HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 03/27/2009Final Drainage and Erosion Contrc
Study for
Harmony Technology Park
Forth Filing
Fort Collins, Colorado
poorMTY OF
LLU46 UTLIMEW
rr
L
City of Ft. Collins Appro ed Plans
Approved By _
Date
Stantec
Final Drainage and Erosion Control
Study for
Harmony Technology Park
Forth Filing
Fort Collins, Colorado
Prepared for
MAV Development
303 Detroit Street, Suite 301
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104
Prepared by:
• Stantec Consulting, Inc.
209 South Meldrum
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
(970)482-5922
Stantec
Final
Drainage and Erosion Control Study
Harmony Technology Park
Forth Filing
Fort Collins, Colorado
June 25, 2008
1
Stantec Consulting Inc 1
' 209 South Meldrum Street
' Fort Collins CO 80521.2603
Tel: (970) 482-5922 Fax: (970) 482.6368
starrtec.com
1
/f
1
Stantec
1
1
1
1
Mr. Basil Hamdan
City of Fort Collins
Water Utilities--Stormwater
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
June 25, 2008
RE: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Harmony Technology Park Forth Filing
Dear Basil:
We are pleased to submit to you, for your review and approval, this Final Drainage and Erosion
Control Study for Harmony Technology Park Forth Filing. All computations within this study have
been completed in compliance with the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria.
We appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing this submittal. Please call if you have any
questions.
Respectfully,
Stantec
Prepared by:
Brad Kug Fer
Project Engineer
Manager
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DESCRIPTION
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. LOCATION
B. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
II. DRAINAGE BASINS
A. MAJOR BASIN DESCRIPTION
B. SUB -BASIN DESCRIPTION
III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
PAGE
1
1
1
I
A. REGULATIONS 2
B. DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA REFERENCE AND CONSTRAINTS 2
C. HYDROLOGICAL CRITERIA 2
D. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA 2
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A: GENERAL CONCEPT 3
B. SPECIFIC DETAILS 3-5
V. STORM WATER QUALITY
A. GENERAL CONCEPT 5
B. SPECIFIC DETAILS 5
VI. EROSION CONTROL
A. GENERAL CONCEPT 6
VII. CONCLUSIONS
A. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS 6
B. DRAINAGE CONCEPT 6
C. STORM WATER QUALITY 7
D. EROSION CONTROL CONCEPT 7
REFERENCES g
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX
PAGE
VICINITY MAP A
RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY B
FAA POND SIZING, WQCV, AND ORIFICE SIZING C
STORM DRAIN, INLET, SWALE, AND WEIR SIZING: D
EROSION CONTROL CALCULATIONS E
DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL PLAN DRAWINGS & DETAILS F
' FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL STUDY
FOR HARMONY TECHNOLOGY PARK 41h FILING
' FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
' A. Location
' The Harmony Technology Park 4`h Filing site is located south of Harmony Road and
east of Ziegler Road in southeastern Fort Collins, Colorado. The site is shown on the
Vicinity Map in Appendix A. More particularly, the site is situated in the northwest
' quarter of Section 4, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the Sixth P.M., City of
Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado.
' B. Description of Property
Harmony Technology Park (HTP), Fourth Filing consists of one lot, a drainage tract
' and the partial construction of both Technology Parkway and Timberwood Drive.
The development will consist of a three story office building and paved parking lot.
The majority of the property currently consists of fallow farmland with tall grass.
' vegetation. The site generally slopes in a southeasterly direction at approximately
0.5%-1.0%.
' Future development south and east of the proposed development will create building
lots and detention areas of similar type land use. .
' H. DRAINAGE BASINS
' A. Maior Basin Description
' The HTP Fourth Filing site lies within the McClellands Basin. The project drainage
is modeled in the East Harmony Portion of McClellands Creek Master Drainage Plan
(August 1999).
' B. Sub -Basin Description
' Historic drainage patterns on the subject site are in a southeasterly direction. The
anticipated off -site runoff from properties surrounding the HTP Fourth Filing will be
a portion of the existing HTP First Filing (Intel Site) and a small portion of Harmony
' Road.
I
III. DRAINAGE BASIN CRITERIA
'
A. Regulations
The City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria is being used for the "subject
'
site.
'
B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints
The criteria and constraints from The East Harmony Portion of McClellands Basin
100-Year Master Plan dated August 1999 by Icon Engineering will be utilized in this
'
Drainage Study. The Harmony Technology Park Fourth Filing site is currently being
utilized as irrigated fallow agricultural land.
'
C. Hydrologic Criteria
'
The Rational Method was used for determining surface runoff for the project site.
The 10-year and 100-year storm event criteria, obtained by the City of Fort Collins,
were used in calculating runoff values. These calculations and criteria are included in
'
Appendix B of this study.
The City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criteria requires detention of the 100-year
'
design storm event, with a 10-year historic release rate for this site. The allowable
release rate from the on -site detention pond is 0.5 cfs/acre for the 100-year event and
0.2 cfs/acre for the 10-year storm event, in accordance with the McClellands Master
Drainage Plan. The pond was sized utilizing MODSWMM and the input and output
data are included in HTP Master Drainage Study. The hydrologic analysis was
'
conducted for developed flows. The detention pond on the HTP Fourth filing will be
temporarily sized to account for more flow than the HTP Master Drainage Study.
Since only a portion of land is being developed from the HTP Master Drainage
'
Study, HTP Fourth Filing needs to account for flow that will be later diverted into
pond 600 when the site is developed. The pond was sized with the FAA Method and
a 1.22 multiplier to account for SWMM.
D. Hydraulic Criteria
' All calculations within this study have been prepared in accordance with the City of
Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criteria.
1 2
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
'
A. General Concept
The purpose of this study is to size the proposed detention pond and present general
'
drainage concepts for HTP Fourth Filing, for use when future development of the site
is reviewed. It is important to note that all storm infrastructure was designed for the
'
100-year storm.
Harmony Technology Park Fourth Filing has been divided into 10 basins. These
basins include the offsite drainage. (See the Drainage Exhibit in back pocket of this
'
study for locations). Runoff from these basins will be routed via curb and gutter,
swales and storm drains to the proposed detention facility. The detention pond outlet
structure will limit the discharge of collected stormwater to the 100-year historic rate
'
of 0.5 cfs/acre.
'
B. Specific Details
Basin 107
'
Basin 107 conveys overland, roof, and grass swale flows from a portion of the lot.
The roof flow will be captured and routed to STRM-F via 8" roof drains. The grass
swale will be diverted to a 15" nyloplast yard drain and is routed west and south to
'
design point 106 via 15" HDPE.
Basin 106-a
' Basin 106-a conveys overland, roof, and grass swale flows from a portion of the lot.
The roof flow will be captured and discharge to a 12" HDPE pipe. Overland and
' swale flow will be routed to a 8" nyloplast yard drain. Flows are then routed west to
design point 106.
' Basin 106
Basin 106 conveys overland and grass swale flows from a portion of the lot to a 18"
nyloplast yard drain and is routed to design point 105 via 18" pipe.
Basin 105
Basin 105 conveys overland and gutter flow from a portion of the parking lot to a
' Type C inlet. Here flows combine from the median underdrain in Technology
Parkway and basins 107-106. Flow is then routed south via 24" RCP pipe into Pond
101.
' Basin 104
Basin 104 conveys overland, gutter, and grass swale flows from a portion of parcel's
' parking lot to a Type C inlet and is routed to design point 103 via 18" RCP pipe.
3
IBasin 103
Basin 103 conveys. overland and gutter flow from a portion of Timberwood Drive to
' a 5' Type R inlet. Combined flow from basins 103 and 104 are routed to design
point 102 via 18" RCP pipe.
' Basin 102
Basin 102 conveys overland and gutter flow from a portion of Timberwood Drive to
a 5"Type R inlet. Here flows are combined with basins 103 and 104 and routed to
Pond 101 via 24" RCP pipe.
' Basin 101
Basin 101 containing Pond 101 will sheet flow to an outlet structure at the southwest
corner. Wetland type plantings will be incorporated in the pond landscaping instead
' of a concrete drainage pan. Cobble lined swales will be used to create a more natural
wetland feature.
' Basin 108
Basin 108 conveys overland and gutter flow from a portion of the parking lot to an
open channel at the east lot line. Flow is then routed to Pond 101 via a grass swale
' (Swale calculations can be found in Appendix D). The flow from Basin 108 will
temporarily be treated and released through Pond 101. Once development of the east
side of the lot is constructed the pond will be reconfigured to include a two pond
system as outlined in the HTP Master Drainage Study. Flows will be then routed into
Pond 600 (See HTP Master Drainage Study).
' Basin 109a
Basin 109a conveys street runoff via curb and gutter from a portion of Harmony
t Road, the west half of Technology Parkway and the existing Intel access. A
temporary swale at the south end of Technology Parkway will be constructed to
intercept flow and routed to design point 109 via swale.
'
Basin 109
Basin 109 conveys street runoff via curb and gutter from a portion of Harmony Road
and the east half of Technology Parkway. A temporary swale at the south end of
'
Technology Parkway will be constructed to intercept and route flow to Pond 101
along with the flows from basin 109a.
'
Detention Pond
Detention Pond 101 will be constructed as a detention pond with a total storage
'
capacity of approximately 3.36 acre-feet, exceeding the required volume of 2.84 acre-
feet including water quality. The release rate from Pond 101 will be approximately 5
cfs. An overflow spillway will be designed to spill at the 100 year water surface
'
elevation of 4914.00.
4
Ultimately the volume of Pond 101 will be decreased when Pond 600 is constructed
with HTP Fifth Filing. Controlled release from a water quality structure in Pond 101
will be routed via 18" RCP pipe and will discharge to the existing 21 inch RCP storm
pipe constructed with the HTP First Filing. When the south extension of Technology
Parkway is constructed to the south (with HTP Fifth Filing) a storm system will
' connect the 18" RCP and existing 21" RCP to the.30" storm pipe in Technology
Parkway constructed with HTP Third Filing Drainage Study. The release rate from
t the existing pond is 4.9 cfs as referenced in the HTP First Filing Site. The existing
21" pipe will have capacity to convey the additional 5 cfs from the developed HTP
Fourth Filing. Discharge will be to the existing ditch used for the 21" storm.
' SWMM Model
Detention is required and will be provided for the Harmony Technology Park
site. The HTP Site encompasses Harmony Technology Park Second Filing
'
which is broken down in three filings, HTP Third, Fourth, and Fifth Filings
(the Fifth Filing is a future Filing). Also the unplatted 40 acres to the west of
'
HTP Third Filing, and portions of Harmony Road, Lady Moon Drive, and Rock
Creek Drive. The detention for the site is a comprehensive plan that relays
storm water to six detention ponds. The coefficient used for the entire site is
0.80. The detention ponds were sized using MODSWMM model.
The SWMM models and data are located in Harmony Technology Park Site Master
'
Plan. (Stantec, May 2008)
' V. STORM WATER QUALITY
' A. General Concept
The State of Colorado requires Stormwater Management Plans as part of their permit
process. The Harmony Technology Park Fourth Filing site development is
anticipating construction beginning in June of 2008. Therefore this study has sought
to find various Best Management Practices for the treatment of storm water runoff
' that could be implemented in the construction phase of the project.
B. Specific Details
1 Best Management Practices (BMP) for the treatment of storm water runoff has
been incorporated into the design for this project. This includes extended
' detention, grass lined swales and wetland planting design. Also, the over
excavation of Pond 101 will serve as a sediment trap during construction.
VI. EROSION CONTROL
' A. General Concept
' Erosion and sedimentation will be controlled by on -site by use of wattles, silt fences,
straw bale check dams, and wetland vegetation in the detention pond. The measures
' are designed to limit the overall sediment yield increase due. to construction as
required by the City of Fort Collins (Erosion control calculations and effectiveness
calculations can be found in Appendix E).
' The Harmony Technology Park Fourth Filing site lies within the Moderate Rainfall
Erodibility Zone and the Moderate Wind Erodibility Zone per the City of Fort Collins
' zone maps. The potential exists for erosion problems during construction, and after
construction until the disturbed ground is re -vegetated or paved.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
' A. Compliance with Standards
All computations within this study have been completed in compliance with the City
' of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria. The City of Fort Collins Stormwater
Utility will not maintain the on -site storm drainage facilities within the Harmony
Technology Park Fourth Filing site. The owners of the Harmony Technology Park
' Fourth Filing site will maintain their on -site storm drainage facilities on a regular
basis.
' B. Drainage Concept
The proposed drainage concepts presented in this study and shown on the final utility
plans adequately provide for the transmission of developed on -site and off -site runoff
to the proposed detention pond. The on -site storm sewer system will provide for the
' developed flows to reach the proposed detention pond. The size, location and release
rate of the pond will allow the Harmony Technology Park Fourth Filing site to
develop in conformance with the McClellands Basin Drainage Master Planning
concepts accepted by the City of Fort Collins.
If groundwater is encountered at the time of construction, a Colorado Department of
Health Construction Dewatering Permit will be required.
1 6
C. Storm Water Ouali
The sediment basin traps proposed within the detention pond is an excellent way to
allow storm water pollutants an opportunity to be filtered out of the storm water as
the storm water carries the pollutants across the site. Periodic maintenance may be
required to remove sediment deposits as they accumulate in the detention pond.
D. Erosion Control Concept
The proposed erosion control concepts adequately provide for the control of wind
and rainfall erosion from Harmony Technology Park Fourth Filing. Through the
construction of the proposed erosion control concepts, the City of Fort Collins
performance standards will be met. The proposed erosion control concepts
presented in this study and shown on the erosion control plan are in compliance
with the City of Fort Collins Erosion Control Criteria.
`/
REFERENCES
1. Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards by the City of Fort
Collins, Colorado, May 1984, Revised January 1997.
2. Erosion Control Reference Manual for Construction Sites by the City of Fort Collins,
Colorado, January 1991, Revised January 1997.
3. East Harmony Portion of McClellands Basin 100-Year Master Plan, by Icon Inc.,
Fort Collins, Colorado, August 1999.
0
R
I OR
7
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report, Harmony Technology Park 2°d Filing,
Prepared by JR Engineering, June 20, 2001.
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report, Harmony Technology Park Site Master
Plan, Prepared by Stantec Consulting, May 19, 2008.
The Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (published by the Urban Drainage and
Flood Control District — Denver, Colorado — June 2001).
Final Drainage and Project Development Report, Harmony Technology Park First
Filing, Prepared by Sear Brown Group, January 23, 1998.
I
1
u
1
1
0
H
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
APPENDIX A
1
F
L
1
1
1
�I
VICINITY MAP
1
J
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
VICINITY MAP
A
8T0NFVAVEt4 OR Mt-Yp'd ERnE$T' t UE
UNTO, PIR Y
DR Sl1 N 9i 4NE D R UAN
R L
Pa§,?O MinT4N RD �t.
raintlit Y�-tty�v' kNY d �. <t h e � _
ce»Nomtx
,r
LOCATION' HP T EC
PARK
OEM
HCC N
m
_ HARMONY ROAD _r
m
MT
IS
TRA.UT DG$ <
a r�c+s HARMONY
r A44Nfl TECACLOGY m k
PARK arc
R o w ROCK CREEK DAIVE
�BSNYATURYUR �+
ti m C 5'M71'+EU LN
1
COUNTYFAR W
ENG DIPPER OR
SCALE: 1" = 1500'
I
1
1
[1
1
1
1
1
[1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX B
1
I
1
1
1
1
n
�I
i
i
1
1
1
i
1
i
1
1
RATIONAL METHOD
HYDROLOGY
1
Rational Method
10 Year Design Storm
Harmony Technology Park Office Building
187710640
Routing Flow Time (tJ
Runoff
Street
Pipe
Design Point
Basins
t°
Length
Type
Slope
Velocity
Travel
pe
Travel
t°.
C
Intensity
Area
T 7re-cT-Uffie-r--To-faT
Runoff
Runoff
Runoff
Capacity
Design
Velocity
Slope
Manning's Roughness
Size
Capacity
Flow Depth
Capacity
Design
Flow
Norma
Flow Depth
Verage
Velocity
Location
(min)
(ft)
(a)
(%)
(ft/s)
(min)
(min)
(min)
(in/hr)
(ac)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(ft/s)
(ft/s)
N
"n"
(in)
(in)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(in)
ON
Remarks
101
101
19.7
-
0.0
19.7
0.32
2.76
2.16
1.91
0.00
1.91
102
102
5.0
-
0.0
5.0
0.82
4.87
0.28
1.13
0.00
1.13
103
103
5.0
-
0.0
5.0
0.84
4.87
0.33
1.34
0.00
1.34
104
104
7.0
-
0.0
7.0
0.76
4.35
0.56
1.84
0.00
1.84
105
105
10.1
-
0.0
10.1
0.75
3.77
1.46
4.11
0.00
4.11
106
106
8.8
-
0.0
8.8
0.32
3.99
0.09
0.12
0.00
0.12
106-a
106-a
5.0
-
0.0
5.0
0.81
4.87
0.28
1.12
0.00
1.12
107
107
5.0
-
0.0
5.0
0.72
4.87
0.48
1.69
0.00
1.69
108
108
.18.2
-
0.0
18.2
0.60
2.89
2.93
5.03
0.00
5.03
109
109
14.6
-
0.0
14.6
0.71
3.23
1.19
2.75
0.00
2.75
109a
109a
13.5
-
0.0
13.5
0.80
3.34
1.28
3.43
0.00
3.43
Routing
107
107
0.0
0.0
PA
0.5
1.3
0.0
5.0
0.72
4.87
0.48
11.69
0.00
1.69.
