Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 01/15/200472opmTr OF Final Approved Repoit :VOKT t%)LUOi'v 4 UTUIrm Data 1 I s o I ■ FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROLSTUDY For CORTINA (CANYON AND HOWES MIXED USED BUILDING) I I I I I I 1 1 1 FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROLSTUDY For CORTINA (CANYON AND HOWES MIXED USED BUILDING) Prepared for: Coulson Development Group, Inc. 510 West Magnolia Street Fort Collins, CO 80521 Prepared by: North Star Design 700 Automation Drive, Unit I .Windsor, Colorado 80550 (970)686-6939 January 28, 2004 Job Number 114-26 North Star A..., design, inc. ' r 1 January 28, 2004 Basil Hamdan City of Fort Collins Stormwater 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 ' RE: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for the Cortina (Canyon and Howes Mixed Use Building) Dear Basil, I am pleased to submit for your review and approval, this revised Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for the Cortina (Canyon and Howes Mixed Use Building). I certify that this report for the drainage design was prepared in accordance with the criteria in the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Manual. I appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing this submittal. Please call if you have any questions. r r ii 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor, Colorado 80550 970-686-6939 Phone . 970-686-1 1 88 Fax TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLEOF CONTENTS............................................................................................................... iii 1. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1.1 Location ....:...................... **......:.....................*...................................................1 1.2 Description of Property ................................:...........................................................1 2. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS 2.1 Major Basin Description..........................................................................................1 2.2 Sub -Basin Description.............................................................................................2 3. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA 3.1 Regulations.......................................................... :................................................... 2 3.2 Development Criteria Reference and Constraints....................................................2 3.3 Hydrologic Criteria ........................... .......................................................*. 11...... 113 3.4 Hydraulic Criteria....................................................................................................3 4. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN 4.1 General Concept.......................................................................................................4 4.2 Specific Flow Routing.............................................................................................4 4.3 Drainage Summary ...................................................................................................5 5. EROSION CONTROL 5.1 General Concept......................................................................................................5 5.2 Specific Details.........................................................................................................5 6. CONCLUSIONS 6.1 Compliance with Standards....................................................................................6 6.2 Drainage Concept.....................................................................................................6 1 1. REFERENCES....................................................................................................................7 APPENDICES A Vicinity Map B Hydrologic Computations C Hydraulic Calculations D Erosion Control Calculations E Figures and Tables F Excerpt from Previous Reports iii I 1 1. I GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1.1 Location The Cortina (Canyon and Howes Mixed Use Building) is located in Old Town Fort Collins. This project is located in the Southeast Quarter of Section 11, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. See the location map in Appendix A. The project is located in the southwest corner of the intersection of Oak Street and Howes Street. The project is bounded on the northwest by Canyon Avenue, on the east by the Howes Street and on the south by the Linden Press Building and a single family residence. ' 1.2 Description of Property ' The entire project consists of approximately 0.4 acres of land. This property currently has a 900 square foot bank building, drive through area and paved parking. The land ' currently slopes to the south at a range of approximately 0.5% to 1%. All of the existing improvements on site will be removed with this proposed redevelopment. ' The proposed redevelopment consists of a single 6 story building with a subterranean parking garage. The building will extend to the right of way on the Canyon Avenue frontage and the Howes Street frontage. The lower two levels of the building will contain commercial uses and the upper 4 levels will contain residential units. Sidewalks, drives and curb locations will be reconfigured with this redevelopment. There is an existing storm sewer system on Canyon Avenue at the north end of this site. iThis storm system will remain and will be extended south to collect runoff from the proposed parking area and in Canyon Avenue. A Stormceptor inlet will also be added to the system to treat the runoff from the roof of the proposed building. ' 2. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS 2.1 Major Basin Description The proposed devclopment lies within the Old Town Master Drainage Basin. The Master t [l Drainage Basin Plan for this basin has been completed by RCE, Inc. dated January 7, 1993. Portions of this report are in Appendix F. This site is not located in a 100-year floodplain or in a `Flooded Area' designated in Figure 4 of the above reference report. In this same report, Canyon Avenue was recommended for street regrading in Figure 5. ' 2.2 Sub -basin Description This site drains to the Poudre River either via the storm system at the north end of the site or in Howes Street which conveys the flow south to another, storm system. The storm ' systems have been designed to carry the 2 year minor storms. The characteristics of the sub -basin are not being modified significantly with the proposed redevelopment. The site 1 is currently paved over the majority of the site and the current proposal will maintain a similar imperviousness. 