The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDrainage Reports - 12/02/19981 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MOPERTY OF Final Repoo FORT COLIJN� Date STORM DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR DELLENBACH CHEVROLET SHOP BUILDING ADDITION AT 3111 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE LOCATED IN THE FOOTHILLS BASIN PREPARED FOR DELLENBACH MOTORS, INC. NOVEMBER 23, 1998 PREPARED BY STEWART & ASSOCIATES, INC. 103 SOUTH MELDRUM STREET P.O. BOX 429 FORT COLLINS, CO 80521 TEL. 970-482-9331 FAX.970-482-9382 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 & 2 Letter & Text 3 Vicinity Map 4 Map of Local Drainage Patterns Appendix Copies of a Portion of 1996 Report of Warren Farms Alternative Components to the Foothills Basin Master Plan STEWART&ASSOCIATES tConsulting Engineers and Surveyors ' November 23, 1998 Mr. Basil Hamdan ' Storm Water Utility City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 ' Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Dear Basil, ' RE: Dellenbach Chevrolet Addition to Shop at 3111 S. College Ave. The proposed shop building addition is a 14,000 square foot building which will be constructed over an area which is now existing concrete and asphalt pavement. ' The construction ofthe new shop building will not change the imperviousness of the site nor will it change the existing drainage patterns. ' We are including copies of the Architect's Site Plan and Demolition Plan. We have added some drainage information to the site plan and information for erosion control to the demolition plan. This project is located in the Foothills Drainage Basin Master plan, prepared by Resource Consultants in February. 1986, and revised by the Warren Farms Alternative Components To The Foothills Basin Master Plan by RBD in April 1996. The original report in 1986 indicated that after construction of the 48 inch pipe improvements ' under the Burlington Northern Railroad and under the Larimer County canal No. 2, to carry water from the detention ponds on the Warren Farm to east of College Avenue, would cause a localized flood plain with a 100 year high water elevation of 5025.0 in the area immediately west of College ' Avenue. The 1996 report indicates that the localized flood plain just west of College Avenue will not ' occur. There were two runs of the UDSEWER model of the piping system; one that modeled inlet flows only, and one that modeled the peak discharge amount from Detentions Pond in the Warren Farm - Meadowlark area. The text states that at the time of downstream peak in the pipe system the ' pond is releasing 31.37 c1s. Although there wasn't a UDSEWER run that included this flow with the inlet flows, the addition of the 31.37 c.£s. to the inlet flows would not exceed the amount modeled for the peak discharge from Pond 19 of 105.3 c.f s. In either of the UDSEWER runs, there ' was no surcharging of the pipe system until downstream (east) of College Avenue, so there would be no water surface above the ground in the area west of College Avenue. A copy of portions of the 1996 report are included in this report. ' James H. Stewart and Associates, Inc. 103 S. Meldrum Street P.O. Box 429 Ft. Collins, CO 80522 ' 970/482-9331 Fax 970/482-9382 ' The floor of the building addition will be placed at the same elevation as the existing building, which is 5028.61. The construction of the building over the existing impervious surface will not add any stormwater runoff quantities, and it will have no adverse affect on upstream or downstream drainage ' facilities. Erosion control will be provided on this project by installing a gravel berm sediment trap ' across the swale area on the existing pavement at the drainage outfall of the site. There is to be a chain link construction fence erected across the east side of the project and across this outfall swale. The sediment trap will be constructed by laying filter fabric on the asphalt on the upstream ' side of the fence and then folding the fabric up the fence and attaching it to the fence. 