Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Drainage Reports - 12/20/2019
December 19 , 20 1 9 City of Fort Collins Approved Plans ~roved b~ £t: - Date: .'-z../1.o/201, DRAI NAGE LETTER REPORT I I I I I I I 1· Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal (TRIC) Relocation I I I I I I I I NorthernEnaineerina.com // 970.221 .41 58 Fort Collins , Colorado Prepared for : Poudre School Dist rict 2407 Laporte Aven ue Fort Colli ns, Colorado 805 2 1 Prepared by : NORTHERN ENG I NEERING 301 North Mason Street, Suite 100 Fort Collins, Co lorado 80524 Phone : 970.221.4158 www.northemengineering.com Pro j ect Number: 100-019 I I \ / I I I I I Date: Project: NORTHERN ENGINEERING December 19, 2019 Timnath Reservoir lrilet Canal Relocation Fort Collins, Colorado Attn: Eric Fuhrman Town of Timnath Mr. .Fuhrman: Project No. 100~019 This letter serves to address the anticipated stormwater impacts related to the relocation of the Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal (TRIC) located along the north side of Prospect Avenue, just west of larimer County Road 5 in Fort Collins, Colorado. The project proposes to move approximately2,500 LF of the existing open channel 40' north of the current location and place the ditch in a 12'x6' Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert (RCBC). As a result of moving from an open chan_nel to a closed box, stormwater flows that have historically entered the ditch ·via surface flow will now need to be conveyed into the box culvert using storm pipes and inlets. The construction plan~ for the ditch relocation provide storm pipes and inlets to convey flows into the box culvert. fhese inlets and pipes will be used to reduce the overall stormwater flows into the ditch to the 10-yr historic rate per the Town of Timnath Master Drainage Plan Update.~ 2018 (MDP). Existing Drainage . In the existing condition, approximately 245 acres of undeveloped farmland and existing subdivisions drain from the north to the portion of the TRIG that is proposed to be relocated. The north half of Prospect also drains to the ditch from the south and .is included iri the 245 acres. These areas are defined in the MDP as Basins S85 and SB5a on the west half Of the project and Basins SBl 5 and SB15A ori the east half of the project. Per the Existing SWMM model results for ~ink Flows in the MPP, Basins SS5 and SB5A contribute 114 cfs to the TRIC in the 100-yr event (Link 105C) and Basins S815 and SB15A contribute 107 cfs (Unk 115AB). This is a total of 2i1 ds thc1t enters the ditch during a 100,yr storrn event in the existing condition. Excerpts from the MDP · have been included in the Appendices for reference. Proposed Drainage Per the MDP, existing flows into the TRIC will need to be reduced from current rates. Per the SWMM Model, Basins SB5 and SB5A are allowed to release 57 cfs (Link 1050) while Basins SB15 and SB15A are allowed to release 28 cfs (L,ink 1 l 5AB). This is a total allowable release of 85 cfs into the TRIC from these basins. Future Drainage . . . The fRIC Relocation project is a precursor to a larger Poudre School District project that will construct a High School/Mi<;ldle School building on the site north of the ditch. This project will consist of new buildings, new playing fields and new parking areas. All of these impermeable areas will create additional runoff from the site that will need to be detained to allowable release rates .. Detention Detention will be provided within an area along the north side of the TRIC. The volume the overall pond was determined using the computer program EPA SWMM 5.1 and the allowable release rate outlined previously. Using these methods, the pond must provide at least 15.91 ac-ft of volume with a fotal release rate of 78.80 cfs (6.2 cfs les.s than the allowable release rate). The proposed pond grc:1ding provides this volume at water surface elevation 4914.60. Pipe inlets i.nto the relocated TRIC are shown with flap gates to prevent entry of ditch flows into the detention pond. There is the possibility that in a worst case scenario, the relocated TRIC is FORT COLLINS: 301 North Howes Street, Suite 100, 80521 I 970.221.4158 GREELEY: 820 81h Street, 80631 I 970.395.9880 I WEB: www.northernengineeting.com I I I I I I I I 1- I I I I I I I I I I NORTHERN EN G.I N EE R I NG flowing full in a 100-year event. We have run a blocked outlet scenario simulating this event, which shows 30.9 ac-ft of volume, ponding to a water surface elevation of 4915.93. Water Quality Stormwatet will generally sheet-flow over large vegetated areas which will provide some water quality trec:1tmen.t. Stormwater will also-accumulate in the detention areas and be conveyed via flat swales to the storm pipes. In the long-term, detention outlet structures will be constructed, and these will indude water quality plates to further treat stormwater before entering the TRIC. fhe current design is an interim condition, and the future school development will provide additional water ·quality treatment TRIG Sizing The TRIC culvert size has been determined using analysis of both the existing conveyance needs as weU as the f1Jt.ure flow$. As with the allowable release rates, _the Timnath Master Drainage Plan Update was utilized to determine flows. In the proposed condition, the flow entering the west end of the box culvert is expected to be 241 cfs -this includes an approximately 190 cfs base flow that is the decreed ditch company irrigation flow. We have added a portion of Master Basin Sl35 100-year storm flow to the 241 cfs, based on current plans under way for the Poudre School Middle School and High School #2. Based on this plan, Basin SB5 will be split, and 33.27 c:1cres of the overall 8.2.00 acre basin will remain draining to the inlet of the TRIC culvert. Based on a cfs per acre value of 1.39 (Basin SB5 lOO~yr existing condition$ di$charge = 114 cfs; Sasin SB5 area = 82 ac~es), we have calculated a l00°yeat inflow from the remainder of the basin of 46.25 cfs. We have added this flow to the 241 cfs for a total inflow rate of 287.3 cfs. The 12'x6' box culvert has .been modeled i.n the computer program Hydraflow, Version 2019.2, which shows an Upstream HGL of 4915.3. It is noted that the proposed plans for the inlet to the enclosure of the TRIC · include a traversable pipe grate trash rack for pedestrian safety. All modeling for both proposed and existing conditions includes an inlet loss coefficient of 0.50 which accounts for energy loss occurring at the inlet due to t_hetrash rack, Due to a fairly wide bar spacing (12~inch spacing shown on the plans), we feel thatsmall trash and debris will not accumulate to significant proportions and a blockc:1ge·factor is not necessary. We understand that Poudre School District will be responsible for maintenance and wfll monitor the inlet conditions in a major flow event, and maintain as necessary in orde.r to prevent major debris blockage, which could result in a spill upstream Of the proposed box culvert: · Upstream analysis of proposed conditions has been completed utilizing the computer program HEC-RAS Version 5.04, by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. HEC~RAS analysis has been done in order to show the affect that the enclosure of the TRIC may have on upstream properties. Previous c:1r,alysis ofthe area LJpstream of the project site was done in the Town of Timnath Master Drainage Plan Update, and we have provided pertinent excerpts of this plan in Appendix C. The proposed project will be causing a small increase in water surface elevation upstream of the project site .. We are proposing the raising of low portions of the Southern bank of the lRIC upstream of the project to prevent spill due to the increase in 100-year water surface elevation. Proposed conditions model output as well as a hydraulic modeling workmap is provided in Appendix D. · Please see Table l, below, for a summary of HEC~RAS output in both proposed and future conditions. Page I 3 -I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ NORTHERN ENGINEERING . Table 1 -HEC-RAS Output -Proposed Conditions Model r--- Proposed Top J Proposed Exist. Exist. Top River Sta QTotal W.S. El ev Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Froude W.S. El ev of South Bank of Sou th Bank (cfs) (ft) (ft/s) (sq ft) (sq ft) #Chi (ft) (ft) (ft) 100 287.3 4915.3 2.51 156.19 35 .53 0.18 4915.20 4914.86 4916.00 110 287.3 4915.37 2.79 145.66 33.8 0 .19 4915.28 4916.06 4916.00 120 287.3 4915.45 3.28 132.66 32 .37 0.23 4915.36 4917.19 4917.19 130 287.3 4915 .5 3.57 124.24 30.86 0 .25 4915.41 4916.77 4916.77 140 241 4915.66 2.07 157.08 38.39 0.15 4915 .58 4916.08 4916 .15 150 241 4915.7 1.33 234.03 39 .74 0 .08 4915 .63 4915.90 4916 .25 t ... 160 241 4915.7 2.04 178.52 36.76 0 .13 4915.62 4915.28 4916.28 170 241 4915.72 1.83 183.26 41.21 0.11 4915 .65 4915.25 4916.30 180 191 4915 .77 1.55 159 .14 30.71 0.1 4915 .70 4917.29 4917.29 .... 190 191 4915 .81 1.32 161.95 30.99 0.09 4915.73 4916.83 4916.83 200 191 4915.81 2.28 95.22 29.71 0 .21 4915.74 4917.53 4917.53 Conclusions The relocation of the TRIC and ut i lizing box culvert ins t ead of the existing open channel will have impacts to the overall stormwater flows, both in the way the stormwater reaches the ditch and the amount of runoff . The overall runoff that will enter the relocated ditch will be reduced to the rates specified in the Town of Ti mnath Master Drainage Plan . Provisions have been made on the south side of the ditch to allow for the appl ication of treatment options that can be incorporated during the future design of Prospect Road. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely , A~~ Andy Reese Project Manager Aaron Cvar, PhD , PE Sen ior Engineer Page I 4 I 1• I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,I NorthernEnaineerina.com II 970.221.4158 APPENDIX A HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS - - - ---·--I------ -!-- --PROPOSED COMPOSITE% IMPERVIOUSNESS AND, RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS I Runoff . Percentage CHARACTER OF Sl:JRFACE: Coefficient Impervious Project: TRIC Relocation Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: Calculations· By: A. Reese Asphalt ........ : ............................... , ......•............................. 0.95 100 Date: June 7, 2019 Concrete· .............•............ , ............................................... 0.95 90 Gravel ........................•...... , ... , ..... , •...... , ............................ 0.50 40 Roofs ............................................................................. 0:95 90 Concrete. Pavers .... : ............................ , ....•.•......•. , ........ : ...... 0.40 22 Lawns and Landscaping Sandy Soil .............................................................. , ......... 0.15 2 Clayey Soil ............................................................... , ...... ,. 0.25 2 2-year C; = 1.00 10-year C; = 1.00, lQQsyearC;·= 1.25 Runoff1Coefficients are taken from the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria.and Construction Standards, Table 3-3. % 'Impervious taken from UDFCD USDCM, Volume Ji. I ' : Area of Area of. 2-year lO~year lOO-year Area of Area of Area of ,! Area of Basin Area ·' Concrete • '. Lawns and, Composite Composite Composite ' Basin'ID ,(ac) Asphalt ·Concrete Roofs Gravel Pavers · , : Landscaping Runoff :Runoff Runoff Composite (ac) (ac) (ac) i (ac) % lmperv. .(ac) ', (ac) Coefficient Coefficient· Coefficient Rl 2.70 0.40 0,00 0.00 0~00 . ' o.oo, 2.31 0.35 0.35 0.44 16.4 R2 1.63 0.21 0.00 0.00 0'.00 0.00 1.42 0.34 0.34 0.43 14.7 R3 ,l.31 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.15 0.34 0.34 0.42 14.2 Prospect Total 5.65' 0.77 0.00 o.oo I 0.00 0.00 4.88 0.35 0.35 0.431 15.4 D.'.\Projects\ 100-019\Drainage\Hydrology\ TRJC\100-0.19 _ Rational-Ca/cs_ TRIC:.:.Proposed.xisx\C-Values ---·-- - - ---·----,-: ----PRQPOSED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS Overland Flow, Time of Concentration: , 1.87(1' .1-C * Cf }Ji Table,-• Project: TRIC Relocation ,1';= X IUI.T%OIIJU. NB'IHOD l1UQUIDlCY IIDJU&iiUiff ll'ACTORS Calculations By: A. Reese Date: June 7, 2019 GLitter[Swale Flow, Tim~ of Concentration: ·~ Rebai:n 'hriod ·ll'blqaancy.: hator. : ;T1 = L / 60V c-..1, ·!:i i "c = T; + T1 (Equation R0,2) 2 to 10 1.00 } (Equation R0-4) 11 to 25 1.10 :velocity (Gutter Flow), V = 20·S'h 26 to SO 1.20 ~elocity (Swale Flow), V = 15·S'h '51 1:0 100 1.25 Note:: The. p.roduct,.of ,c times c, shall not exceed· LOO ( I .NOTE, C-value for overland flows over grassy surfaces; C ·= 0.25 Overland Flow Gutter Flow Swale Flow Time of·Concentration ' Design Basin Is Length C*Ci C*Ci C*Ci , · Length,· 'Slope, T1 T1 T1 Length, I Slope, Velocity, T1 : Length, Siope, Velocity, T1 2-yr 10-yr 1oo;yr '· ,P.oint (2,yr HO,yr (100-yr : L s 2-yr 10-yr 100-yr L i s V L i s \i I Tc Tc Tc >500''? C1=1.00)' C1=1.00) Ci=l.25): ,(ft) . (%) : (min) (min) (miri) (ft) (%) (ft/s) (min)· (ft) (%) Cft/s) (min)' (min) Crnlnl (min) ' Rl Rl No 0.95 0.95 1.00 .64 2.00 1.8 L8. . l:.2 0 0.50 0.00 0.0 698 0.62 1.18 9.8 I 11.6 11.6 11.0 R2 R2 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 50 2.00 1.6 L6 .LO 0 · 0,50 0.00 0.0 379 : 0:90 1.42 4'.4 · 6.0 6.0 5.5 :· R3 R3 No 0.95 0:95 1.00 47 2.00· 1.5 1.5 1.0 0 0,50 0.00 0.0 408 0;62 1.18 5.8 7.3 7.3 6.8 .D:\Projects\100-019\Dralnage\Hydrology\TRIC\100-019_Rational-Ca/cs_ TRIC:_Proposad.x/sx\Tc-2;yr..:.&_ 100-yr -- --· -·---------------PROPOSED RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS Tabl.la .. 3-4 Rational Method Equation: 1RAfforGU. ·!Gl'IIIDI) IISIIKQUIDICY AD.1U8m&lff DCftlRII, Project: TRIC Relocation Q=Cf(CXiXA) .Stoni, lletuzn l'lu1.od. heqaonc:,y l'actor ,Calculations By: A. Reese S,c,,san> 5r Pate: June 7, 2019 From Section 3.2.1 of.the,CFCSDDC 2 to -10 · 1.00 11 to 2S 1.10 26 to 50 1.20 . u to• 100-. 1-.2s Rainfall lntensi~: 'Note: :The product o! c· timea c, ahall not exceed· 1.00 -Rainfall Intensity taken from the·City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage,Design Criteria (CFCSDDC), Figure 3.1 Design Area, A 2-yr lOsyr 100-yr Intensity, Intensity, Intensity, Flow, Flow, Flow, Point Basin(s) (acres) Tc re Tc C2 C10 C100 i2 i10 i100 G2 G10 Gi.oo ·(min) (min) (min) (in/hr) (in/hr) ,(In/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Rl Rl 2.70 11.6 . 11.6 u.o 0.35 0.35 0.44 2.09 357 . 7.42 1.99 3.40 8.84 R2 R2 1.63' 6.0 6.0 5,5 0.34 0.34 0.43 2.67 4.56 9.95 1.48 2.54 6.92 R3 R3 1.31 7.3 7.3 :6.8 0.34 0.34 0.42 2.52 4,31 9.06. 1.11 1.91 5.01 Prospect Total 5.65 4.59 7,84 20.76 D:\Projects\ 100-019\Dralnage\Hydrology\ TRIC.\ 100-019_ Rational-Ca/cs_ TRIC_Proposed:xfsx\Direct-Runoff I I I I I I I I I ·1 I I I I I I I I I DESIGN POINT R1 R2 R3 .. ... -.. . . ... .. .. .. PROPOSED RUNOFF SUMMARY TABLE •· TOTAL 10.;yr 100-yr BASIN 2-yrTc Q2 Q10 Q100 ID AREA C2 C10 C100 (min) Tc Tc (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (acres) (m•r1) (min) ----· .. R1 2.70 o.l5 .. !t3& Ct4~ 11.6 11.6 11.0 1.99 3.40 8.84 R2 1:6 .. 3 (J:$4 Q.34 .. :.--o.•f3: 6.0 6.() 5.5 1.48 2.54 6.92 R3 1.31 0.34 0,34 0.42 .. .. t.3 7.3 ... 6.8 1.11 1.91 5.01 Prqspect Total s.:Gs .. .. ... 4.59 7.84 20.76 ... ...... --·· .... . .. D:\Projects\100-019\DrairJage\Hyqrology\ TRIG\ 100-019..,.Rational-Calcs_ TR.IC ~Proposed.xlsx\Summary Table -· - - -·---·-·---· '---· - --I-· -.~ FUTURE COMPOSITE % IMPERVIOUSNESS AND RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULA·TIONS CHARACTER OF SURFACE: Runoff : · Percentage Coefficient , Impervious . Project: TRIC Relocation . Streets, Parking lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives: Calculations By: A. Reese Asphalt ...... ; .. ; ......... ·;.,., .... , ................................................ 0.95 100 Date: June 7,2019 Concrete ....................... : ..... ;., .... , ..................................... 0.95 90 -Gravel ....................... ; . ; : ......... , ......................................... 0.50 40 Roofs ........................................ , .................................... 0.95 90 Concrete Pavers· ................................................................. 0.40 22 Lawns and Landscaping Sandt Soil ............................................................... , ....... 0.15 2 Clayey Soil ... , ............. : ............................................. , ........ 0.25 2 2-year Ci = 1.00 10,year C1 = LOO 100-year Ci·= 1.25 Runoff Coefficients are taken fmm the City of Fort Collins:Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards, Table 3-3 .. % Impervious taken fmm UDFCD USDCM, Volume I. -Area of Area.of Area of Area of Area of Area of 2-year 10-year. iOO-year Basin ID Basin Area. Asphalt Concrete Roofs Gravel Concrete Lawns and Composite, Composite Composite Composite ' (ac) (ac) (ac) · (ac) (ac) I Pavers Landscaping Runoff Runoff Runoff % lmperv. ! (ac) (ac) Coefficient Coefficient Coefficient ,· Rl 2.70 1:.20 0.17 0.00 0.00 :! 0.00 1.34 · 0.60 0.60 0]5 50,9 R2 l.63 0.76 ,) 0.11. 0.00 0.00 0;00 0.77 0.62 0.62 0.78 53.4 ,, ., '1, R3 l.31 0.61 i 0:09 0.00 0.00 i 0,00 0.61 0.62 0.62 0.78 53.6 , Prospect Total 5.65 2.57 i 0.37 0.00 0.00 •I o.oo 2.71 0.61 0 .• 61 0~77 52.3 D:\Projects\ 100-019\Drainage\Hydro/ogy\ TRIG\ 100-019 _ Rational-Calcs_ TRIC _Future.xlsx\C-Va/ues - ----Overland Flow. Time of Concentratlon:-1.87 ( 1.1-C* CJ}Ji 1';= lj . Gutter/Swale Flow. 'Jim~ o/concentration: Ti= :L/ 601/ :Tc = T; + Ti (Equation ,R0-2). Velocity .(Gutter Flow), V = 20,s'h Velocity,(Swale Flow), V = 15·S'h } (Equation R0-4) . , NOTE,-C-value for overland flows over grassy surfaces; C = 0.25 ----- - --FUTURE TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS 'fabl.CD 3•4 Rll.flOIW:. Ml'mOD VR8QUIDlCY JIDJIJS!lml'l' ll'J\C'!OltS iitom 1181:Qn Pew.ad• -~ ll'll:eqaaDc:y l'aator .!:r. .2: to 10 1. oo· 11 to 25 1·.10 26 to so 1.20 -51 to 100 l..2S _Note:: The product.-. of .c times Cr shal.l not exceed· 1.00 . Overland Flow Gutter Flow :I' Design Basin Is Length C*Ci C*C; C*C1 Length, Slope, , ! T,. T1 T, Length, Slope, , Velocity, Tt Point (2~yr (10-yr (100-yr L s 2,yr 10-yr :1.00-yr •L s ' V >500'? Ci=LOO) C1=1.00) 'Ci=l.25): (ft) (%) (min) (min) (min) (ft) (%) I (ft/s) (min) :(, ! Rl Rl No 0.95 0.95 1.00 42 2.00 1.4 L4 1.0 675 0.50 1.41 RO 'R2 R2 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 42 2.00 1.4 1.4 1.0 409 0;50 1.41 4:8 R3 R3 No 0.95 0.95 1.00 42 2.00 1.4 1.4 1.0 432 0.50 1.41 5.1 ' --· ---Project: TRIC Relocation Calculations By: A. Reese ·Date: June?, 2019 -Swale Flow Time.of'Concentration te11gth, Slope, Velocity, , Tt .2-yr 10-yr 100,yr' L s V Tc Tc Tc (ft) (%) (ft/sJ (min) (min) (min) (m!n) 0 N/A 0.00 0.0 9.4 9.4 8.9 0 N/A 0.00 , 0:0 6:3 6:3 5.8 •O NLA 0.00 0.0 6.5 6.5 6:1 D:\Projects\ 100-0191Drainage1Hydrologyl TR/C\100-019_Rationa/-Ca/cs_ TR/C_Future.xlsx\Tc-2·yr_ &_ 100-yr ·---------·--' -·---:--~ -- -FUTURE RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS Table .. 