Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFORTY-THREE PRIME - FDP210019 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 3 - DRAINAGE REPORT FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS, COLORADO MARCH 23, 2022 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS GREELEY This Drainage Report is consciously provided as a PDF. Please consider the environment before printing this document in its entirety. When a hard copy is necessary, we recommend double-sided printing. NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY COVER LETTER March 23, 2022 City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR FORTY-THREE PRIME Dear Staff: Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final Drainage Report for your review. This report accompanies the combined Final Plan submittal for the proposed Forty-Three Prime. This report has been prepared in accordance with the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM) and serves to document the stormwater impacts associated with the proposed Forty-Three Prime multifamily project. We understand that review by the City of Fort Collins is to assure general compliance with standardized criteria contained in the FCSCM. If you should have any questions as you review this report, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. Frederick S. Wegert, PE Project Engineer NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .......................................................... 1 DRAIN BASINS AND SUB-BASINS ..................................................................... 3 DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA .......................................................................... 4 DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN ........................................................................... 6 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................. 8 REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 9 TABLES AND FIGURES FIGURE 1 – VICINITY MAP .................................................................................................1 FIGURE 2 – AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH ...................................................................................2 FIGURE 3 – FEMA FIRMETTE (MAP NUMBER 08069C1200F) ............................................3 TABLE 1: ONSITE WATER QUALITY VOLUMES .................................................................8 APPENDICES APPENDIX A – HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS APPENDIX B – HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS APPENDIX C –WATER QUALITY/LID COMPUTATIONS APPENDIX D – EROSION CONTROL REPORT APPENDIX E – USDA SOILS REPORT APPENDIX F – FEMA FIRMETTE APPENDIX G – EXCERPTS FROM PREVIOUS REPORTS MAP POCKET DR1 – DRAINAGE EXHIBIT NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 1 | 10 GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. LOCATION Vicinity Map The Forty-Three Primeproject site is located in the northeast quarter of Section 13, Township 6 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. The project site is Tract A of the Provincetowne P.U.D. Filing 2, which was approved in 2001. The project site (refer to Figure 1) is bordered to the north by East Trilby Road; to the south by Candlewood Drive; to the east by Brittany Drive and to the west by Autumn Ridge Drive. A regional detention pond for Provincetowne Subdivision is located on the east quarter of the site. B. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY The Forty-Three Prime project is comprised of ±4.87acres. The site is currently occupied by a small asphalt parking lot and native grasses. Figure 1 – Vicinity Map NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 2 | 10 The existing groundcover consists of native grasses. A regional detention pond with established vegetation is on the east quarter of the site. The original Provincetowne drainage design divided the site into five (5) basins – Basins 212, 220, 221, 225 and 406. In general, all of the basins drained from south to north, where they were intercepted by a swale along the north boundary. The exception was Basin 212, which drained west to Autumn Ridge Drive and then collected by an inlet located on Trilby. Once captured, the flows from all of the basins were conveyed to the northeast corner of the site and detained in Detention Pond 306 in the Provincetowne drainage design. Drainage will then be conveyed via storm sewer to Detention Pond 307 in the Provincetowne drainage design. The Provincetowne drainage design ultimately discharges into Fossil Creek. An Existing Drainage Exhibit has been provided at the back of this report for reference, along with excerpts from the original report in the appendix. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey website: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx), the site consists of Cushman fine sandy loam (Hydrologic Soil Group C), Kim loam (Hydrologic Soil Group B), and Renohill clay loam (Hydrologic Soil Group D). There is 36” storm sewer along the north property line and a regional detention pond for Provincetowne Subdivision within the project site. The proposed development will consist of five multifamily buildings and one clubhouse. Other proposed improvements include: a new parking lot, sidewalks and landscaping. The proposed land use is multifamily attached. This is use is permitted with administrative review in the Low-Density Mixed-Use District (LMN). Figure 2 – Aerial Photograph NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 3 | 10 C. FLOODPLAIN The subject property is within FEMA regulatory floodplain for Fossil Creek. In particular, the project site is not located within Area of Minimal Flood Hazard, Zone X, per Map Number 08069C1200F (Effective date: December 19, 2006). The project site is not located within a City of Fort Collins regulated floodplain. DRAIN BASINS AND SUB-BASINS A. MAJOR BASIN DESCRIPTION Forty-Three Prime is within the City of Fort Collins Fossil Creek major drainage basin. Specifically, the project site is situated in the western half of this major drainage basin. The Fossil Creek drainage basin extends along the south end of Fort Collins, from the foothills across Interstate 25 past County Road 5. It encompasses thirty-two square miles in the city of Fort Collins and Larimer County. Historically, the basin consisted of agricultural land, but the basin has experienced significant development in the recent past. Runoff from the major drainage basin drains to Fossil Creek Reservoir. Figure 3 – FEMA Firmette (Map Number 08069C1200F) NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 4 | 10 B. SUB-BASIN DESCRIPTION The project site was included in the drainage study for Provincetowne P.U.D. Filing Two by Manhard Consulting and dated March 22, 2001. The outfall for the project site is Detention Pond 306 (on the eastern third of the site) of the Provincetowne drainage study. The existing subject site can be defined with five (5) sub-basin that encompasses the entire project site. The existing site runoff generally drains from south to north to be collected by either a drainage swale or the Trilby Road curb and gutter and discharging into Detention Pond 306. Existing storm sewer from Provincetowne Filing 3 conveys stormwater along the north side of the site and into Detention Pond 306. Detention Pond 306 is on the eastern third of the site. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. ORIGINAL PROVISIONS There are no optional provisions outside of the FCSCM proposed with Forty-Three Prime. Off-site drainage from Provincetowne Subdivision passes through the site and into a regional detention pond (Detention Pond 306) on the east side of the site. B. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGY The overall stormwater management strategy employed with Forty-Three Prime utilizes the “Four Step Process” to minimize adverse impacts of urbanization on receiving waters. The following is a description of how the proposed development has incorporated each step. Step 1 – Employ Runoff Reduction Practices. The first consideration taken in trying to reduce the stormwater impacts of this development is the site selection itself. By choosing an already developed site with public storm sewer currently in place, the burden is significantly less than developing a vacant parcel absent of any infrastructure. The Forty-Three Prime aims to reduce runoff peaks, volumes and pollutant loads from frequently occurring storm events (i.e., water quality (i.e., 80th percentile) and 2-year storm events) by implementing Low Impact Development (LID) strategies. Wherever practical, runoff will be routed across landscaped areas or through rain gardens. These LID practices reduce the overall amount of impervious area, while at the same time Minimizing Directly Connected Impervious Areas (MDCIA). The combined LID/MDCIA techniques will be implemented, where practical, throughout the development, thereby slowing runoff and increasing opportunities for infiltration. Step 2 – Implement BMPs that Provide a Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) with Slow Release. The efforts taken in Step 1 will help to minimize excess runoff from frequently occurring storm events; however, urban development of this intensity will still have stormwater runoff leaving the site. The primary water quality treatment will occur in the rain gardens located at the east end of the project, prior to discharging into an existing regional detention pond, and within the green space along Trilby Road. Step 3 – Stabilize Drainageways. As stated in Section I.B.5, above, the site is in the Fossil Creek Major Basin, however no changes to the channel are proposed with this project. While this step may not seem applicable to Forty-Three Prime, the proposed project indirectly NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 5 | 10 helps achieve stabilized drainageways, nonetheless. Once again, site selection has a positive effect on stream stabilization. By developing an infill site with existing stormwater infrastructure, combined with LID and MDCIA strategies, the likelihood of bed and bank erosion is reduced. Furthermore, this project will pay one-time stormwater development fees, as well as ongoing monthly stormwater utility fees, both of which help achieve Citywide drainageway stability. Step 4 – Implement Site Specific and Other Source Control BMPs. This step typically applies to industrial and commercial developments. C. DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA REFERENCE AND CONSTRAINTS The subject property is part of the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Provincetowne PUD Filing Two prepared by Manhard Consulting and dated March 22, 2001. The site plan is constrained by a public street on all sides. A regional detention pond is on the east third of the site. D. HYDROLOGICAL CRITERIA The City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves, as depicted in Figure 3.4- 1 of the FCSCM, serve as the source for all hydrologic computations associated with The Forty- Three Primedevelopment. Tabulated data contained in Table 3.4-1 has been utilized for Rational Method runoff calculations. The Rational Method has been employed to compute stormwater runoff utilizing coefficients contained in Table 3.2-2 of the FCSCM. The Rational Formula-based Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) procedure has not been utilized for detention storage calculations since detention is not required for the project. Two separate design storms have been utilized to address distinct drainage scenarios. The first event analyzed is the “Minor,” or “Initial” Storm, which has a 2-year recurrence interval. The second event considered is the “Major Storm,” which has a 100-year recurrence interval. E. