HomeMy WebLinkAboutFORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION - FDP230022 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - DRAINAGE REPORT
PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
NOVEMBER 1ST, 2023
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 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY COVER LETTER
November 1st, 2023
City of Fort Collins
Stormwater Utility
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, CO 80526
RE: PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT FOR
THE FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION (1971-001)
Dear Staff:
Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Preliminary Drainage Report for your review. This report
accompanies the Preliminary Development Review submittal for the Fort Collins Rescue Mission.
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 Fort Collins Rescue Mission project.
We understand the review by the City of Fort Collins is to ensure 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.
MASON RUEBEL, PE BLAINE MATHISEN, PE
Project Engineer Project Manager
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: MASON STREET INFRASTRUCTRE
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .......................................................... 1
DRAIN BASINS AND SUB-BASINS ..................................................................... 3
DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA .......................................................................... 3
DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN ........................................................................... 6
CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................. 7
REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 8
TABLES AND FIGURES
FIGURE 1 - VICINITY MAP .................................................................................................. 1
FIGURE 2 - FIRMETTE MAP 08069C0977G ........................................................................ 2
TABLE 1 – DETENTION & WQCV SUMMARY ...................................................................... 7
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A – HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS
APPENDIX B – HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX C –WATER QUALITY/LID COMPUTATIONS
APPENDIX D – EROSION CONTROL REPORT
APPENDIX E – EXCERPTS FROM PREVIOUS REPORTS AND USDA SOILS REPORT
MAP POCKET
DR1 – DRAINAGE EXHIBIT
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 1 | 11
GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. LOCATION
Vicinity Map
The Fort Collins Rescue Mission project site is located in the southwest quarter of Section 2,
Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of
Larimer, State of Colorado.
The project site (refer to Figure 1) is bordered to the west by the Hickory Regional Detention
Pond and residential homes. To the north and south by commercial businesses and to the east
by Mason Street and a mixture of residential and commercial businesses.
This project includes Lot 2 per the Mason Street Infrastructure plat. The adjacent streets are N
Mason Street and Hibdon Court. The nearest existing major streets are Hickory Street and N
College Ave.
B. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
The Fort Collins Rescue Mission project requires the construction of the Mason Infrastructure
project and subdivision of the existing parcels. This project will be comprised of Lot 2 of the
Mason Street Infrastructure Plat with a total area of ±2.77 acres.
The site is currently vacant with native grasses.
With the construction of the Mason Street Infrastructure project the project site (Lot 2) will
consist mainly of stockpiled dirt. Drainage from this lot will be in every direction with slopes
Figure 1 - Vicinity map
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 2 | 11
around 5%. Runoff to the west and south overland flows directly to the Hickory Regional
Detention Pond. Runoff to the east and north is conveyed via curb and gutter and swale to the
regional pond. The outfall for the interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond is conveyed
through a 15” HDPE pipe to the east side of Mason Street to an existing roadside ditch and
conveyed to College Ave. The Fort Collins Rescue Mission project will maintain historical
drainage patterns by routing runoff to the regional pond outfall and to the College Ave storm
infrastructure. The ultimate regional pond will also include the realignment of the site outfall
and discharge directly to the Cache La Poudre River per the overall development plan.
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), 83.3% of the site consists of
Nunn Clay loam (Hydrologic Soil Group C) and 16.7% of the site consists of Caruso clay loam
(Hydrologic Soil Group D). The calculations assume a Hydrologic Soil Group C. Hydrologic Soil
Group C has a slow rate of water absorption and infiltration.
A subsurface exploration report was completed by CTL Thompson “Geotechnical Investigation
Hibdon/Mason 24/7 Shelter SWC Hibdon Court and Mason Street Fort Collins, Colorado” on
October 25, 2022 (Project No. FC10,520.000-125-R1). According to the report the site generally
consists of Sandy Clay with groundwater at roughly 8’ to 11’ depths from existing ground.
The site is currently zoned as Service Commercial District (CS) in Fort Collins. Developments to
the north, south, and east are zoned as Service Commercial as well. The west properties are
zoned as Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (L-M-N).
FLOODPLAIN
The subject property is not located in a FEMA or City of Fort Collins regulatory floodplain.
Figure 2 - FIRMette Map 08069C0977G
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 3 | 11
C. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
The project site will include the construction of one building. Other improvements include
asphalt and concrete parking areas, sidewalks, courtyards, and landscaping. This project will
increase the impervious area in Lot 2 and rain gardens will be installed to provide water
treatment. Existing conveyance methods to the Hickory Regional Detention Pond will be
modified to meet current Fort Collins requirements.
DRAIN BASINS AND SUB-BASINS
A. MAJOR BASIN DESCRIPTION
The Fort Collins Rescue Mission project is located in the Dry Creek Major Basin. Dry Creek, which
is tributary to the Poudre River, extends from near the Wyoming border to where it joins the
river near Mulberry and Timberline. The Dry Creek Basin is approximately 23 miles long and six
miles wide and encompasses approximately 62 square miles. The land use in the upper and
middle portion of the basin is primarily rangeland and irrigated hay meadows and pastures.
The majority of the lower basin is developed and includes commercial, industrial, and
residential uses.
Detention for this basin is to release at or below the allowable runoff rate of 0.20 cfs per acre.
The Hickory Regional Detention Pond will provide the required detention volume and standard
water quality treatment for this project.
B. SUB-BASIN DESCRIPTION
The existing subject site can be defined with three (3) major sub-basins that encompass the
entire project site. Historically runoff from the site overland flows to the south and west directly
to the Hickory Regional Detention Pond. Flows to the east are split and conveyed north and
south along N Mason Street to swales and conveyed to the regional pond.
Runoff that is collected in the Hickory Regional Detention Pond outfalls to an 15” HDPE pipe
that discharges to a roadside ditch on the east side of N Mason Street. This ditch discharges to
an existing 21” RCP pipe that leaves the east side of the site and connects to existing
infrastructure within N College Ave.
The project site does not receive runoff from contiguous off-site properties. This project will
utilize the Hickory Regional Detention Pond for detention and standard water quality treatment
per the Mason Street Infrastructure Project and Master Drainage Plan. LID treatment will be
provided on site prior to discharging to the regional pond.
A more detailed description of the project drainage patterns is provided below.
DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
A. ORIGINAL PROVISIONS AND PREVIOUS STUDIES
There are no optional provisions outside the Fort Collins Stormwater Manual (FCSM)
B. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
The overall stormwater management strategy employed with the Fort Collins Rescue
Mission project 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.
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 4 | 11
Step 1 – Employ Runoff Reduction Practices.
The Fort Collins Rescue Mission 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 standard water quality treatment and volume control will occur
in the Hickory Regional Detention Pond.
Step 3 – Stabilize Drainageways.
As stated in Section II. A. 1. above, the site will discharge to the storm infrastructure in N College
Ave and ultimately the Cache La Poudre River, however no changes to the channel are proposed
with this project. While this step may not seem applicable to the Fort Collins Rescue Mission, the
proposed project indirectly helps achieve stabilized drainageways, nonetheless. Once again, site
selection has a positive effect on stream stabilization. By developing 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 project will provide site specific source controls and will improve on historic conditions.
Localized trash enclosures within the development will contain and allow for the disposal of
solid waste. Standard Operating procedures (SOPs) will be implemented for BMP
maintenance of rain gardens and associated drainage infrastructure to remove sediment
accumulation regularly and prolong the design life of the BMPs.
C. DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA REFERENCE AND CONSTRAINTS
The subject property is part of a Master Drainage Plan for the properties adjacent to N Mason
Street and an Overall Development Plan (ODP) drainage study. However, stormwater from this
site will generally follow historic patterns and discharge into storm drains established with the
Mason Street Infrastructure project and previous surrounding developments.
