Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 02/29/2012I r Lanclm I=r-,gi r-,eeri r,g City of Ft. Collins�`prove Plans Approved By /1 Date -1 20 '1)— I ' -Im�.. FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR THE ISLAMIC CENTER OF FORT COLLINS, LARIMER COUNTY, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Engineers Planners Surveyors Architects Geotechnical FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR THE ISLAMIC CENTER OF FORT COLLINS, LARIMER COUNTY, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Prepared for: Islamic Center of Fort Collins 900 Peterson Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 Contact: Mumtaz Hussain MUMTAZ_HUSSAIN39@HOTMAIL.COM December, 2011 Project No. ISLAMC- I G813-01-304 CONSULTING ENGINEER LANDMARK ENGINEERING, LTD. 3521 West Eisenhower Blvd. Loveland, CO 80537 Ph: (970) 667-6286/Toll Free (866)-379-6252 ngine e,— Planners Surveyors ArChlt6<:Aw -00 Erigi near-i ng Loveland 970-667-6286 Toll Free 866-379-6252 Fax 970-667-6298 www. landmarkltd.com December, 2011 Project No. I G813-01-304 3521 West Eisenhower Blvd. Loveland, Colorado 80537 Wes Lamarque, P.E. City of Fort Collins Stormwater ' 700 Wood Fort Collins, CO 80521 ' RE: Final Drainage Report for the Islamic Center of Fort Collins Dear Wes, ' Enclosed, please find the Final Drainage Report for the proposed improvements for the Islamic Center located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal ' Meridian. The proposed site is also located between West Lake Street and Prospect Road and the east end of Summer Street. The 3-acre site consists of an open area covered in native grasses and assortment of trees near the property line between West Lake Street and Prospect Road. The project ' consists of an Islamic Center building, associated parking, drainage facilities, and utilities to be installed on the site. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact me. ' Sincerely, ' LANDMARK ENGINEERING, LTD. ' Jeff Olhausen, P.E. ' JO/mc t 1 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this report (plan) for the final drainage design of the Islamic Center Project was prepared by me (or under my direct supervision) for the owners thereof and meet or exceed the criteria in the City of Fort Collins Design Standards. Prepared By and Approved By: Jeffrey D. Olhausen Colorado P.E. 37659 Seal: 0 RE O .• F 0. U; �3 659 •IV ot'Ec'�' TABLE OF CONTENTS I SECTION I - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................Page No. Introduction......................................................................................................................................I - I ' Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations................................................................ 1-1 & 1-2 1) Existing Drainage Patterns ' 2) Proposed Detention Facilities and Drainage Patterns 3) On -site Storm Drainage System ' SECTION 2 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION Location and Project Description.................................................................................................. 2-1 Vicinity/Basin Map..................................•...........................................................................................2-2 ' Soil/Basin Map.....................................................................................................................................2-3 SECTION 3 - DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN General Concept....__.... ... 3-1 ' Details for On -site Storm Drainage System.........................................................................3-1-3-2 DetentionPond....................................................................................................................... 3-2-3-3 I SECTION 4 — DETENTION POND / WEST LAKE STREET RELEASE RATE ANALYSIS VARIANCE IdentifyingIssue................................................................................................................................. 4-1 ' Proposing Alternative Design ................................ .... .... 4-1 Comparingto Standards..................................................................................................................4-2 Justification.......................................................................................................................................... 4-2 SECTION 5 - SOILS Natural Resources Conservation Service.................................................................................... 5-1 SECTION 6 - EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Erosion and Sediment Control Measures............................................................................6-1- 6-2 Erosion Control Estimate of Cost.................................................................................................6-2 APPENDIX City of Fort Collins Drainage Standards Detention Pond Calculations Basin Calculations Flowmaster — Gutter and Sidewalk Calculations Storm Cad — Pipe & Inlet Runs UD-Inlet Calculations Area Inlet Sizing with 50% Clogging Factor Water Quality Outlet Structure & Overflow Weir West Side, West Parking Lot Pan Calculations Map Pockets: Historic Drainage Exhibit Developed Drainage Plan Storm Water Management Plan 1 ' SECTION I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 This section explains the purpose of the Drainage Study and presents a summary of the major findings ' and recommendations. The development of the recommendations is presented in the following sections of the report. tIntroduction The property being considered in this Drainage Study is for an Islamic Center located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, and is within the ' City limits of Fort Collins, Colorado. The proposed site is also located between West Lake Street and Prospect Avenue and the east end of Summer Street. The 3-acre site consists of an open area covered in native grasses and assortment of trees near the property line between West Lake Street and ' Prospect Road. The project consists of an Islamic Center building, parking, drainage facilities, and utilities to be installed on the site. The main access to the site is from West Lake Street with a secondary access at Summer Street. ' The purpose of this Drainage Study is to provide comprehensive drainage planning for the development. This includes identifying and defining conceptual solutions to drainage problems which may occur on -site ' and off -site as a result of this development, and identifying drainage structures and other drainage features which should be included in the development plans to provide a complete, safe and economical drainage system design. A fundamental objective of this Drainage Study is to develop a visionary ' drainage plan that can be understood, implemented, and controlled effectively. This Drainage Study evaluates the existing drainage patterns of the site and identifies future drainage patterns for the development based on the subdivision plat, the proposed grading plan, and other ' existing site constraints. This includes evaluating historical runoff, investigating routing for design storms through the development, determining what improvements and structures are necessary along with required design capacity, and evaluating off -site drainage which may affect or be affected by the ' development. The City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criteria Manual dated May 1984 (Revised April 1997) has been ' utilized for planning drainage facilities. A major storm drainage system and a minor storm drainage system have been planned and designed as shown on the accompanying Drainage Exhibit. The major storm drainage system is designed to convey runoff from a 100-Year storm through the development in ' a manner which minimizes health and life hazards, damage to structures and interruption to traffic and services. The minor storm drainage system is designed to convey runoff from a 10-Year storm and/or nuisance flows, through the development with a minimum of disruption to the urban environment. ' Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations The principal findings, conclusions, and recommendations which arise out of this Drainage Study are tpresented below. These findings are supported by the detailed material presented in the body of the report. ' I ) Existing Drainage Patterns ' The site is located within the Old Town and Canal Importation Basins. The two basins are divided by a high point in the site located one quarter of the distance north of West Prospect Avenue between ' West Prospect Avenue and West Lake Street. Stormwater from the Southern draining portion of the site follows existing surface drainage patterns in a southwesterly direction at an approximate slope of 2.6%, discharging into the curb and gutter flowline of West Prospect Avenue which flows to the west. t Storm water from the Northern draining portion of the site follows existing surface drainage patterns in a northeasterly direction at an approximate slope of 2.2%, discharging into the curb and gutter flowline of West Lake Street which flows to the east. Neither West Prospect Avenue nor West Lake Street has ' any existing storm drain pipes adjacent to the site to discharge into. Existing and developed flows must utilize the existing street flowlines as their respective drainage outfalls. 