Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 04/26/2006i PROPERTY ®F final roved Report rgaa �u"svt°�ate DRAINAGE AND 1 EROSION CONTROL REPORT ' FOR I CHERRY NTREET STAwlo 1T Prepared for: MTA Architects, P.C. 223 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Ph. 970.416.7431 Fax 970.416.7435 Prepared by: Interwest Consulting Group 1218 W. Ash, Suite C Windsor, Colorado 80550 Ph. 970.674.3300 Fax 970.674.3303 March 2, 2005 Revised June 22, 2005 Revised December 28, 2005 Revised March 7, 2006 R%O u 0'. J MHSTx C ON 5 U LT I N G GROUP''. March 7, 2006 Mr. Basil Hamdan City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Drainage and Erosion Control Report — Cherry Street Station Dear Basil: We are pleased to re -submit to you for your final review and approval this Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Cherry Street Station. All computations within this report have been completed in compliance with the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria. We greatly appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing this submittal. Please call if you have any questions. SincereWEngineer avid Project *eoi erofessional Engineer No.30697 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................:......................I 1.1 Project Description..........................................................................................................1 1.2 Existing Site Characteristics...........................................................................................1 1.3 Proposed Site Characteristics..........................................................................................1 1.4 Design Criteria................................................................................................................2 1.5 Master Drainage Basin....................................................................................................2 2. HISTORIC (EXISTING) DRAINAGE................................................................................2 3. LOCAL DEVELOPED DRAINAGE DESIGN...................................................................2 3.1 Method............................................................................................................................2 3.2 General Flow Routing.....................................................................................................2 3.3 Hydrologic Analysis of the Proposed Drainage Conditions............................................3 4. HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS ..........................:.............................. ...........................................4 4.1 Pond Description.............................................................................................................4 5. EROSION CONTROL...........................................................................................................4 5:1 Erosion and Sediment Control Measures........................................................................4 5.2 Dust Abatement.............................................................. .. ...............................................5 5.3 Tracking Mud on City Streets.........................................................................................5 5.4 Maintenance....................................................................................................................5 5.5 Permanent Stabilization..................................................................................................5 6. REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................6 Appendix A: Maps and Figures Appendix B: Hydrologic Calculations Appendix C: Water Quality Calculations Appendix D: Detention Pond & Outlet Sizing Calculations Appendix E: Erosion Control Calculations t 1 H n 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description Cherry Street Station is a proposed mixed -use building located at the northwest comer of the intersection of Cherry Street and College Avenue, in the northeast quarter of Section 11, Township 7 North, Range 69 West, of the 6th Principal Meridian in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. The proposed building will consist of seventeen (17) residential living units and one (1) commercial unit. A vicinity map is provided in Appendix A. 1.2 Existing Site Characteristics The existing site is bordered on the south by Cherry Street, the west by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, (formerly known as the Colorado and Southern Railroad), and on the east by the Union Pacific Railroad. The soils in the area are reported in the Soil Survey of Larimer County Area, Colorado as being Paoli Fine Sandy Loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes (Soil Number 81). These soils have characteristics of slow runoff with the hazard of water erosion being slight and the hazard of wind erosion being moderate. 1.3 Proposed Site Characteristics This report defines the proposed drainage and erosion control plan for Cherry Street Station. This report takes into account all on -site runoff and the design calculations of all drainage facilities required with this development. A proposed, above -ground stormwater detention/water quality tank will provide both water quantity and quality storage for the majority of increased impervious area on -site. The design of the above ground storage tank will be designed by architect/structural engineer at the time building plans are submitted to the City for review/approval. The proposed stormwater tank will release flows at a historic rate into an existing curb inlet located at the south east corner of the property, along the north side of Cherry Street curb. From this point, flows travel via storm sewer south across Cherry Street, then east across College Avenue and down Willow Street, ultimately discharging into the Cache la Poudre River. Sections of this existing storm sewer trunkline were constructed recently with the North College Avenue / Riverside Avenue Improvements by Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig. Site frontage is along Cherry Street, which currently flows east to the existing inlet discussed above. The City of Fort Collins requires flows from half of an adjacent roadway adjacent to I Drainage and Erosion Control Report Cherry Street Station Page I March 7, 2006 1 1 1 Ll I I 1 a proposed development to be detained. Please consider this as the variance request to allow the existing flows from the north side of Cherry Street to remain un-detained. 1.4 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 and revised in January 1997. Where applicable, the criteria established in the "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual' (UDFCD) dated 1984, developed by the Denver Regional Council of Governments have been utilized. The rainfall criteria used was the April 1999 amended criteria. 1.5 Master Drainage Basin Cherry Street Station is located within the Poudre River Master Drainage Basin. 2. HISTORIC (EXISTING) DRAINAGE The historic (existing) flows draining to or through the site consist primarily of on -site flows. The site historically drains at approximately one percent from south to northeast into an existing 4-inch PVC pipe, which discharges under the railroad tracks and flows continue north, across native grass areas and eventually outlet into the Cache la Poudre River. 3. LOCAL DEVELOPED DRAINAGE DESIGN 3.1 Method The Rational Method was used to determine the 10-year and 100-year flows for the drainage areas indicated in this drainage report. Drainage facilities were designed to convey the 100- year peak flows. The hydrologic calculations are found in Appendix B of this report. 