HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 04/17/2002 (2)A roved RAP
K` Date
SHEAR
ENGINEERING
FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROLREPORT
For
OLD- TOWN NORTH
PHASE 1
0
Ft. Collins, Colorado
Prepared for:
OLD TOWN NORTH LLC
PO Box 270053
Ft. Collins, CO 80527-005
Prepared By:
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
Project No: 1646-01-98
Date: March, 2002
4836 S. College, Suite 12 Ft. Collins, CO 80525 (970) 226}5334 Fax (970) 282-0311 www.shearengineering.com
ki
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase i
March, 2002
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................
4
II. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION...................................................................
4
A.
Property Location..............................................................................................................
4
B.
Description of the Property................................................................................................
4
III.
DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS.....................................................................
5
A.
Major Basin Description....................................................................................................
5
B.
Sub -Basin Description..................................................................................I......................
7
C.
Historic Conditions............................................................................................................
7
D.
Developed Conditions.......................................................................................................
7
IV.
DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA...................................................................................
7
A.
Regulations........................................................................................................................
7
B.
Development Criteria Reference and Constraints.............................................................
8
C.
Lake Canal and Offsite areas.............................................................................................
9
D.
Hydrologic Criteria..........................................................................................................
10
E.
Hydraulic Criteria............................................................................................................
10
V.
DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN......................................................................................
10
A.
General Concept..............................................................................................................
10
B.
Specific Details — Offsite Drainage.................................................................................
11
C.
Specific Details—Swales..................................................................................................
12
D.
Specific Details - Detention.........................................................:...................................
12
E.
Specific Details - WQCV................................................................................................
13
F.
Specific Details — Floodplain...........................................................................................
14
G.
Specific Details — Street /Alley Capacities ................ :.....................................................
15
H.
Specific Details — Storm Sewers..............................................................................:.......
18
I.
Specific Details — Lake Canal /Lake Canal Overflow .....................................................
19
VI.
EROSION CONTROL: ................................................................... ...............................
20
A.
General Concept..............................................................................................................
20
B.
Specific Details...............................................................................:................................
20
C.
Erosion Control Cost Estimate........................................................................................
21
D.
Erosion Control Calculations...........................................................................................
21
Page 2
Project No.: 1646-01-98 March, 2002
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
VII. CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................. 22
A. Compliance With Standards............................................................................................ 22
B. Drainage Concept............................................................................................................ 22
VIII. Variance Requests........................................................................................................... 22
IX. REFERENCES................................................................................................................ 23
APPENDIX I - Drainage Calculations
APPENDIX II - Erosion Control Cost Estimate; Rainfall Performance Standards, and
Erosion Control Effectiveness Calculations
APPENDIX III - Pump Specifications
APPENDIX IV - Portions of the Final Report Hydrological Model Update for the Lower
Dry Creek Basin Master Drainage Plan
APPENDIX V - Charts and Figures
APPENDIX VI - Table of 500-yr Flood Elevations and Recommended Finished Grades
APPENDIX VII - Stormwater Management Model (SWMM) for Old Town North;
Prepared By Northern Engineering Services
APPENDIX VIII - Stuffer Envelope
Page 3
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
I. INTRODUCTION
March, 2002
This report presents the pertinent data, methods, assumptions, references and
calculations used in analyzing and preparing the final drainage and erosion control
design for Phase 1 of the Old Town North site.
a. Phase 1 will be constructed at this time.
b. Phases 2 and 3 will be constructed in the future.
i. No additional drainage infrastructure is required for Phase 2.
ii. The drainage infrastructure shown in Phase 3 is preliminary. Final design will
be required when Phase 3 develops.
2. The Lake Canal is situated along the south side of the Old Town North site.
Stormwater releases from the site will be conveyed to the canal. Close coordination
with Lake Canal representatives is being provided with the final drainage design for
Old Town North. Approvals from the Lake Canal Company are required.
II. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. PROPERTY LOCATION
1. Old Town North is located in the south 1/2 of the southwest 1/4 of Section 1,
Township 7 North, and Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado.
2. More specifically, it is located on the north side of the Lake Canal, west of
Redwood Street, south of Conifer Street and east of North College Avenue.
3. The site is bounded on the north by the future Vine Drive alignment and unplatted
properties, on the east by Redwood Street, on the south by the Lake Canal and on
the west by several commercial sites. The Cache La Poudre River is located south
of the site.
a. The future Vine Drive alignment has been defined with this project based on
the current City of Fort Collins "Master Street Plan."
B. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY
1. Old Town North is a proposed residential subdivision in the City of -Fort Collins,
Colorado. The overall subdivision consists of 105 single-family homes, 110 town
home lots and 2 commercial lots. The project will be built in 3 phases.
2. Old Town North has a platted area of approximately 45.01 acres.
3. The site is currently vacant and is covered with native vegetation.
Page 4
Project No.: 1646-01-98 March, 2002
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
III. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS
A. MAJOR BASIN DESCRIPTION
1. The entire site is located in the Lower Dry Creek Basin as delineated on the City of
Fort Collins Stormwater Basin Map. Portions of the site are located in the existing
Dry Creek floodplain.
a. The site is designated basin 410 in the Final Report — Hydrological Model
Update for the Lower Dry Creek Basin Master Drainage Plan (Final Report) by
Anderson Consulting Engineers. Portions of the report are found in Appendix
IV.
b. The limits of the 100-year floodplain for Dry Creek were taken from FIRM
map — Community Panel number 080102-0004-C; dated March 18, 1996. The
limits of the 100-year floodplain for Dry Creek were also verified with maps
taken from the report prepared by Gingery and Associates titled Major
Drainageway Planning - Dry Creek; Prepared for City of Fort Collins, Larimer
County and Colorado Water Conservation Board; Prepared by Gingery and
Associates; Dated April 1980.
c. The Dry Creek Floodway is identified on the Drainage Plan, and is located
north of Phase I and 2 of the project. No construction in the floodway will
occur during Phase 1 or Phase 2. Phase 3 of the project is shown within the
floodway, but is shown for reference only. Once improvements to Dry Creek
are completed, Phase 3 design completion and construction could be pursued.
2. Water surface elevations (WSEL's) for the 100-year event for each lot is presented
on the Drainage and Erosion Control Notes sheet. This information will be needed
in completing elevation certificates for each lot's Certificate of Occupancy (CO).
a. Data used in calculating the 100-year event is summarized in the table below.
Dry Creek 100-Year Flood Elevations
Cross Section ID
100-Year
WSEL
Reference Source
FIRM Map
Cross
Section
XS 19
4956.0
FIS and Master Plan Table
L
XS 21
4958.3
FIS and Master Plan Table
M
XS 22
4960.4
FIS and Master Plan Table
N
XS 23
4962.6
FIS and Master Plan Table
O
XS 24
4964.4
FIS and Master Plan Table
P
XS 25
4968.3
FIS and Master Plan Table
FIRM Map 080102-0004-C, March 18, 1996
Page 5
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
3. All of the lowest floors will be elevated a minimum of 1.50 feet (18 inches) above
the 500-year WSEL within the Dry Creek floodplain. Minimum recommended
finished grades and protection elevations are shown on the sheet titled Drainage
and Erosion Control Notes.
a. The lowest floor elevation corresponds to the bottom of the basement or crawl
space.
b. Data used in calculating the lowest floor elevations is summarized in the table
below.
Dry Creek 500-Year Flood Elevations
Cross Section ID
500-Year
WSEL
Reference Source
FIRM Map
Cross Section
XS 19
4956.0
FIS
L
XS 21
4958.4
FIS and Master Plan Table
M
XS 22
4960.7
FIS and Master Plan Table
N
XS 23
4962.9
FIS and Master Plan Table
O
XS 24
4964.8
FIS and Master Plan Table
P
XS 25
4968.7
FIS and Master Plan Table
Q
FIRM Map 080102-0004-C, March 18, 1996
c. Various foundation construction types are possible for Phase 1. Because of the
designed grading, generally both crawl spaces and slab -on -grade foundations
are possible.
i. Crawl spaces require 1.5 feet (18 inches) vertical distance between the top
of the ground surface to the bottom of the floor joist. Therefore, crawl
space foundations are possible where actual grading is at least 1.5 feet (18
inches) above the 500-year Flood Protection Elevation. Importing of fill
will be minimized by constructing crawl spaces.
ii. Lots where less than 1.5 feet (18 inches) is available, slab -on -grade
foundations shall be constructed. Garages are considered to be slab -on -
grade.
4. This portion of the Lower Dry Creek Basin is developed with a combination of
residential, commercial and retail uses. There is some remaining undeveloped
property at this time north of the site that will be developed in time.
5. A small portion of the project, located in the extreme southwest portion of the
project site, is located within the Poudre River Floodplain.
Page 6
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
a. The limits of the Product 6 Corridor, in the Poudre River floodplain area, affect
only one of the proposed entry streets to the project site, Jerome Street.
b. Jerome Street has been designed and located based on the requirements of the
current City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Jerome Street is designated as a
Collector Street.
c. Phase 3 of Old Town North has been defined due to its being located in the Dry
Creek floodway.
B. SUB -BASIN DESCRIPTION
1. The site slopes from the northwest corner of the site in a southerly manner to a low
point located near the center of the south property line.
a. There is approximately seven (7') feet of fall across the site.
C. HISTORIC CONDITIONS
1. Historically runoff from the site flows overland into the Lake Canal at the low
point located along the southern property line.
2. Some offsite stormwater flows through the site into the Lake Canal via the Josh
Ames Ditch.
D. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS
1. Development of the site will create three sub -basins within the limits of the site.
Sub -basin A will contribute runoff to the proposed detention pond. Sub -basin B
will contribute runoff to the proposed Dry Creek Channel. Sub -basin C will
contribute runoff to Redwood Street and eventually to the Dry Creek Channel.
Most of sub -basin B is located in future phases of the project. Two minor basins
(13 and 14) contribute runoff to the proposed access points at the existing Vine
Drive.
2. In order to maximize detention volumes, the grading in the southwest corner of the
site will bury the existing 30" culvert at the west property line. This culvert
historically conveys offsite stormwater into the Josh Ames Ditch and then into the
Lake Canal. Therefore, this offsite stormwater will be intercepted at the west
property line of the site and diverted in the Lake Canal.
IV. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
A. REGULATIONS
1. This final report and the Master Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plans for
Old Town North were prepared in accordance with the requirements of the current
City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Erosion Control Criteria
and the recommendations of the Final Report — Hydrological Model Update for the
Lower Dry Creek Basin Master Drainage Plan.
Page 7
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
2: The western entry street, Jerome Street, has been designed within the limits of the
Product 6 Corridor, so that there will be no increase in the Poudre River floodplain.
3. All lots within Old Town North are located within the Dry Creek floodplain, but
not within the Poudre River floodplain, and will be protected from the Dry Creek
500-year WSEL as currently defined by the Lower Dry Creek Basin Master
Drainage Plan. The lowest floor elevation shall be 1.5 feet (18 inches) above the
500-year WSEL.
4. The design has referenced regulations in the "Code of the City of Fort Collins,"
Chapter 10 - Flood Prevention and Protection.
B. DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA REFERENCE AND CONSTRAINTS
The alignment of the Dry Creek channel, in this area, may be changed with Phase 3
of this project. A grass -lined channel will be constructed between the south side of
the future realigned Vine Drive and the north side of the lots in block 7. The
channel section will parallel the south ROW line of the future realigned Vine
Drive. Box culverts will be provided where Dry Creek crosses the future realigned
Vine Drive and Redwood Street. Site grading along the channel will match the
required channel section for the estimated design flows.
a. The future realigned Vine Drive alignment has been defined with this project
based on the current City of Fort Collins "Master Street Plan".
b. The future Dry Creek channel alignment has been defined so that the future
extension of the Dry Creek main channel would be located north of Alta Vista,
an existing development east of Old Town North.
c. The design flow has not been finalized as of the date of this submittal. Our
understanding from City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility personnel is that
the anticipated ultimate flow rate may range from 500 - 700 cfs.
d. Therefore, a preliminary design flow of 700 cfs was used to be conservative.
Box culverts under the future realigned Vine Drive and Redwood Street will be
designed for the same flow as the channel.
e. The channel will be built in Phase 3 of the project when all upstream Dry
Creek floodplain improvements have been completed and the Dry Creek
floodplain limits have been formally redefined. Final design will also occur at
that time.
2. All proposed grading along the south property line matches existing topography
along the north side of the Lake Canal.
a. All proposed grading within the Product 6 Corridor between existing Vine
Drive and Lake Canal shall not cause any rise to the floodplain.
3. All proposed grading along the west property line matches existing topography.
Page 8
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
4. All proposed grading along the east property line will match proposed grading of
the Redwood Street extension along with the grading required to install the box
culverts under Redwood Street for the Dry Creek realignment and the Lake Canal.
5. Detention will be provided in accordance with the recommendations of the Final
Report — Hydrological Model Update for the Lower Dry Creek Basin Master
Drainage Plan. A Stormwater Management Model (SWMM) has been prepared for
the site by Northern Engineering Services. The referred to report is attached in
Appendix VII.
6. The profile of the future realigned Vine Drive has been designed according to City
of Fort Collins Criteria. The Dry Creek floodwaters will overflow at the
intersection of Redwood Street and Vine Drive if the proposed box culvert under
Vine Drive becomes clogged. If this occurs, stormwater would spill back into the
Dry Creek channel on the east side of Redwood Street.
C. LAKE CANAL AND OFFSITE AREAS
Flows from the onsite detention pond will be conveyed to the Lake Canal via a
storm sewer that is located along the north side of the Lake Canal. The outfall point
is located at the existing concrete structure east of the site. The outfall storm sewer
crosses under Redwood Street near Tract HHH of Old Town North, then traverses
Tract A of Redwood Village P.U.D. Phase II.
a. Tract A of Redwood Village P.U.D. Phase II is dedicated as an access,
drainage, utility and maintenance easement according to the plat of Redwood
Village P.U.D. Phase II.
2. The location of the outfall from the stone sewer into the Lake Canal was discussed
with, directed, and approved by Lake Canal Company representatives.
3. There will be future modifications to the Lake Canal near the outlet to allow for the
passage of the Dry Creek and detention pond flows separate from any irrigation
flows in the Lake Canal. An inverted siphon is one alternative that is currently
being considered. Additional detail of the means of separating these flows will be
provided prior to final approval by the City and the Lake Canal Company.
a. The inverted siphon will be designed and constructed in the future with the Dry
Creek Improvements.
4. Representatives of the Lake Canal Company have indicated that the maximum
irrigation flow through the canal is 150 cfs. Visual inspection of the concrete weir
structure, where the storm sewer from the detention pond will outlet to, revealed
water markings at a depth between 18" and 24". The canal is approximately 5'
deep and 15' wide at the weir. The average slope of the canal along the south side
of the site is approximately 0.12%. The canal has a total capacity of approximately
298 cfs in this reach. Refer to the drainage calculations in Appendix I for more
detail on the Lake Canal capacity.
Page 9
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
5. Offsite flows from the west of the site will be diverted at the west property line and
conveyed directly into the Lake Canal. These flows historically pass through the
site via the Josh Ames Ditch into the Lake Canal.
6. There are two (2) street crossings over the Lake Canal proposed with the Old Town
North project. One of the crossings is located at the proposed re -aligned Redwood
Street. The other crossing is located where Jerome Street crosses the Lake Canal.
a. The opening requirements of the two (2) crossings were determined by
documenting the existing openings in structures currently crossing the ditch
west of the site at North College Avenue and east of the site at Lemay Avenue. .
Separate Reinforced Concrete Box Culverts (RCB) will be provided in the
canal to match the existing cross section at the two crossings.
b. Jerome Street has been designed and located based on the requirements of the
current City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Jerome Street is designated as
a Collector Street.
c. Maintenance agreements are currently being developed between the City, the
developer, and Lake Canal Company.
D. HYDROLOGIC CRITERIA
1. Runoff calculations at various design points are based on the "Rational" method.
The 2, 10, and 100-year storms have been analyzed. All runoff calculations have
been performed using the current rainfall IDF curves dated March 16, 1999.
2. Detention is proposed with this subdivision to accommodate the recommendations
of the Final Report — Hydrological Model Update for the Lower Dry Creek Basin
Master Drainage Plan. Detention volume requirements were established using the
Stormwater Management Model (SWMM). This model was prepared by Northern
Engineering Services, "Final SWMM Modeling Report for Old Town North," is
attached in Appendix VII. The design release rate is based on 0.38 cfs per acre in
accordance with the recommendations of "Final Report — Hydrological Model
Update for the Lower Dry Creek Basin Master Drainage Plan". VIAP op" iz -°Z
E. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA
1. Storm sewer inlet design is based on the inlet curves provided in the City of Fort
Collins Drainage Criteria Manual.
2. Storm sewer design is based on Manning's Equation with Manning's coefficients
as suggested in the City of Fort Collins Drainage Criteria Manual.
V. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A. GENERAL CONCEPT
The grading of the site will be done to convey as much stormwater runoff as
possible to the proposed detention pond.
Page 10
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
2. Any swales that have slopes less than 2.0 percent will have 3' valley pans installed
at the flow line of the swale.
B. SPECIFIC DETAILS— OFFSITE DRAINAGE
Onsite and offsite stormwater historically flows through the site to the Lake Canal.
Stormwater currently enters the Lake Canal at its confluence of the Josh Ames
Ditch. Stormwater from the west side of North College Avenue is conveyed to the
Josh Ames ditch via existing culverts located under North College Avenue and the
existing parking lot of the Will Subdivision, just west of Old Town North.
a. There is evidence of an existing structure that conveyed stormwater flows over
the Lake Canal. The structure is located at the confluence of the Josh Ames
Ditch and the Lake Canal.
2. The offsite contributing area is designated basin 409, which has an area of 48.80
acres, according to the Final Report — Hydrological Model Update for the Lower
Dry Creek Basin Master Drainage Plan.
a. Stormwater from basin 409 is conveyed to the Lake Canal via conveyance
element 509 in the existing conditions SWMM and conveyance element 709
N�a.o up�ta �2 oz for developed conditions. The estimated peak flow in conveyance element 509
sx�iocu@ is 118.3 cfs. The estimated peak flow in conveyance element 709 is 219.5 cfs.
CE s0q- i3(oc�s Refer to the attached printouts from the Final Report - Hydrological Model
"tP-0- IOL[?6 -2Ad4s Update for the Lower Dry Creek Basin Master Drainage Plan in Appendix IV.
b. The existing culvert under North College Avenue is a 3.4' high x 6' wide box
culvert. The maximum HW/D for the culvert before College Avenue is
overtopped is 1.77 (4964.95-4958.93/3.4).
c. This is an irregular culvert size. Therefore, a 4'x6' culvert was used to assess
the capacity
d. The capacity of a 4'x6' culvert under inlet control with an HW/D of 1.50
(4964.95-4958.93/4.0) is 160.0 cfs.
e. The stormwater from the west side of North College Avenue is conveyed east
from North College Avenue via a 30" CMP pipe. This pipe has a 0.005 ft/ft
slope. The capacity of this pipe based on Manning's Equation is approximately
47.0 cfs.
3. The existing 30" CMP daylights into the remnants of the Josh Ames Ditch at the
west property line of the site. This pipe will be buried at the west property line by
the proposed detention pond grading. This stormwater will be diverted at the west
property line of the site by installing a manhole at the end of the pipe.
a. A 30" diameter pipe will be installed from the manhole to convey stormwater
south into the Lake Canal.
b. Riprap will be provided in the Lake Canal to reduce the erosion in the canal by
the direct inflow of the stormwater.
