Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 09/27/2007Final Drainage Study For McClelland's Creek PD & PLD Larimer County, Colorado August 27, 2007 Final Drainage Study For McClelland's Creek PD & PLD Latimer County, Colorado August 27, 2007 2' Prepared For: Everitt Companies 3030 South College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Prepared By: NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. 420 S. Howes, Suite 202 Fort Collins, Colorado 90521 Phone:(970) 221-4158 Fax:(970) 221.4159 Project Number: 110-006 n� INORTHERN ENGINEERING ADDRESS: PHONE:970.221.4158 TE: 200 S. College Ave. Suite 100 WEBSIWEBSIrthernengineering.com Fort Collins, CO80524 FAX:970.221.4159 August 27, 2007 Larimer County Engineering Department ' 200 West Oak Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 ' RE: McClelland's Creek PD & PLD Larimer County, Colorado Dear Staff: Northern Engineering Services, Inc. is pleased to submit this Final Drainage Study for McClelland's Creek PD & PLD for your review. This report was prepared in compliance with technical criteria contained in the Larimer County Stormwater Management Manual and the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards Manual. If you should have any questions or comments as you review this report, please feel free to contact us at your convenience. Sincerely, NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. (20�a,_ Aaron Cvar, P.E. Senior Engineer I 1 1 [1 1 1 I ��'�•-�-�i'yFossil Ridge MOM e State Land Board r Sewer District Sludge Farm IY� �C.R.J32— I � J A aim -b 31h(�T.v+ VICINITY MAP N.T.S. I TABLE OF CONTENTS VICINITY MAP Page I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective............................................................................................... 1 1.2 Mapping and Surveying........................................................................ 1 II. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1 Site Location......................................................................................... 1 2.2 Existing Site Description.......................................::.............................. 1 2.3 McClelland's Creek Floodplain................................................................ 1 III. HISTORIC DRAINAGE 3.1 Major Drainage Basin............................................................................. 1 3.2 Historic Drainage Patterns..................................................................... 2 IV. CRITERIA AND DESIGN PARAMETERS 4.1 Criteria............................................................................................. 2 4.2 Hydrologic Parameters.......................................................:.................. 2 4.3 Hydraulic Parameters.............................................................................. 2 V. DEVELOPED DRAINAGE 5.1 Proposed Development........................................................................... 2 5.2 Developed Drainage Patterns................................................................. 3 5.3 Detention................................................................................................ 4 VI. MCCLELLANDS CREEK FLOODPLAIN ........................................... 5 VII. WATER QUALITY 7.1 Design Intent and Criteria...................................................................... 8 VIII. EROSION CONTROL 8.1 Erosion Control Plan and Criteria.......................................................... 5 IV. CONCLUSIONS 9.1 Compliance with Standards................................................................... 6 REFERENCES................................................................................................... 7 APPENDICES Appendix A — Historic Drainage Exhibit and Calculations ' Appendix B — Developed Drainage Calculations Appendix C — Street Capacity Calculations Appendix D — Inlet Calculations Appendix E — Storm Line Calculations Appendix F — Swale Calculations Appendix G — SWMM Parameters, Model Output, Detention Pond Rating Curves Appendix H — Emergency Overflow Weir Calculations Appendix I — Water Quality Calculations Appendix J — Riprap Calculations ' Appendix K — Erosion Control Performance Calculations and Cost Estimate Appendix L — August 2007 Update to McClellands Creek Floodplain MAP POCKET Drainage Exhibit Final Drainage Study McClellands Creek PD & PLD Northern Engineering Services, Inc. ' Final Drainage Study For McClelland's Creek PD & PLD August 27, 2007 1 I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Obiective ' This report summarizes the results of final drainage analysis of both existing and developed conditions for McClelland's Creek PD & PLD'based on design criteria adopted by Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins. I1.2 Mapping and Surveying Northern Engineering conducted field survey of the property in 2006. Topography of the ' site with a contour interval of one -foot has been generated with this information, and is referenced to City of Fort Collins Benchmark Numbers 2-03, 8-01, and 9-01 (NGVD 1929). ' II. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1 Site Location ' The project site is located in a part of the north half of the northeast quarter of Section 9, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in Larimer County, Colorado. More specifically, West of County Road 7, south of Larimer County Road 36 ' (Kechter Road), and east of McClellands Creek (see Vicinity Map). 2.2 Existing Site Description The portion of the property to be developed is roughly 40 acres in size, which is currently used for agricultural purposes. The McClelland's Creek drainageway runs along the west boundary of the site, and receives most of the drainage from the site. In general, the ' majority of the project site slopes southwest toward McClelland's Creek at roughly 0.5 to 3.0 percent. A portion of the site slopes southeast towards County Road 7. 2.3 McClelland's Creek Floodplain The McClelland's Creek drainageway is currently not a FEMA regulated floodplain; however, it is a City of Fort Collins floodplain. Modeling of flood discharges and ' channel hydraulics is provided in an update done in August 2007 to the "McClelland's Creek Master Drainage Plan Update", (Reference 4). Limits of the existing 100-year floodplain have been determined based on this update to the Master Plan and are shown on Final Drainage Plan. Minor construction will be done within floodplain limits as necessary for pedestrian trails and the outfalls of proposed detention ponds associated with this project. III. HISTORIC DRAINAGE 3.1 Major Drainage Basin - 1 - ' Final Drainage Study Northern Engineering Services, Inc. McClellands Creek PD & PLD The site predominantly lies within the McClelland's Creek Major Drainage Basin. Per recommendations found in the McClellands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update, the ' allowable release for the overall site is 0.5 cfs per acre in a 100-year event and 0.2 cfs per acre in a 10-year event. 3.2 Historic Drainage Patterns The site has been broken into 2 historic basin as shown on the Historic Drainage Exhibit. Basin H1 is 33.12 acres in size and drains southwest into McClelland's Creek; basin H2 is 10.27 acres in size and drains southeast to County Road 7, and then drains south in the roadside ditch of the County Road roughly 600 feet into the Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet ' Ditch. There is a small off -site basin (0.56 acres) to the northwest of the site, comprised mostly of Kechter Road. Runoff from this basin enters the site at its northwest corner. There are no other off -site basins contributing runoff to the project site. Historic 2- and 100-year runoff calculations have been performed at design points H1, H2, and OS and are provided in Appendix A. ' IV. CRITERIA AND DESIGN PARAMETERS 4.1 Criteria Drainage criteria outlined in both the Larimer County Stormwater Management Manual (Reference 3) and the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual (Reference 4) have been referenced in this study. ' 4.2 Hydrologic Parameters The Rational Method has been used to estimate peak stormwater runoff from drainage basins within the developed site for the 2-year and 100-year design storms. Flows ' determined using this methodology have been used to check capacities of streets, inlets, culverts, storm lines and swales. Rainfall intensity data for the Rational Method has been taken from current City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency tables. The computer program UDSWMM has been used to determine required detention volumes. Rainfall data for UDSWMM has been taken from current City of Fort Collins ' Rainfall data. 4.3 Hydraulic Parameters Hydraulic analyses of street capacities, storm inlets, storm lines, and swales have been done according to County and City drainage criteria. The following computer programs and methods have been utilized: ' • The computer program "Hydraflow" by Intellisolve has been used to analyze storm sewer lines. ' • The computer program "FlowMaster" Version 7.0 by Haestad Methods has been used to analyze swales. • The computer program "UDINLET" Version 1.06 by the Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District has been used analyze the curb inlets. • The computer program "UDSWMM" Version 1.4 by the Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District has been used to determine detention pond volume 1 1 -2- Final Drainage Study McClellands Creek PD & PLD Northern Engineering Services, Inc. requirements. V. DEVELOPED DRAINAGE 5.1 Proposed Development The proposed development will include single-family residential lots, open space, local streets, and respective utility improvements. Detention and water quality will be provided onsite to mitigate downstream effects of the proposed development. Overall detention release rates will conform to McClellands Creek master plan requirements of 0.20 cfs per acre in the 10-year storm event, and 0.50 cfs per acre in the 100-year storm event. In general, all developed runoff with the exception of developed drainage basin 7a, will be routed to one of the six onsite water quality/detention ponds (Ponds 1 through 6). Discharge from Ponds 1 and 2 (detaining flows from roughly 22.7 acres) will be directed by a storm line into the McClellands Creek Drainageway. Ponds 3 through 6 (detaining flows from roughl 14.9 acres) will discharge by a storm line into the Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet Ditch. 5.2 Developed Drainage Patterns The project site has been broken into 19 sub -basins (see Final Drainage Exhibit). In general, drainage from the site will be routed predominantly via curb and gutter, and then into inlets and storm sewer into water quality/detention Ponds 1 through 6. As described below, some inlets have been designed to take the 2-year flow, allowing 100-year flows to overtop and be conveyed by an overflow Swale. Ponds 1 and 2 will release into McClellands Creek. Ponds 3 through 6 will release into the Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet Ditch. Specific routing of developed flows is described below: Basins la — le Runoff from basin la will be routed via overland flow directly into Pond 1. Runoff from basins lb through le will be routed via street curb and gutter to sump inlets. Up to the 100-year flow will be captured by these inlets be and routed via storm pipe to Pond 1. Basins 2a, 2b Runoff from basin 2a will be routed via overland flow directly into Pond 2. Basin 2b will be routed by street curb and gutter to sump inlets. Up to the 100-year flow will be captured by these inlets be and routed via storm pipe to Pond 2. Basins 3a, 3b Runoff from basin 3a will be routed via overland flow directly into Pond 3. Basin 3b will be routed via street curb and gutter to a sump inlet. Up to the 100-year flow will be captured by this inlet be and routed via storm pipe to Pond 3. Basins 4a-4d Runoff from basin 4a will be routed by overland flow and Swale to a storm sewer -3- Final Drainage Study Northern Engineering Services, Inc. McClellands Creek PD & PLD 1 flared end section. Up to the 2-year storm flow will be captured by this storm sewer, and be conveyed via storm sewer into Pond 4. Runoff from basins 4b and ' 4d will be routed via street curb and gutter to sump inlets, designed to take up to the 2-year storm. Basins' 4a, 4b, and 4d flows which are in excess of the 2-year storm will combine, and be conveyed in an overflow swale south into Pond 4. ' Runoff from basin 4c will be routed via overland flow directly into Pond 4. Basin 5a Runoff from basin 5a will be routed via overland flow directly into Pond 5. Basins 6a, 6b Runoff from basin 6a will be routed via street curb and gutter to a sump inlet. Up to the 100-year flow will be captured by this inlet be and routed via storm pipe to ' Pond 6. Runoff from basin 6b will be routed via overland flow directly into Pond 6. ' Basin 7a Runoff from basin 7a consists of backs of lots and a small portion of street. ' Runoff from the eastern half of this basin will be routed via Swale 5 into McClellands Creek, runoff from the western half will be routed directly into McClellands Creek via overland flow. In a 100-year storm, historic runoff from ' the 2.76 acres that comprises basin 7a has been calculated at 4.6 cfs (see appendix A). Developed 100-year runoff from basin 7a is 6.4 cfs. This increase of 1.8 cfs from historic to developed conditions has been compensated for by reducing the overall release rate from the site as discussed in Section 5.3, below. Also, a variance has been requested for the undetained release in Section 8.1. ' Basins OSI Runoff from basin OS enters the site at its northwest corner and will be routed by curb and gutter to sump inlets. Flows will be routed in storm sewer into Pond ' 1. These flows will bypass Pond 1 via the emergency spillway, and be directed by overland flow into McClellands Creek. ' 5.3 Detention Onsite detention will be provided in order to attenuate developed flows and release at McClellands Creek master plan requirements of 0.20 cfs per acre in the 10-year storm event, and 0.50 cfs per acre in the 100-year storm event. This translates to maximum allowable release rates for the overall site of 7.4 cfs in the 10-year event, and 18.5 cfs in the 100-year event. Table 1, below summarizes pond volumes, water surface elevations and release rates. The overall release rates from the site have been determined from SWMM nodes 901 (representing the combined outflow hydrographs from Ponds 1 and 2), and 902 (representing the combined outflow hydrographs from Ponds 3 through 6). Node 901 peak 10-, and 100-year flows are 4.0, and 10.0, respectively. Node 902 peak 10-, and M Final Drainage Study McClellands Creek PD & PLD Northern Engineering Services, Inc. 100-year flows are 2.0, and 7.0, respectively. The total release rate from the site, the summation of peak flows at nodes 901 and 902, is 1.4 cfs less than the allowable 10-year release rate, and 1.5 cfs less than the allowable 100-year rate. TABLE 1 Pond No. 10-Year Volume AC -FT 10-Year Release CFS 100-Year Volume* AC -FT) 100-Year Release (CFS) 100-Year WSEL* (FT 1 0.80 2.0 2.41 5.0 4880.80 2 0.60 2.0 1.77 5.0 4878.79 3 0.20 1.0 0.55 1.2 4883.07 4 0.50 1.0 1.63 4.0 4880.20 5 0.10 0.3 0.22 0.8 4879.32 6 0.10 0.3 0.21 0.8 4879.33 *100-Year Volume and WSEL includes Water Quality Volume Basin 7a, comprised of backs of lots and a small portion of street, will release undetained flows into the McClellands Creek Drainageway. Historic 100-year flow from Basin 7a increases by 1.8 cfs with the proposed development. A variance for the increase in flow 2 from Basin 7a is requested, based on the fact that the overall release from the site is 1.5 cfs less than the allowable release rate. VI. MCCLELLANDS CREEK FLOODPLAIN A copy of the August 2007 update to the "McClelland's Creek Master Drainage Plan Update", (Reference,4) is provided in Appendix L. The 100-year floodplain shown on the Plan Set for this project is based on this update to the Master Plan. It is noted that the bike path proposed with this project was incorporated in the August 2007 update to the Master Plan. VII. WATER QUALITY 7.1 Design Intent and Criteria Extended (40-hour) detention will be provided in the lower stages of Ponds 1 through 6. Calculation of required water quality capture volume has been provided in Appendix I. The design of the water quality ponds has been done according to criteria found in the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 3 (Reference 3). VIII. EROSION CONTROL 8.1 Rainfall Erosion Control Plan Erosion control measures are shown on the Temporary Erosion Control Plan, provided in the back map pocket of this report. In general, the following erosion control measures have been implemented: • Silt fence will be placed at all locations where grades indicate sheet flows could travel offsite, as shown on the Temporary Erosion Control Plan. • Gravel inlet filters will be placed at all points of discharge from streets. • Straw bale dikes will be placed at a minimum interval of 200-feet in swales. -5- ' Final Drainage Study Northern Engineering Services, Inc. McClellands Creek PD & PLD • A Sediment trap will be placed at the outlet structure for each pond. • Vehicle tracking pads will be placed at all entrances to the site as noted on the Temporary Erosion Control Plan. All seeding requirements and other requirements outlined in the "Grading and Erosion ' Control Notes" provided on the final utility plans for this project are to be complied with. IV. CONCLUSIONS 9.1 Compliance with Standards All drainage analyses contained in this report have been done according to the Larimer County Stormwater Management Manual, and the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual. As described in Section 5.3, above, a variance is requested to allow Basin 7a to release undetained, based on compensation made in the overall detention release rate from the site. ffm Final Drainage Study McClellands Creek PD & PLD Northern Engineering Services, Inc. REFERENCES 1) Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Updated April 1999. 