Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTONERIDGE PUD, FOURTH FILING, PHASE II FINAL - 21 92K - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - DRAINAGE REPORT' Northern Engineering Services, Inc. March 18, 1996 If City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 235 Mathews ' Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 ■ RE: Stone Ridge P.U.D. Fourth Filing, Phase II Fort Collins, Colorado Project Number: 9613.00 Dear Staff: LNorthern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final Drainage Report for Stone Ridge P.U.D. Fourth Filing, Phase II for your review. This report was prepared in compliance with technical criteria set forth in the ' City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards manual. 1 If you should have any questions or comments as you review this report, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. rSincerely, NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. George A. Schoc Mary B. Wohnrade, I 1 420 S. Howes, Suite 202 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 • (970) 221-4158 • Fax (970) 221-4159 DEVELOPED HYDROLOGY Stone Creek P.U.D Fourth Filing, Phase II, Fort Collins, CO. File Number: DSNPT34.WQ1 15-Mar-96 Calc DESIGN POINT 34: (Includes Basin 34) TOTAL AREA = A (ac)= 4.100 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS: (From Table 3-3) Impervoius Area/ Lot (ac)= 1.9400 C for Roofs = 0.95 Area of Streets and Walks(ac)= 1.1300 C for Concrete = 0.95 Area of Gravel Parking (ac)= 0.0000 C for Gravel = 0.50 Area of Lawn (ac)= 1.0300 C for Lawn = 0.25 COMPOSITE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT: C = 0.95(1.94+1.13)+0.25(1.03) = 0.77 4.1 Cf = 1.00 (Frequency Adjustment Factor; Storm Return Period of 2- Years) Cf = 1.25 (Frequency Adjustment Factor; Storm Return Period of 100- Years) OVERLAND FLOW: T2 = 1.87 (1.1 - CCf) SQRT(L) = 16.4 L (ft)= 150 CUBRT(S) S (%) = 20.8-17.8 = 2.00 T100 = 1.87 (1.1 - CCf) SQRT(L) = 15.5 150 CUBRT(S) C = 0.20 GUTTER FLOW: (To Sidewalk Culvert 34 L (ft)= 336 Tt = S(%)= 17.3-15.3= 0.60 336 V(fps) = 1.90 2-YEAR TIME OF CONCENTRATION; Tc2 = 100-YEAR TIME OF CONCENTRATION; Tc100 = RAINFALL INTENSITY: FROM FIGURE 3-1: i2(in/hr)= 1.88 19.3 min 18.4 min i100(in/hr)= 5.35 Q2(cfs) = CCf x i2 x A = 6.0 4:� o/< (.St -r5 , i i ) Q100(cfs)= CCf xi100xA= 21.2 < 25.(e oi�- C=cffa 1:--k. /3 I L = 2.9 60(V) min min min ■ z DEVELOPED HYDROLOGY Stone Creek P.U.D Fourth Filing, Phase II, Fort Collins, CO. File Number: DSNPT34a.WQ1 15-Mar-96 Cale DESIGN POINT 34a: (Includes Basin 34a) TOTAL AREA = A (ac)= 2.180 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS: (From Table 3-3) Impervious Area/ Lot(ac)= 1.1200 C for Roofs = 0.95 Area of Streets and Walks(ac)= 0.5900 C for Concrete = 0.95 Area of Gravel Parking (ac)= 0.0000 C for Gravel = 0.50 Area of Lawn (ac)= 0.4700 C for Lawn = 0.25 COMPOSITE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT: C = 0.95(1.12+.59)+0.25(.47) = 0.80 2.18 Cf = 1.00 (Frequency Adjustment Factor; Storm Return Period of 2- Years) Cf = 1.25 (Frequency Adjustment Factor; Storm Return Period of 100- Years) OVERLAND FLOW: T2 = 1.87 (1.1 - CCf) SQRT(L) = 16.4 L (ft)= 150 CUBRT(S) S (%) = 20.8-17.8 = 2.00 T100 = 1.87 (1.1 - CCf) SQRT(L) = 15.5 150 CUBRT(S) C = 0.20 GUTTER FLOW: (To Sidewalk Culvert 34 L (ft)= 336 Tt = S(a/o)= 17.3-15.3= 0.60 336 V(fps) = 1.90 2-YEAR