HomeMy WebLinkAboutPALMOS INDUSTRIAL - PDP220012 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - DRAINAGE REPORT
Drainage Report
for
Fort Collins Palmos Industrial
115 Hickory Street
Fort Collins, CO 80524
Prepared by: Nicholas Andersen
Reviewed by: Mike Beach, P.E.
Project #:22-195-001
Dated: June 10, 2022
541 East Garden Drive, Unit N, Windsor, CO 80550
(970) 663-4552 EMAIL: mbeach@ridgetopeng.com
2 | Page
Section Page
1. Project Engineer’s Certification ........................................................................................ 3
2. Project Location & Overview ............................................................................................ 4
3. Drainage Design Criteria ................................................................................................... 5
4. Hydraulic Calculations ....................................................................................................... 6
5. Facility Design .................................................................................................................... 7
6. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 8
7. References ......................................................................................................................... 8
Appendix A – Site Vicinity Map
Appendix B – Flood Insurance Rate Map
Appendix C – NRCS Soils Map
Appendix D – Hydrologic Criteria
Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity Curve
Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity Table
Table RO-3 – Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values
Appendix E – Hydraulic Calculations
Runoff Coefficients & Imperviousness
Time of Concentration - SF-2
Rational Method Runoff Flows – SF-3 (2-Year Event)
Rational Method Runoff Flows – SF-3 (10-Year Event)
Rational Method Runoff Flows – SF-3 (100-Year Event)
Rain Garden Calculations
LID Summary
Drain Times
Appendix F – Maps
Drainage Plan/Subbasin Map
Appendix G – References
Table of Contents
3 | Page
Section 1: PROJECT ENGINEER’S CERTIFICATION
I hereby attest that this Final Drainage Report for the design of stormwater management
facilities for Palmos Industrial on 115 Hickory St. was prepared by me, or under my direct
supervision, in accordance with the provisions of the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design
Criteria and Construction Standards for the responsible parties thereof.
__________________________
Mike Beach, P.E.
Registered Professional Engineer
State of Colorado No. 45088
4 | Page
Section 2: Project Location & Overview
Location
The sites address is 115 Hickory St, Fort Collins, CO. For Recording purposes: Part of the
Southeast Quarter of Section 2, Township 7 N, R 69 W of the 6th PM.
Located along the south side of Hickory St., the site is described as above and contains 3.04
acres of undeveloped land. (See Appendix A – Site Vicinity Map)
This site is located in the Dry Creek Basin, which generally flows west to east. A master plan
update is currently underway to improve drainage in the area and prevent flooding.
Existing Condition
The existing site is covered by an existing vegetation and gravel that mainly flows runoff to the
north and east. Stormwater runoff collects into curb and gutter along the north and into
existing stormwater infrastructure within the road.
Proposed Condition
The intent of the development is to construct several new buildings totaling approximately
33,586 SF, concrete parking, curb and gutter, detention ponds, and landscaping. The city
requires that all new or modified impervious areas have standard water quality treatment and
Low impact development (LID) to treat runoff. Permeable pavers are to be installed within the
parking area. The parking areas will then release to either of the new detention ponds.
Floodplain
FEMA Floodplain mapping in this neighborhood is located on map-panel 08069C0977G,
Effective June 17, 2008, however it appears the subject property is located in Zone X, which is
outside the 100-year floodplain.
Existing Soils
The Natural Resource Conservation Service mapped the historic soils on the site as Nunn Clay
Loam. The Hydrologic Class is Type ‘C’ Soils. (Appendix C – NRCS Soils Map)
5 | Page
Section 3: Drainage Design Criteria
Reference Manuals
Storm drainage design criteria is defined in the City of Fort Collins “Storm Water Criteria
Manual (FCSWCM) and Amendments, which references to the “Urban Drainage and Flood
Control District” (UDFCD) and the “Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual” (USDCM), Volumes
1, 2, and 3, dated 2008 with revisions (the Manual), are used and referenced in this report.
