Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSCHOOLSIDE PARK - BDR240009 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - Drainage Related Document 1111rr1 `J`J`111 DRAINAGE REPORT FOR SCHOOLSIDE PARK AT 5830 S TIMBERLINE RD FORT COLLINS, CO 80528 PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS Fort Collins, CO 80523 AUGUST 20, 2024 August 20, 2024 Stephen Agenbroad City of Fort Collins Utilities— Stormwater Engineering 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Schoolside Park—Drainage Report JVA Job No. 240729.CIV Dear Wes: The following Drainage Report and attached drainage maps have been prepared for the Schoolside Park redevelopment project. The reports and drainage maps have been produced in accordance with the City of Fort Collins and the latest local Mile High Flood District recommendations. It is our understanding that the information provided herein meets all requirements of the City of Fort Collins. Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this submission. Sincerely, JVA, Inc. Morgan Clements Project Engineer TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL LOCATION AND EXISTING SITE INFORMATION ......................................................... 3 DRAINAGE BASINS AND HISTORIC RUNOFF..........................................................................3 HISTORICDRAINAGE.....................................................................................................3 PROPOSED DRAINAGE..................................................................................................4 DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA ............................................................................................4 HYDROLOGIC METHOD AND DESIGN STORM FREQUENCIES .................................................4 HYDRAULIC CRITERIA....................................................................................................4 VARIANCES FROM THE CRITERIA.........................................................................................5 DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN ............................................................................................. 5 GENERALCONCEPT.....................................................................................................5 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION/EROSION CONTROL..................................................5 TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL.................................................................................... 5 PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL....................................................................................5 CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................ 6 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 6 Appendix A - Referenced Information 1 . Vicinity Map 2. Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Bacon Elementary School 3. FEMA FIRM Map 4. NRCS Websoil Survey 5. Exhibit 1 : Existing Drainage Plan 6. Exhibit 2: Proposed Drainage Plan Appendix B - Hydrologic/Hydraulic Computations 1 . Rational Method Calculations 2. Detention Calculations 3. SDI Design Data Calculations Schoolside Park Drainage Report Page 1 of 7 ENGINEER'S STATEMENT: "I hereby certify that this report (plan) for the final drainage design for the Schoolside Park was prepared by me (or under my direct supervision) in accordance with the provisions of the City of Fort Collins Standards for the Responsible Parties thereof. I understand that the City of Fort Collins does not and shall not assume liability for drainage facilities designed by others." Cody F Gratny, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of Colorado No. 45353 Schoolside Park Drainage Report Page 2 of 7 GENERAL LOCATION AND EXISTING SITE INFORMATION Schoolside Park(site) adjacent to Bacon Elementary School and is located in Section 8, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 6"'Principal Meridian, in Larimer County, Fort Collins, Colorado. The property address is 5830 S Timberline Road. Refer to Appendix A for the site vicinity map. The site is bordered to the north and east by Mail Creek Ditch,to the west by S Timberline Road, and to the south by Bacon Elementary School. Developed residential areas are to the north, south and east of the site. The property is owned by the City of Fort Collins and is comprised of parcel number 8608253901. The approximate GPS coordinates for the site are 40.504933°N, -105.038809°W. The property is located in the Fossil Creek Basin. The subject property will tie into the existing storm infrastructure at the adjacent Bacon Elementary School property and drainage has been designed referencing the Timberline Site Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report dated May 28, 2002. The site is approximately 5.30 acres of partially developed and partially undeveloped property. A residential building on the northern portion of the site is to be demolished, and along the northeast property line a multi-use trail has been constructed adjacent to the Mail Creek Ditch. The property has an existing percent imperviousness of 9.6%. The existing ground surface slopes to the southeast at grades ranging from 0.5 to 3.0%, with the north portion of the property sloping more sharply to the north at 20 to 30%. From the Geotechnical Investigation dated April 10, 2024 the soil on the site is mainly sandy clay. Groudnwater was measured at a range of 13 to 18 feet below grade. The geotechnical report is attached in Appendix A. The site is located in the Area of Minimal Flood Hazard, Zone X, per FEMA Flood Risk Map number 08069C100017, effective date 12/19/2006. The site is comprised of hydrologic soil group C/D per NRCS soil survey. The FEMA Flood Map and NRCS Websoil Survey are included in Appendix A. In general, the proposed redevelopment of the site consists of constructing a restroom structure, a shade structure, a parking lot, pedestrian pathways, a multipurpose turf field, playground areas, a basketball court, a detention pond and grass buffers. Grass buffers will be located adjacent to the multipurpose turf field. The site development will increase the overall percent imperviousness by 8.7%o to a total of 18.3%. While the site generally conforms to the existing drainage report,the majority of stormwater runoff is conveyed via surface flow to the detention pond in the southwest corner of the property. The detention pond outlets to the existing storm infrastructure that is part of the Bacon Elementary School site. DRAINAGE BASINS AND HISTORIC RUNOFF HISTORIC DRAINAGE The existing site consists of three historical onsite basins H1, 01, and 02. H1 is the majority of the site and flows to the southwest and onto the Bacon Elementary property. 01 is the north portion Schoolside Park Drainage Report Page 3 of 7 that consists of multi-use path that drains north to the Mail Creek Ditch. 02 is the east portion that consists of multi-use path that drains east to Mail Creek Ditch. See Exhibit 1 Existing Drainage Plan in Appendix A. There are no offsite basins that flow onto the site. There is no existing onsite detention for the site. Per the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Bacon Elementary School, future development allowable release rate to the storm system in Bacon Elementary School is 2.00 CFS. This is conveyed to the Bacon Elementary School detention pond on the east side of the site and releasees to storm infrastructure within Zephyr Road. PROPOSED DRAINAGE Proposed drainage patterns are to remain generally the same as current, but will utilize landscape areas, inlets and grass buffers to capture the majority of runoff before discharging into the Bacon Elementary storm system and eventually into the public storm system. The rain garden will be utilized for water quality and low impact development(LID) treatment. The site will be graded to meet the City's requirements of treating 75% of the sites modified or added impervious area in the proposed rain garden. Detention will be provided onsite and released to the Bacon Elementary School storm system at 2.00 CFS as outlined in the previous Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Bacon Elementary School. The proposed site consists of four onsite basins Al, A2, A3, A4, 01 and 02. Basin Al surface flows to the proposed rain garden, then to the detention pond in the southwest portion of the site. Basin A2 is collected by a swale/grass buffer and conveyed via storm drain to the detention pond. Basin A3 surface flows to the detention pond, with the playground area being collected by an underdrain which connects to the storm drain to the south.A4 is the detention pond and rain garden area. 01 surface flows to the north to Mail Creek Ditch, following existing drainage patterns. 02 surface flows to the east to Mail Creek Ditch, also following existing drainage patterns. There are no offsite basins that contribute to the site. See Figure 2 Proposed Drainage Plan in Appendix A. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA HYDROLOGIC METHOD AND DESIGN STORM FREQUENCIES The drainage for the site was designed to meet or exceed the City of Fort Collin's Standards and Specifications. The design one hour point rainfall used for the 2 year and 100 year storm events are 0.82 inches and 2.86 inches respectively. The Rational Method (Q=CIA) was used to determine the storm runoff (Q) from the areas contributing to the new storm system, with composite runoff coefficients (C) and contributing areas (A) given for design points in sub-basins. The runoff coefficients for various land usages were obtained from Table 6-5, USDCM, Vol. 1. Intensities (1) were determined using the Time- Intensity-Frequency equations, and a calculated Time of Concentration (tc). Hydraulic Criteria. See Appendix B for the runoff coefficient calculations. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA Schoolside Park Drainage Report Page 4 of 7 The proposed drainage facility has been designed to comply with the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. Complete drainage plans,details,dimensions, etc. are included in the grading and drainage plans in the site's construction documents. VARIANCES FROM THE CRITERIA No variances are requested for this design. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN GENERAL CONCEPT The site's private storm drainage system has been designed to convey the 100-year storm event through inlets and pipes that connect into the proposed detention pond. The site was graded to capture runoff into the storm system and direct it to the proposed detention pond in the southwest portion of the site. The site was graded to minimize the amount of flow being directed to the adjacent roads. The proposed rain garden will treat the flow from Basin Al before it spills to the detention pond. This treats storm runoff for a minimum of 75% of the modified or added impervious area on the site for water quality prior to discharge into the public storm system, satisfying the City of Fort Collins LID requirements. These features will facilitate sedimentation and filtration while limiting erosion, providing both treatment and slowed release of the water quality capture volume. The proposed redevelopment of this site will serve to limit water quality and quantity impacts to natural drainageways by decreasing the frequency, rate, duration, and volume of runoff. The site has been designed to minimize directly connected impervious areas by grading the site such that stormwater runoff sheet flows from paved areas through landscaped areas to grass buffers to be treated prior to entering the proposed and existing storm systems. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION/EROSION CONTROL During construction, temporary erosion and sediment control practices will be used to limit soil erosion and sediment discharge off the site. TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL A temporary erosion control plan is to be implemented for the site during construction. Temporary erosion control measures include,but are not limited to, slope and swale protection provided using erosion control wattles/sediment control logs, rock socks, etc. All temporary erosion control measures are to be removed after they are deemed unnecessary.A general erosion control plan has been provided in the civil construction documents and attached. PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL Chapter 2 of the MHFD's Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 (USDCM)provides guidelines for the selection of appropriate permanent structural BMPs for a site that is to be developed or redeveloped. The Schoolside Park is best characterized as a "conventional redevelopment"with under 5 acres of impervious area on the project site. The BMP decision tree for such sites is provided in Figure 2-2 of the USDCM. As previously stated, the site and Schoolside Park Drainage Report Page 5 of 7 surrounding vicinity is comprised of hydrologic soil group Type C/D soils, per the NRCS soil survey. The water quality capture volume (WQCV) for this site is accounted for in the design of the rain garden. Runoff will be treated in the proposed rain garden before spilling to the detention pond and ultimately connecting to the existing Bacon Elementary School storm system, detained in the existing Bacon Elementary detention pond, and then released to the public storm system in Zephyr Road. CONCLUSIONS This Drainage Report for the Schoolside Park has been prepared to comply with the stormwater criteria set by the MHFD and the City of Fort Collins. The proposed drainage system presented in this report is designed to convey the 100-year peak stormwater runoff through the site via the proposed storm system.Through calculations,modeling, and review of the proposed storm drain system, there appears to be adequate capacity to convey the proposed flows. It can therefore be concluded that development of the Schoolside Park complies with all of the stormwater jurisdictional criteria and will not adversely affect the existing streets, storm drain system and/or detention/water quality facilities. REFERENCES 1. City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, December 2018. 2. "Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report",Nolte Associates, Inc,Dated May 28,2002. 3. "Geotechnical Investigation Bacon Park Improvements", CTL Thompson Incorporated, Dated April 10, 2024. 4. "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual", Mile High Flood District, August 2018 version. Schoolside Park Drainage Report Page 6 of 7 APPENDIX A - REFERENCED INFORMATION Schoolside Park 5830 S Timberline Road Fort Collins, CO Q � VW- a, a el AL ^' �� `I /•s ,' ® w q� �. Subject Property y o • _ 0• r .�.._.. <y - w At A, - _ _ - - r _ # WA s LN Lj l . MAP NOT TO SCALE (Image from Google Earth) �� Re ors . Date 2003 PROTOTYPE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TIMBERLINE SITE FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT for 2407 LaPorte Avenue ' Ft. Collins, Colorado 80521 by Nolte Associates, Inc. ' 1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite A Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 ' (970) 221-2400 ' May 28, 2002 ' 2003 PROTOTYPE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TIMBERLINE SITE FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT for 2407 LaPorte Avenue ' Ft. Collins, Colorado 80521 by Nolte Associates, Inc. 1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite A Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 ' (970) 221-2400 1 ' May 28, 2002 1 i May 29, 2002 r4C4=TE FC019501 BEYOND ENGINEERING Mr. Basil Hamdan City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 ' RE: 2003 Prototype Elementary School-Timberline Site Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report Dear Mr. Hamdan: We are pleased to submit the"2003 Prototype Elementary School- Timberline Site—Final Drainage ' and Erosion Control Report "for your approval. We have incorporated the results of our meeting on February 7, 2002 as well as second round comments (May 6, 2002) into the design the off-site and on-site storm water runoff. The results that were agreed upon in this meeting that affect the school ' site were: • Runoff collected from the eastern portion of Timberline Road at the designed low point will be conveyed via a storm sewer to the school's on-site water quality/detention pond; • Runoff collected from the northern portion of Zephyr Road (a.k.a. Timber Trail Road)at the designed low point will also be conveyed via a storm sewer to the school's on-site water ' quality/detention pond; • The release rate from the on-site detention has been reduced from 25.1 cfs to 17.1 cfs to allow 8 cfs to be released from the land/basin area west of Timberline Road; ' • Off-site runoff from the north property will be required to release runoff at a rate of 2 cfs upon development; The report also has included findings presented in the "Timbers P.U.D. Final Drainage Report"by ' TST Consultants(dated Nov. 2001) as it pertains to our site. This report was prepared in compliance with technical criteria set forth in the Storm Drainage Design ' Criteria and Construction Standards(revised January 1997) for the City of Fort Collins. If you have any questions or need further clarification,please call me at your convenience. Sincerely, ' NOLTE ASSOCIATES, ReGIn'';•yI �c0 g��gg OR!! yy O e Thomas M. Ochwat, P.E. �,C,e68•oS•>��..eo 3 e Project Manager ';;�Lp`'ft"Gee° '��.`� NOLTE ASSOCIATES, INC. 1901 SHARP POINT DRIVE, SUITE A ' FORT COLLINS, CO 8OS25 970,221.2400 TEL 970.221.2415 FAX N:\FC01951Drsanage\Waage rpt tM15-29-02.doc WWW.N0LTE.00M NCLTE Final Drainage& Erosion Control Study BEYOND ENGINEERING 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site TABLE OF CONTENTS ' PAGE 1.0. INTR.ODUCTION............................................................................ ...................... 1 1.1 Site Location..................................................................................................... I ' 1.2 Existing Site Description................................................................................... 1 1.3 Proposed Project Description............................................................................2 ' 2. 0 VICINITY MAP..........................................................................................................3 3.0 METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................4 ' 3.1 Compliance with Standards...............................................................................4 3.2 Analytical Methods ...........................................................................................4 4.0 HISTORIC DRAINAGE CONDITIONS .....................................................................4 4.1 Major Basin Description....................................................................................4 5.0 DEVELOPED DRAINAGE CONDITIONS.................................................................5 ' 5.1 General Concept ...............................................................................................5 5.2 Basin Descriptions.............................................................................................5 5.3 Detention/Water Quality Pond Design...............................................................7 6.0 STORM SEWER SYSTEMS........................................................................................8 6.1 General Concept ...............................................................................................8 7.0 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL...........:.......................................................9 7.1 General Concept...............................................................................................9 ' 1.2 Existing Site Conditions....................................................................... .... 10 7.3 Soils ....................................................................................:...........I........... 10 ' 7.4 Schedule....................................................................................... ....... 10 7.5 Construction Materials and Equipment........................... ............................... 11 8.0 CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................ 11 8.1 Drainage Concept ........................................................................................... 11 ' REFERENCES........................................................................................................... 12 ' Nohe Associates,Inc. N:\FC0195\Drainage\Word\FC019501_DmgRpt_Final.doc Final Drainage & BEYOND ENGINEERING Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site APPENDIX • Developed Hydrology • Street Capacity and Inlet Design • Storm Sewer Design • Detention/Water Quality Pond Design • Erosion Control Calculations • Design Charts, Tables and Graphs ! • Supplemental Information From Others BACK POCKET—Overall Drainage Plan ' - Timbers P.U.D. Developed Drainage Plan - Final Grading and Erosion Control Plan ' Nolte Associates,Inc. N:\FC01951Drainage\Word\FC019501_Dn*Rpt_Final.doc f Final Drainage & BEYOND E N C IN E B R ING Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School-- Timberline Site 1.0 INTRODUCTION ' 1.1 Site Location The proposed 2003 Elementary School site(Site) is located along Timberline Road north of the Westchase PUD and borders along the north boundary of the proposed the"Timbers PUD". The school parcel is also bounded by the Mail Creek Ditch to the east and vacant farmland to the north. More particularly, the Site (11.434 acres) is a parcel of land designated as Tract "A" of the Minor Land Division—Poudre School District And Paragon Point Partners, LTD which hes t within the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 6 h Principal Meridian, County of Larimer, State of Colorado (see Vicinity Map, page 3). 