TIME OF CONCENTRATION; Tc2 = 100-YEAR TIME OF CONCENTRATION; Tc100 = RAINFALL INTENSITY: FROM FIGURE 3-1: i2(in/hr)= 1.88 Q2(cfs) = CCf x i2 x A = 3.3 Q100(cfs) = CCf x i100 x A = 11.6 I 19.3 min 18.4 min i100(in/hr)= 5.35 L = 2.9 60(V) min min min 3/ DEVELOPED HYDROLOGY Stone Creek P.U.D Fourth Filing, Phase II, Fort Collins, CO. File Number: DSNPT34a.WQ1 15-Mar-96 Calc DESIGN POINT 34b: (Includes Basin 34b) TOTAL AREA = A (ac)= 1.920 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS: (From Table 3-3) Impervious Area/Lot (ac)= 0.8700 C for Roofs = 0.95 Area of Streets and Walks(ac)= 0.5500 C for Concrete = 0.95 Area of Gravel Parking (ac)= 0.0000 C for Gravel = 0.50 Area of Lawn (ac)= 0.5000 C for Lawn = 0.25 COMPOSITE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT: OVERLAND FLOW: C = 0.95(.87+.55)+0.25(.50) = 0.77 1.92 Cf = 1.00 (Frequency Adjustment Factor; Storm Return Period of 2- Years) Cf = 1.25 (Frequency Adjustment Factor; Storm Return Period of 100- Years) -12 = 1.87 (1.1 - CCf) SQRT(L) = 10.0 min L (ft)= 57.5 CUBRT(S) S (%) = 18.2-17.0 = 2.09 T100 = 1.87 (1.1 - CCf) SQRT(L) = 9.4 min 57.5 CUBRT(S) C = 0.20 GUTTER FLOW: (To Sidewalk Culvert 34 L (ft)= 318.5 S (%) = 16.65-15.3 = 318.5 V(fps) = 1.45 0.42 Tt = L = 3.7 min 2-YEAR TIME OF CONCENTRATION; Tc2 = 13.6 min 100-YEAR TIME OF CONCENTRATION; TC100 = 13.1 min RAINFALL INTENSITY: FROM FIGURE 3-1: i2(in/hr)= 2.20 i100(in/hr)= 6.35 Q2(cfs) = CCf x i2 x A = 3.2 Q100(cfs) = CCf x i100 x A = 11.7 I 60(V) 4/ DEVELOPED HYDROLOGY Stone Creek P.U.D Fourth Filing, Phase II, Fort Collins, CO. File Number: DSNPT35.WQ1 DESIGN POINT 35: (Includes Basin 34 and TOTAL AREA BASIN 34 = 4.100 TOTAL AREA BASIN 35 = 1.950 TOTAL AREA BASIN 34 AND 35= 6.050 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS: C FOR BASIN 34 = 0.7700 C FOR BASIN 35 = 0.3300 (See Pg. 11, Appendix) COMPOSITE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT: 15-Mar-96 Calc C = 0.77(4.1)+0.33(1.95) = 0.63 6.05 Cf = 1.00 (Frequency Adjustment Factor; Storm Return Period of 2- Years) Cf = 1.25 (Frequency Adjustment Factor; Storm Return Period of 100- Years) BASIN 34 TIME OF CONCENTRATION: 2-YEAR TIME OF CONCENTRATION; Tc2= 19.3 min. 100 YEAR TIME OF CONCENTRATION; Tc100= 18.4 min. SWALE FLOW: (FROM DESIGN POINT 34 TO DESIGN POINT 35) L (ft)= 575 Tt = L S (%) = 15.3 - 11.2= 0.71 60(V) 575 V(fps) = 1.32 COMPOSITE TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 34 + BASIN 35) 2-YEAR TIME OF CONCENTRATION; Tc2 = 26.6 min 100-YEAR TIME OF CONCENTRATION; Tc100 = 25.7 min RAINFALL INTENSITY: FROM FIGURE 3-1: i2(in/hr)= 1.57 i100(in/hr)= 4.55 Q2(cfs) = CCf x i2 x A = 6.0 Q100(cfs) = CCf x i100 x A = 21.6 I = 7.3 min 1 No Text I NNE mmLn M -N cc 0 C 0 C 000 0 0 0 cc J Q zN o , Ir W� G I H N V) v) 0 o a j 0 Qz Z 0 cc U 0 0 L L a � W z /�V)y C"I W UcD Z J w m LLL � Q W ~ Oz C z a U- O 0 Z D N_ N I J 0 O I ! I � ! SW L O J � J Q Z 00 Qi V r LL ~ I J ID O 0 OLLJ U o: a 2 w - U > z U a w a s Q N r� W = r K W N�> ~ Q U U V) vi Li Q m - J> C U > 5 3 r O Q c V7 Of J J w m a a ci 4 T U N a= J W� W , in mmd No Text Rw V Z U. V 0 I 0 00 ` / LL W 00 W0 aI 0W Z >0 W I�-A/ ■1 - Stoneridge PUD, Fourth Filing TPM Kaplan Co. 4-28-94 rev'd 2-28-95 This sheet calculates the composite "C" values for the Rational Method. Design Area Imperviou "C" Perviou "C" A,total A,imp ac. ac. Percent Im erv. Percent Perviou Comp. "C" 31 0.95 6.2 1.1C81 0.736 66.4 33.6 0.70 32 0.95 0.2 1.243 0.4 32.2 67.8 0.44 33 0.95 0.2 2.563 0.835 32.6 67.4 0.44 34 0.95 0.2 4.099 2.42 59.0 41.Oj 0.64 35 0.95 0.2 1.945 0.334 17.2 82.8 0.33 36 0.95 0.2 1.340 0.27 20.1 79.9 0.35 37 0.95 0.2 4.750 2,19 46.1 53.9 0.55 38 0.95 .0.21 1.7151 0.101 5.9 94.1 0.24 39 0.95 0.2 1.379 i.0.179 13.0 87.0 0.30 40 0.95 0.25 6.109i 2.539 41.6 58.41 0.54 41 0.95 0.25 0.9901. 