2) Proposed Detention Facilities and Drainage Patterns ' It is proposed that the Northern draining portion of the site, which is to be developed, shall be routed to an on -site detention pond. The proposed pond will discharge into the existing flowline of West Lake ' Street. The Southern draining portion of the site, which will have a sidewalk connection through it, will continue to drain to the curb and gutter flowline of West Prospect Avenue as it has historically, without any detention facilities. ' 3) On -site Storm Drainage System ' The on -site storm drainage system as shown on the Developed Drainage Exhibit, utilizes the gutter flow capacity of the parking lots, sidewalk chases, concrete pans, and overland flow, to route storm water to the proposed storm drains and detention facilities. The detention pond utilizes a series of concrete ' pans and retaining walls to achieve the required pond volume. J 1 1-2 ' SECTION 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ' This project description defines the limits and general topography of the study area and provides a description of the proposed development. ' Location and Project Description ' The property being considered in this Drainage Study is for an Islamic Center located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, and is within the City limits of Fort Collins, Colorado. The proposed site is also located between West Lake Street and Prospect Avenue and the east end of Summer Street. Existing land uses to the west and southeast ' corner consist of developed residential properties. Land use to the east consists of an existing church facility. The 3-acre site consists of an open area covered in native grasses and assortment of trees near the property line between West Lake Street and Prospect Road. The topography on the north side of ' the high point in the property generally slopes at 2.2% in a northeasterly direction. Topography on the south side of the high point in the property generally slopes at 2.6% in a southwesterly direction. Historical drainage is by sheet flow to the flowine of the curb and gutter in West Lake Street and ' Prospect Avenue. The project consists of an Islamic Center building, parking, drainage facilities, and utilities to be installed on the site. The main access to the site is from West Lake Street with a secondary access at Summer Street. The grading and earthwork design of the development will provide ' surface drainage to the parking lots, storm water inlets, pans, storm pipes, and detention areas. There are no existing water features such as ponds or irrigation on or adjacent to the site. I 1 2-1 BENNETT ROAD SCALE 1 "=200' VICINITY MAP BEEBE CHRISTIAN SCHOOL PROJECT SITE ISLAMIC CENTER OF FORT COLLINS PLYMOUTH CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH Soil Map—Larimer County Area, Colorado (IC) ac s4e' 40" 34' 1" Map Scale. 1 910 d printed on A stze (8 5" x 11") sheet �n N mmmmm======Meters n 30 20 10 5 0 N Feet 0 30 50 120 180 11SDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey � Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey n to N O 4/15/2011 Page 1 of 3 40" 34' 8" 40' 34' 1" Soil Map—Larimer County Area, Colorado Map Unit Legend Larimer County Area, Colorado (CO644) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 3 Altvan-Satanta loams, 0 to 3 percent 2.8 87.2% slopes 4 Altvan-Satanta loams, 3 to 9 percent 0.4 12.8% slopes Totals for Area of Interest 3.2 100.0% USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 4/15/2011 '� Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 SECTION 3 DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN This section describes the drainage facilities shown on the Drainage Exhibit and explains how storm water will be routed through the development. Interim and ultimate calculations had to be performed for some of the basins based on a full build out scenario. The greater runoff of the two was used for design purposes. General Concept The overall drainage plan for the developed Northern portion of the site is to route storm water to a detention pond. The Southern portion of the site will continue to drain as it has historically. Details for Design of On -site Drainage System The following describes the tributary drainage area and design criteria for the inlets and structures indicated at the design points shown on the Developed Drainage Exhibit. Design Point 3 has been proposed as 10-foot Type R inlet. Design Point 5B has been proposed as 5-foot Type R inlet. This is due to the fact that in a I00-year storm event a smaller inlet at either location will cause stormwater to overtop the pavement crest and direct discharge into West Lake Street. The 10-foot and 5-foot Type R inlets are able to keep headwaters low enough to discharge completely into the detention pond without causing additional direct discharge to West Lake Street. Design Point 5A has been proposed as a 3 unit, 9'-7.5" long Loveland Combination Inlet. This inlet on grade was chosen in order to capture the majority of the I00-year storm which is tributary to the design point. The inlet flowline elevation has been set equal to or greater than the I00-year water surface elevation of the pond. Calculations demonstrate that the three 10-inch diameter pipes out of the inlet are able to discharge into the pond at the I00-year pond full elevation. Calculations have been performed in the appendix of this report for the various drainage capacities and design of the project. Calculations in the appendix have demonstrated that the 2-foot wide sidewalk chases within the western parking lot are able to convey the flows of their respective tributary areas. Due to the much smaller areas that contribute runoff to the curb cuts necessary at the entrances off Lake Street for reduced stormwater projections across sidewalk areas, a 2-foot curb cut with a 2-foot pan and or swale will be adequate for necessary flows. Design Point I —Area A I The design flow for the 30" diameter Nyloplast Standard Grate 3099 CGS are as follows: Q10= ...........................................................1.10 CFS ......................................................................... Q100=....................................................................................................................................2.24 CFS The capacity of the grate accounts for a 50% clogging factor. Its Design Point 3 — Area A3 The design flows for the I 0-foot Type R inlet are as follows: Q10=....................................................................................................................................2.93 CFS Q100=....................................................................................................................................5.98 CFS Design Point 5A — Area 5A The design flows for the 9'-7.5" Loveland Combination Inlet are as follows: Q10=....................................................................................................................................1.81 CFS Q100=....................................................................................................................................4.62 CFS Q10 CARRY OVER =.........................................................................................................................0.06 CFS Q100 CARRY OVER =.......................................................................................................................0.30 CFS Design Point 5113 — Area 5113 The design flows for the 5-foot Type R inlet are as follows: QIo=0.80+0.06=.........................................................................................................0.86CFS Qloo= 0.30 + 2.04=......................................................................................................... 2.34 CFS Design Point 6 — Area A6 The design flow for the 18" diameter Nyloplast Standard Grate 3099 CGS are as follows: Q10=....................................................................................................................................0.35 CFS Q100= ................. .......................0.72 CFS ............................................................................................ The capacity of the grate accounts for a 50% clogging factor. Design Point DR The design flows for the onsite direct release areas to West Lake Street are as follows: Q10=....................................................................................................................................0.53 CFS Q100=....................................................................................................................................1.09 CFS Design Point O Concrete drainage pan design flows for the offsite and onsite areas on the west side of the west parking lot draining to West Lake Street are as follows: Q10=....................................................................................................................................0.22 CFS Q100=....................................................................................................................................0.57 CFS Detention Pond In order to maximize the detention pond volume within a limited space and elevation discharge constraints of the flowline of the curb and gutter of West Lake Street, a retaining wall has been proposed around the entire perimeter of the pond. The detention pond bottom has been designed with f 3-2 ' four concrete pans having slopes of 0.50%. Slopes between the pans and up to the adjacent retaining walls have been graded at 2%. There will be an overflow discharge weir located in the north retaining t wall which will discharge to West Lake Street. The pond will have a water quality capture volume component that will discharge through the outlet structure over a 40 hour time period. The outlet structure of the pond is proposed to be per the City of Fort Collins detail D-46 with a stormwater ' quality plate on the front and an orifice plate on the back that will discharge through the retaining wall to a two foot concrete pan which discharges to the flowline of West Lake Street. The detention pond design specifics are as follows: Calculated Detention Pond Volume = 0.59 Acre -Feet @ EL=5029.30 Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) = 0.06 Acre -Feet Required Detention Pond Volume + WQCV = 0.59 Acre -Feet Pond Full Elevation = 5029.30 Pond Overflow Elevation = 5029.80 = Weir Elevation Pond Top (Retaining Wall) Elevation = 5030.20 Overflow Weir Length = 51.20 feet @ Q 100 =13.74 cfs; Water Depth=0.20' M SECTION 4 DETENTION POND / WEST LAKE STREET RELEASE RATE ANALYSIS / VARIANCE Identifying Issue The City of Fort Collins required release rate of the detention pond is the two-year historic runoff. The existing two-year historic runoff within the property boundary to the new R.O.W. is 0.89 cfs. The direct release areas which can physically not be directed into the proposed detention pond consist of a developed 100-year storm flow to West Lake Street of 1.09 cfs, within the property boundary to the new R.O.W. The required pond volume cannot be achieved at the required detention pond release rate (0.89 cfs). The 100-year developed direct discharge of rate of 1.09 cfs is greater than the required 2-year historic release rate of 0.89 cfs. Site constraints are as follows: There is no underground storm sewer in West Lake Street. The detention pond has to discharge into the flow line of the curb and gutter. This in turn creates a detention pond outlet elevation higher than the street flow line. In order to get any reasonable pond volume adjacent to the street and between the site program (proposed building structures, required parking areas, and street connectivity), the pond has to have vertical retaining walls. This in turn creates areas that direct release to West Lake Street. It was found through the design process that direct release areas increased to West Lake Street the more the site was raised in order to increase pond volume or to try to provide for parking lot detention. Parking lot detention was not an option. It was found through the design process when ponding could occur, either grate elevations in the parking area were above the 100-year water surface of the pond and no additional volume could be achieved; or additional volume could be achieved but adequate cover and slopes for piping into the pond could not. It was proposed to install a detention pond below the existing flow line of West Lake Street in order to get the vast majority of the developed site runoff into the detention pond and have adequate volume for the required release rate of the City of Fort Collins. Underground detention was also considered but the City would not allow pumping. The required setbacks for the building off of West Lake Street have been increased to allow for additional detention. Proposing Alternative Design The proposed alternative design consists of allowing a detention pond release rate (0.81 cfs) plus the ' 100-year developed direct release rate (1.09 cfs) to West Lake Street to be less than or equal to the 100-year historic release rate (3.90 cfs) of the existing flows within the property boundary that drain north to the new R.O.W. In order to eliminate additional direct release flows to Lake Street from the ' Eastern parking lot, storm drainage basins shall be installed with discharge pipes into the detention pond that have flap gates. The eastern parking lot is on the low side of the site. The detention pond would have the ability to backflow through the storm pipes, out of the catch basin, and into Lake Street during ' major storm events when the pond fills up. The flap gates prevent backflow of the storm water while directing additional developed flows from the site into the detention pond for the majority of storm events that would occur. 4-1 Comparing to Standards tThe variance request consists of allowing the detention pond release rate (0.81 cfs) plus the 100-year developed direct release rate (1.09 cfs) to West Lake Street to be less than or equal to the 100-year ' historic release rate (3.90 cfs) of the existing flows within the property boundary that drain north to the new R.O.W. This will have no impact on capital and maintenance costs or requirements. The 2-year historic release rate of the detention pond as would have been required is 0.89 cfs. The new detention ' pond release rate would be 0.81 cfs plus the direct release flows (1.09 cfs) to Lake Street. Justification Although the combined detention release rate and developed direct release (1.90 cfs) to Lake Street will never be restricted to the required 2-year historic release (0.89 cfs), it will always be less than or equal to that of the 100-year historic flow (3.90 cfs) to Lake Street, which does not increase the current or ' historic flows of the site to Lake Street today. The variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, will not reduce design life of any improvements nor cause the City of Fort Collins additional maintenance costs. 1 ']u 4-2 SECTION 5 SOILS Natural Resources Conservation Service The soil on the site is classified by the Natural Resources Conservation Service as Altvan-Satanta loams with 0 to 3 percent slopes on the north draining portion of the site which lies in the Old Town Basin. The soil on the south draining portion of the site which lies in the Canal Importation Basin is classified as Altvan-Satanta loams with 3 to 9 percent slopes. 619 SECTION 6 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL General Erosion and Sediment Control Measures I DISCUSSION ' Erosion and sediment control will consist of controlling runoff across exposed areas and capturing sediment. These recommendations are described briefly below, and should be implemented by the developer during the construction activities for the site. ' GENERAL EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES Minimizing Soil Exposure: Where practical, soils exposure should be kept to a minimum. Grading ' activities should be completed as soon as possible, and temporary seeding or permanent vegetative cover and landscaping should be established in disturbed areas. Temporary seeding will need to occur after overlot grading is completed. Permanent vegetative cover and landscaping will occur within the ' site boundary and street right-of-ways when site improvements are made. Temporary seeding of disturbed areas shall consist of the following or approved equal: ' Pawnee Buttes Seed Inc., Greeley, CO Low Grow Native seed mix (10%) Arizona Fescue ' (40%) Sandberg/Canby Bluegrass (10%) Rocky Mountain Fescue (40%) Big Bluegrass 5 LB/ 1000 s.f. Permanent seeding of the detention pond shall consist of the following or approved equal: Pawnee Buttes Seed Inc., Greeley, CO Native Prairie seed mix (23%) Blue Grama (10%) Buffalograss ' (20%) Green Needlegrass (20%) Sideoats Grama (25%) Western Wheatgrass (2%) Sand Dropseed 15 PLS/LB/Acre ' Controlling Runoff Across Exposed Areas: All soils exposed during land disturbing activities are to be kept in a roughened condition by ripping or disking along land contours until mulch, vegetation, or other permanent erosion control BMP's are installed. Installation of temporary drainage swales and straw wattles may be required during construction as a result of stockpiling soils, and the site storm water management administrator will be responsible for assessing potential runoff and erosion conditions and taking the necessary measure to minimize the same. No soils in areas outside project street rights -of - way shall remain exposed by land disturbing activity for more than thirty (30) days before required temporary or permanent erosion control (seed/mulch, landscaping, etc.) is installed, unless otherwise approved by the City of Fort Collins. 