HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 07/12/1995 (4)final Age -l"
Y -js
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR THE
HARMS LABS NEW FACILITY
1
1
t
1
1
1
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR THE
HARMS LABS NEW FACILITY
PREPARED BY:
CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION
1714 TOPAZ DR., SUITE 215
LOVELAND, CO 80537
PROJECT NUMBER
P94-8069
MAY 5, 1995
May 5, 1995
1
City of Fort Collins
' Stormwater Utility Department
235 Mathews
Fort Collins, CO 80524
' ATTN: Glen Schlueter, Stormwater Development Review Manager
SUBJECT: Harms Labs Drainage Report
CDS Project No.: P94-8069
' Dear Mr. Schlueter:
Attached
is the Final Drainage Report for the
Harms Labs new
'
facility. This report has been revised per the
May 4, 1995,
comments from
the Stormwater Utility Division. As
per the City's
'
requirements,
on -site detention has been provided
with a maximum
release rate
of 0.5 cfs/acre. The calculations
used in the
'
preparation of
this report follow guidelines and criteria set forth
in the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Desian
Criteria and
Construction Standards.
' If you should have any questions or comments concerning this
matter, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
CADS E�N•GINEEERING CORPO ION
' Richard Thornton, E.I.T.
Project Engineer
R
EGIS j 111i,,� 7 g
'Reviewed by: �Q ••.••••.,•Fj�
•17162
-
'>JF. Donnelly, P. .0 % ;_-A •.•\••••M••Randy Demario, RC �14�`�uction Co.
' 1714 Topaz Dr., Suite 215 • Loveland, CO 80537 • (970) 667-8010 • Fax: (970) 667-8024
11
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
01
A. LOCATION
The proposed Harms Labs new facility is located on Lot 1 of
the RCD Plaza South Subdivision. In more general terms, the site
is located on south Mason Street north of the intersection of Mason
Street and Boardwalk Boulevard. Hydrologically, the site is
located within the McClellands-Mail Creek drainage basin. This
information is shown on Exhibit 1, entitled "Vicinity Map".
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SURROUNDING FEATURES
The proposed site is 51,900 ft2 with the existing ground being
poorly graded as not to provide positive drainage in all
directions. The majority of on -site runoff generally flows in a
southeasterly direction. For the existing conditions, the 2 year
and 100 year runoff peaks were determined to be 0.61 cfs and 2.2
cfs, respectively. A small man-made swale exists along the east
property line conveying runoff in a southerly direction. This
swale collects runoff from the undeveloped Harms Labs site and from
Mason Street via a curb inlet. The current condition of the site
is mostly due to the import of fill. Existing vegetation on the
site consists mainly of native grasses and weeds with no trees.
This information is shown on Exhibit 2, entitled "Grading and
Drainage Plan".
The site is bordered by South Mason Street to the east and by
the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way to the west. The
land that abuts the site to the north is presently undeveloped and
is described as Lot 2 of the Mason Street, P.U.D. The land that
t
I
2
' abuts the site to the south is also presently undeveloped and is
described as Lot 2 of the South College Investments Subdivision.
' The proposed site is situated such that essentially no off -site
flows enter the property.
' At the time of this report, the existing ground of Lot 2 of
' the South College Investments Subdivision is approximately 3 to 4
feet lower than the Harms Labs site. The aforementioned on -site
' swale releases to this lot and this lot does not have a positive
outfall for storm runoff. The developer of Lot 2 has been
' contacted and is in agreement to receive fill dirt generated from
' the construction of the Harms Labs site. The letter of agreement
and the construction easement is to be supplied to the City by the
' RC Heath Construction Company.
As shown on the attached Grading and Drainage Plan, there is
an existing 24" RCP storm sewer located in South Mason Street
conveying stormwater to the south. Also shown on this plan are a
number of curb inlets that intercept runoff from Mason Street and
release into the 24" storm sewer via 15" concrete pipes. It should
be noted that these existing curb inlets are not typical Type "R"
' inlets. The existing inlets are basically four foot (41)
curb/sidewalk chases which release into open 15" diameter pipes.