3-4 '-Rational Method Eguation: · RAnCIIIDIX. Xl'fflQD IUQU!Dac:I' ~ lli'JIC,!OaS Project: TRIG Relocation . Q = C1(CXiXA) :stozm-1\etuzn hriod haqaency,~r Calculations By: A. Reese 'SX,..U:,01 '"' Date: June 7,2019 From Section 3.2.1 of'the CFCSDDC .2' eo. 10 1,00 U to 25 1.10 26 to 50 1.20 51. to uio 1,25 Rainfall lntensi~: Noto: ,nie product of :c timaa C,··lihall not· exceed 1·.00 Rainfall Intensity taken from:the.City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage.Design Criteria (CFCSDDC), Figure 3.1 Design Area, A 2-yr 10-yr 100,yr. Intensity, Intensity, Intensity, , : Flow, Flow, Flow, Basin(s) Tc T. T. C2 C10 C100 i2 110 hoo 'I G2 ,: G10 G100 ·Point (acres) (min) (min) (in/hr) (in/hr) ,. (in/hr) :i ,, (min) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) R-1 Rl 2.70 9.4 9.4 8.9 0.60 0;60 0.75 2.30 3.93 8.21 3.75 : 6.41 16.74 R2 R2 1.63 6.3 6,3 · 5.8 0.62 0,62 0.78 2.67 4.56 ·, 9,63 ' 2.71 4.63 12.23 R3 R3 1.31 6.5 6.5 6.1 0.62 0~62 0.78 2.60 4.44 9.31 I 2.12 3.63 9.53 ' · Prospect Total 5.65 I 8.59 14;68 38.49 : D:\Projacts\100-019\Dralnage\Hydrology\TRIC\100-019_Rational-Calcs_TRIC_Future.x/sx\Dlrect-Runoff 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ··---------... -. FUTURE RUNOFF SUMMARY TABLE DESIGN BASIN TOTAL 2~yrTc 10-yr 100-yr Q2 a10 Q100 POINT ID AREA C2 C10 C100 {min) Tc Tc {cfs) {cfs) {cfs) {acres) {min) {min) --··· -- Rf R1 2~tb o.e_o 0.60 0.75 9.4 9.4 8.9 3.75 6.41 16.74 R2 ---· R2 --··--1.63 0.62 0.62 0.78 6.3 6.3 5.8 2.71 4.63 -12.23 ·-·-----·-- _R3 --,, 'B:3 --_------· 1:31 o.e2 0.62 0.78 6.5 6.5 6.1 2.12 3.63 9.53 -----, .. ]?rospect Total 5.65 8.59 14.68 38.49 ----, ---·------ J tY1Projects\ 100-019\Drainage\Hydrology\ TRIG\ 100-019~Rationa/°Calcs _TRIC _ Fl.iture.xlsx\Summary Table -·---------------------- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I North•rnEnnin,...rlnn.com // 970.221 .41.58 APPENDIX B DETENTION & HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NorthernEnaineerina.com // 970.221.4158 APPENDIX B.1 HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS -6X12 RCB IIIPtyfflfl~ Sfffl'm '!lwffll cllbnlffln fflt Afflbdft\~vil'!o<fM'la.,--- - -~ ,1s 14 11 l 13 10 9 al 7 6 sl 4 3 12 l 2 ... Outfall Project File: TRIC_Proposed_2019-12-05.stm 1 Number of lines: 15 1 Date: 12/5/2019 Slorm Sewers ~2019.20 'ffydffl.li~rdfffl LIi ~p'tl'ftttiffll's -- -- - - - ---.. 1 I Line Size a Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) 1 72 366.1 4907.62 4913.57 5.95 71.40 5.13 0.41 4913.98 0.040 132.80 04907.64 4913.63 5.99 71.89 5.09 0.40 4914.03 0.039 0.039 0.052 0.05 0.02 144 B 2 72 366.1 4907.64 4913.65 6.00 72.00 5.08 0.40 4914.05 0.067 290.57 4907.69 4913.85 6.00 72.00 5.08 0.40 4914.25 0.067 0.067 0.194 0.05 0.02 144 B 3 72 346.4 4907.69 4913.87 6.00 72.00 4.81 0.36 4914.23 0.060 364.61 D4907.74 4914.08 6.00 72.00 4.81 0.36 4914.44 0.060 0.060 0.218 0.05 0.02 144 B 4 72 346.4 4907.74 4914.10 6.00 72.00 4.81 0.36 4914.46 0.060 133.13 B4907.76 4914.18 6.00 72.00 4.81 0.36 4914.54 0.060 0.060 0.080 0.05 0.02 144 B 5 24· 19.70 4910.60 4914.20 2.00 3.14 6.27 0.61 4914.81 0.647 80.828 4911.00 4914.72 2.00 3.14 6.27 0.61 4915.33 0.646 0.647 0.523 0.50 0.31 6 72 326.7 4907.76 4914.20 6.00 72.00 4.54 0.32 4914.52 0.053 318.65 M907.81 4914.37 6.00 72.00 4.54 0.32 4914.69 0.053 0.053 0.170 0.05 0.02 144 B 7 72 326.7 4907.81 4914.39 6.00 72.00 4.54 0.32 4914.71 0.053 396.77 ,4907.87 4914.60 6.00 72.00 4.54 0.32 4914.92 0.053 0.053 0.211 0.05 0.02 144 B 8 24 19.70 4910.53 4914.61 2.00 3.14 6.27 0.61 4915.23 0.647 94.447 4911.00 4915.22 2.00 3.14 6.27 0.61 4915.84 0.646 0.647 0.611 0.50 0.31 9 72 307.0 4907.88 4914.61 6.00 72.00 4.26 0.28 4914.90 0.047 395.42 4907.94 4914.80 6.00 72.00 4.26 0.28 4915.08 0.047 0.047 0.186 0.05 0.01 144 B 10 72 307.0 4907.94 4914.81 6.00 72.00 4.26 0.28 4915.10 0.047 306.76 J4907.99 4914.96 6.00 72.00 4.26 0.28 4915.24 0.047 0.047 0.144 0.05 0.01 144 B 11 24 19.70 4910.53 4914.97 2.00 3.14 6.27 0.61 4915.58 0.647 94.260 4911.00 4915.58 2.00 3.14 6.27 0.61 4916.19 0.646 0.647 0.609 0.50 0.31 12 24 19.70 4910.60 4913.87 2.00 3.14 6.27 0.61 4914.48 0.647 80.828 4911.00 4914.39 2.00 3.14 6.27 0.61 4915.00 0.646 0.647 0.523 0.50 0.31 13 72 287.3 4907.99 4914.97 6.00 72.00 3.99 0.25 4915.22 0.041 93.176 4908.00 4915.01 6.00 72.00 3.99 0.25 4915.26 0.041 0.041 0.038 0.05 0.01 144 B 14 72 287.3 4908.00 4915.02 6.00 72.00 3.99 0.25 4915.27 0.041 225.72 94908.04 4915.12 6.00 72.00 3.99 0.25 4915.36 0.041 0.041 0.093 0.30 0.07 144 B 15 72 287.3 4908.04 4915.19 6.00 72.00 3.99 0.25 4915.44 0.041 30.700 4908.04 4915.20 6.00 72.00 3.99 0.25 4915.45 0.041 0.041 0.013 0.50 0.12 144 B Project File: TRIC_Proposed_2019-12-05.stm I Number of lines: 15 I Run Date: 12/5/2019 ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Storm Sewers v2019.: .i:,. <D 0 .i:,. 0 0 0 "' 0 I 0 G) r;-I I .i:,. ! 0 ! 0 ! m G) r C) 0 0 Cl) 0 0 .... 0 0 0 .... "' 0 0 ::0 .... Ct) .i:,. n> 0 0 0 ~ :§ .... C) 0 0 Cl) 0 0 "' 0 0 0 "' "' 0 0 "' .i:,. 0 0 "' C) 0 0 "' Cl) 0 0 I en 0 3 en (I) :E (I) iil I i:; ~ ' ~ 1 X C j i (e .' ~ ) ~ j :~ a ;n c j I ~ ~ I~ f [ ~ = Ii) ' ~ C b "I:> X -c t!;! i j i (E ' -i:: -) "ci a D • ~ ( b J ~ I,, ~ t ~ ( B) b ~ ~ ' ~ j :~ (E ~ : ~ ~ I t. cl ' ~ ~ "L... ' ~ i,.-l, ~ \ V I~ ~ •· b k-·. ~ 6 ~ ~@ 0 0 0 L... ~ = .i:,. <D 0 <D 0 0 .i:,. .i:,. .i:,. .i:,. <D <D <D <D .... .... "' "' .i:,. <D .i:,. <D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I'\ I\ \ I'\ : I\ I\ i\ rs.. ' rs : : i ! l I : l l ,-h ' : I\ l [\ : J,, Ll.., ~ l'\ "" ' m co :< :§ Sta 0+00.00 -Outfall -29 Grnd. El. 4914 Inv. El. 4907.6 Sta 1+32.80 -Grnd. El. 4914 Inv. El. 4907.6• Inv. El. 4907.6• Sta 4+23.374 -Grnd. El. 4914 Inv. El. 4907.6! Inv. El. 4907.6! Sta 7+87.984 -Grnd. El. 4914 Inv. El. 4907.7• Inv. El. 4907.7• Sta 9+21.123 -Grnd. El. 4914 Inv. El. 4907.71 Inv. El. 4907.71 Sta 12+39.781 Grnd. El. 4914 Inv. El. 4907.8 Inv. El. 4907.8 Sta 16+36.557 Grnd. El. 4914 Inv. El. 4907.8. Inv. El. 4907.8, Sta 20+31.981 Grnd. El. 4914 Inv. El. 4907.9• Inv. El. 4907.9· Sta 23+38.741 Grnd. El. 4914 Inv. El. 4907.9! Inv. El. 4907.9! Sta 24+31.917 Grnd. El. 4914 Inv. El. 4908.01 Inv. El. 4908.01 Sta 26+57 .646 --In n: 1 31 Out In Ln:2 35 Out In Ln: 3 41 Out In Ln:4 43 Out In -Ln: 6 48 Out In -Ln: 7 54 Out In -Ln: 9 61 Out In -Ln: 10 65 Out In -Ln: 13 67 Out In -Ln: 14 70 Out In Ln: 15 Grnd. El. 4914.71 Inv. El. 4908.04 Out I i I CD I i I I I I I· I I I I I !"I! II "U • 'i i ,I II 11 RATING CURVE FOR TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL I /' '\ Depth vs. Flow 8.00 7.00 I ---8 .00 ~ --..--- ~] 5.00 -~ 4 .00 I ./" ( > Zl 3.00 2 .00 B 1.00 0.00 I 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 F1ow(cfs) '-.... Bottom W idth B= 12 .00 feet I Left Side S lope Z1 = 1.50 ft/ft Right Side Slope Z2 = 1.50 ft/ft Manning's n or SCS Retardance Curve n= 0.038 ·I Longitudina l Slope S= 0 .0010 ft/ft I Flow Manning's Flow Wetted Hydraulic Flow Flow Froude Depth Roughness Area Perimeter Radius Velocity rate Number y n A p R V Q Fr I (ft) (sq ft) (ft) (ft) (fps) (cfs) 3.00 0 .0380 49.50 22 .82 2.17 2 .1 102.6 0.24 3.20 0 .0380 53.76 23.54 2.28 2.1 115.3 0.24 I 3.40 0.0380 58.14 24.26 2.40 2.2 128.8 0.24 3.60 0 .0380 62.64 24.98 2 .51 2.3 143.0 0.24 3.80 0.0380 67 .26 25 .70 2.62 2 .3 158.0 0.24 I 4.00 0.0380 72.00 26.42 2 .72 2.4 173.7 0.25 4.20 0.0380 76 .86 27.14 2.83 2 .5 190 .2 0.25 4.40 0 .0380 81.84 27 .86 2.94 2 .5 207 .6 0.25 I 4.60 0.0380 86.94 28 .59 3 .04 2.6 225.7 0 .25 4.80 0 .0380 92.16 29 .31 3.14 2.7 244 .6 0.25 I 5 .00 0.0380 97.50 30 .03 3.25 2.7 · 264.4 0.25 5 .20 0 .0380 102 .96 30 .75 3.35 2 .8 285 .0 0 .25 5.40 0 .0380 108 .54 31.47 3.45 2 .8 , 306.4 0 .25 I 5.60 0.0380 114.24 32 .19 3.55 2.9 328 .7 0.25 5 .80 0.0380 120.06 32 .91 3.65 2.9 351.8 0.26 6.00 0.0380 126 .00 33 .63 3 .75 3.0 375.8 0.26 I 6.20 0.0380 132 .06 34 .35 3 .84 3.0 400.7 0.26 6.40 0 .0380 138.24 35 .08 3.94 3 .1 426.5 0 .26 6 .60 0.0380 144.54 35.80 4 .04 3.1 453 .2 0 .26 I 6.80 0.0380 150.96 36.52 4 .13 3.2 480.8 0 .26 7.00 0.0380 157 .50 37.24 4.23 3.2 509.4 0 .26 I Downstream Depth = 5.95 FT, Starting WSEL=4913.57 I I 100-019-DS WSEL.xls , Rat ing 11/25 /2019 , 3:05 PM - I r,a=II ======RA=T=IN=G=C=U=R=V=E =F=O=R=T=R=A=P=EZ=O=l=D=A=L =C=H=A=NN=E=L=======a;i11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 z C1> "C :::s 0 ... LL en a. :=.. >, .. ·c:; 0 'a:i > ~ J: .. a. C1> C ~ 0 ii: ... Cl) .c E :::s z Cl) "C :::s 0 ... LL 0 3.5 3.0 2 .5 2 .0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0 .00 0 I Velocity, Froude Number, & Manning's n vs. Flow Depth I 2 4 ... -... ,--,- 1.00 2 .00 -Velocity (fps) 6 --,_ --,- .... ... ... - I VR Product I 8 ------ .1..1 ,.. ... ti .... -.. ... - 10 ------- ... ... ... ti ... ... - 3 .00 4 .00 5 .00 I Flow Depth (ft) I 12 ... -----:_; ·---I" ...... ... -"' ... . .. 6 .00 -Fro ud e Numb er -Mannin g's n 14 --· 7 .00 Velocity, Flow Depth, Froude Number & Manning's n vs. Discharge 2 4 6 I VR Product I 8 10 12 14 16 0 .040 0.035 0.030 ~~:~ 0.01m 0 .010 0.005 0 .000 8.00 16 8.0 -..----,p,---.....,-----+-----1-----+----+--....,..--1~--...... 0 .040 7 .0 6.0 5 .0 +------I------+---=~~-+-----+------+-----+ 0 .025 c: 4 .0 3.0 2 .0 1.0 0 .0 Ill .Cl -1------f-----=:;aijP::.:,'-+-------+------+------t------t-0 .020 .!: C: C: 0 .015 ~ 0 .010 -L----....!~~~tlt~EJtjt:ll~~~~!:::!~!::~~~~----'-0 .000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 I Flow Rate in cfs I -Flo w Depth -Vel ocity -Froud e No. -Mann ing's n 100-019-DS WSEL.xls, Rating 11/25/2019, 3:05 PM I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,I I NorthernEnaineerina.com fl 970.221 .4158 APPENDIX 8.2 DETENTION CALCULATIONS, SWMM OUTPUT I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------- Detention Stage-Storage Curve By:ATC D_at~: 12/5/19 Stage Volume (PT) (CU.FT.) 49J1_.Q2 0 4911.2 128.35 -. 4911.,4 1027.72 4911.6 3468.95 . -·------------ 4911.8 8223.48 4914_ 16069.95 -. -- 4912.2. 27829.06 4912.4 44369.56 4912.6 ---fi6~fi~.35 - 4912.8 92489.19 491~ . --·· -----128~91,45 4913.2 166740.98 49~j.4 218842.14 4913.6 265445.09 4913.8 335405.lf - 4914 ---· .. -·---~j,4§90.03 ------------ 4914.2 503637.67 4_9J,4A 602702.48 --- 4914.6 712380.33 . - 4914.8 833207.55 4915.15 --·---· _1Q_7_~F? ,J$ -----· -- Volume (AC-FT)_ -----·-- 0.000 0,003 0.024 0.080 0.189 ---··----·-··--·· -------, 0.369 0.639 ·-- 1.019 1.528 2.123 2.947 3.828 5.024 6_,Q94 7.700 9.520 11.562 -- 13.8~6 , 1~.354 19.128 24.641 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ORiFICE RATING CURV~ Orifice W1 1 00-vr: Orifice . PROJECT: 100'019 .. DATE: 12/05i19 8'Y:ATG OR.IFICE RATING Orifice Dia (in) Orifice Area (sf) Orifice invert (ft) Orifice Coefficient . -··-- Stage (FT) 4911.00 ----- 4911.50 --·-4911.75 4912.00 4912.25 4912.50 .. 49.12.75 .. ----- . 4913.00 4913:25 4913.50 4913.75 4914.00 4914.25 .4914.50. 49'15.15 ·--- -.. - 19.50 2.0739 4911.02 0.65 Outlet release -(CFS) .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. · ··o.o 0.9 2.1 3.7 8.8 .. --. 10.4 . -. 11.7 12.9 14.0 15.0 15.9 .. . -----·····---···-16.8 17:7 ... .. 19.7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ORIFICE RATING CURVE Orifice W2 100-vr Orifice -- PROJECT: 100-019 DATE: 12/05/19 BY:ATC OR_IFICE RATING Orifice Dia (in) Orifice Area (sf) Orifice invert (ft) Orifice Coefficient -.. -· Stage (FT) 4911.00 4911.50 4911.75 4912.00 --4912.25 -. 4912.50 4912~75 ---- 4913.00 4913.25 4913.50 -4913.75 4914.00 -----_ A914.25 ___ 4914.50 ----· -----· . ---4915.15 ------- -.. -·------ 19.50 2.0739 49.11.02 0.65 ·---·----- Outlet release (CFS) 0.0 0.0 0.9 2.1 ----·· _3.7 8.8 -- 10.4 11.7 12.9 14.0 15.0 15.9 --16.8 _ -----··-n.r ··-. -- 19.7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ORIFICE RATING CURVE Orifice E1 100-vr Orifice PROJECT: 100-019 DATE: 12/05/19 BY:ATC. .ORIFICE RATING Orifice Dia (in) Orifice Area (sf) Orifice irivert (ft) Orifice Coefficient Stage ---· _(FTl 49·11.00 - 4911.50. 4911.75 4912.00 4912.25 .. _4912.50. ----· 4912.75 . . .. 4913.00 ··-·" -··-- ... ... .. 4913.25 4913.50 4913.75 4914.00 4914.25 4914.50. _ .. 4914.75 -·-- --·4915:00 - ... 4915.15 --·-· - 19.50 2.07:39 4911.02 0.65 Outlet release (CFSl 0.0 0.0 0.9 2.1 3.7 .. -. . 8.8 ·10:4 ... ·-·-· 11.7 12.9 14.0 15.0 15.9 -- 16.8. ··-- 17.7 -------·18:5 .. 19.3 19.7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ORIFICE RATING CURVE Orifice E2 100-Vr Orifice PROJECT: 100-019 DATE: 12/05/19 BY:ATC ORIFICE RATING Orifice Dia (in) Orifice Area (sf) Orifice invert (ft) Orifice Coefficient Stage (FT) 4911.00 4911.50 4911.75 4912.00 49.12.25 .. .. 4912.50 '" ···-- . 4912.75 .. 4913.00 4913.25 4913.50 4913.75 ----- .. 4914.00 . .. .49'14'.25 49R50 4914.75 4915.QO 4915.15 ---·-· ... -------. . . . . . ... .. 19.50 2.0739 4911.02 0.65 Outlet release (CFS) 0.0 0.0 0.9 2.1 .. .. -··- 37 .. .. ------. S:8 . 10.4 11.7 12.9 14.0 -·---... .15.0. ·-·-.. 15.9. ... . . .16.8 17.7 18.5 19.3 -··-19.7 ... . . -----i ------EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL -VERSION 5.1 (Build 5.1.012) --------------------------------------------------------------. . ********************************************************* NOTE: Thersummary statistics displayed in this report are based on results found at every computational time step, not j us,t on results from each reporting time ·step. * * *'* * * *·*·* ** * *'*'** * * *** ** ** * ** **** *** * ** *·**:* * ** * *·*·*"* * * * * ** * *•*·•·• ** * *·* ** ** * * * Analysis Op,tions * *·*'*** * *·* ** **** * Flow Uni ts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CFS Process Models: Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES RDII .................... NO Snowmel t ........ : . . . . . . NO Groundwater ............ NO Flow Routing.·~~······· YES Ponding Allowed ........ NO Water Quality ... : ...... NO Infiltration Method., .... HORTON Flow Routing Method ...... KINWAVE Starting. Date ....... , .... 01/01/20100 00: 00: 00 Ending Date .............. , . 01/06/2;000 01: 00: 00 Anteceden~ Dry Days~·••·· 0.0 Report Time Step .......... 00:15:00 ·Wet Time Step ............ 00:0,:i:OO Dry Time Step .. •r•~~····· 01:00:00 Routing Time Step ........ 30.00 sec **************~********~~* Runoff Quantity Continuity ***************fa********** Total Precipitation ..... . Evaporation Los•s ........ . Infiltration Loss ....... . Surface Runoff ..... •· .... . SWMM5 Volume acre-feet 74.594 0.060 43.562 30.996 Depth inches 3.669 0.000 2.143 1. 525 ---·-----Page 1 · --·-:---Final Storage ... ; ....•... Continuity Error (%) *'** * *·*·*·* * *** * * *.* ** *.** * **** Flow Routing Continuity ************************** Dry Weather Inflow ...... . Wet Weather Inflow·····~· Groundwater Inflow ...... . RDII Inflow ...•.......... External In:flow ......... . External Outflow ........ . Flooding Loss .•.......... Evaporation Loss ........ . Exfiltration Loss ., ..... . Initial Store.ct Volume ... . Final Stored Volume ..... . Continuity Error (%) ·-· ' ' -0.120 -0.112 Volume acre-feet 0. 000. 30.9% 0. OO,Q 0.000 0.000 30.990 0. oo,o 0.000 0.000 0.000 0;000 o .. 01.9 ******************************** Highest Flow·Instability Indexes ******************************** All links are stable. ************************* Routing Time Step Summary ************************* Minimt:im Time Step Average Time Step Maximum Time Step Percent in Steady State Average iterations per Step Percent Not Converging *************************** SubcatchmentRunoff Summary *************************** SWMM5 29.00 30.00 30.00 0.00 1. 00 0.00 s·ec sec sec - -o. 0'06 Volume 10A6 gal ------0. 000 10.101 o.oob 0.000 0.000 10.099 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 --- -----·-.Page 2 -- --Subcatchment -· --Total Precip in -Total Runon in --Total Evap in - -Total Infil in -Total Runoff in --Total Runoff 10"6 gal -Peak Runoff CFS -Runoff Coeff ----~---------------------------------------------------~-----------. ---SB5 SB15 ****************** Node Depth Summary * * * *'* * * ** ** ** * *'*,** Node outfall Pond OV ******************* Node Inflow Summary ****************~** 3.67 3.67 Type OUTFALL STORAGE Average Depth Feet 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 Maximum Depth Feet 0.00 3.59 0.00 0.00 Maximum HGL Feet 96. 00 104. 59 e~ 2.17 2.12 Time. of Max Occurrence days hr:min 0 00:00 0 02:26 1. 50 1. 55 Reported Max Depth Feet o,. o.o 3.59 4.75 5.35 133 .27 147.05 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Node outfall Pond OV ********************* Node Flooding Summary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *'*'* * SWMM5 Type OUTFALL STORAGE Maximum Lateral Inflow CFS 0.00 280.32 Maximum Total Inflow CFS 78.80 280.32 Time O·f Max Occurrence days hr:min 0 01:08 0 00:40 Lateral Inflow Volume 10"6 gal 0 10.1 Total Inflow Volume 10"6 gal 10.1 10.1 Flow Balance Error Pe,rcent o. o•oo 0.019 0.409 0.422 Page3 - ---·--No nodes were flooded. ********************** Storage Volume Summary ********************** Storage Ur:ii t -------Pond OV -Average Volume 1000.ft3 ------l 7. 316 *** * * * **·** * *'* ** * ••.• * * ** Outfall Loading Summary *·* * * * *'* * * * *'*·* * * * *·* * * * * * Outfall Node -------outfall ------System * *'** * * *'*'** * **'*·* * * *** Link Flow Summary ******************** Flow Freq Pent 5. 77 5. 77 .. Link Type ---·------Avg Pent Full 0 Avg Flow CFS 53.70 53.70 Maximum IFlowl CFS Evap Exfil Pent Pent Loss Loss 0 Max Flow CFS 78 .80 78.80 0 Time of Max Occurrence days hr:min Maximum Volume 1000 ft3 -------693. 890 Total Volume 10"6 gal ------10. 098 ------10. 098 Maximum IVelocl ft/sec Ma.l_{ Pent Full Max/ Full Flow 4 Time of Max •Occurrence days hr :,min Max/ Full Depth 0 02.: 26 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------POV Out DUMMY 78.80 0 01:08 SWMM5 ---·Ma,ximum Outflow CFS ------. 78. 80 Page4 - --1---· -: -**************~********~* Conduit Surcharge Summary ************************* No conduits were surcharged. --· -Analysis begun on: Thu Dec 05 16:09:·22 201,9 Analysis ended on: Thu Dec 05 16:09:22 2019 Total elapsed time:< 1 sec SWMM5 ----·--· -·---Pages - ----- -- - ------ -- ----Li1k P _OV_Out Flow (CFS) 80.0 ~ L -----~ -------------70.0 60.0 f-------------~---50.0 ----.. ---~------ii, ·-------I ----------. u. ~40.0 ~ I I I -------------t----30.0 20.0 ----10.0 a.a a 20 40 60 BO 100 120 140 Elapsed lime (hours) SWMM5 Page 1 I I ..- (I) Ol ct! I CL ~ I I 0 -~ I I § I 0 I "' ;;, '§' !!:. :, ~ 0 ,:;. j " E F I > "C o , 8! "E Q. .!ll 0 LU c.. " 0 "8 "' . z I I I 0 ... I I 0 "' I I I 0 ~ ' I i i i i i 0 c:i 0 51 0 0 0 ~ .... "' ... "' "' (£11) SLUnlOfl I It) I I :!:: Cl) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NorthernEnaineerina.c.om // 970.221.4158 APPENDIX 8.3 SWMM BLOCKED OUTLET SCENARIO OUTPUT -- - - -·---- -:-EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODKL -VERSION 5 .1 (Build 5 .1. 012) .. **********************************************~********** NOTE: The surnrriary statistics displayed in this report are based on results f0und at every computational time step, not just on results from each reporting time step. ***********~********************************************* **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units .