HomeMy WebLinkAboutWOODSPRING SUITES - PDP190006 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - DRAINAGE REPORTCity of Fort Collins
Wood Spring Suites
(847 South East Frontage Road)
Preliminary Drainage Report
JULY 2019 | VERSION 1
Prepared By:
4582 South Ulster Street, Suite 1500
Denver, CO 80237
Erin L. Griffin
Registered Professional Engineer
State of Colorado No. 42694
2
INTRODUCTION
The proposed 847 SE Frontage Road Project is located within the Northwest Quarter of Section 15,
Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer,
Colorado. The site is bound by an existing Vehicle Emissions Testing Station to the northeast, I-25 to the
northwest, and the frontage road to the south.
• North: Interstate 25 (“I-25”)
• East: Vehicle Emissions Testing Facility
• South: Frontage Road
• West: Interstate 25 (“I-25”)
A vicinity map is provided below.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
This project will be developed on a platted tract located in Lot 1 of the northeast quarter of Section 15,
Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th PM. The site is approximately 2.79 acres and is an existing
vacant site. The proposed site includes one building with four stories and associated parking, landscape,
and sidewalk improvements. The soil on the site is 100% Nunn loam (73), which is classified as Hydrologic
Soil Group C The soil Classification Map can be found in Appendix A.
The site is currently zoned C-G (General Commercial). The proposed land uses for this site will consist of
a four-story hotel and surrounding site and utility improvements.
Preliminary Drainage Report
847 South East Frontage Road – Fort Collins, Colorado
3
HISTORIC DRAINAGE
The existing Site is relativity flat with slopes ranging from 0.5% to 3%. There are currently no existing on-
site water quality or detention improvements. The majority of the site currently slopes to the southwest,
conveying water into the frontage road. The site and surrounding area currently drain to a swale south of
the Frontage Road conveyed into Boxelder Creek south of the swale. Once the Project takes over control
of the Site, the existing topography is anticipated to be fairly flat and consist of the following:
The majority of existing flows for this site are conveyed into an existing inlet at the northwest corner of the
site which flows into a vegetated swale until it is intercepted by Spring Creek. Once the Project takes over
control of the Site, the existing topography is anticipated to be fairly flat and consist of the following:
• Highest Elevation: 4931
• Lowest Elevation: 4926
• Average Slopes: ±3%
The site is located within City of Fort Collins Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood
Insurance Rate Map Number 08069C1003, and a LOMR/CLOMR was revised and effective February 21,
2019 and is designated as an area outside of the 100-year floodplain. The updated LOMR/CLOMR study
is included in Appendix B.
DESIGN CRITERIA
The City of Fort Collins “Stormwater Criteria Manual, December 2018 Edition,” (Criteria Manual) and the
“Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual” Volumes 1, 2, and 3
(Drainage Manual), with latest revisions, were used to prepare the storm calculations. Weighted
impervious values were calculated and used for the site area in accordance with the Criteria Manual and
Drainage Manual.
Hydrologic Criteria
The proposed imperviousness of the site was determined in order to evaluate the Project’s potential impacts
on stormwater runoff. This was compared to the existing drainage master plan that exists for the area. No
storm sewer adjacent to the site is available to service the site because of existing depths of service lines.
A topographic survey and knowledge of the Site was utilized for this analysis. The existing report used the
C values to determine the site’s allowable runoff. Additional analysis was needed to compare the existing
report to the proposed condition due to a change in rainfall, impervious values, and area assumed. This
analysis is and site-specific calculations are Appendix C. A drainage area map representing the proposed
conditions has been included in Appendix D.
The existing drainage report has been included within Appendix E.
The 2-year, 10-year and 100-year storm events were used in determining rainfall and runoff for the
proposed site. The existing report uses the minor storm as 10 year, which is why both the 2-year and the
10-year calculations were included Table RA-7 of the Criteria Manual was used to determine rainfall data
for the storm events and has been included in Appendix C.
The C value of the site was originally planned for .75, and this is increasing with the site.
4
This site is designed to flow through onsite storm system into a proposed water quality devise and
eventually outfall offsite through an underground storm sewer system and into Boxelder Creek. The master
drainage report has this site (basin 2) flowing offsite to the Frontage Road and into Inlets 2A and 2B and
being conveyed through a swale into Boxelder Creek. The proposed design has the same outfall but a
different location into Boxelder Creek. The overall drainage report could not be followed due to the
requirement of The City of Fort Collins to have water quality to treat this site.
With the existing report and the site’s ultimate outfall into Boxelder creek, no detention is required on site.
This is due to the master plan allowing for outfall directly in to Boxelder Creek.
Hydraulic Criteria
Hydraulic design criteria utilized in the analysis of proposed drainage systems consists of provisions as
outlined within the Criteria and the Manual. Majority runoff for the Site will be conveyed via the surface
pavement, curb and gutter, and concrete curb cuts to the proposed inlets and underground storm sewer
system. Hydraulic design criteria is as follows:
Inlet Hydraulics
Applicable design methods were utilized to size proposed storm sewer inlets, which includes the use of the
Manual’s UD-Inlet, Version 4.05 Spreadsheets. Inlet Hydraulic Calculations are provided in Appendix F for
reference.
Storm Pipe Hydraulics
Applicable storm sewer hydraulic analysis design methods were utilized, which includes FlowMaster
modeling software based upon direct runoff and with assumed slopes of one percent and full pipe flow.
Flowmaster modeling software allows the designer to conservativly analyze the system with respect to
system capacity calculations.
Storm sewer design and modeling will consist of design intervals as outlined by the following design storm
event:
o Major Storm: 100-year Storm Event
Water Quality Treatment Criteria
Applicable design methods will be utilized to size the proposed water quality facility, which includes the
use of UD-Detention, v3.07 UDFCD spreadsheets and using the following design storm events:
o Minor Storm: 2-year Storm Event
o Major Storm: 100-year Storm Event
Water Quality Calculations are provided in Appendix G.
Preliminary Drainage Report
847 South East Frontage Road – Fort Collins, Colorado
5
DRAINAGE PLAN
GENERAL CONCEPT
The site was divided into ten onsite sub-basins which are described in greater detail in the following section.
BMPs were selected utilizing the four step process outlined in Volume 3, Chapter 1, Section 4 of the
Drainage Manual:
1. Employ runoff reduction practices - The redevelopment on an urban site provides limited
opportunities to employ runoff reduction practices. Site has been developed to install landscaping
wherever pavement (or building) is not required.
2. Implement BMPs that provide a water quality capture volume with a slow release – the site will be
treated with a StormTech SC-740 system.
3. Stabilize streams – Not applicable. This development is not adjacent to a stream, nor directly
impact the downstream water body (Boxelder).
4. Implement site specific and other source control BMPs –The site will be surrounded by silt fence to
reduce potential for contamination discharges at the perimeter. Site access will be provided through
an area of vehicle tracking control to reduce tracking of contamination offsite which will be further
controlled with street sweeping and rock socks along the Frontage Road gutter. Proposed storm
sewer will have inlet protection to guard Boxelder Creek from any contamination.
Runoff generated by the majority of these drainage basins will be conveyed into the proposed storm sewer
and conveyed to the proposed water quality system before being released into Elderbox Creek. No
detention was previously provided due to the site’s proximity to Boxelder Creek. A proposed drainage area
map which shows the limits of these sub-basins has been provided in Appendix D. Calculations related to
the preliminary sizing of the basin runoff have been included in Appendix C.
SPECIFIC DETAILS
Sub-basin A
Sub-basin A is 1.18 acres and consists of parking, sidewalk, and landscape areas that drains into an inlet.
Runoff within this sub-basin will enter Boxelder Creek via underground storm sewer. The runoff coefficients
for this sub-basin are 0.76 and 1.00 for the 2-year and 100-year storm, respectively.
Sub-basin B
Sub-basin B is 0.43 acres and consists of parking, sidewalk and landscaped areas. Runoff within this sub-
basin will enter Boxelder Creek via underground storm sewer. This sub-basin receives flows from Sub-
Basin OS1, which is offsite and detailed below. The runoff coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.86 and 1.00
for the 2-year and 100-year storm, respectively.
Sub-basin C
Sub-basin C is 0.02 acres and consists of landscaped areas. Runoff within this sub-basin will enter design
Point C, which is an area drain. Runoff within this sub-basin will enter Boxelder Creek via underground
storm sewer. The runoff coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.20 and 0.25 for the 2-year and 100-year storm,
respectively.
6
Sub-basin D
Sub-basin D is 0.03 acres and consists of landscaped areas. Runoff within this sub-basin will enter design
Point C, which is a sidewalk chase. Runoff within this sub-basin will enter Boxelder Creek via underground
storm sewer. The runoff coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.20 and 0.25 for the 2-year and 100-year storm,
respectively.
Sub-basin E
Sub-basin D is 0.03 acres and consists of landscaped areas. Runoff within this sub-basin will enter Boxelder
Creek via underground storm sewer The runoff coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.20 and 0.25 for the 2-
year and 100-year storm, respectively.
Sub-basin F
Sub-basin F is 0.02 acres and consists of landscaped areas. Runoff within this sub-basin will enter Boxelder
Creek via underground storm sewer. The runoff coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.20 and 0.25 for the 2-
year and 100-year storm, respectively.
Sub-basin ES1
Sub-basin ES1 is 0.65 acres and consists of the mostly landscape area that runs offsite. Runoff within this
sub-basin will flow to the west and will enter into existing drainage systems. The runoff coefficients for this
sub-basin are 0.20 and 0.25 for the 2-year and 100-year storm, respectively.
Sub-basin ES2
Sub-basin ES2 is 0.01 acres and consists of mostly pavement area that runs offsite. Runoff within this sub-
basin will flow to the east and the north of the site and will enter into existing drainage systems. The runoff
coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.95 and 1.00 for the 2-year and 100-year storm, respectively.
Sub-basin ES3
Sub-basin ES3 is 0.09 acres and consists of mostly driveway, sidewalk, and landscape area that runs
offsite. This sub-basin receives flows from Sub-Basins ES2 and ES5 which are detailed above and below
respectively. Runoff within this sub-basin will flow to the east and the north of the site and will enter into
existing drainage systems. The runoff coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.73 and 0.92 for the 2-year and
100-year storm, respectively.
Sub-basin ES4
Sub-basin ES4 is 0.03 acres and consists of the mostly landscape area that runs offsite. Runoff within this
sub-basin will flow to the east and the north of the site and will enter into existing drainage systems. The
runoff coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.46 and 0.58 for the 2-year and 100-year storm, respectively.