Low Impact Development (LID) Requirements
The proposed development is required to meet the City’s current Land Use Code, which
includes:
- 50% of the newly added or modified impervious area must be treated by LID
techniques and 25% of new paved areas must be pervious.
- 75% of all newly added or modified impervious area must be treated by LID
techniques.
Four Step Process
The City of Fort Collins has adopted the “Four Step Process” that is recommended in Volume 3
of the USDCM for selecting BMP’s in urban redevelopment areas. The goal of this process is to
minimize adverse impacts on receiving waters. The following describe how each step of the
process are incorporated in the proposed development:
Step 1 – Employ Runoff Reduction Practices
The impacts of the proposed development will be less due to the addition of LID practices. The
project proposes to install permeable pavements with underdrains to aid in conveyance and
infiltration opportunities which will reduce the effects of the added impervious area from the
development of the site.
Step 2 – Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV)
In order to reduce the sediment load and other pollutants leaving the site, it is important to
provide WQCV to minimize the downstream impacts. This project proposes to provide
permeable pavements with storage capacity for the WQCV. The runoff from the permeable
pavements will then flow to the detention pond to be released at the required rate.
Step 3 – Stabilize Drainageways
Since this site is in close proximity to Poudre River it is important to take this step into
consideration. By providing stormwater detention and water quality and lowering the historic
runoff and providing a metered outflow, the project impacts to the drainageway are essentially
reduced. The majority of the drainageway leaving the site is already stabilized.
6 | Page
Step 4 – Implement Site Specific and Other Source Control BMP’s
The proposed project will contain the following BMP’s:
Permeable Pavement: Most runoff from the project site will be directed into and
through the proposed BMP facilities prior to leaving the site. Permeable pavements
allow vehicle travel while allowing water to enter the soils and have additional storage
of storm runoff.
Maintenance: In order for BMP’s to remain effective proper maintenance needs are
required. Scheduled visual inspections and routine repair after larger storm events are
critical in the maintenance and effectiveness of the installed BMP’s. The sites owner will
be advised of these practices during installation in order to maximize the efficiency of
the installed BMP’s.
Section 4: Hydraulic Calculations
Criteria
Runoff criteria for the proposed sites was analyzed for the 2-YR, 10-YR, and 100-YR storm
events. The Rational Method is being used for the design of the proposed improvements.
Rainfall Intensities used in the proposed design were determined as a function of the Time of
Concertation for each subbasin. The values used were determined by the City of Fort Collins
Rainfall Intensity/Duration/Frequency curve (Figure 3.4-1 and Table 3.4-1 (see Appendix D).
Imperviousness
Values from Table 4.1-3 (Fort Collins Amendment to the USDCM) were used in determining the
sites imperviousness. The overall proposed site improvements and landscaping equate to a
total disturbed Imperviousness of 60.8%.
Time of Concentration & Runoff Coefficient
The onsite area was separated into three (10) subbasins with slopes varying between 0.5% to
3.0%. The calculated Time of Concentration (TC) for each subbasin are listed in Appendix E. See
Basin Map in Appendix F for more information.
WQCV
The UD-BMP_v3.07 (UDFCD) spreadsheet was used to calculate the required permeable
pavement area and volume. See Appendix E for design information. Open Grated Nyloplast
structures (or equivalent) tied to the detention pond will be installed within the pavements to
drain the soils over 12 hours.
Detention
The UD-detention_v2.35 (UDFCD) spreadsheet was used to calculate the required storage
volumes of the two detention ponds. See appendix E for design information.
7 | Page
Section 5: Facility Design
The proposed improvements will increase imperviousness from the undeveloped condition, so
measures have been included in the design to minimize the amount of stormwater released
from the site.
The site was broken into 10 developed subbasins for analyzation; See Appendix E for
breakdown of the different area types for each subbasin and Appendix F for the Subbasin Map.