•........... ,. CFS Process MoGl.els: Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES RDII ..... "'" ............. NO Snowmelt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO Groundwater . . . . .. . . . . . . . NO Flow Routing ........... YES Ponding Allowed .•...... NO Water Quality ..•. ~ ..... NO Infiltration Method ....... HORTON Flow Routing Method ...... KINWAVE Starting Date ............ 01/01/2000 00:00:00 Ending Dat.e ........•...... 01/06/20<00 01.: 00: 00 Antecedent Dry Days •..... 0.0 Report Time Step ......... 00:15:00 Wet Time Step . . . . . . . . . . . . 00: 05: 00· Dry Time Step ............ 01:00:00 Routing Time Step ........ 30.00 ~ec ************************** Runoff Quantity Continuity ************************** Total Precipitation ..... . Evaporation Loss .....•. ~~ Infiltration Loss ......•. Surface Runoff .......... . SWMM5 Volume acre·-feet 74.5.94 0.000 43 .. 562 30 ::996 \ ' Depth inches 3.669 0.000 2.143 1.525 - ------ -Page 1 -: ------, I-Final Storag,e ........... . Continuity Error (%) 0.120 -0 .112 ************************** Flow Routing Cbnt~nuity Volume acre-feet ************************** Dry Weather Inflow ...... . Wet Weather Inflow ...... . Groundwater Inflow ...... . ~DII Inflow ..... r ••••. ~·~· External Inflow ......... . Eiternal Outflow·······~~ Flooding Loss .. : ........ . Evaporation Loss ······~~-Exfiltration Loss ..•..... Initial Stored Volume .... . Final Stored Volume ..... . Continuity Er.ror (%) ******************************** Highest Flow Ihstability Indexes *·*'* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ·* * * * * * * * * * * *·* * All links are stable. ************************* Routing Time Step Summary· ************************* Minimum Time Step Avercage Time Step Maximum Time Step Percent in Steady State Average Iterations per Step Percerit Not Converging *************************** Subcatchment Runof£ Summary * **'* * * **'*** * * *** ** * ** •·•·• ** * SWMM5 0.000 30. 996 0.000 0.000 0. oo,o 0.000 0. 00,0 0. oo:o 0.000 0.000 30.996 0. 00'0 29.00 sec 30,00 sec 30. 00 s.ec 0.00 1. 00 '0. o.o --o,. 006 Volume 10A6gal ------0. 00'0 10.101 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.101 ----;·-----Page2 ,_ ----- ---- --- - --------------------------------------~----~ ------------------------------------------------------------Subcatchment SB5 SB15 ****************** Node Depth Summary ****************** Node outfall Pond OV *'** * * * * ** * *'*** ** *'*'* Node Inflow Summary ******************* Total Precip in 3.67 3.67 Type OUTFALL STORAGE Total Runon in Average Depth Feet 0.00 4.25 0.00 0.00 Maximum Depth Feet 0 .00 4. 2,8 Total Evap in 0 .,oo 0.00 Maximum HGL Feet 96. 00 105.28 Total Infil in 2.17 2.12 Time of Max Occurrence days hr:min 0 00:00 5 00:59 Total Runoff · in 1. 50 1.55 Total Runoff .10A6 gal 4. 7'5 5;35 Reported Max Depth Feet 0.00 4.28 .P~ak Runoff Runoff Coe ff CFS 'l'.33 .27 147.05 0.409 0.422 --------------------------------------------------------------------.. -------------------------Node outfall Pond OV * ***** **** * ***·*·* **** * Node Flooding Summary ********************* Type OUTFALL STORAGE Maximum Lateral Inflow CFS 0.00 2,80. 32 Maximum Total Inflow CFS 0.00 280. 32 Tim:e of Max Occurrence days hr:min 0 00:00 0 00:40 Lateral Inflow Volume 1QA6 gal 0 1.0 .1 Total ]nflow Volume 10A6 gal 0 10.1 Flow Balance Error Percent 0.000 gal 0.000 -SWMM5' Page3 - ---- -.. '-; --- --·'---: ---No nodes were flooded. ********************** Storage Volume Summary ********************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Storage Unit Average Volume 1000 ft3 Avg Pent Full Evap Exfil Pent Pent LOSS' Loss Maximum Volume 100:0 ft:3 Max Pent Fuill Time of Max Occurrence days hr:min Maximum Outflow CFS ------------------------------------------------·-------· ------------------------------------------Pond OV 1.333. 451 *******************~*** Outfall Loading Summary *********************** Outfall Node -------outfall System ******************** Link. Flow Summary ******************** Link P· OV Out SWMM5 Flow Freq Pent 0.00 0.00 Type DUMMY Avg Flow -CFS ·O. 00 ·O. 00 8 0 Max . Flow CFS 0.00 0.00 0 1350. 256 Total Voll:lme 10"6 gal 0.000 0 .,ooo . . . ' Maximum IFlowl CFS ,o. 00 Time of Max Occurrence days hr:min 0 00:00 Maximum IVelocl ft/sec Max/ Fl:111 Flow 8 Max/ Full Depth 5 00:59 0.00 Page4 - ,,_ -----************************* Conduit Surcharge Summary ***~******************~** No conduits were surcharged. ----Analysis begun on: Thu Dec 05 16:13:23 2019 Analysis ended on: Thu Dec 05 16:13:23 2019 Total elapsed time:, < 1 sec SWMM5 -- - --- ---.Pages ---SWMM5 g ~ g -1400000.0 1200000.0 1000000.0 800000.0 600000.0 400000.0 200000.0 0.0 . 0 - - -I ---~.------20 - - - ---- --- - ---Node Pond_OVVolume (fl3) I ---I ------··------40 60 80 100 120 140 Elapsed lime (hours) Page 1 .I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .1 NorthArnEnninAArinn.com II 970.221.41S8 APPENDIX C MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN UPDATE EXCERPTS I I ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Timnath Master Drainage Plan Update 2018 Prepared for: Town of Timnath 4800 Goodman Rd, Timnath, CO 80547 August 2018 -FINAL Revised -November 2018 I Hire ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Timnath Master Drainage Plan Update 2018 AYRES ASSOCIATES 3665 JFK Parkway, Bldg. 2, Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80525-3152 970.223 .5556 www.AyresAssociates.com Ayres Associates Project No. 31-1881 .00 File : f :\32-1881 .00 tlmnath master plan update\report\timnath master dra inage plan -2018 update.docx I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Timnath Master Drainage Plan Update 2018 AYRES ASSOCIATES 3665 JFK Parkway, Bldg. 2, Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80525-3152 970 .223.5556 www.AyresAssociates.com Ayres Associates Project No. 31-1881.00 File: f:\32-1881.00 t i mnath master plan upda te\report\timnath master drainage plan -2018 update .docx I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Contents Page No. 1. lntroducti'on ..... , ... , ......... ' ..................................................................................... ; .................... 1 1.1. Project Goals and Objective,s .......................... :·········································,·······,···•,,,._., .... _ .. ,._,_ .... , .. , .. ,.:-.···,•,;· 3 1.2. Scope of Work ........ , ................ , .... , ......... , .. ,.,._., .. _ .. _ ..•. ,., .. , .. ,,., ... _ .. , .... , .... ,,,,•··f··••'••,•·,,·,···.,,.,.,._ •.•.. ,.,._.,•_··:,·•···,·:;.,, .•••. , .••• .-•• 3 1.3. Acknowledgement:s ., .. ,., .. , ..... -.. ,, .•......• .-.:,:.,: .. , ... .-., .. , .•......•.•......•... ,.-._ ...• , .. -... .-•...... ,, .•..... .-.......... -...•... .-......... , ...... 5 :J.,4. Previou:s Studies, .•. .-. .-... .-., .• , ... ,, ...•........................................ .-..................................... ~ .......................... 5 1.S. Mapping and Surveying ..................................................................... .-.............................................. 6 ,2. Hydrology Plan-........................................................................................................ : .... , ........... 7 2.1. Timnath Basin Description, ......................................................... ,, .. , ............... _.,., ... , ............ ,., ...... ,,·.,.,•:, .. ,.,.,, 7 2.2. General Modeling Procedures ..........•.... , ........ ,.,., ..•. _., .. _ .... , ... ,, .. ,°",._, •• , •• ,.,.,•,•:·:··:·,···-•:··:··:··,····,·,··:·:···-·····:····,··,··········,······ 7 2.2.1. Modeli,ng Ap_proa,ch, ... , .. : .. , ... , .. , ... , ..•.. , .. : .. ,., .... _ •.•.•.. , .. , •. , ........• : . .-. .-..•. ::-.... -..•...... , ..•. .-......•... .-...•.•.....•........... 7 2.2._2. R_ai_nfa_ll: .. , .•... .-..•.•... ,.-, .• ,.-•.. .-... , ..•.• -. .-.. · ...... .-..•...... , •.•.................. .' ...... _ ...............................................•...•.. 8 2.3. Baseline Condition Hydrology .Model ............................................................................................... 9 2.3.1. Delineation and Definition of Subbasins ....................... : .......................................................... 9 2.3.2. Subbasin Hydrology Parameters ......... .: ................................................................................. _.. 9 2.3.3. Conveyance Element-Routing ... , .......... , ............. , ....... , ........................ ,._. .....• ,._., .. _ .. _.._._.,: .. ,.:,····:·•,••,••.,:•:··· 10 2.3.4. Conveyance Element Parameters ........... , .. , .. _.:,, .. u .... _.., ... , .... :.,, .... , .. ,: .. .-.... : ................ .-..... :············ 10 2-.3.5. Node El,evation,s .. ,:·····:···,:·:•'•,.,, .•. ,,._ ... _..,:., .. -..•.• , .. : .. , .•.•.. ,.,., .• , ....•.•. .-.. , ... , ...... : ..........••.•. -....... .-...................... 11 2,.3.6., External Inflows .... .-..•.•...... , . .-.... : ..... , ............................................. : .. .-.......................... , ............... 11 2.3.7. Timn,ath Reservoir Inlet Canal ...... , ........................................................................... · ............... 11 2.3.8. Timnath Reservoir Outlet Canal ... ' ................................................................................... , ...... 12 2.3.9. Timnath Reservoit ............................................... , ...................................... :, ....... ~,.,., .. , ...... ,: .. _ .. ,._.,. :J.2 2.3.10. Downtown Timnath ........................................................................................................ , .• , .. ,. 13 2.3.11. Diversions ....................................................................................................... , ........ : .. ,, .. _.,., .• , .• ·. ,14 2.3.12. Development Since 2005 ............................. ,., ........................................... ,._.,._. .... , .. , ..... ·.,: .. _ .. :;., .. :. l.4 2.3.13. Outfalls ...............•........................................................ , ... , ... _. ............... _..,._., .... ,._. ... ,.:~:., ... , .. :., ... ,.: .. ,.: .. ,.,. 14 2.3.14. Results of Baseline Hydrology Model ........................................... , .......... ,._. .. , ........•••.•....•.•. .-. 15 2.3.15. Comparison of Results to Previous St1..1dy ., ....... , .. _ .. , .•.•......•........•.•....•. : .......••.•......•. , ............ 15 2.4. Developed Condition Hydrology Model ...................................... .-.................................................. 17 2.4.1. Future Land Use Conversion ........................................................................ .' ......................... 17 2.4.2. Conceptual ,Detention for Future Development ......... , ... ························:···············.···············' 18 , 2.4.3. Rout_ing Changes for Future Conditions .•.. -...... , ... .-.. .-......•.•... .-.................................................. 18 -. ' . . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2.4.4. Downtown Timnath ........................................................... , ....... _, ........ -...• _ ...... -._ ....... :·:······:·················-· 18 · 2.4.5. Summary of Developed Condition Hydrology Results i ....................................................... , .. 18 2.4.6. Comparison of Developed Results to Alternative 3 from Previous.Study ....................... , .•.... 19 3. · Hydraulic Evalu~tion of Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal ............................................................. 21 3.1. SRH-2D Hydra_ulic Model Parameters ...................................................................... : ...................... 21 3.2. TRIC Capacity' Analysis .............•... _ ............................ ;.: .......... ; ......................................................... 22 3.3. Unsteady Hydraulic Anaiysis of 10-year and 100-year Flows ......... ; ............................................... 22 3.3.1. Tailwater Conditions/ Timnath Reservoir WSEL Discussion ................ _ .................. _ ......•.......... 23 3.4. Discussion of TRIC Results ... , ................... ,, ............... , ....... , .•... , ...... _ ......... _ .... :.,,: .. ,.: ...... , .. : ... :._ ....... , •.•.• -.... : ...... · 2:3 4. Hydraulic Evaluation of Timnath Reserv9ir 01,1tlet Cc1nal .. : ........ _ ............................................... 26 4.1. Capc;!C_ity Analysis,.,_ .................. -.:·:••.•••••:•,••••.••:•••••:••••••················································································· 26 4.2. SRH-2D Hydraulic Model Parameters ............ : .............................. , ................................................. 26 4.3. Unsteady Analysis of 10-and 100-year Flows ........... ,·:·· ................................................................ 26 4.4. Discussion of TROC Results ............................. : ...................... , .......•........ ,_ ...... _ •. , ......... _ .. _ ..• _ ................. :···-27 5. Alternative Evaluations and Conceptual Design ., ... ;._.,.,.,. ... , ............. , ....................................... 29 .5.1. Hydrology for Channel Design .............. _:._ ........... _. ... , ....... _ .. :,.,-...... -..•.•......•.•......•. , ...•.........•.................. 29 5.2. Conceptual Hydrciulic Design of Clark c!nd IROC Drainage Channels ............................. : ............... 29 5.3_. Downtown Area Jmproverneht Altert1atives .................................................................................. 33 5.3.1. Land Use ahd Imperviousness Assumptions ............................. '. ............................................ 33 5.3.2. Timnath Elementary School Detention ...................................................... : ........................... 33 5.3.3. Storm Drain Sizing Criteria·_ 100-Year Flows ................................. ,.: ........... _ .. , ................... , .... 33 5.3.4. Recommended Improvements -Existing Condition Flows,., ........................ , .•. ; .................... 33 5.3.5. Recommended Improvements -Future Flows ..... _ .. , ............................................ : ........ , ........ 33 5.3.6. Limitations and Further Study Recommendations .... , .............................. -......... , ........ , .......... 34 6. Hydraulic Evaluation of Greeley No. _2 Cc1md c1nd (:onceptual SpiU Weir Design .......... -. .............. 36 6.1. Capacity Analysis .................................... _ ................. _., ........ _ ................................................................. 36 6.2. SRH-2D Hydraulic ·Model Parameters ..................... _,_. .. _.,_._., ........... : ............................... -... '. ................. 36 6.3. Unsteady Hydraulics Analysis ................. _ .......... _ ........ ;,: ........... ,,.-....................................... ; ................. 36 6.4. Conceptual Design of Spill Weir···········:······································ .................................................... 36 6.4.1. Limitations and Further Study Recommendations ................................................ , ...... ; ........ ~7 7. Implementation Plan .......... ~ ................................. _ ..... ,._ .. _._._ ... _. ...... _ ... _ ........ _._ .. _ .... _ ....... _ ....... : ..... -....•.•.• 38 7.1. Regional Drainage Facil_itJes ... :.,· .. _ ........ _, ............... -.....•. _. ......••.•.• -...•..•.• -.................. , ...............•................. 38 7.1.1. Tirnnath Reservoir Inlet Canal (TRIC) ..................................................................................... 38 ii I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7.1.2. Timnath.Reservoir Out_let Canal (TROC) ....... u .................................................................. .-.. .-...... 38 7 .2. On-Site Detention •. · ........... , ......... , .. _ .. _.., .. _ .. , ..... -.-,_ ....... ; .... -., ... _ .. _.., .. ,:.,:········-······· .. ····,_ . .-.• ,.-.... .-., . .-.... .-...... -..••.. .-....•.... 39- 7.3. Minor Lateral.Drainage Facilities .... ,_: ........ ,_ .. _ ....... :.,: .... ,._ ..... .-... :.-.. , ............. : .... y ...... .-.......... .-... ,:······· .. .-.•. .-;.-.. 40 7.4 .. Downtown Dn:1i11age lmprove_rnents ... .-., .. : .. .-........... -...... , ........ ,.; .. .-.................. .-................................. 40 7.5. fimna.th Reservoir ....................................................... ; .......................................................... .'._. ....... 41 7.6. Further.Study Retommendations .................................................................................................... 41 8. References .......•................•............................................ : ........................ : .............................. 42 List _of_App~ndices Appendix A Baseline Condition Hydrology Appendix B Developed Condition Hydrology Appendix C Conceptuai Hydraulic Design of Clark Channel and Timnath Reservoir Outlet Canal Channel Appendix D D.owntown Area Improvement Alternatives Appendix E SRH-2D Hydraulics Results of Timnath Reservoir Inlet Cam~I Appendix F SRH-2D Hydraulics Results Qf Timnath ReservQiJ Outlet Canal Appendix G SR_H-2D Hydraulics Results of Greeley No. 2 Canal Appendix H Digital Data ..,.. Modeling Files and GIS Data List of Figures - --· . -- Page No. Figure 1.l Timnath Town Limits, GMA, and Study Area ........................................................................ 2 Figure 3.1 Timnath Reservoir Inlet Culvert Gates (Reservoir Side) ........................................... .-......... 21 Figure $.1 Clark Channel and TROC Channel Conc;:eptllal [)esig·n Cross Sections ................... : ............ 32 Figure 5.2 North Downtown Storm Drain System Alternatives Map .. , ...... , ........................................ 35 List of Tables Page No. Table 2.1 Rainfall Hyetographs ..................... , .............. , ......... _ ..... , .. _ .. ,., ..... _ .. _. .. _ ........ _ .. ,., .... _..: ............. , ..... : ... · ....... •:•_.-· ... 8 Table 2.2 Hydrologic Soil Group Recommended Values ..... : ........... , ........ , ............................................ 10 Tabl.e 2 .. 3.Timnath Reservoir Sta~e-Storage Information ··········•····:·····:····:···························: . .-.............. .-13 Table 2.4 Timnath Reservoir Out.let Rating .... .-........ , ... i .................................. -........ : ............................. 13 Table 2,5 Summary of Results for Baseline Condition SWMM Hydrology Model ................ ; .......... , ... 16 fable 2.6 Comparison of Baseline Hydrology Model Results to Previous Study ................................. 