106
107,106
5.0
230.0
PA
0.5
1.3
2.9;
7.9
0.66
4.16
0.57
1.57
0.00
1.57
106-a
107,106, 106-a
7.9
10.0
, PA
0.5
1.3
0.1
8.0
0.71
4.14
0.86
2.51
0.00
2.51
105
107,106,106-a, 105
8.8
300.0
PA
0.5
1.3
3.7
12.5
0.72
3.44
2.63
5.05
0.00
5.05
Pond 101
107,106,106-a, 105
12.5
160.0
PA
0.5
1.3
2.0
14.5
0.72
3.24
2.03
4.75
0.00
4.75
104
104
0.0
'0.0
PA
0.5
1.3
0.0
7.0
0.76
4.35
0.56
1.84
0.00
1.84
103
104,103
7.0
15.0
PA
0.5
1.3
0.2
7.2
0.79
4.31
0.8&
3.00
0.00
3.00
102
104,103,102
7.2
45.0
PA
0.5
1.3
0.6
7.8
0.80
4.19
1.17.
3.89
0.00
3.89
Pond 101
7.8
50.0
PA
0.5
1.3
0.6
8.4
0.80
4.06
1.17
3.78
0.00
3.78Pond
101102
rl4,103,102
109
19 7
1 0
PA
0 2
0 8
0.0
19 7
0.64
2.76
9.77
17.37
0.00
17,37
Y.fi4lgrti'i�x.ik;.�b�.�..
Note:
a) Codes the channel type for velocity calculations.
PA = Paved, PL ='Pasture & Lawns, GW = Grassed Waterway
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Confidential
6/6/2008
I
Page 1
7
Rational Method
100 Year Design Storm
Harmony Technology Park Office Building
187710640
Routing
Flow
Time
(tj
Runoff
Street
Pipe
Design Point
Basins
Tc
Length
Type
Slope
Velocity
Travel
Pipe
Travel
tr
C
C'Cr
Intensity
Area
irec
Runoff
er
Runoff
o a
Runoff
Capacity
Design
Velocity
Slope
Manning's Roughness
Size
Capacityesign
Flow Depth
Capacity
Flow
orma
Flow Depth
verage
Velocity
Location
101
(min)
(ft)
(a)
(%)
(ftts)
(min)
(min)
(min)
(in/hr)
(ac)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(fus)
(ft/s)
(%)
"n"
(in)
(in)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(in)
(fus)
Remarks
101
18.3
-
0.0
18.3
0.32
0.40
5.87
2.16
5.08
0.00
5.08
-
102
102
5.0
0.0
5.0
0.82
1.00
9.95
0.28
2.83
0.00
2.83
103
103
5.0
-
0.0
5.0
0.84
1.00
9.95
0.33
3.28
0.00
3.28
104
104
5.0
-
0.0
5.0
0.76
0.95
9.95
0.56
5.25
0.00
5.25
105
105
5.0
0.0
5.0
0.75
0.93
9.95
1.46
13.56
0.00
13.56
106
106
7.9
0.0
7.9
0.32
0.40
8.48
0.09
0.31
0.00
0.31
106-a
106-a
5.0
-
0.0
5.0
0.81
1.00
9.95
0.28
2.84
0.00
2.84
107
107
5.0
-
0.0
5.0
0.72
0.91
9.95
0.48
4.32
0.00
4.32
108
108
14.3
-
0.0
14.3
0.60
0.74
6.66
2.93
14.51
0.00
14.51
109
109
11.2
-
0.0
11.2
0.71
0.89
7.35
1.19
7.82
0.00
7.82
109a
109a
10.4
--
0.0
10.4
0.80
1.00
7.61
1.28
9.76
0.00
9.76
Routing
107
107
0.0
0.0
PA
0.5
1.3
0.0
5.0
0.72
0.91
9.95
0.48
4.32
0.00
4.32
106
107,106
5.0
230.0
PA
0.5
1.3
2.9
7.9
0.66
0.82
8.50
0.57
4.00
0.00
4.00
106-a
107,106, 106-a
7.9
10.0
PA
0.5
1.3
0.1
8.0
0.71
0.89
8.45
0.86
6.42
0.00
6.42
105
107,106,106-a, 105
8.0
300.0
PA
0.5
1.3
3.7
11.7
0.72
0.90
7.22
2.03
13.25
0.00
13.25
Pond 101
107,106,106-a, 105
11.7
160.0
PA
0.5
1.3
2.0
13.7
0.72
0.90
6.77
2.03
12.41
0.00
12.41
104
104
0.0
0.0
PA
0.4
1.2
0.0
5.0
0.76
0.95
9.95
0.56
5.25
0.00
5.25
103
104,103
5.0
15.0
PA
0.4
1.2
0.2
5.2
0.79
0.99
9.83
0.88
8.57
0.00
8.57
102
104,103,102
5.0
45.0
PA
0.4
1.2
0.6
5.6
0.80
0.99
9.59
1.17
11.14
0.00
11.14
Pond 101
104,103,102
5.6
50.0
PA
0.4
1.2
0.7
6.3
0.80
0.99
9.21
1.17
10.71
0.00
10.71
Pond t01
102 109
18 3
T .0
PA
_0 2
0.8
0.0
18.4 10.6410.811
5.87 19.771
46.18 1
0.00 1
46.18
say
_
.�'M�bW }
Note:
a) Codes the channel type for velocity calculations.
PA = Paved, PL = Pasture & Lawns, GW = Grassed Waterway
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Confidential
6/6/2008
Page 1
Developed Weighted Runoff Coefficients
Harmony Technology Park Office Building
187710640
This sheet calculates the composite "C" values for the Rational Method.
101
0.95
0.25
94,276
2.16
9.428
0.22
10
90
102
0.95
0.25
12,396
0.28
10,016
0,23
81
19
103
0.95
0.25
14,354
0.33
12,000
0.28
84
16
104
0.95
0.25
24,180
0.56
17,644
0,41
73
27
105
0.95
0,25
63,482
1.46
45.158
1,04
71
29
106
0.95
0.25
4,016
0.09
402
0.01
10
90
106-a
0.95
0.25
12,413
0.28
9.930
0,23
80
20
107
0.95
0.25
20,861
0.48
14,154
0.32
68
32
108
0.95
0,25
127.575
2.93
62,907
1.44
49
51
109
0.95
0.25
51,874
1,19
34,419
0,79
66
34
1093
0.95
0,25
55,971
1.28
43,915
1,01
78
22
SITE
0.95
0.25.
481.397
11.05
'259.972P
5.97
r, M.n
40
0,82
0.84
0.76
0.75
0.32
0,81
0.72
0,60
0.71
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Confidential 6/6/2008 Page 1
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
10 year design storm
Harmony Technology Park Office Building
187710640
1.87(l.1 - CCr ),iD
t; =_ S0.333
G= ti+tL
Cr = 1.00
SUB -BASIN DATA
INITIAL/OVERLAND TIME
TRAVEL TIME
FINAL
REMARKS
BASIN AREA
C
LENGTH
SLOPE
ti
LENGTH
CHANNEL
SLOPE
VELOCITY
ti
4
NO. (ac)
(ft)
N
(min)
(ft)
TYPE(a)
N
(ft/s)
(min)
(min)
1 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
12
13
101 2.16
0.32
135
2
13.5
410
GW
0.5
1.09
6.3
19.7
102 0.28
0.82
35
2
2.5
200
PA
0.6
1.47
2.3
5.0
103 0.33
0.84
35
2
2.3
200
PA
0.6
1.47
2.3
5.0
104 0.56
0.76
170
2
6.6
35
PA
0.5
1.34
0.4
7.0
105 1.46
0.75
370
2
10.1
1
PA
0.5
1.34
0.0
10.1
106 0.09
0.32
50
2
8.2
75
GW
2
2.18
0.6
8.8
106-a 0.28
0.81
75
2
3.7
1
GW
3
2.67
0.0
5.0
107 0.48
0.72
35
2
3.3
105
GW
2
2.18
0.8
5.0
108 2.93
0.60
310
2
13.2
325
GW
0.5
1.09
5.0
18.2
109 1.19
0.71
160
2
7.2
590
PA
0.5
1.34
7.4
14.6
109a 1.2U8
110
2
4.7
705
PA
0.5
1.34
8.8
13.5
��+,,{0..8800
1 =RD :M:SN
`_#
... Y' .sY.":..:,.
. - - .a„ .,n _' .. 3�i. . .7itY
y
:t �, ,
- t-r' �i..'�' y. y'% 51wr
'r'L
Note:
a) Codes the channel type for velocity calculations.
PA = Paved, PL = Pasture 8 Lawns, GW = Grassed Waterway
c
5
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Confidential
6/6/2008
Page 1
0
1
1
1
1
1
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
100 year design storm
Harmony Technology Park Office Building
187710640
1.87(t.1- CCr),ID
tr = Sa 3�
G = ti+tL
Cr = 1.25
SUB -BASIN DATA
INITIAUOVERLAND TIME
TRAVEL TIME
FINAL
REMARKS
BASIN AREA
C
LENGTH
SLOPE
t;
LENGTH CHANNEL
SLOPE
VELOCITY
. tL
tc
NO. (ac)
(ft)
M
(min)
(ft)
TYPE(a)
M
(ft/s)
(min)
(min)
1 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
12
13
101 2.16
0.32
135
2.0
12.1
410
GW
0.5
1.09
6.3
18.3
102 0.28
0.82
35
2.0
0.9
200
PA
0.6
1.47
2.3
5.0
103 0.33
0.84
35
2.0
0.9
200
PA
0.6
1.47
2.3
5.0
104 0.56
0.76
170
2.0
2.9
35
PA
0.5
1.34
0.4
5.0
105 1.46
0.75
370
2.0
4.7
1
PA
0.5
1.34
0.0
5.0
106 0.09
0.32
50
2.0
7.3
75
GW
2.0
2.18
0.6
7.9
106-a 0.28
0.81
75
2.0
1.3
1
GW
3.0
2.67
0.0
5.0
107 0.48
0.72
35
2.0
1.7
105
GW
2.0
2.18
0.8
5.0
108 2.93
0.60
310
2.0
9.3
325
GW
0.5
1.09
5.0 i
14.3
109 1.19
0.71
160
2.0 -
3.9
590
PA
0.5
1.34
7.4
11.2
109a 1.28
0.80
110
2.0.
1.6
705
PA
0.5
1.34
8.8
10.4
Note:
a) Codes the channel type for velocity calculations.
PA = Paved, PL = Pasture & Lawns, GW = Grassed Waterway
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Confidential
6/6/2008
Page 1
I
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
i
1
0
i
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX C
1
I
1
11
7
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
FAA POND SIZING, WQCV,
AND ORIFICE SIZING
1
tmp#71.txt
POND #101
#units=Elevation,ft,Area,ft2,volume,acft,volume,acft
# Elev
Area
Cumml Avg Cumml
conic
# ft
ft2
acft acft
4914.0000
73594.5946
3.4339
3.3624
4913.0000
55809.9596
1.9486
1.8818
4912.0000
42040.9840
0.8254
0.7623
4911.0000
14648.3697
0.1747
0.1386
4910.0000
571.9471
0.0000
0.0000
n
Page 1
DETENTION POND SIZING BY FAA METHOD
Developed by
Civil engineering Dept., University of Colorado
Supported by Denver Metro Cities/Counties Pool Fund Study
Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Colorado
Storm:100-yr
MAV Development
Pond 101
BASIN NUMBERS: AREAS (Acres):
11.05
TOTAL: 11.05
BASIN AREA 11.05 AC
RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 0.85
RETURN PERIOD 100 YR
INTENSITY (IN/HR)
DURATION 5 10 20
INTENSITY 9.95 7.72 5.6
ALLOW RELEASE RATE 5.00 CFS
Reduction Factor 1.00
Adjusted Release Rate 5.00 CFS
Other (cfs): 0.00 (Total "other" inflow to this pond)
30 40 50 60 80 100
4.52 3.74 3.23 2.86 2.38 2.06
Max Vol '`2030`ace-feetl,
;-E
RAIN DURATIO RAINFALL INTENSITY INFLOW
OUTFLOW REQ'D
VOL
VOL
STORAGE
min
inch/hr
AC -FT
AC -FT
AC -FT
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
9.95
0.65
0.03
0.61
10
7.72
1.00
0.07
0.93
15
6.66
1.30
0.10
1.19
20
5.60
1.45
0.14
1.31
25
5.06
1.64
0.17
1.47
30
4.52
1.76
0.21
1.55
35
4.13
1.87
0.24
- 1.63
40
3.74
1.94
0.28
1.66
45
3.49
2.03
0.31
1.72
50
3.23
2.09
0.35
1.75
55
3.05
2.17
0.38
1.79
60
2.86
2.23
0.42
1.81
70
2.62
2.38
0.49
1.89
80
2.38
2.47
0.56
1.91
90
2.22
2.59
0.63
1.97
100
2.06
2.67
0.69
1.98
110
1.95
2.78
0.76
2.02
120
1.84
2.86
0.83
2.03 ✓
130
1.66
2.79
0.90
1.89
140
1.62
2.94
0.97
1.97
150
1.51
2.94
1.04
1.90
160
1.37
2.83
1.11
1.72
170
1.34
2.95
1.18
1.77
180
1.25
2.92
1.25
1.67
120 150 180
1.84 1.51 1.25
Pond Vol = 2.477
WQCV= 0.36
Total Pond
Volume using
1.22
Multiplier 2.84
Harmony Technology Park
Pond 101 Orifice Calculation
'
100-Year Pond Orifice Plate
Basic Equation:
Q=Cd9A•(2g•(h1-h2))0.5
1
Revised Equation:
A=Q/(Cd • (2g • (h1 - h2 ))0.5
STANTEC
187710640
Input
Basin Area =
11.05
Contributing Drainage Area
Cd=
0.65
Input
g=
32.20 ft/s2
Gravitational Constant
h1=
4914.00
100 year WSEL
'
h2=
4910.00
Invert Elevation of Pipe
Q =
5.00 cfs
Input
Output
A=
0.48 ft'
Calculated orifice area
*r—
4.69
Calculated radius (inches)
* Orifice opening bottom
aligned with invert
of pipe, difference in
head on the orifice measured from the.centerline of the orifice opening
Orifice Dia. = 9.3741
inches
0.7812
feet
7
u�
m
1
O
N
O
00 00
V 00
O
O
O C)
O O LO
V i.
Gi N
> N
} Cl) Q
O 1�
o
2 ..
3 = w
00E 0
j
0 U
w
OO't MOO
O O LO cM 0
O N M -4 LO
'•
77
O
1�'
1-
7;t.
O V co co O
CO
3 C V
O t.- 00 Cl?
M
OD
m
0 0 0 M
O
N
U to
im
O V N N 00
to
O O V
Cl?
CM
O Lvp
'IT 00 co co rl
ono.-00
..
o n N N O
1
N , N O
�
Q.M.
cM- M CD0000 000
O
:--
O M 0 N co
O O O
00 O LO
N
O
d
�'- V -I'�
, 0)
1
N
$
B O O 00 m
M
M
Q
LO
It r,
N
LO
COLO
LO
C $.'
O N M �t
M
13
�-
M
to
o
>
O c- N M V
M
0
N •..
rn rn rn rn rn
�
OM
r-
w
v v v� v
rn
rn
v
v
a�
0
o
X
X
X
X
Q
Q
Q
Q
U)
`c
CD
T
O.:
O
O
Oi .
....
O
.r'
O'
O
O
O
Cl
00
O
O
O
w
O
O
O
O
d
w
O
O
O
O
y
0
0
0
0
V
�a
7
r
Cl
CD
OD
O
0
Cl
O
fV
O
O
O
O
d
O)
d
p
to
to
Ln
l(j
N
3
S
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
d
?� yoo
yoo
O p
O
O
p
0
0
* 3
rn
rn
3
rn
rn
0
Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) - Sedimentation Facility
Sheet 1 of 3
Designer:
Brad Kugler
Company:
Stantec
Date:
June 6, 2008
Project:
Harmony Tech Park
Location:
Fort Collins (Pond 101)
1. Basin Storage Volume
A) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = la / 100)
B) Contributing Watershed Area (Area)
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV)
(WQCV =1.0-(0.91 *13-1.19'IZ+0.78.1))
D) Design Volume: Vol = (WQCV / 12) " Area' 1.2
la =
i =
Area =
WQCV =
Vol =
80.00
0.80
11.05
0.33
0.363 .