2) Larimer County Stormwater Design Standards, Larimer County Engineering Department, June 2005. 3) Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 1-3, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001. 4) McClelland's Creek Basin Master Drainage Plan Update, Icon Engineering, Inc., November 2000 (Revised March 2003). -7- Appendix A INI !'b'Ti NM WIN I I '\ I Ir' I 1 S � II i� L IIIIO�I ,IIII� ,Iifl r/lllli� I COUNTY AGRICULTURE H1 ' hm ------------------------------- --- - _ -ly2_ - -- _--' - � IO.n — --- ------------ ------ _ F r' ------------------------------------------- _ _ `----------------' ------------ - ; I -- -- - ,\ a � ; \-�'�tir-o=,mil �-.:3.�� •' •_•--._ = -�• , Xz�, ' I mr \\ II 1 r om n � O ❑ tv� ONORTH a °� w LEGEND: �IIu MnNG STORY SEWER O M% NG STORY SERER IN E Z 5020 — EXISIINC CONTOUR A �- —� M% NG R NE ZL HMIECT O NW aaaaaaaaaaoaoR HS WC ORNNME WUNO C�1y41 �ldn a N OESICNSTOR iLr 3� 11SJ'E}■f�CE I'0 IAFANRCR6 a�Wr�� i� Q iC �0 \ CfSgN fglM I� w. il[IR RINOY V Z =Zv�� ZWN�ttt it A @ 8 FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION m W W Q U 0 I I 100 i ♦! / 1 it\too �+♦ 1 1 I � -�- It ♦i♦ vv 11 ' ' ♦ `1 It, \\ \ r0 kj it it till �il It it xe it Idz: �v i /,Qr 0 10,2it I 1 l (1( , I ! / i �/'I r r r I r r I I � I I � I I � , l�`r •� % /; II ►� it �i i i 11 i i l II rr / �•� it ' it � � i i I! i f i •t l �/ I' ����/� / I / 3 N 3 O O O O m O CL a: E o 0 00 o U E Y N O � o cS �O Oilmvo Z o EC d o 0 U o O O U U �0 � amo Z o N � O /O V ii (3 t6 pp u j� G C �Nm N m N V N E 0 U U O� ur O T V d> 0 0 r F 0) N 1 2 Z C O W Q O V — C W O U � n C o N O n 4 j cc m m m m o cc) 8 2 cc Y> p O V N o°W3o Y n O m W Wa W oa�m W O E o C y1p 00 c m Y� n O 'ta' _ rQy� 2 � O b 'o W W NNu� o y r C d Ch O) Ohm U OJ y �n C 10vrm im W vd.N C aci .0 m O r b fn O N N O_ Qy.� W d N C W T p U U Yi N O N c W n c W O rn a ! \ k o\\ »=a . � \ o r�� § a° -, � 2 _ > ` - 2 00 o 3 Q B �!«! z z ; � 2 §�'N O Q - iL \a000 O °°� % ®!§§m � CC, C4 - Q ! £ge00 , ZP r-A" 3 k ,! )462000 cy 2 ( re/ 2 L L.2 �)\^( 71 13 > aLLJ k? +/, Ut:LL f\Ia) -) 3 ® oR4£;«2 d B 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Of Emw�a� .'a ;- / ! k o\ »=A q M > 2 0� u $ fij=3e � B rz ®lzzw % !?>J|0- �l N |« Q ; f�s : „ B % °°� 2 \ \!§;; } f0, E � / \ f-■■R ��\� 2 , :fQg 2a00 -`3'2 kE k §k77� &�,�■ �; . 3} / �! \)2§ 272§ .!� 2 |17 -6 2§//�a- #! �k2.$42 #! £2 < ;P 4_;;� § � I O �i 20 GD M U pQ OLL U Q 6) Y U .dil fA W lQ tll g t_ ((O N 7 G d Y �r 2 () T �C+ I� U a 0 0 00 V U o o O O O r � f \ E<� N m S W V N _ O d N N CO) G m M O O d m C x N x � R � m+ cm G Q a x N x o I Appendix B 1 I 11 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 11 r W t 0 d' O d. N n n O n N M N N 0 7 (n 0 rn rn N (n O M � M O O M p M N m N (O O rn O, u Eo M M rn M rn N V N O O N a D N M V O N O N N rn 7 O N n n rn r 2 E V O � J O U p 0 ONN 000 rnN D Mo] O MMN O M UV^ T tt pE=O (O (uN O I O n O n O O rn O N(O O O N O OD O LO O na O O n O V O Mad' O O O rn O n O V 0 a aj g '"c0 U U p, C� W N 2 N 8 U U 4' N omvm 3 N w (NO rn O (O r m N r N a tN[1 N ((1 r 0 n N OaEto `m a N o Z C O U O U �pppp co C C N 0 0 0 0 O O 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O Z ¢ O U Q U C W =a y W 'p C W m M O O N� IN-OOD M 7 n O rn V V CM] rn O M O N 3 O N N N N N M- O N N M N N ❑ m O 4 W W o a 4 2 E `oad a m a c o cO t o_ rn �m (oi v N o cq r (n+ m n0orno aD eoMoao N 00 n 0000 N O (n O N M N N N N 7 C W m U w C LL 4 ra A U Q c N m ma (n (no�nvnMMo(oornvrnaorn(o n rn mry onncvrnNm(o (q�vn �n �n o M y � N N � N N N � N M O � (Wp m Q EO O � w W o C y M O -go J O O O J U O C a h 0 rn p 7 0 a 0 N N O N M U rn O M N rn N M 0 rn M W N m (� N o N " N N N W 0 n (O 00 rn N n (O N N N N M N 7 o m a'oin m O L UQj aU oJR cm m i A O a Um 0 Lo c m C C_ i N N T O m h N tp O m m R O O O N N N F 0 0 O 00 V QO E �aaaa¢¢aaaaaaaaa¢aaa a ¢aa C) ~Ezzz z z z z z zzzz z zzzzzz z zzz Q > Id m al m O 0 O C 24000000 '�j0 0 0 0 O p O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O O CL o 0 0 00 0 0 0800 o o 0 0 0 0 000000000 0 o o 0 0 O 00 O 00 0 0 0 o o o 0 0 � u W A y N a U a e O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O c o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 0 00 0 O 0 r U Zj O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O O_ J L c o M a m o a v N w o .- N V N am¢¢ 7 - - f E0 z <o of N N � <o of viNa_vizz co <o 0 2 '^gym o0nw mmmm�.0 \/ 3u y> -0-- N N N N N - N N .0vmiaoo N Z b M> N N �- O O 4 a f m O U O O o O o O- O -- N —� 0 0 0 0 00 0 Om J CEC v o(vO N vm0 mC�J 0W 0ctp a mhC MNof N No N�m m ma O6I J Vem OoSNi m Oo mmO Nmt7 O Onh 0(OOpO . N v m 0I� �V ooN NN o0 u O 4 od"moo 0000 oom oMo�oo 0-?7 N m om o N N f� N N N N N N N N V N N N N O M N N N N O Iii C 2 O m rX oo M N o M N N m N 0 On o N m OM o0 0 '0 C m t vOi N M M M M N = g m 41 G U m U) N J NNNN N NN Naa NN 0 U N O NNN N N NO NO NN NO N N N N NON O O O O O OOO OU OOOOO ON ONN O 01 > 0 0 E - u � L E K' C m O O a U LL LL 0 N D _ (n 9 O LL 0 `/] C m •- n V D N m N n N V N D m L m n y D m m n m O N LL H N M M O V O V N (O m f� O 0 D W O Ym+ IO ? salLL 7 m O Cco:� A> - i7 mw H oco° rn ° +_y Lc p _ U N J~ C C O 0 j II ? II 11 m a N N N N M M a v a a N m m n 0 LLOin m O 0 A c u¢ U p Y C o H 'E O m O n N v N o M N O n v m m N N n N m m O N N N 0 m of �r o ri ri ri of N of vi of ai ci U N O m E F O p o o ~ E z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z (� ¢ n Z O ,- ro m ml > y 0 Y H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C 0. ; o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 m Q w 7 U m U n rle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 O y J 2 00 O !� C J F E omQ W uiz Imo cero a of a (V N mm t0 o�NOm.-Q¢ vi viNo�Co �- W x Of pp Z S y> O V V V m V N O N V V O O V � m r 0NN tit 0 O O O O Nt uj p� X p Ol O o y mm ONcc p p (O t 0 m J av/ C of of m cU a0 N O Oi I� a0 O Oi Oi o N m �O 0 A N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m O r O 0 0Ix N O 0 0 O O W o N O W N N � d O m m M _ L ^ '= d J W C C S M m II II V U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m M > > U ° o E N V 3 vm Q 3 O � E+ F U �' ° u' OL O t1 0 O I LnL E d« $ ro n o a N N NNNNNm V D N m ro aaa a o ro nmmn ro .O ro N - m i Ij N 0 U 3 w N W m m O n O O— O LL 7 LL > cr D r 3 Lu p °O y fO +« �.r m V A _, L _.y : C W J F- U 0 c _ L II C 0 7 II II W 0 0 •� 'y 4 - N .o N o N a N ro M a CJ m O n O U O a O ro m ro m a m m n O D D ro 0 F' m LLO C7F=F5>>¢ I 1 1 1 1 1 1 DEVELOPED DIRECT RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS Fort Collins. Colorado Rational Method: Q=CIA Calculations By: ATC Rainfall Intensity: Project: 110-006 Rainfall Intensity from City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria, Figure 3-1 Date: 7/1 /06 Design Point Basins Area, A acres 2-yr T. min 1f10-yr Te min Cz CIN Intensity, IZ in/hr intensity, Iw„ in/hr F-ow, O, cfs ow, Otm cfs 1 a 1 a 2.92 20.4 19.4 0.50 0.62 1.61 5.75 2.3 10.5 1b 1b 2.31 18.3 17.4 0.54 0.68 1.70 6.10 2.1 9.5 1c is 1.45 8.8 8.1 0.32 0A0 2.35 8.38 1.1 4.9 1 d 1 d 2.75 20.2 19.2 0.60 0.76 1.61 5.75 2.7 11.9 1e to 2.90 15.5 14.9 0.56 0.70 1.84 6.62 3.0 13.4 Pond 1 Spillway 12.33 19.4 0.65 5.75 46.1 2a 2a 2.85 10.9 10.2 0.41 0.51 2.17 7.72 2.5 11.2 2b 2b 1.24 13.0 12.3 0.73 0.91 1.98 7.16 1.8 8.1 2c 2c 2.07 11.6 11.0 0.48 0.61 2.09 7.57 2.1 9.5 2d 2d 3.73 15.7 14.7 0.56 0.69 1.84 6.62 3.8 17.1 Pond 2 Spillway 9,89 14.7 0.65 6.62 42.5 3a 3a 1.73 12.5 11.8 0.41 0.52 2.02 7.29 1.4 6.5 3b 3b 1.20 16.6 15.9 0.69 0.86 1.78 6.41 1.5 6.6 Pond 3 Spillway 2.92 15.9 0.66 6.41 12.4 4a 4a 1.96 11.0 10.5 0.42 0.53 2.13 7.72 1.8 8.0 4b 4b 2.20 13.8 13.2 0.62 0.78 1.95 6.92 2.7 11.8 4c 4c 2.89 13.9 13.1 0.33 0.41 1.95 6.92 1.9 8.3 4d 4d 1.64 14.4 13.7 0.56 0.70 1.92 6A2 1.8 7.8 Pond 4 Spillway 8.69 13.7 0.59 6.82 34.9 5a 5a 1.59 11.9 11.2 0.38 0.48 2.09 7,42 1.3 5.7 Pond 5 Spillway 1.59 11.9 11.2 0.38 0.48 2.09 7.42 1.3 5.7 6a 6a 1.18 14.0 13.3 0.30 0.38 1.92 6.92 0.7 3.1 6b 6b 0.49 5.4 5.1 0.34 0.42 2.85 9.95 0.5 2.1 Pond 5 Spillway 1.67 13.3 0.39 6.92 4.5 7a 7a 2.76 21.0 19.5 0.33 0.41 1.59 5.68 1.4 6A OS1 OSt 0.55 13.8 13.4 0.72 0.90 1.95 6.92 0.8 3.4 ld ld,OS1 3.30 20.2 19.2 0.62 0.78 1.61 5.75 3.3 14.8 1d 1d,le,0S1 6.20 20.2 19.21 0.59 0.74 1 1.61 5.75 5.9 26.5 1d I la,lb,id,le,051 11.43 24.2 23.2 1 0.56 0.70 1 1.46 5.20 9.3 41.5 1 Appendix C Minor (2-Yr) Storm Street Capacity Summary Project: 110-006 By: ATC Date: 2/1 /2006 Note: City of Fort Collins reduction factors applied to street capacity values Section # Side of Street Street Slope Design Point Street Capacity with Reduction Factor (GFS) Design Flow CFS 1 West 0.9 1a 6.95 2.3 1 East 0.90 1 b 6.95 2.1 2 West 0.75 1d 6.45 2.7 2 East 0.75 1 e 6.45 3 3 West 0.75 4d 6.45 1.8 3 East 0.75 4b 6.45 2.7 4 West 0.7 2c 5.37 2.1 4 East 0.7 2d 5.37 3.8 srcmFcr CArAcxr( SEcnorl Lac.A-ncr 5 0 - o Li i O O V m 2 O O U) O ch a) d N 2 9 VJ Y L a of U am a) Cl) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V N O 00 (D V N O (sp) Apoedeo;ooi;g 0 U Z U. CL m 0 p � � d mod/ Y f4 t V 0 o. 0 co N U� a N R tM M � LO ao N LO M N a n U) M M V M N vwraoaioioo.-- N 1� N N � r- ry NIn N N O O N N N M M M Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 0.50 (%) Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)S1/'2Y813 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) n77� ZOM --a Calculations: Curb & Gutter: Drive Over Q1 Calculations Q2 Calculations Q3 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z1 = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n1=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S1 = 0.0050 S2 = 0.0050 S3 = 0.0050 S4 = 0.0050 Y1 = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1= 4.66 `. Q2= 0.93 • Q3= 2.10 1 04= 0.76 . Results: QTotal = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 6.58 Reduction Factor = 0.65 QReducW = 4.28 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 I 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 [] 1 1 1 1 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 0.76 (°/*) Equation: Q = 0.56(Z/n)S1/2y8/3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) Calculations: Curb & Gutter. Drive Over Q1 Calculations Q2 Calculations Q3 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z1 = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n1=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S1= 0.0075 S2= 0.0075 S3= 0.0075 S4 = 0.0075 Y1 = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1= 5.58 Q2= 1.14 Q3= 2.68 Q4= 0.93 Results: QTotal = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 8•06 Reduction Factor = 0.80 QReduced = 6.45 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = . Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 1.00 (%) Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)S1/2y8 / 3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope W11) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) Calculations: Curb & Gutter: Drive Over Q, Calculations Q2 Calculations % Calculations Q4 Calculations Z, = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n,=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S1 = 0.0100 S2 = 0.0100 S3 = 0.0100 S4 = 0.0100 Y, = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1= 6.45 02= 1.31 Q3= 3.09 Q4= 1.08 Results: Qrotel = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 9.31 Reduction Factor = 0.80 QRedumd = 7.45 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 1.25 (%) Equation: Q = 0.56(Z/n)S1/2y8/3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) Calculations: Curb & Gutter: Drive Over Q1 Calculations 02 Calculations % Calculations Q4 Calculations Z1 = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 7-4 = 3.55 n1=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S1= 0.0125 S2= 0.0125 S3= 0.0125 S4= 0.0125 Y1 = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1= 7.21 Q2= 1.47 Q3= 3.46 Q4= 1.21 Results: QTotal = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 10.41 Reduction Factor = 0.80 QRedumd = 8.33 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11 /2004 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 1.60 (%) Curb & Gutter: Drive Over Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)S1i2y813 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) rn 02 m —..._...—. —. —. -♦• aw a+a O�w �_� a4 Calculations: Q1 Calculations % Calculations % Calculations % Calculations Z1 = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n1=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S1 = 0.0150 S2 = 0.0150 S3 = 0.0150 S4 = 0.0150 Y1 = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1= 7.90 Q2= 1_61 - Q3= 3.79 Q4= 1.32 Results: QTCUI = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 11.40 Reduction Factor = 0.80 QReduced = 9.12 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 1.75 (%) Curb & Gutter. Drive Over Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)S12Yg / 3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) 02 03 Calculations: Q, Calculations Q2 Calculations Q3 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z, = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n,=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S, = 0.0175 S2 = 0.6175 S3 = 0.0175 S4 = 0.0175 Y, = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Qi= 8.53 Q2= 1.74 Q3= 4.09 Q4= 1.43 Results: Qr0cai=Q1-Q2+Q3+Q4= 12.31 Reduction Factor = 0.80 QReduced = 9.85 Q Q Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable 2' Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 2.00 (%) Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)S1/2Yg / 3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) �r.[LCCZZZlJJT/ iJYll � � � Ba. Calculations: Curb & Gutter. Drive Over Q1 Calculations % Calculations % Calculations Q4 Calculations Z1 = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n1=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S1 = 0.0200 S2 = 0.0200 S3 = 0.0200 S4 = 0.0200 Y1 = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1= 9.12 Q2= 1.85 :- Q3= 4.37 - 04= 1.53 Results: QTotal = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 13.16 Reduction Factor = 0.80 QReduced = 10.53 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 2.25 (%) Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)S12Y8 / 3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) ---�ur�rc�•++� _ awn. � � � o Curb & Gutter. Drive Over 2 Calculations: 01 Calculations Q2 Calculations Q3 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z1 = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n1=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S1 = 0.0225 S2 = 0.0225 S3 = 0.0225 S4 = 0.0225 Y1 = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1= 9.67 Q2= 1:97 Q3= 4.64 Q4= 7.62 Results: QTotal = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 13.96 Reduction Factor = 0.78 QR,,d,,cad = 10.95 Q C Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # NIA Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 2.50 (%) Curb & Gutter. Drive Over Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)S12Y8' 3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) 2zr T OILR �� Yn_ Calculations: 01 Calculations 02 Calculations % Calculations Q4 Calculations Z1 = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n1=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S1= 0.0250 S2= 0.0250 S3 = 0.0250 S4= 0.0250 Y1 = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1= 10.20 Q2= 2.07 Q3= 4.89 Q4= 1.71 Results: QTotaf = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 14.72 Reduction Factor = 0.77 QRedumd = 11.27 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2 yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 2.75 (0/6) Equation: Q = 0.56(Z/n)S1'2y8/3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) Curb & Gutter. Drive Over R Calculations: 01 Calculations % Calculations % Calculations Q4 Calculations Zi = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n,=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 Si= 0.0275 S2= 0.0275 S3 = 0.0275 S4= 0.0275 Yi = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q,= 10.69 Q2= 2.17 Q3= 5.13 Q4= 1.79 Results: Qrwai = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 15.43 Reduction Factor = 0.74 QReduced = 11.47 Q C Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004. . Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 3.00 (0k) Curb & Gutter. Drive Over Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)Sl'2Y8' 3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) Calculations: Qi Calculations 02 Calculations % Calculations % Calculations Z, = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n,=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S, = 0.0300 S2 = 0.0300 S3 = 0.0300 S4 = 0.0300 Y, = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 16�Q�= 11.1,7 Q2= 2.27 %= 5,36 Q4= 1.87 Results: QTotal = 01 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 16.12 Reduction Factor = 0.72 QRWurW = 11.57 Q Q Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 3.25 (%) Equation: Q = 0.56.(Z / n)S1'2Y8 / 3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) Calculations: Curb & Gutter: Drive Over Q1 Calculations Q2 Calculations Q3 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z1 = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n1=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S1 = 0.0325 S2 = 0.0325 S3 = 0.0325 S4 = 0.0325 Y1 = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1= 11.62 Q2= 2.36 Q3= 5.57 Q4= 1.95 . Results: QTdal = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 16.78 Reduction Factor = 0.69 QReduced = 11.59 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 3.50 (%) Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)S'/2Yg / 3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) Calculations: Curb & Gutter: Drive Over Q,Calculations 02 Calculations 03 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z, = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n,=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 Si = 0.0350 S2 = 0.0350 S3 = 0.0350 S4 = 0.0350 Y, = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Qi= 12.06 Q2= 2.45 Q3= 5.78 Q4= 2.02 Results: QTaQal = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 17.41 Reduction Factor = 0.66 QReduoed = 11.53 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2 yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 3.75 (0/b) Equation: Q = 0.56(Z/n)S1'2y8/3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) Calculations: Curb & Gutter. Drive Over Q, Calculations Q2 Calculations % Calculations Q4 Calculations Z, = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n,=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S, = 0.0375 S2 = 0.0375 S3 = 0.0375 S4 = 0.0375 Y, = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Qi= 12.49 - Q2= 2.54 Q3= 5.99 Q4=1. 2:09 Results: QTotal = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 18.02 Reduction Factor = 0.63 QRedumd = 11.41 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # N/A Q @ Design Point: (cfs) Street Slope: 4.00 (%) Equation: Q = 0.56.(Z / n)Sr1/2Ya / 3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) m 02 Calculations: Curb & Gutter. Drive Over Q1 Calculations % Calculations Q3 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z1 = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n1=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S1= 0.0400 S2= 0.0400 S3 = 0.0400 S4 = 0.0400 Y1 = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1= 12.90 Q2= 2.62 Q3= 6.16 Q4= 2.1& . Results: QTotBI = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 16.62 Reduction Factor = 0.60 QReduced = 11.23 Q @ Design Point = 0.00 Capacity Status = Acceptable Drive Over -col -minor 10/11/2004 Appendix D 2 Inlet Design Summary Project: 110-006 By: ATC Date: 2/1/2006 InletDesign Point', Desige Storm 'Inlet Condition,' N ", Type o. ' ; ,Design -;Flow° FIow.Depth A1.1 4b 2-YR SUMP Single Combination 2.7 3.9 A1.2 4d 2-YR SUMP Single Combination 1.8 3.5 D1 2c 2-YR SUMP Single Combination 2.1 3.6 D2 2d 2-YR SUMP Sin le Combination 3.8 4.4 E1 1a 100-YR I SUMP Single Combination . 10.5 7.6 E2 1b 100-YR SUMP Single Combination 9.5 7.1 E3 1d 100-YR SUMP Single Combination 14.8 9.6 E4 1e 100-YR SUMP Single Combination 13.4 9.0 G1 3b 100-YR SUMP 5'Type R 6.6 7.3 H7 6a 100-YR SUMP 5'Type R 3.1 4.1 J1 2b half of flow 100-YR SUMP Single Combination 4.1 4.6 J2 2b half of flow 100-YR SUMP Sin le Combination 4.1 4.6 r r='� I r j l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L-J I L_J L_J L_J li L_J I I L_J I �--J I I I I I I I I rti1 I Ir-� I li 11 L_J I I L-J II II LL _JJ =J r- LL- r--i IL_J 1 II I L_J r--1 r-� r-� r-� r-� r-� r --i Li L_J L_J L_J L_J L_J MS68 W)Pa dH'Wd £Z:Sb:E 90OZ/ST/5'OMP'9N1O-900-OIT\6wa\&v<R9o0-OTI\spglWd\:a Sump Inlet Capacity Single Combination Inlet (24" Wide x 34" Long) City of Fort Collins Reduction Factors Utilized Flow (CFS) Depth (Inches) 2.0 3.6 4.0 4.4 6.0 5.6 10.0 8.0 14.0 9.9 22.0 13.0 26.0 17.8 28.0 20.5 Single Combination Inlet Capacity vs. Depth w 25.0 - — -i a� 20.0 v 15.0 c. 0 10.0 _. --- — - — — --- d c 3 5.0 0 M 0.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 Inlet Capacity (CFS) H I 1 FF COMBINATION INLET.IN A SUMP WP L WP Curb I ^ g L±rrt� Ith of a Unit Inlet I Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) bar of Unit Inlets e Information h of a Unit Grate Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.60-0.90) ging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50) a Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) a Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) r Opening Information ht of Curb Opening in Inches a of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Width for Depression Pan ging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3,00) Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) ' Water Depth for Design Condition Total Length of Combination Inlet s a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Capacity as a Weir with Clogging ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging 1 1 1 1 a Weir )acity as a Weir without Clogging gging Coefficient for Multiple Units gging Factor for Multiple Units )acity as a Weir with Clogging an Orifice )acity as an Orifice without Clogging )acity as an Orifice with Clogging Opening is inneffective while Grate is in weir flow.) Flow Direction L. Z83 It ate, =' ` - 0.00 inches No=c ,1 Wo=.,:. .�. 2.00It Co (G) = :0.20 Cd (G) = . 0.67 C. (G) = 3.00 H = _ _ ` .., 6.00 inches Theta = .. - 90.0 degrees Wp _ ,.,...... 6.00 ft Co (C) = .::, 0.20 Cd (C) = 0.67 C„, (C) = 3.00 cfs Yd = 3.6, inches L= 2.83 ft Qom= 3.4cis Coef =.'` - 1.00 Clog = ,. 0.20 O. = 3.1 cis Ooi = 10.9 cis Oa+=, 8.7 cfs CIS O'= '5.9cfs Coef= - '.1.00 Clog = 0.20 0,,,+= 5.6 cis Oa = '1.7 cis Qo, 1.4 cis O+=f 1:1lids C% ' 100.00% Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional Inlet units. combo inlet.xls, Combo-S 4/26/2006, 8:50 AM COMBINATION:INLET IN'A'SUMP 771 1 L WP WP Curb H Flow Direction Lirrre} �� ' Design Information finout) Length of a Unit Inlet L. Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) a„ , 0.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets No = 1 Grate Information Width of a Unit Grate W. = - 2.60 It Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.60-0.90) A = - 0.65 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50) C. (G) _; - -0.20 ' Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Cd (G) _ - . - '. 0.67 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) C.(G)=3.00 Curb Opening Information Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 0:00 Inches ' Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) _ Theta = 90.0 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan WP = 5.00 ft Clogging Factor fora Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Ca (C) = ", 0.20 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Cd (C) = - 0.67 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) Cw (C) = 3.00 Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) %=,- , _,.,. I 4.0 cfs ' Water Depth for Design Condition Yd =;` `. 4.4 inches Total Length of Combination Inlet L =,' ;, ;. ,, 2.83 ft As a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qw _; - 4.6 cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog =' -' 0.20 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Q � _ • 4i2 cfs s an Orifice ' Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi = 12.0 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qa, _ 9.6 cfs Grate Capacity for Design with Clo In Ooc „).. 421ds ' Curb Opening Inlet Capacity In a Sum As a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Q, _, - , 8.0 cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef . 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog ='.. _ ... 0.20 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qw, _ " - 7.6 cfs As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qd = 2.6 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Q. = 2.1 cfs Curb Opening Capacity for Design with Clogging Q.c�ro ;0.01ds (Curb Opening is Inneffective while Grate is in weir flow.) Combination Inlet CapacitV with Clogging ,4.21ds Capture Percentage for the Combination Into C% 100 00;:% Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. 2 combo inlet.xls, Combo-S 4/26/2006, 8:50 AM COMBINATION IN LET:IN A SUMP WP L WP <--------K Cep F"' g th of a Unit Inlet I Depression, If any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) bar of Unit Inlets a Information h of a Unit Grate Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.60-0.90) )Ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50) > Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) a Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) i Opening Information it of Curb Opening in Inches a of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Width for Depression Pan Sing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Opening Orifice Coefficlent (typical value 0.67) Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) ' Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Water Depth for Design Condition Total Length of Combination Inlet s a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Capacity as a Weir with Clogging ' As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging a Weir xcity as a Weir without Clogging gging Coefficient for Multiple Units gging Factor for Multiple Units )acity, as a Weir with Clogging an Orifice 3acity, as an Orifice without Clogging 3acity as an Orifice with Clogging Opening is inneffective while Grate is in weir flow.) Flow Direction Lo =, 2:83 ft 2.30 Inches No= ,1 A = . : 0.65 Co (G)= .,.; . 0.20 Cd (G) _ : ' - 0.67 H=., �' 6.00 inches Theta =, 90.0 degrees 5.00 It . Cd (C) = 0.67 C. (C) = ' 3.00 0. 10.0, cfs yd=`; ' 8.0 inches L=: 2.83ft Om =,*, 1. _.. 11.1 cis Coef = 1.00 Clog 0.20 O„,= 10.11 cfs Goi = 16.1 cfs C6 = 12.9 cis All QW='w �' 19.i cfs Coef = ". 1.00 .. Clog =" `0.20 O„, = 18.2 cis Ooi =" 4.9 cis Om = 3.9 cis cfs 10:ilcfs Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional Inlet units. combo inlet.xis, Combo-S 4/2612006, 8:52 AM COMBINATION INLET'IN A SUMP " WP L WP �--- -_--- ><-_ Cuab H Flow Diirectfon b ' Design Information (input) Length of a Unit Inlet L. =.. 2.83 ft Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) a., = - -3.70 inches Number of Unit Inlets No Grate Information Width of a Unit Grate W. =- 2.00 it Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.60-0.90) A = „� - 0.65 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50) G. (G) = 0.20 Grata Orifice Coefficlent (typical value 0.67) Cd (G) = `"' "0.67 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) C. (G) = 3.00 Curb Opening Information Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 Inches ' Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 90.0, degrees Side Width for Depression Pan Wo = 6.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) C. (C) _ 0.20 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Ca ((;) _, `"- '. 0.67 ' Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) C„, (C) _ " 3:00 Grate Inlet CaDacitv In a Sumn lCalculated Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) O, = 14.0 cfs Water Depth for Design Condition Vd = 9.9 inches otal Length of Combination Inlet L =. 2.83 ft As a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging 0, 15.3 cfs ' Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog =,:.. - 0.20 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging QM =: 14.0 cfs As an Orifice ' Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qa = 18.0 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging ci . = 14.4 cfs Grate CaDacitv for Design with Clogging Oa -Gm. _%;; ,.:.:; '":::14:0!cfs ' Curb Opening Inlet Capacity In a Sum s a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Q,u = ' `26.6 cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog =. 0.20 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Q_ 25.3 cfs s an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qa = - 6.8 cfs ' Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging . Q. _ 4.6 cfs Curb Openina CaDacity for Design with CIoqqInq O (Curb Opening is inneffective while Grate is in weir flow.) Combination Inlet Capacity with Clogging ,r...... ,� r.-,...� O. , � �= 14A;da lCapture Percentage for the Combination Inlet C% ' Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. combo inlet.xls, Combo-S 4/26/2006, 8:53 AM COMBINATION INLET IN.A SUMP WP L WP <-------->K 3•<---� CUA H Flaw Direction 14, ' Design Information In Length of a Unit Inlet L, = 2.03 ft Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) a., = 6'AO Inches Number of Unit Inlets No = .1 Grate Information Width of a Unit Grate W. =^';? 2.60. ft Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.60-0.90) A =' .. OAS Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50) C. (G) =" -�0.20 ' Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Cd (G) =�' 0.67 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) C. (G) = 3.00 Curb Opening Information Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches ' Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = ', 90.0 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan WP = 5.00 it Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) C. (C) = _ 0.20 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Cd (C) = 0.67 ' Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) Cw (C) = - : 3.00 Grate Inlet apacity In a Sum Calculated Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Qu _, . 22.0 cfs ' Water Depth for Design Condition Yd =' 13.0 inches Total Length of Combination Inlet L = - 2.83 ft As a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Q - �n-. 23.1 cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Cost = 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = , 0.20 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Q„, _ . 21.1 cis s an Orifice ' Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Q,i =. Me cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Q. = - 16.5 cfs Grate Capacity for Design with Clogging Q=)>� `` ` i "'._16S`cfs ' Curb Opening Inlet Capacity In a Sum s a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qom; =-' 39.9 cis Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.06 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = - 0.20 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Q� = 38.0 cis s an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qoi =, r, : -..; 6.9 cfs ' Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Q„ = 5.6 cis Curb ODening Capacity for Design with Clogging O=cfs Combination I let Capacity with Clogging O. _( �.7:'' �,` `%22O�Ma ' Capture Percentage for the Combination Inlet C%='' `,.' ::100.0ti ' Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb Is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. combo inlet.xls, Combo-S 4/2612006, 9:28 AM ' COMBINATION INLET:IN A SUMP W L WP P *<---� Curb H `� Flow Direction I ' Design Information (input)• -� Length of a Unit Inlet L. =; ;, ,,;; 2.83 ft Local Depression, If any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) a,,,,, =' , , 10.80 Inches Number of Unit Inlets No = Grate Information Width of a Unit Grate Wo =: - . 2.00 It Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.60-0.90) A = . 