HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 04/24/2023FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
�f�'�`\ LINITED CIVIL
Design Group
, "� ���� � . ��
�' .;t, .. � :�c.,� .�r+,,, i � . r ,��;,..�.�~ �%d.._ ��2
., ,i' t . �. � _ ' tl ti • � _
�: ���e` 4�'� I fec- �:4 f r. r.. � � • `
t�� � �., i . j Y •. � �� �,
1,`. _y�( ��. 1 I. 1 /� "� F'�\ i�i
� i77 t r I��
�a'� �, :p _ 1 .w� �t P '_� / t�:�r �� JM1C � �s,
, �' - i ����I �� � � �� �_ �
♦ v'�. ' a�, . ,, :�,�.r/" �{ r ���w' ��1'
�9.. � , 7 i X . � y { y '� � }� ; r ��:� '
i; � .f ��'�� . _.'r_ (�..
b
.li��c'�'"_:�� ,r/, ,i,y,`r.�. _ ��sr- �3 .. �.t
7,.t, ti. _�.J x i',`1.�. gt�° y y y���. �•� \.a�:
�•' ` ,'F ,� ¢" - :�'� �4- , " �;� j ff', �$`
�y' . . — • - _ r �a
,.�t ,! . . a !{� _ � 4 � �'
�« . ... � , .. : ���11�� �l .. . ...hca�",�
' ' "� � R:
�.� ti �.:�c.*� �/�`�YS~
i: � �k` '�.;;�'�j'9�;�� i
-�.: � ' . y ��. �� ���
<
��������
� � ���
�RT OLLINS ISSAN- IA
Fassil Creek Subdivision
Fart Collins, CO
�
�� �
!
�`
� ,C. �
�.
1j !�
_ -�f:
��1 A
��x ���''
� "�`"."� ,.
Y��l�1'i�{ :�
sy'�F.�.'�,.,,q.,
,.
City of Fort Collins Approved Plans
Approved by: Wes Lamarque
Date: 4/24/2�23
Prepared for:
Fart Cnllins Nissan-Kia
5811 S College Ave
Fart Collins, CO 80526
�
Date:
Navember 22, 2022
19 OLD TOWN SQUARE #238 � FORT COLLINS, CO 80524 � 970-530-4044 � www.unitedciviLcom
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
November 22, 2022
City of Fort Collins
Stormwater Utility
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
RE: Fort Collins Nissan-Kia
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project Number: U21004
Dear Staff:
�f�'�`\ IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
United Civil Design Group, LLC. is pleased to submit this Final Drainage Report for the Fort Collins Nissan-Kia site in Fort
Collins, Colorado. In general, this report serves to document the stormwater impacts associated with the proposed
improvements related to the existing site.
We understand that review by the City of Fort Collins is to assure general compliance with standardized criteria contained in
the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM). This report was prepared in compliance with technical criteria set forth
in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual.
If you should have any questions or comments as you review this report, please feel free to contact us at your convenience.
Sincerely,
United Civil Design Group
.^''`
Colton Beck, PE
Project Engineer
��
Kevin Brazelton, PE
Principal
�p,00 L/�
0
�p�'' ..�''f p A N%`� •;
�'
�`''S61 1 1 �s
v ��
-o� �: 1122, 2022 :' �
o�fiSS�UNA��-�G��
U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
�f�'�`\ IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
TABLE �F CONTENTS
�
�
IV
V.
VI
General Location and Description ......................................................................................................................................1
A. General Location & Existing Site Information ............................................................................................. 1
B. Description of Property ............................................................................................................................... 2
C. Project Description ..................................................................................................................................... 2
D. Floodplains ..................................................................................................................................................3
Drainage Basins and Sub-Basins .........................................................................................................................................3
A. Major Basin Description .............................................................................................................................. 3
B. Sub-Basin Description ................................................................................................................................. 3
DrainageDesign Criteria ..............................................................................................................................................
A. Regulations ................................................................................................................................................. 3
B. Directly Connected Impervious Area (DCIA) ............................................................................................... 4
C. Hydrological Criteria ................................................................................................................................... 4
D. Hydraulic Criteria ........................................................................................................................................ 4
E. Modifications of Criteria ............................................................................................................................. 5
DrainageFacility Design ..............................................................................................................................................
A. General Concept ......................................................................................................................................... 5
B. Specific Details ............................................................................................................................................ 5
ErosionControl ............................................................................................................................................................
Conclusions.................................................................................................................................................................
A. Compliance with Standards ...................................................................................................................... 15
B. Drainage Concept ...................................................................................................................................... 15
C. Stormwater Quality ................................................................................................................................... 15
3
5
15
15
VII. References ....................................................................................................................................................................16
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A — Hydrology Calculations
APPENDIX B — Hydraulic Calculations
8.1 — Low Impact Development Calculations
8.2 — Water Quality Calculations
8.3 — Detention Pond and Orifice Calculations
8.4 — eioretention Calculations
8.5 — Inlet Sizing Calculations
8.6 — Storm Pipe Calculations
8.7 — Forebay Calculations
B.8 — WeirAnalyses
8.9 — Channel Capacity Calculations
8.10 — Riprap Calculations
APPENDIX C — Referenced Materials �
APPENDIX D — Drainage Exhibits
I I U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
GENEI2AL LOCATI�N AND DESCRIPTIDN
A. GENERAL LOCATION S� EXISTING $ITE INFORMATION
�f�'�`\ IJNITED CIVIL
Design Graup
The Fort Collins Nissan-Kia site (referred herein as "the site") is located within the Fossil Creek Subdivision, situated in the
northeast quarter of Section 11, T6N, R69W of the 6th P.M., City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. The property,
consisting of approximately 17.0 acres, is located immediately west of S College Ave. The site is split into two separate areas
divided by Crestridge St. South of Crestridge St. exists a car dealership to be redesigned and redeveloped. This portion of the
property is bounded by Crestridge St to the north, S College Ave to the east, a school facility and residential land to the west,
and a commercial property to the south. On-site stormwater drains off-site undetained to either S College Ave, Crestridge St,
or off-site to the west.
The northern, undeveloped portion of the site is bounded by Crestridge St to the south, S College Ave to the east, and
undeveloped land to the north and west. Stormwater on this portion of the site largely drains the northwest via overland
flow to Fossil Creek. A portion of the site adjacently north of Crestridge St drains to the south via overland flow. All on-site
runoff drains downstream within the City of Fort Collins Fossil Creek master drainage basin.
Storm sewer infrastructure exists on-site south of Crestridge St and drains to the off-site to the east. This storm pipe exists as
an irrigation bypass system. A City of Fort Collins Floodway and an Erosion Buffer are established with Fossil Creek and Lang
Gulch. Also, existing on-site is an underground irrigation pipe owned by North Louden Ditch Company. This irrigation pipe
drains from south to north through the site, ultimately to infrastructure that drains across S College Ave to the east. The on-
site portion of this ditch lateral is planned to be relocated; however, this relocation is unrelated to the drainage design of the
site.
An existing residential subdivision and small commercial property are constructed to drain runoff to Venus Ave, conveyed
through an existing wetland area west of Venus Ave to Lang Gulch and ultimately to Fossil Creek.
`'�i�' i . - -- � .
,;
�i N ;i .; � ;
.�
��
FIGIJRE �: $ITE VICINITY MAP
U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
B. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
�f�'�`\ IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
The northern portion of the project site currently exists largely as grass/weed landscape. The southern portion of the site
includes concrete and asphalt pavement, a commercial building, and gravel landscaping. In its historic condition, the site
primarily sheet flows in two general directions: north and south, all conveyed to Fossil Creek.
Below are summaries of key components of the site in its existing conditions.
Land Use - The site's current land use is commercial.
Ground Cover - The northern portion of the site exists as grass/weed landscape. The weed/grass cover is good (ie.,
heavy or dense cover with nearly all ground surfaces protected by vegetation). The southern portion of the site is
fully developed as consists largely of impervious hardscaping.
Existing Topography — The northern, undeveloped portion of the site is bounded by Crestridge St to the south, S
College Ave to the east, and undeveloped land to the north and west. Stormwater on this portion of the site largely
drains the northwest via overland flow to Fossil Creek. A portion of the site adjacently north of Crestridge St drains
to the south via overland flow. All on-site runoff drains downstream within with the City of Fort Collins Fossil Creek
master drainage basin.
Grades — In general, the northern portion of the site slopes northwesterly at approximately 1.0% to 15.0%; the
southern portion of the site is sloped in several directions at approximately 1.0%to 3.0%
Soil Type —The USDA's Web Soil Survey shows that the site consists of "Type B", "Type C", and "Type D" soils. The
Web Soil Survey indicates the site is comprised of Kim Loam (5.0 to 9.0% slopes), Kim Thedalund Loams (3.0 to 15.0°/o
slopes), Midway Clay Loam (5.0% to 25.0% slopes) and Thedalund Loam (3.0% to 9.0% slopes). The on-site soils
provide moderate infiltration and are suitable for development.
Utilities — The following utilities exist adjacent to the site in Crestridge St, College Avenue and Venus Drive: potable
water, sanitary sewer, natural gas, electric and telecommunications.
Irrigation Facilities — An existing on-site underground irrigation pipe owned by North Louden Ditch Company. This
irrigation pipe drains from south to north through the site, ultimately to infrastructure that drains across S College
Ave to the east.
Drainage Features and Storm Sewer— Storm sewer infrastructure exists on-site south of Crestridge St. North of the
site exists the Fossil Creek. For development purposes, a City of Fort Collins Floodway and an Erosion Buffer are
established with Fossil Creek. The western side of the site drains via sheet flow to the Lang Gulch. This portion of the
Lang Gulch exists immediately upstream of Fossil Creek and is accounted for within the City of Fort Collins Floodway
boundary.
C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Fort Collins Nissan-Kia site improvements are limited to approximately 19.0 acres of disturbance. South of
Crestridge St, the proposed site improvements consist of the demolition of the existing car dealership building and associated
paving, and ultimately the construction of a new building with associated drive lanes and inventory parking lot. North of
Crestridge St, site improvements include the extension of Venus Ave, and the addition of a car dealership building and
associated drive lanes and inventory parking lot. Designed with the proposed commercial buildings and paving include
underground utilities, underground water quality, and underground detention. On-site stormwater south of Crestridge Dr is
designed to be conveyed via storm sewer to proposed drainage facilities west of Venus Ave.
In addition to an existing school facility adjacent to the site at the intersection of the Venus Ave and Crestridge St, the existing
Skyview Subdivision to the south is associated with the site in regard to stormwater runoff. In its existing state, this
development along with the school facility drains approximately 3.3-acres to an existing on-site wetland area. With a
proposed relocation of the mentioned wetlands, runoff is now designed to be conveyed to a proposed on-site detention
facility.
U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
D. FLOODPLAINS
The proposed development is not in a FEMA
designated floodplain. According to the FEMA
Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel (08069C1000F),
the site is zoned in an area of minimal flood
hazard. The FEMA FIRM Map is included in the
appendix.
West and Northwest of the site improvements
exists a"High Risk — Floodway" boundary and
erosion buffer along Lang Gulch and Fossil
Creek, established by the City of Fort Collins. The
Nissan-Kia property boundaries exist within the
City of Fort Collins Floodway boundary and
erosion buffer; however, the bounds of grading
construction is to be completed outside of this
boundary. The City of Fort Collins Floodway
boundary is provided on the Drainage Plan (see
Appendix D) and a City of Fort Collins floodplain
map is included in Appendix C. Should
construction be required within the floodway, a
Floodplain Use Permit with a No-Rise
Certification will be required and all work will be
required to be in compliance with Chapter 10 of
the City Municipal Code. If work within the
erosion buffer is required, a erosion buffer
waiver will be required.
I I. DRAINAGE 6ASINS AND SUB-BASINS
A. MAJOR BASIN DESCRIPTION
� ;.
�,
�,a n
�f�'�`\ IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
��
4�
��.s�,,vue 5,
_J
J
� ".!
�
� ��
,�
�
;��
�
�
a
:
- _1
- _I
� J � —
� �
O
_I �
� -� L
� �1 J
� �.
FIGURE 2: FLDODPLAIN MAP
The proposed development is located within the Fossil Creek Basin and will adhere to the Fossil Creek Basin Master Drainage
Plan. In conformance with master plan, the site is designed to release on-site runoff at a rate not to exceed 0.2 cfs/acre.
B. SUB-BASIN DESCRIPTION
Historically the southern portion of the property has been utilized for commercial purposes. The site is designed to operate
in a similar fashion (i.e., commercial), though with significant site improvements. Despite these significant improvements, the
proposed site is largely designed to conform to existing drainage patterns — downstream within the Fossil Creek Basin. In its
existing condition, stormwater on the northern portion of the site is largely conveyed the north to Fossil Creek. The southern
portion of the property drains in a multitude of directions: west to a neighboring property, east to US 287, and north to
Crestridge St. In its improved condition, on-site runoff is intended to drain to multiple downstream underground water quality
and detention facilities by way of sheet flow, swales, pans, inlets, and storm sewer.
III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
A. REGULATIONS
The design criteria for this study are directly from the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction
Standards Manual and the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual's (referred to herein as USDCM) Volumes 2, and 3, used
for supplement only.
3 U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
B. DIRECTLY CONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA �DCIA�
�f�'�`\ IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
The City drainage criteria has also adopted the "Four Step Process" that is recommended in Volume 3 of the USDCM in
selecting structural BMPs for the redeveloping urban areas. The following portions of this summary describe each step and
how it has been utilized for this project:
Step 1— Employ Runoff Reduction Practices
The objective of this step is to reduce runoff peaks and volumes and to employ the technique of "minimizing directly
connected impervious areas" (MDCIA). This project accomplishes this by:
Routing the roof and pavement flows through a bioretention facility, underground water quality treatment/infiltration
facilities and vegetated swales to increase time of concentration, promote infiltration and provide water quality.
Step 2— Provide Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV)
The objective of providing WQCV is to reduce the sediment load and other pollutants that exit the site. For this project WQCV
is provided within underground treatment facilities, a bioretention pond and an extended detention pond.
Step 3 — Stabilize Drainageways
The site exists adjacent to lang Gulch and Fossil Creek. Although the project will not be directly connecting or stabilizing either
drainageway, the project will enhance the stabilization of the existing drainageways by reducing peak flows to the
drainageways via extended detention; and in the case of Lang Gulch, detaining a portion of an offsite basin that currently free
releases to the drainageway. In addition, this project will pay stormwater development and stormwater utility fees which
the City uses, in part, to maintain the stability of the City drainageway systems.
Step 4— Consider Need for Site Specific and Source Control BMPs
Site specific and source control BMPs are generally considered for large industrial and commercial sites. The redevelopment
of the existing site will include multiple site specific and source controls, including:
• Covered storage areas for vehicles and materials.
• Dedicated vehicle maintenance areas within each build with appropriate internal waste collection systems. Sand/oil
separators are provided with the utility plans.
• Dedicated maintenance personnel providing landscape maintenance and snow and ice management.
• Bioretention water quality control ponds.
C. HYDROLOGICAL CRITERIA
City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves, provided by Table 3.4-1 of the Fort Collins Stormwater
Criteria Manual, are utilized for all hydrologic computations related to the site in its existing/historic and proposed conditions.
Since this site is relatively small and does not have complex drainage basins, the peak flow rates for design points have been
calculated based on the Rational Method as described in the USDCM and the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual
(FCSCM) with storm duration set equal to the time of concentration for each sub-basin. This method was used to analyze the
developed runoff from the 2-year (minor) and the 100-year (major) storm events. The Rational Method is widely accepted
for drainage design involving small drainage areas (less than 160 acres) and short time of concentrations. Runoff coefficients
are assumed based on impervious area and are given in the Appendices.
D. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA
The developed site will convey runoff to the proposed pond or underground treatment facility via swales, concrete channels,
and pipes. The City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM) and USDCM are referenced for all hydraulic
calculations. In addition, the following computer programs are utilized:
• Storm Sewer Extension for AutoCAD Civi13D
• Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD Civi13D
• UD-Inlet by UDFCD
4 U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT � f�'�`\ LINITED CIVIL
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
F O R T C O L L I N S, C o Desi gn Grau p
Drainage conveyance facility capacities proposed with the development project, including storm sewer, swales, and inlet
capacities, are designed in accordance with criteria outlined in the FCSCM and/or the Urban Drainage and Flood Control
District's Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (UDFCD) used for supplement purposes only.
E. MODIFICATIONS OF CRITERIA
The conveyance of a considerable amount of off-site stormwater, in addition to hardships related to on-site detention,
present unique challenges concerning the release of stormwater in the site's improved condition. To meet The Fossil Creek
Basin release criterion of 0.2 cfs/acre, while decreasing the overall release within the Fossil Creek Basin relative to existing
conditions, the solution presented in this report includes the "swapping" of detention throughout the site. We believe
manipulating the release rate to Lang Gulch and Fossil Creek outside the bounds of 0.2 cfs/acre for specific on-site drainage
basins, while overdetaining off-site stormwater, is beneficial to downstream features. Despite this variance, the overall
release from the site meets the 0.2 cfs/acre criterion, and the overall release from the site is significantly reduced.
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A. GENERAL CONCEPT
Developed runoff is designed to be conveyed in a safe and effective manner via swales, concrete channels, and storm sewer
systems/inlets. Stormwater is designed to be released within the Fossil Creek Basin. Runoff that drains off-site to the west
(south of Crestridge St) is heavily reduced with the proposed site. Runoff from the site in its improved condition is primarily
conveyed to underground water quality and detention facilities. Due to grading constraints, not all on-site runoff is fully
detained - these areas are considered in the overall release rate from the site.
B. $PECIFIC DETAILS
Hydrolo�y
As previously stated, hydrology from the developed site is designed to comply with criteria set forth in the City of Fort Collins
Stormwater Criteria Manual. Referenced tables, charts, formulas, etc. are included in the appendices. The area, time of
concentration, and runoff of each proposed sub-basin is summarized in Appendix A. The following information outlines the
basin characteristics and drainage patterns for each basin.
Existin� Basins
The following basins provide proposed drainage delineations for the site in its existing condition. Refer to Appendix A for
hydrology computations and Appendix D for visual representation of existing basins.
Basin EX1
Basin EX1 (refer to attached Existing Drainage Map) represents runoff associated with CDOT Right-of-Way in College Ave.
This basin consists of concrete paving, asphalt paving, gravel, and landscaping. Runoff within this basin is conveyed north
along College Ave and ultimately to Fossil Creek.
Basin EX2
Basin EX2 represents on-site runoff that drains to College Ave. This basin consists of concrete paving, asphalt paving, gravel,
and landscaping. Runoff within this basin is conveyed College Ave (i.e., Basin EX1) via sheet flow and concrete curb.
Basin EX3
Basin EX3 represents runoff associated with CDOT Right-of-Way in College Ave. This basin consists of concrete paving, asphalt
paving, gravel, and landscaping. Runoff within this basin is conveyed south along College Ave within the Fossil Creek Basin.
Basin EX4
Basin EX4 represents on-site runoff that drains to College Ave. This basin consists of concrete paving, asphalt paving, gravel,
and landscaping. Runoff within this basin is conveyed to College Ave (i.e., Basin EX3) via sheet flow and concrete curb.
.5 U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT �� LINITED CIVIL
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO Design Group
Basin EX5
Basin EX5 represents on-site runoff that drains to Fossil Creek. This basin is to remain undeveloped, consisting of landscaped
area. Runoff within this basin is conveyed to the northwest, designed to drain to off-site to a culvert system associated with
Fossil Creek.
Basin EX6
Basin EX6 represents on-site runoff that drains to the Lang Gulch, and ultimately Fossil Creek. A portion of this basin is
developed and is designed to drain to existing wetlands located around the southwestern region of the site; other
undeveloped areas drain directly to the Lang Gulch via sheet flow. This basin consists of concrete paving, asphalt paving,
gravel, and landscaping.
Basin OS1
Basin OS1 is a drainage basin associated with and adjacent commercial property and the Skyview Subdivision, located
immediately south of the site. This basin is fully developed and drains on-site via sheet flow along Venus Ave. This basin
accounts for approximately 3.3-acres of off-site drainage.
Basin OS2
Basin OS2 represents off-site runoff that drains to Fossil Creek. This basin is to remain undeveloped, consisting of landscaped
area. Similar to Basin EXS, runoff within this basin is conveyed to the northwest to a 12" culvert system associated with Fossil
Creek.
Proposed Basins
The following basins provide proposed drainage delineations for the site in its improved condition. Refer to Appendix A for
hydrology computations and Appendix B for calculations related to Detention, Water Quality, Low Impact Development, and
other hydraulic features.
Basin A
Sub-basins A1-A16 (see Drainage Plans attached) are generally located around the southern region of the site. These basins
consist of roofs, asphalt and concrete paving, and landscaping. Runoff within these basins A2, A4-A5, & A7-A16 are conveyed
to a Bioretention Pond (Pond A2) via sheet flow, curb, inlets, and storm sewer. Runoff conveyed to the Bioretention Pond is
further discharged to a detention facility (Pond A1). Runoff from Basin A is released to Lang Gulch and ultimately to Fossil
Creek.
Basin B
Sub-basins 61-67 represent on-site drainage basins generally located around the central region of the site. These basins
consist of roofs, asphalt and concrete paving, and landscaping. Runoff within these basins is conveyed to Bioretention Pond
A3 and Detention Pond A1. Runoff from Basin B is released to Lang Gulch via Pond A1 and ultimately to Fossil Creek.
Basin C
Sub-basins C1-C6 represent on-site drainage basins generally located around the northern region of the site. These basins
consist of roofs, asphalt and concrete paving, and landscaping. Runoff within Basins C3-C6 is conveyed to a proposed
underground water quality and detention facility (Pond C2) via inlets and storm sewer. Basin C1 and C2 (i.e., Venus Ave) are
conveyed to proposed storm sewer in Venus Ave and treated within underground water quality chambers prior to being
released downstream to Fossil Creek.
Basin D
Basin D1 represents CDOT Right-of-Way in College Ave at the Southeast corner of the site. In accordance with established
drainage patterns, this area of College Ave drains south along College Ave, ultimately to Fossil Creek. The basin consists of
concrete pavement, asphalt pavement, and landscaping.
U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
�f�'�`\ IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
Basin E
Basin E1, similar to Basins D1, represents CDOT Right-of-Way in College Ave; however, this portion of College Ave drains to
the north. In accordance with established drainage patterns, this area of College Ave drains north along College Ave,
ultimately to Fossil Creek. The basin consists of concrete pavement, asphalt pavement, and landscaping.
Basin OS1
Basin OS1 is a drainage basin associated with and adjacent commercial property and the Skyview Subdivision, located
immediately south of the site. This basin is fully developed and drains on-site via sheet flow along Venus Ave. This basin
accounts for approximately 3.3-acres of off-site drainage. In its improved condition, Venus Ave is designed to convey Basin
OS1 to a proposed detention facility (i.e., Pond A1) via storm sewer infrastructure.
Basin OS2
Basin OS2 represents off-site runoff that drains to Fossil Creek. This basin is to remain similar to its existing condition and is
designed to drain to an existing culvert system at the downstream Fossil Creek Trail.
Stormwater Quality
Bioretention
Bioretention is designed to remove sediment and pollution from stormwater runoff via infiltration through an
engineered sand media. This slows the conveyance rate of storm water runoff, reduces runoff and provides a flow
path across a vegetated surface. Bioretention ponds are proposed with the site improvements and are utilized to
convey and treat stormwater prior to release to downstream proposed detention facilities and ultimately Fossil
Creek.
Bioretention Pond A2 is designed to provide approximately 11,425-sf of bioretention area. Provided 12-inches of
depth, the bioretention pond provides an approximate volume of 12,282-cf — this volume exceeds the required
WQCV for Basin A2, A4-A5, and A7-16 (7,890-cf). Ponding above the initial 12-inches of pond depth is intended for
head purposes to discharge a portion of the 100-year event through the outlet structure — the proposed weir
associated with Pond A2 is designed to assist in conveying the 100-yr event to Pond A1(see Appendix B for hydraulic
analyses). Below is a summary of Bioretention Pond A2:
Bioretention Volume Bioretention Volume
Pond Bottom of Bioretention Required Provided
Pond Elevation WSEL (cf) (cf)
Pond A2 5009.00 5010.00 7,220 12,282
Bioretention Pond A3 is designed to provide about 3,840-sf of bioretention area. Provided 12-inches of depth, the
bioretention pond provides an approximate volume of 3,589-cf—this volume exceeds the required WQCV for Basins
B2-B7 (2,802-cf). Ponding above the initial 12-inches of pond depth is designed to be conveyed to Pond A1 by way
of an overflow weir. Below is a summary of the bioretention pond (i.e., Pond A3):
Bioretention Volume Bioretention Volume
Pond Bottom of Bioretention Required Provided
Pond Elevation WSEL (cf) (cf)
Pond A3 5006.40 5007.40 2,802 3,590
ll. Underpround Water Quality
An underground water quality facility is designed to divert storm water runoff during the water quality event and
treat the flows through infiltration prior to being collected within an underdrain system. This provides for the
removal of sediment and other pollutants from the runoff while also promoting infiltration. Underground water
7 U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
�f�'�`\ IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
quality chambers are designed in two separate locations on-site to collect and treat storm water runoff within Basin
C prior to being released to downstream storm sewer associated with Basin C.
The first underground water quality system, designated as "Pond C1", is designed with a volume equivalent to the
required WQCV (i.e., 3,692-cf). The insulator row designed with the underground detention system will exceed the
volume required for water quality purposes; additional volume will be accounted for with the rest of the chambers
designed for detention purposes. Below is a summary table for water quality related to Basins C3-C6. Refer to
Appendix B for additional information.
WQCV Required WQCV Provided
Pond (cf) (cf)
Pond C1 3,692 3,692
The other underground water quality system, designated as "Pond C2", is designed with a volume of 1,567-cf which
exceeds the minimum design requirements for the area (1,487-cf). Below is a summary table for water quality
related to Basins C1 and C2. Refer to Appendix B for additional information.
WQCV Required WQCV Provided
Pond (cf) (cf)
Pond C2 1,487 1,567
Water quality treatment for a developed Basin OS2 is ultimately the responsibility of the adjacent development;
however, due to the build out of the Venus Ave roadway, water quality treatment is required with the installation
of the northwestern half of Venus Ave. The underground chambers are designed to be a permanent facility for the
proposed Basins C1 and C2 only. Future off-site development of the neighboring property to the northwest is to
provide a separate private water quality system for the basin west of Venus Avenue.
Downstream of the Pond C1 and Pond C2 outfall is a 12" culvert under the Fossil Creek Trail. In its existing condition,
approximately 4.7-cfs is conveyed through the 12" culvert prior to overtopping the Fossil Creek Trail —this culvert is
not sufficient to convey the historic 10-year event (i.e., 12.41-cfs). In the site's improved condition, larger storm
events would continue to overtop the Fossil Creek Trail at a 10-year event of 9.60-cfs.
Designed upstream of the Fossil Creek culvert is a drainage channel (Channel A), sized to convey stormwater from
Underground Ponds C1 and C2. Riprap is included with the design of Channel A for energy dissipation purposes. A
channel capacity analysis is included in Appendix B.
Channel A would be constructed within a drainage easement and will remain within the drainage easement until the
landowner pursues development of the property. In the case of future development, the landowner would
potentially be required to replace the conveyance feature with an improved feature if removed.
111. Extended Detention - WQCV
The proposed site improvements include water quality for Basins A1, A3, A6, and 61. The accumulation of these
basins necessitates a WQCV approximately 939-cf. Pond A1 is sufficiently sized to provide this combined treatment
volume with additional capacity. Below is a summary table for water quality related to Basins A1, A3, A6, and B1.
Refer to Appendix B for additional information.
Treated Area % WQCV Required WQCV Provided
Pond (acres) Impervious (cf) (cf)
Pond A1 2.1 24.7 939 4,976
* Required WQCV represents the sum of each sub-basin. See Appendix B for calculation breakdown.
g U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
��IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
IV. Forebays
The proposed site improvements also include several forebay basins located upstream of the Lang Gulch Outfall. In
addition to bioretention and extended detention methods, four forebay basins are designed to treat all "A" Basins,
"B" Basins, and Basin OS1. Mile High Flood District design criteria (Table EDV-4 of Volume 3 of the UDFCD manual)
is referenced with the design of each forebay. Calculations related to the forebay designs are provided in Appendix
B.
Low Impact Development (LID)
In December of 2015, Fort Collins City Council adopted the revised Low Impact Development (LID) policy and criteria which
requires developments within City limits to meet certain enhanced stormwater treatment requirements in addition to more
standard treatment techniques. The proposed development will be required to meet the newly adopted LID criteria which
requires the following:
- Treat no less than 75% of any newly added impervious area using one or a combination of LID techniques.
- Treat no less than 50% of any newly added impervious area using one or a combination of LID techniques when at
least 25% of any newly added pavement is provided with permeable pavement.
