Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Drainage Reports - 09/23/2006
FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT LINDENMEIER ESTATES P.U.D. Approved RSA ate 23 04, J J R ENGINEERING 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT LINDENMEIER ESTATES P.U.D. Prepared for: BAYBERRY DEVELOPMENT 2120 South College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80525 Prepared by: JR ENGINEERING 2620 E. Prospect Rd., Suite. 190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 (970) 491-9888 July 17, 1997 Revised: June 5, 1998 Revised: September 1, 1998 Revised: December 31, 1998 Revised: April 9, 1999 Revised: July 12, 2000 Revised: October 25, 2000 Revised: February 22, 2001 Revised July 20, 2001 Revised October 31, 2001 Revised February 27, 2002 Revised February 6, 2004 Revised April 29, 2004 Job Number 9090.00 I �I 1 1 1 1 CERTIFICATION OWNER Bayberry Development LLC hereby certifies that the drainage facilities for the proposed Lindenmeier Estates P.U.D. subdivision shall be constructed according to the design presented in this report. I understand that the City of Fort Collins does not and will not assume liability for the drainage facilities designed and/or certified by my engineer. I understand that the City of Fort Collins reviews drainage plans pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes Title 30, Article 28; but cannot, on behalf of Lindenmeier Estates guarantee that final drainage design review will absolve the Lindenmeier Estates P.U.D. subdivision and/or their successors and/or assigns of future liability for improper design. I further understand that approval of the Final Plat and/or Final Development Plan does not imply approval of my Engineer's drainage design. Bayberry Development LLC Edward Zdenek ' Manager ' ENGINEER 1 7 L 1 1 1 I hereby certify that this report (plan) for the preliminary drainage design of Lindenmeier Estates P.U.D. was prepared by me (or under my direct supervision) in accordance with the provisions of the City of Fort Collins ST DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARD for the o sxhwa Respectfully Su ;rake F, AND P•-' Professional Eng 11 1 7. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TABLEOF CONTENTS..........................................................................................................................................2 1. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................4 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION...................................................................................................................................4 1.2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS.............................................................................................................................4 1.3 SOILS...........................................................................................................................................................4 1.4 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF REPORT..............................................................................................................4 1.5 DESIGN CRITERIA.......................................................................................................................................5 1.6 MASTER DRAINAGE BASIN & OTHER DRAINAGE REPORTS.....................................................................5 2. HISTORIC DRAINAGE...................................................................................................................................5 3. DEVELOPED FLOWS.....................................................................................................................................6 3.1 METHOD......................................................................................................................................................6 3.2 EXTERIOR FLOWS.......................................................................................................................................6 3.3 ONSITE FLOWS............................................................................................................................................6 3.4 GENERAL FLOW ROUTING.........................................................................................................................6 3.5 PROPOSED DRAINAGE PLAN.......................................................................................................................7 3.6 HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED DRAINAGE CONDITIONS.....................................................9 3.7 ALLOWABLE STREET FLOW CAPACITIES................................................................................................ 10 3.8 CURB INLET DESIGN................................................................................................................................. 10 3.9 STORM SEWER DESIGN............................................................................................................................. 11 3.10 SWALES......................................................................................................................................................14 4. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN.................................................................................................................14 4.1 VARIANCES................................................................................................................................................14 4.2 IRRIGATION DITCHES............................................................................................................................... 14 4.3 DITCH COMPANY APPROVAL................................................................................................................... 15 4.4 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS..................................................................................................................15 4.4 WATER QUALITY.................................................................................................................................15 6. EROSION CONTROL....................................................................................................................................16 5.1 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES..................................................................................... 16 5.2 DUST ABATEMENT.................................................................................................................................... 16 5.3 TRACKING MUD ON CITY STREETS..........................................................................................................16 5.4 MAINTENANCE..........................................................................................................................................17 5.5 PERMANENT STABILIZATION.................................................................................................................... 17 6. REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................................17 APPENDIX A MAPS AND FIGURES APPENDIX B HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS APPENDIX C STREET CAPACITY CALCULATIONS APPENDIX D INLET CALCULATIONS APPENDIX E PIPE CALCULATIONS APPENDIX F SWALES AND OUTFALL INTO LINDENMEIER LAKE APPENDIX G IRRIGATION LATERALS 2 0 1 11 1 1 1 APPENDIX H EROSION CONTROL APPENDIX I LETTER TO PROPERTY OWNER APPENDIX J WATER QUALITY PONDS BACK POCKETS DRAINAGE PLAN AND PLAT OF LINDEN LAKE SUBDIVISION [1 3 1 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Location ' Lindenmeier Estates P.U.D. is a proposed 6.95 acre single-family residential development. This project is located in the Southeast One -Quarter of Section 36, ' Township 8 North, Range 69 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, in the City of Ft. Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. (See Appendix A - VICINITY MAP.) ' The project is located 1/a mile north of Willox Lane on the west side of Lemay Avenue. The site is bounded by Lemay Avenue on the east property line, by the Eaton Ditch on the ' north, and by Greenbriar Subdivision and Tellez Estates along the south property line. ' 1.2 Site Characteristics ' The entire project consists of 6.95 acres of land. The land is covered with rangeland grasses and weeds. The general topography of this site consists of fair to average covered ' rangeland. The slopes range from 2 to 7 percent across the site. A ridge runs from west to east through the southern third of the property. ' This site, which is currently undeveloped, will be developed as a single-family residential subdivision. This site is zoned LMN (Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood). 1.3 Soils The soils for this site are Kim loam (54) according to the "Soil Survey for Larimer County Area, Colorado", prepared by the United States Department of Agriculture Soil ' Conservation Service. (See FIGURE 2 - SOIL MAP.) The Kim series consists of deep, well drained soils that formed in mixed alluvium. The characteristics of the soil include medium runoff and moderate erosion. ' 1.4 Purpose and Scope of Report This report defines the proposed final drainage plan for Lindenmeier Estates P.U.D., including consideration of all on -site and tributary off -site runoff. The plan includes ' consideration of all on -site and tributary off -site runoff and the design of all drainage 1 4 ' facilities required for this development. 1.5 Design Criteria This report was prepared to meet or exceed the submittal requirements established in the "City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards" ' (SDDCCS), dated May 1984 with Revision January 1997. Runoff computations were prepared for the 2-year minor and 100-year major storm frequency utilizing the rational ' method. ' Where applicable, the criteria established in the "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual" (UDFCD), 2001, developed by the Denver Regional Council of Governments, has been utilized. 1.6 Master Drainage Basin & Other Drainage Reports This site is included in the Lower Dry Creek Drainage Basin. It is located at a junction ' between the Upper Dry Creek Drainage Basin, Lower Dry Creek Drainage Basin, and the Evergreen/Greenbriar Drainage Basin. ' All the basin reports reference an original "Dry Creek Hydrology Reconnaissance Study" by Resource Consultants & Engineers, Inc., October 1992. This report determined the ' contributing basin for Lindenmeier Lake. Our drainage basins are consistent with this determination. ' 2. HISTORIC DRAINAGE ' Historically, the north portion of the site, as well as the east half of the O'Halloran property, drains to the east where it enters an existing 10" RCP that flows under Lemay Avenue. The flows are then carried in a Swale into an existing 18" RCP that outlets into Lindenmeier Lake. The Historic runoff calculations can be found in Appendix F. 11 The southern portion of the site drains to the southwest into the Lindenmeier Lake Ditch and Lower Eaton Ditch Lateral. 5 ' 3. DEVELOPED FLOWS 1 3.1 Method The Rational Method was used to determine both the 2-year and 100-year flows for the subbasins indicated in this drainage report. A detailed description of the hydrologic ' analysis is provided in section 3.6 of this report. ' Detention is not required and will not be provided for this site. The existing storm sewer pipe under Lemay Avenue is being replaced to carry the developed flows. Once the flows ' leave this pipe, they are conveyed through an existing pipe and swale into Lindenmeier Lake. A letter from Lindenmeier Lake is included in the Appendix F. ' Water quality ponds have been provided for this site and are located within the site and off site along Linden Way as approved by the Linden Way Home Owners association. ' The hydrologic analysis was conducted for developed flows only. The resulting 100-year ' runoff values were used to define design discharges at design points identified along streets, low points, and drainage swales. ' 3.2 Exterior Flows ' The exterior flows entering the site are from the northeast half of the O'Halloran property. These flows are collected in the Lindenmeier Estates storm sewer system. ' 3.3 Onsite Flows ' Flows within this site will take the form of overlot, swale, street, or conduit flow. The existing drainage patterns have been kept as close to the historical drainage as possible. All lots will be graded to carry flows away from structures to the streets and proposed swales. 1 3.4 General Flow Routing ' The final drainage pattern for Lindenmeier Estates has been developed to provide a drainage system that is sufficient for the surrounding area. This has been accomplished ' by utilizing existing drainage patterns as much as possible and routing flows to limit the 1 6 amount of required drainage structures and facilities. 3.5 Proposed Drainage Plan ' A summary of the drainage patterns within each subbasin and at each design point is provided in the following discussion patterns. Discussions of the detailed design of ' drainage facilities are included in Sections 3.7, 3.8, and 3.9. t Runoff from Subbasin A is conveyed via overland flow over the top of the Lindenmeier Lake Ditch that runs along the back lots of Lindenmeier Estates and into Greenbriar Estates. In addition, a small amount (an area smaller than ' existing) of runoff outfalls onto the Tellez Estates development (lot) in sheet flow and is conveyed to Greenbriar Estates via sheet flow. ' Runoff from Subbasin B is conveyed via overland and drainage swale flow to water quality pond A to design Point 6. Runoff from Subbasin C is conveyed via overland flow to Linden Gate Court and routed northerly and easterly via street flow. A proposed on -grade combination inlet collects flow west of Lemay Avenue at design point 3. ' Runoff from Subbasin D is conveyed via overland flow to the northern gutter of ' Linden Gate Court where it is routed easterly and northerly via street flow. The flow is then collected in a proposed on -grade combination inlet at design point 2. t Runoff from Subbasin E is conveyed via overland flow into Linden Gate Court and routed via street flow to a proposed on -grade combination inlet west of Lemay Avenue at design point 4. ' Runoff from Subbasin F is conveyed via overland flow into Linden Gate Court and routed via street flow to a proposed on -grade combination inlet at design ' point 1. Runoff from Subbasin H is conveyed via overland and drainage swale flow to a proposed sump condition open pipe at design point 3a. The runoff from the combination of Subbasins B, C, D, E, F, and H is routed ' through a storm sewer system and released into water quality pond A and then released through a second storm sewer system that daylights into water quality ' pond B on the east side of North Lemay Avenue, which then releases through the existing 18" RCP under Linden Way. ' Runoff from Subbasin G is conveyed via proposed curb and gutter on the west side of North Lemay in the southerly direction to the low point of North Lemay 7 `R' and a proposed sump condition Type inlet at design point 5. ' Runoff from Subbasin K is conveyed via proposed curb and gutter on the west side of North Lemay in the northerly direction to the low point of North Lemay ' and a proposed sump condition Type `R' inlet at design point 5. The runoff from the combination of Subbasins G an K is routed through the storm sewer system under North Lemay Avenue and released into water quality ' pond B on the east side of North Lemay Avenue, which then releases through the existing 18" RCP under Linden Way. 1 Runoff from Subbasin I, an area where Lindenmeier Estates, P.U.D. includes a portion of the existing access/maintenance road for the irrigation ditch, is conveyed via overland flow into the Larimer - Weld Canal. The flows are the same as the historical 100-year release for this subbasin as the grading has not been revised for the access road nor has any additional flow been routed to this road or ditch. Runoff from Subbasin J is conveyed via overland flow and drainage swale flow into water quality pond B and design Point 8. Runoff from Subbasin L is conveyed via overland flow to Design Point 7. The combination of runoff from Subbasins B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K are routed through an existing 18" RCP under Linden Way and an overflow swale on the east side of Linden Way. The pipe carries 10.2 cfs into Lindenmeier Lake. The remaining flows along with flows from Subbasin L are conveyed into Lindenmeier Lake by way of Linden Way, which outlets to an existing swale over the top of the existing 18" RCP. During the 100-year event, 24.46 cfs of flow will surcharge out of the proposed water quality structure for Pond B and travel via overland flow across Linden Way and into Lindenmeier Lake. In addition to the 24.46 cfs surcharge from Pond B, the historic drainage Subbasin L will add an additional 6.01 cfs to the overland flow across Linden Way and into Lindenmeier Lake. I 3.6 Hydrologic Analysis of the Proposed Drainage Conditions The Rational Method was used to determine both 2-year and 100-year peak runoff values ' for each subbasin. The Rational Method utilizes the SDDCCS equation: Q = CfC1A (1) ' where, Q is the flow in cubic feet per second (cfs), A is the total area of the basin in acres, Cf is the storm frequency adjustment factor, C is the runoff coefficient, and I is the ' rainfall intensity in inches per hour. The frequency adjustment factor (Cf) is 1.0 for the initial 2-year storm and 1.25 for the major 100-year storm. ' The appropriate rainfall intensity information was developed based on rainfall intensity duration curves in the SDDCCS Manual. ' In order to utilize the rainfall intensity curves, the time of concentration is required. The ' following equation was used to determine the time of concentration. ttc = ti + tt (2) where tc is the time of concentration in minutes, t; is the initial or overland flow time in ' minutes, and tt is the travel time in the channel, pipe, or gutter in minutes. The initial or overland flow time is calculated with the equation: ' tt = [1.87(1.1 - CCf)LO'5xs)0.33 (3) ' where L is the length of overland flow in feet (limited to a maximum of 500 feet), S is the average slope of the basin in percent, and C and Cf are as defined previously. 