Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVILLAGE ON REDWOOD (FORT COLLINS HOUSING AUTHORITY) - FDP - FDP150036 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - DRAINAGE REPORTFINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR Village on Redwood Prepared by: Interwest Consulting Group 1218 West Ash, Suite A Windsor, Colorado 80550 Phone: 970.674.3300 Fax: 970.674.3303 Prepared for: Fort Collins Housing Authority 1715 West Mountain Ave. Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Phone: 970.416.2910 November 25, 2015 Job Number 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 Mr. Wes Lamarque Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Final Drainage Report for Village on Redwood Dear Wes, We are pleased to submit for your review and approval, this Final Drainage Report for the Village on Redwood low-income housing development. I certify that this report for the drainage design was prepared in accordance with the criteria in the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Manual. I appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing this submittal. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jason T. Claeys, P.E., LEED AP Interwest Consulting Group 1218 W. ASH, STE. A, WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550 TEL. 970.674.3300 – FAX 970.674.3303 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................... 1 3. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................... 2 4. LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES .............................................................................................. 3 5. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 6. REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 APPENDIX A — SITE DESCRIPTIONS, CHARACTERISTICS & REFERENCES ........................................ A APPENDIX B — RATIONAL CALCULATIONS .................................................................................................. B APPENDIX C — STORM CONVEYANCE SIZING ............................................................................................. C APPENDIX D — DETENTION POND CALCULATIONS ................................................................................... D APPENDIX E — LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS ............................................................ E 1 1. INTRODUCTION The project site currently is an undeveloped infill site located north of Nokomis Ct and west of Redwood St. The site is 9.61 acres with approximately 3.0± acres being an existing detention pond and approximately 6.6± acres of developable land. The property will be subdivided into two lots, one containing the existing detention pond and the other being the developed portion for low income housing. The project will consist of constructing 12 low income housing buildings, a community clubhouse, and associated pedestrian and vehicle accesses. This project will be completed in one phase of construction. 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS The project site is bound by Redwood St to the east and surrounded by previously developed properties on the north, south, and west. The site is currently undeveloped and appears to be vegetated with native grasses and wetland plants surrounding the existing detention pond. The existing detention pond encompasses the western portion of the site. Based on research of the site, it appears that this detention pond was constructed sometime after 1975. The site is within the Dry Creek basin and within the basin limits of the Northeast College Corridor Outfall (NECCO) improvements. The existing site is approximately 2.7% impervious, including the west half of Redwood St. The existing 100-yr peak runoff rate to Redwood St (Basin H1) and to the existing detention pond (Basin H2) is 14.10 cfs and 11.45 cfs, respectively. The runoff directed to Redwood St is conveyed to and collected by an existing 15’ Type R inlet located near the southeast corner of the site. Upon further research of the surrounding storm drainage infrastructure, the design drawings and calculations were found. Referencing the “Redwood Street Improvements” plan set, dated September 1996 and prepared by Stewart & Associates, the existing storm drain within Redwood Street was sized and constructed to convey the 100-yr developed runoff from the proposed Village on Redwood site. The storm drain was anticipated to capture and convey 33.5 cfs from the site during a 100-yr storm event. Since this site is within the NECCO area plan, the site is constrained to matching the existing runoff rates for the developed condition. The existing runoff rates, stated above, are referenced for the stormwater release rates for 2 the proposed improvements. All calculations and exhibits are attached. 3. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS The project proposes to develop this infill site with 12 low income housing buildings (with a total of 72 units), a community clubhouse and associated infrastructure and site/building pedestrian and vehicle access. The property will be subdivided into 2 lots, one containing the existing detention pond and the remaining containing the proposed low income housing development. The project is required to detain the developed 100-yr runoff to the existing 100-yr runoff rate. The detention requirements will be provided through the use of a detention pond in the southeast corner of the site. Water quality capture volume and associated infrastructure is not required as part of this project, though implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques for water quality enhancement are required and proposed with this project. Similar to the existing conditions, the proposed project is divided into two major basins, one basin draining undetained to the existing detention pond to the west (Basin D7), and the remaining basin draining towards Redwood St (Basins D1 thru D6). In general, the basin limits are maintained for the areas draining to the existing detention pond and towards Redwood Street. This causes a slight increase to the existing pond and is considered negligible. Runoff from Basins D1 thru D5 are conveyed to the proposed detention pond in the southeast corner of the site, with the outfall being the connection to the existing storm drain within Redwood St. The undetained developed portion (Basin D6) drains to the existing inlet within Redwood St. Under the developed condition, the 100-yr peak runoff rates to the existing detention pond and Redwood Street are estimated to be 12.33 cfs and 26.57 cfs, respectively. Detaining the developed runoff to the existing 100-yr runoff rate for the basin draining towards Redwood Street, in addition to accounting for the undetained portions that drain directly to Redwood, requires a detention volume of 0.402 acre-ft. The undetained portion has a runoff rate of 7.14 cfs, combined with detention pond release rate of 6.96 cfs, has a peak 100-yr runoff rate of 14.10 cfs, equal to the existing 100-yr runoff rate. The storm drain pipe sizes were determined utilizing Hydraflow. The storm drain system has been designed to convey the 100-yr storm through a combination of the pipe and overland flow. The grading design is such that when the hydraulic grade line exceeds the 3 pipe capacities at the inlets, the runoff will overtop the adjacent high point and convey overland ultimately to the proposed detention pond. The detention pond spillway will be a combination of overland and pipe emergency overflow. The pond outlet structure and pipe are sized to handle majority of the 100-yr runoff rate in the event that the 100-yr orifice plate was compromised with the remaining runoff surface flowing to Redwood Street. All calculations and exhibits are attached for reference. 4. LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES In reference to the code requirements for implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques, the use of permeable pavers and a sand filter are necessary to satisfy these requirements. The main LID being proposed to be implemented on site are permeable pavers located in sections of the north and south drives. The remaining developed area will be treated by a sand filter located near the southeast corner of the site within the detention pond. The sand filter is designed to detain and infiltrate the required water quality capture volume and directly spill into the detention area for events beyond the capacity of the sand filter. The sand filter water quality capture volume is designed to have a depth of 12 inches. Underdrains are not required with a full infiltration design. Percolation test was performed and is provided in the appendix. Based on the average percolation rate of 8.6 minutes per inch, it is estimated that the water quality capture volume will infiltrate within 2 hrs of filling. A Standard Operations Procedure will be provided to assist in ensuring that these BMPs will adequately perform over time. All calculations are attached for reference. 5. CONCLUSION All computations that have been completed within this report are in compliance with the CoFC Stormwater Criteria Manual, and Urban Drainage and Flood Control District requirements and standards. The proposed drainage concepts presented in this report and on the construction plans adequately provide for stormwater quantity and quality treatment of proposed impervious areas. Conveyance elements have been designed to pass required flows and to minimize future maintenance. 