Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 06/21/2019 (2) DRAINAGE MEMORANDUM TEACHING TREE 424 PINE STREET FORT COLLINS, CO PEC PROJECT NO. 180847 JUNE 2018 PREPARED BY PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS PA 420 Linden Street, Suite 110 Fort Collins, CO 80524 970-232-9558 www.pec1.com June 2019 Project No. 180847 DRAINAGE MEMORANDUM TEACHING TREE June 18, 2019 Stormwater Utilities City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Teaching Tree – 424 Pine Street This project consists of interior and exterior renovations to the Teaching Tree building (formerly United Way of Larimer County) located at 424 Pine Street in Fort Collins, Colorado. The proposed exterior improvements include the addition of two playground areas, landscaping, and additional sidewalk paving. The site is located within the Northside Aztlan Community Center development and is owned by the City of Fort Collins. With the departure of United Way, Teaching Tree is interested in further developing the property to meet their growing needs. Evaluation of the primary site and landscape plans show an increase in impervious area due to the proposed exterior alterations at the site. The site sits within close proximity to the Cache La Poudre River where storm drainage from the existing parking lot and building site is currently discharged via earthen channel swale directly to the river. This drainage swale is also utilized by the Aztlan Community Center site. This memorandum includes discussion and analysis of the proposed stormwater management systems to be applied at this site to reduce runoff, improve water quality, and comply with the requirements of the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or information request regarding our project. Sincerely, Scott Turnbull, P.E. Professional Engineering Consultants, P.A. 06/18/2019 June 2019 Project No. 180847 DRAINAGE MEMORANDUM TEACHING TREE TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Location and Project Description .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Location ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Proposed Development ................................................................................................................ 1 2. Drainage Basins and Sub-Basins ........................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Major Basins .................................................................................................................................. 1 2.2 Existing Sub-Basins ........................................................................................................................ 2 3. Stormwater Evaluation and Management ............................................................................................ 2 3.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 2 3.2 Proposed Conditions ..................................................................................................................... 2 3.3 General Concept ........................................................................................................................... 3 4. Erosion and Sediment Control .............................................................................................................. 4 5. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 5 6. References ............................................................................................................................................ 5 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Existing Weighted Runoff Coefficient ............................................................................................. 2 Table 2: Proposed Weighted Runoff Coefficient .......................................................................................... 3 Table 3: Existing and Proposed Peak Runoff ................................................................................................. 3 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A – Grading and Drainage Plan Attachment B – Vegetated Buffer Fact Sheet Attachment C – Bioretention Fact Sheet Attachment D – Underdrain WQCV Worksheet Attachment E – FEMA FIRM Map Attachment F – NRCS Soils Report Attachment G – Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) June 2019 PEC Project No. 180847 1 DRAINAGE MEMORANDUM TEACHING TREE 1. LOCATION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 Project Location The existing building at 424 Pine St. is located on 1.95-acre Lot 3, Northside Aztlan Community Center. This lot is situated near the Legacy Senior Center and Willow Street Condos to the south and the Poudre River to the north. The existing conditions at the site include the existing building, parking facilities, driveways, playgrounds, and underground utilities. Current stormwater runoff from the building site is by means of sheet flow away from the building to the existing drainage swale and subsurface rain leaders which also discharge to the swale. The existing parking lot drains to this swale by a curb cut on the north end of the lot. This swale also collects runoff from several surrounding properties and discharges to the Poudre River. 1.2 Proposed Development The proposed improvements to the site will consist of additional playground areas, landscaping, and pedestrian sidewalks. Due to these improvements, the net change in impervious area is approximately 1,360 SF. This represents approximately 2.5% increase in impervious area than the existing site. The project site is known to have soil and groundwater contamination. Proposed development will attempt to limit excavation and earthmoving activities as much as possible. Playground areas will consist of pervious materials with underdrain systems as a stormwater treatment technique acting as a modified rain garden before discharging to the existing swale. The increased stormwater runoff from the site shall be treated by permanent low impact development techniques to promote infiltration. The increase in impervious area compared to existing is minimal (2.5%) and additional management techniques will be applied. On-site filtration will be provided by means of the wood mulch surface with underdrains within play areas (effetely creating a rain garden concept). Runoff from the new sidewalk on the northeast site of the building will be treated with a vegetated buffer before entering the swale. These approaches will limit earthwork in the contaminated soils compared to construction of new detention facilities. Existing drainage patterns on the site will be maintained. A Grading and Drainage Plan is included in Appendix A. 2. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS 2.1 Major Basins The project site is located within the Cache La Poudre basin which is a tributary to the South Platte River per maps produced by the City of Fort Collins1. Runoff from the project site is 1 https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/stormwater/drainage-basins/ June 2019 PEC Project No. 180847 2 DRAINAGE MEMORANDUM TEACHING TREE directed to the existing swale and green space to the north of the project site. The project area is located outside of floodplain designated by FEMA map 08069C0979H (see Appendix B). 2.2 Existing Sub-Basins Historical drainage for the existing site is generally from west to east towards the Cache La Poudre River. The soils on this property consist of Paoli fine sandy loam which is classified by NRCS as hydraulic group ‘A’ soils (see soil report in Appendix C). These soils consist primarily of well drained sands having high infiltration rates and low runoff potential. 