Page 11
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
C. SPECIFIC DETAILS —SWALES
1. Grassed swales will have a minimum slope of 2.0%.
March, 2002
2. Concrete valley pans will be installed in locations where the slope is less than 2%.
D. SPECIFIC DETAILS -DETENTION
1. A detention/WQCV pond is provided in the south-central portion of the site. The
pond is designed to restrict the release rate from the 100-year developed storm to
_. 0.38 cfs/acre (13.29 cfs) in accordance with the recommendations of the Final
Report - Hydrological Model Update for the Lower Dry Creek Basin Master
Drainage Plan.
a. Detention Pond modeling was performed by Northern Engineering Services to
determine the pond volume requirements. The results are attached in Appendix
VII of this report. The outlet from the pond was designed to restrict the release
to 13.20 cfs (0.38 cfs/ acre x 34.98 acres).
b. The pond volume requirements were determined to be 8.25 acre feet. The pond
volume was determined by Northern Engineering. The calculations performed
by Northern Engineering are found in Appendix I, under the section "Culvert
& Pond Calculations from Northern." Approximately 14.19 acre feet of storage
volume is provided in the pond at the 4961.5-foot elevation (top of berm). The
required volume for water quality and detention is achieved at an elevation of
4960.25 feet (100-yr Required Water Surface Elevation (WSEL)).
c. The volume of 8.25 acre feet includes the sites' overall detention requirements
plus the WQCV (0.85 acre feet) required for the site as well as additional
retention volume. A pump system has been designed to transport water that has
passed through the water quality device to the outlet box. Since there is a pump
system located within the pond, it is assumed that the pump could possibly quit
functioning during large storms, thereby creating a retention area within the
detention pond. As a result, the volume from the invert of the WQCV box to
the invert of the outlet box has been added twice to the total detention volume
per retention requirements set forth by the City of Fort Collins.
d. Pond grading and the design of the outlet were performed by Shear
Engineering Corporation in accordance with the recommendations of Northern
Engineering Services and with consideration of the existing trees, which are to
remain in the pond area.
2. The outlet from the pond will convey the release from the detention pond east to
the existing irrigation structure in accordance with the directives of Lake Canal
Company representatives.
a. The existing Lake Canal irrigation structure is located directly in the current
Dry Creek floodway flow line alignment.
Page 12
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
3. A portion of the storm sewer outfall from the detention pond will be constructed on
the east side of Redwood Drive. This portion of the storm sewer will be
constructed in Tract A of Redwood Village P.U.D. Phase H. Redwood Village
P.U.D. Phase II is platted. Tract A was dedicated as an Access, Drainage, Utility
and Maintenance Easement with the final plat of Redwood Village P.U.D. Phase II.
a. A Type 2 outlet structure is specified within the limits of the berm. The top of
the 5' x 5' outlet structure is set above the required 100-year WSEL for the
100-year storm. An 18" high by 32" wide rectangular orifice will be placed
within the outlet structure to restrict flows to required 13.20 cfs. The outlet
structure will function as a 20-foot broadcrested weir. The top of the box is set
so that the required WSEL is reached in the pond. The top of the box is set at
an elevation of 4960.47 feet. Refer to the Storm Sewer, Drainage and Erosion
Control Detail Sheet located within the plan set for reference. Additional
specifications regarding the outlet box are located in Appendix I attached to
this report.
4. A 24" RCP pipe will convey the released stormwater to the existing irrigation
structure as agreed to by the Lake Canal Company. The pipe has a capacity of
20.79 cfs based on Manning's equation. Since the pipe will be flowing under
pressure, R4 joints are specified on the plan and profile.
5. An emergency overflow weir is specified within the limits of the berm to pass
flows directly into the Lake Canal in case the orifice and outlet structure are
completely plugged. The emergency overflow weir is sized to pass the 100-year
peak flow (Q100) to the pond.
a. The Q100 to the pond is 160.46 cfs.
b. The weir is set at an elevation of 4960.55 feet.
c. The weir length is 70.00 feet.
d. The weir is sized to allow the Q100 to pass with a maximum head of 0.95 feet.
e. The maximum WSEL if the weir were to be functioning alone is 4961.47 feet.
f. The maximum WSEL if the weir were functioning in tandem with the orifice
and the primary weir is 4961.23 feet.
g. Buried class M riprap (1350 = 12") is specified at the weir and down the bank to
the Lake Canal.
E. SPECIFIC DETAILS - WQCV
1. Water Quality control measures are specified on both the Drainage Plan sheet and
Erosion Control Plan sheet.
2. Maintenance of water quality control devices will remain the responsibility of the
contractor and the owner until the project is complete.
Page 13
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
3. The water quality pond is provided within the detention pond that is located in the
south-central portion of the site. According to the sites' overall imperviousness
value, a water quality storage volume of 37,111 cubic feet of water is required.
4. The top of the water quality/detention pond is at an elevation of 4961.50 feet. The
invert of the WQCV pond is at an elevation of 4956.00 feet.
5. The volume provided in the water quality/detention pond is 618,153 cubic feet up
to the top of the pond. The required WSEL to obtain the necessary WQCV is
4957.37 feet.
6. A water quality outlet device is specified on the Storm Sewer, Drainage and
Erosion Control detail sheet as "Water Quality Sump Pit." The first row of
openings in the WQCV plate are set at an elevation of 4956.00. Refer to the water
quality calculations for additional detail.
7. The sump pit has dimensions of 5'x5' as measured from the exterior. The interior
dimension is 4'x4'. The top of the sump pit is grated, and set at an elevation of
4957.50 for the necessary WQCV. The box is approximately 6.5' high. This
height is required to house the pumping system used for the transportation of water
from the sump pit to the outlet box. A detail of the water quality box is provided
on the•Storm Sewer, Drainage, and Erosion Control sheet found within the plan set.
8. A sump pit and pump will handle nuisance flows, and will be located within the
detention pond at the lowest elevation.
a. The pump will be sized according to the discharge required for water quality.
Specifications for a suitable pump are included in Appendix III of this report.
b. Flows will be routed from the sump pit to the Type 2 outlet structure located
within the limits of the berm. From the outlet structure, flows will continue
into the 24" RCP for ultimate discharge into the Lake Canal.
F. SPECIFIC DETAILS— FLOODPLAIN
The City of Fort Collins has required that all development within the Dry Creek
floodplain set all lowest floors a minimum of 1.50 feet above the 500-year WSEL.
The 500-year WSEL's for several cross sections of the Dry Creek are provided on
the Drainage and Erosion Control Plan. These were furnished to Shear Engineering
Corporation by the City of Fort Collins Floodplain administrator. Finished grades
are specified for all lots.
a. The 500-year storm WSEL's, obtained from the City of Fort Collins and
corresponding to the cross sections of Dry Creek shown on the FIRM map —
Community Panel Number 080102-0004-C, Dated March 18, 1996, are
summarized on the Drainage and Erosion Control Plan.
Page 14
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
b. Final grading of the site was dictated primarily by existing outfall elevations
and the detention pond top of berm grades. Typically, the Old Town North lots
will have finished grades above the 500-year flood protection elevation. Refer
to the table shown on Sheet 60 of the plan set.
c. A table summarizing the 500-year flood protection elevation and recommended
finished grades for each lot is included on the Drainage and Erosion Control
Notes sheet and in Appendices VI and VIII.
d. A table summarizing the 100-year flood elevation for each lot is included on
the Drainage and Erosion Control Notes and in Appendices VI and VIII. This
information is provided for use in completing elevation certificates as part of
the occupancy approval process.
e. A floodplain use permit is required for each structure prior to obtaining a
building permit.
f. A FEMA Elevation Certificate is required for each structure prior to obtaining
a Certificate of Occupancy (CO).
g. Residence construction exhibits have been provided with the final utility plans.
These exhibits identify the relationship of the allowable finished floor elevation
to the 500-year water surface elevation. They represent a graphic visual of the
data provided in the summary tables previously discussed.
G. SPECIFIC DETAILS— STREET /ALLEY CAPACITIES
1. The street capacity of Blondel Street was checked at the intersection with Pascal
Street (DP 6 and 7). This portion of Blondel Street has a slope of 0.90% coming
into the intersection.
a. The allowable capacity of Blondel Street at this location for the minor storm
(2-year) is 17.68 cfs.
b. The peak flow to the intersection for the minor storm is 17.74 cfs. This is a
minimal difference in flows, and therefore acceptable.
c. The allowable capacity of Blondel Street at this location for the major storm
(100-year) is 90.04 cfs.
d. The peak flow to the intersection for the major storm is 77.24 cfs.
2. The street capacity of Pascal Street was checked at the intersection with Heschel
(DP 8). This portion of Pascal Street has. a slope of 0.85% coming into the
intersection.
a. The allowable capacity of Pascal Street at this location for the minor storm (2-
year) is 17.02 cfs.
b. The peak flow to the intersection for the minor storm is 3.13 cfs.
c. The allowable capacity of Pascal Street at this location for the major storm
(100-year) is 53.17 cfs.
Page 15
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
d. The peak flow to the intersection for the major storm is 14.20 cfs.
March, 2002
3. The street capacity of Cajetan Street was checked at the intersection with Pascal
Street (DP 11). This portion of Cajetan Street has a slope of 0.50% coming into the
intersection.
a. The allowable capacity of Cajetan at this location for the minor storm (2-year) is
13.18 cfs.
b. The peak flow to the intersection for the minor storm is 6.27 cfs.
c. The allowable capacity of Cajetan Street at this location for the major stone
(100-year) is 67.11 cfs.
d. The peak flow to the intersection for the major storm is 27AI cfs.
4. The street capacity of Jerome Street was checked at the intersection with Vine
Drive (DP 13). This portion of Jerome Street has a slope of 1.22% coming into
the intersection.
a. The allowable capacity of Jerome at this location for the minor storm (2-year)
is 19.06 cfs.
b. The peak flow to the intersection for the minor storm is 1.14 cfs.
c. The allowable capacity of Jerome Street at this location for the major storm
(100-year) is 67.11 cfs.
d. The peak flow to the intersection for the major storm is 4.98 cfs.
5. The street capacity of the ultimate Redwood Street was checked at the intersection
with Vine Drive (DP 14). This portion of Redwood Street has a slope of 0.87%
coming.into the intersection.
a. The allowable capacity of the Redwood Street at this location for the minor
storm (2-year) is 16.10 cfs.
b. The peak flow to the intersection for the minor storm is 1.61cfs.
c. The allowable capacity of Redwood Street at this location for the major storm
(100-year) is 260.99 cfs.
d. The peak flow to the intersection for the major storm is 7.04 cfs.
6. Peak flow inundations for the three different alley typical sections have been
determined. Locations were analyzed using a worst case scenario (largest flows
due to greatest contributing area). The calculations and WSEL for the 2 and 100
year storms are found in Appendix I.
Page 16
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
a. During a 2 year storm, all three alley configurations stay within the access and
utility easements on either side of the ROW. During a 100 year storm, two of
the three alley configurations previously did not stay within the access and
utility easements on either side of the ROW. Some grading modifications were
made to all three alley configurations and are discussed below. Information
regarding 100 year peak flows in all three alley configurations are discussed
below as well. An alley typical section for all three alley configurations
including water surface elevations, ROW elevations, and easement elevations
is provided on the sheet titled Drainage Plan within the planset, and is included
with this report.
i. Alley T was analyzed for the 2 year storm. The 2 year peak flow in alley T
is 1.00 cfs. The ROW elevation on the graph is at 030 feet and the WSEL
in the swale is approximately 0.27 feet.
ii. Alley T was analyzed for the 100 year storm and completely contained the
peak flows through the alley. The 100 year peak flow through alley T is
4.22 cfs. The lowest elevation that flows would not be allowed to pass is at
0.48 feet, and the WSEL is at 0.39 feet. Water would begin to flow over the
southern ROW and into the detention pond before encroaching on the
northern ROW.
iii. Alley O and alley S-2 were analyzed for the 2 year storm. The 2 year peak
flows are 2.26 cfs and 2.04 cfs respectively. The lowest elevation that the
flows would not be allowed to pass is 0.80 feet for alley O and the WSEL is
at 0.58 feet. The lowest elevation that the flows would not be allowed to
pass for alley S-2 is 0.80 and the WSEL is at 0.55 feet. Both alleys carry
the 2 year storm within the limits of the 8' access and utility easement as
required.
iv. Alley O and alley S-2 did not contain a 100 year storm within the limits of
the 8' access and utility easement. The WSEL exceeded the elevation at
the end of the 8' access and utility easement. Grading modifications were
made for both alleys in the form of a steeper slope between the right-of-
way and the 8' access and utility easement. The slope was increased to
10% between the right-of-way and the 8' access and utility easement. This
modification provides complete containment within the 8' access and utility
easement, therefore requiring no additional easements within the adjacent
lots.
v. Alley Z has a sufficiently small contributing area and is divided into two
separate flows, and therefore requires no analysis.
vi. Alley U is the last alley to be analyzed for the 2 year storm. The 2 year
peak flow in alley U is 2.20 cfs. The lowest elevation that the flow would
not be allowed to pass is at the ROW and is at 0.70 feet. The WSEL in alley
U for the 2 year storm is at 0.49 feet.
Page 17
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
vii. Alley U was also analyzed for the 100 year storm. The 100 year peak flow
through alley U is 11.30 cfs. This is at an elevation of 0.64 feet, and the
WSEL is at 0.70 feet. The 100 year storm is not contained within the
ROW, however, the 100 year storm is contained within the 17' access and
utility easement, thus requiring no additional easements within the adjacent
lots.
H. SPECIFIC DETAILS— STORM SEWERS
1. A 30" storm sewer is proposed to convey storm water from the Josh Ames Ditch
into Lake Canal. The location of this storm sewer is just west of the smaller
portion of the detention pond and south of Pascal Street. The storm sewer is shown
graphically as storm sewer profile "A". This storm sewer has now been moved
east, and is now inside of the west property line.
2. One (1) 30' Type R inlet and 6 — 4' concrete sidewalk culverts are specified on
Jerome Street north of the Lake Canal. These channel/chases are designed to
intercept 100% of the Q100 to Design Points 4 and 5 and convey the stormwater
into the detention pond. A 24" RCP will convey storm water from the 30' Type R
inlet on the east side of Jerome Street into the detention pond. The storm sewer is
shown graphically as storm sewer profile `B".
a. The Q100 to DP 4 is 31.50 cfs.
b. The Q100 to DP 5 is 10.88 cfs.
3. Three (3) 14" X 23" ERCP's are specified to be placed under Jerome Street to
connect the two separate portions of the pond together. The reason for the use of
elliptical pipe is to meet minimum cover requirements. Ponding around the
upstream side (west end) of the three storm sewers will reach an elevation of
approximately 4961.18 feet. This provides for a freeboard of approximately 0.32
feet. The two ERCP's are shown graphically as storm sewer profile "C".
Calculations supporting the need for three culverts under Jerome street were
performed by Northern Engineering and are found in Appendix I, under the section
"Culvert & Pond Calculations from Northern."
4. An 18" storm sewer is proposed in realigned Vine Drive located slightly north of
the intersection of realigned Vine Drive and Redwood Street. The storm sewer
will convey water collected from Redwood street into the concrete box located
slightly south of the intersection of realigned Vine Drive and Redwood Street. The
sewer is shown graphically as storm sewer profile "D".
5. An 18" storm sewer is proposed at the intersection of realigned Vine Drive and
Redwood Street. The final design and construction of this storm sewer will be
completed in future phases. The storm sewer is shown graphically on the Phase 1
plans as storm sewer profile "E".
6. A storm sewer is proposed for Interim Redwood Street. A 12" RCP is proposed to
cross Interim Redwood Street slightly south of Lake Canal. The storm sewer is
shown graphically as storm sewer profile "F".
Page 18
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
7. A storm sewer is proposed for Interim Redwood Street further south of storm
sewer " P. An 18" RCP is proposed to cross Interim Redwood Street just north of.
the intersection of Interim Redwood Street and East Vine Drive. This storm sewer
is only temporary and will be removed once the Ultimate Redwood Street
construction is completed. The storm sewer is shown graphically as storm sewer
profile "H".
8. A storm sewer is proposed for Ultimate Redwood Street. An 18" RCP is proposed
to cross the Ultimate Redwood Street between two 10' Type R inlets just north of
the intersection of Ultimate Redwood Street and East Vine Drive. This will be the
final design and is shown as storm sewer profile "G".
9. A 24" storm sewer is proposed for conveying storm water from the pond to an
existing concrete weir located within the Lake Canal. The storm sewer runs along
the south side of the pond and continues northeast until it intersects with the Lake
Canal. The storm sewer is shown graphically as storm sewer profile "I".
10. An 18" storm sewer is proposed in realigned Vine Drive to convey stormwater
from a low point located west of Jerome Street to the proposed Dry Creek Channel.
The final design and construction of this storm sewer will be completed in future
phases. The storm sewer is shown graphically as storm sewer profile "J".
I. SPECIFIC DETAILS —LAKE CANAL /LAKE CANAL OVERFLOW
The existing irrigation structure blocks the Dry Creek drainageway. An emergency
overflow spillway will be constructed in the east wall of the existing irrigation
structure. The overflow structure is sized to pass the developed peak flows from
the site. for the 100-year event (Q100).
a. Approximately 150 cfs is conveyed in the Lake Canal for irrigation purposes.
i. The calculated flow depth for the irrigation flows across the structure is
1.91 feet.
ii. The capacity of the irrigation structure is 617.71 cfs while flowing full.
This data is found in the Lake Canal Overflow section of Appendix I.
b. The Lake Canal conveys 150 cfs for irrigation purposes.
i. The calculated flow depth of the Lake Canal with 150 cfs flowing is
approximately 2.67 feet.
ii. The capacity of the Lake Canal is 297.95 cfs, this value is found assuming
the canal is flowing full at a depth of four feet. This data is found in the
Lake Canal Overflow section of Appendix I.
iii. A combination of the maximum ditch flow requirement of 150 cfs, and the
100-year overflow from the pond in emergency situations (160.46 cfs),
results in a potential total flow in the ditch of 310.46 cfs. This is
approximately 12.50 cfs more than the calculated theoretical capacity of the
Lake Canal. Overflow in emergency situations is minimal.
Page 19
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
iv. One concern with the additional 12.50 cfs is that it could possibly flood
structures located south of the Lake Canal. The Lake Canal could
essentially act as a 1500 foot broadcrested weir from Jerome Street to
Redwood Street. With this assumption a weir calculation can be performed
to determine the head that would be overflowing the ditch. With a
discharge of 12.50 cfs and assuming a 1500 foot broadcrested weir, the
head that would overflow the ditch would be approximately 0.055 feet.
This is an insignificant amount of water to flood any structure in the area.
The flows would spread out over an area of about 2.5 acres before it would
reach any structures, therefore, eliminating any danger of flooding. A
calculation verifying the discussed information is found in the Lake Canal
section of Appendix I.
c. A 4' high x 20' wide box culvert will be placed within the Lake Canal at the
proposed Redwood Street crossing.
i. The calculated flow depth for the box culvert assuming 150 cfs is flowing
through the culvert is approximately 1.55 feet.
ii. The capacity of the box culvert is 637.80 cfs assuming the culvert is
flowing full at four feet high. This data is found in the Lake Canal
Overflow section of Appendix I.
d. The Q100 to the detention pond is 160.46 cfs.
e. The 25' weir will be set 3.0 feet above the floor of the structure to ensure that
the irrigation flows stay in the canal. A 25' notch will be cut into the east wall
of the structure and the grading east of the structure will be modified to allow
the excess flows to spill over the weir and into the historic Dry Creek channel.