0.155 15.7 84.3 0.36 42 0.95 0.21 C,.350 0.186 53.1 46.9 0.60 431 0.95 0.21 1.193 0.9551 80.1 19.9 0.80 441 0.95 0.2 0.900 0.101.1 11.2 88.8 0.28 Z O O LLJQ OU �O J 0 Q O ry LJ Q ry Z J I IF � I LL oQ q� ailw' o 0 w z 0 N s — n 14 U 7 W 08 Z W es W t' We Z w� Ex-F O z Cn N N G1 � N m Ci Y� za 0 w W 0z� A a W O W '1' c CI! LL W 0 0 F' m 0 LL • s O CL O. .G CiS � C o CA 00 M CO CD1� CO Cn CO It � CO M CO %- •L 1� rD r CO O O CO Co O 1 1� CO f M 'L F C Ch O 1� c0 C 1� M O 00 .- O Ln � r r CC 6 i CO v w O M w CO N M N N O •- N r- r G .. r co CO0U? U�LqtiLnM0000r*.:CO•tC` CO o O O O O O O O N O O M O O v R 'L a O Q O O 0 0 0 1n to O O O O O O r Cn Cl) C'M 1- N st e} CO O> CVr •a CV) e It st CO N CO N O et N p � J M Cn CC) r N - O CO O CA OO ti 'd N CO C C In N O CO r M W CO O f` N N N N N N M N N N N to N N M a) po; y w O O N O O O O CO O O L6. 0 oO0 OOD O a La CO r r r M J � C 0 M M N O U •Q Nt LO o 0 m COO cOo N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 mcu 0 N ry co O 0 v to N M r O H CA 0� N f9 r r N 4 m N M M M M M M M M M d st st M, IU) lo N N cC 0 mr I fl/ 1 �1 111; IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIAIIIII . . �6111 11llllllllilllllllllllilllill �111111111 11111111111111111111111111 �111.��1 IiN�� 111111 `IIIIII�11111 =111111 i line, IIB111 1111111111111 ' ®01111111 11111 111111A1i11111111111 . �11111111111 1111011111111111111111 Em 111 1111111111111k11111 ��111AI161L1 811111111116111 1111 ''111111A11111 11111 11 111 1111111 111101111'11 �11111m11 Illl�lllllllllllll�illl�l _, ' 1�1��111 ®0101�� �1 � ����fiflll�����8�lliil�gll �0 : OIIAIIIIIIIIIAA�1::1111 �0' II iAl ' �1: '' 1�11 III�111���111111�11 , ®1 , ,• I �� ®0 MAY 1984 5-3 \'��/' DESIGN CRITERIA as C& N N d N L oat E-46w°z �0a z�WH C) 00 TWO O O CD M CO k w m O C O u- o 'D c ob L 0 C E "- a) 0 ll�) M 0` r- M to t1� O I� � M ti� .-- O `ct O O U') CO CD (D M M (D M O U-)(D E e- CV .- r I� (D O� O O P (D O O ti ci ,C CO O 1� �t C) O 1- (D CO O o0 �- Cl Lo N (D CO. 'ct M CM co co co N co N N N CV i — (D (D U) U? 1-. I- Ln co Ln LO co ti tD �t O U! o O O O Cl O O O O N O O M O O F— L 0 0 O O O O O LO LO Lo O CD O O O O «. Lo CO M 1� a- N 'ct 00 0)C144 •- 'it C co it 'ci' (D CO N (D co N O It N i CD � J O co N O OIO 1� f- N O Nt� C'M 00 M 1� .S M O c0 Nt CD to to co Lo m CD N M O O to E -- r- 'v N N N N M I.Q. N N N M N to N N N LO I ces w co 0 0 ul r- 0 0 0 0 0� 0 00 O O DO 00 t� O M O O N N ti.- O M '� N CO _ m f �- �-- e- M .- �-- e- Cri e- C J O mt 'ct M Lo Lo Lo U.) O m CD O O CD co U ti Nt It tD M (M Ln Ln N CO N M CD 00 N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N V' CD O Ln d' to I.- N M r O Lo O O O LO . O M 1- CDf- M e M M 77 (D y Q a- N tY .