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA The drainage facilities proposed with The Forty-Three Prime project are designed in accordance with criteria outlined in the FCSCM and/or the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District’s (UDFCD) Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. F. FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS COMPLIANCE As previously mentioned, this project within an Area of Minimal Flood Hazard, Zone X, per FEMA. G. MODIFICATIONS OF CRITERIA No formal modifications are requested at this time. H. CONFORMANCE WITH WATER QUALITY TREATMENT CRITERIA City Code requires that 100% of runoff from a project site receive water quality treatment. This project proposes to provide water quality treatment using rain gardens at east of the parking lot and along the north property line. Rain gardens are considered a LID treatment method. Due to the physical constraints associated with an infill project of this nature and the prohibition of providing water quality facilities within the public right-of-way, there are some small, narrow areas around the perimeter of the project that cannot be captured. The NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 6 | 10 uncaptured areas tend to be narrow strips of concrete flatwork that link the building entrances to the public sidewalks as well as small planter beds between the building and public sidewalks or property lines. However, 100% of the site will discharge, either through internal storm sewer or public curb and gutter, into the existing regional detention pond. I. CONFORMANCE WITH LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) Although stormwater quantity detention is not required, stormwater quality will be addressed by permanent Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Low Impact Development (LID) requirements. City LID requirements specify that either 75% of all newly added impermeable areas receive water quality treatment from a LID facility OR 50% of new pavements be treated by a LID method along with 25% of drivable surfaces being permeable pavers. This project proposes to treat at least 75% of the new impervious areas through a combination of a large rain garden on the east side of the project site and three small rain gardens along Trilby Road. The large rain garden will treat 78,285 square-feet of impervious area on the site. Three small rain gardens along the north property line will treat 12,093 square feet. The total treated impervious area is 90,377 square feet. This is 93.32% of the total impervious area within the project area, which exceeds the amount of LID treatment required by City Code. The large rain garden will be designed as a single feature that will treat most of the parking lot, concrete flatwork and rooftops by conveying flows from the parking area into the rain garden. Two 12” pipe will allow both sides of the large rain garden to equalize. The facility will have 12” of ponding, at which point stormwater will flow out the east side of the facility, down a reinforced rundown and into the existing detention pond. A LID Treatment Exhibit is provided with this report detailing the treatment areas and methods. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. GENERAL CONCEPT The main objective of The Forty-Three Prime drainage design is to maintain existing drainage patterns, while not adversely impacting adjacent properties. A 36” storm sewer from Provincetowne Subdivision conveys storm water along the north property line and into a regional detention pond on the east third of the site. A list of tables and figures used within this report can be found in the Table of Contents at the front of the document. The tables and figures are located within the sections to which the content best applies. Drainage for the project site has been analyzed using seven (7) drainage sub-basins, designated as sub-basins OS1, A, B1 – B4, and C. The drainage patterns anticipated for the basins are further described below. Sub-Basin OS1 Sub-Basin OS1 encompasses the west edge of the site that drains directly into the Autumn Ridge Drive curb and gutter. Runoff from Sub-Basin OS1 will collect with the Autumn Ridge curb and gutter, flow into the Trilby Road curb and gutter, and into an inlet at the intersection of Trilby Road and Brittany Drive. The inlet discharges into the regional detention pond (Pond 306) along the east third of the site. Pond 306 discharges into the Provincetowne storm sewer and detention system and into Fossil Creek. NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 7 | 10 Sub-Basin A Sub-Basin A encompasses the parking lot and the large rain garden. Runoff will sheet flow across the parking lot to be collected by onsite curb and gutter. The curb and gutter will convey the stormwater to a 7.5 ft wide sidewalk culvert. The sidewalk culvert will discharge the runoff into the rain garden. Two 12-inch pipes are located within the rain garden to convey stormwater past a firepit and into the other half of the rain garden. The 12-inch pipes will equalize the flow between the two halves of the large rain garden. Stormwater will overtop the east wall of the rain garden, travel down a turf reinforced spillway, and into the Pond 306. Pond 306 discharges into the Provincetowne storm sewer and detention system and into Fossil Creek. Sub-Basins B1 – B4 Sub-Basins B1 to B4 consist of the apartment buildings and surrounding landscaping. A storm drain system is provided to collect as much roof runoff as possible and convey it to the large rain garden described in Sub-Basin A. Runoff will then overtop the east wall of the rain garden, travel down a turf reinforced spillway, and into Pond 306. Pond 306 discharges into the Provincetowne storm sewer and detention system and into Fossil Creek. Sub-Basin C Sub-Basin C consist of that area of the site that drains directly into Pond 306. Roof runoff along the north buildings (Buildings A, B, C, and D) will sheet flow into a drainage swale along the north property line where three small rain gardens will provide water quality treatment. The three rain gardens will discharge into an existing 36” storm sewer, and the storm sewer discharges into Pond 306. Pond 306 discharges into the Provincetowne storm sewer and detention system and into Fossil Creek. A full-size copy of the Drainage Exhibit can be found in the Map Pocket at the end of this report. B. SPECIFIC DETAILS Stormwater detention for this site is provided by the regional detention pond loca ted on site (Pond 306). While the drainage patterns of the proposed project generally conform with the previously approved drainage design, the drainage basins themselves do not have the same extents or areas. Since a direct comparison cannot be made between the original and proposed basins, a weighted percent imperviousness was developed. Using this approach, we find the original drainage plan had a Composite Percent Imperviousness of 42.6% (C100=0.56) while the proposed project will have a Composite Percent Imperviousness of 39.5% (C100=0.44). This is an overall imperviousness decrease of 3.1%, which will result in decreased runoff from the project than the original report anticipated. As shown in the analysis of overall site imperviousness, the proposed project will decrease the imperviousness of the project site when compared to the originally approved Provincetowne drainage study, thereby decreasing the runoff from the project site. This decrease in imperviousness and runoff also results in a decrease in the required detention volume identified in the original Provincetowne report. Since detention was accounted for in the original drainage report, and the detention required by this project is less than originally assumed, no additional detention is required as a part of this project, and no changes to the NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 8 | 10 existing facilities are proposed. No additional detention is required because the site conforms to the Provincetowne Filing Two drainage study. Similar to the analysis performed for detention, all areas draining to existing inlets have a decrease in imperviousness and area from what was projected in the original Provincetowne report. This results in decreased runoff to the existing inlets that were designed and approved with the earlier project, so no additional inlet calculations from the proposed infrastructure is provided as a part of this report. The majority of the water quality for Forty-Three Prime is provided by the onsite rain gardens shown in Table 1. The majority of the site will be treated by the large double rain gardens between Buildings D and E. The north side of Buildings A, B, C, and D will be treated by three smaller rain gardens along Trilby Road. Together, all four rain gardens will provide water quality for 93.2% of the site. Description Required Volume (cu. ft) Design Volume (cu. ft.) Large Double Rain Gardens 1457 1904 Rain Garden C1 122 171 Rain Garden C2 152 200 Rain Garden C3 122 197 Table 1: Onsite Water Quality Volumes However, Basin OS 1 and portions of Basin C, due to grading constraints and proximity to the existing detention pond (Pond 306), wil not drain towards the onsite rain gardens. Instead, these basins will drain into Detention Pond 306. • Basin OS1 will drain into the existing curb and gutter along Autumn Ridge Drive and Trilby Road where a Type-R inlet will collect and direct drainage into Pond 306. • The eastern half of Basin C, including Pond 306, drains directly into Pond 306. The required water quality volume, per City of Fort Collins criteria, for the area of Basins C and OS1 bypassing the rain gardens is 493 cu. ft. While constructed prior to recent Fort Collins Stormwater requirements, Pond 306 will provide some sedimentation and water quality treatment to occur by slowing down velocities within the pond. Furthermore, landscaping within the Basins C and OS1 will provide additional water quality treatment. Finally, Pond 306 discharges into Pond 307 to provide a water quality treatment train prior to discharging into the Fossil Creek Basin. CONCLUSIONS A. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS The design elements comply without variation and meet all LID requirements. The drainage design proposed with The Forty-Three Prime complies with the City of Fort Collins Master Drainage Plan for Fossi Creek and the Provincetowne P.U.D. Filing 2 Drainage Report. The site is located with an Area of Minimal Flood Hazard, Zone X, per FEMA. NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 9 | 10 The drainage plan and stormwater management measures proposed with The Forty-Three Prime project are compliant with all applicable State and Federal regulations governing stormwater discharge. B. DRAINAGE CONCEPT The proposed grading concept closely matches the original drainage patterns and decreases overall site imperviousness and additional detention is proven to be unnecessary. Stormwater quality has been provided and meets the city requirements for Low Impact Development treatment. Therefore, it is my professional opinion that Forty-Three Prime satisfies all applicable stormwater criteria and will effectively limit potential damage associated with its stormwater runoff. The drainage design proposed with this project will effectively limit potential damag e associated with its stormwater runoff. The Forty-Three Prime development will not impact the Master Drainage Plan recommendations for the Fossil Creek major drainage basin. REFERENCES 1. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, as adopted by Ordinance No. 159, 2018, and referenced in Section 26-500 of the City of Fort Collins Municipal Code. 2. Soils Resource Report for Larimer County Area, Colorado, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. 3. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes 1-3, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Wright-McLaughlin Engineers, Denver, Colorado, Revised April 2008. 4. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Provincetowne PUD Filing Two, March 22, 2001, Manhard Consulting, Ltd. NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX APPENDIX A HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL Hydrology Standards (Ch. 5) 3.0 Rational Method 3.4 Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves for Rational Method Page 8 Table 3.4-1. IDF Table for Rational Method Duration (min) Intensity 2-year (in/hr) Intensity 10-year (in/hr) Intensity 100-year (in/hr) Duration (min) Intensity 2-year (in/hr) Intensity 10-year (in/hr) Intensity 100-year (in/hr) 5 2.85 4.87 9.95 39 1.09 1.86 3.8 6 2.67 4.56 9.31 40 1.07 1.83 3.74 7 2.52 4.31 8.80 41 1.05 1.80 3.68 8 2.40 4.10 8.38 42 1.04 1.77 3.62 9 2.30 3.93 8.03 43 1.02 1.74 3.56 10 2.21 3.78 7.72 44 1.01 1.72 3.51 11 2.13 3.63 7.42 45 0.99 1.69 3.46 12 2.05 3.50 7.16 46 0.98 1.67 3.41 13 1.98 3.39 6.92 47 0.96 1.64 3.36 14 1.92 3.29 6.71 48 0.95 1.62 3.31 15 1.87 3.19 6.52 49 0.94 1.6 3.27 16 1.81 3.08 6.30 50 0.92 1.58 3.23 17 1.75 2.99 6.10 51 0.91 1.56 3.18 18 1.70 2.90 5.92 52 0.9 1.54 3.14 19 1.65 2.82 5.75 53 0.89 1.52 3.10 20 1.61 2.74 5.60 54 0.88 1.50 3.07 21 1.56 2.67 5.46 55 0.87 1.48 3.03 22 1.53 2.61 5.32 56 0.86 1.47 2.99 23 1.49 2.55 5.20 57 0.85 1.45 2.96 24 1.46 2.49 5.09 58 0.84 1.43 2.92 25 1.43 2.44 4.98 59 0.83 1.42 2.89 26 1.4 2.39 4.87 60 0.82 1.4 2.86 27 1.37 2.34 4.78 65 0.78 1.32 2.71 28 1.34 2.29 4.69 70 0.73 1.25 2.59 29 1.32 2.25 4.60 75 0.70 1.19 2.48 30 1.30 2.21 4.52 80 0.66 1.14 2.38 31 1.27 2.16 4.42 85 0.64 1.09 2.29 32 1.24 2.12 4.33 90 0.61 1.05 2.21 33 1.22 2.08 4.24 95 0.58 1.01 2.13 34 1.19 2.04 4.16 100 0.56 0.97 2.06 35 1.17 2.00 4.08 105 0.54 0.94 2.00 36 1.15 1.96 4.01 110 0.52 0.91 1.94 37 1.16 1.93 3.93 115 0.51 0.88 1.88 38 1.11 1.89 3.87 120 0.49 0.86 1.84 FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL Hydrology Standards (Ch. 5) 3.0 Rational Method 3.4 Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves for Rational Method Page 9 Figure 3.4-1. Rainfall IDF Curve – Fort Collins SITE IMPERVIOUSNESS COMPARISON Basin ID Basin Area (ac)Composite % Imperv. 