1 All hydrologic calculations associated with the subbasins are attached in Appendix B of ' this report. Table 3.1 provides a summary of the design flows for all Subbasins and Design Points (DP's) associated with this site. t 1 1 9 I 1 11 TABLE 3.1 DRAINAGE SUMMARY TABLE DESIGN AREA AREA C(2) C(100) T(2) T(100) Q(2) Q(100) POINT DESIG. (ACRES) (MIN) (MIN) (CFS) (CFS) A 1.35 0.32 0.40 10.9 9.8 1.05 3.90 6 B 1.18 0.41 0.51 12.1 12.1 1.12 3.98 3 C 2.15 0.38 0.48 12.8 11.9 1.85 6.79 2 D 0.46 0.60 0.75 6.1 5.0 0.83 3.10 4 E 0.24 0.60 0.75 5.0 5.0 0.45 1.61 1 F 0.83 0.55 0.69 7.5 6.5 1.28 4.75 5 G 0.55 0.84 1.04 5.0 5.0 1.45 5.13 3A H 0.39 0.31 0.39 11.2 10.2 0.29 1.07 l(OS) 0.16 0.25 0.31 12.2 11.9 0.09 0.33 8 J 1.62 0.43 0.53 13.1 13.1 1.55 1 5.49 5 K 0.46 0.88 1.10 5.0 5.0 1.27 4.50 7 L 1.22 0.49 0.61 7.7 6.9 1.63 6.01 6 B,C,D,E,F,H 5.25 0.44 0.55 12.8 11.3 5.23 19.54 5 G,K 1.01 N/A N/A 5.0 5.0 2.71 9.63 3.7 Allowable Street Flow Capacities ' During the initial storm, runoff was not allowed to overtop either the curb or street crown ' for local streets. For arterials during the initial storm flow was allowed to overtop the curb, but leave at least one-half of roadway width free of water in each direction. According to the SDDCCS Manual, maximum street runoff criteria during the major ' storm event, limits the depth of water over the crown to 6 inches for local streets and arterial streets. Allowable gutter flows and maximum street capacities for both the initial ' and major storms were estimated and evaluated based on the specifications set forth in the SDDCCS Manual. ' A normal depth analysis of the allowable street capacities was performed using Haestad tMethods, Inc. "Flowmaster". (Output is included in Appendix C of this report.) 3.8 Curb Inlet Design All inlet locations and sizes are shown on the Utility Plans for the construction of this tproject. There is one sump Type "R" inlet required. There are four (4) on -grade combination inlets sized with this project. There are two (2) water quality outlet ' 10 1] ' structures designed for WQ Ponds A and B. Calculations for the sizing of these inlets are ' shown in Appendix D of this report (See Table 3.2 below for sizes). Calculations are provided from the UDFCD UD-Inlet spreadsheet. Calculations are also provided from the USDCM Volume 3 for the design of the water quality ponds and outlet structures. �J 1 1 11 TABLE 3-. SUMMARY OF STORM INLET REQUIREMENTS LOCATION INLET SIZE (feet) INLET CONDITION DESIGN INTAKE (cfs) Linden Gate Court - East side DP 1 1-Comb. Inlet On -Grade 3.9 Linden Gate Court - West side DP2 1-Comb. Inlet On -Grade 2.8 Linden Gate Court - North side DP3 2-Comb. Inlets On -Grade 6.4 Linden Gate Court — South side DP 4 1-Comb. Inlet On -Grade 2.3 Low point North Lemay DP 5 10' Type "R" Sump 10.9 Water Quality Pond A Outlet Overflow DP 6 4'x4' WQ Inlet Sump 19.5 Water Quality Pond B Outlet Overflow DP 8 4'x4' WQ Inlet F Sump 10.2 ' 3.9 Storm Sewer Design ' There is one storm sewer system proposed for the Lindenmeier Estates P.U.D. This storm sewer system is designed to handle 100-year flows for 6.32 on -site and off -site acres to the west of North Lemay and an additional 1.62 off -site acres east of North Lemay. Basins A & L (2.57 acres) are not collected by the storm sewer system. Three 0 ' StormCad runs have been provided. The first has been used to size the storm sewer ' above water quality Pond A and determines the amount of flow entering water quality Pond A. The second sizes the storm sewer between WQ Pond A and WQ Pond B and ' determines the amount of flow entering water quality Pond B. The third has been run to determine the flow allowable through the existing 18" RCP under Linden Way that releases into Lindenmeier Lake. In the third run, the design flow of 10.2 cfs was used ' based on the constriction at the overflow inlet grate that is weir controlled. The remaining flow of 24.46 cfs will bypass the inlet and flow across Linden Way. ' For the storm pipe design, the computer program StormCAD, developed. by Haestad ' Methods, Inc. was used. StormCAD considers whether a storm pipe is under inlet or outlet control and if the flow is uniform, varied, or pressurized and applies the appropriate equations (Manning's, Kutter's, Hazen -Williams, etc). StormCAD also takes into ' account tailwater effects and hydraulic losses that are encountered in the storm structures. ' It calculates the losses through an inlet or manhole by allowing the user to assign a coefficient for the equation, ' hL = K*(V2/2g) ' Where hL = headloss K = headloss coefficient V = average velocity (ft/s) ' g = gravitational constant (32.2 ft/s2) Table 3.3 is a summary of the storm sewer system on the following page. 12 [1 [1 1 1] TABLE'3.3 SUMMARY, OF STORM SEWER.PIPE=REQUIREMENTS " LOCATION PIPE DIAMETER (inches) DESIGN SLOPE (%) DESIGN DISCHARGE (cfs) Linden Gate Court DP 2 to DP 1 15" RCP 1 1.00 3.1 Linden Gate Court DP 1 to MH 1 15" RCP 2.94 7.9 Linden Gate Court MH 1 to DP 4 15" RCP 2.80 7.9 Linden Gate Court DP 3a to DP 3 8" HDPE 1 1.25 1.07 Linden Gate Court DP 3 to DP 4 12"x18" Box 1.25 7.9 Linden Gate Court to WQ Pond A DP 4 to WQ Pond A 19"00" HERCP 0.58 17.7 WQ Pond A to Lemay Ave.. DP 6 to DP-5 24" RCP 1 2.00 19.5 Under Lemay Ave. to WQ Pond B DP-5 to J-1 18" RCP 19"00" HERCP 8.01 9.04 29.1 29.1 J-lto WQ Pond B WQ Pond B to Lindenmeier Lake I-7 to Lake Exist. 18" RCP 2.29 10.2 11 13 71 ' 3.10 Swales The swales designed for our site are in accordance with Section 7.2 of the "City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design and Construction Standards". There are four (4) designed swales. Two, swales A and B, are to the west of, and run ' parallel to, North Lemay Ave. The other two are along the path to Lindenmeier Lake, swales C and D. Swale A is directly west of North Lemay Ave. and conveys subasin B ' flows north to water quality Pond A. Swale B is directly west of North Lemay Ave. and conveys subasin H flows south to design point 3a and the storm sewer system. ' Swale B is between Lots 39 and 40 in Linden Lake subdivision. This swale is along the east edge of a concrete drive. This is located at the critical section where the water surface ' alters from a backwater across the cul-de-sac to a draw down along the swale. The calculations included reflect conditions where the swale is passing the initial, major, and ' 133% of major storms. ' Swale C is between Lots 39 and 40 east of swale B. This swale is within the draw down section leading to Lindenmeier Lake across from the window well of the house on Lot 40. ' The calculations included reflect conditions where the swale is passing the initial, major, and 133% of major storms. This calculation shows that the spread of the flows are within the easement. 4. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN ' 4.1 Variances ' There are no variances requested with the development of Lindenmeier Estates. ' 4.2 Irrigation Ditches There are three irrigation ditches adjacent to or contained within Lindenmeier Estates. These include the Eaton Ditch along the north and Lindenmeier Lake Ditch and Lower ' Eaton Ditch Lateral in the southwesterly portion of the site. The Eaton Ditch is not affected by this development as it receives no direct runoff. The two small laterals are ' considered to be full in a 100-year event and the runoff routed to them is less than historic. (The historic area contributing to this area was the portion of the site from the 1 14 I 1 southwest boundary to the existing ridgeline in the vicinity of Linden Gate Court. The 1 developed condition reduces this area considerably as the basin line has shifted to the center of the houses on the southerly side of Linden Gate Court.) 1 In addition, the Lindenmeier Lake has agreed to accept the additional flows resulting from the development of Lindenmeier Estates. 1 4.3 Ditch Company Approval 1 Separate agreements for the easements have been obtained from the affected ditch 1 companies. This approval was for grading and easements affecting their property rights. 4.4 Maintenance Agreements 1 The developer will be responsible for the maintenance of all temporary and permanent idrainage structures on -site and off -site until accepted by the city. The 8" HDPE pipe running from DP3a to DP3 shall remain the ownership and responsibility of the Home 1 Owners Association. 1 4.5 Water Quality In order to minimize pollutants entering Lindenmeier Lake, and at the request of the 1 Linden Way Home Owner's Association, Water Quality (WQ) Ponds will be constructed for this development. The WQ ponds have been sized to accommodate the runoff 1 developed from the Lindenmeier Estates proposed development based on the UDFCD Extended Detention Basin Design Procedure (See Appendix J for calculations). Two WQ 1 ponds in series have been designed to accommodate the necessary design Water Quality Capture Volume of 4729 CF. WQ Pond A has been designed to detain 2000 CF of water and WQ Pond B has been sized to detain 3040 CF of water, thus a total design WQCV of 1 5040 CF. Both WQ Pond A and Pond B have been designed to function as wetland ponds and will maintain permanent water surface elevation. 1 �I 1 1 15 I ' 5. EROSION CONTROL ' 5.1 Erosion and Sediment Control Measures ' Erosion Sedimentation and will be controlled on -site by use of inlet filters, silt fences, gravel construction entrances, and seeding and mulch. (See the attached Erosion Control Plan for details.) During overlot and final grading the soil will be roughened and furrowed perpendicular to the prevailing winds (northwest and southeast). ' The measures are designed to limit the overall sediment yield increase due to construction ' as required by the City of Fort Collins. A construction schedule is contained in Appendix H and shown on the Erosion Control Plan which shows the overall time frame for ' construction activities. Silt fences or straw bale dikes will be utilized in limited areas adjacent to any stripping ' stockpiles that are created during grading. They will also.be used to slow runoff around the perimeter of the site. ' 5.2 Dust Abatement ' During the performance of the work required by these specifications or any operations appurtenant thereto, whether on right-of-way provided by the City or elsewhere, the contractor shall furnish all labor, equipment, materials, and means required. The Contractor shall carry out proper efficient measures wherever and as necessary to reduce ' dust nuisance, and to prevent dust nuisance that has originated from his operations from damaging crops, orchards, cultivated fields, and dwellings, or causing nuisance to ' persons. The Contractor will be held liable for any damage resulting from dust originating from his operations under these specifications on right-of-way or elsewhere. 5.3 Tracking Mud on City Streets It is unlawful to track or cause to be tracked mud or other debris onto city streets or rights -of -way unless so ordered by the Director of Engineering in writing. Wherever construction vehicles access routes or intersect paved public roads, provisions must be ' made to minimize the transport of sediment (mud) by runoff or vehicles tracking onto the paved surface. Stabilized construction entrances are required per the detail shown on the ' Erosion Control Plan, with base material consisting of 6" coarse aggregate. The contractor will be responsible for clearing mud tracked onto city streets on a daily basis. 16 ' 5.4 Maintenance All temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control practices must be maintained ' and repaired as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. Straw bale dikes or silt fences will require periodic replacement. Sediment traps (behind straw bale barriers) shall be cleaned when accumulated sediments equal approximately one-half of trap storage capacity. Maintenance is the responsibility of the developer. ' 5.5 Permanent Stabilization ' All soils exposed during land disturbing activity (stripping, grading, utility installations, stockpiling, filling, etc.) shall be kept in a roughened condition by ripping or dicing along ' land contours until mulch, vegetation or other permanent erosion control is installed. No soils in areas outside project street rights of way shall remain exposed by land disturbing activity for more than thirty (30) days before required temporary or permanent erosion ' control (e.g. seed/ mulch, landscaping, etc.) is installed, unless otherwise approved by the Stormwater Utility. Vegetation shall not be considered established until a ground cover is achieved which is demonstrated to be mature and stable enough to control soil erosion as specified in paragraph 11.3.10 of the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Construction ' Standards. ' 6. REFERENCES ' 1. City of Fort Collins, "Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards", (SDDCCS), dated May 1984, Revised January 1997. ' 2. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual", Volumes 1 and 2, dated March, 1969, and Volume 3 dated September, 1992. 3. Lidstone & Anderson, Inc., "Final report Hydrologic Model Update for the Lower Dry Creek Basin Master Drainage Plan", dated September 10, 1997. ' 4. Resource Consultants & Engineers, Inc., "Dry Creek Hydrology Reconnaissance Study", Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District. October, ' 1992. 1 17 I 1 1] 1 1 [I 1 APPENDIX A MAPS AND FIGURES 1 18 VIGNITY MAP 1' = 20005 C 1 JREngineering, Ltd. 2920 Ferri Prospect Road, Suite 190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Tel. (970) 491-9999 FAX (970) 491-9984 ENGI NEERINC/PUNNING/SURVEYING LA RI M' uI loim sh(°I IJ R. 69 W. R. 68 W. �' rn vz r 4 55 37 236 y . - 35 .55 • � :95 2 '+ � r' • ) � c 95. s� ��� .,a 63 108 , 53 55 1 '- _ ?? a.i_. •se e d rfi_, 35 ' ' 1 90 U i54 l 08 �: 2 < lob . a°?' i-.-. v:.i 35 54 10254 i. 35 � a t {3 95 n.�,,. ,94 .S• 9 ... ; 73 ]Ol101 � •Y 74 22 N'53 4..�" Ols.A:00 1 _ / Y LK4 i 1.y ..3 1• 102 73 105 22 ' y. 64 35 t •'( !i - x" 4 cwaws. 53 �f._t� \ c wr -.Y4t dµ .37 -' r� `4 _ '�1 a Li.31r u 76. 45 rowwoo _ 64 ;". , ` a r• villa x �,_ 101 3' �o 22 *x ... yy Bbpnam � - _ .°i 76 1� rA I � 21051, �I 64 9? t f 'yr a �.' d. r -{ E2 J 103 v 7 7 0 ° !\` � ro r 61 -' ..j ° r I 1� us MIT wr TFix4l�xse.a r. gp.' r 22 _'n rn. i `, .I J71 rJ. • •64 i'r ACNF_ e64 0.• j jf`� 81 64 <•�b7{ Sq b 105103 54 water Index to Mapping Units ' 1—Altvan loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes __________ 2—Altvan loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes __________ Page 11 60—Larim gravelly sandy loam, b to 40 percent 11 slopes Page 3—Altvan-Satanta loams, 0 to 3 percent slopes-- 4—Altvan-Satanta loams, 3 to 9 percent slopes __ __________________________________ 12 61—Larimer fine sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent 12 slopes 35 ' 5—Aquepts, loamy ___________________________ 6—Aquepts, ponded------------------------ 7—Ascalon loam, 0 12 62—Larimer-Stoneham complex, 3 to 10 percent 12 slopes -- --- -- -------------------- 3b 36 sandy to 3 percent slopes ____ 8—Ascalon sandy loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ____ 13 63—Longmont clay, 0 to 3 percent slopes ________ 13 64—Loveland clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 36 37 9—Bainville-Epping silt loams, 5 to 20 percent slopes __ ____ _____ 65—Midway clay loam, b to 25 percent slopes ____ 13 66—Minnequa 38 __ __ ______________ 10—Bainville-Keith complex, 2 to 9 percent silt loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes ____ 67—Minnequa-LaPorte complex, 3 to 15 percent 38 slopes ---------------------------------- 11—Baller-Carnero complex, 9 to 35 percent P P slopes 13 slopes sandy loam, 5 --_____'-'------'----- 68—Miracle sandy loam, 6 to percent slopes ___ 38 39 _ ____________ ____ _____________ 12—Baller-Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 45 percent slopes _ __ ____________ 14 69—Naz sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ________ 70—Naz sandy loam, 3 to 25 percent slopes _______ 14 71—Nelson fine loam, 40 40 13—Blackwell clay loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes ____ 14—Boyle gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent sandy 3 to 9 percent slopes__ 15 72—Newfork sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes ___ 73—Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 slopes 41 41 slopes __ _____ __ _____ __ _ __________ 15—Boyle gravelly sandy loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes percent ________ 16 74—Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ________ 75—Nunn clay loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ________ 42 42 43 __________________________________ 16—Boyle-Ratake gravelly sandy loams, 1 to 9 percent slopes 16 76—Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to 3 percent slopes ___ 77—Otero sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes ______ 43 43 ___________________________ 17—Boyle-Ratake gravelly sandy loams, 9 to 25 16 78—Otero sandy loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ______ 79—Otero sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes 43 44 percent slopes ___________________________ ' 18—Breece coarse sandy loam, 0 tow3 percent ______ 16 80—Otero-Nelson sandy loam, 3 to 25 percent slopes 44 slopes _ _ __ __.,_____________ 19—Breece coarse sandy loam, 3 to 9__percent ____ __ _____ _____________ ______ 17 81—Paoli fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes __ 82—Pendergrass-Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 25 44 slopes -------- -------------------- 20—Breece coarse sandy loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes 17 percent slopes ------- ------------------ 83—Pinata-Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 45 percent 45 ---------------------------------- 1— arnero loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes __________ 22—Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes ______ 17 slopes - ------------------- 17 84—Poudre fineesandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes__ 18 85—Purner fine sandy loam, 1 to 9 45 46 46 23—Clergern fine sandy loam, 2 to 10 percent slopes -------------------------------- percent slopes__ 86—Purner-Rock outcrop complex, 10 to 50 19 24—Connerton-Barnum complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes percent slopes -------- --- ------------ 87—Ratake-Rock outcrop complex, 25 to 55 47 ---------------------------------- 25—Connerton-Barnum complex, 3 to 9 percent slopes 19 percent slopes ----------- - 88—Redfeather sandy loam, 5 to 50 percent 47 ---------------------------------- 26—Cushman fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent 'slopes 19 slopes 89—Renohill clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 48 48 _________________________________ - '21—Cushman fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent ____• 20 90—Renohill clay loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes _-__ 91—Renohill-Midway clay loams, 3 to 15 percent 49 slopes ---- ----------- ---------- - -- -- ---- 28—Driggs loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes __________ 20 slopes --------------------------------- - 21 92—Riverwash 49 49 29—Drigggs loam, 3 to 25 percent slopes _________ 30—Elbeth-Moen loams, -------------------------------- 21 93—Rock outcrop _____________________________ 49 5 to 30 percent slopes ____ 31—Farnuf loam, 2 to 10 percent slopes ---------- 32—Farnuf-Boyle-Rock 22 94—Satanta loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes __________ 23 95—Satanta loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes __________ 50 50 outcrop complex, 10 to 25 percent slopes 96—Satanta loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ---------- 50 ___________________________ nearly level ___________________ 34—Fort 23 97—Satanta loam, gullied, 3 to 9 percent slopes ___ 23 98—Satanta Variant clay loam, 0 to 3 50 '33—Fluvaquents, Collins loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes ______ 35—Fort Collins loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ______ 36—Fort Collins loam, 3 to 5 percent 24 slopes __ __ _ ____________ ____ 24 99—Schofield-Redfeather-Rock outcrop complex, 51 percent slopes ______ 37—Fort Collins loam 5 to 9 percent slopes ______ 38—Foxcreek loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 25 5 to 25 percent slopes ____________________ 25 100—Stoneham loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes ________ 25 51 52 ________ clay loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes -------- 0—Garrett loam, 101—Stoneham loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes -------- 26 102—Stoneham loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes 52 52 139—Gapo 0 to 1 percent slopes __________ 1—Garrett loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes __________ -------- 27 103—Stoneham loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes ________ 27 104—Sunshine stony sandy loam, 5 to 15 52 2—Gravel pits ------------------------------ 43—Haploborolls-Rock outcrop complex, steep ____ percent 27 slopes 27 105—Table Mountain loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 63 54 144—Haplustolls, hilly _________________________ 5—Haplustolls-Rock outcrop complex, steep ____ __ 27 106—Tassel sandy loam, 3 to 25 percent slopes ____ 28 107—Thedalund loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 54 55 6—Harlan fine sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes__ 7—Harlan fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes__ --------- 29 108—Thedalund loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes -------- 30 109—Thiel gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 25 55 48—Heldt clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes _______ 49—Heldt clay loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes _______ percent 30 slopes _ ______ __ ____ ___ ____________ 30 110—Tine gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 3 56 0—Keith silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes __ 1—Kildor clayloam, 0 to 6 p percent slopes ______ percent 31 slopes -y sandy loam--------------------- 32 111—Tine cobbly sandy loam, 15 to 40 57 2—Kildor-Shale outcrop complex, 5 to 30 percent slopes percent slopes --- 57 _ _----omple 53—Kim loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ____________ 4—Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes o l complex, 5 p c percent slopes ___ , 5 to 0 percent slopes 32 112—Ulm clay 32 113—Ulm clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes ________ 58 58 _____________ 5—Kim loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes ____________ 6—Kim-Thedalund loams, 3 to 15 32 114—Ulm clay loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ________ 33 115—Weld silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes ________ 33 58 59 percent slopes__ 57—Kirtley loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes __________ 58—Kirtley-Purner complex, 5 to 20 116—Wetmore-Boyle-Moen complex, 5 to 40 percent 33 slopes ___________ 60 percent slopes 117—Wetmore-Boyle-Rock outcrop complex, 5 to 60 33 ,9—LaPorte-Rock outcrop complex, 3 to 30 percent slopes percent slopes __ _________ ____________ 118—Wiley silt loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ________ 60 61 _ ___________ 34 119—Wiley silt loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ________ 61 I 1 n 0 7 J APPENDIX B HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS 19 0 C 0 O O aD O O (- O O (A n co n O M M O V O O L N Cl) O U M M (D M O (A O N V 0 O O Q U (A N In M (q a0 (A O M CO N U O a0 aD 7 N V N N O M (n N N (O N N Q O O O O 6 N O C_ w 0 0 0 0 O N 0 0 0o? 0 U .Q cz F. v C O -7 cq O 0 O N N O N O O U E O N N Co G ,,C G a co r n O M CO O VJ U 0 1n 0 0 0 0 f00 0 , 0 M 0 0 � (O 0 ((( 0 a Z cu c cz Q .N.. N M O N M O O O (O Ncf M ' c0 M (n N M 7 M cq O V C V Q O O O O O O O O O Z d (n CO c0 LO co V V N Cl) a0 (n (n O M (O N (O (O V N N (n C O N O O O O O O O 0 C = LC q 10 a, Q ao U O W U- C7 = O -� Y J D a U6 N m C O C 0 N V CO N F 1 1 Ll 1 1 1 1 o a 0 0 N N Z W (7 2 J p p W U W IW- R O y IL LL V) p W = O W a zui o-J W S Q W 0 Z p 2 O cc 0 a oI M U) Z O U g O W U 0 Q J U W U Z ¢ N W W W N W H W o a W O w a i w o Z O LL o U 00 U N O U r 0 LL O } m m v Z O m U Z Qa W J H a d c U w W OJ m N O F Q (n c a LLI W N Q O � N U W F W 0 N co O O N O N m <p O O J (") V c] t0 (O to O o') N V fD V a< o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O U E LL O w Z m N � N 0 N N N 0 N N N O N N N U) N 0 N to N In N O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q W W OQ fn n co co Q N m a O M � N CD W 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 Z Q Q J LL LL 0 W U) N NU) N N N In N tN In Z rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn O O 0 0 O 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O 2 O Z W N N O O O O Cl)O O O O O O O O O W O O O O O O 0 O O O O O Q (� L LL O W In rn N rn N rn N rn In rn In rn N M N m N rn In rn m m In rn Z Z) O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q JQ LL O co N N Q O O C O O V O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06 6 O Q J N W M V N N U N c�'1 (NO. N O Q N O O O O O O O Z O Q Q W Z cr z Q Co U a W 11 U' S — '� Y J Q HW a I Z O Q 0 N O W W Z z W W ro o W w i Z O U Z Q N 0 w w w c Z Y CC a: = O J N O ¢ U C LL _m a En .6¢ i m a m ¢ p m `m o Z FO ~ LU d c W Z O F < 0 m wN UO w0m ¢ m � N J ❑ U N N W Y n n n ¢ u Itu 3 z i cc j us D ¢ z k w Z z_ z z a O C7 a U N N O n W O zu r e LL M W O m m r V r i0 M n p N N N N N C) (V Cl f7 Z o c M V Q m U ❑ m o m r n o in m e m o �n m Ir u � m N V l0 M N N M r r W a E O N M tD V h O N m O n N o - U m N N W O N m m m M m N J m n M N m O m W m v v n rn M n e _ Z CI N O aD N M N O N 0 O N N W V � N W T Q N N M N C N N N O N Ni N N �- cJ 6 Z m > n m M m m m m m m m m y O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 2 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 C L C m O Q i0 W m m N O W N W O N W m 0 Q 0 o W N N C) <C Z w w m= n Q J v ¢ r f r m O N r V m N M N m N m - E M m N O W m O N O r O O N Q a W O ❑ O OZ L n N M O M V N r Z a m ^ a l I J cc> C J W N W O O N O i0 M W m V Q M O M m m l0 W M N O W V V M fW U Z_ — i0 W W m V M 10 m m7 7Q N W LO M m O N N O d ro N N O O O O O O O N Q Z r C7 Z (n O N V W r m N w a x Z LL ❑ C7 _U jCO3] z w 0 ¢ Vf m w w W O > m y G w O a x z w z a cc o N Q N J Q W F N W O z W > o w w 0 z o cr:N w o < w z 0 w = w U z > ¢ ¢ N C_ J N � O U c 0 LL O al N ¢ J m m ca z 0 d o 0 z a w a O z �ui a U a g U Zn- co ¢ m � N w O Z) 0 U N I'd�l�����IIIIII�II! ■��llu iI�I1R w Q cn 0 ¢ a N W O Z W W w w 0LU O w o 2 Z Z w 3 W 2 U 0 W J O O cc v C_ O U c 0 LL O ai �Q m N a m o ccZ m 0 LL z��o Z w 7 < C7 a g w o o W m ¢ -1 N J O U N ■��iiis���di�nvi� l�i�I1AlIIRi� Project: ,liens: . Subject: 1 [1 11 1 r. 1 1 Job No: By: Chk. By: Date: Sheet No: _ of J•R ENGINEERING A Westrian Company I I I 1 1 1 11 1 1 APPENDIX C STREET CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Ell 11 11 1 u LINDENMEIER ESTATES PUD Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Lemay Avenue West Gutter CE Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Input Data Channel Slope 005500 ft/ft Water Surface Elev, 0.44 ft Options Current Roughness Methc)ved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting wed Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method Results Mannings Coeffic 0.014 Elevation Range ).00 to 0.72 Discharge 5.96 cfs Flow Area 2.5 ft2 Wetted Perimetei 16.03 It Top Width 15.58 It Actual Depth 0.44 ft Critical Elevation 0.44 it Critical Slope 0.005261 ft/ft Velocity 2.34 ft/s Velocity Head 0.09 It Specific Energy 0.53 It Froude Number 1.02 Flow Type supercritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient -0+16 0+00 0.035 0+00 0+02 0.013 0+02 0+26 0.016 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation ' (ft) (ft) -0+16 0.72 0+00 0.50 0+00 0.00 0+02 0.17 0+26 0.65 /\Jo-rC • :;�.!`f yr^ �%'•. � �, ;n,1s"r `:�-f".?r;n,�t f"�4. ,��,'.��' v� t t ,o � r a• j �,.>� O I�7 V,'r'r/o, 7 , O Vice; r., 3, �f Title: untitled Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. x:\3900000.all\3909000\drainage 2001\stormsew.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 01/29/04 03:59:46 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 LINDENMEIER ESTATES PUD Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Lemay Avenue West Gutter CE Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.014 Channel Slope 0.005500 Wit Water Surface Elev. 0.44 It Elevation Range .00 to 0.72 Discharge 5.96 cfs 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 1 1 1 1 IF I I I I 1 1 -0+20 -0+15 -0+10 -0+05 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 V:37.4531835� HA NTS Title: untitled Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. x:\3900000.all\3909000\drainage 2001\stormsew.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 01/29/04 04:01:00 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 I LINDENMEIER ESTATES PUD Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Lemay Avenue West Gutter Cap Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Input Data Channel Slope 005500 Wit — 51ept.. ai' ajor"ad e � j,�{ip�y �, P�.�t �7� , J Water Surface Elev. 0.65 ft vA �, aN ,L.> efaYv r7 o i ;r41-» f 74,'" J.J-sr c'q�i�4i Options Current Roughness Methc wed Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting wed Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method Results Mannings Coeffic 0.014 Elevation Range ).00 to 0.72 Discharge 21.57 cfs 0 - ,a' e ",nw°v Aye 4 Flow Area 7.7 ft2 Wetted Perimetei 37.42 ft Top Width 36.91 ft Actual Depth 0.65 ft Critical Elevation 0.66 ft Critical Slope 0.004725 ft/ft Velocity 2.79 ft/s Velocity Head 0.12 ft Specific Energy 0.77 ft Froude Number 1.07 Flow Type >upercritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient -0+16 0+00 0.035 0+00 0+02 0.013 /nw / 0+02 0+26 0.016 /00 -', Q fA rt i f'n Vl Natural Channel Points q V'/ rA 4 r,n rvl ! � e,-3 '- C2, /� d Station Elevation (ft) (ft) - /0, 03 G s -0+16 0.72 - w 0+00 0.50 0+00 0.00 0+02 0.17 0+26 0.65 /U , Title: untitled Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. ' x:\3900000.aR3909000\drainage 2001\stormsew.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 f7.0005j 01/29/04 04:01:57 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 LINDENMEIER ESTATES PUD Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Lemay Avenue West Gutter Cap Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Section Data Mannings Coefficiel 0.014 Channel Slope 0.005500 ft/ft Water Surface Elev. 0.65 ft Elevation Range .00 to 0.72 Discharge 21.57 cfs 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 1 1 1 1IF I I I 1 -0+20 -0+15 -0+10 -0+05 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 V:37.4531835N H:1 NTS Title: untitled Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. x:\3900000.all\3909000\drainage 2001\stormsew.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 01/29/04 04:02:14 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 ' LINDENMEIER ESTATES PUD ' Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description ' Worksheet 28' LOCAL STREET - 2 YEA Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula ' Solve For Discharge Input Data Slope 008100 ft/ft — rya- 4,5f % >c:x., C d t J?r r 4 tChannel Water Surface Elev. 100.37 ft _ �.e r.,,,,,y Options Current Roughness Methc )ved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting )ved Lotter's Method ! ty,• I ' Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method ) .. Results ' Mannings Coeffic 0.016 Elevation Range ).00 to 100.55 Discharge 10.68 cfs / Flow Area 4.6 ft2 �PRU ty Wetted Perimeter 30.74 ft T i ' Top Width 30.63 ft 2 YR fit 1 Actual Depth 0.37 it d ' Critical Elevation 100,311997 ft Critical Slope 0.006997 fUft �'71`� � `� /� f Velocity 2.34 f /s 6-0 Pk4 At Velocity Head 0.09 it Specific Energy 100.46 ft ' Froude Number 1.07 J t Flow Type Supercritical Calculation Messages: Flow is divided. 1 1] 1 Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+04 0.035 0+04 0+42 0.016 0+42 0+46 0.035 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (it) 0+00 100.55 0+04 100.48 0+08 100.40 0+09 100.00 0+10 100.11 0+23 100.37 0+36 100.11 0+37 100.00 Title: untitled ' x:\3900000.all\3909000\drainage 2001\street1 .fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005) 01/29/04 04:03:06 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 7 L Natural Channel Points ' Station Elevation (tt) (ft) 0+38 100.40 0+42 100.48 ' 0+46 100.55 1_1 1 1 n [1 1 LINDENMEIER ESTATES PUD Worksheet for Irregular Channel Title: untitled x:\3900000.all\3909000\drainage 2001 \street 1.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005) 01/29/04 04:03:06 PM p Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 LINDENMEIER ESTATES PUD Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet 28' LOCAL STREET - 2 YEA Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.016 Channel Slope 0.008100 ft/ff Water Surface Elev 100.37 ft Elevation Range ).00 to 100.55 Discharge 10.68 cfs 100.W5 100.50 100.45 100.40 100.35 100.30 100.25 100.20 100.15 100.10 100.05 100.00 0+00 0+10 0+20 0+30 0+40 0+50 V:90.9090909�\ H:1 NTS Title: untitled x:\3900000.all\3909000\drainage 2001 \street 1.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005j 01/29/04 04:03:46 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 11 1] 1 1 0 LINDENMEIER ESTATES PUD Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet 28' LOCAL STREET - 100 YE Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Input Data Channel Slope 008100 ft/ft 4 Water Surface Elev, 100.55 ft Options Current Roughness Methc rved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting >ved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method Results Mannings Coeffic 0.020 Elevation Range ).00 to 100.55 Discharge 29.52 cfs Flow Area 11.2 ft2 Wetted Perimetei 46.13 ft Top Width 46.00 ft Actual Depth 0.55 ft Critical Elevation 100.00 ft Critical Slope 0.000000 fift Velocity 2.64 We Velocity Head 0.11 ft Specific Energy 100.66 ft Froude Number 0.94 Flow Type Subcritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+04 0.035 0+04 0+42 0.016 0+42 0+46 0.035 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) [ft> VV ! / j T r.l r�. t'Ar,. q � i" yW �l I +..Jf 0+00 100.55- 'r - �r 0+04 100.48 •' Asa ^ c f 0+08 100.40 0+09 100.00 0+10 100.11 0+23 100.37 0+36 100.11 0+37 100.00 0+38 100.40 0+42 100.48 0+46 100.55 Title: untitled x:\3900000.all\3909000\drainage 2001\street1 .fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.00051 01/29/04 04:03:58 PM m Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 1 1 1 1 1 LINDENMEIER ESTATES PUD Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet 28' LOCAL STREET - 100 YE Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Discharge Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.020 Channel Slope 0.008100 ft/ft Water Surface Elev. 100.55 ft Elevation Range ).00 to 100.55 Discharge 29.52 cfs 100.50 100.45 100.40 100.35 100.30 100.25 100.20 100.15 100.10 100.05 4 100.00 0+00 0+10 0+20 0+30 0+40 0+50 V:90.9090909L H:1 f fTS Title: untitled x:\3900000.a11\3909000\drainage 2001\street1.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.00051 01/29/04 04:04:07 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 LEI 1 1 1 [] 1 1 APPENDIX D INLET CALCULATIONS Pi '; Gutter..Storm-Water Conve aric&.Cap acit ;for'Ma'or Event ' Project: Lindenmeler Estates - 39090.00 Inlet ID: DP#1 ' Top of Curb or T Street W __ TX Crown Allowable Depth T Qw. /Qx H y I d I I Gutter Geometry ' Allowable Depth to Gutter Flow Line for Major Event H = 4.8 inches Gutter Width W = 2.58 it Gutter Depression a = 1.4 inches Street Transverse Slope S„ = 0.0200 Wit ✓ ' Street Longitudinal Slope %= ✓ 0.0290 fUft Manning's Roughness n = 0.016 Maximum Water Spread for Major Event T = 15.0 it ' Gutter Conveyance Capacity Based On Maximum Water Spread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) S„, _ `' 6.0644 Nit Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) y = `.. 3.6 inches Water Depth with a Gutter Depression d = 5.0 inches Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) E. 0.48. Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) T. = 12.4 it Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T. Q„ 7.2 cis Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Q - Q„) Q„ _' ` 6.6 cfs ' Flow Rate Based On Maximum Water Spread OT = 13.8;cfs Gutter Full Conve ance Capacity Based on Maximum Allowable Gutter Depth Water Spread T 14.1 It Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Eo = 0.50 Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) T„ = 11:5 it Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T. Q„ = 5.9 cis Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Q - Q„) Q, = 6.0 cfs Flow Rate Based on Maximum Allowable Gutter Depth OF =;; `+ 11'.8;cfs Gutter Desi n Conveyance Capacity Based on Minimum of O or R'O Reduction Factor for Major Event R = 0.62 ' Gutter Design Conveyance Capacity for Major Event O7.3 cis 1 [1 1 ' UD-Inlet-DP#1.xls, Q-Major 2/6/2004, 11:28 AM GUTTER CONVEYANCE CAPACITY , Project =Lfndenmeler Estates 39090 00 Inlet ID =:DP#1 Top of Curb or Allowable Debt T ti W T) H ' - dl n Discharge In the Gutter Width (Cannot Be Less Than Any Grate Width) Depression, if Composite Gutter Transverse Slope Longitudinal Slope ng's Roughness utter Cross Slope later Spread Width 'star Depth without Gutter Depression 'star Depth with a Gutter Depression utter Conveyance Calculations by HEC-22 Method )read for Side Flow on the Street (T - W) scharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T. utter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) scharge within the Gutter Section W )tal Flow Rate by HEC-22 Method luivalent Street Transverse Slope ow Area ow Velocity 'd product NOTE: V,'d product should be less than 6.0 for minor event and less than 8.0 for major event. Street Crown I O, 4.8.cfs W ::: 58 It a= 1A inches S, 0.0200 Wit S� wit n Oi018 ................. .................... Sw . 0`0644: ft/ft T ><9Zft y .2 2' inches d = : :.::::.:::: .. 