Sub-basin ES5
Sub-basin ES5 is 0.12 acres and consists of the mostly driveway, sidewalk, and landscape area that runs
offsite. Runoff within this sub-basin will flow into Sub-Basin ES3 and flow to the east and the north of the
site and will enter into existing drainage systems. The runoff coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.70 and
0.87 for the 2-year and 100-year storm, respectively.
Preliminary Drainage Report
847 South East Frontage Road – Fort Collins, Colorado
7
Sub-basin OS1
Sub-basin OS1 is 0.05 acres of offsite landscape area that flows onsite from the northeast. Runoff within
this sub-basin will flow into Sub-Basin B, be collected via inlet, and routed offsite through proposed storm
sewer to Boxelder Creek . The runoff coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.20 and 0.25 for the 2-year and
100-year storm, respectively.
Sub-basin R1
Sub-basin R is 0.29 acres and consists of the roof area. Runoff within this sub-basin will be detailed at a
later date through roof drains and is anticipated to connect to the proposed underground storm sewer and
run offsite to Boxelder Creek. The runoff coefficients for this sub-basin are 0.95 and 1.00 for the 2-year and
100-year storm, respectively.
IMPLEMENTATION AND PHASING
The Project will disturb over 10,000 square feet of stabilized ground; therefore, a Stormwater Management
Plan is required. Construction will be implemented in one phase due to the size of the project and types of
improvements required for the Project. The Stormwater Management Plans and Details will be provided in
the Project Construction Documents, and a separate StormWater Management Plan and Report have been
included with this submittal.
CONCLUSIONS
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS
The 847 South East Frontage Road project is in compliance with City of Fort Collins criteria for storm
drainage design as it is in compliance with the Master Drainage Plan for the Area developed by Northern
Engineering Services, Inc dated April 13, 2001. The “Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, December
2018 Edition,” and the Urban Drainage Flood Control District “Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual
Volumes 1, 2, and 3 have been utilized for reference.
SUMMARY OF CONCEPT
The onsite drainage basins are collected into two inlets along with four area drains to collect and convey
runoff from the site through underground storm sewer to a proposed underground water quality structure.
Once treated, the water is conveyed via underground storm sewer to Boxelder Creek. This design differs
from the master drainage report referenced above due to the requirement of The City of Fort Collins to have
water quality to treat this site.
REFERENCES
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, December 2018 Edition, City of Fort Collins.
Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 1-3, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver,
CO; January 2016, with latest revisions.
8
APPENDICES
A. NRCS Data
B. FEMA Firmette Map
C. CIA Calculations
D. Proposed Drainage Map
E. Existing Drainage Report
F. Inlet Calculations
G. Water Quality Calculations
9
APPENDIX A
6
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4491860 4491890 4491920 4491950 4491980 4492010 4492040 4492070 4492100
4491860 4491890 4491920 4491950 4491980 4492010 4492040 4492070 4492100
499900 499930 499960 499990 500020 500050 500080
499900 499930 499960 499990 500020 500050 500080
40° 34' 47'' N
105° 0' 4'' W
40° 34' 47'' N
104° 59' 56'' W
40° 34' 38'' N
105° 0' 4'' W
40° 34' 38'' N
104° 59' 56'' W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84
0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 15 30 60 90
Meters
Map Scale: 1:1,320 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
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:
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
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
73 Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent
slopes
3.2 93.6%
74 Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent
slopes
0.2 6.4%
Totals for Area of Interest 3.4 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
Custom Soil Resource Report
8
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
9
Larimer County Area, Colorado
73—Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2tlng
Elevation: 4,100 to 5,700 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F
Frost-free period: 135 to 152 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Nunn and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Nunn
Setting
Landform: Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Pleistocene aged alluvium and/or eolian deposits
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 6 inches: clay loam
Bt1 - 6 to 10 inches: clay loam
Bt2 - 10 to 26 inches: clay loam
Btk - 26 to 31 inches: clay loam
Bk1 - 31 to 47 inches: loam
Bk2 - 47 to 80 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 7 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.1 to 1.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 0.5
Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: Clayey Plains (R067BY042CO)
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
10
Minor Components
Heldt
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: Clayey Plains (R067BY042CO)
Hydric soil rating: No
Wages
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO)
Hydric soil rating: No
74—Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2tlpl
Elevation: 3,900 to 5,840 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 17 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 54 degrees F
Frost-free period: 135 to 160 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Nunn and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Nunn
Setting
Landform: Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Pleistocene aged alluvium and/or eolian deposits
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 9 inches: clay loam
Bt - 9 to 13 inches: clay loam
Btk - 13 to 25 inches: clay loam
Bk1 - 25 to 38 inches: clay loam
Bk2 - 38 to 80 inches: clay loam
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
Properties and qualities
Slope: 1 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 7 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.1 to 2.0
mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 0.5
Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: Clayey Plains (R067BY042CO)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Heldt
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: Clayey Plains (R067BY042CO)
Hydric soil rating: No
Satanta
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO)
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
12
Soil Information for All Uses
Soil Reports
The Soil Reports section includes various formatted tabular and narrative reports
(tables) containing data for each selected soil map unit and each component of
each unit. No aggregation of data has occurred as is done in reports in the Soil
Properties and Qualities and Suitabilities and Limitations sections.
The reports contain soil interpretive information as well as basic soil properties and
qualities. A description of each report (table) is included.
Soil Chemical Properties
This folder contains a collection of tabular reports that present soil chemical
properties. The reports (tables) include all selected map units and components for
each map unit. Soil chemical properties are measured or inferred from direct
observations in the field or laboratory. Examples of soil chemical properties include
pH, cation exchange capacity, calcium carbonate, gypsum, and electrical
conductivity.
Chemical Soil Properties (WoodSpring Suites)
This table shows estimates of some chemical characteristics and features that
affect soil behavior. These estimates are given for the layers of each soil in the
survey area. The estimates are based on field observations and on test data for
these and similar soils.
Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated.
Cation-exchange capacity is the total amount of extractable cations that can be held
by the soil, expressed in terms of milliequivalents per 100 grams of soil at neutrality
(pH 7.0) or at some other stated pH value. Soils having a low cation-exchange
capacity hold fewer cations and may require more frequent applications of fertilizer
than soils having a high cation-exchange capacity. The ability to retain cations
reduces the hazard of ground-water pollution.
Effective cation-exchange capacity refers to the sum of extractable cations plus
aluminum expressed in terms of milliequivalents per 100 grams of soil. It is
determined for soils that have pH of less than 5.5.
13
Soil reaction is a measure of acidity or alkalinity. It is important in selecting crops
and other plants, in evaluating soil amendments for fertility and stabilization, and in
determining the risk of corrosion.
Calcium carbonate equivalent is the percent of carbonates, by weight, in the fraction
of the soil less than 2 millimeters in size. The availability of plant nutrients is
influenced by the amount of carbonates in the soil.
Gypsum is expressed as a percent, by weight, of hydrated calcium sulfates in the
fraction of the soil less than 20 millimeters in size. Gypsum is partially soluble in
water. Soils that have a high content of gypsum may collapse if the gypsum is
removed by percolating water.
Salinity is a measure of soluble salts in the soil at saturation. It is expressed as the
electrical conductivity of the saturation extract, in millimhos per centimeter at 25
degrees C. Estimates are based on field and laboratory measurements at
representative sites of nonirrigated soils. The salinity of irrigated soils is affected by
the quality of the irrigation water and by the frequency of water application. Hence,
the salinity of soils in individual fields can differ greatly from the value given in the
table. Salinity affects the suitability of a soil for crop production, the stability of soil if
used as construction material, and the potential of the soil to corrode metal and
concrete.
Sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) is a measure of the amount of sodium (Na) relative
to calcium (Ca) and magnesium (Mg) in the water extract from saturated soil paste.
It is the ratio of the Na concentration divided by the square root of one-half of the
Ca + Mg concentration. Soils that have SAR values of 13 or more may be
characterized by an increased dispersion of organic matter and clay particles,
reduced saturated hydraulic conductivity and aeration, and a general degradation of
soil structure.
Custom Soil Resource Report
14
Chemical Soil Properties–Larimer County Area, Colorado
Map symbol and soil name Depth Cation-
exchange
capacity
Effective
cation-
exchange
capacity
Soil reaction Calcium
carbonate
Gypsum Salinity Sodium
adsorption
ratio
In meq/100g meq/100g pH Pct Pct mmhos/cm
73—Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent
slopes
Nunn 0-6 21-29 — 6.6-7.8 0-1 0 0.0-1.0 0
6-10 27-33 — 6.6-7.8 0-1 0 0.0-1.0 0
10-26 27-33 — 6.6-7.8 0-1 0 0.0-1.0 0
26-31 16-25 — 7.4-8.5 1-5 0 0.1-1.0 0
31-47 14-20 — 7.9-8.6 2-5 0 0.1-1.0 0-1
47-80 11-18 — 7.4-8.6 2-7 0 0.0-1.0 0-1
74—Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent
slopes
Nunn 0-9 22-29 — 6.6-7.8 0-1 0 0.1-2.0 0
9-13 27-33 — 6.6-7.8 0-1 0 0.1-2.0 0
13-25 26-31 — 7.4-8.5 0-5 0 0.1-2.0 0
25-38 14-24 — 7.9-8.6 2-5 0 0.1-2.0 0-1
38-80 11-24 — 7.4-8.6 2-7 0 0.1-2.0 0-1
Custom Soil Resource Report
15
Soil Physical Properties
This folder contains a collection of tabular reports that present soil physical
properties. The reports (tables) include all selected map units and components for
each map unit. Soil physical properties are measured or inferred from direct
observations in the field or laboratory. Examples of soil physical properties include
percent clay, organic matter, saturated hydraulic conductivity, available water
capacity, and bulk density.
Engineering Properties (WoodSpring Suites)
This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineering
properties for the layers of each soil in the survey area.
Hydrologic soil group is a group of soils having similar runoff potential under similar
storm and cover conditions. The criteria for determining Hydrologic soil group is
found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://
directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17757.wba).
Listing HSGs by soil map unit component and not by soil series is a new concept for
the engineers. Past engineering references contained lists of HSGs by soil series.
Soil series are continually being defined and redefined, and the list of soil series
names changes so frequently as to make the task of maintaining a single national
list virtually impossible. Therefore, the criteria is now used to calculate the HSG
using the component soil properties and no such national series lists will be
maintained. All such references are obsolete and their use should be discontinued.