This project proposes to utilize the Hickory Regional Detention Pond and existing infrastructure
as the site’s outfall. In the interim this runoff will be routed to the existing 15” HDPE storm
outfall, but in the future will connect to the ultimate Hickory Pond outfall designed by the City
of Fort Collins. Detention requirements for this basin are to release at or below the allowable
runoff rate of 0.20 cfs per acre. The interim release rate for the regional pond is calculated as
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 5 | 11
2.02cfs (10.12ac x 0.2cfs/ac). With the Mason Street Infrastructure project, the anticipated
release rate for Lot 2 is 0.64cfs (3.14ac x 0.2cfs/ac) which includes a portion of N Mason Street.
This project proposes to also utilize the Hickory Regional Detention Pond for standard water
quality treatment. The provided water quality storage volume was calculated as 6,813 cu.ft. for
Lots 1 & 2 with the Mason Street Infrastructure Project.
The site plan is constrained on all sides by developed and public roads. Existing elevations
along the property lines will be maintained.
The Hickory Regional Detention Pond has a planned high-water elevation of 4980. The design of
the Fort Collins Rescue Mission will take this into account and the detention volume is
anticipated to encroach on Rain Garden 2 and the Mason St & Hibdon Ct intersection.
D. HYDROLOGICAL CRITERIA
The City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves, as depicted in Figure
3.4-1 of the FCSCM, serves as the source for all hydrologic computations associated with the
Mason Street Infrastructure development. 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 Tables 3.2-1, 3.2-2, and 3.2-3 of the FCSCM.
The Rational Method will be used to estimate peak developed stormwater runoff from drainage
basins within the developed site for the 2-year, 10-year, and 100-year design storms. Peak
runoff discharges determined using this methodology have been used to check the street
capacities, inlets, swales, and storm drain lines.
Three separate design storms have been utilized to address distinct drainage scenarios. The
first event analyzed is the "Minor" or "Initial" Storm, with a 2-year recurrence interval. The
second event considered is the "Major Storm," which has a 100-year recurrence interval. The
final event analyzed was the 10-year recurrence interval for comparative analysis only.
E. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA
The hydraulic analyses of street capacities, inlets, storm drain lines, culverts, and swales are
per the FCSM criteria and provided during Final Plan. The following computer programs and
methods were utilized:
· The storm drain lines were analyzed using Hydraflow Storm Sewer Extension for AutoCAD
Civil 3D.
· The inlets were analyzed using the Urban Drainage Inlet and proprietary area inlet
spreadsheets.
· Swales and street capacities were analyzed using the Urban Drainage Channels
spreadsheets.
As stated in Section I. B. 7. above, the subject property is not located within a FEMA 100-year or
a City of Fort Collins designated floodplain.
F. MODIFICATIONS OF CRITERIA
No formal modifications are requested at this time.
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 6 | 11
G. CONFORMANCE WITH WATER QUAILTY TREATMENT CRITERIA
The City Code requires that 100% of runoff from a project site must receive some sort of
water quality treatment. The Hickory Regional Detention Pond will provide standard water
quality treatment for any area of Lot 2 that will not be treated with LID methods. With the
Mason Street Infrastructure project an anticipated water quality volume of 6,813 cu.ft. was
anticipated with Lots 1 & 2 and a portion of N Mason Street. This project will utilize a small
fraction of this anticipated water quality volume.
H. CONFORMANCE WITH LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID)
The project site will conform with the requirement to treat a minimum of 75% of the project site
using a LID technique. LID treatment will be provided by rain gardens prior to discharge into the
Hickory Regional Detention Pond. Please see Appendix C for LID design information, table, and
exhibits.
DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A. GENERAL CONCEPT
The main objective of the Fort Collins Rescue Mission drainage design is to maintain existing
drainage patterns and to not adversely impact downstream infrastructure.
Detention and water quality treatment for Lot 2 and a portion of N Mason Street will be
provided in the Hickory Detention Pond. Detention and water quality volumes were calculated
with the Mason Street Infrastructure project.
The emergency overflow for the two proposed rain gardens will be into the Hickory Regional
Detention Pond. The ultimate regional detention pond HWSEL of 4980 will encroach along the
north property line and into the N Mason Street & Hibdon Intersection. Per the Mason Street
Infrastructure project, the planned regional pond emergency spillway is located south along N
Mason Street adjacent to the interim pond outfall location.
A list of tables and figures used within this report can be found in the Table of Contents at the
front of this 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 four (4) Major Drainage Basins, designated
as Basins A, B, C, & R. These basins have associated sub-basins. The drainage patterns
anticipated for the basins are further described below. More detail on specific sub-basins will
be included with Final.
Major Basin A
Major Basin A has 8 sub-basins (A1-A7) and has a total area of 1.4 acres. All sub-basins discharge to
Rain Garden 1, located in basin A1. These sub-basins primarily consist of asphalt paving, concrete,
and landscaping. Runoff is generally conveyed via concrete rundown or storm drain to Rain
Garden 1. This rain garden will provide water quality treatment for these basins and discharge to
the Hickory Regional Detention Pond.
Major Basin B
Major Basin A has 4 sub-basins (B1-B4) and has a total area of 0.7 acres. All sub-basins discharge to
Rain Garden 2, located in basin B1. These sub-basins primarily consist of asphalt paving, concrete,
and landscaping. Runoff is generally conveyed via concrete rundown or storm drain to Rain
Garden 2. This rain garden will provide water quality treatment for these basins and discharge to
the Hickory Regional Detention Pond.
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 7 | 11
Major Basin C
Major Basin C has 1 sub-basin (C1) and has a total area of 0.37 acres. All sub-basins within major
basin C will not be routed to any LID treatment areas and will overland flow off-site directly into
the Hickory Regional Detention Pond. The regional pond will provide detention and standard
water quality for this basin.
Major Basin R
Major Basin R has 4 sub-basins (R1-R4) and has a total area of 0.69 acres. These basins make up the
rooftop of the Rescue Mission. Runoff from these basins will be conveyed via roof drain connection
or area inlet to either Rain Garden 1 or 2.
A full-size copy of the Drainage Exhibit can be found in the Map Pocket at the end of this report.
In addition, excerpts from earlier drainage reports referenced in this Section can be found in
Appendix E.
B. SPECIFIC DETAILS
As mentioned in Section III.C The detention requirements for this project site are to release at
or below the allowable runoff rate of 0.20 cfs per acre, per the Dry Creek Master Plan. The table
below summarizes the detention and release rates for the project site. The Hickory Regional
Detention Pond will provide 100% of the detention and standard water quality treatment for
this project. Two rain gardens will provide the additional LID water treatment required.
Table 1 – Detention & WQCV Summary
CONCLUSIONS
A. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS
The design elements comply without the need for variances.
The drainage design proposed for the Fort Collins Rescue Mission project complies with the City
of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual as well as the associated master drainage plan.
There are no City or FEMA 100-year regulatory floodplains associated with the Fort Collins
Rescue Mission Project.
The drainage plan and stormwater management measures proposed with the Fort Collins
Rescue Mission project are compliant with all applicable State and Federal regulations
governing stormwater discharge.
Description
Provided
(Hickory Det. Pond) Notes
Lot 2 Required Detention Volume 0.70 ac. ft. 18.9 ac. ft. Volume provided in interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond (See Note 1)
Lot 2 Release Rate 0.64 cfs 2.02 cfs Release rate per Dry Creek Basin Criteria (See Note 1)
Description
Volume
Provided Notes
Rain Garden 1 1,443 cu. ft. 1689 cu. fft. LID for Major Basin A
Rain Garden 2 969 cu. ft. 978 cu.ft. LID for Major Basin B
Standard Water Quailty (Hickory Regional Pond) 307 cu. ft. 6,813 cu. ft.
Standard water quailty treatment provided in interim Hickory Regional
Detention Pond (See Note 1)
Notes:
Summary of Water Quality Volumes
Volume
Required
Summary of Detention Volumes
Required
1)Detention and standard water quailty volumes shown above are to confrim compliance with Mason Street Infrastructure project. See the Mason Street
infrastructure project for detailed design of the Interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 8 | 11
B. DRAINAGE CONCEPT
The drainage design proposed with this project will ensure that all downstream infrastructure
is not adversely impacted by this development. All existing downstream drainage facilities are
expected to not be impacted negatively by this development.