Subbasin 1 - contains undeveloped land to the southwest of Building 1. This basin will continue
to flow to the southwest as it has in the existing condition.
Subbasin 2 - contains Buildings 1, 2, and 3, parking west of Mason, and Detention Pond 1. This
basin’s impervious areas will largely be directed over the permeable pavers and into the
detention pond.
Subbasin 3 - contains landscaped area to the west of Building 2. This basin will flow to a
nyloplast and drain directly to the detention pond.
Subbasin 4 - contains landscaped area to the north of Building 2. This basin will flow to a
nyloplast and drain directly to the detention pond.
Subbasin 5 - contains additional right of way for the detached walk and tree lawn, landscape to
the north of Buildings 1, 3, and 4, and a portion of Mason St. This basin will flow into curb and
gutter in the right of way and into existing storm infrastructure to the east.
Subbasin 6 - contains the west portion of Mason St. This basin flows to a Type R, which will
then convey the flows to a sump pump and into the existing storm infrastructure.
Subbasin 7 - contains the east portion of Mason St. This basin flows to a Type R, which will then
convey the flows to a sump pump and into the existing storm infrastructure.
Subbasin 8 - contains Building 4, parking, and Detention Pond 2. This basin will flow to the
south along permeable pavers and into the detention pond.
Subbasin 9 - contains undeveloped land to the east of Building 4. This basin will continue to
flow to the east as it has in the existing condition.
Subbasin 10 - contains undeveloped land to the south of Detention Pond 2. This basin will
continue to flow to the south as it has in the existing condition.
See table 1 below for basin breakdown.
8 | Page
Basin Area (ac) Imperviousness (%) 2-yr Runoff (cfs) 10-yr Runoff (cfs) 100-yr Runoff (cfs)
1 0.12 2.0 0.00 0.07 0.47
2 1.87 69.6 1.94 3.84 9.38
3 0.04 8.5 0.00 0.03 0.17
4 0.06 17.1 0.02 0.06 0.27
5 0.28 51.5 0.30 0.67 1.86
6 0.14 70.1 0.21 0.42 1.02
7 0.11 78.4 0.20 0.38 0.87
8 0.32 63.2 0.42 0.86 2.19
9 0.06 2.0 0.00 0.03 0.24
10 0.03 2.0 0.00 0.02 0.13
Total 3.04 60.8 3.10 6.38 16.60
The detention ponds were designed using spreadsheet UD-Detention_v2.35 from UDFCD. Per
Fort Collins requirements the ponds were designed to release the 100-yr developed runoff at
the 2-yr historic rate. See table 2 below for detention pond summaries.
Pond 1 Pond 2
Bottom of Pond (ft) 4972.04 4971.84
Top of Pond (ft) 4976.12 4975.88
Pond Capacity (ac-ft) 0.518 0.163
100-yr Vol. (ac-ft) 0.459 0.73
100-yr Release Rate (cfs) 0.08 0.01
2-yr Pre-Developed
Release Rate (cfs) 0.08 0.01
The permeable pavements were designed using UD-BMP_v3.07 from UDFCD. The areas were
designed with 6” of pavement, 6” min. depth of reservoir, and 4” pipes.
The area tributary to Detention Pond 1 is split into 4 cells, each approximately 200’x20’. These
will flow to two Nyloplasts in the center and into the detention pond. The pipe ends will need
an orifice of 0.5” diameter to release the WQCV over 12 hours (UD BMP calcs show 1-1/16” for
the whole area, (4) 1/2” diameter orifices is the same area). Each pipe will have a cleanout at
the other end.
The area tributary to Detention Pond 2 is approximately 100’x30’. This cell will flow to a
Nyloplast on the east side and into the detention pond. The pipe outlet will need an orifice of
3/8” diameter to release the WQCV over 12 hours. Each pipe will have a cleanout at the other
end.