3 6: inches T, :6 7 it AA+cfs Eo Ow ::3.3' cfs ar `4.7! cfs S. 0:0511ft/ft A, - .:......: 1,:0., sq It V. 4:7:fps z UD-Inlet-DP#1.xls, Street Hy 2/6/2004, 11:28 AM COMBINATION INLET O.N A GRADE Project :briclenmefer.Estateiv- 89090.00 Inlet lD. DP#1 Wp L WP Club Design Information In ut 'Type of Grate Length of a Single Unit Grate Width of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W from Street Hy) Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical value = 0.5) ' Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical value = 0.1) vLocal Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) otal Number of Units in the Combination Inlet ' urace Anal sls ;alcularea Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Water Depth for Design Condition Total Length of Inlet Grate & Curb Opening ' Ratio of Grate Flow to Design Flow E. Flow Velocity Vs (from Street Hy) Spash-over Velocity V°: Check Against Flow Velocity V. Under No -Clogging Condition ' Interception Rate of Gutter Flow Interception Rate of Side Flow Rx (from Street Hy) Interception Capacity Under Clogging Condition Clogging Coefficient for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Clogging Factor for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet ' Effective (unclogged) Length of Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Interception Rate of Side Flow Rx (from Street Hy) Actual Interception Capacity ' Carry -Over Flow = t]°--0° (to be applied to curb opening) Curb Oaenina Analvsis tCalcnlaterll Equivalent Slope S. (based on grate carry-over) Required Length LT to Have 100% Interception Clogging Coefficient Clogging Factor for Multiple -unit Curb Opening Inlet Effective (Unclogged) Length ' Under No -Clogging Condition Effective Length of Curb Opening Inlet (must be < LT) Interception Capacity ' Under Clogging Condition Actual Interception Capacity Carry -Over Flow = Q°u,-Q° = ' Capture Percentage = O°/p° Flow Direction Type Vane Grate L° 4'.33'ft W. 2.50:It C° G 0.50: C° C 010' aid .': 20: inches Q, 4.8: cfs Yd 5.6:inches L 433: ft E° :069: V. 4.67; fps V° is: greater than Vs R, R, :0.53 O, 4:1 cfs Ccef 11:i00 Clog La X2.17 It R,- ...:.........0.19 cfs O°°rs 1'.? cfs .................. ........................... S. .... 0.0948 f /ft LT 1.1..04iIt Ccef 1.00 Clog :0:T0 L° 3.90: ft L 4.33 It O, .4!cfs cfs On O19:: CIS C% .. 8Yi11% err I9 DP 4 ' UD-Inlet-DP#t.xls, Combo-G 2/6/2004, 11:28 AM 11 Gutter Storm Water Conveyance CapacityC6pacity toe 'Major.,Event.:; Project: Lindenmeler Estates - 39090.00 Inlet ID: DP#2 Top of Curb T Street W Tx Crown Allowable Depth H I Y d a WWI/0 x a ' Allowable Depth to Gutter Flow Line for Major Event Gutter Width Gutter Depression Street Transverse Slope ' Street Longitudinal Slope Manning's Roughness Maximum Water Spread for Major Event ' uuner conveyance uatoacity tiasea vn Maximum waters read Gutter Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T . W) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T. Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Q - Q,) ' Flow Rate Based On Maximum Water Spread P_uHne Cnll r`nn.mvn..we I+n...,•.la. n,......a .... u....:........ nu�...��:� r. Water Spread Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) ' Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T. Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Q - QJ ' Flow Rate Based on Maximum Allowable Gutter Depth Gutter Design Conveyance Capacity Based on Minimum of O or R Reduction Factor for Major Event Gutter Design Conveyance Capacity for Major Event H = 4.8 inches i a = 1.4 inches S, = 0.0200 ft/ft ✓ S,= 0.0290 ft/ft ✓ n= 0.016 T= 15.0 fl f[ k� CV cL�f� Sw = : Z 010644 Wit y= 3.6 inches d =.' 5.0 inches E. = 0.48 T,_. .12.4f1 Q,=. 72 cfs Qw= ':6.6cfs OT=i'.: 13.8 cfs T = 14.1 it E, = 0.50 T. i1:5ft O, 5.9 cfs Q, _ 6.0 cfs QF=', - - 11.8;CfS R = 0.62 7.3' cfs ' UD-Inlet-DP#2.xls, 0-Major 2/6/2004, 11:28 AM I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project = Undennneier Estates.; 39690.00 Inlet ID =DP#2;:�:....: . .... .. ...... —T Street Top of Curb or W —Tx Crown Allowable Depth n Discharge In the Gutter 3:1. cfs Width (Cannot Be Less Than Any Grate Width) W 2:58] ft Depression, if Composite Gutter a 1.4 Inches Transverse Slope S� 0.0200 Wit Longitudinal Slope S, 0.0290, Wit rig's Roughness n 0:0 16 Cross Slope Sw 0.06441 Wit Spread Width T 7.5 it Depth without Gutter Depression y .1.13: inches Depth with a Gutter Depression d .3.2 inches ter Conveyance Calculations by HEC-22 Method -ad for Side Flow on the Street (T - W) T, 4:9 it :harge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T, Qx 016 cis .er Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) E. 0.80 :harge within the Gutter Section W Q„. 2.5cfs it Flow Rate by HEC-22 Method OT 3A cfs ivalent Street Transverse Slope So ::0;0556.ft/ft i Area 0.7: sq it I Velocity V. ..,14.4 fps I product V.-d 7777757 ft2ls NOTE: V.*d product should be less than 6.0 for minor event and less than 8.0 for major event. IUD-Inlet-DP#2.xls, Street Hy 2/6/2004, 11:28 AM I. I Project:: Lifid6iiMe!6e.Estates T3go9o.00..�. . ... ....... ......... . Inlet ID. .DP#2 .. ... ..... . ..... . WP L WP Curb I I H ype of Grate Length of a Single Unit Grate Width of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W from Street Hy) Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical value = 0.5) Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical value = 0.11) Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) ,Total Number of Units in the Combination Inlet Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Water Depth for Design Condition Total Length of Inlet Grate & Curb Opening Ratio of Grate Flow to Design Flow E. Flow Velocity Vs (from Street Hy) Spash-over Velocity V.: Check Against Flow Velocity V. Under No -Clogging Condition Interception Rate of Gutter Flow Interception Rate of Side Flow Fix (from Street Hy) Interception Capacity Under Clogging Condition Clogging Coefficient for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet CloggingFactor for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Effective (unclogged) Length of Multiple -unit Grate Inlet nte I rce p ti on Rate of Side Flow Rx (from Street Hy) Actual Interception Capacity I Flow = C.-Q. (to be applied to curb opening) Flow Direction Type ..Vane Grate.... 4.33 It W. 2:50 ft Co = 0.50 '0101 1 2.0 inches No= 1 00 = I cfs Y, = ... ... 5.2 inches L= 4.33. It lz° = 6.79 Vs=:. 4,36 fps V. is: greater than Vs .00 R' = .Asq Qi = 2.8 CIS Coef 1.00 Clog= :.6.50� 2.17: It 0.23 1.6C f s Q..1b ..:6 cfs t) Equivalent Slope S. (based on grate carry-over) Sa = 0.1058 ft/ft Required Length L, to Have 100% Interception LT 7.19 ft Clogging Coefficient Coef= 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple -unit Curb Opening Inlet Clog = '0.10: Effective (Unclogged) Length L. = 3,90 ft Under No -Clogging Condition Effective Length of Curb Opening Inlet (must be < LT) :4,33: It Interception Capacity .0.2 cfs Under Clogging Condition Actual Interception Capacity ':,:.:�:0.2 cfs Carry -Over Flow = Q°°,,-Q. = Q'= .:0.3 cfs Capture Percentage = QJQ° = C%=.:::.:::: % UD-Inlet-DP#2.xls, Combo-G 2/6/2004,11:28 AM 7 U Gutter $torm`Water Cone ance,Ca acit'`,for Ma'or`Event, Project: Lindenmeler Estates - 39090.00 Inlet ID: DP#3 Top of Curb or Allowable Depth T W TxF- ' Allowable Depth to Gutter Flow Line for Major Event Gutter Width Gutter Depression Street Transverse Slope ' Street Longitudinal Slope Manning's Roughness Maximum Water Spread for Major Event uuner conveyance ualoacrty tiasea on Maximum water Spread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T. ,Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Q - Q,) ' Flow Rate Based On Maximum Water Spread ater Spread Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T. Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Q - QJ ' Flow Rate Based on Maximum Allowable Gutter Depth Gutter Design Conveyance Cavacity Based on Minimum of Q or R Reduction Factor for Major Event tGutter Design Conveyance Capacity for Major Event 1 Street Crown H = 4.8 inches 7 W= 2.58ft C,0 a= 1.4 inches S, = 0.0200 wit ✓ S, = 0.0366 ft/ft ✓ n = 0.016 T = 15.0 ft ft Sw = : 0.0644 ft/ft y= 3.6 inches d=''TS:O inches E, = , 0.48. T, 12.4it Q,= iTcfs 7.4 cfs +15.5i,cfs T = ., 14.1 ft E,=; 0.56 T = 11.5 it Q,= 6.6cfs Qe=: - ..6.7 cfs OF = 13.3;cfs R 0.52 6.9, cfs UD-Inlet-DP#3.xls, Q-Major 2/6/2004, 11:28 AM I I I I I I GUTTER CONVEYANCECAPACITY.:, Project Linderrin eiertstetes49090.66 . . . . . . . Inlet ID =:DP#3... Top of Curb or I � W —T —T Street AlIMAInkin n.nfk I x Crown Street Geometry (InDut) Design Discharge in the Gutter Gutter Width (Cannot Be Less Than Any Grate Width) Gutter Depression, if Composite Gutter Street Transverse Slope Street Longitudinal Slope ann ng's Roughness 0. = W = a S, n 7.1 cfa 2Mit 14 inches 0,0200, ft/ft 0.0366 ft/ft 0.016 Gutter Conveyance GeometrV Gutter Cross Slope S„ 0:01044: Wit Water Spread Width Water Depth without Gutter Depression T y '' 1 , 0; , 7 it 2.6 inches Water Depth with a Gutter Depression d inches Gutter Conveyance Calculations by HEC-22 Method Spread for Side Flow on the Street (T - W) Tx 8: 1 t f Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T, Q. 2.6: cis Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) E. .::, 0.63 Discharge within the Gutter Section W 0, 4.5: cis Total Flow Rate by HEC-22 Method QT r 71. Cfa Equivalent Street Transverse Slope S, 0;0482L ft/ft Flow Area 1 .3: sq it Flow Velocity V. 5.5: fps V.*d product V.-d INOTE: V,*d product should be less than 6.0 for minor event and less than 8.0 for major event. I I I 4- ILlD-Inlet-DP#3.x1s, Street Hy 2/6/2004,11:28 AM I= ' CMA 1' H 04 tfer,�b Design Information (Input) tType of Grate Length of a Single Unit Grate Width of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W from Slreef Hy) Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical value = 0.5) Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical value = 0.1) Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) Local Number of Units in the Combination Inlet ' orate Anal sis ;arcuiatea Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Water Depth for Design Condition Total Length of Inlet Grate & Curb Opening ' Ratio of Grate Flow to Design Flow E. Flaw Velocity Vs (from Street Hy) Spash-over Velocity V°: Check Against Flow Velocity V. Under No -Clogging Condition ' Interception Rate of Gutter Flow Interception Rate of Side Flow Rx (from Street Hy) Interception Capacity ' Under Clogging Condition Clogging Coefficient for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Clogging Factor for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet ' Effective (unclogged) Length of Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Interception Rate of Side Flow Rx (from Street Hy) Actual Interception Capacity ' Carry -Over Flow = Q.-Q. (to be applied to curb opening) Curb ODening Analysis Calculated Equivalent Slope S. (based on grate carry-over) Required Length LT to Have 100% Interception ' Clogging Coefficient Clogging Factor for Multiple -unit Curb Opening Inlet Effective (Unclogged) Length ' Under No -Clogging Condition Effective Length of Curb Opening Inlet (must be < LT) Interception Capacity ' Under Clogging Condition Actual Interception Capacity Carry -Over Flow = Q°orb-0, = Capture Percentage = QJQ° _ Flow Direction Type = Lo = W. CoG= CoC= No = Q° 7.t:cfs Ya ._..........,_.5.9;inches L 6.66' it V. 5:53, fps V° is: (greater than Vs: R, 1' 00; R, 6,79 Qi i 8.51 cfs Coef .1i50 clog 0.38: L° 5:41i tt R 6.57 0° 5;9; cfs .............................. .............................. Q°°m 1:2 cfs ........................ S° = I:i >i:::0.0878: ff/ft LT 12.19: ft Coef ;1.25- Clog =>;^!<):: O, 0.5 cfs Q bls cfs Qp 0t7:cfs -rrre' ► Lo Z In1-eTs DP05 ' UD-Inlet-DP#3.xis, Combo-G 2/6/2004, 11:28 AM 11 1 1 1 1_ J 1 Project: Lindenmefer Estates - 39090.00 Inlet ID: DP#4 Top of Curb T Street W -�— Tx Allnwnhla rlanfh Crown 1 Allowable Depth to Gutter Flow Line for Major Event Gutter Width Gutter Depression Street Transverse Slope 1 Street Longitudinal Slope Manning's Roughness Maximum Water Spread for Major Event 1 Gutter Conveyance CapacitV Based On Maximum Water Spread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression 1 Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Q - Q,) 1 Flow Rate Based On Maximum Water Spread - Water Spread Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) 1 Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T. Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Q - QJ 1 Flow Rate Based on Maximum Allowable Gutter Depth Gutter Desi n Conveyance Capacity Based on Minimum of OT or R Reduction Factor for Major Event 1 Gutter Design Conveyance Capacity for Major Event 11 1 1 1 H = 4.8 inches W = 2.58 ft a = 1.4 inches S, = 0.0200 Wit So = 0.0386 Wit n = 0.016 T= 15.0 ft Sw_ 0.0644ft/ft y- 3.6'inches d=' z5.0;inches E. = 0.48 T,= ' 12.4ft Q,= 8.3 cfs Qw=;::' 7.5cfs Or = ` :` =,, 15.9 cfs T= - 14.1'.-ft Eo = , 0.50. T,= 11.5 ft Q, _ :6:8 cfs Q. -.6.9 cfs Qr = �,. : ,:°13.6 cfs R= -. 0.49 Q,Ibw ='.,:: 'z' ' : -.6.7- cfs 1 UD-Inlet-DP#4.xls, Q-Major 2/6/2004, 11:27 AM GUTTER. CONVEYANCE CAPACITXi��'-'-:�'�' �...�.-:�. Project cl� Un enimeier] states39090;OQ Inlet ID=:DP#4'.::.... Top of Curb or W -T Street Allowable Depth x Crown H Y V d a n Discharge In the Gutter Q. 2.5 cis Width (Cannot Be Less Than Any Grate Width) W :2.58 it Depression, if Composite Gutter a 1A inches Transverse Slope S, 0.02001ftift Longitudinal Slope S� 0.6386: fvft ng's Roughness n 0.016 ar Cross Slope Sw O'0644: Wit -r Spread Width T=: 61:ft -r Depth without Gutter Depression y 1:5: inches )r Depth with a Gutter Depression d inches or Conveyance Calculations by HEC-22 Method ad for Side Flow on the Street (T - W) T, 3.6: it iarge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T, Q, 0:3 cis n Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) E.=,:: iarge within the Gutter Section W Ow .22 cis I Flow Rate by HEC-22 Method QT 1 2 1 .5 cfa talent Street Transverse Slope S. 0.0591, fVft Area A. 0.5. sq it Velocity V. 4.8 fps product V.'d A# ft2/s NOTE: V.*d product should be less than 6.0 for minor event and less than 8.0 for major event. UD-Inlet-DP#4.x1s, Street Hy 2/6/2004, 11:27 AM 'Type of Grate Length of a Single Unit Grate Width of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W from Street Hy) Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical value = 0.5) Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical value = 0.1) ' Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) otal Number of Units in the Combination Inlet ' v, oac ev w, ma �.mumuiev Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Water Depth for Design Condition Total Length of Inlet Grate & Curb Opening ' Ratio of Grate Flow to Design Flow E. Flow Velocity Vs (from Street Hy) Spash-over Velocity V.: Check Against Flow Velocity Vs ' Under No -Clogging Condition Interception Rate of Gutter Flow Interception Rate of Side Flow Rx (from Street Hy) Interception Capacity Under Clogging Condition Clogging Coefficient for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Clogging Factor for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet ' Effective (unclogged) Length of Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Interception Rate of Side Flow Fix (from Street Hy) Actual Interception Capacity ' Carry -Over Flow = Q,-0, (to be applied to curb opening) Curb Openina Analysis Calculated Equivalent Slope S. (based on grate carry-over) ' Required Length LT to Have 100% Interception Clogging Coefficient Clogging Factor for Multiple -unit Curb Opening Inlet Effective (Unclogged) Length ' Under No -Clogging Condition Effective Length of Curb Opening Inlet (must be < LT) Interception Capacity ' Under Clogging Condition Actual Interception Capacity Carry -Over Flow = Oc,,,b-0, = ' Capture Percentage = QJQ, _ ' UD-Inlet-DP#4.xls, Combo-G Type = Lo = Wa CoG= CoC= a�a = No = Oa �25 cfs Ye = ....:............: 0;9'. inches L = 433 If Eo 0:37 V. 4.79f-fps Vo is. greater than Vs R, 0:57 Q, "2:4. cfs Clog = ::0.50: Lo 2:17 ft R, _ 6.21: O, 2.2. cfs .............................. O� ro 0.3 CIS S. = . 0.1 146 Wit LT 5.84 ft Coef .1.:00. Clog = La=. :. ....... ".3.90 ft L 4.33 it Qi= _:i::,_........:0;1 cfs cfs Ob 0,21 cfs C./. s2ka Rio -r( PE ) In Vj jw.o 5 2/6/2004, 11:27 AM I ' Project: Lindenmeter Estates - 39090.00 Inlet ID: DP#5 Top of Curb or Allowable Depth T W Tx� ' Ilowable Depth to Gutter Flow Line for Major Event Gutter Width Gutter Depression Street Transverse Slope Street Longitudinal Slope Manning's Roughness Maximum Water Spread for Major Event ' uutter L;onve ance UaPaCrty Based on Maximum Water Spread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression ' Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W IT - W) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section Tx Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Q - Ox) ' Flow Rate Based On Maximum Water Spread L ^ Water Spread Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) ' Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section Tx Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Q - Qx) Flow Rate Based on Maximum Allowable Gutter Depth Gutter Design Conveyance Capacity Based on Minimum of OT or R Reduction Factor for Major Event ' Gutter Design Conveyance Capacity for Major Event Street Crown H = 6.0 inches ~ W = 2.50 It (� a = 2.0 inches S. = 0.0200 Wit S. = 0.0050 tuft ✓ n = 0.016 T = 35.0 ft S , _ " 0.0867 Wit y = ' 8.4 inches d = 10.4 inches Tx =: 32.5 ft Qx= 39.2. cfs OT=t' f:,- -49.6tcfs T= 16.7 ft Eo = 0.45 Tx = 14.2 ft Qx = 4.3 cfs Q, = 3.5 cis QF = i 7.8: ors R 1.00 `.7.8.cfs Vert t�l R {v r-fL Art ' UD-Inlet-DP#5.xis, 0-Major 2/6/2004, 11:27 AM Gl1TTER;CONUEYANC;E CAPACITY . Project = Lrndenmeler Estates 39090 00 Inlet ID = DP#5. Top of Curb or Allowable Der' H I ' ----1_ a T W Tx n Discharge in the Gutter Width (Cannot Be Less Than Any Grate Width) Depression, if Composite Gutter Transverse Slope Longitudinal Slope ig's Roughness ' ' I Gutter Conveyance Geometry Gutter Cross Slope Water Spread Width Water Depth without Gutter Depression Water Depth with a Gutter Depression Gutter Conveyance Calculations by HEC-22 Method ' Spread for Side Flow on the Street (T- W) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T. Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) ' Discharge within the Gutter Section W Total Flow Rate by HEC-22 Method ' Equivalent Street Transverse Slope Flow Area Flow Velocity ' V; d product NOTE: V,•d product should be less than 6.0 for minor event and less than 8.0 for major event. Street Crown Oo 0.5.cfs a `:7:0 inches S. 0.0200: ft/ft So _ 0.0050 ftfft n . 0:016. S„, 0.0867. f1/ft T 18:9 /t y:'4 5:inches d= < =;56:5:inches T, 16r4'ft Q. .6:3 cfs E. :0.40 Q„ :4.2 cis Gr .10.5: of S. 0:0465:ft/ft V, .2.8. fps V,'d ........,.::1,5'ft'/s 0" I uz 11&3 + 0.2 4-0,7 ' UD-Inlet-DP#5.xls, Street Hy 2/6/2004, 11:27 AM Project = Inlet ID = Lu WP Wp_ � �___s esign Information (Input) :ngth of a Unit Inlet )cal Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) eight of Curb Opening in Inches de Width for Depression Pan ogging Factor for a Single Unit (typical value = 0.1) igle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) rifice Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) eir Coefficient (see USDCM Table ST-7) )tal Number of Units in the Curb Opening Inlet a Weir sign Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) iter Depth for the Design Condition al Length of Curb Opening Inlet pacity as a Weir without Clogging gging Coefficient for Multiple Units gging Factor for Multiple Units :)acity as a Weir with Clogging an Orifice :)acity as an Orifice without Clogging )acity as an Orifice with Clogging Percentage for this Inlet = Q, / Q, = L H= WP=_ C. _ Theta = Cd =' Cw='. No = : nv Direction ft T�(Pt� inches inches L ft � degrees 10.5 cfs Yd 8.54 inc Coef 1.001' Clog 0:10l Qwa 25.9!:cfs Q„ , 1,8.81 cfs Q. 'te 9: cfS C% li 100.00::% Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. V UD-Inlet-DP#5.xls, Curb-S 2/6/2004, 11:27 AM I Project: llient: . fbject: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Job No: By: Chk. By: Date: Sheet No: of J•R ENGINEERING A Westrian Company Y I t -- ; ,_., j. T. .I .yt - S,�t;� r 7 l �-2, , '=N6 —CF ,. -_ ,.. -I I } TL1E� J, r c { l C�l��C NGE` �TYI cis . 