Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 02/21/2006Final Drainage Report for Lemay Avenue Estates Fort Collins, Colorado ° !A Mved Repo _ ate 2 Prepared For: Everitt Company 3030 South College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Phone: (970) 226-1500 Prepared By: NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. 420 S. Howes, Suite 202 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Phone: (970)221-4158 Fax: (970) 221-4159 Project Number: 110-004 I I I I I I I I 1 I r n� NORTHERN ENGINEERING October 27, 2005 City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 RE: Lemay Avenue Estates Fort Collins, Colorado Project Number: 110-004 Dear Staff. ADDRESS: PHONE: 970.221.4158 200 S. College Ave. Suite 100 W .ort : wn Fort Collins, CO80524 FAX:970.221.4159 orthernengineering.com Northern Engineering Services, Inc. is pleased to submit this Final Drainage Report for Lemay Avenue Estates for your review. In general, this report serves to document the historical drainage patterns for the site and the proposed drainage design for Lemay Avenue Estates. We understand that review by the City of Fort Collins is to assure general compliance with standardized criteria contained in the Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards. This report was prepared in compliance with technical criteria set forth in the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards manual. If you should have any questions or comments as you review this report, please feel free to contact us at your convenience. Sincerely, NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. Aaron Cvar, P.E. Senior Engineer �p0 I ' Table of Contents ' VICINITY MAP Page I. INTRODUCTION ' 1.1 Objective.......................................................................................... 1 1.2 Mapping and Surveying................................................................... 1 1.3 Site Reconnaissance......................................................................... 1 1 II. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1 Site Location.................................................................................... 1 2.2 Site Description................................................................................ 1 ' III. PRE -DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS 3.1 Major Basin Description.................................................................. 2 - 3.2 Pre -development Drainage Patterns ................................................ 2 IV. POST -DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS 4.1 Post -development Conditions.......................................................... 3 ' 4.2 Design Criteria and References....................................................... 4.3 Hydrologic Criteria.......................................................................... 4 4 4.4 Hydraulic Criteria............................................................................ 4 ' V. 4.5 Detention.......................................................................................... WATER QUALITY 4 5.1 Water Quality Measures and Criteria .............................................. 5 VI. EROSION CONTROL PLAN 6.1 Erosion Control Plan and Criteria .................................................... 5 6.2 Rainfall Erosion Control Plan .......................................................... 5 VII. CONCLUSIONS 7.1 Compliance with Standards............................................................. 6 REFERENCES.......................................................................................... 7 APPENDICES Appendix A — Historic Drainage Exhibit and Calculations Appendix B — Developed Drainage Calculations Appendix C — Street Capacity Calculations Appendix D — Inlet Calculations ' Appendix E — Storm Line Calculations Appendix F — Swale Calculations Appendix G — Detention Pond 303, 304, 305 Calculations Appendix H — SWMM Input Data, SWMM Modeling Output Appendix I — Water Quality Calculations Appendix J — Riprap Calculations Appendix K — Detention Pond Emergency Overflow Weir Calculations BACK MAP POCKET ' Developed Drainage Exhibit I i 1 1 1 1 [l 1 i F L 1 1 n 11 1 1 1 1 i VICINITY MAP i11�\ 1 Final Drainage Report Northern Engineering Services, Inc. Lemay Avenue Estates ' October 27, 2005 Final Drainage Report ' for Lemay Avenue Estates Fort Collins, Colorado ' October 27, 2005 I. INTRODUCTION ' 1.1 Ob; ective This report summarizes the results of a comprehensive analysis of both pre- and post - development hydrologic and hydraulic conditions for the Lemay Avenue Estates site in ' Fort Collins, Colorado. Specifically, this report will serve the following: • Preserve existing drainage release rates and patterns for the site • Minimize any adverse effects downstream of the project due to the developed ' conditions 1.2 Mapping and Surveying The initial land survey of the project site was provided by King Surveyors Incorporated; Windsor, Colorado. The survey was performed in July of 2004. The existing topography was given at a one -foot contour interval. Additionally, existing structures, roadways, ' utilities, etc. were also provided. All vertical elevations have been referenced to City of Fort Collins Benchmark 7-96 located at the southwest corner of Lemay Avenue and Province Drive (elevation = 4959.34, NGVD 1929). Horizontal locations have been ' referenced from Colorado State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 (1992) datum. 1.3 Site Reconnaissance Several site visits have been conducted by Northern Engineering Services, Inc.. Existing drainage patterns and land use were among the items confirmed during these visits. II. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1 Site Location The project site is located south of East Trilby Road and east of South Lemay Avenue in Fort Collins, Colorado. More specifically, the site is located in the northwest corner of the southwestern quarter of Section 18, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 61h Principal Meridian in the City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. The project is bounded to the north by Stanton Creek Subdivision (Second Filing), to the east by Greenstone P.U.D., to the south by a single-family residence, and to the west by Lemay Avenue (See Vicinity Map). 2.2 Site Description The project site is approximately 48.47 acres and has historically been a single-family residence and undeveloped alfalfa field. The existing home and garage are located in the western -central portion of the site. The site soils are primarily loam, and are classified as Hydrologic Group B by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (Loveland Quadrangle). IA 20'easement intersects the eastern property boundary at several locations and contains Page 1 ' Final Drainage Report Northern Engineering Services, Inc. Lemay Avenue Estates October 27, 2005 a sanitary sewer line owned by South Fort Collins Sanitation District. An existing drainage easement for Stanton Creek lies adjacent to the eastern property line also. Existing gas, telephone, overhead utility, fiber optic and irrigation lines run along the western edge of the site in the Lemay Avenue right-of-way. ' III. PRE -DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS 3.1 Maior Basin Description The site is located in the Fossil Creek Drainage Basin, which has recently been revised by the City of Fort Collins. New detention requirements in this basin now restrict the 100- year developed release rate to the 2-year historic rate. The portion of Stanton Creek that runs adjacent to the project site is included in the modeling for the Fossil Creek iDrainageway Planning Study (Study Reach 25). The proposed development will be entirely out of the floodplain boundary and erosion buffer for Stanton Creek; therefore, there are no floodplain considerations for this development. ' The Erosion Buffer Zone for Stanton Creek runs along the East side of the project site, ' and is to be marked in the field with silt fence. The following Erosion Buffer Zone requirements must be met with the proposed project: • Design of any allowed development minimizes disturbance to channel bed and ' banks. • No structures allowed. • No additions to existing structures allowed. • Any fencing is split -rail design and break -away, but cabled. Must be oriented parallel to general flow direction. • No detention or water quality ponds. • No bike or pedestrian paths or trails except as required to cross streams or waterways. • Road, bicycle and pedestrian bridges must span erosion buffer zone. • No fill. • No outdoor storage of materials or equipment. • No driveways or parking areas. • No irrigated vegetation and non-native trees, grasses, or shrubs. • No utilities except as necessary to cross streams or waterways. • No grading or excavation except as required for permitted activities in erosion buffer zone. • No construction traffic except as required for permitted activities in erosion buffer zone. • Any construction in the erosion buffer zone shows that it will not impact the channel stability. 