VI. EROSION CONTROL:
A. GENERAL CONCEPT
1. Erosion control measures are specified on the Erosion Control Plan.
2. Maintenance of erosion control devices will remain the responsibility of the
contractor and the owner until the project is complete.
B. SPECIFIC DETAILS
1. The following temporary measures are specified on the Erosion Control Plan:
a. A silt fence shall be installed around the entire Phase 1 portion of the project.
The location of the silt fence shall be at the base of all grading improvements,
roughly along property lines. The only exception to this is at the improvements
along the north side of existing Vine Street. No silt fencing will be incorporated
with the existing Vine Street improvements.
b. A gravel inlet filter shall be included in front of the orifice plate at the water
quality inlet box, located at the sump of the detention pond. The gravel inlet
Page 20
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase t
March, 2002
filter will be approximately four feet wide (inside width of box), two feet long,
and approximately one foot high. The top of the inlet box is approximately 1.5-
feet higher than the proposed grade, and requires no special sediment control
features. Since the top of the box is raised above the proposed grade, water will
tend to pond by design allowing sediment to settle to the ground.
c. A gravel inlet filter is not necessary at the 6 — 4' concrete sidewalk culverts,
which are located along the west side of Jerome Street. The inlet drains into the
water quality detention pond, which by design acts as sediment trap.
d. Gravel inlet filters shall be installed at several locations prior to site drainage
entering into the water quality detention pond. These locations are:
i. Alley K - Approximate Station 2+30 where drainage enters the pond from
the valley pan.
ii. Alley P - Approximate Station 1+60 where drainage enters the pond from
the alley pan.
iii. Blondel Street - South end of Blondel Street where drainage enters the pond
passing through two sidewalk culverts.
iv. At the 30' Type R inlet located on the east side of Jerome Street. The 30'
Type R inlet collects storm water and then conveys the flows to the water
quality detention pond.
2. The following permanent measures are specified on the Drainage Plan and Erosion
Control Plan sheets:
a. Buried riprap aprons, D50 = 6" at most culverts and locations where flows leave
alleys and streets and enter the water quality detention pond.
b. Buried riprap aprons, D50 = 12", at storm sewer "A" and at the emergency
overflow weir at the south end of the water quality detention pond.
c. Riprap size, dimension, and classification varies throughout the site, therefore
these characteristics are labeled on the Erosion Control sheet located within the
plan set for this project.
C. EROSION CONTROL COST ESTIMATE
1. An Erosion Control Cost Estimate has been prepared for the project, identifying
the required erosion control security deposit.
2. The amount of the security deposit is $ 32,062.91.
3. The erosion control cost estimate can be found under Appendix II of this report for
immediate review.
D. EROSION CONTROL CALCULATIONS
Erosion control calculations have been performed which includes the site's
Rainfall Performance Standard, and the Erosion Control Plan Effectiveness.
Page 21
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
March, 2002
2. The Rainfall Performance Standard has been determined to be 73.55%.
3. The Erosion Control Plan Effectiveness has been determined to be 78.55%.
4. Since the Erosion Control Plan Effectiveness is greater than the Rainfall
Performance Standard, 78.55% > 73.55%, the erosion control plan features are
adequate for the project.
5. Supporting calculations can be found under Appendix II of this report.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
A. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS
1. The grading and drainage design for Old Town North complies with the City of
Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and the recommendations of the Final
Report - Hydrological Model Update for the Lower Dry Creek Basin Master
Drainage Plan.
2. The erosion control measures shown on the erosion control plan comply with the
City of Fort Collins Standards and generally accepted erosion control practices.
3. The design complies with regulations presented in the "Code of the City of Fort
Collins", Chapter 10 - Flood Prevention and Protection.
4. There are two (2) variances being requested. These are presented below.
B. DRAINAGE CONCEPT
1. The proposed drainage design for Old Town North is effective for the control of
storm runoff with a considerable reduction in potential downstream effects..
VIII. VARIANCE REQUESTS
A. A variance is requested here for the headwater to depth ratio for the culvert under
Jerome Street. The allowable headwater to depth ratio specified in the City of Fort
Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria is a value of 1.5. Due to backwater effects
from the lower portion of the detention pond, the currently designed triple 14"x 23"
culvert under Jerome Street conveys 22.3 cfs in the 100-year event with a headwater to
depth ratio of approximately 2.37. Because the culvert capacity is controlled by
backwater from the lower portion of the detention pond, and cover over the culvert is
minimal, a variance is requested for this increase in headwater to depth ratio.
Page 22
Project No.: 1646-01-98 March, 2002
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
IX. REFERENCES
• City of Fort Collins "Code of the City of Fort Collins", Chapter 10 - Flood Prevention and
Protection; 1986 as amended.
• City of Fort Collins "Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards"; May,
1984, revised May, 1997
• City of Fort Collins "Erosion Control Reference Manual"; January, 1991
• Final Report - Hydrological Model Update for the Lower Dry Creek Basin Master Drainage
Plan; Dated September 10, 1997; Prepared by Lidstone and Anderson, Inc; Project Number
COFC96.06
• FIRM map -Community Panel number 080102-0004-C; dated March 18, 1996.
• Final SWMM Modeling Report for Old Town North; Northern Engineering; March 6, 2002
• City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado Water Conservation Board, "Major
Drainageway Planning, Dry Creek, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado; ' Gingery
Associates, Inc., April 1980.
• . Hydraulic Analysis for the Cache La Poudre River Floodway Revisions; August, 2000;
Ayres Associates; Project No. 32-0224.00
• Final plat of Redwood Village P.U.D. Phase II as recorded in-Larimer County Records on
August 17, 1984 at Book 2285, Page 1285
Page 23
Project No.: 1646-01-98
Re: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
Old Town North — Phase 1
APPENDIX I
Drainage Calculations
March, 2002
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation OTN-rational
By: dah 12/21/2001
RUNOFF
Page 1 of 44
G
oQ0
N lA
04 O
N
H
M m
O
Sa
3 to
I W
OI o u
H
3
O
r-1
C N
x W
N N U
N
a
a
O
H
OI
U O �
F o E .
H
O
u H
E
N
V it
v >1
41
O O
U O
U
Y4
W >.
W I
N O
O H
U
W S
S4 O
z;:I N
a
0
E a u
ri
O
W v J.
W E T
I •rl F
E cn
Ui Q1 J
C
rl r
O 0 U
r-1 Q a 4
(r, C
O
r
Vl
O
m
m
C
O
01
c}
H
N
'I,m
V,
N
d'
0m
m
m
k0
r1
N
w
O
-W
r
N
O1
O
N
O
m
IT
O
O
m
v'
r
VD
r
N
r
v'
r
N
�Di
1-1
m
H
N
N
r-I
N
N
r
V'
r
r
N
O
H
ID
Ln
-WU)
O
ri
U1
l0
U1
Lnw
m
r
m
r
H
N
m
r
m
N
O
r
O
N
0\
r
m
N
U1
ri
r1
0)
O
Ln
- N
O
O
H
O
ri
N
rl
10
H
H
1-1
H
H
M
N
m
N
O
O
O
v
ri
rl
0\
m
r
N
v'
d•
H
H
r
H
o
r
Ln10
m
H
N
m
N
w
r
H
w
O
�O
rl
r-1
r
N
H
l0
rl
H
U)
r
H
r
r
m
H
m
O
O
O
N
m
m
H
N
w
O
m
w
O
Ln
O
N
r1
N
N
w
m
01
w
m
H
N
Ol
O
N
Ln
a
r
m
D
z
cn
r
rn
w
w
r
co
rn
m
c
H
1n
r
m
w
-zr
w
H
r
m
w
o
w
r
vW
v
r
.
0)
1n
o
o
o
H
r
Ln
o
r1
in
o
m
w
o
N
N
m
r1
rl
M
m
m
rl
M
m
m
m
O%
m
a%
r-I
m
m
w
r
0\
H
U1
U1
m
U1
O
m
Ln
r
o
m
r
r
m
H
O
m
m
0
r
m
%D
r
ri
H
N
r1
H
H
H
N
N
ri
rl
N
rl
N
N
H
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
00
O
O
O
O
O
U1
U1
U1
O
Ln
U1
U1
Ln
Ln
N
O
U1
0
LnU1
o
r
H
%D
w
W
V
LnH
In
N
N
E
U1
10
W
N
H
H
H
H
H
ri
H
ri
H
H
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
O
o
O
O
O
U1
U1
U7
O
U1
U1
U1
U1
U1
o
U1
O
U1
O
U1
In
O
r
H
w
w
w
In
O
H
W
rl
N
w
m
w
k0
N
H
H
rl
rl
H
H
r-1
ri
H
rl
rl
ri
H
m
m
0\
o
r
r
U1
r
m
U1
a0
U)
ID
O
O
O
CO
m
r
o
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
N
m
O
O
O
0
0
0
H,
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
r-I
H
H
�0
�O
fh
U1
m
r
l0
m
m
�O
H
O
r
O
O
10
O
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
r-1
o
o
o
o
o
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
r-I
CO
w
k0
O
H
r
m
w
m
m
w
N
w
O
m
H
a%
m
r
O
m
d'
W
m
r
N
Ul
Ul
m
U1
r
m
,;v
w
O
U1
ri
m
d'
ri
O-IV
It
H
N
O
O
l0
r
H
m
m
O
r-I
N
r1
d'
r
r
H
rl
r-I
rl
H
%0 N
U)
In
r-1
�
In
ri
r
w
Q
N
H v' � rlH
l0
�
H
N
cn
v'
U1
w
r
m
0)
O
ri
N
rl
v�
H
En
N
m UI
ID
Id.
V
O
N
FU
co
f6
a
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:15 AM
Determine Runoff Coefficients for Single Family and Town Home Lots
Single Family Lots
Lot Dimensions
40.00 ]ft
x
85.00
ft
Area
13400.00
sf =
1 0.08
ac.
A
C
A*C
Imp
A*%Imp
sf
Building Area
1910
1 0.95 11814.50
100%
1910
Drive/ walks Area
405
0.95
384.75
1.0096
405
Lawn Area = remainder
1085
0.10
108.50
0%
0
Avg Lot Area (A)=
3400
sf
2315
Total A*C =
2307.75
C2 = (Total/A)
0.68
196
impervious
68.09%
C100 = 1.25*C2
0.85
- C100
cannot be > 1
Roof
Drives and walks
L x W =
Area
L x
W =
Area
ft ft
sf
ft
ft
sf
34.00
1 40.00
11360.00
40.00
4.00
1160.00
25.00
1 22.00
1 550.00
15.00
3.00
45.00
Total
11910.00
8.00
25.00
200.00
Total
1405.00
Town Home Lots
Lot Dimensions 70.00 ft x 18.00 ft
Area = .1260.00 sf = 0.03 ac.
A C A*C Imp A*%Imp
sf
Building Area 970 0.95 921.50 100% 970
Drive/ walks Area 102 0.95 96.90 10096 102
Lawn Area = remainder 188 0.10 18.60 0% 0
Avg Lot Area (A)= 1260 1072
Total A*C = 1037.20. Im ervious 85.08%
C2 = (Total/A) 0.82
C100 = 1.25*C2 1.00 - C100 cannot be > 1
Roof Drives and walks
L x W = Area L x W = Area
ft ft sf ft ft sf
38.00 18.00 684.00 18.00 4.00 72.00
22.00 13.00 286.00 10.00 3.00 30.00
Total 1 970.00 ITotal 1102.00
OTN-rational
Blocks Typ Page 3 of 44
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:15 AM
Blocks C2 %im
rass
kroof
96 d/w
Itotal
TH
1 0.82
1 85.089d
159d
1 77961
896
10096
SF
1 0.68
1 68.09%.1
32961
569a
1 1296
100%
COMM
1 0.88
1 90.00%-1
1096
40%
50%1
100%
Mixed = Townhomes and open space
OTN-rational
Blocks Typ Page 4 of 44
M
N
O
2
co
C
O
CO
0
O
aL
O t:
U O
Z
c c
CDo 'o
c�
m a
c p
w
`m `n
m
t
� c
N
t4
d
7
N
aM
I
04
rn c U
0 3
N
Z
m a�° Q
o
Y
U
O
Fn
Il�,pi��
p
�IIIYIII
I,I
V
v
0
LO
m
rn
m
a
NN
Z cYi
Om
'M
O Q
O
N to
N pj
N
c
O
00
O
O
O Kzr
`C
O CL
Z .M.
O ma
� cc
111
ql�
Il,l�
119
I;I
III
� N
Z o
0m
N Qj E O
N O
o >
c
�u
n
t
F.
■E■I■ i! ill■I■li
a
■
�
�In■�n�
i
�
1�1■
I
I
�
�
1,
m IOININININININININININIMIMIM f`MIMIMIM IM IMIMICIVIVIVIV�'IV
oQ0
N
N Qj
N
c
O
O
a
o C
U Z
c c
0
c
c
023
w
m
(1)
t
U)
0
Z
m
0
3
Y
O
FO
A1��
■I
11■i
�
�
��9■9
v
v
0
0
d
0>
m
a
m
c
0
Om
o QO
N U7
N Qj
N
N
O
a
`o r
U Z
m c
o
m �
c
0)v
cO
w
CO
d
L
L
co
m co
O C
(6 @fN
;I-D(0
Q
O c0
Z .Cku
a U)W
n pQ
Y
U
O
M
o
III
Om
'M
o Q
0
N tt7
N Qj
N
I
ca
O
d.
O V-
U Z
3
O
c
�O
w
m
W
L
U)
L
U
O
N
C
H
Y
0
Z
a
0
Y
0
O
m
V
0
o_
a�
rn
m
a
c`a y
Z Y
Om
2
o Q
0
N to
N pj
N
7
i
v
0
aD
m
m
a
Om
F�
N
O
d
O V-
UZ
Im
C C
O O
N
C
'5:2
c0
w
co
CD
L
fn
V
0
Cl
0
0
0
•-
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
co
0
0
0
0
0
T-
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
I
O
N
NO
O
O
CDOO
CD
918Q
r
CO
N
O
M
o
r
I,-
N
CO
N
CD
O
CO
r
CT
O
o
CO
O
r�-
.-
I
CD
CO
I
O
O
V
N-'r
o
O
O
CD
O
~
CO
CA
.-
V'
N
o
O
CO
tl-
CO
CD
Cj
Cj
C 5
�-
rl-
co
co
O
co
CO
tl-
I--
�
N
,
O
.
10�
CO
co
O
Cn
co
o
N
t,
N
n
V
co
O
M
~
Cn
N
Lo
Un,
m
rl-
O
t,
O
h
N
N
O
N
r-
V
co
r.-
CO
Cn
o
N
co
co
M
O
M
N
O
N
O
M
I
In
t--
co
o
r-
Cnt.-
Cnrn
O
O
O
O
r
N
V
O
N
o
N
N
00
N
CO
O
O
O
IcD
O
O
M
r
co
t,
o
O
C0
CD
CD
co
0
o
0
O
I
O
a
N
E a
Q Q N Q -.-0o U
d CL
'FuE
FO-hoUHU
V
v
0
N_
N
CT
co
Q.
N N
U U
@ co
co
f` N
cM M
QW O M
7� VM MMCO
CO 00 O
�- M
f0 N
C _
O m
O
m ra Cc 0 cv m Z o
< CC) 0) QN� Qa1°ia) Om
InQa tnQa c wQQ
ccN � O
mC�O�UmCDOx co00w
CDQO
N 0)
N
c
O
(9
0
O
a L
O 'C
U z
c c
(D 0
c ~
C3)�
cO
w
cu
f0
N
L
U)
O
rn
O
O L
Itr ca
to
O C
z rn
1n
m
RI
v
U
ro
W
is
N
L
c]
v
�i
v
w
w
.H
W
O
0
O
.H
L
U
v
to
L
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
"P
dP
dP
dP
v
ri
kO
l0
w
N
c+l
O
O
O
v
M
N
N
Ln
m
Vv
0
0
o
dP N
J-I
m
O
O
In
ri
m
0
0
0
(n
r
m
m
c�
m
h
o
0
0
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
m
Ol
w
w
d
m
Ir
o
0
0
m
o
r
r
w
r+
In
O
o
0
dP ro
r-I
m
rn
co
ri
o
0
0
U'
N
r1
ri
N
ri
N
1-1
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
ro
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
W
0
M
10
l0
lfl
10
ri
N
10
O.
H
m
UI
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
m O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ro W N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Si
U' O
m
m
m
ri
N
ri
O
O
O
ri
ri
ri
ri
ri
ri
v
CD
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
In
&
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0144
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0 o
r
ui
w
'Ir
w
0
0
0
U
�
L
r-I
dp
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ro In
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4 m
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(A O
H
m
lD
w
O
O
�O
N
10
O
4M
V'
V�
N
d•
N
ri
ri
N
-1
o
ri
ro
.J
'0
iJ
-H
U
O
r-I
N
m
ri
N
m
N
N
S-I
0
O
r-I
r-I
ri
v v
11
v
r-t
3
ro
ro
ro
v
v
v
:1
E
4-1
ri
'o
u
U
u
ri
r-I
r-I
iJ
N
•r1
i1
O
v
O
O
O
ri
ri
ri
cn
U
dP
Q
U
OY
4
a
a
.¢
r
f0
0
O
a L
O =
U O
oZ
c c
o
c
•m a
c p
w
m
a�
L
U)
00
m
O
CD
v
CD
O
Z
a
O
L
m
'O
N
C
m
rm,
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
riHHH
u
0
4J
4J
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
dP
4)
w
O
O
1D
N
m
O
O
O
l4
H
aJ
rn
dP
N
dP
dP
ap
dP
dP
&
dP
dP
dP
y
N
0
0
Vr
co
N
O
O
O
ro
N
N
N
N
r-I
N
N
cr
dP
dP
&
dP
aW
dP
oP
dP
dP
dP
r-I
W
to
w
N
m
O
O
O
E
m
N
N
m
W
V�
O
O
O
0
0
In
r-I
a0
O
O
O
'p
r
co
co
r
m
r
O
O
O
H
r-I
ri
m
o
o
r
-I
m
In
Ln
In
N
r
m
ao
r
m
r
m
m
m
u
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
S4
N
ro
°
v
J-I
-rl
u
O
H
N
M
rl
N
m
C)
Y4
v
O
r4
r4
r-I
v
v
r4
3
10
m
m
v
v
v
:I
1.1
r-I
'O
u
u
u
r•i
ri
ri
1�
LI
0
0
0
0
0
r1
r-I
r-I
mrlux4411
�
V
0
v
m
m
m
a
C
O
O
nL
`o t:
U Z
co
C C
O O
C) �
C
c p
W
C)
L
C/)
co
O
CO L
V N
O
O C
Z of
L N
C)
-5
C
C
Z
Y
R
a
cc
CL
a
J
d.r
O
U
o
w
co
O
O
N
O
O
O
m
N
M
N
m
r
1-�
O
Mr-�
6
m
(p
r
M
0
LO
O
0
O
m
"T
Z
LO
V
r
0
r
O
LO
LO
N
r
M
CO
LO
r
V
O
O
r
0
0
0
0100
r
m
O
N
o
r
o
CD
o
O
f0
O
CD
0,
m
N
0
coN
to
O
LO
CND
M
V
M
N
m.
ti
co
O
r
O
o
0
0
0
0
O
r
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
m
I.
co
co
co
O
N
N
N
M
N
O
W
N
o
0
0
0
0
0000000
D
o
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
O
r
Cl
0
o
r
o
o
LO
O
O
O
co
o
r
O
O
6
V
O
M
CD
O
N
to
rLO
r
N
LO
co
I�
m
O,
CO
LO
co
V
r
I,-
�
Lo
LO
r
r
r
lb
o
O
r
r
0
0
000
r
0
O
M
r
0
0
r
O
o
ol
EO
O
co
co
r-
Oo
m
(OD
N
C
(0
Zo
O
n
V
h
M
M
r
V)
N
N
N
r
r
r
CO
CD
0
0
0
0
0
o
fl-
0
O
M
CO
LO
M
o
0
0
0
0
0
6
N
o
O
M
6
O
O
M
rl-
co
O^
co
CD
CD
CO
Cl
O
r
CO
O
O
O
N
O
O
V
O
O
r
N
CO
00
O
O
O
CO
O
M
m
6
66
N
W
'
M
V
CD
co
r
O
N
coO
n
V
co
I,
O
O
O
M
O
I�
O
O
W
Co
CD
McR
�
o
O
O
O
O
o
6
N
CD
C�0
M
O
M
CD
(0
CD
r
M
OO
LO
L
M
r
r
r
W
CD
O
O
o
CD
O
r
-
to
O
O
CD
m
N
o
0
0
O
O
O,
CCOO
LO
(MD
co
co
r
r
N
O
LO
co
00
r
Co
r
(o
r
N
m
LO
Cl
V
0
I�-
O
r�
O
O
N
LO
V)
o
CD
LO
CD
m
0
0
O
f`
C.
r
CO.