%
acres
watershed inches
acre-feet
2. Outlet Works
A) Outlet Type (Check One)
x
Orifice Plate
Perforated Riser Pipe
Other:
B) Depth at Outlet Above Lowest Perforation (H)
H =
1.40
feet
C) Required Maximum Outlet Area per Row, (Ao)
Ao =
1.29
square inches
D) Perforation Dimensions (enter one only):
i) Circular Perforation Diameter OR
D =
1.2500
inches, OR
ii) 2" Height Rectangular Perforation Width
W =
inches
E) Number of Columns (nc, See Table 6a-1 For Maximum)
nc =
1
number
F) Actual Design Outlet Area per Row (Ao)
A. =
1.23
square inches
G) Number of Rows (nr)
nr =
4
number
H) Total Outlet Area (At)
Aot =
5.15
square inches
3. Trash Rack
A) Needed Open Area: A, = 0.5 ' (Figure 7 Value) * Aot
At =
170
square inches
B) Type of Outlet Opening (Check One)
x
< 2" Diameter Round
2" High Rectangular
Other:
C) For 2", or Smaller, Round Opening (Ref.: Figure 6a):
i) Width of Trash Rack and Concrete Opening (W�wc)
from Table 6a-1
Wcoot -
9
inches
ii) Height of Trash Rack Screen (HTR)
HTR =
41
inches
WQCV Pond 101.xis. EDB
Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) - Sedimentation Facility
Sheet 2 of 3
Designer:
Brad Kugler
Company:
Stantec
Date:
June 6, 2008
Project:
Harmony Tech Park
Location:
Fort Collins (Pond 101)
iii) Type of Screen (Based on Depth H), Describe if "Other"
x
S.S. #93 VEE Wire (US Filter)
Other:
iv) Screen Opening Slot Dimension, Describe if "Other"
x
0.139" (US Filter)
Other:
v) Spacing of Support Rod (O.C.)
0.75
inches
Type and Size of Support Rod (Ref.: Table 6a-2)
#156 VEE
vi) Type and Size of Holding Frame (Ref.: Table 6a-2)
3/8 in. x 1.0 in. flat bar
D) For 2" High Rectangular Opening (Refer to Figure 6b):
1) Width of Rectangular Opening (W)
W =
inches
ii) Width of Perforated Plate Opening (W.on. = W + 12")
Wconc =
inches
iii) Width of Trashrack Opening (Wopening) from Table 6b-1
Wopening =
Inches
iv) Height of Trash Rack Screen (HTR)
HTR =
inches
v) Type of Screen (based on depth H) (Describe if "Other")
KlempT" KPP Series Aluminum
Other:
vi) Cross -bar Spacing (Based•on Table 6b-1, KlempT" KPP
inches
Grating). Describe if "Other"
Other:
vii) Minimum Bearing Bar Size (KlempTM Series, Table 6b-2)
(Based on depth of WQCV surcharge
4. Detention Basin length to width ratio (L/W)
5 Pre -sedimentation Forebay Basin - Enter design values
A) Volume (5 to 10% of the Design Volume in 1 D) acre-feet
B) Surface Area acres
C) Connector Pipe Diameter inches
(Size to drain this volume in 5-minutes under inlet control)
D) Paved/Hard Bottom and Sides yes/no
WQCV Pond 101.xls. EDB
Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) - Sedimentation Facility
Sheet 3 of 3
Designer: Brad Kugler
Company: Stantec
Date: June 6, 2008
Project: Harmony Tech Park
Location: Fort Collins (Pond 101)
6. Two -Stage Design
A) Top Stage (DWo = 2' Minimum)
DWo =
feet
Storage=
acre-feet
B) Bottom Stage (DBs = DWo+ 1.5' Minimum, DWo+ 3.0' Maximum,
DBS =
feet
Storage = 5% to 15% of Total WQCV)
Storage=
acre-feet
Surf. Area=
acres
C) Micro Pool (Minimum Depth = the Larger of
Depth=
feet
0.5 " Top Stage Depth or 2.5 Feet)
Storage=
acre-feet
Surf. Area=
acres
D) Total Volume: Vol,,, = Storage from 5A + 6A + 6B
Volt., =
acre-feet
Must be > Design Volume in 1 D
7. Basin Side Slopes (Z, horizontal distance per unit vertical)
Z =
(horizontal/vertical)
Minimum Z = 4, Flatter Preferred
8. Dam Embankment Side Slopes (Z, horizontal distance)
Z =
4.00 (horizontal/vertical)
per unit vertical) Minimum Z = 3, Flatter Preferred
9. Vegetation (Check the method or describe "Other")
Native Grass
Irrigated Turf Grass
Other:
Notes:
WQCV Pond 101.x1s. EDB
I
[J
1
1
1
i
1
0
1
1
1
1
H
1
i
1
1
APPENDIX D
1
I
11
1
1
i
STORM DRAIN, INLET, SWALE
1 AND WEIR SIZING
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
i
1
0 Z- M - C
STTN - E3
a I s ,� 2eP
z
tg �� Rc ?
F
5 7 ri► — E �
aN . 2ce
a.-t" f- 6S
3
I
' NeoUDS Results Summary
Project Title: Harmony Technology Park 41h Filing
Project Description: STRM-E
Output Created On: 6/6/2008 at 2:46:14 PM
Using NeoUDSewer Version 1.5.
Rainfall Intensity Formula Used.
Return Period of Flood is 100 Years.
ISummary of Manhole Hydraulics
fl
r
I
i
I
B
..............................................
Manhole
-----
Contributing
-- ....... _..._................._
Rainfall.)
I Duration!
........... ... -
Rainfall
Intensity
- - - - - - --
Design
Peak
----- ....... ............ ............................................. .... _ ... ... ....... _.._._._.__._._.._
Ground I Water
Comments j
ID #
Area * C
((Minutes):I(Inch/Hour)
Flow :Elevation
(CFS)
;Elevation
(Feet) (Feet)
1
10.8!
(Surface
4913.18 4913.63 (Water
Present
-11.2
�..__4915.29 j 4913.53 (—_ -- - -
i 3
I
(
�----.._._.-..._.......__..-�..-...___.8.6
4915.29 1 4913.73 �--------------------------
i ...4
�"--
[ 5.2
4914.50 4914.03
I
Summary of Sewer Hydraulics
Note: The given depth to flow ratio is 0.9.
Manhole ID Number j�Calculated
Suggested Existing
Diameter
Diameter Diameter
Sewer
ID #
Sewer (Rise)
Upstream Downstream Sewer
(Inches)
(Rise) (Rise) Width
(Inches) (Inches) (FT)
(FT)
i . (p'I) (FT)
j 1
2 --�
1IRound;
21.91u
241
24
N/A
j 2
r 3
(--- 2-- Round
8'
2iF
18
N/A
3
�- — 4---1—
3 IRound;
16.5
181
�— 18
N/A
SRound and arch sewers are measured in inches.
Box sewers are measured in feet.
Calculated diameter was determined by sewer hydraulic capacity.
I
Suggested diameter was rounded up to the nearest commercially available size
All hydraulics where calculated using the existing parameters.
If sewer was sized mathematically, the suggested diameter was used for hydraulic
calculations.
I -- ............. ..
Sewer
i
Desi n Full
Normal[Ve
Normal
Critical'
Critical Full
Flow Flow
CFS) (CFS)
Depth
(Feet)
locity
(FPS)
Depth
(Feet)
Velocity,!VelocityFroudeCID
(FPS) j (FPS)
(Number,1..33(.........................5.0
�- -1.20
�- - ... 5..7
(...........................316'
1...._.._..........0.82:
f -
2
_ _.-
8 6
.._..-_............L..........-...._.._.r.........._..--
6 7
-6.7F-1.00f
--
1 50
-...._.
I- --- 4.9
--4.2,I
L.._._.._..._...1.13
--
.................-----
(..........................6.01
-- -
4.9�
---3.0�
_ -N/A
--
f........
3
� 5.2�
0.881
4.9(
0.78.i.._.
rA
Froude number = 0 indicated that a pressured flow occurs.
I
I
I
1
r
11
I
Summary of Sewer Design Information
Invert Elevation I Buried Depth
Slope Upstream Downstream 'Downstream
Sewer ID % Feet Feet Feet(Feet)Comment
1 ( 0.40 4911.37 4911 21 1.92 -0.03 Isewer Too Shallow
I 2 (0.40 ( 4911.56 (---------,4911.39 2.23 j 2.40,[ -----
-
3 6.40 4911.61. 4911.56 1.39 2.23. Sewer Too Shallow
Summary of Hydraulic Grade Line
Invert Elevation ) Water Elevation
Sewer Surcharged(
Sewer f Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream
ID # Length
Length
' (Feet) (Feet) (Feet) (Feet) Condition
Feet Feet
r l 1 40.971 40.97 ; 4911 7373 I 4911.21 [4913.53 4913.631 Pressured
2 41.33 41.331F 4911.56 4911.39 4-9-Ii 3 4913.53 Pressured
3 13.3 13.3 4911.61 4911.56 4914.03 4913.73 Pressured
I _.
1
I
1
I
1
1
i
I
i
1
1
1
Summary of Energy Grade Line
e
Upstream F
� Downstream
Manhole Juncture Losses Manhole
Sewer: Manhole
ID # ID #
Energy
Elevation
(Feet)
Sewer
Friction
(Feet)
'Bend Lateral
Bend K I Loss Lateral K Loss
Coefficient (Feet); Coefficient (Feet)
Energy
Manhole lElevation
ID # (Feet)
................
1 2
4913.73
0.101
0.051 0.00i 0.00 '0.001
1 4913.63
— 2—I----..--------_.�..._
4914.10
r _0.27
--0. 0. -- _ 0.00 0.00
r......3..--j— -4 --
r 4914.16
L.------ 0.03
---------------0.25ir0.03i� 0.00 �.. .._..O.00
( 3 4914.10
Bend loss = Bend K * Flowing full vhead in sewer.
Lateral loss = Outflow full vhead - Junction Loss K * Inflow full vhead.
A friction loss of 0 means it was negligible or possible error due to jump.
Friction loss includes sewer invert drop at manhole.
Notice: Vhead denotes the velocity head of the full flow condition.
A minimum junction loss of 0.05 Feet would be introduced unless Lateral K is 0.
Friction loss was estimated by backwater curve computations.
1
5
gtTu-F3
I
I
LJ
'1
n
I
1.
NeoUDS Results Summary
Project Title: Harmony Technology Park 41h Filing
Project Description: STRM-F
Output Created On: 6/6/2008 at 2:51:26 PM
Using NeoUDSewer Version 1.5.
Rainfall Intensity Formula Used.
Return Period of Flood is 100 Years.
Summary of Manhole Hydraulics
;Manhole
ID #
Contributing
Area * C
Rainfall
Duration
(Minutes)
Rainfall
Intensity
(Inch/Hour)
Design.
Peak
Flow
(CFS )
Ground Water
Elevation (Elevation
(Feet) (Feet)
I
Comments;
1
^ISurface
1
12.4.
4912.88 4913.63
lWater
Present
2
1
13.21
4915.64 4913.81
j�-
3��—
(—�-
4.0
4919.07 4915.31i
4�
�—
�-
I 4.2F4920.761
4915.721
—.
IL �
�
4919.00 4916.48 I
...—.57
6
........_
64
4919.00 4914 99i!
---
r -
....
I 2.8
( 49. 661 491- j _..... - -
Summary of Sewer Hydraulics
' Note: The given depth to flow ratio is 0.9.
-- Manhole ID Number Calculated Suggested Existing
— Diameter Diameter Diameter
Sewer (Sewer.'; (Rise) ( (Rise) (Rise) Width
Upstream Downstream;
ID # iShape ! (Inches) ( (Inches) (Inches) (FT)
_..................(FT)..........._._.�._.... �� - (FT)....._......_..._ L _.....1........._L._ _......_..2._....--- I- --1_._._.-.. (Round 22.4 24 ' 24 Na
I I
3 4 3 Round l 14.5 R18 15 N/A
_ I
41 5 1 4 Round' 14.71 181
�_ 15; N/A.
' 1 5-(--- 6--jRround 12.6 18
! 12 N/A
1
r �6F 3--F- 6 R ri 14.3 18 8 j N/A
a 2 �-F- 2 IRoundi 17.01 181 18I- N/A
Round and arch sewers are measured in inches.
Box sewers are measured in feet.
Calculated diameter was determined by sewer hydraulic capacity.
Suggested diameter was rounded up to the nearest commercially available size
' All hydraulics where calculated using the existing parameters.
If sewer was sized mathematically, the suggested diameter was used for hydraulic
calculations.
I
1
�I
11
Design Full Normal[Normal
Critical Crytical. Full werFlowFlow Depth elocity. Depth Velocity [Velo
city Froude ;Comment
ID (Flow
(CFS) (Feet Number j
(FPS) (Feet) (FPS) (FPS) j
r-- 1---F 13.2 (---16.0 F---1.3.9 (... 5.7 1.31 6.1 4.2 r0.9.(....._..__�-..
[- 3
�� 4.21--4.6I-..._093F---4.2`--0.824.8--3.4.i-- 0.78....... ---
I 44.3 4 0.97 4.2 1 0.841 4.91 3.51 1
I 5F 2.8 2.5F 1.00F 3.61 j 4.8 3.6:1 N/A -
F- 'I 4.01 7.4�0.781 4.3 0.78 4.3 2.3 0.96. -
2 �6.4 � 7.41 1.07 4.7 �- 0.98'-5.3T?-- 3.6!1 0.841
A Froude number = 0 indicated that a pressured flow occurs.
Summary of Sewer Design Information
FInvert Elevation j Buried Depth
;Sewer ID
Slope
%(Feet)
Upstream Downstream ;Upstream ;Downstream
(Feet) (Feet) j (Feet)
Comment
f
I 1 FO.-501 4911.59.1 4910.911 2.05 j -0.03
Sewer Too Shallow
3
0.50.�4913.69
4913.13
5.82 ' 4.69
�I
(-----4914.27,�..._...._..........4913.6.81
i
....................._.....3.48 �....:_..:____...__-5.83
f---____._............._.._......._........._..........
[-.---4914.45'�.._...._..............4913.57
I'll
.............._._._._... 4..5.5., ---- -4.43
--....._._.........._........._............_..................
6 F0.50 � 4913.11 4913.07 4.46.i�-4.43
j 2
0.50
F 4913.07
4911.60
4.43 2.54
r - -
r
Summary of Hydraulic Grade Line
Invert Elevation Water Elevation�I
ID #
Fsewerr(F
er
gth
et)
Surcharged
Length
(Feet)
Upstream !Downstream
(Feet) I (Feet)
Feet Feet
Upstream
Feet(Feet)FCondition
(Feet)
[Downstream
�- 1 135.32 F135.32I 4911.59F 4910.91; 4913.81. 4913.63 rPressured
F 3 112.82 F 112.82 4913.69 4913.13 4915.72 4915.31 Pressured
4 117.73 117.73 4914.27 4913.68 4916.48 4915.72 Pressured
�5 176.83 176.83 4914.45 F_4913.57.F_4916.37 4914.99 'Pressured
�6
2
8
1 93.5
8;(
C..._....-..---.._._.293.5
4913.11
4913.07
4913.07 4915.31
L..........-............4911.60 L.........4914.99
4914.99
(_..._..._._-.4913.81
Pressured
Pressured
Summary of Energy Grade Line
Upstream
Manhole
Juncture Losses
Downstream
Manhole
(Sewer
Manhole:
Energy
Bend K
Sewer B ne dr(Lee
Friction I Loss
Lateral K
ateralEnergy
ossElevation
ManholeElevation
ID # .
ID #
Coefficient.,
(Feet) j ;(Feet)
Coefficient
t)
ID #(Feet) (Feet) I
1
��--2
14914.09
0.46 ( 0 OS 0 00:��
0.00
0.001
1 4913.63
r 3 -F
4
4915.90
: 0.46
0.25;j 0
0.00
0.00
l 3' -1
4915.391
' 4 F 5 - 4916.68 0.52 �1.32;; 0 0.00 0.00 � 4 �i 4 9
5 ��7 4916.58 � 1.12 1.321 0.27 0.00 �0.00 6j 4915.19
' F 6 �4 F 3 915.39 0.01 �� 0.05: 00 0 I 0.25 I�0.19 , �! 4915.19
2 6��4915.19 �1.09 0.05 0.01:�-0.00 �0.00 -2 1 4914.09
1
0
1
1
t
Bend loss = Bend K * Flowing full vhead in sewer.
Lateral loss = Outflow full vhead - Junction Loss K * Inflow full vhead.
A friction loss of 0 means it was negligible or possible error due to jump.
Friction loss includes sewer invert drop at manhole.
Notice: Vhead denotes the velocity head of the full flow condition.
A minimum junction loss of 0.05 Feet would be introduced unless Lateral K is 0.
Friction loss was estimated by backwater curve computations.
1 CJ'rR,M- E! 4 OvT��T STi,�cTu�S
1 X
3
1 fig" (Z<P
i
1 3
STMH
1
1 �
I
1
I
j
2
1
1
1
1
1
S
'C �� • •SK''� } 5k r
2 4 i`._ ..
' NeoUDS Results Summary
Project Title: Harmony Technology Park 4ch Filing
Project Description: STRM-G
Output Created On: 3/10/2008 at 3:27:05 PM
'
Using NeoUDSewer Version 1.5.
Rainfall Intensity Formula Used.
Return Period of Flood is 100 Years.