1 1/2 inch rock filter material will then be placed on the filter fabric. The fabric will stop the rock from going through the chain link fence and will also provide additional filtration. A detail of this gravel filter is shown ' on the erosion control plan included in the pocket of this report. This sediment trap will be installed before any demolition of existing asphalt begins. ' The erosion control collateral for this project should be the minimum 1000 dollars. Since the stormwater runoff quantities and patterns will not change, we have not made any ' runoff calculations. A vicinity map has been included along with a plan of the local drainage patterns around the ' site. ' There have been no water quality procedures proposed for this project since the entire runoff area is existing hard surface and will continue to be so. The area to be covered by the new building is now used for outside auto parking, and after the building is constructed, any oils or harmful ' sediments from the cars parked inside the building will be filtered through the sand and oil trap which will be provided for the new buildings, so the new site will have more filtration area than that which now exists. This reporthas been prepared in compliance with the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criteria. Sincerely, r � � Phillip I. Robinson, P.E. & L.S. •. Ap meh I 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a m iLas Dt It Rd w lake - St BI 4 St. Ber ELoka'°' St. ...p q BiiR PL. # :x. , _ . _•• "— I Po �r St i Cette •--•� Sneer Dr. i If 0 E i Stua c um 6` w wem.e 1\OLc set AMe 5••.«R+e clr. riser.• �'O Ra ��.- =I -Ar ur.._ •_ _.a.. Ct CM.osA 0 T� N Dr W' E nni _ ee.. Z 2 Rut en v 0 ¢• ��I CM1.. Sol Q: le I Y a Afoxv •� C-pKi I I i Vale NI f I 2I y � Tat. Wa a• l � I Ci . N pr N > 0l • Prince on Rd W. Dra a Rd. '^ N C y `�w \l N Y rkrJ S Dr. c a \ I one•en ir#�CSter 2�� Or. r 0 IT n ` Dr. W. Or. E. o ttan St. > S1 a Roelt or n+'ard a WR.t ... /c ct. Robin Ct. •Y Cardi Cf. Z N• • • we •eO: a.•. c,. �... _aiaeeird G• `t' Justice D, "• a ' a ado Anee■a a 0 SITES OCATIOs `'ffis fkwy. 2 E•� M 1 Sao, 0. ~' IY• 4o� 40 a 1�1 o Are. •.; >: .fir'"" r raMin fbvpod 6 Arnor i I .So,. u. s '* as Dyne u o Bonito ?� Y i d Are. Jovnan a. G e ao6 Co VICINITY MAP N.TS- 0 0 ' N •O d � N i o /�i' M PROS SEO oK SU Rv eR . i I o 0 0 o •- !- =. o o i d c Q N o N n LO `I a E cn O /l lot Z 2 m 9^'0 PIPE S . t, Q O � � N C N � J N � N d 0 3 I TIRE SHOP O 3 O �G O a 3 p 7 .. '-_ . ice- i k r. ,•, v+. y- ,.,. i.. r _ M e _ a (" ram• i i f' '_ ; - ..a '. t. _ r If r a t L P' � th`if'71 f i9 tr+r%{1' t'p '>-yf -w JI:Pr^� t..f S•j t._t � «I f a1 '� ,• ' 1 t � ! J J �:w l' 1 i r /� t tr , i�� _ i !. �� i E! �' r r > ,t t Y ( +' .. 5. r _ 1 f, X+ s.. [Mtr Gw)'tl wit rM�'lfyj,y `v !hr Yu �;f Mt tii �w.•sv J�. at .FY- Iri s.!! �.•' 1F • r tf{' Sf V./et♦Nw Al.•, 1 1 .M Si C'IfrF C'f`f. �v Xy yi/ i w"'rt4f * '` ♦Fi.t'P�t -M1� !' I (,*., f ''- v r r �' 1 F i r'1 k N- )r!, u+E x fh M1 ti + <x i rr't.°'.i s'. l.�t t -. i., y.•r f -u, `' .'�"t ti a flyt r 1 Yha'' I w�� # f - i 3''Y-• r i C e w. nU' i 'i�`r t ♦ a � rf4i 7F I= .,a .��b 1 > tr � � .{ y" r �tr •.rf .n� !~F >s 1#'7 .{ � 5 r v r f � _"Yr>J f ! > +" 1 X tS y 3'i", Fr ) 'i ✓ >1..y t t+ r f� '�'a; }?v< ar �F 11, : o- F='1p f`•. v'§1 Ff 4, t � �t 1 r �5;, N C q, .e ,, t t{�, .�a�4�tf �+1.: tS a t d �y F � � s 4_i i }-tJ t -) _ _ t- to Y u{ t n 1t7" � y}tA.i f W 1r EE 4 3 �k v^ N✓4V+.P 7^ 1� ja t{ 4 4So J� w p _'. �. r'tr`"jt \'..> M 1� Y .r ' jf„� L-rr V�C ,'xyM r} 7 xFk+f• > Si•r t , }r✓r C+ iS � kc i{ rf� ry i r X. �� x-Klf'�!r�.i,1 t F y� 1 a ,1;� r+ 1 7vS �- i S Hwr 4� ♦f�'a.�� 1an 1, } f- v v., S ,,f i,} k P t :✓_ ;� *-> ks'.j1 r A iw YA•n .r tF 'Aib�t7i h�3 s't�y � trti��ft r��}y�4 f}`: a(-S F•`7 �yt F,ut rir �f•x� �f t t. ' t%, `� tt 1Y � � �-x t '. #yt rrt r r�r '.1 i3' ,M1fiSti �'vr �� 4`3. f"iA�'`F .: .mt wG H[ 1_.�i •�£. 3ryr. M1$. trf �w . y,� L•t rh , u � r� i . ,t.rF y A 5, fl � i �>•: 1i �tik t t Y 1 ✓x "a s ��{ .. } I �1 y r 1 "i ,,, t +. 47ayt n u£r tc- l hYf -3r L y� t r, r � <-yf}r •}R,,,� t +fair 'rtry ^s r f� tx �'� zr { .4 cot f r?�i" r t .. Jit _ f a it +h , R�N_fr n y y � iJ _.q. F Jt a yJr4� Yrr � etj� y� iF7F+f Fy. �� v y✓ ` � -?) FF�} 'r`ve ir' f re � / # � ..t �t♦d i _. t, r 4. ssAX J' .G.� ~ ' � , q � Q� �' SL.• 91�t n x yse^,,.�J.. t s v r"�s- yi 3t ♦ : - ' 1> x t '' .a.,y rt' -? 1 + R ♦ � r r T i '' - rtf ?�!�t�� 7 t >f :"� a� � �h, �.x�P? �lY 1 r i 9 } }F � r- r! f *) :r y t � i. , r >• a "` i� c .Z: 1.. <r i�t 1 i y`' 1_S � 1'r [s .M1 r L T,Y l f Im.a , � •-' y f-: ,. t ,ter% ♦ L- > .��.a r-. t 5' O < � •M1 _-,� i\ S ♦ , F -3Ta p r n + 1 T , rt ,• t t r y y !