HomeMy WebLinkAboutENCLAVE AT REDWOOD - PDP210004 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - DRAINAGE REPORT
PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
Fort Collins, CO 80524
Date: August 18, 2021
Revised: N/A
Prepared for:
9555 South Kingston Court
Denver, CO 80112
Phone: 303-488-0061
Prepared by:
Mark A. West, P.E., C.F.M.
1120 Lincoln Street, Suite 1000
Denver, CO 80203
Ph.: 303-623-6300, Fax: 303-623-6311
Harris Kocher Smith Project No. 201013
Enclave at Redwood
Table of Contents
August 18, 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................... 4
A. Site Location ....................................................................................................................................... 4
B. Description of Property ...................................................................................................................... 4
II. MASTER DRAINAGE BASIN DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................. 5
A. Floodplain........................................................................................................................................... 5
B. Master Drainage Basin ....................................................................................................................... 5
III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA ................................................................................................................. 6
A. Regulations and Previous Studies ...................................................................................................... 6
B. Four-Step Process .............................................................................................................................. 6
C. Hydrologic Design Criteria ................................................................................................................. 7
D. Hydraulic Design Criteria .................................................................................................................... 8
E. Variances ............................................................................................................................................ 9
F. Erosion Control .................................................................................................................................. 9
IV. PROPOSED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................................ 9
A. General Concept ................................................................................................................................ 9
B. Proposed Basins ............................................................................................................................... 10
C. Specific Details ................................................................................................................................. 11
V. CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 16
A. Compliance with Standards ............................................................................................................. 16
B. Drainage Concept ............................................................................................................................. 16
VI. REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................... 17
VII. APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................................... 18
Appendix A – Vicinity Map, FIRM, Geotechnical Engineering Report ....................................................... A
Appendix B - Portions from Relevant Previous Studies ............................................................................ B
Appendix C – Subcatchment Hydrology .................................................................................................... C
Appendix D – Detention Storage Sizing ..................................................................................................... D
Appendix E – SWMM Model and Results .................................................................................................. E
Appendix F – Low Impact Development ................................................................................................... F
Appendix G – Drainage Map ..................................................................................................................... G
Enclave at Redwood
Engineer Certification
August 18, 2021
Engineer Certification
I hereby attest that this report for the preliminary drainage design for the Enclave at Redwood was
prepared by me or under my direct supervision, in accordance with the provisions of the Fort
Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. I understand that the City of Fort Collins does not and will not
assume liability for drainage facilities designed by others.
__________________________________ _______________________
Mark A. West, P.E., C.F.M. Date
State Of Colorado Registration No. 38561
On Behalf of Harris Kocher Smith
Enclave at Redwood
Page 4
August 18, 2021
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. Site Location
The proposed Enclave at Redwood development (hereinafter referred to as “Site”) is located in the
southeast ¼ of Section 1, Township 7 north, Range 69 west of the sixth Principal Meridian, City of Fort
Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. The Site is bounded by Redwood Street to the west and
East Suniga Road to the south. Adjacent developments include the Meadows at Redwood PUD Phase 1
(Redwood Meadows) to the west, Northfield to the east and southeast, and Evergreen Park 3rd
(Evergreen) to the north. Lake Canal exists as an irrigation ditch adjacent to the Site to the east and
southeast, and an unnamed drainage ditch lies adjacent to the Site to the north. The Site will connect to
Redwood St to the southwest, Lupine Dr in Redwood Meadows to the west, Steeley Dr in Northfield to
the southeast, and Collamer Dr in Northfield to the east. See Appendix A for the Vicinity Map. The Site
exists entirely within the Dry Creek master drainage basin.
B. Description of Property
The Site is approximately 27.47 acres of undeveloped land. The undeveloped land is made up of various
native trees and grasses. The Site generally slopes from west to east at grades between roughly 0.3%
and 1% towards Lake Canal. Lake Canal is an irrigation ditch and discharging stormwater from the
developed Site to this ditch will require approval from the ditch ownership. Given that the Site
historically flows to this ditch, it is currently assumed that as long as developed flow entering the ditch is
kept to a minimum, as much as is practical, this approval will not be out of reach. Redwood Pond is an
existing regional pond to the northwest of the Site, it historically outfalls east into the unnamed
drainage ditch that exists north of the Site. The proposed development of the Site will feature mutli-
family housing, public and private roadways, walks, parks, a clubhouse with pool, landscaped areas,
three on-Site detention ponds, low-impact-development systems, and the regrading of the Redwood
Pond.
Cole Garner Geotechnical has prepared a Geotechnical Engineering Report for Enclave at Redwood
Residential Development on August 11, 2021. This report details existing soils information for the Site.
Ten borings were drilled on-Site to examine subsurface conditions. Materials encountered in these
borings generally included fine to coarse sand with silt and gravel overlying claystone bedrock.
Sedimentary claystone bedrock was encountered in nine of ten borings at depth between 17 and 23 feet
below Site grades and extending to the bottom of the borings. Groundwater was encountered in all
borings at depths ranging from 8 to 17 feet below existing Site grades. Due to shallow groundwater
concerns, construction dewatering may be required, and underdrains may be requested by the City of
Fort Collins. Please see Appendix A for a copy of the Geotechnical Engineering Report.
Enclave at Redwood
Page 5
August 18, 2021
II. MASTER DRAINAGE BASIN DESCRIPTION
A. Floodplain
The Site is shown on the Federal Emergency Agency’s (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)
Community Panel Numbers 08069C0977G and 08069C0981G, effective June 17, 2008. Lake Canal is
partially located within Zone X (0.2% annual chance flood hazard) and therefore the Site is partially
within this zone. Because the development of the Site will not involve altering of Lake Canal, no
floodplain modifications are necessary. Please refer to Appendix A for more details.
B. Master Drainage Basin
The Site exists in the Dry Creek Master Drainage Basin, but according to the City of Fort Collins, the Dry
Creek Master Drainage Plan is outdated and not specific to the Site. The North East College Corridor
Outfall Design Report prepared by Ayres Associates in August 2009 (NECCO) will be utilized to impose
drainage conditions on the Site instead of the Dry Creek Master Drainage Plan. Please see Appendix B
for relevant portions from the NECCO report. This report details the design and construction of a
regional pond that conveys a large amount of runoff from the Dry Creek basin in a new storm main
beneath E Suniga St running from west to east. This report also contains design plans to revise the
existing Redwood Pond’s grading and change its outfall location from the unnamed drainage ditch north
of the Site to the NECCO storm main beneath E Suniga St south of the Site. The regrading of the
Redwood pond never took place and therefore the outlet south to the NECCO storm main never was
constructed either. This storm main south of the Site includes a stub to the Site that will act as the
ultimate outfall of the developed Site.
The basins from the NECCO report that were analyzed for this report include basins 113, 213, 313, 413,
and 812. The Site exists in basins 113 and 313, which the NECCO report calls for future on-Site detention
of these basins with a 100-year release rate of 0.2 cubic-feet-per-second (CFS) per acres. Basin 213
consists of the Redwood Meadows development and calls for future water quality but no detention.
Basin 812 consists of the Redwood Pond, which the report states already provides water quality for all
basins historically tributary to the pond. Basin 413 exists just south of the Site and E Suniga Rd and was
only included in the analysis of the Site drainage because runoff from this basin enters the NECCO storm
main at the same point as the stub connecting to our Site. This basin will not feature detention or water
quality treatment. From the NECCO report’s SWMM model, the combined release rate of the Redwood
Pond (15.96 CFS), basin 213 undetained (72.65 CFS), and the future detained release from basins 113
and 313 (6.92 CFS) is 95.53 CFS conveyed to the stub provided form the NECCO mainline to the Site.
Based on this maximum release rate it is determined that as long as the 100-year release rates from the
proposed on-Site ponds and the Redwood pond meet criteria of 1.0 CFS/ac and do not exceed 95.53 CFS
when combined with flow from basin 213, the constraint of releasing only 0.2 CFS/ac will no longer
apply. This is an assumption for this preliminary drainage design of the Site and may be altered with
future revisions to this drainage report.
Also provided for the development of drainage for the Site was an as-built conditions SWMM model
featuring the constructed NECCO storm main under E Suniga St and the regional pond designed in the
NECCO report. This master model showed that basins 113, 313, 213, 413, 812, and a few others not
mentioned were captured and detained by the Redwood Pond. All of these basins besides 812 grades
away from the Redwood Pond. Another issue was that the NECCO storm main stub to the Site had the
Enclave at Redwood
Page 6
August 18, 2021
wrong invert elevation based on land survey conducted by Harris Kocher Smith for the purposes of Site
development. These two issues lead to the development of the Site specific SWMM model that’s output
hydrograph can be input into the master SWMM model provided. Information taken from the master
SWMM model include a tailwater time series at the connection of the stub and the NECCO main, and a
100-year inflow time series of all the existing areas tributary to the Redwood pond upstream. Please see
Appendix E for input time series of the proposed SWMM model. The proposed SWMM output will be
inserted into the provided master SWMM plan for a future revision to this drainage report, once the
proposed SWMM is more fleshed out.
III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
A. Regulations and Previous Studies
The principal design criteria used for this report was the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, revised
December 2018 (FCSCM). In addition, Mile High Flood District’s (MHFD) Urban Storm Drainage Criteria
Manual, Volumes 1-3 revised August 2018, September 2017, and January 2021 respectively, was used
(USDCM). The NECCO report from above also provides a certain level of drainage criteria for the Site
that must be met.
B. Four-Step Process
a. Step 1: Employ Runoff Reduction Practices
The Site will feature numerous open areas dedicated for low-impact-development (LID), parks, and
above ground detention. Wherever possible, vegetated swales were used to convey runoff from
impervious areas to LID implements and roof drains were used to convey flow to these swales or directly
to LID implements.
b. Step 2: Implement BMPs That Provide a WQCV with Slow Release
There are ten different LID systems incorporated on-Site: four sand filters, five rain gardens, and one set
of isolator rows for underground infiltration. These ten implements are utilized to treat 75% of newly
added impervious area with the development of the Site per the FCSCM. The remainder of Site Water
Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) will be treated in the three on-Site ponds and revised Redwood Pond.
c. Step 3: Stabilize Streams
The Site will be far upstream of Dry Creek and the NECCO report has already considered developed
release rates from the Site entering Dry Creek. There will be no need to provide stream stabilization of
Dry Creek with the development of the Site.
Enclave at Redwood
Page 7
August 18, 2021
d. Step 4: Implement Site Specific and Other Source Control BMPs
Because the Site is not a new development of redevelopment of an industrial or commercial zone this
step is not applicable to the Site.
C. Hydrologic Design Criteria
Design Frequencies – For the Site, the minor storm will be the 2-year and the major storm will be the
100-year. For detention volume and release rates, the WQCV and 100-year storm events have been
analyzed.
Rainfall Data - Fort Collins varies by runoff calculation method. For the purpose of this preliminary
drainage report, only SWMM was used in calculating runoff. Below is Table 4.1-4 which presents rainfall
intensity values for use in SWMM modelling.
Hydrologic Computation Method – As stated above, only EPA SWMM 5.1 was used to calculate runoff
for this preliminary drainage design. As of now the basins tributary to each of the ponds have not been
broken into smaller sub-basins for the purpose of inlet calculations. If needed in future iterations of this
report, the rational method may be utilized. SWMM uses basin imperviousness, slope, area, and width
along with several default parameters to calculate runoff. SWMM inputs can be found in Appendix E as
well as Section IV of this report. The rational method uses weighted “C” coefficients based upon surface
type and a time of concentration to determine runoff. Fort Collins rational method IDF table and “C”
Enclave at Redwood
Page 8
August 18, 2021
coefficient table can be found in Appendix C along with SWMM subcatchment default parameters and
imperviousness by surface type tables. A summary of SWMM results for each subcatchment can be
found in Appendix C as well. The rational method “C” coefficient and water quality event rainfall
intensities were utilized in the Modified FAA Procedure to calculate the WQCV for the isolator rows. It
should be noted that imperviousness values used were rounded up from exact calculated values for this
preliminary drainage design.
Detention Volume Computation Method – For project sizes greater than 20 acres, SWMM is required for
detention calculation. SWMM storage nodes are used to represent the ponds and require storage curves
(depth-area), SWMM then computes a volume based on these tables. SWMM outlet links are used to
represent a ponds outlet structure and require rating curves (depth-release). These rating and storage
curves are based on pond design and stage-storage-discharge tables that can be found in Appendix D.
These tables feature orifice and weir sizing and elevation information that computes the release rates
for each stage. SWMM 5.1 accounts for WQCV depth in storage nodes before the design storm, so
SWMM calculated volume includes WQCV. See Appendix E for output results of storage nodes.
Water Quality Control Volume Calculation – For the sand filters and rain gardens, the MHFD spreadsheet
“UD-BMP v3.07” released April 2018 was used to calculate WQCV. This spreadsheet calculates the
WQCV based on a 12-hour drain time. Fort Collins requires 120% of the WQCV to be treated by LID, so
the calculated values from UD-BMP were overridden to meet those requirements. Stage-Storage tables
were provided for nearly all of the sand filters and rain gardens to confirm the volume provided from
the UD-BMP spreadsheet. See Appendix F for the UD-BMP sheets and stage-storage tables for every
sand filter and rain garden proposed. For the isolator rows underground infiltration, a spreadsheet
received from Advanced Drainage Systems (ADS) was used to determine the number of chambers
needed based on product choice, chamber volume, and required WQCV. For the sizing of the system,
the WQCV calculated from UD-BMP’s extended detention basin tab was compared to the WQCV
calculated from the modified FAA procedure and the volume that required the greater number of
chambers was used. Please see Appendix F for the calculation of WQCV and chambers required for the
isolator rows.
D. Hydraulic Design Criteria
Detention Pond Infrastructure Sizing - Express Hydraflow will be used to calculate vegetated swale and
emergency overflow spillway capacities for the Site. UD-BMP will be used to size trickle channels,
forebays, and forebay notches for the ponds. As stated above, pond rating curves will be developed
using stage-storage-discharge tables but the MHFD spreadsheet “SDI_Design_Data_v1.08.xlsm” released
January 2017 will be used to confirm that pond release rates meet Colorado drain time criteria.
Spillways have been sized and included in Appendix D of this report as they pertain to SWMM modelling.
All other items mentioned above will be included in a later version of this report.
Street Capacity Calculation – Street sections upstream of proposed inlets will be analyzed using the
MHFD spreadsheet “MHFD-Inlet v5.01” released April 2021. These calculations will be presented in a
later version of this report.
Storm Sewer Sizing – Inlet sizing will be performed using the MHFD-Inlet spreadsheet. For the
preliminary layout of the storm network inlet sizes were estimated based on contributing area. Inlet
Type 16 curb and valley inlets, Type R curb inlets, and Type C and D areas inlets were utilized for this
Site. Storm pipe sizing and vertical alignment will be analyzed using Bentley StormCAD CONNECT.
Enclave at Redwood
Page 9
August 18, 2021
StormCAD computes losses and velocities and produces accurate HGLs and EGLs to prove the storm
sewer network works hydraulically. Inlet sizing calculations and StormCAD pipe sizing calculations will be
provided in a later version of this report.
E. Variances
The drainage design for the Site will require a variance from release rate restrictions imposed in the
NECCO report. This report dictates that on-Site detention ponds must feature a 100-year release rate of
0.2 CFS/ac. In order to reduce size and footprint of above ground detention ponds on-Site, 100-year
release rates equaling 1.0 CFS/ac has been utilized given that the combination of all flows leaving the
Site via the NECCO line be less than 95.53 CFS as detailed above. Note this variance is assumed to be
feasible for this preliminary drainage design and this assumption could change with later revisions to
this report.
F. Erosion Control
The following drainage design will comply with all erosion control criteria put forth in the USDCM,
FCSCM, and NECCO Report. All erosion control materials will be provided with the final drainage report.
IV. PROPOSED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS
A. General Concept
The Site includes revisions to the Redwood Pond to the northwest including regrading and design of a
new outlet, trickle channel, forebay, and spillway. According to National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) data,
there is a wetlands area existing in the current Redwood Pond. The final drainage report for this Site will
further address these wetlands. There are three proposed on-Site detention ponds featuring some level
of water quality treatment. These proposed ponds will treat flows up to the 100-year storm event and
will feature at least 1.0 foot of freeboard above the overflow spillway design depth. All four of these
ponds will release to a proposed storm line that travels from north to south and connects to the stub
provided per the NECCO report. Basin 213 containing the Redwood Meadows neighborhood needs to be
conveyed to this proposed line and will be captured by proposed inlets on-Site and routed to this line
undetained. Further breakdown of the ponds and a summary table can be found below.
The Site will feature ten LID systems: four sand filters, five rain gardens, and underground isolator rows.
These LID features are designed to treat at least 75% of the Site’s impervious areas for the WQCV.
Runoff will be routed to these systems via roof drains, sheet flow, storm sewer pipes, vegetated swales,
and landscaped drains. Flows above the WQCV are designed to overflow via spillway to the nearest
drainage system that can capture them. The sand filters and rain gardens will feature slotted
underdrains that capture treated flows and send them to the nearest storm sewer system or directly to
a pond. Further breakdown of the LID areas and a summary table can be found below.
For the SWMM analysis included in this preliminary drainage design report only seven subcatchments
were used, and the only storm line included was the NECCO stub extension line that receives the outfall
from all four ponds and runoff from basins 213 and 413. This is a high-level analysis of the Site’s
Enclave at Redwood
Page 10
August 18, 2021
drainage and the SWMM subcatchments will be broken into sub-basins for the final drainage report.
Below is a breakdown of the seven subcatchments as well as a table featuring their SWMM input
parameters. Also found below is a table summarizing SWMM model results.
See Appendix C for summary of subcatchments and SWMM input parameters. See Appendix D for stage-
storage-discharge tables for ponds and spillway calculations. See Appendix E for SWMM schematic,
input report and output results. See Appendix F for LID calculations, summary table, and exhibit showing
areas and locations of facilities. See Appendix G for drainage map showing pond locations, basins,
drainage patterns, and storm layout.
B. Proposed Basins
Below is Table 1 featuring a summary of all basin input parameters for SWMM and other calculated
parameters.
Table 1:
Pond Subcatchment Summary Table
Basin Area
(ac)
Imperviousness
(%)
Width
(ft)
Slope
(%)
2-Year
Peak
Runoff
(CFS)
100-
Year
Peak
Runoff
(CFS)
113 9.80 75 276 0.60 7.42 47.74
213 7.82 80 336 1.00 8.86 52.18
313-1 4.10 60 193 0.75 3.98 22.49
313-2 8.00 50 272 0.50 5.29 32.54
313-3 5.57 55 220 0.80 4.81 27.59
413 2.19 5 162 1.00 0.32 3.57
812 3.75 2 265 0.50 0.22 4.31
Basin 113 lies on-Site and encompasses the northern portion of the Site. This basin is consisting of multi-
family housing, walks, roadways, alleys, open space, a rain garden and a sand filter. Runoff from this
basin will be conveyed to the Redwood Pond in the northwest. This drainage pattern is opposite to the
historic drainage pattern, but Site flows cannot be freely released into Lake Canal and so this historic
drainage pattern no longer applies. It is assumed some portions of this basin will contribute runoff north
off-Site undetained into the unnamed drainage ditch, but all of this basin is tributary to the pond for the
purpose of this preliminary drainage analysis.
Basin 213 lies off-Site to the west of the Site. This basin consists of the Redwood Meadows development
featuring walks, single-family homes, roadways, and open spaces. Runoff from this basin will not need
detained but will need to be conveyed to the NECCO stub for the Site. Two inlets are proposed in at the
connection of Lupine Dr and the Site to collect all runoff from this basin and route it directly to the
NECCO storm line. This basins imperviousness was assumed to be 80% for conservative analysis but may
decrease to a more exact value for the Final Drainage Report.
Enclave at Redwood
Page 11
August 18, 2021
Basin 313-1 lies on-Site and encompasses the southwestern portion of the Site. This basin consists of
multi-family housing, walks, roadways, alleys, open space, two rain gardens, a sand filter, and South
Pond 1. Runoff from this basin will be conveyed to South Pond 1 to the south. It is assumed that some
potions of this basin will flow off-Site undetained into basin 213 or Redwood St, but all of this basin is
tributary to the pond for the purpose of this preliminary drainage analysis.
Basin 313-2 lies on-Site and encompasses the eastern portion and border of the Site. This basin consists
of multi-family housing, walks, roadways, alleys, open space, a sand filter, isolator row chambers,
portions of Lake Canal irrigation ditch and South Pond 2. Runoff from this basin will be conveyed to
South Pond 2 to the southwest. It is assumed that some potions of this basin will flow off-Site
undetained into Lake Canal or the Northfield development, but all of this basin is tributary to the pond
for the purpose of this preliminary drainage analysis.
Basin 313-3 lies on-Site and encompasses the middle portion of the Site. This basin consists of multi-
family housing, walks, roadways, alleys, open space, a sand filter, two rain gardens, and South Pond 3.
Runoff from this basin will be conveyed to South Pond 3 in the middle of the basin. The area South
Pond 3 take up will also be utilized as an open space park.
Basin 413 lies off-Site south of E Suniga St. This basin will remain undeveloped and consists entirely of
open space. Runoff from this basin will sheet flow to a ditch where it is collected by a stub off of the
NECCO main line under E Suniga St and conveyed to the same point as the stub that extends north to
the Site.
Basin 812 lies off-Site to the northwest of the Site. This basin consists of the existing Redwood Pond to
be redesigned. Runoff from this basin will be collected by the Redwood Pond.
C. Specific Details
The Redwood Pond’s redesign is driven by pond bottom elevation requirements and not required
volume. In order to properly route flow from the Site to this pond the bottom was deepened by 3.5 feet,
while tying into existing contours to ensure the berm elevation stayed the same and trees adjacent to
the pond could remain intact. Basin 812 and 113 are tributary to this pond as well as multiple areas off-
Site upstream. The pond was analyzed in SWMM and was found to have a 100-year volume of 6.484
acre-feet (ac-ft) with a water surface elevation (WSEL) of 4957.94 ft. The 100-year release rate for this
pond is 14.76 CFS, which is less than the 15.96 CFS release rate calculated in the NECCO report. The
spillway crest elevation is set above the 100-year WSEL at 4958.00 ft, with a design depth of 1.56 ft and
a width of 10 ft. The berm of this pond is at 4962.00, giving a freeboard of 2.44 ft. Any overflow from
this pond will pass over the spillway and into the unnamed drainage ditch to the northeast of the pond.
This ditch is tributary to Dry Creek and is the location of the historic outfall of the pond. This pond
outfalls to the NECCO storm main stub extension before routing into the NECCO storm main.
South Pond 1 is located in the southwestern portion of the Site and features a depth of 7.67 ft and a
pond bottom elevation of 4952.71 ft. Basin 313-1 (4.10 ac) is tributary to this pond. The pond was
analyzed in SWMM and was found to have a 100-year volume of 0.596 ac-ft with a WSEL of 4958.91 ft.
The 100-year release rate for this pond is 3.50 CFS, which is less than the 4.10 CFS release rate per the
1.0 CFS/ac criteria. The spillway crest elevation is set above the 100-year WSEL at 4959.00 ft, with a
design depth of 0.38 ft and a width of 30 ft. The berm of this pond is at 4960.38, giving a freeboard of
1.0 ft. Any overflow from this pond will pass over the spillway and into E Suniga St where it will be
Enclave at Redwood
Page 12
August 18, 2021
collected by inlets and routed into the NECCO storm main under E Suniga St. This pond outfalls to the
NECCO storm main stub extension before routing into the NECCO storm main.
South Pond 2 is located in the southwestern portion of the Site and features a depth of 11.0 ft and a
pond bottom elevation of 4948.00 ft. Basin 313-2 (8.00 ac) is tributary to this pond. The pond was
analyzed in SWMM and was found to have a 100-year volume of 0.872 ac-ft with a WSEL of 4953.73 ft.
The 100-year release rate for this pond is 6.71 CFS, which is less than the 8.00 CFS release rate per the
1.0 CFS/ac criteria. The spillway crest elevation is set above the 100-year WSEL at 4954.00 ft, with a
design depth of 1.14 ft and a width of 5 ft. The berm of this pond is at 4959.00, giving a freeboard of
3.86 ft. Any overflow from this pond will pass over the spillway and into E Suniga St where it will be
collected by inlets and routed into the NECCO storm main under E Suniga St. This pond outfalls to the
NECCO storm main stub extension before routing into the NECCO storm main.
South Pond 3 is located in the middle portion of the Site and features a depth of 6.35 ft and a pond
bottom elevation of 4954.00 ft. Basin 313-2 (5.57 ac) is tributary to this pond. The pond was analyzed in
SWMM and was found to have a 100-year volume of 0.750 ac-ft with a WSEL of 4957.75 ft. The 100-year
release rate for this pond is 4.27 CFS, which is less than the 5.57 CFS release rate per the 1.0 CFS/ac
criteria. The spillway crest elevation is set above the 100-year WSEL at 4958.00 ft, with a design depth of
0.80 ft and a width of 10 ft. The berm of this pond is at 4960.35 ft, giving a freeboard of 1.55 ft. Any
overflow from this pond will pass over the spillway and into the alley to the south of the pond where it
will be collected by an inlet in sump that conveys water to South Pond 2. This pond outfalls to the
NECCO storm main stub extension before routing into the NECCO storm main.
See below for Table 2 showing a summary of pond results from SWMM. The WQCV presented in this
table does not account for the WQCV already treated in LID systems because the LID systems are not
present in the SWMM model, therefore SWMM accounts for the WQCV depth as if there were no LID
systems on-Site.
Table 2:
Detention Pond Summary Table
Pond
100-
Year
Volume
(cu-ft)
100-
Year
Volume
(ac-ft)
100-Year
WSEL
WQCV
(cu-ft)
WQCV
WSEL
Max
Release
Rate (CFS)
Redwood 282,444 6.484 4957.94 *10,672.2 4954.78 14.76
South 1 25,962 0.596 4958.91 3,528.36 4955.30 3.50
South 2 38,001 0.872 4953.73 6,011.28 4950.08 6.71
South 3 32,651 0.750 4957.75 4,443.12 4955.77 4.27
*WQCV for Redwood Pond from On-Site Contributing Area Only
The total release of all the ponds combined with the release from basins 213 and 413 sum up to 84.99
CFS, which is less than the maximum release rate at the NECCO stub of 95.53 CFS.
Enclave at Redwood
Page 13
August 18, 2021
Sand Filter 1 is located in the southwest portion of the Site. This sand filter has 4:1 side slopes, a WQCV
depth of 1.5 ft and a total depth of 2.0 ft. Runoff will enter this sand filter via storm sewer pipe,
landscape drains, and roof drains. Wherever concentrated runoff enters this basin will be a concrete
impact basin to protect against scour. The slotted underdrain for this basin will connect to a manhole
just south of the basin, and flow above the WQCV will overflow directly to South Pond 1 adjacent to the
sand filter to the east.
Rain Garden 1 is located in the southwest portion of the Site, just south of the Redwood Meadows
development. This rain garden has vertical walls on all sides and a 2’ buffer from the closest sidewalks.
This rain garden has dimensions of 10’ by 50’ with a WQCV depth of 12”. Runoff will enter this basin via
chase drain at a concrete impact basin. The slotted underdrain will connect to the NECCO stub extension
line east of the rain garden. Flow above the WQCV will overflow south into the roadway to be collected
by the nearest inlet downstream.
Rain Garden 2 is located in the southwest portion of the Site, sandwiched between a roadway to the
north and two buildings to the south. This rain garden has 4:1 side slopes, a WQCV depth of 6” and a
total depth of 1.5’. Runoff will enter this rain garden via chase drain or vegetated swale. Runoff will
enter the vegetated swale via sheet flow and roof drains. The basin will feature an impact basin for the
chase drain and riprap for the swale to protect against scour. The slotted underdrain will connect to the
NECCO stub extension line north of the rain garden. Flow above the WQCV will overflow north into the
roadway to be collected by the nearest inlet downstream.
Sand Filter 2 is located in the southwest portion of the Site. This sand filter has 4:1 side slopes, a WQCV
depth of 1.0 ft and a total depth of 2.0 ft. Runoff will enter this sand filter via sheet flow or a vegetated
swale. Runoff will enter the vegetated swale via chase drain or roof drains, where the swale enters the
sand filter will be riprap to protect against scour. The slotted underdrain for this basin will connect to an
inlet just south of the basin, and flow above the WQCV will overflow north into a different vegetated
swale that conveys flow to the nearest roadway where it is collected by the inlet the underdrain
connects into.
The isolator rows are proposed underneath sidewalk in the northeast portion of the Site. The sizing
process is detailed above in Section III. The result is 25 chambers of ADS SC-310 StormTech chambers
that provide a total system volume of 775 cubic-feet and a combined release rate of 0.39 CFS. This
product was chosen because of its low height being useful to connect to the shallow storm in this area
of the Site. The outfall from these chambers will connect to a storm main that runs along Lake Canal and
into South Pond 2 to the southwest.
Sand Filter 3 is located in the middle portion of the Site. This sand filter has 4:1 side slopes, a WQCV
depth of 1.4 ft and a total depth of 1.9 ft. Runoff will enter this sand filter via sheet flow from the alley
adjacent or roof drains. Wherever concentrated runoff enters this basin will be a concrete impact basin
to protect against scour, and wherever sheet flow enters this basin will be riprap to protect against
scour. The slotted underdrain for this basin will connect to South Pond 3 just east of the basin, and flow
above the WQCV will overflow directly to South Pond 3.
Rain Garden 3 is located in the middle portion of the Site. This rain garden has 8:1 side slopes, a WQCV
depth of 12” and a total depth of 2.0 ft. Runoff will enter this rain garden via storm sewer pipe,
landscape drains, and roof drains. Wherever concentrated runoff enters this basin will be a concrete
Enclave at Redwood
Page 14
August 18, 2021
impact basin to protect against scour. The slotted underdrain for this basin will connect directly to South
Pond 3 to the southwest, and flow above the WQCV will overflow directly to South Pond 3.
Rain Garden 4 is located in the northwest portion of the Site. This rain garden has 4:1 side slopes, a
WQCV depth of 12” and a total depth of 4.25 ft. Runoff will enter this rain garden at three points via
storm sewer. Wherever concentrated runoff enters this basin will be a concrete impact basin to protect
against scour. The slotted underdrain for this basin will connect to an area inlet southwest of the rain
garden. Flow above the WQCV will overflow northwest into a vegetated swale that conveys flow
southeast to the aforementioned area inlet. This area inlet outfalls to the Redwood Pond.
Rain Garden 5 is located in the northeast portion of the Site, sandwiched between a roadway to the
south and buildings to the north. This rain garden has 8:1 side slopes, a WQCV depth of 9” and a total
depth of 1.5’. Runoff will enter this rain garden via chase drain or vegetated swale. Runoff will enter the
vegetated swale via sheet flow and roof drains. The basin will feature an impact basin for the chase
drain and riprap for the swale to protect against scour. The slotted underdrain will connect to a manhole
in the roadway to the northeast. Flow above the WQCV will overflow northeast into the roadway to be
collected by the nearest inlet downstream.
Sand Filter 4 is located in the northeast portion of the Site. This sand filter has 4:1 side slopes, a WQCV
depth of 1.75 ft and a total depth of 3.75 ft. Runoff will enter this sand filter via storm sewer pipe,
landscape drains, and roof drains. Wherever concentrated runoff enters this basin will be a concrete
impact basin to protect against scour. The slotted underdrain for this basin will connect to a manhole in
the roadway west of the basin, and flow above the WQCV will overflow west into the roadway where it
is collected by the next inlet downstream.
Table 3 below features a summary of the LID systems for the Site including tributary area,
imperviousness, impervious area, calculated WQCV, and provide WQCV.
Table 3:
Table 4 below features a summary of the SWMM results for nodes. Table 5 below features a summary of
the SWMM results for links. See Appendix E for a schematic calling out the nodes summarized below.
Enclave at Redwood
Page 15
August 18, 2021
Table 4:
SWMM Node Results Summary Table
Node Type Maximum
Depth (ft)
Maximum
HGL (ft)
Maximum Total
Inflow (CFS)
A2_1 JUNCTION 2.74 4949.62 53.79
A2_2 JUNCTION 3.11 4950.26 51.46
A2_3 JUNCTION 2.7 4951.09 50.3
A2_4 JUNCTION 2.97 4951.78 50.5
A2_5 JUNCTION 3.01 4952.42 50.78
A2_6 JUNCTION 3.04 4953.04 52.05
A2_7 JUNCTION 2.53 4954.19 51.41
A2_8 JUNCTION 2.84 4955.04 52.18
A2_9 JUNCTION 2.34 4955.06 14.76
A2_10 JUNCTION 1.75 4955.08 14.76
NECCO_Stub OUTFALL 2.1 4948.64 57.35
Pond_Redwood STORAGE 4.44 4957.94 58.4
Pond_South_1 STORAGE 6.2 4958.91 22.49
Pond_South_2 STORAGE 5.73 4953.73 32.54
Pond_South_3 STORAGE 3.75 4957.75 27.59
Table 5:
SWMM Link Results Summary Table
Link Type Maximum
Flow (CFS)
Maximum
Velocity
(fps)
Maximum/Full
Flow
Maximum/Full
Depth
A2_1 CONDUIT 53.8 6.76 0.54 0.61
A2_2 CONDUIT 51.27 5.4 0.57 0.71
A2_3 CONDUIT 49.97 5.37 0.55 0.7
A2_4 CONDUIT 50.3 5.61 0.56 0.68
A2_5 CONDUIT 50.5 5.27 0.56 0.72
A2_6 CONDUIT 50.78 5.24 0.56 0.73
A2_7 CONDUIT 50.89 5.82 0.56 0.67
A2_8 CONDUIT 51.41 6.07 0.57 0.65
A2_9 CONDUIT 14.76 4.95 0.57 0.97
A2_10 CONDUIT 14.76 4.62 0.57 0.78
Redwood_Outlet DUMMY 14.76
South1_Outlet DUMMY 3.5
South2_Outlet DUMMY 6.71
South3_Outlet DUMMY 4.27
Enclave at Redwood
Page 16
August 18, 2021
V. CONCLUSIONS
A. Compliance with Standards
The drainage design is prepared in compliance with the FCSCM and the USDCM Volumes 1, 2, and 3.
As stated before, the NECCO report details a pond release of 0.2 CFS/ac, but given that the proposed
ponds release less than the value calculated in the NECCO report, utilizing a release of less than 15.96
CFS for the Redwood Pond and less than 1.0 CFS/ac for the three on-Site ponds is sufficient.
B. Drainage Concept
The drainage design as described herein; if properly constructed and maintained, will effectively control
stormwater runoff in accordance with the criteria. The proposed development will provide water quality
and detention for the 100-year event with associated outlets and spillway overflow. This drainage design
for the proposed development does not have any impact on the NECCO report design. The drainage
design for this Site will have no adverse effects to any upstream or downstream adjacent properties.
Enclave at Redwood
Page 17
August 18, 2021
VI. REFERENCES
1. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Map No. 08069C0977G,
Map No. 08069C0981G, June 17, 2008, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
2. Geotechnical Engineering Report for Enclave at Redwood Residential Development, Cole Garner
Geotechnical, August 11, 2021.
3. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, revised December 2018.
4. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Vol. 1, Mile High Flood District, revised August 2018.
5. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Vol. 2, Mile High Flood District, revised September 2017.
6. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Vol. 3, Mile High Flood District, revised November 2010
with updates from January 2021.
7. North East College Corridor Outfall (NECCO) Design Report, Ayres Associates, August 2009.
Enclave at Redwood
Page 18
August 18, 2021
VII. APPENDICES
Appendix A Vicinity Map, FIRM, Geotechnical Engineering Report
Appendix B Portions from Relevant Previous Studies
Appendix C Subcatchment Hydrology
Appendix D Detention Storage Sizing
Appendix E SWMM Model and Results
Appendix F Low Impact Development
Appendix G Drainage Map
Enclave at Redwood
Page A
August 18, 2021
Appendix A – Vicinity Map, FIRM, Geotechnical Engineering Report
SHEET NUMBER
PROJECT #:
1120 Lincoln Street, Suite 1000
Denver, Colorado 80203
P: 303.623.6300 F: 303.623.6311
HarrisKocherSmith.comPlotted: MON 08/16/21 1:59:51P By: Jericho Rapp Filepath: k:\201013\engineering\xref\vic map.dwg Layout: layout1201013
ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD - VICINTY MAP
1
1 OF 1
DHI COMMUNITIES
NO CHANGES ARE TO BE MADE TO THIS DRAWING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION OF HARRIS KOCHER SMITH.
0
SCALE: 1" =
800 800 1600
800'
National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250
Feet
Ü
SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT
SPECIAL FLOOD
HAZARD AREAS
Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)
Zone A, V, A99
With BFE or DepthZone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR
Regulatory Floodway
0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas
of 1% annual chance flood with average
depth less than one foot or with drainage
areas of less than one square mileZone X
Future Conditions 1% Annual
Chance Flood HazardZone X
Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to
Levee. See Notes.Zone X
Area with Flood Risk due to LeveeZone D
NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X
Area of Undetermined Flood HazardZone 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 map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of
digital flood maps if it is not void as described below.
The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap
accuracy standards
The flood hazard information is derived directly from the
authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map
was exported on 8/10/2021 at 11:04 AM and does not
reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and
time. The NFHL and effective information may change or
become superseded by new data over time.
This map image is void if the one or more of the following map
elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels,
legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers,
FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for
unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for
regulatory purposes.
Legend
OTHER AREAS OF
FLOOD HAZARD
OTHER AREAS
GENERAL
STRUCTURES
OTHER
FEATURES
MAP PANELS
8
B 20.2
The pin displayed on the map is an approximate
point selected by the user and does not represent
an authoritative property location.
1:6,000
105°4'5"W 40°36'21"N
105°3'27"W 40°35'54"N
Basemap: USGS National Map: Orthoimagery: Data refreshed October, 2020
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development
Redwood Street and Suniga Drive
Fort Collins, Colorado
Prepared for:
DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
9555 South Kingston Court
Englewood, CO 80112
Prepared by:
Cole Garner Geotechnical
CGG Project No.: 21.22.034
August 11, 2021
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W. 124th Ave, Ste. 300
Westminster, CO 80234
303.996.2999
August 11, 2021
DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
9555 S Kingston Court
Englewood, Colorado 80112
Attn: Mr. Tyler Field
Development Manager
tfield@drhorton.com
805.223.1761
Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development
NEC of Redwood Street and Suniga Drive
Fort Collins, Colorado
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical (CG Geotech) has completed a design-level geotechnical engineering
investigation for the proposed residential development to be located in the northeast corner of the
subject intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado.