3.2 General Flow Routing The proposed drainage pattern conveys flows from the proposed ramp and roof area to a proposed above -ground stormwater detention/water quality tank located at the southeast corner of the site. Flows traveling down the proposed ramp into the underground parking structure will be captured in a trench drain that will discharge into a storm sewer and eventually pumped via forcemain to the roof. A 4-inch PVC storm pipe will then carry flows from the roof into the top of the tank. The proposed tank will provide both water quantity and I Drainage and Erosion Control Report Cherry Street Station Page 2 March 7, 2006 I I I 1 1 1 water quality for these two drainage areas. Details of the proposed stormwater tank can be found on the stormwater detail plan sheet located in the back pocket of this report. The proposed patio, dumpster area and grass areas will be released un-detained, due to the fact these areas amount to less than 5,000 square feet of new impervious area. The new patio area is approximately 1,056 SF, the new dumpster area is approximately 255 SF and the new grass area is approximately 3,007 SF. These areas all flow to the north and a historic calculation has been provided in Appendix B showing that the historic flows to the north are greater than the flows we are releasing un-detained. Since stormwater detention is not being provided for the areas mentioned above it seems impractical to provide water quality since 70% of this area is grass. Therefore please consider this as a variance request to dismiss the water quality requirement for the proposed patio area, dumpster area and grass areas. Flows from the proposed sidewalk area along Cherry Street will be collected in a proposed six-inch underdrain system which discharges into the outlet pipe of the proposed stormwater detention tank. This flow is also being released un-detained, but only accounts for 0.22 cfs in the 100-year event. Please consider this a variance request to dismiss the water quality requirement for the sidewalk area along the north side of Cherry Street. A Drainage Exhibit has also been provided in the back pocket of this report showing all proposed drainage areas for your review. 3.3 Hydrologic Analysis of the Proposed Drainage Conditions The Rational Method was used to determine the 10-year and 100-year peak runoff values for each sub -basin. Runoff coefficients were assigned using Table 3-2 of the SDDCCS Manual. The Rational Method is given by: Q = CfCIA (1) where Q is the maximum rate of runoff in 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 for a storm duration equal to the time of concentration. The frequency adjustment factor, Cf, is 1.0 for the initial 2-year storm and 1.25 for the major 100- year storm. The runoff coefficient is dependent on land use or surface characteristics. Drainage and Erosion Control Report Cherry Street Station Page S March 7, 2006 t I i 1 I 1 The rainfall intensity is selected from Rainfall Intensity Duration Curves for the City of Fort Collins (Figure 3.1 of SDDCCS). In order to utilize the Rainfall Intensity Duration Curves, the time of concentration is required. The following equation is used to determine the time of concentration tc = ti + tt (2) where to is the time of concentration in minutes, ti is the initial or overland flow time in minutes, and tt is the conveyance travel time in minutes. The initial or overland flow time is calculated with the SDDCCS Manual equation: ti = [1.87(1.1 - CCf)LO'5i/(S)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. All hydrologic calculations associated with the sub -basins shown on the attached drainage plan are included in Appendix B of this report. 4. HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS 4.1 Tank Description A proposed above ground stormwater detention/water quality tank will provide, water quality and quantity storage volume for the proposed roof and ramp. The proposed outlet structure is designed to release at a 2-year historic rate, which is approximately 0.1 cfs. A 1-inch orifice plate on the outlet pipe regulates this release rate. The 100-year water surface elevation in the proposed tank is 5003.5. An additional 18-inches of freeboard has been provided in the tank. In the event of back-to-back major events, the top of the tank will remain open under the eave, to allow for emergency overflow (see architectural/structural drawings by others). All water quality calculations can be found in Appendix C of this report. All tank design and outlet sizing calculations can be found in Appendix D of this report. Structural design of the proposed stormwater tank and all necessary safety precautions will be designed by JVA Structural Engineers. 5. EROSION CONTROL Drainage and Erosion Control Report Cherry Street Station Page 4 March 7, 2006 5.1 Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Erosion and sedimentation will be controlled on -site by use of silt fences, as well as landscaping. The measures are designed to limit the overall sediment yield increase due to construction as required by the City of Fort Collins. During overlot and final grading the soil will be roughened and furrowed perpendicular to the prevailing winds. Erosion control effectiveness, rainfall performance calculations and a construction schedule are provided in Appendix E. 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 necessary to reduce dust nuisance. Efficient measures shall be taken to prevent dust nuisance that has originated from the contractor's 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 approved 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 detail sheet, with base material consisting of 6" coarse aggregate. The contractor will be responsible for clearing mud tracked onto city streets on a daily basis. 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. Maintenance is the responsibility of the developer. 5.5 Permanent Stabilization A vegetative cover shall be established within one and one-half years on disturbed areas and soil stockpiles not otherwise permanently stabilized. Vegetation shall not be considered established until a ground cover is achieved which is demonstrated to be mature enough to Drainage and Erosion Control Report Page 5 Cherry Street Station March 7, 2006 control soil erosion to the satisfaction of the City Inspector and to survive severe weather conditions. Drainage and Erosion Control Report Cherry Street Station Page 6 March 7, 2006 6. REFERENCES 1. City of Fort Collins, "Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards" (SDDCCS), May 1984.. 2. Soil Survey of Larimer County Area, Colorado. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service, 1980. 3. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual", Volumes 1 and 2, dated June 2001, and Volume 3, dated September 1992. I i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 [I 1 1 1 APPENDIX A MAPS AND FIGURES 1 0 w �(n -w "MIN w kl, r E C IF_ cn 0 r D uc�p 1� u ca Carta Dr N Mason St Pli K N Howus N MCIdMITI Gj _ie cf) N Sbutwood St >rj r. Pie0 Ou u 0 < rd N Whilcomb St ❑ st IS Wood St DAV 5111100� N R4 Glatil Ave Eli-,-. Cl � Park St slliulkfs St pi L 0 G. cn (n z 0/ LS M A C' d A m ' m `I 't ♦. ` n rt m 0 1 i °°� �;J 'II C c .L<lij t: W ri •r� ut -t•i " - .- ♦"$' . a+ (V :"Z i�t` a rti +�ya+��wy.'. ♦ a _ S{ `Ti �i'PM1r f y..' - is 4' w♦et _xy ,.s.f�,ylr�t[4yi�x 5 #. rz J `1p .r t Y N N � ; S- � 9>•'�r✓1 +eW `1Y?* 5i " {nAy Pt In m - + r�. � 7,�3t' "�� '�'-fk�T, it S- tom: �,P r •1? t to. !ram- - - 'i$ N y4ii'�i'-'�V7 'V�•✓ if'�ii�q _ t�OY i3w ��'t r1 1 t T d6.}'�Pw� /K3ld 7 r Yp �Z,r :.. m � ._ ^ a � < <�, ao y!'•._ ♦ t 1 "jr..� .g 3.�1iw �F��t �I�t/ �� �saun; ,�.��, I "B 4•��...,{ `--... _. ei. f ..- •1i ,o r t + : '. rT ; r • i s. Si -;I . v T+`t 4� T v�i¢ t - F • .-lp'.. �ixiY♦ �� t:. I �� A... ,I t it _ , a� .T m ! Pp y rA �_. _`. 3 `. `� - ;i`..) fps -. �a f i `7iw .