^ •ifi )f 1 t t S w 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i t� WARREN FARMS ALTERNATIVE 'COMPONENTS TO THE FOOTHILLS BASIN MASTER PLAN (Lower Portion of Reach 4 Basin G), FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Revised: April 24, 1996 Prepared for: City of Fort Collins Utility Services Stormwater 235 Mathews Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Prepared by: RBD, Inc., Engineering Consultants 209 South Meldrutn Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 (970) 482-5922 RBD Job No. 020-136 0 I troof drain system for Foothills Fashion Mall were calculated based on full -pipe flow of the roof drain pipes and limited by full -pipe flow of Line A and Line B which are tributary to the storm drain pipe system main line (refer to appendix page D-4 for roof drain schematic). Discharge from a future 18-inch storm drain from the intersection of College Avenue and Swallow Road was added at manhole 9 to be consistent with the SWMM model. This future discharge was based on full -pipe flow of that future line. (Note that the basin master plan also shows a 12-inch diameter storm drain draining into this main line from the south, but this ' was neglected as the SWMM model does not include this future pipe.) Lastly, outflow from Detention Pond 19 was added into the storm drain system. The peak flow time for the sub -basin which includes the Foothills Fashion Mall and ' this storm drain system was obtained from the SWMM model. The conveyance! element hydrograph from Detention Pond 19 at the time�of the downstream peak- ,flow indicatedYthaf the detention pond would simultaneously be 31.3T ' _releasing cis:.0 'These discharges were summed..up by manholealongthe pipe system, toff determine peak flows for use .in the UDSEWER model. .This is the most conservative flow condition to model the downstream storm drain. (The storm drain system was also modeled at the time outflow from Detention Pond 19 peaks; flow in the system at this time did not cause any downstream manhole ' surcharge.) Only the main storm drain pipeline was modeled in UDSEWER. Laterals (and thus lateral losses) were not modeled, although energy losses due to lateral inflow were included. Energy loss coefficients are referenced on pages D-34 through D-36. The Foothills Basin drainageway channel downstream of Stanford Drive is the outfall location for this pipe system. A cross-section of the channel was surveyed ' to provide a basis for a normal depth rating curve on the channel. The starting water surface elevation for the UDSEWER analysis was determined by entering this rating curve with the peak SWMM discharge for the channel (conveyance element 34). Peak discharge was 704.6 cfs at a water surface elevation of 4993.35. ' The UDSEWER analysis indicates that the manholes along the main storm drain line between Stanford Drive and Mathews Street will be surcharged during an ' 100-year storm event. The analysis also indicates the energy grade line in the upstream -most inlet --between the railroad embankment and the Larimer No. 2 Canal --is below the flowline of the grate. Therefore the 48-inch storm drain ' system and the detention pond outfall are not hydraulically connected; there are no tailwater effects on Detention Pond 19 caused by this 48-inch storm drain pipe system. 11 1 1 D-za 1 �x1'S-�� J s --ho ryy\ WA, (,,)e-> F7% ri s IV V�d c Z C,� sl 1M-Blo I 8TT w REPEAT Of me a I o —� �.. _ — '� „_ - w1 I .;—_—� - --=r----=--=- Q i a SO ' SWALLOW SUB �" " 1 Ill; lD ------ ----- m- sic 6.4- 7C326 s.('00 I =>3 27 ial2 s�28:' c� POUDRE VALLEY _ rA3zl _ Z MOTORS =31 ,>.. 3 -� -- nazz `tt321` S3� 324 =S OTAILLS-- r..: -�3jA 5323 - / f.i�G '.?'.'•`.�3` Pb2 ' I .., = 313 PQBA� `� A U 5 3 as :�Z 30111 1 �l i I _ Y /1 ia IqZ � �. � x 30-7 i !2ufu �a 9,i��' I32v �M�26 f;\ .,ro 2,3 17 Z 20 , r2oq q I 13 Y 319 / ^ Zl ) r too r' M 3I9 - o.:! N .Y +dry _ .M32 (` i-p '� » \ ./ ,.•� I ' ' ri321 2Z.IS .•nrs .aa I - - 1 I= j, •�= —�• Y. _ y �.i z •Z I O + :h „l'� `(/ :j.- ryo \ M92C M'115 a PARKWAY y j I -::: -- .lam .'Y i.. - a` I I.� :n�Is !+ CD•�� I viv101 \ vsvv ... _ . �.. ,�fl'.{• Q- 1 '' I _ v ' MGCIRN/N6 SUB ' ,c ' .. �.. � - . •' - �� X , SROI �• �O I � I \ ''lit •1 :. ., : v •is I - I WEST +inns ni `i a / i+. r : IS `• ` MS C.Z03 I f �' SOUTHX. MESA B oq I A SUB. 1 rnc.a+.yr @y I \ -p ...' 