3. STORMWATER EVALUATION AND MANAGEMENT 3.1 Existing Conditions The project site currently includes a building and exterior site improvements. Based upon these existing conditions, the weighted runoff coefficient for the rational method is shown in Table 1. Areas are estimated from aerial photography of the site. Table 1: Existing Weighted Runoff Coefficient Surface Type Area (SF) Runoff Coefficient 2 and 10-yr 100-yr Pavement 39,000 0.95 1.00 Roof 15,000 0.95 1.00 Turf 2-7% Slope, Sandy Soil 38,000 0.15 0.20 Total Area2 92,000 Weighted = 0.62 Weighted = 0.67 3.2 Proposed Conditions The proposed site conditions are shown in Table 2. The proposed improvements which impact stormwater runoff consist primarily of impervious sidewalk paving. Accounting for an additional 1,360 SF of pavement, the weighted runoff coefficient is shown in Table 2. 2 Total area includes additional land outside of the current property line for development of playground areas. June 2019 PEC Project No. 180847 3 DRAINAGE MEMORANDUM TEACHING TREE Table 2: Proposed Weighted Runoff Coefficient Surface Type Area (SF) Runoff Coefficient 2 and 10-yr 100-yr Pavement 40,360 0.95 1.00 Roof 15,000 0.95 1.00 Turf 2-7% Slope, Sandy Soil 36,640 0.15 0.20 Total Area2 92,000 Weighted = 0.63 Weighted = 0.68 Based upon these site conditions, the peak stormwater discharge is computed using the Rational Method for a time of concentration of 5 minutes reflecting the small size of the site. The peak discharges from the site are shown in Table 3. Table 3: Existing and Proposed Peak Runoff Storm Event Rainfall (in/hr) Existing (cfs) Proposed (cfs) Increased Discharge (cfs) Increase Discharge (%) 2-year 2.85 3.73 3.80 0.07 1.9% 10-year 4.87 6.37 6.49 0.12 1.9% 100-year 9.95 14.07 14.32 0.25 1.8% 3.3 General Concept The proposed exterior improvements to the existing building will maintain existing drainage patterns on the site. Stormwater runoff will continue to be directed towards the existing drainage swale. The additional 0.25 CFS of peak runoff of the 100-year storm event will be treated by existing drainage infrastructure and additional storm water treatment techniques applied on the project site to improve water quality. These treatment techniques include: 1) Utilization of the existing pervious areas and drainage swales to infiltrate stormwater prior to discharge to the Cache La Poudre. 2) Construct a vegetated buffer area between the new proposed sidewalks/ play areas and the existing swale along the north perimeter of the site designed in accordance with City of Fort Collins criteria. Runoff from the proposed 5’ wide sidewalk will sheet flow across a 14’-wide (minimum) grass area at less than 10% slope to slow and infiltrate water. The site soils are hydraulic group A and have high infiltration and low runoff potential. 3) Installation of engineered wood fibers (EWF) mulch playground surfaces within the play areas to promote infiltration of runoff and exceeding the size required for Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) per Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) criteria. The engineered wood mulch will be 12” minimum depth, free of bark, leaves, twigs, and other foreign or toxic material, and of material meeting June 2019 PEC Project No. 180847 4 DRAINAGE MEMORANDUM TEACHING TREE ASTM F2075. The playground areas will be drained via perforated underdrain pipe to the existing swale north of the project site. See cross section in Figure 1 provided by the project landscape plans. Figure 1 – Play Area “Rain Garden” Cross Section The underdrain pipe will be backfilled with gravel aggregate and separated from contaminated soils by an impervious liner meeting UDFCD criteria for bioretention areas. These playground areas will function similarly to rain gardens (see Attachment C for calculation worksheet) and reduce the release rate of stormwater runoff than if it flowed directly to the pipe outfall. Overflow of these locations will be to existing drainages matching current drainage patterns of the site. 4) Due to removal of sidewalk pavement for the playground on the south side of the building, near the main entrance, runoff rates and volume will decrease at this location. 4. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL The contractor will install the following temporary measures to mitigate erosion and sediment transport from the site during construction activities: · Silt Fence – A silt fence will be installed around the parameter of the disturbed site to prevent sediment runoff towards the Poudre River. Silt Fence ditch checks will also be provided to capture sediment transport in the swale. · Curb/Flume Protection – Drain protection will installed at the inlets to the curbs/flumes discharging from the site to capture any sediment runoff after the flumes and paving have been installed. June 2019 PEC Project No. 180847 5 DRAINAGE MEMORANDUM TEACHING TREE · Erosion Control Mats – Mats will be installed at locations were site runoff will be discharged into the existing drainage ditch for temporary bank protection during construction. · Construction Entrance – A gravel entrance or equivalent vehicle tracking pad will be constructed/installed to reduce the amount of sediment tracked by vehicles leaving the site onto public roadways. All erosion and sediment control measures will comply with City of Fort Collins requirements. 5. CONCLUSION Analysis was conducted to determine proposed conditions runoff in comparison to existing conditions at the project site. The net runoff increase from the proposed site improvements is relatively small compared to existing conditions and stormwater management techniques will be implemented to infiltrate and filter additional stormwater runoff prior to discharge to the existing drainage swale leading to the Cache La Poudre River. No additional detention facilities are to be provided in an effort to limit earthwork in contaminated soils. Erosion control measures will be utilized within the site to minimize sediment transport off-site during construction activities. 6. REFERENCES Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins. Adopted January 2019. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD), Revised August 2018. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), USDA Web Soil Survey. Accessed 12/19/2018. ATTACHMENT A Grading and Drainage Plan Teaching Tree Remodel & Expansion424 Pine StreetFort Collins, CO 80527180847-000 SMT 04/04/2019 Job Number: Drawn By: Project Issue Date: 970 | 672 | 6570 Fort Collins, CO 80525 100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTSRevision Schedule #Date Desc. Current Sheet Issue Date:06/10/2019 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, P.A.970-232-9558 www.pec1.com420 LINDEN ST, SUITE 110 FORT COLLINS, CO 80524C3.0 GRADING PLAN U:\FTCollins\2018\180847\000\Muni\Drawings\180847-000-C3.0-GRADING PLAN.dwg6/18/2019 11:12:22 AM 1 2 3 4 6 5 7 9 8 11 10 13 12 14 15 17 16 19 18 23 20 22 21 UNDERDRAIN PIPE KEYNOTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 20 22 23 Teaching Tree Remodel & Expansion424 Pine StreetFort Collins, CO 80527180847-000 SMT 04/04/2019 Job Number: Drawn By: Project Issue Date: 970 | 672 | 6570 Fort Collins, CO 80525 100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTSRevision Schedule #Date Desc. Current Sheet Issue Date:06/10/2019 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, P.A.970-232-9558 www.pec1.com420 LINDEN ST, SUITE 110 FORT COLLINS, CO 80524C3.1 DRAINAGE PLAN U:\FTCollins\2018\180847\000\Muni\Drawings\180847-000-C3.1-DRAINAGE PLAN.dwg6/18/2019 11:12:41 AM ATTACHMENT B Vegetated Buffer Fact Sheet 3.14 Vegetated Buffer The vegetated buffer cleans stormwater runoff by catching sediment and debris between the stalks and leaves of dense vegetation. It is often used to reduce directly connected impervious areas, allow water to infiltrate and provide pretreatment for other BMPs. COST AND BENEFIT CONSIDERATIONS MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS • Reduces directly connected impervious areas. • May be used to meet landscape requirements. • Low construction cost. • Flexible space for recreation and snow storage. • Vegetated buffers require gently sloping sites, 2% minimum to 10% maximum. • Applicable to sites with large open spaces. • Uses existing areas, which reduces land consumption. • Dense cover is required to maintain the function of this BMP. Ensure at least 80% vegetated cover. • Protect vegetated buffers from compaction. Prevent cars from driving onto the buffer. Amend soils that become compacted. • Provide wheel stops or similar barrier adjacent to parking and drives. • Trim and maintain vegetation along edges where impervious area flows to buffer. • Monitor for invasive species and remove as needed. • Remove accumulated sediment in level spreader to maintain dispersed flow. Section Three: LID BMP Fact Sheet 3.15City of Fort Collins | LID Implementation Manual• Plan and delineate buffer areas prior to site disturbance to protect subgrade from construction related compaction. • Protect finished BMPs from construction sediment including landscape installation. During establishment protect BMPs from washout. • Construct level spreaders parallel to site contours. • Plants will require establishment irrigation during and for a time following construction. Precedent Projects • Bucking Horse Apartments DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS • Level spreaders are required for concentrated flow applications and recommended for sheet flow applications. • Select vegetation with uniform cover characteristics. Avoid bunch type vegetation that can result in concentrated flow between plants. • Where feasible provide a 2-3” drop between the top of the vegetated buffer and the contributing impervious area. This drop prevents vegetation from growing against the impervious area and concentrating flow. • Confirm vegetated flow path is not within footprint of future development. • Permaculture techniques such as keyline design may be used to increase infiltration. • BMP is not applicable to rights-of-way. Notes and References • UDFCD Treatment BMP Fact Sheet T-01 • Grass Buffer Seed Mix Specification (Appendix D) * This is a graphic representation. For more technical guidance, refer to the construction detail. ATTACHMENT C Bioretention Fact Sheet Bioretention T-3 November 2015 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-1 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Terminology The term bioretention refers to the treatment process although it is also frequently used to describe a BMP that provides biological uptake and retention of the pollutants found in stormwater runoff. This BMP is sometimes referred to as a porous landscape detention (PLD) area or rain garden. Photograph B-1. This recently constructed rain garden provides bioretention of pollutants, as well as an attractive amenity for a residential building. Treatment should improve as vegetation matures. Description A BMP that utilizes bioretention is an engineered, depressed landscape area designed to capture and filter or infiltrate the water quality capture volume (WQCV). BMPs that utilize bioretention are frequently referred to as rain gardens or porous landscape detention areas (PLDs). The term PLD is common in the UDFCD region as this manual first published the BMP by this name in 1999. In an effort to be consistent with terms most prevalent in the stormwater industry, this document generally refers to the treatment process as bioretention and to the BMP as a rain garden. The design of a rain garden may provide detention for events exceeding that of the WQCV. There are generally two ways to achieve this. The design can provide the flood control volume above the WQCV or the design can provide and slowly release the flood control volume in an area downstream of one or more rain gardens. See the Storage chapter in Volume 2 of the USDCM for more information. This infiltrating BMP requires consultation with a geotechnical engineer when proposed adjacent to a structure. A geotechnical engineer can assist with evaluating the suitability of soils, identifying potential impacts, and establishing minimum distances between the BMP and structures. Bioretention (Rain Garden) Functions LID/Volume Red. Yes WQCV Capture Yes WQCV+Flood Control Yes Fact Sheet Includes EURV Guidance No Typical Effectiveness for Targeted Pollutants3 Sediment/Solids Very Good1 Nutrients Moderate Total Metals Good Bacteria Moderate Other Considerations Life-cycle Costs4 Moderate 1 Not recommended for watersheds with high sediment yields (unless pretreatment is provided). 3 Based primarily on data from the International Stormwater BMP Database (www.bmpdatabase.org). 4 Based primarily on BMP-REALCOST available at www.udfcd.org. Analysis based on a single installation (not based on the maximum recommended watershed tributary to each BMP). T-3 Bioretention B-2 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2015 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Site Selection This BMP allows WQCV treatment within one or more areas designated for landscape (see design step 7 for suggusted vegetation). In this way, it is an excellent alternative to extended detention basins for small sites. A typical rain garden serves a tributary area of one impervious acre or less, although they can be designed for larger tributary areas. Multiple installations can be used within larger sites. Rain gardens should not be used when a baseflow is anticipated. They are typically small and installed in locations such as:  Parking lot islands  Street medians  Landscape areas between the road and a detached walk  Planter boxes that collect roof drains Bioretention requires a stable watershed. Retrofit applications are typically successful for this reason. When the watershed includes phased construction, sparsely vegetated areas, or steep slopes in sandy soils, consider another BMP or provide pretreatment before runoff from these areas reaches the rain garden. The surface of the rain garden should be flat. For this reason, rain gardens can be more difficult to incorporate into steeply sloping terrain; however, terraced applications of these facilities have been successful in other parts of the country. When bioretention (and other BMPs used for infiltration) are located adjacent to buildings or pavement areas, protective measures should be implemented to avoid adverse impacts to these structures. Oversaturated subgrade soil underlying a structure can cause the structure to settle or result in moisture-related problems. Wetting of expansive soils or bedrock can cause swelling, resulting in structural movements. A geotechnical engineer should evaluate the potential impact of the BMP on adjacent structures based on an evaluation of the subgrade soil, groundwater, and bedrock conditions at the site. Additional minimum requirements include:  In locations where subgrade soils do not allow infiltration and/or where infiltration could adversely impact adjacent structures, include a drainage layer (with underdrain) under the growing medium.  In locations where potentially expansive soils or bedrock exist, placement of a rain garden adjacent to structures and pavement should only be considered if the BMP includes a drainage layer (with underdrain) and an impermeable geomembrane liner designed to restrict seepage. Benefits Bioretention uses multiple treatment processes to remove pollutants, including sedimentation, filtering, adsorption, evapotranspiration, and biological uptake of constituents. Stormwater treatment occurs within attractive landscaped areas. There is a potential reduction of irrigation requirements by taking advantage of site runoff. Limitations Additional design and construction steps are required for placement of any ponding or infiltration area near or upgradient from a building foundation and/or when expansive (low to high swell) soils exist. This is discussed in the design procedure section. In developing or otherwise erosive watersheds, high sediment loads can clog the facility. Bioretention T-3 November 2015 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-3 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Designing for Maintenance Recommended maintenance practices for all BMPs are in Chapter 6 of this manual. During design, consider the following to ensure ease of maintenance over the long-term:  Do not put a filter sock on the underdrain. This is not necessary and can cause the underdrain to clog.  