6.65 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50) Co (G) _, ' `, 0.20 ' Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Cd (G) = : 0.67 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) C. (G) =' '�` 3.00 Curb Opening Information eight of Curb Opening in Inches H =' _ _ . 6.00 inches ' Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta =' "'.90.0 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan Wo= . 5.00 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Co (C) = 0.20 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Cd (C) _ Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2,30-3.00) C. (C) = 3.00 Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) O, = .26.0 cfs Water Depth for Design Condition Yd = 17.0 inches Total Length of Combination Inlet L =' 2.83 It s a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qw = - -37.0 cis ' Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = ' 0.20 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Q,a = 34.0 cis an Orifice 'As Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qa = .. 24:1 cis Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Q„ _-'"19.3 cis Grate Capacltv for Design with CloggingOwrar. Gc°^f` "'^19.3)ds Curb Opening Inlet Capacity In a Sum a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qm = " ' 641, cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = _ 0.20 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Q„a =' 61.1 cis As an Orifice Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qa = - _. - . 8.4, cis ' Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa = 6.8 cfs Curb Ol CaDacity for Design with Clogging O,.c,d, _"-„g;8jcfs ng Combination Inlet Capacity millith CloggiClio e ' Capture Percentage for the Combination Inlet C%a i 100A.0;;% Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100 % Ina sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. combo inlet.xls, Combo-S 4/26/2006, 9:01 AM -'COMBINATION, INLETIN A SUMP WP L WP Curb F"' g QttteJ, �� th of a Unit Inlet I Depression, If any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) bar of Unit Inlets e Information h of a Unit Grate Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.60-0.90) ging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50) 3 Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) 3 Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) r Opening Information ht of Curb Opening in Inches 3 of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Width for Depression Pan ging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) ' Design Discharge on the Street (from Water Depth for Design Condition Total Length of Combination Inlet As a Weir ' Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Capacity as a Weir with Clogging a Capacity as a Capaa city as an Orifice without Clogging Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging a Weir )acity as a Weir without Clogging gging Coefficient for Multiple Units gging Factor for Multiple Units )acity as a Weir with Clogging an Orifice )acity as an Orifice without Clogging )acity as an Orifice with Clogging Flow Direction .2.83 it 13.50 inches No= 7 W. zoo it A= ,. 0.65 Co (G) Cd (G) _ _. . 0.67 C„, (G)= '3.00 H = _ -", 6.06 inches =.., _ Theta .90.0 degrees Wo= - 5.00ff C. (C) _-' 3.00 Qo=: _ .,28.0. cfs Yd = 20.5 inches 2.83 it QM _ ;., 45.6 cis Coef = 1.00 Clog = , 0.20 Q. 411.9 cis Qw=,�'- 25i8,,cis 20.7, cis Qso ) `'" 20.Tcts Ow_.. `79.1,cfs Cost = 1.00 Clog = 0.20 Q„, _ ` ` 76.3 cis .,-9.2 cis Q. 7.3cis 0.—,._ . efs C% "`. 100.00!% Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional Inlet units. combo iniet.xis, Combo-S 4/26/2006, 9:51 AM Sump Inlet Capacity 5' Type R Inlet City of Fort Collins Reduction Factors Utilized Flow (CFS) Depth (Inches) 2.0 3.7 4.0 4.5 6.0 6.5 8.0 9.3 10.0 13.1 12.0 17.7 14.0 23.1 5' Type R Inlet Capacity vs. Depth N 25.0 m 20.0 r 15.0 a m 0 10.0 - ---- m c 3 5.0 _o LL 0.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 Inlet Capacity (CFS) 15.0 CURB' OPENING INLET, IN A SUMP ' ' Project = Inlet ID = wP Lu WP `--------].E-------�► water ' Yd f Flow Direction H Pan Gutter Design Information (Input) Length of a Unit Inlet L =, ,'.'; ;.: 5.00 it Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) aiocai 0.00, inches Height of Curb Opening in Inches H = 6.00 inches Side Width for Depression Pan Wp 3.00 ft ' Clogging Factor for a Single Unit (typical value = 0.1) Co —' 0.20 Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63:4 degrees Orifice Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) Cd 0.67 ' Weir Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) C„ 3.00 Total Number of Units in the Curb Opening Inlet No — 1 ' Curb Opening Inlet CaDacltv in a Sum As a Weir Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Qo = 2.6 cfs Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd = 3.60 inches ' Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L = 5.00 ft Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Q„ _ . 5.3 cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 ' Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.20 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Qv = 4.8 cfs As an Orifice ' Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qo; = 3.9 cfs Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa = 3.1 cfs ' Capacity for Design with Clogging Oa 3 icfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet = O, / Oa = C% 7755 00?00? % ' Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. 1 1 V type R inlet.xls, Curb-S 4/26/2006, 3:35 PM Project = Inlet ID = 'CURB OPENING ,INL'ET'IN A SUMP WP Lu WP L---- - - - - YE Yd H ' ' Pan Gutter Design Information (Input) Length of a Unit Inlet Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) Height of Curb Opening in Inches ' Side Width for Depression Pan Clogging Factor for a Single Unit (typical value = 0.1) Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Orifice Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) ' Weir Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) Total Number of Units in the Curb Opening Inlet a Weir sign Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) ter Depth for the Design Condition al Length of Curb Opening Inlet )acity as a Weir without Clogging gging Coefficient for Multiple Units gging Factor for Multiple Units )acity as a Weir with Clogging an Orifice )acity as an Orifice without Clogging )acity as an Orifice with Clogging Percentage for this Inlet = Qe / 0, = wate r Flow Direction L, _; 5:00 ft alocal _'- 0.00 inches H = : ` 6.00 inches Wp=' 3.00ft Co = :.' .., 0.4 Theta = " 63.4 degrees Cd = 0.67 Cw = .. 3.00 No=.' 1 Q, = A.0 cfs Yd = 4:51 inches L = 5.00 it Ow =: 7.2 cis Coef = 1.00 Clog = 0.20 Q. =' 6.5 cis Qoi = '5.2 cis Qoa . " 4.2 cis Oa I 4.2; cfs C% j 100.0% Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. 5' type R inlet.xls, Curb-S 4/26/2006, 3:35 PM ' Project = Inlet ID = CURB OPENING INLETIN A SUMP W Lu wP Yd H ' ' Pan Gutter Design Information (Input) ' Length of a Unit Inlet Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) Height of Curb Opening in Inches ' Side Width for Depression Pan Clogging Factor for a Single Unit (typical value = 0.1) Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Orifice Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) 'Weir Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) Total Number of Units in the Curb Opening Inlet a Weir sign Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) ter Depth for the Design Condition al Length of Curb Opening Inlet )acity as a Weir without Clogging gging Coefficient for Multiple Units gging Factor for Multiple Units )acity as a Weir with Clogging an Orifice )acity as an Orifice without Clogging 3acity as an Orifice with Clogging Percentage for this Inlet = Oa / O° = wate r Flow Direction LU = 5.00 It alocal = 1.40 inches H =' . " '. 6:00 inches Wp=, 3.00It Co=.. .i ,0.20 Theta = 63.4 degrees C. —' 3.00 No Qo =, 6.0 cfs Yd =` 6.48inches L = 5.00 ft QW = 12.4 cfs Coef = 1.00 Clog =. 0.20 Q a = 11.2 cis Q'I = 7.6 cfs Qoa = 6.0 cfs ds C%=77 .55 Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. 5' type R inlet.xls, Curb-S 4/26/2006, 3:36 PM ` °._.. CURB OPENING INLET IN WSUMP, ' Project = Inlet ID = ' Wp Lu WP Yd H ' ' Pan Gutter Design Information (Input) ' Length of a Unit Inlet Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) Height of Curb Opening in Inches ' Side Width for Depression Pan Clogging Factor for a Single Unit (typical value = 0.1) Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Orifice Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) ' Weir Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) Total Number of Units in the Curb Opening Inlet a Weir ;ign Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) ter Depth for the Design Condition al Length of Curb Opening Inlet )acity as a Weir without Clogging gging Coefficient for Multiple Units gging Factor for Multiple Units )acity as a Weir with Clogging an Orifice )acity as an Orifice without Clogging )acity as an Orifice with Clogging Percentage for this Inlet = Q. / Q. = water Flaw Direction LU =r; `.. 5:00ft a,cal = 3.86 inches H = ,' `' 6.00 inches WP = `. 3,00 It Co = 0; 0 Theta =.. ,; , ,EA degrees Cd Cw No='1 J, 6.6 cfs Yd = ' 9.34 inches L = 5.00 ft O,„ = 21.4 cfs Coef = - 1.00 Clog = 0.20 Oa= 19.4cfs Qo; _' 10.0 cfs Ooe = 8.0. cfs Qe = r r `8:0� cIa Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. 5' type R inlet.xls, Curb-S 4/26/2006, 3:36 PM ' Project = Inlet ID = 1 1 r FF CURB,OPENINGINLET-,IN A SUMP WP Lu WP w Direction gn Information (Input) th of a Unit Inlet L. = 5.00 it I Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) E4maj = 7.20 inches it of Curb Opening in Inches H = . 6.00 inches Width for Depression Pan WP =' 3.00 ft Sing Factor for a Single Unit (typical value = 0.1) Co = 0.20 3 of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = 63.4 degrees e Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) Cd = 0.67 Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) C„ = 3.00 Number of Units in the Curb Opening Inlet No= 1 a Weir sign Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) O° _ ` ".10:0 cfs ter Depth for the Design Condition Yd = 1 ' 1112 inches at Length of Curb Opening Inlet L =: ._ `.5.00 it 3acity as a Weir without Clogging Q_ 35.7 cfs gging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef =• 1.00 gging Factor for Multiple Units Clog =,' ,. 0.20 )acity as a Weir with Clogging Q„,a =' 32.2 cis an Orifice )acity as an Orifice without Clogging Q,i =' "' 12.5 cfs 3acity as an Orifice with Clogging Q°a = 10.0 cfs 3acity for Desian with Clogging Q. � ., � 10�0; cfs 3ture Percentage for this Inlet = Q, / 0, = C% _ . 100AOj Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. 5' type R inlet.xls, Curb-S 4/26/2006, 3:37 PM - - CURB OPENING INLET IN A SUMP Project = Inlet ID = ' WP Lu WP 1 Yd H ' ' Pan Gutter Design Information (Input) Length of a Unit Inlet ' Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) Height of Curb Opening in Inches ' Side Width for Depression Pan Clogging Factor for a Single Unit (typical value = 0.1) Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Orifice Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) ' Weir Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) Total Number of Units in the Curb Opening Inlet 1 1 [1 a Weir sign Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) ter Depth for the Design Condition al Length of Curb Opening Inlet )acity as a Weir without Clogging gging Coefficient for Multiple Units gging Factor for Multiple Units )acity as a Weir with Clogging an Orifice )acity as an Orifice without Clogging )acity as an Orifice with Clogging Percentage for this Inlet = 0° / 0° = wale r Flow Direction L = i F r , 5.00 ft aimai = 11.40' inches H = °' 6.00 inches Wp= 3.00,ft Co = 0.20 Theta=. ., 163.4 degrees Cd C,„ 3.00 No= '1 12.6 cfs Yd =, ,; ' 17.66 inches L=. '5.00ft Q„; = 55.7 cfs Coef = 1.00 Clog = 0.20 Qw = 50.3 cfs Q°; 15.0 cfs Qua = , 12.0 cfs 0, (7 1 cfs C% 100AQ% Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. ' 5' type R inlet.xis, Curb-S 4/26/2006, 3:37 PM CURB "OPENINGINLET INA SUMP Project = Inlet ID = ' WP Lu WP water ' Yd f Flaw Direction Ii �^^ ' Pan Gutter Design Information (Input) Length of a Unit Inlet L = 5.00 ft ' Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) ai.,j = 16.50 inches Height of Curb Opening in Inches H =' ', 6.00 inches Side Width for Depression Pan Wp = 3.00 ft ' Clogging Factor for a Single Unit (typical value = 0.1) C. = 0.20 Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta = • 63.4 degrees Orifice Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) Cd = 0.67 ' Weir Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) C„, = 3_.06 Total Number of Units in the Curb Opening Inlet No = 1 ' Curb Opening Inlet Capacity in a Sum As a Weir Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) O° _ 14.0 cis Water Depth for the Design Condition Yd = 23.07 inches ' Total Length of Curb Opening Inlet L = . ' 5.00 ft Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Qw _. - _ "83.2 cfs Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 ' Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.20 Capacity as a Weir with Clogging Q„ _; 75.2 cfs As an Orifice ' Capacity as an Orifice without Clogging Q°; = 17.5 cis Capacity as an Orifice with Clogging Q°a =; , 14.0 cfs ' Capacity for Design with Clogging O° 14.01cfs Capture Percentage for this Inlet = O° / O° = C% 700:001 ' Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. 5' type R inlet.xls, Curb-S 4/26/2006, 3:38 PM 1 Appendix E I I I I I I I I I 1 1 to n 12 — — — — ter. — � T — — — — — — — — — — — r I I I I I I I j ? ? I I I I I I I I I I I L_J I L_J L_J II L_J IL-J/ i L_JI I i1 II L_J I II I L_J I LL= J Ll�r- L_J I r-1 � II I I I I I I I --- I I L_J I I L=J L-J -=J L_J L J LJ I / C I I � I I �/ •� L_ J I I I I I I I L_J L_J L_--_� I L-J I I F— I I I L_J I I I n� I I I I II I I I I 1 I I r-� I ILi j1 Qr I I I I` J L-J L-J _ I y 111 / I 1 a*568 w)Pa dH'Wd EZ:Sb:£ 900Z/9i/S'BMP''JN'da-900-011\6wcl\&Ao\gpp-pTt\sp2(wd\;d CD a o i ' Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) M (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Pipe367 7.50 18 c 92.5 4877.00 4877.36 0.389 4878.05 4878.81 0.26 4879.08 End 2 Pipe366 1.20 15 c 383.9 4877.46 4879.00 0.401 4879.35 4879.63 0.06 4879.69 1 3 Pipe395 6.30 18 c 127.5 4877.73 4878.37 0.502 4879.16 4879.54 0.04 4879.58 1 4 Pipe394 3.60 18 c 30.3 4878.57 4878.72 0.496 4879.73 4879.75 0.03 4879.77 3 5 Pipe393 1.80 15 c 115.7 4878.92 4879.50 0.501 4879.86 4880.06 0.18 4880.24 4 110.006_STRM-A Number of lines: 5 Run Date: 07-27-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 2 Yrs. HYdraflM Storm Sewers 2005 I I I I I I I I I J$ £ co IT 30 ; G >U) A S S& S A @ 3 §a£ } k k k \ >� § § § \ OD LO k ) ) § \ / / | { k { � ) CL co )�£ \ \ \ \ \ > co 00 co co Go IT -tr \ £ to § ( § § 5 ( \ \ j j �� co t \ \ \ \ !)£ \ § § § \ \ al\ 0a a . 0 kIT Cl )�� \ \ \ \ �)E00 co IT CT v ° k a e § ; - U) I 1 I III L 1 rll 1 p Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Pipe379 5.60 18 c 166.3 4861.50 4863.16 0.999 4862.28 4864.06 0.19 4864.06 End 2 Pipe378 5.60 18 c 383.3 4866.48 4870.32 1.000 4867.39 4871.22 n/a 4871.22 1 3 Pipe377 4.80 18 c 42.4 4870.52 4870.94 0.998 4871.50 4871.77 n/a 4871.77 2 4 Pipe376 4.00 18 c 278.5 4871.14 4873.92 1.000 4872.04 4874.69 n/a 4874.69 3 5 Pipe375 4.00 18 c 275.9 4874.12 4875.50 0.500 4874.91 4876.28 0.29 4876.57 4 6 Pipe382 0.80 15 c 341.9 4873.91 4875.62 0.500 4874.27 4875.98 n/a 4875.98 2 7 P1pe381 0.80 15 c 36.6 4875.82 4876.00 0.493 4876.18 4876.36 0.12 4876.48 6 8 Pipe384 0.80 15 c 13.5 4875.37 4875.50 0.963 `4875.73 4875.86 n/a 4875.86 3 110-006_STRM-B-7-27-06 Number of lines: 8 Run Date: 07-27-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. ; j - Line contains hyd. jump. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 CL E _O C_ F' D) D) Cl)U) O m m D) N C) N p 9— O O O C O C O C J Y O v o ano o 0 0 0 0 T (O Cl) N rn N _ C p l6 A N fpCON r CO` N N Y W— c c c c .- c o c u r t V N w e h o N Cl) O V Cl) O 7 O V (`') V O R O Q (p (No O O O O O O O O Q (Cl)n N O (D O C �r y e N O N N O 00 OD (n V u7 (n OD V CO V O V � O O C O o 0 0 0 (o N a) r o ao 0 J > V t07 D) (D 7V a) d W a)(Vo I,n (n0 (n0 (n0LO V V 7 V 7 V 7 7 V _ N d M N I .�' � Cl mLO Cl) OD E N o o � v Cl? m � to c i N (o V V N N N - N N O Q N O 07 D) N N N L 0 0 0 0 o E z Z y x rn 0) ao (n° ono M M M O C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D N r D) CD co (o (o J> O N n (o N W ('M CO 4! co m OD co 00 V R co 00 V V 7 V V (D N V N O N O o C7 m o Lq (D O (n > ry to O O r n n C p V C co co co 7 7 V 7 JC 'K co m ITco N C (D N w � co M N V N r N M O (h m M m n (D (o O O O w y e N (o N (o M m m co V co V 00 V co V o O O O O O O O (A CO V V D) D) O (D J > Co n r N7 (9 (M Co ND r co W CI ( V (rD oo r n r n C R V 7 V V [i p j _ _ � W M N N N .