0
r
cli
U
N
0�
M
p
N
N
N
m
f�
r
N
r
r
co
V'
O
V
O
O
O
o
0
0
0
I�
Lf)
r
p
o
C
O
LO
O
6
6
6
6
6
6
LO
O
O
O
(vj
O
co
LOO
O
CD
CO
O
r
r
CD
C
j Cl)
O
o
0
0
0
o
r�
O
O
Ih
N
LO
o
.5
6
0
0
0
O
O
m
6
0
m
M
m
o
co
M
04
_
O
m
N
O
6
M
co
C
O
r
d
d N
o
0
0
0
cc
O
O
O
O
co
LO
o
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
6
6
00
6
6
N
O
�j
L
M
M
N
M
O
r
�
O r
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
0
o
CCI
LO
D
o
L
O88000
V
OOvm°?
o
O
O
NO
G
O
N
00
J
r
1
14 1-
IC
i)
'O
N
o
O ""1
-�
U
O
H
N
M
H
N
M
V
M
G W
1•I
W
O
.1
r-I
i-I
J
J
J
m
x '014
w-1
3
o
m
(IS
w
w
v
m
m
m
CL
E
0
0
0
0
0�
rl
.-�
O
O
N
O
�C
u
x
a
-I
-I
zc
t
F-
F
U
H
o
C H
U) N N
mU(n
C N
co
f�
c
c
ai
1111111111
0 0
0 co
.= o
v
T
M
T
N
T
C
O
L
O
CL
O V T
U O
cm
c c
o0
U T
•m v
cp
w
L
m rn
d
L
0
0
0
i
T
0
cD L
v f0
co
T
O C
Z rn
L cn
N
N
ell
ICI
ICI
ICI
,I
ill
N
�il
a
v
0
0
T
a>
rn
m
d
c
O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O
T CD f0 to N 0 N
0 V � N
lL T L
� O
_ 0 O cn
(0 v O T N M T M
O D U U N N GI
Q U J J J Q a a
CD
CD
Q
N Lo
N Oi
N N
U
co
N
c
01
.N
N
Y
i
i
II
it
e
V
v
0
am
rn
m
a
oQ
N to
N Qj
N
O
E
0
r
N
N
U)
w
O
c
O
f0
0
O
O r-
U 0
mZ
c c
� o
G7
C
c 0
w
m
L
U)
O
T
O
(D c
V cord �
O C
Z rn
�III�I
V
O
Ot--
O
O
N
O
O
O
OO
0000
V
OOO
V
N
co
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
�OOo
o
rl-0a)
T
000
MON
M
V
V
I
O
O
O
V
"'t
O
N
V
r'
O
0
0
GO
C
O
V
V
O
I
N
N
CNO
M
.^-
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
.-
CO
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
V
O
O
co
coN
N
co
O
O
O
co
O
r--
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
O
M
V
O
O
1
0
n
M
N
r.-
000r-
gcor,ov
000r�o
0
U')
rn
v
co
O
O
O
O
O
r
CM
00
O
0
0
0
O
O
N
V'
O
Ln
r`
M
V)
�t
M
O
00
O
'
M�
O
N
'*
O
M
O
n
r�
O
rn
O)
V
C
M
0
0
O
0
0
0
O
N
0
0
6
0
0
0
O
rA
O
V
V
IT
0
co
d
tT
f6
a
oQ
N In
N pj
N
f6
0
O
D
O r
U Z
m c
o
m H
c
0).�j
cO
w
0
L
U)
0
rn
0
� L
V N
O CD
Z rn
a N
CD-5 0
II,I�
ern
I
it
e
lqt
v
0
rn
m
rn
co
a
C)
0
N lA
N pj
N
I
f0
0
O
Q L
O r-
U Z
m
c c
0
N
c
'a)'O
c0
w
m
m
L
U)
0
rn
0
O
Z
a
0
3
Al
`L,
i
�I
�I
II
V
v
0
0
N
N
01
(6
IL
C
O
12
m
O in
oa
d
y
0
O
f9
Cl
0 �
j
co
d
CL
O t�
C) Z
c c
a) o
a)
C
CO
w
m
0
r
U)
o
rn
0
cD
v
1
0
Z
a
0
inn
i
V
v
0
N
(D
0)
(0
a
o Q
0
N to
N pj
N
NT
O
N
N
N
O
r 2
O Q
0
N Lc)
N m
N
r
c
0
CL9
O
n.
O 'C
U 0
O) Z C
C c O
•c 3 H
� I-0 C
01 L
u O
L
m x
tU q
L ro
A
G
0
J.)
ro
U
ri
ro
U
F'i
0
.rl
41
ro
ri
00 U
rn ri
r ro
O U
CD L
v (o
tov
r
Z -O)
w
0 m
M
n
c
x
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Mu
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0)
o
00
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4 u
O
r
o
(D
O
M
V
N
to
N
O
O
N
V
Cp �
O
r
o
r
V
0
N
tt
V
r
(p
V
tvJ
sf
r
fD
O
N
M
N
th
M
0
V
0
co
0
O
F- Q
C 11
U
O
o
N
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
M
0
O
0
O
0
O U
o
U
O)
(D
D)
r
to
r
CD
o
O
M�r
O
O
N
U
N
Cl)
O
V
M
O
M
CA
N
I�-
N
O
V
CD
Fi
O
O
O
r
O
r
r
O
O
r
r
0
0
0
co
co
I�-
O
Cn
NT
Co
M
i-
CD
N
(O
N
C)O
O
x
U
U
ONM
00
O)o
Oo
V
VD)000
G
O
O
N
•-
6
N
C;O
r
r
0
0
0
Q
fQ
ri
ro
m
(O
(O
O
ri
r
m
10
m
m
10
N
O
m
U
-0
0 ro
W
c
o
'
w
(o
W*
o
Ln
r
r
C;
C;
('.
m
-W
N
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
N
0
0
N U
r-i
N
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
m
m
Ln
O
O
C
a ro
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ri y
O
Cn
)O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
ri
o
C.
'- n.
O
o
m
m
Cn
ri
Cn
W
O
r
O
O
m
L
N
Q)
N U
Cl)
C�)
O
r
d'
r-1
(O
r
N N
H
W
O
tf)
r�
N
it ro
•
r
y)
O
C,
O
r-1
O
ri
ri
O
O
N
'i
o
0
0
r
V)
m
m
44
in
M
o
w
m
w
w
kD
r
0
0
0
x
U
0
0
ro
U
N
V
N
-W
m
CO
r-
U)
m
r
O
O
O
y
}U.l
O ro
0
0
0
m
r-I
r
N
ri
O
r-I
N
O
O
O
N O
�
CQ
m
0
0
w
M
m
0
r
r
N
r
m
to
m
m
O
O
x
r
ro
U
o
0
o
ri
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
4)
>4
w
r-I
M
In
m
r
10
m
m
l0
ri
O
O
o
N
N
(O
m
r
r
r
r
r
C.-[-
N
m
m
qU
.
w
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M
A
m
)O
(
O
r
a
n
)O
m
m
w
N
o
m^
O
id ro
U
N U
dl
m
r
O
m
-W
m
r
N
N
N
In
r
00
a
�4 ro
o
0
(O
to
O
In
H
m
v
ri
0
d'
V'
ri
O
O
b
W
V'
In
wr
m
m
O
a
?4
ri
ri
r-1
rl
m_
O
C -N
0
A
>
N
N
A
F0
<n
r
0
v
V)
Q
a
N
V
0
M
N
CD
O)
C6
CL
oQ
0
N �
N Qj
N
I
N
O
O V-
U Z
c) c
O O
N �
C
mO
W
IO
O
L
W
a
0
aLo_
wo
0
o �
m a
� c
� o
U c
O O
,c c
0 CO CO
c6 L —
v Co o
o
r
0
Z m
0 ° w w
0
MWHEINIREINMUM
MINIMUM
�
u
MINIMUM
IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
MONSOON
o■o�
V
v
0
N
d
Q1
f0
(L
z q
O O .N
coIV
c a co c
0 u u 0)0 a m ro Z m
J C u u 00
o Q0
c
O
A
0
O
d L
O "C
U Z
rn c
0
N
c
��
cO
w
cu
a)
m
t
0
m
0
It
V
CD
T
0
Z
m
0
�9iIA
��lillwl
II
tip
I
ICI
9
v
0
0
N
N
O)
f0
a
oQ
0
N Lc)
77
N Qj
N
I
F7
E2
0
nL
o r
U Z
cm
c 3
o
O �
C
0
c
w
m
L
i
d H
d
0
IMMIIIIIIIIIIIIII
.o�
v
0
(D
N
N
O)
f0
a
oQ0
N LC)
r r
N 0)
N
r
OD
qr
0
CO
O
Z
d
O
W
iiiiiiiiiiiiii
EIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
EIIIIIIIIIIII
EIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
v
0
r,
N
N
CT
CO
a
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation
Designer: dah Old Town North
12/21 /2001
9:15 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point 1 Legend
From Sub-basin(s) 1, 4,5,6,7,8,9, inputdata
Notes: calculation
Instruction
Area (A)= 34.98 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr 100-yr
C = 0.66 0.66 0.83
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*LA0.5)/S"0.33
Length 200 ft Insert Overland Travel Length
Slope 1.00 % Insert Overland Travel Slope
0.50
15.87
C -
Ti (min)=
Travel Time (Tt)
en th(ft) slope
720.00 0.50
180.00 0.90
0.50 1 0.63 Insert C2 for surface
15.87 1 12.56 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow TvDe Velocitv Tt (min)
1.50 8.00
1.88 1.60
53.00 1 0.50 1 Gutter 1.50 0.59
752.00 0.50 Gutter 1.50 8.36
Total Travel Time 18.54
Travel Length (L) 11905.00 Ift
L/180+10= 20.58 min
2-year 10-year 100- ear
Ti+Tt 34.41 34.41 1 31.10
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)= 20.58, 20.58 20.58
Use Tc = 20.5 20.5 20.5 Rounded to the nearest
Intensity (I) (iph:Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
L = 1.59 1 2.71 1 5.53
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q =1 36.78 62.77 160.40
Conclude:
Peak flow to pond - Design overflow weir to pass this flow if outlet
structure gets clogged
OTN-rational
Developed Page 28 of 44
C -
Ti (min)=
Travel Time (Tt)
en th(ft) slope
720.00 0.50
180.00 0.90
0.50 1 0.63 Insert C2 for surface
15.87 1 12.56 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow TvDe Velocitv Tt (min)
1.50 8.00
1.88 1.60
53.00 1 0.50 1 Gutter 1.50 0.59
752.00 0.50 Gutter 1.50 8.36
Total Travel Time 18.54
Travel Length (L) 11905.00 Ift
L/180+10= 20.58 min
2-year 10-year 100- ear
Ti+Tt 34.41 34.41 1 31.10
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)= 20.58, 20.58 20.58
Use Tc = 20.5 20.5 20.5 Rounded to the nearest
Intensity (I) (iph:Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
L = 1.59 1 2.71 1 5.53
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q =1 36.78 62.77 160.40
Conclude:
Peak flow to pond - Design overflow weir to pass this flow if outlet
structure gets clogged
OTN-rational
Developed Page 28 of 44
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:15 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point 2 Legend
From Sub-basin(s) 2, input data
Notes: calculation
Instruction
Area (A)= 6.86 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr 100-yr
C = 0.26 0.26 0.33
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*LA0.5)/SA0.33
Length 50 ft Insert Overland Travel Length
Slope F:2 00 % Insert Overland Travel Slope
2-vear In-vear Inn-vear
0.20
9.47
C =
Ti (min)=
Travel Time (Tt)
1.00
0.20 1 0.25 Insert C2 for surface
9.47 1 8.94 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow T e Velocit Tt (min)
Swale 1.58 13.81
0.00 1 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Total Travel Time 13.81
Travel Length (L) 11359.00 Ift
L/180+10= 17.55 min
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 23.28 23.28 1 22.75
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)= 17.55 17.55 17.55
Use Tc = 17.5 17.5 17.5 Rounded to the nearest 0.5
Intensity (I) (iph:Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
I - 1.73 1 2.95 1 6.01
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q =F 3.12 1 5.32 1 13.57
Conclude:
Peak flow from site to Future Dry Creek channel.
Channel to be designed and contructed with future phases considering
upstream flows
OTN-rational
Developed Page 29 of 44
C =
Ti (min)=
Travel Time (Tt)
1.00
0.20 1 0.25 Insert C2 for surface
9.47 1 8.94 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow T e Velocit Tt (min)
Swale 1.58 13.81
0.00 1 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Total Travel Time 13.81
Travel Length (L) 11359.00 Ift
L/180+10= 17.55 min
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 23.28 23.28 1 22.75
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)= 17.55 17.55 17.55
Use Tc = 17.5 17.5 17.5 Rounded to the nearest 0.5
Intensity (I) (iph:Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
I - 1.73 1 2.95 1 6.01
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q =F 3.12 1 5.32 1 13.57
Conclude:
Peak flow from site to Future Dry Creek channel.
Channel to be designed and contructed with future phases considering
upstream flows
OTN-rational
Developed Page 29 of 44
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:15 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point 3 Legend
From Sub-basin(s) 3, input data
Notes: calculation
Instruction
Area (A)= 0.76 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr 100-yr
C = 0.63 0.63 0.79
Time of Concentration (Tc),
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*LA0.5)/S"0.33
Length 55 ft Insert Overland Travel Length
SlopeF 2.00 % Insert Overland Travel Slope
-year 10- ear 100- ear
C = 0.20 0.20 0.25 Insert C2 for surface
Ti (min)=1 9.93 9.93 9.38 of overland flow
Travel Time (Tt) L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Len th(ft) Slope Flow Type Velocity Tt (min)
220.00 0.50 Gutter 1.50 2.44
0.00 0.00
0.00 1 0.00
Total Travel Time L 2.44
Travel Length (L) 275.00 Ift
L/180+10= 11.53 min
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 12.37 12.37 11.82
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)=1 11.53 1 11.53 1 11.53
Use Tc = I 11.5 1 11.5 1 11.5 Rounded to the nearest 0.5
Intensity (I) (iph'Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
I - 2.09 1 3.57 1 7.29
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q - 1.00 1 1.70 4.35
Conclude:
Peak flow to grassed area adjacent to Redwood Street
OTN-rational
Developed Page 30 of 44
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12121/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:07 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point 4 Legend
From Sub-basin(s) 4, input data
Notes: calculation
Instruction
Area (A)= 5.00 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr 100-yr
C = 0.85 0.85 1.00
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*LA0.5)/S"0.33
Length 200 ft Insert Overland Travel Length
Slope 1.00 % Insert Overland Travel Slope
2-vear 10-vear 100-vPar
C =
Ti (min)=
Travel Time
en th(ft)
720.00
180.00
0.50
0.50
15.87
(Tt)
0.50
0 0.63 Insert C2 for surface
15.87 12.56 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow Tvoe Velocitv Tt (min)
1.88 1.60
0.00 0.00
Total Travel Time L 9.60
Travel Length (L) 11100.00 Ift
L/180+10= 16.11 min
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 25.46 25.46 1 22.16
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/160+10
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min) 16.11 16.11 16.11
Use Tc = 16.0 16.0 16.0 Rounde,
(5 min minimum)
to the nearest 0.5
Intensity (I) (iph'Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
I - 1.81 3.08 6.30
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q - 7.70 13.11 31.50
Conclude:
Peak flow to proposed inlet on West side of Jerome Street
Size curb and sidewalk chase for 100% interception of Q100
T = 18.00 ft - see Haestads printout attached
Slope = 0.0055 ft/ft
Sx = 0.02 ft/ft
dw = Sx(T-2) 0.32
n= 0.016
From figure 5-5 - 28.00 ft chase required for 100% interception
Install 30.00 ft curbed channel and sidewalk chase
OTN-rational
Developed Page 31 of 44
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North M7 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point 5 Legend
From Sub-basin(s) 5, input data
Notes: calculation
Instruction
Area (A)= 1.81 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr 100-yr
C = 0.78 0.78 0.97
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*LA0.5)/S"0.33
Length 75 ft Insert Overland Travel Length
SlopeF 2.00 Insert Overland Travel Slope
9 _voter 1 (1_ve=r '1 fll ,.,
0.20
11.60
C =
Ti (min)=
Travel Time
(Tt)
.000.00 0.50
180.00 0.90
0.20 1 0.25 Insert C2 for surface
11.60 1 10.95 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow Type Velocity Tt (min)
Gutter 1 1.50 1 11.11
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Total Travel Timel 12.71
Travel Length (L) 1255.00 ft
L/180+10= 16.97 Imin
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 24.30 1 24.30 23.66
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10
2- ear 10-year 100- ear
Tc (min)= 16.97 16.97 16.97
Use Tc = 16.5 16.5 1 16.5 Rounde
(5 min minimum)
the nearest 0.5
Intensity (I) (iph;Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
I - 1.78 1 3.04 1 6.20
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q =1 2.50 1 4.26 10.88
Conclude:
Peak flow to proposed inlet on East side of Jerome Street
Size curb and sidewalk chase for 100% interception of Q100
T = 17.50 ft - see Haestads printout attached
Slope = 0.0055 ft/ft
Sx = 0.02 ft/ft
dw = Sx(T-2) 0.31
n= 0.016
From figure 5-5 - 27.00 ft chase required for 100% interception
Install 30.00 ft curbed channel and sidewalk chase.
OTN-rational
Developed Page 32 of 44
2-year flow @ inlets on Jerome DP 4&5
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet Jerome -1/2 street - 76' ROW
Flow Element Irregular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope 0.005500 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.50 ft
Elevation range: 100.00 ft to 10 1. 13 ft.