The following measures are implemented with this proposed development:
Underpround Water Quality
Basins C1-C6, combined for 144,990-sf of proposed impervious area, are designed to be routed through underground
water quality systems located in the northern region of the site. The proposed impervious area treated through
underground water quality chambers includes proposed parking, driveway, roof areas, and landscaping. The
underground water quality systems are designed with an overall combined capacity of 6,572-cf which exceeds the
minimum design requirements for the area. Refer to Appendix B for additional information.
eioretention
Basins A2, A4-A5, and A7-A16, accounting for 227,748-sf of proposed impervious area, are designed to be conveyed
to Bioretention Pond A2. All new or modified impervious area related to Basins A2, A4-A5, and A7-A16 is to be
treated by Pond A2.
Basins 62-67, accounting for 84,158-sf of proposed impervious area, are designed to be conveyed to Bioretention
Pond A3. All new or modified impervious area related to Basins B2-B7 is to be treated by Pond A3.
Provided the LID measures noted above, approximately 83.6% of the site is treated in its improved condition. Refer to
Appendix B for LID calculations and Appendix D for a LID Treatment Map. Below is a summary LID treatment table for
reference.
75% On-Site Treatment bv LID Requirement
�
New or Modified Impervious Area (Total)
Required Minimum Impervious Area to be Treated
Impervious Area Treated by LID Treatment Method #1
(Bioretention)
Impervious Area Treated by LID Treatment Method #2
(Underground WQ Chambers)
Total Impervious Area Treated
Percent of Imaervious Areas Treated bv LID
12.16 acre
9.12 acre
6.84 acre
3.33 acre
10.17 acre
83.6 %
9 U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
Detention
Pond A1
�f�'�`\ IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
The design of Pond A1 is intended for extended detention purposes for all `A" Basins (8.43-acres), "B" Basins (3.41-
acres), Basin C1 (0.61-acres), and Basin C2 (0.90-acres). Though Pond A1 is not physically related to Basins C1 and
C2, these basins are analyzed to provide for an area swap with Basin OS1. Sub-basins C1 and C2 will free release
along the northern flow path with exchange for additional "area swap" detention in Pond A1. This detention facility
is designed to release captured runoff at a rate of 2.67-cfs in the 100-yr event, equivalent to the 0.2-cfs/acre
criterion. For emergency situations, the pond is designed to spill stormwater through the emergency overflow
structure which is located at the western end of the detention pond. Water discharged from the emergency overflow
will be conveyed directly to the Lang Gulch.
Below is a summary of Pond A1 utilizing the FAA method:
Detention Detention 100-yr
Pond Bottom of Detention Top of Pond Volume Required Volume Provided Release Rate
Pond WSEI Elevation (ac-ft) (ac-ft) (cfs)
Pond A1 5006.00 5011.00 5012.00 3.03 3.41 2.67
* Refer to the provided tables in the Drainage Summary section on the following pages for context related to
the 100-yr release for Pond A1.
Pond A1 is designed to release upstream of Lang Gulch avoiding the floodplain, erosion buffer and existing wetlands
near the channel bottom. Flows from the pond release will be directed to a level spreader prior to discharging onto
existing dense vegetation. A side slope analysis completed by Ayres Associates is included in Appendix C affirming
the that the existing vegetation and exposed rock along the downstream side slope is sufficiently stable to convey
the Pond A1 release rate.
11. Pond C1
Runoff captured within Basins C3-C6 (i.e., 2.45-acres) is routed to underground chambers, designed to collect and
detain storm water runoff prior to being released to Fossil Creek. Stormwater events that exceed the water quality
event (see section Stormwater Quality narrative above) are designed to exceed the capacity of the system's isolator
row and be further conveyed throughout the underground facility to other chambers for detention purposes. The
minimum 100-yr release via underground detention is established by a release rate per chamber to an underdrain —
this release rate is limited by flow through geotextile with accumulated sediment.
Below is a summary of Pond C1 utilizing the FAA method:
Detention Volume Detention Volume 100-yr
Pond Required Provided Release Rate
(ac-ft) (ac-ft) (cfs)
� Pond C1 0.67 0.68 *0.49
* Refer to the provided tables in the Drainage Summary section on the
following pages for context related to the 100-yr release for Pond C1.
1� U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT � f�'�`\ LINITED CIVIL
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
F O R T C O L L I N S, C O Desi gn Grou p
Drainage Summary
A basin summary table is included below:
.
Basin Area %I Cz Cio Cioo Qz Qio Qioo
(acre) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs)
EX1 2.12 65.0% 0.70 0.70 0.87 3.40 5.81 14.85
EX2 1.70 60.6% 0.67 0.67 0.84 2.63 4.49 11.47
EX3 0.41 82.1% 0.82 0.82 1.00 0.85 1.46 3.65
EX4 0.38 88.9% 0.89 0.89 1.00 0.96 1.65 3.80
EX5 7.97 2.0% 0.25 0.25 0.31 4.08 6.97 17.83
EX6 6.44 24.7% 0.41 0.41 0.52 5.46 9.33 23.85
051 3.27 43.0% 0.55 0.55 0.69 3.58 6.13 15.63
052 6.22 2.0% 0.25 0.25 0.31 3.19 5.44 13.91
... -.
Basin Area %I Cz Cio Cioo Qz Qio Qioo
(acre) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs)
A1 0.95 2.0% 0.25 0.25 0.31 0.51 0.86 2.21
A2 0.57 2.0% 0.25 0.25 0.31 0.30 0.52 1.32
A3 0.49 72.9% 0.76 0.76 0.95 0.79 1.35 4.64
A4 0.60 63.3% 0.69 0.69 0.86 0.88 1.50 4.80
A5 0.40 92.3% 0.89 0.89 1.00 0.77 1.30 3.74
A6 0.20 65.8% 0.71 0.71 0.88 0.30 0.52 1.66
A7 0.39 86.0% 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.74 1.27 3.93
A8 0.11 100.0% 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.28 0.48 1.10
A9 0.14 100.0% 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.34 0.59 1.43
A10 0.68 76.6% 0.78 0.78 0.98 1.13 1.93 6.19
A11 0.31 77.8% 0.79 0.79 0.99 0.52 0.89 2.86
Al2 0.56 81.0% 0.81 0.81 1.00 1.01 1.74 4.96
A13 0.94 90.0% 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.90 3.25 7.26
A14 0.44 78.0% 0.79 0.79 0.99 0.77 1.32 3.66
A15 0.86 89.6% 0.88 0.88 1.00 1.67 2.86 7.23
A16 0.77 90.0% 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.68 2.87 7.16
61 0.46 2.0% 0.25 0.25 0.31 0.25 0.42 1.07
62 0.48 2.0% 0.25 0.25 0.31 0.26 0.44 1.12
63 1.10 70.8% 0.74 0.74 0.93 1.74 2.96 7.88
B4 0.38 91.8% 0.89 0.89 1.00 0.75 1.29 2.95
B5 0.54 85.4% 0.85 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.66 4.53
B6 0.18 68.8% 0.73 0.73 0.91 0.30 0.51 1.56
B7 0.25 80.4% 0.81 0.81 1.00 0.45 0.78 2.52
C1 0.61 84.9% 0.84 0.84 1.00 1.05 1.80 5.68
C2 0.90 58.0% 0.65 0.65 0.81 1.20 2.04 6.79
C3.1 0.93 94.5% 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.86 3.19 7.15
C3.2 0.64 95.6% 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.29 2.21 5.11
C4 0.65 90.7% 0.88 0.88 1.00 1.22 2.07 6.01
C5 0.20 90.0% 0.88 0.88 1.00 0.38 0.65 1.70
C6 0.04 90.0% 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.09 0.16 0.39
D1 0.48 69.1% 0.73 0.73 0.91 0.74 1.27 4.34
E1 2.08 73.5% 0.76 0.76 0.95 2.95 5.04 17.36
OS1 3.27 43.0% 0.55 0.55 0.69 3.58 6.13 15.63
OS2 6.36 2.0% 0.25 0.25 0.31 3.26 5.57 14.23
11 U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT ��'�`\ LINITED CIVIL
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO Design Group
Refer to Appendix D for an Existing Drainage Map that provides a visual representation of Existing Basins EX1-EX6 and OS1-
052. In the site's existing condition, nearly 2.1-acres (i.e., Basin EX2 and EX4) of on-site runoff drains undetained to College
Ave. In addition to on-site basins EX2 and EX4, Basins EX1 and EX2 (i.e., College Ave) also contribute runoff to the west half
of College Ave — the entirety of Basins EX1-EX4 account for approximately 33.77-cfs in the 100-year event. In the site's
improved condition, this 2.1-acre area is captured and conveyed to on-site detention; runoff related to all "A" basins are
detained. Moreover, the improved site is designed to convey 0.35-acres of College Ave runoff (see Basin A10). Despite the
addition of a drive lane to College Ave (i.e., additional impervious area), there is a significant reduction in runoff conveyed by
College Ave in the 100-year Event. The tables below summarize the impacts of the proposed improvements to College Ave
relative to the site's existing condition. In the site's its improved condition, the total runoff related to College Ave during the
100-year event is significantly reduced.
100-year Event: Existing Runoff to College Ave 100-year Event: Proposed Runoff to College Ave
Basin Flowrate
Designation (cfs)
Basin EX1 14.85
Basin EX2 11.47
Basin EX3 3.65
Basin EX4 3.80
Existing Runoff 33.77
Basin Flowrate
Designation (cfs)
Basin D1 4.34
Basin E1 17.36
Proposed Runoff 21.70
In relation to the Fossil Creek, the site is designed to outfall to the west at two locations, including Lang Gulch. Ultimately, all
runoff conveyed to the west (i.e., Lang Gulch and Fossil Creek) has a similar design point in Fossil Creek, northwest of the site.
Per coordination with the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Engineering Department, swapping of basin areas is permitted given
grading constraints while maintain an overall release rate from each detention pond of 0.2 cfs/acre. The tables on the
following page summarize the impacts of the proposed improvements to Lang Gulch and Fossil Creek relative to the site's
limiting criteria.
12 U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
Lang Gulch Outfall
100-year Event: Existing Flows to Lang Gulch
Basin Flowrate
Designation (cfs)
Basin OS1 15.63
Basin EX6 23.85
Tota/ Release 39.48
Fossil Creek Outfall
100-year Event: Existing Flows to Fossil Creek
Basin Flowrate
Designation (cfs)
Basin EX5 17.83
Basin OS2 13.91
Total Flows 31.74
Overall Release to Fossil Creek
100-year Event: Overall Flows to Fossil Creek
(Including upstream Lang Gulch)
Basin Flowrate
Designation (cfs)
Basin EX5 17.83
Basin EX6 23.85
Basin OS1 15.63
Basin OS2 13.91
Total F/ows 71.22
�
��IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
100-yr Event: Proposed On-Site Flows to Lang Gulch
Basin/Pond Area Flowrate
Designation (acre) (cfs)
Pond A1 13.35 2.67
Basin OS1 3.27 15.63*
Total Flows 1830
* Flowrate of Basin 051 assumes no detention. A portion of Basin 051, however,
is detained via an area swap with Basins Cl and C2. The remainder of the flows
from Basin 051 will overtop the spillway of Pond A1 (approximated at 4-cfs).
100-yr Event: Proposed Flows to Fossil Creek
Basin/Pond Area Flowrate
Designation (acre) (cfs)
Pond C1 2.45 0.49
Basin C1 0.61 5.68*
Basin C2 0.90 6.79*
Basin OS2 6.36 14.23
Total Flows 27.19
* Flowrate of Basins C1 & C2 assumes no detention. A portion of Basin OS1,
however, is detained via an area swap with Basins C1 and C2. Basins C1 & C2
are accounted for in the detention design of Pond A1.
100-yr Event: Overall Flows to Fossil Creek
(Including upstream Lang Gulch)
Basin/Pond Area Flowrate
Designation (acre) (cfs)
Pond A1 13.35 2.67
Pond C1 2.45 0.49
Basin C1 0.61 5.68*
Basin C2 0.90 6.79*
Basin OS1 3.27 15.63*
Basin OS2 6.36 14.23
Total Flows 45.49
* Flowrate of Basin OS1 assumes no detention. A portion of Basin 051, however,
is detained via an area swap with Basins C1 and C2. The remainder of the flows
from Basin 051 will overtop the spillway of Pond A1 (approximated at 4-cfs).
13
U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT �� LINITED CIVIL
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO Design Group
Standard Operatin� Procedures (SOPs)
In order for physical stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be effective, proper maintenance is essential.
Maintenance includes both routinely scheduled activities, as well as non-routine repairs that may be required after large
storms, or as a result of other unforeseen problems. Standard Operating Procedures should clearly identify BMP maintenance
responsibility. BMP maintenance is typically the responsibility of the entity owning the BMP.
Identifying who is responsible for maintenance of BMPs and ensuring that an adequate budget is allocated for maintenance
is critical to the long-term success of BMPs. Maintenance responsibility may be assigned either publicly or privately. For this
project, the privately owned BMPs including grass swales, underground water quality and detention, and the bioretention
pond, are to be maintained by the property owner.
Level Spreader
Limited to a release rate of 2.67-cfs, the outfall to Lang Gulch proposed with the site improvements, namely a level spreader,
is designed to ensure non-erosive sheet flow into Lang Gulch. This level spreader is 8-inches in depth (equivalent to the depth
of the Pond A1 outfall pipe) and 35-ft in length, designed at a recommended flowrate of approximately 13-ft per 1-cfs.
Referenced for the design of the level spreader are criteria per the "Low Impact Development Stormwater Management
Planning and Design Guide" by the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program.
A memorandum composed by Ayres Associates is included in Appendix C. This letter affirms the proposed level spreader and
its design to limit erosion of the Lang Gulch.
Storm Sewers
There are multiple storm sewer networks proposed with the site improvements. Several networks including roof drains,
storm drains, and underground water quality and detention features are proposed ultimately with outfalls to Fossil Creek.
Proposed storm sewer systems are both private and public, designed to accommodate the flows from the 100-year storm
event. Hydraulic computations of these systems are provided in Appendix B.
Inlets
There are multiple inlets proposed with the site improvements, including Nyloplast drain basins, Combination Inlets, and Type
R inlets. Type R Inlets are designed throughout the site on-grade and in sump to capture developed runoff for detention. On-
site drain basins are designed in a sump condition and are designed to convey runoff produced within smaller interior basins
to on-site bioretention and detention facilities. All inlets on the site are sized to provide adequate capacity and convey the
100-year storm event. Hydraulic computations of these systems are provided in Appendix B.
Loudon Ditch
Though not associated with the hydrologic design of the Nissan-Kia improvements analyzed with this report, an underground
Loudon Ditch pipe network exists on-site. In coordination with the North Loudon Ditch and Reservoir Company,
improvements to the underground infrastructure are proposed with the Nissan-Kia project. A proposed 24" storm network
is designed to re-route irrigation water from an existing 24" pipe at the southern property boundary to an existing 24" pipe
in College Ave, adequately sized to convey a peak irrigation flow of 2-cfs and a maximum capacity flow of 25-cfs.
14 U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
v. ERosiaN CaNTRa�
�f�'�`\ IJNITED CIVIL
Design Graup
A separate Erosion Control Report / Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) will be prepared for the site in accordance with
the Stormwater Discharge Permit for Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment as the site will disturb an area
greater than 1-acre. The Erosion Control Report will be completed during the Final Compliance phase of the project and will
include more detailed information on the sediment and erosion control items for this project. It is intended that the proposed
improvements will comply with Erosion Control Criteria per the FCSCM, and all Erosion Control Materials will be provided
with the Final Drainage Report. At a minimum, the following temporary BMP's will be installed and maintained to control
on-site erosion and prevent sediment from traveling off-site during construction:
• Silt Fence — a woven synthetic fabric that filters runoff. The silt fence is a temporary barrier that is placed at the base
of a disturbed area.
• Vehicle Tracking Control — a stabilized stone pad located at points of ingress and egress on a construction site. The
stone pad is designed to reduce the amount of mud transported onto public roads by construction traffic.
• Riprap — Riprap will be used downstream of all storm sewer outfalls to control erosion of the receiving channels.
• Inlet Protection — acts as a sediment filter. It is a temporary BMP and requires proper installation and maintenance
to ensure their performance.
• Straw Wattles — wattles act as a sediment filter in swales around inlets. They are a temporary BMP and require
proper installation and maintenance to ensure their performance.
• Slope Protection —Slopes should be terraced using a"tracked" vehicle, run perpendicular to slope to inhibit rill/gulley
erosion.
The contractor shall store all construction materials and equipment and shall provide maintenance and fueling of equipment
in confined areas on-site from which runoff will be contained and filtered. Temporary Best Management Practices (BMP's)
will be inspected by the contractor at a minimum of once every two weeks and after each significant storm event.
VI. C�NCLUSIONS
A. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS
Storm drainage calculations have followed the guidelines provided by the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals Volumes
1, 2 and 3 and the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. Moreover, Chapter 10 of the City Code has been adhered
to. Detention Pond A1 also adheres to State Senate Bill 15-212 drain time requirements (refer to Appendix C for calculations).
B. DRAINAGE CONCEPT
The drainage system has been designed to convey the runoff to the designated design points and the existing public
infrastructure in an effective, safe manner. No negative impacts are anticipated to the City of Fort Collins Master Drainage
Plan or to downstream properties or infrastructure due to the proposed improvements.
C. $TORMWATER QUALITY
Multiple long-term stormwater quality measures have been selected for the site that will provide treatment of stormwater
prior it to being discharged from the site. For this site this includes grass swales, bioretention ponds, and underground water
quality.
15 U21004_Drainage Report
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FORT COLLINS NISSAN-KIA
FORT COLLINS, CO
VII. REFERENCES
��IJNITED CIVIL
Design Group
1. City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, December 2018.
2. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 1 and 2, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado,
June 2001, Revised April 2008.
3. Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey at: websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app
4. Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map, FEMA, Panel 2079E, https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/
5. Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity, Stormwater Management Plan Preparation Guides, State
of Colorado, www.colorado.com
6. Low Impact Development Stormwater Mana�ement Plannin� and Design Guide, Sustainable Technologies Evaluation
Program, June 2022.
16 U21004_Drainage Report
PPENDIX
DRAINAGE CALCl1LATI0NS
RUNOFF CDEFFICIENTS AND % IMPERVIOUS
Nissan - Kia Dealership, Fort Collins, C�
Basin Oesign Pt Areas Composite Com asite Runoff Coeificients
Tutal Total Raof ��� Asphalt Concrete��� Gravel��� Lawns��� Imperviousness �z �io �ioo
acres %I = 90% %I = IDO% %I =100% %I =40% %1=2% (%I)
C=0.95 C=0.95 C=0.95 C=0.50 C=0.25
sf sf sf sf sf sf
EXl EXl 2.72 92,255 54,030 3,425 4,665 30,135 65.0% 0.70 0.70 0.87
EX2 EX2 1.70 74,165 4,185 5,225 32,995 6,200 25,560 60.6% 0.67 0.67 0.84
EX3 EX3 0.41 18,045 10,235 2,435 5,375 - 82.1% 0.82 0.82 1.00
EX4 EX4 0.38 16,625 4,145 10,100 2,380 - 88.9% 0.89 0.89 1.00
EXS EXS 7.97 347,140 347,140 2.0% 0.25 0.25 031
EX6 EX6 6.44 280,470 7,095 15,390 42,290 2,450 213,245 24.7% 0.41 0.41 0.52
O51 O51 3.27 142,330 20,800 36,360 4,460 80,710 43.0% 0.55 0.55 0.69
052 052 6.22 270,840 270,540 2.0% 0.25 0.25 0.31
Date: 9/13/2022 C: � United CivilOropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nisson L
RUNOFF CDEFFICIENTS AND % IMPERVIOUS
Nissan - Kia Dealership, Fort Collins, C�
��� •� �
Basin Oesign Pt Areas Composite Com osite Runoff Coeificients
Tatal Total Roof10 Asphalt Concrete�0 Pavers°1 Lawns10 Imperviousness �z �io �ioo
acres sf %I = 90% %I =100% %I =100% %I =40% %1=2% (%p
C=�.95 C=0.95 C=0.95 C=0.50 C=0.25
sf sf sf sf s1
A1 AI 0.95 41,480 41,480 2.0% 0.25 0.25 0.31
qZ qZ 0.57 24,770 24,770 2.0% 015 025 0.31
A3 A3 0.49 21,460 11,730 3,805 5,925 72.9% 0J6 0J6 095
qq qq 0.60 26,110 14,590 1,735 9,785 633% 0.69 0.69 0.86
AS AS 0.40 ll,495 13,325 2,795 b375 923% 0.89 0.89 1.00
A6 A6 010 8,780 5,145 575 3,060 65.8% 0.71 0.71 0.88
q7 q7 0.39 ll,195 12,690 2,045 2,460 86.0% 0.85 0.85 1.00
qg qg 0.11 4,805 4,570 235 100.0Y 095 0.95 1.00
qg qg 0.14 6,250 5,310 940 100.0Y 095 0.95 1.00
AIO A10 0.68 29,595 19,110 3,405 7,080 76.6% 0J8 0J8 0.98
All All 0.31 13,525 9,965 500 3,060 77.8% 0J9 0J9 0.99
q12 q12 0.56 24,565 ll,870 1,920 4,775 81.0% 0.81 0.81 1.00
A13 A13 0.94 40,990 40,990 90.0% 095 095 1.00
q14 A14 0.44 19,U0 13,235 1,635 4,300 78.0% OJ9 OJ9 0.99
A15 A15 0.86 37,570 25,750 7,850 3,970 89.6% 0.88 0.88 1.00
A16 A16 OJ7 33,500 33,500 90.0% 095 0.95 1.00
Storm Line E(3� 1 3.96 ll2,570 20,800 53,235 $840 - 89,695 47.9% 0.59 059 0J3
Smrm Line H(4) 2 612 270,770 74,490 136,415 23,060 - 36,805 83.9% 0.85 0.85 1.00