3.2 Pre -development Drainage Patterns The site drains generally from west to east, at slopes ranging from 1.0% to 6.0%, towards Stanton Creek. Slopes directly adjacent to Stanton Creek range from 4:1 to 2.3:1, with the creek running south to north at slopes ranging from 0.4% to 2.2%. Runoff from the existing single-family residence currently flows to the irrigation ditch surrounding the house. This area was not included in the historic calculations, but will be included in the Page 2 Final Drainage Report Northern Engineering Services, Inc. Lemay Avenue Estates ' October 27, 2005 proposed improvements for the site. A historic drainage exhibit along with a Rational ' Method analysis is included with this study. The results of hydrologic estimates and hydraulic analyses are summarized in Table 1. TABLE 1 1 Historic Drainage Outfalls Maximum 2-year Release Area Area Peak Flow Rate Location (cfs) (cfstac) Existing undeveloped field 43.33 7.46 0.17 Off -site drainage from the north has historically been intercepted in a drainage swale that ' runs along the northern edge of the site and discharges directly into Stanton Creek. Drainage from the northeastern portion of Lemay Avenue runs in a roadside swale to the north. Drainage from the southeastern portion of Lemay runs in a roadside swale that discharges to the south. The 100-year floodplain boundary for Stanton Creek has been shown on the drainage exhibit for the project, and will not be altered by this development. The proposed site plan for Lemay Avenue Estates is entirely out of the floodplain boundary and erosion buffer. Release from the detention ponds on -site will be allowed at the bottom of the creek bed. Stanton Creek is dry for the majority of the year, with seasonal releases. Stanton Creek historically flows to Fossil Creek, which ultimately discharges into Fossil Creek Reservoir located east of the site. 1 IV. POST -DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS 4.1 Post -development Conditions The proposed development will include the following: ' • residential lots for single family homes • on -site and off -site roadway improvements • drainage and utility improvements ' Developed drainage patterns will generally follow historic flow paths with drainage traveling from west to east into Stanton Creek. Three detention ponds will be provided on -site to intercept drainage and release discharge at the historical 2-year rate. Detention Ponds 301 and 302 were sized using the computer program SWMM (See Appendix D). Detention Pond 303 was sized using the FAA Method (See Appendix Q. There will be ' two outfalls into Stanton Creek, one from Pond 302 and one from Pond 303. The site hydrology was completed using a Rational C-value of 0.95 for developed areas ' with asphalt, concrete, or roof material. A C-value of 0.50 was used for gravel areas. A C-value of 0.15 was used for lawns and landscaped areas, assuming a sandy soil value, based on NRCS soil mapping of the site. The majority of lots are graded so that drainage ' will be directed to the street or backyard swale. The streets are graded to low points that will discharge into the detention ponds on -site. Additional on -grade inlets have been provided to intercept roadway drainage and discharge into Pond 301. Page 3 Final Drainage Report Northern Engineering Services, Inc. Lemay Avenue Estates ' October 27, 2005 4.2 Design Criteria and References Drainage criteria outlined in both the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual, (SDDCMD and the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (,USDCM by the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District have been referenced for this study. 4.3 Hydrologic Criteria The Rational Method has been used to estimate peak stormwater runoff within the 1 developed site. The minor 2-year and major 100-year design storms have been used in the design of the proposed drainage system, which includes inlets, storm sewer, and surface detention. The FAA Method has been used to size Detention Pond 303. The computer program "UDSWMM2000" by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District has been used to size the Detention Ponds 301 and 302. ' Rainfall intensity data for the Rational Method and the FAA Method has been taken from Figure 3-la updated by the City of Fort Collins in 1999. Rainfall data for SWMM has been taken from Figure 3-1c, also updated by the City of Fort Collins in 1999. 4.4 Hydraulic Criteria The following computer programs have been used in the proposed design of the storm ' systems for the site at final design: • The computer program "Hydraflow" by Intelisolve has been used to design and analyze the storm sewer lines and outlet pipes in final design. • The computer program "F1owMaster v6.1 [614o]" by Haestad Methods has been used to analyze swales and major storm street capacities. ' • The Excel spreadsheet "UD Inlet v1.06a" by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District has been used to analyze inlet sizes. • An Excel spreadsheet based on Urban Drainage and Flood Control Street Capacity equations has been used to analyze street capacities. 4.5 Detention The primary function of the proposed detention ponds is to control release from the overall site such that the maximum allowable release from the historic 2-year storm is observed. Ponds 302 and 303 will also be utilized to provide water quality capture volume in their lower stage. Pond 301 will discharge into a pipe which will daylight at Pond 302. Pond 302 will discharge into Stanton Creek. The release rate from Pond 302 was determined based on the 2-year release from historic basin EX-1 of 7.46 cfs. Since developed basins FI and G2 flow into Stanton Creek undetained, the difference between developed 100-year flows and historic 2-year flows were subtracted from the 7.46 cfs. Also, the release from Pond 303 was subtracted from the 7.46 cfs, leaving Pond 302 with an allowable release rate of 1.0 cfs. Table 2, below summarizes detention pond peak discharges and detention volumes. I ' Page 4 I 11 1 1 Final Drainage Report Northern Engineering Services, Inc. Lemay Avenue Estates October 27, 2005 TABLE 2 Detention Storage Summary Maximum Maximum Detention plus 100-year Water Quality Discharge Capture Volume Pond (cfs) (ac-ft) 301 5.00 6.40 302 1.00 4.32 303 0.50 0.10 Each pond will be controlled by an orifice plate to limit the peak discharge. Additionally, a water quality capture volume will be provided at the bottom of the surface detention Ponds 302 and 303. An outlet box with vertical perforations will control the water quality volume. V. WATER QUALITY 5.1 Water Quality Measures and Criteria The primary water quality method will be built into Detention Ponds 302 and 303. Water quality capture volume (WQCV) will be provided in these ponds in order to remove sediment and other pollutants from developed runoff. Design of these ponds has been based on criteria for a 40-hour dry extended detention basin outlined in the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 3 — Best Management Practices by the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (September 1999). A steel orifice plate with vertical perforations will be built into the outlet structures of these ponds to control the water quality capture volume as shown on the construction drawings for the development. VI. EROSION CONTROL PLAN 6.1 Erosion Control Criteria The erosion control plan presented here is intended to control both wind and rainfall erosion. The Erosion Control Reference Manual for Construction Sites (ECRM), City of Fort Collins, has been referenced for this erosion control plan. 6.2 Rainfall Erosion Control Plan The proposed rainfall erosion control plan during construction will consist of temporary structural erosion control measures. Gravel inlet filters will be placed at all curb inlets (including Type R and Combination). Sediment traps will be placed at all pond outlet structures. Straw bales will be placed in swales at an interval of no less than 200 feet. Silt fencing will be installed at the locations shown on the Grading and Erosion Control Plan. 1 Vegetative erosion control consisting of straw mulch with temporary seeding will be used on all open space areas that are disturbed with this project. All temporary erosion control structures are to remain in place until permanent vegetation has been established. I Page 5 ' Final Drainage Re port eport Northern Engineering Services, Inc. Lemay Avenue Estates October 27, 2005 The proposed erosion control plan after construction will consist of permanent riprap, which will be provided at the locations specified on the construction plans. All open space areas and grass -lined swales will be seeded with seed mixtures as specified in the planset. VII. CONCLUSIONS 7.1 Compliance with Standards All drainage design considerations are in accordance with the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual and the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District's Drainage Criteria Manual. Additionally, drainage stipulations outlined in previous drainage studies and master plans for the area have been strictly followed. Off -site stormwater will be safely routed around the site without being detained. Overall, the drainage system proposed within this report and the supporting construction documents provides adequate conveyance, detention and water quality enhancement for the developed stormwater runoff from the proposed development. Every attempt has been made to minimize any negative impacts on the downstream receiving waters. 