� i `� (r L L N E (� > g V o 'IT o rn m o m N CD n CD r toC n 'ro 10 (o (D m m V N N N oCo N C � Q W N ON) N N N C G Q H O � mNNM tNm a _y Ci O O O O O O O O 'a co W J> N Cl(oD O 0 N N (' d N r N V V co N _ (o v (o v v n r n r r U v v o v v « ate) d to o v ri (ri ui E c d 000 m cno oro m m m co 1D �i y — V V V 'IT V V V V H N N a d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (q o m o 0 o m o m ) N C HN CO W CD o0 W (O 0 p C .. N C O j N Cl) V (n (o n Co Z 1 re' Lrej Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line No. Line ID Flow rate (cfs) Line size (in) Line length (ft) Invert EL Dn (ft) Invert EL Up (ft) Line slope N HGL down (ft) HGL up (ft) Minor loss (ft) HGL Junct (ft) Dns line No. 1 Pipe448 5.00 18 c 388.0 4870.50 4873.00 0.644 4871.35 4873.85 n/a 4873.85 End 110-006_STRM-C-7-27-06 Number of lines: 1 Run Date: 07-27-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. ; j - Line contains hyd. jump. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 0 2 � [Ll J$ Z n0 2 �/« a , JB/ S m a ) @ / §O£ § \k{ ) > ` k § \ } \ 0 CD \ _ k «00 . § �)E 00 « ® E Cl) § §!£ 1)£ § . > ) & ) \ / 2 ( f o — 7 / )�£00CD § a;E - � k o / § t LO ) k \ d = co § 2 ) - �CD i� 2 U7 O O O N 04 N � O LO N N C J O Z (o 0 ri N w � 5 ' O � H U) to 0 0 0 ' Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 I 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) N (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Pipe463 5.90 18 c 230.7 4875.50 4876.42 0.399 4876.43 4877.71 0.03 4877.74 End 2 Pipe462 3.80 15 c 30.3 4876.62 4876.74 0.396 4877.74 4877.83 0.18 4878.00 1 110.006_STRM-D-7-27-06 Number of lines: 2 Run Date: 07-27-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 2 Yrs. HydraFlow Storm Sewers 2005 @ I I I I I � (D J$ E �© 0 to 3 L- G )) A 2 3 § Z ��£ § k ) 3£ f / > k § § k § . { k \ . E k « N CD § § C14 -CT co co \ « ( ) 5 \ \ IT §z£ ( ( >I� / / > $ ) \ 0a a _ i « �0£ § ( �!E S co co o f § - _ co } \ W FL 3 0 L v c� 2 m. m v O O N f� N C) O u 2 V N C J O Z m m 2 v40 .Uyy VJ co 1 rn N n W o U) 0 0 0 ' Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Pipe440 48.20 36 c 143.1 4877.00 4877.60 0.419 4879.21 4880.39 0.12 4880.51 End 2 Pipe439 37.70 30 c 30.3 4877.81 4877.93 0.396 4880.51 4880.76 0.14 4880.90 1 3 Pipe438 28.20 30 c 314.1 4878.13 4879.38 0.398 4881.301 4882.79" 0.08 4882.87 2 4 Pipe437 13.40 30 c 30.3 4879.58 4879.70 0.396 4883.26 4883.300 0.12 4883.41 3 110-006_STRM-E-7-27-06 Number of lines: 4 Run Date: 07-27-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. ; 'Surcharged (HGL above crown). Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 N O E W O N �^. N O g�C o 0 0 0 J y Y o O V O O N coLL7 N 0) (D OD M N C O �' r N � O r N Y V W— o 0 o r a L V N e LO W R o N Q 0 0 O O O O N Cl) r C r ^ y o 7 r O v ao v O O o O J > (D 00 O D M V N W 0) 0o OD 00 000 00 00 N OD R C C V O i 0D �' cli � ON) V) E N U) i R O V M O m r r f/1 c UI N � c � co rn rn a) O (D a (d v v v E Z y x m N N U O N N N N J > M � r M SN .'�... 000 0 00 coN00 O0 R R R V a `+ O M 00 O O O) Cl? r co 00 00 00 J (M cl M M M M N M r c W (O o co �r O J > ONo M `i C _ WN 000 CO OD OMO co � V � i L Lv' O CN coN) t o O CJ O E N N Go n Cl) cD (o r r ao n LO Ci d N _ N CA CY) m W CQ (n V 7 V O L N h LO LO O N N N N J > O O N VI M N _ N m W 00 OMO Ico 00 7 V V i+ > O O (O f) d C N Oro OD co 00 10 — R R 7 V Q rn O O O O N aV N r NV: n co � co Cl) C Cl) N W N C F y y - m o 0 0 M M M M O O O V C O N M R � L co O O N N O N N N C J O Z S 5 0 fry u 2 � m Ln m u 2 In i0 O N ti LL H N of 0 0 0 ' Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) ( I) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Pipe350 5.00 15 c 241.3 4872.50 4874.91 0.999 4873.33 4875.81 0.44 4875.81 End 2 Pipe349 5.00 15 c 15.2 4875.11 4875.27 1.052 4876.01 4876.17 0.43 4876.60 1 110.006_STRM-F-7-27-06 Number of lines: 2 Run Date: 07-27-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 1CL E mO —M ML °_0 x g— o 0 n p Y o 0 V 0 O O7 V N 04 N C C 0 n W— c o n d L U ^ jwe N o 0 � hi Q N co m O O � `y n 0 C o 0Oo m 0 0 J > N o N (O W a! v r- I, V 7 10 >d O C; N w 0) > cli Ci N (N N 0 C_ Ul C 01 N OC) m 0O Q 0 o E z Z C x rn rn C o 0 J > cq C7 2^ 2d� LO i[i co m co v V Y n O N no n C W Oco — v v C _ J N V N N w I, - co 00 O O J > 9 V N V ^ W co CDco co v L d O O 0I > O N 00 Ch N N l0 C O 000 a) 3 Q 0) O O O O L 0 x 0) m rn CL d J > Cli 0 S u Cl) Co 00 c U 0000 v v > 0 U d d y ^ > C-4 vi m E d ano Co — v v O r y 07 N E CJ w O O r C O ui N W Vp 10 r 41 O O C J N O � O Z CY) M c� L (n O O O N 04 N O N C J O Z i 0 r N r O R' N �I 0 0 0 Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line No. Line ID Flow rate (cfs) Line size (in) Line length (ft) Invert EL Dn (ft) Invert EL Up (ft) Line slope M HGL down (ft) HGL up (ft) Minor loss (ft) HGL Junct (ft) Dns line No. 1 Pipe391 6.60 18 c 35.7 4880.00 4880.18 0.505 4880.98 4881.30 0.34 4881.64 End 110-006_STRM-G-7-27.06 Number of lines: 1 Run Date: 07-27-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 ■ & £ ■� � &f E ci u CD 2� J®/ i a R §7 \ �) §�{ j \}/ § k § § / k \ � ) CL a cli �E. � ( . �00 wE00 \ £ § # 3 $ §Z£ § \k« f ) ■ ) \ / a # jco ! A co §�£ § «) CD co co w o { \ co � § ; k z U) I 1 `i 00 O O N N O 00 M V N C J O Z O to 0 rr N n 2 H NI <O O O O Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Line No. Line ID Flow rate (cfs) Line size (in) Line length (ft) Invert EL Dn (ft) Invert EL Up (ft) Line slope N HGL down (ft) HGL up (ft) Minor loss (ft) HGL Junct (ft) Dns line No. 1 Pipe386 3.10 15 c 52.2 4876.00 4876.26 0.497 4876.71 4877.05 0.22 4877.27 End 110-006_STRM-H-7-27-06 Number of lines: 1 Run Date: 07-27-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 ■ mIL if E �0 2 LO - L ! )U) LO ° R @ E ) W §�£ ( \k« § > ` § D { \ \ . E I £ ci LO 04,to co ! £ § @ E d . w4' ( . \k£ § > k § & . k / o a, } « ( >! E 0 7 e B 3 - \ CD O O N n N 0 O N � � N N C J O Z 2 Q U N 4'1 Q Q U 0 C4 N r� N 01 0 0 0 I Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 i I I I I I I I I I I I Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Pipe446 8.10 18 c 127.3 4875.00 4876.31 1.029 4875.98 4877.40 0.08 4877.40 End 2 Pipe445 4.00 15 c 30.4 4878.59 4878.90 1.021 4879.39 4879.70 n/a 4879.70 1 110-006_STRM-J-7-27-06 Number of lines: 2 Run Date: 07-27-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. ; j - Line contains hyd. jump. Hydraflow Storm Sewers 2005 ■} � � � � $) [ § 2 R m ( § # E -Ir co wk£ ( § \k£ / ) - fA > - a) § / ) ) k « (�£ § k >13 co co \ « ) § §�£ k / , r 42£ § ) / E ! / k § k ) - a71 / «00 \ X0£ § M \ LO 00 rzm cc Crcm \ k ) _ } 9 CD 2 ® _ ) Appendix F I I C I 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 1 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Forn Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 020000 ft/ft Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 8.00 cfs Results Depth 0.79 It Flow Area 2.5 ft2 Wetted Perim, 6.54 ft Top Width 6.35 ft Critical Depth 0.76 ft Critical Slope 0.025729 ft/ft Velocity 3.18 ft/s Velocity Head 0.16 ft Specific Enerc 0.95 ft Froude Numb, 0.89 Flow Type 3ubcritical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\...\110-006\drainage\swales\110-006_swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7,0005] 04/26/06 04:39:55 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 1-freebo Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Forrr Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 020000 ft/ft Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 10.60 cfs Results Depth 0.88 it Flow Area 3.1 ftz Wetted Perimi 7.27 ft Top Width 7.05 ft Critical Depth 0.85 ft Critical Slope 0.024736 ft/ft Velocity 3.41 ft/s Velocity Head 0.18 ft Specific Enerc 1.06 ft Froude Numb. 0.90 Flow Type 3ubcritical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\...\110-006\drainage\swales\110-006_swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/26/06 04:40:04 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 2 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Forn Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 020000 Wit Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 4.20 cis Results Depth 0.62 it Flow Area 1.6 ft2 Wetted Perim, 5.14 it Top Width 4.98 ft Critical Depth 0.59 it Critical Slope 0.028001 ft/ft Velocity 2.70 ft/s Velocity Head 0.11 ft Specific Enerc 0.74 it Froude Numb 0.85 Flow Type Subcritical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\...\110-006\drainage\swales\110-006_swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7.00051 04/26/06 04:40:13 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 2-freebo; Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Forn Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 020000 ft/ft Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 5.60 cis Results Depth 0.69 ft Flow Area 1.9 ftz Wetted Perimi 5.72 ft Top Width 5.55 ft Critical Depth 0.66 ft Critical Slope 0.026968 ft/ft Velocity 2.91 f /s Velocity Head 0.13 ft Specific Enert 0.83 ft Froude Numb. 0.87 Flow Type 3ubcritical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\...\110-006\drainage\swales\110-006_swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7.00051 04/26/06 04:40:24 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 3 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Forrr Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 020000 ft/ft Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 5.70 cis Results Depth 0.70 It Flow Area 2.0 ftz Wetted Perim, 5.76 it Top Width 5.59 it Critical Depth 0.66 It Critical Slope 0.026911 ft/ft Velocity 2.92 ft/s Velocity Head 0.13 ft Specific Enerc 0.83 ft Froude Numb 0.87 Flow Type 3ubcritical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\...\110-006\drainage\swales\110-006_swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7.00051 04/26/06 04:40:34 PM (DHaestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 3-freebo; Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Forn Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 020000 Wit Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 7.60 cis Results Depth 0.78 It Flow Area 2.4 ft2 Wetted Perimi 6.42 ft Top Width 6.23 It Critical Depth 0.74 It Critical Slope 0.025842 ft/ft Velocity 3.14 fUs Velocity Head 0.15 ft F Specific Enerc 0.93 ft Froude Numb, 0.89 Flow Type 3ubcritical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\...\110-006\drainage\swales\110-006_swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7.00051 04/26/06 04:40:43 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 4 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Four Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 020000 ft/ft Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 25.40 cfs Results Depth 1.22 ft Flow Area 6.0 ft2 Wetted Perimi 10.09 ft Top Width 9.79 ft Critical Depth 1.20 ft Critical Slope 0.022028 ft/ft Velocity 4.24 ft/s Velocity Head 0.28 ft Specific Eneq 1.50 ft Froude Numb. 0.96 Flow Type 3ubcritical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\...\110-006\drainage\swales\110-006_swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/26/06 04:40:52 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 4-freebo; Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Forn Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 020000 ft/ft Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 33.80 cis Results Depth 1.36 ft Flow Area 7.4 ft2 Wetted Perim, 11.23 ft Top Width 10.90 ft Critical Depth 1.35 it Critical Slope 0.021209 ft/ft Velocity 4.55 fUs Velocity Head 0.32 ft 2 Specific Ener< 1.68 ft Froude Numb. 0.97 Flow Type 3ubcritical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\...\110-006\drainage\swales\110-006_swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/26/06 04:41:02 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel ' Project Description Worksheet Swale 5 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Fonr Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 015000 ft/ft Left Side Slope 3.00 H : V Right Side Slope 3.00 H : V Discharge 3.20 cis bFs�c.1�1 TL Lov3 34Sga orA A, CP1ZAo414&1 7 a S4ArU (RA'aOVY 44Aw o�'•. -6 o� 1 i'a Results 0.67 It SAS $ nl �'4 Q l— z �4 GFS val.0 �W /41.r 5 4roa 3, Z Depth Flow Area 1.3 ft' Wetted Perimr 4.21 ft Top Width 3.99 It Critical Depth 0.59 It Critical Slope 0.028789 ft/it Velocity 2.41 ft/s Velocity Head 0.09 ft Specific Energ 0.76 It Froude Numb 0.74 Flow Type Subcritk al Project Engineer: Northam Engineering d:\...\110-006\drainage\swates\110-006_swaies.fm2 Northam Engineering Services Inc FbwMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 03/01 /07 10:28:26 AM 0 Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1 -203-755-1 6W Page 1 of 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 5-freebo: Flow Element Triangular Char Method Mannino Fonr Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefftc 0.035 Channel Slope 015000 ftRi Left Side Slope 3.00 H : V Right Side Slope 3.00 H : V Discharge 4.30 cis Results Depth 0.74 it Flow Area 1.7 112 Wetted Perimr 4.70 ft Top Wktth 4.46 It Critical Depth 0.66 ft Cdtk:al Slope 0.027676 ftRt Velocity 2.60 We Velocity Head 0.10 ft Specific Enerf 0.65 ft Froude Numb, 0.75 Flow Type Subcrfical 2' Project Engineer. Northern Engineering d:1...1110-0081drsinagelswalesM 10.006_sweles.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 03/01 /07 10:29:10 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-765-1666 Page 1 of 1 Appendix G O W = ' Z W = G 2 yI > W w 08 8� 8Z ' 1 J 0®®® ' N o T 1, O p p J N cn O d' wO ' o C.)wW ItU CIv O _ _ � 1 O U tnwJ a o0z LO Y W U x NI? 0 ' Z g w J • U U ' J NW Nw c o Ow wU 1 ON 0 wZ 0 f0 NU �15 0 CD o N '" I, B E �g NORTHERN ENGINEERING PROJECT. JOB #: CLIENT - CALCULATIONS FOR: SHEET- OF: MADE BY: DATE: CHECKED BY: DATE: rr _ li -ElirLI 11 mt - � — —I— I -T -+—r I'•-- 7 pII— - I 47 - _ r J7-, ... _- — W%c fDT — INf ---C-�'-� I,a -' - j'— I J- j _;_------I-N-- � clrpo. I Ir I �_l' t_-. T..-n -t- Q%6: I �- � '�.�i�LD`� 1-._._1-- �. �� , I +-� ii._ r I-F, I rs T �-�-r- I I � I � • �� � T Y-� 7-1 -r*00 A,4 2 v�1G a �t�ulF�aso�-rwq 'FoK BAs„� i-0. ` =SWMM BASIN PARAIIIIETERSt} re5 Project: 110-006 Date: 6/1 /2006 By: ATC Basin Overland Flow Length FT Basin Width FT Area AC Percentage Imperviousness %(FT/FT) Basin Slope 1 120 4476 12.33 37.09 0.020 2 120 3383 9.89 36.31 0.020 3 120 1100 2.92 37.43 0.020 4 120 3267 8.69 29.17 0.020 5 120 574 1.59 17.30 0.020 6 120 875 1.67 8.25 0.020 Q ap t O Q� I� O O N N O N M m N O N O Off, E V E O Q O ®®® i O_ U w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 O CD O U o< Q a.mc U (EEC} CCCCCC N 6 M W V Q N Q W N 0 0 0 0 b 0 0 o 0 0 0 66 Q 6666 W N 6 M 00 M (7 O � M a '" SSivrn Oo O m c F C O O yam^ D 'b" N M M N O M, in W h (O N W W N N a m W W M M M W m W Ip N W 0 0 0 Op O 2 D aC 10 9 N W N (O i0 O l0 O h n ((gypp Ol N M N N O] f� N �O ^N y M N V W OI 01 N N W OI O 1 O C N n (O CWJ N Q W d Q E Z 0 Cc x L. Em O �U C z¢ o 0 0 0 0 0 o U Q U a m y m iYQ N OOM W tM0 Qi m 01 � M W M V� YNi O�� OMi M O W 1� � � .M- M w W OY LL h0 M O WWN Q� WNW O O� N p OO M M W Q NO tp En v ut N M N Np W W N N n m C --MN N N uO N O U 1'� � O S N O �� N N •- N N N (V .- N M p � � N C N N � CG � � O � N N Q O OO h 4 a�i N `p : �0 F M r N N W m W tD N N h W N Q Q aD N N J J 12 C $ a N 0 M0 Q N N N N T W r N Pm N m m N r WO 00 0 N n N N o m m L a W y _. O EI 10 W h O y N L U] N (n .� G W Asq T O 0 0 0 2 ap w U O C N .O U 9 0; N N N N E CO'J t�'J ; V V V V; E N E^ E l U N J Cl w a cn w U it OOON W mwrl COOPIMOMIq w Q LLLL M U O f-- Q O T M V CO In V M O m w m w w mm O O N V' 00 M m o O O O O O T r N W Q LL 00 QV r � rMco Iq (j Cl,) coVO)NOMNO a) 00 000 V r O M T r M CO Op T w 0 Q w 0 it O N 00 00 Iq CO OQ co ON�n (n OMB co T r T N N N N W U o w LL (} o Z T "'• r O T r N M� In CO QO Op Z �_ W N V 2 _0W F- m Q l~L N c o I ca u�� w w r� °o o } 1_1_Nrr-rr-l_ww Arn fn IL a-000 Z wwwwwmODm vvvvv'tvIt G, 0 op 0 —d- r V) 3 4% d' Mi m1 0 r c Or 3 J0 Q �(n 000N LO D)On H LL rL 000 r- MMM't OjU0000Ta�ui 0 O J LL p~ w 0P O 6 O N O O O 00 H tL W co co rn ao of 0 p Z U) wwwwwww V' It It V Itt V It O a 0wcnuO 0Tr�co oi:$coo o W U) _jQv)oav MMWN F WLL0w"T -i U O T N N rnMrnIt M V l0 Z 0 a: a w c U w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ar mC7 _ L > oQ LLnr�r�nr�r�ww ui6cdr�coofor } U U U U dwwww �0000 LO w u')to r, r, cr; co ^ 0 w > co c Oct W rn .•-. JQ rn OOONNNOO m �LLrLL000�00M^10� 0 0 0 0 w 0 T `y M M :.i O Z 0 oC 0 O Q (� Z T � I_ a T O w w m V C v V O IL :� r W w L ^ CO _ LZ r T UOoQ Fr :Z > O HUH L r r- WWNMMMWW CD N w w 7 Lll Q U U U U Crvwvv v d' SOH..>��-� O fndaom c 0000 w W U OONNIADNIDI.-M O O I+, M M M V M 1- N 4 6 6 w LL U O F.. QOOO°OM Q/NO0 O V' O t� O oo�C N l* W COOCC.