The Fort Collins Rescue Mission project will not impact the Master Drainage Plan
recommendations for the Dry Creek Major Drainage Basin and the Mason Street Infrastructure
Overall Development Plan.
The drainage design will improve existing drainage facilities and bring immediate offsite storm
infrastructure into compliance with the current Fort Collins water quality and LID standards.
REFERENCES
1. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, 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. Geotechnical Investigation Hibdon/Mason 24/7 shelter SWC Hibdon Court and Mason Street Fort
Collins, Colorado, CTL Thompson, Fort Collins, Colorado, October 2022
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX A
HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS
Runoff Coefficient1
Percent
Impervious1 Project:
Location:
0.95 100%Calc. By:
0.95 90%Date:
0.50 40%
0.20 2%
0.20 2%
Basin ID Basin Area
(sq.ft.)
Basin Area
(acres)
Asphalt, Concrete
(acres)Rooftop (acres) Gravel (acres)
Undeveloped:
Greenbelts,
Agriculture (acres)
Lawns, Clayey Soil,
Flat Slope < 2%
(acres)
Percent
Impervious
C2*Cf
Cf = 1.00
C5*Cf
Cf = 1.00
C10*Cf
Cf = 1.00
C100*Cf
Cf = 1.25
R1 10,618 0.24 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00
R2 6,020 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00
R3 9,639 0.22 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00
R4 3,832 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00
A1 14,111 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 4% 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.27
A2 15,606 0.36 0.23 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.11 66% 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.86
A3 16,941 0.39 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 83% 0.82 0.82 0.82 1.00
A4 5,650 0.13 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 79% 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.99
A5 2,900 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 63% 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.83
A6 2,345 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.03 38% 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.60
A7 3,220 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.03 50% 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.71
B1 8,037 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 2% 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.25
B2 11,391 0.26 0.19 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.06 75% 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.95
B3 5,825 0.13 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 74% 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.94
B4 6,524 0.15 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 43% 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.64
C1 16,179 0.37 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 44% 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.65
Rain Garden 1 (A) 74,244 1.70 0.74 0.31 0.06 0.00 0.59 62% 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.84
Rain Garden 2 (B) 48,415 1.11 0.35 0.38 0.01 0.00 0.37 80% 0.87 0.87 0.87 1.00
Total 138,838 3.19 1.25 0.69 0.07 0.00 1.17 60% 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.83
Lawns and Landscaping:
Combined Basins
2) Composite Runoff Coefficient adjusted per Table 3.2-3 of the Fort Collins
Stormwater Manual (FCSM).
Lawns, Clayey Soil, Flat Slope < 2%
USDA SOIL TYPE: C
Undeveloped: Greenbelts, Agriculture Composite Runoff Coefficient2
1) Runoff coefficients per Tables 3.2-1 & 3.2 of the FCSM. Percent impervious per Tables 4.1-2 & 4.1-3 of the FCSM.
DEVELOPED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS
Asphalt, Concrete
Rooftop
Gravel
Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives:
Character of Surface:Fort Collins Rescue Mission
Fort Collins
M. Ruebel
November 1, 2023
Notes:
1) Rain Garden 1 consists of A basins and Basin R3 & R4
2) Rain Garden 2 consists of B basins and Basins R1 & R2
5/18/2022
Where:
Length
(ft)
Slope
(%)
Ti
2-Yr
(min)
Ti
10-Yr
(min)
Ti
100-Yr
(min)
Length
(ft)
Slope
(%)Surface n
Flow Area3
(sq.ft.)WP3 (ft)R (ft)V
(ft/s)
Tt
(min)
Max.
Tc
(min)
Comp.
Tc 2-Yr
(min)
Tc
2-Yr
(min)
Comp.
Tc 10-Yr
(min)
Tc
10-Yr
(min)
Comp.
Tc 100-
Yr
(min)
Tc
100-Yr
(min)
r1 R1 80 2.00%1.99 1.99 1.33
0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.44 1.99 5.00 1.99 5.00 1.33 5.00
r2 R2 70 2.00%1.86 1.86 1.24 0.00%Valley Pan 1.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.39 1.86 5.00 1.86 5.00 1.24 5.00
r3 R3 60 2.00%1.72 1.72 1.15
0.00%Valley Pan 2.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.33 1.72 5.00 1.72 5.00 1.15 5.00
r4 R4 20 2.00%1.00 1.00 0.66 0.00%Valley Pan 3.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.11 1.00 5.00 1.00 5.00 0.66 5.00
a1 A1 40 5.00%6.10 6.10 5.72
0.00%Valley Pan 4.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.22 6.10 6.10 6.10 6.10 5.72 5.72
a2 A2 40 2.00%3.86 3.86 2.25 210 0.80%Valley Pan 5.02 6.00 10.25 0.59 0.02 188.22 11.39 192.08 11.39 192.08 11.39 190.46 11.39
a3 A3 40 2.00%2.59 2.59 0.94 130
0.50%Valley Pan 6.02 6.00 10.25 0.59 0.01 176.77 10.94 179.36 10.94 179.36 10.94 177.71 10.94
a4 A4 55 2.00%3.40 3.40 1.22 0.00%Valley Pan 7.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.31 3.40 5.00 3.40 5.00 1.22 5.00
a5 A5 50 2.00%4.54 4.54 2.79
0.00%Valley Pan 8.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.28 4.54 5.00 4.54 5.00 2.79 5.00
a6 A6 38 2.00%5.68 5.68 4.58 0.00% Valley Pan 9.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.21 5.68 5.68 5.68 5.68 4.58 5.00
a7 A7 28 2.00%4.20 4.20 3.09 0.00% Valley Pan 10.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.16 4.20 5.00 4.20 5.00 3.09 5.00
b1 B1 10 5.00%3.11 3.11 2.94 60 2.00% Swale (6:1)11.02 6.00 12.17 0.49 0.01 83.76 10.39 86.87 10.39 86.87 10.39 86.70 10.39
b2 B2 80 5.00%3.32 3.32 1.46 160 1.50% Gutter 12.02 3.61 19.18 0.19 0.00 534.39 11.33 537.72 11.33 537.72 11.33 535.86 11.33
b3 B3 40 2.00%3.27 3.27 1.51 60 2.00% Gutter 13.02 3.61 19.18 0.19 0.01 187.99 10.56 191.27 10.56 191.27 10.56 189.50 10.56
b4 B4 45 4.50%4.48 4.48 3.51 0.00% Valley Pan 14.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.25 4.48 5.00 4.48 5.00 3.51 5.00
c1 C1 50 4.00%4.81 4.81 3.72 0.00% Valley Pan 15.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.28 4.81 5.00 4.81 5.00 3.72 5.00
Design
Point Basin ID
Overland Flow Channelized Flow Time of Concentration
DEVELOPED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS
Location:
Maximum Tc:Overland Flow, Time of Concentration:
Channelized Flow, Velocity: Channelized Flow, Time of Concentration:
Fort Collins Rescue Mission
Fort Collins
M. Ruebel
November 1, 2023
Project:
Calculations By:
Date:
Notes
S = Longitudinal Slope, feet/feet
R = Hydraulic Radius (feet)
n = Roughness Coefficient
V = Velocity (ft/sec) WP = Wetted Perimeter (ft)
(Equation 3.3-2 per Fort Collins
StormwaterManual)
1.87 1.1 ∗
1.49
∗
/ ∗ (Equation 5-4 per Fort Collins
StormwaterManual)
180 10 (Equation 3.3-5 per Fort Collins
StormwaterManual)
∗ 60
(Equation 5-5 per Fort Collins
1)Add 4900 to all elevations.
2) Per Fort Collins Stormwater Manual, minimum Tc = 5 min.
3) Assume a water depth of 6" and a typical curb and gutter per Larimer
County Urban Street Standard Detail 701 for curb and gutter
channelized flow. Assume a water depth of 1', fixed side slopes, and a
triangular swale section for grass channelized flow. Assume a water
depth of 1', 4:1 side slopes, and a 2' wide valley pan for channelized
flow in a valley pan.