9 | Page
Section 6: Conclusions
All computations that have been reviewed or completed within this report are in compliance
with the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards manual
and the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual
Volumes 1, 2, & 3.
The proposed drainage concepts presented in this report and on the construction plans
adequately provides for water quality treatment of impervious areas by collecting storm events
within the proposed rain garden.
Section 7: References
• The Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey for Larimer County and the WSS
website.
• FEMA FIRM map-panel 08069C0977G Effective 6/17/2008.
• “City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual” dated December 2018
• Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual
(UDFCD), Volumes 1, 2, and 3, dated 2008 with revisions (the Manual).
w Appendix A
Site Vicinity Map
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e
Label contains
b
r
o
ke
n
r
e
f
er
e
n
c
e HICKORY STCONIFER STEL SUNIGA RDE VINE DRW VINE DRN SHIELDS STBLUE SPRUCE DRHIGHWAY 287HEMLOCK STREDWOOD STN MASON ST
Appendix B
Flood Insurance Rate Map
Appendix C
NRCS Soils Map
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Larimer County
Area, Colorado
Palmos Industrial
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
October 7, 2022
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
Soil Map..................................................................................................................8
Soil Map................................................................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11
Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11
Larimer County Area, Colorado......................................................................13
73—Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 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
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
Custom Soil Resource Report
6
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8
9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4494600449463044946604494690449472044947504494780449481044946004494630449466044946904494720449475044947804494810493120 493150 493180 493210 493240 493270 493300 493330 493360 493390 493420 493450
493120 493150 493180 493210 493240 493270 493300 493330 493360 493390 493420 493450
40° 36' 14'' N 105° 4' 53'' W40° 36' 14'' N105° 4' 38'' W40° 36' 7'' N
105° 4' 53'' W40° 36' 7'' N
105° 4' 38'' WN
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84
0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 20 40 80 120
Meters
Map Scale: 1:1,560 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado
Survey Area Data: Version 17, Sep 7, 2022
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 2, 2021—Aug 25,
2021
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
10
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
73 Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent
slopes
4.1 100.0%
Totals for Area of Interest 4.1 100.0%
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.
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
12
Larimer County Area, Colorado
73—Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2tlng
Elevation: 4,100 to 5,700 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F
Frost-free period: 135 to 152 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Nunn and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Nunn
Setting
Landform:Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Pleistocene aged alluvium and/or eolian deposits
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 6 inches: clay loam
Bt1 - 6 to 10 inches: clay loam
Bt2 - 10 to 26 inches: clay loam
Btk - 26 to 31 inches: clay loam
Bk1 - 31 to 47 inches: loam
Bk2 - 47 to 80 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:7 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline (0.1 to 1.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:0.5
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R067BY042CO - Clayey Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
13
Minor Components
Heldt
Percent of map unit:10 percent
