No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION - FDP230022 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - Drainage Related Document (2) FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION FORT COLLINS, COLORADO FEBRUARY 14TH, 2024 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 February 14th, 2024 City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80526 RE: FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR THE FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION (1971-001) Dear Staff: Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final 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 .............................................................................................. 8 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 – WATER QUALITY/LID COMPUTATIONS APPENDIX C – HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS 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 FINAL 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 FINAL 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 Hickory Regional Detention Pond is conveyed through a 24” HP storm pipe and is 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. Lot 2 has been raised several feet with the Mason Street Infrastructure project and conflict with groundwater is not expected with the proposed building or LID treatment. 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 FINAL 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 existing Hickory Regional Detention Pond and outfalls to a 24” HP storm pipe that is conveyed 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 FINAL 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 existing Hickory Regional Detention Pond and existing infrastructure as the site’s outfall. In the interim this runoff will be routed to the existing 24” HP storm pipe outfall, but in the future an ultimate Hickory Pond outfall will be 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. This has already been taken into account with the Mason Street Infrastructure Project. The interim release rate for the regional pond is calculated NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 5 | 11 as 2.63cfs (13.13ac x 0.2cfs/ac). With the Mason Street Infrastructure project, the anticipated release rate for Lot 2 is 0.64cfs (3.19ac 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 9,346 cu.ft. for Lots 1, 2, 3, and Tract A with the Mason Street Infrastructure Project. The site plan is constrained on all sides by the regional detention pond, public roads, and residential buildings. Existing elevations along the property lines will be maintained. The Hickory Regional Detention Pond has a planned high-water elevation of 4978. The design of the Fort Collins Rescue Mission will take this into account and there will not be any encroachment of the Hickory Detention Pond within the rain gardens. 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 manufacturers capacity charts for Nyloplast basins and grates (Advanced Drainage Systems).  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 FINAL 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 9,346 cu.ft. was anticipated with Lots 1, 2, 3, Tract A 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 B 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 Rescue Mission Project will utilize a very small portion of the calculated standard water quality. The Majority of treatment will be provided through LID facilities. The emergency overflow for the two proposed rain gardens will be into the Hickory Regional Detention Pond. The interim regional detention pond HWSEL of 4978 and will not encroach into the proposed rain gardens. Per the Mason Street Infrastructure project, the regional pond emergency spillway is located south along N Mason Street adjacent to the 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 1.30 acres. All sub-basins discharge to Rain Garden 1, located in basin A1. These sub-basins primarily consist of asphalt paving of the south parking area, courtyards along the west side of the building, 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 0.73 acres. All sub-basins discharge to Rain Garden 2, located in basin B1. These sub-basins primarily consist of asphalt paving of the NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 7 | 11 north parking area, 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. Major Basin C Major Basin C has 1 sub-basin (C1) and has a total area of 0.35 acres. This basin primarily consists of landscaping and a concrete trail along the west property line. 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. This Basin The regional pond will provide detention and standard water quality for this basin. Major Basin R Major Basin R has 4 sub-basins (R1-R12) and has a total area of 0.81 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. These rain gardens will provide water quality treatment for these basins and discharge them to the Hickory Regional Detention Pond. 