Station (ft) Elevation (ft) Start Station
End Station
Roughness
0.00 101.13 0.00
14.00
0.032
0.00 100.93 14.00
80.00
0.016
9.00 100.75 80.00
94.00
0.032
14.00 100.65
21.50 100.50
22.00 100.50
22.00 100.00
24.00 100.17
47.00 100.63
70.00 100.17
72.00 100.00
72.00 100.50
72.50 100.50
80.00 100.65
85.00 100.75
94.00 100.93
94.00 101.13
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Discharge
15.99
cfs
Flow Area
7.11
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
38.02
ft
Top Width
37.00
ft
Height
0.50
ft
Critical Depth
100.48
ft
Critical Slope
0.006794 ft/ft
Velocity
2.25
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.08
ft
Specific Energy
100.58
ft
Froude Number
0.91
Flow is subcritical.
Flow is divided.
04/22/02 FlowMaster v5.13
02:45:40 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 2
2-year flow @ inlets on Jerome DP 4&5
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Jerome -1 /2 street - 76' ROW
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.016
Channel Slope 0.005500 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.50 ft
Discharge 15.99 cfs
101.0
1 OO.f
c
0 100.E
m
m
W
100.14
100.E
04/22/02
02:46:06 PM
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
Station (ft)
FlowMaster v5.13
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
100-year flow @ inlets on Jerome DP 4&5
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Jerome -1/2 street - 76' ROW
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005500 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.78 ft
Elevation range:
100.00 ft to 10 1. 13 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
0.00
101.13 0.00
0.00
100.93 14.00
9.00
100.75 80.00
14.00
100.65
21.50
100.50
22.00
100.50
22.00
100.00
24.00
100.17
47.00
100.63
70.00
100.17
72.00
100.00
72.00
100.50
72.50
100.50
80.00
100.65
85.00
100.75
94.00
100.93
94.00
101.13
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.019
Discharge
64.27
cfs
Flow Area
24.46
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
80.03
ft
Top Width
79.00
ft
Height
0.78
ft
Critical Depth
100.74
ft
Critical Slope
0.007476 ft/ft
Velocity
2.63
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.11
ft
Specific Energy
100.89
ft
Froude Number
0.83
Flow is subcritical.
End Station
14.00
80.00
94.00
Roughness
0.032
0.016
0.032
12/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
10:29:19 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
100-year flow @ inlets on Jerome DP 4&5
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Jerome -1/2 street - 76' ROW
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.019
Channel Slope
0.005500 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.78 ft
Discharge
64.27 cfs
C
0 100.E
.r
m
w
100.4
100.Z1
12av01
10:29:32 AM
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
Station (ft)
FlowMaster v5.13
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
No Text
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:07 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point
From Sub-basin(s)
Notes:
Area (A)= 8.47 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr
C 0.77 0.77
6 Legend
6, input data
calculation
Instruction
100-yr
0.97
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*LA0.5)/S"0.33
Length 45 ft Insert Overland Travel Length
Slope F=2 . 00 % Insert Overland Travel Slope
9 _.,. ,- in_ , inn_ -.-
C -
Ti (min)=
Travel Time
Len th(ft)
600.00
550.00
0.20
8.98
(Tt)
Slop
0.50
0.25 Insert C2 for surface
-
of 8.48 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3
Flow Type Velocity Tt (min)
Gutter 1.50 6.67
Gutter 1.88 4.88
0.00 1 0.00
0.00 1 0.00
Total Travel Time 11.54
Travel Length (L) 11195.00 Ift
L/180+10= 16.64 min
2-year ILO -year 100- ear
Ti+Tt 20.52 20.52 1 20.03
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)= 16.64 16.64 16.64
Use Tc = 1 16.5 16.5 16.5 Rounde
(5 min minimum)
to the nearest 0.5
Intensity (I) (iph'Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
I - 1.78 3.04 1 6.20
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
Q - 11.64 19.85 50.68
Conclude:
Check overall street capacity vs overall peak flow
See calculation for DP 7
OTN-rational
Developed Page 33 of 44
Job No. 1646-01-98
Designer: dah
Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Old Town North 9:07 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point
From Sub-basin(s)
Notes:
Area (A)= 4.49
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr
C = 0.76
acres
7 Legend
7, input data
calculation
Instruction
10-yr 100-y
0.76 0.95
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*L-0.5)/S"0.33
Length q
ftInsert Overland Travel Length
Slope 2.0& Insert Overland Travel Slope
F2-vear 90-vPAr M-vPar
C -
Ti (min)=
Travel Time
Len th(ft)
550.00
450.00
0.50
5.85
(Tt)
slop,
0.50
0.50 0.63 Insert C2 for surface
5.85 4.63 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow Type Velocity Tt (min)
Gutter 1.50 6.11
Gutter 1.88 3.99
0.00 0.0o
0.00 1 0.00
Total Travel Time 10.10
Travel Length (L) 1043.00 Ift
L/180+10= 15.79 Imin
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 15.95 15.95 1 14.73
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
.79 159 7Tc (min)= 1514.3 Use Tc =
15.5 1 14.5 lRounded
(5 min minimum)
Intensity (I) (iph;Intensities taken from fig. 3-1,
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
I - 1.84 1 3.14 1 6.62
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
IQ =1 6.31 10.74 28.34
Qall 1 17.74 30.25 77.24 Refer to flow summary for the calc
Conclude:
Street capacity (minor storm) = 21.48 cfs - Blondel Street
Slope of street = 0.0085 ft/ft
Reduction factor from fig. 4-2 0.80
Allowable Street capacity (minor stol 17.18 icfs> 17.74 cfs ok
Refer to attached Haestads printouts for street capacity calculation
OTN-rational
Developed Page 34 of 44
DP 6 & 7 Minor Storm
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street B,C,E
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.009000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.50
ft
Elevation range: 100.00 ft to 100.93 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
100.93
0.00
0.00
100.88
9.00
9.00
100.70
13.50
13.50
100.61
19.00
19.00
100.50
50.00
19.50
100.50
55.50
19.50
100.00
60.00
21.50
100.17
34.50
100.43
47.50
100.17
49.50
100.00
49.50
100.50
50.00
100.50
55.50
100.61
60.00
100.70
69.00
100.88
69.00
100.93
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Discharge
22.10
cfs
Flow Area
6.86
ftz
Wetted Perimeter
31.02
ft
Top Width
30.00
ft
Height
0.50
ft
Critical Depth
100.54
ft
Critical Slope
0.007946 ft/ft
Velocity
3.22
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.16
ft
Specific Energy
100.66
ft
Froude Number
1.19
Flow is supercritical.
End Station
Roughness
9.00
0.032
13.50
0.016
19.00
0.032
50.00
0.016
55.50
0.032
60.00
0.016
69.00
0.032
12/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
03:15:48 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
DP 6 & 7 Minor Storm
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street B,C,E
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Channel Slope
0.009000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.50 ft
Discharge
22.10 cfs
101 A
100.E
100.7
100.E
x
W
100.4
100.
1 OO.e
100.1
100.0 L
0.0
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Station (ft)
70.0
12/21 /01
- FlowMaster v5.13
03:16:09 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
DP 6 & 7 Major Storm
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street B,C,E
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.009000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.93
ft
Elevation range:
100.00 ft to 100.93 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
100.93
0.00
0.00
100.88
9.00
9.00
100.70
13.50
13.50
100.61
19.00
19.00
100.50
50.00
19.50
100.50
55.50
19.50
100.00
60.00
21.50
100.17
34.50
100.43
47.50
100.17
49.50
100.00
49.50
100.50
50.00
100.50
55.50
100.61
60.00
100.70
69.00
100.88
69.00
100.93
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.021
Discharge
112.55
cfs
Flow Area
29.31
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
70.13
ft
Top Width
69.00
ft
Height
0.93
ft
Critical Depth
100.94
ft
Critical Slope
0.008325 ft/ft
Velocity
3.84
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.23
ft
Specific Energy
101.16
ft
Froude Number
1.04
Flow is supercritical.
End Station
Roughness
9.00
0.032
13.50
0.016
19.00
0.032
50.00
0.016
55.50
0.032
60.00
0.016
69.00
0.032
12/21/01
FlowMaster v5.13
03:16:27 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
C
DP 6 & 7 Major Storm
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street B,C,E
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.021
Channel Slope
0.009000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.93 ft
Discharge
112.55 cfs
101.1
100.9
100. E
100.7
100.E
iY
100.4
100.3
100.2
100.1
100.01
0.0
a
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Station (ft)
70.0
12/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
03:16:36 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Job No. 1646-01-98
Designer: dah
Shear Engineering Corporation
Old Town North
4/22/2002
2:49 PM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point a Legend
From Sub-basin(s) 8, input data
Notes: calculation
Instruction
Area (A)= 1.86 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr 100-yr
C = 0.78 0.78 0.97
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*LA0.5)/SA0.33
Length 45 ft. Insert Overland Travel Length
Slope F:2.00 5 Insert Overland Travel Slope
9 _v., ,n_ - ,nn .... .. ...
C -
Ti (min)=
Travel Time
:jen th(ft)
250.00
200.00
0.50
0 50
0.63
5.99
(Tt)
slot)
2.22
0.00 1 0.00
0.00 1 0.00
Total Travel Time L 4.81
Travel Length (L) 495.00 Ift
L/180+10= 12.75 Imin
2-Year 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 10.80 10.80 1 9.55
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)= 10.80 10.80 9.55
Use Tc = 10.5 10.5 9.5 Rounded to the nearest 0'.5
Intensity (I) (iph'Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
I - 2.17 3.71 7.88
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q = 3.13 5.35 14.20
Insert C2 for surface
5.99 4.74 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow TypeVelocity Tt (min)
Gutter 1 1.61 1 2.59
0 Gutter
Conclude:
Street capacity (minor storm) = 17.88 cfs - Pascal Street
Slope of street = 1 0.0060 ft/ft
Reduction factor from fig. 4-2 10.80
Allowable Street capacity (minor stol 14.30 cfs> 3.13 cfs ok
Refer to attached Haestads printouts for street capacity calculation
Install 4.00 foot sidewalk chase for minor storm flows
Y = H = 0.50 ft - area = 2.00 sf
Cc 0.65 1Q0 = CA(2gH)^1/2 7.38 cfs
Remainder of flows will overtop sidewalk and flow into pond
OTN-rational
Developed
Page 35 of 44
DP 8 - Minor Storm
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street D & F
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.008500 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.50 ft
Elevation range: 100.00 ft to 100.88 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
100.88
0.00
9.00
100.70
9.00
13.50
100.61
13.50
19.00
100.50
19.00
19.50
100.50
44.00
19.50
100.00
49.50
21.50
100.17
54.00
31.50
100.37
41.50
100.17
43.50
100.00
43.50
100.50
44.00
100.50
49.50
100.61
54.00
100.70
63.00
100.88
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Discharge
21.28
cfs
Flow Area
6.26
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
25.02
ft
Top Width
24.00
ft
Height
0.50
ft
Critical Depth
100.54
ft
Critical Slope
0.008424 ft/ft
Velocity
3.40
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.18
ft
Specific Energy
100.68
ft
Froude Number
1.17
Flow is supercritical.
End Station
Roughness
9.00
0.032
13.50
0.016
19.00
0.032
44.00
0.016
49.50
0.032.
54.00
0.016
63.00
0.032
12/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
03:26:15 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
DP 8 - Minor Storm
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street D & F
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Channel Slope
0.008500 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.50 ft
Discharge
21.28 cfs
100.$
100.7
100.E
100.E
100.4
W
100.3
100.2
100.1
100.0 L
0.0
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Station (ft)
70.0
12/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
03:26:23 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
DP 8 - Major Storm
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street D & F
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.008500 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.88 ft
Elevation range:
100.00 ft to 100.88 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
100.88
0.00
9.00
100.70
9.00
13.50
100.61
13.50
19.00
100.50
19.00
19.50
100.50
44.00
19.50
100.00
49.50
21.50
100.17
54.00
31.50
100.37
41.50
100.17
43.50
100.00
43.50
100.50
44.00
100.50
49.50
100.61
54.00
100.70
63.00
100.88
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.024
Discharge
66.46
cfs
Flow Area
22.98
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
64.03
ft
Top Width
63.00
ft
Height
0.88
ft
Critical Depth
100.83
ft
Critical Slope
0.011439 ft/ft
Velocity
2.89
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.13
ft
Specific Energy
101.01
ft
Froude Number
0.84
Flow is subcritical.
End Station
Roughness
9.00
0.032
13.50
0.016
19.00
0.032
44.00
0.016
49.50
0.032
54.00
0.016
63.00
0.032
12/21/01 03:26:39 PM FlowMaster v5.13
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
DP 8 - Major Storm
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street D & F
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.024
Channel Slope
0.008500 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.88 ft
Discharge
66.46 cfs
100.
100.6
100.7
100.E
100.5
(D 100.4
W
100.3
100.2
100.1
100.0 t_
0.0
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Station (ft)
70.0
12/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
03:26:48 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Job No. 1646-01-98
Designer: dah
Shear Engineering Corporation
Old Town North
12/21 /2001
9:07 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point 9 Legend
From Sub-basin(s) 9, input data
Notes: calculation
Instruction
Area (A)= 0.79 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr 100-yr
C = 0.78 0.78 0.98
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*L�0.5)/S�0.33
Length 51 ft Insert Overland Travel Length
Slope F:2::O0 Insert Overland Travel Slope
0.20
9.56
C -
Ti (min)=l
Travel Time (Tt)
0.20
0.25 Insert C2 for surface
9.56 9.03 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow TypeVLlocit Tt (min)
Gutter 1.50 2.89
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Total Travel Timel 2.89
Travel Length (L) 311.00 ft
L/180+10= 11.73 min
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 12.45 1 12.45 1 11.92
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)ar 10- 2- eear 100- ear
Tc (min) = 11.73 11.73 11.73
Use Tc = 11.5 11.5 11.5 lRounded to the nearest
Intensity (I) (iph:Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
I - 2.09 1 3.57 1 7.29
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
Q - 1.29 1 2.20 1 5.63
Conclude:
Peak flow in Alley P to pond
Install 2' curb chase and riprap down the bank into the pond
OTN-rational
Developed
Page 36 of 44
C -
Ti (min)=l
Travel Time (Tt)
0.20
0.25 Insert C2 for surface
9.56 9.03 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow TypeVLlocit Tt (min)
Gutter 1.50 2.89
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Total Travel Timel 2.89
Travel Length (L) 311.00 ft
L/180+10= 11.73 min
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 12.45 1 12.45 1 11.92
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)ar 10- 2- eear 100- ear
Tc (min) = 11.73 11.73 11.73
Use Tc = 11.5 11.5 11.5 lRounded to the nearest
Intensity (I) (iph:Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
I - 2.09 1 3.57 1 7.29
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
Q - 1.29 1 2.20 1 5.63
Conclude:
Peak flow in Alley P to pond
Install 2' curb chase and riprap down the bank into the pond
OTN-rational
Developed
Page 36 of 44
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:07 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point 10 Legend
From Sub-basin(s) 10, input data
Notes: calculation
Instruction
Area (A)= 4.29 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr 100-yr
C = 0.76 0.76 0.95
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*LA0.5)/S�0.33
Length 16 ft Insert Overland Travel Length
Slope 2.00 Insert Overland Travel Slope
7 -VPAY In-VPar 1nn_vo�r
0.95 0.89
Ti (min) _
Travel Time (Tt)
Len th(ft) Slop
1652.00 0.80
0.95 1 1.00 Insert C2 for surface
0.89 1 0.60 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow Type Velocity Tt (min)
Gutter 1.80 15.30
0.00 0.00
0.00 1 0.00
0.00 0.00.
Total Travel Time 15.30
Travel Length (L) J1668.00 Ift
L/180+10= 19.27 min
2-year 10-year 100- ear
Ti+Tt 16.19 16.19 1 15.89
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/160+10 (5 min minimum)
2-year 10-year 100- ear
Tc (min)= 16.19 16.19 15.89
Use Tc = 16.0 16.0 15.5 Rounded to the nearest
Intensity (I) (iph;Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10-year 100- ear
I - 1.81 1 3.06 1 6.41
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10-year 100- ear
Q - 5.88 10.01 26.04
Conclude:
Peak flow to future inlet @ corner of Redwood and Vine
To be designed and constructed with future phases
OTN-rational
Developed Page 37 of 44
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:07 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point
From Sub-basin(s)
Notes:
(A)= 4.56 acres
f Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr
0.71 0.71
11
100-yr
11,
Legend
input data
calculation
Instruction
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*L�0.5)/S"0.33
Length 50 ft Insert Overland Travel Length
Slope F=2 , 00 96 Insert Overland Travel Slope
9-va=r 1n1nn_..-
0.20
9.47
(min)_(min)=j
iel Time (Tt)
0.20 1 0.25 Insert C2 for surface
9.47 1 8.94 of overland flow.
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3Tv-DeFlow Tv -De Velocitv Tt (min)
Total Travel Time 6.94
Travel Length (L) 675.00 Ift
L/180+10= 13.75 min
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 16.41 16.41 1 15.89
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)= 13.75 13.75 13.75
Use Tc = 13.5 13.5 13.5 Rounded to the nearest
Intensity (I) (iph;Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
I - 1.95 1 3.34 1 6.82
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q - 6.27 10.75 27.41
0.51
Conclude:
Street capacity (minor storm) = 16.47 cfs - Cajetan Street
Slope of street = 1 0.0050 ft/ft
Reduction factor from fig. 4-2 0.70
Allowable Street capacity (minor stol 11.53 lcfs> 6.27 cfs ok
Refer to attached Haestads printouts for street capacity calculation
OTN-rational
Developed Page 38 of 44
(min)_(min)=j
iel Time (Tt)
0.20 1 0.25 Insert C2 for surface
9.47 1 8.94 of overland flow.
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3Tv-DeFlow Tv -De Velocitv Tt (min)
Total Travel Time 6.94
Travel Length (L) 675.00 Ift
L/180+10= 13.75 min
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 16.41 16.41 1 15.89
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)= 13.75 13.75 13.75
Use Tc = 13.5 13.5 13.5 Rounded to the nearest
Intensity (I) (iph;Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
I - 1.95 1 3.34 1 6.82
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q - 6.27 10.75 27.41
0.51
Conclude:
Street capacity (minor storm) = 16.47 cfs - Cajetan Street
Slope of street = 1 0.0050 ft/ft
Reduction factor from fig. 4-2 0.70
Allowable Street capacity (minor stol 11.53 lcfs> 6.27 cfs ok
Refer to attached Haestads printouts for street capacity calculation
OTN-rational
Developed Page 38 of 44
DP 11 Minor Storm
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street B,C,E
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.50
ft
Elevation range:
100.00 ft to 100.93 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
100.93
0.00
0.00
100.88
9.00
9.00
100.70
13.50
13.50
100.61
19.00
19.00
100.50
50.00
19.50
100.50
55.50
19.50
100.00
60.00
21.50
100.17
34.50
100.43
47.50
100.17
49.50
100.00
49.50
100.50
50.00
100.50
55.50
100.61
60.00
100.70
69.00
100.88
69.00
100.93
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Discharge
16.47
cfs
Flow Area
6.86
ftz
Wetted Perimeter
31.02
ft
Top Width
30.00
ft
Height
0.50
ft
Critical Depth
100.48
ft
Critical Slope
0.006543 ft/ft
Velocity
2.40
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.09
ft
Specific Energy
100.59
ft
Froude Number
0.89
Flow is subcritical.