2 1 '�• '.. Imo. •, • 1 I /N.rOL N.OII I \ �w^ riw •• '.Jy� `.N" L�C�NA O h bk141 N i' I PE 1 0 1\-A-&N40L=C Nobs 1180. Inc, Engineering Cons Rants Warren Farms 020-136 Inlet Caoacity and System Flow Evaluation MH Inlet Reach Total No. Typical Type Capac ty Discharge Discharge ' (MH.*) No. (cn) (Cls) (Cft) 24 16.47 16.47 ' 24.0 100 Future area inlet 16.47 23 13.34 29.81 - 23.2 10 Type 13 combination in sump 6.67 ' � 23.1 10 Type 13 combination in sump 6.67 4.71 34.52 22.1 70 Area inlet 4.71 21 34.52 ' 10 20.51 55.03 10.3 70 Area inlet 4.71 10.2 50 10' Type R curb inlet in sump 9.13 9 10.1 10 Type 13 combination in sump (Conveyance Element 204 inflow) 6.67 9 6.65 4.52 61.68 66.20 9.2 45 4' Type R curb inlet on grade 2.26 9.1 45 4'Type R curb inlet on grade 2.26 8 66.20 7 21.44 87.64 8.0 90 Area inlet -multiple 9.11 7.3 30 Type 13 combination on grade 2.83 7.2 30 Type 13 combination on grade 2.83 7.1 10 Type 13 combination in sump 6.67 6 30.82 118.46 ® 6.4 80 Area inlet -pipe grate 3.62 6.3 70 Area inlet 4.71 6.2 40 4' Type R curb inlet in sump 4.80 6.1 60 15' Type R curb inlet in sump 17.69 31 27.29 145.75 5.3 40 4' Type R curb inlet in sump 4.80 5.2 60 15' Type R curb inlet In sump 17.69 5.1 40 4' Type R curb inlet in sump 4.80 ' 5 (Line B inflow) 6.59 152.34 4 (Line A inflow) 13.00 165.34 4 4.80 170.14 ' 4.1 40 4' Type R curb inlet in sump 4.80 3 14.40 184.54 3.3 40 4' Type R curb inlet in sump 4.80 ' 3.2 40 4' Type R curb inlet in sump 4.80 3.1 40 4' Type R curb inlet in sump 4.80 ' 2 2.7 70 Area inlet 4.71 43.35 227.89 2.4 20 DoubleType 13 combination in sump 12.65 2.3 20 DoubleType 13 combination in sump 12.65 2.2 10 Type 13 combination in sump 6.67 ' 2.1 10 Type 13 combination in sump 6.67 1 6.67 234.56 1.1 10 Type 13 combination in sump 6.67 0 6.67 241.23 0.1 10 Type 13 combination in sump 6.67 otes: (r) Next D/S manhole or node (numbers 1-19 from Stewart. & Assoc.). (2) Reach discharge = sum of inlet capacities in U/S pipe reach. (3) Total discharge = reach discharge plus U/S total discharge. 22•Apr-96 r [1 1 1 OPEN CHANNEL FLOW ANALYSIS: FLOW IN A PIPE Developed by Dr James Guo, Civil Eng Dept, U of Colorado at Denver Metro Denver Cities/Counties and UDBFCD Pool Fund Study User= KEVIN GINGERY RBD INC. FT. COLLINS COLORADO ............................. ON DATE 11-27-1995 AT TIME 12:43:58 ** PROJECT TITLE: Future conveyance element 204 ** DESIGN INFORMATION PIPE (EQUIVALENT) DIAMETER(INCHES) = 18.00 PIPE ROUGHNESS MANNING N = 0.013 . PIPELINE SLOPE (FT/FT) = 0.0040 DESIGN FLOW RATE (CFS) = 6.65 ** NORMAL FLOW CONDITIONS: FLOW CENTRAL ANGLE (DEGREE) = 359.28 FLOW DEPTH (FEET) = 1.50 FLOW AREA (SO FEET) = 1.77 FLOW VELOCITY (FPS) = 3.77 SPECIFIC ENERGY (FT) = 1.72 SPECIFIC FORCE (KLB) = 0.13 FLOW FROUDE NUMBER = 0.00 NOTE: FROUDE NUMBER=O MEANS FLOWING FULL. ** CRITICAL FLOW CONDITIONS : FLOW CENTRAL ANGLE (DEGREE) = 218.621 FLOW DEPTH (FEET) = 1.00 FLOW AREA (SO FEET) = 1.25 FLOW VELOCITY (FPS) = 5.33 MINIMUM SPECIFIC ENERGY (FT) = 1.44 MINIMUM SPECIFIC FORCE (KLB) = 0.11 SLOPE (FT/FT) = 0.0065 r. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CLIENT �1'�y /Jf'�'✓yri- KD Cy JOB NO. >�-1-0^ J INC PROJECT W a �f c n. a t'ON S CALCULATIONS FOR j' D CM II(:+ 111 Engineering Consultants MADE BYA!�rDATE 1/ HECKED BY- DATE SHEETD:::7z3F am I P'2� REPORT OF STORM SEWER SYSTEM DESIGN ' USING UDSEWER-MODEL VERSION 4 DEVELOPED BY JAMES C.Y. GUO ,PHD, PE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER ' IN COOPERATION WITH URBAN DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT DENVER, COLORADO 1 *** EXECUTED BY DENVER CITY/COUNTY USE ONLY ............................................. ON DATA 04-22-1996 AT TIME 11:40:58 *** PROJECT TITLE : Existing storm drain system - FFM 8 Mourning sub. *** RETURN PERIOD OF FLOOD IS 100 YEARS th oxie-j ct{' -6Ime o-p j 0vv Art? t-c"v% :�e a, k (`k n.o- ;p ' *** SUMMARY OF HYDRAULICS AT MANHOLES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MANHOLE CNTRBTING RAINFALL RAINFALL DESIGN GROUND WATER COMMENTS ID NUMBER AREA * C DURATION INTENSITY PEAK FLOW ELEVATION ELEVATION MINUTES INCH/HR CFS FEET FEET ----------- ----------------------------------------------------- -- - 0.01 241.23 4994.00 4993.33 OK 1.00 234.56 4994.00 4994.48 NO 2.00 227.89 4996.00 4998.52 NO 3.00 184.54 5001.00 5003.96 NO 4.00 170.14 5003.50 5007.15 NO 5.00 152.34 5007.50 5009.94 NO 31.00 145.75 5008.00 5011.06 NO 6.00 118.46 5009.00 5012.30 NO 7.00 87.64 5013.20 5014.01 NO 8.00 66.20 5013.20 5015.09 NO 9.00 66.20 5018.50 5015.50 OK ' 10.00 - .55.03 5021.70 5015.69 OK 21.00 34.52 5029.00 5015.76 OK 22.00 34.52 5025.20 5018.09 OK 23.00 29.81 5028.50 5019.76 OK 24.00 16.47 5026.00 5020.29 OK ' 25.00 16.47 5026.00 5020.30 OK OK MEANS WATER ELEVATION IS LOWER THAN GROUND ELEVATION ' *** SUMMARY OF SEWER HYDRAULICS NOTE: THE GIVEN FLOW DEPTH -TO -SEWER SIZE RATIO= 1 -- ...