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 LID treatment requirements for the project site and two proposed rain gardens. The Hickory Regional Detention Pond will provide 100% of the detention and standard water quality treatment for this project. Table 1 – Detention & WQCV Summary Description Hickory Det. Pond (See Note 1) Notes Lot 2 Required Detention Volume n/a ac. ft. n/a ac. ft. Volume provided in Hickory Regional Detention Pond (See Note 1) Lot 2 Release Rate n/a cfs n/a cfs Release Rate provided in Hickory Regional Detentin Pond (See Note 1) Description Volume Provided Notes Rain Garden 1 1,405 cu. ft. 1870 cu. ft. LID for Major Basin A and Roof Connections Rain Garden 2 682 cu. ft. 915 cu.ft. LID for Major Basin B and Roof Connections Standard Water Quailty (Hickory Regional Pond) n/a cu. ft. n/a cu. ft. Standard water quailty treatment provided in 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 per the Mason Street Infrastructure project. See the Mason Street infrastructure project for detailed design of the Hickory Regional Detention Pond. See Appendix E NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 8 | 11 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. 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 3,986 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R2 1,069 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R3 3,995 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R4 7,543 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R5 4,961 0.11 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R6 1,712 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R7 741 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R8 1,263 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R9 3,017 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R10 4,555 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R11 1,765 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 R12 716 0.02 0.00 0.02 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 16,118 0.37 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 88% 0.86 0.86 0.86 1.00 A4 4,575 0.11 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 90% 0.87 0.87 0.87 1.00 A5 1,783 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.87 0.87 0.87 1.00 A6 1,902 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 90% 0.87 0.87 0.87 1.00 A7 2,487 0.06 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 90% 0.87 0.87 0.87 1.00 B1 11,834 0.27 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 10% 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.33 B2 8,356 0.19 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 52% 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.73 B3 10,356 0.24 0.17 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.06 73% 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.93 B4 1,206 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 2% 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.25 C1 15,259 0.35 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 13% 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.36 Rain Garden 1 (A) 77,894 1.79 0.78 0.49 0.02 0.00 0.50 69% 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.92 Rain Garden 2 (B) 45,763 1.05 0.29 0.32 0.01 0.00 0.43 56% 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.80 Total 138,916 3.19 1.11 0.81 0.03 0.00 1.24 59% 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.82 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 February 14, 2024 Notes: 1) Rain Garden 1 consists of A basins and Basin R4 & R6-R12 2) Rain Garden 2 consists of B basins and Basins R1-R3 & R5 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 55 5.00%1.22 1.22 0.81 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.31 1.22 5.00 1.22 5.00 0.81 5.00 r2 R2 18 5.00%0.70 0.70 0.46 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.10 0.70 5.00 0.70 5.00 0.46 5.00 r3 R3 55 5.00%1.22 1.22 0.81 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.31 1.22 5.00 1.22 5.00 0.81 5.00 r4 R4 85 5.00%1.51 1.51 1.01 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.47 1.51 5.00 1.51 5.00 1.01 5.00 r5 R5 80 5.00%1.47 1.47 0.98 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.44 1.47 5.00 1.47 5.00 0.98 5.00 r6 R6 26 5.00%0.84 0.84 0.56 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.14 0.84 5.00 0.84 5.00 0.56 5.00 r7 R7 26 5.00%0.84 0.84 0.56 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.14 0.84 5.00 0.84 5.00 0.56 5.00 r8 R8 22 5.00%0.77 0.77 0.51 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.12 0.77 5.00 0.77 5.00 0.51 5.00 r9 R9 62 5.00%1.29 1.29 0.86 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.34 1.29 5.00 1.29 5.00 0.86 5.00 r10 R10 62 5.00%1.29 1.29 0.86 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.34 1.29 5.00 1.29 5.00 0.86 5.00 r11 R11 20 5.00%0.73 0.73 0.49 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.11 0.73 5.00 0.73 5.00 0.49 5.00 r12 R12 10 5.00%0.52 0.52 0.35 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.06 0.52 5.00 0.52 5.00 0.35 5.00 a1 A1 60 5.00%7.47 7.47 7.00 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.33 7.47 7.47 7.47 7.47 7.00 7.00 a2 A2 40 2.00%3.86 3.86 2.25 225 0.90%Gutter 0.02 3.61 19.18 0.19 3.10 1.21 11.47 5.07 5.07 5.07 5.07 3.46 5.00 a3 A3 40 2.00%2.30 2.30 0.94 130 0.60%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 0.59 5.38 0.40 10.94 2.70 5.00 2.70 5.00 1.34 5.00 a4 A4 40 2.00%2.14 2.14 0.94 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.22 2.14 5.00 2.14 5.00 0.94 5.00 a5 A5 25 2.00%1.68 1.68 0.74 0.00%Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.14 1.68 5.00 1.68 5.00 0.74 5.00 a6 A6 28 2.00%1.77 1.77 0.79 0.00% Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.16 1.77 5.00 1.77 5.00 0.79 5.00 a7 A7 20 2.00%1.52 1.52 0.66 0.00% Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.11 1.52 5.00 1.52 5.00 0.66 5.00 b1 B1 70 5.00%7.68 7.68 7.08 0.00% Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.39 7.68 7.68 7.68 7.68 7.08 7.08 b2 B2 30 2.00%4.18 4.18 2.98 107 0.50% Gutter 0.02 3.61 19.18 0.19 