Soil properties that influence runoff potential are those that influence the minimum
rate of infiltration for a bare soil after prolonged wetting and when not frozen. These
properties are depth to a seasonal high water table, saturated hydraulic conductivity
after prolonged wetting, and depth to a layer with a very slow water transmission
rate. Changes in soil properties caused by land management or climate changes
also cause the hydrologic soil group to change. The influence of ground cover is
treated independently. There are four hydrologic soil groups, A, B, C, and D, and
three dual groups, A/D, B/D, and C/D. In the dual groups, the first letter is for
drained areas and the second letter is for undrained areas.
The four hydrologic soil groups are described in the following paragraphs:
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
Custom Soil Resource Report
16
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.
Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated.
Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in the
fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam," for example, is
soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percent sand.
If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an appropriate
modifier is added, for example, "gravelly."
Classification of the soils is determined according to the Unified soil classification
system (ASTM, 2005) and the system adopted by the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2004).
The Unified system classifies soils according to properties that affect their use as
construction material. Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution of
the fraction less than 3 inches in diameter and according to plasticity index, liquid
limit, and organic matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW, GP,
GM, GC, SW, SP, SM, and SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH, and
OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting engineering properties of two
groups can have a dual classification, for example, CL-ML.
The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affect
roadway construction and maintenance. In this system, the fraction of a mineral soil
that is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified in one of seven groups from A-1
through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution, liquid limit, and plasticity index.
Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines (silt and clay). At
the other extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly organic soils are
classified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection.
If laboratory data are available, the A-1, A-2, and A-7 groups are further classified
as A-1-a, A-1-b, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, or A-7-6. As an additional
refinement, the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated by a group
index number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade material to
20 or higher for the poorest.
Percentage of rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter and 3 to 10 inches
in diameter are indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. The
percentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage in
the field to weight percentage. Three values are provided to identify the expected
Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H).
Percentage (of soil particles) passing designated sieves is the percentage of the soil
fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight. The sieves,
numbers 4, 10, 40, and 200 (USA Standard Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00,
0.420, and 0.074 millimeters, respectively. Estimates are based on laboratory tests
of soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made in
the field. Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative
Value (R), and High (H).
Liquid limit and plasticity index (Atterberg limits) indicate the plasticity
characteristics of a soil. The estimates are based on test data from the survey area
or from nearby areas and on field examination. Three values are provided to identify
the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H).
References:
Custom Soil Resource Report
17
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Custom Soil Resource Report
18
Absence of an entry indicates that the data were not estimated. The asterisk '*' denotes the representative texture; other
possible textures follow the dash. The criteria for determining the hydrologic soil group for individual soil components is
found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/
OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17757.wba). Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L),
Representative Value (R), and High (H).
Engineering Properties–Larimer County Area, Colorado
Map unit symbol and
soil name
Pct. of
map
unit
Hydrolo
gic
group
Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number— Liquid
limit
Plasticit
y index
Unified AASHTO >10
inches
3-10
inches
4 10 40 200
In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H
73—Nunn clay loam, 0
to 1 percent slopes
Nunn 85 C 0-6 Clay loam CL A-7-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
-100
100-100
-100
93-96-1
00
62-68-
74
39-44
-52
19-22-2
7
6-10 Clay loam, clay CH A-7-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
-100
100-100
-100
90-95-1
00
69-76-
83
47-51
-59
24-27-3
3
10-26 Clay loam, clay CH A-7-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
-100
100-100
-100
90-95-1
00
69-76-
83
47-51
-59
Engineering Properties–Larimer County Area, Colorado
Map unit symbol and
soil name
Pct. of
map
unit
Hydrolo
gic
group
Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number— Liquid
limit
Plasticit
y index
Unified AASHTO >10
inches
3-10
inches
4 10 40 200
In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H
74—Nunn clay loam, 1
to 3 percent slopes
Nunn 85 C 0-9 Clay loam CL A-7-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
-100
100-100
-100
91-94-
98
62-68-
74
39-44
-52
18-21-2
7
9-13 Clay loam, clay CH A-7-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
-100
100-100
-100
90-95-1
00
69-76-
82
47-51
-59
24-27-3
3
13-25 Clay loam, clay CL A-7-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
-100
100-100
-100
90-95-1
00
69-76-
82
45-49
-57
24-27-3
3
25-38 Sandy clay loam,
loam, clay loam
CL A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
Physical Soil Properties (WoodSpring Suites)
This table shows estimates of some physical characteristics and features that affect
soil behavior. These estimates are given for the layers of each soil in the survey
area. The estimates are based on field observations and on test data for these and
similar soils.
Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated.
Particle size is the effective diameter of a soil particle as measured by
sedimentation, sieving, or micrometric methods. Particle sizes are expressed as
classes with specific effective diameter class limits. The broad classes are sand,
silt, and clay, ranging from the larger to the smaller.
Sand as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are 0.05 millimeter to 2
millimeters in diameter. In this table, the estimated sand content of each soil layer is
given as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters
in diameter.
Silt as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are 0.002 to 0.05
millimeter in diameter. In this table, the estimated silt content of each soil layer is
given as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters
in diameter.
Clay as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are less than 0.002
millimeter in diameter. In this table, the estimated clay content of each soil layer is
given as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters
in diameter.
The content of sand, silt, and clay affects the physical behavior of a soil. Particle
size is important for engineering and agronomic interpretations, for determination of
soil hydrologic qualities, and for soil classification.
The amount and kind of clay affect the fertility and physical condition of the soil and
the ability of the soil to adsorb cations and to retain moisture. They influence shrink-
swell potential, saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat), plasticity, the ease of soil
dispersion, and other soil properties. The amount and kind of clay in a soil also
affect tillage and earthmoving operations.
Moist bulk density is the weight of soil (ovendry) per unit volume. Volume is
measured when the soil is at field moisture capacity, that is, the moisture content at
1/3- or 1/10-bar (33kPa or 10kPa) moisture tension. Weight is determined after the
soil is dried at 105 degrees C. In the table, the estimated moist bulk density of each
soil horizon is expressed in grams per cubic centimeter of soil material that is less
than 2 millimeters in diameter. Bulk density data are used to compute linear
extensibility, shrink-swell potential, available water capacity, total pore space, and
other soil properties. The moist bulk density of a soil indicates the pore space
available for water and roots. Depending on soil texture, a bulk density of more than
1.4 can restrict water storage and root penetration. Moist bulk density is influenced
by texture, kind of clay, content of organic matter, and soil structure.
Saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat) refers to the ease with which pores in a
saturated soil transmit water. The estimates in the table are expressed in terms of
micrometers per second. They are based on soil characteristics observed in the
field, particularly structure, porosity, and texture. Saturated hydraulic conductivity
(Ksat) is considered in the design of soil drainage systems and septic tank
absorption fields.
Custom Soil Resource Report
21
Available water capacity refers to the quantity of water that the soil is capable of
storing for use by plants. The capacity for water storage is given in inches of water
per inch of soil for each soil layer. The capacity varies, depending on soil properties
that affect retention of water. The most important properties are the content of
organic matter, soil texture, bulk density, and soil structure. Available water capacity
is an important factor in the choice of plants or crops to be grown and in the design
and management of irrigation systems. Available water capacity is not an estimate
of the quantity of water actually available to plants at any given time.
Linear extensibility refers to the change in length of an unconfined clod as moisture
content is decreased from a moist to a dry state. It is an expression of the volume
change between the water content of the clod at 1/3- or 1/10-bar tension (33kPa or
10kPa tension) and oven dryness. The volume change is reported in the table as
percent change for the whole soil. The amount and type of clay minerals in the soil
influence volume change.
Linear extensibility is used to determine the shrink-swell potential of soils. The
shrink-swell potential is low if the soil has a linear extensibility of less than 3
percent; moderate if 3 to 6 percent; high if 6 to 9 percent; and very high if more than
9 percent. If the linear extensibility is more than 3, shrinking and swelling can cause
damage to buildings, roads, and other structures and to plant roots. Special design
commonly is needed.
Organic matter is the plant and animal residue in the soil at various stages of
decomposition. In this table, the estimated content of organic matter is expressed
as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in
diameter. The content of organic matter in a soil can be maintained by returning
crop residue to the soil.
Organic matter has a positive effect on available water capacity, water infiltration,
soil organism activity, and tilth. It is a source of nitrogen and other nutrients for
crops and soil organisms.
Erosion factors are shown in the table as the K factor (Kw and Kf) and the T factor.
Erosion factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by
water. Factor K is one of six factors used in the Universal Soil Loss Equation
(USLE) and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) to predict the
average annual rate of soil loss by sheet and rill erosion in tons per acre per year.
The estimates are based primarily on percentage of silt, sand, and organic matter
and on soil structure and Ksat. Values of K range from 0.02 to 0.69. Other factors
being equal, the higher the value, the more susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill
erosion by water.
Erosion factor Kw indicates the erodibility of the whole soil. The estimates are
modified by the presence of rock fragments.
Erosion factor Kf indicates the erodibility of the fine-earth fraction, or the material
less than 2 millimeters in size.
Erosion factor T is an estimate of the maximum average annual rate of soil erosion
by wind and/or water that can occur without affecting crop productivity over a
sustained period. The rate is in tons per acre per year.
Wind erodibility groups are made up of soils that have similar properties affecting
their susceptibility to wind erosion in cultivated areas. The soils assigned to group 1
are the most susceptible to wind erosion, and those assigned to group 8 are the
least susceptible. The groups are described in the "National Soil Survey Handbook."
Custom Soil Resource Report
22
Wind erodibility index is a numerical value indicating the susceptibility of soil to wind
erosion, or the tons per acre per year that can be expected to be lost to wind
erosion. There is a close correlation between wind erosion and the texture of the
surface layer, the size and durability of surface clods, rock fragments, organic
matter, and a calcareous reaction. Soil moisture and frozen soil layers also
influence wind erosion.
Reference:
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. (http://soils.usda.gov)
Custom Soil Resource Report
23
Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H).