7
H
1
1
1
1
Summary of Manhole Hydraulics
Manhole
ID #
—
Contributing
*
Area C
Rainfall '
Duration,
Rainfall
Intensity
Design:
Peak
Ground
Elevation'
Water
Elevation
Comments
Flow
(Minutes)I(Inch/Hour)°
(CFS)
(Feet)
(Feet)
9.9
4910 171
4909.12
�- -2 __..'_.._._.
--- -:
_._......_......_....._..................L......-..._....._._...-..._.._,r.._....-
-
. ..._
--- -
-- --.—
r. 9.9�..........4913.44
�.....'.4910.30
.4911.66�-
------
------
3
�-
�._......
r 50.l-
4914.29i
f
[Surface-
IF-
4
5.0,
4910.00
1 4911.91
iWater
jPresent
Summary of Sewer Hydraulics
Note: The given depth to flow ratio is 0.9.
- ---- - -
Manhole ID Number
Calculated
j Suggested
Existing
Diameter
Diameter
Diameter
Sewer
ID # :
Upstream Downstream;
Sewer. (Rise)
Shape. (Inches)
(Rise)
(Inches)
(Rise) Width
(Inches) (FT)
(FT).....
(FT) . ..
(FT)...
F-F-
2 —F—
1
Round: 17.5
18
21
N/A
2
3
1 2
Ro d i 17.4
18
F— 18
r N/A
1 3
4
3
lRound 17.4
18
181
N/A
Round and arch sewers are measured in inches.
Box sewers are measured in feet.
Calculated diameter was determined by sewer hydraulic capacity.
Suggested diameter was rounded up to the nearest commercially available size
' All hydraulics where calculated using the existing parameters.
If sewer was sized mathematically, the suggested diameter was used for hydraulic
calculations.
Desi n Full Normal Normal Critical Critical' Full r
Sewer' Flow Flow F Depth Velocity Depth Velocity Velocity; Froude.Comment
ID Number
(CFS) (CFS) (Feet) (FPS)..., (Feet).; ..(FPS)...�...(FPS) .!�............. ..............'
9.9' 16.0� 0.99:r 7.0; 1.17 5.8F 4.11 1.37���
2 5.0 5.5 113 35rr 086r 4.81. 2.8' 0.59
3 � 5.0 F 5.5 F 1. 1 3F 3.5 0.86 8 8 0.59
' A Froude number = 0 indicated that a pressured flow occurs.
' Summary of Sewer Design Information
Invert Elevation T^ Buried Depth
!Sewer Slope. pe Upstream Downstream. Upstream Downstream Comment
�. /o (Feet).. . _.. (Feet)... (Feet) (Feet).._ ..
F-1 F1.02 4909.13; 4908.42 2.56 F 0.00 Sewer Too Shallow:
�.
4909.11 .3.00 . ......... ..2.83 �____._._....._
3
0.27
4910.00
4909.79'
-1.50
3.00.
Sewer Too Shallow
' Summary of Hydraulic -Grade Line
Invert Elevation
Water Elevation
Fee
Sewer
Length.
Surcharged'Upstream
Length
(Feet)
Downstream:
(Feet)
Upstream
Downstream
(Feet)
(Feet)
(Feet)
(Feet)Condition
1)
69.51
-- -- 0
r 4909.13
�- - 4908.42j
4910 30
L 4909.12
- -Jump
-2 1251.21 F- 251.21 [ 4909.79F 4909.11
491I.W1 4910.30 Pressured
�-
78.6
78.6'j 4910.00)
4909.79
4911.91
4911.66
FPessured
J
Summary of Energy Grade Line
Juncture Losses Upstream Downstream
Manhole Manhole
Sewer: Manhole'
`.
Energy
Elevation
Sewer
Friction[Coe
Bend K
Bend
Loss ;Coefficient
Lateral K •
Laterali
Loss
Energy
Manhole
!Elevation'
ID # ID #
(Feet)
(Feet)
fiicient
(Feet)
(Feet)
ID #
j (Feet)
1.701
0 05,1...._
0 00
(....... 0.00
6.001
1 f - 4909.12
2 �;�- 3 —
�4911.78--0.57
_.-1 321�0
16�-----
0..25
�0.23'�
2 4910.82,
3 I 4
4912.03
r 0.18
0.56
0 07
I— 0.00
0.00
�3 ( 4911 78
Bend loss = Bend K * Flowing full vhead in sewer.
Lateral loss = Outflow full vhead - Junction Loss K * Inflow full vhead.
A friction loss of 0 means it was negligible or possible error due to jump.
Friction loss includes sewer invert drop at manhole.
Notice: Vhead denotes the velocity head of the full flow condition.
A minimum junction loss of 0.05 Feet would be introduced unless Lateral K is 0.
Friction loss was estimated by backwater curve computations.
n
11
n
I
1
1
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Harmony Technology Park 4th Filing
SITN E1
II II Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow
OVERLAND I
yy � STREET � FLOW
FLOWE y
® F GUTTER FLOW PLUS CARRY-OVER FLOW F ® F GUTTER FLOW
INLET INLET
1/2 OF STREET
Design Flow: ONLY if already determined through other methods: Minor Storm Major Storm
(local peak flow for 1/2 of street, plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchments): 'Q = 1.13 . - 2.83 cfs
If you entered a value here. skin the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet O-Allowl
Site: (Check One Box Only) -
Site is Urban: x
Site Is Non -Urban:
rmation: Intensity I (inch/hr) = C, ' Pr / ( CZ + Tc
SubcatchmenlArea='. Acres
Percent Imperviousness = %
NRCS Soil Type 1A, B, C, or D
Slope (2./ Len lh (ft
Overland Flow =
Gutter Flow = - -
Design Storm Return Period, Tr =
Return Period One -Hour Precipitation, Pr =
C,=,.
Cz=
C3=
User -Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C = _
User -Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), CS =
Bypass (Carry -Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments, Qp =
Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment: Minor
Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient, C =
Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C5 =
Overland Flow Velocity, Vo =
Gutter Flow Velocity, Va =
Overland Flow Time, to =
Gutter Flow Time, tc =
Calculated Time of Concentration, T. =
Time of Concentration by Regional Formula, T, =
Recommended T. =
Time of Concentration Selected by User, T, =
Design Rainfall Intensity, I =
Calculated Local Peak Flow, 0. =
Total Design Peak Flow, Q =
years
inches
0.00 cfs
re�u.r cmrr., �
NIA
- N/A
N/A
N/A
NIA
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NIA
N/A
N/A
N/A
NIA
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.13
2.83
ps
ps
minutes
minutes
minutes
minutes
minutes
minutes
nch/hr
cfs
cis
STIN E1 UD-Inlet.xls, Q-Peak 3/19/2008, 11:06 AM
I� INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION �I
Project = Harmony Technology Park 4th Filing
Inlet ID = SITN El
,l—Lo (C)—
H-Cur6
H-Van W
Wp
' W
Lo (G)
1
n
0
1
11
1
an Information (Input)
MINOR
MAJOR
of Inlet
Type =
CDOT Type R Curb Opening
Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from'0-Allov/)
a, =
� 2.D01
2.00
inches
Der of Unit Inlets (Grate or Cum Opening)
No =
' 11
1
r Information
MINOR
MAJOR
in of a Unit Grate
L. (G) =
N/A
N/A
feet
i of a Unit Grate
W. =
N/A
N/A
feet
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
A. =
NIA
N/A
ling Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
C, (G) =
N/A
WA
, Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00)
C„ (G) =
N/A
WA
i Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0,67)
C. (G) =
N/A
N/A
Opening Information
MINOR
MAJOR
th of a Unit Cum Opening
L. (C) =
5.00
5.D0
feet
it of Vertical Cum Opening in Inches
HH,,,,, =
5.00
- 5.00
inches
1t of Cum Orifice Throat in Inches
Hy =
4.95
4.95
inches
i of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Theta =
63.4
63.4
degree
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
W. =
1.00
1.00
feet
ling Factor fora Single Cum Opening (typical value 0.10)
C, (C) =
0.10
0.10
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2,30-3.00)
C. (C) =
2.30
2.30
ling Coefficient for Multiple Units
ging Factor for Multiple Units
e as a Weir
Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate, 1.19 cis cum)
Row Used for Combination Inlets Only
Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cis grate, 1.19 ds cam)
Row Used for Combination Inlets Only
e as an Orifice
Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cis grate, 1.19 ds cum)
Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cis grate, 1.19 ds cum)
ihlna Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Deoresslon
ling Coefficient for Multiple Units
ling Factor for Multiple Units
as a Weir, Grate as an Orifice
Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 ds grate, 1.19 cis cum)
Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cis grate, 1.19 ds cum)
as an Orifice, Grate as an Orifice
Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 ds grate, 1.19 cis cam)
Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cis grate, 1.19 cis cum)
Mine Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression
Inlet Length
Inlet Interception Capacity (Design Discharge from O-Peak)
Itant Gutter Flow Depth (based on sheet O-Allow geometry)
pant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet O-Allow geometry)
MINOR MAJOR
Cost =I N/Al WA
Clog =1 NIAI WA
N/A
WA
NIA
N/A
NIA
NIA
N/A
NIA
riches
riches
nches
nches
MINOR MAJOR
Cost1.001 1.00
Clog =1 0.101 0,10
MINOR MAJOR
d„. = 2.15 3.84 inches
d,,.= 2.27 4.04 inches
da
L
0.
of
T
dcs
STIN E1 UD-Inlet.xls, Inlet In Sump
3/1712008, 11:29 AM
I
I
I
Ll
I
7
L
F7
L
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ll
0
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
T'i
-
24
t
4) 23
1 P
22
21
(A
20
17
z
a 16
T
14
i
12
10
9
8
I
JI
IX-
7
6
A/
4
P
3
Ila2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
0 for 112 Street (cfs)
Curb Weir 0 Curborif. 2 NotUsed—D—NolUseul 9 Reported Design x Reported Design
Flow Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in.) Flow Spread (ft.)
I
STIN El UD-Inlet.xis, Inlet In Sump
3117/2008. 11:29 AM
I
1
i
F-
L
L
7
J
1
^1
II
1
1
1
i
n
L
1
1
�l
0 Intercepted
(Cfs)
Curb Weir a Flow
Depth (in.)
Curb Orif. Flow
Depth (in.)
Not Used
Not Used
Reported Design
Flow Depth (in.)
Reported
Designr Flow
Spread (ft.)
0.00
0.00
0.21
- 0.21
0.17
1.00
0.02
0.33
0.33
0.27
2.00
- 1.20
0.59
-
1.20
- 0.97
. 3.00
2.20
1.30
2.20
1.77
4.00
3.09
2.14
3.09
4.54
5.00
3.90
3.22
3.90
7.92
6.00
4.67
4.55
4.67
11.12
7.00 -
5.39
6.12
6.12
17.00
8.00
6.08
7.92
7.92
17.00`
9.00
6.74
9.97
9.97
17.00
10.00
7.37
12.26
12.26
17.00
11.00
7.99
14.79
-
14.79
17.00
12.00
8.58
17.56
17.56
17.00
13.00
9.16
20.57
20.57
17.00
14.00
9.73
23.82
23.82
17.00
15.00
10.28
27.32
27.32
17.00
16.00
10.82
31.05
- 31.05
17.00
17.00
11.35
•35.03
-
35.03
17.00
18.00
11.87
39.24
39.24
17.00
19.00
12.38
43.70
43.70
17.00
20.00
12.88
48.40
-
48.40'
17.00
21.00
13.37
. 53.34
53.34 --
17.00
22.00
13.85
58.52
58.52
17.00
23.00
14.33
63.94
63.94
17.00
24.00
14.80
69.60
-
69.60
17.00
25.00
15.26
75.50
. 75.50
17.00
26.00
15.72
81.65
81.65
17.00
27.00
16.17
88.03
-
88.03
17.00
28.00
16.62
94.66
94.66.
17.00
29.00
17.06
101.52
101.52-
17.00
30.00
17.49
108.63.
108.63
17.00
31.00
17.92
115.98
115.98
17.00
32.00
18.35
123.57
123.57
17.00
33.00
1877
131.40
131.40
17.00 _
34.00
19.19'
139.47
139.47
17.06
35.00
19.60
147.78
147.78
17.00.
36.00
20.01
156.34
156.34
17.00
37.00
20.42
165.13
-
165.13
17.00
38.00
20.82.174.17
174.17
17.00
39.00
21.22
183.44
183.44
17.00
40.00
21.61
192196
192.96
17.00
1
STIN El UD-Inlel.xls, Inlet In Sump
3/17/2008, 11:29 AM
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Harmony Technology Park 4th Filing:
SITN E2
I Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow
�OVERLAND
y I STREET � I FLSIDE OW
®FGUTTER FLOW PLUS CARRY -`OVER FLOW F ® F GUTTER FLOW
INLET INLET
1/2 OF STREET
(local peak flow for 112 of street, plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchments): 'Q
If you entered a value here, skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet Q-Allow)
Site: (Check One Box Only)
Site is Urban: x
Site Is Non -Urban:
rmntinn• Intpncily I linrhthr1 = r.
cfs
Sub catchment Area =Acres
Percent Imperviousness =
NRCS Soil Type = A, B, C, or D
Slo a %ft Len th (ft
Overland Flow = � �-
Gutter Flow = .
+Tc)AC3
Design Storm Return Period, Tr
Return Period One -Hour Precipitation, Pt
Ct
User -Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C
User -Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), Cs :
Bypass (Carry -Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments, Qe
w Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment:
Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient, C
Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, CS:
Overland Flow Velocity, Vc
Gutter Flow Velocity, VG
Overland Flow Time, to
Gutter Flow Time, to
Calculated Time of Concentration, Tc
Time of Concentration by Regional Formula, T.
Recommended T.
Time of Concentration Selected by User, T. r
Design Rainfall Intensity, I :
Calculated Local Peak Flow, Qp :
Total Design Peak Flow, Q ,
hAin
N/A
N/A
N/A
' N/A
N/A
N/A
- N/A
N/A
• N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NIA
NIA
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.34
3.28
ps
ps
ninutes
ninutes
ninutes
ninutes
ninutes
ninutes
nch/hr
1s;
;fs
STIN E2 UD-Inlet.xls, Q-Peak 3/1912008, 11:05 AM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION �I
Project = Harmony Technology Park 4th Filing
Inlet ID = - SITN E2 - - - -
' ,I�---Lo (C)�Y
H-Curb
H-Vert w
W WP
' Lo (Gl
H
I
I
of Inlet
Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression'a' from'Q-AIIow)
)er of Unit Inlets (Grate or Cum Opening)
Ih of a Unit Grate
i of a Unit Grate
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)
ling Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
i Weir Coefficient (typical value 3,00)
i Onfica Coefficient (typical value 0.67)
Opening Information
Ih of a Unit Cum Opening
it of Vertical Cum Opening in Inches
it of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches
i of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
ling Factor for a Single Cum Opening (typical value 0.10)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00)
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67)
ging Coefficient for Multiple Units
ging Factor for Multiple Units
e as a Weir
Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate, 3.09 cfs cum)
Row Used for Combination Inlets Only
Depth at Local Depression Win Clogging (0 cfs grate, 3.09 cfs curb)
Row Used for Combination Inlets Only
e as an Orifice
Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 ofs grate, 3.09 cis curb)
Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cis grate, 3.09 cis curb)
ling Coefficient for Multiple Units
ling Factor for Multiple Units
as a Weir, Grate as an Orifice
Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 dis grate, 3,09 ds curb)
Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate, 3.09 cis curb)
as an Orifice, Grate as an Orifice
Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate, 3.09 cfs curb)
Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cts grate, 3.09 cis curb)
Inlet Length
Inlet Interception Capacity (Design Discharge from Q-Peak)
Itant Gutter Flow Depth (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry)
Kant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry)
Rant Flow Depth at Street Crown
MINOR MAJOR
Type = CDOT Type R Curb Opening
ate= 2.00 2.00 inches
No = 1 1
r..uuno un ino
L.(G):
W.:
A�'
C,(G)
C. (G)'
C.(G):
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
WA
4(C)=
5.00
5.0
H� =
5.00
5.0
H� =
Theta =
4.95
4.£
63.4
63.
%=
1.00
1.0
Cr (C) =
0.10
0.1
C,. (C) =
2,30
2.1
MINOR MAJOR
Cost =I N/A N/A
clog =1 N/A N/A
d
d....n `
dwma`
N/A
NIA
N/A
N/A
N/A
WA
N/A
N/A
set
eel
niches
riches
riches
nches
dv=
N/A
WA
inches
d.=1
WA
N/A
inches
d.n,.0
WA
WA
Inches
MINOR
MAJOR
Cost =
1.00
1.00
Clog =
0.10
0.10
MINOR
MAJOR
cl�
4.07
4.24
inches
it . =
4.28
4.46
inches
MINOR
MAJOR
d,i=
3.14
3.26
inches
it.
3.36
3.51
inches
2.281
2.46lnchel
MINOR
MAJOR
L =
5.0
5.0
feet
Q.=
3.1
3.3
cis
d =
2.28
2.46
Inches
T-
1.8
2.0
feet
dcto m
0.00
0.00
lnchei
I
STIN E2 UD-Inlet.xls, Inlet In Sump
3/17/2008, 11:29 AM
I
1
I
1
t
II
0
0
n
1
40
39
I
I
36
I
!
