The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPROSPECT SPORTS CLUB - FDP240002 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - Drainage Related DocumentFINAL DRAINAGE REPORT 19 OLD TOWN SQUARE #238 | FORT COLLINS, CO 80524 | 970-530-4044 | www.unitedcivil.com P ROSPECT S PORTS Lot 5 Prospect Park East P.U.D Fort Collins, CO Prepared for: RB+B Architects, Inc. 315 E. Mountain Ave, Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: April 2 nd , 2024 F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO i U22014_Drainage Report City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 RE: Prospect Sports Fort Collins, Colorado Project Number: U22014 Dear Staff: United Civil Design Group, LLC. is pleased to submit this Preliminary Drainage Report for the Prospect Sports site in Fort Collins, Colorado. In general, this report serves to document the stormwater impacts associated with the proposed improvements related to the existing site. We understand that review by the City of Fort Collins is to assure general compliance with standardized criteria contained in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM). This report was prepared in compliance with technical criteria set forth in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. If you should have any questions or comments as you review this report, please feel free to contact us at your convenience. Sincerely, United Civil Design Group Nate Stroud, PE, LSIT Project Manager COMPLIANCE STATEMENT I hereby attest that this report for the Final drainage design for Prospect Sports was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, in accordance with the provisions of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. I understand that the City of Fort Collins does not and will not assume liability for drainage facilities designed by others. Registered Professional Engineer State of Colorado No. 52985 F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO ii U22014_Drainage Report TABLE OF CONTENTS I. General Location and Description ................................................................................................................................ 1 A. General Location & Existing Site Information ......................................................................................... 1 B. Description of Property ......................................................................................................................... 1 C. Project Description ................................................................................................................................ 2 D. Floodplains and Floodplain Information................................................................................................. 2 II. Drainage Basins and Sub-Basins ................................................................................................................................... 3 A. Major Basin Description ........................................................................................................................ 3 B. Sub-Basin Description ........................................................................................................................... 3 III. Drainage Design Criteria .............................................................................................................................................. 3 A. Regulations ........................................................................................................................................... 3 B. Directly Connected Impervious Area (DCIA) ........................................................................................... 3 C. Hydrological Criteria .............................................................................................................................. 4 D. Hydraulic Criteria .................................................................................................................................. 4 E. Modifications of Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 4 IV. Drainage Facility Design .............................................................................................................................................. 5 A. General Concept ................................................................................................................................... 5 B. Specific Details ...................................................................................................................................... 5 V. Erosion Control ............................................................................................................................................................ 9 VI. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................... 10 A. Compliance with Standards ................................................................................................................. 10 B. Drainage Concept................................................................................................................................ 10 C. Stormwater Quality ............................................................................................................................. 10 VII. References ............................................................................................................................................................ 11 APPENDICES APPENDIX A – Hydrology Calculations APPENDIX B – Hydraulic Calculations B.1 – Low Impact Development Calculations B.2 – Water Quality Calculations B.3 – Inlet Sizing Calculations B.4 – Storm Pipe Calculations B.5 – Channel Capacity Calculations B.6 – Riprap Calculations APPENDIX C – Referenced Materials APPENDIX D – Drainage Exhibits F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 1 U22014_Drainage Report I.GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A.GENERAL LOCATION &EXISTING SITE INFORMATION The Prospect Sports site (referred herein as “the site”) is located within the Prospect Park East P.U.D, situated in the northwest quarter of Section 20, T7N, R68W of the 6th P.M., City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. The property, consisting of approximately 2.46 acres, is located immediately south of East Prospect Road. The property is bounded by Sharp Point Drive to the east, and Prospect Park East P.U.D lots to the west and south. On-site stormwater drains via overland flow off-site to an existing detention pond south of the site and within Tract A of the Prospect Park East P.U.D. FIGURE 1:SITE VICINITY MAP B.DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY The property currently exists largely as grass/weed landscape with sidewalk adjacent to East Prospect Road and Sharp Point Drive. Immediately south of the property are existing parking and drive lanes associated with the Prospect East P.U.D. – it is intended that the proposed surface improvements tie-in to these existing features. In its existing condition, the site primarily sheet flows to a low point at the south side of the site and ultimately drains to the existing pond located south of the site. Below are summaries of key components of the site in its existing conditions. Land Use - The site’s current land use is commercial. Ground Cover - The site exists largely as grass/weed landscape. The weed/grass cover is good (ie., heavy or dense cover with nearly all ground surfaces protected by vegetation). The southern portion of the site is fully developed as consists largely of impervious hardscaping. Existing Topography and Grades – In general the site slopes from north to south at approximately 0.5% to 25%. The center of the site has been built up with fill material and ties to the existing commercial lot south of the project at approximately 4:1 slopes. A majority of the site slopes from top back of curb along public roadways down into the site. Sharp Point Drive Prospect Park Way Site F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 2 U22014_Drainage Report Soil Type – The USDA’s Web Soil Survey shows that the site consists of “Type C” and “Type D” soils. The Web Soil Survey indicates the site is comprised of Aquepts, Loveland Clay Loam (0% to 1% slopes), and Riverwash material. The on-site soils provide low infiltration but are suitable for development. Utilities – The following utilities exist adjacent to the site in Prospect Road, Sharp Point Road, or in easement on the west side of the site: potable water, sanitary sewer, natural gas, electric and telecommunications. Drainage Features and Storm Sewer – Storm sewer infrastructure does not currently exist adjacent to the site. There is an existing detention pond for the proposed subdivision that is located to the south of the site within Tract A of the Prospect Park East P.U.D, but this facility is inaccessible to the proposed site due to lack of drainage easements. There is also an existing lake/pond across Sharp Point Drive to the east of the site that will be utilized by the proposed project and improvements and is owned by the same owner that is developing the Prospect Sports facility. C.PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Prospect Sports site improvements are limited to approximately 2.5 acres of disturbance. The proposed site improvements consist of the construction of a new 2-court basketball venue with associated site improvements including proposed drive lanes, parking, utilities, and storm and water quality infrastructure. On-site stormwater is designed to be conveyed to the proposed storm sewer and conveyed to the existing lake/wet pond east of the proposed site and across Sharp Point Drive. D.FLOODPLAINS AND FLOODPLAIN INFORMATION The proposed development is within the Poudre River designated floodplain. According to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (08069C0984H and 08069C0986H) effective 5/2/2012, the site is zoned in a “High Risk – Floodway” boundary area. The floodplain boundaries are provided on the Drainage Plan (see Appendix D) and FEMA FIRMette maps are included in Appendix C. A Floodplain Use Permit will be required for all work within the floodplain and improvements including building, EV stations, trash enclosures, and parking improvements will be required prior to construction in compliance with Chapter 10 of the City Municipal Code. Note that this development is considered a non-residential and non-critical use structure. The proposed development meets the critical facilities requirements as it will not be a care facility or day camp facility and is not a critical facility. Note that the existing Poudre River Floodplain is currently being revised by FEMA. It is anticipated that the proposed development will be removed from the 100-year floodplain but will remain in the 500-year floodplain. To comply with Chapter 10 of the City Code, the finished floor of the proposed building is proposed to be elevated 2.5 feet above the 100-year Poudre River base flood elevation. However, due to the basketball courts sitting 4.5’ lower than the finished floor in the rest of the building, the walls, and doors adjacent to the basketball courts (largely on the south side of the building) sitting at this lower finished floor are proposed to be floodproofed. Floodproofing information shall be submitted at the time of the building permit application and a FEMA Elevation and floodproofing certificate will be completed prior to the certificate of occupancy being issued. F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 3 U22014_Drainage Report All floatable materials on the site will be stored inside the building or anchored and the trash dumpsters are contained with the trash enclosure area which will prevent them from floating downstream during flooding. Additionally, overnight parking of vehicles will be prohibited with the proposed development. The building is proposing to use slab on-grade foundations with all elevations being tied to the NAVD 1988 Datum. A table summarizing elevations of critical items is shown on this sheet. II.DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS A.MAJOR BASIN DESCRIPTION The proposed development is located within the Cache La Poudre Basin and will adhere to the Cache La Poudre Master Drainage Plan. B.SUB-BASIN DESCRIPTION Historically the site drains off-site to an existing detention pond within Tract A of the Prospect Park East P.U.D. As drainage easements were never recorded south of the site to the pond and the southern property owner has denied any new easements on the property, from communications with City personnel, the proposed site will not be able to drain developed stormwater flows through the existing property to the south and to the pond. In the proposed conditions, stormwater will be collected via storm sewer, inlets, swales, and curb and gutter and ultimately conveyed to the east beyond Sharp Point Drive to an existing lake/pond and lot under the same ownership as this site. In its improved condition, on-site runoff is intended to drain to multiple water quality facilities by way of sheet flow, swales, curb and gutter, inlets, and storm sewer. The Prospect Sports site was previously discussed in the “Final Drainage Report and Erosion Control Plan” for the Advanced Energy Buildings 7 and 8 project. This report shows Lot 5, the project area of the subdivision, being included in the calculations as part of Basin J10 which is designed with a 100-year C value of 1.00. This basin was designed to drain to the south via overland flow to the existing detention pond within Tract A and ultimately discharge into culverts across Sharp Point to an existing lake/pond east of the site. III.DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A.REGULATIONS The design criteria for this study are directly from the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards Manual and the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual’s (referred to herein as USDCM) Volumes 2, and 3, used for supplement only. B.DIRECTLY CONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA (DCIA) The City drainage criteria has also adopted the “Four Step Process” that is recommended in Volume 3 of the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (USDCM) in selecting structural BMPs for the redeveloping urban areas. The following portions of this summary describe each step and how it has been utilized for this project: Step 1 – Employ Runoff Reduction Practices The objective of this step is to reduce runoff peaks and volumes and to employ the technique of “minimizing directly connected impervious areas” (MDCIA). This project accomplishes this by: Routing the roof and pavement flows through water quality treatment/infiltration facilities and vegetated swales to increase time of concentration, promote infiltration, and provide water quality. FLOODPLAIN AND STRUCTURE ELEVATIONS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION ELEVATION FEMA BFE at Upstream End of Structure 4,901.00 Regulatory Flood Protection / Floodproofing Elevation 4,903.00 Upper Finished Floor Elevation 4,903.50 Lower Finished Floor Elevation 4,899.00 HVAC Elevation *4,919.50 *HVAC equipment to be located on top of lower roof on north end of building. **Building electrical equipment to be located above the RFPE. ***EV chargers to remain under the RFPE. A variance request will be submitted for the interim condition of these chargers being within the 100-year floodplain. F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 4 U22014_Drainage Report Step 2 – Provide Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) The objective of providing WQCV is to reduce the sediment load and other pollutants that exit the site. Formal WQCV is being proposed on this site in two bioretention ponds prior to runoff leaving the site. Step 3 – Stabilize Drainageways Although the site is not adjacent to the Cache La Poudre River, it does exist within its floodplain. The project will not be directly connecting