�}j�`� .'V�• ;`PN li �. I I I I I I I I i I I I I Index to Mapping Units 1—Altvan loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes __________ 2—Altvan loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes __________ 3—Altvan-Satanta loams, 0 to 3 percent slopes 4—Altvan-Satanta loams, 3 to 9 percent slopes 6—Aquepts, loamy --------------------------- 6—Aquepts, ponded _ 7—Ascalon sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes ____ 8—Ascalon sandy loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes -___ 9—Bainville-Epping silt loams, 5 to 20 percent slopes---------------------------------- 10—Bainville-Keith complex, 2 to 9 percent slopes ------------------ 11—Baller-Carnero complex, 9 to 35 percent slopes _ - 12—Baller-Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 45 percent slopes _ 13—Blackwell clay loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes ____ 14—Boyle gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes _ -- 15—Boyle gravelly sandy loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes ---------------- 16—Boyle-Ratalce gravelly sandy loams, 1 to 9 percent slopes --------------------------- 17—Boyle-Ratake gravelly sandy loams, 9 to 25 percent slopes --------------------------- 18—Breece coarse sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 19—Breece coarse sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes _ --- 20—Breece coarse sandy loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes 21—Carnero loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes __________ 22—Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes ______ 23—Clergern fine sandy loam, 2 to 10 percent slopes---------------------------------- 24—Connerton-Barnum complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes---------------------------------- 25—Connerton-Barnum complex, 3 to 9 percent slopes ----- 26—Cushman fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes---------------------------------- 27—Cushman fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes __ 28—Driggs loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes _____-____ 29—Driggs loam, 3 to 25 percent slopes _________ 30—Elbeth-Moen loams, 5 to 30 percent slopes ____ 31—Farnuf loam, 2 to 10 percent slopes ______---- 32—Farnuf-Boyle-Rock outcrop complex, 10 to 25 percent slopes --------------------------- 33—Fluvaquents, nearly level __________________ 34—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes ------ 35—Fort Collins loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ______ 36—Fort Collins loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ______ 37—Fort Collins loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes ______ 38—Foxcreek loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes -------- 39—Gapo clay loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes ________ 40—Garrett loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes ______--_- 41—Garrett loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes __________ 42—Gravel pits ------------------------- 43—Hap oborolls-Rock outcrop complex, steep _-__ 44—Haplustolls, hilly ___________ _____________ 45—Haplustolls-Rock outcrop complex, steep _ 46—Harlan fine sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes__ 47—Harlan fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes__ 48—Heldt clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes ---___- 49—Heldt clay loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes ___-__- 50—Keith silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes -_ 51—Kildor clay loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes ______ 52—Kildor-Shale outcrop complex, 5 to 30 percent slopes _ 53—Kim loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ___________- 54—Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes _____________ 55—Kim loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes ------------ 56—Kim-Thedalund loams, 3 to 15 percent slopes__ 57—Kirtley loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes -_________ 58—Kirtley-Purner complex, 5 to 20 percent . slopes _ 59—LaPorte-Rock outcrop complex, 3 to 30 percent slopes---------------------------------- Page 11 60—Larim gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 40 percent Page 11 slopes ---------------------------------- 35 12 61—Larimer fine sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent 12 slopes ---------------------------------- 35 12 62—Larimer-Stoneham complex, 3 to 10 percent 12 13 slopes ---------------------------------- 63—Longmont clay, 0 to 3 percent slopes -------- 36 36 13 64—Loveland clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes _____ 37 65—Midway clay loam, 5 to 25 percent slopes ____ 38 13 66—Minnequa silt loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes ____ 38 67—Minnequa-LaPorte complex, 3 to 15 percent 13 slopes -- - ---- -- ---------- ------- 68—Miracle sandy loam, 5 to 25 percent slopes ___ 38 39 14 69—Naz sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes -------- 40 70—Naz sandy loam, 3 to 25 percent slopes _______ 40 14 71—Nelson fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes__ 41 15 72—Newfork sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes _-- 41 73—Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes ________ 42 16 74—Nunn clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes -------- 42 43 75—Nunn clay loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes -------- 43 16 76—Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to 3 percent slopes _-_ 43 77—Otero sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes ______ 43 16 78—Otero sandy loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ------ 44 79—Otero sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes ______ 16 80—Otero-Nelson sandy loam, 3 to 25 percent 44 17 slopes _ 81—Paoli fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes __ 44 82—Pendergrass-Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 25 17 percent slopes ---------------- ---- 83—Pinata-Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 45 percent 45 17 17 slopes ----- ------------------- ------ 84—Poudre fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes-_ 45 46 18 85—Purner fine sandy loam, 1 to 9 percent slopes__ 46 86—Purner-Rock outcrop complex, 10 to 50 47 19 percent slopes -------------------------- 87—Ratake-Rock outcrop complex, 25 to 55 19 percent slopes --------------------------- 88—Redfeather sandy loam, 5 to 50 percent 47 19 slopes - -- ----- --- ------ --------- 89—Renohill clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes ____• 48 48 20 90—Renohill clay loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes --__ 49 91—Renohill-Midway clay loams, 3 to 15 percent 49 20 21 slopes ------ -------------------------- 92—Riverwash-----'-------------------------- 49 49 21 22 93—Rock outcrop ----------------------------- 94—Satanta loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes ---------- 50 23 95—Satanta loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ---------- 50 50 96—Satanta loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes __________ 50 23 97—Satanta loam, gullied, 3 to 9 percent slopes -__ 23 98—Satanta Variant clay loam, 0 to 3 percent 51 24 24 slopes ---------------------------------- 99—Schofield-Redfeather-Rock outcrop complex, 25 5 to 25 percent slopes ____________________ 51 25 100—Stoneham loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes -------- 552 25 101—Stoneham loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ________ 52 26 102—Stoneham loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ________ 52 27 103—Stoneham loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes -------- 27 104—Sunshine stony sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent 53 27 27 slopes ------- ---- --- ------ - ------ 105—Table Mountain loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes __ 54 54 27 106—Tassel sandy loam, 3 to 25 percent slopes ___- 55 28 107—Thedalund loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes ______-- 55 29 108—Thedalund loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes ________ 30 109—Thiel gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 25 percent 56 30 30 slopes ---------------------------------- 110—Tine gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent 57 31 32 slopes ---------------------------------- 111—Tine cobbly sandy loam, 15 to 40 percent 57 32 slopes _ 112—Trag-Moen complex, 5 to 30 percent slopes ___ 58 58 32 113—Ulm clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes -------- 58 32 114—Ulm clay loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes -------- 59 33 115—Weld silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes -------- 33 116—Wetmore-Boyle-Moen complex, 5 to 40 percent 60 33 slopes -- -- ------------- --- ---- - 117—Wetmore-Boyle-Rock outcrop complex, 5 to 60 33 percent slopes------------------------ 118—Wiley silt loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ________ 60 61 34 jig —Wiley silt loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ________ 61 I I it SOIL SURVEY 79—Otero sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes. This strongly sloping soil is on uplands and fans. Included with this soil in mapping are small areas tf soils that are more sloping or less sloping. Also neluded are a few small areas of Nelson, Kim, and Tassel soils. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is severe. iIf irrigated, this soil is well suited to pasture and, to a lesser extent, wheat, barley, or alfalfa. Under dryland management it is suited to pasture or native grasses. Capability units IVe-2, irrigated, and VIe-2, dryland; Sandy Plains range site; windbreak suit- ability group 2. 80—Otero-Nelson sandy loam, 3 to 25 percent slopes. This complex consists of gently sloping to mod- erately steep soils on uplands. It is about 50 percent Otero sandy loam and 35 percent Nelson sandy loam. Otero sandy loam is less sloping at the top and near the base of the slope, and Nelson sandy loam is steeper. The Otero soil has the profile described as representa- tive of the Otero series. The Nelson soil has a profile similar to the one described as representative of the Nelson series, but the surface layer is sandy loam. Included with these soils in mapping are about 15 percent areas of Tassel soils and Rock outcrop. Runoff is medium to rapid, and the hazard of erosion is severe. rThese soils are suited to pasture or native grasses. Capability unit VIe-2, dryland; Sandy Plains range site; windbreak suitability group 3. Paoli Series The Paoli series consists of deep, well drained soils that formed in alluvium. These soils are on terraces and bottom lands. Elevation ranges from 4,800 to 5,600 feet. Slopes are 0 to 1 percent. The native vegetation is blue grama, bluestems, needlegrass, and some forbs and shrubs. Mean annual precipitation ranges from 13 to 15 inches, mean annual air tempera- ture ranges from 480 to 500 F, and the frost -free season ranges from 135 to 150 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark grayish brown fine sandy loam about 42 inches thick. The underlying material is brown fine sandy loam. Permeability is moderately rapid, and the available water capacity is high. Reaction is mildly alkaline above a depth of 22 inches and moderately alkaline below that depth. These soils are used mainly for irrigated crops. Some areas are in native grass. Representative profile of Paoli fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes, in native grass, about 2,000 feet south and 100 feet east of the northeast corner of sec. 24, T. 5 N., R. 69 W.: A11-0 to 8 inches; dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) fine sandy loam, very dark gray (10yR 3/1) moist; weak fine granular and weak medium subangular blocky structure; soft, very friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; calcareous; mildly alka- line; clear smooth boundary. Al2-8 to 30 inches; dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) fine sandy loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; weak medium subangular blocky structure; soft, very friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; cal- careous; mildly alkaline; clear smooth boundary. A13--30 to 42 inches; dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) fine sandy loam, very dark gray- ish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; mas- sive; soft; very friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; calcareous; few streaks of visible secondary calcium carbonate and few calcium sulfate seams; moderately alkaline; clear smooth boundary. Cca-42 to 60 inches; brown (10YR 5/3) fine sandy loam, dark brown (10YR 4/3) moist; massive; soft, very friable, non - sticky and nonplastic; calcareous; vis- ible secondary calcium carbonate as seams and streaks; moderately alkaline. The A horizon is sandy loam or fine sandy loam, but it is loam in some places. The C horizon is sandy loam to heavy loamy sand. Thickness of the mollic epipedon ranges from 20 to 50 inches. Reaction ranges from neutral to moderately alkaline. * 81—Paoli fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes. This level soil is on low terraces. Included with this soil in mapping are a few small areas of soils that are more sloping. Also included are a few small areas of Caruso and Table Mountain soils and some gravel spots. Runoff is slow. The hazard of water erosion is slight, and the hazard of wind erosion is moderate. This soil is flooded in places, especially near stream channels. If irrigated, this soil is suited to corn, sugar beets, beans, barley, alfalfa, and wheat. Under dryland management it ijR suited to wheat and barley. It is also well suited to pasture and native grasses. Capability units IIs-2, irrigdted, and IIIe-8, dryland; Overflow range site; windbreak suitability group 2. Pendergrass Series The Pendergrass series consists of shallow, well drained to somewhat excessively drained soils that formed in material weathered from reddish brown sandstone. These soils are on uplands and are under- lain by hard sandstone at a depth of 10 to 20 inches. Elevation ranges from 7,800 to 8,800 feet. Slopes are 5 to 25 percent. The native vegetation is mainly wheat - grasses, junegrass: sage, and . mountainmahogany. Mean annual precipitation ranges from 12 to 15 inches, mean annual air temperature ranges from 42' to 45' F, and the frost -free season ranges from 60 to 85 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is reddish brown fine sandy loam about 5 inches thick. The underlying material is reddish brown channery fine sandy loam about 10 inches thick. Below this is hard sandstone. Permeability is rapid, and the available water ca- pacity is low. Reaction is neutral. These soils are used mainly for native grasses. Representative profile of Pendergrass fine sandy loam in an area of Pendergrass -Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes, in native grass, 1,000 feet west of the northwest corner of sec. 27, T. 12 N., R. 75 W.: A1-0 to 5 inches; reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) 1 APPENDIX B HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS 1 1 SECTION 3. E=ROLOGY STANDARDS .1 General Design Storms s have to take into consideration two separate and distinct drainage All drainage systemch occurs problems. The first is the initiaars9��rm,wdafairly ependinq onlanduse. regular a second is the usually based on the two to ten ye major storm which is usually based on an infrequent storm, such as the 100-year storm. In some instances the major storm routing will not be the same as the initial storm. ' In this case, a complete set of drainage plans shall be submitted for each storm system. 3.1.1 Initial Storm Provisions As stated before, the initial storm shall based =e two minimizee two to inconvenience The objectives of such drainage system planning e and to reduce maintenance costs in to protect against recurring minor damage order to create an orderly drainage system at a reasonable cost for the urban rm drainage system may include such facilities as curb resident. The initial stand open drainageways, and detention facilities. and gutter, storm sewer a ' 3.1.2 Major Storm Provisions of the The major storm shall be considered the ub -yeartanti l property damage or Sloss of major storm planning are to eliminate substantial p op Y 9 1 life. Major drainage systems may include storm sewers, open drainageways, and e initial and detention facilities e insure lation a well between coordinat h drainage system. jo storm system shall be analyzed to 3.1.3 Storm Frequency ' The initial and major storm design frequencies shall not be less than those found in the following table: Table 3-1 DESIGN STORM FREQUENCIES Design Storm Return Period Land Use or Zonin Initial Storm Major Storm ' Residential: ,RM,R • (RIM, ,RH). p.ML,R....., 2-year 100-year RIM, MM, RH) .. . Business: 10-year 100-year ' (BG,BL,BP,HB,C,IL,IP,IG)..