' A typical detail of an existing inlet is shown on the Grading and
Drainage Plan. Each lot in the vicinity of the site has a curb
inlet in the adjacent street. When these lots are developed, this
' allows for runoff to be removed from the street and to be detained
on -site by placing a headwall and orifice plate at the inlet of the
1
I
3
' existing 15" pipe. The relatively small runoff peaks generated by
1/2 of the right-of-way adjacent to these lots and the flat grade
' of Mason Street allows the runoff to be removed from the street by
the curb inlets with approximately 0.5 cfs of carry-over per inlet.
' Since the lots adjacent to the Harms Labs site have curb inlets and
' the minor carry-over flows, off -site flows entering the site along
Mason Street were considered negligible for this report.
1
C. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
' The proposed development of the Harms Labs site is to consist
' of a single commercial building, asphalt, concrete paving, and
landscaping. This information is shown on the attached Grading and
' Drainage Plan and is listed below in the land use summary.
Land Use Summary
' Building Footprint = 0.169 ac
Parking, Drives and Walks = 0.628 ac
Landscaping = 0_394-ac
Total = 1.191 ac
' D. DESIGN METHODOLOGY
' For this report the Rational Method was used to determine
stormwater runoff peaks and the Cumulative Runoff Method was used
' to determine detention storage requirements. The calculations used
in this report follow the guidelines and criteria set forth in the
' City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and
' Construction Standards. The calculations used in the preparation
of this report are attached in the Appendix.
1
I
1
1
H
1
1
4
The stormwater detention requirements for this site were
obtained from the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility
Department. The City's requirement is that the 100 year developed
runoff peak be detained on -site and released at a rate of 0.5
cfs/acre. This 0.5 cfs/acre release rate is a result of the site
being located within a storm sewer improvement district and is
consistent with other sites in the area.
As previously noted, the site is located in the McClellands-
Mail Creek drainage basin. The Basin Master Plan for this basin
was reviewed for the preparation of this report. The Master Plan
specifies improvements to the south and west of the site but this
site does not contribute runoff to those improvements. The
stormwater requirements obtained from the City, as stated in the
previous paragraph, were used in the preparation of this report and
therefore, this report/plan is in compliance with the McClellands-
Mail Creek Master Drainage Plan. A portion of Fig. I-1 of the
McClellands-Mail Creek Drainage Study is attached as Exhibit 3 to
show the location of the site within the basin.
' E. RESULTS
' As shown on the attached Grading and Drainage Plan, the
proposed grading of the site divides it into five sub -basins. For
the proposed conditions, the 2 year and 100 year runoff peaks were
determined for the five sub -basins and are summarized below in
Table 1.
0
I
1
0
1
5
Table 1
Developed Runoff Peaks
Sub -basin
Q(2), cfs
Q(100), cfs
W1
0.03
0.09
W2
1.1
3.9
E1
0.2
0.8
E2
1.0
3.4
E3
0.3
1.1
The two western sub -basins, sub -basin "Will and "W211, have an
area of 1,640 ftZand 21,330 ft2, respectively. The total area of
the west sub -basin is 22,970 ftZwhich requires a maximum release
rate of 0.26 cfs. Since sub -basin "Will is to be released
undetained, runoff detained in the west detention pond will be
overdetained by 0.09 cfs. Therefore, the release rate from the
west detention pond is set at 0.17 cfs which requires 3,400 ft3of
storage and results in a 100 year water surface elevation 5038.3.
As mentioned above, it is proposed that runoff from sub -basin
"Will be released undetained into the railroad right-of-way as sheet
flow. The landscape plan for this site shows sub -basin "Will as a
landscape/grass planted area. The existing grading of the site is
such that approximately 6,750 ftZof undeveloped area drain into the
railroad R-O-W. The existing runoff peaks from this 6,750 ftZarea
were determined to be 0.10 cfs and 0.35 cfs for the 2 year and 100
year storms, respectively. When comparing these figures with those
for sub -basin "Will in Table 1, it can be seen that the developed
I
1
1
11
1
t
1
0
runoff entering the railroad R-O-W is less than what presently
exists. It should be noted that no grading is proposed within the
railroad right-of-way.