or stabilizing this drainageway but will improve the existing drainageway by providing water quality for the proposed site and reducing peak flows via the bioretention ponds and existing lake/pond prior to draining to the river. Step 4 – Consider Need for Site Specific and Source Control BMPs Site specific and source control BMPs are generally considered for large industrial and commercial sites. The redevelopment of the existing site will include multiple site specific and source controls, including: Dedicated maintenance personnel providing landscape maintenance and snow and ice management. Bioretention ponds to collect and treat proposed pavement. To locate trash collection or enclosure areas away from storm drainage or LID facilities so that highly concentrated and polluted runoff from that area has the opportunity to be cleaned prior to conveyance to the stormwater outfall. For this project, it is proposed that this treatment include a bioretention pond located downstream of the trash enclosure area. C.HYDROLOGICAL CRITERIA City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves, provided by Table 3.4-1 of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, are utilized for all hydrologic computations related to the site in its existing/historic and proposed conditions. Since this site is relatively small and does not have complex drainage basins, the peak flow rates for design points have been calculated based on the Rational Method as described in the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (USDCM) and the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM) with storm intensities set equal to the time of concentration for each sub- basin. This method was used to analyze the developed runoff from the 2-year (minor) and the 100-year (major) storm events. The Rational Method is widely accepted for drainage design involving small drainage areas (less than 20 acres per FCSCM) and short time of concentrations. Runoff coefficients are assumed based on impervious area and are given in the Appendices. D.HYDRAULIC CRITERIA The developed site will convey runoff to the proposed pond or underground treatment facility via swales, concrete channels, and pipes. The City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM) and Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (USDCM) are referenced for all hydraulic calculations. In addition, the following computer programs are utilized: Storm Sewer Extension for AutoCAD Civil3D Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD Civil3D UD-Inlet by UDFCD Drainage conveyance facility capacities proposed with the development project, including storm sewer, swales, and inlet capacities, are designed in accordance with criteria outlined in the FCSCM and/or the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District’s Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (UDFCD) used for supplement purposes only. E.MODIFICATIONS OF CRITERIA Stormwater Detention Variance The original subdivision development planned for drainage to be conveyed via overland flow to the drainage facility located south of the site; therefore, no storm sewer currently exists on the site. However, the original subdivision plat did not include drainage easements on the property to allow for the conveyance of 100-year stormwater runoff from the site, across the property to the south and to the existing drainage facility. After discussion with the south property owner and their attorney, the southern property owner has denied any new easements on their property. Therefore, storm sewer for the project, required to convey both water quality and 100-year developed stormwater flows, is proposed to convey runoff to the east F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 5 U22014_Drainage Report across Sharp Point to the existing property also owned by the developer of the Prospect Sports Club facility to avoid the need for drainage easements south of the site. These storm sewer difficulties generated by the design of the existing subdivision, the inability to modify the southern property easements/agreements and the resulting site plan configuration culminate into hardships with providing stormwater detention. A Variance Request for Stormwater Detention Standards has been approved by the City requesting that the development, due to the hardships documented, is allowed to drain 100-year undetained flows from the Prospect Sports site directly to the existing pond, bypassing the subdivision detention facility and negating the need for drainage easements on properties south of the development site. This variance request document can be found in Appendix C. As documented in the variance, the existing detention facility south of the site was analyzed in the approved drainage report entitled, “Final Drainage and Erosion Control Plan – Advanced Energy Buildings 7 & 8”, by Park Engineering Consultants and dated June 11, 1999. In said report, the detention facility was found to require a total volume of 8.94 ac-ft; however, the facility only has a volume of 7.69 ac-ft to the centerline of Sharp Point prior to overtopping, by approximately 0.32-feet, and draining directly to the existing pond east of Sharp Point. For the variance document, it was calculated that the proposed development would account for approximately 0.43 ac-ft of the required volume in the existing detention facility. By piping the undetained 100-year flows from the proposed development directly to the existing pond east of Sharp Point: 1.The existing detention storage deficit in the facility to the south is reduced. 2.The amount of flow overtopping of Sharp Point is reduced. 3.The net volume of undetained storage the existing pond east of Sharp Point remains the same. Additionally, it should be noted that the existing pond east of Sharp Point is approximately 6.1-acres in size. With the required detention volume of the site of 0.43 ac-ft being attenuated within the existing pond, rather than detained onsite, the rise in depth in the existing pond would be less than 1-inch. IV.DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A.GENERAL CONCEPT Developed runoff is designed to be conveyed in a safe and effective manner via swales, curb and gutter, and storm sewer systems/inlets. Stormwater is designed to be released to proposed bioretention ponds, then to the existing lake/pond east of the site and across Sharp Point Drive, and ultimately to the Cache La Poudre River. Runoff that drains off-site to the south was minimized with the proposed site and is greatly reduced from existing flows heading to the same area. Runoff from the proposed site is primarily conveyed to bioretention ponds for water quality treatment and then collected via storm sewer and discharged offsite to the existing pond east of the site. B.SPECIFIC DETAILS Hydrology As previously stated, hydrology from the developed site is designed to comply with criteria set forth in the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. Referenced tables, charts, formulas, etc. are included in the appendices. The area, time of concentration, and runoff of each proposed sub-basin is summarized in Appendix A. The following information outlines the basin characteristics and drainage patterns for each basin. Existing Basins The following basins provide proposed drainage delineations for the site in its existing condition. Refer to Appendix A for hydrology computations. F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 6 U22014_Drainage Report Basin EX1 Basin EX1 represents on-site runoff that drains to the existing property to the south and ultimately to the detention pond within Tract A of the Prospect Park East P.U.D. There is a very small portion of this basin that has existing public concrete sidewalk, but the majority of the existing site is undeveloped. Proposed Basins The following basins provide proposed drainage delineations for the site in its improved condition. Refer to Appendix A for hydrology computations and Appendix B for calculations related to Water Quality, Low Impact Development, and other hydraulic features. Basin A Sub-basins A1-A8 (see Drainage Plans attached) include the area of the site being collected by the proposed storm sewer infrastructure and are a majority of the site. These basins consist of roofs, asphalt and concrete paving, and landscaping. Runoff within these basins is conveyed to grass swales and bioretention ponds via sheet flow, curb, inlets, and storm sewer. Ultimately runoff is conveyed through the proposed storm sewer to the existing lake/pond across Sharp Point and ultimately released to the Cache La Poudre River. Basin OS1 Basin OS1 represents the portion of the proposed site draining offsite to the south undetained. This basin consists of concrete sidewalk, asphalt pavement, and landscaping. In its improved condition, this basin will continue to function as most of the existing site did with conveying flows offsite to the south property and ultimately to the detention pond within Tract A of the Prospect Park East P.U.D. There is also proposed asphalt offsite, to the south of Basin OS1 that will be conveyed to the south with flows from Basin OS1. Although there are some pervious areas being directed to the south, it should be noted that the original drainage report showed all of the developed site being conveyed south. Because of this and the minimal pervious areas being conveyed south in the proposed condition, no negative impacts are foreseen. Detention and Water Quality No detention is being provided for the site due to previously discussed site constraints and as documented in the variance request. However, water quality is provided and will be achieved through the use of bioretention ponds per the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. Low Impact Development (LID) In December of 2015, Fort Collins City Council adopted the revised Low Impact Development (LID) policy and criteria which requires developments within City limits to meet certain enhanced stormwater treatment requirements in addition to more standard treatment techniques. The proposed development will be required to meet the newly adopted LID criteria which requires the following: -Treat no less than 75% of any newly added impervious area using one or a combination of LID techniques. -Treat no less than 50% of any newly added impervious area using one or a combination of LID techniques when at least 25% of any newly added pavement is provided with permeable pavement. The following measures are implemented with this proposed development: I.Northern Bioretention Pond Basins A5, A6, and A 8.1, combined for 5,905-sf of proposed composite impervious area, are designed to be conveyed to the northern bioretention pond. The proposed impervious area treated through the bioretention ponds includes roof areas, and landscaping. All bioretention ponds will be designed with underdrains which will be conveyed to the proposed storm sewer onsite. It should be noted that groundwater was encountered during boring for geotechnical analysis of the soil in December of 2022. With the bioretention ponds, groundwater would have a negative impact on how the system functions as it relates to water quality and LID purposes. After analyzing groundwater depths in this area, groundwater would be at a depth of approximately 8 feet below existing ground, corresponding to an elevation of 4893.50. The bottom F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 7 U22014_Drainage Report of the northern bioretention pond is at an elevation of 4900.65 and bottom of bioretention media is at an elevation of approximately 4898.15 and approximately 4.5 feet above the groundwater at the time of the borings. It is anticipated that no negative impacts to the bioretention system and underdrain will occur due to groundwater depth. II.Southern Bioretention Pond Basins A1 – A4, A7, A8.2, and A8.3, combined for 45,096-sf of proposed composite impervious area, are designed to be conveyed to the southern bioretention pond. The proposed impervious area treated through the bioretention ponds includes proposed parking, driveway, roof areas, and landscaping. All bioretention ponds will be designed with underdrains which will be conveyed to the proposed storm sewer onsite. It should be noted that groundwater was encountered during boring for geotechnical analysis of the soil in December of 2022. With the bioretention ponds, groundwater would have a negative impact on how the system functions as it relates to water quality and LID purposes. After analyzing groundwater depths in this area, groundwater would be at a depth of approximately 8.5 below existing ground feet at the boring west of the pond and 10+ feet at the boring on the east side of the pond. It should be noted that the boring on the east side of the pond, no groundwater was encountered up to a depth of 10 feet. Groundwater elevations corresponding to these boreholes yields a groundwater elevation of 4891.50 for the west boring and 4890.00 for the east boring. The bottom of the southern bioretention pond is at an elevation of 4896.00 and bottom of bioretention media is at an elevation of approximately 4893.50 and approximately 2 to 3.5 feet above the groundwater at the time of the borings. It is anticipated that no negative impacts to the bioretention system and underdrain will occur due to groundwater depth. Provided the LID measures in the bioretention ponds, approximately 98.3% of the site is treated in its improved condition. The 75% requirement for LID treatment will therefore be met for this project. Refer to Appendix B for LID calculations and Appendix D for a LID Treatment Map. Below is a summary LID treatment table for reference. 75% On-Site Treatment by LID Requirement New or Modified Impervious Area (Total) 1.19 acre Required Minimum Impervious Area to be Treated 0.89 acre Impervious Area Treated by Bioretention Ponds 1.17 acre Total Impervious Area Treated 1.17 acre Percent of Impervious Areas Treated by LID 98.3 % F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 8 U22014_Drainage Report 100-year Event: Proposed Runoff to South Basin Designation Flowrate (cfs) Basin OS1 0.53 Drainage Summary A basin summary table is included below: Existing/Historic Basins Basin Area %I C2 C10 C100 Q2 Q10 Q100 (acre) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) EX1 2.65 3.8% 0.26 0.26 0.33 1.48 2.53 6.46 Proposed Basins Basin Area %I C2 C10 C100 Q2 Q10 Q100 (acre) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) A1 0.37 16% 0.35 0.35 0.44 0.27 0.47 1.19 A2 0.09 100% 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.24 0.41 0.94 A3 0.54 47% 0.57 0.57 0.72 0.63 1.08 2.86 A4 0.28 72%0.75 0.75 0.94 0.46 0.78 2.66 A5 0.17 9% 0.30 0.30 0.38 0.11 0.18 0.47 A6 0.23 14% 0.33 0.33 0.42 0.17 0.29 0.75 A7 0.25 7% 0.28 0.28 0.35 0.16 0.27 0.69 A8.1 0.10 90% 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.22 0.38 0.98 A8.2 0.09 90% 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.21 0.36 0.92 A8.3 0.36 90%0.95 0.95 1.00 0.75 1.29 3.15 TOTAL 2.49 47%0.59 0.59 0.73 3.00 5.12 13.57 OS1 0.16 13% 0.33 0.33 0.41 0.12 0.20 0.53 It should be noted from the proposed basins table that the overall site 100-year C value is 0.74 which is less than the previously planned 100-year C value of 1.00 for Basin J10 in the Advanced Energy buildings 7 and 8 drainage report. Refer to Appendix D for an Existing Drainage Map that provides a visual representation of the proposed drainage basins. In the existing conditions, the site drains undetained to the south and is conveyed to the existing detention pond in Tract A of the Prospect Park East P.U.D. The improved site is designed to convey the 100-yr storm to the east to an existing pond / lake. The tables below summarize the impacts of the proposed improvements vs. existing conditions to property to the south. 