1.2 Existing Site Description In general, the Site slopes at one percent to the south and east towards Fossil Creek and Fossil Creek Reservoir. The Site's present use is agricultural with hay as the main crop. The Mail Creek Irrigation Ditch traverses along the eastern ' property line of the parcel. ' Presently, the areas surrounding the proposed school site consist of farm and hay fields. However, proposed land development to the south for multi-family ' residences(Timbers P.U.D.)are in the final design and municipal approval process. Westchase PUD, a 408 lot single-family subdivision located south of the school ' site and the Timbers site, is currently under construction with the installation of utilities and roads. The existing soil conditions on the Site consist of an approximate 6-inch layer of ' cultivated silty topsoil, underlain by lean clay with sand, lean clay, and sandy lean clay extending to the depths explored to the bedrock below(Ref. 6). Groundwater ' Nolte Associates,Ins. 1 N:1FC01951Drainage\Word\FC019501_Dmg,Rpt_Final.doc Final Drainage & ' BEYOND ENGINEERING Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site was encountered and noted in the Site's soil boring logs to range between ' approximate depths of 8-to 15-feet below existing site grades. The geotechnical engineering report prepared by Terracon (11/09/01) indicates that on-site subsoil conditions are suitable for the proposed construction. ' 1.3 Proposed Project Description The proposed development will be annexed and zoned for school use. The Fort Collins 2003 Elementary School will be modeled similar to the 2002 Prototype ' building. This school will provide educational resources for approximately 600 students. The school building has a roof area of 1.17 acres. The landscape areas on ' the west side of the school (along Timberline Road) will have berms varying in height from 2- to 4 feet. The area to the south of the school building will be the playground area. The playground areas will incorporate basketball courts (2), other hard surface playing areas such as foursquare and tetherball, a mulched area for ' swings and playground equipment and small sandbox play areas(refer to landscape plans). To the east of the school building and playground area will be multi-use playing fields(soccer and baseball) and a site detention facility. ' Timberline Road(County Road 11)is currently a 24-foot wide paved street used for local access with an existing eastern right-of-way of 40 feet. The east side Timberline Road will be widened and upgraded by the developers of Westchase and The Timbers PUD to meet the street cross section equivalent to City of Fort ' Collins' 4-lane arterial road. David Evans and Associates(DEA), Civil Engineers for the Westchase PUD, have designed the Timberline Road improvements that twill be built at the same time as the school. Nolte has coordinated curb return information with DEA that relate to the Timberline Road construction plans. The ' proposed street section will increase to have an 83-foot flowline to flowline arterial street and have an increased east right-of-way width of 59.5 feet. There will be a Nolte Associates,Inc. 2 N:1Fc0195\Dnunape Word1FC019501_DmgRRt_Final.aoc NOLTE Final Drainage & ' Erosion Control Study B E Y O N D E N G I N E E R I N G 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site 36-foot wide entrance to the Site on Timberline Road to provide for bus access and faculty parking. ' 2.0 VICINITY MAP I ave � I \, I I l .4 � •\ I - � '. �{ — •, - +Fo,E. _ �,' !' �'-=-.mac. HARMONY ROAD 'A ZIEGLER ROAD(CR9 r� r � TIMBERLINE ROAD — r \y a KFCHTER ROAD CR3 t 1 C ., v PROJECT SITE ' ' •a4.) • .).• •.Y � ' •NSM1-•SAIL ) J/r1 r'nIi ellYY-- r:.h ' Printed from TOPO1 01997 Wildflower Prodwbonc(www.topo.com) t Nolte _Final.da Associates•Inc. 3 N:�FC0195\Drainage%Word\FC019501_DmgRpt i NFinal Drainage & BEYOND ENGINEERING Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site Proposed Zephyr Road that will border the Site to the south has been designed by TST Consultants as part of the construction plans for the Timbers PUD and meets the street cross section equivalent to City of Fort Collins' 2-lane minor collector street (76-ft R-O-W). There will be a 30-foot wide entrance to the Site on Zephyr Road to provide for parent drop-off and visitor parking. t 3.0 METHODOLOGY 3.1 Compliance with Standards ' The following Preliminary Drainage&Erosion Control Study was prepared in accordance with the design requirements and procedures set forth in the City of ' Fort Collins(City)Storm Drainage Criteria and Construction Standards(Criteria —Ref. 1) and Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual(Manual—Ref. 2)by the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. ' 3.2 Analytical Methods The Rational Method was used to calculate 10 and 100-year developed flows. The ' Rational Method is widely accepted for design problems involving small drainage areas (<160 acres) and short times of concentration. Mathematically, it relates ' peak discharge to the runoff coefficient, rainfall intensity, and drainage area. Runoff coefficients and rainfall intensity data were obtained from the Criteria. 4.0 HISTORIC DRAINAGE BASINS ' 4.1 Major Basin Description The Site lies within the Fossil Creek Reservoir Drainage Basin watershed. A ' master drainage study does not exist for this portion of the basin. However, topography shows that this site drains to Fossil Creek Reservoir. Per this report, ' the historic land use is agricultural and proposed land use as low density mixed use ' None Associates,Inc. 4 N:1FC01951Drainage\Wond1FC019501_DmgRpt_Final.doc N p� Final Drainage & BE Y O N O E N G IN E E R ING Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site 5.0 DEVELOPED DRAINAGE CONDITIONS 5.1 General Concept In general, developed flows from the proposed site improvements will sheet flow ' or be conveyed via two storm pipe systems in an easterly direction to the proposed on-site detention/water quality pond. Developed flows along the Site's west side ' and along the future improvements of Timberline Road will flow north via curb and gutter to a proposed inlet at the low point in the street. ' In an effort to achieve environmental sustainability, a porous pavement alternative (GravelPave) for the faculty parking lot will be a construction bid alternate to the ' typical asphalt pavement. Runoff that is collected in the storm drain pipes will be routed to the detention pond where a water quality outlet structure is designed to regulate the release rate. 5.2 Basin Descriptions ' Basin 100 and 101 are the rooftop of the school ().17 ac). Stormwater that collects on the school rooftop will sheet flow to drains located toward the center ' of the roof. The mechanical engineer has designed the roof drains and piping using the Uniform Plumbing Code. This water will be piped to the center of the building ' and route flows to the south of the building. Storm pipes will pickup these flows and continue to route the stormwater into system 300. Basin 200(1.43 ac) incorporates the west entrance drive, faculty parking and bus ' drop-off. The developed runoff from Basin 200 flows overland through landscaped areas before entering paved areas where the water will sheet flow within the ' proposed curb and gutter systems to a 10' Type `R' inlet. Basin 201 (0.14 ac) and 202 (0.10 ac)border the building to the north. Area inlets located within local low Nolte Associates,Inc. 5 N:\FC0195\Drainage\Word\FC019501_DmgRpt_Final.doc 4 NctTE Final Drainage & Erosion Control Study BEYOND ENGINEERING 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site points collect the stormwater in 18" diameter area inlets. Basin 203 (0.23 ac) and 204 (0.61 ac) slope to the north across landscaped areas and runoff is collected in 18" diameter area inlets. Runoff from Basin 300 (0.72 ac)encompasses the southern parking lot that will be ' used for visitor parking and parent drop-off. Stormwater will traverse the site over pavement to curb and gutter routing the water to a 10' Type `R' curb inlet. Basins 302 (1.33 ac)includes a portion of Zephyr Road and the hard surface playing ' areas. The runoff sheet flows to curb and gutter and is routed to a 10' Type 'R' curb inlet at D.P. 302. Basin 304 (0.41 ac) consists of a portion of the north half of ' Zephyr Road and runoff is attenuated at the inlet at design point 302. The runoff from Basin 303 (0.84 ac) sheet flows to the south across the playground area, ' which consists of sand, wood chips, and grass. This runoff is collected in area inlets at D.P. 303. These flows are then routed to the east to the pond. Basin 305 ' (0.37 ac) attenuates the half-street runoff from Zephyr Road at an existing 5' Type `R' inlet. The inlet is adequately sized for the change in basin boundary created by ' development of the Site. ' The off-site basins are designated as the 400-series. Basin 400 (1.51 ac) encompasses the half street flows from Timberline Road and routes runoff to a 10' Type `R' inlet, which will enter system 200 at D.P. 400. Basin 401 to Basin 404 (5.05 ac+/_) is the undeveloped area bordering the Site to the north. Runoff from ' the area located on the west side of Timberline Road will be collected by others, see Construction plans for the Timbers, P.U.D. for more information. Basin 500(2.58 ac) slopes to the east across playing fields at mild slopes around ' 2%. Runoff from Basin 500 flows overland and enters Basin 501 (0.62 ac), which Nolte Associates,Inc. 6 NAFC01950rainageMordTC019501_DrngRp1_FinaLdoc 1 NCUTE Final Drainage & BE V O N 0 6 N C IN 6 E R i N G Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site is delineated as the detention pond area. Stormwater flows are attenuated at the outlet structure located in the southeast corner of the pond. 5.3 Detention/Water Quality Pond Design The water quality pond for the 11.43-acre Site uses the affected developed areas of t11.84 acres. The area to the north(5.05 ac) is not being developed at this time. The area to the north will have a maximum release rate of 2.0 cfs at the time of development(See D.P. 404). The water quality pond was designed using Urban ' Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 —Best Management Practices(BMPs) "Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin(EDB)", (See Appendix D). ' The required 100-yr detention volume was calculated using the FAA method. Utilizing the Urban Drainage software, Hydropond, a volume of 0.70 ac-ft is 1 needed. ' The water quality capture volume(WQCV)is based on the tributary area draining to the pond as well as the percentage of the total area that is impervious. The Site ' has an imperviousness ratio of 46%. This includes all impervious areas such as pavement, sidewalk, and rooftop compared to the landscaped areas. A WQCV of ' 0.231 ac-ft will be required, based on calculations obtained from the Urban Drainage manual. The total volume required is 0.93 ac-ft, the actual volume for the ' proposed detention pond is 2.82 ac-ft. These calculations can be found in Appendix D. 1 Detention requirements for developing the school site have been modified based on ' the drainage criteria presented in the Final Drainage Reports for the Timbers and Westchase PUDs. Based on these reports, a release rate of 17.10 cfs was ' determined for the school site and the remaining undeveloped parcel (off-site to the north). Runoff from the east half of the full width of Timberline Road and ' Nolte Associates,Inc. 7 N:TC0195MDrainagelWorffC019501_Ihng $jinal.doc NCUTE Final Drainage & BEYOND E N G I N E E R I N G Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site north half of the proposed Zephyr Road will also be conveyed to the detention ' pond and to be released at the above rate. The outlet structure is designed per the Manual utilizing the EDB worksheet. A plate with one column of 8—29132" diameter holes will control the release of ' Stormwater. The pedestrian grate on top of the Type C outlet structure will be set ' at the WQCV elev. An 8" diameter orifice plate will regulate the release of the major event runoff to 17.1 cfs A 30" RCP will route the stormwater to the system provided by the Timbers, P.U.D. If the inlet should become clogged, stormwater would overtop the curb and gutter and enter the inlet at D.P. 305. If this inlet were ' to become clogged, the water would pond up to 4953.50 and enter Mail Creek Ditch. ' 6.0 STORM SEWER SYSTEMS ' 6.1 General Concept There are two storm sewer systems, one running across the north side of the ' school and the other along the southern border of the Site. The system to the north, System 200, captures flows from design points 400 and 200-204. The main ' reach of pipe will be 30" HDPE ADS N-12 running at 0.50%. Area inlets will be ADS Nyloplast standard inlet area grates_ This pipe has no` vet" utility crossings. ' The system outfalls into the detention pond located in the southeast corner of the Site. The system to the south is designated as System 300. This system begins with a ' 10' Type `R' inlet at D.P. 300. Storm water that is collected at design points 300- 303 are conveyed by NRCP pipe east to the detention facility. The area inlets ' within the playground area will also be Nyloplast standard inlet area grates. ' Nolte Associates,Inc. 8 N:1FC01951DsingelWcrd1FC019501_DmgRpt_Final.doc NOT� Final Drainage & ' BEYOND ENG INS ERING Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School— 77mberline Site Roof drainage is collected within the school and routed to the connection points ' designated by DP 100 and 101. HDPE ADS N-12 pipe will route the flows south to a manhole (MH-3) intersecting System 300. 7.0 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ' 7.1 General Concept The 2003 Elementary School site lies within the moderate Rainfall Erodibility Zone ' and the moderate Wind Erodibility Zone per the City of Fort Collins zone maps. The potential exists for erosion problems during and after construction until the disturbed ground is again vegetated. ' The Erosion Control Performance Standard (PS) during construction for this project was computed to be 78.03 per the criteria in the City of Fort Collins ' Erosion Control Reference Manual for Construction Sites. The Effectiveness ' (EFF) of the proposed erosion control plan was calculated to be 80.8. ' The proposed erosion control methods meet the City of Fort Collins' requirements. Calculations can be found in the appendix. Erosion control during ' construction of this project will consist of silt fencing installed around the Site's disturbed areas that will be graded and have the potential for sediment to be ' transported off the Site. The Grading and Erosion Control Plan in the construction drawings(see back pocket)indicates the type and timing of proposed measures. ' Once the foundation is in place and floor slabs constructed, the potential for erosion will be minimized. Generally, developed storm flows will travel to the ' detention/water quality pond via curb and gutter, landscape swales, and storm sewer systems during and after grading and construction. Thus, sediment not ' detained by the inlet protection filters(gravel filters and straw bale barriers)will be conveyed to the detention pond, which will also act a sediment trap during Nconstruction. ' Nolte Associates,Inc. 9 N:1FC0195\Drainage\Word\FC019501_1"i"_Fiaal.doc NCUTE Final Drainage & ' BEYOND E NO IN E ER ING Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site ' 7.2 Existing Site Conditions In general, the Site slopes at one percent to the south and east towards Fossil Creek and Fossil Creek Reservoir. The Site's present use is agricultural with hay as the main crop. The Mail Creek Irrigation Ditch traverses along the eastern tproperty line of the parcel. ' 7.3 Soils The subsurface soils at the Site consist of an approximate 6-inch layer of cultivated silty topsoil, underlain by sandy lean clay, lean clay with sand, clayey sand and silty sand extending to the depths explored to the bedrock below. Reference the ' geotechnical report for more detailed information(Ref. 6). ' 7.4 Schedule Silt fencing will be installed first followed by clearing and grubbing and overlot grading for the Site. Next will be the placement of the vehicle tracking control at the construction entrance. The proposed utility and building construction will ' occur next. Inlet protection will be installed during the construction phase of the landscape storm sewer. Prior to the final grading and landscaping, erosion control ' matting will be installed at curb cuts and storm sewer outlet locations. Paving and landscaping will follow subsequently. After permanent vegetation is stabilized, the ' inlet protection as well as the silt fence will be removed. ' The estimated start of construction for the site has been set for May, 2002 and completion to be one year later. The school is scheduled to open in the fall of ' 2003. M ' Nolte Associates,Inc. 10 N:1FC01950rainagelWordTC019501_DmgRpt_Froal.doe NO� Final Drainage & ' BEYOND ENGINEERING Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School-- Timberline Site 7.5 Construction Materials & Equipment The contractor shall store construction materials and equipment on site in such a manner that the materials and equipment will not impact Mail Creek Ditch. The Contractor shall also provide an area for maintenance and fueling of equipment in a confined area on site from which runoff will be contained and filtered prior to ' entering the ditch. Contaminated soils from fuel spills shall follow state and local criteria for removal. 8.0 CONCLUSIONS 8.1 Drainage Concept The proposed drainage concepts presented in this study and shown on the drainage plan adequately provide for the conveyance of developed runoff for detention and ' water quality purposes from the proposed development and adjacent off-site basins. Water quality will be provided via bio-swales, grass turf swales and the ' detention pond in the southeast corner of the Site. This ensures that the proposed development will have limited negative impact to downstream conveyance facilities ' under the designed storms. 1 ' Nolte Associates,Inc. 11 N:1FC01951DrainagelWoid1FC019501_DmgRpt_Final.doc P4C43E Final Drainage & ' BEYOND E N G IN E E R ING Erosion Control Study 2003 Elementary School— Timberline Site P REFERENCES ' 1. Storm Drainage Criteria and Construction Standards Manual, City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility, Colorado, May 1984. ' 2. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Denver, Colorado, prepared by Wright- McLaughlin Engineers, March 1969. ' 3. Fossil Creek Drainage Basin -Master Drainage Plan- Final Report, prepared for City of Fort Collins, prepared by Simons Li and Associates, Inc., August 1982. 4. Final Drains a Re ort or Timbers PUD prepared b TST Consultants Inc. November r t r r y , 16, 2001. 5 Final Drainage e ort or Westchase P r p f UD, prepared by David Evans and Associates, ' Inc., last revision: November 3, 2000, 6. Geotechnical Engineering Report, Proposed 2003 Elementary School, Northeast Corner ' of Timberline Road and Timber Trail Road, Fort Collins, Colorado, prepared by Terracon, November 9, 2001. 1 1 Nolte Associates,Inc. 12 NAFC01951DrainagelWord1FC019501_DmgRpt_Final.doc 1 6 DEVELOPED FLOW CALCULATIONS tilt YtN s. t 4 Project#: FC0195 ; Project Name: 2003 Elementary School Calculated By: JEP Date: 5/28/2002 r BEYOND ENGIN EERING Per Table 3-3(City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design and Construction Standards) Ci,n,,,ious 0.95 CTuri- 0.50 ' C2 to 7%t,e ,= 0.25 CCjT wff 0.50 C<2i u.= 0.20 Total Total Total Total Total Impervious 2 to 7%Lawn <2%Lawn Artificial Turf Gravel 10 yr. 10 yr. 100 yr. 100 yr. Overland Average Channelized Average Basin Area Area Area Area Area Area Area %Impervious Composite"C" Cf CCf Cf CCf Basin Length Slope Length Slope ft2 ac. ft2 ft2 ft2 ft2 ft2 ft % ft % r 100 `� 45,843 1.05 45,850 0 0 0 0 100% 0.95 1.00 t. 0.95. 1.25 100 60 0.50 120 0.50 101 s 4.643 0.11 4,643 0 0 0 0 100% 0.95 1.00 �' '.:'095 '' j 1.25 .: ;: 100 ; j 101 68 0.50 50 0.50 ' 200 R' 62,420 1.43 37,521 19,254 0 0 5,645 60% 0.69 1.00 f�=,0.Q j 1.25 r f87 �i 200 , 139 1.60 176 0.81 201 5 6.113 0.14 715 5,398 0 0 0 12% 0.33 1.00 ..0:33: r.j 1.25 201.' 93 4.09 0 0.00 202 Pf 4,315 0.10 600 3,715 Q 0 0 14% �-y F.-.s 0.35. lA0 ! . .,h035 �;j 1.25 w..043; :,, 202 21 9.50 58 2.60 203 5 10,100 0.23 2,353 7,748 0 0 0 23% 0.41 1.00 °0341�r: 1 1.25 0{52 { 203- 74 ! 3.23 81 2.31 204 t� 26 400 0.61 1,560 24,840 0 0 0 6/0 0.29 1.00 r ° tr 0!Q1- ; 1.25 0 6 =f 204 ' 111 ; 2.70 96 2.00 300 V 31,578 0.72 26,064 5,515 0 0 0 83% 0.83 1.00 1.25 1 b0^ 300 44 ! 10.40 300 1.61 ' 301 P 6,803 0.16 4,485 2,319 0 0 0 66% 0.71 1.00 r ,»0 71 '� 1.254 89`�` 301- ' 81 E 2.00 59 2.43 302 Q 57,998 1.33 44,591 12,247 0 0 1,160 77% 0.79 1.00 {„`'.0.79 'y; 1.25099 j 302 59 2.00 701 0.90 303 36,530 0.84 3,727 32,803 0 0 0 10% 0.32 1.00 !`>' 032= '' 1.25 ==": 440 ''"j 303: '81 1.73 128 2.54 ' 304 9•010 17,861 0.41 10,749 7,112 0 0 0 60% 0.67 1.00 L 0 67 �I 1.25 � 0 84 r :j 304 33 2.00 282 0.50 305 16,306 0.37 13,397 2,909 Q 0 0 82% 0.83 1.00 1 Y',0 83 ='� 1.25 1 00' j 305 1, 33 2.00 269 0.50 400/ Aflw 65,580 1.51 53,190 12,389 0 0 0 81% 0.82 1.00 j 0`82; ._' 1.25 1'00�;` , 400. 59 2.00 632 0.72 401/ "NIP 142,454 3.27 0 0 142,454 0 0 0% 0.20 1.00026 d 1.25 =�Q�25�'��j 401 375 0.43 290 0.35 ' 402' 1MJFl. 35,943 0.83 0 0 35,943 0 0 0% 0.20 1.00 "f 0'20 I 1.25 - 0 25}_ 402 255 0.53 78 2.00 4031 s 26,736 0.61 0 0 26,736 0 0 0% 0.20 1.00 j 0220' -'J 1.25 t 0�25 403 1 181 0.64 89 j 2.00 404 14,820 0.34 0 0 14,820 0 0 0% 0.20 1.000 20 =-:' 1.25 hs0.l5g 404 j 103 0.78 113 2.60 500 65, 112,527 2.58 0 112,527 ! 0 0 1 0 0% 0.25 1.00 < t0 25 1.250131 500 150 ; 2.00 j 347 ! ' 1.15 j 501 bcj 27,114 0.62 0 27,114 0 0 0 0% 0.25 1.00 w 02 -� 1.25 0;31*` 50L 1 f 0.50 1 0.50 ' Total Site 752,085 17.27 249,445 275,891 219,952 0 6,805 033 OX 1.00 0.47 1.25 0.59 ' FC0195_Rational-Fort Collins-20020326.xls - 9:27 AM X < N � M N _ N R N N t: O U r .o O 1i R--N r Min' �I a ••.� N CD O M�D O O N O N b �IRlh,7 °E ri rl R OC viloo NW; N - %D 1II'-•ml_IR_N r Miv1iN Vt M V<10 N rN r1 %q IOCtP Ih ?��.aGIR r�110:0 GC N m rl 0%111.— ..:I viI�IT M{N PIP IN �' ! i- vi l i 1 ► 1 C ^ P M O OIP 00 v.•— O 00 N 'r W '� C V'I O O OWN h R M -+ OOr.•- N R L r h v.0 ' - C _C O C O_ Cv.•O G G M1 i _ p !� r,,) V - -' O O Nf00 N Q N O P•_•-Ih ?NIN NI-.� �I00 O?.N ► m -C Nif`If N N .; _ CV`-�-�- OINIIN C4 - W m � v V OOI_ OO:- O �•MOIO:O:O1N v;•-:pp O�r1",� Q u oo r'i h 00 0 v9•M O�D co rf.r..'n .+. CIO \0'- h h to O OIG O fV IfV !V � N ONI•+10IC O'fV�N N ^.O 1 s � 111 I f � I O 00 O V O —I00'N ^IN Olu h :,� = C h N h 0 r7100 R O rRj O N_'x,•.r7 M P;^�P 7•- - M h IN•NI' N OI— M 4 O�a _ Q � M .-• h F r1100 � N R O NJ. N l��•-•Ih rt rf.0 V 0 „ h R �0 'L1 O sf d: rf�• h O� I N l N V1 7 C Z E N N h ao In F .•. h M ="M N M 7�•":iN oo10 ri�N Gcz ` � J ❑ � `II I t O \ v1 h O hIN F O O t* �1,41 10 attr.,1p h O•r1 O O —•R P i e+'i N N N —r N•N I N O' !O O r V O b � i to Z c C a '�rn N n4_ ao rRi oolM en!In rt R R M V1- R M- R N r!M N O ^10 O Nlh ' 4 U •a R R V M In7 N oo r h M V100 CO fV IfViN N NI N C O C C O C C 0 0 0 0 0 CIC'O O CO a I Iflf . o o c,ai b�b� oiXo 0 0 o0;R 0 b b O O b o o o ; w r d i V)I—IR M — R N r'M'N O!—.. 0 0 rt•NI G fJ M R P .D M M�1N W IM1 F MIS. 7C`00 NIN N N N N f. U C C C G CfOfC O G C C .^.:=:C�01� O O O'O( y 0 • N y rn C M 0f�—:r:^�r NI V r — M oOIR'M r:tNIX O In - O. 0 O:O IC C o - o��l��fM o Nib1 N N I 1 T N n T ,,... ^ OO C A O O N M •� O N M tf�rli0 — ^IM Q OI ° > 2 CO� O tO O O O O o10.O O O O OI^ .7 c6 N N L N :y O N a y — •�N N N N N M 7.,t W V1 H !