.87 3.87 9.720 ----------------------------------------------------------- System 94.39 3.87 3.87 9.720 ******************** Link Flow Summary ******************** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Time of Max Maximum Max/ Max/ |Flow| Occurrence |Veloc| Full Full Link Type CFS days hr:min ft/sec Flow Depth ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- C1 CONDUIT 3.87 0 00:15 6.14 1.09 0.92 TemporaryOutfall PUMP 5.00 0 00:12 1.00 *************************** Flow Classification Summary *************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - Adjusted ---------- Fraction of Time in Flow Class ---------- /Actual Up Down Sub Sup Up Down Norm Inlet Conduit Length Dry Dry Dry Crit Crit Crit Crit Ltd Page 4 SWMM.txt Ctrl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - C1 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ************************* Conduit Surcharge Summary ************************* ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hours Hours --------- Hours Full -------- Above Full Capacity Conduit Both Ends Upstream Dnstream Normal Flow Limited ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- C1 0.01 93.31 0.01 93.32 0.01 *************** Pumping Summary *************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------- Min Avg Max Total Power % Time Off Percent Number of Flow Flow Flow Volume Usage Pump Curve Pump Utilized Start-Ups CFS CFS CFS 10^6 gal Kw-hr Low High ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------- TemporaryOutfall 77.85 1 0.00 5.00 5.00 12.565 171.08 0.0 0.0 Analysis begun on: Tue Sep 08 16:52:55 2015 Analysis ended on: Tue Sep 08 16:52:55 2015 Total elapsed time: < 1 sec Page 5 Node DetentionPond Volume (ft3) Elapsed Time (hours) 02468101214161820222426283032343638404244464850525456586062646668707274767880828486889092949698100102104106108110112114116 118 120 Volume (ft3) 1800000.0 1750000.0 1700000.0 1650000.0 1600000.0 1550000.0 1500000.0 1450000.0 1400000.0 1350000.0 1300000.0 1250000.0 1200000.0 1150000.0 1100000.0 1050000.0 1000000.0 950000.0 900000.0 850000.0 800000.0 750000.0 700000.0 650000.0 600000.0 550000.0 500000.0 450000.0 400000.0 350000.0 300000.0 250000.0 200000.0 150000.0 100000.0 50000.0 0.0 SWMM 5.1 | East Ridge Subdivision ` PRELIMINARY EDB AND LID SIZING CALCULATIONS Project: East Ridge Subdivision Project Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Date: 9/8/2015 Calculations By: H. Feissner Pond Description: EDB for C and D-Basins User Input Cell: Blue Text Design Point: Outfall Design Storm: WQCV Required Volume: 28445 ft3 4931.31 ft Design Storm: 10-year Required Volume: 0 ft3 4928.40 ft Design Storm: 100-year Required Volume: 0 ft3 4928.40 ft Contour Elevation Contour Area Depth Incremental Volume Cummulative Volume Incremental Volume Cummulative Volume Cummulative Volume ft ft2 ft ft3 ft3 ft3 ft3 ac-ft 4928.40 243 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.00 4928.60 1939 0.2 218 218 191 191 0.00 4928.80 4908 0.2 685 903 662 853 0.02 4929.00 8695 0.2 1360 2263 1342 2196 0.05 4929.20 9119 0.2 1781 4045 1781 3977 0.09 4929.40 9551 0.2 1867 5912 1867 5844 0.13 4929.60 9988 0.2 1954 7866 1954 7798 0.18 4929.80 10432 0.2 2042 9908 2042 9840 0.23 4930.00 10980 0.2 2141 12049 2141 11981 0.28 4930.20 11342 0.2 2232 14281 2232 14213 0.33 4930.40 11805 0.2 2315 16596 2315 16527 0.38 4930.60 12274 0.2 2408 19004 2408 18935 0.43 4930.80 12750 0.2 2502 21506 2502 21437 0.49 4931.00 13387 0.2 2614 24120 2613 24051 0.55 4931.20 14056 0.2 2744 26864 2744 26795 0.62 4931.40 14759 0.2 2882 29746 2881 29676 0.68 Extended Detention Basin (EDB) | C and D-Basins Stage-Storage Calculations Required Volume Water Surface Elevation Average End Area Method: Conic Volume Method: WQCV 4928 4929 4929 4930 4930 4931 4931 4932 4932 