4 If, at the time of construction, groundwater is encountered, a Colorado Department of Health Construction Dewatering Permit will be required. 6. REFERENCES 1. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (Volumes 1, 2, and 3), Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001, Revised April 2008. 2. Storm Drainage Criteria Manual and Construction Standards, City of Fort Collins Storm Water Utility, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Updated January, 1997 with 2012 amendments. 3. “Hydrologic Group Rating for Larimer County Area, Colorado”, USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Cooperative Soil Survey. Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov. [03/28/2014] APPENDIX A — SITE DESCRIPTIONS, CHARACTERISTICS & REFERENCES vicinity map PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88 CITY OF FORT COLLINS BENCHMARK #42-97 ON TOP OF A STORM INLET STRUCTURE ON THE EAST SIDE OF REDWOOD ST., 400 FEET SOUTH OF WILLOX LANE. ELEV= 4969.93 CITY OF FORT COLLINS BENCHMARK #43-97 ON THE SOUTH END OF THE WEST HEADWALL OF THE LAKE CANAL BRIDGE AT NORTH LEMAY AVE., 200 FEET SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF LEMAY AVE. AND CONIFER ST. ELEV= 4960.11 PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL DATUM. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29 UNADJUSTED FOR THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS. IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATIONS SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED = 4969.93 (NAVD88) - 3.18 = 4966.75 NGVD29 UNADJUSTED = 4960.11 (NAVD88) - 3.17 = 4956.94 Hydrologic Soil Group—Larimer County Area, Colorado Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 10/14/2015 Page 1 of 4 4494910 4494940 4494970 4495000 4495030 4495060 4495090 4494910 4494940 4494970 4495000 4495030 4495060 4495090 494040 494070 494100 494130 494160 494190 494220 494250 494280 494310 494340 494040 494070 494100 494130 494160 494190 494220 494250 494280 494310 494340 40° 36' 24'' N 105° 4' 14'' W 40° 36' 24'' N 105° 4' 0'' W 40° 36' 17'' N 105° 4' 14'' W 40° 36' 17'' N 105° 4' 0'' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 20 40 80 120 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,470 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") 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 64 Loveland clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes C 3.3 32.5% 73 Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes C 7.0 67.5% Totals for Area of Interest 10.3 100.0% 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 Hydrologic Soil Group—Larimer County Area, Colorado Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 10/14/2015 Page 3 of 4 Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Hydrologic Soil Group—Larimer County Area, Colorado Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 10/14/2015 Page 4 of 4 Storm drain sized for 100 yr (33.5 cfs) developed flows from Village on Redwood site Assumed developed flows from Village on Redwood site, referenced for existing storm drain sizing (100-yr = 33.5cfs) B APPENDIX B — RATIONAL CALCULATIONS FCHA - Villages on Redwood DRAINAGE SUMMARY Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DRAINAGE SUMMARY: Area (acres) % Imprevious 100-yr Peak Runoff (cfs) Area (acres) % Imprevious 100-yr Peak Runoff (cfs) To Redwood 6.217 4.4% 14.10 5.983 46.7% 26.57 H1 compared to D1+...D6 To Existing Pond 3.785 0.0% 11.45 4.020 1.4% 12.33 H2+OF1 compared to D7+OF1 Totals 10.002 2.7% 25.56 10.002 29.6% 38.90 T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 Basins Notes Historical Developed FCHA - Villages on Redwood HISTORIC IMPERVIOUS AREA CALCULATION Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 (Revised August 2006) BASINS: % Impervious Runoff Coefficient C Return Period Frequency Adjustment Factor (Cf ) 100% 0.95 2-year to 10-year 1.00 90% 0.95 100-year 1.25 90% 0.95 40% 0.50 0% 0.25 C2 to C10 C100 H1 270,830 6.217 11,888 0 0 0 258,941 4.4% 0.28 0.35 H2 162,764 3.737 0 0 0 0 162,764 0.0% 0.25 0.31 OF1 2,110 0.048 0 0 0 0 2,110 0.0% 0.25 0.31 Total 435,704 10.002 11,888 0 0 0 423,816 2.7% 0.27 0.34 Pavers Walks Apaved (sq feet) Lawns (Heavy, 2-7% Slope) Weighted % COMPOSITE Impervious 1237-112-00 Interwest Consulting Group T.Alva November 25, 2015 Sub-basin Designation Atotal (sq feet) Atotal (acres) % Impervious values from Table RO-3 in the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Runoff Coefficients and Frequency Adjustment Factors for