HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 05/01/1998Final App ved Report
ate
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
for
MARTINEZ P.U.D.
Fort Collins, Colorado
Prepared for:
Wonderland Hill Development Comp:
- 745 Poplar Avenue
Boulder, Colorado 80304
Prepared by:
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
Project No: 1558-01-97
DATE: April, 1998
4836 S. College, Suite 12 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 FAX (970) 282.0311
701
July 8, 1997
Project No: 1558-01-97
Basil Hamdan
City of Ft. Collins Stormwater Utility
P.O: Box 580
Ft. Collins, Colorado 80524
Re: Martinez P.U.D.; Ft. Collins, Colorado
Dear Basil,
Enclosed, please find the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Martinez P.U.D. The
hydrology data and the hydraulic analysis presented in this report complies with the requirements
of the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criteria Manual dated March, 1984 and revised this
year, the City of Fort Collins Erosion Control Reference Manual and the Old Town Master
Drainage Basin Plan for the City of Fort Collins.
If you have questions, or require further information on any item, please call me or Mark
Oberschmidt at (970) 226-5334.
Sincerely,
2
Brian W. Shear, P.E.
Shear Engineering Corporation
BWS / meo
cc: James W. Leach; Wonderland Hill Development Company
Mikal Stephen Torgerson; M Torgerson Architects
4836 S. College, Suite 12 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 FAX (970) 282-0311
PAGE 1
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
A. Location
1. Martinez P.U.D. is located in the Northeast One Quarter (1/4) of Section 11, UN,
R69W of the 6th P.M., City of Ft. Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado.
2. More specifically, Martinez P.U.D. is located directly south of Lee Martinez Park
and north of the railroad tracks located north of Cherry Street near the vicinity of the
intersection of Cherry Street and Mason Street. The western end of the site borders
on Sherwood Street. The eastern end of the site borders on North College Avenue.
(See Vicinity Map).
3. The site is bounded entirely on the north by Lee Martinez Park. It is bounded on the
east by College Avenue, on the west by Sherwood Street and on the south by the
Burlington Northern Railroad property and Cherry Street.
4. The Cache La Poudre River is approximately 600 feet north of the site (at its closest
point near the eastern end of the site).
B. Description of Property
1. The site is directly adjacent to Burlington Northern Railroad property and was
previously utilized as a railroad switching yard. Historic use of the property can be
visualized on the City of Fort Collins aerial photo dated May 8, 1984.
2. The site area that is to be developed is approximately 9.58 acres. The total site has an
area of approximately 11.38 acres. The eastern portion of the site has been sold to the
City of Fort Collins for use by the Parks and Recreation Department.
3. Development of the site will consist of a co -housing (multi -unit) area, 10 (ten) single
family lots, a commercial tract currently planned for a 12,200 square foot commercial
building. The tract to the east of the commercial area has been purchased by the City
of Fort Collins Parks and Recreation Department. Adequate parking for the co -
housing units and the commercial building will be provided.
4. The site is encumbered by several existing utilities. Additional utilities will be
installed as needed to service the site. There are two (2) existing City of Fort Collins
sanitary sewer lines. There is also an existing North Weld County water transmission
line and a 12" City of Fort Collins water line running through the site.
5. Development of the site with this project will be limited to the portion of the property
west of the intersection of Cherry and Mason Streets. It is our understanding that the
area east of Mason Street (extended) has been purchased by the City of Fort Collins
Parks and Recreation Department to create expanded parking for Lee Martinez Park.
6. There is an existing 48" storm sewer running in a northeasterly direction across the
site immediately east of the proposed commercial building. The storm sewer is
situated in an existing 50' ROW.
PAGE 2
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
H. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS:
A. Major Basin Description
1. The site is situated within the Old Town Drainage Basin as designated on the City of
Fort Collins Stormwater Basin Map. Portions of the site are located in Subcatchment
136 of the Old Town Basin. The drainage fees associated with the Old Town Basin
are $4,150.00 per acre.
2. The eastern parking area is subject to shallow flooding of less than 1.5 feet in depth
according to figure 4 of the Old Town Master Drainage Basin Plan. Figure 4 is
attached in Appendix IV. This has also been delineated on the Drainage and Erosion
Control Plan.
3. No portion of the Martinez P.U.D. site is located within the 100-year Foodplain.
Reference the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 2 of 7; Community Panel
Number 080102 0002 B; map revised February 15, 1984. Floodplain elevations near
the site range from approximately 4966 to 4971 feet from east to west. The lowest
elevations across the northern property line of the site range from approximately 4970
to 4987 from east to west.
4. Some offsite contribution is expected from the properties to the south and west. The
offsite contributing area is bounded by Loomis Avenue on the west and Cherry Street
on the south. The offsite contributing area consists of subcatchment 136 and 108 as
designated on Figure 4.1 of the Old Town Master Drainage Basin Plan. A 2 (two)
sheet exhibit is attached in Appendix V which delineates the offsite basins.
a. The majority of the offsite stormwater from subcatchment 136 is conveyed
easterly along the north side of the existing railroad tracks. There is a defined
Swale along the northern side of the tracks. Subcatchment 136 has an area of
approximately 26.8 acres. This compares to an area of 17.0 acres which is listed
the Old Town Master Drainage Plan.
b. Historically stormwater is conveyed easterly along the north side of the tracks to a
point east of the site of the proposed commercial building. From this point the
water begins to flow in a northeasterly direction towards the Cache La Poudre
River (refer to aerial exhibits included with this report).
c. The proposed commercial building is situated in the historic flow path. Grading
on the west side of the building will divert the offsite stormwater around the south
side of the building.
5. Much of the runoff from subcatchment 108 will be conveyed underground through
either the existing 48" storm sewer which crosses the site or the future box culvert
represented in the Old Town Basin Master Plan.
PAGE 3
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
H. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS:
B. Sub -basin Description
1. The site slopes to the east and north. Historically much of the onsite stormwater
flows overland east to a low point at the northeastern corner of the property. The low
point is located north of the intersection of Cherry and Mason Streets. From the low
point, storm water runoff is conveyed north into Lee Martinez Park via a natural
swale eventually reaching the Cache La Poudre River.
a. A 3'x30' concrete box culvert is proposed with the Old Town Master Drainage
Basin Plan. This box culvert would convey stormwater from the southwest corner
of the intersection of Mason and Cherry streets under Cherry Street to the existing
swale.
i. It is our understanding that the design of the box culvert noted with the Old
Town Master Drainage Basin Plan is conceptual only.
ii. It is our understanding that the box culvert noted with the Old Town Master
Drainage Basin Plan will not be constructed in the immediate future.
b. The outfall of the future box culvert will be located east of the proposed entry
drive off of Cherry Street.
III. DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL DESIGN CRTTERIA:
A. Regulations
1. All storm drainage design criteria from the City of Fort Collins Drainage Criteria
Manual were considered.
2. All erosion control design criteria from the City of Fort Collins Erosion Control
Reference Manual were considered.
3. Recommendations made in the Old Town Master Drainage Basin Plan prepared by
Resource Consultants & Engineers, Inc. were also considered.
B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints
1. All grading design must match the existing elevations at all property lines unless a
temporary construction easement is provided.
2. Stormwater improvements are proposed with the Old Town Master Drainage Basin
Plan for this area. These improvements include a 3'x30' Reinforced Concrete Box
Culvert to be installed at the intersection of Cherry and Mason Streets.
a. Stormwater runoff will be conveyed in the box culvert to an open channel along
the eastern portion of this site. Water is then conveyed to a proposed settling basin
north of the site in Lee Martinez Park eventually reaching the Poudre River.
PAGE 4
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
M. DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL DESIGN CRITERIA:
B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints
2. b. Refer to Figure 8.6 of the Old Town Master Drainage Basin Plan attached in
Appendix IV. Adequate land area at the eastern portion of the site has been
provided to facilitate this proposed improvement.
c. The Old Town Master Drainage Basin represents the open channel on the north
side of Cherry Street in line with the extension of Mason Street, which is where
the entrance to the site is located. The proposed box culvert was shown in the
preliminary submittal with a larger skew in order to locate the channel east of the
Martinez P.U.D. entrance drive. The box culvert was represented as being
extended to the north because the Parks Department is planning to provide
additional parking for Martinez Park in the future. The alignment noted was
conceptual.
d. It is our understanding that the final details of the design of the box culvert have
not been completed at this time. The box culvert shown in the Old Town Master
Drainage Basin Plan is only designed based on the expected flows. There is a
very good possibility that the culvert may have to be extended further north than
the master plan shows because of the potential for parking east of the site and
potential conflicts with existing underground utilities.
3. There is an existing 48" storm sewer which crosses the property just east of the
proposed commercial building. The 48" storm sewer extends across Lee Martinez
Park and currently daylights at the Cache la Poudre River.
a. The storm sewer is situated in an existing 50' easement that is recorded in Urimer
County records in Book 446, Page 338.
b. Stormwater improvements proposed with the Old Town Master Drainage Basin
Plan indicate that this storm sewer will be daylighted at the proposed settling
pond located downstream of the site.
c. Refer to Figure 8.6 of the Old Town Master Drainage Basin Plan attached in
Appendix IV.
4. The 100-year flood plain is delineated on the Final Drainage and Erosion Control
Plan. The floodplain was taken from Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 2 of 7;
Community Panel Number 080102 0002 B; map revised February 15, 1984. A copy
of the flood plain map is included with this report in the Appendix IV
a. Much of the park is in the 100 - year flood plain. No part of the site is in the 100
- year flood plain
PAGE 5
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
M. DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL DESIGN CRITERIA:
C. Hydrological Criteria
1. The Rational Method (Q = CIA) was used to determine the pre -developed and post
development peak flows for the 2, 10 and 100-year storm events at critical points.
Only the 2 and 100-year flows are included in the body of the report. Refer to
Appendix I for the 10-year peak flows.
D. Hydraulic Criteria
Storm sewer and drainage channel capacities were based on the Mannings Equation.
The Mamungs coefficients are as suggested by the City of Fort Collins Storm
Drainage Criteria Manual.
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN:
A. General Concept
Onsite stormwater will have 2 different travel paths. A portion of the site (Sub -basin
1) will contribute stormwater to a proposed low point at the eastern end of the site
The remainder of the site (Sub -basin 2) will contribute stormwater directly to Lee
Martinez Park. Parks and Recreation Department approvals are required. Easements
have been requested and approved by the Parks and Recreation Department. It is our
understanding that these easements have received approval from City Council as of
the date of this submittal.
2. Offsite flows will be conveyed east along the north side of the railroad tracks via an
existing swale. Some grading will occur on the south side of the proposed
commercial building to better define the swale and convey flows around the building
into the parking lot and to the east. This grading, along with the on site grading, will
redirect the offsite runoff around the south side of the proposed commercial building.
NO grading will be done in the railroad ROW.
3. No detention will be provided for this site because of its proximity to the river and the
fact that all stormwater flows into Lee Martinez Park, much of which is within the
limits of the 100-year floodplain.
4. The total area of the entire site is approximately 11.38 acres. The portion of the site
to be developed has an area of approximately 9.58 acres. The remaining 1.8 acres of
the property east of Mason Court has not been considered in any calculations or
design. It is our understanding that area east of the site has been purchased by the
City of Fort Collins Parks and Recreation Department in order to provide additional
parking facilities for Lee Martinez Park.
a. A concept plan of the proposed improvements is available at the City of Fort
Collins Parks and Recreation Department.
PAGE 6
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN:
B. Specific Details - General
1. Historic and developed peak flows from the portion of the site to be developed and
the overall contributing area to Martinez Park are summarized in the table below.
Area
Q2
Q100
Description
acres
C2
C100
cfs
cfs
Historic Site
9.58
0.21
0.26
3.8
13.2
Developed Site
9.58
0.73
0.92
11.07
39.01
Historic Overall
33.35
0.55
0.69
30.2
107.1
Developed Overall
33.35
0.70
0.87
36.4
129.2
2. A small portion of the site located at the western end of the property (minor basin 2A)
contributes runoff to the entry drive into Lee Martinez Park (Design Point 2). A
comparison of the historic and developed flows is summarized in the table below.
Area
C2
C100
Q2
Q100
Historic
1.46
0.33
0.41
1.22
4.29
Developed
1.24
0.61
0.76
1.91
6.70.
3. The allowable 1/2 street capacity of the entry drive for the nunor storm (2-year) into
the Lee Martinez Park at the design point is 6.82 cfs. This is greater than the
developed flow generated during the 100-year event to the design point; therefore no
additional storm sewer infrastructure is needed in the entry drive into Lee Martinez
Park. Refer to pages 17, 17a and 17b in Appendix I.
C. Specific Details - Swales in Lee Martinez Park
1. Two channels are proposed on the south side of the existing ballfields in Lee
Martinez Park. The swales will intercept the sheet flow from the site and the park
and convey it east around the eastern ballfield or west around the western ballfield.
a. The eastern swale will meander among the existing trees. Beyond the trees the
swale spreads out and stormwater flows over land to the Cache La Poudre River.
Refer to the City aerial photo of which shows the existing topography of the park.
The City of Fort Collins Parks and Recreation Department has agreed to provide
construction and permanent easements for construction of the channel.
b. It is our understanding that these easements have received approval from City
Council as of the date of this submittal.
c. The western swale will convey stormwater around the west side of the western
ballfield.
PAGE 7
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN:
C. Specific Details - Swale in Martinez Park
2. The eastern channel in Lee Martinez Park (Section X-X) is designed to convey 39.66
cfs to the east.
a. This is 133% of the Q100 from the entire upstream area which includes portions
of sub -basins 1 and 2 and some of the park property. More specifically the area
includes offsite basins 02 and 03 and minor basins la, lc, 2c and 2d
b. The Swale will meander among the existing trees. Beyond the trees the swale
spreads out and stormwater flows over land to the Cache La Poudre River.
c. Refer to pages 19 and 20 in Appendix I for the design of the swale.
3. The slope at the eastern end of section X-X increases to 2.0%. Therefore the capacity
increases as well. The proposed trapezoidal swale on the park property (Section X-X)
has the following geometric and hydraulic characteristics.
Side
Depth Bottom Slope Mannings Slope Capacity
ft. Width ft. fti—ft. n H_V cfs
1.5 2.0 0.01 0.032 4:1 49.42
4. The western swale (Sections K-K and P-P) is designed to convey runoff from the
western portion of the site around the western side of the existing ballfields.
a. These swales are designed to convey 133% of the Q100 from the contributing
area which includes minor basins 2b and 01 for Section K-K. Section P-P is
designed to convey flows from minor basins 2a, 2b and 01. A 10' curb cut will
be installed along the east side of the access drive to the park to divert flows to
the swale.
b. The design flow for section K-K is 9.83 cfs (1.33*Q100). The design flow for
section K-K is 24.73 cfs (1.33*Q100).
c. Refer to page 18 & 18A in Appendix I for the design of the section P-P. Refer to
page 26 & 26A in Appendix I for the design of the section P-P.
5. The table below summarizes geometric and hydraulic characteristics of sections K-K
and P-P.
Section Depth
Bottom
Slope
Mannings
SS
Capacity
ft.
Width ft.
ft,
n
HV
cfs
P-P 1.0
5.0
0.01
0.032
10:1
49.42
K-K 1.5
0.0
0.01
0.032
4:1
11.47
PAGE 8
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN:
D. Specific Details - Swale in Railroad ROW
1. The existing swale along the north side of the railroad tracks was surveyed and cross
sections were prepared to determine the flow capacity of the existing cross section. A
total of 6 cross sections were analyzed for the existing conditions and the developed
conditions. The developed conditions assumed that the grading matched the existing
grade at the south property line. No grading will be done in the railroad ROW from
Sherwood Street east to the property line of Martinez P.U.D. at the southwest corner
of lot 12. Calculations can be found in Appendix 11 of this report.
a. The developed conditions initially assumed that the the top of the curb on the
south side of the private drive was the top of the channel. In cases where the
channel did not have sufficient capacity the top of -curb was raised to increase the
capacity of the channel.
b. The design flow is 126.67 cfs which is 133% of the Q100 at Design Point 3
(Q100 = 95.24 cfs). Design Point 3 is located at the southwest corner of the
proposed commercial building on lot 12. This is the estimated peak flow from the
upstream area as delineated in the offsite drainage exhibit. The contributing area
is Sub -basin 136 on the offsite drainage exhibit.
2. The table below summarizes the Water Surface Elevation (WSEL) for the design flow
in relation to the elevation of the top of the channel on the north side of the channel.
The top of the channel on the north side of the channel is the top of curb elevation on
the south side of the private drive. The developed swale requires NO grading in the
railroad ROW.
Section
Existing
Existing
Developed
Developed
Station
Swale
Swale
Swale
Swale
Top Berm
WSEL
Top Curb
WSEL
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
2+00
88.00
87.32
88.13
87.32
4+00
86.00
85.94
86.00
85.91
6+00
85.00
84.60
85.00
84.59
8+00
83.00
"a"
83.34
83.11
10+00
82.00
81.70
82.00
81.77
12+00
not modeled
79.79
79.58
a. The existing channel as defined at station 8+00 was overtopped to the north.
Therefore it was concluded that additional capacity would be provided by raising
the top of curb as needed to ensure that the offsite flows did not overtop the curb
and flow into the private drive.
b. An existing swale was not modeled at station 12+00 because the existing grades
do not represent a swale. Grading will be completed within the Martinez property
to define swale section X-X. The developed swale in this location will provide
sufficient capacity for the design flows.
PAGE 9
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
IV. DRAINAGE FACILM DESIGN:
D. Specific Details - Swale in Railroad ROW
2. The swale continues along the north side of the railroad tracks on the south side of the
proposed commercial building (Section Z-Z). This portion of the swale is located
within the limits of the Martinez P.U.D. property. This portion of the swale consists
of a 10' wide concrete pan centered in a 30' wide swale. The grading in this area is
designed to convey the offsite flows into the parking lot.
a. The grading will be done on the north side of the tracks. The grade of the tracks
will not be changed by construction of the swale.
b. The proposed trapezoidal swale has the following geometric and hydraulic
characteristics.
Side
Depth Bottom Slope Mannings slope Capacity
ft.. Width ft.. ft../ft.. n H_V cfs
1.5 10.0 0.007 0.027 7:1 138.99
c. An eight foot (8') wide sidewalk culvert is in line with the valley pan to ensure
that the flow is diverted into the parking lot. The capacity of the eight foot
sidewalk culvert based on a flow depth of 1.0 feet is 17.60 cfs. Refer to page 21
in the drainage calculations.
d. A 1.5 foot high curb will be installed at the east end of the valley pan to force the
some of the stormwater to flow through the sidewalk culvert. Some stormwater
will overflow the sidewalk into the parking lot.
E. Specific Details - Storm Sewer
1. A thirty foot (30') Type R inlet will be installed in sump condition at the east end of
the parking lot in lot 12 (Design Point lb). Stormwater from the swale in the
Railroad ROW is conveyed into the parking lot and to this inlet.
a. The inlet is sized to intercept the runoff generated by the ofsite minor basin 1B
and the offsite area during the 10-year event. The topography limits the size of
the pipe that can convey the stormwater into the park. Therefore the inlet was
sized based on the capacity of the pipe. It was also deemed impractical to try to
intercept the entire flow generated during the 100-year event because of large
offsite area which contributes to this point.
b. Allowable flow depth in a parking lot for the 100-year event is one foot (1.0').
PAGE 10
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
IV. DRAINAGE FACILM DESIGN:
E. Specific Details - Storm Sewer
1. c. Water will begin to overflow into the street when it exceeds a depth of
approximately 1.0 feet at the inlet. The inlet is sized based on the allowable flow
depth of 1.0 feet.
d. The overflow will be conveyed towards the driveway on the City property to the
east. This is the historic flow path of the stormwater. A lowpoint will be
constructed on Mason Court at the intersection of Mason Court and the City's
access drive. The intersection will be constructed with concrete. The street
section at the lowpoint will be sloped from west to east to facilitate the
conveyance of the stormwater which overflows the inlet in the parking lot.
e. The overall developed Q10 from the contributing area to the inlet at design point
lb is 53.59 cfs. The overall Q100 to the inlet is 108.11 cfs. Refer to page 10A in
Appendix I for the calculations.
f. The capacity of the inlet based on a flow depth of 1.0 feet at design point lb is
66.15 cfs. This includes the reduction factor of 0.90.
g. A 30" RCP storm sewer with a capacity of 67.4 cfs will convey the stormwater to
a 6 foot diameter manhole. This pipe will be flowing under pressure during the
100-year event.
h. A 30" ADS N-12 storm sewer with a capacity of 47.86 cfs will convey the
stormwater into the park from the manhole. This pipe will be flowing under
pressure during the 10-year event. A larger pipe cannot be installed here because
of the proposed grading in the area around the manhole and the requirement that
the grading meet ADA requirements in this area.
i. A buried riprap apron will be installed at the outfall. The riprap will have a D50
of 12". The length of the apron will be 10 feet.
PAGE 11
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
IV. DRAINAGE FACILM DESIGN:
E. Specific Details - Storm Sewer
2. A twenty foot (20') Type R inlet will be installed in sump condition at Design Point
la located on the north side of the roundabout on Mason Court.
a. The inlet is sized to intercept the runoff generated by the onsite contributing area
during the 100-year event. The capacity of the inlet is 20.70 cfs. The inlet
capacity is based on a flow depth of 0.50 feet at the flowline. A reduction factor
of 0.90 is considered in the capacity of the inlet. Refer to page 9 in Appendix I
for the calculations.
b. Allowable flow depth on a local street for the 100-year event is 6" over the crown
(0.89 feet at the flowline).
c. Allowable flow depth on a local street for the 2-year event is up to the top of the
curb (0.50 feet at the flowline).
d. Water will begin to overflow into the park if it exceeds a depth of approximately
0.5 feet at the flowline on the north side of the entry drive; therefore street
capacity is not exceeded.
e. The Q100 to the inlet at design point la is 17.92 cfs.
A 24" ADS N-12 pipe with a capacity of 30.61 cfs will convey the stormwater
into the park.
g. A buried riprap apron will be installed at the outfall. The riprap will have a D50
of 12". The length of the apron will be 10 feet.
h. Buried riprap will be installed along the bank at the location of the inlet to
minimize the chance of erosion in case the curb is overtopped.