The best surface cover for a rain garden is full vegetation. Use rock mulch sparingly within the rain garden because rock mulch limits infiltration and is more difficult to maintain. Wood mulch handles sediment build-up better than rock mulch; however, wood mulch floats and may clog the overflow depending on the configuration of the outlet or settle unevenly. Some municipalities may not allow wood mulch for this reason.  Consider all potential maintenance requirements such as mowing (if applicable) and replacement of the growing medium. Consider the method and equipment for each task required. For example, in a large rain garden where the use of hand tools is not feasible, does the shape and configuration of the rain garden allow for removal of the growing medium using a backhoe?  Provide pre-treatment when it will reduce the extent and frequency of maintenance necessary to maintain function over the life of the BMP. For example, if the tributary is larger than one acre, prone to debris or the use of sand for ice control, consider a small forebay.  Make the rain garden as shallow as possible. Increasing the depth unnecessarily can create erosive side slopes and complicate maintenance. Shallow rain gardens are also more attractive.  Design and adjust the irrigation system (temporary or permanent) to provide appropriate water for the establishment and maintenance of selected vegetation. Design Procedure and Criteria 1. Subsurface Exploration and Determination of a No-Infiltration, Partial Infiltration, or Full Infiltration Section: Infiltration BMPs can have three basic types of sections. The appropriate section will depend on land use and activities, proximity to adjacent structures and soil characteristics. Sections of each installation type are shown in Figure B-1.  No-Infiltration Section: This section includes an underdrain and an impermeable liner that prevents infiltration of stormwater into the subgrade soils. Consider using this section when any of the following conditions exist: o The site is a stormwater hotspot and infiltration could result in contamination of groundwater. o The site is located over contaminated soils and infiltration could mobilize these contaminants. o The facility is located over potentially expansive soils or bedrock that could swell due to infiltration and potentially damage adjacent structures (e.g., building foundation or pavement).  Partial Infiltration Section: This section does not include an impermeable liner, and allows some infiltration. Stormwater that does not infiltrate is collected and removed by an underdrain Is Pretreatment Needed? Designing the inflow gutter to the rain garden at a minimal slope of 0.5% can facilitate sediment and debris deposition prior to flows entering the BMP. Be aware, this will reduce maintenance of the BMP, but may require more frequent sweeping of the gutter to ensure that the sediment does not impede flow into the rain garden. T-3 Bioretention B-4 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2015 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 system.  Full Infiltration Section: This section is designed to infiltrate the water stored in the basin into the subgrade below. UDFCD recommends a minimum infiltration rate of 2 times the rate needed to drain the WQCV over 12 hours. A conservative design could utilize the partial infiltration section with the addition of a valve at the underdrain outlet. In the event that infiltration does not remain adequate following construction, the valve could be opened and allow this section to operate as a partial infiltration section. A geotechnical engineer should scope and perform a subsurface study. Typical geotechnical investigation needed to select and design the section includes:  Prior to exploration review geologic and geotechnical information to assess near-surface soil, bedrock and groundwater conditions that may be encountered and anticipated ranges of infiltration rate for those materials. For example, if the facility is located adjacent to a structure and the site is located in a general area of known shallow, potentially expansive bedrock, a no- infiltration section will likely be required. It is also possible that this BMP may be infeasible, even with a liner, if there is a significant potential for damage to the adjacent structures (e.g., areas of dipping bedrock).  Drill exploratory borings or exploratory pits to characterize subsurface conditions beneath the subgrade and develop requirements for subgrade preparation. Drill at least one boring or pit for every 40,000 ft2, and at least two borings or pits for sites between 10,000 ft2 and 40,000 ft2. The boring or pit should extend at least 5 feet below the bottom of the base, and at least 20 feet in areas where there is a potential of encountering potentially expansive soils or bedrock. More borings or pits at various depths may be required by the geotechnical engineer in areas where soil types may change, in low-lying areas where subsurface drainage may collect, or where the water table is likely within 8 feet below the planned bottom of the base or top of subgrade. Installation of temporary monitoring wells in selected borings or pits for monitoring groundwater levels over time should be considered where shallow groundwater is encountered.  Perform laboratory tests on samples obtained from the borings or pits to initially characterize the subgrade, evaluate the possible section type, and to assess subgrade conditions for supporting traffic loads. Consider the following tests: moisture content (ASTM D 2216); dry density (ASTM D 2936); Atterberg limits (ASTM D 4318); gradation (ASTM D 6913); swell- consolidation (ASTM D 4546); subgrade support testing (R-value, CBR or unconfined compressive strength); and hydraulic conductivity. A geotechnical engineer should determine the appropriate test method based on the soil type.  For sites where a full infiltration section may be feasible, perform on-site infiltration tests using a double-ring infiltrometer (ASTM D 3385). Perform at least one test for every 160,000 ft2 and at least two tests for sites between 40,000 ft2 and 160,000 ft2. The tests should be located near completed borings or pits so the test results and subsurface conditions encountered in the borings can be compared, and at least one test should be located near the boring or pit showing the most unfavorable infiltration condition. The test should be performed at the planned top of subgrade underlying the growing media.  Be aware that actual infiltration rates are highly variable dependent on soil type, density and moisture content and degree of compaction as well as other environmental and construction influences. Actual rates can differ an order of magnitude or more from those indicated by infiltration or permeability testing. Select the type of section based on careful assessment of the subsurface exploration and testing data. Bioretention T-3 November 2015 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-5 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 The following steps outline the design procedure and criteria, with Figure B-1 providing a corresponding cross-section. 