1 I I 1 I Page 6 Final Drainage Report Lemay Avenue Estates October 27, 2005 Northern Engineering Services, Inc. REFERENCES 1) Drainage Criteria Manual Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Wright Water Engineers, Inc., Denver, Colorado, Updated June 2001. 2) Erosion Control Reference Manual for Construction Sites, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Hydrodynamics, Inc., January 1991. 3) Fossil Creek Drainage Basin Master Drainageway Planning Study, City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, Simons, Li & Associates, Inc., August, 1982. 4) Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Updated April 1999. Page 7 APPENDIX A [1 ! I I I I ----------------------- ------ -____._____- T ___—___—_—_ ........ 1, STANTON CREEK SUBDIVISION ) {'j 1� �_ (�� \.j \ \ J'/' III t % •I I �� SECOND FILING- i._�� e�' DMY —�•-� �`T� a�";IILa'IIxIR'�l^+!r: rlt'�l ally-� r-s- w�-i_^�•�:.i+� �-rr r'rr, ir+ rfr I W II 6 1 \l i I 1 ! / ,/ // ,�• /� f !!! 1 1! r l, i i I I \ i"1i't. II H t 1 i %' it If II I 1 I I I I I I 1� !I t 7 /', /' /� J/' J //( 1! !1�!►' I I I l 1 Ft :411II1 '� .' � I I I (/ I � I � I I 1 % l�• �// // JJ /''!'�'•'/ � !I % � i i j I I I I 1{ 11 11 I�w�Illj r 11 11 f! I 1 ! ! 1 iI 1 I i I I + / ' i /� ' '' / / 1 1 t , t �I 'I� I '1 ' �i!• nl it I � •1 1 ! I I�I 1 I ! I + I 1• _ , � ,' ,' / / : ;' f !I ! 1 I ' ' /j� 1 �i 6lll 1 1 I I I I l ! 1 / / / % I /' 1. Ij ' / I' I' I i 6 : ' I I I I 7 I ! 1 ! 1 I ! ! /J , ,, ,/ / / /• I 1 / //%, r,. �I 1 II ' I r j i I I I 1 i !' 1 ! f ! /�' /'• 1 s' i f/ ! ! t i I 1 i�r x'i� f It MsiNG 1 / / '� \ �\ '. I 1 f � • I ; i TUPAL f41D I r I / / � , /� i�� /) %, ' ,' � � � �) af'K , 9 / ,//�' r ' 11 l '/ '• / %• ! r 1 rl II.I III 1' 1 �~ "STING WN(LE •' II ! t I I I I t '' / 'I� I I I 5' I STAGo-•IN ELMGPLNN FAMILY\REWDENCE 1 1 �.I )� ' \1 1 I I I :M� r ! li 1 I !� r! r • �' I ! ,/ / i �. / BGiiNDMY X / r_ � t It , r :.ggr. ✓ ' �..' / ,' f I /� /, /' �'' , /�'�/ � j ,/. �/ ,l• , i// � �. / / J 1/ r �i / i i i /' ''� � // ,/ ' r f � �,' tea/• J r' _�' W� rt r w #� ✓W. '..1.-_.� fiY Lam.-. '...-�.:�- �_IrW'_ �, �.. _L:-. .qll.-.a. r .1 Y _. ! MMM ® NORTH 100 D IM 200 300FMH (N EET ) 1 In> - IM ft. LEGEND PRCPDSED WATER MAIN --1I1-- E TNC ATER MAN — M01,06ED SVNEPi MAN • OISTING SEWER MAIN . __.._- E%ISTING STORLI SEWER -- — MOPGSED STWM SEYkR PROPOSED SWALE — MOPERTY SOUNOMY PROPOSED CMTCUR —28 CASTING CMTMR ._...._._ 4924 -- .._-- PROPOSED ORB R GUTTER PROPOSED TYPE R INLET PROPOSED CMBINATM INLET WPRM MNNAM SAWN LABEL MAew v s .am DEWM PONT DI PLAN MRDW „y SAWN BOUNDMY .. MMA .. . GENERAL NOTES: y 1. ALL PIPE LENGTHS ME TRN ONIFA TO 0E31TER C ADJACENT SMUCTURES. CEWM LENGTH M THE PIPE : DDES INCLUDE THE LAYING LENGTH M RASED END SECTIONS. . 2. MANHOLE DIAMETERS NoTE, N PRDfILES REPRESENT MINIMUM SIZES UNLESS RENEWED MPgON£D. 3. PIPES SHOW IN PRMUES REPRESENT NWDE DIAMETERS. A. NL JONTi MUST BE WATrRTMT RUBSER GASKETS MEETING A CIe1 CALL UTILITY NOTIFICMTION CENTER OF COLORA00 0 Iq Se] RR Im w uE Pq�l cN. x� quLv Nn n .lux oax Mt q [CIv.2 rq M uuwwx q uro:gwwP ueuM. uvna City of Fort Collins, Colorado UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL { TTA•. Iw , V ZV Z. I.0 A N - WWWH,Hg.gI =Zv f.>ia ZWIWj1 d3 l�6gE p�p T m U m J - W Z >Q LLu rOn 1a.. r Z W w Oa 5 pZ O0 U� Z O0 U) W Sheet OR4 Of 49 Sheets ° t\\§§ E \{}\{/\) \ 2 o . � \j\/]§/ @ 2 � ,0 WNW � ((/ § 0 03 ! \m0 3 ;|ff§aa§!! CC 0 2 U - k U - � uj Q _ - LL. LU §\ 0 ... \ �}2ara; > LU . % % \\/)_ ..■: � � \{:\: ®®/} )tk/fw wo'- � 3i ) < � I I I @ I I I I @ I I I I I I I @ I I k C? / m -rm;« 2 � 0 E - _ gmaa � o ° § LLI z / §; « :>!aa§@ } �>/z§§§§ ■ ' 0 \ LL 0£_�„ � z z \ ®i;\g@ ;aw§ � & e k 0 _ 0 z ■ i \ _ �k !■q.,� !■;%__ _ _ {E »>o w`� E/ §)7«& ,2o. >> \ ■/ k / ! ��I§22 0 » J- # k £ ! -=§ 11111 oo )!§:@ . 3`®0gR;««« 1 1 1 1 1 a N O LL N L O n 6 y � PC d 6f 10 ,6 a p Yf O' c o� �ovm v a m F E M a m m Q c 0 wd T m (� P t0 NP ¢¢ O IL m O !O Z P N 10 O W �z z z z 'z z O> O � .00. a m o000 a ge P0O. � e_0000 O N O � J CNodm Z � 1 � �' °' � o L� •r po o � v L6 o E a ` N r� om PPm U o 000 N� fi U C O Y O C o� O, i; P InPm U V II Q a mao� P > > U u o a y E °� v 3 30a o c LL LL _H� C 9 IL p N.-Nac X�] E LLC7 OLL �3o1-LLU'yNW O P J F C U O _ P II i. II II P �a m o W WLL(7 [] I I I I [1 I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX B I I 1 1 I 1 1 t 1 1 O Nm rn W NNMfOrOO�OOUI GND GD N fmY ry O C T C O m? LA S S O V I n N N N N l n S S S C to v 6 o a g o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i d c5 qq pp TyCthm v0101Sma CC m mNNN�f�V_aD pp aND ��OO 1�1 (0 V m N Fs y C CC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000 O O w N W1� � � ��OO pp pp (�p O��1�Oppp!((tp01{gN��000OfgO pO qq O O OOO O QO��OyJN ffVV t� j®p pSS W 1(�p� 0011 w iY 9CLj (V ff�� OQO ag 'aQ a �+Y /0 v/ Ym N Q �� � 8 v � OOOO yj 80 S S pppppO 000000 S S 8$aa O m � N � y J o V0 {�. 888� �K� uc 2 N O g 88.8$8Q888$$$888.88 0 0 2 U ci ci ci d 0 o O y d c o 0 0 0 o 0 o o O O O o O O o O O A m U_ N 00 Y W =a 5888�888 $$ 8 " a�sN 0_88888888� 0000000nLu N O ` m L O O N 2 C O LL M A MYi00010N V 17 Cl� �0.-.-G � 0 U g i E o v " oa$ i _ Q IL co as mfDU�O NON W W LLC7 C7 C7200 La g V U' N C O � 'NOb C m --66J1 1 I 1 L I 1 1 1 a LLY>T p� 1p �p�p p� p� �O C 1? nN,1 0 0 0 1 A O. . O I OI . CQ,. . . . g n p 4 () i c O~ E o N mryerna��mn«aln?sO N N m c N N F V V: V O C N Q Z � a m = ~ E aaaaaaaaaaa+��oQQ<aa 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 N N 0 a r p pp pp pp pp pp pp pp pp p p pp p p p 0 „ g X p O p O p p O O p p O O p O p p O O p p O O p p O O p p O O p p O O Q s 0 0 0 0 O 6 old O 0 6 N O O N 0 0 W a J££ 0Ko0000000000O000 W c m OOmYI m Nof QQQ Q QyQQ W .- Q E Nelm m ofui3333333 N N MI Z M 8C4C N�'`Q 10m000000000< ppppp . . . . .COC117 p pplp O y'z N NN. r o Ism �sssssssss a i� �pX jNry �N`Nn000 G a000p1 ss U. O O � � C F E �`{ N O 1� mmh� 1��ajN ID NYi 101'j V (� �m 01�1 OIO� OOr rime ION � b g�e$8$888RR$S�$�8$88 N LLLL � U O J IIOOaa ppppppp p �Op n J W 1 � UOOO � 0000000000000000 ''Ir^ Vf O CC Y O b dodo o d0 o 0 0 0 O o o o 000000 cZ u � N� m P IO O O 10 N� m N � � � 0 -- 0 U > > x cr Y Q U hm> cr o ; r w y II y 11 N O n Q NI fOm�U�❑ W W LL(i U� (75�0 I LJ 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 LL� Y� � m A 1�f Y m N 10 Y r m C 1`I b f0 � 10 1r0 V_ m Y Y A r m m N m r r n N r m tD m m m O �aaaa¢gggaaamaaYaa E z z z z z z z z z z z N z z N z z a a z Za°� O~ Ha Z x�pp8ppppp0pp Npp OC fypp O p G G O a UN W {¢{¢ X p O p O p p O O p p O O p p O O p p O O p p O O p p O O p p Y O p O p p O O Y O O O O O O O O O O O N O O ry 0 0 C C a YY O J Jg000000000001000 1ll A 00 O O i ry`W/J �. 5 � E chi '^omNn � oincimrovizzzzzzz NN¢¢aaa¢am� N ri a z c p 8 m 2 yy�� N N Y NG 9. p 88 p p 0 0 B H S S �p 'f p �p O N G 14 Q > N f�NYION pp pp pp pp pp pp pp pp pp pp pp ppp 10 � dJl EpSp2 AS•'NN�N�0000000 �5�5pp$$ pp O U� IL LL J O Z 0 � m C F E Y m r Nm YIO�Y�OOLM1m M 0O.T- V �mVa�n Nm�(`��OO V" N m r �e `n N /...► s �`yeS98 Ra484P8888 8 S C 2 N p 0 N Q p N N p N 8 p N 8 y� n`� �O Y y� Y �O Y V 0 y C y N IV N g € w N �f. � P"~i Swamm Uocco mmm 000000cc mmmmmmam occ�� 88 m m c c � Q LL 9 .-. 6 8 V angg�u°iryryr�i,g88 n C b p `o 000.��00000 00000 �� o 0 a y C n u OC R� 3^f 3 d f C G y C A LL LL C C � N t�l N C9 U i7 U U x i LL 9 3 O m w ` OLLti h3$F��dJW as U C7Ix c 8 APPENDIX C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # Honholtz Dr. E. Side (design pt. B2) Street Type: Local Q @ Design Point: 2.37 (cfs) FL to FL Distance: 30' Street Slope: 1.00 (%) Curb & Gutter: Drive Over Equation: Q = 0.56(Z/n)S1/2Y8/3 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1 /cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) Calculations: Q, Calculations Q2 Calculations Q3 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z, = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n,=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S, = 0.0100 S2 = 0.0100 S3 = 0.0100 S4 = 0.0100 Y, = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q,= 645 Q2= 11.31 ` Q3= Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # Mountain Home Dr.