PAGE 12
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN:
F. Specific Details - Streets
1. The overflow from the inlet in the parking lot (Design Point lb) is conveyed across
Mason Court by creating a lowpoint in the street which is in line with the inlet. The
overflow amount is approximately 42 cfs. The intersection where lowpoint is located
will be made of concrete and slopes from west to east at 0.006 ft./ft..
a. The western flowline (high side) has been modeled using Haestad Flowmaster
software to determine the capacity of Mason Court at this location.
b. The capacity of the street at the lowpoint was determined to be 55.95 cfs.
c. The depth of flow at the low point during the 100-year event was determined to
be 0.40 feet. The high point on the western flowline will not be overtopped
during the 100-year event.
d. Refer to pages 22-24 in the drainage calculations for capacity and depth
calculations and cross sections.
2. Minor basin 1C contributes stormwater to the eastern end of the private drive at the
Cul-de-Sac (design point 1C).
a. The Q100 at Design Point 1C = 16.05 cfs.
b. The capacity of the private drive along this portion of the road is 21.6 cfs.
c. The capacity of the street is based on a flow depth of 0.57 feet at the flowline on
the low side of the street. Flow depths exceeding 0.57 feet will overtop the
sidewalk at this location. Street capacity is not exceeded.
d. Refer to pages 11, 11a, llb in the drainage calculations for capacity calculations
and cross sections. Street section B-B on sheet 5 of the plans is the basis of the
cross section.
PAGE 13
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN:
G. Specific Details - Swale in Co -housing area
1. A minor basin (2xx) was delineated to determine the total flow between co -housing
units H & K (Design Point 2xx). This calculation was used to verify that the Swale
(Section Q-Q) between the units was adequate.
a. The design flow is 2.49 cfs which is 133% of the Q100 at Design Point 2xx
(Q100 = 1.88 cfs).
b. The proposed triangular swale between the units has the following geometric and
hydraulic characteristics.
Depth Bottom
ft. Width ft.
0.5 0.0
V. EROSION CONTROL:
A. General Concept
Slope Mannings SS Capacity
n HV cfs
0.05 0.032 8:1 25.64
1. Erosion control measures will be as identified on the Final Drainage and Erosion
Control Plan.
2. An erosion control security deposit is required in accordance with City of Fort Collins
policy (Chapter 7, Section C: SECURITY; page 7.23 of the City of Fort Collins
Development Manual). In no instance shall the amount of the security be less than
$1,000.00.
3. The site is located in a low and moderate erodibility zone.
4. Refer to the Erosion Control Security Document located in Appendix II for the
amount of the deposit.
5. Erosion control calculations are attached in Appendix H.
B. Specific Details
1. Silt fence will be provided along the downstream property line before the start of
overlot grading.
2. Haybales will be provided in all swales.
3. Gravel inlet filters will be provided at the inlets.
4. Buried riprap will be placed at the outfall of the storm sewers and on steep banks
where overflow of an inlet is possible or the bank will be receiving a concentrated
flow.
PAGE 14
Project No: 1558-01-97
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
VI. VARIANCE REQUEST:
A. Variance from City of Fort Collins Requirements
1. There will be no requests for any variances from the City of Fort Collins Storm
Drainage Criteria for the Martinez P.U.D.
VII. CONCLUSIONS:
A. Compliance with Standards
1. All drainage analysis has been performed according to the requirements of the City of
Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins policy, and the Old
Town Master Drainage Basin Plan.
2. All Erosion Control design complies with the City of Fort Collins Erosion Control
Reference Manual and generally accepted practices.
B. Drainage Concept
1. The drainage design for Martinez P.U.D. is in accordance with the City of Fort
Collins requirements and the recommendations of the Master Drainage Basin Plan -for
Old Town Basin.
2. There will be no adverse downstream effects due to the development of the site.
1. Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criteria Manual
2. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Drainage Criteria Manual
3. Fort Collins Storm Erosion Control Reference Manual
4. Old Town Master Drainage Basin Plan; Resource Consultants & Engineers, Inc.;
Dated January 7, 1993
APPENDIX I
Storm Drainage Calculations
APPENDIX I
Drainage Calculations
FLAW SUMMARY FOR MARTINEZ PUD
DESIGN CONTRIBUTING AREA C2
POINT SUB/MINOR
BASIN(S) ac.
♦xrrrrxxxrrxxxxa arrrrrar♦rrraearrr
HISTORIC CONDITIONS
PARK SITE 9.58 0.21
PARK OVERALL 33.35 0.55
C10 C100 Tc Tc I2
2,10 100
min. in iph
a rrrrrrrr rr♦♦rrr rrrrxxrrxrx
PAGE 1
DATE 21-Nov
I10 I100 Q2 Q10 Q100 PAGE
iph iph cf0 cfs cfe
r rr rrr xxr xrr rerrrrr rrx rrr rrrrrrrrrrr
0.21 0.26 20.00 20.00 1.85 3.25 5.21 3.76 6.60 13.22 3
0.55 0.69 24.50 24.50 1.65 2.91 4.69 30.20 53.16 107.13 5
DEVELOPED CONDITIONS
PARK
SITE 9.58 0.61 0.61 0.76 19.00 19.00 1.91 3.35 5.38 11.07
19.41 39.01
4
PARK
OVERALL 33.35 0.66 0.66 0.83 24.50 24.50 1.65 2.91 4.69 36.43
64.13 129.23
6
SUB BASINS DEVELOPED CONDITIONS
1
1 5.23 0.71 0.71 0.89 19.00 19.00 1.91 3.35 5.36 7.12
12.50 25.09
T
2
2 4.35 0.48 0.48 0.59 11.00 11.00 2.46 4.31 6.92 5.09
8.92 17.92
a
SEE
CAt,G.V Lniw sv5 iU 6P IWHLGN IniCW U6 5ti)E aPA2X ON PAi7E
I4
STORM SEWER
DESIGN AND STREET CAPACITY FLOWS
la
IA & SC 3.53 0.73 0.73 0.91 18.00 18.00 1.57 3.45 5.55 5.08
8.91 17.92
9
lb
15 1.54 0.57 0.57 O.71 12.00 12.00 2.38 4.17 6.71 2.09
3.66 7.36
10
lb
1B&OFFSITE 28.36 0.68 0.68 0.85 26.50 26.50 1.58 2.79 4.50 30.40
53.59 108.11 l0A
lc
1C 2.96 0.78 0.78 0.97 18.00 18.00 1.97 3.45 S.SS 4.55
7.58 16.05
11
id
1D 0.16 0.86 0.86 1.00 26.50 26.50 1.58 2.79 4.50 0.22
0.38 0.72
12
id
1D & OVERFLOW SEE CALCULATIONS ON PAGE 12 IN APPENDIX I OF R 0.22
0.38 42.68
12
HISTORIC
OFFSITE PLOWS TO SITE
3 OPPSITE 23.77 0.68 0.68 0.85 24.50 24.50 1.65 2.91 4.69 26.85
47.26 95.24
13
STORM SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMARY
DP DESIGN Q INLET INLET Q PIPE MANNINGS SLOPE
PIPE NOTE
STORM INLET SIZE CAP. PIPE SIZE N
CAP.
YEAR CPS FT CPS CPS FT FT/FT
CFS
la 300 17.92 20.00 20.70 17.92 2.00 0.012 0.010
24.51
lb 10 30.40 30.00 66.15 66.15 2.50 0.013 0.027
67.40 PRESSURE100
2.50 0.012 0.012
47.86 PRESSURE
10
SWALE SUMMARY
SECT. DESIGN Q DEPTH SIDE SLOPE BOTTOM MANNINGS
SWALE NOTE
STORM SLOPE WIDTH N
CAP
YEAR CPS PT H:1 1 FT
CPS
Y-Y 100 126.67 1.50 7 0.70 10.00 0.028
128.76 RAILROAD
Z-Z 100 126.67 1.50 T 0.70 10.00 0.026
138.99 RAILROAD
NOTE: Q = 1.33rQ100 - FOR SWALES ONLY
Q = Q DESIGN STORM FOR STORM SEWER
BE
REDUCTION FACTORS FOR INLETS ARE BUILT INTO INLET CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
INLET REDUCTION
SIZE FACTOR
5 0.80
10 0.85
15 0.90
>15 0.90
PRESSURE 100 MEANS THAT THE PIPE WILL FLOWING UNDER PRESSURE DURING 100-YEAR
EVENT
PRESSURE 10 MEANS THAT THE PIPE WILL FLOWING UNDER PRESSURE DURING 10-YEAR EVENT
ALL STORM SEWER CAPACITIES ARE BASED ON MANNINGS EQUATION
CONVEYANCE FACTOR ((1.486a A-R 2/3)/N) TAKEN FROM TABLES 4 & 5 IN APPENDIX
III OF REPORT
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
SUBBASIN
BREAKDOWN
PAGE
2
PROTECT:
MARTINEZ
PUD
OATS
11/18/97
LOCATION:FORT
COLLINS
BY
MEO
PROT.NO.:1558-01-97
FILE:
MARTRUN
TOTAL SITE AREA =
9.58
ACRES TOTAL BASIN AREA -
33.35
OFFSITE AREA =
23.77
ACRES
SUBCATCHMENT 136
26.82
ACRES A PORTION OF THIS
BASIN IS ONSITB
ASSUMPTIONS:
TOTAL AREA INCLUDES
RESIDENTIAL AREA NORTH OF CHERRY
AND BAST OF
LOOMIS
OFFSITE AREA WHICH
IS RESIDENTIAL IS 40% IMPERVIOUS
AND
60% LAWNS,
HEAVY
SOIL
MINOR
MINOR
MINOR
MINOR
SITE
SUBBASIN
SUBBASIN
BASIN
BASIN
BASIN
BASIN
HISTORIC
DEVELOPED
OPFSITE
1
2
lA
1B
1C
1D
CHECK
ASPHALT
0.00
3.75
3.84 2.BO
0.95
0.36
0.54
1.78
0.12
2.80
CONCRETE
0.00
0.05
0.00 0.03
0.02
0.00
0.03
0.00
O.OD
0.03
GRAVEL
0.38
0.30
1.67 0.20
0.10
0.00
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.2D
ROOFS
0.00
1.26
12.79 D.67
0.59
0.03
0.11
0.51
0.02
0.67
LAWNS,SANDY SOIL
FLAT < 2%
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
AVERAGE 2 TO 74
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
STEEP > 7%
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
D.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
LAWNS, HEAVY SOIL:
FLAT < 2%
9.20
4.22
8.52 1.53
2.69
0.16
0.66
0.69
0.02
1.53
AVERAGE 2 TO 7%
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
D.00
STEEP > 74
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
9.58
9.SB
26.82 5.23
4.35
0.55
1.54
2.98
0.16
5.23
RUNOFF COEFFICIENT
SUB BASINS AND / OR MINOR BASINS
HISTORIC
DEVELOPED
SITE
SITE
OFPSITE
1
2
lA
1B
1C
1D
C2-C10
0.21
0.61
0.6B 0.71
0.48
0.73
0.57
0.78
0.86
C100 = 1.25-C2
0.26
0.76
0.85 0.89
0.59
0.91
0.71
0.97
1.00
C100 IS NEVER GREATER THAN
1.0
HISTORIC
DEVELOPED
OVERALL
OVERALL
C2-C10
0.55
0.66
C100 - 1.25-C2
0.69
0.83
DESIGN BASINS
AREA
C2
C100
POINT
acreo
la la&lc
3.53
0.73
0.91
lb 16&OFP
2B.36
0.68
0.85
SHEAR ENGINBBRING CORPORATION
HISTORIC
PLOW TO MARTINEZ PARK
FROM SITE
PROTECT: MARTINEZ PUD
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS
PILE: MARTRUN
AREA (A)= 9.580 ACRES
RUNOFF COBF. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR
C 0.21 0.21
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH =? FEET SLOPE _.
2 YEAR 10 YEAR
C 0.20 0.20
Ti (min). 0.00 0.00
2
100 YEAR
0.26
4
100 YEAR
0.25
0.00
DATE 09/05/97
PROD. NO.1558-01-97
BY MBO
PAGE 3
TRAVEL TIME (Tt) .L/(60•V) PLOW TYPE
L (ft) 1140 S (4) . 0.70 GUTTER V (fps) . 1.72 Tt(min). 11.05
L (£t) 520 S (4) . 2.00 LAWN V (fps) . 1.00 Tt(min). 8.67
L (ft) .? S (4) . 1.00 NONE V (fps) . 0.00 Tt(min). 0.00
L (ft) .? S (4) . 1.00 NONE V (fps) . 0.00 Tt(min). 0.00
L (ft) .? S (4) . 1.00 NONE V (fps) - 0.00 Tt(min). 0.00
L (ft) .? S (4) . 1.00 NONE V (fps) . 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) _? S (4) - 1.00 NONE V (fps) . 0.00 Tt(min). 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) . 19.71
Tc .Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)- 19.71 19.71 19.71
USE Tc = 20.0 20.0 20.0
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I . 1.85 3.25 5.21
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOFF (Q. CIA) (cfe)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q . 3.76 6.60 13.22
CONCLUDB:COMPARB WITH DEVELOPED PLOWS
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED
PLOW TO MARTINEZ PARK
FROM SITE
PROTECT: MARTINEZ PUD
LOCATION: PORT COLLINS
PILE: MARTRUN
AREA (A)= 9.580 ACRES
RUNOFF CORP. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR
C = 0.73 0.73
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE
2
100 YEAR
0.91
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 60 PERT SLOPE = 2.00 1
2 YEAR 10 YEAR _ 100 YEAR
C = 0.20 0.20 0.25
Ti (min)- 10.37 10.37 9.79
DATE 09/05/97
PROS. NO.1558-01-97
BY MSO
PAGE 4
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)=L/(60•V) FLOW TYPE
L (ft) 1600 S (4) = 1.00 GUITHR V (fp0) = 2.00 It(min)- 13.33
L (ft) _. S M - 1.00 NONE V UFO) - 0.00 It(min)- 0.00
L (ft) S (i) - 1.00 NONE V (fpo) - 0.00 It(min)= 0.00
L (ft) =t S (t) = 1.00 NONE V (fp0) = 0.00 Tt(mi.)= 0.00
L (ft) _? S (i) = 1.00 NONE V (fpo) - 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) _. S (4) = 1.00 NONE V (fpo) = 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
L (ft) =7 S (4) = 1.00 NONE V (fp0) = 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) 13.33
TOTAL LENGTH = 1660 L/180+10= 19.22 < 23.13 CHOOSE LESSER
Tc -Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)- 19.22 19.22 19.22
USE Tc - 19.0 19.0 19.0
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I = 1.91 3.35 5.38
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOFF (Q- CIA) (cf.)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q = 13.26 23.28 46.73
VERSUS HISTORIC PLOWS
Qhiet - 3.76 6.60 13.22
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
HISTORIC
PLOW TO MARTINEZ PARK
FROM OVERALL AREA
PROTECT: MARTINEZ PUD
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS
FILE: MARTRUN
AREA (A). 33.35 ACRES
RUNOFF CORP. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR
C . 0.55 0.55
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE
n
100 YEAR
0.69
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH 230 FEET SLOPE . 1.00 4
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C 0.20 0.20 0.25
Ti (min)= 25.52 25.52 24.11
DATE 09/05/97
FEW. NO.1558-01-97
BY MEO
PAGE 5
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)=L/(60•V) FLOW TYPE
L (ft) . 960 S (4) . 0.50 GUTTER V (fps) . 1.50 Tt(min). 10.67
L (ft) . 100 S (4) . 4.00 LAWN V (fps) . 1.47 Tt(min). 1.13
L (ft) . 100 S (4) . 2.00 GUTTER V (fps) . 2.83 Tt(min). 0.59
L (ft) . 1200 S (4) . 1.00 GUTTER V (fps) . 2.00 Tt(min). 10.00
L (ft) .] S (4) . 1.00 NONE V (fps) . 0.00 Tt(=in)= 0.00
L (ft) .: S (4) . 1.00 NONE V (fps) . 0.00 Tt(min). 0.00
L (ft) .i S (5) . 1.00 NONE V (fps) 0.00 It(min). 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) . 22.39
TOTAL LENGTH = 2590 FEET L/180+10 = 24.39 < 46.50
Tc
2 YEAR to YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)- 24.39 24.39 24.39
USE Tc . 24.5 24.5 24.5
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I . 1.65 2.91 4.69
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOFF (Q- CIA) (cfe)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q . 30.20 53.16 107.13
CONCLUDE:COMPARE WITH DEVELOPED FLOWS
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED PAGE
PLOW TO MMTZNEZ PARK
FROM OVERALL AREA
PROJECT: MARTINEZ PUD DATE 09/05/97
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS PROJ. NO.1558-01-97
PILE: MARTRUN BY HBO
ARRA (A)= 33.35 ACRES
RUNOFF CORP. (C)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
C = 0.70
0.70
0.87
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 2
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (TO
LENGTH 230 FEET
SLOPE = 1.00
4
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
C 0.20
0.20
0.25
Ti (min). 25.52
25.52
24.11
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)=L/(60-V)
PLOW TYPE
L (ft) . 960 S (4) =
0.50 GUTTER
V (fps) -
1.50
It(min)-
10.67
L (ft) . 100 S (4) =
4.00 LAWN
V (fps) -
1.47
It(min)=
1.13
L (ft) . 100 S (k)
2.00 GUTTER
V (fps) .
2.83
It(min)=
0.59
L (ft) = 1200 S (t) =
1.00 GUTTER
V (fp0) -
2.00
Tt(min)=
10.00
L (ft) .] S (i) .
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min).
0.00
L (ft) =l S (t) -
1.00 NONE
V (fps) .
0.00
It(min)-
0.00
L (ft) =F S (4) =
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
It(min)-
0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE
3-2
TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
(min)
22.39
TOTAL LENGTH . 2590
FEET L/160410 .
24.39
<
46.50
Tc
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Tc (min)= 24.39
24.39
24.39
USE Tc = 24.6
24.5
24.5
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
I 1.65
2.91
4.69
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN
FROM FIGURE
3-1
RUNOFF (Q- CIA) (cfo)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Q = 38.33
67.47
135.96
VERSUS HISTORIC FLOWS
Qhist 30.20
53.16
107.13
CONCLUDE:CONVEY OPPSITE WATER THROUGH AND AROUND SITE
C°
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED
PAGE
FLOW TO MARTINEZ PARK (DP)
1
FROM SUB BASIN 1
PROJECT:
MARTINEZ PUD
DATE
09/US/97
LOCATION:PORT
COLLINS
PROJ.
NO.1558-01-97
PILE:
MARTRUN
BY
HBO
NOTE:
PLOW TO NORTHEAST PORTION OF SITS AND INTO PARK
AREA (A)- 5.230 ACRES
RUNOFF COSP. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.91 0.91 0.89
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 2
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 60 FEET SLOPE 2.00 4
2 YEAR 10 YEAR- 100 YEAR
C . 0.20 0.20 D.25
Ti (min)- 10.37 10.37 9.09
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)-L/(60-V) FLOW TYPE
L (£t) = 1600 S (1) - 1.00 GUTTER V (fps) - 2.00 Tt(min)- 13.33
L (ft) =l S M - 1.00 NONE V (fps) - 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
L (ft) =P S M - 1.00 NONE V (fps) - 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
L (ft) =i S (5) a 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
L (£t) _? S (t) = 1.00 NONE V (fp0) - 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
L (ft) -i S (t) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) - 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
L (ft) =i S (i) - 1.00 NONE V (fps) - 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) = 13.33
TOTAL LENGTH = 1660 L/180+10= 19.22 < 23.13 CHOOSE LESSER
Tc =Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)= 19.22 19.22 19.22
. USE Tc a 19.0 19.0 19.0
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I = 1.91 3.35 5.38
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOFF (Q= CIA) (c£0)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q = 7.12 12.50 26.09
CONCLUDE:PLOW IS CONVEYED BY SEPARATE STORM SEWERS
SEE PAGES 9 AND 10
V
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED PAGE
FLOW TO MARTINEZ PARK FROM
SUBBASIN 2
PROJECT: MARTINEZ PUD DATE 11/18/97
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS PROJ. NO.1558-01-97
FILR: MARTRUN BY MEO
NOTE: SHEET FLOW DIRECTLY INTO PARK
THIS FLOW IS CONVEYED AROUND BALL FIELDS BY PROPOSED SWALE
AREA (A)= 4.350 ACRES
RUNOFF CORP. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.48 0.48 0.59
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 2
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 240 FEET SLOPS 2.00 4
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.20 0.20 0.25
Ti (min)= 20.74 20.74 19.59
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)=L/(60-V) FLOW TYPE
L (ft) S (4) 1.00 NONE V (fp0) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) _] S (t) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) - 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) _. S (4) = 1.00 NONE V (fp0) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) =T S (4) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) S (t) = 1.00 NONE V (fpo) = O.DO Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) _. S (4) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) _. S M = 1.00 NONE - V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) = 0.00
TOTAL LENGTH = 240 L/180+10= 11.33 < 19.59 CHOOSE LESSER
Tc =Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)= 11.33 11.33 11.33
USE Tc = 11.0 11.0 11.0
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I = 2.46 4.31 6.92
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOFF (Q= CIA) (cf.)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q = 5.09 8.92 17.92
CONCLUDE:SHEST FLOW INTO MARTINEZ PARK
SEE MINOR BASIN FLOWS ON PAGES 18 - 20
FOR SWALE DESIGN FLOWS
8
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED
FLOW TO INLET AT DP Is
FROM MINOR BASINS 1A 6 1C
PROJECT: MARTINEZ PUD DATE O1/16/98
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS PROD. N0.1558-01-97
FILE: MARTRUN BY MEG
NOTE: INLET IN CUL-DE-SAC
AREA (A)= 3.530 ACRES
RUNOFF CORP. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.73 0.73 0.91
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 2
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 60 FRET SLOPE = 2.00 t
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C 0.20 0.20 0.25
Ti (min)= 10.37 10.37 9.79
PAGE
9
TRAVEL TIME (TO=L/(60�V) FLOW TYPE
L (£t) 1380 S (}) = 1.00 GUTTER V (fps) 2.00 Tt(min)• 11.50
L (ft) •] S (}) - 1.00 NONE V (fps) • 0.00 Tt(min)• 0.00
L (ft) _: S (}) = 1.00 NONE V (fp0) • 0.00 Tt(min)• 0.00
L (ft) _. 5 (4) • 1.00 NONE V (fps) • 0.00 Tt(min)• 0.00
L (ft) _] S (}) = 1.00 NONE V (fp0) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (£t) _. S (}) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) _] S (}) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) = 11.50
TOTAL LENGTH • 1440 L/180+10= 18.00 < 21.29 CHOOSE LESSER
Tc -Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)= 18.00 18.00 18.00
USE Tc = 18.0 18.0 18.0
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I = 1.97 3.45 5.55
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOFF (Q= CIA) (cfe)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q 5.08 8.91 17.92
CONCLUDE:SIZE INLET FOR 100 YEAR SIZE PIPE FOR 100 YEAR STORM
FLOW DEPTH (Yo) = 0.50 ft PIPE SIZE 2.00 FEET
H = 0.50 FT Yo/H • 1.00 PIPE TYPE ADS MANNINGS N = 0.012
CAPACITY/LF = 1.15 cfe SLOPE 0.0100 PT/PT
REFER TO PIG 5-2 CAPACITY= 24.51 CPS PIPE CAPACITY OK
INLET SIZE = 20 ft
INLET CAPACITY = 20.70 cfe INLET CAPACITY OK
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED PAGE
FLOW TO INLET AT DP 1b
FROM MINOR BASIN 1B
PROTECT: MARTINEZ PUD
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS
FILE: MARTRUN
NOTE: INLET IN PARKING AREA
AREA (A)= 1.540 ACRES
RUNOFF COEF. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR
C = O.ST 0.57
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 2
100 YEAR
O.71
DATE 11/19/97
PROS. NO.1558-01-97
BY HBO
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
(Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME
(Ti)
LENGTH = 140
FEET
SLOPE
= 1.00
1
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
C = 0.20
0.20
0.25
Ti (min)= 19.91
19.91
18.61
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)
=L/(60+V)
FLOW TYPE
L (ft) = ISO
S
(t) =
0.50
GUTTER
V (fps) =
1.50
Tt(min)=
2.00
L (ft) =i
S
(1) .