City of Fort Collins - Storm Water Criteria Manual Land Use Paved Roof Alawn (sq feet) Apavers FCHA - Villages on Redwood HISTORIC TIME OF CONCENTRATION Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 (Revised August 2006) EQUATIONS: -Equation RO-3 -Equation RO-4 -Urbanized Check Equation RO-5 -Equation RO-3 CONSTRAINTS: 300 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for developed condition 500 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for undeveloped condition Final t c = minimum of t i + t t and urbanized basin check recommended minimum t c = 5 min for urbanized basins BASINS: Type of Travel Surface Cv H1 H1 0.28 6.217 419 0.0043 40.72 495 0.0059 Paved Areas 20 1.54 5.37 46.09 15.08 15.08 H2 H2 0.25 3.737 32 0.2582 3.00 0 0.0001 Tilage/Field 5 0.05 0.00 5.00 10.18 5.00 All Overland Flow OF1 OF1 0.25 0.048 15 0.0802 3.06 38 0.0251 Tilage/Field 5 0.79 0.81 5.00 10.30 5.00 SUB-BASIN DATA INITIAL/OVERLAND TIME (ti ) T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 DESIGN POINT Sub-basin C5 AREA (acres) LENGTH (ft) SLOPE (ft/ft) ti (min) LENGTH Table RO-2 (ft) TRAVEL TIME (tt ) REMARKS tc Urban Check Final tc (min) tc=ti+tt SLOPE (min) (ft/ft) VEL. (ft/s) tt (min) FCHA - Villages on Redwood HISTORIC PEAK RUNOFF Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 (Revised August 2006) EQUATIONS: Q n = n -yr peak discharge (cfs) I = rainfall intensity (in/hr) P 1-5yr = 1.14 in C n = n -yr runoff coefficient P 1 = one-hour point rainfall depth (in) P 1-100yr = 2.86 in I n = n -yr rainfall intensity (in/hr) t c = time of concentration (min) P 1-10yr = 1.40 in A n = Basin drainage area (ac) BASINS: Runoff Coeff. (C5 ) C(A) (acres) Intensity (in/hr) Q (ft 3 /s) Runoff Coeff. (C5 ) C(A) (acres) Intensity (in/hr) Q (ft 3 /s) Runoff Coeff. (C100 ) C(A) (acres) Intensity (in/hr) Q (ft 3 /s) H1 H1 6.217 15.08 0.28 1.75 2.58 4.50 0.28 1.75 6.46 11.28 0.35 2.18 6.46 14.10 H2 H2 3.737 5.00 0.25 0.93 3.86 3.61 0.25 0.93 9.68 9.05 0.31 1.17 9.68 11.31 OF1 OF1 0.048 5.00 0.25 0.01 3.86 0.05 0.25 0.01 9.68 0.12 0.31 0.02 9.68 0.15 5-yr Peak Runoff 10-yr Peak Runoff 100-yr Peak Runoff T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 City of Fort Collins - Storm Water Criteria Manual (1997) Design Point Sub-basin Area (acres) tc (min) Q n = C n I n A n 0.786651) 1 ( 10 ) 28 . 5 FCHA - Villages on Redwood DEVELOPED IMPERVIOUS AREA CALCULATION Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 (Revised August 2006) BASINS: % Impervious Runoff Coefficient C Return Period Frequency Adjustment Factor (Cf) 100% 0.95 2-year to 10-year 1.00 90% 0.95 100-year 1.25 90% 0.95 40% 0.50 0% 0.25 C2 to C10 C100 D1 54,800 1.258 12,356 11,432 7,959 2,091 20,963 55.9% 0.67 0.83 D2 29,959 0.688 5,389 6,849 4,140 4,825 8,755 57.4% 0.67 0.84 D3 45,346 1.041 0 8,831 5,683 0 30,833 28.8% 0.47 0.59 D4 48,207 1.107 15,311 7,420 5,959 4,349 15,167 60.3% 0.69 0.86 D5 36,006 0.827 3,656 5,478 1,714 0 25,158 28.1% 0.46 0.58 D6 46,296 1.063 16,675 3,690 7,155 0 18,777 57.1% 0.67 0.83 D7 174,015 3.995 0 2,185 523 0 171,307 1.4% 0.26 0.33 OF1 1,076 0.025 0 0 0 0 1,076 0.0% 0.25 0.31 Total 435,704 10.002 53,386 45,884 33,133 11,265 292,036 29.6% 0.47 0.59 Headwall (D1+D2+D3) 130,104 2.987 17,745 27,112 17,782 6,915 60,551 46.8% 0.60 0.75 Inlet 01 (D1+D2+D3+D4) 178,311 4.093 33,056 34,532 23,741 11,265 75,718 50.5% 0.62 0.78 To Detention Outlet (D1+�.D5) 214,317 4.920 36,711 40,010 25,456 11,265 100,876 46.7% 0.60 0.75 To Redwood 260,614 5.983 53,386 43,699 32,610 11,265 119,653 48.6% 0.61 0.76 % Impervious values from Table RO-3 in the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Runoff Coefficients and Frequency Adjustment Factors for City of Fort Collins - Storm Water Criteria Manual T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 Weighted % Impervious COMPOSITE Roof Apaved (sq feet) Aroof (sq feet) Awalk (sq feet) Apavers (sq feet) Alawn (sq feet) FCHA - Villages on Redwood DEVELOPED TIME OF CONCENTRATION Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 (Revised August 2006) EQUATIONS: -Equation RO-2 -Equation RO-4 -Urbanized Check Equation RO-5 -Equation RO-3 CONSTRAINTS: 300 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for developed condition 500 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for undeveloped condition Final t c = minimum of t i + t t and urbanized basin check recommended minimum t c = 5 min for urbanized basins BASINS: Type of Travel Surface Cv D1 D1 0.67 1.258 31 0.0370 2.87 521 0.0069 Paved Areas 20 1.67 5.21 8.08 13.07 8.08 D2 D2 0.67 0.688 78 0.0239 5.16 156 0.0079 Paved Areas 20 1.77 1.47 6.62 11.30 6.62 D3 D3 0.47 1.041 101 0.0297 8.02 159 0.0253 Paved Areas 20 3.18 0.84 8.85 11.45 8.85 