This geotechnical summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design and/or
construction purposes. It should be recognized that specific details were not included or fully developed in
this section, and the report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items
contained herein. The section titled General Comments should be read for an understanding of the report
limitations.
• Subsurface Conditions: Subsurface conditions encountered at the site generally included fine to
coarse sand with silt and gravel overlying claystone bedrock. Limited lean clay lenses that were about
3 to 7 feet thick were encountered just beneath the surface in Boring Nos. 4, 6, 7, and 9. Sedimentary
claystone bedrock was encountered in nine of our ten borings at depths ranging from about 17 to 23
feet below existing site grades and extended to the full depth of exploration, where encountered.
Groundwater was encountered in our borings during drilling at depths ranging from about 8 to 17 feet
below existing site grades (typically from 8 to 11 feet). When checked about two weeks later,
groundwater levels ranged from about 8 to 12 feet below existing site grades. Other specific
information regarding the subsurface conditions is shown on the attached Boring Logs.
• Shallow Groundwater and Construction Dewatering: As mentioned, stable groundwater levels were
measured in our borings at depths ranging from about 8 to 12 feet below existing site grades (EL
4,945.5 to 4,951.5 feet). Groundwater elevations reported in this study are similar to those
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page ii
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
estimated to be present after underdrain installation on the adjacent Northfield Development by
Highland Development Services and to those recorded by A.G. Wassenaar (AGW) in February of 2020,
with the exception of AGW’s shallowest groundwater measurement of AGW Boring No. TB-2 near the
northern edge of the property (which may be an anomaly).
As presented in Table 1 groundwater is expected to be present at depths ranging from about 7.7 to
17 feet after grading. We do not believe that groundwater should not prohibit at-grade residential
construction (slab-on-grade foundations), but could impact deeper underground utility trenches To
help reduce the impacts of groundwater on the construction process, we recommend that installation
of the sanitary sewer system (typically the deepest trench) begin at the lowest point of the system
(tie-in to the existing system at Northfield). If possible, we recommend installation of an underdrain
be considered below the sanitary sewer to relive the expected groundwater inflow. The Civil Engineer
should coordinate with the City of Fort Collins to determine if the installation of an underdrain is
feasible. If underdrains can be used at the site, we recommend that they be designed using the flow
rate information presented in this report.
• Soft Soil Stabilization: Where shallow groundwater conditions are encountered, some soft/loose soil
conditions may be encountered. These relatively moist and potentially unstable soils will likely need
to be mitigated as construction activity begins on the site. Depending on seasonal conditions and
the depth of excavations, these soils will likely need to be improved to provide a stable base for new
infrastructure, foundations, or earthen fill. Contractors should plan on the use of track-mounted
and/or lightweight equipment to complete deeper excavations. To aid in stabilization, we
recommend crushing some inert construction materials or rock and blending these materials into the
soft/unstable soils. Typically, these materials should be crushed to sizes ranging from about 3 to 6
inches and kneaded/compacted into the soft soils in order to provide a stable base for construction.
• Below-Grade Construction: The shallow groundwater at the site will limit or preclude basement
construction and likely impact earthwork activities, depending on site grading and the depth of
underground utilities. We understand that basement construction is not currently planned for the
project; however, crawlspace construction may be included in design of the structures. If the buildings
are to include below-grade spaces, such as basement or crawlspace construction, we recommend
raising the site grades as high as possible in order to help alleviate this condition. We recommend
that the interior floor of any basement or crawlspace bear a minimum of three feet above
groundwater. If basement or crawlspace construction will be used, foundation drainage and/or
dewatering systems will be required.
• Foundations and Floor Slabs: Provided that subgrade preparation is properly performed, the site
appears suitable for the intended development. Considering the size and type of construction planned
and the subsurface conditions encountered in our test borings, we believe that spread footings or post-
tensioned slab-on-grade foundations are suitable for the proposed residential structures. Provided any
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page iii
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
8/11/21
unstable or otherwise unsuitable soil conditions are mitigated, footings and slabs-on-grade may bear
directly on the on-site soil or newly compacted fill comprised of the on-site or similar soils.
• Private Pavements: The on-site soils include sands and clays, however, pavement design is typically
conducted based on the properties of the poorest quality subgrade soils. We have estimated a
resilient modulus of 3,025 psi for the on-site clay soils. Even though the pavements for the project will
be privately maintained, the City of Fort Collins requires they be designed in general accordance with
their Standards. Based on assumed traffic frequencies, we recommend 4 inches of hot-mix asphalt
(HMA) over 6 inches of aggregate base course (ABC) be used to pave the private drives associated
with the project. Additional section alternatives are presented in the report. For any public roadway
improvements, the City of Fort Collins will require submittal of a pavement thickness design report
based on completion of additional geotechnical exploration and analyses after completion of site
grading.
• Surface Drainage: The amount of movement associated with foundations, floor slabs, pavements, etc.
will be related to the wetting of underlying supporting soils. Therefore, it is imperative the
recommendations outlined in the “Grading and Drainage” section of this report be followed to reduce
potential movement.
We appreciate being of service to you in the geotechnical engineering phase of this project and are
prepared to assist you during the construction phases as well. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you
have any questions concerning this report or any of our testing, inspection, design, and consulting
services.
Sincerely,
Cole Garner Geotechnical
Patrick Maloney, G.I.T. Andrew J. Garner, P.E.
Project Manager/Geologist Senior Project Manager
Copies to: Addressee (1 PDF copy)
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page iv
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Letter of Transmittal .............................................................................................................................. ii
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1
PROJECT INFORMATION ....................................................................................................................... 2
SITE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES ........................................................................................................ 2
Field Exploration ............................................................................................................................. 2
Laboratory Testing .......................................................................................................................... 3
SITE CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................. 3
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................... 3
Geology ........................................................................................................................................... 3
Soil and Bedrock Conditions ........................................................................................................... 4
Field and Laboratory Test Results ................................................................................................... 4
Groundwater Conditions ................................................................................................................ 4
Hydraulic Conductivity Testing ....................................................................................................... 5
ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 6
Geotechnical Considerations .......................................................................................................... 6
Earthwork ....................................................................................................................................... 7
Site Preparation ........................................................................................................................ 8
Excavations and Trench Construction ...................................................................................... 8
Temporary Construction Dewatering ....................................................................................... 9
Fill Materials ........................................................................................................................... 11
Fill Placement and Compaction Requirements ...................................................................... 11
Foundation Design and Construction ........................................................................................... 12
Lateral Earth Pressures ................................................................................................................. 13
Seismic Considerations ................................................................................................................. 14
Below-Grade Construction ........................................................................................................... 15
Non-structural Interior Floor Slabs ............................................................................................... 15
Private Pavement Design and Construction ................................................................................. 17
Final Grading, Landscaping, and Surface Drainage ....................................................................... 21
Additional Design and Construction Considerations .................................................................... 22
Exterior Slabs .......................................................................................................................... 22
Underground Utilities ............................................................................................................. 22
Concrete Corrosion Protection ............................................................................................... 22
GENERAL COMMENTS ........................................................................................................................ 23
APPENDIX A: SITE VICINITY MAP, BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM, BORING LOGS, GROUNDWATER
DEPTH CONTOUR DIAGRAM, GROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOUR DIAGRAM
APPENDIX B: LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
APPENDIX C: GENERAL NOTES, FOUNDATION DRAIN DETAIL FOR BELOW-GRADE SPACES
APPENDIX D: HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST RESULTS, INILTRATION RATE TEST RESULTS,
GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL TESTING RESULTS
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W. 124th Ave, Ste. 300
Westminster, CO 80234
303.996.2999
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
NEC OF REDWOOD STREET AND SUNIGA DRIVE
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
August 11, 2021
INTRODUCTION
This report contains the results of our geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed residential
development to be constructed at the subject intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado. This study was
performed in general accordance with our proposal number P20.22.289 - REVISED, dated January 19,
2021.
The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations
relative to:
• Subsurface soil and bedrock conditions
• Groundwater conditions
• Site preparation and earthwork
• Foundation design and construction
• Lateral earth pressures
• Floor slab design and construction
• Below-grade construction
• Private pavement thickness design and construction
• Surface and subsurface drainage
The recommendations contained in this report are based upon the results of field and laboratory testing,
engineering analyses, our experience with similar subsurface conditions and structures, and our
understanding of the proposed project. The following documents were provided for our review during the
preparation of this report:
• Geotechnical Site Development Study – Old Town North – Fort Collins, Colorado prepared by A.G.
Wassenaar, Inc. (AGW) (AGW Project No. 201023) dated February 25, 2020.
• Final Drainage Report for Northfield prepared by Highland Development Services (Highland
Project No. 18-1000-00) dated February 26, 2020.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 2
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
PROJECT INFORMATION
We understand that the project will include development approximately 25 acres of vacant property
located northeast of the subject intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado. Development of the site will include
mass site grading, underground utility installation, and the construction of paved private drives and fire
lanes to support residential development. We understand that the project will include a construction of
one and two story single-family homes and duplexes housing a total of about 230 for-lease units. As
currently planned, the homes will be supported at-grade foundations; however, crawlspace construction
may be included in design of the structures. Basements are not planned at the site. A leasing and amenity
building will be located near the southwest corner of the development. Two stormwater detention ponds
and a one-acre pocket park are planned.
Based on our review of grading plans, we assume that earthen cut and fill on the order of about 3 feet may
be required to bring the site to construction grades, however, due to the presence of relatively shallow
groundwater, we believe that cut depths should be limited as much as possible. If our assumptions above
are not accurate, or if you have additional useful information, please inform us as soon as possible.
SITE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES
The scope of the services performed for this project included a subsurface exploration program,
laboratory testing, and engineering analysis.
Field Exploration: Our scope of services for this current study included geotechnical exploration of the
subsurface materials at ten (10) locations on the site. As part of the February 2020 study completed by
AGW at this site, sixteen (16) borings were drilled. Borings were located as shown on the Boring Location
Diagram included in Appendix A.
Borings were advanced to a depth of about 25 feet below existing site grades with truck and all-terrain-
vehicle-mounted drilling rigs utilizing 4-inch diameter, solid-stem auger. All of the borings were
completed as a temporary monitoring wells by installing perforated and screened PVC pipe in order to
keep the borings open and allow for flow-rate testing and sampling of groundwater for the purposes of
dewatering design and permitting.
Our field personnel recorded a lithologic log of each boring during the drilling operations. At selected
intervals, samples of the subsurface materials were obtained by driving Modified California samplers.
Penetration resistance measurements were obtained by driving the sample barrels into the subsurface
materials with a 140-pound automatic hammer falling 30 inches. The penetration resistance value is a
useful index to the consistency, relative density or hardness of the materials encountered.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 3
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Groundwater measurements were made in each boring at the time of site exploration and again
approximately 12 days later. Slug testing was conducted in two wells at the time of follow-up
groundwater measurements in order to determine hydraulic conductivity of the subsurface profile to be
used in calculating potential flow rates for subsurface drainage systems.
Laboratory Testing: Samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the laboratory for
observation by the project geotechnical engineer and were classified in general accordance with the
Unified Soil Classification System described in Appendix C. Bedrock was classified according to the General
Notes for Rock Classification. At that time, an applicable laboratory-testing program was formulated to
determine engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Following the completion of the laboratory
testing, the field descriptions were confirmed or modified as necessary, and Boring Logs were prepared.
These logs are presented in Appendix A.
Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. These results were used for the geotechnical
engineering analyses and the development of foundation and earthwork recommendations. Laboratory
tests were performed in general accordance with the applicable local or other accepted standards.
Selected soil and bedrock samples were tested for the following engineering properties:
• Water content
• Dry density
• Swell/Consolidation
• Grain size
• Plasticity Index
• Water-soluble sulfates
SITE CONDITIONS
The site consists of a vacant lot located in the northeast corner of Redwood Street and Suniga Drive in
Fort Collins, Colorado. The lot is bound by Suniga Drive, the Lake Canal Ditch, and the Northfield
development to the south and east, existing residential development to the north, and Redwood Street
and existing residential development to the west. At the time of our field exploration, the ground surface
was covered with a low growth of grass and weeds. The proposed area of construction was generally level
with a total relief on the order of about 5 feet across the site. We assume the project area is at or near
final grade or will require only minimal cuts and fills of up to about 3 feet to provide positive site drainage.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Geology: Surficial geologic conditions at the site, as mapped by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (1Colton,
1978), consist of Post-Piney Creek Alluvium (Qpp) of Upper Holocene Age. These materials are described
1 Colton, R.B., 1978, Geologic Map of the Boulder - Fort Collins – Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado, United States
Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Investigations Map I-855-G.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 4
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
as dark grey sandy to gravelly alluvium that underlies the floodplains of major streams (such as the Cache
La Poudre in this area). The thickness is reported to be about 5 to 15 feet.
Bedrock mapped in the area consists various members of the Pierre Shale Formation (Kpu, Kpm, Kprl) of
Upper Cretaceous Age. This formation within this area has been reported to include shale, sandstone,
and siltstone. The finer-grained (shale) units within the formation can contain montmorillonitic clays that
produce low to very high swelling pressures when moisture content is elevated. The thickness of the
various members in this area has been reported to be on the order of 60 to 2,800 feet.
Mapping completed by the Colorado Geological Survey (2Hart, 1972) indicates the site is located in an area
of "Low Swell Potential”. This category typically has low swell but the upper 6 to 12 inches may locally
have moderate swell potential. The thickness of the surficial deposits is generally variable and bedrock
with higher swell potential may locally be less than 10 ft below the ground surface.
Due to the gently sloping nature of the site, other geologic hazards at the site are anticipated to be low.
Seismic activity in the area is anticipated to be low, and the property should be relatively stable from a
structural standpoint. With proper site grading around proposed structures, erosional problems at the
site should be reduced.
Soil and Bedrock Conditions: Subsurface conditions encountered at the site generally included fine to
coarse sand with silt and gravel overlying claystone bedrock. Limited lean clay lenses that were about 3
to 7 feet thick were encountered just beneath the surface in Boring Nos. 4, 6, 7, and 9. Sedimentary
claystone bedrock was encountered in nine of our ten borings at depths ranging from about 17 to 23 feet
below existing site grades and extended to the full depth of exploration, where encountered. Other
specific information regarding the subsurface conditions is shown on the attached Boring Logs.
Field and Laboratory Test Results: Field test results indicate that the clay soils were generally stiff to hard
in relative consistency while the granular soils were loose to very dense in relative density (typically dense
to very dense). The bedrock ranged from medium hard to very hard in density (typically very hard) based
on penetration testing results. Laboratory test results indicate that the clay soils and claystone bedrock
exhibit moderate plasticity and select samples exhibited low to moderate expansive potential at existing
moisture contents. Testing of select samples for water-soluble sulfates indicated concentrations ranging
from 600 to 800 parts per million (ppm).
Groundwater Conditions: Groundwater was encountered in our borings during drilling at depths ranging
from about 8 to 17 feet below existing site grades (typically from 8 to 11 feet). When checked about two
weeks later, groundwater levels ranged from about 8 to 12 feet below existing site grades.
2 Hart, Stephen S., 1972, Potentially Swelling Soil and Rock in the Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado, Colorado Geological Survey,
Sheet 1 of 4.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 5
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Groundwater observations are summarized below:
Table 1: Groundwater Summary
Boring
No.
Ground
Surface
Elevation (ft)
Groundwater Depth (ft)
Groundwater
Elevation (ft)
Approximate
Cut/Fill (+/- ft)
Approximate
Groundwater
Depth After
Cut/Fill (ft)
During
Drilling
(2/19-2/23)
After
Drilling
(3/3)
1 4960.50 11.0 9.0 4951.50 -0.5 8.5
2 4958.00 8.0 8.7 4949.30 -1 7.7
3 4956.50 11.0 11.0 4945.50 -0.5 10.5
4 4959.00 11.0 8.0 4951.00 +1 9.0
5 4958.75 11.0 8.0 4950.75 +1.25 9.3
6 4957.50 14.0 8.0 4949.50 +1.5 9.5
7 4959.25 8.0 9.3 4949.95 +0.75 10.1
8 4958.25 17.0 11.0 4947.25 +1.25 12.8
9 4961.00 11.0 10.5 4950.50 0 10.5
10 4960.00 17.0 12.0 4948.00 +5 17.0
The above groundwater observations are only representative of the locations explored at the time(s) of
our exploration(s). Seasonal fluctuations in groundwater elevation beyond those indicated above should
be expected, therefore, the possibility of groundwater fluctuations should be considered when developing
design and construction plans for the project.
Based upon review of U.S. Geological Survey Maps (3Hillier, et al, 1983), regional groundwater beneath
the project area is expected to be encountered in unconsolidated alluvial deposits at depths generally
between 5 and 10 feet below the ground surface.
Hydraulic Conductivity Testing: Hydraulic conductivity (permeability) testing was completed at the site in
Monitoring Well/Boring Nos. 2 and 7. We utilized a submerged water-level data-logger to monitor the
water level in the well before raising groundwater by inserting a 5 feet long slug, during the resulting return
(drop) of water level to static level (falling head), and after removal of the 5 feet long slug and during the
resulting rise in water level (rising head).
The water level measurements were imported into AQTESOLV® software in order to determine the hydraulic
conductivity of the subsurface profile for both the rising and falling head tests. Table 2 below summarizes
permeability and flow rate testing performed at the site.
3 Hillier, Donald E.; Schneider, Paul A., Jr.; and Hutchinson, E. Carter, 1983, Depth to Water Table (1976-1977) in the Greater Denver
Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado, United States Geological Survey, Map I-855-I.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 6
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Table 2: Hydraulic Conductivity Determinations
Test Type Hydraulic Conductivity
Centimeters/sec Gallons/min./ft2 (GPM/ft2) Gallons/day/ft2
Rising Head – 2 0.001807 0.02661109 38.32
Falling Head – 2 2.292 33.7499784 4.86 x 104
Rising Head – 7 0.001027 0.01512499 21.78
Falling Head – 7 2.594 38.2013644 5.501 x 104
Falling Head Avg. 2.443 35.9756714 5.181 x 104
ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS
Geotechnical Considerations: Based on the information obtained from our subsurface exploration(s),
laboratory testing of selected samples, and a cursory review of geologic conditions, it is our opinion that the
site appears suitable for development of the proposed project. The primary geotechnical considerations at
the site are the presence of shallow groundwater, the need for construction dewatering, and potentially
soft/unstable subgrade soils
• Shallow Groundwater and Construction Dewatering: As mentioned, stable groundwater levels were
measured in our borings at depths ranging from about 8 to 12 feet below existing site grades (EL
4,945.5 to 4,951.5 feet). Groundwater elevations reported in this study are similar to those
estimated to be present after underdrain installation on the adjacent Northfield Development by
Highland Development Services and to those recorded by A.G. Wassenaar (AGW) in February of 2020,
with the exception of AGW’s shallowest groundwater measurement of AGW Boring No. TB-2 near the
northern edge of the property (which may be an anomaly).
As presented in Table 1 groundwater is expected to be present at depths ranging from about 7.7 to
17 feet after grading. We do not believe that groundwater should not prohibit at-grade residential
construction (slab-on-grade foundations), but could impact deeper underground utility trenches To
help reduce the impacts of groundwater on the construction process, we recommend that installation
of the sanitary sewer system (typically the deepest trench) begin at the lowest point of the system
(tie-in to the existing system at Northfield). If possible, we recommend installation of an underdrain
be considered below the sanitary sewer to relive the expected groundwater inflow. The Civil Engineer
should coordinate with the City of Fort Collins to determine if the installation of an underdrain is
feasible. If underdrains can be used at the site, we recommend that they be designed using the flow
rate information presented in this report.
• Soft Soil Stabilization: Where shallow groundwater conditions are encountered, some soft/loose soil
conditions may be encountered. These relatively moist and potentially unstable soils will likely need
to be mitigated as construction activity begins on the site. Depending on seasonal conditions and
the depth of excavations, these soils will likely need to be improved to provide a stable base for new
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 7
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
infrastructure, foundations, or earthen fill. Contractors should plan on the use of track-mounted
and/or lightweight equipment to complete deeper excavations. To aid in stabilization, we
recommend crushing some inert construction materials or rock and blending these materials into the
soft/unstable soils. Typically, these materials should be crushed to sizes ranging from about 3 to 6
inches and kneaded/compacted into the soft soils in order to provide a stable base for construction.
• Below-Grade Construction: The shallow groundwater at the site will limit or preclude basement
construction and likely impact earthwork activities, depending on site grading and the depth of
underground utilities. We understand that basement construction is not currently planned for the
project; however, crawlspace construction may be included in design of the structures. If the buildings
are to include below-grade spaces, such as basement or crawlspace construction, we recommend
raising the site grades as high as possible in order to help alleviate this condition. We recommend
that the interior floor of any basement or crawlspace bear a minimum of three feet above
groundwater. If basement or crawlspace construction will be used, foundation drainage and/or
dewatering systems will be required.
• Foundations and Floor Slabs: Provided that subgrade preparation is properly performed, the site
appears suitable for the intended development. Considering the size and type of construction planned
and the subsurface conditions encountered in our test borings, we believe that spread footings or post-
tensioned slab-on-grade foundations are suitable for the proposed residential structures. Provided any
unstable or otherwise unsuitable soil conditions are mitigated, footings and slabs-on-grade may bear
directly on the on-site soil or newly compacted fill comprised of the on-site or similar soils.
• Private Pavements: The on-site soils include sands and clays, however, pavement design is typically
conducted based on the properties of the poorest quality subgrade soils. We have estimated a
resilient modulus of 3,025 psi for the on-site clay soils. Even though the pavements for the project will
be privately maintained, the City of Fort Collins requires they be designed in general accordance with
their Standards. Based on assumed traffic frequencies, we recommend 4 inches of hot-mix asphalt
(HMA) over 6 inches of aggregate base course (ABC) be used to pave the private drives associated
with the project. Additional section alternatives are presented in the report. For any public roadway
improvements, the City of Fort Collins will require submittal of a pavement thickness design report
based on completion of additional geotechnical exploration and analyses after completion of site
grading.
• Surface Drainage: The amount of movement associated with foundations, floor slabs, pavements, etc.
will be related to the wetting of underlying supporting soils. Therefore, it is imperative the
recommendations outlined in the “Grading and Drainage” section of this report be followed to reduce
potential movement.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 8
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Earthwork: The following presents our initial recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade
preparation and placement of engineered fills on the project based on typical construction methods. As
the design plans are finalized, these recommendations should be refined accordingly.
Earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer. The evaluation
of earthwork should include observation and testing of engineered fill, subgrade preparation, foundation
bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of the project.
• Site Preparation: Strip and remove existing vegetation, debris, and any other deleterious materials
from the site. Stripped materials consisting of vegetation and organic materials should be wasted from
the site or stockpiled for use in re-vegetation of non-structural/landscaping areas.
The on-site soils are considered to be relatively stable based on the conditions at the time of our
exploration, but soft/loose soil conditions may be encountered as excavations approach groundwater
elevation. Subgrade stability may also be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic, or
other factors. Where unstable conditions, if any, are encountered or develop during construction,
workability may be improved by scarifying and aeration during warmer periods. In some areas,
removal and recompaction (or replacement with other on-site soils) may be suitable to build a stable
base for placement of new fills.
In areas where subgrade soils are very soft/yielding (if any), gravel augmentation (mechanically
compacting/kneading crushed rock into the subgrade soils) may be cost-effective. In our experience,
crushed rock or recycled concrete materials on the order of 3 to 6 inches in size would be effective in
most situations. As an alternative, chemical treatment by blending fly ash, lime or Portland cement
into the subgrade could also be considered. The actual mitigation methods used should be based on
observation of exposed conditions by the geotechnical engineer.
• Excavations and Trench Construction: It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction
can be accomplished with conventional, heavy-duty earthmoving equipment. All excavations should
be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local and federal regulations, including current
OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. The site soils predominantly consist of sands that are
prone to caving, es[ecially as excavation approach groundwater elevation.
In our opinion, the soils at the site predominantly classify as OSHA Type C. An excavation side slope
configuration of 1-½ to 1 (horizontal to vertical) should be used for the overburden soils unless the
contractor’s OSHA competent personnel allow for steeper side slopes. If excavations approach
property lines, public right-of-way, or adjacent facilities the contractor should assess the potential
need to shore the sides of excavations. The individual contractor(s) is responsible for designing and
constructing stable and dry, temporary excavations, as required, maintaining stability of both the
excavation sides and bottom.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 9
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
The soils to be penetrated by the proposed excavations may vary significantly across the site. The
contractor should verify that similar conditions exist throughout the proposed area of excavation. If
different subsurface conditions are encountered at the time of construction, the actual conditions
should be evaluated to determine any excavation modifications necessary to maintain safe
conditions.
• Temporary Construction Dewatering: Deep underground utility trenches will likely be excavated
below the groundwater table. To help reduce the impacts of groundwater on the construction
process, we recommend that installation of the sanitary sewer system (typically the deepest trench)
begin at the lowest point of the system (tie-in to the existing system at Northfield). If possible, we
recommend installation of an underdrain be considered below the sanitary sewer. The Civil Engineer
should coordinate with the City of Fort Collins and the adjacent developer to determine if the
installation of an underdrain is feasible. If underdrains can be used at the site, we recommend that
they be designed using the flow rate information in this report.
For the purpose of developing temporary construction dewatering design parameters, engineering
analysis was conducted using the wetted thickness of the overburden soils in an excavation (determined
by depth of excavation below water table), such as a sanitary sewer trench/underdrain in a seasonal
high-water condition, and the hydraulic conductivities for the overburden soil presented in Table 2
above using the equation:
Q = kA
where k = hydraulic conductivity in GPM/ft2
A = wetted hydraulic front, ft2
Total flow rate for temporary dewatering will therefore depend on seasonal groundwater conditions
and the geometry of the excavation being dewatered as follows when using the average fastest
hydraulic conductivity:
Q = (35.9756714 GPM/ft2)(wetted excavation perimeter + floor area) (depth of excavation below
groundwater)
Although sanitary sewer plans were not available, we anticipate that the deepest utility excavations
or other temporary excavations may be up to about 5 feet below groundwater elevation. Flow rates
into excavations can be estimated using the shallowest of our estimated post-grading groundwater
depths (approximately 7.7 feet below site grade: EL 4,949.30’).
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 10
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Due to the inherent variability of the overburden soil and seasonal groundwater fluctuations, we believe
that it is prudent to include a scaling factor to design the temporary construction dewatering system
components if considering design based on measured groundwater depths. Similar sensitivity would be
realized with fluctuations in soil permeability. We recommend the application of a scaling factor of 1.5
be applied to the calculated flows. Typically, the pump rates should rapidly decrease with time as the
aquifer is drawn down. The contractor will need to monitor the drawdown and adjust the number of
wells, well points, or sumps within the excavation as required to attain the necessary drawdown.
Temporary dewatering should continue until the trenches are backfilled above groundwater
elevation.
Should groundwater levels rise above our available measurements or excavation sizes increase from
those assumed, additional flows from utility excavations should be anticipated. Therefore, we
recommend additional monitoring of water levels monthly up to construction to further refine this
design, as needed. At a minimum, temporary dewatering and stabilization of the base of deep
excavations should be anticipated. Pumping from sumps may be utilized to control water within the
excavations. Well points may be required for significant groundwater flow, or where excavations
penetrate groundwater to a significant depth.
Temporary construction dewatering discharge will need to be permitted with the Water Quality Control
Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment according to the stipulations of
the SUDP. Geochemical testing results of water samples obtained from Monitoring Well/Boring No. 7 to
assist effluent discharge permitting are presented in Appendix C. Discharge monitoring will be required
to maintain construction dewatering permits to discharge the collected water into City storm drainage
systems or other surface waters (per applicable State, City, and/or County requirements). We would be
pleased to discuss these services, upon request
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 11
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
• Fill Materials: Clean on-site soils or approved imported materials may be used as fill material.
Imported soils (if required) should conform to the following:
Percent finer by weight
Gradation (ASTM C136)
6” ................................................................................................................................... 100
3" .................................................................................................................................... 100
No. 4 Sieve ................................................................................................................ 30-100
No. 50 Sieve ................................................................................................................ 10-60
No. 200 Sieve ................................................................................................................ 5-20
• Liquid Limit .................................................................................................................. 35
• Plasticity Index .............................................................................................................. 6
• Maximum expansive potential (%)* .......................................................................... 0.5
*Measured on a sample compacted to approximately 95 percent of the ASTM D698 maximum dry
density at about optimum water content. The sample is confined under a 500 psf surcharge and
submerged.
• Fill Placement and Compaction: Engineered fill for site development, grading, and below foundations
and floor slabs should be placed and compacted in horizontal lifts, using equipment and procedures
that will produce recommended moisture contents and densities throughout the lift. Fill soils should
be placed and compacted according to the following criteria:
Criteria Recommended values
Lift Thickness 8 to 12 inches or less in loose thickness
Moisture Content Range
• Clayey soils: +1% to +4% above optimum moisture content
• Non-plastic sand soils: -2% below to +3% above optimum
• Pavement areas: Optimum to +2% above optimum
Compaction
Clayey soils: ASTM D698 standard Proctor dry density
• 95% minimum
Non-plastic sand soils: ASTM D1557 modified Proctor dry density
• 95% minimum
Earthwork contractors should use equipment and methods that ensure relatively uniform distribution
of added moisture and adequate compaction throughout each lift. We recommend that fill placement
and compaction beneath foundations be observed and tested by CGG on a nearly full-time basis,
unless modified by the geotechnical engineer.
At a minimum, fill soils placed for site grading, utility trench backfill, foundation backfill or sub-
excavation fill, and pavements and PCC flatwork subgrade soils should be tested to confirm that
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 12
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
earthwork is being performed according to our recommendations and project specifications.
Subsequent lifts of fill should not be placed on previous lifts if the moisture content or dry density is
determined to be less than specified. Fill should not be allowed to dry significantly prior to
construction. Areas allowed to dry may require additional preparation prior to construction of
roadways, flatwork, foundations, etc.
Foundation Design and Construction: Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in our borings,
we believe the soils at the site are suitable for support of the residential structures. Due to the presence
of low expansive soils at the site, spread footing or post-tensioned slab-on-grade foundations are
considered acceptable for support of structures on this site. However, as discussed above, where any
loose soils or other unsuitable materials are present below shallow foundations, they should be removed
and recompacted as directed by CGG.
The design of shallow foundations such as spread footings, mat foundations or post-tensioned slabs (using
criteria outlined by the Post-Tensioning Institute4) should be based on the following:
SPREAD FOOTING, MAT, or POST-TENSIONED SLABS
Criteria Design Values
Bearing Soils Undisturbed soils or recompacted engineered fill
approved by the Geotechnical Engineer
Maximum net allowable bearing pressure1 2,500 psf
Min. depth below grade, exterior wall footings2 36 inches
Min. depth below grade, interior footings 12 inches
Edge moisture variation distance, em • 8.3 feet Center (shrink)
• 4.9 feet Edge (swell)
Differential Soil Movement, ym • -0.70 inch Center (shrink)
• +1.15 inch Edge (swell)
Slab subgrade coefficient 2.00 for on-site clay soils
Estimated total foundation movement3 1 inch
Estimated differential foundation movement3 ½ to ¾-inch
1. The design bearing pressure above applies to dead loads plus one-half of design live load conditions.
The design bearing pressure may be increased by 1/3 when considering total loads that include wind
or seismic conditions.
2. Finished grade is the lowest adjacent grade for perimeter footings and floor level for interior footings.
3. Based on assumed structural loads. Footings should be proportioned to apply relative constant dead
load pressure in order to reduce differential movement between adjacent footings.
It should be noted that ym is the estimated vertical movement at the edges of a uniformly loaded slab.
These are theoretical values that are used in the design of post-tensioned slabs-on-grade and do not
represent the movements that would be expected from the actual loading conditions. The estimated
4 Post-Tensioning Institute, (2004, Third Edition), Design of Post-Tensioned Slabs-on-Ground
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 13
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
values of total and differential movement outlined above are considered the applicable to overall
movement or “tilting” of the structures. As previously discussed, the use of either conventionally-
reinforced or post-tensioned slabs-on-grade assumes that some potential movement is considered
acceptable.
Additional foundation movements could occur if water from any source infiltrates the foundation soils;
therefore, proper drainage should be provided in the final design and during construction. Footings,
foundations, and foundation walls should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the potential for distress
caused by differential foundation movement. The use of joints at openings or other discontinuities in
masonry walls is recommended.
Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer during construction. If the soil
or bedrock conditions encountered differ significantly from those presented in this report, supplemental
recommendations may be required.
Where spread footings are used, interior (non-structural) slab-on-grade floors should provide acceptable
performance provided they are properly designed and constructed as discussed in subsequent sections of
this report.
Lateral Earth Pressures: Earth pressures will be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of
wall restraint, methods of construction, wetting of backfill materials, and/or compaction and the strength
of the materials being restrained. Loads that should be considered by the structural engineer on walls are
shown below.
Active earth pressure is commonly used for design of freestanding cantilever retaining walls and assumes
wall movement. The "at-rest" condition assumes no wall rotation. Walls with unbalanced backfill levels
on opposite sides (i.e. crawlspace, basement, or site retaining walls) should be designed for earth
pressures at least equal to those indicated in the following table. The recommended design lateral earth
pressures do not include a factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the
walls.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 14
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS
Earth
pressure
conditions
Coefficient for backfill
type
Equivalent fluid
pressure, pcf
Surcharge
pressure P1,
psf
Earth pressure
P2, psf
Active (Ka) On-site clayey soils - 0.33 40 (0.33)S (40)H
At-Rest (Ko) On-site clayey soils - 0.50 60 (0.50)S (60)H
Passive (Kp) On-site clayey soils – 2.3 275 --- ---
Conditions applicable to the above conditions include:
• for active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements 0.01 Z to
0.02 Z, where Z is wall height
• for passive earth pressure, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance
• uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure
• in-situ soil backfill weight a maximum of 120 pcf
• horizontal backfill, compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density
• loading from heavy compaction equipment not included
• no groundwater acting on wall
• no safety factor included
• ignore passive pressure in frost zone
Backfill placed against structures may consist of the on-site soils processed to a soil-like consistency with
maximum particle sizes on the order of 4 to 6 inches. To calculate the resistance to sliding, a value of 0.35
may be used as the coefficient of friction between the footing and the underlying soil.
If the project contains any walls which will retain unbalanced soil loads (i.e. basement, crawlspace, or site
retaining walls), we recommend installation of a drainage system be installed at the base of the retained
soil mass to control the water level behind the wall. If this is not possible, then combined hydrostatic and
lateral earth pressures should be calculated for lean clay backfill using an equivalent fluid weighing 90 and
100 pcf for active and at-rest conditions, respectively. These pressures do not include the influence of
surcharge, equipment or floor loading, which should be added. Heavy equipment should not operate
within a distance closer than the exposed height of retaining walls to prevent lateral pressures more than
those provided.
Seismic Considerations: Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the test holes drilled on the
site, we estimate that a Site Class D is appropriate for the site according to the 2015 International Building
Code (Section 1613.3.2 referencing Table 20.3-1 of ASCE 7, Chapter 20). This parameter was estimated
based on extrapolation of data beyond the deepest depth explored, using methods allowed by the code.
Actual shear wave velocity testing/analysis and/or exploration to 100 feet was not performed.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 15
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Below-grade Construction: As discussed, stable groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from
about 8 to 12 feet below existing site grades, or predominantly about 7-½ to 10 feet below finished site
grades. We understand that basement construction is not currently planned for the project; however,
crawlspace construction may be included in design of the structures. If the buildings are to include below-
grade spaces, such as crawlspace construction, we recommend raising the site grades as high as possible
in order to help alleviate this condition. We recommend that the interior floor of any basement or
crawlspace bear a minimum of three feet above groundwater. In addition, drainage and/or dewatering
systems could be required, depending on finished grades.
Final dewatering/drainage system design will need to account for final grading and architectural plans,
however, in general terms, the drainage system should include a 4-inch diameter perforated pipe,
installed in a trench at the base of each below-grade space. The drain trench should slope to the
subdivision-wide underdrain system within the roadway, however, it is common to also install a sump pit
within the structures to collect flows in case of a malfunction of the underdrain system. The perforated
drain-pipe should be embedded in a zone of washed gravel to protect against the intrusion of fines. A
typical construction detail for the interior foundation drainage system is included in Appendix C.
In our experience, water that is discharged from the sump pit to the ground surface may pond within
swales or behind curbs/sidewalks. Provided that the sump pit is higher than the underdrain connection,
we believe that only minimal flows should collect in the sump pit. If water is discharged too close to the
structures it can be “recycled” through the drain system frequently. Care should be used to properly
direct discharged water to existing site improvements away from homes and other facilities.
At a minimum, crawlspaces should be well ventilated and any exposed soil beneath the homes sealed
with a moisture barrier.
Non-structural Interior Floor Slabs : As discussed, non- to low expansive sand, clays, and bedrock were
encountered on a majority of the site. In general, these soils are suitable for support for interior (non-
structural) slab-on-grade floors with low risk of post-construction movement. Post-tensioned slab
foundations are considered structural elements and should be designed and constructed as discussed
above.
Non-structural, interior floor slabs bearing on approved non- to low expansive native soils or on moisture-
conditioned and compacted engineered fill could still experience movement when subjected to typical
post-construction wetting, even with the recommended site preparation. However, we believe that
movement would be limited to amounts that are generally tolerable for slab-on-grade construction in the
region. Based on our analyses, provided mitigation of any large areas soft/unstable soils or dry, expansive
soils are mitigated, we estimate potential slab-on-grade movement to be on the order of 1 to 2 inches.
The movement estimate outlined above assumes that the other recommendations in this report are
followed. Additional movement could occur should the subsurface soils become wetted to significant
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 16
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
depths, which could result in potential excessive movement causing uneven floor slabs and severe
cracking. This could be due to over watering of landscaping, poor drainage, improperly functioning
drain systems, and/or broken utility lines.
If slab-on-grade is utilized, the subgrade soils should be prepared as outlined in the “Earthwork” section
of this report. For structural design of concrete slabs-on-grade, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100
pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for floors supported on existing or compacted soils at the site.
Additional floor slab design and construction recommendations are as follows:
• Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all foundations,
columns or utility lines to allow independent movement.
• Control joints should be provided in slabs to control the location and extent of cracking.
• A minimum 2-inch void space should be constructed below non-bearing partition walls placed on the
floor slab. This typically involves suspending drywall 3 to 4 inches above the slab and utilizing a
“bottom plate” in the framing to which baseboards can be connected (no connection from
baseboards to drywall). Corner beads and other elements must also be isolated from the slab.