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 Contour Elevation, ft Cummulative Volume, ft3 Project: East Ridge Subdivision Project Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Date: 9/8/2015 Calculations By: H. Feissner Pond Description: EDB for E, F, G and H-Basins User Input Cell: Blue Text Design Point: Outfall Design Storm: WQCV Required Volume: 52969 ft3 4930.78 ft Design Storm: 10-year Required Volume: 0 ft3 4928.20 ft Design Storm: 100-year Required Volume: 0 ft3 4928.20 ft Contour Elevation Contour Area Depth Incremental Volume Cummulative Volume Incremental Volume Cummulative Volume Cummulative Volume ft ft2 ft ft3 ft3 ft3 ft3 ac-ft 4928.20 538 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.00 4928.40 2063 0.2 260 260 244 244 0.01 4928.60 5125 0.2 719 979 696 940 0.02 4928.80 10324 0.2 1545 2524 1515 2455 0.06 4929.00 15485 0.2 2581 5105 2564 5018 0.12 4929.20 20646 0.2 3613 8718 3601 8619 0.20 4929.40 22750 0.2 4340 13057 4338 12957 0.30 4929.60 24882 0.2 4763 17821 4762 17718 0.41 4929.80 27056 0.2 5194 23014 5192 22911 0.53 4930.20 30346 0.4 11480 34495 11474 34385 0.79 4930.40 31433 0.2 6178 40673 6178 40562 0.93 4930.60 32525 0.2 6396 47068 6395 46958 1.08 4930.80 33623 0.2 6615 53683 6614 53572 1.23 4930.95 34461 0.1 5106 58789 5106 58678 1.35 Extended Detention Basin (EDB) | E, F, G and H-Basins Stage-Storage Calculations Required Volume Water Surface Elevation Average End Area Method: Conic Volume Method: WQCV 4928 4929 4929 4930 4930 4931 4931 4932 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 Contour Elevation, ft Cummulative Volume, ft3 Stage - Storage | Extended Detention Basin Project: East Ridge Subdivision Project Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Date: 9/8/2015 Calculations By: H. Feissner Pond Description: EDB for I and J-Basins User Input Cell: Blue Text Design Point: Outfall Design Storm: WQCV Required Volume: 18034 ft3 4930.58 ft Design Storm: 10-year Required Volume: 0 ft3 4928.60 ft Design Storm: 100-year Required Volume: 0 ft3 4928.60 ft Contour Elevation Contour Area Depth Incremental Volume Cummulative Volume Incremental Volume Cummulative Volume Cummulative Volume ft ft2 ft ft3 ft3 ft3 ft3 ac-ft 4928.60 154 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.00 4928.80 2246 0.2 240 240 199 199 0.00 4928.95 8847 0.1 832 1072 777 977 0.02 4929.20 9315 0.3 2270 3342 2270 3247 0.07 4929.40 9701 0.2 1902 5244 1901 5148 0.12 4929.60 10093 0.2 1979 7223 1979 7127 0.16 4929.80 10491 0.2 2058 9281 2058 9185 0.21 4929.95 10805 0.1 1597 10879 1597 10783 0.25 4930.20 11283 0.3 2761 13639 2761 13543 0.31 4930.40 11679 0.2 2296 15936 2296 15839 0.36 4930.60 12080 0.2 2376 18311 2376 18215 0.42 4930.80 12487 0.2 2457 20768 2457 20672 0.47 4930.95 12810 0.1 1897 22665 1897 22569 0.52 Extended Detention Basin (EDB) | I and J-Basins Stage-Storage Calculations Required Volume Water Surface Elevation Average End Area Method: Conic Volume Method: WQCV 4928 4929 4929 4930 4930 4931 4931 4932 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 Contour Elevation, ft Cummulative Volume, ft3 Stage - Storage | Extended Detention Basin Sheet 1 of 4 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia = 70.0 % B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia / 100 ) i = 0.700 C) Contributing Watershed Area Area = 23.76 ac D) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of Average d6 = in Runoff Producing Storm E) Design Concept (Select EURV when also designing for flood control) F) Design Volume (1.2 WQCV) Based on 40-hour Drain Time VDESIGN = 0.653 ac-ft (VDESIGN = (1.0 * (0.91 * i 3 - 1.19 * i 2 + 0.78 * i) / 12 * Area * 1.2) G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VDESIGN OTHER = ac-ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume (VWQCV OTHER = (d 6*(VDESIGN /0.43)) H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VDESIGN USER = ac-ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) I) Predominant Watershed NRCS Soil Group J) Excess Urban Runoff Volume (EURV) Design Volume For HSG A: EURVA = (0.1878i - 0.0104)*Area EURV = ac-f t For HSG B: EURVB = (0.1178i - 0.0042)*Area For HSG C/D: EURVC/D = (0.1043i - 0.0031)*Area 2. Basin Shape: Length to Width Ratio L : W = 2.0 : 1 (A basin length to width ratio of at least 2:1 will improve TSS reduction.) 