Bl Bl 0.46 20,160 20,160 2.0% 025 015 031
gZ gZ 0.48 21,090 21,090 2.0% 015 015 031
B3 B3 1.10 47,980 33,665 14,315 70.8% OJ4 OJ4 0.93
gq gq 0.38 16,646 15,246 1,400 91.8% 0.89 0.89 1.00
BS BS 0.54 23,550 18,230 1,800 3,520 85.4% 0.85 0.85 1.00
B6 B6 0.18 8,045 4,225 1,260 2,560 68.8% 0J3 0.73 0.91
g7 g7 0.25 11,040 7,620 1,210 2,210 80.4% 0.81 0.81 1.00
Smrm Line G 5 1.36 59,281 - 45,321 4,270 - 9,690 84.0% 0.84 O.S4 1.00
Cl Cl 0.61 26,565 16,845 5,625 4,095 84.9% 0.84 0.84 1.00
C2 C2 0.90 39,100 16,340 6,020 16,740 58.0% 0.65 0.65 0.81
C3.1 C3.1 0.93 40,354 29,825 8,260 2,269 94.5% 0.91 0.91 1.00
C3.2 C3.2 0.64 27,731 20J25 5,750 1,256 95.6% 0.92 0.92 1.00
C4 C4 0.65 28,140 23,780 1,680 2,680 90.7% 0.88 0.88 1.00
CS CS 010 8,825 6,230 1,695 900 90.0% 0.88 0.88 1.00
C6 C6 0.04 1,840 1,840 90.0% 0.95 0.95 1.00
SmrmLineA (5) 3 1.51 65,665 - 33,185 11,645 - 20,835 68.9% 0J3 0.73 0.91
Trail Culvert �6� 4 7.87 342,730 - 33,185 11,645 - 297,900 14.8% 034 034 0.43
Dl Dl 0.48 20,830 12,950 1,315 6,565 69.1% 0J3 0J3 0.91
El El 2.08 90,425 54,180 11,755 24,490 73.5% OJ6 0.76 0.95
O51 O51 31� 142,330 20,500 36,360 4,460 80,710 43.0% 0.55 O55 0.69
052 052 6.36 277,065 277,065 2.OY 025 015 031
Notes:
(1) Remmmended % Imperviousness Values perTable 4.1-3 Surface Type - Percent Impervious in Fort Collins Stormwater Giteria Manual
(2) Runoff C is based Table 3.2-2. Surfare Type - Runoff Coefficients and Table 3.23. Frequency Adjustment Factors in Fort Collins Stormwater Manual
(3) Storm Line E is an analysis of the routed flows 6etween Basin A3, A6, and O51
(4) Storm Line H is an analysis of the routed flows between Basins A4-A5, and A7-A16
(5) Storm Line A is an analysis of the routed flows 6etween Baslns CI and Basin C2, plus the addition of Pond Cl release rate
(6) Trail Culvert calculations is an analysis of the routed flows between Basins Cl-C2 and Basin 052, plus the addition of Pond Cl release rate
Date: 9/13/2022 C: � United CivilOropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nisson L
TIME OF C�NCENTRATIDN (Y-YR)
Nissan - Kia �ealership, Fart Collins, CO
8asin esign t. rea Overland Flow (T;) Travel/Channelized Time of Flow (T�)
��F�� Length Slope T;«� Sinpe Length n R Velocity13� T��"� T,+Tr T�m��s� FinalT��s�
acres k � min % ff f s min min min min
E%1 E%1 2.12 0.70 50 2.2% 18.7 2.3% 1180 0.016 0.2 4.8 4.1 22.8 16.6 16.6
EX2 E%2 1.70 0.67 160 2.8% 33.0 1.0% 155 0.016 0.2 3.2 0.8 33.8 10.9 30.9
E%3 E%3 0.41 0.82 40 2.0% 12.2 2.5% 730 0.016 0.2 5.0 2A 14.6 14.1 14.1
EX4 EX4 038 0.89 45 2.0% 9�g 3.5% 165 0.016 0.2 6.0 0.5 10.2 10.9 10.2
E%5 EXS 7.97 0.25 500 10.0% �6.0 Z.0% 320 0.25 0.2 0.3 18.5 94.5 11.8 11.8
EX6 E%6 6.44 0.41 200 I.8% 68.3 2.6% 376 0.016 0.2 5.1 1.2 69.5 12.1 12.1
O51 O51 3.27 0.55 65 2.0% 30.0 2,0% 475 0.016 0.2 4.5 1.8 31.7 12.6 12.6
052 052 6.22 0.25 380 10.0% 66.2 2.0% 360 0.25 0.2 0.3 20.8 87.1 12.0 12.0
Date: 9/13/2022 C: � United CivilOropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nisson L
TIME OF C�NCENTRATIDN (Y-YR)
Nissan - Kia �ealershio. Fart Collins. CO
Aasin esign t. rea �verland Flow (T;) Travel/Channelized Time of Flow (T�)
��F�� Length Slope T;«� Slope Length n R Velacity13� T��"� T,+T� T�m�„�5� FinslT��s�
acres k % min % ff f s min min min min
A1 A1 0.95 0.25 120 14.0% 33.3 1.0% 160 0.016 0.2 3.2 0.8 34.2 10.9 10.9
A2 A2 0.57 0.25 q5 12.0% Zl.s 0.5% 170 0.016 0.2 �.3 1.3 22.7 10.9 10.9
A3 A3 0.49 0.76 q0 2.0% 14.8 1.5% 210 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.9 15.7 11.2 11.2
A4 A4 0.60 0.69 70 2.6% Z7.5 Z.g� 170 0.016 0.2 5.3 0.5 22.0 10.9 30.9
AS AS 0.40 0.89 95 3.9% 10.9 0.6% 100 0.016 0.2 2.5 0.7 11.6 10.6 10.6
A6 A6 0.20 0.71 65 2.2% Z0.9 2.0% 90 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 21.3 10.5 10.5
A7 A7 0.39 0.85 45 3.0% 10.0 1.0% 70 0.016 0.2 3.2 0.4 10.3 10.4 10.3
A8 AS O.11 0.95 45 2.9% 6.1 0.6% 50 0.016 0.2 Z.5 0.3 6.4 103 6.4
A9 A9 0.14 0.95 45 2.2% 6.6 0.8% 110 0.016 0.2 Z.8 0.6 7.3 10.6 7.3
A10 A10 0.68 0.78 60 2.0% 16.7 0.8% 210 0.016 0.2 �.8 1.2 17.9 11.2 11.2
All All 0.31 0.79 50 2.0% 14.8 0.6% 130 0.016 0.2 Z.5 0.9 15.7 10.7 10.7
AI2 Al2 0.56 0.81 g0 2.0% 17.4 0.6% 85 0.016 0.2 Z.5 0.6 18.0 10.5 30.5
A13 A13 0.94 0.95 200 2.0% 14.4 2.0% 100 0.016 0.2 4.5 OA 14.8 10.6 10.6
AI4 A14 0.44 0.79 160 3.3% ZZ.4 0.5% 40 0.016 0.2 �.3 0.3 22.7 10.2 10.2
AIS A15 0.86 0.88 160 3.3% 16.3 0.5% 80 0.016 0.2 2.3 0.6 16.9 10.4 10.4
AI6 A16 0.77 0.95 75 2.0% 8�8 2.0% 60 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.2 9.1 103 9.1
Storm Line E 1 3.96 0.85 65 2.0% 13.4 2.0% 475 0.016 0.2 4.5 1.8 15.2 12.6 12.6
Storm Line H 2 6.22 0.85 145 4.0% 16.0 1.3% 750 0.016 0.2 3.6 3.4 19A 14.2 14.2
B1 61 0.46 0.25 50 25.0% 1��8 0.5% 110 0.016 0.2 �.3 0.8 18.6 10.6 30.6
B2 62 0.48 0.25 50 25.0% 17.8 1.5% 130 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.6 18.3 10.7 10.7
B3 63 1.10 0.74 200 2.0% 34.5 0.8% 115 0.016 0.2 �.8 0.7 35.2 10.6 10.6
B4 B4 0.38 0.89 195 1.6% Z1.3 1.6% 15 0.016 0.2 4.0 0.1 21.4 10.1 10.1
BS 65 0.54 0.85 130 2.7% 17.9 0.5% 110 0.016 0.2 �.3 0.8 18.7 10.6 30.6
B6 66 0.18 0.73 95 2.5% Z3.0 q.0% 50 0.016 0.2 6.4 0.1 23.1 103 10.3
B7 67 0.25 0.81 55 3.7% 11.9 5.2% 40 0.016 0.2 7.3 0.1 12.0 10.2 10.2
Storm Line G 5 1.36 0.84 g5 2.2% 16.1 0.5% 350 0.016 0.2 2.3 2.6 18.7 11.9 11.9
Cl Cl 0.61 0.84 55 2.5% 12.1 5.0% 380 0.016 0.2 7.7 0.9 13.0 12.1 12.1
C2 Q 0.90 0.65 60 2.5% ZZ.O 5.0% 300 0.016 0.2 7.1 0.7 22.7 11.7 11.7
C3.1 C3.1 0.93 0.91 375 5.0% 18.4 2.0% 50 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.2 18.6 10.3 10.3
C3.2 C3.2 0.64 0.92 275 5.0% 15.1 2.5% 75 0.016 0.2 5.0 0.2 15.4 10.4 30.4
C4 C4 0.65 0.88 130 5.0% 12.4 1.5% 165 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.7 13.1 10.9 10.9
CS 6 0.20 0.88 180 3.0% 17.7 1.8% 95 0.016 0.2 4.3 0.4 18.0 10.5 10.5
C6 C6 0.04 0.95 65 2.0% 8�Z 2.0% 75 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 8.5 10.4 8.5
StarmLineA 3.00 1.51 0.73 55 2.5% 17.4 5.0% 380 0.016 0.2 7.1 0.9 18.3 12.1 12.1
Trail Culvert 4 7.87 0.34 55 2.5% 35.5 5.0% 580 0.016 0.2 7.1 1.4 36.9 132 13.2
Dl Dl 0.48 0.73 q0 2.0% 15.9 Z.5% 210 0.016 0.2 5.0 0.7 16.6 11.2 11.2
El El 2.08 0.76 q0 2.0% 14.6 2.5% 940 0.016 0.2 5.0 3.1 17.7 15.2 15.2
O51 051 3.27 0.55 65 2.0% 30.0 2.0% 475 0.016 0.2 4.5 1.8 31.7 12.6 12.6
052 052 6.36 0.25 380 10.0% 66.2 2.0% 360 0.25 0.2 0.3 20.8 87.1 12.0 12.0
Notes:
�'� C=C,'CF is less than or equal to 1.0 (Cf = I.0)
���ti= [1.87(1.1LxCF�L'�z]/5'�' S= slope in %, L=length of overland flow (200' maz urban, 500' max rural)
�'�V=(1.49/n�R'�'S'��, 5= slope in ft/ft, FCSCM Equation 5-4
�0�t� L/(V*60sec/min)
�s� Maxi mum t� = total length/180 + 10
�fi� Minimum t�= 5 min
Date: 9/13/2022 C: � United CivilOropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nisson L
TIME OF C�NCENTRATIDN (10-YR)
Nissan - Kia �ealership, Fart Collins, CO
Basin esign t. rea �verland Flow (T;) Travel/Channelized Time nf Flow (T�)
��F�� Length Slope T;«� Slope Length n R Velocity13� T�j4� T+T� T�m�„�s� FinalT��s�
acres k � min % ff f s min min min min
E%1 E%1 2.12 0.70 50 2.2% 18.7 2.3% 1780 0.016 0.2 4.8 4.1 22.8 16.6 16.6
EX2 EH2 1.70 0.67 160 2.8% 33.0 1.0% 155 0.016 0.2 3.2 0.8 33.8 10.9 10.9
E%3 E%3 0.41 0.82 40 2.0% 12.2 2.5% 730 0.016 0.2 5.0 2.4 14.6 14.1 14.1
EX4 E%4 038 0.89 45 2.0% 9�8 3.5% 165 0.016 0.2 6.0 0.5 10.2 10.9 1�.2
E%5 E%5 7.97 0.25 500 10.0% �6.0 Z.0% 320 0.25 0.2 0.3 18.5 94.5 11.8 11.8
EX6 E%6 6.44 0.41 200 1.8% 68.3 2.6% 376 0.016 0.2 5.1 1.2 69.5 12.1 12.1
O51 O51 3.27 0.55 65 2.0% 30.0 2.0% 475 0.016 0.2 4.5 1.8 31.7 12.6 12.6
052 052 6.22 0.25 380 10.0% 66.2 2.0% 360 0.25 0.2 0.3 20.8 87.1 12.0 12.0
Date: 9/13/2022 C: � United CivilOropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nisson L
TIME OF C�NCENTRATIDN (10-YR)
Nissan - Kia �ealershio. Fart Collins. CO
Basin esign t. rea �verland Flow (T;) Travel/Channelized Time of Flow (Ti)
��F'� Length Slope T;«� Slope Length n R Velacity13� T,�"� T,�T� T�m�,�s� FinalT��s�
acres k % min % ff f s min min min min
A1 A1 0.95 0.25 120 14.0% 33.3 1.0% 160 0.016 0.2 3.2 0.8 34.2 10.9 10.9
A2 A2 0.57 0.25 q5 12.0% ZI.S 0.5% 170 0.016 0.2 �.3 1.3 22.7 10.9 1�.9
A3 A3 0.49 0.76 40 2.0% 14.8 1.5% 210 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.9 15.7 11.2 11.2
A4 A4 0.60 0.69 70 2.6% Z1.5 Z.g� 170 0.016 0.2 5.3 0.5 22.0 10.9 10.9
AS AS 0.40 0.89 95 3.9% 10.9 0.6% 100 0.016 0.2 �.5 0.7 11.6 10.6 10.6
A6 A6 0.20 0.71 65 2.2% Z0.9 2.0% 90 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 21.3 10.5 1�.5
A7 A7 0.39 0.85 45 3.0% 10.0 1.0% 70 0.016 0.2 3.2 0.4 10.3 10.4 1�.3
A8 A8 0.11 0.95 q5 2.9% 6.1 0.6% 50 0.016 0.2 �.5 0.3 6.4 10.3 6.4
A9 A9 0.14 0.95 45 2.2% 6.6 0.8% 110 0.016 0.2 Z.8 0.6 7.3 10.6 7.3
A10 A10 0.68 0.78 60 2.0% 16.7 0.8% 210 0.016 0.2 �.8 1.2 17.9 11.2 11.2
All All 031 0.79 50 2.0% 14.8 0.6% 130 0.016 0.2 �.5 0.9 15.7 10.7 10.7
AI2 Al2 0.56 0.81 g0 2.0% 17.4 0.6% 85 0.016 0.2 �.5 0.6 18.0 10.5 10.5
A13 A13 0.94 0.95 200 2.0% 14.4 2.0% 100 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.4 14.8 10.6 10.6
AI4 A14 0.44 0.79 160 3.3% Zz.4 0.5% 40 0.016 0.2 �.3 0.3 22.7 10.2 1�.2
AIS A15 0.86 0.88 160 3.3% 16.3 0.5% 80 0.016 0.2 �.3 0.6 16.9 10.4 10.4
AI6 A16 0.77 0.95 75 2.0% 8�8 2.0% 60 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.2 9.1 10.3 9.1
Storm Line E I 3.96 0.85 65 2.0% 13.4 2.0% 475 0.016 0.2 4.5 1.8 15.2 12.6 12.6
Storm Line H 2 6.22 0.85 145 4.0% 16.0 13% 750 0.016 0.2 3.6 3.4 19.4 14.2 14.2
B1 BI 0.46 0.25 50 25.0% 17.8 0.5% 110 0.016 0.2 �.3 0.8 18.6 10.6 10.6
B2 B2 0.48 0.25 50 25.0% 17.8 1.5% 130 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.6 18.3 10.7 10.7
B3 B3 1.10 0.74 200 2.0% 34.5 0.8% 115 0.016 0.2 Z.8 0.7 35.2 10.6 1�.6
B4 64 0.38 0.89 195 1.6% Z1.3 1.6% IS 0.016 0.2 4.0 0.1 21.4 10.1 10.1
BS 65 0.54 0.85 130 2.7% 17.9 0.5% 110 0.016 0.2 �.3 0.8 18.7 10.6 10.6
B6 66 0.18 0.73 95 2.5% z3.0 4.0% 50 0.016 0.2 6.4 0.1 23.1 10.3 30.3
B7 67 0.25 0.81 55 3.7% 11.9 5.2% 40 0.016 0.2 7.3 0.1 12.0 10.2 1�.2
StormLineG 5 136 0.84 g5 2.2% 16.1 0.5% 350 0.016 0.2 �.3 2.6 18.7 11.9 11.9
Cl Cl 0.61 0.84 55 2.5% 12.1 5.0% 380 0.016 0.2 7.1 0.9 13.0 12.1 12.1
C2 C2 0.90 0.65 60 2.5% Zz.O 5.0% 300 0.016 0.2 7.1 0.7 22.7 11.7 11.7
C3.1 C3.1 0.93 0.91 375 5.0% 18.4 2.0% 50 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.2 18.6 10.3 10.3
C3.2 C3.2 0.64 0.92 275 5.0% 15.1 Z.0% 75 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 15A 10.4 10.4
C4 C4 0.65 0.88 130 5.0% 12.4 1.5% 165 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.7 13.1 10.9 30.9
CS CS 0.20 0.88 I80 3.0% 17.7 1.8% 95 0.016 0.2 4.3 0.4 18.0 10.5 1�.5
C6 C6 0.04 0.95 65 2.0% g�Z 2.0% 75 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 8.5 10.4 8.5
StarmLineA 3.00 1.51 0.73 55 2.5% 17.4 5.0% 380 0.016 0.2 7.1 0.9 18.3 12.1 12.1
Trail Culvert 4.00 7.87 0.34 55 2.5% 35.5 5.0% 580 0.016 0.2 7.1 1.4 36.9 13.2 13.2
Dl Dl 0.48 0.73 40 2.0% 15.9 2.5% 210 0.016 0.2 5.0 0.7 16.6 11.2 11.2
El El 2.08 0.76 q0 2.0% 14.6 2.5% 940 0.016 0.2 5.0 3.1 17.7 15.2 15.2
O51 051 3.27 0.55 65 2.0% 30.0 Z,0% 475 0.016 0.2 4.5 1.S 31.7 12.6 12.6
052 052 6.36 0.25 380 10.0% 66.2 2.0% 360 0.25 0.2 0.3 20.8 87.1 12.0 12.0
Notes:
�'� C=C,'CF is less than or equal to 1.0 (Cf = I.0)
���ti= [1.87(1.1LxCF�L'�z]/5'�' S= slope in %, L=length of overland flow (200' maz urban, 500' max rural)
�'�V=(1.49/n�R'�'S'��, 5= slope in ft/ft, FCSCM Equation 5-4
�0�t� L/(V*60sec/min)
�s� Maxi mum t� = total length/180 + 10
�fi� Minimum t�= 5 min
Date: 9/13/2022 C: � United CivilOropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nisson L
TIME OF C�NCENTRATIDN (10�-YR)
Nissan - Kia �ealership, Fart Collins, CO
Basin esign t. rea �verland Flow (T;) Travel/Channelized Time nf Flow (T�)
��F�� Lengffi Slupe T;��� Slope Lengffi n R Velocity�31 T�"� T�,*T, T�ma,�s� FinalT��s�
acres k � min % ff f s min min min min
E%1 E%1 2.12 1.00 50 2.2% 4.7 2.3% I180 0.016 0.2 4.6 4.1 8.8 16.6 8.8
EX2 E%2 1.70 1.00 160 2.8% ��� 1.0% 155 0.016 0.2 3.2 0.8 8.5 10.9 8.5
E%3 E%3 0.41 I.00 40 2.0% 4.3 2.5% 730 0.016 0.2 5.0 2.4 6.7 14.1 6.7
EX4 E%4 0.38 1.00 q5 2.0% 4.6 3.5% 165 0.016 0.2 6.0 0.5 5.0 10.9 5.0
E%5 E%5 7.97 0.39 500 10.0% 63.4 2,0% 320 0.25 0.2 0.3 18.5 81.9 11.8 11.8
EX6 E%6 6.44 0.65 200 1.8% 45.1 2,6% 376 0.016 0.2 5.1 1.2 46.4 12.1 12.1
O51 O51 3.27 0.86 65 2.0% 12.9 2.0% 475 0.016 0.2 4.5 1.8 14.7 12.6 12.6
052 052 6.22 0.39 380 10.0% 55.3 2.0% 360 0.25 0.2 0.3 20.8 76.1 12.0 12.0
Date: 9/13/2022 C: � United CivilOropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nisson L
TIME OF C�NCENTRATIDN (10�-YR)
Nissan - Kia �ealershio. Fart Collins. CO
Basin esign t. rea Overland Flow (T;) TraveUChannelized Time of Flow (T�)
��F�� Length Slope T;«� Slope Length n R Velocity�31 Ti�41 T�,*Tr Tom,„�s� FinalT��s�
acres k � min % ff ( s min min min min
A1 A1 0.95 0.39 120 14.0% Z�.B I.0% 160 0.016 0.2 3.2 0.8 28.6 10.9 10.9
A2 A2 0.57 0.39 q5 12.0% 17.9 0.5% 170 0.016 0.2 2.3 13 19.2 10.9 10.9
A3 A3 0.49 1.00 40 2.0% 4.3 1.5% 210 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.9 5.2 11.2 5.2
A4 A4 0.60 1.00 70 2.6% 5.2 I.g/ 170 0.016 0.2 5.3 0.5 5.7 10.9 5.7
AS AS 0.40 I.00 95 3.9% 5.3 0.6% 100 0.016 0.2 2.5 0.7 6.0 10.6 6.0
A6 A6 0.20 1.00 65 2.2% 5.3 2.0% 90 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 5.6 10.5 5.6
A7 A7 0.39 1.00 45 3.0% 4.0 1.0% 70 0.016 0.2 3.2 0.4 4.4 10.4 5.0
A8 AS 0.11 1.00 45 2.9% 4.0 0.6% 50 0.016 0.2 2.5 0.3 4.4 10.3 5.0
A9 A9 0.14 I.00 45 2.2% 4.4 0.8% 110 0.016 0.2 2.8 0.6 5.1 10.6 5.1
A10 A10 0.68 1.00 60 2.0% 5.3 0.8% 210 0.016 0.2 2.8 1.2 6.5 11.2 6.5
All A11 0.31 1.00 50 2.0% 4.8 0.6% 130 0.016 0.2 2.5 0.9 5.7 10.7 5.7
AI2 Al2 0.56 1.00 g0 2.0% 6.1 0.6% 85 0.016 0.2 2.5 0.6 6.7 10.5 6.7
A13 A13 0.94 I.00 200 2.0% 9�6 2.0% 100 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.4 10.0 10.6 10.0
AI4 A14 0.44 1.00 160 3.3% ��3 0.5% 40 0.016 0.2 2.3 0.3 7.6 10.2 7.6
AIS A15 0.86 1.00 160 3.3% ��3 0.5% 80 0.016 0.2 2.3 0.6 7.9 10.4 7.9
AI6 A16 0.77 1.00 75 2.0% 5.9 2.0% 60 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.2 6.1 10.3 6.1
Storm Line E 1 3.96 I.00 65 2.0% 5.5 2.0% 475 0.016 0.2 4.5 1.8 7.2 12.6 7.2
Storm Line H 2 6.22 1.00 145 4.0% 6.5 1.3% 750 0.016 0.2 3.6 3.4 10.0 14.2 10.0
B1 Bl 0.46 0.39 50 25.0% 14.8 0.5% 110 0.016 0.2 2.3 0.8 15.6 10.6 10.6
B2 62 0.48 0.39 50 25.0% 14.8 I.5% 130 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.6 15.4 10.7 10.7
B3 63 1.10 1.00 200 2.0% 9�6 0.8% 115 0.016 0.2 Z.8 �.7 10.3 10.6 10.3
B4 64 0.38 1.00 195 1.6% 10.2 1.6% IS 0.016 0.2 4.0 0.1 10.3 10.1 10.1
BS BS 0.54 1.00 130 2.7% ��0 0.5% 110 0.016 0.2 2.3 0.8 7.8 10.6 7.8
B6 66 0.18 I.00 95 2.5% 6.2 4.0% 50 0.016 0.2 6.4 0.1 6.3 10.3 6.3
B7 B7 0.25 1.00 55 3.7% 4.1 5.2% 40 0.016 0.2 7.3 0.1 4.2 10.2 5.0
StormLineG 5 1.36 1.00 g5 2.2% 6.1 0.5% 350 0.016 0.2 2.3 2.6 8.7 11.9 8.7
Cl Cl 0.61 I.00 55 2.5% 4.7 5.0% 380 0.016 0.2 7.1 0.9 5.6 12.1 5.6
C2 Q 0.90 1.00 60 2.5% 4.9 5.0% 300 0.016 0.2 7.1 0.7 5.6 11.7 5.6
C3.1 C3.1 0.93 1.00 375 5.0% 9�� 0.5% 50 0.016 0.2 2.3 0.4 10.1 10.3 10.1
C3.2 C3.2 0.64 1.00 275 5.0% 8�3 2.0% 75 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 8.6 10.4 8.6
C4 C4 0.65 I.00 130 5.0% 5.7 I.5% 165 0.016 0.2 3.9 0.7 6.4 10.9 6.4
CS CS 0.20 1.00 180 3.0% 8�0 1.8% 95 0.016 0.2 4.3 0.4 8.4 10.5 8.4
C6 C6 0.04 I.00 65 2.0% 5.5 2.0% 75 0.016 0.2 4.5 0.3 5.8 10.4 5.8
StarmLineA 3 1.51 1.00 55 2.5% 4.7 5.0% 380 0.016 0.2 7.1 0.9 5.6 12.1 5.6
Trail Culvert 4.00 7.87 0.53 55 2.5% Z6.5 5.0% 580 0.016 0.2 7.1 1.4 27.9 13.2 13.2
Dl Dl 0.48 1.00 40 2.0% 4�3 2.5% 210 0.016 0.2 5.0 0.7 5.0 11.2 5.0
El E1 2.08 I.00 q0 2.0% 43 2.5% 940 0.016 0.2 5.0 3.1 7.4 15.2 7.4
O51 O51 3.27 0.86 65 2.0% 12.9 2.0% 475 0.016 0.2 4.5 1.8 14.7 12.6 12.6
052 052 6.36 0.39 380 10.0% 55.3 2.0% 360 0.25 0.2 0.3 20.8 76.1 12.0 12.0
Notes:
�'� C=C,"CF is less than or equal to 1.0 (CF = 1.25)
���ti =[1.87(1.1-CxCF�L'�']/5'�', 5= slope in %, L=length of overland flow (200' maz urban, 500' max rural)
�'� V=(1.49/n)R'�'S'��, S= slope in ft/ft, F6CM Equation 5�
�0�t�=L/(V`60 sec/min)
�s� Maxi mum t� = total length/180 + 10
�fi� Mlnimum t�= 5 min
Date: 9/13/2022 C: � United CivilOropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nisson L
RATI�NAL METHOD PEAK Rl1NOFF
Nissan - Kia �ealership, Fort Collins, CO
Basin Uesign Pt. Contrihuting Area 2-Year I00-Year ' Runaff Coefficients Rainfall Intensity Peak Discharge
Basins acre t�, t� C2 Cio �mo �2 �io �mo �2 Qio Qioo
min min in/hr in/hr in/hr cfs cis c/s
EXl EXl EXl 2.12 17 9 OJO OJO 0.87 1J5 2.99 5.03 2.59 4.42 14.85
EX2 EX2 EX2 1.70 11 9 0.67 0.67 0.84 2.13 3.63 5.03 2.43 4.15 11.47
EX3 EX3 EX3 0.41 14 7 0.82 0.82 1.00 1.92 3.29 5.80 0.65 1.11 3.65
EX4 EX4 EX4 0.35 10 5 0.89 0.89 1.00 2.21 3.75 9.95 0.75 1.25 3.80
EXS EXS EXS 7.97 12 12 0.25 0.25 0.31 2.05 3.50 7.16 4.08 6.97 17.83
EX6 EX6 EX6 6.44 12 12 0.41 0.41 0.52 2.05 3.50 7.16 5.46 9.33 23.85
OSl OSl OSl 3.27 13 13 0.55 0.55 0.69 1.98 3.39 6.92 3.58 6.13 15.63
052 052 052 6.22 12 12 0.25 0.25 0.31 2.05 3.50 7.16 3.19 5.44 13.91
Date: 9/13/2022 C: �United Civil Dropbox�Projects� U21004 - Nisson Deoler.
RATI�NAL METHOD PEAK Rl1NOFF
Nissan - Kia �ealership, Fort Collins, CO
��� •� �
8asin Uesign Pt. Contrihuting Area 2-Year 10�-Year Runaff Coefficients Rainfall Intensity Peak Uischarge
Basins acre t� t� C2 Cio �mo �s �io �mo �2 Qm Qioo
min min in/hr in/hr in/hr cfs cis c/s
A1 A1 A1 0.95 11 11 0.25 0.25 0.31 2.13 3.63 7.42 0.51 O.S6 2.21
A2 A2 A2 0.57 11 11 0.25 0.25 0.31 2.13 3.63 7.42 0.30 0.52 1.32
A3 A3 A3 0.49 11 5 OJ6 OJ6 0.95 2.13 3.63 9.95 0.79 135 4.64
A4 A4 A4 0.60 11 6 0.69 0.69 O.S6 2.13 3.63 9.31 0.88 1.50 4.80
AS AS AS 0.40 11 6 O.S9 0.89 1.00 2.13 3.63 9.31 0.77 1.30 3.74
A6 A6 A6 0.20 11 6 0.71 0.71 O.SS 2.13 3.63 9.31 0.30 0.52 1.66
A7 A7 A7 0.39 10 5 0.85 0.85 1.00 221 37S 9.95 0.74 117 3.93
A8 AS A8 0.11 6 5 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.67 4.56 9.95 0.28 0.45 1.10
A9 A9 A9 0.14 7 5 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.52 4.31 9.95 0.34 0.59 1.43
A10 A10 A10 0.68 11 6 0.78 0.78 0.98 2.13 3.63 9.31 1.13 1.93 6.19
All All All 0.31 11 6 0.79 0.79 0.99 2.13 3.63 9.31 0.52 0.89 2.86
Al2 Al2 Al2 0.56 10 7 O.S1 0.81 1.00 2.21 3.75 8.80 1.01 1.74 4.96
A13 A13 A13 0.94 11 10 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.13 3.63 7J2 1.90 315 7.26
A14 A14 A14 0.44 10 S 0.79 0.79 0.99 2.21 3.78 5.38 0.77 1.32 3.66
A15 A15 A15 0.86 10 8 0.88 0.88 1.00 2.21 3.78 8.35 1.67 2.86 7.23
A16 A16 A16 0.77 9 6 0.95 0.95 1.00 2.30 3.93 9.31 1.68 2.87 7.16
Storm Line E 1 A3, A6, OSl 3.96 13 7 059 0.59 0J3 1.95 3.39 S.SO 4.60 7.57 25.54
Storm Line H 2 A4, A5, A7 - A16 6.22 14 10 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.92 3.29 7.72 10.20 17.48 47.99
Bl Bl 81 0.46 11 11 0.25 0.25 0.31 2.13 3.63 7.42 0.25 0.42 1.07
62 B2 62 0.48 11 11 0.25 0.25 0.31 2.13 3.63 7.42 0.26 0.44 1.12
83 B3 B3 1.10 11 10 0.74 0.74 0.93 2.13 3.63 7.72 1.74 2.96 7.88
84 64 64 0.38 10 10 0.89 0.89 1.00 L21 3JS 7J2 0.75 119 2.95
BS BS BS 0.54 11 S 0.85 0.85 1.00 2.13 3.63 5.38 0.97 1.66 4.53
B6 66 66 O.1S 10 6 0.73 0.73 0.91 2.21 3.78 9.31 0.30 0.51 1.56
67 87 87 0.25 10 5 O.S1 0.81 1.00 2.21 3.75 9.95 0.45 0.75 2.52
Storm Line G 5 64 - B7 1.36 12 9 0.84 0.84 1.00 2.05 3.50 8.03 2.33 3.95 10.93
Cl Ci Cl 0.61 12 6 O.S4 0.84 1.00 2.05 3.50 9.31 1.05 1.50 5.68
C2 C2 C2 0.90 12 6 0.65 0.65 0.81 2.05 3.50 9.31 1.20 2.04 6.79
C3.1 C31 C3.1 0.93 10 10 0.91 0.91 1.00 221 3J8 7J2 1.86 3.19 7.15
C3.2 C3.2 C3.2 0.64 10 9 0.92 0.92 1.00 2.21 3J8 8.03 1.29 2.21 5.11
C4 C4 C4 0.65 11 6 0.88 0.85 1.00 2.13 3.63 931 112 2.07 6.01
CS CS CS 0.20 11 8 O.SS 0.88 1.00 2.13 3.63 8.38 0.38 0.65 1.70
C6 C6 C6 0.04 9 6 0.95 0.95 1.00 230 3.93 931 0.09 0.16 039
Storm Line A 3 C1, Q 1.51 12 6 OJ3 OJ3 0.91 2.05 3.50 931 2J4�1) 433 (1) 13.26 (l)
Trail Culvert 4 Cl, Q, OS2 7.87 13 13 034 034 0.43 1.98 339 6.92 5.81 (2) 9.60 (Z) 23.74 �z)
Dl Dl Dl 0.48 11 5 0.73 OJ3 0.91 2.13 3.63 9.95 0.74 117 434
E1 El El 2.OS 15 7 0.76 0.76 0.95 1.57 3.19 5.80 2.95 5.04 17.36
O51 051 051 3.27 13 13 0.55 0.55 0.69 1.95 3.39 6.92 3.58 6.13 15.63
OS2 OS2 052 6.36 12 12 0.25 0.25 0.31 2.05 3.50 7.16 3.26 5.57 14.23
(1) Storm Line A is an analysis of the routed flows between Basins C1 and Basin C2, plus the addition of Pond C1 release rate
(2) Trail Culvert calculations is an analysis of the routed flows between Basins Cl-Q and Basin 052, plus the addition of Pond Cl release rate
Date: 9/13/2022 C: �United Civil Dropbox�Projects� U21004 - Nisson Deoler.
PPENDIX
HYDRAl1LIC CALCl1LATI0NS
LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT SIJMMARY
Nissan - Kia �ealership, Fort Collins, CO
Basin
Proposed
Impervious Area
LID Treatment
Area Treated % of Site Treated
830
495
15,654
16,521
16,148
5,781
14,784
4,805
6,250
17,269
10,526
19,856
36,891
14,956
33,679
30,150
403
422
33,951
15,274
20,100
5,536
8,874
1
22,552
22,695
38,130
26,500
25,514
7,943
1,656
6,851
48,795
New/Modified 5ite
529.851
None
Bioretention
None
Bioretention
Bioretention
None
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
None
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Underground Water Quality
Underground Water Quality
Underground Water Quality
Underground Water Quality
Underqround Water Quality
Underground Water quality
Underground Water Quality
None
None
0
495
0
16,521
16,148
0
14,784
4,805
6,250
17,269
2, 065
19,886
36,891
14,956
33, 679
30,150
0
422
33,951
15,274
20,100
5,536
8,874
22,552 4
Z2,695 4
38,130 7
26,500 5
25,514 4
7,943 1
1,656 0
0 0
0 0
443.�46 83.