1 6-1 Sediment Capture: Temporary silt fence sediment control should be installed along the downhill ' portions of the site boundary to minimize sediment transport to adjacent areas. Vehicle tracking control pads should be installed in locations shown on the erosion control plan drawings. Inlet protection should be placed around inlets after they have been installed. Sediment control devices ' should remain in place and be properly maintained until permanent cover is in place. As site conditions warrant, additional sediment control devices may be required at strategic on -site locations and, as mentioned above, will require evaluation and implementation by the storm water management 1 I 11 F� J 'J administrator. Erosion Control / Construction Phasing: Refer to the included Storm Water Management Plan in the map pockets. Fugitive Dust Control Permit: Per the State of Colorado, this site does not require a Fugitive Dust Control Permit because it is less than 25 contiguous acres and the project should be less than 6 months in duration to build. If dust becomes a problem during construction, the site should be watered on an as needed basis. Erosion Control Estimate of Cost Concrete Washout Area: $500.00 Wattles: $2.00/FT *560 FT = $1 120.00 Silt Fence: $2.00/FT `720 FT = $1440.00 Surface Roughening: $200.00/ACRE'2.5 ACRES = $500.00 Vehicle Tracking Control: I @ $800.00 = $800.00 Sediment Trap Gravel: I @ $100.00 = $100.00 Seeding and Mulching: $500.00/ACRE' I ACRE _ $500.00 Total = $4960.00 ' 1.5 = $7440.00 OR $ 1 000.00/ACRE 3 ACRES' 1.5 = $4500.00 Greater of the two = 74$ 40.00 1 6-2 APPENDIX I I fl F1 CITY OF FORT COLLINS DRAINAGE STANDARDS SECTION 3. HYDROLOGY STANDARDS 3.1 General Design Storms All drainage systems have to take into consideration two separate and distinct drainage problems. The first is the initial storm which occurs at fairly regular intervals, usually based on the two to ten-year storm, depending on land use. The second is the major storm which is usually based on an infrequent storm, such as the 100-year storm. In some instances the major storm routing will nct be the same as the initial storm. In this case, a complete set of drainage plans shall be submitted for each storm system. 3.1.1 Initial Storm Provisions As stated before, the initial storm shall be based on the two to ten-year storm. The objectives of such drainage system planning are to minimize inconvenience, to protect against recurring minor damage and to reduce maintenance costs in order to create an orderly drainage system at a reasonable cost for the urban resident. The initial storm drainage system may include such facilities as curb and gutter, storm sewer and open drainageways, and detention facilities. 3.1.2 Major Storm Provisions The major storm shall be considered the 100-year storm. The objectives of the major storm planning are to eliminate substantial property damage or loss of life. Major drainage systems may include storm sewers, open drainageways, and detention facilities. The correlation between the initial and major storm system shall be analyzed to insure a well coordinated drainage system. 3.1.3 Storm Frequency The initial and major storm design frequencies shall not be less than those found in the following table: Table 3-1 DESIGN STORM FREQUENCIES Design Storm Return Period Land Use or Zoningt Initial Storm Major Storm Residential: (RE,RL,RLP,RP,ML,RM,RMP, RLM,MM,RH).............................. 2-year 100-year Business: (BG,BL,BP,HB,C,IL,IP,IG)................. 10-year 100-year Public Building Areas ...................... 10-year 100-year Parks, Greenbelts, etc ...................... 2-year 100-year Open Channels 6 Drainageways -- 100-year Detention Facilities -- 100-year HSee Table 3-2 for zoning definitions 3.1.4 Rainfall Intensities The rainfall intensities to be used in the computation of runoff shall be obtained from the Rainfall Intensity Duration Curves for the City of Fort Collins, included in these specifications as Figure 3.1. 3.1.5 Runoff Computations Storm Runoff computations for both the initial and major storm shall comply with the criteria set forth in Section 3.2 "Analysis Methodology." All runoff calculations made in the design of both initial and major drainage systems shall be included with the storm drainage plans in the form of a Drainage Report. Reports submitted for approval should have a typed narrative with computations and maps in a legible form. ' May 1984 Revised January 1997 Design Criteria 3-1 �a o g 0 pf 3 - co k a � _ t fib/ P i y aP a O f. J j i 6 N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O �- O O 00 � CO L It (`) N O (ay/Ut) AI!SUOIUI � I H 1 J 1 City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency Table for using the Rational Method (5 minutes - 30 minutes) Figure 3-1a Duration (minutes) 2-year Intensity in/hr) 10-year intensity in/hr 100-year Intensity in/hr 5.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 6.00 2.67 4.56 9.31 7.00 2.52 4.31 8.80 8.00 2.40 4.10 8.38 9.00 2.30 3.93 8.03 10.00 2.21 3.78 7.72 11.00 2.13 3.63 7.42 12.00 2.05 3.50 7.16 13.00 1.98 3.39 6.92 14.00 1.92 3.29 6.71 15.00 1.87 3.19 6.52 16.00 1.81 3.08 6.30 17.00 1.75 2.99 6.10 18.00 1.70 2.90 5.92 19.00 1.65 2.82 5.75 20.00 1.61 2.74 5.60 21.00 1.56 2.67 5.46 22.00 1.53 2.61 5.32 23.00 1.49 2.55 5.20 24.00 1.46 2.49 5.09 25.00 1.43 2.44 4.98 26.00 1.40 2.39 4.87 27.00 1.37 2.34 4.78 28.00 1.34 2.29 1 4.69 29.00 1.32 2.25 4.60 30.00 1.30 2.21 4.52 Chapter 3 Calculating the WQCV and Volume Reduction t 3.0 Calculation of the WQCV The first step in estimating the magnitude of runoff from a site is to estimate the site's total ' imperviousness. The total imperviousness of a site is the weighted average of individual areas of like imperviousness. For instance, according to Table RO-3 in the Runoff chapter of Volume 1 of this manual, paved streets (and parking lots) have an imperviousness of 100%; drives, walks and roofs have an ' imperviousness of 90%; and lawn areas have an imperviousness of 0%. The total imperviousness of a site can be determined taking an area -weighted average of all of the impervious and pervious areas. When measures are implemented minimize directly connected impervious area (MDCIA), the imperviousness used to calculate the WQCV is the "effective imperviousness." Sections 4 and 5 of this chapter provide ' guidance and examples for calculating effective imperviousness and adjusting the WQCV to reflect decreases in effective imperviousness. ' The WQCV is calculated as a function of imperviousness and BMP drain time using Equation 3-1, and as shown in Figure 3-2: WQCV = a(0.9113 — 1.191' + 0.781) Equation 3-1 Where: ' WQCV = Water Quality Capture Volume (watershed inches) a = Coefficient corresponding to WQCV drain time (Table 3-2) 1 = Imperviousness (%) (see Figures 3-3 through 3-5 [single family land use] and /or the Runoff chapter of Volume 1 [other typical land uses]) Table 3-2. Drain Time Coefficients for WQCV Calculations Drain Time hrs Coefficient, a 12 hours 0.8 24 hours 0.9 40 hours 1.0 Figure 3-2, which illustrates the relationship between imperviousness and WQCV for various drain times, ' is appropriate for use in Colorado's high plains near the foothills. For other portions of Colorado or United States, the WQCV obtained from this figure can be adjusted using the following relationships: ' WQCVother = d6 (WQCV) Equation 3-2 0.43 ' Where: WQCV = WQCV calculated using Equation 3-1 or Figure 3-2 (watershed inches) ' WQCVothef = WQCV outside of Denver region (watershed inches) d6 = depth of average runoff producing storm from Figure 3-1 (watershed inches) ' November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District 3-5 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 r Calculating the WQCV and Volume Reduction Chapter 3 Once the WQCV in watershed inches is found from Figure 3-2 or using Equation 3-1 and/or 3-2, the required BMP storage volume in acre-feet can be calculated as follows: V = (WQCV)A Equation 3-3 12 Where: V = required storage volume (acre-ft) A = tributary catchment area upstream (acres) WQCV = Water Quality Capture Volume (watershed inches) 0.500 0.450 0.400 c 0.350 v 0.300 0.250 0.200 c 0.150 0 0.100 0.050 o aoo M-1, MMAFA MMMMMMMMMM Pre 11 is 'P M,MMMMMMMMM &MMMMMMMMMM 0 0.1 02 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Total imperviousness Ratio (i = la/100) Figure 3-2. Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Based on BMP Drain Time 3-6 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Table 3-3 RATIONAL METHOD RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS FOR CCHPOSITS: ANALYSIS Character of Surface Runoff Coefficient Streets, Parking Lots, Drives: Asphalt...................................... 0.95 Concrete ..................................... 0.95 Gravel....................................... 0.50 Roofs.......................................... 0.95 Lawns, Sandy Soil: Flat<28..................................... 0.10 Average 2 to 7%.............................. 