!
I
37
!
I
!
!
36
35
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
33
! I
I
I
I
I
32
I
it
I
31
I
30
I
29
!
I
! I
27
i I i
if
26
25
j
I
24
a23
I
I I
I
I
!
22
`a 21
I
I
!
I
I
N
l
I
I
I
t 19
I
I
i
I
L
a 17
! !
!
C3 76
i
i
I
15
14
i I
i
I
13
I ! I
!
I
I
12
I
I j i l
i
I
I j
I
I I
I•
„
j
I10
9
!
I
!
l
I
I
l
6
I
7
6
I I
6
I I I
I
I
!
4
! I
!
3
2
I ! I I
!
0
!
I
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 . 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Q for 1/2 Street (cfs)
-6 CurbWeir -0 Curb 0riL -E Nat Used 0--Notused • ReporteriDesign --X Reported Design
Flow Depth (in.) Fl" Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in.) Flow Spread (11.)
STIN E2 UD-Inlet.xls, Inlet In Sump
3/17120G8, 11:29 AM
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
0 Intercepted
(ds)
Curb Weir a Flow
Depth (in.)
Curb Orif, Flow
Depth (in.)
Not Used
Not Used
Reported Design
DFlow Depth (in.)
Reported
Designr Flow
Spread (ft.)
0.00
0.00
0.21
0.21
0.17
1.00
0.02
0.33
0.33
0.27 _
2.00
1.20
0.69'
-
1.20
0.97
3.00
2.20
- 1.30
-
2.20
1.77 "
4.00
1 3.09
.2.14
3.09
4.54
5.00
3.90
3.22 -
3.90
7.92
6.00
4.67
4.55
4.67
11.12
7.00
5.39
6.12
6.12
17.00 -
8.00
6.08
7.92
7.92
17.00 '.
9.00
6.74
9.97
9.97
17.00
10.00
7.37
12.26
12.26
17.00
11.00
7.99
14.79
14.79
17.00
12.00
8.58
17.56
17.56
17.00
13.00
9.16.
20.57
20.57
17.00
14.00
9.73
23.82
-
23.82
17.00
15.00
10.28
27.32
27.32
17.00
16.00
10.82
31.05
31.05
17.00
17.00.
11.35
35.03
35.03
17.00
18.00
.11.87
39.24
39.24
17.00
19.00
12.38
43.70
-
43.70
17.00
20.00
12.88
48.40.
48.40
17.00
21.00
13.37
53.34
-
53.34
17.00
22.00
13.85
58.52
- 58.52
17.00
23.00
14.33
63.94
63.94
17.00
24.00
14.80
69.60
69.60
17.00
25.00
15.26
75.50
75.50
17.00
26.00
- 15.72
1 81.65
81.65
17.00
27.00
16.17
88.03
88.03
17.00
28.00
16.62
94.66
94.66
17.00-
29.00
17.06
101.52
101.52
17.00
30.00
17.49
108.63
108.63
17.00
31.00
17.92
115.98
115.98
17.00
32.00.
18.35
123.57
123.57
17.00
33.00
18.77
131.40
131.40
17.00
34.00
19.19
139.47
139.47
17.00
35.00
19.60
147.78
147.78
17.00
36.00
20.01
156.34
156.34
17.00
37.00
20.42
165.13
165.13.
17.00
38.00
20.82_
174.17
174.17
17.00
39.00
21.22
183.44
183.44
17.00
40.00
21.61
192.96
192.96
17.00
STIN E2 UD-Inlet.xls, Inlet In Sump
3/17/2008, 11:29 AM
Area Inlet Design • Sump Condition
Area Inlet for Design Point 104 (STIN�E3)
Project No. 187700640
This shoal computes the controlling area inlet flow condition.
Wei-Orfice Coarof
Q,,,, = CLH'
titters: H = head above wok
Ddfice Equator:
L7....F.. - C.. A. f2gH
Nhere- H = h 2 - h ,
Grate: Modified COOT Type C Area Inlet
Weir:
Orifice:
C-, = 3.20
Cw =
0.65
L4 t= 842 8.(1)
7Sm.=
427ft'
cl
eemo,=
0.20
Number of Inlets =
1
Flowline elevation of grate =
4915.64
1 DO year Design Flow(cfs)=
5.25
100 year WSEL(525)=
4916.04
Head (ft.)
0„w
0-e,.
a--
WSEL
0.00
000
0 00
0.00
4915.64
0,50
7.62
12 6O
7 62
4916.14
1,00
21.55
17,81
17,81
4916.64
150
39.58
21.82
21.82
4917A4
2.00
60.W
25.19
25,19
491764
2.50
85.17
28.17
28.17
4918.14
300
111,96
3085
30.85
4918.64
3.50
141,09
33.33
33,33
4919.14
4.00
172.37
35,63
35,63
4919.64
4.50
205,68
47,79
3779
4920,14
500
240,90
39,83
3983
4920.64
Notes:
1) This is the effective weir length which ebuale fine sum of the open apace laterite
between bars in the predominant flow directions.
300
250
200
'50
LL 100
50
a
0.00
Weir Orifice Control } o
t OonRce
100 200 300 a.00 500 a.Do
Flow Depth llrl
Space width = 0.0417 8.
Bar width =
0.0208 8.
Number of bars =
42
Number of spaces =
41
Grate length =
2.58 e.
Effective Grate Length
1,71 ft,
Space widin=
0.3125 ff.
Bar width =
0.0208 ft
Number of bars =
9
Number of spaces=
8
Grate Width-
269 f1.
Effective GrateWldth=
250 ft.
i'1:38 AM
Stantec Consulting Inc. 311712008
Area Inlet Design - Sump Condition
Area Inlet for Design Point 105 (STIN-F1)
Project No. 187700640
This sheaf computes the controlling area inlet Now condition.
Weir Equation:
Q„r„ =CLH.,
where: H= head above weir
Onfice Equation:
where: H = h z - h ,
Grate: Modified COOT Type C Area Inlet
Weir:
Orifice:
C- = 3.20
C.. =
065
L-1 = 8.42 ft. (1)
AMn.. =
4.27 ft'
CI gl Facbr=
0.20
Number of Inlets =
1
Flowline elevation of grate =
4915.64
100 year Design Flow (cfs) =
13.56
100 year WSEL(13.56)=
4916.36
Head (ft)
O„e,
O„w.
4r.w
WSEL
000
0.00
0.00
0,00
491564
0.50
7.62
1260
7.62
4916.14
1.00
21.55
17,81
17.81
4916 fi4
1.50
39.58
21,82
21.82
4917,14
2.00
60.94
25.19
25.19
491764
2.50
85.17
28.17
28.17
4918,14
3.00
11196
30.85
30.85
4918,64
3.50
141.09
33.33
33.33
4919.14
4.00
172.37
35.63
35.63
4919,64
4.50
20568
3.7.79
37.79
4920.14
5.00
240.90
39.83
3983
4920.64
Notes:
11 This is the effective weir length which equals the sum of the open apace lengths
between bars in the predominant flow directions.
Weir -Orifice Control'+-aw.v�
--F aann<4 i
300
250
. _ 200
150
u ,ee
50
o - --
000 1.00 zoo 3 00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Flow oepM IM1.1 �
Space width= 00417 X.
Bar width =
0.0208 8.
Number of bars =
42
Number of spaces=
41
Grate length =
2.58 R.
Effective Grate Length =
1.71 g.
Space width= 0.3125 ft.
Bar width =
00208 ft
Number of bars=
9
Number of spaces =
8
Grate Width=
2.69 fl.
Effective GrateWidth=
250 ft.
11:38 AM
Stantec Consulting Inc. 311712008
Worksheet for Basin 109a Temporary Swale
Project Description
Friction Method
Manning Formula
Solve For
Normal Depth
Input Data
Roughness Coefficient
0.030
Channel Slope
0,00500
ft/ft
Left Side Slope
4.00
ft/ft (H.V)
Right Side Slope
4.00
ft/ft (HIV)
Discharge
7.82
ft'/s
Results
Normal Depth
0.96
ft
Flow Area
3.71
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
7.94
ft
Top Width
7.70
ft
Critical Depth
0.75
ft
Critical Slope
0,01893
ft/ft
Velocity
2.11
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.07
ft
Specific Energy
1.03
ft
Froude Number
0.54
Flow Type
Subcritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth
0.00
ft
Length
0.00
ft
Number Of Steps
0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth
0.00
ft
Profile Description
Profile Headloss
0.00
fit
Downstream Velocity
Infinity
ft/s
Upstream Velocity
Infinity
ft/s
Normal Depth
0.96
ft
Critical Depth
0.75
ft
Channel Slope
0,00500
tuft
Critical Slope
0.01893
ft/ft
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.00)
311712008 11:50:44 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1.203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1
I
Worksheet for Basin 109a Temporary
Swale w/freeboard
'
Project Description
Friction Method
Manning Formula
'
Solve For
Normal Depth
Input Data
'
Roughness Coefficient
0.030
Channel Slope
0,00500
ft/ft
Left Side Slope
4.00
ft/ft (H:V)
'
Right Side Slope
4.00
ft/ft (H:V)
Discharge
10.40
W/s
'
Results
Normal Depth
1.07
ft
'
Flow Area
Wetted Perimeter
4.59
8.84
ft'
ft
Top Width
8.57
ft
Critical Depth
0.84
ft
'
Critical Slope
0.01823
ft/ft
Velocity
2.26
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.08
ft
'
Specific Energy
1.15
ft
Froude Number
0.55
'
Flow Type
Subcritical
GVF Input Data
'
Downstream Depth
• 0.00
ft
Length
' 0.00
ft
Number Of Steps
0
'
GVF Output Data
'
Upstream Depth
Profile Description
0.00
it
Profile Headloss
0.00
ft
Downstream Velocity
Infinity
ft/s
'
Upstream Velocity
Infinity
ft/s
Normal Depth
1.07
ft
Critical Depth
0.84
ft
'
Channel Slope
0.00500
ft/ft
Critical Slope
0.01823
ft/ft
'
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.001
3/17/2008 11:59:06 AM
27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1'
Worksheet for Basins 109 & 109a Temporary Swale
Project Description
Friction Method
Manning Formula
Solve For
Normal Depth
Input Data
Roughness Coefficient
0.030
Channel Slope
0.00500
ft/ft
Left Side Slope
4.00
ft/ft (H:V)
Right Side Slope
4.00
ft/ft (H:V)
Discharge
17.58
ft-is
Results
Normal Depth
1.30
ft
Flow Area
6.81
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
10.76
ft
Top Width
10.44
ft
Critical Depth
1.04
ft
Critical Slope
0.01700
ft/ft
Velocity
2.58
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.10
ft
Specific Energy
1.41
ft
Froude Number
0.56
Flow Type
Subcritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth
0.00
ft
Length
"
0.00
ft
Number Of Steps
0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth
0.00
ft
Profile Description
Profile Headloss
0.00
ft
Downstream Velocity
Infinity
ft/s
Upstream Velocity
Infinity
ft/s
Normal Depth
1.30
ft
Critical Depth
1.04
ft
Channel Slope
0.00500
ft/ft
Critical Slope
0.01700
ft/ft
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08,01.068.00)
3/17/2008 11:53:49 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1
I
11
1
n
I 1
1
Worksheet for Basins 109 & 109a Temproary Swale w/freeboard
Project Description
Friction Method
Manning Formula
Solve For
Normal Depth
Input Data
Roughness Coefficient
0.030
Channel Slope
0.00500
ft/ft
Left Side Slope
4.00
ft/ft (H:V)
Right Side Slope
4.00
Rift (H:V)
Discharge
23.38
ft-/s
Results
Normal Depth
1.45
ft
Flow Area
8,43
ft-
Wetted Perimeter
11.97
ft
Top Width
11.62
ft
Critical Depth
1.16
ft
Critical Slope
0.01636
ft/ft
Velocity
2.77
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.12
It
Specific Energy
1,57
ft
Froude Number
0.57
Flow Type
Subcritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth
0,00
ft
Length
0.00
It
Number Of Steps
0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth
0.00
It
Profile Description
Profile Headloss
0.00
It
Downstream Velocity
Infinity
ft/s
Upstream Velocity
Infinity
ft/s
Normal Depth
1.45
ft
Critical Depth
1,16
ft
Channel Slope
0.00500
ft/ft
Critical Slope
0.01636
ft/ft
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.001
3117/2008 11:55:02 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755A666 Page 1 of 1
Worksheet for Basin 108 Temporary Swale
Project Description
Friction Method
Manning Formula
Solve For
Normal Depth
Input Data
Roughness Coefficient
0,030
Channel Slope
0.00500
ft/ft
Left Side Slope
4.00
tuft (H:V)
Right Side Slope
50:00
ft/ft (H:V)
Discharge
14.51
ft-Is
Results
Normal Depth
0.59
ft
Flow Area
9.37
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
31.89
ft
Top Width
31,82
ft
Critical Depth
0,45
ft
Critical Slope
0,02167
ft/ft
Velocity
1.55
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.04
ft
Specific Energy
0.63
ft
Froude Number
0.50
Flow Type
Subcritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth
0,00
ft
Length
0.00
ft
Number Of Steps
0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth
0,00
ft
Profile Description
Profile Headloss
0.00
ft
Downstream Velocity
Infinity
f is
Upstream Velocity
Infinity
f /s
Normal Depth
0.59
ft
Critical Depth
0.45
ft
Channel Slope
0.00500
ft/ft
Critical Slope
0,02167
ft/ft
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.001
3/17/2008 11:55:38 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1
I
Worksheet for Basin 108 Temporary Swale w/freeboard
'
Project Description
Friction Method
Manning Formula
'
Solve For
Normal Depth
Input Data
Roughness Coefficient
0.030
Channel Slope
0.00500
ft/ft
Left Side Slope
4.00
ft/ft (H:V)
Right Side Slope
50.00
ft/ft (H:V)
Discharge
19.35
ft'/s
Results
Normal Depth
0.66
ft
Flow Area
11.64
ft-
Wetted Perimeter
35.54
ft
Top Width
35.45
ft
Critical Depth
0.50
ft
'
Critical Slope
0-02086
ft/ft
Velocity
1,66
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.04
ft
'
Specific Energy
0.70
ft
Froude Number
0.51
'
Flow Type
Subcritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth
0.00
ft
'
Length
0.00
ft
Number Of Steps
0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth
0,00
If
'
Profile Description
Profile Headloss
0.00
It
Downstream Velocity
Infinity
ftis
Upstream Velocity
Infinity
ft/s
Normal Depth
0.66
ft
Critical Depth
0,50
ft
'
Channel Slope
0.00500
ft/ft
Critical Slope
0,02086
ft/ft
-------- ---
---------- ----- --
--._---- -- I____----- ---
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.00]
'
3117/2008 11:55:57 AM
27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT
06795 USA +1.203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Worksheet for Overflow Weir for Pond 101
Project Description
Solve For
Headwater Elevation
Input Data
Discharge
44.64
ft-/s
Crest Elevation
4914.00
ft
Tailwater Elevation
4914.00
ft
Crest Surface Type
Gravel
Crest Breadth
2.00
ft
Crest Length
50.00
ft
Results
Headwater Elevation
4914.44
ft
Headwater Height Above Crest
0,44
ft
Tailwater Height Above Crest
0,00
ft
Weir Coefficient
3.03
US
Submergence Factor
1.00
Adjusted Weir Coefficient
3,03
US
Flow Area
22.14
ft-
Velocity
2,02
ft/s
Wetted Perimeter
50.89
ft
Top Width
50.00
ft
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.00]
3/17/2008 2:22:32 PM 27 Samons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA *1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1
I
i
1
11
11
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
[I
1
1
APPENDIX E
i
i
i
1
1
1
1
1
i
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
EROSION CONTROL
CALCULATIONS
i
Harmony Technology Park 3rd Filing
Riprap Rundown at STRM-E Outlet
Updated: 17-Mar-08
Pipe Diameter: D 24 in
Discharge: Q 10.79 cfs
Tailwater*: V 0.8 ft (unknown)
* Assume that y=0.4*D if tailwater conditions are unknown
1. Required riprap type:
2. Expansion Factor:
3. Riprap Length:
By: MBK 187700640
Checked: AGW
Soil Type: Erosion Resistant Soil (Clay)
Max Velocity: V 7.7 ft/sec
Q/D2.5 =
1.91
< 6 --> use design charts
D =
2.00
ft
Yt/D =
0.40
Q/D^1.5 =
3.81
d50 =
3.16
in -------> 6 in
-- > Use Type
VL
(Class 6) riprap
1/2tan0 = 5.76
At = Q/V = 1.40 ft2
L = 1/2tan0 * (At/Yt - D) = -1 ft
4. Governing Limits:
L>3D 6 ft
L<10D 20 ft
5. Maximum Depth:
Depth = 2d50 = 2 (6 in / 12) _ 1 ft
6. Bedding:
increase length to 6 ft
=> -1 ft --> OK
Use 1 ft thick layer of Type II (CDOT Class A) bedding material.
7. Riprap Width:
Width = 3D = 3 (24 in /12) = 6 ft
(Extend riprap to minimum of culvert height or normal channel depth.)