2.31 0.77 10.76 4.95 5.00 4.95 5.00 3.76 5.00 b3 B3 47 5.00%2.68 2.68 1.29 190 1.50% Gutter 0.02 3.61 19.18 0.19 4.00 0.79 11.32 3.47 5.00 3.47 5.00 2.08 5.00 b4 B4 20 2.00%5.97 5.97 5.64 0.00% Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.11 5.97 5.97 5.97 5.97 5.64 5.64 c1 C1 14 405.00%0.77 0.77 0.70 0.00% Valley Pan 0.02 6.00 10.25 N/A N/A 0.00 10.08 0.77 5.00 0.77 5.00 0.70 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 February 14, 2024 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 Stormwater Manual) 𝑇௜ =1.87 1.1 − 𝐶 ∗ 𝐶𝑓𝐿 𝑆ଵ ଷൗ 𝑉 = 1.49 𝑛∗ 𝑅 ଶ/ଷ ∗𝑆(Equation 5-4 per Fort Collins Stormwater Manual) 𝑇𝑐 =𝐿 180 + 10 (Equation 3.3-5 per Fort Collins Stormwater Manual) 𝑇𝑡 =𝐿 𝑉 ∗ 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 0.09 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 r2 R2 0.02 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 r3 R3 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 r4 R4 0.17 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.2 0.5 0.8 1.7 r5 R5 0.11 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.1 r6 R6 0.04 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 r7 R7 0.02 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 r8 R8 0.03 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 r9 R9 0.07 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.7 r10 R10 0.10 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 1.0 r11 R11 0.04 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 r12 R12 0.02 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 a1 A1 0.32 7.5 7.5 7.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 2.5 4.3 8.8 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.8 a2 A2 0.36 5.1 5.1 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.9 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.4 0.7 1.2 3.1 a3 A3 0.37 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.5 0.9 1.5 3.7 a4 A4 0.11 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.3 0.4 1.0 a5 A5 0.04 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 a6 A6 0.04 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 a7 A7 0.06 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 b1 B1 0.27 7.7 7.7 7.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 2.5 4.2 8.8 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.8 b2 B2 0.19 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.6 0.6 0.7 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.4 b3 B3 0.24 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.9 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.3 0.5 0.9 2.2 b4 B4 0.03 6.0 6.0 5.6 0.2 0.2 0.3 2.8 4.7 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 c1 C1 0.35 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.3 0.3 0.4 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 1.2 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 February 14, 2024 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 WATER QUALITY/LID COMPUTATIONS Project Number:Project:Fort Collins Rescue Mission Project Location:Date:February 14, 2024 Description Hickory Det. Pond (See Note 1) Notes Lot 2 Required Detention Volume n/a ac. ft.n/a ac. ft. Volume provided in Hickory Regional Detention Pond (See Note 1) Lot 2 Release Rate n/a cfs n/a cfs Release Rate provided in Hickory Regional Detentin Pond (See Note 1) Description Volume Provided Notes Rain Garden 1 1,405 cu. ft.1870 cu. ft. LID for Major Basin A and Roof Connections Rain Garden 2 682 cu. ft.915 cu.ft. LID for Major Basin B and Roof Connections Standard Water Quailty (Hickory Regional Pond)n/a cu. ft.n/a cu. ft.Standard water quailty treatment provided in 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 per the Mason Street Infrastructure project. See the Mason Street infrastructure project for detailed design of the Hickory Regional Detention Pond. See Appendix E 1 FD C SC T F E M GM UD G ELE C CT V OH U X X G G G F E S F ES UD UD UD UD UD UD DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS b1 a1 HICKORY REGIONAL DETENTION POND HI B D O N C O U R T N MASON S T R E E T 0.09 ac. R1 0.09 ac. R3 0.11 ac. R5 0.27 ac. B1 0.36 ac. A2 0.32 ac. A1 0.37 ac. A3 0.11 ac. A4 0.04 ac. A5 0.35 ac. C1 0.03 ac. B4 0.19 ac. B2 0.04 ac. A6 0.06 ac. A7 0.24 ac. B3 0.02 ac. R2 0.17 ac. R4 0.02 ac. R12 0.04 ac. R6 0.02 ac. R7 0.03 ac. R8 0.10 ac. R10 0.07 ac. R9 0.04 ac. R11 RAIN GARDEN 1 CURB CUT & SIDEWALK CHASE INTERIM DETENTION POND OUTFALL PROPOSED STORM DRAIN RAIN GARDEN 2 CURB CUT CURB CUT DRAWN BY: SCALE: DATE: WQ EXHIBIT SHEET NO: P: \ 1 9 7 1 - 0 0 1 \ D W G \ E N G I N E E R \ M A S O N \ 2 0 2 4 - 0 2 - 1 2 \ M A S O N S T R E E T \ M A S O N \ U P D A T E D D R A I N A G E \ 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' 02/14/2024 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 Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By: Sq. Ft.Acres R1 3,986 0.09 90% 3,587 R2 1,069 0.02 90% 962 R3 3,995 0.09 90% 3,596 R4 7,543 0.17 90% 6,789 R5 4,961 0.11 90% 4,465 R6 1,712 0.04 90% 1,541 R7 741 0.02 90% 667 R8 1,263 0.03 90% 1,137 R9 3,017 0.07 90% 2,715 R10 4,555 0.10 90% 4,100 R11 1,765 0.04 90% 1,589 R12 716 0.02 90% 644 A1 14,111 0.32 4% 627 A2 15,606 0.36 66% 10,268 A3 16,118 0.37 88% 14,127 A4 4,575 0.11 90% 4,110 A5 1,783 0.04 90% 1,604 A6 1,902 0.04 90% 1,714 A7 2,487 0.06 90% 2,230 B1 11,834 0.27 10% 1,177 B2 8,356 0.19 52% 4,385 B3 10,356 0.24 73% 7,545 B4 1,206 0.03 2% 24 C1 15,259 0.35 13% 2,027 Total 138,916 3.19 81,628 Sq. Ft.Acres Rain Garden 1 77,894 1.79 69% Rain Garden 1,405 53,860 Rain Garden 2 45,763 1.05 56% Rain