100-year Event: Existing Runoff to South In relation to the property to the south, the majority of the site is designed to outfall to the east via proposed storm sewer due to previously discussed site and easement constraints. The tables above show that the proposed site is significantly reducing the amount of stormwater being conveyed to the south from existing conditions and no negatives impacts to the south are anticipated from the proposed improvements. Ultimately all stormwater runoff from this site and surrounding sites will be conveyed to the Cache La Poudre River Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) In order for physical stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be effective, proper maintenance is essential. Maintenance includes both routinely scheduled activities, as well as non-routine repairs that may be required after large storms, or as a result of other unforeseen problems. Standard Operating Procedures should clearly identify BMP maintenance responsibility. BMP maintenance is typically the responsibility of the entity owning the BMP. Basin Designation Flowrate (cfs) Basin EX1 6.46 F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 9 U22014_Drainage Report Identifying who is responsible for maintenance of BMPs and ensuring that an adequate budget is allocated for maintenance is critical to the long-term success of BMPs. Maintenance responsibility may be assigned either publicly or privately. For this project, the privately owned BMPs include grass swales and bioretention ponds which are to be maintained by the property owner. Standard operating procedures for the maintenance of these features will be included in the project development agreement. Private Storm Sewers There are multiple storm sewer networks proposed with the site improvements and all are proposed to be privately owned systems maintained by the property owner. Several networks including roof drains, storm drains, and underdrain lines for bioretention areas are proposed ultimately with outfalls to the existing pond east of the site. Proposed storm sewer systems are designed to accommodate the flows from the 100-year storm event. Hydraulic computations of these systems will be provided with the final drainage report and design. Private Inlets There are multiple inlets proposed with site improvements, including Type C Inlets, Type D Inlets, and Type R inlets and all are proposed to be privately owned systems maintained by the property owner. One Type R Inlet is designed in sump to capture developed runoff while the other is on grade. On-site drain basins are designed in a sump condition and are designed to convey runoff produced within smaller interior basins to proposed storm sewer and ultimately to the existing lake/pond east of the site. All inlets on the site are sized to provide adequate capacity and convey the 100-year storm event. Hydraulic computations of these systems will be provided with the final drainage report and design. V.EROSION CONTROL A separate Erosion Control Report / Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) has been prepared for the site in accordance with the Stormwater Discharge Permit for Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment as the site will disturb an area greater than 1-acre. The Erosion Control Report, provided under separate cover, includes more detailed information on the sediment and erosion control items for this project. It is intended that the proposed improvements will comply with Erosion Control Criteria per the FCSCM. At a minimum, the following temporary BMP’s will be installed and maintained to control on-site erosion and prevent sediment from traveling off-site during construction: Silt Fence – a woven synthetic fabric that filters runoff. The silt fence is a temporary barrier that is placed at the base of a disturbed area. Vehicle Tracking Control – a stabilized stone pad located at points of ingress and egress on a construction site. The stone pad is designed to reduce the amount of mud transported onto public roads by construction traffic. Riprap – Riprap will be used downstream of all storm sewer outfalls to control erosion of the receiving channels. Inlet Protection – acts as a sediment filter. It is a temporary BMP and requires proper installation and maintenance to ensure their performance. Straw Wattles – wattles act as a sediment filter in swales around inlets. They are a temporary BMP and require proper installation and maintenance to ensure their performance. Slope Protection – Slopes should be terraced using a “tracked” vehicle, run perpendicular to slope to inhibit rill/gulley erosion. The contractor shall store all construction materials and equipment and shall provide maintenance and fueling of equipment in confined areas on-site from which runoff will be contained and filtered. Temporary Best Management Practices (BMP’s) will be inspected by the contractor at a minimum of once every two weeks and after each significant storm event. F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 10 U22014_Drainage Report VI.CONCLUSIONS A.COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS Storm drainage calculations have followed the guidelines provided by the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals Volumes 1, 2 and 3 and the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. Moreover, Chapter 10 of the City Code has been adhered to. B.DRAINAGE CONCEPT The drainage system has been designed to convey the runoff to the designated design points in an effective, safe manner. No negative impacts are anticipated to the City of Fort Collins Master Drainage Plan or to downstream properties or infrastructure due to the proposed improvements. C.STORMWATER QUALITY Multiple long-term stormwater quality measures have been selected for the site that will provide treatment of stormwater prior to it to being discharged from the site. For this site this includes grass swales and bioretention ponds. F INAL D RAINAGE R EPORT P ROSPECT S PORTS F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 11 U22014_Drainage Report VII.REFERENCES 1.City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, December 2018. 2.Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 1 and 2, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado, June 2001, Revised April 2008. 3.Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey at: websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app 4.Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map, FEMA, Panel 2079E, https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/ 5.Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity, Stormwater Management Plan Preparation Guides, State of Colorado, www.colorado.com 6.Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Planning and Design Guide, Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program, June 2022. 7.Final Drainage Report and Erosion Control Plan for Advanced Energy Buildings 7 & 8, Park Engineering Consultants, April 1999. A PPENDIX A H YDROLOGY C ALCULATIONS RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS AND % IMPERVIOUS Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO Basin Design Pt.Composite Total Total Roof (1)Asphalt Concrete(1)Gravel(1)Lawns(1)Imperviousness C2 C10 C100 acres %I = 90%%I = 100%%I = 100%%I =40%%I=2%(%I) C=0.95 C=0.95 C=0.95 C=0.50 C=0.25 sf sf sf sf sf sf EX1 EX1 2.65 115,518 2,110 113,408 3.8%0.26 0.26 0.33 -0.00 ----- -0.00 ----- -0.00 ----- Basin Design Pt.Composite Total Total Roof (1)Asphalt Concrete(1)Pavers(1)Lawns(1)Imperviousness C2 C10 C100 acres sf %I = 90%%I = 100%%I = 100%%I =40%%I=2%(%I) C=0.95 C=0.95 C=0.95 C=0.50 C=0.25 sf sf sf sf sf A1 A1 0.37 16,107 2,262 13,845 15.8%0.35 0.35 0.44 A2 A2 0.09 4,107 4,107 100.0%0.95 0.95 1.00 A3 A3 0.54 23,416 9,858 988 12,570 47.4%0.57 0.57 0.72 A4 A4 0.28 12,396 8,870 3,526 72.1%0.75 0.75 0.94 A5 A5 0.17 7,320 538 6,782 9.2%0.30 0.30 0.38 A6 A6 0.23 10,194 1,206 8,988 13.6%0.33 0.33 0.42 A7 A7 0.25 11,082 515 10,567 6.6%0.28 0.28 0.35 A8.1 A8.1 0.10 4,273 4,273 90.0%0.95 0.95 1.00 A8.2 A8.2 0.09 4,034 4,034 90.0%0.95 0.95 1.00 A8.3 A8.3 0.36 15,617 15,617 --90.0%0.95 0.95 1.00 TOTAL TOTAL 2.49 108,547 23,925 22,835 5,509 -56,279 47.0%0.59 0.59 0.73 ------ OS1 OS1 0.16 6,971 488 292 6,190 13.0%0.33 0.33 0.41 Notes: (1) Recommended % Imperviousness Values per Table 4.1-3 Surface Type - Percent Impervious in Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (2) Runoff C is based Table 3.2-2. Surface Type - Runoff Coefficients and Table 3.2-3. Frequency Adjustment Factors in Fort Collins Stormwater Manual (3) the "Total" basin is an analysis of the routed onsite flows. Areas Composite Runoff Coefficients (2) Composite Runoff Coefficients (2)Areas Existing Basins Proposed Basins (3) Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\U22014-Drain Calcs TIME OF CONCENTRATION (2-YR) Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO Basin Design Pt.Area CXCF (1)Length Slope Ti (2)Slope Length n R (3)Tt (4)Tc max (5) acres ft %min %ft fps min min min min EX1 EX1 2.65 0.26 200 2.0%80.5 1.0%180 0.035 0.2 1.5 2.1 82.6 11.0 11.0 Basin Design Pt.Area CXCF(1)Length Slope Ti (2)Slope Length n R (3)Tt (4)Tc max (5) acres ft %min %ft fps min min min min A1 A1 0.37 0.35 20 5.0%16.9 2.0%100 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.7 17.6 10.6 10.6 A2 A2 0.09 0.95 30 2.0%5.6 2.0%90 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 5.9 10.5 5.9 A3 A3 0.54 0.57 60 2.5%25.7 1.0%280 0.016 0.2 3.2 1.5 27.2 11.6 11.6 A4 A4 0.28 0.75 30 1.6%14.0 1.5%141 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.6 14.6 10.8 10.8 A5 A5 0.17 0.30 20 4.0%19.3 2.0%115 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.8 20.1 10.6 10.6 A6 A6 0.23 0.33 20 5.0%17.2 2.0%80 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.6 17.8 10.4 10.4 A7 A7 0.25 0.28 20 4.0%19.8 2.0%80 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.6 20.3 10.4 10.4 A8.1 A8.1 0.10 0.95 20 0.5%7.2 0.5%50 0.013 0.2 2.8 0.3 7.5 10.3 7.5 A8.2 A8.2 0.09 0.95 20 0.5%7.2 0.5%50 0.013 0.2 2.8 0.3 7.5 10.3 7.5 A8.3 A8.3 0.36 0.95 40 0.5%10.2 0.5%80 0.013 0.2 2.8 0.5 10.7 10.4 10.4 TOTAL TOTAL 2.49 0.59 54 2.5%23.8 0.5%400 0.013 0.2 2.8 2.4 26.2 12.2 12.2 --- OS1 OS1 0.16 0.33 20 16.0%11.8 10.0%40 0.016 0.2 10.1 0.1 11.9 10.2 10.2 Notes: (1) C=CX*CF is less than or equal to 1.0 (Cf = 1.0) (2) ti = [1.87(1.1-CXCF)L1/2]/S1/3, S= slope in %, L=length of overland flow (200' max urban, 500' max rural) (3) V=(1.49/n)R2/3S1/2, S = slope in ft/ft, FCSCM Equation 5-4 (4) tt=L/(V*60 sec/min) (5) Maximum tc = total length/180 + 10 (6) Minimum tc = 5 min Travel/Channelized Time of Flow (Tt) Existing Basins Proposed Basins Overland Flow (Ti)Travel/Channelized Time of Flow (Tt) Ti+Tt Final Tc (6) Ti+Tt Final Tc (6) Overland Flow (Ti) Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\U22014-Drain Calcs TIME OF CONCENTRATION (10-YR) Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO Basin Design Pt.Area CXCF (1)Length Slope Ti (2)Slope Length n R (3)Tt (4)Tc max (5) acres ft %min %ft fps min min min min EX1 EX1 2.65 0.26 200 2.0%80.5 1.0%180 0.035 0.2 1.5 2.1 82.6 11.0 11.0 Basin Design Pt.Area CXCF(1)Length Slope Ti (2)Slope Length n R (3)Tt (4)Tc max (5) acres ft %min %ft fps min min min min A1 A1 0.37 0.35 20 5.0%16.9 2.0%100 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.7 17.6 10.6 10.6 A2 A2 0.09 0.95 30 2.0%5.6 2.0%90 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 5.9 10.5 5.9 A3 A3 0.54 0.57 60 2.5%25.7 1.0%280 0.016 0.2 3.2 1.5 27.2 11.6 11.6 A4 A4 0.28 0.75 30 1.6%14.0 1.5%141 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.6 14.6 10.8 10.8 A5 A5 0.17 0.30 20 4.0%19.3 2.0%115 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.8 20.1 10.6 10.6 A6 A6 0.23 0.33 20 5.0%17.2 2.0%80 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.6 17.8 10.4 10.4 A7 A7 0.25 0.28 20 4.0%19.8 2.0%80 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.6 20.3 10.4 10.4 A8.1 A8.1 0.10 0.95 20 0.5%7.2 0.5%50 0.013 0.2 2.8 0.3 7.5 10.3 7.5 A8.2 A8.2 0.09 0.95 20 0.5%7.2 0.5%50 0.013 0.2 2.8 0.3 7.5 10.3 7.5 A8.3 A8.3 0.36 0.95 40 0.5%10.2 0.5%80 0.013 0.2 2.8 0.5 10.7 10.4 10.4 TOTAL TOTAL 2.49 0.59 54 2.5%23.8 0.5%400 0.013 0.2 2.8 2.4 26.2 12.2 12.2 - OS1 OS1 0.16 0.33 20 16.0%11.8 10.0%40 0.016 0.2 10.1 0.1 11.9 10.2 10.2 Notes: (1) C=CX*CF is less than or equal to 1.0 (Cf = 1.0) (2) ti = [1.87(1.1-CXCF)L1/2]/S1/3, S= slope in %, L=length of overland flow (200' max urban, 500' max rural) (3) V=(1.49/n)R2/3S1/2, S = slope in ft/ft, FCSCM Equation 5-4 (4) tt=L/(V*60 sec/min) (5) Maximum tc = total length/180 + 10 (6) Minimum tc = 5 min Existing Basins Overland Flow (Ti)Travel/Channelized Time of Flow (Tt) Ti+Tt Final Tc (6) Proposed Basins Overland Flow (Ti)Travel/Channelized Time of Flow (Tt) Ti+Tt Final Tc (6) Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\U22014-Drain Calcs TIME OF CONCENTRATION (100-YR) Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO Basin Design Pt.Area CXCF (1)Length Slope Ti (2)Slope Length n R (3)Tt (4)Tc max (5) acres ft %min %ft fps min min min min EX1 EX1 2.65 0.41 200 2.0%66.3 1.0%180 0.035 0.2 1.5 2.1 68.4 11.0 11.0 Basin Design Pt.Area CXCF(1)Length Slope Ti (2)Slope Length n R (3)Tt (4)Tc max (5) acres ft %min %ft fps min min min min A1 A1 0.37 0.54 20 5.0%12.5 2.0%100 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.7 13.2 10.6 10.6 A2 A2 0.09 1.00 30 2.0%3.7 2.0%90 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 4.1 10.5 5.0 A3 A3 0.54 0.90 60 2.5%9.9 1.0%280 0.016 0.2 3.2 1.5 11.4 11.6 11.4 A4 A4 0.28 1.00 30 1.6%4.0 1.5%141 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.6 4.6 10.8 5.0 A5 A5 0.17 0.47 20 4.0%15.2 2.0%115 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.8 16.0 10.6 10.6 A6 A6 0.23 0.52 20 5.0%13.0 2.0%80 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.6 13.6 10.4 10.4 A7 A7 0.25 0.44 20 4.0%15.9 2.0%80 0.03 0.2 2.4 0.6 16.5 10.4 10.4 A8.1 A8.1 0.10 1.00 20 0.5%4.8 0.5%50 0.013 0.2 2.8 0.3 5.1 10.3 5.1 A8.2 A8.2 0.09 1.00 20 0.5%4.8 0.5%50 0.013 0.2 2.8 0.3 5.1 10.3 5.1 A8.3 A8.3 0.36 1.00 40 0.5%6.8 0.5%80 0.013 0.2 2.8 0.5 7.3 10.4 7.3 TOTAL TOTAL 2.49 0.92 54 2.5%8.5 0.5%400 0.013 0.2 2.8 2.4 10.9 12.2 10.9 OS1 OS1 0.16 0.51 20 16.0%9.0 10.0%40 0.016 0.2 10.1 0.1 9.1 10.2 9.1 Notes: (1) C=CX*CF is less than or equal to 1.0 (Cf = 1.25) (2) ti = [1.87(1.1-CXCF)L1/2]/S1/3, S= slope in %, L=length of overland flow (200' max urban, 500' max rural) (3) V=(1.49/n)R2/3S1/2, S = slope in ft/ft, FCSCM Equation 5-4 (4) tt=L/(V*60 sec/min) (5) Maximum tc = total length/180 + 10 (6) Minimum tc = 5 min Existing Basins Overland Flow (Ti)Travel/Channelized Time of Flow (Tt) Ti+Tt Final Tc (6) Proposed Basins Overland Flow (Ti)Travel/Channelized Time of Flow (Tt) Ti+Tt Final Tc (6) Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\U22014-Drain Calcs RATIONAL METHOD PEAK RUNOFF Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO Basin Design Pt.Contributing Area 2-Year 100-Year Basins acre tc tc C2 C10 C100 I2 I10 I100 Q2 Q10 Q100 min min in/hr in/hr in/hr cfs cfs cfs EX1 EX1 EX1 2.65 11 11 0.26 0.26 0.33 2.13 3.63 7.42 1.48 2.53 6.46 Basin Design Pt.Contributing Area 2-Year 100-Year Basins acre tc tc C2 C10 C100 I2 I10 I100 Q2 Q10 Q100 min min in/hr in/hr in/hr cfs cfs cfs A1 A1 A1 0.37 11 11 0.35 0.35 0.44 2.13 3.63 7.42 0.27 0.47 1.19 A2 A2 A2 0.09 6 5 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.67 4.56 9.95 0.24 0.41 0.94 A3 A3 A3 0.54 12 11 0.57 0.57 0.72 2.05 3.50 7.42 0.63 1.08 2.86 A4 A4 A4 0.28 11 5 0.75 0.75 0.94 2.13 3.63 9.95 0.46 0.78 2.66 A5 A5 A5 0.17 11 11 0.30 0.30 0.38 2.13 3.63 7.42 0.11 0.18 0.47 A6 A6 A6 0.23 10 10 0.33 0.33 0.42 2.21 3.78 7.72 0.17 0.29 0.75 A7 A7 A7 0.25 10 10 0.28 0.28 0.35 2.21 3.78 7.72 0.16 0.27 0.69 A8.1 A8.1 A8.1 0.10 8 5 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.40 4.10 9.95 0.22 0.38 0.98 A8.2 A8.2 A8.2 0.09 8 5 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.40 4.10 9.95 0.21 0.36 0.92 A8.3 A8.3 A8.3 0.36 10 7 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.21 3.78 8.80 0.75 1.29 3.15 