- N. Side (design pt. C11) Street Type: Local Q @ Design Point: 3.42 (cfs) FL to FL Distance: 30' Street Slope: 1.80 (%) Curb & Gutter: Drive Over Equation: Q = 0.56(Zln)S 1/2y8 / 3 0 = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope Oft) 01 02 03 029* 0.40r 22' 2.00% Calculations: Q, Calculations Q2 Calculations Q3 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z, = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n, = 0.016 n2 = 0.016 n3 = 0.016 n4 = 0.016 S, = 0.0180 S2 = 0-0180 S3 = 0-0180 S4 = 0-0180 Y, = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q2= "176 %=4 Q4= JA I I Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # Woods Landing Dr.- N. Side (design pt. D11) Street Type: Local Q @ Design Point: 2.73 (cfs) FL to FL Distance: 30' Street Slope: 1.30 (%) Curb & Gutter: Drive Over Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)S 11'2y8 13 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope (ft/ft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) 01 02 03 04 0.29' GAY Ur Calculations: Q, Calculations Q2 Calculations Q3 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z, = 50.00 Z2 = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n, = 0,016 n2 = 0.016 n3 = 0.016 n4 = 0.016 S, = 0.0130 S2 = 0.0130 S3 = 0.0130 S4 = 0.0130 Y, = 0.29 Y2 = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q1 = Q2= .50: Results: QTotal = Q1 - Q2 + Q3 + Q4 = 10.61 Reduction Factor = 0.80 QRedu,ed = 8.49 Q @ Design Point = 2.73 Figure 4-2, Fort Collins SDDCM Capacity Status ='..,�:'A6,ceptable :y j, 1 1 1 1 Minor Storm (2-yr) Street Capacity Calculations Design Point # Woods Landing Dr.- S. Side (design pt. D2) Street Type: Local Q @ Design Point: 3.18 (cfs) FL to FL Distance: 30' Street Slope: 1.30 (%) Curb & Gutter: Drive Over Equation: Q = 0.56 (Z / n)S1/2y113 Q = Flow (cfs) Z = 1/cross slope Oft) n= roughness coefficient (0.016) S = street longitudinal slope (ft/ft) oz Calculations: Q, Calculations Qz Calculations Q3 Calculations Q4 Calculations Z, = 50.00 Zz = 10.17 Z3 = 10.17 Z4 = 3.55 n,=0.016 n2=0.016 n3=0.016 n4=0.016 S, = 0.0130 Sz = 0.0130 S3 = 0.0130 S4 = 0.0130 Y, = 0.29 Yz = 0.29 Y3 = 0.40 Y4 = 0.40 Q,= 7.35 Qz= 1.50 Q3= 3 53 Qq- I I 11 I I �1 I I I 1 I I L I I 11 APPENDIX D 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 COMBINATION INLET IN A SUMP Project = 110-004 Inlet ID = A7 Wp L WP Flow Diaection Cvti 117, H �3ete} �ar� '.h of a Unit Inlet L. = 3.33 It Depresslon, If any (not part of upstream Composite Guher) a.. = 2.00 inches ter of Unit Intent No = 1 t Info rmaton r of a Unit Grate W. = 2.00 it Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.W-0.90) A = 0.65 ling Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50) C. (G) = 0.20 i Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Ca (G) = 0.67 i Weir Coel icierd (typical value 3.00) C. (G) = 3.00 Opening Information 1t of Curb Opening in Inches H - 8.00 inches r of Throat (see USDCM Figure STu7 Theta = 90.0 degrees Width for Depression Pan Wp = 5.00 8 ;Ing Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Co (C) = 0.20 Opening Orifice Cceflicterd (typical value 0.67) Cd (C) = 0.67 Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3D-3.00) C. (C) = 3.0D sign Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Q. = 8.5 crs ter Depth for Design Condition Yd = 7.4 inches al Length of Combination Inlet L = 3.33 h a Weir paciy as a Weir without Clogging Q„ = 10.6 cis egging Coefficierd for Multiple Units Ceef = 1.00 egging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.20 pacfy as a Weir with Clogging 0.,,, = 9.7 cis an Ortf ce pachy as an Orifice without Clogging Oct = 18.3 cfs pacify as an Critics with Clogging O..= 14.6 cis ate Capacity for Design with Cleaning Own.. = 9.7 cis orb Opening Inlet CapacOv In a Sump a Weir pacify as a Weir without Clogging Qd= 17.9 cis )gging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 >gging Factor for Multiple Units Clog = 0.20 paciy as a Weir with Clogging 0...= 16.9 cts an Orifice opacity as an Orifice without Clogging Q. = 5.3 cis poetry as an Orifice with Clogging O.. = 5.1 cis ub Opening Capacity for Design with Cloggina O.o.e = 0.0 cis r. h Opening is mneftecti,> wh'da Giale is in ev,, How imbina0nn Inlet Capacity with Cluaaing O. = 9.7 cis ipture Percentage for the Combination inlet C%= 100.00% Note: Unless additional pending depth or spHibig over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% In a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. Inlet- A1.xls, Combos 10/212005, 8:25 AM I 1 11 1 COMBINATION INLET IN A SUMP 11 Project - 110-004 Inlet ID = B1 Will L WP --- y<-___�__f� Cap%I' H Y \ \fir Flow Direction 4ryfer � _ th of a Unit Inlet L. = 3.33 ft Depression, if any (not pan of upstream Composite Gutter) a� = 2.00 inches aer of Unit Inlets No - 2 i of a Unit Grate W. = 2.00 it Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.60-0.90) A = 0.65 ling Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50) C. (G) = 0.20 t Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Cd (G) = 0.67 t Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) C. (G) = 3.00 Opening Information it of Curb Opening in Inches H = 8.00 inches t of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-S) Theta = 90.0 degrees Width for Depression Pan Wp = 5.00 it ling Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) co (C) = 0.20 Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Cd (C) = 0.67 Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) C. (C) = 3.00 sign Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) O. = 15.6 cis der Depth for Design Condition Yd = 8.5 inches at Length of Combination Inbt L = 6.66 it a Weir pacity as a Weir without Clogging O,d = 19.2 cfs gging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef= 1.50 gging Factor for Multiple Unite Clog = 0.15 pacify as a Weir with Clogging O.. = 17.4 cfs an Orifice pocit as an Orifice without Clogging O,i = 39.3 cfs pacifyy as an Orifice with Clogging O.. = 33.4 cfs de Capacity for Desian with Cloaaina cl . = 17A cis is a Weir )apacity as a Weir without Clogging 4. = 28.2 cfs :logging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef= 1.25 :logging Fades for Multiple Units Clog - 0.13 rapacity, as a Weir with Clogging Q. = 26.7 cis is an DrUlce rapacity as an Orifice without Clogging Od - 14.7 cfs rapacity as an Orifice with Clogging O.. = 12.8 cfs :urb Opening Capacity for Design with Clogging O.ci.s = 0.0 cis '.'+u b Opening is innoffective while Grate is in wcirflow_) 7ombinatlon Inlet Capacity with Cloagina O. = 17A cis )airture Percenhae for the Combination Inlet CX = 100.00 % Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture percentage of less than 100% In a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. ' Inlet- B1.xls, Corl 10/21/2005, 8:26 AM J 1 1 1 1 COMBINATION INLET IN A SUMP 11 Project = 110-004 Inlet ID = B2 WP L WP CM 1^ H th of a Unit Inlet I Depression, if any (not pen of upstream Composite Gutter) bar of Unit Inlets e Information h of a Unit Grate Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.60-0.90) girg Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50) , Critics, Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) i Opening Infornabon ht of Curb Opening in Inches s of Throat (aee USDCM Figure ST-5) Width for Depression Pan ging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) Design Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) 'Water Depth for Design Condition Total Length of Combination Inlet As a Weir Capacity as a Weir without Clogging Clogging CoeRcient for Multiple Units Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Capacity as a Weir with Clogging s an OrHke 'rapacity as an Orifice without Clogging apaclty as an Orifice with Clogging fate Ca acit for Deem with Clogging ,achy, as a Weir without Clogging gging Coefficient for Multiple Units gging Fedor for Multiple Units mcity as a Weir with Clogging an Orifice mclly as an Orifice without Clogging mcity as an Cdfice with Clogging . Cur=piny is InneffeMive while Grate is in weir flow Flaw MRedox L. = 3.33 It ar=a = 2.00 inches No = 2 W, = 2.00 It A = 0.65 C. (G) = 0.20 Cd (G) = 0.87 C. (G) = 3.00 H - 8.00 inches Theta = 90.0 degrees We= 5.000 C. (C) = 0.20 Cd (C) = 0.67 C. (C) = 3.00 O,= 12.6 cfs yd= 8.1 inches L = 6.66 0 Q. = 17.8 cis Coef = 1.50 Clog= 0.15 O„ = 16.1 cfs Qa = 38.3 efs Q. = 32.5 cfs O,o,.r.= 16.1 cfs Q.= 26.1 cfs Coal= 1.25 Clog = 0.13 O"= 24.7 cfs O,, = 14.0 cfs O,.