--- - '-------------- ------- ------------------ - -------- SEWER MAMHOLE NUMBER SEWER REQUIRED SUGGESTED EXISTING ID NUMBER UPSTREAM DNSTREAM SHAPE DIA(HIGH) DIA(HIGH) DIA(HIGH) WIDTH --- ---- 1.00 - ID -NO.- - 1.00 ID NO. -'- ---- 0.01 ---. - ARCH (IN) (FT) 55.42 (IN) (FT) 60.00 (IN)(FT) - 45.00 (FT) ------- 73.00 12,00 2.00 1.00 ARCH 61.19 66,00 45.00 73.00 23.00 3.00 2.00 ARCH 56.54 60.00 45.00 73.00 34.00 4.00 3.00 ROUND 54.64 60.00 60.00 0.00 45.00 5.00 4.00 ROUND 51.54 54.00 60.00 0.00 Sur-cha.r6e.j .wzd� Iw (es i't✓f�r� S-i�t n'4�- v f ct Aver one, u I ' 531.00 31.00 5.00 ROUND 50.70 54.00 60.00 0.00 316.00 6.00 31.00 ROUND 46.90 48.00 60.00 0.00 67.00 7.00 6.00 ROUND 43.76 48.00 54.00 0.00 78.00 8.00 7.00 ROUND 39.77 42.00 54.00 0.00 89.00 9.00 8.00 ROUND 35.77 36.00 54.00 0.00 910.00 10.00 9.00 ROUND 27.99 30.00 54.00 rY 0.00 1021.00 21.00 10,00 ROUND 31,79 33.00 48.00 0.00 ' 2122.00 22.00 21.00 ROUND 29.33 30.00 48.00 0.00 2223.00 23.00 22.00 ROUND 27.76 30.00 48.00 0.00 2324.00 24.00 23.00 ROUND 22.22 24.00 48.00 0.00 2425.00 25.00 24.00 ROUND 22.22 24.00 48.00 0.00 ' DIMENSION UNITS FOR ROUND AND ARCH SEWER ARE IN INCHES DIMENSION UNITS FOR BOX SEWER ARE IN FEET REQUIRED DIAMETER WAS DETERMINED BY SEWER HYDRAULIC CAPACITY. ' SUGGESTED DIAMETER WAS DETERMINED BY COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE SIZE. FOR A NEW SEWER, FLOW WAS ANALYZED BY THE SUGGESTED SEWER SIZE; OTHERWISE, EXISITNG SIZE WAS USED -'-----------"'----------------------------------------------------------- SEWER DESIGN FLOW NORMAL. NORAAL CRITIC CRITIC FULL FROUDE COMMENT ID FLOW Q FULL 0 DEPTH VLCITY DEPTH VLCITY VLCITY NO. - NUMBER CFS CFS FEET FPS FEET FPS FPS 1.0 234.6 278.1 3.46 16.42 4.27 13.77 12.35 1.62 V-OK 12.0 227.9 207.4 4.92 12.00 4.23 13.49 12.00 0.00 V-OK 23.0 184.5 207.4 3.61 12.35 3.90 14.12 9.72 1.17 V-OK ' 34.0 170.1 216.9 3.33 12.23 3.74 11.71 8.67 1,25 V-OK 45.0 152.3 229.2 2.98 12.49 3.54 11.45 7.76 1.40 V-OK 531.0 145.8 229.2 2.90 12.37 3.54 10.25 7.42 1.41 V-OK 316.0 118.5 229.2 2.55 11.77 3.10 11.40 6.03 1.46 V-OK 67.0 87.6 154.0 2.43 10.00 2.73 11.71 5.51 1.26 V-OK 78.0 66.2 150.2 2.09 9.14 2.39 10.20 4.16 1.27 V-OK 89.0 66.2 199.1 1.79 11.25 2.39 7.71 4.16 1.72 V-OK 910.0 55.0 318.6 1.27 15.00 2.22 8.45 3.46 2.78 V-OK 1021.0 34.5 103.9 1.59 7.43 1.77 10.29 2.75 1.20 V-OK ' 2122.0 34.5 128.8 1.41 8.69 1,77 6,46 2.75 1.50 V-OK 2223.0 29.8 128.8 1.31 8.34 1.66 7.01 2.37 1.50 V-OK 2324.0 16.5 128.8 0.97 7.04 1.23 9.08 1.31 1.50 V-OK 2425.0 16.5 128.8 0.97 7.04 1.23 5.02 1.31 1.50 V-OK ' FROUDE NUMBER=O INDICATES THAT A PRESSURED FLOW OCCURS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ' SEWER SLOPE INVERT ELEVATION BURIED DEPTH - COMMENTS ID NUMBER UPSTREAM DNSTREAM UPSTREAM DNSTREAM % (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.00 1.24 4989.35 4987.74 0.90 2.51 NO 12.00 0.69 4990.70 4989.35 1.55 0.90 NO 23.00 0.69 4992.56 4990.90 4.69 1.35 NO 34.00 0.69 4995.25 4992.56 3.25 3.44 OK 45.00 0.77 4999.02 4995.46 3.48 3.04 OK 531.00 0.77 4999.71 4999.02 3.29 3,48 OK 316.00 0.77 5000.50 4999.71 3.50 3.29 OK 67.00 0.61 5003.54 5000.68 5.16 3.82 OK 78.00 0.58 5004.76 5003.73 ' 3.94 4.97 OK 89.00 1.02 5008.00 5004.96 6.00 3.74 OK ' 910.00 2.61 5012.20 5008.15 5.00 5.85 OK 1021.00 0.52 5013.90 5012.77 11.10 4.93 OK 2122.00 0.80 5016.32 5014.20 4.88 10.80 OK 2223.00 0.80 5018.10 5016.41 6.40 4.79 OK ' 2324.00 0.80 5019.06 5018.20 2.94 6.30 OK 2425.00 0.80 5019.06 5019.06 2.94 2.94 OK OK MEANS BURIED DEPTH IS GREATER THAN REQUIRED SOIL COVER OF 2 FEET *'* SUMMARY OF HYDRAULIC GRADIENT LINE ALONG SEWERS --- - SEWER - ----- ---------- SEWER SURCHARGED ----- ---------' CROWN ELEVATION ------'--------- - WATER ELEVATION ---- FLOW ID NUMBER LENGTH LENGTH UPSTREAM DNSTREAM UPSTREAM DNSTREAM CONDITION FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET 1.00 130.00 130.00 4993.10 4991.49 4994.48 4993.33 PRSS'ED 12.00 195.00 195.00 4994.45 4993.10 4998.52 4994.48 PRSS'ED 23.00 240.00 240.00 4996.31 4994.65 5003.96 