0.15 Steep>7%.................................... 0.20 Lawns, Heavy Soil: Flat<28..................................... 0.20 Average 2 to 7%.............................. 0.25 Steep>7%..................................... 0.35 3.1.7 Time of Concentration In order to use the Rainfall Intensity Duration Curve, the time of concentration must be known. The time of concentration, T., represents the time for water to flow from the most remote part of the drainage basin under consideration to the design point under consideration. The time of concentration can be represented by the following equation. T�=t,,,+tt Where: T, = Time of Concentration, minutes t,,,= overland flow time, minutes tt= travel time in the gutter, swale, or storm sewer, minutes The overland flow time, t,,, ,can be determined either by the following equation or the "Overland Time of Flow Curves" from the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, included in this report (See Figure 3-2). 1.87(1.1-Cr )DI/2 Tav S1/3 Where: Tov Overland Flow Time of Concentration, minutes S = Slope, % C = Rational Method Runoff Coefficient D = Length of Overland Flow, feet (500' maximum) Ct = Frequency Adjustment Factor The travel time, t,, in the gutter, swale, or storm sewer can be estimated with the help of Figure 3-3. ' 3.1.8 Adjustment for Infrequent Storms The preceding variables are based on the initial storm, that is, the two to ten year storms. For storms with higher intensities an adjustment of the runoff coefficient is required because of the lessening amount of infiltration, ' depression retention, and other losses that have a proportionally smaller effect on storm runoff. ' These frequency adjustment factors are found in Table 3-4. I Mav 1984 Design Criteria Revised January 1997 3-5 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL 5C kr a- 20 z LU U Q lL a. 10 z ry lit a O 5 V7 L} lit c 3 O U 2 C LU Q 1 RUNOFF o \� f II 7 ST C7 C• a, � � tc, I O, �? y - Cl 1 1 I A: tv v +t Q' 4T I T j QT . t ! I I I I I I I I I I I r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i l l l i t I I I i I1 Figure 3-3 .2 .3 .5 I 1 } ,I� 2 3 5 10 20 VELOCITY IN FEET PER SECOND ESTIMATE OF AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY FOR USE WITH THE RATIONAL FORMULA. MOST FREQUENTLY OCCURRING "UNDEVELOPED" LAND SURFACES IN THE DENVER REGION. REFERENCE:: "Urban Hydrology For Small Watersheds" Technical Release No. 55, USDA, SCS Jan. 1975. 5-1-84 URBAN DRAINAGE & FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT Table 3-4 ' RATIONAL METHOD FREQUENCT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Storm Return Period Frequency Factor t (years) Cl- 2 to 10 1.00 11 to 25 1.10 ' 26 to 50 1.20 51 to 100 1.25 Note: The product of C times C- shall not exceed 1.00 3.2 Analysis Methodology The methods presented in this section for use in the determination of runoff at specific design points in the drainage system are currently under review by the Stormwater Utility. Until detailed criteria for hydrologic modeling are developed, the accepted methods for hydrologic analysis are (1) the Rational Method and (2) UDSWM2- PC. The Stormwater Utility shall determine circumstances requiring computer modeling with UDSWM2-PC. Early contact with the Stormwater Utility is encouraged for the determination of the appropriate method. Where applicable, drainage systems proposed for construction should provide the minimum protection as determined by the methodology so mentioned above. 3.2.1 Rational Method The Rational Method is recommended only for sites less than 5 acres. The runoff may be calculated by the Rational Method, which is essentially the following equation: Q = C-CIA Where Q = Flow Quantity, cfs A = Total Area of Basin, acres C-= Storm Frequency Adjustment Factor (See Section 3.1.8) C = Runoff Coefficient (See Section 3.1.6) f I = Rainfall Intensity, inches per hour (See Section 3.1.4) 3.2.2 UDSWM2-PC For circumstances requiring computer modeling, the design storm hydrographs shall be determined usinc UDSWM2-PC. Basin and conveyance element parameters shall be developed from the physical characteristics of the development. Refer to the UDSWM2-PC User's Manual* for modeling methodology and development. *Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, March 1985 3.2.2.1 Surface Storage and Infiltration Table 3-5 gives those values for surface storage for pervious and impervious surfaces. Table 3-6 gives the infiltration rates to be used with UDSWM2-PC. Table 3-5 VALUES FOR SURFACE STORAGE (All Values in Inches) (For Use with UDSWM2-PC) Impervious Areas .................. .100 Pervious Areas .................... .300 May 1984 Revised January 1997 Design Criteria 3-6 Fi' 1 r IJ DETENTION POND CALCULATIONS C=o.Z5 ' C-�= l,a� si3 (2,J�j�3 L. FDv- r — Z7, 77 min (� = I (. Z5) (. 3� (Z. �5� = 4 • �% GAS - �e..l`��. �� � q Z Acrc-S 9 r• 1 Jr" ?5 ,JtyZ _ I Z b�z iT- = IZo = 1.Z5 (-,go (J.(/, ) OF 1.12 ' /UD- Yr ,�iS�arlG Juno r .a�th /►lei -O. a= C�CTA C, C= r oa 10 1 1 -7 for u alrElt arMI.Do IA11�41i411' n.1E uMWu1Y filtlae r 4 awu¢ OYlIFIt NIgrY t .xruYEE tax f 4NYYI ------------------- --- --------------------- ----- ---------- 50 �- -------GAS--------GAS--- --GAS-,Y •gyp---GAS�r-------GAS----- GAS--� SEALFND.'LS®444 �RR � _ �' WEST LAKE STREET (60' R—O—YU) a1� �-L NY for ,o �T I, T1T. �s 7 J r=� R T.P. �31'!0'E JfM5.0 a.Ynt Rw« cawaaTwY nurcx HISTORIC DRAINAGE?ems I `L�ti 2.65 ACPxES TO NEW R.O.W.p ; ` s ° 3-6"1 zy-'-'- PINES > I� x'L- 1 \\ r ^ aa \\ 3-6 x > �s PINEqt o9 PINES 2-6" TREES 4-24"` 24- -�30"^ 5-16" > M — 12'=Y,`"jki'"i 12" -_ _. _ - �.�15^ i 1\ i 1\ r-^tea <`'^•G >\ -� 5-1�2' 1 r / \ ` V PINES of N 1 .8 — 2 �FND. µ REeAR'W/ TREES — INF-S S8343'20'W �\ PINES PINES O. A REBAR N 14.98 q05� No SEAL ` 6-.\42 ACRES0. olxax rfmmrx � oar am, I �aerLn�aii I 21 5034 %101 `1 _. _. ______-__-__________-______________-______________________________________-________-_________ ""OEEDli1-1D�7S-'9F F%ZRAQRS REC. NM S62'i4.n PROSPECT ROAD (30' 1/2 R—O—W) S8951'30'E 136.00' v�oi�nsarr 1-., ' V O Y" /87(//-•118�'1.Z5) 1 Z7 gd V3 77 Oloo Z - (fie 1 cc6e- = D , $9 GF�5 P�nc� Rom!eat -+ - Ir_c_i' �se��;� = L G2laa p, g� t /, 09 3.9O Av0.i lab 1e {PonJ CpouclI +Y (odc-y = o 0 55 i Ar e- ,)re -et —----------------- -- — ------ — — ---------- — --- — — —————----———— ------ -------------- ?9.-------GAS--------GAS---____GAS— !7—i' : 7" —GAS GAS--? -ST LAKE STREET (W R-O-W) ;;K ml� &I I oil owoe van mwcun ouno- PROSPECT ROAD (30' 1/2 R-O-W) -1il /14-10 -rl Arco. m+0 r--'C� rj = Z • 51 ACreG, �oo�- � l.pnC,S'C'�"t�.. �' ✓ L-75^' �'�-- 1, � .3 /QCJ'�S IT 3 -1. I g /00 - wQC-Vr � = eZy2 Z.5( — b-a51 Ltr60-n Dr'aa nae E. I%avcm-A+ = 100 Rda /C.nc= 90 rea info Fonj Lc-ujn = 0 /'C)A ¢ Concrmfe = D. i2 hcres A,pho- � - 0 72 4cre�-,- "rwr� = 0,97 Acres -- - ---------- - ---- -' -------- -W --- —aoZy - - - W;g --- — — — — — — — GAS — — — — — — — — GAS--_� —GAS—W;U, AS T LAKE STREET (W R-10-W) — — — — — — — SAN .... - --- - - - - - - - 1.1- - - - - - - — — — — — — — - R I R r- — — — — — - ' d V I S -- -- I — )R 4 1 ' wr e � I / ---- I—a>tua: war. IVRIM v A rca- I ------ - ------ lwmml� STREET _O_w) --------- 111 71 L — --------- 5034 ' -�, � � I auieal I —Nog �T,I � N I I —T. 11 GL//// I C� ,� i I 7 7� cog — - - ----------------------------------------- — — -- — — ------ — — — ------------------------------ — — = — — — — — — — — — — 4= — — — — -- =L— PROSPECT ROAD (30' 1/2 R-O-W) Ir - - +1 -11 ' 100 Year This is to convert % imp. to a C value 1 00-ear (must insert % imp. and C pervious). Required detention fe acre-ft. C' value 0.7 26287.2 1 0.6035 'C'* 1.25 0.875 Area 2.511 _ acres M. EATER Modified D. JUDISI- Modified CAI Release Ratel 07811 5/95 Nov-97 Nov-98 DETENTION POND SIZING ; 1 TIME TIME INTENSITY Q 100 Runoff Release Required Required cum 100 year I Volume Cum total Detention; Detention (mins) (secs) (in/hr) (cfs) (ft^3 ft^3 ft^3) (ac-ft) 0 0; 0 0.001 01 0.0 0.01 0.0000 _ 300 9.950, 21.85, 6555.806 243.0' 6312.8' 0.1449 _5 10 600 7 7201 16.96i 10173.03 486.01 9687.0 0.2224 15, -_ - 900 6.520 14.32 ! 12887.6 ' 729.0 0.2791 20I 12001 5.6001 12.301 14758.8 972.0, _12158.6 13786.81 0.3165 25 1500 4.9801 10.94; 16405.99 T 1215.0 15191.01 0.3487 30 1800 4.520 ! 9.93 i 17868.69 r 1458.0 : 16410 77 0.3767 35 2100 4.080' 8.96, 18817.47 1701.0� 17116.5 0.3929 40 2400 3.740; 21', 8 19713.541 1944.0'1 17769.5 0.4079 45' 2700 3.460' 7.60; 20517.37' 2187.0j 18330.4 0.4208 50 3000 3.230 7.09 21281.66 2430.0: 18851.7' 0.4328 55 -. 5 60, 3300 3600 3.030 2.8601, 6.65 21960.3 2673.0, 19287.3 _ 6.28I 22612.59 2916.01 19696.6'. 0._4428 0.4522 65 3900 2.720i 5.97i 23297.82: 3159.0' 20138.8 0.4623 _ 70 _ 4200 2.5901 5.69' 23890.81 3402.0' 20488.8 0.4704 - - 75 4500 2.480 5.45; 24510.15 3645.0 65 20865.2 0.4 ._ D.4790 80 4800 2.380 5.23' 25089.96' 3888.0; 21202.0' 0.4867 85 5100 2.290; 5.03' 25650: 4131.0, 21519.0 0.4940 90 5400 2.210' 4.85 , 26210.05' 4374.0' 21836 0 0.5013 95 _ 5700 _ _ 2.130; 4.68', 26664.67 4617.01 22047.7' 0.5061 100 6000 2.060 4.52' 27145.65 4860.0 22285.7 0.5116 105 6300 _ _ 2.000; 4.39 27672.75' 5103.0 22569.8 0.5181 - 110 6600 --1.940 4.26 28120.79 5346.0-- ------_... 