Garden 682 25,741 Total 123,657 2.84 79,601 138,916 ft2 79,601 ft3 2,027 ft2 81,628 ft2 61,221 ft3 79,601 ft2 98% Rain Garden 2 Rain Garden 2 Rain Garden 2 n/a LID TREATMENT ID Rain Garden 2 Rain Garden 2 Rain Garden 2 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 2 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 2 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 Rain Garden 1 LID SUMMARY AreaBasin ID Percent Impervious Fort Collins Rescue Mission February 14, 2024 1971-001 Fort Collins, Colorado M. Ruebel Total Impervious Area (ft2) LID Summary per Basin Weighted % Impervious LID Summary per LID Structure Impervious Area (ft2)Treatment TypeLID ID Required Volume (ft3) Area Total Impervious Area 75% Requried Minium Area to be Treated Total Treated Area Percent Impervious Treated by LID ` LID Site Summary Total Site Area Total Impervious Area with LID Treatment Total Impervious Area without LID Treatment Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =69.0 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.690 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 0.22 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 77,894 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 =1,405 cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =12 in B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical) Z = 4.00 ft / ft (Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls) C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =1075 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 February 13, 2024 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, RG 2/13/2024, 1:49 PM Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity of structures or groundwater contamination? 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 February 13, 2024 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, RG 2/13/2024, 1:49 PM Project: Date: Pond No.: 4,978.00 1,405.00 cu. ft. 4,979.00 4,978.86 1,870.40 cu. ft. 4,980.00 Max. Elev. Min. Elev. cu. ft. acre ft cu. ft. acre ft 4,978.00 N/A 1,313 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,978.20 4,978.00 1,591 0.20 290.40 0.01 290.40 0.01 4,978.40 4,978.20 1,775 0.20 336.60 0.01 627.00 0.01 4,978.60 4,978.40 1,966 0.20 374.10 0.01 1,001.10 0.02 4,978.80 4,978.60 2,168 0.20 413.40 0.01 1,414.50 0.03 4,979.00 4,978.80 2,391 0.20 455.90 0.01 1,870.40 0.04 Crest of Pond Elev.: Volume at Grate: Grate Elevation: RAIN GARDEN 1 Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By:Rain Garden 1 Required LID Provided LID STAGE STORAGE CURVE Contour Contour Surface Area (ft2) Depth (ft) Incremental Volume Cummalitive Volume Pond Stage Storage Curve 1971-001 Fort Collins, CO M. Ruebel Elev at Req. LID Volume: Fort Collins Rescue Mission February 14, 2024 Pond Outlet and Volume Data Outlet Elevation: Required LID Volume: 1 Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =56.0 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.560 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 0.18 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 45,763 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 =682 cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =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 =513 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 February 13, 2024 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, RG 2/13/2024, 1:49 PM Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity of structures or groundwater contamination? 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 February 13, 2024 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, RG 2/13/2024, 1:49 PM Project: Date: Pond No.: 4,978.16 682.00 cu. ft. 4,978.66 4,978.55 915.04 cu. ft. 4,980.00 Max. Elev. Min. Elev. cu. ft. acre ft cu. ft. acre ft 4,978.16 N/A 1,550 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,978.40 4,978.16 1,783 0.24 399.96 0.01 399.96 0.01 4,978.60 4,978.40 2,028 0.20 381.10 0.01 781.06 0.02 4,978.66 4,978.60 2,438 0.06 133.98 0.00 915.04 0.02 STAGE STORAGE CURVE Contour Contour Surface Area (ft2) Depth (ft) Incremental Volume Cummalitive Volume Pond Stage Storage Curve 1971-001 Fort Collins, CO M. Ruebel Elev at Req. LID Volume: Fort Collins Rescue Mission February 14, 2024 Pond Outlet and Volume Data Outlet Elevation: Required LID Volume: Crest of Pond Elev.: Volume at Grate: Grate Elevation: RAIN GARDEN 2 Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By:Rain Garden 2 Required LID Provided LID 1 1971-001 Fort Collins Rescue Mission Fort Collins Rescue Mission Fort Collins, CO M. Ruebel Date:2/13/2024 Forebay ID Storm Conveyance ID Basin ID Total Undetained Area Contributing to Pond Total Undetained 100-yr Discharge Percent Impervious Forebay Depth Required Forebay Area Provided Length Provided Width Provided Area (ac) (cfs) (%)(ft3)1% of WQCV (ft)(ft2)(ft) (ft)(ft2) Forebay 1-1 Curb Cut 1 (South Parking Lot) A3 0.39 3.9 83% 394.06 3.94 1 3.9 2.0 4.0 8.0 Forebay 1-2 Curb Cut 2 (N Mason Street)A2 0.36 3.1 66% 269.78 2.70 1 2.7 2.0 4.0 8.0 Forebay 1-3 Storm A R4, R6-10, R12, A4-7 0.76 7.53 90% 886.10 8.86 1 8.9 2.0 5.0 10.0 Forebay 1-4 Storm R3 R11 0.04 0.9 90% 46.64 0.47 1 0.5 2.0 2.0 4.0 Forebay 2-1 Curb Cut 3 (North Parking Lot) B2, B3, R3, R5 0.6 5.6 72% 495.47 4.95 1 5.0 2.0 4.0 8.0 Forebay 2-2 Storm R1 R1 0.09 0.9 90% 104.93 1.05 1 1.