4998.52 PRSS'ED 34.00 45.00 390.00 463.00 390.00 463.00 5000,21 5004.02 4997.56 5000.46 5007.15 5009.94 5003.96 5007.15 PRSS'ED PRSS'ED 531.00 90.00 90.00 5004.71 5004.02 5011.06 5009.94 PRSS'ED 316.00 102.00 102.00 5005.50 5004.71 5012.30 5011.06 PRSS'ED 67.00 469.00 469.00 5008.04 5005.18 5014.01 5012.30 PRSS'ED 78.00 177.00 177.00 5009.26 5008.23 5015.09 5014.01 PRSS'ED ' 89.00 298.00 298.00 5012.50 5009.46 5015.50 5015.09 PRSS'ED 910.00 155.00 112.73 5016.70 5012.65 5015.69 5015.50 JUMP 1021.00 218.00 0.00 5017.90 5016.77 5015.76 5015.69 JUMP ' 2122.00 2223.00 265.00 211.00 0.00 0.00 5020.32 5022.10 5018,20 5020.41 5018.09 5019.76 5015.76 5018.09 JUMP JUMP 2324.00 108.00 0.00 5023.06 5022.20 5020.29 5019.76 JUMP 2425.00 0.10 0.00 5023.06 5023.06 5020.30 5020.29 JUMP PRSS'ED=PRESSURED FLOW; JUMP=POSSIBLE HYDRAULIC JUMP; SUBCR=SUBCRITICAL FLOW ' *** SUMMARY OF ENERGY GRADIENT LINE ALONG SEWERS UPST MANHOLE SEWER JUNCTURE LOSSES DOWNST MANHOLE SEWER MANHOLE ENERGY FRCTION BEND BEND LATERAL LATERAL MANHOLE ENERGY ID NO ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ID NO. ELEV FT FT K COEF LOSS FT K COEF LOSS FT ID FT 1.0 1.00 4996.85 1.15 1.00 2.37 0.00 0.00 0.01 4993.33 12.0 2.00 5000.75 1.62 1.02 2.28 0.00 0.00 1.00 4996.85 ' 23.0 3.00 5005.43 1.31 1.02 1.50 0.25 1.87 2.00 5000.75 34.0 4.00 5008.32 1.66 0.05 0.06 0.25 1.18 3.00 5005.43 45.0 5.00 5010.87 1.58 0.05 0.05 0.25 0.93 4.00 5008.32 531.0 31.00 5011.92 0.28 0.05 0.04 0.25 0.72 5.00 5010.87 ' 316.0 6.00 5012.87 0.21 0.05 0.03 0.25 0.71 31.00 5011.92 67.0 7.00 5014.48 0.93 0.50 0.24 0.25 0.45 6.00 5012.87 78.0 8.00 5015.36 0.20 1.02 0.27 0.25 0.40 7.00 5014.48 89.0 9.00 5015.71 0.34 0.30 0.08 0.00 0.00 8.00 1015.36 910.0 10.00 5015.87 0.09 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 9.00 5015.77 1021.0 21.00 5015.88 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 10.00 5015.87 2122.0 22.00 5018.20 2.32 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.00 21.00 5015.88 2223.0 23.00 5019.85 1.54 0.05 0.00 0.25 0.10 22.00 5018.20 2324.0 24.00 5020.32 0.39 0.05 0.00 0.25 0.08 23.00 5019.85 ' 2425.0 25.00[50 0.3 0.00 0.25 0.01 0.00 0.00 24.00 5020.32 4,p!� `�~ SIG✓ SO Z( b ��' BEND LOSS =BEND K* FLOWING FULL VHEAD IN SEWER. LATERAL LOSS= OUTFLOW FULL VHEAD-JCT LOSS K*INFLOW FULL VHEAD '-10akwa,'�r e--•t-'eG�'- FRICTION LOSS=O MEANS IT IS NEGLIGIBLE OR POSSIBLE ERROR DUE TO JUMP. U/s ' FRICTION LOSS INCLUDES SEWER INVERT DROP AT MANHOLE �� d uti��S NOTICE: VHEAD DENOTES THE VELOCITY HEAD OF FULL FLOW CONDITION. A MINIMUM JUCTION LOSS OF 0.05 FT WOULD BE INTRODUCED UNLESS LATERAL K=O. ' FRICTION LOSS WAS ESTIMATED BY BACKWATER CURVE COMPUTATIONS. 1 P I D 2� ______________________________________________________ --------------------------------------- REPORT OF STORM SEWER SYSTEM DESIGN USING UDSEWER-MODEL VERSION 4 ' DEVELOPED BY JAMES C.Y. GUO ,PHD, PE' DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER ' IN COOPERATION WITH URBAN DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT DENVER, COLORADO ' *** EXECUTED BY DENVER CITY/COUNTY USE ONLY ............................................. ON DATA 04-22-1996 AT TIME 11:54:05 *** PROJECT TITLE Existing storm drain system - FFM & Mourning sub. �i��o�C.�eO` Gl c �' "Ne *** RETURN PERIOD OF FLOOD IS 100 YEARS *** SUMMARY OF HYDRAULICS AT MANHOLES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MANHOLE CNTRBTING RAINFALL RAINFALL DESIGN GROUND WATER COMMENTS ID NUMBER AREA * C DURATION INTENSITY PEAK FLOW ELEVATION ELEVATION MINUTES INCH/HR CFS FEET FEET ----------- - - 0.01 105.30 4994.00 4990.36 OK 1.00 105.30 4994.00 4992.28 OK 2.00 105.30 4996.00 4993.63 OK 3.00 105.30 5001.00 4995.49 OK 4.00 105.30 5003.50 4998.17 OK 5.00 105.30 5007.50 5001.94 OK 31.00 105.30 5008.00 5002.63 OK 6.00 105.30 5009.00 5003.42 OK 7.00 105.30 5013.20 5006.55 OK 8.00 105.30 5013.20 5007.77 OK ' 9.00 105.30 5018.50 5011.01 OK 10.00 105.30 5021.70 5015.21 OK 21.00 .105.30 5029.00 5017.30 OK 22.00 105.30 5025.20 5019.43 OK 23.00 105.30 5028.50 5021.21 OK ' 24.00 105.30 5026.00 5022.17 OK 25.00 105.30 5026.00 5022.44 OK OK MEANS WATER ELEVATION IS LOWER THAN GROUND ELEVATION ' *** SUMMARY OF SEWER HYDRAULICS NOTE: THE GIVEN FLOW DEPTH -TO -SEWER SIZE RATIO= 1 SEWER NAMHOLE NUMBER SEWER REQUIRED SUGGESTED EXISTING ID NUMBER UPSTREAM DNSTREAM SHAPE DIA(HIGH) DIA(HIGH) DIA(HIGH) WIDTH ID NO_ ID