The runoff from the remainder of the site, sub -basins "E1",
"E2" & "E311, is to be detained in the east detention pond. These
sub -basins have a total area of 28,930 ft2and require 4,250 ft3 of
storage. Runoff from sub -basin "El" is collected by an area inlet
and is released into the detention pond by the 8" diameter pipe.
Runoff from sub -basin "E2" enters the detention pond by a 4' curb
cut located at the southeast corner of the parking area. Runoff
from sub -basin "E3" is released into the detention pond via the
existing curb inlet. The detained stormwater is then released into
the existing 15" concrete pipe which outlets into the existing 24"
storm sewer. The outlet for the east detention pond was designed
as to detain the runoff from the east sub -basins and to pass the
detained stormwater from the west detention pond. To pass the
0.17 cfs from sub -basin "W2" and to detain the developed runoff
from the east sub -basins to 0.34 cfs, the outlet orifice was sized
to release 0.51 cfs.
The proposed grading for this site matches the existing ground
at the north, east and west property lines. As previously
mentioned, the undeveloped lot to the south is considerably lower
than the Harms Labs site. A small amount of fill will be required
in the undeveloped lot and along the south boundary of the site to
obtain the elevations shown on the Grading and Drainage Plan.
1
H
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
H
1
0
1
1
1
i
1
1
11
7
The proposed finished floor elevation of 5039.7 is set 1.4'
higher than the calculated 100 year water surface elevation of the
west detention pond and is 2.1' higher than the 100 year water
surface of the east detention pond.
F. EROSION CONTROL
Erosion control measures have been developed for this site and
are shown on the attached Erosion Control Plan. During
construction, a silt fence is to be installed along the south
boundary of the site and straw bales are to be placed at the
outlets of the detention ponds. Also, a straw bale inlet filter is
to be placed at the proposed area inlet. The silt fence and straw
bales are to remain until revegetation has been completed. These
erosion control items are to be inspected, repaired or replaced
after each storm event.
The proposed erosion control measures were developed using
rainfall performance standard and effectiveness calculations. The
rainfall performance standard for the 1.191 ac. site was determined
to be 79.5%. The erosion control measures presented result in a
calculated net effectiveness 92.4% which is greater than the
performance standard. Due to the small size of the developed sub -
basins, the net effectiveness was determined by analyzing the site
as if it had only two sub -basins, east and west.
The location of the site, as shown on the Wind Erodibility
Map, is within an area classified as a low erodibility zone. The
proposed silt fence and soil roughening requirements will provide
1
8
' adequate wind erosion control measures. The construction sequence
form, SF-C, showing scheduling of erosion control methods is
' attached in the calculations section of this report and is also
shown on the Erosion Control Plan.
' G. CONCLUSIONS
Due to the proposed development, there is a significant
' increase in the peak runoff rate and therefore stormwater detention
is required. As per the City's requirements, stormwater will be
treleased from the developed site at a maximum rate of 0.60 cfs.
' If the proposed grading plan, drainage facilities and
recommendations are implemented, runoff from this site will be
' adequately conveyed and detained.
' Prepared by:
' CDS E�NGINEEERRIING CORPO TION
' Richard Thornton, E.I.T.
' References:
1. City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and
' Construction Standards, May 1984
2. City of Fort Collins Erosion Control Reference Manual,
January 1991
' 3. D.R.C.O.G. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual,
May 1984
C
I
APPENDIX I
' Calculations
�I
[1
1
1
1
1
7'
11
1
1
n
J
1
1
1
1
1
1
l`E, �Zc+t-� t /zurJuFr COtF.
-73�0
f��NDy�= /4.33a - qW AIZ7 7)1 C!! c.35`/
pC3GRIQ7701�I /t-zcft C.
0.