3. DRAINAGE. DESIGN CRITERIA ' 3.1 Regulations ' This report was prepared to meet or exceed the "City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual" specifications. Where applicable, the criteria established in the ' "Urban Storm Drainage .Criteria Manual" (UDFCD), 1984, developed by the Denver Regional Council of Governments, has been used. 3.2 Development Criteria Reference and Constraints The runoff from this site has been routed to conform to the requirements of the City Stormwater Department. Detention is not proposed for this site. The site contains an existing building and asphalt parking lot which will be removed for the construction of this site. The existing site runoff was quantified and compared to the runoff for the proposed site. The existing 2 year runoff is 2.7 cfs and the 100 year runoff is 10.7. With the proposed development, the 2 year runoff increases to 2.8 cfs and the 100 year runoff ' increases to 11.0 cfs. Because the additional amount of runoff is minor, detention is not proposed for this site. Water Quality measures are being provided for the new building proposed on the site. This is being accomplished by the use of a Stormceptor structure located at the north end 2 I I ' 4. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN ' 4.1 General Concept All of the runoff from this site currently drains to the adjacent streets and is either collected in the storm system on Canyon Avenue or is conveyed south in Howes Street to another storm system Both storm systems convey the runoff to the Poudre River. There ' is currently no detention or water quality provided on site. It is proposed that a similar runoff pattern be maintained with the redevelopment of this site and water quality will be ' provided for the building runoff. 4.2 Specific Flow Routing ' A summary of the drainage patterns within each basin is provided in the following paragraphs. Basin 1 contains the southeastern portion of Canyon Avenue and adjacent buildings and parking. The runoff from this basin currently flows to the existing type r inlet in Canyon Avenue. A new inlet is proposed to capture this runoff and convey it to the existing storm system. If this new inlet becomes clogged, the water would flow downstream to Basin 3. Calculations are included in Appendix C to show the capacity of the street in the instance that all runoff from Basins 1 and 3 need to be conveyed in the street to the existing inlet in Canyon. Based on the updated Old Town Drainage Master Plan, approximately 49 cfs may flow in Canyon Avenue in a 100 year storm event. The southeast side of the street is able to convey 24.5 cfs (half of the 100 year flow) without overtopping the high point in ' the garage driveway. To provide additional protection, a manually operated flood gate is proposed at the high point in the driveway. This flood gate will be closed when flow depth in the street appears to threaten the garage entry. A program for responsibility for gate closure will be established in the home owners documents. . Calculations for the street capacity (Canyon Avenue) in the 2, 10, 50 and 100 year events are included in Appendix.0 and excerpts from the Old Town Drainage Master Plan are included in Appendix F. ' Basin 2 contains the proposed asphalt parking lot. This basin is currently a gravel parking lot and is the only area of the existing site that is not paved. The runoff from this basin 1 4 I Basin 2 contains the proposed asphalt parking lot. This basin is currently a gravel parking lot and is the only area of the existing site that is not paved. The runoff from this basin also currently flows .to the existing type r inlet in Canyon Avenue. Another new inlet is proposed to capture this runoff and convey it to the existing storm system. ' Basin 3. contains the northeastern portion of Canyon Avenue and the adjacent walks and ' landscaped areas. Runoff from this basin will flow to, the existing type r inlet as it has historically done. Calculations have been completed to show that the streets are capable ' of conveying the 100 year flows from this basin and the 24.5 cfs Master Plan flow. If the existing inlet becomes clogged, the water would overtop the road before the water would enter the building or inundate the sidewalk. Refer to the drainage plan for location of 1 overflow. 1 Basin 4 contains the majority of the site including the proposed building. Runoff from this basin will be collected in roof drains and will be piped underground to a Stormceptor and be conveyed to the existing storm system. Basin 4A is a small basin that contains only the ramp into the subterranean garage. Runoff from this basin will be collected in a trench drain and conveyed to collection system in the garage and then pumped to the storm sewer system. 4.3 Drainage Summary ' The existing and proposed drainage facilities located outside in the right of way for ' Canyon Avenue will be maintained by the City of Fort Collins. The Stormceptor structure will be maintained by the Home Owner's Association. 5. EROSION CONTROL 5.1 General Concept This site lies within the Moderate Rainfall and Wind Erodibility Zone per the City of Fort Collins Zone Maps. The potential exists for silt movement from the site and into Spring ' Creek. Potential also exists for tracking of mud onto existing streets which could then wash into existing storm systems. 5 The erosion control escrow amount is $4,830. 5.2 Specific Details To limit the amount of silt leaving the site several erosion control measures shall be implemented during construction. All existing and proposed inlets shall be protected with gravel filters and all boundaries shall have silt fence installed. A vehicle tracking pad shall be installed at the proposed drive to control the mud being tracked onto the existing pavement. During demolition, disturbed areas are to be kept in a roughened condition and watered to reduce wind erosion. 6. CONCLUSIONS 6.1 Compliance with Standards All computations that have been completed within this report are in compliance with the City of Fort Collins Erosion Control Reference Manual for Construction Sites and the Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual. 6.2 Drainage Concept The proposed drainage concepts presented in this report and on the construction plans provide for stormwater quality treatment of proposed impervious areas to the greatest extent possible considering the existing improvements surrounding the site. Conveyance elements have been designed to pass required minor storm flows and to minimize future maintenance. If, at the time of construction, groundwater is encountered, a Colorado Department of Health Construction Dewatering Permit will be required. 