• •••••'• 10-year 100-year Public Building Areas•- z_year 100-year Parks, Greenbelts, etc.. 100-year open Channels & Drainageways 100-year Detention Facilities HSee Table 3-2 for zoning definitions 3.1.4 Rainfall Intensities The rainfall intensities to be used in the computation of runoff shall be obtained from the Rainfall Intensity Duration Curves for the City of Fort Collins, included in these specifications as Figure 3.1. 3.1.5 Runoff Computations Storm Runoff computations for both the initial and major storm 'shall comply with t the criteria set forth 1n Section 3.2 "Analysis Methodology." All runoff calculations made in the design of both initial and major drainage systems shall i be included with the storm drainage plans in the form of a Drainage Report. Reports submitted for approval should have a typed narrative with computations and maps in a legible form. Design Criteria f May 1984 Revised January 1997 3-1 No Text City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency Table for using the Rational Method (5 minutes — 30 minutes) Figure 3-1a City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency Table for using the Rational Method (31 minutes — 60 minutes) Figure 3-1 b I 1 �I 1 W J m H C� G 'W V Q Z Q ii o _ O b r N N O N O p b o m a N o M O o H m O O 0 o ci E vi vi vi vi ui ro n O c o 0 0 0 o y E vi vi ui vi vi � 0 O O O O O Cl! o U o m m m m m N U O C O O G C O O 0 0 0 W O O C G O O 0 Y fq Z m m z w= o N i a - > > p 0 a W j Z w a W J m W 2 C � C m � a m 2-YEAR HISTORIC FLOWS LOCATION: Cherry Street Station PROJECT NO: 1019-017-00 COMPUTATIONS BY: DRH DATE: 6/22/2005 Recommended Runoff Coefficient from Table 3-3 of City of Fort Collins Design Criteria Recommended % Impervious from Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Lawns (flat <2%, sandy soil), Lawns (average, 2-7%, sandy soil), Runoff coefficient Impervious C 0.20 0 0.20 0 DESIGN POINT SUBBASIN DESIGNATION TOTAL AREA (ac.) TOTAL AREA (sq.k) Length (k) (4) Slope (%) (5) 6 (min) (6) i2 (inthr) ilm (inQv) O (2) (cfs) O (100) (cfs) 1 HISTORIC 0.35 15,219 200 1.0 10.0 2.21 7.72 total 0.35 15,219 Equations - Calculated C coefficients & % Impervious are area weighted C=£(Ci Ai) /At Ci = runoff coefficient for specific area, Ai Ai = areas of surface with runoff coefficient of Ci In = number of different surfaces to consider At = total area over which C is applicable; the sum of all Ai's Q=CtCiA Q = peak discharge (cfs) ti = [1.87 (1.1 - CCt) L05 j / S'/3 C = runoff coefficient Cf = frequency adjustment factor I = rainfall intensity (in/hr) from OF curve I = 26 f (10+n>°'B' A = drainage area (acres) I RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS & % IMPERVIOUS LOCATION: Cherry Street Station PROJECT NO: 1019-017-00 COMPUTATIONS BY: DRH DATE: 6/22/2005 ' Recommended Runoff Coefficients from Table 3-3 of City of Fort Collins Design Criteria Recommended % Impervious from Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual I 1 Streets, parking lots (asphalt) Sidewalks (concrete) Roofs Lawns (Flat <2%, sandy soil) Runoff % coefficient Impervious C 0.95 100 0.95 96 0.95 90 0.20 0 SUBBASIN DESIGNATION TOTAL AREA (ac.) TOTAL AREA (sQ.ft) ROOF AREA (s9.ft) PAVED AREA (sq.ft) SIDEWALK AREA (sQ.ft) LANDSCAPE AREA aq.ft) RUNOFF COEFF. (C'o) RUNOFF COEFF. (Cim) % Impervious BUILDING RAMP TRIBUTARY TO TANK 0.17 0.05 0.22 7.493 2,259 9,762 7,493 0 7.493 0 2,259 2,259 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 90 100 92 CONCRETE 0.02 974 0 0 974 0 0.95 1.00 96 RELEASE INTO CHERRY STORM DUMPSTER AREA PATIO GRASS 0.01 0.02 0.07 255 1,056 3,007 0 0 0 255 0 0 0 1,056 0 0 0 3,007 0.95 0.95 0.20 1.00 1.00 0.25 100 96 0 UNDETAINED FLOWS TO NORTH ' Equations Calculated C coefficients & % Impervious are area weighted C=E(Ci Ai) /At Ci = runoff coefficient for specific area, Ai ' Ai = areas of surface with runoff coefficient of Ci - n = number of different surfaces to consider At = total area over which C is applicable; the sum of all A7s 1 1 } O Z 0 N m z Z K W 0 Z 00 LL �d0 N W O O 11 U p p p O O m JQ N YI � N Y) tC E Z 9 m m m m 0 M O G O O O r m C (7 m 'S LU � m UN W J N o upi uoi N x m 0 m m Ci m ry m LL J 0 0 h 0 0 W Z > Q = Of m m mm m 0 F o 0 o c W 2 N m ohm ic? r ItIll W � avoio om a W m r J r � o a E o m o 0 0 0 m a� N N m N fV N N p n O O C09 N G yCv c J a' W rn rn m rn N 0 0 0 G C O O W U M r Z_ o 0 0 0 0 N � O O O O O O y v N 4 � F m 0 Y y Z } w O r C y za� w= w0y3 Q O �i UU w1-¢O m S 0 a s CK7K LL m p U N m W 7 Z m O a r K ? Z z �r W a a y O 0 E E E m C w C 0 1 U Y f W K J Q .-. E y Iri IN IN IA N m LL E m m m m o e o c o 0 0 h � E IU m 0 y W o 0 o ug om N U � m r rn Bm W U � I'll] 9 m Odl l7 t7 N (mO 30 s E 00 LL � Q S V m m m m Ile lem K c a o 0 0 0 0 O S W c c � Q G G O O C O k o N r r o 0 0.- (�7 0 2em N " W f O m < d N N J L O m N N m r E o m o 0 0 0 O d" N OOON C d v IT J O O O O O N O U 5 m m m m q N W 00 0 000 O F W 2 a-- f � 0 0 0 ~ uj za0w= LL �ON3 N m o> K V W a O m � Q z O w m U N m 2 a a r w W w z Z r N a � W a W N 0 RATIONAL METHOD PEAK RUNOFF (City of Fort Collins, 10-Yr Storm) LOCATION: Cherry Street Station PROJECT NO: 1019-017-00 COMPUTATIONS BY: DRH DATE: . 6/22/2005 10 yr Storm, Cf = 1.00 DIRECT RUNOFF CARRYOVER TOTAL REMARKS Design Point Tributary Sub -basin A (ac) C Cf tc (min) i (Inlhr) O (10) (cfs) from Design Point Q (10) (CIS) Q(10)tm (cfs) BUILDING 0.17 0.95 5.0 4.87 0.80 0.80 0 RAMP 0.05 0.95 5.0 4.87 0.24 0.24 0 TRIBUTARY TO TANK CONCRETE 0.02 0.95 5.0 4.87 0.10 0.10 0 RELEASE INTO CHERRY STORM DUMPSTER AREA 0.01 0.95 5.0 4.87 0.03 0.03 0 PATIO 0.02 0.95 5.0 4.87 0.11 0.11 0 GRASS 0.07 0.20 6.6 4.41 0.06 0.06 0 UNDETAINED FLOWS TO NORTH Q=C1CA Q = peak discharge (cfs) C = runoff coefficient Cf = frequency adjustment factor i = rainfall intensity (in/hr) from City of Fort Collins IDF curve (4/16/99) A = drainage area (acres) I = 41.44 f (to- tc)"'B" RATIONAL METHOD PEAK RUNOFF (City of Fort Collins, 100-Yr Storm) LOCATION: Cherry Street Station - PROJECT NO: 1019-017-00 COMPUTATIONS BY: DRH DATE: 6/22/2005 100 yr storm, Cf = 1.25 DIRECT RUNOFF CARRYOVER TOTAL REMARKS Des. Point Area Design. A (ac) C Cf tc (min) i (in/hr) Q (100) (cfs) from Design Point 0(100) (cfs) Q(100)t0t (cfs) BUILDING 0.17 1.00 5.0 9.95 1.71 1.71 RAMP 0.05 1.00 5.0 9.95 0.52 0.52 TRIBUTARY TO TANK CONCRETE 0.02 1.00 5.0 9.95 0.22 0.22 RELEASE INTO CHERRY STORM DUMPSTER AREA 0.01 1.00 5.0 9.95 0.06 0.06 PATIO 0.02 1.00 5.0 9.95 0.24 0.24 GRASS 0.07 0.25 6.3 9.14 0.16 0.16 UNDETAINED FLOWS TO NORTH Q=CIA Q = peak discharge (cfs) C = runoff coefficient i = rainfall intensity (in/hr) from City of Fort Collins IDF curve (4/16199) A = drainage area (acres) I = 64.662 / (10+ tCf M5 I [1 1 1 1 1 [I 1 1 Worksheet for Roof Outlet r2'7i� jProJect DBSCrlphon "s e „ - Flow Element: Circular Pipe Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Full Flow Diameter _ Input'Data Roughness Coefficient 0.010 Channel Slope: 0.50000 ft/ft Discharge: 1.71 . ft/s RCSUIts xa r Diameter: 0.33 ft Normal Depth: 0.33 ft Flow Area: 0.09 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 1.04 ft Top Width: 0.00 ft Critical Depth: 0.33 ft Percent Full: 100.0 % Critical Slope: 0.50000 ft/ft Velocity 19.90 ft/s Velocity Head: 6.16 ft Specific Energy: 6.49 ft Froude Number: 0.00 Maximum Discharge: 1.84 ft3/s Discharge Full: 1.71 ft /s Slope Full: 0.49816 ft/ft Flow Type: SubCritical Downstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft Number Of Steps: 0 Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft Profile Description: N/A Profile Headloss: 0.00 ft Average End Depth Over Rise: 0.00 % Normal Depth Over Rise: 0.00 % Downstream Velocity: 0.00 ft/s ' Worksheet for Roof Outlet ' Upstream Velocity: 0.00 Normal Depth: 0.33 ft/s ft Critical Depth: 0.33 ft Channel Slope: 0.50000 ft/ft Critical Slope: 0.50000 ft/ft I I L I U L I I 11 In L _1 I I IWorksheet for Underdrain 777�-;;o Flow Element: Circular Pipe Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Full Flow Diameter ii Ll G/�Y� 5 {�'S R }�` f Z•.,, Input Data ,.