N0. (IN) (FT) (IN) (IN) (FT) ' ----------- 1.00 1.00 ---------------- 0.01 -- ARCH 41.04 -(FT) 42.00 45.00 -(FT) --- 73.00 12,00 2.00 1,00 ARCH 45.81 48.00 45.00 73,00 23.00 3.00 2.00 ARCH 45.81 48.00 45.00 73.00 34.00 4.00 3.00 ROUND 45.81 48.00 60.00 0.00 p 45.00 5.00 4.00 ROUND 44.88 48.00 60.00 0.00 I D-ZS ' 131.00 31.00 5.00 ROUND 44.811 48.00 60.00 0.00 316.00 6.00 31.00 ROUND 44.88 48.00 60.00 0.00 67.00 7.00 6.00 ROUND 46.88 48.00 54.00 0.00 78.00 8.00 7.00 ROUND 47.33 48.00 54.00 0.00 89.00 9.00 8.00 ROUND 42.57 48.00 54.00 0.00 910.00 10.00 9.00 ROUND 35.70 36.00 54.00 0.00 ' 1021.00 21.00 10.00 ROUND 48.30 54.00 48.00 0.00 2122.00 22.00 21.00 ROUND 44.56 48.00 48.00 0.00 2223.00 23.00 22.00 ROUND 44.56 48.00 48.00 0.00 2324.00 24.00 23.00 ROUND 44.56 48.00 48.00 0.00 2425.00 25.00 24.00 ROUND 44.56 48.00 48.00 0.00 DIMENSION UNITS FOR ROUND AND ARCH SEWER ARE IN INCHES DIMENSION UNITS FOR BOX SEWER ARE IN FEET REQUIRED DIAMETER WAS DETERMINED BY SEWER HYDRAULIC CAPACITY. SUGGESTED DIAMETER WAS DETERMINED BY COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE SIZE. FOR A NEW SEWER, FLOW WAS ANALYZED BY THE SUGGESTED SEWER SIZE; OTHERWISE, EXISITNG SIZE WAS USED --- -------- ---------- ------ -------- -------- --1--1---- ---1-----------------....--- SEWER DESIGN FLOW NORMAL NORAML CRITIC CRITIC FULL FROUDE COMMENT ID FLOW 0 FULL Q DEPTH VLCITY DEPTH VLCITY VLCITY NO. NUMBER CFS CFS FEET FPS FEET FPS FPS 1.0 105.3 278.1 2.10 13.62 2.93 8.92 5.55 1.90 V-OK 12.0 105.3 207.4 2.48 10.97 2.93 8.92 5.55 1.38 V-OK 23.0 105.3 207.4 2.48 10.97 2.93 8.92 5.55 1.38 V-OK 34.0 105.3 216.9 2.46 10.96 2.92 8.85 5.36 1.39 V-OK t 45.0 105.3 229.2 2.38 11.42 2.92 8.85 5.36 1.48 V-OK 531.0 105.3 229.2 2.38 11.42 2.92 8.85 5.36 1.48 V-OK 316.0 105.3 229.2 2.38 11.42 2.92 8A5 5.36 1.48 V-OK 67.0 105.3 154.0 2.73 10.43 3.01 9.31 6,62 1.21 V-OK 78.0 105.3 150.2 2.78 10.22 3.01 9.31 6.62 1.17 V-OK 89.0 105.3 199.1 2.33 12.70 3.01 9.31 6.62 1.65 V-OK 910.0 105.3 318.6 1.78 17.97 3.01 9.31 6.62 2.74 V-OK 1021.0 105.3 103.9 4.00 8.38 3.11 10.06 8.38 0.00 V-OK 2122.0 105.3 128.8 2.75 11.43 3.11 10.06 8.38 1.28 V-OK t 2223.0 105.3 128.8 2.75 11.43 3.11 10.06 8.38 1.28 V-OK 2324.0 105.3 128.8 2.75 11.43 3.11 10.06 8.38 1.28 V-OK 2425.0 105.3 128.8 2.75 11.43 3.11 10.06 8.38 1.28 V-OK FROUDE NUMBER=O INDICATES THAT A PRESSURED FLOW OCCURS ' ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SEWER ID NUMBER SLOPE INVERT ELEVATION BURIED UPSTREAM DNSTREAM UPSTREAM DEPTH COMMENTS DNSTREAM % (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.00 1.24 4989.35 4987.74 0.90 2.51 NO 12.00 0.69 4990.70 4989.35 1.55 0.90 NO ' 23.00 0.69 4992.56 4990.90 4.69 1.35 NO 34.00 0.69 4995.25 4992.56 3.25 3.44 OK 45.00 0.77 4999.02 4995.46 3.48 3.04 OK ' 531,00 316.00 0.77 4999,71 0.77 5000.50 4999,02 4999.71 3,29 3.50 3,48 OK 3.29 OK 67.00 0.61 5003.54 5000.68 5.16 3.82 OK 78.00 0.58 5004.76 5003.73 3.94 4.97 OK 89.00 1.02 5008.00 5004.96 6.00 3.74 OK 910.00 2.61 5012.20 5008.15 5.00 5.85 OK ' 1021.00 0.52 5013.90 5012.77 11.10 4.93 OK 2122.00 0.80 5016.32 5014.20 4.88 10.80 OK 2223.00 0.80 5018.10 5016.41 6.40 4.79 OK 2324.00 0.80 5019.06 5018.20 2.94 6.30 OK ' 2425.00 0.80 5019.06 5019.06 2.94 2.94 OK OK MEANS BURIED DEPTH IS GREATER THAN REQUIRED SOIL COVER OF 2 FEET *** SUMMARY OF HYDRAULIC GRADIENT LINE ALONG SEWERS ___ SEWER -___ _ -- ------------------------------------------------ SEWER SURCHARGED CROWN ELEVATION WATER ELEVATION FLOW ID NUMBER LENGTH LENGTH UPSTREAM DNSTREAM UPSTREAM DNSTREAM CONDITION FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET 1.00 130.00 0.00 4993.10 4991.49 4992.28 4990.36 JUMP 12.00 195.00 0.00 4994.45 4993.10 4993.63 4992.28 JUMP 23.00 240.00 0.00 4996.31 4994.65 4995.49 4993.63' JUMP 34.00 390.00 0.00 1000*25 4997,16 4998*17 4995*49 JUMP ' 45.00 463.00 0.00 5004.02 5000.46 5001.94 4998.17 JUMP 531.00 90.00 0.00 5004.71 5004.02 5002.63 5001.94 JUMP 316.00 102.00 0.00 5005.50 5004.71 5003.42 5002.63 JUMP 67.00 469.00 0.00 5008.04 5005.18 5006.55 5003.42 JUMP 78.00 177.00 0.00 5009.26 5008.23 5007.77 5006.55 JUMP ' 89.00 298.00 0.00 5012.50 5009.46 5011.01 5007.77 JUMP 910.00 155.00 0.00 5016.70 5012.65 5015.21 5011.01 JUMP 1021.00 218.00 0.00 5017.90 5016.77 5017.30 5015.21 PRSSIED ' 2122.00 2223.00 265.00 211.00 0.00 0.00 5020.32 5022.10 5018.20 5020.41 5019.43 5017.30 5021.21 5019.43 JUMP JUMP 2324.00 108.00 0.00 5023.06 