6 7. REFERENCES 1. - City of Fort Collins, "Storm Drainage Criteria Manual", (SDCM), dated March, 1986. . 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. Old Town Master Drainage Basin Plan for the City of Fort Collins Summary Report by Resource Consultants & Engineers, Inc, dated January 7, 1992. 7 APPENDIX A VICINITY MAP 1 t A QI w J HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS B u z 0 H y U W U `A o W a c 4 a U U aZ C z FA c j O H H C Q Lo F d C 0)o0 a� U W OFOp Pa E U @ o U 0 sQ� 0 o c Z U W H W OJ C9 O N W m0 a j o 0 0 0 O LL LL LL 0 LL W O N O N O N O N O N Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 � U w LL a¢ O <U) o 0 0 0 0 W O z o 0 0 0 0 ¢ g LL 0 LC LL Z W N rn rn O rn O rn N rn D O U 0 0 0 0 0- jr LL O O ¢ i W C V OV N O W w o 0 0 0 0 ¢ a J I¢- W V N N O O Q 0 0 0 0 0 z O ¢ F- az O N r -It U w 0 U F w O J m v rn rn LL; O O O O O 2 0 LL LL LL 0 LL W O Lq O Lq O U� O UN O O Z O o 0 0 0 0 U LL ¢ > o o 0 0 W < � O O O O O O LL LL LL 0 LL Z W O N O N O N O N O N 0 U O O O O O w LL Q ¢ U (n o 0 0 0 O W X.z z o 0 0 0 0 g LL 0 LL LL Z W LO rn N rn m rn 0 rn 0 rn O 0 0 0 0 o U LL O O Q > V O N Cl) 00 ` W o O O O LL J F w V N N O O Q 0 0 0 0 0 z O ¢ a w w 0 u C ti m z U � w CyJ Q O x F �d x Td F a 'E U a Z c > — .c o C Q In 'On - GA y o O W �E� z°aw o `o OrnF F v>> r<w F z�F d�0. 0o c Urn0.1 O '- Z OU q Gn Y m II '. z f J ¢ m c o 0 0 0 ? " E vi vi vi 6 ui O i C t7 O l7 N N li m m .. p Y N J U rpi. C.1K f'�' NmNN u � n � rna Nmm Cz 5 m m N O m n 0 J E N C LL J W n < N v S - U � LL, mmmmm W m p o o m o N .. C N O �i ~ J L N O o J s _ C 1mF R O m E � o m 0 � o 0 0 0 0 N` L C O O m m O m J O U m m T N m m P N 01 a, U o0000 w O W U m a m a rn f C 0 0 0 0 2f 1 U O O < V m N N N O yy Z F �Z wO N 7 Q a w a p Z = m Iwo O N U N O rl m z 9 � U U til W o x x H a U � C C Q tfJ Q� moo$ z5 Q m d Ora o U z a W N p w F D O F F �O C aC70. O O ._ Z r-- r O .] G U vi N n f W C � f _2 Q y C O O O O O Z •• E ui vi vi vi ui LL O C ? O o N N E o 0 yZ a u ..- m p Y N U �J m m u � u m �n a M fc L ni c �+i No E O J E cli a N N � O LL J W Z m p yy N a 0 0 0 0 C � O O 10 f0 f0 ❑ C C O O O O O � � 0 0 coo � U' m 02` aN19 �tD W f ~ J L LLI > C O N O N t00 O) J F- Z � n m r m v E o 0 0 � o m O O O O o 0o O0000 y N N L N O o O m J - �j o0000 0 0 0 0 0 U w W O_ 4 W❑ m rn m rn w H O O G O O 2 N U 00 O 0 N O N N O y zZ cD Z co p N C O w a z Z m Q S N O I- . I 1 N d U " ! � d 9 z CD LU W a P40 V? W cw w H� C >a ,� A o? ; a � U c5 Q. Z oz 20 o9F I r . c > — O C p C) r 0 co p m o AEU M o L ��o tQ� �o� 0 R O C O IM U N W cc O o C C C C C V Y EE 30 6 c EE 30 Im O > 7>> Kd'C:�K 7 p y W O o O 5 'c o FOB N Ul _N N_ _N O � LLFILSSSSSF- I m N I- N LO LL7 O I� LO O co a aD,' tfc. N -T c00 O n p I� N 0 O C O N 1 O O C O L coo LO coo LO coo CO Go �W m w co LO co C N N N N N N N N N N U C 0 0 lll 0 0 0 II-D .R 0to LO Li 0 6 to 6 ui vi '5 II O U, CO co corn N comm IO co covmrnn w O Ln I- U U c o 0 6 6 0 0 o c o U mmccoom0 ucoovrnrn� 6 0 0 6 o O O C O o V Q. N N O . N N O O O O O O O O O O O � c m 'y N M '7 Q v N o9 Q ,¢d. LL Q LL Q O z W Ix 0 0 N M a a N M V' V oN a � IT 0 0 N 0 0 0 M u 0 �A z is w PWi ai0 oW W 1 w0 °W C u~i a W o$ Ixo O H g r _ U Qj C � O C co �o co AEU � o 0 3 on L Q "p O CDC z Ol O W OF,A O H F F �rja 0W0� .aAUrn M� u 0 " o 0 z F U U 0'`' C C C C C V ai 3 3 � d f^n: 3 7 7>>> O > .0KC�= Q m� c501i` c; m „.��, 0 0 0 0 0 a= K li Flim�F�F S2S2SE- a OV) N O N O N O O .V.. N o o 0 V N o - - o V m m L coo co m m Gro Cro coo coo O C O O O O O O O 00 O E ui ui ui ui ui ui ui ui ui ui n o U ,�.o m ao rn NLO ao rnrn in co co co vrnrnr oNr U U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 000 0) GND Off 00) coo v m m r- 0 0 0 0 o 00000 U O) O V W N W O V f0 N Q W V N N O V N N O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 � c O m 'y N M V N MV LL Q N LL 0 0 z w cc 0 d p N CO V N M V o a c 0 N CT G , § a \§It $E '( Q uj In 93 0 0 a .k/ U)0. ) �q §§ 2� (q�2 2� uk ■i 2k 27 z z/j Q��� UE§k. /§§7 0 k e�/ @ 3 R ma\ @2@@22 . § | �J�fff. & z E«k\ § kI§f$]% jkk%2 2/LLIm }£I)Ik ®°$ ° o f § '0 0\$ clici ® E 22222' 2\223 b"q m §3»7Q o§_ a§§§§ ° §§§§§ §ci)\§ « k CD /§§» §\§§§ ®- i -»< �ƒ \ z / k / ) M-T Cl) IT : @ @ @ � @ I : @ � d / §o 4( z_ § LU & o� o §IL m° luG � m k = § CD 2� us■9 �k ca § �\K U§�\ \4 0 U « k a � 2 \ t a a 01k3aE ' c k _%__1£ @ ■CS,Cl )J)))) }\°»>'a 0 2»I ■ o`ks;2\ -I.—ILm ,kka2� . =llff& f 0o§ m +w&Cjci .46ww6e ' k 0)§§§§ §§§§§ ® E 22;22 QQQ2Q e"q ob_ 22§2§ 202 ° 00000 00000 « k 3§§§§ 0\§§§ \ /# n_< C14 n_« k �.0 nV< n«<CL HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS i i L I - -- -------------------------------------- ' UDINLET: INLET HYDARULICS AND SIZING DEVELOPED BY CIVIL ENG DEPT. U OF COLORADO AT DENVER ------SUPPORTED-BY METRO-DENVER CITIES/COUNTIES AND UD&FCD t --------------------------------------------------------------- SE_R_: ...... •............. .... .................. ON DATE 11-19-2002 AT TIME 11:11:58 t** PROJECT TITLE:.Canyon&Howes *** CURB OPENING INLET HYDRAULICS AND SIZING: INLET ID NUMBER: 1 INLET HYDRAULICS: IN A SUMP. GIVEN INLET DESIGN INFORMATION: GIVEN CURB OPENING LENGTH (ft)= 4.00 HEIGHT OF CURB OPENING (in)= 6.00 INCLINED THROAT ANGLE (degree)= 45.00 LATERAL WIDTH OF DEPRESSION (ft)= 2.00 SUMP DEPTH (ft)= 0.00 Note: The sump depth is additional depth to flow depth. STREET GEOMETRIES: STREET LONGITUDINAL SLOPE (%) = 0.50 STREET 1 CROSS SLOPE M = 2.00 STREET MANNING N 0.016 GUTTER DEPRESSION (inch)= 2.00 GUTTER WIDTH (ft) = 2.00 STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: WATER SPREAD ON STREET (ft) = 6.97 GUTTER FLOW DEPTH (ft) = 0.31 FLOW VELOCITY ON STREET (fps)= 1.88 FLOW CROSS SECTION AREA GRATE CLOGGING FACTOR (sq ft)= (%)= 0.65 50.00 CURB OPENNING CLOGGING FACTOR(%)= 10.00 INLET INTERCEPTION CAPACITY: IDEAL INTERCEPTION CAPACITY (cfs)= 2.96 BY FAA HEC-12 METHOD: DESIGN FLOW (cfs)= FLOW INTERCEPTED (cfs)= CARRY-OVER FLOW (cfs)= BY DENVER UDFCD METHOD: DESIGN FLOW (cfs)= FLOW INTERCEPTED (Cfs)= CARRY-OVER FLOW (cfs)= 'I 1.23 1.23 0.00 1.23 1.23 0.00 1 E m La—) r-+ cn 0 _ 3 O LL �L L .8 CO W L Q 0 " 3 � ipf a� O 0 C � cn W U p C - d ci N N v/ O Sjovm 1 A t �q Pv 7 +J N 0 C to co CD- Lh U) n 0 0 N t 0 0 CO N 0 0 0 N C N O N `V 7 O (D o to 6 is is r a6 rn rn 0) a) 0) 0) c2>v rnrnrnrnrnrn 777777 o w ❑ 0 0 0 r O U 0) 01 O O 0 O O N 0) 00) W 00) m 0) V'0V 7 V V 2 ' O O m co t0 in N C 7 7 7 0) co `Q m.00 co couivvv y > t6 C m 0) m M M M 0) 01 (3) 0) W C O w O co (DN O O E C O 10 N O 7 O =O > r- N O) O) 0) 0) O) m CL m 7 7 7 7 7 7 ��w M tD n O h U (n O) 0 0 0 >(DC n co O O to (D 0O) �0 C TC9J al C m to W 7 7 7 7 V 7 2 N N O m N O E C O n 7 7 0 h O m N m a) 0) cm 0) 00)) v O O) W O O (D N>> a— a) 4 -q 7 W 0 >>>� (M N N (00 O t- r (0 L O N O N U u N m O O O 00 to U N 2R toror O O O O O o � CU 0 U 0 O tD N L L L L L U U U U U 0 U (�! N N N t0 N (O O O O O O O L O O CO O m O co (6 6 07) (7D J G) 9N E 4) y c c N m N ° o L t � 0 M ° 3 C 0 m N C Q Q� i i m 0) ° m ° E E - - - ❑ O O N in N 3 X X X ° (n U W W W tl m a) C E o p O N ° L 0 N O ° co N 0) U m �Z N E c E c 4) 0 N 0 Mn C C U) w (n W CM 7 m Q N E m E L E O O E E € (n E to `0 `o 0 0 X X U) In (n w (n W 0 E N N 0 L o 2 0 c Q O U = U V (d U � E n 0 c D U O m a, L � h CD , « \ \ « §% ) $ 2 $ $ $ )0) & k & § k ƒ ««.. MyEm � � {\ qr k§ )U) , ( � . � \ � 9(6� + ; /77 a ))\C!N ! 