Physical Soil Properties–Larimer County Area, Colorado
Map symbol
and soil name
Depth Sand Silt Clay Moist
bulk
density
Saturated
hydraulic
conductivity
Available
water
capacity
Linear
extensibility
Organic
matter
Erosion
factors
Wind
erodibility
group
Wind
erodibility
index
Kw Kf T
In Pct Pct Pct g/cc micro m/sec In/In Pct Pct
73—Nunn clay
loam, 0 to 1
percent
slopes
Nunn 0-6 36-43- 45 17-26- 37 27-31- 38 1.39-1.41-
1.43
1.00-1.41-4.23 0.16-0.16-0.1
7
3.4- 4.2- 6.8 1.0- 1.5-
2.0
.32 .32 5 6 48
6-10 25-32- 39 16-30- 40 35-38- 45 1.32-1.37-
1.42
0.42-0.92-1.41 0.14-0.15-0.1
6
5.8- 6.8- 8.4 1.0- 1.5-
2.0
.28 .28
10-26 25-32- 39 16-30- 40 35-38- 45 1.32-1.37-
1.42
0.42-0.92-1.41 0.14-0.15-0.1
6
5.8- 6.8- 8.4 1.0- 1.5-
2.0
.28 .28
26-31 41-42- 64 15-26- 39 20-32- 35 1.40-1.46-
1.52
1.41-2.82-14.11 0.12-0.15-0.1
6
1.7- 4.0- 5.7 0.5- 0.8-
1.0
.32 .32
31-47 35-47- 65 5-32- 45 20-21- 30 1.42-1.52-
10
APPENDIX B
USGS The National Map: Orthoimagery. Data refreshed April, 2019.
National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Feet
Ü
105°0'17.56"W
40°34'55.43"N
104°59'40.11"W
40°34'28.11"N
SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT
HAZARD SPECIAL FLOOD AREAS
Without Zone A, V, Base A99 Flood Elevation (BFE)
With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR
Regulatory Floodway
0.of 2% 1% Annual annual Chance chance Flood flood with Hazard, average Areas
depth areasdrainage of less less than than one one foot square or with mile
Zone X
Future ChanceAnnual Conditions Flood Hazard 1%
Zone X
Area Levee.to with See Reduced Notes. Flood Risk due
Zone X
Area with Flood Risk due to LeveeZone D
NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X
Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D
Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer
Levee, Dike, or Floodwall
Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance
17.5 Water Surface Elevation
Coastal Transect
Coastal Transect Baseline
Profile Baseline
Hydrographic Feature
Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)
Effective LOMRs
Limit of Study
Jurisdiction Boundary
Digital Data Available
No Digital Data Available
Unmapped
This digital map flood complies maps if with it is FEMA's not void standards as described for the below. use of
The accuracy basemap standards shown complies with FEMA's basemap
The authoritative flood hazard NFHL information web services is derived provided directly by FEMA. from This the map
was reflectnot exported changes on or 7/amendments 11/2019 at 5:subsequent 34:53 PM to and this does date and
time. becomeor The superseded NFHL and effective by new data information over time. may change
This elementsmap map image do not is appear: void if basemap the one or imagery, more of flood the following zone labels,
legend, FIRM panel scale number, bar, map and creation FIRM effective date, community date. Map identifiers,images for
unmapped regulatoryfor purposes. and unmodernized areas cannot be used
Legend
OTHER FLOOD AREAS HAZARD OF
OTHER AREAS
STRGUECNTUERREASL
FEATURES OTHER
MAP PANELS
8
1:6,000
B 20.2
The point pin selected displayed by the on the user map and is does an approximate not represent
an authoritative property location.
11
APPENDIX C
096813000 Woodsprings Suites
Fort Collins, CO
7/12/2019
Prepared By: MTH
Checked By: EPF
Rainfall Intensity
TIME 2 YR 10 YR 100 YR
5 2.85 4.87 9.95
6 2.67 4.56 9.31
7 2.52 4.31 8.80
8 2.40 4.10 8.38
9 2.30 3.93 8.03
10 2.21 3.78 7.72
11 2.13 3.63 7.42
12 2.05 3.50 7.16
13 1.98 3.39 6.92
14 1.92 3.29 6.71
15 1.87 3.19 6.52
20 1.61 2.74 5.60
25 1.43 2.44 4.98
30 1.30 2.21 4.52
40 1.07 1.83 3.74
50 0.92 1.58 3.23
60 0.82 1.40 2.86
120 0.49 0.86 1.84
Note:
Time Intensity Frequency Tabulation
Intensity values from the City of Fort Collins Intensity-Duration-Frequency Tables; Chapter 5, Section 3.4
of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, 2018 Edition.
K:\DEN_Civil\096813000_WoodSprings FoCo\_Project Files\Eng\Drainage\Calcs\CIA Calculations.xls
096813000 Woodsprings Suites
Fort Collins, CO
7/12/2019
Prepared By: MBW
Checked By: EPF
Proposed Imperviousness and Runoff Coefficient Calculations
Basin A Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 12,957 25% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 38,539 75% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
51,496 100% 75% 0.76 0.76 1.00
Basin B Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 2,312 12% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 16,543 88% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
18,855 100% 88% 0.86 0.86 1.00
Basin C Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 943 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 0 0% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
943 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Basin D Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 1,519 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 0 0% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
1,519 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Basin E Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 1,239 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 0 0% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
1,239 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Basin F Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 1,025 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 0 0% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
1,025 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Basin ES1 Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 28,150 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 0 0% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
28,150 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Basin ES2 Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 0 0% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 428 100% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
428 100% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.00
Basin ES3 Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 1,085 29% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 2,653 71% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
3,738 100% 72% 0.73 0.73 0.92
096813000 Woodsprings Suites
Fort Collins, CO
7/12/2019
Prepared By: MBW
Checked By: EPF
Lawns, Clayey Soil 1,802 34% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 3,501 66% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
5,303 100% 67% 0.70 0.70 0.87
Basin OS1 Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 2,182 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 0 0% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
2,182 100% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Basin R1 Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 0 0% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 12,536 100% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 0 0% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
12,536 100% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.00
Notes:
1. Imperviousness, I, values per UDFCD Criteria Manual Volume 1, Table 6-3
2. Runoff Coefficient values are from the City of Fort Collins Runoff Coefficient Tables 3.2-2 and 3.2-3; Chapter
5, Section 3.2 of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, 2018 Edition.
K:\DEN_Civil\096813000_WoodSprings FoCo\_Project Files\Eng\Drainage\Calcs\CIA Calculations.xls
096813000 Woodsprings Suites
Fort Collins, CO
7/12/2019
Prepared By: MBW
Checked By: EPF
Proposed Time of Concentration (2-Year and 10-Year Design Storms)
A A 51,496 1.18 75% 0.76 92 2.0% 4.9 119 2.1% 0.195 5.5 0.4 5.3 211 11.2 5.3
B B 18,855 0.43 88% 0.86 80 2.2% 3.1 174 0.8% 0.195 3.5 0.8 5.0 254 11.4 5.0
C C 943 0.02 2% 0.20 24 2.4% 6.2 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 6.2 24 10.1 6.2
D D 1,519 0.03 2% 0.20 53 1.0% 12.4 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 12.4 53 10.3 10.3
E E 1,239 0.03 2% 0.20 40 1.8% 8.8 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 8.8 40 10.2 8.8
F F 1,025 0.02 2% 0.20 28 6.0% 4.9 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 28 10.2 5.0
ES1 ES1 28,150 0.65 2% 0.20 103 4.2% 10.6 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 10.6 103 10.6 10.6
ES2 ES2 428 0.01 100% 0.95 34 2.1% 1.3 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 34 10.2 5.0
ES3 ES3 3,738 0.09 72% 0.73 15 2.1% 2.1 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 15 10.1 5.0
ES4 ES4 1,496 0.03 36% 0.46 27 2.6% 4.5 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 27 10.2 5.0
ES5 ES5 5,303 0.12 67% 0.70 38 2.2% 3.6 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 38 10.2 5.0
OS1 OS1 2,182 0.05 2% 0.20 28 2.9% 6.3 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 6.3 28 10.2 6.3
R1 R1 12,536 0.29 90% 0.95 0 0.0% 0.0 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 0 10.0 5.0
TOTAL 128,910 2.96
SUB-BASIN DATA
DESIGN
POINT
DRAIN
BASIN
AREA
(SF)
AREA
(AC)
RUNOFF
COEFFICIENT
I
(%)
Slope
(%)
TI
LENGTH
(FT)
Slope
(%) R
C2/10
DESIGN
TC (2-YR)
INITIAL / OVERLAND TIME
TI
Velocity
(FPS)
TT T
C
LENGTH
(FT) L/180+10
TRAVEL TIME
TT
URBANIZED BASIN CHECK
TC
LENGTH
(FT)
096813000 Woodsprings Suites
Fort Collins, CO
7/12/2019
Prepared By: MBW
Checked By: EPF
Proposed Time of Concentration (100-Year Design Storms)
A A 51,496 1.18 75% 1.00 92 2.0% 1.4 119 2.1% 0.195 5.5 0.4 5.0 211 11.2 5.0
B B 18,855 0.43 88% 1.00 80 2.2% 1.3 174 0.8% 0.195 3.5 0.8 5.0 254 11.4 5.0
C C 943 0.02 2% 0.25 24 2.4% 5.8 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.8 24 10.1 5.8
D D 1,519 0.03 2% 0.25 53 1.0% 11.7 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 11.7 53 10.3 10.3
E E 1,239 0.03 2% 0.25 40 1.8% 8.3 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 8.3 40 10.2 8.3