1.00
NONE
V (fps) .
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) _.
S
(t) -
1.00
NONE
V (fps) -
0.00
Tt(min).
0.00
L (ft) _.
S
(1) -
1.00
NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) _.
S
(1) =
1.00
NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) _.
S
(1) -
1.00
NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) =i
S
(1) =
1.00
NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKSN
FROM FIGURE
3-2
TOTAL TRAVEL
TIME
(min) =
2.00
TOTAL LENGTH =
320
FEET L/180+10
=
11.78 <
20.81
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Tc (min)= 11.78
11.70
11.78
USE Tc = 12.0
12.0
12.0
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR
I 2.38 4.17
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE
RUNOFF (Q= CIA) (c£s)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR
Q = 2.09 3.66
QINT = 21.05 31.05
QOVSR = 0.00 0.00
100 YEAR
7.36
31.05 FLOW INTERCEPTED BY INLET
0.00 NO OVERFLOW FROM SUBBASIN
CONCLUDE:SEE INLET AND PIPE SIZING BASED ON TOTAL FLOW TO INLET FROM MINOR BASIN AND
OFFSITE AREA ON PAGE 10A
10
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED PAGE
FLOW TO INLET AT DP 1b
FROM MINOR BASIN 15 AND OFFSITE
PROJECT: MARTINEZ PUD
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS
PILE: MARTRUN
NOTE: INLET IN PARKING AREA
AREA (A)- 28.360 ACRES
RUNOFF CORP. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR
C = 0.68 0.69
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 2
100 YEAR
0.85
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 230 FEET SLOPE 1.00 4
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C 0.20 0.20 0.25
Ti (.in). 25.52 25.52 24.11
DATE 11/21/97
PRAT. NO.1558-01-97
BY MED
10A
TRAVEL TIME (It) =L/(60+V) FLOW TYPE
L (ft) - 960 S (f) = 0.50 GUTTER V (fpe) = 1.50 Tt(min)- 10.67
L (ft) - 100 S (4) = 4.00 LAWN V (£pe) - 1.47 Tt(min)= 1.13
L (ft) 100 S (4) = 2.00 GUTTER V (fpa) - 2.83 It(min)= 0.59
L (ft) - 1200 S (4) = 1.00 GUTTRR V (fpe) = 2.00 Tt(min)= 10.00
L (ft) - 400 S (t) = 0.70 GUTTER V (fpe) - 1.72 Tt(min)= 3.88
L (ft) =i S M = 1.00 NONE V (fpe) - 0.00 It(min)= 0.00
L (ft) =i S (4) = 1.00 NONE V (fpe) = 0.00 It(.in)= 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) = 26.27
TOTAL LENGTH = 2990 FEET L/180+10 = 26.61 < 50.37
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)= 26.61 26.61 26.61
USE Tc = 26.5 26.5 26.5
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I 1.58 2.79 4.50
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOFF (Q= CIA) (cf0)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q = 30.40 53.59 108.11
QINT = 66.15 66.15 66.15 PLOW INTERCEPTED BY INLET
QOVER = 0.00 0.00 41.96 OVERFLOW TO EAST
CONCLUDR:SIZE INLET FOR 10 YEAR SIZE PIPE FOR 10 YEAR
PLOW DEPTH (Yo) = 1.00 ft PIPE SIZE 2.50 FRET
H = 0.50 PT Yo/H = 2.00 PIPE TYPE RCP MANNINGS N 0.013
CAPACITY/LF = 2.45 cfe SLOPE 0.0270 FT/PT
REFER TO PIG 5-2 CAPACITY- 67.40 CPS PIPE CAPACITY OK
INLET SIZE = 30 ft CAPACITY - (1.486•A-R'2/3)/n
INLET CAPACITY = 66.15 cfe INLET CAPACITY OK
NOTE: CALCULATION OF INLET CAPACITY INCLUDES REDUCTION FACTOR
PROJECT: MARTINEZ PUD
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS
FILE: MARTRUN
NOTE:
AREA (A)= 2.980 ACRES
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED
PLOW TO BAST END PRIVATE DRIVE AT lc
FROM MINOR BASIN 1C
DATE 11/18/97
PROD. NO.1558-01-97
BY MEO
RUNOPP COEF. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.78 0.78 0.97
SHE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 2
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 60 FEET SLOPE 2.00 %
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.20 0.20 0.25
Ti (min)= 10.37 10.37 9.79
PAGE
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)-L/(60-V) FLOW TYPE
L (ft) 1380 S (t) - 1.00 GUTTER V (fp0) = 2.00 Tt(min)= 11.50
L (£t) _. S (t) = 1.00 NONE V (fp0) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) =i S (4) = 1.00 NONE V (fp0) = 0.00 It(min)= 0.00
L (ft) S M a 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(.in)= 0.00
L (ft) S (t) - 1.00 NONE V (fp0) = 0.00 It(.in)= 0.00
L (ft) e] S (t) = 1.00 NONE V (fp0) = 0.00 TO(min)= 0.00
L (ft) _] S (t) = 1.00 NONE V (fp0) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) 11.50
TOTAL LENGTH = 1440 L/180+10= 18.00 < 21.29 CHOOSE LESSER
Tc -Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)- 18.00 18.00 18.00
USE Tc = 18.0 18.0 18.0
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I = 1.97 3.45 5.55
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOPP (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q 4.55 7.98 16.05
CONCLUDB:CHECK PRIVATE DRIVE CAPACITY Q EAST END OF PRIVATE DRIVE
SEE HABSTAD PRINTOUT ON PAGES 11 A AND 11 B
11
Section B-B - Private Drive
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\streets.fm2
Worksheet 20' sloped road with vert and rollover
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.021
Channel Slope 0.014000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 99.52 ft
Discharge 21.61 cfs
106 A
C
0 99.4
N
v
w
99.2
Q►o�G 14. = cfs
ll.gZ
t,o� Ca � CfS
16. O
1.4
------ - --------- - - - - -- - - - - -------------- - - - - --
------
i
i
+- ouTFA4t ;
-c�� �-------� -------------------------------------------
z
99,5
-------------- r---------�--------- r-------- -------- r r---------�
2
0.57 `1"4
-------�--------�--- --------------------------------� -- --
f
C4 G :
------- �S�U.- -
_____r_________ --__ ____�__________r_________�
98.8 L
0.0
Zu• 1;rt-It
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
Station (ft)
30.0 35.0
09/05/97 FlowMaster v5.13
09:30:16 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
I I b
Section B-B street capacity at varying depths
Rating Table for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\streets.fm2
Worksheet
20' sloped road with vert and rollover
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Constant Data
Channel Slope 0.014000 ft/ft
Minimum Maximum Increment
Water Surface Elevation 99.06 99.52 0.02 ft
Rating Table
Water Surface
Elevation Wtd. Mannings Discharge Velocity
(ft) Coefficient (cfs) MIS)
99.06
0.016
0.14
99.08
0.016
0.19
99.10
0.016
0.29
99.12
0.016
0.45
99.14
0.016
0.68
99.16
0.016
0.98
99.18
0.016
1.37
99.20
0.016
1.84
99.22
0.016
2.42
99.24
0.016
3.10
99.26
0.016
3.90
99.28
0.016
4.82
99.30
0.016
5.87
99.32
0.016
7.06
99.34
0.016
8.38
99.36
0.017
9.00
99.38
0.018
9.85
99.40
0.019
10.92
99.42
0.019
12.19
99.44
0.020
13.80
99.46
0.020
15.54
99.48
0.021
17.41
99.50
0.021
19.41
99.52
0.021
21.61
1.58- LIP ROLLOIAR
1.46
1.52
1.64
1.78
1.93
2.08
2.23
2.38
2.52
2.67
2.81
2.94
3.08
TG
ROLLOVEYk
3.21 -
3.04
2.94
2.89
OOTFAIL
2.87 _LAP
2.91
2.95
2.99
it
OU}50.11
3.03
3.09-
�.th`r %INL
09/05/97 FlowMaster v5.13
09:30:55 AM Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
SHEAR ENGINEERING
CORPORATION
DEVELOPED
PAGE
PLOW TO LOWPOINT ON MASON COURT
id
FROM MINOR BASIN
1D
PROJECT:
MARTINEZ POD
DATE
O1/16/98
LOCATION:PORT
COLLINS
PROD.
NO.15S8-01-97
PILE:
MARTRUN
BY
M60
NOTE:
AREA (A)= 0.160 ACRES
RUNOFF CORP. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.86 0.86 1.00
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 2
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc) USE Tc TO UP 1b
OVRRLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH 230 FRET SLOPE = 1.00 4
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.20 0.20 0.25
Ti (min)= 25.52 25.52 24.11
TRAVEL TIME (It) =L/(60�V) FLOW TYPE
L (ft) = 960 S (4) = 0.50 GUTTER V (fpe) - 1.50 Tt(min)= 10.67
L (ft) = 100 S (4) = 4.00 LAWN V (fp0) = 1.47 Tt(min)= 1_13
L (£t) = 100 S (i) = 2.00 GUTTER V (fps) = 2.83 Tt(min)= 0.59
L (ft) = 1200 S (4) = 1.00 GUTTER V (fps) = 2.00 Tt(min)- 10.00
L (ft) = 400 S (4) = 0.70 GUTTER V (fp0) = 1.72 Tt(min)= 3.88
L (ft) =7 S (R) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) S (%) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) = 26.27
TOTAL LENGTH - 2990 FRET L/180+10 26.61 < 50.37
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)= 26.61 26.61 26.61
USE Tc = 26.5 26.5 26.5
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I = 1.58 2.79 4.50
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOPP (Q= CIA) (cfe)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q = 0.22 0.38 0.72
QOVRR = 0.00 0.00 41.96 OVERFLOW FROM PARKING LOT
QTOTAL = 0.22 0.38 42.66
CONCLUDR:FLOW TO DRIVE INTO CITY PROPERTY. DRIVE IS AT LOWPOINT.
FLOW CONVEYED INTO SWALE ON EAST SIDE OF BIKE PATH.
THIS IS THE HISTORIC PLOW PATH OF THE WATER.
PROVIDE RIPRAP INTO SWALE
INTRRSRCIION IS ALL CONCRETE WITH A SLOPE OF 0.6% WEST TO EAST
12
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED
FLOW TO DP 3
FROM OFFSITE
PROJECT: MARTINEZ PUD DATE 11/18/97
LOCATION:PORT COLLINS PROJ. NO.1558-01-97
FILE: MARTRUN BY MEO
NOTE: FLOW FROM SUB CATCHMENT 126 IN OLD TOWN BASIN
AREA (A)= 23.770 ACRES
RUNOFF COEF. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C 0.68 0.68 0.85
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 2
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 230 FEET SLOPE = 1.00 t
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.20 0.20 0.25
Ti (.in)- 25.52 25.52 24.11
PAGE 13
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)-L/(60-V) PLOW TYPE
L (ft) = 960 S (t) = 0.50 GUTTER V (fp0) = 1.50 Tt(min)= 10.61
L (ft) = 100 S (t) = 4.00 LAWN V (fp0) = 1.47 Tt(min)= 1.13
L (ft) 100 S (i) = 2.00 GUTTER V (fps) = 2.93 Tt(min)= 0.59
L (ft) = 1200 S (4) = 1.00 GUTTER V (fps) = 2.00 Tt(min)= 10.00
L (ft) _. S (%) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) _? S (i) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
L (ft) _? S M = 1.00 NONE V (fps) - 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) 22.39
TOTAL LENGTH = 2590 FEET L/180+10 = 24.39 < 46.50
Tc
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)- 24.39 24.39 24.39
USE Tc = 24.5 24.5 24.5
INTENSITY (1) (iph)
2 YEAR 30 YEAR 100 YEAR
1 = 1.65 2.91 4.69
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOFF (Q= CIA) (cfn)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q 26.85 47.26 95.24
CONCLUDE:PLOW FROM SOUTH AND BAST TO RR TRACKS ON SOUTH SIDE OF PROJECT
SIZE SWALE FOR Q100-1.33 = 126.67 CFS
SEE SWALE DESIGN ON PAGE 13 A AND 13 B
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
PAGE 13A
CHANNEL CAPACITY- SECTION Y-Y
PROTECT NAME: MARTINEZ PUD DATE: 11/20/97
PROTECT NO. : 1558-01-97 BY : MEO
SWALE DESCRIPTION:SWALE ALONG RAILROAD FILE: MARTRUN
SECTION Y-Y
CAPACITY OF TRIANGULAR OR TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL
CHANNEL CONFIGURATION: TRAPEZOIDAL Q1OO (CPS) 95.24
CHANNEL LINING: GRASS WITH PAN Qdeeign = 126.67
WEIGHTED MANNINGS N VALUE
P GRASS (ft) = 24.22 N = 0.032 PIN = 0.7752
P CONCRETE (ft) = 6.00 N . 0.016 PIN - 0.0960
PERIMETER (ft) = 30.22
WEIGHTED N VALUE = 0.029
Da Db Dc Sc n W I
(ft) (ft) (ft) (1) (ft) (ft)
---- ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- ----
10.00 10.00 1.50 D.70 0.029 10.00 0.50
0.15 PT/PT . LEFT BANK SLOPE 7 :1 (H:V)
0.15 FT/FT = RIGHT BANK SLOPE 7 :1 (H:V)
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft.) (ft) (..£.) (ft) (A/P) (c£e) (ft/sec)
--------------------------------------------------------
1.50 30.00 30.00 30.22 1.00 0.08 128.06 4.29
1.00 23.53 16.67 23.48 0.80 0.09 57.20 3.43
0.50 16.67 6.67 16.74 0.54 0.08 15.56 2.33
0.00 10.00 0.00 10.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00
1.294 27.25 24.10 27.45 0.92 0.08 95.34 3.96
1.489 29.85 29.67 30.08 0.99 0.08 126.83 4.27
r♦rrrr+rrrrxx+exxx+++ar««r+xxxx+xax«x+xxx+r«««««r+««+«x ««x«««r«vv v«r«««•
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft.) (ft) (a.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cfe) (ft/a--)
FLOW DEPTH FOR THE DESIGN FLOW IS APPROXIMATELY 1.49 FRET
FLOW DEPTH FOR THE Q100 IS APPROXIMATELY 1.29 FEET
CONCLUDS:CHANNRL IS ADEQUATE
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
PAGE 13B
CHANNEL CAPACITY- SECTION Z-Z
PROJECT NAME: MARTIN2Z POD DATE: 11/20/97
PROJECT NO. : 1558-01-97 BY : MEO
SWALE DESCRIPTION: SWALE ALONG SOUTH SIDE OF FILE: MARTRUN
COMMERCIAL BUILDING
CAPACITY OF TRIANGULAR OR TRAPSZOIDAL CHANNEL
CHANNEL CONFIGURATION: TRAPEZOIDAL Q100 - 95.24
CHANNEL LINING: GRASS/CONCRETE Qde0ign = 126.67
WEIGHTED MANN INGS N VALUE
P GRASS (ft) = 20.22 N = 0.032 P-N - 0.6470
P CONCRETE (ft) = 10.00 N = 0.016 P•N = 0.1600
PERIMETER (ft) = 30.22 FEET
WEIGHTED N VALUE = 0.027
Da Db Dc Sc n W I
(ft) (£t) (ft) (i) (ft) (ft)
-___ ___- ---- --_- ----- ____ ----
10.00 10.00 1.50 0.70 0.027 10.00 0.50
0.15 FT/FT - LEFT BANK SLOPE 7 :1 (H:V)
0.15 PT/FT - RIGHT BANK SLOPE ] :1 (H:V)
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft.) (ft) (P.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cfa) (ft/sec)
------- --------------------- ----------------------------
1.50 30.00 30.00 30.22 1.00 0.08 138.99 4.63
1.00 23.33 16.67 23.48 0.80 0.08 61.74 3.70
0.50 16.67 6.67 16.74 0.54 0.08 16.8D 2.52
0.00 10.00 0.00 10.00 0.00 0!08 0.00 0.00
1.246 26.61 22.81 26.80 0.90 0.08 95.39 4.18
1.434 29.12 28.05 29.33 0.97 0.08 126.76 4.52
xxxxxxxxxxuxxrxruurrrrr xr rrrrx rrr»rrrxxu xxxrxxrxxxxxxxxrxxx»xruu
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 SC 1/2 Q V
(ft.) (ft) (D.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cfo) (ft/sec)
FLOW DEPTH FOR QIOO = 1.25 FEET
FLOW DEPTH FOR DESIGN PLOW= 1.43 FEET
CONCLUDE:CHANNEL IS ADEQUATE
PLOW SUMMARY FOR MARTINEZ POD PAGE 14
DATE 29-San
DESIGN CONTRIBUTING AREA C2 C10 C100 Tc Tc I2 I10 I100 Q2 Q10 Q100 PAGE
POINT SUB/MINOR 2,10 100
BASIN(S) ac. min. min iph iph iph cfa cfa cEO
HISTORIC CONDITIONS
2A 2A 1.46 0.33 0.33 0.41 10.00 10.00 2.54 4.45 7.14 1.22 2.14 4.29 16
DEVELOPED CONDITIONS
2A 2A 1.24 0.61 0.61 0.76 10.00 10.00 2.54 4.45 7.14 1.91 3.34 6.70 17
DESIGN FLOWS FOR SWALES IN MARTINEZ PARK
25 25 & 01 1.82 0.48 0.48 0.60 11.50 11.50 2.42 4.24 6.82 2.10 3.68 7.39 18
2B 2A & 25 & O1 3.23 0.68 0.68 0.84 11.50 31.50 2.42 4.24 6.82 5.28 9.26 18.60 26
2C 2C & 02 2.51 0.36 0.36 0.45 14.50 14.50 2.18 3.82 6.17 0.00 3.43 6.91 19
1 SITE/PARK 7.25 0.55 0.55 0.69 15.50 15.50 2.11 3.70 5.98 8.43 14.77 29.82 20
DESIGN PLOW BETWEEN UNITS H & K IN COHOUSING AREA
2X 2x 0.42 0.47 0.47 0.59 9.50 9.00 2.62 4.57 7.57 0.52 0.91 1.88 25
SUMMARY OF SWALE DESIGNS IN PARK
DESIGN
SECTION
DESIGN
Q
DESIGN
TOP
DEPTH BOTTOM
SIDE SLOPE
CAPA-
VELD-
PLOW
POINT
STORM
Q
WIDTH
WIDTH
SLOPE
LEFT
RIGHT
CITY
CITY
DEPTH
YR.