7� \ ]&6\/n k / \ ƒ(\ E//. )ff � )))\\ )s9$k\ ..'j&62n4 \ e \ e4), North Star Design, Inc. 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor, CO 80550 4/6103 LOCATION: Cortina ITEM: STREET CAPACITY CALCULATIONS - Canyon Avenue COMPUTATIONS BY: PPK SUBMITTED BY: NORTH STAR DESIGN, INC 100-year design storm Design in accordance to "Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards" City of Fort Collins, May 1984. Street with 30' Roadway, vertical curb and gutter - local street depth of water to garage high point a o calculate for channel slopes from 0.4 /o to 7 /o Theoretical Capacity: use Mannings eq. Allowable Gutter Flow: 0=1.486/n'R213'S112'A Qall=F`Q where Q = theoretical gutter capacity (cfs) F = reduction factor (Fig. 4-2) n = roughness coeff. Qall = allowable gutter capacity (cfs) R= A/P A = cross sectional area (ft) Q = Qa + Qb P = wetted perimeter (ft) S = channel slope sec. A sec. B A'= 3.58 A = 0.17 P = 15.50 P = 4.20 R = 0.23 R = 0.04 n = 0.016 n = 0.035 Both sides of strppt S Qa S Qb Qtot F QaII Qall 0.40% 7.94 0.40% 0.05 7.99 0.50 4.00 7.99 0.50% 8.87 0.50% 0.06 8.93 0.65 5.81 11.62 0;60% + * .° 0 0 N , "'9 9f Ea==83 0.80% 11.23 0.80% 0.08 11.30 0.80 9.04 18.08 1.00% 12.55 1.00% 0.09 12.64 0.80 10.11 20.22 1.50% 15.37 1.50% 0.10 15.48 0.80 12.38 24.76, 2.00% 17.75 2.00% 0.12 17.87 0.80 14.30 28.59 3.00% 21.74 3.00% 0.15 21.89 0.72 15.76 31.52 4.00% 25.10 4.00% 0.17 25.27 0.60 15.16 30.33 5.00% 28.06 5.00% 0.19 28.25 0.48 13.56 27.12 .. 6.00% 30.74 6.00% 0.21 30.95 0.40 12.38 24.76 7.00% 33.20 7.00% 0.23 33.43 0.34 11.37 22.73 FL 7.2 cfs actual 100 year flow q 0.08' 0.26' 0.17' Area A = (0.08')'(15') + (0.17)'(2')'(1/2) + (0.26')'(2') + (0.26')*(13')'(1/2) = 3.58 sq. ft. Area B = (4.2')"(0.08')'(l/2) = 0.17 sq. ft. Strtcap.xls 1 of 1 North Star Design, Inc. 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor, CO 80550 LOCATION: Cortina ITEM: STREET CAPACITY CALCULATIONS - Canyon Avenue COMPUTATIONS BY: PPK SUBMITTED BY: NORTH STAR DESIGN, INC 2-year design storm Design in accordance to "Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards" City of Fort Collins, May 1984. Street with 30' Roadway, vertical curb and gutter - local street no curb topping, flow may spread to crown of street calculate for channel slopes from 0.4% to 7% Theoretical Capacity., use revised Mannings eq. Allowable Gutter Flow: Q = 0.56'Z/n'S'rz' y ' Qall = F' Q where Q = theoretical gutter capacity (cfs) F = reduction factor (Fig. 4-2) Z = reciprocal of cross slope (ft/ft) Qall = allowable gutter capacity (cfs) n = roughness coeff. S = channel slope (ft/ft) Q = Qa - Qb + Qc y = depth of flow at face of gutter (ft) Z n Y. S Q. 12 0.013 0.43 0.40% 3.44 12 0.013 0.43 0.50% 3.85 12 0.013 0.43 0.60% 4.22 12 0.013 0.43 0.80% 4.87 12 0.013 0.43 1.00% 5.45 12 0.013 0.43 1.50% 6.67 12 0.013 0.43 2.00% 7.70 12 0.013 0.43 3.00% 9.43 12 0.013 0.43 4.00% 10.89 12 0.013 0.43 5.00% 12.18 12 0.013 0.43 6.00% 13.34 12 0.013 1 0.43 1 7.00% 1 14.41 Z in Yb S Qb .12 0.013 0.26 0.40% 0.90 12 0.013 0.26 0.50% 1.01 12 0.013 0.26 0.60% 1.10 12 0.013 0.26 0.80% 1.27 12 0.013 0.26 1.00% 1.42 12 0.013 0.26 1.50% 1.74 12 0.013 0.26 2.00% 2.01 12 0.013 0.26 3.00% 2.47 12 0.013 0.26 4.00% 2.85 12 0.013 0.26 5.00% 3.18 12 0.013 0.26 6.00% 3.49 12 1 0.013 1 0.26 1 7.00% 3.77 4/6/03 FL 2' 13' 2" Yb=Yl= (13ft)'(2%)=0.26ft ya= 0.26 ft + (2 in)'(1ft/12 in) = 0.43 ft Z. = 24"/2" = 12 Zb = 24"/2" = 12 Z, = 1 /0.02 = 50 Both sides n - no _ nh i rlr of ctropt - Z- n Y. S Q= Q F Q,u Qan 50 0.016 0.26 0.40% 3.05 5.59 0.50 2.80 5.59 50 0.016 0.26 0.50% 3.41 6.25 0.65 4.06 8.13 I 50 �--�': -0016: :•,,026 ,' aas . 0.60J 3 73 6 85=,'. 0.80 -. 45 S . 1-6 . 96 50 0.016 0.26 0.80% 4.31 7.91 0.80 6.33 12.65 50 0.016 0.26 1.00% 4.82 8.84 0.80 7.07 14.15 50 0.016 0.26 1.50% 5.90 10.83 0.80 8.66 17.33 50 0.016 0.26 2.00% 6.82 12.50 0.80 10.00 20.01 50 0.016 0.26 3.00% 8.35 15.31 0.72 11.03 22.05 50 0.016 0.26 4.00% 9.64 17.68 0.60 10.61 21.22 50 0.016. 0.26 5.00% 10.78 19.77 0.48 9.49 18.98 50 0.016 0.26 6.00% 11181 21.66' 0.40 8.66 17.33 50 0.016 0.26 1 7.00% 1 12.75 1 1 23.39 1 0.34 1 7.95 1 15.91 1.78 cfs actual 2 year flow Strtcap.xIs 1 oft Canyon Avenue flows for 2 year storm Worksheet Irregular Channel if for ttAL-e SST Project Description Worksheet Canyon 2 year flow- half street 11 Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Mannino Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Slope 0.50 % Discharge 1.78 cfs �J-- (!;� 7— Options Current Roughness Methc)ved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting I )ved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weightinc Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficler 0.016 Water Surface Elev 98.25 ft Elevation Range 1.97 to 98.50 Flow Area 1.2 ft' Wetted Perimeter 11.66 ft Top Width 11.64 ft Actual Depth 0.28 ft Critical Elevation 98.23 ft Critical Slope 0.81 % Velocity 1.46 tVs Velocity Head 0.03 ft Specific Energy 98.29 it Froude Number 0.79 Flow Type Subcritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+63.8 0+37.5 0.016 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+63.8 98.47 0+59.8 98.31 0+54.3 98.14 0+52.3 97.97 0+50.3 98.14 0+37.5 98.50 Project Engineer: Patrioia Kroetch n:\114-24 canyon & howes\drainage\cortina.fm2 North Star Design, Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 [614n] 01128/04 10:02:49 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 ' Canyon Avenue flows for 10 year storm Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Canyon 10 year flow- half street 1 ' Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Slope 0.50 % Discharge 3.10 cis qt;� Q 1j p Options Current Roughness Methc wed Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting I wed Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weightinf Horton% Method ' Results Mannings Coetficier 0.016 Water Surface Elev. 118,30 ft Elevation Range - 1.97 to 98.50 Flow Area 1.9 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 15,05 ft Top Width 15.03 ft Actual Depth 0.33 It Critical Elevation 98.28 it Critical Slope 0.76 % Velocity 