5022.20 5022.17 5021.21 JUMP 2425.00 0.10 0.00 5023.06 5023.06 5022.44 5022.17 JUMP ' PRSSIED=PRESSURED FLOW; JUMP=POSSIBLE HYDRAULIC JUMP; SUBCR=SUBCRITICAL FLOW *** SUMMARY OF ENERGY GRADIENT LINE ALONG SEWERS -----------------"'----------------------------------------------------------- UPST MANHOLE SEWER JUNCTURE LOSSES DOWNST MANHOLE SEWER MANHOLE ENERGY FRCTION BEND BEND LATERAL LATERAL MANHOLE ENERGY ID NO ID NO. ELEV FT FT K COEF LOSS FT K COEF LOSS FT ID FT ----'----- 1.0 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.00 4992.76 1.92 1.00 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.01 4990.36 12.0 2.00 4994.11 0.86 1.02 0.49 0.00 0.00 1.00 4992.76 ' 23.0 3.00 4995.97 1.01 .1.02 0.49 0.25 0.36 2.00 4994.11 34.0 4.00 4998.62 2.26 0.05 0.02 0.25 0.37 3.00 4995.97 45.0 5.00 5002.39 3.41 0.05 0.02 0.25 0.33 4.00 4998.62 531.0 31.00 5003.08 0.33 0.05 0.02 0.25 0.33 5.00 5002.39 ' 316.0 6.00 5003.87 0.43 0.05 0.02 0.25 0.33 31.00 5003.08 67.0 7.00 5007.23 2.75 0.50 0.34 0.25 0.28 6.00 5003.87 78.0 8.00 5008.45 0.01 1.02 0.69 0.25 0.51 7.00 5007.23 89.0 9.00 5011.69 3.04 0.30 0.20 0.00 0.00 8.00 5008.45 910.0 10.00 5015.89 4.17 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 9.00 5011.69 ' 1021.0 21.00 5018.39 2.44 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 10.00 5015.89 2122.0 22.00 5020.52 2.04 0.08 0.09 0.00 0.00 21.00 5018.39 2223.0 23.00 5022.30 0.91 0.05 0.05 0.25 0.82 22.00 5020.52 2324.0 2425.0 24.00 5023.26 25.001]023.5 0.09 0.00 0.05 0.25 0.05 0.27 0.25 0.82 23.00 0.00 0.00 24.00 5022.30 5023.26 I V �vct-Eaart SG-26•D� BEND LOSS LATERAL =BEND K* FLOWING FULL VHEAD IN SEWER. LOSS= OUTFLOW FULL VHEAD-JCT LOSS K*INFLOW FULL VHEAD ' FRICTION FRICTION LOSS=O MEANS IT IS NEGLIGIBLE OR POSSIBLE ERROR DUE TO JUMP. LOSS INCLUDES SEWER INVERT DROP AT MANHOLE NOTICE: VHEAD DENOTES THE VELOCITY HEAD OF FULL FLOW CONDITION. A MINIMUM JUCTION LOSS OF 0.05 FT WOULD BE INTRODUCED UNLESS LATERAL K=O. ' FRICTION LOSS WAS ESTIMATED BY BACKWATER CURVE COMPUTATIONS. r 1 t/ WEST ENTRANCE CN.IRONSTR1- UCTONI ,I +.t yENKWEB. i a i / P' lU SHEET NOTES 1 M09FY ARCHITECT OF ANY D16CREPENCIE6 ENCOUNTERED OON N SIT DRAWINGSWHICHVARY FROM THE CONDITIONS SHOWN DETAILSTO OF LEC TRIC eLKAMD MECHANICAL CRAVINGS FOR 3 - GRADE AT PERIMETER OF NEW CONSTRUCTION AS REQUIRED 70 ACHIEVE FINISH PAVING SURFACE ELEVATION T PERIMETER OF THE BUILDING TO MATCH EX16TING4 LIMITS OF CONSTRAFFIC AMP OTER ACTIVITIES . OF THE CONTRACTORION SUB CONTRACTORS, SUPPLIERS ETC. IS DEFINED BY THE CONSTRUCTION FENCE LOCATION INDICATED ON THE SITE PLAN. THE EXCEPTION! ARE NEW THE WORK SMALL BE COORDINATED WITH i E OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE TO MINIMIZE 016ROPTION OF NORMAL ACTIVITIES ON THE SrtE. 5 - THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAIR AND/Oft REPLACEMENT OF ALL PAVING DAMAGED BY THE ACTIVITIES OF THE CONTRACTOR. REFER TO 6PECIFICATION6 SECTION 025D S - ALL CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC &MALL USE THE EXI6TING WEST ENTRANCE ONLY. FjI T ti PcnOYI�c ✓.YSM' YA�• TIM ToLL461 J-- OVERALL SITE / ROOF PLAN P,. 11=3000 SHOWING SITE GR/q DING LEGAL DESCRIPTION VICINITY MAP NTS Lu li 0/F� lul qquuppl �l �y�xI'1 `S N 0 �a WISH. 1,2 I CONSTRUCTION /EwcW" f EXISTING FACILITY FE ESV26V "PUP Ll Q NI W W � Q O I U U � V N U IKx ROCK FJLTER ON TOP OF FILTEF F,�' _TNE hsP X� p[uTIVG "T✓O ^LME"T <qPoE P rvc SITE DEMOLITION PLAN r sm m� SHOW/NG (D EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHEET NOTES ON IFY SITE UNION ECT VARTFANY FROM DTHE CONDIITIONSCIES ENCOUNTERED ON THE DRAWINGS. - REFER TECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL DRAWINGS FOR OF DETAILS WORK. S LIMITS CONTRACTOR CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC AND OTHER ACTIVITIES OF TH E $US CONTRACTORS, SUPPLIERS II+°FCC - ETC IS DEFINEDHBY THE CONSTRUCTION PENCE LOCATION F K p�= t ENCE (',NH Nu) NDILptID ON ! AN THE WORK SHALL BE COORDINATED TOE OWITH THE OWNERS RILES ON T E VE MINIMIZE DISRUPTION O NORMAL ACTIVITIES ON THE SITE F lie- 4 — - -- ALL CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC SHALL USE THE EXISTING WEST ENTRANCE ONLY ENTER eaF TEP4 c FOLD UP U via �NaFttORc, ti" N1THCT?q FENE SECT/ON A -A >NROVGN GRAVELp =R �ro am)e/ RXq� xwm.�sa NIP�`uN. NFPF.. PH INPF Vu TA 0 LIuI Q M�O f z<< go 0 � wv z� mmm DEMOLMO PLAN lso SOFT eT, FF AFF A1,1 RPmPmPPPPF £Ros