CPS
CPS
PT
PT
FT
4
H:1
H:1
CPS
PPS
PT
2B
K-K
100
7.39
9.83
8.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
4.00
4.00
11.47
2.87
0.94
2C
X-X
100
6.91
9.20
14.00
1.50
2.00
1.00
4.00
4.00
49.42
4.12
0.71
1
X-X
100
29.82
39.69
14.00
1.50
2.00
1.00
4.00
4.00
49.42
4.12
1.37
BETWEEN
UNITS H & K
100
1.88
2.49
8.00
1.00
0.00
5.00
4.00
4.00
25.64
6.41
0.42
2B
P-P
100
18.60
24.73
25.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
10.00
10.00
49.42
3.29
0.73
NOTE: SECTION G-G IS BETWEEN BALLFIELD AND PARKING LOT
DESIGN Q - 1.33«Q100
BOTTOM WIDTH OF 0 FEET IS A TRIANGULAR SWALE
CAPACITY - (1.486«A«R A2/3«5�0.5)/n
A = CROSS SECTIONAL AREA OF CHANNEL (SP)
R = HYDRAULIC RADIUS OF CHANNEL (A/P)
S = SLOPE OF CHANNEL (FT/FT)
n = MANNINGS n
VELOCITY = CAPACITY/ARRA
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
MINOR BASIN BREAKDOWN PAGE 15
PROTECT: MARTINEZ PUD DATE 04/02/98
LOCATION:PORT COLLINS BY MEO
PROJ.NO.:1558-01-97 PILE: MARTRUN2
TOTAL SITE AREA 9.58 ACRES TOTAL BASIN AREA - 33.35 ACRES
OPPSITE AREA = 23.77 ACRES
SUBCATCHMENT 136 26.82 ACRBS A PORTION OF THIS BASIN IS ONSITE
HISTORIC
DEVELOPED
SUB
MINOR
MINOR
MINOR
MINOR
MINOR
PARK
PARK
PARK
BASIN
BASIN
BASIN
BASIN
BASIN
BASIN
BASIN
BASIN
BASIN
2
2A
2A
25
,
2C
2D
O1
02
03
ASPHALT
0.95
0.18
0.58
0.37
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.02 _
CONCRETE
0.02
0.00
0.01
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
GRAVEL
0.10
0.18
0.00
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ROOFS
0.59
0.00
0.08
0.14
0.37
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
LAWNS,SANDY SOIL
PLAT < 2%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
AVERAGE 2 TO 71
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
STEEP > 7t
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
LAWNS, HEAVY SOIL:
PLAT < 24
2.69
1.10
0.57
0.96
0.92
0.00
0.14
0.59
0.58
AVERAGE 2 TO 7%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
STEEP > 7%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.22
0.25
0.61
0.39
TOTAL
4.35
1.46
1.24
1.60
1.29
0.22
0.39
1.22
0.99
RUNOPP
SUB
MINOR BASINS
COEFFICIENT
BASIN HISTORIC
DEVELOPED
2A
2A
2B
2C
2D
01
02
03
C2-C10
0.48
0.33
0.61
0.47
0.42
0.35
0.29
0.30
0.29
C100 - 1.25*C2
0.59
0.41
0.76
0.59
0.52
0.44
0.36
0.37
0.36
C100 IS NEVER GREATER THAN 1.0
DESIGN BASINS
AREA
C2
C100
POINT
acres
2B 2B & 01
1.82
0.48
0.60
2C 2C & 02
2.51
0.39
0.45
2B 2A&B & 01
3.23
0.68
0.84
1 2c
1.29
0.42
0.52
2d
0.22
0.35
0.44
le
2.98
0.78
0.98
Is
0.55
0.73
0.91
02
1.22
0.30
0.37
03
0.99
0.30
0.37
1 subtotal
7.25
0.55
0.69
SUB/
AREA
C2
C100
NOTE
MINOR
BASIN
acres
1
5.23
0.71
0.89
PLOW TO EASTERN END OF PROPERTY AND PARK
2
4.35
0.48
0.59
SHEET PLOW TO PARK
Is
0.55
0.71
0.91
DIRECT PLOW TO INLET IN CUL-DE-SAC
1b
1.54
0.57
0.71
PLOW TO INLET IN PARKING LOT
Ic
2.98
0.78
0.97
CHECK STREET CAPACITY
Id
0.16
0.86
1.00
MINOR BASIN IS MASON COURT
2a
1.24
0.61
0.76
SHEET PLOW TO PARK ENTRY DRIVE
2b
1.60
0.47
0.59
SHEET PLOW TO PARK
2c
1.29
0.42
0.53
SHEET PLOW TO PARK
2d
0.22
0.25
0.31
SHEST PLOW TO PARK
01
0.39
0.29
0.36
BASIN IN PARK DRAINS TO WEST
02
1.22
0.30
0.38
BASIN IN PARK DRAINS TO EAST
03
0.99
0.30
0.37
BASIN IN PARK DRAINS TO EAST
2xx
0.42
0.47
0.59
MINOR BASIN FOR SWALE BETWEEN UNITS H & K
INCLUDED IN SUB BASIN 2B
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
HISTORIC PAGE
PLOW TO ENTRY DRIVE (DP) 2A
FROM MINOR BASIN 2A
PROTECT: MARTINEZ PUD DATE 11/19/97
LOCATION:PORT COLLINS PROD. NO.155E-01-97
FILE: MARTRUN2 BY MEO
AREA (A). 1.460 ACRES INCLUDES 1/2 OF ENTRY DRIVE AND 1/2 SHERWOOD NORTH OF HIGH
POINT
RUNOFF CORP. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.32 0.33 0.41
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 15
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 20 PERT SLOPE = 1.00 4
- 2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C 0.20 0.20 0.25
Ti (min)= 7.53 7.53 7.11
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)=L/(60+V) PLOW TYPE
L (ft) - 65 S (i) . 0.50 GUTTER V (fpe) . 1.50 Tt(min)= 0.72
L (£t) 70 S (5) = 1.50 GUTTER V (fp0) = 2.36 Tt(min)= 0.49
L (ft) . 340 S (4) . 5.00 GUTTER V (£p0) = 4.45 Tt(min)= 1.27
L (ft) _) S (t) . 1.00 NONE V (fpe) = 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
L (ft) =7 S (4) 1.00 NONE V (fpo) . 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) .i S (5) = 1.00 NONE V (fpe) = 0.00 Tt(min)- 0.00
L (ft) =i S (i) . 1.00 NONE V (fpo) - 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) = 2.49
TOTAL LENGTH = 495 L/160+10= 12.75 > 9.60 CHOOSE LESSER
Tc=T3+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)- 10.02 10.02 9.60
USE Tc = 10.0 10.0 10.0
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I = 2.54 4.45 7.14
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOFF (Q= CIA) (cfe)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q = 1.22 2.14 4.29
CONCLUDE:COMPARR WITH DEVELOPED FLOWS
16
PwSe 1 °6A
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED PAGE 10
FLOW TO ENTRY DRIVE (DP) 2A
FROM MINOR BASIN 2A
MARTINEZ PUD DATE 01/20/97
PORT COLLINS PROS. NO.1555-01-97
MARTRUN2 BY HBO
1.240 ACRES INCLUDES 1/2 OR ENTRY DRIVE AND 1/2 SHERWOOD NORTH OF HIGH
POINT
EF. (C)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
0.61
0.61
0.76
D SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 15
ONCENTRATION (Tc)
TRAVEL TIME (TO
20 FEET
SLOPE = 1.00
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
-
0.20
0.20
0.25
7.53
7.53
7.11
ME (Tt)-L/(60-V)
FLOW TYPE
65 S (4) =
0.50 GUTTER
V (fps) =
1.50
Tt(min)-
0.72
70 S (4) =
1.50 GUTTER
V (fps) =
2.36
Tt(min)=
0.49
340 S (4) =
5.00 GUTTER
V (fps) =
4.45
Tt(min)-
1.27
i S M -
1.00 NONE
V (fp0) -
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
. S (1) -
1.00 NONE
V (fps) -
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
. S (4) =
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
i S (}) a
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
e.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
ITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2
TOTAL TRAVEL
TIME
(min) a
2.49
GTH - 495
L/180+10= 12.75
>
9.60
CHOOSE LESSER
TAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
10.02
10.02
9.60
10.0
10.0
10.0
(I) (iph)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
2.54
4.45
7.14
INTENSITIES TAKEN
FROM FIGURE
3-1
= CIA) (cfe)
2 YEAR
30 YEAR
100 YEAR
1.91
3.24
6.70
STORIC FLOWS
1.22
2.14 -
4.29
0.68
1.20
2.41
ALLOWABLE FLOW DEPTH IN STREET FOR MINOR STORM IS UP TO CROWN - 0.43 FEET
1/2 STREET CAPACITY EQUALS 14.21 CPS SEE HABSTADS PRINTOUT ATTACHED
REDUCTION FACTOR FROM FIG 4-2 - 0.4B
ALLOWABLE 1/2 STREET CAPACITY - 6.62 OK GREATER THAN Q100
ALLOWABLE 1/2 STREET CAPACITY FOR MINOR STORM NOT EXCEEDED BY Q100
Gw'f !) lDr1\M Zo PCACK I 1 n
30' wide road with vertical curb and gutter
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\streets.fm2
Worksheet 30 street with vertical curb and gutter
Flow Element Irregular Channel
= it } Q -4 3
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Discharge
,}
r
LI P = It 0%17
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.016
Channel Slope 0.050000 fUft
Water Surface Elevation 100.00 ft
Discharge 52.10 cfs
Top
;l
100. 1 30r 1it It
1 1 LIVrb
I I 1
I 1
Q
1 1 I
1 1
I I I
I 1
99.9
--------------------
----------------
1 1 I
1 I
I I I
1 I
I 1 I
I I
1 I 1 I 1
I I 1
- 1 1
I 1
I
1
I 1 I 1 I
1 1 I
1 1
0 99.75
«,
------------------I--------- --- -- - ---
1-- -r-----------r-----------I- -I
I
I I
7
1 I
1 1 I
I
1 1
lL
I
I I
99.7
-. -+ Y
ti ,
I I 1
1 I I
1 I
1
I I 1
1
I I
1 I 1
1 I
1 I 1
1 I
I I 1
1 I
I I 1
I 1
1 I 1
1 1 1
I 1
I 1
J
9^ pV
1 I I
----------1-----------T------ __r-----------I-----------1--------
1 1 1
1 I --
I I 1
I I
I 1
1 1 I
1 I
I 1 I
I 1
--- -
1 I I
I I 1
1 1
1 1
I I 1
1 1
I I I
1 I
I I I
I I
99.5
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0
20.0 25.0 30.0
Station (ft)
09/02/97 FlowMaster v5.13
08:05:16 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
l 713
Capacity of 30' wide street with vert C & G for varied depths
Rating Table for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\streets.fm2
Worksheet
30 street with vertical curb and gutter
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Constant Data
Channel Slope 0.050000 ft/ft
Input Data
Minimum Maximum Increment
Water Surface Elevation 99.90 100.00 0.01 ft
Rating Table
Water Surface
Elevation Wtd. Mannings Discharge Velocity
(ft) Coefficient (cfs) (ft/s)
99.90
0.016
21.90
5.61
99.91
0.016
23.95
5.73
99.92
0.016
26.12
5.85
99.93
0.016
28.42
5.97
99.94
0.016
31.45
6.22
99.95
0.016
34.61
6.46
99.96
0.016
37.88
6.69
99.97
0.016
41.26
6.92
99.98
0.016
44.76
7.15
99.99
0.016
48.38
7.37
100.00
0.016
52.10
7.59
4' fo1J S+rgq&
COOC,\\)&e,* TZ Uf �o cerkt,-1vNt,
IA z2 -fs (Z1.4zla�
�icdvc.�►o n� r3ac,�or = 0.17
fWow&.At- TL '►reed Gap�c•�� = 6.gLcfs
09/02/97 FlowMaster v5.13
08:11:01 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Pagel of 1
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED PAGE
FLOW TO DESIGN POINT 2B IN MARTINEZ PARK
MINOR BASINS 2B 6 01
PROTECT: MARTINEZ POD
DATE
01/26/98
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS
PEW.
NO.1558-01-97
PILE: MARTRUN2
BY
MEO
NOTE: SHEET PLOW DIRECTLY INTO PARK
FLOW CONVEYED WEST
TO ENTRY DRIVE
BY
SWALE SECTION
K-K
AREA (A)= 1.820 ACRES
RUNOFF COEF. (C)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
C = 0.48
0.48
0.60
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE
15
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 300 FEET
SLOPS = 2.00
i
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
C 0.20
0.20
0.25
Ti (min)= 23.19
23.19
21.90
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)-L/(60-V)
PLOW TYPE
L (£C) =i S (i) -
1.00 MONS
V (£p0) -
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) =i S (1) -
1.00 NONE
V (fps) -
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) =t S (4) =
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
L (ft) _] S (i) =
1.00 NONE
V (fps) -
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) =i S (i) =
1.00 NONE
V (fps) -
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
L (ft) =2 S M =
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
L (ft) .? S (i) =
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE
3-2
TOTAL TRAVEL
TIME
(min) =
0.00
TOTAL LENGTH = 300
L/180+10= 11.67
< 21.90
CHOOSE LESSER
Tc =Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Tc (min)- 11.67
11.67
11.67
USE Tc = 11.5
11.5
11.5
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
I 2.42
4.24
6.82
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN
FROM FIGURE
3-1
RUNOFF (Q- CIA) (cfs)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Q 2.10
3.68
7.39
CONCLUDE:SHEET PLOW INTO MARTINEZ PARK
SIZE SWALE TO HANDLE 133% OF Q100
DESIGN PLOW = 9.83 CPS
SEE SWALE DESIGN ON PAGE 18 A
18
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
PAGE 18 A
CHANNEL CAPACITY- SECTION K-K
PROJECT NAME: MARTINEZ PUD DATE: 01/16/98
PROJECT NO. : 1558-01-97 BY : MRS
SWALE DESCRIPTION:SWALE ALONG BALL FIELDS FILE: MARTRUN2
SECTION A -A
CAPACITY OF TRIANGULAR OR TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL
'CHANNEL CONFIGURATION: TRIANGULAR Q100 (CFS) = 7.39
CHANNEL LINING: GRASS Qdeeign 9.83
Da Db Dc Sc n W I
(ft) (ft) (ft) (4) (ft) (ft)
---- ---- ---- ---- _____ ---- ----
4.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 0.032 0.00 0.25
0.25 FT/FT = LEFT BANK SLOPE 4 :1 (H:V)
0.25 FT/FT - RIGHT BANK SLOPE 4 :1 (H:V)
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft) (ft) (0.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cfo) (ft/aeC)
1.00 8.00 4.00 8.25 0.62 0.10 11.47 2.87
0.75 6.00 2.25 6.18 0.51 0.10 5.32 2.37
0.50 4.00 1.00 4.12 0.39 0.10 1.E1 1.81
0.25 2.00 0.25 2.06 0.24 0.10 0.28 1.14
0.943 7.54 3.56 7.78 0.59 0.10 9.81 2.76
0.944 7.55 3.56 7.78 0.59 0.10 9.83 2.76
rrrerr rr re a««rrr r:rrr rrrrrrrrrrrr rr«•«««««rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr««««r♦r♦♦rrr
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft.) (ft) (e.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cfo) (ft/aeC)
FLOW DEPTH FOR THE DESIGN FLOW IS APPROXIMATELY 0.94 FRET
CONCLUDB:CHANNEL IS ADEQUATE
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED PAGE
FLOW TO DESIGN POINT 2C IN MARTINEZ PARK
MINOR BASINS 2C & 02
PROJECT: MARTINEZ PUD DATE 01/16/96
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS PROJ. NO.1558-01-97
FILE: MARTRUN2 BY MEO
NOTE: SHEET FLOW DIRECTLY INTO PARK
WEST OF STORM SEWER
AREA (A)= 2.510 ACRES
RUNOFF COEF. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C 0.36 0.36 0.45
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 15
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH 190 FEET SLOPE = 2.00 4
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C • 0.20 0.20 0.25
Ti (min)= 17.96 17.96 16.97
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)-L/(60+V) FLOW TYPE
L (ft) • 600 S (4) - 1.00 SWALE V (fps) - 1.58 Tt(min)= 6.33
L (ft) •'t S M - 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) •i S (t) = 1.00 NONE V (fps) - 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) •i S (4) • 1.00 NONE V (fps) - O.DO Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) •. S (i) • 1.00 NONE V (fps) - 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (ft) =7 S (5) - 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
L (£t) =P S (t) - 1.00 NONE V (fps) = 0.00 Tt(min)= 0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2 TOTAL TRAVEL TIME (min) = 6.33
TOTAL LENGTH = 780 L/180+10= 14.33 < 23.29 CHOOSE LESSER
Tc =Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Tc (min)= 14.33 14.33 14.33
USE Tc = 14.5 14.5 14.5
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
I 2.19 3.62 6.17
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-1
RUNOFF (Q- CIA) (cfo)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
Q = 1.96 3.43 6.91
CONCLUDS:SHEET FLOW INTO MARTINEZ PARK
SIZE SWALE TO HANDLE 133% OF QSOO
DESIGN FLOW • 9.20 CPS
SEE SWALE DESIGN ON PAGE 19 A
19
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
PAGE 19 A
CHANNEL CAPACITY- SECTION X-X
PROJECT NAME: MARTINEZ PUT) DATE: 01/16/98
PROJECT NO. : 1558-01-97 BY : MEO
SWALE DESCRIPTION:SWALE ALONG BALL FIELDS FILE: MARTRUN2
SECTION X-X
CAPACITY OF TRIANGULAR OR TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL
CHANNEL CONFIGURATION: TRAPEZOIDAL Q100 (CPS) 6.91
CHANNEL LINING: GRASS Qdesign = 9.20
Da Db Dc Sc n W I
(£t) (ft) (ft) M (ft) (ft)
6.00 6.00 1.50 1.00 0.032 2.00 0.25
0.25 FT/FT = LEFT BANK SLOPE 4 :1 (H:V)
0.25 FT/FT = RIGHT BANK SLOPE 4 :1 (H:V)
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(£t) (ft) (s.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cfs) (ft/sec)
--------------------------------------------------------
1.50 14.00 12.00 14.37 0.89 0.10 49.42 4.12
1.25 12.00 8.75 12.31 0.80 0.10 32.37 3.70
1.00 10.00 6.00 10.25 0.70 0.10 19.50 3.25
0.7E 8.00 3.75 8.19 0.59 0.10 10.35 2.76
0.50 6.00 2.00 6.12 0.47 0.10 4.40 2.20
0.25 4.00 0.7E 4.06 0.32 0.10 1.13 1.51
0.710 7.68 3.44 7.85 0.58 0.10 9.20 2.68
0.711 7.69 3.44 7.86 0.58 0.10 9.22 2.68
rrr«rrr rrrr♦rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrr re ««rrrrerr«rrrrrrrr«rree«rr«e«rrrrrrr««♦
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft.) (ft) (s.f.) (ft) (A/P) (c£s) (ft/sac)
FLOW DEPTH FOR THE DESIGN FLOW IS APPROXIMATELY 0.71 PEET
CONCLUDE: CHANNEL IS ADEQUATE
SHEAR ENGINEERING
CORPORATION
DEVELOPED
PAGE 20
PLOW TO DESIGN POINT 1
IN MARTINEZ PARK
MINOR BASINS
IA,1C,2C,2D,02
AND 03
PROJECT:
MARTINEZ PUD
DATE
O1/29/98
LOCATION:PORT
COLLINS
PRAT.
NO.1558-01-97
PILE:
MARTRUN2
BY
HBO
NOTE:
TOTAL PLOW TO
SWALE SECTION X-X
AREA (A)= 7.250 ACRES
RUNOFF COED. (C)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
C 0.55
0.55
0.69
SEE SPREAD SHBRT ATTACHED ON PAGE
15
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 180 FEET
SLOPE = 2.00
4
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
C - 0.20
0.20
0.25
Ti (min)= 17.96
17.96
16.97
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)-L/(60+V)
FLOW TYPE
L (ft) 800 S (7) -
1.00 SWALE
V (fps) -
1.58
Tt(min)-
8.44
L (ft) =7 S (t) -
1.00 NONE
V (fps) -
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
L (ft) =7 S (4) -
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) _] S (4) -
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) =7 S (5) =
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) =7 S (t) -
1.00 NONE
V (fps) -
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) =7 S (i) -
1.00 NONE
V (fps) _ -
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE 3-2
TOTAL TRAVEL
TIME
(min) =
8.44
TOTAL LENGTH = 980
L/180+10- 15.44
<
25.40
CHOOSE LESSER
T. =Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Tc (min)- 15.44
15.44
15.44
USE Tc = 15.5
15.5
15.5
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
I = 2.11
3.70
5.98
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN
FROM FIGURE
3-1
RUNOFF (Q= CIA) (cfe)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Q = 8.43
14.77
29.82
CONCLUDS:THBREFORB SIZE SWALE FOR 133% OF QSOO
QDBSIGN = Q100+1.33 SEE PAGE 20 A
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
PAGE 20 A
CHANNEL CAPACITY- SECTION X-X
PROJECT NAME: MARTINEZ POD DATE: 01/29/98
PROJECT NO. : 155E-01-97 BY : MEO
SWALE DESCRIPTION:SWAIH ALONG BALL FIELDS FILE: MARTRUN2
SECTION X-X
CAPACITY OF TRIANGULAR OR TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL
CHANNEL CONFIGURATION: TRAPEZOIDAL 0100 (CPS) 29.62
CHANNEL LINING: GRASS Qdeaign 39.66
Da Db Dc Sc n W I
(ft) (ft) (ft) (4) (ft) (ft)
---- ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- ----
6.00 6.00 1.50 1.00 0.032 2.00 0.25
0.25 PT/FT = LEFT BANK SLOPE 4 :1 (H:V)
0.25 FT/FT a RIGHT BANK SLOPE 4 :1 (H:V) ,
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft) (ft) (s.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cfa) (ft/sec)
--------------------------------------------------------
1.50 14.00 12.00 14.37 0.89 0.10 49.42 4.12
1.25 12.00 8.75 12.31 0.80 0.10 32.37 3.70
1.00 10.00 6.00 10.25 0.70 0.10 19.50 3.25
0.75 8.00 3.75 8.18 0.59 0.10 10.35 2.76
1.366 12.93 10.20 13.26 0.84 0.10 39.73 3.90
1.365 12.92 10.1E 13.26 0.84 0.10 39.66 3.09
r rrrrrrrr♦rrrrrrr+++r+++++++r+++r+r+r++rrrrrrrrrrrr♦rrrrr♦r rrrrrrrrrrr rr
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft.) (ft) (e.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cfo) (£t/ae C)
FLOW DEPTH FOR THE DESIGN FLOW IS APPROXIMATELY 1.37 PBBT
CONCLUDE:SWALE IS ADEQUATE FOR 100-YEAR STORM
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
PAGE 21
CAPACITY OF CONCRETE SIDEWALK CULVERT IN SUMP CONDITION
PROTECT: MARTINEZ PUD
FILE: CONCWALK
PEW NO.:1558-01-97
DATE: 11/20/97
BY: MRO
LOCATION:FORT COLLINS
ALLOWABLE FLOW DEPTH 1 FRET
HEIGHT OF OPENING (h) 0.45 FEET
FLOW DEPTH (Yo) 1.00 FRET OK LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO ALLOWABLE FLOW DEPTH
Yo/H = 2.22
FROM FIG 5-2 CAPACITY PER LINEAR FOOT 2.2 CPS/LP
WIDTH OF VALLEY PAN = 10.00 FEET FROM 6-20 IN EVEN INCREMENTS
WIDTH OF S/W CULVERT OPENING B FEET
MAXIMUM WIDTH OF OPENING - 8 FEET SO THAT SIDEWALK CULVERT IS CENTERED
ON FLOWLINB OF VALLEY PAN
REDUCTION FACTOR = 80.00% NEVER MORE THAN 90%
ACTUAL CAPACITY = 17.60 CPS
CONCLUDE:SIDEWALK CULVERT IS ADEQUATE IT CANNOT BE MADE ANY LARGER
LARGER STORMS WILL OVER TOP THE SIDWALK INTO THE PARKING LOT
P%.� ZZ
West side of Mason Court - Q = 41.96
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
West side of Mason Court
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.006000 ft/ft
Elevation range:
75.79 ft to 76.97 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station
0.00
76.23 0.00 168.75
77.94
75.94
90.71
75.79
103.82
75.94
168.75
76.97
Discharge
41.96 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Water Surface Elevation
76.19
ft
Flow Area
18.81
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
108.93
ft
Top Width
108.92
ft
Height
0.40
ft
Critical Depth
76.18
ft
Critical Slope
0.006746 ft/ft
Velocity
2.23
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.08
ft
Specific Energy
76.27
ft
Froude Number
0.95
Flow is subcritical.