3. Basin Side Slopes A) Basin Maximum Side Slopes Z = 8.00 ft / ft (Horizontal distance per unit vertical, 4:1 or flatter preferred) 4. Inlet A) Describe means of providing energy dissipation at concentrated inflow locations: Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) East Ridge Subdivision Galloway September 7, 2015 Fort Collins, Colorado | C and D-Basins H. Feissner Choose One Excess Urban Runoff Volume (EURV) Choose One A B C / D Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) HFHLV0001.01_UD-BMP_v3.03_EDB_C and D-Basins.xlsm, EDB 9/7/2015, 4:38 PM Sheet 1 of 4 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia = 75.0 % B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia / 100 ) i = 0.750 C) Contributing Watershed Area Area = 40.59 ac D) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of Average d6 = in Runoff Producing Storm E) Design Concept (Select EURV when also designing for flood control) F) Design Volume (1.2 WQCV) Based on 40-hour Drain Time VDESIGN = 1.216 ac-ft (VDESIGN = (1.0 * (0.91 * i 3 - 1.19 * i 2 + 0.78 * i) / 12 * Area * 1.2) G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VDESIGN OTHER = ac-ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume (VWQCV OTHER = (d 6*(VDESIGN /0.43)) H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VDESIGN USER = ac-ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) I) Predominant Watershed NRCS Soil Group J) Excess Urban Runoff Volume (EURV) Design Volume For HSG A: EURVA = (0.1878i - 0.0104)*Area EURV = ac-f t For HSG B: EURVB = (0.1178i - 0.0042)*Area For HSG C/D: EURVC/D = (0.1043i - 0.0031)*Area 2. Basin Shape: Length to Width Ratio L : W = 2.0 : 1 (A basin length to width ratio of at least 2:1 will improve TSS reduction.) 3. Basin Side Slopes A) Basin Maximum Side Slopes Z = 8.00 ft / ft (Horizontal distance per unit vertical, 4:1 or flatter preferred) 4. Inlet A) Describe means of providing energy dissipation at concentrated inflow locations: Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) East Ridge Subdivision Galloway September 7, 2015 Fort Collins, Colorado | E, F, G and H-Basins H. Feissner Choose One Excess Urban Runoff Volume (EURV) Choose One A B C / D Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) HFHLV0001.01_UD-BMP_v3.03_EDB_E F G and H-Basins.xlsm, EDB 9/7/2015, 4:39 PM Sheet 2 of 4 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 5. Forebay A) Minimum Forebay Volume VFMIN = 0.030 ac-ft (VFMIN = 3% of the WQCV) B) Actual Forebay Volume VF = ac-ft C) Forebay Depth DF = in (DF = 30 inch maximum) D) Forebay Discharge i) Undetained 100-year Peak Discharge Q100 = cfs ii) Forebay Discharge Design Flow QF = cfs (QF = 0.02 * Q 100) E) Forebay Discharge Design F) Discharge Pipe Size (minimum 8-inches) Calculated DP = in G) Rectangular Notch Width Calculated WN = in 6. Trickle Channel A) Type of Trickle Channel F) Slope of Trickle Channel S = ft / ft 7. Micropool and Outlet Structure A) Depth of Micropool (2.5-feet minimum) DM = ft B) Surface Area of Micropool (10 ft 2 minimum) A M = sq ft C) Outlet Type D) Depth of Design Volume (EURV or 1.2 WQCV) Based on the Design H = feet Concept Chosen Under 1.E. E) Volume to Drain Over Prescribed Time WQCV = 1.013 ac-ft F) Drain Time TD = hours (Min TD for WQCV= 40 hours; Max