• Doorjambs and frames within partition walls should be trimmed to allow for floor slab movement
and avoid potential distortion (we understand that about ½-inch is typical).
• The thickness of the partition void and gap at the base of door frames should be checked periodically
and adjusted as needed to maintain a void space and avoid transferring slab movement to upper
level framing.
• Interior trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in accordance with recommended
specifications outlined below.
• The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade that will be
covered with wood, tile, carpet or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, or when the slab
will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor
retarder/barrier, the slab designer and slab contractor should refer to ACI 302 for procedures and
cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder/barrier.
• Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade.
• Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in Section 302.1R of the ACI Design
Manual, are recommended.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 17
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Private Pavement Design and Construction: The design of private pavements for the project is based on the
procedures outlined in the 2001 City of Fort Collins Urban Area Street Standards. The design methods are
based on procedures outlined in the 1993 Guideline for Design of Pavement Structures by the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and the CDOT Pavement Design Manual
by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). For any public roadway improvements, the City of
Fort Collins will require submittal of a pavement thickness design report based on completion of additional
geotechnical exploration and analyses after completion of site grading.
• Subgrade Soil for Pavement Support: The majority of the soils on-site are sandy soils that are judged
to provide fair to good support of pavements. However, the clayey soils encountered at the site are
considered to offer poor pavement support. The referenced design methods are based on the
subgrade soil support properties and anticipated traffic values. Based on the properties of the poorest
quality subgrade soils, we have estimated an R-value of 5, corresponding to a resilient modulus of
3,025 psi using the CDOT correlation. A terminal serviceability index of 2.0 and a reliability index of 75
were applied in the design of the roadways.
• Assumed Traffic: We assume that pavements associated with the project will include the fire lanes and
main access drives along with surface parking for automobiles and light trucks. The following traffic
designation criteria was used for determining pavement thicknesses using a design life of 20 years, as
outlined in the City of Fort Collins Standards:
City of Fort Collins Traffic
Classification
Equivalent Daily Load
Application (EDLA)
Equivalent (18-kip) Single
Axle Load (ESAL)
Local Residential – Two Lane 5 36,500
Local Residential – Single Lane 10 73,000
The owner should review these assumptions, and we should be contacted to confirm or modify these
resulting pavement sections, if needed.
• Private Pavement Sections: Recommended alternatives for flexible and rigid pavements are
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 18
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
summarized for each traffic area as follows:
Traffic Area Alternative* Preliminary Pavement Thickness (Inches)
Asphalt Concrete
Surface (AC)
Aggregate Base
Course (ABC)
Portland Cement
Concrete (PCC)
Local Residential – Two Lane
(EDLA = 5, ESAL = 36,500)
A* 6 -- --
B* 4 6 --
C -- -- 5
Local Residential - Single Lane
(EDLA = 10, ESAL = 73,000)
A* 6.5 -- --
B* 5.5 6 --
C -- -- 6
* City of Fort Collins default minimum sections
For areas subject to concentrated and repetitive loading conditions such as dumpster pads, truck
delivery docks and ingress/egress aprons, we recommend using a Portland cement concrete
pavement with a thickness of at least 7 inches. For dumpster pads, the concrete pavement area
should be large enough to support the container and tipping axle of the refuse truck. Each alternative
should be investigated with respect to current material availability and economic conditions.
• Pavement Subgrade Preparation: Site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction
phase. However, as construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations,
construction traffic, drying/desiccation, or rainfall. As a result, the pavement subgrade may not be
suitable for pavement construction and corrective action will be required.
We recommend that any areas to receive fill be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted to
a depth of 12 inches. In addition, the upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade should be scarified,
moisture conditioned, and recompacted immediately prior to final proofroll and paving.
A proofroll of the subgrade soils should also be performed prior to paving and any soft/yielding areas
remediated. Paving materials used at the site should meet current City of Fort Collins and CDOT
specifications.
• Temporary Unpaved Access Drives: In our opinion, the use of aggregate base course or crushed stone may
be considered for use in constructing temporary access roads for construction traffic and/or all-weather
fire truck access. In order to provide an all-weather surface, we recommend that the section include a
minimum of 12 inches of aggregate base course (CDOT Class 5 or 6) or a minimum of 8 inches of 3-inch
minus crushed aggregate (or recycled concrete). In our opinion, these sections would be suitable for the
support of delivery and concrete trucks and occasional fire truck access (80,000 ponds maximum) for the
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 19
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
anticipated duration of a typical project of this magnitude. The contractor should be responsible for
monitoring the condition of unpaved drive lanes, including the repair and maintenance of the drive lanes
throughout its use in order to provide the required access. We believe it is likely that these aggregate
materials will be “contaminated” with soil and other constituents over the course of construction,
therefore, the aggregate materials should not be considered part of the final pavement section unless
otherwise evaluated and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer.
• Pavement Materials: Materials and construction of pavements for the project should be in
accordance with the requirements and specifications of the City of Fort Collins and CDOT. Aggregate
base course (if used on the site) should consist of a blend of sand and gravel that meets strict
specifications for quality and gradation. Use of materials meeting Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) Class 5 or 6 specifications is recommended for base course. Aggregate base
course should be placed in lifts not exceeding 6 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent
standard Proctor density (ASTM D698).
Asphalt concrete should be composed of a mixture of aggregate, filler, and additives (if required) and
approved bituminous material. The asphalt concrete should conform to approved mix designs stating
the Hveem properties, optimum asphalt content, job mix formula and recommended mixing and
placing temperatures. Aggregate used in asphalt concrete should meet particular gradations.
Material meeting CDOT Grading S or SX specifications or equivalent is recommended for asphalt
concrete. Mix designs should be submitted prior to construction to verify their adequacy. Asphalt
material should be placed in maximum 3-inch lifts and compacted within a range of 92 to 96 percent
of the theoretical maximum (Rice) density (ASTM D2041) or 95 percent Hveem density (ASTM D1560,
D1561).
Where rigid pavements are used, the concrete should be obtained from an approved mix design with
the following minimum properties:
• Modulus of Rupture @ 28 days ................................................................... 650 psi minimum
• Strength Requirements ........................................................................................... ASTM C94
• Cement Type .................................................................................................. Type II Portland
• Entrained Air Content ................................................................................................. 6 to 8%
• Concrete Aggregate ........................................................... ASTM C33 and CDOT Section 703
Concrete should be deposited by truck mixers or agitators and placed a maximum of 90 minutes from
the time the water is added to the mix. Other specifications outlined by CDOT should be followed.
Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed in concrete pavements for
expansion/contraction and isolation. The location and extent of joints should be based upon the final
pavement geometry. Sawed joints should be cut within 24 hours of concrete placement and should
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 20
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
be a minimum of 25 percent of slab thickness plus 1/4 inch. All joints should be sealed to prevent
entry of foreign material and doweled where necessary for load transfer.
• Compliance: Recommendations for pavement design and construction presented depend upon
compliance with recommended material specifications. To assess compliance, observation and testing
should be performed under the observation of the geotechnical engineer.
• Pavement Maintenance and Performance: Pavement design methods are intended to provide
structural sections with adequate thickness over a particular subgrade such that wheel loads are
reduced to a level the subgrade can support. The support characteristics of the subgrade for
pavement design do not account for shrink/swell movements of an expansive clay subgrade such as
is common in the region. Thus, the pavement may be adequate from a structural standpoint, yet still
experience cracking and deformation due to shrink/swell relate movement of the subgrade. It is,
therefore, important to minimize moisture changes in the subgrade to reduce shrink/swell
movements.
Future performance of pavements constructed on the clay soils at this site will be dependent upon
several factors, including:
• maintaining stable moisture content of the subgrade soils.
• providing for a planned program of preventative maintenance.
Pavements could crack in the future primarily because of expansion of the soils when subjected to an
increase in moisture content to the subgrade. The cracking, while not desirable, does not necessarily
constitute structural failure of the pavement.
The performance of all pavements can be enhanced by minimizing excess moisture that can reach the
subgrade soils. The following recommendations should be considered at minimum:
• Site grading at a minimum 2 percent grade onto or away from pavements.
• Water should not be allowed to pond behind curbs.
• Compaction of any utility trenches for landscaped areas to the same criteria as the pavement
subgrade.
• Sealing all landscaped areas in or adjacent to pavements to minimize or prevent moisture
migration to subgrade soils.
• Placing compacted backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter.
• Placing curb, gutter and/or sidewalk directly on subgrade soils without the use of base course
materials.
• Placing shoulder or edge drains in pavement areas adjacent to water sources.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 21
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided for an ongoing pavement management
program in order to enhance future pavement performance. Preventative maintenance activities are
intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration and to preserve the pavement investment.
Preventative maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack sealing and patching and
global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing). Preventative maintenance is usually the first priority when
implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on
investment for pavements.
Final Grading, Landscaping, and Surface Drainage: All grades must be adjusted to provide positive
drainage away from structures during construction and maintained throughout the life of the proposed
project. Water permitted to pond near or adjacent to the perimeter of the structures (either during or
post-construction) can result in significantly higher soil movements than those discussed in this report.
As a result, any estimations of potential movement described in this report cannot be relied upon if
positive drainage is not obtained and maintained, and water is allowed to infiltrate the fill and/or
subgrade. Infiltration of water into utility or foundation excavations must be prevented during
construction.
In accordance with the building code for non-expansive sites, exposed ground should be sloped at a
minimum of 10 percent grade for at least 10 feet beyond the perimeter of the buildings, where possible.
We understand that this may not be feasible in all unpaved areas due to ADA access requirements and
other required design features. In these areas, exterior grades should be sloped as much as possible down
to area drain systems, swales, and/or sidewalk chases to facilitate drainage. In all cases, we recommend
that grades slope at least 5 percent away from the building in accordance with building codes.
Downspouts should also be connected to storm sewers or area drain systems to help reduce wetting. If
this is not possible, roof drain flows should be directed onto pavements or discharge a minimum of 5
feet away from the structure a through the use of splash blocks or downspout extensions.
Backfill against foundations, exterior walls and in utility and sprinkler line trenches should be well
compacted and free of all construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration. After
building construction and prior to project completion, we recommend that verification of final grading be
performed to document that positive drainage, as described above, has been achieved. This is especially
important in areas where heating and cooling units are placed in close proximity to the buildings.
Planters located adjacent to the structure should preferably be self-contained (planter boxes, potted
landscaping, etc.). Landscaped irrigation adjacent to foundations should be eliminated where possible
or minimized to only limited drip irrigation. Sprinkler mains and spray heads should be located a
minimum of 5 feet away from the buildings. We recommend the use of Xeric landscaping, requiring little
or no irrigation, be used within 5 feet of foundations. If drip irrigation is required in this zone, systems
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 22
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
should timed to provide only the amount of water needed to sustain growth. Irrigation systems should be
frequently checked for proper performance and any breakages fixed as soon as possible.
Additional Design and Construction Considerations:
• Exterior Slabs: Exterior slabs-on-grade, exterior architectural features, and utilities founded on the
on-site soils may experience some movement due to frost heave and potential volume change of
backfill in utility trenches and around building pads. Potential movement could be reduced by:
• minimizing moisture increases in the subgrade soils.
• controlling moisture-density during placement of any backfill.
• using designs which allow vertical movement between the exterior features and adjoining
structural elements.
• placing effective control joints on relatively close centers.
• Underground Utilities: All underground piping within or near the proposed structure should be
designed with flexible couplings, so minor deviations in alignment do not result in breakage or
distress. Utility knockouts in foundation walls should be oversized to accommodate differential
movements.
It is strongly recommended that a representative of the geotechnical engineer provide full-time
observation and compaction testing of trench backfill within building and pavement areas.
• Concrete Corrosion Protection: Select soil/bedrock samples were tested for the presence of water-
soluble sulfates, as outlined in the table below.
Boring Depth
(ft) Material Water-Soluble
Sulfates (ppm)
ACI Sulfate
Exposure Class
7 2 Lean Clay with Sand 800 S1
9 2 Lean Clay with Sand 600 S1
The select samples, likely to be in contact with project concrete, were tested for the presence of
water-soluble sulfates in order to determine corrosion characteristics and the appropriate concrete
mixtures. Based on these results, project concrete should be designed for American Concrete Institute
(ACI) Sulfate Exposure Class S1 in accordance with Chapter 19 of the ACI design manual, Building Code
Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-14) as summarized below.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Enclave at Redwood Residential Development – Fort Collins, CO
CGG Project No. 21.22.034
Cole Garner Geotechnical Page 23
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing
ACI Sulfate
Exposure Class
Portland Cement Type
(ASTM C150)
Maximum
Water/Cement Ratio
Minimum Concrete
Compressive Strength
(psi)
S1 II (or equivalent) 0.50 4,000
GENERAL COMMENTS
CGG should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments can be made
regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and
specifications. CGG should also be retained to provide testing and observation during the excavation,
grading, foundation, and construction phases of the project.
The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the
borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This
report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the site, or due to the modifying
effects of weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after
construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and
supplemental recommendations can be provided.
The scope of services for this project does not include, either specifically or by implication, any
environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or
prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential
for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project
discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering
practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety, excavation support,
and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes are planned in
the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report, the conclusions and
recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless CGG reviews the changes,
and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing.
APPENDIX A
SITE VICINITY MAP
BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM
BORING LOGS
GROUNDWATER DEPTH CONTOUR DIAGRAM
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DIAGRAM
APPROXIMATE PROJECT SITE LOCATION Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W. 124 th Ave., Suite 300
Westminster, CO 8023 4
(303) 996-2999
FIGURE 1 – SITE VICINITY MAP
THE ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
CGG PROJECT NO. 21.22.034
APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATIONS Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W. 124 th Ave., Suite 300
Westminster, CO 8023 4
(303) 996-2999 AGW BORING LOCATIONS
1
1 2 3
4
6
8 7
5
FIGURE 2 - BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM
THE ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
CGG PROJECT NO. 21.22.034
TB-1
TB-1
TB-2
TB-3
TB-4
TB-5
TB-6 TB-7
TB-8 TB-9
TB-10
TB-11 TB-12
TB-13 TB-14
TB-15 TB-16 10
9
50 / 5
50 / 7
50 / 9
50 / 3
50 / 6
131
1.6
5.7
6.8
10.6
100
100
100
0
100
FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, varies
clayey, tan, light brown, white, dry to moist, dense to very dense
Approximate bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
25 4935.5
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
DRILLING METHOD Buggy Rig/Solid Stem Auger
DATE STARTED 2/19/21
GROUND WATER LEVELS:
SURFACE CONDITIONS Low growth of grass and weedsDRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories
COMPLETED 2/19/21
LOGGED BY JL CHECKED BY AG
HAMMER TYPE Automatic
PROPOSED ELEV.4960 ft
DURING DRILLING 11.00 ft / Elev 4949.50 ft
AFTER DRILLING 9.00 ft / Elev 4951.50 ft - 3/3/21
GROUND SURFACE ELEV.4960.5 ft
GRAPHICLOGDEPTH(ft)0
5
10
15
20
25 PENETRATIONblows/inDRY UNIT WT.(pcf)SWELL-CONSOL/SURCHARGELOAD, %psfMOISTURECONTENT (%)RECOVERY %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPEUSCS SYMBOLPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER 1
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GEOTECH BH COLUMNS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:41 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
50 / 8
50 / 9
50 / 7
50 / 7
50 / 5
120
124
5.0
6.4
6.9
7.6
11.9
100
100
100
100
100
FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, varies to Silty
Sand, tan, light brown, white, dry to moist, dense to very dense
CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, varies sandy, bluish-grey, moist,
very hard
Approximate bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
22
25
4936.0
4933.0
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
SP-SM
SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
-
DRILLING METHOD Buggy Rig/Solid Stem Auger
DATE STARTED 2/19/21
GROUND WATER LEVELS:
SURFACE CONDITIONS Low growth of grass and weedsDRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories
COMPLETED 2/19/21
LOGGED BY JL CHECKED BY AG
HAMMER TYPE Automatic
PROPOSED ELEV.4957 ft
DURING DRILLING 8.00 ft / Elev 4950.00 ft
AFTER DRILLING 8.70 ft / Elev 4949.30 ft - 3/3/21
GROUND SURFACE ELEV.4958 ft
GRAPHICLOGDEPTH(ft)0
5
10
15
20
25 PENETRATIONblows/inDRY UNIT WT.(pcf)SWELL-CONSOL/SURCHARGELOAD, %psfMOISTURECONTENT (%)RECOVERY %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPEUSCS SYMBOLPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER 2
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GEOTECH BH COLUMNS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:41 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
50 / 6
50 / 7
50 / 5
50 / 4
50 / 4
2.2
9.3
4.4
16.4
16.7
100
100
100
100
100
FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, varies
clayey, tan, light brown, white, dry to moist, very dense
CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, varies sandy, grey, bluish-grey,
moist, very hard
Approximate bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
17
25
4939.5
4931.5
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
-
-
DRILLING METHOD Buggy Rig/Solid Stem Auger
DATE STARTED 2/19/21
GROUND WATER LEVELS:
SURFACE CONDITIONS Low growth of grass and weedsDRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories
COMPLETED 2/19/21
LOGGED BY JL CHECKED BY AG
HAMMER TYPE Automatic
PROPOSED ELEV.4956 ft
DURING DRILLING 11.00 ft / Elev 4945.50 ft
AFTER DRILLING 11.00 ft / Elev 4945.50 ft - 3/3/21
GROUND SURFACE ELEV.4956.5 ft
GRAPHICLOGDEPTH(ft)0
5
10
15
20
25 PENETRATIONblows/inDRY UNIT WT.(pcf)SWELL-CONSOL/SURCHARGELOAD, %psfMOISTURECONTENT (%)RECOVERY %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPEUSCS SYMBOLPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER 3
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GEOTECH BH COLUMNS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:41 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
29 / 12
50 / 7
50 / 6
50 / 4
50 / 4 104
8.1
7.1
5.8
11.4
19.3
100
100
100
100
100
SANDY LEAN CLAY, with gravel, brown, moist, very stiff
FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, tan, light
brown, white, dry to moist, very dense
CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, varies sandy, grey, bluish-grey,
moist, very hard
Approximate bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
7
20
25
4952.0
4939.0
4934.0
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CL
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
-
DRILLING METHOD Buggy Rig/Solid Stem Auger
DATE STARTED 2/19/21
GROUND WATER LEVELS:
SURFACE CONDITIONS Low growth of grass and weedsDRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories
COMPLETED 2/19/21
LOGGED BY JL CHECKED BY AG
HAMMER TYPE Automatic
PROPOSED ELEV.4960 ft
DURING DRILLING 11.00 ft / Elev 4948.00 ft
AFTER DRILLING 8.00 ft / Elev 4951.00 ft - 3/3/21
GROUND SURFACE ELEV.4959 ft
GRAPHICLOGDEPTH(ft)0
5
10
15
20
25 PENETRATIONblows/inDRY UNIT WT.(pcf)SWELL-CONSOL/SURCHARGELOAD, %psfMOISTURECONTENT (%)RECOVERY %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPEUSCS SYMBOLPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER 4
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GEOTECH BH COLUMNS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:41 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
11 / 12
29 / 12
50 / 11
50 / 4
50 / 3
126
133
4.3
5.7
4.5
8.6
13.1
100
100
100
100
100
FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, tan, light
brown, white, moist, loose to very dense
CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, varies sandy, grey, bluish-grey,
moist, very hard
Approximate bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
23
25
4935.8
4933.8
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
-
DRILLING METHOD Buggy Rig/Solid Stem Auger
DATE STARTED 2/19/21
GROUND WATER LEVELS:
SURFACE CONDITIONS Low growth of grass and weedsDRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories
COMPLETED 2/19/21
LOGGED BY JL CHECKED BY AG
HAMMER TYPE Automatic
PROPOSED ELEV.4460 ft
DURING DRILLING 11.00 ft / Elev 4947.75 ft
AFTER DRILLING 8.00 ft / Elev 4950.75 ft - 3/3/21
GROUND SURFACE ELEV.4958.75 ft
GRAPHICLOGDEPTH(ft)0
5
10
15
20
25 PENETRATIONblows/inDRY UNIT WT.(pcf)SWELL-CONSOL/SURCHARGELOAD, %psfMOISTURECONTENT (%)RECOVERY %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPEUSCS SYMBOLPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER 5
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GEOTECH BH COLUMNS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:41 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
16 / 12
35 / 12
50 / 7
50 / 9
49 / 12
50 / 2
112
110
115
-1.3/50014.1
1.2
5.7
6.6
19.1
15.9
100
100
100
100
100
100
SANDY LEAN CLAY, brown, tan, moist, stiff
FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, tan, light
brown, white, moist, medium dense to very dense
CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, varies sandy, grey, bluish-grey,
moist, medium hard to very hard
Approximate bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
3
17
25
4954.5
4940.5
4932.5
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CL
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
-
-
DRILLING METHOD CME-55 / Solid Stem Auger
DATE STARTED 2/23/21
GROUND WATER LEVELS:
SURFACE CONDITIONS Low growth of grass and weedsDRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories
COMPLETED 2/23/21
LOGGED BY JL CHECKED BY AG
HAMMER TYPE Automatic
PROPOSED ELEV.4959 ft
DURING DRILLING 14.00 ft / Elev 4943.50 ft
AFTER DRILLING 8.00 ft / Elev 4949.50 ft
GROUND SURFACE ELEV.4957.5 ft
GRAPHICLOGDEPTH(ft)0
5
10
15
20
25 PENETRATIONblows/inDRY UNIT WT.(pcf)SWELL-CONSOL/SURCHARGELOAD, %psfMOISTURECONTENT (%)RECOVERY %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPEUSCS SYMBOLPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER 6
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GEOTECH BH COLUMNS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:41 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
11 / 12
35 / 12
50 / 11
50 / 11
32 / 12
50 / 4
104
121
-0.5/50017.1
2.2
5.4
5.9
7.3
12.6
100
100
100
100
100
100
LEAN CLAY with SAND, with gravel, brown to dark brown,
iron-stained, moist, stiff
FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, tan, light
brown, white, moist, medium dense to dense
CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, varies sandy, grey, bluish-grey,
moist, very hard
Approximate bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
3
21
25
4956.3
4938.3
4934.3
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CL
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
-
DRILLING METHOD CME-55 / Solid Stem Auger
DATE STARTED 2/23/21
GROUND WATER LEVELS:
SURFACE CONDITIONS Low growth of grass and weedsDRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories
COMPLETED 2/23/21
LOGGED BY JL CHECKED BY AG
HAMMER TYPE Automatic
PROPOSED ELEV.4960 ft
DURING DRILLING 8.00 ft / Elev 4951.25 ft
AFTER DRILLING 9.30 ft / Elev 4949.95 ft - 3/3/21
GROUND SURFACE ELEV.4959.25 ft
GRAPHICLOGDEPTH(ft)0
5
10
15
20
25 PENETRATIONblows/inDRY UNIT WT.(pcf)SWELL-CONSOL/SURCHARGELOAD, %psfMOISTURECONTENT (%)RECOVERY %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPEUSCS SYMBOLPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER 7
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GEOTECH BH COLUMNS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:41 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
30 / 12
30 / 12
50 / 8
50 / 6
50 / 3
116
118
+3.1/1000
1.5
5.8
7.9
13.2
12.8
100
100
100
100
100
FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, tan, light
brown, white, moist, medium dense to dense
CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, varies sandy, grey, bluish-grey,
moist, very hard
Approximate bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
17
25
4941.3
4933.3
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
-
-
DRILLING METHOD CME-55 / Solid Stem Auger
DATE STARTED 2/23/21
GROUND WATER LEVELS:
SURFACE CONDITIONS Low growth of grass and weedsDRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories
COMPLETED 2/23/21
LOGGED BY JL CHECKED BY AG
HAMMER TYPE Automatic
PROPOSED ELEV.4960 ft
DURING DRILLING 17.00 ft / Elev 4941.25 ft
AFTER DRILLING 11.00 ft / Elev 4947.25 ft - 3/3/21
GROUND SURFACE ELEV.4958.25 ft
GRAPHICLOGDEPTH(ft)0
5
10
15
20
25 PENETRATIONblows/inDRY UNIT WT.(pcf)SWELL-CONSOL/SURCHARGELOAD, %psfMOISTURECONTENT (%)RECOVERY %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPEUSCS SYMBOLPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER 8
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GEOTECH BH COLUMNS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:42 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
45 / 12
15 / 12
48 / 12
35 / 12
50 / 10
50 / 2
113 +3.8/50010.1
0.8
6.2
6.9
9.8
4.3
100
100
100
100
100
100
LEAN CLAY with SAND, brown to light brown, tan, calcareous,
dry to moist, hard
FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, varies
clayey, tan, light brown, white, dry to wet, medium dense to
dense
CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, varies sandy, grey, bluish-grey, dry,
very hard
Approximate bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
3
23
25
4958.0
4938.0
4936.0
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CL
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
-
DRILLING METHOD CME-55 / Solid Stem Auger
DATE STARTED 2/23/21
GROUND WATER LEVELS:
SURFACE CONDITIONS Low growth of grass and weedsDRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories
COMPLETED 2/23/21
LOGGED BY JL CHECKED BY AG
HAMMER TYPE Automatic
PROPOSED ELEV.4961 ft
DURING DRILLING 11.00 ft / Elev 4950.00 ft
AFTER DRILLING 10.50 ft / Elev 4950.50 ft - 3/3/21
GROUND SURFACE ELEV.4961 ft
GRAPHICLOGDEPTH(ft)0
5
10
15
20
25 PENETRATIONblows/inDRY UNIT WT.(pcf)SWELL-CONSOL/SURCHARGELOAD, %psfMOISTURECONTENT (%)RECOVERY %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPEUSCS SYMBOLPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER 9
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GEOTECH BH COLUMNS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:42 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
50 / 10
47 / 12
50 / 1
50 / 6
50 / 4
118
115
1.0
2.4
14.5
12.7
100
100
0
100
100
FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL, tan, light
brown, white, dry to moist, dense to very dense
CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, varies sandy, grey, bluish-grey,
brown, moist, very hard
Approximate bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
18
25
4942.0
4935.0
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
SP-SM
SP-SM
SP-SM
-
-
DRILLING METHOD CME-55 / Solid Stem Auger
DATE STARTED 2/23/21
GROUND WATER LEVELS:
SURFACE CONDITIONS Low growth of grass and weedsDRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories
COMPLETED 2/23/21
LOGGED BY JL CHECKED BY AG
HAMMER TYPE Automatic
PROPOSED ELEV.4965 ft
DURING DRILLING 17.00 ft / Elev 4943.00 ft
AFTER DRILLING 12.00 ft / Elev 4948.00 ft - 3/3/21
GROUND SURFACE ELEV.4960 ft
GRAPHICLOGDEPTH(ft)0
5
10
15
20
25 PENETRATIONblows/inDRY UNIT WT.(pcf)SWELL-CONSOL/SURCHARGELOAD, %psfMOISTURECONTENT (%)RECOVERY %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPEUSCS SYMBOLPAGE 1 OF 1
BORING NUMBER 10
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GEOTECH BH COLUMNS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:42 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATIONS Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W. 124 th Ave., Suite 300
Westminster, CO 8023 4
(303) 996-2999 AGW BORING LOCATIONS
GROUNDWATER DEPTH CONTOUR (2 feet contour interval) GROUNDWATER SPOT DEPTH (feet)
1
1
2 3
4
6
8 7
5
FIGURE 3 – GROUNDWATER DEPTH CONTOUR DIAGRAM
THE ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
CGG PROJECT NO. 21.22.034
TB-1
TB-1
TB-2
TB-3 TB-4
TB-5 TB-6
TB-7
TB-8 TB-9
TB-10
TB-11
TB-12
TB-13 TB-14
TB-15 TB-16 10
9
7 9 3.5
8 8
7
11
8
7.5 8
7.5
8
8.5
8.5 8
8
9
7
11 9.3
10
10.5
11.5
10
12 12 4 6
8
8
8
10
12
10
8
12
10
8 11
APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATIONS
AGW BORING LOCATIONS
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W. 124 th Ave., Suite 300
Westminster, CO 8023 4
(303) 996-2999
APPROXIMATE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION (feet)
1
1
3
4
6
8 7
5
TB-1
10
9
4951.5
4949.3
4945.5
4951
4949.5
4950.75
4947.25
2
4949.9
5
4950.5
FIGURE 4
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DIAGRAM
THE ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
CGG PROJECT NO. 21.22.034
4948
XXXX =
4952
4950
4951
4949
4948
4947 4946
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
0.0010.010.1110100
PI Cc
NP
19
NP
NP
19
NP
49
NP
NP
43
CuLL PL
43.493.20
NP
30
NP
NP
24
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
COBBLES GRAVEL
15.4
81.6
12.1
8.4
SAND
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
coarse fine
Classification
D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel
1.322
4.409
0.016 21.1
2
3
4
5
7
coarse SILT OR CLAYfinemedium
9.0
19.0
9.0
4.0
2.0
%Sand %Silt %Clay
0.432
0.765
1.195 0.101
73.0
47.1
53.9
50.0
BOREHOLE DEPTH
BOREHOLE DEPTH
3 100
2
3
4
5
7
24 16 30
1 200610501/2
HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS
1403420 406 601.5 8 143/4 3/8
9.0
19.0
9.0
4.0
2.0PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHTSILTY SAND(SM)
LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL)
POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT and GRAVEL(SP-SM)
LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL)
4.75
0.075
4.75
4.75
0.075
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GRAIN SIZE - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/16/21 14:48 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
0.0010.010.1110100
PI Cc
19
NP
49
NP
CuLL PL
30
NP
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
COBBLES GRAVEL
5.4
SAND
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
coarse fine
Classification
D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel
0.005 21.7
9
10
coarse SILT OR CLAYfinemedium
2.0
9.0
%Sand %Silt %Clay
0.945 0.212 52.4
60.0
BOREHOLE DEPTH
BOREHOLE DEPTH
3 100
9
10
24 16 30
1 200610501/2
HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS
1403420 406 601.5 8 143/4 3/8
2.0
9.0PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHTLEAN CLAY with SAND(CL)
0.075
4.75
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
GRAIN SIZE - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/16/21 14:48 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
0.1 1 10 100CONSOLIDATION(-) % SWELL(+)APPLIED PRESSURE, ksf
SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST
112 14
Date: 3/12/21Date: 3/12/21Note: Water Added to Sample at 500 psf.
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
BOREHOLE DEPTH
62.0 SANDY LEAN CLAY
Classification MC%CONSOL STRAIN SINGLE - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:42 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
0.1 1 10 100CONSOLIDATION(-) % SWELL(+)APPLIED PRESSURE, ksf
SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST
104 17
Date: 3/12/21Date: 3/12/21Note: Water Added to Sample at 500 psf.
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
BOREHOLE DEPTH
72.0LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL)
Classification MC%CONSOL STRAIN SINGLE - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:42 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
0.1 1 10 100CONSOLIDATION(-) % SWELL(+)APPLIED PRESSURE, ksf
SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST
116 13
Date: 3/12/21Date: 3/12/21Note: Water Added to Sample at 1000 psf.
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
BOREHOLE DEPTH
819.0 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK
Classification MC%CONSOL STRAIN SINGLE - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:42 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
0.1 1 10 100CONSOLIDATION(-) % SWELL(+)APPLIED PRESSURE, ksf
SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST
113 10
Date: 3/12/21Date: 3/12/21Note: Water Added to Sample at 500 psf.
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
BOREHOLE DEPTH
92.0LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL)
Classification MC%CONSOL STRAIN SINGLE - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:42 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
1 4 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 1.6
1 9 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 5.7 130.5
1 14 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 6.8
1 24 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 10.6
2 4 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 5.0
2 9 SILTY SAND(SM)6.4 120.4 15 NP NP NP
2 14 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 6.9
2 19 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 7.6
2 24 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 11.9 123.6
3 4 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 2.2
3 9 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 9.3
3 14 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 4.4
3 19 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 16.4 82 49 19 30
3 24 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 16.7
4 4 SANDY LEAN CLAY 8.1
4 9 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 7.1 12 NP NP NP
4 14 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 5.8
4 19 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 11.4
4 24 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 19.3 104.4
5 4 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 4.3 8 NP NP NP
5 9 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 5.7 125.8
5 14 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 4.5 132.7
5 19 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 8.6
5 24 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 13.1
6 2 SANDY LEAN CLAY 14.1 112.2 -1.3/500
6 4 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 1.2
6 9 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 5.7
6 14 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 6.6
6 19 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 19.1 110.1
6 24 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 15.9 115.0
Water
Content
(%)
PAGE 1 OF 2
Liquid
Limit
Atterberg LimitsSwell (+) or
Consolidation (-)/
Surcharge
(%/psf)
Dry
Density
(pcf)
Passing
#200 Sieve
(%)
Water Soluble
Sulfates
(ppm)
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY RESULTS
Soil Description Plastic
Limit
Plasticity
Index
Borehole Depth
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
LAB SUMMARY - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:42 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
7 2 LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) 17.1 104.0 -0.5/500 800 71 43 19 24
7 4 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 2.2
7 9 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 5.4
7 14 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 5.9
7 19 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 7.3
7 24 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 12.6 120.6
8 4 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 1.5
8 9 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 5.8
8 14 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 7.9
8 19 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 13.2 115.5 +3.1/1000
8 24 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 12.8 117.9
9 2 LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) 10.1 112.7 +3.8/500 600 82 49 19 30
9 4 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 0.8
9 9 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 6.2
9 14 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 6.9
9 19 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 9.8
9 24 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 4.3
10 4 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 1.0
10 9 FINE to COARSE SAND with SILT and GRAVEL 2.4 5 NP NP NP
10 19 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 14.5 117.5
10 24 CLAYSTONE BEDROCK 12.7 115.0
Water
Content
(%)
PAGE 2 OF 2
Liquid
Limit
Atterberg LimitsSwell (+) or
Consolidation (-)/
Surcharge
(%/psf)
Dry
Density
(pcf)
Passing
#200 Sieve
(%)
Water Soluble
Sulfates
(ppm)
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY RESULTS
Soil Description Plastic
Limit
Plasticity
Index
Borehole Depth
CLIENT DHI Communities, a D.R. Horton Company
PROJECT NUMBER 21.22.034
PROJECT NAME Enclave at Redwood
PROJECT LOCATION NEC of Redwood St & Suniga Dr - Fort Collins, CO
LAB SUMMARY - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 4/22/21 10:42 - Y:\GINT BACKUPS\MAIN TRANSFER 10.28\PROJECTS GEO 2021\21.22.034 ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD.GPJCole Garner Geotechnical1070 W 124th Ave Suite 300Westminster, CO 80234Telephone: 303-996-2999
APPENDIX C
GENERAL NOTES
FOUNDATION DRAIN DETAIL
GENERAL NOTES
DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS:
SS: Split Spoon - 1!" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted HS: Hollow Stem Auger
ST: Thin-Walled Tube – 2.5" O.D., unless otherwise noted PA: Power Auger
RS: Ring Sampler - 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted HA: Hand Auger
CB: California Barrel - 1.92" I.D., 2.5" O.D., unless otherwise noted RB: Rock Bit
BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WB: Wash Boring or Mud Rotary
The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split-spoon sampler (SS) the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch
penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the “Standard Penetration” or “N-value”. For 2.5” O.D.
California Barrel samplers (CB) the penetration value is reported as the number of blows required to advance the sampler 12
inches using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches, reported as “blows per inch,” and is not considered equivalent to the
“Standard Penetration” or “N-value”.
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:
WL: Water Level WS: While Sampling
WCI: Wet Cave in WD: While Drilling
DCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing Removal
AB: After Boring ACR: After Casing Removal
Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other
times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater.
In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations.
DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils
have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand.
Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they
are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents
may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined
on the basis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.
FINE-GRAINED SOILS COARSE-GRAINED SOILS BEDROCK
(CB)
Blows/Ft.
(SS)
Blows/Ft.
Consistency
(CB)
Blows/Ft.
(SS)
Blows/Ft.
Relative
Density
(CB)
Blows/Ft.
(SS)
Blows/Ft.
Consistency
< 3 0-2 Very Soft 0-5 < 3 Very Loose < 24 < 20 Weathered
3-5 3-4 Soft 6-14 4-9 Loose 24-35 20-29 Firm
6-10 5-8 Medium Stiff 15-46 10-29 Medium Dense 36-60 30-49 Medium Hard
11-18 9-15 Stiff 47-79 30-50 Dense 61-96 50-79 Hard
19-36 16-30 Very Stiff > 79 > 50 Very Dense > 96 > 79 Very Hard
> 36 > 30 Hard
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND
GRAVEL
GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY
Descriptive Terms of
Other Constituents
Percent of
Dry Weight
Major Component
of Sample
Particle Size
Trace < 15 Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm)
With 15 – 29 Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm)
Modifier > 30 Gravel 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm)
Sand
Silt or Clay
#4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm)
Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm)
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION
Descriptive Terms of
Other Constituents
Percent of
Dry Weight
Term Plasticity Index
Trace
With
Modifiers
< 5
5 – 12
> 12
Non-plastic
Low
Medium
High
0
1-10
11-30
30+
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory TestsA Soil Classification
Group
Symbol
Group NameB
Cu ! 4 and 1 " Cc " 3E GW Well graded gravelF Clean Gravels
Less than 5% finesC Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E GP Poorly graded gravelF
Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravelF,G, H
Coarse Grained Soils
More than 50% retained
on No. 200 sieve
Gravels
More than 50% of coarse
fraction retained on
No. 4 sieve Gravels with Fines More
than 12% finesC Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelF,G,H
Cu ! 6 and 1 " Cc " 3E SW Well graded sandI Clean Sands
Less than 5% finesD Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E SP Poorly graded sandI
Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sandG,H,I
Sands
50% or more of coarse
fraction passes
No. 4 sieve Sands with Fines
More than 12% finesD Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sandG,H,I
PI > 7 and plots on or above “A” lineJ CL Lean clayK,L,M Silts and Clays
Liquid limit less than 50
Inorganic
PI < 4 or plots below “A” lineJ ML SiltK,L,M
Liquid limit - oven
dried
Organic clayK,L,M,N
Fine-Grained Soils
50% or more passes the
No. 200 sieve
Organic
Liquid limit - not
dried
< 0.75 OL
Organic siltK,L,M,O
Inorganic PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clayK,L,M
Silts and Clays
Liquid limit 50 or more PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic siltK,L,M
Liquid limit - oven dried Organic clayK,L,M,P Organic
Liquid limit - not dried
< 0.75 OH
Organic siltK,L,M,Q
Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
A Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve
B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles
or boulders, or both” to group name.
C Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well graded
gravel with silt, GW-GC well graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly
graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.
D Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well graded
sand with silt, SW-SC well graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded
sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
E Cu = D60/D10 Cc =
F If soil contains ! 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name.
G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.
HIf fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name.
I If soil contains ! 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name.
J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.
K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with
gravel,” whichever is predominant.
L If soil contains ! 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add
“sandy” to group name.
M If soil contains ! 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add
“gravelly” to group name.
N PI ! 4 and plots on or above “A” line.
O PI < 4 or plots below “A” line.
P PI plots on or above “A” line.
Q PI plots below “A” line.
ROCK CLASSIFICATION
(Based on ASTM C-294)
Sedimentary Rocks
Sedimentary rocks are stratified materials laid down by water or wind. The sediments may be
composed of particles or pre-existing rocks derived by mechanical weathering, evaporation or by
chemical or organic origin. The sediments are usually indurated by cementation or compaction.
Chert Very fine-grained siliceous rock composed of micro-crystalline or cyrptocrystalline
quartz, chalcedony or opal. Chert is various colored, porous to dense, hard and
has a conchoidal to splintery fracture.
Claystone Fine-grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts and clays or any rock
containing clay. Soft massive and may contain carbonate minerals.
Conglomerate Rock consisting of a considerable amount of rounded gravel, sand and cobbles
with or without interstitial or cementing material. The cementing or interstitial
material may be quartz, opal, calcite, dolomite, clay, iron oxides or other
materials.
Dolomite A fine-grained carbonate rock consisting of the mineral dolomite [CaMg(CO3)2].
May contain noncarbonate impurities such as quartz, chert, clay minerals, organic
matter, gypsum and sulfides. Reacts with hydrochloric acid (HCL).
Limestone A fine-grained carbonate rock consisting of the mineral calcite (CaCO3). May
contain noncarbonate impurities such as quartz, chert, clay minerals, organic
matter, gypsum and sulfides. Reacts with hydrochloric acid (HCL).
Sandstone Rock consisting of particles of sand with or without interstitial and cementing
materials. The cementing or interstitial material may be quartz, opal, calcite,
dolomite, clay, iron oxides or other material.
Shale Fine-grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts and clays or any rock
containing clay. Shale is hard, platy, of fissile may be gray, black, reddish or
green and may contain some carbonate minerals (calcareous shale).
Siltstone Fine grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts or rock containing
silt. Siltstones consist predominantly of silt sized particles (0.0625 to 0.002 mm in
diameter) and are intermediate rocks between claystones and sandstones and
may contain carbonate minerals.
LABORATORY TEST
SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE
TEST SIGNIFICANCE PURPOSE
California Bearing
Ratio
Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil,
subbase, and base course material, including recycled
materials for use in road and airfield pavements.
Pavement Thickness
Design
Consolidation Used to develop an estimate of both the rate and amount of
both differential and total settlement of a structure.
Foundation Design
Direct Shear Used to determine the consolidated drained shear strength
of soil or rock.
Bearing Capacity,
Foundation Design,
and Slope Stability
Dry Density Used to determine the in-place density of natural, inorganic,
fine-grained soils.
Index Property Soil
Behavior
Expansion Used to measure the expansive potential of fine-grained
soil and to provide a basis for swell potential classification.
Foundation and Slab
Design
Gradation Used for the quantitative determination of the distribution of
particle sizes in soil.
Soil Classification
Liquid & Plastic Limit,
Plasticity Index
Used as an integral part of engineering classification
systems to characterize the fine-grained fraction of soils,
and to specify the fine-grained fraction of construction
materials.
Soil Classification
Permeability Used to determine the capacity of soil or rock to conduct a
liquid or gas.
Groundwater Flow
Analysis
pH Used to determine the degree of acidity or alkalinity of a
soil.
Corrosion Potential
Resistivity Used to indicate the relative ability of a soil medium to carry
electrical currents.
Corrosion Potential
R-Value Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil,
subbase, and base course material, including recycled
materials for use in road and airfield pavements.
Pavement Thickness
Design
Soluble Sulfate Used to determine the quantitative amount of soluble
sulfates within a soil mass.
Corrosion Potential
Unconfined
Compression
To obtain the approximate compressive strength of soils
that possess sufficient cohesion to permit testing in the
unconfined state.
Bearing Capacity
Analysis for
Foundations
Water Content Used to determine the quantitative amount of water in a soil
mass.
Index Property Soil
Behavior
REPORT TERMINOLOGY
(Based on ASTM D653)
Allowable Soil
Bearing Capacity
The recommended maximum contact stress developed at the interface of the foundation
element and the supporting material.
Alluvium Soil, the constituents of which have been transported in suspension by flowing water and
subsequently deposited by sedimentation.
Aggregate Base
Course
A layer of specified material placed on a subgrade or subbase usually beneath slabs or
pavements.
Backfill A specified material placed and compacted in a confined area.
Bedrock A natural aggregate of mineral grains connected by strong and permanent cohesive forces.
Usually requires drilling, wedging, blasting or other methods of extraordinary force for
excavation.
Bench A horizontal surface in a sloped deposit.
Caisson (Drilled
Pier or Shaft)
A concrete foundation element cast in a circular excavation which may have an enlarged
base. Sometimes referred to as a cast-in-place pier or drilled shaft.
Coefficient of
Friction
A constant proportionality factor relating normal stress and the corresponding shear stress
at which sliding starts between the two surfaces.
Colluvium Soil, the constituents of which have been deposited chiefly by gravity such as at the foot of a
slope or cliff.
Compaction The densification of a soil by means of mechanical manipulation
Concrete Slab-on-
Grade
A concrete surface layer cast directly upon a base, subbase or subgrade, and typically used
as a floor system.
Differential
Movement
Unequal settlement or heave between, or within foundation elements of structure.
Earth Pressure The pressure exerted by soil on any boundary such as a foundation wall.
ESAL Equivalent Single Axle Load, a criteria used to convert traffic to a uniform standard, (18,000
pound axle loads).
Engineered Fill Specified material placed and compacted to specified density and/or moisture conditions
under observations of a representative of a geotechnical engineer.
Equivalent Fluid A hypothetical fluid having a unit weight such that it will produce a pressure against a lateral
support presumed to be equivalent to that produced by the actual soil. This simplified
approach is valid only when deformation conditions are such that the pressure increases
linearly with depth and the wall friction is neglected.
Existing Fill (or
Man-Made Fill)
Materials deposited throughout the action of man prior to exploration of the site.
Existing Grade The ground surface at the time of field exploration.
REPORT TERMINOLOGY
(Based on ASTM D653)
Expansive
Potential
The potential of a soil to expand (increase in volume) due to absorption of moisture.
Finished Grade The final grade created as a part of the project.
Footing A portion of the foundation of a structure that transmits loads directly to the soil.
Foundation The lower part of a structure that transmits the loads to the soil or bedrock.
Frost Depth The depth at which the ground becomes frozen during the winter season.
Grade Beam A foundation element or wall, typically constructed of reinforced concrete, used to span
between other foundation elements such as drilled piers.
Groundwater Subsurface water found in the zone of saturation of soils or within fractures in bedrock.
Heave Upward movement.
Lithologic The characteristics which describe the composition and texture of soil and rock by
observation.
Native Grade The naturally occurring ground surface.
Native Soil Naturally occurring on-site soil, sometimes referred to as natural soil.
Optimum Moisture
Content
The water content at which a soil can be compacted to a maximum dry unit weight by a
given compactive effort.
Perched Water Groundwater, usually of limited area maintained above a normal water elevation by the
presence of an intervening relatively impervious continuous stratum.
Scarify To mechanically loosen soil or break down existing soil structure.
Settlement Downward movement.
Skin Friction (Side
Shear)
The frictional resistance developed between soil and an element of the structure such as a
drilled pier.
Soil (Earth) Sediments or other unconsolidated accumulations of solid particles produced by the
physical and chemical disintegration of rocks, and which may or may not contain organic
matter.
Strain The change in length per unit of length in a given direction.
Stress The force per unit area acting within a soil mass.
Strip To remove from present location.
Subbase A layer of specified material in a pavement system between the subgrade and base course.
Subgrade The soil prepared and compacted to support a structure, slab or pavement system.
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070"W.#124 th!Ave.,&Suite&300!
Westminster,*CO*80234!
(303)%996"2999!
TYPICAL(INTERIOR(
PERIMETER(DRAIN(DETAIL(
FOOTING(FOUNDATION(
NOT!TO!SCALE!
6. DRAINS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN WINDOW WELLS AND
CONNECTED TO DISCHARGE INTO FOUNDATIOON DRAIN SYSTEM
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070"W.#124 th!Ave.,&Suite&300!
Westminster,*CO*80234!
(303)%996"2999!
TYPICAL(EXTERIOR((
PERIMETER(DRAIN(DETAIL(
FOOTING(FOUNDATION(
NOT!TO!SCALE!
6. DRAINS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN WINDOW WELLS AND
CONNECTED TO DISCHARGE INTO FOUNDATIOON DRAIN SYSTEM
APPENDIX D
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TESTING RESULTS
INILTRATION RATE TEST RESULTS
GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL TESTING RESULTS
0. 20. 40. 60. 80. 100.
0.01
0.1
1.
Time (sec)Displacement (ft)ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
Data Set:
Date: 03/16/21 Time: 11:07:34
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Cole Garner Geotech
Client: D.R. Horton
Project: 21.22.034
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Test Well: 2
Test Date: 3/3/121
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 13.3 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA (MW-2)
Initial Displacement: 0.5 ft Static Water Column Height: 11.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 28.7 ft Screen Length: 15. ft
Casing Radius: 0.083 ft Well Radius: 0.083 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.001807 cm/sec y0 = 0.1465 ft
0. 20. 40. 60. 80. 100.
0.01
0.1
1.
Time (sec)Displacement (ft)ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
Data Set:
Date: 03/16/21 Time: 11:08:03
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Cole Garner Geotech
Client: D.R. Horton
Project: 21.22.034
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Test Well: 2
Test Date: 3/3/121
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 13.3 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA (MW-2)
Initial Displacement: 0.5 ft Static Water Column Height: 11.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 28.7 ft Screen Length: 15. ft
Casing Radius: 0.083 ft Well Radius: 0.083 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 38.32 gal/day/ft2 y0 = 0.1465 ft
0. 40. 80. 120. 160. 200.
1.0E-4
0.001
0.01
0.1
Time (sec)Displacement (ft)ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
Data Set:
Date: 03/16/21 Time: 10:19:39
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Cole Garner Geotech
Client: D.R. Horton
Project: 21.22.034
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Test Well: 2
Test Date: 3/3/121
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 13.3 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA (MW-2)
Initial Displacement: 0.2 ft Static Water Column Height: 11.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 28.7 ft Screen Length: 15. ft
Casing Radius: 0.083 ft Well Radius: 0.083 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 2.292 cm/sec y0 = 1. ft
0. 40. 80. 120. 160. 200.
1.0E-4
0.001
0.01
0.1
Time (sec)Displacement (ft)ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
Data Set:
Date: 03/16/21 Time: 10:03:42
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Cole Garner Geotech
Client: D.R. Horton
Project: 21.22.034
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Test Well: 2
Test Date: 3/3/121
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 13.3 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA (MW-2)
Initial Displacement: 0.2 ft Static Water Column Height: 11.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 28.7 ft Screen Length: 15. ft
Casing Radius: 0.083 ft Well Radius: 0.083 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 4.86E+4 gal/day/ft2 y0 = 1. ft
0. 20. 40. 60. 80. 100.
1.0E-4
0.001
0.01
0.1
1.
Time (sec)Displacement (ft)ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
Data Set:
Date: 03/16/21 Time: 13:42:54
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Cole Garner Geotech
Client: D.R. Horton
Project: 21.22.034
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Test Well: 7
Test Date: 3/3/121
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 11.75 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA (MW-7)
Initial Displacement: 0.2 ft Static Water Column Height: 10.75 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 19.25 ft Screen Length: 15. ft
Casing Radius: 0.083 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.001027 cm/sec y0 = 0.01752 ft
0. 20. 40. 60. 80. 100.
1.0E-4
0.001
0.01
0.1
1.
Time (sec)Displacement (ft)ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
Data Set:
Date: 03/16/21 Time: 13:43:33
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Cole Garner Geotech
Client: D.R. Horton
Project: 21.22.034
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Test Well: 7
Test Date: 3/3/121
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 11.75 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA (MW-7)
Initial Displacement: 0.2 ft Static Water Column Height: 10.75 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 19.25 ft Screen Length: 15. ft
Casing Radius: 0.083 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 21.78 gal/day/ft2 y0 = 0.01752 ft
0. 16. 32. 48. 64. 80.
0.01
0.1
Time (sec)Displacement (ft)ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
Data Set:
Date: 03/16/21 Time: 13:34:04
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Cole Garner Geotech
Client: D.R. Horton
Project: 21.22.034
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Test Well: 7
Test Date: 3/3/121
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 11.75 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA (MW-7)
Initial Displacement: 0.048 ft Static Water Column Height: 10.75 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 19.25 ft Screen Length: 15. ft
Casing Radius: 0.083 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 2.594 cm/sec y0 = 1. ft
0. 16. 32. 48. 64. 80.
0.01
0.1
Time (sec)Displacement (ft)ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD
Data Set:
Date: 03/16/21 Time: 13:34:42
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Cole Garner Geotech
Client: D.R. Horton
Project: 21.22.034
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Test Well: 7
Test Date: 3/3/121
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 11.75 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA (MW-7)
Initial Displacement: 0.048 ft Static Water Column Height: 10.75 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 19.25 ft Screen Length: 15. ft
Casing Radius: 0.083 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 5.501E+4 gal/day/ft2 y0 = 1. ft
3/3/2021
Hole diameter (in):2
Approx. Test Depth (in):60
Infiltration
Rate During
Interval
(in/hr)
1.00
1.50
1.25
1.25
0.75
1.00
Average
Infiltration
Rate
1.15
Cased borehole infiltration test method performed at a depth of approximately 5 feet below existing site grade. Test performed
in the fine to coarse sand with silt and gravel stratum.
(303) 996-2999
Date:
Field Infiltration Rate Test No. 3
Project Name:
Cole Garner Project No.:
Interval End Time Length of Interval
(hh:mm)
3:10
4:25
4:10
Interval Start Time
Eng./Tech.:
3:553:40
4:40
4:10
4:25
3:25
3:403:25
3/16
15
15
15
15
15 60.001/4
REMARKS:
60.00
40.00
48.00
48.003:55
15 80.00
(in)
1/4
3/8
5/16
5/16
(min/in)
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 West 124th Avenue, Ste. 300
Westminster, CO 80234
(min)
T.M.C.
21.22.034
Infiltration Rate During
IntervalWater Level Drop
Enclave at Redwood
(hh:mm)
3/3/2021
Hole diameter (in):2
Approx. Test Depth (in):60
Infiltration
Rate During
Interval
(in/hr)
5.00
4.75
5.00
4.75
4.75
5.25
Average
Infiltration
Rate
4.85
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 West 124th Avenue, Ste. 300
Westminster, CO 80234
Field Infiltration Rate Test No. 10 (303) 996-2999
Project Name:Enclave at Redwood Date:
Cole Garner Project No.:21.22.034
Eng./Tech.:T.M.C.
Interval Start Time Interval End Time Length of Interval Water Level Drop
1 3/16 12.63
Infiltration Rate During
Interval
(hh:mm)(hh:mm)(min)(in)(min/in)
1 3/16 12.63
3:10 3:25 15 1 1/4 12.00
3:25 3:40 15
1 5/16 11.43
3:40 3:55 15 1 1/4 12.00
3:55 4:10 15
4:10 4:25 15 1 3/16 12.63
4:25 4:40 15
REMARKS:Cased borehole infiltration test method performed at a depth of approximately 5 feet below existing site grade. Test performed
in the fine to coarse sand with silt and gravel stratum.
Summit Scientific
303.277.9310
4653 Table Mountain Drive, Golden, Colorado 80403
Cole Garner Geotechnical
RE: Enclave @ Redwood
Westminster, CO 80234
1070 W 124th Ave, Suite 300
Patrick Maloney
Paul Shrewsbury
President
Enclosed are the results of analyses for samples received by Summit Scientific on 03/04/21 08:30. If you have any
questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
March 24, 2021
2103080Work Order #
Project:
Project Number:
Project Manager:
Reported:
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W 124th Ave, Suite 300 21.22.034
Patrick Maloney 03/24/21 14:19Westminster CO, 80234
Enclave @ Redwood
S2
Sample ID Laboratory ID Matrix Date Sampled
ANALYTICAL REPORT FOR SAMPLES
Date Received
MW-7 2103080-01 Water 03/03/21 14:00 03/04/21 08:30
Summit Scientific The results in this report apply to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of
custody document. This analytical report must be reproduced in its entirety .
Page 1 of 8
Project:
Project Number:
Project Manager:
Reported:
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W 124th Ave, Suite 300 21.22.034
Patrick Maloney 03/24/21 14:19Westminster CO, 80234
Enclave @ Redwood
S2
MW-7
2103080-01 (Water)
Summit Scientific
Dissolved Metals by EPA Method 200.8
03/03/21 14:00Date Sampled:
Reporting
Notes MethodAnalyzedPreparedBatchDilutionUnitsLimitResultAnalyte
EPA 200.80.0963 BEC0130 03/05/21 03/05/21 ug/l 1Antimony0.0500
"1.27 """""Arsenic 0.600
ND """"""Beryllium 0.0500
"0.139 """""Cadmium 0.0500
ND """"""Chromium 1.00
"1.90 """""Copper 1.00
ND """"""Lead 0.500
"9.52 """""Nickel 1.00
"4.43 """""Selenium 1.00
ND """"""Silver 0.0500
ND """"""Thallium 0.0250
ND """"""Zinc 1.00
Dissolved Mercury by EPA Method 245.1
03/03/21 14:00Date Sampled:
Reporting
Notes MethodAnalyzedPreparedBatchDilutionUnitsLimitResultAnalyte
ND EPA 245.103/10/21 03/11/21 ug/l BEC02091Mercury0.200
Summit Scientific The results in this report apply to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of
custody document. This analytical report must be reproduced in its entirety .
Page 4 of 8
Project:
Project Number:
Project Manager:
Reported:
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W 124th Ave, Suite 300 21.22.034
Patrick Maloney 03/24/21 14:19Westminster CO, 80234
Enclave @ Redwood
S2
Result Limit
Reporting
Units Level
Spike
Result
Source
%REC
%REC
Limits RPD
RPD
Limit Notes Analyte
Dissolved Metals by EPA Method 200.8 - Quality Control
Summit Scientific
Batch BEC0130 - EPA 200.8
Blank (BEC0130-BLK1)Prepared & Analyzed: 03/05/21
Antimony ug/lND0.0500
Arsenic "ND 0.600
Beryllium "ND 0.0500
Cadmium "ND 0.0500
Chromium "ND 1.00
Copper "ND 1.00
Lead "ND 0.500
Nickel "ND 1.00
Selenium "ND 1.00
Silver "ND 0.0500
Thallium "ND 0.0250
Zinc "ND 1.00
LCS (BEC0130-BS1)Prepared & Analyzed: 03/05/21
Antimony ug/l27.1 0.0500 25.0 85-115108
Arsenic "543 0.600 500 85-115109
Beryllium "26.6 0.0500 25.0 85-115106
Cadmium "27.2 0.0500 25.0 85-115109
Chromium "530 1.00 500 85-115106
Copper "530 1.00 500 85-115106
Lead "265 0.500 250 85-115106
Nickel "533 1.00 500 85-115107
Selenium "47.0 1.00 50.0 85-11594.0
Silver "26.9 0.0500 25.0 85-115108
Thallium "13.4 0.0250 12.5 85-115107
Zinc "537 1.00 500 85-115107
Duplicate (BEC0130-DUP1)Prepared & Analyzed: 03/05/21 Source: 2103080-01
Antimony ug/l0.0829 0.0500 0.0963 2014.9
Arsenic "1.31 0.600 1.27 202.64
Beryllium "0.0360 0.0500 0.0377 204.45
Cadmium "0.150 0.0500 0.139 208.08
Chromium "0.582 1.00 0.551 205.50
Copper "1.73 1.00 1.90 208.93
Lead "0.134 0.500 0.132 201.55
Nickel "8.86 1.00 9.52 207.19
Selenium "ND 1.00 4.43 20
Silver "ND 0.0500 0.00635 20
Summit Scientific The results in this report apply to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of
custody document. This analytical report must be reproduced in its entirety .
Page 5 of 8
Project:
Project Number:
Project Manager:
Reported:
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W 124th Ave, Suite 300 21.22.034
Patrick Maloney 03/24/21 14:19Westminster CO, 80234
Enclave @ Redwood
S2
Result Limit
Reporting
Units Level
Spike
Result
Source
%REC
%REC
Limits RPD
RPD
Limit Notes Analyte
Dissolved Metals by EPA Method 200.8 - Quality Control
Summit Scientific
Batch BEC0130 - EPA 200.8
Duplicate (BEC0130-DUP1)Prepared & Analyzed: 03/05/21 Source: 2103080-01
Thallium ug/lND0.0250 ND 20
Zinc "ND 1.00 ND 20
Matrix Spike (BEC0130-MS1)Prepared & Analyzed: 03/05/21 Source: 2103080-01
Antimony ug/l27.6 0.0500 25.0 0.0963 70-130110
Arsenic "569 0.600 500 1.27 70-130114
Beryllium "25.0 0.0500 25.0 0.0377 70-13099.8
Cadmium "27.3 0.0500 25.0 0.139 70-130109
Chromium "536 1.00 500 0.551 70-130107
Copper "537 1.00 500 1.90 70-130107
Lead "265 0.500 250 0.132 70-130106
Nickel "545 1.00 500 9.52 70-130107
Selenium "44.4 1.00 50.0 4.43 70-13080.0
Silver "26.9 0.0500 25.0 0.00635 70-130107
Thallium "13.4 0.0250 12.5 ND 70-130107
Zinc "539 1.00 500 ND 70-130108
Matrix Spike Dup (BEC0130-MSD1)Prepared & Analyzed: 03/05/21 Source: 2103080-01
Antimony ug/l26.2 0.0500 25.0 0.0963 2570-130105 4.99
Arsenic "548 0.600 500 1.27 2570-130109 3.68
Beryllium "23.2 0.0500 25.0 0.0377 2570-13092.5 7.64
Cadmium "26.2 0.0500 25.0 0.139 2570-130104 4.05
Chromium "513 1.00 500 0.551 2570-130103 4.39
Copper "522 1.00 500 1.90 2570-130104 2.75
Lead "248 0.500 250 0.132 2570-13099.2 6.72
Nickel "527 1.00 500 9.52 2570-130104 3.18
Selenium "42.0 1.00 50.0 4.43 2570-13075.2 5.54
Silver "25.2 0.0500 25.0 0.00635 2570-130101 6.20
Thallium "12.5 0.0250 12.5 ND 2570-130100 6.61
Zinc "519 1.00 500 ND 2570-130104 3.80
Summit Scientific The results in this report apply to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of
custody document. This analytical report must be reproduced in its entirety .
Page 6 of 8
Project:
Project Number:
Project Manager:
Reported:
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W 124th Ave, Suite 300 21.22.034
Patrick Maloney 03/24/21 14:19Westminster CO, 80234
Enclave @ Redwood
S2
Result Limit
Reporting
Units Level
Spike
Result
Source
%REC
%REC
Limits RPD
RPD
Limit Notes Analyte
Dissolved Mercury by EPA Method 245.1 - Quality Control
Summit Scientific
Batch BEC0209 - EPA 245.1
Blank (BEC0209-BLK1)Prepared: 03/10/21 Analyzed: 03/11/21
Mercury ug/lND0.200
LCS (BEC0209-BS1)Prepared: 03/10/21 Analyzed: 03/11/21
Mercury ug/l2.17 0.200 2.50 85-11586.8
Duplicate (BEC0209-DUP1)Prepared: 03/10/21 Analyzed: 03/11/21 Source: 2103131-01
Mercury ug/l0.210 0.200 0.210 2000.00
Matrix Spike (BEC0209-MS1)Prepared: 03/10/21 Analyzed: 03/11/21 Source: 2103131-01
Mercury ug/l2.22 0.200 2.50 0.210 75-12580.4
Matrix Spike Dup (BEC0209-MSD1)Prepared: 03/10/21 Analyzed: 03/11/21 Source: 2103131-01
Mercury ug/l2.27 0.200 2.50 0.210 2075-12582.4 2.23
Summit Scientific The results in this report apply to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of
custody document. This analytical report must be reproduced in its entirety .
Page 7 of 8
03/15/21
Technical Report for
Summit Scientific
2103080
SGS Job Number: DA32947
Sampling Date: 03/03/21
Report to:
Summit Scientific
4653 Table Mountain Dr
Golden, CO 80403
pshrewsbury@s2scientific.com; mpremer@s2scientific.com;
mpremer@s2scientific.com
ATTN: Paul Shrewsbury
Total number of pages in report:
Certifications: CO (CO00049), NE (NE-OS-06-04), ND (R-027), UT (NELAP CO00049)
LA (LA150028), TX (T104704511), WY (8TMS-L)
This report shall not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written approval of SGS.
Test results relate only to samples analyzed.
SGS North America Inc. • 4036 Youngfield St. • Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-3862 • tel: 303-425-6021 • fax: 303-425-6854
Test results contained within this data package meet the requirements
of the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program
and/or state specific certification programs as applicable.
Client Service contact: Carissa Cumine 303-425-6021
Jason Savoie
General Manager
Wheat Ridge, CO 03/15/21
e-Hardcopy 2.0
Automated Report
13
SGS is the sole authority for authorizing edits or modifications to this document.
Unauthorized modification of this report is strictly prohibited.
Review standard terms at: http://www.sgs.com/en/terms-and-conditions
The results set forth herein are provided by SGS North America Inc.
Please share your ideas about
how we can serve you better at:
EHS.US.CustomerCare@sgs.com
1 of 13
DA32947
Table of Contents
-1-
Sections:
Section 1: Sample Summary ...................................................................................................3
Section 2: Summary of Hits ....................................................................................................4
Section 3: Sample Results ........................................................................................................5
3.1: DA32947-1: MW-7 .......................................................................................................6
Section 4: Misc. Forms ............................................................................................................11
4.1: Chain of Custody ...........................................................................................................12 12342 of 13
DA32947
SGS North America Inc.
Sample Summary
Summit Scientific
Job No:DA32947
2103080
Sample Collected Matrix Client
Number Date Time By Received Code Type Sample ID
This report contains results reported as ND = Not detected. The following applies:
Organics ND = Not detected above the MDL
DA32947-1 03/03/21 14:00 03/05/21 AQ Water MW-7
3 of 13
DA329471
Summary of Hits Page 1 of 1
Job Number:DA32947
Account:Summit Scientific
Project:2103080
Collected:03/03/21
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Result/
Analyte Qual RL MDL Units Method
DA32947-1 MW-7
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 3.6 1.9 0.48 ug/l EPA 625.1
4 of 13
DA329472
SGS North America Inc.
Sample Results
Report of Analysis
Wheat Ridge, CO
Section 3
5 of 13
DA329473
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 2
Client Sample ID:MW-7
Lab Sample ID:DA32947-1 Date Sampled:03/03/21
Matrix:AQ - Water Date Received:03/05/21
Method:EPA 624.1 Percent Solids:n/a
Project:2103080
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 a 7V71554.D 1 03/10/21 23:59 JB n/a n/a V7V3597
Run #2
Purge Volume
Run #1 5.0 ml
Run #2
VOA PPL List
CAS No.Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
107-02-8 Acrolein ND 10 7.0 ug/l
107-13-1 Acrylonitrile ND 5.0 4.0 ug/l
71-43-2 Benzene ND 1.0 0.50 ug/l
75-27-4 Bromodichloromethane ND 2.0 0.55 ug/l
75-25-2 Bromoform ND 4.0 1.5 ug/l
56-23-5 Carbon tetrachloride ND 2.0 0.50 ug/l
108-90-7 Chlorobenzene ND 1.0 0.50 ug/l
75-00-3 Chloroethane ND 4.0 2.0 ug/l
110-75-8 2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
67-66-3 Chloroform ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
124-48-1 Dibromochloromethane ND 2.0 0.50 ug/l
95-50-1 o-Dichlorobenzene ND 1.0 0.50 ug/l
541-73-1 m-Dichlorobenzene ND 1.0 0.50 ug/l
106-46-7 p-Dichlorobenzene ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 4.0 3.0 ug/l
75-34-3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
107-06-2 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
75-35-4 1,1-Dichloroethylene ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
156-59-2 cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
156-60-5 trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
78-87-5 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
10061-01-5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
10061-02-6 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene ND 1.0 0.50 ug/l
74-83-9 Methyl bromide ND 4.0 2.0 ug/l
74-87-3 Methyl chloride ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
75-09-2 Methylene chloride ND 4.0 2.0 ug/l
79-34-5 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 1.0 0.50 ug/l
127-18-4 Tetrachloroethylene ND 1.0 0.50 ug/l
108-88-3 Toluene ND 1.0 0.50 ug/l
71-55-6 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
79-00-5 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
6 of 13
DA3294733.1
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 2 of 2
Client Sample ID:MW-7
Lab Sample ID:DA32947-1 Date Sampled:03/03/21
Matrix:AQ - Water Date Received:03/05/21
Method:EPA 624.1 Percent Solids:n/a
Project:2103080
VOA PPL List
CAS No.Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
79-01-6 Trichloroethylene ND 1.0 0.50 ug/l
75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 4.0 2.0 ug/l
75-01-4 Vinyl chloride ND 2.0 1.0 ug/l
1330-20-7 Xylene (total)ND 1.0 1.0 ug/l
CAS No.Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane 102%60-140%
17060-07-0 1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 95%60-140%
2037-26-5 Toluene-D8 93%60-140%
460-00-4 4-Bromofluorobenzene 99%60-140%
(a) Sample was not preserved to a pH < 2.
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
7 of 13
DA3294733.1
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 2
Client Sample ID:MW-7
Lab Sample ID:DA32947-1 Date Sampled:03/03/21
Matrix:AQ - Water Date Received:03/05/21
Method:EPA 625.1 EPA 625.1 Percent Solids:n/a
Project:2103080
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 1G152717.D 1 03/08/21 12:45 DC 03/06/21 OP19908 E1G2895
Run #2
Initial Volume Final Volume
Run #1 1050 ml 1.0 ml
Run #2
ABN 625PPL List
CAS No.Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
59-50-7 4-Chloro-3-methyl phenol ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
95-57-8 2-Chlorophenol ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
120-83-2 2,4-Dichlorophenol ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
87-65-0 2,6-Dichlorophenol ND 1.9 0.76 ug/l
105-67-9 2,4-Dimethylphenol ND 1.9 0.95 ug/l
534-52-1 4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol ND 9.5 7.1 ug/l
51-28-5 2,4-Dinitrophenol ND 9.5 7.1 ug/l
88-75-5 2-Nitrophenol ND 1.9 0.53 ug/l
100-02-7 4-Nitrophenol ND 19 7.1 ug/l
87-86-5 Pentachlorophenol ND 4.8 3.8 ug/l
108-95-2 Phenol ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
88-06-2 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
83-32-9 Acenaphthene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
208-96-8 Acenaphthylene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
120-12-7 Anthracene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
92-87-5 Benzidine ND 19 7.1 ug/l
56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
101-55-3 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether ND 1.9 0.53 ug/l
85-68-7 Butyl benzyl phthalate ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
111-91-1 bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
111-44-4 bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether ND 1.9 0.62 ug/l
108-60-1 2,2'-Oxybis(1-chloropropane)ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
91-58-7 2-Chloronaphthalene ND 1.9 0.56 ug/l
7005-72-3 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether ND 1.9 0.50 ug/l
218-01-9 Chrysene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
53-70-3 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
91-94-1 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine ND 4.8 0.48 ug/l
121-14-2 2,4-Dinitrotoluene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
8 of 13
DA3294733.1
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 2 of 2
Client Sample ID:MW-7
Lab Sample ID:DA32947-1 Date Sampled:03/03/21
Matrix:AQ - Water Date Received:03/05/21
Method:EPA 625.1 EPA 625.1 Percent Solids:n/a
Project:2103080
ABN 625PPL List
CAS No.Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
606-20-2 2,6-Dinitrotoluene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
122-66-7 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
84-74-2 Di-n-butyl phthalate ND 1.9 0.69 ug/l
117-84-0 Di-n-octyl phthalate ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
84-66-2 Diethyl phthalate ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
131-11-3 Dimethyl phthalate ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
117-81-7 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 3.6 1.9 0.48 ug/l
206-44-0 Fluoranthene ND 1.9 0.54 ug/l
86-73-7 Fluorene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
87-68-3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
77-47-4 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
67-72-1 Hexachloroethane ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ND 4.8 0.48 ug/l
78-59-1 Isophorone ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
91-20-3 Naphthalene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
98-95-3 Nitrobenzene ND 1.9 0.50 ug/l
62-75-9 N-Nitrosodimethylamine ND 4.8 3.8 ug/l
86-30-6 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
621-64-7 N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine ND 1.9 0.52 ug/l
85-01-8 Phenanthrene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
129-00-0 Pyrene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
120-82-1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 1.9 0.48 ug/l
CAS No.Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
367-12-4 2-Fluorophenol 30%2-140%
4165-62-2 Phenol-d5 22%8-424%
118-79-6 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 57%10-140%
4165-60-0 Nitrobenzene-d5 63%15-314%
321-60-8 2-Fluorobiphenyl 54%47-140%
1718-51-0 Terphenyl-d14 44% a 59-140%
(a) Outside control limits due to possible matrix interference. Insufficient sample for repreparation and
reanalysis.
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
9 of 13
DA3294733.1
SGS North America Inc.
Report of Analysis Page 1 of 1
Client Sample ID:MW-7
Lab Sample ID:DA32947-1 Date Sampled:03/03/21
Matrix:AQ - Water Date Received:03/05/21
Method:SW846 8270C BY SIM SW846 3510C Percent Solids:n/a
Project:2103080
File ID DF Analyzed By Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batch
Run #1 3G45770.D 1 03/11/21 17:29 DC 03/10/21 OP19917 E3G2288
Run #2
Initial Volume Final Volume
Run #1 1060 ml 1.0 ml
Run #2
CAS No.Compound Result RL MDL Units Q
123-91-1 1,4-Dioxane ND 0.47 0.19 ug/l
CAS No.Surrogate Recoveries Run# 1 Run# 2 Limits
4165-60-0 Nitrobenzene-d5 49%10-130%
ND = Not detected MDL = Method Detection Limit J = Indicates an estimated value
RL = Reporting Limit B = Indicates analyte found in associated method blank
E = Indicates value exceeds calibration range N = Indicates presumptive evidence of a compound
10 of 13
DA3294733.1
SGS North America Inc.
Misc. Forms
Custody Documents and Other Forms
Includes the following where applicable:
• Chain of Custody
Wheat Ridge, CO
Section 4
11 of 13
DA329474
DA32947: Chain of Custody
Page 1 of 2
12 of 13
DA3294744.1
SGS Sample Receipt Summary
Job Number:DA32947 Client:SUMMIT SCIENTIFIC
Date / Time Received:3/5/2021 2:00:00 PM Delivery Method:
Project:2103080
4. No. Coolers:1
Airbill #'s:HD
Cooler Security
1. Custody Seals Present:
Y or N
2. Custody Seals Intact:
3. COC Present:
4. Smpl Dates/Time OK
2. Cooler temp verification:
Cooler Temperature Y or N
1. Temp criteria achieved:
3. Cooler media:
IR Gun;
Ice (Bag)
Quality Control Preservation Y or N N/A
1. Trip Blank present / cooler:
2. Trip Blank listed on COC:
3. Samples preserved properly:
4. VOCs headspace free:
Sample Integrity - Documentation Y or N
1. Sample labels present on bottles:
2. Container labeling complete:
3. Sample container label / COC agree:
Sample Integrity - Condition Y or N
1. Sample recvd within HT:
3. Condition of sample:
2. All containers accounted for:
Sample Integrity - Instructions
1. Analysis requested is clear:
2. Bottles received for unspecified tests
3. Sufficient volume recvd for analysis:
4. Compositing instructions clear:
5. Filtering instructions clear:
Intact
Y or N
Comments
Y or N N/A
Cooler Temps (Initial/Adjusted):#1: (3.8/3.8);
DA32947: Chain of Custody
Page 2 of 2
13 of 13
DA3294744.1
Project:
Project Number:
Project Manager:
Reported:
Cole Garner Geotechnical
1070 W 124th Ave, Suite 300 21.22.034
Patrick Maloney 03/24/21 14:19Westminster CO, 80234
Enclave @ Redwood
S2
Notes and Definitions
Sample results reported on a dry weight basis
Relative Percent DifferenceRPD
dry
Not ReportedNR
Analyte NOT DETECTED at or above the reporting limitND
Analyte DETECTEDDET
Enclave at Redwood
Page B
August 18, 2021
Appendix B - Portions from Relevant Previous Studies
DRAFT FINAL
NORTH EAST COLLEGE CORRIDOR OUTFALL
(NECCO)
DESIGN REPORT
Prepared for
City of Fort Collins Utilities
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
3.2 Ayres Associates
From the previous NCDID study, the results showed that the existing storm sewer within the
NECCO project area is undersized for the 2-year storm event.
During the final design process the following assumptions were made for each of the
basins:
• Basin 102 will discharges into the Blue Spruce Channel once developed via storm
sewer. This storm sewer was not design with the NECCO project. The ModSWMM
model accounts for the east half of the intersection of Willox and College to drain east
towards Blue Spruce, to be intercepted by the proposed inlets in Bristlecone Drive and
then discharge into the Blue Spruce channel that outfall into the Evergreen West Pond.
The west side of the intersection is assumed to drain west along Willox as it currently
drains today. The potential for an improved intersection at College and Willox is not
accounted for in this design.
• Basin 103 consists of the existing Albertson shopping center. The shopping center
drains to a detention pond at the south end of the basin. This detention pond ultimately
drains to the Evergreen West Pond.
• Basin 104 is a large developed basin that ultimately drains into the Evergreen West
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 108 ultimately drains to the Evergreen East Pond via overland flow, curb and
gutter or an existing storm sewer system. This Evergreen East Pond was modeled as
ultimately draining into the proposed storm sewer Line A4. If redeveloped, the existing
drainage patterns are to remain, or be improved, and the basin will ultimately drain into
the proposed system.