Roughness
0.016
01119/98 FlowMaster v5.13
02:33:24 PM Haeslad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
West side of Mason court - Q = 41.96
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet West side of Mason Court
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.016
Channel Slope 0.006000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 76.19 ft
Discharge 41.96 cfs
76.6
w 76.4
C
0
W 76.2
01/19/98
02:33:47 PM
I I 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 I
1 1 I 1 1
I 1 1 1 I
1 1 1 1
1 I 1 1 I
I I I I I
I I 1 1 I
1 1 I I 1
I I 1 1 I
1 I 1 1 1
I 1 I 1 I
1 _L L I _J
I 1 I 1
I 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1 1
I I I I
I 1 1 I I
I I 1 1 I
1 I I 1 I
1
1 _L L I _J
I 1 I I
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 I
I I 1 I I
I I 1 I 1
1 I 1 1 1
I 1 1 I I
1 I I 1 1
I I 1
I 1 1 I
1 I 1 1
1 I 1 I
I 1 I 1
I I 1 1
I I 1 1
1
_L _L _I _J
1 1 1 1
1 I 1 1
1 1 1 I
1 I I I
1 1 1 1
I 1 I I 1
I 1 I 1 I
I 1 I 1 1
I 1 I 1
1 I 1 I I
1 I 1 I I
1 1 1 1 I
1 1 I 1 I
I I 1 I 1
I 1 1 I I
I 1 I I 1
75.61
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0
Station (ft)
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666
I 1 1
I 1 I
I 1
1 I I
1 _J
1 I I
1 I 1
1 I I
I 1 1
I I I I
I I I 1
I I 1 1
1 I I 1
I 1 1 I
I I I I
I I I I
I 1 1 1
1 I 1 1
1 I I I
1 I I I
I I 1
160.0 180.0
FlowMasler v5.13
Page 1 of i
Z.4
West side of Mason Court up to HP
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
Ohaestaciftw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
West side of Mason Court
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.006000 fUft
Water Surface Elevation 76.23 ft
Elevation range:
75.79 ft to 76.97 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
0.00
76.23 0.00
77.94
75.94
90.71
75.79
103.82
75.94
168.75
76.97
Results
Wild. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Discharge
55.95
cfs
Flow Area
23.40
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
122.11
ft
Top Width
122.10
ft
Height
0.44
ft
Critical Depth
76.22
ft
Critical Slope
0.006502 fUft
Velocity
2.39
fus
Velocity Head
0.09
ft
Specific Energy
76.32
ft
Froude Number
0.96
Flow is subcritical.
End Station Roughness
168.75 0.016
01/19/98 FlowMaster v5.13
02:32:49 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
SHRAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED PAGE
FLOW TO DESIGN POINT 2X
MINOR BASINS 2x
PROTECT:
MARTINEZ PUT)
DATE
01/21/98
LOCATION:FORT
COLLINS
PROS.
NO.1558-01-97
FILE:
MARTRUN2
BY
MEO
NOTE:
TOTAL FLOW TO BETWEEN UNITS H 6 K
AREA (A)= 0.420 ACRES 140 x 130
RUNOFF COEF. (C)
2 YEAR 10 YEAR 100 YEAR
C = 0.47 0.47 0.59
SAME AS MINOR BASIN 2B
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
(Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME
(Ti)
LENGTH = 40 FEET
SLOPE 2.00
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
C = 0.20
0.20
0.25
Ti (min)= 8.47
8.47
8.00
TRAVEL TIME (Tt)=L/(60+V)
FLOW TYPE
L (ft) = 60 S
M -
2.00 SWALE
V (fps) =
2.16
Tt(min)=
0.46
L (£t) = 90 S
(4) =
5.00 SWALE
V (fps) =
3.37
Tt(min)=
0.45
L (ft) _. S
(4) =
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) _. S
(4) -
1.OD NONE
V (fps) .
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) =4 S
(i) .
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) =4 S
(4) .
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
L (ft) _. S
(5) .
1.00 NONE
V (fps) =
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN
FROM FIGURE
3-2
TOTAL TRAVEL
TIME
(min) =
0.91
TOTAL LENGTH -
190
L/180+10- 11.06
>
8.91
CHOOSE LESSER
Tc =Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Tc (min)= 9.38
9.38
8.91
USE Tc = 9.5
9.5
9.0
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
I = 2.62
4.57
7.57
NOTE: INTENSITIES
TAKEN
FROM FIGURE
3-1
RUNOFF (Q= CIA) (c£s)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Q = 0.52
0.91
1.88
THEREFORE SIZE SWALE FOR 133% OF Q100
QDESIGN = Q10D+1.33 SEE PAGE 25 A
:L1
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
PAGE 2S A
CHANNEL CAPACITY BETWEEN UNITS H & K
PROJECT NAME: MARTINEZ PUD DATE: 01/21/98
PROJECT NO. : 1SSB-01-97 BY : MEO
SWALE DESCRIPTION:TRIANGULAR FILE: MARTRUN2
CAPACITY OF TRIANGULAR OR TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL
CHANNEL CONFIGURATION: TRIANGULAR Q100 (CPS) 1.88
CHANNEL LINING: GRASS Qde0ign = 2.49
Da Db Dc Sc n W I
(ft) (ft) (ft) M (ft) (ft)
---- ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- ----
4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 0.032 0.00 0.25
0.25 PT/FT = LEFT BANK SLOPE 4 :1 (H:V)
0.25 FT/FT . RIGHT BANK SLOPE 4 :1 (H:V)
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft) (£t) (e.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cf0) (ft/0ec)
--------------------------------------------------------
1.00 8.00 4.00 8.25 0.62 0.22 25.64 6.41
0.7E 6.00 2.25 6.18 0.51 0.22 11.91 5.29
0.50 4.00 1.00 4.12 0.39 0.22 4.04 4.04
0.25 2.00 0.25 2.06 0.24 0.22 0.64 2.54
0.417 3.34 0.70 3.44 0.34 0.22 2.49 3.58
0.416 3.33 0.69 3.42 0.34 0.22 2.47 3.57
r rrrererrrrrrr+r+++rr++++++»+++rr+rr++rrr rrrrrrurrrrrru•rr rr rrrrrvrer
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft.) (ft) (e.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cf-) (ft/Dec)
FLOW DEPTH FOR THE DESIGN FLOW IS APPROXIMATELY 0.42 FEET
CONCLUDE:SWALE BETWEEN CO -HOUSING UNITS H & K IS ADEQUATE FOR 100-YEAR STORM
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DEVELOPED
PAGE 26
PLOW TO DESIGN
POINT 2B
IN MARTINEZ PARK
MINOR BASINS
2A & 2B & 01
PROJECT:
MARTINEZ PUD
DATE
O1/26/98
LOCATION:PORT
COLLINS
PROJ.
N0.155B-01-97
PILE:
MARTRUN2
BY
MEO
NOTE: SHEET PLOW DIRECTLY INTO PARK
PLOW CONVEYED BETWEEN DRIVE AND BALLPIELD IN SWALE SECTION i p_p
AREA (A)• 3.230 ACRES
RUNOFF CORP. (C)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
C 0.66
0.68
0.84
SEE SPREAD SHEET ATTACHED ON PAGE 15
TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME (Ti)
LENGTH = 300 FEET
SLOPE 2.00
4
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
C 0.20
0.20
0.25
Ti (min)• 23.19
23.19
21.90
TRAVEL TIME (It) =L/(60-V)
PLOW TYPE
L (ft) _] S (4) -
1.00 NONE
V (Epe) -
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) •. S (4) •
1.00 NONE
V (Ep0) -
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
L (ft) •. S (4) •
1.00 NONE
V (£pa) =
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
L (ft) •i S (4) -
1.00 NONE
V (fpo) -
0.00
Tt(min)•
0.00
L (ft) _. S (4) =
1.00 NONE
V (fpo) -
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
L (ft) _. S (4) =
1.00 NONE
V (fpe) •
0.00
Tt(min)-
0.00
L (ft) =P 5 (4) =
1.00 NONE
V (fpe) •
0.00
Tt(min)=
0.00
ALL VELOCITIES TAKEN FROM FIGURE
3-2
TOTAL TRAVEL
TIME (min) -
0.00
TOTAL LENGTH • 300
L/180+10- 11.60
<
21.90
CHOOSE LESSER
Tc =Ti+TOTAL TRAVEL TIME
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Tc (min)= 11.67
11.67
11.60
USE Tc • 11.5
11.5
11.5
INTENSITY (I) (iph)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
I 2.42
4.24
6.82
NOTE: INTENSITIES TAKEN
FROM FIGURE
3-1
RUNOPP (Q= CIA) (cfn)
2 YEAR
10 YEAR
100 YEAR
Q 5.28
9.26
18.60
CONCLUDE:SHEET PLOW INTO MARTINEZ PARK
SIZE SWALE TO HANDLE 133% OR Q100
DESIGN PLOW =
24.73 CPS
SEE SWALE DESIGN ON PAGE 26
A
INCLUDES PLOWS FROM DRIVE - 10' CURB CUT INSTALLED
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
PAGE 26 A
CHANNEL CAPACITY SECTION
P
PROTECT NAME: MARTINEZ PUD DATE: 01/26/98
PROTECT NO. : 1558-01-97 BY : RED
SWALE DESCRIPTION: SWALE ON WEST SIDE OF FILE: MARTCHAN
BALLFIELD
CAPACITY OF TRIANGULAR OR TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL
CHANNEL CONFIGURATION: TRAPEZOIDAL Q100 (CFS) = 18.60
CHANNEL LINING: GRASS Qdeeign a 24.73
Da Db Dc Sc n W I
(ft) (ft) (ft) M (ft) (ft)
____ ____ ____ --_- _____ ____ ----
10.00 10.00 1.00 1.00 0.032 5.00 0.25
0.10 PT/FT - LEFT BANK SLOPE 10 :1 (H:V)
0.10 FT/FT - RIGHT BANK SLOPE 10 :1 (H:V)
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft) (ft) (e.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cfe) (ft/sec)
1.00 25.00 15.00 25.10 0.71 0.10 49.42 3.29
0.75 20.00 9.38 20.07 0.60 0.10 26.20 2.80
0.50 15.00 5.00 15.05 0.48 0.10 11.14 2.23
0.25 10.00 1.88 10.02 0.33 0.10 2.85 1.52
0.731 19.62 9.00 19.69 0.59 0.10 24.79 2.75
0.730 19.60 8.98 19.67 0.59 0.10 24.72 2.75
araaaraar♦a rrrrrrarar aaaaaraaa rrr rrrrar agar aaaa•aarra a•araarrarrra♦+rrra
DEPTH WIDTH AREA PERIM R 2/3 Sc 1/2 Q V
(ft) (ft) (e.f.) (ft) (A/P) (cfe) (ft/eec)
PLOW DEPTH FOR THE DESIGN FLOW IS APPROXIMATELY 0.73 FEET
CONCLUDS:CHANNEL IS ADEQUATE
APPENDIX H
Analysis of Channel in Railroad ROW
Existing Channel @ 2+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Existing Channel 2+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005900 ft/ft
Elevation range:
86.49 ft to 88.00 ft.
Station(ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
84.00
88.00 84.00
100.00
87.00
112.00
86.50
134.00
86.49
138.00
86.50
153.00
86.60
166.00
87.00
181.00
88.00
Discharge
126.67 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Water Surface Elevation
87.32
ft
Flow Area
48.13
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
75.93
ft
Top Width
75.90
ft
Height
0.83
ft
Critical Depth
87.10
ft
Critical Slope
0.019197 ft/ft
Velocity
2.63
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.11
ft
Specific Energy
87.43
ft
Froude Number
0.58
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
Q100 to East end of RR ROW = 95.24 cfs
Q10 to East end of RR ROW = 47.26 cfs
Q2 to East end of RR ROW = 26.85 cfs
1.33' Q100 = 126.67 cfs
End Station Roughness
181.00 0.032
0324198 FlowMaster v5.13
11:56:21 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Existing Cross Section 2+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File cAhaestaciftw1imartinez.fm2
Worksheet Existing Channel 2+00
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.032
Channel Slope 0.005900 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 87.32 ft
Discharge 126.67 cfs
1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1
I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
p I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I
♦ -I
I 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I
I 1 I I I 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 I I I I I I I I
I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I
I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I I
1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I
87.6----- 1 -I h ti r Y Y Y -Y
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
87.4
I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 I
1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I
I I 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 I
1 1 1 I I I I I I I I
1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I
1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 I
w1 1 I
C I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
p I ' ____I ____ _____I 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I
1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I
W 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I
_____I ____ 1 1 _____1 1 I I I
1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
86.8----- ------'--- --------------�-----�------ '------ ------ '------
-----�
1 I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I
1 I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1
I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0 160.0 170.0 180.0 190.0
Station (ft)
03/24/98 FlowMaster v5.13
11:56*39 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Developed Channel @ 2+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Developed Channel - 2+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005900 ft1ft
Elevation range:
86.49 ft to 88.13 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
83.00
88.13 83.00
83.50
88.13 -TC 83.50
100.00
87.00
112.00
86.50
134.00
86.49
138.00
86.50
153.00
86.60
166.00
87.00
181.00
88.00
182.00
88.13
Discharge
-.126.67 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Water Surface Elevation
87.32
ft < V3.13
Flow Area
48.01
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
75.47
ft
Top Width
75.43
ft
Height
0.83
ft
Critical Depth
87.10
ft
Critical Slope
0.019187 fUft
Velocity
2.64
fus
Velocity Head
0.11
ft
Specific Energy
87.43
ft
Froude Number
0.58
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
See notes at end of Existing Channel @ 2+00 for flows
Proposed Top of Curb is at an elevation of 88.13 feet
Top of curb is 17 feet north of south property line
Section matches existing grade at south property line
End Station
83.50
182.00
Roughness
0.016
0.032
CCNC�Y�C. y,
Gi�aYVN�� IS ��Ct�Uti1L„
Curb rtswrGA
03/24198 FlowMaster v5.13
11:57:15 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 2
Developed Cross Section @ 2+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Developed Channel - 2+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.032
Channel Slope 0.005900 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 87.32 ft
Discharge 126.67 cfs
87.8E----
87.6
F 87.4
m 87.2
W
87
[:rxy
C 199.13
1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1
1 I I 1 I I 1 1 I I I
1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I I
1 I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I
1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I
1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 I
I 1 I I 1 1 I 1 I I I
J _L _1 _1 _L J _L _J L _ 1 _J
1 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I
1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1
I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I i
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
_L _J _L J L _1 _J
1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1
1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 I
I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 I
1 1 1 I I I I I I I I
I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1
I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I
1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I
1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1
I I 1
I I 1 I 1 = I I I 1 I
I I 1 1 I I I I I I
1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I I
J L 1 1 L J
I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1
1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I
1 1 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 1
I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I I
1 I 1 I I I I 1 1 I
1 I 1 1 I I I I I I
I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I
I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1
I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1
I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I
I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1
1 I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1
1 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1
I I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1
I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I
I 1 I 1 I I I I I 1 I
1 I I I 1 1 I 1 1
I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I 1
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I
1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1
1 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 1 I
86.4'
80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0 160.0 170.0 180.0 190.0
Station (ft)
032M6 Flowtvaster v5.13
01:08:47 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 7551666 Page 1 of 1
Water Elevation Versus Discharge for Developed Channel @ 2+00
Plotted Curves for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet Developed Channel - 2+00
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Salve For Water Elevation
Constant Data
Channel Slope 0.005900 Wit
Input Data
Minimum Maximum Increment
Discharge 0.00 130.00 5.00 cfs
Water Elevation vs Discharge
87.4----------• - - -
I 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I I I 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 ---------- I 1 /------ ----- I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
87.2 '
______________________-________________�_______ ___�___________r__________n
1 1 I 1 1 I 1
1 I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I 1 I I 1 I
I I I I I I 1
W I 1 1 I 1 I 1
C
o I 1 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 I
I I ______I I I __________I I
w 87.0 __________,-___________I____ r__________l____-______ i___-_______
W 1 1 1 I 1 I 1
1 1 I 1 1 1 1
I I 1 1 1 I 1
I I 1 1 1 1 1
1
86.9 ---1 4 --1 -I _y _y
1 1 I I I I I
I 1 I I 1 I I
I I 1 I 1 I I
I I 1 I 1 1 I
I I I I 1 I I
I I 1 I I I I
86.p _________ _-------
_---------------
I__________1___________1___________1__________-
V 1 1 1 1 I 1 I
1 1 I 1 I 1 I
1 I I 1 1 I I
I I I 1 I 1 1
1 I I 1 1 1 1
1 I I 1 I I 1
86.7 I I I I 1 I I
1 I 1 1 I 1 1
1 I I 1 I I 1
1 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 I 1 1 1 1 1
1 I 1 1 1 1 1
1 I 1 1 1 1 I
56.6
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0
Discharge (cfs)
OX24/08 FlowMasler v5.13
11:58:16 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-16W Page 1 of 1
Existing Channel @ 4+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\marfinez.fm2
Worksheet
Existing Channel 4+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope 0.005300 fUft
Elevation range: 85.00 ft to 86.00 ft.
Station (ft) Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station Roughness
87.00 86.00 87.00 175.00 0.032
90.00 85.00
100.00 85.00
105.00 85.00
134.00 85.37
153.00 85.45
175.00 86.00
Discharge 126.67 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Water Surface Elevation
85.94
ft
Flow Area
52.13
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
85.55
ft
Top Width
85.39
ft,
Height
0.94
ft
Critical Depth
85.71
ft
Critical Slope
0.019598 fUft
Velocity
2.43
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.09
ft
Specific Energy
86.03
ft
Froude Number
0.55
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
See notes at end of Existing Channel @ 2+00 for flows
0324/98 FlowMasler v5.13
11:59:16 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Existing Cross Section @ 4+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Existing Channel 4+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.032
Channel Slope 0.005300 fUft
Water Surface Elevation 85.94 It
Discharge 126.67 cfs
0.