= 12.2 cfs O.u.ee 0.0 cfs O. = 16.1 cis C%= 100.00 % Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb is acceptable, a capture parcentage of less than 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. Inlet- B2.xls, Combos 10/212005, 8:26 AM t I 1 1 C 1 1 1 Project - 110-004 Inlet ID = C1 COMBINATION INLET IN A SUMP L WP Wp ,y„(___y, CUA I- H 4tah � Flax, Direction A of a Unit Inlet L, = 3.33 It Depression, if any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) aKKv = 2.00 inchos ter of Unit Inlets No = 2 t Information i of a Unit Grate W. = 2.00 it Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical valued 0.60.0.90) A - 0.65 ling Factor for a Single Grade (typical value 0.50) C. (G) = 0.20 i Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Cd (G) = 0.67 i Weir Coefficient (typical] value 3.00) C. (G) = 3.00 Opening Information it of Curb Opening in Inches H - 8.00 inches r of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta - 90.0 degrees Width for Depression Pan Wo = 5.00 it ling Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Ca (C) = 0.20 Opening Critics Coefficient (typical value 0.67) C. (C) = 0.67 Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) C. (C) = 3.0D esign Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Q. = 15.1 Ms later Depth for Design Condition Yd - 8.5 inches )tat Length of Combination Inlet L - 6.66 fl a a Weir opacity as a Weir without Clogging Ow' 19.0 ofs logging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coal= 1.50 logging Factor for Multiple Units Clog - 0.15 apacity as a Weir with Clogging O„' 17.2 cis s an Ortfke apaclty as an Critics without Clogging Qw. 39.1 cis apacity as an Orfice with Clogging (:1- 33.3 ofs rate Capacity for Desian with Clooaina cl l = 17.2 ds urb Opening Inlet Capacity In a Sump s a Weir apacity as a Weir without Clogging Cw= 27.9 cis logging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coal = 1.25 logging Factor for Multiple Units Clog : 0.13 opacity as a Weir with Clogging O„,= 26.4 ds s an Orifice opacity as an Orifice without Clogging Oa = 14.6 cis apacti, as an Orifice with Clogging Q,,, = l Zit cis urb Openina Capacity for Design with Clongirst Q.C. = 0.0 cis 'Orb Opening is inneffodive while Grate is in welt flow l ombination Inlet Capacity With Clopping 0, = 17.2 cis apture Percentage for the Combination Inlet C%= 100.00 % Note: Unless additional ponding depth or spilling over the curb Is acceptable, a capture percentage of lase then 100% in a sump may indicate the need for additional inlet units. Inlet- C1.)ds, Combo-S 10/21/2005, 8:26 AM I Project: 110-004 Inlet ID: Dt WP L WP <--- ----- ><----3<-_ -! culb r^ H Eirffy,-� of Grate :h of a Single Unit Grate i of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W from Sheet Hy) ling Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical value = 0.5) ling Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical value = 0.1) Depression, If any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) Number of Units in the Combination Inlet 'n Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) r Depth for Design Condition Length of Inlet Grate 8 Curb Opening of Grate Flow to Design Flow E. Velocity Vs (from Street Hy) In -over Velocity V.: Check Against Flow Velocity V. Under No -Clogging Condition Interception Rate of Gutter Flow Interception Rate of Side Flow Rx (from Street Hy) Interception Capacity Clogging Condition ig Coefficient for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet ig Factor for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet e (unclogged) Length of Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Ytion Rate of Side Flow Rx (from Street Hy) Interception Capacity )ver Flow = Q.-0, (to be applied to curb opening) it Slope S. (based on grate carry-over) Length Lr to Have 100% Interception Coefficient Factor for Multiple -unit Curb Opening Inlet (Unclogged) Length No -Clogging Condition a Length of Curb Opening Inlet (must be < LT) ption Capacity Clogging Condition Interception Capacity er Flow = Q. -Q. Percentage = G V0, _ Flow Dilectins, Type = Retiouline L. _ 3.33 R W. = , 2.00 It C.-G = 0.20 C.-C = 0.20 area = " 2.11 inches No- 2 Q.=.. :14.1 cfs Yd = `. 7.6 inches L = i 7 6.67 It E. = - 0.33 V. _ ' 4.34 fps V. is: =greater than Vs Rf= r :..1.00 R, = 0.71 Q; _ 11 A cis Coef = 1.50 Clog = _ 0.15 L. _ :. 5.67 It R. 0.63 Q. _ 16.8: cfs S. = 0.0865: Wit LT = 17.14 R Coef = 1.25 Clog = O,13. L. = ': : 9.83' It L = 0.67 It 0i = 1.0 cis 0. Q9l cfs %. 2.6-.cfs Inlet- D1.As, Combo-G 6113/20o5, 4:57 PM 11 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 i i 1 1 1 1 i 11 11 Project: 11"04 Inlet ID: 02 WP L WP Flow Dineclion CVA of Grate Type= Reticuliha-'-' In of a Single Unit Grate L. = 3:3;i', it i of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W from Street Hy) Wo = 2.00. R ling Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical value = 0.5) Co G = D20'. ling Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical value - 0.1) C,C = 0.20 Depression, If any (not part of upstream Composite Gutter) a[... = 2..10 inches Number of Units in the Combination Inlet No- --'' 2'. In Discharge on the Street (from Street Hy) Q. = 1Z.f cfs r Depth for Design Condition Yd = 7.4y inches Length of Inlet Grate & Curb Opening L = 6.67. R of Grate Flow to Design Flow Ea E. = ...: Q.35: Velocity Vs (from Street Hy) V, = 274 fps rover Velocity V,: Check Against Flow Velocity V, V. is: greater MM ys i tr No -Clogging Condition option Rate of Gutter Flow Rr option Rate of Side Flaw Rx (from Sheet Hy) Rx = A7S: option Capacity Q, _ 10.0-cis �r Clogging Condition ling Coefficient for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Cost = 150I ling Factor for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Clog = OAS. tive (unclogged) Length of Multiple-unit Grate Inlet L, = 5.¢Z-.. E option Rate of Side Flow Rx (from Street Hy) Rx = Qm d Interception Capacity Q. = rOver Flow = Q.-Q. (to be applied to curb opening) Q=.e = ,.:::-.cia:2< 'cis lent Slope S. (based on grate carry-over) S. = OMNI: Wit ad Length LT to Have 100% Interception LT = 15.01 it ig Coefficient Coef= '1,25 tg Factor for Multiple -unit Curb Opening Inlet Clog = 0.13 a (Unclogged) Length 4 = ` 5,83 it No -Clogging Condition re Length of Curb Opening Inlet (must be < LT) L = 6.67 It ption Capacity O, = 0.9 cis Clogging Condition Interception Capacity Q. eft Dver Flow = Qc -Q. = Qb = -------------- 1.,9 cfs e Percentage = Q,/% = C% _ :it143:I % 1 Inlet- D2.xls, Com(w-G 6/13/2005, 4:55 PM I APPENDIX E I 1 1 0 0 t� n U M t/1 C J C Z N N I-- U cM (0 43 O a-+ U U) Z ai M .o a Storm Sewer Summary Report z("ozv�A A page I. 1 1 1 1 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (it) (ft) (ft) N (ft) (it) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Pipe109 8.50 15 c 115.7 4917.00 4918.16 1.002 4918.W 4920.09' 0.71 4920.80 End 2 PIpe108 8.50 15 c 134.1 4920.75 4925.40 3.468 4921.53 4926.54 n/a 4926.54 1 Project File: New.stm Number of lines: 2 Run Date: 01-04-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 2 Yrs. ;'Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; j - Line contains hW. jump. Horaflm Sfmm Sewma 2W5 N J c o N w 111 v rnW E o ui W 1 N "' N� N O N N n In tr + t cc cc m Ln C O N r O N N + C O O O O O O O d W v co v v cm v v F' Z n o J N N N C J N d Z ti 2 r o m m ' Storm Sewer Summary Report Page , 1 1 1 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (it) (ft) (ft) N (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 Pipe75 28.10 24 c 35.3 4929.32 4929.46 0.397 4931.15' 4931.77• 0.19 4931.96 End 2 Plpe74 12.60 18 c 34.3 4929.46 4929.60 0.408 4932.41' 4932.90' 0.40 4933.30 1 Line B Number of lines: 2 Run Date: 06-23.2005 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period =100 Yrs. ;'Surcharged (HGL above crown). Hydmflow Storm Sewers 2005 W In dNl�ll ms� I MINIM 0 0 0 0 N 01 com w �0p 0i M IV 00 G V 1� N No Text Storm Sewer Summary Report I SToizM C Page 1 I 1 I Line No. Line ID Flow rate (Cfs) Line size (in) Line length (it) Invert EL Dn (it) Invert EL Up (ft) Line slope N HGL down (it) HGL up (ft) Mirror loss (ft) HGL Junct (it) Dns line No. 1 Pipel06 15.10 15 c 105.7 4934.00 4939.73 5.419 4935.24 4940.97 Na 4940.97 End Storm C Number of lines: 1 Run Date: 01-04-2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 2 Yrs. i Hydraflow Storm S� 2005 J CID 0 n IT M O I W W 1 O 0 �0 V1 0 0 O 00 o ti o co r cc d lx `. o LO 0 v 0 M l0 7 O N + O cc 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d W O O O O I 1 n 0 N N ,11`! Y' N t/J N C J O Z T 0 N r �7 cn V/ G 0 M a F:5 ' Storm Sewer Summary Report "e7reV t- ` J> page , 1 1 1 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns No. rate size length EL Dn EL Up slope down up loss Junct line (cfs) (in) (ft) (it) (ft) N (ft) (ft) (it) (it) No. 1 Pipe104 26.20 18 c 87.6 4928.62 4938.01 10.714 4929.64 4939.50 1.71 4939.50 End 2 PIpe103 12.10 18 c 3D.3 4938.01 4938.31 0.992 4942.20' 4942.60' 0.73 4943.33 1 Storrs Line D Number of lines: 2 Run Date: 01-05.2006 NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. ;'Surcharged (HGL above crown). Hydre}bw Storm Sewers 2005 N O J � n c- Ww cc, E > o � fN V /TM O' 7 � � V apCC O t � O O O co O Z cc a O O M C N O cl 0 o a o a o 0 d O N c00 ci cm W It a It 11 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' Storm Sewer Summary Report SToe.