- r- Q N CD 0 0. `a' O CM C:N M '-Ct to Or�.0 CO O O r N M,4 I'd 'ro- m co M m co M M M M M d 4v 'v pr I st (� m 1 1 i L C I 7 I NO ®�11111111111111111111111111 11111111 . �81111111111111111111111111 11111111 : �11111111111111�111111111111 11111111 ��11�1 �1611111�111111111111 11111111 �611111111111111111L�IIBililllllllll ®01111111111111111111�111111111111111�1 ®IIIII01111111111�I11C�Ilillllllllllll �1111101881111111111111110111 1011111 �91: ; IA1llllllllllllllll11111 IIIBIII ®�IIIIIIIP111111�1111111111111�181111 moil liIIiAlllllillllllllillllgilalll� IIoil 1 �0�1111�111���,.11��1161111�1 ' 11�1111111110 ®� 1 I Its V w H Q 0 Z U) w 0 } Q Zcy) 9to J Q N a. w rn ~w } c Lb �L UJ OI ZM 7c at 0 a: OE COo cc OLL LL cc LL Q U a. r MAY 1984 5-3 DESIGN CRITERIA w J Q N Z Q w J z LL 0 z w 0 l4 I UNLINED CHANNEL DESIGN CRITERIA ' REFERENCE: THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS "STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS", MAY, 1984. SECTION 7.2, UNLINED CHANNELS r1 ) MAXIMUM SIDE SLOPES = 4: 1 2) MAXIMUM DEPTH OF FLOW IN CHANNEL = 4.0' 3) SUBCRITICAL FLOW ONLY 4) MINIMUM FREEBOAP.D = ADDITIONAL CAPACITY FOR 1 /3 OF THE DESIGN FLOW. 5) CHANNEL VELOCITY < 7.5 fps DURING THE 1 00—YF STORM. 6) CHANNEL VELOCITY > 2.0 fps DUPING THE 2—YR STORM. 7) MANNINGS "n" = 0.035 (See Tcble 2-4) 1 8) MINIMUM SLOPE OF CHANNEL = 2.0% (FOR `LOPES LESS THAN 2.07. A A SUBDP.AII',I SHALL BE PROVIDED) 9) MINIMUM PADIUS = 1 00' OR TWICE THE TOPWIDTH OF THE DESIGN FLOW. I I 1 s/ Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow ' Worksheet Name: STONE RIDGE PUD ' Comment: SWALE #34, Q2=6.0 Solve For Depth CFS Given Input Data: ' Left Side Slope.. 4.00:1 (H:V) Right Side Slope. 4.00:1 (H:V) Manning's n...... Channel Slope.... 0.035 0.0060 ft/ft Discharge........ 6.00 cfs ' Computed Results: Depth.. •...... 0.89 ft Velocity......... 1.88 fps Flow Area........ Flow Top Width... 3.19 sf 7.14 ft Wetted Perimeter. 7.36 ft ' Critical Depth... Critical Slope... 0.67 ft 0.0267 ft/ft Froude Number.... FULL IM I] I Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.42 (c) 1991 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 I 1 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: STONE RIDGE P.U.D.] Comment: Swale #34; Q100= 21.2 cfs Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Left Side Slope.. Right Side Slope. Manning's n...... Channel Slope.... Discharge........ Computed Results: Depth............ Velocity......... Flow Area........ Flow Top Width... Wetted Perimeter. Critical Depth... Critical Slope... Froude Number.... 4.00:1 (H:V) 4.00:1 (H:V) 0.035 0.0060 ft/ft 21.20 cfs 1.43 ft 2.58 fps 8.21 sf 11.46 ft 11.82 ft 1.12 ft 0.0226 ft/ft 0.54 (flow is Subcritical) Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.42 (c) 1991 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 I i r Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: STONE RIDGE PUD Comment: SWALE #34, Q100 x 33% = 28.20 cfs Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Left Side Slope.. 4.00:1 (H:V) Right Side Slope. 4.00:1 (H:V) Manning's n...... 0.035 Channel Slope.... 0.0060 ft/ft Discharge........ 28.20 cfs Computed Results: Depth............ 1.59 ft Velocity......... 2.77 fps Flow Area.... ... 10.17 sf Flow Top Width... 12.76 ft Wetted Perimeter. 13.15 ft Critical Depth... 1.25 ft Critical Slope... 