1-1-4 s, �j r o +. l3LE. I( ss 6 �c"DucT! n F,oC I 7 t I tI �r � T, rrr+-r • f i I :� f i' is rL4. ;; MM%M\) �A.t j I r } r !:_ _ i r ; rt 1.4-�� 7 I IIII I_ { r+1�J, I- k ' I 1--4, LOwv-,5 - Sti�P C�.cl b B 0. W J 0." z W > 0.4 0 x a 0.3 w 0 0 ? 0.2 0 z 0 a 0.1 0.0 � c FLOW INTO INLET PER SQ 9 MAY 1984 3 4 5 FT. OF OPEN AREA (CFS/FT2) Figure 5-3 CAPACITY OF GRATED INLET IN SUMP (From: Wright -McLaughlin Engineers, 1969) 5-11 DESIGN CRFT, 1 1 1 1 1 Water Quality Pond B Overflow Inlet Length of a Unit Grate Lo = 4.00 ft Width of a Unit Grate W o = 4.00 ff Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values = 0.6-0.9) A = 0.80 Clogging Factor for a Single Inlet (Value per CFC Storm Water Table 5-4 = 0.2) CO = 0.20 Orifice Coefficient (typical value = 0.67) Cd = 0.67 W eir Coefficient (typical value = 3.00) C,„ = 3.00 Local Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) ai.ai = 0.0 inches otal Number of Units in the Grated Inlet No = 1 ;sign Discharge Qo = 34.7 cfs ater Depth for Design Condition Yd = 6.0 inches ital Length of Grated Inlet(s) L = 4.0 ff o a Weir ipacity as a Weir without Clogging Qom; = 12.7 cfs ogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 ogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.20 ipacity as a Weir with Clogging Ow = 10.2 cfs an Orifice ipacity as an Orifice without Clogging Qo; = 48.7 cfs ipacity as an Orifice with Clogging Qoa = 38.9 cfs sir or Orifice Control introl Depth 2.4 ff dter Depth for Design Condition 0.5 It Weir 10.2 cfs troject: Llaiewfnele;, L <�G lr� Job No: 3°/U�lU.DU Flient: By: Chk. By: Date: W-1,2 -O•�/ Subject: YV_ t4 Qua1,u -T n[A -P> Sheet No: of ' A I 1 I I J•R ENGINEERING A Westrian Company 1 1 ul 1 1 y r I_. -Ir ;,i I I J I I � � I � 1� Y r- � I 1_ VVT ` Ti A rA ir+2 �••I p I p� I I_ /�� 4q , { I 4 f- - 1 I y J 1- j 1 i �I ` -{ , 1 + - • ... 1 A� I _ i. N�T2U L 1 _ 1 i 1 1 R'OM r :� TALI. 9 CF S, ( I U�� ►JAG S; _ U% use Z o,;'�� CL ,, c�. • f 1 © T�� 4 'I' - V a lur.i �?t� . ✓4L Q � � , 1 1 I Q: (133'�� 32 5Z . L� S ' � I �lvw 7t Th�S low \J'Q .. tileST F� F LAND fJ 'lnis { 11 ! �c AT CeA OF �1rJDb N WAY Se[ Rc3nS I 1 I # A- n I' �I troject: {, ride. M.01 r Job No: 3909o. az-> bent. . Subject: 1 1 t J 1 Ll 1 1 [1 1 By: Chk. By: Date: 4-22-61/ Sheet No: of `V J•R ENGINEERING A Westrian Company --1-- r *- ..�.� I r r I_. '_ I I I_i 1 �. -�_ 1 I-i—i F N D �.! 1 ! ! �OVJ 1J J .}... a..4 t J Y cf-S I 1-4 �] I 5 r T LtV — r _ F:l W VS�`D FD/2_ srZTlO1R (.s�, A -4 ac8-16� ;.. _ f , 1 t o F hl�i' AC KDs S LIND eta wA`P' GD5 ` _ g :. +i 4a - 1-4 I Jt 71 ' r Y t r , r I { , .4 tt I , , L. i I-- 1 [1 1 APPENDIX E PIPE CALCULATIONS 22 Q C7 (D aCo. CL a C;) 0 a 0 a 0 a. 9 m c c 0 c w U N O A W m N n 0 N cn D 0 O H U �a c u? �3 M 'O W N R Q O O Y O m M G C N O O L N ro N N N E i9 Cd m O m ro s v N N yW� F 0 N N W N Q N Q w G w m N g�ov a Wo o 0 jrno co ai 1- x 0 I 1 1 1 I 1-- l0 r u 0 N 1 1 f� m 0). co N N rn n f0 v 10 n O g U h CD t0 10 a) 0) M M Q � v -Do— Cl) O r-D L 0 O m n n n m x J c v v a a v D C^ O V N N N N N ro C r T — C7 J 01 00 U) co O n O n O N W S a v v v v a Cl)� N O m n ° v ri c6 v ri v m m m v C C > O) O) 01 O) W O 30-W V v V C V 7 c co e o O rn v 0 rn o (1) "m CLE m rn m m rn rn w v v a a a v v 0)o .,. ui o ODN a a)O.0 W O O W p U�. no g aE 3 y rn m 0 H�LL� n Cl) t O O O O O O J v CO N 0 ItN m O O co R co O j nr Ln cm O CO) O m O Ln cm ` O CMN CO v O O O O O O O O O O O L O O E co ° a m p m x rn C C C C C U U U U U U W c 0 a m N L O m O ` ` ` O 00 U U U 2 U C O O m p L L L U C U) 05` _� C G C M U co a) LO LO LO cn N N n O O V co co J a rL cL d d a °0 J O w>a Wp zQ z € W m ¢y c m m c c W O a co co N n 0 N D O ro O U c m W m 2 0 Q m p 8 co 1` E m d (b0 N m w d F Cl) (n `• W m ¢ma W c n W f D N w0 O O J m (0 I— X O L O co L C 1 `n N Co rn v I � I 0) i O 0 40 aim O�V ..� . CL .0 E N 10 M -i U) , a0� ornv �EE J Q Cn � 0 > Zt= ( =o w om ( O $ C\j N� oCo ?,6n r- COr anm o a) 0 O a r, ° o ...a o, L6 o ao O %v • • E N n v Sa t iv v oEE .9¢cn �7 0 chi r n co 2 CD � o;v DEE = 4= W O 99 P2 0 Ci 7 V � V V DL C O >>��N N �p dC NO J�0_l ln� rcLrr rnrn V N CO I'- rnm V V V co N o C C O_� _. a)— _.0 O _.__ .... ... _. ( 0 LlC^ N� 1 ❑ J(n 0 co 0) ry a It U O toy �=.C-$ d( (ONO arc .0aCN NO .35 0�j (j fn =rt 0009 o)O Cm rc,jom C'7 CO V O r N O N C U7 0 4 O N O 0 0 J 00 O N .- (� N ( Z N N W > D W Cl Z Q Z E W 0 Q� ro m c cm c w d 0 a co N 1N n O N Q 0) O O U �a e O D W co 0 c _0 9 0 O m` d c rl O L N m N A u) t0 6 0 rn m N N > ui m F 0 N N W ( ¢ ma w c v gvo) 000 08 �C F X O J � O ' N - � N N Z N N w>a Wo zQ w E 0 a:W coW � .-. o c � w O U rr ' M O a E m O ro O O O Lh O O O Ln TT TT n ' V^ V/ 0 N L- ' a O + in Q Vco T 0)0) U d V M �Qcr cc co ��I VVV O w O Y (� N N C: O I O `V ..._�......_...... Qom$ ..g Q(flln �J $r ro ' d rn -00) �0 m ' Oc cN w N �0 �o ' N W am ¢tea W �_ cm, � � 2 'O h ' W O N 000 0 O ll Cl)m N O F ii O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1--r E E g o N Y - rn E qa H a c U c W m 0 a T 1 N N n O G L N 0 + � a o a0 o r O U C 'y Z O 0n L V c m �3 m E M W o J � / 1 �a L 0 O CO Z m OU m c C y N o Cl)m a N m x V / E y n1 0 I..L. O El N �g rn A W c mil/ Ii dma 1 11 �0N y o 0 -00 JOOO Q � tn N �x k I Scenario: North Lemay Crossing 100-yr Storm 1 1 1 1 1 JR Custom Label Section Section Material onstructec Length Total Design Upstrearr DownstrearTHydraulic Hydraulic Average Size Shape Slope (it) System Capacity Invert Invert Grade Grade Velocity escriptio (ft/ft) Flow (cfs) Elevation Elevation Line In Line Out fts) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) P-2 24 inch Circular Concreti 0.020000 15.00 19.54 31.99 4,971.80 4,971.50 4,974.99 4,974.88 6.22 P-3 18 inch Circular Concreti 0.080147 68.00 29.17 29.74 4,971.45 4,966.00 4,972.94 4,967.27 19.18 P-4 19x30 inc Horizontal Elfir Concreti 0.090400 25.00 29.17 75.57 4,965.26 4,963.00 4,966.76 4,963.89 20.26 Title: Lindenmeier Estates Project Engineer: Tom Kassmel ' x:\...\3909000\drainage 2003\revised\39090-b.stm JR Engineering StormCAD v5.5 (5.5003) 04/15/04 09:57:10 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Profile Scenario: North Lemay Crossing 100-yr Storm Profile: North Lemay Crossing 100-yr Storm Label: Ou(lel Rim: 4,965.00 X Sump: 4,963.00 X 2+00 Label: Rim: 4.38 X Su :4,971.45 X / ' OX 4,980.00 I: D P 6 4,975.00 X i s 4,971.80 X 5.00 / Up.Inven: 4,971.80It Din. In von: 4,971 .50 X L: 1500 X Slze:24 inch S:0.020000 Wit 4.970.00 Elevation (X) larr Up. In ven: 4,971 .45 X Dn. lnvad: 4,966.00X FF L:Sizo:lai I 5:0.080147 NX 4.965.00 Label: P4 Up.In van: 4,961.26 0 Dn.lnven: 4,963.00X L: 2500 X Sae:19a30inch ._ [_._..... _ . 5:0.090400 XPo...... ............. .... ............... 14.960.00 1+00 0+00 Slabon(X) Title: Lindenmeier Estates Project Engineer: Tom Kassmel x:\...\3909000\drainage 2003\revised\39090-b.stm JR Engineering StormCAD v5.5 [5.5003j 04/15/04 09:59:34 AM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 v JR Engineering, Ltd. 2620 E. Prospect Rd., Ste. 190, Fort Collins, CO 80525 4/15/2004 LOCATION: LINDENMEIER ESTATES ITEM: RIPRAP CALCULATIONS FOR CONDUIT OUTLETS COMPUTATIONS BY: TEK SUBMITTED BY: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. From Urban Strom Drainage Criteria/ Manual Volume ll, June 2001 (Referenced figures are attached at the end of this section) Q = discharge, cfs D = diameter of circular conduit, ft Yt = tailwater depth, ft V = velocity in the downstream channel, fUs Pipe from DP-5 To WO Pond B 19"x30" HERCP Q = 29.17 cfs Depth at outlet = D = 30 in = 2.5 ft HGL Elevation - Yt = 0.89 ft Invert Elevation V = 20.26 ft/sec = allowable channel velocity Pd = 21.0 From Figure HS-20, use Type M riprap From Table HS-9, d5o = 12 in Riprap depth (T) = 21 in Width of riprap (extend to height of culvert) = 10 ft Min. Length of riprap = 10 ft Min Dimensions = 10'x10'x21" Based on Plan Use: Use 10'x10'x21 " Type M riprap 9090RPALS I 1 11 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I -7 Scenario: WO OUTLET tiet Title: LINDENMEIER ESTATES Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. ' x:\...\3909000\drainage 2003\revised\39090-c.stm JR Engineering StormCAD v5.5 [5.50031 01/30/04 03:33:14 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Scenario: WO OUTLET JR Custom Label Section Section Material "onstructec Length Total Design Upstrearr DownstrearTHydraulic Hydraulic Average Size Shape Slope (it) System Capacity Invert Invert Grade Grade Velocity escriptio (fvft) Flow (cis) Elevation Elevation Line In Line Out (Ws) (cis) (it) (it) (ft) (it) P-9 18 inch Circula Concreti 0.022938 211.00 10.20 15.91 4,960.34 4,955.50 4,961.57 4,956.37 9.55 Title: LINDENMEIER ESTATES Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. x:\...\3909000\drainage 2003\revised\39090-c.stm JR Engineering StormCAD v5.5 [5.5003) 04/22/04 01:54:32 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 1 1 1 1 Profile Scenario: WQ OUTLET Profile: WQ OUTLET _i e Station (ft) Label: P-9 Up. Invert: 4,960.34 1t Dn. Invert: 4,955.50 it L: 211.00 It Sze: 18 inch 4,965.00 Label: 1-7 Rim: 4,963.00 ft Surrp: 4,960.34 ft 4,960.00 Elevation (fq --' 4,955.00 0+00 Title: LINDENMEIER ESTATES Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. x:\...\3909000\drainage 2003\revised\39090-c.stm JR Engineering StormCAD v5.5 15.50031 04/22/04 01:54:55 PM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 ' APPENDIX F ' SWALES AND OUTFALL INTO LINDENMEIER LAKE [I [1 1 1 1 1 23 1 1 1 1 WEST FLOW LINE OF LINDEN WAY Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet WEST FLOW LINE OF LINDEI Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Channel Slope 0.200000 ft/ft Discharge 32.53 cfs - F)W,ys 11r, 1cX(k>S OG PbtJb 6 11,311,ST 2.3% �a1 l00 %y STpPM Options Current Roughness Method Improved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting Method Improved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Metho, Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Water Surface Elevation 63.55 it Elevation Range 63.40 to 64.10 Flow Area 3.8 112 Wetted Perimeter 41.60 ft Top Width 41.60 ft Actual Depth 0.15 ft Critical Elevation 63.72 ft Critical Slope 0.006642 ft/ft Velocity 8.48 ft/s Velocity Head 1.12 ft Specific Energy 64.67 It Froude Number 4.92 Flow Type Supercritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 1 +51 0.016 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+00 64.10 0+09 64.00 0+18 63.90 0+25 63.80 0+30 63.70 0+35 63.60 0+40 63.50 0+46 63.40 0+55 63.40 0+70 63.50 0+87 63.60 1 +04 63.70 1 +19 63.80 Title: untitled x:\...\drainage 2003\revised\lind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/29/04 11:39:33 AM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 WEST FLOW LINE OF LINDEN WAY Worksheet for Irregular Channel Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 1+36 63.90 1+51 64.00 Title: untitled x:\...\drainage 2003\revised\lind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 (7.00051 04/29/04 11:39:33 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 WEST FLOW LINE OF LINDEN WAY Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet WEST FLOW LINE OF LINDE[ Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Channel Slope 0.200000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 63.55 ft Elevation Range 63.40 to 64.10 Discharge 32.53 cfs 64.10 64.00 63.90 63.80 63.70 63.60 63.50 63.401 1' 0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 V:200.0N H:1 NTS Title: untitled x:\...\drainage 2003\revised\lind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.00051 04/29/04 11:39:41 AM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA f1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 AT CROWN OF LINDEN WAY Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet AT CROWN OF LINDEN Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Channel Slope 0.029000 ft/ft Discharge 32.53 cfs J`�bWS r EXLC�S Options Current Roughness Method Improved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting Method Improved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Metho. Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Water Surface Elevation 63.77 ft Elevation Range 63.50 to 64.15 Flow Area 7.8 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 57.27 ft Top Width 57.26 ft Actual Depth 0.27 ft Critical Elevation 63.86 ft Critical Slope 0.006624 fJft Velocity 4.18 ft/s Velocity Head 0.27 ft Specific Energy 64.05 ft Froude Number 2.00 Flow Type Supercritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 1+21 0.016 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+00 64.15 0+06 64.10 0+14 64.00 0+22 63.90 0+30 63.80 0+38 63.70 0+46 63.60 0+53 63.50 0+57 63.50 0+65 63.60 0+79 63.70 0+93 63.80 1+08 63.90 i7F 'POwt> �a INI,I;FT 4 >•VQ loO,�f SlbZtA Title: untitled ' x:\...\drainage 2003\revised\lind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/29/04 11:39:01 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 1+21 64.00 I 1 1 1 1 1 AT CROWN OF LINDEN WAY Worksheet for Irregular Channel 1 Title: untitled ' x:\...\drainage 2003\revised\lind-rev4-04Jm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005) 04/29/04 11:39:01 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 1 1 t 1 1 1 AT CROWN OF LINDEN WAY Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet AT CROWN OF LINDEN Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.016 Channel Slope 0.029000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 63.77 it Elevation Range 63.50 to 64.15 Discharge 32.53 cfs 64.20 64.10 64.00 63.90 63.80 63.70 63.60 63.50 ' ' ' V' ' ' ' ' 0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 V:200.0N H:1 NTS Title: untitled x:\...\drainage 2003\revised\lind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/29/04 11:39:07 AM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 ' 3/4 OF WAY ACROSS LINDEN WAY CDS W/ CURB Worksheet for Irregular Channel ' Project Description t Worksheet 3/4 OF WAY ACROSS LINDEN WAY CDS Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula ' Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Channel Slope 0.029000 ft/ft ' Discharge 40.52 cfs FLOWS IN 6XC.b'SS OF 'Pbt4 z, INLET 1'LUS U' ASAN L 133% 6F I uo y� S't�Rh Options Current Roughness Method Improved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting Method Improved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Metho, Horton's Method ' Results Mannings Coefficient 0.018 ' Water Surface Elevation 63.13 ft Elevation Range 62.78 to 63.50 Flow Area 10.2 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 69.83 It ' Top Width 69.60 it Actual Depth 0.35 ft ' Critical Elevation 63.21 ft Critical Slope 0.007737 ft/ft Velocity 3.98 f /s Velocity Head 0.25 it Specific Energy 63.38 It ' Froude Number 1.83 Flow Type Supercritical ' Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient ' 0+00 0+18 0.035 0+18 0+83 0.016 0+83 0+83 0.035 ' Natural Channel Points Station Elevation ' (ft) (ft) 0+00 63.50 0+02 63.40 0+03 63.30 ' 0+04 63.20 0+18 63.10 ' 0+58 63.00 0+65 62.90 0+70 62.80 0+71 62.78 0+77 62.80 ' 0+8383 62.90 --- Title: untitled x:\...\drainage 2003\revised\lind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.00051 ' 04/29/04 11:38:40 AM ® Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (it) 0+83 63.40 1 1 11 1 3/4 OF WAY ACROSS LINDEN WAY CDS W/ CURB Worksheet for Irregular Channel Title: untitled ' x:1-1drainage 20031revised\lind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 (7.00051 04/29/04 11:38:40 AM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 3/4 OF WAY ACROSS LINDEN WAY CDS W/ CURB Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet 3/4 OF WAY ACROSS LINDEN WAY CDS Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.018 Channel Slope 0.029000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 63.13 it Elevation Range 62.78 to 63.50 Discharge 40.52 cfs 63 63 63. 63. 63. 63. 62. 62. 0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+90 V:200.0 H:1 NTS ►JEt,a Cv�% Title: untitled x:\...\drainage 2003\revised\1ind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/29/04 11 :38:47 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 1 1 EXISTING AT EAST SIDE OF CDS (Cv (-Diz Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet EXISTING AT EAST SIDE OF Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Channel Slope 0.029000 ft/ft 1 ' Discharge 40.52 cfs - F\oZW h f N E KLt-3�S OF + -PAS 1 N L 7t 133% Op IW yt STDf�'� Options ' Current Roughness Method Improved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting Method Improved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Metho, Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficient 0.019 ' Water Surface Elevation 62.62 ft Elevation Range 62.20 to 63.00 Flow Area 10.2 ft2 ' Wetted Perimeter 62.76 ft Top Width 62.76 ft Actual Depth 0.42 ft Critical Elevation 62.69 ft ' Critical Slope 0.008689 ft/ft Velocity 3.98 ft/s Velocity Head 0.25 ft ' Specific Energy 62.86 ft Froude Number 1.74 Flow Type Supercritical ' Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient ' 0+00 0+58 0.016 0+58 1+03 0.035 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) ' 0+00 63.00 0+02 62.90 0+04 62.80 0+06 62,70 0+12 62.60 0+39 62.50 0+45 62.40 ' 0+49 62.30 0+53 62.20 0+56 62.20 ' 0+58 —62.30 0+6565 62.40 Title: untitled ' xA... \drainage 2003\revised\lind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005j 04/29/04 11:39:18 AM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 I Natural Channel Points Station Elevation ' (ft) (ft) 0+69 62.50 0+73 62,60 ' 0+77 62.70 0+82 62.80 0+90 62.90 ' 1+03 63.00 1 11 1 1 1 EXISTING AT EAST SIDE OF CDS Worksheet for Irregular Channel Title: untitled ' x:\...\drainage 2003\revised\lind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/29/04 11 :39:18 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 1 1 1 1 EXISTING AT EAST SIDE OF CDS Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet EXISTING AT EAST SIDE OF Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.019 Channel Slope 0.029000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 62.62 ft Elevation Range 62.20 to 63.00 Discharge 40.52 cis 63.00 62.90 62.80 62.70 62.60 62.50 62.40 62.30 62.20 1 1 U 1 1 1 0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 V:200.0N H:1 NTS Title: untitled x:\...\drainage 2003\revised\1ind-rev4-04.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/29/04 11:39:25 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +-1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 1 1 1 1 1 LINDENMEIER ESTATES, PUD S�IAIJs� Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet OVERFLOW E. OF LEMAY -TYP. SE Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Channel Slope 0.036000 ft/ft Discharge 40.52 cfs Options Flows ItJ EXct'SS of �0►.)4 BIN T + tpo sitj L 4� 133% I oo yr• si kv-{ Current Roughness Method Improved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting Method Improved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Metho, Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficient 0.018 Water Surface Elevation 62.25 ft Elevation Range 61.69 to 64.00 Flow Area 5.9 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 19.43 It Top Width 19.39 ft Actual Depth 0.56 ft Critical Elevation 62.48 ft Critical Slope 0.006530 ft/ft Velocity 6.89 ft/s Velocity Head 0.74 it Specific Energy 62.99 It Froude Number 2.20 Flow Type Supercritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+20 0.035 0+20 0+54 0.016 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+00 64.00 0+09 63.00 0+17 62.00 0+20 61.69 0+33 62.15 0+38 62.53 0+54 63.19 Title: untitled Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. x:\...