22774.8 0.5228 115 6900 1.890 4.15 28641.3 5589.0 23052.3_ 0.5292 _ - 120 7200 1.840 4.04 29095.92 5832.0 23263.9 0.5341 125 7500 1.790 3.93 29484.66 6075.0 23409.7 0.5374 130 7800 1.756 3.84 29978.81 _ 6318.0 23660.8 0.5432 135 8100 1.710 3.76 30420.26_ 6561.0 0.5477 140 8400, 1.670 3.67 30809 6804.0 _23859.3 24005.0' _ 0.5511 145 8700 1.630 3.58! 31145.02 7047.0 24098.0; 0.5532 150 9000 1.600 3.51 31626' 7290.0 24336.0 0.5587 155' 9300 1.570 3.45 32067.45 i 7533.0 24534.4: 0.5632 160 9600 1.540� 3.38, 32469.36: 7776.0 24693.41 0.5669 165 9900 - 1.510i 3.32 32831.74' 8019.01 24812.7! 0.5696 170 1.480 3.25 33154.591 8262.0 24892.E 0.5715 175 _1020 10500 - 1.4501 3.18 33437.91, 8505.0' 24932.91 0.5724 _ 180 10800 1.420: 3.12 33681.69 8748.0 24933.7 0.5724 185 1.400, 3.07 34129.73 8991.0 25138.7 0.5771 190 _11100 11400 _ 1.380 3.03 34551.41 9234.0 25317.4 0.5812 195 - -11_700_ 1.360 � 2.99 34946.73: 9477.025469.7 0.5847 200 12000 _ 1.340 2.94 35315.7 9720.0 25595.7 0.5876 205 12300 1.320 2.90 35658.32 25695.3 0.5899 _ 210 12600 1.300 2.86 35974.58 _9963.0 10206.0 25768.6 0.5916 215 12900 1.280 2.81 36264.48: 10449.0 25815.5 0.592_6 220 13200 1.260 2.77 36528.03 10692.0 _2_5836.0 0.5931 225 _ 13500 1.240 2.72 36765.23 109_35.0 25830.2 0.5930 _ 230 13800 _ 1.220 2.68 36976.07 11178.0 25798.1 0.5922 _ 235 14100 1.210 2.66 37470.22 11421.0 26049.2 0.5980 240 14400 1.200 2.64 37951.2 11664.0 26287.2 0.6035 +wcLc%/ 7- 0•06Ac,F9' Page 1 BASIN CALCULATIONS A( G = 7-5 @ 2 7-ota�frfa = O. 7 Z 5 %_res Z5 Z V-3 .5"rn«l J , pp =1.15 Q /, z5(80) 7,-iV = 0, q55 Aca-es Lawn = 0, 36 &M--s' Pam} Cons . - D , o 7 4cr&S 79„ _ ,g 7 p.36'-1.z5) 19S /l, ZZ ��i✓ 3.2 V3 171�= 7.� o 1.25(,36 7,3� (,L(55crS uS� 2.2 q CPS l or T, Id s► I .- 0 %d�aI Arm = D. 5q Acres ter; = o, 65 q�r� C�nc • t �-s�h = b, u i �s /ate _ 7,(,Z-V3 85 Tr = Z9g — = z- y9 r►;� Smi f • -ciao 01OrD = 1.25 (0, F� ) 9,15 (0.5u `J V 05 = 5, 9 8 C=S bo < $g > 5't (4,27 TfQ�, �0 5 4� l n'J/N Zlo " 9-9✓� C,ob = l,zs(.8Z) 995(aZ8) = Z.d7 Cry No Text '�/ ,47raZ = D. 9y i4creS a. 2, 5'/3 175 ). Z7 mrrl 5 = / 56 / j - /01& 1 /Y11fs o©_ 7, 5� 7,54 (9Y ) = q. 52 CFS 0,0 =/,Z5(.51 ),q` // z5urld out , 1I,r - Q. 9 - g. 3? m;,, boa = �- 2 9 Oloo = 1 • Z5 (, y5) S, 2 q (47) = y. 8 CFS SP 76(ly047(q.03)= /,So o:�5 U �I. B CAS F—or pesr # I For A5 �c+ LL5eJ WEST LAKE STREET (60' R-O-W) 0 �II PONI© I I I « _ I I A 4)- U -----Ne- ----- I I •ems - .�:.� - _ LC o w 0 j % aw.rtx: dui aar snn� I oxrae: v�rr n� I - No Text _ Dcstip 0 2 r, A51 1 7-ov- JET I�r - y. 3 Z P S.S L-ow&-r Sect'. or = o . J8Ul Roes = C>.oI Rcr�s T = Amin r r t t N� r,�, 91 E 1 /11114 11 /--Lk1( T3w1 I d okx - O.O`� � o G� � - C,t'c!�) T�-; "qcr -s C = 0- (�A /ono � = 0, O - � Inc No Text I FLOWMASTER GUTTER &SIDEWALK CHASE CALCULATIONS J A3 CURB LINE INTO INLET Work -sheet for Irregular Channel Project Description 'Worksheet A3 Flow Element Irregular Chant Method Manning's Fort Solve For Channel Deptl- Input Data Slope 017900 ft/ft Discharg- 5.98 cfs Options Current Roughness Meth( wed Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting wed Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficiei 0.015 ' Water Surface Elev 1.68 ft Elevation Range 1.32 to 2.00 Flow Area 1.6 ft' Wetted Perimeter 10.55 ft Top Width 10.25 ft Actual Depth 0.36 ft Critical Elevation 1.75 ft Critical Slope 0.005912 ft/ft Velocity 3.76 ft/s Velocity Head 0.22 ft Specific Energy 1.89 ft Froude Number 1.68 Flow Type supercritical ' Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+21 0.015 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+00 2.00 ' 0+20 1.40 0+21 1.32 0+21 1.82 f:\projects\islamiccenter\civil\drainage\a3.fm2 LANDMARK ENGINEERING LTD. FlowMaster v6.1 [614o] ' 04/12/11 09:09:13 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Irregular Channel � 3 Cu-rE I t rue 4-a I n I �- +- Project Description Worksheet A3 Flow Element Irregular Chani Method Manning's Forr Solve For Channel Deptl- Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.015 Slope 0.017900 fUft Water Surface Elev 1.68 ft Elevation Range .32 to 2.00 Discharge 5.98 cfs 2.001.30 — --- - - -- 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 V :1 H:1 NTS f:\projects\islamiccenter\civil\drainage\a3 fm2 LANDMARK ENGINEERING LTD. FlowMaster v6.1 [614o] 04/12/11 09:10:14 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 PORTION OF A3 TO 1 ST SIDEWALK CHASE UPSTREAM OF INLET Worksheet for Rectangular Channel Project Description Worksheet A3-CHASE Flow Element Rectangular Chz Method Manning's Formi Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.013 Slope 005000 ft/ft Bottom Width 2.00 ft Discharge 2.87 cfs Results Depth 0.41 ft Flow Area 0.8 ft' Wetted Perimi 2.81 ft Top Width 2.00 ft Critical Depth 0.40 ft Critical Slope 0,005235 ft/ft Velocity 3.53 ft/s Velocity Head 0.19 ft Specific Ener( 0.60 ft Froude Numb 0.98 Flow Type 3ubcritical f \ .\islamiccenter\civil\drainage\a3chase.fm2 LANDMARK ENGINEERING LTD. FlowMaster v6.1 [614o] 04/12/11 09:49 34 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 A 5T 5 , J e wal - o�'- r n l�'{" Cross Section Cross Section for Rectangular Channel Project Description Worksheet A3-CHASE Flow Element Rectangular Chz Method Manning's Formi Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coeffic 0.013 Slope 005000 ft/ft Depth 0.41 ft Bottom Width 2.00 ft Discharge 2.87 cfs 2.00 ft - --- -- - -- L 0.41 ft VA HA NTS f:\...\islamiccenter\civil\drainage\a3chase.fm2 LANDMARK ENGINEERING LTD. FlowMaster v6.1 (614o) 04/12/11 09:49:49 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 STORM CAD PIPE & INLET RUNS I � I I-1 � 1 In iGf 10' Ty PG R t.r. Coiner fte=,l p*r ktr2 ►ot Scenario: Base P-� 0.1 Title. ISLAMIC CENTER INLET A3 Project Engineer. JEFF OLHAUSEN f:\projects\islamiccenter\civil\drainage\a3.stm Landmark Engineering Ltd StormCAD v5.5 [5 5003] ' 08/13/11 11.03 21 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Ij 0l ,LZO`5 :dwnS 4 OZ,0c0'S =w!2:] 14 OL-LZO`9 :Ul nUI 11 6 �+0 =��S �_O 11 0C'LZO`5 :dwnS 4 90 0£0`S 'W!i :l 14 0£-LZO`S :Inp nUI L-1 O 4- O O O O LO co O LLI N O LO Lo O O + z J W N� � N} L.L w � ° z LLJ U co U) ° ct (0 r (') U r' O a r- O O .O O O II W z v /�� W J O W co r- z M W O o (/) o L Q n m J � � o�,n LLLLJ 0 LL Q U E m c co m c w co to co 0 O N U c U) O L m 2 O E h ri m 'm Cl) co Q C wa J z '_> w zaci Q UU CO U_ m o Ln � N � N O co F w O . 22- §8» =e- 7/} /\a ® co \\ E \� \ k\ 3 / \�\ R 2 _ moo= / \ /)}/ LU 5 mCc F 0) 2 °� § \ G 3®£ @ @]c\ a » \o§ / [ T c \ � \�F \ < /o� - § }L) G o j/k }\ §7]\ \ // %3ƒL6 LL\ E E_{ / ]) 2>> L G \/$ ° G = u § C� \ \\ \ Cl) _»� �\§ ° _ ) L) \ 7 �2�— m a e/ems 7 g 0 g $7 G m f \� co\ u , cm kS E /o e! \0 ±7 �z K» 0 - If 3 (2» 3�\ \} /\§ 222 e _ )\¢ }2o / (/§ Scenario: Base P-1 0-1 2 3 Thr-cy-- /b-inGh Drceedc�(G 8� lbvG DP-5A I'r%lc�5A 1 f f �Ovr-[ Tj IAMPIr\a.�Ofl In le-t S.w, Cornea'' A ��-E p"+-A ng l of Title: ISLAMIC CENTER Project Engineer: JEFF OLHAUSEN f:\...\islamiccenter\civil\drainage\dp-5a-2 stm Landmark Engineering Ltd StormCAD v5.5 [5.5003] 12/05/11 03:14:23 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 z �,j T w o a U) 0 ::) N Q N N _ " O J N @ O a w L p E @ O w Q � u > � U E C O N O U 0 0 p cc w 21-o O a)@ CDv O v W C J O O d T (D C O)-o — N @ N O C � WU- N o _ O j -0O^ O N N TU .0 O LO 7 N C O _C J N O ch _ � O N v N `O rL _N O Q Q�w LO W D a ro o V N ^ ` D O O o O O O Cl) O U 0 U a �j m M C � co F N � O N C C > - — N U-) c W a O w p Y @ O m � E v @ 1.0 N N (D N N J > > U C O O -2 w N m r co N T N CM �--,co @ U V O N U C > % . (1 'Cc)— _T U � O L LL coU N 7 @ v U a v m� 3N O A O U LO N N fn _ OU C L O O U U .N C — O In O CO L C � N J V @ � N 1 0 C 3Z 0 _ p p a w g a E m 10 Q W o 0 L0 U a Z d _U Z E o gy O N m J N = O a C N 11 ZL'9Z0`5 :deans 11 0C*6Z0`5 :w!2J Jj C8'9Z0`5 :ul AUJ 11 t � +0 • elS � -O O O m ) O a) co O W LO W L Z_ W J Z J W n QW L.L Q �F- Q CL iz = �w IJ L6'9Z099 :dwnS IJ OE'6Z0`5 :w!�:I IJ L6'9Z0`5 :jn0 Aul 11 00+0 : elS V9-da =' O O O Z F — W O Q u� J O l9 U a LL � LL Q U a) o c rn c w a 0 N Q co O r co 0 v U �r c -2 ca d� m W� 0 _N J Y O co 0 M U c 0 Z W o 0 o! :D 0. Q n a _ m ' J Ico O � d W Q LL W Q 03 'IT co. ' N o c o `. o 0 o O � W _ MOO N O T N � G) O 1 w (7 c o a U)"o _ ^ t L 1 J J v O N O T:� C O = J to � O C j O LO In C N co t N r + C (0 'O O p ch N 7 ,O O G (V > .... N _(LI O Q co ❑UW LO ❑ - RD o LO i co o O Q. U U O O o O O � N O � c oo U v 1 cc C M m oN Z^ E co N �@ MF O= O N C O I C O Q > > C r> 1o.c O LLJ Y O ors v� ca cu ) Nl O O t C N C> a— a)Lo W p m O /�L' U � C7 U T m ^ N co cu U N U Q > N T 'U cJ O o L 7 O w NLL N U L V 3 m O m o O N U LL @ 0 0 N_ O U) O E L_ cy) O O N ' C O .. J h N a E m N O z C O m ' 3Z c o ❑ O m W�3� E -o Q ' Z ; m N o Na Z L N U 7 d ❑ U p 0 Lo � N � co N N ' O J d w N t N Ij ZL"9Z0`5 :dwnS 11 0C6Z0`5 :w'l A Ij E8'9Z0`5 :ul nub I -O 11 L6'9Z095 :dwnS 11 0C'6Z0`9 :w!16 14 16'970`5 :jnO AU 1100+0:elS VS-da W Z J W CQ N\ 0 U L.L O O LO N O Lr) O O O O 0 Z LU o � o 0 L Q E a� J � c0 Q u d > LL Q LL Q � U � o c N 0) W U N O a LO LO 0 0 N Z W O (n O `J O) a o �u E 3 U C to 0 0 � W T O 7 m O Q N r U 2 ' w cz J o a T Q C CM O ^ _C .... W J N — a) j O Q v O N O O = J �2 - U C OLO ' LO @ C � Cn Co" a 0 J O O � E O CO OM t + O > Cn N O > Q Q� O W O ,n n N L i U M O co O 0 Q OoU d = CD O J E Coa`, mO ° Z n Co O O n a m^ a W m C a O w 0 O a E m t� a U% C m C .