TOTAL TOTAL A Basins 2.49 12 11 0.59 0.59 0.73 2.05 3.50 7.42 3.00 5.12 13.57 OS1 OS1 OS1 0.16 10 9 0.33 0.33 0.41 2.21 3.78 8.03 0.12 0.20 0.53 (1) the "Total" basin is an analysis of the routed onsite flows. Existing Basins Peak Discharge Proposed Basins Runoff Coefficients Rainfall Intensity Peak Discharge Rainfall IntensityRunoff Coefficients (1) Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\U22014-Drain Calcs A PPENDIX B H YDRAULIC C ALCULATIONS WATER QUALITY Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO Required Water Quality Capture Volume Basin Area Area Imperviousness Watershed WQCV WQ Treatment (sf)(acres)(%)(inches)(cf)Method A1 16,107 0.37 16%0.08 125 South Bioretention Pond A2 4,107 0.09 100%0.40 164 South Bioretention Pond A3 23,416 0.54 47%0.16 373 South Bioretention Pond A4 12,396 0.28 72%0.23 283 South Bioretention Pond A5 7,320 0.17 9%0.05 37 North Bioretention Pond A6 10,194 0.23 14%0.07 70 North Bioretention Pond A7 11,082 0.25 7%0.04 41 South Bioretention Pond A8.1 4,273 0.10 90%0.32 137 North Bioretention Pond A8.2 4,034 0.09 90%0.32 130 South Bioretention Pond A8.3 15,617 0.36 90%0.32 502 South Bioretention Pond TOTAL 108,547 2.49 47%0.16 1,721 Bioretention Ponds ------ OS1 6,971 0.16 13%0.07 46 None Northern Pond 21,787 0.50 27%0.11 248 North Bioretention Pond Southern Pond 86,760 1.99 52%0.17 1,469 South Bioretention Pond Water quality provided based on 12-hour storage Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\U22014-Drain Calcs LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO Basin Proposed Impervious Area LID Treatment Area Treated % of Site Treated (sf)(acres)(sf)(%) A1 2,539 South Bioretention Pond 2,539 4.9% A2 4,107 South Bioretention Pond 4,107 7.9% A3 11,097 South Bioretention Pond 11,097 21.4% A4 8,940 South Bioretention Pond 8,940 17.2% A5 674 North Bioretention Pond 674 1.3% A6 1,385 North Bioretention Pond 1,385 2.7% A7 726 South Bioretention Pond 726 1.4% A8.1 3,846 North Bioretention Pond 3,846 7.4% A8.2 3,631 South Bioretention Pond 3,631 7.0% A8.3 14,055 South Bioretention Pond 14,055 27.1% OS1 904 None 904 1.7% Total New/Modified Site 51,905 51,001 98.3% Low Impact Development (LID) Treated Areas Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\U22014-Drain Calcs Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =27.1 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.271 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.11 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area = 21,787 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =206 cu ft Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in Average Runoff Producing Storm G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =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 =118 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =848 sq ft E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =1900 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=687 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 =0.5 ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =206 cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =7/16 in Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) NKS United Civil Design Group March 11, 2024 Prospect Park North Bioretention Pond UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018) Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO UD-BMP_v3.07 Bio Ponds north, RG 3/11/2024, 9:55 AM Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity of structures or groundwater contamination? 6. Inlet / Outlet Control A) Inlet Control 7. Vegetation 8. Irrigation A) Will the rain garden be irrigated? Notes: Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) NKS United Civil Design Group March 11, 2024 Prospect Park North Bioretention Pond Choose One Choose One Choose One Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided Plantings Seed (Plan for frequent weed control) Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod Choose One YES NO YES NO UD-BMP_v3.07 Bio Ponds north, RG 3/11/2024, 9:55 AM Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =52.3 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.523 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.17 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area = 87,317 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =1,238 cu ft Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in Average Runoff Producing Storm G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =12 in B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical)Z =4.00 ft / ft (Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls) C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =913 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =998 sq ft E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =2331 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=1,665 cu ft (VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth) 3. Growing Media 4. Underdrain System A) Are underdrains provided?1 B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.0 ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =1,238 cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =15/16 in Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) NKS United Civil Design Group March 19, 2024 Prospect Park Southern Bioretention Pond UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018) Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO UD-BMP_v3.07 Bio Ponds south, RG 3/19/2024, 1:54 PM Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity of structures or groundwater contamination? 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) NKS United Civil Design Group March 19, 2024 Prospect Park Southern Bioretention Pond Choose One Choose One Choose One Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided Plantings Seed (Plan for frequent weed control) Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod Choose One YES NO YES NO UD-BMP_v3.07 Bio Ponds south, RG 3/19/2024, 1:54 PM IINLET CAPACITY Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO INLET ID:INLET A3 Governing Equations: Inlet capacity equation at low flows (weir calculation): Where: P = 2(L + W) H = depth of water above the flowline Inlet capacity equation at higher flows (orifice calculation): Where: A = open area of the inlet grate H = depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) Input Parameters: Grate: Type D Wier Perimeter:17.2 Open Area of Grate (ft2):7.7 Q10 = 5.12 cfs Grate Centroid Elevation (ft):4897.00 Q100 = 13.57 cfs Allowable Capacity:50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Elevation Shallow Orifice Actual Above Inlet Weir Flow Flow Flow (ft)(ft)(cfs)(cfs)(cfs) 0.00 4897.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 4897.05 0.29 4.62 0.29 0.10 4897.10 0.81 6.53 0.81 0.15 4897.15 1.50 8.00 1.50 0.20 4897.20 2.30 9.24 2.30 0.25 4897.25 3.22 10.33 3.22 0.30 4897.30 4.23 11.32 4.23 0.34 4897.34 5.12 12.06 5.12 <---- 10-Year Flow 0.40 4897.40 6.52 13.07 6.52 0.45 4897.45 7.77 13.86 7.77 0.50 4897.50 9.11 14.61 9.11 0.55 4897.55 10.51 15.32 10.51 0.60 4897.60 11.97 16.01 11.97 0.65 4897.65 13.57 16.69 13.57 <----100-Year Flow 0.70 4897.70 15.08 17.29 15.08 0.75 4897.75 16.73 17.90 16.73 0.80 4897.80 18.43 18.48 18.43 0.85 4897.85 20.18 19.05 19.05 0.90 4897.90 21.99 19.60 19.60 0.95 4897.95 23.85 20.14 20.14 1.00 4898.00 25.76 20.66 20.66 <----Top of Pond Elevation 5.10.3 HPQ 5.0)2(67.0 gHAQ Calculations by: NKS Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\U22014-Drain Calcs IINLET CAPACITY Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO INLET ID:INLET B2.1 Governing Equations: Inlet capacity equation at low flows (weir calculation): Where: P = 2(L + W) H = depth of water above the flowline Inlet capacity equation at higher flows (orifice calculation): Where: A = open area of the inlet grate H = depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) Input Parameters: Grate: Typce C Wier Perimeter:12.0 Open Area of Grate (ft2):6.8 Q10 = 0.78 cfs Grate Centroid Elevation (ft):4901.15 Q100 = 2.66 cfs Allowable Capacity:50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Elevation Shallow Orifice Actual Above Inlet Weir Flow Flow Flow (ft)(ft)(cfs)(cfs)(cfs) 0.00 4901.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 4901.20 0.20 4.09 0.20 0.12 4901.27 0.78 6.41 0.78 <---- 10-Year Flow 0.15 4901.30 1.05 7.08 1.05 0.20 4901.35 1.61 8.17 1.61 0.25 4901.40 2.25 9.14 2.25 0.28 4901.43 2.66 9.66 2.66 <----100-Year Flow 0.35 4901.50 3.73 10.81 3.73 0.40 4901.55 4.55 11.56 4.55 0.45 4901.60 5.43 12.26 5.43 0.50 4901.65 6.36 12.92 6.36 0.55 4901.70 7.34 13.55 7.34 0.60 4901.75 8.37 14.15 8.37 0.66 4901.81 9.56 14.80 9.56 0.70 4901.85 10.54 15.29 10.54 0.75 4901.90 11.69 15.82 11.69 0.80 4901.95 12.88 16.34 12.88 0.85 4902.00 14.11 16.85 14.11 0.90 4902.05 15.37 17.33 15.37 0.95 4902.10 16.67 17.81 16.67 1.00 4902.15 18.00 18.27 18.00 5.10.3 HPQ 5.0)2(67.0 gHAQ Calculations by: NKS Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\U22014-Drain Calcs IINLET CAPACITY Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO INLET ID:INLET B2.2 Governing Equations: Inlet capacity equation at low flows (weir calculation): Where: P = 2(L + W) H = depth of water above the flowline Inlet capacity equation at higher flows (orifice calculation): Where: A = open area of the inlet grate H = depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (A) Input Parameters: Grate: Type C Wier Perimeter:12.0 Open Area of Grate (ft2):6.8 Q10 = 0.86 cfs Grate Centroid Elevation (ft):4900.60 Q100 = 2.20 cfs Allowable Capacity:50% Depth vs. Flow: Depth Elevation Shallow Orifice Actual Above Inlet Weir Flow Flow Flow (ft)(ft)(cfs)(cfs)(cfs) 0.00 4900.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 4900.65 0.20 4.09 0.20 0.10 4900.70 0.57 5.78 0.57 0.13 4900.73 0.86 6.64 0.86 <---- 10-Year Flow 0.20 4900.80 1.61 8.17 1.61 0.25 4900.85 2.20 9.06 2.20 <----100-Year Flow 0.30 4900.90 2.96 10.01 2.96 0.34 4900.94 3.61 10.69 3.61 0.40 4901.00 4.55 11.56 4.55 0.45 4901.05 5.43 12.26 5.43 0.50 4901.10 6.36 12.92 6.36 0.55 4901.15 7.34 13.55 7.34 0.60 4901.20 8.37 14.15 8.37 0.66 4901.26 9.56 14.80 9.56 0.70 4901.30 10.54 15.29 10.54 0.75 4901.35 11.69 15.82 11.69 0.80 4901.40 12.88 16.34 12.88 0.85 4901.45 14.11 16.85 14.11 0.90 4901.50 15.37 17.33 15.37 0.95 4901.55 16.67 17.81 16.67 1.00 4901.60 18.00 18.27 18.00 5.10.3 HPQ 5.0)2(67.0 gHAQ Calculations by: NKS Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\U22014-Drain Calcs Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry: Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK =0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)SBACK =0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)nBACK =0.020 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB =6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN =24.0 ft Gutter Width W =1.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX =0.010 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft)SW =0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO =0.030 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)nSTREET =0.013 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX =24.0 24.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX =6.0 6.0 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (check box for yes, leave blank for no) MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Spread Criterion Qallow =17.1 17.1 cfs MHFD-Inlet, Version 5.02 (August 2022) ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet B2 Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than the design peak flow of 0.41 cfs on sheet 'Inlet Management' Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than the design peak flow of 0.94 cfs on sheet 'Inlet Management' MHFD-Inlet_v5.02_Inlets, Inlet B2 3/20/2024, 10:29 AM Design Information (Input)MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a')aLOCAL =3.0 3.0 inches Total Number of Units in the Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening)No =1 1 Length of a Single Unit Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening)Lo =5.00 5.00 ft Width of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W, Gutter Width) Wo =N/A N/A ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical min. value = 0.5)Cf (G) =N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical min. value = 0.1)Cf (C) =0.10 0.10 Street Hydraulics: OK - Q < Allowable Street Capacity'MINOR MAJOR Design Discharge for Half of Street (from Inlet Management )Qo =0.4 0.9 cfs Water Spread Width T =4.7 7.3 ft Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)d =1.4 1.8 inches Water Depth at Street Crown (or at TMAX)dCROWN =0.0 0.0 inches Ratio of Gutter Flow to Design Flow Eo =0.729 0.503 Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section Tx Qx =0.1 0.5 cfs Discharge within the Gutter Section W Qw =0.3 0.5 cfs Discharge Behind the Curb Face QBACK =0.0 0.0 cfs Flow Area within the Gutter Section W AW =0.08 0.10 sq ft Velocity within the Gutter Section W VW =3.8 4.5 fps Water Depth for Design Condition dLOCAL =4.4 4.8 inches Grate Analysis (Calculated)MINOR MAJOR Total Length of Inlet Grate Opening L =N/A N/A ft Ratio of Grate Flow to Design Flow Eo-GRATE =N/A N/A Under No-Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Minimum Velocity Where Grate Splash-Over Begins Vo =N/A N/A fps Interception Rate of Frontal Flow Rf =N/A N/A Interception Rate of Side Flow Rx =N/A N/A Interception Capacity Qi =N/A N/A cfs Under Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple-unit Grate Inlet GrateCoeff =N/A N/A Clogging Factor for Multiple-unit Grate Inlet GrateClog =N/A N/A Effective (unclogged) Length of Multiple-unit Grate Inlet Le =N/A N/A ft Minimum Velocity Where Grate Splash-Over Begins Vo =N/A N/A fps Interception Rate of Frontal Flow Rf =N/A N/A Interception Rate of Side Flow Rx =N/A N/A Actual Interception Capacity Qa =N/A N/A cfs Carry-Over Flow = Qo-Qa (to be applied to curb opening or next d/s inlet)Qb =N/A N/A cfs Curb Opening or Slotted Inlet Analysis (Calculated)MINOR MAJOR Equivalent Slope Se Se =0.246 0.173 ft/ft Required Length LT to Have 100% Interception LT =2.77 4.97 ft Under No-Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Effective Length of Curb Opening or Slotted Inlet (minimum of L, LT)L =2.77 4.97 ft Interception Capacity Qi =0.4 0.9 cfs Under Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient CurbCoeff =1.00 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple-unit Curb Opening or Slotted Inlet CurbClog =0.10 0.10 Effective (Unclogged) Length Le =2.77 4.50 ft Actual Interception Capacity Qa =0.4 0.9 cfs Carry-Over Flow = Qb(GRATE)-Qa Qb =0.0 0.0 cfs Summary MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity Q =0.4 0.9 cfs Total Inlet Carry-Over Flow (flow bypassing inlet)Qb =0.0 0.0 cfs Capture Percentage = Qa/Qo C% =100 99 % INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE MHFD-Inlet, Version 5.02 (August 2022) CDOT Type R Curb OpeningCDOT Type R Curb Opening MHFD-Inlet_v5.02_Inlets, Inlet B2 3/20/2024, 10:29 AM Project: Inlet ID: Gutter Geometry: Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK =0.0 ft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)SBACK =0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)nBACK =0.020 Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB =6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN =19.0 ft Gutter Width W =1.00 ft Street Transverse Slope SX =0.020 ft/ft Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft)SW =0.083 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO =0.000 ft/ft Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)nSTREET =0.013 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX =19.0 19.0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX =6.0 6.0 inches Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is not applicable to Sump Condition Minor Storm Major Storm MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is not applicable to Sump Condition Qallow =SUMP SUMP cfs MHFD-Inlet, Version 5.02 (August 2022) ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Inlet B3 MHFD-Inlet_v5.02_Inlets, Inlet B3 3/20/2024, 10:29 AM Design Information (Input)MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)alocal =3.00 3.