Date: 9/12/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nisson Dealership�Reports�Draina
WATER QIJALITY j�, LJNITED CIVIL
Nissan-KiaOealership,FortCollins,CO � �~ Desf�n Group
8asin
A1
A2
A3�sl
A4
AS
A6�3�
A7
AS
A9
A10
A11
Al2
A13
A14
A15
A16
B1
82
B3
84
BS
86
87
CZ �3�
C2 (3)
C31�Z, 5�
C3.21z,s1
C4 �Z, 6�
CS Iz, sl
C6 �Z' S�
D1
E1
051
Area
(sf)
41,480
24,770
21,460
26,110
17,495
8,750
17,195
4,805
6,250
29,595
13,525
24,565
40,990
19,170
37,570
33,500
20,160
21,090
47,980
16,646
23,550
8,045
11,040
26,565
39,100
4Q354
27,731
25,140
8,825
1,840
20,530
90,425
142,330
Area
aeres
0.952
0.569
0.493
0.599
0.402
0.202
0.395
0.110
0.143
0.679
0.310
0.564
0.941
0.440
0.862
0.769
0.463
0.484
1.101
0.382
0.541
0.185
0.253
0.610
0.898
0.926
0.637
0.646
0.203
0.042
0.475
2.076
3.267
Imperviousness
�a� �
2%
2%
73%
63%
92%
66%
86%
100%
100%
77%
78%
81%
90%
78%
90%
90%
2%
2%
71%
92%
85%
69%
80%
85%
$8�
94%
96%
91%
90%
90%
69%
73%
43%
Watershed
(inches)
0.02
0.01
0.29
0.20
034
016
030
0.40
0.40
OZS
025
017
032
O15
032
032
0.02
0.01
012
033
019
0.22
016
0.29
0.18
035
036
033
032
032
017
0.29
0.19
�1� Water quality provided by bioretention and based on 12-hour storage
�Z� Water quality provided by underground detention and based on 12-hour storage
�3� Based on 40 hr storage
�4� Basins Dl & E1 are related to CDOT R.O.W and are not captured with the site improvemens
�5� The larger Isolated row related to Pond C1 is designed to treat Basins C3.1, C3.2, C5, C6 - this required volume is 2,775 cf.
�6� The smaller Isolated row related to Pond Cl is designed to treat Basins C4 - this required volume is 917 cf.
Faeility
Uesignation
Detention Pond Al
Bioretention Pond A2
Bioretention Pond A3
Underground Pond C1
Underground Pond Q
W[lCV
ae-ft
o.oz
0.18
0.06
0.08
0.02
WUCV
ae-ft
o.0
0.28
0.08
0.08
0.04
WRCV
�C�
63
30
620
517
590
226
508
192
250
729
341
657
1,317
485
1,198
1,076
31
26
1,069
555
687
174
292
768
719
1,425
1,005
917
283
59
565
2,636
2,671
IMlTreatment
Method
Extended Detention
Bioretention �l�
Extended Detention
Bioretention �1�
Bioretention
Extended Detention
Bioretention �1�
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Extended Detention
Bioretention �1�
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
Underground Water Quality
Underground Water Quality
Underground Water Quality
Underground Water Quality
Underground Water Quality
Underground Water Quality
Underground WaterQuality
None
None
None
Date: 10/11/2022 C: �United Civil Dropbox�Projecu�U21004 - Nisson Deolership�Reports�Drainage�Colculotions�U21004-Drain Colcs-FDP
IJNDERGRDIJND DETENTION � WATER QUALITY
Nissan - Kia Oealership, Fort Collins, CO
Cham6er
10
Cl (Larger LID/WQ)
CI (Smaller LID/WQ)
Cl (Detention)
Total Required Detentian/ Cham6er Cham6er Chamber *Installed Min. End Cap *Installed Min. Min. Req'd Oesign No. nf No. of
Uetention/NR NR Type llnit llnit Chamber llnit No. of IJnit End Cap INQ Isolator Row Control' Chambers End Caps
Volumea Inflow6 Release Volumed Volume ine. Cham6ers� Valumed Volume ine. Release Volume hy Provided Provided
Rate` Aggregatee Aggregatee Rate9 FAA Methodh
(sf) (efs) (efs) (ef) (ef) (sf) (ef) (cf) (cfs) (cf)
2,775 l.11 MCJ200 0.043 ll5.90 26730 10 39.50 11530 0.43 1,075 WQCV 11 2
917 0.61 MC-7200 0.043 175.90 267.30 3 39.50 115.30 0.13 249 WQCV 6 2
28,975 20.37 MC-7200 0.043 ll5.90 267.30 98 39.50 11530 - - - 95 26
_ Pond Cl 32,667 MC-7200 0.043 175.90 267.30 111 39.50 115.30 0.43 1,078 WQCV 112 30
C2 (LID/WQ) 1,487 1.12 MC-7200 0.043 175.90 267.30 5 39.50 115.30 0.21 898 WQCV 5 2
*Volume assumes minimum aggregate depth below chamber.
a. Total required WQCV calculated per 12-hr drain time.
b. WQ inflow is approximated as one-half the 2-yr peak runoff rate.
c. Release rate per chamber, limited by flow through geotextile with accumulated sediment.
d. Volume within chamber only, not accounting for void spaces in surrounding aggregate. The Isolator Row�s) are sized per this unit volume.
e. Volume indudes chamber and void spaces (40%) in surrounding aggregate, per chamber unit. The total system WQCV is sized per this unit volume.
f. Number of chambers required to provide full WQCV within total installed system, including aggregate.
g. Release rete per chamber times number of chambers. This is used at the'outlet control' for the FAA calculations.
h. Minimum'chamber-only'volume to ensure dirty water is fully contained within Isolator Row.
i. Determines whether the design is controlled by the Isolator Row volume or WQCV.
j. Release rate per chamber times number of chambers provided.
k. Volume provided in chambers only (no aggregate storage). This number must meet or exceed the required FAA storage volume.
I. System volume includes total number of chambers, plus surrounding aggregate. This number must meet or exceed the required 12-hr WQCV.
Date: 10/11/2022 C: �United Civil Dropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nisson Deolership�F
DETENTI�N POND WLUME (FAA Method)
Nissan - Kia Dealershio. Fort Collins. C�
�IJNITED CIVIL
� �
o�.�s�y�, s�-��,,
100 Year Storm Into Uetention Faeility
Area = 581,436 squarefeet
Area = 1335 acres
C z = 0.72
� ioo = 0.86
Release Rate Dut af Pond
Q our = 2.67 cfs
Notes:
1. Pond Area indudes all "A" Basins, all "B" Basins, and Basins Cl and Q. The C Basins are used to provide for an area swap from Basin OSl.
Z. �ioo value shown is a weighted average of the C values calculated using each sub-basin.
3. Release rate is equal to the Pond Area x 0.2 cfs/acre.
Detention Valume Calculations
Rainfall Rainfall Inflow Rate Inflow Volume Adjustment
Duration (T) IntensitY (�) 4�� ��ioo`Area*I V� (4;�'T*60) Factor
m= 0.5(1 + T�/T)
min
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
70
SO
90
100
110
120
Average
Outflow Rate
4a�= m*�k��
cfs
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
Outflow Volume
Vo Q,,,*T *60
JL3
SO1
1, 602
2,403
3,204
4,004
4,805
5,606
6,407
7,208
5,009
8,810
9,611
11,212
12,814
14,416
16,018
17,619
19,221
Required
Storage Volume
Vs VrVo
£t 3
�
33,303
51,319
64,640
73,573
81,341
88,150
92,284
96,145
99,526
102,701
105,430
lOS,023
113,070
117,707
121,932
125,197
128,668
132,139
Required Detention Volume
�ioo = 132,139 cubic feet
�ioo = 3.03 acre-ft
Date: 10/il/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projeds�U21004 - Nissan Dealership�Reports�Drainage�Calculations�UZ1004-Drain Calcs-FDP
in/hr
9.95
7.72
6.52
5.60
4.98
4.52
4.08
3.74
3.46
3.23
3.03
2.56
2.59
238
2.21
2.06
1.94
1.54
cfs
113.7
88.2
74.5
64.0
56.9
51.6
46.6
42.7
39.5
36.9
34.6
32.7
29.6
27.2
25.2
23.5
222
21.0
£t 3
�
34,104
52,921
67,043
76,777
85,346
92,955
97,590
102,552
106,734
110,709
114,240
117,633
124,283
130,521
136,347
141,215
146,287
151,360
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
DETENTI�N POND WLUME (FAA Method)
Nissan - Kia Dealershio. Fort Collins. C�
�IJNITED CIVIL
� �
o�.�s�y�, s�-��,,
asin araeateristics
Area = 75,750 squarefeet
Area = 1.81 acres
C z = 0.91
� ioo = 1.00
e ease ate etermine rum um er o am ers an am er e ease ate
Q oor = o.a7 cfs
Notes:
1. Release rate out of pond based on number of chambers multiplied by release rate per chamber.
2. Rainfall intensities approximated as one-half the 2-yr peak runoff rate.
3. CZ utilired for water quality event detention calculation.
4. Isolated is designed to provide WQ for Basins C3, C5, C6.
Detention Volume Caleulations
Rainfall Rainfall Inflow Rate Inflow Volume Adjustment
Duration (T) Intensity (I) Q�,�=�CiQo*Area*I V;=(Q;�*T*60) Factor
m= 0.5(1 + T�/T)
min
5
10
IS
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
SS
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
Average
Outflow Rate
4a� = m � ���
cfs
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.47
Outflow Volume
Vo Qa�*T *60
a
141
283
424
565
707
S4S
989
1,131
1,272
1,414
1,555
1,696
1,835
1,979
2,120
2,262
2,403
2, 544
2,686
2,827
2,968
3,110
3,251
3,393
Required
Storage Volume
Vr V,-Vo
562
809
961
1,025
1,059
1,078
1,033
9S3
928
858
808
734
634
545
436
346
242
167
36
-61
168
-285
354
488
Required Detention Volume
�ioo = 1,078 cubicfeet
�ioo = 0.02 acre-ft
Date: 10/il/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projeds�U21004 - Nissan Dealership�Reports�Drainage�Calculations�UZ1004-Drain Calcs-FDP
in/hr
1.425
1.105
0.935
0.805
0.715
0.650
0.585
0.535
0.495
0.460
0.435
0.410
0385
0365
0345
0330
0315
0305
0190
0280
0.270
0.260
0.255
0.245
cfs
23
1.S
1.5
13
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
O.S
O.S
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
�
704
1,092
1,385
1,590
1,766
1,926
2,023
2,114
2,200
2,272
2,363
2,430
2,472
2,524
2,556
2,608
2,645
2,712
2,721
2,766
2,800
2,825
2,897
2,904
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
DETENTI�N POND WLUME (FAA Method)
Nissan - Kia Dealershio. Fort Collins. C�
�IJNITED CIVIL
� �
o�.�s�y�, s�-��,,
asin araeateristics
Area = 25,140 squarefeet
Area = 0.65 acres
Cz = 0.85
� ioo = 1.00
e ease ate etermine rum um er o am ers an am er e ease ate
Q our = 0.26 cfs
Notes:
1. Release rate out of pond based on number of chambers multiplied by release rate per chamber.
2. Rainfall intensities approximated as one-half the 2-yr peak runoff rate.
3. CZ utilired for water quality event detention calculation.
4. Isolated Row is designed to provide WQ for Basin C4.
Detention Volume Caleulations
Rainfall Rainfall Inflow Rate Inflow Volume Adjustment
Duration (T) Intensity (I) Q�,�=�CiQo*Area*I V;=(Q;�*T*60) Factor
m= 0.5(1 + T�/T)
min
5
10
IS
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
SS
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
Average
Outflow Rate
4a� = m � ���
cfs
0.26
0.26
026
016
0.26
016
0.26
0.26
016
026
016
016
0.26
026
0.26
026
0.26
0.26
016
026
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.26
Outflow Volume
Vo Qa�*T *60
a
77
154
231
308
386
463
540
617
694
771
84S
925
1,002
1,079
1,157
1,234
1, 311
1,385
1,465
1,542
1,619
1,696
1,773
1,550
Required
Storage Volume
Vr V,-Vo
167
224
249
243
226
205
161
116
69
16
29
-83
146
-205
271
-330
394
-448
522
-583
649
-717
769
844
Required Detention Volume
�ioo = 249 cubicfeet
�ioo = 0.01 acre-ft
Date: 10/il/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projeds�U21004 - Nissan Dealership�Reports�Drainage�Calculations�UZ1004-Drain Calcs-FDP
in/hr
1.425
1.105
0.935
0.805
0.715
0.650
0.585
0.535
0.495
0.460
0.435
0.410
0385
0365
0345
0330
0315
0305
0190
0280
0.270
0.260
0.255
0.245
cfs
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3
03
03
0.3
01
01
01
02
01
0.2
01
02
01
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
�
244
378
480
551
612
668
701
733
763
787
819
842
857
875
886
904
917
940
943
959
971
979
1,004
1,007
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
DETENTI�N POND WLUME (FAA Method)
Nissan - Kia Dealershio. Fort Collins. C�
�IJNITED CIVIL
� �
o�.�s�y�, s�-��,,
100 Year Storm Into Uetention Faeility
Area = 106,590 squarefeet
Area = 2.45 acres
Cz = 0.90
� ioo = 1.00
Release Rate Dut af Pond
Q our = 0.49 cfs
Notes:
1. Pond area indudes Basins C3 - C6.
Z. �ioo value shown is a weighted average of the C values calculated using each sub-basin.
3. Release rate is equal to the Pond Area x 0.2 cfs/acre.
Detention Valume Calculations
Rainfall Rainfall Inflow Rate Inflow Volume Adjustment
Duration (T) IntensitY (�) 4�� ��ioo`Area*I V� (4;�'T*60) Factor
m= 0.5(1 + T�/T)
min
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
70
SO
90
100
110
120
Average
Outflow Rate
4a�= m*�k��
cfs
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
Outflow Volume
Vo Q,,,*T *60
JL3
147
294
442
589
736
883
1,031
1,178
1,325
1,472
1,620
1,767
2,061
2,356
2,650
2,945
3,239
3,534
Required
Storage Volume
Vs VrVo
£t 3
�
7,178
11,072
13,958
15,901
17,594
19,081
19,994
20,848
21,599
22,306
22,917
23,495
24,632
25,677
26,634
27,385
28,180
28,975
Required Detention Volume
�ioo = 28,975 cubic feet
�ioo = 0.67 acre-ft
Date: 10/il/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projeds�U21004 - Nissan Dealership�Reports�Drainage�Calculations�UZ1004-Drain Calcs-FDP
in/hr
9.95
7.72
6.52
5.60
4.98
4.52
4.08
3.74
3.46
3.23
3.03
2.56
2.59
238
2.21
2.06
1.94
1.54
cfs
24.4
18.9
16.0
13.7
12.2
11.1
10.0
92
8.5
7.9
7.4
7.0
6.4
S.S
5.4
S.1
4.8
4.5
£t 3
�
7,325
11,366
14,399
16,490
15,330
19,965
21,025
22,026
22,924
23,778
24,536
25,265
26,693
25,033
29,284
30,330
31,419
32,509
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
DETENTI�N POND WLUME (FAA Method)
Nissan - Kia Dealershio. Fort Collins. C�
�IJNITED CIVIL
� �
o�.�s�y�, s�-��,,
asin araeateristics
Area = 65,665 squarefeet
Area = 1.51 acres
C z = 0.73
� ioo = 0.89
e ease ate etermine rum um er o am ers an am er e ease ate
Qo�T = o.0 �f5
Notes:
1. Release rate out of pond based on number of chambers multiplied by release rate per chamber.
2. Rainfall intensities approximated as one-half the 2-yr peak runoff rate.
3. CZ utilized for water quality event detention calculation.
4. Pond is designed to provide WQ for Basins C1 & Q.
Detention Volume Caleulations
Rainfall Rainfall Inflow Rate Inflow Volume Adjustment
Duration (T) Intensity (I) Q�,�=�CiQo*Area*I V;=(Q;�*T*60) Factor
m= 0.5(1 + T�/T)
min
5
10
IS
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
SS
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
Average
Outflow Rate
4a� = m � ���
cfs
0.21
0.21
021
011
0.21
011
0.21
011
011
021
011
0.21
011
021
011
021
0.21
0.21
011
021
0.21
0.21
0.21
0.21
Outflow Volume
Vo Qa�*T *60
a
64
129
193
257
321
386
450
514
578
643
707
771
835
900
964
1,028
1,092
1,157
1,221
1,285
1,349
1,414
1,475
1,542
Required
Storage Volume
Vr V,-Vo
405
599
731
803
856
898
898
895
888
872
868
849
812
783
740
710
670
651
593
558
517
469
453
394
Required Detention Volume
�ioo = 898 cubicfeet
�ioo = 0.02 acre-ft
Date: 10/il/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projeds�U21004 - Nissan Dealership�Reports�Drainage�Calculations�UZ1004-Drain Calcs-FDP
in/hr
1.425
1.105
0.935
0.805
0.715
0.650
0.585
0.535
0.495
0.460
0.435
0.410
0385
0365
0345
0330
0315
0305
0190
0280
0.270
0.260
0.255
0.245
cfs
1.6
1.2
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
03
03
03
0.3
03
0.3
03
03
�
469
727
923
1,060
1,177
1,284
1,348
1,409
1,467
1,514
1,575
1,620
1,648
1,682
1,704
1,738
1,763
1,807
1,814
1,843
1,866
1,883
1,931
1,936
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
DETENTI�N P�ND ST�RAGE AND ORIFICE CALCULATI�N3
Nissan - Kia Dealershio. Fort Collins. C�
�IJNITED CIVIL
� �
o�.�s�y�, s�-��,�
Stage Storage Caleulations
Elevation Area (sf) Depth (ft) Volume (ef) Volume total (cf) ft)
16.00 15.70 0.00 0 0 0.00
)6.20 953.15 0.20 73 73 0.00
16.40 2,877.16 0.20 366 438 0.01
76.60 6,090.91 0.20 877 1,315 0.03
16.80 9,151.20 0.20 1,517 2,832 0.07
17.00 12,33721 0.20 2,144 4,976 0.11
17.20 14,737.94 0.20 2,704 7,650 0.18
77.40 22,561.98 0.20 3,702 11,383 0.26
17.60 24,834.75 0.20 4,738 16,120 037
J7.80 26,26831 0.20 5,110 21,230 0.49
18.00 27,705.23 0.20 5,397 26,627 0.61
18.20 28,978.65 0.20 5,668 32,295 0.74
18.40 30,198.95 0.20 5,917 35,212 0.88
18.60 31,388.92 0.20 6,158 44,370 1.02
18.80 32,565.78 0.20 6,395 50,765 1.17
)9.00 33,777.45 0.20 6,634 57,399 132
19.20 35,002.03 0.20 6,878 64,277 1.48
19.40 36,224.64 0.20 7,122 71,399 1.64
19.60 37,439.35 0.20 7,366 75,765 1.81
19.80 38,660.57 0.20 7,610 86,375 1.98
L0.00 53,149.88 0.20 9,143 95,S1S 2.19
L0.20 54,767.74 0.20 10,791 106,309 2.44
L0.40 56,743.81 0.20 11,151 117,460 2.70
L0.60 58,75436 0.20 11,552 129,012 2.96
L0.80 60,868.13 0.20 11,965 140,977 3.24
11.00 63,139.27 0.20 12,400 153,377 3.52
Detention Pond Starage 8 Water [luality
300-Year Detention Volume and Elevations Water Quality Volume and Elevations
Detention Volume Required = 132,139 ft3 Water quality Volume Required = 939 ft3
3.03 ac-ft 0.02 ac-ft
Elev81- ElevBo (VoIReQ��„Qa Voleo)+Elev$o Elev81- ElevBo (Volaeq�;,ed VolBo)+ElevBo
W.S. Elevation, ft = W.S. Elevation, ft =
Volgi - Voao Volgi - Voao
Required W.S. Elevation = 5010.66 ft Required W.S. Elevation = 5006.67 ft
Provided W.S. Elevation = 5031.00 ft Provided W.S. Elevation = 5007.00 ft
Detention Volume Provided = 148,400 ft; Water Quality Volume Provided = 4,976 ft3
3.41 ac-ft 0.11 ac-ft
100-year Depth D= 5.00 ft Water quality Depth D= 1.00 ft
Top-of-Berm = 5012.00 ft 100-year W.S. Elevation = 5011.00 ft
Freeboard = 1.00 ft Freeboard = 4.00 ft
Orifice Opening and Water Uuality Plate
100-Year Orifice Calculation Water Quality Plate Calculation
Orifice Flow Rate, Q= CpAo(2gHo)o.s cfs Area Required per WQ Plate Row 0.86 inZ
Area of orifiw Ao, k� = Q diam of WQ Hole = 1.05 in
Co(2gHo)°'S diam of WQ Hole (fractionJ = 1 1/16 in
Co = 0.65 SpaceBetweenRows 4 in
Q= Q o„� of pond = 2.67 cfs Number of Columns 1
gravitational acceleration g= 322 ft/secZ Number of Rows 4
diam = 0.547 ft
Effective head on orifice H o= D-1/2diam = 4.73 ft
Area of orifice A o= 0.24 ft�
Area of orifice A o= 33.90 in�
300-YearOrificeDiameter= 6.57 6 9/16 inches
Date: 10/il/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projeds�U21004 - Nissan Dealership�Reports�Drainage�Calculations�UZ1004-Drain Calcs-FDP
DETENTI�N P�ND ST�RAGE AND ORIFICE CALCULATI�N3
Nissan - Kia Dealershio. Fort Collins. C�
�IJNITED CIVIL
� �
o�.�s�y�, s�-��,,
Stage Storage Caleulations
Elevation Area (sf) Depth (ft) Volume (ef) Volume total (cf) ft)
10.25 6,679 0.00 0 0 0.00
)1.25 6,679 1.00 6,679 6,479 0.15
12.25 6,679 1.00 6,679 12,055 0.28
73.25 6,679 1.00 6,679 18,836 0.43
14.25 6,679 1.00 6,679 25,592 0.59
15.25 6,679 1.00 6,679 32,395 0.74
75.57 6,679 0.32 2,137 33,397 OJ7
Detentian Pond Starage
300-Year Detention Volume and Elevations
Detention Volume Required = 32,667 ft3
0.75 ac-ft
Elev81- ElevBo (VoIReQ��„ea VolBa)+Elev$a
W.S. Elevation, ft =
Volai - Voao
Required W.S. Elevation = 5005.29 ft
Provided W.S. Elevation = 5005.57 ft
Detention Volume Provided = 33,397 ft3
0.77 ac-ft
100-year Depth D= 5.32 ft
Finished 6rade At Orifice = 5008.05 ft
Freeboard = 2.45 ft
100-Year Orifise Opening
100-Year Orifice Calculation
Orifice Flow Rate, Q= CoAo(2gHo)o.s cfs
Area of orifice Ao, k� = Q
�o�zgHo)os
C o = 0.65
Q= Q o„� of pond = 0.49 cfs
gravitational acceleration g= 322 ft/secZ
diam = 0.229 ft
Effective head on orifice H o= D-1/2diam = 5.21 ft
Area of orifice A o= 0.04 ftZ
Area of orifice A o= 5.9q in�
100-YearOrificeDiameter= 2.75 2 3/4 inches
Date: 10/il/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projeds�U21004 - Nissan Dealership�Reports�Drainage�Calculations�UZ1004-Drain Calcs-FDP
BIORETENTION POND STURAGE CALCULATIDNS
Nissan - Kia Dealershio. Fort Collins. C�
�^ IJNITED CIVIL
/ \r` pi.�sfyit Gi�i�u�,
Stage Storage Caleulations
Elevation
(sf)
ii,in.00
11,670.00
12,122.00
12,522.00
12,857.00
13,247.00
(ft)
o.00
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
(ef)
0
2,285
2,379
2,464
2,541
2,613
(cf)
0
2,285
4,664
7,128
9,669
12,282
(ac-ft)
o.00
0.05
0.11
0.16
0.22
0.28
Date: 10/13/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projeds�U21004 - Nissan Dealership�Reports�Drainage�Calculations�UZ1004-Drain Calcs-FDP
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018) Sheet 1 of 2
Designer. CDB
Company: United Civil Design Group
Date: October 13, 2022
Project: Nissan - Kia: Bioretention Pond A2
Location: Fort Collins, CO
1. Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, la la = 77.1 %
(100 % if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = la/100) i= 0.771
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 025 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 *(0.91* i3- 1.19 * iZ+ 0.78' i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 295,540 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWo�� =�cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of dfi =� in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQcvoTHeR =�cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWocvuseR = 7,890 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2. Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum) DWo�� = 12 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical) Z= 4.00 ft/ ft
(Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AM;� = 4557 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AA��„a� = 11060 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area) AT� = 13250 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT= 12,155 cu ft
�Vr= (�%�rov + An�wai) / 2) " Depth)
Choose One
3. Growing Media Q 18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Q Other (Explain):
4. Underdrain System
Choose One
QQ YES
A) Are underdrains provided?
Q NO
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y= 2.2 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol�2= 7,890 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum Do = 2� in
UD-BMP v3.07 Pond A2, RG 10/13/2022, 2:57 PM
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer: CDB
Company: United Civil Design Group
Date: October 13, 2022
Project: Nissan - Kia: Bioretention Pond A2
Location: Fort Collins, CO
5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric Choose One
Q YES
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity Q NO
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6. Inlet / Outlet Control Choose One
�Q Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required
A) Inlet Control Q Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided
Choose One
7. Vegetation Q Seed (Plan for frequent weed control)
Q Plantings
Q Sand Grown or Other High Infltration Sod
8. Irrigation Choose One
Q YES
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated? � NO
Notes:
UD-BMP v3.07 Pond A2, RG 10/13/2022, 2:57 PM
BIORETENTION POND STURAGE CALCULATIDNS
Nissan - Kia Dealershio. Fort Collins. C�
�IJNITED CIVIL
, r
o�.�s�y�, s�-��,�
Stage Storage Caleulations
Elevation Area (sf) (h) Volume (ef) (ef) (ae-ft)
16.40 O.OS 0.00 0 0 0.00
)6.60 1,968.00 020 132 132 0.00
16.80 4,101.00 OZO 594 726 0.02
77.00 4,580.00 0.20 868 1,594 0.04
17.20 4,986.00 010 956 2,550 0.06
17.40 5,411.00 0.20 1,039 3,589 0.08
Date: 10/il/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projeds�U21004 - Nissan Dealership�Reports�Drainage�Calculations�UZ1004-Drain Calcs-FDP
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018) Sheet 1 of 2
Designer. CDB
Company: United Civil Design Group
Date: October 12, 2022
Project: Nissan - Kia: Bioretention Pond A3
Location: Fort Collins, CO
1. Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, la la = 65.6 %
(100 % if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = la/100) i= 0.656
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV = 021 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 *(0.91* i3- 1.19 * iZ+ 0.78' i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 128,351 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWo�� =�cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of dfi =� in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQcvoTHeR =�cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWocvuseR = 2,802 cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2. Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum) DWo�� = 12 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical) Z= 4.00 ft/ ft
(Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AM;� = 1684 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AA��„a� = 3842 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area) AT� = 5411 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT= 4,627 cu ft
�Vr= (�%�rov + An�wai) / 2) " Depth)
Choose One
3. Growing Media Q 18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Q Other (Explain):
4. Underdrain System
Choose One
QQ YES
A) Are underdrains provided?
Q NO
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y= 2.3 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol�2= 2,802 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum Do = 1 3/16 in
UD-BMP v3.07 Pond A3, RG 10/12/2022, 9:16 AM
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer: CDB
Company: United Civil Design Group
Date: October 12, 2022
Project: Nissan - Kia: Bioretention Pond A3
Location: Fort Collins, CO
5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric Choose One
Q YES
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity Q NO
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6. Inlet / Outlet Control Choose One
�Q Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required
A) Inlet Control Q Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided
Choose One
7. Vegetation Q Seed (Plan for frequent weed control)
Q Plantings
Q Sand Grown or Other High Infltration Sod
8. Irrigation Choose One
Q YES
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated? � NO
Notes:
UD-BMP v3.07 Pond A3, RG 10/12/2022, 9:16 AM
Channel Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 by Autodesk, Inc.
Design Point 1: Sidewalk Culvert (100-yr Evenet)
Rectangular Highlighted
Bottom Width (ft) = 3.00 Depth (ft)
Total Depth (ft) = 1.00 Q (cfs)
Area (sqft)
Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00 Velocity (ft/s)
Slope (%) = 1.80 Wetted Perim (ft)
N-Value = 0.013 Crit Depth, Yc (ft)
Top Width (ft)
Calculations EGL (ft)
Compute by: Known Q
Known Q (cfs) = 25.54
Elev (ft)
102.00
101.50
101.00
100.50
100.00
99.50
Section
Wednesday, Oct 12 2022
= 0.84
= 25.54
= 2.52
= 10.13
= 4.68
= 1.00
= 3.00
= 2.44
) .5 1 1.5
2
Reach (ft)
2.5 3 3.5
Depth (ft)
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
� ��
-0.50
4
Channel Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 by Autodesk, Inc.