F F 1,025 0.02 2% 0.25 28 6.0% 4.6 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 28 10.2 5.0
ES1 ES1 28,150 0.65 2% 0.25 103 4.2% 10.0 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 10.0 103 10.6 10.0
ES2 ES2 428 0.01 100% 1.00 34 2.1% 0.8 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 34 10.2 5.0
ES3 ES3 3,738 0.09 72% 0.92 15 2.1% 1.0 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 15 10.1 5.0
ES4 ES4 1,496 0.03 36% 0.58 27 2.6% 3.7 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 27 10.2 5.0
ES5 ES5 5,303 0.12 67% 0.87 38 2.2% 2.1 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 38 10.2 5.0
OS1 OS1 2,182 0.05 2% 0.25 28 2.9% 5.9 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.9 28 10.2 5.9
R1 R1 12,536 0.29 90% 1.00 0 0.0% 0.0 0 0.0% 0.195 0.0 0.0 5.0 0 10.0 5.0
TOTAL 128,910 2.96
SUB-BASIN DATA RUNOFF
COEFFICIENT
INITIAL / OVERLAND TIME
TI
TRAVEL TIME
TT
URBANIZED BASIN CHECK
TC DESIGN
DESIGN TC (2-YR)
POINT
DRAIN
BASIN
AREA
(SF)
AREA
(AC)
I
(%)
C100
LENGTH
(FT)
Slope
(%)
TI
LENGTH
(FT) L/180+10
Slope
(%) R
Velocity
(FPS)
TT T
C
LENGTH
(FT)
096813000 Woodsprings Suites
Fort Collins, CO
7/12/2019
Prepared By: MBW
Checked By: EPF
Proposed Runoff Calculations
2-Year Design Storm Runoff Calculations
(Rational Method Procedure)
A A 1.18 0.76 5.3 0.90 2.80 2.52
B B 0.43 0.86 5.0 0.37 2.85 1.06 6.3 0.38 9.16 3.49 BASIN B, B & OS1
C C 0.02 0.20 6.2 0.00 2.64 0.01
D D 0.03 0.20 10.3 0.01 2.19 0.02
E E 0.03 0.20 8.8 0.01 2.32 0.01
F F 0.02 0.20 5.0 0.00 2.85 0.01
ES1 ES1 0.65 0.20 10.6 0.13 2.16 0.28
ES2 ES2 0.01 0.95 5.0 0.01 2.85 0.03
ES3 ES3 0.09 0.73 5.0 0.06 2.85 0.18 5.0 0.16 9.95 1.56 BASIN ES3, ES3, ES2, ES5
ES4 ES4 0.03 0.46 5.0 0.02 2.85 0.05
ES5 ES5 0.12 0.70 5.0 0.08 2.85 0.24
OS1 OS1 0.05 0.20 6.3 0.01 2.63 0.03
R1 R1 0.29 0.95 5.0 0.27 2.85 0.78
TOTAL 2.96 5.22
Q
(CFS)
I
(IN/HR)
∑
C*A
TC
Q
(CFS)
AREA
(AC)
REMARKS
BASIN INFORMATON TOTAL RUNOFF
DESIGN
POINT
DIRECT RUNOFF
I
(IN/HR)
∑
C*A
C2 TC
DRAIN
BASIN
K:\DEN_Civil\096813000_WoodSprings FoCo\_Project Files\Eng\Drainage\Calcs\CIA Calculations.xls
096813000 Woodsprings Suites
Fort Collins, CO
7/12/2019
Prepared By: MBW
Checked By: EPF
Proposed Runoff Calculations
10-Year Design Storm Runoff Calculations
(Rational Method Procedure)
A A 1.18 0.76 5.3 0.90 4.79 4.31
B B 0.43 0.86 5.0 0.37 4.87 1.81 6.3 0.38 9.16 3.49 BASIN B, B & OS1
C C 0.02 0.20 6.2 0.00 4.51 0.02
D D 0.03 0.20 10.3 0.01 3.74 0.03
E E 0.03 0.20 8.8 0.01 3.96 0.02
F F 0.02 0.20 5.0 0.00 4.87 0.02
ES1 ES1 0.65 0.20 10.6 0.13 3.69 0.48
ES2 ES2 0.01 0.95 5.0 0.01 4.87 0.05
ES3 ES3 0.09 0.73 5.0 0.06 4.87 0.31 5.0 0.16 9.95 1.56 BASIN ES3, ES3, ES2, ES5
ES4 ES4 0.03 0.46 5.0 0.02 4.87 0.08
ES5 ES5 0.12 0.70 5.0 0.08 4.87 0.41
OS1 OS1 0.05 0.20 6.3 0.01 4.49 0.04
R1 R1 0.29 0.95 5.0 0.27 4.87 1.33
TOTAL 2.96 8.91
DIRECT RUNOFF
Q
(CFS)
BASIN INFORMATON TOTAL RUNOFF
DESIGN REMARKS
POINT
DRAIN
BASIN
AREA
(AC)
C10 TC
I
(IN/HR)
∑
C*A
I
(IN/HR)
Q
(CFS)
TC
∑
C*A
K:\DEN_Civil\096813000_WoodSprings FoCo\_Project Files\Eng\Drainage\Calcs\CIA Calculations.xls
096813000 Woodsprings Suites
Fort Collins, CO
7/12/2019
Prepared By: MBW
Checked By: EPF
Proposed Runoff Calculations
100-Year Design Storm Runoff Calculations
(Rational Method Procedure)
A A 1.18 1.00 5.0 1.18 9.95 11.76
B B 0.43 1.00 5.0 0.43 9.95 4.31 5.9 0.45 9.37 4.17 BASIN B, B & OS1
C C 0.02 0.25 5.8 0.01 9.44 0.05
D D 0.03 0.25 10.3 0.01 7.63 0.07
E E 0.03 0.25 8.3 0.01 8.28 0.06
F F 0.02 0.25 5.0 0.01 9.95 0.06
ES1 ES1 0.65 0.25 10.0 0.16 7.72 1.25
ES2 ES2 0.01 1.00 5.0 0.01 9.95 0.10
ES3 ES3 0.09 0.92 5.0 0.08 9.95 0.78 5.0 0.19 9.95 1.93 BASIN ES3, ES3, ES2, ES5
ES4 ES4 0.03 0.58 5.0 0.02 9.95 0.20
ES5 ES5 0.12 0.87 5.0 0.11 9.95 1.05
OS1 OS1 0.05 0.25 5.9 0.01 9.37 0.12
R1 R1 0.29 1.00 5.0 0.29 9.95 2.86
TOTAL 2.96 0.78 22.67
DIRECT RUNOFF
Q
(CFS)
BASIN INFORMATON TOTAL RUNOFF
DESIGN REMARKS
POINT
DRAIN
BASIN
AREA
(AC)
C100 TC
I
(IN/HR)
∑
C*A
I
(IN/HR)
Q
(CFS)
TC
∑
C*A
K:\DEN_Civil\096813000_WoodSprings FoCo\_Project Files\Eng\Drainage\Calcs\CIA Calculations.xls
0969813000 Woodsprings Suites
Fort Collins, CO
7/12/2019
Prepared By: MBW
Checked By: EPF
Proposed Imperviousness and Runoff Coefficient Summary
A A 1.18 40% 75% 30.1% 0.89 0.76 0.76 1.00
B B 0.43 15% 88% 12.9% 0.38 0.86 0.86 1.00
C C 0.02 1% 2% 0.0% 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.25
D D 0.03 1% 2% 0.0% 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.25
E E 0.03 1% 2% 0.0% 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.25
F F 0.02 1% 2% 0.0% 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.25
ES1 ES1 0.65 22% 2% 0.4% 0.01 0.20 0.20 0.25
ES2 ES2 0.01 0% 100% 0.3% 0.01 0.95 0.95 1.00
ES3 ES3 0.09 3% 72% 2.1% 0.06 0.73 0.73 0.92
ES4 ES4 0.03 1% 36% 0.4% 0.01 0.46 0.46 0.58
ES5 ES5 0.12 4% 67% 2.7% 0.08 0.70 0.70 0.87
OS1 OS1 0.05 2% 2% 0.0% 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.25
R1 R1 0.29 10% 90% 8.8% 0.26 0.95 0.95 1.00
2.96 100% 57.8% 1.71
WEIGHTED
(%)
TOTAL
Impervious
Area (Ac)
C2 C
10 C100
DESIGN
POINT
DRAIN
BASIN
AREA
(AC)
% of Site
(%)
I
(%)
K:\DEN_Civil\096813000_WoodSprings FoCo\_Project Files\Eng\Drainage\Calcs\CIA Calculations.xls
096813000 Woodsprings Suites
Fort Collins, CO
7/12/2019
Prepared By: MBW
Checked By: EPF
Proposed Direct Runoff Summary
A A 1.18 2.52 4.31 11.76
B B 0.43 1.06 1.81 4.31
C C 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.05
D D 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.07
E E 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.06
F F 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.06
ES1 ES1 0.65 0.28 0.48 1.25
ES2 ES2 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.10
ES3 ES3 0.09 0.18 0.31 0.78
ES4 ES4 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.20
ES5 ES5 0.12 0.24 0.41 1.05
OS1 OS1 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.12
R1 R1 0.29 0.78 1.33 2.86
2.96 5.22 8.91 22.67
Standard Rational Method
Q100
(CFS)
Q2
(CFS)
DESIGN
POINT
DRAIN
BASIN
AREA
(AC)
Q10
(CFS)
K:\DEN_Civil\096813000_WoodSprings FoCo\_Project Files\Eng\Drainage\Calcs\CIA Calculations.xls
12
APPENDIX D
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
847 SE FRONTAGE ROAD
WOODSPRING SUITES
FOR REVIEW ONLY
NOT FOR
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
CONSTRUCTION
OF 13
LEGEND
PROPOSED DIRECT RUNOFF SUMMARY
6
DRAINAGE PLAN
NORTH
TT
SOUTHEAST FRONTAGE ROAD
(PRIVATE)
INTERSTATE 1-25
13
APPENDIX E
14
APPENDIX F
Version 4.05 Released March 2017
Worksheet Protected
INLET NAME No Bypass Flow Received A B User-Defined
URBAN URBAN
STREET STREET
In Sump In Sump
CDOT Type R Curb Opening CDOT/Denver 13 Combination
USER-DEFINED INPUT
User-Defined Design Flows
2.5 1.1
11.8 4.4
No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
Watershed Characteristics
Watershed Profile
Minor Storm Rainfall Input
Major Storm Rainfall Input
CALCULATED OUTPUT
2.5 1.1
11.8 4.4
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
Minor Storm (Calculated) Analysis of Flow Time
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
Major Storm (Calculated) Analysis of Flow Time
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
Overland Length (ft)
INLET MANAGEMENT
Inlet Application (Street or Area)
Hydraulic Condition
Minor QKnown (cfs)
Major QKnown (cfs)
Receive Bypass Flow from:
Minor Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cfs)
Major Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cfs)
Subcatchment Area (acres)
Percent Impervious
Project:
Inlet ID:
Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells)
Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK
= 10.0 ft
Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK
= 0.050 ft/ft
Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK
= 0.013
Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB
= 6.00 inches
Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN
= 33.0 ft
Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft
Street Transverse Slope SX
= 0.030 ft/ft
Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW
= 0.083 ft/ft
Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO
= 0.000 ft/ft
Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET
= 0.013
Minor Storm Major Storm
Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX
= 33.0 33.0 ft
Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX
= 6.0 12.0 inches
Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm
MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs
Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR
Type of Inlet Type =
Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal
= 3.00 3.00 inches
Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1
Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 6.0 12.0 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
Project:
Inlet ID:
Gutter Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells)
Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK
= 5.0 ft
Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SBACK
= 0.050 ft/ft
Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nBACK
= 0.013
Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB
= 6.00 inches
Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN
= 34.0 ft
Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft
Street Transverse Slope SX
= 0.025 ft/ft
Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft) SW
= 0.083 ft/ft
Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO
= 0.000 ft/ft
Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020) nSTREET
= 0.013
Minor Storm Major Storm
Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX
= 34.0 34.0 ft
Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX
= 6.0 12.0 inches
Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm
MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow = SUMP SUMP cfs