%4Vc"7'K t7J7-
�r
<. 6z:> V,
z
C•
0
(7•�.r..�..---
4.70
1
1
1
1
?7*1< 5
�.00> 17.UU
Utz=(��(.•�'X3.zs�/,U3�> = D•U2S c�
Q,co =G.z-s7C•z)C5•c:C,oSc� = v. U �Sh �`�
Go Cl.z)
4-3
3,z1���.y�t�
�
=f1.o�'.7`(3.zS�(.osfr� = U,ZZ�
co
eSo
1
QZc 1 ( x3.zr)( gzis) _ / U�-�5
Qlm= I.zs(,7)(5.c),'1Zb'�
sub-/Sh'Sii� �3 L
�♦".3 =(clXX�r�LZ-- O+/3$L� ��D' i �.= f'.Sl % LL=�-••tw
o= 1.Z5 7)(9[O)(,•
u.,4,,Z
,3/
I
1
1
tJ
1
�J
II
1
1 1 J
-P
o.i��c..�-
o,.tx-ve7'e ,1)
%t rt�'K: c•�:-, ,Z -u /.Jr7 /=l.c-a ; c L-)t-:3 r:
/i7/'-'�/�Ly�Aui 7' //„1Lc (F=i'o,..1 c cr]To.�.e.5 c �!ts.,=^� o.•� lc,,'.d�,a�� =/�,•] J
l
v
5-/3
sy�
5D3F5-. o
y 0-15 D
k0
�03Y_S
Ltoo
U
•y73U 7
�.���.wi_<s /Z yii,!-moo.] �-. i�o�� f• /<L,-Jr rJ 7-
T::/ 1E
7-r„-)Pz cr;- (_F /�lar� c?l-c�Zir�c/ D= T_rJ
,Altr- o�,/
-
= 0,(o0 71
.slvo ��r,=-J '�2�:�-�,=
Cscc'
c,•%�ic"✓,-7S.•y=.rT cry �ftc�c .�u= Cif.C..s�
115;it
So34-
-5z:"3 7
�,D325-
I , `r /i `;j c. r— ( r-,;, -- (f � �j a.-� r� C`t
U
u
5
/3
.�235- 1
/2c3
//,7Cc>S
5[SS9-
U
/3
577� cc�-> 37
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
Z_
O
co
co
0
>
to
W
m
�
3
C
O
m
u
c
�
A A C
O
m m 0
m U
U
Y
c
`o
T
m
m m
� �
m
J
E
m �i ii E
�
pppp
00 00
V7
y`my
O
0
0000
C
T
C
N
8 II
II II
II
11
II
`C
C
U
c
e > U
00CL
m
C
0
is
m
E
U
sWssrK41
(U no)'asealaa g young
Ip
�-NNNN CCC'"'ffff MMM M MMM
M MMM M MM MM M
0
qO
�NNNM ONN:NO I^Dn
EMO aDTT 00 Q �N
MC
1�
m
�
C
U
J
E
L)
C
OU
�p p� p� p p �p
O fMDONN1(i 8�0 �fO
NM <O Q
m
>>
e
m M f0 ZJ] N pp 1� pppp C1 O.� N N t7 fN'I
N N N M CI M M M Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
LL
> C
A u
8
j
�U
8888Sp o p ppp ppp
S� O SO S 58000lom O
.. NOID
W NIA a00
N CO N, ONCDn NN NC Q
8 L
� Z
ONf.-CON V
m h 0 N Q M M M M N N N N N N
Z
m 0 m 0 Go m C m 0 0 0 0 w 0 0 co 0 00 m 0 m m w 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a Q Q Q a Q Q Q Q Q
U
...�O
O 10ONpp NONoo IAp NoN
�NNM MQ QN Nt0 WV1 Na0 hOD 2088IAO0O
0fSO��^
EE
P
I/
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
W
N
1
W
Z
Q
m
m
1
a
N
>
N
N
�
Q
W
v
c
v m c
o
�°
U
1
O
C y
'�i u E
m
temp
O
O O O O
C T
J
.m.