Design Point 1: Concrete Rundown (100-yr)
Rectangular
Bottom W idth (ft) = 3.00
Total Depth (ft) = 1.00
Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00
Slope (%) = 3.10
N-Value = 0.013
Calculations
Compute by: Known Q
Known Q (cfs) = 25.54
Elev (ft) Section
102.00
101.50
101.00
100.50
100.00
99.50
Monday, Oct 10 2022
Highlighted
Depth (ft) = 0.70
Q (cfs) = 25.54
Area (sqft) = 2.10
Velocity (ft/s) = 12.16
Wetted Perim (ft) = 4.40
Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 1.00
Top Width (ft) = 3.00
EGL (ft) = 3.00
Depth (ft)
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
� ��
_n �n
.5 1 1.5
2
Reach (ft)
2.5 3 3.5 4 vvv
MHFD-Inlet, l/ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
� �
INLET NAME
Site Ty e Urban or Rural
Inlet Application (Street or Area)
H draulic Condition
Inlet Ty e
USER-DEFINEDINPUT
DP C2
Inlet A3.2
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
CDOT Type R Curb O
DP C1
Inlet A3.3
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
CDOT Type R Curb C
DP B7
Inlet G5
URBAN
STREET
On Grade
CDOT Type R Curb Oper
User-Defined Desi ng Flows
MIIIOf QKnown ��5�
B ass Car -Over Flow from
Receive Bypass Flow from:
Minor Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Major Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Watershed Characteristics
Subcatchment Area (acres)
Percent Impervious
NRCS Soil Type
Watershed Profile
Minor Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
Major Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.5
No Bypass Flow Receiv�
0.0
CALCULATED OUTPUT
Minor Total Desi n Peak Flow, cfs 1.2
Major Total Design Peak Flow, Q(cFs) 6.2
Minor Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) N/A
Major F�ow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) N/A
1.1
5.7
N/A
N/A
0.5
3.0
0.0
0.8
MHFD-Inlet, l/ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
� �
INLET NAME
Site Ty e Urban or Rural
Inlet Application (Street or Area)
H draulic Condition
Inlet Type
USER-DEFINEDINPUT
DP B6
Inlet G4
URBAN
STREET
On Grade
CDOT Type R Curb O
DP C4
Inlet Al2
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
Denver No. 16 Combination
DP C5
Inlet A14.2
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
Denver No. 16 Combinatior
User-Defined Desi ng Flows
MIIIOf QKnown ��5�
B ass Car -Over Flow from
Receive Bypass Flow from:
Minor Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Major Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Watershed Characteristics
Subcatchment Area (acres)
Percent Impervious
NRCS Soil Type
Watershed Profile
Minor Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
Major Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
0.4
No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0
CALCULATED OUTPUT
Minor Total Desi n Peak Flow, cfs 0.3
Major Total Design Peak Flow, Q(cfs) 1.8
Minor Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) 0.0
Major Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) 0.2
1.2
6.0
N/A
N/A
0.4
1.7
MHFD-Inlet, l/ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
� �
INLET NAME
Site Ty e Urban or Rural
Inlet Application (Street or Area)
H draulic Condition
Inlet Type
USER-DEFINEDINPUT
DP A4 DP A5
Inlet H3.2 Inlet H3.3
URBAN URBAN
STREET STREET
In Sum In Sum
CDOT Type R Curb Openin CDOT Type R Curb Openin<
User-Defined Desi n Flows
MIIIOf QKnown ��5�
MdJOf QKnown ��5�
B ass Car -Over Flow from U stream
Receive Bypass Flow from:
Minor Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cfs)
Major Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cfs)
Watershed Characteristics
Subcatchment Area (acres)
Percent Impervious
NRCS Soil Type
Watershed Profile
Overland Slope (ft/ft)
Overland Length (ft)
Channel Slope (ft/ft)
Channel Len th (ft
Minor Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T� (years)
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inches)
Major Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T� (years)
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inches)
0.8 0.9
4.5 4.0
No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
CALCULATED OUTPUT
Minor Total Desi n Peak Flow, cfs 0.8 0.9
Major Total Design Peak Flow, Q(cfs) 4.5 4.0
Minor Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) N/A N/A
Major Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) N/A N/A
MHFD-Inlet, l/ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
� �
INLET NAME
Site Ty e Urban or Rural
Inlet Application (Street or Area)
H draulic Condition
Inlet Type
USER-DEFINEDINPUT
DP A7
Inlet H4.1
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
CDOT Type R Curb 0
DP A14
Inlet H6
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
CDOT Type R Curb C
DP A15
Inlet H7
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
CDOT Type R Curb Openin<
User-Defined Desi ng Flows
MIIIOf QKnown ��5�
B ass Car -Over Flow from
Receive Bypass Flow from:
Minor Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Major Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Watershed Characteristics
Subcatchment Area (acres)
Percent Impervious
NRCS Soil Type
Watershed Profile
Minor Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
Major Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
1.7
No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0
CALCULATED OUTPUT
Minor Total Desi n Peak Flow, cfs 0.7
Major Total Design Peak Flow, Q(cfs) 4.2
Minor Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) N/A
Major Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) N/A
0.8
3.7
N/A
N/A
1.7
7.2
MHFD-Inlet, l/ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
� �
INLET NAME
Site Ty e Urban or Rural
Inlet Application (Street or Area)
H draulic Condition
Inlet Type
USER-DEFINEDINPUT
DP A8
Inlet H4.2-1
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
Denver No. 16 Combination
DP A10
Inlet H4.4
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
CDOT Type R Curb O
DP A11
Inlet H4.5
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
CDOT Type C Grate
User-Defined Desi ng Flows
MIIIOf QKnown ��5�
B ass Car -Over Flow from
Receive Bypass Flow from:
Minor Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Major Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Watershed Characteristics
Subcatchment Area (acres)
Percent Impervious
NRCS Soil Type
Watershed Profile
Minor Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
Major Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
0.5
No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0
CALCULATED OUTPUT
Minor Total Desi n Peak Flow, cfs 0.3
Major Total Design Peak Flow, Q(cfs) 1.1
Minor Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) N/A
Major Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) N/A
1.1
5.8
N/A
N/A
0.5
2.9
MHFD-Inlet, l/ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
� �
INLET NAME
Site Ty e Urban or Rural
Inlet Application (Street or Area)
H draulic Condition
Inlet Type
USER-DEFINEDINPUT
DP Al2
Inlet H4.6
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
CDOT Type C Grate
DP A9
Inlet H4.7
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
CDOT Type R Curb 0
DP B5
Inlet G3
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
Denver No. 16 Combinatior
User-Defined Desi ng Flows
MIIIOf QKnown ��5�
B ass Car -Over Flow from
Receive Bypass Flow from:
Minor Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Major Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Watershed Characteristics
Subcatchment Area (acres)
Percent Impervious
NRCS Soil Type
Watershed Profile
Minor Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
Major Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
1.�
4.5
No Bypass Flow Received
0.0
CALCULATED OUTPUT
Minor Total Desi n Peak Flow, cfs 1.0
Major Total Design Peak Flow, Q(cfs) 4.7
Minor Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) N/A
Major Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) N/A
0.3
1.4
N/A
N/A
1.0
4.5
MHFD-Inlet, l/ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
� �
INLET NAME
Site Ty e Urban or Rural
Inlet Application (Street or Area)
H draulic Condition
Inlet Type
USER-DEFINEDINPUT
DP B4
Inlet G2
URBAN
STREET
On Grade
Denver No. 16 Combination
DP B3
Inlet F2
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
Denver No. 16 Combination
DP C3.1
Inlet A8
URBAN
STREET
In Sump
Denver No. 16 Combinatior
User-Defined Desi ng Flows
MIIIOf QKnown ��5�
B ass Car -Over Flow from
Receive Bypass Flow from:
Minor Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Major Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Watershed Characteristics
Subcatchment Area (acres)
Percent Impervious
NRCS Soil Type
Watershed Profile
Minor Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
Major Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inc
1.9
No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received No Bypass Flow Received
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0
CALCULATED OUTPUT
Minor Total Desi n Peak Flow, cfs 0.8
Major Total Design Peak Flow, Q(cfs) 3.0
Minor Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) 0.0
Major Flow Bypassed Downstream, Qb (cfs) 0.0
1.7
7.9
N/A
N/A
1.9
7.2
MHFD-Inlet, l/ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
� �
DP C3.2
User-Defined Design Flows
MIIIOf QKnown ��5�
MdJOf QKnown ��5�
Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from
Receive Bypass Flow from:
Minor Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Major Bypass Flow Received, Qb (cf
Watershed Characteristics
Subcatchment Area (acres)
Percent Impervious
NRCS Soil Type
Watershed Profile
�r Storm Rainfall
�n Storm Return Pe
Hour Preciqitation,
No Bypass Flow Received
0.0
0.0
USER-DEFINEDINPUT
Minor Storm Rainfall Input
Design Storm Return Period, T� (years)
One-Hour Precipitation, P, (inches)
CALCULATED OUTPUT
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet A3.2
T T
T. Tw.
�'�' W T.
� - � SfwEE7
� u _ CRGwN
Y j �
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 20.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 25.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = 17A 25.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet A32 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
Jof Inlet �^I CDOT Type R Curb Opening _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = CDOT T pe R Curb Openln
aio�i = 3.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 5.6 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR i Override Depths
Lo (G) = N/A �
Wo = N/A feet
A,aao = N/A
Cf(G) = N/A N/A
Cw (G) = N/A
Co(G) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 10.00 feet
Hverc = 6.00 inches
H�„oa� = 6.00 inches
Theta = 63.40 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.60
Co (C) = 0.67
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = N/A N/A ft
dc�m = 030 033 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.53 0.57
RFc,,,b = 0.91 0.93
RF�,aee = N/A N/A
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet A32 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet A3.3
T T
T. Tw.
�'�' W T.
� - � SfwEE7
� u _ CRGwN
Y j �
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 20.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 25.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = 17A 25.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet A3.3 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
Jof Inlet �^� CDOTType R Curb Opening _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = CDOT T pe R Curb Openln
aio�i = 3.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 5.6 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR i Override Depths
Lo (G) = N/A �
Wo = N/A feet
A,aao = N/A
Cf(G) = N/A N/A
Cw (G) = N/A
Co(G) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 10.00 feet
Hverc = 6.00 inches
H�„oa� = 6.00 inches
Theta = 63.40 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.60
Co (C) = 0.67
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = N/A N/A ft
dc�m = 030 033 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.53 0.57
RFc,,,b = 0.91 0.93
RF�,aee = N/A N/A
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet A3.3 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet GS
T T
T. Tw.
�'�' W T.
� - � SfwEE7
� u _ CRGwN
Y j �
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
Flow Depth at Street Crown (check box for yes, leave blank for no)
TencK = 20.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 25.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.050 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = 17A 25.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
iNOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Qiterion Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
�]OR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qaiiow = 16.3 16.3 cfs
inor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than the design flow given on sheet'Inlet ManagemenY
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet G5 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE �
. - �- . � �:m�r�ys�
�Lo fcj�
_.._..._....__._..._.._--� I rnnrr,,..oar��.�.n..o..�.,.. J ___-_
of Inlet Type = CDOT T
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a') a�ocA� = 3.0
I Number of Units in the Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1
th of a Single Unit Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) Lq = 5.00
h of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W, Gutter Width) Wo = N/A
3ing Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical min. value = 0.5) Cf G= N/A
Inlet Interception Capacity Q =
Inlet Carry-Over Flow (flow bypassing inlet) Qb =
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet G5 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet G4
T T
T. Tw.
�'�' W T.
� - � SfwEE7
� u _ CRGwN
Y j �
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
Flow Depth at Street Crown (check box for yes, leave blank for no)
TencK = 20.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 25.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.050 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = 17A 25.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
iNOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Qiterion Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
�]OR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qaiiow = 16.3 16.3 cfs
inor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than the design flow given on sheet'Inlet ManagemenY
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet G4 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE �
. - �- . � �:m�r�ys�
�Lo fcj�
�.._..._....__._..._..__" I rnnrT,,..oar��.hn..o.,�.,,. J ___-_
of Inlet Type = CDOT T
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a') a�ocA� = 3.0
I Number of Units in the Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1
th of a Single Unit Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) Lq = 5.00
h of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W, Gutter Width) Wo = N/A
3ing Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical min. value = 0.5) Cf G= N/A
Inlet Interception Capacity Q =
Inlet Carry-Over Flow (flow bypassing inlet) Qb =
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet G4 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet A32
T T
T. Tw.
�'�' W T.
� - � SfwEE7
� u _ CRGwN
Y j �
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 1.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = Z0.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZOA 20.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet Al2 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
of Inlet � Denver No. 16 Com bination _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = Denver No. 16 Combination
aio�i = 2.00 inches
No = 2
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR i Override Depths
Lq (G) = 3.00 feet
Wo = 1.73 feet
A,aao = 031
Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50
Cw (G) = 3.60
Co (G) = 0.60
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 3.00 feet
Hverc = 6.50 inches
H�„oa� = 5.25 inches
Theta = 0.00 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.70
Co (C) = 0.66
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = 0.523 0.523 ft
dc�ro = 033 033 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.71 0.71
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = 0.71 0.71
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet Al2 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet A34.2
� T
T, T�
� "n W T.
�- .�' � -- SitEET
a �. C4ow1:
/ ,
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 0.5 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = Z0.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZOA 20.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet A142 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
of Inlet � Denver No. � 6 Combina6on _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = Denver No. 16 Combination
aio�i = 2.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR !— Override Depths
Lq (G) = 3.00 feet
Wo = 1.73 feet
A,aao = 031
Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50
Cw (G) = 3.60
Co (G) = 0.60
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 3.00 feet
Hverc = 6.50 inches
H�„oa� = 5.25 inches
Theta = 0.00 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.70
Co (C) = 0.66
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = 0.523 0.523 ft
dc�ro = 033 033 ft
RFcomc �aro� = 0.94 0.94
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = 0.94 0.94
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet A142 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet H3.2
T . T
T. T�
� w � T.
� "_ __-_ STaEEf
� �, ckew��
r -
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 1.0 ft
SBACK — O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 26.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = 26.0 26.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H32 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb H-Vert
Wo
Wp
W
Lo (G)
of Inlet � CDOT Type R Curb Opening _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = CDOT T pe R Curb Openln
aio�i = 3.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR !— Override Depths
Lq (G) = N/A feet
Wo = N/A feet
A,aao = N/A
Cf(G) = N/A N/A
Cw (G) = N/A
Co(G) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 5.00 feet
Hverc = 6.00 inches
H�„oa� = 6.00 inches
Theta = 63.40 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.60
Co (C) = 0.67
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = N/A N/A ft
dc�ro = 033 033 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.77 0.77
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = N/A N/A
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H32 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet H3.3
T . T
T. T�
� w � T.
� "_ __-_ STaEEf
� �, ckew��
r -
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 1.0 ft
SBACK — O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = Z0.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZOA 20.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H3.3 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb H-Vert
Wo
Wp
W
Lo (G)
of Inlet � CDOT Type R Curb Opening _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = CDOT T pe R Curb Openln
aio�i = 3.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR !— Override Depths
Lq (G) = N/A feet
Wo = N/A feet
A,aao = N/A
Cf(G) = N/A N/A
Cw (G) = N/A
Co(G) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 5.00 feet
Hverc = 6.00 inches
H�„oa� = 6.00 inches
Theta = 63.40 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.60
Co (C) = 0.67
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = N/A N/A ft
dc�ro = 033 033 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.77 0.77
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = N/A N/A
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H3.3 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet H4.1
T T
T. Tw.
�'�' W T.
� - � SfwEE7
� u _ CRGwN
Y j �
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 6.5 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = Z0.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZOA 20.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H4.1 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
of Inlet � CDOT Type R Curb Opening _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = CDOT T pe R Curb Openln
aio�i = 3.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR I— Override Depths
Lq (G) = N/A teet
Wo = N/A feet
A,aao = N/A
Cf(G) = N/A N/A
Cw (G) = N/A
Co(G) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 5.00 feet
Hverc = 6.00 inches
H�„oa� = 6.00 inches
Theta = 63.40 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.60
Co (C) = 0.67
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = N/A N/A ft
dc�ro = 033 033 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.77 0.77
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = N/A N/A
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H4.1 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet H6
� T
T, T�
� "n W T.
�- .�' � -- SitEET
a �. C4ow1:
/ ,
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 1.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = Z0.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZOA 20.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H6 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
of Inlet � CDOT Type R Curb Opening _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = CDOT T pe R Curb Openln
aio�i = 3.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR I— Override Depths
Lq (G) = N/A teet
Wo = N/A feet
A,aao = N/A
Cf(G) = N/A N/A
Cw (G) = N/A
Co(G) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 5.00 feet
Hverc = 6.00 inches
H�„oa� = 6.00 inches
Theta = 63.40 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.60
Co (C) = 0.67
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = N/A N/A ft
dc�ro = 033 033 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.77 0.77
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = N/A N/A
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H6 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet H7
� T
T, T�
� "n W T.
�- .�' � -- SitEET
a �. C4ow1:
/ ,
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 5.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 25.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZSA 25.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H7 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
of Inlet � CDOTType R Curb Opening _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = CDOT T pe R Curb Openln
aio�i = 3.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 10.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR f� Override Depths
Lq (G) = N/A feet
Wo = N/A feet
A,aao = N/A
Cf(G) = N/A N/A
Cw (G) = N/A
Co(G) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 5.00 feet
Hverc = 6.00 inches
H�„oa� = 6.00 inches
Theta = 63.40 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.60
Co (C) = 0.67
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = N/A N/A ft
dc�ro = 033 0.67 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.77 1.00
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = N/A N/A
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H7 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet H4.2-1
T T
T. Tw.
�'�' W T.
� - � SfwEE7
� u _ CRGwN
Y j �
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 4.5 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = Z0.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZOA 20.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H42-1 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
of Inlet � Denver No. � 6 Combina6on _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = Denver No. 16 Combination
aio�i = 2.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR I— Override Depths
Lq (G) = 3.00 teet
Wo = 1.73 feet
A,aao = 031
Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50
Cw (G) = 3.60
Co (G) = 0.60
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 3.00 feet
Hverc = 6.50 inches
H�„oa� = 5.25 inches
Theta = 0.00 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.70
Co (C) = 0.66
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = 0.523 0.523 ft
dc�ro = 033 033 ft
RFcomc �aro� = 0.94 0.94
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = 0.94 0.94
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H42-1 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet H4.4
� T
T, T�
� "n W T.
�- .�' � -- SitEET
a �. C4ow1:
/ ,
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 10.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 25.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZOA 25.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 7.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H4.4 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
of Inlet � CDOTType R Curb Opening _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = CDOT T pe R Curb Openln
aio�i = 3.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 7.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR I— Override Depths
Lq (G) = N/A teet
Wo = N/A feet
A,aao = N/A
Cf(G) = N/A N/A
Cw (G) = N/A
Co(G) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 5.00 feet
Hverc = 6.00 inches
H�„oa� = 6.00 inches
Theta = 63.40 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.60
Co (C) = 0.67
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = N/A N/A ft
dc�ro = 033 0.42 ft
RFcomc�aro� = 0.77 0.90
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = N/A N/A
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H4.4 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet H4.5
T T
T. Tw.
�'�' W T.
� - � SfwEE7
� u _ CRGwN
Y j �
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 15.0 ft
SBACK - O.OLO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 30.0 ft
W = 3.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = 30.0 30.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H4.5 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
Jof Inlet �^I CDOT Type C Grate _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = CDOT T e C Grate
aio�i = 0.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 8.3 inches
MINOR MAJOR I.� Override Depths
Lo (G) = 2.92 �
Wo = 2.92 feet
A,zao = OJO
Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50
Cw (G) = 2.41
Co (G) = 0.67
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = N/A feet
Hverc = N/A inches
H�„oa� = N/A inches
Theta = N/A degrees
WP = N/A feet
Cf(C) = N/A N/A
CH, (C) = N/A
�o ��) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = 0379 0.570 ft
dc�m = N/A N/A ft
RFcomc���aro� = N/A N/A
RFc,,,b = N/A N/A
RF�,aee = 0.95 1.00
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H4.5 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet H4.6
T T
T. Tw.
�'�' W T.
� - � SfwEE7
� u _ CRGwN
Y j �
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 30.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 30.0 ft
W = 3.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = 30.0 30.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H4.6 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
Jof Inlet �^I CDOT Type C Grate _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = CDOT T e C Grate
aio�i = 2.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 8.3 inches
MINOR MAJOR �� Override Depths
Lq (G) = 2.92 feet
Wo = 3.00 feet
A,zao = OJO
Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50
Cw (G) = 2.41
Co (G) = 0.67
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = N/A feet
Hverc = N/A inches
H�„oa� = N/A inches
Theta = N/A degrees
WP = N/A feet
Cf(C) = N/A N/A
CH, (C) = N/A
�o ��) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = 0.459 0.651 ft
dc�m = N/A N/A ft
RFcomc���aro� = N/A N/A
RFc,,,b = N/A N/A
RF�,aee = 0.95 1.00
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H4.6 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet H4.7
� T
T, T�
� "n W T.
�- .�' � -- SitEET
a �. C4ow1:
/ ,
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 6.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = Z0.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZOA 20.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H4.7 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
CDOT Type R Curb Opening
of Inlet
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
Type = CDOT T pe R Curb Openln
aio�i = 3.00 inches
No = 1
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.0 � Override Depths
MINOR MAJOR
Lq (G) = N/A feet
Wo = N/A feet
A,aao = N/A
Cf(G) = N/A N/A
Cw (G) = N/A
Co(G) = N/A
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 5.00 feet
Hverc = 6.00 inches
H�„oa� = 6.00 inches
Theta = 63.40 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.60
Co (C) = 0.67
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = N/A N/A ft
dc�ro = 033 033 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.77 0.77
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = N/A N/A
MINOR MA70R
Q, = 5.4 5.4
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet H4.7 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet G3
� T
T, T�
� "n W T.
�- .�' � -- SitEET
a �. C4ow1:
/ ,
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 1.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 25.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZSA 25.0 ft
dM,a = 5.5 5.5 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet G3 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
Jof Inlet �^I Denver No. 16 Com bination _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = Denver No. 16 Combination
aio�i = 2.00 inches
No = 2
Ponding Depth = 5.5 5.5 inches
MINOR MAJOR i Override Depths
Lq (G) = 3.00 feet
Wo = 1.73 feet
A,aao = 031
Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50
Cw (G) = 3.60
Co (G) = 0.60
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 3.00 feet
Hverc = 6.50 inches
H�„oa� = 5.25 inches
Theta = 0.00 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.70
Co (C) = 0.66
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = 0.481 0.481 ft
dc�m = 0.29 0.29 ft
RFcomb,�aro„ = 0.65 0.65
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = 0.65 0.65
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet G3 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet G2
� T
T, T�
� "n W T.
�- .�' � -- SitEET
a �. C4ow1:
/ ,
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
Flow Depth at Street Crown (check box for yes, leave blank for no)
TencK = 1.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 25.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.005 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZSA 25.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
iNOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Qiterion Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
�]OR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qaiiow = 10.4 10.4 cfs
inor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than the design flow given on sheet'Inlet ManagemenY
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet G2 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE �
. - �- . � �:m�r�ys�
�Lo (C)�
�.. _..._....___.. ._..__�. --
Denver No. 16 Combination
ofInlet Type = Denver
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a') a�ocA� = 2.0
I Number of Units in the Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 3
th of a Single Unit Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) Lq = 3.00
h of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W, Gutter Width) Wo = 1.73
3ing Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical min. value = 0.5) Cf G= 0.50
Inlet Interception Capacity Q =
Inlet Carry-Over Flow (flow bypassing inlet) Qb =
ire Percentaae = O,/O_ = Co/ _
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet G2 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet F2
T T
T. Tw.
�'�' W T.
� - � SfwEE7
� u _ CRGwN
Y j �
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 1.0 ft
SBACK - O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 25.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = ZSA 25.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet F2 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
W
WP
Lo (G)
Jof Inlet �^I Denver No. 16 Com bination _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = Denver No. 16 Combination
aio�i = 2.00 inches
No = 3
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.1 inches
MINOR MAJOR �� Override Depths
Lq (G) = 3.00 feet
Wo = 1.73 feet
A,aao = 031
Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50
Cw (G) = 3.60
Co (G) = 0.60
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 3.00 feet
Hverc = 6.50 inches
H�„oa� = 5.25 inches
Theta = 0.00 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.70
Co (C) = 0.66
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = 0.523 0.531 ft
dc�ro = 033 034 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.57 0.58
RFc,,,b = 0.97 0.98
RF�,aee = 0.57 0.58
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet F2 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet A8
T . T
T. T�
� w � T.
� "_ __-_ STaEEf
� �, ckew��
r -
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 1.0 ft
SBACK — O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 30.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = 30.0 30.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet A8 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
Wp
W
Lo (G)
of Inlet � Denver No. 16 Combination _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = Denver No. 16 Combination
aio�i = 2.00 inches
No = 3
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR f� Override Depths
Lq (G) = 3.00 feet
Wo = 1.73 feet
A,aao = 031
Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50
Cw (G) = 3.60
Co (G) = 0.60
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 3.00 feet
Hverc = 6.50 inches
H�„oa� = 5.25 inches
Theta = 0.00 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.70
Co (C) = 0.66
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = 0.523 0.523 ft
dc�ro = 033 033 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.57 0.57
RFc,,,b = 0.97 0.97
RF�,aee = 0.57 0.57
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet A8 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
MHFD-Inlet �ersion 5.01 A ril 2021
� � � i �' � �' � � � ' � � . • •
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
Project: Nissan - Kia
Inlet ID: Inlet A7.3
T . T
T. T�
� w � T.
� "_ __-_ STaEEf
� �, ckew��
r -
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically behveen 0.012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ftJft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ig's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
< boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
TencK = 1.0 ft
SBACK — O.OZO fi�ft
nencK = 0.015
Hcuae = 6.00 inches
Tcaowm = 30.0 ft
W = 2.00 ft
Sx = 0.020 ft/ft
SW = 0.083 ft/ft
Sa = 0.000 ft/ft
�sraEEr = 0.015
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Tnnx = 30.0 30.0 ft
dM,a = 6.0 6.0 inches
Minor Storm Ma�or Storm
Qaiiow = SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet A7.3 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
. . �• . � . �
MHFD-Inlet, �ersion 5.01 (April 2021)
�Lo (C)�
H-Curb
H-Vert
Wo
Wp
W
Lo (G)
of Inlet � Denver No. 16 Combination _
I Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)
ber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
�r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)
:h of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
�ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
� Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
� Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)
of a Unit Curb Opening
of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
__ of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
3ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
� for Grate Midwidth
i for Curb Opening Weir Equation
�ination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inletr
�d Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets
Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Type = Denver No. 16 Combination
aio�i = 2.00 inches
No = 2
Ponding Depth = 6.0 6.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR f� Override Depths
Lq (G) = 3.00 feet
Wo = 1.73 feet
A,aao = 031
Cf (G) = 0.50 0.50
Cw (G) = 3.60
Co (G) = 0.60
MINOR MAJOR
Ib (C) = 3.00 feet
Hverc = 6.50 inches
H�„oa� = 5.25 inches
Theta = 0.00 degrees
WP = 2.00 feet
Cf(C) = 0.10 0.10
CH, (C) = 3.70
Co (C) = 0.66
MINOR MAJOR
d��aee = 0.523 0.523 ft
dc�ro = 033 033 ft
RFcomc���aro� = 0.71 0.71
RFc,,,b = 1.00 1.00
RF�,aee = 0.71 0.71
Qa =
MINOR MA70R
MHFD-Inlet v5.01, Inlet A7.3 9/12/2022, 12:06 PM
IINLET CAPACITY S� LINITED CIVIL
Nissan - Kia Dealership. Fort Collins, CO ��`� Design Graup
Governing Equations:
Inlet capacity equation at low flows (weir calculationJ:
Where:
P=2(L+WJ
H= depth of water above the flowline
Inlet capacity equation at higher flows (orifice calculation):
Where:
A= open area of the inlet grate
H= depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area (AJ
Q =3.OPH�s
Q = 0.67 A(2gH )o.s
Input Parameters:
Grate: Type D Grate
Wier Perimeter. 17.17
Open Area of Grate (ftZ): 7.69
Grate Centroid Elevation (ft): 5010.00
Allowable Capacity: 50%
�iioo = llJ tfs
Oepth vs. Flow:
Depth
Ahove Inlet
Elevatinn
5hallow �rifiee Actual
Weir Flow Flow Flow
o.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.78
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.10
50l0.00
5010.05
5010.10
5010.15
5010.20
5010.25
5010.30
5010.35
5010.40
5010.45
5010.50
5010.55
5010.60
5010.65
5010.70
5010.75
5010.78
5010.80
5010.85
5010.90
5010.95
5011.00
5011.10
0.00
0.29
0.81
1.50
2.30
3.22
4.23
5.33
6.51
7.77
9.10
10.50
11.97
13.49
15.08
16.73
17.70
18.43
20.18
21.99
23.84
25.75
29.71
0.00
4.62
6.53
8.00
9.24
10.33
11.32
12.22
13.07
13.86
14.61
15.32
16.01
16.66
17.29
17.90
18.24
18.48
19.05
19.60
20.14
20.66
21.67
0.00
0.29
0.81
1.50
2.30
3.22
4.23
5.33
6.51
7.77
9.10
10.50
11.97
13.49
15.08
16.73
17.70
18.43
19.05
19.60
20.14
20.66
21.67
<---- 100-Year Flow
Date: 10/10/2022
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 84.000 70.000 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4972.59 1.50 4973.85 18 Cir 0.013 0.�
2 1 91.600 -21.282 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4978.15 9.01 4986.40 18 Cir 0.013 0.�
3 2 63.000 -20.000 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4989.40 0.49 4989.71 18 Cir 0.013 0.£
4 3 23.650 0.000 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4995.19 5.03 4996.38 8 Cir 0.012 0.£
5 4 127.809 -73.389 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4998.38 0.50 4999.02 8 Cir 0.012 0.7
6 5 46.967 45.156 MH 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.0 5000.02 0.49 5000.25 8 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM A.stm Number of lines: 6
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (°/a)
1 Pipe A1 12.97 18 Cir 84.000 4972.59 4973.85 1.500
2 Pipe A2 12.97 18 Cir 91.600 4978.15 4986.40 9.007
3 Pipe A2(2) 12.97 18 Cir 63.000 4989.40 4989.71 0.492
4 Pipe A3 0.50 8 Cir 23.650 4995.19 4996.38 5.031
5 Pipe A4 0.50 8 Cir 127.809 4998.38 4999.02 0.501
6 Pipe A5 0.50 8 Cir 46.967 5000.02 5000.25 0.490
Project File: STORM A.stm
NOTES: Return period = 100 Yrs. ;*Surcharged (HGL above crown).