Design Information (Input) MINOR MAJOR
Type of Inlet Type =
Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above) alocal
= 2.00 2.00 inches
Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1
Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Ponding Depth = 6.0 11.6 inches
Grate Information MINOR MAJOR
Length of a Unit Grate Lo
(G) = 3.00 3.00 feet
Width of a Unit Grate Wo
= 1.73 1.73 feet
Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) Aratio
= 0.43 0.43
Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) Cf
(G) = 0.50 0.50
Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60) Cw
(G) = 3.30 3.30
Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80) Co
(G) = 0.60 0.60
Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR
Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo
(C) = 3.00 3.00 feet
Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert
= 6.50 6.50 inches
Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat
= 5.25 5.25 inches
Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 0.00 0.00 degrees
Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) Wp
= 2.00 2.00 feet
Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Cf
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Formula
Solve For Discharge
Input Data
Roughness Coefficient 0.013
Channel Slope 0.01500 ft/ft
Normal Depth 0.50 ft
Bottom Width 2.00 ft
Results
Discharge 6.73 ft³/s
Flow Area 1.00 ft²
Wetted Perimeter 3.00 ft
Hydraulic Radius 0.33 ft
Top Width 2.00 ft
Critical Depth 0.71 ft
Critical Slope 0.00564 ft/ft
Velocity 6.73 ft/s
Velocity Head 0.70 ft
Specific Energy 1.20 ft
Froude Number 1.68
Flow Type Supercritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth 0.00 ft
Length 0.00 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 0.50 ft
Critical Depth 0.71 ft
Channel Slope 0.01500 ft/ft
Critical Slope 0.00564 ft/ft
Worksheet for Curb Cut A
7/19/2019 12:23:24 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 1
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Formula
Solve For Discharge
Input Data
Roughness Coefficient 0.013
Channel Slope 0.02000 ft/ft
Normal Depth 0.50 ft
Bottom Width 2.00 ft
Results
Discharge 7.77 ft³/s
Flow Area 1.00 ft²
Wetted Perimeter 3.00 ft
Hydraulic Radius 0.33 ft
Top Width 2.00 ft
Critical Depth 0.78 ft
Critical Slope 0.00577 ft/ft
Velocity 7.77 ft/s
Velocity Head 0.94 ft
Specific Energy 1.44 ft
Froude Number 1.94
Flow Type Supercritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth 0.00 ft
Length 0.00 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 0.50 ft
Critical Depth 0.78 ft
Channel Slope 0.02000 ft/ft
Critical Slope 0.00577 ft/ft
Worksheet for Curb Cut A2
7/19/2019 12:24:31 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 1
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Formula
Solve For Discharge
Input Data
Roughness Coefficient 0.013
Channel Slope 0.00800 ft/ft
Normal Depth 0.50 ft
Bottom Width 2.00 ft
Results
Discharge 4.91 ft³/s
Flow Area 1.00 ft²
Wetted Perimeter 3.00 ft
Hydraulic Radius 0.33 ft
Top Width 2.00 ft
Critical Depth 0.57 ft
Critical Slope 0.00542 ft/ft
Velocity 4.91 ft/s
Velocity Head 0.38 ft
Specific Energy 0.88 ft
Froude Number 1.23
Flow Type Supercritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth 0.00 ft
Length 0.00 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 0.50 ft
Critical Depth 0.57 ft
Channel Slope 0.00800 ft/ft
Critical Slope 0.00542 ft/ft
Worksheet for Curb Cut B
7/19/2019 12:25:10 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 1
15
APPENDIX G
Project:
Basin ID:
Depth Increment = ft
Required Volume Calculation Top of Micropool
Selected BMP Type = EDB
Watershed Area = 2.06 acres
Watershed Length = 300 ft
Watershed Slope = 0.030 ft/ft
Watershed Imperviousness = 74.00% percent
Percentage Hydrologic Soil Group A = 0.0% percent
Percentage Hydrologic Soil Group B = 0.0% percent
Percentage Hydrologic Soil Groups C/D = 100.0% percent
Desired WQCV Drain Time = 40.0 hours
Location for 1-hr Rainfall Depths = User Input
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) = 0.051 acre-feet
Excess Urban Runoff Volume (EURV) = 0.149 acre-feet
2-yr Runoff Volume (P1 = 0.82 in.) = 0.099 acre-feet 0.82 inches
5-yr Runoff Volume (P1 = 0 in.) = 0.000 acre-feet inches
10-yr Runoff Volume (P1 = 1.4 in.) = 0.190 acre-feet 1.40 inches
25-yr Runoff Volume (P1 = 0 in.) = 0.000 acre-feet inches
50-yr Runoff Volume (P1 = 0 in.) = 0.000 acre-feet inches
100-yr Runoff Volume (P1 = 2.86 in.) = 0.451 acre-feet 2.86 inches
500-yr Runoff Volume (P1 = 0 in.) = 0.000 acre-feet inches
Approximate 2-yr Detention Volume = 0.092 acre-feet
Approximate 5-yr Detention Volume = 0.000 acre-feet
Approximate 10-yr Detention Volume = 0.170 acre-feet
Approximate 25-yr Detention Volume = 0.000 acre-feet
Approximate 50-yr Detention Volume = 0.000 acre-feet
Approximate 100-yr Detention Volume = 0.282 acre-feet
Stage-Storage Calculation
Zone 1 Volume (WQCV) = 0.051 acre-feet
Select Zone 2 Storage Volume (Optional) = acre-feet
Select Zone 3 Storage Volume (Optional) = acre-feet
Total Detention Basin Volume = 0.051 acre-feet
Initial Surcharge Volume (ISV) = 7 ft^3
Initial Surcharge Depth (ISD) = ft
Total Available Detention Depth (Htotal) =
ft
Depth of Trickle Channel (HTC) = ft
Slope of Trickle Channel (STC) =
ft/ft
Slopes of Main Basin Sides (Smain) =
H:V
Basin Length-to-Width Ratio (RL/W) =
Initial Surcharge Area (AISV) = ft^2
Surcharge Volume Length (LISV) = ft
Surcharge Volume Width (WISV) = ft
Depth of Basin Floor (HFLOOR) = ft
Length of Basin Floor (LFLOOR) = ft
Width of Basin Floor (WFLOOR) = ft
Area of Basin Floor (AFLOOR) = ft^2
Volume of Basin Floor (VFLOOR) = ft^3
Depth of Main Basin (HMAIN) = ft
Length of Main Basin (LMAIN) = ft
Width of Main Basin (WMAIN) = ft
Area of Main Basin (AMAIN) = ft^2
Volume of Main Basin (VMAIN) = ft^3
Calculated Total Basin Volume (Vtotal) = acre-feet
DETENTION BASIN STAGE-STORAGE TABLE BUILDER
Optional
SHEET
OF
DATE:
PROJECT #:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
THIS DRAWING HAS BEEN PREPARED BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED TO ADS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER OR OTHER PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER SHALL REVIEW
THIS DRAWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IT IS THE ULTIMATE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER TO ENSURE THAT THE PRODUCT(S) DEPICTED AND ALL ASSOCIATED DETAILS MEET ALL APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND PROJECT REQUIREMENTS.
4640 TRUEMAN BLVD
HILLIARD, OH 43026
1-800-733-7473
ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, INC.
R
REV DRW CHK DESCRIPTION
Tool ---
70 NIWOOD ROAD, SUTIE 3 | ROCKY HLIL | CT | 06067
860-529-8188 |888-892-2694 | WWW.STORMTECH.COM
Detention Retention Water Quality
ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS: STORMTECH SC-740 CHAMBER SYSTEMS
PLEASE NOTE:
1. THE LISTED AASHTO DESIGNATIONS ARE FOR GRADATIONS ONLY. THE STONE MUST ALSO BE CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR. FOR EXAMPLE, A SPECIFICATION FOR #4 STONE WOULD STATE: "CLEAN, CRUSHED,
ANGULAR NO. 4 (AASHTO M43) STONE".
2. STORMTECH COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS ARE MET FOR 'A' LOCATION MATERIALS WHEN PLACED AND COMPACTED IN 6" (150 mm) (MAX) LIFTS USING TWO FULL COVERAGES WITH A VIBRATORY COMPACTOR.
3. WHERE INFILTRATION SURFACES MAY BE COMPROMISED BY COMPACTION, FOR STANDARD DESIGN LOAD CONDITIONS, A FLAT SURFACE MAY BE ACHIEVED BY RAKING OR DRAGGING WITHOUT COMPACTION
EQUIPMENT. FOR SPECIAL LOAD DESIGNS, CONTACT STORMTECH FOR COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS.
NOTES:
1. SC-740 CHAMBERS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F2418 "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPYLENE (PP) CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS",
OR ASTM F2922 "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYETHYLENE (PE) CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS".
2. SC-740 CHAMBERS SHALL BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787 "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION
CHAMBERS".
3. "ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS" TABLE ABOVE PROVIDES MATERIAL LOCATIONS, DESCRIPTIONS, GRADATIONS, AND COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS FOR FOUNDATION, EMBEDMENT, AND FILL
MATERIALS.
4. THE "SITE DESIGN ENGINEER" REFERS TO THE ENGINEER RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DESIGN AND LAYOUT OF THE STORMTECH CHAMBERS FOR THIS PROJECT.
5. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ASSESSING THE BEARING RESISTANCE (ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY) OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS AND THE DEPTH OF FOUNDATION STONE
WITH CONSIDERATION FOR THE RANGE OF EXPECTED SOIL MOISTURE CONDITIONS.
6. PERIMETER STONE MUST BE EXTENDED HORIZONTALLY TO THE EXCAVATION WALL FOR BOTH VERTICAL AND SLOPED EXCAVATION WALLS.
7. ONCE LAYER 'C' IS PLACED, ANY SOIL/MATERIAL CAN BE PLACED IN LAYER 'D' UP TO THE FINISHED GRADE. MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE SOILS CAN BE USED TO REPLACE THE MATERIAL
REQUIREMENTS OF LAYER 'C' OR 'D' AT THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S DISCRETION.
MATERIAL LOCATION DESCRIPTION AASHTO MATERIAL
CLASSIFICATIONS
COMPACTION / DENSITY
REQUIREMENT
D
FINAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'D' STARTS
FROM THE TOP OF THE 'C' LAYER TO THE BOTTOM
OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT OR UNPAVED FINISHED
GRADE ABOVE. NOTE THAT PAVEMENT SUBBASE
MAY BE PART OF THE 'D' LAYER
ANY SOIL/ROCK MATERIALS, NATIVE SOILS, OR PER
ENGINEER'S PLANS. CHECK PLANS FOR PAVEMENT
SUBGRADE REQUIREMENTS.