T D for EURV= 72 hours) G) Recommended Maximum Outlet Area per Row, (Ao) A o = square inches H) Orifice Dimensions: i) Circular Orifice Diameter or Dorifice = inches ii) Width of 2" High Rectangular Orifice Worifice = inches I) Number of Columns nc = number J) Actual Design Outlet Area per Row (Ao) A o = square inches K) Number of Rows (nr) nr = number L) Total Outlet Area (Aot) A ot = square inches M) Depth of WQCV (HWQCV) H Sheet 1 of 4 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia = 75.0 % B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia / 100 ) i = 0.750 C) Contributing Watershed Area Area = 13.82 ac D) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of Average d6 = in Runoff Producing Storm E) Design Concept (Select EURV when also designing for flood control) F) Design Volume (1.2 WQCV) Based on 40-hour Drain Time VDESIGN = 0.414 ac-ft (VDESIGN = (1.0 * (0.91 * i 3 - 1.19 * i 2 + 0.78 * i) / 12 * Area * 1.2) G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VDESIGN OTHER = ac-ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume (VWQCV OTHER = (d 6*(VDESIGN /0.43)) H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VDESIGN USER = ac-ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) I) Predominant Watershed NRCS Soil Group J) Excess Urban Runoff Volume (EURV) Design Volume For HSG A: EURVA = (0.1878i - 0.0104)*Area EURV = ac-f t For HSG B: EURVB = (0.1178i - 0.0042)*Area For HSG C/D: EURVC/D = (0.1043i - 0.0031)*Area 2. Basin Shape: Length to Width Ratio L : W = 2.0 : 1 (A basin length to width ratio of at least 2:1 will improve TSS reduction.) 3. Basin Side Slopes A) Basin Maximum Side Slopes Z = 8.00 ft / ft (Horizontal distance per unit vertical, 4:1 or flatter preferred) 4. Inlet A) Describe means of providing energy dissipation at concentrated inflow locations: Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) East Ridge Subdivision Galloway September 7, 2015 Fort Collins, Colorado | I and J-Basins H. Feissner Choose One Excess Urban Runoff Volume (EURV) Choose One A B C / D Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) HFHLV0001.01_UD-BMP_v3.03_EDB_I and J-Basins.xlsm, EDB 9/7/2015, 4:37 PM Sheet 1 of 1 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Design Discharge for 2-Year Return Period Q2 = 32.5 cfs 2. Hydraulic Residence Time A) : Length of Grass Swale LS = 500 ft B) Calculated Residence Time (based on design velocity below) THR= 7.8 minutes 3. Longitudinal Slope (vertical distance per unit horizontal) A) Available Slope (based on site constraints) Savail = 0.0025 ft / ft B) Design Slope SD = 0.0025 ft / ft 4. Swale Geometry A) Channel Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. distance per unit vertical) Z = 8 ft / ft B) Bottom Width of Swale (enter 0 for triangular section) WB = 20 ft 5. Vegetation A) Type of Planting (seed vs. sod, affects vegetal retardance factor) 6. Design Velocity (minimum of 1 ft /s, LS / 300) V2 = 1.06 ft / s TOO HIGH ( > 1 fps) 7. Design Flow Depth (1 foot maximum) D2 = 1.07 ft TOO DEEP (> 1) A) Flow Area A2 = 30.6 sq ft B) Top Width of Swale WT = 37.1 ft C) Froude Number (0.50 maximum) F = 0.21 D) Hydraulic Radius RH = 0.82 E) Velocity-Hydraulic Radius Product for Vegetal Retardance VR = 0.87 F) Manning's n (based on SCS vegetal retardance curve D for sodded grass) n = 0.062 G) Cumulative Height of Grade Control Structures Required HD = 0.00 ft AN UNDERDRAIN IS 8. Underdrain REQUIRED IF THE (Is an underdrain necessary?) DESIGN SLOPE < 2.0% 9. Soil Preparation (Describe soil amendment) 10. Irrigation Notes: City of Fort Collins Seed Mix Design Procedure Form: Grass Swale (GS) H. Feissner Galloway September 7, 2015 East Ridge Subdvision Fort Collins, Colorado | A-Basins Choose One Temporary Permanent Choose One Grass From Seed Grass From Sod