#A 115� Page , 1 LI 1 1 r 1 1 Line No. Line ID Flow rate (cfs) Line size (in) Line length (ft) Invert EL On (ft) Invert EL Up (ft) Line slope 11%) HGL down (ft) HGL up (it) Minor loss (ft) HGL Juru3 (ft) Dns line No. 1 Pipe83 5.00 15 c 189.1 4916.87 4926.97 5.341 4917.37 4927.87 0.22 4927.87 End Storm E Number of lines: 1 Run Date: 06-23-2005 NOTES: c = cir, e = elfip; b = box; Return period =.100 Yrs. Hydmffm Storm Sewers 2005 L 'a d �sm �0 N� _J V N 00 w �_ W o Zr N LO O U) LO N e— t co O LO ti O LO i LO N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 y> I� W O c7 M (p N Oi r- N 0) 11 11 Ir 0 N N t�4 VI O a� J O T Z CD CD U 2 Storm Sewer Summary Report 5r°r-'j Page 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Line No. Line ID Flow rate (CIS) Line size (in) Line length (it) Invert EL Dn (ft) Invert EL Up (It) Line slope M HGL down (it) HGL up (it) Minor loss (n) HGL Junct (ft) Dns line No. 1 Pipe66 1.00 15 c 57.0 4915.75 4915.96 0.368 4916.15 4916.41 0.05 4916.46 End storm f Number of lines: 1 Run Date: 06-23-2005 NOTES: c = cir, e = ellip; b = box; Return period = 100 Yrs. "inflow Storm Sewma zoos 1 E z w a 0 W d� 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 ui F;� No Text Storm Sewer Summary Report �ro�►� Page 1 Line No. Line ID Flow rate (S) Line size (in) Line length (it) Invert EL Dn (it) Invert EL Up (ft) Line slope M HGL down (ft) HGL up (it) Minor loss (ft) HGL Junct (it) Dns line No. 1 Pipe89 0.50 15 c 77.7 4926.01 4926.45 0.567 4928.29 4926.73 We 4926.73j End storm G Number of lines: 1 Run Date: OB 23 2005 NOTES: c = cir, e = ellip; b = box; Return period =100 Yrs. ; j - Line contains hyd. jump. Hrdraftw Storm Sewers 2005 n III III III 0 0 0 0 0 0 MMm � Iq M IVvIVv t N N I I APPENDIX F I Swale 1 Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 1 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Fonr Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 025000 Vt Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 4.12 ofsy0 Results Depth 0,59 It Flow Area 1.4 1? Wetted Perimi 4.89 It Top Wdth 4.75 ft Critical Depth 0.58 It Critical Slope 0.028073 ft/ft Velocity 2.93 ft/s Velocity Head 0.13 ft Specific Energy 0.73 ft Froude Numb, 0.95 Flow Type Subcdfical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\..\710-004Vdrainagetsweles\110-004swales.fm2 Northam Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 06/14/05 03:15:27 PM 0 Hoestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Swale 1 Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 1 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Form Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 025000 ft/It Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge y ?!3 5.48 cfs Results Depth 0.66 ft Flow Area 1.7 ft' Wetted Perim( 5.44 ft Top Width 5.28 ft Critical Depth 0.65 ft Critical Slope 0.027028 ft/ft Velocity 3.14 ft/s Velocity Head 0.15 ft Specific Enerf 0.81 It Froude Numb. 0.96 Flow Type Subcritical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering dA..\110-004\drainage\swales\110-004-swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 [7.0005] 06/14/05 03:15:45 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 I Swale 2 Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 2 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Forrr Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 020000 Wit Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 15.10_ c1a 4?W0 Results Depth 1.01 ft Flow Area 4.1 ft' Wetted Perimr 8.30 ft Top Width 8.06 It Critical Depth 0.98 ft Critical Slope 0.023609 ft/ft Velocity 3.72 ftfs Velocity Head 0.22 ft Specific Enerf 1.22 ft Froude Numb- 0.93 Flow Type Subcritical Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\...\110-004\drainage\swales\110-004-swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 (7.0005) 06/14/05 03:18:02 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Swale 2 Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 2 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Forrr Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeftk 0.035 Channel Slope 020000 Wit Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 20,10 cis �eo j.33 Results Depth 1.12 ft Flow Area 5.0 ft' Wetted Perimi 9.24 ft Top Width 8.97 it Critical Depth 1.09 ft Critical Slope 0.022725 MR Velocity 4.00 ft/a Velocity Head 0.25 ft Spedflc Energy 1.37 ft Froude Numb 0.94 Flow Type SubcrRloal Project Engineer: Northern Engineering d:\...\710-0041drainage\swales\110-004-swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMaster v7.0 17.00051 06/14/05 03:18:35 PM ® Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Swale 3 Worksheet for Triangular Channel Project Description Worksheet Swale 3 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Fom Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coetfic 0.035 Channel Slope 021000 f /ft Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Discharge 3.80 cfs Qtoo Results Depth 0.59 it Flow Area 1.4 fN Wetted Perimi 4.90 it Top Width 4.76 it Critical Depth 0.56 it Critical Slope 0.028412 ft/ft Velocity 2.69 Me Velocity Head 0.11 it Specific Ener£ 0.71 it Froude Numb, 0.87 Flow Type Subcritical Project Engineer. Northern Engineering dA..\110-004\drsinage\swales\110-004-swales.fm2 Northern Engineering Services Inc FlowMasterv7.0[7.0005] 06/14/05 03:20:05 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Swale 3 Worksheet for Triangular Channel 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Project Description Worksheet Swale 3 Flow Element Triangular Char Method Manning's Four Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.035 Channel Slope 021000 ft/ft Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Qlpp+ 1.330 Discharge 5.10 cfe Results Depth 0.66 ft Flow Area 1.8 ft2 Wetted Perimr 5.48 It Top Width 5.31 ft Critical Depth 0.63 ft Critical Slope 0.027259 ft/R Velocity 2.89 We Velocity Head 0.13 ft Specific EnerS 0.79 ft Froude Numb, 0.88 Flow Type Subcritical Project Engineer: Northam Engineering d:l..\110-004\drsinage\swales\110-004-swales.fm2 Nordom Eng6reering Servkes Inc FlowMaster v7.0 (7.0005] 06/14/05 03:20:19 PM ® Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 APPENDIX G 1 1 1 1 LEMAY AVENUE ESTATES Pond Sizing -FAA Method Pond 303 By: ATC Date: 6-21-05 CITY OF FORT COLLINS 100-YEAR RAINFALL Composite 'C' evelo ed Area acres Release Rate cfs 0. 1.861 0.51 TIME TIME INTENSITY Q 100 Release Required Required cum 100 year Runoff Volume Cum total Detention Detention (mins) (secs) (in/hr) (cfs) (ft"3) (ft^3) (ft^3) (ac-ft) 0 0 0 0.00 0 0.0 0.0 0.000 5 300 9.950 5.37 1610 150.0 1460.1 0.034 10 600 7.720 4.16 2499 300.0 2198.5 0.050 15 900 6.520 3.52 3165 450.0 2715.2 0.062 20 1200 6.600 3.02 3625 600.0 3024.8 0.069 25 1500 4.980 2.69 4029 750.0 3279.3 0.075 30 1800 4.520 2.44 4389 900.0 3488.6 0.080 35 2100 4.080 2.20 4622 1050.0 3571.6 0.082 40 2400 3.740 2.02 4842 1200.0 3641.7 0.084 45 2700 3.460 1.87 5039 1350.0 3689.1 0.085 50 3000 3.230 1.74 5227 1500.0 3726.8 0.086 55 3300 3.030 1.63 5393 1650.0 3743.5 0.086 80 3800 2.860 1.54 5554 1800.0 3753.7 0.086 85 3900 2.720 1.47 5722 1950.0 3772.0 77:0U 70 4200 2.590 1.40 5868 2100.0 3767.6 0.086 75 4500 2.480 1.34 6020 2250.0 3769.7 0.087 80 4800 2.380 1.28 6162 2400.0 3762.1 0.086 85 5100 2.290 1.24 6300 2550.0 3749.7 0.086 90 5400 2.210 1.19 6437 2700.0 3737.2 0.086 95 5700 2.130 1.15 6549 2850.0 3698.9 0.085 100 6000 2.060 1.11 6667 3000.0 3667.0 0.084 105 6300 2.000 1.08 6796 3150.0 3646.4 0.084 110 6600 1.940 1.05 6906 3300.0 3606.5 0.083 115 6900 1.890 1.02 7034 3450.0 3584.1 0.082 120 7200 1 1.840 0.99 7146 3600.0 3546.0 0.081 peak r-, L.' 1 [1 11 1 1 w Cl w �0014LOCoo, V00000 m w 0 �O�NNQf V O O � N a O Cl) C G 0 6 6 w Q(O 0) I-- U') F lL �LOmo CO) V O Mfo� ovrnao Q N N N M a W D U z = a Q R w O � O N Mv z a z Oo a� W 0 W`bo U' G C. a o m � LL���vv t§■ 0 BEko ao aaS§ w �U- co co k Sk)q §SSm§ cob-0 ----- 2 _ � 2 � ��3Ek Q c) wk/C4 ■3kSO &� i�LU 0 �8a88 §Go©§ �§aMf �«(2r o80 0 0CLIaCIO 00000 1616666 APPENDIX H No Text 11 11 11 11 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N O_ E Z � O V N N N N O Z (;p J 9 OD 7 (O N N C CO O DO W U O N y r M N O O Q O H Q A W Q am ox o CL �00000 N Aa0O r W 0.' Q N ry N OnD p W 00 0 U 6 y � � C o 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 a 1 Q d = O O_ tCp � a O d "tea 5 f+ WA GGG g n M Mt (D O M CL b Q L� W d M cc m W M a C Q i M N O M $ M N •WY C.0 m N p U m > N p o o 4 o m o N m e J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SWMM BASIN PARAMETERS SUMMARY Project: 110-004 Date: 10/1 /05 By: ATC BASIN AREA SF AREA AC BASIN % IMP BASIN WIDTH FT 1 137214 3.15 19.07 1143 2 469911.39 10.79 35.33 3916 3 272540.22 6.26 27.63 2271 4 416869.2 9.57 30.76 3474 5 210411.29 4.83 7.19 1753 6 116305.2 2.67 6.50 969 I 7 u 11 1 1 H w QW� J U-000DetNaN UCNfV R� 0Qi144 W co I--N NC9 f0 O M Of On �- Ql0 CA 0 0 in GM e-N 1, W Q etO�N [L et Ititn��NM O d v 00���-M O n YY N M w 1n co 0 co v co O � Q 0 NOD LL1 I�O to mIn Qi Ml--01 M0cdom00 Q M M M m m fp 1� W ~ CL do 0 CMI o VIL010 c.i Z 3 O F a Q dc4 OD OfO�NMa N M M M M M 0 N a. a o m CO) v v v v v v v I 1 I O r W)UY O Oti (p d LL 0 e O O O O W ON V N r� V r N 1p aO MNO 0)LLI O N LL W N O)Or N M M NM co M SF M U rn�0)0)(7)0)0) vvvvvav O Z c 'L Q f6 CDN CC W(�7Hcv WOQU(A C C' W Q y y �{, m 0 0) 0! W Of Of Q O Q C C C M co c��1 ccn O d CIO a 9 co 00000 ooc0000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 w co J �OON(�O)00 �JJ OO(01�000r W O oMVMor�v) o(cMaorro i.