2. Basin Storage Volume: Provide a storage volume based on a 12-hour drain time. Find the required WQCV (watershed inches of runoff). Using the imperviousness of the tributary area (or effective imperviousness where LID elements are used upstream), use Figure 3-2 located in Chapter 3 of this manual to determine the WQCV based on a 12-hour drain time. Calculate the design volume as follows: 𝑉 = �WQCV12�𝐴 Equation B-1 Where: V= design volume (ft3) A = area of watershed tributary to the rain garden (ft2) 3. Basin Geometry: UDFCD recommends a maximum WQCV ponding depth of 12 inches to maintain vegetation properly. Provide an inlet or other means of overflow at this elevation. Depending on the type of vegetation planted, a greater depth may be utilized to detain larger (more infrequent) events. The bottom surface of the rain garden, also referred to here as the filter area, should be flat. Sediment will reside on the filter area of the rain garden; therefore, if the filter area is too small, it may clog prematurely. If the filter area is not flat, the lowest area of the filter is more likely to clog as it will have a higher sediment loading. Increasing the filter area will reduce clogging and decrease the frequency of maintenance. Equation B-2 provides a minimum filter area allowing for some of the volume to be stored beyond the area of the filter (i.e., above the sideslopes of the rain garden). Note that the total surcharge volume provided by the design must also equal or exceed the design volume. Where needed to meet the the required volume, also consider the porosity of the media at 14 percent. Use vertical walls or slope the sides of the basin to achieve the required volume. Sideslopes should be no steeper than 4:1 (horizontal:vertical). AIAF02.0= Equation B-2 Where: AF= minimum (flat) filter area (ft2) A = area tributary to the rain garden (ft2) I = imperviousness of area tributary to the rain garden (percent expressed as a decimal) T-3 Bioretention B-6 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2015 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 4. Growing Medium: Provide a minimum of 18 inches of growing medium to enable establishment of the roots of the vegetation (see Figure B-1). A previous version of this manual specified a mixture consisting of 85% coarse sand and a 15% compost/shredded paper mixture (by volume). Based on field monitoring of this medium, compost was removed to reduce export of nutrients and fines and silts were added to both benefit the vegetation and increase capture of metals in stormwater. Table B-1 specifies the growing media as well as other materials discussed in this Fact Sheet. Growing media is engineered media that requires a high level of quality control and must almost always be imported. Obtaining a particle size distribution and nutrient analysis is the only way to ensure that the media is acceptable. UDFCD has identified placement of media not meeting the specification as the most frequent cause of failure. Sample the media after delivery and prior to placement or obtain a sample from the supplier in advance of delivery and placement and have this analyzed prior to delivery. Other Rain Garden Growing Medium Amendments The specified growing medium was designed for filtration ability, clogging characteristics, and vegetative health. It is important to preserve the function provided by the rain garden growing medium when considering additional materials for incorporation into the growing medium or into the standard section shown in Figure B-1. When desired, amendments may be included to improve water quality or to benefit vegetative health as long as they do not add nutrients, pollutants, or modify the infiltration rate. For example, a number of products, including steel wool, capture and retain dissolved phosphorus (Erickson 2009). When phosphorus is a target pollutant, proprietary materials with similar characteristics may be considered. Do not include amendments such as top soil, sandy loam, and compost. Bioretention T-3 November 2015 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-7 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Table B-1. Material specification for bioretention/rain garden facilities T-3 Bioretention B-8 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2015 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 5. Underdrain System: When using an underdrain system, provide a control orifice sized to drain the design volume in 12 hours or more (see Equation B-3). Use a minimum orifice size of 3/8 inch to avoid clogging. This will provide detention and slow release of the WQCV, providing water quality benefits and reducing impacts to downstream channels. Space underdrain pipes a maximum of 20 feet on center. Provide cleanouts to enable maintenance of the underdrain. Cleanouts can also be used to conduct an inspection (by camera) of the underdrain system to ensure that the pipe was not crushed or disconnected during construction. Calculate the diameter of the orifice for a 12-hour drain time using Equation B-3 (Use a minimum orifice size of 3/8 inch to avoid clogging.): 𝐷12 hour drain time =�𝑉1414 𝑦0.41 Equation B-3 Where: D = orifice diameter (in) y = distance from the lowest elevation of the storage volume (i.e., surface of the filter) to the center of the orifice (ft) V = volume (WQCV or the portion of the WQCV in the rain garden) to drain in 12 hours (ft3) In previous versions of this manual, UDFCD recommended that the underdrain be placed in an aggregate layer and that a geotextile (separator fabric) be placed between this aggregate and the growing medium. This version of the manual replaces that section with materials that, when used together, eliminate the need for a separator fabric. The underdrain system should be placed within an 6-inch-thick section of CDOT Class B or Class C filter material meeting the gradation in Table B-1. Use slotted pipe that meets the slot dimensions provided in Table B-3. Bioretention T-3 November 2015 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-9 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 6. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric: For no- infiltration sections, install a 30 mil (minimum) PVC geomembrane liner, per Table B-1, on the bottom and sides of the basin, extending up at least to the top of the underdrain layer. Provide at least 9 inches (12 inches if possible) of cover over the membrane where it is attached to the wall to protect the membrane from UV deterioration. The geomembrane should be field- seamed using a dual track welder, which allows for non- destructive testing of almost all field seams. A small amount of single track is allowed in limited areas to seam around pipe perforations, to patch seams removed for destructive seam testing, and for limited repairs. The liner should be installed with slack to prevent tearing due to backfill, compaction, and settling. Place CDOT Class B geotextile separator fabric above the geomembrane to protect it from being punctured during the placement of the filter material above the liner. If the subgrade contains angular rocks or other material that could puncture the geomembrane, smooth-roll the surface to create a suitable surface. If smooth-rolling the surface does not provide a suitable surface, also place the separator fabric between the geomembrane and the underlying subgrade. This should only be done when necessary because fabric placed under the geomembrane can increase seepage losses through pinholes or other geomembrane defects. Connect the geomembrane to perimeter concrete walls around the basin perimeter, creating a watertight seal between the geomembrane and the walls using a continuous batten bar and anchor connection (see Figure B-3). Where the need for