16 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Table 2. 7 Land Use to Imperviousness Table .. _. ..... ,.: ... : ........... ;., ...... , .............. .-•... ,:,,._. ......... .-•. .-...................... 17 Table 2.8 Summary of Results for' Developed Condition SWMl'v1 Hydrology Model .............. , .... : ....... i9 Table 2.;9 Comparison of Developed Hydrology Model Results to Previoys Study,: .... , .......... , ............ 20 Table 5.1 Summary of Dischc1rge for Design of Clark and Timnath Reservoir Oytlet Canal Channels 29 Table 5.2 Clark Channel Design Summary .............. ; ....... , ....... , ., . , ..... , .. , ... ,:, ....... ,:, ........ ,:,, ....... u ,:, ....... , ................... · .... 30 Table 5.3 Timnath Reservoir Outlet Canal -Channel Design S1Jmmary .......... _ •... ; .... , .......... , .• '. ..... ,., .. , .• 30 iv I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3. Hydraulic Evaluation of Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal The goals of the hydraulic analysis of the Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal (TRIC) were to quantify the capacity of the canal, identify the natural spill locations, develop spill rating curves to be used in the hydrology model, evaluate the impact of development, and to analyze the performance of the current canal during the 10-and 100-year storm events. This study identified canal spill locations but did not evaluate alternatives, solutions for the spills, or define a floodplain. 3.1. SRH-2D Hydraulic Model Parameters Model input data for the SRH-2D hydraulic model included lidar topography data and hydraulic roughness (Manning's n) coverages. The manning's n values used for this model were 0.035 for the channel and 0.04 for the overbank areas. Modeling for the TRIC bridge and culvert structures were performed using the SRH-2D pressure flow routine . Culvert and bridge opening dimensions were verified with survey information . Pressure flow structures were modeled at the County Road 5, Prospect Road, and County Road 42E crossings, as well as at the Timnath Reservoir inlet culvert which consists of twin 5'(W) x 6.5'(H) concrete .box culverts. Tailwater conditions in Timnath Reservoir, at the downstream end of the model, were set to match the normal high-water level of the Reservoir (WSEL 4910.77) which is essentially equal to the crown of the inlet culverts (El. 4910 .79). This tailwater assumption is discussed further in Section 3.3.1. On the downstream end of the inlet culverts (reservoir side) there are two flap gates which prevent reservoir water from flowing back into the TRIC canal. These flap gates were not discretely modeled with either the hydrology or hydraulics models; essentially the models function such that the flap gates would be open during storm flows. This decision was made for two reasons: 1) There is no design or rating information available for the hydraulic performance of the flap gates, and 2) the counter-weighted flap gates open rather easily and result in relatively small head loss compared with the hydraulic controls of the culvert restriction and the high reservoir tailwater (at the crown of the inlet culverts). The culvert gates are shown in Figure 3.1 below. The TRIC drain into Lake Canal was ignored because the relatively small flow rate was considered negligible (approx. 5 cfs) and because this gate is manually operated. Figure 3.1 Timnath Reservoir Inlet Culvert Gates (Reservoir Side) Photo Credit (Fuhrman, 2017) 21 -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3.2. TRIC Capacity Analysis To determine capacity of the canal, the TRIC was broken into three reaches : 1-25 to Prospect, Prospect to CR42E, and CR42E to Timnath Reservoir. These reaches were analyzed in three separate SRH -20 models with increasing d ischarge until flows began to spill out of the channel 's downslope embankment (to the southwest). The max imum flow rate that was completely conta i ned w ithin the cana l's banks was cons idered the channel capacity . A map of the results from this analysis can be found in Appendix E. The maximum capacities for each individual section are as follows : 1. 1-25 to Prospect Road (near McLaughlin Lane): 244 cfs. (Note: Ponding in adjacent areas north of the channel begins at approximately 185 cfs.) 2. Prospect Road (near McLaughlin Lane) to TRIC crossing with Prospect Road: 350 cfs 3. Prospect Road to CR42E: a. Upstream Section: 275 cfs b. Downstream Section: 190 cfs 4 . CR42E to Timnath Reservo ir Inlet: 200 cfs Using the three individual 20 models descr i bed above , rat i ng curves were developed for each spill location. These locations are labeled A through E, from upstream to downstream, and are briefly described as follows: • Spill A is an area of pond i ng on the north side of the channel 1,400 feet east of 1-25 . At this location, water that spills out of the channe l does not leave the model but ponds in the adjacent fields. When the TRIC discharge decreases, most of the ponding in this area will to drain back into the canal leav i ng a small amount of shallow ponding adjacent to the ditch road . • Spill Bis 1500 feet further downstream where the TR IC turns parallel to Prospect Rd. This location begins spilling south when flows in the canal exceed 244 cfs. • Spill C is south of Prospect where flows will spill to the west when flows exceed 275 cfs. • Spill Dis just north of CR42E, this is the most limiting area of the channe l where water spills to the west when flows exceed 190 cfs . • Spill E is approximately 700 feet downstream of CR42E and sp i lls ex it the channel when flows exceed 200 cfs. The spill rat i ng curves were developed by plac i ng model monitori ng lines immed iately upstream , downstream, and perpend icular to each spill location. Monitor lines are features of SRH-20 wh ich track flow through the line at each timestep . The monitor line data was used to develop channel and spill rating curves at each spill location, the rating curves were then entered to the hydrology model. Appendix E presents these rating curves and spill results for the 10 and 100-year storm events (existing and future conditions). 3.3. Unsteady Hydraulic Analysis of 10-year and 100-year Flows Hydraulic analyses of the 10-year and 100-year TRIC flows were performed in SRH -20 using input hydrographs from the EPA SWMM hydrology model. It was assumed that all upstream drainage would be intercepted by the TRIC. Prior to the storm inflows, irrigation baseflow was run through the model in 22 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I steady state until equilibrium was reached through the entire channel. The decreed flow for this channel is 200-cfs, but because the TRIC begins to spill flow at 190-cfs, this flow rate was chosen as the baseline condition. The 190-cfs base irrigation flow continued during the storm duration . With these inflows, the 20 model was run in an unsteady condition for an 8-hour period. The canal flow and canal spill results compared reasonably well between the SRH-20 hydraulics model and the EPA SWMM hydrology model , with some variation that would be expected between different models. These comparisons are presented in Appendix E. 3.3.1. Tailwater Conditions/ Timnath Reservoir WSEL Discussion The TRIC canal terminates at the Timnath Reservoir inlet, which is the downstream boundary of the SRH - 20 analysis. The SRH analysis assumed a constant water surface in Timnath Reservoir equal to the normal - high water level (normal-HWL) or service spillway crest at WSEL 4910.77. However, the final SWMM hydrology models showed that the reservoir level may rise above the normal HWL, during a 100-year storm event, by 1.93-feet (existing/ baseline conditions) to 2.34-feet (future conditions). These depths correspond to water surface elevations of 4912.70 (existing) and 4913.11 (future). The hydrology model assumed conservatively that the Timnat.h Reservoir initial conditions would be at Normal-HWL prior to 100-year rainfall. The existing and future SWMM model results show that, given a drainage bas i n wide storm event, the TRIC would not only have the inability .to convey flows into the Reservoir, but that the Reservoir could backflow through the TRIC if the inlet flap gates were left in the fixed open position. Without the Reservoir inlet flap gates in place, these maximum reservoir WSELs would fill the TRIC to 3-feet deep at Prospect Road and 2-feet deep at 1-25 . These maximum Reservoir WSELs are higher than the TRIC spill crests at the Spill D and E locations and presents a situation where -without the inlet culvert flap gates - reservoir water could backflow through the TRIC and spill over the canal banks (existing and future scenarios). 3.4. Discussion ofTRIC Results As presented in the previous sections, the primary purpose of the TRIC hydraulic analyses focused on conveyance of the 10-year and 100-year stormwater flows in addition to the 190-cfs of irrigation base flow. These analyses showed that the TRIC does not have capacity, above the 190-cfs of irrigation base flow, to convey additional stormwater flows without spills from the canal. In addition, the SWMM hydrology models showed that the existing and future 100-yr WSELs in the Reservoir would be higher than portions of the TRIC embankment. At the direction of the Town, a less conservative SRH modeling run was performed which removed the 190-cfs irrigation baseflow and allowed storm flows to be run through a dry TRIC channel. The results showed that, without irrigation flows, the TRIC would be able to convey all of the future condition 100- year flows (or about 70% of existing condition flows) to Timnath Reservoir. This model run assumed the Reservoir level would remain at the normal-HWL. The reduction in canal spills from these runs is due to a combination of two main factors : 1) flow attenuation from the empty TRIC provides storage volume similar to a detention pond, and 2) the hydraulic capacity of the TRIC to convey 190-cfs to the reservoir- assuming the reservoir level would not rise above the normal-HWL. However, the SWMM hydrology results, as discussed in Section 3.3.1. showed that a watershed wide rain event would increase the Timnath Reservoir WSELs such that storm flows could not be conveyed into the Reservoir via the TRIC. 23 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .I I I I Summarizing the overall TRICmodeling results, the following conclusions ca.n'be made: 1. The overall capacity of the TRIC is 190-cfs before canal spills begin. This is slightly less than the decreed flow of 200-cfs and with the caveat that at 185-cfs ponding begins in ijdjacent areas north of the TRIC, between 1-25 and Prospect Road. Flows spills to the south/ solJthwe.st of the TRIC begin at 190-cfs and are located along the car,al sectJcm between Prospect Road and CR 42E. 2. The capacity oft.he TRIC to convey 190-cfs is based on the WSEL of Tlmnath Reservoir staying at, or below, the normal HWL of the reservoir (4910.77 NAVD 88). 3. In the event of a drainage basin wide 10o~year storm event, the water surface of Timnath Reservoir will fill to elevations higher than portions of the TRIC embankment (Existing WSEL: 49l2..70; Future WSEL: 4913.11). The reservoir inlet flap gates will. prevent back flow in this situ~tion. As .. such, the TRIC -along its current alignment and profile .,,,.. would be unable to convey flows into th_e Reservoir in this situation. 4. Based on points 1-3, the present configuration of the.TRIC cannot be relied upon to convey major storm flows. Significant improvements to the TRIC would be required to provide assurance that storm flows can be conveyed to the Reservoir. · 5. Future implementation of 100-year to 10-year over-detention (per <::urrent Timnath criteria), in developing areas tributary to the TRIC, will reduce but not eliminate the flow spills. The TRIC analyses and the conclus.ions stated above lay the framework for several TRIC stormwater management scenarios to be considereq l:>y the Town, presented in the following list. These scenarios were not modeled or evaluated, but are conceptual in nature. A. Disconnect stormwater discharges from TRIC: This management scenario assumes the most conservative case (being: Timnath .Reservoir full, irrigation base flow in the TRIC, and 100-year rainfall event in the drainage basin), for which the TRIC has no capacity to convey storm flows. Unde_r this scenario, all future development, upstream of the TRIC, will need to find a separate outfall for stormwater' discharges. This will likely require construction of stormwater ch~Hinels on the downstream side ofthe TRIC. ' B. Convey stormwater through the TRIC to formal spjll location(s): This scena.rio would convey all storm water intercepted by the TRIC to a formalized spill location(s) where excess flows would be routed into the Clark Drainage. This will require constructed drainage channels between the TRIC and the main Clark Drainage channel and improvements to the. TRIC to eliminate informal flow spills. The dimensions and sizing of TRIC channel improvements and spill weir configuration would. require further hydraulic evaluation witr dn appropriate backwater model and were beyond the scope of this study. This scenario may· need further hydrologic evaluation in EPA SWMM if the formalized spill locations significantly "change the existing flow spills. · C. Convey stormwater.throu~h.the TRIC to Jim!'c!th Reservoir: This scenario would convey all storm flows throlJgh the TRIC in.to Timnath .Reservoir. Signifitarit improvements t.o the TRIC would be neces5;;1ry so ~hat the full 100-year flows could be conveyed into the Rese~oir, without spills and . with assuming the highest tailwater in the Reservoir (as shown in the existing and future 24 I I .I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I hydrology models). The required improvements would include raising the canal embankment height and rnay include widening the canal or the addition of a second channel along a higher profile gracje-Hne. the dimensions and sizing of these TRIC channel improvements would require further hydraulic evaluation with an appropriate backwater model and were beyond the scope of this study. This scenario would need further evaluation in EPA SWMM hydrology to determine the full TRIC flow rate .~ithout spills. Aiternative hydrology scenarios for the TRIC were not part of the present study. D. Hydrology Alternatives: In addition to the conveycince · altemat_ives presen.ted in points A"'C; hydrology alternatives mciy also be considered for f1.,1rther evaluation. Scenarios such as rnore restrictive detention req11irements upstrecim from t_he TRIC or regional detention. facilities wo_uld lower peak flow rate5i cine! reduce the size of future conveyance improvements. Beyqnd these options, two other storrnwater management scenarios were initially considered but not recqmmended for further evaluation because of impacts to itrigation flows· and storage. These scenarios wo11ld i_ncrease the effectiveness of the current fRIC arid Reservoir facilities for storrnwater management but wo11ld require significant concessions frorn theTRIC and Reservoir owners (such as constraints on the t.iming ofTRIC irrigation flows or reduction ofthe maxirnurn irrigation water storage in the Reservoir), and th_erefore were not recommended for further consideration. · 25 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EXHIBIT B-1 • SWMM Subbasin Map Developed Condition • North Map Timnath Drai nage Master Plan 2018 Update Legend SWMM Subbaslns O.valoped lmperv. o 0 •6._.. SWMM Subbasln (Name, Area ·Ac, 0.4 Imp ,) ,.,.,. 21 -J!"A, ....... 51·55% SWMM Routing Link 600 -FNt ·:ic .. - I I I I I I I .I I I I I I I I I I I I EXHIBIT A-1 • SWMM Subbasin Map Baseline Condition -North Map Timnath Drainage Master Plan 2018 Update Legend SWMM Subbslns • E11l 11lng /mparv. Percent o 0 • G"4 SWMM Subbasln (Name, Area. Ac,% Imp.) SWMM Rouling Link N t ,00 -, ... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Element ID 2-Yr s 10 10 10 14 16 31 14 33 8 35 3 37 30 39 28 45 30 46 2 53 2 59 372 60 28 6 1 6 62 295 63 1 64 15 67 29 70 7 7 1 14 75 15 76 13 87 10 88 2 89 75 94 2 95 2 97 6 98 62 99 38 101 50 102 2 103 3 104 12 107 0 108 13 109 2 112 5 114 0 115 12 118 2 119 12 120 9 122 23 123 19 124 74 127 22 128 18 133 6 134 l 135 11 137 14 138 5 142 0 143 0 144 l 145 7 146 11 147 3 148 29 149 6 151 11 152 5 153 5 155 11 156 7 158 1 159 1 160 0 161 0 162 26 163 15 164 7 Timnath Stormwater Master Plan Update -2018 B-4 -SWMM Model Results -Link Flows Exi sting SWMM Model Results Discharge (cfs) 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr 2-Yr 5-Yr 16 21 29 39 55 11 17 16 20 28 39 94 7 12 23 30 50 84 140 19 30 20 32 90 213 423 23 38 11 13 23 52 103 3 5 7 21 91 223 466 28 45 41 65 236 586 1,192 #N/A #N/A 40 59 162 364 701 0 0 42 64 236 591 1,224 #N/A #N/A 2 .4 16 36 69 2 3 2 4 16 36 69 2 3 549 702 1,054 1,732 3,035 260 436 40 56 203 573 1,2 13 46 79 8 10 30 70 133 3 5 438 5 53 771 1,149 2,007 247 406 2 3 9 25 55 2 3 21 33 91 205 379 17 27 43 63 231 589 1,269 4 7 10 13 22 46 84 7 10 20 26 48 90 160 14 20 22 28 52 126 249 15 24 19 25 52 125 247 15 24 15 20 51 122 240 15 24 2 3 4 8 16 1 . 