1.64 ft/s Velocity Head 0.04 it Specffic Energy 98.34 ft Froude Number 0.82 Flow Type Subcdbral Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+63.8 0+37.5 0,0111 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (it) (it) 0+63.8 98.47 0+59.8 98.31 ' 0+54.3 98.14 0+52.3 97.97 0+50.3 98.14 ' 0+37.5 98.50 1 Project Engineer. Patricia Kroetch n:\114-24 canyon & howes\dra1nage\cortine.fm2 North Star Design, Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 (614n) 10/14/03 08:37:41 AM 0 Haested Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Canyon Avenue 50 year flows Worksheet for Irregular Channel 1-a0-V- Project Description Worksheet Canyon 50 year flow- half street 1 Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth ' Input Data Slope 0.50 % Discharge 4.80 cfs Q 5O Options Current Roughness Methcwed Lotter's Method. Open Channel Weighting I wed Lotter's Method Closed Channel WelghtirK Horton's Method ' Results Mannings Coefflcier 0.016 Water Surface Elev, 98,35 It Elevation Range '.97 to 98.50 Flow Area 2.6 ft' Wetted Perimeter 17.82 ft Top Width 17.80 1t Actual Depth 0.38 ft Critical Elevation 98.33 ft ' Critical Slope 0,72 % Velocity 1.83 ft Velocity Head 0.05 it Specific Energy 98.40 ft Froude Number 0.84 Flow Type Subcritical ' Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+63.8 0+37.5 0.016 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+63.8 98.47 0+59.8 98.31 0+54.3 98.14 , 0+52.3 97.97 0+50.3 98.14 0+37.5 98.50 Project Engineer Patricia Kroetch n:\114-24 canyon 8, howes\drainageNcortina.fm2 North Star Design, Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 [614n) 0128/04 10:02:33 AM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Srookslde Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755.1666 Page 1 of 1 Canyon Avenue 100 year flaws Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Canyon 100 year flow- half street Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth ' Input Data Slope 0.50 % r Discharge 7.20 cfs Q IOD ��i �1�G C �Ur•( �)? Options Current Roughness Methc tved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting Irved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weightinc Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficier 0.016 Water Surface Elev 98,40 11 Elevation Range 1.97 to 98.50 Flow Area 3.6 ft= Wetted Perimeter 20.75 ft ' Top Width 20.73 ft Actual Depth 0.43 ft Critical Elevation 98.38 ft Critical Slope 0.69 % Velocity 2.03 f fs Velocity Head 0.06 ft Specific Energy 98.46 ft ' Froude Number 0.86 Flow Type Subcritkzl Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+63.8 0+37.5 0.016 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation - (ft) (ft) 0+63.8 98.47 0+59.8 98.31 0+54.3 98.14 0+52.3 97.97 0+50.3 98.14 ' 0+37.5 98.50 Project Engineer. Patricia Kroetch nA114-24 canyon & howes\drainage\cortina.fm2 North Star Design, Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 (614n] 01/28/04 10.03:08 AM ® Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 i P I IL 77 L Canyon Avenue -100 year storm, full street Worksheet for Irregular Channel Full St mot" Project Description Worksheet Irregular Channel - full street I OP Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Slope 0.50 % ' Dischargr56.20 cis /tn -/ Q�--'T'lCXS /•2 GFS .=i Q100 Options Current Roughness Methc )ved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting 11ved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficier 0.013 Water Surface Elev, 98.47 It Q�- Elevation Range 1.68 to 98.58 Flow Area 17.6 ft' Wetted Perimeter 70.48 It Top Width 70.23 It Actual Depth 0.79 ft Critical Elevation 98.49 ft Critical Slope 0.38 % Velocity 3.20 ft/s Velocity Head 0.16 It Specific Energy 98.63 ft Froude Number 1.13 Flow Type Supercritical Calculation Messages: Flow is divided. Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+63.8 -0+12.0 0.013 Natural Channel Points r i Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+63.8 98.47 0+59.8 98.31 0+54.3 98.14 0+52.3 97.97 0+50.3 98.14 0+37.5 98.47 0+10.5 97.85 0+08.5 97.68 0+08.0 98.18 sliree� se�fi�n -Clow. Project Engineer. Patricia Kroetch d:Nhaestadtfmwlcortina.fm2 " North Star Deslgn, Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 [614nj 10/10/03 09:30:04 AM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 2 Canyon Avenue -100 year storm, full street Worksheet for Irregular Channel Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (it) 0+00.0 98.34 -0+12.0 98.58 Project Engineer: Patricia Kroetch d:\haestadUmwXcort1na.fm2 North Star Design, Inc. FlowMasterv6.1 (614n] 10/10/03 09:30:04 AM 0 Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 2 of 2 APPENDIX D EROSION CONTROL CALCULATIONS N k � 2/ § ` < 5 E c S[ . ) .SSa2 D !( \G(\ 2\ /\§§ § \�. §§§§ \ )\ = o� 0 k/?§ 0 cl § @ k §/ j) )§ a \\ k\ \_) �\\ . ` §d m)0 . d0 \/d . 7 0 ƒ \)/ 22§ 2± ƒ ƒ to V as ) - .k Cc u _ \ ! ( CO @ 7 2 ( § § ® ( § § \ \])�k d§) \\\{{ \2/ QacojA 22$ rl L North Star Design 700 Automation Drive, Unit I. Windsor, CO 80550 EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS PROJECT: Canyon & Howes - STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: ppk - DATE: 18-Nov-02 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/WALKSBLDG 0.01 1.00 GRAVEL FILTERS 1.00 0.80 PLACED AT INLETS SEDIMENT TRAP 1.00 .0.50 ALL BASINS 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 = (1-C*P)*100 MAJOR SUB BASIN AREA EROSION CONTROL METHODS BASIN BASIN (Ac) 1 0.49 ROADS/WALKS. 0.45 Ac. SILT FENCE 0.00 Ac. GRAVEL FILTER 0.04 STRAW/MULCH 0.00 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.09 NET P-FACTOR 0.96 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 = 91.3% 2 0.10 ROADS/WALKS 0.00 Ac. SILT FENCE 0.00 Ac.. GRAVEL FILTER 0.10 STRAW/MULCH 0.00 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 1.00 NET P-FACTOR 0.50 EFF = (I-C*P)* 100 = 50.0% 3 0.24 ROADS/WALKS 0.20 Ac. SILT FENCE 0.00 Ac. GRAVEL FILTER 0.04 STRAW/MULCH 0.00 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.18 NET P-FACTOR 0.92 EFF = (1-C*P)!I00 = 84.0% 4 0.26 ROADS/WALKS 0.00 Ac. SILT FENCE 0.26 Ac. GRAVEL FILTER 0.00 STRAW/MULCH 0.00 Ac. - NET C-FACTOR 1.00 NET P-FACTOR 0.50 EFF = (1-C*P)*100 = 50.0% TOTAL AREA = 1.09 TOTAL EFF = 76.0% . REQUIRED PS = 74.0% ac = (94.0%*29.77 ac. + .. +99.6%*0.40 ac)/1.14 ac 1of1 a CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE STANDARD FORM C PROJECT: CANYON & HOWES RESIDENCES SEQUENCE FOR 2002-2003 ONLY COMPLETED BY: PPK DATE: 11/02 Indicate by use of a bar line or symbols when erosion control measures will be installed. Major modifications to an approved schedule may require resubmitting a new schedule for approval by the City Engineer. MONTH APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR Demolition - Grading Wind Erosion Control: Soil Roughing Perimeter Barrier 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 Terracin Asphalt%Concrete _ Paving Other Vegetative: Permanent Seed , Planting Mulching/Sealant Temporary Seed Planting Sod Installation . Nettings/Mats/Blankets Other BUILDING CONSTRUCTION STRUCTURES: INSTALLED BY: CONTRACTOR MAINTAINED.BY. VEGETATION/MULCHING CONTRACTOR: TO BE DETERMINED BY BID DATE SUBMITTED: APPROVED BY CITY OF FORT COLLINS ON: North Star Design, Inc. 