100-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 212 0.68 33%0.71 220 0.52 45%0.74 221 2.18 45%0.74 224 0.08 96%1.00 225 1.30 39%0.73 406 0.11 45%0.74 Total Site 4.87 42.6%0.56 Basin ID Basin Area (ac)Composite % Imperv. 100-year Composite Runoff Coefficient OS1 0.23 43%0.69 A 1.64 82%1.00 B1 0.15 69%0.98 B2 0.03 60%0.89 B3 0.15 41%0.69 B4 0.45 41%0.70 C 2.21 10%0.39 Total Site 4.87 41.9%0.44 EXISTING MASTER PLANNED COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS PROPOSED COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS CHARACTER OF SURFACE: Runoff Coefficient Percentage Impervious Project:Forty-Three Prime Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives:Calculations By:F. Wegert Asphalt ……....……………...……….....…...……………….…………………………………..0.95 100%Date: Concrete …….......……………….….……….………………..….…………………………………0.95 100% Gravel ……….…………………….….…………………………..………………………………..0.50 40% Roofs …….…….………………..……………….…………………………………………….. 0.95 90% Pavers…………………………...………………..……………………………………………..0.50 40% Lawns and Landscaping Sandy Soil ……..……………..……………….……………………………………………..0.15 2% Clayey Soil ….….………….…….…………..……………………………………………….0.25 2%2-year Cf = 1.00 100-year Cf = 1.25 Basin ID Basin Area (ac) Area of Asphalt (ac) Area of Concrete (ac) Area of Roofs (ac) Area of Gravel (ac) Area of Pavers (ac) Area of Lawns and Landscaping (ac) 2-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 10-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 100-year Composite Runoff Coefficient Composite % Imperv. OS1 0.23 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.55 0.55 0.69 43% A 1.64 0.75 0.38 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.83 0.83 1.00 82% B1 0.15 0.00 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.78 0.78 0.98 69% B2 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.71 0.71 0.89 60% B3 0.15 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.55 0.55 0.69 41% B4 0.45 0.00 0.03 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.56 0.56 0.70 41% C 2.21 0.00 0.07 0.12 0.02 0.00 2.01 0.31 0.31 0.39 10% Rain Garden 2.42 0.75 0.43 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.76 0.76 0.95 71% DEVELOPED COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS Runoff Coefficients are from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM) Table 3.2-2. % Impervious are from Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual Table 4.1-3. 10-year Cf = 1.00 October 20, 2021 Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: Project:Forty-Three Prime Calculations By: Date: Gutter/Swale Flow, Time of Concentration: Tt = L / 60V Tc = Ti + Tt (Equation 5-3 FCSCM) Velocity (Gutter Flow), V = 20·S½ Velocity (Swale Flow), V = 15·S½ NOTE: C-value for overland flows over grassy surfaces; C = 0.25 Is Length >500' ? C*Cf (2-yr Cf=1.00) C*Cf (10-yr Cf=1.00) C*Cf (100-yr Cf=1.25) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) Ti 2-yr (min) Ti 10-yr (min) Ti 100-yr (min) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) Velocity, V (ft/s) Tt (min) Length, L (ft) Slope, S (%) Velocity, V (ft/s) Tt (min) 2-yr Tc (min) 10-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) OS1 OS1 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 99 4.88%4.42 0.4 0 NA N/A N/A 5 5 5 A A No 0.25 0.25 0.31 23 22.78%2.7 2.7 2.5 563 0.50%1.41 6.6 91 1.79%2.01 0.8 10 10 10 B1 B1 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 143 0.50%1.41 1.7 21 2.00%2.12 0.2 5 5 5 B2 B2 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 61 0.50%1.41 0.7 20 4.85%3.30 0.1 5 5 5 B3 B3 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 53 6.64%6.2 6.2 5.7 138 0.50%1.41 1.6 76 1.96%2.10 0.6 8 8 8 B4 B4 No 0.25 0.25 0.31 23 22.78%2.7 2.7 2.5 563 0.50%1.41 6.6 91 1.79%2.01 0.8 10 10 10 C C No 0.25 0.25 0.31 140 0.91%19.4 19.4 17.9 513 0.40%1.26 6.8 0 NA N/A N/A 26 26 25 DEVELOPED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS Gutter Flow Swale Flow Design Point Basin Overland Flow F. Wegert October 20, 2021 Time of Concentration (Equation 5-1 FCSCM) () 31 *1.187.1 S LCfCTi −= Rational Method Equation:Project:Forty-Three Prime Calculations By: Date: From Section 3.0 of FCSCM. Rainfall Intensity: Design Point Basin(s)Area, A (acres) 2-yr Tc (min) 10-yr Tc (min) 100-yr Tc (min) C2 C10 C100 Intensity, i2 (in/hr) Intensity, i10 (in/hr) Intensity, i100 (in/hr) Flow, Q2 (cfs) Flow, Q10 (cfs) Flow, Q100 (cfs) Flow, WQ (cfs) OS1 OS1 0.23 5 5 5 0.55 0.55 0.69 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.4 0.6 1.6 0.18 A A 1.64 10 10 10 0.83 0.83 1.00 2.21 3.78 7.88 3.0 5.1 12.9 1.50 B1 B1 0.15 5 5 5 0.78 0.78 0.98 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.3 0.6 1.5 0.17 B2 B2 0.03 5 5 5 0.71 0.71 0.89 2.85 4.87 9.95 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.03 B3 B3 0.15 8 8 8 0.55 0.55 0.69 2.40 4.10 8.59 0.2 0.4 0.9 0.10 B4 B4 0.45 10 10 10 0.56 0.56 0.70 2.21 3.78 7.88 0.6 0.9 2.5 0.28 C C 2.21 26 26 25 0.31 0.31 0.39 1.40 2.39 5.04 1.0 1.7 4.4 0.48 DEVELOPED RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS F. Wegert October 20, 2021 Rainfall Intensity taken from the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Figure 3.4-1. ()()()AiCCQf= NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX APPENDIX B HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS NNORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX STORM SEWER CALCULATIONS Storm Sewer A - 100-Year Storm Sewer A - 100-Year Storm Sewer A - 100-Year Storm Sewer A2 - 100-Year Storm Sewer A7 - 100-Year Storm Sewer A8 - 100-Year Storm Sewer A8-1 - 100-Year Storm Sewer B - 100-Year Storm Sewer B - 100-Year Storm Sewer B - 100-Year Storm Sewer B6 - 100-Year Storm Sewer C1 - 100-Year Storm Sewer C1 - 100-Year Storm Sewer C1 - 100-Year Storm Sewer C2 - 100-Year Storm Sewer C2 - 100-Year Storm Sewer C2 - 100-Year Storm Sewer C3 - 100-Year Storm Sewer C3 - 100-Year Storm Sewer C3 - 100-Year INLET CALCULATIONS Project #: Project Name: Project Loc.: Design Flowrate Allowable Flowrate1 Overflow Design Flowrate Allowable Flowrate1 Overflow Inlet A2-1 Basin B2 8" Drain Basin 0.10 cfs 0.54 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.20 cfs 0.54 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A-3 1/4 of the roof from Bldg E 15" Drain Basin 0.07 cfs 1.49 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.22 cfs 1.49 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A5 1/2 of Basin B3 15" Drain Basin 0.10 cfs 0.69 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.45 cfs 0.69 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A7-1 1/4 of Basin B3 8" Drain Basin 0.05 cfs 0.62 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.23 cfs 0.62 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A7-2 1/4 of Basin B3 8" Drain Basin 0.05 cfs 0.66 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.23 cfs 0.66 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A8-1-1 185 sq. ft. of landscaping in Basin B4 8" Drain Basin 0.01 cfs 0.44 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.05 cfs 0.44 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A8-1-2 340 sq. ft. of landscaping in Basin B4 8" Drain Basin 0.01 cfs 0.69 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.05 cfs 0.69 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A8-2 1/6 of Basin B4 8" Drain Basin 0.10 cfs 0.55 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.42 cfs 0.55 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A8-3 1/6 of Basin B4 8" Drain Basin 0.10 cfs 1.17 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.42 cfs 1.17 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A9 1/3 of Basin B4 12" Drain Basin 0.20 cfs 1.07 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.83 cfs 1.07 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A12 1/3 of Basin B4 12" Drain Basin 0.20 cfs 1.52 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.83 cfs 1.52 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet B4 1/3 of Basin B1 12" Drain Basin 0.10 cfs 0.75 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.50 cfs 0.75 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet B5 1/6 of Basin B1 8" Drain Basin 0.05 cfs 0.63 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.25 cfs 0.63 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet B6 1/6 of Basin B1 8" Drain Basin 0.05 cfs 0.64 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.25 cfs 0.64 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet B6-1 235 sq. ft. of landscaping in Basin A 8" Drain Basin 0.01 cfs 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.05 cfs 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet B7 1/3 of Basin B1 8" Drain Basin 0.10 cfs 0.64 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.50 cfs 0.64 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet C1 1/3 of Basin B2 8" Drain Basin 0.17 cfs 0.94 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.73 cfs 0.94 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet C2 1/3 of Basin B3 8" Drain Basin 0.17 cfs 1.12 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.73 cfs 1.12 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet C3 1/3 of Basin B4 8" Drain Basin 0.17 cfs 1.33 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.73 cfs 1.33 cfs 0.00 cfs 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime Fort Collins, Colorado INLET CAPACITIES SUMMARY Private Area Drains and Pond Outlets Inlet Type2 Inlet and Area Drain Capacities 2-Year 100-Year Basins / Design Notes Notes: 1) Allowable flowrate calculated per Urban Drainage Inlet 5.01. 2) Drain basins are assumed to be a Nyloplast Drain Basin. Inlet Name:Inlet A2-1 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.10 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.20 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,962.56 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,962.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,962.66 0.10 0.30 0.10 10-Year Storm 0.16 4,962.72 0.20 0.38 0.20 100-Year Storm 0.20 4,962.76 0.28 0.42 0.28 0.30 4,962.86 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.33 4,962.89 0.60 0.54 0.54 Overflow to the east 0.40 4,962.96 0.79 0.59 0.59 0.50 4,963.06 1.11 0.66 0.66 0.60 4,963.16 1.46 0.73 0.73 0.70 4,963.26 1.84 0.78 0.78 0.80 4,963.36 2.25 0.84 0.84 0.83 4,963.39 2.38 0.85 0.85 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow Nyloplast 8" Dome 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Reduction Factor: AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Rim Elevation (ft): Open Area of Grate (ft2): 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet A3 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.20 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.45 Calc. By: Type of Grate:1.23 Diameter of Grate (ft):1.25 4,962.37 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,962.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 4,962.42 0.07 0.74 0.07 10-Year Storm 0.10 4,962.47 0.19 1.04 0.19 0.11 4,962.48 0.22 1.10 0.22 100-Year Storm 0.15 4,962.52 0.34 1.28 0.34 0.20 4,962.57 0.53 1.47 0.53 0.25 4,962.62 0.74 1.65 0.74 0.30 4,962.67 0.97 1.81 0.97 0.35 4,962.72 1.22 1.95 1.22 0.40 4,962.77 1.49 2.09 1.49 Overflow to the east 0.60 4,962.97 2.74 2.55 2.55 1.02 4,963.39 6.07 3.33 3.33 FG at Building Input Parameters Nyloplast 15" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet A5 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.20 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.45 Calc. By: Type of Grate:1.23 Diameter of Grate (ft):1.25 4,962.41 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,962.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,962.51 0.19 1.04 0.19 0.11 4,962.52 0.21 1.09 0.21 10-Year Storm 0.18 4,962.59 0.45 1.40 0.45 100-Year Storm 0.20 4,962.61 0.53 1.47 0.53 0.30 4,962.71 0.97 1.81 0.97 0.40 4,962.81 1.49 2.09 1.49 0.50 4,962.91 2.08 2.33 2.08 0.54 4,962.95 2.34 2.42 2.34 Overflow to the east 0.60 4,963.01 2.74 2.55 2.55 0.70 4,963.11 3.45 2.76 2.76 0.98 4,963.39 5.71 3.26 3.26 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 15" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet A7-1 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.10 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.23 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,962.48 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,962.