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)No =1 1 Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)Ponding Depth =5.3 5.3 inches Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) =N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo =N/A N/A feet Open Area Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)Aratio =N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)Cf (G) =N/A N/A Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)Cw (G) =N/A N/A Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)Co (G) =N/A N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) =5.00 5.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert =6.00 6.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat =6.00 6.00 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)Theta =63.40 63.40 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)Wp =1.00 1.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)Cf (C) =0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)Cw (C) =3.60 3.60 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)Co (C) =0.67 0.67 Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated)MINOR MAJOR Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate =N/A N/A ft Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb =0.36 0.36 ft Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate =N/A N/A Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb =1.00 1.00 Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination =N/A N/A MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)Qa =4.8 4.8 cfs Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms (>Q Peak)Q PEAK REQUIRED =1.1 2.9 cfs INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION MHFD-Inlet, Version 5.02 (August 2022) CDOT Type R Curb Opening H-VertH-Curb W Lo (C) Lo (G) Wo WP CDOT Type R Curb Opening Override Depths MHFD-Inlet_v5.02_Inlets, Inlet B3 3/20/2024, 10:29 AM Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, Mar 19 2024 A1 Sidewalk Chase Rectangular Bottom Width (ft)= 2.00 Total Depth (ft)= 0.50 Invert Elev (ft)= 4899.01 Slope (%)= 2.00 N-Value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Known Q (cfs)= 1.19 Highlighted Depth (ft)= 0.15 Q (cfs)= 1.190 Area (sqft)= 0.30 Velocity (ft/s)= 3.97 Wetted Perim (ft)= 2.30 Crit Depth, Yc (ft)= 0.23 Top Width (ft)= 2.00 EGL (ft)= 0.39 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 4898.75 -0.26 4899.00 -0.01 4899.25 0.24 4899.50 0.49 4899.75 0.74 4900.00 0.99 Reach (ft) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, Mar 19 2024 A1 Swale Triangular Side Slopes (z:1)= 8.00, 20.00 Total Depth (ft)= 0.99 Invert Elev (ft)= 4900.00 Slope (%)= 1.50 N-Value = 0.035 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Known Q (cfs)= 1.19 Highlighted Depth (ft)= 0.26 Q (cfs)= 1.190 Area (sqft)= 0.95 Velocity (ft/s)= 1.26 Wetted Perim (ft)= 7.30 Crit Depth, Yc (ft)= 0.22 Top Width (ft)= 7.28 EGL (ft)= 0.28 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 4899.75 -0.25 4900.00 0.00 4900.25 0.25 4900.50 0.50 4900.75 0.75 4901.00 1.00 Reach (ft) Pipe End Riprap Sizing Calculations Prospect Sports, Fort Collins, CO Circular D or Da, Pipe Diameter (ft) H or Ha, Culvert Height (ft) W, Culvert Width (ft) Yt/D Q/D1.5 Q/D2.5 Yt/H Q/WH0.5 Storm Line A Erosion Resistant 13.57 2.00 2.10 1.05 4.80 2.40 0.68 2.40 1.76 -0.79 Type L 6.00 5.00 1.50 Storm Line B Erosion Resistant 10.27 1.50 1.48 0.99 5.59 3.73 0.68 3.73 1.33 -0.41 Type L 4.50 5.00 1.50 Pipe Parameters Calculations Circular Pipe (Figure MD-21) Froude Parameter Q/D2.5 Max 6.0 or Q/WH1.5 Max 8.0 Design Discharge (cfs) Pipe Designation Box Culvert Suggested Riprap Size Rectangular Pipe (Figure MD-22) ***Spec Min. Width of Riprap (ft) 2*d50, Depth of Riprap (ft) for L/2 Riprap Type (From Figure MD-21 or MD-22) Urban Drainage pg MD-107 *for purposes of outlet protection during major floods, the acceptable velocity is set at 5.5 ft/sec for erosive soils and at 7.7 ft/sect for erosion resistant soils. ***Use Pipe Diameter for circular conduits as a minimum width. **In no case should the length be less than 3H or 3D, nor does L need to be greater than 10H or 10D when the Froude Parameter is less than 8.0 or 6.0 respectively. Whenver the Froude parameter is greater than these maximums, increase the maximum L by 1/4 D or 1/4 H for each whole number by which the Froude Parameter is greater than 8.0 or 6.0 respectively. Soil Type L= 1/(2tanq)* [At/Yt)-W] (ft) **Spec Min. Length of Riprap (ft) Culvert Parameters *At=Q/V (ft) Expansion Factor 1/(2tanq) (From Figure MD-23 or MD-24) Yt, Tailwater Depth (ft) Calculations by: NKS Date: 3/20/2024 C:\United Civil Dropbox\Projects\U22014 - Prospect Park East\Reports\Drainage\Calculations\Hydraulics\RiprapSizing.xls A PPENDIX C R EFERENCED M ATERIALS Stormwater Alternative Compliance/Variance Application City of Fort Collins Water Utilities Engineering Section A: Engineer/Owner Information Engineer Name____________________________________________Phone___________________________ Street Address_____________________________________________________________________________ City__________________________________________State________________________Zip_____________ Owner Name______________________________________________Phone___________________________ Street Address_____________________________________________________________________________ City__________________________________________State________________________Zip_____________ Section C: Alternative Compliance/Variance Information Section B: Proposed Project Information Legal description and/or address of property____________________________________________________ Project Name______________________________________________________________________________ Project/Application Number from Development Review (i.e. FDP123456)__________________________ Description of Project_______________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ Existing Use (check one): ☐ residential ☐ non-residential ☐ mixed-use ☐ vacant ground Proposed Use (check one): ☐ residential ☐ non-residential ☐ mixed-use ☐ other____________________ If non-residential or mixed use, describe in detail_______________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ State the requirement from which alternative compliance/variance is sought. (Please include applicable Drainage Criteria Manual volume, chapter and section.) What hardship prevents this site from meeting the requirement? What alternative is proposed for the site? Attach separate sheet if necessary Attach separate sheet if necessary Kevin Brazelton 970-530-4044 19 Old Town Square #238 Fort Collins CO 80524 Max West Inc (Attn:Jonathan O'Neil)970-218-9453 1500 Buckeye Street Fort Collins CO 80525 Prospect Sports Club Lot 5,Prospect Park East,PUD,FTC Development of existing vacant lot into a sports complex Property to be developed into a sports complex containing (2)gymnasiums and associated supporting infrastructure. Alt.Compliance -Section 6,Detention See attached. See attached. page 2 The owner agrees to comply with the provisions of the zoning ordinance, building code and all other applicable sections of the City Code, Land Use Code, City Plan and all other laws and ordinances affecting the construction and occupancy of the proposed building that are not directly approved by this variance. The owner understands that if this variance is approved, the structure and its occupants may be more susceptible to fl ood or runoff damage as well as other adverse drainage issues. Signature of owner:_____________________________________________Date:_______________________ The engineer hereby certifi es that the above information, along with the reference plans and project descriptions is correct. Signature of engineer:___________________________________________Date:_______________________ PE STAMP If you have questions or need assistance fi lling out forms, contact Fort Collins Utilities at: Phone: 970-221-6700 · TDD 970-224-6003 Web: fcgov.com/stormwater · Email: WaterUtilitiesEng@fcgov.com Utilities Of f i c e u s e o n l y Date complete application submitted:_____________ Date of approval/denial:__________________________ Variance: ☐ approved ☐ denied Staff justifi cation/notes/conditions:_______________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________ Approved by:__________________________________ Entered in UtilityFile Database? ☐ yes ☐ no 12/13/23 12/13/23 1/9/24 1/12/24 x Site does not have an easement to allow developed flows to reach existing subdivision detention pond. This variance allows detention in an existing pond adjacent to the river across Sharp Point Dr. x S TORMWATER V ARIANCE R EQUEST P ROSPECT S PORTS C LUB F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 19 OLD TOWN SQUARE #238 | FORT COLLINS, CO 80524 | 970-530-4044 | www.unitedcivil.com December 20, 2023 DAN MOGEN 700 WOOD STREET FORT COLLINS,CO 80522 RE: STORMWATER ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE AND VARIANCE REQUESTS PROSPECT SPORTS CLUB –1600 EAST PROSPECT ROAD PROJECT NUMBER:U22014 Dan, This letter is being submitted on behalf of the owners of the Prospect Sports Club development. The project is currently in the Preliminary Development Plan process and currently one (1) variance is being requested to modify portions of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual as follows: VARIANCE REQUEST –STORMWATER DETENTION STANDARDS DESIGN CRITERIA OF VARIANCE BEING REQUESTED Section 6.0 within the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual which states: Onsite detention is required for all development projects. The required minimum detention volume and maximum release rate(s) for the developed condition 100-year recurrence interval storm must be determined in accordance with the conditions and regulations established in the appropriate Master Drainage Plan(s) for that area of the City, for the development and in accordance with the criteria set forth in this Manual. HARDSHIP REGARDING REQUIREMENT The site is located at 1600 East Prospect Road within Prospect Park East P.U.D and is surrounded by existing fully developed commercial properties to the south (Advanced Energy) and west (Larimer County Coroner) along with Prospect Road and Sharp Point to the north and east respectively. The original subdivision development planned for drainage to be conveyed via overland flow to the drainage facility located south of the site; therefore, no storm sewer currently exists on the site. However, the original subdivision plat did not include drainage easements on the property to allow for the conveyance of 100-year stormwater runoff from the site, across the property to the south and to the existing drainage facility. After discussion with the south property owner and their attorney, the southern property owner has denied any new easements on their property. Refer to Appendix A for an email from the south property owner regarding the denial of new easements. Therefore, the site cannot utilize the detention system within the subdivision. Storm sewer for the project, required to convey both water quality and 100-year developed stormwater flows, is proposed to convey runoff to the east across Sharp Point to the existing property also owned by the developer of the Prospect Sports Club facility to avoid the need for drainage easements south of the site. PROPOSED ALTERNATE DESIGN The existing subdivision detention facility located south of the project site drains to the existing pond located east of Sharp Point prior to being released to the Poudre River. Coincidentally, the property east of Sharp Point where this existing pond is located is also owned by the developer of the Prospect Sports project. As such, the development team proposes to drain 100-year undetained flows from the Prospect Sports site directly to this existing pond, bypassing the subdivision detention facility and negating the need for drainage easements on properties south of the development site. The following sections of this variance request documents the negligible impacts this alternate design will cause the downstream pond and property. S TORMWATER V ARIANCE R EQUEST P ROSPECT S PORTS C LUB F ORT C OLLINS ,CO 19 OLD TOWN SQUARE #238 | FORT COLLINS, CO 80524 | 970-530-4044 | www.unitedcivil.com The existing detention facility was analyzed in the approved drainage report entitled, “Final Drainage and Erosion Control Plan – Advanced Energy Buildings 7 & 8”, by Park Engineering Consultants and dated June 11, 1999, see Appendix A for excerpts. In said report, the detention facility was found to require a total volume of 8.94 ac-ft; however, the facility only has a volume of 7.69 ac-ft to the centerline of Sharp Point prior to overtopping, by approximately 0.32-feet, and draining directly to the existing pond east of Sharp Point. With this request, it is calculated that the proposed development would account for approximately 0.43 ac-ft of the required volume in the existing detention facility. By piping the undetained 100-year flows from the proposed development directly to the existing pond east of Sharp Point: 1.The existing detention storage deficit in the facility to the south is reduced. 2.The amount of flow overtopping of Sharp Point is reduced. 3.The net volume of undetained storage the existing pond east of Sharp Point remains the same. Additionally, it should be noted that the existing pond east of Sharp Point is approximately 6.1-acres in size. With the required detention volume of the site of 0.43 ac-ft being attenuated within the existing pond, rather than detained onsite, the rise in depth in the existing pond would be less than 1-inch. Based on the information provided for this detention variance request, it is the design teams opinion that the proposed design will improve the function of downstream infrastructure (i.e. the existing detention facility to the south and the overtopping of Sharp Point), will have negligible impacts to the existing pond east of Sharp Point and will have no negative impacts on City infrastructure, downstream properties or the safety of the public. On behalf of the owners of the Prospect Sports Club and the design team, we thank you for the consideration of this request. If you should have any questions or comments regarding this request, please feel free to contact us at your convenience. Sincerely, United Civil Design Group, LLC Kevin Brazelton, PE Principal APPENDIX A – Referenced Materials 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, Colorado Prospect Sports Natural Resources Conservation Service May 10, 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 6—Aquepts, ponded....................................................................................13 64—Loveland clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes...........................................14 92—Riverwash............................................................................................15 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 0 6 2 0 44 9 0 6 4 0 44 9 0 6 6 0 44 9 0 6 8 0 44 9 0 7 0 0 44 9 0 7 2 0 44 9 0 6 2 0 44 9 0 6 4 0 44 9 0 6 6 0 44 9 0 6 8 0 44 9 0 7 0 0 44 9 0 7 2 0 497310 497330 497350 497370 497390 497410 497430 497450 497470 497490 497310 497330 497350 497370 497390 497410 497430 497450 497470 497490 40° 34' 2'' N 10 5 ° 1 ' 5 4 ' ' W 40° 34' 2'' N 10 5 ° 1 ' 4 6 ' ' W 40° 33' 58'' N 10 5 ° 1 ' 5 4 ' ' W 40° 33' 58'' N 10 5 ° 1 ' 4 6 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 40 80 160 240 Feet 0 10 20 40 60 Meters Map Scale: 1:863 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 6 Aquepts, ponded 0.6 21.8% 64 Loveland clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 1.1 