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor, CO 80550 LOCATION: PROJECT NO: COMPUTATIONS BY: SUBMITTED BY: DATE: EROSION CONTROL COST ESTIMATE Canyon & Howes 114-24 PPk North Star Design 11/18/02 ITEM IQUANTITY JUNIT COST/UNIT ITOT=T Silt Fence 740 LF $3 $2,220 Straw Bale Barrier 0 EA $150 $0 Gravel Inlet Filter 3 EA $150 $450 Construction Entrance 1 EA $550 $550 Subtotal Contingency (50%) Total $3,220 $1,610 $4,830 CITY RESEEDING COST Reseed/Mulch 0.5 ACRE 1 $615 $308 Subtotal Contingency (50%) Total $308 $154 $461 EROSION CONTROL ESCROW AMOUNT $4,830 Page 1 APPENDIX E I-31fillORxi". alaW.1;3a*1 E No Text PAGE 23 I 1 i 1 1 1 0 l CC,occ 1 1 0 l c c !n Ln Ln I I Ln 1 ggqqq 1 I I 1 1 c I o,c�Cc�cccooc t 1 G 1 CC CC to L7 L, Ln, Ln U, 1 I 1 1 1 C I q CL C1 m C+ C C m cN m Ct C1000 I I O I C -m- co q C C C q q C q q q q q 1 1 I 1 I C 1 t\ q CC q Cl. C C% C+ CI C C ON C. 01 C, m CN m m m 1 I O I Q C C C Q C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C 1 1 N I co cc gCgqppC.lqCqqqq q qq 1 1 I I C 1 C M Q Ln iO tD tD tD r\r\t\ r` r-- t� r,. tZ. r\ r\ r\ r\ co co Co co 1 O I C Q C C C C C C C C C C Ct C C C C C C C C Q C C C I qco co Coco ggCOCJ M MCCL cogqCco co co I 1 1 C 1 q N M CU) to Ln tD tD to co co Co J I M CC C QQQQCCC CCCCC C CCQCCQCC C, O g q C q q q q q CG C g q q q 0 CO CO CO I i O ; tDONMCCL7�LL7 Ln tD LD tD to to tD tC tD tD tD r`r� r�r\r\r` i O I I q I oCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCQ-c--C, 'CC'c U I I co co g co q co Co q q q C7 cc g q q q cc qq CO CO Co Cc CO CO Lb 1 1 1 • I O 1 C Ql .--r N m M C C C' C to Ln Ln L'I Ln Lo L^, L: Ln tD tD tD tD tD r�1 to 1 t0 1 Z 1 f\ P M cn C C CCcc, CC C C C C C Q Q C C Q C C C Q CCC` 1 IO g q q q q C C C C cz qq C CO q C' q q COq CO CO CO COI J t 1 tD CO O.--I .--r NN MML"7M CCCCQ CC Q LP: In Ln Lo tD CD 1 LD I M M M Q C C C C C C C C C C C C C Q C Q C C Q C C C t 1 cc cc q q co qq C co cc C co q q q co co co q q co cc 1 OC i �C ; L^. CV Ln r\ CCTOG•-+.--r .--�NNN CJ en M M M MCC C'QC 1 vLn l N M M M MM CC CC CCC CCC Q CCCCCQ CCr , C i W i== co cc CO CO cog cc co qq ccC g q cc q q q CO cc co q q co / C m- Ln I CJ.--IMCL. in to to r` r` r� cc CC cc C co C m m COO i I J C I N N M M M M M M L `9 M M M M M M M M L `9 M M M Q Q C C C' 1 N 1 t/7 I g co coq coq co co cc cc coq C) C CC CO cc g q co co coq q co co, LnC O C- JMCCLn L: Ln tC tO tC tO tC t-, r� r� r, CoC Co Crn 1 C 1 , N N M M M M M M M M f" 7 C n C' 7 f• 7 m L+ � M M M M M M M M M I Z I I co q q q CJ g q q q C q C q q CO CO g CO CO CO CO q Co CC q 1 C I I H I Ln I .-. .r Ln r\ gOC.�CW N M M MCC C C Q LO Ln Ln tD tD t.0 Ln 1 . I I W i M l q ggq======qqqCqqqqqqqqq©COCO i U 1 1 C 1 O ; m N LD q O C.--r NNM M MC CC CQ C Ln Ln Ln Ln tD tD tD tD 1 M I C-- N NNNN N N N N N N N N N NNNN N N N I C I I co g q q C q C CJ=co q q co g C q co q q q q q q C7 co co 1 0 1 I Ln 1 Ln Ln C1 N m L1 to r\ r\ r\ q co co Ct C 0 0 0 0 0 1 C 1 , W I N I m C` O .--..� rl .•-i .-I .••� r1 .--i N .-.I .--I 14 r....r ry .ti ...y N N N N N N 1 CC I 1 r� c" co g q C C co co co C q qq CO co coq coco Co q CQ q CO C.' I 1 1 I 'C Ln O M LntD co coM,C)O O.-+.--I.--Iv-.N N N N M M M M M M 1 I N I Co cn O O O O O O O g q q q Co q co co co q co co co Co q Co g co q q q co q co t I 1 1 Ln I CO N CC rr C Lo CO m C1 OOr+.--I 'r .--i ..r N NNM mcnm M 11 1 I to CJ q C1 a% C1 C% C1 C1 C1 C 0 00 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 1 r\ r` r\ r\ co co q q q CO co co CO CO CO q CO q CO r t t O I to cn OC\ rC1ON M M Q C Ln L7 tf9 to tD tD tD%C r�r\ UO%0 tD 11 c10 rl r� r\ q Co CC g q q q q q q gCgqqCOqco* CO qO 1 1 1 1 Ln 1 CT O C tp r\ q q r� to Ln C Q m M N N Cl to C .r. CS1 tD 1 1 O I O CN1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N.4 .--r r.. .--1 O O l 1 1 n n ^tom r�r`nn t\r\f\r�rl n ran r\ n 1�1 r\ n 1 1 S 1 1 I CO C O O O c 000000000 C 0000000 cm I 00 1 1 0F- CDC) 00000000000000000000000 1 1 JZLL I •-yN M C L'I tD r\ q C10.�N MC Ln tD r� Ol0 L70 Ln CLnCD 1 I LL W v 1 - I J I NNMMCCLf') I TABLE 5.1 Stormceptor Sizing and Capacities Stormceptor TM SIZING GUIDELINES Sediment Removal vs. Storage Capacity 100 90 i E 80 70 m a o 60 Cn w 50 y=0.3864x + 20.431 m R2= 0.6015 40 n n 30 a ,■ 20 E `m 10 w 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 StormceptorTMSediment Storage Capacity (ft'/ac) 1 yr. Sediment Removal ' Lit— Sediment capacities from 85 to 825 cu.ft./unit Lr-- Inorganic (sand) removal rate at 83 % Lv—t- Organic (peat) removal rate at 73% Lr-- Annual mass removal is 670 lbs/acre IMF, Grain size distribution results show 86% of sediment in clay or silt category LONG TERM SEDIMENT REMOVAL VS. DRAINAGE AREAS 100 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1.25 3.25 5.25 7.25 8.25 1125 x axis - paved area (acres) Stormceptor 900 y axis - TSS Removal % Stormceptor 1200 Stormceptor 1800 �4Y Stormceptor 00 Stmceptor 3600 or 36 Stormceptor 4800 Stormceptor 6000 ��-7t�� � .7 i 4 StormceP1or 7200 _— Oil Separation Oil capacities from 240 to 1100 gal/unit IMF— Floatable oil captured as it rises upon release from down pipe IRK- Recent testing proves oil removal at 97.8% FLOWS & CAPACITIES` Precast Concrete STC MODEL STC TREATED FLOW RATE' U.S. GPM (Liters/sec.) TOTAL HOLDING CAPACITY U.S. Gallons (Liters) OIL HOLDING CAPACITY U.S. Gallons (Liters) SEDIMENT HOLDING CAPACITY cubic feet (cubic meters) Series 900 285 (18) 900 (3410) 240 (910) 85 (2.41) Series 1200 285 (18) 1200 (4550) 240 (910) 115 (325) Series 1800 285 (18) 1800 (6820) 240 (910) 200 (5.66) Series 2400 475 (30) 2400 (9090) 780 (2950) 215 (6.08) Series 3600 475 (30) 3600 (13640) 780 (2950) 365 (10.33) Series 4800 800 (50) 4800 (18180) 920 (3480) 500 (14.15) Series 6000 800(50) 6000(22730) 920 (3480) 650 (18.40) Series 7200 1110 (70) 7200 (27270) 1100 (4160) 825(23.35) 'Flows in excess of the Treated Flow Rate will internally by-pass the lower holding chamber, thus preventing scouring of stored sediment and oil. Stormceptor U.S. Patent # 4,985,148 *GpROr;q* 8311 West Carder Court www.carderconcrete.com 725 Bryan Stock Trail 49`0M1N0 Littleton, CO 80125 Casper, WY 82609 * « CO CR E Bus. (303) 791-1600 Bus. (307) 265-3100 CO CR TE q QODUC- Fax (303)791-1710 1-800-285-2902 Colorado Fax (307)265-0013 q gOOUet' erm�orce w..eo mw.rr only) EMf4DYEE PVNECI CCn.1iNNY APPENDIX F EXCERPTS FROM PREVIOUS REPORTS F N. � (tl. �4 —Alt F Ill 10 fu ,p6� f t t. � '1 [ V6i.. e' 1 -'-P- FL6o1 ; ,• ,r - Apo 2 a � CV ° ` •�• r.