` j k g f Roughness Coefficient: 0.010 Channel Slope: 0.01000 fUft Discharge 0.22 ft /s _ Results: 1 Diameter: 0.32 ft Normal Depth: 0.32 ft Flow Area: 0.08 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 1.00 ft Top Width: 0.00 ft Critical Depth: 0.27 ft Percent Full: 100.0 % Critical Slope: 0.00977 ft/ft Velocity: 2.76 ft/s Velocity Head: 0.12 ft Specific Energy: 0.44 ft Froude Number: 0.00 Maximum Discharge: 0.24 fN/s Discharge Full: 0.22 ft3/s Slope Full: 0.01002 ft/ft Flow Type: SubCritical GVF Inpuf Data ;max Yon t 4 Downstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft Number Of Steps: 0 Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft Profile Description: N/A Profile Headloss: 0.00 ft Average End Depth Over Rise: 0.00 % Normal Depth Over Rise: 0.00 % Downstream Velocity: 0.00 ft/s I I Worksheet for Underdrain Upstream Velocity: 0.00 Normal Depth: 0.32 Critical Depth: 0.27 Channel Slope: 0.01000 Critical Slope: 0.00977 C 4 11 1 1 I 1 i I I I 11 ft/s ft ft ft/ft ft/ft i G i APPENDIX C WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS H I 11 It I PROJECT NAME: JR PROJECT NO: COMPUTATIONS BY: DATE: WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME SUMMARY FOR EXTENDED DETENTION CHERRY STREET STATION 1019-017-00 DRH 6/22/2005 Guidelines from Urban Strom Drainage Criterial Manual, September 1999 (Referenced figures are attached at the end of this section) Use 40-hour brim -full volume drain time for extended detention basin Water quality Capture Volume, WQCV = 1.0 ` (0.91 ' i3 - 1.19' iZ + 0.78i) Design Volume: Vol = WQCV/12' Area " 1.2 MAJOR BASIN Trib. area (acres) Impervious Ratio, la % Impervious i = ]all 00 WQCV (watershed inches) Design Volume, Vol. (ac-ft) TRIBUTARY TO TANK 0.22 92 0.92 0.42 0.01 Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) - Sedimentation Facility POND Project Name: Cherry Street Station Project Number: 1019-017-00 Company: Interwest Consulting Group Designer. DRH Date: 6/22/2005 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i=1a/100) la = 92 % i = 0.92 B) Contributing Watershed Area (Area) A = 0.22 acres C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) WQCV = 0.42 watershed inches (WQCV = 1.0' (0.91 * i3 - 1.19. iZ + 0.76i) ) D) Design Volume: Vol = WQCV/12 * Area * 1.2 Vol. = 0.009 ac-ft 2. Outlet Works A) Outlet Type (Check One) x Orifice Plate Perforated Riser Pipe Other: B) Depth at Outlet Above Lowest Perforations (H) H = 1.5 ft C) Required Maxiumum Outlet Area per Row, (Ao) Ao = 0.04 square inches (Figure EDB-3) D) Perforation Dimensions (enter one only) i) Circular Perforation Diamter OR D = 114 inches, OR ii) 2" Height Rectangular Perforation Width W = inches E) Number of Columns (nc, See Table 6a-1 for Maximum) nc = 1 number F) Actual Design Outlet Area per Row (Ao) Ao = 0.05 square inches G) Number of Rows (nr) . nr = 3 number H) Total outlet Area (At) Pot = 0.15 square inches 3. Trash Rack A) Needed Open Area: At = 0.5 * (Figure 7 Value) * Act At = 5.1 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 (Want) Wwnc = 3 inches from Table 6a-1 ii) Height of Trash Rack Screen (HTR) HTR = 16 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, x 0.139" (US Filter) Describe if "other" Other: v) Spacing of Support Rod (O.C.) 3/4 inches Type and Size of Support rod (Ref: Table 6a-2) #156 VEE 1 1 1 1 7 '1 1 1 vi) Type and size of Holding Frame (Ref: Table 6a-2) 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") Wwnc iii) Width of Trashrack Opening (Wopening) Wopwing 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" 3/8" x 1.0" flat bar vii) Minimum Bearing Bar Size (KlempTM Series, Table 6b-2) (Based on depth of WQCV surcharge) 4. Detention Basin length to width ratio 5. 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) Qao = Storage = B) Bottom Stage (DBs = 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) DBs = Storage = Surf. Area = Depth = Storage = Surf. Area = D) Total Volume: Volat = 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 ver Minimum Z = 4, flatter preferred 9. Vegetation (Check the method or describe "other") Vol,', _ Z= Z= inches inches inches inches KlempTm KPP Series Aluminum Other: inches Other: acre-feet acres inches yes/no feet acre-feet feet acre-feet acres feet acre-feet acres 0 acre-feet (horizontal/vertical) (horizontal/vertical) x_Native Grass _ Irrigation Turf Grass Other: i 1 1 1 1 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V.3) 10.( D 4.0 2.( 1.0 d 0.6( m 0.4C E 0.21 U ca C1 0.11 STRUCTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES EXAMPLE: DWO = 4.5 ft WOCV = 2.1 acre-feet SOLUTION: Required Area per Row = 1.75 in? EQUATION: WQCV a= K 40 in which, K40=0.013DWQ +0.22DWQ -0.10 � O �o O a i Qr � I F u.iu V.LV V.YV �•� Required Area per Row,a (in? ) 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 S-43 I I i 1 1 1 1 Orifice Plate Perforation Sizing Circular Perforation Sizing Chart may be applied to orifice plate or vertical pipe outlet. Hole Dia • Hole Dia (in) Min. Sc (in) Area per Row (sq In) n-2 n-3 1 4 0.250 1 0.05 0.10 0.15 D.313 2 0.15 0.23 3 B 0.375 2 0.11 0.22 0.33 7/16 0.438 2 0.15 0.3D 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 M625 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 0.69 1.77 2.66 1 1 1.125 4 0.99 1.99 2.98 1 3 16 1.188 4 I'll 2.22 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 t 3 8 1.375 4 1.48N4.15 4.45 1 7 16 1.438 4 1.62 4.87 1 112 1.500 4 1.77 5.30 1 9 16 1.563 4 1.92 5.75 1 5 8 1.625 4 2.07 6.22 1 11 6 1.688 4 2.24 6.71 1 3 4 1.750 4 2.41 7.22 1 t3 16 1.813 4 2.58 7.74 1 7 8 1.875 4 2.76 5.52 8.28 1 15 16 .938 4 2.95 5.90 8.84 2 2.000 4 3.14 6.28 9.42 n - Number of columns of perforations Minimum steel plate thickness 1/4 ' 5/16 • 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) PIe: Detuladwg Rectangular Hole Width Min. Steel Thickness 5" 1 4 6" 1 4 7" 5/32 " g" 5/16 " Figure 5 WQCV Outlet Orifice Perforation Sizing 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 Terms. Maximum Dia. Width of Trash Rack O enin W,o,,. Per Column of Holes as a Function of Water Depth H of Circular Opening (inches) — 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. 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 < 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 Table 6a-2: Standardized WQCV Outlet Design Using 2" Diameter Circular Openings. US Filtefm 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 9" 0.139 #156 VEE '/," 0.31' '/e'k1.0'lat bar 18" 0.139 TE .074"x.50" 1" 0.655 %"x 1.0 angle 24" 0.139 TE.074'x05" 1" 1.03" I.0"x 1'/x"angle 27" 0.139 TE .074"x 75" i" 1.03" 1.0" x 1'h" angle 30" 0.139 TE .074"xlff.I 1" 1.155" 1 '/; k 1 2 an le 36" 0.139 TE.074"x1.0 1" 1 1.155" 1 74'`A 1'/z"angle 42" 0.139 TE .105"x1.0" 1" 1.155. " 1 '/`k I'/:" angle US Filter, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA DESIGN EXAMPLE: Given: A WQCV outlet with three columns of 518 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 = 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 flame = 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 No Text APPENDIX D DETENTION POND & OUTLET SIZING CALCULATIONS 1 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 DETENTION VOLUME CALCULATIONS Rational Volumetric (FAA) Method 100-Year Event LOCATION: Cherry Street Station PROJECT NO: 1019-017-00 COMPUTATIONS BY: DRH DATE: 3/2/2005 Equations: Area trib. to pond = 0.22 Developed flow = Qo = CIA C (100) = 1.00 Vol. In = Vi = T C I A = T Qp Developed C A = 0.22 Vol. Out = Vo =K Qpo T Release rate, Qpo = 0.10 storage = S = Vi - Vo K = 0.9 Rainfall intensity from City of Fort Collins IDF Curve with updated (3.67') rainfall acre acre cfs Storm Rainfall Qo Vol. In Vol. Out Storage