• Basin 109 was modeled as ultimately draining into proposed storm sewer Line A4. If
redeveloped, the existing drainage patterns are to remain, or be improved, and the basin
will ultimately drain into the proposed system.
• Basin 111 was modeled as ultimately draining into proposed storm sewer Line A4. If
redeveloped, the existing drainage patterns are to remain, or be improved, and the basin
will ultimately drain into the proposed system.
• Basin 112 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. A overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 113 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into proposed Manhole A4.
• Basin 114 is currently an undeveloped basin. It will drain into the future east Vine
Diversion Channel.
3.3 Ayres Associates
• Basin 115 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into proposed Manhole A1.
• Basin 116 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into proposed Manhole Riser A6.
• Basin 117 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into the proposed storm sewer downstream of Manhole Riser A5.
• Basin 118 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. A overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 119 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. An overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 120 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. An overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 122 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. An overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 123 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. An overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 124 drains via curb and gutter to the intersection of Conifer and Red Cedar Circle
to proposed Inlet B4B. If redeveloped, the basin will continue to drain to this inlet.
• Basin 124 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. An overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 126 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains to proposed Manhole B.
3.4 Ayres Associates
• Basin 127 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains to proposed Manhole C.
• Basin 128 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. A overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 203 discharges into the Albertson shopping center detention pond and ultimately
to the Evergreen West pond. If the Albertson detention pond is removed, the
development will need to account for drainage from basins 103 as well as 203.
• Basin 204 drains to the existing inlets at the intersection of Bristlecone Drive and Blue
Spruce Drive and ultimately into the Evergreen West Pond. This intersection will need to
be improved with either grading or new storm sewer. If redeveloped, the existing basin
drainage patterns need to remain or be improved.
• Basin 205 discharges to an existing storm sewer system along the east side of the
Albertson Shopping center. This storm sewer ultimately discharges into Evergreen West
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 206 drains to proposed Inlet B7A, If redeveloped, the basin will continue to drain
to this inlet.
• Basin 207 drains to the existing inlets at the intersection of Bristlecone Drive and Blue
Spruce Drive and ultimately into the Evergreen West Pond. This intersection will need to
be improved with either grading or new storm sewer. If redeveloped, the existing basin
drainage patterns need to remain or be improved.
• Basin 209 drains to proposed Inlet B8A. If redeveloped, the basin will continue to drain
to this inlet.
• Basin 213 drains overland to an existing drainage swale to the east of the basin and
ultimately to proposed Inlet A6. If redeveloped, the basin will continue to drain to this
inlet. The drainage swale on the east side of the basin can be removed as long as the
basin ultimately drains to the proposed storm sewer system.
• Basin 214 drains to the existing inlets at the intersection of Bristlecone Drive and Blue
Spruce Drive and ultimately into the Evergreen West Pond. This intersection will need to
be improved with either grading or new storm sewer.
• Basin 221 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. An overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
3.5 Ayres Associates
• Basin 224 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into proposed Manhole B6.
• Basin 225 drains via curb and gutter to proposed Inlet B10A and to the intersection of
Conifer and Blue Spruce (proposed Inlets B9A and B9B). If redeveloped, the basin will
continue to drain to these inlets.
• Basin 226 drains overland to proposed Inlet B5A. If redeveloped, the basin will continue
to drain to the inlet. This basin drains through basins 326 and 426 and will need to
accounted for in the drainage of these basins.
• Basin 227 drains overland to the intersection of Conifer and Red Cedar Circle to
proposed Inlets B4A and B4B. If redeveloped, this basin will continue to drain to these
inlets. This basin drains through basins 228, 328 and 229 and will need to accounted for
in the drainage of these basins.
• Basin 228 drains overland to the intersection of Conifer and Red Cedar Circle to
proposed Inlets B4A and B4B. If redeveloped, this basin will continue to drain to these
inlets. Basin 227 drains through this basins and will need to be accounted for in the
redevelopment of basin 228.
• Basin 229 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into proposed Manhole B5.
• Basin 230 drains overland to the Evergreen West pond outlet swale to the east of the
basin. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 304 discharges to an existing storm sewer system along the east side of the
Albertson Shopping center. This storm sewer ultimately discharges into Evergreen West
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 305 is an undeveloped basin that discharges to an existing storm sewer system
along the east side of the Albertson Shopping center. This storm sewer ultimately
discharges into Evergreen West Pond. When developed, the existing basin drainage
patterns need to remain or be improved.
• Basin 306 drains to the existing inlets at the intersection of Bristlecone Drive and Blue
Spruce Drive and ultimately into the Evergreen West Pond. This intersection will need to
be improved with either grading or new storm sewer. If redeveloped, the existing basin
drainage patterns need to remain or be improved.
• Basin 313 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into proposed Manhole Riser A8.
• Basin 315 drains overland and through existing storm sewer to proposed Inlet C3. If
redeveloped, the basin will continue to drain to this inlet.
3.6 Ayres Associates
• Basin 316 currently drains to an onsite detention ponds. This pond will be removed with
the construction of the re-aligned Vine Drive. The basin will flow overland to proposed
Inlet C4B. If redeveloped, the basin will continue to drain to this inlet.
• Basin 317 was modeled as discharging into proposed Manhole C7. The proposed storm
sewer required to connect the basin to the proposed manhole was not designed with the
NECCO project.
• Basin 318 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet C4A.
• Basin 320 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into proposed Manhole A1. The storm sewer that would be required to connect
this basin with the proposed manhole was not designed with the NECCO project.
• Basin 321 was modeled as discharging into proposed Manhole A1. The storm sewer
that would be required to connect this basin with the proposed manhole was not
designed with the NECCO project.
• Basin 324 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into proposed Manhole B6. Basin 424 drains through this basin and will need to
be accounted for in the development of basin 324 and 326.
• Basin 326 drains overland to proposed Inlet B6A. If redeveloped, the basin will continue
to drain to the inlet. Basin 424 and part of Basin 226 drain through this basin and will
need to be accounted for in the redevelopment of basins 326 and 324.
• Basin 327 is currently an undeveloped basin. This basin contains the proposed regional
Detention Pond.
• Basin 328 drains to an existing onsite detention pond. This pond will connect into the
proposed storm sewer at Manhole B5. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage
patterns need to remain or be improved and ultimately connect into the proposed
manhole.
• Basin 330 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into the Evergreen West Pond outlet swale just east of the basin.
• Basin 407 drains to an existing onsite detention pond. This pond will connect into the
proposed storm sewer at Manhole Riser C2. If redeveloped, the basin can discharge
directly into the proposed storm sewer and the detention pond can be removed.
• Basin 408 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains to proposed Manhole C1.
• Basin 410 is the Old Town North development. This basin currently discharges into an
existing detention pond with ultimately discharges into Lake Canal. With the NECCO
project, this basin will continue to discharge into the existing detention pond. However, a
storm sewer (A3) was designed to pick up the flow from the detention pond and re-route
them from the Lake Canal and into the proposed storm sewer (Line A).
3.7 Ayres Associates
• Basin 412 is currently an undeveloped basin consisting of the Raptor Center. It was
modeled as a developed basin that drains into proposed Manhole A1. The storm sewer
that would be required to connect this basin with the proposed manhole was not
designed with the NECCO project.
• Basin 413 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into the proposed Regional Detention Pond. The storm sewer that would drain
this basin to the proposed detention facility was not designed with the NECCO project.
The future pipe will cross the re-aligned Vine Drive. This pipe crossing must take into
account the GWET and NEWT waterline clearances. These clearances are very critical.
• Basin 414 consists of the Alta Vista development. If redeveloped, the basin was
modeled as discharging into proposed Manhole Riser A4 (or downstream of transition
A1). The storm sewer that would be required to connect this basin with the proposed
manhole was not designed with the NECCO project.
• Basin 417 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into proposed Manhole Riser A3.
• Basin 417 is currently an undeveloped basin. It will drain into the future east Vine
Diversion Channel.
• Basin 418 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains downstream of the proposed Manhole Riser A2.
• Basin 419 is currently an undeveloped basin. It will drain into the future east Vine
Diversion Channel.
• Basin 420 is currently an undeveloped basin. It will drain into the future east Vine
Diversion Channel.
• Basin 421 is currently an undeveloped basin. It will drain into the future east Vine
Diversion Channel.
• Basin 422 is currently an undeveloped basin. It will drain into the future east Vine
Diversion Channel.
• Basin 424 drains overland to proposed Inlet B6A. If redeveloped, the basin will continue
to drain to the inlet. This basin drains through basins 324 and 326 and will need to
accounted for in the drainage of these basins.
• Basin 426 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains to proposed Manhole B5. Basin 226 drains through this basin and will need to be
accounted for in the redevelopment of basin 426.
• Basin 427 drains overland to proposed Inlet B6A.
• Basin 510 currently drains into the Lake Canal. This basin was not further analyzed with
the NECCO project.
3.8 Ayres Associates
• Basin 512 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. An overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 513 ultimately drains to the Evergreen East Pond via overland flow, curb and
gutter or an existing storm sewer system. This Evergreen East Pond was modeled as
ultimately draining into the proposed storm sewer Line A4. If redeveloped, the existing
drainage patterns are to remain, or be improved, and the basin will ultimately drain into
the proposed system.
• Basin 517 was modeled as discharging into proposed Manhole C7. The proposed storm
sewer required to connect the basin to the proposed manhole was not designed with the
NECCO project.
• Basin 524 drains via curb and gutter to proposed Inlet B10A. If redeveloped, the
development will tie into proposed Manhole B9.
• Basin 526 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains to the proposed Regional Detention Pond.
• Basin 604 is currently a undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains to the intersection of Blue Spruce Drive and Bristlecone Drive and ultimately to the
Evergreen West Pond via storm sewer. This storm sewer was not designed with the
NECCO project.
• Basin 612 is currently an undeveloped basin which ultimately drains to the Redwood
Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or an existing storm sewer system. An overflow
weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need to be constructed in order to insure the
conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood Pond. If redeveloped, the existing
basin drainage patterns need to remain or be improved.
• Basin 624 is mainly an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into proposed Manhole B2. It can also drain into proposed Manhole B1.
• Basin 625 is mainly an undeveloped basin. It currently drains via curb and gutter to the
intersection of Conifer and Blue Spruce to proposed Inlet B9A. It was modeled as a
developed basin that connected into proposed Inlet B9A.
• Basin 626 drains via curb and gutter to proposed Inlet B10B. If redeveloped, the basin
will continue to drain to these inlets.
• Basin 627 drains via curb and gutter to the intersection of Conifer and Blue Spruce to
proposed Inlet B9B. If redeveloped, the basin will continue to drain to this inlet.
• Basin 628 drains via curb and gutter to the intersection of Conifer and Blue Spruce to
proposed Inlet B9A.
3.9 Ayres Associates
• Basin 704 drains to the existing inlets at the intersection of Bristlecone Drive and Blue
Spruce Drive and ultimately into the Evergreen West Pond. This intersection will need to
be improved with either grading or new storm sewer. If redeveloped, the existing basin
drainage patterns need to remain or be improved.
• Basin 712 ultimately drains to the Redwood Pond via overland flow, curb and gutter or
an existing storm sewer system. An overflow weir at Redwood Pond will ultimately need
to be constructed in order to insure the conveyance of the storm flows into the Redwood
Pond. If redeveloped, the existing basin drainage patterns need to remain or be
improved.
• Basin 726 drains to the Evergreen West Pond outlet swale through a proposed curb-cut
on the south side of Conifer.
• Basin 810 is currently an undeveloped portion of the Old Town North Development. It
was modeled as a developed basin that drains into the proposed Regional Detention
Pond. The storm sewer that is required to connect this basin to the proposed detention
facility was not designed with the NECCO project. The future pipe will cross the re-
aligned Vine Drive. This pipe crossing must take into account the GWET and NEWT
waterline clearances. These clearances are very critical.
• Basin 812 was modeled as Redwood Pond. It will discharge into Storm Line A2.
• Basin 912 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin that
drains into the Evergreen West Pond outlet swale just west of the basin.
• Basin 930 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet C6B.
• Basin 931 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet C6A.
• Basin 950 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet A5B.
• Basin 951 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet A5A.
• Basin 960 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet A7B.
• Basin 961 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet A7A.
• Basin 970 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet A8B.
• Basin 971 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet A8A.
3.10 Ayres Associates
• Basin 980 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet A9B.
• Basin 981 is currently an undeveloped basin. It was modeled as a developed basin
consisting of the re-aligned Vine Drive and to proposed Inlet A9A.
Refer to Exhibit 1 in Appendix B for the updated 100-year ModSWMM Basin Map.
4.1 Ayres Associates
4. FINAL STORM SEWER DESIGN AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
ModSWMM was used to develop the basin hydrographs only, while EPA SWMM 5.0.013
was used for the hydraulic routing of the basins in the developed condition with proposed
facilities model. EPA SWMM was used to model the inflows and outflows of the existing
Evergreen West and Redwood Ponds as well as model the proposed storm sewer lines A, B,
C, and E.
The input requirements for the EPA SWMM 5.0.013 model include the following:
• Pipe lengths, diameters, inverts and material
• Reservoir stage vs. area information for each pond
• Inflow hydrographs – These were developed from the ModSWMM analysis described
previously
• Geometry of outlet structures, i.e., weirs, orifices etc.
UD Inlet version 2.14a was used to size inlets for each system. The City of Fort Collins
Storm Drainage Criteria was followed to determine the street carrying capacity and
encroachment for the 100-year storm event. The same criterion was followed to size the
inlets along re-aligned Vine Drive for the 10-year storm event. Snout oil-water debris
separators are incorporated into the design of the inlets along realigned Vine Drive (refer to
Appendix D for the inlet calculations).
Following is a list summarizing the detention and water quality assumption made for
each basin during the final design process:
• Undeveloped properties east of Redwood require future on-site detention and water
quality. These basins were modeled assuming a proposed detention facility 100-year
release rate of 0.2 cfs/acre.
- Basins: 113, 114*, 115, 116, 117, 313, 320, 412, 417, 418, 419*, 420*, 421*, 422*
*These basins do not discharge into the proposed NECCO Storm Sewer.
• The undeveloped area south of Conifer Street, west of Redwood and north of the
proposed re-aligned Vine Drive would discharge into the regional pond without on-site
detention or water quality.
- Basins: 126, 127, 327*, 408, 526, 726
*Proposed Regional Detention Pond
• Dry Creek, behind Autozone and south to the Proposed East Vine Drive, will be filled in.
Currently basins 407, 316 and 315 drain into Dry Creek.
Currently Basin 407 drains into an existing detention pond. This pond will be connected
into the proposed storm sewer. This pond can be removed as long as basin 407
ultimately discharges into the proposed NECCO storm sewer system.
Currently Basin 316 drains into an existing detention pond. This pond will be removed
with the construction of the re-aligned Vine Drive. The flow that currently travels to the
southern pond will be conveyed overland to Vine Drive where it will be collected in the
proposed storm sewer.
4.2 Ayres Associates
Basin 316 currently discharges into Dry Creek via overland flow and an existing storm
sewer. With the removal of Dry Creek, the basin will discharge into the proposed
NECCO storm sewer.
Conveyance, detention, and water quality will be provided for these basins in the regional
detention pond. If these basins are re-developed, the current percent impervious value
(as modeled) as well as the total runoff for the basin will need to be maintained. If these
values are increased then detention will be required so the total runoff matches current
conditions. Water quality does not need to be provided.
- Basins and current I% (percent impervious):
315 (85%), 407 (49.2), 316 (44.4%)
• The undeveloped area north of Conifer Street would provide on-site detention when
development occurs. Water Quality will not need to be provided. These basins were
modeled assuming a proposed detention facility 100-year release rate of 0.2 cfs/acre.
- Basins: 102, 224, 229, 305, 324, 330, 426, 604, 624, 625
• Re-developing land north of Conifer Street would be required to provide the same
amount of detention that they currently provide. The re-developing land will need to
maintain the current percent impervious value (as modeled) as well as the total runoff for
the basin. If these values are increased then detention will be required so the total runoff
matches current conditions during a 100-year event. Water quality does not need to be
provided.
- Basins and current I% (percent impervious): 104 (49.6%), 124 (85%), 203 (85%),
204 (85%), 205 (86.7%), 206 (85%), 207 (85%), 209 (85%), 214 (85%), 225 (85%),
226 (85%), 227 (85%), 228 (85%), 230 (85%), 304 (85%), 306 (85%), 326 (85%),
328 (85%), 424 (85%), 427 (85%), 524 (85%), 626 (89.4%), 627 (85%), 628 (85%),
704 (85%)
• The Albertson Shopping Center detention pond, located southwest of Albertsons on
basin 103, currently discharges into a storm sewer that runs east along Bristlecone Drive
and outfalls into a swale that enters the Evergreen West Pond. The analysis assumed
that the existing Albertsons pond would be removed once the downstream improvements
are built. Albertsons will be required to collect their undetained storm runoff and convey
it to the Evergreen West Pond. The Evergreen West swale has the capacity to convey
undetained flows from Albertsons. However, the developer will need to analyze the
proposed outfall with the NECCO improvements as well as with existing conditions prior
to removal of the pond. Basin 203 currently drains into the Albertson Center Detention
Pond. With the removal of the detention pond, the flows from basin 203 will need to be
accounted for in the design of the new storm sewer.
- Basins: 103
• Re-developed properties east of Redwood will need to maintain the current percent
impervious value (as modeled) as well as the total runoff for the basin during a 100-year
event. If these values are increased then detention will be required so the total runoff
matches current conditions during a 100-year event. The developments have to provide
onsite water quality.
- Basins and current I% (percent impervious):
213 (55%), 414 (66.5), 321 (67.4%)
4.3 Ayres Associates
• Inlets located along re-aligned Vine Drive would be constructed with the roadway project
and will be adjusted as needed per final design of the re-aligned Vine Drive. These
basins do not require detention and water quality will be provided through the use of
BMP Snouts.
- Basins: 318, 930, 931, 950, 951, 960, 961, 970, 971, 980, 981
• Existing storm sewer in Redwood Street, combined with the street capacity, meets the
City of Fort Collins street criteria for the 100-year event, therefore it is considered
adequate. Re-developed properties will need to maintain the current percent impervious
value (as modeled) as well as the total runoff for the basin during a 100-year event. If
these values are increased then detention will be required so the total runoff matches
current conditions during a 100-year event. The developments do not have to provide
onsite water quality, it will be provided in the Redwood Pond.
- Basins and current I% (percent impervious): 112 (64.5%), 118 (55%), 119 (60.2%),
120 (65.4%), 121 (30.7%), 122 (5%), 123 (55%), 128 (5%), 221 (85%), 512 (55%),
612 (5%), 712 (70.8%), 812 (----)*
*Redwood Pond
• Due to the location of the following basins, water quality and detention does not need to
be provided if the basins ultimately discharge into the Regional Detention Pond. It will be
provided in the proposed Regional Detention Pond.
- Basins: 912, 810, 413
• Re-developed properties south of the re-aligned Vine Drive will need to maintain the
current percent impervious value (as modeled) as well as the total runoff for the basin
during a 100-year event. If these values are increased then detention will be required so
the total runoff matches current conditions during a 100-year event. The developments
do not have to provide onsite water quality, it will be provided in the Redwood Pond.
- Basins and current I% (percent impervious):
317 (37.6%), 517 (49.1%)
• The Old Town North Basin provides its own detention and water quality. The proposed
storm Line A3 will connect into the outlet of the existing detention pond for the
development. Water quality and detention is not provided in the proposed Regional
Detention Pond.
- Basin: 410
• Rating Curves for the ponds which currently contain water, i.e., The Evergreen West
Pond and the Redwing Marsh Pond, start at the "normal pool" water surface elevation.
The "normal pool" water surface elevation is the normal/constant water surface elevation
in the pond based on the elevation of the pond outlet. The rating curve therefore, does
not take into account the full volume in the pond, just the volume available for storage
above the elevation of the outlet. This was done because the pond volume below the
pond outlet is typically full of water prior to a storm event and therefore not available for
storage.
The 100-year EPA SWMM model results are included in Appendix C.
Figure 4.1 represents the backbone structure of the proposed storm infrastructure as
described in the following sections. Figure 4.2 depicts the future detention and water quality
requirements as mentioned above.
4.4 Ayres Associates
Figure 4.1. Proposed storm infrastructure.
4.13 Ayres Associates
The Regional Detention Pond has been sized for additional flows generated from the un-
developed portion of the Old Town North development. A storm sewer was not designed to
convey the flows north to the proposed Regional Detention Pond. When this storm sewer is
designed, special considerations must be given to the GWET and NEWT waterline
crossings. These clearances are very critical.
Laterals C6A and C6B are located just west of the regional detention pond along re-aligned
Vine Drive. Lateral C5A is at the intersection of Blondel and Future Vine Drive. This inlet
will reduce flows from Blondel Street. Laterals C4A and C4B are placed just east of College
Avenue and the future re-aligned Vine Drive.
The inlets located within the re-aligned Vine Drive were designed for the 10-year minor storm
event and the 100-year major storm event being handled within the road, based on current
COFC criteria.
Table 4.5 shows Storm Line C1 and C2, 10- and 100-Year Inlet Summary.
Table 4.5. Storm Line C1 and C2, 10- and 100-Year Inlet Summary.
ID Number
and Type Condition
10- / 100-Year
Flow to Inlet
(cfs)
10- / 100-Year
Capture %
10- / 100-Year
Carry-Over (cfs)
Carry-Over
Location
Inlet
C6A
3-Type 13
Combination On-Grade 5 / 11 90 / 83 1/ 2 A5A
Inlet
C6B
3-Type 13
Combination On-Grade 5 / 11 87/ 77 1 / 3 A5B
Inlet
C5A
1-Type 13
Combination On-Grade 5 / 5 100 - -
Inlet
C4A
2-Type 13
Combination Sump 4.5 / 10 100 - -
Inlet
C4B
3-Type 13
Combination Sump 10 / 27 100 - -
Inlet
C3A 3-Type C Orifice/Weir 24 / 60 - - -
A headwall with wing walls and scour stop are incorporated into the outlet of Storm Line C1
and C2. Scour stop was sized by the manufactured. Storm Line C1 will discharge
approximately 202 cfs to the regional pond during a 100-year storm. Storm Line C2 will
discharge approximately 50 cfs into the regional pond during a 100-year storm.
EPA SWMM Hydraulic Modeling
EPA SWMM was used to model the capacity of the parallel Storm Sewer Lines C1 and C2.
The model results show the energy grade line of the system to be below the flowline of the
inlets, therefore the inlets will function properly during a 10- and 100-year event.
4.4 Redwood Pond
The existing Redwood Pond currently outfalls into existing drainage swale that conveys the
storm water to the Evergreen East Pond. The swale and downstream system does not meet
City of Fort Collins drainage criteria for the 100-year event. The improvements to the pond
included re-grading the pond to outlet at the southeast corner of the site. This outlet will
ultimately discharge into the proposed storm sewer in re-aligned Vine Drive. The re-graded
pond has the same footprint and top of berm elevation as the existing pond. A water quality
4.14 Ayres Associates
outlet structure is proposed prior to discharging into the proposed storm sewer system. A 4-
foot concrete trickle pan is incorporated into the pond bottom to direct low flows due to
minimal slope across the pond. The overall footprint encompasses approximately 3.5 acres
at an approximate depth of 6 ft. The required 100-year detention volume is 7.70 ac-ft with
an additional 2.16 ac-ft of storage below the detention storage for water quality. Table 4.6
shows the major characteristics of Redwood Pond.
Table 4.6. Redwood Pond.
Description
Elevation
(ft)
Pond Volume
(ac-ft)
Pond Depth
(ft)
Pond Invert 4953.10 --- ---
Outlet Structure
Elevation 4955.12 2.16 2.02
100-year WSEL 4957.75 9.86 4.65
Spillway into
Pond 4958.39 11.94 5.29
Top of Pond 4959 14.00 5.90
WSEL = Water Surface Elevation
The outlet structure for the redwood pond is a combination of two Type C inlets in series.
The inlets will be separated by a steel plate with an orifice opening sized to provide a 40-
hour drain time for the water quality portion of the pond. One of the frequent maintenance
issues associated with water quality structures is the clogging of the orifice plates. For this
reason we are proposing to install an 18F snout oil-water debris separator inside the first
Type C inlet over the water quality plate. The snout should prevent the orifice plate from
clogging. The second Type C inlet will be set at the water quality elevation and the outlet
pipe from the inlet controls the release rate from the pond.
Currently an undersized storm sewer system conveys flow from inlets along Redwood Street
into Redwood Pond. The series of existing inlets surcharge during the minor events creating
localized flooding at the intersection of Redwood Street and Conifer Street. The existing
inlets and storm sewer do not have the capacity for the 100-year runoff from the surrounding
basins. An adequate storm system would require large diameter storm pipe and deep inlets
to prevent surcharging. Due to existing water and sanitary conflicts in the area, and a
controlled invert into Redwood Pond, the only storm sewer system that could fit within the
existing constraints would be multiple shallow 12-inch diameter storm sewer culverts. These
storm sewer culverts would still not alleviate the minor and major storm flooding problem.
To mitigate the flooding, the design incorporates a 90-foot overflow weir graded into the
pond embankment. The 100-year storm event (approximately 85 cfs) will overtop the curb at
an elevation of approximately 4958.39 and be conveyed to the pond through the weir. Minor
event flows will continue to be captured by the existing inlets located north of the pond. This
design can be looked at in more detail during the final design process.
EPA SWMM Hydraulic Modeling
The proposed weir into Redwood Pond was modeled using a weir in EPA SWMM. The
transverse weir option was chosen with a discharge coefficient of 3.0. During a 100-year
event the 90 foot weir will convey approximately 80 cfs at a max depth of 0.45 ft.
4.15 Ayres Associates
The detention pond was given an initial depth of 2.02 ft to account for water quality storage.
The pond outlet structure was modeled using a combination of a low flow orifice and
overflow weir. A side calculation was performed to verify the accuracy of the generated EPA
SWMM rating curve out of the pond. Based on the calculations the discharge from the pond
is being controlled by the outflow pipe. The model results matched the side calculations (see
Appendix F for Redwood Pond Calculations).
4.5 East Vine Diversion Channel / Regional Detention Pond Outfall
The future East Vine Diversion Channel will serve as the outfall to the North East College
Corridor Outfall drainage system.
Table 4.7 represents the tailwater rating curve that was used in the EPA SWMM model for
the downstream boundary condition (Storm Line A1) at the future East Vine Diversion
Channel. This rating curve is based on a conceptual design of the future channel and was
taken from the preliminary HEC-RAS model of the East Vine Diversion Channel from the
DC3 project (Dry Creek Connection Channel).
Table 4.7. Dry Creek Tailwater Rating Curve.
Time (hr) Tailwater (ft)
100-year Storm Event
0.0 4934.24
0.3 4939.31
1 4937.88
1.19 4938.29
2 4937.31
3 4936.94
4 4936.86
5 4936.79
6 4936.42
4.5.1 Storm Line A1
Storm Line A1 is a major component of the proposed storm drainage system east of
Redwood Street. Storm Line A1 starts at the outlet of the regional pond and continues east
along re-aligned Vine Drive. This system will outfall into the future East Vine Diversion
Channel. Storm Line A1 will collect flow from the Redwood Pond outlet (Storm Line A2), the
Old Town North detention pond (Storm Line A3), and the Green briar Outfall (Storm Line
A4). The storm line consists of a storm sewer ranging in diameter from 48- to 54-inch RCP,
4 ft x 7 ft and 4 ft x 12 ft RCBC, contains 4 storm laterals, a total of 25-Type 13 combination
inlets, snout oil-water debris separators for water quality, and a crossing at Lake Canal.
Box culverts are required at the downstream end of the Storm Line A1 due to cover
constraints. The box culvert is mainly located so the outside edge of the box coincides with
the outside edge of the 6-foot sidewalk of the future re-aligned Vine Drive.
4.17 Ayres Associates
The 60-inch GWET and 42-inch NEWT water lines were also in conflict with the proposed
storm sewer in several locations along Storm Line A1, primarily at the storm lateral locations.
As mentioned previously, Storm Line A1 system is constrained by the upstream and
downstream inverts. The laterals are constrained by the hydraulics of the system.
Discussions between the City of Fort Collins and the City of Greeley occurred during the
initial design stages. The engineers from both sides offered alternatives and made
accommodations where possible. An agreement was made to allow the Greeley waterlines
to be within 6 inches (outside diameter) of the proposed storm sewer. Manhole risers were
incorporated into the storm sewer design where the hydraulics permitted to allow shallow
storm laterals. The construction drawings reflect GWET and NEWT waterline elevations as
Boyle Engineering submitted to the City of Fort Collins in May 2008.
The potential for future development of the land north of the re-aligned Vine Drive required
Ayres to look at the feasibility of future utilities. After investigating potential sanitary sewer
access locations, it was determined that any development in this area would not be able to
have basements. The sanitary sewer on the east side of Redwood Street posed the
greatest concern. The proposed storm sewer and Greeley waterlines create a utility barrier
along re-aligned Vine Drive. Existing sanitary sewer is currently located in Alta Vista, Lemay
Avenue, and Redwood Street. The sewers located in Lemay Avenue and Redwood Street
do not pose a connection problem, however, the sewer located on the west side of Alta Vista
would required to run at minimum grade and drop manholes would be needed to tie into this
system. Other areas west and east of Redwood should not have issues connecting to
existing utilities.
EPA SWMM Hydraulic Modeling
EPA SWMM was used to model the capacity of the Storm Sewer Lines A1. The proposed
design shows the energy grade line of the system to be underground at the inlets, therefore
the inlets will function properly during a 10- and 100-year event.
4.5.2 Storm Line A2
Storm Line A2 outlets Redwood Pond, continues south and connects into Storm Line A1.
This system consists of storm sewer ranging in diameter from 15- to 48-inch RCP, contains
1 storm lateral and a total of 3-Type C inlets and one snout oil-water debris separator for
water quality.
Storm lateral A6 is placed near the cul-de sac just south of Lupine Drive. Inlet A6 will
replace an existing 12-inch pipe that currently conveys flows north to the existing channel
where Redwood Pond outfalls. Runoff (approximately 73 cfs) from the development will be
re-directed into the proposed system.
EPA SWMM Hydraulic Modeling
EPA SWMM was used to model the capacity of Storm Sewer Lines A2. The analysis shows
the energy grade line of the system to be below the flowline of the inlets, therefore the inlets
will function properly during a 10- and 100-year event.
LEGENDDRAINAGE BASINBASIN NUMBERBASIN AREA (ACRES)EXHIBIT 4.2FUTURE DETENTION AND WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTSRESTRICT AMOUNT OF RUNOFFTO EXISTING CONDITIONS IFRE-DEVELOPED. WATER QUALITYPROVIDED IN REDWOOD PONDREQUIRE FUTURE ON-SITEDETENTION & WATERQUALITY. RELEASE RATE @ 0.20 cfs/acreREQUIRE FUTURE ON-SITEDETENTION.WATER QUALITY PROVIDEDIN REGIONAL POND.FUTURE RE-ALIGNED VINEDRIVE. WATER QUALITYPROVIDED WITH SNOUTS.DISCHARGE INTOREGIONAL POND WITHOUTFUTURE DETENTION ORWATER QUALITY.RESTRICT AMOUNT OF RUNOFFTO EXISTING CONDITIONS IFRE-DEVELOPED. FUTURE WATERQUALITY REQUIRED.RESTRICT AMOUNT OF RUNOFFTO EXISTING CONDITIONS IFRE-DEVELOPED. WATER QUALITYPROVIDED IN REGINAL POND.BASIN 103: NO DETENTION ORWATER QUALITY REQURED IFDISCHARGING INTOEVERGREEN WEST PONDCOLLEGE AVENUERED CEDAR CIRCLELEMAY AVENUEDRY CREEKBRISTLECONE DRIVECONIFER STREETNOKOMIS COURTBLUE SPRUCE DRIVECONIFER STREETLUPINE DRIVEREDWOODPONDREGIONALPONDREDWOOD STREETCOLLEGE AVENUEJEROME STREETBONDELL STREETOSIANDER STREETEAST VINE DRIVE70.0 ac68.2 ac13.2 ac18.5 ac8.7 ac29.3 ac11.4 ac9.8 ac11.4 ac4.8 ac16.4 ac3.3 ac1.3 ac31.6 ac52.7 ac21.3 ac7.4 ac18.1 ac17.0 ac2.5 ac2.7 ac2.0 ac4.6 ac2.5 ac13.1 ac3.9 ac13.7 ac1.8 ac0.2 ac7.2 ac6.0 ac3.8 ac0.6 ac2.4 ac5.2 ac1.6 ac2.6 ac35.7 ac2.6 ac1.8 ac1.8 ac1.6 ac1.2 ac0.7 ac4.2 ac2.6 ac13.6 ac13.0 ac8.6 ac7.1 ac5.1 ac4.5 ac4.2 ac10.9 ac8.2 ac19.2 ac16.0 ac32.4 ac17.5 ac9.8 ac16.6 ac29.3 ac6.0 ac10.3 ac5.9 ac1.5 ac1.3 ac21.2 ac1.2 ac1.5 ac1.1 ac1.1 ac8.2 ac1.0 ac8.6 ac5.2 ac14.8 ac2.0 ac1.6 ac3.3 ac1.4 ac5.3 ac1.2 ac1.0 ac2.7 ac2.2 ac3.9 ac3.3 ac3.4 ac4.4 ac7.9 ac0.2 ac4.2 ac1.1 ac1.7 ac2.4 ac2.0 ac1.0 ac36.2 ac5.5 ac49.1 ac
Enclave at Redwood
Page C
August 18, 2021
Appendix C – Subcatchment Hydrology
Duration (min)Intensity WQ Event (in/hr)Intensity 2-year (in/hr)Intensity 100-year (in/hr)51.4252.859.95101.1052.217.72150.9351.876.52200.8051.615.60250.7151.434.98300.6501.304.52350.5851.174.08400.5351.073.74450.4950.993.46500.4600.923.23550.4350.873.03600.4100.822.86650.3900.782.71700.3650.732.59750.3500.702.48800.3300.662.38850.3200.642.29900.3050.612.21950.2900.582.131000.2800.562.061050.2700.542.001100.2600.521.941150.2550.511.881200.2450.491.84Intensity-Duration-Frequency Tables (Rational Method)
BasinOutfall IDArea (ac)Calculated Imperviousness (%)Utilized Imperviousness (%)100-Year Total Runoff Volume (ac-ft)2-Year Peak Runoff (CFS)100-Year Peak Runoff (CFS)2-Year SWMM Calculated Runoff Coefficient100-Year SWMM Calculated Runoff Coefficient113Redwood Pond9.8069.86752.557.4247.740.6770.855213Existing NECCO Stub7.82N/A802.158.8652.180.7250.896313-1South Pond 14.1054.26600.983.9822.490.5450.789313-2South Pond 28.0041.13501.725.2932.540.4530.697313-3South Pond 35.5754.46551.294.8127.590.5000.753413Existing NECCO Stub2.19N/A50.340.323.570.0500.500812Redwood Pond3.752.0020.490.224.310.0210.434Pond Subcatchment Summary Table
Enclave at Redwood
Page D
August 18, 2021
Appendix D – Detention Storage Sizing
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/16/21Revised:Design by:JMRNECCO Pond 308 (Redwood Pond Regrading)Preliminary Outlet Structure DesignStage-Storage-DischargeFormulas:orifice formula: Q = CoAo(2gH)0.5, with Co = 0.60 weir formula: Q = CdLH1.5 with Cd = 2.8low-flow outletmajor-flow outlet*overflow spillwayWidth (ft):0.14.510Invert Elevation:4953.549574958w.s. elevOutlet Orifice flowOutlet Weir flowOverflow Weir flowTotal Discharge QArea Area incrementalaccumulated Vol.(cfs)(cfs)(cfs)(cfs)(sf)(acre)volume (ac-ft)(ac-ft)4953.5- - - - - 0.00- - 4954.00 - - 0.10 5,344 0.120.020 0.020 4955.01 - - 0.51 33,375 0.770.398 0.419 4956.01 - - 1.11 83,756 1.921.301 1.720 4957.02 - - 1.83 110,689 2.542.225 3.945 4958.03 13 - 15.65 116,111 2.672.603 6.548 4958.253 18 4 24.30 117,548 2.700.671 7.218 4959.04 36 28 67.24 122,328 2.812.065 9.283 4960.04 65 79 148.75 129,103 2.962.886 12.169 4961.05 101 145 250.81 140,319 3.223.092 15.260 4962.05 141 224 369.78 149,037 3.423.321 18.581
Weir Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Aug 16 2021
Redwood Pond Regrade Spillw ay
Trapezoidal Weir
Crest = Sharp
Bottom Length (ft)= 10.00
Total Depth (ft)= 4.00
Side Slope (z:1)= 4.00
Calculations
W eir Coeff. Cw = 3.10
Compute by:Known Q
Known Q (cfs)= 89.89
Highlighted
Depth (ft)= 1.56
Q (cfs)= 89.89
Area (sqft)= 25.33
Velocity (ft/s)= 3.55
Top W idth (ft)= 22.48
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Depth (ft)Depth (ft)Redwood Pond Regrade Spillway
-1.00 -1.00
0.00 0.00
1.00 1.00
2.00 2.00
3.00 3.00
4.00 4.00
5.00 5.00
Length (ft)Weir W .S.
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/16/21Revised:Design by:JMRProposed On-Site South Pond 1Preliminary Outlet Structure DesignStage-Storage-DischargeFormulas:orifice formula: Q = CoAo(2gH)0.5, with Co = 0.60 weir formula: Q = CdLH1.5 with Cd = 2.8low-flow outletmajor-flow outlet*overflow spillwayWidth (ft):0.05230Invert Elevation:4952.714958.54959w.s. elevOutlet Orifice flowOutlet Weir flowOverflow Weir flowTotal Discharge QArea Area incrementalaccumulated Vol.(cfs)(cfs)(cfs)(cfs)(sf)(acre)volume (ac-ft)(ac-ft)4952.71- - - - - 0.00- - 4953.00 - - 0.02 28 0.000.000 0.000 4954.00 - - 0.21 1,289 0.030.012 0.012 4955.00 - - 0.49 2,749 0.060.045 0.057 4956.01 - - 0.84 4,313 0.100.080 0.137 4957.01 - - 1.46 5,981 0.140.118 0.255 4958.02 - - 1.75 7,752 0.180.157 0.412 4958.52 - - 1.87 8,677 0.200.094 0.506 4959.02 2 - 3.97 9,627 0.220.105 0.611 4960.02 10 84 96.50 11,606 0.270.243 0.855 4960.382 14 136 152.90 12,385 0.280.105 0.959
Weir Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Aug 16 2021
Southern Pond 1 Spillw ay
Trapezoidal Weir
Crest = Sharp
Bottom Length (ft)= 30.00
Total Depth (ft)= 1.38
Side Slope (z:1)= 4.00
Calculations
W eir Coeff. Cw = 3.10
Compute by:Known Q
Known Q (cfs)= 22.49
Highlighted
Depth (ft)= 0.38
Q (cfs)= 22.49
Area (sqft)= 11.98
Velocity (ft/s)= 1.88
Top W idth (ft)= 33.04
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Depth (ft)Depth (ft)Southern Pond 1 Spillway
-0.50 -0.50
0.00 0.00
0.50 0.50
1.00 1.00
1.50 1.50
2.00 2.00
Length (ft)Weir W .S.