Landform:Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R067BY042CO - Clayey Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Wages
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
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.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
15
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf
Custom Soil Resource Report
16
Appendix D
Hydrologic Criteria
FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL Hydrology Standards (Ch. 5)
3.0 Rational Method
3.4 Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves for Rational Method
Page 8
Table 3.4-1. IDF Table for Rational Method
Duration
(min)
Intensity
2-year
(in/hr)
Intensity
10-year
(in/hr)
Intensity
100-year
(in/hr)
Duration
(min)
Intensity
2-year
(in/hr)
Intensity
10-year
(in/hr)
Intensity
100-year
(in/hr)
5 2.85 4.87 9.95
39 1.09 1.86 3.8
6 2.67 4.56 9.31
40 1.07 1.83 3.74
7 2.52 4.31 8.80
41 1.05 1.80 3.68
8 2.40 4.10 8.38
42 1.04 1.77 3.62
9 2.30 3.93 8.03
43 1.02 1.74 3.56
10 2.21 3.78 7.72
44 1.01 1.72 3.51
11 2.13 3.63 7.42
45 0.99 1.69 3.46
12 2.05 3.50 7.16
46 0.98 1.67 3.41
13 1.98 3.39 6.92
47 0.96 1.64 3.36
14 1.92 3.29 6.71
48 0.95 1.62 3.31
15 1.87 3.19 6.52
49 0.94 1.6 3.27
16 1.81 3.08 6.30
50 0.92 1.58 3.23
17 1.75 2.99 6.10
51 0.91 1.56 3.18
18 1.70 2.90 5.92
52 0.9 1.54 3.14
19 1.65 2.82 5.75
53 0.89 1.52 3.10
20 1.61 2.74 5.60
54 0.88 1.50 3.07
21 1.56 2.67 5.46
55 0.87 1.48 3.03
22 1.53 2.61 5.32
56 0.86 1.47 2.99
23 1.49 2.55 5.20
57 0.85 1.45 2.96
24 1.46 2.49 5.09
58 0.84 1.43 2.92
25 1.43 2.44 4.98
59 0.83 1.42 2.89
26 1.4 2.39 4.87
60 0.82 1.4 2.86
27 1.37 2.34 4.78
65 0.78 1.32 2.71
28 1.34 2.29 4.69
70 0.73 1.25 2.59
29 1.32 2.25 4.60
75 0.70 1.19 2.48
30 1.30 2.21 4.52
80 0.66 1.14 2.38
31 1.27 2.16 4.42
85 0.64 1.09 2.29
32 1.24 2.12 4.33
90 0.61 1.05 2.21
33 1.22 2.08 4.24
95 0.58 1.01 2.13
34 1.19 2.04 4.16
100 0.56 0.97 2.06
35 1.17 2.00 4.08
105 0.54 0.94 2.00
36 1.15 1.96 4.01
110 0.52 0.91 1.94
37 1.16 1.93 3.93
115 0.51 0.88 1.88
38 1.11 1.89 3.87
120 0.49 0.86 1.84
FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL Hydrology Standards (Ch. 5)
3.0 Rational Method
3.4 Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves for Rational Method
Page 9
Figure 3.4-1. Rainfall IDF Curve – Fort Collins
FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL Hydrology Standards (Ch. 5)
4.0 SWMM
4.1 Input Parameters
Page 10
4.0 SWMM
This section is for project sites that require the use of the Stormwater Management Model (SWMM) to
determine storm hydrograph routing and is the only method that is able to assess the overall
performance of multiple detention basins in parallel or in series in a particular project site or watershed.
Reference: The theory and methodology for reservoir routing is not covered in this Manual
as this subject is well described in many hydrology reference books. The EPA SWMM
Reference Manuals, dated January 2016, have been utilized in preparing the information in
this section of the Manual.
4.1 Input Parameters
Table 4.1-1 provides required input values to be used for SWMM modeling.
Basin and conveyance element parameters must be computed based on the physical characteristics of
the site.
Table 4.1-1. SWMM Input Parameters
Depth of Storage
Impervious Areas 0.1 inches
Pervious Areas 0.3 inches
Infiltration Parameters
Maximum 0.51 in/hr
Minimum 0.50 in/hr
Decay Rate
0.0018 in/sec or
6.48 in/hr
Zero Detention Depth 1%
Manning's "n"
Pervious Surfaces 0.250
Impervious Surfaces 0.016
For Overall Drainage Plan (ODP) and Project Development Plan (PDP) submittals, when surface types
may not yet be known, land uses may be used to estimate impervious percentages. Table 4.1-2 lists the
percent imperviousness for common types of land uses in the City.
FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL Hydrology Standards (Ch. 5)
4.0 SWMM
4.1 Input Parameters
Page 11
Table 4.1-2. Land Use - Percent Impervious
Land Use
Percent Impervious
(%)
Residential
Urban Estate 30
Low Density 50
Medium Density 70
High Density 90
Commercial
Commercial 80
Industrial 90
Undeveloped
Open Lands, Transition 20
Greenbelts, Agriculture 2
Offsite Flow Analysis (when
Land Use not defined) 45
Reference: For further guidance regarding zoning classifications, refer to the Land Use
Code, Article 4.