the impermeable membrane is not as critical, the membrane can be attached with a nitrile-based vinyl adhesive. Use watertight PVC boots for underdrain pipe penetrations through the liner (see Figure B-2) or the technique shown in photo B-3. Photograph B-2. The impermeable membrane in this photo has ripped from the bolts due to placement of the media without enough slack in the membrane. Photograph B-3. Ensure a water-tight connection where the underdrain penetrated the liner. The heat-welded “boot” shown here is an alternative to the clamped detail shown in Figure B-2. T-3 Bioretention B-10 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2015 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Table B-2. Physical requirements for separator fabric1 1 Strength values are in the weaker principle direction 2 As measured in accordance with ASTM D 4632 7. Inlet and Outlet Control: In order to provide the proper drain time, the bioretention area can be restricted at the underdrain outlet with an orifice plate or can be designed without an underdrain (provided the subgrade meets the requirements above). Equation B-3 is a simplified equation for sizing an orifice plate for a 12-hour drain time. UD-BMP or UD-Detention, available at www.udfcd.org, also perform this calculation. How flow enters and exits the BMP is a function of the overall drainage concept for the site. Curb cuts can be designed to both allow stormwater into the rain garden as well as to provide release of stormwater in excess of the WQCV. Roadside rain gardens located on a steep site might pool and overflow into downstream cells with a single curb cut, level spreader, or outlet structure located at the most downstream cell. When selecting the Elongation < 50%2 Elongation > 50%2 Grab Strength, N (lbs.)800 (180)510 (115)ASTM D 4632 Puncture Resistance, N (lbs.)310 (70)180 (40)ASTM D 4833 Trapezoidal Tear Strength, N (lbs.)310 (70)180 (40)ASTM D 4533 Apparent Opening Size, mm (US Sieve Size)ASTM D 4751 Permittivity, sec-1 ASTM D 4491 Permeability, cm/sec ASTM D 4491 Ultraviolet Degradation at 500 hours ASTM D 4355 k fabric > k soil for all classes 50% strength retained for all classes Property Class B Test Method AOS < 0.3mm (US Sieve Size No. 50) 0.02 default value, must also be greater than that of soil Photograph B-4. The curb cut shown allows flows to enter this rain garden while excess flows bypass the facility. Bioretention T-3 November 2015 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-11 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Designing for Flood Protection Provide the WQCV in rain gardens that direct excess flow into to a landscaped basin designed for flood control or design a single basin to provide water quality and flood control. See the Storage chapter in Volume 2 of the USDCM for more information. UD-Detention, available at www.udfcd.org, will facilitate design either alternative. type and location of the outlet structure, ensure runoff will not short-circuit the rain garden. This is a frequent problem when using a curb inlet located outside the rain garden for overflow. For rain gardens with concentrated points of inflow, provide a forebay and energy dissipation. A depressed concrete slab works best for a forebay. It helps maintain a vertical drop at the inlet and allows for easily removal of sediment using a square shovel. Where rock is used for energy dissipation, provide separator fabric between the rock and growing medium to minimize subsidence. 8. Vegetation: UDFCD recommends that the filter area be vegetated with drought tolerant species that thrive in sandy soils. Table B-3 provides a suggested seed mix for sites that will not need to be irrigated after the grass has been established. Mix seed well and broadcast, followed by hand raking to cover seed and then mulched. Hydromulching can be effective for large areas. Do not place seed when standing water or snow is present or if the ground is frozen. Weed control is critical in the first two to three years, especially when starting with seed. When using sod, specify sand–grown sod. Do not use conventional sod. Conventional sod is grown in clay soil that will seal the filter area, greatly reducing overall function of the BMP. When using an impermeable liner, select plants with diffuse (or fibrous) root systems, not taproots. Taproots can damage the liner and/or underdrain pipe. Avoid trees and large shrubs that may interfere with restorative maintenance. Plant these outside of the area of growing medium. Use a cutoff wall to ensure that roots do not grow into the underdrain or place trees and shrubs a conservative distance from the underdrain. 9. Irrigation: Provide spray irrigation at or above the WQCV elevation or place temporary irrigation on top of the rain garden surface. Do not place sprinkler heads on the flat surface. Remove temporary irrigation when vegetation is established. If left in place this will become buried over time and will be damaged during maintenance operations. Adjust irrigation schedules during the growing season to provide the minimum water necessary to maintain plant health and to maintain the available pore space for infiltration. T-3 Bioretention B-12 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2015 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Table B-3. Native seed mix for rain gardens 1 Wildflower seed (optional) for a more diverse and natural look. 2 PLS = Pure Live Seed. Common Name Scientific Name Variety PLS2 lbs per Acre Ounces per Acre Sand bluestem Andropogon hallii Garden 3.5 Sideoats grama Bouteloua curtipendula Butte 3 Prairie sandreed Calamovilfa longifolia Goshen 3 Indian ricegrass Oryzopsis hymenoides Paloma 3 Switchgrass Panicum virgatum Blackwell 4 Western wheatgrass Pascopyrum smithii Ariba 3 Little bluestem Schizachyrium scoparium Patura 3 Alkali sacaton Sporobolus airoides 3 Sand dropseed Sporobolus cryptandrus 3 Pasture sage1 Artemisia frigida 2 Blue aster1 Aster laevis 4 Blanket flower1 Gaillardia aristata 8 Prairie coneflower1 Ratibida columnifera 4 Purple prairieclover1 Dalea (Petalostemum) purpurea 4 Sub-Totals: 27.5 22 Total lbs per acre: 28.9 Bioretention T-3 November 2015 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-13 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Reflective Design A reflective design borrows the characteristics, shapes, colors, materials, sizes and textures of the built surroundings. The result is a design that fits seamlessly and unobtrusively in its environment. Aesthetic Design In addition to effective stormwater quality treatment, rain gardens can be attractively incorporated into a site within one or several landscape areas. Aesthetically designed rain gardens will typically either reflect the character of their surroundings or become distinct features within their surroundings. Guidelines for each approach are provided below. Reflecting the Surrounding  Determine design characteristics of the surrounding. This becomes the context for the drainage improvement. Use these characteristics in the structure.  Create a shape or shapes that "fix" the forms surrounding the improvement. Make the improvement part of the existing surrounding.  The use of material is essential in making any new improvement an integral part of the whole. Select materials that are as similar as possible to the surrounding architectural/engineering materials. Select materials from the same source if possible. Apply materials in the same quantity, manner, and method as original material.  Size is an important feature in seamlessly blending the addition into its context. If possible, the overall size of the improvement should look very similar to the overall sizes of other similar objects in the improvement area.  