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,962.58 0.10 0.30 0.10 10-Year Storm 0.18 4,962.66 0.24 0.40 0.24 100-Year Storm 0.20 4,962.68 0.28 0.42 0.28 0.30 4,962.78 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.40 4,962.88 0.79 0.59 0.59 0.43 4,962.91 0.89 0.62 0.62 Overflow to Inlet 6-2 0.50 4,962.98 1.11 0.66 0.66 0.60 4,963.08 1.46 0.73 0.73 0.70 4,963.18 1.84 0.78 0.78 0.80 4,963.28 2.25 0.84 0.84 0.91 4,963.39 2.73 0.89 0.89 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet A7-2 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.10 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.23 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,962.43 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,962.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,962.53 0.10 0.30 0.10 10-Year Storm 0.18 4,962.61 0.24 0.40 0.24 100-Year Storm 0.20 4,962.63 0.28 0.42 0.28 0.30 4,962.73 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.40 4,962.83 0.79 0.59 0.59 0.49 4,962.92 1.08 0.66 0.66 Overflow to Inlet 6-1 0.50 4,962.93 1.11 0.66 0.66 0.60 4,963.03 1.46 0.73 0.73 0.70 4,963.13 1.84 0.78 0.78 0.80 4,963.23 2.25 0.84 0.84 0.96 4,963.39 2.96 0.92 0.92 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet A8-1-1 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.02 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.05 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,966.44 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,966.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 4,966.47 0.02 0.16 0.02 10-Year Storm 0.06 4,966.50 0.05 0.23 0.05 100-Year Storm 0.10 4,966.54 0.10 0.30 0.10 0.20 4,966.64 0.28 0.42 0.28 0.27 4,966.71 0.44 0.49 0.44 Low Point in Sidewalk 0.30 4,966.74 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.40 4,966.84 0.79 0.59 0.59 0.50 4,966.94 1.11 0.66 0.66 0.60 4,967.04 1.46 0.73 0.73 0.70 4,967.14 1.84 0.78 0.78 0.80 4,967.24 2.25 0.84 0.84 Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet A8-1-2 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.02 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.05 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,966.43 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,966.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 4,966.46 0.02 0.16 0.02 10-Year Storm 0.06 4,966.49 0.05 0.23 0.05 100-Year Storm 0.10 4,966.53 0.10 0.30 0.10 0.20 4,966.63 0.28 0.42 0.28 0.30 4,966.73 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.40 4,966.83 0.79 0.59 0.59 0.50 4,966.93 1.11 0.66 0.66 0.54 4,966.97 1.25 0.69 0.69 Low Point in Sidewalk 0.60 4,967.03 1.46 0.73 0.73 0.70 4,967.13 1.84 0.78 0.78 0.80 4,967.23 2.25 0.84 0.84 Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet A8-2 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.15 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.42 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,965.67 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,965.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,965.77 0.10 0.30 0.10 0.13 4,965.80 0.15 0.34 0.15 10-Year Storm 0.20 4,965.87 0.28 0.42 0.28 0.26 4,965.93 0.42 0.48 0.42 100-Year Storm 0.30 4,965.97 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.34 4,966.01 0.62 0.55 0.55 Overflow to Inlet A8 0.40 4,966.07 0.79 0.59 0.59 0.50 4,966.17 1.11 0.66 0.66 0.60 4,966.27 1.46 0.73 0.73 0.70 4,966.37 1.84 0.78 0.78 0.84 4,966.51 2.42 0.86 0.86 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet A8-3 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.15 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.42 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,964.45 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,964.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,964.55 0.10 0.30 0.10 0.13 4,964.58 0.15 0.34 0.15 10-Year Storm 0.20 4,964.65 0.28 0.42 0.28 0.26 4,964.71 0.42 0.48 0.42 100-Year Storm 0.50 4,964.95 1.11 0.66 0.66 0.75 4,965.20 2.04 0.81 0.81 1.00 4,965.45 3.14 0.94 0.94 1.25 4,965.70 4.39 1.05 1.05 1.56 4,966.01 6.12 1.17 1.17 Overflow to Inlet A11 1.80 4,966.25 7.59 1.26 1.26 2.06 4,966.51 9.29 1.35 1.35 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet A9 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.30 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.83 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.79 Diameter of Grate (ft):1.00 4,964.71 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,964.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,964.81 0.15 0.67 0.15 0.16 4,964.87 0.30 0.84 0.30 10-Year Storm 0.20 4,964.91 0.42 0.94 0.42 0.30 4,965.01 0.77 1.16 0.77 0.32 4,965.03 0.85 1.19 0.85 100-Year Storm 0.40 4,965.11 1.19 1.33 1.19 0.50 4,965.21 1.67 1.49 1.49 0.76 4,965.47 3.12 1.84 1.84 Overflow to Inlet A11 1.00 4,965.71 4.71 2.11 2.11 1.25 4,965.96 6.59 2.36 2.36 1.80 4,966.51 11.38 2.83 2.83 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 12" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet A12 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.30 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.83 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.79 Diameter of Grate (ft):1.00 4,964.33 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,964.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,964.43 0.15 0.67 0.15 0.16 4,964.49 0.30 0.84 0.30 10-Year Storm 0.20 4,964.53 0.42 0.94 0.42 0.30 4,964.63 0.77 1.16 0.77 0.32 4,964.65 0.85 1.19 0.85 100-Year Storm 0.40 4,964.73 1.19 1.33 1.19 0.52 4,964.85 1.77 1.52 1.52 Overflow to the west 0.80 4,965.13 3.37 1.89 1.89 1.25 4,965.58 6.59 2.36 2.36 1.75 4,966.08 10.91 2.79 2.79 2.18 4,966.51 15.17 3.12 3.12 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 12" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet B4 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.20 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.50 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.79 Diameter of Grate (ft):1.00 4,961.24 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,961.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,961.34 0.15 0.67 0.15 0.12 4,961.36 0.20 0.73 0.20 10-Year Storm 0.20 4,961.44 0.42 0.94 0.42 0.23 4,961.47 0.52 1.01 0.52 100-Year Storm 0.30 4,961.54 0.77 1.16 0.77 0.40 4,961.64 1.19 1.33 1.19 0.50 4,961.74 1.67 1.49 1.49 0.63 4,961.87 2.36 1.68 1.68 Overflow to the east 0.75 4,961.99 3.06 1.83 1.83 1.00 4,962.24 4.71 2.11 2.11 1.25 4,962.49 6.59 2.36 2.36 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 12" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet B5 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.10 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.25 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,961.55 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,961.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,961.65 0.10 0.30 0.10 10-Year Storm 0.19 4,961.74 0.26 0.41 0.26 100-Year Storm 0.30 4,961.85 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.40 4,961.95 0.80 0.60 0.60 0.44 4,961.99 0.92 0.63 0.63 Overflow to Inlet B6 0.50 4,962.05 1.12 0.67 0.67 0.60 4,962.15 1.47 0.73 0.73 0.70 4,962.25 1.85 0.79 0.79 0.80 4,962.35 2.26 0.85 0.85 0.90 4,962.45 2.70 0.90 0.90 0.94 4,962.49 2.88 0.92 0.92 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet B6 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.10 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.25 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,961.54 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,961.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,961.64 0.10 0.30 0.10 10-Year Storm 0.19 4,961.73 0.26 0.41 0.26 100-Year Storm 0.30 4,961.84 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.40 4,961.94 0.80 0.60 0.60 0.45 4,961.99 0.95 0.64 0.64 Overflow to Inlet B6 0.51 4,962.05 1.15 0.68 0.68 0.61 4,962.15 1.50 0.74 0.74 0.71 4,962.25 1.89 0.80 0.80 0.81 4,962.35 2.30 0.85 0.85 0.91 4,962.45 2.74 0.90 0.90 0.95 4,962.49 2.92 0.92 0.92 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet B6-1 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.02 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.05 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,962.99 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,962.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 4,963.02 0.02 0.16 0.02 10-Year Storm 0.06 4,963.05 0.05 0.23 0.05 100-Year Storm 0.10 4,963.09 0.10 0.30 0.10 Overflow to Inlet B6 0.20 4,963.19 0.28 0.42 0.28 0.30 4,963.29 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.40 4,963.39 0.80 0.60 0.60 0.50 4,963.49 1.12 0.67 0.67 0.60 4,963.59 1.47 0.73 0.73 0.70 4,963.69 1.85 0.79 0.79 0.80 4,963.79 2.26 0.85 0.85 0.89 4,963.88 2.65 0.89 0.89 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet B7 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.20 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.50 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,961.54 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,961.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,961.64 0.10 0.30 0.10 0.16 4,961.70 0.20 0.38 0.20 10-Year Storm 0.20 4,961.74 0.28 0.42 0.28 0.30 4,961.84 0.52 0.52 0.52 100-Year Storm 0.40 4,961.94 0.80 0.60 0.60 0.45 4,961.99 0.95 0.64 0.64 Overflow to Inlet B6 0.50 4,962.04 1.12 0.67 0.67 0.60 4,962.14 1.47 0.73 0.73 0.70 4,962.24 1.85 0.79 0.79 0.80 4,962.34 2.26 0.85 0.85 0.95 4,962.49 2.92 0.92 0.92 FG at Building Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet C1 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.10 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.20 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,955.29 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,955.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,955.39 0.10 0.30 0.10 0.20 4,955.49 0.28 0.42 0.28 10-Year Storm 0.30 4,955.59 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.40 4,955.69 0.79 0.59 0.59 0.50 4,955.79 1.11 0.66 0.66 0.60 4,955.89 1.46 0.73 0.73 100-Year Storm 0.70 4,955.99 1.84 0.78 0.78 0.80 4,956.09 2.25 0.84 0.84 0.90 4,956.19 2.68 0.89 0.89 1.00 4,956.29 3.14 0.94 0.94 Overflow to the east Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet C2 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.10 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.20 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,957.75 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,957.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,957.85 0.10 0.30 0.10 0.20 4,957.95 0.28 0.42 0.28 10-Year Storm 0.30 4,958.05 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.40 4,958.15 0.79 0.59 0.59 0.50 4,958.25 1.11 0.66 0.66 0.60 4,958.35 1.46 0.73 0.73 100-Year Storm 0.75 4,958.50 2.04 0.81 0.81 0.90 4,958.65 2.68 0.89 0.89 1.05 4,958.80 3.38 0.96 0.96 1.20 4,958.95 4.13 1.03 1.03 1.43 4,959.18 5.37 1.12 1.12 Overflow to the east Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Inlet Name:Inlet C3 Project: 10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.10 Location: 100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.20 Calc. By: Type of Grate:0.35 Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,958.09 0.50 Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs)Notes 0.00 4,958.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4,958.19 0.10 0.30 0.10 0.20 4,958.29 0.28 0.42 0.28 10-Year Storm 0.30 4,958.39 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.40 4,958.49 0.79 0.59 0.59 0.50 4,958.59 1.11 0.66 0.66 0.60 4,958.69 1.46 0.73 0.73 100-Year Storm 0.75 4,958.84 2.04 0.81 0.81 1.00 4,959.09 3.14 0.94 0.94 1.25 4,959.34 4.39 1.05 1.05 1.50 4,959.59 5.77 1.15 1.15 2.01 4,960.10 8.95 1.33 1.33 Overflow to the east Depth vs. Flow AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime F. Wegert Governing Equations If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2): Rim Elevation (ft): Reduction Factor: 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50Discharge (cfs)Stage (ft) Stage -Discharge Curves Series1 Series2 At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = π * Dia. of grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of teh inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross - sectional area (A). 𝑃=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5 𝑃=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY OVERFLOW PATH AUTUMN R IDGE DR 64.33 64.716 6 . 0 1 65.736 4 . 8 5 66.01FFE=67.18 BLDG F 66.01 65. 6 7 64.51PROPOSED INLET PROPOSED INLET PROPOSED INLET PROPOSED INLET 66.17 UD UD UD MAIL FFE=64.06 BLDG E62.4862.4362.4862.9163.1663.776 2 . 7 8 64.87PROPOSED INLET PROPOSED INLET D UD UD UD T FFE=63.15 BLDG D 61. 6 6 61. 5 561.9961.5463.2661.9961.546 2 . 3 362.756 4 . 1 3 PROPOSED INLET PROPOSED INLET PROPOSED INLET 6 1 . 