Summary:
Type VL (Class 6) riprap
Length = 6 ft
Depth = 1 ft
Width = 6 ft
Reference: UDFCD USDCM, Vol. 1, Major Drainage, Page MD-105
V:\52877F\ACTIVE\187710640\CIVIL\DESIGN\REPORTS\DRAINAGE\OFFICE BUILDING\RIP-RAP CALCS\STRM-E-OUTLET.XLS
Harmony Technology Park 3rd Filing
By: MBK 187700640
Riprap Rundown at STRM-F Outlet
Checked: AGW
Updated: 17-Mar-08 I
Pipe Diameter: D 24 Soil Type:
Erosion Resistant SoilDischarge:
:in
Q 13.98 s Max Veloci :
v 7.7 ft/sec
Tailwater*: 0.8 (unknown
'
* Assume that y=0.4*D if tailwater conditions are unknown
1. Required riprap type:
Q/D2.5 = 2.47 < 6 --> use design charts
D = 2.00 ft
Yt/D = 0.40
Q/D^1.5 = 4.94
d50 = 4.10 in -------> 6
in
----> Use Type VL Klass 61 riprap
2. Expansion Factor:
' 1/2tanO = 5.09
3. Riprap Length:
' At = Q/V = 1.82 ft2
L = 1/2tanO * (At(Yt - D) = 1 ft
' 4. Governing Limits:
L> 3D 6 ft increase length to 6 ft
L<10D 20 ft =>1ft-->OK
5. Maximum Depth:
' Depth = 2d50 = 2 (6 in / 12) _ 1 ft
' 6. Bedding:
Use 1 ft thick layer of Type II (CDOT Class A) bedding material.
' 7. Riprap Width:
Width = 3D = 3 (24 in /12) = 6 ft
' (Extend riprap to minimum of culvert height or normal channel depth.)
Summary:
Type VL (Class 6) riprap
' Length = 6 ft
Depth = 1 ft
Width = 6 ft
' Reference: UDFCD USDCM, Vol. 1, Major Drainage, Page MD-105
V:\52877F\ACTIVE\187710640\CIVIL\DESIGN\REPORTS\DRAINAGE\OFFICE BUILDING\RIP-RAP CALCS\STRM-F-OUTLET.XLS
Discharge
cis
Peak Flow
Period hrs
Velocity (fps)
Area (sp.fl)
Hydraulic
Radm ft
Normal
De h ft
17.6
100.0
9.71
1.81
0.31
0.47
LINER RESULTS
C350
S
1
4. Width=�00 ft 4.
Not to Scale
Reach
Matting Type
Stability Analysisl
Vegetation Characteristics
Permissible
Shear Stress
(psfJ
CabAated 1
Shear Stress
(psi)
Safety Factor
Remarks
Staple Pattern
Phase
Class
Type
DensRy
Straight
C350
Vegetation
3
D
Sod
>-95%
9.00
7.30
1.23
STABLE
Staple E
Soil
Sandy Loam
1 1.200
1 0.501 1
2.40
1 STABLE
I
. Bath 10 Input Scroeri
l
RAINFALL PERFORMANCE STANDARD EVALUATION
187710640
Project - Harmony Technology Pad STANDARD FORMA
akulffieA By: MBK Data; 3/18/2008
DEVELOPED
ERODIBILITY
Aso
Lab
Sab
Lb
PS
SUBBASIN
ZONE
(ac)
(ft)
(%)
(ft)
IS
(16)
(%)
101
Moderate
2.16
545
0.87
1069
0.17
102
Moderate
0.28
235
0.72
6.0
0.02
103
Moderate
0.33
235
0.72
7.0
0.02
104
Moderate
0.56
205
1.70
10A
0.09
105
Moderate
1.46
370
2.00
49.1
0.27
106
Moderate
0.09
125
2.00
1.0
0.02
107
Moderate
0.73
140
2.00
9.3
0.13
108
Moderate
2.93
635
1.23
169.0
0.33
109
Moderate
1.19
750
0.82
81.1
0.09
109a
Moderate
1.28
815
0.68
94.8
0.08
Tohl
11.01
534.64
1.21
78.4
EQUATIONS
Lb = sum(Aib)/sum(Ai)
= 534.5 ft
So = sum(AiS)/sum(A)
1 21 %
PS (d ..9 construction) = 78.4 (from Table 8A)
PS (after construction) - 78.4 /0.85 - 92.2
I
1
H
1
1
L
EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS
187710640
ProjectHarmony Technology Park STANDARD FORM B
Calculated By: MBK Date:. 1 ?Mty2t106
Erosion Control
C-Factor
P-Factor
I
Comment
Number Method
Value
Value
3
Bare Soil - Rough Irregular Surface
1
0.9
6
Gravel Filter
1
0.8
5
Straw Bale Barrier
1
0.8
6
Gravel Filter
1
0.8
8
Silt Fence Barrier
1
0.5
38
Gravel Mulch
0.05
1
39
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5 % slope
0.06
1
SUB
PS
BASIN
(%)
il
7835
SU8
SUB
AREA
Practice C' A P `A Remarks
BASIN
AREA
(ac)
DURING
CONSTRUCTION
39
0.13
2.16
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope)
101
Pervious
2.16
102
Impervious
0.23
38
0.01
0.23
Gravel Mulch I
102
Pervious
0.05
39
0.00
0.05
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5 % slope)
103
Impervious
0.28
38
0.01
0.28
Gravel Mulch I
103
Pervious
0.05
39
0.00
0.05
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5 % slope)
104
Impervious
0.41
38
0.02
0.41
Gravel Mulch I
104
Pervious
0.15
39
0.01
0.15
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5 % slope)
105
Impervious
1.04
38
0.05
1.04
Gravel Mulch
105
Pervious
0.42
39
0.03
0.42
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1 -5% slope)
106
Pervious
0.09
39
0.01
0.09
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1 -5% slope)
107
Impervious
0.01
38
0.00
0.01
Gravel Mulch I
107
Pervious
0.23
39
0.01
0.23
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope) _
107
Building
0.49
3
0.49
0.44
Bare Soil - Rough Irregular Surface
108
Impervious
144
38
0.07
1.44
Gravel Mulch
108
Pervious
149
39
0.09
149
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope)
109
Impervious
0.79
38
0.04
0.79
Gravel Mulch I
109
Pervious
040
39
0.02
0.40
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope)
109a
Impervious
1.00
38
0.05
1.00
Gravel Mulch
109a
Pervious
0.28
39
002
0.28
Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5 % slope)
Cnet
0.10
Pnet
0.796701
EFF = (1-CP)100
EFF
92.3
78.4 PS Be/ore
1
I
EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS
187010500
Project: Harmony Technology Park STANDARD FORM
CalculatedB : MBK Date: 3nalm
Erosion Control
Number Method
C-Factor
Value
P-Factor
Value
Comment
9
72
14
16
78
sphaltlConcrete P AsphalUConcrete Pavement
Established Grass Ground Cover - 30 %
Established Grass Ground Cover- 50%
Established Grass Ground Cover- 70 %
Established Grass Ground Cover- 90%
0.01
0.15
0.08
0.04
0.025
1
1
1
1
1
SUB
BASIN
PS
(%)
AREA
(ac)
Site
92.18
11.01
SUB
BASIN
SUB
AREA
AREA
(ac)
Practice
C • A
P ` A
Remarks
AFTER
CONSTRUCTION
101
Pervious
2.16
18
0.054
2.16
Established Grass Ground Cover - 90%
102
Impervious
0.23
9
0.0216
0.2268
Asphalt/Concrete Pavement
102
Pervious
0.05
18
0 054
0.0532
Established Grass Ground Cover - 90%
103
Impervious
0.28
9
0.0216
0.2772
Asphalt/Concrete Pavement
103
Pervious
0.05
18
0.054
0.0528
Established Grass Ground Cover - 90%
104
Impervious
0.41
9
0.0216
0.4088
Asphall/Concrele Pavement
104
Pervious
0.15
18
0.054
0.1512
Established Grass Ground Cover - 90%
105
Impervious
1.04
9
0.0216
1.0366
Asphalt/Concrete Pavement
105
Pervious
0.42
18
0.054
0.4234
Established Grass Ground Cover - 90%
106
Pervious
0.09
18
0.054
0.09
Established Grass Ground Cover - 90%
107
Impervious
0.01
9
0.0216
0.01
Asphalt/Concrete Pavement
107
Pervious
0.23
18
0.054
0.2336
Established Grass Ground Cover - 90%
107
Building
0.49
9
0,0216.
0.49
Asphalt/Concrete Pavement
106
Impervious
1.44
9
0.0216
1,4357
Asphalt/Concrete Pavement
108
Pervious
1.49
18
0.054
1.4943
Established Grass Ground Cover - 90%
108
Impervious
0.79
9
0.0216
0.7854
Asphalt/Concrete Pavement
108
Pervious
040
18
0.054
0.4046
Established Grass Ground Cover - 90%
109a
Impervious
1.00
9
0.0216
0.9984
As halUConcrete Pavement
Cnet
0.0598365
Pnet
0.88
EFF = (1-C-P)100
EFF
94.7
>
92.2
PS After
EROSION CONTROL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
18771M40
Pry'ea Harmony Technology Park STANDARD FORM C
Calculated By. MBK Data Y18200B
SEOUENCE FOR 2008 3 20M ONLY
Indicate by use of a bar Una or symbols when erosion control measures we be installed.
Major modifications to an approved schedule may requite aubmiNrp a new schedule for
approval by the City Engineer,
YEAR 2WS 20H
MONTH A S 1 O 1 N D I J I F I M A I M I J I J 1 A 8
OVERLOTGRADING k `
r
WIND EROSION CONTROL
Sod Rougheningj;N -M OVA
Perimeter Bonier
Additional Banters
Vegetative Methods
$oil Sealant
Other
RAINFALL EROSION CONTROL
STRUCTURAL:
Sediment TnOvBesin
IMeI Ellen
Strew Barriers aG e _
SO Farce Barriers Is r
Sand Begs
Bare Sod Preparation
Contour Furrows
Terracing
AsphalVConcro a Paving
Other
VEGETATIVE: _
Permanent Seed Planting `_'i r
MulchunglSealam ", .g �
Temporary Seed PlaMhg
Sod Immolation HE
N etBngalMats 0lankets
Other
STRUCTURES: INSTALLED BY MAINTAINED BY
VEGETATIONPJULCHING CONTRACTOR
DATE SUBMITTED 'APPROVED BY CITY OF FORT COLLINS ON
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
L
EROSION CONTROL COST ESTIMATE
Project:
HARMONY TECHNOLOGY PARK 3RD FILING
187700640
Prepared By::
MBK
Date:
3/18/200
CITY RESEEDING COST
Unit
Total
Method
Quantity
Unit
Cost
Cost
Notes
Reseed/mulch
11.01
ac
$723
$7,960.23
Subtotal
$7,960
Contingency
50%
$3,980
Total
$11,940
Notes: 1. A-5 ac=$6551ac; A>5 ac=$615/ac.
EROSION CONTROL MEASURES
Unit
Total
Number Method
Quantity
Unit
Cost
Cost
Notes
Wattle
3
ea
$300
$900
5 Straw Bale Barrier
6
ea
$150
$900
8 Silt Fence Barrier
2310
LF
$3
$6,930
39 Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope)
5.32
ac
$500
$2,660
38 Gravel Mulch
5.32
ac
$1,350
$7,182
Subtotal
$18,572
Contingency
50%
$9,286
Total
$27,858
I
H
11
F
1
1
1
1
1
1
F
F
1
i
APPENDIX F
1
I
1
i
1
1
1 DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL
1 PLAN DRAWINGS & DETAILS
1
[J
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
-
--------- - _==__� __
�'
----------------
1
I1.
I
01
DITCH USED TEMITFURI}AYl FO
OUTDI'dip , D MWN
PROPERTYDNE
RM
_ _ � nMBERWODDORIVE
IWT TE
TRACT
LEGEND
-49M PROPOSED INDEX CONTOUR
4939 PROPOSED MTERMEDIAn CONTOUR-1 FT
MEII
(4915)- EXISTING INDEX CONTOUR-5 R INTERVAL
4:y 16)--- EXISTING INTERMEDIATE C TOUR- I FTINTEINAL
DRNINAGE BASIN EOUN WRY LINE
1 (]2 SI ID
B.M _ AOgES
OMINAGE DESIGN POINT
Oni9n
Point
BrinlU
Ana
lace)
Composite
C.
015(cb)
Olnlo•1
101
101
2.16
on
1.91
5.W
102
102
028
om
1.13
2.0
103
103
0.33
0 U
1.34
3.28
104
104
0.56
0.76
1.84
5.25
105
105
1.46
0.75
4.11
13.56
IN
IN
1
0.32
0.12
0.31
io"
106-a
028
0.81
1.12
2.84
107
107
0.18
0.72
1.69
4.W
108
108
2.93
0.80
5.03
14.51
109
109
1.19
071
2.75
7.82
109a
109a
120
0.80
343
976
POND SUMMARY
100YR
V IAME
VOLIIEE
SPILLWAY
POND
DESC
OUSEL
PRONGED
REQUIRED
MEDIATION
im
wGm
we-m
Pn
101
DETENTION POND
4914
3.35
2.84
4914.DO
�a
a
W L��90
E O
Cg O H
m
U =
a F
Z
0= B
PNR185aN
EXNI6R
NOT FOR
CONSmucTION
F111M x... w EF
u n m ou
DMmi RATIONAL
ROVWM BFeN
I oft
`IRRIWTp1A
I_
SEE G30i
c-��Swle;
A- PERFORATED
UNMMMN
SEE DETAIL
SHEET Cfi
INTEL SITE
min
L
I A
Holes
A•soles
DRAWN
PIK
PIPE
. is<\ SF
of OM
/5
\
m
C
SEE DET
1/
II 11 I I R I
1111111 /�1�I IIj1 I
111lilll r!!/4 � ^,li
IF ELEV 4921.60 '\
NYLOPIAST NYLOPUST
OWNRAISIN OMIN WIN 1
SF — SF — SF
IN I
A
I
172
IN 1
1
1
ILL
trI7 1
3.3101E SILT FENCE
1
/
B /
172 I /
a r
I` PROPOSED LOT LINE
TEMPORARY DRAINAGE SWALE
/
I
/
w
w
--'
0
/
FUTURE
0
TIMBERW OD DRIVE
Q
ACAS
Z
Z
O
w
TION `l/
CONSTRUU
OU
B
ACCESS RLOAO /\
`
OU
EXISTs.ROA0.91ME E i E%18f. EDGE OF ASRMLT"� /
EAST. IRRIGATON DGCH
z �r
4 IF
69\T — 4-14913 'r _ — ^III IIIII oI III
SF SF SF F SF — SF SF SF — 4912 /W'111
BF {T}1
TYPICAL SWALE SECTIONS m0050 ^
CHASE
1' BERM MIN
P,?ft EGA zLEVEL LEGEND
15
vxwasLo RIGHT —6—WAY
_y
2'GRAVEL PROPOSED BOWLINE
;Y
_______SHOULDER _____ __— IIIO — NEW INDEX LdRbJRS
5111 NEW INIERNEDATE CONTOURS
p SECTION A — EXISTING CONTOURS
C-t T2 NTB �0 STORM wu
woseD RAPE MTx MANxaE
1' BERM MIN PROPOSED WTFIAL CORE AND GUTTFA
LEVEL+ PROPOSED SWALE
2%
r R. w lao-m wnaR anxA¢ ETEe
_---____
- - - - - - EASING S1WY PIPE
B SECTION B --IRR DaTaxG IRRIGATION PIPE
o1rz SE SET FENCE
® WHOLE TRACKING PAD
20% EGA ® MPRIP
EROSION ODIORIL FABRIC
d.5�' OS%
STRAW CAME CHECK DAM
____ ________ __ 1
2' GRAVEL SHOULDER-' STRAW RN£ MET PETER
C SECTION C f
C1t2 NUS M SPAw ONE OURAFT MOnCnw
20% FOR 12'
.5' BERM MIN Lm DIECRON OF ROSE/
_� 40 LEVEL
2-GRAVEL HAY OR SDON MY MULCH
OU SHLDER D% M. W.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - T�---- -_
_ ATIIL
D SECTION D (cma •il
c-1T1 SETS • WATTLE
MUMS T TRUMP
On 1.5'BERMMIN
z LEVEL
T GRAVEL
SHOULDER I3 4A G
/ e , SECTION E
NTS
DRAINAGE
TRACT
�A911
i—
49
i
/
/ 4919
BE BE SF SF
gW
BE
SF S F S F S F
F-
/
W
TEl1NRARY GRAVEL
_ I
FUTURE
OVERFLOWNEIR SEESHEET
Coos FOR DETAILS
W
/ TIMBERVJOOD DRNE
SCOUR 90P
ILONG NA' VWX
/
~
NSTALL PER MANUFACTURERS
/
RECOMMENDATIONS
/
/ Z
/
SEE DETAIL ON SLEET C505
/
0
I
/
Q
/
OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE
/
Z
SEE DETAIL ON SHEET CW5
I'Iil 1 STORM G SEE 0201
I
I I STORM
G21'
I I IIII
I IIIII
ST 1 I�y
_
O /
V
/TVEHICLERACKING PAD III
h /
ROM
ACCESS ROAD I
/ / I
______ _____
-------------
_ ______\\-----__—_---____-- _--_____�—_____
1. ALL DISTURBED AREAS ME TO BE SEEDED AND
MULCHED, INCLUDING REGRADED LOTS AND POND
AREAS
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY
IRRIGATION IN NONIRRIGATEDGRASS SEED AREAS
FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF GRASSES.