Tc2 Tc10 Tc100 C2 C10 C100 I2 I10 I100 QWQ Q2 Q10 Q100
r1 R1 0.24 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.3 0.7 1.1 2.4
r2 R2 0.14 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 1.4
r3 R3 0.22 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.3 0.6 1.0 2.2
r4 R4 0.09 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.9
a1 A1 0.32 6.1 6.1 5.7 0.2 0.2 0.3 2.7 4.6 9.6 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.9
a2 A2 0.36 11.4 11.4 11.4 0.7 0.7 0.9 2.1 3.6 7.4 0.3 0.5 0.9 2.3
a3 A3 0.39 10.9 10.9 10.9 0.8 0.8 1.0 2.2 3.7 7.6 0.3 0.7 1.2 2.9
a4 A4 0.13 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.8 0.8 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 1.3
a5 A5 0.07 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.8 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6
a6 A6 0.05 5.7 5.7 5.0 0.5 0.5 0.6 2.8 4.7 10.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3
a7 A7 0.07 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.6 0.6 0.7 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5
b1 B1 0.18 10.4 10.4 10.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 2.2 3.8 7.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4
b2 B2 0.26 11.3 11.3 11.3 0.8 0.8 1.0 2.1 3.6 7.4 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.8
b3 B3 0.13 10.6 10.6 10.6 0.8 0.8 0.9 2.2 3.7 7.6 0.1 0.2 0.4 1.0
b4 B4 0.15 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.5 0.5 0.6 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 1.0
c1 C1 0.37 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.5 0.5
0.7 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 2.4
Intensity, I from Fig. 3.4.1 Fort Collins Stormwater Manual
Rational Equation: Q = CiA (Equation 6-1 per MHFD)
DEVELOPED DIRECT RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS
Intensity
Fort Collins Rescue Mission
M. Ruebel
November 1, 2023
Design
Point Basin Area
(acres)
Runoff CTc (Min)
Date:
Fort Collins
Project:
Location:
Calc. By:
Flow (cfs)
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
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX B
B.1 - DETENTION SYSTEM CALCULATIONS
B.2 - HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS (PROVIDED WITH FINAL)
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX B.1
DETENTION SYSTEM CALCULATIONS
Project Number:Project:Fort Collins Rescue Mission
Project Location:Date:November 1, 2023
Description
Provided
(Hickory Det. Pond)Notes
Lot 2 Required Detention Volume 0.70 ac. ft. 18.9 ac. ft. Volume provided in interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond (See Note 1)
Lot 2 Release Rate 0.64 cfs 2.02 cfs Release rate per Dry Creek Basin Criteria (See Note 1)
Description
Volume
Provided Notes
Rain Garden 1 1,443 cu. ft. 1689 cu. fft. LID for Major Basin A
Rain Garden 2 969 cu. ft. 978 cu.ft. LID for Major Basin B
Standard Water Quailty (Hickory Regional Pond) 307 cu. ft. 6,813 cu. ft.
Standard water quailty treatment provided in interim Hickory Regional Detention
Pond (See Note 1)
Notes:
Summary of Water Quality Volumes
Volume
Required
RELEASE RATE AND SUMMARY OF DETENTION VOLUMES
1971-001
Fort Collins
Summary of Detention Volumes
Required
1)Detention and standard water quailty volumes shown above are to confrim compliance with Mason Street Infrastructure project. See the Mason Street infrastructure
project for detailed design of the Interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond
1
Date:11/01/23
Pond No.:
A
100-yr WQCV 307 ft3
0.83 Quantity Detention 30483 ft3
3.19 acres Total Volume 30790 ft3
0.64 cfs Total Volume 0.707 ac-ft
Time Time
Ft.Collins
100-yr
Intensity
Q100
Inflow
(Runoff)
Volume
Outflow
(Release)
Volume
Storage
Detention
Volume
(mins) (secs) (in/hr) (cfs)
(ft3) (ft
3) (ft
3)
5 300 9.95 26.3 7903 191 7712
10 600 7.72 20.4 12264 383 11881
15 900 6.52 17.3 15537 574 14963
20 1200 5.60 14.8 17793 766 17027
25 1500 4.98 13.2 19778 957 18821
30 1800 4.52 12.0 21542 1148 20393
35 2100 4.08 10.8 22685 1340 21346
40 2400 3.74 9.9 23766 1531 22235
45 2700 3.46 9.2 24735 1723 23012
50 3000 3.23 8.6 25656 1914 23742
55 3300 3.03 8.0 26474 2105 24369
60 3600 2.86 7.6 27261 2297 24964
65 3900 2.72 7.2 28087 2488 25599
70 4200 2.59 6.9 28802 2680 26122
75 4500 2.48 6.6 29548 2871 26677
80 4800 2.38 6.3 30247 3062 27185
85 5100 2.29 6.1 30922 3254 27669
90 5400 2.21 5.9 31598 3445 28152
95 5700 2.13 5.6 32146 3637 28509
100 6000 2.06 5.5 32726 3828 28898
105 6300 2.00 5.3 33361 4019 29342
110 6600 1.94 5.1 33901 4211 29690
115 6900 1.89 5.0 34529 4402 30126
120 7200 1.84 4.9 35077 4594 30483
Detention Pond Calculation | FAA Method
Project:
Project Location:
Calculations By:
Fort Collins Rescue Mission
Fort Collins, Colorado
M. Ruebel
Interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond
Developed "C" =
Area (A)=
Max Release Rate =
Input Variables Results
Design Point Required Detention Volume
Design Storm
1
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX B.2
HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS (PROVIDED WITH FINAL)
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX C
WATER QUALITY/LID COMPUTATIONS
FDC
UD
UD
SCTF
EM
GM
E
ELE
C
CT
V
OH
U
X
X
G
G
G
D
F
E
S
F
ES
b1
a1
HICKORY REGIONAL
DETENTION POND
HI
B
D
O
N
C
O
U
R
T
N MASON S
T
R
E
E
T
RAIN GARDEN 1
CURB CUT &
SIDEWALK CHASE
INTERIM DETENTION
POND OUTFALL
PROPOSED
STORM DRAIN
RAIN GARDEN 2
CURB CUT
0.24 ac.
R1
0.14 ac.
R2
0.22 ac.
R3
0.09 ac.
R4
0.18 ac.
B1
0.36 ac.
A2
0.32 ac.
A10.39 ac.
A3
0.13 ac.
A4
0.07 ac.
A5
0.37 ac.
C1
0.15 ac.
B4
0.26 ac.
B2
0.05 ac.
A6
0.07 ac.
A7
0.13 ac.
B3
DRAWN BY:
SCALE:
DATE:
WQ EXHIBIT
SHEET NO:
FORT COLLINS: 301 North Howes Street, Suite 100, 80521
GREELEY: 820 8th Street, 80631
E N G I N E E R N GI
EHTRON R N
970.221.4158
northernengineering.com
P:
\
1
9
7
1
-
0
0
1
\
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
\
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
_
O
N
-
S
I
T
E
\
L
I
D
\
1
9
7
1
-
0
0
1
_
L
I
D
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
.
D
W
G
FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS
COLORADO
MCR
1" = 70'
11/1/2023
LID 1
PROPOSED STORM SEWER
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
ADESIGN POINT
DRAINAGE BASIN LABEL
DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY
A
LEGEND:
FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
( IN FEET )
1 inch = ft.
Feet07070
70
LID Summary per Basin
LID ID Area Weighted %
Impervious
Treatment
Type
Required
Volume (cu. ft.)