The use of the word texture in terms of the structure applies predominantly to the selection of plant material. The materials used should as closely as possible, blend with the size and texture of other plant material used in the surrounding. The plants may or may not be the same, but should create a similar feel, either individually or as a mass. Creating a Distinct Feature Designing the rain garden as a distinct feature is limited only by budget, functionality, and client preference. There is far more latitude in designing a rain garden that serves as a distinct feature. If this is the intent, the main consideration beyond functionality is that the improvement create an attractive addition to its surroundings. The use of form, materials, color, and so forth focuses on the improvement itself and does not necessarily reflect the surroundings, depending on the choice of the client or designer. T-3 Bioretention B-14 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2015 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Figure B-1 – Typical rain garden plan and sections Bioretention T-3 November 2015 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-15 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 T-3 Bioretention B-16 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2015 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Bioretention T-3 November 2015 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-17 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 T-3 Bioretention B-18 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2015 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Figure B-2. Geomembrane Liner/Underdrain Penetration Detail Figure B-3. Geomembrane Liner/Concrete Connection Detail Bioretention T-3 November 2015 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-19 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Photograph B-3. Inadequate construction staking may have contributed to flows bypassing this rain garden. Photograph B-4. Runoff passed the upradient rain garden, shown in Photo B-3, and flooded this downstream rain garden. Construction Considerations Proper construction of rain gardens involves careful attention to material specifications, final grades, and construction details. For a successful project, implement the following practices:  Protect area from excessive sediment loading during construction. This is the most common cause of clogging of rain gardens. The portion of the site draining to the rain garden must be stabilized before allowing flow into the rain garden. This includes completion of paving operations.  Avoid over compaction of the area to preserve infiltration rates (for partial and full infiltration sections).  Provide construction observation to ensure compliance with design specifications. Improper installation, particularly related to facility dimensions and elevations and underdrain elevations, is a common problem with rain gardens.  When using an impermeable liner, ensure enough slack in the liner to allow for backfill, compaction, and settling without tearing the liner.  Provide necessary quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) when constructing an impermeable geomembrane liner system, including but not limited to fabrication testing, destructive and non-destructive testing of field seams, observation of geomembrane material for tears or other defects, and air lace testing for leaks in all field seams and penetrations. QA/QC should be overseen by a professional engineer. Consider requiring field reports or other documentation from the engineer.  Provide adequate construction staking to ensure that the site properly drains into the facility, particularly with respect to surface drainage away from adjacent buildings. Photo B-3 and Photo B-4 illustrate a construction error for an otherwise correctly designed series of rain gardens. T-3 Bioretention B-20 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2015 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 References Erickson, Andy. 2009. Field Applications of Enhanced Sand Filtration. University of Minnesota Stormwater Management Practice Assessment Project Update. http://wrc.umn.edu. Hunt, William F., Davis, Allen P., Traver, Robert. G. 2012. “Meeting Hydrologic and Water Quality Goals through Targeted Bioretention Design” Journal of Environmental Engineering. (2012) 138:698-707. Print. ATTACHMENT D Underdrain Design Worksheet Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =100.0 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i = 1.000 C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 0.40 watershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 3,180 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =106 cu ft Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in Average Runoff Producing Storm G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =12 in B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical) Z = 0.00 ft / ft (Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls) C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =64 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =1780 sq ft E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =1780 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=1,780 cu ft (VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth) 3. Growing Media Engineered wood mulch playground surface (12" min depth). No vegetation will be planted in filter media. 4. Underdrain System A) Are underdrains provided?1 B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =ft Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =cu ft iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO = in Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) S Turnbull PEC May 14, 2019 Teaching Tree 424 Pine St Fort Collins CO UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018) Choose One Choose One 18" Rain Garden Growing Media Other (Explain): YES NO UD-BMP_v3.07.xlsm, RG 5/14/2019, 10:46 AM Orifice restriction not provided per City recommendation. Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity of structures or groundwater contamination? PROVIDE A 30 MIL (MIN) PVC LINER WITH CDOT CLASS B GEOTEXTILE ABOVE IT. USE THE SAME GEOTEXTILE BELOW THE LINER IF THE SUBGRADE IS ANGULAR 6. Inlet / Outlet Control A) Inlet Control 7. Vegetation 8. Irrigation A) Will the rain garden be irrigated? Notes: Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) S Turnbull PEC May 14, 2019 Teaching Tree 424 Pine St Fort Collins CO Rain garden concept applied to wood mulch playground areas. No outlet orrifice restriction to be provided per City direction. Impervious liner to be provided in order to separate contaminated soils and groundwater from the underdrain systems. Choose One Choose One Choose One Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided Plantings Seed (Plan for frequent weed control) Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod Choose One YES NO YES NO UD-BMP_v3.07.xlsm, RG 5/14/2019, 10:46 AM No vegetation. ATTACHMENT E FEMA FIRM Map TEACHING TREE SITE ATTACHMENT F NRCS Soils Report United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Larimer County Area, ColoradoNatural Resources Conservation Service December 19, 2018 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map..................................................................................................................8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Larimer County Area, Colorado......................................................................13 81—Paoli fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes.......................................13 References............................................................................................................15 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report 6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 