� 2 O)I-_ l` N C I�j �v o 0 0 0 ° M M M M M{•M 1 Q I Q ep V r�N V zU. K G N OQ M N N � O O N O t O w 8 _ Ip pO i r� C oo N n •• o cl Qh O O t�+1 N O; IA M a I Op � ' i.v`� � C - tlnlvi l�ll�tl of�c��i.n vi F O v1 .ri ri � r•1 N O F v1 U W Q w = _ _ :Q•M o MIMto Z .0 :_ _ _ :N•V1 r._ ' � � I,;,, r �. N �oln'eri �c�_�evr•ir�jviv FVMe�i °Dr � p i iiij l(I of O O I N 1p p 'Q•N 'VIC'Q vllrlEO:r M - 00111 •-r:N ? b F FIB d ' •-;O •-�01O O O{= O �O Ol"i M�O vi O O OiM O -I_I OiOiNIOOINIQ N pp O.1•-• O IT N N•- 'V 'Q QIa0�iO•Q'N! W - QI.IO �j^..i1NI 4I NI eV In -•"I-,- - O N N cV W IIl IT { E � � � olp o.o!—log— M o Q o o N v1 0 0 olvl of ' C p ao n nleo c..?;-1101 o v a nlr r r M o o v1 T to dp l0O;NICTT N C N1O O C O N fV N�- C = I Ij � -- . •NIi-II ,.h�O rO�i M QO i{ N FI00�mI��rry in n NE Ma �� ^ N 'Om INCQIO M'O lnl;1F I Q 0 Oz 00 h 1 - ^ - OIO ^�pie+'llpld�p O MI0 00 MIIM) oolpf p� Q T � � L � h .in•v11W ..IviENlrl`r' O O rl0 O O QIv1I� FIO NI y, N p F (/• OIL Q.P`Mi Nl3OIN N -'N N N O�OlO C�N�Cjj ^C Gr Z U C Q '�iOV'Jt•�•1 T'Ni =I� oo vPi OOItM�1 H N OIG MO1I� J� •' i-1O�F I-•M�NlO O a O�M O�4Q O O N M-1 IA V1 -•I O GO O� Q Im1c. 6IOJ ' �* yCj � .=:hlv17 v1iv1'v1 v11 v1 v1 =v1 v1 v1= v1 vv11 v1-�=v1 �� � � �� ;NiN NIN NtNIN�N N N N N N N N N N NIN NI 1- -�- 1 u F4 It r-�t". O V .^ 11'110��M.vf �;OIM O�NIF M N O Ot0 O�v1 v11 C � v M T•�OtM M� Q:N.oOIF I � j u duo..^' diolo.o c cid c o d c OII c cII 6 m o ' too N ' .r_-. 1V1•� 1'1ItQ f0•M -' G `a N '-p•I��d,`Q1 -'N Iv^lINr I MM QD MF�•.-. n r'1 M 0 VN' a N. QN ? CICD CC - O OIO m O O O tV CIj li; l O 01 N �`m .o C. Q - N M Q O 0 o > cNp O iD 0000000000000000 U1 G7 L N p Ip N N NIN N M M M M .n O 0M M V Q 0 Q Q Q 1n -nis ❑. �L tC N C L N _O O O O O O NCN1 O•-+ NM v1O - NnQ OBIS opI� op aa Z G I O E O d O?0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O I O O po O O p :: ��,T` - _ ;- ;�:`' � •''.- (1-yearDevelo ed�Runo r �' - Job Number FC0195 Project 2003 Elementary School Date: 5/28/2002 Calculated By:JEP Design Stomt 10 year(Developed) BEYOND ENGINEERI N G ' DIRECT RUNOFF Design Rainfall Basin Point Area of Area CCt k CC, A Intensity Flow(Q) ' Design acre(s) min acre(s) in/hr cfs ] (2) 3 4 (5) (6 7) (8) (9) 100 t00 I 100 1.05 0.95 1 5.00 1.00 4.87 4.87 ' 101 I 101 I 101 O.11 0.95 i 5.00 0.10 4.87 0.49 200 I 200 I 200 I 1.43 1 0.69 1 9.30 0.99 3.93 3.91 201 I 201 I 201 0.14 0.33 1 8.67 0.05 4.07 0,19 - 202 I 202 I 202 0.10 0.35 i 5.00 0.03 4.87 7 0.17 1 203 I 203 1 203 0.23 0.41 8.07 0.10 4.20 0.40 204 204 I 204 0.61 0.29 1 12.20 0.18 3.52 0.62 300 300 300 0.72 0.83 1 5.00 0.60 4.87 2.92 301 1 301 301 0.16 0.71 1 5.51 0.11 4.76 0.53 302 I 302 1 302 1.33 0.79 9.66 1.06 3.85 4.07 303 1 301 1 303 0.84 0.32 5.51 0.27 4.76 - A.28 . ' { 304 I 301 I 304 0.41 0.67 ' 11.49 0.28 3.60 0.99 I 305 I 301 { 305 0.37 0.83 J 48.61 0.31 1.61 0.50 400 E 400 I 400 1.51 1 0.82 11.49 1.23 I 3.60 4.44 - { 401 I 401 i 401 { 3.27 0.20 48.61 0.65 1.61 1.05 402 1 402 402 0.83 0.20 33.82 0.17 2.05 0.34 403 403 I 403 0.61 0.20 26.97 0.12 2.35 0.29 464 404 { 404 0.34 0.20 19.33 0.07 2.80 0:19 500 500 ( 500 2.58 0.25 19.05 0.65 I 2.83 1.82 501 501 1 501 0.62 0.25 5.00 0.16 .4.87 0.76 ROUTED FLOWS Design Rainfall Point Area of Area-CCf 4 Intensity Flow(Q) Design acre(s) min hVbr cfs 1 302 I 302,303 1.33 9.66 I ' FC0195_Rational-Fort Collins-20020326.x)s 10:21 AM 111+~ Job Number.FC0195 Project:2003 Elementary School Date: 5J2812002 Calculated By:JEP Design Storm 100 year(Developed) BEYOND ENGINEERING ' DIRECT RUNOFF Design Rainfall Basin Point Area of Area CCr 4 CC(*A Intensity Flow(Q) Design acre(s) min ACM(s) lift cfs (i) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9 100 ! 100 1 100 1.05 1 1.00 5.00 1.05 9.95 10.47 ' 101 I 101 I 101 I 0.11 1 1.00 5.00 I 0.11 9.95 1t06.•- 200 200 1 2Do 1.43 I 0.87 6.03 1.24 9.49 :"':'11.79 201 I 201 201 0.14 1 0.41 7.73 0.06 8.73 0.51 202 I 202 202 0.10 1 0.43 5.00 j 0.04 9.95 0"43 j 203 { 203 I 203 0.23 1 0.52 6.95 0,12 9.08 1:09. ' 204 I 204 i 204 1 0.61 0.36 11.17 1 0 22 7.44 1:64 300 1 300 I 300 0.72 = 1,00 5.00 1 0.72 9.95 711 -: 301 I 301 I 301 0.16 1 0.89 5.00 0.14 9.95 71:38 : 302 I 302 1 302 1.33 1 0.99 7.40 1.32 8.88 303 1 303 I 303 0.84 1 0.40 10.68 0.34 7.56 304 I 304 { 304 0.41 1 0.84 5.55 0.34 9.71 "7,,,334' i 305 I 305 305-1 0.37 1 1.00 I 5.00 0.37 9.95 : :3:72'-v 400 I 400 I 400 1 1.51 1- 1.00 7.35 1.51 8.90 -13:40 _ 401 1 401 1 401 1 3.27 1 0.25 46.22 1 0.82 1 3.40 �Z:78 ' 402 1 402 { 402 1 0.83 1 0.25 I 31.97 1 0.21 I 4.35 -0.90 _j 403 403 1 403 1 0.61 I 0.25 1 25.51 I 0.15 1 4.93 `0.76 1 404 1 404 I 404 0.34 I 0.25 18.30 1 0.09 1 5.91 :0:50. 500 1 500 1 500 I 2.58 I 0,31 17.91 I 0.81 5.98 4:83'_ _ 501 I 501 1 501 0.62 0.31 5.00 0.19 9.95 Basin 401 w171 release at historic rate of 1 cfs per acre. ROUTED FLOWS ' Design Rainfall Point Area of Area'CCr 4 Intensity Flow(Q) Design am(s) min inth cfs ' I 302 1 302,304 1.66 1 7.40 8.88 ":14.78'^ ' FC0195_Rational-Fort Collins-20020326.xts 9:29 AM c, tP a F Y .' STREET CAPACITY 'AN. I,��r T y D LE-. DESIGN 2t Attu � q A. E 3'. •"k� Z �f ��q •. y S�rfE�GD�01[tt/---- "ML��fUI-1 peod CA•kG1 - �Q� l� R"') ' -Eco? - JOB NO_ DESIGNED BY �/oz-f oz -----•- DATE CHECKED BY �_ --Th[o�c Kcal_ G�paG� y Ca.�c.u.l ect lay TST, a� limbers P U.D. Q = 224.—?3�• - Z2y•�3.yo.a�Sa � I'S;�3 9 � - ---- - I cc 7ED __ „eiUaF �SIL�C�,IZr�,ro�U��__��jE7 Noi 3 i o T_._o D�? _0 Z _- 1 __ _ �GtL1AtA-tom ._Cv�vo� _ JT v' D.P•' j .per 2,�P3 5c4e-v_A- — - f oCQ uA-ta:r ! I E ! l ; � � l � L I 1 � f � ' IIiEIfii ( I ff ! Eii 1 1 Theoretical Capacity Timberline Road ' Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Timberline Road Theoretical Capacity Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula ' Solve For Discharge Input Data ' Slope 0.007800 f 1ft Water Surface Elevation 100.00 ft ' Options Current Roughness Method Improved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting Method Improved Lotter's Method ' Closed Channel Weighting Method Horton's Method Results ' Mannings Coefficient 0.015 Elevation Range 99.18 to 100.65 Discharge 54.71 cfs Flow Area 14.3 ft' ' Wetted Perimeter 49.18 ft Top Width 48.66 ft Actual Depth 0.82 ft ' Critical Elevation 100.05 ft Critical Slope 0.004820 ft/ft Velocity 3.83 ft/s Velocity Head 0.23 It ' Specific Energy 100.23 ft Froude Number 1.24 Flow Type Supercritical tRoughness Segments Start End Mannings ' Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+06 0.013 0+06 0+16 0.036 0+16 0+19 0.013 0+19 0+49 0.016 0+49 0+51 0.013 ' Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) ' 0+00 100.00 0+06 99.88 0+16 99.68 ' 0+17 99.68 0+17 99.18 0+19 99.34 0+49 99.99 0+51 100.15 0+51 100.65 n:\...\haestad\flowmaster%street capacity.fm2 Notte Associates Inc FlowMaster v6.1 [6114o] 04/02/02 09:58:14 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Theoretical Capacity Timberline Road ' Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Timberline Road Theoretical Capacity Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula 1 Solve For Discharge Section Data 1 Mannings Coefficient 0.015 Slope 0.007800 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 100.00 ft 1 Elevation Range 99.18 to 100.65 Discharge 54.71 cfs 1 1 - 100.80 99.80" 99.40 99,00 9,00 --- ' 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 V:4.0n_ 1 H1 N T5 ' n:1..\haestad\flowmaster\street capacity.tm2 Notte Associates Inc FlowMaster v6.1 [6141 0123102 12,02:46 PM m Haestad Methods,Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 ' Flow Depth for Timberline e Road {100-yr} Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description M Worksheet Timberline Road Flow Depth Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula ' Salve For Channel Depth Input Data ' Slope 0.007800 ft/ft Discharge 13.40 cfs ' Options Current Roughness Method Improved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting Method Improved Lotter's Method ' Closed Channel Weighting Method Horton's Method Results ' Mannings Coefficient 0.014 Water Surface Elevation 99.72 ft Elevation Range 99.18 to 100.65 Flow Area 4.3 ft' 1 Wetted Perimeter 22.57 ft Top Width 22.06 ft Actual Depth 0.54 ft ' Critical Elevation 99.76 ft Critical Slope 0.004999 ft/ft Velocity 3.11 ft/s Velocity Head 0.15 ft ' Specific Energy 99.87 ft Froude Number 1.24 Flow Type Supercritical ' Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+06 0.013 0+06 0+16 0.035 ' 0+16 0+19 0.013 0+19 0+49 0.016 0+49 0+51 0.013 ' Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) ' 0+00 100.00 0+06 99.88 0+16 99.68 ' 0+17 99.68 0+17 99.18 0+19 99.34 0+49 99.99 0+51 100.15 0+51 100.65 ' n:V..lhaestad\flowrnasterlstreet capacity.fm2 Nolte Associates Inc FlowMaster v6.1 [614o] 04/02/02 09:57:36 AM m Haestad Methods;Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Flow Depth Timberline Road (100-yr) Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Timberline Road Flow Depth Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula ' Solve For Channel Depth Section Data ' Mannings Coefficient 0-014 Slope 0.007800 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 99.72 ft ' Elevation Range 99,18 to 100.65 Discharge 13.40 cfs ' 100.80 100.20 - --- --- 99.80= 99.40 99.00 ------ 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 V:4.01 ' H:1 NTS 1 M ' n:V..\haestad\flowmaster\street capacity.fm2 Notte Associates Inc FlowMaster v6.1 [614o] 04/02/02 09:57:54 AM m Haestad Methods,Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 1 - {�SprECtp - I.�nf��I�n C SUBJECT — -- FCO(a5 JOB NO. DESIGNED BY MAC 0%-Zbo — - DATE CHECKED BY� - 7^ASG-a.L4u�— ._.,•--- ___ T = l9: 24' QF�,,,i�U D ' � j I :8 � BI � I-ISLe' �► 1Z!' �q�� ,zd' I ' ---- 2-(.Lq! > I � IS>+•o�.nw�-r..r :� ' I '29 e��_�—i Lt��,.��1 I�I.�n.�-r- FT i ITI l II ! L , FORT COLLINS ONLY 1r I nA15OE.UAE "A- 115' ROW (min.) Walk Pkwy 83' RoadwayPkwy. 8' min. in. Fence ASetback 4 12' 12' 15' Travel 12' 12' Travel E 15 Uti! Util Esmf. tLaBne ' Travel Travel B' !1 6' Esmi. eBikemn Lane lmin. f 19' ' Center Median 7' 12' Median Left 1 Turn �, Lane LEFT TURN MEDIAN 1 1 ROADWAY WIDTH: 83' 1 RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH: 115' (min.) plus 30' (min.) utility easement. TRAVEL LANES: 4 lanes, 12' wide LEFT TURN LANE: 12' wide 1 BIKE LANES: 2 lanes, 8' wide PARKING: None. 1 PARKWAY: 10' (min.) width. Additional width optional. SIDEWALK: 6' (min.) width. Additional width may be required for higher pedestrian traffic in and leading to activity areas. 1 MEDIA : Center Median: 19' wide landscaped; Left Turn Median: 7' wide landscaped. Barrier curb or out—fall curb and gutter. WHERE USED: These specifications shall apply as required by the Local Entity when a 4—lane arterial street is shown on the Master Street Plan, or when the traffic volume on the street is anticipated to be 15,000 to 35,000 vpd. ' DESIGN SPEED: 50 MPH SPEED LIMIT: 35-45 MPH ACCESS: Access will be limited. Points of access must be approved by the Local Entity. ' CONTINUITY: Unlimited FENCES: Fences shall be setback a minimum of 8' from the parkway edge of the sidewalk. LANDSCAPING: See Appendix "C" 1 CURB AND GUTTER: Vertical curb and gutter. 1 4--LANE ARTERIAL STREET L&RIMER COUNTY DESIGN APPROVED: FIGURE 1 URBAN AREA FIGURE DATE: 09/11/00 7 �� STREET STANDARDS DRAWN BY: BKP 1 GUTTER-CO-NVEYANCE--CAPACITY.� - Project= FC0195-2043 Elementary School Street ID= D.P.200, 100-Yr(North Parking Lot) 1 Street Side Walk Ts Crown h Jul-- ' Y ; Qs+' Qx _"'I Sx _ Sw <------------------------> ' <--V-><---------TX--------> Gutter Street Street Geometry(input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= 11.8 cfs Curb Height H= 6.00 inches Gutter Width W= 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds= • 1 M inches Street Transverse Slope Sx= 0.0200 Wit Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's Roughness N= 0.016 Gutter Conveyance Capacity ' Gutter Cross Slope Sw= ' 0.08 ft/ft Water Spread Width T= 20:20 ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= 0.40 it ' ater Depth with a Gutter Depression D= 0.53 ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx= 18.20 ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts= 6.37 It ' Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws= .5.5 cfs Flowrate Carried by Width (Ts-W) Qww= :2:0 cfs Gutter Flow Qw=. > .. 3.5 cfs ' Side Flow Qx= 8.3 cfs Total Flow(Check against Qo) Qs= 11.8 cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo= 0.29 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se= 0.04 fttft Flow Area As= 4.21 sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs= 2.81 fps sD product VsD=. 1.49 ftz/s ' UD-Inlet DP 200-100YR.xls,Street Hy 4/2/2002, 11:43 AM CURB-OPENING INLET:IN -A:SUMP ro — l P sect— FC0195-2003 Elementary School Inlet ID = D.P. 200, 100-Yr(North Parking Lot) Wp Lu WF wate r 3�d ' H Flow Direction Pan ' Gutter ' Design Information (Input) Design Discharge on the Street(from Street Hy) Qo= 11.8 cfs ' Length of a Unit Inlet Lu= 5.00 ft Side Width for Depression Pan Wp= 3.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Co= 0.15 Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches Orifice Coefficient Cd= 0.67 Weir Coefficient Cw= 3.00 Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd= 0.53 ft ' Angle of Throat(see USDCM Chapter 6, Figure ST-5) Theta= 63.0 degrees Number of Curb Opening Inlets No= 2 Curb Opening inlet Capacity in a Sum As a Weir Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L= 10.00 ft Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi=' 17.8 cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clog-Coeff= 1.25 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.09 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa=., 16.7.cfs ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi= 14.9 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa= 13.5 cfs ' Capacity for Design with Clogging .�� Qa=i:;<z t�=_,;�-13:5 cfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet=Qa 1 Qo= C%_ :a-'e100.00 % 1 Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable,a capture percentage of less than 100%in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. UD-Inlet DP_200-100YR.xls, Curb-S 4/2/2002, 11:43 AM GUTTER CONVEYANCE CAPACITY Project= FC0195-2003 Elementary School Street 1D= D.P. 200, 10-Yr(North Parking Lot) strect ' s:ae wax - —rs_ _ — cro�,�,� <- - - Y ; V ` Qx —�1 sx x D 1 r Do Y ,_-- T d------------------ --- --- -------------) Gutter S hnect Street Geometry(input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= 3.9 cfs Curb Height H= 6.00 inches Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds= 1.52 inches Street Transverse Slope Sx= 0.0200 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's Roughness N= 0.016 Gutter Conveyance Capacity ' Gutter Cross Slope SW= 0.08 ft/ft Water Spread Width T= 12.88 ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= 0.26 ft ' Water Depth with a Gutter Depression D= 0.38 ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx= 10.88 ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts= 4.61 ft ' Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws= 2.3.cfs Fiowrate Carried by Width(Ts-W) Qww= 0.5 cfs Gutter Flow Qw= 1.8 cfs ' Side Flow Qx cfs Total Flow(Check against Qo) Qs = 3.9.cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo= 0.46 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se = 0.05 ft/ft Flow Area As= 1.79 sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs= 2.19 fps sD product VsD= 0.84 ftZ/s ' UD-Inlet DP_200-10YR.xls, Street Hy 412/2002, 11:44 AM CUR&OPENING.INLET IN:A SUMP - Project— FC0195-2003 Elementary School _ Inlet ID= D.P.200, 10-Yr(North Parking Lot) WP Lu WP C- - - - - - - -y[- - ' wate r Yd ' H f Flaw Direction E� ' Guitar Pan ' Design Information (Input) Design Discharge on the Street(from Street Hy) Qo= 3.9 cfs ' Length of a Unit Inlet Lu = 5.00 ft Side Width for Depression Pan Wp= 3.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Co = 0.15 Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches Orifice Coefficient Cd= 0.67 Weir Coefficient Cw= 3.00 Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd = 0.38 ft Angle of Throat(see USDCM Chapter 6, Figure ST-5) Theta= 63.0 degrees Number of Curb Opening Inlets No = 2 ' Curb Opening Inlet Capacity in a Sum As a Weir Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L= 10-00 ft ' Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi= 10.8 cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clog-Coeff= 1.25. Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.09 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa = -10.2;cfs ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi= 10:7 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa= 9.7 cfs _. _ _:-_ Capacity for Design with Clo in Qa=:_ „; :9.Zlcfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet=Qa/Qo= C%=ir, r 100.00;% Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture ' percentage of less than 100%in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. ' UD-Inlet DP_200-10YR.xls, Curb-S 4/2/2002, 11:44 AM 1 —_--- ' SUBJECT -F-C_D l q5 GAS JOB NO. DESIGNED BY _P—UUL 2, 2002- DATE CHECKED BY ._ D• a. tot/^ ._._. .___ ._ .. .. ._ -..._.__.------ ---- a Frzor, _ --. .I t_! cr-rr-- .c14 2-7 't`o2cncicrd 2 .6 ' G.t51'cis L � f•-S�(s- -';� C.� ___._ _ ._ -_._ .. .-- _ci -l—�oz _`-S._�:Eb5�ra,+� . ..la 2,o.I �.�:.1.t�+:l cN—!.5._c�55_"C_tf•�rJ�!•S c�g__•%_diL cs �-,4' C) css, 'x I oTl- 2 6i'tEl 1 INLE-r CAPAcrrY_ SUBJECT Fco.q GA O JO8 NO. DESIGNED BY- DATE CHECKED BY INLE7 APo.c t 7y Jio( LµA�NG _O�- -5/,!` - C-O -.:!�,21 IV64T9 -40 l 51 Pff 60 3i2 9 G t$_ �SE i L-,..e&--Z r— GZ!AZ G_ ' s 133 ens^G if. (S.c�s � C7�! ! �� � ktj2P•�E _f _ D.P. + QL t PQNb, h��7 SS.oo, i 3 '� _. I ` CQ'- 5'.•2 c �5 ' >t! Sal ' Go !c FS_' ,i t I k I i .•; --- I ' l � Ili lilillli • iltl � fi _ i � ! li { E 1 .iGUTTER=.CONVEYANCE-CAPACITY: , Project- FC0195-.2003-Elementary School Street ID= DP 300- 100YR (South Parking Lot) Street ' Side wax < --- — 1 cru--- r8 -> .nm i Y : +�++ Qx Sx H' D 1 A. S. v Y--- T <------------------------> t <-w><---------Tx--------> Gutter street Street Geometry(input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= 7.2 cfs Curb Height H= 6.00 inches Gutter Width W= 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds= 1.52 inches Street Transverse Slope Sx= 0.0200 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0150 ft/ft ' Manning's Roughness N= 0.016 Gutter Conveyance Capacity ' Gutter Cross Slope SW= `0`08'ft/ft Water Spread Width T= 13.23 ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= 0.26 ft Water Depth with a Gutter Depression D= 0'39 ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx= 11.23 ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts= 4.70,ft ' Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws= . 4:2 cfs Flowrate Carried by Width(Ts-W) Qww= 4� -I%0;cfs Gutter Flow Qw= . ;3.3''.cfs ' Side Flow Qx= '?Z 4:05 cfs Total Flow(Check against Qo) Qs= 7:2 cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo= '0.45 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se= 0.05 ft/ft Flow Area As= 1.88 sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs= 3.85 fps sD product VsD= 1.51 ftZ/s ' LID-Inlet DP 300-100YR.xis, Street Hy 3/29/2002, 8:39 AM 1 CURB.OP.ENING'INLET:IN.A SUMP Project = FC0195 -2003 Elementa School _ Inlet ID= DP 300 -100YR(South Parking Lot) WP Lu WP ' irate I. Yd H Flog Direction AL ' Psli Gutter ' Design Information (Input) Design Discharge on the Street(from Street Hy) Qo= 7.2 cfs ' Length of a Unit Inlet Lu = 5.00 ft Side Width for Depression Pan Wp = 3.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Co= 0.15 Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches Orifice Coefficient Cd= 0.67 Weir Coefficient Cw= 3.00 Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd= 0.39 ft ' Angle of Throat(see USDCM Chapter 6, Figure ST-5) Theta= 63.0 degrees Number of Curb Opening Inlets No= 2 ' Curb Opening Inlet CapacitV in a Sum As a Weir Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L= 10.00 ft Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi = 11.3 cfs ' Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clog-Coeff= 1.25 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.09 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa= 10.6 cfs ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi= 11.0 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa = 10.0 cfs ' Capacity for Design with Clogging Qa= .1b0 cfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet=Qa 1 Qo= C%= .100.00 % ' Note: Unless additional n po ding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture ' percentage of less than 100%in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. ' UD-Inlet DP_300-100YR.xls, Curb-S 3/29/2002, 8:39 AM GUTTER CONVEYANCE-CAPACITY Project=_FC0195 2003.Elementary School Street ID= DP 300- 10 YR(South Parking Lot) _ Street Side Walk 1 <_--Ts---3' Crown Y ; Qw Qx Ss 1 H1 D _ Da SW y--- T <------------------------> ' <-W> ---------Tx--------> Gutter Street Street Geometry(input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= 2.9 cfs Curb Height H= 6.00 inches Gutter Width W= 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds= 1.52 inches Street Transverse Slope Sx= 0.0200 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0050 ftlft Manning's Roughness N= 0.016 Gutter Conyp nce Capacity ' Gutter Cross Slope SW= °0.08 ft/ft Water Spread Width T= 11.35 ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= 0.23 ft Water Depth with a Gutter Depression D= 0.35 ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx= .9.35 ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts= 7 4.24 ft ' Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws= 1.9 cfs Flowrate Carried by Width(Ts-W) Qww= '`_ 0.3 cfs Gutter Flow Qw= - " 1.5.cfs ' Side Flow Qx= --:;.1.4 cfs Total Flow(Check against Qo) 'Qs= .2.9 cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo= 0.52 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se= 0.05 ft/ft Flow Area As= .1.41 sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs= 2.06 fps sD product VsD= 0.73 ftz/s 1 ' UD-Inlet DP 300-10YR.xis, Street Hy 3/2912002,8:52 AM 1 -CURB OPENING=INLET IN:A=SUMP Proj1ect= FC0195-2003 Elements School rY inlet ID= DP 300 -10 YR (South Parking Lot) WP Lu WP ' �- - - - - - - water Yd ' H Flaw Direction Fan Gutter ' Design Information (Input) Design Discharge on the Street(from Street Hy) Qo= 2.9 cfs Length of a Unit Inlet Lu= 5.00 ft ' Side Width for Depression Pan Wp= 3.