Total Impervious
Area (sq. ft.)Sq. Ft.Acres
RG1 74,244 1.70 62%Rain Garden 1,443 45,950
RG2 48,415 1.11 64%Rain Garden 969 30,783
Total 122,659 2.82 2,412 76,733
Water Quailty Summary per Basin
Basin ID
Area
Percent
Impervi
ous LID ID
Treatment
Type
Total
Impervious
Area (sq. ft.)Sq. Ft.Acres
R1 10,618 0.24 90%RG2 Rain Garden 9,556
R2 6,020 0.14 90%RG2 Rain Garden 5,418
R3 9,639 0.22 90%RG1 Rain Garden 8,675
R4 3,832 0.09 90%RG1 Rain Garden 3,449
A1 14,111 0.32 4%RG1 Rain Garden 627
A2 15,606 0.36 66%RG1 Rain Garden 10,268
A3 16,941 0.39 83%RG1 Rain Garden 14,143
A4 5,650 0.13 79%RG1 Rain Garden 4,476
A5 2,900 0.07 63%RG1 Rain Garden 1,820
A6 2,345 0.05 38%RG1 Rain Garden 897
A7 3,220 0.07 50%RG1 Rain Garden 1,595
B1 8,037 0.18 2%RG2 Rain Garden 161
B2 11,391 0.26 75%RG2 Rain Garden 8,561
B3 5,825 0.13 74%RG2 Rain Garden 4,313
B4 6,524 0.15 43%RG2 Rain Garden 2,775
C1 16,179 0.37 44%n/a n/a 7,144
LID Site Summary
Total Site Area 138,838 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area with LID
Treatment 76,733 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area without LID
Treatment 7,144 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area 83,878 sq. ft.
75% Requried Minium Area to be Treated 62,908 cu. ft.
Total Treated Area 76,733 sq. ft.
Percent Impervious Treated by LID 91%
Project Number:Project:
Project Location:
Calculations By:Date:
Sq. Ft.Acres
R1 10,618 0.24 90% RG2 Rain Garden 1,443 9,556
R2 6,020 0.14 90% RG2 Rain Garden 1,443 5,418
R3 9,639 0.22 90% RG1 Rain Garden 1,443 8,675
R4 3,832 0.09 90% RG1 Rain Garden 1,443 3,449
A1 14,111 0.32 4% RG1 Rain Garden 1,443 627
A2 15,606 0.36 66% RG1 Rain Garden 1,443 10,268
A3 16,941 0.39 83% RG1 Rain Garden 1,443 14,143
A4 5,650 0.13 79% RG1 Rain Garden 1,443 4,476
A5 2,900 0.07 63% RG1 Rain Garden 1,443 1,820
A6 2,345 0.05 38% RG1 Rain Garden 1,443 897
A7 3,220 0.07 50% RG1 Rain Garden 1,443 1,595
B1 8,037 0.18 2% RG2 Rain Garden 1,443 161
B2 11,391 0.26 75% RG2 Rain Garden 1,443 8,561
B3 5,825 0.13 74% RG2 Rain Garden 1,443 4,313
B4 6,524 0.15 43% RG2 Rain Garden 1,443 2,775
C1 16,179 0.37 44% n/a n/a 0 7,144
Total 138,838 3.19 83,878
Sq. Ft. Acres
RG1 74,244 1.70 62% RG1 Rain Garden 1,443 45,950
RG2 48,415 1.11 64% RG2 Rain Garden 969 30,783
Total 122,659 2.82 76,733
138,838 ft2
76,733 ft3
7,144 ft2
83,878 ft2
62,908 ft3
76,733 ft2
91%
LID SUMMARY
AreaBasin ID Treatment Type
Percent
Impervious LID ID
Fort Collins Rescue Mission
November 1, 2023
1971-001
Fort Collins, Colorado
M. Ruebel
Total
Impervious
Area (ft2)
Treatment
Volume (ft3)
LID Summary per Basin
Weighted %
Impervious
LID Summary per LID Structure
Impervious
Area (ft2)Subbasin ID Treatment TypeLID ID
Required
Volume (ft3)
Area
`
LID Site Summary
Total Site Area
Total Impervious Area with LID Treatment
Total Impervious Area without LID Treatment
Total Impervious Area
75% Requried Minium Area to be Treated
Total Treated Area
Percent Impervious Treated by LID
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1. Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =62.0 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i = 0.620
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 0.19 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 74,244 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 =0.43 in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =1,443 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 =921 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =1421 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =1852 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=1,637 cu ft
(VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth)
3. Growing Media
4. Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO = in
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Mason Ruebel
Northern Engineering
October 28, 2023
Fort Collins Rescue Mission
Rain Garden 1
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Raingarden 1.xlsm, RG 10/28/2023, 1:23 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6. Inlet / Outlet Control
A) Inlet Control
7. Vegetation
8. Irrigation
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated?
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Mason Ruebel
Northern Engineering
October 28, 2023
Fort Collins Rescue Mission
Rain Garden 1
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
Raingarden 1.xlsm, RG 10/28/2023, 1:23 AM
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1. Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =64.0 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i = 0.640
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 0.20 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 48,415 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 =0.43 in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =969 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2. Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =6 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical) Z = 4.00 ft / ft
(Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =620 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =1250 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =2666 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=979 cu ft
(VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth)
3. Growing Media
4. Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO = in
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Mason Ruebel
Northern Engineering
October 28, 2023
Fort Collins Rescue Mission
Rain Garden 2
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
Raingarden 2.xlsm, RG 10/28/2023, 1:31 AM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6. Inlet / Outlet Control
A) Inlet Control
7. Vegetation
8. Irrigation
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated?
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Mason Ruebel
Northern Engineering
October 28, 2023
Fort Collins Rescue Mission
Rain Garden 2
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
Raingarden 2.xlsm, RG 10/28/2023, 1:31 AM
Project:
Calc. By:
Date:
0.37 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs
44%<-- INPUT from impervious calcs
0.44 <-- CALCULATED
40 hours <-- from FCSM Figure 5.4-1
1.00 <-- from FCSM Figure 5.4-1
0.19 <-- MHFD Vol. 3 Equation 3-1
0.01 <-- FCSCM Equation 7-2
307 <-- Calculated from above
0.08 <-- INPUT from stage-storage table
0.04 <-- CALCULATED from Equation EDB-3
WQCV (ac-ft) =
WQ Depth (ft) =
Area Required Per Row, a (in 2) =
WQCV (cu. ft.) =
WQCV (watershed inches) =
WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
Water Quality for Interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond
Fort Collins Rescue Mission
M. Ruebel
November 1, 2023
Required Storage & Outlet Works
Basin Area (acres) =
Basin Percent Imperviousness =
Basin Imperviousness Ratio =
Drain Time =
Drain Time Coefficient =
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX D
EROSION CONTROL REPORT
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY EROSION CONTROL REPORT
EROSION CONTROL REPORT
A comprehensive Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (along with associated details) will be 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 CS3 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: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX E
EXCERPTS FROM PREVIOUS REPORTS
AND USDA SOILS REPORT
S
ELEC
F ES
M VAULT
ELEC
VAULT
CABLEVAULT
ELEC
VAULT
ELEC
VAULT
ELEC
CABLE
CABLE
VAULT
ELEC
CELEC
ELEC
ELEC
CTV CTV CTV
OH
U
OH
U
OH
U
OH
U
E
E
E
E
OHU
E
E
X
X X
X
X
X
CT
V
CT
V
CT
V
CT
V
CTV
CT
V
CTV CTV CTV
OHU OHU
X X
X X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
CTV CTV CTV
CT
V
CTV CTV
CT
V
CTV CTV
G G
G G G G G G
CTV CTV
G G
SS SS SS SS SS SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
H2O
H2O
A RV
H2O H2O
D
H Y D
S
F E S
F E
S
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
XXXXXXXXXXXXX
OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
X
X
W W W W W
S
S
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
D
ELEC
X
X
X
X
XX
X
X
X
X
W W W W W
XXX X X
X
X
X
X
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
8" W
b1
a1
c2
a8
a6
b2
NCFS LLC
300 HICKORY STREET
FORT COLLINS, CO
QR INC.
280 HICKORY STREET
FORT COLLINS, CO
QR INC.
200 HICKORY STREET
FORT COLLINS, CO
R AND S HOLDINGS
1235 N. COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO
HAINES BRANDON KUHRT 1295
N. COLLEGE AVENUE FORT
COLLINS, CO
GRATITUDE LLC
1303 N. COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO
HOYT JOHN R
1307 N. COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO
1311 N. COLLEGE LLC
HIBON CT.