Storage Duration, T Intensity, I (cfs) Vi Vo S S (ft) (ft) (ft) (ac-ft) (min) (in/hr) 5 9.95 2.1 642 27 615 0.01 10 7.77 1.7 1002 54 948 0.02 20 5.62 1.2 1450 108 1342 0.03 30 4.47 1.0 1729 162 1567 0.04 40 3.74 0.8 1930 216 1714 0.04 50 3.23 0.7 2086 270 1816 0.04 60 2.86 0.6 2213 324 1889 0.04 70 2.57 0.6 2321 378 1943 0.04 80 2.34 0.5 2415 432 1983 0.05 90 2.15 0.5 2498 486 2012 0.05 100 1.99 0.4 2573 540 2033 0.05 110 1.86 0.4 2640 594 2046 0.05 120 1.75 0.4 2702 648 2054 0.05 130 1.65 -E. -4 2 559 702 2057 0.05 140 1.56 0.3 2812 756 2056 0.05 150 1.48 0.3 2862 810 2052 0.05 160 1.41 0.3 2909 864 2045 0.05 170 1.35 0.3 2953 918 2035 0.05 180 1.29 0.3 2995 972 2023 0.05 Required Storage Volume: 2057 ft' 0.05 acre-ft �Ea'Q �S7DkaE Vol,. t lam auac-�Ty Vo L- . Zio51�t3 + �3to �i3= Z)g93 t+3 DETENTION VOLUME CALCULATIONS Rational Volumetric (FAA) Method 100-Year Event LOCATION: Cherry Street Station PROJECT NO: 1019-017-00 COMPUTATIONS BY: DRH DATE: 3/2/2005 3500 3000 2500 w 2000 m E c 1500 1000 500 0 0 50 100 150 Storm Duration (min) t Inflow Volume --m— Outflow Volume zuu DETENTION VOLUME CALCULATIONS Rational Volumetric (FAA) Method 100-Year Event LOCATION: Cherry Street Station PROJECT NO: 1019-017-00 COMPUTATIONS BY: DRH DATE: 3/2/2005 2500 2000 1500 d E 0 1000 500 0 0 50 100 150 200 Storm Duration (min) - # -Storage Volume 1 POND 100-yr Event, Outlet Sizing LOCATION: CHERRY STREET STATION PROJECT NO: 1019-017-00 COMPUTATIONS BY: DRH SUBMITTED BY: Interwest Consulting Group DATE: 3/2/2005 Submerged Orifice Outlet: . release rate is described by the orifice equation, ' Qo = Cok sgrt( 29(h-Eo)) where Qo = orifice outflow (cfs) Co = orifice discharge coefficient g = gravitational acceleration = 32.20 ft/s A0 = effective area of the orifice (W) Eo = greater of geometric center elevation of the orifice or d/s HGL (ft) h = water surface elevation (ft) Qo = 0.17 cfs (0.5 cfs/acre) outlet pipe dia = D = 12.0 in Invert elev. = 4986.52 ft (inv. "D" on outlet structure) I Eo = 4986.60 ft (downstream HGL for peak 100 yr flow - from FlowMaster) h = 5003.52 ft - 100 yr WSEL Co = 0.65 solve for effective area of orifice using the orifice equation Ao = 0.008 ft` I = 1.1 in` orifice dia. = d = 1.21 in Check orifice discharge coefficient using Figure 5-21 (Hydraulic Engineering) d/ D = 0.10 kinematic viscosity, v = 1.22E-05 ft2/s ' Reynolds no. = Rea = 4Q/(Trzdv) = 1.77E+05 Co = (K in figure) = 0.65 check ' Use d= A 0 = Qmax = .I I 1 in 0.005 ft` = 0.12 cfs 0.79 in I 1 1 1 1 1 PROGRAM INPUT Diameter: 13 feet Eave Height: 32 feet -- Hopper: 30 degrees Outlet: 1.5 feet Outlet Neck 24 inches Length: Clearance: 6 feet Free board: 18 inches 36' 20.68' PROGRAM OUTPUT F-- 13' =r Hopper height: 3.32 feet Hopper volume: 1240 gallons Straight wall ht: 20.68 feet Shell volume: 20535 gallons Level full 21775 gallons 3.32' capacity: Working 20286 gallons capacity: 1.5' .6' Springline 11.32 feet y elevation: . Liquid Hopper Bottom (Leg or Skirt Supports) Dimensions are in feet. (Picture is not drawn to Scale) �i 7,9 6 i �8i 6 S0 Copyright © 2004 The Tank Connection. All rights reserved. APPENDIX E EROSION CONTROL CALCULATIONS JOB NO. 10191-017-00 rmr!o CHERRY STREET STATION Erosion Control Cost Estimate COMPLETED BY: DRH LiA�V U1v1T l.ivl. ITEM AA�vu DESCRIPTION UNITS I UNIT COST QUANTITY TOTAL COST 1 TEMPORARY SEED & MULCH ACRE $ 775.00 0.10 $ 77.50 2 SILT FENCE LF $ 3.00 550 $ 1,650.00 3 INLET PROTECTION EACH $ 150.00 3 $ 450.00 4 GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EACH $ 500.00 1 $ 500.00 COST $ 2,677.50 .��..-. A OTTT AnUA l..lA 1 1\liUL1.iLA1TV ITEM li DESCRIPTION UNITS I UNIT COST QUANTITY TOTAL COST 1 RESEED/MULCH I ACRE $ 775.00 1 0.1 1 $ 77.50 COST 77 SECURITY DEPOSIT $ 2,677.50 DF.OrrruFn EROSION CONTROL SECURITY DEPOSIT WITH FACTOR OF 150% s 4,016.25 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE Project: CHERRY STREET STATION Date December 28, 2005 n rmintinr In fho rnn0n,rtinn nh2tie Grading (Include Offsite) Detention/WQ Ponds Pipeline Installation (Include Offsite) I -Sanitary Sewer Stormwater Concrete Installation (Include Offsite) Curb Inlets Pond Outlet Structures Curb and Gutter Box Culverts, Bridges ,Street Installation (Include Offsite) Pavememt Miscellaneous (include Offsite) Drop Structures Other (List) IStructural Silt Fence Barriers Contour Furrows (Ripping/Disking) Sediment Trap/Filter V hicle Tracking Pads Flow Barriers (Bales, Wattles, Etc) Bare Soil Preparation Stream Flow Diversion Vegetative Temporary Seed Planting Permanent Seed Planting Sod Installation Other (List) J RAINFALL PERFORMANCE STANDARD EVALUATION PROJECT: Cherry Street Station STANDARD FORM A COMPLETED BY: DRH DATE: 22-3un-05 DEVELOPED ERODIBILITY Asb Lsb Ssb Ai • LI At' Si Lb Sb PS SUBBASIN(s) ZONE (AC) (FT) (%) (/6) BUILDING MODERATE 0.17 100 1.0 17.2 0.2 RAMP MODERATE 0.05 150 4.4 7.8 0.2 TRIBUTARY TO TANK CONCRETE - MODERATE 0.02 150 0.8 3.4 0.0 RELEASE INTO CHERRY STORM DUMPSTERAREA MODERATE 0.01 150 0.8 0.9 0.0 PATIO MODERATE 0.02 ISO 1.2 4.4 0.0 GRASS MODERATE 0.07 225 1.4 15.5 0.1 UNDETAINED FLOWS TO NORTH Total 0.25 28.33 0.55 115 1 2.2 1 78.6% Ash = Sub -basin area Lsb = Sub -basin flow path length Ssb = Sub -basin slope Lb = Average flow path length = sum(Ai Li)/sum(Ai) Sb = Average slope = sum(Ai Si)/Sum (Ai) PS is taken from Table 8-a (Table 5.1, Erosion Control Reference Manual) by interpolation. An Erosion Control Plan will be developed to contain PS% of the rainfall sedimentation that would normally flow off a bare ground site during a 10-year, or less, precipitation event. 1 1 � r— 1 I 1 1 1 1 EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS PROJECT: Cherry Street Station STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: DRH DATE: 22-Jun-05 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 SILT FENCE 1.00 0.50 SEDIMENT TRAP 1.00 0.50 STRAW MULCH (S = 1-5%) 0.06 1.00 FROM TABLE 8B STRAW BARRIERS 1.00 0.80 EFF = (I-C*P)*100 MAJOR SUB BASIN AREA EROSION CONTROL METHODS BASIN BASIN (Ac) BUILDING 0.17 ROADS/WALKS 0.00 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.17 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.00 Ac. GRAVEL FILTER NET C-FACTOR 1.00 NET P-FACTOR 0.72 EFF = (1-C*P)*100 = 28.0% RAMP 0.05 ROADS/WALKS 0.05 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.00 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.00 Ac. GRAVEL FILTER NET C-FACTOR 0.01 NET P-FACTOR 0.80 EFF = (I-C*P)*100 = 99.2% CONCRETE 0.02 ROADS/WALKS 0.00 Ac. ROUGHENED OR. 0.00 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.02 Ac. GRAVEL FILTER NET C-FACTOR 0.06 NET P-FACTOR 0.80 EFF = (1-C*P)*100 = 95.2% DUMPSTER AREA 0.01 ROADS/WALKS 0.00 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.00 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.01 Ac. GRAVEL FILTER ' NET C-FACTOR 0.06 NET P-FACTOR 0.80 EFF = (1-C*P)*100 = 95.2% PATIO 0.02 ROADS/WALKS 0.00 Ac. ROUGHENED OR. 0.00 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.02 Ac. GRAVEL FILTER PROJECT: Cherry Street Station STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: DRH DATE: 22-Jun-05 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 SILT FENCE 1.00 0.50 SEDIMENT TRAP 1.00 0.50 STRAW MULCH (S = I-5%) 0.06 1.00 FROM TABLE 8B STRAW BARRIERS 1.00 0.80 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 MAJOR SUB BASIN AREA EROSION CONTROL METHODS BASIN BASIN (Ac) NET C-FACTOR 0.06 NET P-FACTOR 0.80 EFF = (1-C*P)*100 = 952% GRASS 0.07 ROADS/WALKS 0.00 Ac. ROUGHENED GR. 0.00 Ac. STRAW/MULCH 0.07 Ac. GRAVEL FILTER NET C-FACTOR 0.06 NET P-FACTOR 0.80 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 = 95.2% ' TOTAL AREA = 0.35 ac TOTAL EFF = 28.8% ( E (basin area * efi) / total area ' REQUIRED PS = 78.6% Since 95.9% > 78.6%, the proposed plan is o.k. r-. J 1 PAGE 23 1 1 O 1 I I C CN CD G C I I I 1 1 p 1 to I cctnlnlo 1 I WWco 1 1 C I C t C T C t C C G C O C C I 1 t I G 1 1 ccc Cl.C%�I'�'� 1 I WW WW WCC C'W WW I 1 c 1 twO Ct Qt QNCt C+mO�Ot QI CtOOC t I 1 t O I I cccccccccccctntnln I q.O C�^O00 I 1 M j p 1 ggqqCqpqqGC 1 1 t1G^. 