%Ov0(OVNr Q (A o O r r N M a w O 00 r 0) � M N H (NO CO 000(p(MO fA U O Gow(navco r v I� r r r Q 1n r N (O N r M 11J N O V (n M 1-- 1�- (3)0)M I.-N ISM Q N N r IW N 00 N r OM (n M 00 OM N v 2 w a > w �Or NM V U)W m U Z o cn V N W tD U lil Q Q I�000)OrNM 0 O F r r r N N N N d a o m to �0)MO vvvvvvv 0)0)0) I 1 1 r-, LI LL O oo CD Dr oW a 0 0 0 0 0 m rn� LLI `-- > O h M M O O N M O O (O •- Ott N N N N a' O NT ClV V VO' V Z v o Z Cl) ~ C N U co ) LL W ccr) WOQ` �U O F-Q u t-��C: ^��� O 0000000O d O O O O O a m} 161616161616161 11 URBAN DRAINAGE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - 32 BIT VERSION 1998 REVISED BY UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER ••• ENTRY MADE TO RUNOFF MODEL ••• Project: 110-004 Northern Engimeringr 10/1/05 100-M Analysis ONUMBER OF TIME STEPS 600 OINTEGRATION TIME INTERVAL (MINUTES) 1.00 25.0 PERCENT OF IMPERVIOUS AREA HAS ZERO DETENTION DEPTH OFOR 24 RAINFALL STEPS, THE TIME INTERVAL IS 5.00 MINUTES OFOR RAINGAGE NUMBER 1 RAINFALL HISTORY IN INCHES PER HOUR 1.00 1.14 1.33 2.23 2.84 5.49 1.22 1.06 1.00 .95 .91 .07 .73 .71 .69 .67 1 Project: 110-004 Northern Engineering; 10/l/05 9.95 4.12 2.48 1.46 .84 .81 .78 .75 SUBAREA GUTTER WIDTH AREA PERCENT SLOPE RESISTANCE FACTOR SURFACE STORAGE(IN) INFILTRATION RATE(IN/HR) GAGE NUMBER OR MANHOLE (FT) (AC) IMPERV. (FT/FT) IMPERV. PERV. IMPERV. PERV. MAXIMUM MINIMUM DECAY RATE NO 1 101 1143. 3.2 19.1 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 2 102 3916. 10.8 35.3 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 3 103 2271. 6.3 27.6 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 4 104 3546, 9.8 30.8 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 5 301 1753. 4.8 7.2 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 6 302 969. 2.7 6.5 .0200 .016 .250 .100 .300 .51 .50 .00180 1 OTOTAL NUMBER OF SUBCATCHMENTS, 6 OTOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA (ACRES), 37.47 1 Project: 110-004 Northern Engineering; 10/1/05 HYDROGRAPHS ARE LISTED FOR THE FOLLOWING 7 SUBCATCHMENTS - AVERAGE VALUES WITHIN TIME INTERVALS TI14E(HR/MIN) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1 Project: 110-004 Northern Engineering; 10/1/05 ••• CONTINUITY CHECK FOR SUBCATCHME7TT ROUTING IN UDSWM386 MODEL WATERSHED AREA )ACRES) 37.470 TOTAL RAINFALL (INCHES) 3.669 TOTAL INFILTRATION (INCHES) .892 TOTAL WATERSHED OUTFLOW (INCHES) 2.647 TOTAL SURFACE STORAGE AT ENO OF STORM (INCHES) .131 ERROR IN CONTINUITY, PERCENTAGE OF RAINFALL .000 1 Project: 110-004 Northern Engineering; 10/l/05 WIDTH INVERT SIDE SLOPES OVERBANH/SURCHARGE GUTTER GUTTER MP NP OR DIAM LENGTH SLOPE HORIZ TO VERT MANNING DEPTH UK NUMBER CONNECTION (FT) (FT) (FT/FT) L R N (FT) 101 302 0 2 PIPE 3.0 128. .0100 .0 .0 .013 3.00 0 102 301 0 2 PIPE 4.0 89. .0100 .0 .0 .013 4.00 0 103 301 0 2 PIPE 4.0 209. .0100 .0 .0 .013 4.00 0 104 301 0 2 PIPE 3.0 107. .0100 .0 .0 .013 3.00 0 201 302 0 2 PIPE 2.0 294. .0100 .0 .0 .013 2.00 0 901 0 0 3 .0 0. .0010 .0 .0 .001 10.00 0 [1 301 201 7 2 PIPE .1 10. RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .5 .0 1.0 2.1 4.1 3.8 302 0 7 2 PIPE .1 10. RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE-FEET VS SPILLWAY OUTFLOW .0 .0 .5 .0 1.0 .6 4.1 1.1 OTOTAL NUMBER OF GUTTERS/PIPES, 8 1 Project: 110-004 ' Northern Engineering; 10/1/05 ARRANGEMENT OF SUBCATCHMENTS AND GUTTERS/PIPES GUTTER TRIBUTARY GUTTER/PIPE 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 201 301 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 301 102 103 104 0 0 0 00 0 0 302 101 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Project: 110-004 Northern Engineering; 10/1/05 0010 .0 .0 .013 .10 1.7 2.6 2.4 3.1 3.2 3.5 0010 .0 .0 .013 .10 1.7 .8 2.4 .9 3.2 1.0 0 0 TRIBUTARY SUBAREA D.A.(AC) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10.8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31.7 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31.7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37.5 HYDROGRAPHS ARE LISTED FOR THE FOLLOWING 2 CONVEYANCE ELEMENTS THE UPPER NUMBER IS DISCHARGE IN CPS THE LOWER NUMBER IS ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CASES: ( 1 DENOTES DEPTH ABOVE INVERT IN FEET (S) DENOTES STORAGE IN AC -FT FOR DETENTION DAM. DISCHARGE INCLUDES SPILLWAY OUTFLOW. (I) DENOTES GOITER INFLOW IN CFS FROM SPECIFIED INFLOW HYDROGRAPH (D) DENOTES DISCHARGE IN CPS DIVERTED FROM THIS GUTTER (0) DENOTES STORAGE IN AC -FT FOR SURCHARGED GUTTER TIME(HR/MIN) 301 302 0 1. 0. 0. .0(s) .O(S) 0 6. 0. 0. .O(S) .O(S) 0 11. '0. 0. .1(S) .O(S) 0 16. 0. 0. .I(S) .O(S) 0 21. 0. 0. .3(S) .O(S) 0 26. 0. 0. .5(S) .O(S) 0 31. 2. 0. 1.1(S) .1(S) 0 36. 3. 0. 2.4(S) .3(S) 0 41. 4. 0. 3.4(S) .6(S) 0 46. 4. 0. 4.1(S) .7(S) 0 51. 4. 0. 4.6(S) .8(S) 0 56. 4. 1. 4.9(S) .9(s) 1 1. 4. 1. 5.1(S) 1.O(S) 1 6. 4. 1. 1 1 1 1 5.3(S) 1.1(S) 11. 4. 1. 5.5(S) 1.1(5) 1 16. 4. 1. 5.6(S) 1.2(S) 1 21. 4. 1. 5.7(S) 1.3(S) 1 26. S. 1. 5.9(S) 1.3(S) 1 31. 5. 1. 5.9(S) 1.4(S) 1 36. 5. 1. 6.0(5) 1.4(S) 1 41. 5. 1. 6.1(S) 1.4(S) 1 46. 5. 1. 6.2(S) 1.5(5) 1 51. 5. 1. 6.2(S) 1.5)S) 1 56. 5. 1. 6.3(S) 1.6(S) 2 1. 5. 1. 6.3(S) 1.6(S) 2 6. 5. 1. 6.4(S) 1.7(S) 2 11. 5. 1. 6.4(S) 1.7(S) 2 16. 5. 1. 6.3(S) 1.7(S) 2 21. 5. 1. 6.3(S) 1.8(5) 2 26. 5. 1. 6.3(S) 1.B(S) 2 31. 5. 1. 6.3(S) 1.8(S) 2 36. 5. 1. 6.3(S) 1.8(S) 2 41. 5. 1. 6.2(S) 1.9(S) 2 46. 5. 1. 6.2(S) 1.9(5) 2 51. 5. 1. 6.2(S) 1.9(S) 2 56. 5. 1. 6.2(S) 2.0(S) 3 1. 5. 1. 6.1(5) 2.0(S) 3 6. 5. 1. 6.1(S) 2.0(S) 3 11. 5. 1. 6.1(S) 2.0(S) 3 16. 5. 1. 6.0(S) 2.1)S) 3 21. 5. 1. 6.0(S) 2.1)S) 3 26. 5. 1. 6.0(S) 2.1(S) 3 31. 5. 1. 6.0(5) 2.1(S) 3 36. 5. 1. 5.9(S) 2.2(S) 3 41. 5. 1. 5.9(S) 2.2(S) 3 46. 5. 1. 5.9(S) 2.2(S) 3 51. S. 1. SAM 2.2(S) 3 56. 4. 1. 5.8(S) 2.3(S) 4 1. 4. 1. 5.8(S) 2.3(S) 4 6. 4. 1. 5.7(S) 2.3(S) 4 11. 4. 1. 5.7(S) 2.3(S) 4 16. 4. 1. 5.7(S) 2.4)S) 4 21. 4. 1. 5.6(S) 2.4(S) 4 26. 4. 1. 5.6(S) 2.4(S) 4 31. 4. 1. 5.6(S) 2.4(S) 4 36. 4. 1. 5.6(S) 2.5(S) 4 41. 4. 1. 5.5)S) 2.5(S) 4 46. 4. 1. 5.5(S) 2.5(S) 4 51. 4. 1. 5.5(S) 2.5(S) 4 56. 4. 1. 5.4(S) 2.6(S) 5 1. 4. 1. 5.4(S) 2.6(S) 5 6. 4. 1. 5.4(S) 2.6(S) 5 11. 4. 1. 5.3(S) 2.6(S) 5 16. 4. 1. 5.3(S) 2.7(S) 5 21. 4. 1. 5.3(S) 2.7(S) 5 26. 4. 1. 5.3(S) 2.7(S) 5 31. 4. 1. 5.2(S) 2.7)S) 5 36. 4. 1. 5.2(S) 2.7)S) 5 41. 4. 1. 5.2(S) 2.8)S) 5 46. 4. 1. 5.1(S) 2.8)S) 5 51. 4. 1. 5.1(S) 2.8)S) 5 56. 4. 1. 5.1(S) 2.8)S) 6 1. 4. 1. 5.0(S) 2.9(S) 6 6. 4. 1. 5.0)S) 2.9(S) 6 11. 4. 1. 5.0(S) 2.9(S) 6 16. 4. 1. 5.0)5) 2.9)S) 6 21. 4. 1. 4.9)S) 2.9(S) 6 26. 4. 1. 4.9(S) 3.0(S) 6 31. 4. 1. 4.9(S) 3.0(S) 6 36. 4. 1. 4.8(S) 3.0(S) 6 41. 4. 1. 4.8(S) 3.0(S) 6 46. 4. 1. 4.8(S) 3.1(S) 6 51. 4. 1. 4.8(S) 3.1(S) 6 56. 4. 1. 4.7(S) 3.1(S) 7 1. 4. 1. 4.7(S) 3.1(S) 7 6. 4. 1. 4.7(S) 3.1(S) 7 11. 4. 1. 4.7(S) 3.2(S) 7 16. 4. 1. 4.6(S) 3.2(S) 7 21. 4. 1. 4.6)S) 3.2(S) 7 26. 4. 1. 4.6)S) 3.2)S) 7 31. 4. 1. 4.5)S) 3.2)S) 7 36. 4. 1. 4.5(S) 3.3(S) 7 41. 4. 1. 4.5(S) 3.3(S) 7 46. 4. 1. 4.5(S) 3.3(S) 7 51. 4. 1. 4.4(S) 3.3(S) 7 56. 4. 1. 4.4(S) 3.3(S) 8 1. 4. 1. 4.4(S) 3.4(S) 8 6. 4. 1. 4.4(S) 3.4(S) 8 11. 4. 1. 4.3(S) 3.4(S) 8 16. d. 1. 4.3(S) 3.4(S) 8 21. 4. 1. 4.3(S) 3.4(S) 8 26. 4. 1. 4.2)S) 3.5)S) 8 31. 4. 1. 4.2)S) 3.5)S) 8 36. 4. 1. 4.2(S) 3.5(S) 8 41. 4. 1. 4.2(S) 3.5(S) 8 46. 4. 1. 4.1(S) 3.5(S) 8 51. 4. 1. 4.1(S) 3.6(S) 8 56. 4. 1. 4.1(S) 3.6(S) 9 1. 4. 1. i 4.1(S) 3.6(S) 9 6. 4. 1. 4.0(S) 3.6(5) 9 11. 4. 1. 4.0(5) 3.6(S) 9 16. 4. 1. 4.0(S) 3.7(S). 9 21. 4. 1. 4.0(5) 3.7(5) 9 26. 4. 1. 3.9(5) 3.7(S) 9 31. 4. 1. 3.9(S) 3.7(S) 9 36. 4. 1. 3.9(S) 3.7(S) 9 41. 4. 1. 3.9(S) 3.7(S) 9 46. 4. 1. 3.8(S) 3.8(S) 9 51. 4. 1. 3.8(S) 3.8(S) 9 56. 4. 1. 3.8(5) 3.8(S) 1 Project: 110-004 Northern Engineering; 10/1/05 - PEAK FLOWS, STAGES AND STORAGES OF GUTTERS AND DETENTION DAMS CONVEYANCE PEAK STAGE STORAGE TIME ELEMENT (CPS) (FT) (AC -FT) (HR/MIN) 104 71. 2.7 0 35. 103 44. 1.5 0 35. 02 8. 2.2 0 37. Fob 301 301 5. .1 6.4 2 . 2 1 5. 6 2 B. 101 20. 