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Co= 0.15 Height of Curb Opening in Inches H= 6.00 inches Orifice Coefficient Cd= 0.67 Weir Coefficient Cw= 3.00 Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd= 0.35 ft ' Angle of Throat(see USDCM Chapter 6, Figure ST-5) Theta= 63.0 degrees Number of Curb Opening Inlets No= 2 Curb Opening Inlet Capacity in a Sum As a Weir Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L= 10.00 ft Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi= _ 9.6 cfs ' Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clog-Coeff= 1.25 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0.09 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa= 9.0 cfs ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi= 9.6 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa= 8.7 cfs ' Capacity for Design with Clogging Qa >; :'8.7.cfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet=Qa/Qo= C%_ L-"q100.00 % 1 Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable,a capture percentage of less than 100%in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. ' UD-Inlet DP_300-10YR.xls, Curb-S 3/29/2002, 8:53 AM - - reo nlet Capac>iCalcula>�iaris=D.P. 3OI ` "' ` Project#: FC0195 Project Name: 2003 Elementary School ' Calculated By: GAD BEYOND ENG INEERI N G Date: 4/2/2002 ' Grate: AMCOR Type 16,SDI-301 Weir Perimeter,L= 64.00 in 5.33 ft Open Area,A= 336.00 in' 2.33 ftz Clogging Factor,c= 50% ' Stage Interval,Ah= 0.10 ft Weir Calculation: Orifice Calculation: ' Qw=CLH" Q.=CA(2gH)o.s C= 3.00 C= 0.65 cL= 2.67 ft Ac= 1.17 ft' ' H H Q--rNLET Q.-INLET Rules ft -] ft cfs cfs cfs 0.00 4955.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 ' 0.10 4955.31 0.25 1.92 0.25 0.20 4955.41 0.72 2.72 0.72 0.30 4955.51 1.31 3.33 1.31 4955.52 0.40 4955.61 2.02 3.85 2.02 ' 0.50 4955.71 2.83 4.30 ; 2.83 1 ' ' Nolte Associates,Inc. 1 :GUT-TER-CONVEYANCE,CAPACITY _ N ProjJect= FC0195-:2003 Elements h Elementary School o Street ID = D.P. 301 100-yr Event Side walk T Street Crown Y ; ( xw QX - sk H DDo w - Sw <------------------------> T. ><-------------------> Gutter Street Street Geometry(Input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= 1.4 cfs Curb Height H = 6.00 inches Gutter Width W= 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds= 1.52 inches Street Transverse Slope Sx= 0.0200 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0145 ft/ft Manning's Roughness N = 0.016 Gutter Convevance Capac—ity ' Gutter Cross Slope Sw= 0.08.ft/ft Water Spread Width T= 5.97 ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= 0.12 ft ' ater Depth with a Gutter Depression D= 0.25.ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx= 3.97 ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts= 2.95 ft Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws = 1.2 cfs Flowrate Carried by Width (Ts-W) Qww= 01 cfs Gutter Flow Ow= 1.1 cfs Side Flow Qx= = 0:2 cfs Total Flow(Check against Qo) Qs= 1.4 cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo= 0.82 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se= 0.07 ft/ft Flow Area As= 0.48 sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs= 2.86 fps sD product VsD= 0.70 ft2/s 1 ' LID-Inlet DP_301-1OOYR.xis, Street Fly 5/28/2002, 10:08 AM GRATE INLET IN ASUMP Project=�FC0195 -2003EI Elementary School� e ry Sc I o Inlet ID = D.P..301 -100-yr Event -- S in$l�_ T�4�& ((c 1 Curti ' Gutter Vt�Wo 4- Flow Clamed ' Lo Le L ' Design Information (Input) Design Discharge on the Street(from Street Hy) Qo= 1.4 cfs Length of a Unit Grate Lo= 3.33 ft ' Width of a Unit Grate Wo = 2.00 ft rea Opening Ratio for a Grate Ar= 0.35 Clogging Coefficient for a Single Inlet Co= 0.50 Number of Grates No= 1 Orifice Coefficient Cd= 0.60 Weir Coefficient Cw= 3.30 Water Depth for Design Condition Yd= 0.25 ft Capacity of Grate Inlet in a Sum Calculated Length of Grate Inlet L= 7 i'a,-3.33 ft ' Width of Grate Inlet W 2.00 ft As a Weir ' Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi= . 3.0 cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units C-coef= 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.50 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa 2.3 cfs ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi=' 5.6.cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa 2.8 cfs Caoacitv for Design with CloggingQa= .' 9 23.cfs Capture percentage=Qa/Qo 1 ' Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable,a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. 1 ' UD-Inlet DP_301-100YR.xls, Grate-S 5/28/2002, 10:09 AM 1 :GUTTER CONVEYANCE.:CAPACITY Project= FC0195-.2003 EI ementary.School Street ID = DP 302- 10 YR (Zephyr Road) street ' Side Walk Crown<---T:---�► .. A-- ��--. v sx H' D w , Dvviel�--- Stiv T <------------------------3► <--- �------ Tx -------> Gutter Street Street Geometry(input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= 5.1 cfs Curb Height H = 6.00 inches Gutter Width W= 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds= 1-.52 inches Street Transverse Slope Sx= 0.0200 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's Roughness N= 0.016 Gutter Conveyance Ca acit ' Gutter Cross Slope Sw `0.08 ft/ft Water Spread Width T 14.41 ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= =• _0:29 ft ' Water Depth with a Gutter Depression D =. .0.41 ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx= - ,I Al ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts= '::. 4:98 ft ' Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws= ="2.8 cfs Flowrate Carried by Width (Ts-W) Qww=;-' ;. 0.7 cfs Gutter Flow Qw=; :-:2.1 cfs ' Side Flow Qx= ^_ °3.0 cfs Total Flow(Check against Qo) Qs= 5.1 cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo = 0.41 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se= 0.05 ft/ft Flow Area As= 2.20 sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs = 2.32 fps sD product VsD= 0.96 ft2/s 1 ' UD-Inlet DP_302-10YR.xis, Street Hy 5/28/2002, 10:23 AM 1 CURB OPENING_INLET.IN.:A,SUMP. ProjJect= FC0195-.2003 Elements School Elementary Inlet ID= DP 302 - 10 YR. (Zephyr Road) WP Lu WP x^atbe r Yd H Florw Direction Pan ' Gutiber ' Design Information (Input) Design Discharge on the Street(from Street Hy) Qo= 5.1 cfs Length of a Unit Inlet Lu = 5.00 ft Side Width for Depression Pan Wp= 3.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Co = 0.15 Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches ' Orifice Coefficient Cd= 0.67 Weir Coefficient Cw= 3.00 Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd= 0.41-ft ' Angle of Throat(see USDCM Chapter 6, Figure ST-5) Theta= 63.0 degrees Number of Curb Opening Inlets No= 2 ' Curb Opening Inlet Capacity in a Sum As a Weir Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L= 10.0&ft Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi= 12:1'cfs ' Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clog-Coeff= 1.25 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = .0'.09 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa=. . 11.4icfs ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi= 11.6 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa= 10.5 cfs ' Capacity for Design with Clogging Q a=' " :'10:5 i cfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet=Qa/Qo= C%_ "--I 00.60i% ' Note: Unless additional ondin depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture P 9 P P 9 P P ' percentage of less than 100%in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. ' UD-Inlet DP_302-10YR.xls, Curb-S 5/28/2002, 10:23 AM 1 '=. "GUTTER CONVEYANGECAPACITY Project= FC0195-2003 Elementary School Street ID= DP302 - 100YR (Zephyr Road) Stmet side Walk Crown Y V W QX t� S5c x D Do ... T <------------------------> <--1> ---------T"--------> ' Gutter Stmet Street Geometry(input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= 14.8 cfs Curb Height H= 6.00 inches Gutter Width W= 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds 1.52 inches Street Transverse Slope Sx= 0.0200 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's Roughness N= 0.016 Gutter Conveyance Capacity ' Gutter Cross Slope Sw 0.08 ft/ft Water Spread Width T 2-2.07 ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= 0.44 ft ' Water Depth with a Gutter Depression D= -. 0.57 ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx=, 20.07 ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts 6:82 ft ' Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws='''_ 6.6 cfs Flowrate Carried by Width (Ts-W) Qww -2.6 cfs Gutter Flow Qw= 4:0 cfs ' Side Flow Qx= _ 10.8 cfs otal Flow(Check against Qo) Qs 14.8 cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo= 0.27 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se= 0.04 ft/ft Flow Area As= 5.00 sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs= 2.96 fps sD product VsD= 1.68 ftz/s ' UD-Inlet DP_302-100YR.xls, Street Hy 5128/2002, 10:18 AM 1 CURB OPENING INLET IN.A'SUMP Project= FC0195 -2003 Elementary School Inlet ID ='DP 302 -100YR. (Zephyr Road) Wp Lu WP _ E- - -- - - - -7�[- - - - - - � VMte r Yd ' H FlawDirection Fan ' Gutter ' Design Information (input) Design Discharge on the Street(from Street Hy) Qo= 14.8 cfs Length of a Unit Inlet Lu= 5.00 ft ' Side Width for Depression Pan Wp= 3.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Co= 0.15 Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches Orifice Coefficient Cd = 0.67 Weir Coefficient Cw= 3.00 Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd = 0.57 ft ' Angle of Throat(see USDCM Chapter 6, Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.0.degrees Number of Curb Opening Inlets No = 2 Curb Opening Inlet Capacity in a Sum As a Weir Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L= 10.00 ft Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi -.: 19.9 cfs ' Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clog-Coeff 1.25 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = - `0.09 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa= . :'_18.7,cfs t an Orifice Cap - acity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi= 15.8 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa= 14.4 cfs Capacity for Design with CloggingQa :4icfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet=Qa/Qo= C%=is_, ,97:14<% Note: Unless additional ondin depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable,a capture P 9 P P 9 P ' percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. ' UD-Inlet DP_302-100YR.xls, Curb-S 5/28/2002, 10:18 AM ' SUBJECT JOB NO. DESIGNED BY DATE CHECKED BY ' A��A�LN.trts�LocA'�trp-- -3--- - -ct . " _._____^-�u�vv► av�aD�t_.�On_a+_r�t� L��h_��.t_.5._y��� s.?_y2 O� ic i •___.1��.�I��_PI�s-�Goa ie s_ ,-- . __.._._. -- � _______.�..___..__-_-- j i R i rr x { ' � .—?ASS:__� _�. `7�•_ c�_ .'; � i�$,� j Gnu-,-ems Gk { j I i 3 3 1 t I S = i i t F 1 tGUTT.ER CONVEYANCE CAPACITY-' r Project= FC0195-2003 Elementa ry ary School Street ID= DP 305- 10 YR (Zephyr Road) Street Side Walk Ts Crown Y ' +� Qx Q S. H' D Do �Sw <------------------------) ' <-16 (---------Tx--------> Gutter Street Street Geometry(input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= 0.5 cfs Curb Height H= 6.00 inches Gutter Width W= 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds= 1.52 inches Street Transverse Slope. Sx= 0.0200 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0055 ft/ft ' Manning's Roughness N= 0.016 Gutter Conveyance Capacity ' Gutter Cross Slope Sw= '" "`d.68 ft/ft Water Spread Width T= .-.-:4.13 ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= 0.08 ft Water Depth with a Gutter Depression D= 0.21 ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx= .2.13 ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts= '2'51:ft ' Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws= 0.5 cfs Flowrate Carried by Width(Ts-W) Qww -0'.0 cfs Gutter Flow Qw= =-0:5 cfs ' Side Flow Qx=.: -JOA:cfs Total Flow(Check against Qo) Qs= 0.5•cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo= 0.94 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se= 0.08 ft/ft Flow Area As= 0.30 sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs= '168 fps sD product VsD= 0.35 ftz/s N ' UD-Inlet DP_305-10YR.xls, Street Fly 5/28/2002, 10:30 AM CURB'IOPENING'INLET:IN ASUMP Project= FC0195 -2003 Elementary School Inlet ID= DP 305 - 10 YR(Zephyr Road) Wp Lu WP E- - - - - - - - - - - -><- - >- wate r Yd ' H Flotiv Direction Pan Gutter ' Design Information (input) Design Discharge on the Street(from Street Hy) Qo= 0.5 cfs Length of a Unit Inlet Lu = 5.00 ft Side Width for Depression Pan Wp= 3.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Co= 0.15 Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches ' Orifice Coefficient Cd= 0.67 Weir Coefficient Cw= 3.00 Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd= 0.26 ft ' Angle of Throat(see USDCM Chapter 6, Figure ST-5) Theta= 63.0 degrees Number of Curb Opening Inlets No= 1 ' Curb Opening Inlet Capacityin a Sum As a Weir Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L= 5.00 ft Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi= 4.1 cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clog-Coeff= 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.15 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa =. 3.8 cfs ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi= 2.6 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa= 2.2 cfs Capacity for Design with Clp_qqing Qa=; 2.2 cfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet=Qa/Qo= C%_; .1.00.00 % Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable,a capture ' percentage of less than 100%in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. N ' UD-Inlet DP_305-10YR.xls, Curb-S 5/28/2002, 10:30 AM 1 1 _ :GUTTER CONVEYANCE .CAPACITY Project— FC0195-2403 Elementary School Street ID= DP 305- 100 YR(Zephyr Road) Stmet Side Walk 1 <- T: crown-_-----> Y . Qw Qx Sx H' D t D �SW ' <--A ---------T"--------> Gutter Stmet Street Geometry(input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= 3.7 cfs Curb Height H = 6.00 inches Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds= 1.52 inches Street Transverse Slope Sx= 0.0200 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0055 ft/ft Manning's Roughness N= 0.016 Gutter Conveyance Capacity ' Gutter Cross Slope Sw= y 0:08 ft/ft Water Spread Width T= 12.35`ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= 0.25 ft ' Water Depth with a Gutter Depression D= 0.37 ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx= 10.35 ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts= 4.48'.ft ' Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws - .2.3-cfs Flowrate Carried by Width (Ts-W) Qww=;' •.0.57 cfs Gutter Flow Ow ,.. : 1.8 cfs ' Side Flow Qx= - `19,cfs Total Flow(Check against Qo) Qs= . '3.7 cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo= 0.48 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se= 0.05 ft/ft Flow Area As= 1.65 sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs= 2.25 fps sD product VsD= 0.84 ft2/s t N ' UD-Inlet DP 305-104YR.xls,Street Hy 3/29/2002, 9:00 AM IL 'CURB:OPENINGINL'ET IN.A SUMP Project= FC0195-2003.Elementary School Inlet ID = DP 305 -100 yr(Zephyr Road) WP Lu WP wate r Yd ' x Flow Direction Pbn ' Gutter ' Design Information(Input) Design Discharge on the Street(from Street Hy) Qo= 3.7 cfs Length of a Unit Inlet Lu= 5.00 ft ' Side Width for Depression Pan Wp= 3.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Co= 0.15 Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches Orifice Coefficient Cd= 0.67 Weir Coefficient Cw= 3.00 Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd= 0.37 ft ' Angle of Throat(see USDCM Chapter 6, Figure ST-5) Theta= 63.0 degrees Number of Curb Opening Inlets No= 1 ' Curb Opening Inlet Capacity in a Sum As a Weir Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L= 5.00 ft Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi= 7.0 cfs ' Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clog-Coeff= 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = '0.15 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa= 6.5:cfs ' an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi= 5.2 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa= 4.4 cfs ' CaDacity for Design with Clog in Qa ;. 4:4!cfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet=Qa/Qo= C%_ 100.001% ' Note: Unless additional ondin depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable,a capture P 9 P P 9 P P percentage of less than 100%in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. UD-Inlet DP_305-100YR.xis, Curb-S 3129/2002, 9:00 AM 1 GUTTER CONVEYANCE:CAPACITY MProject= FC0195-.2003 Elem nt _� e ary School Street ID= D.P.400, 10-Yr(Timberline Rd) Street Side Walk Ts Crown Y Q- QX �� sx H; D De SW� T <------------------------) Tx 1K><-------------------) Gutter Street Street Geometry(Input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= .4.8 cfs Curb Height H = 6.00 inches Gutter Width W = 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds= 1.52 inches Street Transverse Slope Sx= 0.02 00 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's Roughness N = 0.016 Gutter ConveyMnce Capacity ' Gutter Cross Slope SW= r.A 0:08 ft/ft Water Spread Width T= 14:05 ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= 0.28 ft ' Water Depth with a Gutter Depression D= 10.41 ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx= 12.05 ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts= .4.89•ft ' Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws= 2.7.cfs Flowrate Carried by Width(Ts-W) Qww=. i` .ry0.7 Cfs Gutter Flow Qw .20.cis ' Side Flow Qx= _z8 cis Total Flow(Check against Qo) Qs= 4.8 cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo= -0.42 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se= 0.05 ft/ft Flow Area As= . 2.10.sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs= '.2.29 fps sD product VsD= 0.93 ftz/s ' UD-Inlet DP 400-10YR.xls, Street Hy 4/212002, 11:42 AM 1 1 'CURB OPENING=INLET,IN:A-SUMP Project= FC0195 -2003 Elementary School Inlet ID= D.P. 400, 10-Yr Timberline Rd WP Lu WP tiwate r Yd ' H Flow Direction ' Pan 7Gutter Design Information (Input) Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Qo= 4.8 cfs ' Length of a Unit Inlet Lu= 5.00 ft Side Width for Depression Pan Wp= 3.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Co= 0.15 Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches Orifice Coefficient Cd= 0.67 Weir Coefficient Cw= 3.00 Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd= 0.41 ft ' Angle of Throat(see USDCM Chapter 6, Figure ST-5) Theta= 63.0 degrees Number of Curb Opening Inlets No = 2 ' Curb Opening Inlet Ca aci in a Sum As a Weir Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L= 10.00 ft Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi= 12.1 cfs ' Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clog-Co eff=. 1.25 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0.09 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa= 1.1:4 cfs ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi =. 11.6 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa= 10.5 cfs ' Capacity for Design with CloggingQa= ;- :=.10:5 cfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet=Qa/Qo= C%-ram 3100.'00 % Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture ' percentage of less than 100%in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. ' UD-Inlet DP 400-10YR.xls, Curb-S 4/2/2002, 11:42 AM GUTTER"CONVEYANCE;CAPACITY Project- FC0195-2003 Elementary School Street ID= D.P.400, 100-Yr(Timberline Road) street Side Walk Ts Crown A, h--- H' D ' - W Dr V;S-I Y `j' Y--- T <------------------------3. ' <--w]�--------TS--------> Gutter Street Street Geometry(input) ' Design Discharge in the Gutter Qo= 13.4 cfs Curb Height H= 6.00 inches Gutter Width W= 2.00 ft ' Gutter Depression Ds= 1.52 inches Street Transverse Slope Sx= 0.0200 ft/ft Street Longitudinal Slope So= 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's Roughness N= 0.016 Gutter Conveyance Capacity ' Gutter Cross Slope Sw= 0.08 ft/ft Water Spread Width T= 21.24 ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression Y= 0.42 ft ' Water Depth with a Gutter Depression D= 0.55 ft Spread for Side Flow on the Street Tx= 19.24 ft Spread for Gutter Flow along Gutter Slope Ts= `' 6.62 ft ' Flowrate Carried by Width Ts Qws= 6.1 cfs Flowrate Carried by Width(Ts-W) Qww= 2:3 cfs Gutter Flow Qw=i`r;.:Y:. :3:7.cfs Side Flow Qx=�; �;.;:''^. �9:7 cfs otal Flow(Check against Qo) Qs 13:4 cfs ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio Eo= 0.28 Equivalent Slope for the Street Se= 0.04 ft/ft Flow Area As= 4.64 sq ft ' Flow Velocity Vs= .2.89 fps sD product VsD= . 1.59 ftz/s ' UD-Inlet DP 400-100YR.xls, Street Hy 4/2/2002, 11:40 AM 1 1 -CURB,;.OPENINGINLET IN-A SUMP ProjJect= FC0195-2003 ElementarySchool Inlet ID = D.P. 400, 100-Yr(Timberline Rd) 1 WP Lu W P ' - <- - - - - - - ;rater Yd ' H FlawDirection pan ' Gutter ' Design Information (Input) Design Discharge on the Street(from Street Hy) Qo= 13.4 cfs ' Length of a Unit Inlet Lu= 5.00 ft Side Width for Depression Pan Wp= 3.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Co= 0.15 Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches ' Orifice Coefficient Cd = 0.67 Weir Coefficient Cw= :3.00 Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd = 0.55 ft ' Angle of Throat(see USDCM Chapter 6, Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.0 degrees Number of Curb Opening Inlets No = .2 ' Curb Openincl Inlet Capacity in a Sum As a Weir Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L='-` 10.00 It Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qwi= `.18.8 cfs ' Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clog-Coeff= '1.25 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog 0,.09 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qwa= 177 cfs ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi= '.15A cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa= 13.9 cfs ' Capacity for Design with Clogging Qa=y;' cfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet=Qa!Qo= C%=4 ': ';'10000:% Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable,a capture ' percentage of less than 100%in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. ' UD-Inlet DP 400-100YR.xls, Curb-S 4/2/2002, 11:41 AM � tt r.. "t .4 fM t ro STORMSEWER DESIGN F 3 < s ts' bit+ s - � r , s .AV C ,y < v o 0 0 ' Noe`rK sou-rK r a) u U to Q m W O O O M to 0 m M W M to W In N m CD D O r n W d 0 0 :`� N N 0) 4) W CA co 10 f` n N N C r Cl 0C to v m N N O m (o a v m M M O m W� N.�... N U) N U) W U) 1!) L7 v U) to N 0 h m U) to tin O to v C TUr C 0) tT O O O O CA O 0) D) 0) 0) G CDO 4) 4. O O 4) 4) > _ V V V V v V v c V}v V a v V V V v V V v v U O d E tau) 00cnLotnoco;000rNOd000d (D oV m m C v h In to r N N '7 NM V V Ih V r r Cl) M Cl) tD r d E 4) C.0_ n v V V m M C6 n t` tf) N to to v V M t0 7 W to IA to to to to _7 v U) to to Lo U) to to to an In to O C 0 >t_ 4) 0) Ci 6) 4? 4) 4) ' o�lli a v v v v v v c viv v v v v v v v v v v v OU n m N 0 O N a) > V.O co to m Q V 0) to O O 0 C N tD tq M U7 (0 O N 1�1 V N tD 0) N ', h W U) W U) :3 V Ifi v M th N O O i(0 0 to m N t7 M o ' m m.- WP) to to to W In I to to U) U) U) to V) N 0 N W to _ J Q 0) W 0) 4) 0 of �i4Y C) C) 4) 0) 0 a O 0) 0) 4) 0) v v a v v v c -= via v v v v v v v v v v v E C tT W W O O M O t7 O U) coo O N ti O N O co O O m� O O v f, U) N r O N m M r M V h v r M M tD f` to V V V V n M `Lo Lo W a fV W) IN fV In N v m ' 2 m- to to to to U) l3 N 7 O F: In W N Wn u) to W to Coto to H O >— m Q1 CA Q Q O) O) 7 W O O CA m Q W Q a) W t O O (O M(D 2 v V V � V V v — �� (p co N 0 m 0) f` N O _.l r'O O M N CD W v N f� �p y O N r Lo to O ..'