FORT COLLINS, CO
1311 N. COLLEGE LLC
1311 N. COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO
WANKIER LANCE
1401 N. COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO
WOOD RONALD G/ JENNIFER
L/ WILLARD E
122 HIBDON COURT
FORT COLLINS, CO
THOMPSON PROPERTIES LLC
1319 N. COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO
D AND S MOTELS INC
1405 N. COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO
RI
C
H
E
Y
A
D
D
I
E
16
0
1
N
.
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
FO
R
T
C
O
L
L
I
N
S
,
C
O
MA
S
O
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
N
M
A
S
O
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
HICKORY STREET
HIBDON COURT
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD
HICKORY REGIONAL DETENTION POND
(INTERIM)
REQUIRED VOLUME= 65,979 CU.FT.
REQUIRED WSEL = 4976.16
WATER QUALITY VOLUME = 6,813 CU.FT.
WATER QUALITY WSEL = 4975.11
PROVIDED VOLUME = 18.89 AC.FT.
2' CONCRETE
PAN
WATER QUALITY OUTLET
STRUCTURE WITH
RESTRICTOR PLATE
a3
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
SWALE
4' CURB CUT &
SIDEWALK CHASE
ROW AGREEMENT WITH UNION
PACIFIC RAILROAD FOR THE
PURPOSE OF IRRIGATION DITCH
& IRRIGATION WATER
UNSPECIFIED WIDTH BK 813 PG
27 TO BE VACATED PER
LANGUAGE FOUND ON PAGE 28
OF SAID DOCUMENT
c1
6.79 ac.
A1
0.40 ac.
A4
1.32 ac.
A2
0.40 ac.
B2
0.35 ac.
B1
0.07 ac.
C1
0.24 ac.
A7
0.18 ac.
A6
1.39 ac.
D1
0.64 ac.
A5
0.41 ac.
A3
0.18 ac.
C2
0.13 ac.
A8
0.95 ac.
C3
d1
a4
a2
STORM DRAIN A
SEE SHEET ST1
STORM DRAIN B
SEE SHEET ST1
OFFSITE STORM DRAIN C
SEE SHEET ST2
a7ULTIMATE PLANNED WSEL
(4980) PER THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS
ULTIMATE PLANNED WSEL
(4980) PER THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS
ULTIMATE PLANNED WSEL
(4980) PER THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS
20' WATERLINE AND
ROW EASEMENT
REC. NO. 85040113
6' UTILITY
EASEMENT
BK 1658 PG 746
6' UTILITY EASEMENT
PER PLAT OF BREW
SUB. FIRST FILING
10' UTILITY EASEMENT
BK 1658 PG 746
45' ROW
BK 1743 PG 632
10' UTILITY
EASEMENT
BK 1572 PG 322
45' ROW
BK 1743 PG 632
10' UTILITY
EASEMENT
BK 1572 PG 321
53.5' PERPETUAL EASEMENT FOR
ELECTRIC POWER TRANSMISSION LINE
BK 923 PG 282
24' ACCESS EASEMENT
REC. NO. 20140036292
30' EASEMENT FOR ROAD PURPOSES
BK 1143 PG 187
(EXCEPTION PARCEL PIB FCIF25205400)
30' UPRR TRACK EASEMENT
BK 2027 PG 988
REC. NO. 98091992
REC. NO. 20060019203
20' UTILITY EASEMENT PER VALLEY STEEL & WIRE SUBDIVISION PLAT
6' UTILITY EASEMENT
REC. NO. 2006-0068858
REC. NO. 2006-0068859
10' UTILITY
EASEMENT
10' UTILITY
EASEMENT
3' POWER LINE EASEMENT TO
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
BK 1475 PG 941
EXISTING
AREA INLET
40' DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
60' DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
ONSITE 100-YR
REQUIRED WSEL
(4976.16)
ONSITE 100-YR
REQUIRED WSEL
(4976.16)
PROPOSED NATURAL
HABITAT BUFFER ZONE
80
.
1
8
80
.
7
7
S
CO
L
L
E
G
E
A
V
E
EXISTING
36" PIPE
EXISTING
18" PIPE
EXISTING
AREA INLET
DR1
DR
A
I
N
A
G
E
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
26
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
( IN FEET )
1 inch = ft.
Feet05050
50
100 150
Sheet
Th
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
in
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
o
f
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
b
y
N
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
an
d
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
o
b
e
u
s
e
d
f
o
r
an
y
t
y
p
e
o
f
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
un
l
e
s
s
s
i
g
n
e
d
a
n
d
s
e
a
l
e
d
b
y
a
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
th
e
e
m
p
l
o
y
o
f
N
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
E
T
of 26
MA
S
O
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
KEYMAP
DEVELOPED DRAINAGE SUMMARY
Design
Point Basin ID
Total
Area
(acres)
C2 C100 2-Yr Tc
(min)
100-Yr Tc
(min)
Q2
(cfs)
Q100
(cfs)
a1 A1 6.794 0.20 0.25 17.53 17.53 2.34 10.21
a2 A2 1.321 1.07 1.00 5.00 5.00 4.04 13.14
a3 A3 0.411 0.86 1.00 11.61 11.61 0.74 3.00
a4 A4 0.396 0.86 1.00 5.00 5.00 0.97 3.94
a5 A5 0.644 0.87 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.59 6.41
a6 A6 0.175 0.79 0.99 11.17 11.17 0.30 1.29
a7 A7 0.241 0.78 0.97 11.28 11.28 0.40 1.74
a8 A8 0.134 0.95 1.00 11.28 11.28 0.27 1.00
b1 B1 0.346 0.20 0.25 11.52 11.52 0.14 0.63
b2 B2 0.396 0.73 0.92 12.34 12.34 0.60 2.60
c1 C1 0.068 0.95 1.00 10.81 10.81 0.14 0.51
c2 C2 0.181 0.51 0.63 10.48 10.48 0.20 0.88
c3 C3 0.949 0.28 0.35 7.69 7.69 0.66 2.93
d1 D1 1.392 0.20 0.25 11.50 11.50 0.58 2.54
PROPOSED CONTOUR
PROPOSED STORM SEWER
PROPOSED SWALE
EXISTING CONTOUR
PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PROPOSED INLET
A
DESIGN POINT
FLOW ARROW
DRAINAGE BASIN LABEL
DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY
PROPOSED SWALE SECTION
11
NOTES:
1.REFER TO THE FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT, DATED OCTOBER 4, 2023 FOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
2.THE INTERIM HICKORY REGIONAL DETENTION POND DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR
OFFSITE RUNOFF. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ANALYSIS
OF OFFSITE BASINS AND THE ULTIMATE DESIGN OF THE HICKORY REGIONAL
DETENTION POND.
A
LEGEND:
FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
EMERGENCY OVERFLOW PATH
PROPOSED NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER ZONE
Interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond Volume
Contour Elev.Contour Surface Area (ft2)
Cummalitive Volume
cu. ft.acre ft
4,974.60 106 0 0.0
4,975.00 10,254 2072 0.0
4,976.00 76,514 45456 1.0
4,977.00 181,808 174617 4.0
4,978.00 224,278 377660 8.7
4,979.00 248,736 614167 14.1
4,979.80 273,127 822912 18.9
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
E
E
B
O
T
T
O
M
L
E
F
T
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
E
E
T
O
P
R
I
G
H
T
A
A
BB
XX X
X
X
X
X
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
S
ELEC
F ES
M VAULT
ELEC
VAULT
ELEC
VAULT
ELEC
TRAFFICVAULT
CONTROL
IRR
CONTROL
IRR
CONTROL
IRR
VAULT
F.O.