86,0�--- - ---- -- ----- -
1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1
85.9E----
85.81
85.7E----
w
c
a 85.5
m
m
W
85.4
85.3
85-2
85.1�-----
I I I I 3 1 1 I 1 I
1 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 1 I I I I I
1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I I
1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 I
I I I I I I 1 1 I
L _L _L _J _J _J _J _J _J
1 I I I I I 1 1 1 I
I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I
1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I 1
I 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I
1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I
I I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I
I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1
I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1
I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1
1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I
1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1
I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1
I 1 I I 1 I I I I I
I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I 1
I I I 1 I 1 1 I I I
1 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I
1 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1 I
1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I I
1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1
I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1
1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1
1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I
1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1
I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I
1 1 I I 1 1 1 I
I I I 1 I I I 1 1
I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1
I I I 1 1 1 1 I I
80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0 160.0 170.0 180.0
Station (ft)
0324/98 FlowMaster v5.13
11:59:45 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Developed Channel @ 4+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Developed Channel - 4+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005300 ft/ft
Elevation range:
85.00 ft to 86.00 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station
Roughness
83.50
86.00 83.50 83.50
0.016
83.50
85.58 83.50 175.00
0.032
90.00
85.00
100.00
85.00
105.00
85.00
134.00
85.37
153.00
85.45
175.00
86.00
Discharge
126.67 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Water Surface Elevation
85.91
- ft
Flow Area
52.77
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
88.42
ft
Top Width
88.05
ft
Height
0.91
ft
Critical Depth
85.69
ft
Critical Slope
0.019785 ft/ft
Velocity
2.40
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.09
ft
Specific Energy
86.00
ft
Froude Number
0.55
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
See notes at end of Existing Channel @ 2+00 for flows
Top of curb raised to provide freeboard
Top of curb from original profile = 85.58 feet
Raise top of curb to 86.0 feet
Grade from back of curb at 85.58 feet to match existing @ property line
No grading required in Railroad ROW
0325/98 FlowMaster v5.13
08:23:30 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 2
Developed Cross Section @ 4+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet Developed Channel - 4+00
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.032
Channel Slope 0.005300 fUft
Water Surface Elevation 85.91 ft
Discharge 126.67 cfs
TC
86.0r- -- ---- ------ -- -- ----
1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I
I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1
I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I
85.9
85.8
85.7
85.6
w
C
0 85.5
lu
W
85.4
85.3
85.2
85.1
85.0
80.0
OX25198
08:24:11 AM
_L _L _L _1 J _J _J _J
I 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I
1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 I
I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I
I I I 1 I I 1 1 I 1
1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1
1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I
I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1
I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I
I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I I
I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I
I I I I I I I I 1 1
I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 I
I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1
1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I
I I ___ I 1 I I __ I______ I_ 1
1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1
1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1
I I I I 1 1 I I 1 1
1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I
I I I 1 1 I I I 1 1
I I I I I I 1 1 I 1
1 I I I I 1 1 I I I
1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I
I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1
I 1 1 1 1 1 1_ 1 _____ 1_ 1
1 I I I I 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 I
1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I
1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
I 1 I I I 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1
I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 1
I I 1 1 I 1 I I I
I I 1 I I 1 I I I
90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0 160.0 170.0 180.0
Station (ft)
FlowMaster v5.13
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of i
Discharge versus Flow Depth for Developed Channel @ 4+00
Plotted Curves for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet Developed Channel - 4+00
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Water Elevation
Constant Data
Channel Slope 0.005300 fUft
Input Data
Minimum Maximum Increment
Discharge 0.00 130.00 5.00 cfs
Water Elevation vs Discharge
86.0 ---------------------- -- -------
1 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 I 1 1 1 I
1 1 1 I 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 I
I I I 1 I I 1
1 1----------1 1----------1 //f' 1
I I 1 1 I ii 1
85.7
1
I 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 I 1 1 i 1
I 1 I 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 1
I 1 I I 1 I 1
v---------1
c
0
> I -------I 1 I----------1 1
85.6 ----------1
i ----- r- r ---- - -i - ---r r-------- 1
WI 1 1 I 1 1 1
1 I 1 1 1 1
L 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 1 1 I I I
1 1 I 1 I 1 1
I I I 1 I I 1
I 1 1 I 1 I 1
I I 1 I 1 1
I 1 1 1 1 I 1
85.4 ------------- -'----------- 1------------ ----------------------- I---------- �I 1 I I 1 I
1 I I I 1 I 1
1 I 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 I I 1 I
1 1 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 1
-----1--------- !----------1 1----------I 1 ---------I
I I I I I I 1
I I 1 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 I I 1 1
I 1 I 1 1 1 1
I 1 I 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1 I I 1
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0
Discharge (cfs)
03/24/98 FlowMaster v5.13
12:01:04 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Existing Channel @ 6+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Existing Channel6+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.008000 ft/ft
Elevation range:
83.80 ft to 85.00 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
93.00
85.00 93.00
100.00
84.20
102.00
84.00
122.00
83.80
134.00
83.90
153.00
83.90
155.00
84.00
175.00
85.00
Discharge
126.67 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Water Surface Elevation
84.60
ft
Flow Area
42.63
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
70.44
ft
Top Width
70.39
ft
Height
0.80
ft
Critical Depth
84.44
ft
Critical Slope
0.018994 ft/ft
Velocity
2.97
fus
Velocity Head
0.14
ft
Specific Energy
84.73
ft
Froude Number
0.67
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
See notes at end of Existing Channel @ 2+00 for flows
End Station Roughness
175.00 0.032
0324198 FlowMaster v5.13
12:01:36 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Existing Channel @ 6+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet Existing Channel 6+00
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.032
Channel Slope 0.008000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 84.60 ft
Discharge 126.67 cfs
I -
I I I 1 I I 1 I I
1 1 1 I I I I 1 I
1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I
1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1
1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1
84.8 -I -I y 1 1 4 f 1-------
RA S __1_______J
w 84.4
C
0
W 84.2
1-y—
I 1 I 1= 1 1 1 I I
1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1
1 I 1 1 1 1 I I 1
1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1
1
1 1 J ♦ L L F 1 -1
I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1
1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I I I 1 I I I
I I 1 1 I 1 I I I
1 I 1 I I I I I
I I 1 I I I 1 I
J J 1 L L L .I J
1 1 I 1 1 1 I I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I I I 1 1 1 I 1 I
I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I
I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1
I I 1 1 I I I I I
_J _J _L _L _L 1 _J
1 I I I I 1 I I I
1 I I I I 1 I 1 1
1 I I I I I I 1 I
I I I I I 1 1 1
I I 1 1 1 1 I
I I I I 1 1 1 1
I I I 1 I 1 I I 1
_L _I _J
1 I I I 1 I I I 1
1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1
1 I I I 1 I I 1 1
1 I 1 I I 1 I I I
1 I I I I I I I 1
1 I I I 1 1 I I I
1 I I 1 I 1 I I I
90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0 160.0
Station (ft)
03/24/98
12:02:04 PM Haeslad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666
170.0 180.0
FlowMaster v5.13
Page 1 of 1
Developed Channel @ 6+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Developed Channel - 6+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.008000 fUft
Elevation range:
83.80 ft to 85.00 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
95.00
85.00 95.00
95.00
84.44 95.00
100.00
84.20
102.00
_ 84.00
122.00
83.80
134.00
83.90
153.00
83.90
155.00
84.00
175.00
85.00
Discharge
126.67 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Water Surface Elevation
84.59
ft
Flow Area
42.98
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
72.01
ft
Top Width
71.83
ft
Height
0.79
ft
Critical Depth
84.44
ft
Critical Slope
0.019176 fttft
Velocity
2.95
fUs
Velocity Head
0.13
ft
Specific Energy
84.73
ft
Froude Number
0.67
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
See notes at end of Existing Channel @ 2+00 for flows
Raise Top of Curb to Elev = 85.0 ft to provide freeboard
End Station Roughness
95.00` 0.016
175.00 0.032
0324198 FlowMaster v5.13
12:05:43 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Developed Channel @ 6+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet Developed Channel - 6+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
Channel Slope
Water Surface Elevation
0.032
0.008000 ft/ft
84.59 ft < BE.Od
Discharge 126.67 cfs
It
TC
=85
84.6E--
,;_ 84.4h
c
0
d
W
i
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
I I 1
I 1 1
1 1 1
I 1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
I
1
1
1 1 I
1 I 1
I I I
I
I
1
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
I I 1
I 1 1
I I 1
I 1 I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
83.8
1
I
I
-1
1 1
I 1
I 1
-J -J-----
1 1
1 1 I
I I I 1
I
l L _L
1
1
I
1
I
1
I
I
I 1 1
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I I 1
I 1 I
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
I 1 I
I I 1
I I I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
1
1
1 I 1
1
1
I
1
I
I
1 I 1
1
1
1
83.6
90.0
100.0
110.0
120.0
130.0 140.0 150.0
160.0
170.0
180.0
Station (ft)
03/24/98 FlowMasler v5.13
12:06:05 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Discharge vs WSEL @ Developed Channel @ 6+00
Plotted Curves for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Developed Channel - 6+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Constant Data
Channel Slope 0.008000 ft/ft
Input Data
Minimum Maximum Increment
Discharge 0.00 130.00 5.00 cfs
Water Elevation vs Discharge
84.7---------------------- ----------------------- -
t4.6 ------ 1- ----- ' ------ - -L---- -------------'----------L---- '
yam'
84.5---------- =--------------------------------- ;------- — -------------------------
84.4---------- '----------- '----------- `----- ---- '----------- '----------- `----------
�
0
N
> ' ' ! _' ' '-_________' '
0 84.3 ----------1-----------�---- -- r---------------------r r-----------�
i
84.1---------I---------------------- ---------- ----------------------------------
--------- -----------------------� ----------
33.9
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0
Discharge (cfs)
03/24/98 FlowMasler v5.13
12:07:22 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Existing Channel @ 8+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Existing Channel 8+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope 0.007700 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 83.00 ft
Elevation range: 82.00 ft to 84.00 ft.
Station (ft) Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station Roughness
85.00 83.00 85.00 180.00 0.032
100.00 82.70
115.00 82.00
134.00 82.57
153.00 82.57
178.00 83.00
180.00 84.00
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Discharge
89.51
cfs
Flow Area
39.13
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
93.03
ft
Top Width
93.00
ft
Height
1.00
ft
Critical Depth
82.86
ft
Critical Slope
0.021254 ft/ft
Velocity
2.29
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.08
ft
Specific Energy
83.08
ft
Froude Number
0.62
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
See notes at end of Existing Channel @ 2+00 for flows
Q100 exceeds capacity of existing channel at this location. Provide additional capacity with developed section by
raising top of curb as needed
0324/98 FlowMaster v5.13
12:10:21 PM Haesed Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Existing Channel @ 8+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Existing Channel 8+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Channel Slope
0.007700 fttft
Water Surface Elevation
83.00 ft
Discharge
89.51 cfs
t
84.0--------------
-------------
------
-------
---------------------------
i
i
83.5------ r------ *---------------------------
=------ =------ =------ -------
0 83.0 --
LU
i
i
i
i
i
80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0 160.0 170.0 180.0
Station (ft)
03t24198 FlowMasler v5.13
12:10:46 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Developed Channel @ 8+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Developed Channel - 8+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.007700 ft1ft
Elevation range:
82.00 ft to 84.00 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
93.00
83.34 93.00
100.00
82.70
115.00
82.00
134.00
82.57
153.00
82.57
178.00
83.00
180.00
84.00
Discharge
126.67 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Water Surface Elevation
83.11
ft
Flow Area
45.98
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
82.71
ft
Top Width
82.64
ft
Height
1.11
ft
Critical Depth
82.96
ft
Critical Slope
0.019732 ft/ft
Velocity
2.75
fUs
Velocity Head
0.12
ft
Specific Energy
83.22
ft
Froude Number
0.65
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
End Station Roughness
180.00 0.032
See notes at end of Existing Channel @ 2+00 for flows
Top of curb based on flowline profile = 83.34. This is adequate to provide capacity and freeboard. However since the
downstream section will required raised top of curb the actual top of curb at 8+00 will be slightly higher
0324198 FlowMaster v5.13
12:15:54 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Developed Channel @ 8+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Developed Channel - 8+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Channel Slope'
0.007700 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 83.11 ft <
D G 3 .34
Discharge
126.67 cfs
-84.0
-------
---------------,---------
1 1
1 1 1 1
I
1 1
I 1
1 I
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 I I
1
1
1
1 1
1 I 1 1
1
I
1 1
1 1 I
I 1 1 1
I 1 1 I
1
1
1
I
I 1 I
1 I I
I
1 1 1 I
I I 1 I
I
I
I
1
1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 11
1
1
1
1 1 I
1 1 1 1
1
I
83.5
------
'------- I 1 1------1 1 1 1
1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1
- I
1
TC
1 I 1
I I I
I I 1 I
I 1 1 I
1
I
1
I
` �a.34
1 1 I
1 I 1
1 1
1 1 1 I
1 1 I 1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1 1
1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1
I
1
1
I
1 I 1
1 1 1 I
1
1
C
0 83.0
I 1 I I 1 I I I
--1------- - - - --- 1 1 1 I I 1
�
1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1
1
W
1 1 1
I 1 I
1 I 1
1 1 1 I
1 1 I 1
I 1 1 I
I
1
1
I
I
I
1 1
1 1
I I I
1 1 1
1 I 1 I
I 1 I
I 1 1 I
1 1 1 1
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
1
1 1 1
1 1 I I
I
1
1 1 1
I 1
1
1
I 1 I
I I 1
I 1 I I
1 1 I
I
I
1
1
I I 1
I I 1
1 I 1 1
1 I I I
I
I
I
1
I I 1
1 1 1 I
I
1
I 1 I
I 1 1 1
1
1
I I I
I 1 I I
I
I
I 1 I
1 1 I I
I
I
1 I
1 1 1 1
1
I
1 I 1
1 1
1 I 1 1
1 1 1 I
1
1
1
I
1 1
1 1 1
I
1 I 1 I
I I I 1
I
1
1
I
82.0
1 1
1 I I
I I I I
I I 1 1
I
I
I
1
90.0
100.0 110.0 120.0
130.0 140.0 150.0 160.0
170.0
180.0
Station (ft)
0324198
FlowMaster v5.13
12:16:07 PM
Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside
Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666
Page 1 of 1
WSEL vs Discharge for Developed Channel @ 8+00
Plotted Curves for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet Developed Channel - 8+00
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Water Elevation
Constant Data
Channel Slope 0.007700 fUft
Input Data
Minimum Ma)dmum Increment
Discharge 0.00 130.00 5.00 cfs
Water Elevation vs Discharge
83.2
83.1-------------------------------L--------------------------------L- -+
' ' __________' r/ ' ' __________' '
i
-----
__________1 ' '
i
82.4 -------------------------L----- - -- --- ------ -----------------
82.3
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0
Discharge (cfs)
03/24/98 FlowMaster v5.13
12.16:49 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Existing Channel @ 10+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Existing Channel 10+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Elevation range:
80.50 ft to 84.00 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
65.00
82.00 65.00
100.00
80.75
115.00
80.50
163.00
82.00
179.00
84.00
Discharge
126.67 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Water Surface Elevation
81.70
ft
Flow Area
51.62
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
79.90
ft
Top Width
79.87
ft
Height
1.20
ft
Critical Depth
81.42
ft
Critical Slope
0.018801 ft/ft
Velocity
2.45
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.09
ft
Specific Energy
81.79
ft
Froude Number
0.54
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
For flows refer to notes on worksheet of Existing Channel @ 2+00
End Station Roughness
179.00 0.032
0420198 FlowMaster v5.13
12:07:34 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Developed Channel @ 10+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Developed Channel - 10+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005000 fUft
Elevation range:
80.50 ft to 84.00 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
95.00
82.00 95.00
95.50
82.00 95.50
95.50
81.50
100.00
80.75
115.00
80.50
163.00
82.00
179.00
84.00
Discharge
126.67 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.032
Water Surface Elevation
81.77
ft
Flow Area
46.18
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
60.66
ft
Top Width
60.30
ft
Height
1.27
ft
Critical Depth
81.47
ft
Critical Slope
0.017913 ft/ft
Velocity
2.74
fUs
Velocity Head
0.12
ft
Specific Energy
81.89
ft
Froude Number
0.55
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
Top of curb per profile = 80.83 feet
Raised top of curb to 82.0 feet to provide capacity and freeboard.
End Station Roughness
95.50 0.016
179.00 0.032
04/20/98 FlowMaster v5.13
12:05:23 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Developed Channel @ 10+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\marfinez.fm2
Worksheet Developed Channel - 10+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.032
Channel Slope 0.005000 fttft
Water Surface Elevation 81.77 It
Discharge 126.67 cfs
83.5
83.0
w 82.5
C
0
W 82.0
81
E
-------------,--------I---------------------- I--------
1 1--------1 1 I1 1 1 1
1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1
1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1
I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1
♦ ♦ f F 1 _ -I
1 1 I I I I I I I
1 I I I 1 I 1 I I
1 I 1 1 11 1 I I
1 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1
I 1 I I 1 1 I I 1
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1
J ♦ Y------- L -L -I J
1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I
I 1 1 I I 1 1 1
I 1 I 1 .
4 F 1 y
1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 I
1
1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1
I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1
I I I 1 I I 1 1 I
I I I 1 I I 1 1 I
1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I
1
1 J J J -Y
1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1
1 1 I I 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I
1 1 1
I I I = I I 1 1 1 1
I I I I I I 1 1 1
I I I 1 I 1 I I
I
_I J -J J L _4 -L 1 __I
1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I
1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1
I 1
I I I I I I I I I
I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I
1 I I I 1 I I I
1 I 1 1 I I I 1 1
I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I
I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 1 I I 1
I 1 I 1 1 I I 1
I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I
I I 1 I 1 I I I
90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0 160.0
Station (ft)
04/20/98
12:11:33 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666
170.0 180.0
FlowMaster v5.13
Page 1 of 1
Existing Channel @ 10+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet Existing Channel 10+00
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.032
Channel Slope 0.005000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 81.70 ft
Discharge 126.67 cfs
w 82.5
C
O
d
W
80.51
60.0
I 1
1 I 1
I I 1
I I I
I I 1
I 1 I
♦ F -1
1 1
1 I I
I 1 1
I 1 I
1 1 1
1 I I
I 1 I
4 L _ -1
1 I
1 1 1
I 1 1
I 1 1
I 1 I
1 I I
1 I 1
4 L -1
1 1 1
1 1
1 1 1
1 I I
I I I
I 1 I
1 1 1
_L L _J
1 1
1 1
1 1 1
I 1 I
I I
I 1
1 I I
_4 L J
1 I
1 I I
1 I 1
1 I
1 I 1
I I 1
1 1 1
_L _L _J
I I
1 I I
I 1 I
I 1 I
I 1 1
I I I
1 I I
1 I
80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 160.0 180.0
Station (ft)
04/20/98
12:07:44 PM
FlowMaster v55.13
Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Developed Channel @ 12+00
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet
Developed Channel - 12+00
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.007000 fUft
Elevation range:
78.50 ft to 81.00 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
95.00
79.79
95.00
95.00
79.29
120.00
100.00
79.20
130.00
120.00
78.62
125.00
78.50
130.00
78.62
135.00
79.62
145.00
80.00
153.00
80.00
155.00
79.90
157.00
80.00
162.00
81.00.
Discharge
126.67 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.021
Water Surface Elevation
79.58
ft
Flow Area
27.50
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
40.19
ft
Top Width
39.79
ft
Height
1.08
ft
Critical Depth
79.57
ft
Critical Slope
0.007327 ft/ft
Velocity
4.61
fUs
Velocity Head
0.33
ft
Specific Energy
79.91
ft
Froude Number
0.98
Flow is subcritical.
Notes:
End Station
120.00
130.00
162.00
Top of curb raised on south side of Private Drive to provide enough capacity.
Original Top of curb = 79.28
Raised Top of curb = 79.78
Roughness
0.032
0.016
0.032
o3r24f9S
Flowtvtaster v5.13
04:14:49 PM Haeslad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 2
Developed Channel @ 12+00
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet Developed Channel - 12+00
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
Channel Slope
Water Surface Elevation
0.021
0.007000 ft/ft 1tt
79.58 ft
Discharge 126.67 cfs
81.0
80.5
Tc=-7 5 r
F
c
O
N
N
W 79.5
-------- ------------------
I I 1--------- I--
1 1 1
I 1 I 1
1 I 1 1
I 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
I 1 I I
1 I I 1
I I 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 I
I 1 1
1 1 1 I
I 1 1 1
1 I 1 I
1 1 1 I
1 1 1 1 I
1 1 1 I
1 I 1 1
1 1 1 I
1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1
1 1 1 I
1 1 1 I
I 1 1 I
1 1 I 1
1 I 1 1
1 I 1 1
1 1 1 1
r 1 Y Y
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 I
1 1 I I
I 1 I I
1 I 1 1
1 I I I
1 I I I
1 I 1
I 1 I I
1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1
-1 -----------
I - T
1 I I 1
1 1 I
1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1
1 I 1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
I 1 1 1
- - T-------- ,--------- _---
I I I 1
I I 1 1
I 1 I 1
I I 1 I
I I 1 1
I 1 1 I
1 1 I
I 1 1
1 I 1
------1 1 ------ 1------1 r ________r_ r_ 1
1 I I I
I 1 1 1
I 1 1 1
1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
I I I 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1
1 1 1 I
I 1 1 1
I I 1
1 I I 1
I I I 1
I 1 1 1
I 1 I 1
I 1 1 1
I 1 1 1
I
I 1 I 1
1 1 1 1
I I 1 I
1 I 1 I
I I I I
I I I 1
1 I 1 1
I I I I
I I 1 1
I I 1 1
1 I 1 I
1
T- r- 1 I
I I 1 I
I I 1 1
I I I 1
1 1 I 1
I 1 1 1
I 1 1 1
1 I 1 1
I 1 1 1
I 1 I 1
I I 1 I
I I 1 1
78.5 '
90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0
Station (ft)
160.0 170.0
03/26/98 FlowMaster v5.13
01:09:39 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
79.6
�9.5
C
79.2
78.
78.8
Discharge versus WSEL @ Developed Channel @ 12+00
Plotted Curves for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\martinez.fm2
Worksheet Developed Channel- 12+00
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Water Elevation
Constant Data
Channel Slope 0.007000 ft/ft
Input Data
Minimum Maximum Increment
Discharge 0.00 130.00 5.00 cfs
Water Elevation vs Discharge
__________
I 1'- r I_
1 I I I 1 1
1 I I 1 1 1 1
1 I I 1 / 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 /_______1 1 1
J _I L J L- I L .J
I I I I 1 I
1 1 I I 1 I 1
1 I I I 1 1 I
I I I I 1 I I
I
---------- 3___________1___________r_ --------------------I - __________r__________I
1 I I 1 1 I
1 1 1 I 1 1 1
1 1 I I 1 1 1
1 I I 1 1 1 I
1 I I I I 1 I
1 I 1 I I I 1
I 1 I I 1 I 1
I 1 I 1 I I
1 I I I I 1 I
1 1 1
I 1 I I 1 1 I
1 1 I 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 1 1 1
I I I 1 I I I
1 1 1 1 I 1 I
1 I I 1 1 I 1
1 1 I I I I
1 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 1
♦ L J ♦ 4
1 I I I I 1 I
I I I I 1 I I
I I I 1 I I I
1 I I 1 I 1 I
1 I I I 1 1 I
I___________1___________1 _______1 __ ___1 ______ I
1 I
1 I I 1 1 I 1
1 I I I I I 1
I I 1 I I I I
1 1 I I 1 1 I
1 I I I I 1 1
18.7
0.0
20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0
Discharge (cfs)
120.0 140.0
03/24/98 FlowMaster v5.13
04:17:16 PM Hassled Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
APPENDIX III
Erosion Control Calculations
Erosion Control Sequencing schedule
Erosion Control security deposit estimate
July 8, 1997
Project No: 1558-01-97
Basil Hamdan
City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility
P.O. Box 580
Ft. Collins, Colorado 80522
Re: Erosion Control Cost Estimate for Martinez P.U.D. Fort Collins, Colorado
Dear Basil,
Attached is the erosion control security deposit estimate for Martinez P.U.D.
ESTIMATE 1:
1600 LF of Silt Fence @ $ 3.00 per LF $ 4,800.00
3 Haybale barriers @ $75.00 each $ 225.00
2 - Gravel Inlet Filters @ 150.00 each $ 300:00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $ 5,325.00
x 1.50
$7,987.50
ESTIMATE 2:
re -vegetate the disturbed area of 9.5 acres at $531.00 per acre $ 5,044.50
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $ 5,044.50
x 1.50
$ 7,566.75
In no instance shall the amount of the security be less than $ 1,000.00. Therefore, the total
required erosion control security deposit for Martinez P.U.D. will be $ 7,987.50.