� to-r r In N U7 M V W) N W Q t O ' O m v th c� V V V c N to l r O f` N T W N Oi v Cn r r N N N N N N N r r r N N N 0 _ _ N 7. N to Q N 0) O 0) - m t` tD V f• N N lT O cD W f` N Uf q: t7 to N j m N O 0 tll 1 7 O (D t7 t0 v to co tL C.'a N N M M M M r �7 M) N r N r r N N N U >, N N v M M (D r - O U) W O t0 lA r M 0 0 _ N M W Q1 W U) .- �+ D 7 Wn v WA to Lo ko r �7 u) v m to N m to N M (O ,t W co t m V O E W W M M � � n CD;M (o to CO to r to to N O tD U ' W m ` CD U) N n 4) O CA 0 co Nr W W e} r W 4) to U) r N m r M N O O W DI '.: (6,0 m M 0 co m Q W W W r 0 U 7 N a) c N to N to to V V — v(to to to N v V v v v v v V L Q� C m'�O 3 v v v v v v v v v`v er v a v v v v v v v v G Q. �o w a? 43 W Wo O CD in 0 t- v N 0 tD N v f� 0 O (D in 0 (D W U) O Q N f` O O V V U) W f` to r m U) O O CO ul mO O O O 0) O 0) Q p,U') N 4) 0) 0) O O O O O 0) m O CD to U) v to V t' V F P W N v v N) to In W O v m 4 0 _L O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O I m O O M 0 0 0 0 0 w 0 (A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q Q p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C1 O O j 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 'a N W m M n r-i O m d O m W Cl) C) (n In E— CO 0� M r cD co0) C, r 0) n v N M V O N V to O N o M N O O CJ f~ Wn to v 6 rn M O W W h Q W N j. M O m C, to to to W to V U) ^ VS Lo to to In v U) to V V v v V D 'U y C >r. 0) 4) 0) 0) O 0) CD ,,. a):0) Q 0) (n m 4) 4) to 4? 4) 4) 0) m ' v♦ v V V V v v V c v v 7 7 c vc v V MmN NNN N:N N N M O NOj_W _ M _ rM C O O O OOO O O O C O 1 . . . . . v. Nry Omry O O Oj Q O O O O O O O ONv UC O O O It 4 O U U U U U U U tLJ uC C C C C G C _ C i C = C C C C C C C C C C N V V O O O O v O O N co V N W v v V O O tu N N M M M M N M M�W W r N N r N N m co ' L N ID O W N fD © Oi[D O M N M W r In O O N O m C" N N M O 0 N N M N 0V 0 0m f- 0 W P. 0 V M f` U) W 0) M O Ol O N h W O O v v N W CO N MI N r N ' r 0( p o Q E E m cV, _ _ C° 00p20N o o o o 0 �00 W'o 0 0 tt N M 7 m MM m 7 MZ - W E W= DODflF0 = Z)IOiWpp = = 2 = _ _ D L6 ' 20 O,U 20 0, 0 DO D�p L I I < m < 'C U ' m r N M V In to m f` co N m V O m to m N N m v E 0 0 0 0 0 0 D O 0 o o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 In4 N N N N N N N t? aaaad. acnaa a. acLan. n. aad. o. ad � yQ m 6v E I EmCC 2 n w�N N r < m o M M m aa p 0 0 0O N M V C N. rN O O p N NZO N QOO O O pf O p 0 0 0 OpO Q Q Q CDN m NMM (� h Q o = o `a000n =,o68 w.8o = o = = m8o ' co W.c0 N N CD (n r2:(n U (A (n co H U) U) to _F C Lo O - Mom_ ular.0u .� - Project#: FC0195 Project Name: 2003 Elementary School ts1c;0= Calculated By: GAD Date: 5/9/2002 BEYOND ENGI N £ ERING ' Calculations per Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Section 5.6.2 Required Rock Size and Section 5.6.3 Extent of Protection Location: Storm Drain 200 outfalling to pond. Outfall Pipe Diameter,in: 30 Velocity,ft/s: 5.19 Qtou,cis: 25.51 Depth of flow,ft: 2.5 ' Tailwater depth,ft: 2.99 Froude Number: • _0.58 subcritical Where, F=V/(gY)0.5 F>0.80,supercritical flow F<0.80,subcritical flow ' Required Rock Size: a. Q/D"= 2.58 Q/Dt s= 6.45 b. Y,/D= 1.20 ' C. (d5o/D)(Y�D)t.21(Q/D2s)=0.023 From Figure 5-7, Use Type 'L'" Riprap ' dso= 9 _ inches If the flow in the culvert is supercritical,substitute D.for D. Where: 1 D.=t/2(D+Y.) Therefore: D.= n/a ft a,. Q/D+2.s= n/a Q/D.t.s= n/a ' V. Y,lD, n/a c'• (dso .)(Y D.)'.2/(QID.")=0.023 From Figure 5-7, ' Use Type n/a Riprap dso= inches Extent of Protection: ' L=(1/(2tan0))(A,/Y,-W) Where: _ 1/(2ian9)�-b.60,:peT Figure 5_9 A, QN Where,V=acceptable velocity,5.5 fps ' A,. 4.64 ft2 Therefore: Calculated L= -6 it ' Check Results: L>3D Minimum L= 7.5 ft •L<1 OD Maximum L= 25 ft •'A%cn Q/D''<6 ' Use L= 8 feet Maximum Depth: ' D=2dso Use D= 18 inches Riprap Width: W=3D Use W= 8 feet 1 .j`' - -� `�`� _ :� s �' -�=-�l►Riprap esign•-.Circuldr'�sOutfdll - �.�.t,=�: ••�--, Project#: FC0195 Project Name: 2003 Elementary School N� Calculated By: GAD Date: 5/9/2002 eEroNo ENGINEERING ' Calculations per Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Section 5.6.2_Required Rock Size and Section 5.6.3 Extent of Protection ' Location: Storm Drain 300 outfalling to pond. Outfall Pipe Diameter,in: -30 - Velocity,ft/s:' 6.00 Q,re•cfs; 29.44 Depth of flow,ft:- . 2:5 ' Tailwater depth,ft: 3.09- Froude Number: 0.67 subcritical Where,F=V/(g1)0.5 F>0.80,supercritical flow F<0.80,subcritical flow ' Required Rock Size. a. Q/DZ•s= 2.98 Q/DI's= 7.45 b. YeD= 1.24 ' c• (d*/D)(Y/D)t.2/(Q/D")=0.023 From Figure 5-7, Use Type' L w Riprap ' dso 9.09''` inches !f the flow in the culvert is supercritical,substitute D.for D. Where: D.=t/2(D+Y.) Therefore: D,= n/a ft a'. QID,u= n/a Q/D.t's= n/a b YMS= n/a c.. (dsdD.)(YMJ'2/(Q/D.2)=0.023 From Figure 5-7, ' Use Type N/A'` :Riprap dso=l" inches Extent of Protection: ' L=(1/(2tan0))(AfY,-W) Where: 1/(2tan8)='6.bperFigure5-9-- ,_ ' A�QN Where,V=acceptable velocity,5.5 fps A,. 5.35 ft2 Therefore: Calculated L= -5 ft ' Check Results: L>3D Minimum L= 7.5 ft 'L<1 OD Maximum L= 25 ft When Q/D-s<6 Use L= 8 feet Maximum Depth: D—2dsc Use D= 18 inches Riprap Width: W=3D Use W= 8 feet Profile 1 Scenario: 100 Year Event , i i 1 1 ' 1 . 1 Label:MH-201 Label:SDI-400 Rim:4,957.49 it Rim:4,957.09 It Label:-SD6200 Sump:4,952.64 ft Sump:4,953.27 ft Label:ISDI-202 Label:SDI-201 1 Rim:4R54.75 ft 4,958.00 Label:SDI-204 Label:SDI-203 I Rim.-4�54-13-ft Rim:4!.9.54.50_ft Rim:9 9.54 501t I Sump: ft Sum 4,950.16 ft Sum 4,956.00 1 Label:MH-202 � Sump•4 948.20ft � Sump:4,949.26ft P=; p.4,951.01 ft 1 Rim:4,951.50 It 4,954.00 Label:OUTLET-200 SumpA-.94.7.10_ft I i Elevation(fQ Rim: 4,952.00 Sump:4,946.26 ft 4,950.00 4,948.00 I I Station(ft) 4,946.00 0+00 2+00 4+00 6+00 8+00 10+00 12+00 14+00 Label: Up.invert ert 4,947.77 ft Label:P-207 Label:P-206 Label:P-204 Label:P-202 Up.invert 4,948.87 ft Up.invert 4,949.93 ft Up.Invert 4,951.68 ft Up.Invert 4,953.31 ft Dn.Invert 4.946.26 ft Dn.invert 4,947.87 ft Dn.invert 4,948.97 ft Dn.Invert 4,950.93 ft Dn.Invert 4,952.25 ft 1 L:302.20 ft L:201.38 ft 'L:191.02 ft L:150.00 ft L:132.26 ft Size:30 inch Size:30 inch Size:30 inch Size:30 inch S:04997 fVft S:0.004966 ftlft S:0.005026 ftfft S:0.005000 fvft Size: inch .00 S:0.008015 Nfft 1 Label:P-205 Label:P-203 Label:P-201 Up.Invert 4,950.83 ft Up.Invert 4,952.15 it Up.Invert 4,953:94 ft Dn.Invert 4,950.03 ft Dn.invert 4.951.78 it Dn.Invert 4,953.51 ft L.160.28 ft L:73.20 ft L:42.62 It Size:30 inch Size:30 inch Size:24 inch 1 S:0.004991 ftlft S:0.005055 fvft S:0.010089 Wit 1 1 Title:20134 Elementary School Project Engineer:GAD n:\fc01951drainagelstorrncad\fc0195-stmc.stm Notte Associates Inc 05/09/02 09:30:58 AM StonnCAD v4.1.1 i4.2014a] O Haestad Methods.Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666. i Pagel of.1 Profile ' Scenario: 100-Year Event 17 Label: SD{-301 Label:SDI-300 Label: MH-302 Label: MH-301 Rim: 4,955.71 ft Rim: 4,954.32 ft ' Label: MH-303 Rim: 4,955.10 ft Sum 4 Sump: 4,949.83 ft Rim:4,95_4_3.O�t p: ,949.36 ft f im:14,9b3� Sump: 4,947.38 ft I I Sar p=4;948 74-ft 4,956.00 Sump: 4,946.53 ft 4,954.00 Label: OUTLET-300 - Rim: 4-9�8�fi I � � i i 4,952.00Elevation {ft) Sump: 4,946.16 ft i i 4,950.00 I f 4,948.00 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 Station (ft) .5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 946.00 Label:P-304 Label: P-303 Label: P-302 Label: P-301 ' Up. Invert: 4,947.20 ft Up. Invert: 4,948.05 ft Up. Invert: 4,949.41 ft Up. Invert 4,950.03 ft Dn. Invert 4,946.16 ft Dn. Invert 4,947.30 ft Dn. Invert: 4,948.15 ft Dn. Invert: 4,949.51 ft L: 261.00 ft L: 187.22 ft L: 249.20 ft L: 103.71 ft Size:30 inch Size: 30 inch Size:24 inch Size:24 inch ' S:0.003985 ft/ft S: 0.004006 ft/ft S:0.005056 ft/ft S: 0.005014 ft/ft Label: P-300 Up. Invert 4,950.50 ft Dn. Invert 4,950.13 ft L: 74.52 ft Size:24 inch S: 0.004965 ft/ft ' Title:2004 Elementary School n:1fc01951drainagelsto Project Engineer.GAD mtcad\fc0195-stmc stm Nolte Associates Inc StonnCAD v4.1.1 [4.2014a] 05/09/02 09:32:33 AM ®Haestad Methods,'Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury.CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 i i Profile ' Scenario: 100-Year Event ' Label:MH-302 Rim:4,954.30 ft Sump:4,947.35 4,955.00 l I Label:SDI-303A ' beF~SDI303B Rim:4 4,954.00 Rim:4,952.42 ft 952 77 t�— Sump�4.948.f 6 ft I Strrrip:4;948 t 2 ft l 4,953.00 4,952.00 pev ti a on (ft) i 1 4,951.00 I4,950.00 J U" 4,949.00 ; 4,948.00 i 14,947.00 ' 4+40 4+60 4+80 5+00 5+20 5+40 5+60 5+80 6+00 Station (ft) ' Label:P-303B Label:P-303A Up. Invert:4,948.79 ft Up. Invert:4,949.33 ft Dn. Invert:4,948.55 ft Dn. Invert:4,948.89 ft L:47.65 ft L: 88.43 ft ' Size: 12 inch Size: 12 inch S: 0.005037 ft/ft S: 0.004976 Wit ' Title:2004 Elementary School Project Engineer:GAD n:\fc0195\drainage%stormpd\fc0195-stmc.stm Nolte Associates Inc StormCAD v4.1.1 [4.2014ai 05/09/02 09:33:42 AM O Haestad Methods,Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,C7 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Profile ' Scenario: 100-Year Event Label: SDI-100 Rm:4,958.10 ft Sump:4,95 A A IN ft' 4,959.00 Label:TEE-1 j Fdm--4,957.40 tt— 14,958.00 Sump:4,953.45 ft Label: MH-301 = 4,957.00 Rm:4,955 In ft Sump:4,948.74 ft 4,956.00 4,955.00 4,954.00 Bevation (ft) ' { 4,953.00 14,952.00 ' 4,951.00 4,950.00 ' ' 4,949.00 t i I i 4,948.00 6+80 7+00 7+20 7+40 7+60 7+80 8+00 8+20 8+40 ' Station (ft) 3 ' Label: R105 Label: P 104 Up. Invert 4,953.45 ft Up. Invert 4,954.40 ft Dn. Invert 4,949.91 ft Dn. Invert 4,953.45 ft L: 106.78 ft L:28.83 ft ' Size: 18 inch Size: 18 inch S:0.033152 ft/ft S: 0.032952 fttft 1 Title:2004 Elementary School Project Engineer.GAD n:\fc0195\drainage\stormcad\fc0195-stmc.stm Nolte Associates Inc StormCAD v4.1.1 (4.2014a] 05/09/02 09:44:27 AM 0 Haestad Methods,Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1.203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Profile Scenario: 100-Year Event ' Label: SDI-101 Label: CQ102 Rim: 4,958.35 ft Rim: 4,958.30 ft Sump: 4,955.90 ft Sump: 4,955.06 ft 4,958.50 ' — 4,957.00 Label:TEE-101 Elevation (ft) Rim: 4,957.40 ft 4,956.00 Sump: 4,953.45 ft i ' -- 4,955.00 + 4,954.00 4,953.00 8+00 8+20 8+40 8+60 8+80 9+00 9+20 ' Station (ft) Label: P-103 Label: P-102 ' Up. Invert: 4,955.73 ft Up. Invert 4,955.90 ft Dn. Invert 4,953.86 ft Dn. Invert: 4,955.83 ft L: 102.50 ft L: 3.99 ft ' Size: 8 inch Size:8 inch S: 0.018244 ft/ft S: 0.017544 ft/ft ' Title:2004 Elementary School Project Engineer:GAD n:\fc0195\drainage\stonncad\fc0195-stmc.stm Nolte Associates Inc StormCAD v4.1.1 [4.2014a) 05/09/02 09:45:35 AM 0 Haestad Methods,Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury.CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 y � r { S � • Yx r DETENTION/WATER QUALTITY POND DESIGN OY +ti •'u r L` ••� 4 y � L - t A � a F t �r �. etenfion on""" o um Ccnlafion . _ Project#1: FC0195 Project Name: 2003 Elementary School NO Calculated By: GAD ' Date: 3/30/2002 BEYOND ENGINEERING Detention pond volume(V): 1/3d(A+B+(AB)0'5) (uniform sides) ' Where: V= Volume between contours,ft3 d=Depth between contours,ft A= Surface area of contour line,ft' ' B=Surface area of contour line at a depth relevant to d,A' Required Volume Cummulative Cummulative Per Volume Elevation DQ A B Volume Volume Volume FAA+W CV I ft ft2 ft'` ft3 ft3 ac-ft ' Vo 1 4943.75 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.001 0.00 V, I 4944.00 0.25 0 j 567 47 47 0.00 1 VZ i 4945.00 1.00 " 567 2,954 1,605 1,652 0.04 V3 4946.00 I 1.00 ( 2,954 i 7 rye 1 4,852 I 6,504 0.15 j ' 0.231 I Vwo I 4946.44 i 0.23 I V, I 4947.00 1.00 I 7,041 ; 8.866 7,936 14,440 0.33 I Vs I 4948.00 1.00 8,866 10.198 9,524 ; 23,964 0.55 ' V, I 4949.00 1.00 10,198 14,047 12,071 I 36,035 0.83 0.696 VtOO 4949.25 I 0.93 I V7 I 4950.00 1.00 14,047 I21,193 17,498 I 53,533 1.23 ' V, I 4951.00 1.00 21,193 ( 34.812 27,723 81,256 1.87 V9 4952.00 1.00 34,812 49.094 41,749 I 123,005 2.82 Nolte Associates,Inc. ' 313012002 10:48 AM DETEI7ION POND SIZING BY FAA METHOD Developed by Civil Eng. Dept., U. of Colorado Supported by Dearer Metro Cities/Counties Pool Fund Study Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Colorado 1 USER=Nolte Associates, Inc.. . ... ......... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .... . . .. . . . . . EXECUTED ON 03-30-2002 AT TIME 10:22:48 PROJECT TITLE: 2003 Elementary School ' **** DRAINAGE BASIN DESCRIPI-TON 1 BASIN ID NUMBER 501 BASIN AREA (a=re)= 11.84 RUNOFF COEF 0.69 ***** DESIGN RAINFALL STA-:STICS ' DESIGN RETURN PERIOD (YEARS) = 100.00 RAINFALL INTENSITY-DURATION FORMULA IS GIVEN I(IN/HR)=CONSTI*Hl/(T+CONST2)"CONST3 ' ONE-HOUR DEPTH (INCK2S)= 2.60 CONST 1 = 28.5 CONST 2 = 10 CONST 3 = .786 POND OUTFLOW CHARACTERISTICS: MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE F=LEASE RATE 17.1 CFS OUTFLOW ADJUST?e-T�*I F ACTOR = 1 AVERAGE RELEASE RAT= 17.1 CFS ' AVERAGE RELEASE RATE = MAXIMUM RELEASE RATE * ADJUSTMENT FACTOR. ***** COMPUTATION OF POND SIZE ----------------------------------------------------- RAINFALL RAINFALL INF:,OW OUTFLOW REQUIRED DURATION INTENSITY VOL ME VOLUME STORAGE MINUTE INCH/HR ACRE-FT ACRE-FT ACRE-FT ----------------------------------------------------- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 8.82 0.50 0.12 0.38 10.00 7.03 0.80 0.24 0.56 ' 20.00 -5.11 1.16 _ 0.47 0.69 20.00 5.11 1.16 0.47 0.69 25y.`00 �- 453-_s;_ ? '1-29 0 59� 0:70, 30.00 4.08 1.39 0.71 0.68 35.00 3.72 1.48 0.82 0.65 ' 40.00 3.42 1.55 0.94 0.61 45.00 3.18 1.62 1.06 0.56 50.00 2.97 1.68 1.18 0.51 55.00 2.79 1.74 1.30 0.44 ---------------------------------------------------- THE REQUIRED POND SIZE = .6364109 ACRE-FT THE RAINFALL DURATION FOR -:E ABOVE POND STORAGE= 25 MINUTES 1 1 N 1 ' Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) - Sedimentation Facility Sheet 1 of 3 ' Designer: 6-,&4> Company: No11c Assxac�les �r.L Date: M1A.;?c.H 30 ?sDZ Project: FC014S Location: 5.��t, ' 1. Basin Storage Volume la= 45.77 % ' A)Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio(i = la/ 100 ) i= 0.46 B) Contributing Watershed Area (Area) Area= 11.84 acres C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) WQCV= 0.19 watershed inches (WQCV=1.0* (0.91 ' 13- 1.19* 12+ 0.78 * 1)) D) Design Volume:Vol = (WQCV/ 12)*Area* 1.2 Vol= 0.231 acre-feet ' 2. Outlet Works A) Outlet Type(Check One) X Orifice Plate Perforated Riser Pipe ' Other: ' B) Depth at Outet Above Lowest Perforation(H) H= 2.69 feet C) Required Maximum Outlet Area per Row, (A,) A.= 039 square inches ' D) Perforation Dimensions(enter one only): i) Circular Perforation Diameter OR D= 0.6880 inches, OR ii)2"Height Rectangular Perforation Width W = inches ' E) Number of Columns (nc, See Table 6a-1 For Maximum) nc= 1 number ' F) Actual Design Outlet Area per Row(k) Ao= 0:37� T square inches G) Number of Rows(nr) nr= 8' number ' H) Total Outlet Area(AoJ - Ao,_ i3`00-., '='-square inches ' 3. Trash Rack A) Needed Open Area:A,=0.5* (Figure 7 Value)*Ao, A,= 106 square inches ' B) Type of Outlet Opening (Check One) X <2"Diameter Round 2"High Rectangular Other: C) For 2",or Smaller, Round Opening (Ref.: Figure 6a): i) Width of Trash Rack and Concrete Opening (W,,„,) N from Table 6a-1 _ Wro„�- 6 inches ii) Height of Trash Rack Screen (HTR) HTR= "56 inches 1 FC0195_WaterQuality.xls, EDB .�, =_ .Qr"i ice Plate Calcu ations. Proj1 ect#: FC0195 Project Name: 2003 Elementary School Calculated By: GAD B E Y O N D E N G I N E E R I N G Date: 3/30/2002 Design Point-- 501 , Orifice Calculation: ' Rim Elevation= •4946.44 Q.=CA(2gH)os 100-yr Ponding Elev= 4949:25 Invert Our-- := --4943.75 ' Allowable Release Rate= '..1-71 cfs H= 5.50 R C= 0.65 ' g= 32.2 fVs Q= 17.10 cfs ' Ac= 1.40 f1' Diameter of Orifice: ' Nolte Associates,Inc. .r.' ny itk '4�� S� -• � .. k f x' 5 } EROSION CONTROL C°ALCULATION5 } f y� W Y t> a Vr' a A � ,• -u -Mal A .t.4 n'. ..vaiT 4 '. '"c •:. ._._•ay aEi�..LR;" :•.- .-.2m6� ��vill$LI�W'-i�°4.rV9!'.t...�..r .Ji - 1 1 A79-1 1tF L P ORMANGE ST'91VD ;Y U �7a10 Project#: FC0195 Project Name: 2003 Elementary School ' Calculated By: GAD Date: 4/16/2002 BEYOND ENGIN EERI N G STANDARD FORM A DEVELOPED ERODIBILITY Asb Lsb Ssb Lb Sb PS ' SUB-BASIN ZONE ac (ft) (%) (ft (%) (% 100 MODERATE/MODERATE* 1.05 180.00 0.50 101 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.11 118.00 0.50 ' 200 MODERATE/MODERATE* 1.43 315.00 1.16 201 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.14 93.00 4.09 202 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.10 79.00 4.43 203 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.23 155.00 2.75 ' 204 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.61 207.00 2.38 300 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.72 344.00 2.73 301 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.16 140.00 2.18 302 MODERATEIMODERATE* 1.33 760.00 0.99 ' 303 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.84 209.00 2.23 304 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.41 315.00 0.66 305 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.37 302.00 0.66 ' 400 MODERATE/MODERATE* 1.51 691.00 0.83 401 MODERATE/MODERATE* 3.27 665.00 0.40 402 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.83 333.00 0.87 403 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.61 270.00 1.09 404 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.34 216.00 L73 500 MODERATE/MODERATE* 2.58 497.00 1.41 501 MODERATE/MODERATE* 0.62 60.00 0.50 ' 17.26 439.51 1.15 78.03 *-MODERATE WIND ERODIBILITY ZONE&MODERATE RAINFALL ERODIBILITY ZONE ' Lb=sum(AiLi)/(sum(Ai)_ (1.05*180+...+0.62*60)/17.26 439.51 ' Sb=sum(AiSi)/(sum(Ai)_ (1.05*0.5+...+0.62*0.5)/l7.26 1.15 ' PS(during construction)= 78.03 (from Table 8-A) PS(after construction)=78.03/0.85= 91.80 1 1 ' Notte Associates, Inc. ��_ FF�EETlVENESs C0 1ZGUlA.TIIDNS+DURING G'UN_STRUCTION 41 Project#: FC0195 Project Name: 2003 Elementary School Np Calculated By: GAD Date: 4/172002 BEYOND ENGINEERING ' STANDARD FORM B EROSION CONTROL C-FACTOR P-FACTOR COMMENTS ' METHOD VALUE VALUE BARE SOIL 1 1.00 0.90 GRAVEL MULCH 2 O-05 1.00 ' STRAW-HAY MULCH 3 0.06 L00 HYDRAULIC MULCH 4 0.10 1.00 ESTAaustlEl)GWSCOVER 5 0.35 1.00 PAVEMENT 6 0.01 1.00 i1TtAW BA1F.GRAVEL.FTLi£R 7 I.00 0.80 SILT FENCE BARRIER 8 1.00 0,50 SUB PS AREA BASIN (%) ac) ' SITE 78.03 17.26 SUB SUB AREA PRACTICE C•A P•A REMARKS BASIN AREA ac ' 100 PERVIOUS 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 BARE SOIL 100 IMPERVIOUS 1.05 6 0.01 1.05 PAVEMENT 101 PERVIOUS 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 BARE SOIL 101 IMPERVIOUS 0.11 6 0.00 0.11 PAVEMENT 200 PERVIOUS 0.57 3 0.03 0.57 STRAW-HAY MULCH 200 RaERVIOUS 0.86 6 0.01 0.86 PAVEMENT 201 PERVIOUS 0.12 7 0.12 0.10 STRAW BALE,GRAVEL FILTER 201 IMPERVIOUS 0.02 6 0.00 0.02 PAVEMENT 202 PERVIOUS 0.09 7 0.09 0.07 STRAW BALE,GRAVEL FILTER ' 202 IMPERVIOUS 0.01 2 0.00 0.01 GRAVEL MULCH 203 PERVIOUS 0.18 7 0.18 0.14 STRAW BALE,GRAVEL FILTER 203 IMPERVIOUS 0.05 2 0.00 0.05 GRAVEL MULCH 204 PERVIOUS 0.57 7 0.57 0.46 STRAW BALE,GRAVEL FILTER 204 IMPERVIOUS 0.04 2 0.00 0.04 GRAVEL MULCH ' 300 PERVIOUS 0.13 1 0.01 0.13 BARE SOIL 300 IMPERVIOUS 0.60 6 0.01 0.60 PAVEMENT 301 PERVIOUS 0.05 3 0.00 0.05 STRAW-HAY MULCH 301 IMPERVIOUS 0.10 2 0.01 0.10 GRAVEL MULCH ' 302 PERVIOUS 0,31 3 0,02 0.31 STRAW-HAY MULCH 302 IMPERVIOUS 1.02 2 0,05 1.02 GRAVEL MULCH 303 PERVIOUS 0.75 7 0,75 0.60 STRAW BALE,GRAVEL FILTER 303 IMPERVIOUS 0.09 2 0.00 0.09 GRAVEL MULCH 304 PERVIOUS 0.16 3 0.01 0,16 STRAW-HAY MULCH ' 304 IMPERVIOUS 0.25 6 0.00 0.25 PAVEMENT 305 PERVIOUS 0.07 3 0.00 0.07 STRAW-HAY MULCH 305 IMPERVIOUS 0.31 6 0.00 0.31 PAVEMENT 400 PERVIOUS 0.28 8 0.28 0.14 SILT FENCE BARRIER 400 IMPERVIOUS 1.22 6 0.01 1.22 PAVEMENT ' Soo PERVIOUS 2.58 4 0.26 2.58 HYDRAULIC MULCH 500 IMPERVIOUS 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 GRAVEL MULCH 501 PERVIOUS 0.62 4 0.06 0.62 HYDRAULIC MULCH 501 IMPERVIOUS 0,00 2 0.00 0.00 GRAVEL MULCH ' Cnet=(0.1+...+0'0.05)1(0+...+0)= 0,20 ' Pnet=(0.1+...+0"1}1(0+...+0)= 0.96 EFF=(1-C`P)100=(1-0.2`0.96)100 80.8 NN:1FC01951DrainagekExceP4FC0195 Erosion_Control.xts]DURING ' We Associates,Inc. NESS�C�4LCULAr770NS R CONSTRUCT310N Project aim: 2003 Elementary School Np Calculated By: GAD Date: 4/17/2002 BEYOND ENGINEERING ' STANDARD FORM B ' EROSION CONTROL C,FACTOR P-FACTOR COMMENTS METHOD VALUE VALUE BARE SOIL 1 1.00 0.90 GRAVEL MULCH 2 O.05 1.00 ' STRAW-HAY MULCH 3 0.06 1.00 HYDRAULIC MULCH 4 0.10 1.00 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 5 0.06 1.00 PAVEMENT 6 0.01 1.00 ' SUB PS AREA BASIN (%) ac ' SITE 91.80 17.26 SUB SUB AREA PRACTICE C'A P'A REMARKS BASIN AREA (ac ' 100 PERVIOUS 0.00 5 0.00 0.00 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 100 IMPERVIOUS 1.05 6 0.01 1.05 PAVEMENT 101 PERVIOUS 0.00 5 0.00 0.00 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 101 ,MPERVOUS 0.11 6 0.00 0.11 PAVEMENT 200 PERVIOUS 0.57 5 0.03 0.57 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER ' 200 IMPERVIOUS 0.86 6 0.01 0.86 PAVEMENT 201 PERVIOUS 0.12 5 0.01 0.12 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 201 IMPERVIOUS 0.02 6 0.00 0.02 PAVEMENT 202 PERVIOUS 0.09 5 0.01 0.09 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER ' 202 IMPERVIOUS 0.01 6 0.00 0.01 PAVEMENT 203 PERVIOUS 0.18 5 0.01 0.18 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 203 IMPERVIOUS 0.05 6 0.00 0.05 PAVEMENT 204 PERVIOUS 0.57 5 0.03 0.57 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 204 IMPERVIOUS 0.04 6 0.00 0.04 PAVEMENT ' 300 PERVIOUS 0.13 5 0.01 0.13 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 300 IMPERVIOUS 0.60 6 0.01 0.60 PAVEMENT 301 PERVIOUS 0.05 5 0.00 0.05 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 301 IMPERVIOUS 0.10 6 0.00 0.10 PAVEMENT 302 PERVIOUS 0.31 5 0.02 0.31 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER ' 302 IMPERVIOUS 1.02 6 0.01 1.02 PAVEMENT 303 PERVIOUS 0.73 5 0.05 0.75 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 303 IMPERVIOUS 0.09 6 0.00 0.09 PAVEMENT 304 PERVIOUS 0.16 5 0.01 0.16 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER ' 304 IMPERVIOUS 0.25 6 0.00 0.25 PAVEMENT 305 PERVIOUS 0.07 5 0.00 0.07 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 305 IMPERVIOUS 0.31 6 0.00 0.31 PAVEMENT 400 PERVIOUS 0.28 5 0.02 0.28 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 400 IMPERVIOUS 1.22 6 0.01 1.22 PAVEMENT ' Soo PERVIOUS 2.58 5 0.15 2.58 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 500 IMPERVIOUS 0.00 6 0.00 0.00 PAVEMENT 501 PERVIOUS 0.62 5 0.04 0.62 ESTABLISHED GRASS COVER 501 IMPERVIOUS 0.00 6 0.00 0.00 PAVEMENT ' Cnet=(0.1+...+0'0.05Y(0+...+0)= 0.04 Pnet=(0'1+...+0'1 u(0+...