0.0217 ft/ft Froude Number.... FULL 1 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.42 (c) 1991 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 I I V N r N � = G J� ZZ O Z U � O ¢ pa oa V W W � ¢n o� �z �m m w � I N a) o e` `� O 0 0 LO Ln Ln L ") t''l Ln p_O 00 00 00 a' 3 00 00 00 n o 0 L L MC Z v W v ° n0 00 00 � -i� 00 0 0- c° n 00 WQ O O 0 0 CD U OI N I W Z O O CD a m � u � 0 � Ir c L a) N N Y O O Z N N S G Z Cj N N N N m i O O L OO v O u 3a w m a `w 0 0 ¢ U I r-� ' Final Drainage Report for Stone Ridge P.U.D. Fourth Filing, Phase II 1 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective To provide a final drainage scheme for the proposed Stone Ridge planned unit development Fourth Filing, Phase II based on master drainageway planning and preliminary drainage concepts developed by others. Specific objectives as part of this study are: 1. To adopt the drainage and grading concepts contained in the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Stone Ridge P U D Fourth Filing, Phase I, (Reference 1), 2. To consider the drainage schemes of adjacent Stone Ridge P.U.D. filings, L3. To consider any possible adverse effects downstream of the development due to developed stormwater, 1.2 Mapping and Surveying 1 Field survey information was provided by RBD, Inc. which included topographic mapping with a contour interval of one (1) foot. 1.3 Site Reconnaissance A site visit was conducted on Monday February 26, 1996 by the project engineer. Based on the topographic mapping, existing drainage basins and land use were confirmed as well as existing adjacent structures. The location of existing swales and storm inlets were verified as well as their condition and flow direction. II. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1 Site Location The project is located in the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in Fort Collins, ' Colorado. The project is bounded by Horsetooth Road to the south and County Road 9 to the east. (See Vicinity Map). Adjacent developments include Stone Ridge P.U.D. Fourth Filing, Phase I to the north and south. I 1 I I I i I I I I TABLE 4-1 INITIAL STORM - STREET RUNOFF ENCROACHMENT Street Classmcatlon Maxkm Encroachment LOCAL (Includes places, alleys No curb -overtopping. 'Flow may spread to marginal access) crown of street. COLLECTOR No curb -overtopping. 'Flow spread must leave at least one lane width free of water, MAJOR ARTERIAL No curb - overtopping. *Flow spread must leave at least one-half of roadway width free of water in each direction. *. Where no curb overtopping exists, encroachment shall not extend over property lines. TABLE 4-2 MAJOR STORM - STREET RUNOFF ENCROACHMENT Street ClaaaMloason Maxkr Enwcect m t LOCAL (Includes places, alleys Residential dwellings, public, marginal access. & collector) commercial and industrial buildings shall not be inundated at the ground line unless buildings are flood -proofed. The depth of water over the crown shall not exceed six (6) inches. MAJOR ARTERIAL Residential dwellings, public, commercial and industrial buildings shall not be inundated at the ground line unless buildings are flood -proofed. Depth of water at the street crown shall not exceed six (6) inches to allow operation of emergency vehicles. The depth of water over the iu,tter flowline shall not exceed 18 inches. In Borne cases, the 18 inch depth over the gutter flowline is more restrictive than the 6 inch depth over the street crown. For these conditions, the most restrivtive of the two criteria shall govern. H Z I N Q a0 p U T Z Q W < W . Q Wtl) H J � IM W F Q 0 J J Q 2 0/ O ti C Q OD 00 O C ^ U r v r Q m � ri0000W U C�r,v ¢ e L R U o Q u o o a o vi Gaaaa�aa 3 II (nOEa a �Ao N ova ILN � V N v