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
4973.94 4975.20 n/a
4978.82 4987.75 n/a
4990.90` 4991.86� 0.81
4995.38 4996.71 n/a
4998.73 4999.37 0.09
5000.37 5000.60 0.11
Number of lines: 6
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
1
2
3
4
5
6
18
18
18
8
8
8
12.97 4972.59 4973.94 1.35 1.67 7.75 0.93
12.97 4978.15 4978.82 0.67" 0.77 16.95 0.93
12.97 4989.40 4990.90 1.50* 1.77 7.34 0.84
0.50 4995.19 4995.38 0.19` 0.08 6.26 0.13
0.50 4998.38 4998.73 0.35* 0.19 2.70 0.11
0.50 5000.02 5000.37 0.35' 0.19 2.68 0.11
Project File: STORM A.stm
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
4974.87 0.000 84.000 4973.85 4975.20 1.35"* 1.67 7.75 0.93
4979.75 0.000 91.600 4986.40 4987.75 1.35" 1.67 7.75 0.93
4991.74 1.526 63.000 4989.71 4991.86 1.50 1.77 7.34 0.84
4995.51 0.000 23.650 4996.38 4996.71 0.33" 0.17 2.90 0.13
4998.84 0.500 127.80 4999.02 4999.37 0.35 0.19 2.70 0.11
5000.48 0.489 46.967 5000.25 5000.60 0.35 0.19 2.69 0.11
Number of lines: 6
Notes: " depth assumed; *" Critical depth. ; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
�
w
� � C
ONrn
� � �
O � N
O � �
Elev. (ft) o w �
O -p W
� � >
� � �
� �
� O C
J ��L[')
O�p�
N
O ���
� ���
o www
w,9 � »
� � C C
N � M 7 V 7
Q C " Q C " O C
J ^00 J Mr6) J �o0a0
rVV �I�� �MM
(�p �NaO CO �CO(J� N `—O��
��� ��m ���
� ��� � ��� � ���
+ W W W N W W W N w W W
�,6 �>> � �» � �>>
� � C C � � C C � � C C
�
7
J Q C
�N('�
� MOC
� ��C
O 61C
���C
���
M w L11 LL
(6 � j �
� � C C
5037.00
5022.00
5007.00
4992.00
4977.00
4962.00 �
0
_ �g' 1.50%
50 100 150
HGL- EGL
— 23.650Lf -
63.00OLf 18" @ 0.49%
200 250
Reach (ft)
5.03%
300 350
400
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Outfall
Project File: STORM A3.1.stm � Number of lines: 2
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 26.221 -128.13 Curb 6.79 0.00 0.00 0.0 4990.95 0.50 4991.08 18 Cir 0.012 0.°
2 1 54.340 -6.379 Curb 5.68 0.00 0.00 0.0 4991.48 0.50 4991.75 15 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM A3.1.stm Number of lines: 2
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%)
1 Pipe A3.2 12.47 18 Cir 26.221 4990.95 4991.08 0.495
2 Pipe A3.3 5.68 15 Cir 54.340 4991.48 4991.75 0.497
Project File: STORM A3.1.stm
NOTES: Known Qs only ;*Surcharged (HGL above crown).
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
4994.78" 4995.10* 0.39
4995.48' 4995.84` 0.33
Number of lines: 2
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
1 18 12.47 4990.95 4994.78 1.50 1.77 7.06 0.77 4995.55 1.202 26.221 4991.08 4995.10 1.50 1.77 7.06 0.77
2 15 5.68 4991.48 4995.48 1.25 1.23 4.63 0.33 4995.82 0.660 54.340 4991.75 4995.84 1.25 1.23 4.63 0.33
Project File: STORM A3.1.stm
Number of lines: 2
; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
� � N
7 7
�� C C O C C Q
.�. m � J .�r. J ..�.
Elev. (ft)
5008.00
5004.00
5000.00
4996.00
4992.00
4988.00
HGL- EGL Reach (ft)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Outfall
Project File: STORM A7.1.stm � Number of lines: 4
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 18.789 -97.497 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5000.27 0.48 5000.36 24 Cir 0.012 1.0
2 1 48.484 -90.780 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5001.82 0.50 5002.06 18 Cir 0.012 O.E
3 2 17.957 53.765 Comb 5.11 0.00 0.00 0.0 5002.06 0.50 5002.15 18 Cir 0.012 1.0
4 1 51.070 -1.396 Comb 7.15 0.00 0.00 0.0 5000.36 0.51 5000.62 24 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM A7.1.stm Number of lines: 4
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (°/a)
1 Pipe A7 12.26 24 Cir 18.789 5000.27 5000.36 0.478
2 Pipe A7-1 5.11 18 Cir 48.484 5001.82 5002.06 0.495
3 Pipe A7.2 5.11 18 Cir 17.957 5002.06 5002.15 0.500
4 Pipe A8 7.15 24 Cir 51.070 5000.36 5000.62 0.510
Project File: STORM A7.1.stm
NOTES: Return period = 100 Yrs. ;*Surcharged (HGL above crown).
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
5004.85` 5004.90� 0.24
5005.13" 5005.23� 0.11
5005.34* 5005.38� 0.13
5005.13' 5005.18� 0.08
Number of lines: 4
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
1 24 12.26 5000.27 5004.85 2.00 3.14 3.90 0.24 5005.09 0.250 18.789 5000.36 5004.90 2.00 3.14 3.90 0.24
2 18 5.11 5001.82 5005.13 1.50 1.77 2.89 0.13 5005.26 0.202 48.484 5002.06 5005.23 1.50 1.77 2.89 0.13
3 18 5.11 5002.06 5005.34 1.50 1.77 2.89 0.13 5005.47 0.202 17.957 5002.15 5005.38 1.50 1.77 2.89 0.13
4 24 7.15 5000.36 5005.13 2.00 3.14 2.28 0.08 5005.21 0.085 51.070 5000.62 5005.18 2.00 3.14 2.28 0.08
Project File: STORM A7.1.stm
Number of lines: 4
; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
� � �
> >
�� c � 0 c c Q
.� � — J ,� J ,..,
Elev. (ft)
5017.00
5013.00
5009.00
5005.00
5001.00
4997.00
HGL- EGL Reach (ft)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Storm Sewer Profile
N C`')
7 7 7
Q C C Q C C �
J J
� m �v . �«�m . oin
Elev. (ft)
5014.00
5011.00
5008.00
5005.00
5002.00
4999.00
HGL- EGL Reach (ft)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 117.440 170.206 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5005.34 0.50 5005.93 15 Cir 0.012 O.E
2 1 17.900 55.282 Curb 6.01 0.00 0.00 0.0 5005.96 0.50 5006.05 12 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM A10.stm Number of lines: 2
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%)
1 Pipe A10 6.01 15 Cir 117.440 5005.34 5005.93 0.503
2 Pipe A11 6.01 12 Cir 17.900 5005.96 5006.05 0.502
Project File: STORM A10.stm
NOTES: Known Qs only ;*Surcharged (HGL above crown).
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
5006.33" 5007.37* 0.32
5007.69' 5008.12` 0.91
Number of lines: 2
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
1 15 6.01 5005.34 5006.33 0.99 1.04 5.76 0.52 5006.85 0.787 117.44�5005.93 5007.37 1.25 1.23 4.90 0.37
2 12 6.01 5005.96 5007.69 1.00 0.79 7.65 0.91 5008.60 2.428 17.900 5006.05 5008.12 1.00 0.79 7.65 0.91
Project File: STORM A10.stm
Number of lines: 2
; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
@ � �
,� � � � � o ,
Elev. (ft)
5018.00
5015.00
5012.00
5009.00
5006.00
5003.00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
HGL- EGL Reach (ft)
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Outfall _
Project File: STORM A13.stm � Number of lines: 5
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 145.400 90.729 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5005.84 4.30 5012.09 8 Cir 0.012 1.0
2 1 36.200 41.000 None 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5013.94 5.00 5015.75 6 Cir 0.012 O.E
3 2 5.000 -40.000 None 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.0 5015.75 5.00 5016.00 6 Cir 0.012 1.0
4 1 64.021 -90.000 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5012.09 0.50 5012.41 8 Cir 0.012 0.�
5 4 30.200 -22.215 Curb 1.70 0.00 0.00 0.0 5012.41 0.50 5012.56 8 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM A13.stm Number of lines: 5
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%)
1 Pipe A13 2.09 8 Cir 145.400 5005.84 5012.09 4.298
2 Pipe A14 0.39 6 Cir 36.200 5013.94 5015.75 5.000
3 Pipe A15 0.39 6 Cir 5.000 5015.75 5016.00 5.000
4 Pipe A14.1 1.70 8 Cir 64.021 5012.09 5012.41 0.500
5 Pipe A14.2 1.70 8 Cir 30.200 5012.41 5012.56 0.496
Project File: STORM A13.stm
NOTES: Known Qs only ;*Surcharged (HGL above crown).
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
5006.28 5012.72 n/a
5014.12 5016.07 0.09
5016.07 5016.32 0.14
5012.76` 5013.83` 0.16
5013.99" 5014.50* 0.37
Number of lines: 5
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
1
2
3
4
5
8
6
6
8
8
2.09 5005.84 5006.28 0.44 0.24 8.57
0.39 5013.94 5014.12 0.18" 0.07 5.97
0.39 5015.75 5016.07 0.32* 0.13 2.97
1.70 5012.09 5012.76 0.67` 0.35 4.87
1.70 5012.41 5013.99 0.67 0.35 4.87
Project File: STORM A13.stm
0.58
0.14
0.14
0.37
0.37
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
5006.86 0.000 145.40 5012.09 5012.72 0.63"* 0.34 6.11 0.58
5014.26 0.000 36.200 5015.75 5016.07 0.32*` 0.13 2.97 0.14
5016.20 0.000 5.000 5016.00 5016.32 0.32'* 0.13 2.97 0.14
5013.13 1.666 64.021 5012.41 5013.83 0.67 0.35 4.87 0.37
5014.36 1.689 30.200 5012.56 5014.50 0.67 0.35 4.87 0.37
Number of lines: 5
Notes: " depth assumed; *" Critical depth. ; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
@ � �
� �
,�� � � ^Qc J p�
Elev. (ft)
5027.00
5022.00
5017.00
5012.00
5007.00
5002.00
HGL- EGL Reach (ft)
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 30.000 27.623 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4999.33 2.00 4999.93 8 Cir 0.012 0.1
2 1 79.652 0.000 None 2.67 0.00 0.00 0.0 5002.00 1.26 5003.00 8 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM B.stm Number of lines: 2
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (°/a)
1 Pipe - B1 2.67 8 Cir 30.000 4999.33 4999.93 2.000
2 Pipe - B2 2.67 8 Cir 79.652 5002.00 5003.00 1.255
Project File: STORM B.stm
NOTES: Return period = 100 Yrs. ;*Surcharged (HGL above crown).
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
4999.98` 5001.18� 0.14
5002.67" 5005.96� 0.91
Number of lines: 2
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
1 8 2.67 4999.33 4999.98 0.65 0.35 7.69 0.92 5000.90 3.724 30.000 4999.93 5001.18 0.67 0.35 7.65 0.91
2 8 2.67 5002.00 5002.67 0.67" 0.35 7.65 0.91 5003.58 4.110 79.652 5003.00 5005.96 0.67 0.35 7.65 0.91
Project File: STORM B.stm
Notes: * depth assumed ; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Number of lines: 2
Storm Sewer Profile
� � �
�m � � .^p�
Elev. (ft)
5016.00
5012.00
5008.00
5004.00
5000.00
4996.00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10
HGL EGL Reach (ft)
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 92.800 -109.36 None 22.10 0.00 0.00 0.0 5006.29 0.25 5006.52 30 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM C.stm Number of lines: 1
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (°/a)
1 Pipe 1 22.10 30 Cir 92.800 5006.29 5006.52 0.248
Project File: STORM C.stm
NOTES: Return period = 100 Yrs. ;*Surcharged (HGL above crown).
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
5011.00` 5011.23� 0.32
Number of lines: 1
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
1 I 30 I 22.10 I 5006.29 I 5011.00 I 2. 50 I 4.91 I 4. 50 I 0. 32 I 5011. 32 I 0.248 I 92.8001 5006. 52 I 5011.23 I 2. 50 I 4. 91 I 4. 50 I 0. 32
Project File: STORM C.stm
Number of lines: 1
; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
�
�� �
i. N
Elev. (ft)
5019.00
5016.00
5013.00
5010.00
5007.00
5004.00
HGL- EGL Reach (ft)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 68.000 -91.400 None 17.70 0.00 0.00 0.0 5006.50 0.25 5006.67 12 Cir(2b) 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM D.stm Number of lines: 1
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope Down Up loss
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft)
1 � Pipe 1 � 17.70 � 12 � Cir(2b) � 68.000 � 5006.50 � 5006.67 � 0.250 � 5007.46* � 5010.86* �1.97
Project File: STORM D.stm I Number of lines: 1
NOTES: Known Qs only ;*Surcharged (HGL above crown).
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
1 I 12(2b) � 17.70 � 5006.50 � 5007.46 � 0.96 � 1.55 � 11.41 � 2.03 � 5009.49 � 4.590 � 68.000� 5006.67 � 5010.86 � 1.00 � 1.57 � 11.27 � 1.97
Project File: STORM D.stm
Number of lines: 1
; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
� � �
� o � .. o0
��- = o
Elev. (ft)
5019.00
5016.00
5013.00
5010.00
5007.00
5004.00
HGL- EGL Reach (ft)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 20.100 -6.402 Curb 7.88 0.00 0.00 0.0 5006.84 0.50 5006.94 15 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM F.stm Number of lines: 1
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%)
1 Pipe 1 7.88 15 Cir 20.100 5006.84 5006.94 0.498
Project File: STORM F.stm
NOTES: Known Qs only ;*Surcharged (HGL above crown).
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
5011.00" 5011.26* 0.64
Number of lines: 1
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
1 I 15 I 7. 88 I 5006. 84 I 5011.00 I 1.2 5 I 1.23 I 6.42 I 0.64 I 5011.64 I 1.269 I 20.1001 5006. 94 I 5011.26 I 1.2 5 I 1.2 3 I 6.42 I 0.64
Project File: STORM F.stm
Number of lines: 1
; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
� � �
� � ` _ .. °
� .
Elev. (ft)
5020.00
5017.00
5014.00
5011.00
5008.00
5005.00
HGL EGL Reach (ft)
0 10 20
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Project File: STORM G.stm � Number of lines: 4
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 22.600 -52.079 Curb 2.95 0.00 0.00 0.0 5006.86 0.49 5006.97 24 Cir 0.012 O.E
2 1 146.851 30.255 Curb 4.53 0.00 0.00 0.0 5006.97 0.50 5007.70 24 Cir 0.012 0.:
3 2 126.652 3.776 Curb 1.56 0.00 0.00 0.0 5007.70 0.50 5008.33 18 Cir 0.012 0.`
4 3 55.327 13.498 Curb 2.52 0.00 0.00 0.0 5008.33 0.51 5008.61 15 Cir 0.013 1.0
Project File: STORM G.stm Number of lines: 4
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%)
1 Pipe 1 11.56 24 Cir 22.600 5006.86 5006.97 0.488
2 Pipe 2 8.61 24 Cir 146.851 5006.97 5007.70 0.497
3 Pipe 3 4.08 18 Cir 126.652 5007.70 5008.33 0.497
4 Pipe 4 2.52 15 Cir 55.327 5008.33 5008.61 0.506
Project File: STORM G.stm
NOTES: Known Qs only ;*Surcharged (HGL above crown).
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
5011.00" 5011.05* 0.18
5011.23' 5011.41 ` 0.06
5011.47* 5011.63* 0.04
5011.67` 5011.76` 0.07
Number of lines: 4
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
1 24 11.56 5006.86 5011.00 2.00 3.14 3.68 0.21 5011.21 0.223 22.600 5006.97 5011.05 2.00 3.14 3.68 0.21
2 24 8.61 5006.97 5011.23 2.00 3.14 2.74 0.12 5011.34 0.124 146.85 5007.70 5011.41 2.00 3.14 2.74 0.12
3 18 4.08 5007.70 5011.47 1.50 1.77 2.31 0.08 5011.55 0.129 126.65 5008.33 5011.63 1.50 1.77 2.31 0.08
4 15 2.52 5008.33 5011.67 1.25 1.23 2.05 0.07 5011.74 0.152 55.327 5008.61 5011.76 1.25 1.23 2.05 0.07
Project File: STORM G.stm
Number of lines: 4
; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
@ � N M
7 7 7
.-�. � C C r. O � J .v. O C J .-. Q C
Elev. (ft)
5024.00
5020.00
5016.00
5012.00
5008.00
5004.00
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300
HGL EGL Reach (ft)
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Outfall
Project File: STORM H.stm � Number of lines: 28
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 78.097 -61.522 MH 47.99 0.00 0.00 0.0 5009.00 0.26 5009.20 29X45 EII 0.012 O.E
2 1 54.216 51.024 MH 47.99 0.00 0.00 0.0 5009.20 0.24 5009.33 29X45 EII 0.012 1.0
3 2 180.601 7.515 MH 38.52 0.00 0.00 0.0 5009.33 1.20 5011.50 36 Cir 0.012 1.0
4 3 161.702 92.463 MH 18.05 0.00 0.00 0.0 5013.36 0.75 5014.58 24 Cir 0.012 1.0
5 4 9.861 -88.529 None 7.16 0.00 0.00 0.0 5016.80 4.97 5017.29 12 Cir 0.012 1.0
6 4 129.540 0.000 Curb 10.89 0.00 0.00 0.0 5014.78 0.70 5015.69 18 Cir 0.012 1.°
7 6 166.104 -88.729 Curb 7.23 0.00 0.00 0.0 5016.19 0.51 5017.03 18 Cir 0.012 1.0
8 2 151.011 -88.998 Curb 16.64 0.00 0.00 0.0 5010.23 0.25 5010.60 24 Cir 0.012 1.�
9 8 45.293 76.570 Curb 11.84 0.00 0.00 0.0 5010.70 0.51 5010.93 24 Cir 0.012 0.:
10 9 86.100 0.000 MH 8.10 0.00 0.00 0.0 5011.43 3.00 5014.01 18 Cir 0.012 0.�
11 10 8.000 23.000 None 8.10 0.00 0.00 0.0 5014.28 3.00 5014.52 15 Cir 0.012 1.0
12 11 5.000 0.000 None 7.58 0.00 0.00 0.0 5014.52 3.00 5014.67 15 Cir 0.012 1.0
13 12 61.500 -90.000 None 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.0 5014.92 1.79 5016.02 6 Cir 0.012 1.0
14 13 4.837 90.000 None 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.0 5016.91 2.89 5017.05 6 Cir 0.012 1.0
15 13 46.500 0.000 None 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.0 5016.02 1.81 5016.86 6 Cir 0.012 1.0
16 15 4.837 90.000 None 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.0 5016.86 1.87 5016.95 6 Cir 0.012 1.0
17 11 32.775 90.000 None 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.0 5014.77 2.99 5015.75 6 Cir 0.012 1.0
18 17 9.837 -90.000 None 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.0 5015.75 2.95 5016.04 6 Cir 0.012 1.0
19 3 59.523 3.742 MH 16.54 0.00 0.00 0.0 5011.80 0.50 5012.10 30 Cir 0.012 1.0
20 19 147.737 5.949 MH 15.44 0.00 0.00 0.0 5012.20 0.49 5012.93 30 Cir 0.012 0.�
21 20 21.106 78.190 Curb 1.43 0.00 0.00 0.0 5014.42 5.02 5015.48 12 Cir 0.012 1.0
22 12 20.541 0.000 None 7.26 0.00 0.00 0.0 5014.67 2.97 5015.28 15 Cir 0.012 0.1
23 22 4.483 0.488 None 7.26 0.00 0.00 0.0 5015.28 3.13 5015.42 15 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM H.stm Number of lines: 28
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
24 19 18.469 90.125 Curb 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.0 5014.60 2.98 5015.15 12 Cir 0.012 1.0
25 20 26.505 -80.501 Curb 14.01 0.00 0.00 0.0 5013.12 0.49 5013.25 24 Cir 0.012 0.:
26 25 109.928 -14.414 Curb 7.82 0.00 0.00 0.0 5013.34 0.51 5013.90 24 Cir 0.012 1.�
27 26 47.481 -91.169 Curb 4.96 0.00 0.00 0.0 5013.97 0.50 5014.21 18 Cir 0.012 1.0
28 3 51.353 -87.367 Curb 3.93 0.00 0.00 0.0 5013.36 1.01 5013.88 18 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: STORM H.stm Number of lines: 28
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope Down Up loss
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Pipe 1
Pipe 2
Pipe 3
Pipe 4
Pipe 5
Pipe 6
Pipe 7
Pipe 8
Pipe 9
Pipe 10
Pipe 12
Pipe 13
Pipe 14
Pipe 15
Pipe 16
Pipe 17
Pipe 18
Pipe 19
Pipe 20
Pipe 21
Pipe 22
Pipe 23
Pipe 24
Pipe 25
Project File: STORM H.stm
47.99
47.99
38.52
18.05
7.16
10.89
7.23
16.64
11.84
8.10
8.10
7.58
0.32
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.52
0.52
16.54
15.44
1.43
7.26
7.26
1.10
29x45
29x45
36
24
12
18
18
24
24
18
15
15
6
6
6
6
6
6
30
30
12
15
15
12
78.097 5009.00
54.216 5009.20
180.601 5009.33
161.702 5013.36
9.861 5016.80
129.540 5014.78
166.104 5016.19
151.011 5010.23
45.293 5010.70
86.100 5011.43
8.000 5014.28
5.000 5014.52
61.500 5014.92
4.837 5016.91
46.500 5016.02
4.837 5016.86
32.775 5014.77
9.837 5015.75
59.523 5011.80
147.737 5012.20
21.106 5014.42
20.541 5014.67
4.483 5015.28
18.469 5014.60
NOTES: Return period = 100 Yrs. ;"Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; j- Line contains hyd. jump.
5009.20
5009.33
5011.50
5014.58
5017.29
5015.69
5017.03
5010.60
5010.93
5014.01
5014.52
5014.67
5016.02
5017.05
5016.86
5016.95
5015.75
5016.04
5012.10
5012.93
5015.48
5015.28
5015.42
5015.15
0.256
0.240
1.202
0.755
4.971
0.703
0.506
0.245
0.508
2.996
3.003
2.998
1.789
2.887
1.806
1.868
2.990
2.948
0.504
0.494
5.023
2.969
3.126
2.977
5011.13 5011.33 n/a
5012.79' 5013.03` 0.71
5013.74 5014.16 0.52
5014.77 5016.11 0.76
5017.50 5018.27 1.31
5016.28` 5017.47* 0.89
5018.35` 5019.02` 0.26
5013.74* 5014.44* 0.64
5015.08` 5015.18` 0.11
5015.29* 5015J3* 0.15
5015.88' 5015.99� 0.68
5016.66" 5016.72* 0.59
5017.31 ` 5017.49` 0.04
5017.53 5017.53 0.01
5017.53* 5017.56* 0.01
5017.57` 5017.57` 0.01
5016.66" 5016.90* 0.11
5017.01 * 5017.08` 0.11
5014.69" 5014J7* 0.18
5014.95 5015.09 0.18
5015.27 5015.99 n/a
5017.31 * 5017.54* 0.08
5017.62" 5017.67' 0.54
5014.95 5015.59 n/a
Number of lines: 28
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%)
25 Pipe 26 14.01 24 Cir 26.505 5013.12 5013.25 0.490
26 Pipe 27 7.82 24 Cir 109.928 5013.34 5013.90 0.509
27 Pipe 28 4.96 18 Cir 47.481 5013.97 5014.21 0.505
28 Pipe 29 3.93 18 Cir 51.353 5013.36 5013.88 1.013
Project File: STORM H.stm
NOTES: Return period = 100 Yrs. ;"Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; j- Line contains hyd. jump.
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
5015.27* 5015.36* 0.15
5015.51 5015.60 0.18
5015.78" 5015.87* 0.12
5014.69 5014.64 n/a
Number of lines: 28
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
1
�a
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
29
45 e
29
45 e
36
24
12
18
18
24
24
18
15
15
6
6
6
6
6
6
30
30
12
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
47.99 I 5009.00 I 5011.13 I 2.13 I 7.12 I 6.74 I 0.81 I 5011.94 I 0.000 I 78.0971 5009.20 I 5011.33 I 2.13�` I 6.66 I 7.21 I 0.81
47.99 I 5009.20 I 5012.79 I 2.42 I 7.12 I 6.74 I 0.71 I 5013.50 I 0.447 I 54.216 I 5009.33 I 5013.03 I 2.42 I 7.12 I 6.74 I 0.71
38.52 5009.33 5013.74 3.00 7.07 5.45 0.46 5014.20 0.284 180.60 5011.50 5014.16 2.66 6.63 5.81 0.52
18.05 5013.36 5014.77 1.41 * 2.37 7.60 0.76 5015.54 0.000 161.70 5014.58 5016.11 1.53'� 2.58 7.00 0.76
7.16 5016.80 5017.50 0.70" 0.58 12.25 1.31 5018.81 0.000 9.861 5017.29 5018.27 0.98" 0.78 9.17 1.31
10.89 5014.78 5016.28 1.50` 1.77 6.16 0.59 5016.87 0.917 129.54 5015.69 5017.47 1.50 1.77 6.16 0.59
7.23 5016.19 5018.35 1.50 1.77 4.09 0.26 5018.61 0.404 166.10 5017.03 5019.02 1.50 1.77 4.09 0.26
16.64 5010.23 5013.74 2.00 3.14 5.30 0.44 5014.18 0.461 151.01 5010.60 5014.44 2.00 3.14 5.30 0.44
11.84 5010.70 5015.08 2.00 3.14 3.77 0.22 5015.30 0.234 45.293 5010.93 5015.18 2.00 3.14 3.77 0.22
8.10 5011.43 5015.29 1.50 1.77 4.58 0.33 5015.62 0.507 86.100 5014.01 5015.73 1.50 1.77 4.58 0.33
8.10 5014.28 5015.88 1.25 1.23 6.60 0.68 5016.56 1.341 8.000 5014.52 5015.99 1.25 1.23 6.60 0.68
7.58 5014.52 5016.66 1.25 1.23 6.18 0.59 5017.26 1.175 5.000 5014.67 5016.72 1.25 1.23 6.18 0.59
0.32 5014.92 5017.31 0.50 0.20 1.63 0.04 5017.36 0.278 61.500 5016.02 5017.49 0.50 0.20 1.63 0.04
0.16 5016.91 5017.53 0.50 0.20 0.82 0.01 5017.54 0.069 4.837 5017.05 5017.53 0.48 0.19 0.83 0.01
0.16 5016.02 5017.53 0.50 0.20 0.82 0.01 5017.54 0.069 46.500 5016.86 5017.56 0.50 0.20 0.81 0.01
0.16 5016.86 5017.57 0.50 0.20 0.82 0.01 5017.58 0.069 4.837 5016.95 5017.57 0.50 0.20 0.81 0.01
0.52 5014.77 5016.66 0.50 0.20 2.65 0.11 5016.77 0.733 32.775 5015.75 5016.90 0.50 0.20 2.65 0.11
0.52 5015.75 5017.01 0.50 0.20 2.65 0.11 5017.12 0.733 9.837 5016.04 5017.08 0.50 0.20 2.65 0.11
16.54 5011.80 5014.69 2.50 4.91 3.37 0.18 5014.87 0.139 59.523 5012.10 5014.77 2.50 4.91 3.37 0.18
15.44 5012.20 5014.95 2.50 4.91 3.15 0.15 5015.10 0.121 147.73 5012.93 5015.09 2.16 4.51 3.43 0.18
1.43 5014.42 5015.27 0.85 0.40 2.01 0.20 5015.47 0.000 21.106 5015.48 5015.99 j 0.51'� 0.40 3.59 0.20
Project File: STORM H.stm
Notes: ' Normal depth assumed; " Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump ; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Number of lines: 28
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
15
15
12
24
24
18
18
7.26 5014.67 5017.31 1.25 1.23 5.92 0.54
7.26 5015.28 5017.62 1.25 1.23 5.92 0.54
1.10 5014.60 5014.95 0.35 0.24 4.54 0.17
14.01 5013.12 5015.27 2.00 3.14 4.46 0.31
7.82 5013.34 5015.51 2.00 3.14 2.49 0.10
4.96 5013.97 5015.78 1.50 1.77 2.81 0.12
3.93 5013.36 5014.69 1.33 0.90 2.37 0.30
Project File: STORM H.stm
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
5017.86 1.077 20.541 5015.28 5017.54 1.25 1.23 5.92 0.54
5018.16 1.077 4.483 5015.42 5017.67 1.25 1.23 5.92 0.54
5015.12 0.000 18.469 5015.15 5015.59 0.44*� 0.33 3.30 0.17
5015.58 0.327 26.505 5013.25 5015.36 2.00 3.14 4.46 0.31
5015.61 0.102 109.92 5013.90 5015.60 1.70 2.84 2.75 0.12
5015.90 0.190 47.481 5014.21 5015.87 1.50 1.77 2.81 0.12
5014.99 0.000 51.353 5013.88 5014.64 j 0.76�� 0.90 4.39 0.30
Number of lines: 28
Notes: ' Normal depth assumed; " Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump ; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
� .- N M
7 7 �
��n � J O� � O� � O�
O, r O ^ �00 N�MM �, d.�M
Elev. (ft)
5035.00
5029.00
5023.00
5017.00
5011.00
5005.00
HGL EGL
Re
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Storm Sewer Profile
� � �
�
o = �� o= _
C J
N M M J �00
� M N � � CO I� M
Elev. (ft)
5032.00
5027.00
5022.00
5017.00
5012.00
5007.00
HGL EGL
0 50 100 150 2
Storm Sewer Profile
�
N
7 7
0 C J �
� [ff . � Of]
Elev. (ft)
5026.00
5023.00
5020.00
5017.00
5014.00
5011.00
HGL- EGL Reach (ft)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Storm Sewer Profile
Elev. (ft)
5029.00
5025.00
5021.00
5017.00
5013.00
5009.00
0
25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325
- HGL EGL Reach (ft)
� � �
.- O N N
j � N � 7
O C C O C .. O C c Q C C
J C J J
� r, !-, . � c-� c� � M m r�i . ��n �r . �
Storm Sewer Profile
Elev.