-� CV w Go U O NO°GoaN mVl4�u, NN ap t V' Go O co MM co O�On000)M N°D� Q z LL N N v M CD W �p 0= N O N MN 0 M W N N M N N w U o w LL w O o LO N .. z p ` w 'O3a~ N Q LL N C OHQ fA M V•�D�CDn�610 Od'Q} U)a.n.Dca o z f`rn vvv°Dvvvvvv ti r-In r. r`r`M J Q_j 0 0 0 N N to N 0 n M F-LLLLoon'-wtn0't0 O Cr 466 1-UCG H � rCV 3 O 0 W O O O N O O O O O O U CO. I*- tri N O th 00 Oi a a co a co co pp6pp a Z (j �w0' O a O w Cl) W) Or1 0 O) co O O W U J Q (A uJ LLOWM0 Co N of W M r-om of 0 n qrm M �JUOr CV CM CO 4466 Z 0m H LLI ^ LL C�vU ;7.O F= ) W Ov Ov N 0 0 0 0 0 CO .O O U C nnnnnF,n oDOwOoo0 d o r,mn co OiCO 0E -- v v v v v v -- o w w w w �0000 n m to m ? p V W Q w LL00P, O O N N to Wtnovw N t0 M M O: JUGCCrr N C'M 66 U o Z OIr ~ 0 0 Z r r O tb a W ^ V C_ Zo LL. `�cc O OU w My in to N fO n GoO)0 NVaUO3Q f-r > O �UF 1-r-P, vvaanovvvvv nnna$ � -0 Sw w 8 8 8 �� v C0 0ofQ - >wc�wv= (4)CL0-0 O'r-'a'r'C - 0 0 0 01 w cn w LL w U (r 000rn n u�T O O O N O N -It O O O O T r T w Q LL c U 0 f- Q O M O W N O (n O N n N O N T O o O T M LOW 0000000 w Cc a w U n� a N O N 0 r T T T 0 Cl) tt O M � M w 0 Q U- zLL:U) O00 O N Cl) O Ln Iq N O OD � r W LL V oo w 0 (g o T YI Z T OTTNM<t � Q O CO z O T W �cr)WaU a LL 1n d C 01-a U) OOOT NMIt n 00 CO 00 00 00 00 f) d d 0 m z 00 ItItIctvvvIt 00 w 00 00 00 00 H CF- O 0 c4 J I� 40 it J 1 0 0 es 3 J a-JWOOOMNOn H LL 000 N O N V LL 0f-00000 O O J LL ~ Q W O MOO O M 0 0 0 0 F- H LL W T 0 CV (M V W Q z cn ODD vv GOO vvvv W GOO O a Lo T O Ln nr)nco Cm 00 O HU) �<wONMoNoT E- W LL. O W N W O N V n-jUOOOOT TT O _z F— Q W D.O LL. C W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oa)m 4)0 .- > Oa �MOO LL N GO GOWM NMqT GOM W W W W 0 W W ,00001 In Lo Lo Ln N OO(O LU 0co O� W� Jq LPL DOOCA OONT O mf" OOM (y H W 0LjUO000000 OON to rim Vco O¢ C7 o a z '- T _ F Q � O W H = Gi � OT If vvv co W r, �r�waUOoa`.=L) F- fG N > Q Q L` Co 00 00 O 00 O 00 OD a a 3 < CC 0) 4) U Iq = 0 >- w fa a a o m 0 0 0 0 1 w cn w U 0000 u)MMM O O O Lq CD V OA Cl? O O O O r M M V w U F Q O CD O V"t Co t N O N CD O M D) 00 r N Cn (Y) In r 00 C5000 N w CD fr V Itr OD it O coNf�r D) N M O it) (D r V D) (Da) O,CMO OMC)N V cr Q LLI O ¢ iy^ Z LL CD r (A CD O _ O C\ CO D) oo r 0 cm co r Cy N W a.w LL V o (3 b n Z r O r r N M� In CO Q O p Z w Z w NLli U Q LL H Q op a�)i (j nCCoo(Dr,coon coo m N 4 d m Z ao ao ao lr-ao co ao ao ao S N � a O it J it 0 it — Q J I 1 11 I i J > Q W O o O O LO M M M _j H LL LL O O O In W t M M O oiviv 0 O J LL 0 F w O O w 0 0 0 6rl- 0 O o F- < LLZ lt] (O c0 r` GD fn It V V' V V qtlKT'T O IL oLOCO OMr-_cc aD M � O O E- U) J Q !/) O M r` In r` M M M F-W LL 0 V�MM V MM -1 Uo NNNM fM'i Z 0� H Q W c . LL c r NC7 W O O w 0 0 0 0 0 ro U N O ._ > O Q.EUI- F Q LL 6(Oc6nOD6O.- rl wwwwwwww r, N N r� r,, w w ar a� � a�U vvvvvvvv �0000 LncoLOLO r- r.Nco W pco JQQ1n0000N W LL 0 0 0 0 W n M NM M M 0 0 0 0 0 W N N M V coZ 0� o (9 o a Z T w a U <D V C U w O n H� oC cC m j Q HnN ro r,Nww �vC) U 0 c <._U� LL w avaovvv�a w n w w w w w 2 a �OHQ>www 3 w m m m m m U a i O ir Q >- d cna.aom�0000 w Cl) w U cr O O O r N n 0 O O O N M n w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w a � � U �0- a O M M M M CD O r 0 n N n r O O O O r r M 16161616 C50O w 0 LL QO C7 w (MD M co Cn CO (D n O (D to CO r MM M C) nr CO Q W cr O¢LL z�m Occ N co w (n (no N N o r coCn n W o a V O w Z CN Cn r O r r N N co c} Q o � Z o r w (o(a0 C:0 w m Q LL (n c~n cDnnwaorno O cr Q} o n n n n n n w U) a a 0 m z w v't'tvvvItr w w w w w w 0 11 1► A 4 <• J H LLLLOOON Mrs W OF-U0000000 0 O J LL ~ w 00N0 to 00 LL W W W W W W W O IL O (M CO IN O W Oo W V 0 I�t O o F- W J< W F-wLL07 O N M W N W O N N N M W D J O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z 0 OwC Q w c LL � r w o o m o w o o O > o¢ ����n°r°On�000 WOa.SU5. U) vvItvvvv U U U U C �0000 O co LO N LO Co t` W M10 NoF-w co O JW OOONM[FLn LL jWU0000000 0 V o Z 0¢ (g o a Z '- r ¢ C w ZO LL�tC N NC7 W r, NW HMO �LOwaUOoa.EUF- p� m U a F- LLvv�v�v� r, r-- r- r, W N W �0E-a}www 0 ¢ a (1) daom.-0000 w a co w U Cc O O lqt O f,, CA O O N m I� 00 6 0 0 0 6 0 w LL < U O 0 Q �"� O (O 1- 70 N � O r f, N f, 0)0 0 0 �, N 0 0 0 0 0 6 w Q LL cr U n O v rn P, LO O(D CV)nN W OQLL zLL:U) D ((D T 0000 N d) 0) o N V W LL v o w O o Z O*- NN Mt a0 zo awaF LL LO°aCD F- U) co P,�c6� ooao c)dm z °°OoOoco`°°° v�rvva�r 0 .J OU- H OONMr o00 O?U000000 3 0 O J LL ~ W O O O U) 0 0 LL' p Z ono ono ono ono W 000 O IL OCl) (OLO o�N(o v o 00 o o H� J 0 0 W LL 0 O N V' N 0 O n r� n O O ��Uood000 (7 0 ¢ Z H Q W c U w � li c CU � �� ^OOO�A00 (OI'l I�666O (C N ��Q.>UH LL G �0000 O (n� (D C7 0� O W > O W U) Ja(n 0 o0t 00co �W LLOONMM� 0 �-�U000000 V o z w 0m o Q C7 zT ¢ ~ F T W w .N ^ V) U ZO tL '�(C N(O(�o0 �00 F— p�,m > Oa Hnnn�nw W oo a0 a0 00 a0 GG�cow(�Uooa.=_U� c W a¢ U U U U U �r �rv�vv =OH a w O¢ a } =w p c c f/)daom.0000 2 ' URBAN DRAINAGE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - 32 BIT VERSION 1998 REVISED BY UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER " ENTRY MADE TO RUNOFF MODEL 110-006 Developed Conditions Modell 10-M ' Northern Bngineerinal 6/1/06 ONUMBER OF TIME STEPS 144 OINTEGRATION TIME INTERVAL (MINUTES) 1.00 25.0 PERCENT OF IMPERVIOUS AREA HAS ZERO DETENTION DEPTH OFOR 24 RAINFALL STEPS, THE TIME INTERVAL IS 5.00 MINUTES OFOR RAINGAGE NUMBER 1 RAINFALL HISTORY IN INCHES PER HOUR .49 .56 .65 1.09 1.39 2.69 4.87 2.02 1.21 .71 .60 .52 .39 .37 .35 .34 .32 .31 .30 .29 .28 .27 .26 .25 - 1 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 100-YR Northern Engineering; 6/1/06 SUBAREA GUTTER WIDTH AREA PERCENT SLOPE RESISTANCE FACTOR SURFACE STORAGE(IN) INFILTRATION RATE(IN/HR) GAGE NUMBER OR MANHOLE (FT) (AC) IMPERV. (FT/PT) IMPERV. PERV. IMPERV. PERV. MAXIMUM MINIMUM DECAY RATE NO 101 401 4476. 12.3 37.1 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 102 402 3383. 9.9 36.3 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 103 403 1100. 2.9 37.4 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 104 404 3267. 8.7 29.2 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 105 405 574. '1.6 17.3 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 106 406 875. 1.7 8.3 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 OTOTAL NUMBER OF SUBCATCHMENTS, 6 OTOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA (ACRES), 37.09 ' 1 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 10-YR Northern Engineering; 6/l/06 ••• CONTINUITY CHECK FOR SUBCATCHMEMT ROUTING IN UDSWM386 MODEL •*• WATERSHED AREA (ACRES) 37.090 TOTAL RAINFALL (INCHES) 1.711 TOTAL INFILTRATION (INCHES) .551 TOTAL WATERSHED OUTFLOW (INCHES) .917 ' TOTAL SURFACE STORAGE AT END OF STORM (INCHES) .242 ERROR IN CONTINUITY, PERCENTAGE OF RAINFALL .008 1 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 100-YR Northern Engineering; 6/l/06 ' WIDTH INVERT SIDE SLOPES OVERBANK/SURCHARGE GUTTER GUTTER MP NP OR DIAM LENGTH SLOPE HORIZ TO VERT MANNING DEPTH JK NUMBER CONNECTION (FT) (FT) (FT/FT) L R N (FT) 201 901 0 1 CHANNEL 30.0 300. .0050 20.0 20.0 .035 4.00 0 301 901 0 2 PIPE 1.5 531. .0040 .0 .0 .013 1.50 0 302 303 0 2 PIPE 1.3 476. .0040 .0 .0 .013 1.25 0 303 902 0 2 PIPE 1.5 1146. .0075 .0 .0 .013 1.50 0 401 201 8 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .1 .0 .3 .0 .4 .7 .9 1.9 1.4 4.4 1.9 5.0 2.5 5.5 402 301 9 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE -FEEL' VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .7 .2 1.1 .5 1.9 .9 2.5 1.4 5.0 1.9 5.5 2.5 5.9 403 302 7 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .0 .1 .3 .3 1.1 .5 1.3 .8 1.4 404 303 8 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .0 .2 .5 .6 1.6 1.0 3.5 1.5 3.9 2.4.3 ' 405 304 7 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .3 .9 406 902 6 2 PIPE .1 100 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .2 901 0 0 3 .0 0 902 0 0 3 .0 0 304 902 0 2 PIPE 1.3 378 OTOTAI, NUMBER OF GUTTERS/PIPES, 13 1 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 10-YR Northern Engineering; 6/l/06 ARRANGEMENT OF SUBCATCHMENTS AND CUTTERS/PIPES GUTTER TRIBUTARY GUTTER/PIPE 201 401 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 301 402 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 302 403 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 303 302 404 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 304 405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 401 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 402 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 403 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 404 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 406 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 10-YR Northern Engineering; 6/1/06 .1 .2 .1 .3 .2 .8 .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 .1 .3 .2 .8 .3 .9 .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 1.4000 .0 .0 .013 1.25 0 TRIBUTARY SUBAREA D.A.(AC) 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.3 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.3 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.9 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.7 105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 a 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 HYDROGRAPHS ARE LISTED FOR THE FOLLOWING 2 CONVEYANCE ELEMENTS THE UPPER NUMBER IS DISCHARGE IN CPS THE LOWER NUMBER IS ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CASES- ( ) DENOTES DEPTH ABOVE INVERT IN FEET (S) DENOTES STORAGE IN AC -FT FOR DETENTION DAM. DISCHARGE INCLUDES SPILLWAY OUTFLOW. (I) DENOTES GUTTER INFLOW IN CFS FROM SPECIFIED INFLOW HY➢ROGRAPH (D) DENOTES DISCHARGE IN CFS DIVERTED FROM THIS GUTTER (0) DENOTES STORAGE IN AC -FT FOR SURCHARGED GUTTER TIME(HR/MIN) 901 902 0 1. 0. 0. 0( 1 .0( 1 0 2. 0. 0. 0( I 0( ) 0 3. 0. 0. .0( ) .0( ) 0 4. 0. 0. 0( ) .0( ) 0 5. 0. 0. .0( I 0( 1 0 6. 0. 0. 0( 1 .0( 1 0 7. 0. 0. 0( ) 0( ) 0 8. 0. 0. 0( 1 .0( 1 0 9. 0. 0. 0( 1 .0( 1 0 10. 0. 0. .0( ) 0( ) 0 11. G. 0. .0( ) .0( ) 0 12. 0. 0. 0( I 01 I 0 13. 0. 0. 0( 1 .01 1 0 14. 0. 0. 0( ) 0( ) 0 15. 0. 0. 01 ) 0( ) 0 16. 0. 0. .0( I .0( 1 0 17. '0. 0. 01 ) .0( 1 0 18. 0. 0. .01 1 .01 1 0 19. 0. 0. 0( I .0( I 0 20. 0. 0. 0( ) .0( 1 0 21. 0. 0. 0( 1 .01 1 0 22. 0. 0. .0( 1 .0( 1 0 23. 0. 0. 0( I 0( I 0 24. 0. 0. .0( 1 .0( ) 0 25. 0. 0. .01 I 01 ) 0 26. 0. 0. 0( I -0( 1 0 27. 0. 0. 0( ) .0( 1 0 28. 0. 0. .0( 1 .0( I 0 29. 0. 0. 0( 1 .0( 1 0 30. 0. 0. .0( 1 .01 ) 0 31. 0. 0. .0( I .01 1 0 32. 0. 0. .0( 1 .0( 1 0 33. 0. 0. 01 I .0( 1 0 34. 1. 0. 01 ) 0( I 0 35. 1. 0. .01 1 .0( ) 0 36. 1. 0. .01 1 .01 1 0 37. 1. 0. .0( 1 .01 1 0 38. 1. 0. .0( I 01 I 0 39. 1. 0. 0( I .0( 1 0 40. 1. 0. 0( I 0( I 0 41. 2. 1. 01 1 .0( 1 0 42. 2. 1. .0( 1 .0( ) 2' 0 43. 2. 1. .0( 0 44. 2. 1. 0( ) 0( ) 0 45. 2. 1. .0( 1 .0( I 0 46. 2. 1. 0( 1 .0( ) 0 47. 2. 1. 0( ) .0( I 0 48. 3. 1. .0( I .0( ) 0 49. 3. 1. .0( ) .0( 1 0 50. 3. 2. 0( 1 .0( I 0 51. 3. 2. .0( 1 .0( ) 0 52. 3. 2. .0( 1 .0( ) 0 53. 3. 2. 0( 1 .01 1 0 54. 3. 2. .0( 1 .0( I 0 55. 3. 2. 0( ) 0( ) 0 56. 3. 2. 0( ) 0( ) 0 57. 3. 2. 0( ) 0( 1 0 58. 3. 2. 0( ) 0( 1 0 59. 3. 2. .0( 1 .01 1 1 0. 3. 2. .0( 1 .0( 1 1 1. 3. 2. 0( I .0( I 1 2. 3. 2. 0( ) .0( 1 1 3. 3. 2. 0( ) 0( I 1 4. 3. 2. .0( ) .0( 1 1 5. 3. 2. 0( 1 .0( 1 1 6. 3. 2. .0( 1 .0( 1 1 7. 3. 2. .0( 1 .0( ) 1 B. 3. 2. .0( ) 0( 1 1 9. 4. 2. .0( ) 0( 1 1 10. 4. 2. .0( ) 0( 1 1 11. 4. 2. .0( 1 .0( I 1 12. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( I 1 13. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( I 1 14. 4. 2. 0( I 0( ) a' 1 15. 4. 2 . of ) 0( ) 1 16. 4. 2. .0( I .0( I 1 17. 4. 2. .01 ) .0( I 1 18. 4. 2. 0( I .0( l 1 19. 4. 2. .01 1 .0( 1 1 20. 4. 2. 1 21. 4. 2. 01 ) 01 I 1 22. 4. 2. 0( I 0( I 1 23. 4. 2. 0( ) .01 ) 24. 4. 2. 01 1 .0( 1 1 25. 4. 2. .0( I 0( I 1 26. 4. 2. 0( 1 .01 ) 1 27. 4. 2. .0( 1 .01 I 1 28. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( I 1 29. 4. 2. .0( I 0( ) 1 30. 4. 2. 0( I 0( ) 31. 4. 2. 01 ) .01 ) 1 32. 4. 2. 01 ) 0( I 1 33. 4. 2. 0( ) 0( ) 1 34. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( ) 1 35. 4. 2. 0( ) 01 ) 36. 4. 2. 01 ) .01 ) 1 37. 4. 2. 0( ) 0( 1 1 38. 4. 2. .0( I 0( I 1 39. 4. 2. .0( 1 .0( 1 1 40. 4. 2. .01 1 .01 1 1 41. 4. 2. .01 1 .01 1 1 42. 4. 2. .0( 1 .0( 1 1 43. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( 1 1 44. 4. 2. 01 1 .01 ) 45. 4. 2. .01 ) .0( ) 46. 4. 2. 1 1 1 1 1 1 0( , .0( ) 1 47. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( I 1 48. 4. 2. 0( ) 01 I 1 49. 4. 2. 0( ) 01 ) 1 50. 4. 2. 0( I 0( 1 1 51. 4. 2. .01 ) 01 1 1 52.. 4. 2. 0( I 0(.) 1 53. 4. 2. .01 ) 01 I 1 54. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( ) 1 55. 4. 2. .01 ) 0( I 1 56. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( 1 57. 4. 2, 01 ) 01 1 1 58. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( I 1 59. 4. 2. 0( I 0( ) 2 0. 4. 2. .01 I .01 1 2 1. 4. 2. 01 1 .0( 1 2 2. 4. 2. 0( I 0( ) 2 3. 4. 2. .01 1 .01 1 2 4. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( 1 2 5. 4. 2. 0( I .0( I 2 6. 4. 2. .01 ) 0( ) 2 7. 4. 2. .0( 1 .0( 1 2 B. 4. 2. 01 1 .0( I 2 9. 4. 2. .01 ) .0( ) 2 10. 4. 2. .0( 2 11. 4. 2. 0( I .0( I 2 12. 4. 2. 01 ) 0( 1 2 13. 4. 2. 0( 1 .01 1 2 14. 4. 2. .0( 1 .0( 1 2 15. 4. 2. .0( ) 0( ) 2 16. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( 1 2 17. 4. 2. .0( 1 .0( 1 2 18. 4. 2. 0( I .0( 1 2 19, 4. 2. .0( ) .0( ) 2 20. 4. 2. .01 1 .0( 1 2 21. 4. 2. 01 I 01 I 2 22. 4. 2. .0( ) .01 ) 2 23. 4. 2. .0( 1 .0( 1 2 24. 3. 2. .01 I .0( ) 1 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 10-YR Northern Engineering; 6/l/06 •.. PEAK FLOWS, STAGES AND STORAGES OF GUTTERS AND DETENTION DAMS .'. CONVEYANCE PEAK STAGE STORAGE TIME ELEMENT (CFS) (FT) (AC -FT) (HR/MIN) 403 1. .1 .2 1 27. 405 0. .1 .1 1 34, 404 1. .1 .5 1 30. 302 1. .3 1 30. 402 2. .1 .6 1 22. 401 2. .1 .8 1 49. 304 0. .0 1 34. 406 0. .1 .1 1 25. 303 2. .5 1 33. 301 2. .6 1 24. 201 2. .1 1 55. 902 2. )DIRECT FLOW) 1 32. 901 4. (DIRECT FLOW) 1 42. ' URBAN DRAINAGE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - 32 BIT VERSION 1998 REVISED BY UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER ' ENTRY MADE TO RUNOFF MODEL " 110-006 Developed Conditions Modell 300-YR Northern Eegineeringl 6/1/06 ONUMBER OF TIME STEPS 144 OINTEGRATION TIME INTERVAL (MINUTES) 1.00 25.0 PERCENT OF IMPERVIOUS AREA HAS ZERO DETENTION DEPTH ' OFOR 24 RAINFALL STEPS, THE TIME INTERVAL IS 5.00 MINUTES OFOR RAINGAGE NUMBER 1 RAINFALL HISTORY IN INCHES PER HOUR 1.00 1.14 1.33 2.23 2.84 5.49 9.95 4.12 2.48 1.46 1.22 1.06 1.00 .95 .91 .87 .84 .81 .78 .75 .73 .71 .69 .67 _ ' 1 \ 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 100-YR Northern Engineering; 6/l/06 ' SUBAREA GUTTER WIDTH AREA PERCENT SLOPE RESISTANCE FACTOR SURFACE STORAGE(IN) INFILTRATION RATE(IN/HR) GAGE NUMBER OR MANHOLE (FT) (AC) IMPERV. (FT/FT) IMPERV. PERV. IMPERV. PERV. MAXIMUM MINIMUM DECAY RATE NO 101 401 4476. 12.3 37.1 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 102 402 3383. 9.9 36.3 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 103 403 1100. 2.9 37.4 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 104 404 3267. 8.7 29.2 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 105 405 574. 1.6 17.3 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 106 406 875. 1.7 8.3 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 OTOTAL NUMBER OF SUBCATCHMENTS, 6 OTOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA (ACRES), 37.09 ' 1 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 100-YR Northern Engineering; 6/1/06 CONTINUITY CHECK FOR SUBCATCHMEMT ROUTING IN UDSWM386 MODEL WATERSHED AREA (ACRES) 37.090 TOTAL RAINFALL (INCHES) 3. 669 TOTAL INFILTRATION )INCHES) .679 TOTAL WATERSHED OUTFLOW (INCHES) 2.720 ' TOTAL SURFACE STORAGE AT END OF STORM (INCHES) .270 ERROR IN CONTINUITY, PERCENTAGE OF RAINFALL .004 1 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 100-YR Northern Engineering; 6/l/06 ' WIDTH INVERT SIDE SLOPES OVERBANK/SURCHARGE GUTTER GUTTER NDP NP OR DIAN LENGTH SLOPE HORIZ TO VERT MANNING DEPTH qK NUMBER CONNECTION (FT) (FT) (FT/FT) L R N (FT) 201 901 0 1 CHANNEL 30.0 300. .0050 20.0 20.0 .035 4.00 0 301 901 0 2 PIPE 1.5 531. .0040 .0 .0 .013 1.50 0 ' 302 303 0 2 PIPE 1.3 476. .0040 .0 .0 .013 1.25 0 303 902 0 2 PIPE 1.5 1146. .0075 .0 .0 .013 1.50 0 401 201 8 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW ,0 .0 .1 .0 .3 .0 .4 .7 .9 1.9 1.4 4.4 1.9 5.0 2.5 5.5 ' 402 301 9 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .7 .2 1.1 .5 1.9 .9 2.5 1.4 5.0 1.9 5.5 2.5 5.9 403 302 7 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .013 ' .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .0 .1 .3 .3 1.1 .5 1.3 .8 1.4 404 303 8 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .0 .0 .2 .0 .2 1.6 1.0 3.5 1.5 3.9 2.1 4.3 .5 .6 405 304 7 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .2 .1 .3 .2 .8 .3 .9 406 902 6 2 PIPE .1 100. .0010 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .2 .1 .3 .2 .8 .3 .9 901 0 0 3 .0 0. .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 902 0 0 3 .0 0. .