ICI uUz O/� V wCl U O D Q N O� N T N ni fV O Cl ti h W O a ^o °' oo U 0 a C7 o II � omoM oM c c u � eca O y O c°Li w N"❑ C7 L N L O ti U S 3 p L u? o `o S ti r W � z h c :. � y ; 5 �� � z 3 = _ o � a W C4 Z II II II II II II II II II II L F a L 3 1V N N N N N N N T ai a � ❑ U � a Z fi n Q z o moo z %/ 11 �J r. I C I P boo ^oe cq aq 0 0 II F. U a II p II ? ry v L Y U w Q a�zl F � au0'ddaad O F O OQ zw ama � O ktr. z `T r I T u c vn^ oxc�`.xaF:o� U O D U `-z Q ry a N T N ri eV C Z V h Q /a t 4l e0 c �- c � V v H G G G O L U U Dr L f .. o 3 c s 3 C iOH cC7 y m .�. zu L � ° � o a y ? a Z II II II II II II II II E u s 0 z 0 U Z E o F Z w i ZZ/ cn a W zo �l w o ` L1 U U ¢ o c U u a 0 o a L:7 UC7> Ll U L y `o c L .0 �o O w II n1 o II c c C n� o v U � E r VI f S O L Ezvi cJ c a < as Wz E `va 05 z =� iv „zZ >� C. O aN0 ^ oN0 P F S R h m�mGOr�°r°0000 ovo 1Ny' o M o m o M d =3/ r I o� moo u F » v�aaa.. W a 3 II o v o Z w „a �, 4 A y y C U o L L c o ? o O B c °h•,,11 E s .° o o o° � 3 m o —°w O N N N�LJ, N= L O Y O DU O N O 0 y 0 L V p L u ,y c�1 V vt E N L L N (x L o cL ¢ F, e=0 ep0 W o ,>. p; > FQ'i Z II II II II II II II II N N N N N N N N T v o y¢ W U azeA�N¢ vvz'��->� O 0' 0 P O L W 11 2 �/ KE .8 7 .3 .2 .0 0 SLOPE OF CUTTER (7.) REDUCTION FACTOR, F 0.60 0.80 0.55 0,725 0.50 065 0,45 0.575 0.40 0.50 III Imil11111111 1119, P1111iuom 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 SLOPE OF GUTTER (%) Figure 4-2 u 3 REDUCTION FACTOR FOR ALLOWABLE GUTTER CAPA.;ITY W Apply reduction factor for applicable slope to the theoretical gutter capacity to obtain allowable gutter capacity. 0 REFERENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE i BUREAU OF PUBUC ROADS, 1965. [1 11 1 1 I I I I 11 11 I 1 11 �J 1 Riprap Erosion Protection Calculations Reference: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 2, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, March, 1969. From Section 5.6 Erosion Protection at Conduit Outlets, for Froude numbers up to 2.5. Location #1: At proposed curb cut, upstream end of Swale #34. Design Parameters: 100-yr Froude Number, 100-yr Design Discharge, Diameter of Circular Conduit, Width of Rectangular Conduit, Height of Rectangular Conduit, Tailwater Depth, F = 0.54 Q (cfs)= 21.2 cfs at Design Point 34. D (ft) = N.A. W (ft) = 12.0 H (ft) = 1.43 (Assumed) Y, (ft) = 1.43 (See pg.16, Appendix) Required Rock Size: Select required rock size from Figure 5-7 for circular conduits and from Figure 5-8 for rectangular conduits. Figure 5-7 is valid for Q/D2.5 of 6.0 or less, Figure 5-8 is valid for Q/WH1-5 of 8.0 or less. Q/WH15 = 21.2/12(1.43)' 5 = 1.03 < 8.0, OK. Q/WHO-5 = 21.2/12(1.43)1.5 = 1.48 Y,/H = 1.43/1.43 = 1.0 From Figure 5-8, Use Type L riprap for a distance of 3H downstream. 3H = 3(1.43)= 5.29 ft, Use a distance of 8 ft. GS J IY N O J Z 4 U QQ C gu V w e MEN no W 4 W x3m 60 Q MENEM EME OEM O .2 .4 .6 .8 1 Yt/H Use Ho instead of H whenever culvert has supercritical flow in the barrel. **Use Type L for a distance of 3H downstream. FIGURE 5-8. RIPRAP EROSION PROTECTION AT RECTANGULAR CONDUIT OUTLET. FIGURE 5-8 IS VALID FOR Q/ WHO'S OF 8.0 OR LESS, Y N W D= DESIGN DISCHARGE IN CFS J 0 W AND H=- WIDTH AND HEIGHT OF RECTANGULAR CONDUIT IN FEET Y. = TAILWATEF DEPTH i I Final Drainage Report Page 2 Stone Ridge Fourth Filing, Phase II 2.2 Site Description Stone Ridge P.U.D. Fourth Filing, Phase II is approximately 8.322 acres and ' has historically been furrowed agricultural land. The site has been previously overlot graded as part of previous Stone Ridge P.U.D. filings. The Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet is located east of the site across County Road 9 and flows from northwest to ' southeast. 