Choose One YES NO HFHLV0001.01_UD-BMP_v3.03_Swale_A-Basins.xlsm, GS 9/7/2015, 6:13 PM Sheet 1 of 1 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Design Discharge for 2-Year Return Period Q2 = 45.5 cfs 2. Hydraulic Residence Time A) : Length of Grass Swale LS = 500 ft B) Calculated Residence Time (based on design velocity below) THR= 7.4 minutes 3. Longitudinal Slope (vertical distance per unit horizontal) A) Available Slope (based on site constraints) Savail = 0.0025 ft / ft B) Design Slope SD = 0.0025 ft / ft 4. Swale Geometry A) Channel Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. distance per unit vertical) Z = 10 ft / ft B) Bottom Width of Swale (enter 0 for triangular section) WB = 25 ft 5. Vegetation A) Type of Planting (seed vs. sod, affects vegetal retardance factor) 6. Design Velocity (minimum of 1 ft /s, LS / 300) V2 = 1.12 ft / s TOO HIGH ( > 1 fps) 7. Design Flow Depth (1 foot maximum) D2 = 1.12 ft TOO DEEP (> 1) A) Flow Area A2 = 40.5 sq ft B) Top Width of Swale WT = 47.4 ft C) Froude Number (0.50 maximum) F = 0.21 D) Hydraulic Radius RH = 0.85 E) Velocity-Hydraulic Radius Product for Vegetal Retardance VR = 0.96 F) Manning's n (based on SCS vegetal retardance curve D for sodded grass) n = 0.060 G) Cumulative Height of Grade Control Structures Required HD = 0.00 ft AN UNDERDRAIN IS 8. Underdrain REQUIRED IF THE (Is an underdrain necessary?) DESIGN SLOPE < 2.0% 9. Soil Preparation (Describe soil amendment) 10. Irrigation Notes: City of Fort Collins Seed Mix Design Procedure Form: Grass Swale (GS) H. Feissner Galloway September 7, 2015 East Ridge Subdvision Fort Collins, Colorado | B-Basins Choose One Temporary Permanent Choose One Grass From Seed Grass From Sod Choose One YES NO HFHLV0001.01_UD-BMP_v3.03_Swale_B-Basins.xlsm, GS 9/7/2015, 2:58 PM ` APPENDIX D SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ` LAKE CANAL AGREEMENT ` BARKER AGREEMENT ` APPENDIX E DRAINAGE MAPS ` DEVELOPED CONDITION DRAINAGE MAP BARNSTORMER STREET BIPLANE STREET COLEMAN STREET SUPERCUB LANE CONQUEST STREET SYKES DRIVE COMET STREET RELIANT STREET CRUSADER STREET VICOT WAY ALLEYAA ZEPPELINWAY TIGERCATWAY NAVION LANE VICOT WAY YEAGER STREET MARQUISESTREET FAIRCHILD STREET QUINBYSTREET FAIRCHILD STREET DASSAULT STREET DELOZIERROAD SYKES DRIVE BARNSTORMER STREET BIPLANE STREET COLEMAN STREET VICOT WAY VICOT WAY CONQUEST STREET CONQUEST STREET CONQUESTWAY ALLEY A ALLEY A ALLEY A ALLEYA ALLEY A ALLEY A QUINBY STREET MARQUISESTREET CRUSADER STREET ZEPPELINWAY Z EPPELINWAY SYKES DRIVE ALLEY B COMET STREET A LLEY C B6 D1C14 C13 C12 C11 E1 E2 F2 C10 C9 C5 C7 B10 B9 B7 C3 C2 C1 B6 B4 B3 B2 Fut-B B5 B13 B16 A3 A4 A5 A6 B14 B8 Fut-A A2 A8 Fut-I3 I2 I1 I3 A1 B1 B15 B7 B3 B4 B2 B1 Fut-B Fut-A A1 A4 A6 B8 B9 B10 B11 C2 C4 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 D2 E3 D1 D2 E3 E2 F3 F2 F3 B18 B16 B18 A12 A13 A11 A8 A9 A10 G5 G6 Fut-H H1 H2 H4 H5 H6 Fut-I1 I3 I5 A7 B12 B12 C16 J2 A5 A7 B5 B13 B17 C3 C1 C5 C6 C17 C16 C17 C15 C18 C8 C6 B11 C4 F1 B17 E1 F1 Fut-G1 G1 G2 G3 G4 H3 Fut-TL3 I2 Fut-I3 J1 J1 J2 I4 A9 B14 B15 Fut-I2 Fut-I2 Fut-TL4 Fut-G2 C18 Fut-TL1 Fut-TL2 Wtlnd 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 # THESE PLANS ARE AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND ARE THE PROPERTY OF GALLOWAY, AND MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED, OR REPRODUCED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHTS AND INFRINGEMENTS WILL BE ENFORCED AND PROSECUTED. 