• t C.>? 1 -� 1. n 4 •i, , �"`I a r ({.: fr '' ` M 07 VFj h t '3a avp_' •Tt ,, /^r G '.a`'i?-"a t d f, r i '�.i i{ i-i ,j%3i R1 42 J� - 0 IVE ST P - 8.•( j7i�Y•.�I, . u>; �fr oil>;�•`' i ya �� ..�' .'.\/lC^:L-iDR�t.�" -\. ! _ j '1"... ill � c-, �._: .3- z�° 1 � �'{�'''R��1 •/C5' 141 tit It 691 691 ARV t -- --- -- - _ - -� o. l Y I-+a� :,ra S e• O• r� -.�Q i r 1, i�t 1F'� 1h ^i.'�... 117 IF g p fak l z d:. r ZVI low ti �- S.. •+a`, ,. W � a. .. aP'f#+c. a fi€. , rfc - , a -.;a •i p:a . 1 1 f� �i .�^'- �3'"{}.�.+RI ✓Ir4�! Jxi _•Rl'�y ,'a {,"-"��i�, 3 j'(' 4a. I, I Ir �.• �� �+� 'Le I- �i n,� � �i� u� FF ^ �RR. '"'>f.-i :.ly..�'+y. ;h��) ../1.�. 1. 1 'ti ; `,',•A I - _� oil S. .� "a a yea..-i r.=+).. 'r� t. ,�y T vi �i r- r . i ' - - -Ir ,� !•■*:1,�Y „ - " # f s i +F '* t �- �. 1'�• 1 ~,� LAUREL $T Y44 �. 7 4- ���t�r,�'� �' r M'1w�y?� x •L �j'.. �I¢ - �`:'j .nl 1 y ; r. e _£� �,c�if r�� .t. .. , �l{I 'ar �. Ina' { -.,� {�1• �.¢'��..., � I(���� �~±���.• '7lFy, � 420:4 201.8 .7 1 12. 421:3 665.7 (DIRECT FLOW) 1 6. 432:3 833.5 - (DIRECT FLOW) 1 10. 423:3 499.6 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 53. 424:3 453.0 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 55. 425:3 677.0 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 55. 426:3. 714.8 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 56. 429:3 1265.1 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 56. 430:3 1209.3 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 59. 432:3 743.2 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 52. 432:3 522.8 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 52. {33:3 220.5 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 53. 434:3' S70.9 .(DIRECT FLAW) 0 54. 435:3 643.7 (DIRECT -FLOW) 0 54. 436:3 183.6 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 50. 437.:3 104.1 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 50. 438:3 79.4 (DIRECT.FL.OW) .. 0 50. ' _ . 439:3 112.0 IDIRECT FLAW) 0: 52. 440:3 31.2 -(DIRECT FLAW) `0 52. 441:3 80.7 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 52. - 442:3 88.5 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 35. 443:3 42.2 (DIRECT FLOW) 0' 35. 444:3 46.3 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 35. ' . 445:3 482.4 (DIRECT FLAW) 1 3. 446 { 0 0 0 0. 447 3 39 5 (DIRECT' FLOW)T,,, 0 46. 448 � ta1:L:' 49 9 t S v`-Fi '+".'""„'",� T .i ,.r 1,.r"-. ai'• 449:3 1307-A n:.Xyy£ (DIRECT FLAW) 0 56-. 450:3 57.7 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 '56. ' 451 :4. -'143.4 .0 0 36. 452:4 633.5 1.6 1 10. 453:4 544.4 1.2 1 1 S. 454:3 244.0 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 40. '455i4' 495.6 1.5 0 37. . 456:4 7.9 .5 0 457:2 487.6. 4.6 0 38. 38. 458:2 508.9 3.3 0 39. 459:2 891.8 5.7 - 0 41. 460:3 171.8 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 37. 461:3 107.0 (DIRECT FLOW) - 0 37. 462:3 64.9 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 38. 463:3 242.4 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 35. 464:3 255.5 (DIRECT FLON) 0. 40. 465:3 238.4 (DIRECT FLAN) 0 47. 466:3 534.2 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 36. 467:3 179.7 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 41, _ 468:3 248.0 _ (DIRECT FLAW) 0 42. ' .469:3 123.5' (DIRECT FLAW) 0 37. 470:3 71.7 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 38. 471:4 252.0 1.1 0 43. - 472:3 227.9 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 35. 473:3 195.3 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 17, . 474:3 223.7 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 36. ' 475:3 472.5 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 35. 477:3 399.3 - - (➢IRECT FLOWN 0 41. 478:3 412.9 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 '42. 479:3 463.9 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 43.' - 48:4 481:4 1. 76 76.4 .9 9 0 0 4. 44. ' 482:3' 244.3 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 44. 403:3 205.2 .(DIRECT FLAN) 0 44. 484:3 39.0 (➢IRECT FLAW)" 0 44. 485:3 746.3 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 50. 8:4 487i{ . 135]5.0 .6. .7 0 0 . 48 48. ' 488:3 503.2 (DIRECT FLAW) 0 35. 489:4 137.8 1.1 1 9. 490:3 154.0 (DIRECT.FLAW) 0 35. _ - 491:3 134.0 (DIRECT FLOW)' 0 45. . 492:3 90.3 (DIRECT FLOW) " 0 45. 493:3 53.8 (DIRECT FIAN) 0 45. 494:3 60.3 (DIRECT FLOW) 0' 45. 495:3 34.0 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 45. 496:3' 46.3 -(DIRECT FLOW) .0 46. 497:4 51.1 .7 0 49. 498:4 .8 .fi 0 . 501 :3 3737.8 (DIRECT FLOW) 0 3535. 502:4. 65.5 .5 0 36. 503:4 187.2 .7 0 36. 504:4 171.8 .8 0 37. . 505A 381.6 -1.1 0 41. $0:4 9. 1. 0 3. ' 507:4 1 98.0 .8 0'38. 509:4 102.6 .7 0 35. 509:4 205.7 .9 0 39. 510:4 '442.9 1.4 '0 36'. 511:4 195.3 .9 0 37. $13:4 . .6 0 .. 513:4 251 251.5 .9- 0 41 41. 514:4 272.4 1.3 0 54. 5154 743.2 1.4 0 52.' 516:4 211.3 .9 0 36. 517:4 393.4 1.1 0 42. 510:4 81.2 .6 0 36. 519:4 76.8 .7 0 36. ' 16 F - sic dl. 9 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 OLD TOWN BASIN MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN CITY OF FORT COLLINS SUMMARY REPORT Resource Consultants & Engineers, Inc. 3665 John F. Kennedy Parkway Building 2, Suite 300 P.O. Box 270460 Fort Collins, Colorado 80527 January 7, 1993 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 OLD TOWN BASIN MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN CITY OF FORT COLLINS SUMMARY REPORT 1. INTRODUCTION The Old Town Master Drainage Plan study was begun in December 1986 under direction of the City Stormwater Utility and the Storm Drainage Board. A draft report was prepared in August 1989 and public meetings were held. The plan was revised and finalized in December 1992. This study was conducted to develop a basin master plan for the Old Town Basin, the general limits of which are shown in Figure 1. The major goals of this project were to identify problems in the existing drainage system and to conduct feasibility level investigations of potential solutions. A detailed inventory of the existing drainage system was conducted. Several improvement plans were investigated and a final improvement plan was developed. Priorities for the improvements were recommended and a financing plan is currently being developed. This report was prepared to summarize the results of the study and to assist in implementation of the proposed master drainage plan. The main report presents more detailed information concerning the study, proposed