Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 06/01/1983Z1161110h M01 FINAL STORM DRAINAGE REPORT for PINEVIEW P.U.D. PHASES I AND II CITY OF FORT COLLINS COUNTY OF LARIMER STATE OF COLORADO June, 1983 Prepared by: Parsons & Associates Consulting Engineers 432 Link Lane Plaza Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Project Number 83.14 PIN Utilities light & }power • stormwater e wastewater • water City of Fort Collins Date: December 15, 1999 To: Mark Taylor — Civil Engineer II Memorandum From: Susan Hayes — Senior Stormwater Engineer n`*' Matt Fater— Master Planning Engineer�j' RE: Pineview PUD This memorandum is to provide you the information I found regarding the Pineview PUD. First, I was asked to determine how the Pineview Pond would function as shown on the approved Pineview PUD drainage under the new 3.67" rainfall criteria. I updated the most current version of the Mail Creek Basin Model to reflect the new rainfall criteria and any problems the new rainfall caused for the model. The modeling results showed a 100-year discharge, storage, and water surface elevation of 81.2 cfs, 3.9 ac-ft, and 5084.5 ft, respectively. These results are an increase over the original design plans (designed under old rainfall criteria and modeling methods) that showed a 100-year discharge, storage, and water surface elevation of 62.3 cfs, 2.72 ac-ft, and 5083.2 ft, respectively. It should also be noted that with a 100-year water surface of 5084.5 ft, the pond will overtop the intersection of Shields and Harmony by approximately six inches. This overtopping condition would be a violation of arterial street criteria. After the existing condition analysis, I proceeded to evaluate the possibility of slightly modifying the Pineview PUD plan to contain the revised 3.67" rainfall without overtopping. I conceptualized a six inch high berm along Harmony and Shields and modified the pond analysis accordingly. The results of the analysis showed a 100-year discharge, storage, and water surface elevation of 66.0 cfs, 4.14 ac-ft, and 5084.25 ft, respectively. This condition would require an extension of the pond drainage easement into the adjacent parking lot as well as raising three of the adjacent buildings by a half foot and one of the adjacent buildings by a quarter of'a foot. The raising of the building is to get one foot of freeboard from the 100-year water surface. However, the City may be willing to consider a variance from the parking lot and freeboard criteria in order to eliminate the overtopping of the street. In addition, I will note the development agreement references 2.13 acres to be purchased by the City. This area appears to include the detention pond easement and the channel easement carrying flows from the upstream Regency Pond. These easements are shown on the Pineview Phase 1 and 2 plats. I also spoke to Dave Stringer about the status of Pineview PUD. He said the utility plans are still valid because the developer constructed some of the site utilities giving the developer vested rights. However, if the developer chooses to construct something different than the approved utility plans, then the development would be subject to current City criteria including: Land Use Code and rainfall criteria. I think if the developer chooses to build based on the approved plans, we should encourage the minor changes to the pond to eliminate the road overtopping. 700 Wood St. - P.O. Box 580 - Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 - (9701 221-6700 - FAX (970) 221-6619 • FAX (970) 221-6593 - TDD (970) 224-0 III:, e-mail: utilitiest(I-ci.fort-collins.co.iis - N,,,N ii :.ci.fort-colliiis.co.us/UTILITIES I PARSONS & IA ASSOCIATES r_ n CONSULTING ENGINEERS June 6, 1983 Mr. Bob Smith City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Re: Pineview P.U.D. Drainage Report Dear Mr. Smith: Please find attached the storm drainage report for Pineview P.U.D., Phases I and II. Included in the report is a discussion on regional detention ponds No: 1 and 5 and the relocation of a portion of the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal as recommended by the "McClellands and _ Mail Creek Major Drainageway Plan." The City of Fort Collins' Storm Drainage Design Criteria, dated January, 1980, has been utilized as a guideline for analyzing the stormwater runoff and required improvements.. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, ivl G' Michael C. Ketterling, P.E.. \��.`�PFLC.oKETTFgvi,,�� %S T EgFO 0016299 W ` i i. ids U e 9j .TONAL ;. • 432 Link Lane Plaza • Ft. Collins, Colorado 80524 • [3031221-2400 FINAL STORM DRAINAGE REPORT ` PINEVIEW P.U.D. FORT COLLINS, COLORADO ABSTRACT This report, in combination with Sheets 13 and 14 of the Pineview P.U.D. Phase I final design plans, Sheets 8 through 11 of the Phase II final design plans, and Sheets 1 and 2 of the Regional Detention Pond Number 1 design plans, is intended to describe the procedures and results of a drainage study of stormwater runoff generated by this project and subsequent development west of the Pleasant Valley and.Lake Canal. The historic conditions and proposed development along with the required drainage improvements are analyzed in accordance with the guidelines established by the City of Fort Collins' Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. INTRODUCTION The intent of thi's study is to determine the quantity of stormwater runoff generated from Phases I and II of the Pineview P.U.D., along with potential adj�,cent upstream developments, the manner in which thia runoff will be'accommodated by the Pineview development, and ho� it relates to the storm drainage plan as determined in a study entitled "McClellands and Mail Creek Major Drainageway Plan", prepared by Cornell ConSulting Company and John S. Griffith, dated December, 1980., SITE DESCRIPTION The site is located in the southeast 1/4 of Section 34, Township 7 North, Range 69 West, of the 6th Principal Meridianr State of Colorado, County of Larimer, in the southwestern portion of the City of Fort Collins. Phase I of Pineview consists of 7.50 acres, and Phase II consists of 19.45 acres. The project is bounded by Shields Street on the east, � Harmony Road on the south, proposed Wakerobin Lane on the north, and Lhe proposed relocation of a portion of the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal on the west (Figure 1). The site, as well as adjacent upstream properties, is presently undeveloped and used for agricultural purposes. The existing dra�nage is to the southeast at a slope of approximately 1.5%. The Mail Creek Drainageway flows through the Pineview project. PROPOSED LAND USE The project has received preliminary approval as the Pineview P.U.D. The proposed development for the site will consist of townhomes clustered around central plazas. Detached garages will be located along the private drives throughout the project. The gross density of the development will be approximately 12 units per acre. • L�ki%�t .X�. • I i cak e to • V) ■ • �_ NTS_ ■ — - - . s 83 T . I II 48 47. 20.7 44 ■ ' • \\ 3 L • ° I� D ; r� 1.34. . — 50 I ` 79 I 52.6 \ �46 �45 84 11100 �,I2 4 CT 28:3 1 � I 0 29.2 - UJaKe ro'o n•i Ln. + \ De1ar,Tlen Por.c. 4- No. I I � 2 3 I 22 `� . ! • 32.8 /', 19i ; /25 Redocallon 75 8 \\ _ Area c. 37.3 1` '- �•: �%�4 - � 107 —� a my Roa'\— _ -.-.. 2-r_ ■ _1f ° Phase o 20 11; i9 74 O�� �� 87 22.2 i 38.5 ti HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS ` The Rational Method has been � used to generate stormwater runoff flows for the 100-year return period storm for Phases I and II of ` Pineview., The design plans define sub -basins A through G, and Table 1 summarizes the results of the hydrologic analysis of these sub -basins. The Rational Method was also utilized for determining the 100-year developed runoff from the portion of Basin 76 (Figure 1) north of proposed Wakerobin Lane which will flow into Pineview Phase I. Additionally, the 100-year developed flow from that portion of Basin 85 north of proposed Wakerobin Lane and west of the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal has been calculated by this method. The Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure (CUHP) was used to determine the 100-year developed inflow flood to be used in the design of Regional Detention Pond Number 1. As a result of the Mail Creek Major Drainageway Plan, a system of detention ponds to accommodate runoff from the Southern half of Section 34 was recommended. The contributing area to Detention Pond Number 1 is 195.4 acres (Basins 75, 80, 79 and (35). The contributing area to Detention Pond Number `5 is 38.89 acres (Phases I and II of Pineview P.U.D. along with 15.92 acres of Basin 76). DETENTION STORAGE Stormwater generated upstream from the