For Final Plan (FP) submittals, impervious values must be based on the proposed land surface types.
Refer to Table 4.1-3 for recommended percent impervious values.
Table 4.1-3. Surface Type – Percent Impervious
Surface Type
Percent Impervious
(%)
Hardscape or Hard Surface
Asphalt, Concrete 100
Rooftop 90
Recycled Asphalt 80
Gravel 40
Pavers 40
Landscape or Pervious Surface
Playgrounds 25
Lawns, Sandy soil 2
Lawns, Clayey soil 2
Appendix E
Hydraulic Calculations
Designer:
Company:2-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 500-yr
Date:1-hour rainfall depth, P1 (in) =0.82 1.40 2.86
Project:a b c
Location:Rainfall Intensity Equation Coefficients =28.50 10.00 0.786
2-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 500-yr
Overland
Flow Length
Li (ft)
U/S Elevation
(ft)
(Optional)
D/S Elevation
(ft)
(Optional)
Overland
Flow Slope
Si (ft/ft)
Overland
Flow Time
ti (min)
Channelized
Flow Length
Lt (ft)
U/S Elevation
(ft)
(Optional)
D/S Elevation
(ft)
(Optional)
Channelized
Flow Slope
St (ft/ft)
NRCS
Conveyance
Factor K
Channelized
Flow
Velocity
Vt (ft/sec)
Channelized
Flow Time
tt (min)
Computed
tc (min)
Regional
tc (min)
Selected
tc (min)2-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 500-yr 2-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 500-yr
0.01 0.05 0.15 0.33 0.40 0.49 0.59 6.74 7.21 10.00 2.22 3.79 7.74 0.00 0.07 0.47
0.56 0.60 0.64 0.71 0.74 0.77 0.81 10.11 14.83 14.83 1.87 3.20 6.53 1.94 3.84 9.38
0.05 0.10 0.19 0.37 0.43 0.52 0.61 6.40 7.10 10.00 2.22 3.79 7.74 0.00 0.03 0.17
0.11 0.17 0.26 0.41 0.48 0.55 0.64 5.95 8.30 10.00 2.22 3.79 7.74 0.02 0.06 0.27
0.40 0.45 0.51 0.61 0.65 0.69 0.75 4.63 4.97 5.00 2.78 4.75 9.70 0.30 0.67 1.86
0.56 0.61 0.65 0.71 0.74 0.77 0.81 3.55 4.49 5.00 2.78 4.75 9.70 0.21 0.42 1.02
0.63 0.67 0.71 0.76 0.78 0.80 0.83 3.06 4.00 5.00 2.78 4.75 9.70 0.20 0.38 0.87
0.50 0.55 0.60 0.67 0.71 0.74 0.79 5.59 6.17 6.17 2.62 4.48 9.14 0.42 0.86 2.19
0.01 0.05 0.15 0.33 0.40 0.49 0.59 3.52 3.59 10.00 2.22 3.79 7.74 0.00 0.03 0.24
0.01 0.05 0.15 0.33 0.40 0.49 0.59 5.99 6.15 10.00 2.22 3.79 7.74 0.00 0.02 0.13
C 69.6
0.02020.00
Rainfall Intensity, I (in/hr)
1.41 0.47 26.17100.02040.00
Peak Flow, Q (cfs)
Calculation of Peak Runoff using Rational Method
Overland (Initial) Flow Time Channelized (Travel) Flow Time Time of ConcentrationRunoff Coefficient, C
Subcatchment
Name
Area
(ac)
NRCS
Hydrologic
Soil Group
Percent
Imperviousnes
s
1 0.12 C 2.0
Select UDFCD location for NOAA Atlas 14 Rainfall Depths from the pulldown list OR enter your own depths obtained from the NOAA website (click this link)
Cells of this color are for required user-input
Cells of this color are for optional override values
Cells of this color are for calculated results based on overrides
NGA
Ridgetop Engineering and Surveying
10/7/2022
Palmos
Fort Collins
Version 2.00 released May 2017
20 1.41 2.36
19.20
3 0.04 C 8.5 20.00 0.020 60.00 0.005 20 1.41 0.71