C N
L
II
II II II II II
C L
Q
U 0 0
o ;
>
z
U
m u
1
Z IS
IE
U
0l
OM f�T W N40 $ �fD
QMf01�o Qvo vwm N f-Q
A�000 W
t`
-MMNOQfn�O.-NNN.N
N N M M M M Q Q Q Q
f0�n�1
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q M M M M MM
O U
�
Qp (pp oM fQ� (lip
O
N C
> j
� V
J
E
U
C
-
O,AppM00Np
M� MN
0
> >
ppOCD 0 p
� MNM
IN MhQ QQQNIN N DNNNco NN N I
R
u
,1
0E
U
00000
88p88ppp Q�j Q�jp IQ�' Ss{p om w
t00N N aDOQOO t
Y O
... �O
N
� l'f l� P NtDN t0D
a0 N0p O<N'°0D Npp
nONQ?N $tDO^tq
N pON''tD
8t
�f�NIDQQMMMMNNNNNN�r-��e-���
mm lOm m �I(f001t7NN0 N�NIDN NNN
Q
O�I (Q
O O O O O C G C O 0 0
U
p p Qo p p p IN�
O O N N N 0 0 0 V N II( w n r O 0 o m 0 0 N
EE
I
11
1
1
1
7
1
� . cVFST .su-II-E�3..J
O, 1-7cF-s - O, C. Ca'i [ i,y C3'a. j - 36v�1) /, �!"rPD r�
c,0Z7 Ct = 3,Fs9 &vL � h5
3 OX
. C�=.17c�s �✓ �i e 3�' 37
0,7 = o,olt5TI17 - o,c-7b',/L
\I= z, 7 )�s
Q. a776
L
�Ivs,a5 z1�Y
i
ozl l ,� VL o7bvJ1
G/lcZK L,J, Tr.lz /4'3J ccrtPTzc.J
2,7(.4�7
i
Iz,o"
O,18x o�
,7 s
n '
c7 Gt/i�
`
�1 LAW ' � � � �r- o�oZc� ✓o,�
Er�tzFr�� ,a A,c—,vc
n,o4 .
zro- _
Cell
77
V - z,z iT•s
f ��
✓9y — �c� 5
7
I
1
I
1
1
11
1
FI
OuTLe—T O/Z,F+Lt
_ 1Z�= c,�s 1� \\
�- /"aiE : I rrFct 15
—,741-- �D1s�i ✓c 7-&-N77L ✓ r::tML
Q = �Ou7 CWC'jil r 0&., Cc-ikS T,. = D, 17 r- D. 31/,
= D U73 lEZ = iO.S� Z 3k�:tir
�� �uri6 CuZ- Fc�t �.17—Pcay i�t,ET
,00
o,or3
4<� (z�� Li = D,ob3 1Z
L
�= A• '{yam r �O./2r
(fA' .yam
Q.00 (,..Iz) = �144c C?j C = p.oi�3.9�= D.oq
v=�,sa
O'(z%Z113 J • C�'7 LTS
L_J
I
L _1
F
1
[I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
/ l 0 �c3 %�.c �l C..7SCi L riR' S! Tc T =Zc-^-s�-3 rt-s Ste= i FL..�r.J T u
t �c3i n%TJ ( It s 1Z-o -1 J
A,.� (r tSi.> = V 75Zi f-�— = J. 15 So-
��_ L181 .`:7z 3a"e A. 30 )�
�c
�lsr.z
(� = c:CA
QC�� I,O�.Z��,2�(. Ss� = 0,10 -%
Q(a�oLzS(.zX�rv�(_15S>= Q3� c�S
-)! ,-)4t2 %ST,t-Y-
�•-�r�i._`✓
wr�rJY - Q�l1D%_� h�3Cr
s
eo
jT'
�/� rS F�•,,-�-/�— IS FiZ d-v�_ .—�i 1STj.J[/ µn»cV tZNt�7 rj/ � �1-->> ��Z^,•^—
LJ 37' za ST 1-z -U —LJ • �c5
y
/r.1/c!3 A-i•c`�>t� /'/�/lS av
t3cr'�IE _Z/T>— ZeT.
C�J"h r,
i
gtzlu s
l
1
G.