4")CS O'OI CI QI G%Q101 Ct Ct 010'• +nTCT Q1 Q1 1 1 1 C I I ccQOcccccc�cc, OQ'OQ C' Q' c I co W W C j C M C LP) tC tC tC%Cn r.- r•r j l-- n � r-- t-- I� t, CO co aDd 1 1 , O t 1 cccq R'`C." 0c0 CJq coOCO W.c".. Cc'.^ mW i 1 i O WCJ t:^, Cc'7W W G^6c•`C I 1 W NMct[')toL^1 tp tD tC tC to tCnn1\nf`f\f`f\f\t` W W 1 1 C j tT COG W W qCO CJq COq GC 6:.ggqqOC COggq W ACC W W ; C 1 O 1 1 1 tCONMc,�. l.7W u')to t0 tC tC tC tC tC to C tC tC f`r'� f.- 1-1r\ r` I CD 1 p i W 1 I W W WWC.= A cW CCJ COJ W= WOW A W cc Wq CO cOCWW Waco • i O I Q�r•N M MCQcctn W to u')u•)tn u') to li': to tC tG tC tC tC f` ; V) 1 1 MCWIccccccc-ml -cr ccccccccccc CO CO co co co ccccWWW co WWcc co C`Wco WW WW I ... I CD .I 1 1 1 CtD W O'..I ..-INNMMM MCccc cc c c to Ln to to tC J 1 ISI C 1 t 1 CCggOCqqqqqW 1 1 Nto t\ W Q1OO NNNMM MI'7MCcccc i li. 1 vin 1 I i co coi cW CW' qcc pCco G g G ccco WCCCco 0©CD _ 1 C I W O 1 tl Ln r .-+Go Cl)c� I•�IG t01�1�1�Go W q cc C,^gCNG%GICCCOO' I I 1 1 Jc 1 ct,Nl•'Icnc�-Ic'�c•icnc+'i�1'�f"�r�ch/'�r�rii.1• 00coccccc c) M W W W m CC W W W" W q CO W W G'•' W W W W W W co W I C 1 O 1 tC to W O r+ N M c C to In to tC tC tC tC t0 r` n n rW W W C) C1 WC�W CC) CO Cl) en co coW cocoQWW co W Wco qC co co COW ¢ 1 H I In 1 .•+ ton W CC NNMM M c c c c c to If) Ln to tC tC r`n 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . m M M M M M M M C")M to 1 M 1 1 r+ N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M cC CO cc co co a;W G co coJ CO CO co co CO 00 co CC co coC co co co co LIJ I Z 1 CD I 1 M N tC co C10 r+ N N M M M-a, -W QQccln u•11.n 4". �C tC tC tC NN NN NN �N NN NNNN NNNNNNNN Wco=co, W WWG"'cJWCOW W Wwco COW COW COW ' O 1 to 1 I In to CN Mc to tC r`r`f` W W W pl Ot to Cn Qt QICO0OO U- 1 C 1 1 N CD 4 i r C Q C QQ �C^�.J co co coC* co W coco C W CON 6W. I CD; r.lN NMM M M M M ctnOMt.')t0 W W cn'OCO NN 1 N 1 W C)OOOOCOO•-'ram•"^'"f wCOW Wwco co W coW co WCCW Wcocc WW co 1 1 1 lt) I I i M. cocoN C.^ e� �. IL7 1� A O O O O O 00 O C C 0 0 0 i ��� Qt Qt Ot tr pl Ot G1 OI O O r` r` r` r\ rr W CO W CO CO CO co co co co W W W W co i CD1 tnr•�ocr�c in. c%jMchcclntntntntotctotol�r�tctcic W qCO CO WCO co co nnr^1^�^Ap^��ggqqqqtb ' ctC r` coWr` r` r--tC tC to toc c M mNNQt tD c.--I 01 tC 1 In 1 . O 1 Q1O 1 - 1 1 ��r\r-_r`r`r��r`r�r`r`r`t\OO jg l O C O O O O G O O O O O C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ooc00000OOOOOOO00000Coc000 W+�NNMMCQt� ICDCD 1 JZU- 1 .••rN Mc to tO r,q�.c+.�+.�•. r1�,1 ..-. 1 lL W v 1 ' TABLE 5.1 A -Bet 6� Structural Steel Plate to be bolted to Inside of proposed tank Are w 00 News 3 ROWS Ny Mz Hole Did. AS 1/4" ask. I'll Man Minimum Steel Plate Mlaknen - Ile TM New AtMeiw By ASH 12' Pw p In4mvMA _ - A WDCM rash Racks: Trash Rack Detail 0 1. wMl-eves, boon rocks shall be stainless steel aae MISS be Attadmd by mtamntant .aide along the edge of We mounting name. veh-samer I. 2. 61, grata trash make Shall be Wummum and Moll be eN<W ueng Stainless state naMwve. 0 3. Trash Roak Mail am fid, emolned trash ck material. Finer al-emam Miller size A — than specmed m == table. ERNESTT tram rack dimensions need to be adjusted lo, mote la Faring a different open ar o/gmes also ratio (F issue) FIOW Control Plate Detail �' head too Ilneeelam of f trash rocks .null be ea.ed an mu hydrostatic head with zero Section A -A �w FOR CONTINUATION OF PIPE SEE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. weling AS Alms Section B—B — Plan View Limits far this Standardized Design: Ww 1. All outlet plate openings are circular. A4 2. Dtameler of opening — 2 Inches MAX. ELEV, ±502 adL• .us Fnty s< pool. Minnneta USA 0 PROPOSED 4' PVC 45' BEND—.- 11 Sims ped) < men SEE ARCHITECTURAL/STRUCTURAL - 1- - DRAWNGS FOR DESIGN AND LOCATION WAR O' g OF ALL BRACING. PROVIDE OPENINGS BETWEEN ROOF $e CtlOn C-C AND TANK WALL TO ALLOW FOR R value - (net open cre0)/(gmn rack area) InEMERGENCY SPILLWAY asks 1.5' AND setm d he w.M ar 100-YR W.S.E.L 5003.5 IIm. aMe . Ir Le 3.00'SIR Orifice Detail FOR DETENTION TANK DESIGN AND DETAILS PROPOSED 11 CIA. Rol SEE STRUCTURAL/ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS ORIFICE PLATE! (SEE PROPOSED PVC STORMWATER DETENTION TANK/ DETAIL THIS SHEET) 90' BEND STORM SEWER PROFILE d WOCV ELEV 4967.00 TUT.& n PROPOSED 12"X12" m PROPOSED TRASH PVC TEE RACK & FLOW CONNECT 6" UNDERDRAIN CONTROL PLATE TO EX. STORM STRUCTURE (SEE DETAIL PROPOSED 12H PVC CORE & SEAL THIS SHEET) LOW FLOW OUTLET PIPE PROPOSED 6" INV. IN = 4972.50 PROPOSED 12A%12a III PVC TEE CONNECT 12" PVC TO EX. PROPOSE.... I `90' BEND P� E COREM&ED STRUCTURE / NV. IPROPN 4972.50 PROPOSED 6* PVC UNDERDRAIN PIP)E 7 1Be-Ely IERGENCY O 1.OR min. SLOP SHALL BE MAINTAINEDOUTLET VALVE BY DEVELOPERND/OR BUILDING OWNER PROPOSED PVC SEE ARCHITECTURAL/STRUCTURAL DRA FCR CONCRETE SLAB DESIGN AND BRACING CONNECTIONS TO 22 LF. A• 12e PVC I PpROPOSED OUTLET STORM PIPE SHAL 4oRIVATE SYSTEM AND SHALL BE If BY THE DEVELOPER/BUILDING j j EXISTING LL _ INLET Lj EXISEEP; ra AlINV. OUT. .vm Earn saw IN �w� my, m w we Niger SILT FENCE o OR taLM S WAIFR etymology Di m caxsT1%C11 DETAIS ew 1vd+iw —2 w I/z air wwe "now I lyll Macy Of MN. FRDSION ONT2�f IC .r�NFRA NOBS: 1 INSPECT ARE REPAID GRAVEL FILTERS AFTER EACX among INTENT REMOVE Sala 4Ea MEN NNE HAE HAZE OF ME RLBir TE DEPTH H1 BEEN F�I�.ARY TO A WID111 T enwN OR OTHER FILTERING MIN AN l EE 2 EROI CMTROL MAINTENANCE IS ME RESPON IIITY OF ME DEVELOPER. CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE A BEDDING� CLASS B BEDDING� �CLASS + key"' Alt ARE SRI GLASS C BEDDING ROCK EXCAVATION ea�ww.�r r .ML ease . by l MA� L + + .. e. All I Sir UNSTABLE SUBGRADE SUBDRAIN DETAIL we�r �SAw was +� r.,m.. .wow Sou —7 AN �VIA mas _ _ _ Ma STORMWATCR BEDDING REQUIREMENTS tlna FORT=5 STORMWATER Nunn Cg1STRNG1 CETULg ''�® �Tw wa 1/upw D_1 NOTES: I. 715T EDEVELOPER'SRESPONSIBILIWTOPERIODICALLYOPENTHEIB" EMERGENCYOUTLET VALVE ATBOTTOM OFTHE SrORMWATER DETENTION TANK TO RELEASE ANY WATER THAT MAYBE TRAPPED ATTIRE BOTTOM. A MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE SHALL BE AGREED UPON BETWEEN THE CITYAND DEVELOPER AND PVT IN THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT. 2. THE &INCH UNDERORAIN PIPE AND PRIVATE SFORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY DEVELOPER AND/OR BUILDING OWNER. ALL UNDERDRAIN AND STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE CONTECH A2W0 PVC DFUNNI PIPE OR APPROVEDEOUAL. 3. THE TREE WELLSALONG CHERRY SFREEFSHALL BE MAINTAINED ABSTO ALLOW PROPER DRAINAGET061NCH UNDEROMIN PIPES BY DEVELOPER AND/OR BUILDING OWNER. 4. STRUCTURAL DESIGN/DRAWINGS FOR THE PROPOSED STORMVVATER DETENTION TANK SHALL BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY BUILDING PERMIT. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, CO'LORADO • UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL APPROVED: _ OTY flIPAXEER CHECKED BY: j _ wnrtR IS wASTEwATcv unur CHECKED BY: - STOIwwATER UTIMY CHECKED BY: - RANKS in REOPIAIION CHECKED BY: _ IlWoric ENGXEEA CHECKED El _ I 'A � I W Za Z Oj Q 10 00 In o (g0 Dn a J UiQ i VGV �Irno rc D Owen a ZoOLL N LL N Z w '�.NS _O F 2 we x N W oxw INNER UW x 11-4 Cn m J W W 0 Z 0 U 7 U) Z 0 U rc p o Z Z sa m HQ m ? F aw B in O W N O U PROD. 70F7 IU10E SUMMARY TAfL! eD�t ors_ • alsr STORMWATERTANK _•�+ _ - - - -- - - VOLUME SUMMARY ®�0mm00ft® �ommmmm�o mm0s RISE <,as,s>s>zas>�s>as>�s>oass>�s>s» ROSE ROSS TMK 10 / PATIO = 7056 SF i / / // BUILDING = 7493 SF GRASS = 3,007 SF DUMPSTE • 255 SF / ___ ——______ _ a- -_ —_-- -! :� -__ ____ ____ _ 00 i I I � I I � I I k' I r. I I � I I 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I 1 1 11 I I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 11 1 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 11 1 11 1 1 \ 1 1 1 1\ I Ij 1 1 II \ I \ I �\ I I \1 II � 1 i LEGEND j 1 � � PflEAOF BVILOINGTOBE CETNXED \ \ -� AREAOFm PTOREDEEANED o 11 AgEp TOFREE RELEASE IIR}DETNNEO �i 1 ___ — a '' O GR/SSMFA TO EPEE RELEASE VN-0ETNNED \ 0 s O 10 PO SCALE'. 1 10' £E�Eqq�R w za U ZN m QWaccp �w ra loan m x o?Oo awrn F O�OLL i ZOa NU N N Z O w } H Q Z r w W F' �UW a NW LL -. t0 1� y, 8 m b - ¢ � Z � � W z m a EAR �JS m w PROJ. NO. 101901 1 OF 1