3. STOCK PILES NOT TO EXCEED 10' HIGH SOIL.
4. ALL OFFERS AREAS DISTURBED DURING
CONSTRUCTION ME TO BE RE VEGETATED AND
RETURNED TO SIMILAR CONDITION AS PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION.
Pmmn AIIUUARV
POND CODE IWYR SPILLWAY VOLUME VOLUME
OUSEL ELEVATION PRONOED RELUMEO
(m cAcm iAGfT1
101 DETEN70N POND A914.0
0
4914.00 3.36 2.64
CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION
CENTER OF COLORADO
1=800ESS DAYS INDVANCE
BEFOREYOUM922:1987
CUFF 2 FOR THE
KING OF UNDERGROUND
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL THESE PUNS HARE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE
LOCAL ENRTY FOR CONCEPT ONLY. THE
APPROVED: REVIEW DOES NOT IMPLY RESPONSIBILITY BY
City Engineer Date THE RENEWING DEPARTMENT, THE LOCAL
CHECKED BY: EKEY ENGINEER. OR THE LOCK ENTITY FOR
Water & Wastewater Utility Date ACCURACY AND CORRECTNESS OF THE
CALCUILATIONS.
REVIEW
CHECKED BY: WESNOT IMPLY
PLY TTHAT OUAN4 OF ITEMS
Stwmwaw ICI Date ON THE PLANS ME THE FINAL QUANTITIES
CHECKED 60 REQUIRED. THE REVIEW SHAH NOT BE
Part Is Recreation Date CONSTRUED IN ANY REASON AS ACCEPTANCE
CHECKED 9Y: OF PNWCML RESPONSIBI TY BY THE LOCAL
Tic Engineer Gate ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES OF ITEMS
SHOWN THAT MAY BE REQUIRED DURING THE
CHECKED W.—Date CONSTRUCTION PHASE.
N a
G Y
CD a
O J
U O K
Z F
FZ P WOO
m ) L) (9Z
o Z G O
0LL
¢0 QO
S � � 0 W
Pe dI
June 25, 2008
PmNH NmM: 1
rye AN s-1Tpe
—m-
Ne Chile N Y RIaR.L
rrmm
DRWNND C-172
ft Bb Sho
0 son
1. ALL DISTURBED AREAS ME TO BE SEEDED AND
MULCHED, INCLUDING REGRADED LOTS AND POND
AREAS
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY
IRRIGATION IN NONIRRIGATEDGRASS SEED AREAS
FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF GRASSES.
3. STOCK PILES NOT TO EXCEED 10' HIGH SOIL.
4. ALL OFFERS AREAS DISTURBED DURING
CONSTRUCTION ME TO BE RE VEGETATED AND
RETURNED TO SIMILAR CONDITION AS PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION.
Pmmn AIIUUARV
POND CODE IWYR SPILLWAY VOLUME VOLUME
OUSEL ELEVATION PRONOED RELUMEO
(m cAcm iAGfT1
101 DETEN70N POND A914.0
0
4914.00 3.36 2.64
CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION
CENTER OF COLORADO
1=800ESS DAYS INDVANCE
BEFOREYOUM922:1987
CUFF 2 FOR THE
KING OF UNDERGROUND
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL THESE PUNS HARE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE
LOCAL ENRTY FOR CONCEPT ONLY. THE
APPROVED: REVIEW DOES NOT IMPLY RESPONSIBILITY BY
City Engineer Date THE RENEWING DEPARTMENT, THE LOCAL
CHECKED BY: EKEY ENGINEER. OR THE LOCK ENTITY FOR
Water & Wastewater Utility Date ACCURACY AND CORRECTNESS OF THE
CALCUILATIONS.
REVIEW
CHECKED BY: WESNOT IMPLY
PLY TTHAT OUAN4 OF ITEMS
Stwmwaw ICI Date ON THE PLANS ME THE FINAL QUANTITIES
CHECKED 60 REQUIRED. THE REVIEW SHAH NOT BE
Part Is Recreation Date CONSTRUED IN ANY REASON AS ACCEPTANCE
CHECKED 9Y: OF PNWCML RESPONSIBI TY BY THE LOCAL
Tic Engineer Gate ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES OF ITEMS
SHOWN THAT MAY BE REQUIRED DURING THE
CHECKED W.—Date CONSTRUCTION PHASE.
N a
G Y
CD a
O J
U O K
Z F
FZ P WOO
m ) L) (9Z
o Z G O
0LL
¢0 QO
S � � 0 W
Pe dI
June 25, 2008
PmNH NmM: 1
rye AN s-1Tpe
—m-
Ne Chile N Y RIaR.L
rrmm
DRWNND C-172
ft Bb Sho
0 son
CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION
CENTER OF COLORADO
1=800ESS DAYS INDVANCE
BEFOREYOUM922:1987
CUFF 2 FOR THE
KING OF UNDERGROUND
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL THESE PUNS HARE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE
LOCAL ENRTY FOR CONCEPT ONLY. THE
APPROVED: REVIEW DOES NOT IMPLY RESPONSIBILITY BY
City Engineer Date THE RENEWING DEPARTMENT, THE LOCAL
CHECKED BY: EKEY ENGINEER. OR THE LOCK ENTITY FOR
Water & Wastewater Utility Date ACCURACY AND CORRECTNESS OF THE
CALCUILATIONS.
REVIEW
CHECKED BY: WESNOT IMPLY
PLY TTHAT OUAN4 OF ITEMS
Stwmwaw ICI Date ON THE PLANS ME THE FINAL QUANTITIES
CHECKED 60 REQUIRED. THE REVIEW SHAH NOT BE
Part Is Recreation Date CONSTRUED IN ANY REASON AS ACCEPTANCE
CHECKED 9Y: OF PNWCML RESPONSIBI TY BY THE LOCAL
Tic Engineer Gate ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES OF ITEMS
SHOWN THAT MAY BE REQUIRED DURING THE
CHECKED W.—Date CONSTRUCTION PHASE.
N a
G Y
CD a
O J
U O K
Z F
FZ P WOO
m ) L) (9Z
o Z G O
0LL
¢0 QO
S � � 0 W
Pe dI
June 25, 2008
PmNH NmM: 1
rye AN s-1Tpe
—m-
Ne Chile N Y RIaR.L
rrmm
DRWNND C-172
ft Bb Sho
0 son
N a
G Y
CD a
O J
U O K
Z F
FZ P WOO
m ) L) (9Z
o Z G O
0LL
¢0 QO
S � � 0 W
Pe dI
June 25, 2008
PmNH NmM: 1
rye AN s-1Tpe
—m-
Ne Chile N Y RIaR.L
rrmm
DRWNND C-172
ft Bb Sho
0 son
June 25, 2008
PmNH NmM: 1
rye AN s-1Tpe
—m-
Ne Chile N Y RIaR.L
rrmm
DRWNND C-172
ft Bb Sho
0 son
CONSTRUCTION SEOUENCE I STANDARD EROSION CONTROL CONSTRUCTION PLAN NOTES,
MOPES PERMIT NOTES
SEEDING CHART
INNCAR BY UK OF A BAR ONE OR 51WBXS WHEN ERMM LCx MEASURES WILL BE
STAOFD, MAJOR M WIi1CATWS TO AN APPROVED SCHEDULE MAY REWIRE 4 UITIING A
NEW SCHEDULE FOR MPROVAL By IRE Cm ENONEER.
YEAR
2005
MONTH
Jan
I Feb
MVIAKIMOYI
Alit
I Ad
µg
W
Oct
No
Bee
Jm
FW
Mar
AIR
OSERLOi GRAPHIC
NEEP
BOND EROSIw Coxma
Sol Roaanenmg
OEM
PmYmelw April
Aabwa.al earnwa
wigurtive Methods
see $eami
OMer
RAINFALL EROSION CWTR0.
STRUCTJRAL'.
SNlmml Tmp/90eF
SIR
Am
Intel Flat...
Sna
Sh rance 8... Iwo
Sand AN
San,AGO
....
a)CCa
Olpw$ UINaWg
VEETAPVE:
PMMOIICt Sold Planting
T
emporary Seed planting
Said nMollwlon
NettingM^NMlanketerg
Other
PROFILE VIEW
GENERAL NOTES:
1. INSPECT, REPAIR, AND REPLACE,
(IF RECESSION 19 THE FLTERS AFTER
EACH STORM +ENT.
2. ALL BALES MUST BE REPLACED AFTER 1
MONTHS UNLESS APPROVAL IS GRANIEO BY
THE ENGINEERING DIVISION FOR LONGER ISE.
EROSION SALE CHECK
wmm,.t. areanx� edPm.r..e
m 1o� —
o1wL __ Ilr�ryy SECTION A
e INLET PROTECTON
A ismA i
ELAd—SHE
W `..'amen
NTH 901N'AEl 11111 N INTO INTO EROSION ONCE I ITS
ol
SMW BALE R L�.w. UCTURES
SLOPE
W 0
PANES'.
D-din-STATE CLASSIFICATION FOR NOMINAL STARE SITE.
ALL EWES WU BE TCEP INTO MOVE DIMENSICN.
IFRIPAAPTOBEGRWTED:
GROUTS LL BE IN ACCORDANCE MASM'.CI107 LAMSTREVINS
GROUT SH BE VIBMTEC IN PLACE. TOPS OF Exp05ED RIP{nP WILLW
V BRC SIT ED AND CLEANED CF GROUT TO EXPOSE RIP -A COLOR.
DIMENSIONS GIVEN ON PIM'S ME MINIMUM DIMENSIONS
RIPRAP SHOULD STARET 2 FEET BEHIND THE FESµD E%TENED THE
MINIMUM LEHGM PLUS 2 FEET.
THE CONCRETE Pµ CAN BE INCLUDED IN ME WDM OF THE RIPRAP Pµ,
THE RIPRM WN HSHOUID EMEND A MINIMUM OF A FCCT ON EITHER SIDE
OF THE CONCRETE PAN IN ISOM DIRECTIONS.
RIP RAP DRAWING
The City or Fat Collins Strom w UNlty erosion cMUO xgetw must M natlW at Import
24 nwa mor to my croslmetk an Isle me,
All .wweea pmimebr air
TR Mn<NT .nml be f" Coaxial
pl m one Rona I measure awour
installed It the a,Pq. groomer ES i Ali off" eryuYM erosion 11 Ill mwgm enrol be
wa
po m uctte um. IP My�wce a. xa;aMa m m. cep ,a
p.ep.l eanaMle. < aw.uaa plan., the enoldcn contra wl. °
Pee-dlnu2mce wgelanm Moll be protected and Fal Wwewr portal.. Romowl or
hate nce of exsma wgnaUm Mml be waited to ue area..yl Ian Immediate
onew<tim ryerdlaPe. Amid Ian the MMut webers Period of time.
At ewaeea dmaq land dLW2mq aatWty (wppktg, ill aunty Nmd,tlars
ackpimg, Mllnq, eAA sal be kept n eaughmed a mtm n ripping A thing ^ io
and contourstit muchwgetat m, m oev mmA ofinstalled,
wYs A o e ci iM protect street night, f wy Mall eon d by land dishonor
micro than 0n .we did before,
cral lm
mrm fe red mulch land.. N (wO/ an � tic. a Deal
I^9 ) I .Cite rlv Aby a mead p me
PP Y
5lwmroter Utety,
The property, a wowed and mdntairred peep r hen h. at 11 Oclp .unite canammm tsby .o as
toPiriwm uttl erdust Alipa is dstu2ing robes, Mal Mined bythenuM dim /li illw duet Impacts adjrc'ant prgwtlx, an delmnFM by Ib City of
Feel Cdlxa Fnginminq DePo.lmant.
n temporary (elm eon) . si control m e en n dole inaw and rapre ea A
remstri du Puy ^Rer ec nnaH ewd Rawer to aevuContinuedertamf
Of thi < in stained eedxrm e.epoae^Iwla^y tIXesroadway<•
and aiya M n a n w old aum eo as not to use
their release into any dr nagewy.
No au emapu. al e.ceed <m (mfeet m Mail A Amur% m protected
transport SO WALL... ... ghwe g watering, llm m ter silt fe Nq. my wII
M,,Apw reemadimrs SHOT be Mee a Owed
City Gmnmu prooReffe, ;M bracxxQ^ dropping, oe eeeposiOPq at WI, w m m. m.tMRl
Unto City
ye sleet, by a or EARlar. Ile. Any Rita . .P deposited TOOLING Nml be eanen
itram water nT ue amPSm lama the .m.wwim of the Charles me the fees, BUD
el of chi ct dlm.
All disturbed arms shall he reseeded and mulched.
Contractor was e temporary hlgaWn mit M Vincex ban- dgmmd e.efa
eetMllMmm of wuwgrossed,
RN
AOF DNOL YV]I! SWIIEn
SIDxf SNE
yp.
DESYNAMV
nWl M Ghll SAM
(Ix %MIxIA)
Px(1($1
cI a..
]o - Tao
55
50 - HO
W
25 - fie
o
e
2 - 10
s1
CLASS 12
]O - ,w
;;D—
SO - m
2]5
25 - M
W
12
2 - 10
5
[LASE 1a
100
1275
So - D
655
D - W
275
is
2 - 10
10
CLl42R
IW
SO- AS
1]W
a - era
- 10
y
- Lfµ PMIIc1E GEE AT IUST A BEM OF M smallLWL BE $iGGS GAOL TO ON MMJFR MAN
oRE1sGx.
AN BIRY W . W I EASE ACP¢ M G ROG IF SLOPES ARE SIEfPER.
TRENCH NbATTACHEDIFN NOT
Ex
I HIT
whe EACH
INNER
DR AT POSTS Fill i THE ANNUAL IOAMMI" IF to
OF POSTS AND APPETITE FR. III NCEER SE
N50
1 itil — lETffi H
1/2 — J/.- FLTER UMR
SILT FENCE
WITS.
I. MENCLE T MANS BEST SHLLL BE UGmMr
AT DO ENIRAVCE ff To THE CCNSTRLCMx SHE
z Y CU T KIW wl sIW1 BE MVNTANED
M NEmm TO PREVENT A!I WMRLLL PON BEING
T°ACHE➢ ONTO Clry SIREET,
S. SEDIMENT AND NER WTQML SPILLED. OROPPEO
OR TI KM IXRO COPY STREEL Syµ1 BE IYMEDNIELY
REMOVED.
1. SR DESCRIPTION
a. single h man Army etlamtW lwe ct n A" .meek of aerial grcdYla unity +a'A. roa6.ey
em.nue on and the cwstmcnm of a retention/dot tlon pm .
b. me mapr aaltl l a are e pm The e la .
O Akwy an Drubbing nnecCe rr fan peM1neler [mbGr
2. doll of perimeter cm
:. Derr of e.I. xg etructu
. OMOI gnashing hall Iwpwwy diyrslm srNes.
5. uadmg or .Mention mdnn.e
6 UIIIpy Gal a tiro - Including &tam
Rmd.ay croswcuan
a $labnhaua . xaodxg ..NNg
9. Rsmawl of .most measures
the Are xntaxs 11.01 acres At 11D1 aw f es o She rate we .ale to and.ga a.wH9 / m w w a
pedln e
Ranmal'C' - 0.10 babe croslmaim. Rauanal'C - 0.60 aR cmmwct n. One Mle less small,
the Maaww. Raxhu Eraaonity Eme and Ma cto Stand ErMmulty zone peg Me City of Fwt Collins Alone
affir lee I'll site Mope Of appro.Mately 05[ to IX INS I" Mpmwnmla rbl be mbPelM
to Path .ad and ra ffall wri
The, �mt property cal of falow muwa ayiAmid Emery cwstr,, MNO
s
concerted of sin wl&le turn d slid arm growers and +ears,.
OF a
Trans m no anticipated polutlan es . Done Ron ibe no WAG& &Iwq or Meaning MIN.
Daniel be na cheml of al age m Into
g, IDw rAl M anticipated non-stwmsaNr components of dluFarge.
IF Slmn ralr nnaH M1an the d&wccgM portion of to ells rill be tm,*wl to an or
delmilm pond by am 5 autte ;pipes, banneR a w one Most now. Da downstream ran ring rater
h combined with Intel . treated & mmrwer to a teting Tribal ditch.
2. SHE MAP
I . 9w Did xye 4 Erosion Cmua Plan.
5. sup FDA STWMWAIER PCLLUTpI pIENNTW:
a Erosion ma Gdmml Cmtrd&: See Folk, CmNtl NON& and g umce TOM, (Drier +rest).