1 114 145 198 269 379 74 112 3 3 11 27 55 2 3 3 4 12 37 83 3 5 7 8 17 42 89 6 9 88 109 149 213 318 62 88 53 64 81 123 199 38 53 76 97 133 183 260 so 76 3 3 9 25 52 2 3 5 6 8 15 29 2 4 19 25 34 46 61 11 17 1 1 4 9 17 0 1 20 30 7l 133 227 25 41 3 3 12 31 62 1 2 6 8 27 61 111 5 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 21 30 49 93 2 3 3 4 10 28 57 1 2 17 23 58 123 230 13 21 12 13 15 19 34 9 12 35 45 63 94 157 23 35 27 34 46 66 97 19 27 113 147 200 262 335 74 113 33 41 56 76 104 15 23 26 34 54 83 132 21 34 9 12 16 22 30 6 9 1 1 3 7 14 0 1 18 27 59 113 199 10 17 20 32 90 211 410 21 34 7 9 12 15 21 5 7 0 1 3 8 17 0 1 l 1 7 18 35 1 1 1 2 2 2 23 1 1 10 13 18 37 68 7 10 16 21 29 48 81 11 16 4 5 9 13 18 3 4 41 64 234 583 1,199 #N /A #N/A 8 10 14 21 34 5 8 17 22 29 45 73 11 17 8 10 14 20 29 5 6 7 9 13 19 29 5 7 17 2l 28 38 52 7 10 11 13 37 85 162 7 11 2 2 10 25 47 1 1 2 4 15 3 1 54 2 3 0 0 o o o a 0 0 0 0 49 117 0 0 38 45 56 74 148 26 38 23 29 41 57 84 24 37 9 11 16 24 39 5 9 F:\32-1881.00 Tim nath Master Plan Update\Hydrology\EPA SWMM\Results\Results Comparlson.xlsx Discharge (cfs) 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr 21 28 34 40 15 20 26 34 38 54 76 110 55 100 153 227 7 14 21 27 65 119 181 264 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A l 1 1 4 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 4 7 9 11 4 7 9 11 614 1,065 1,617 2,313 101 140 178 222 7 12 15 19 543 772 1,009 1,283 4 5 10 13 38 74 118 182 9 13 16 20 13 22 46 84 26 48 90 160 32 44 55 68 31 44 55 68 31 44 55 67 1 2 2 3 143 196 266 374 4 6 8 10 7 11 14 17 11 16 20 23 109 149 213 318 65 82 125 20 1 97 133 183 260 4 5 6 7 5 7 8 10 21 28 34 40 1 2 2 3 54 77 106 150 3 5 7 9 10 20 45 82 0 0 0 0 5 12 17 22 3 5 6 8 29 46 69 101 13 15 19 34 45 63 94 157 34 46 66 97 147 200 262 335 30 4 2 57 80 44 63 93 139 12 16 22 30 1 2 2 3 22 32 40 49 49 91 140 211 9 12 15 21 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 23 13 18 37 68 21 29 48 8 1 5 9 13 18 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 10 12 15 19 22 29 45 73 8 10 11 14 9 13 19 29 12 15 18 22 13 37 85 162 2 3 4 5 5 19 39 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 45 56 74 H O 46 63 86 122 11 16 21 27 8/21/2018 -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I El ement ID 2-Yr 165 6 166 10 169 1 170 3 171 2 172 4 173 29 174 5 175 3 176 4 177 17 178 14 183 5 184 24 185 14 186 48 193 2 203 2 206 0 208 10 209 9 210 38 211 7 212 3 214 3 217 14 218 15 219 27 220 6 223 14 224 6 226 9 234 9 246 29 249 4 251 30 261 2 264 1 268 28 270 3 283 4 29 1 1 292 0 349 3 361 8 600 9 601 3 1121 295 1122 15 1123 28 1124 33 1125 372 1126 363 1611 11 .... " 105( 3 L~ 1110 1< 115A8 2 1 1 6 pipe 1 116 SF 0 120A 7 121A 16 1218 28 125A 19 134A 11 175A 19 177A 0 185( 6 209A 7 2098 33 267A 2 277A 1 Timnath Stormwater Master Plan Update -2018 B-4-SWMM Model Results -Link Flows Ex isting SWMM Model Results Dis cha rge (ds) 5-Yr 10-Yr 25 -Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr 2-Yr 5-Yr 9 12 17 31 87 7 11 20 30 48 73 106 15 24 2 2 6 15 32 1 2 4 5 10 19 34 2 4 2 3 8 19 35 1 1 7 10 35 75 138 1 2 43 63 231 589 1,269 4 7 8 10 17 45 90 3 5 4 5 7 15 28 1 1 7 21 91 224 469 28 45 25 32 49 81 136 17 25 21 27 38 53 81 13 20 8 9 25 58 111 6 9 38 48 65 112 190 24 38 22 28 38 56 108 7 12 72 91 123 166 234 48 72 4 4 11 28 56 2 3 3 ·4 7 15 28 2 4 0 1 2 16 66 0 1 18 28 67 124 216 25 41 13 16 22 32 52 6 9 54 68 92 150 271 18 27 10 14 34 74 162 13 21 4 5 7 17 33 2 3 4 5 13 33 69 1 2 21 28 47 80 135 14 21 21 28 56 106 189 13 21 39 57 156 347 665 65 108 8 10 13 19 34 4 7 20 30 84 188 341 17 27 9 11 16 26 46 6 9 13 16 22 30 44 6 8 13 16 26 48 84 6 10 41 59 166 377 726 0 0 5 7 10 17 30 5 8 42 64 236 591 1,221 17 28 2 3 4 6 9 1 1 2 2 3 4 7 1 1 42 63 230 580 1,216 #N/A #N/A 4 6 19 47 95 5 7 6 8 25 57 109 6 9 2 2 4 9 18 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 12 23 43 7 10 12 15 21 30 42 8 12 13 16 38 75 166 13 21 4 5 13 32 63 1 2 438 553 771 1,149 2,007 247 406 21 26 77 194 405 19 28 40 56 203 573 1,213 46 79 47 57 171 420 876 32 56 549 702 1,054 1,732 3,035 260 436 532 666 901 1,361 2,353 145 237 15 26 73 141 218 11 19 on " ,e en ,. . ,n 4 5 22 58 114 1 2 00 ~ SYO <LO ,00 --- ,0 ., 1ns ,,, .,, « 01 3 3 7 47 107 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 13 18 28 46 2 3 24 30 41 56 75 11 18 40 58 161 363 698 #N/A #N/A 29 38 56 91 153 19 29 17 21 31 49 85 6 10 28 34 47 65 94 19 28 1 1 1 2 2 0 1 9 11 15 26 49 2 3 10 14 35 76 168 38 62 49 61 108 224 438 53 87 3 7 25 59 104 1 2 1 1 3 5 13 1 1 F:\32-1881.00 Timnath Master Plan Update\Hydrology\EPA SWMM\Results\Results Comparlson.xlsx Dis charge (ds) 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr 14 20 26 34 32 52 81 122 2 3 3 4 5 7 9 12 2 3 4 6 4 8 11 14 9 13 16 20 7 11 14 18 1 2 3 5 65 119 183 267 32 49 81 136 26 37 51 72 11 14 17 21 48 65 112 190 16 22 28 35 91 123 166 234 4 6 8 10 5 7 8 10 1 1 1 4 54 77 106 150 13 19 26 33 33 44 55 67 29 41 54 68 4 6 8 11 3 6 8 11 28 42 62 93 28 43 64 95 147 217 287 377 9 13 17 22 35 69 109 169 11 16 26 46 9 12 15 18 13 18 22 27 1 1 1 4 10 12 15 19 36 50 62 76 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 4 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 9 13 16 20 11 14 17 21 3 3 4 5 0 0 2 11 12 16 20 24 15 21 30 42 29 42 54 68 3 5 7 9 543 772 1,009 1,283 34 46 58 71 101 140 178 222 72 99 126 156 614 1,065 1,617 2,313 334 660 1,091 1,630 29 59 85 110 ,e ,e rn - 4 13 29 57 --- 1T) .,. ,., so• 3 12 20 28 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 7 10 12 23 32 42 54 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 38 56 91 153 13 18 22 27 34 47 65 94 1 1 2 2 5 7 10 12 84 119 152 195 116 165 210 265 4 8 11 14 1 3 5 13 8/21/2018 -r---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ele ment ID 2-Yr OP-SOA 0 OP-Sl 0 O P-SA 0 OP-7S 0 OP-7SA 8 OP-7SA WEIR 0 OP-7SD 1 OP-7SD WEIR 0 OP-77 0 OP-778 1 OP-77C 0 OP-77C WEIR 0 OP-77D 1 OP-80 0 OP-BOD 1 OP-BOD W EIR 0 OP -81 2 OP-82Dl 10 OP-82Dl WEIR 0 OP-82D2 8 OP-82D2 WE IR 0 OP-82D3 9 OP-84 3 OP-8SB 3 OP-8SB-WE IR 0 OP-85C 6 OP-86 1 OP-86A 2 OP-86C 0 OP-88 1 OP-92 0 OP-9S 4 OP-97 18 OP-98 4 OP-98A 1 r,p_no, u mn n I TRICLl 191 .,. TRICL3 193 TRICL4 212 TR ICLS 212 TRICL6 218 TRICL7 207 TRI CL7A 207 TRICLB 205 TROC 18 214 TROCLl 216 TROCLl A 216 TROCLlO 254 TROCLll 254 TROCL13 256 TROCL14 260 TROCLlS 260 TROCL16 260 TROCL17 260 TR OCL18 260 TROC L3 216 TROCL4 216 TROCLS 217 TRO CL6 224 TROCL8 252 TROCL9 252 CLARKl CLARK2 CLARK3 CLARK4 . - CLARKS CLARK6 CLARK7 CLARKS Timnath Stormwater Master Plan Update -2018 B-4 -SWMM Model Results -Link Flows Ex isting SWMM Model Results Discharge (cfs) 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr 2-Y r 5-Yr 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 12 43 99 14 22 0 0 8 25 52 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 12 15 19 24 29 8 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 0 1 1 1 2 4 11 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 1 1 3 4 12 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 3 1 1 0 0 0 1 14 0 0 2 2 3 5 10 2 2 12 14 21 29 31 10 12 0 0 0 0 80 0 0 11 12 18 26 62 8 11 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 10 12 16 21 32 9 10 4 5 9 13 18 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 3 4 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 8 11 33 78 151 8 12 2 4 10 19 28 1 2 2 3 4 5 6 2 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 4 15 35 41 6 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 5 6 6 4 4 20 21 24 66 115 18 20 4 5 s 6 6 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n n n n n n n 191 192 198 213 240 191 192 ··-··-·-· 195 198 225 297 380 194 197 218 225 261 343 445 209 216 218 225 261 293 326 209 216 227 242 294 369 453 219 232 211 215 221 227 235 208 213 212 217 233 256 292 209 215 209 213 222 227 229 207 212 219 223 242 273 322 226 238 223 229 287 387 546 226 238 223 229 287 387 546 226 238 276 304 495 888 1,632 363 460 276 304 495 888 1,631 363 460 278 307 508 921 1,669 365 464 283 312 529 946 1,735 371 472 283 312 529 946 1,735 372 474 283 312 529 946 1,735 372 474 283 312 529 946 1,735 373 476 283 312 529 946 1,735 373 476 223 230 290 395 561 226 238 224 232 295 404 578 226 238 224 232 296 405 578 227 239 235 246 314 439 635 227 239 273 301 491 885 1,629 360 456 273 301 491 884 1,628 360 457 132 217 127 208 125 206 112 185 107 177 105 174 78 129 ·1 73 122 F:\32-1881 .00 Timnath Master Pl an Update\Hydrolo gy\EPA SWMM\Rc sults\Res ults Comp arlson .xlsx Discha rge (cfs) 10-Yr 25-Yr SO-Yr 100-Yr -0 0 0 4 28 37 46 56 0 8 25 52 1 1 1 2 15 19 24 29 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 3 0 0 0 21 1 1 2 2 1 2 4 11 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 9 1 3 4 12 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 0 0 1 14 2 3 5 10 14 21 29 31 0 0 0 80 12 18 26 62 0 0 0 18 12 16 21 32 5 9 13 18 4 5 5 5 0 0 0 14 16 22 27 33 4 10 19 28 3 4 5 6 0 0 0 1 15 26 36 41 0 0 2 11 5 5 6 6 21 24 54 97 5 5 6 6 1 1 1 1 n n n n 193 194 195 196 I ·- 200 211 223 241 223 246 268 311 223 246 267 286 246 278 307 334 216 219 222 224 220 225 231 236 216 220 222 223 249 274 306 409 249 275 326 430 249 275 326 430 552 749 975 1,280 552 749 975 1,280 558 761 995 1,309 576 784 1,021 1,355 579 791 1,031 1,369 579 791 1,030 1,369 581 796 1,038 1,379 581 796 1,038 1,379 250 276 335 446 250 276 346 465 251 278 346 464 251 292 385 531 549 744 969 1,264 549 745 971 1,267 298 467 653 869 287 448 628 838 283 442 619 827 254 400 559 747 244 386 542 727 240 378 533 711 177 267 355 462 167 249 330 430 8/21/2018 .1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Eleme nt ID 2-Yr 115 3 116 12 117 17 118 16 127 14 129 5 132 17 133 0 134 28 135 13 136 7 137 9 138 38 140 27 142 40 143 6 144 33 146 6 147 0 149 12 151 4 153 22 154 16 155 15 156 4 157 27 158 16 159 12 160 28 16 1 28 162 18 1 63 23 164 29 165 5 166 9 169 9 170 24 171 22 173 20 176 935 177 1 178 454 179 28 180 13 181 372 182 13 183 11 184 93 18 5 40 186 14 187 17 188 28 189 43 190 702 191 295 193 15 194 15 196 6 197 4 199 30 200 29 201 19 204 30 206 6 207 11 213 4 214 30 216 8 217 12 220 3 22 1 3 223 30 224 2 Timnath Stormwater Master Plan Update -2018 B-5 -SWMM Model Results -Node Flows Ex isting SWMM Model Results Discharge (cfs) 5 -Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr SO -Yr 100-Yr 2-Yr 5-Yr 5 6 8 15 29 2 4 19 25 34 46 61 11 17 24 30 41 55 76 11 17 34 52 86 120 150 15 25 20 24 35 so 76 14 20 7 9 23 61 122 1 2 24 30 42 58 96 7 12 1 1 2 16 66 0 1 39 49 82 151 253 25 41 20 30 71 133 227 25 41 10 14 36 76 168 38 62 13 16 38 75 166 13 21 54 67 92 150 271 18 27 41 53 115 248 487 55 91 57 71 109 225 439 53 87 8 10 16 26 44 2 3 49 61 108 224 438 53 87 8 10 18 38 78 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 22 34 57 96 2 3 5 6 11 5 1 117 1 2 32 40 62 98 158 25 37 23 30 so 84 140 19 30 22 29 58 107 191 14 23 6 8 13 31 63 1 2 39 57 156 347 665 65 108 23 31 69 140 258 14 22 17 21 29 42 63 5 8 40 59 162 364 701 0 0 40 58 161 363 698 74 122 26 32 43 60 86 11 18 35 45 63 94 157 23 35 42 53 77 115 179 29 42 8 10 13 18 25 5 8 13 16 24 37 61 9 13 13 16 23 32 49 6 8 35 44 60 81 115 17 25 33 41 56 76 104 15 23 28 37 57 87 139 23 36 1,325 1,639 2,263 3,148 4,530 203 337 2 2 4 9 18 0 1 666 840 1,187 1,802 3,088 267 455 42 49 87 192 358 27 40 18 23 37 58 93 6 10 549 702 1,054 1,732 3,035 260 436 20 30 62 116 204 10 17 17 21 31 49 85 6 10 130 160 267 506 1,019 36 61 57 70 212 584 1,231 47 79 20 32 90 213 424 23 38 24 35 95 215 427 21 34 40 56 203 573 1,213 46 79 59 73 122 23 1 465 21 30 996 1,231 1,700 2,364 3,402 260 433 438 553 771 1,149 2,007 247 406 21 26 41 69 120 3 5 21 33 91 206 379 17 27 8 23 91 224 469 28 45 7 21 91 224 470 28 45 42 66 239 596 1,200 107 177 41 59 166 378 726 0 0 26 32 45 63 92 6 9 41 65 236 586 1,203 112 185 8 10 14 21 34 5 8 15 19 26 37 55 5 8 6 7 14 25 46 7 10 42 64 237 593 1,224 17 28 11 14 19 27 39 5 6 17 21 29 39 53 7 10 4 5 7 9 13 1 2 4 5 7 11 15 1 2 42 64 236 59 1 1,224 #N/A #N/A 2 4 16 36 69 2 3 F:\32·1881.00 Timnath Master Plan Update\Hydrology\EPA SWMM\RHults\Results Comparlson.xlsx Discharge (cfs) 10-Yr 25-Yr SO-Yr 100-Yr 5 7 8 10 21 28 34 40 21 28 34 40 38 66 104 136 24 35 so 76 4 13 30 58 15 20 26 34 1 1 1 4 55 80 114 162 54 77 106 150 84 119 152 197 29 42 54 68 33 44 55 67 123 175 224 28 2 117 165 210 26 5 4 6 8 11 116 165 210 265 3 6 8 11 0 0 0 0 5 12 17 22 3 12 21 28 47 65 90 128 38 54 76 110 30 45 67 99 3 5 6 8 147 217 287 377 30 47 70 103 9 13 17 22 1 1 1 4 167 249 330 430 23 32 42 54 45 63 94 157 53 77 115 179 10 13 18 25 16 24 37 61 9 12 15 18 32 45 62 86 30 42 57 80 46 66 94 139 465 753 1,112 1,641 1 2 2 3 630 1,078 1,620 2,3 19 48 69 109 169 13 18 22 27 614 1,065 1,617 2,313 22 32 40 49 13 18 22 27 76 103 130 159 102 140 179 222 55 100 153 227 49 91 140 210 101 140 178 222 36 47 59 72 561 773 1,012 1,288 543 772 1,009 1,283 7 14 21 27 38 74 118 182 65 119 181 264 65 119 183 267 244 386 543 727 1 1 l 4 13 19 26 33 255 400 560 747 10 12 15 19 10 12 15 19 12 16 20 24 37 50 62 76 8 10 11 14 12 15 18 22 2 3 4 5 3 3 4 5 #N/A #N/A #N /A #N/A 4 7 9 11 8/21/2018 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Element ID 2-Vr 225 3 226 4 229 2 230 4 231 3 234 7 237 29 238 29 239 30 243 20 248 7 250 11 252 33 253 0 254 1 274 17 275 5 276 10 277 2 279 35 283 20 284 19 285 15 287 13 291 0 293 7 295 1 296 55 297 0 298 6 303 94 307 2 309 26 310 6 311 2 312 4 314 6 316 62 317 60 321 63 323 1 323-surf 0 324 1 326 3 327 5 328 6 329 7 330 21 335 1 338 8 339 10 341 19 342 102 346 9 348 10 349 7 350 5 351 5 352 5 353 5 355 8 356 2 360 8' 500 20 501 7 53 4 54 5 DTNlO 13 DTNll 12 DTN12 12 DTN13 32 DTN14 33 DTN15 33 Timnath Stormwater Master Plan Update -2018 B-5 -SWMM Model Results -Node Flows Existing SWMM Model Results Discharge (cfs) 5 -V r 10-Vr 25-Vr 50-Vr 100-Vr 2-Vr 5-Vr 4 6 18 42 80 2 3 7 10 35 75 138 1 2 3 4 7 16 33 1 2 6 8 22 53 104 5 7 5 6 11 20 35 3 4 10 14 37 81 151 1 2 43 63 231 589 1,269 4 7 43 64 233 592 1,273 5 7 42 64 237 597 1,246 #N/A #N/A 28 35 48 68 99 20 28 11 14 22 46 85 7 11 16 19 39 84 161 3 5 46 58 86 129 198 33 46 1 1 1 2 2 0 1 1 1 3 5 13 1 1 26 34 so 94 164 17 26 8 9 25 58 111 6 9 15 18 30 63 123 6 9 2 3 5 9 16 1 1 49 61 97 162 266 35 49 28 34 50 77 125 7 12 29 38 52 127 250 15 24 22 28 52 126 249 15 24 19 25 52 125 247 15 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 11 18 29 51 2 3 2 4 10 19 28 1 2 78 97 132 181 256 55 78 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 10 16 24 39 6 8 133 165 227 312 440 93 132 3 4 7 11 19 1 2 38 47 64 86 118 26 38 8 10 16 34 71 2 3 4 4 11 28 56 2 3 6 7 12 37 82 3 5 7 8 17 43 89 6 9 88 109 150 214 319 62 89 85 104 148 217 325 60 85 89 110 153 213 304 63 89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 5 10 20 0 1 4 5 13 32 63 1 2 7 8 15 34 69 1 2 8 10 17 45 90 3 5 10 12 33 74 146 5 7 26 30 38 48 63 21 26 2 2 3 6 10 0 0 10 11 14 18 33 8 10 12 13 16 23 41 10 12 26 32 46 67 98 19 26 150 188 256 346 477 102 150 12 15 21 30 43 3 4 15 18 26 38 54 8 13 10 13 18 24 33 7 10 7 9 12 16 22 5 7 8 9 13 19 27 5 8 6 8 11 15 22 5 6 7 9 13 20 31 5 7 11 12 18 26 80 8 11 2 3 4 5 6 2 2 12 16 22 30 43 8 12 29 35 53 83 169 13 22 10 12 19 32 53 2 3 5 7 12 28 58 2 3 7 9 14 21 34 2 4 19 24 33 44 60 7 11 19 24 33 44 60 7 11 18 21 28 37 53 7 11 44 51 66 91 128 30 45 46 56 69 95 134 33 49 46 55 74 93 132 33 49 F:\32·1881.00 Tlmnath Master Plan Update\Hydrology\EPA SWMM\Results\Re sults Compari son .xlsx Discharge (cfs) 10-Vr 25-Vr 50-Vr 100-Vr 4 7 9 11 4 8 11 14 2 3 3 4 9 13 17 20 5 7 10 12 4 8 11 14 9 13 16 20 9 13 16 20 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 35 48 68 99 14 22 46 85 7 12 15 20 58 86 129 198 1 1 2 2 1 3 5 13 34 so 94 164 11 14 17 21 11 14 17 21 1 2 2 3 61 97 162 266 16 22 28 35 32 44 55 68 32 44 55 68 31 44 55 68 0 0 2 11 5 7 10 12 4 10 19 28 97 132 181 256 0 0 0 1 10 16 24 39 163 224 307 432 3 3 4 5 47 64 86 118 4 6 8 10 4 6 8 10 7 11 14 17 11 16 20 24 110 150 215 320 104 148 217 325 110 153 213 304 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 3 3 5 7 9 3 5 7 9 7 11 14 18 10 26 58 114 30 38 48 63 1 1 1 2 11 14 18 33 13 16 23 41 32 46 67 98 188 256 346 477 6 9 12 14 16 22 29 39 13 18 24 33 9 12 16 22 9 13 19 27 8 11 15 22 9 13 20 31 12 18 26 80 3 4 5 6 16 22 30 43 30 42 54 68 4 7 10 12 4 5 6 7 5 7 8 10 13 17 21 27 13 17 21 26 13 17 21 26 55 76 91 115 61 83 101 133 60 80 94 125 8/21/2018 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Elem ent ID 2-Yr DTN3 5 DTN4 9 DTNS 9 DTNG 11 DTN7 6 DTN8 17 DTN9 18 DTS2 5 DTS3 7 DTS4 7 DTSS 8 DTS6 8 DTS7 8 DTS01 8 G3-1 7 G3-2 5 G3-2 A 5 J-90 3 LAKECANA Ll 10 LAKECANALlO 3 LAKECANALll 2 LAKECANAL12 10 LAKECANAL16 18 LAKECANAL17 3 LAKECANAL18 18 LAKECANAL19 8 LAKECANAL2 15 LAKECANAL20 1 LAKECANAL21 1 LA KECANAL22 1 LAKECANAL3 29 LAKECANAL4 31 LAKECANAL7 0 LAKECANAL8 3 LAKECANAL9 3 P-103 30 P-103A 26 P-103C 20 P-103 Dl 23 P-103D2 11 P-104 86 P-105 31 P-106A 76 P-107 63 P-110 10 P-120 1,161 P-15 12 P-25 34 P-28 18 P-29 13 P-31 33 P-43 15 P-4A 46 P-50 8 P-SOA 10 P-51 34 P-SA 14 P-75 28 P-75A 19 P-75 D 9 P-77 17 P-778 1 P-77C 7 P-77D 25 P-80 5 P-80D 7 P-81 32 P-82D l 94 P-82D2 10 P-82D3 16 P-84 24 P-8 58 58 P-85C 6 Timnath Stormwater Master Plan Update -2018 B-5 -SWMM Model Results -Node Flows Existing SWMM Model Results Di scharge {cfs) 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr SO -Yr 100-Yr 2-Yr 5-Yr 7 8 ' 11 15 20 5 8 13 17 23 31 41 11 15 13 17 24 30 38 10 15 17 21 28 35 46 14 21 9 11 15 21 30 7 9 25 32 42 54 70 21 30 25 31 42 53 70 21 30 8 10 14 20 29 5 7 11 14 19 27 33 6 9 11 13 19 26 33 6 9 12 15 21 30 40 7 10 12 15 21 30 40 7 10 12 15 21 30 40 7 10 12 15 21 30 40 7 10 10 13 18 28 46 2 3 7 9 13 20 68 3 4 7 9 13 20 68 3 4 4 5 11 31 65 1 2 16 20 28 39 94 7 12 5 6 11 22 42 1 1 3 ,4 7 15 29 1 1 15 18 41 93 177 10 15 25 30 45 68 106 18 25 4 5 9 13 18 3 4 25 31 46 72 116 18 25 11 13 24 43 78 8 11 21 26 37 53 77 6 10 1 2 2 2 23 1 1 1 2 8 20 39 1 1 1 1 4 9 19 0 1 41 51 70 97 138 29 41 44 55 75 106 155 31 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 21 43 79 3 4 4 5 16 36 70 1 1 43 53 72 97 134 30 43 36 45 62 86 121 26 36 28 35 48 67 94 20 28 32 39 57 85 124 23 32 13 14 16 30 66 11 13 122 151 209 288 398 86 121 45 57 77 103 141 31 45 115 149 203 267 338 76 115 89 110 153 212 301 63 89 15 20 29 42 66 8 13 1,825 2,381 3,311 4,431 7,073 1,277 2,049 17 21 30 49 93 2 3 51 66 98 154 247 34 51 26 34 54 83 132 21 34 18 22 31 44 66 13 19 46 57 81 117 173 33 46 21 32 92 .224 463 26 43 70 90 126 169 225 46 69 12 14 20 29 42 8 12 14 17 24 34 48 10 14 47 56 76 98 141 43 63 20 25 35 so 74 14 20 39 48 68 95 135 28 39 28 34 47 65 94 19 28 12 15 22 28 36 9 12 25 32 49 81 136 17 25 2 2 4 8 16 1 2 9 11 21 38 62 7 9 34 42 60 89 134 25 34 7 8 14 24 40 3 5 10 13 21 38 67 7 10 44 55 81 120 180 32 44 131 161 239 364 559 94 131 12 14 21 29 110 10 12 23 29 53 96 166 16 23 38 48 65 112 190 24 38 88 111 152 200 263 58 88 9 11 33 78 151 8 12 F:\32-1881.00 Timnath Master Plan Update\Hydrology\EPA SWMM\Results\Results Comparlson.xlsx Discharge (cfs) 10-Yr 25-Yr SO -Yr 100-Yr 10 13 17 23 19 26 34 46 19 26 33 43 26 34 40 53 11 16 22 31 38 49 60 81 37 52 60 80 9 13 17 23 12 17 23 31 12 17 22 31 13 19 27 37 13 19 26 37 13 19 26 37 13 19 26 37 4 7 10 12 5 8 10 72 5 8 10 n 3 5 6 8 15 20 26 34 2 3 4 6 1 2 3 5 18 41 93 177 30 45 68 106 5 9 13 18 31 46 72 116 13 24 43 78 12 16 21 27 2 2 2 23 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 51 70 97 138 55 75 106 155 0 0 0 0 6 21 43 79 2 3 4 5 53 72 97 134 45 62 86 121 35 48 67 94 39 57 85 124 14 16 30 66 150 207 285 398 57 77 103 141 149 203 267 338 110 153 212 301 17 24 33 47 2,691 3,774 5,073 6,848 5 12 17 22 66 98 154 247 44 63 93 139 23 32 45 66 57 81 117 173 61 114 173 255 87 119 159 213 14 20 29 42 17 24 34 48 78 96 120 157 25 35 so 74 48 68 95 135 34 47 65 94 15 22 28 36 32 49 81 136 2 4 8 16 11 21 38 62 42 60 89 134 6 11 19 32 13 21 38 67 55 81 120 180 161 239 364 559 14 21 29 110 29 ,53 96 166 48 65 112 190 111 152 200 263 16 22 27 33 8/21/2018 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I El ement ID 2-Yr P-86 52 P-86A 11 P-86C 3 P-88 77 P-92 25 P-95 76 P-97 38 P-98 so P-98A 30 TR ICl 191 TRI C2 193 TRI C3 193 TR IC4 212 TRI C4A 212 TRIC4-S PILL 0 TRI CS 218 TRICS A 218 TRI CSA SPILL 11 TR IC 6 207 TR IC6 Spill 1 TRIC6A 207 TRI C-O UT FA LL 205 TRO C l A 216 TR OCl 216 TROC l Oa 256 TROCll 260 TR OC 1 2 260 TROC-12A 260 TROC 13 260 TRO C1 4 260 T ROC2 216 TROC3 217 TROC4 217 TROCS 226 TROC6 252 TROC7 252 TROC8 254 TR OC9 254 TR CC-OUTFAL L 260 CP-10 CP -100 CP -lOOA CP -101 CP -102 CP -106 CP-1 08 CP-10 8A CP-10 9 CP-11 CP -110 CP-1 13A CP -1 2 CP-12 1 CP-122 CP-123 CP-124 CP-125 CP -126 CP-13 CP -14 CP-15 CP-lSA CP-17 CP-18 CP-2 CP-20 CP-21 CP-21A CP -26 CP-3 CP-3 0 CP -33 Timnath Stormwater Master Plan Update -2018 B-5 -SWMM Model Results -Node Flows Existing SWMM Model Results Discharge (cfs) 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr SO-Yr 100-Yr 2-Yr S-Yr 78 99 134 181 258 52 78 16 19 28 43 65 11 16 4 5 8 14 23 3 4 117 149 204 279 403 74 112 39 so 73 109 167 22 34 108 133 183 254 361 76 108 53 64 81 123 199 38 53 76 97 133 183 260 so 76 42 52 72 102 148 30 42 192 192 198 214 241 191 192 194 197 220 266 337 192 195 195 198 225 298 382 194 197 218 225 261 343 445 209 216 218 225 261 343 445 209 216 0 0 0 so 119 0 0 227 242 294 369 454 219 232 227 242 294 369 453 219 232 15 27 73 141 218 11 19 212 217 233 257 294 209 215 2 4 11 29 63 2 3 212 217 233 256 292 209 215 209 213 22 2 227 229 207 212 223 229 287 387 546 226 238 223 229 287 387 546 226 238 278 307 508 92 1 1,669 365 464 283 312 529 946 1,736 371 472 283 312 529 946 1,735 372 474 283 312 529 946 1,735 372 474 283 312 529 946 1,735 373 476 283 312 529 946 1,735 373 476 223 230 290 395 562 226 238 224 232 295 405 579 226 238 225 232 296 406 580 227 239 237 248 316 443 645 227 239 273 301 491 885 1,629 360 456 273 301 491 885 1,629 360 457 276 304 495 889 1,634 363 460 276 304 495 888 1,632 363 460 283 312 529 946 1,735 373 476 163 235 33 46 33 46 99 142 51 73 -30 43 --16 23 5 8 -56 82 38 54 47 69 8 12 -49 69 -2,216 3,433 -640 992 552 845 1,454 2,265 880 1,357 1,336 1,920 27 38 -93 132 ---49 69 6 1 88 -44 63 -101 145 139 206 39 56 65 93 -86 122 55 80 -70 102 -8 11 8 12 F:\32-1881.00 Timnath Master Plan Update\HvclroloBV\EPA SWMM\Results\Results Comparison.xlsx Disch a rge (cfs) 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr 99 134 181 258 19 28 43 65 5 8 14 23 143 196 266 374 44 61 83 114 133 183 254 361 65 82 125 20 1 97 133 183 260 52 72 102 148 193 194 195 196 197 206 221 247 200 211 223 242 223 246 268 311 223 246 268 311 0 0 0 26 246 278 307 334 246 278 307 334 29 59 85 110 220 225 231 236 4 5 10 13 220 225 23 1 236 216 220 222 223 249 275 326 430 249 275 326 430 558 76 1 995 1,309 576 785 1,021 1,356 579 791 1,031 1,369 579 791 1,031 1,369 581 796 1,038 1,379 581 796 1,038 1,3 79 250 276 335 448 250 276 346 467 25 1 278 347 468 251 294 389 540 549 745 969 1,264 549 745 971 1,267 553 750 976 1,281 552 749 975 1,280 581 796 1,038 1,379 293 396 531 725 57 80 112 163 57 79 112 162 176 239 324 449 90 122 164 226 53 74 103 145 29 40 55 77 10 13 19 28 102 139 185 247 67 92 126 176 87 117 156 209 15 20 27 36 86 117 158 219 4,425 6,109 8,149 10,971 1,278 1,765 2,354 3,170 1,082 1,486 1,980 2,668 2,929 4,053 5,411 7,285 1,745 2,406 3,207 4,319 2,389 3,261 4,424 6,163 48 67 93 130 163 223 309 438 85 123 179 269 110 149 201 274 79 107 145 201 181 245 330 45 2 260 352 463 607 69 94 128 178 115 156 211 292 152 207 28 1 391 100 135 180 242 129 176 233 309 14 19 27 40 14 20 28 40 8/21/2018 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Elem ent ID 2-Yr CP-34 CP-35 CP -37 CP -38 CP-39 CP-4 CP-43 CP-43A CP-45 CP-46 CP-47 CP-47A CP -48 CP-49 CP-5 CP-51 CP-52 CP-55 CP-6 CP-61 CP-64 CP-67 CP-68 CP-69 CP-7 CP-70 CP-70A CP-71 CP-72 CP-72A CP-73 CP-76 CP-8 CP-83 CP-83A CP -85 CP-8SC CP-87 CP -89 CP-9 CP-90 CP -91 CP-92 CP-93 CP-94 CP -99 CP-9A J-CLARKl J-CLARK2 J-CLARK3 J-CLARK4 J-CLARKS Timnath Stormwater Master Plan Update -2018 B-5 -SWMM Model Results -Node Flows Existing SWMM Model Results Di scharge (cfs) 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr SO-Y r 100-Yr 2-Yr 5-Yr 71 102 99 141 117 167 55 78 29 40 62 91 66 93 47 68 76 107 58 82 19 26 27 38 141 206 52 75 116 167 38 57 27 39 19 28 18 26 5 7 5 7 38 55 so 70 72 106 34 48 72 103 50 73 14 20 78 111 4 6 207 298 77 109 327 476 128 187 15 21 195 282 59 85 20 28 12 17 186 267 47 67 32 47 58 84 131 188 86 123 14 20 16 22 132 217 127 209 125 206 105 174 78 129 F:\32-1881.00 Timnath Master Pla n Update\Hydrology\EPA SWMM\Results\Results Comparlson.x lsx Discha rge (cfs) 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr 129 180 244 332 178 251 346 482 206 281 384 540 96 131 182 261 49 75 117 184 114 155 204 272 115 160 230 341 84 115 156 217 133 185 256 360 102 140 193 271 32 47 70 106 47 67 95 137 258 352 469 631 94 127 169 229 210 290 391 534 71 96 127 170 49 67 89 118 36 48 64 85 33 46 60 78 8 11 15 20 8 11 15 20 69 94 127 174 88 123 170 240 133 180 239 319 60 84 116 162 129 175 235 323 91 124 165 222 25 35 52 79 139 198 282 406 7 10 15 22 373 515 698 959 134 188 265 383 597 815 1,089 1,466 235 32 1 427 573 26 36 49 68 351 475 637 870 106 144 194 267 35 49 69 100 21 29 41 61 333 454 613 842 83 113 156 221 60 81 107 142 104 141 187 249 234 317 426 585 153 207 280 388 25 35 so 73 27 38 54 80 299 467 653 869 287 449 628 839 283 442 619 827 240 378 533 711 177 267 355 463 8/21/2018 I I I I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EXHIBIT s.3 • SWMM Routing Map Developed Condition • North Map Timnath Drainage Master Plan 2018 Update Legend SWMM Nodes OMOER JUNCTION • OUTF.4.LL • PONO (EXIST.) SWMM Conveyanc• Unks --Uak __,__ Oril\ce: OUt!tt Weir E PROSPECT RO E HORSETOOTH RD Suba11nl1bel Subbuln Connnectlon ... t 500 -· ... E MULBERRY ST I I I :• 11 I I I I I I I ·I I I I I I I Appendix E SRH-2D Hydraulics Results of Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 1) TRIC Spills Map 2) TRIC Spills Rating Curves 3) TRIC Analysis Results Summary Tab les 4) TRIC Inflows Summary Table 5) Comparison of Spil l Hydrographs -SRH -2D vs. SWMM I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal Spills Map SRH-20 Model Results (Existing 100-year) SE FRONl'"GE ~ Base Flow @ 125 TRICSPIUA (South Bank) TRICSPIUB TRICSPIUC TRICSPIUD TRIC SPILLE •-u --~~o A A •AA- SRH Flows, O,,w (cfs) EXISTING FUTURE 11:mlllmmll:mllllm 190 190 190 190 0 0 0 0 49 1 0 0 116 0 40 0 170 27 90 19 18 0 0 0 ·-·-· .. ·-·-·-- --TRIC 100-year WSEL Contours (Existing ) LJ TRIC 100-yea rBoundary (Existing ) 850 E PROSPECT RO AYRES ASSOCIATES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix E SRH-20 Hydraulics Results of Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal Spill Rating Curves from 20 Analysis for SWMM 111£2,_..._. .. TIit .......... la 1'.IIIE.!I .............. ma ... .... .. Glilll .... Gin --0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 190 0 190 200 0 200 190 0 190 199 0 199 225 0 225 200 4 195 222 0 222 250 0 250 225 14 212 244 2 242 275 0 275 250 32 217 270 14 255 300 16 284 284 64 220 296 31 265 325 37 288 295 74 221 321 49 272 350 55 295 344 119 225 343 63 279 500 156 344 411 180 229 448 137 303 750 339 411 500 261 239 flll/JI , ... --0 0 0 188 0 188 200 0 200 225 5 220 250 23 227 275 48 227 300 69 231 325 93 232 350 114 236 500 259 241 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I link/ Nodct "" Unk ""' U,-L ""'' Element lD IHJ .. l·TRICl SPILL L TRIC<IA·SP1ll 1. llUC.!>A·SJ'lll L·TIUC6A!.P!Ll TIUC·OUTFAU flemen t lO fF c ) Location l·TR1Cl_SPIU ITRICSp ill B 0 LTIUCOSJ'lll TRIC Spm C 0 L·1R1C.A-SP1ll. TRIC Spill D 11 L Tll!CtiA·SPILL TRIC Spm E 1 t,"RIC -Timnath TIUC,OUTrAU Reservior Inlet 205 •rRIC Base Flow of 190 ds. I Location TRIC Sp ill B TRICSp ill C TRIC Sp ill 0 TRI( Sp ill E TRIC-Timnath Reservior Inlet "'TRJC Base Flow of 190 cfs. F:\32-1881.00 Timnath Mast er Plan Update\Hydroloav\EPA SWMM\Results\Results Com~rlson.xlsx I I I Timnath Stormwater Master Plan Update -2018 TRIC Flows Summary Existing SWMM Model Results Peak Discharge (cfs) SO-Yr 100-Yr 2-Yr 5-Vr 0 0 0 13 59 0 0 0 0 0 50 119 0 0 15 27 73 141 218 11 19 2 4 11 29 63 2 3 209 213 222 227 229 207 2U Existing SRH-20 Model Results I Peak Discharge (cfs) 100-yr 10-Yr 100-Yr w/o Ba se Flow 1 49 0 0 116 0 27 170 93 0 18 0 207 22 7 213 Peak Discharge (cfs) 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr 0 0 0 3 I 0 0 0 26 I 29 59 85 110 I 4 5 10 13 ,I 216 220 222 223 ! ........... -.... Peak Discharge (cfs) 100-yr 10-Yr 100-Yr w/o Base Flow 0 0 0 0 40 0 19 90 0 0 0 0 219 228 147 10/30/2017 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Uni/ Node Link Lirlk lil'lk Li nk Li nk SobcJtch Element ID (EC.) 102 lOSC USAB OP~25 13!i 39 Timnath Stormwater Master Plan Update -2018 TRIC Inflows Summary Existing SRH Inflows from SWMM Element JD ____ P_ec...ac...k_l_n_fl_o_w--'('--d_s.,_) ___ _ Peak Inflow (ds) (FC) .. 10-Yr 100-Yr 10-Yr 102 3 52 4 lOSC 5 114 4 115AD 3 107 3 OP·25 27 80 27 135 27 199 22 39 12 83 4 I F:\32-1881.00 Timnath Master Plan Update\Hydrology\EPA SWMM\Results\Results Comparison.xis, I I I I 100-Yr 7 57 28 80 49 12 10/30/2017 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Comparison of Spill Flowrates from SRH-20 vs. SWMM 70 .. " 100 YR-TRIC2 Spill Compari son --+ 20 -----+---~----, 10 8:00:00 1"1 u o ~ 80 0 .. 40 20 8:00:00 9:00:00 10.00:00 9:00:00 11:00,00 lHI0.00 Time 13.00:00 -SWM M•TII.IC2 -SR 1l2D-TRIO 100 YR-TRIC4A Spill Comparison U :00:00 Time 1!;00:00 -SWMM-TRIU.A -SR Hl O.TRICIA U :00:00 F:\32-1881.00 Timnath Master Plan Update\Hydraullcs\SMS\SPJUS\TRIC Spllls Hydrographs -EC&FC.xlu JS:00:00 1600:00 15:00:00 lti:00:00 'Z 0.9 ,., 07 " ~ o.~ 0 o., 0.3 0,2 O.l Ul0-00 0.9 o., ., t::: 9·00:00 0 " i-----;-- 0.3 0.2 •1 10 YR-TRIC2 Spill Comparison 12:0000 Ti m, il :0000 -SWMM•TR IQ. -SRt!lD-TRIO 10 YR -TRIC4A Spill Comparison 14:00:00 lS:0000 16:00:00 0'----------------------------3:00:00 9:IJOj)() 10:00:00 11:00:00 U:00:00 U:00:00 JJ.:00:00 lS:00:00 16:00:00 Tim, -SWM M·TRIC4A -SRH20-IRI C-4A 10/30/2017 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Comparison of Spill Flowrates from SRH-2D vs. SWMM =[ _ ,so :§. O 100 50 70 " 50 ., " l :OOilO 8:00:00 "' 220 200 9:00:00 9:00:00 10:00:00 10:00:00 100 YR-TRICSA Spill Comparison lli>0:00 12:00:00 Time 11:00:00 -SWMM·TRICSA -SRH.ZO·TRICSA 100 YR-TRIC6A Spill Comparison 11:00:00 U:00:00 Time 13:00:00 -SWMM ·TRIC6A -s1m2D,TIUC6A + 1-1:00:00 100 YR-Timnath Reservoir Inflow Comparison t 10:00:00 F:\32-1881.00 Timnath Master Plan Update\Hydraullcs\SMS\SPILLS\TRIC Spills Hydrosraphs -EC&FC.xls.x 1500:00 .U:00:00 16:0(UlO l~:00:00 16:00:00 " ,, lO !1s " 10 ll;00.00 9:00:00 10:00:00 ·: r l .S ~ 2 " l ,S 10 YR -T RICSA Sp i ll Comparison JJ:0000 Jl:00,00 Tirne f 13:00:00 -$WMM-TIIICSA -5RH20-1'RIC5A 10 YR-TRIC6A Spill Comparison J IA:00;00 15;00:00 16:00:00 ,.: I ,.__..._ ..... .._ ________ ._ _______________ _ 800:00 • 900-00 10.0CUIO .uoo,oo ll:00.00 Time 13:00:00 -SWMM-TIUC6A -SRH20.TRIC6A 14:00.00 10 YR-Timnath Reservoir Inflow Comparison 15.00.00 16;00Jl) 10/30/2017 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NorthernEnaineerina.com // 970.221.4158 APPENDIX D HEC-RAS WORKMAP AND MODEL OUTPUT I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I I I I I Existing Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 1?/2019 Page.1 of 11 HEC-RAS HEC-RAS 5.0.4 April 2018 U. S, A_rmy Corps qf Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center 609 Setond Street Davis~ California X X xxxxxx xxxx xxxx xx x X x X X X X X X X X X ·x X X. X X xxxxxxx xxxx X XXX xxxx xxxxxx X X X X X X x X X X X xxxxxx xxxx PROJECT DATA ·Project Title: 100~019 TRIC WSEL Project File 100~019 TRIC WSEL.prj Run Date and Time: 12/19/2019 2:50:31 PM Project in English units PLAN DATA Plan Title: Existing-Corid X X X X X X X X X X X x xxxx X X xxxx X X XXX:XX Plan File d_: \Projects \100-019\Drainage\Modeling'\HEC-RAS\2019-11-22\100-019 _ TRIC=WSEL .p02 Geometry Title: ExistingCond Geom·etry File : d: \Projetts\100-019\Drainage\Modeling\HEC-RAS\2019-11-22\lOO~ 019 TRIC::_WSEL.gOl Flow Title Flow _File 019.TRIC WSEL.fOl TRIC Flow-ExistingCond d:\Projects\100-019\Drainage\Modeling\HEC-RAS\2019-11-22\100- Plan Summary _Inforination: Number of: C_ross Sections Culverts Bridges Computational Information 11 0 0 Multiple Openings Inlin·e Structures Lateral Structures Water surface calculation tolerance Critical depth calculation toler_ance - Maximum number of iterations 0.01 0.01 20 0.3 0.001 Maximum difference tolerance Flow tolerance _f_?Ctor Computation Options Critical depth computed only where necessary Conveyanc:e Calcula"i:ion Met_l10d: At bre_aks in n values only Friction Slope Method: Average Conveya_nce Computational Flow Regime: Subcritical Flow FLOW DATA Flow Title: TRIC Flow-ExistingCohd 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Existing Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 12/2019 Page.2 of 11 Flow File d: \Projects\100-019\Drainage\ModeHng\HEC-RAS\2019~11-22\100-019 _ TRIC_WSEL. fOl· Flow Data (cfs) · Riv.er TRIC TRIC TRIC Reach RCHl RC.Hl RCHl Boundary Conditions River Downstream TRIC. 4915.2 GEOMETRY DATA Reach RCHl Geometry Title: ExistingCohd RS 200 170 130 Profile Proposed Cond 191 241 287.3 Proposed Cond Upstream Kn.ow:n WS - Geometry File d:\Projects\100-019\Drainage\Modeling\HEC-RAS\2019-11-22\100-019 TRIC~WSEL.gOl CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description: Station Elevation D.ata Sta E_lev Sta 246.14 4916 246.48 250.16 4913 250.79 261.41 4911. 96 264.6 272. 74 4913 ?72.84 275.95 4915.69 276.36 280.11 4918 Manning's n Values Sta n Val Sta 246.14 .. 042 251. 34 Bank Sta: Left Right 251.34 271.31 RS: 200 num= 26 Eiev Sta Elev Sta 4915.75 247.49 4915 248.74 4912.44 251.34 4912 258.13 4 911. 98 268.12 4911. 99 271. 31 4913.09 273.92 4914 274 .. 6"/ 4916 276.7 4916.·28 277 .. 83 num= 3 n Val. Sta n Val .03 271. 31 .042 Lengths: Left Channel Right 300.61 300.61 300.61 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) 4915.8.1 Ele)l(ent Vel Head (ft) 0.08 Wt. n-Va-1. w.s. Elev (ft) 4915.74 Reach Len. (ft) Crit w .. s .. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000380 A_rea (sq ft) Q Total (cfs) 191. 00 Flow (cfs) Top Width (ft) 29.51 Top Width (ft) Vel Total (ft/s) 2.05 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) Max C_hl Dpth (ft) 3.78 Hydr. Depth (ft) Conv.· Total (cfs) 9801,2 Conv. (cfs) Length Wtd. (ft) 300.61 Wetted Per. (ft) Min Ch El (ft) 4911. 96 Shear (lb/sq ft) Alpha 1. 20 Stream Power . (lb/f-t Elev Sta Elev 4914 248.75 4914 4911.98 261. 34 4911.96 4912 272. 66 4912.93 4914.58 275.27 4915 4917 279. 71 4917 .86 Coeff Contr. Expan. .1 .3 Left OB. Channel Right OB 0.042 0.030 0.042 300.61 300.61 300.61 8 .. 92 74. 95 9.19 8.92 74.95 9 .19 7.90 174. "/0 . · 8.41 4.84 i9. 97 4.70 0.89 2.33 0.91 1. 84 3.75 1. 96 405.3 8 964 .. 5 431. 4 6.12 ·. 19. 97 .6. 02 0.03 0.09 0.04 s) · o .. 03 0.21 · 0. 03 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Existing ConditJons Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 12/2019 Page 3 of 11 F:i:ctn Loss (ft) C & E Loss (ft) 0.04 0.02 Cum Volume (acre-ft) Cum SA (acres) 2.01 0.65 6.05 0.89 L9ti 0. 65. Warning: The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream conveyance) is les:5 tpap 0.7 or greater than 1. 4. This may in<i.icate the nee.d for additional cross sections. CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description: Station Elevation Sta Elev 231.19 4916 235.13 4913.67 257.84 4912.34 261.38 4915 Pata Sta 232.95 236.04 258.77 261. 94 Manning is n Values Sta .n Val Sta 231.19 .042 237.94 Ba.nk Sta: Left Right 2·37. 94 257 .3 RS: 190 num=· 18 El~v Sta Elev 'Sta Elev st.a 4915.02 233 4915 233.19 4914.89 234.69 4913 237. 94 4912.04 238.02 4908.63 257.3 4913 259.55 4913.64 259.96 4914 260.41 4915.36 ?62,79 4916 hum= 3 n Val Sta n Val .03 2.57. 3 . 04.2. Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr. 399.32 399.32 399.32 .1 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) Vel Head (ft) w.s. Elev (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) Q Total (cfs_) Top Width (ft) Vel Total (ft/s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) C6nv. Tot.al (cfs) Length Wt.d. (ft) Min Ch El (ft) Alpha Frctn Los~ (ft) C & E Loss (ft) CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description: Station Elevation Sta Elev 234.09 4915 238.78 4912.06 258.45 4911. 85 262.3 4914 265.8 4916.36 Data Sta 234 .11 238.94 258.81 263.33 266.32 4915.76 E_lement Left OB 0.03 Wt. n-Val. 0.042 4915.73-Reach Le~. (ft) 399.32 Flow Area (sq ft) 11. 70 0.000066 Area (1,q ft) 11. 70 191.00 Flow (cfs) 4.59 30.77 Top Width (ft) ·6 .27 1 .. 20 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 0 .. 39 7 .11 Hydr. Depth (ft) 1.87 23595.1 Conv. (cfs) 567.0 399.32 . Wette.d Per. (ft) 7 .29 4908.62 Shear (lb/sq ft) 0.01 1.19 Stream Power (lb/ft s) 0.00 6.03 Cum Volume (acre-ft) 1. 94 0.00 Cum SA (acres) 0.61 RS.: 180 num= 23 Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta 4914.99 23.5. 78 4914 237.31 4913.19 237.64 49i2 239.09 4911.93 242.49 4908.63 256.65 4912 259.1 4n2 .15 260.99 4913 261.79 4914.68 263.78 4915 264.01 4915.29 265.17 4917 268.37 4917 .27 Elev 4914 4908.6? 4914.29 Expan. . 3 Channel Right OB 0.030 0.042 399.32 399.32 137.47 10.52 137.47 10.52 183.18 3.23 19.36 5.1'4 1.33. 0.31 7.10 2.05 22628.8 399,2 22.69 9.48 ci. 02 0.00 0,03 0.00 5.31 1.91 0.75 0 .. 62 Elev 4913 4908.08 4913.55 4916 I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Existing Conditions Mod_el Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 12no19 Page4 of 11 Mahhing's n "Values Sta n Vai Sta 234.09 .042 242,49 Bank Sta: Left 242.49 Right 256.65 nurn= 3 n Val Sta n Val .03 .256.65 .042 Lengths: Left Channel Right 462.76 462.76 462.76 CROSS SECTION OUTPU,T Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) 4915.73 Elell)_ent Vel Head (ft) 0.03 Wt. n-Val. w.s. Elev (ft) 4915.70 Reach Len. (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000071 Area (sq ft) Q Total (cfs) 191. 00 Flow (cfs) Top Width (ft) 30.59 Top Width (ft) Vel Total (ft/s) 1.22 Av'g. Vel. (ft/s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) 7.62 Hydr. Depth (ft) Conv. Total (cfs) 227.43.0 Conv. (cfs) Lehgth Wtd. (ft) 462.76 Wetted Per. (ft) Min.Ch El (ft) 4908.08 Shear (lb/sq ft) Alpha 1. 45 St.ream Power (lb/ft Frctn Leiss (ft) 0.0.4 Cum Volume (acr~-ft) C & E Loss (ft) 0.00 Curit SA (acres) s) Coeff Contr. .1 Left OB 0.042 462.76 29. 28 29.28 16.39 8.40 0.56 3.49 195i.3 11. 33 0.01 0.01 1.75 0.55 Expan. .3 Channel 0.030 462.76 103.98 103.98 163.33 14.16 1. 57 7.34 19447.7 14.17 0.03 0.05 4.21 0.60 Right OB 0.042 462.76 23.60 23.60 11.29 8.03 0.48 2.94 1344.0 11. 56 0.01 0.00 1. 75 · 0.56 lllarning: The cross-section end points had to be extended vertically for the coll)puted wqter surface. CROS,S SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl . INPUT Description: Station Elevation ;,ta Elev 56.54 4914.79 84 .. 74 4912.02 Data Sta 63.04 96.25 Manni-ng·' s n Vah1es Sta n Val Sta 56.54 .042 66.35 Bank Sta:-Left Right 66.35 79.9 RS: 170 nurn= 9 Elev Sta Elev Sta · Elev Sta 49_12,9 66.23 4911_.66 66.35 4907.58 79.9 4915.64 100.53 4915.88 104.19 4916 num= 3 n Val Sta n Val .03 79.9 .042 Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff C.ontr. 226.15 226.15 226.15 .1 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) 4915.69 Element Left OB Vel Head (ft) 0.05 Wt. n-Val. 0.042 w.s. Elev (ft) 4915.65 Reach Len. (ft) 226.15 Crit W.S. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) 23.19 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0,000087 Area (sq ft) 23 .19. Q Total (cfs) 241.00 Flow (cfs) 10.20 Top Width (ft) 39.86 Top Width (ft). 9.81 Vel To.tal (.ft/ s) 1.34 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 0.44 Max Chl Dpth (ft) 8.07 Hydi:. Depth (ft) 2.36 Conv. Totij.l (cfs) 25770.8 Conv. (cfs) 1090.7 Length Wtd. (ft) 226 .15 Wetted Per. (ft) 15.13 Min Ch El (ft) 4907.58 Shear (lb/sq· ft) 0.01 Alpha · 1. 