502
502
502
501
501
501 �.,,,,
10 20 30 40
HGL EGL Reach (ft)
�
N
7 7
� C C �
J
� t-'� c'� . � �['f
Storm Sewer Profile
Elev.
502
502
502
501
501
501 �.,,,,
10 20 30 40
HGL EGL Reach (ft)
N
7 7
� � � �
J
MmN . �m
Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 Plan
Storm Sewer Inventory Report
Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data
No.
Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Lo
Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope EI Up Size Shape Value Coei
No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (°/a) (ft) (in) (n) (K)
1 End 76.112 146.227 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5011.79 1.54 5012.96 24 Cir 0.013 O.E
2 1 239.246 -55.631 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5012.96 0.75 5014.75 24 Cir 0.012 0.1
3 2 188.231 0.000 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5014.75 0.75 5016.16 24 Cir 0.012 0.�
4 3 60.000 27.693 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5016.16 0.77 5016.62 24 Cir 0.012 0.1
5 4 143.634 0.000 MH 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 5016.82 3.70 5022.13 24 Cir 0.012 1.0
Project File: Irrigation Bypass.stm Number of lines: 5
Storm Sewer Summary Report
Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line
No. rate Size shape length EL Dn EL Up Slope
(cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%)
1 Pipe IR-1 2.00 24 Cir 76.112 5011.79 5012.96 1.537
2 Pipe IR-2 2.00 24 Cir 239.246 5012.96 5014.75 0.748
3 Pipe IR-3 2.00 24 Cir 188.231 5014.75 5016.16 0.749
4 Pipe IR-4 2.00 24 Cir 60.000 5016.16 5016.62 0.767
5 Pipe IR-5 2.00 24 Cir 143.634 5016.82 5022.13 3.697
Project File: Irrigation Bypass.stm
NOTES: Known Qs only
HGL HGL Minor
Down Up loss
(ft) (ft) (ft)
5012.28 5013.45 n/a
5013.45 5015.24 n/a
5015.24 5016.65 n/a
5016.65 5017.11 n/a
5017.11 5022.62 n/a
Number of lines: 5
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Line Size Q Downstream
Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL
elev elev head elev
(in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft)
1
2
3
4
5
24
24
24
24
24
2.00 5011.79 5012.28 0.49 0.60 3.35
2.00 5012.96 5013.45 0.49" 0.60 3.35
2.00 5014.75 5015.24 0.49` 0.60 3.35
2.00 5016.16 5016.65 0.49` 0.60 3.35
2.00 5016.82 5017.11 0.29 0.28 7.09
Project File: Irrigation Bypass.stm
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
Len
Invert
elev
) (ft) (ft)
Upstream
HGL Depth Area Vel Vel
elev head
(ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft)
5012.45 0.000 76.112 5012.96 5013.45 0.49"* 0.60 3.35 0.17
5013.63 0.000 239.24 5014.75 5015.24 0.49" 0.60 3.35 0.17
5015.42 0.000 188.23 5016.16 5016.65 0.49'* 0.60 3.35 0.17
5016.83 0.000 60.000 5016.62 5017.11 0.49" 0.60 3.35 0.17
5017.29 0.000 143.63 5022.13 5022.62 0.49** 0.60 3.35 0.17
Number of lines: 5
Notes: " depth assumed; *" Critical depth. ; c= cir e= ellip b= box
Storm Sewer Profile
Elev. (ft)
5042.00
5035.00
5028.00
5021.00
5014.00
5007.00
0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
- HGL- EGL Reach (ft)
� � N M d'
7 7 7 �
��= C Q C C Q C C � C C Q C
.-. aD J ... J � J ... J ..�
FOREBAY DESIGN � � NITED CIVIL
Nissan - Kia Dealership, Fort Collins, CO � Design Graup
Total Area: 3.96 acres
Imperviousness: 48%
Impervious Area: 1.90 acres
Min. Forebay Volume: 35.17 cf (1%of WQCV)
Max Forebay Depth: 12 in
Design Volume: 47 cf
•�. I
Total Area: 6.22 acres
Imperviousness: 84%
Impervious Area: 5.22 acres
Min. Forebay Volume: 157.21 cf
Max Forebay Depth: 18 in
Design Volume: 190 cf
(2%of WQCV)
Total Area: 136 acres
Imperviousness: 84%
Impervious Area: 1.14 acres
Min. Forebay Volume: 17.08 cf (1%of WQCV)
Max Forebay Depth: 12 in
Design Volume: 26 cf
:o: �
Total Area: 1.10 acres
Imperviousness: 71%
Impervious Area: 0.78 acres
Min. Forebay Volume
Max Forebay Depth
Design Volume
10.69 cf
12 in
21 cf
(1%of WQCV)
Date: 10/11/2022 C: �United Civil Dropbox�Projeds�U21004 - Nissan Dealership�Reports�Drainage�Calculations�U21004-Drain Calcs-FDP
Weir Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 by Autodesk, Inc.
Pond A2 Overflow Weir
Trapezoidal Weir
Crest = Sharp
Bottom Length (ft) = 50.00
Total Depth (ft) = 1.00
Side Slope (z:1) = 4.00
Calculations
Weir Coeff. Cw = 3.10
Compute by: Known Q
Known Q (cfs) = 30.30
Depth (ft)
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
� ��
-0.50
Highlighted
Depth (ft)
Q (cfs)
Area (sqft)
Velocity (ft/s)
Top Width (ft)
Pond A2 Overflow Weir
Monday, Oct 10 2022
= 0.34
= 30.30
= 17.46
= 1.74
= 52.72
Depth (ft)
Z.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
� � �'
-0.50
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Weir W.S. Length (ft)
Weir Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 by Autodesk, Inc.
Pond A2 Overflow Weir
Trapezoidal Weir
Crest = Sharp
Bottom Length (ft) = 50.00
Total Depth (ft) = 1.00
Side Slope (z:1) = 4.00
Calculations
Weir Coeff. Cw = 3.10
Compute by: Known Q
Known Q (cfs) = 30.30
Depth (ft)
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
� ��
-0.50
Highlighted
Depth (ft)
Q (cfs)
Area (sqft)
Velocity (ft/s)
Top Width (ft)
Pond A2 Overflow Weir
Monday, Oct 10 2022
= 0.34
= 30.30
= 17.46
= 1.74
= 52.72
Depth (ft)
Z.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
� � �'
-0.50
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Weir W.S. Length (ft)
Weir Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 by Autodesk, Inc.
Pond A3 Overflow Weir
Trapezoidal Weir
Crest = Sharp
Bottom Length (ft) = 22.00
Total Depth (ft) = 2.00
Side Slope (z:1) = 4.00
Calculations
Weir Coeff. Cw = 3.10
Compute by: Known Q
Known Q (cfs) = 21.64
Depth (ft)
3.00
2.00
1.00
� ��
-1.00
Highlighted
Depth (ft)
Q (cfs)
Area (sqft)
Velocity (ft/s)
Top Width (ft)
Pond A3 Overflow Weir
Wednesday, Oct 12 2022
= 0.45
= 21.64
= 10.71
= 2.02
= 25.60
Depth (ft)
3.00
2.00
1.00
� ��
-1.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Weir W.S. Length (ft)
Channel Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3D0 by Autodesk, Inc.
Channel A: 100-yr Event
User-defined Highlighted
Invert Elev (ft) = 4972.04 Depth (ft)
Slope (%) = 2.00 Q (cfs)
N-Value = 0.033 Area (sqft)
Velocity (ft/s)
Calculations Wetted Perim (ft)
Compute by: Known Q Crit Depth, Yc (ft)
Known Q(cfs) = 12.94 Top Width (ft)
EGL (ft)
(Sta, EI, n)-(Sta, EI, n)...
( 0.00, 4973.31)-(18.06, 4972.04, 0.033)-(23.06, 4972.04, 0.033)-(30.65, 4973.05, 0.033)-(40.00, 4973.29, 0.033)
Tuesday, Oct 11 2022
= 0.46
= 12.94
= 4.60
= 2.81
= 15.04
= 0.44
= 14.99
= 0.58
Elev (ft) Section
4974.00
4973.50
4973.00
4972.50
4972.00
4971.50
0
Depth (ft)
1.96
1.46
� • .,
0.46
-0.04
_n �n
� 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 v v
Sta (ft)
Pipe End Riprap Sizing Caleulations
Nissan-Kia, Fort Collins, Colarado
' �•' �
Pipe Designation 5oil Type Design Culvert Parameters Yi, Tailwater Circular Rectangular Expansion Fraude llr6an Drainage
Oischarge Oepth(k) Pipe Pipe Factor Parameter pgMO-107
���� Circular Box Culvert (Figure MO•20 (Figure MO•22) I/(2tanq) p/pzs *p�=p/V (h) l=
0 or Oa, Pipe H or Ha, W, Culvert Y,/0 p�p�.s Q�Oz.s p �H Q�WHo.s Max 6.� I/(2tanq)*
Oiameter (ft) Culvert Width (h) (From or [At/Yt)•W]
Height (h) Figure U/WH�s (k)
MO-23 or Max S.�
MD-24)
Storm Line A Erosion Resistant 13.0 1.5 135 0.90 7.06 4.71 6.70 4.71 1.68 -1.69
"for purposes of outlet protection during major floods, the acceptable velocity is set at 5.5 ft/sec for erosive soils and at 7.7 ft/sect for erosion resistant soils.
**In no case should the length be less than 3H or 3D, nor does L need to be greater than lOH or lOD when the Froude Parameter is less than 8.0 or 6.0 respectively. Whenver the Froude parameter is greater than these ma.imums, increase the maxin
which the Froude Parameter is greater than S.0 or 6.0 respectively.
***Use Pipe Diameter for ciralarconduits as a minimum width.
Date: 10/13/2022 C:�United Civil Dropbox�Projects�U21004 - Nissan Dealers
PPENDIX
REFERENCED MATERIALS
SDI-Design Data v2.00, Re%ased January 2020
Stormwater Facility Name: Fort Collins Nissan-Kia
Facility Location & Jurisdiction: Fort Collins
User In ut: Watershed Characteristics
r,,.. �-i�:� n���,•,�:�� ;:�-,,-� �r�e, � EDB
Watershed Area = 1335
Watershed Length = 970
Watershed Length to Centroid = 515
Watershed Slope = 0.030
Watershed Imperviousness = 65.0%
Percentage Hydrologic Soil Group A= 0.0%
Percentage Hydrologic Soil Group B= 60.0%
Percentage Hydrologic Soil Groups C/D = 40.0%
Target WQCV Drain Time = 40.0
Location for 1-hr Rainfall Depths (use dropdown):
Userlcput �
acres
ft/ft
hours
After providing required inputs above including 1-hour
rainfall depths, click'Run CUHP' to generate runoff
hydrographs using the embedded Colorado Urban
Hydrograph Procedure.
Once CUHP has been run and the Stage-Area-Discharge
information has been provided, click 'Process Data' to
interpolate the Stage-Area-Volume-Discharge data and
generate summary results in the table below. Once this
is complete, click 'Print to PDF'.
After completing and printing this worksheet to a pdf, go to:
https: //maperture.d igitaldataservices.com/gvh/?viewer=cswd if
Create a new stormwater facility, and attach the PDF of this
worksheet to that record.
Routed Hydrograph Results
Design Storm Return Period =
One-Hour Rainfall Depth =
CUHP Runoff Volume =
Inflow Hydrograph Volume =
Time to Drain 97% of Inflow Volume =
Time to Drain 99% of Inflow Volume =
Maximum Ponding Depth =
Maximum Ponded Area =
Maximum Volume Stored =
User Defined User Defined User Defined User Defined
Stage [ft] Area [ft^2] Sta9e [ft] Discharge [cfs]
0.00 0 0.00 0.000
1.00 12,337 1.00 0.092
2.00 27,705 2.00 0.870
3.00 33,777 3.00 1.240
4.00 53,150 4.00 1.950
5.00 63,139 5.00 2.670
SDI_Design_Data_v2.00, Design Data 10/12/2022, 9:36 AM
60
50
40
3 so
0
zo
io
4.5
4
3.5
i 3
x
x
�
a
0 2.5
c7
Z
C
Z
O 2
a
1.5
1
0.5
DRAIN TIME [hr]
SDI_Design_Data_v2.00, Design Data 10/12/2022, 9:36 AM
o : ,
0.1 TIMfl [hr] 10
p. _ , . _-_ ��., �.
0.1 1 10 100
\ \�/
S
EMORANDUM
To: Sam Eliason, PE, Kevin Brazelton, PE
From: Dusty Robinson, PE (Ayres), Mason Garfield, EI (Ayres)
Date: May 25, 2022 Project No.:
Re: Nissan-Kia Development - Lang Gulch Assessment
36-4743.00
This memorandum documents Ayres' review of United Civil's design plans and the expected impacts on
the outfall area of Pond A1.
Background
Fort Collins Nissan-Kia plans to construct a new building with associated drive lanes and inventory
parking lot. The proposed site grading plan incorporates bioretention treatment, underground chamber
treatment, and detention ponds to account for the increased impervious area of the site. Ayres was
tasked with determining the geomorphic impacts on the outfall area due to the outflow of a proposed
detention pond named "Pond A1" (Figure 1), which will receive flows from the watershed name "Basin
OS1° (Figure 2).
a '�I I �' �:.,� � ` J
� ' �; �
�..
� �I �� 9
" ;..,�� i
� "`;_ � Proposed
I�� f�,� ` `.'�'/� j outfall area
� � � � � i`... .-r_,f! �;,;,,�,�
{ I - � . .c �� i
i � �,.._...� ___—
.�m . �._ .
� .� �A
Y� j��" ;
�
�,�,
— — — — . ,-._..�.��,
. �. ..-�snw.xwi r,-... �.
tk�y�[pyry,�' � fYr� �� r.
y lldl[�tMt�OM �Iv.l':1 �.
� �- ,-:11^!YY/ \!l'EKAJ' 11�0 CY�✓'� - .
� .AJ(.�[JVC�
'1! 1rVaA �RA��
!'lClw^.r: "1.' 1
, __ _ __ .:.� ���.� f �„� ��
':EVUS 4.E �F � t � _. -; 'ii _ - � � �:� ��. '1
�,,� �i�
__":•�l, io'�t'�l�+��— 1 � �'��'� � ,,:'3. �, --,. . '�' �
. (. ..i•4 �.
�_:--, i �� y ��' `t,`��_
Figure 1. The proposed outfall area with the proposed detention ponds from United Civil's document, "Fort Collins
Nissan-Kia Preliminary Drainage Report"
�— C y a��� YY _
, Y -- - +` ��_ t ? _ z. r•.�'f .
/'_ �; l
i�,� � - _�. .� � .
/�
— I � I 1' ..'I� _ �� 1 � \ i� �`
��II�I � � �.-_ `. �� r � 9�•1�i
I i 1� II !/' � . i 1 i
i r��Ut+, ll` ° I � _ �;; ,, _." � r�_� — ,� t._}
Y [ II
� �' ` ' II
� I _ 'ti'� ''���� I {� �_;'r ,i���� h � .,'�.��•� II
I `1
�I. — I�.��I�.'� ��•: , j ' 1I
� . ��t � i' � � "'x .
�r - •i- I
� '�' � ���li � � � '� - �
'�� � r; - :�r , . �
I ' �' � ., • - -
�
'i, ,�
''F
� J s �._ :�,;�:�. = � � — �
Page 1 of 5
970.223.5556 � 3665 JFK Parkway, Bldg. 2, Suite 100 � Fort Collins, CO 80525-3152
www.AyresAssociates.com
Project: 36-4743.00 File: Fort Collins Nissan-Kia Detention Pond Impacts Memo
i i
��
��
��
_ J/! I
— i
_ ', �,
� I
1� i �
�
E3� �'�
—==����
_—,�� �,
_,
� ��
' '�
�, �
—_ . �
_ __,
Y' �a � � � , � GMt�v B++�na
L�� ; �f�s i Proposed � r � � � �� �^�
� C; C C�� 6 0, 6ii
��� ` � << outfall area � /,.. _ - _ _ * _ � � �
� ./,,_ . /%,>>� � ., �.
�.� a�- ,
_ '�'—�'� '�� `` 1 r a . o. o. a o.� �4
` 1 ��� �
� —� ►,�� `\\ , � ..
� �Exs i � �' ,p����r ���, � �E�ao
, � ,,
��O � �, w,�o�s�o�.n�
osz , ;��...��
�
�
� ,� .. _ _�
r I �_ 051 � —� i
z, ,
L--- I — ���.�..'
—� ' j - --
, -'
'i i�
EX4 � -i�l'!� �
I
03B , � � I . E%:
� , � � O � ��� � i � .�A. �.�E�,���
. ,,� � � �, ����� `�� ���� �� �� _ _ _ _ �a�. � �,
1 � i �. �� y �� � �: �, _ «s.��.����,�.a�
��
,) . ' � EXS �� • \` � \ �•' `�, � ������ •
� �l � . � \ � �� ° �,�<,t�__ �`�o -
1,I � r \�`� /� R�� ��ro�n \
' ! .'.e y � ;, ` �' \ ' � \ �� � \�\
,-,� , ,
,,
� �
__ — — �"— — — �-, _ . ., � —
Figure 2. The proposed outfall area with the existing watersheds from United Civil's document, "Fort Collins Nissan-
Kia Preliminary Drainage Report"
Existing Site Conditions
The proposed outfall area receives flow from the Venus Avenue neighborhood, store parking lots, and the
Fort Collins Nissan-Kia dealership. The majority of flow entering the proposed outfall area passes over
Venus Ave and is channelized for approximately 300 ft. After the channel ends, the water travels as sheet
flow over prairie grass for approximately 150 feet until reaching the steep bedrock banks of Lang Gulch
(Figure 3). There were no signs of significant erosion during the site visit by Ayres on April 19, 2022, and
the grass was intact near the proposed outfall area. Minor erosion was noted just upstream of the
proposed outfall location, but it did not expose the bedrock (Figure 4). Based on the "Preliminary
Drainage Report," the 100-yr event would result in 39.5 cfs entering Lang Gulch for the current site
conditions.
A bedrock outcropping exists near the proposed outlet that extends to the banks of Lang Gulch (Figure
5). There were no signs of erosion of the bedrock banks of Lang Gulch during Ayres' site visit. Based on
the borings provided by Terracon, a claystone and sandstone bedrock layer exists 0.5 ft beneath a
vegetative soil top layer near where the spillway will be located ("Geotechnical Engineering Report for
Fort Collins Nissan and Kia Dealerships — Retention Pond").
The existing site conditions show that the concentrated stormwater flows from Venus Avenue naturally
spread under the current hydrologic conditions due to the local topography (Figure 6). Therefore, the
existing stormwater flow regime is not causing erosion of the grass cover or bedrock downstream of
where the flow spreads.
Page 2 of 5
Project: 36-4743.00 File: Fort Collins Nissan-Kia Detention Pond linpacts Meino
'` / .:
�,^` ° . � � � ; 4 , = �—,�
��,j� ti . - �:
� : � i '4 �� { u` il�_ • 5t;.i � %����� � +Y § r r' y6 ' ;y- :
� t'M';y' t . •'� \ x� � � , n 'r, /� � , �? �
�� � ���� '��,�t� .�� �, � � ''\.. � �:� ;� �u
� - �� � � 'y� .. i.. '� �l
'�- � . r
4,
,� r�• .. ,
- .- ��. . _. .
t
+ ��y� q .'r r�`�u y� .. L..a _�� J�'��i -.
3 �� wi `r�G%F�.,a F _�p {� .
�w i- a¢'�Lx�.� �-. tr '�'-�- � �w. �� � �. � ,,,� `��Tty< ��� �"°`" Y 'v
rr
.1�1a�� y :�. � ^ �:.w a,` _ E _ � � �. .� ,� .< � ,.
- �"�.� � � . ,r�4`�' ,� � : e �y,�� �"4 s' '��
'� r�s' ,''0Wt%�.` � *ti � "� twe�gr � .y +�n -. ' ' �
:c
s S., �.3. • ws tl" -.y i.+' w-' .
P �a b -:�. �\ � '- � .
a f .. �., , �'t�. ' .i
_ ty�,.?f'A a - r d,-- � .� 3.. 'a � d
E,a`�ak t � ,�. ; �^�Y� ��'? -' ti n � `�r{k .,'Zcy 4' 'it(�6Q-.�R.yy -
�� � �. fi'_�ay'K'�,s�--, � .r��e.,� ���� Y :,"*'�5,, _ ,v ;�!?-' �Y' 3 s;.a P � _� �,a.,
Figure 3. The existing flow path and approximate proposed s�illw�ay location of Pond A1 lookir�c� clotl%r:�stream (west)
�, ��,L o. L �- .,. .;,,1�
� E .ii
r , d f � �
_ L���`��`�
� . �� r
� _ . 'i��
._� �y� � ry.' . � � � � ; r .
> ,r !
w -' ��s�y�1s.\"c ,. �S. � . # ,» s � ..� v`
f�� �� 'd� `� � k s w�d*..y�l , �C a +' . c, �,r '�-f�, ^� � ��
�,• 'f'i� '- f �'x 5�:. �^ `Y � ,':.s R�e �,e�r �t{a d>�R � � ,,,1
� ��_ .. ���t� ( �i"'� f ��:'�' -•.A�, y �,.,� f't''
�' 7 _ � , : - . �;'.., y �
' " � �� �qy��.i . r � tc���;. tif�d .+;, �;
y �1� � . t�/r� '� �' j � %�� � � , r • � y ,
� p,l
�' ',�-�+, / � w.. < : r . R �:
: � �t�'�7��i � rj� �.�} �a,
�y .. d �� k �O, �'� '���ii 1y��' �
s . �� v� �b�!.,,;iRa .md i .�3 ;
4A+.,F �aa . _ •(
„1,�, • q� v W
� . .. � w`uC •. , 4
t �c =9e � . er �, _; - t � lJ
9
� ��1! �'` .. t'��lp � i-,, �s
g .'r�Q < e'1 . . a, Y .... . .��. � Y qY .
�, ,+' � �t•r•�"�:%d. � �s� r';+:�/,l,��1��F �� "�:� ¢ �
� 3 � �jj�� '�' .a.
��� " r � �`:a �w` ;�'_�J 7.��)��ef a""" :t�.., �,i�;;,��� 1 ��� �¢°f.j
�
♦: ��' �+4 '•�� „�_�� y ' �a � .a;,v� .yjjycM� �����Yd �r y ...'
���.�-' ,�',�i,� � t�' f�l , �`,." �i b . �. ,�,+� 1 �
,�/, : __ i . r � � � . � a Y, �.
�_ . i�: � t e ,.�.y.� r '�r��.�'�„
s "� s � f a �� � a
�i i /. � -�. � � . ry�,�•;��� T y :�; �Y ,1� ^.,�,4 a � � � , � <� i '.�'
,�f J
��jG � y= ` '� �� d'��v' �� � �%i � , j ' S' a � �` .. � +� ,�iy ���1.����;
:�.d�l�.�./7`,s:�,�-- rs����� �. _ . . ��'� Sa�:',r�J-...:.�...�.�14i ?
Figure 4. Minor erosion slightly upstream of the proposed outfall location
�' �
.;J
� �,•�nYqk�RYG^.'^�
��:� �.,1��y ,�'
ll} ' t ,
7 �, ����y14
i 5�� �Yr4' r�' I
.' . �,� .�_. �Y4_'-Y
� -ry... -� 1 � � '. 1� .. �r p �'s . '.. . .�� . _ � ` �r. ao�� � 7
� i t
�y'. y � � ! �� �.A, 4•
s r P' a��., J I � . �
���` �(. '��a � � � � �
w � ���: „ fy.-
��� ' V�1�� '' W.n�,� . • �~}+k�i� : .,}�i'..�, ,r�` . f'' ~
�Y:.L,'�'1 B. 1 ��.,�Y.�`� !f; L - c'j�,gi.t
s� �'�ysACf s., :y'�' � ,y� �^a"�. � , i � '` .,�,�,�"�g ,.
��,y. �; . �,b �.- � s, S i. � ;
r` f� '�';r , `+'� "� '� �` ��" �t�
" o � v ; ��' 0 Q , `"1 �: �''
° 4 �. - i � �-,t � '' � .�i �� r . � ti � � "a. .1�`�kF. ?� � R��
��� 'y�� / � � �: -.Ni c i [G�r � � 5E � ��rr � . � . . • � j� 95�.
. e. tL � F ����#G .Y'�.i�' �1 �'�. Rw � ; . � 1 ^ �1 h
p� 0 X
i %rr•^h�� - . Jc1Y . , , � � , a, e.� �'irr>?' :'`A:`� . -��^.r�
Frgure 5. Bedrock outcropping at the banks of Lang Gulch�looking north
Page 3 of 5
rr
:?r ir,��'„��r,
y � ' '%/
s, , ;
R -
�' 'h
! �
� ..��,�,�i �
{�
�`t
�:yEA_. `?`���r
Project: 36-4743.00 File: Fort Collins Nissan-Kia Detention Pond linpacts Memo
��; P . � �� : . .�� ��
����.�' .���� , � ��: 7 �� . ��,. � .1 ',� , / �..�,.��
�.., t. �.�''� '.' . � M1 ��M . • .. .. (�`� . ._ �I�'y .
'�" y�- , � ` '�,� �.�`,�., i � _
`�R '*cg���, �`° ��.. �� � ��,� ' .y�� . ��'' 1�,� ��
� �� �.'+T � •�� � � `�, L'�� i. � . . �
��� �' ; � � � �� , * � ����.
� _7.1 �� ! � '."�` , � =- ,� 4'� J` . � rt �
� �.�� � �� � � .
� � _ � ��� . � � .x �: �'
,n,�J �'� ' `' � J� .
X�:i�,�gr'::' � 'Z ' , �' �i
_"�� �
y� . , •� �
��� �. , � �Y�s , � ' � • ,. . ', '` .
.���� -'��� �
� "`�� ��li: �FyTGi, y ,' ' • �
�_�" .. � +N �, R. ."T 1 ,��i �n i .t�^ •.-- _.�. m �,� � �
_._ �.i. r. � � y ti � .. �� a, � } - .r- ^3'r;�. -
�o ,,,,�. "�. ,, a* ; _ `� � .
mzg�-. 1 � ��— — ' ����i'i""y (�. A � �1� a�%.. ''� '`r L,. •1' � --� �
-- . — - - - _ _ -- - -- - - - —
Figure 6. Existing stormwater concentrated and spread flow paths.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed design directs flows from Basin OS1 to the outlet of Pond A1. This outlet includes a level
spreader that will distribute shallow flow over a larger area than a standard stormwater outlet (Figure 7).