3760 E. 15th Street, Suite 202 Loveland, CO 80538 970.800.3300 O www.gallowayUS.com C 2015. Galloway & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved SHEET TITLE: Date: Drawn By: Project No: Checked By: HFHLV0001.01 09/09/15 EAST RIDGE HOLDINGS 4801 Goodman Rd. Timnath, CO 80547 970.674.1109 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 09/09/15 LEGEND: DRAINAGE SYMBOLS: BASIN ID MINOR RUNOFF COEFFICIENT MAJOR RUNOFF COEFFICIENT BASIN AREA (ACRES) EASEMENT LINE FUTURE LOTLINE PROPOSED LOTLINE FUTURE RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPOSED STORM INLET PROPOSED STORM SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR 4900 4900 WQCV = feet (Estimate using actual stage-area-volume relationship and VWQCV) N) Ensure Minimum 40 Hour Drain Time for WQCV TD WQCV = hours Fort Collins, Colorado | E, F, G and H-Basins H. Feissner East Ridge Subdivision September 7, 2015 Galloway Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) Choose One Wall with Rect. Notch Berm With Pipe Choose One Orifice Plate Other (Describe): Choose One Concrete Soft Bottom Wall with V-Notch Weir HFHLV0001.01_UD-BMP_v3.03_EDB_E F G and H-Basins.xlsm, EDB 9/7/2015, 4:39 PM Stage - Storage | Extended Detention Basin 4942 0 500000 1000000 1500000 2000000 2500000 3000000 3500000 4000000 Contour Elevation, ft Cummulative Volume, ft3 Stage - Storage | Detention Pond Curb Opening as a Weir (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qwi = 23.46 64.47 cfs Interception with Clogging Qwa = 22.84 62.75 cfs Curb Opening as an Orifice (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qoi = 48.77 59.22 cfs Interception with Clogging Qoa = 47.47 57.65 cfs Curb Opening Capacity as Mixed Flow MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qmi = 31.46 57.46 cfs Interception with Clogging Qma = 30.62 55.94 cfs Resulting Curb Opening Capacity (assumes clogged condition) QCurb = 22.84 55.94 cfs Resultant Street Conditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L = 25.00 25.00 feet Resultant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) T = 18.7 31.2 ft.>T-Crown Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown dCROWN = 0.0 1.5 inches MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 22.84 55.94 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 22.84 55.94 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION East Ridge Subdivision 25' Type 'R' Curb Inlet | 25' CL to FL CDOT Type R Curb Opening H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP Override Depths HFHLV001.01_UD-Inlet_v3.14_25 Type R-25 CL to FL.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 9/8/2015, 2:18 PM Curb Opening as a Weir (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qwi = 10.68 29.27 cfs Interception with Clogging Qwa = 10.33 28.30 cfs Curb Opening as an Orifice (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qoi = 39.01 45.88 cfs Interception with Clogging Qoa = 37.72 44.35 cfs Curb Opening Capacity as Mixed Flow MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qmi = 18.98 34.08 cfs Interception with Clogging Qma = 18.35 32.95 cfs Resulting Curb Opening Capacity (assumes clogged condition) QCurb = 10.33 28.30 cfs Resultant Street Conditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L = 20.00 20.00 feet Resultant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) T = 15.2 25.3 ft.>T-Crown Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown dCROWN = 0.1 2.5 inches MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 10.33 28.30 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 10.33 28.30 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION East Ridge Subdivision 20' Type 'R' Curb Inlet | 15' CL to FL CDOT Type R Curb Opening H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP Override Depths HFHLV001.01_UD-Inlet_v3.14_20 Type R.