62 Stream Power (lb/ft s) 0. 00 . ·Frct_n Loss (ft) 0.02 Cum Volume (acre-ft) 1.47 Elev 4907.75 Expan. .3 Channel Right OB 0.030 0.042 226.15 226.15 108.18 48.82 108.18 48.82 200.14 30.66 13.55 16.50 1.85 0.63 7.98 2.96 21401.2 3279.0 13.55 18.67 0.04 0.01 0.08 0.01 3.08 1. 37 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ex_istjng Cor,ditions Model Qutput 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 12/2019 Page Sof 11, C & E Loss (ft) 0.00 Cum SA (acres) 0.45 0.45 0.43 Warning: The cross-section end points had to be extended vertically for the computed wate~ surface. CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl rn·Pu·T Description: Station Elevation Sta Eiev 59'1 4914.59 89.45 4913.09 Data Sta 64 .. 49 96.03 Manning's n Vaiues Sta n Val St_a 59.1 .042 71.15 Bank Sta: Left R{ght 71.15 81. 5 RS: 160 num= 8 Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta 4912.53 68. 91 4910.84 71.15 4.907. 85 81. 5 4915.77 100.82 4 915. 98 num= 3 n Val Sta h Val .03 81. 5 ,042 Lengths: Left-Channel Right Coeff Contr. 195. 72 195. 72 195.72 ._ l CROSS SECTIO_N OUTPUT Profile .#Proposed cond E.G. Elev (ft) 4915.67 Element Le_ft OB Vel Head (ft) 0.05 Wt. n-Val. 0.042 W.S. Elev (ft) 4915.62 Reach Leri. (ft) 195. 72 Crit W.S. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) 42.57 E_.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000109 Area (sq ft) 42.57 Q Total (cfs) 241.00 -Flow (cfs) 31.15 Top Width (ft) 36.57 Top Width (ft) 12.05 Vel Total (ft/s) 1. 37 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 0.73 Max Chl Dpth (ft) 8.19 Hydr. Depth (ft) 3.53 C.9nv. Total (cfs) 23085.8 c_oriv. (cfs) 2983.6 t;ength Wtd. (ft) 195.72 Wetted Per. (ft) 15.27 Min Ch El (ft) 4907.43 Shear (1b/sq ft) 0.02 Alpha 1. 69 Stream Power (lb/ft s) 0.01 F1cctn Loss (ft) 0.01 Cum Volume_ (acre-ft) 1.30 C & E Loss (ft) 0,01 Cum SA (acres) 0.39 Elev 4907.43 Expan. .3 Channel Rigllt OB 0.030 0.042 195.72 195. 72 82.61 50.49 82 ·-61 50.49 170. 50 39.35 10.35 14.17 2.06 0.78 7.98 3.56 16332.2 3769.9 10.36 16. 4 7 0.05 0.02 0.11 0.02 2 . .58 1.11 o_. 39 0.35 Warning: The cross-section end points had to be e~ten<;l.ed vertically for the computed water surface. Wa_rni_ng: T_he conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream conveyance) is less than 0.7 or greater than · 1. 4. This may indicate the need for addi tiona_l cross sections. CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description: S'ta-tion Elev'3tion Sta Elev 79.07001 4914.99 119.32 4916.16 Manni~g's n Valu~s Delta Sta 79.16 119. 76 RS: 150 .num= Elev 4914.98 4916.38 num= 7 Sta Elev Sta Elev Ste! Elev 90.12 4909.62 91.13 4907.71 109.52 4907.32 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Existing Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydra'ulic Analysis for · Ti.mni:'lth R~servoir Inlet Canal 12/2019 Page 6 of 11 Sta n Val Sta n Val 79.0'7001 .042 91.13 .03 Bank Sta: Left Right Lengths: Sta n Val 109.52 .042 Left C.hannel Right 91.13 109.52 156.86 156.86 156.86 CROSS SECTION OUTPtfT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G .. Elev (ft) 4915.65 Element Vel Head (ft) 0.02 Wt. n-Val. w.s. Elev (ft) 4915,63 Reach Len_. (ft) Crit .W •. S. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000045 Area (sq ft) Q Tota.l (cfs) 241. 00 Flow (cfs) Top Width (ft) 39,66 Top Width (ft) Vel Total (ft/s) 1. 04 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) 8.31 Hydr .. Depth (ft) Conv. ··Total (cfs) 35813.8 Com,. (cfs) Length Wtd. (ft) 156.86 Wetted Pei;-. (ft) Min Ch El (ft) 4907.32 Shear (lb/sq ft) Alph.a 1. 42 Stream Power (lb/ft Frctn Loss (ft) 0.01 Cum Vo.lume (acre-ft) C & E Loss (ft) 0.00 Cum SA (acres)· s) Coeff Contr. .1 Left OB 0.042 156.86 43.55 43.55 21. 02 12.06 0,48 3.61 3123 ... o 15.09 0.01 0.00 1.11 0.34 ., Expan. . 3 Chan.nel. 0.030 i56.86 149.17 149.17 200.69 18.39 1.35 8.11 29824.0 18.39 0.02 0.03 2 .. 06 0.32 Right OB 0. 0.42 156.86 38.25 38.25 19.29 9.21 0.50 4.i5 2866 .. 8 12.40 0.01 0.00 0.91 0.30 Warning: The cross-section end poi.nt.s. had. to be extended vertic·ally for the computed water surface .. Warning: The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream conveyance) is lE!s.s than O, 7 or grE!ater than · · 1. 4. This may indicate ·the need for additional cross sections. CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REAC'.H: RCHl INPUT Description: Statior; Elevation Data Sta Elev Sta 6S.84999 4915.1271.35999 83.37 4909.1290.31999 107,24 4915,61 Manni.ng's n Values Sta n Val Sta 68.84999 .042 81.23 Bank Sta: Left Right 81.2395 .. 81999 RS: 140 num·= 11 Elev Sta 4914.03 01:23 4910.192.50999 num= 3 n Val Sta .0395.81999 Elev St.a Elev Sta Elev 4908.7881.73999 4908.74 82.16 4908.84 4910.3695~81999 4910.6897.40999 4911.68 n Val .042 Lengths: Left CJ:!annel 250.35 250.35 Right 250.35 Coeff Cohtr. .Expan. .1 ,3 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Eiev (ft) Vel Head (ft) W.S. Elev (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) E .. G. Slope (ft/ft) Q Total (cfs) Top Width (ft) Vel Total (ft/s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) Conv. Total· (cfs) Lehgth Wtd. (ft) 4915.64 0.05 4915.58 0.000177 241. 00 38.32 1. 56 6.84 18110.7 250.35 Element WL n-Val. Re.ach Len. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) Area (sq ft) Flow (cfs) Top Width (ft) Avg. Vel. (ft/s) Hydr. DE!pth (ft) Conv. (cfs) Wetted Per. (ft) .Left OB Chann.el 0.042 0.030 250.35 250.35 43.74 84.28 43.74 84.28 43.24 177.67 12.38 14.59 0.99 2 .11 3.53 s.70 3249,1 13351.2 14.38 14.73 Right OB 0.042 250.35 26. 02 26.02 20,10 11. 35 0.77 2.29 1510.4 12.39 I I I I I I I ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I ~xistfng Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 12/2019 Page 7 of 11 Min Ch El (ft) 4908.74 Alpha 1. 43 Frctn Loss (ft) 0.07 C & E Loss (ft) 0.01 Shear (lb/sq ft) 0.03 0.06 0.02 Stream Power (lb/ft s) 0.03 0.13 0.02 Cum Volu_me (acre-ft) 0.95 1. 64 0.80 Cum SA (acres) 0.30 0.26 0.26 Warning: The cross-section end points had to be exte)'.lcied vertically for the computed wate_r, surface. CROSS SECTION ~IVEJ<: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description: Station Elevation Sta Elev 69.3 4916.2 Data Sta 72.59 90.27 4909.0491. 71999 Manning's n Values Sta n Val Sta 69.3 .04283.91999 Bank Sta: Left Right 83, 9199991. 71999 RS: 130 num= 9 Elev Sta 4914.6283.91999 4909.01 101. 78 _num= 3 n Val Sta .0391~ 71999 Elev 4909.12 4915.61 h Val .042 Lengths: Left Channel 168.5 168.5 Sta 84.66 104.05 Right 168.5 Elev Sta 4909.11 86.95 4917.13 Coeff Contr. .1 Elev 4909.08 Expan. • 3 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) Vel Head (ft) w.s. Elev (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) Q Total (cfs) Top Width (ft) Vel Tbtal (ft/s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) C_ohv. Total (cfs) Length Wtd. (ft) Min Ch El (ft) Alpha Frctn L_oss C & E Loss CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description: (ft) (ft) Station Elevation Data Sta Elev Sta 66,63 4917.22 ~6.81 83.95999 4909.i886.92999 106.15 4916.96 106.27 Manning's n Values Sta n Val Sta 66.63 ,04283,959~~ 4915.56 Element Left OB Channel 0.14 Wt. n~val. 0.042 0.030 4915.41 Reach Len. (ft) 168.50 168.50 Flow Area (sq ft) 40.81 49.49 0.000458 A_~ea (sq ft) 40.81 49. 49 287.30 Fiow (cfs) 61.81 179,84 30.54 Top Width (ft) 12.98 7.80 2.36 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 1. 51 3.63 6.40 Hydr. Depth (ft) 3.14 6.35 13420.9 Conv. (cfs) 2887.6 8401. 0 168.50 Wet te_d Per. (ft) 14.43 7.80 4_909. 01 Sh_ea_r (lb/sq ft) 0.08 0.18 1. 63 Stream Power (lb/ft s) 0.12 0.66 0.07 Clim Volume (acre-ft) 0. 71 1.26 0.01 Cum S.A (acres) 0.22 0.20 RS: 120 num= 12 Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev 4917.1768.59999 4909.0~89.4i999 4917.06 num=; n Val .03 3 Sta. 92.62 4916.5868.99999 4916.576.24999 4912.94 4908.89 92.62 4908~79 104.04 4915.77 n Val .042 Right OB 0.042 i68.50 31.26 31..26 45.65 9. 76 1. 46 3.20 2132.3 11. 67· 0.08 0.11 0.63 0.20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Existing Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal :!.UZ019 Page 8 of 1_1 Ba_nk Sta: Left -83.95999 Right 92.62 Lengths: Left Channel 296.6 296.6 Right 296. 6 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) 4915.48 E_lernen.t Vel Head (ft) 0.12 Wt. n~vai. w.s. Elev (ft) 4915.36 Reach Len. (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) Flow_Area (sq ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000384 ~re.a (sq ft) Q Total (cfsl 287.30 Flow (cfs) Top Width (ft) 32.04 Top Width (ft) Vei Totgl (ft/s) 2.21 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) 6.57 Hydr. Depth (f:t) Conv. Total (cfs) 14658.3 Conv. (cfs) Length Wtd. (ft) 296.60 Wetted Per. (ft) Min Ch El (ft) 4908.79 Shear (lb/sq ft) Alpha 1. 60 Stream Power (lb/ft 1) Coeff .Contr. .1 Left OB 0. 04_2 296.60 39.08 39.08 53.57 12.63 1.37 :3. 09 273:3.3 14.06 0.07 0.09 Frctn Loss (ft) 0.10 Cum Volume (acre~ft) 0.55 C & E Loss CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description.: (ft) Station Elevation Data Sta Elev Sta 67.59999 4916.39 68.3 92.53999 4.908.88 93.31 Manning's n Values Sta n Val 67.59.999 .042 Bank Sta: Left 81.88 Sta 81. 8.8 Right 93.31 0.01 Cum SA (acres) :El.S: 110 m.im= 10 Elev Sta Elev 4916.3179.21999 4910 .. 33 4 908 .. 85 96.87 4911 .. 22 n_um= 3 n Val Sta n Val .03 93 .. 31 .042 Lengths: Left Channel 349.4 349.4 Sta 81. 88 98.14 Right 349.4 0.17 Elev Sta 4909.03 88.23 4911'.86 104.79 Coeff Contr. .1 CROSS SEC'!'ION ouTru·T Profile #Proposed Cond E_.G. Elev (ft) Vel Head ( ft) W.S. Elev (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) Q Total (cfs) Top Width (ft) Vel Totat (ft/s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) Conv. Total (cfs) Length Wtd. (ft) Min Ch El ( ft) Alpha Frctn Loss (ft) c & E Loss (ft) CROSS SECTION 4915.38 0.10 4915.28 0,00028i 287.30 33.48 2.02 6.43 i7139 .. 4 349.40 4908.85 1.52 0.09 0.00 Element Left OB Wt. n,-Val. 0.042 Reach Len. (ft) 349.40 Flow Area (sq ft) 37.26 Area (sq ft) 37.26 Flow (cfs) 43.99 Top Width (ft) 11. 70 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 1.18 Hydr. Depth (ft) 3.19 Conv. (cfs) 2624.2 Wetted Per. (ft) 13.26 Shear (lb/sq ft) 0.05 Strea,m Power (lb/ft s) 0.06 Cum Volume (acre-ft) 0;29 Cum SA (acres) 0.09 Expan, .• 3 Channel 0.030 296. 60 55.38 55.38 185._10 8.66 3.34 6.40 9444.1 8.67 . 0 .. :15 0.51 1.06 0.17 Elev 4908.94 4915.98 Expan. . 3 Channel 0.030 349.40 72 .36 72 .36 205.58 11. 43 2.84 6.33 12264.2 11. 43 0 .11 0.32 0.62 0.10 Right OB 0.042 296.60 35.28 35.28 4_8. 62 10.74 1.38 3.28 2480.9 · 12.59 0.07 0.09 0.50 0.16 Right OB 0.042 349.40 32.85 32.85 37.73 10.35 1.15 3.17 2-250.9 12.19 0.05 0.05 0·.27 0.09 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Existing Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath R~servoir Inlet Canal 12/2019 Page 9 of 11 RIVER: TRIC RE.ACH: RCHl INPUT Description: Station Elevatioh Data Sta Elev Sta 62 .. 09999 4915.65 63.3 74.95 ~909.1182.93999 Manning's n Va_lues Sta n Val· Sta 62.09999 .04273.60999 Rs: loo num= E.lev 4914.97 4909.09 .. num= n Val .03 10 Sta. Elev Sta Elev Sta . Elev 66.95 4912.4570.84~99 4910.3873.60999 4909.1? 87.13 4909.07 97.87 4914.8~98.24999 4915.1 3 Sta 87.13 n Val .042 Bank Sta: Left 73 ... 60999 Right 87.13 Coeff·<:::ontr. .1 Expan. . • j,' CROSS SECTiON OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) 4915.28 Vel He.ad (ft) 0.08 w.s. E_lev (ft) 4915.2.0 Crit W.S. (ft) 4911.34 E .. G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000239 Q Total (cfs) 287.30 Top Width (ft) 35.36 Vel Tota:l (ft/s) 1. 88 M.ax .Chl Dpth (ft) 6.13 Conv .. · Total (cfs) 18578.2 Length Wtd. (ft) Min Ch El (ft) 4909.07 Alpha 1. 45 Frctn Loss (ft) C & E Loss (ft) SUMMARY OF MANNING'S N VALUES River:TRIC Reach River Sta. RCHl 200 RCHl 190 RCHl 180 RCHl 170 RCHl 160 RCHl 150 RCHi 140 RCHl 130 RCHl 120 RCHl HO RCHl 100 SUMMARY OF REACH LENGTHS River: TRIC Reach River Sta. Element Wt. ri-Val. Reach Len. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) .Area (sq ft) Flow (cfs) Top Width (ft) Avg. Vel. (ft/s) Hydr. Depth (ft) Conv. (cfs) Wette.d Per. (ft) Shear (lb/sq ft) Stream Power (lb/ft s) Cum Volume (acre-ft) Cum SA (acres) nl n2 n3 .042 ;03 .042 .042 .03 .042 .042 .. 03 .042 .042 .03 .042 .042 .03 . 04'2 .042 .03 .042 .042 ,03 .04.2 .042 .03 .042 .042 .03 .042 .042 ,03 .042 .042 .03 .042 Left Cha.nnel Right Left OB Ch.annel 0 .. 042 0.030 35.29 82.54 35,29 82.54 38.88 211.18 10. 72 13.52 1.10 2.56 3.29 6.11 2513.9 13656.2 12.35 13.52 0.04 0.09 0.05 0.23 Right OB 0.042 34.83 }4. 83 37.24 11.12 1. 07 3.13 2408.1 12.75 0.04 0.04 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Existing Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic.Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 14/2019 Page 10 of 11 RCHl 200 RCHl 190 RC.Hl 180 RCHl 170 -RCHl 160 RCHl 150 RCHl 140 RCHl 130 RCHl 120 RCHl 110 RCHl 100 300.61 300.61 399.32 399.32 462.76 462.76 226.15 226.15 195.72 195. 72 156.86 156.86 250. 3_5 250.35 168.5 168.5 296.6 296.6 349.4 349.4 SUMMARY OF CONTRACTION AND EXPANSION COEFFtCIENTS River: TRIC Reach River Sta. Cont_r. · Expan. RCHl 200 .1 .3 RCHl i90 .1 .3 '.RCHl 180 .1 ._3 RCHl 170 .1 .3 RCHl 160 .1 .3 RCHl 150 .1 .3 RCHl 140 .1 ,3 RCHl 130 .1 '. 3 RC!_il 120 .1 .3 RCHl 110 _._ 1 .3 'RCHl 100 .1 .3 Profile Output Table -Standard Ta_ble 1 Reach River Sta Profile Q Total Elev E.G. Slop·e Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width (cfs) (ft) (ft/ft) (ft/s) (sq ft) (:ft) RCHl 100 Proposed Cond 287 .. 30 49i5.28 0.000239 2 .. 56 152.66 35.36 RCHl 110 Proposed Cond 287.30 4915.38 0.000281 2.84 142.47 33.48 RCHl 120 Proposed Cond 287.30 4915.48 0.000384 3.34 129.75 32.04 RCHl 130 Proposed Cond 287.30 4915.56 0.000458 3.63 121.56 30.54 RCHl 140 Proposed Cond 241. 00 4915_.64 0. 000177 2 .11 154.04 38.32 RCHl 150 Proposed Corid 241.00 '4915. 65 0.000045 1. 35 230.96 39.66 RCHl 160 Proposed C_ond 241. 00 · 4915.67 0.000109 2.06 i75.67 36.57 RCHl 170 Proposed Cond 241.00 4915.69 0.000087 1. 85 180.19 39,86 RCH1 18Q Proposed Cond 191.00 4915.73 0.000071 1. 57 156.86 30.59 RCHl ~90 Proposed Cond 191.00 4915.76 0.000066 1,. 33 159.69 30.77 RCHl 200 Proposed Cond 191. 00 4915.81 0.000380 2.33 93. 05. 29.51 Joo. 61 399.32 462.76 226.15 195.72 156.86 250.35 168.5 296, 6 349.4 Min Ch El w.s. Elev Crit w.s. E.G. Froude # Chl (ft) (ft) (ft) 4909.07 4915.20 4911. 34 0.18 4908.85 4915.28 0.20 4908.79 4915.36 0,23 4909.01 4915.41 0.25 4908.74 4915._58 0.15 4907. 32. 4915 .. 63 0;08 4907.43 4915.62 0.13 4907.58 4915.65 0 .. 1:2 4908.08 4915.70 0.10 4908.62 4915.73 0.09 4911.96 4915.74 0.21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Existing Conditions Model Output lOO~Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 1,2/2019 Page 11 ofll Profile Output Table -Standard Table 2 i:leach River Sta Profile E.G. Elev &'E Loss Q Left Q Channel Q Right Top Width (ft) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) RCHl 100 Proposed Conq 4915 .. .28 38.88 211.18 37.24 35.36 RCHl 110 Proposed COnd 4915.38 0.00 .43. 99 205.58 37.73 33.48 RCHl 120 Proposed Cond 4 91.5. 48 0.01 53.57 185.10 48.62 32.04 RCHl 130 Proposed COnd 4915.56 0.01 61.81 179.84 45.65 30.54 RCHl 140 Proposed Cond 4915.64 \ ,., . . 0.01 43.24 177.67 20.10 38.32 RCH1 150 Proposed Cond 4915.65 0.00 21. 02 200.69 19.29 39.66 RCHl 160 Proposed Cond 4915:-67 0.01 31.15 170.50 39.35 36.57 RCHl 170 Proposed Cond 4915.69 0.00 10.20 200.14 30 •. 66 39. 86 RCHl 180 Proposed Cond 4915.73 0.00 16.39 163.33 11.29 30.59 RCHl 190 Proposed Cond 4915.76 ci. 00 4 .. 59 i83.18 3.23 30.77 RCHl 200 Proposed ·conq 4915.81 0.02 7.90 174.70 8.41 29.51 W.S. Elev Vel Head Frctn Loss C (ft) (ft) (ft) 4915 .• 20 0.08 4915.28 0.10 0.09 4915.36 0.12 0.10 4915.41 0.14 0.07 4915.58 0.05 0.07 491.5.63 0.02 0.01 4915.62 0.05 0.01 4915.65 0.05 0.02 4915.70 0.03 0.04 4915. 73 0.03 0.03 491,5. 74 0.08 0.04 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Tim hath Reservoir Inlet Canal ... I. .. . . .. .. . . .. 11/2019 Page 1 of 10 HEC-RAS HEC~RAS 5.0.4 April 2018 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center 609 Second Street Davis, California X X . xx:x:xxx xxxx xxxx xx X X X X X X ,X X ·x X X X X X X X X xxxxxxx xxxx X XXX xxxx xxxxxx X X X x X X X X X X X xxxxxx xxxx P~OJECTDATA Project Title: 100-019_TRIC_WSE~ Project File 100-019 TRIC WSEL.prj Run Date and Time: 11/25/2019 3:31:14 PM Project in English units PLAN DATA Plan Title: Proposed-Cond x X x. x X X X X X X X X xxx:x X X xxxx X X xxxxx Plan File d:. \Proj e.cts\100-019\Drainage \Modeling\HEC-RAS\2019-11-22\100-019 _ TRIC WSEL. p06 Geometry Title: ProposedCond Geometry File: d:\Projects\100-019\Drainage\Modeling\HEC-,RAS\2019-11-22\100- .019 TRIC_W.SEL.g07 Flow Title Flow File 019 TRIC W.SEL. f03 TRIC Flow-ProposedCond d:\Projects\100-019\Drainage\Modeling\HEC-RAS\2019-11-22\100- Plan Summary Information: Number of: <::ross Sections Culverts Bridges 11 0 0 Mu.l tiple Openin_gs Inline Structures Lateral Structures Computational In-formation Water surface calculation tolerance Critical depth calculation toleranc.e ·Maximum number of iterations. Maximum difference tolerance Flo~ tblerance factor Computation Options 0.01 0.01 20 0.3 0.001 Critical depth computed only where necessary Conveyance.Calculation Method: At breaks inn values only Friction Slope Method:. Average Conveyance Computational Flow Regime: Subcritical Flow FLOW DATA 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysisfor Tiriir1ath Rese.rvoir Inlet Canal 11/2019 Page 2 of10 Flow Title: TRIC Flow-ProposedCond . Flow File d:\Projects\100-019\Drainage\Modeling\HEC-RAS\2019-ll-22\100-019_TRIC_WSEL.f03 Flow Data (cfs) River TRIC TRIC TRIC Reach RCHl RCHl RCHl Boundary .. Cond_i tions River Downstream TRIC 4915.3 GEOMETRY DATA Reach RCHl Geometry T-i tle: ProposedCond RS 200 170 130 Profile Proposed Cond 191 241 287.3 Proposed Cond Upstream ~nown WS Geometry File d: \Projects\100-019\Drainage \Modeling\HEC-RAS\2019-11-22\100-0l 9 _:TRIC_ WSEL. g.07 CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRJC REACH: . RCHl INPUT Descriptioi): Station Elevation Data Sta Elev Sta 246.14 4916 246.48 250.16 4.913 250.79 261.41 4911. 96 264.6 272. 74 4913 272. 84 275.95 4915.69 276.36 280.11 4918 Mari_ning' s n Values Sta n Val Sta .246.14 .042 251. 34 Bank Sta: Left Right 251.34 271.31 RS: 200 nums= 26 Elev Sta Elev Sta: 4915. 75/ 247.49 4915 248.74 4912.44 251 .. 34 4912 258. 13. 4911. 98 268.12 4911. 99 271.31 4913.09 273. 9.2 4914 274.67 4916 276.7 4916.28 277.83 num= 3 n Val Sta n Val .03 271. 31 .042 Lengths: Left Channet Right 300.61 300.61 300.61 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile JtProposed C:ond E.G. Elev (ft) 4915.89 Element Vel Head (ft) 0.08 Wt. n-Val. w.s. Elev (ft) 4915.81 Reach ·Len_. (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000355 Area (sq ft) Q Total (cfs) 191. 