2.3 Irrigation Ditches and Reservoirs There are no irrigation laterals located on the Fourth Filing, Phase II site. 1 III. HISTORIC DRAINAGE BASIN ' 3.1 Major Basin Description The site is located in the Foothills Basin (Basin G) and is included in the report entitled Foothills Basin (Basin G) Drainage Master Plan, by Resource Consultants, Inc., February, 1981. The master plan calls for an on -site detention facility for the Stone Ridge P.U.D. site which was designed by RBD Inc. and included in the report Stone Ridge P.U.D. Overall Site Detention Pond, March, 1994. The pond was constructed as part of Stone Ridge P.U.D. Third Filing and is intended to detain all developed stormwater within the Stone Ridge P.U.D.. 3.2 Historic Drainage Patterns The site has historically drained from west to east at a very gradual slope of approximately 0.5%. Off -site flows enter Phase II of the Fourth Filing from the west 1 from Stone Ridge Fourth Filing, Phase I, Sub -Phase A. IV. DEVELOPED DRAINAGE BASIN 4.1 Developed Conditions The proposed development of the site includes: • extension of a private drive, • new water services and sanitary sewer, • and improvements to temporary swale #34. 4.2 Design Criteria and References Drainage criteria outlined in both the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual.(SDDCM) and Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District have been referenced for this Final Drainage Study. 1 L� O 0000 N N N ca aogoo o n n M .-y � N w�.0 a au¢ww III ( o� �z 3 � cFF O �W W �p z FNa¢ O z°z�� z'a�a Ln ai% W �naAC7v� O 7 Ln 000 N VI II II F F O 00 :6q a x i 06 a II F Q or" F- W p; �w O U U> w O > z ¢ ¢ p W z p Q 3 O o00 ¢ I Final Drainage Report Page 3 Stone Ridge Fourth Filing, Phase II 4.3 Hydrologic Criteria The Rational Method has been used to estimate peak stormwater runoff from the developed site. The initial 2-year and major 100-year design storms have been used in the evaluation of the proposed drainage system. Rainfall intensity data for the Rational Method has been taken from Figure 3-1 of SDDCM. 4.4 Hydraulic Criteria The City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria has been referenced for all hydraulic calculations. In addition, the following computer program has been utilized: • The computer program "Flowmaster" has been used to analyze the capacity of proposed Swale # 34. 4.5 Drainage Concept Drainage basins located on the Phase II site (Basins' 31-37) coincide with those delineated on the Final Drainage Plan by RBD, Inc. for Stone Ridge P.U.D. Fourth Filing, Phase I. Composite runoff coefficients and areas in all basins except Basin 34 have remained relatively unchanged from those calculated by RBD in the Final Drainage Report for the Fourth Filing, Phase I. Design Point 35 has been recalculated to reflect final runoff coefficients and design flows from Basin 34. Final design flows from Basin 34 are less than those I estimated in the Phase I, Final Drainage Report for developed conditions (See pages 11 and 13, Appendix) therefore downstream conveyance elements will not require re- design. 