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 9/8/2015, 2:20 PM Curb Opening as a Weir (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qwi = 8.01 21.96 cfs Interception with Clogging Qwa = 7.66 21.00 cfs Curb Opening as an Orifice (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qoi = 29.26 34.41 cfs Interception with Clogging Qoa = 27.98 32.91 cfs Curb Opening Capacity as Mixed Flow MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qmi = 14.24 25.56 cfs Interception with Clogging Qma = 13.62 24.45 cfs Resulting Curb Opening Capacity (assumes clogged condition) QCurb = 7.66 21.00 cfs Resultant Street Conditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L = 15.00 15.00 feet Resultant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) T = 15.2 25.3 ft.>T-Crown Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown dCROWN = 0.1 2.5 inches MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 7.66 21.00 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 7.66 21.00 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION East Ridge Subdivision 15' Type 'R' Curb Inlet | 15' CL to FL CDOT Type R Curb Opening H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP Override Depths HFHLV001.01_UD-Inlet_v3.14_15 Type R.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 9/8/2015, 2:21 PM Curb Opening as a Weir (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qwi = 6.49 17.08 cfs Interception with Clogging Qwa = 6.08 16.01 cfs Curb Opening as an Orifice (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qoi = 19.51 22.94 cfs Interception with Clogging Qoa = 18.29 21.51 cfs Curb Opening Capacity as Mixed Flow MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qmi = 10.46 18.41 cfs Interception with Clogging Qma = 9.81 17.26 cfs Resulting Curb Opening Capacity (assumes clogged condition) QCurb = 6.08 16.01 cfs Resultant Street Conditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L = 10.00 10.00 feet Resultant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) T = 15.2 25.3 ft.>T-Crown Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown dCROWN = 0.1 2.5 inches MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 6.08 16.01 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 6.08 16.01 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION East Ridge Subdivision 10' Type 'R' Curb Inlet | 15' CL to FL CDOT Type R Curb Opening H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP Override Depths HFHLV001.01_UD-Inlet_v3.14_10 Type R.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 9/8/2015, 2:39 PM Curb Opening as a Weir (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qwi = 3.81 8.58 cfs Interception with Clogging Qwa = 3.43 7.72 cfs Curb Opening as an Orifice (based on UDFCD - CSU 2010 Study) MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qoi = 9.75 11.47 cfs Interception with Clogging Qoa = 8.78 10.32 cfs Curb Opening Capacity as Mixed Flow MINOR MAJOR Interception without Clogging Qmi = 5.67 9.22 cfs Interception with Clogging Qma = 5.10 8.30 cfs Resulting Curb Opening Capacity (assumes clogged condition) QCurb = 3.43 7.72 cfs Resultant Street Conditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L = 5.00 5.00 feet Resultant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) T = 15.2 25.3 ft.>T-Crown Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown dCROWN = 0.1 2.5 inches MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa = 3.43 7.72 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED = 3.43 7.72 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION East Ridge Subdivsion 5' Type 'R' Curb Inlet | 15' CL to FL CDOT Type R Curb Opening H-Vert H-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP Override Depths HFHLV001.01_UD-Inlet_v3.14_5 Type R.