00 Flow (cfs) Top Width (n> 29.71 Top Width (ft) \Tel Tot:al (ft/s) 2.01 Avg. Vel. ( ft/-s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) 3.85 Hydr. Depth (ft) Conv. Total (cfs) 10138.0 Conv. (cfs) Length Wtd. (ft) 300 .. 61 Wetted Pei:. (ft) Elev Sta Elev 4914 248.75 4914 4911.98 261.34 4911.96 4912 272. 66. 4912. 93 4914.58 275.27 4915 4917 279.71 4917.86 Coeff Cont_r .. Expan. .1 . 3 Left OB Channel Right OB 0.042 0.030 0.042 300_. 6i 300.61 300.61 9 .. 27 76.4.1 9.54 9.27 76.41 9.54 8.05 174.42 8.53 4.94 19.97 4.80 0.87 2.28 0.89 1.88 3.83 ·1. 99 427.0 9258.0 452.9 6.25 19.97 6 .. 14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I Proposed Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 11/2019 Page 3 of 10 Min Ch El (ft) Alpha 4911. 96 Frctn Loss (ft) C & E Loss (ft) 1.20 0.04 0.01 Shear (lb/sq ft) Stre.am. Power (lb/ft Cum Volume (acre-ft) Cum SA (acres) 0.03 0.08 0.03 s) 0.03 0.19 0.03 2.06 6.12 2.03 0.66 0.89 0.67 Warning: The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance div-ided by downstream conveyance) is less than 0.7 ·or greater than . 1.4. This may indicate the need for additional cross sections. CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl IN.PUT Description: Station Elevation Data Sta Elev Sta n.L19 4916 232. 95 235.13 4913,67 236.04 257.84 4912.34 258.77 261.3.8 4915 261.94 Manning's n Values Sta n Val Sta 231.19 .042 237.94 Bank Sta: Left Right 237.94 257 . .3 RS: 190 num= 18 Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta 4915.02 233 ·4915 233.19 4914.89 234.69 4913 237.94 4912.04 238.02 4908.63 257.3 4913 259.55 4913.64 259. 96 4914 260.41 4915.36 262.79 4916 num= 3 n Val Sta n Val .03 257.3 .042 Lengths: Left Channel Right Goeff Contr. 399.32 399.32 399.32 .1 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) Vel Head (ft) w.s. Elev (ft) .Crit w.s; (ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) Q Total (cfs) Top Width (ft) Vel Total (ft/s) Max Chl Dpt]:1 (ft) Conv. Total ·(Cfs) Length Wtd. (ft) Min Ch El (ft) Alpha Frctn Loss (ft) C & E Lo.ss (ft) . CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description:· Station Elevation Sta Elev 234.09 4915 238.78 491.~. 06 258.45 4911.85 Data Sta 234 .11 238.94 258,81 4915.83 Element Left OB 0.03" Wt. n-Val. 0.042 4915,81 Reach Len. (ft) 399.32 Flow Area (sq ft) 12.16 0.000063 Area (sq ft) 12.16 191. 00 Fiow (cfs) 4.74 30.99 Top Wicith (ft) 6.40 1.18 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 0.39 7.19 Hydr. Depth (ft) 1. 90 24035.9 Conv. (cfs) 596.8 399.32 Wetted Per. (ft) 7.44 4908_. 62 Shear (lb/sq ft) 0.01 1.20 stream Power (lb/ft S.) 0.00 0.03 Cum Volume (acre-ft) 1. 99 0.00 Curh SA (acres) 0.62 RS: 180 num= 23 Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta 4914.99 235.78 4914 237·. 31 4913.19 237.64 4912 :139.09 4911. 93 242.49 4908.63 256.65 4912 259.1 4912.15 260.99 4913 261.79 Elev 4914 4908.62 4914.29 Expa,n. .3 Channel Right OB 0.030 0.042 399.32 399.32 138 .. 89 10.90 138.89 10.90 182.92 3.34 19 .36 5.23 1.32 0,31 7.17 2.08 23019,2 41.9. 9 22.69 9.60 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.00 5.37 1.96 0.75 0.63 Elev 4913 4_908. 08 4913. 55 '. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath R.eservbir Inlet Cana.I 11/2019 Page 4 of 10 262.3 4914 263.33 4914.68 265.8 4916.36 266.32 4917 Manning·' s n Values num= Sta n Val Sta n Val 234 :09 .0.42 242.49 .03 Bank Sta: Left Right Lengt.hs: 263.78 4915 264.01 268.37 4917 .27 3 Sta n Val 256. 6,5 .042 Left Channel Right 242.49 256.65 462.76 462.76 462.76 CROSS -SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed C.ond E.G. Elev (ft) 4915.81 Element Vel Head. (ft) 0.03 Wt. n-Val. w.s. Elev (ft) 4915.77 Reach L.en. (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) Flow Ar~a (sq ft) E.G., Slope (ft/ft) 0.000068 Area (sq ft) Q Total (cfs) 191. 00 Flow (cfs) Top Width. (ft) 30,71 Top Width (ft) Vel Total (ft/s) 1.20 Avg. Vel. (ft/si Max Chl Dpth (ft) 7.69 Hydr. Depth (ft) Conv. Total (cfs) 23178.7 Conv. (cfs) Length Wtd. (ft) 464.76 Wetted Per. (ft) Min Ch El (ft) 4908.08 Shear (lb/sq ft) Alpha 1. 45 Stream Power (lb/ft 4915.29 265.17 Coeff Contr. .1 Left OB 0.042 462.76 29.90 29.90 16.58 8.40 0,55 3.56 2012 .. 3 11.40 0.01 s) 0.01 Frctn Lo.ss (ft) 0.04 Ci.Im Volume (act~-ft) 1. 79 C. & E Loss (ft) 0.00 Culll SA., (acres) 0.55 4916 Expan .. .3 Channel Right OB 0.030 0.042 462.76 462.76 105.03 24·. 20 105.03 24.20 162.96 11.45 14.16 8.15 i . .55 0.47 7.42 2.97 19776.4 1390 .. 0 14.17 11. 70 ·0.03 0.01 0.05 0.00 4.26 1.80 0.60 0.57 ·warning: The cross:-section end points had to be extended vertically for the computed water surface. CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description.:· Station Elevation Data Sta Elev Sta 56 •. 54 4914.79 63.04 84.74 4~12.02 9fi.25 Manning's n Values Sta n Val 56.54 .042 Sta 66.35 B.ank Sta: Left Right 66.35 79.9 RS: 170 m.im= Elev 4912.9 4915 .. 64 num= n Val .03 9 Sta Elev 66 .. 23 4911.66 100.53 4915.88 3 Sta 79. 9 ri. Val .042 Sta Elev Sta Elev 66 .. 35 4907.58 79.9 4907.75 104.19 4916 Lengths: Left Channel Right 226.15 J26.15 226.15. Coeff Contr. .1 Expan. . 3 CROSS SECTION O.UTPUT Profile #Proposed Corid E.G. Elev (ft) 4915.77 E.lement Left OB C)1annel Vel Head (ft) 0.04 Wt. n-Val. 0.042 0.030 w.s. Elev (ft) 4915.72 Reach Len. (ft) 226.15 226.15 Cri,t W.S. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) 23.93 109.20 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.00.0085 Area (sq·ft) 23.93 109.20 Q Total (cfs) 24LOO Flow (cfs) 10.56 200,32· Top Width (ft) 41.21 Top Width (ft) 9.81 13.55 Vel Total (ft/s) 1.32 Avg. VeL (ft/s) 0.44 1. 83 Max Chl Dpth (ft) 8.14 Hydr. Depth (ft) 2.44 8.06 Conv. Total (cfs) 26155.6 Conv. (cfs) 1145. 7 21740.4 Right OB (l.042 226.15 .50 .'12 50 .. 12 30.13 17.85 0.60 2.81 3269.6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic.Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 11/2019 Page 5 of 10 Length Wtd. (ft) 226.15 Min Ch El (ft) 4907.58 Alpha i.65 f'.rctn Loss (ft) 0.02 C & E Loss (ft) 0.00 Wetted Per. (ft) 15.21 13.55 20.02 Shear (lb/sq ft) . 0. 01 0.04 0.01 stream Power (lb/ft s) 0.00 0.08 0.01 Cum Volume (acre-ft) 1.51 3.12 1. 41 Cum SA (acres.) 0.45 0.45 0.44 Warning: .The cross-section end points had to be extended vertica.lly fo:e the computed water .surface. CROSS SECtION RIVER: TRIC REACH: R.CHl INPUT. Description: Station Elevation Sta Elev 59 .. 1 4914.59 89.45 4913.09 Dati:i Sta · .64.49 96.03 Manning's n Values Sta n Val Sta 59.1 .042 71.15 Bank Sta: Left Right 71.15 81. 5 RS: 160 nurn= 8 Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta 4912.53 68. 91 4910.84 71.15 4907.85 81.5 4915.77 100.82 4915.98 num= 3 n Val Sta ri Val .03 81.5 .042 Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr. 195.72 195.72 195.72 .1 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) Ve! Head (ft) W.S. Elev (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) E;:.G. Sl'ope (ft/ft) Q Total (cfs) Top Width (ft) Ve! Total (fth) Ma,i:i: Chl Dpth ( ft) Conv. Total (cfs) Lerigth Wtd. (ft) M_iil C.h El (ft) Alpha Frctn Loss (ft) c & E Loss. (ft) 4915.75. 0.05 4915.70 0.000105 241.00 36.76 1 .. 35 8.27 23557.6 195 .72 '4907.43 1.69 0.01 0.01 El.ement : Wt. n~val. Reach Len. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) Area (sq ft) Flow (cfs) Top Width (ft) Avg. Ve!. (ft/s) Hydr. Depth (ft) Conv. (cfs) Wetted Per. ( ft) Shear (lb/sq ft) Str~am Power (lb/ft s) Cum Volume (acre-ft) Cum SA (acres) Left OB 0.042 195.72 43.51 43.51 31.54 12.05 0. 72 3.61 3083.3 15.35 0.02 0 .. 01 1. 33 0.40 Elev .4907 .43 Expan. .3 Chaririel O. 030 195.72 83.41 83.41 169.80 10.35 2.04 8.06 i6597.9 10.36 0.05 a.ii 2. 62 0.39 Right OB 0.042 195.72 51.60 51.60 39.66 14.36 0.77 3.59 3876.4 16 .. 68 0.02 0.02 1.1.4 0.35 Warn:i,.ng: The cross-section end points had to be extended vertically for the computed water surface. Warning: The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream conveyance) is ·1ess tha.n O. 7 or greater than · L 4. This m<1y indicate the need for acldi tional cross sections. CROSS SECTION RIVER.: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT De.scription: Station Elevation Data RS: 150 num= 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Calial 11/2019 Page Gofio Sta Elev Sta Elev S'ta Elev Sta Elev Sta 79.07001 4914.99 79.16 4914.98 90.12 4909.62 91.13 4907. 71 109.52 119.32 4916.16 119.76 4916.38_ Manning's n Values nurn= 3 Sta n Val Sta n Val Sta n Val 79.07001 .042 91.13 .03 109.52 .042 Bank Sta: Left Right Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr. 91.13 109.52 156.86 156.86 156.86 .1 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Conp. E.G. Elev (ft) 4915.73 Eleinent Left OB Vel Head (ft) 0.02 Wt. n-Val. 0.042 w.s. Elev (ft) 4915.70 Reach Len. (ft) 156.86 Crit W.S. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) 44.48 E.G,. Slope (ft/ft) .0. 000044 Area (.sq ft) 44.48 Q Total . (cfs) 241. 00 Flow (cfs) · 21. 31 Top ,Width (ft) 39. 74_ Top Widtl). (ft) 12.06 Vel Total (ft/s) 1. 03 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 0.48 Max Chl Dpth (ft) 8.38 Hydi:. Depth (ft) 3.69 Conv.-Total (cfs) 3646_0.7 Conv. (cfs) 3224.1 Length Wtd. (ft) 156.86 Wetted Per. (ft) 15.17 Min Ch El (ft) 4907.32 Shear (lb/sq ft) 0.01 Alpha 1. 42 Stream Power (lb/ft· s) 0.00 Frct_n Loss ( f:t) 0.01 Cu_m Volume (acre-ft) 1.14 C & E Loss (ft) 0.00 Cum SA (ac_re_s) 0.34 Elev 4907.32 Expan. . 3 Channel Right OB 0.030 0.042 156.86 156.86 150.59 38.96 150.59 38.96 200.27 19.42 i8.39 9_._29 1.33 0.50 8.19 4.19 30298.3 2938.3 18.39 12.5;? 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 2.09 0.94 0.32 0.30 Warning: The cross-se·ction e_nd poi_nts had to be extended vertically for the co!l)puted water surface. Warning: The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream conveyance) is less t_h_an O. 7 or greater than 1. 4. This may indicate the need for addi-tional cross section_s. CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT . Description: Station Elev_ation Data Sta Elev Sta 68.84999 4915.1271.35999 83,37 4909.-1290.31999 107.24 4915.61 Ma_nni_ng '.s n Values Sta n Val Sta 68.84999 .042 81.23 Bank Sta: Left Right 81.2395.81999 (, RS: 140 num= 11 Elev Sta 4914.03 81.23 4_910.192.50999 num= 3 n Val Sta .0395.81999 Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev 4908.7881.73999 4908.74 82.16 4908.84 4910i3695~81999 4910.6897,40999 4911.6~ n Val .042 Lengtl).s: Left Cha_nnel Right 250.35 250.35 250.35 Coe ff Cont_r. .1 Expan. • 3 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G .. Elev (ft), 4915.71 Elem_ent Left OB Channel Vel Head (ft) ' 0.05 Wt. n-Val. 0.042 0.030 w.s. Elev (ft) 4915.66 Reach Len. (ft) 250.35 250.35 Crit w.s. (ft) Fl.ow Area: (sq ft) 44. 72 85.43 E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000168 Area (sq ft) 44. 72 85.43 Right OB 0.04~ I 250.35 26.93 26.93 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed C:oriclitions Model Output lOOsYear Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal· 11/2019 Page 7 oflO Q Total (cfs) 241.00 Top Width (ft) 38.39 Vel Total (ft/s) 1. 53 Max Chl Dpth (ft) 6.92 Conv. Total (cfsi 18603.9 Len·gth Wtd. (ft) 250.35 Min Ch El (ft) 4908.74 Alpha 1. 43 · Frct.n .Loss (ft) 0.07 C & E Loss (ft) 0.01 Flow (cfs) · 43.51 176.92 20.57 Top Width (ft) 12.38 14.59 11.42 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) 0.97 2.07 0.76 Hydr. Depth (ft) 3.61 5.86 2.36 Com,. (cfs) 3358.9 13657.3 1587.7 Wetted Per. (ft) 14. 4.6. 14.73 12.51 Shear (lb/sq ft) 0,03 0 .. 06 0.02 Stream Power (lb/ft s) 0.03 0.13 0.02 Ciim Volume (acre-ft) 0.98 1.67 0.82 Cuni SA (acres) 0.30 0 .26 0 .26 Warning.: The cross-section end points had to be extended vertically foi: the computed water surface. CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description: Station El.evation Data RS: .130 num=-9 Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev 4909.12 4915.61 Sta El.ev Sta Elev 69.3 4916.2 72.59 90.27 4~09.0491.71999 4914.6283.91999 4909. 01 101. 78 84.66 4909.11 104.05 4917.13 86.95 4909,08 ])1anning's n Values Sta n Val Sta 69.3 .04283.91999 Bank Sta: Left Right 83. 9199991. 71999 num;= 3 n Val Sta . 03.91. 71999 n Val .042 Lengths: Left .Channel Right 168.5 168.5 'I68.5 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT ·Profile #Proposed C.ond E.G. E'iev (ft) 4915.64 Vel Head (ft) 0.14 W.S. Elev (ft) 4915.50 Crit W.S. (ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) 0.000433 Q Total (cfs) 287,30 Top Width (ft) 30.86 Vel Total (ft/sl 2.31 Max Chl Dpth (ft) 6.49 Conv. Total (cfs) 13801.3 Length Wtd. (ft) 168,. 50 Min Ch El (ft) 4909 .. 01 Alpha 1. 63 Frctn Loss (ft) 0.07 C &·.E Loss (ft) 0.01 CROSS SE<::TION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl RS: 120 INPUT Description: Station.Elevation Data num= Sta Elev Sta Elev Element wt. n-VaL Reach Len. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) Area (sq ft)· Flow (cfs) Top Width (ft) Avg. Vel. (ft/sl Hydr. Depth (ft) Conv. (cfs) Wetted Per. . (ft) S.hea.r (lb/sq ft) Stream Power (lb/ft Cum Volume (acre-ft) Cum SA (acre.s) 12 Sta Elev Sta s) Coeff Contr. .1 Left OB 0.042 168,50 .41. 95 41. 95 62.36 13.17 1.49 3 .19 ,2995.7 14.63 0.08 0.12 0.73 0.23 Elev Sta Expan .. • 3 Channel 0.030 168.50 50.17 50.17 178 .. 92 7.80 3.57 6.43 8594.8 7.80 0 .. 17 0.62 1.28 0.20 Elev Right OB 0.042 168.50 32.12 32 .1.2 46.02 9.89 1. 43 3 .25 · 2210. 8 11. 83 0.07 0,11 0.65 0.20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Timnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 11/2019 Page 8 of 10 66.63 4917.22 66.81 4917.1768.59999 4916. 5868. 9_9999 83.95999 4909.1886.92999 4909.0289.41999 4908.89 92.62 106.15 4916.96 106.27 4917.06 Manning's n Values num= 3 Sta n Val Sta n Vai Sta n Val 66.63 .04283.95999 .03 92.62 .042 Bank Sta: Left Right ·· Lengths: Left Channel Right 83. 95'999 92.62 296.6 296.6 296.6 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) Vel Head (ft) W.S. Elev (ft)· C_rit W.S. (ft) E.G. Slope (ft/ft) Q Total (cfs) Top Width (ft) 4915.57 0,12 4915.45 0.000363 287.30 32.37 2.17 6.66 15081.5 296.60 Element Wt. n-Val. Reach Len. (ft) Flow· Area (sq ft) Area (sq ft). Flow (cfs) Top Widtl'}. (ft) Avg. Vel. (ft/s) Hydr. Depth (ft) Conv. (cfs) Wetted Per. (ft) 4916.576.24999 4908.79 104.04 Coeff Contr. .1 Left OB 0.042 296.60 40.23 40.23 54.12 12:92 1.35 3.14 2841.1 Vel Total (ft/s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) Conv. Total (cfs) Length Wtd, (ft) Min Ch El (ft) Alpha Frctn Loss (ft) C & E Loss (ft) 4908.79 1.61 0.09 0.01 Shear (lb/sq ft) Stream Power (lb/ft s) Cum Volume (acre"-ft) Cum SA (ac-res) 14.27 0.06 0.09 0.57 0.18 CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Description: Station Elevation Data Sta Elev Sta 67.59999 49i6.39 68.3 92.53999 4908.88 93.31 Manning's n Values Sta n Val Sta 67.59999 .042 81. 88 Bank Sta: -Left Right 81.88 93.31 . RS: 110 num= 10 Elev Sta Elev Sta. 4916.3179.21999 4910.33 81. 88 4908.85 96.87 4911.22 98.14 num= 3 n Val Sta n Val .03 93.31 .042 Lengths: Left Channel R_ight 349. 4 349.4 349.4 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. EJev (ft) 4915.47 Element Vel Head (ft) 0.09 wt. n~val. w.s. Elev (ft) 4915.37 Reach L~n. (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) E.G. Siope (ft/ft) 0.000265 Area (sq ft) Q Total (cfs) 287.30 Flow (cfs) Top Width (ft) 33.80 Top Width (ft) Vel Total (ft/s) 1. 97 Avg. Vel. (ft/s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) 6.52 Hydr. Depth (ft) Conv. Total (cfs) 17643.0 Conv. (cfs) Length Wtd. (ft) 349.40 Wetted Per, (ft) Min Ch El (ft). 4908.85 Shear Clb/sq ft) Elev Sta 4909.03 88.23 49il.86 104.79 Coeff Contr. .1 Left OB 0.042 349.40 38.38 38.38 44.45 11. 87 1.16 3.23 2729.6 13 .46 0.05 4912. 94 4915.77 Expa_n. . 3 Channel 0.030 296. 60 56.16 56.16 184.16 8.66 3.28 6.49 9667. 5 8.67 0.15 0.48 1. 07 0.17 Elev 4908.94 4915.98 Expan. .3 Channel 0.030 349.40 73.44 73.44 204.72 11.43 2.79 6. 43 12571.6 11.43 0.11 ) Right OB 0.042 296.60 36.26 36.26 49.01 10.89 1.. 35 3.33 2572. 9 12,77 0.06 0.09 0.52 0.16 Right OB 0.042 349.40 33.84 33.84 38.13 10.50 1.13 3.22 2341. 8 12.37 0.05 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for Tlmriath Reservoir lillet Canal. 11/2019 Page 9 oflO Alpha Frctn Loss (ft) C & E Loss (ft) CROSS SECTION RIVER: TRIC REACH: RCHl INPUT Desci-iption: Station Elevation Dat'a: Sta Elev Sta 62-09999 4915.65 63.3 74.95 4909.1182-93999 Mai:ini.ng's n Value.s Sta n Val Sta 62.09999 .04273.60999 1.52 0.09 0.00 RS: 100 mim= Elev 4914.97 4909.09 num= n Val .03 10 Streall) Po1'1er (l_b/ft s) Cum Volume (acre-ft) Cuin SA (acres) 0.05 0.30 0.09 0.30 0,63 0.10 Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev 66.95 4912,4570.84999 4910.3873~60999 4909.12 87.13 4909.07 97.87 4914.8698.j49~9 4915.1 3 Sta n Val 87.13 .042 Bank St.a: Left R:i,ght Coeff Contr. Expan. 73.60999 87.13 .1· . 3 CROSS SECTION OUTPUT Profile #Proposed Cond E.G. Elev (ft) Vel Head (ft) W.S, Elev (ft) Crit W.S. (ft) .E.G. Slope (ft/ft) Q Total (cfs) Top Width (ft) Vel Total (ft/s) Max Chl Dpth (ft) Conv. Total (cfs) Length Wtd. (ft) Min Ch El (ft) Alpha Frctn Loss (ft) C & E Loss (ft)n J 4915.38 0.08 4915.30 4911. 34 0.000225 287.30 35.53 1. 84 6 .. 23 19168.0 4909.07 1. 45 SUMMARY OF MANNING'S N VALUES Rivei::TRIC Reach River Sta. RCHl 200 RC:Hl 190 RCHl 180 RCHl 170 RCHl 160 RCHl 150 RCHl 140 RCHl 130 RCHl. 120 RCHl 110 RCHl 100 Element Wt. n-'Val. Reach Len. (ft) Flow Area (sq ft) Area (sq ft) Flow (cfs) Top Width (ft) Avg. Vel. (ft/s) Hydr. Depth (ft) Coriv. (cfs) Wetted Pe.r ,. (.ft) Shear (lbisq .ft) Stream Power (lb/ft s) Cum Volume (acre-ft) Cu.m. SA (acres) nl n2 n3 .042 .03 .042 .03 .042 .o~ . 0.42 .03 .. 042 .03 .. 0.42 .03 .042 .03 .042 .03 . 0.42 .03 .042 .03 .042 .03 Left OB Cha.nnel 0.042 0.030 36 ,.37 83 .. 89 36.37 83.89 39.19 210.28 10.89 13.52 1. 08 2.51 3. 3.4 6.20 2614.5 14029.6 12.55 13.52 0.04 0,09 0.04 0.22 .. 042 .042 .042 .042 .042 .042 .042 .042 .042 .042 .042 0.05 0.28 0.09 Right OB 0.042 35.94 35.9.4 37.83 11.12 1.05 3.23 2523. 9. 12.85 0.04 0. 0.4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Conditions Model Output 100-Year Hydraulic Analysis for nmnath Reservoir Inlet Canal 11/2019 Page 10 of 10 SUMMARY OF REACH LENGTHS River: T°RIC Reach River Sta. RCHl ~00 RCHl 190 RCHl 180 RCHl 170 RCHl i60 RCHl ' 150 RCHl 140 RCHl 130 RCHl i20 RCHl llO RCHl 100 Left Channel 300.61 300.61 399.32 399.32 462.76 462.76 226.15 226.15 195.72 195.72. 15~.86 156.86 25.0. 35 250.35 168.5 168.5 29_6. 6 296.6 349.4 349. 4 SU~Y OF CONTRACTION AN:D EXPANSION COJ;:FFICIENTS River:· TRIC Reach River St_a. Contr. Expan . RCHl 200 .1 . 3 RCHl 190 .1 .3 RC:Hl 180 .1 .3 RCHl 170 .1 . 3 RCHl 160 : 1 . 3 RC_Hl 150 .1 .3 RCHl 140 .:I. .3 RCHl 130 .1 . 3 RCHl 120 .. 1 .. 3 RCHl llO .1 .3 RCHl 100 .). .3 Right 300.61 399.32 462. 76 226.15 195. 72 156.86 250.35 168.5 296 .. 6 349.4 I I I I I 1· 1 ... , I I I I I I I I ' .. ..... " ,..... -... --·-· ............. . . , . . ... -. . -. ' ' . . ' ' Noi,thern.Enalrieerina.com ii 970a221.4158 APPENDIX E DRAINAGE EXHIBITS