449343044934504493470449349044935104493530449343044934504493470449349044935104493530493700 493720 493740 493760 493780 493800 493820 493840 493860 493880 493700 493720 493740 493760 493780 493800 493820 493840 493860 493880 40° 35' 33'' N 105° 4' 28'' W40° 35' 33'' N105° 4' 19'' W40° 35' 29'' N 105° 4' 28'' W40° 35' 29'' N 105° 4' 19'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 40 80 160 240 Feet 0 10 20 40 60 Meters Map Scale: 1:890 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 10, 2018 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Sep 20, 2015—Oct 21, 2017 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 10 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 81 Paoli fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 2.4 100.0% Totals for Area of Interest 2.4 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Custom Soil Resource Report 11 An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report 12 Larimer County Area, Colorado 81—Paoli fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpxx Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Paoli and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Paoli Setting Landform: Stream terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 30 inches: fine sandy loam H2 - 30 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam, sandy loam, loamy sand H2 - 30 to 60 inches: H2 - 30 to 60 inches: Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (2.00 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 16.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 1 Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3c Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Overflow (R067BY036CO) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 13 Minor Components Caruso Percent of map unit: 6 percent Hydric soil rating: No Table mountain Percent of map unit: 6 percent Hydric soil rating: No Fluvaquentic haplustolls Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Terraces Hydric soil rating: Yes Custom Soil Resource Report 14 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 15 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report 16 ATTACHMENT G Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) Playground Surfacing Routine Maintenance Table (Summary from Chapter 6 of UDFCD) Required Action Maintenance Objective Frequency of Action Debris and Litter Removal Remove debris and litter from the infiltrating surface to minimize clogging of the media. Routine – Including just before annual storm seasons (April and May), end of storm seasons after leaves have fallen (October), and following significant rainfall events. Sediment Removal and Media Replacement Maintain adequate infiltration rates to drain the playground surfacing within 24 hours. Upon replacement of EWF and/or clogging is observed. Inspection of the geotextile fabric and drainage gravel below the EWF should be performed. If either item is preventing proper infiltration, it should be replaced per design specifications. Non-Routine – Maintenance activities to restore infiltration capacity of playground surfacing will vary with the degree and nature of the clogging. The frequency of media replacement will depend on site- specific characteristics that have the potential to clog the playground surfacing and drainage gravel. Replacement of Engineered Wood Fiber (EWF) Maintain a level play surface with raking of existing EWF and add additional EWF as necessary to achieve a level surface and proper depths. Where playground equipment is less than 4 feet in height, the minimum EWF depth required is 8 inches after compaction. Where playground equipment exceeds 4 feet in height, the minimum EWF depth required is 12 inches after compaction Non-Routine -As needed and inspect EWF conditions at least twice annually following precipitation events. Inspections Determine if the playground surfacing area is providing acceptable infiltration, and outlet structures are not obstructed. Check for erosion and repair as necessary. Routine – Inspect the infiltrating surface at least twice annually following precipitation events. Check for obvious problems during routine maintenance visits, especially for plugging of outlets and erosion. Bioretention/Bioswale Routine Maintenance Table (Summary from Chapter 6 of UDFCD) Required Action Maintenance Objective Frequency of Action Lawn mowing and vegetative care Occasional mowing of grasses and weed removal to limit unwanted vegetation. Maintain irrigated turf grass as 2 to 4 inches tall and non- irrigated native turf grasses at 4 to 6 inches. Routine – Depending on aesthetic requirements, planting scheme and cover. Weeds should be removed before they flower. Debris and litter removal and snow stockpiling Remove debris and litter from bioretention area and upstream concrete forebay to minimize clogging of the sand media. Remove debris and litter from the pond area and outlet orifice plate to minimize clogging. Remove debris and litter from curb channel and sidewalk chase outlets adjacent to pond if applicable to minimize clogging. Avoid stockpiling snow in the bioretention area to minimize clogging from sediment accumulation. Routine – Including just before annual storm seasons and after snow season (April or May), end of storm season after leaves have fallen, and following significant rainfall events. Inspections Inspect detention area to determine if the sand media is allowing acceptable infiltration. If standing water persists for more than 24 hours after storm runoff has ceased, clogging should be further investigated and remedied. Routine – Biannual inspection of the hydraulic performance. Growing media replacement Restore infiltration capacity of bioretention facilities. Non-routine – Performed when clogging is due to the migration of sediments deep into the pore spaces of the media. The frequency of replacement will depend on site-specific pollutant loading characteristics. Perforated Subdrain The perforated subdrain system storm drain outfall at the bottom of the Low Impact Development (LID) system is critical to the overall function of the system subbase. As such, special maintenance has been identified to ensure these perforated drain systems perform as they were designed. Perforated subdrains leading away from the LID system is designed to provide faster release of water when accumulation occurs under the LID system. Outflow should be seen into downstream storm boxes. If not seen it is recommended that the system is inspected using a video camera to verify no clogging has occurred. Perforated subdrains leading toward the LID system are designed to provide an opportunity for infiltration. These subdrains may lead to a drywell where additional infiltration capacity is available to reduce runoff per the stated LID goals adopted by the City. Routine Maintenance Table Required Action Maintenance Objective Frequency of Action Inspection Use a video camera to inspect the condition of the perforated drain pipes. Cleanout pipes as needed. If the integrity of the pipe is compromised, then repair the damaged section(s). Every two to five years. Inspection Where accessible, expose inlet and/or outlet of perforated pipe and watch for water inflow and/or outflow. Minimum Annually Storm Drain Lines Maintenance Plan Storm drain lines are subject to sedimentation as well as tree roots clogging the flow path or altering the pipe slope. Maintenance is important to ensure these storm drain systems perform as they were designed. Routine Maintenance Table Required Action Maintenance Objective Frequency of Action Inspection Use a video camera to inspect the condition of the storm drain pipes. Cleanout pipes as needed. If the integrity of the pipe is compromised, then repair the damaged section(s). Every two to five years.