N/A
PREPARE PER SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S PLANS.
PAVED INSTALLATIONS MAY HAVE STRINGENT
MATERIAL AND PREPARATION REQUIREMENTS.
C
INITIAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'C'
STARTS FROM THE TOP OF THE EMBEDMENT
STONE ('B' LAYER) TO 18" (450 mm) ABOVE THE
SHEET
OF
DATE:
PROJECT #:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
THIS DRAWING HAS BEEN PREPARED BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED TO ADS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER OR OTHER PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER SHALL REVIEW
THIS DRAWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IT IS THE ULTIMATE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER TO ENSURE THAT THE PRODUCT(S) DEPICTED AND ALL ASSOCIATED DETAILS MEET ALL APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND PROJECT REQUIREMENTS.
4640 TRUEMAN BLVD
HILLIARD, OH 43026
1-800-733-7473
ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, INC.
R
REV DRW CHK DESCRIPTION
Tool ---
70 NIWOOD ROAD, SUTIE 3 | ROCKY HLIL | CT | 06067
860-529-8188 |888-892-2694 | WWW.STORMTECH.COM
Detention Retention Water Quality
INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE
STEP 1) INSPECT ISOLATOR ROW FOR SEDIMENT
A. INSPECTION PORTS (IF PRESENT)
A.1. REMOVE/OPEN LID ON NYLOPLAST INLINE DRAIN
A.2. REMOVE AND CLEAN FLEXSTORM FILTER IF INSTALLED
A.3. USING A FLASHLIGHT AND STADIA ROD, MEASURE DEPTH OF SEDIMENT AND RECORD ON MAINTENANCE LOG
A.4. LOWER A CAMERA INTO ISOLATOR ROW FOR VISUAL INSPECTION OF SEDIMENT LEVELS (OPTIONAL)
A.5. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3.
B. ALL ISOLATOR ROWS
B.1. REMOVE COVER FROM STRUCTURE AT UPSTREAM END OF ISOLATOR ROW
B.2. USING A FLASHLIGHT, INSPECT DOWN THE ISOLATOR ROW THROUGH OUTLET PIPE
i) MIRRORS ON POLES OR CAMERAS MAY BE USED TO AVOID A CONFINED SPACE ENTRY
ii) FOLLOW OSHA REGULATIONS FOR CONFINED SPACE ENTRY IF ENTERING MANHOLE
B.3. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3.
STEP 2) CLEAN OUT ISOLATOR ROW USING THE JETVAC PROCESS
A. A FIXED CULVERT CLEANING NOZZLE WITH REAR FACING SPREAD OF 45" (1.1 m) OR MORE IS PREFERRED
B. APPLY MULTIPLE PASSES OF JETVAC UNTIL BACKFLUSH WATER IS CLEAN
C. VACUUM STRUCTURE SUMP AS REQUIRED
STEP 3) REPLACE ALL COVERS, GRATES, FILTERS, AND LIDS; RECORD OBSERVATIONS AND ACTIONS.
STEP 4) INSPECT AND CLEAN BASINS AND MANHOLES UPSTREAM OF THE STORMTECH SYSTEM.
NOTES
1. INSPECT EVERY 6 MONTHS DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF OPERATION. ADJUST THE INSPECTION INTERVAL BASED ON PREVIOUS
OBSERVATIONS OF SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION AND HIGH WATER ELEVATIONS.
2. CONDUCT JETTING AND VACTORING ANNUALLY OR WHEN INSPECTION SHOWS THAT MAINTENANCE IS NECESSARY.
SUMP DEPTH TBD BY
SITE DESIGN ENGINEER
(24" [600 mm] MIN RECOMMENDED)
24" (600 mm) HDPE ACCESS PIPE REQUIRED
USE FACTORY PRE-FABRICATED END CAP
PART #: SC740EPE24B
TWO LAYERS OF ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 315WTK WOVEN
GEOTEXTILE BETWEEN FOUNDATION STONE AND CHAMBERS
5' (1.5 m) MIN WIDE CONTINUOUS FABRIC WITHOUT SEAMS
CATCH BASIN
OR
MANHOLE
COVER ENTIRE ISOLATOR ROW WITH ADS
GEOSYNTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE
8' (2.4 m) MIN WIDE
SC-740 CHAMBER
SC-740 END CAP
SHEET
OF
DATE:
PROJECT #:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
THIS DRAWING HAS BEEN PREPARED BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED TO ADS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER OR OTHER PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER SHALL REVIEW
THIS DRAWING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IT IS THE ULTIMATE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER TO ENSURE THAT THE PRODUCT(S) DEPICTED AND ALL ASSOCIATED DETAILS MEET ALL APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND PROJECT REQUIREMENTS.
4640 TRUEMAN BLVD
HILLIARD, OH 43026
1-800-733-7473
ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, INC.
R
REV DRW CHK DESCRIPTION
Tool ---
70 NIWOOD ROAD, SUTIE 3 | ROCKY HLIL | CT | 06067
860-529-8188 |888-892-2694 | WWW.STORMTECH.COM
Detention Retention Water Quality
UNDERDRAIN DETAIL
NTS
A
A
B B
SECTION A-A
SECTION B-B
NUMBER AND SIZE OF UNDERDRAINS PER SITE DESIGN ENGINEER
4" (100 mm) TYP FOR SC-310 SYSTEMS
6" (150 mm) TYP FOR SC-740, DC-780, MC-3500 & MC-4500 SYSTEMS
OUTLET MANIFOLD
STORMTECH
END CAP
STORMTECH
CHAMBERS
STORMTECH
CHAMBER
STORMTECH
END CAP
DUAL WALL
PERFORATED
HDPE
UNDERDRAIN
ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 601T
NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE
ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 601T
NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE
FOUNDATION STONE
BENEATH CHAMBERS
FOUNDATION STONE
BENEATH CHAMBERS
PART # STUB A B C
SC740EPE06T / SC740EPE06TPC 6" (150 mm) 10.9" (277 mm)
18.5" (470 mm) ---
SC740EPE06B / SC740EPE06BPC --- 0.5" (13 mm)
SC740EPE08T /SC740EPE08TPC 8" (200 mm) 12.2" (310 mm)
16.5" (419 mm) ---
SC740EPE08B / SC740EPE08BPC --- 0.6" (15 mm)
SC740EPE10T / SC740EPE10TPC 10" (250 mm) 13.4" (340 mm)
14.5" (368 mm) ---
SC740EPE10B / SC740EPE10BPC --- 0.7" (18 mm)
SC740EPE12T / SC740EPE12TPC 12" (300 mm) 14.7" (373 mm)
12.5" (318 mm) ---
SC740EPE12B / SC740EPE12BPC --- 1.2" (30 mm)
SC740EPE15T / SC740EPE15TPC 15" (375 mm) 18.4" (467 mm)
9.0" (229 mm) ---
SC740EPE15B / SC740EPE15BPC --- 1.3" (33 mm)
SC740EPE18T / SC740EPE18TPC 18" (450 mm) 19.7" (500 mm)
5.0" (127 mm) ---
SC740EPE18B / SC740EPE18BPC --- 1.6" (41 mm)
SC740EPE24B* 24" (600 mm) 18.5" (470 mm) --- 0.1" (3 mm)
ALL STUBS, EXCEPT FOR THE SC740EPE24B ARE PLACED AT BOTTOM OF END CAP SUCH THAT THE OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF
THE STUB IS FLUSH WITH THE BOTTOM OF THE END CAP. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONTACT STORMTECH AT
1-888-892-2694.
* FOR THE SC740EPE24B THE 24" (600 mm) STUB LIES BELOW THE BOTTOM OF THE END CAP APPROXIMATELY 1.75" (44 mm).
BACKFILL MATERIAL SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM BELOW THE N-12 STUB SO THAT THE FITTING SITS LEVEL.
NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE NOMINAL
NOMINAL CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS
SIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 51.0" X 30.0" X 85.4" (1295 mm X 762 mm X 2169 mm)
CHAMBER STORAGE 45.9 CUBIC FEET (1.30 m³)
MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 74.9 CUBIC FEET (2.12 m³)
WEIGHT 75.0 lbs. (33.6 kg)
*ASSUMES 6" (152 mm) STONE ABOVE, BELOW, AND BETWEEN CHAMBERS
STUBS AT BOTTOM OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "B"
STUBS AT TOP OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "T"
SC-740 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
NTS
90.7" (2304 mm) ACTUAL LENGTH 85.4" (2169 mm) INSTALLED LENGTH
OVERLAP NEXT CHAMBER HERE
(OVER SMALL CORRUGATION)
BUILD ROW IN THIS DIRECTION
START END
A A
C
B
51.0"
(1295 mm)
30.0"
(762 mm)
ACCEPTS 4" (100 mm) SCH 40 PVC PIPE FOR INSPECTION
PORT. FOR PIPE SIZES LARGER THAN 4" (100 mm) UP TO
10" (250 mm) USE INSERTA TEE CONNECTION CENTERED
ON A CHAMBER CREST CORRUGATION
12.2" 45.9" (1166 mm)
(310 mm)
29.3"
(744 mm)
INSERTA TEE DETAIL
NTS
INSERTA TEE
CONNECTION
CONVEYANCE PIPE
MATERIAL MAY VARY
(PVC, HDPE, ETC.)
PLACE ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 315 WOVEN
GEOTEXTILE (CENTERED ON INSERTA-TEE
INLET) OVER BEDDING STONE FOR SCOUR
PROTECTION AT SIDE INLET CONNECTIONS.
GEOTEXTILE MUST EXTEND 6" (150 mm)
PAST CHAMBER FOOT
INSERTA TEE TO BE
INSTALLED, CENTERED
OVER CORRUGATION
SECTION A-A SIDE VIEW
A
A
DO NOT INSTALL
INSERTA-TEE AT
CHAMBER JOINTS
NOTE:
PART NUMBERS WILL VARY BASED ON INLET PIPE MATERIALS.
CONTACT STORMTECH FOR MORE INFORMATION.