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 304 902 0 2 PIPE 1.3 378. 1.4000 .0 .0 .013 1.25 0 OTOTAL NUMBER OF GUTTERS/PIPES, 13 1 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 100-YR Northern Engineering; 6/l/06 ARRANGEMENT OF SUBCATCHMENTS AND GUTTERS/PIPES GUTTER TRIBUTARY GUTTER/PIPE TRIBUTARY SUBAREA D.A.(AC) 201 401 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.3 301 402 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.9 302 403 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 303 302 404 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.6 304 405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 401 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.3 402 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.9 403 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 404 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.7 405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 1 406 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 100-YR Northern Engineering; 6/l/06 HYDROGRAPHS ARE LISTED FOR THE FOLLOWING 2 CONVEYANCE ELEMENTS THE UPPER NUMBER IS DISCHARGE IN CPS THE LOWER NUMBER IS ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CASES: 1 I DENOTES DEPTH ABOVE INVERT IN FEET (S) DENOTES STORAGE IN AC -FT FOR DETENTION DAM. DISCHARGE INCLUDES SPILLWAY OUTFLOW. (I) DENOTES GUTTER INFLOW IN CPS FROM SPECIFIED INFLOW HYDROGRAPH (D) DENOTES DISCHARGE IN CPS DIVERTED FROM THIS GUTTER (0) DENOTES STORAGE IN AC -FT FOR SURCHARGED GUTTER TIME(HR/MIN) 901 902 0 1. 0. 0. .0( ) .0( 1 0 2. 0. 0. .0( I .0( I 0 3. 0. 0. 01 1 .0( 1 0 4. 0. 0. .01 1 .0( 1 0 5. 0. 0. .0( 1 .0( 1 0 6. 0. 0. .0( ) .0( ) 0 7. 0. 0. .0( 1 .0( ) 0 B. 0. 0. .01 1 .01 ) 0 9. 0. 0. .01 I .0( 1 0 10. 0. 0. .0( ) .0( 1 0 11. 0. 0. 0( ) .01 1 0 12. 0. 0. 01I 0( 1 0 13. 0. 0. .0( 1 .01 1 0 14. 0. 0. .01 1 .0( 1 0 15. 0. 0. 0( 1 .01 1 0 16. 0. 0. 01 1 .0( 1 0 17. b. 0. 01 I .0( ) 0 18. 0. 0. 0( 1 .01 1 0 19. 0. 0. .01 ) .0( I 0 20. 0. 0. 0( I .0( ) 0 21. 0. 0. 0( I .01 1 0 22. 0. 0. .01 ) 0( I 0 23. 0. 0. 01 1 .0( 1 0 24. 0. 0. 0( I 0( 1 0 25. 0. 0. 0( 1 .01 1 0 26. 1. 0. .0( I 01 ) 0 27. 1. 0. .0( ) 0( 1 0 28. 1. 0. 0( 1 .0( 1 0 29. 1. 0. .0( 1 .0( I 0 30. 1. 0. 0( 1 .0( ) 0 31. 1. 0. .0( 1 .0( ) 0 32. 2. 1. .0( ) .0( ) 0 33. 2. 1. 01 1 .0( 1 0 34. 2. 1. .0( 1 .0( I 0 35. 3. 2. .01 ) 0( I 0 36. 3. 2. 01 1 .0( 1 0 37. 4. 2. 0( 1 .0( ) 0 38. 4. 3. .0( ) 0( 1 0 39. 5. 3. 0( 1 .0( 1 0 40. 6. 4. 01 1 .01 1 0 41. 6. 4. .01 1 .0( 1 0 42. 7. 5. 0( 1 .0( 1 0 43. 7. 5. 01 ) .01 1 0 44. 8. 6. 01 ) 0( 1 0 45. 8. 6. .01 1 .0( I 0 46. 9. 6. .0( 1 .01 1 0 47. 9. 6. .01 I .0( ) 0 48. 9. 6. 01 ) 01 1 0 49. 9. 6. .01 1 .0( 1 0 50. 10. 6. .0( ) .01 ) 0 51. 10. 6. .01 ) 0( I 0 52. 10. 6. 0( 1 .0( I 0 53. 10. 6. 0( 1 .01 1 0 54. 10. 6. 0( 1 .0( I 0 55. 10. 6. .0( I 0( I 0 56. 10. 7. .0( ) 01 ) 0 57. 10. 7. 01 ) 01 1 0 58. 10. 7. .01 1 .0( 1 0 59. 10, 7. 0( 1 .0( ) 1 0. 10. 7. .0( ) 0( ) 1 1. 10. 7. 0( ) 01 1 1 2. 10. 7. 01 1 .01 1 1 3. 10. 7. .0( 1 .0( ) 1 4. 10. 7. 0( ) .0( 1 1 5. 10. 7. 0( ) 0( ) 1 6. 10. 7. .01 ) .0( ) 1 7. 10. 7. 01 1 .01 1 1 B. 10. 7. .0( ) 0( I 1 9. 10. 7. .0( ) .0( ) 1 10. 10. 7. 01 ) 0( ) 1 11. 10. 7. 01 I .01 1 1 12. 10. 7. 0( 1 .0( I 1 13. 10. 7. .0( ) .0( ) 1 14. 10. 7. 0( 1 .0( ) 1 15. 10. 7. .01 1 .01 1 1 16. 10. 7. 0( I 0( ) 1 17. 10. 7. .0( 1 .0( 1 1 18. 10. 7. 0( ) 0( 1 1 19. 10. 7. .0( 1 .0( 1 1 20. 10. 7. .0( ) 0( 1 1 21. 10. 7. 0( 1 .01 1 1 22. 10. 7. 0( 1 .0( ) 1 23. 10. 7. 01 1 .0( 1 1 24. 10. 7. 0( 1 .0( 1 1 25. 10. 7. .0( I 0( ) 1 26. 10. 7. .01 ) .0( 1 1 27. 10. 7. .0( 1 .01 1 28. 10. 7. 0( I 0( ) 1 29. 10. 7. 0( I 0( 1 30. 10. 7. .01 1 .0( ) 31. 10. 7. .0( 1 .01 ) 1 32. 10. 7. 0( 1 .01 1 33. 10. 7. -0( I .01 1 1 34. 10. 7. 01 1 .0( 1 35. 10. 7. .0( 1 .0( ) 1 36. 10. 7. 0( 1 .01 ) 37. 10. 7. 0( 1 .01 1 1 38. 10. 7. .0( 1 .0( 1 1 39. 10. 7. .01 ) 0( I 40. 10. 7. .0 ) .0( 1 1 41. 10. 7. .0( I .01 ) 1 42. 10. 7. 0( I 01 ) 1 43. 10. 7. 01 1 .0( 1 1 44. 10. 7. .0( 1 .0( 1 1 45. 10. 7. .0( I 01 ) 1 46. 10. 7. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .0( I .0( 1 1 47. 10. 7. .01 1 .0( ) 1 48. 10. 7. of I .0( I 1 49. 10. 7. 0( 1 .01 1 1 50. 10. 7. 0( ) 0( 1 1 51. 10. 7. 0( 1 .01 1 1 52. 10. 7. .0( 1 .0( I 1 53. 10. 7. .01 1 .01 ) 1 54. 10. 7. .0( I 0( ) 1 55. 10. 7. .0( ) 0( I 1 56. 10. 7. 0( 1 .0( ) 1 57. 10. 7. 0( I .0( 1 1 58. 10. 7. 01) 0O 1 59. 10. 7. .01 ) 01 ) 2 0. 10. 7. 0( I 0( ) 2 1. 10. 7. .0( ) .0( 1 2 2. 10. 7. .01 ) .0( I 2 3. 10. 7. .0( 1 .01 1 2 4. 10. 7. 01 I 01 ) 2 5. 10. 7. 0( 1 .01 1 2 6. 10. 7. 01 ) .0( 1 2 7. 10. 7. 0( 1 .0( I 2 B. 10. 7. .0( I .0( ) 2 9. 10. 7. .0( 1 .01 1 2 10. 10. 7. .0( ) .0i ) 2 11. 10. 7. 01 ) 0( ) 2 12. 10. 7. 0( 1 .0( 1 2 13. 10. 7. .0( 1 .0( ) 2 14. 10. 7. 0( I 0( ) 2 15. 10. 7. 01 ) 01 1 2 16. 10. 7. 0( ) 0( 1 2 17. 10. 7. .0( I 0( 1 2 18. 10. 7. .0( ) .0( 1 2 19. 10. 7. 0( 0( ) 2 20. 10. 7. .0( ) .0( 2 21. 10. 7. .0( ) 0( ) 2 22. 10. 7. .0( ) .0( 2 23. 10. 7. .0( 1 .O( 1 2 24. 10. 7. .0( ) .0( 1 1 110-006 Developed Conditions Model; 100-YR Northern Engineering; 6/l/06 ... PEAK FLOWS, STAGES AND STORAGES OF GUTTERS AND DETENTION DAMS CONVEYANCE PEAK STAGE STORAGE TIME ELEMENT (CPS) (FT) (AC -FT) (HR/MIN) 403 1. .1 .5 1 55, 405 I. .1 .2 1 31. 404 4. .1 1.5 1 45. 302 1. .5 1 57. 402 5. .1 1.6 1 36. 401 5. .1 2.2 1 56. 304 1. .1 1 32. 406 1. .1 .2 1 26. 303 5. .8 1 50. 301 5. 1.0 1 38. 201 5. .2 2 0. 902 7. (DIRECT FLOW) 1 44. 901 10. (DIRECT FLOW) 1 48. a' Appendix H Trapezoidal Weir Performance Curve: POND 1 Project: 110-006 Date: 7/27/06 By: ATC Governing Equation: The trapezoidal weir is a broad -crested weir governed by the following equation: r )]H where =discharge (cfs) - I eb *where C w =weir coefficient Q C L+ 0.8 H tan w 2 where L _ crest length (ft) where H = head on weir (ft) where b = 1.5 For 4:1 side slopes, 6 = 151.92760 so that tan (0/2) = 4 Input Parameters: Top of Weir Elevation Crest Elevation (ft): Length of Crest (ft): Weir Coefficient: Depth vs. Flow: 4880.80 200 2.60 Depth Above Crest (ft) Elevation (ft) Emergency Overflow Weir Discharge (cfs) 0.00 4880.80 0 0.10 4880.90 16 0.20 4881.00 47 DESIGN FLOW=46.1 Trapezoidal Weir Performance Curve: POND 2 Project: 110-006 Date: 7/27/06 By: ATC Governing Equation: The trapezoidal weir is a broad -crested weir governed by the following equation:• (')]H where Q= discharge (cfs) = L L+ 0.8 H tan b• where Cµ, = weir coefficient w 2 ' where L = crest length (ft) where H = head on weir (ft) where 6 = 1.5 For 4:1 side slopes, 0 = 151.92760 so that tan (0/2) = 4 Input Parameters: Top of Weir Elevation Crest Elevation (ft): Length of Crest (ft): Weir Coefficient: Depth vs. Flow: 4dtfl.UU 4881.00 28 2.60 Depth Above Crest (ft) Elevation (ft) Emergency Overflow Weir Discharge (cfs) 0.00 4881.00 0 0.20 4881.20 7 0.40 4881.40 19 0.60 4881.60 36 0.80 4881.80 57 1.00 4882.00 81 DESIGN FLOW=42.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 i 1 i 1 1 1 Trapezoidal Weir Performance Curve: POND 3 Project: 110-006 Date: 7/27/06 By: ATC Governing Equation: The trapezoidal weir is a broad -crested weir governed by the following equation: 1 where Q= discharge (cfs) - C L+ 0.8 H tan B 1 J H b where C„ = weir coefficient w 2 J • where L = crest length (ft) " where H = head on weir (ft) where b = 1.5 For 4:1 side slopes, 9 = 151.92760 so that tan (0/2) = 4 Input Parameters: Top of Weir Elevation Crest Elevation (ft): Length of Crest (ft): Weir Coefficient: Depth vs. Flow: 4884.50 30 2.60 Depth Above Crest (ft) Elevation (ft) Emergency Overflow Weir Discharge (cfs) 0.00 4884.50 0 0.20 4884.70 7 0.40 4884.90 21 0.50 4885.00 29 DESIGN FLOW=12.4 I 1 1] 1 1 1 H 1 1 1 1 Trapezoidal Weir Performance Curve: POND 4 Project: 110-006 Date: 7/27/06 By: ATC Governing Equation: The trapezoidal weir is a broad -crested weir governed by the following equation: 1 ' where = discharge = C L+ 0.8 H tan C B J H b C ' where w =weir coefficient nt Q w • where L — crest length (ft) • where H = head on weir (ft) *whereb= 1.5 For 4:1 side slopes, 9 = 151.9276° so that tan (0/2) = 4 Input Parameters: I op of weir Llevatlon (tt): 4882.00 Crest Elevation (ft): 4881.50 Length of Crest (ft): 50 Weir Coefficient: 2.60 Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Crest (ft) Elevation (ft) Emergency Overflow Weir Discharge (cfs) 0.00 4881.50 0 0.20 4881.70 12 0.40 4881.90 34 0.50 4882.00 47 DESIGN FLOW=34.9 t 1 I 1 Trapezoidal Weir Performance Curve: POND 5 Project: 110-006 Date: 7/27/06 By: ATC Governing Equation: The trapezoidal weir is a broad -crested weir governed by the following equation: • where O = discharge (cts) ]H' `where C„ = weir coefficient Q = CW L + 0.8H tan \ e/ • where L - crest length (ft) 2 where H = head on weir (ft) *where b = 1.5 For 4:1 side slopes, 6 = 151.92760 so that tan (0/2) = 4 Parameters: Crest Elevation (ft): 4880.00 Length of Crest (ft): 20 Weir Coefficient: 2.60 Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Crest (ft) Elevation (ft) Emergency Overflow Weir Discharge (cfs) 0.00 4880.00 0 0.20 4880.20 5 0.40 4880.40 14 0.50 4880.50 20 DESIGN FLOW=5.7 Trapezoidal Weir Performance Curve: POND 6 Project: 110-006 Date: 7/27/06 By: ATC Governing Equation: The trapezoidal weir is a broad -crested weir governed by the following equation: rr ' where Q= discharge (cis) = C I ` Q B L+ 0.8 H tan H b where C w= weir coefficient w 2 J ` l where L - crest length (ft) where H = head on weir (ft) *where b = 1.5 For 4:1 side slopes, 9 = 151.92760 so that tan (0/2) = 4 'JH L Input Parameters: Top of Weir Elevation (ft): 4880.50 Crest Elevation (ft): 4880.00 Length of Crest (ft): 20 Weir Coefficient: 2.60 Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Crest (ft) Elevation (ft) Emergency Overflow Weir Discharge (cfs) 0.00 4880.00 0 0.20 4880.20 5 0.40 4880.40 14 0.50 4880.50 20 L_ DESIGN FLOW=4.5 Appendix I POND DESIGN ject: 110-006 ATC REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET BASIN AREA = 12.300 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 37.10 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = 0.3710 <-- CALCULATED WQCV (watershed inches) = 0.172 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.212 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WO Depth (ft) = 1.500 <-- INPUT from stage -storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in2) = 0.816 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING: dia (in) = 1 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 S. (in) = 4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 n = 1 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 t (in) = 1 /4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of rows = 4.5 <-- CALCULATED from WQ Depth and row spacing • round to lowest whole number = 4 <-- INPUT from above cell POND 2 Project: 110-006 By: ATC STORAGE & OUTLET BASIN AREA = 9.900 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 36.30 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO= 0.3630 <--CALCULATED WQCV (watershed inches) = 0.170 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.168 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WO Depth (ft) = 2.250 <-- INPUT from stage -storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in2) = 0.365 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING dia (in) = 11/16 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 S, (in) = 4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 n = 1 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 t (In) = 1/4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of rows = 6.75001 <-- CALCULATED from WC Depth and row spacing ' round to lowest whole -number = 6 <-- INPUT from above cell WATER QUALITY POND 3 Project: 110-006 By: ATC REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS: BASIN AREA = 2.900 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 37.40 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = 0.3740 <-- CALCULATED WOCV (watershed inches) = 0.173 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WOCV (ac-ft) = 0.050 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WO Depth (ft) = 1.500 <-- INPUT from stage -storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in2) = 0.193 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 \R PERFORATION SIZING dia (in) = 1 /2 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 S. (in) = 3 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 n = 1 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 t (in) = 1 /4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of rows = 4.5 <-- CALCULATED from WO Depth and row spacing round to lowest whole -number = 4 <-- INPUT from above cell WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS POND 4 Project: 110-006 By: ATC Date: 4/1 /06 REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS: BASIN AREA = 8.700 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 29.20 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO= 0.2920 <--CALCULATED WOCV (watershed inches) = 0.149 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.130 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WQ Depth (ft) = 1.750 <-- INPUT from stage -storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in2) = 0.399 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING: dia (in) = 3/4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 S. (in) = 4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 n = 1 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 t (in) = 1/4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of rows = 5.25001 <-- CALCULATED from WQ Depth and row spacing • round to lowest whole -number = 5 <-- INPUT from above cell CALCULA POND 5 Project: 110-006 BV: ATC STORAGE & OUTLET BASIN AREA = 1.600 <-- INPUT from impervious cales BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 17.30 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = 0.1730 <-- CALCULATED WQCV (watershed inches) = 0.104 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.017 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WO Depth (ft) = 1.500 <-- INPUT from stage -storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in2) = 0.064 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING dia (in) = 1/4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 S. (in) = 4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 n = 1 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 t (in) = 1/4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of rows = 4.5 <-- CALCULATED from WO Depth and row spacing ' round to lowest whole -number = 4 <-- INPUT from above cell POND DESIGN ject: 110-006 ATC REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS BASIN AREA = 1.700 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 8.30 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = 0.0830 <-- CALCULATED WQCV (watershed inches) = 0.057 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.010 <-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WO Depth (ft) = 1.000 <-- INPUT from stage -storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (ins) = 0.073 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING dia (In) = 5/16 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 Sc (in) = 4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 n = 1 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 t (in) = 1/4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 number of rows = 3 <-- CALCULATED from WO Depth and row spacing ' round to lowest whole -number = 3 <-- INPUT from above cell Appendix �|�f£ aeam|eaaa § �f,/£ aaa§aea■a ... ;�.�. ` ®® §! !J 2 | f E zRam■am■; LC)k 7-0 5$�7■##Rm LU IL mm■¥885?8 .ui.� - ..id. ee§6 LLI 0|!| Lu a ■ 2 \ N-NMNN-N § LL Al § y 9¥¥¥¥kk¥k 000,,,000 `|k® ■■#■wama■ k ` 0 ! . I ®!§!2§|2| §P !- 22ec : 3:30 kk |k||k7| Appendix K 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 McClelland's Creek PD and PLD Erosion Control Cost Estimate Project Number: I I O-00G Location: Fort Collins, CO Date: July 27, 2000 Total Acres: 38,1 Estimated Unit Total EROSION CONTROL MEASURE Units Quantity Price Price Inlet Filters each 12 $100.00 $1 ,200.00 Silt Fencing L.F. 1 770 $ 1 .30 $2,301 .00 Sediment Trap each G $75.00 $450.00 Straw Bale Dikes each 9 $50.00 $450.00 Vehicle Tracking Control Pads each 3 $200.00 $GOO.00 TOTAL = $5, 001. 00 AMOUNT OF SECURITY = 1.5 x $5,001 .00 = TOTAL = $7,501 .50 - OR - COST TO VEGETATE: TOTAL ACRES x ($725/acre) x 1.5 = TOTAL = $41 ,433.75 (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) REQUIRED AMOUNT OF SECURITY = $41,433.75 RAINFALL PERFORMANCE STANDARD EVALUATION STnunean FnPKA e PROJECT: 110-006 MAJOR BA51N: All Areas CALCULATED BY: ATC TOTAL BA51N AREA (Ab) : 35. 