Cx, f rr,, �5
fL L
NA:Tr✓� fj,2.E-SSt3 1r Wc��S
6/4+"Z� (��L"Ou.J�/1M/�CyLiL=li �LL
a CJ,,v,o> cTG07rg,c/F� aJNt = loC.�
�2 ry"C) 5c� �cS�J 171 (/
!J/kTvc Feiss !�= o, 2:C4 K
�� C ham; .c•ic-/3f�i ni � c i �^^c z � c �
U) / Z3 ate.
2
70S = 0,737ac-
3v
Lm ��ti1D CrtoS,Cii
-2or.(c Z5Ct�Ji7
_ GaT I^�G%. C,�t�c ���_TrFL!-rl irT�) r ,Krf-,nJit•-s[��-L't'
COSTS t=�L SOr� Zn..vry irJ C-�
I (f-SC I'61L
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
RAINFALL PERFORMANCE STANDARD EVALUATION
PROJECT:; �,,� �� STANDARD FORM A
COMPLETED BY: 28% DATE: 4�
DEVELOPED
SUBBASIN
ERODIBILITY
ZONE
Asb
(ac)
Lsb
(ft)
Ssb
Lb
(feet)
Sb
,M
PS
M
rJ 1
r��4
0,037
S
7-5.
0,410
,1-/7 '
�1
131.4
0,c4
;Z7.;'
. �2 1
3;r /
b = l0/It
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS
PROJECT: STANDARD FORM B
COMPLETED BY: 3T DATE:
Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor
Method Value Value Comment
e7,�.c
Si.iFLJ 3� rS I,J G,�S Es 6-,a?4J2-
51��cJcr� 1 0.5 LJI L�7� ?cZ
I�vr-YK e" 7-
MAJOR
PS
SUB
AREA
BASIN
BASIN
(Ac)
CALCULATIONS
4Jt"3T
—?i f,
tJ�� J2
0,:5;Z7
A1Ar,ve- 204cl.11-.
0,39
jICZ
U'C��o-T
/'mil lVt FJ/Z��L"3 J/jCOLtE /f�J� ('J/7�Ll AI� = O.01 L.
I=/I�1
IG
0,-530
= o, cz3
s o6�
%G �c
7q,
j�La K
4�rf sc_aro„vs rlr;s
!1 kc ysls Nocwc� T�/c 31�c- R 5 I / i sJ t�Zr C^JL`�
' MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA
' CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
' PROJECT: 11,gKm6 ),+ta5 STANDARD FORM C
SEQUENCE FOR 19 MI5 ONLY COMPLETED BY: RB T DATE:
' Indicate by use of a bar line or symbols when erosion control measures will be installed.
Major modifications to an approved schedule may require submitting a new schedule for
approval by the City Engineer.
YEAR MONTH T �FGai I r F8 IMAR I APK I MAY
' OVERLOT GP' -.DING
' WIND EROSION CONTROL
Soil Roughening
Perimeter Barrier S1,-T ��o= ( �c�a��
' Additional Barriers
Vegetative Methods
Soil Sealant
Other
1
RAINFALL EROSION CONTROL
' STRUCTUR.=:
SedLnent Trap/Basin
Inlet Filters
' Straw Barriers
Silt Fence Barriers
Sand Bays
Bare Saii Preparation
Contour Furrows
Terracing
Asphalt/Concrete Paving
Other,
VEGETATIVE:
Permanent Seed Planting
Mulching/Sealant
' Temporary Seed Planting
Sod Installation �
Nett:n;s/Mats/Blankets
Other
1
'STRUCTURES: INSTALLED BY
��GETATION/MUL -ING CONTRACTOR
'DATE SUBMITTED
1
MAINTAINED BY
APPROVED BY CITY OF FORT COLLINS ON
' MARCH ;991 B-16 DESIGN CRITERIA
�y-so`s
/3i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Ir CdE GS
Sig/`ETS
�!�l1
cr /7� /++/o 5 IAds 5/Tc .