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 Forebay 2-3 Storm R2 R2 0.02 0.9 90% 23.32 0.23 1 0.2 2.0 2.0 4.0 Project Number: Project Location: Calculations By: WQCV Forebay Calculations NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX APPENDIX C HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS Project #: Project Name: Project Loc.: Design Flowrate Upstream Flowrate Total Flowrate Allowable Flowrate Overflow Design Flowrate Upstream Flowrate Total Flowrate Allowable Flowrate Overflow Inlet A9 (1/3) of Basin A7, Basin R12 15" Nyloplast Basin 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 4.00 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.30 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.30 cfs 4.00 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A13 (1/3) of Basin A7 12" Nyloplast Basin 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 2.50 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.20 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.20 cfs 2.50 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A3-1 Basin A4 12" Nyloplast Basin 0.30 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.30 cfs 2.50 cfs 0.00 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs 1.00 cfs 2.50 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A3-2 Basin A4 (Nuisance Flows)12" Nyloplast Basin 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 2.50 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 2.50 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A10-1 (1/3) of Basin A7 8" Nyloplast Basin 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.20 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.20 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A7-3 Basin A5 (Nuisance Flows)12" Nyloplast Basin 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 2.50 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 2.50 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A10-2 Basin A6 (Nuisance Flows)8" Nyloplast Basin 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A7-4.1 Basin A6 (Nuisance Flows)8" Nyloplast Basin 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A7-2.1 Basin A6 8" Nyloplast Basin 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.40 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.40 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet A7-1.1 Basin A5 8" Nyloplast Basin 0.10 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.10 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.40 cfs 0.00 cfs 0.40 cfs 1.00 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet B2 Outlet Structure for Rain Garden 1 Type C Inlet 3.70 cfs 0.00 cfs 3.70 cfs 18.66 cfs 0.00 cfs 7.60 cfs 0.00 cfs 14.90 cfs 18.66 cfs 0.00 cfs Inlet C4 Outlet Structure for Rain Garden 2 30" Nyloplast Basin 1.90 cfs 0.00 cfs 1.90 cfs 14.00 cfs 0.00 cfs 14.90 cfs 0.00 cfs 7.60 cfs 14.00 cfs 0.00 cfs INLET CAPACITIES SUMMARY Inlet Type Inlet and Area Drain Capacities 2-Year 100-Year 1971-001 Mason Street Infrastructure Fort Collins, Colorado Basins / Design Notes 3130 Verona Avenue • Buford, GA 30518 (866) 888-8479 / (770) 932-2443 • Fax: (770) 932-2490 © Nyloplast Inlet Capacity Charts June 2012 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 Ca p a c i t y ( c f s ) Head (ft) Nyloplast 8" Dome Grate Inlet Capacity Chart Inlet A7-2.1 = Q(REQ) 0.4 CFS w/ 50% Clogging Q = 0.6 CFS NOTE: Inlets A10-1, A10-2, A7-4.1, & A7-1.1 are designed to collect nuisance flows in landscaped areas. The majority of flows within these basin are collected in other inlets. See Inlet Capacity Summary for more information See Note 3130 Verona Avenue • Buford, GA 30518 (866) 888-8479 / (770) 932-2443 • Fax: (770) 932-2490 © Nyloplast Inlet Capacity Charts June 2012 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 Ca p a c i t y ( c f s ) Head (ft) Nyloplast 12" Dome Grate Inlet Capacity Chart Inlet A3-1 = Q(REQ) 1.0 CFS w/ 50% Clogging Q = 1.5 CFS NOTE: Inlets A13, A3-2, A7-3 are designed to collect nuisance flows in landscaped areas. The are sized mainly due to the pipe sizing requirements. The majority of flows within these basin are collected in other inlets. See Inlet Capacity Summary for more information See Note 3130 Verona Avenue • Buford, GA 30518 (866) 888-8479 / (770) 932-2443 • Fax: (770) 932-2490 © Nyloplast Inlet Capacity Charts June 2012 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 Ca p a c i t y ( c f s ) Head (ft) Nyloplast 15" Dome Grate Inlet Capacity Chart Inlet A9 = Q(REQ) 0.3 CFS w/ 50% Clogging Q = 0.45 CFS NOTE: Inlet A9 is sized mainly due to pipe sizing requirements 3130 Verona Avenue • Buford, GA 30518 (866) 888-8479 / (770) 932-2443 • Fax: (770) 932-2490 © Nyloplast Inlet Capacity Charts June 2012 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 Ca p a c i t y ( c f s ) Head (ft) Nyloplast 30" Dome Grate Inlet Capacity Chart Inlet C4 = Q(REQ) 7.6 CFS w/ 50% Clogging Q = 11.4 CFS Area Inlet Performance Curve: Inlet B2 Governing Equations: At low flow depths, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation: * where P = 2(L + W) * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation: * where A equals the open area of the inlet grate * where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) The exact depth at which the inlet ceases to act like a weir, and begins to act like an orifice is unknown. However, what is known, is that the stage-discharge curves of the weir equation and the orifice equation will cross at a certain flow depth. The two curves can be found below: If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir. Input Parameters: Type of Grate: CDOT TYPE C Length of Grate (ft): 2.79 Width of Grate (ft): 3.43 Open Area of Grate (ft2):8.13 Flowline Elevation (ft): 4979.00 Allowable Capacity: 0.50 Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Inlet (ft) Elevation (ft) Shallow Weir Flow (cfs) Orifice Flow (cfs) Actual Flow (cfs) 0.00 4979.