D4 D4 0.69 1.107 42 0.0191 3.93 246 0.0109 Paved Areas 20 2.09 1.97 5.90 11.60 5.90 D5 D5 0.46 0.827 97 0.0264 8.37 37 0.0083 Paved Areas 20 1.82 0.34 8.71 10.75 8.71 D6 D6 0.67 1.063 12 0.0651 1.50 563 0.0040 Paved Areas 20 1.26 7.42 8.92 13.20 8.92 D7 D7 0.26 3.995 37 0.0513 5.44 0 0.0001 Paved Areas 20 0.20 0.00 5.44 10.21 5.44 All Overland Flow OF1 OF1 0.25 0.025 6 0.1371 1.66 0 0.0001 Paved Areas 20 0.20 0.00 5.00 10.04 5.00 All Overland Flow TRAVEL TIME (tt) REMARKS tc Urban Check Final tc (min) tc =ti +tt SLOPE (min) (ft/ft) VEL. (ft/s) tt (min) T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 SLOPE (ft/ft) ti (min) LENGTH Table RO-2 (ft) SUB-BASIN DATA INITIAL/OVERLAND TIME (ti) DESIGN POINT Sub-basin C5 FCHA - Villages on Redwood DEVELOPED PEAK RUNOFF Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 (Revised August 2006) EQUATIONS: Q n = n -yr peak discharge (cfs) I = rainfall intensity (in/hr) P 1-5yr = 1.14 in C n = n -yr runoff coefficient P 1 = one-hour point rainfall depth (in) P 1-10yr = 1.40 in I n = n -yr rainfall intensity (in/hr) t c = time of concentration (min) P 1-100yr = 2.86 in A n = Basin drainage area (ac) BASIN SUMMARY: Runoff Coeff. (C5) C(A) (acres) Intensity (in/hr) Q (ft3/s) Runoff Coeff. (C5) C(A) (acres) Intensity (in/hr) Q (ft3/s) Runoff Coeff. (C100) C(A) (acres) Intensity (in/hr) Q (ft3/s) D1 D1 1.258 8.08 0.67 0.84 3.33 2.79 0.67 0.84 4.09 3.42 0.83 1.05 8.36 8.74 D2 D2 0.688 6.62 0.67 0.46 3.56 1.65 0.67 0.46 4.37 2.02 0.84 0.58 8.93 5.17 D3 D3 1.041 8.85 0.47 0.49 3.22 1.59 0.47 0.49 3.96 1.95 0.59 0.62 8.09 4.99 D4 D4 1.107 5.90 0.69 0.76 3.69 2.81 0.69 0.76 4.53 3.45 0.86 0.95 9.25 8.82 D5 D5 0.827 8.71 0.46 0.38 3.24 1.24 0.46 0.38 3.98 1.52 0.58 0.48 8.14 3.87 D6 D6 1.063 8.92 0.67 0.71 3.22 2.28 0.67 0.71 3.95 2.80 0.83 0.88 8.07 7.14 D7 D7 3.995 5.44 0.26 1.04 3.77 3.93 0.26 1.04 4.63 4.83 0.33 1.30 9.47 12.33 OF1 OF1 0.025 5.00 0.25 0.01 3.86 0.02 0.25 0.01 4.74 0.03 0.31 0.01 9.68 0.07 100-yr Peak Runoff T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 Design Point Sub-basin Area (acres) tc (min) 5-yr Peak Runoff 10-yr Peak Runoff City of Fort Collins - Storm Water Criteria Manual (1997) Q n = C n I n A n 0.786651) 1 ( 10 ) 28 . 5 t c P I FCHA - Villages at Redwood Attenuated Flows for Pipe Sizing Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 EQUATIONS: -Equation RO-2 -Equation RO-4 -Equation RO-3 CONSTRAINTS: 300 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for developed condition Final t c = minimum of t i + t t and urbanized basin check 500 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for undeveloped condition recommended minimum t c = 5 min for urbanized basins Qn = n -yr peak discharge (cfs) I = rainfall intensity (in/hr) Cn = n -yr runoff coefficient P1 = one-hour point rainfall depth (in) In = n -yr rainfall intensity (in/hr) tc = time of concentration (min) A = drainage area (ac) P1-5yr = 1.14 in. P1-10yr = 1.40 in. P1-100yr = 2.86 in. BASINS: UD-Sewer - DP/Manhole Headwall Contributing Basins D1+D2+D3 Contributing Area (acres) 2.99 C2 to C10 C100 Runoff Coefficients 0.60 0.75 Overland Flow Time Length (ft) 31 Slope (ft/ft) 0.03 ti (min) 3.46 Travel Time Length (ft) Slope (%) Type of Travel Surface Cv Velocity (ft/s) tt (min) 529 0.68% Paved Areas 20 1.65 5.33 147 1.80% Paved Areas 20 2.69 0.91 Total Time 6.24 Final Time of Concentration - tc (min) tc (min) 9.70 Intensities (in/hr) 5-yr 10-yr 100-yr 3.11 3.83 7.81 Discharge (cfs) 5-yr 10-yr 100-yr 5.58 6.86 17.51 T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 City of Fort Collins - Storm Water Criteria Manual (1997) Q n = C n I n A t c = t i + t t 0 . 5 V = C v S w V L tt 60 ( ) = 0 .33 FCHA - Villages at Redwood Attenuated Flows for Pipe Sizing Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 EQUATIONS: -Equation RO-2 -Equation RO-4 -Equation RO-3 CONSTRAINTS: 300 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for developed condition Final t c = minimum of t i + t t and urbanized basin check 500 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for undeveloped condition recommended minimum t c = 5 min for urbanized basins Qn = n -yr peak discharge (cfs) I = rainfall intensity (in/hr) Cn = n -yr runoff coefficient P1 = one-hour point rainfall depth (in) In = n -yr rainfall intensity (in/hr) tc = time of concentration (min) A = drainage area (ac) P1-5yr = 1.14 in. P1-10yr = 1.40 in. P1-100yr = 2.86 in. BASINS: UD-Sewer - DP/Manhole Inlet 01 Contributing Basins D1+D2+D3+D4 Contributing Area (acres) 4.09 C2 to C10 C100 Runoff Coefficients 0.62 0.78 Overland Flow Time Length (ft) 21 Slope (ft/ft) 0.05 ti (min) 2.38 Travel Time Length (ft) Slope (%) Type of Travel Surface Cv Velocity (ft/s) tt (min) 529 0.68% Paved Areas 20 1.65 5.33 147 1.80% Paved Areas 20 2.69 0.91 76 0.26% Paved Areas 20 1.02 1.24 56 0.25% Paved Areas 20 1.00 0.93 Total Time 8.42 Final Time of Concentration - tc (min) tc (min) 10.79 Intensities (in/hr) 5-yr 10-yr 100-yr 2.99 3.67 7.49 Discharge (cfs) 5-yr 10-yr 100-yr 7.63 9.37 23.93 T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 11/25/2015 City of Fort Collins - Storm Water Criteria Manual (1997) Q n = C n I n A t c = t i + t t 0 . 