0.005 20 1.41 4.71200.00 0.020 400.0021.87
17.66
27.23
5 0.28 C 51.5 25.00 0.020 40.00 0.010 20 2.00 0.33
25.94
4 0.06 C 17.1 20.00 0.020 200.00 0.005
15.09
7 0.11 C 78.4 25.00 0.020 80.00 0.005 20 1.41 0.94
0.005 20 1.41 0.940.020 80.0060.14 C 70.1 25.00
15.92
9 0.06 C 2.0 10.00 0.050 10.00 0.050 10 2.24 0.07
13.62
8 0.32 C 63.2 50.00 0.020 50.00 0.005 20 1.41 0.59
25.84
25.74
10 0.04 C 2.0 10.00 0.010 10.00 0.010 10 1.00 0.17
I 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖/ℎ𝑟𝑟=a ∗P1b+tc c
ti =0.395 1.1 −C5 LiSi0.33tt=Lt60K St =Lt60Vt
Computed tc =ti +tt
Regional tc =26 −17i +Lt6014i+9 St Selected tc =max tminimum ,min Computed tc ,Regional tc
tminimum =5 (urban) tminimum =10 (non-urban)
Q 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐=CIA
Weighted Runoff Coefficients Calculated By: JKS
Project :Palmos Industrial Checked By: MRB
Job Number: -Date:10/7/2022
Proposed/IMP%Soil Types: Nunn Clay Loam, 0-1 %
Existing Roof 90
Concrete Drive/Walk 90
Landscaping 2 Hydrologic Grouping:Type C/D
Gravel 40
Multi-family (attached)75 Runoff Coefficients:C = Kc
Commercial 50 Kc(2year) = 0.83i^1.122
Undeveloped Historical 2 Kc(5year) = 0.82i+0.035
Kc(10year) = 0.74i+0.132
Kc(100year) = 0.41i+0.484
Proposed Basins (proposed conditions)Land Use (Acres)Weighted Runoff Coefficient
Total Concrete
Basin Area Roof Drive/Walk Landscape Gravel Residential Pavers C2 C5 C10 C100 %Imp
1 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.11 0.49 2.0
2 1.87 0.67 0.77 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.60 0.61 0.77 69.6
3 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.16 0.52 8.5
4 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.17 0.22 0.55 17.1
5 0.28 0.00 0.16 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.45 0.48 0.70 51.5
6 0.14 0.00 0.11 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.60 0.62 0.77 70.1
7 0.11 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.67 0.68 0.81 78.4
8 0.32 0.10 0.12 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.55 0.57 0.74 63.2
9 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.11 0.49 2.0
10 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.11 0.49 2.0
Pond 1 1.98 0.67 0.78 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.57 0.59 0.76 66.6
Pond 2 0.32 0.10 0.12 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.55 0.57 0.74 63.2
Total 3.04 0.77 1.26 1.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.53 0.55 0.73 60.8
15 | Page
Appendix F
Maps
CP TRACKSCP RAILGATECHAIN LINK FENCECHAIN LINK FENCECHAIN LINK FENCECHAIN LINK FENCEGATEGATEREAL ESTATEFOR SALE SIGNVAULTELECVAULTELECHYDMHH2OH2OV.P.TTELETVAULTELECVAULTELECTVAULTCABLEXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTEEETTTTTTTTTTTTEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWEEEOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUS20564976.04SANITARY MANHOLES20974977.79SANITARY MANHOLEMASON STHICKORY STHICKORY ST123457108961BASIN MAPC-1.01NGA#