CHAMBER MAX DIAMETER OF
INSERTA TEE
HEIGHT FROM BASE OF
CHAMBER (X)
SC-310 6" (150 mm) 4" (100 mm)
SC-740 10" (250 mm) 4" (100 mm)
DC-780 10" (250 mm) 4" (100 mm)
MC-3500 12" (300 mm) 6" (150 mm)
MC-4500 12" (300 mm) 8" (200 mm)
INSERTA TEE FITTINGS AVAILABLE FOR SDR 26, SDR 35, SCH 40 IPS
GASKETED & SOLVENT WELD, N-12, HP STORM, C-900 OR DUCTILE IRON
(X)
5 5
Fort Collins Project - SC-740 Option
Colorado
07/09/2019 EF
SC-740 ISOLATOR ROW DETAIL
NTS
OPTIONAL INSPECTION PORT
STORMTECH HIGHLY RECOMMENDS
FLEXSTORM PURE INSERTS IN ANY UPSTREAM
STRUCTURES WITH OPEN GRATES
SC-740 6" INSPECTION PORT DETAIL
NTS
SC-740 CHAMBER
FLEXSTORM CATCH IT
PART# 6212NYFX
WITH USE OF OPEN GRATE
12" (300 mm) NYLOPLAST INLINE
DRAIN BODY W/SOLID HINGED
COVER OR GRATE
PART# 2712AG06N
SOLID COVER: 1299CGC
GRATE: 1299CGS
6" (150 mm) INSERTA TEE
PART#06N12ST74IP
INSERTA TEE TO BE CENTERED
ON CORRUGATION CREST
6" (150 mm) ADS N-12
HDPE PIPE
18" (450 mm) MIN WIDTH
CONCRETE SLAB
8" (200 mm) MIN THICKNESS
PAVEMENT CONCRETE COLLAR NOT REQUIRED
FOR UNPAVED APPLICATIONS
CONCRETE COLLAR
4 5
Fort Collins Project - SC-740 Option
Colorado
07/09/2019 EF
TOP OF THE CHAMBER. NOTE THAT PAVEMENT
SUBBASE MAY BE A PART OF THE 'C' LAYER.
GRANULAR WELL-GRADED SOIL/AGGREGATE MIXTURES, <35%
FINES OR PROCESSED AGGREGATE.
MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE MATERIALS CAN BE USED IN LIEU
OF THIS LAYER.
AASHTO M145¹
A-1, A-2-4, A-3
OR
AASHTO M43¹
3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57, 6, 67, 68, 7, 78, 8, 89,
9, 10
BEGIN COMPACTIONS AFTER 12" (300 mm) OF
MATERIAL OVER THE CHAMBERS IS REACHED.
COMPACT ADDITIONAL LAYERS IN 6" (150 mm) MAX
LIFTS TO A MIN. 95% PROCTOR DENSITY FOR
WELL GRADED MATERIAL AND 95% RELATIVE
DENSITY FOR PROCESSED AGGREGATE
MATERIALS. ROLLER GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT
NOT TO EXCEED 12,000 lbs (53 kN). DYNAMIC
FORCE NOT TO EXCEED 20,000 lbs (89 kN).
B
EMBEDMENT STONE: FILL SURROUNDING THE
CHAMBERS FROM THE FOUNDATION STONE ('A'
LAYER) TO THE 'C' LAYER ABOVE.
CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE, NOMINAL SIZE
DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN 3/4-2 INCH (20-50 mm)
AASHTO M43¹
3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57 NO COMPACTION REQUIRED.
A
FOUNDATION STONE: FILL BELOW CHAMBERS
FROM THE SUBGRADE UP TO THE FOOT (BOTTOM)
OF THE CHAMBER.
CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE, NOMINAL SIZE
DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN 3/4-2 INCH (20-50 mm)
AASHTO M43¹
3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57
PLATE COMPACT OR ROLL TO ACHIEVE A FLAT
SURFACE. ² ³
18"
(450 mm) MIN*
8'
(2.4 m)
MAX
SUBGRADE SOILS
(SEE NOTE 5)
PAVEMENT LAYER (DESIGNED
BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER)
SC-740
END CAP
6" (150 mm) MIN
D
C
B
A
PERIMETER STONE
(SEE NOTE 6)
EXCAVATION WALL
(CAN BE SLOPED OR VERTICAL)
12" (300 mm) MIN
ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE ALL
AROUND CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE IN A & B LAYERS
6" 51" (1295 mm) 12" (300 mm) TYP
(150 mm) MIN
30"
(760 mm)
DEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINED
BY DESIGN ENGINEER 6" (150 mm) MIN
*TO BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT. FOR UNPAVED
INSTALLATIONS WHERE RUTTING FROM VEHICLES MAY OCCUR,
INCREASE COVER TO 24" (600 mm).
3 5
Fort Collins Project - SC-740 Option
Colorado
07/09/2019 EF
Override
Area (ft^2)
Length
(ft)
Optional
Override
Stage (ft)
Stage
(ft)
Stage - Storage
Description
Area
(ft^2)
Width
(ft)
UD-Detention, Version 3.07 (February 2017)
Volume
(ft^3)
Volume
(ac-ft)
Area
(acre)
Optional User Override
1-hr Precipitation
Total detention volume
is less than 100-year
volume.
Example Zone Configuration (Retention Pond)
UD-Detention_v3.07.xlsm, Basin 7/19/2019, 12:01 PM
(C) = 0.10 0.10
Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7) Cw
(C) = 3.70 3.70
Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70) Co
(C) = 0.66 0.66
Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR
Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = 0.523 0.989 ft
Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.33 0.80 ft
Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.94 1.00
Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00
Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = 0.94 1.00
MINOR MAJOR
Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa
= 3.6 8.9 cfs
Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED
= 1.1 4.4 cfs
CDOT/Denver 13 Combination
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Version 4.05 Released March 2017
Version 4.05 Released March 2017
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Woodspring Fort Collins
B
H-Vert
H-Curb
W
Lo (C)
Lo (G)
Wo
WP
CDOT/Denver 13 Combination
Override Depths
UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, B 7/19/2019, 11:51 AM
(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
Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated) MINOR MAJOR
Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate = N/A N/A ft
Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb = 0.33 0.83 ft
Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination = 0.77 1.00
Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb = 1.00 1.00
Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate = N/A N/A
MINOR MAJOR
Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Qa
= 5.4 12.3 cfs
Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK) Q PEAK REQUIRED
= 2.5 11.8 cfs
Version 4.05 Released March 2017
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Woodspring Fort Collins
A
CDOT Type R Curb Opening
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Version 4.05 Released March 2017
H-Vert
H-Curb
W
Lo (C)
Lo (G)
Wo
WP
CDOT Type R Curb Opening
Override Depths
UD-Inlet_v4.05.xlsm, A 7/19/2019, 11:51 AM
NRCS Soil Type
Overland Slope (ft/ft)
Inlet Type
Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from Upstream
Channel Slope (ft/ft)
Channel Length (ft)
Design Storm Return Period, Tr (years)
One-Hour Precipitation, P1 (inches)
Design Storm Return Period, Tr (years)
One-Hour Precipitation, P1 (inches)
Recommended Tc
Tc selected by User
Design Rainfall Intensity, I
Minor Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs)
Major Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs)
Channel Flow Velocity, Vt
Overland Flow Time, Ti
Channel Travel Time, Tt
Calculated Time of Concentration, Tc
Regional Tc
Minor Total Design Peak Flow, Q (cfs)
Major Total Design Peak Flow, Q (cfs)
C
C5
Overland Flow Velocity, Vi
Site Type (Urban or Rural)
Calculated Local Peak Flow, Qp
Overland Flow Velocity, Vi
Channel Flow Velocity, Vt
Overland Flow Time, Ti
Channel Travel Time, Tt
Calculated Time of Concentration, Tc
Regional Tc
Calculated Local Peak Flow, Qp
C
Recommended Tc
Tc selected by User
Design Rainfall Intensity, I
C5
Basin ES4 Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
Lawns, Clayey Soil 971 65% 2% 0.20 0.20 0.25
Rooftop 0 0% 90% 0.95 0.95 1.19
Asphalt, Concrete 525 35% 100% 0.95 0.95 1.19
1,496 100% 36% 0.46 0.46 0.58
Basin ES5 Area (sf) Basin % I C2 C
10 C100
K:\DEN_Civil\096813000_WoodSprings FoCo\_Project Files\Eng\Drainage\Calcs\CIA Calculations.xls
1.61
1.41-9.17-14.11 0.12-0.14-0.1
5
1.5- 2.1- 3.5 0.0- 0.3-
0.9
.37 .37
47-80 37-48- 72 2-28- 48 15-24- 26 1.44-1.54-
1.65
4.23-9.17-42.34 0.11-0.17-0.1
7
0.9- 2.6- 2.9 0.0- 0.3-
0.9
.37 .37
74—Nunn clay
loam, 1 to 3
percent
slopes
Nunn 0-9 36-43- 45 17-26- 37 27-31- 38 1.39-1.41-
1.43
0.42-2.82-4.23 0.16-0.16-0.1
7
3.3- 4.3- 6.8 1.0- 1.5-
2.0
.28 .28 5 6 48
9-13 25-32- 39 16-30- 40 35-38- 45 1.32-1.37-
1.42
0.42-0.92-1.41 0.14-0.16-0.1
6
5.8- 6.6- 8.4 1.0- 1.5-
2.0
.28 .28
13-25 25-32- 39 16-30- 40 35-38- 45 1.43-1.46-
1.48
0.42-0.92-1.41 0.14-0.16-0.1
6
5.6- 6.2- 8.2 0.5- 0.8-
1.0
.32 .32
25-38 35-41- 65 2-30- 45 20-29- 33 1.42-1.49-
1.56
1.41-2.82-14.11 0.12-0.17-0.1
7
1.8- 3.5- 4.4 0.0- 0.3-
0.9
.37 .37
38-80 37-41- 65 2-29- 48 15-30- 33 1.44-1.50-
1.56
1.41-2.82-42.34 0.10-0.17-0.1
7
1.1- 3.7- 4.5 0.0- 0.3-
0.9
.32 .32
Custom Soil Resource Report
24
-100
100-100
-100
86-94-1
00
57-69-
85
29-39
-44
12-19-2
3
38-80 Sandy clay loam,
sandy loam, loam,
clay loam
CL A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
-100
100-100
-100
84-94-1
00
53-69-
77
25-40
-44
9-20-23
Custom Soil Resource Report
20
24-27-3
3
26-31 Clay loam, loam,
sandy clay loam
CL A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
-100
100-100
-100
87-94-1
00
58-68-
74
30-42
-47
12-22-2
5
31-47 Loam, clay loam,
sandy clay loam
CL A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
-100
100-100
-100
88-96-1
00
55-65-
80
29-31
-41
12-14-2
0
47-80 Sandy clay loam,
sandy loam, loam
CL A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100
-100
100-100
-100
86-96-1
00
49-64-
75
24-34
-38
7-16-18
Custom Soil Resource Report
19
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
Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 10, 2018
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Sep 20, 2015—Oct
21, 2017
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.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7