+0)= 1.00 ' EFF=(1-C'P)100=(1-0.04'1)100 96 > 91.80(PS) N:\FC01951Drainage)Excel)[FC0195_Erosion_Control.xlsAFTER ' Nolte Associates,Inc. 1 BIWA '' EROSIU,NfCO tROL C�NSTRrICTIDNSE IlENCE �• '�"' r Project#: FC0195 N Project Name: 2003 Elementary School Calculated By: GAD ' Date: 4/17/2002 BEYOND ENGINEERING STANDARD FORM B Sequence for 2002 thru 2003 Indicate by use of a bar line or symbols when erosion control measures will be installed. Major modifications to an approved schedule may require submitting a new schedule for ' approval by the City Engineer. Year 2002 2003 Month A M I J I J A I S O N D J F M A M PJ J A ' Overlot GradingMmm Wind Erosion Control ' Soil Roughening Perimeter Barrier Additional Barriers Vegetative Methods ' Soil Sealant Other Rainfall Erosion Control Structural: Sediment Trap/Basin ' Inlet Filters Straw Barriers Silt Fence Barriers Sand Bags ' Bare Soil Preparation Contour Furrows Terracing Asphalt/Concrete Paving Other Vegetative: Permanent Seed Planting ' Mulching/Sealant Temporary Seed Planting Sod Installation Nettings/Mats/Elan lets ' Other ' STRUCTURES: INSTALLED BY MAINTAINED BY VEGETATION/MULCHING CONTRACTOR ' DATE SUBMITTED APPROVED BY CITY OF FORT COLLINS N:\FC0195\Drainage\Excel\[FC0195_Erosion_Control.xls}construction Nolte Associates,Inc. •ti:a r �• tA 3�ta DEIGN CHARTS � A6LE:5; AND GRAPHS e ,T "mot t t Ez 2 4r r s 3 Tabie 3-3 RATIONAL METHOD RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS FOR_COMPOSITE ANALYSIS ' Character of Surface Runoff Coefficient Streets, Parking Lots, Drives: Asphalt ................................................................................................ 0.95 Concrete ............................................................................................. 0.95 Gravel ........................................................... ............... 0.50 Roofs .......................................................................................................... 0.95 t Lawns,Sandy Soil: Flat<2% ............................................................................................. 0.10 Average2 to 7% .................................................................................. 0.15 Steep >7%....................................................... ............ 0.20 ....................... ' Lawns,Heavy Soil: Fiat<20/6 ............................................................................................. 0.20 Average2 to 7% .................................................................................. 0.25 ' Steep>7% .......................................................................................... 0.35 ' MAY 1984 3-4 DESIGN CRfTERIA Table 3-4 RATIONAL METHOD FREQUENCY ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ' Storm Return period Frequency Factor (Years) G ' 2 to 10 1.00 11 to25 1.10 26 to 50 1.20 51 to 100 1 25 Note:The product of C bmes'Cf shall not exceed 1.00 .f DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF N so 30 I ) I 1 l ' z 20 �e t Z la 1 L)cc LU IL z 10 , �We , z t o I I I Z ! G A v I i ~ W I ? eW !pe '0 hO Uj 2 a� 1 I ! I I I t I ! I I I ! I ! 4 1 1 1 1I I I I I I 5 I 1 1 4 I I 1 .2 .3 .5 1 2 3 5 10 20 ' VELOCITY IN FEET PER SECOND ' FIGURE RO-1 Estimate of Average Overland Flow Velocity for Use With the Rational Formula TABLE RO-2 ' Conveyance Coefficient, C. Type of Land Surface Conveyance Coefficient. C,. ' Heavy meadow 2.5 Tina elfieid 5 Short pasture and lawns I 7 ' Nearty bare around 10 Grassed waterway I 15 Paved areas and shallow paved swales 20 ' 0612001 RO-13 Urban Drainage and Flood Contra!District Ell I MEMBERS s a;�s�:. :�����;a�_ ` _vv fiOLai �' •+ '/ �` �'J e►iLib� W�d16.Z V'ar6Si� .ZL'fyFi� C{`�iP ya�L- fad] !�'ry ]g � 7� �l'rrC•>) .n RwY:L.Y.t�uT'a S� � r-7•i� [ � (� �t i y��•i����1ii!�� 74t�w..q � r'i[f. 5� r �S'1. rl�F"[ y 13 t. _�;JJ yy ��99 ��]] t ,p} r R Ira vr• _ m w3111,410171 It�L �.. VL - ?1- V- L .•s3'a1��(isl���.c -�t23!`J"'61..'���gr[L71�i✓:'�;� j i� ^+1(.�rj? '9 a'G(>• [i��sr 'i�4�SRda�-� 6ID ead)t.���ie]-'� ! d +e°�lt ..S �% 'i t 7 r: 3 +J °? 1� r �z�{]i 4 Saab E�]a.]• _ 3A ifi R_I17*.z��flww � asyq .�'}.r.�tiql �r tlll .irr - Lc 61i �.rii�.a.S� K1/5i 3..ri ^' t �' - f j4��t< -lalti 9 • ; F n�Y-�rq�' ']i} "5 r�%591W2�B ��Ywi3 L�f x Ill f .4 Tito • `d� d rt1.e .a I.1n+F !(yn'{(>jty£t�R''NZ�1 ,� la S �.7��� 1� ! q, Mal ays�+u Y laGij t 7`3]' l r]i J•.�a't_{.eS.7- ) � a�{.awl L.lt+eLL�'�utc y 7.'tl yvf7 eICf9 ��t • 3`7E7`sZ�R�; a?q..rt+e uiinc3eSla o�i; .•`.�t_xG�r_ cur .� 4`'� I f � 7 r�' yy 7 *-) .y�4 I"la t•lti Fl�'27 • ��$�4E£;yt nn yz]+ sre�tz¢¢]] R � .'�lJ,.� c '�..c: - t� �3� .x c � 11r i R .)[F�"�� l• CS - - 75nZ A9•� 1�]'.if AY'�La'�� • • y trIC60w�t.G� ta. t'���N aG4yy�i,+:u ���� {� a t'i r 3 11f ]LI__ L7. �� it r3W.abtltla, 'St w l t {� 4 $ �Y7�''7�nq�ti�g @y15� � � •�•I��+w Yy 3��a� ] 'Sn�..l��,_��a. � � -y = � r .t3<"la.u� ss�tfim)PLilil�:$tt� may, 1 l • LYSL� Cci .IG9 637.E t"� '9 '3tFg � �,�^'� La�eu�(r�7 , � i�z.3y..f r� E;r' '�i EM �t`?.tg1�� L�` ii312313Ly1d:i'vL6: J� �.`J�f�(";� hC:1fi.,L?c:�rt �'1' i< (a`'��r6[ s 9$r1}S ]?7 vNa^imaf• 4 .a-'4.0 ,d �. Y• 4 t_ �• ����.� a � y,. �F' d���`i1$I L.tu 'td7d�u! �;9�F�,a��Jay-��.7cogs rcN��K•,a R�, ��7•` r.r HIM REMEMBER ��gp���ii.FGZI�i��a��t'i rPttty�A'��EiG�p�p bpqi �®f�!f�•wc. 55tj n1`�'ftl��;�.�� � ��Ii��QA � LE! �J6f5iS��Y7�..`��nLrjCl�dStaY. iit�r5 '.��:�s3•',-�e.�'�u � _ City of Fort Collins ' Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table for using the Rational Method (5 minutes - 30 minutes) ' Figure 3-1 a Duration 2-year 10-year 100-year ' (minutes) Intensity Intensity Intensity in/hr in/hr in/hr 5.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 ' 6.00 2.67 4.56 9.31 7.00 2.52 4.31 8.80 8.00 2.40 4.10 8.38 ' 9.00 2.30 3.93 8.03 10.00 2.21 3.78 7.72 11.00 2.13 3.63 7.42 ' 12.00 2.05 3.50 7.16 13.00 1.98 3.39 6.92 14.00 1.92 3.29 1 6.71 15.00 1.87 3.19 6.52 16.00 1.81 3.08 6.30 17.00 1.75 2.99 6.10 ' 18.00 1.70 2.90 5.92 19.00 1.65 2.82 5.75 20.00 1.61 2.74 5.60 ' 21.00 1.56 2.67 5.46 22.00 1.53 2.61 1 5.32 23.00 1.49 2.55 5.20 ' 24.00 1.46 2.49 5.09 25.00 1.43 2.44 4.98 26.00 1.40 2.39 4.87 ' 27.00 1.37 2.34 4.78 28.00 1.34 2.29 4.69 29.00 1.32 2.25 4.60 ' 30.00 1.30 2.21 4.52 1 1 T City of Fort Collins ' Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table for using the Rational Method (31 minutes - 60 minutes) ' Figure 3-1 b Duration 2-year 10-year 100-year ' (minutes) intensity Intensity Intensity in/hr in/hr in/hr 31.00 1.27 2.16 4.42 ' 32.00 1.24 2.12 4.33 33.00 1.22 2.08 4.24 34.00 1.19 2.04 4.16 ' 35.00 1.17 2.00 4.08 36.00 1.15 1.96 4.01 37.00 1.13 1.93 3.93 38.00 1.11 1.89 3.87 39.00 1.09 1.86 3.80 40.00 1.07 1.83 3.74 41.00 1.05 1.80 3.68 42.00 1.04 1.77 3.62 43.00 1.02 1.74 3.56 44.00 1.01 1.72 3.51 45.00 0.99 1.69 3.46 46.00 0.98 1.67 3.41 47.00 0.96 1.64 3.36 48.00 0.95 1.62 3.31 49.00 0.94 1.60 3.27 ' 50.00 0.92 1.58 3.23 51.00 0.91 1.56 3.18 52.00 0.90 1.54 3.14 ' 53.00 0.89 1.52 3.10 54.00 0.88 1.50 3.07 55.00 0.87 1.48 3.03 56.00 0.86 1.47 2.99 57.00 0.85 1.45 2.96 58.00 0.84 1.43 2.92 ' 59.00 0.83 1.42 2.89 60.00 0.82 1.40 2.86 f.. ' .9 1 ' F =0 8 . .8 I .7 U- ' o .6 � I kU I (I 5 =0.4% F. p5 I I 1 5 o Uj U i tr .4 1 .3 I I BELOW MINIMUM ' 4LLOWABL£ J STREET GRADE .2 I ' .I 1 .0 ' 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 SLOPE OF GUTTER ' Figure 4-2 REDUCTION FACTOR FOR ALLOWABLE GUTTER CAPACITY Apply reduction factor for applicable slope to the theoretical gutter capacity to obtain allowable gutter capacity. (From: U.S. Dept. of Commerce,Bureau of Public Roads, 1965) ' MAY 1984 4-4 DESIGN CRfTERiA ' DRAINAGE CRITERIA TER MANUAL NU L RIPRAP 1 60 J 0 40 ' 5�QIle, 20 TYPE 00 .2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 Yt/D Use Do instead of D whenever flow is supercritical in the barrel. ** Use Type L for a distance of 30 downsrream . ' FIGURE 5-7 RIPRAP EROSION PROTECTION AT. CIRCULAR CONDUIT OUTLET. ' 11--15-82 URBAN DRAINAGE a FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 1 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL RIPRAP 1 1 ' 9 = Expansion Angle 8 7 I 6 /1"�11171 77771,100 �c a D Q J_ c� 5 h � p O 4 O z 6� 1 z .0001, a 2 ' w //"04 / 1 0 0 .l .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 ' TAILWATER DEPTH/ CONDUIT HEIGHT, Y t/ D 1 FIGURE 5-9. EXPANSION FACTOR FOR CIRCULAR CONDUITS 11-15-82 URBAN DRAINAGE 8 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT ' Orifice PI ate Perforation Sizin Circular Perforotion Sizin ' Chart may be applied to orifice plate or vertical Pipe outlet. Hole Diu Hole DiC'Min. Area per Row (sq in) (in) ' (in) n=1 n=2 n=3 ' 1 4 0.250 1 1 0.05 0.10 0.15 5/16 0.313 2 0.08 i 0.15, 1 0.23 3/8 1 0.375 1 2 0.11 1 0.22 1 0.33 7/16 0.438 2 0.15 0.30 0.45 1/2 0.500 2 1 0.20 0.39 I 0.59 9/16 0.563 3 0.25 0.50 I 0.75 5/8 0.625 3 0.31 0.61 1 0.92 11/16 0.588 3 0.37 1 0.74 1 1.11 ' 3 4 0.750 1 3 0.44 0.88 1 1.33 13 16 0.813 3 0.52 1.04 1.56 7 8 0.875 3 0.60 1.20 1 1.80 15/16 0.938 3 0.69 1.38 207 1 I 1.000 4 0.79 1 1.57 1 236 t l 16 1.063 I 4 I 0.89 1.77 2.66 1 1 8 I 1.125 I 4 0.99 1 1.99 2.98 1 3 16 1.185 4 1.11 1 2.22 3.32 ' 1 1 4 1.250 4 1.23 2.45 I 3.68 I 1 5 16 1.313 4 i.35 I 2.71 I 4.06 1 3 8 1-375 4 1.48 297 I 4.45 1 7 16 1.438 4 1.62 3.25 I 4.87 1 1 2 1.500 4 1 1.77 3.53 5.3Q 1 9 16 1.563 4 1.92 3.83 1 5.75 1 5 8 1.625 4 207 4.15 6.22 1 11 16 1.688 4 2.24 1 4.47 1 6.71 1 3 4 1.750 4 241 4.81 7.22 1 1 13 161 1.813 4 2.58 5.16 I 7.74 1 7 8 1.B75 4 2.76 5.52 8 28 1 15 16 1.938 4 2.95 5.90 8.84 2 2.00014 3.14 6.28 1 9.42 ' n , Number of columns of perforations Minimum steel pfate thickness 1/4 5/16 3/8 • Designer may interpolate to the nearest 32nd inch ' to better match the required area, if desired Rectangular Perforation Sizin ' Only one column of rectangulari Steel Rectangular Min. St perforations afiowed. Hole Width Thickness ' Rectangular Height = 2 inches 5.. 1 a Rectoncular Width (inches) = Recuired Area per Row (sq in) O" I 1 4 2" 7" 5/32 " ' 8" 5/16 g" 11/32 " 10" 3/8 Urban Drainage and Figure 5 Flood Control District -"! WOCV Outlet Orifice +I Drainage Criteria Manual (V.3) Perforation Sizing ' F11c Da{oHiOwq Grate specificatims flor hfm Drains and Drain Basins $ Inlet Area Slot Size(Min.) 18 11 Pedestrian H-10 Inlet Area Slot Size(Min.) , MStandard: ❑D , ❑❑ �G/ 20.3 sq.in. 0.51" I D❑❑ ❑O❑ Standard H-20 Rated: Domed style: D❑❑ ❑❑❑ Standard Domed Style N/A N/A ❑D D ❑D❑ 98.7 sq.in. 1.10" O❑D D❑❑ 10 Standard: �\ 00 . 00 Pedestrian H-10 Rated: 29.7 sq.in. 0.43' — 87.6 sq.in. .375" Domed style: Sid.H-20 ' �� N/A N/A �"-' ry^ii Pedestnan H•10 Standard Domed Style 24 Standard H-20 Rated: 12" & 15" Standard H-20 Rated: Q cz±nm p 161.4 sq.in. 1.25" 12": 62.7 sq.in. 1.13" r�EH a ' �lc= 15": 92.5 sq.in. 1,13' !—� O Pedestrian H-10 Rated: =� 125.2 s Pedestrian H-10 Rated: C� Q f �:� q.in. .375.. 12": 51.0 sq.in. .375" 15": 79.3 sq.in. .375" d 30"grates available in (12'and 15"grates are square and Standard H-20 only.� Call for details. Sid.H-20 Pedestrian H-10 hinged to base.} Std.H-20 Solid grates and locking styles are available in all sizes for an additional charge. ' j • 4TJ wAm-ow—i41MOM ZONE OFFICES F MIDWEST/NORTHEAST LONDON,OH 1-800-733-9554 SOUTHERN �""""'°°" ,mow, • FRANKLIN,TN ' oh 1-800-733-9987 WESTERN WASHOUGAL,WA T"" u- - ...e�...•. 1-800-733-8523 MANUFACTURING FACILITY LOCATIONS ' f� & MOW np Nyloplast ' Call ADS for this free CAD diskette containing detailed product data, ���,�,g,l��"� specifications, and project layout information. ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, INC. - 3300 RIVERSIDE DRIVE COLUMBUS, OH 43221 " 800.821-6710 WWW.ADS-PIPE.COM ' nrr� e7G Gr�k�G lid:51 ADS WASHOUGAL 360 835 3823 P.02 . Inlet Capacloty Chapts— These charts are based on equations from the FAA airport drainage AC150/5320-5B, 1970, Page 35. ' Certain assumptions have been made, and no two installations will necessarily perform the same way, Safety factors should change with site ' conditions such that a safety factor of 1.25 should be used for an inlet in pavement, but a safety factor of 2.0 should be used in turf areas. For Nyloplast Standard Grates 811, 1011, 1211, 1511 18" and 24" 2a•Grate 4-5 ' 3.5 � 18'Grata U 15"Grate 23 m U 12"Grate tS 1 , 10"Grate 0.5 e'Grate -0.5 0.0 0-1 02 0.3 OA 0.5 ' O.ti 0.7 0.$ 0-8 1.0 1.1 Head,Feet For Nylopiast Pedestrian Grates 1211, 151, 18" and 24" 3 24'Grate 7 B'Grate ' 2.5 15'Grate 2 T 1S 12'Grate Y U 1 • I 0 ' 0.0 0.1 0-2 0 3 0 ..a 05 0.6 o.>• os os Bead,Feet I i 1 AMCOR '-�z",t/- I GRATES i �O aausTABL_= 24'SQUARE INLET GRATE n OPEN AREA:220 sq.in. ems' WEIGHT:280 lbs. (13 Shown) TYPE'13/16'COMBINATION ' OPEN AREA:336 sq.in. +variable curb area WEIGHT:M Ibs. 3 (16 Shown) 'L s r TYPE'13/16'VALLEY ' OPEN AREA:336 sq.in. WEIGHT:680 lbs. i CDZyT tcect;tini�an I-S4 x 7.7 BEAMS IHOT-DIPPED GALVANIZED TYPE'C/D'GRATE STANDARD GRATE OPEN AREA:91a sq.in. WEIGHT: 130 lbs. ' TYPE'C/D'PEDESTRIAN STYLE GRATE OTHER INLET CASTINGS AND OPEN AREA:890 sq.in. GRATES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE WEIGHT:260 Ibs, Colorado Division COCYngM 1992 ISSUE:DECEEMBER.,N2 r �Y T 4> SUPPLEMENTAL INFORM �� ON'.FROM OTHERS �? i ! A 1 k . i . /.... 3_4. ate;_;. �,.iu'm.a�L7F... �'�. '� tf�_...� .... ..�.�3a.s<_- IYYa�..SDw•• s ..s_w. .... .. 1 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR TIMBERS PUD 1 - _ Submitted to: LARiMER COUNTY November 16, 2001 NI eiO�gt a g b w n N IN! 1 n b b O � a n r+. OIiI e0•f lrpn :_O +1 mf Pl + O Prl 1' _ -1 ♦ N b m P OA L'.�:•:.0::: 1�O.A A n P PIA a0r�01r:i�' Ot m A A n B�p�ON, n rpnl ml N L'.�:::•::::::. � I � 1 1 1 � b� b AIP b 1•ru� A N V� H r0 rC rC I� V rG rA rp a to T)5:�:•�:. -�•••H •1n INItVI_._I b r0 m O r0 1 wl n � b h n ........... T•':i•!!••: � ;JJevn "1 + rP a++a C'=�mnNnq qN ` Fi nIN+ h�'• rl nI0 tl 10 - _ !r lY gIwIO n of=1N n n � •1 h b M{O O O N n h m �' 0�01 A N n m W Iola h ^1 �O .C::.�:N.�� �1+ V9 f�n_ I N N - •O e l FII y IiI c z �w M NIM1M NIM r^, N N N N N 17 J'p, -- -I�1•! ry nInIN N Nlnr N N N r N g •:.:.�,•.�.•. 8 8I8 8 8 g QlIQ�+ p p�CC p � � g g Si f $ x g, g �I g � QI gl ISJj� N I -I - •�- - - _ 7 C S�7 r• .::.�YI.'.SM:L ^Ib b b NI Liz O O O �Plb' m� nIN• m • N1A I 1 -•:.T':••::: O O O O O Ib b GIO O CI N h r0 r0 M f !�n •OOj V�M • n n5 n •G ..:::'. 1 ......... i II � 1 O O O OiO O O O O O O O OIO OI O p ..rT: i a1P OIN eOv 8 r+0'bl r0 Q O• - w�a O -� n, r -i I •:.':�:�.:. -•C O- e•1 O- ••Nf•I IM rn: n m_ b Y V O „ h n� A 1 O e O b - !II 1111 I!j f _•• :�:��:� I ! ill � � l � I � � � � i � x � I 4.= n LIG '•' _r n�N�L i=• N m _'� Ira ax Oi oI- I n C nI16C <I<JcIGI n df- Im l b a �_ a ! N1 LI {;T. aI �1 -�4IAI�I71 r'IC C I� C�aIO �Q o m i fa 0 V n - _I L.� c� ' ..:m < < <a•Ia� �O±^_.•ol_'7pi I_I G Cl� h _la Cl1v IUI 1 :. 'aa �GtC1 QC'GO C m� Ia O �IOta {O u flI=� d1C UI IC ri U� c 1 ! 1 I+ f 1 i � ��� :< :;�_�� ! I I , . • I+I I ; , III ► ! I I I n1 NIn�n IP1 lrw.� �f�1 rOt���I IZ�n -�O� I I I+� I •Zr 1 4 is I . ► r � III � il , I � I y U_H .� zyz a ••••� I I I I Ip1 I i I t I I �UI ! Y2 U W { lIfI � III � � I a �I I � ! ► I , il ! II !_r F ' TST, INC. Consulting Engineers CUENT ' JOB NO. .i/G9S'V9] PROJECT /iM�es r•y•� CALCULATIONS FOR 571FC- T- 11-f e-try MADE BY �/YL� DATE / CHECKED BY DATE SHEET / OF n OF y� I '� (03' 2 L3' 1 rTo A-1 r Z z 441 X1,?- >! - �.S5 F I �a LEGEND CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE E o I ►R"CT: -20Q9 6levninlasy ScAo_oJ STANDARD FROM C o, a I ` SEQUENCE FOR 200?-?003 COMPLETED BY: �^•� DATE: ,�, �. _ X BASIN DESIGNATION i I I INDICATE BY USE OF A BAR LINE OR SYMBOLS WHEN EROSION CONTROL MEASURES WILL BE INSTALLJEDI � °•• MAJOR MODIFICATIONS TO AN APPROVED SCHEDULE MAY REOURE SUBMITTING A NEW SCHEDULE FOR xxx x�a 10-K• '��' COEFFICIENT APPROVAL BY THE CITY ENGINEER fiAS`� AREA • � I � I x.xx 100-yr. CCF COEFFICIENT s i3 YE AR IOW _ so"I + _ �F AP* 4 MONTH Il l SUN!JMT JNC SLIP OCr AW Mr ALM KI &AN 1PR Aff JOW AMi -- --- I I I ' :•. OVERLOT GRADING BASIN BOUNDARY M E WIND EROSION CONTROL XX DESIGN POINT = III SOIL ROUGHING h { , I PERIMETER BARRIER ADDITIONAL BARRIERS •,• ' -"• -• 0 PROPOSED STORM DRAIN gY I i SGE VEGETATIVE AI/ETHOOS MANHOLE NOV) « I OTHER 1Y PROPOSED STORM DRAIN PIPE 04 a t I � � --, ! I RAINFALL EROSION CONTROL o O PROPOSED STORM DRAIN INLET o STRUCTURAL: I I SEDIMENT TRAP/ BASIN O INLET FILTERS - EXISTING 1 CONTOUR I I ( STRAW BARRIERS _ - SILT FENCE BARRIERS O ' SAND BAGS - EXISTING 5 CONTOUR I ! BARE SOIL PREPARATION I CONTOUR FURROWS TERRACING I s PROPOSED V CONTOUR tL ASPHALT/ CONCRETE PAVING 'I I ( I � ti •. OTHER O I \ XJD- PROPOSED 5' CONTOUR OD 0 VEGETATIVE: � � MULPERCHING/SSE EAuwPLANTING ° b Si 5I2' PROPOSED 1' CONTOUR BY OTHERS j TEMPORARY SEED PLANTING W SOD INSTALLATION z NETTINGS/ MATS/ BLANKETS !>Reb 5130-- PROPOSED 5' CONTOUR BY OTHERS U p �t OTHER CO i Basin Design Q10-year Q100-year Basin Point Area (cfs) (cfs) W IN, 100 100 1.05 4.87 10.47 cc 101 101 0.11 0.49 1.06 Q I � I ' i I I :! I � � --•,, . �_ 0•sax Q Z 1 495 .7' 200 200 1.43 3.91 11.79 i I l I 201 201 0.14 0.19 0.51 K�40�1 SIDEWALK- 20,Op' 202 202 0.10 0.17 0.43 Z I I I I 3 27 l 203 203 0.23 0.40 1.09 I � c�FF4- 204 204 0.61 0.62 1.64 J Vlcy EMERGENCY SPILLWAY SECTION 300 300 0 2-92 7.21 J K�40�2 N.T.S. 301 301 0.16 0.53 1.38 Q I I Ii -m 302 302 1.33 4.07 11.73 ' f ! + Q°3 " 303 303 0.84 1.28 2.55 W (*'40�3 304 304 0.41 0.99 3.34 (� > 305 305 0.37 0.50 3.72 0 SDI-202 asp .m 18 HDPE STUB sDl-too - .b _ . 400 400 1.51 4.44 13.40 , { I r-- 18 0 k.REA INLET FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT J. -- _ ,� - 401 101 3.27 1.05 2.78 !_4V0 - T`,'PE R tN•.ET FRIM=54.50 ALLOWABLE RELEASE RATE I 1 I 1 IM TYPE 'R' INLET T•O.C.-54.75 ` - 30 HDPE ADS-N12 404 _ •� = 2.00 CFS. ' \ 402 402 0-83 0.34 0.90 O . O.C.-57.09 73.20 LF O 0.40x 202 a� �, t 403 403 0.61 0.29 0.76 CC ` ) SDI--201 Io SDI-202 `\ \ - �\ �_ 404 404 0.34 0.19 0.50 O II MH 201 18 :. , AREA INLET .0 - 18 0 AREA INLET ti'�.� \ \ \ II O �I RIM-57.49 RIM�54.50 RIM-54.13 ® ��� - �, \ 500 500 2.58 1.82 4.83 1 I ? I I 0-4' - .......- ....�... - - - _ 501 501 0.62 0.76 1.94 ...- << - 30�H p -N 12 0' `-'-�-- ,� __30 -ADPE-AD 4 150. LF O _ cr o X \ \� City of Fort Collins, Colorado a 24' NRCP _ - - - ��, - - - - -__19 '02_LE O 44?' \ ::�,,� CL 42.62 LF I 203 - -- - - - \ SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW APPROVAL w O 1.QQX 23 •, SDI-204 N. I i Ii Ia.s_ -- • -W `t" 46 0 -A INLET ( ,Y,``. APPROVED: cb p.a MRCP J RI 03 ,?Q� H AE• SOS \ oo• ' ` I 1 26 LF O 1.2 4 X ,. =t� -:- tit0ik-illt-ifs•>>i - I F �� \ \ I I� l \ CHECKED BY I t ! .14 1.__ �`` 204 �'� \ ��\ \ CHECKED BY: � . CHECKED sY: z � I1 I PROPOSED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL -' ti x \ \ ! - - FINISHED FLOOR=4958.40 �\ \ 200 , -GIs ; \. M -202 \ , :. !. ► w. 1 \ \ CHECKED BY: cc 5 ill I ,.,3 �• _. �,;� t oo \ 0-5' \ ,\ b RIM 53.25 I , CHECKED Br. w CC I Los o ROOF DRAINS \. t _ I { �I _\;�, s� CONNECTION FES DETENTION POND � x ROO DRAIN 18" HDPE ADS-N12 - -- - -A - -- --4 -------- A rn \S ` � +;�`�\ WV. 4�.� Avoll I V - LU ,`\ ob a flume: 2.82 oc-ft Z _ p �. �' ` Required WOCV: 0.23 oc ft of Elev. 4946.44 u, . CONNECTION ® 28,83 LF O 3.31X . ' '� `;.`• ` Required 100-yr. Detention Volume: 0.70 oc-ft " ri01 _ of Elev. 4949.25 c ul N all f o+• ` 500 7 \ \ �\ Allowable Release. 17.10 cfs Z co i •I ' '!r i<: ' I 1t�Y r P - 0 a W 102.50 LF O 1.82X \ SD 03 ` \ CL I + , ( � I ..• *; N Im ' �,� 8 AREA INLET I_ _.� 1 0 YR WATER - ` ° 8 30t K 1 I 52.42 ELEVATION 4949.25 �-. \ TYPE C OUTLET u� 302 z 1- --� � 303 ISTRUCTURE i ! ? 18 v IN ots n ! I �l INV. OUT= 43.75 °O X�N \ o 0 I.33 .� In"� ae4 i 1 HDPE ADS- 12 �Q SEE SHEET DT03 E> " .- Co I' F Ali 9 ,� , RIM 5.00 � .« 4 O ��� ..o I 5 LF O 0. X ,- � -- v; ' \ I^F Z r I MH 302, c a ?c 18 0 AREA I ET EPOS` • 5 I I •� ae2 ry EXISITING 18MP I 300 ""I; ; 3, RIM- 2.77 • NOP 5p / FES TO BE ABANDONED f ( Tt I o 12 `F RIM 54. 4 I { �I iiililt l gg•4 - -- - - -- - - - - - 30�-AIR NV: 46. -- INSTAL RIPR u i 24 RCP 24a MRCP - - - - - - - TYPE L;D%-9- EwST1NG I' hj - _ '' 4 P - • - _ - L=8' 18' W=8' 30" RCP I � '• � - - - - - -- - - - - _ ., _ 4 2 LF _ _ - - -- -- - - - _ MH 303 - - - --- � \ = 24' NRCt�_ 304 ��5, _ \ pUti � !� 29.19 LF O 0.96x'- a41 --- -- i I �. -- - - - -- -- , ,� RIM=54:34s� _; a.___• - _ . 5.,4 F.., y 7 .� 10--iYPE R '1t'ILET _ SINGLE lfi ._.�. 0 _.--. ..__._. ..___ . - r r ••....:.. T.O.C. 54.33 _ /#- _--T.O:Cs 55.71 ' �-` M 55. 0 - - ---�- -t .---•�-,+. '_.- r- ------- - ----r•+.Ra-.+� -� --`"'- ' --� -- - - - --- - 1 >W .�..�- esns+--� .niki -.SUS-+,: we+- _ ____�DL- QZ_--- - - - _ f"••--- EPHYR ROAD - - _ Y - 20 EMERGENCY __ :-- x ' I _ INLET - - = -~j 1��� SPILLWAY `� NUMB R -�-� ���-•4952.7� D R 01 305 � ,- 14 srIEE Ts EXISTING 5 -�_ -- .,� SCALE LLL TI M R S P. U. D. "� O '-� E R INLET ~�� --- KRJICAL I'= 50 i ' ;I •, t ,' ,.. B E # I � � _..1 � � MolituprrAi. I. 50 FC019501 � o � C Cr � 11 Y o e-& 4 E o Q� O { a n 0 15 30 60 O V N L da � E N I inch - 30 ft 3 8 a ` ��� `x N tit''`, .• ,:�`'\ �' �- � LEG __ND cl - — — EXISTING MAJOR J 0 W -�s1�- — CONTOUR EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR .,\ . •' 4M 5--- PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR °D 4913---- PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR W 4915-- PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR BY OTHERS U � PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR BY OTHERS xx.x HP Z PROPOSED HIGH POINT PROPOSED LOW POINT \ N. \ \ XX.X LP _ Z xx.x TO PROPOSED TOP OF NAUTILUS co Q x.xx Sc PROPOSED SUBGRADE (L \ \ X.XX FG PROPOSED FINISH R W \ 1 x x F FINISHED GRADE Q T PROPOSED FINISHED SURFACE �-.- 0 \ \ , • x xx C PROPOSED TOP OF CURB ` � L \ \ • A \ x.x PROPOSED z 0 OSED SLOPE L1J Z ~ \ L 1 PROPOSED STAGING AREA — Z PROPOSED SILT FENCE PROPOSED OUTLET PROTECTION ..J SEEDED MULCHED AREAS w 4 � O \ � \�.�. '� \ _ _ C ...... �. �«::,: .;:: PROPOSED VEHICLE TRACKING rn I \ CON TROL 1 m ,t'�� \ \ VtN INLET PROTECTION (STRAW BALES) co a ce \ '' � \��,•� O INLET PROTECTION (GRAVEL FILTER) N o NOTES: o 1 . SEE DETAIL SHEET DT01 FOR EROSION CONTROL DETAILS cr_ 2. ALL ELEVATIONS ARE T F ate. \\ \, E 0 LOWLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. w l 2.0% cc EROSION CONTROL NOTES Ia. I I OP 1. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS STORMWATER UTILITY EROSION CONTROL INSPECTOR MUST BEN NOTIFIED LEAST 4 0 ED AT LE S 2 HOURS PRIOR TO N ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE SITE. co 2. ALL REQUIRED PERIMETER SILT FENCING SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITY (STOCKPILING, STRIPPING. z I, GRADING, ETC.). ALL OTHER REQUIRED EROSION CONTRCL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AS INDICATED IN THE APPROVED PROJECT SCHEDULE, CONSTRUCTION I PLANS. AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT.RETAINING WALL \\\� .��, cc _j E GHT WARIES 3. PRE-DISTURBANCE VEGETATION SHALL BE PROTECTED AND RETAINED WHEREVER POSSIBLE. REMOVAL OR DISTURBANCE OF EXISTING W 0.5 3.O VEGETATION SHALL BE UMITED TO THE AREA REQUIRED FOR IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, AND FOR THE SHORTEST W ~ J SEE ETAIL 47. Tyy PRACTICAL PERIOD OF TIME. g --- — — - — — — — — — — — -- — DT02 4..e Bw �ti�• ti �` 4. ALL SOILS EXPOSED DURING LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY (STRIPPING. GRADING. UTILITY INSTALLATIONS. STOCKPILING. FILLING, ETC.) SHEE cop .�.�� �. ` SHALL BE KEPT IN A ROUGHENED CONDITION BY RIPPING OR DISCING ALONG LAND CONTOURS UNTIL MULCH. VEGETATION OR OTHER Cyr- ..