HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRING CREEK CENTER PUD FINAL - 17 90D - CORRESPONDENCE - MEETING COMMUNICATION11
Ll
June 9, 1998
Mr.. Basil Harridan
City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility
235Mathews
P.O. Box 580
Ft. Collins, CO 80522-0580
re: Spring Creek Center
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No. 9734.03
Dear Libby?
E N G I N
E E R I'N G
5.,1E- R V. 1
C_'`E, S I N C`
In a June 1 meeting with the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility regarding Spring
Creek Center, the most recent City comments were discussed. Further discussions were held at a
meeting with yourself and Mary Wohnrade of Northern Engineering on June 5. The following
are the resolutions of the thirteen items on the City's list, dated May 15. (The comments
themselves are attached and are not reproduced here:):
We will move the swale as requested. Other design concerns may be raised once the
swale revisions are under way.
2. This item has already been done.
3. This item has already been done.
4. This item has already been done.
5. The City agreed that the water quality design is for stormwater runoff only. Potential
future gasoline spills at the two pads allocated to service stations will be designed when
those sites develop. Three water quality ponds had been designed per City standards but,
in order to restrict outflows to the required 40-hour detention period, the orifice was
unreasonably small. Stormwater requested that two of the ponds be replaced with an
oil/sand separator and that the remaining pond orifice be sized for a larger opening.
6. This item has already been done.
7. This item has already been done.
8. The City agreed that we can leave the pipes as -is and to use buried rip rap for erosion
protection.
420 SOUTH HOWES, SUITE 202, FORT (OLLINS, (OLORADO 80521, (970) 221-4158, FAX (970) 221-4159
_+ Spring Creek Center
t June 5, 1998
Page 2 of 2
9. At a meeting earlier in the project; the City had agreed to use the FIS discharge. The
City, therefore, agreed to leave the calculations as -is.
10. In order to avoid placing a large temporary culvert under Timberline, the 100-year storm
flows which currently over top the railroad embankment are being allowed to continue to
flow across Timberline into the existing swale. The required median in Timberline will
direct this flow into the swale, but may cause a small rise in the water surface elevation at
that location. The City has asked that a new HEC-2 model of the area west of
Timberline is to be prepared to analyze the impacts of the median on that area.
11. This item has already been done.
12. After discussing this item at the second meeting; the City agreed that the design is
acceptable..
13. The City agreed that the topography is acceptable as -is.
The above represents our understanding of the discussions that were held concerning the
design of the Spring Creek Center. We would like very much to bring this project to closure
with this round of comments. If you have any comments regarding these issues, please contact
this office by June 15 so that we may re -submit the plans on the schedule we had discussed..
Sincerely,
NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.
Michael F. Jones, P.E.
Principal
Attachment: Stormwater comments, 5-15-98
cc; Libby Glass, W. W. Reynolds
Eldon Ward, Cityscape
Lucia LiIley, March & Liley
Mike Ludwig, Current Planning
Mike Dean, Engineering Review
M
coNTME d'T SKEET
Cun-ent PWwIng
DATE: s- /S -� DEFT: Stormwater4.
PROJECT: .SP+7179 Cfee h CPin fp/
P
1. The diversion swale along the west side is shown to be within the right -of --way. The
swale should be located outside the right-of-way. This comment was mad with the
previous comments.
RESPONSE:
2. The swale 12 calculations show the 500-year flow will not be contained within the
swale. Please contain the 500-year flow in the swale to not inundate the gas stations.
RESPONSE:.
3. Please evaluate culvert 12 and the overtopping in this location. The flow must be
contained within the channel.
RESPONSE:
WGLsUMI OU ML7o 1V DiGM WM
UMM
VWMAd
Mi/lp Gv�/wig
l�o✓ f'MM
OkIV. w, Reynolds
Qtp of Fost comas
4. There were two stage -storage calculations for pond 3. Please provide the correct
calculations in the report and remove the other.
RESPONSE:
5. Please revise the water quality outlet design to match the procedure shown in section 5
of the UDFCD Vol. 3. The water quality outlets shown on the plans are under sized. The
open area determined from Figure 5-2 is the open area per row. Please see detail.
RESPONSE: O �7 ;V c
6. The inlet sizing calculations for design points 6 and 7 must apply an 800/6 clogging
factor.
RESPONSE:
7. Two of the water quality ponds will be within the proposed parking lots. The ponds are
designed to detain the "first flush" for 40 hours. Therefore the ponds will be full of water
quite frequently. These ponds are not intended for parking lot detention. Please provide
the water quality ponds in grass open space areas.
RESPONSE: — J
8. The outfall pipes to Spring Creek should meet the elevation of the bed of the creek.
Please revise the profiles 7 and 8 to enter the creek at the bed elevation.
RESPONSE: . 1 � -r ,..., .:,,�_
9. Please verify the discharge used for the 500-year overflow of Timberline Drive. The
FIS 500-year discharge should not be used. The 100-year discharge of 2400 cfs from the
1988 Master Plan was used for the 100-year overtopping. Therefore, it is logical that the
500-year discharge from the 1988 Master Plan should also be used. It should be noted
that the most updated 1998 Spring Creek model shows less discharge than the 1988 model
for the 100-year event so this means that the 1988 Master Plan 500-year would also be
less than the 1998 Master Plan 500-year.
RESPONSE: L-�-
E
0
10. The median is Timberline Road is shown to divert the overtopping to the diversion
swale. However, there is a concern that this median will cause more ponding on the
property west of Timberline because the low point in Timberline will be raised. The
improvements with this.site must not cause an adverse impact on off -site properties.
RESPONSE:
_1 Lam. *c.. ..,^ ,,)_- t r i is s j 5 tD
11. Please provide supporting documentation for the weir coefficients used for the split
flow analysis.
RESPONSE:
12. Further explanation and justification is needed for removing part of the flow at station
2000 that overtops Timberline Drive from the existing and proposed models. Please
provide justification that flow will be diverted in the swale along Timberline Drive back
into Spring Creek. Please see comments in the HEC-2 output.
RESPONSE: IDJ
13. The cross -sections show that City aerial topography was used to develop the cross -
sections. Please show this topography to support the cross -sections.
RESPONSE:
n ; .,
Please refer to the redline plan and report for additional review comments.