The spread flow will mimic the natural flow pattern and travel as sheet flow over/through the grass until it
flows down the bedrock banks of Lang Gulch. The maximum flow rate from the outlet pipe to the level
spreader is 2.6 cfs. The calculated maximum flow rate overtopping the pond from offsite undetained
flows is 4 cfs. Therefore, the approximate proposed condition 100-year event flow rate will reduce the
peak discharge to 6.6 cfs. Riprap will be used downstream of all storm sewer outfalls.
Page 4 of 5
Project: 36-4743.00 File: Fort Collins Nissan-Kia Detention Pond linpacts Meino
Figure 7. Proposed stormwater outlet and flow paths.
Evaluation
Based on the evaluation of available resources and site visits, the discharge from the outlet of Pond A1
will not increase the erosion potential within the proposed outfall area due to the following reasons:
• There was no significant sign of erosion in the proposed outfall area during the site visit due to
existing stormwater flows. All of the grass was intact where the sheet flow begins, indicating that
with the higher peak fiow experienced under existing conditions, the velocity and associated
hydraulic forces have not been sufficient to tear up the grass,
• The flow is spread out over the level spreader outlet from Pond A, mimicking the existing
condition sheet flow over the prairie grass,
• Proposed condition peak discharges are less than existing conditions, so hydraulic forces for the
highest energy events are reduced, lowering the chance of erosion.
• The bedrock layer is about 0.5 ft below the vegetative soil layer, so any erosion that may develop,
such as a headcut, would be arrested by the bedrock layer.
Based on the above findings, we recommend a level spreader outlet at Pond A1 to minimize the erosion
potential within the proposed outfall area. We recommend that the level spreader width be at least 15 ft,
to mimic the existing channel conditions. The outlet velocity of a 15 ft level spreader (assuming the level
spreader acts as a broad-crested weir) during a 100-year event is roughly 1.2 ft/s which is significantly
less than the permissible velocity of the grass of 4 ft/s. This indicates that tearing of the grass is unlikely
in the outfall location (Part 654 Stream Restoration Design National Engineering Handbook, 2007). To
further reduce impacts by erosive forces, we recommend that riprap be installed downstream of the level
spreader. Additionally, we recommend that the storage volume of the retention ponds is enough to reduce
the flows out of Pond A1 to equal or less than the existing conditions 100-year flow rate of 39.5 cfs.
References
Part 654 Stream Restoration Design National Engineering Handbook (2007). Chapter 8. NRCS.
Page 5 of 5
Project: 36-4743.00 File: Fort Collins Nissan-Kia Detention Pond linpacts Memo
,.F�`or`�t Coll�ns
1--
FCMaps
�
�, "' �;
t
�
-.--..�
J
�
oJ
g �
� �
�
� _I
L �O
� 1 i _J
_ _ __.i. _J
_ �i
�
S� to rt
�
- �...���. �'
� wAlwy W�y
� � J � � ,- • ' �
� � � � � �
__ �
�
Crr.hrlr�e $1
��
� -
� � �
� = I
�7
1 � �'
j1� '
`! � SmolueY 5
� �J ��,�
�
s � i
�� �
1: 3,430 �
572.0 0 286.00 572.0 Feet
This map is a user generated static output from the City of Fort Collins FCMa
WGS 1984 Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on tl
map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliaE
City of Fort Collins - GIS
National Flood Hazard Layer FI RMette ;�: FEMA Legen�
105°5'1"W 40°30'39"N SEE FIS REPORT I
' � . � � ._ � . � + ! �`
� —'� �� � } "� � � M SPECIAL FLC
- , _ � � � �
_ ` s �; I' " HA2ARD ARf
�� '�` � . � ,�
�n T��r�1 R��4"s� �2 i � i *�_ e �tPJ �x5� n� �� � � •
. _ _ � _ . - s'� �t� �•��
� �'�''= ' i - '��
� �r
, � , �, .
- ,� �; e . � �, � �� ,
' '�"� ` �, OTHER AREAS
- � . � ��"� }� 1� �L . _ FLOOD HA2P
���i►i s
'��i ��� -
. .
+ a�
���"� ,tf OTHERARI
� * , � '�� �� � GENEf
' � STRUCTUF
7 ^ � "'�
� . ` �p '� `
' h " � � t ♦ t � _a�.�' �
����� �t���� ��i����, ��E��F rti��ir��.�ir��i.���'��c�� ������'� _
o.�o � o ��`,� ��'� , � � � . � � --~ .�, �:-�w *
r _ `'.-�' . � . � ,� `� ► �#;,� .
. �"' �, :�.,�+r� �. 1 �,'���,+�
, �:r.�a i��, �j; ,�r � �� oTF
Fi . FEATUF
_ � ' I 4 ��, �
- - . ' :.�.�, �« .J�,� � 4 �: . .. ^ � �
-- � .,,. . '� � � CJ F����u::,� °�11 � , � . � T�PJ R6�'v'd S1� '
�`�- �` � �" � � • '� "-` �
� � e 1 F � ��
A � � � �"' ��. �_ � MAP PAN
� y ,=.y� .���i� . - 1t4 - y f�: � + � -
• � � E- - .� ��, �
� r � ���� e w,�"�'u" ` �'� `"�
� � �,' �^�� � i �,,,� � .�M, �� ��- ' � � � ,�..
'� �,� � - � � I �
� . '� �� �' '� �� � �.
�
i
g
Y
�� . ��
•��� � `���' � " � � +i� € � .� � This map
' ayr . �� +�p ; ' « � � . ,�_� �y � !�'i « � � �� y� � � digital flo
! � ;� � �� � , �� _ _ The basei
��` accuracy
��� � `_ �- — �. t �-- -� '�:? The flood
`�" ,,�.� :�� - - - ' � �
authoritai
� was expoi
'1 � i y��� I � � reflect ch.
g � .r' . �f } =�i � N. � � . '� time. The
� �" `:,ti, a � ' k . �. 6 � �tr becomes
" -� �� I�e. . ''�T'� 'll�r .,�`V � _ , - �, i � �� � � �
� � � r
,.��, � j i " , �— This map
�,, . � a M ` , �, �, elements
_ _ + legend, si
•� L Feet 105°4'24"W 40°30'li'N unmappe
FIRM pan
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
1 .6, o0o regulaton
Basemap: USGS National Map: Orthoimagery: Data refreshed October, 2020
�rr�con
�� GeoRe ort�
p
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Fort Collins Nissan and Kia Dealerships
Fort Collins, Colorado
April 7, 2021
Terracon Project No. 20215013
Prepared for:
TCC Corporation
Windsor, Colorado
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Fort Collins, Colorado
USDA United States
= Department of
Agriculture
I� RCS
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
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
�� r �� ��
�� ' ',�
c�i
{ �� �
_ �,
_`�� ; -_ � - -'�
�.� �
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Larimer County
Area, Colorado
Nissan Dealership
r�,,r.
:•;� . ��
i� "��
.: d
-- ��
•- �
� � �
��.� :
� r, �
r z � ,i
w
- • . . � . ' _ .'�'. . -�• �;._ ��� y.��;.y .. �, �
. ' ♦ � � ,'- - ^ � '_^'��,.-�., �i.�j 1
� '
r"����..�
� �-'� �� ; I
�,.�,�, ^ .I
� • �.:a:.-+++;lr� � .
:. � `
� � `� �( �
� ,�f �
1 - * . ,�,� �
.� ���
� 4� �
� ��� �
•a+� '�, •,, - . � r{`_�'F• ` li�y�'�;.� �'� ' •' � '�j�
1 • �� .r <��� ` � ��f � �
���"a _�,,� =.�+' ��1� . ,� �
-��, , � R:���'��'�'� - ,, !�- :�
�' :1 ��..♦ � �I�'��'�—�;� �I
M � �. �i�
' r �'. 1 �^ � � � 7 S' �
�_ . � 1 ♦ ` � y �; y
� � i � �• s .;'� � � �i .i.�' ,1
r
j �,: � � . Y .� �.� • :.�
._ .. ..T.� i� t 11LL..� ��
�t t '1 s% y'�' �
�'x � +�,� �" t r-_ �
:, +�y� � ,� ,�',•�� ��,� ,.-, -
w � _ _ � � N �. —
, ' � � ' � -:
-' ������ �-'i;��=� ft �`�l� f � ^�
�, } ~
��..a�
,A{�
I��� �
�
��
� �
� �, ��
� �
:—��b , :
I �
,
M ��i.� �- ,
i i��
� �
March 4, 2021
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.
E:3
�
v
0
493130 493190
40° 30' 33" N I I f
� � {��
y
��; �� j'�
�. �;���`
�� .
.. ''',� .
�
�
�
�r._�
�
�
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4932�0 493310 493370
� � � _
_ -' �
56,
�
�I
��
ti
: -� �
� T
i}� �,.
� �
�-
.. M�
, �-! �' ' �� �'
. ��
.
,
,
':�: ; `# ,� �'
i' �, - � K
� �
4934y0
�
♦
�� .
�
� '
♦
N �
9� , �' ,
! , ri� *
� � s� , �.. :yr�
'� �
� � �'yb t 1� ' �� �k
�'�`� � ! �b� •,� ; � a
� �r
- - - , �'' - , .
�""" _ ,� '��1 i s� .� � �
��
� �� ��'1� � � �
v -� ,.� � � `� +
�4,. .� �� � r _ ,
, ,� i, I ! '_ �- � w � ' � ^: 4 ,
l � �� ""� '� 3� � •-
- `� T ••_ ' � � fr
� �T �
, , ,� �:.+. �".� _ .: � - +
, �'� +y , �� �i �
�.�'� �, �� .�� � rn
� s -�i � � '�� :�u ^' �
��'*'
'y'` iNA � `1 � �► ,� . � �
�. ti'rl, 'i�f� 1_
� � ' y�` '_.....«:� �
�' � �
.� � �„ ...d
� i
,', 79) �9� �fP�9 <� ,�1f1 �1 �.
- - 4`'`" �
_ , _ � �' � �,,� ,
,� k • � �
� R � ' r ° .
� , � �A � C,y� �
o;il M,�N :in,�ay no`t�lie�vili� at this scal:e. � I�
40° 30' 17" N
,� . ,I `i �.���'� ��' — —%'_� �'� I
493130 49319D 4932W 4�310 493370 4�J34."?0
3
a Map Sc�Ie: 1:2,350 fi printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
� N Meters
0 30 60 120 180
� FE 2t
0 100 200 400 600
Map projection: Web Mercator Comer coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: U1T1 Zone 13N WCS&1
9
3
�
v
0
493490
r� y� 40° 30' 33" N
I�
�H `� 2G
- �
�
I ~<�
�.,�
_ I, "
� I� �
� -�
8� : � �
� �
� II� �
I y �
,� I �•�
� - �
II �
� I �
�� I �_ �
�!� � �
al I �
1�
�,�,�— �
1 �
1
�
� p� — �
� ��k
. �
9 � o
1 �
;M� �
.�
'� � 40° 30' ll" N
4Si490
3
�
a
0
Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
� _� Soil Map Unit Lines
0 Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
v Blowout
C`� Borrow Pit
j�' 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
lSandy Spot
= Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
oa Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
, Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canais
Trensportation
,+* Rails
ti Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
� Aerial Photography
MAPINFORMA
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI �
1:24, 000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at thi
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale o
misunderstanding of the detail of mappin�
line placement. The maps do not show th
contrasting soils that could have been sh
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each maF
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Con
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EP
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are base
projection, which preserves direction and
distance and area. A projection that pres�
Albers equal-area conic projection, shoul
accurate calculations of distance or area
This product is generated from the USOP
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area
Survey Area Data: Version 15, Jun 9, 2
Soil map units are labeled (as space allo�
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographec
12, 2018
The orthophoto or other base map on wh
compiled and digitized probably differs fr�
imagery displayed on these maps. As a r
shiftinq of map unit boundaries may be e
10
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol
55
56
65
108
Totals for Area of Interest
Map Unit Name
Kim loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes
Kim-Thedalund loams, 3 to 15
percent slopes
Midway clay loam, 5 to 25
percent slopes
Thedalund loam, 3 to 9 percent
slopes
Map Unit Descriptions
Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
0.3 1.6%
5.8 36.2%
2.1 13.0%
7.9
16.0
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
49.2%
100.0%
11
Custom Soil Resource Report
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.
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 undifferentiafed 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.
12
Custom Soil Resource Report
Larimer County Area, Colorado
55—Kim loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jpwz
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: Farmland of local importance
Map Unit Composition
Kim and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Kim
Setting
Landform: Fans
Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, side slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Mixed alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: loam
H2 - 7 to 60 inches: loam, clay loam, sandy clay loam
H2 - 7 to 60 inches:
H2 - 7 to 60 inches:
Properties and qualities
Slope: 5 to 9 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water capacity: Very high (about 26.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: R067XY002C0 - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
13
Custom Soil Resource Report
Minor Components
Thedalund
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Stoneham
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
56—Kim-Thedalund loams, 3 to 15 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jpx0
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: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Kim and similar soils: 45 percent
Thedalund and similar soils: 35 percent
Minor components: 20 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Kim
Setting
Landform: Fans, valley sides
Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, side slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Mixed alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: loam
H2 - 7 to 60 inches: loam, clay loam, sandy clay loam
H2 - 7 to 60 inches:
H2 - 7 to 60 inches:
Properties and qualities
Slope: 3 to 7 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat)
(0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Moderately high to high
14
Custom Soil Resource Report
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water capacity: Very high (about 26.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: R067XY002C0 - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Thedalund
Setting
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Material weathered from sandstone and shale
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 4 inches: loam
H2 - 4 to 33 inches: clay loam, loam, sandy clay loam
H2 - 4 to 33 inches: weathered bedrock
H2 - 4 to 33 inches:
H3 - 33 to 37 inches:
Properties and qualities
Slope: 7 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to fransmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to high
(0.06 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to moderately saline (0.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water capacity: Very high (about 15.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R067XY002C0 - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Renohill
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Midway
Percent of map unit: 9 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
15
Custom Soil Resource Report
Aquic haplustolls
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Swales
Hydric soil rating: Yes
65—Midway clay loam, 5 to 25 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jpxb
Elevation: 4,800 to 5,800 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: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Midway and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Midway
Setting
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Material weathered from shale
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 4 inches: clay loam
H2 - 4 to 19 inches: clay, clay loam, silty clay loam
H2 - 4 to 19 inches: weathered bedrock
H2 - 4 to 19 inches:
H3 - 19 to 23 inches:
Properties and qualities
Slope: 5 to 25 percent
Depth to restrictive feafure: 6 to 20 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding.� None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent
Gypsum, maximum content: 15 percent
Maximum salinity: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 15.0
rL:
Custom Soil Resource Report
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 7.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R067BY045C0 - Shaly Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Renohill
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
108—Thedalund loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jpv1
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: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Thedalund and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Thedalund
Setting
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Material weathered from sandstone and shale
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 6 inches: loam
H2 - 6 to 37 inches: clay loam, loam, sandy clay loam
H2 - 6 to 37 inches: weathered bedrock
H2 - 6 to 37 inches:
H3 - 37 to 41 inches:
Properties and qualities
Slope: 3 to 9 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
17
Custom Soil Resource Report
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to high
(0.06 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to moderately saline (0.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water capacity: Very high (about 16.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R067XY002C0 - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Kim
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Renohill
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
18
PPENDIX
DRAINAGE EXHIBITS
�
�
�,
t
`��� I 1 � 1 I � ,
\�\ I r /'/ 'r ��
�=�f
— ' '' �
- �1�_
�
� II
� i I
��
�a Z I�.
� �� ° I
I I>J
-� J o �
1 r1m�
I Iz��
r1Y
I I �
-L J
� � /
— `� _ �
�`,�
r -� �
L_ � �
�
r� �
� I r
� _ _ -�_
�
0
1,
�
r
�-►,., � VENUS AVE
� ��
� r'I-1 OS�
� L 3.27
L_---
� �I
EX4 �I
:�� .
o.s8 � -
L���
; �,-�'� �
, ��� �� ��°
�'�����:
�
1
==���_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
- -� - _ _ _ - - ��. - -
� � � � � �.._� '��
__ _ _=502� � - - - COLLEGE AVE (I
��y
--- ,,. --- _,
� �� �� — — ,— — — � — — -
� � � ,• -,..i
� � �.
m \\ / /
W `� �
v��l !�','� �:,;� �
; �
`' �NC, GULCH '%�� EROSION BUFFER LIMITS (TYP)
�_ +A` �/�/ � �
' � F`�F ` �� ,Y- � .
_.��_ � � ' � � .
o�
�
� 5�p5
- �
� � „ �h� / /J /
/ t
\ . �� // -- .\ \\ '
V � � / \ � 1� I�
0
� EX6 ���� I
�ry� 1
j��r� 6.44 �7`'0 �►
� I : '�' //
�� �// � � r
. 1���� j �/ /) f��l�,
iij���l\t\� !//i 1 � 1 jr�f
' i i � � � � � � 1 / � � / i j (
!C( :r �/� /��
i �111��J1�11
ir����ii� f �
i i ����,��,;�`��>>>��l�f;
11 )
`~~: ,��;o�'` �:����
I I :���:.�,.
,.•���.�
. / ".\\�\\1 �
,.��
� ,e.
// � �
�j
// 7 �'�
�f
f� � �i�'.. _
� � �� i j / / ��
jt�) 1 �1f%r;�
Iltill�)(lrl..
�i�����ii+i iir
,li�ii������ii
i �
�!!�i(�f'�i�'�i
'I�I �l��l
f � � � I � I � �
� , ��
� I j �j l � I� 11
� I � I � � � � I I
,,�,,,,��
��I����II
�, , ��
Ir�!r��i��
- / , i
�;� � � - so' � �� o i,-'/�; i';
`-, � s � � � � � �
� 1 ; �� � �, ;
(�
�I �EXIST�NG WETLANDS � � � �
`� � � I � ��� �
�� I I I , \ \ ,� ` I� ` � l
1 � � �� � � `� ���'`
� � i �, `� � `� i`�i i �
--- � � F I � � � � ��� � �
�- �- � j � ( > ', '� ' '� ' '
� _�__ � �
_-�Z--g��,�—, , � � � � � � � �� ,
0 o Q
oy ``�o
y � � �1 1�
4 ���-� �� � � \ � � � ''"�;' ��
�r�� I.., .� , �I�.-� EX5 ���i�;��
� �� �.
�� ' , ,. � �' ) �, �� _� i i„ �,�
r _ `� -� � �� ; � � � i I 7.97
���—� I � � �� �l �
T :_= �- - -�-- -���, `�=��� 1 � �
, �� ,
I —, 1-�1 �
, I � a —� ,t - — f ,so2o I %.
I I N r— � I
0
� s: � � � � .
� '
� f� Q xi ' � i--� !
� � EX2 � — — _ �
� � .�o �� 1 � s ` \� �
� ��o / � I /
x
� LINITED CIVIL
0
Design Gr❑up
- �_� � � �� _� �_� � ,, �, ��� ��.��,�
� DATE: Apri124, 2022
FORT C
ExisTir
PREPARED FOR: TCC CORPORAT�ON JOB NUMBER: U21004 NOTE: THIS EXHIBIT WAS PREPARED FOR I
�,
� � \'� ���.��
=,; .�
�
S COLLEGE AVE
R.O.W BOUNDARY
f7[ISting �a51115
Easin 11rea Impervious Runo$�oe$eients Peak Diseharge
acre ualue �� Cio �ioo �� Qio Qioo
°� cf� sf� c!s
F�G1 2.12 65.090 0.70 (1.7� J.$7 3.4i] 5.81 14.85
Qf2 1.70 5Q.51 0.�7 d.67 d.84 2.63 4.49 11.47
EJC3 Q.41 82.19`0 0.82 �.82 1.00 d.85 1.46 3.65
EX4 0.38 88.41 d.89 (7.89 1.(l0 d.96 1.65 3.80
E?C5 7.47 2. Q9`o Q.25 4.25 C1.31 4. QS 5.97 17.83
IX6 6.44 24.7% 0.41 D.41 D.52 5.46 9.33 23.85
D51 3.27 43.090 d.55 �1.55 D.69 3, 5& 6.13 15, 63
052 �.22 2.df 0.25 0.25 0.31 3.19 5.44 13,91
�
✓ 1 �� �
/EB EB �I
Basin
a1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A1�
A11
Al2
A13
A14
A15
A15
5tarm Line E
St€arm Line H
B1
�2
B3
B4
B5
B5
B7
Design
Point
A1
A2
A3
A4
R5
A6
A7
AS
A4
A10
A11
Al2
A13
A14
A15
A16
1
2
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
Area
acre
0.95
0.57
0.49
0.6D
(i.40
d.20
0.39
�.11
0.14
0.68
0.31
(7.56
0.94
o.nn
(i.85
0.77
3,46
6.22
Q.46
�.48
1.1�
0.38
0.54
o. sa
0.25
C1 C1 0.61
C2 C2 0.40
C3.1 C3.1 0.93
Prap
Impervious
Yalue
%
�. V�4
2.17�
72.9%
63.39"�
92.3 fo
65.83'�
85.J�`a
1�0,49'0
1oc�.aro
76,6 fo
77.0 f0
81.D10
90.d%
78.09"�
89.6 /o
90.d�'o
47.9�0
83,4 /�
2.09'0
2.0%a
70.8�0
91.8%
85.4�a
68.8%
8(l.4%
84.9%
.]Q.� IQ
94.5%a
osed �asins
Runo$ Caefficients
C� Cio �ioo
0.25 d.25 17.31
0.25 d,25 0.31
0.76 0,76 0.95
0.69 0.69 Q.86
41.89 0.89 1.00
d.71 0.71 Q.88
0.85 0.85 1.QD
0,95 0,95 1.dD
G1.95 d.95 1.d0
0.78 f7.78 0.98
0.79 d,79 0.99
0.81 0,81 1.OD
0.95 0,95 1.Od
0.79 0.79 Q.95
�.88 d.88 1.00
d.45 d.95 1.OQ
0.59 d,59 0.73
4.85 0.85 1.00
0.25
0.25
Q.74
0.84
D.85
D.73
0.81
0.25
0.25
d.74
0.89
0, 85
0.73
0, 81
0.31
4.31
0.93
1. d0
1.0t�
D.91
1.00
D.84
Q.65
D.41
0.84
0.55
0.91
1. oa
0.81
1.00
Peak Disch
Il; Qio
cfs cfs
0.51 d.86
D.30 0,52
0.74 1.35
a.$s Z.�o
D.77 1.30
0.3(i 0,52
OJ4 1.27
0.28 0,48
Q.34 (7.59
1.13 1.93
0.52 d,89
1.D1 1.74
1.90 3.25
0.77 1.32
1.67 2.86
1.68 2.87
4.6D 7.87
10.20 17.48
0.25 (1.42
o.zs a.n4
1.74 2.96
0.75 1.29
Q.97 1.56
0.30 d.51
0.45 0,78
1.a5 i.so
1.20 2.04
1.86 3.19
Qi o0
cfs
2.21
1.32
4.64
4.80
3.74
1.66
3.93
1.1D
1.43
6.19
2.85
4.96
7.26
3.66
7.23
7.15
25.54
47.49
1.07
1. sz
7.88
2.95
4.53
1.55
2.52
5.58
6.79
7.15
0�_Fe �
�
m
--�- - -
m
� /
y ���/���
//i-�\ �
/ ��
` /�
i'
/
/
�
�
�
� �,r-
f `�•-
\ f �_
��
i' �
, .
,' � -
� ���
� �
' i
/ / r'
� � �
/ � /
� � i i'
i �
i r� �
� � i
i �
� � � / /5
/ f � �
' I �� �� � .
,
� I �
�
l �
`` � �
��oo�P,
1�� Y�P
/b
� �
�,
/
�0 �
/' '
�0 � � �
��
—-_
--_
-
� _
� � �
� �
�
\ee � � �
\EB
\�
B
\F
B �� EB
�,.
.,
�,
�,,;
, ,,
,�
/ � � ��� �
�0� �%�����
,
. ,�;� ; % � =
- �� / �� _
_ �- , ,,.
,m� — � � G ,,, c
� W 5��' �
5
� � � � �� �//
� � �0 � � � cco ��C
� � cJJ /
� '
/ \ \� �\` //
F,0 - � � 4
/ �
� i /
�ii / /
!?,%�)` `(`\\ c � �0 '
/
/
�� � ��
EXIS'
,
,r �
�� �0
�
�
� �0
�' /
,�r ��
�- /
��' �� �0
� -
�. /�'
�► ♦ ' ��
� ,
,
� ,t�S
�ee \� �; i ,�— � t �,e
/
___\ee ���,�_____ _--
�--,
—� __- _ ,
— ��, �: � ,t� i , � t ��
�\ � � ��' �i— �--- _
� � �_ � , _ �_ —_-- -
r" � � � — i�� i� �� � — '
—/ \� l � � / I C � �' �` '_—_ �—__
\� \ , —/ �/ 1 �/ �'� —�-- -- ---�
�\ �= _�� � i — —�� __ —_�
� ,
-`\ �\ ` \�`-- � �—��'J ---------------�
�� ` '--- —� ��__�� _ ` �----�------� ---' _�
�� ¢98� — `'\ `—� _--- --� -- --- —�— ---�--���
� — — — — — — — —
� — — — —
� �--__--
�_--
__�—�
� _ �__
A O 'y�
� � � 2
� Q m �
� 0
. � 2�� N
� N
�G p �O N
�►� O C�
� � � R` n
__J_----------
—.,�_— ��__--�_
�— �—���
--- �—
\���� _
,, � ,
/
�__
�
\\
� s��g�
�
'
�\
��i
B5 �
�
—� � '
i �rr� �
� a i 9�A
�� 1
i
`�`� � � � � � � I LOl
\\� i � pP �' � �\ �I BLOC
� l�/ � Ba h-� �
�� //// , � �� � II
�
� � /� %% �, � � �, � �� so�,o�'
�/ / �� �. \ � ���
// // �,,, � � � � \. �
%/%%% %� % ,� � � � `� \ �
,� , , C
�/// // �. � MIN. FILTER AREA: 1 684 SF �
� �� �� � � , DESIGN FILTER AREA: 3,840 SF �
�/�////l ll �\ ' �
� I � � � � / � � �.o�
1 � ��I � I � �� \
\� , � �� I � � � I \
\ \ BIORETENTION I �, � I. �
� \\, \\ I, I PO N D A3 I 1 \ =;-
� \� WQ WSEL = 5007.40 '� \ I -
�\\\ 1 I \ \ \ 1 "l__ `� k�
,� ����\\�. BZ �\ �� _:,,_ 11
� �►� ����� \ 0.25 �,� \ 1 '•' .•a II
(1� � � �\� 0.48 \� � 1Ii
� �au� ��\\�� 0.31 �� � , DP I �'• :< VI
.<
���� \ ��.\\\ \ ; B3 so -�, )I
i ��\ �.., \\. � �. ' ,p , ',o 's
�,� � �� � , " � � ��
� ��\ \ �\\ \� \ \ � % ! A
I \ ��\\ \ \''�\\\\� �%/ I B3
� ���� � � �ta�\\� �— �•.1 ` 1.10 0.74 — \ � � �
�\�t�I�, r.:l� 1_ I _ 0.9 � � /
� � ��—
+.1 ! �� � \
1 \'��\11 I \ �til ( � 'I 11 ' \
� �111l��1�1� I �fiII �� I I __--�
� \ 1 lfili � I � ��,i I B 025 \ -, I �� �
� 1`1�� � � �� ` 0.46 0.3 � � o �
��� �I �\�� �� � I � w r �
���U�I�� ����� � �
� I I 1�� \\,�\ . � J DETENTION , � \ '
I I;v�\�� �,'�� v�'�. 1,POND A1 \� ��
�"��'� �. � `, � '� WSEL = 5011.00 s ` �
� � �,� , �
I In � , .,, �, � � �, —
I I (i `� \ i �, �` \ ��� \ � � � � �
, ,
� � i; ��, ��,, �, �; �, �`, ��, , . �,, �\ 1 � � � ,� � �
; �i ��, ; �, ►. !, `,� �� A� ��� \ \ � I� � �� I I � � i
" TRACT B ' ; ; I � � ' '� ` , , � ,�
� �
1 �
�� � 1 , 1 `'� � � I � � � � �'�,�;�,,--,
•; � 1 � , � — ,.�� r : . � �
I �' 1,����,�1����� \� � �� 5010— �;�
\ � �, '�, �` `�. � `, �` \ \ '� � \\ \ � �\ �
� �� �. `, ��, �V �,� �, �' �'�, �V �,� �, � � � �'so DP � I
/ � `� \� �`\\�� �' �� � \�,p B1
�1� ��:�� � ��� ��� ` � � �`� �� � � � � � � � 6„�� 6„UC
`, �, � � '� �`,, '�, `� ` BIORETENTION PO
` i �'�, '\ ��. \', a ,; �'i �! `�. . r \\
� � WQWSEL=5010