`` `�� \\� PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL IS INSTALLED. NO SOILS IN AREAS OUTSIDE PROJECT STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAY SHALL REMAIN EXPOSED � `\. ~'*��. BY LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITY FOR MORE THAN THIRTY (30) DAYS BEFORE REQUIRED TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL 2 47. Bw 4 ��� \ \\\\ (E.G. SEED/MULCH. LANDSCAPING, ETC.) IS INSTALLED. 'JNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE STORMWATER UTILITY. Lu 0 RIGHT—OF—WAY � — 44.8 Bw �!- \\ \ 5. THE PROPERTY SHALL BE WATERED AND MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SO AS TO PREVENT o r'• � � IPSB 4 \ \ \`\`\��\' \\i WIND-CAUSED EROSION. ALL LAND DISTURBING ACTIV111ES SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY DISCONTINUED MIEN FUGITIVE DUST IMPACTS ram__— .+r.:-�.. ------ _......w.a..w.rr.a-.._•_•••__-w._ SF •_„ ` — — `\�. •` �\ ADJACENT PROPERTIES, AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY CF FORT COLLINS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, z w _ - � . •..r-�--�- 6. ALL TEMPORARY (STRUCTURAL) EROSION CONTROL -AEASURES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND REPAIRED OR RECONSTRUCTED AS � 0 SF �� ���� �'` - '""-.r='' NECESSARY AFTER EACH RUNOFF EVENT IN ORDER TO ASSURE CONTINUED PERFORMANCE OF THEIR INTENDED FUNCTION. ALL RETAINED rCL XISTING PROPERTY UNE "� ' ` - - \ � � "--- A SEDIMENTS. PARTICULARLY THOSE ON PAVED ROADWAY SURFACES, SHALL BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF IN-- Bw ��� A MANNER AND LOCATION SO AS NOT TO CAUSE THEIR RELEASE INTO ANY DRAINAGEWAY. W 7. NO SOIL STOCKPILE SHALL EXCEED TEN (10) FEET IN HEIGHT. ALL SOIL STOCKPILES SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SEDIMENT TRANSPORT BY SURFACE ROUGHENING, WATERING, AND PERIMETER SILT FENCING. ANY SOIL STOCKPILE REMAINING AFTER 30 DAYS CIO - SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED. 8. CITY ORDINANCE PROHIBITS THE TRACKING, DROPPING, OR DEPOSITING OF SOILS OR ANY OTHER MATERIAL ONTO CITY STREETS BY SF OR FROM ANY VEHICLE. ANY INADVERTENT DEPOSITED MATERIAL SHALL BE CLEANED IMMEDIATELY BY THE CONTRACTOR. 9. THE SILT FENCE LOCATION SHALL DETERMINE THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION. V , 495J— City of Fort Collins Colorado SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW APPROVAL `''•• ...... .. APVRDVED: CHECKED Br. 24EET NOW— W CHECKED Or G R 0 2 Of 14 sN Ts CHECKED BY: � � SCALE CHECKED BY' VERTICAL. 1'-N/A HORIZONTAL: 1'-.30' vi W CHECKED BYJD8 NUMBER X FC019501 4 P p = �_ I O N y fm Lkk 1 c � EO I 1 ► ! EXISTING PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE "�► a o --- �. -- - - Ot E I 1 -- o I31l ' AR 25 st \ iPc - - --- - - - a: �_ 2.0� fi p I , CONCRETE 10 -- J ..a..su.ra.wrw�w..r.•..�Y�u.nWav«MWi.earr..es►ar.�u.vr'..wv�u.a s. _ _ -� 4 I PROPERTY UNE n o I ` he 1 I _ 2.0R „o t 5 to OL IF57.46F'S _ , I \ o E 1 \ 5 N \ l CURB CNA.r '°' -t I83 I LS9 all SEE DETAt_ 0 55.74 .I f r \ \ N RAI.FD L- I CROSSWALKI METAL CHASE � � SF SEE DETA,L -SEE DETAIL SEE DETAIL AREA I ��a� �`` - • � o 1 SHEET D oz SHEET DT02 THIS SHEET �- I� � I 0 ! .�' L4 .S`1t12fS I ��i• '.,.� 1 r ?�'• _ � i____.- - - -- - 0 I �0 1 .� .....� I I G A=IG ® �' Cs 27 1 - i 0 2.Ox 2.OX o 2 2 I -�:�.. `+�Sd3�S ' � •� • �� O 6 o _ - 2003 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CIO WW FINISH FLOOR ELEV. - 4958.40 ' lei I Q { I SUBGRADE ELEV.- 4957.73 r � I 0 � . C/) CROSSWALK U' `.,�' 1�F3 ► i s/�T �'. C� Z 1 ! SEE DETAIL SHEET DT02 ! l O 57.3Fc tr) � 7FG a. METAL CHASE I�j W �, y LEG- .� SEE DETAIL � ` l 1 l c � �� �' � ' �� f 55.025G SHEET DT02 joy • , / 8FS Z Z 7 77 � 4.4 + 4 �2. I � I ; I -- �' :� .'.�..4l� _ _.- -_- �e`fSe �6�Ec�'�1 �6`�16,�Se �6��• 1�4 � -___ I i T - ,6S : w �t .m a: I 9.29E 71 56.02FG 54.88SG 54.00= 5s.2 54.69SG 57.73F c ' dam&? 10, a- 56.52 56.70SG i I '7 07F5 1 _' '�.`ti"' .r+�� -ir-r-•v- I d i- yw�........... __ 55.075G I - I- II _57.40TC 56. 1 I(I 74� I O + -'� "T- `� IPSBCC ► 2 77T � 1 4956495 ULM, J ► Oj� 7F :58 45 �' 54.745G 3.49SC�'- ,2SG/GRATE N 0 ' U- SF ► cJ RAISE _ _.._. .j.. ; { .50F _..... ..__. _. CRO WALK ! 1 I 53.,7SG _ =•SOFG I w I SEE DETAIL "� `"� -' 53.755c ,7SG cc 4)) f�'� SH T DT02 52.77SG/GRATE - - -- Q FS tP58 53.28SG - - -- 0- cc 46 FC 552L9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - `-J - J1 i 1 PROM RIGHT-OF- Y-O -WA - -- '- PR OSE .- - -_- ... ._ .�.- v w SIF .� �. $F SF �. �. �. _ �� �+ SF ..._ .... . ._ ._.�._ SF CDO 1- coNCRE1E � p� ` J V T C PROPERTY UNE E uj ( EX1ST1 PROPERTY LINE LEGEND NOTES: _ 4915-- - EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR 1 . SEE DETAIL SHEET DT01 FOR EROSION CONTROL DETAILS o EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR 2. ALL ELEVATIONS ARE TO FLOWLINE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. � • --{o� PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR W -d913- PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR EROSION CONTROL NOTES �58.38fs s8.38Fs ,;_,��'N �. h „ � :915 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR BY OTHERS off; 1. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS STORMWATER UT1L!TY EROSION CONTROL INSPECTOR MUST BE NOTIFIED AT LEA:iT 24 HOURS PRIOR TO N 0 0 ��' ��' , h ---a913 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR BY OTHERS ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE SITE. Z O O - ' r, XX.X P PROPOSED HIGH POINT 2. ALL REQUIRED PERIMETER SILT FENCING SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITY (STOCKPILING. STRIPPING. XX.X L PROPOSED LOW POINT GRADING, ETC.). ALL OTHER REQUIRED EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE r ~ �\�I. - _ •' XX.X TON PROPOSED TOP OF NAUTILUS CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AS INDICATED IN THE APPROVED PROJECT SCHEDULE, CONSTRUCTION PLANS. AND L'ROSION CONTROL REPORT. X.XX SG o �s �o so tz _j PROPOSED SUBGRADE 3. PRE-DISTURBANCE VEGETATION SHALL BE PROTECTED AND RETAINED WHEREVER POSSIBLE. REMOVAL OR DISTURBANCE OF EXISTING _ co 7 y �� a X.XX FG PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE VEGETATION SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE AREA REQUIRED FOR IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, AND FOR THE SHORTEST X.XX FS PROPOSED FINISHED SURFACE PRACTICAL PERIOD OF TIME. a , Inch 30 ft X.)CX TC .�3ES PROPOSED TOP OF CURB 4. ALL SOILS EXPOSED DURING LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY (STRIPPING, GRADING, UTILITY INSTALLATIONS, STOCKPILING. FILLING. ETC.) r X X SHALL BE KEPT IN A ROUGHENED CONDITION BY RIPPING OR DISCIING ALONG LAND CONTOURS UNTIL MULCH, '/EGETATION. OR OTHER PROPOSED SLOPE PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL IS INSTALLED. NO SOILS IN AREAS OUTSIDE PROJECT STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAY SHALL REMAIN EXPOSED ,',,""111kFjj I TRANSITION CURB BY LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITY FOR MORE THAN THIRTY (30) DAYS BEFORE REQUIRED TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL 09FS (E.G. SEED/MULCH, LANDSCAPING, ETC.) IS INSTALLED. UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE STORMWATER UTILITY. 57.66FS PROPOSED STAGING AREA - �{ 5. THE PROPERTY SHALL BE WATERED AND MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SO AS TO PREVENT `'� t�23- = 106 F PROPOSED SILT FENCE WIND-CAUSED EROSION. ALL LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY DISCONTINUED WHEN FUGITVE DUST IMPACTS 58.00FS 58.65FS ADJACENT PROPERTIES, AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. City of Fort Collins, Colorado -,,�•' .,,...,�-; 58.37Tc 1 SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW APPROVAL .` ssM SEEDED / MULCHED AREAS 6. ALL TEMPORARY (STRUCTURAL) EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND REPAIRED OR RECONSTRUCTED AS 56.41TCav NECESSARY AFTER EACH RUNOFF EVENT IN ORDER TO ASSURE CONTINUED PERFORMANCE OF THEIR INTENDED FUNCTION. ALL RETAINED Ago)&Q -� 58.40FS SEDIMENTS, PARTICULARLY THOSE ON PAVED ROADWAY SURFACES, SHALL BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF IN A MANNER AND LOCATION 1 7 58'25fS 1 ��• 58. O,4FS OP PROPOSED OUTLET PROTECTION SO AS NOT TO CAUSE THEIR RELEASE INTO ANY DRAINAGEWAY. CHECKED BY: NUMBER 55.93 7. NO SOIL STOCKPILE SHALL EXCEED TEN (10) FEET IN HEIGHT. ALL SOIL STOCKPILES SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SEDIMENT CHECKED BY: G R 01 J 58.40FS TRANSPORT BY SURFACE ROUGHENING, WATERING, AND PERIMETER SILT FENCING. ANY SOIL STOCKPILE REMANING AFTER 30 DAYS 11■..r. 8.38Fs L583tIES ru ,:,� PROPOSED VEHICLE TRACKING SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED. a 14 SHEETS CHECKED BY: CONTROL "''~ i• math" we SCALE 8. CITY ORDINANCE PROHIBITS THE TRACKING, DROPPING, OR DEPOSITING OF SOILS OR ANY OTHER MATERIAL ONTO CITY STREETS BY VERTICAL: t N/A tPse INLET PROTECTION (STRAW BALES) OR FROM ANY VEHICLE. ANY INADVERTENT DEPOSITED MATERIAL SHALL BE CLEANED IMMEDIATELY BY THE CONTRACTOR. I CHECKED Br. �- HOMZONTAL t'-30' SCALE 1 " - 20 ' t INLET PROTECTION (GRAVEL FILTER) 9. THE SILT FENCE LOCATION SHALL DETERMINE THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION. CHEO(ED BY: -bats w t xI FC019601 National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 1#FEMA Legend 105°2'37"W 40°30'29"N SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT r ! Without Base Flood Elevation(BFE) Zone A.V.A99 SPECIAL FLOOD With BFE or Depth Zone AE.AO.AH.VE,AR HAZARD AREAS Regulatory Floodway • i> 0.2%Annual Chance Flood Hazard,Areas �+ of 1%annual chance flood with average • depth less than one foot or with drainage areas of less than one square mile Zonex • ® Future Conditions 1%Annual ®� Chance Flood Hazard Zone Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to i I OTHER AREAS OF Levee.See Notes.zone x FLOOD HAZARD Area with Flood Risk due to Levee zone o NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard zonex � •� Q Effective LOMRs OTHER AREAS Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D ' GENERAL -—-- Channel,Culvert,or Storm Sewer 4 r STRUCTURES IIIIIII Levee,Dike,or Floodwall J�3,�� &Zo=2 Cross Sections with 1%Annual Chance %,, 14. . 17•5 Water Surface Elevation AREA OF MINIMAL FL • HAZARD ± �� 8- - - Coastal Transect —513^°^^^• Base Flood Elevation Line(BFE) * Limit of Study T6N R68W S7 City of4Fort Collins • Jurisdiction Boundary Qp�102 ----- Coastal Transect Baseline CC 1,: 1 - • 1 1 1 T6fJ R68`.b'SE + w OTHER _ Profile Baseline FEATURES Hydrographic Feature • ' r �' . 7 Digital Data Available N No Digital Data Available i S- - MAP PANELS Unmapped OThe pin displayed on the map is an approximate 1 point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative property location. l 1 S This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap • accuracy standards � ` � The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA.This map was exported on 6/10/2024 at 4:12 PM and does not '+11 • �w reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and ti�R r .� time.The NFHL and effective information may change or become superseded by new data over time. i ! 3• This map image is void if the one or more of the following map '\/• _ Zen, sk• elements do not appear:basemap imagery,flood zone labels, S legend,scale bar,map creation date,community identifiers, 105°2'W 40°30'2"N FIRM panel number,and FIRM effective date.Map images for Feet 1:6 000 unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 regulatory purposes. Basemap Imagery Source:USGS National Map 2023 USDA United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource Department of Cooperative Soil_ Survey,Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for N States Department of RCS Agriculture and other Larimer County Federal agencies, State Natural agencies including the Resources Agricultural Experiment Area, Colorado Conservation Stations, and local Service participants K 1 ► L 0 .,00 ft a April 23, 2024 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.nres.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nres/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=nres)or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nres142p2_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 SoilMap.................................................................................................................. 8 SoilMap................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 MapUnit Legend................................................................................................ 11 MapUnit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Larimer County Area, Colorado...................................................................... 13 74—Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes.................................................13 References............................................................................................................15 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 6 Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. 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 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 0 496590 496630 496670 496710 496750 496790 4%830 495B70 496910 496950 496990 497030 40°30'23"N .- 40°31 23"N r r i Soil Map may not � �llid at this sc�le� it ` '�' 40°30'13"N l 1 �� r 40°39 13"N 496590 4%630 496670 496710 496750 496790 496830 496870 496910 496950 496990 497030 3 3 Map Scale:1:2,060 if printed on A landscape(11"x 8.5")sheet N Meters o 0 30 60 120 m. 180 Feet 0 100 200 400 600 Map projection:Web Mercator Comer coordinates:WGS84 Edge tics:UTM Zone 13N WGS84 9 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest(AOI) 1:24,000. Q Stony Spot Soils Very Stony Spot I Soil Map Unit Polygons � Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 1. Wet Spot �s Soil Map Unit Lines Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause Other misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil ® Soil Map Unit Points g pp g y Special Line Features line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of Special Point Features contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed V Blowout Water Features scale. Streams and Canals Borrow Pit Clay Spot Transportation Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map x .+. Rails measurements. J Closed Depression ti Interstate Highways Gravel Pit Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service US Routes Web Soil Survey URL: Gravelly Spot Major Roads Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) O Landfill Local Roads Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator A Lava Flow Background projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the Marsh or swamp . Aerial Photography Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more Mine or Quarry accurate calculations of distance or area are required. O Miscellaneous Water This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as O Perennial Water of the version date(s)listed below. V Rock Outcrop Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area,Colorado + Saline Spot Survey Area Data: Version 18,Aug 24,2023 Sandy Spot Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales Severely Eroded Spot 1:50,000 or larger. 0 Sinkhole Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Jul 2,2021—Aug 25, Slide or Slip 2021 Sodic Spot 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. 10 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 74 Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent 7.3 100.0% slopes Totals for Area of Interest 7.3 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. 11 Custom Soil Resource Report 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. 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Larimer County Area, Colorado 74—Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tlpl Elevation: 3,900 to 5,840 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 17 inches Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 160 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Nunn and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Nunn Setting Landform:Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Pleistocene aged alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 9 inches: clay loam Bt-9 to 13 inches: clay loam Btk- 13 to 25 inches: clay loam Bk1 -25 to 38 inches: clay loam Bk2-38 to 80 inches: clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 7 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.1 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:0.5 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R067BY042CO - Clayey Plains Hydric soil rating: No 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Minor Components Heldt Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform:Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R067BY042CO- Clayey Plains Hydric soil rating: No Satanta Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform:Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No 14 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.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_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.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nresl42p2_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.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nres142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 15 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nres142p2_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.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/? cid=n res 142 p 2_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/lnternet/FSE—DOCUMENTS/nrcsl42p2_052290.pdf 16 i TFRY3�� DRAINAGE MAP LEGEND r-OUSULTIK1s EUrLINEEifS EXISTING INDEX CONTOUR 1VA,Inc. 213 Linden Street,Suite 200 EXISTING INTERMEDIATE CONTOUR Fort Collins,Co80s24 970.225.9099 www.jvajva.com .INE LOCATES OF PROPOSED INDEX CONTOUR Boulder•Fort Collins•Winter Park OLLINS LOVELAN �� Glenwood Springs•Denver DISTRICT. PROPOSED INTERMEDIATE CONTOUR TOP 0 CONCRETEkWA EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION \ \\ +03.54 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION \ Uj�[3ERRRra _� 30 0 30 60 ESE HISTORIC DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY (MAJOR BASIN) SCALE IN FEET ( ) HISTORIC DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY SUB BASIN F PARAPET WALL-7 '� GROTEI £ �\ N FT HIG RAILS. _ W DEVELOPED DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY (MAJOR BASIN) d \ l CABINET ET I \\ ~ �� c. yeN ' d.. PGC'� DEVELOPED DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY (SUB BASIN) CC-b -U - WA L�IN `-FOR PU I e �O / - ________ DIRECTION OF FLOW (HISTORIC) A WPAL�ATIO � 01 �P 4�O. —— —__— — \ DIRECTION OF FLOW (DEVELOPED) OVERFLOW PATH \�CH� K, Q BASIN DESIGN POINT LE TRl� M TER\CABINEA AFT Y VT�Y IFT ♦NIGH. � / / / � / , / \\ ' 1 I II I rT� DRAINAGEDEVELOPED BASIN IDENTIFICATION DESNATION LE 1.0 .50 = 100-YR RUNOFF COEFFICIENT o a 1.0 = AREA ACRES z 4 F- IN OF CI OF I �- I I I/ // / IN N ELECT I I E / / // , / C) I\ I I __ _ I HISTORIC RUNOFF SUMMARY 0 LU II Vm i 1 I II I YA D�.IGH/T /// Q \ \ (6F PIG7 PQLE}\ U) ff TABLE o N LOCATE OF I \ , ° DESIGN AREA 100-YR )L NS LOVEAND \I I I I \\ % j II ° A BASIN POINT (ACRES) RUNOFF (CfS) LU )I RICT. I a I I i I , THIS TREE H1 1 3.89 8.22 W I I I \/ / / , I MAY HAVE 1 ° BEEN 01 2 0.92 3.02 EMOVED 02 3 0.49 1.79 2F TIC NK COVE 46934 6343 I BR FT DIA. FT ° TOTAL SITE 5.09 13.03 \ \ I SEPTCI5@0TA 34 ' S$PTIC TAN),( RE11N 2D 3D ` P �OTANK OPENING 2D WEEP n 0 I ` I D 9 ) \ Q W \I LOCA S LIN OF — TOP TER OF f� c. / GA E 3/4" C. / i1A�eER WALL c 0.6FT WIDE. CHA LMK FENCE — q -\ (4FT HIGH) I v z o Q — — dam\ LLI Lb I ° LI_J p� J f DESIGNED BY: MEC/MMC d I \ /' � � \ \ \ I � DRAWN BY: MMC/CMS CHECKED BY: CFG JOB #: 240729.CIV w I \ // \ `® • DATE: JUNE, 2024 1 ,4 , / \ _ \ © JVA, INC. 02 / .53 0.5 � COM AST CABLE TV I / / FIBE OPTICS W / LOCATES LINE. I ( \ I r, 'd / / �► J oO W j I 1 J 44�z Q w CV 0 - 4 00 U a o \ rn N H I 1 I // \ ` a,a O V 7*111 C IATER C B INLET----' 6 .12a �M I VC-49 .98 +/- L I�` \\ I __// _ ` ` °` O�OpO V"RCP-4956.98 ° \ F.E.S. I _ O v 0 BOX ELEV. = 4957.00 1 - VAU `-_ \---` E V.= 9 7 --- - ��-k\ (� /� E 1 w SIGN � �� � � "� VJ I I I N _ -ZSIGN FIRE E qZ 4MP 4- ° 4,/ . . 4 . S - - 15 =4956.48 CENTER OF d ° ° / ° ° 4 ° sw R s�gREA _ -_ sw W d I I ` d d I 2FT DIA. \ . y G —_ / -LOCATES LINE OF POUDRE W I�I�A MH sw ST0IWAT R LET / SCHOOL DISTRICT STORMWATER CHAIN LINK FENCE d IM-4960.38 FL W 24"RCP-4 54.14 ° . / / \ LINE. ( ) _\ ° rn SWMH / / i 8FT HIGH 3 60.38 L NW 24"RCP 4956.48 I FL E 30"ADS/PL-4954.09 / o L E 24"RCP- 956.36 l FLOOR BOX ELEV.=4p54.14 CENTER OF GATE o II L TOP BAR \ \\ 4 / / (9FT WIDE). \ v I.I 7 T WIDE I , SI N\NTR� IG�Oa SIGN v� / / a -{/ (8FTCHAIN HIGIHj FED o v 1.6F WIDE q / .. o I � \ w d RAMP \ v /"" o `� I'°A ° $ \ I vy A f I d SHEET NO. N � W EX1 o 'IC OC ES LINE \I / SCHOOLPB DG K) I 0 DRAINAGE MAP LEGEND TFRY3�� EXISTING INDEX CONTOUR r-OUSULTIKrl Ek i]WEERS EXISTING INTERMEDIATE CONTOUR 1VA,Inc. 213 Linden Street,Suite 200 � Fort Collins,CO 80524 970.225.9099 PROPOSED INDEX CONTOUR www.jvajva.com TERLINE LOCATES OF *Winter 2T COLLINS LOVELAN /�� PROPOSED INTERMEDIATE CONTOUR Boulder•FortCPlli9s•DenvePark Glenwood Springs TER DISTRICT. Uj.j EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION TOP 0 CONCRETEBWA +03.54 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION 30 0 30 60 m ! F HISTORIC DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY (MAJOR BASIN) SCALE IN FEET HISTORIC DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY (SUB BASIN)� M DEVELOPED DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY (MAJOR BASIN) TO F PARA T ° GRAT W ' FT HW RAIL° V ` ` \\ � � � � � � DEVELOPED DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY (SUB BASIN) CTRIC I \\ \ 8 ELE - \ Q \ - CABINET I I \a .: ° �. ° \\ � DIRECTION OF FLOW (HISTORIC) c�aeaET� - I WA I. IN \- -FOR PUMP \ ' wvAATI� I - \ ► DIRECTION OF FLOW (DEVELOPED) / ------ \ °dw I=> OVERFLOW PATH BASIN DESIGN POINT a I \ \ \\ \\ 1�/ / /%/ ///// // // \I '// \\ �\ E °. _ DRAINAGE BASIN IDENTIFICATION BUBBLE III ' 1 \TRIM TY�FT�INGH� // / // // \ \ �\ rA A = DEVELOPED BASIN DESIGNATION I � 1 � '� / / / // = \ 50 1.0 .50 = 100-YR RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 1.0 = AREA ACRES .44 1.4 � `�\. \ \� z ° U \ O =S LI OF°CIT 0 -oL ELECT o I I E / DEVELOPED RUNOFF SUMMARY v TABLE LU I I - `, { ° \ (6F Df IIGF��P E}� OT \� \ Z -YR U) DESIGN AREA 100 / J \ BASIN POINT (ACRES) RUNOFF (CfS) j ERLIN LOCATE OFJ =I � �• � 11 1 / I / \ \ W T COL NS LOVERAND ER DI l I I \I / / I / OUTI G BRICK \\ I \ Al 4 1.23 5.11 A2 5 0.29 0.69 I 1 I � BR 1.5 FT p \ A3 6 0.93 2.16 6 � 1 S TIC NK COVERTS I \ \ \ 2F DIA. I st3a HI FT DIA. \ ' A4 7 0.76 1.78 $ ca \\ TANK OPENING 2D 3DEEP SEPTIC 'W PE<N 2I 3D EP ` 0 \ Ol $ 1.3$ 4.35 02 1 9 1 0.67 1 2.70 T An \i LOEA ES LIN OF _TOP TER OF \ \ a I GA E 3/4" P C. E AL-L \ T WIDE. PVC. a LLJ LLJ Q Z LL W a I I v v n v Al 5 .50 1.2 - v v 1P DESIGNED BY: MEC/MMC DRAWN BY: MMC/CMS , >� �� CHECKED BY: CFG I I I A \ \ i �' s. - JOB #: 240729.CIV � I II I I �� DATE: JUNE, 2024 NOTE: �,r,' , JVA, INC TOP SOIL PILE AREA NOT \ INCLUDED IN SURFACE. d 1 ONLY NATURAL GROUN A I III ! F., CONSIDFR�n < �r" f COM A T CABLE TV , < r FIBE @PTICS LOC TES LINE. I I I I I I - J I I I I I I I rA3 I J I l 50 0.9 C � �s' rz a ••'• � `` 02 v � II i y ° d , L�' � ,lam c :'�': �£ \\\ � , .Q I � - wi � a �� S. - Q. �o J -` ; .