If you have any questions, please call at 226-5334.
Sincerely,
Mark Oberschmidt
Shear Engineering Corporation
MEO/meo
cc: James W. Leach; Wonderland Hill Development Company
Dave Stringer; City of Fort Collins
4836 S. College, Suite 12 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 FAX (970) 282-0311
January 16, 1998
Project No: 1558-01-97
Re: EROSION CONTROL SECURITY DEPOSIT REQUIREMENTS:
Erosion Control Cost Estimate for Martinez P.U.D.; Fort Collins, Colorado
A. An erosion control security deposit is required in accordance with City of Fort Collins
policy (Chapter 7, Section C: SECURITY; page 7.23 of the City of Fort Collins
Development Manual). In no instance shall the amount of the security be less than
$ 1000.00.
a. The cost to install the proposed erosion control measures is approximately
$ 5,325.00 Refer to the cost estimate attached in Appendix If. 1.5 times the cost to
install the erosion control measures is $ 7,987.50.
b. Based on current data provided by the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility, and
based on an actual anticipated net affected area which will be disturbed by
construction activity (approximately 9.5 acres), we estimate that the cost to re -
vegetate the disturbed area will be $ 5,044.50 ($ 531.00 per acre x 8.5 acres). 1.5
times the cost to re -vegetate the disturbed area is $ 7,566.75. The $ 500.00 per acre
for re -seeding sites less than 10 acres was quoted to us by the City of Fort Collins
Stormwater Utility personnel.
CONCLUSION:
The erosion control security deposit amount required for Martinez P.U.D. will be
$ 7,987.50.
4836 S. College, Suite 12 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226-5334 FAX (970) 282-0311
RAINFALL PERFORMANCE STANDARD EVALUATION
PROTECT:
MARTINEZ PUD
PROD. NO. 1558-01-97
STANDARD FORM A
COMPLETED BY:
MARK OBERSCHMIDT
DATE: 07/07/97
w rxr»xrrr rwwwru
rrrru rwwwrrrr♦u rrrr»rrarrr•ra•rrr+rewwrre
r•wvwwrw w•rwww•rr a vrru rover
DEVELOPED
ERODIBILITY
Aeb Lob Seb
Lb Sb PS
SUBBASIN
ZONE
(ac) (ft) (1)
(feet) (t) (t)
w♦rrrrr»row wwwwrrarrww+eee
wwxrwwxrrrr
urrr•rarr•rr rrruru rr+aar+rwxewwrv+wwwwvr wxxwrrrrr
1
MODERATE
4.86 1600.00 1.00
7776 4.86
2
MODERATE
4.71 200.00 1.10
942 5.18
rrrrrrrrrrrrwvw+wxxxrrrrrrrrrrrrrr aa+wr+wrrrrrrrrrr rrrxxrr rrrrrrrrrrrr•+r+rrvxwvw
9.57 910.97 1.05
LINEAR INTERPOLATION
SLOPE
LENGTH 1.00 1.05 1.50
900 78.2 78.36 79.8
911 78.37
1000 78.3 78.46 79.9
CONCLUDE:PBRPORMANCE STANDARD - 78.37%
EROSION CONTROL PLAN OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS MUST EXCEED THIS
EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS
STANDARD FORM B
PROTECT: MARTINEZ PUD PROS. NO.1558-01-97
BY: MARK OBERSCHMIDT DATE O7/07/97
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EROSION CONTROL
C-FACTOR
P-PACTOR
COMMENT
METHOD
VALUE
VALUE
__________________________________________________________________________________________
ROUGHENED GROUND
1.00
0.90
ROOF AREAS - A39 0'-"!%)�i^.
C��=
ASPHALT
0.01
1.00
SUB BASIN
1 & 2
SOD
0.01
1.00
SUB BASIN
1 & 2
SILT PENCE
1.00
0.50
SUB BASIN
1 & 2
HAYBALB BARRIERS
1.00
0.80
SUB BASIN
1 & 2
GRAVEL INLET FILTERS
1.00
0.80
SUB BASIN
1
__________________________________________________________________________________________
MAJOR PS SUB
AREA
CALCULATIONS
BASIN t BASIN
acre
AREA
C
P
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
T8.3Tt 1
4.86
ROOF
0.64
ACRES
1.00
0.90
SOD
1.46
ACRES
0.01
_1.00
ASPHALT
2.76
ACRES
0.01
1.00
SILT PENCE
1.00
0.50
HAYBALB
1.00
0.90
EQUATIONS
GRAVEL INLET
FILTER
1.00
0.80
C = WEIGHTED AVG
OF C X AREA
C = 0.1404
P= (WEIGHTED AVG
OF P X AREA) X P
P- 0.3158
EFF - (1 - P X C)
X 100
EFF
95.57t
__________________________________________________________________________________________
2
4.10
ROOF
0.62
ACRES
1.00
0.90
SOD
1.42
ACRES
0.01
1.00
ASPHALT
2.68
ACRES
0.01
1.00
SILT PENCE
1.00
0.50
HAY BALE
1.00
0.80
C 0.1612
p 0.4544
EFF 92.67%
_____________________________________________________________________
•rrrr•rr rr rrrr♦rrrrrrrrrru»r♦rrrrrrre ♦rrrru rr•rrr♦»rrr»r♦r♦r♦rrr
TOTAL AREA - 8.96 ACRES
OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS = 94.24t > 70.374
CONCLUDE: EROSION CONTROL PLAN IS EFFECTIVE
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
PROJECT: Martinez P.U.D.
STANDARD FORM C
SEQUENCE FOR 1998-1999 ONLY COMPLETED BY: MEO / Shear Engineering Corp.
Indicate by use of a bar line or symbols when erosion control measures will be installed. Major
.modifications to an approved schedule may require submitting a new schedule for approval by the City
Engineer.
Year 198 99
Month A M J I A S O N D J F M
OVERLOT GRADING ***
WIND EROSION CONTROL
* Soil Roughening
***
Perimeter Barrier
Additional Barriers
Vegetative Methods
Soil Sealant
Other
RAINFALL EROSION CONTROL
STRUCTURAL:
SedimentTrap/Basin
Inlet Filters
*** ***
***
***
***
***
*** *** ***
***
Straw Barriers
xxx xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx xxx xxx
' xxx
Silt Fence Barriers
*** ***
***
***
xxx
xxx
xxx xxx xxx
xxx
Sand Bags
Bare Soil Preparation
Contour Furrows
Terracing
Asphah/Concrete Paving
***
***
***
Other
VEGETATIVE:
Permanent Seed Planting
***
***
Mulching/Sealant
Temporary Seed Planting
***
***
Sod Installation
***
***
Nettings/Mats/B lankets
Other
STRUCTURES: INSTALLED BY: OWNER MAINTAINED BY: OWNER
VEGETATION/MULCHING CONTRACTOR: OWNER
DATE PREPARED: 04102 98 DATE SUBMITTED: 04 03 8
APPROVED BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ON:
APPENDIX IV
Backup Diagrams and Exhibits
Table 3-3; Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis
Table 3-4; Rational Method Frequency Adjustment Factors
Figure 3-2; Estimate of Average Flow Velocity for Use with the Rational Formula
Figure 3-1; City of Ft... Collins Rainfall Intensity Duration Curve
PROM CITY OF PORT COLLINS DRAINAGE
CRITERIA MANUAL
TABLE 3-3
RATIONAL METHOD RUNOFF COEPPICIENTS
FOR COMPOSITE ANALYSIS
SURFACE C
ASPHALT
0.95
CONCRETE
0.95
GRAVEL
0.50
ROOFS
0.95
LAWNS, SANDY SOIL:
PLAT < 25 0.10
AVERAGE 2 TO 74 0.15
STEEP > 71 0.20
LAWNS, HEAVY SOIL:
PLAT < 2% 0.20
AVERAGE 2 TO 7% 0.25
STEEP > 74 0.35
R-M-P Medium Density Planned Residential District — designation for medium density
areas planned as a unit (PUD) to provide a variation in use and building placements
with a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet.
R-L-M Low Density Multiple Family District — areas containing low density multiple family
units or any other use in the R-L District with a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet
for one -family or two-family dwellings and•9,000 square feet for multiple -family
dwellings.
M-L Low Density Mobile Home District — designation for areas for mobile home parks
containing independent mobile homes not exceeding 6 units per acre.
M-M Medium Density Mobile Home District — designation for areas of mobile home
parks containing independent mobile homes not exceeding 12 units per acre.
B-G General Business District — district designation for downtown business areas,
including a variety of permitted uses, with minimum lot areas equal to 1 /2 of the total
floor area of the building.
B-P Planned Business District — designates areas planned as unitdevelopments to
provide business services while protecting the surrounding residential areas with
minumum lot areas the same as R-M.
H-B Highway Business District — designates an area of automobile -orientated busi-
nesses with a minimum lot area equal to 1/2 of the total floor area of the building.
B-L Limited Business District — designates areas for neighborhood convenience
centers, including a variety of community uses with minimum lot areas equal to two
times the total floor area of the building.
C Commercial District —designates areas of commercial, service and storage areas.
I-L Limited Industrial District — designates areas of light industrial uses with a minimum
area of lot equal to two times the total floor area of the building not to be less than
20,000 square feet.
I-P Industrial Park District —designates light industrial park areas containing controlled
industrial uses with minimum lot areas equal to two times the total floor area of the
building not to be less than 20,000 square feet.
I-G General Industrial District — designates areas of major industrial development.
T Transition District — designates areas which are in a transitional stage with regard
to ultimate development.
For current and more explicit definitions of land uses and zoning classifications, refer to the
Code of the City of Fort Collins, Chapters 99 and 118.
Table 3-3
RATIONAL METHOD RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS FOR COMPOSITE ANALYSIS
Characterof Surface Runoff Coefficient
Streets, Parking Lots, Drives: 0.95
Asphalt.......... .... :................................................................................. 0.95
Concrete............................................................................................. 0.50
Gravel.................................................................................................
Roofs.......................................................................................................... 0.95
Lawns, Sandy Soil:
0.1
Flat<2%.............................................................................................
0. 5
Average2 to 7%..................................................................................
0.20
Steep>7%..........................................................................................
Lawns, Heavy Soil:
0.20
Flat<2%.............................................................................................
0.25
Average2 to 7%.................................................................................
0.35
Steep>7%......... :.............................................................
...................
MAY 1984 3-4 DESIGN CRITERIA
3.1.7 Time of Concentration
In order to use the Rainfall Intensity Duration Curve, the time of concentration must be
known. This can be determined either by the following equation or the "Overland Time of
Flow Curves" from the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, included in this report (See
Figure 3-2).
Tc=1.87 (1.1 —CC,) D12
WhereTc =Time of Concentration, minutes
S = Slope of Basin,
C = Rational Method Runoff Coefficient
D = Length of Basin, feet
C, = Frequency Adjustment Factor
Time of concentration calculations should reflect channel and storm sewer velocities as well
as overland flow times.
3.1.8 Adjustment for Infrequent Storms
The preceding variables are based on the initial storm, that is; the two to ten year storms. For
storms with higher intensities an adjustment of the runoff coefficient is required because of
the lessening amount of infiltration, depression retention, and. other losses that have a
proportionally smaller effect on storm runoff.
These frequency adjustment factors are found in Table 3-4.
Table 3-4
RATIONAL METHOD FREQUENCY ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
..Storm Return Period Frequency Factor
(years) C,
210 l O 1.00
11 to25 1.10
26 to 50 .1.20
51 to 100 1.25
Note: The product of c times C, shall not exceed 1.00
3.2 Analysis Methodology
The methods presented in this section will be instituted for use in the determination and/or verification
of runoff at specific design points in the drainage system. These methods are (1), the Rational Method
and (2) the Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure (CUHP). Other computer methods. such as
SWMM, STORM, and HEC-1 are allowable if results are not radically different than these two. Where
applicable, drainage systems proposed for construction should provide the minimum pro!ection as
determined by the methodology so mentioned above.
3.2.1 Rational Method
For drainage basins of 200 acres or less, the runoff may be calculated by the Rational
Method, which is essentially the following equation:
Q = C,CIA
Where Q = Flow Quantity, cis
A =Total Area of Basin, acres
C, = Storm Frequency Adjustment Factor (See Section 3.1.8)
C = Runoff Coefficient (See Section 3.1.6)
I = Rainfall Intensity, inches per hour (See Section 3.1.4)
3.2.2 Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure
For basins larger than 200 acres, the design storm runoff should be analyzed by deriving
synthetic unit hydrographs. It is recommended that the Colorado Urban Hydrograph
Procedure be used for such ana!ysis. This procedure is detailed in the Urban Storm Drainage
Criteria Manual, Volume 1, Section 4.
MAY 1984 3.5 DESIGN CRITERIA
APPENDIX V
Portions of the Old Town Master Drainage Basin Plan
location of sites available for treatment are located in an area which may be enhanced
by the creation.of wetlands.
This study investigated the cost of establishing water quality enhancement
facilities at the Locust outfall, the Mountain Avenue system east of Lincoln Avenue,
and the Laporte Avenue system north of Cherry Street in addition to replacement of the
storm sewers along Mountain Avenue in Old Town. Recent redevelopment plans in the
downtown area have include the removal of some of.the railroad tracks northeast of
Jefferson will allow redevelopment of this.area at Linden and.Jefferson Streets.The
existing storm sewer system in this area is undersized and in need of repair. It is
anticipated that new storm sewers will be installed as part of new -development.
As part of the overall project planning; the.timing and phasing of.construction
:was considered. Table 3 presents refined cost estimates ;for :the recommended'project
phasing. Phasing of the construction would be as follows:
Phase I - Downtown Storm Sewer
The downtown area is in immediate need of these improvements. Damages
occur almost.every summer.because of.the:inadequate -storm sewer:system.
Phase II - Locust Outfall
The east end of the Locust storm sewer system is:in need of improvement.due
to poor drainage conditions.at the:east end of.Laurel Street —In addition,:these
improvements should occur.prior.to new development in the area.
Phase III - Howes -Mason Outfall
The north:end;of,the.,LaporterAvenue:system:expe�iences surcharging almost
every year. This area would benefit from improvements prior to new
development occurring in this area. I -
Phase IV - Elizabeth -Plum Street Regrading
The area near Whedbee and Plum frequently causes basement flooding. This
area would be of next importance for improvements. These improvements
cannot be installed until Phase II improvements are in place.
Phase V - Canyon Avenue Street Regrading
The improvements along Canyon and Howes would be the final phase of
improvements to be completed. These improvements cannot be installed before
the Reach 6 improvements are complete.
In addition to the improvements discussed above, cost estimates were included
for the other improvements identified. These include the street intersection
improvements and the water quality improvements. Cost estimates were also prepared
for the Linden Street storm sewer improvements.
The timing of the improvements was discussed with the staff and reviewing
agencies and public. As a result, it is -envisioned that the improvements will be
constructed as fees are collected.
13
from flooding in the Old Town Basin indicated that the average annual damage of
flooding in the basin is $585,000 per year.
The first level of improvements are the minor capital improvements which solve
the localized problem. The localized improvements include replacement of inlets and
lateral pipes where routine problems exist. _ A program of,asphalt removal should occur
for street overlays to reestablish curb and gutter sections and to lower street crowns
that inhibit the overland flow of water when storm sewer capacity is exceeded or inlets
clogged. This increase.in_pavement height results in increased ponding depths above
these paving areas. Improvements to curb extensions ("pedestrianbulbs") should be
made to assure that drainage waters are not ponded or.diverted toward the buildings
' where inlet capacity is exceeded or inlets become clogged.
A five phase program of major improvements has been recommended. 'The first
phase is the construction of a new storm sewer system along Mountain Avenue. The
second phase is the construction of an outfall channel and improved overland flow
system near Laurel Street and Riverside Avenue. The third phase of the improvements
. is the. construction ..of a.:new.,outfall channel,near.Mason,Street.and-Cherry..Streetr.�The
fourth phase is the improvement of street grades along. Plum. Street,:Whedbee' Street,
and Locust Street, to provide for street capacity to carry.overland flows during major
storm events. The final phase of improvements would be to regrade Canyon Avenue
and Howes Street thus diverting overland flow to the new outfall.channel at.Mason
Street and Cherry Street.
I
The overall:cost benefit ratio of.these. improvements is 1.12 with the
•improvements being paid for.by:either:a combination of:stormwater utilities and other
-revenues. :The.average:annual benefits resulting.from the project would be'$405,300
per year.
Other specific improvements recommended include intersection improvements at
five intersections in the upper reaches of the basin, installation of a new storm sewer
system along Linden Street, and water quality enhancement facilities at three major
storm sewer outf ails.
15
V
ff �
z o
OS
W
o s�
Q
Z
;
o n
ll..O
i
t
Q�
¢ u
Lu Lu Q
yy
S°
n
0 3� i
Q W
>>zZO
>GQ� A
o °o -n
o go
J
�Jo
LT-
O�mV...
JQQ� ��I
u.. �
i
i
1
S
i
c
No Text
U
Z
Z _
O Q V( l
� F I
Vl Q ZOO E a i- ° r✓ l M _n
roil
1'-;Lr) WLJ ZK�CG gge o 3a m
Oce0<2
J 8 �8
Y lu
W
TWO JQN� d 'I�11')•`IIL
UF
C
co
a� •
r
v,n
r
Lam_ - _ is �11 , . ,
co
1 JI
_N\
OD
c
. n
¢gym'
.1 LJI
1 �
I x-�1;-���'�<.��I �_. �� '� Imo. ��' '- � I ,����,[�r�-'_•``''}$III
_—_ I �,'�,; .o;� -� I � Ifs �� ,!'�•r 11 ._ �;�;��—���,�-�
. � ;41
I
IauueVO Caull ecu0 \\\\�\\\( soli lava$ w,ot$ _.._ =AaomddI91t961AMOINSV33N10N3
I4W AS ONIdd 9161 AM NOw dtl'N ,Vs
uolPmisua aetl leul$ j eloVuely o N91530031 oaVNINN193901 tl01tld 0313I83n O1319 391SM SNO1110N00 SUlllp'J jJpj jp AI13
311S ONI A1nIlf1'AHdWOOd01'S3SO nd
aull
+...S AuquaS ---- ,aiul N011Ontl15N00 90d 0350 3S ioN
null aIe ____ 1 llYHS GIN ONM33NION3 AUVNIN113tld GIN
M — a9 ONOO S1NMV,139 ONM. a SIH1
ON3Wl :S31ON
i
I 'O
1
HOV3Ff
ldWl03SOdOkld
9 k
S1N3 W3AO
g-g em81d
8
I I
I I
KEY TO MAP
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
500-Year Flood Boundary
100-Year Flood Boundary --
Zone Designations* With
Date of Identification
e.g., 12/2/74
�•
100.Ycar Flood Boundary
500-Year Flood Boundary
Base Flood Elevation Line
b7J--
With Elevation In Feet*'
Base Flood Elevation in Feet
(EL 987)
Where Uniform Within Zone**
Elevation Reference Mark
RM7x
Zone D Boundary
River Mile •M1.5
**Referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929
*EXPLANATION OF ZONE DESIGNATIONS
ZONE EXPLANATION
A Areas of -100-year flood; base flood elevations and
flood hazard factors not determined.
AO Areas of 100-year shallow flooding where depths
arc between one (1) and three (3) feet; average depths
of inundation are shown, but no flood hazard factors
arc determined.
AH Areas of 100-year shallow flooding where depths
are between one (1) and three (3) feet; base flood
elevations are shown, but no flood hazard factors
are determined. -
A1-A30 .Areas of 100-year flood; base flood elevations and
flood hazard factors determined.
A99 .Areas of -100-year-flood to be protected by flood
protection system under construction; base flood
elevations and flood hazard factors not determined.
B Areas between limits of the 100-year flood and 500-
year (lood; or certain areas subject to 100-year flood-
ing with average depths less than one (1 ) foot or where
the contributing drainage area is less than one square
mile; or areas protected by levees from the base flood.
(Medium shading)
c Areas of minimal flooding. (No shading)
D Areas of undetermined, but possible, flood hazards.
V Areas of 100-year coastal flood with velocity (wave
action); base flood elevations and flood hazard factors
not determined.
VI-V30 Areas of 100-year coastal flood with velocity (wave
action); base flood elevations and flood hazard factors
determined.
NOTES TO USER
Cerl,in areas not in the special flood hazard areas (zones A and V)
miry be protected by flood control structures.
This map is for flood insurance purposes only; it does not neces-
sarily show all areas subject to flooding in the community or
all planimetric features outside special flood hazard areas.
For adjoining map panels, see separately printed Index To Map
Panels.
INITIAL IDENTIFICATION:
JUNE §S, 1974
FLOOD HAZARD BOUNDARY MAP REVISIONS:
FIRM
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
CITY .OF
FORT COLLINS,
COLORADO
LARIMER COUNTY
PANEL 2 OF 1
(SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED)
COMMUNITY -PANEL NUMBER
080102 0002 B
MAP REVISED:
FEBRUARY 15, 1984
Federal Emergency Management Agency
C\:
ZONE A4
7/16/79
ZONE
Larimer AREA NOT NOCLUUED V I_I11,1"600
1
FLOOIDPLAIt,11 EXHIB
ZONE(
►1�
APPENDIX VI
Stuffer Envelope
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Plan - 2 sheets
Offsite Drainage Exhibit - 2 sheets
"BED C"ANNE.
v r�oasrr \•
I �.'` 1 I °aromol
oaa �r
67 1 \ '\
TENNIS C(
onto.. E ! 2a \
L 1
I 1'. L_—
Irl
IF
AS
i 9 P!f
LEGEND
yn--------- IWIMif Qx101P1
np [antl Y GM1CU1
BIBILIBIIBIIBIIBIIB IWI MYOPY
. 9R-°♦W BOIIOARY
GRAPHIC SCALE
•. Iv A -I} ea n.
N
�gRTIN�2
AA III\1 + W a 04.