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 4979.10 0.59 6.91 0.59 0.20 4979.20 1.67 9.78 1.67 0.30 4979.30 3.07 11.97 3.07 0.40 4979.40 4.72 13.82 4.72 0.50 4979.50 6.60 15.46 6.60 0.60 4979.60 8.67 16.93 8.67 0.70 4979.70 10.93 18.29 10.93 0.80 4979.80 13.35 19.55 13.35 0.90 4979.90 15.93 20.74 15.93 1.00 4980.00 18.66 21.86 18.66 <-Overflow 100-Year Design Flow = 14.9 cfs <-100-Year 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Di s c h a r g e ( c f s ) Stage (ft) Stage - Discharge Curves Weir Flow Orifice Flow 5.10.3 HPQ 5.0)2(67.0 gHAQ 19 26 20 25 STORM A STORM A STORM A7 STORM B STORM B STORM C STORM C Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Wednesday, Feb 14 2024 Curb Cut 1 (South Parking Lot) Rectangular Bottom Width (ft) = 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 80.80 Slope (%) = 3.60 N-Value = 0.015 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 4.90 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.21 Q (cfs) = 4.900 Area (sqft) = 0.84 Velocity (ft/s) = 5.83 Wetted Perim (ft) = 4.42 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.37 Top Width (ft) = 4.00 EGL (ft) = 0.74 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Elev (ft) Depth (ft)Section 80.00 -0.80 80.50 -0.30 81.00 0.20 81.50 0.70 82.00 1.20 Reach (ft) Req Q = 3.7cfs x 1.33 (Freeboard) = 4.9 cfs Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Wednesday, Feb 14 2024 Curb Cut 2 (Mason Street) Rectangular Bottom Width (ft) = 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 79.88 Slope (%) = 3.60 N-Value = 0.015 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 4.12 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.19 Q (cfs) = 4.120 Area (sqft) = 0.76 Velocity (ft/s) = 5.42 Wetted Perim (ft) = 4.38 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.33 Top Width (ft) = 4.00 EGL (ft) = 0.65 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Elev (ft) Depth (ft)Section 79.00 -0.88 79.50 -0.38 80.00 0.12 80.50 0.62 81.00 1.12 Reach (ft) Req Q = 3.1cfs x 1.33 (Freeboard) = 4.12 cfs Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Wednesday, Feb 14 2024 Curb Cut 3 (North Parking Lot) Rectangular Bottom Width (ft) = 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 78.67 Slope (%) = 5.00 N-Value = 0.015 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 5.98 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.21 Q (cfs) = 5.980 Area (sqft) = 0.84 Velocity (ft/s) = 7.12 Wetted Perim (ft) = 4.42 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.42 Top Width (ft) = 4.00 EGL (ft) = 1.00 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Elev (ft) Depth (ft)Section 78.00 -0.67 78.50 -0.17 79.00 0.33 79.50 0.83 80.00 1.33 Reach (ft) Req Q = 4.5cfs x 1.33 (Freeboard) = 5.98 cfs NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: FORT COLLINS RESCUE MISSION FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX APPENDIX C WATER QUALITY/LID COMPUTATIONS 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. Specification Sheet TMax™ High-Performance Turf Reinforcement Mat RMX_MPDS_TMAX_1.19 Material Content Woven Structure 100% UV stable Polypropylene Monofilament yarns Black/Green or Black/Tan Standard Roll Sizes Width 11.5 ft (3.5 m) 11.5 ft (3.5 m) Length 78 ft (23.8 m) 156 ft (47.5 m) Weight ± 10%72 lbs (32.7 kg)143.5 lbs (65.1 kg) Area 100 yd2 (83.6 m2)200 yd2 (167 m2) DESCRIPTION The TMax™ high-performance turf reinforcement mat (HP-TRM) shall be a machine-produced mat of 100% UV-stabilized, high denier polypropylene monofilament yarns woven into permanent, high-strength, three-dimensional turf reinforcement matting. Available in either a green/black or a tan/black coloring, the mat shall be composed of polypropylene yarns woven into a uniform configuration of resilient, pyramid-like projections. The mat provides sufficient thickness, optimum open area, and three- dimensionality for effective erosion control and vegetation reinforcement against high flow induced shear forces. The mat has high tensile strength for excellent damage resistance and for increasing the bearing capacity of vegetated soils subject to heavy loads from maintenance equipment and other vehicular traffic. The material has very high interlock and reinforcement capacities with both soil and root systems, and is designed for erosion control applications on steep slopes and vegetated waterways. Index Property Test Method Typical Thickness ASTM D6525 0.4 in (10 mm) Resiliency ASTM D6524 75% Mass/Unit Area ASTM D6566 11.3 oz/yd2 (382 g/m2) Tensile Strength – MD ASTM D6818 4,400 lbs/ft (64 kN/m) Elongation – MD ASTM D6818 35% Tensile Strength – TD ASTM D6818 3,300 lbs/ft (48.2 kN/m) Elongation – TD ASTM D6818 30% Light Penetration ASTM D6567 75% coverage UV Stability ASTM D4355 >90% @ 3000 hr Design Permissible Shear Stress* Vegetated Shear 16 psf (766 Pa) Vegetated Velocity 25 fps (7.6 m/s) + Minimum Average Roll VAlue *Design values extrapolated from large scale ASTM D6460 testing ©2019, North American Green is a registered trademark from Western Green. Certain products and/or applications described or illustrated herein are protected under one or more U.S. patents. Other U.S. patents are pending, and certain foreign patents and patent applications may also exist.Trademark rights also apply as indicated herein. Final determination of the suitability of any information or material for the use contemplated, and