HomeMy WebLinkAboutSite Certifications - 03/07/2017 (3)1
Nick Haws
From:Andy Reese
Sent:Monday, August 08, 2016 10:07 AM
To:Mike Campana (mike@campanarealty.com); Wes Lamarque (wlamarque@fcgov.com)
Cc:Nick Haws
Subject:Pond 215 Outlet Structure Modifications
Attachments:Pond 215 Outlet Mods.pdf; BH2_Pond 215_Outlet Mods.pdf
Mike & Wes,
Please find the attached pdf detailing the modifications to the northern-most outlet structure of Pond 215 of Bucking
Horse Second Filing. These modification match what was discussed during our site visit to view the backup of water at
the outlet structure. As you may recall, the backup is a result of significant groundwater flows originating upstream. Per
that meeting, it was agreed that we would remove the lower portion of both the Well Screen on the front of the box and
the Flow Control Plate so that they could pass the groundwater base flow of 1 cfs. This results in the removal of the
bottom 3” of screen and plate. The other item that was discussed was removing the lip of the orifice plate so that the
same base flow could leave the outlet structure more easily. This has also been shown on the attached pdf. I am
attaching our drainage calculation that the proposed modifications were based on for your records as well.
If either of you need any additional information on this matter, please don’t hesitate to contact me.
ANDY REESE
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
D: 970.568.5403 | O: 970.221.4158
Channel Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Aug 8 2016
Pond 215 Outlet Structure Modification
Rectangular
Bottom Width (ft) = 2.00
Total Depth (ft) = 1.00
Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00
Slope (%) = 0.50
N-Value = 0.013
Calculations
Compute by: Known Q
Known Q (cfs) = 1.00
Highlighted
Depth (ft) = 0.21
Q (cfs) = 1.000
Area (sqft) = 0.42
Velocity (ft/s) = 2.38
Wetted Perim (ft) = 2.42
Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.20
Top Width (ft) = 2.00
EGL (ft) = 0.30
0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section
99.50 -0.50
100.00 0.00
100.50 0.50
101.00 1.00
101.50 1.50
102.00 2.00
Reach (ft)
AUGUST 2016
DOCUMENTATION FROM
BASIL HAMDAN
OUTLINING RUNDOWN EXPECTATIONS
1
Dan Mogen
From:Basil Hamdan
Sent:Tuesday, February 21, 2017 11:54 AM
To:Dan Mogen; 'Nick Haws'
Cc:Andy Reese
Subject:RE: Bucking Horse Drainage Certification
Dan,
I went out and met with Mike Campana after installations and it actually looked very good
and will provide a stable outlet for the drainage as built. I think it is
a bit oversized but since there was no design done, it is probably better to err on that side.
Basil
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Basil Hamdan P.E.
Stormwater Quality Engineer, Utilities
City of Fort Collins
970-224-6035 office
970-222-1801 mobile
bhamdan@fcgov.com
From: Dan Mogen
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2017 4:19 PM
To: 'Nick Haws'
Cc: Andy Reese; Basil Hamdan
Subject: RE: Bucking Horse Drainage Certification
Nick,
Thanks for putting this together. Question I have at this point is, was the loop with Basil closed? His email ends with, “I
would like to see a sketch design showing reinforcement at the bottom and a boulder or something to that effect used
for energy dissipation.” Was that sent to and accepted by Basil? Or, Basil, are you accepting of what has been
completed?
If Basil is accepting of the solution as constructed, then I need to:
1. Have a completed certification. I was under the impression that all this would be put together and submitted as
a final, but I don’t mind adding the communication pieces about the outlet modification and riprap rundown to
what has been submitted.
2. Hear back from Mike on the chase fix and pipe cleaning. Last I heard he was having the chase corrected and was
getting estimates on the pipe cleaning (this was as of 2/6/17).
Basil, please let us know if there are any issues with the riprap rundown as it has been constructed or if this is acceptable
and I’ll keep this ball rolling.
Dan Mogen, EI, CFM
Development Review Engineer
Water Utilities Engineering
City of Fort Collins
(970)224‐6192
dmogen@fcgov.com
1
Nick Haws
From:Basil Hamdan <BHAMDAN@fcgov.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 17, 2016 8:54 AM
To:Nick Haws
Subject:RE: Rundown
Nick yes I am OK with no pipe and inlet, I think grouted riprap will work still because
It would not allow undermining of the riprap, however, the base of the rundown has
to be reinforced to dissipate energy before flow is back to the bottom of the pond, so I would like
to see a sketch design showing reinforcement at the bottom and a boulder or something to that effect
used for energy dissipation.
Basil
Basil Hamdan, P.E., CFM
Stormwater Quality Engineer
Fort Collins Utilities
(970) 224-6035 (O)
(970) 222-1801 (M)
bhamdan@fcgov.com
From: Nick Haws [mailto:nick@northernengineering.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 8:38 AM
To: Basil Hamdan
Subject: FW: Rundown
Basil,
I’m just following up on the discussion you had with Mike Campana regarding the rundown at the industrial area
behind Jessup Farm Artisan Village at Bucking Horse. You and Mike met both on-site at Jessup Farm as well as
near the Poudre River behind the Northside Aztlan Center. The photographs below are from the Aztlan
rundown. This particular rundown consists of a grouted boulder/riprap rundown as well as a small catch inlet and
outlet pipe for low flows.
You had indicated to Mike that he could do either or both measures for the rundown at Bucking Horse, and that
you would ensure that the selected option would be accepted. Mike is proceeding with a grouted riprap rundown,
without an inlet and pipe. Please confirm that this remains acceptable per your discussions, as I was not present
for all of them.