End Station
Roughness
9.00
0.032
13.50
0.016
19.00
0.032
50.00
0.016
55.50
0.032
60.00
0.016
69.00
0.032
12/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
03:23:46 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 1 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
DP 11 Minor Storm
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street B,C,E
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.50 ft
Discharge
16.47 cfs
101.1
100.9
100.e
100.7
100.6
w
100.4
100.3
100.2
100.1
100.0 L
0.0
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Station (ft)
70.0
12/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
03:24:25 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
DP 11 Major Storm
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street B,C,E
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.93
ft
Elevation range: 100.00 ft to 100.93 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
100.93
0.00
0.00
100.88
9.00
9.00
100.70
13.50
13.50
100.61
19.00
19.00
100.50
50.00
19.50
100.50
55.50
19.50
100.00
60.00
21.50
100.17
34.50
100.43
47.50
100.17
49.50
100.00
49.50
100.50
50.00
100.50
55.50
100.61
60.00
100.70
69.00
100.88
69.00
100.93
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.021
Discharge
83.89
cfs
Flow Area
29.31
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
70.13
ft
Top Width
69.00
ft
Height
0.93
ft
Critical Depth
100.86
ft
Critical Slope
0.011016 ft/ft
Velocity
2.86
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.13
ft
Specific Energy
101.06
ft
Froude Number
0.77
Flow is subcritical.
End Station
Roughness
9.00
0.032
13.50
0.016
19.00
0.032
50.00
0.016
55.50
0.032
60.00
0.016
69.00
0.032
12/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
03:24:01 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
DP 11 Major Storm
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Street B,C,E
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.021
Channel Slope 0.005000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.93 ft
Discharge 83.89 cfs
101.1
100.E
100.E
100.7
100.E
x
W
100.4
100.;
100.2
100.1
100.0 L--
0.0
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Station (ft)
70.0
12/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
03:24:09 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:07 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point
From Sub-basin(s)
Notes:
Area (A)= 1.52 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr
C = 0.20 0.20
12
100-yr
Legend
12, input data
calculation
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*L"0.5)/S"0.33
Length qO
ftInsert Overland Travel Length
Slope F:::20% Insert Overland Travel Slope
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
C = Insert C2 for surface
Ti (min)= of overland flow
Travel Time (Tt)=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Len th(ft) Slope Flow T e Velocit Tt (min)
332.00 0.50 lawn 0.50 11.07
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.20
0.20
0.25
10.02
10.02
9.46
0.00 0.00
Total Travel Time 11.07
Travel Length (L) 388.00 ft
L/180+10= 12.16 min
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 21.09 21.09 20.53
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10 (5 min minimum)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)= 12.16 12.16 12.16
Use Tc = 12.0 12.0 12.0 Rounded to the nearest
Intensity (I) (iph',Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
I - 2.05 3.50 7.16
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q - 0.62 1.06 2.72
Conclude:
Flow to dual 14 x 23 ERCP that connects western portion of pond
with eastern portion
OTN-rational
Developed Page 39 of 44
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:07 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point 13 Legend
From Sub-basin(s) 13, input data
Notes: calculation
Instruction
Area (A)= 0.50 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr 100-yr
C = 0.80 0.80 1.00
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(1.1-C*Cf)*L�0.5)/SA0.33
Length �ft Insert Overland Travel Length
Slope 2.00 96 Insert Overland Travel Slope
2-UPAr in-vPAr inn-v» r
C _
Ti (min)=
Travel Time
Len th(ft)
297.00
0.95
0.63
(Tt)
ON
0.95 1.00 Insert C2 for surface
0.63 0.42 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow Type Velocit Tt (min)
Gutter 2.00 2.48
0.00 0.00
0.00 1 0.00
0.00 0.00
Total Travel Time 2.48
Travel Length (L) 305.00 ft
L/180+10= 11.69 min
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 3.11 3.11 2.90
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Tc (min)= 3.11 3.11 2.90
Use Tc = 5.0 5.0 1 5.0 Roundel
(5 min minimum)
nearest 0.5
Intensity (I) (iph'.Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2- ear 10- ear 100- ear
I - 2.85 1 4.87 1 9.95
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q - 1.14 1 1.95 1 4.98
Conclude:
Street capacity (minor storm) 1 23.82 1cfs - Jerome
Slope of street = 1 0.0122 ft/ft
Reduction factor from fig. 4-2 1 0.80
Allowable Street capacity (minor stol 19.06 lcfs> 1.14 cfs ok
Refer to attached Haestads printouts for street capacity calculation
OTN-rational
Developed Page 40 of 44
Jerome - 70' - Minor Storm
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Jerome-70'ROW
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.012200 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.50
ft
Elevation range: 100.00
ft to 101.13 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
101.13
0.00
0.00
100.79
0.00
5.00
100.69
5.00
14.50
100.50
14.50
15.00
100.50
55.50
15.00
100.00
65.00
17.00
100.17
70.00
35.00
100.53
53.00
100.17
55.00
100.00
55.00
100.50
55.50
100.50
65.00
100.69
70.00
100.79
70.00
101.13
_Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.016
Discharge
23.82
cfs
Flow Area
7.10
ftz
Wetted Perimeter
38.02
ft
Top Width
37.00
ft
Height
0.50
ft
Critical Depth
100.55
ft
Critical Slope
0.008370 ft/ft
Velocity
3.35
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.17
ft
Specific Energy
100.67
ft
Froude Number
1.35
Flow is supercritical.
Flow is divided.
End Station
0.00
5.00
14.50
55.50
65.00
70.00
70.00
Roughness
0.032
0.016
0.032
0.016
0.032
0.016
0.032
05/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
01:24:11 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Jerome - 70' ROW - minor Storm
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Jerome-70'ROW
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Md. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Channel Slope
0.012200 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.50 ft
Discharge
23.82 cfs
,101,
W
100
100
100
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0
Station (ft)
50.0 60.0
70.0
05/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
01:24:32 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Jerome - 70' - Major Storm Op j 3
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Description
_Project
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Jerome-70'ROW
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.012200 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 101.13
ft
Elevation range: 100.00 ft to 101.13 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
101.13
0.00
0.00
100.79
0.00
5.00
100.69
5.00
14.50
100.50
14.50
-15.00
100.50
55.50
15.00
100.00
65.00
17.00
100.17
70.00
-35.00
100.53
53.00
100.17
55.00
100.00
55.00
100.50
55.50
100.50
65.00
100.69
70.00
100.79
70.00
101.13
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.017
Discharge
339.88
cfs
Flow Area
46.95
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
71.71
ft
Top Width
70.00
ft
Height
1.13
ft
Critical Depth
101.36
ft
Critical Slope
0.004898 ft/ft
Velocity
7.24
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.81
ft
Specific Energy
101.94
ft
Froude Number
1.56
Flow is supercritical.
End Station
Roughness
0.00
0.032
5.00
0.016
14.50
0.032
55.50
.0.016
65.00
0.032
70.00
0.016
70.00
0.032
05/21/01 - FlowMaster v5.13
01 :24:52 PM Haestad Methods. Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury. CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Jerome - 70' ROW - Major Storm OP Q3
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Jerome-70'ROW
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.017
Channel Slope 0.012200 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 101.13 ft
Discharge 339.88 cfs
101.
100
IV
c
0 100
Y
ID
W
W
100
10C
I r)
0.0
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Station (ft)
70.0
05/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
01:25:03 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Jerome - 70' - ROW line N3
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Jerome-70'ROW
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.012200 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.79 ft
Elevation range:
100.00 ft to 101.13 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
101.13
0.00
0.00
100.79
0.00
5.00
100.69
5.00
14.50
100.50
14.50
15.00
100.50
55.50
15.00
100.00
65.00
17.00
100.17
70.00
35.00
100.53
53.00
100.17
55.00
100.00
55.00
100.50
55.50
100.50
65.00
100.69
70.00
100.79
70.00
101.13
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.021
Discharge
86.27
cfs
Flow Area
23.16
ftz
Wetted Perimeter
71.03
ft
Top Width
70.00
ft
Height
0.79
ft
Critical Depth
100.82
ft
Critical Slope
0.007347 ft/ft
Velocity
3.73
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.22
ft
Specific Energy
101.01
ft
Froude Number
1.14
Flow is supercritical.
End Station
Roughness
0.00
0.032
5.00
0.016
14.50
0.032
55.50
0.016
65.00
0.032
70.00
0.016
70.00
0.032
05/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
01:27:05 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Jerome - 70' ROW - ROW line
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Jerome-70'ROW
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.021
Channel Slope
0.012200 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
100.79 ft
Discharge
86.27 cfs
a
101.1
100.
100.
100
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0
Station (ft)
50.0 60.0
70.0
05/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
01:27:16 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
Designer: dah Old Town North 9:07 AM
Developed Conditions
Flow to Design Point
From Sub-basin(s)
Notes:
Area (A)= 0.78 acres
Runoff Coef. (C)
2-yr 10-yr
C = 0.80 0.80
RWe
14 Legend
14 , input data
calculation
Time of Concentration (Tc)
Overland Travel time (Ti) (1.87*(,1.1-C*Cf)*L�0.5)/S"0.33
Length F:2
ft Insert Overland Travel Length
Slope .00 Insert Overland Travel Slope
7 -vP�r �(1_vc�r �fl 11_vc�r
C. -
Ti (min)=
Travel Time
mm me
0.95
0.95
0
(Tt)
Slop
1.00
1.00
Insert C2 for surface
0.67 0.45 of overland flow
=L/(60*V)All Velocities taken from figure 3-2
Flow Type Velocit Tt (min)
Gutter 2.00 1.67
�.1 0.90 1 Gutter 1.88 4.39
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Total Travel Timel 6.05
Travel Length (L) 704.00 ft
L/180+10= 13.91 min
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Ti+Tt 6.72 6.72 6.50
Tc =Min of Ti+Total Travel Time vs L/180+10
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
c (min)= 6.72 6.72 T6.50
e Tc = 6.5
(5 min minimum)
6.5 lRounded to the
Intensity (Z) (iph.Intensities taken from fig. 3-1
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
I - 2.60 1 4.44 1 9.06
Runoff (Q= CIA) (cfs)
2-year 10- ear 100- ear
Q - 1.61 1 2.76 1 7.04
Conclude:
Street capacity (minor storm) = 20.12 cfs - Redwood Street
Slope of street = 1 0.0090 ft/ft
Reduction factor from fig. 4-2 1 0.80
Allowable Street capacity (minor stol 16.10 lcfs> 1.61 cfs ok
Refer to attached Haestads printouts for street capacity calculation
OTN-rational
Developed Page 41 of 44
Redwood - DP 14 - Minor Storm
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Redwood Ultimate
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.008700 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.50 ft
Elevation range:
100.00 ft to 101.13 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
101.13
0.00
0.00
100.97
9.00
9.00
100.79
14.00
14.00
100.69
23.50
23.50
100.50
74.50
24.00
100.50
84.00
24.00
100.00
89.00
26.00
100.17
49.00
100.63
72.00
100.17
74.00
100.00
74.00
100.50
74.50
100.50
84.00
100.69
89.00
100.79
98.00
100.97
98.00
101.13
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Discharge
20.12
cfs
Flow Area
7.11
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
38.02
ft
Top Width
37.00
ft
Height
0.50
ft
Critical Depth
100.53
ft
Critical Slope
0.007685 ft/ft
Velocity
2.83
fUs
Velocity Head
0.12
ft
Specific Energy
100.62
ft
Froude Number
1.14
Flow is supercritical.
Flow is divided.
End Station
Roughness
9.00
0.032
14.00
0.016
23.50
0.032
74.50
0.016
84.00
0.032
89.00
0.016
98.00
0.032
05/21/01 FlowMaster v5.13
02:22:20 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Pagel of 2
Redwood- DP 14 - Minor Storm
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Redwood Ultimate
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.016
Channel Slope 0.008700 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 100.50 ft
Discharge 20.12 cfs
101.0
100.6
s=
v
C
0 100.E
Y
^1,
W
W
100.4
100.
100.G
0.0
05/21/01
02:22:40 PM
10.0 .20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 .100.0
Station (ft)
FlowMaster v5.13
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Redwood - DP 14 - Major Storm
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Redwood Ultimate
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.008700 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 101.13
ft
Elevation range:
100.00 ft to 101.13 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
End Station
0.00
101.13
0.00
9.00
0.00
100.97
9.00
14.00
9.00
100.79
14.00
23.50
14.00
100.69
23.50
74.50
23.50
100.50
74.50
84.00
24.00
100.50
84.00
89.00
24.00
100.00
89.00
98.00
26.00
100.17
49.00
100.63
72.00
100.17
74.00
100.00
74.00
100.50
74.50
100.50
84.00
100.69
89.00
100.79
98.00
100.97
98.00
101.13
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.017
Discharge
326.24
cfs
Flow Area
56.95
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
99.35
ft
Top Width
98.00
ft
Height
1.13
ft
Critical Depth
101.25
ft
Critical Slope
0.004992 ft/ft
Velocity
5.73
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.51
ft
Specific Energy
101.64
ft
Froude Number
1.32
Flow is supercritical.
Roughness
0.032
0.016
0.032
0.016
0.032
0.016
0.032
05/21/01 - FlowMaster v5.13
02:22:58 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 2
Redwood - DP 14 - Major Storm
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Redwood Ultimate
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.017
Channel Slope 0.008700 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 101.13 ft
Discharge 326.24 cfs
101.c
100. E
W
100.,e
100.:
•
05/21/01
02:23:07 PM
10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
Station (ft)
FlowMaster v5.13
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation OTN-rational
By: dah 12/21/2001
SWALES
Page 42 of 44
12
o Q
NN
N a
1
U
a
Q
H
0
N
W
a
F
a
0
c�
H
Ix
F
W
0
E�
H
U
o a
r)
m u
0
CL
O
U Z
c 3
� O
0)
c p
w
`o a
m W
L
U
a
0
H
0
N
w
a
a
O
a
D
zU
N
a
F
00 t`
O
r
o F
� v U
i c U
0)
al
OF
m
x x
0
-•i
H ri
rn
..
>
>
W O
W d
.H
H W to
ro
v
O
E
N
I,
a O
i)
m
L O
O r i
a
3 w o
r N
m
O
0
ro
[
A
A
4.
ko
W4J
�
C. rl
W .t.HO
.
3
� U.
,
O
a Cx
N
U JJ
I II
q
cn w O
q
\ Ln
4.) u
Rf
4.1 O
y„ 1 44
N
W O
\ \
U w
W 1.1
x v U
w w
N •r
N O O
U 41 O
U'1 1f1
O
Q W O
N N
U U N
00
a
o 0
>1 m ro
Q F C7 N
m m
-a 0) 01
A u 0
a v
S4 -H C.
Q W O
UW •r1
"'
W
rA Fi 9
LD
rl H
N o -H
H
Q u a
It
ri ri
^
u u
U N W
b O
4-4
Q w
a
C o
-
s
.0
a a
U U U OI
�4
x x
H H
E-)
b
W O
V V
N
H W N
N
v
W
O
to
a
o
W o
ri U1
r4
3 w o
m
s
�. .
x
0
m
C
ro
M
A
N
A
0
Ln
W
Mo
w o
a a
N
o
U JJ
I II
W O
Mfn
\ Ln
W 41
UW
0
w w
b `~
w o
\ \
a. a
X U
o
W W
N �
N 0
it N O
U J-) O
Ln Ln
() N W O
Q W O
N N
a m
b b o
w
o 0
0
Q F C�4
-H 01m
m
14 -H 0
Q w
c w
o
Ln 0 q
w w
0
H H
A u° a
u
4J 0
G G G
q w o
o
.41 1
a
0
ro ro CDXD
,,
u u u a
H
a s
v
fA
M
m
l0
M
H\
o
m
lO
M
m
M
W
111
M
N
H
H
m
10
H
n
N
O
N
M
m
m
m
n
O
01 w
m
o
11
ko
r-,
ui
v
Ln
m
m
m
o
N
rl
m
m
m
m
r
r
n
r
n
n
N
\
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
n
r
n
n
r
U
O
O
O
O
O
O
m
o
o
o
0
0
0
m
r
M
M
O
N
M
\ a
N \
N
rl
m
n
1I1
n
a Q
N
N
H
H
H
r
E
m
w
w
N
m
m
CO
r
�O
a
Ln
Q) W
Ln
ri
r
M
m
M
a `-'
N
N
H
r1
O
rl
H
H
H
H
H
0
0
0
0
0
m
^
m W ,N
o
m
O
m
o
w
�4'
�o
w
n
n
N
n
M
r
H
m
O
m
.I
M
M
N
N
N
JJ .-.
O
O
O
O
O
m
ro 41
-r1 W
Ln
H
r
M
m
N
3�
N
N
rl
H
O
H
H
H
ri
ri
H
H
0
0
0
o
O
H
41
0
a�
.
.
.
.
..
N W
V'
M
M
N
N
Q �
N
O
m
o
w
m
1-0
Lo
'J
w
Ln
Ln
w
w
m
Ln
M
m
m
o
0
N
m
m
m
H
n
0
ICI W
r
U
m
r1
m
v
o
v
ri
a'
H
H
V
O
N
o)
r
Ln
M
r
H
n
n
r
n
n
r
N
\
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
r
Lr
r
n
r
U
o
0
0
0
O
O
W
0
0
0
0
0
0
r
N
l0
m
0
Ifl
M
N a
O
m
r
Ln
d�
r
a
N
H
r11111
E
m
a
w
N
m
r
m
m
r
�
v
I.
)i 4J
.
.
.
.
.
0 W
N
H
r
M
m
r
04
1D
to
In
M
V
M
o
0
0
0
0
w
ro
U W
O
N
O
M
O
H
w
`l
'o
c
Ln
r
N
M
m
w
M
O
m
M
H
H
H
ri
H
o
o
O
0
0
v
41
O
O
O
O
O
n
ro JJ
"i W
Ln
H
n
M
m
LO
Lo
to
Ln
Ln
w
Ln
0
0
0
0
o
m
4J
O
N
O
In
O%D
a,J
.
.
.
.
m
4) W
V
M
M
N
N
•
Q
N
ro
>4
u
0
0
A
41 JJ
A
w w
y
ya
U
m H
W
L
w Ln
C
N ri
W
0
W
E
11
N
0
W
N
C)
O
O
b N
W
41
O Q
E
w u
r
ji ?
0
N
a
E 0
4J
a
ro
m
ro
ro
o
o w
En
•rl
cu
ro C.'
OW IJ
3
41
> .i
m 0 w
O
w
O ro
. N W
ri
f4 N
ro
W
O
a C.
M "1 O
O
-r1
W M O
9
•
O ri
N
!]1
Ln
W
H 4 Ln
N •ri
N
H
N
1J N
y-I M
iJ
M 1.1
O 0 H
U IU
rt
•14 N
4J O
oro
vaa41rn4-3
owm0U3ro
b
41
O
.3
3
W
-•�i N
a M
11 ro
••
.,I
•r1
O a
b
A
o m
r-I
C
4 0
W P
41
A
r-4
q
E
.ri
u ro r•I
ri 3 v
u
0
0
0 41
0> m
N O N
g
0
W
iJ U
ro O a)
ro ri LI
O
J.'".