Materials Homing am.Spot Prer&nuan: Measures mood be uMMWm m cmtrdl building Nobel
and earld disposalasphalt a o rete to D matmde as n lww the sit,
and .m. be a atoy p wits namir dul IP posh uUW. Asphalt. anwe4l building
materps waste. Iancroup by Van Ct& Mould not be d&Ga ed Nice Mae m-site dutb mNN and storm
ml iffmi nor Should they l u N-sVe anmilm Mind. a mitt or Pill hint One we
In o erne Nye & curb curb "let AT pslma Sweetpre a•rl Ppswnaatto m em should be undertaken mmMmlMy
wnt future sAl h earring,
E1NAL STABN2ATON µO LgRO-1ERY STCRYWATEA MMAC MT:
Aa, See Emaim Col Not" this wi M Mtl Otimadla mwwrw to watrd polual in
mormrwer dNmagrs,
x OTHER CONTACTS:
I . Arius Maaobe unM n to remove e< r bat M tb„oN aM destom al
n material, x-.Ib m empropwle mm l m ee a M u Maaken to
MrollOff-site-e a mmg of mud and luag.nl pit n lisocibrng HAS MN. Mud m
mld a be name stale Oda area to enter) m-pro dwmaa& ran wife discharge
vivo unly into the Cxhe Pdunr Plead as
6 (INSPECTION µ0 MANTFNME:
Team& ma Cmmllmee cf the Wvs Gulf whould be undertaken m d ,eylm Mdn d, w,nmee x 6acllm a If me
Table 11.2.
Remmmenaea S lb and Applkalkn Baptist of Seed.
for Temporary Vegetation maricer Coar uep..
=3r_
Seaem 1 DnnM Pwnd✓Awe
al env an'
Out,co20
ca
ie
Cored a
NOcoal
a^d m
CAROL
Wheat - Spring
Cod W
B,H,"
Caa 50
'15
Hybrid Guam
Wum
Sorghum
IC
Coal "Olson Table. w ^ graml
e
Make their m growth
Apr qr
R lase a anti Pamms, Rohl. 1LR�
spring aenllnw ImTN p q
Doty I nnitl end
a, tier•
ton par cow cr
p r/ .ores..
Tal HAD Rmte Ors. r Formal 9 • a wen lal and L'rlpwaY/Cos P[a 6aexe.
DAIS
PERENNIAL TEMPMMY/BOY
GRASSES CRW GRASSES
An m - Feb 26 Ye Yes No No
Ym 01 - May 15 yyes Yes Noes Yes
I5 May - may 51 NNo
o
.LP 01 _ AT 51 No No Yes
Aug 01 AT Aug 51 Ha Yes No Yes
No No YN
Pat Of - Diedd ] Yes Y s No No,
MupMn9 WhII M ue to owe SOntwiigmml at vagelalimnti w , amorat 00
temporary
a+N l q mNme M l e used ym wish a pmmnka a.d pees mFAA
mixture o
empty y ngelatim w Pry.
KMW ow Applleat n Rala
Shaw or Hoy ACJan P� BGac Sl ate, of u 1 1/2-2 Ime/aae
Hydri (rood or pm,) Yf 15 -
E.Mw contra (mate a sari Jm m - o« is No1/2-2
"i immdeo
Try10 Sir" rinsor ihMOST M hx�Mn..lwnm Wesas and ct Iewt 5 M us I WHO
gem is o length In I, w wish na11w graem hay hm a naliw
suggested r lMing and rd IL a Ilan,
11 bowl is ua", bpraullc mutts.. may M PpIIM hmm March 15 i O Gap ]O
Hcy w Straw Ill
1. Huy PCarmw mrdm l Ali be anchc to me BON by we M
MloWx methods.'
9
(a) A rmps, whim .ul .rmp the Ill four Rmes An
WON, At least 50%of the
Mall be 10 ewNs
we M more In length,
(e) Mor anufactured rmartni y to mount cturent nstrucctions
F) Todd Pmpd on the mulch to ins
nuyata. ...won «around
2. All anti. oraro must be from of null,$ n s,
—r "'" .
.�
•
I____.
e AN r
y
HEA._.,
� NOT IN n
PRE --
`ASEAN
—.rear......
®
._
AS
e.
NATO I AT
....
NEAR ANCIm RANSETATTERSENTRAINARrANNEARE
♦1 ri
,...
..e....IQ
_
ev
m_
i ...a....A ...m.
w_W..w.,. .aemLz
PC
C �.�.::,
�1uL.e �rTJ�e"RRztiy
MWELSO
Al
r al
...m..�NNOTER.......r..r.rm.,.......
__„r �.Ex
. _.,n
....... ,. m......w..r.mo. ..,.
ATC: AN
Iffil IS MODEL
�er
w..r....
THITHENTRAPPENCEPECENTANTAFF
N�e�Tl:'2S
.�r...... M,.,. ...®..
.,.,,..e..e...-.o.......
won
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET DETAIL
EEN
FOR CHANNEL INS TALLAT/ON
A
NOTE:
\/ Pam nr ANONG THEciwwE���,t¢wuBOilfE aTF�
CRRICAL SIN
CI E �w�NECaevxY TO PROPEIar He' IME OP
w
L
REAREAR.W
vwwan
..i..er....
�..s.ww.m�
CREEP MTU�
SETUP
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL
APPROVED:
City Engineer
Date
CHECKED
BY:
Water A Wastewater Unity
Gate
CHECKED
BY:
%ormmter Utility
Date
CHECKED
BY:
Port k Recreatlan
Dote
CHECKED
BY:
Traffic Enginmr
Gate
CHECKED
Date
...an I
�O �
CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION
CENTER OF COLOFUOO
7.800mil987
THESE PLANS HAVE BEEN RENEWED BY THE
LOCAL ENlltt FOR CONCEPT ONLY. THE
REVIEW ODES NOT IMPLY RESPONSIBILITY BY
TIE REVIEWING DEPARTMENT, ME LOCAL
ENTITY ENGINEER, VAR THE LOCAL ENTITY FOR
ACCURACY AND CORRECTNESS OF ME
CALCULATIONS. FURTHERMORE, THE REVIEW
DOES NOT IMPLY THAT QUANTITIES OF ITEMS
ON ME PLANS ARE THE FINAL QUANTTIES
REQUIRED. THE RENEW SHALL NOT BE
CONSTRUED IN ANY REASON AS ACCEPTANCE
OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBWIT BY THE LOCAL
ENTITY FOR ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES OF ITEMS
SHOWN THAT MAT BE REQUIRED DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION PHASE.
T
C
d
Y
E
OJ
J
F
Q
o
tiz
a
UD
i
ZOZ ti
2
zee
Qy
X
OWI
=
W Z
PemYSW
NO
June 25, 2008
Fort Am Mm
fY ,e o-l].Mc
AM do don MEDIA
D oft NO. C-173
Ret41n Bh6N
0 9d2t
',\ anS.uLgtwer[wxawxL(IrP.I
aIAaA Wltl1
\
\ EE6YM�w E
I
OF
°•
WIN AN
\\ ♦ e.
A
Mragwan
IN
HE �
\ B IIr
D
TIN
m :qYR�\ Iv�1DimA
INDNAN T
i
�w
�
D...:i.•.1..........r.Ei
mmo
D
RONNIE
unmunAAWnn
uunWePMT■S
i
u
u...
..........IIIIIIII"
R..........
AARAN
monsH
i
��I�riIIIIIn'
1
.
1
iiRiRiEEEARR
..]RR.r
moons@"Y■Y■
^„PAIRIA"IAAAAAAue
...RRRx
} DAL J� WNALLISCREEN.�
STAINLESS (US FILTER
A B O
STEELED EGLAR, PLAN
WRAIN WELDED
TOOREATE WITH
SECTION C-C
MI6.&AEEN
SECTION A -A
SECTION O-0
100-YR ORIFICE
Hid
i
POND OUTLET STRUCTURE DETAIL ORIFICE PLATE
SCOURSTOP TRANSITION MAT
CURB OPENING INSTALLA
P 91 W
FWF-WAY SICP
NK %
1w MtM MAT
METAL AALf
ANCIICt AND FLEXIBLE STRAP
M SCALE
NO LOAN DINNER IT PILL STRAP EVIL µDLROURSPUSH M
STOP SAM SAI14.
A TRIM FREERS •TRAP IF NEME Y.
SC NVALP TRANSITION MAT
INSTALLATION DETAINS
RUM ON
PPE
bIIEIFR
(bs)
(TENS)
S EREENGP
MaNMENGm
1r
a
A' A!
SIR
m
IN
IN OF le•.
12
AM BUTT MET AIM
HerW
INS
Is A IV'
AT.
ME-E- PEAYANENTILY ARAgIm
WAY�To NAG 350 TLNF _
W
72•.
130
M' . A•
we DFMIZ
r
TT Y MLLS FOR CONSISTENT SOL
STRUCTURE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION,
SECTION B-B
— IHiEND
a
.YERW
ABBREW.TIDNB
FLA
TNY
AN WARNER
iP.l
M, wVi[
AS AT
WEN
Ela
Me
NET
ONE
c NERK MS
NIWKmOegnPMa
aLMI11Mv TWM•Tnl wr ArnrwnaM NW PMr mMIMAIIION r
IglDm .s .N wrtowrx I�IAmon ra aP-w a N.I. Avm
z w" 7
S.arts ImAN r AwTON) M`TNMxMMNa®rt iWSm Rm IEAAE
STANDARD4 SESSION • .A� . SMEET
WmINNoM
P.uww#Pwrt IMNFDAOANAA�dOep�rtY aar�o>tYwluAyFDxxA mIwW.
SAz m MEMY AN 3Iw)Ml�NAysA A µ fjMYMY UNDER MASS lw[
M NI MAMAR�WLERAE ~MANLY PM.A9gAMUAME G 8 96RYA2 A'oons AE.v'wWA 11A Name
wwEgz a Maam Aa¢ MP IRIA6 mae
E Tian AND Yll`EMrMO eT P6
I FOR EACH wYlAwmL cwWza wnYNu's oamar wY Fwra m a0uu camrna ra
ENEDITATEM
s�a� mews wr rm m arlw ooi'stlrul a ism .5sw�i.Aml TY01wu o
MR-DARAX WAY
_ aDAn tacW wM Oma Pwa m wsrYulEll.
sa! ra A m A.e IMqu nqE oaxn s cAP1Im MM A
EAR
OMEMP IREJUN0RU1 o1mR W'R Aw'w'NwAEl My AWr m o. HARD SLAN
P. AW w a.MM IN Aaw METN•311 o-Sw.MVA AND
an wxl[ wW INN TAPE IN OETEW[
D z m Ns SKacATIBL Eo Mwona
iM aF M wlbl. WRIIILCr WA1 a MT
in MARY IN SANNE m.w9l wus Arne sRWs m YWTAN Ya a TMT .o109 NOW wr
]IRAPs w q 4� To WOYN M ro 1A• m DEUxna a MNv m wr aMI OD!
. TW[ •A• wrxNAlo •MlwcrlgM
14 flora ai n n e E M MP m a W
A THa D/N SAIIAA ftI�aEWABIfd LHTM
smp [Wwx.na R FiMRD WMYtInwM WR EN95( gLa16 wEF EMARD.
SEE DE7�I ON - pM I N MAY MAY As oR D'ql BUE
TAIRD RW RAID 6 nE Y4 TIME
- ESWE.a.WT �x MIS
-lDHoo RED YA NERA wETLE wST SIEMENS Are IN rcm0.
16
sT nrrsNlAW DESCRIBES wm DAwEw WNMUM Alem MAr1[
b M OOa NMYAq MPB ID SYW WadOaY OObbNI AVAINt AT.•ue.RY.OA
ADD A MMKAXMMS IF MATS
ARE ro K PLACED ON UNEA£N
M91E0 9JFAQ3 TO mA E
CQNgI T CONTACT WM SKI
rA rB
M r t
t
e
11 wE,,
4�1 '
LA LB
WILT WEN Oncx PANT
IfiaFlAIY•TDnNO}�
a
:"—
oEan.�u�ruL:Wm
WawN®
a
WR.W
al„
r
o
AN
.IN
P WAY �TZFFFTF`
prp�
IY[wM YWYMb
SECIYIN B-94
MADE
SECTION C�—CC®® (ROW
xx n_—Sli I^ A��x LSD
FROM ONE
Yw;wt�M 1/2-mmm ��j•MfSRi .' f T va
IIN CONNECTED TO A Y lECTpI A-
INUT AT BDRW
OF VFRMIiDILINSM�
T'T�T
nW
rBeB
wW ;I ®I ICI
III � - �TirF
r
CONCRETE
m
E XIFr
W
NAM
Sur
CDOT TYPE 'C' INLET DETAIL
TNIE/SW COMBNATW
INSNALLATUN DETAILS
M M)WbYMMIT Wi IMTMIA alll @ 0 SCALE
- rsl .YALa em SIRElO11W nanr IM4E Tice
- ns Y1SOF MAT �NWLA AMEA DON W l® T MM MAT .OW � Alla
YE STAAAEM SAYME �n IIMWrW!YMI AN OF IRMwkLAi T]a. YOWAWRa
ANNINNIS NOW OMMM E.vlaa oa A ma rllmmr om.on AWE.rE AT ...M..W W.
A\CW •Tb111YC WERE MASS R ACES SEEMSTIN TRY AWY Rbl 5(ML 9JFFACE BY IXSTILIHC
$IAFLF$ AT ] TYEs YANYFACNXERS SUGGES1Ep
N RARE IF HST s1sPEx4m MOWRs M EAagM
CANMswor aE wsEALLAnM.
7 77 sm EASIER
—
wr (M.)
MINIMUM TRANSITION MAT COYFAAOE FOR ROPES
WYM5IRENL Oi OUIFALL
S l- - r
MIT
b 63
MOPNpWTN
r
e
W
s
Y
3
[.IV
i
N
Ir.IP
A
N
rAa
E
@AM sxomx TRwvnw
W STEEP TO MT ACNE
AREAS
TOE OF SLOPE INSTALLN
SCALE I- - 1-
nLn9RW WR
FM MAT I GN . USE
CglWlm gsOIAWY
m wiuxi NipFOR
I�
$TAWF Sa EHAY 10 Wb6
MT a WOKS OF LEACM4
EDK Aro RY Y TMgmNgIT
STAPLFD SCA DETAIlS
NO SCALE
•PACING MLL VARY MIX
1EN4m OF SLOPE, W
BARS > 5.1. crosC
THE Tgl/SCO C NAITM
FOR NEATER PROTECTION
AND sI W FACTO.
TRANSROW MAN
1
ETYMA) —I
E
L YW ! or We / 1V OF MpC I]lYIN
r SLOT_GOALL eOTImS
AND
r IN M Vow
TIE
. m ALTERNATE SLOT AND
OLD DOWN
ORATE INSFALUnON PLATE CETAIL
fdiAll `GENFRAJ FILTER +`ta wHr
OLWIIIRES
FOR ONE INLET
SHE
11
IS
0
THE
It
MR
A
FOR
in
2
NEW
NA
In
a
ISO
in
a
ISO
AM,
in
3
THE
IN
in
4
INIS
AN
in
6
SHE
IT
MW
A
aW USr FOR H-T-e•
AMO BENCING DIAGRAM
Y j
wim.
•1U
mmmmmm
I__;
—r
-
fib:_
11:=Y.
.._
...-._:ARMY
IIIANNA
vao.
I A.Ix)
AM OF
o•
�MOvl
A.Y
CUN
IP
510
.•1!W
NIAW
SEA IT
�•PIgaiS IT NY iIT737.T�
IRAN
Ra
BURIED RPRAP DETAIL
CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION
CENTER OF roI ORADO
1 AN
800 922 1987
IL
FOR THE MARKIN, �N NO
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL
OIY Engineer owe
CHECKED BY:
Water A Waatawater Waly Me
CHECKED B
Stormwoter (Eility Dote
CHEERED BNP
Parks h Recreation Dote
CNFCNED BY:
TroBk Engineer Date
CHECKED BY:
DOES
THESE PLANS LANE BEEN REVIEWED BY ME LOCAL
ENTRY FOR CONCEPT ONLY. THE REVIEW WES NOT
IMPLY RESPONSIBILHY BY ME RENEWING
DEPARTMENT. THE LOCAL ENIDY ENGINEER. OR ME
LOCAL ENTRY FOR ACCURACY AND CORRECTNESS OF
THE CALCULATIONS. FURTHERMORE. THE RENEW DOES
NOT IMPLY THAT QUANTITIES OF ITEMS ON THE PUNS
ME ME FINAL CLAN➢LIES REQUIRED. THE RENEW
SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED IN ANY REASON M
ACCEPTANCE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILfIY BY THE
LOCAL ENTP FOR ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES OF RENTS
SHOWN THAT MAY BE REWIRED WRING THE
CONSTRICTION PHASE.
D
ENJ S2 Q Ski IQ
5
S
3Igd
fr"soot
Ellpp1
�s aamI
k ��E
g
34
fill;.
$§]!
11
181 IF
5(511
i
A
®Rj
III
I�
C
a
T
N
}
E
0
0
W
o
V
J_
Z
Q
E
w?
O
I--J
m
S- u.
U
CI
0�
+
]
Z
m
O
A
A.
a
June 25, 2008
Pmpn
FIN KNEW
-Aal
ANY AIR AM aat.ez
nr
DNWngw� C-505
R91nsIm Seel
0 29 M YB