100 acres DATE: 7/27/06 DEVELOPED SUB43A51N ERODIBIUTY ZONE b `(acres) Lab (ft) A., x L,b ..rb - M A., x S,b (Pt) ,� 6"" M : 'PS MY 1a MODERATE 2.92 770.0 2251.2 0.99 2.89 1b MODERATE 2.31 700.0 1617.3 1.03 2.38 1c MODERATE 1.45 115.0 166.8 6.9E 10.09 td MODERATE 2.75 730.0 2007.2 0.90 2.49 1e MODERATE 2.90 740.0 2144.5 0.81 2.35 2a MODERATE 2.85 205.0 554.3 1.61 4.59 2b MODERATE 1.24 500.0 620.0 1.24 1.54 2c MODERATE 2.07 445.0 921.1 1.82 3.77 2d MODERATE 3.73 440.0 1641.4 1.68 6.27 3a MODERATE 1.73 330.0 569.E 2.00 3.45 3b MODERATE 1.20 825.0 986.1 1.01 1. 00 4a MODERATE 1.96 540.0 1057.E 2.04 3.99 4b MODERATE 2.20 690.0 1519.9 I.I6 2.55 4c MODERATE 2.89 490.0 1415.6 2.24 6.49 4d MODERATE 1.64 615.0 1007.E 1.19 1.94 5a MODERATE 1.59 310.0 492.8 1.74 2.77 6a MODERATE 1.18 385.0 452.9 1.64 1.93 6b MODERATE 0.49 65.0 31.8 12.31 6.03 7a MODERATE 2.78 105.0 289.8 5.57 23.6E TOTAL 39.8497 . 19777.9 90.37.. 496:.. 2.27 1 813 Lb (Lab x Lab / From Table 5.1 `4b Length 510pe P5 400 2 80.3 496 2.27 81.2632 500 2.5 81.3 PS (dunng construction) = 81 .3 (Fw Table 5.1) P5 (after construction) = 95.E n...,.i o-m __ L (Sab x Lab Sb A b 2251.19 2.88565 1617.2E 2.37639 166.832 10.0919 2007.22 2.48595 2144.52 2.34973 584.25 4.5878 619.995 1.53759 921.146 3.7678E I G41 .39 6.27392 569.583 3.45202 986.13E 1.2014 1057.E 3.98957 1519.88 2.55389 1415.85 6.486E IO07.65 1.94453 492.833 2.7693 452,932 1.92509 31,8449 6.02981 289.799 23.657 EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS QTAmnAPrf Fl1DEA R PROJECT: 1 10-006 MAJOR BASIN: All Areas CALCULATED BY: ATC TOTAL BA51N AREA (Ab) : 35. 100 acres DATE: 7/27/06 CONSTRUCTION PROCESS: Durin EROSION ,CONTROL METHOD C-FACTOR VALUE P-FACTOR VALUE COMMENT , Sediment Basin / Trap 1.00 0.50 all drain basins Bare Soil: Rou h Irrecjular Surface 0.90 1.00 all lots Straw Bale Barrier 1.00 0.80 upstream of culverts and downstream Curb Sock Inlet Filter 1.00 0.80 at all inlets A5pha / Concrete Pavement 0.01 1.00 all roads, parkinq lots, walks, etc. Erosion Control Mats / Blankets 0.10 1.00 not applirable. Sift Fence Barrier 1.00 0.50 alon roe ndary Temporary Ve etation / Cover Crops 0.45 1.00 disturbed areas ' Sod Grass 0.01 1.00 landscaped areas Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (From Table 5.2) 0.17 1.00 disturbed areas MAJOR BASIN. P5 (96).. ,5UB-BASIN -AREA (acres) .: CALCULATIONS... ♦. All Areas 81.3 38,100 PLAN INTENT: see Temporary Erosion Control Plan Impervious 13.250 Roads: Walks: all impervious areas have been grouped together Parkin : Pervious 24.850 Temp Vecg all pervious areas have been grouped together Bare Soil Cat = 0.35 P � = 0.38 EFF = 86.7% •-�-.. ... .� , ....0 vm niy wu��, u,.eivn ��. me nurw arc enu;uVe EQUATIONS: C, _I(�xC,) Pm,=PixPzxP;... EFF=[1—(CxP)]x100 A b i Appendix L i I E1101nEEffrIG, IFIC 8100 S. Akron Street, Suite 300 1 1 1 Planning e 1 Design �r Management 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fax (303)-221-4019 August 1, 2007 Ms. Susan Hayes City of Fort Collins Utilities Department 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: McClellands Creek Floodplain Evaluation ICON Project No. 07-026-MCA Dear Susan: Centennial, CO 80112 - Phone (303) 221-080 ICON Engineering is pleased to submit our findings for the McClellands Creek floodplain evaluation from Kechter Road to County Road 7. As part of our evaluation, we incorporated several sources of information provided by the City of Fort Collins. This information includes: the effective floodplain model from the 2003 Master Plan for McClellands Creek; the floodplain model from the McClellands Creek Footbridge at Staley Park and Zach Elementary School study; the floodplain model from the Final Drainage Study for McClellands Creek PD & PLD Second Filing; and survey information collected by the City of Fort Collins reflecting the recently constructed McClellands Creek PD & PLD development adjacent to Fossil Creek. The following letter report presents a summary of our evaluation and documents the proposed changes to the McClellands Creek 100-year floodplain. Location The McClellands Creek study area is located within the McClellands Creek Drainage Basin, in the City of Fort Collins. More specifically, the study reach begins at the southeast corner of the intersection of Cambridge Avenue and Kechter Road and extends along the south sides of Zach Elementary School and the future site for the McClellands Creek PD & PLD Second Filing development, a distance of approximately 0.5 miles. The study area is shown in Figure 1. I Previous Studies Figure 1. Project Location Map ' McClellands Creek has undergone various changes over the past four years. Construction of Zach tElementary School, the McClellands Creek PD & PLD development, and pedestrian trails and crossings have been the biggest influence in the project area. Previous studies and data collected reflecting existing and proposed changes along McClellands Creek are described in detail below. McClellands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update [March 20031 ' The McClellands Creek Master Drainage Plan Update was ,completed by ICON Engineering, Inc. in March 2003. The report originally identified discharges and 100=year floodplain limits for McClellands Creek in the vicinity of this project. The report also provided an effective HEC-RAS model that was used for this project, as well as the updates described below. McClellands Creek Footbridge at Staley Park and Zach Elementary School [April 20061 ' The McClellands Creek Footbridge at Staley Park and Zach Elementary School study was completed by Anderson Consulting Engineers in April 2006. New topography and channel cross-section surveying was ' completed as part of this study. The effective HEC- RAS hydraulic model, developed as part of -the Master Plan, was updated to reflect development of the Zach Elementary School site and construction of a pedestrian trail and footbridge along the south side of the school property. Cross Sections 2867, 3260, ' 3317, 3343, 3609, and 3847 were added to the effective hydraulic model. Results from this study show that construction of Zach Elementary School and the pedestrian trail and footbridge increased the 100- year water surface elevation by approximately 1.3-ft in the vicinity of the current project. Only minor floodplain changes resulted along McClellands Creek. ' Final Drainage Study for McClellands Creek PD & PLD [May 20071 The Final Drainage Study for McClellands Creek PD & PLD was completed by Northern Engineering in May 2007. Topographical surveying with 1-ft contour intervals was completed for the proposed 40-acre development site, located on the north side McClellands Creek, east of Zach Elementary School. The effective HEC-RAS hydraulic model, from the Master Plan, was updated to reflect existing conditions at the proposed development site as well as the proposed construction of the Spring Canyon Ditch diversion structure and adjacent pedestrian trail culvert crossing. Cross Sections 2395 and 2443 were added to the t effective hydraulic model to show proposed construction of the diversion structure. Cross Sections 1700, 2000, and 2350 were revised to reflect updated topography. The effective model used for this study did not include updates completed for the McClellands Creek Footbridge at Staley Park and Zach Elementary School study previously discussed. Results from this study show that construction of the proposed diversion structure and pedestrian trail increases the 100-year water surface elevation approximately 1.1- ft in the vicinity of the current project. City of Fort Collins Field Survev ' The City of Fort Collins completed surveys for new cross -sections along McClellands Creek in April and May of 2007. The new survey provides information for updating Cross Sections 2350 and 2867 and adding Cross Sections 2530 and 2672 to the effective hydraulic model. The survey data reflects current ' conditions within the McClellands Creek channel and the Spring Canyon Ditch. In addition, the survey provides existing site conditions for the recently constructed McClellands Creek PD & PLD residential development located along the south side of McClellands Creek. The new residential development includes construction of an earthen berm between the channel and residential properties and a detention pond facility. The intent of the earthen berm is to contain the McClellands Creek floodplain on the ' channel side of the berm and to provide protection for the adjacent structures. 2007 McClellands Creek Hydraulic Update ' In order to determine the proposed 100-year floodplain for McClellands Creek, ICON Engineering has combined the efforts of the sources described above into a single HEC-RAS hydraulic model. For the ' purposes of this evaluation, the existing conditions 100-year discharge was utilized through the project reach without modification from the Master Plan. The existing conditions 100-year discharge is 1489-cfs at Kechter Road and 1584-cfs at County Road 7. ' The final model developed as part of the McClellands Creek 'Footbridge at Staley Park and Zach Elementary School (Zack Elementary School) study, based on the as -constructed conditions, was used as ' the effective hydraulic model for this update. Information from the Final Drainage Study for McClellands Creek PD & PLD and recent City survey information was incorporated into the Zach Elementary School model to create an updated post project HEC-RAS model for McClellands Creek. The ' I updated model reflects both the existing and proposed development along McClellands Creek. As part of the hydraulic model update, ICON added and modified several cross sections for the ' McClellands Creek study area. Cross -sections 2350 and 2867 were changed and cross -sections 2530krnd 2672 were added to reflect the most recent City survey data and to show construction of the earthen berm adjacent to the McClellands Creek PD & PLD development. Cross -sections 2000 and 2395 were updated to reflect topography changes at the McClellands Creek PD & PLD residential development along the south side of the McClellands Creek channel. Cross-section 2443 was removed from the model and replaced with cross-section 2506 at the location of the proposed diversion structure and pedestrian trail crossing. Lastly, cross-section 2385 was added downstream of the future diversion structure and trail crossing project area. Summary and Results The results of the McClellands Creek hydraulic update are presented in Exhibit 1. It should be noted that topographic data was obtained from several sources and combined for this exhibit. In some locations, ' field survey elevations for channel cross sections do not match the topography shown. Floodplain delineation is based on recent survey data, instead of base mapping, where applicable. ' A summary of resulting water surface elevations, average channel velocities, and comparisons to the effective City of Fort Collins Master Plan, Zach Elementary School Study, and Drainage Study for the McClellands Creek PUD are presented in Table 1. 1 I 1 1 I Tahle L N1r ClPIInnrlc ('raab ra.,.rr „r,. rr„a.,.,, uo,...i., 100-Year Water Surface Sevation vv Cross Section "Difference in "'Average Channel Master Plan" McClellands Creek 'Effective ' Post Project PD & PLD Condition Condition: WSEL (ft) Velocity (fvs) 1350 4873.11 4873.11 4873.11 4873.11 0 2.28 1700 4874.54 4875.02 4874.53 4875.02 0.49 7.71 2000 4876.06 4876.59 4876.07 4876.59 0.52 2.77 2350 4877.38 4878.59 4877.38 4878.30 0.92 8.14 2385 4877.63 4679.96 4878. 00 4879.22 0.82 5.57 2395 4877.70 4880.35 4878.69 4880.27 1.58. 6.69 2424 4878.00 48 00.85 48 99.31 4880.67 1.36 - 2443 4878.18 4881.17 4879.44 4880.93 1.49 - 2500 4878.70 4881,32 4879.83 4881.72 1.89 2506 4878.77 4881.34 4879,88 4881.80 1.92 2530 4879.04 48 11.40 4880.08 4881.97 1.89 2672 4880.63 4881.78 4881- 4883.08 1.82 2750 4881.50 4681.99 48$1.91 4883.41 1.5 2867 4882.09 4882.41 4882.72 4883.69 0.97 M4.62 3260 4884.05 4883.81 4885.33 4885.09 -0.24 3317 4B84.34 4884.02 4885.52 4685.36 -0.16 3343 4884.47 4884.11 4885.66 4885.54 -0.12 3450 4885.00 4884.49 488581 4885.72 -0.09 3609 4885.75 4885.55 4886.12 4886.07 -0.05 4.26 3768 4886.50 4886.61 4886.26 4886.22 -0.04 6.03 3788 1 4886.50 4886.63 4886.30 4886.26 -0.04 8.50 3847 4886.73 4886.82 4886.77 4886.75 -0.02 5.04 4000 1 4887.31 1 4887.32 4887.01 4887.00 -0.01 6.10 -••--•• •� �....cyu,vacrn w um rusrrmleu[ uonomon as dewnbed by the McClellands Creek Footbridge at Staley Park and Zach Elementary School study completed by Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc., April 2006. " Difference in WSEL = Post Project Condition WSEL - Effective Condition WSEL Average channel velocity reported for Post Project Conditions Note: Interpolated values are shown in blue italics As shown in Table 1, the Post Project Condition 100-year water surface elevations will increase and decrease compared to the Master Plan conditions, the elevations presented in the Zach Elementary School study (Effective Condition), and the elevations shown in the McClellands Creek PD & PLD study. The maximum increase and decrease compared to the effective conditions is 1.92-feet and 0.24-feet respectively. The revised 100-year floodplain has been delineated and is shown along with the Master Plan 100-year floodplain on Exhibit 1. Additionally, it should be noted that several residential properties in the McClellands Creek PD & PLD development are protected by the earthen berm constructed along the channel. Results from the hydraulic model update indicate that there is approximately 0.2-ft of freeboard at the earthen berm during the existing conditions 100-year storm event. Failure of this berm has the potential to result in flooding of structures at these properties. We have enjoyed working with the City on this project. We have included a CD containing the post - project HEC-RAS model, pertinent AutoCAD files, and information used to develop the cross -sections for the various sources. Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns regarding the results of the analysis. Thank you very much. Sincerely, ICON Engineering, Inc. POOP .4p Aaron Bousselot, P.E. Project Engineer Craig D. Jacobson, P.E., CFM Project Manager ME O O KECHTER ROAD r---- ------------r---- ------------- -------------------- ost ' — - .. ......ac.-w.w._..a�..• w.IMMWI�.. \ All \ \ L\ 11 1 It! I a 0 1 K F I i COUNTY AGRICULTURE ROPD��3� ------ - 11�1 STORM auN —. NEG WIN I11 ♦ I r 1 `♦ IN ITII I _m WIN m Wi ` ♦ \\ ja _, \ I� ry N, N.N. min ♦ — RN AAV ONAA♦ ARE _ 1 Wool A 4 11 `-T \ LINE E 1 I _T r - ' _ a z 1 �, No II "WINNINNINNIN BOUNDARY _ _- 1 -i J _ _ 100 YEAR FLOODPIAI JJJ T -- - 1 1 1 \ STOflM f � _ ORNN ``I 1 a , I i ELE "� / V ♦ 1 , C I , u a L, 1 1 —i --- T �1 1 AMAN Nw AFID ARYSCHOOL -� `� IC , } -- x AND PARK SITE 1A\UN UP, Il "Now Wo '� " . \ ANSe \aaa rN TORN 4 i1 ` No AN 1L .� . �DRAY♦♦ i ---V I WIN DRAI w \ T' �AN D x WINN IAETIAION ND SETBACK - - \ `RmF+ ` ` w % < 1 ♦ ! I i0 BOUNDARY TEEA� -/ ASK NV AN10 6TORMWR so,10 INI WC •. COPPER SPRING DRIVE ` �. 4`, _^ IT -- - - AAPPROIC VMEFLANO 6TORM BOUNDARY DRAIN 3 CO LINE ' 1 1 A IN IN FOSSIL CAKE PU.D. EROSION ` - �1 ` ` AWN -f- FIFTH FILING BUFFER �\ - C I wl WETLAND SETBACK --_-_—�___ ` SWALE 5TO CONVEY STREET-' STORM DRAIN ® BOUNDARY \ e��FLONANDSAGKOFLOTRLOW LN'32 \ \\ ` TO MCCLELLANDS CREEK Al to COONSEEN\ Is SHAFT POND 3` It STORM DRAIN N1 ♦` LINE X STORM IXUIN I LINE p I -STORM DRAIN II I tLp�Y LINE B3 TEMPORARY CDLVERTI J I I I I III I I I I'1 I II I I I I GPE�� 1L T f PEA& ® NORTH RHO B Im 200 .%q F-< IN FEET ) Ina . ImR LEGEND: PROPOSED WATER MAIN ------~ •SING WATER MAN ✓HEROICS SEWER MAN - • CISTNG SEWER MAN EXISTING STORM ROWER - - - - PROPOSES STORM SEWER PROPOSED SWALE — PROPERTY BOUNDARY - - PROPOSED CONTOUR �. T"xC CONTOUR —ABN— — yFRODUCED CURB ! won MWOSED TIRE R PAST IA c NAI N NL IC p Pm� amt UppINAC{ BASIN LABEL IRWIN � T Z C1 $ ISM FsrGN POINT — 01 FLOW ANION Rollo y W , BASIN BRUNET m m Z SWNL/ OELI�E SHEET Z w DEFINITION �TA RUNOFF SWMAMI' TABLE ,f0.n 11Fn W La 1MNn RLY� =I" POINT BASING AREA OR) Ca OW, Go I 0.M (W ION 2% 05O 0.w 1I1 10" m1S IE 231 0.IN 0" 2R BS] T ;47VnsoIN S.m tc tc IA5 om 04 1,10 AW tE IU 1l5 Om 0]8 3m 1105Is :m O.m Is 1m ON on I fi O.T ITm Dm a N IN Owt SAN 1Bx 1I:I `IOCnmosvol wSEL IrcLnNs wrwv M. m 1e A 1.24 073 0.91 179 B.m 1c L 1.07 ON 0.91 110 940 1a Be 373 Om on 391 1214 Am M 173 041 0.AN 1 BA 3b ee 9BID1.Be 0m 0.m 1IS A9 9.SS Y As 1BB1 0 0...0 76 ].m AO 0 1.20 Om 0 2% 1.m oil 041 1 8A[ N AyC AM 1 om 0 1n 7AS SN 1 Se 0SK 0 I9e sm e 11 030 O 0B9 e10 ® m OAB 0 Si A] 1.m T. To x.]e Dv DA1 222 994 os1 os1 Dle o.n o.m D.n iAA FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CALL UTILITY NOTTIFICAMON CENTER Ol' COLORNED YOU IN NRUE1 IN LANAlL ONE HE UNCIFFINNOWDAMEDUTUEN LARIMERpCOLI ENGINEERING APPROVAL �W v.F City of Fort Collins, Colorado UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL APPRONED'city Fregummor '.xCCNED BY: mmy CHECKED BY: ZTECKED BY: er , .MECNED BY:� .CHECKED Sr. � <g $ i Nww E4 m 1Q1Q�� Sheet DR1 Of 62 Sheets