2 • cd — (� (� *%�'+�z1� T, LRz.>
TJ Pd7t-,Lm,,4 c` ioJC 7- C/I'>'iK�ITY
T=
oiJ Cc/J i iN(-wbt5
/
J Le%
uD/-h<c /i7J�t�JT Si �3 Fn'Lc c+J 4 �a�T/NLCoccS
,
1
1
1
1
1
1 C 000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
2000
1000
900
800
700
rw
600
500 ;
O
400
~
Q
30C•
200
90
80
70
6C
5C
40
30
20
10
From BPR
-71 I t> I
r
J
1
2.0
n IS •D.G..t II -01 II,CIt.T I, Y1..,.I
.10
10... a 1.,.0I.1•T[ 10 Y.Tt•I.L I.
LOTTC. 01 C..., CL
.08
1'0
[ Is •Ln•.Oc.L d c•ns swn
L
.trt.taC[ . I I.0Ctt0•,81 a.a.
.07
Iact ao, to.nw. ILr
.06
.80
.70
gxa11 RLE ntt oa•to L,au
loo
LL
.05
.60
t�" • Itoo so
1"'
.04
n . of
l.—:
.50
S0
Lr
20
II,cI o [.o CIS __---.03
.40
Z
F
—____----E:7
F
zZ__
Z
L
02
T
Cy
7
ul)
[.5
.3
v
LJ
z
INSTRUCTIONS
�[
I
E
GI
Ci
U i
[. ro• sw.Lw. � .005
r-,....: C.... CL - J LL
.S "0.. USE •avOL....
.004
as....c[
• ' J
w.ru4 .IDT. c •�•�:
DR[.Y,+[ DL•T. J Io• *er.L ols:•.•c[ 1. .002
T,C• USE .G.CO.✓. 1-1) F
0(rt•Y'+t 0 I. 3[CT10, a r0• 0 rw IrL
�J f4F
• +e DCTL•.I.t DISC.. -It
I
„ aYlo snc s[cr,o. - 1 � a I • i r
i _ C
I,STaVCT10, ) IOL:O. T i
OOI
TG Olt.,. 01SC w..Ot 1• I • �- l�l
SLC'IOr a at .SSOS.tO
0[•T. J ; olTalr a 10•
SIO.0 •.T.0 1. ..0 DL•T. J' r.t,
Figure 4-1 .
NONOGRAPH FOR FLOW IN TRIANGULAR GUT ERS
(From U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads, 19e5)
MAY 1984 4-3
.30
n.
I G
.7 'r 0
0
0
. C
.2 �
cl
DESIGN CRITERIA
Figure 4-1 .
NONOGRAPH FOR FLOW IN TRIANGULAR GUT ERS
(From U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads, 19e5)
MAY 1984 4-3
.30
n.
I G
.7 'r 0
0
0
. C
.2 �
cl
DESIGN CRITERIA
-• 2 F
r ] I .
.03 .C= :?3 Ca" ,�'�W 02 C'• Q.4 C^ 09 1.0
�.I I. I I
i
wi•
I 1
i
_y
/
h• � — LJ .-.J '��.J �:.1 9 � 10 u
_ n �• _, L. IJ '� .. _ l i : \
2
C =C I 200
.ITERiA
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1.0
-j-
12
5
Z
II
10
4
.9
8
3
10
6
.8
�
F-
'�
2
9
0 4
-!,-�
i tL
.7
8
3
w
_
1.5
a
L
Cn 2
\
.6
b/L
T
,p\ey V
r
I.0
G
z
IE
5
—
c
6 -_ xamR e�
—
Fort a- J I.0
z
Z
9
]
8---------CL
I
9
+-
5.5
0
w
o
z
O
7
5
w
1
v
z 4
F-
w
.;
z
w
6
z
4.5
p .3
W
V
LL
5
4
=
.2
r
z
z
Z
0
'
l
z
—
�
o
>.
1-
3.5
Izr
_
.4
0
G
O
J •1
w
�
L
o oa
F
.25
3
~0 06
0
-
3
z
u
.04
I
7
.25
2.5
c-
C
. L
H
2
i
.O3
r.