5 V = C v S w V L tt 60 FCHA - Villages at Redwood Attenuated Flows for Pipe Sizing Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 EQUATIONS: -Equation RO-2 -Equation RO-4 -Equation RO-3 CONSTRAINTS: 300 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for developed condition Final t c = minimum of t i + t t and urbanized basin check 500 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for undeveloped condition recommended minimum t c = 5 min for urbanized basins Qn = n -yr peak discharge (cfs) I = rainfall intensity (in/hr) Cn = n -yr runoff coefficient P1 = one-hour point rainfall depth (in) In = n -yr rainfall intensity (in/hr) tc = time of concentration (min) A = drainage area (ac) P1-5yr = 1.14 in. P1-10yr = 1.40 in. P1-100yr = 2.86 in. BASINS: UD-Sewer - DP/Manhole To Redwood Contributing Basins D1+D2+D3+D4+D5 Contributing Area (acres) 4.92 C2 to C10 C100 Runoff Coefficients 0.60 0.75 Overland Flow Time Length (ft) 21 Slope (ft/ft) 0.05 ti (min) 2.51 Travel Time Length (ft) Slope (%) Type of Travel Surface Cv Velocity (ft/s) tt (min) 529 0.68% Paved Areas 20 1.65 5.33 147 1.80% Paved Areas 20 2.69 0.91 76 0.26% Paved Areas 20 1.02 1.24 56 0.25% Paved Areas 20 1.00 0.93 97 1.05% Paved Areas 20 2.05 0.79 pan from fes to headwall Total Time 9.20 Final Time of Concentration - tc (min) tc (min) 11.72 Intensities (in/hr) 5-yr 10-yr 100-yr 2.89 3.54 7.24 Discharge (cfs) 5-yr 10-yr 100-yr 8.47 10.40 26.57 T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 City of Fort Collins - Storm Water Criteria Manual (1997) Q n = C n I n A t c = t i + t t 0 . 5 V = C v S w V L C APPENDIX C — STORM CONVEYANCE SIZING Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Wednesday, Nov 25 2015 Basin D1 Swale Trapezoidal Bottom Width (ft) = 2.00 Side Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 1.25 Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00 Slope (%) = 0.60 N-Value = 0.015 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 8.74 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.55 Q (cfs) = 8.740 Area (sqft) = 2.31 Velocity (ft/s) = 3.78 Wetted Perim (ft) = 6.54 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.59 Top Width (ft) = 6.40 EGL (ft) = 0.77 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 99.50 -0.50 100.00 0.00 100.50 0.50 101.00 1.00 101.50 1.50 102.00 2.00 Reach (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Wednesday, Nov 25 2015 Basin D2 Swale Trapezoidal Bottom Width (ft) = 2.00 Side Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 1.25 Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00 Slope (%) = 1.00 N-Value = 0.015 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 5.17 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.38 Q (cfs) = 5.170 Area (sqft) = 1.34 Velocity (ft/s) = 3.87 Wetted Perim (ft) = 5.13 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.45 Top Width (ft) = 5.04 EGL (ft) = 0.61 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 99.50 -0.50 100.00 0.00 100.50 0.50 101.00 1.00 101.50 1.50 102.00 2.00 Reach (ft) D APPENDIX D — DETENTION POND CALCULATIONS 100 Year This is to convert % imp. to a C value 100-year (must insert % imp. and C pervious). ft3 acre-ft. 'C' value 0.6 17493.8 0.402 'C' * 1.25 0.75 Area 4.92 acres Modified Modified Release Rate 6.96 M. FATER D. JUDISH C. LI 5/95 Nov-97 Nov-98 TIME TIME INTENSITY Q 100 Runoff Release Required Required cum 100 year Volume Cum total Detention Detention (mins) (secs) (in/hr) (cfs) (ft^3) (ft^3) (ft^3) (ac-ft) 0 0 0 0.00 0 0.0 0.0 0.0000 5 300 9.950 36.72 11014.65 2088.0 8926.7 0.2049 10 600 7.720 28.49 17092.08 4176.0 12916.1 0.2965 15 900 6.520 24.06 21652.92 6264.0 15388.9 0.3533 20 1200 5.600 20.66 24796.8 8352.0 16444.8 0.3775 25 1500 4.980 18.38 27564.3 10440.0 17124.3 0.3931 30 1800 4.520 16.68 30021.84 12528.0 17493.8 0.4016 35 2100 4.080 15.06 31615.92 14616.0 16999.9 0.3903 40 2400 3.740 13.80 33121.44 16704.0 16417.4 0.3769 45 2700 3.460 12.77 34471.98 18792.0 15680.0 0.3600 50 3000 3.230 11.92 35756.1 20880.0 14876.1 0.3415 55 3300 3.030 11.18 36896.31 22968.0 13928.3 0.3198 60 3600 2.860 10.55 37992.24 25056.0 12936.2 0.2970 65 3900 2.720 10.04 39143.52 27144.0 11999.5 0.2755 70 