Pineview P.U.D. project will be detained in Regional Detention Pond Number 1. The 100-year developed inflow design flood for this contributing area will have a peak flow of approximately 654 cfs at a time to peak of 40 minutes. This storm generates an estimated 37.02 acre-feet of runoff. (Figure 3 in Appendix). Figure 4 has been prepared to show the stage -capacity curve for proposed Detention Pond Number 1. The 100-year historic discharge from the contributing area to this - pond has been determined to be 22 cfs. Using this as the discharge of Pond Number 1, the accumulated runoff method gives a required detention volume of 25.8 acre feet. Planimetering the area between the inflow hydrograph and an outflow hydrograph for an 18'' R.C.P. outlet pipe (Figure 5) results in a storage volume requirement of 33.45 acre-feet. The water su�face elevations corresponding to these storage volumes are 509q.95 and 5101.0. This pond, as proposed, will be constructed to elevation 5102 to provide one foot of freeboard. � Detention Pond Number 1 will be constructed immediately west of the proposed relocation of the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal. As an additional safety factor, when a storm with return period greater than a If0-year occurs which exceeds the additional storage volume available, the runoff from the pond will flow into the canal and along the west side of the canal to the southr where it will flow into the drainage provided along the north side of Harmony Road. Detention Pond Number 5 is proposed for the northwest corner of Harmony Road and Shields Street. The intent of this pond is to detain runoff from Pineview P.U.D. along with a portion of Basin 76 as well as'routing the 22.8 cfs released from Pond Number 1 through the system. The 100--year high water surface elevation for this pond has been calculated to be 5083.2 with a storage volume of'.'72 acre feet. The release rate at this level is 62.3 cfs. The stage -storage curve for Pond Number 5 is shown in Figure 5. The discharge -elevation curve for the 36" R.C.P. outlet pipe for this pond is shown on Figure 7. The recommended improvements to the Mail Creek Drainageway as discussed in the study of that drainageway have been made along Harmony Road to the east of Shields Street. These improvements have the capacity to discharge th,e 62.3 cfs released from Pond Number 5. The detention storage required for the Pineview Phase I development is 0.76 acre-feet with a peak discharge of 23.1 cfs. It is our recommendation, however, that upon construction of this phase, that Detention Pond Number 5 be rough -graded. to its final configuration. HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS All the streets within the Pineview P.U.D. are designated as private drives. A few of these drives have a single cross pan located to one side of the drive. The transverse slopes away from these pans are a minimum of 2%. In areas where the runoff dictates, an additional cross pan has been added on the opposite side of the drive to provide additional capacity. Reduction factors depending on longitudinal street slope have been incorporated into the anaylsis to determine the allowable street flows. Culverts are proposed under Private Drive "A" in Phase I (30" R.C.P.', and at 0+75 under Wakerobin Lane. (2----29" X 45" R.C.P. horizontal elliptical). The 301' R.C.P. will discharge 30.3 cfs (desi(:.in flow X 1.33) with a headwater depth of 3.1 feet. The horizontal elliptical culverts beneath Wakerobin Lane are designed to carry the 100--year developed runoff from 15.92 acres of land situated north of Wakerobin Lane between the Pleasant Valley and LakeCanal and Shields Street. These two culverts will pass 93.2 cfs with a headwater depth ot 3-0 feet. The proposed 29" X 45" R.C.P. horizontal elliptical culvert located approximately 100 feet west of the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal beneath Wakerobin Lane is designed to discharge the 100-year developed runoff of 43.5 cfs generated from 12.04 acres north of Wakerobin Lane between proposed Seneca Street and the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal. This flow will discharge directly into Detention Pond Number 1 Presently, the P sant Valley and Lake Canal has a normal flow estimated to be 3 cfs at a depth of 2.5 feet, a slope of 0.0002 ft/ft. and a vel ty of 0.8 fps. The approximate