its manner of use, is the sole responsibility of the user. Printed in the U.S.A. Western Green 4609 E. Boonville-New Harmony Rd. Evansville, IN 47725 nagreen.com 800-772-2040 Disclaimer: The information contained herein may represent product index data, performance ratings, bench scale testing or other material utility quantifications. Each representation may have unique utility and limitations. Every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, however, no warranty is claimed and no liability shall be assumed by North American Green (NAG) or its affiliates regarding the completeness, accurracy or fitness of these values for any particular application or interpretation. While testing methods are provided for reference, values shown may be derived from intrpolation or adjustment to be representatvie of intended use. For further information, please feel free to contact NAG. 4609 E Boonville-New Harmony Rd Evansville, IN 47725 866-540-9810 12/7/21 Technical Bulletin: Comparison of TRM Design Life Estimates In the process of design, a relative frame of reference for the estimation of design life for Turf Reinforcement Mats (TRMs) and High Performance TRMS (HPTRMs) is often desired. To that end, this document has been developed to provide context and recommendations for a series of Western Excelsior and North American Green materials. Specifically, the longevity of a TRM in the field is a function of factors that are intrinsic to the material and many factors that are site specific. TRMs are typically constructed of any variety of filaments that may be bonded, woven or bound to create a cohesive matrix that is formed into a rolled product. The base synthetic product (ie polyester, nylon or polypropylene), chemical additives and dimensions can all, among other factors, influence the longevity of the material. Once installed in the field, degradation is a function of: • Exposure to ultra-violet (UV) radiation (sunlight) • Moisture • Mechanical Loading • Temperature • Exposure to chemicals and/or pollution • Definition of acceptable performance (i.e. tensile strength, coverage, etc.) Further, exposure to UV radiation naturally varies by: • Location • Facing Direction (North, East, West, South) • Elevation • Inclination (slope angle) • Coverage by soil, debris, foliage, vegetation or other shade Based on these factors, any material will degrade at different rates, depending on the field-specific situation. Even within a given project, the direction and inclination of one area compared to another may reduce the lifespan by fifty percent. Thus, it is important to realize that, absent a detailed, site-specific analysis, any design life estimate should be considered an estimate for informational purposes. With this background, general guidance for North American Green (NAG) and Western Excelsior (WEC) produced TRMs are provided for consideration in product selection: • S200, SC250, C350 – Up to ten years (synthetic portion) • PP5-8, PP5-10, PP5-12, P300 – Up to ten years • P550 – Up to fifteen years • PP5-Pro, TMax 3k – Up to fifty years • PP5-Xtreme, TMax – Up to seventy-five years These estimates may or may not be reasonable for any specific condition or location and represent a maximum duration where it would be reasonable to expect acceptable performance. This estimation is exclusive of fastener performance. Consult Western Green or NAG directly for more specific recommendations. Emergency Spillway 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 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT MASON STREET INFRASTRUCTURE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO JANUARY 31ST, 2024 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. Approved Drainage report will be included prior to FCRM approval Project Number:Project:Mason Infrastructure Project Location:Date:January 31, 2024 Description Provided Notes Interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond 1.84 ac. ft. 9.99 ac. ft.Volume for Mason Street Infrastructre project and development of Lot 2 in the Interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond Interim Hickory Pond Release Rate 2.63 cfs Release rate for on-site flows per Dry Creek Basin Criteria (13.13 acres * 0.2 cfs/acre) Description Volume Provided Notes Interim Standard Water Quailty 9,346 cu. ft. 9,346 cu. ft. Standard water quailty treatment for lots 1, 2, 3 & Tract A Notes: Summary of Water Quality Volumes Volume Required RELEASE RATE AND SUMMARY OF DETENTION VOLUMES 1971-001 Fort Colins Summary of Detention Volumes Required 1)LID Treatment for Lot 2, 3 and Mason Street will be provided with future development of lots. 1 ELEC FES M VAULTELEC CABLE ELEC X CT V CT V CTVCTV OHU XXXX X X CTVCTVCTVGGG SS SS SS H2O H2O ARV H2O H2O H Y D S FES FES W W W W W W W W W XXXXXX OHU OHU X X X X X S W W D UDUDUD UD U D U D UD UD a1 SITE OUTFALL LOCATION 6.98 ac. A1 0.40 ac. A4 1.32 ac. A2 0.32 ac. B3 0.35 ac. B4 0.06 ac. B6 0.23 ac. A7 0.18 ac. A6 1.39 ac. B1 0.64 ac. A5 0.41 ac. A3 0.09 ac. B7 0.13 ac. B5 0.86 ac. C1 0.08 ac. B2 LOT 1 HICKORY REGIONAL DETENTION POND LOT 2 LOT 3 TRACT A HIBDON COURT N M A S O N S T R E E T 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 W G \ S H E E T S _ M A S O N S T R E E T \ D R A I N A G E \ 1 9 7 1 - 0 0 1 _ L I D . D W G MASON STREET INFRASTRUCTURE FORT COLLINS COLORADO MCR 1" = 100' 01/31/2024 LID 1 PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPOSED INLET ADESIGN POINT DRAINAGE BASIN LABEL DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY A LEGEND: FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = ft. Feet0100100 100 LOT 1 (BASINS A1-A7, B1-B7) ·STANDARD WATER QUALITY AREA OF WATER QUALITY RESPONSIBILITY LOT 2 (BASINS A2-A7) ·LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT LOT 3 (BASINS B1, B2, B3) ·LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT 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 ARV H2O H2O H Y D S F E S FE 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 X X S 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 X SSSS UDUDUDUDUDUDUD UD UD UD UD U D U D UD UD UD UD UD 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 80 . 