1 Developed stormwater from Stone Ridge Fourth Filing, Phase II will be conveyed overland in drive -over curb and gutter and in Swale #34 to existing open grass -lined swales (#33, #35, #36 and #38) and the overall site detention pond located in the northeast corner of the Stone Ridge P.U.D.. The existing temporary swale #34, which was constructed as part of the Fourth Filing, Phase I, will be improved and will ' contain an underdrain due to a proposed slope of 0.60%. Off -site stormwater from Phase I (Sub -Phase A) of the Fourth Filing will be conveyed through Phase II to the existing overall site detention pond via proposed Swale #34. Storm sewer will not be required as part of the Fourth Filing, Phase II improvements. I I I Final Drainage Report Page 4 Stone Ridge Fourth Filing, Phase II V. EROSION CONTROL 5.1 Erosion Control Plan Permanent riprap will be provided at the proposed curb cut located at the upstream end of Swale #34. The improved temporary Swale #34 shall be seeded immediately upon completion with the permanent seed mix specified on the Grading Plan. ' Temporary sediment control consisting of straw bale dikes will be used in Swale #34 until permanent vegetation is established. A gravel filter will be required at the curb cut and silt fencing installed adjacent to all swales. VI. CONCLUSIONS 6.1 Compliance with Standards All drainage analyses have been performed according to the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual (SDDCM) and the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District's Drainage Criteria Manual. Let me emphasize here, that many of the hydraulic calculations for downstream I street and swale capacities have been completed in connection with previous filings of Stone Ridge P.U.D. by RBD, Inc.. These calculations are still valid because design flows for Phase 2 of the Fourth Filing are the same or less than those estimated by RBD for this phase. I would refer the reviewer to the report, Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Stone Ridge P.U.D. Fourth Filing, Phase I for verification of downstream capacities, these do not require modification as part of Phase 2 due to consistent design flows. I i I r I ' Final Drainage Report Page 5 Stone Ridge Fourth Filing, Phase II I I I REFERENCES a 1. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Stone Ridge P.U.D. Fourth Filing, Phase I, Fort Collins, Colorado, RBD, Inc. Engineering Consultants, March 3, 1995. ! 2. Foothills Basin (Basin G) Drainage Master Plan, Fort Collins, Colorado, Resource Consultants, Inc., February 1981. 3. Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, May, 1984. 4. Drainage Criteria Maunal, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Wright -McLaughlin Engineers, Denver, Colorado, March, 1969. LI I I I I I I Final Drainage Report Stone Ridge Fourth Filing, Phase II Page 6 APPENDIX PAGE Developed On -Site Hydrology ............................................... 1 - 8 Developed Hydrology Stone Ridge Fourth Filing, Phase I ....................................... 9 -13 Design of Swales................................................................. 14 -18 StreetCapacity.................................................................... 19 -24 Design of Riprap Outlet Protection .................................... 25- 26 I 1 LJ I I I } 0 0 } W F- Z 0 0 W I 0 J LU W 0 11