M
O N
0 li O
0 G. G.
U
U
W
Z to
Si a F
0 N
O
JJ iJ
N
A -,.1
w w
� -r1
n M
W r♦
•14
m o
L
N H
W
O :3
1) ii
0
W
w
>1
O 4
w
O WU
�
� 3
E
E
•'I
w
O
O
q
w
ro
E (U
r4
w' roQ
N
•�
Lv
ro o
G
3
> Ln
> v
0
o H
w
r-I
)d
JJ W
W
04
ri
ro
W o
tri
i0.1 G
l
N
O
W
En m
iJ
N -.i
U O
W lU
to
-A W
m
U ro
7
r1
N
a ro
ro
o
si
a
c ro
-r1
O
LO
ro
4J LlS
N II
II
A ❑
A
4J LJ
D
i
u3
ro b O
a
N
� ro
ro°
0
x
o°°
o
OI W k.
u
u
z a
m F
r
M
v
O
M
It
CD
0)
m
(_
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation OTN-rational
By: dah 1/7/2002
Alley Peak Flows
Minor Storm WSEL Alley T
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley T
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Elevation range: 0.00
ft to 1.28 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
0.00
0.14 0.00
8.00
0.30
9.50
0.00
11.00
0.30
20.00
0.48
28.00
1.28
Discharge
1.00 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Water Surface Elevation
0.27
ft
Flow Area
0.79
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
9.42
ft
Top Width
9.24
ft
Height
0.27
ft
Critical Depth
0.25
ft
Critical Slope
0.008975 ft/ft
Velocity
1.26
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.02
ft
Specific Energy
0.30
ft
Froude Number
0.76
Flow is subcritical.
Flow is divided.
Water elevation exceeds lowest end station by 0.13 ft.
End Station Roughness
28.00 0.016
03/12/02
FlowMaster v5.13
03:17:23 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Alley T WSEL (Minor Storm)
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley T
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Channel Slope
0.005000 fUft
Water Surface Elevation
0.27 ft
Discharge
1.00 cfs
1.4
1.2
1.0
w O.E
v
C
O
Ej O.E
0.4
0.1
' Acce.SS
V > ,\:�y
-=V\0 l
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
Station (ft)
25.0 30.0
03/12/02 FlowMaster v5.13
03:17:33 PM - Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Major Storm WSEL Alley T
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley T
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Elevation range: 0.00
ft to 1.28 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station End Station Roughness
0.00
0.14 0.00 28.00 0.016
8.00
0.30
9.50
0.00
11.00
0.30
20.00
0.48
28.00
1.28
Discharge
4.22 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Water Surface Elevation
0.39
ft
Flow Area
2.32
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
15.94
ft
Top Width
15.63
ft
Height
0.39
ft
Critical Depth
0.37
ft
Critical Slope
0.007420 ft/ft
Velocity
1.82
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.05
ft
Specific Energy
0.44
ft
Froude Number
0.83
Flow is subcritical.
Water elevation exceeds lowest end station by 0.25 ft.
03/12/02 FlowMaster v5.13
03:18:02 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Alley T WSEL (Major Storm)
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley T
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
0.39 ft
Discharge
4.22 cfs
c
0
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0 5.0 10.0
8' Au4ss
El s L—v k-
Gco atL S tk
k:1:fy
ac
P.4
15.0 20.0
Station (ft)
25.0 30.0
03/12/02 FlowMaster v5.13
03:18:11 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Minor Storm WSEL Alley O
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley O
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Elevation range:
0.00 ft to 1.60 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
-10.00
1.26
-10.00
-8.00
1.26
0.00
0.00
0.46
20.00
1.50
0.00
3.00
0.46
20.00
0.80
28.00
1.60
Discharge
2.26 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.018
Water Surface Elevation
0.58
ft
Flow Area
1.43
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
10.05
ft
Top Width
9.90
ft
Height
0.58
ft
Critical Depth
0.53
ft
Critical Slope
0.009025 ft/ft
Velocity
1.58
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.04
ft
Specific Energy
0.61
ft
Froude Number
0.73
Flow is subcritical.
End Station
Roughness
0.00
0.032
20.00
0.016
28.00
0.032
03/18/02 FlowMaster v5,13
04:14:05 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Alley O WSEL (Minor Storm)
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley O
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.018
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
0.58 ft
Discharge
2.26 cfs
1.6
1.4
1.2
c
00.8
m
W
0.4
1 WE
0.0
-10.0
03/18/02
04:14:15 PM
4- ut;
V
l,�y
9 Stkba
tL
C
-5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
Station (ft)
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666
30.0
FlowMaster v5.13
Page 1 of 1
Major Storm WSEL Alley O
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley O
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Elevation range: 0.00
ft to 1.60 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
-10.00
1.26
-10.00
-8.00
1.26
0.00
0.00
0.46
20.00
1.50
0.00
3.00
0.46
20.00
0.80
28.00
1.60
Discharge
9.75 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.017
Water Surface Elevation
0.77
ft
Flow Area
4.43
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
21.55
ft
Top Width
21.39
ft
Height
0.77
ft
Critical Depth
0.74
ft
Critical Slope
0.006936 ft/ft
Velocity
2.20
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.08
ft
Specific Energy
0.84
ft
Froude Number
0.85
Flow is subcritical.
End Station
0.00
20.00
28.00
Roughness
0.032
0.016
0.032
03/18/02 FlowMaster v5.13
04:13:33 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Alley O WSEL (Major Storm)
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley O
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.017
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
0.77 ft
Discharge
9.75 cfs
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
c
� 0.8
0
a�
W
0.6
0.4
0.2
O.0
-10.0
t Acts=1�U
Ga�a�G SC�b
,I,I•i
tk
SCPa.ngaE,
/itt
i
5}t.�a;1: 4�/
-5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
Station (ft)
03/18/02 FlowMaster v5.13
04:13:44 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury. CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Alley S-2 (Minor Storm)
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley S-2
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.006000 ft/ft
Elevation range: 0.00
ft to 1.60 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
1.26
0.00
5.00
1.26
13.00
13.00
0.46
33.00
14.50
0.00
16.00
0.46
33.00
0.80
41.00
1.60
Discharge
2.04 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.018
Water Surface Elevation
0.55
ft
Flow Area
1.18
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
8.35
ft
Top Width
8.21
ft
Height
0.55
ft
Critical Depth
0.51
ft
Critical Slope
0.008703 ft/ft
Velocity
1.73
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.05
ft
Specific Energy
0.59
ft
Froude Number
0.81
Flow is subcritical.
End Station
Roughness
13.00
0.032
33.00
0.016
41.00
0.032
03/12/02 FlowMaster v5.13
03:21:18 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Alley S-2 WSEL (Minor Storm)
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley S-2
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.018
Channel Slope 0.006000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 0.55 ft
Discharge 2.04 cfs
IZ
1.4
1.2
1.0
W
0.4
env,
03/ 12/02
03:21:22 PM
!FS'AoL
s54-LW'�
Grog
Sa) JL
3
0
0
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0
Station (ft)
FlowMaster v5.13
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Alley S-2 (Major Storm)
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley S-2
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.006000 ft/ft
Elevation range:
0.00 ft to 1.60 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Start Station
0.00
1.26
0.00
5.00
1.26
13.00
13.00
0.46
33.00
14.50
0.00
16.00
0.46
33.00
0.80
41.00
1.60
Discharge
8.93 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.017
Water Surface Elevation
0.74
ft
Flow Area
3.83
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
19.81
ft
Top Width
19.65
ft
Height
0.74
ft
Critical Depth
0.73
ft
Critical Slope
0.006971 ft/ft
Velocity
2.33
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.08
ft
Specific Energy
0.82
ft
Froude Number
0.93
Flow is subcritical.
End Station
Roughness
13.00
0.032
33.00
0.016
41.00
0.032
03/12/02 FlowMaster v5.13
03:21:51 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Alley S-2 WSEL (Major Storm)
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley S-2
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient 0.017
Channel Slope 0.006000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation 0.74 ft
Discharge 8.93 cfs
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
n
0.4
iE
03/12/02
03:22:00 PM
8'Acce
��+'I.I•r
T
0
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Station (ft)
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666
40.0 45.0
FlowMaster v5.13
Page 1 of 1
Minor Storm WSEL Alley U
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley U
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Elevation range: 0.00
ft to 2.08 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
0.00
2.08 0.00
17.00
0.38
18.50
0.00
20.00
0.38
33.00
0.64
41.00
1.44
Discharge
2.20 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Water Surface Elevation
0.49
ft
Flow Area
1.30
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
9.93
ft
Top Width
9.83
ft
Height
0.49
ft
Critical Depth
0.47
ft
Critical Slope
0.007503 ft/ft
Velocity
1.69
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.04
ft
Specific Energy
0.54
ft
Froude Number
0.82
Flow is subcritical.
End Station Roughness
41.00 0.016
03/12/02 FlowMaster v5.13
03:25:51 PM. Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Alley U WSEL (Minor Storm)
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley U
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
0.49 ft
Discharge
2.20 cfs
2.5
2.0
1.5
0.5
03/12/02
03:25:57 PM
17
O.
fxrao L 1
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Station (ft)
Haestad Methods. Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666
40.0 45.0
FlowMaster v5.13
Page 1 of 1
Major Storm WSEL Alley U
Worksheet for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley U
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Elevation range: 0.00
ft to 2.08 ft.
Station (ft)
Elevation (ft) Start Station
0.00
2.08 0.00
17.00
0.38
18.50
0.00
20.00
0.38
33.00
0.64
41.00
1.44
Discharge
11.30 cfs
Results
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Water Surface Elevation
0.70
ft
Flow Area
4.59
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
19.98
ft
Top Width
19.86
ft
Height
0.70
ft
Critical Depth
0.69
ft
Critical Slope
0.006244 ft/ft
Velocity
2.46
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.09
ft
Specific Energy
0.80
ft
Froude Number
0.90
Flow is subcritical.
End Station Roughness
41.00 0.016
03/12/02 FlowMaster v5.13
03:26:24 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708, (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Alley U WSEL (Major Storm)
Cross Section for Irregular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Alley U
Flow Element
Irregular Channel
Method .
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Water Elevation
Section Data
Wtd. Mannings Coefficient
0.016
Channel Slope
0.005000 ft/ft
Water Surface Elevation
'030 ft
Discharge
11.30 cfs
2.5
2.0
C
0
CU
W
1.0
0.=
03/14/02
11:31:27 AM
Ga,r
5e— Se4ioa
G.
I.i1:l;ty
�ftra
J
4e, Access
raSC rtn}
�4bd� 4
77
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Station (ft)
Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666
40.0 45.0
FlowMaster v5.13
Page 1 of 1
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 3/18/2002
By: dah Old Town North 4:43 PM
(Culvert & Pond Calculations from Northern
Scenario: Base
»» Info: Subsurface Analysis iterations: 1
»» Info: Convergence was achieved.
Gravity subnetwork discharging at: 0-1
»» Info: Loading and hydraulic computations completed
successfully.
»» Warning: 0-1 Pipe crown is above structure.
»» Warning: I-1 Pipe invert is below structure.
»» Warning: P-1 Pipe fails minimum cover constraint.
»» Warning: P-1 Pipe fails minimum slope constraint.
»» Warning: P-2 Pipe fails minimum cover constraint.
»» Warning: P-2 Pipe fails minimum slope constraint.
»» Warning: P-3 Pipe fails minimum slope constraint.
»» Warning: P-4 Pipe fails minimum slope constraint.
»» Warning: P-5 Pipe fails minimum cover constraint.
»» Warning: P-5 Pipe fails minimum slope constraint.
»» Warning: P-6 Pipe fails minimum cover constraint.
»» 1Warning: P-6 Pipe fails minimum slope constraint.
CALCULATION SUMMARY FOR SURFACE NETWORKS
•�Ca.� Jam„ i ,� -It,, r-: '
TK�G�M1 �.Jr�Sy'fT•��NT�SE�F.�
CZ ' T7r°SYt I n�
I Label I Inlet I Inlet I Total I
Total
I Capture I
Gutter I
Gutter
I I Type I I Intercepted I
Bypassed
I Efficiency I
Spread I
Depth
I I I I Flow I
Flow
I I%) I
(ft) I
(ft)
I I I I (cfs)
I-------I---------------I----------------------I-------------I----------I------------I--------I-------
(cfs)
I I
I
I I-1 I Generic Inlet I Generic Default 100% I 0.00 I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.00 I
100.0 1
0.00 I
0.00
CALCULATION SUMMARY FOR SUBSURFACE NETWORK WITH ROOT: 0-1
I Label I
Number
I Section I
Section
I I
of
I Size I
Shape
I I
I I
Sections
I
I
I
I -------I----------
1 P-6 1
I---------
1 1
24
I---------
inch I
Circular
I P-5 1
1 1
24
inch I
Circular
I P-4 I
1 1
24
inch I
Circular
I P-3 1
1 1
24
inch I
Circular
I P-2 1
1 1
24
inch I
Circular
I P-1 I
---------------------------------------
1 1
24
inch I
Circular
I Length
I Total
I Average
I (ft)
I System
I Velocity
I I
Flow
I (ft/s)
I I
(cfs)
I
I 18.50 1
13.20
1 4.80
1 270.00 1
13.20
1 4.87
1 205.64 1
13.20
1 4.97
1 251.96 1
13.20
I 5.01
1 400.00 1
13.20
I 5.33
1 22.53 1
-----------------------------
13.20
1 4.48
I Label
I Total
I Ground
I Hydraulic I
Hydraulic I
I System
I Elevation
I Grade
Grade I
I
I Flow
I (ft)
I Line In
Line Out 1
I
I - ------I--------
I (cfs) I
I
-----------
I (ft)
-----------I-----------I
(ft) I
1 0-1
1 13.20 I
52.20
54.20 I
54.20 I
1 J-5
1 13.20 1
56.72 I
54.54 I
54.25
1 J-4
1 13.20 I
61.37 I
55.56 I
55.44 1
1 J-3
1 13.20 1
62.40 I
56.44 I
56.33
1 J-2
1 13.20 1
61.87 I
57.48
57.36 I
I J-1
I 13.20 1
61.75
59.65 1
59.26 I
1 I-1
1 13.20 1
63.00 1
59.86 1
59.70 I
I Hydraulic
I Hydraulic I
I Grade
I Grade I
I Upstream
I Downstream 1
I (ft)
-----------
I (ft) I
------------I
I 54.25
I
I 54.20 I
I 55.44
I 54.54 I
I 56.33
I 55.56 I
I 57.36 I
56.44 I
I 59.26 I
57.48 I
I 59.70 I
--------------------------
59.65 I
Title: OTN-Stormcad Project Engineer: Northern Engineering Services
d:\projects (oid)btn\stormca&otn-strmline 1.stm Northern Engineering Services Storm CAD v4.1.1 (4.2014]
05/01/02 11:27:57 AM ®Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2
w
uoi coo M M M coo
—�°.
o 0 0 0 o d
w m
x
O
8 11 Gog � n tf)
�s
W
0 �°d�((9rR8
�o
vvuiuitivvNui'I
U
NuN) (D
G
(7 v 7 IN N 1n V v 0 N v v v
G 5�
n ro N �i• roi fD mIn v 1l- N fND. g
Uorn LO LO
p.
CD O Y IN V w 0 0 ID (D O
n(
C
— ...
1 1 N .- rp , (p .- N
IYis N
m 5
y:
(ND N O (h (O 7 n N N}
0
(Vp (NNp
eN�
oi N 0 0 IL M N 9 t a' N� A
x
3 0 C
fD O N (D G� fD V m w 7 v N O
co n w N 'C m V m N V N N N
m o m s
c
m Di m p� t� m N N
N N N N N N N N N
T:� J
x
m
N=Tn
< mo m m co
O a
V' ui N v v 7
Q>v
E
N m 3^
o 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
F TLL
m vi 6 vi vi 6 m 07 f7 l7 m 6 vi
c
y O
LO
co 0) ODD O ccl oo 0
C C
N U) N U) N 0
p w
C
N C G
s}
N co aD n N CD
m 0— ^
C T w
1f If 10 N N V
N
73 a— W
m
a"3 8 `8i 9 8 �
C�
N 8
8
J
Iq N N N
c y
O
N 10 N 10 M N
2
N
U L
` ` U ` U
N N
U U U U U 8
c
O m
L t t L C L
C C C
NN_
C C C
N
(n
O `7 V• K O w
N N N N N N
N
m
N N ch m Y? N N (Q
J
_aiaa�aa-;ao
a
a
0
m
O
co
O
F-
a U
u
Z;
c
C �
C m
w O
E a
m m
Y
ZO
O
an
M
Scenario: Base=
»» Info: Subsurface Analysis iterations: 1
»» Info: Convergence was achieved.
s Gravity subnetwork discharging at: 0-1
»» Info: Loading and hydraulic computations completed
successfully.
»» Warning: 0-1 Pipe crown is above structure.
»» Warning: P-1 Pipe fails minimum cover constraint.
»» Warning: P-2 Pipe fails minimum cover constraint.
CALCULATION SUN24ARY FOR SURFACE NETWORKS
Label I Inlet I
Type
I I
---------------
I-1 1 Generic Inlet I
--------------------
Generic Default 100$
--------------------
I Intercepted 1
Flow
(cfs)
I -------------I
0.00
CALCULATION SUMMARY FOR SUBSURFACE NETWORK WITH ROOT: 0-1
Bypassed
Flow
(cfs)
n1oY� : *1 A.VCM -N/.t
/oo.ZS
Capture I Gutter 1 Gutter
Efficiency I Spread I Depth
(6) I (ft) I (ft)
I I
- I -------- I -------
100.0 1 0.00 1 0.00
----------------------------.
Label I Number I Section I
Section I
Length
I Total I
Average
I Hydraulic I
Hydraulic I
of Size I
Shape I
(ft)
I System
I Velocity
I Grade I
Grade 1
f Sections
Flow
I (ft/s)
I Upstream I
Downstream I
1
I
(cfs)
I
I (ft)
I (ft)----------------------------------------------------I----------I-----------I------------I
P-2 1 1 1 24 inch I
Circular
1 43.50
1 10.88
1 3.46.
1 60.35
1 60.25 1
1 P-1 I 1 1 24 inch I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Circular
1 104.00
1 10.88
1 3.46
1 60.65
1 60.41 1
Label
I Total
I Ground
I Hydraulic
I Hydraulic I
System
I. Elevation
I Grade
I Grade I
I Flow
I (ft)
Line In
I Line Out I
(cfs)
I
(ft)
I (ft)
-----------I
---------------
1 0-1
10.88
I -----------I-----------
1 57.56
1 60.25
I
1 60.25 1
1 J-1
1 10.68
1 62.10
1 60.41
1 60.35 1
1 I-1
______________________________________________________
1 10.88
1 61.34
I 60.74
1 60.65 1
Completed: 05/01/2002 01:59:03 PM
Title: OTN-Stonncad Project Engineer: Northern Engineering Services
d?Projects (old)btnlstormcad\otn-strmline 2.stm Northern Engineering Services Sto"CAD v4.1.1 (4.2014)
05/01/02 01:59:16 PM V Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA-1.203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1
�
k 2
m �
d
to §
W.