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/16/21Revised:Design by:JMRProposed On-Site South Pond 2Preliminary Outlet Structure DesignStage-Storage-DischargeFormulas:orifice formula: Q = CoAo(2gH)0.5, with Co = 0.60 weir formula: Q = CdLH1.5 with Cd = 2.8low-flow outletmajor-flow outlet*overflow spillwayWidth (ft):0.12.255Invert Elevation:49484953.254954w.s. elevOutlet Orifice flowOutlet Weir flowOverflow Weir flowTotal Discharge QArea Area incrementalaccumulated Vol.(cfs)(cfs)(cfs)(cfs)(sf)(acre)volume (ac-ft)(ac-ft)4948.0- - - - 967 0.02- - 4949.00 - - 0.28 2,838 0.070.042 0.042 4950.01 - - 0.79 4,753 0.110.086 0.128 4951.01 - - 1.45 6,757 0.160.131 0.259 4952.03 - - 2.72 8,880 0.200.179 0.438 4953.03 - - 3.34 11,089 0.250.229 0.667 4954.04 4 - 7.94 13,401 0.310.281 0.948 4955.04 15 14 32.89 15,818 0.360.335 1.283 4956.05 29 40 73.05 18,339 0.420.392 1.675 4957.05 46 73 123.59 20,964 0.480.451 2.125 4958.05 65 112 182.67 23,693 0.540.512 2.638 4959.06 87 157 249.17 26,527 0.610.576 3.214
Weir Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Aug 16 2021
South Pond 2 Spillway
Trapezoidal Weir
Crest = Sharp
Bottom Length (ft)= 5.00
Total Depth (ft)= 5.00
Side Slope (z:1)= 4.00
Calculations
W eir Coeff. Cw = 3.10
Compute by:Known Q
Known Q (cfs)= 32.54
Highlighted
Depth (ft)= 1.14
Q (cfs)= 32.54
Area (sqft)= 10.90
Velocity (ft/s)= 2.99
Top W idth (ft)= 14.12
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Depth (ft)Depth (ft)South Pond 2 Spillway
-1.00 -1.00
0.00 0.00
1.00 1.00
2.00 2.00
3.00 3.00
4.00 4.00
5.00 5.00
6.00 6.00
Length (ft)Weir W .S.
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/16/21Revised:Design by:JMRProposed On-Site South Pond 3Preliminary Outlet Structure DesignStage-Storage-DischargeFormulas:orifice formula: Q = CoAo(2gH)0.5, with Co = 0.60 weir formula: Q = CdLH1.5 with Cd = 2.8low-flow outletmajor-flow outlet*overflow spillwayWidth (ft):0.12.510Invert Elevation:49544957.54958w.s. elevOutlet Orifice flowOutlet Weir flowOverflow Weir flowTotal Discharge QArea Area incrementalaccumulated Vol.(cfs)(cfs)(cfs)(cfs)(sf)(acre)volume (ac-ft)(ac-ft)4954.0- - - - - 0.00- - 4955.00 - - 0.28 2,052 0.050.016 0.016 4956.01 - - 0.79 8,468 0.190.112 0.128 4957.01 - - 1.45 16,012 0.370.276 0.405 4958.03 2 - 5.20 23,305 0.540.449 0.853 4959.03 13 28 44.20 32,118 0.740.633 1.487 4960.04 28 79 110.72 37,716 0.870.801 2.287 4960.354 34 101 138.57 39,688 0.910.311 2.598
Weir Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Aug 16 2021
Southern Pond 3 Spillw ay
Trapezoidal Weir
Crest = Sharp
Bottom Length (ft)= 10.00
Total Depth (ft)= 2.35
Side Slope (z:1)= 4.00
Calculations
W eir Coeff. Cw = 3.10
Compute by:Known Q
Known Q (cfs)= 27.59
Highlighted
Depth (ft)= 0.80
Q (cfs)= 27.59
Area (sqft)= 10.56
Velocity (ft/s)= 2.61
Top W idth (ft)= 16.40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Depth (ft)Depth (ft)Southern Pond 3 Spillway
-1.00 -1.00
0.00 0.00
1.00 1.00
2.00 2.00
3.00 3.00
Length (ft)Weir W .S.
Enclave at Redwood
Page E
August 18, 2021
Appendix E – SWMM Model and Results
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
[TITLE]
;;Project Title/Notes
Model Created by Jericho Rapp for Harris Kocher Smith Project #201013 on 7/21/2021.
[OPTIONS]
;;Option Value
FLOW_UNITS CFS
INFILTRATION HORTON
FLOW_ROUTING DYNWAVE
LINK_OFFSETS DEPTH
MIN_SLOPE 0
ALLOW_PONDING YES
SKIP_STEADY_STATE NO
START_DATE 06/03/2015
START_TIME 00:00:00
REPORT_START_DATE 06/03/2015
REPORT_START_TIME 00:00:00
END_DATE 06/04/2015
END_TIME 00:00:00
SWEEP_START 01/01
SWEEP_END 12/31
DRY_DAYS 0
REPORT_STEP 00:01:00
WET_STEP 00:05:00
DRY_STEP 01:00:00
ROUTING_STEP 0:00:01
RULE_STEP 00:00:00
INERTIAL_DAMPING PARTIAL
NORMAL_FLOW_LIMITED BOTH
FORCE_MAIN_EQUATION D-W
VARIABLE_STEP 0.75
LENGTHENING_STEP 0
MIN_SURFAREA 12.557
MAX_TRIALS 8
HEAD_TOLERANCE 0.005
SYS_FLOW_TOL 5
LAT_FLOW_TOL 5
MINIMUM_STEP 0.5
THREADS 1
[EVAPORATION]
;;Data Source Parameters
;;-------------- ----------------
CONSTANT 0.0
DRY_ONLY NO
[RAINGAGES]
;;Name Format Interval SCF Source
;;-------------- --------- ------ ------ ----------
RG1 INTENSITY 0:05 1.0 TIMESERIES 100-year
[SUBCATCHMENTS]
;;Name Rain Gage Outlet Area %Imperv Width %Slope CurbLen SnowPack
;;-------------- ---------------- ---------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ----------------
Basin_812 RG1 Pond_Redwood 3.75 2 265 0.5 0
Basin_113 RG1 Pond_Redwood 9.7970 75 276 .6 0
Basin_313_2 RG1 Pond_South_2 8.0008 50 272 .5 0
Basin_213 RG1 A2_8 7.82 80 336 1 0
Basin_413 RG1 NECCO_Stub 2.19 5 162 1 0
Basin_313_1 RG1 Pond_South_1 4.0983 60 193 .75 0
Basin_313_3 RG1 Pond_South_3 5.5751 55 220 .8 0
[SUBAREAS]
;;Subcatchment N-Imperv N-Perv S-Imperv S-Perv PctZero RouteTo PctRouted
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Basin_812 .016 .25 .1 .3 1 OUTLET
Basin_113 .016 .25 .1 .3 1 OUTLET
Basin_313_2 .016 .25 .1 .3 1 OUTLET
Basin_213 .016 .25 .1 .3 1 OUTLET
Basin_413 .016 .25 .1 .3 1 OUTLET
Basin_313_1 .016 .25 .1 .3 1 OUTLET
Basin_313_3 .016 .25 .1 .3 1 OUTLET
[INFILTRATION]
;;Subcatchment Param1 Param2 Param3 Param4 Param5
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Basin_812 .51 .5 6.48 7 0
Basin_113 .51 .5 6.48 7 0
Basin_313_2 .51 .5 6.48 7 0
Basin_213 .51 .5 6.48 7 0
Basin_413 .51 .5 6.48 7 0
Basin_313_1 .51 .5 6.48 7 0
Basin_313_3 .51 .5 6.48 7 0
[JUNCTIONS]
;;Name Elevation MaxDepth InitDepth SurDepth Aponded
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
A2_10 4953.33 3.92 0 0 0
A2_8 4952.2 8.67 0 0 0
A2_1 4946.88 13.21 0 0 0
A2_9 4952.72 8.8 0 0 0
A2_7 4951.66 10.24 0 0 0
A2_6 4950 14.5 0 0 0
A2_5 4949.41 15.48 0 0 0
A2_4 4948.81 15.42 0 0 0
A2_3 4948.39 15.43 0 0 0
A2_2 4947.15 13.13 0 0 0
[OUTFALLS]
;;Name Elevation Type Stage Data Gated Route To
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------------- -------- ----------------
NECCO_Stub 4946.54 TIMESERIES Outfall_Existing_Conditions NO
[STORAGE]
Page 1
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
;;Name Elev. MaxDepth InitDepth Shape Curve Name/Params N/A Fevap Psi
Ksat IMD
;;-------------- -------- ---------- ----------- ---------- ---------------------------- -------- --------
-------- --------
Pond_Redwood 4953.5 8.5 0 TABULAR Redwood 0 0
Pond_South_2 4948 11 0 TABULAR South_2 0 0
Pond_South_1 4952.71 7.67 0 TABULAR South_1 0 0
Pond_South_3 4954 6.35 0 TABULAR South_3 0 0
[CONDUITS]
;;Name From Node To Node Length Roughness InOffset OutOffset InitFlow MaxFlow
;;-------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
----------
A2_10 A2_10 A2_9 104.31 0.013 0 .2 0 0
A2_8 A2_8 A2_7 85.83 0.013 0 .2 0 0
A2_1 A2_1 NECCO_Stub 71.66 0.013 0 0 0 0
A2_9 A2_9 A2_8 78.86 0.013 0 .2 0 0
A2_7 A2_7 A2_6 365.62 0.013 0 .2 0 0
A2_6 A2_6 A2_5 98.45 0.013 0 .2 0 0
A2_5 A2_5 A2_4 100 0.013 0 .2 0 0
A2_4 A2_4 A2_3 56 0.013 0 .2 0 0
A2_3 A2_3 A2_2 261.03 0.013 0 .2 0 0
A2_2 A2_2 A2_1 17.83 0.013 0 .2 0 0
[OUTLETS]
;;Name From Node To Node Offset Type QTable/Qcoeff Qexpon Gated
;;-------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------- --------------- ---------------- ---------- --------
Redwood_Outlet Pond_Redwood A2_10 0 TABULAR/DEPTH Redwood_Outfall NO
South2_Outlet Pond_South_2 A2_1 0 TABULAR/DEPTH South2_Outfall NO
South1_Outlet Pond_South_1 A2_2 0 TABULAR/DEPTH South1_Outfall NO
South3_Outlet Pond_South_3 A2_6 0 TABULAR/DEPTH South3_Outlet NO
[XSECTIONS]
;;Link Shape Geom1 Geom2 Geom3 Geom4 Barrels Culvert
;;-------------- ------------ ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
A2_10 CIRCULAR 2.5 0 0 0 1
A2_8 CIRCULAR 4 0 0 0 1
A2_1 CIRCULAR 4 0 0 0 1
A2_9 CIRCULAR 2.5 0 0 0 1
A2_7 CIRCULAR 4 0 0 0 1
A2_6 CIRCULAR 4 0 0 0 1
A2_5 CIRCULAR 4 0 0 0 1
A2_4 CIRCULAR 4 0 0 0 1
A2_3 CIRCULAR 4 0 0 0 1
A2_2 CIRCULAR 4 0 0 0 1
[LOSSES]
;;Link Kentry Kexit Kavg Flap Gate Seepage
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
A2_10 .5 .5 0 NO 0
A2_8 .5 .5 0 NO 0
A2_1 .5 .5 0 NO 0
A2_9 .5 .5 0 NO 0
A2_7 .5 .5 0 NO 0
A2_6 .5 .5 0 NO 0
A2_5 .5 .5 0 NO 0
A2_4 .5 .5 0 NO 0
A2_3 .5 .5 0 NO 0
A2_2 .5 .5 0 NO 0
[INFLOWS]
;;Node Constituent Time Series Type Mfactor Sfactor Baseline Pattern
;;-------------- ---------------- ---------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
Pond_Redwood FLOW Redwood_Inflow FLOW 1.0 1.0
[CURVES]
;;Name Type X-Value Y-Value
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
South2_Outfall Rating 0 0
South2_Outfall 1 .28
South2_Outfall 2 .79
South2_Outfall 3 1.45
South2_Outfall 4 2.72
South2_Outfall 5 3.34
South2_Outfall 6 7.94
South2_Outfall 7 32.89
South2_Outfall 8 73.05
South2_Outfall 9 123.59
South2_Outfall 10 182.67
South2_Outfall 11 249.17
;
Redwood_Outfall Rating 0 0
Redwood_Outfall .5 .1
Redwood_Outfall 1.5 .51
Redwood_Outfall 2.5 1.11
Redwood_Outfall 3.5 1.83
Redwood_Outfall 4.5 15.65
Redwood_Outfall 4.75 24.30
Redwood_Outfall 5.5 67.24
Redwood_Outfall 6.5 148.75
Redwood_Outfall 7.5 250.81
Redwood_Outfall 8.5 369.78
;
South1_Outfall Rating 0 0
South1_Outfall .29 .02
Page 2
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
South1_Outfall 1.29 .21
South1_Outfall 2.29 .49
South1_Outfall 3.29 .84
South1_Outfall 4.29 1.46
South1_Outfall 5.29 1.75
South1_Outfall 5.89 1.87
South1_Outfall 6.29 3.97
South1_Outfall 7.29 96.50
South1_Outfall 7.67 152.90
;
South3_Outlet Rating 0 0
South3_Outlet 1 .28
South3_Outlet 2 .79
South3_Outlet 3 1.45
South3_Outlet 4 5.20
South3_Outlet 5 44.20
South3_Outlet 6 110.72
South3_Outlet 6.35 138.57
;
South_2 Storage 0 967
South_2 1 2838
South_2 2 4753
South_2 3 6757
South_2 4 8880
South_2 5 11089
South_2 6 13401
South_2 7 15818
South_2 8 18339
South_2 9 20964
South_2 10 23693
South_2 11 26527
;
Redwood Storage 0 0
Redwood .5 5344
Redwood 1.5 33375
Redwood 2.5 83756
Redwood 3.5 110689
Redwood 4.5 116111
Redwood 4.75 117548
Redwood 5.5 122328
Redwood 6.5 129103
Redwood 7.5 140319
Redwood 8.5 149037
;
South_1 Storage 0 0
South_1 .29 28
South_1 1.29 1289
South_1 2.29 2749
South_1 3.29 4313
South_1 4.29 5981
South_1 5.29 7752
South_1 5.89 8677
South_1 6.29 9627
South_1 7.29 11606
South_1 7.67 12385
;
South_3 Storage 0 0
South_3 1 2052
South_3 2 8468
South_3 3 16012
South_3 4 23305
South_3 5 32118
South_3 6 37716
South_3 6.35 39688
[TIMESERIES]
;;Name Date Time Value
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
;Depth over Time
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:01:00 0
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:02:00 0
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:03:00 0
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:04:00 0
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:05:00 0
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:06:00 0
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:07:00 0
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:08:00 0.01
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:09:00 0.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:10:00 0.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:11:00 0.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:12:00 0.08
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:13:00 0.18
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:14:00 0.28
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:15:00 0.34
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:16:00 0.37
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:17:00 0.38
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:18:00 0.39
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:19:00 0.4
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:20:00 0.41
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:21:00 0.42
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:22:00 0.43
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:23:00 0.44
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:24:00 0.45
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:25:00 0.46
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:26:00 0.46
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:27:00 0.47
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:28:00 0.48
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:29:00 0.48
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:30:00 0.49
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:31:00 0.5
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:32:00 0.5
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:33:00 0.51
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:34:00 0.51
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:35:00 0.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:36:00 0.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:37:00 0.53
Page 3
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:38:00 0.54
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:39:00 0.54
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:40:00 0.55
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:41:00 0.55
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:42:00 0.56
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:43:00 0.56
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:44:00 0.57
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:45:00 0.57
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:46:00 0.58
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:47:00 0.58
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:48:00 0.58
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:49:00 0.59
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:50:00 0.59
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:51:00 0.59
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:52:00 0.59
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:53:00 0.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:54:00 0.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:55:00 0.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:56:00 0.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:57:00 0.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:58:00 0.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 0:59:00 0.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:00:00 0.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:01:00 0.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:02:00 0.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:03:00 0.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:04:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:05:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:06:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:07:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:08:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:09:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:10:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:11:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:12:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:13:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:14:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:15:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:16:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:17:00 0.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:18:00 0.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:19:00 0.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:20:00 0.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:21:00 1.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:22:00 1.08
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:23:00 1.13
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:24:00 1.17
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:25:00 1.22
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:26:00 1.27
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:27:00 1.31
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:28:00 1.36
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:29:00 1.4
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:30:00 1.44
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:31:00 1.48
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:32:00 1.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:33:00 1.57
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:34:00 1.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:35:00 1.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:36:00 1.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:37:00 1.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:38:00 1.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:39:00 1.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:40:00 1.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:41:00 1.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:42:00 1.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:43:00 1.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:44:00 1.95
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:45:00 1.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:46:00 2.01
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:47:00 2.04
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:48:00 2.07
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:49:00 2.1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:50:00 2.12
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:51:00 2.15
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:52:00 2.18
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:53:00 2.21
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:54:00 2.23
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:55:00 2.26
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:56:00 2.29
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:57:00 2.31
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:58:00 2.33
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 1:59:00 2.36
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:00:00 2.38
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:01:00 2.41
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:02:00 2.43
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:03:00 2.45
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:04:00 2.47
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:05:00 2.5
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:06:00 2.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:07:00 2.54
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:08:00 2.56
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:09:00 2.58
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:10:00 2.59
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:11:00 2.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:12:00 2.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:13:00 2.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:14:00 2.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:15:00 2.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:16:00 2.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:17:00 2.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:18:00 2.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:19:00 2.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:20:00 2.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:21:00 2.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:22:00 2.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:23:00 2.75
Page 4
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:24:00 2.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:25:00 2.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:26:00 2.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:27:00 2.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:28:00 2.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:29:00 2.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:30:00 2.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:31:00 2.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:32:00 2.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:33:00 2.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:34:00 2.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:35:00 2.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:36:00 2.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:37:00 2.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:38:00 2.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:39:00 2.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:40:00 2.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:41:00 2.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:42:00 2.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:43:00 2.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:44:00 2.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:45:00 2.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:46:00 2.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:47:00 2.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:48:00 2.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:49:00 2.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:50:00 2.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:51:00 2.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:52:00 2.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:53:00 2.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:54:00 2.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:55:00 2.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:56:00 2.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:57:00 2.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:58:00 2.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 2:59:00 2.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:00:00 2.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:01:00 2.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:02:00 2.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:03:00 2.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:04:00 2.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:05:00 2.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:06:00 2.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:07:00 2.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:08:00 2.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:09:00 2.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:10:00 2.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:11:00 2.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:12:00 2.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:13:00 2.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:14:00 2.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:15:00 2.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:16:00 2.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:17:00 2.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:18:00 2.59
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:19:00 2.58
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:20:00 2.58
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:21:00 2.57
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:22:00 2.56
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:23:00 2.55
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:24:00 2.55
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:25:00 2.54
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:26:00 2.53
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:27:00 2.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:28:00 2.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:29:00 2.51
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:30:00 2.5
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:31:00 2.49
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:32:00 2.49
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:33:00 2.48
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:34:00 2.47
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:35:00 2.46
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:36:00 2.46
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:37:00 2.45
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:38:00 2.44
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:39:00 2.43
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:40:00 2.43
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:41:00 2.42
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:42:00 2.41
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:43:00 2.4
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:44:00 2.4
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:45:00 2.39
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:46:00 2.38
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:47:00 2.37
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:48:00 2.37
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:49:00 2.36
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:50:00 2.35
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:51:00 2.35
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:52:00 2.34
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:53:00 2.33
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:54:00 2.32
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:55:00 2.32
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:56:00 2.31
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:57:00 2.3
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:58:00 2.3
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 3:59:00 2.29
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:00:00 2.28
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:01:00 2.28
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:02:00 2.27
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:03:00 2.26
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:04:00 2.26
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:05:00 2.25
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:06:00 2.24
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:07:00 2.24
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:08:00 2.23
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:09:00 2.22
Page 5
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:10:00 2.22
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:11:00 2.21
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:12:00 2.21
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:13:00 2.2
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:14:00 2.19
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:15:00 2.19
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:16:00 2.18
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:17:00 2.18
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:18:00 2.17
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:19:00 2.16
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:20:00 2.16
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:21:00 2.15
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:22:00 2.15
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:23:00 2.14
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:24:00 2.13
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:25:00 2.13
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:26:00 2.12
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:27:00 2.12
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:28:00 2.11
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:29:00 2.11
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:30:00 2.1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:31:00 2.1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:32:00 2.09
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:33:00 2.09
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:34:00 2.08
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:35:00 2.08
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:36:00 2.07
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:37:00 2.07
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:38:00 2.06
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:39:00 2.06
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:40:00 2.05
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:41:00 2.05
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:42:00 2.04
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:43:00 2.04
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:44:00 2.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:45:00 2.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:46:00 2.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:47:00 2.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:48:00 2.01
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:49:00 2.01
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:50:00 2
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:51:00 2
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:52:00 1.99
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:53:00 1.99
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:54:00 1.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:55:00 1.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:56:00 1.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:57:00 1.97
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:58:00 1.97
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 4:59:00 1.96
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:00:00 1.96
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:01:00 1.95
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:02:00 1.95
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:03:00 1.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:04:00 1.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:05:00 1.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:06:00 1.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:07:00 1.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:08:00 1.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:09:00 1.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:10:00 1.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:11:00 1.91
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:12:00 1.91
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:13:00 1.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:14:00 1.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:15:00 1.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:16:00 1.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:17:00 1.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:18:00 1.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:19:00 1.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:20:00 1.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:21:00 1.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:22:00 1.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:23:00 1.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:24:00 1.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:25:00 1.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:26:00 1.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:27:00 1.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:28:00 1.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:29:00 1.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:30:00 1.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:31:00 1.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:32:00 1.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:33:00 1.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:34:00 1.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:35:00 1.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:36:00 1.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:37:00 1.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:38:00 1.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:39:00 1.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:40:00 1.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:41:00 1.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:42:00 1.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:43:00 1.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:44:00 1.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:45:00 1.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:46:00 1.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:47:00 1.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:48:00 1.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:49:00 1.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:50:00 1.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:51:00 1.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:52:00 1.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:53:00 1.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:54:00 1.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:55:00 1.75
Page 6
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:56:00 1.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:57:00 1.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:58:00 1.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 5:59:00 1.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:00:00 1.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:01:00 1.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:02:00 1.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:03:00 1.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:04:00 1.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:05:00 1.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:06:00 1.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:07:00 1.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:08:00 1.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:09:00 1.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:10:00 1.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:11:00 1.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:12:00 1.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:13:00 1.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:14:00 1.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:15:00 1.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:16:00 1.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:17:00 1.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:18:00 1.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:19:00 1.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:20:00 1.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:21:00 1.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:22:00 1.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:23:00 1.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:24:00 1.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:25:00 1.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:26:00 1.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:27:00 1.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:28:00 1.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:29:00 1.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:30:00 1.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:31:00 1.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:32:00 1.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:33:00 1.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:34:00 1.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:35:00 1.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:36:00 1.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:37:00 1.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:38:00 1.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:39:00 1.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:40:00 1.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:41:00 1.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:42:00 1.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:43:00 1.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:44:00 1.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:45:00 1.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:46:00 1.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:47:00 1.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:48:00 1.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:49:00 1.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:50:00 1.61
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:51:00 1.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:52:00 1.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:53:00 1.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:54:00 1.6
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:55:00 1.59
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:56:00 1.59
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:57:00 1.59
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:58:00 1.59
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 6:59:00 1.58
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:00:00 1.58
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:01:00 1.58
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:02:00 1.58
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:03:00 1.57
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:04:00 1.57
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:05:00 1.57
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:06:00 1.57
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:07:00 1.57
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:08:00 1.56
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:09:00 1.56
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:10:00 1.56
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:11:00 1.56
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:12:00 1.55
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:13:00 1.55
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:14:00 1.55
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:15:00 1.55
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:16:00 1.55
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:17:00 1.54
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:18:00 1.54
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:19:00 1.54
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:20:00 1.54
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:21:00 1.53
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:22:00 1.53
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:23:00 1.53
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:24:00 1.53
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:25:00 1.53
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:26:00 1.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:27:00 1.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:28:00 1.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:29:00 1.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:30:00 1.52
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:31:00 1.51
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:32:00 1.51
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:33:00 1.51
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:34:00 1.51
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:35:00 1.51
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:36:00 1.5
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:37:00 1.5
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:38:00 1.5
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:39:00 1.5
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:40:00 1.5
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:41:00 1.49
Page 7
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:42:00 1.49
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:43:00 1.49
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:44:00 1.49
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:45:00 1.49
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:46:00 1.48
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:47:00 1.48
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:48:00 1.48
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:49:00 1.48
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:50:00 1.48
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:51:00 1.47
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:52:00 1.47
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:53:00 1.47
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:54:00 1.47
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:55:00 1.47
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:56:00 1.46
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:57:00 1.46
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:58:00 1.46
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 7:59:00 1.46
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:00:00 1.46
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:01:00 1.45
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:02:00 1.45
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:03:00 1.45
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:04:00 1.45
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:05:00 1.45
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:06:00 1.44
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:07:00 1.44
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:08:00 1.44
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:09:00 1.44
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:10:00 1.44
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:11:00 1.43
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:12:00 1.43
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:13:00 1.43
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:14:00 1.43
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:15:00 1.43
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:16:00 1.42
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:17:00 1.42
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:18:00 1.42
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:19:00 1.42
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:20:00 1.42
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:21:00 1.42
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:22:00 1.41
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:23:00 1.41
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:24:00 1.41
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:25:00 1.41
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:26:00 1.41
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:27:00 1.4
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:28:00 1.4
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:29:00 1.4
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:30:00 1.4
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:31:00 1.4
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:32:00 1.4
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:33:00 1.39
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:34:00 1.39
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:35:00 1.39
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:36:00 1.39
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:37:00 1.39
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:38:00 1.38
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:39:00 1.38
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:40:00 1.38
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:41:00 1.38
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:42:00 1.38
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:43:00 1.38
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:44:00 1.37
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:45:00 1.37
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:46:00 1.37
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:47:00 1.37
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:48:00 1.37
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:49:00 1.36
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:50:00 1.36
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:51:00 1.36
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:52:00 1.36
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:53:00 1.36
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:54:00 1.36
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:55:00 1.35
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:56:00 1.35
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:57:00 1.35
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:58:00 1.35
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 8:59:00 1.35
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:00:00 1.34
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:01:00 1.34
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:02:00 1.34
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:03:00 1.34
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:04:00 1.34
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:05:00 1.34
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:06:00 1.33
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:07:00 1.33
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:08:00 1.33
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:09:00 1.33
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:10:00 1.33
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:11:00 1.33
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:12:00 1.32
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:13:00 1.32
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:14:00 1.32
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:15:00 1.32
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:16:00 1.32
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:17:00 1.31
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:18:00 1.31
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:19:00 1.31
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:20:00 1.31
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:21:00 1.31
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:22:00 1.31
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:23:00 1.3
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:24:00 1.3
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:25:00 1.3
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:26:00 1.3
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:27:00 1.3
Page 8
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:28:00 1.3
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:29:00 1.29
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:30:00 1.29
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:31:00 1.29
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:32:00 1.29
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:33:00 1.29
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:34:00 1.29
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:35:00 1.28
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:36:00 1.28
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:37:00 1.28
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:38:00 1.28
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:39:00 1.28
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:40:00 1.27
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:41:00 1.27
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:42:00 1.27
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:43:00 1.27
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:44:00 1.27
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:45:00 1.27
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:46:00 1.26
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:47:00 1.26
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:48:00 1.26
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:49:00 1.26
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:50:00 1.26
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:51:00 1.26
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:52:00 1.25
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:53:00 1.25
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:54:00 1.25
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:55:00 1.25
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:56:00 1.25
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:57:00 1.25
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:58:00 1.24
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 9:59:00 1.24
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:00:00 1.24
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:01:00 1.24
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:02:00 1.24
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:03:00 1.24
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:04:00 1.23
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:05:00 1.23
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:06:00 1.23
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:07:00 1.23
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:08:00 1.23
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:09:00 1.23
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:10:00 1.22
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:11:00 1.22
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:12:00 1.22
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:13:00 1.22
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:14:00 1.22
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:15:00 1.22
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:16:00 1.22
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:17:00 1.21
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:18:00 1.21
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:19:00 1.21
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:20:00 1.21
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:21:00 1.21
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:22:00 1.21
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:23:00 1.2
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:24:00 1.2
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:25:00 1.2
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:26:00 1.2
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:27:00 1.2
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:28:00 1.2
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:29:00 1.19
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:30:00 1.19
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:31:00 1.19
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:32:00 1.19
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:33:00 1.19
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:34:00 1.19
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:35:00 1.18
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:36:00 1.18
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:37:00 1.18
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:38:00 1.18
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:39:00 1.18
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:40:00 1.18
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:41:00 1.17
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:42:00 1.17
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:43:00 1.17
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:44:00 1.17
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:45:00 1.17
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:46:00 1.17
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:47:00 1.17
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:48:00 1.16
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:49:00 1.16
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:50:00 1.16
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:51:00 1.16
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:52:00 1.16
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:53:00 1.16
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:54:00 1.15
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:55:00 1.15
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:56:00 1.15
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:57:00 1.15
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:58:00 1.15
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 10:59:00 1.15
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:00:00 1.14
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:01:00 1.14
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:02:00 1.14
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:03:00 1.14
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:04:00 1.14
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:05:00 1.14
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:06:00 1.14
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:07:00 1.13
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:08:00 1.13
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:09:00 1.13
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:10:00 1.13
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:11:00 1.13
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:12:00 1.13
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:13:00 1.12
Page 9
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:14:00 1.12
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:15:00 1.12
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:16:00 1.12
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:17:00 1.12
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:18:00 1.12
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:19:00 1.11
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:20:00 1.11
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:21:00 1.11
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:22:00 1.11
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:23:00 1.11
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:24:00 1.11
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:25:00 1.11
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:26:00 1.1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:27:00 1.1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:28:00 1.1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:29:00 1.1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:30:00 1.1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:31:00 1.1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:32:00 1.09
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:33:00 1.09
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:34:00 1.09
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:35:00 1.09
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:36:00 1.09
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:37:00 1.09
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:38:00 1.09
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:39:00 1.08
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:40:00 1.08
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:41:00 1.08
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:42:00 1.08
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:43:00 1.08
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:44:00 1.08
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:45:00 1.07
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:46:00 1.07
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:47:00 1.07
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:48:00 1.07
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:49:00 1.07
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:50:00 1.07
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:51:00 1.07
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:52:00 1.06
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:53:00 1.06
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:54:00 1.06
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:55:00 1.06
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:56:00 1.06
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:57:00 1.06
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:58:00 1.06
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 11:59:00 1.05
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:00:00 1.05
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:01:00 1.05
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:02:00 1.05
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:03:00 1.05
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:04:00 1.05
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:05:00 1.04
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:06:00 1.04
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:07:00 1.04
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:08:00 1.04
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:09:00 1.04
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:10:00 1.04
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:11:00 1.04
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:12:00 1.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:13:00 1.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:14:00 1.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:15:00 1.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:16:00 1.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:17:00 1.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:18:00 1.03
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:19:00 1.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:20:00 1.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:21:00 1.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:22:00 1.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:23:00 1.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:24:00 1.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:25:00 1.02
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:26:00 1.01
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:27:00 1.01
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:28:00 1.01
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:29:00 1.01
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:30:00 1.01
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:31:00 1.01
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:32:00 1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:33:00 1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:34:00 1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:35:00 1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:36:00 1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:37:00 1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:38:00 1
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:39:00 0.99
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:40:00 0.99
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:41:00 0.99
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:42:00 0.99
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:43:00 0.99
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:44:00 0.99
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:45:00 0.99
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:46:00 0.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:47:00 0.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:48:00 0.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:49:00 0.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:50:00 0.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:51:00 0.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:52:00 0.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:53:00 0.98
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:54:00 0.97
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:55:00 0.97
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:56:00 0.97
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:57:00 0.97
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:58:00 0.97
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 12:59:00 0.97
Page 10
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:00:00 0.97
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:01:00 0.96
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:02:00 0.96
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:03:00 0.96
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:04:00 0.96
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:05:00 0.96
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:06:00 0.96
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:07:00 0.96
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:08:00 0.95
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:09:00 0.95
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:10:00 0.95
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:11:00 0.95
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:12:00 0.95
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:13:00 0.95
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:14:00 0.95
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:15:00 0.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:16:00 0.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:17:00 0.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:18:00 0.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:19:00 0.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:20:00 0.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:21:00 0.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:22:00 0.94
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:23:00 0.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:24:00 0.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:25:00 0.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:26:00 0.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:27:00 0.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:28:00 0.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:29:00 0.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:30:00 0.93
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:31:00 0.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:32:00 0.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:33:00 0.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:34:00 0.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:35:00 0.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:36:00 0.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:37:00 0.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:38:00 0.92
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:39:00 0.91
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:40:00 0.91
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:41:00 0.91
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:42:00 0.91
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:43:00 0.91
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:44:00 0.91
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:45:00 0.91
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:46:00 0.91
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:47:00 0.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:48:00 0.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:49:00 0.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:50:00 0.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:51:00 0.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:52:00 0.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:53:00 0.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:54:00 0.9
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:55:00 0.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:56:00 0.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:57:00 0.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:58:00 0.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 13:59:00 0.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:00:00 0.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:01:00 0.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:02:00 0.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:03:00 0.89
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:04:00 0.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:05:00 0.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:06:00 0.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:07:00 0.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:08:00 0.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:09:00 0.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:10:00 0.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:11:00 0.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:12:00 0.88
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:13:00 0.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:14:00 0.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:15:00 0.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:16:00 0.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:17:00 0.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:18:00 0.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:19:00 0.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:20:00 0.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:21:00 0.87
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:22:00 0.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:23:00 0.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:24:00 0.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:25:00 0.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:26:00 0.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:27:00 0.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:28:00 0.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:29:00 0.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:30:00 0.86
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:31:00 0.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:32:00 0.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:33:00 0.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:34:00 0.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:35:00 0.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:36:00 0.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:37:00 0.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:38:00 0.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:39:00 0.85
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:40:00 0.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:41:00 0.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:42:00 0.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:43:00 0.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:44:00 0.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:45:00 0.84
Page 11
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:46:00 0.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:47:00 0.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:48:00 0.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:49:00 0.84
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:50:00 0.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:51:00 0.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:52:00 0.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:53:00 0.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:54:00 0.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:55:00 0.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:56:00 0.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:57:00 0.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:58:00 0.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 14:59:00 0.83
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:00:00 0.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:01:00 0.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:02:00 0.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:03:00 0.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:04:00 0.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:05:00 0.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:06:00 0.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:07:00 0.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:08:00 0.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:09:00 0.82
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:10:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:11:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:12:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:13:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:14:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:15:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:16:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:17:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:18:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:19:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:20:00 0.81
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:21:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:22:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:23:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:24:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:25:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:26:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:27:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:28:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:29:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:30:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:31:00 0.8
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:32:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:33:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:34:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:35:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:36:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:37:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:38:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:39:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:40:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:41:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:42:00 0.79
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:43:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:44:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:45:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:46:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:47:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:48:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:49:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:50:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:51:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:52:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:53:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:54:00 0.78
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:55:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:56:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:57:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:58:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 15:59:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:00:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:01:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:02:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:03:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:04:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:05:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:06:00 0.77
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:07:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:08:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:09:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:10:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:11:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:12:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:13:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:14:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:15:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:16:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:17:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:18:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:19:00 0.76
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:20:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:21:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:22:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:23:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:24:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:25:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:26:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:27:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:28:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:29:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:30:00 0.75
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:31:00 0.75
Page 12
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:32:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:33:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:34:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:35:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:36:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:37:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:38:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:39:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:40:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:41:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:42:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:43:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:44:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:45:00 0.74
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:46:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:47:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:48:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:49:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:50:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:51:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:52:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:53:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:54:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:55:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:56:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:57:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:58:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 16:59:00 0.73
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:00:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:01:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:02:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:03:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:04:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:05:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:06:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:07:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:08:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:09:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:10:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:11:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:12:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:13:00 0.72
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:14:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:15:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:16:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:17:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:18:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:19:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:20:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:21:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:22:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:23:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:24:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:25:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:26:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:27:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:28:00 0.71
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:29:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:30:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:31:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:32:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:33:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:34:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:35:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:36:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:37:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:38:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:39:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:40:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:41:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:42:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:43:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:44:00 0.7
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:45:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:46:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:47:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:48:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:49:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:50:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:51:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:52:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:53:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:54:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:55:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:56:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:57:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:58:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 17:59:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:00:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:01:00 0.69
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:02:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:03:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:04:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:05:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:06:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:07:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:08:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:09:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:10:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:11:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:12:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:13:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:14:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:15:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:16:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:17:00 0.68