� 0 J Y _ a� ri m O W M a m- m U V C U O O �2 N C Q > v N 0 T O O w U N ' m 0 U a m E m 3 v n o N O m m n U S C O 4) U C N_ N Cn O E r rn O C � 0 N M ? J m E O (m a U U m N O C m C_ Z 3 m O O O W E Z i N ' Q a Q W U `� � o Z Ln U C n _ v a a C) CO U O Q E C) y N (D ' O 11 ZL*9Z0`5 :dwnS 11 09' 6Z0` 9 =w!2� 14 E8'9Z0`9 :uj nub 11 9 �+0 •els �-O 1; L6'9Z0`5 :dwnS 11 09' 6Z0` 9 'w!c*I 1; L6*9Z0`5 :In0 ^ul 1; 0 0+0 ' elS VG-da l� O O m O > O O C") W O LO W z_ J 0 Q ry U_ J Z) ry'Qr, C) O LO N O SZ�� a 4- �M MMN (Y) ` J U O 0 0 O l� COI CY) vJ N T- r� O O O N O N 0 Scenario: Base 0.1 P-1 DP�5B 5' Tire R 1nieI Title: ISLAMIC CENTER DP-5B Project Engineer: JEFF OLHAUSEN untitled.stm Landmark Engineering Ltd StormCAD v5.5 15,5003] 12/05/11 08:55:10 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 O Q Z; W o N o L Q a� J � � o�;a w� E � wQ O C)N E N > C O U O N 3 U c to o a w U a) _ >+ N 3 ma O O j J >. O C O7 e" 04 C UJ j -O O O O co y N m T C7 C m = J LC) �2 N = N C Oco O O ` a T C� O O _ u-) lV + O C m C O () � N O > > — N N Q N a� _N C W � � � � N _ r O O O H O J c � m cu N N C _� fN > Im > C: Cv C W a O W O O E� m :o w N E c t� co f0 C O CD J Y O N N @ > > N C O Cc n — ui m :5 w N O U N O N U C > % N D O _T •V 7 M w p ( ) L LL c U m � O C p O L U N C (u U) N L m N d' co J E m N O n7 O 3Z O o C O w g Z Q E (D -0 m w °0 U w Z LO d U_ a c D o Eco 17 �_o 11 �9.9Z0`9 :deans 11 E � •SZO`9 :Wlij Jj �9.9Z0`9 :ul AUJ 14 8 0+ 0 : els Y O IJ L9.9Z0`9 :deans 11 E 8Z0`9 :wl�j 4 L9.9Z0`9 :}n0 Aul 99-da = i-+ C O 0 O O O O > LO � o W o LID O O r w W z _z J i J LU W r) Q V U (D � j Lli Q z (If w o J 0 0 0 a) L U 0 U N U C: 1� CL •- o N O O 4► C\l CO @) co 0 U) ZFj- w O N O a�� J co Q>a LLD n0 �o �Lo w co co 0 A n 0 N N Q Z) CO O n co O U _, d� W c Y N 0 to J O O m n M Lo U O L 0 Scenario: Base � I � I I A6 Icf A6 P, 7 fit Al Jorl."t- s+a►jar� 6104c la9q co Qry ' Al TnI et- Al I 3011 C.GS O-1 ' Title INLET A6 Project Engineer JEFF OLHAUSEN f:\projects\islamiccenter\civil\drainage\a6&a1 stm Landmark Engineering Ltd StormCAD v5 5 (5.5003) ' 09/08/11 10:53 22 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 r Q 06 �lJ Q U) W I Z a) nnL a_ m 11 09.9Z0`S :dans 11 OZ•0£0`9 :W!�j 11 09,9Z0`S :ul Sul 11 02+ I elS 1-O 11 81,•LZO`S :deans 11 II,L•0£0`9 :wl?d 11 8V•LZO`9 :1nO ^ui 11 89•LZO`S :ul nul Y Y SZ•8Z0`S :deans 11 6V I.£0`S :w1�:] jj SZ*8Z0`S :jnO AUI 11 00+0 •elS 9`d w Z J W 0 ^ 4- O O O m O O o U LO CY) 0 J � W O --- - O + N i- 2 O w Z L O J � W O O E 4tf C v_ _ I -' i:f M o ag � o CO w .� 0 � 0' Z w O �� o 11 O cu C/) O N i Q O U L M _O L 0 _O C O- ., O `A'- C r `. co p a •C: o C) O o (n - O O .1 o Z L L O U Z M W 0 0 N 0 :) L Q lfl N Lc) m 0 U-) ao �LLJ Q U a� Eo` c U) C W Q Z) co 0 0 a U W'a m 0 E� C N l0 Y J o O m U C N 0 0 L N N x O E co lG co U C Q LO U N Q f0 � N � W m J U � Z N O co N 0) Iwo Z M W O o Q n N m J N @ O > a W E NO LO coW W Q m O a� (N N U E > oC O 3U N cU) 0 0 w U _ >. U ON 01-0 O 0 N (U M v O) 07 O C� c o o d w J > O C co N LO N (2 C W U N N O O J — N 7 1.00 N O v N O O rn W N N N O O W S Ln r, — O C f7 M C N O O n C N N O O O O _ Ln L N + O CO m r y O>- O co coQ O_U`r N O C (n W Un U) co O f— co N O O r- U O O O O O O O O c o o U o c � E m coo N .2 y N Zp N N O O Im C N �' Lo iA = W 'O co O W .Y O E N C N E C N V c6 V .2 N r J O N N c9 N N O > > C O O m C � W Lr Lf � N >, 01 N M fp U N O j? r N U C Q i v N 0 L T r O 7 co w W O. U t0 N U � m w E N ( lD 47 3 ti r T N O in O V O N R O C O L L U U N C C E a)in o Un Ul N L Cl) I co LO Ojf N m E @ C � O N O 3Z o _ Q O c Q E N N U N cn aZ Q 0 N O (O y Q Q J N U � Z N N � d a i-wo 41 UD - INLET CALCULATIONS I 1 1 DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD ISLAMIC CENTER Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow (local peak flow for 1/2 of street, plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchments): If you entered a value here, skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet Geographic Information: (Enter data in the blue cells): Minor Storm Major Storm 'Q = 1.00 5.98 cfs Subcatchment Area = Acres Percent Imperviousness = % NRCS Soil Type = A, B, C, or D Site (Check One Box Only) Slope (ft/ft) Length (ft) Site is Urban Overland Flow Site Is Non -Urban Gutter Flow = Rainfall n orma ion: Intensity inc = C, a + 3 Minor Storm Major Storm Design Storm Return Period, T, = years Return Period One -Hour Precipitation, P, = inches C,= C2 = C3= User -Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C = User -Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C5 = Bypass (Carry -Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments, %= 0.001 cfs Analvsis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment: Minor Storm Major Storm Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient, C = Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C5 = Overland Flow Velocity, Vo = Gutter Flow Velocity, VG = Overland Flow Time, to = Gutter Flow Time, t� = Calculated Time of Concentration, T� = Time of Concentration by Regional Formula, T� = Recommended T, = Time of Concentration Selected by User, T, = Design Rainfall Intensity, I = Calculated Local Peak Flow, OP = Total Design Peak Flow, Q = N/A, N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.00 5.98 fps fps minutes minutes minutes minutes minutes minutes nch/hr cfs cfs A3LID-Inlet v2.14c.xIs,Q-Peak 4/13/2011, 11 :26 AM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Project = ISLAMIC CENTER Inlet ID = A3 Lo (C)- -- ii-Curb H Vcrt __ ------ Wp�* - W Lo lG) of Inlet it Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from'Q-Allow) fiber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) e Information Ith of a Unit Grate h of a Unit Grate Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) ging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) e Weir Coefficient (typical value 3 00) e Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) t Opening Information Ith of a Unit Curb Opening hl of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches ht of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches e of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 1 feet) ging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) i Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2,30-3.00) i Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) Ating Gutter Flow Depth for Grate Inlet Capacity in a Sump ging Coefficient for Multiple Units ging Factor for Multiple Units e as a Weir Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate, 1 cfs curb) Row Used for Combination Inlets Only Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate, 1 cfs curb) Row Used for Combination Inlets Only e as an Orifice Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate, 1 cfs curb) Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cis grate, 1 cfs curb) Ating Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression Ating Gutter Flow Depth for Curb Opening Inlet Capacity in a Sump ging Coefficient for Multiple Units ging Factor for Multiple Units I as a Weir, Grate as an Orifice Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate, 1 cfs curb) Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 ds grate, 1 cfs curb) i as an Orifice, Grate as an Orifice Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate, 1 cfs curb) Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cis grate, 1 cis curb) tlting Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression iltant Street Conditions Inlet Length Inlet Interception Capacity (Design Discharge from O-Peak) iltant Gutter Flow Depth (based on sheet Q-Allow, geometry) iltant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) dtant Flow Depth at Street Crown MINOR MAJOR CDOT Type R Curb Opening 1.00 1.00 2 2 Type = a_, = inches No = MINOR MAJOR L,(G)= feet W, = feet Armes = G(G)_ C. (G)= C. (G) _ MINOR MAJOR L. (C) = _ 5.00 5.00 feel H,,,, = 4.00 �- _ 4.00 inches H,,,,,, = 3.95 3.95 inches Theta = 63.4 63.4 degree W, = 1.00 1.00 feet C, (C) = 0.20 0.20 Cw (C) = 2.30 2.30 N/A N/A . N/A NIA N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A MINOR MAJOR Coe = N/A N/A ClogN/A N/A d„„ = inches d_,,,,, = inches d„„ = inches inches MINOR MAJOR d„ = N/A N/A inches tlw = N!A NIA inches N/A N/A inches _MINOR _ MAJOR Coef = _ 1.25 i11Y.� 1.25 Clog = 0.13 0.13 MINOR MAJOR d„„ = 1.43 4.72 in hes MINOR MAJOR T d„ = 1,80 3.14 inches dW = 1.82 3.56 inches cl,_ 0.82 3.77 inchei MINOR MAJOR L = 10.0 10.0 feet Q, = 1.0 6.0 cfs d = 0.82 3,72 inche! T = 0.6 7.6 feet clown = 0.00 0.00 inche< NIA N/A NIA NIA N/A NIA N/A NIA A3UD-Inlet_v2.14c.xis, Inlet In Sump 4/13/2011. 