3
i
L
2
a .02
o
I
C
2
a_
IS
.01
0
.15
L
o
p
t
1.5
L
t
.10
c=2 In
I
1.2
Figure. 5-2
NOMOGFIPAH FOR CAPACITY OF CURB OPENING INLETS IN SUMPS, DEPRESSION DEPTH 2"
Adapted from Bureau of Public Roads Nomograph
MAY 1954 5-10 DESIGN CRITERIA
11
1
[1
1 EXHIBITS
1 Exhibit 1 - "Vicinity Map"
Exhibit 2 - "Grading and Drainage Plan" (Back Pocket)
1 "Erosion Control Plan"
1 "Utility Plan"
"Landscape/Site Plan"
1 "Final Plat"
1 Exhibit 3 - Fig. I-1 of the Basin Master Plan
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-HAVEN--m LIGRTFC
DR
riLEN`
¢o
a LN
w
YS�c4
OR
WA
N
7�
f
O
_
.��. •P4 �; ON
S
Wy ; 'p I
ORk,- cBEO.Ox:2=DEL(
gOQ O
9Q OAF Z
{
�w U
LLl
N
c, m
S TONE
�y S TOA
a° CZ �—
�R2�0
U`!
—UWA RMQgi
C W Y
w
02 _
d !I
N {% =EL�,
tocxr� �.Qe
UJa �
U¢ ¢
� a}
NY—
"c
B Cp NO v
LQU<
O�Q
RA,
LW
• Rir�]-'-[�
W
ONIIVIS r. DR
i
k: r= 1 i�f
T
S.
Y7Es:Oac F ¢ rD
<- Q) Q!C'KER�
Y
; h'IGDHRTHA F3P,
5N,J
-FRONTIERN":J _ •Y� Z }
i
JUNCO•. Z-,
c
BOBOLINK
'n
ROBIN CT
CT
Tr°<r9.. Crg EAGLE=
gr•�0
a'i y`„?b,.C1T :Ti0N DR Cp
�' �j?�P i Q�rFIRMED CT l fMC
ADITIOM OP � eJ�'v I '
i �2 : COLONT� a1C�� � PSG O
IjYC FCC-�J..2i ��i6'J LYY ..
{DD�Vcv} C
DEJSGhc.L�r
VIR CT i I
7
zAiNS'Pk ! (Sr
o o �=
_AwFr4Rl. _�R23^S�(i .�7 Q.
ACK..HAWK CT
n_Tv `PUKAR
Cr
-
•Q
Front Range
Comm. CollegeLU
.
• i
y
i �UkN "D" LE-�• "� :
U
rL-!
Bl1AD 7:,' "�O 2
� r�w,.5L, T.H S T I
7-1_
n I_
FZ P \FC�--RD—
� ANN�,ts �,P .
G
. v CORTE
I
Q C
.Zc__ Via. tl' AyQ�,`�
WQLL�YY-W 'tit
Foothills!
'Fashion Mall!
ROd
7 O
';JT
J
a
Square wY
� CG
j-
.
Go �j
�
SP,;
9 0 CAN
3 x
P.
I
3<
3 mr
J
W J �
`r'-.iY;LlON LN
U N
N
O
I i
KENSINGTON
O
,
ORS
J'
�—z
(�--
- N
d J
• .T
�1K'C_'
WeINITY MAP
.f �?t9RSETGCTH R0AC �• v a3`<
— 2I
NEW MERCER
CANAL _ (� ;_ '�%` __-_ y \ I �\ Z=
,,� ', �--�• � \ ^roman L¢ke � •-� �
Y Yip s��' ' � - �, � •�
1`y
i cs
�-4 I •y _ `�' HARWO Y RQAM
.-�-��� •!S•��= .�.a::. _ 1...-ice : • `'�•, -� a 0 �� '�J
\;'' q
/���� .�--/ 7 —_.•wry, i �� - Q�s
W
Z
J
7
INDEX OF IMPROVEMENTS
GRASSLINED CHANNEL
RECOMMENDED
DETENTION POND
O STRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS
EXHIBIT
FIGURE I-1
3
LLi
Lij
tc1c
V
A
y
1.�
Q
co
CJ7
two,
z
Q
w
W
J�
J4
O
cl—
SH`r—T
I OF I