Page 13
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:18:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:19:00 0.68
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:20:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:21:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:22:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:23:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:24:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:25:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:26:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:27:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:28:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:29:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:30:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:31:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:32:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:33:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:34:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:35:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:36:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:37:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:38:00 0.67
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:39:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:40:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:41:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:42:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:43:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:44:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:45:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:46:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:47:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:48:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:49:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:50:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:51:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:52:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:53:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:54:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:55:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:56:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:57:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:58:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 18:59:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:00:00 0.66
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:01:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:02:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:03:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:04:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:05:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:06:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:07:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:08:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:09:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:10:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:11:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:12:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:13:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:14:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:15:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:16:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:17:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:18:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:19:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:20:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:21:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:22:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:23:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:24:00 0.65
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:25:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:26:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:27:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:28:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:29:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:30:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:31:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:32:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:33:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:34:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:35:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:36:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:37:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:38:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:39:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:40:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:41:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:42:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:43:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:44:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:45:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:46:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:47:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:48:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:49:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:50:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:51:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:52:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:53:00 0.64
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:54:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:55:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:56:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:57:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:58:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 19:59:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:00:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:01:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:02:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:03:00 0.63
Page 14
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:04:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:05:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:06:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:07:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:08:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:09:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:10:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:11:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:12:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:13:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:14:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:15:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:16:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:17:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:18:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:19:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:20:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:21:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:22:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:23:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:24:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:25:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:26:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:27:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:28:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:29:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:30:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:31:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:32:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:33:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:34:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:35:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:36:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:37:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:38:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:39:00 0.63
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:40:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:41:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:42:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:43:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:44:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:45:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:46:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:47:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:48:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:49:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:50:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:51:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:52:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:53:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:54:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:55:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:56:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:57:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:58:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 20:59:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:00:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:01:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:02:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:03:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:04:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:05:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:06:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:07:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:08:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:09:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:10:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:11:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:12:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:13:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:14:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:15:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:16:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:17:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:18:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:19:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:20:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:21:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:22:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:23:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:24:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:25:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:26:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:27:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:28:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:29:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:30:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:31:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:32:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:33:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:34:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:35:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:36:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:37:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:38:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:39:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:40:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:41:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:42:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:43:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:44:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:45:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:46:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:47:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:48:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:49:00 0.62
Page 15
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:50:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:51:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:52:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:53:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:54:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:55:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:56:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:57:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:58:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 21:59:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:00:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:01:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:02:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:03:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:04:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:05:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:06:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:07:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:08:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:09:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:10:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:11:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:12:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:13:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:14:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:15:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:16:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:17:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:18:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:19:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:20:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:21:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:22:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:23:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:24:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:25:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:26:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:27:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:28:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:29:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:30:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:31:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:32:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:33:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:34:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:35:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:36:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:37:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:38:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:39:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:40:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:41:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:42:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:43:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:44:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:45:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:46:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:47:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:48:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:49:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:50:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:51:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:52:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:53:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:54:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:55:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:56:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:57:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:58:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 22:59:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:00:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:01:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:02:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:03:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:04:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:05:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:06:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:07:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:08:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:09:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:10:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:11:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:12:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:13:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:14:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:15:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:16:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:17:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:18:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:19:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:20:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:21:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:22:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:23:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:24:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:25:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:26:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:27:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:28:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:29:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:30:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:31:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:32:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:33:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:34:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:35:00 0.62
Page 16
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:36:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:37:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:38:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:39:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:40:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:41:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:42:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:43:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:44:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:45:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:46:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:47:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:48:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:49:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:50:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:51:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:52:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:53:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:54:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:55:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:56:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:57:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:58:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/3/2015 23:59:00 0.62
Outfall_Existing_Conditions 6/4/2015 0:00:00 0.62
;
100-year 0:00 0
100-year 0:05 1
100-year 0:10 1.14
100-year 0:15 1.33
100-year 0:20 2.23
100-year 0:25 2.84
100-year 0:30 5.49
100-year 0:35 9.95
100-year 0:40 4.12
100-year 0:45 2.48
100-year 0:50 1.46
100-year 0:55 1.22
100-year 1:00 1.06
100-year 1:05 1
100-year 1:10 0.95
100-year 1:15 0.91
100-year 1:20 0.87
100-year 1:25 0.84
100-year 1:30 0.81
100-year 1:35 0.78
100-year 1:40 0.75
100-year 1:45 0.73
100-year 1:50 0.71
100-year 1:55 0.69
100-year 2:00 0.67
;
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:01:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:02:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:03:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:04:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:05:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:06:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:07:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:08:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:09:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:10:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:11:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:12:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:13:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:14:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:15:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:16:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:17:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:18:00 0
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:19:00 0.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:20:00 0.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:21:00 0.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:22:00 0.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:23:00 0.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:24:00 0.11
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:25:00 0.16
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:26:00 0.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:27:00 0.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:28:00 0.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:29:00 0.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:30:00 0.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:31:00 1.1
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:32:00 1.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:33:00 1.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:34:00 2.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:35:00 2.77
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:36:00 3.39
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:37:00 4.15
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:38:00 5.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:39:00 5.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:40:00 6.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:41:00 7.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:42:00 8.5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:43:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:44:00 9.2
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:45:00 9.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:46:00 9.51
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:47:00 9.62
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:48:00 9.56
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:49:00 9.57
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:50:00 9.68
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:51:00 9.77
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:52:00 9.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:53:00 9.82
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:54:00 9.84
Page 17
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:55:00 9.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:56:00 9.86
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:57:00 9.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:58:00 9.89
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 0:59:00 9.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:00:00 9.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:01:00 9.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:02:00 9.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:03:00 10.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:04:00 10.19
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:05:00 10.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:06:00 10.89
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:07:00 11.46
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:08:00 12.17
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:09:00 12.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:10:00 13.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:11:00 14.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:12:00 14.58
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:13:00 15.18
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:14:00 15.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:15:00 16.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:16:00 17.71
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:17:00 20.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:18:00 21.21
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:19:00 21.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:20:00 22.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:21:00 23.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:22:00 25.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:23:00 26.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:24:00 27.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:25:00 28.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:26:00 28.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:27:00 29.14
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:28:00 29.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:29:00 31.16
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:30:00 32.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:31:00 33.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:32:00 33.45
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:33:00 33.57
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:34:00 33.7
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:35:00 34.09
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:36:00 34.76
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:37:00 35.6
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:38:00 36.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:39:00 36.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:40:00 36.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:41:00 36.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:42:00 36.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:43:00 36.68
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:44:00 37.21
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:45:00 37.68
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:46:00 37.84
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:47:00 37.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:48:00 37.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:49:00 37.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:50:00 37.11
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:51:00 37.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:52:00 37.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:53:00 37.86
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:54:00 37.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:55:00 37.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:56:00 36.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:57:00 36.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:58:00 36.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 1:59:00 36.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:00:00 37.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:01:00 36.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:02:00 36.43
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:03:00 35.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:04:00 35.56
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:05:00 35.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:06:00 35.54
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:07:00 35.55
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:08:00 35.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:09:00 34.83
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:10:00 34.2
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:11:00 33.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:12:00 33.2
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:13:00 32.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:14:00 32.74
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:15:00 32.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:16:00 31.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:17:00 31.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:18:00 30.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:19:00 29.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:20:00 29.58
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:21:00 29.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:22:00 29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:23:00 28.55
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:24:00 27.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:25:00 27.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:26:00 26.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:27:00 26.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:28:00 26.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:29:00 25.74
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:30:00 25.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:31:00 24.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:32:00 24.37
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:33:00 23.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:34:00 23.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:35:00 23.17
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:36:00 22.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:37:00 22.58
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:38:00 22.16
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:39:00 21.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:40:00 21.21
Page 18
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:41:00 20.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:42:00 20.51
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:43:00 20.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:44:00 20.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:45:00 19.7
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:46:00 19.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:47:00 18.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:48:00 18.61
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:49:00 18.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:50:00 18.13
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:51:00 17.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:52:00 17.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:53:00 17.39
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:54:00 17.08
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:55:00 16.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:56:00 16.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:57:00 16.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:58:00 16.15
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 2:59:00 15.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:00:00 15.72
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:01:00 15.45
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:02:00 15.17
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:03:00 14.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:04:00 14.8
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:05:00 14.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:06:00 14.51
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:07:00 14.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:08:00 14.12
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:09:00 13.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:10:00 13.76
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:11:00 13.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:12:00 13.51
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:13:00 13.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:14:00 13.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:15:00 13.15
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:16:00 12.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:17:00 12.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:18:00 12.79
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:19:00 12.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:20:00 12.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:21:00 12.58
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:22:00 12.5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:23:00 12.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:24:00 12.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:25:00 12.2
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:26:00 12.11
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:27:00 12.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:28:00 11.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:29:00 11.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:30:00 11.8
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:31:00 11.7
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:32:00 11.61
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:33:00 11.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:34:00 11.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:35:00 11.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:36:00 11.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:37:00 11.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:38:00 11.19
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:39:00 11.12
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:40:00 11.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:41:00 11.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:42:00 10.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:43:00 10.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:44:00 10.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:45:00 10.79
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:46:00 10.74
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:47:00 10.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:48:00 10.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:49:00 10.59
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:50:00 10.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:51:00 10.48
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:52:00 10.43
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:53:00 10.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:54:00 10.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:55:00 10.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:56:00 10.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:57:00 10.2
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:58:00 10.16
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 3:59:00 10.12
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:00:00 10.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:01:00 10.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:02:00 9.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:03:00 9.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:04:00 9.89
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:05:00 9.86
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:06:00 9.82
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:07:00 9.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:08:00 9.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:09:00 9.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:10:00 9.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:11:00 9.62
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:12:00 9.58
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:13:00 9.55
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:14:00 9.52
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:15:00 9.49
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:16:00 9.46
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:17:00 9.43
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:18:00 9.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:19:00 9.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:20:00 9.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:21:00 9.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:22:00 9.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:23:00 9.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:24:00 9.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:25:00 9.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:26:00 9.22
Page 19
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:27:00 9.2
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:28:00 9.19
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:29:00 9.17
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:30:00 9.15
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:31:00 9.14
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:32:00 9.12
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:33:00 9.11
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:34:00 9.09
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:35:00 9.08
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:36:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:37:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:38:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:39:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:40:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:41:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:42:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:43:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:44:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:45:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:46:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:47:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:48:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:49:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:50:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:51:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:52:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:53:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:54:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:55:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:56:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:57:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:58:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 4:59:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:00:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:01:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:02:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:03:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:04:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:05:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:06:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:07:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:08:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:09:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:10:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:11:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:12:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:13:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:14:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:15:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:16:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:17:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:18:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:19:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:20:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:21:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:22:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:23:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:24:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:25:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:26:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:27:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:28:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:29:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:30:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:31:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:32:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:33:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:34:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:35:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:36:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:37:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:38:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:39:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:40:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:41:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:42:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:43:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:44:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:45:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:46:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:47:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:48:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:49:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:50:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:51:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:52:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:53:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:54:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:55:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:56:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:57:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:58:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 5:59:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:00:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:01:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:02:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:03:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:04:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:05:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:06:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:07:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:08:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:09:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:10:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:11:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:12:00 9.04
Page 20
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:13:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:14:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:15:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:16:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:17:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:18:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:19:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:20:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:21:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:22:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:23:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:24:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:25:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:26:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:27:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:28:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:29:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:30:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:31:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:32:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:33:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:34:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:35:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:36:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:37:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:38:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:39:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:40:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:41:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:42:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:43:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:44:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:45:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:46:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:47:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:48:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:49:00 9.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:50:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:51:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:52:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:53:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:54:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:55:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:56:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:57:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:58:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 6:59:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:00:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:01:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:02:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:03:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:04:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:05:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:06:00 9.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:07:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:08:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:09:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:10:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:11:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:12:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:13:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:14:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:15:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:16:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:17:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:18:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:19:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:20:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:21:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:22:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:23:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:24:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:25:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:26:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:27:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:28:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:29:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:30:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:31:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:32:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:33:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:34:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:35:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:36:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:37:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:38:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:39:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:40:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:41:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:42:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:43:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:44:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:45:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:46:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:47:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:48:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:49:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:50:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:51:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:52:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:53:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:54:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:55:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:56:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:57:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:58:00 8.99
Page 21
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 7:59:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:00:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:01:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:02:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:03:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:04:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:05:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:06:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:07:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:08:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:09:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:10:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:11:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:12:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:13:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:14:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:15:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:16:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:17:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:18:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:19:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:20:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:21:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:22:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:23:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:24:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:25:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:26:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:27:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:28:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:29:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:30:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:31:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:32:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:33:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:34:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:35:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:36:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:37:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:38:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:39:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:40:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:41:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:42:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:43:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:44:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:45:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:46:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:47:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:48:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:49:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:50:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:51:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:52:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:53:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:54:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:55:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:56:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:57:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:58:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 8:59:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:00:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:01:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:02:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:03:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:04:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:05:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:06:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:07:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:08:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:09:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:10:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:11:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:12:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:13:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:14:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:15:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:16:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:17:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:18:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:19:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:20:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:21:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:22:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:23:00 9.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:24:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:25:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:26:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:27:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:28:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:29:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:30:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:31:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:32:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:33:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:34:00 9.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:35:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:36:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:37:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:38:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:39:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:40:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:41:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:42:00 9.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:43:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:44:00 9.02
Page 22
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:45:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:46:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:47:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:48:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:49:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:50:00 9.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:51:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:52:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:53:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:54:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:55:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:56:00 9.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:57:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:58:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 9:59:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:00:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:01:00 9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:02:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:03:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:04:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:05:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:06:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:07:00 8.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:08:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:09:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:10:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:11:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:12:00 8.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:13:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:14:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:15:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:16:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:17:00 8.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:18:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:19:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:20:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:21:00 8.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:22:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:23:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:24:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:25:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:26:00 8.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:27:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:28:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:29:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:30:00 8.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:31:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:32:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:33:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:34:00 8.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:35:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:36:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:37:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:38:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:39:00 8.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:40:00 8.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:41:00 8.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:42:00 8.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:43:00 8.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:44:00 8.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:45:00 8.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:46:00 8.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:47:00 8.89
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:48:00 8.89
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:49:00 8.89
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:50:00 8.89
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:51:00 8.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:52:00 8.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:53:00 8.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:54:00 8.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:55:00 8.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:56:00 8.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:57:00 8.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:58:00 8.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 10:59:00 8.86
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:00:00 8.86
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:01:00 8.86
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:02:00 8.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:03:00 8.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:04:00 8.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:05:00 8.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:06:00 8.84
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:07:00 8.84
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:08:00 8.84
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:09:00 8.83
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:10:00 8.83
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:11:00 8.83
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:12:00 8.83
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:13:00 8.82
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:14:00 8.82
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:15:00 8.82
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:16:00 8.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:17:00 8.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:18:00 8.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:19:00 8.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:20:00 8.8
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:21:00 8.8
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:22:00 8.8
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:23:00 8.79
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:24:00 8.79
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:25:00 8.79
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:26:00 8.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:27:00 8.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:28:00 8.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:29:00 8.77
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:30:00 8.77
Page 23
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:31:00 8.77
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:32:00 8.76
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:33:00 8.76
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:34:00 8.76
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:35:00 8.76
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:36:00 8.75
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:37:00 8.75
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:38:00 8.75
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:39:00 8.74
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:40:00 8.74
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:41:00 8.74
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:42:00 8.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:43:00 8.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:44:00 8.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:45:00 8.72
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:46:00 8.72
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:47:00 8.72
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:48:00 8.71
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:49:00 8.71
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:50:00 8.71
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:51:00 8.7
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:52:00 8.7
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:53:00 8.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:54:00 8.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:55:00 8.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:56:00 8.68
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:57:00 8.68
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:58:00 8.68
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 11:59:00 8.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:00:00 8.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:01:00 8.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:02:00 8.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:03:00 8.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:04:00 8.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:05:00 8.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:06:00 8.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:07:00 8.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:08:00 8.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:09:00 8.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:10:00 8.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:11:00 8.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:12:00 8.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:13:00 8.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:14:00 8.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:15:00 8.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:16:00 8.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:17:00 8.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:18:00 8.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:19:00 8.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:20:00 8.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:21:00 8.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:22:00 8.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:23:00 8.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:24:00 8.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:25:00 8.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:26:00 8.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:27:00 8.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:28:00 8.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:29:00 8.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:30:00 8.62
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:31:00 8.62
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:32:00 8.61
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:33:00 8.6
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:34:00 8.59
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:35:00 8.58
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:36:00 8.57
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:37:00 8.55
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:38:00 8.54
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:39:00 8.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:40:00 8.52
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:41:00 8.5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:42:00 8.49
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:43:00 8.48
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:44:00 8.46
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:45:00 8.45
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:46:00 8.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:47:00 8.42
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:48:00 8.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:49:00 8.39
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:50:00 8.37
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:51:00 8.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:52:00 8.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:53:00 8.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:54:00 8.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:55:00 8.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:56:00 8.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:57:00 8.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:58:00 8.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 12:59:00 8.2
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:00:00 8.18
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:01:00 8.15
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:02:00 8.13
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:03:00 8.11
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:04:00 8.09
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:05:00 8.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:06:00 8.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:07:00 8.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:08:00 8
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:09:00 7.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:10:00 7.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:11:00 7.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:12:00 7.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:13:00 7.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:14:00 7.84
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:15:00 7.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:16:00 7.79
Page 24
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:17:00 7.76
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:18:00 7.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:19:00 7.7
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:20:00 7.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:21:00 7.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:22:00 7.62
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:23:00 7.59
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:24:00 7.56
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:25:00 7.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:26:00 7.5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:27:00 7.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:28:00 7.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:29:00 7.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:30:00 7.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:31:00 7.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:32:00 7.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:33:00 7.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:34:00 7.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:35:00 7.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:36:00 7.21
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:37:00 7.18
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:38:00 7.14
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:39:00 7.11
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:40:00 7.08
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:41:00 7.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:42:00 7.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:43:00 6.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:44:00 6.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:45:00 6.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:46:00 6.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:47:00 6.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:48:00 6.82
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:49:00 6.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:50:00 6.75
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:51:00 6.72
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:52:00 6.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:53:00 6.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:54:00 6.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:55:00 6.59
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:56:00 6.56
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:57:00 6.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:58:00 6.5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 13:59:00 6.46
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:00:00 6.43
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:01:00 6.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:02:00 6.37
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:03:00 6.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:04:00 6.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:05:00 6.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:06:00 6.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:07:00 6.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:08:00 6.19
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:09:00 6.16
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:10:00 6.13
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:11:00 6.1
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:12:00 6.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:13:00 6.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:14:00 6.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:15:00 5.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:16:00 5.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:17:00 5.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:18:00 5.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:19:00 5.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:20:00 5.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:21:00 5.82
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:22:00 5.79
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:23:00 5.77
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:24:00 5.74
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:25:00 5.72
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:26:00 5.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:27:00 5.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:28:00 5.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:29:00 5.62
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:30:00 5.59
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:31:00 5.57
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:32:00 5.55
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:33:00 5.52
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:34:00 5.5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:35:00 5.48
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:36:00 5.45
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:37:00 5.43
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:38:00 5.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:39:00 5.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:40:00 5.36
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:41:00 5.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:42:00 5.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:43:00 5.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:44:00 5.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:45:00 5.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:46:00 5.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:47:00 5.2
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:48:00 5.18
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:49:00 5.16
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:50:00 5.14
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:51:00 5.12
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:52:00 5.1
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:53:00 5.08
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:54:00 5.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:55:00 5.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:56:00 5.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:57:00 5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:58:00 4.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 14:59:00 4.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:00:00 4.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:01:00 4.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:02:00 4.91
Page 25
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:03:00 4.89
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:04:00 4.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:05:00 4.86
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:06:00 4.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:07:00 4.83
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:08:00 4.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:09:00 4.8
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:10:00 4.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:11:00 4.77
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:12:00 4.75
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:13:00 4.74
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:14:00 4.72
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:15:00 4.7
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:16:00 4.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:17:00 4.68
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:18:00 4.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:19:00 4.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:20:00 4.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:21:00 4.62
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:22:00 4.61
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:23:00 4.59
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:24:00 4.58
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:25:00 4.57
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:26:00 4.55
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:27:00 4.54
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:28:00 4.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:29:00 4.52
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:30:00 4.5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:31:00 4.49
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:32:00 4.48
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:33:00 4.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:34:00 4.46
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:35:00 4.45
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:36:00 4.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:37:00 4.43
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:38:00 4.42
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:39:00 4.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:40:00 4.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:41:00 4.39
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:42:00 4.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:43:00 4.37
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:44:00 4.36
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:45:00 4.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:46:00 4.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:47:00 4.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:48:00 4.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:49:00 4.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:50:00 4.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:51:00 4.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:52:00 4.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:53:00 4.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:54:00 4.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:55:00 4.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:56:00 4.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:57:00 4.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:58:00 4.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 15:59:00 4.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:00:00 4.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:01:00 4.21