1 8 80 . 7 7 b4 a1 b7 b5 a6 b3 a3 b6 a4 a2 a7 b2 2' CONCRETE PAN WATER QUALITY OUTLET STRUCTURE WITH RESTRICTOR PLATE 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 STORM DRAIN A SEE SHEET 16 STORM DRAIN B SEE SHEET 19 ULTIMATE PLANNED WSEL (4978) PER THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ULTIMATE PLANNED WSEL (4978) PER THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ONSITE 100-YR REQUIRED WSEL (4976.47) ONSITE 100-YR REQUIRED WSEL (4976.47) PROPOSED NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER ZONE STORM DRAIN C SEE SHEET 18 DRAINAGE EASEMENT 4222 SQ. FT. of TMAX 1030 SQ. FT. of TMAX HICKORY REGIONAL DETENTION POND (INTERIM) REQUIRED VOLUME= 89,588 CU.FT. REQUIRED WSEL = 4976.47 WATER QUALITY VOLUME = 9,346 CU.FT. WATER QUALITY WSEL = 4975.27 PROVIDED VOLUME = 9.99 AC.FT. LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 6.98 ac. A1 0.40 ac. A4 1.32 ac. A2 0.32 ac. B3 0.35 ac. B4 0.06 ac. B6 0.23 ac. A7 0.18 ac. A6 1.39 ac. B1 0.64 ac. A5 0.41 ac. A3 0.09 ac. B7 0.13 ac. B5 0.86 ac. C1 0.08 ac. B2 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 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 10' UTILITY EASEMENT 10' UTILITY EASEMENT 3' POWER LINE EASEMENT TO CITY OF FORT COLLINS BK 1475 PG 941 30' STORMWATER EASEMENT 60' DRAINAGE EASEMENT S CO L L E G E A V E EXISTING 36" PIPE STORM DRAIN A SEE SHEET 16 DR1 DR A I N A G E E X H I B I T 37 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 37 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 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 JANUARY 31, 2024 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 2.THE VOLUME SHOWN FOR THE INTERIM HICKORY REGIONAL DETENTION POND DO 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 GRAVEL GEOGRID TURF REINFORCEMENT (TMAX) 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 SWALE SECTIONS SWALE SUMMARY TABLE 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 6.985 0.20 0.25 16.67 16.67 2.49 10.83 a2 A2 1.321 0.86 1.00 5.00 5.00 3.25 13.14 a3 A3 0.411 0.86 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.01 4.09 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 0.77 0.96 5.00 5.00 0.38 1.68 a7 A7 0.234 0.84 1.00 5.00 5.00 0.56 2.33 b1 B1 1.392 0.87 1.00 8.99 8.99 2.86 13.85 b2 B2 0.081 0.95 1.00 5.00 5.00 0.22 0.80 b3 B3 0.315 0.69 0.86 5.00 5.00 0.62 2.69 b4 B4 0.346 0.23 0.29 5.00 5.00 0.23 1.00 b5 B5 0.134 0.95 1.00 5.00 5.00 0.36 1.33 b6 B6 0.057 0.95 1.00 5.00 5.00 0.15 0.56 b7 B7 0.092 0.79 0.98 5.00 5.00 0.21 0.90 c1 C1 0.864 0.29 0.36 7.61 7.61 0.61 2.83 Interim Hickory Regional Detention Pond Volume Contour Elev.Contour Surface Area (ft2) Cummalitive Volume cu. ft.acre ft 4,974.80 125 0 0.0 4,975.00 3,010 313 0.0 4,976.00 60,990 32313 0.7 4,977.00 171,880 148749 3.4 4,978.00 221,264 345321 7.9 4,978.40 226,940 434961 10.0 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 DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS 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 HY D S FE S FE S XX X X X X S W W W W W W W W W S UDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUDUD UD UD UD U D U D UD U D U D U D UD UD UD UD UD UD UD UD UD UD E V UD S C TF G G UDUDUD G 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 b3 b2 b1 60' DRAINAGE EASEMENT EMERGENCY SPILLWAY EMERGENCY SPILLWAY 4' CURB CUT AND SIDEWALK CHASE STORM DRAIN (TYP.) HICKORY REGIONAL DETENTION POND LOT 1 LOT 3 LOT 2 RAIN GARDEN 2 REQ VOL. 682 CUFT PROVIDED VOL. 915 CUFT PROVIDED FLAT AREA = 1,532 SQFT RAIN GARDEN 1 REQ VOL. 1,405 CUFT PROVIDED VOL. 1,870 CUFT PROVIDED FLAT AREA = 1,442 SQFT 0.09 ac. R1 0.09 ac. R3 0.11 ac. R5 0.27 ac. B1 0.36 ac. A2 0.32 ac. A1 0.37 ac. A3 0.11 ac. A4 0.04 ac. A5 0.35 ac. C1 0.03 ac. B4 0.19 ac. B2 0.04 ac. A6 0.06 ac. A7 0.24 ac. B30.02 ac. R2 0.17 ac. R4 0.02 ac. R12 0.04 ac. R6 0.02 ac. R7 0.03 ac. R8 0.10 ac. R10 0.07 ac. R9 0.04 ac. R11 b1 r1 r3 r2 b4 r5 r4 c1 r10 r11 r9 r8 r7 a5 a6 r6 a7 r12 1' CURB CUT AND SIDEWALK CHASE 1' CURB CUT AND SIDEWALK CHASE CONCRETE RUNDOWN AND FOREBAY 1-1 SEE DETAIL SHEET 20 CONCRETE FOREBAY 1-3 SEE DETAIL SHEET 20 CONCRETE FOREBAY 1-4 SEE DETAIL SHEET 20 CONCRETE RUNDOWN AND FOREBAY 1-2 SEE DETAIL SHEET 20 CONCRETE RUNDOWN AND FOREBAY 2-1 SEE DETAIL SHEET 20 CONCRETE FOREBAY 2-2 SEE DETAIL SHEET 20 CONCRETE FOREBAY 2-3 SEE DETAIL SHEET 20 DR1 DR A I N A G E E X H I B I T 24 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 by a P r o f e s s i o n a l En g i n e e r i n t h e e m p l o y o f No r t h e r n E n g i n e e r i n g Se 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 24 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 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT, DATED FEBRUARY 14, 2024 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 2.REFER TO THE MASON STREET INFRASTRUCTURE DRAINAGE REPORT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. A LEGEND: EMERGENCY OVERFLOW PATH C2 C100 Q2 (cfs) Q100 (cfs)