�
6 f
)�
°
_
� ° «
E2-
E] t
& ) in
m
�Jk
33§�
m o
;
$£
N222/
7
~
«
)a_
co co
j/5
t ;
,OS
8N0N8
IT tn in
Ir
)N)C4g
ia0_q§gnK
5
ƒR�8GBG8
Rkgn
'o w0
999
12
n n
J$
!■»-§§§§§
aƒ!£0_,00
r§CD r
�. ,
-E
>
\ j
$ #
c
( )
§]
- -
a
a a
]
=J;23
e
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
By: dah 9:53 AM
DETENTION POND
Page 1 of 6
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 5/6/2002
By: dah 11:37 AM
0
Rating Curve for Detention Pond
Elevation
ft
Stage
ft
Storage
Release
cfs
Notes
cf
AF
56.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
WQ Pond Invert
57.00
1.00
15006
0.34
0.00
58.00
2.00
75080
1.72
0.00
Pond Outlet 57.97
59.00
3.00
170119
3.91
4.40
60.00
4.00
1 311643
7.15
11.53
60.25
4.25
321473
7.38
13.20
Actual 1 00-r WSEL
60.50
4.50
368953
8.47
14.73
Overflow Weir Invert60.55
61.00
5.00
500158
11.48
70.31
61.50
5.50
618153
14.19
184.25
Top of Berm
Rating Curve for reference only
See Rating curve in SWMM prepared by Northern Engineering
Note: Actual 100-yr WSEL is for a release rate of 13.20 cfs.
OTN-pond
Rating Curve
Page 2 of 6
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 5/6/2002
By: dah 11:37 AM
Stage Storage
62.00
61.00
60.00
59.00
c 58.00
57.00
m 56.00
w 55.00
54.00
53.00
52.00
0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000
Volume (c�
Volume Provided —100YR WSEL
OTN-pond
Stage Storage Page 3 of 6
Project No: 1646-01-98
By: dah
Shear Engineering Corporation
5/6/2002
11:41 AM
OTN-pond
Outlet
INPUT FOR OUTLET STRUCTURE
Determine Req'd Orifice
Q= CA(2gH)A0.5
A = Q/(C(2 H)"0.5
H (ft) 2.28
C 0.65
Q (cfs) 13.29
A (sf) 1.69
W (ft) 1.500
L (ft) 2.667
Area 1 4.000 Ift diamete
Outlet Orifice Data
Diam. 4.00 ft
Invert 57.97 ft
Top of Orifice 61.97 ft
Coefficient 0.65
Upper Orifice Data
Diam. ft
Invert ft
Top of Orifice 0.00 ft
Coefficient 0.65
Primary Weir Data
Length 20.00 ft
Invert 60.47 ft
Coefficient 1 2.60
Top of Pond
Init Delta Head
Delta Head
61.50
ft
1.00
ft
1.00
ft
Overflow Weir Data
Length 70.00
Invert 60.55
Coefficient 2.60
ft
ft
ft
Pipe Data
Diameter
Top of Pipe
Slope
Mannino's n
2.00
ft
59.97
ft
0.0040
ft
0.013
RC
For Reference Only
Outlet modelled in SWMM
Prepared by Northern Engineering
ice =
to
lincnes
Design
Release
Req'd
Top of
Storm
Rate
WSEL
Berm
r
cfs
ft
ft
100
13.29
60.251
61.50
Sizing of Primar Weir
Design Q100 Max Req'd
Storm Head Length
r cfs f I ft
100 160.40 1.031 59.0:
Determine Req'd Overflow Weir
Q = CwLH�3/2
L = (Q/(Cw*HA1.5))
Design Q100 Max Req'd
Storm Head Length
r cfs ft I ft
100 160.40 0.951 66.6:
Page 4 of 6
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 5/6/2002
By: dah 11:41 AM
*OUTPUT*
Pipe Area 3.14 sf P 6.28 ft
R = 0.500 ft R"2/3 =1 0.6298
C = 226.17 C - 1.486*A*RA2/3/n
Minimum Vel 2.00 fps Max Velocity 1 10.00 Ifps
Min Slope 0.0008 ft/ft Max Slope 0.0193 ft/ft
Outlet Pipe Capacity = 14.30 cfs - pipe under pressure -
Lower Orifice Area (Al) ####### sf
Upper Orifice Area (A2.) f 0. 0000._ sf
Orifice Equation CA(2gH)�1/2
Weir Flow Equation CwLHA3/2
Note: Head over orifice is measured from the center of the orifice
Elev.
ft
Lower Orifice
Head
Over Lower
Lower Orifice
Orifice Flow
ft cfs
Upper Orifice
Head
Over Upper
Upper Orifice
Orifice Flow
ft cfs
Primary Weir
Head
Over Weir
Weir Flow
ft cfs
Sub
Total
Flow
cfs
57.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
58.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
59.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
60.55
0.58
15.89
0.00
0.00
0.08
1.18
17:07
60.97
1.00
20.86
0.00
0.00
0.50
18.38
39.25
61.50
1 1.53
1 25.81
0.00
1 0.00
1.03
54.36
80.17
60.38
1 0.41
1 13.29
0.00
1 0.00
0.00
0.00
13.29
Emergency Overflow
Spillway
Head
Elev.
Over
Weir
Weir
Flow
ft
ft
cfs
57.97
0.00
0.00
58.97
0.00
0.00
59.97
0.00
0.00
60.97
0.42
49.54
61.47
0.92
160.40
Qdelta =I 0.00 Jcfs
Qdelta = 1 0.00 Jcfs
Conclude:
100-yr WSEL 1 60.38 Ift - ok is greater than required WSEL
Max WSEL = 1 61.47 Ift - is below top of berm
OTN-pond
Outlet Page 5 of 6
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 5/6/2002
By: dah 11:42 AM
Lower Orifice
Primary Weir
Emergency
Total
Head
Head
Spillway
Elev. Over
Lower
Over
Weir
Head
Flow
Lower
Orifice
Weir
Flow
Over
Weir
Orifice
Flow
Weir
Flow
cfs
ft
Ift
Icfs
ft
Icfs
ft
Icfs
1 , 2'3 %'1
1.26
1 23.44
0.76
1 34.56
1 0.68
J102.40
1160.40
Qdeltaall = 0.00
OTN-pond
Outlet Page 6 of 6
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 3/19/2002
By: dah 1:13 PM
Pnnrt r)i itlot Rnv Stn irh iro ci immnry
Pond
Box Dimensions
Weir
Top Box
Box
Box
Length Width
Length
Invert
Height
A B
D
ft ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
1
5.00 5.00
20.00
60.47
57.97
2.50
Dimension are the inside wall dimensions
%Alnr'%l Dnnrl ri,M=+Rnv Stnirhiro enmmnni
Pond
Box Dimensions
Weir
Top Box
Box
Box
Length Width
Length
Invert
Height
A B
D
ft ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
1
4.00 4.00
16.00
57.50
56.00
6.50
Emer enc Overflow Weir Summary
Pond
Weir
Weir
Top of
Weir
Inv.
Length
Berm
Width
ft
Ift
ft
ft
1
60.55
1 70.00
61.50
4.00
Orifice Op enin Summary
Pond
Invert
ft
Orifice Opening
Inches
1
1 57.97
24
Storm sewer From Irrigation Ditch Slope 0.0040 ft/ft
From To Pipe Slope Invert Invert Notes
in out Length out in
ft ft/ft ft ft
Ditch MH ST 1 18.50 0.0040 4552.55 0.35' > FL
MH ST 1 MH ST 2 270.00 0.0040 4552.62 4552.82 MH ST 1
MH ST 2 MH ST 3 205.64 0.0040 4553.90 4554.00 MH ST 2
MH ST 3 MH ST 4 251.96 0.0040 4554.83 4554.93 MH ST 3
MH ST 4 MH ST 5 400.00 0.0040 4555.93 4556.03 MH ST 4
MH ST 5 HW 25.00 0.0046 4557.63 4557.83 MH ST 5
HW. I 1 1 4557.95 JInv ® pond
OTN-pond
Notes Page 1 of 1
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
By: dah Old Town North 11:34 AM
Water Quality Volume Calculations
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 3/18/2002
Designer: dah Old Town North 4:39 PM
DETERMINATION OF WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME FOR POND
AREA = 48.17 acres
Area (ac) Impervious A*I
Asphalt
Concrete/Roof
Gravel
Lawn
11.49
100.00
11149.00
9.95
100.00
995.00
6.06
50.00
303.00
20.67
0.00
0.00
Total 48.17
2447.00
OVERALL PERCENT IMPERVIOUS: 50.80 PERCENT
TYPE OF POND (RETENTION OR DETENTION) DETENTION
SELECT 40.00 HOUR BRIM FULL VOLUME DRAIN TIME
USES 40 HOUR FOR DETENTION PONDS
USES 12 HOUR FOR RETENTION PONDS
FROM FIGURE 5-1 REQUIRED STORAGE
WATERSHED INCHES OF RUNOFF= 0.2122
WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME ((REQUIRED STORAGE/12)*AREA
WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME (WQCV) = 0.85 AF
37111 cf
Conclude
Design pond to have at this least 37111 cf of storage
Install water quality outlet structure
OTN-WQCV
WQCV
Page 1 of 4
Job No. 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 3/18/2002
Designer: dah Old Town North 4:39 PM
Volume = 1/3d(A1+A2+sgrt(A1*A2) d=E2-El
Stage Storage for Water Quality Pond
Invert
56.00
ft
Incr.
1.00
ft
Top
61.50
ft
Elev.
Stage
Area
Volume
Cum
Cum
(d)
(A)
Volume
Volume
ft
ft
sf
cf
cf
AF
56.00
0.00
0
0
0
0.00
57.00
1.00
45019
15006
15006
0.34
58.00
2.00
76512
60074
75080
1.72
59.00
3.00
114860
95039
170119
3.91
60.00
4.00
169982
141524
311643
7.15
61.00
5.00
207677
188515
500158
11.48
61.50
5.50
265483
117995
618153
14.19
Req'd Water
Quality Volume (WQCV)
37111
Cf
0.85
AF
Required
WSEL for WQCV is below
58.00.
ft
Elev
Cum Vol
ft
cf
58.00
75080
57.00
15006
Required
WSEL for WQCV
57.37
ft
Freeboard
4.13
ft
Notes:
Water Quality Volume is in addition to any
needed detention volume for this site.
OTN-WQCV
Stage Storage Page 2 of 4
(`0
O
d L
U o
Z
C C
O O
CD H
c
cO
W
m
d
L
co
rn
0
O L
IT m
co 'D
z rn
d y
(Dn 0
O
O
rn
o
r
O
3
o
y
N
N
_y
O
L
cl
N
E
>
(0
6
U
L
CO n
LL
O
D
U
N i
C
CD M
N
0.M
f0
N
w
(0 M (Lo O
t
y
O I, 1 (O .--
N
d
f0
0
3 )
to (D (o
Q
L
c
(D
T
O
3
c
2 %
p
m
V
y L
a
N
,rn
y
O
O
E
C
C O Gl
O
X
y
j m y
<
m
E
3
o
0 - �
E
U
0
c
CO.
N
II
CDM
(9
y
j
O-
II
� II
L
v
U
'0
II a-
0
U
2 co
II
U '� p r v
9
O
a D2
Co LO
Omo> 0
m
II
o
y
vi
N
U Vl
C (D
CO
3
y . �
M d
E y .
Mn .L
d
:3 y
0)3
L O
U O`
c c
a) d
N
E co�
a a
y
f)
E
rn CDN
C c
X CO <
co c
U U
yw COUJU)
w `p
E E
=1 7
y
ccE
E
F 3
z i
II N
N N y
a2 = U
V (n O r, h
N (D N M I�-
(oIq OMEN
0
o = c c;
m rn
w U
O
OQ QU II 2C7
v
O
M
m
rn
m
a
N
o
O
Ln
.'i
v
1.1
p
cd
U
.,.{
o
O
44
N
co
.0
II
=
«
CL
U
O r
p,
U Z
D)
N
a s
v
U
O
0
c o
a
m
a
ca
`
co
d
W
m as
o)
y @
cn
rt1
a)
c c
ai (1)) N a`D) a)
L)
o)
�4
U U
LL) cL) LL) LL)
c c c c c
cLi a) Q
p c a)
E 1
a) d
x
M
O
00
E-H
E E
`
s
0
,_0 V
V/ /
A�
W
N
co
C
a s
c c X
'v
U>
>
co n
O)
<a) co
N
a) U H O N T
.O 4
` N
O a O Y Y
J d d F-
Qu ca
>
> a) Y
CW
O O
f9 a) !Y
O U N
N a
a) O. W O lL
lL LL
C (n
0 0 0 w
.ca
d to O coO O N N
'
0
E
0#
o oi c
c6
K
O
D 'D
O
X a2 ;a6) an
O>>CDO
a7 U� 7 0 CoU
d
Z cm
y
O a
(n
_
a)
O�
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
By: dah 9:58 AM
Lake Canal Overflow Structure
Page 1 of 2
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 4/29/2002
By: dah Old Town North 4:30 PM
Head over Lake Canal in Overflow Situation
Q = C aTH'/2
H v (Q"/`mow") 113
Discharge Q 12.50
cfs
Weir Coefficient (C.) 0.65
Length (L) 1500
feet
Head (H) VO
feet
Note:
0.055 feet of water would overtop the Lake Canal Weir under the
assumption that the Lake Canal acts as a 1500' weir and the discharge
is approximately 12.50 cfs.
OTN-pond
Lake Canal Weir Page 1 of 1
Project No: 1646-01-98 Shear Engineering Corporation 12/21/2001
By: dah 9:58 AM
OTN-pond
Lake Canal
Problem
Provide overflow in irrigation structure for drainage flows
from pond when occurring simultaneously with irrigation
Given
Irrigation flows = 150.00 cfs per Lake Canal
Q100 from pond = 160.40 cfs
Total Flow = 310.40 cfs
Weir Dimensions
Height
Weir Length (L)
Length of east wall
Concrete - n =
ITypical Flow Depth
ft - measured on site
ft - measured on site
ft - from survey
ft - based on observation
5.00
13.33
37.97
0.016
2.00
Calculated Flow depth (Hi) for Irri tion Flow
Q = 1 150.00 lefs
Q = CiLHi^1.5 - Hi = (Q/CiL)^0.667
Ci = 1 2.60
Hi = 1 2.66 Ift
Remaining Height = 1 2.34 ft
Remaining Heigth - maximum available head for overflow weir
on east side of structure
Calculated Flow depth for combined flows
He = 4.31 1 ft
Difference - He -Hi 1 1.66 Ift
Determine Weir Length and Invert for Q100 from Pond
Ld = Q/(CdHAl.5)
Cd
2.60
Set Weir
3.00
ft above floor
Maximum Head
2.00
ft
Required Ld =
21.81
ft
Length must be less than
37.97
ft - length of wall
Set Length =
25.00
ft
Actual Head over Weir
1.83
ft
Total Height
4.83
ft - must be less than 5
Conclude:
Provide 25.00 foot notch in the east wall
3.00 feet above the floor
Notch to be centered across from the inlet pipe from
the detention pond
Page 2 of 2
High Water Depth of Lake Canal (150 cfs)
Worksheet for Trapezoidal Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Real Lake Canal
Flow Element
Trapezoidal Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Channel Depth
Input Data
Mannings Coefficient
0.035
Channel Slope
0.001200
fUff
Left Side Slope
1.000000
H : V
Right Side Slope
1.000000
H : V
Bottom Width
20.00
ft
Discharge
150.00
cfs p
Results
Depth
2.67
ft"
Flow Area
60.41
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
27.54
ft
Top Width
25.33
ft
Critical Depth
1.18
ft
Critical Slope
0.018208
ft/ft
Velocity
2,48
fus
Velocity Head
0.10
ft
Specific Energy
2.76
ft
Froude Number
0.28
Flow is subcritical.
03/14/02 FlowMaster v5.13
11:57:10 AM Haestad Methods. Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Full Flow Capacity of Canal (4' High)
Worksheet for Trapezoidal Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
Real Lake Canal
Flow Element
Trapezoidal Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Mannings Coefficient
0.035
Channel Slope
0.001200 fUftl
Depth
4.00 ft
Left Side Slope
1.000000 H : V
Right Side Slope
1.000000 H : V
Bottom Width
20.00 ft
Results
Discharge
297.95
cfs f
Flow Area
96.00
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
31.31
ft
Top Width
28.00
ft
Critical Depth
1.84
ft
Critical Slope
0.016255
ft/ft
Velocity
3.10
fUs
Velocity Head
0.15
ft
Specific Energy
4.15
ft
Froude Number
0.30
Flow is subcritical.
F, I I 6,z ca c c 4y kk-i- `Lakt coral
03/14/02 FlowMaster v5.13
11:55:51 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury. CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
High Water Depth (150 cfs)
Worksheet for Rectangular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
5' X 15' Weir Structure
Flow Element
Rectangular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Channel Depth
Input Data
Mannings Coefficient
0.013
Channel Slope
0.001200 ft/ff
Bottom Width
15.00 .ft
Discharge
li
150.00 cfs
Results
Depth
1.91
ft
Flow Area
28.64
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
18.82
ft
Top Width
15.00
ft
Critical Depth
1.46
ft
Critical Slope
0.002752
fUft
Velocity
5.24
fUs
Velocity Head
0.43
ft
Specific Energy
2.34
ft
Froude Number
0.67
Flow is subcritical.
N rgh ,aa)Ire. - �`eP�4. ; * � 5r �x lnsl
lJG1� <, � t�Ctl�f� .W 1 V\ 1 `JV 4}S .
03/14/02 FlowMaster v5.13
11:46:24 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
/
Full Flow Capacity (5' High)
Worksheet for Rectangular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
5' X 15' Weir Structure
Flow Element
Rectangular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.013
Channel Slope 0.001200Jt(i
Depth 5.00 ft
Bottom Width 15.00 ft
Results
Discharge
617.71
cfJ
Flow Area
75.00
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
25.00
ft
Top Width
15.00
ft
Critical Depth
3.75
ft
Critical Slope
0.002722fllft
Velocity
8.24
ftls
Velocity Head
1.05
ft
Specific Energy
6.05
ft
Froude Number
0.65
Flow is subcritical.
Fl .11 �lola .qc C'' y o� 5' x ( �
o.Ssvw.�r.nJ �\o�as
03/14/02 FlowMaster v5.13
11:47:02 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury. CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
1
High Water Depth (150 cfs)
Worksheet for Rectangular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
4' X 20' Box Culvert (Lake Canal)
Flow Element
Rectangular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Channel Depth
Input Data
Mannings Coefficient
0.013
Channel Slope
0.001200 ft/fi
Bottom Width
20.00 ft y
Discharge
150.00 cfs
Results
Depth
1.55
ft J
Flow Area
31.09
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
23.11
ft
Top Width
20.00
ft
Critical Depth
1.20
ft
Critical Slope
0.002693 ft/ft
Velocity
4.83
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.36
ft
Specific Energy
1.92
ft
Froude Number
0.68
Flow is subcritical.
N;g�n ,�t- r,
box c(,lvtr� so cis.
03/14/02 FlowMaster v5.13
11:47:55 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury. CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Full Flow Capacity (4' High)
Worksheet for Rectangular Channel
Project Description
Project File
d:\haestad\fmw\oldtown.fm2
Worksheet
4' X 20' Box Culvert (Lake Canal)
Flow Element
Rectangular Channel
Method
Manning's Formula
Solve For
Discharge
Input Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.013
Channel Slope 0.001200 ft/f?
Depth 4.00 ft
Bottom Width 20.00 ft
Results
Discharge
637.80
cfs
Flow Area
80.00
ft'
Wetted Perimeter
28.00
ft
Top Width
20.00
ft
Critical Depth
3.16
ft
Critical Slope
0.002420 ft/ft
Velocity
7.97
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.99
ft
Specific Energy
4.99
ft
Froude Number
0.70
Flow is subcritical.
Ft,J� �1 OLZ C40-c; VY o� u' x ZA'
�OX Cc�1VQf 6--,5tlrLirla moos
tech N' h,Z ` J
03/14/02
FlowMaster v5.13
11:47:35 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1e66 Page 1 of 1