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:02:00 4.21
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:03:00 4.2
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:04:00 4.19
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:05:00 4.19
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:06:00 4.18
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:07:00 4.17
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:08:00 4.17
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:09:00 4.16
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:10:00 4.15
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:11:00 4.15
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:12:00 4.14
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:13:00 4.13
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:14:00 4.13
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:15:00 4.12
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:16:00 4.11
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:17:00 4.11
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:18:00 4.1
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:19:00 4.1
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:20:00 4.09
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:21:00 4.09
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:22:00 4.08
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:23:00 4.08
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:24:00 4.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:25:00 4.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:26:00 4.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:27:00 4.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:28:00 4.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:29:00 4.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:30:00 4.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:31:00 4.05
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:32:00 4.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:33:00 4.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:34:00 4.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:35:00 4.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:36:00 4.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:37:00 4.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:38:00 4.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:39:00 4.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:40:00 4.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:41:00 4.01
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:42:00 4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:43:00 4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:44:00 4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:45:00 3.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:46:00 3.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:47:00 3.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:48:00 3.98
Page 26
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:49:00 3.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:50:00 3.98
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:51:00 3.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:52:00 3.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:53:00 3.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:54:00 3.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:55:00 3.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:56:00 3.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:57:00 3.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:58:00 3.95
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 16:59:00 3.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:00:00 3.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:01:00 3.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:02:00 3.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:03:00 3.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:04:00 3.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:05:00 3.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:06:00 3.92
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:07:00 3.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:08:00 3.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:09:00 3.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:10:00 3.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:11:00 3.89
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:12:00 3.89
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:13:00 3.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:14:00 3.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:15:00 3.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:16:00 3.86
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:17:00 3.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:18:00 3.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:19:00 3.84
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:20:00 3.83
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:21:00 3.82
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:22:00 3.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:23:00 3.8
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:24:00 3.79
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:25:00 3.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:26:00 3.77
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:27:00 3.75
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:28:00 3.74
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:29:00 3.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:30:00 3.71
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:31:00 3.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:32:00 3.68
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:33:00 3.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:34:00 3.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:35:00 3.61
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:36:00 3.59
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:37:00 3.56
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:38:00 3.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:39:00 3.5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:40:00 3.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:41:00 3.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:42:00 3.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:43:00 3.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:44:00 3.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:45:00 3.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:46:00 3.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:47:00 3.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:48:00 3.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:49:00 3.19
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:50:00 3.16
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:51:00 3.12
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:52:00 3.09
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:53:00 3.06
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:54:00 3.03
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:55:00 3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:56:00 2.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:57:00 2.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:58:00 2.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 17:59:00 2.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:00:00 2.84
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:01:00 2.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:02:00 2.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:03:00 2.75
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:04:00 2.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:05:00 2.7
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:06:00 2.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:07:00 2.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:08:00 2.61
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:09:00 2.59
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:10:00 2.56
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:11:00 2.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:12:00 2.51
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:13:00 2.48
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:14:00 2.46
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:15:00 2.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:16:00 2.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:17:00 2.39
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:18:00 2.37
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:19:00 2.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:20:00 2.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:21:00 2.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:22:00 2.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:23:00 2.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:24:00 2.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:25:00 2.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:26:00 2.21
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:27:00 2.19
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:28:00 2.17
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:29:00 2.15
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:30:00 2.13
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:31:00 2.11
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:32:00 2.09
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:33:00 2.07
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:34:00 2.05
Page 27
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:35:00 2.04
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:36:00 2.02
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:37:00 2
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:38:00 1.99
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:39:00 1.97
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:40:00 1.96
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:41:00 1.94
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:42:00 1.93
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:43:00 1.91
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:44:00 1.9
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:45:00 1.88
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:46:00 1.87
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:47:00 1.86
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:48:00 1.85
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:49:00 1.83
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:50:00 1.82
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:51:00 1.81
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:52:00 1.8
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:53:00 1.79
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:54:00 1.78
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:55:00 1.76
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:56:00 1.75
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:57:00 1.74
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:58:00 1.73
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 18:59:00 1.72
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:00:00 1.71
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:01:00 1.71
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:02:00 1.7
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:03:00 1.69
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:04:00 1.68
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:05:00 1.67
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:06:00 1.66
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:07:00 1.65
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:08:00 1.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:09:00 1.64
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:10:00 1.63
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:11:00 1.62
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:12:00 1.61
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:13:00 1.61
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:14:00 1.6
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:15:00 1.59
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:16:00 1.59
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:17:00 1.58
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:18:00 1.57
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:19:00 1.57
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:20:00 1.56
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:21:00 1.56
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:22:00 1.55
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:23:00 1.54
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:24:00 1.54
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:25:00 1.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:26:00 1.53
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:27:00 1.52
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:28:00 1.52
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:29:00 1.51
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:30:00 1.51
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:31:00 1.5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:32:00 1.5
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:33:00 1.49
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:34:00 1.49
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:35:00 1.49
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:36:00 1.48
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:37:00 1.48
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:38:00 1.48
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:39:00 1.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:40:00 1.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:41:00 1.47
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:42:00 1.46
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:43:00 1.46
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:44:00 1.46
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:45:00 1.45
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:46:00 1.45
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:47:00 1.45
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:48:00 1.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:49:00 1.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:50:00 1.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:51:00 1.44
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:52:00 1.43
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:53:00 1.43
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:54:00 1.43
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:55:00 1.43
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:56:00 1.42
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:57:00 1.42
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:58:00 1.42
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 19:59:00 1.42
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:00:00 1.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:01:00 1.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:02:00 1.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:03:00 1.41
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:04:00 1.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:05:00 1.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:06:00 1.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:07:00 1.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:08:00 1.4
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:09:00 1.39
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:10:00 1.39
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:11:00 1.39
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:12:00 1.39
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:13:00 1.39
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:14:00 1.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:15:00 1.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:16:00 1.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:17:00 1.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:18:00 1.38
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:19:00 1.37
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:20:00 1.37
Page 28
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:21:00 1.37
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:22:00 1.37
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:23:00 1.37
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:24:00 1.36
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:25:00 1.36
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:26:00 1.36
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:27:00 1.36
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:28:00 1.36
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:29:00 1.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:30:00 1.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:31:00 1.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:32:00 1.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:33:00 1.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:34:00 1.35
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:35:00 1.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:36:00 1.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:37:00 1.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:38:00 1.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:39:00 1.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:40:00 1.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:41:00 1.34
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:42:00 1.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:43:00 1.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:44:00 1.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:45:00 1.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:46:00 1.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:47:00 1.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:48:00 1.33
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:49:00 1.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:50:00 1.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:51:00 1.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:52:00 1.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:53:00 1.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:54:00 1.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:55:00 1.32
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:56:00 1.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:57:00 1.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:58:00 1.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 20:59:00 1.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:00:00 1.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:01:00 1.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:02:00 1.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:03:00 1.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:04:00 1.31
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:05:00 1.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:06:00 1.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:07:00 1.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:08:00 1.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:09:00 1.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:10:00 1.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:11:00 1.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:12:00 1.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:13:00 1.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:14:00 1.3
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:15:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:16:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:17:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:18:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:19:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:20:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:21:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:22:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:23:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:24:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:25:00 1.29
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:26:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:27:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:28:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:29:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:30:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:31:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:32:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:33:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:34:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:35:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:36:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:37:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:38:00 1.28
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:39:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:40:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:41:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:42:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:43:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:44:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:45:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:46:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:47:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:48:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:49:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:50:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:51:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:52:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:53:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:54:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:55:00 1.27
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:56:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:57:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:58:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 21:59:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:00:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:01:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:02:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:03:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:04:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:05:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:06:00 1.26
Page 29
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:07:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:08:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:09:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:10:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:11:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:12:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:13:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:14:00 1.26
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:15:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:16:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:17:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:18:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:19:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:20:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:21:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:22:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:23:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:24:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:25:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:26:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:27:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:28:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:29:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:30:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:31:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:32:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:33:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:34:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:35:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:36:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:37:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:38:00 1.25
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:39:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:40:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:41:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:42:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:43:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:44:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:45:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:46:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:47:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:48:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:49:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:50:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:51:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:52:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:53:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:54:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:55:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:56:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:57:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:58:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 22:59:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:00:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:01:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:02:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:03:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:04:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:05:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:06:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:07:00 1.24
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:08:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:09:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:10:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:11:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:12:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:13:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:14:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:15:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:16:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:17:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:18:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:19:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:20:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:21:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:22:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:23:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:24:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:25:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:26:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:27:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:28:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:29:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:30:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:31:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:32:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:33:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:34:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:35:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:36:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:37:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:38:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:39:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:40:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:41:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:42:00 1.23
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:43:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:44:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:45:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:46:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:47:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:48:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:49:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:50:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:51:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:52:00 1.22
Page 30
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:53:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:54:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:55:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:56:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:57:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:58:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/3/2015 23:59:00 1.22
Redwood_Inflow 6/4/2015 0:00:00 1.22
;
2-year 0:00 0
2-year 0:05 0.29
2-year 0:10 0.33
2-year 0:15 0.38
2-year 0:20 0.64
2-year 0:25 0.81
2-year 0:30 1.57
2-year 0:35 2.85
2-year 0:40 1.18
2-year 0:45 0.71
2-year 0:50 0.42
2-year 0:55 0.35
2-year 1:00 0.3
2-year 1:05 0.2
2-year 1:10 0.19
2-year 1:15 0.18
2-year 1:20 0.17
2-year 1:25 0.17
2-year 1:30 0.16
2-year 1:35 0.15
2-year 1:40 0.15
2-year 1:45 0.14
2-year 1:50 0.14
2-year 1:55 0.13
2-year 2:00 0.13
[REPORT]
;;Reporting Options
SUBCATCHMENTS ALL
NODES ALL
LINKS ALL
[TAGS]
[MAP]
DIMENSIONS 196716.381 133797.814 200531.510 137356.790
Units Feet
[COORDINATES]
;;Node X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
A2_10 198068.219 136679.437
A2_8 198166.003 136424.810
A2_1 198001.173 134980.065
A2_9 198167.940 136550.671
A2_7 198212.475 136299.916
A2_6 198195.048 135719.985
A2_5 198185.367 135567.015
A2_4 198070.155 135462.453
A2_3 197990.765 135415.013
A2_2 197980.116 135002.575
NECCO_Stub 198080.555 134895.509
Pond_Redwood 197872.600 136794.527
Pond_South_2 198374.159 135261.438
Pond_South_1 197643.194 135061.996
Pond_South_3 198728.507 136094.302
[VERTICES]
;;Link X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
[Polygons]
;;Subcatchment X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
Basin_812 197782.865 137167.707
Basin_812 198137.529 136780.283
Basin_812 198074.858 136649.243
Basin_812 197392.593 136643.545
Basin_812 197255.855 136969.722
Basin_812 197234.490 137046.637
Basin_812 197238.763 137164.858
Basin_113 199261.343 137058.032
Basin_113 199347.161 137054.115
Basin_113 199432.978 137050.198
Basin_113 199604.612 137042.364
Basin_113 199821.114 137025.272
Basin_113 200027.645 136996.785
Basin_113 199997.734 136964.025
Basin_113 200024.796 136934.113
Basin_113 199983.490 136892.807
Basin_113 200010.553 136865.744
Basin_113 199452.207 136357.251
Basin_113 199294.103 136532.446
Basin_113 199288.406 136654.940
Basin_113 198563.411 136664.911
Basin_113 198556.289 136516.778
Basin_113 198516.407 136518.202
Basin_113 198470.828 136484.018
Basin_113 198469.403 136412.800
Basin_113 198409.580 136429.893
Basin_113 198379.669 136419.922
Basin_113 198349.758 136431.317
Basin_113 198326.968 136417.073
Basin_113 198264.296 136417.073
Basin_113 198247.204 135662.167
Basin_113 198218.717 135645.074
Basin_113 198191.655 135692.078
Page 31
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Basin_113 198205.898 136385.738
Basin_113 198180.260 136409.952
Basin_113 198143.227 136398.557
Basin_113 198114.739 136465.501
Basin_113 198116.164 136609.361
Basin_113 198106.193 136625.029
Basin_113 198185.957 136791.678
Basin_113 197909.633 137076.549
Basin_313_2 199367.458 136404.254
Basin_313_2 199377.072 136393.572
Basin_313_2 199386.686 136382.889
Basin_313_2 199405.915 136361.524
Basin_313_2 199444.373 136318.793
Basin_313_2 200046.874 136862.896
Basin_313_2 200020.523 136894.588
Basin_313_2 200058.981 136937.318
Basin_313_2 200034.767 136962.957
Basin_313_2 200066.102 136994.292
Basin_313_2 200358.095 136935.894
Basin_313_2 198183.108 134961.741
Basin_313_2 197966.607 134974.560
Basin_313_2 197977.289 135177.887
Basin_313_2 198064.175 135179.311
Basin_313_2 198068.448 135267.621
Basin_313_2 198185.245 135271.894
Basin_313_2 198239.370 135354.506
Basin_313_2 198406.020 135536.824
Basin_313_2 198371.835 135589.525
Basin_313_2 198350.470 135632.255
Basin_313_2 198333.378 135700.624
Basin_313_2 198421.687 135714.868
Basin_313_2 198424.536 135875.819
Basin_313_2 198601.156 135870.122
Basin_313_2 198642.462 135827.391
Basin_313_2 198726.499 135895.760
Basin_313_2 198757.835 135861.576
Basin_313_2 199150.956 136211.967
Basin_313_2 199086.860 136280.336
Basin_313_2 199099.679 136318.793
Basin_313_2 199052.676 136368.645
Basin_313_2 199074.041 136385.738
Basin_313_2 199169.473 136287.457
Basin_313_2 199252.085 136303.125
Basin_213 197395.441 136609.717
Basin_213 197740.847 136600.459
Basin_213 198086.252 136591.201
Basin_213 198084.116 136471.911
Basin_213 198148.212 136322.354
Basin_213 198131.120 135685.668
Basin_213 197904.647 135479.137
Basin_213 197377.637 135491.956
Basin_213 197405.412 136478.677
Basin_413 197963.758 134704.646
Basin_413 197684.585 134308.676
Basin_413 197593.426 134097.871
Basin_413 197462.386 133958.285
Basin_413 197334.194 133961.134
Basin_413 197356.984 134744.527
Basin_313_1 198166.016 135683.888
Basin_313_1 198204.474 135612.670
Basin_313_1 198274.267 135645.430
Basin_313_1 198274.267 135698.131
Basin_313_1 198302.754 135696.707
Basin_313_1 198325.544 135606.973
Basin_313_1 198365.426 135535.755
Basin_313_1 198224.415 135383.350
Basin_313_1 198158.894 135300.737
Basin_313_1 198036.400 135295.040
Basin_313_1 198034.976 135209.579
Basin_313_1 197949.515 135209.579
Basin_313_1 197933.847 134980.258
Basin_313_1 197364.106 135018.715
Basin_313_1 197378.349 135464.538
Basin_313_1 197909.633 135451.718
Basin_313_1 198153.197 135669.644
Basin_313_1 198173.138 136334.817
Basin_313_1 198151.773 136377.548
Basin_313_1 198174.562 136384.669
Basin_313_1 198184.533 136366.153
Basin_313_3 199262.768 136626.453
Basin_313_3 199264.192 136571.616
Basin_313_3 199265.616 136516.778
Basin_313_3 199345.380 136428.468
Basin_313_3 199238.554 136328.764
Basin_313_3 199180.155 136318.793
Basin_313_3 199066.207 136424.195
Basin_313_3 199012.082 136377.192
Basin_313_3 199063.358 136323.066
Basin_313_3 199043.417 136283.184
Basin_313_3 199111.786 136213.391
Basin_313_3 198762.820 135900.033
Basin_313_3 198728.635 135935.642
Basin_313_3 198648.872 135868.698
Basin_313_3 198613.263 135901.458
Basin_313_3 198398.186 135904.306
Basin_313_3 198392.488 135737.657
Basin_313_3 198321.271 135726.262
Basin_313_3 198274.267 135726.262
Basin_313_3 198288.510 136394.284
Basin_313_3 198328.392 136388.586
Basin_313_3 198356.879 136401.406
Basin_313_3 198379.669 136387.162
Basin_313_3 198403.883 136399.981
Basin_313_3 198430.946 136387.162
Basin_313_3 198495.042 136387.162
Basin_313_3 198499.315 136468.350
Page 32
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Input.txt
Basin_313_3 198524.953 136488.291
Basin_313_3 198590.473 136486.867
Basin_313_3 198593.322 136634.999
[SYMBOLS]
;;Gage X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
RG1 196889.796 136485.086
[BACKDROP]
FILE "K:\201013\Documents\Drainage\SWMM\South Pond and Redwood Regrade\Background.jpg"
DIMENSIONS 197116.451 134738.830 200474.709 137356.790
Page 33
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Output.txt EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - VERSION 5.1 (Build 5.1.015) -------------------------------------------------------------- Model Created by Jericho Rapp for Harris Kocher Smith Project #201013 on 7/21/2021. ********************************************************* NOTE: The summary statistics displayed in this report are based on results found at every computational time step, not just on results from each reporting time step. ********************************************************* **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units ............... CFS Process Models: Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES RDII ................... NO Snowmelt ............... NO Groundwater ............ NO Flow Routing ........... YES Ponding Allowed ........ YES Water Quality .......... NO Infiltration Method ...... HORTON Flow Routing Method ...... DYNWAVE Surcharge Method ......... EXTRAN Starting Date ............ 06/03/2015 00:00:00 Ending Date .............. 06/04/2015 00:00:00 Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0.0 Report Time Step ......... 00:01:00 Wet Time Step ............ 00:05:00 Dry Time Step ............ 01:00:00 Routing Time Step ........ 1.00 sec Variable Time Step ....... YES Maximum Trials ........... 8 Number of Threads ........ 1 Head Tolerance ........... 0.005000 ft ************************** Volume Depth Runoff Quantity Continuity acre-feet inches ************************** --------- ------- Total Precipitation ...... 12.607 3.669 Evaporation Loss ......... 0.000 0.000 Infiltration Loss ........ 2.948 0.858 Surface Runoff ........... 9.513 2.769 Final Storage ............ 0.195 0.057 Continuity Error (%) ..... -0.389 ************************** Volume Volume Flow Routing Continuity acre-feet 10^6 gal ************************** --------- --------- Dry Weather Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000 Wet Weather Inflow ....... 9.513 3.100 Groundwater Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000 RDII Inflow .............. 0.000 0.000 External Inflow .......... 15.183 4.948 External Outflow ......... 20.696 6.744 Flooding Loss ............ 0.000 0.000 Evaporation Loss ......... 0.000 0.000Page 1
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Output.txt Exfiltration Loss ........ 0.000 0.000 Initial Stored Volume .... 0.000 0.000 Final Stored Volume ...... 4.001 1.304 Continuity Error (%) ..... -0.001 *************************** Time-Step Critical Elements *************************** None ******************************** Highest Flow Instability Indexes ******************************** All links are stable. ************************* Routing Time Step Summary ************************* Minimum Time Step : 0.60 sec Average Time Step : 1.00 sec Maximum Time Step : 1.00 sec Percent in Steady State : 0.00 Average Iterations per Step : 2.00 Percent Not Converging : 0.00 Time Step Frequencies : 1.000 - 0.871 sec : 100.00 % 0.871 - 0.758 sec : 0.00 % 0.758 - 0.660 sec : 0.00 % 0.660 - 0.574 sec : 0.00 % 0.574 - 0.500 sec : 0.00 % *************************** Subcatchment Runoff Summary *************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total Total Total Total Imperv Perv Total Total Peak Runoff Precip Runon Evap Infil Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff Coeff Subcatchment in in in in in in in 10^6 gal CFS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Basin_812 3.67 0.00 0.00 2.08 0.07 1.52 1.59 0.16 4.31 0.434 Basin_113 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.47 2.69 0.45 3.14 0.83 47.74 0.855 Basin_313_2 3.67 0.00 0.00 1.07 1.80 0.76 2.56 0.56 32.54 0.697 Basin_213 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.32 2.87 0.42 3.29 0.70 52.18 0.896 Basin_413 3.67 0.00 0.00 1.84 0.18 1.66 1.83 0.11 3.57 0.500 Basin_313_1 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.73 2.16 0.74 2.90 0.32 22.49 0.789 Basin_313_3 3.67 0.00 0.00 0.87 1.98 0.79 2.76 0.42 27.59 0.753 ****************** Node Depth Summary ****************** --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max Reported Depth Depth HGL Occurrence Max Depth Node Type Feet Feet Feet days hr:min Feet --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A2_10 JUNCTION 1.02 1.75 4955.08 0 00:40 1.71Page 2
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Output.txt A2_8 JUNCTION 0.91 2.84 4955.04 0 00:41 2.84 A2_1 JUNCTION 0.96 2.74 4949.62 0 00:43 2.74 A2_9 JUNCTION 1.04 2.34 4955.06 0 00:40 2.33 A2_7 JUNCTION 0.82 2.53 4954.19 0 00:40 2.52 A2_6 JUNCTION 0.93 3.04 4953.04 0 00:42 3.04 A2_5 JUNCTION 0.93 3.01 4952.42 0 00:42 3.00 A2_4 JUNCTION 0.97 2.97 4951.78 0 00:42 2.96 A2_3 JUNCTION 0.87 2.70 4951.09 0 00:42 2.70 A2_2 JUNCTION 1.06 3.11 4950.26 0 00:43 3.11 NECCO_Stub OUTFALL 0.81 2.10 4948.64 0 00:43 2.10 Pond_Redwood STORAGE 3.77 4.44 4957.94 0 03:08 4.44 Pond_South_2 STORAGE 1.22 5.73 4953.73 0 01:34 5.73 Pond_South_1 STORAGE 1.48 6.20 4958.91 0 01:35 6.20 Pond_South_3 STORAGE 1.01 3.75 4957.75 0 01:45 3.75 ******************* Node Inflow Summary ******************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Maximum Lateral Total Flow Lateral Total Time of Max Inflow Inflow Balance Inflow Inflow Occurrence Volume Volume Error Node Type CFS CFS days hr:min 10^6 gal 10^6 gal Percent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A2_10 JUNCTION 0.00 14.76 0 03:08 0 4.65 0.005 A2_8 JUNCTION 52.18 52.18 0 00:40 0.698 5.35 0.024 A2_1 JUNCTION 0.00 53.79 0 00:43 0 6.63 0.002 A2_9 JUNCTION 0.00 14.76 0 03:09 0 4.65 -0.003 A2_7 JUNCTION 0.00 51.41 0 00:40 0 5.34 0.048 A2_6 JUNCTION 0.00 52.05 0 00:41 0 5.76 -0.006 A2_5 JUNCTION 0.00 50.78 0 00:41 0 5.76 0.008 A2_4 JUNCTION 0.00 50.50 0 00:42 0 5.76 0.007 A2_3 JUNCTION 0.00 50.30 0 00:42 0 5.76 0.017 A2_2 JUNCTION 0.00 51.46 0 00:42 0 6.08 0.003 NECCO_Stub OUTFALL 3.57 57.35 0 00:43 0.109 6.74 0.000 Pond_Redwood STORAGE 58.40 58.40 0 00:40 5.94 5.94 0.000 Pond_South_2 STORAGE 32.54 32.54 0 00:40 0.555 0.555 0.000 Pond_South_1 STORAGE 22.49 22.49 0 00:40 0.322 0.322 0.000 Pond_South_3 STORAGE 27.59 27.59 0 00:40 0.418 0.418 0.000 ********************** Node Surcharge Summary ********************** No nodes were surcharged. ********************* Node Flooding Summary ********************* No nodes were flooded. ********************** Storage Volume Summary ********************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Average Avg Evap Exfil Maximum Max Time of Max MaximumPage 3
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Output.txt Volume Pcnt Pcnt Pcnt Volume Pcnt Occurrence Outflow Storage Unit 1000 ft3 Full Loss Loss 1000 ft3 Full days hr:min CFS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pond_Redwood 212.288 26 0 0 282.444 35 0 03:08 14.76 Pond_South_2 5.816 4 0 0 38.001 27 0 01:34 6.71 Pond_South_1 4.195 10 0 0 25.962 62 0 01:35 3.50 Pond_South_3 5.512 5 0 0 32.651 29 0 01:45 4.27 *********************** Outfall Loading Summary *********************** ----------------------------------------------------------- Flow Avg Max Total Freq Flow Flow Volume Outfall Node Pcnt CFS CFS 10^6 gal ----------------------------------------------------------- NECCO_Stub 99.38 10.51 57.35 6.744 ----------------------------------------------------------- System 99.38 10.51 57.35 6.744 ******************** Link Flow Summary ******************** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Time of Max Maximum Max/ Max/ |Flow| Occurrence |Veloc| Full Full Link Type CFS days hr:min ft/sec Flow Depth ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- A2_10 CONDUIT 14.76 0 03:09 4.62 0.57 0.78 A2_8 CONDUIT 51.41 0 00:40 6.07 0.57 0.65 A2_1 CONDUIT 53.80 0 00:43 6.76 0.54 0.61 A2_9 CONDUIT 14.76 0 03:09 4.95 0.57 0.97 A2_7 CONDUIT 50.89 0 00:40 5.82 0.56 0.67 A2_6 CONDUIT 50.78 0 00:41 5.24 0.56 0.73 A2_5 CONDUIT 50.50 0 00:42 5.27 0.56 0.72 A2_4 CONDUIT 50.30 0 00:42 5.61 0.56 0.68 A2_3 CONDUIT 49.97 0 00:42 5.37 0.55 0.70 A2_2 CONDUIT 51.27 0 00:43 5.40 0.57 0.71 Redwood_Outlet DUMMY 14.76 0 03:08 South2_Outlet DUMMY 6.71 0 01:34 South1_Outlet DUMMY 3.50 0 01:35 South3_Outlet DUMMY 4.27 0 01:45 *************************** Flow Classification Summary *************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Adjusted ---------- Fraction of Time in Flow Class ---------- /Actual Up Down Sub Sup Up Down Norm Inlet Conduit Length Dry Dry Dry Crit Crit Crit Crit Ltd Ctrl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A2_10 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.01 0.00 A2_8 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.99 0.00 0.00 A2_1 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A2_9 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.91 0.00 0.00 A2_7 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00 A2_6 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.00 0.00Page 4
Enclave at Redwood Developed Model Output.txt A2_5 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 A2_4 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.00 0.00 A2_3 1.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.00 A2_2 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.00 ************************* Conduit Surcharge Summary ************************* ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hours Hours --------- Hours Full -------- Above Full Capacity Conduit Both Ends Upstream Dnstream Normal Flow Limited ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A2_9 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.01 Analysis begun on: Mon Aug 16 13:36:40 2021 Analysis ended on: Mon Aug 16 13:36:41 2021 Total elapsed time: 00:00:01Page 5
Enclave at Redwood
Page F
August 18, 2021
Appendix F – Low Impact Development
PROPOSED LID CALCULATIONSProject:Enclave at RedwoodDate:8/16/2021Date Revised:N/ABy:JMRBasinArea (sq-ft)Calculated Imperviousness (%)*Utilized Imperviousness (%)Impervious Area (sq-ft)WQCV (12-Hour Drain Time) (cu-ft)120% WQCV (cu-ft)LID TreatmentProvided Volume in LID (cu-ft)SF-145180.4377.0677.0634816.04936.241123.49Sand Filter 11169.42RG-118460.7379.6379.6314700.28401.25481.50Rain Garden 1500RG-224628.8252.835513011.41361.92434.30Rain Garden 2578.17SF-242449.22455019102.15583.68700.42Sand Filter 2730.16IR-112819.7174.39759536.58353.5**N/AIsolator Rows775SF-323788.1280.4680.4619139.92525.25630.30Sand Filter 3632.29RG-3126071.3575.9675.9695763.802560.973073.16Rain Garden 33939.05RG-4278156.7473.1575203471.665554.446665.33Rain Garden 46807.94RG-535335.8738.234513508.90454.53545.44Rain Garden 5663.64SF-4115137.7972.227583152.512299.162758.99Sand Filter 42988.58Total LID Treated Area722028.7870.11506203.24Total Site Area1196645.4756.13671677.10Standard WQCV Treatment Area474616.6934.86165451.3875.36%Total LID Treated Impervious Area/Total Site Impervious Area (Must be > 75%)LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY TABLE**Isolator Rows were not sized using a 12-Hour Drain Time or 120% WQCV, rather by comparing MHFD EDB WQCV to Modified FAA Method WQCV*In some cases imperviousness was rounded up to be more conservative in sizing LID facilities, exact imperviousness was used to prove 75% of new impervious areas treated by LID
DSDS
DS DSDSDSDS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DSDSDS
DS
DS DS
DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS DS DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DSDS
DSDSDS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDS
DS
DS
DSDSDS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS DS DS DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSACBASINAREAIMP%SF-1ACBASINAREAIMP%RG-1ACBASINAREAIMP%RG-2ACBASINAREAIMP%RG-4ACBASINAREAIMP%RG-4ACBASINAREAIMP%RG-4ACBASINAREAIMP%SF-4ACBASINAREAIMP%IR-1ACBASINAREAIMP%RG-5ACBASINAREAIMP%RG-3ACBASINAREAIMP%SF-3ACBASINAREAIMP%SF-2ACBASINAREAIMP%RG-3SHEET NUMBERISSUE DATE:DATEREVISION COMMENTSDESIGNED BY:CHECKED BY:DRAWN BY:PROJECT #:1120 Lincoln Street, Suite 1000Denver, Colorado 80203P: 303.623.6300 F: 303.623.6311HarrisKocherSmith.comKnow what's below.Call before you dig.®FILEPATH: K:\201013\ENGINEERING\DRAINAGE\FINAL DRAINAGE PLAN.DWG LAYOUT: LID MAP8 XREFs: dhi_logo, e-base, e-legal[U], e-offsite, e-util, p-base, p-legal, p-utilPLOTTED: TUE 08/17/21 6:20:46P BY: JERICHO RAPP
201013ENCLAVE AT REDWOODLOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT PLAN11OF108-18-2021JMRMAWJMR########################################################NO CHANGES ARE TO BE MADE TO THIS DRAWING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION OF HARRIS KOCHER SMITH.0SCALE: 1" =808016080'BASINDESIGNATIONBASIN SIZEIN ACRESC COEFFICIENTOS 10.671.23ACBASINAREAC100-YR SWMMLOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY TABLEBasinArea (sq-ft)CalculatedImperviousness (%)*UtilizedImperviousness (%)Impervious Area(sq-ft)WQCV (12-HourDrain Time) (cu-ft)120% WQCV(cu-ft)LID TreatmentProvidedVolume in LID(cu-ft)SF-145180.4377.0677.0634816.04936.241123.49Sand Filter 11169.42RG-118460.7379.6379.6314700.28401.25481.50Rain Garden 1500RG-224628.8252.835513011.41361.92434.30Rain Garden 2578.17SF-242449.22455019102.15583.68700.42Sand Filter 2730.16IR-112819.7174.39759536.58353.5**N/AIsolator Rows775SF-323788.1280.4680.4619139.92525.25630.30Sand Filter 3632.29RG-3126071.3575.9675.9695763.802560.973073.16Rain Garden 33939.05RG-4278156.7473.1575203471.665554.446665.33Rain Garden 46807.94RG-535335.8738.234513508.90454.53545.44Rain Garden 5663.64SF-4115137.7972.227583152.512299.162758.99Sand Filter 42988.58Total LID Treated Area722028.7870.11506203.24Total Site Area1196645.4756.13671677.10Standard WQCV Treatment Area474616.6934.86165451.38Total LID Treated Impervious Area/Total Site Impervious Area (Must be > 75%)75.36%*In some cases imperviousness was rounded up to be more conservative in sizing LID facilities, exact imperviousness was used to prove 75% of new impervious areas treated by LID**Isolator Rows were not sized using a 12-Hour Drain Time or 120% WQCV, rather by comparing MHFD EDB WQCV to Modified FAA Method WQCV
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =77.1 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of sand filter)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.771
C) W ater Quality Capture Volume (W QCV) Based on 12-hour Drain Time W QCV =0.25 watershed inches
WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing W atershed Area (including sand filter area)Area =45,180 sq ft
E) W ater Quality Capture Volume (W QCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
VWQCV = W QCV / 12 * Area
F) For W atersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For W atersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (W QCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of W ater Quality Capture Volume (W QCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =1,123.49 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) W QCV Depth DWQCV =1.5 ft
B) Sand Filter Side Slopes (Horizontal distance per unit vertical, Z =4.00 ft / ft
4:1 or flatter preferred). Use "0" if sand filter has vertical walls.
C) Minimum Filter Area (Flat Surface Area)AMin =435 sq ft
D) Actual Filter Area AActual =458 sq ft
E) Volume Provided VT =1167 cu ft
3.Filter Material
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.71 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =1,123 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =13/16 in
Enclave at Redw ood - Sand Filter 1
Fort Collins, CO
Design Procedure Form: Sand Filter (SF)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" CDOT Class B or C Filter Material
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Sand Filter 1.xlsm, SF 8/17/2021, 8:50 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
PROVIDE A 30 MIL (MIN) PVC GEOMEMBRANE PER TABLE
SF-4 WITH SEPARATOR FABRIC (PER TABLE SF-3) ABOVE IT.
PROVIDE SEPARATOR FABRIC BELOW THE GEOMEMBRANE
AS WELL IF SUBGRADE IS ANGULAR OR COULD OTHERWISE
PUNCTURE THE GEOMEMBRANE.
6.Inlet / Outlet W orks
A) Describe the type of energy dissipation at inlet points and means of
conveying flows in excess of the W QCV through the outlet
Notes:
A 15" RCP will enter the Sand Filter at an impact basin.
Flow above the W QCV will overflow via spillway into South Pond 1.
Design Procedure Form: Sand Filter (SF)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redw ood - Sand Filter 1
Fort Collins, CO
Choose One
YES NO
Sand Filter 1.xlsm, SF 8/17/2021, 8:50 AM
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/17/21Revised:Design by:JMRSand Filter 1Stage-StorageWSELArea Area IncrementalAccumulatedAccumulated(sf)(acre)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)4960.0458.04 0.0105- - - 4960.5660.35 0.01520.0064 0.0064 278.06 4961.0887.79 0.02040.0089 0.0152 663.70 4961.51,140.37 0.02620.0116 0.0268 1,169.42 WQCV Top4962.01,418.08 0.03260.0147 0.0415 1,807.77
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =79.6 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.796
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.26 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area =18,461 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =481.50 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =12 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical)Z =0.00 ft / ft
(Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =294 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =500 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =500 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=500 cu ft
(VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth)
3.Growing Media
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.75 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =482 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =1/2 in
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Rain Garden 1
Fort Collins, CO
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Rain Garden 1.xlsm, RG 8/17/2021, 8:59 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6.Inlet / Outlet Control
A) Inlet Control
7.Vegetation
8.Irrigation
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated?
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Rain Garden 1
Fort Collins, CO
Since this Rain Garden will feature vertical walls, no Stage-Storage table will be needed for this LID implement.
Choose One
Choose One
Choose One
Sheet Flow-No Energy Dissipation Required
Concentrated Flow-Energy Dissipation Provided
Plantings
Seed (Plan for frequent weed control)
Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod
Choose One
YES
NO
YES
NO
Rain Garden 1.xlsm, RG 8/17/2021, 8:59 AM
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =55.0 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.550
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.18 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area =24,629 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =434.30 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =6 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical)Z =4.00 ft / ft
(Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =271 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =1025 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =1292 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=579 cu ft
(VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth)
3.Growing Media
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.75 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =434 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =1/2 in
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Rain Garden 2
Fort Collins, CO
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Rain Garden 2.xlsm, RG 8/17/2021, 9:06 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6.Inlet / Outlet Control
A) Inlet Control
7.Vegetation
8.Irrigation
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated?
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Rain Garden 2
Fort Collins, CO
Choose One
Choose One
Choose One
Sheet Flow-No Energy Dissipation Required
Concentrated Flow-Energy Dissipation Provided
Plantings
Seed (Plan for frequent weed control)
Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod
Choose One
YES
NO
YES
NO
Rain Garden 2.xlsm, RG 8/17/2021, 9:06 AM
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/17/21Revised:Design by:JMRRain Garden 2Stage-StorageWSELArea Area IncrementalAccumulatedAccumulated(sf)(acre)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)4963.251,025.39 0.0235- - - 4963.751,292.45 0.02970.0133 0.0133 578.17 WQCV Top4964.251,585.35 0.03640.0165 0.0298 1,296.38 4964.751,903.38 0.04370.0200 0.0498 2,167.35
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =50.0 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of sand filter)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.500
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Based on 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.17 watershed inches
WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including sand filter area)Area =42,449 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
VW QCV = WQCV / 12 * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =700.42 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth DWQCV =1.0 ft
B) Sand Filter Side Slopes (Horizontal distance per unit vertical, Z =4.00 ft / ft
4:1 or flatter preferred). Use "0" if sand filter has vertical walls.
C) Minimum Filter Area (Flat Surface Area)AMin =265 sq ft
D) Actual Filter Area AActual =354 sq ft
E) Volume Provided VT =730 cu ft
3.Filter Material
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.71 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =700 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =5/8 in
Enclave at Redwood - Sand Filter 2
Fort Collins, CO
Design Procedure Form: Sand Filter (SF)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" CDOT Class B or C Filter Material
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Sand Filter 2.xlsm, SF 8/17/2021, 9:08 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6.Inlet / Outlet Works
A) Describe the type of energy dissipation at inlet points and means of
conveying flows in excess of the WQCV through the outlet
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Sand Filter (SF)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Sand Filter 2
Fort Collins, CO
A vegetated swale will enter the Sand Filter at a riprap rundown.
Flow above the WQCV will overflow via spillway the roadway to be collected
by inlets.
Choose One
YES NO
Sand Filter 2.xlsm, SF 8/17/2021, 9:08 AM
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/17/21Revised:Design by:JMRSand Filter 2Stage-StorageWSELArea Area IncrementalAccumulatedAccumulated(sf)(acre)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)4959.0354.06 0.0081- - - 4959.5733.25 0.01680.0061 0.0061 266.14 4960.01,137.57 0.02610.0107 0.0168 730.16 WQCV Top4960.51,567.03 0.03600.0155 0.0322 1,403.45 4961.02,021.61 0.04640.0205 0.0528 2,298.20
Sheet 1 of 3Designer:Company:Date:Project:Location:1.Basin Storage VolumeA) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, IaIa =75.0%B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia / 100 )i =0.750C) Contributing Watershed AreaArea = 0.294 acD) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of Averaged6 = in Runoff Producing StormE) Design Concept (Select EURV when also designing for flood control)1F) Design Volume (WQCV) Based on 40-hour Drain TimeVDESIGN=0.007346 ac-ft (VDESIGN = (1.0 * (0.91 * i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) / 12 * Area )Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB)Enclave at Redwood - Isolator Rows WQCV Option 1HKSAugust 17, 2021Fort Collins, COJMRUD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)Choose OneExcess Urban Runoff Volume (EURV)Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV)Isolator Rows MHFD WQCV.xlsm, EDB8/17/2021, 9:13 AM
ISOLATOR ROW VOLUME CALCULATION: MODIFIED FAA METHOD FROM FORT COLLINS IDF
Project #201013
Project Name Enclave at Redwood
Designer JMR
Date 8/17/2021
0.804
0.2943
0.0157
Time (min)WQCV Intensity (1/2 of 2-Year
Intensity) (in/hr)
Volume In
(cu-ft)Out Factor Adjusted
Release (CFS)
Volume Out
(cu-ft)
Storage
(cu-ft)
5 1.425 101.154 1.00 0.0157 4.710 96.44
10 1.105 156.877 1.00 0.0157 9.420 147.46
15 0.935 199.113 1.00 0.0157 14.130 184.98
20 0.805 228.572 0.95 0.0149 17.898 210.67
25 0.715 253.772 0.86 0.0135 20.253 233.52
30 0.65 276.842 0.80 0.0126 22.608 254.23
35 0.585 290.684 0.76 0.0119 25.057 265.63
40 0.535 303.816 0.73 0.0115 27.506 276.31
45 0.495 316.239 0.70 0.0110 29.673 286.57
50 0.46 326.532 0.68 0.0107 32.028 294.50
55 0.435 339.664 0.66 0.0104 34.195 305.47
60 0.41 349.247 0.65 0.0102 36.738 312.51
65 0.39 359.895 0.64 0.0100 39.187 320.71
70 0.365 362.734 0.63 0.0099 41.542 321.19
75 0.35 372.672 0.62 0.0097 43.803 328.87
80 0.33 374.802 0.61 0.0096 45.970 328.83
85 0.32 386.159 0.61 0.0096 48.843 337.32
90 0.305 389.709 0.60 0.0094 50.868 338.84
95 0.29 391.128 0.59 0.0093 52.799 338.33
100 0.28 397.517 0.59 0.0093 55.578 341.94
105 0.27 402.486 0.59 0.0093 58.357 344.13
110 0.26 406.035 0.58 0.0091 60.100 345.94
115 0.255 416.328 0.58 0.0091 62.831 353.50
120 0.245 417.393 0.58 0.0091 65.563 351.83
353.50
Qout (From ADS maximum chamber flow rate)(CFS)
FAA Method Table
Maximum Storage Represents Required WQCV
C (From Fort Collins Storm Criteria Manual)
Area (ac)
ABC DEFGHIJKLMNVAULT IDTOTAL REQUIRED WQCV(CF)WQ FLOW (CFS)CHAMBER TYPERELEASE RATE/CHAMBER(CFS)CHAMBER VOLUME(CF)CHAMBER VOLUME + AGGREGATE(CF)NUMBER OF CHAMBERSCOMBINED RELEASE RATE WQCV METHOD(CFS)FAA REQUIRED STORAGE VOLUME (CF)NUMBER OF CHAMBERS (FAA)TOTAL VOLUME (CHAMBERS ONLY)(CF)COMBINED RELEASE RATE FAA METHOD (CFS)TOTAL NUMBER OF CHAMBERS REQUIREDTOTAL SYSTEM VOLUME (CF)3200SC-3100.01614.731.0110.17353.5253680.3925775CONFIRMCONFIRMAMHFD Extended Detention Basin Spreadsheet WQCV * 0.8 (Drain Time Coefficient for allowable 12-hr drain time)B1/2 of the 2-year developed flow rate for the basin being sizedCChamber type based on site constraintsDFlwo rate thru the bottom of the isolator row chamber which is equal to the area of the bottom of the chamber multiplied by the flow rate per unit area (see calculations below)EVolume within chamber only, not accounting for void spaces in surrounding aggregate (standard spec)FVolume includes chamber and void space (40%) in surrounding aggregate , per chamber unit. (standard spec)GNumber of chambers required to provide full WQCV within total installed system, include aggregate = A / FHRelease rate per chamber times number of chambers = D * G IFAA calc based on Flow, WQ and Total Release RateJNumber of chambers required to provide required FAA staorage volume stored within the chamber only (no aggregate stone) = I / EKVolume provided in chambers only (no aggregate storage). This must meet or excheed the required FAA storage volume. Greater of G or J * E LRelease rate per chamber times number of chambers = D * J MTotal number of chambers (Greater of J or G)NTotal system volume. Includes number of chambers plus aggregate. This must meet or exceed required WQCVMC-4500MC-3500SC-740SC-310SC-160LP60.045.030.016.012.0100.077.051.034.025.048.386.085.485.485.433.546.030.220.214.8106.5109.985.914.76.9162.6175.074.931.015.0CHAMBER FLOW RATE CONVERSION (GPM/SF TO CFS)0.35GPM/SF1 CF=7.48052GAL1 GALLON=0.133681CF 1 GPM=0.002228CFS*FLOW RATE BASED ON 1/2 OF NOV 07 QMAX IN FIGURE 17 OF UNH TESTING REPORTMC-4500MC-3500SC-740SC-310SC-160LP0.0260.0360.0240.0160.012(COLUMN D)FLOW RATE / CHAMBER (CFS)STORMTECH CHAMBER VOLUME AND RELEASE RATE CALCULATIONSFLOOR AREA (SF)CHAMBER VOLUME (CF)CHAMBER/AGGREGATE VOLUME (CF)STORMTECH CHAMBER DATAFLOW RATE*CHAMBER FLOW RATECHAMBER DIMENSIONSWIDTH (IN)INSTALLED LENGTH (IN)HEIGHT (IN)
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =80.5 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of sand filter)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.805
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Based on 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.26 watershed inches
WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including sand filter area)Area =23,788 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
VW QCV = WQCV / 12 * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =630.30 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth DWQCV =1.4 ft
B) Sand Filter Side Slopes (Horizontal distance per unit vertical, Z =4.00 ft / ft
4:1 or flatter preferred). Use "0" if sand filter has vertical walls.
C) Minimum Filter Area (Flat Surface Area)AMin =239 sq ft
D) Actual Filter Area AActual =242 sq ft
E) Volume Provided VT =632 cu ft
3.Filter Material
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.71 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =630 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =5/8 in
Enclave at Redwood - Sand Filter 3
Fort Collins, CO
Design Procedure Form: Sand Filter (SF)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" CDOT Class B or C Filter Material
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Sand Filter 3.xlsm, SF 8/17/2021, 9:36 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
PROVIDE A 30 MIL (MIN) PVC GEOMEMBRANE PER TABLE
SF-4 WITH SEPARATOR FABRIC (PER TABLE SF-3) ABOVE IT.
PROVIDE SEPARATOR FABRIC BELOW THE GEOMEMBRANE
AS WELL IF SUBGRADE IS ANGULAR OR COULD OTHERWISE
PUNCTURE THE GEOMEMBRANE.
6.Inlet / Outlet Works
A) Describe the type of energy dissipation at inlet points and means of
conveying flows in excess of the WQCV through the outlet
Notes:
Runoff will sheet flow or be conveyed via roof drain to the Sanf Filter.
Riprap on the slopes will provide scour protection.
Flows above the WQCV will overflow into South Pond 3 over a vertical wall.
Design Procedure Form: Sand Filter (SF)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Sand Filter 3
Fort Collins, CO
Choose One
YES NO
Sand Filter 3.xlsm, SF 8/17/2021, 9:36 AM
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/17/21Revised:Design by:JMRSand Filter 3Stage-StorageWSELArea Area IncrementalAccumulatedAccumulated(sf)(acre)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)4963.1241.81 0.0056- - - 4963.5357.00 0.00820.0027 0.0027 119.02 4964.0512.29 0.01180.0050 0.0077 335.17 4964.5680.14 0.01560.0068 0.0145 632.29 WQCV Top4965.0860.57 0.01980.0088 0.0233 1,016.59
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =76.0 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.760
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.24 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area =126,071 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =3,073.16 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =12 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical)Z =8.00 ft / ft
(Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =1915 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =1931 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =6095 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=4,013 cu ft
(VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth)
3.Growing Media
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.75 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =3,073 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =1 5/16 in
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Rain Garden 3
Fort Collins, CO
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Rain Garden 3.xlsm, RG 8/17/2021, 9:40 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6.Inlet / Outlet Control
A) Inlet Control
7.Vegetation
8.Irrigation
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated?
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Rain Garden 3
Fort Collins, CO
Choose One
Choose One
Choose One
Sheet Flow-No Energy Dissipation Required
Concentrated Flow-Energy Dissipation Provided
Plantings
Seed (Plan for frequent weed control)
Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod
Choose One
YES
NO
YES
NO
Rain Garden 3.xlsm, RG 8/17/2021, 9:40 AM
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/17/21Revised:Design by:JMRRain Garden 3Stage-StorageWSELArea Area IncrementalAccumulatedAccumulated(sf)(acre)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)4962.01,931.27 0.0443- - - 4962.53,963.07 0.09100.0331 0.0331 1,443.48 4963.06,095.40 0.13990.0573 0.0904 3,939.05 WQCV Top4963.58,328.26 0.19120.0824 0.1729 7,530.47 4964.010,661.65 0.24480.1087 0.2816 12,265.96
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =75.0 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.750
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.24 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area =278,157 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =6,665.33 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =12 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical)Z =4.00 ft / ft
(Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =4172 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =6081 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =7553 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=6,817 cu ft
(VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth)
3.Growing Media
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.75 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =6,665 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =1 15/16 in
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Rain Garden 4
Fort Collins, CO
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Rain Garden 4.xlsm, RG 8/17/2021, 9:46 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
PROVIDE A 30 MIL (MIN) PVC LINER WITH CDOT CLASS B
GEOTEXTILE ABOVE IT. USE THE SAME GEOTEXTILE BELOW
THE LINER IF THE SUBGRADE IS ANGULAR
6.Inlet / Outlet Control
A) Inlet Control
7.Vegetation
8.Irrigation
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated?
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Rain Garden 4
Fort Collins, CO
Choose One
Choose One
Choose One
Sheet Flow-No Energy Dissipation Required
Concentrated Flow-Energy Dissipation Provided
Plantings
Seed (Plan for frequent weed control)
Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod
Choose One
YES
NO
YES
NO
Rain Garden 4.xlsm, RG 8/17/2021, 9:46 AM
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/17/21Revised:Design by:JMRRain Garden 4Stage-StorageWSELArea Area IncrementalAccumulatedAccumulated(sf)(acre)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)4957.756,082.61 0.1396- - - 4958.06,439.35 0.14780.0359 0.0359 1,565.03 4958.57,175.49 0.16470.0781 0.1140 4,967.08 4958.757,552.98 0.17340.0423 0.1563 6,807.94 WQCV Top4959.07,936.76 0.18220.0444 0.2007 8,743.96 4959.58,723.16 0.20030.0956 0.2963 12,907.39 4960.09,534.70 0.21890.1048 0.4011 17,470.35 4960.510,371.37 0.23810.1142 0.5153 22,445.41 4961.011,233.17 0.25790.1240 0.6392 27,845.11 4961.512,120.10 0.27820.1340 0.7732 33,682.02 4962.013,032.17 0.29920.1443 0.9176 39,968.71
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =45.0 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.450
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.15 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area =35,336 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =545.44 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =9 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical)Z =8.00 ft / ft
(Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =318 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =554 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =1257 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=679 cu ft
(VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth)
3.Growing Media
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.75 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =545 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =9/16 in
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Rain Garden 5
Fort Collins, CO
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Rain Garden 5.xlsm, RG 8/17/2021, 9:56 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6.Inlet / Outlet Control
A) Inlet Control
7.Vegetation
8.Irrigation
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated?
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Rain Garden 5
Fort Collins, CO
Choose One
Choose One
Choose One
Sheet Flow-No Energy Dissipation Required
Concentrated Flow-Energy Dissipation Provided
Plantings
Seed (Plan for frequent weed control)
Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod
Choose One
YES
NO
YES
NO
Rain Garden 5.xlsm, RG 8/17/2021, 9:56 AM
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/17/21Revised:Design by:JMRRain Garden 5Stage-StorageWSELArea Area IncrementalAccumulatedAccumulated(sf)(acre)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)4961.75553.99 0.0127- - - 4962.25997.47 0.02290.0088 0.0088 382.47 4962.501,256.91 0.02890.0065 0.0152 663.64 WQCV Top4962.751,541.48 0.03540.0080 0.0233 1,012.84 4963.252,186.03 0.05020.0213 0.0445 1,940.04
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =75.0 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of sand filter)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.750
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Based on 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.24 watershed inches
WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including sand filter area)Area =115,138 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
VW QCV = WQCV / 12 * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =2,758.99 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth DWQCV =1.75 ft
B) Sand Filter Side Slopes (Horizontal distance per unit vertical, Z =4.00 ft / ft
4:1 or flatter preferred). Use "0" if sand filter has vertical walls.
C) Minimum Filter Area (Flat Surface Area)AMin =1079 sq ft
D) Actual Filter Area AActual =1149 sq ft
E) Volume Provided VT =2989 cu ft
3.Filter Material
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.71 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =2,759 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =1 1/4 in
Enclave at Redwood - Sand Filter 4
Fort Collins, CO
Design Procedure Form: Sand Filter (SF)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" CDOT Class B or C Filter Material
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Sand Filter 4.xlsm, SF 8/17/2021, 10:04 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
PROVIDE A 30 MIL (MIN) PVC GEOMEMBRANE PER TABLE
SF-4 WITH SEPARATOR FABRIC (PER TABLE SF-3) ABOVE IT.
PROVIDE SEPARATOR FABRIC BELOW THE GEOMEMBRANE
AS WELL IF SUBGRADE IS ANGULAR OR COULD OTHERWISE
PUNCTURE THE GEOMEMBRANE.
6.Inlet / Outlet Works
A) Describe the type of energy dissipation at inlet points and means of
conveying flows in excess of the WQCV through the outlet
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Sand Filter (SF)
JMR
HKS
August 17, 2021
Enclave at Redwood - Sand Filter 4
Fort Collins, CO
Runoff will be piped via storm or via roof drain to the Sand Filter.
Impact basins will provide scour protection.
Flows above the WQCV will overflow into the roadway over a berm.
Choose One
YES NO
Sand Filter 4.xlsm, SF 8/17/2021, 10:04 AM
Project Name:Enclave at RedwoodProject No:201013Date:08/17/21Revised:Design by:JMRSand Filter 4Stage-StorageWSELArea Area IncrementalAccumulatedAccumulated(sf)(acre)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)Volume (ac-ft)4959.251,149.05 0.0264- - - 4959.51,297.33 0.02980.0070 0.0070 305.61 4960.01,612.73 0.03700.0167 0.0237 1,031.70 4960.51,953.27 0.04480.0204 0.0441 1,921.84 4961.02,318.94 0.05320.0245 0.0686 2,988.58 WQCV Top4961.52,709.74 0.06220.0288 0.0974 4,244.49 4962.03,125.68 0.07180.0335 0.1309 5,702.11 4962.53,566.75 0.08190.0384 0.1693 7,374.00 4963.04,032.95 0.09260.0436 0.2129 9,272.73
Enclave at Redwood
Page G
August 18, 2021
Appendix G – Drainage Map
DSDS
DS DSDSDSDS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DSDS DS
DS
DS DS
DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS DS DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS DS DSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSD
S
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DS
DS
DS DSDS
DSDSDS
DS
DS
D
SDSDS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DSDSDSDSDS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS
DSDS
DS
DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS DS DS DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DS DS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS
DSDS
DS
DS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS DS DS DSDS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS DSDS DS DS DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSACBASINAREAC2137.820.896ACBASINAREAC8123.750.434ACBASINAREAC313-14.100.789ACBASINAREAC313-28.000.697ACBASINAREAC1139.800.855ACBASINAREAC313-35.570.753ACBASINAREAC1139.800.855ACBASINAREAC313-28.000.697ACBASINAREAC4132.190.500SHEET NUMBERISSUE DATE:DATEREVISION COMMENTSDESIGNED BY:CHECKED BY:DRAWN BY:PROJECT #:1120 Lincoln Street, Suite 1000Denver, Colorado 80203P: 303.623.6300 F: 303.623.6311HarrisKocherSmith.comKnow what's below.Call before you dig.®FILEPATH: K:\201013\ENGINEERING\DRAINAGE\FINAL DRAINAGE PLAN.DWG LAYOUT: DRAINAGE MAP8 XREFs: dhi_logo, e-base, e-legal[U], e-offsite, e-util, p-base, p-legal, p-utilPLOTTED: MON 08/16/21 5:04:21P BY: JERICHO RAPP
201013ENCLAVE AT REDWOODPRELIMINARY DRAINAGE MAP11OF108-18-2021JMRMAWJMR########################################################NO CHANGES ARE TO BE MADE TO THIS DRAWING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION OF HARRIS KOCHER SMITH.0SCALE: 1" =808016080'Pond Subcatchment Summary TableBasinOutfall IDArea (ac)CalculatedImperviousness(%)UtilizedImperviousness(%)100-Year TotalRunoff Volume(ac-ft)2-YearPeakRunoff(CFS)100-YearPeakRunoff(CFS)2-Year SWMMCalculatedRunoffCoefficient100-Year SWMMCalculatedRunoffCoefficient113Redwood Pond9.8069.86752.557.4247.740.6770.855213Existing NECCOStub7.82N/A802.158.8652.180.7250.896313-1South Pond 14.1054.26600.983.9822.490.5450.789313-2South Pond 28.0041.13501.725.2932.540.4530.697313-3South Pond 35.5754.46551.294.8127.590.5000.753413Existing NECCOStub2.19N/A50.340.323.570.0500.500812Redwood Pond3.752.0020.490.224.310.0210.434Detention Pond Summary TablePond100-YearVolume(cu-ft)100-YearVolume(ac-ft)100-YearWSELWQCV(cu-ft)WQCVWSELMax ReleaseRate (CFS)Redwood282,4446.4844957.94*10,672.24954.7814.76South 125,9620.5964958.913,528.364955.303.50South 238,0010.8724953.736,011.284950.086.71South 332,6510.7504957.754,443.124955.774.27*WQCV for Redwood Pond from On-Site Contirbuting Area OnlyBASINDESIGNATIONBASIN SIZEIN ACRESC COEFFICIENTOS 10.671.23ACBASINAREAC100-YR SWMM