improvements, and detailed flooded area maps. 2. BASIN CHARACTERISTICS The Old Town Basin is located in the central part of Fort Collins. The basin limits are approximately Pitkin Street on the south, Larimer No. 2 Canal on the west, and Cache la Poudre River on the north and east. With the exception of the areas along the river within the floodplain, almost the entire basin has undergone urban development. As part of this urban development, storm sewer systems have been installed, over the years to help eliminate nuisance drainage problems that have occurred as the basin was developed. Most of these drainage improvements have been installed through the use of drainage improvement districts. The general flow direction of storm sewer systems within the Old Town Basin is from west to east, although "surface drainage tends to follow a slightly different direction. Figure 2. is a general map of the major storm sewers within the basin showing flow patterns of the storm sewers to flow east and then north to the river. Figure 2 also shows the district boundaries used to finance previous improvements. Two of the storm drainage systems which drain from West Elizabeth Street and Shields Street and the CSU campus carry water to Spring Creek. The remainder of the storm sewer systems within the basin carry water to the Poudre River. As part of this project, a detailed inventory of the existing storm sewer system was made and is discussed in Section 3 of this report. Generally, the storm sewer capacity is sufficient for the 2-year storm, but in storms exceeding the capacity of the storm sewer system overland flow occurs. fa ... . s, Scale: 1"=1 mi. Figure 1: GENERAL LOCATION OLD TOWN MASTER DRAINAGE BASIN PLAN for the CITY of FORT COLLINS RC E,p,m ° "G 2 m.. No Text No Text I II I L-------------------- j OAK STREETu e - _ _ - __ -- --- - -_�� ;, o -- - - -� -- ------------- __ 0 YMVTAW 9CT PENCE l�P Is AREA Ji ADEsel M I IS PR02CGpx A IN.A l mwituANvd' s Call at dtp i s/ I 1I i / /GYSNIa TVET N40 P ' i 3silly silly3 � a , I �i 0.240.8 L I it / ".J U �I � I I m i ! silly 4 a° elf e0 TO A PIR ER UN Cif I l - -. - SEE 07 4 1 028 Z�- __ _ ( �ewes�■■� '�. _ Af� 0.9 I ; I fill 0 0.02 0.9 mill mill, sr -- _- It rII F I '/ / /0.4908 _ - - - -- III p V/ mill me I' � I OLIVE STREET DRAINAGE STIIAIART TABLE DESIGN PONT AREA M9pAMON AREA (ACRES)Gam c2 CYao R Of 1CO ) o (2) all 1 ANY 0.77 fulfil 0 .23 A9 2 2 010 o.e1 .W 1 0_j 127 10 J 3 0.ze 0,57 Lao 0 0.35 a3 • 0.a o57 Lao D DID xs 'A IM AN 0.95 1.N, 0 00 0.2 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE mer MONAMAN, All AN NO Is NO ON AN Oil w fer 711 New . `,whormsed aaw t rm�Im amwro.. Net rAdw rvdnew - By rmnm .A.N..a BY "m m anion. �: n ey an, Or FORT am STANDARD EROi AND SEoeENT CONTRLI �COlIIIIMIIgN FALAN w Es -.-- - :Aae ) . wao III neaec« tmast ee no1 Mw d Of m btr-lou. (24) noon after to r cph,ructoo on this (z.) mm will be no ■arm e.tuhlnv ANOIdly awe ee the man designated ON the dol of... (3) All real Otmem, sliff and croslrvcem lei Was be Ivte ee RCM to mr and bell onta,b (,bel Instant.a ). A whey w ^M wavan cm t at the appropriate W, in the comtri $"I^ k "heal1W M,"low Newt O At If fill''s IWWN,l the0,val Wall be isothermal, d a tbg a s l e IN keeping We W drallied, be Thembor0koe far offit'111m; I'd maintain m b w. °° IN) P p la a ONpred t M R ens v M) Immal for curldly, orstri wwmxmeand far the Si wol Plead If tiffl, be U) All 11,1, ,owed Al land 1 sn s t A s cros[aW f AstdICUme Stwipild filing date thaliff. } at,) final Moral a 0 Ills 1 sWasol oul pa t el dowl m all lemon I-PI'M by Ford 9 i Nor more When thirty IN) date bills Te.aNp tw W / u ) a related, a wale v ov by We 1 /Cw ly t al (7) 1, u'd Moderate (eWtta.d)«asM owd, mw I. ) BIII I WIN, vuWY time ((2) ski Ind after e sly Wl t t eserld m l 1 d of WI Mew" funi E) R me rencaneeYs diWNw dews IN imuy scombed 11 NbwmmP by (.1 aremoved IfW the ste hum been elfne may Sae .b u5 aSwmmm by the wromidert Nomming wwtm. :A) Vessel t. o«a m c ,.. removed the Dewwol MW W reepmm. an We awn uP e aw I eon "aliment Ind WAIT, Earn d dr r.ass nhailimcWn d Wdk fxiddhe and a)wxe`INI.aw« mtl mmwdtlyy death anion cm. fumm mSerde m„ �..` NYY dife me m al s t soy. oT ouw ryas snl If ey, and Me use streets and .akwe 1 me M n t:Mhv (10.)All ^.l " em.nen4 Po\ WY u m sold ro>d•a Yewr^aw ma G T N mA eeoaeee of n a ... a n m to eve . releaseWe Imme"% m. 01) No sad stockpile wdl IN thin (ma Iwt m 1rol9nt. All Ni model Smel be Pm� .e rkm e P PNdl by surface e Wool IP.M. «Inv. a ael set fool Any ue till , nFs Ol t� element (30) (12) The Wwrf volume eoPl of eebmlw bonds oil be ,eaww QWJ for, dew .d be clewed Pon P If the Protect Ind before mmmammon.. 9 the mIv. to the l y/coampw of Ha amww«. A..naim (13) City wemana. Ina COMIM Drool Pwmet aptem (COPS` A nmsme max It vnmebl ra smarge « Id. the Qiwnm,eo aI . All bw ...Nett bushad material, truck eon consWild truction eeMr, the 1, ma ... tvP Wall Tn. d:.a�w S m1 I Ocum en;bh.,ny necessary l, ua. w Ohta Ohtani and e Will ar Pd1at 1. m the nl.' ma. -n Inr o e I aPDli[able Iwo, elms, w ■ewe fell (IA) A e«OlaalM b I be Pro"i m w w among 1 nwe .IN shag a mstruC my DGamns eluOMOO ua/ p 1fulayers 1m of andlocated We Colr`,ee l.` 01hout material . Omm mauve aneao Wemrla non. to 1 Lw being «tatty. In be w we a (eton5.ry i were that sediment as of me" YR o IndiNWd lotsWer man* of the Idloanv NOlmwl/wash IwttaIRYP& shall be In dee a until lab are sufficiently at,bPrzed, ce delwmuni by the wodm n"i Duties (toward City omG. Gniy� nspi (e ) a� od .ol• ,W.Is, Along (e) lot pwi (d) Olhf amtlane IfnemM. (IB) CmelNlm n We Feld maywr mtrO m Iddi o1 c n on New pone. The d na ee DewaPw an t.nat. m.awte. are delwmm.e m.o . mt.�be by A. ay/cemn CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF COLORADO 1m800m922m1987 JussEiiuvhm MIlawOR FOR THE MAImW9 OF uMOER WAND MEMBER J➢D➢ES. 30 15 0 30 60 SCALE: 1" NO 30- LEGEND QDESIGN POINT BASIN IDENTIFICATION 0.60 0.4 RUNOFF COEFFICIENT ICE) AREA IN ACRES f'- ROW DIRECTION ■■M■■■■■■ BASIN BOUNDARY -- --= CC EXISTING PIPES ® PROPOSED STORM PIPE FLARED END SECTION ■ PROPOSED INLET LOCATION — — — EXISTING 5' Call EXISTING V CONTOUR PROPOSED 5' CONTOUR —won— PROPOSED V CONTOUR e --If—IH SILL FENCE IP INLET PRo2CTW OI -1 caNslRUCnaN ENTRANCE City of Fort Collins. Colorado UTTIIL(I�TY� PLAN APPROVAL APPROVED: C 2 OIIY En91n n \e CHECKED BY a w Rw k n\..a. Vt /=6111 — mrzy /�i CHECKED BY I� / a-d slmn.atwell I...Y Dale CHECKED BT: Pwxs k Racrw\en BY Twnk E191,sw _49 Dent OiCom pa�m CT9m— �� WAS r CS E mON A �in <c o.. ft�Lelse n�ali 0 0 5 CO y CA � II My — e A a a m o�oo o (%� Z W < O ZJ 0 in z U Omo Z C0 p a (.) D w _Z F _X Al Z O a U 0 SHEET 7 7 OF 13 Ad Na. 114-24