° _ � � 6 ;,. i a C) - ➢ `,�"- n ; ..�N IE= ', \\ . � � W tr a w C14 x o I V v a� L a \ �I Q o ' LU Ld :P::..::.::::::.00 U) A � O LL ----- $ of 96112L A �A\ 5 i OLL r H RMWATER CB INLET \ Q O�aC y c1 N 8" VC-49 .98 N SE RCP-4956.98 c ; \ )OR 0 BOX ELEV. = 4957.00 - V ` \ r� O r^^ V) I � N O I - �t FMP d V �/ ° SD 1653o X - - ' ° d GRA"c OCA7ES LINE OF POUDRE L.L a �- ATE MH CHAIN LINK FENCE I I w /ST0IWAT R LE� v SCHOOL DISTRICT STORMWATER IM-4960.38 FL W 24"RCP-4 54.14 \ LINE. ( ) \ v SWMH SW r I 8FT HIGH ° 60.38 I FL E 30"ADS PL-4Q54.09 c .3 L NW 24"RCP 4956.48 / o L E 24"RCP'rV56.36 /1 FLOOR BOX ELEV.=4J954.14 \ �' v / \\ CENTER OF GATE ` L TOP BAR \ \ - 4 (91FT WIDE). n I .7 T WIDE (. f.;, n�-SIG NO ENTR� I SIGN S v I �.� V � OP BAR v� ° -f (8FT HIGH) CHAIN LINI,. t / w \ 1.6F WIDE 0 RAMP/ \\ v �..� o o ° n / U I \I m SHEET NO. / 1 m U r I w I \ I BACON PARK EX2 o ECTRIC OC ES LINE 1) / SCHOOL BLDG 16749 APPENDIX B - HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC COMPUTATIONS JVA Incorporated Job Name: CoFC Schoolside Park 1% C2 C5 C10 C100 ""��, 213 Linden Street,S 200 Job Number: 240729.CIV Streets Paved 100% 0.95 0.00 0.95 1.00 """J„`"' Fort Collins,CO 80524 Date: 8/20/24 Concrete Drives/Walks 100% 0.95 0.00 0.95 1.00 `� " ` Ph:(970)225 9099 By: MMC Roof 90% 0.95 0.00 0.95 1.00 Gravel 40% 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.63 Landscaping(B soil) 2% 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.19 CoFC Schoolside Park Landscaping(C/D soil) 2% 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.31 Historic Runoff Coefficient&Time of Concentration Calculations Playground 25% 0.11 0.00 0.11 0.14 Location: Fort Collins Artificial Turf 25% 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.25 Minor Design Storm: Major Design Storm: 100 Soil Type: CID Basin Design Data I(%)= 100% 100% 90% 40% 25% 25% 2% 2% 1(%) Runoff Coeffs Initial Overland Time(t;) Travel Time(tt) 60) tt=Length/(Velocity x t�Comp tc Urbanized Check I. ON Final Ape Aiscape(e 446w a Upper Time of Total Basin Design sheets Add-/.. A, Agra Apiygnd Aart.and s.i1 (cro snip ATota1 ATorai Imp C2 C5 C10 C100 most Slope(%) t; Length Slope Type of Land Surface K Velocity tt Conc Length t�(U180)+ Min Name Point (sf) nc (sf) (sf) (sf) (sf) (sf) (sf) (sf) (sf) (ac) (%) Length (min) (ff) (%) (fps) (min) *tr=k (ff) 10(min.) t H1 1 0 0 3,359 0 0 0 0 156,869 169,361 3.89 3.6% 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.31 300 0.5% t26.4 312 0.5% Short Pasture and 7 0.5 10.6 55.7 612 13.4 13.4 lawns 01 2 0 6,757 103 2,274 0 0 0 31,115 40,248 0.92 20.8% 0.38 0.00 0.38 0.45 100 4.1% 159 5.0% Paved areas&shallow 20 4.5 0.6 13.2 259 11.4 11.4 aved swales 02 3 0 5,319 0 3,165 0 0 0 12,743 21,227 0.49 32.2% 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.53 300 2.3% 260 0.2% Grassed waterway 15 0.7 6.6 33.0 560 13.1 13.1 Total TAL SITE 1 0 12,076 3,462 5,439 0 1 0 0 200,727 221,703 5.09 9.6% 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.37 Runoff Coeffs Rainfall Intensities in/hr Area Flow Rates cfs Time of Basin Design Conc C2 C5 C10 C100 2 5 10 100 A­ ATotal Q2 Q5 Q10 Q100 Name Point (tc) (sf) (ac) H1 1 13.4 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.31 1.98 0.00 3.35 6.84 169,361 3.89 1.90 0.00 3.26 8.22 01 2 11.4 0.38 0.00 0.38 0.45 2.10 0.00 3.58 7.32 40,248 0.92 0.74 0.00 1.27 3.02 02 3 13.1 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.53 1.97 0.00 3.38 6.90 21,227 0.49 0.45 0.00 0.76 1.79 TOTAL SITE 221,703 5.09 3.09 0.00 5.29 13.03 JVA Civil Rational Calculations Historic Page 1 of 1 JVA Incorporated Job Name: CoFC Schoolside Park li C2 C5 C10 C100 213 Linden Street,S 200 Job Number: 240729.CIV streets Paved 100% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 �� •�f Fort Collins,CO 80524 Date: 8/20124 Concrete Drives/Walks 100% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 Ph:(970)225 9099 By: MMC Roof 90% 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 Gravel 40% 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.63 Landscaping(B soil) 2% 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.19 CoFC Schoolside Park Landscaping CID soil) 2% 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.31 Composite Runoff Coefficient Calculations Playground 25% 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.14 Location: Fort Collins Artificial Turf 25! 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.25 Minor Design Stonn: 2 Major Design Storm: 100 Soil Type: C/D Basin Design Data I(%)= 100% 100% 90% 40% 25% 25% 2% 2% 1(%) Runoff Coeffs Basin Design Apaved ^ riveslc 'S "P 9 A Alscape(B Alscape A A Im 9 '�`tl Arcof ravel ly nd art.turf Total Total P Name Point streets one (sf) (sf) (sf) (sf) (sf) soil) (C/Dsoil) (sf) (ac) (%) C2 C5 C10 C100 (sf) (sf) (sf) Al 4 0 19,714 1,052 0 2,548 0 0 30.184 53,498 1.23 40.9% 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.57 A2 5 0 0 0 708 0 0 0 11,831 12,539 0.29 4.1% 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.33 A3 6 0 2,228 0 1,106 7,355 0 0 29,951 40,640 0.93 12.6% 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.33 A4 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33,263 33,263 0.76 2.0/ 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.31 Ot 8 0 7,425 0 0 0 0 0 52,648 60,072 1.38 14.1% 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.40 02 9 0 6,003 0 742 0 0 0 30,796 29,185 0.67 23.7% 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.55 Detention A1-A4 0 21,942 1,052 1,814 9,903 0 0 105,229 139,940 3.21 1 20.1 Total TAL SITE 0 1 35,370 1 1,052 1 2,556 1 9,903 1 0 1 0 188,673 237,553 1 5.45 18.3% 0.35 1 0.35 1 0.35 0.41 JVA Civil Rational Calculations Basin Data Page 1 of 2 JVA Incorporated Job Name: CoFC Schoolside Park 213 Linden Street,S 200 Job Number: 240729.CIV Fort Collins,CO 524 D 4 Ph:(970)225 099 By: MMC CoFC Schoolside Park Time of Concentration Calculations Location: Fort Collins Minor Design Storm: PC/D 2 Major Design Storm: 00 Soil Type: Sub-Basin Data Initial Overland Time(t;) Travel Time(Q t.Comp tc Urbanized Check t. tt=Length/(Velocity x 60) ON Final Upper Basin Design A Time of g ro�ai most t; Length Velocity tt Total 80) Min Name Point (ac) C5 Length Slope(%) (min) (ft) Slope(%) Type of Land Surface C„ (fps) (min) Conc Length(ft) +10(min) tc (n) t'+tt._tc Al 4 1.23 0.52 157 1.9% 10.8 107 1.4% Paved areas&shallow 20 2.3 0.8 11.6 264 11.5 11.5 paved swales A2 5 0.29 0.26 100 0.3% 22.9 161.5 0.2% Paved areas&shallow 20 0.9 2.9 25.8 261.5 11.5 11.5 paved swales A3 6 0.93 0.27 100 1.4% 13.6 107 2.7% Short Pasture and lawns 7 1.2 1.5 15.1 407 12.3 12.3 A4 7 0.76 0.25 43.5 8.1% 5.1 237.5 1.0% Short Pasture and lawns 7 0.7 5.7 10.8 237.5 11.3 10.8 01 8 1.38 0.34 100 4.1% 8.7 159 5.0% Paved areas&shallow 20 4.5 0.6 9.3 459 12.6 9.3 paved swales 02 9 0.67 1 0.47 1 300 1 2.3% 15.1 260 0.2% Grassed waterway 15 0.7 6.6 21.6 260 11.4 11.4 JVA Civil Rational Calculations Basin Data Page 2 of 2 JVA Incorporated Job Name: CoFC Schoolside Park 213 Linden Street,S 200 Job Number: 240729.CIV Fort Collins,CO 524 D 4 Ph:(970)225 099 By: MMC CoFC SChOOlside Park Developed Storm Runoff Calculations Design Storm: 100 Year Point Hour Rainfall(Pj): 2.86 Direct Runoff Total Runoff Inlets Pipe Pipe/Swale Travel Time E o a- o m a > w m 3 o v m z v U T U 0 N N > lO o _O C m p L iA L raj) H N dO N LL 0_ U r 'V C F y .W .� m Q 2 '��' o c U 2 a� ct0i a n m n o n,fin m o' C E m e o m o ¢ U C7 r E w C" c7 a 0 a a U) 'a u r j > E z Al 4 1.23 0.57 11.50 0.70 7.29 5.11 11.50 0.70 7.29 5.11 A2 5 0.29 0.33 11.50 0.10 7.29 0.69 11.50 0.10 7.29 0.69 A3 6 0.93 0.33 12.30 0.31 7.09 2.16 12.30 0.31 7.09 2.16 A4 7 0.76 0.31 10.80 0.24 7.48 1.78 10.80 0.24 7.48 1.78 Total to Detention 12.30 1.34 7.09 9.50 01 8 1.38 0.40 9.30 0.55 7.94 4.35 9.30 0.55 7.94 4.35 02 9 0.67 0.55 11.40 0.37 7.32 2.70 11.40 0.37 7.32 2.70 JVA Civil Rational Calculations Q100 Page 1 of 1 JVA Incorporated Job Name: CoFC Schoolside Park III\1/��11 213 Linden Street, S 200 Job Number: 240729.CIV "J)l`J/l` Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: 8/20/24 Ph: (970) 225 9099 By: MMC CoFC Schoolside Park LID AREA Calculations per City of Fort Collins The implementation of LID systems requires one of the following two options: 1i 50% of the newly added or modified impervious area must be treated by LID techniques and 25% of new paved (vehicle use) areas must be pervious_ 2) 75% of all newly added or modified impervious area must be treated by LID techniques. Acres Notes Total Site Area = 5.45 Area within the drainage boundary Total Site Impervious Area = 1.00 Area of impervious surfaces Added or Modified Impervious Area = 0.51 Area of impervious surfaces - existing impervious surface area Kequired impervious Area to 0.38 75% of added or modified impervious area be treated by LID = Total Site Area to LID = 1.23 Provided Impervious Area to LID = 0.49 Impervious surfaces are defined as hardscape surfaces that do not allow stormwater to infiltrate into the ground. Impervious surfaces include asphalt and concrete surfaces, concrete curbs, gutters, sidewalks, patios and rooftops. (Impervious surface areas must be assumed for single family residential lots when overall impervious areas are being determined for residential developments. The assumed areas must then be included in LID calculations.) JVA Civil Rational Calculations LID Area Page 1 of 1 DETENTION VOLUME BY THE MODIFIED FAA METHOD Project:Schoolside Park Basin ID: (For catchments less than 160 acres only. For larger catchments,use hydrograph routing method) (NOTE:for catchments larger than 90 acres.CUHP hydrograph and routing are recommended) Determination of MINOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method Determination of MAJOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method Design Information(Input): Design Information(Input): Catchment Drainage Imperviousness 1a= 20.10 percent Catchment Drainage Imperviousness Ia= 20A0 percent Catchment Drainage Area A= 3.210 acres Catchment Drainage Area A= 3.210 acres Predevelopment NRCS Sol]Group Type= C A,B,C,or D Predevelopment NRCS Soil Group Type= C A,.B,.C,or D Return Period for Detention Control T= 2 years(2,5,10,25,50,or 100) Return Period for Detention Control T= 100 years(2,5,10,25,50,or 100) Time of Concentration of Watershed Tc= 12 minutes Time of Concentration of Watershed To= 12 minutes Allowable Unit Release Rate q= 0.62 cfslacre Allowable Unit Release Rate q= 0.62 cfs/acre One-hour Precipitation P,= 0.82 inches One-hour Precipitation P,= 2.86 inches Design Rainfall IDF Formula i=C1*PAC2+TJ-cC Design Rainfall IDF Formula i=C1*P,/(C2+T.)-C, Coefficient One C,= 28.50 Coefficient One C,= 28.50 Coefficient Two Cz= 10 Coefficient Two Cz= 10 Coefficient Three Ca= 0.7t19 Coefficient Three Ca= 0.789 Determination of Average Outflow from the Basin(Calculated): Determination of Average Outflow from the Basin(Calculated): Runoff Coefficient C= 0.17 Runoff Coefficient C= 0.55 Inflow Peak Runoff Qp-in= 1A3 cfs Inflow Peak Runoff Qp-in= 12.79 is Allowable Peak Outflow Rate Qp-out= 2.00 cfs Allowable Peak Outflow Rate Qp-out= 2.00 cfs Mod.FAA Minor Storage Volume= 0 cubic feet Mod.FAA Major Storage Volume= 14,473 cubic feet Mod.FAA Minor Storage Volume= 0.000 acre-ft Mod.FAA Major Storage Volume= 0.332 acr4 5 <-Enter Rainfall Duration Incremental Increase Value Here(e.g.5 for 5-Minutes) Rainfall Rainfall Inflow Adjustment Average Outflow Storage Rainfall Rainfall Inflow Adjustment Average Outflow Storage Duration Intensity Volume Factor Outflow Volume Volume Duration Intensity Volume Factor Outflow Volume Volume minutes inches/hr acre-feet "m.. cf$ acre-feet acre-feet minutes inches/hr acre-feet "m" cfs acre-feet acre-feet (input) output (output) (output) output (output (output) input .(output) (output) (output) (output) (output) (output) 0 goo 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 Q000 5 2.76 0.010 1.00 2.00 0.014 i 0.003 5 9.62 0.117 1.00 2,00 0.014 0.103 10 2.20 0.017 1.00 2.00 0,028 0.011 10 7.67 0.186 1.00 2.00 0.028 0.159 15 1.84 0.021 0.88. 1.77 0.037 0.016. 15 6.43 0.235 0.88 1.77 0.037 0.198 20 1.60 0.024 0.79 1:58 0.043 0.019 20 5.57 0.271 0.79 1.56 0.043 0.227 25 1.41 0.027 0.73 1A6 0.050 -0.024 25 4.93 0.300 0.73 1.46 0.050 0.250 30 1.27 0.029 0.69 1.38 0.057 -0.028 30 4.44 0.324 0.69 1.38 0.057 0.267 35 1.16 0.031 0.66 1.33 0.064 -0.034 35 4.04 0.344 0.66 1.33 0.064 0.280. 40 1.07 0.032 0.64 1.29 0,071 -0,039 40 3.72 0.362 0.64 129 0.071 0291 45 0.99 0.033 0.63 1.26 0.078 -0.044 45 3.45 0.378 0.63 1.26 0.078 0.300 50 0.92 0.035 0.62 1.23 0.085 -0.050 50 322 0.392 0.62 1.23 0.085 0.307 55 0.87 0.036 0.60 1.21 0.092 -0.056 55 3.03 0.405 0.60 1.21 0.092 0.313 60 0.82 0.037 0.60 1.19 0.098 -0.062 60 2,85 0.416 0.60 1.19 0.098 0.318 65 0.77 0.038 0.59 1.18 0.105 -0.068 65 2.70 0.427 0.59 1.18 omti 0.322 70 0.74 0.039 1 0.58 1.16 1 0.112 -0.074 70 1 257 0A37 0.58 1.16 0.112 0.325 75 0.70 0.041) 0.58 1.15 0.119 -0.080 75 2.45 0.447 0.68 1.15 0.119 0.327 80 0.67 0.040 0.57 1.14 0,126 -0.086 80 2.34 0.455 1 0.57 1.14 0.126 0,329 85 0.64 0.041 0.57 1.14 0.133 -0.092 85 224 0.464 0.57 1A4 0.133 0.331 90 0.62 0.042 0.56 1.13 0,140 -0.098 90 2.15 0.471 0.56 1.13 0.140 0.332 95 0.59 0.042 0.56. 1.12 0.147 -0.104 95 2.07 0.479 0.56 1.12 0.147 0.332 100 0.57 0.043 0.56 1.12 0.154 -0.111 100 200 0.486 0.56 1.12 0.154 0.332 105 0.55 0.044 0.55 '1.11 0.160 -0.117 105 1.93 0.493 0.56 1.11 0.160 0.332 110 0.53 0.044 0.55 1.10 0.167 -0.123 110 1.87 0.499 0.55 1.10 0.167 0.332 115 0.52 0.045 0.55 1.10 0.174 -0.129 115 1.81 0.505 0.55 1.10 0.174 0.331 120 0.50 0,046 0.55 1.10 0,181 -0.136 120 1.75 0.511 0.55 1.10 0.181 0,330 125 0.49 0.046 0.55 1.09 0.188 -0.142 125 1.70 0.517 0.55 1.09 0.188 0.329 130 0.47 0.046 0.54 1.09 0,195 -0.149 130 1.65 0.522 0.54 1.09 0.195 0.327 135 0.46 0.047 0.54 1.09 0.202 -0.155 135 1.61 0.527 0.54 1.09 0.202 0.326 140 0.45 0.047 0.54. 1.08 0.209 -0.161 140 1.56 0.533 0.54 1.08 0.209 0.324 145 0.44 0.048 0.54 '1.08 0.216 -0.168 145 1.52 0.537 0.54 1.08 0.216 0.322 150 0.43 0.048 0.54 1.08 0.222 -0.174 150 1.49 0.542 0.54 1.08 0.222 0.320 155 0.42 0.048 0.54 1.07 0.229 -0.181 155 1.45 0.547 0.54 1,07 0.229 0.318 160 0.41 1 0.049 0.54 1.07 0,236 -0.187 160 1.42 0.551 0.54 1.07 0.236 0,315 165 0.40 0.049 0.53 1.07 0.243 -0.194 165 t.39 0.556 0.53 1.07 0.243 0.313 170 0.39 0.050 0.53 1.07 0,250 -0.200 1 170 1.35 0.560 0.53 1.07 0.250 0.310 175 0.38 0.050 0.53 1.07 0.257 -0.207 175 1.33 0.564 0.53 1.07 0.257 0.307 180 0.37 0.050 0.53 1.06 0.264 -0.213 180 1.30 0.568 0.53 1.06 0.264 0.304 185 0.36 0.051 0.53 1.06 0.271 -0.220 185 1.27 0.572 0.53 1.06 0.271 0.301 190 0.36 0.051 0.53 1.06 0.278 -0.227 190 1.25 0.576 0.53 1.06 0.278 0.298 195 0.35 0.051 0.53 1.06 0.284 -0.233 195 1.22 0.580 0.53 1,06 0.284 0,295 200 0.34 0.052 1 0.53 1.06 0,291 -0.240 200 1.20 0.583 0.53 1.06 0.291 0292 205 0.34 0.052 0.53 1.06 0.298 -0.246 205 1.18 0.587 0.53 1.06 0.298 0.289 210 0.33 0.052 0.53 1.05 0.305 -0.253 210 1.16 0.590 0.53 1.05 0.305 0.285 215 0.33 0.063 0.53 1.05 0.312 1 -0.259 215 1A4 0.594 0.53 1.05 0.312 0.282 220 0.32 0.053 0.53 1.05 0.319 -0.266 220 1.12 0.597 0.53 1.05 0.319 0.278 225 0.31 0.053 0.53 1.05 0.326 -0.273 225 1.10 0.601 0.53 1.05 0.326 0.275 230 0.31 0.054 0.53 1.05 0.333 -0.279 230 1.08 0.604 0.53 1.05 0.333 0.271 235 0.30 0.054 0.52 1.05 0.340 -0.286M255 1.06 0.607 0.52 1,05 0.340 0.287 240 0.30 0.054 0.52 1.05 0,346 -0.292 1.05 0.610 0.52 1.05 0.346 0264 245 0.30 0.054 0.52 1.05 0.353 -0.299 1.03 0.613 0.52 1.05 0.353 0.260 250 0.29 0.055 0.52 1.05 0.360 -0.306 1.01 0.616 0.52 1.05 0.360 0.256 255 029 0.055 0.52 1.05 0.367 -0.312 1.00 0619 0,52 1.05 0.367 0.252 260 0.28 0.055 0.52 1.04 0.374 -0.319 0.98 0.622 0.52 1.04 0.374 0.248265 0.28 0.055 0.52 '1.04 0.381 -0.325 0.97 0.625 0.52 1.04 0.381 0244 270 0.27 0.056 0.52 1.04 0.388 -0.332 0.96 0.628 0.52 1.04 0.388 0.240 275 027 0.056 0.52 1.04 0.395 -0.339 275 1 0.94 0.630 0.52 1,04 0.395 0.236 280 0.27 0.056 0.52 1.04 0,402 -0,345 280 0.93 0.633 0.52 1.04 0.402 0232 285 026 0.056 0.52 1.04 0.408 -0.352 285 0.92 0.636 0.52 1.04 0.408 0.227 290 0.26 0.057 0.52 1.04 0.415 -0359 290 0.91 0.638 0.52 1.04 0.415 0.223 295 026 0.057 0.52 1.04 0.422 -0.365 295 0.89 0.641 0.52 1.04 0.422 0.219 300 0.25 0.057 0.52 1.04 0.429 -0.372 300 0,88 0.644 0.52 1 1.04 0.429 0.214 Mod.FAA Minor Storage Volume(cubic ft.)= 0 Mod.FAA Major Storage Volume(cubic ft.)= 14,473 Mod.FAA Minor Storage Volume(acre-ft.)= 0.0000 Mod.FAA Major Storage Volume(acre-ft.)= 0.3322 UDFCD DETENTION BASIN VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 2.34,Released November 2013 Detention v 2.34-FAA Method,Modified FAA 812012024,8:48 PM DETENTION VOLUME BY THE MODIFIED FAA METHOD Project:Schoolside Park Basin ID: Inflow and Outflow Volumes vs. Rainfall Duration 0.7 — — 0.6 0.5 d 0.4 m w d L) E 0.3 •••• ••••••••• • • 0.2 • - 0.1 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Duration(Minutes) +MMot Stmn MflowVaM1im• �MMw elmvn OUNNw Vdun• a InnorStanf eNrzpe V•Mre �-r�mela Bmrm XMuw volume �Matnr sroiin ouukwvoiiun• • M)msmrm smxpevwume UDFCD DETENTION BASIN VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 2.34,Released November 2013 Detention v 2.34-FAA Method,Modified FAA 812012024,8:48 PM STAGE-STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS Project: Schoolside Park Basin ID: D— ---- - side S]W Z sae slope z Dot Sae gape= ---___-� Da(zi FW }l- A W -> W� V Sae Slopr E "t L �_________C________> gi M&Skpe= Design Information(Input): Check Basin Shave Width of Basin Bottom,W ft Right Triangle OR... Length of Basin Bottom,L =�ft Isosceles Triangle OR... Dam Side-slope(H:V),Zd = ft/ft Rectangle OR... Circle/Ellipse OR... Irregular I l(Use Overide values in cells G32:G52) MINOR MAJOR Storage Requirement from Sheet'Modified FAA': 0.33 acre-ft. Stage-Storage Relationship: Storage Requirement from Sheet'Hydrograph': acre-ft. Storage Requirement from Sheet'Full-Spectrum': acre-ft. Labels Water Side Basin Basin Surface Surface Volume Surface Volume Target Volumes for WQCV,Minor, Surface Slope Width at Length at Area at Area at Below Area at Below for WQCV,Minor, &Major Storage Elevation (H:V) Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage &Major Storage Stages ft ft/ft ft ft ftz ftZ User ft' acres acre-ft Volumes (input) (input) Below El. (output) output (output) Overide output (output) (output) for goal seek) 4954.50 input 0 0.000 0.000 4955.00 0.00 0.00 2,873 718 0.066 0.016 4955.50 0.00 0.00 9,018 3,691 0.207 0.085 4956.00 0.00 0.00 14,955 9,684 0.343 0.222 4956.50 0.00 0.00 17,722 17,853 0.407 0.410 4957.00 0.00 0.00 20,885 27,505 0.479 0.631 4957.50 0.00 0.00 23,420 38,581 0.538 0.886 4958.00 0.00 0.00 28,242 51,496 0.648 1.182 4958.50 0.00 0.00 32,900 66,782 0.755 1.533 4959.00 0.00 0.00 41,308 85,334 0.948 1.959 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A Detention v 2.34-FAA Method,Basin 8/20/2024,8:57 PM STAGE-STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS Project: Basin ID: STAGE-STORAGE CURVE FOR THE POND 5010.20 4960.20 4910.20 d d 4860.20 W 0) m 4810.20 4760.20 4710.20 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Storage (acre-feet) Detention v 2.34-FAA Method,Basin 8/20/2024,8:57 PM Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden(RG) UD-BMP(Version 3.07,March 2018) Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: MIMIC Company: Date: August 20,2024 Project: CoFC Schoolside Park Location: 1.Basin Storage Volume A)Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area,la la= 40.9 % (100%if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio(i=]all 00) i= 0.409 C) Water Quality Capture Volume(WQCV)for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV= 0.15 watershed inches (WQCV=0.8*(0.91*i3-1.19*iZ+0.78*i) D) Contributing Watershed Area(including rain garden area) Area= 53,500 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume(WQCV)Design Volume Vwocv= 650 cu ft Vol=(WQCV/12)*Area F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region,Depth of d6=0 in Average Runoff Producing Storm G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VwOCV OTHER=0cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume(WQCV)Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume(WQCV)Design Volume VWOCV USER=0cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2.Basin Geometry A)WQCV Depth(12-inch maximum) Dwgcv=©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= 438 sq ft D)Actual Flat Surface Area AAcwai= 1045 sq ft E)Area at Design Depth(Top Surface Area) Ara= 2049 sq ft F)Rain Garden Total Volume VT= 774 cu ft (VT=((ATw+AAct-1)/2)*Depth) 3.Growing Media Choose One p 18"Rain Garden Growing Media OO Other(Explain): Reduced to 12"due to lack of cover 4.Underdrain System Choose One A)Are underdrains provided? OO YES O NO B)Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i)Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y= 1.8 ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii)Volume to Drain in 12 Hours V0I12= 650 cu ft iii)Orifice Diameter,3/8"Minimum Do= 5/8 in UD-BMP_v3(version 1)-JPW,RG 8/20/2024,9:00 PM Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: MIMIC Company: Date: August 20,2024 Project: CoFC Schoolside Park Location: 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric Choose One O YES A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity OO NO of structures or groundwater contamination? 6. Inlet/Outlet Control Choose One O Sheet Flow-No Energy Dissipation Required A) Inlet Control t7 Concentrated Flow-Energy Dissipation Provided Choose One 7.Vegetation O Seed(Plan for frequent weed control) O Plantings O Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod 8. Irrigation Choose One O YES A) Will the rain garden be irrigated? O NO Notes: UD-BMP_v3(version 1)-JPW,RG 8/20/2024,9:00 PM Weir Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk®Civil 3D®by Autodesk, Inc. Monday,Aug 19 2024 Emergency Spillway Trapezoidal Weir Highlighted Crest = Sharp Depth (ft) = 0.42 Bottom Length (ft) = 10.00 Q (cfs) = 9.500 Total Depth (ft) = 1.00 Area (sqft) = 4.91 Side Slope (z:1) = 4.00 Velocity (ft/s) = 1.94 Top Width (ft) = 13.36 Calculations Weir Coeff. Cw = 3.10 Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 9.50 Depth (ft) Emergency Spillway Depth (ft) 2.00 2.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 0.50 Noor0.50 0.00 0.00 -0.50 1 1 1 1 -0.50 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 Weir W.S. Length (ft)