42.8% 92 Riverwash 0.9 35.4% Totals for Area of Interest 2.7 100.0% 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 11 development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report 12 Larimer County Area, Colorado 6—Aquepts, ponded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpx4 Elevation: 4,500 to 6,700 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 80 to 140 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Aquepts, ponded, and similar soils:90 percent Minor components:10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Aquepts, Ponded Setting Landform:Draws, channels, drainageways Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, tread Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Variable alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 60 inches: variable Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Very poorly drained Runoff class: Negligible Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to very high (0.60 to 99.90 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 0 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding:NoneFrequent Frequency of ponding:None Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8w Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Hydric soil rating: Yes Minor Components Nunn Percent of map unit:10 percent Ecological site:R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 13 64—Loveland clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpx9 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 Loveland and similar soils:90 percent Minor components:10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Loveland Setting Landform:Flood plains, stream terraces Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 15 inches: clay loam H2 - 15 to 32 inches: loam H3 - 32 to 60 inches: very gravelly sand Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Poorly drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high (0.20 to 0.60 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 18 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding:OccasionalNone Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent Maximum salinity:Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R067BY036CO - Overflow Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 14 Minor Components Aquolls Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Swales Hydric soil rating: Yes Poudre Percent of map unit:5 percent Ecological site:R067BY036CO - Overflow Hydric soil rating: No 92—Riverwash Map Unit Composition Riverwash:100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Riverwash Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 8 Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 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 This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jul-06-2022 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact City of Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 USA This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jul-06-2022 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact City of Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 USA This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jul-06-2022 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact City of Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 USA This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jul-06-2022 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact City of Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 USA This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jul-06-2022 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact City of Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 USA This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jul-06-2022 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact City of Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 USA Th i s u n o f f i c i a l c o p y w a s d o w n l o a d e d o n J u l - 0 6 - 2 0 2 2 f r o m t h e C i t y o f F o r t C o l l i n s P u b l i c R e c o r d s W e b s i t e : h t t p : / / c i t y d o c s . f c g o v . c o m Fo r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n o r a n o f f i c i a l c o p y , p l e a s e c o n t a c t C i t y o f F o r t C o l l i n s U t i l i t i e s 7 0 0 W o o d S t r e e t F o r t C o l l i n s , C O 8 0 5 2 4 U S A This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jul-06-2022 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact City of Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 USA This unofficial copy was downloaded on Jul-06-2022 from the City of Fort Collins Public Records Website: http://citydocs.fcgov.com For additional information or an official copy, please contact City of Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 USA FLOOD HAZARD INFORMATION NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAMFLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP LARIMER COUNT Y, COLORADOand Incorporated Areas Panel Contains: COMMUNIT Y NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX 09830983 JJLARIMER COUNTYFORT COLLINS, CITY OF 080101080102 MAP NUMBER MAP REVISED 08069C0983J VERSION NUMBER2.6.4.6 SCALE 0979 0984 0981 0987 0977 0982 09921000* 0983 0 1,000 2,000500feet 1 inch = 500 feet 1:6,000 Map Projection: LARIMER COUNTY 0 250 500125meters PANEL LOCATOR * PANEL NOT PRINTED NOTES TO USERS )) )) )) )))) )) )))) )))) )) )) )))) )) )) )))) )))) ÑÑÑ ÑÑÑ ÑÑÑ ÑÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑÑÑÑÑ Larimer CountyUnincorporated Areas080101 City of Fort Collins 080102 4 9 4 2 4920 4 9 0 6 4930 4912 4923 4911 4933 4955 4953 4927 4917 4 9 2 1 4 9 0 3 4931 4911 4920 4933 4925 4949 4913 4 9 2 3 4934 4919 4923 4954 4921 4932 4944 4 9 0 4 4 9 1 5 4 9 1 1 4 9 0 5 4945 4905 4932 4909 4941 4951 4 9 1 8 4 9 2 2 4928 4908 4930 ,P ,E 4 9 2 1 .1 ,S ,B 4927.0 4931.3 ,N 4 9 2 0 .1 ,P 4924.3 4909.1 ,F 4905.8 ,C G ,M ,A ,D ,H 4 9 2 0 .1 ,CF 4937.4 ,K ,D 4920.1 4917.4 4941.3 4 9 3 4.2 4945.1 4912.5 ,H 4935.0 4 9 2 2.8 ,D ,O 4927.6 ,A ,CE ,F 4934.5 4 9 2 5.4 ,S 4920.6 ,O ,O ,B 4940.7 ,E 4 9 2 0 .1 4926.5 ,L 4909.0 ,E4920.1 4924.7 ,I 4954.9 4 9 2 6 .0 49 3 7.9 ,L 4929.9 ,M ,I 4 9 3 9 .3 4 9 1 7 .7 4917.4 4930.1 4 9 3 3 . 9 ,L 4 9 1 7 .4 4930.6 4926.9 4923.9 ,U 4 9 1 8 .0 ,R ,R ,C ,P ,C 4 9 2 8.0 4 9 2 0 .1 ,F 4938.4 4930.3 ,H ,K 4924.4 4922.1 ,I 4920.1 4950.1 4 9 0 9 .1 4928.5 ,J 4 9 4 2 . 6 4913.6 4932.2 ,B ,M 4917.4 4 9 1 9 .5 4 9 2 4 .6 ,D ,G 4926.8 ,T ,A 4910.1 ,N ,Q 4938.7 4937.7 4925.6 ,G ,G 4923.4 ,J 4905.0 ,Q ,J ,CD 4920.1 4 9 4 7 . 4 4920.1 4929.1 4939.1 ,K 4913.6 4917.5 ,C 4 9 4 0.3 4 9 2 7 . 4 4922.9 ,N Weir FootbridgeBridge Bridge Bridge 1-PERCENT-ANNUAL-CHANCEFLOOD DISCHARGECONTAINED IN STRUCTURE Culvert Bridge Bridge 1-PERCENT-ANNUAL-CHANCE FLOOD DISCHARGE CONTAINED IN STRUCTURE Bridge Bridge Bridge Bridge Levee Cache LaPoudre RiverLPATH Dry Creek - (South of Canal) Cache La Poudre River Cache La PoudreRiver- Mulberry Sp lit Cache LaPoudre River -Timberline SFP Dry Creek - (South of Canal) Cache LaPoudre River- Linc SFP Cache La Poudre River- Mulberry Split Cache La Poudre River Cache La Poudre River Old Dry Creek (Historic Channel) Cache La Poudre River S p r i n g C r e e k Cache La PoudreReservoir Inlet L a k e C a n a l Spring Creek 12 24 19 8 20 18 13 17 7 R. 69 W. R. 68 W. R. 68 W. R. 69 W. MAP AREA SHOWN ONTHIS PANEL IS LOCATEDWITHIN TOWNSHIP 7NORTH, RANGE 69 WESTAND TOWNSHIP 7NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST. RIVERSIDE AVE MYRON WAY WEBSTER CT WI N A MAC DR AIRPARK DR TRAPP-IST ST S TIMBERLINE RD STOUT ST E MAGNOLIA ST LEMA LN S COURT ST WATER-COURSE WAY DONELLACT BUCKEYE S T DUFF DR LINK LANE CT TANA DR ZURICHDR S TIMBERLINE RD BUCKINGHAM ST C A IRNE S DR WOOD-WARD WAY RAILROAD RACQUETTE DR LESSER DR PALE ALE ST WELCH ST CORDOVA RD GARFIELDST FRONTAGE RD S E LAUREL ST JAY DR ROBBIE WAY LA PLATA AVE LORY ST PROSPECT PARK WAY EDORA RD PATTON ST PAWNEE DR SAISON ST BAKER ST L U K E S T E M I G H S T HOUGH-TON CT HOFFMAN MILL RD POUDRE RIVER DR GREEN ST MOROCCO WAY MONTGOMERY ST JENNIE DR ANNABEL AVE COLLEGIATE WAY MEEKER DR TORONTO ST E PROSPECT RD MIDPOINT DR SEMINOLE DR RAILROAD MUNICH WAY PIKES PEAK AVE ERIN CT LONGS PEAK DR ELINCOLNAVE N L E M A Y A V E ROME CT Y O U N T S T COMMERCE DR A C A D E M Y C T MORGAN ST 11TH ST ALFORD ST TERRY DR LUKE ST HAYS ST E MULBERRY ST WB PENNOCK PL L A G E R S T RAILROAD AIRWAY AVE WOODWARD WAY ROBERTSON ST APEX DR MACKINAC ST W E L C H S T N LEMAY AVE S LINK LN E PITKIN ST CHEROKEE DR DOCTORS LN E MYRTLE ST E MAGNOLI A ST E LAKE ST E OLIVE CT 10TH ST DUNKEL STNEWAYGO DR JESSUP DR E LAKE ST S O L S T I C E LN BANN-OCK ST P A T T O N S T E STUART ST HEATH PKWY EDORA CT GOLD DR S LEMAY AVE SPECHT POINT RD ALTBIER ST E PITKIN ST PINT ST LONDON CT INDUSTRIAL D R PLAZA DE MEXICO DAINE DR SPRINGMEADOWSCT 12TH ST ROBERTSONST BOCK ST GOLD DR KALIKASA CT CLOVERDALE DR WEBSTER AVE RICHARD WAY WILLIAMS ST LONGLEAFLN E LAKE PL HOSPITAL LN ROMERO ST E M U L B E R R Y S T E B CHRISTMAN DR EMIGH ST MEXICO WAY LINCOLN CT NOQUET CT ALFORD ST SHANDY ST DARREN ST E LAU REL ST MCHUGH ST POUDRE PKWY CHEYENNE DR FRONTAGE RD N AIRWAY AVE ERIC ST R I V E N D A L D R ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONEAE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE 40° 35' 38'' 105° 03' 45'' 40° 35' 38'' 40° 33' 45''40° 33' 45''105° 01' 52'' 105° 03' 45''105° 01' 52'' 3130000 FT3125000 FT 1455000 FT 1450000 FT 4491000m N 4492000m N 4493000m N 495000m E 496000m E 497000m E PANEL 983 OF 1420 REVISED PRELIMINARY12/20/2021 Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 13N; North American Datum 1983;Western Hemisphere; Ver tical Datum: NAVD 88 SPECIAL FLOODHAZARD AREAS OTHER AREAS OFFLOOD HAZARD OTHERAREAS GENERALSTRUCTURES Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) With BFE or Depth Regulator y Floodway Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone A,V, A99 Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Zone X Zone D HTTPS://MSC.FEMA .GOV THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP AND SUPPORTINGDOCUMENTATION ARE ALSO AVAILABLE IN DIGITAL FORMAT AT SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT Cr oss Sections with 1% Annual ChanceWater Sur face Elevation Coastal Tr ansect OTHERFEATURES Profile BaselineHydrographic FeatureBase Flood Elevation Line (BFE)Limit of StudyJurisdiction Boundar y Coastal Tr ansect Baseline 17.5 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazar d, Areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depth less than one foot or with drainage areas of less than one square mileFuture Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazar dArea with Reduced Flood Risk due to LeveeSee Notes. Zone X Zone X Zone X !(8 %,E 18.2 NO SCREEN Levee, Dike, or Floodwall Channel, Culver t, or Storm Sewer Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D For information and questions about this Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), available products associated withthis FIRM, including historic versions, the current map date for each FIRM panel, how to order products, or theNational Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in general, please call the FEMA Mapping and Insurance eXchange at1-877-FEMA-MAP (1-877-336-2627) or visit the FEMA Flood Map Service Center website at https://msc.fema.gov.Available products may include previously issued Letters of Map Change, a Flood Insurance Study Report, and/ordigital versions of this map. Many of these products can be ordered or obtained directly from the website. Communities annexing land on adjacent FIRM panels must obtain a current copy of the adjacent panel as well asthe current FIRM Index. These may be ordered directly from the Flood Map Service Center at the number listedabove. For community and countywide map dates refer to the Flood Insurance Study Report for this jurisdiction. To determine if flood insurance is available in this community, contact your Insurance agent or call the NationalFlood Insurance Program at 1-800-638-6620. Base map information shown on this FIRM was derived from the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL), dated 2013and digital data provided by Larimer County GIS Department, dated 2018. NON-ACCREDITED LEVEE SYSTEM: This panel contains a levee system that has not been accredited and istherefore not recognized as reducing the 1-percent-annual-chance flood hazard. FLOOD HAZARD INFORMATION NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAMFLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP LARIMER COUNT Y, COLORADOand Incorporated Areas Panel Contains: COMMUNIT Y NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX 09840984 JJLARIMER COUNTYFORT COLLINS, CITY OF 080101080102 MAP NUMBER08069C0984J VERSION NUMBER2.6.4.6 SCALE 0983 1003 0992 0982 1011 0981 1001 1000* 0984 0 1,000 2,000500feet 1 inch = 500 feet 1:6,000 Map Projection: LARIMER COUNTY 0 250 500125meters PANEL LOCATOR * PANEL NOT PRINTED NOTES TO USERS )))) )))) )))) )))) ÑÑÑ ÑÑÑ ÑÑÑ ÑÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑ Ñ Ñ ÑÑÑÑÑÑ Larimer CountyUnincorporated Areas080101 Larimer County Unincorporated Areas 080101 Larimer County Unincorporated Areas 080101 City of Fort Collins 080102 City of Fort Collins 080102 City of Fort Collins 080102 City of Fort Collins 080102 City of Fort Collins 080102 City of Fort Collins 080102 4 9 0 34903 4 9 0 5 4 8 9 2 48 80 4 8 9 3 4940.0 4900.5 4 8 9 9 .3 4930.7 4898.1 ,D 4917.5 ,E 4897.1 4 8 9 3.0 4 8 8 8 . 0 4883.5 ,B ,X 4913.0 4945.6 4902.5 ,C B ,A A ,P ,A 4896.1 4923.1 ,A 4913.6 4 8 9 4 .4 4919.9 4 8 9 3 .2 4900.3 ,K ,D 4903.7 ,O 4918.9 4920.7 4892.8 4928.3 ,C ,B 4 9 2 0 .5 4 8 9 2.9 4 8 9 4.0 ,C 4 8 9 2 .3 ,H ,Y 4909.1 4945.7 4 9 0 5.0 ,Q 4895.7 4930.5 ,A ,N 4924.8 4909.0 4905.2 4 9 4 2 .0 ,W 4937.7 4930.5 4 9 2 3 .0 4 8 9 8 .6 4920.6 4 8 9 3.1 ,C 4886.0 ,Z ,S 4894.8 4949.2 ,V 4 8 9 8 .5 ,R ,B ,E 4889.7 ,B 4923.6 ,F,CC ,J ,D ,B 4896.7 4 9 0 9.7 ,D 4900.0 4 9 1 6.9 4916.9 ,M 4902.3 4887.0 ,C 4902.1 4895.6 ,B ,T ,I 4914.3 ,F ,E ,C 4 8 9 8 .4 4892.7 ,C 4895.7 4921.3 4900.9 ,A 4909.0 4883.3 4939.1 4916.9 4894.7 4892.3 ,U4894.3 Control Structure Bridge Bridge Bridge Bridge1-PERCENT-ANNUAL-CHANCE FLOOD DISCHARGE CONTAINED IN STRUCTURE 1-PERCENT-ANNUAL-CHANCEFLOOD DISCHARGECONTAINED IN STRUCTURE 1-PERCENT-ANNUAL-CHANCEFLOOD DISCHARGECONTAINED IN STRUCTURE Culvert Culvert Cache La Poudre River- RProspect SFP Cache LaPoudre River Cache LaPoudre River- LPATH SFP Cache La Poudre River Cooper Slough Cooper Slough Boxelder Creek Boxelder Creek Lake Canal Cache La Poudre Reservoir Inlet L a k e C a n a l Box-elder Creek Cache La Poudre River Reservoir Inlet Cache La Poudre River Split - R Path Box-elder Creek Cooper Slough Overflow Sherry Drive Overflow Spring Creek 15 22 8 16 20 9 17 21 10 MAP AREA SHOWNON THIS PANEL ISLOCATED WITHINTOWNSHIP 7 NORTH,RANGE 68 WEST. N TIMBERLINE RD GREENFIELDS CT E L I N C O L N A V E JOHN DEERE DR DONELLA CT ZEPPELINWAY STIMBERLINERD SE FRONTAGE RD INTERNATIONAL BLVD E LOCUST ST S W F R O N T A G E R D HORIZON AVE JENNIE DR COUNTRY-SIDE DR COUNTRY-SIDE CT CRUSADER ST RELIANT ST VERDE AVE E MULBERRY ST EB T R A C E Y P K W Y SE FRON-TAGE RD NE FRONTAGE RD HARVESTER CT P L E A S A N T A C R E S D R E LINCOLN AVE GREENBRIAR DR ¦25 WEICKER DR DARREN CT COMET ST DASSAULT ST COLLINS AIRE LN CLIFFORD CT TIGERCAT WAY REDMAN DR GREENBRIAR DR N W FRO NTAG E RD COUNTRYSIDE DR ANNABEL AVE SUPERCUB LN DELOZIER RD LAKE CANAL CT RIVERBENDDR CRUSADER ST CONQUESTST RIVERBEND CT S SUMMIT VIEW DR TANA DR CENTRO WAY CHERLY ST LAURA LN FRONTAGE RD N RENE DR MAX ST KIMBERLY DR COLEMAN ST FRONTAGE RD S ¦25 BOXELDER DR E PROSPECT RD S S U M MIT VIE W D R SUNRISE AVE ¦25 STEVEN DR GREENFIELDS CT RAILROAD QUINBY ST MARQUISE ST JOHN DEERE DR CANAL DR FRONTAGE RD S KENWOOD DR BUCKEYE ST E MULBERRY ST WB TERRY DR DARREN ST SURREY LN DAWN AVE SYKESDR COMET ST SW FRONTAGE RD A L A N S T SMITHFIELD DR VICOTWAY JAY DR M A R C H CT ANDREA ST SHARP POINT DR CLIFFORD DR JOANNE ST S U M MIT C T FAIRCHILD ST DELOZIER DR CONQ-UEST WAY STOCKTON AVE COUN-TRYS-IDE CIR SW FRONTAGE RD SHERRY DR ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONEAE ZONE AE ZONE AE(EL 4891)ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AO(DEPTH 2) ZONE AO(DEPTH 1) ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AO (DEPTH 2) ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE LIMIT OF STUDY 105° 00' 00'' 40° 35' 38'' 40° 33' 45''40° 33' 45''105° 01' 52'' 105° 01' 52''40° 35' 38''105° 00' 00'' 1450000 FT 1455000 FT 3135000 FT 1450000 FT 1455000 FT 4493000m N 4492000m N 4491000m N 499000m E498000m E PANEL 984 OF 1420 REVISED PRELIMINARY12/20/2021 Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 13N; North American Datum 1983;Western Hemisphere; Ver tical Datum: NAVD 88 SPECIAL FLOODHAZARD AREAS OTHER AREAS OFFLOOD HAZARD OTHERAREAS GENERALSTRUCTURES Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) With BFE or Depth Regulator y Floodway Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone A,V, A99 Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Zone X Zone D HTTPS://MSC.FEMA .GOV THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP AND SUPPORTINGDOCUMENTATION ARE ALSO AVAILABLE IN DIGITAL FORMAT AT SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT Cr oss Sections with 1% Annual ChanceWater Sur face Elevation Coastal Tr ansect OTHERFEATURES Profile BaselineHydrographic FeatureBase Flood Elevation Line (BFE)Limit of StudyJurisdiction Boundar y Coastal Tr ansect Baseline 17.5 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazar d, Areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depth less than one foot or with drainage areas of less than one square mileFuture Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazar dArea with Reduced Flood Risk due to LeveeSee Notes. Zone X Zone X Zone X !