1.1 0 35. Poo 1>3oZ 302 1. .1 3.8 10 0 901 0. (DIRECT FLOW) 0 0. APPENDIX I WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS POND 302 Project: 110-004 By: ATC Date: 10/1/05 BASIN AREA = 37.460 <— INPUT from impervious talcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 25.8 <— INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = 0.2580 <— CALCULATED WQCV (watershed inches) = 0.138 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (ac-ft) = 0.516 <— CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WQ Depth (ft) = 2.000 <-- INPUT from stage -storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in2) = 1.315 <-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING: dia (in) = 1 5/16 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 S, (in) = 4 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 n = 1 <— INPUT from Figure 5 t (in) = 1 /4 <— INPUT from Figure 5 number of tows = 5.00 <— CALCULATED from WQ Depth and row spacing total outlet area (in') = 6.77 <— CALCULATED from total number of holes 1 t 1 1 1 WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS POND 303 Project: 110-004 By: ATC Date: 6/21105 REQUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS: BASIN AREA = 1.860 <— INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT = 10.40 <-- INPUT from impervious calcs BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO = 0.1040 <— CALCULATED WQCV (watershed inches) = 0.069 <— CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2 WQCV (aC-ft) = 0.013 <— CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5 WQ Depth (ft) = 1.000 <— INPUT from stage -storage table AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in) = 0.097 <— CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3 CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING: dia (in) - 5/16 <— INPUT from Figure 5 S, (in) = 3 <— INPUT from Figure 5 n = 1 <-- INPUT from Figure 5 t (in) - 1 /4 <— INPUT from Figure 5 number of rows= 3.00 <— CALCULATED from WQ Depth and row spacing total outlet area (in2) = 0.23 <— CALCULATED from total number of holes 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i i 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX J I I I I I I I I I I I p I I I I I I I q in tq LQ tQ tQ IQ lge to rx 0 00 co CD CD go co C4 cd Cc F 6E Ld P. 9 U? pr 4, CII: (4) Ln 0 0 LL: CQ C�p 0 LU r�, 0001212 z LL. C4 CD co (D 0 LU aaaaaaa IL F:; (6 ci CD, 0) 60 P0 z 0 P c; 0 0 6 6 d In 8 8 U O 5 IM C7 cq �c wl() 2 a a a w a w I a a tv :3 tog u APPENDIX K . I I I I 1] I I I I I i I I I ' Trapezoid Project: 110-i Date: 6128/05 By: ATC 1 1 t I LI Weir Performance Curve: POND 302 Govemina Eauation: The trapezoidal weir Is a broad -crested weir govemed by the following equation: r r 11 • where 4 = =weirdischarge (cis) Q = C I L + 0.8 H tail I 0 IJH b • where C w = weir coeRldent C. L ` f where L = crest length (R) • where H = head on weir M) *where b=1.5 For 4:1 side slopes, 0 = 151.92760 so that tan (en) = 4 Input Parameters: Top of Weir Elevation Crest Elevation (ft): Length of Crest (ft): Weir Coefficient: Depth vs. Flow: 4923.00 210 2.60 Depth Above Crest (ft) Elevation (ft) Emergency Overflow Weir Discharge (cis) 0.00 4923.00 0 0.10 4923.10 17 0.20 4923.20 49 0.30 4923.30 90 0.40 4923.40 139 0.50 4923.50 195 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 Trapezoidal Weir Performance Curve: POND 303 Project: 110-004 Date: 6128/05 By: ATC Governing Equation: The trapezoidal weir is a broad -crested weir governed by the following equation: • where Q = discharge Ws) Q = C„ L + 0.8 H tm C 8 ]H6 • where CW = weir coeflldent i • where L = crest length (ft) • where H = head on weir (ft) • where b = 1.5 For *1 side slopes, 6 = 151.9276• so that tan (e2) = 4 WE / / H L ►� / Input Parameters• Top of Weir Elevation (ft) 4931.00 Crest Elevation (ft): 4930.00 Length of Crest (ft): 10 Weir Coefficient: 2.60 Depth vs. Flow: Depth Above Crest (ft) Elevation (ft) Emergency Overflow Weir Discharge (cfs) 0.00 4930.00 0 0.10 4930.10 1 0.20 4930.20 2 0.30 4930.30 5 0.40 4930.40 7 0.50 4930.50 11 0.60 4930.60 14 0.70 4930.70 19 0.80 4930.80 23 0.90 4930.90 29 1.00 4931.00 34 RAINFALL PERFORMANCE STANDARD EVALUATION STANDARD FORM A PROJECT: Lemay Avenue Estates MAJOR BASIN: All Areas CALCULATED BY: ATC TOTAL BA51N AREA (A,) : 42.734 acres DATE: february,17 2000 DEVELOPED' SUB BASIN ERODIBIUTY ZONE ... (acres).. e O . Aye X �e . (�'°) A,y (qo) Al MODERATE 3.15 71 G.0 2255.4 2.33 7.34 BI MODERATE 4.5G 1859.0 8477.0 1.90 8.G8 132 MODERATE 5.45 1455.0 7929.8 1.52 8.31 83 MODERATE 0.35 530.0 154.4 I.G3 0.57 B4 MODERATE 0.43 255.0 109.G 0.7G 0.33 Cl MODERATE G.2G 1425.0 8915.7 1.48 9.25 DI MODERATE 5.42 1440.0 7804.8 1.71 9.29 D2 MODERATE 4.35 900.0 3915.0 1.53 G.G7 E I MODERATE 3.02 120.0 3G2.4 2.50 7.55 E2 MODERATE 2.G7 90.0 240.3 4.40 11.75 FI MODERATE 1.49 210.0 312.9 7.GO 11.32 G 1 MODERATE 1.8G 450.0 837.0 2.48 4.G I G2 MODERATE 1.49 75.0 111.8 2.70 4.02 G3 MODERATE 0.43 45.0 19.3 4.00 1.72 H l MODERATE 1.81 450.0 814.5 2.G4 4.78 TOTAL �. •r,.. ; _ ': 42:73;; , , . ; ; f, , 42289 From Table 5.1 Length Slope 000 990 1000 __ E Lab x Lsb Lb A b P5 2 82.80 2.25 53.07 2.5 53.10 PS (during construction) = 83.07 (From Table 5.1) P5 (after construction) = 97.73 (Psm,,,,4/0.65) SN sb x Lsb / Ab EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS STANDARD FORM B PROJECT: Lemay Avenue Estates MAJOR BASIN: All Areas CALCULATED BY: ATC TOTAL BASIN AREA (Ab) : 42.734 acres DATE: February 17, 2006 CONSTRUCTION PROCE55: Durin EROSION CONTROL METHOD C-FACTOR VALUE P-FACTOR VALUE COMMENT Sediment Basin / Trap 1.00 0.50 at outlet structures of detention ponds. all dram basms Bare Sod: Rou4gh Irr ular 5urlace 0.90 1.00 all lots Straw Bale Barrier 1.00 0.80 upstream of culverts and downstream Gravel Inlet filter 1.00 0.80 at all inlets Asphalt / Concrete Pavement 0.01 1.00 all roads, parFin,3 lots, walks, etc. Erosion Control Mats / Blankets 0.10 1.00 not applicable Silt Pence Barrier 1.00 0.50 alonq prope boundary Temporary V etation / Cover Crops 0.45 1.00 not applicable Sod Grass 0.01 1.00 not applicable Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (From Table 5.2) 0.17 1.00 Detention Ponds MAJOR BASIN .. PS ' -(%) 5UB-BASIN AREA. (acres).: .: CALCULATIONS . All Areas 83.1 42.734 PLAN INTENT: See Erosion Control Plan Impervious 10.470 Roads: Walks: all pervious areas have been grouped together Parkin : Pervious 32.264 Temp Veg 10 acres open space Bare Soil 53.716 acres of bare soil on lots during construction C , = 0.58 F, = 0. 16 EFF = 90.7% JV. /`fb > 06.1110 Uurng Construction EG measures are effective EQUATIONS: — (A, x Cl) C„�— A P,�,=PlxPzxP,... EFF=[1—(CxP)]x100 b EFFECTIVENE55 CALCULATIONS STANDARD FORM B PROJECT: Lemay Avenue Estates MAJOR BASIN: All Areas CALCULATED BY: ATC TOTAL BASIN AREA (4) : 42,734 acres DATE: February 17, 2000 CONSTRUCTION PROCESS: After C-FACTOR P-FACTOR E90,551ON CONTROL METHOD VALUE VALUE COMMENT, Asphalt / Concrete Pavement 0.01 1.00 all roads, parkmej lots, walks, etc. Sod Grass 0.01 1.00 all on-srte Ian dsca m , MAJOR P5, . AREA BASIN M 5UB-BA51N (acres) .,' CALCULATIONS. ' PLAN INTENT: See Erosion Control Plan All Areas 97.7 42,734 Roads: Impervious 10.470 Walks: all pervious areas have been grouped together Parking: Pervious 32.2G4 Temp Veg 10 acres open space - 53.71 G acres of permanent sod landscapmg on mdi%ndua Sod Grass: lots Cwt = 0.01 F �t = 1.00 EFF = 99.0% yy. V96 > U7.7% After Construction EC measures are effective EQUATIONS: C„,�—�(A,xC,� pd=P,xPZxP,... EFF=[1—(CxP)x100] 6 (In0 X ,,,•---- H HC STANTON CREEK SUBDIVISION v� SECOND FILING I 11't I ~► .:- y --� L- y 1 AD RIM w 01110149VIM DD HELE.YG.' SO 65, slap mNx� Re & 1 I B1\ IE1} tit 1 1 1'I I OFTSIR PROPERTY I 49Y0 .P► 1O �I �}a}DRAINS rWAY FROM SITE T / 1 F1 1 9 1 E1 , �' 912 THER FOLLNHn Bu Al� 1 f ♦ RIN /4914 i ' T ♦ STORY IXiNx uxEF 916 Ro ER. L.Nrje,* / :�nFTFN]NMI M]NIl'YY) ,DR �� �... ���{ �1ao�"' SE- $Iems 4918 1 ~ l STANTON LCREEK OOLD t •" BOUND n000Pl Fln �I� �I�' (BOUNDARY ., IIS III, i�^ l A I —BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS ♦ Y RIP 1 i %' / r , / ER09W BUFFER 0 / 4922 BOUNDARY I j / /.4924 , r / AM. AMAMAMAMIMAM GREENSTONE EDD r--eRw"W,IS III , ( \ DETENTION POND 303 926 MIT M WOU 412S w FT �Q]OAY qUN DR-IOD-Yrs MOM - 0.0 M-FT' MEG - OAS RES I FLOCDPLAIN CROSS MCI BONS /�\ 0. IM \I SO ISO 240Feet nN =I ) limb. SOIC LEGEND PR6GYD WATER MAN fM50NG WATER YMN PROPOSED SUMER MAIN • EXISTING MAIN EXISTING STORM YNER PROPO�D STUART NEWS PROPOSED SWALE — PRCRRTY BOUNDARY PRCPYSED CONTEXTS ]B DUSAc 491TauR — —pN — PRIWYD pRB f GUTTER PIIavau TYPE R INLET FAlV03O COMBINATION INUO ■ RNARAIR DRAINAGE BASN um m o r RESIGN POINT Di aoW uBDw .Py SAA!BPIMARY SIWE 1 — sim 1 FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION City of Fort Collins, Colorado UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL REII:- - - - - - eavy-MME MrI ED BY',� ED BYStannumater Utility ED BY: eel ED BY:SRq�—er ED BY: ZED R Z WL 3r = w �Z a C)m ZW f is RF m m U) m W X Q w H Ed W W w Q Z) z_ Z W Q Q Q � J Q J LU O Sheel DR1 Of 54 Sheets