4200 2.590 9.56 40139.82 29232.0 10907.8 0.2504 75 4500 2.480 9.15 41180.4 31320.0 9860.4 0.2264 80 4800 2.380 8.78 42154.56 33408.0 8746.6 0.2008 85 5100 2.290 8.45 43095.51 35496.0 7599.5 0.1745 90 5400 2.210 8.15 44036.46 37584.0 6452.5 0.1481 95 5700 2.130 7.86 44800.29 39672.0 5128.3 0.1177 100 6000 2.060 7.60 45608.4 41760.0 3848.4 0.0883 105 6300 2.000 7.38 46494 43848.0 2646.0 0.0607 110 6600 1.940 7.16 47246.76 45936.0 1310.8 0.0301 115 6900 1.890 6.97 48121.29 48024.0 97.3 0.0022 120 7200 1.840 6.79 48885.12 50112.0 -1226.9 -0.0282 125 7500 1.790 6.61 49538.25 52200.0 -2661.8 -0.0611 130 7800 1.750 6.46 50368.5 54288.0 -3919.5 -0.0900 135 8100 1.710 6.31 51110.19 56376.0 -5265.8 -0.1209 140 8400 1.670 6.16 51763.32 58464.0 -6700.7 -0.1538 145 8700 1.630 6.01 52327.89 60552.0 -8224.1 -0.1888 150 9000 1.600 5.90 53136 62640.0 -9504.0 -0.2182 155 9300 1.570 5.79 53877.69 64728.0 -10850.3 -0.2491 160 9600 1.540 5.68 54552.96 66816.0 -12263.0 -0.2815 165 9900 1.510 5.57 55161.81 68904.0 -13742.2 -0.3155 170 10200 1.480 5.46 55704.24 70992.0 -15287.8 -0.3510 175 10500 1.450 5.35 56180.25 73080.0 -16899.8 -0.3880 180 10800 1.420 5.24 56589.84 75168.0 -18578.2 -0.4265 185 11100 1.400 5.17 57342.6 77256.0 -19913.4 -0.4571 190 11400 1.380 5.09 58051.08 79344.0 -21292.9 -0.4888 195 11700 1.360 5.02 58715.28 81432.0 -22716.7 -0.5215 200 12000 1.340 4.94 59335.2 83520.0 -24184.8 -0.5552 205 12300 1.320 4.87 59910.84 85608.0 -25697.2 -0.5899 210 12600 1.300 4.80 60442.2 87696.0 -27253.8 -0.6257 215 12900 1.280 4.72 60929.28 89784.0 -28854.7 -0.6624 220 13200 1.260 4.65 61372.08 91872.0 -30499.9 -0.7002 225 13500 1.240 4.58 61770.6 93960.0 -32189.4 -0.7390 230 13800 1.220 4.50 62124.84 96048.0 -33923.2 -0.7788 235 14100 1.210 4.46 62955.09 98136.0 -35180.9 -0.8076 Village on Redwood Critical Pond Elevations Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 (Revised April 2008) Stage Storage Volume (pond volume calculated using the prismoidal formula): CONTOUR (FT) AREA (FT2) AREA (ACRE) VOLUME (ACRE-FT) DEPTH (FT) CUMULATIVE VOLUME (ACRE-FT) 4962.33 0 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.000 4963.0 2061 0.047 0.011 0.67 0.011 4964.0 6214 0.143 0.091 1.67 0.101 4965.0 9583 0.220 0.191 2.67 0.293 4966.0 15126 0.347 0.281 3.67 0.574 0.402 4965.39 ft T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 Acre-Ft Interpolates to an Elev. of Required 100-yr Detention Volume (including WQCV) = November 25, 2015 4962.00 4962.50 4963.00 4963.50 4964.00 4964.50 4965.00 4965.50 4966.00 4966.50 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 ELEVATION (FT) DETENTION POND VOLUME (AC-FT) DETENTION POND VOLUME VERSUS ELEVATION ( ) 3 AAAADepth 1 2 1 2 V + + = 1237-112-00 PondCalcs.xls - Pond Stage Storage Page 1 of 2 Interwest Consulting Group Village on Redwood Circular Orifice Plate Sizing Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: Orifice Equation where: C = Orifice Discharge Coefficient A o = Orifice Area (ft 2 ) g = Gravity (32.2 ft/s 2 ) ∆h = Difference in Elevation Head (ft) D o = Orifice Diameter (in) Calculations 100-yr Orifice Sizing 100-yr Orifice Rating Table Knowns: 100-yr Release Rate 6.96 cfs 100-yr WSEL 4965.39 ft 4962.33 0.00 0.000 4964.00 4.50 0.101 Pond Outlet Invert 4962.33 ft 4965.00 6.37 0.293 4966.00 7.80 0.574 Discharge Coefficient 0.65 Tailwater Elevation 4963.00 ft Orifice Diameter 12 9/16 in Orifice Area 0.863 ft 2 Centroid Elevation 4962.85 ft Actual Release Rate 6.96 cfs Pond Volume (ac-ft) T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 Elevation (ft) Discharge (cfs) C g h Q QCA o g h A o ∆ = ∆ ⇒ = 2 2 π o o A D = 576 1237-112-00 PondCalcs.xls - Outlet Orifice Plate Sizing Page 2 of 2 Interwest Consulting Group E APPENDIX E — LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS FCHA - Villages on Redwood Low Impact Development Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: DESIGN CRITERIA Low Impact Development Summary Pavement Area Summary 43,661 sqft 11,265 sqft 25.8% Newly Added Impervious Area Summary 115,390 sqft 11,265 sqft 30,431 sqft 41,696 sqft 15,999 sqft 57,695 sqft 50.0% Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, January 2010 Total Paved Area: Permeable Paver Area: Total Site Impervious Area: Proposed Area of Pavers: Additional Area Treated by Pavers: Total Area Treated by Pavers: Area to be Treated by Sand Filter: Total Area Treated by LID: Percent Impervious Area Treated by LID: Percent Pavement Area as Permeable Pavers: City of Fort Collins - Ordinance No. 152 - No less than 25% of any newly added pavement areas must be treated using a permeable pavement technology that is considered an LID Technique, and - No less than 50% of any newly added