(8 %,E 18.2 NO SCREEN Levee, Dike, or Floodwall Channel, Culver t, or Storm Sewer Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D For information and questions about this Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), available products associated withthis FIRM, including historic versions, the current map date for each FIRM panel, how to order products, or theNational Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in general, please call the FEMA Mapping and Insurance eXchange at1-877-FEMA-MAP (1-877-336-2627) or visit the FEMA Flood Map Service Center website at https://msc.fema.gov.Available products may include previously issued Letters of Map Change, a Flood Insurance Study Report, and/ordigital versions of this map. Many of these products can be ordered or obtained directly from the website. Communities annexing land on adjacent FIRM panels must obtain a current copy of the adjacent panel as well asthe current FIRM Index. These may be ordered directly from the Flood Map Service Center at the number listedabove. For community and countywide map dates refer to the Flood Insurance Study Report for this jurisdiction. To determine if flood insurance is available in this community, contact your Insurance agent or call the NationalFlood Insurance Program at 1-800-638-6620. Base map information shown on this FIRM was derived from the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL), dated 2013and digital data provided by Larimer County GIS Department, dated 2018. MAP REVISED 1 Nate Stroud From:Claudia Quezada <cquezada@fcgov.com> Sent:Monday, July 24, 2023 3:35 PM To:Nate Stroud Cc:Kevin Brazelton Subject:RE: Prospect Sports Club Floodplain Variance Hi Nate, The form you attached is the correct one. We will need a draft Floodplain Use Permit (FUP) application along with payment. Since the effective shows most of the site in the 100-yr, we’ll want the FUP application to capture all items in the floodplain (EV stations, building, grading, parking lot, utilities, etc.). The variance application fee is $1000, the permit fee is $50, and $150 for the review of “new building,” so that’s the grand total is $1,200.00. https://library.municode.com/co/fort_collins/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=CH10FLPRPR_ARTIIFLHAAR_DIV2ADPR_S 10-31FLPEREFE I spoke with Ted Bender, my supervisor, and he agrees: City Staff would be in support of a variance to use RiskMAP as best available data. All floodplain variances must be approved by the Water Board. They meet once a month, so scheduling a hearing is at least 1-2 months out. The variance application must be submitted to City Floodplain Staff 3 weeks before Water Board Hearing date, but we would appreciate more time given our staffing shortages. Let me know if there’s anything else I can help with. Thank you, Claudia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CLAUDIA QUEZADA, EI, CFM 970.416.2494 office From: Nate Stroud <Nate.Stroud@UnitedCivil.com> Sent: Monday, July 24, 2023 1:09 PM To: Claudia Quezada <cquezada@fcgov.com> Cc: Kevin Brazelton <kevin.brazelton@UnitedCivil.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Prospect Sports Club Floodplain Variance Hey Claudia, Sorry to bug you again, but had a couple more quick quesfions after discussing this with Kevin that we wanted to confirm prior to our internal team meefing tomorrow. I believe I found the correct variance form (aftached) but wanted to verify. On the variance form it calls for a completed Floodplain Use Permit. Would this be needed to complete and approve the variance or could this wait unfil more final design and approval? We wanted to confirm fee amounts as well. The Variance calls for $300 but the Floodplain Use Permit calls out an addifional $1,000 variance fee and a $50 use permit applicafion fee. Feel free to call my cell if it is easier to discuss the above over the phone or if you have any quesfions for us. A PPENDIX D D RAINAGE E XHIBITS OS1 0.16 A6 0.23 A4 0.28 A2 0.09 A3 0.54 A1 0.37 A7 0.25 A8.2 0.39 A8.1 0.10 A5 0.17 A8.2 0.09 SH A R P P O I N T D R I V E PROPOSED BUILDING EAST PROSPEC T R O A D (100' ROW) SOUTHERN POND NORTHERN POND EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN STORMWATER FROM THE WEST STORM SYSTEM TO DRAIN THROUGH TREES AND VEGETATION PA T H : 0'50'100' SCALE: 1" = 50' 25' C: \ U N I T E D C I V I L D R O P B O X \ P R O J E C T S \ U 2 2 0 1 4 - P R O S P E C T P A R K E A S T \ C A D D \ E T \ 2 0 2 4 - 0 3 - 1 1 _ L I D E X H I B I T . D W G 20 2 4 - 0 3 - 1 1 _ L I D E X H I B I T DR A W I N G N A M E : SH E E T S I Z E : 1 1 x 1 7 PROSPECT SPORTS CLUB LID & BMP TREATMENT MAP DATE:March 11, 2024 PREPARED FOR:MAX WEST INC.JOB NUMBER:U22014 NOTE:THIS EXHIBIT WAS PREPARED FOR INFORMATION ONLY AND THE ENGINEER PREPARING THESE PLANS WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR UNAUTHORIZED USE OF THEM.SHEET OF1 1 NO R T H 19 OLD TOWN SQUARE #238 | FORT COLLINS, CO 80524 | (970) 530-4044 | www.unitedcivil.com UNITED CIVIL Design Group BASIN BOUNDARY LEGEND NORTHERN BIORETENTION POND SOUTHERN BIORETENTION POND NO SYSTEM PROVIDED SH A R P P O I N T D R . PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 4903.50 (NORTH) FFE = 4899.00 (GYM / SOUTH) LOT 5 PROSPECT PARK EAST P.U.D. GRASS SWALE EXISTING LAKE/POND 11+75 9+ 7 5 10 + 0 0 11+00 INLET A3 STA 11+48.51 N: 1449914.75 E: 3131424.21 FES A1 STA 10+00.00 N: 1449878.73 E: 3131562.01 66.7 LF 30"X19" STORM EDGE OF POND TOP OF BANK 8' UTILITY EASEMENT 25' PEDESTRIAN & ACCESS EASEMENT BOOK: 2296 PAGE: 2456 COMCAST TELE EXISTING 8" SANITARY SEWER EXISTING 12" WATER STA: 9+75.00 N: 1449865.14 E: 3131582.99 BEGIN ALIGNMENT FLOODPLAIN BFE 100-YEAR FLOOD ELEVAT I O N - 4901 (NAVD 88) 81.8 LF 19"x30" STORM STMH A2 (60'' FLAT TOP MH) STA 10+66.69 N: 1449914.97 E: 3131506.03 10' DRAINAGE & TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT POUDRE RIVER 100-YR FLOODWAY STA: 11+75.00 N: 1449914.68 E: 3131397.72 END ALIGNMENT XCEL GAS 15.3 LF 6" STORM PERIMETER DRAIN STUB INV.=4894.00 103.0 LF 4" PERFORATEDPVC @ 0.50% CLEANOUT INV. OUT=4893.91 (E) FG=4896.33 NYLOPLAST 10'' DRAIN BASIN W/ SLOTTED GRATE INV. =4896.37 (S) FG=4898.40 NYLOPLAST 10'' DRAIN BASIN W/ SLOTTED GRATE INV. =4896.04 (N) FG=4897.67 FOREBAY (SEE SHEET C6.06 FOR DETAIL) INV. =4896.00 (E) 3.5 LF 8" HDPE @ 1.00% 33.0 LF 8" HDPE @ 1.00% STORM LINE A STA: 9+75.00 - STA: 11+75.00 4885 4890 4895 4900 4905 4910 4915 4885 4890 4895 4900 4905 4910 4915 9+7510+0010+5011+0011+5011+75 66.7 LF 19"x30" HERCP @ 0.25% PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GROUND FE S A 1 ( S E E N O T E 1 3 ) ST A : 1 0 + 0 0 . 0 0 IN V . 4 8 9 3 . 0 3 ST A : 1 1 + 1 1 . 9 0 T. O . P . = 4 8 9 4 . 9 ± EX . 1 2 " W A T E R ST M H A 2 ( 6 0 ' ' F L A T T O P M H ) ST A : 1 0 + 6 6 . 6 9 RI M 4 8 9 6 . 6 ± IN V . I N 4 8 9 3 . 1 9 ( W ) IN V . O U T 4 8 9 3 . 1 9 ( S E ) 81.8 LF 30"X19" HERCP @ 0.25% ST A : 1 1 + 2 0 . 6 6 T. O . P . = 4 8 9 8 . 9 ± EX . 2 " F I B E R ST A : 1 1 + 2 2 . 2 9 T. O . P . = 4 8 9 6 . 9 ± EX . 6 " E L E C T R I C ST A : 1 1 + 3 1 . 5 5 T. O . P . = 4 8 9 6 . 1 ± EX . 2 " C A T V ST A : 1 1 + 3 3 . 5 4 T. O . P . = 4 8 9 6 . 3 ± EX . 2 " G A S 1' ST A : 1 1 + 1 1 . 9 0 T. O . P . = 4 8 9 2 . 0 3 (S E E S H E E T C 6 . 0 3 ) WA T E R L I N E L O W E R I N G 100-YR HGL 6'x6' TYPE L RIPRAP PAD ST A : 1 1 + 4 3 . 6 9 IN V . = 4 8 9 6 . 0 9 ST O R M C R O S S I N G 0.85' IN L E T A 3 ST A : 1 1 + 4 8 . 5 1 GR A T E 4 8 9 7 . 0 ± IN V . I N 4 8 9 3 . 6 9 ( N ) IN V . I N 4 8 9 3 . 4 0 ( W ) IN V . O U T 4 8 9 3 . 4 0 ( E ) STORM LINE B PROFILE STA: 9+75 - STA: 11+00 4885 4890 4895 4900 4905 4910 4915 4885 4890 4895 4900 4905 4910 4915 9+7510+0010+5011+00 IN L E T B 3 ST A : 1 0 + 7 0 . 8 4 IN V . O U T 4 8 9 7 . 5 6 ( E ) 58.1 LF 12" RCP @ 0.35% IN L E T B 2 ST A : 1 0 + 1 2 . 7 8 IN V . I N 4 8 9 7 . 3 6 ( W ) IN V . I N 4 8 9 7 . 3 6 ( N ) IN V . O U T 4 8 9 7 . 3 6 ( S E ) 12.8 LF 18" HDPE @ 0.25% FE S B 1 ( S E E N O T E 1 3 ) ST A : 1 0 + 0 0 . 0 0 IN V . 4 8 9 7 . 3 3 EXISTING GROUND PROPOSED GRADE 100-YR HGL 5'x5' TYPE L RIPRAP PAD GRASS SWALE 2' CURB CUT PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 4903.50 (NORTH) FFE = 4899.00 (GYM / SOUTH) LOT 5 PROSPECT PARK EAST P.U.D. 9+ 7 5 10 + 0 0 11+00 STA: 11+00.00 N: 1449940.57 E: 3131058.27 END ALIGNMENT STA: 9+75.00 N: 1449915.89 E: 3131178.34 BEGIN ALIGNMENT INLET B3 STA 10+70.84 N: 1449938.41 E: 3131087.35 INLET B2 STA 10+12.78 N: 1449934.15 E: 3131145.26 FES B1 STA 10+00.00 N: 1449927.96 E: 3131156.45 12.8 LF 18" STORM 58.1 LF 12" STORM STORM LINE B2 (SEE SHEET C3.11) TBC EL = 4900.05 N = 1449937.40 E = 3131143.85 TBC EL = 4899.82 N = 1449931.08 E = 3131143.36 TBC EL = 4900.44 N = 1449940.33 E = 3131084.37 TBC EL = 4900.41 N = 1449939.74 E = 3131090.68 STORM LINE C (SEE SHEET C3.11) 0 30'60' SCALE: 1" = 30' 15' NO R T H 3/ 2 6 / 2 0 2 4 8: 1 7 : 2 1 A M C: \ U N I T E D C I V I L D R O P B O X \ P R O J E C T S \ U 2 2 0 1 4 - P R O S P E C T P A R K E A S T \ C A D D \ C P \ C 3 . 1 0 - S T O R M S E W E R P & P . D W G C3 . 1 0 - S T O R M S E W E R P & P -- - - -- - - A A 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 PR O J E C T I N F O R M A T I O N SH E E T I N F O R M A T I O N PR O J E C T P H A S E AR C H I T E C T SE A L ISSUE DATE: PROJECT #: CO N S U L T A N T B C D A B C D T - 970.484.0117 F - 970.484.0264 315 East Mountain Ave Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80524-2913 © 2015 www.rbbarchitects.com ARCHITECTS REVISIONS: 2204 PR O S P E C T S P O R T S CL U B MA X W E S T I N C . FI N A L DE V E L O P M E N T PL A N 3/26/2024 16 0 0 E A S T P R O S P E C T R O A D FO R T C O L L I N S , C O 8 0 5 2 5 DESCRIPTION DATE CIVIL ENGINEERING & CONSULTING UNITED CIVIL Design Group 19 OLD TOWN SQUARE #238 FORT COLLINS, CO 80524 (970) 530-4044 www.unitedcivil.com PR O J . M G R : DR A W I N G N A M E : PA T H : DE S I G N E R : DA T E : TI M E : ELECTRIC LINE GAS LINE SANITARY SERVICE SANITARY SERVICE CLEANOUT DOWNSPOUT FLARED END SECTION STORM INLET STORM MANHOLE STORM OUTLET STRUCTURE STORM PIPE RIP RAP WATER SERVICE WATER METER DS LEGEND NOTES 1.EXISTING UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES AS SHOWN ARE INDICATED ACCORDING TO THE BEST INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE ENGINEER. THE ENGINEER DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY OF SUCH INFORMATION. EXISTING UTILITY MAINS AND SERVICES MAY NOT BE STRAIGHT LINES OR AS INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO CALL ALL UTILITY COMPANIES (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE) PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION TO VERIFY EXACT UTILITY LOCATIONS. 2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL EXISTING FEATURES THAT ARE NOT TO BE REMOVED ADJACENT TO THE CONSTRUCTION AREA INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PAVEMENT, PRIVATE FENCES, ABOVE GROUND OR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, STRUCTURES, AND UNDERGROUND FOUNDATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE THAT SHOULD OCCUR TO ANY ON-SITE, OFF-SITE, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FACILITY OR FEATURE AS A RESULT OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS FOR THIS PROJECT. 3.THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION WILL BE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO SEVERAL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH ALL UTILITY PROVIDERS PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION TO MINIMIZE SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS TO SURROUNDING BUILDINGS OR PROPERTIES. 4.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL UTILITY DEMOLITION AND/OR RELOCATION ITEMS WITH THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY PROVIDER PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY ONSITE DEMOLITION. 5.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL CONSTRUCTION ITEMS IMPACTING ADJACENT PROPERTIES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER'S PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. A RIGHT-OF-WAY WORK PERMIT FROM THE TOWN OF WINDSOR SHALL BE OBTAINED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. 6.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THE FIELD CONDITIONS ARE AS SHOWN IN THE DRAWINGS. IF THE CONTRACTOR FINDS DISCREPANCIES THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEER. 7.THE PLUMBING CONTRACTOR SHALL TERMINATE UTILITY LATERALS 5' OUTSIDE OF BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. EXACT LOCATIONS (HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL) OF ALL UTILITY CONNECTIONS INTO THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH APPROVED ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. 8.ALL STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PER CITY OF FORT COLLINS STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA. 9.MAINTAIN 10' HORIZONTAL AND 18" VERTICAL MINIMUM SEPARATION BETWEEN ALL SANITARY SEWER & WATER MAINS & SERVICES. SHOULD THE WATER LINE CROSS UNDER EITHER STORM DRAIN OR SANITARY SEWER, THE STORM OR SANITARY SHALL BE CONCRETE ENCASED FOR 10' ON EITHER SIDE OF THE CROSSING. 10.ALL PIPE LENGTHS ARE FROM CENTER TO CENTER OF ADJACENT STRUCTURES AND INCLUDE LAY LENGTH OF FLARED END SECTIONS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 11.STORM SEWER MAINS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS AS REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE (RCP) SHALL BE CLASS III RCP UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. STORM SEWER MAINS OR ROOF DRAINS SHOWN AS HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (HDPE) SHALL BE WATERTIGHT ADS-N12 OR APPROVED EQUAL. WATER TIGHT JOINTS ARE TO BE USED ON ALL STORM DRAINAGE PIPE. 12.CONNECTIONS OF PROPOSED HDPE STORM SEWER TO BUILDING ROOF LEADERS OF DISSIMILAR SIZES AND/OR MATERIALS SHALL BE MADE USING APPROPRIATE REDUCERS AND/OR COUPLINGS. PROVIDE CLEANOUTS AT ALL CONNECTIONS TO ROOF DRAIN LATERALS. 