+ By sey
St
' DID rall. � 'a'%.- G c S
i `\..\
❑ i `\` Fro arc To
m ❑
Eon
CT,7
E
BEE DRAINAGE EXHIBIT FOR OFFSETS BASIN DELI�TN)MY
�I
I QI
ORIFYSM
[Oi1AM1
Ol.d0n
&MIT mWAnm
OC
- ramwn PPP
—WE—
WTF
g
zTuw exE D6m
FA
Al m
SIM'PT W =Ia' AID:Iw.
LO/
x6.
P clod
wlf/ PDIIPIRIIP TO
OEPIOI POINT
WIN
v«
IN
O.w
0.711 C91
I. uo l
10
1
M
`E
AN C97
1<one 1
is
14
o.N I.O@
I
P
4.25
0.4 P.M
�nY-Win
16<
a
0'.<) 4AP
a
6
.P
on 6.53
ft ad I
$:a
Po
m
a'. a:0a
a. "Float in Bran N
Po
OR
I."
0.37
and I
W
o
9 OF w w FOR 0-w tw MIT$
MIT1M
rDWARDS
"1
6[Y�
4�
nID1
�ENEW
ATION
i
aaio :w'i
c
.iN
aai..i
49110.7
0
at°`'°
af"°` 3
AM.3
WO.1
a
a"6
5
fsaa s
ON'.0
a96c0
a 49M,0
"`w
NJAMIN
e
im v Kl
a
ro sHAN Into i rumb. PPIw
vAu
TO HILL
FORT Fw OV.lww Mn dw.x
M THIS RM
7 �NIMLEVATI yP6 OMS
AMi . 0.1 FORTON
LIN S OF THIL
Dl
6TAINIw
all W A
6c ORTACTEO AT Tw W10911
III W WIT$E. F. N.
NM ALL IwR
FT In" FFIL Doi FAA Coal CUSTIL R�t It �ill
x. M I<Y of Fort Con 1 l m. b I l not f AT
ro In any nnc, of .bn tru o au�t 106 zaae`a So u4 pwr1T
.. �6c� pt�.a`To :'mr. `lt aha"'&�:eUrp<r. Toy Unit .'tn
ITT
SAL Ce"ise b a� u0L0-fbII �PP..]00 tMrrv[rwu T If Do on 1rq,
finm, Parl And EacTurivitSoetim. Bon. 1303)691
o. if�bwtell a to At, ilood Tol t nWn <
M 0uelvrp Nri<�i fW✓N
Any .o"4"`rr l Is mo
If yitoymrcm<o..r. tlgnnol, tia Gixn, r
ll
P. hi�ago<rtif cotiro W filklty by
T iaa AT aOm`WarWn
lonallilan
(at tional too let nothenom policy to "A", If Unnificill
<And r. ntleci :R m f:,tTi < r.'cccc d' a" w°wn "nw ALItility n .
6. lans
Air recommendations
motion, P.uEA ry al the
ua tm a op w0 front on Cmfrol xW< fr t
Ildrold
part N W gonl n u0re ° I �qt a Ob`holtual
m
to tth AL ur.m .a,°.>:r.. w`< " w . n.0, AIR .Font aIt III `
.. fra P.: aa'a Uva ola"40an 166ar O:oi"rd a tN. Plan
r . mNr
w m":
0
a
A
I II
WAS
V 6 '
W I
ia^ °'4,
at A
IT 0
I �
F .. fail
It All
/PRBFILE ■ `�-
- -r BEE SHEET 47 loan,` o rI'll'
cumin FT RAP L
\u aB•A W by so'
"1' 03 <I BURICO RIP RAP APRON
1O ;E om - Tr
to 10• E W A B•
'M9 I / " 0
i BURIED RIP RAPOWALE
V 1Df, 2 Al by IIO' lid
'{\ice •
w•�I y4G / I IR.� T to <i0llly
O�V
El" :5 \ ISM'¢5' /ry 1//
joi I LEI ON
SAM F1 IN maw 1
ionto alxwAll7; _
----------------------------- —
------CHERRY STREET
— — --
_ e h' ny a for; coBw, coal
----- _-_ �----- - - - - -- /----------------, � ,\ E /�-------------------`- - - - - _ _-___G ERIDtt Pux uPR9vu
GX7
Mi'm.a� not
❑ O i E-1 I [ y II II 6vrw.TO
3 !E/]
9 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ l i❑ III l °m® 6r m m,,,L Dom
U] III % II OeR® m
9 I I I I I I � I I w I II ZO II .....O.m..a m.
5¢ e 1 OwP®n em
} �E: fIEGID m
PROJECT NO. xOwRr
REVISIONS Bn< B.o.O D.M.C. uXxr SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION 1°`c MASTER DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEET N0- SNEETS
m wRv9b IN LAID Li FT ==v B.W.S. WONDERLAND HILL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY /838 SO- COLLEGE AW. SUITE 12, SORT GOWNS• COLORAW W525 MARTINEZ P.U.D. ' 5 n0
DAL- H Iwou c^ ^ 156E—01-97 G
unto .. Coal, 1' a 80' Am'aal B.W.S. PHONE: (970) 228-533A (970) 226 1 FAX: (970) 282-0311 FORT COLLINS. COLORADO MAIxi.OwO
KVDIN( INDUKVINYd'IN I NVI AnIIA
M AN DMO EROSION CON ERCH
ONSTRIICTON RAN NOIEt
Te cut M Rn calm, Swnaveer Ileliry Emlm amwl
mAnslna RUN wnm Maeriw n 4u 34 Irma Pw w mV
II , SW paimew DEC f.wly; Fall be IwIkE Pav m u:Y
I'm Gnm4e.E nnivrry (% w11ry n - EnlinF ALL). All
dM n®on'Arw nr a.W hiwIIW at tN egq. .
Any
m ne In on eerulu: w:.m u SAUDed"ee ENCRARI
Ivopv I p5arymPiC. N.rQArPm
Is
DOOR, pmFn m rN ( "t
�m h OR as Utility
w.IM wb aM.ie
IrS, NAKI SUCH by, rtd It ...�Ir III MAII
COUNCIL l
jr
1r.,..,
drurnsl
W wo RARAR YII ea®9 b 11% /ls, w Woon All MI
W arm,
.:EMNy. �YiFW FRiv SUN Rki ASS, I
:::ywlR?�®IY� 4YbmlE�mLiLL
°rix gMw:r w
:y Y4Ms GytlW mrrY illh eb:eg1 A
[OYSRICTnX )Rp[INCE
PM(O : p4r LP.UA
RESONANCE FOR Iw-IM EN1RIVIAEFn BY: 9�91ENSERtl�daGw.
r.n III Re Yvw4 )Yy.
F YM• :�.. ER b•neewen v:•5:w'ervl.vH. v..w:I.Ia µpc.IM the I
ANDUCCAN
'"^runtmen ...
SQUI OCCUR
SOL
PAR PC PC
ALI
oZr�r�F"n "•
RvvNw ... ...
::TFmRI�<ROA,eYI�a All
m ml m,.lr
I mole aa..,. It, .m .n f. .a. .1.
annla, r aM aM ....:e
PC PI CUQI" I MCI
ncm
SO An US
rs m.vvama eu uuanuru PC no uvuramnrmaa.0 •v ea.0 • a a. a a- a • e W ,.ee aav a a., n
so as
ml RI PUSS'
u nI ro le an a vrun e..' a ICK
R! a O. naawala I ar mrrn . 1R .. a.+ a o a ee m y r •.ar •.n
now IS. sr. DO Al
111
:e mon vuyr raeeov rvu runuw. LA IOCCUL "Itsw nOL
Wy
. 1e .. a
a a y. eu— I awafn.
DUL
. a 11 IS. 95 OT
11 An
low
I.
oppy,
..:C,y..a:� Illna...a,,elronr� wwr.v:":�W"rW MI I par d �-
REVISIONS —
CCIY ..9e} O'S
ACRE - O.M FIRST
SECTION P—P
LOOKING NORTH
Date Ina Day RUDEn<la eoof LVX=N<e 9.w.S. I WONDERLAND HILL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
bu PIYRrM.I�
ems, CONA AS
�P{YIII OR
wu ANSI
f WCONSUL PC
wem F
TANI "An r.FrywFT+w•rIa-.
Dore R �Y. �mm�Y+n11�
AS, 01. Ply DO ALI
iI
SCSI NO I
ubWaey�All�' w w NU W AD
M SOL INS 11" ASDOCASOUR
Vr.wYrT"�..YY��q �rRYaYf.
ay. :reyrwyn nlFYrw4
Arpapsy
'�R EtrI IYNFYJ4
':Y'"R." �,'.`a�".Fie_."`...::`:�:+-`..I"a.`o".I.:..W. •Iw
e nAm N:d.bde.Y•vu•w Y.NaNRrwni.d.E.rr.»
Ibss.•u++
r ".IyIh.�Rvrw.0 R.erY.a�vRuydlybwr a>wyw...
M�wpWlu .-�►�IYLrM/u.m
b YNeRrrlrYnuyHaRwwYHwrr�EwrNruNumlr
.. •"Nuyu.Yww�Yfwb�ir.FawrReeNr
a nFr>brbl..�rb.ey
g�g
E w' 4
ar
61
AS
it
CK
PROPOSED
O5E0 PRCPoSLO
— I ar
�
0100 - 7.39
CMS 983
READ ItI
SECTION K—K
IN PARK
CONCRETE TRAIL SECTION L—L
IlwI NWsPAUR EnI Z,3
94.NP: 1I43 E9a.
s,.o Buena
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
N36 S0. COLLEGE AVE. SUITE 13. PORT COLLINS. COLORADO 60515
PHII (9E0) 996-5334 (9E01 106-4451 PA}: (9E0) 361-0311
NOTE. I—��
OIN NO RISKS —
y I mm
OCCUR 1 49 Q 3.00'
SWAL,E SECTION X—X
IN PARK
�I B
0.50'
S = 5%
Ocil = 8.23 0Ps
Oaezl9^ a 3. 06 cFz
SECTION 0-0
N.T s
1ti.ALP: rL:(,r 01
MASTER DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES
MARTINEZ P.U.D.
ME of FUEL COIGoR, Golarado
E0'ORE PLI APPROVAL
r
mm 11
w�m.w rvnKID
a:awvv wm
urz
MODEST
w m w:e
we
In
I91NI0 m
PT N0. SNEET N0.
N0�
9Xf[R
i5H—Ol—B7 16 120
soll
49677
''e'
W
3 t
... kNI _I -
REVISIONS cOle - 9.n.n e► SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION PROJECT NO. N,EI..O, "°- °:
o..RE `/ DRAINAGE EXHIBIT
e:_ _ yervee. Reif Bc Appm,eCheckeNEED
WONDERLAND MILL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 4836 SO. COLLEGE AVE. FORT COLLINS. COLORADO MARTINEZ P.U.D. 155E-01-97 /1f o.:= ___- M -- o..mpie= Scoie_ 1•: 100• APProwE YIEG PHONE: 970) 226-5334 970) 226—A61 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO G
eF•`' ( *+ - �' 1 •�\11 - �- -r Cj_ �R •-�irIRkM4�"{ •vlY r
:II 1 It
f
;.. - '
i� I '1.; 1 ,� � � ��,: •R � FiK-! i1 ��v � �` 4 ��t r �� ! � } ��� �' �• t 4�t 1'v y:I � ').��\r {�'IY n •v
x^ �s961aa_ _
1 �010.4 ♦ — .-ter, �'v � ����. U `� I; � _..ix^•6r
•9z.s j/0
�, I.� r , ( t•-=s;.' •11'�+•`� il. {...Y. !i. S /L'' \\6.•qM(� �".
r 'Y 4 ►Alk Su.
411
I • /, .. t 1 r 1 a/ `�� ii+ • / 6e• v ��
' * H
v,
r
• `Y
"f �'f ♦.. }. 1 r. riY I .Yt,, •tl - bt D _ • "L: ` 9
f A
- .; -xSWD. �.. `1.'•L-i •� �� �1F' j •^�r L -1 q.l
ELM xs000s X<99Bd \ ;.. 4r axv f
Rid
I ,
CalLl
w Ar 'r'•.�' S� '` I y ^�t
r'- �� p} a
.ij
��-A�y S ' I •, :' 3I 0 ILL `e I!`y _
kitRt INh -i" j � '# 1LIIZ III
aIF
,r ! 1 ' � � �� •• ova• K ��. ' ��3'Ti" •;�'- �
b'� _ � b ,�may't ��,�� • * A .M ice_ (, _ e �' �! _ + �;: !
dam' s �v. �r it : ,i _ 4;iC: `_� 13i
_- f x60ii.3 IISYCAMORE V. �, �ISaoRi �'�5000
`•
fui�i+�b-�"-v i Iry o
•. 'OIi;N4 V ' r ! 1, g
jfrr"\ S r . - ! • A�
It
C w
��=iiaF f �.�_�-' 1fi' 4" • �,• 7..,���-
x5032.9 ST soiAx -I p. Er. iA 1� j J .! �v�:f t ',f 'T�'• •`.' .� a .'T
� Z _.tye,' .p .d r h'.._ . } ✓ �fi y _� .x S { --a6 ..'�' ^' x , All
f^ �� f[_ (� {�??; �2C `.> / _ s s ` f 4 `7"*
!•�+ - r... r—r 2 ' \ max. • Y I _ t E'
..
IL z
to
.:. �r / Yy.
�.• 4{ ��y� of ! +'� ? -� x_4' Y "`I _ •L r
t'. ' -• 3tt T' v -�••.—yam -
_r
IT I
to n :� ��� - �i '' . �. � 3a �4'i � � � • � � ! ' ...-PI
i
a-_i-_i .'..1�, • , f S!1 'w•! ' A
r Tk -_�_. d�4�1 JY • ._a !r Jr �' `r ,�xYddd
.rii I }� •. �.
:_yar`.' ii _,. +r •v e--. i, :.'_t » "+� ��IrF ��^¢x" R�1 tttt
o
'fir
REVISIONS
Dale— Bro.r,_CP
a`"
SHEAR ENGINEERING
CORPORATION x""
DRAINAGE EXHIBIT
zxz2xo. ,2,
rw+eer roe n nin
FP[d Book __ cnec.ea_
MEO
WONDERLAND HILL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
A636 SO. COLLEGE AVE.
FORT COLLINS. COLORADO
MARTINEZ P.U.D.
ts6e-oT-aT
III— u pNo
scale 1•u 100' Approved
MEO
PHONE: 970 226-533A
9T0) 226-4451
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
mu w o„mum.
6
9
W z
a
G0
¢
..e
•
cu
yin
. .
L 2+00 L 1+W ww I,
CROSS SECTION 6+00
I-r-„wmera.
4990
4985
4980
R
u
4975
L 2+00
Dade
Dade
W
W
CROSS SECTION 4+0Q
I�
p D
4990
4985
4980
rA
L 2+00 L 1+00 ww K f+w
CROSS SECTION 12+00
SUMMARY
ILPOp
Sectim E40tM9 E1111119 OaMcgM (a) CaNWe] (a)
station SRI 5Wa SMe Sede
TW Bwm W4L (c) Tcp Cat (A) INI (c)
2+00 may) 97.32 &13 0].M
.+DJ 66.03 0594 50W "'of
6+00 a0) 0460 6S.W W.59
0+00 W00 a film MAI
10+00 wNO 81.53 0zW 51�52
2+00 'b. 6' 79.79 79.50
The vletF9 cmmne as defense at stNm "00 loseW.aa to In Therefore II that oa611lon^I cWacltr
voiddp e eN6e6 6T calms are op If w2 ro need mull Pat ItheColita home alb not .adds IN cat old and an It,
theplwb dlw.
/. .adds we It mWie6 0l 13 6eoaaw ued a pale. grading M cay,dOflori a6
heeds Ea not representThe
IPa
'.hat
istation
out o9
X this
m athe reed xtllm x-x at aauM out m Pa emma9e wah. ma awWopM ..alb m 1 a xmlon
b the Y fFn sh
C��
p,a.lw efficient wae11T rd tne w.q, na.e. Na Reading •.wl.w N Pmewa Pow.
cocoon
�1
r
r�
c. ARSEL le ewe] m a design noe of t2667 of, (13511 of 0100 to OR s • sw owner of Lad 12),
IN
a TOP qo,owt the too of an Ads of the Not, that the of ily at the We
0 h4hee Inwa noted On the tabs aaan.aairdo
sMlaes mar1s
Refer to the Wlw\~hlM plan and PrOfel fin' Wind of cvp dewtin
V
Ali Reading far the d,,w i a.do match.. a.l.tlng Rhoden at to, about Property lNe of Joi l : P,LJ D..
I up
F
S q)il5 Res not w6nY
L 2+09
L 1+00
V+W
n 1+W n arw
CROSS
SECTION
10+00
gti9a
(;dn5.
1e rhsl I
toe
tone M wife -
Cdrrr }
o�
L 1+00 Orrw
CROSS SECTION 2+0
1+00 R 2+00
L 2+00 L 1+00
CROSS
OhUU in l+w n.+w
SECTION 8+00
ode
omW oMc
�— Ch` L:e NEo
BWS
WONDERLAND HILL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
4935 so. C0L1ECE AVE. SUITE 12, FORT COwMS, COLORADO W525
PHONE: (970) 226-5334 (970) 226-4451 FAX (970) 282-03ry
ITU
1
RAILROAD SWALE CROSS SECTIONS
MARTINEZ P.U.D.
FORT COLONS, COLORADO
ride max
ScgN H
PROFILE
HORIZ. 1' er 50'
PERT. I' 05'
City of Fort Collin, Colondo
UFMV PUN APPROVAL
APPPOIEO
pmnw X Eo Nr
w¢
CI[0Im Br'
11" a e.nL.Anw no,
wrz
01[G30 n
nwwA'm .man
drz
pECE[0 R'
rho .ND .awns,
drz
61EL%m aY'
urz
CNECIlFD W'
box
No. SIRV NO.
VPROJECT w
EEn
1558-01-97 1
1
x—SE —DM
4990
4965
4980
49]5
L2
S
Zti
=
E
E
CROSS SECTION 4+00
PC
6
�p
999g
LKLOPED
k
49M
4985
49W
49]5
W
4990
4985
d
d
d
4990
4985
4980
4980
4o ]S
L 2+00
L 1+00
0+00
R
1+00
R 2+UU
CROSS
SECTION
2+3
SHEET 13
`Erns W
6€
WE
/ _-
4990
4985
4980
49]5
L 2+00
6
6
E
E
� ^
m
L 1+00 0+00 R 1+00
CROSS SECTION 10+00
FROM SHEET 14
�
E
Y
E
E
$
all
t
a
gth
g �
r,
W
4990
4985
4980
49]5
R 2+00
Fsell
mommmE
----
L 2+DO
L liW
CHEW
R 1+En
N z+w
CROSS
SECTION
8+00
gd aInR, Wm (Twlcu)
d d al
d d al
4990
49M
4990
4990
6
4985
498.5
4985
4985
4980
49M
4980
4980
4975
4975
4975
1
4975
L 2+00
L 1+00 0+00 R 1+00
R 2+00
L 2+00 L
1+00
0+00 R 1+00
R 2+00
a
CROSS SECTION 2+Op
CROSS
SECTION 6+00
FROM SHEET 13
FROM SHEET 13
D.M.C.N`�W
SHEAR ENGINEERING
CORPORATION
FKU Rddl
gaLw M£0_ -,_
�„ 10-12-9e nJfcD_do,,4°�.i�VNDMEHT AND REVls orbs - - ---
WONDERLAND HILL DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY
4836 50. COLLEGE AVE, SURE 12. FORT
COLLINS. COLORADO 80525
_
Dial
M
oared'
Sink H' 1-- 50'h N 1'= 05
pprwy B W S
PHONE: (970) 226-5334 (970) 228-4451 FIVE: (970) 282-0311
F0'2
LC OWSUMMARY OF CHANNEL CAPACITIES
FOR CHANNEL ALdiG RAILROAD ��section E,Istlna Existing De M" (0) oe.Weped (e) _
station seat$ style seine Svale
n Den WrOt. (a) TOP Curb (d) WSEL (c)
R it It
2+0) A9.M 8l M13 67.32
2+301 66.00 al 87.87 8710
4+00 BI al ae.GO 0.91
6+00 85.00 9460 man 84. se
6+00 61.ao 83,34 as. 11
t01W as On 51.53 BLOO 6152
12+00 -b- -b- 79J9 ]9.55
o. The .mats marry as deM al statke send w Tnneiors It r coded that oddmm�at aapoaly
twld M noMld by raking the too or curb as needed to snwre that th .Oslo floes I not Intel the are and flow Into
he prM1s aln.
d. Al eMNg Wale was not milli e1 talks, I2+00 because the Will groan do not ,present a swale. Grading nlll be caepleled
within the Ma1Nn Vr ty to desire will Callon M-M as called out on the drainage plan. The deMped swab In this location
will prmMw wfncknt Opacity f Y the Will II Na Aading ,pulod In Railroad ROW.
z All b based on a d 19, now at I26.67 cry (p3F of OIM to OR s e Be ONCE, of Lot 12).
d. Top Of curb we spa of berm m north sae of me a Mp.b a Note um the of O at
,coons may be higher in,, noted PC the table oboes. Refer to the pot gb or" plain um profile for actuaip of u curb newtlm.u•
e. M godbg fa the de *p swat. nrl .Voting III at the south p,pwly 10, of Val p.V.O,.
r swoon 2+30 so, acrid wool of the Centel to the pnwte brie..
ID
EE
z
43
00
PC
in
PC
€
RR
4990
0
03
(
6MI
499D
4985
4980
4985
4980
00
1+00
+oo
R z+oo
CROSS
SECTION
12+00
FROM SHEET 14
ROAD SWALE CROSS SECTIONS
MARTINEZ P.U.D.
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROFILE
HOl 1" - 50'
IERT In - 05
City o1 Fort Collins. Colorado
UTIOUTY Pun APPROVAL
WOVE1 ••� a� 6"6-95
o..
DECKED 6Y:_ _ NA((�.�
424'9P
mi
DECKED BY
Oil 91
Ol
PROJECT"o.
s1fEEr No.
No. cur
SHEETlE
15A
LO
1558—01-9 701-97
-SECTS