impervious area must be treated using one or a combination of LID techniques T.Alva Interwest Consulting Group 1237-112-00 November 25, 2015 Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia = 100.0 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100) i = 1.000 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 0.40 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 16,000 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV = cu ft Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = 0.43 in Average Runoff Producing Storm G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER = 533.3 cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER = cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum) DWQCV = 12 in B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical) Z = 4.00 ft / ft (Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls) C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin = 356 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual = 359 sq ft E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area) ATop = 707 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT= 533 cu ft (VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth) 3. Growing Media 4. Underdrain System A) Are underdrains provided? B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y = N/A ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 = N/A cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO = N/A in Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) J. Claeys Interwest Consulting Group November 25, 2015 Villages at Redwood Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO 1237-112-00 UD-BMP_v3.03.xlsm, RG 11/25/2015, 4:36 AM Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity of structures or groundwater contamination? 6. Inlet / Outlet Control A) Inlet Control 7. Vegetation 8. Irrigation A) Will the rain garden be irrigated? Notes: Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) J. Claeys Interwest Consulting Group November 25, 2015 Villages at Redwood Choose One Choose One Choose One Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided Plantings Seed (Plan for frequent weed control) Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod Choose One YES NO YES NO 1237-112-00 UD-BMP_v3.03.xlsm, RG 11/25/2015, 4:36 AM Percolation Test Results DEPTH DEPTH PERC PERC MINUTES START END CHANGE RATE HOLE (INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) (MPI) 1 10 22.88 24.75 1.88 5.3 10 24.75 26.25 1.50 6.7 10 26.25 27.50 1.25 8.0 10 27.50 28.63 1.13 8.9 10 28.63 29.75 1.13 8.9 10 29.75 30.88 1.13 8.9 10 20.50 22.38 1.88 5.3 10 22.38 24.13 1.75 5.7 2* 10 19.38 19.38 0.00 >80 10 19.38 19.50 0.13 80.0 10 19.50 19.50 0.00 >80 10 19.50 19.63 0.13 80.0 10 19.63 19.75 0.13 80.0 10 19.75 19.75 0.00 >80 10 19.75 19.88 0.13 80.0 10 19.88 20.00 0.13 80.0 3 10 20.25 22.00 1.75 5.7 10 22.00 23.63 1.63 6.2 10 23.63 25.25 1.63 6.2 10 25.25 26.63 1.38 7.3 10 26.63 27.88 1.25 8.0 10 27.88 29.25 1.38 7.3 10 29.25 30.13 0.88 11.4 10 30.13 31.00 0.88 11.4 4 10 17.25 18.63 1.38 7.3 10 18.63 19.88 1.25 8.0 10 19.78 21.00 1.22 8.2 10 21.00 22.00 1.00 10.0 10 22.00 23.13 1.13 8.9 10 23.13 24.00 0.88 11.4 10 24.00 24.88 0.88 11.4 10 16.88 18.00 1.13 8.9 5 10 22.00 24.25 2.25 4.4 10 24.25 26.38 2.13 4.7 10 26.38 28.25 1.88 5.3 10 28.25 29.88 1.63 6.2 10 29.88 31.25 1.38 7.3 10 31.25 32.63 1.38 7.3 10 32.63 33.88 1.25 8.0 10 33.88 35.13 1.25 8.0 6 10 22.88 31.25 8.38 1.2 10 31.25 38.00 6.75 1.5 10 28.25 35.25 7.00 1.4 10 35.25 41.75 6.50 1.5 10 41.75 45.00 3.25 3.1 10 21.75 30.50 8.75 1.1 10 30.50 37.63 7.13 1.4 10 37.63 41.63 4.00 2.5 Average Percolation Rate (mpi): 8.6 *Perc hole 2 was neglected for our average percolation rate INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP FCHA REDWOOD DEVELOPMENT CTL | T PROJECT NO. FC06667.001-130 FIGURE 3 240 14400 1.200 4.43 63763.2 100224.0 -36460.8 -0.8370 Required detention DETENTION POND SIZING Page 1 tt 60 ( ) = 0 .33 0 . 395 1 . 1 5 S C L ti − = 0.786651) 1 ( 10 ) 28 . 5 t c P I + = ( ) = 0 .33 0 . 395 1 . 1 5 S C L ti − = 0.786651) 1 ( 10 ) 28 . 5 t c P I + = 0 . 395 1 . 1 5 S C L ti − = 0.786651) 1 ( 10 ) 28 . 5 t c P I + = + = AREA (acres) LENGTH (ft) ( ) 0 .33 0 . 395 1 . 1 5 S C L ti − = t c = t i + t t 0 . 5 V = C v S w 10 180 = + L tc V L tt 60 = Sub-basin Designation Paved Pavers Land Use Atotal (sq feet) Atotal (acres) Walks Lawns (Heavy, 2-7% Slope) t c P I + = ( ) 0 .33 0 . 395 1 . 1 5 S C L ti − = t c = t i + t t 0 . 5 V = C v S w 10 180 = + L tc V L tt 60 = (sq feet) Awalk (sq feet) Aroof (sq feet) 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 Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 10/14/2015 Page 2 of 4