bank full capacity of the existing canal is 37.2 cfs at a depth of 4.1 feet. / AsSuming Basin 77 were to flow into the canal at e 100-year historic rate, the design flow for sizing the relocated canal would be 37.2 + ` 20.1 cfs or 57.3 cfs. ~The proposed relocated canal will have a 7 foot bottom widtyp 2:1 side slopes, depth of 3.25 feet, slope of 0.0004 ft/ft.and velocity of 1.4 fps under peak flow conditions. A one -foot freeboard has also been incorporated into the design. CONCLUSION Drainage from Pineview P.U.D. Phases I and II has been accomplished by street and open channel conveyance to Detention Pond Number 5. The 100-year developed runoff from the area north of Wakerobin Lane also flows to_this detention pond. The area contributing runoff to` - Mail Creek west of the relocated Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal will be detained in Detention Pond Number 1. APPENDIX it u-. C 4� O C •r •r o O 0) m en I� mt t0 m N- MT ch M Ln O Ln Ln 00 00 d 00 O Ln r` O1 d• O W to O 00 - Un CD Ln Lf) Ln U) U) In In C� LP) tO t0 t0 r� tO O O tO r1 e r r N • N N O O M O O O O M O O L.n w I*- U) U) LO Ln M Ln t0 O O O O O O O O O O L� m tO N N Gt M r M M 0p Ln tO Ln t0 O m 0) .--i N C) Lo N r` Ln N n •-'� r :Zl- Ln 0) O O 00 M V O M � N Cl O N Ln O O n n O1 m N N N N � 0 O CL U 0) 3 .r 3 0 N i d r O •r r > 1 > 0) Q m U (n W L' CD 0) •r C> •r S •r � Cl- D_ Pnevte-w P.Lk-U. Ph. a3.17 De-+cn*or, Pon,ci 1 S/z518.3 Mc- K Color ac,o Ur Dan d o 0n ne /oo-yeas deb. runoi� Area 195.+ acres L$as1n5 75, 80.> 79 anci 85 from IAcCaIl ay\As and ►ka,l cre-ey- 1la,or Drfl na�e ulay Plan ") L la.�4\ dratna, e Way -Pron s'ika' P{`, io uQsi�earr� I m� of bash 39f7o' ± Lca : d sl from s4ucky Pi. alon� s.+rearvl to tie cent-otA of he- basin a_sume So 7� PCfViDI).�i area l0 /" Im eCrV�OU,g (7.81 ct colt, rai lec� no I he +o, eea�. = CSa)B. Ta > Qefv okAs Ct - 7.EI/(-eO)0, o.37 5138.5 - So4E Se 317/0� D.o13 1 o,01 < :5 S 0.0 noe. . Sloe - co rc` C-1. to Y'\ > Ci = Cto \0.3 \ 0.3 p7 C.79A.33 Z4 hr say Is minu"{"e5 to Pear ra+e, OT rv.n0 o, 41? 0.SR Cci) (� 0, 09 ( o, 37) o.a .56 tr� 640 Cp 640 %P = Qcak ra+e. vT Atsci\ar�e-. = 1-P o.z4 1493 c..*g L Vey 591 mi., Q? = max. un, { hycirograeh ?C-aK for basin = 9P A - 1493 �95,4 i � 690) = 456 �-�S Z/ Y nevte,)j De++en-�ton Pon.L� 1 S�z5�83 AC-Y- D<-+e.rm%rte_ Vjk + k of unl+" hYJrogra �V\ @ 50 `% aYtci 11-6 QP 50/9P - .500/1493 = .33 hr = ZO min. '11_ Z60 2fo0 v5% QP �P - 493 a 17 hr /O m r\, 7= + R e. i t P e-;3 rm to E:o n o t tt�o 0-� rat n-Fa l � 0,5+� +u i'irr.e of u�t� rdtr\ial� dLkratlon as£umC �,o(.z4) + %Z - 17 min. dclurne. o-� ur\t4- hydro�raph svtov-kCL 6e P onlh E leced are2 - 3 5�6 x /00 {�eC x ZO m n X �m n -T —Ime. W,Ir%. o ao 60 5n -i, C. MIr. UNIT 14YDROGRAP14 1 , JS O fIo Z93 4 410 ?7� �3 12b 55 0 SC 39 17 O /00 IZO Figure 2 Loc ATI 0 N : Sec. 34 -T' -7 M, RA69W DESIGN STORM: ioo - Yr-AP, P R OTE C-T No, sz. 17 DET Lt rK T co 4- j o � _ �� o .. � N � 0 0 0 0 � 0 0 0- o o � o � 0 0 O 4pl o p o 0� J w \A 00 cc ILI w VI 0 %A 0. c c c C� 43ci a- o of 0 CMI, 10- of M! oI o, of 0' VI ru cri C) Iu 0 It c CO \Aj lq 43 0 1`0' 6 of cc, 0 00 0 4u qT 0 0. CO (Y\ \n IA m : N N N N N (� N N N N N N r4 T- Ir VZ5 /8-3 Mc K woc • . • •Film ' D _ I N.T.S. _ ■ � i 49 tea. II • T • — • 8 II - 48 ci 47.. - ` 20.7 44 , 90.3 — �\ Z34 \_ I' L . • ( 508I 79 I 52.8 \�46 �45 17.9 �� \ 84 11100 \�p124 tT 28.3 1 \ I 29 2 Pro used LL1aK�robrt� Ln,7 <4 DetenT[or\ Pond I ;23' .. 22 No.l 19.; Bas No. ProPOs GD.P. \ i 7 rJ 2 5 Relocation ;% Ilo. S Area ac. 37.3 i — -.� Q �`/ 8 :�/ I .107 74 Ha nr RO a — — — — - -� ° Phase 20/" i 19 D 2.2 38.5 PRo'JECT No. &B. 1-7 D(5-r SrAfLs3 14C r- 0 r LI: "D ol Tz \n MIT CA + 43 Ni i 1 —1 —1 tA NtTi 01 I. jj i D c,-4, 'd- til ff r-�i coI! J 4- Cq, 11 _791--- U I I 'd N D; T! rq1 0 a! i \n It i CL \of)! dcA Njr a: 'n. �2; C"j r- I ID Vi N al col ro- 0 CO N 2 cc z "A 1* CAI rp N I I L \n q- Ln L� w 'D 'D I- cn O tX ff CQ 0. In (Rj "An O'A .m n fl�sci�arg2.> c�5 i J Fgur� 3 tY %-1 O L1 1 � Li. ..1 i fa 7 9 uaf,.}_nn-a13-aae��r�c�, .��,.�.>zr(1 �•.�o,� uol�.u��a� H $ W F-� F,gare: s V) N 0 Of Dei eni ion Pond Wa+er Surface. Elevation LA c 2 Z c c a c 4- i 4- d C m 4- ro ro +T �j ro a_ N U ni Z D_O c O C 4- d �} o lD O co m m m OD r Detention Pond Water Surface Elevation 0 r 0 Is a 0 v N 0 6j rq ro s 0 q CD m 0 m 8 m 0 0 m a V) b Detention Pond Wa+er Surface Eleva+ion