\3909000\drainage 2003\revised\stormsew.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/29/04 11:41 :27 AM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 1 1 1 1 1 LINDENMEIER ESTATES, PUD SWALL 141S Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet OVERFLOW E. OF LEMAY -TYP. SE Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.018 Channel Slope 0.036000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 62.25 ft Elevation Range 61.69 to 64.00 Discharge 40.52 cfs [1nuSr DSK1111 63.50 62.50 62.00 v 6iAA�� Cc�e a Concre to br1 v e Cp rJ xG P rr1S 61.50 ' I I I I I I I I I I 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 V:20.0L�l H:1 NTS Title: untitled Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. x:\...\3909000\drainage 2003\revised\stormsew.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/29/04 11:41:36 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA + 1 -203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 I 1 J LINDENMEIER ESTATES, PUD SWAI.� C"C Worksheet for Irregular Channel _ Project Description Worksheet Section C-C, Between Houses at Windov Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula . Solve For Channel Depth Input Data ' Channel Slope 0.084000 f/ft Discharge 40.52 cfs — 11pWs IN akC6S� Dr— ?0Qb 6 INL 1 -F SM)IN L ' Options Current Roughness Method Improved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting Method Improved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Metho. Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficient 0.030 ' Water Surface Elevation 4,957.48 ft Elevation Range 4,956.67 to 4,959.30 Flow Area 5.2 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 12.90 ft ' Top Width 12.79 It Actual Depth 0.81 it ' Critical Elevation Critical Slope 4,957.77 ft 0.016164 ft/ft Velocity 7.82 ft/s Velocity Head 0.95 ft Specific Energy 4,958.43 It ' Froude Number 2.16 Flow Type Supercritical ' Roughness Segments Start End Mannings ' Station Station -0+22 0+16 Coefficient 0.030 ' Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) ' -0+22 4,958.78 -0+13 4,958.00 0+00 4,956.67 0+08 4,958.00 ' 0+16 4,959.30 1 �I 4 133% /vo S' Ski&M Title: untitled Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. ' x:\...\3909000\drainage 2003\revised\stormsew.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/29/04 11:40:31 AM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 ' LINDENMEIER ESTATES, PUD Cross Section for Irregular Channel ' Project Description Worksheet Section C-C, Between Houses at Windov Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula ' Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.030 ' Channel Slope 0.084000 ft/ft Water Surface Elevation 4,957.48 It Elevation Range 4,956.67 to 4,959.30 ' Discharge 40.52 cfs ' 4,959.50 ' 4,959.00 ' 4,958.50 ' 4,958.00 ' 4,957.50 ' 4,957.00 ' 4,956.50 -0+25 -0+20 -0+15 -0+10 -0+05 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 ' V:10.0L�, H:1 NTS Title: untitled Project Engineer: JR ENGINEERING, LTD. ' x:\...\3909000\drairiage 2003\revised\stormsew.fm2 JR Engineering FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 04/29/04 11 :40:37 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 JR EngineeringT �g, Ltd. CLIENYP�Y JOB NO. `_�09D• PROJECT 11JpJ 6g BYd4,ti-CHECK BY DATE / SUBJECT QuTF L(� 6,+5,r F �/G(.¢ySHEETNO.__Z_ OF / G ,bng leering, .Ltd. 21 Bast Prospeet R4. Stdte 190 Fort Cb1Uns,. 1orado 805z (970) 491-9888. • FAX (97p) 491-9984 www4 eng-wm June 16,11998 Mr. Thomas K Moore The Water Supply and Storage Company 2319 East Mulberry P.O. Box 1504 Fort Collins, CO. 80522 RE: Lindenmeier Estates;-P.U.D. — Drainage into Lindenmeier Lake Dear Mr. Moore, Please consider this letter as .the formal request for approval by The Water Supply and Storage Company to accept the additional storm runoff directed to Lindenmeier Lake as the result of the development -of Lindenmeier Estates, P.U.D. It is our understanding that Mr. Ed Zdenek of Bayberry Development Company, L.L.C. has discussed this matter with you. The development of Lindenmeier Estates, P.U.D. will increase the amount.of storm runoff that drains into Lindenmeier Lake. due to an increase in tributary drainage area and an increase in percent imperviousness. It is estimated that the volume of runoffwillincrease by 9.27 acre-feet (11,761 cubic feet) during the _100-year storm event. Based on a lake size of approximately 98 acres (4,268,880 square feet), this will result in a'net increase in depth of 0.033 inches_(0.0028 feet or 1/32 inch): The drainage flow patterns and the outfall point into-tindenmeier Lake will be the same as. the current stone conditions. If this is acceptable to the Water Supply and Storage Company, please sign this letter below and return it to meat your.earliest convenience. Sincerely, JR Engineering, Ltd. David W. Klockeman, P.E.- Project Manager Accepted by: The Water Supply and Storage Company Nam Title: Date: , � _ 1 6 4935 North 30th Street 6020 Grecnwond Plaza pled. 704 Fortino Blvd. West Colorado Springs, Colorado P0919 (719) 593 2`,93 - FAX (719) 5M-6613 Englewood, Cnloradn H01)) Pueblo, Colorado 81008 (303) 740-9393__ fA Y. (303) 721 9019 (719) 583 2575 - FAX (719) 583 111) 9 to iL JIBEngineering, Ltd. CLIENT &-l4bexy D-..- - - .. Jos NO. __j(29_Q,_0 PROJECT By_,TvjT CHECK DATE (0/1!; P8 SUBJECT Ru r44r SHEET NO. 1 OF De-vgf Iope J4,, r7le, 6 7 - atc "c- n ef-17 ct_ n 7'r-,," 13 45 1 n"5 .(3 C I E A too- r lw g Ul 1ili� A e- d? '>k 761.1 2. B in Z'4 c e-n fyom 22 CL Engineering, Ltd. CLIENT _ _ JOB NO. 90 100, CO PROJECT Lihde I net pX BY JPZ CHECK BY DATE tO M A SUBJECT RU n O4 Ib L C jr a SHEET NO. Z OF Z 9090.CHO Created on 06/ 16/98 10:06 AM Page 1 of 3 1 U.D.F.C.D. CUHP RUNOFF ANALYSIS EXECUTED ON DATE 6/16/1998 AT TIME 10: 6 CUHPF/PC (i.e., Ver. F) LAST UPDATED February 7,1997 PRINT OPTION NUMBER SELECTED FOR THIS BASIN IS 0 Lindenmeier Estates - Drainage Area into Lake 411, BASIN ID: 1 -- BASIN COMMENT: developed basin AREA LENGTH OF BASIN DIST TO CENTROID IMPERV. AREA SLOPE UNIT DURATION (SQMI) (MI) (MI) (PCT) (FT/FT) (MIN) .01 .17 .11 41.00 .0282 5.00 COEFFICIENT COEFFICIENT r . (REFLECTING TIME TO PEAK) (RELATED TO PEAK RATE OF RUNOFF) .f .093 .265 THIS BASIN USES TRADITIONAL DRAINAGE PRACTICES FRACTION OF PERVIOUS FRACTION OF IMPERVIOUS AREA RECEIVING AREA DIRECTLY CONNECTED IMPERVIOUS DRAINAGE TO DRAINAGE SYSTEM ( DEFAULT ) ( DEFAULT ) R= .19 D= .81 CALCULATED UNIT HYDROGRAPH - TIME TO PEAK TIME OF CONCENTRATION PEAK RATE OF RUNOFF UNIT HYDROGRAPH PEAK VOLUME OF RUNOFF (MIN) (MIN) (CFS/SQMI) (CFS) (AF) 7.50 14.80 2039.02 19.37 .51 ••• NOTE : THE TIME TO PEAK IS CALCULATED BASED ON THE TIME OF CONCENTRATION PROVIDED BY THE USER, REPLACING THE ONE COMPUTED BY CVHPF (TP= 4.49) WIDTH AT 50 = 15. MIN. WIDTH AT 75 - 8. MIN. K50 = .31 K75 = .42 RAINFALL LOSSES INPUT W/ BASIN DATA MAX. PERVIOUS RET. _ .50 IN. MAX. IMPERVIOUS RET. _ .05 IN. INFILTRATION - 3.00 IN./HR. DECAY - .00180/SECOND FNINFL - .50 IN./HR. TIME UNIT I TIME UNIT I TIME UNIT I HYDROGRAPH I HYDROGRAPH I HYDROGRAPH I I I I I I I 0. 0. 1 20. 9. I 40. 8. I 5. 17. 1 25. 9. I 45. 7. I 10. 17, 1 30. 9. 1 50. 0. 'I 15. 12. 1 35. 8. 1 0. 0. I BASIN ID: 1 -- BASIN COMMENT: developed basin 9090.CHO Created on 06/16/98 10:06 AM Page 2 of 3 '•" STORM NO. - 1 '•'• DATE OR RETURN PERIOD - 100 YEAR INCREMENT TOTAL* STORM** I INCREMENT TOTAL* STORM** ) TIME RAINFALL EXCESS HYDROGRAPH I TIME RAINFALL EXCESS HYDROGRAPH ) (MIN.) (IN) PRECIP (CFS) ( (MIN.) (IN) PRECIP (CFS) I I 0• .00 .000 0. I 50. .13 .102 18. ) 5. .05 .000 0. I 55. .10 .073 18. 10. .08 .025 0. I 60. .07 .044 17, 1 15. .12 .038 1. I 65. .05 .024 15. 20. .14 .044 2. I 70. .04 .015 14. 25. .25 .092 3. I 75. .03 .010 11. ) 30. .42 .276 7. 1 80. .03 .010 6. ) 40. .31 .277 22. 1 90. .02 .006 2. ) 40. .31 .277 22. I 90. .02 .006 2, 1 45. .18 .150 20. 1 95. .02 .006 2. 1 • LESS ANY WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME INCLUDES ANY WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME RELEASE FLOW TOTAL PRECIP. - 2.89 EXCESS PRECIP. = 1.932 INCHES -WVOLUME OF EXCESS PRECIP = .98 ACRE-FEET I[)LYC_Ip pc ck COV)d�+jOyuPEAK Q - 22. CFS TIME OF PEAK - 40. MIN. I INFILT.= 3.00 IN/HR DECAY = .00180 FNINF - .50 IN/HR MAX.PERV.RET.- .50 IN. MAX.IMP.RET.- .05 IN. 1 U.D.F.C.D. CUHP RUNOFF ANALYSIS EXECUTED ON DATE 6/16/1998 AT TIME 10: 6 CUHPF/PC (i.e., Ver. F) LAST UPDATED February 7,1997 PRINT OPTION NUMBER SELECTED FOR THIS BASIN IS 0 Lindenmeier Estates - Drainage Area into Lake BASIN ID: 2 -- BASIN COMMENT: historic basin AREA LENGTH OF BASIN DIST TO CENTROID IMPERV. AREA SLOPE UNIT DURATION (SQMI) (MI) (MI) (PCT) (FT/FT) (MIN) .01 .17 .10 2.00 .0220 5.00 COEFFICIENT COEFFICIENT (REFLECTING TIME TO PEAK) (RELATED TO PEAK RATE OF RUNOFF) .156 .165 THIS BASIN USES TRADITIONAL DRAINAGE PRACTICES FRACTION OF PERVIOUS FRACTION OF IMPERVIOUS AREA RECEIVING AREA DIRECTLY CONNECTED IMPERVIOUS DRAINAGE TO DRAINAGE SYSTEM ( DEFAULT ) ( DEFAULT ) R= .06 D= .09 CALCULATED UNIT HYDROGRAPH RUNOFF TIME TO PEAK TIME OF CONCENTRATION PEAK RATE OF RUNOFF UNIT HYDROGRAPH PEAK VOLUME OF ( (MIN) (MIN) (CFS/SQMI) (CFS) (AF) 7.67 27.50 1227.92 11.30 .49 n 9� v I 6 9 9090.CHO Created on 06/16/98 10:06 AM Page 3 of 3 USER, NOTE : THE TIME TO PEAK IS CALCULATED BASED ON THE TIME OF CONCENTRATION PROVIDED BY THE REPLACING THE ONE COMPUTED BY CUHPF (TP- 5.86) WIDTH AT 50 - 24. MIN. WIDTH AT 75 - 13. MIN. X50 - .19 K75 - .26 RAINFALL LOSSES INPUT W/ BASIN DATA MAX. PERVIOUS RET. - .50 IN. MAX. IMPERVIOUS RET. - .05 IN. INFILTRATION = 3.00 IN./HR. DECAY = .00180/SECOND FNINFL - .50 IN./HR. TIME UNIT HYDROGRAPH I I 0. I 0, 5. 9, 10. 10. I 15. 7, 20. 8• 25. 6, 1 BASIN ID: 2 I*'** STORM NO. = 1 *'** TIME UNIT I TIME UNIT HYDROGRAPH I I HYDROGRAPH i I 30. 6. I I 60. 7, 35. 6. 1 65. 7. 40. 6. 1 70. 7. 45. 6. 1 75. 7, 50. 6. 1 80. 0• I 55. 7. I 0. p, I -- BASIN COMMENT: historic basin DATE OR RETURN PERIOD - 100 YEAR INCREMENT TOTAL' STORM** I TIME RAINFALL EXCESS INCREMENT TOTAL* STORM** HYDROGRAPH I TIME RAINFALL (MIN.) (IN) PRECIP (CFS) I EXCESS HYDROGRAPH 1 I (MIN.) (IN) PRECIP (CFS) I 0. .00 .000 0. I 60. 1 5. .OS .000 0, 1 .07 .029 9, 10. .08 .000 0. .OS .009 9, 1 15. .12 .000 p, 70. 75. .04 .001 9• I 25. .14 I .000 0. .03 .000 9, 1 I .25 .000 p, 80. 80. .03 .000 9• I 30. 30. .42 I 2. 85. .02 .000 g, I .163 I 35. .75 8. 90. .02 .000 10. I 45. .31 .265 11. 95. .02 •000 10. 1 45 18 I .137 11. I 100. 105. .02 .000 10. I 50. .18 .088 11. I 110. .02 .000 9. 55. .10 .058 10. .02 .000 4• 1 I 115. .01 .000 2, I ` LESS ANY WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME *` INCLUDES ANY WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME RELEASE FLOW TOTAL PRECIP. - 2.89 EXCESS PRECIP. '�-► VOLUME OF EXCESS = 1.453 INCHES PRECIP = .71 ACRE-FEET PEAK Q = 11. I d� t� CFS TIME OF PEAK = 40. MIN. U1_1 INFILT.= 3.00 IN/HR DECAY = .00180 MAX.PERV.RET.= .50 IN. MAX.IMP.RET.= FNINF = .05 IN. .50 IN/HR 1 U.D.F.C.D. CUHPF RUNOFF ANALYSIS EXECUTED ON DATE AT TIME CUHPF/PC VERSION 1.0 MODIFIED IN Feb. 1997 TO WRITE OUTPUT FILE OF STORM HYDROGRAPHS FOR SUBSEQUENT USE WITH MULTI -PLAN RIVER ROUTING ROUTINES OF HEC-1 Lindenmeier Estates - Drainage Area into Lake NO HYDROGRAPH VALUES WERE WRITTEN TO AN OUTPUT FILE FOR THIS RUN OF CUHPF. ■II ! 1 ! — — — — — — — — — -- EWi9l EE / i 1 ' 1 \1 \ \ 1 1 \ TitA6T� . \yam- ^♦` mxo.f. ` \ L \�\ 1 ` Y`♦ IL 110- 0 `♦ 1 IN `C \ CA I 1 11 �` ♦ Nt ��1`` L;•A4 iC WELL \ eE-XWo, e X ■ 1 ill 1 / / I /l MA��"m `�`�\` \ � .` �' �`\ `p�n ``� \ ' � \ill i I i 1 i\I I iEi �\.J.� �/ �� � •e,.-%_ . . \, sue' � y � ,, I I R� 4 I 1 ,. .`I♦ � , O l '`. \ . . . F \ • Y ♦ .L a �1 i.; \`l v I , , �� i ` \ � \ \ `\ �♦ A L ,I Pp \ r��Li I � i1♦ `` 1 •``.`` \ vC\ \ \ \ �L 1 ,n w iFlp �+�I `I \� 1 \I, aas LOT 40 \ � \ ♦ `\ ` 1 \ ♦ \ \ \ F 11 I I I I I Aq/Y I `\` ♦` ?\ \ �> `% \` r \` \I` 1\ \ ` / \ gay I 1 1 I 1 I I 1111 y INN ♦\ `\ `\ A '` R �` ♦ �\ \ _ ` _ I f? III ,'I /Ii / / I \\ \\ � `i 1 • ♦ ill 1 i \ »� ast" �`\ `- \` \� �� I \ \\\\ 1 1l111 I I g s ..,�%♦ y `� ��_` \ \\s` I I LOT 41 I ww a„ -.Ana I \i J / / it 1, III' ..rsz mee� ✓�RE�B/ SDHI \ \ / I. 1 I - \ Ir- \ it I T I LEGEND _ Ems' DEvcN vONi W AREA N ACR;E. QA �p,�N ACER4E-OEl. ROW TIRE ON T� III TLC BAVN BOIMDAR, — — — — — EnsnNc PIPES I 00 PROPOSED DRANACE PIPE e 90EWALDL CIXVERT O LOT TYPE oO-1 EROSION BALES FLOW L.-"' yq IN BY OVERELOWNG RDAD Cn* ROW EXISDNG m 9q BY PIPE, ps%slor %** C. — EXISTING V CONTOUR ------ EXISTING Y CONTOUR PROPOSED S' CONTOUR PROPOSED V CONTOUR $F SILT FENCE --If—Yr ONEET PROTECTION SENTRANCE E'W . (1{3\2 NPRAP PROPOSED NUT LOCAnON MM7 WATER EXTENT FOR IM YR EVENT I APPENDIX G IRRIGATION LATERALS 24 I 1 JR Engineering, Ltd. CLIENT —4.t'tO-6:F�Y JOB NO. PROJECT IbNV jC-dC BY44:&-�HECK BY - DATE 61 SUBJECT ffIS7& f F UAjorl= 7-0 14 SHEET No OF Poo O Cc D --------- - 0 0 c G: Q L= C'D, C l, o� z ¢� z, 0-t) �?,00 Co,2) C�.Zs CC�,�) Z,o3) �. cf Iid c, Irs loo .5- <9 7�e o c, -7-0 -(�) -44 7/ 1 Z- 7- Ek9 tAl iTRACT 20'\ID.E.: A` (01 ,i lil is I i I � I 1 W 10, \ \ xjUlds I I !X SIOf7M M.�NNO/(J - •` _ FEpLAT OF GREENBRIAR i' TELLEZ ESTATES SUBDIVISION /,v'L ov/l,/, 4,2" _ 4965.E\� l�1 57-0 K( G )2u. 1 I i TO IP-P- (&A r I t 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX H EROSION CONTROL t 25 r-, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U) N O 00 O U 0 U C LL Z O a J Q W G a G Z Q N W U a O LL m W IL J J Q LL Z Q cc o °O O C Z Q � Q F W a ^ O a M r a v- o- ^ Q 00 M 00 ^ ^ N ^ O N M 7 ti N e a 0^, N m m o cO a yi o m 0 0 m m O 0 0 0 A V 0 M N t M 7 V .- G. w _ (), In .�- C cm F Q Q N 0 0 0 O O O w a w a ¢ N zw a am oa > 0 U w m a U o w LL p a o N a O H c c c > � n C N � s o �v o m � p T N N � C) LLB 00 cl c ¢_ o Q � � o E � G 0 A a c s M 0o c � 0 � � � c c ,° ❑ o E c E N N O L O O Z O cn O w ' JR Engineering, Ltd. 2620 E. Prospect Rd., Ste. 190, Fort Collins, CO 80525 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 [_] 1 PROJECT: LINDENMEIER ESTATES, P.U.D. STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: DRH DATE: 06-Feb-04 EROSION CONTROL C-FACTOR P-FACTOR METHOD VALUE VALUE COMMENT BARE SOIL 1.00 1.00 SMOOTH CONDITION ROUGHENED GROUND I.00 0.90 ROADS/WALKS 0.01 1.00 GRAVEL FILTERS 1.00 0.80 PLACED AT INLETS SILT FENCE 1.00 0.50 STRAW MULCH 0.06 1.00 ESTABLISHED GRASS 0.08 1.00 FROM FIGURE 8-A STRAW BARRIERS 1.00 0.80 EFF = (I -C*P)* 100 MAJOR SUB BASIN AREA EROSION CONTROL METHODS BASIN BASIN (Ac) A 1.35 ROADS/WALKS 0.00 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.14 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 1.21 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.16 NET P-FACTOR 1.00 EFF = (1-C*P)* I00 = 84.4% B&K 1.51 ROADSIWALKS 0.43 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.20 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.88 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.17 NET P-FACTOR 1.00 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 = 82.7% C 2.15 ROADS/WALKS 0.24 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.24 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 1.67 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.16 NET P-FACTOR 1.00 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 = 84.0% D 0.46 ROADS/WALKS 0.20 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.03 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.23 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.10 NET P-FACTOR 1.00 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 = 90A %n E 0.24 ROADS/WALKS 0.14 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.00 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.10 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.03 NET P-FACTOR 1.00 EFF = (I -C*P)* 100 = 97.0% ' EROSION ' JR Engineering, Ltd. 2620 E. Prospect Rd., Ste. 190, Fort Collins, CO 80525 0 11 PROJECT: LINDENMEIER ESTATES, P.U.D. STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: DRH DATE: 06-Feb-04 EROSION CONTROL C-FACTOR P-FACTOR METHOD VALUE VALUE COMMENT BARE SOIL 1.00 1.00 SMOOTH CONDITION ROUGHENED GROUND 1.00 0.90 ROADS/WALKS 0.01 1.00 GRAVEL FILTERS 1.00 0.80 PLACED AT INLETS SR.TFENCE 1.00 0.50 STRAW MULCH 0.06 1.00 ESTABLISHED GRASS 0.08 1.00 FROM FIGURE 8-A STRAW BARRIERS 1.00 0.80 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 MAJOR SUB BASIN AREA EROSION CONTROL METHODS BASIN BASIN (Ac) F 0.83 ROADS/WALKS 0.26 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.10 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.47 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.16 NET P-FACTOR 1.00 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 = 84.2% H&K 1.13 ROADS/WALKS 0.37 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.10 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.66 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.13 NET P-FACTOR 1.00 EFF = (1-C*P)* I00 = 87.0% 1 0.16 ROADS/WALKS 0.00 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.00 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.16 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.06 NET P-FACTOR 1.00 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 = 94.0% ' TOTAL AREA = 7.83 ac TOTAL EFF = 85.2% _ (83.8%*1.27 ac. +...+98.2%*L89 ac)/36.97 ac ' REQUIRED PS = 82.9% Since 88.9% > 82.9%, the proposed plan is o.k. e ' EROSION JR Engineering, Ltd. 2620 E. Prospect Rd., Ste. 190, Fon Collins, CO 80525 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE PROJECT: LINDENMEIER ESTATES STANDARD FORM C COMPLETED BY: DRH DATE: 02/06/04 Indicate by use of a bar line or symbols when erosion control measures will be installed. Major modifications to an approved schedule may require submitting a new schedule for approval by the City Engineer. MONTH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Demolition Grading Wind Erosion Control: Soil Roughingm.i r a 1 Perimeter Barrier _w<..., ., .0 .,.� ^- Additional Barriers Vegetative Methods Soil Sealant Other Rainfall Erosion Control Structural: Sediment Trap/Basin Inlet Filters Straw Barriers Silt Fence Barriers Sand Bags Bare Soil Preparation Contour Furrows Terracing Asphalt/Concrete Paving m.11u v�n..n. `�dhw dk P Lp t.A �p.tx. Other .,e.. d` e...AYA RGIw3b7GK� .. «w�i.V ,. �.r x� "M.ui<.. ,y'R,,'K.9 .