CONTROL
IRR
VAULT
CABLE
VAULT
ELEC
VAULT
ELEC
VAULT
ELEC
CABLE
CABLE
CS
W
H Y D
VAULT
ELEC
CELEC
ELEC
ELEC
CTV CTV
OH
U
OH
U
OH
U
E
E
E
E
E
OHU
E
X X
X
X
X
CT
V
CT
V
CT
V
CT
V
CTVCTVCTVOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHU
X X
X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
CTV CTVCTVCTVCTVCTV
G G G G G G G
CTV CTV
G G G
W
SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
MW
H2O H2O
A RV
H2O H2O
D
H Y D
S
S
F ES
F E
S
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
OH
U
OH
U
OH
U
OH
U
OH
U
XXXXXXXXXX
OHU OHU OHU OHU
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
X
S
W W W W
S
S
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
D
ELEC
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
W W W W
S
EXISTING OWNER: NORTH
COLLEGE 1311 LLC
OWNER: VALLEY
STEEL & QR INC
(C-S DISTRICT)
OWNER: NORTH
COLLEGE 1311 LLC
(C-S DISTRICT)
OWNER: HOYT JOHN R
(C-S DISTRICT)
OWNER: THOMPSON
PROPERTIES LLC
(C-S DISTRICT)
OWNER: D AND S
MOTELS INC
(C-S DISTRICT)OWNER: WOOD RONALD
G/JENNIFERL/WILLARD E
(C-S DISTRICT)
OWNER: WANKIER LANCE
(C-S DISTRICT)
OWNER: STONECREST INC
(C-S DISTRICT)
OWNER: R AND S
HOLDINGS LLC
(C-S DISTRICT)
OWNER: VALLEY STEEL &
WIRE SUBDIVISION
(C-S DISTRICT)
OWNER:HAINES BRANDON KUHRT
MUSTANG SUBDIVISION
(C-S DISTRICT)
HICKORY STREET
HIBDON COURT
N
M
A
S
O
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
N
M
A
S
O
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
EXISTING OWNER: CITY OF
FORT COLLINS
R.O.W AGREEMENT WITH UNION
PACIFIC RAILROAD FOR THE PURPOSE
OF IRRIGATION DITCH & IRRIGATION
WATER UNSPECIFIED WIDTH
AGREEMENT
BK 813 PG 27
UNI
O
N
P
A
C
I
F
I
C
R
A
I
L
R
O
A
D
OWNER: NORTHERN COLORADO
FEEDERS SUPPLY SUB., 1ST
(C-S DISTRICT)
OWNER: GINKY TRUST
(L-M-N DISTRICT)
N
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
OWNER: R AND S
HOLDINGS LLC
(C-S DISTRICT)
EXISTING
PROPERTY LINE
TO BE VACATED EXISTING
PROPERTY LINE
TO BE VACATED
C-S DISTRICT
HICKORY REGIONAL
DETENTION POND
±7.79 ACRES
C-S DISTRICT
±2.77 ACRES
C-S DISTRICT
±1.32 ACRES
EXISTING OWNER: NORTH
COLLEGE 1311 LLC
2
7.79
1
EXISTING SITE
OUTFALL
EXISTING DETENTION
POND OUTFALL
EXISTING
CULVERT
EXISTING STORM
DRAIN2.77 ac.
2
1.32 ac.
3
1
3
EXISTING IRRIGATION
DITCH
DETENTION POND
DETENTION POND
DETENTION POND
20' WATERLINE AND
ROW EASEMENT
REC. NO. 85040113
20' UTILITY EASEMENT BK
1430 PG 930
20' UTILITY
EASEMENT PER
PLAT OF BREW SUB.
FIRST FILING
RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT
BK 929 PG 30
(WIDTH VARIES)
6' UTILITY
EASEMENT
BK 1658 PG 746
6' UTILITY
EASEMENT PER
PLAT OF BREW SUB.
FIRST FILING
EXISTING 10' UTILTIY
EASEMENT
BK 1658 PG 746
3' POWER LINE EASEMENT
TO CITY OF FORT COLLINS
BK 1475 PG 941
45' ROW
BK 1743 PG 632
10' UTILITY
EASEMENT
BK 1572 PG 322
45' ROW
BK 1743 PG 632
10' UTILITY
EASEMENT
BK 1572 PG 321
30' UPRR TRACK EASEMENT
BOOK 2027 PAGE 988
REC. NO. 98091992 &
REC. NO. 20060019203
D
R
Y
C
R
E
E
K
EXISTING STORM
INLETS
SECTION LINE
SECTION LINE
LOT 2
LOT 1
LOT 3
30' UPRR TRACK EASEMENT
BOOK 2027 PAGE 988
REC. NO. 98091992 &
REC. NO. 20060019203
NON-EXCLUSIVE
ACCESS EASEMENT
REC. NO. 20140030921
53.5' PERPETUAL EASEMENT FOR
ELECTRIC POWER TRANSMISSION LINE
BK 923 PG 282
24' ACCESS EASEMENT
REC. NO. 20140036292
20 IRRIGATION DITCH
EASEMENT
BK 1429 PG 750
30 EASEMENT FOR ROAD PURPOSES
BK 1143 PG 187
(EXCEPTION PARCEL PIB FCIF25205400)
20 RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT
BK 1114 PG 555
6' UTILITY EASEMENT
REC. NO. 2006-0068858 &
REC. NO. 2006-0068859
20' UTILITY EASEMENT
PER VALLEY STEEL &
WIRE SUBDIVISION PLAT
INTERIM SITE
OUTFALL
RAIN
GARDEN
RAIN
GARDEN
RAIN
GARDEN
DETENTION
POND
EXISTING DETENTION
POND
0.35
4
EXISTING
CULVERT
S
T
4
EXISTING 36"
WATER LINEEXISTING 36"
WATER LINE
ST
ST ST
S
T
S
T
S
T
ST
ST
ST
ST
STSTSTST
STORM CONNECTION
TO EXISTING
ROADSIDE DITCH
INTERIM HICKORY
REGIONAL DETENTION
POND OUTFALL
ULTIMATE HICKORY
REGIONAL DETENTION
POND OUTFALL
TRACT A
PROPOSED
NATURAL
HABITAT BUFFER
ZONE
PROPOSED
NATURAL
HABITAT BUFFER
ZONE
MDP
MA
S
T
E
R
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
L
A
N
Sheet
Th
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
in
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
o
f
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
b
y
N
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
an
d
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
o
b
e
u
s
e
d
f
o
r
an
y
t
y
p
e
o
f
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
un
l
e
s
s
s
i
g
n
e
d
a
n
d
s
e
a
l
e
d
b
y
a
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
th
e
e
m
p
l
o
y
o
f
N
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
E
T
NO
R
T
H
M
A
S
O
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
OV
E
R
A
L
L
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF
COLORADO
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
NORTH
( IN FEET )
0
1 INCH = 60 FEET
60 60 120 180
LEGEND:
NOTES:
1.ALL PROJECT DATA IS ON THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS VERTICAL DATUM; NAVD88.
SEE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR BENCHMARK REFERENCES.
2.ACCESS POINTS SHOWN ON THE ODP ARE APPROXIMATE. EXACT LOCATIONS TO BE
DETERMINED DURING THE PDP PROCESS. TWO POINTS OF FIRE ACCESS HAVE BEEN
PLANNED TO SERVICE DEVELOPMENT.
3.PLANNING AREA ACREAGE AND BOUNDARIES ARE PRELIMINARY AND SUBJECT TO
CHANGE WITH DETAILED PLANNING.