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 9/8/2015, 2:40 PM I3 0.91 0.92 8.0 0.84 8.57 7.2 I4 0.79 0.90 7.8 0.71 8.68 6.1 I5 1.57 0.91 6.0 1.44 9.45 13.6 J1 0.12 1.00 5.0 0.12 9.98 1.2 J2 0.28 0.86 5.0 0.24 9.98 2.4 Wetland 22.49 0.47 63.7 10.65 2.69 28.6 Fut-A 5.15 1.00 10.0 5.15 7.87 40.6 Fut-B 5.81 1.00 10.0 5.81 7.87 45.8 Fut-G1 8.08 1.00 10.0 8.08 7.87 63.6 Fut-G2 2.43 1.00 10.0 2.43 7.87 19.1 Fut-H 4.79 1.00 10.0 4.79 7.87 37.7 Fut-I1 3.92 1.00 10.0 3.92 7.87 30.8 Fut-I2 1.25 1.00 10.0 1.25 7.87 9.8 Fut-I3 1.15 1.00 10.0 1.15 7.87 9.1 Fut-TL1 2.62 1.00 10.0 2.62 7.87 20.6 Page 2 of 3 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls B17 0.82 0.76 7.3 0.62 8.86 5.5 B18 0.38 0.83 5.9 0.32 9.52 3.0 C1 1.39 0.83 8.4 1.15 8.44 9.7 C2 1.25 0.82 7.8 1.02 8.67 8.9 C3 1.53 0.83 9.4 1.28 8.07 10.3 C4 0.53 0.85 5.0 0.45 9.98 4.5 C5 1.04 0.86 5.0 0.89 9.98 8.9 C6 0.82 0.88 5.0 0.72 9.95 7.2 C7 0.77 0.88 5.0 0.67 9.98 6.7 C8 1.01 0.85 5.5 0.86 9.73 8.4 C9 1.50 0.82 6.3 1.22 9.31 11.4 C10 1.02 0.84 6.3 0.85 9.34 8.0 C11 1.41 0.78 7.9 1.10 8.64 9.5 C12 1.75 0.80 8.1 1.41 8.56 12.1 C13 1.42 0.78 8.3 1.10 8.48 9.4 C14 2.29 0.80 8.3 1.84 8.49 15.6 C15 1.21 0.82 7.0 0.99 9.00 8.9 PIPE 100-Year DIRECT RUNOFF TOTAL RUNOFF STREET 9/7/15 Page 1 of 3 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls I5 1.57 0.73 8.1 1.15 2.45 2.8 J1 0.12 0.80 5.0 0.10 2.86 0.3 J2 0.28 0.68 6.3 0.19 2.67 0.5 Wetland 22.49 0.38 66.6 8.52 0.75 6.4 Fut-A 5.15 0.80 10.0 4.12 2.26 9.3 Fut-B 5.81 0.80 10.0 4.65 2.26 10.5 Fut-G1 8.08 0.85 10.0 6.87 2.26 15.5 Fut-G2 2.43 0.90 10.0 2.19 2.26 4.9 Fut-H 4.79 0.80 10.0 3.83 2.26 8.7 Fut-I1 3.92 0.80 10.0 3.13 2.26 7.1 Fut-I2 1.25 0.80 10.0 1.00 2.26 2.3 Fut-I3 1.15 0.80 10.0 0.92 2.26 2.1 Fut-TL1 2.62 0.90 10.0 2.36 2.26 5.3 Fut-TL2 1.10 0.90 10.0 0.99 2.26 2.2 Fut-TL3 0.83 0.90 10.0 0.74 2.26 1.7 Page 2 of 3 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls C2 1.25 0.66 10.3 0.82 2.23 1.8 C3 1.53 0.67 11.1 1.02 2.16 2.2 C4 0.53 0.68 5.9 0.36 2.73 1.0 C5 1.04 0.69 6.8 0.71 2.60 1.9 C6 0.82 0.70 7.0 0.58 2.58 1.5 C7 0.77 0.70 5.3 0.54 2.81 1.5 C8 1.01 0.68 7.4 0.69 2.53 1.7 C9 1.50 0.65 7.6 0.98 2.50 2.4 C10 1.02 0.67 7.6 0.68 2.51 1.7 C11 1.41 0.62 10.3 0.88 2.23 2.0 C12 1.75 0.64 9.4 1.13 2.31 2.6 C13 1.42 0.62 10.6 0.88 2.20 1.9 C14 2.29 0.64 9.6 1.47 2.29 3.4 C15 1.21 0.65 8.9 0.79 2.37 1.9 C16 0.87 0.73 10.0 0.64 2.25 1.4 DIRECT RUNOFF TOTAL RUNOFF STREET PIPE STANDARD FORM SF-3 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN (RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURE) 2-Year 9/7/15 Page 1 of 3 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls Future Developed Area | Tract E - Single Family Attached Future Developed Area | Tract E - Single Family Attached Future Developed Area | Tract A - Multi-Family and Tract B - Single Family Attached Future Developed Area | Tract B - Single Family Attached Future Developed Area | Tract A - Multi-Family Future Developed Area | Tract A - Multi-Family Future Developed Area | Tract A - Multi-Family Future Developed Area | Tract E - Single Family Attached Page 2 of 2 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls E3 0.24 C 0.77 0.77 0.96 15 2.00 1.8 0.8 204 0.50 20 1.4 2.4 4.3 3.2 219 11.2 5.0 5.0 F1 0.66 C 0.69 0.69 0.86 63 2.00 4.7 2.7 333 1.00 20 2.0 2.8 7.5 5.5 396 12.2 7.5 5.5 F2 1.77 C 0.67 0.67 0.84 70 2.00 5.2 3.1 411 1.00 20 2.0 3.4 8.6 6.6 481 12.7 8.6 6.6 F3 0.18 C 0.79 0.79 0.98 44 2.00 3.0 1.1 231 0.65 20 1.6 2.4 5.4 3.5 275 11.5 5.4 5.0 DATA INITIAL/OVERLAND FINAL (Ti) STANDARD FORM SF-2 TIME OF CONCENTRATION SUB-BASIN Tc CHECK HFHLV0001.01 (URBANIZED BASINS) TRAVEL TIME (Tt) Page 1 of 2 9/7/2015 X:\1520000.all\1528001\Excel\US Highway 85\Drainage\HFHLV0001.01_Drainage_Calcs_Template_v2.0-CoFC.xls Survey Area Data: Version 9, Sep 22, 2014 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 22, 2011—Apr 28, 2011 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Hydrologic Soil Group—Larimer County Area, Colorado (East Ridge Subdivision) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/24/2015 Page 2 of 4