�i7,{ Vegetative: Permanent Seed Planting Mulching/Sealant Temporary Seed Planting Sod Installation Netti ngs/Mats/Blankets Other 3UILDING CONSTRUCTION m r t �, 1"7 K �; ac. STRUCTURES: INSTALLED BY: CONTRACTOR MAINTAINED BY: DEVELOPER VEGETATION/MULCHING CONTRACTOR: TO BE DETERMINED BY BID DATE SUBMITTED: APPROVED BY CITY OF FORT COLLINS ON: EROSION 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 JR Engineering, Ltd. 2620 E. Prospect Rd., Ste. 190, Fort Collins, CO 80525 LINDENMEIER ESTATESP.U.D. EROSION CONTROL COST ESTIMATE JOB NO. 39090.00 COMPLETED BY RROSTON CONTI?OT MFeCimrrc ib]a:i ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS UNIT COST QUANTITY I TOTAL COST 1 SILT FENCE LF $ 3.00 1,320 $ 3,960.00 2 GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANC EACH $ 500.00 1 $ 500.00 3 INLET PROTECTION EACH $ 250.00 5 $ 1,250.00 4 RESEED/MULCH ACRE $ 655.00 6.2 $ 4,054.45 COST $ 9,764.45 CITY RACFT:TITNC3 CC1QT DESCRIPTION UNITS UNIT COST QUANTITYRESEED/MULCH EI I ACRE 1 $ 655.00 1 7.8 $ 5,109.00 COST $ 5,109.00 TOTAL COST $ 9,764.45 TOTAL COST WITH FACTOR OF 150% $ 14,646.68 EROSION I 0 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX LETTER TO PROPERTY OWNER 26 01 0 August 23, 1999 Property Owner 1704 Linden Way Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Re: Proposed Lindenmeier Estates Subdivision Dear Property Owner: As you are probably aware, Lindenmeier Estates Subdivision is being proposed on the west side of Lemay Avenue across from your street. The drainage from this site currently crosses under Lemay Avenue and between your house and your neighbor in existing pipes. This plan was approved when your subdivision was originally approved by Larimer County. This letter is being written to inform you that the originally approved drainage plan will be followed. However, some upgrades will be made to the system in order to adequately accommodate the total runoff. Currently, the drainage fiom the Lindenmeier Estates site comes under Lemay Avenue in an existing pipe, crosses a small landscape area between Lemay Avenue and Linden Way, enters an existing pipe and is conveyed under Linden Way and between 1704 and 1710 Linden Way to Lindenmeier Lake in said pipe. In the event that there was a large amount of rain or the pipe was plugged, it was planned that the runoff would flow over the top of Linden Way and between 1704 and 1710 Linden Way above ground. This area is included in an existing drainage easement that was dedicated when your subdivision was originally approved. As part of this proposed development, there will be some upgrades to this drainage system. For starters, the existing pipe under Lemay Avenue is not a large enough to carry the design flows. Therefore, this pipe will be enlarged. In addition, the area between Lemay Avenue and Linden Way will be cleaned out and re -shaped to better define the drainage channel. The existing pipe from there to Lindenmeier Lake will not be changed. The end result will be that the system will function as intended, with much of the runoff going through the pipe and the remainder within the existing depression between the two houses. If you have any questions or comments, or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at my office. Thank you. Sincerely, JR Engineering David W. Klockeman, PE Project Manager 0 H 1 11 1 APPENDIX J WATER QUALITY PONDS 27 6 Qb A - Table 6a-1: Standardized WQCV Outlet Design Using 2" Diameter Circular Openings. Minimum Width (Wc,,,,j of Concrete Opening for a Well -Screen -Type Trash Rack. See Figure 6-a for Explanation of Terms. Maximum Dia. Width of Trash Rack Opening W,o„,) Per Column of Holes as a Function of Water Depth H of Circular Opening (inches) —2 t� H=3.0' 11=4.0' H=5.0' H=6.0' Maximum Number of Columns < 0.25 in. 3 in. 3 in. 3 in. 3 in. 14 < 0.50 3 in. 3 in. 3 in. 3 in. 3 in. 14 < .75 3 in. 6 in.. 6 in. 6 in. 6 in. 7 < 1.00 6 in. 9 in. 9 in. Tin. 9 in. 4 < 1.25 9 in. 12 in. 12 in. 12 in. 15 in. 2 < 1.50 12 in. 15 in. 18 in. 18 in. 18 in. 2 < 1.75 18 in. 21 in. 21 in. 24 in. 24 in. 1 < 2.00 21 in. 24 in. 27 in. 30 in. 30 in. 1 �I Table 6a-2: Standardized WQCV Outlet Design Using 2" Diameter Circular Openings. ' US FilterTm Stainless Steel Well -Screen' (or equal) Trash Rack Design Specifications. Max. Width of Opening -- Screen #93 VEE Wire Slot Opening Support Rod Type Support Rod, On -Center, S acin Total Screen Thickness Carbon Steel Frame Type _ CO. IT97 #156 VEE '/d' 0.31' 3/p'k1.0"flat bai 0.139 TE.074"x.50" 1" 0.655 '/a"x —ang I 24" 0.139 TE.074"x.75" P, 1.03" 1.0"x 1%"an le 27" 0.139 TE .074"x.75" 1" 1.03" 1.0"x 1'h"an le 30" 0.139 TE.074"xl.0" 1" 1.155" 1'/,`5t1 %z'an le 36" 0.139 TE 074"x1.0" 1" 1.155" 1 '/,'k 1'/2"an le 42" 0.139 TE.105"xl.0" 1" 1.155" 1'/,`x l%:"an le U3 rater, 3t. raut, Minnesota, USA DESIGN EXAMPLE: Given: A WQCV outlet with three columns of 5/8 inch (0.625 in) diameter openings. Water Depth H above the lowest opening of 3.5 feet. Find: The dimensions for a well screen trash rack within the mounting frame. Solution: From Table 6a-1 with an outlet opening diameter of 0.75 inches (i.e., rounded up from 5/8 inch actual diameter of the opening) and the Water Depth H = 4 feet (i.e., rounded up from 3.5 feet). The minimum width for each column of openings is 6 inches. Thus, the total width is W ,o,,. = 36 = 18 inches. The total height, after adding the 2 feet below the lowest row of openings, and subtracting 2 inches for the flange of the top support channel, is 64 inches. Thus, ' Trash rack dimensions within the mounting frame = 18 inches wide x 64 inches high From Table 6a-2 select the ordering specifications for an 18", ' or less, wide opening trash rack using US Filter (or equal) stainless steel well -screen with #93 VEE wire, 0.139" openings between wires, TE .074" x .50"support rods on 1.0" on -center spacing, total rack thickness of 0.655" and'/," x 1.0" welded carbon steel frame. Table 6a AND A 1 1 1 1 Orifice Plate Perforation Sizing Circular Perforation Sizing Chart may be applied to orifice plate or vertical pipe outlet. Hole Dia (in) • Hole Dia (in) Min. So (in) Area per Row (sq in) n=1 n=2 n=3 1 4 0.250 1 0.05 0.10 0.15 5 16 0.313 2 0.08 0.15 0.23 3 8 0.375 2 0.11 0.22 0.33 7/16 0.438 2 0.15 0.30 0.45 1 /2 0.500 2 0.20 0.39 0.59 9/16 0.563 3 0.25 0.50 0.75 5 8 0.625 i 3 1 0.31 0.61 0.92 11 16 0.688 3 1 0.37 0.74 1.11 3 4 0.750 3 0.44 0.88 1.33 13 16 0.813 3 0.52 1.04 1.56 7 8 0.875 3 0.60 1.20 1.80 15 16 0.938 3 0.69 1.38 2.07 1 1.000 4 0.79 1.57 2.36 1 1 16 1.063 4 0.89 1.77 1 2.66 1 1 8 1.125 4 0.99 1.99 2.98 1 3 16 1.188 4 1.11 2.22 3.32 1 1 4 1.250 4 1 1.23 2.45 3.68 1 5 16 1.313 4 1.35 2.71 4.06 1 3 8 1.375 4 1.48 2.97 4.45 1 7 16 1.438 4 1.62 3.25 4.87 1 1 2 1.500 4 1.77 3.53 5.30 1 9 16 1.563 4 1.92 3.83 5.75 1 5 8 1.625 4 2.07 4.15 1 6.22 1 11 16 1.688 4 2.24 4.47 6.71 1 3 4 1.750 4 2.41 4.81 7.22 1 13 16 1.813 1 4 2.58 5.16 7.74 1 7 8 1.875 4 2.76 5.52 8.28 1 15 16 1.938 4 2.95 5.90 8.84 2 12.000 4 3.14 6.28 9.42 n = Number of columns of perforations Minimum steel plate thickness 1/4 ' 5/16 ' 3/B ' • Designer may interpolate to the nearest 32nd inch to better match the required area. if desired. Rectangular Perforation Sizing Only one column of rectangular perforations allowed. Rectangular Height = 2 inches Required Area per Row (sq in) Rectangular Width (inches) _ 2" Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Drainage Criteria Manual (V.3) n1e: Detons.ms '== Rectangular Hole Width Min. Steel Thickness 5" 1 4 6" 1 4 7" 5/32 " 8" 5/16 " 9" 11/32 " 10" 3/8 " >10" 1/2 Figure 5 WQCV Outlet Orifice Perforation Sizing 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V.3) 100 A H 2. 1. 0.61 a� 0.4( E a� z 0.21 0 U 0.0E 0.0'e 0.02 0.01 STRUCTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES D EXAMPLE: DWO = 4.5 ft 0 WCCV = 2.1 acre-feet SOLUTION: Required Area per Row = 1.75 in? D EQUATION: WQCV a= K 40 in which, K40=0.013DWQ +0.22DWQ -0.10 .moo_ OJT a b�` I rt� OeQr CAI h If J� 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.20 0.40 0.60 1.0 .2.0 Vila'/ Required Area per Row,a (in.2 ) AND A FIGURE EDB-3 Water Quality Outlet Sizing: Dry Extended Detention Basin With a 40-Hour Drain Time of the Capture Volume 9-1-99 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District 4.0 6.0 S-43 I 1 11 0 11 L I Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) - Sedimentation Facility POND A Project Name: Lindenmeier Estates Project Number: 39090 Company: ]R Engineering Designer: TEK Date: 1/28/2004 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 -ia-1.19'i'+0.78i)) D) Design Volume: Vol = WQCV/12' Area 1.2 2. Outlet Works - Design Pond A for 2000 CF (0.046 Acres) A) Outlet Type (Check One) B) Depth at Outlet Above Lowest Perforations (H) C) Required Maxiumum Outlet Area per Row, (Ao) (Figure EDB-3) D) Perforation Dimensions (enter one only) i) Circular Perforation Diamter OR ii) 2" Height Rectangular Perforation Width E) Number of Columns (nc, See Table 6a-1 for Maximum) 1 F) Actual Design Outlet Area per Row (A,) G) Number of Rows (nr) H) Total outlet Area (A,,) 3. Trash Rack A) Needed Open Area: A, = 0.5 ' (Figure 7 Value)' kt B) Type of Outlet Opening (Check One) C) For 2", or Smaller, Round Opening (Ref: Figure 6a) 1) Width of Trash Rack and Concrete Opening (Wco J from Table 6a-1 ii) Height of Trash Rack Screen (HTR) = H - 2" for flange of top support iii) Type of Screen Based on Depth H) Describe if "other" iv) Screen Opening Slot Dimension, Describe if "other" v) Spacing of Support Rod (O.C.) Type and Size of Support rod (Ref: Table 6a-2) vi) Type and size of Holding Frame (Ref: Table 6a-2) la= 37 % i = 0.37 A = 6.32 acres WQCV = 0.172 watershed inches Vol. = 0.109 ac-ft 4729 cf 4 VokvmC tweGt•.b {Gr er�tre. �t Y>f(,kx-, �n4v 2 3, 2voaCF anv 30W0 CF, X Orifice Plate r-espW:Ci 1e`� Perforated Riser Pipe Other: H = 2 ft Ao = 0.1173 square inches D = 318 inches, OR W = inches nc = 1 number Ao = 0.11 square inches nr = 6 number Ao, = 0.66 square inches A, = 22.4 square inches x < 2" Diameter Round 2" High Rectangular Other: WCOM = 3 inches HTR = 22 inches x S.S. #93 VE Wire (US Filter) Other: x 0.139" (US Filter) Other: 3/4 inches 3/8" x 1.0" flat bar ' Page 1 1 1 1 1 D) For 2" High Rectangular Opening (Refer to Figure 6b) 1) Width of rectangular Opening (W) W = inches ii) Width of Perforated Plate Opening (Wconc=W+12") Wconc = inches iii) Width of Trashrack Opening (Wopening) Wopen;ng = inches from Table 6b-1 iv) Height of Trash Rack Screen (HTR) HTR = inches v) Type of Screen (based on Detph H) KlempTM KPP Series Aluminum (Describe if "other) Other: vi) Cross -bar Spacing (Based on Table 6b-1, KlempTM KPP inches Grating). Describe it "other" Other: vii) Minimum Bearing Bar Size (KlempTM Series, Table 6b-2) (Based on depth of W QCV surcharge) 4. Detention Basin length to width ratio 2 (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 6. Two -Stage Design A) Top Stage (Dwo = 2' minumum) Dwo = feet B) Bottom Stage (Des = Dwo + 1.5' min, Dwo + 3.0' max. Storage = 5% to 15% of Total WQCV) C) Micro Pool (Minimum Depth = the Larger of 0.5`Top Stage Depth or 2.5 feet) D) Total Volume: Vol,,, = Storage from 5A + 6A + 6B Must be > Design Volume in 1 D 7. Basin Side Slopes (Z, horizontal distance per unit vertical) Minimum Z = 4, flatter preferred 8. Dam Embankment Side Slopes (Z, horizontal distance per unit verb Minimum Z = 4, flatter preferred 9. Vegetation (Check the method or describe "other") Storage = acre-feet Des = feet Storage = acre-feet Surf. Area = acres Depth = feet Storage = acre-feet Surf. Area = acres Vol,o, = 0 acre-feet Z = (horizontal/vertical) Z = (horizontal/vertical) Native Grass Irrigation Turf Grass Other: Page 2 F W QJ R j s o O 0 Cl o b d IO o N 0 OJ 0 6 o N c C o 0 0 V 0 O U LL LL LL 0 LL Z W ¢ h N N N h N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N w LL (QJ 1Q N ¢ Z Q Q N m o n N c o V 0 O 0 0 0 N O 0 m 0 J LL LL Z W z ¢ 0 m O m O m O m O m O m O m O m O m O m O m O m O LL W O O Q m d N N O O G S O O S O S O S O O O LL LL Q LL Z W O N m o N m 0 N m 0 N m 0 N m 0 N m 0 N m 0 1(1 m 0 N m 0 N m 0 N m o N m c Y LL Q W< O O O N O N O N N O N V O O O O O O G < O tD O O Q O l J Q W O Q N m N N Ip O y O N O N O OI O Ip O N N O N 0 Q Q Q� m W o n m CO CO 00 N N rn rn O O 0 E: I 11 1 11 Table 6a-1: Standardized WQCV Outlet Design Using 2" Diameter Circular Openings. Minimum Width (W .„...) of Concrete Opening for a Well -Screen -Type Trash Rack. See Figure 6-a for Explanation of Temis. Maximum Dia. of Circular Opening (inches) Width of Trash Rack Opening W,) Per Column of Holes as a Function of Water Depth H H�2 0' H=3.0' H=4.0' H=5.0' H=6.0' Maximum Number of Columns < 0.25 3 in. 3 in. 3 in. 3 in. 3 in. 14 < 0.50 3 in 3 in. 3 in. 3 in. 3 in. 14 < 0.75 3 in. 6 in.. 6 in. 6 in. 6 in. 7 < 1.00 6 in. 9 in. 9 in. 9 in. 9 in. 4 < 1.25 9 in. 12 in. 12 in. 12 in. 15 in. 2 < 1.50 12 in. 15 in. 18 in. 18 in. 18 in. 2 18 in. 21 in. 21 in. 24 in. 24 in. 1 < 2.00 21 in. 24 in. 27 in. 30 in. 30 in. l Table 6a-2: Standardized WQCV Outlet Design Using 2" Diameter Circular Openings. US FilterTM Stainless Steel Well -Screen' (or equal) Trash Rack Design Specifications. Max. Width of Opening Screen #93 VEE Wire Slot Opening SupportRod Type Support Rod, On -Center, S pacin cin Total Screen Thickness Carbon Steel Frame Type 9" 0.139 # 156 VEE ' 0.31' '/e'k1.0"flat ba 18" 0.139 TE .074"x.50" 1" 0.655 <"ic 1.0 an le 24" 0.139 TE .074"x.75" 1" 1.03" 1.0"x 1 %z"an le 27" 0. IN-1 1E.074x.75" 1" 1.03" 1.0"x 1%z"an le 30" 0.139 11TE .074"x1.0" I" 1.155" 1 '/,'k 1'/z"an le 36" 0.139 TE .074"xl.0" 1" 1.155" 1 '/;k 1 %z"an le 42" 0.139 TE .105"x1.0" 1" 1.155" 1 '/; k 154"an le US Alter, Jt. r'aul, tvimnesota, USA DESIGN EXAMPLE: Given: A WQCV outlet with three columns of 5/8 inch (0.625 in) diameter openings. Water Depth H above the lowest opening of 3.5 feet. Find: The dimensions for a well screen trash rack within the mounting frame. Solution: From Table 6a-1 with an outlet opening diameter of 0.75 inches (i.e., rounded up from 5/8 inch actual diameter of the opening) and the Water Depth H = 4 feet (i.e., rounded up from 3.5 feet). The minimum width for each column of openings is 6 inches. Thus, the total width is W ,o,,. = 36 = 18 inches. The total height, after adding the 2 feet below the lowest row of openings, and subtracting 2 inches for the flange of the top support channel, is 64 inches. Thus, Trash rack dimensions within the mounting frame = 18 inches wide x 64 inches high From Table 6a-2 select the ordering specifications for an 18", or less, wide opening trash rack using US ' Filter (or equal) stainless steel well -screen with #93 VEE wire, 0. 139" openings between wires, TE .074" x .50" support rods on 1 A" on -center spacing, total rack thickness of 0.655" and %" x 1.0" welded carbon steel frame. ' Table 6a 1 1 1 1 1 1 Orifice Plate Perforation Sizing Circular Perforation Sizing Chart may be applied to orifice plate or vertical pipe outlet. Hole Dia (in) • Hole Dia (in) Min. Sc (in) Area per Row (sq In) n=1 n=2 n=3 1 4 0.250 1 0.05 0.10 0.15 5 16 6313 2 0.08 0.15 0.23 3 8 0.375 2 0.11 0.22 0.33 7/16 0.438 2 0.15 0.30 0.45 1 2 0.500 2 0.20 0.39 0.59 9/16 0.563 3 0.25 0.50 0.75 5 8 0.625 3 0.31 0.61 0.92 11 16 0.688 3 0.37 0.74 1.11 3 4 0.750 3 0.44 0.88 1.33 13 16 0.813 3 0.52 1.04 1.56 7 8 0.875 3 0.60 1.20 1.80 15 16 0.938 3 0.69 1.38 2.07 1 1.000 4 0.79 1.57 2.36 1 1 16 1.063 4 0.89 1.77 2.66 1 1 8 1.125 4 0.99 1.99 2.98 1 3 16 1.188 4 1.11 2.22 1 3.32 1 1 4 1.250 4 1.23 2.45 3.68 1 5/16 1.313 4 1.35 2.71 4.06 1 3/8 1.375 4 1.48 2.97 4.45 1 7 16 1.438 4 1.62 3.25 4.87 1 1 2 1.500 4 1.77 3.53 5.30 1 9 16 1.563 4 1.92 3.83 5.75 1 5 8 1.625 4 2.07 4.15 6.22 1 11 16 1.688 4 2.24 4.47 6.71 1 3 4 1.750 4 2.41 4.81 7.22 1 13 16 1.813 4 2.58 5.16 7.74 1 7 8 1.875 4 2.76 5.52 8.28 1 15 16 1.938 4 1 2.95 5.90 8.84 2 2.000 4 1 3.14 6.28 9.42 n = Number of columns of perforations Minimum steel plate thickness _ 1/4 5/16 ' 3/8 • Designer may interpolate to the nearest 32nd inch to better match the required area, if desired. Rectangular Perforation Sizing Only one column of rectangular perforations allowed Rectangular Height = 2 inches Rectangular Width (inches) = Required Area per Row (sq in) 2" Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Drainage Criteria Manual (V.3) Flle: DetaOe.dwq Rectangular Hole Width Min. Steel Thickness 5" 1 4 6" 1 4 7" 5/32 „ 8„ 5/16 „ 9" 11/32 " 10., 3/8 „ >10" 1 /2 „ Figure 5 WQCV Outlet Orifice Perforation Sizing DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V.3) STRUCTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 10C CQ 4. 0.61 m U co a� 0.4( E a� 0 0.2( U T CU 0 0.1( ca • K: 0.04 0.02 Mel D EXAMPLE: DWQ = 4.5 ft D WQCV = 2.1 acre-feet SOLUTION: Required Area per Row = 1.75 in? EQUATION: WQCV a= K 40 in which, K40=0.013DWQ +0.22DW0 -0.10 01 6�1 OJT e b�� �% ti l h OeQr J� 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.20 0.40 0.60 1.0 2.0 p. /'7°f Required Area per Row,a (in.2 ) Fulb 6 FIGURE EDB-3 Water Quality Outlet Sizing: Dry Extended Detention Basin With a 40-Hour Drain Time of the Capture Volume 4.0 6.0 9-1-99 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District S-43 1 Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) - Sedimentation Facility POND B ' Project Name: Lindenmeier Estates Project Number: 39090 ' Company: ]R Engineering Designer: TEK Date: 1/28/2004 ' 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i=l,/100) I, = 37 % i = 0.37 ' B) Contributing Watershed Area (Area) A = 6.32 acres C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) WQCV = 0.172 watershed inches (WQCV =1.0'(0.91'i -1.19'i'+0.78i)) ' D) Design Volume: Vol = WQCV/12' Area 1.2 Vol. = 0.109 ac-ft 4729 cf 2. Outlet Works - Design Pond B for 3040 CIF (0.070 Acres) ' A) Outlet Type (Check One) X Orifice Plate Perforated Riser Pipe Other: ' B) Depth at Outlet Above Lowest Perforations (H) H = 2 it C) Required Maxiumum Outlet Area per Row, (Ao) Ao = 0.1786 square inches (Figure EDB-3) D) Perforation Dimensions (enter one only) ' i) Circular Perforation Diamter OR D = 7116 inches, OR ii) 2" Height Rectangular Perforation Width W = inches E) Number of Columns (no, See Table 6a-1 for Maximum) no = 1 number ' F) Actual Design Outlet Area Row per (Ao) Ao = 0.15 square inches G) Number of Rows (nr) nr = 6 number H) Total outlet Area (A,,) Apt = 0.9 square inches ' 3. Trash Rack A) Needed Open Area: At = 0.5 ` (Figure 7 Value) ' A,, At = 30.6 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) 1) Width of Trash Rack and Concrete Opening (Wconc) Wconc = 3 inches from Table 6a-1 ii) Height of Trash Rack Screen (HTR) HTR = 22 inches ' = H - 2" for flange of top support iii) Type of Screen Based on Depth H) x S.S. #93 VE Wire (US Filter) Describe if "other" Other: ' iv) Screen Opening Slot Dimension, Describe if "other" x 0.139" (US Filter) Other: v) Spacing of Support Rod (D.C.) 3/4 inches Type and Size of Support rod (Ref: Table 6a-2) ' vi) Type and size of Holding Frame (Ref: Table 6a-2) 3/8" x 1.0" flat bar ' Page 1 D) For 2° High Rectangular Opening (Refer to Figure 6b): 1) Width of rectangular Opening (W) W = ii) Width of Perforated Plate Opening (Wconc=W+12") Woo o = iii) Width of Trashrack Opening (Wopening) Wopening = from Table 6b-1 iv) Height of Trash Rack Screen (HTR) HTR = v) Type of Screen (based on Detph H) (Describe if "other) vi) Cross -bar Spacing (Based on Table 6b-1, KlempTM KPP Grating). Describe if "other" vii) Minimum Bearing Bar Size (KlempTM Series, Table 6b-2) (Based on depth of W QCV surcharge) 4. Detention Basin length to width ratio S. Pre -sedimentation Forebay Basin - Enter design values A) Volume (5 to 10% of the Design Volume in 1 D) B) Surface Area C) Connector Pipe Diameter (Size to drain this volume in 5-minutes under inlet control) D) Paved/Hard Bottom and Sides 6. Two -Stage Design A) Top Stage (Dwo = 2' minumum) B) Bottom Stage (DBS = Dwo + 1.5' min, Dwo + 3.0' max. Storage = 5% to 15% of Total W QCV) C) Micro Pool (Minimum Depth = the Larger of 0.5'Top Stage Depth or 2.5 feet) D) Total Volume: Vol,,, = Storage from 5A + 6A + 6B Must be > Design Volume in 1 D 7. Basin Side Slopes (Z, horizontal distance per unit vertical) Minimum Z = 4, flatter preferred 8. Dam Embankment Side Slopes (Z, horizontal distance per unit verti Minimum Z = 4, flatter preferred 9. Vegetation (Check the method or describe "other") inches inches inches inches KlempTM KPP Series Aluminum Other: inches Other: 2 (LIW) acre-feet acres inches yes/no Dwo = feet Storage = acre-feet DBs = feet Storage = acre-feet Surf. Area = acres Depth = feet Storage = acre-feet Surf. Area = acres Vol,o, = 0 acre-feet Z = (horizontal/vertical) Z = (horizontal/vertical) Native Grass Irrigation Turf Grass Other: Page 2 Drains a Su Table 50 35 0 SO 100 SCALE: I' - 50' DF: n TneuY Ar•p c x c 1 Y x N Rao 01 e 9u6Y N Pam (so) NIIXt apt �1 A 1.35 an OW 10.9 ae LOS 3,110 a e Its 0.n 051 121 12A 1.12 3Ja 3 C 245 am O.N 12D 11.9 '.a3 O" 2 0 am O60 0.76 6.1 50 0.a3 3.10 4 E 03a Oa0 an 50 So 0.4 1,61 1 F on 0.55 OM 25 a3 t.! ATS 5 G O55 am 10E 5.0 50 1A5 5.13 3A H 0]0 031 a.IT 112 10x On 1m I Ga Ota 025 0.31 12p 119 Btll 0]] a 3 10x of 053 13.1 13.1 `55 Sup 5 K aXa one lie 50 50 "H l50 T L In aW Del 77 ep 1W e01 6 a.CA.E,PH 525 OM 0Be Its 11.3 5D ism 5 O,K 101 WA WA 50 6.0 2Tt 9aJ 1. ALL DISTURBED AREAS ARE TO BE SEEDED AND MULCHED PER NOTE 16 ON LANDSCAPE PLAN. ]. PAD GRADE EIEVATIMS (G-X)l SHALL BE CCNSIDERED MINIMUM ELEVATIONS AT GROUND. BUILDINGS SHALL HAYS A MINIMUM OF Be OF FOUNDATION EXPOSED ADDVE THIS MINIMUM ELEVATION. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN 3.5 FEET OF COVER OVER EXISTING 27-INCH GREELEY WATER LINE. 6. CAUTION: GREELEY WATER MAIN IS SHALLOW AT SEVERAL LOCATIONS. FIELD VERIFY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CE CW51110CININ ENTRANCE Ter r Ad a MIN. 53�>Iat CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE •� slo.o rlb,r Metal ISTATIM .i. ... N,. 1! — r bell nA.wAtNaker, ANN Fahey `y ~ saAs ,orthor hours, =wMM Ne AAAN beept Prewhe wrw,1""`rR. Naff SK,,ol • Tonto a, fpWM® uwreo My M4® OAK v Maw rpv as oy anafmw s STANDARD EROSION CONTROL CONSTRUCTION PENN NOTES Itloota24 Kuo PArSto my mnlrvci an Mass vie. •qo mw, or nal.r,m Al tll fral e l b mC f e (dM pivp. ebpaa Q. W^a^V. VdC) A notated nowt. MY N<appmrcJ proper 'Mtl il. IOYNKtlm pan and sm,m na atr a WI be orobclN An rntaAew o Ell N en "Mal results, or, mmmw.relanao MIT al 'd NM d to kedto the dean "We'd w Iw vomnpt wm oanwIoa . Old Narm Ind man•n Neonate 4 v p It th" AT 114, •pam9 la M(eyp6, yodnp, u 'ExApsYX Ad ) N twaLmed crgmin by alma us IlMy load lot note uAl ."INAIT or other ttWarren cat hol r ^d.popct M•I ron• of my AAmMY ry (ID) "A W looted lmd Nn.lml•a, omeu omreu• appowd by then Aam /l Bodyemm�p. en jr ]he pdpwry ✓.ma sal n nIall em•wcl ne nt so us to prevent Modest n All Id JN W2F9 OCt"tM OK 0 Yad hurl M lagdi..a M lMeal , as d•brmna by the Cdy of Fort Gala Engneernq Oepnlmml. Ad r ter al . Inspected t Bullh anm nmi: to �to Pastures purformroter .w ad For rem ayowtended function Ad 11tornald �� a n morns Old lacmm .n oe not to cover Inn N11he nor my &OnOW y No hen Wye anal •e lm (10) BAN A INwgIIL Ad W ores Al be Poll Imcn4 my sal nudes ordartant Munched morns l al 30 rAa�apwhativingl W eewdow and maNW.m Cdy bdnmc• prMLlt• N Bx4 docap np a dpwtnp of tl• or m Other ffill unusual Nredoll W tYtlemme mmof sort tort Myby l ab'aelr May'KAMmt dgwlm OLLIIJS T32S51 LOT 17 cN smw.49Z![M- Y. iy(Mpadds w/ Ie-= ds AMEX AAna p Al z-Assn n.no, rrrn.r.,,.N "V EWRDR) A+-- gals 6. I I I 1 1 I I I l 1 1 I 1 1 I l 1 1 �L.T;,rpl I E Fp ST MLL LANE 8 k LEGEND i fiY ffi QDESIGN PONT — — EXISTING S' CONTOUR M dd EXISTING 1' CONTOUR r. R 6 . BASIN CRITERIA PROPOSED 5' CONTOUR A a0 0. RUNOFF COEFFICIENT • • 'd — AREA IN ACRES PROPOSED 1' CONTOUR ill x g b FLOW DIRECTION O SILT FENCE I• BASIN BOUNDARY—er ------ EXISTING PIPES IP lLET PROTECTOR! wainaaanam PROPOSED DRAINAGE PIPE CONSTRUCTION 4ypg • SIDEWALK CULVERT O� ENTRANCE �� •®?�f OONE%%K T EROSION BaLFS O iwt T131\2 RIPRAP � NAa hp� G6J� PROPOSED INLET Ra 9 O ! LOCATION K 222 YY gco'l hisher !04 / IIlWWt.my.,X LOT 38 IT 1 1 � S.Iouo Y r I Bell 1 nhalx g6r Z3 fARNN .956 STA new STAL Bad am 63W AMID a?" 17,00 62TOO Now dal NEW 4d" foom befor BOOK am WAY am "by SECTOR cc -1304) ULOO NEW NOW May mm VAN 51.00 z R 8 All w 3 z g 51 s wv OIKICII 'CROSS -SECTIONS NOT TO SCALE, I I AT 41 NOTE. FUR WATER OLALITY POND A TYPICAL SECTION SEE SHEET 15 OF 17 I L� d oz East EDrimer County Water District � J UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL in Q O. Linden Lake Home Owners Association APPROVED CW70¢ UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL DAM,Q Z I- Q Z City of Fort Collins, Colorado W m O 7- APPROVED: O•I• UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL Of GUYENOnw oMe W EdLorimer (so Ell County 2 UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL CHECKED BY: Z 0ON AMC K a nl• A McA.aN. unity cote M W cc APPROVED:_ Z Lonmw Canty Eugew DOW CHECKED BY: W LN ER COUNTY RENEW CMSIINIES CCYWMCE MM Be SLmnMs Evans offer J.Wt(R COUNTY LNBAN SIREII STMOMOS. All BY THE :AUNTY ODES NOT coydr,YwNE ePPRoru By BE ETAN EXXON. CHECKED BY: INS NENEN DOES NOT EMSPNR RENEW/APPROVN OF MY Pat• 31 N wtlm DOW rel M-S'IE lYP MENR W CH MAY BE SHOM. DESE xANS ME WITNOEO TO BE EW COUNry Aff CE PUBLIC CHECKED BY: SHEET 8 OF 17 WR umm eD MCENI TO THE mN RTI CWSTNOCTW OF IraMc E,NoeW Dal• N-SITE He VAR IW101EYEM5 CANNOT CC ENCE fall ALL JOB NO. REV. RWNED TRAfTTC MR EEI OR SNDY(5). FINAL O WLC Ni CHECKED BY: tool sal RE'll AND Bull s) puea ' AMC peT, 9090.00 0 I E 0 NDiF 1+�t�^ Lwx Gt.d u % /f•z/'S /ifafii�m i M \ r;mAOT'E' AACOCA Qm ° SIN r•Twer: - l / > n couvrry eGvs E4T >es !O!K {R ° �` r \ I �A ram rM/PO iU tvv/s/ON S.F / ( ^P2a 4 rarer' rvvi 0Y fee fl i N W }' /� ✓ L,eM,f/ eAVO ELr4TE46Zr r..resa V 4 rb SNAla i t I I Q I I 4 o° Qf ; •��a "y AXAwExN tavvLN.vitf t'b°ir e i�\ t4 wR' /f9ti BF I 1�- -0:9 GE E aLKN/wKOr f° qt 4 •4 [ y W ry- rIts? S f /O.f d7tVVm �L1. wi. ri /IH Wop- t' ® 1� \\ v6 fF rET�OMlrrfl �i/svY�- V, ° 4^^NW � Y4 4v �IjeNJ\ i m c /�/l'f.fyea Nre'µ M '- N, 2 % Ls iR N+ ow ml l„ I °iA ,/F•oe WE fIM' /IL l>•�� -.\� I ry• SM s4\II?6 I/frit lF Ay 'may W i "� byL Ar/SoiIBF Eia ii �_ x i 1 L iq m+ \ y e G Vol. 6 05' A&'" , \ n yl° y �J F./a.ewm�^wwarw >.N `ral is \\' °4 �,(E •``.\ a� IYttp°M�B �y $•+ S Zy 6, lB. /t° °N I%�^ 4 •1^4ro fi e T 4 u l�` \ Q °f Zi \1, BL9 �ya B`f. I R., a � oep0i t+ YyiHn' p4a � � WL! m�° f � A BF �YO ti rw ,fsd � ®\ d x a' L:J 8 ® � 6°Y o�p. � :�, +Y✓ 4° 4N _r'r � _ d++ pf z f'OQia \ m 4 ✓°. ��'0 Tz \ Z �. 1°,4�' \\\\ ' x 'n; L < .w s "s �'"—��t- `4` 4\\\ ° ` °I- ' �V°J w"9,C ® \M �'/ ..��yq _.®p\y L pf nfr[fry I,Bp \ w y - R� yu`p ae 5n t,",.'l R�C� �� ,� 6g 1Y°ya°� s' Lya°° • `c-.P �I `®� +,'�/ c , © b Ly L/ r' Iwo!!l' t r �`• : el °p`iov I ii w pi r -0I �, J \� `po ��L°f \ ppp O t 0 ® q i r� �w�sarn y '� J""°' `�" t ° •ftt •. .� a'`:c,. ® 3 oia ;• ��o EL°yy RtiAl r✓ Aaira�:r.--T '�9e' .t recr c. „ t`- 4 Y"' o°,d x a+'i O .�j a .\ t°a°4 Yy \'\\ A roue mr I e' - t +f t° rr veeese rurwrr save "- a- 1'°•N 2�p��,�.N/•' /���'� j� //t+ 1j0\A \ I� c `^'r^"wnaN. i C "4Id.r.f-R, aorW4, .e cr• °toL°�I •w.ri jp zp. areO.�h`Ali ra'ua� Y r�/ �' J°Jl J. / gfER CAKE \ �'• '`. "ei t .1°+4' </ 1?14200 It W "° iu / / '•r rP>i°Nr -f.. 1'4 ,w r Q Ill: I ! @ �•i„t. NQ I I Co Gir r> \Y , 8 A Corti W ! /Gorr!ADEN LAKE vS1,O . ff' `G4N/SAP; 6 Wv% In t $ P nd ° Lem W N W W �w ' OF WHICH IS A REPLAT OF TRACT A OF L/NDENWOOD a` 4J 3 A /+/ A POR. i /O; ° A ® J-W i THIRD FIU VG: LOCATED /N THE SOUTH 112 OF SECTION 3/, aC /iHLaFI A Y t ° V flip- lOvru/r✓ELvr a; x RA„ I E I ,G °L <leLlBlwr a 7— r TOWNSHIP S NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6m P.M. LARIMER W eeiiae° ESV> r�,w• gA .d�" ;i.ro/r.✓ COUNTY, COn ® 'r\* °x+y'is' ,y 1, ° ✓s[f ?A`� Gfr W LORADO 3 I Lrf LE All d , rrr rl• mr[i• \ rwr✓iar.r W/� G/NOLNWOOO /Y iour/aarc'fwN i i 1 I I I • I 1 N....nujpp.q.tary..fp..pb. 4RE4494' Or- C!F GwrE'ruOuiT, /90B SHEET / OF L KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that Willard 6. HOIz and Meter Supply and Storage Company, a Colorado Corporation being all of the owners of the following described property in Latimer county, Colorado, to-wfp A tract Of land located in the south bale of section 31. Township 0 North, Range 46 Windt Of the 6tw P.M., Latimer County, Colorado, being Moro pa circularly de"Ellea as follows Considering the South line of said Section 31 as beating North 90000'00• Nest and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto: Beginning at the Southwest corner of said SeCLi on 31, the True point of Beginning Of this description; thence along the Hest line of the Southwest quarter of section n North 00009.00• Nest 1075.42 feet to the southerly fight -Of -way line of the existing Latimer and Weld Canali thence along said southerly fight -of -way the following Sixteen (16) coursed and distances; (1) North 46055137• East 326.42 feet' (2) North 89040.52• Zest 310.30 feep (3) North 76016405- set; (10) South 78030'34- East 100.05 feep (11) South 66°59'49- East 199.06 feet, (12) South 59054A10• East 251.25 feet, 1131 South 51002039• zest 700.30 feet: (14) South 51050,55• Esac 232.51 feed (15) South 43017.31• East 140.00 feet; (16) South 33022138• East 256.58 feet to a point on the northeasterly prolongation of the eam[em-Most boundary of Tract A of the Plat of Llndenwood Third Fill", As fllea there a belong Clerk said dRecorder of Prrolongation andr loot OOLnty.Cbound.ey, of Tract A South 53003.074 Neat 402.24 efeet rho mtthe souLhrrn- o°t corner between said Tract A and Tract F of said Plat of Lindenwoed Third piling; thence continuing along the boundary Of said Tract A the f011owia9 twenty-one (211 areas and distances (1) Earth 50008'06• went 15.96 feet, (2) North 54036115a Nest 197.76 feep (3) North 79039.451 West 102.20 feeti (4) South 7705646• Nast 130.79 feet; ,S) North B0009.09• Nest 144.21 feet; (6) Borth 61018.23- Went 192.01 feet; (7) North 59029'10• West 169.76 fuep (8) North 63043.40• West 113.54 feeti (9) South 79004.31• West 175.00 48059.2(3 `)Wstt 117.927123- feep Mest 260.96 feet; (12)South � 44 42.021 West 140.54 feet; (13) South 420371166 Most 128.56 feet; (14) South 19023'35• West 120.51 toot, (15) South 33036'53• Went 139.00 feet; (16) South 28000-44• Wet 7B.39 feep (17) South 130171/80 West 110.17 feet; (19) South 00058.25• West 10156 feep (191 South 23018.33- Zest 57.56 fu4 120) Bouts 330 20.59• Bast 71.06 feep (21) North 90000.00• West 312.63 feet to the True Point of Beginning. ' containing 38.34 acres, more or lesq have by these presents caused the name to be surveyed and subdivided Into lose to to known an Linden Lake do hereby dedicate and convey as publis highways Pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes 43-2-201111(s) the streets, foads, and highways as laid out and designated On this plat, and do 4180 fksetvt perpetual easements for the Inetdllation and maintenance of utilities and for Irrigation and drainage facilities 36 are laid out and designated on this plat. LINOLAMVIEN LAME DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; Aaw 1 Jerome Carr Millard E. NOl ater Sup y d Storage Company l Star,: 01 ]nraao) County It Latimer) Be: 1 ; The foregoing dedication was acknowledged before me Lhls ua Of NOMR!fts , A.D., 19 S1_ by J.C✓nc_O. Cwa�RY � M* Awe, 1a 15a1_C Hjz. My Commission expires: State of Colorado) s0 Cmm Ly Ot Latimer) =�n r1r, fO: eguing dedieatI0n NAB aeknovl,ol d Lefolo I, Lh 1s 3� I: of ftbeellt, _, A?D., 19 ti �, Oy ____ ______ - 1; . r, n _ J D1mea -- __-. _ ._........ MY .1R1 irb11n expires, _ 0... e...a}_ Iasi/ SdByL�"ILHT-IFICATE. 11, Wallace C. Muaeott, a duly regteteteJ land aur veyor in the 1 State of Colorado, d0 ;hereby represent that this plat of 1 'Linen Lake' truly and correctly represents the results of a survey made by Be or unrlec my direct supervision• mxw� xwo Won ace c. xwec��nt, 'gaLend surveyor t 17497 C.OlnrndO Registration NO.r 17497 �y �r ]°viL Iaat A6y Or Ca gi p' epa°Je4 5 m1R11 9n.1,,.,1.,M.,.,. Approved by the Latim:an er County Pning COa.missron this day Of 'iN- Y A.D., 19. x I P `OF cnr,r7z1_,_ I :DBe O 'I r6 ill ! M" JpOVER D L Nrimer count Board of County Commtse,t1..- 'rA+�'i dayof / y high waYo[ then e" [foots, highways, and d,dicaatiosne as publorth ic within plat are hereby accepted pursuant toroadsColoradf8eviseo the 8tatuces, 1973, 43-2-2al(1)(a). The acceptance of the dedications made herein are AS public higways only. This acceptance doea not institute adding the roads, streets and highways a set forth i this plat to to* County primary' r Secondary road system, a.-L the county does noAccept r assume any responsibility for in, [rution, repair Maintenance f any o streets, highway., roads, alloys, bridges, tights -of -way, or other pr¢u¢ designated n this plat. ---y1 , l B0 Y Ch. � TT�ES�T^: , ,.. Deputy lYni AetlaD eleik of the board -- Approved 0yy the)Poudre t. a Autburt[y L... day of /1'i• A.D., 19 Ste', APPROVAL By TILE LMIMBR Mary HB,ALTB DSPANTNM -���4t Approved by the Latimer County �HY Ith Authority this yy_ day of uhd]vL len f12--, all construction this any Ise seeress ]nmluldng the asal°pment of done eIN e manner which vlllimut 611 of alga treatment requirements .hall he Colorado Department of Health and the Ladneunty Public ce. Health Department and the Officers authorized to enforce such requirements. odl a _ LarLae County HaalM Authority SOILS; 1) THE CUNNEN'V ¢ANNUNL FEE F:m TOO PORT COLLi NS DONE GNOWrll ABU SHALL BE COELECVEO FOR iACh DWELLING UNIT 'ONSTNIICTED. 2) LOT ACCESS SHALL NE FROM INI[HNAL STREETS ONLY; u'IACC ACCESS TO LIMAY AVENUE SHALL NOT u: PERMITTED. 3) INTERIOR STMEETS MAL PNIVAYE,.Y OWNED BY THE hGMrZ NCµ-ti ASSOCIATION. LORIMER COUNT', AND THE CITY OF FOhT COLL,NS SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE I'OR MAINTENANC3 OF INTERIOR STREETS, 4) ZONING IS A - µESIDuNTIAL. 51 DASENENTS AAl NOT H.i FEASLu.J: DUn 'M HIGH GR04LD p; LOTOUSHALL HAVE A SITE SPECIFIC PIOATION DE$ AND IL5 R REPORT PREPARED BY A RWIAM PRDFBSSIONAL 8)G IL 1, 61 ALL LOTS upVE A 15' OUILDING SETBACK ON SIDE LOT ]) LIUDENHEIN LANE BEVLLOP.YENT CORPORATION GRANTS TO TI1LOWNERS. THEIR GUESTS AND INVITEES, OF THE LINDENWOLD FIRST AND SECOND FILINGS A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER LINDEN LANE ROAD FOR VEUICUUR AND PEDESTRIAN USE. 0) TNN ROADS LAND OPEN -SPACE, DRAINAGE FACILITIES ON JTILU COMMON ELEMENTS IF APPLICABLE) SET FORTH ON THIS PLAT WILL NOT BE MAINTAINED BY LAAIMER COUNTY, COLORADO. FAILUI.E TO MAINTAIN SUCH FACILITIES MAY RESULT' IN A LIEN ON ALL PROPERTIES OR LOPS SET FORTH ON THIS PUT, YIM1 PoLLOWING .]ACTS ARE HEMEB: :.SIGI1161 FOR TIIL t-vo (1-JS AS DESCRIBED BBWW: TUAI ., A, B, D, 1, x, ARE L ARL JIGA/'I'L- AS CeM DO. , PACK AI ... AS e" LLE OF ALI, C..dlDiWTS, AND .; O'AVJD AT Tne ni vJ ASSDCIATION. NL RESIDENTIAL 1DIMINv- MALL Ic �'ER:;.'fTED UPOA LA V LeLJDZ'.'.. '1RACT C IS DES,JSATSD AS CONAC], ,PEN S2ACE AREA MI, V A ?EuXAHENf ACC[.JS AND UTILITY BAc,_t ENT: MAIMENALCE 0' TLL .ITT SPACL SHALL BG 09 TILE NCMEOWNL:i S ASS(.'IATION. OP,..^ION A..O MAINTENANCE OF ?H8 SANF]AMY S6NM:c Ll:? STATION 4P44 SAID :BACY XIBB BY THE SANITATION DIST"ICP. t" A 4 E TI 085 FROWARD,R 5 E V STRUCTURES NANC. OF TNG LINDENLA 3 INLET DIt sTMUCTUXBb W .ATEµ 5 PFLY AND 'AL CJNPMY TI"N :S Y AND L ME DI "[G rA.ED - M 'd 0YBN 5YACL WL ,...p nS PL a WENT ACCEDE AND MA: Mae" M]'.EUTS FOR MAI -RpFU SIt,A.OE COMPANY; AND SHIAJ, as A NSAINM BY TNL HOKEOW ASSOCIATION. TI.ACT G IS OBb I G.NATSD AL TML L, XL LNA _t t:. LANE L NLE" u: It AN.. I S LI .AEO BY THE I,,ITER SU.•Pi.Y AND b:.3RACE CvRPANY AL I I, )E{11 I: CORDED IN "A 2193, PAGE O)i ], CLthri ANO MnC(IMD. AI'S 0:'.' UNIMER COUNTY', COLORADO. 'Cu, TIaC^ J 15 DE:,ILUTGL A. CORN.::, J,Lh SPACE ANLn CO:CAIN1.,. Fi CRUTIONAL YkCILITIEi FOR TUN USE UP ALL RESIUEN'1S, AND sI,U.L BE MAINTAINED BY THE MOAFAAMBk'S ASSOCIATION. TIACT M IS DE;.ICNATLI) A.i CO ON .)YEN SPACE AREA Al, AL A I:RMANF.NF ACCESS AND UTILITY EAT,:VENT; MA, .NTEUNCE OF THE IF, IIOME.WNEN'S ASSOCIATION. :;nci �, yE nV THE Curve No. lA 1B 1C D 2 3 4 44 4B 5 6 ]A IS C 8 8A SB BC 8D 9 0 ISA LOU 10B 10 00 11 IIA Ila B 12 13 13 13B IlC 1 14B l4C c 15 6 16 16B 16C 16D E 6 1s 14 19 19A 19B 20 20A 208 21 22 22A 22B 22C 220 23 23A 23B 23C 21D 24 25 25A 255 25C 25D 25e 26 26A 26B 27 20 29A 28B 29 29A 29B 29C 30 31 Dolca -00• -00• -so. .39• '28' '46• '56• •11• 17• -05• 600.00 570.Do 540.00 540.00 540.00 420.00 420.00 31A 09009.43• 400.00 31B 17000.23• 400.00 32 44058.27• 348.13 32A :3009*56' 740.13 32B : o4644• 148.13 32C 16 59.47• 348.13 33 53055.46• 316.13 34 44005.02• 211.13 34A 13055'Il• 2u0.13 36B 50009.51• 2be.13 35 299046'19• i60.00 35A 12011.17• �60.00 35B 1,803b'04• 60.00 35C 55046'56' 60.30 '-D .-ei°Sp 42' 60.04 66019.40• 60.00 1NDF_ A 490.11 32,59 10 .65 5 .60 49.84 234.46 110.45 10h.73 10,3.00 70.90 24.10 3q'8.19 297.16 51.03 3n.32 298.45 11.11 140.00 140.00 .34 212.00 6.33 118.00 110.00 16.67 365.ub 329.27 5.02 0.00 20.01 I$S.00 9.SS 1 7.42 8.66 8.85 3.61 9.95 9.95 03.66 194.04 11).73 96.09 J50.21 81.38 168.73 50.00 118.73 273.26 80.00 90.00 103.27 299.44 221.61 ]0.6d 151.69 313.93 2.76 103.29 58.42 70.r0 69.fu I Chord 60.00 73.35 04.85 1 65.07 67.54 56.11 64.13 72.14 34.36 37.54 179.18 200.69 153.89 79.53 102.31 14.66 232.03 20.20 100.21 20.14 92.65 226.48 220.13 4.90 11L43 22.00 79.13 114.13 15.95 99.29 137.74 161.35 23.9E 72.00 69.13 524.15 198.34 50.37 326.46 479.73 435b1 52.56 121.76 $0.54 49.78 220.30 114.27 208.56 102:65 70.83 24.10 338.31 291.00 51.00 314.14 2 Y.Ya 1.11 39.12 139.12 7.34 273.51 36..3 109.6.67 7.44 55 16 3) 3359g5.01 40 9. 9 24.01 39 130.13 35.40 27.41 MIA 84.24 53.07 99.95 9.27 82.60 47.71 95.92 50.19 50.04 IBO.Oa .9 49.7 8.29 2669..82630 277 a9n5 102.dO 268.S1 . 6926 .83 .94 60.20 12.74 56.4 6665.10 . 10 65.64L4 CLord Bearing S 74047'44' 8 S 39031 38• W a 4b°O9 OD• 0 N 57000'43• E N 10018'a9' W N 07031'39• E N 07031'S9. 9 N 070311390 E N 13033'24• E N 03052'45• e N 68051100• E N 68051'00• e N 66004.24' E N 76655136• E N 60003129• E N 49012'17• 8 N 53055130• S N 48022'34• e N 51030,46• e N 54038'52• e N 57035.11• E e53°55'30• E 53055'30. 9 N 47059.06• E N 51016'25. 8 N 55002,00• a N 57049•11• E h 36049.31• E N 56050'S0• E N a3040.22• E b 36049'31- E N 36049.31- e N 56038.47• E N 43010.42• E N 23021.26• E N 61n24.34• E H 29 55'Ob• C N 50015'59' E N E1042'35A E N 61024'34• E N 61024'34• E N 16649'31' E N 31. 57'WI E N 480491550 E N 58037'09' E N 9eo19'19• E E 65022'02• E S 65022'U2' E S 65022'02' e S 6003845• E S 61010153• E S 36009410• E 9 39038101• E S 15053.01- E 8 36009'10' E 36009'10' G S 59001.07' E S 4605U•37' e S 2404243' E 8 12059'13' E 6 35024'10. 9 8 1$022'35• E 8 28000.30- E 8 46040.13. 8 B 57002'18' N 0 E 5 35024.10- 9 s 14051'00• E S 24017.03• E 3 32040110• E S 43030101" 8 a 55040'45• R e 47040.32" S 5 55052'OB• e S 45008.29' E 5 47040'32- E 8 47040.32- E a 57015446• E S 46032'07. 8 N 07005'03' E N 02001.38' E N 06055`48' E N 16002.29- E N G7005'D3' E N 07005.03- E N 01025.05' E N 10031155- E N 27029'14' N N `3023129% W N 9024'09' W N ID029'54' N N 3'057'53• W N 2Y002.31• W 0 42007'26- W 26OGP55• W E 35045.37• E S 00026'42- E S 55051'23- E V 46056'Ou' E j14022'42- w 80057.5J' N �s 9b14 AD