13.ALL FLARED END SECTIONS SHALL BE CONCRETE. THE HDPE STORM PIPING SHALL BE CONNECTED TO THE FLARED END SECTION USING A MARMAC CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS DISSIMILAR PIPE MATERIAL COUPLER (OR APPROVED EQUAL) AND THEN A CONCRETE COLLAR SHALL BE PLACED AROUND THE JOINT. 14.STORM SEWER SHOWN ON THESE PLANS TO BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED PRIVATELY PER STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES. C3.10 STORM SEWER PLAN & PROFILE INLET SCHEDULE INLET ID.INLET TYPE GRATE TYPE INLET A3 TYPE D STANDARD INLET B2 5' TYPE R STANDARD INLET B3 5' TYPE R STANDARD E. P R O S P E C T R O A D EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G LOT 6 PROSPECT PARK EAST P.U.D. STORM SEWER (SEE SHEET C3.10) 15' UTILITY EASEMENT BOOK: 2296 PAGE: 2456 50' PEDESTRIAN & ACCESS EASEMENT BOOK: 2296 PAGE: 2456 CITY OF FORT COLLINS ELECTRIC CITY OF FORT COLLINS FIBER XCEL GAS 9+75 10+00 11 + 0 0 12 + 0 0 1 3 + 0 0 PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 4903.50 (NORTH) FFE = 4899.00 (GYM / SOUTH) LOT 5 PROSPECT PARK EAST P.U.D. STA: 9+75.00 N: 1449909.37 E: 3131141.98 BEGIN ALIGNMENT STA: 12+75.00 N: 1450070.82 E: 3131320.26 END ALIGNMENT FES B2.3 STA 12+67.78 N: 1450068.22 E: 3131313.53 13.7 LF 12" STORM 22.5° BEND STA 12+54.09 N: 1450063.28 E: 3131300.76 117.2 LF 12" STORM INLET B2.2 STA 11+36.86 N: 1450063.80 E: 3131183.53 67.9 LF 12" STORM INLET B2.1 STA 10+68.96 N: 1450002.51 E: 3131154.30 69.0 LF 18" STORM INLET B2 STA 10+00.00 N: 1449934.15 E: 3131145.26 18.6 LF 4" PVC @ 0.50% 9.8 LF 4" PVC @ 0.50% CLEANOUT INV. OUT=4898.14 (S) FG=4901.18 CLEANOUT INV. =4898.27 FG=4901.43 35.0 LF 4" PERFORATED PVC @ 0.50% 4'' TEE INV. =4898.09 INV. =4898.09 FG=4900.65 STORM LINE C (SEE THIS SHEET) STORM LINE B2 PROFILE STA: 9+75 - STA: 12+75 4885 4890 4895 4900 4905 4910 4915 4885 4890 4895 4900 4905 4910 4915 9+7510+0010+5011+0011+5012+0012+5012+75 13.7 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.39% 117.2 LF 12 " H D P E @ 1 . 3 9 % 67.9 LF 12" HDPE @ 0.25% 69.0 LF 18" HDPE @ 0.25% 22 . 5 ° B E N D ST A : 1 2 + 5 4 . 0 9 IN V . I N 4 8 9 9 . 3 3 ( E ) IN V . O U T 4 8 9 9 . 3 3 ( W ) IN L E T B 2 . 1 ST A : 1 0 + 6 8 . 9 6 RI M 4 9 0 0 . 6 ± IN V . I N 4 8 9 7 . 5 3 ( N E ) IN V . O U T 4 8 9 7 . 5 3 ( S ) FE S B 2 . 3 ( S E E N O T E 1 3 ) ST A : 1 2 + 6 7 . 7 8 IN V . 4 8 9 9 . 5 2 IN L E T B 2 . 2 ST A : 1 1 + 3 6 . 8 6 RI M 4 9 0 1 . 2 ± IN V . I N 4 8 9 7 . 7 0 ( E ) IN V . I N 4 8 9 8 . 0 0 ( N E ) IN V . O U T 4 8 9 7 . 7 0 ( S W ) IN L E T B 2 ST A : 1 0 + 0 0 . 0 0 IN V . I N 4 8 9 7 . 3 6 ( W ) IN V . I N 4 8 9 7 . 3 6 ( N ) IN V . O U T 4 8 9 7 . 3 6 ( S E ) EXISTING GROUND PROPOSED GRADE 1.04' ST A : 1 1 + 1 8 . 8 2 IN V . = 4 8 9 9 . 7 5 SA N I T A R Y C R O S S I N G 100-YR HGL CONCRETE ENCASE STORM LINE 10' EITHER SIDE OF CROSSING E. PROSPECT R O A D GRASS SWALE 2' CURB CUT 9+75 10+00 10+50 STA: 10+50.00 N: 1450093.93 E: 3131110.63 END ALIGNMENT STA: 9+75.00 N: 1450085.49 E: 3131185.15 START ALIGNMENT 25.6 LF 8" STORM HEADWALL (SEE DETAILS) STA 10+25.64 N: 1450091.19 E: 3131134.84 HEADWALL (SEE DETAILS) STA 10+00.00 N: 1450088.30 E: 3131160.31 PR O P O S E D B U I L D I N G FF E = 4 9 0 3 . 5 0 ( N O R T H ) FF E = 4 8 9 9 . 0 0 ( G Y M / S O U T H ) LO T 5 P R O S P E C T P A R K EA S T P . U . D . STORM LINE B2 (SEE THIS SHEET) STORM LINE C PROFILE STA: 9+75 - STA: 10+50 4885 4890 4895 4900 4905 4910 4915 4885 4890 4895 4900 4905 4910 4915 9+7510+0010+50 25.6 LF 8" HDPE @ 0.70% HE A D W A L L ST A : 1 0 + 0 0 . 0 0 IN V . 4 9 0 0 . 6 5 HE A D W A L L ST A : 1 0 + 2 5 . 6 4 IN V . 4 9 0 0 . 8 3 PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GROUND 0 30'60' SCALE: 1" = 30' 15' NO R T H 3/ 2 6 / 2 0 2 4 8: 1 7 : 2 7 A M C: \ U N I T E D C I V I L D R O P B O X \ P R O J E C T S \ U 2 2 0 1 4 - P R O S P E C T P A R K E A S T \ C A D D \ C P \ C 3 . 1 0 - S T O R M S E W E R P & P . D W G C3 . 1 0 - S T O R M S E W E R P & P -- - - -- - - ELECTRIC LINE GAS LINE SANITARY SERVICE SANITARY SERVICE CLEANOUT DOWNSPOUT FLARED END SECTION STORM INLET STORM MANHOLE STORM OUTLET STRUCTURE STORM PIPE RIP RAP WATER SERVICE WATER METER DS LEGEND NOTES 1.EXISTING UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES AS SHOWN ARE INDICATED ACCORDING TO THE BEST INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE ENGINEER. THE ENGINEER DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY OF SUCH INFORMATION. EXISTING UTILITY MAINS AND SERVICES MAY NOT BE STRAIGHT LINES OR AS INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO CALL ALL UTILITY COMPANIES (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE) PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION TO VERIFY EXACT UTILITY LOCATIONS. 2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL EXISTING FEATURES THAT ARE NOT TO BE REMOVED ADJACENT TO THE CONSTRUCTION AREA INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PAVEMENT, PRIVATE FENCES, ABOVE GROUND OR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, STRUCTURES, AND UNDERGROUND FOUNDATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE THAT SHOULD OCCUR TO ANY ON-SITE, OFF-SITE, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FACILITY OR FEATURE AS A RESULT OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS FOR THIS PROJECT. 3.THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION WILL BE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO SEVERAL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH ALL UTILITY PROVIDERS PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION TO MINIMIZE SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS TO SURROUNDING BUILDINGS OR PROPERTIES. 4.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL UTILITY DEMOLITION AND/OR RELOCATION ITEMS WITH THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY PROVIDER PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY ONSITE DEMOLITION. 5.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL CONSTRUCTION ITEMS IMPACTING ADJACENT PROPERTIES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER'S PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. A RIGHT-OF-WAY WORK PERMIT FROM THE TOWN OF WINDSOR SHALL BE OBTAINED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. 6.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THE FIELD CONDITIONS ARE AS SHOWN IN THE DRAWINGS. IF THE CONTRACTOR FINDS DISCREPANCIES THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEER. 7.THE PLUMBING CONTRACTOR SHALL TERMINATE UTILITY LATERALS 5' OUTSIDE OF BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. EXACT LOCATIONS (HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL) OF ALL UTILITY CONNECTIONS INTO THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH APPROVED ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. 8.ALL STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PER CITY OF FORT COLLINS STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA. 9.MAINTAIN 10' HORIZONTAL AND 18" VERTICAL MINIMUM SEPARATION BETWEEN ALL SANITARY SEWER & WATER MAINS & SERVICES. SHOULD THE WATER LINE CROSS UNDER EITHER STORM DRAIN OR SANITARY SEWER, THE STORM OR SANITARY SHALL BE CONCRETE ENCASED FOR 10' ON EITHER SIDE OF THE CROSSING. 10.ALL PIPE LENGTHS ARE FROM CENTER TO CENTER OF ADJACENT STRUCTURES AND INCLUDE LAY LENGTH OF FLARED END SECTIONS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 11.STORM SEWER MAINS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS AS REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE (RCP) SHALL BE CLASS III RCP UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. STORM SEWER MAINS OR ROOF DRAINS SHOWN AS HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (HDPE) SHALL BE WATERTIGHT ADS-N12 OR APPROVED EQUAL. WATER TIGHT JOINTS ARE TO BE USED ON ALL STORM DRAINAGE PIPE. 12.CONNECTIONS OF PROPOSED HDPE STORM SEWER TO BUILDING ROOF LEADERS OF DISSIMILAR SIZES AND/OR MATERIALS SHALL BE MADE USING APPROPRIATE REDUCERS AND/OR COUPLINGS. PROVIDE CLEANOUTS AT ALL CONNECTIONS TO ROOF DRAIN LATERALS. 13.ALL FLARED END SECTIONS SHALL BE CONCRETE. THE HDPE STORM PIPING SHALL BE CONNECTED TO THE FLARED END SECTION USING A MARMAC CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS DISSIMILAR PIPE MATERIAL COUPLER (OR APPROVED EQUAL) AND THEN A CONCRETE COLLAR SHALL BE PLACED AROUND THE JOINT. 14.STORM SEWER SHOWN ON THESE PLANS TO BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED PRIVATELY PER STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES. A A 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 PR O J E C T I N F O R M A T I O N SH E E T I N F O R M A T I O N PR O J E C T P H A S E AR C H I T E C T SE A L ISSUE DATE: PROJECT #: CO N S U L T A N T B C D A B C D T - 970.484.0117 F - 970.484.0264 315 East Mountain Ave Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80524-2913 © 2015 www.rbbarchitects.com ARCHITECTS REVISIONS: 2204 PR O S P E C T S P O R T S CL U B MA X W E S T I N C . FI N A L DE V E L O P M E N T PL A N 3/26/2024 16 0 0 E A S T P R O S P E C T R O A D FO R T C O L L I N S , C O 8 0 5 2 5 DESCRIPTION DATE CIVIL ENGINEERING & CONSULTING UNITED CIVIL Design Group 19 OLD TOWN SQUARE #238 FORT COLLINS, CO 80524 (970) 530-4044 www.unitedcivil.com PR O J . M G R : DR A W I N G N A M E : PA T H : DE S I G N E R : DA T E : TI M E : C3.11 STORM SEWER PLAN & PROFILE INLET SCHEDULE INLET ID.INLET TYPE GRATE TYPE INLET B2 5' TYPE R STANDARD INLET B2.1 TYPE C STANDARD INLET B2.2 TYPE C STANDARD E. PROSPECT R O A D SH A R P P O I N T D R . EXISTING BUILDING LOT 6 PROSPECT PARK EAST P.U.D. LOT 4 PROSPECT PARK EAST P.U.D. TRACT "A" PROSPECT PARK EAST P.U.D. PROPOSED BUILDING FFE = 4903.50 (NORTH) FFE = 4899.00 (GYM / SOUTH) LOT 5 PROSPECT PARK EAST P.U.D. FLOODPLAIN BFE 100-YEAR FLOOD ELEVATION - 4904 (NAVD 88) DP A6 DP A4 DP A3 DP OS1 DP A1 DP A5 DP A2 DP A7 OS1 0.16 A6 0.23 A4 0.28 A2 0.09 A3 0.54 A1 0.37 A7 0.25 A8.2 0.39 A8.1 0.10 A5 0.17 A8.2 0.09 10' DRAINAGE & TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT FLOODPLAIN BFE 100-YEAR FLOOD E L E V A T I O N - 4,900.0 (NAVD 88) FLOODPLAIN BFE 100-YEAR FLOOD ELEVATI O N - 4901 (NAVD 88) FLOODPLAIN C R O S S - S E C T I O N # 208567 100-YR FLOOD E L E V . 4 , 9 0 0 . 0 ( N A V D 8 8 ) GRASS SWALE GRASS SWALE EXISTING LAKE/POND STORM SEWER (SEE SHEET C3.10) STORM SEWER (SEE SHEET C3.11) POND OUTLET STRUCTURE (TYPE C INLET) FLARED END SECTION CURB INLET POUDRE RIVER 100-YR FLOODWAY POUDRE RIVER 500-YR FLOODPLAIN LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE POND OUTLET STRUCTURE (TYPE D INLET) POUDRE RIVER 100-YR FLOODPLAIN NORTH BIORETENTION POND SOUTH BIORETENTION POND EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN STORMWATER FROM THE WEST STORM SYSTEM TO DRAIN THROUGH TREES AND VEGETATION AND ULTIMATELY TO THE SOUTHERN BIORETENTION POND GRASS SWALE FOREBAY STRUCTURE 0 30'60' SCALE: 1" = 30' 15' NO R T H 3/ 2 6 / 2 0 2 4 8: 1 7 : 5 7 A M C: \ U N I T E D C I V I L D R O P B O X \ P R O J E C T S \ U 2 2 0 1 4 - P R O S P E C T P A R K E A S T \ C A D D \ C P \ C 5 . 0 0 - D R A I N A G E P L A N . D W G C5 . 0 0 - D R A I N A G E P L A N -- - - -- - - PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR LEGEND EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY RIGHT OF WAY XX.X X BASIN DESIGNATION BASIN AREA (ACRE) PROPOSED BASIN PROPOSED BASIN LINE 1.THE TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE THE MINIMUM ELEVATIONS REQUIRED FOR PROTECTION FROM THE 100-YEAR STORM. MINIMUM FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS ABOVE THE 100-YEAR WATER SURFACE IN STREETS, CHANNELS, DITCHES, SWALES, OR OTHER DRAINAGE FACILITIES, AS ILLUSTRATED BY A MASTER GRADING PLAN ARE TO BE SHOWN. NOTES 1.THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDING IS BEING ELEVATED A MINIMUM OF 24-INCHES ABOVE THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OR FLOOD PROOFED. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR FLOOD PROOFING DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS. ALL FLOOD PROOFING MEASURES SHALL ADHERE TO SECTION 10-38 OF CITY CODE AND THE REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH WITHIN THE CITY'S "FLOODPROOFING GUIDELINES". A FLOOD PROOFING CERTIFICATE WILL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. 2.ALL SPOT ELEVATIONS AND BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS AS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE PER VERTICAL CONTROL DATUM NAVD 88. 3.PORTIONS OF THIS PROPERTY ARE LOCATED IN THE FEMA REGULATED, 100-YEAR AND 500-YEAR POUDRE RIVER FLOODPLAIN. ANY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN MUST COMPLY WITH THE SAFETY REGULATIONS OF CHAPTER 10 OF CITY MUNICIPAL CODE. 4.ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IN THE FLOOD FRINGE (E.G. BUILDING OF STRUCTURES, EV CHARGING STATIONS, GRADING, FILL, DETENTION PONDS, BIKE PATHS, PARKING LOTS, UTILITY WORK, FLOOD CONTROL CHANNELS, SIDEWALK OR CURB & GUTTER INSTALLATION/REPLACEMENT, LANDSCAPING, ETC.) MUST BE PRECEDED BY AN APPROVED FLOODPLAIN USE PERMIT, THE APPROPRIATE PERMIT APPLICATION FEES, AND APPROVED PLANS. 5.AN APPROVED FEMA ELEVATION CERTIFICATE COMPLETED BY A LICENSED SURVEYOR OR CIVIL ENGINEER AND A FLOODPROOFING CERTIFICATE SHOWING THAT THE BUILDING IS CONSTRUCTED/FLOODPROOFED TO THE REQUIRED ELEVATION IS REQUIRED POST-CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY (CO) BEING ISSUED. PLEASE NOTE: IF ANY PART OF THE BUILDING IS WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN BOUNDARY, THEN THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE IS CONSIDERED IN THE FLOODPLAIN AND THE ENTIRE BUILDING ENVELOPE MUST MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ELEVATING OR FLOODPROOFING TO THE RFPE. 6.OUTSIDE STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT OR FLOATABLE MATERIALS WHETHER PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY IS PROHIBITED IN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN. ALL FLOATABLE MATERIALS, MUST BE STORED INSIDE A BUILDING, BE ANCHORED PER AN APPROVED ENGINEERED DESIGN, OR BE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN. NO OVERNIGHT PARKING OF VEHICLES IS ALLOWED. 7.AT-RISK POPULATIONS, ESSENTIAL SERVICES, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES CRITICAL FACILITIES ARE PROHIBITED IN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN. AT-RISK POPULATION FACILITIES INCLUDE AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS/DAY CAMPS FOR K-12, ETC). 8.CONSTRUCTION OF NEW STRUCTURES, HARD SURFACE PATHS, WALKWAYS, DRIVEWAYS, WALLS, AND PARKING AREAS IS PROHIBITED IN THE FLOODWAY UNLESS NO-RISE CONDITIONS ARE MET, PER SECTION 10-45 OF CITY CODE. ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IN THE REGULATORY FLOODWAY MUST ALSO INCLUDE A NO-RISE CERTIFICATION PREPARED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER LICENSED IN COLORADO. FLOODPLAIN NOTES DESIGN / CONCENTRATION POINT FLOW DIRECTION DP 1 A A 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 PR O J E C T I N F O R M A T I O N SH E E T I N F O R M A T I O N PR O J E C T P H A S E AR C H I T E C T SE A L ISSUE DATE: PROJECT #: CO N S U L T A N T B C D A B C D T - 970.484.0117 F - 970.484.0264 315 East Mountain Ave Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80524-2913 © 2015 www.rbbarchitects.com ARCHITECTS REVISIONS: 2204 PR O S P E C T S P O R T S CL U B MA X W E S T I N C . FI N A L DE V E L O P M E N T PL A N 3/26/2024 16 0 0 E A S T P R O S P E C T R O A D FO R T C O L L I N S , C O 8 0 5 2 5 DESCRIPTION DATE CIVIL ENGINEERING & CONSULTING UNITED CIVIL Design Group 19 OLD TOWN SQUARE #238 FORT COLLINS, CO 80524 (970) 530-4044 www.unitedcivil.com PR O J . M G R : DR A W I N G N A M E : PA T H : DE S I G N E R : DA T E : TI M E : C5.00 DRAINAGE PLAN POND SUMMARY North Pond South Pond REQUIRED LID VOLUME (CF)248 1,469 PROVIDED LID VOLUME (CF)425 1,570 LID PROVIDED DEPTH 0'-6"1'-0" BOTTOM OF POND FOOTPRINT (SF)848 998 BOTTOM OF POND ELEVATION 4,900.65 4,896.00 LID WATER SURFACE ELEVATION 4,901.15 4,897.00 TOP OF POND ELEVATION 4,901.50 4,898.00