Thanks!
Nick Haws, PE, LEED AP
Vice President
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
301 N. Howes Street, Suite 100 | Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
2
O: 970.221.4158 ext. 5414 | D: 970.568.5414 | M: 970.690.0927
nick@northernengineering.com | www.northernengineering.com
From: Mike Campana [mailto:mike@campanarealty.com]
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 9:04 AM
To: Nick Haws <nick@northernengineering.com>
Subject: Rundown
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Thanks,
Mike Campana
970-690-3391
AUGUST 2016
PHOTOGRAPHS FROM
MIKE CAMPANA & NICK HAWS
DOCUMENTING RUNDOWN INSTALLATION
Nick Haws
From:Mike Campana <mike@campanarealty.com>
Sent:Monday, February 13, 2017 7:20 AM
To:Nick Haws
Subject:Rundown
Here you go
First photo is at the bottom of rundown and should be what you need to show for energy dissipation. The other photo shows the same situation
occurring up and dun the entire rundown.
Thanks,
Mike Campana
970-690-3391
JANUARY 2014
CORRESPONDENCE WITH
GLEN SCHLUETER
REGARDING RUNDOWN
From: Glen Schlueter [mailto:GSCHLUETER@fcgov.com]
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 10:01 AM
To: 'Nick Haws'; Nico Campana
Cc: Wes Lamarque; Daniel Mogen
Subject: RE: Rip Rap Rundown in Bucking Horse Filing One
Nick and Nico,
Sorry, yesterday was crazy busy with fires to put out.
Nick does make some good points and I agree with his suggestion of the rundown having a defined depression. In order
to do that the riprap may need to be removed as well as the bedding/matt. I also do think burying the center of the
rundown would only wash off. I think a temporary TRM may also be in order to hold the sides of the buried riprap while
the vegetation is taking hold.
One option I was thinking of is installing a small PVC pipe (6 or 8 in.) in the riprap to bring the low flows to the bottom of
the slope and that would allow the entire rundown to be buried and seeded.
I do agree that the Urban Drainage detail is a “bit excessive” in this case. Most designers will opt to an inlet and a pipe
daylighting at the bottom of the slope rather than build the Urban Drainage detail. I would like to see a flow calc to see
what the expected flows would be in say the 2 and 100 year storms. The 100 year flow may already be in the report. A
PCV pipe could be sized for the 1 year event or less.
After you have read this we can still have a conference call say next Monday afternoon or you can propose something to
react to. I am swamped again today so that is why I’m suggesting Monday. There probably won’t be a good time for me
since I am still covering for Jay’s position and trying to get my own work done. That is why was so direct in the email I
sent Ralph Shields in November. I have now been disciplined by the direction of the City Manager.
Let me know what you want to do with the rundown and escrow for the remaining issues so we don’t hold up any
building permits. Jean said yesterday that quite a few permits have been applied for. She plans on giving me a count
when she gets time to look into it.
Sincerely,
Glen Schlueter
224-6065
From: Nick Haws [mailto:nick@northernengineering.com]
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 6:37 AM
To: Nico Campana; Glen Schlueter
Subject: RE: Rip Rap Rundown in Bucking Horse Filing One
Nico,
I never heard back from anyone on this yesterday. My availability today is rather limited, so I’ll briefly summarize my
opinions on this matter below…
- While I believe the UDFCD detail is certainly sufficient from an engineering perspective, I would advocate for
alternatives in this instance. I think the concrete flume may be a bit excessive, and could compete with the natural
aesthetic and habitat objectives of this pond.
- Given the relatively small flows to this discharge point, I believe exposed riprap will be stable if properly
installed.
- If the riprap is exposed, I believe proper bedding is essential. Actually, proper bedding is important regardless,
but becomes even more critical if the riprap is exposed.
- I have concerns if the riprap is to be buried or planted (“soil riprap”) regarding the ability for permanent
vegetation and stability to be established. If the rundown is buried, significant TRM (or similar) products will
with adjacent grade.
- Attention should be paid to interface immediately behind the curb cut so as to avoid undermining.
Thanks,
Nick Haws, PE, LEED AP
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
From: Nick Haws [mailto:nick@northernengineering.com] Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 6:37 AM To: Nico Campana; Glen Schlueter Subject: RE: Rip Rap Rundown in Bucking Horse Filing One Nico, I never heard back from anyone on this yesterday. My availability today is rather limited, so I’ll briefly summarize my opinions on this matter below… - While I believe the UDFCD detail is certainly sufficient from an engineering perspective, I would advocate for alternatives in this instance. I think the concrete flume may be a bit excessive, and could compete with the natural aesthetic and habitat objectives of this pond. - Given the relatively small flows to this discharge point, I believe exposed riprap will be stable if properly installed. - If the riprap is exposed, I believe proper bedding is essential. Actually, proper bedding is important regardless, but becomes even more critical if the riprap is exposed.
need to be employed. Temporary irrigation should be considered, and even then, I remain skeptical.
- The cross section of the rundown should have a well defined depression so as to fully contain the flows. The
width of the depression should be 1 to 3 times the width of the curb cut, and should be approximately 1 foot
deeper than the adjacent pond side slopes. Riprap should extend along both sides of the cross section until flush
with adjacent grade.
- Attention should be paid to interface immediately behind the curb cut so as to avoid undermining.
Thanks,
Nick Haws, PE, LEED AP
NORTHERN ENGINEERING