5 7 DRAINAGE OVERFLOW PATHS FORT COLLINS, CO FORTY-THREE PRIME E N G I N E E R N GI EHTRON R N NOVEMBER 14, 2018 D:\PROJECTS\1328-010\DWG\EXHIBITS\FORTY THREE PRIME-OVERFLOW PATH.DWG BUILDING F BUILDING E BUILDING D ( IN FEET ) 0 1 INCH = 30 FEET 30 30 RIPRAP & TURF REINFORCEMENT MATS Circular D or Da, Pipe Diameter (ft) H or Ha, Culvert Height (ft) W, Culvert Width (ft) Yt/D Q/D1.5 Q/D2.5 Yt/H Q/WH0.5 Underdrain 2.08 0.50 0.20 0.40 5.88 11.77 N/A N/A 2.00 11.77 0.52 4.20 Type M 5.00 2.00 1.5 Project: 1328-010 Urban Drainage pg MD-107 L= 1/(2tanq)* [At/Yt)-W] (ft) Yt, Tailwater Depth (ft) Culvert Parameters At=Q/V (ft) CALCULATIONS FOR RIPRAP PROTECTION AT PIPE OUTLETS Circular Pipe (Figure MD-21) Rectangular Pipe (Figure MD-22)Spec Width of Riprap (ft) 2*d50, Depth of Riprap (ft) for L/2 Froude Parameter Q/D2.5 Max 6.0 or Q/WH1.5 Max 8.0 Riprap Type (From Figure MD-21 or MD-22) By: F. Wegert CALCULATE Date: 10/20/2021 INPUT Storm Line/Culvert Label Design Discharge (cfs) Expansion Factor 1/(2tanq) (From Figure MD-23 or MD-24) OUTPUT Spec Length of Riprap (ft) Box Culvert See the following sheets from Urban Drainage Volume 1 (2011) for how riprap was sized. The current Mile High Flood Control criteria do not adequately how to size riprap. DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) MAJOR DRAINAGE 7.0 PROTECTION DOWNSTREAM OF PIPE OUTLETS This section is intended to address the use of riprap for erosion protection downstream of conduit and culvert outlets that are in-line with major drainageway channels. Inadequate protection at conduit and culvert outlets has long been a major problem. The designer should refer to Section 4.4 for additional information on major drainage applications utilizing riprap. In addition, the criteria and guidance in Section 4.4 may be useful in design of erosion protection for conduit outlets. The reader is referred to Section 7.0 of the HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES chapter of this Manual for information on rundowns, and to Section 3.0 of the HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES chapter for additional discussion on culvert outfall protection. Scour resulting from highly turbulent, rapidly decelerating flow is a common problem at conduit outlets. The riprap protection design protocol is suggested for conduit and culvert outlet Froude numbers up to 2.5 (i.e., Froude parameters Q/d02.5 or Q/WH1.5 up to 14 ft0.5/sec) where the channel and conduit slopes are parallel with the channel gradient and the conduit outlet invert is flush with the riprap channel protection. Here, Q is the discharge in cfs, d0 is the diameter of a circular conduit in feet and W and H are the width and height, respectively, of a rectangular conduit in feet. 7.1 Configuration of Riprap Protection Figure MD-25 illustrates typical riprap protection of culverts and major drainageway conduit outlets. The additional thickness of the riprap just downstream from the outlet is to assure protection from flow conditions that might precipitate rock movement in this region. 7.2 Required Rock Size The required rock size may be selected from Figure MD-21 for circular conduits and from Figure MD-22 for rectangular conduits. Figure MD-21 is valid for Q/Dc2.5 of 6 or less and Figure MD-22 is valid for Q/WH1.5 of 8.0 or less. The parameters in these two figures are: 1. Q/D1.5 or Q/WH0.5 in which Q is the design discharge in cfs, Dc is the diameter of a circular conduit in feet, and W and H are the width and height of a rectangular conduit in feet. 2. Yt/Dc or Yt/H in which Yt is the tailwater depth in feet, Dc is the diameter of a circular conduit in feet, and H is the height of a rectangular conduit in feet. In cases where Yt is unknown or a hydraulic jump is suspected downstream of the outlet, use Yt/Dt = Yt/H = 0.40 when using Figures MD-21 and MD-22. Rev. 04/2008 MD-103 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District This is from UDFCD Vol 1. From 2011 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) MAJOR DRAINAGE Figure MD-21—Riprap Erosion Protection at Circular Conduit Outlet Valid for Q/D2.5 ≤ 6.0 Rev. 04/2008 MD-107 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) MAJOR DRAINAGE Figure MD-23—Expansion Factor for Circular Conduits Rev. 04/2008 MD-109 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) MAJOR DRAINAGE Table MD-7—Classification and Gradation of Ordinary Riprap Riprap Designation % Smaller Than Given Size by Weight Intermediate Rock Dimensions (inches) d50 (inches)* Type VL 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 12 9 6 2 6** Type L 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 15 12 9 3 9** Type M 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 21 18 12 4 12** Type H 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 30 24 18 6 18 Type VH 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 42 33 24 9 24 * d50 = mean particle size (intermediate dimension) by weight. ** Mix VL, L and M riprap with 35% topsoil (by volume) and bury it with 4 to 6 inches of topsoil, all vibration compacted, and revegetate. Basic requirements for riprap stone are as follows: • Rock shall be hard, durable, angular in shape, and free from cracks, overburden, shale, and organic matter. • Neither breadth nor thickness of a single stone should be less than one-third its length, and rounded stone should be avoided. • The rock should sustain a loss of not more than 40% after 500 revolutions in an abrasion test (Los Angeles machine⎯ASTM C-535-69) and should sustain a loss of not more than 10% after 12 cycles of freezing and thawing (AASHTO test 103 for ledge rock procedure A). • Rock having a minimum specific gravity of 2.65 is preferred; however, in no case should rock have a specific gravity less than 2.50. 4.4.1.2 Grouted Boulders Table MD-8 provides the classification and size requirements for boulders. When grouted boulders are used, they provide a relatively impervious channel lining which is less subject to vandalism than ordinary riprap. Grouted boulders require less routine maintenance by reducing silt and trash accumulation and Rev. 04/2008 MD-61 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District DESCRIPTION The permanent erosion control blanket shall be a machine-produced mat of 100% UV stable polypropylene fiber. The matting shall be of consistent thickness with the synthetic fibers evenly distributed over the entire area of the mat. The matting shall be covered on the top side with black heavyweight UV-stabilized polypropylene netting having ultraviolet additives to delay breakdown and an approximate 0.50 x 0.50 inch (1.27 x 1.27 cm) mesh. The bottom net shall also be UV- stabilized polypropylene with a 0.63 x 0.63 inch (1.57 x 1.57 cm) mesh size. The blanket shall be sewn together on 1.5 inch (3.81 cm) centers with non-degradable thread. All mats shall be manufactured with a colored thread stitched along both outer edges as an overlap guide for adjacent mats. The P300 shall meet Type 5A, 5B, specification requirements established by the Erosion Control Technology Council (ECTC) and Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) FP-03 Section 713.18 Material Content Matrix 100% UV stable Polypropylene Fiber 0.7 lbs/sq yd (0.38 kg/sm) Netting Top: UV-stabilized Polypropylene Bottom: UV-stabilized Polypropylene 5 lbs/1000 sq ft (24.4 g/sm) 3 lbs/1000 sq ft (14.7 g/sm) Thread Polypropylene, UV stable Standard Roll Sizes Width 6.67 ft (2.03 m)8 ft (2.44 m) Length 108 ft (32.92 m) 112 ft (35.14 m) Weight ± 10%61 lbs (27.66 kg) 76.25 lbs (34.59 kg) Area 80 sq yd (66.0 sm) 100 sq yd (83.61 sm) Slope Design Data: C Factors Slope Gradients (S) Slope Length (L)≤ 3:1 3:1 – 2.1 ≥ 2:1 ≤ 20 ft (6 m)0.001 0.029 0.082 20-50 ft 0.036 0.060 0.086 ≥ 50 ft (15.2 m)0.070 0.090 0.110 Index Property Test Method Typical Thickness ASTM D6525 0.47 in. (11.94 mm) Resiliency ASTM D6524 91.5% Density ASTM D792 0.916 g/cm3 Mass/Unit Area ASTM 6566 13.03 oz/sy (443 g/m2) UV Stability ASTM D4355/ 1000 hr 90% Porosity ECTC Guidelines 95.89% Stiffness ASTM D1388 0.94 in-lb (1085378 mg-cm) Light Penetration ASTM D6567 17.9% Tensile Strength - MD ASTM D6818 438 lbs/ft (6.49 kN/m) Elongation - MD ASTM D6818 28.1% Tensile Strength - TD ASTM D6818 291.9 lbs/ft (4.32 kN/m) Elongation - TD ASTM D6818 26.7% Biomass Improvement ASTM D7322 497% Design Permissible Shear Stress Short Duration Long Duration Phase 1: Unvegetated 3.0 psf (144 Pa)2.0 psf (96 Pa) Phase 2: Partially Veg.8.0 psf (383 Pa)8.0 psf (383 Pa) Phase 3: Fully Veg.8.0 psf (383 Pa)8.0 PSF (383 Pa) Unvegetated Velocity 9.0 fps (2.7 m/s) Vegetaged Velocity 16 fps (4.9 m/s) Roughness Coefficients – Unveg. Flow Depth Manning’s n ≤ 0.50 ft (0.15 m)0.034 0.50 – 2.0 ft 0.034-0.020 ≥ 2.0 ft (0.60 m)0.020 Specification Sheet EroNet™ P300® Permanent Erosion Control Blanket EC_RMX_MPDS_P300_1.19 ©2019, North American Green is a registered trademark from Western Green. Certain products and/or applications described or illustrated herein are protected under one or more U.S. patents. Other U.S. patents are pending, and certain foreign patents and patent applications may also exist.Trademark rights also apply as indicated herein. Final determination of the suitability of any information or material for the use contemplated, and its manner of use, is the sole responsibility of the user. Printed in the U.S.A. Western Green 4609 E. Boonville-New Harmony Rd. Evansville, IN 47725 nagreen.com 800-772-2040 North American Green 5401 St. Wendel-Cynthiana Rd. Poseyville, Indiana 47633 Tel. 800.772.2040 >Fax 812.867.0247 www.nagreen.com ECMDS v7.0 SLOPE ANALYSIS > > > Rain Garden Spillway Country United States State/Region Colorado City Ft. Collins Annual R Factor 30.00 Adjusted R Factor 0.00 Total Slope Length 46 Protection Type Permanent Protection Period 0 Beginning Month Slope Gradient (H:1) 7 Soil Type Clay Loam K Factor 0.21 Reach 1Start: 0ft End: 46 ftVegetation Type: >95% P300 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.25 in >10 STABLE D P550 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.25 in 0 UNSTABLE D C350 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.25 in >10 STABLE D SC250 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.25 in >10 STABLE D W3000 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.25 in >10 STABLE B TMax 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.25 in >10 STABLE B Estb. Veg. 0.1 in 0.0 in N/A in N/A in 0.03 in >10 STABLE -- P300 Reinf. Veg 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.03 in >10 STABLE D SC250 Reinf. Veg 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.03 in >10 STABLE D C350 Reinf. Veg 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.03 in >10 STABLE D P550 Reinf. Veg 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.1 in 0.0 in 0.03 in 0 UNSTABLE D Material ASL bare ASL mat MSL bare MSL mat Soil Loss Tolerance SF Remarks Staple / App Rate ECMDS 7.0 https://ecmds.com/project/148940/slope-analysis/207531/show 1 of 1 7/26/2021, 11:06 AM NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX APPENDIX C WATER QUALITY/LID COMPUTATIONS RAIN GARDEN, WATER QUALITY, & LID CALCUALTIONS Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1.Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =68.0 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.680 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.21 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area =107,107 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =1,901 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 =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 =1457 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =1904 sq ft E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =1904 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=1,904 cu ft (VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth) 3.Growing Media 4.Underdrain System A) Are underdrains provided? B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =N/A cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =N/A in Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) F. Wegert Northern Engineering October 20, 2021 Forty-Three Prime Fort Collins, CO UD-BMP (Version 3.06, November 2016) Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO UD-BMP_v3.06_Double Rain Garden WQVol-FSW.xlsm, RG 10/18/2021, 3:53 PM 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) F. Wegert Northern Engineering October 20, 2021 Forty-Three Prime 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 UD-BMP_v3.06_Double Rain Garden WQVol-FSW.xlsm, RG 10/18/2021, 3:53 PM Project: Date: Pond No.: 4,959.87 1,901.00 cu. ft. 4,960.87 4,960.87 1,904.00 cu. ft.1.00 ft. 4,961.87 Max. Elev.Min. Elev.cu. ft.acre ft cu. ft.acre ft 4,959.87 N/A 1,904.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,960.37 4,959.87 1,904.00 0.50 952.00 0.02 952.00 0.02 4,960.87 4,960.37 1,904.00 0.50 952.00 0.02 1,904.00 0.04 4,961.37 4,960.87 1,904.00 0.50 952.00 0.02 2,856.00 0.07 4,961.87 4,961.37 1,904.00 0.50 952.00 0.02 3,808.00 0.09 STAGE STORAGE CURVE Contour Contour Surface Area (ft2) Depth (ft) Incremental Volume Cummalitive Volume Pond Stage Storage Curve 1328-010 Fort Collins, Colorado F. Wegert Elev at WQ Volume: Forty-Three Prime October 20, 2021 Pond Outlet and Volume Data Bottom Elevation:Water Quality Volume: Crest of Pond Elev.: Volume at Spillway: Spillway Elevation: Double Rain Garden Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By:Double Rain Garden Water Quality Depth: NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1.Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =31.4 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.314 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.12 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area =11,749 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =122 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 =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 =74 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =74 sq ft E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =267 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=171 cu ft (VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth) 3.Growing Media 4.Underdrain System A) Are underdrains provided? B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =N/A cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =N/A in Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) F. Wegert Northern Engineering October 20, 2021 Forty-Three Prime-Rain Garden C1 Fort Collins, CO UD-BMP (Version 3.06, November 2016) Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO UD-BMP_v3.06_Rain Garden-C1 WQVol.xlsm, RG 10/18/2021, 3:54 PM 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) F. Wegert Northern Engineering October 20, 2021 Forty-Three Prime-Rain Garden C1 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 UD-BMP_v3.06_Rain Garden-C1 WQVol.xlsm, RG 10/18/2021, 3:54 PM Project: Date: Pond No.: 4,955.29 122.00 cu. ft. 4,956.29 4,956.07 170.75 cu. ft.0.78 ft. 4,956.29 Max. Elev.Min. Elev.cu. ft.acre ft cu. ft.acre ft 4,955.29 N/A 74.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,955.79 4,955.29 171.00 0.50 61.25 0.00 61.25 0.00 4,956.29 4,955.79 267.00 0.50 109.50 0.00 170.75 0.00 Crest of Pond Elev.: Volume at Spillway: Spillway Elevation: C1 Rain Garden Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By:C1 Rain Garden Water Quality Depth: STAGE STORAGE CURVE Contour Contour Surface Area (ft2) Depth (ft) Incremental Volume Cummalitive Volume Pond Stage Storage Curve 1328-010 Fort Collins, Colorado F. Wegert Elev at WQ Volume: Forty-Three Prime October 20, 2021 Pond Outlet and Volume Data Bottom Elevation:Water Quality Volume: NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1.Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =45.2 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.452 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 =11,749 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =152 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 =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 =106 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =95 sq ft ACTUAL FLAT AREA < MINIMUM FLAT AREA E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =306 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=200 cu ft (VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth) 3.Growing Media 4.Underdrain System A) Are underdrains provided? B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =N/A cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =N/A in Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) F. Wegert Northern Engineering October 20, 2021 Forty-Three Prime - Rain Garden C2 Fort Collins, CO UD-BMP (Version 3.06, November 2016) Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO UD-BMP_v3.06_Rain Garden-C2 WQVol.xlsm, RG 10/18/2021, 3:55 PM 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) F. Wegert Northern Engineering October 20, 2021 Forty-Three Prime - Rain Garden C2 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 UD-BMP_v3.06_Rain Garden-C2 WQVol.xlsm, RG 10/18/2021, 3:55 PM Project: Date: Pond No.: 4,957.75 152.00 cu. ft. 4,958.75 4,958.56 200.50 cu. ft.0.81 ft. 4,958.75 Max. Elev.Min. Elev.cu. ft.acre ft cu. ft.acre ft 4,957.75 N/A 95.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,958.25 4,957.75 200.50 0.50 73.88 0.00 73.88 0.00 4,958.75 4,958.25 306.00 0.50 126.63 0.00 200.50 0.00 STAGE STORAGE CURVE Contour Contour Surface Area (ft2) Depth (ft) Incremental Volume Cummalitive Volume Pond Stage Storage Curve 1328-010 Fort Collins, Colorado F. Wegert Elev at WQ Volume: Forty-Three Prime October 20, 2021 Pond Outlet and Volume Data Bottom Elevation:Water Quality Volume: Crest of Pond Elev.: Volume at Spillway: Spillway Elevation: C2 Rain Garden Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By:C2 Rain Garden Water Quality Depth: NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1.Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =31.5 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.315 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.12 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area =11,749 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =122 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 =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 =74 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =92 sq ft E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =301 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=197 cu ft (VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth) 3.Growing Media 4.Underdrain System A) Are underdrains provided? B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =N/A cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =N/A in Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) F. Wegert Northern Engineering October 20, 2021 Forty-Three Prime - Rain Garden C3 Fort Collins, CO UD-BMP (Version 3.06, November 2016) Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO UD-BMP_v3.06_Rain Garden-C3 WQVol.xlsm, RG 10/18/2021, 3:56 PM 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) F. Wegert Northern Engineering October 20, 2021 Forty-Three Prime - Rain Garden C3 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 UD-BMP_v3.06_Rain Garden-C3 WQVol.xlsm, RG 10/18/2021, 3:56 PM Project: Date: Pond No.: 4,958.09 122.00 cu. ft. 4,959.09 4,958.79 196.50 cu. ft.0.70 ft. 4,959.09 Max. Elev.Min. Elev.cu. ft.acre ft cu. ft.acre ft 4,958.09 N/A 92.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,958.59 4,958.09 196.50 0.50 72.13 0.00 72.13 0.00 4,959.09 4,958.59 301.00 0.50 124.38 0.00 196.50 0.00 Crest of Pond Elev.: Volume at Spillway: Spillway Elevation: C3 Rain Garden Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By:C3 Rain Garden Water Quality Depth: STAGE STORAGE CURVE Contour Contour Surface Area (ft2) Depth (ft) Incremental Volume Cummalitive Volume Pond Stage Storage Curve 1328-010 Fort Collins, Colorado F. Wegert Elev at WQ Volume: Forty-Three Prime October 20, 2021 Pond Outlet and Volume Data Bottom Elevation:Water Quality Volume: NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 4YD4YD4YD4YDCCTFESFESFESFESLIDLIDLID/ / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / /DDDDDDDDRAIN GARDENREQUIRED VOLUME: 1,873 CU. FT.PROVIDED VOLUME: 1,904 CU. FT.TREATMENT AREA: 76,305 SFRAIN GARDENREQUIRED VOLUME: 122 CU. FT.PROVIDED VOLUME: 197 CU. FT.TREATMENT AREA: 2,798 SFRAIN GARDENREQUIRED VOLUME: 152 CU. FT.PROVIDED VOLUME: 200 CU. FT.TREATMENT AREA: 7,522 SFRAIN GARDENREQUIRED VOLUME: 122 CU. FT.PROVIDED VOLUME: 171 CU. FT.TREATMENT AREA: 1,773 SFFORTY-THREE PRIMESHEET NO:D:\PROJECTS\1328-010\DWG\DRNG\1328-010_LID.DWG301 N. Howes Street, Suite 100Fort Collins, Colorado 80521ENGINEERNGIEHTRONRNPHONE: 970.221.4158www.northernengineering.comDRAWING REFERENCE:LID TREATMENT EXHIBITF. Wegert1 in = 60 ftOct 10, 2021LID-1DRAWN BY:SCALE:ISSUED:( IN FEET )01 INCH = 60 FEET6060LEGENDUNTREATED AREARAIN GARDEN AREARAIN GARDENTREATMENT AREAFORTY-THREE PRIME ON-SITE LID TREATMENTProject SummaryTotal Impervious Area 96,849sfTarget Treatment Percentage75%Minimum Area to be Treated by LID measures 72,637sfRain GardenMain Rain Gardens78,285sfNorth Rain Gardens12,093sfTotal Rain Garden Treatment Area90,377sfTotal Treatment Area90,377sfPercent Total Project Area Treated93.3%NORTH RAIN GARDEN AREANORTH RAIN GARDENTREATMENT AREA PAVER PARKING AREA Project: 43 Prime By: A. Reese REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS: BASIN AREA (acres)=1.620 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT =80.00 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO =0.8000 <-- CALCULATED Drain Time (hrs)12 <-- INPUT Drain Time Coefficient 0.8 <-- CALCULATED from Figure Table 3-2 WQCV (watershed inches) =0.263 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (ac-ft) =0.035 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 Adjusted WQCV (ac-ft) =0.0426 <-- CALCULATED (20% Sedimentation Accumulation) Adjusted WQCV (cu-ft) =1853 <-- CALCULATED (20% Sedimentation Accumulation) WATER QUALITY CONTROL STRUCTURE PLATE July 28, 2021 CONVEYANCE OF 100-STORM THROUGH DOUBLE RAIN GARDENS Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Oct 18 2021 Capacity of 1 Barrel at 7.5-ft Wide Sidewalk Culvert for 100-Year Storm Rectangular Bottom Width (ft) = 3.50 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 60.87 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.012 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 6.45 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.28 Q (cfs) = 6.450 Area (sqft) = 0.98 Velocity (ft/s) = 6.58 Wetted Perim (ft) = 4.06 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.48 Top Width (ft) = 3.50 EGL (ft) = 0.95 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 60.00 -0.87 60.50 -0.37 61.00 0.13 61.50 0.63 62.00 1.13 Reach (ft) Note: Above calculation is for 2 barrel at the 7.5 ft wide sidewalk culvert. There are two barrels, and each barrel is 3.5 ft wide and 0.5 ft in depth. Therefore, the total capacity at the 7.5 ft sidewalk culvert is 6.45 cfs X 2 barrels = 12.9 cfs. Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Oct 18 2021 Conveyance of 100-Year Storm Through Double Rain Garden Rectangular Bottom Width (ft) = 15.00 Total Depth (ft) = 1.00 Invert Elev (ft) = 4960.87 Slope (%) = 0.10 N-Value = 0.012 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 12.90 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.42 Q (cfs) = 12.90 Area (sqft) = 6.30 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.05 Wetted Perim (ft) = 15.84 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.29 Top Width (ft) = 15.00 EGL (ft) = 0.49 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 4960.00 -0.87 4960.50 -0.37 4961.00 0.13 4961.50 0.63 4962.00 1.13 Reach (ft) Project Number: Project Name: Project Location: Pond No:Calc. By:F. Wegert Orifice Dia (in):12 Orifice Area (sf):0.79 Orifice invert (ft):4,959.87 Orifice Coefficient:0.65 Elevation Stage (ft)Velocity (ft/s)Flow Rate (cfs)Comments 4,959.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,959.97 0.10 1.65 1.29 4,960.07 0.20 2.33 1.83 4,960.17 0.30 2.86 2.24 4,960.27 0.40 3.30 2.59 4,960.37 0.50 3.69 2.90 4,960.47 0.60 4.04 3.17 4,960.57 0.70 4.36 3.43 4,960.67 0.80 4.66 3.66 4,960.77 0.90 4.95 3.88 4,960.87 1.00 5.21 4.09 <- Spillway/WQV 4,960.97 1.10 5.47 4.29 4,961.07 1.20 5.71 4.49 4,961.17 1.30 5.94 4.67 4,961.27 1.40 6.17 4.85 4,961.37 1.50 6.39 5.02 4,961.47 1.60 6.59 5.18 4,961.57 1.70 6.80 5.34 4,961.67 1.80 7.00 5.49 4,961.77 1.90 7.19 5.64 4,961.87 2.00 7.37 5.79 4,961.97 2.10 7.56 5.93 4,962.07 2.20 7.73 6.07 4,962.17 2.30 7.91 6.21 4,962.27 2.40 8.08 6.34 4,962.37 2.50 8.24 6.47 <-100 Year Elev. 4,962.47 2.60 8.41 6.60 4,962.57 2.70 8.57 6.73 4,962.67 2.80 8.72 6.85 4,962.77 2.90 8.88 6.97 4,962.80 2.93 8.92 7.01 <-Top of Pond Orifice Rating Curve ORIFICE RATING CURVE 1328-010 Forty-Three Prime Fort Collins, Colorado Double Rain Garden Orifice Design Data 12" Culverts at Double Rain Garden Note: Assume 6.45 cfs for 100-Year Storm at each culvert. 6.45 cfs x 2 culverts = 12.9 cfs. NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FORT COLLINS | GREELEY Rain Garden Culverts - 100-Year Rain Garden Culverts - 100-Year Note: 2 barrels are assumed. Rain Garden Culverts - 100-Year Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Oct 18 2021 Spillway for Double Rain Garden Rectangular Bottom Width (ft) = 13.00 Total Depth (ft) = 1.00 Invert Elev (ft) = 4960.87 Slope (%) = 0.10 N-Value = 0.012 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 12.90 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.46 Q (cfs) = 12.90 Area (sqft) = 5.98 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.16 Wetted Perim (ft) = 13.92 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.32 Top Width (ft) = 13.00 EGL (ft) = 0.53 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 4960.00 -0.87 4960.50 -0.37 4961.00 0.13 4961.50 0.63 4962.00 1.13 Reach (ft) NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX APPENDIX D EROSION CONTROL REPORT NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY EROSION CONTROL REPORT EROSION CONTROL REPORT A comprehensive Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (along with associated details) has been included with the final construction drawings. It should be noted; however, any such Erosion and Sediment Control Plan serves only as a general guide to the Contractor. Staging and/or phasing of the BMPs depicted, and additional or different BMPs from those included may be necessary during construction, or as required by the authorities having jurisdiction. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure erosion control measures are properly maintained and followed. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is intended to be a living document, constantly adapting to site conditions and needs. The Contractor shall update the location of BMPs as they are installed, removed, or modified in conjunction with construction activities. It is imperative to appropriately reflect the current site conditions at all times. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall address both temporary measures to be implemented during construction, as well as permanent erosion control protection. Best Management Practices from the Volume 3, Chapter 7 – Construction BMPs will be utilized. Measures may include, but are not limited to, silt fencing and/or wattles along the disturbed perimeter, gutter protection in the adjacent roadways, and inlet protection at existing and proposed storm inlets. Vehicle tracking control pads, spill containment and clean-up procedures, designated concrete washout areas, dumpsters, and job site restrooms shall also be provided by the Contractor. Grading and Erosion Control Notes can be found on Sheet CS2 of the Utility Plans. The Final Utility Plans will also contain a full-size Erosion Control Plan as well as a separate sheet dedicated to Erosion Control Details. In addition to this report and the referenced plan sheets, the Contractor shall be aware of, and adhere to, the applicable requirements outlined in any existing Development Agreement(s) of record, as well as the Development Agreement, to be recorded prior to issuance of the Development Construction Permit. Also, the Site Contractor for this project may be required to secure a Stormwater Construction General Permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Water Quality Control Division – Stormwater Program, before commencing any earth disturbing activities. Prior to securing said permit, the Site Contractor shall develop a comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) pursuant to CDPHE requirements and guidelines. The SWMP will further describe and document the ongoing activities, inspections, and maintenance of construction BMPs. NNORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX APPENDIX E USDA SOILS REPORT United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Larimer County Area, ColoradoNatural Resources Conservation Service December 20, 2021 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map..................................................................................................................8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Larimer County Area, Colorado......................................................................13 27—Cushman fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes................................13 54—Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes..........................................................14 90—Renohill clay loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes............................................15 Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................17 Soil Properties and Qualities..............................................................................17 Soil Erosion Factors........................................................................................17 K Factor, Whole Soil....................................................................................17 Wind Erodibility Group.................................................................................20 Soil Qualities and Features.............................................................................23 Hydrologic Soil Group.................................................................................23 References............................................................................................................28 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report 6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 44824904482520448255044825804482610448264044826704482490448252044825504482580448261044826404482670494530 494560 494590 494620 494650 494680 494710 494740 494770 494800 494530 494560 494590 494620 494650 494680 494710 494740 494770 494800 40° 29' 41'' N 105° 3' 53'' W40° 29' 41'' N105° 3' 40'' W40° 29' 34'' N 105° 3' 53'' W40° 29' 34'' N 105° 3' 40'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 20 40 80 120 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,370 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 2, 2021 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 11, 2018—Aug 12, 2018 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 10 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 27 Cushman fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes 2.2 26.1% 54 Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes 0.1 1.1% 90 Renohill clay loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes 6.2 72.8% Totals for Area of Interest 8.5 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The Custom Soil Resource Report 11 delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report 12 Larimer County Area, Colorado 27—Cushman fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpvz Elevation: 4,800 to 5,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Cushman and similar soils:90 percent Minor components:10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Cushman Setting Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Material weathered from sandstone and shale Typical profile H1 - 0 to 2 inches: fine sandy loam H2 - 2 to 13 inches: clay loam H3 - 13 to 31 inches: loam H4 - 31 to 35 inches: weathered bedrock Properties and qualities Slope:3 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature:20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:10 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R067BZ902CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Stoneham Percent of map unit:10 percent Custom Soil Resource Report 13 Ecological site:R067BZ902CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No 54—Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpwy Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Kim and similar soils:90 percent Minor components:10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kim Setting Landform:Fans Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Mixed alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: loam H2 - 7 to 60 inches: clay loam Properties and qualities Slope:3 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R067BZ902CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 14 Minor Components Thedalund Percent of map unit:4 percent Ecological site:R067BZ902CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Stoneham Percent of map unit:3 percent Ecological site:R067BZ902CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Fort collins Percent of map unit:2 percent Ecological site:R067BZ008CO - Loamy Slopes Hydric soil rating: No Aquic haplustolls Percent of map unit:1 percent Landform:Swales Hydric soil rating: Yes 90—Renohill clay loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpy7 Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Renohill and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Renohill Setting Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Material weathered from sandstone and shale Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: clay loam H2 - 7 to 19 inches: clay H3 - 19 to 29 inches: clay loam H4 - 29 to 33 inches: unweathered bedrock Custom Soil Resource Report 15 Properties and qualities Slope:3 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature:20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R067BZ008CO - Loamy Slopes Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Midway Percent of map unit:6 percent Ecological site:R067BY045CO - Shaly Plains Hydric soil rating: No Heldt Percent of map unit:5 percent Ecological site:R067BZ902CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Ulm Percent of map unit:4 percent Ecological site:R067BY042CO - Clayey Plains Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 16 Soil Information for All Uses Soil Properties and Qualities The Soil Properties and Qualities section includes various soil properties and qualities displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in the selected area of interest. A single value or rating for each map unit is generated by aggregating the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This aggregation process is defined for each property or quality. Soil Erosion Factors Soil Erosion Factors are soil properties and interpretations used in evaluating the soil for potential erosion. Example soil erosion factors can include K factor for the whole soil or on a rock free basis, T factor, wind erodibility group and wind erodibility index. K Factor, Whole Soil Erosion factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by water. Factor K is one of six factors used in the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) to predict the average annual rate of soil loss by sheet and rill erosion in tons per acre per year. The estimates are based primarily on percentage of silt, sand, and organic matter and on soil structure and saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat). Values of K range from 0.02 to 0.69. Other factors being equal, the higher the value, the more susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill erosion by water. "Erosion factor Kw (whole soil)" indicates the erodibility of the whole soil. The estimates are modified by the presence of rock fragments. Factor K does not apply to organic horizons and is not reported for those layers. 17 18 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—K Factor, Whole Soil 44824904482520448255044825804482610448264044826704482490448252044825504482580448261044826404482670494530 494560 494590 494620 494650 494680 494710 494740 494770 494800 494530 494560 494590 494620 494650 494680 494710 494740 494770 494800 40° 29' 41'' N 105° 3' 53'' W40° 29' 41'' N105° 3' 40'' W40° 29' 34'' N 105° 3' 53'' W40° 29' 34'' N 105° 3' 40'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 20 40 80 120 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,370 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons .02 .05 .10 .15 .17 .20 .24 .28 .32 .37 .43 .49 .55 .64 Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines .02 .05 .10 .15 .17 .20 .24 .28 .32 .37 .43 .49 .55 .64 Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points .02 .05 .10 .15 .17 .20 .24 .28 .32 .37 .43 .49 .55 .64 Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 2, 2021 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 11, 2018—Aug 12, 2018 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 19 Table—K Factor, Whole Soil Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 27 Cushman fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes .20 2.2 26.1% 54 Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes .28 0.1 1.1% 90 Renohill clay loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes .24 6.2 72.8% Totals for Area of Interest 8.5 100.0% Rating Options—K Factor, Whole Soil Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Layer Options (Horizon Aggregation Method): Surface Layer (Not applicable) Wind Erodibility Group A wind erodibility group (WEG) consists of soils that have similar properties affecting their susceptibility to wind erosion in cultivated areas. The soils assigned to group 1 are the most susceptible to wind erosion, and those assigned to group 8 are the least susceptible. Custom Soil Resource Report 20 21 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Wind Erodibility Group 44824904482520448255044825804482610448264044826704482490448252044825504482580448261044826404482670494530 494560 494590 494620 494650 494680 494710 494740 494770 494800 494530 494560 494590 494620 494650 494680 494710 494740 494770 494800 40° 29' 41'' N 105° 3' 53'' W40° 29' 41'' N105° 3' 40'' W40° 29' 34'' N 105° 3' 53'' W40° 29' 34'' N 105° 3' 40'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 20 40 80 120 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,370 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons 1 2 3 4 4L 5 6 7 8 Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines 1 2 3 4 4L 5 6 7 8 Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points 1 2 3 4 4L 5 6 7 8 Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 2, 2021 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 11, 2018—Aug 12, 2018 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 22 Table—Wind Erodibility Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 27 Cushman fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes 3 2.2 26.1% 54 Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes 4L 0.1 1.1% 90 Renohill clay loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes 6 6.2 72.8% Totals for Area of Interest 8.5 100.0% Rating Options—Wind Erodibility Group Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Lower Soil Qualities and Features Soil qualities are behavior and performance attributes that are not directly measured, but are inferred from observations of dynamic conditions and from soil properties. Example soil qualities include natural drainage, and frost action. Soil features are attributes that are not directly part of the soil. Example soil features include slope and depth to restrictive layer. These features can greatly impact the use and management of the soil. Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained Custom Soil Resource Report 23 soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Custom Soil Resource Report 24 25 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Hydrologic Soil Group 44824904482520448255044825804482610448264044826704482490448252044825504482580448261044826404482670494530 494560 494590 494620 494650 494680 494710 494740 494770 494800 494530 494560 494590 494620 494650 494680 494710 494740 494770 494800 40° 29' 41'' N 105° 3' 53'' W40° 29' 41'' N105° 3' 40'' W40° 29' 34'' N 105° 3' 53'' W40° 29' 34'' N 105° 3' 40'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 20 40 80 120 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,370 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 2, 2021 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 11, 2018—Aug 12, 2018 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 26 Table—Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 27 Cushman fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes C 2.2 26.1% 54 Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes B 0.1 1.1% 90 Renohill clay loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes D 6.2 72.8% Totals for Area of Interest 8.5 100.0% Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Custom Soil Resource Report 27 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 28 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report 29 NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX APPENDIX F FEMA FIRMETTE USGS The National Map: Orthoimagery. Data refreshed October 2017. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250Feet Ü105°4'5.57"W 40°29'50.10"N 105°3'28.11"W 40°29'22.74"N SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOODHAZARD AR EAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)Zone A, V, A99With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Regulator y Floodway 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areasof 1% annual chance flood with averagedepth less than one foot or with drainageareas of less than one square mile Zone X Future Conditions 1% AnnualChance Flood Hazard Zone XArea with Reduced Flood Risk due toLevee. See Notes.Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D NO SCREE N Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D Channel, Culver t, or Storm SewerLevee, Dike, or Floodwall Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance17.5 Water Surface ElevationCoastal Transect Coastal Transect BaselineProfile BaselineHydrographic Feature Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Effective LOMRs Limit of StudyJurisdiction Boundar y 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 theauthoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This mapwas exported on 9/26/2018 at 10:31:24 AM and does notreflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date andtime. The NFHL and effective information may change orbecome superseded by new data over time. This map image is void if the one or more of the following mapelements 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 forunmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used forregulatory purposes. Legend OTHER AREAS OFFLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERALSTRUCTURES OTHERFEATURES MAP PANELS 8 1:6,000 B 20.2 The pin displayed on the map is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative proper ty location. NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX APPENDIX G EXCERPTS FROM PREVIOUS REPORTS This unofficial copy was downloaded on Aug-14-2018 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact Engineering Office 281 North College Fort Collins, CO 80521 USA This unofficial copy was downloaded on Aug-14-2018 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.comFor additional information or an official copy, please contact Engineering Office 281 North College Fort Collins, CO 80521 USA NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORTY-THREE PRIME FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX MAP POCKET DR1 – DRAINAGE EXHIBIT ST STSTSTC C T V.P.FE S FE SFE SV.P. V.P.FE SLID LID LID / / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / /D D D D D D D D221 220 406 224 221 225 224 0.08 AC 221 2.18 AC 225 1.30 AC 212 0.68 AC 220 0.52 AC 406 0.11 AC EAST TRILBY ROAD CAND L E W O O D D RI V E BRITTANY DRIVEAUTUMN RIDGE DRIVEEXISTING STORM DRAINEXISTING STORM DRAIN EXISTING STORM DRAIN EXISTING STORM DRAIN EXISTING INLET EXISTING INLET EXISTING INLET EXISTING INLET EXISTING INLET FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DR1 HISTORIC DRAINAGE EXHIBIT24 A 1.62 AC LEGEND: EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTING CONTOUR EXISTING CURB & GUTTER PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING INLET ADESIGN POINT FLOW ARROW DRAINAGE BASIN LABEL DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY PROPOSED SWALE SECTION 11 NOTES: 1.REFER TO THE FINAL DRAINAGE LETTER AND LID REPORT FOR FORTY-THREE PRIME BY NORTHERN ENGINEERING DATED 03/23/2022, AND THE FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR PROVINCETOWNE PUD FILING TWO, DATED MARCH 22, 2001 BY MANHARD CONSULTING, LTD., FOR ADDITIONAL 2.THE NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER ZONE IS INTENDED TO BE MAINTAINED IN A NATIVE LANDSCAPE. PLEASE SEE SECTION 3.4.1 OF LAND USE CODE FOR ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN THE NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER ZONE. EXISTING PLANNEDCOMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS Basin ID Basin Area (ac)Composite % Imperv. 100-year Composite Runoff Coefficient 212 0.68 33%0.71 220 0.52 45%0.74 221 2.18 45%0.74 224 0.08 96%1.00 225 1.30 39%0.73 406 0.11 45%0.74 Total Site 4.87 42.6%0.56 SheetFORTY-THREE PRIMEThese drawings areinstruments of serviceprovided by NorthernEngineering Services, Inc.and are not to be used forany type of constructionunless signed and sealed bya Professional Engineer inthe employ of NorthernEngineering Services, Inc.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONREVIEW SETENGINEERNGIEHTRONRNFORT COLLINS: 301 North Howes Street, Suite 100, 80521GREELEY: 820 8th Street, 80631970.221.4158northernengineering.comof 30 NORTH CALL 2 BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE BEFORE YOU DIG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATE FOR THE MARKING OF UNDERGROUND MEMBER UTILITIES. CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF COLORADO Know what'sbelow. before you dig.Call R ST STSTSTC C T FE S FE SCONTROL IRR CONTROL IRR CONTROL IRR CONTROL IRR CONTROL IRR CONTROL IRRFES FE SLID LID LID / / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / // / / / / / / /D D D D D D D D 4YD4YD4YD4YDUD UD UDFF F FFFF FC OS1 C A OS1 B1 B3 B4 OS1 0.23 AC A 1.64 AC B1 0.15 AC B3 0.15 AC B4 0.45 AC C 2.21 AC EXISTING STORM DRAIN EXISTING STORM DRAIN EXISTING STORM DRAIN EXISTING STORM DRAIN PROPOSED AREA DRAIN PROPOSED AREA DRAIN PROPOSED AREA DRAIN EXISTING INLET EXISTING INLET EXISTING INLET EXISTING INLET EXISTING INLET PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN (SEE NOTE 4)PROPOSED 2' CONCRETE CHASE PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN (SEE NOTE 4) PROPOSED UNDERDRAIN PROPOSED 1'SIDEWALK CHASE PROPOSED 1' SIDEWALK CHASE PROPOSED 1' SIDEWALK CHASE PROPOSED 7.5' SIDEWALK CULVERT PROPOSED CULVERTS EAST TRILBY ROAD CAND L E W O O D D RI V E BRITTANY DRIVEAUTUMN RIDGE DRIVELOT 2 TRACT A LOT 1 BLDG A BLDG B BLDG C BLDG D BLDG E BLDG F PROPOSED CULVERT PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN C1 PROPOSED UNDERDRAINPROPOSED RAIN GARDEN C2 PROPOSED UNDERDRAIN PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN C3 PROPOSED UNDERDRAIN STORM INLET B4 STORM INLET B5 STORM INLET B6 STORM INLET B7 STORM INLET B6-1 B2 0.03 AC B2 STORM INLET A2-1 STORM INLET A5 STORM INLET A7-1 STORM INLET A7-2 STORM INLET A8-2 STORM INLET A8-3 STORM INLET A8-1-2 STORM INLET A8-1-1 STORM INLET A9 STORM INLET A12 TURF REINFORCEMENT MAT STORM INLET A3 HYDROLOGY SUMMARYLID SUMMARY SheetFORTY-THREE PRIMEThese drawings areinstruments of serviceprovided by NorthernEngineering Services, Inc.and are not to be used forany type of constructionunless signed and sealed bya Professional Engineer inthe employ of NorthernEngineering Services, Inc.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONREVIEW SETENGINEERNGIEHTRONRNFORT COLLINS: 301 North Howes Street, Suite 100, 80521GREELEY: 820 8th Street, 80631970.221.4158northernengineering.comof 30 DR2 DEVELOPED DRAINAGE EXHIBIT25 Basin ID Basin Area (s.f.) Basin Area (ac) Composite % Imperv. Flow, WQ (cfs) Flow, Q2 (cfs) Flow, Q100 (cfs) Treatment Area (sf) OS1 10130 0.23 43%0.18 0.36 1.59 4315.00 A 71360 1.64 82%1.50 3.01 12.90 59264.00 B1 6712 0.15 69%0.17 0.34 1.50 5103.00 B2 1190 0.03 60%0.03 0.06 0.24 784.00 B3 6716 0.15 41%0.10 0.21 0.92 2921.16 B4 19524 0.45 41%0.28 0.55 2.46 8565.00 C 96480 2.21 10%0.48 0.97 4.36 9091.00 PROPOSED COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS FORTY-THREE PRIME ON-SITE LID TREATMENT Project Summary Total Impervious Area 96,849 sf Target Treatment Percentage 75% Minimum Area to be Treated by LID measures 72,637 sf Rain Garden Main Rain Gardens 78,285 sf North Rain Gardens 12,093 sf Total Rain Garden Treatment Area 90,377 sf Total Treatment Area 90,377 sf Percent Total Project Area Treated 93.3% Basin ID Basin Area (ac)Composite % Imperv. 100-year Composite Runoff Coefficient OS1 0.23 43%0.69 A 1.64 82%1.00 B1 0.15 69%0.98 B2 0.03 60%0.89 B3 0.15 41%0.69 B4 0.45 41%0.70 C 2.21 10%0.39 Total Site 4.87 41.9%0.44 A 1.62 AC LEGEND: PROPOSED CONTOUR PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED SWALE EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPOSED INLET ADESIGN POINT FLOW ARROW DRAINAGE BASIN LABEL DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY PROPOSED SWALE SECTION 11 NOTES: 1.REFER TO THE FINAL DRAINAGE LETTER AND LID REPORT FOR FORTY-THREE PRIME BY NORTHERN ENGINEERING DATED 03/23/2022, AND THE FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR PROVINCETOWNE PUD FILING TWO, DATED MARCH 22, 2001 BY MANHARD CONSULTING, LTD., FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 2.THE NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER ZONE IS INTENDED TO BE MAINTAINED IN A NATIVE LANDSCAPE. PLEASE SEE SECTION 3.4.1 OF LAND USE CODE FOR ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN THE NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER ZONE. 3.ALL PROPOSED STORM SEWER AND RAIN GARDENS WILL BE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED. 4.WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS AND VOLUMES FOR DOUBLE RAIN GARDEN ARE FOLLOWS: WATER QUALITY VOLUME = 4,901 CU. FT. WATER QUALITY SURFACE ELEVATION = 4,960.87 100-YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION = 4,961.29 UDPROPOSED UNDERDRAIN EXISTING NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER ZONE PROPOSED NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER ZONE EXISTING WETLAND FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CALL 2 BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE BEFORE YOU DIG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATE FOR THE MARKING OF UNDERGROUND MEMBER UTILITIES. CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF COLORADO Know what'sbelow. before you dig.Call R NORTH EMERGENCY OVERFLOW PATH