5.PLEASE SEE SECTION 3.4.1 OF THE LAND USE CODE FOR ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN
THE NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER ZONE
6.REFER TO ODP AND OVERALL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
C
3
Phasing Schedule
Drainage Phasing Schedule
Phase Description Required Improvement
Mason Street Infrastructure Interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond, Interim Standard Water Quailty & Reconstruction of Offsite Storm Outfall
Lot 1 Ultimate Hickory Regional Pond sizing and outfall
Lot 2 Low-Impact Development
Lot 3 Detention & Low-Impact Development
Tract A (City Owned)n/a
Site Phasing Schedule
Phase Description Required Improvements
Mason Street Infrastructure Mason St. (42'FL-FL & 6' West Sidewalk)
Lot 1 n/a
Lot 2 n/a
Lot 3 Hibdon Ct. (Ultimate Street Section) & Mason St. (6' East Sidewalk)
Tract A (City Owned)Mason St. (6' East Sidewalk)
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
September 27, 2023
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
22—Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slope...............................................13
73—Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes.................................................14
References............................................................................................................16
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
44
9
4
8
3
0
44
9
4
8
7
0
44
9
4
9
1
0
44
9
4
9
5
0
44
9
4
9
9
0
44
9
5
0
3
0
44
9
4
8
3
0
44
9
4
8
7
0
44
9
4
9
1
0
44
9
4
9
5
0
44
9
4
9
9
0
44
9
5
0
3
0
493090 493130 493170 493210 493250 493290 493330 493370 493410 493450
493090 493130 493170 493210 493250 493290 493330 493370 493410 493450
40° 36' 22'' N
10
5
°
4
'
5
4
'
'
W
40° 36' 22'' N
10
5
°
4
'
3
8
'
'
W
40° 36' 14'' N
10
5
°
4
'
5
4
'
'
W
40° 36' 14'' N
10
5
°
4
'
3
8
'
'
W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84
0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 25 50 100 150
Meters
Map Scale: 1:1,730 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 17, Sep 7, 2022
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 2, 2021—Aug 25,
2021
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
22 Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1
percent slope
2.4 16.7%
73 Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent
slopes
11.9 83.3%
Totals for Area of Interest 14.2 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
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
22—Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slope
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jpvt
Elevation: 4,800 to 5,500 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: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Caruso and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Caruso
Setting
Landform:Flood-plain steps, stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Mixed alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 35 inches: clay loam
H2 - 35 to 44 inches: fine sandy loam
H3 - 44 to 60 inches: gravelly sand
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Somewhat poorly 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:About 24 to 48 inches
Frequency of flooding:NoneOccasional
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R067BY036CO - Overflow
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Loveland
Percent of map unit:9 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
13
Landform:Terraces
Ecological site:R067BY036CO - Overflow
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Fluvaquents
Percent of map unit:6 percent
Landform:Terraces
Hydric soil rating: Yes
73—Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2tlng
Elevation: 4,100 to 5,700 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F
Frost-free period: 135 to 152 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Nunn and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Nunn
Setting
Landform:Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Pleistocene aged alluvium and/or eolian deposits
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 6 inches: clay loam
Bt1 - 6 to 10 inches: clay loam
Bt2 - 10 to 26 inches: clay loam
Btk - 26 to 31 inches: clay loam
Bk1 - 31 to 47 inches: loam
Bk2 - 47 to 80 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Custom Soil Resource Report
14
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:7 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline (0.1 to 1.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:0.5
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R067BY042CO - Clayey Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Heldt
Percent of map unit:10 percent
Landform:Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R067BY042CO - Clayey Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Wages
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
15
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
16
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
17
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
MAP POCKET
DR1 – PROPOSED DRAINAGE EXHIBIT
ELEC
F
CTV
CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV
OHU OHU OHU OHU
CTV
X X X X
X X X X X X X
CTV
G G G
G G G G G G
SS SS SS SS SS SS
D
HY D
S
FE
S
FE
S
XX
X
X
X
X
W W W W W W W
12" W
S
UDUDUDUD
UD
UD
UD
U
D
U
D
UD
SC
TF
10' UTILITY EASEMENT
BK 1658 PG 746
45' ROW
BK 1743 PG 632
10' UTILITY EASEMENT
BK 1572 PG 322
N
M
A
S
O
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
a1
HIBDON COURT
45' ROW
BK 1743 PG 632
10' UTILITY
EASEMENT
40' DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
WANKIER LANCE
1401 N. COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO
WOOD RONALD G/ JENNIFER
L/ WILLARD E
122 HIBDON COURT
FORT COLLINS, CO
THOMPSON PROPERTIES LLC
1319 N. COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO
a2
a3
b2
b3
b1
60' DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
ULTIMATE PLANNED WSEL
(4980) PER THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
4' CURB CUT AND
SIDEWALK CHASECONCRETE
RUNDOWN AND
FOREBAY
CONCRETE
RUNDOWN AND
FOREBAY
STORM DRAIN
(TYP.)
4' CURB CUT
CONCRETE
RUNDOWN AND
FOREBAYULTIMATE PLANNED WSEL
(4980) PER THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS
HICKORY REGIONAL
DETENTION POND
LOT 1
LOT 3
LOT 2
RAIN GARDEN 2
REQ VOL. 969 CUFT
PROVIDED VOL. 978 CUFT
RAIN GARDEN 1
REQ VOL. 1,443 CUFT
PROVIDED VOL. 1,689 CUFT
0.24 ac.
R1
0.14 ac.
R2
0.22 ac.
R3
0.09 ac.
R4
0.18 ac.
B1
0.36 ac.
A2
0.32 ac.
A1
0.39 ac.
A3
0.13 ac.
A4
0.07 ac.
A5
0.37 ac.
C1
0.15 ac.
B4
0.26 ac.
B2
0.05 ac.
A6
0.07 ac.
A7
0.13 ac.
B3
DR1
DR
A
I
N
A
G
E
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
8
NORTH
( IN FEET )
1 inch = ft.
Feet03030
30
60 90
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
Sheet
FO
R
T
C
O
L
L
I
N
S
R
E
S
C
U
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
Th
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
in
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
s
o
f
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
b
y
N
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
an
d
a
r
e
n
o
t
t
o
b
e
u
s
e
d
f
o
r
an
y
t
y
p
e
o
f
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
un
l
e
s
s
s
i
g
n
e
d
a
n
d
s
e
a
l
e
d
b
y
a
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
th
e
e
m
p
l
o
y
o
f
N
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
E
T
of 8
FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
KEYMAP
PROPOSED CONTOUR
PROPOSED STORM SEWER
PROPOSED SWALE
EXISTING CONTOUR
PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PROPOSED INLET
A
DESIGN POINT
FLOW ARROW
DRAINAGE BASIN LABEL
DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY
PROPOSED SWALE SECTION
11
NOTES:
1.REFER TO THE PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT, DATED NOVEMBER 1, 2023 FOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
2.REFER TO THE MASON STREET INFRASTRUCTURE DRAINAGE REPORT FOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
A
LEGEND:
EMERGENCY OVERFLOW PATH
DEVELOPED DRAINAGE SUMMARY
Design
Point Basin ID
Total
Area
(acres)
C2 C100 2-Yr Tc
(min)
100-Yr Tc
(min)
Q2
(cfs)
Q100
(cfs)
r1 R1 0.244 0.95 1.00 5.00 5.00 0.66 2.43
r2 R2 0.138 0.95 1.00 5.00 5.00 0.37 1.38
r3 R3 0.221 0.95 1.00 5.00 5.00 0.60 2.20
r4 R4 0.088 0.95 1.00 5.00 5.00 0.24 0.88
a1 A1 0.324 0.22 0.27 6.10 6.10 0.19 0.85
a2 A2 0.358 0.69 0.86 11.39 11.39 0.53 2.29
a3 A3 0.389 0.82 1.00 10.94 10.94 0.70 2.94
a4 A4 0.130 0.79 0.99 5.00 5.00 0.29 1.28
a5 A5 0.067 0.67 0.83 5.00 5.00 0.13 0.55
a6 A6 0.054 0.48 0.60 5.68 5.68 0.07 0.32
a7 A7 0.074 0.57 0.71 5.00 5.00 0.12 0.52
b1 B1 0.185 0.20 0.25 10.39 10.39 0.08 0.36
b2 B2 0.262 0.76 0.95 11.33 11.33 0.42 1.84
b3 B3 0.134 0.75 0.94 10.56 10.56 0.22 0.95
b4 B4 0.150 0.51 0.64 5.00 5.00 0.22 0.95
c1 C1 0.371 0.52 0.65 5.00 5.00 0.55 2.41
LID Summary per Basin
LID ID Area Weighted %
Impervious
Treatment
Type
Required
Volume (cu. ft.)
Total Impervious
Area (sq. ft.)Sq. Ft.Acres
RG1 74,244 1.70 62%Rain Garden 1,443 45,950
RG2 48,415 1.11 64%Rain Garden 969 30,783
Total 122,659 2.82 2,412 76,733
LID Site Summary
Total Site Area 138,838 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area with LID Treatment 76,733 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area without LID
Treatment 7,144 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area 83,878 sq. ft.
75% Requried Minium Area to be Treated 62,908 cu. ft.
Total Treated Area 76,733 sq. ft.
Percent Impervious Treated by LID 91%