11:26 AM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project: ISLAMIC CENTER Inlet ID: A3 ..___TSACK TCROWN -_- $ T. TMAX _- BACK - ---� - -W ---- TV -- ----- Crown QW Q% Y Hcuae d _ $ x " a 5.d mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) ring's Roughness Behind Curb of Curb at Gutter Flow Line :e from Curb Face to Street Crown Depression Width Transverse Slope Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition ig's Roughness for Street Section Allowable Water Spread for Minor & Major Storm Allowable Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) er Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) er Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) er Depth with a Gutter Depression vable Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) er Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) harge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section Tx harge within the Gutter Section W (QT - Ox) harge Behind the Curb (e.g., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) imum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread t Velocity Within the Gutter Section Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Theoretical Water Spread Theoretical Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Theoretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section Tx TH Actual Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, (limited by distance TcRowN) Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Qd - %) Discharge Behind the Curb (e.g., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section V'd Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Slope -Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor (d > 6") Storm Max Flow Based on Allow. Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) TRACK = 0.0 ft SBACK = ft. vert_ / fthoriz nBACN = HcuRB = 6.00 inches TCROWN = 20.0 ft a = 1.00 inches W = 1.00 ft % = 0.0300 ft. vert. / ft. horiz So = 0.0000 ft. vert. / ft. horiz nSTREET = Minor Storm Major Storm TMAx = 20.0 20.0 ft dMAx = 6.001 6.00 inches X X X=yes Minor Storm Main Rtnrm Sw = y= d= Tx = Eo = % ow ABACK QT- V= V"d = TTN Tx TR = Eo= Qx TH ' Qx= Qw` ABACK Q= V= V'd = R= Qd= d= dCROWN - 0,1133 0,1133 7.20 7.20 8.20 8.26 19.0 19.0 0.141 0.141 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SUMP SUMP 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Minor Storm Maior Storm 13.9 13.9 12.9 12.9 0.207 0.207 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SUMP SUMP SUMP SUMP 'Uft nches nches f cfs :fs -fs :fs 'ps :fs Ms :fs �S :fs 'ps :fs nches riches Minor Storm Major Storm owable Gutter Capacity Based on Minimum of QT or Q. Q,,,ow = SUMPI SUMP cfs STORM max. allowable capacity OK - greater than flow given on sheet'Q-Peak' STORM max. allowable capacity OK - greater than flow given on sheet'Q-Peak' IA3UD-Inle1_v2.14c.xis, Q-Allow 4/13/2011. 11:26 AM 1 � I DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD ISLAMIC CENTER AREA 5A - DESIGN POINT 5A Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow IE S ==L�,= II I DE y FGTPEE UTTEP. LLLi,v F'LUS CAP..P,Y-OVER FLOC- -E <---- FUTTEP FLO`.. INLET INLET ❑F STREET esign ow: i a rea y etermined through other methods: Minor Storm Major Storm (local peak flow for 1/2 of street, plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchments): "Q = 1.81� 4.62 cfs If you entered a value here, skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet Q-Allow) eoorao is n orma ion: nter ata in t e ue ce s): n Site (Check One Box Only) Site is Urban: X Site Is Non -Urban: Subcatchment Area = Acres Percent Imperviousness = p� NRCS Soil Type = A, B, C, or D Slope (ft/ft) Length (ft) Overland Flow = Gutter Flow = 3uon: imensay i tincnmr/ _ u, r, i t Uz r 1 / U3 Minor Storm Malor Storm Design Storm Return Period, T, Return Period One -Hour Precipitation, P, C, Cz C3 User -Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C User -Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C5 Bypass (Carry -Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments, Qb Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment: Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient, C = Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C5 = Overland Flow Velocity, Vo = Gutter Flow Velocity, VG = Overland Flow Time, to = Gutter Flow Time, tc = Calculated Time of Concentration, T. _ Time of Concentration by Regional Formula, Tc _ Recommended T. _ Time of Concentration Selected by User, T. _ Design Rainfall Intensity, I = Calculated Local Peak Flow, Qp = Total Design Peak Flow, Q = Minor Storm v N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA 1.8111 4.62 fps fps minutes minutes minutes minutes minutes minutes nch/hr -fs cfs I DPSA UD-Inlet_v2.14c.xls, Q-Peak 12/2/2011, 10:47 AM IF ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project: ISLAMIC CENTER Inlet ID: AREA 5A - DESIGN POINT 5A TBACR -_ TCRWW S T, TMAx BACK __W Tx - Street - -- Crown Qw Qx --' HcuRB d y S a c� num Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) ing's Roughness Behind Curb of Curb at Gutter Flow Line ce from Curb Face to Street Crown Depression Width Transverse Slope Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition ig's Roughness for Street Section Allowable Water Spread for Minor & Major Storm Allowable Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) Gutter Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression Allowable Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section Tx Discharge within the Gutter Section W (QT - Qx) Discharge Behind the Curb (e.g., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) Maximum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section V'd Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth oretical Water Spread oretical Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) er Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) oretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, tarred in Section Tx TH ial Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, (limited by distance TcRo_) :harge within the Gutter Section W (Qa - Qx) :harge Behind the Curb (e.g., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) it Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Velocity Within the Gutter Section Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth ie-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor (d > 6") Storm Flow Based on Allow. Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) ultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Applied) ultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) TBncK = 0.0 ft SaACK = 0.0200 ft. vert. / ft. horiz nBACK = 0.0130 HcuRB = 6.00 inches TCROWN = 30.0 ft a = 1.00 inches W = 2.00 ft Sx = 0.0300 ft. vert. / ft. horiz SO = 0.0050 ft. vert. / ft. horiz nsTREET = Minor Storm Major Storm TMAx = 15.0 15A ft dmm = 6.00 6.00 inches X=yes Minor Storm Maior Storm Sw = y= d= Tx = Eo = Qx= Qw= ABACK QT° V= V'd = TTH TX TH EO = Qx TH Qx= Qw = QBACK = Q= V= V'd = R= Qa= d= dCROWN = 0.0717 0.0717 5.40 5.40 s.4o 6.40 13.0 13.0 0.353 0.353 5.4 5.4 2.9 2.9 0.0 0.0 8.3 8.3 3.2 3.2 1.7 1.7 Minor Rtnrm Mainr Stnrm 13.9 13.9 11.9 11.9 0.380 0.380 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 2.6 2.6 0.0 0.0 6.8 6.8 3.0 3.0 1.5 1.5 1.00 1.00 6.8 6.8 600 6.00 tool 0.00 t/ft nches nches t :fs :fs :fs :fs ps :fs ;fs :fs ;ts :fs ps Js nches nches Minor Storm Major Storm lowable Gutter Capacity Based on Minimum of QT or Q. Q.- 6.8 6.8 cfs STORM max. allowable capacity OK - greater than flow given on sheet'Q-Peak' STORM max. allowable capacity OK - greater than flow given on sheet'Q-Peak' I DP5A UD-Inlet_v2 14c.xls, Q-Allow 1202011, 10 48 AM INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE Project: ISLAMIC CENTER Inlet ID: AREA SA - DESIGN POINT 5A Lo (C) -- H-Curb H-VertWo -- _ W ----- WP G1: Type of Inlet (Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a'from'O.Allow) 'Total Number of Units in the Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) Length of a Single Unit Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) Width of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W from Q-Allow) Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical min. value = 0.5) Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical min. value = 0 1) Street Hydraulics: OK - Q < maximum allowable from sheet'Q-Allow Design Discharge for Half of Street (from Sheet Q-Peak ) Water Spread Width Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) Water Depth at Street Crown (or at TL,�) Ratio of Gutter Flow to Design Flow Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T. Discharge within the Gutter Section W Discharge Behind the Curb Face Street Flow Area Street Flow Velocity Water Depth for Design Condition Grate Analysis (Calculated) Total Length of Inlet Grate Opening Ratio of Grate Flow to Design Flow Under No -Clogging Condition Minimum Velocity Where Grate Spash-Over Begins Interception Rate of Frontal Flow nterception Rate of Side Flow nterception Capacity Under Clogging Condition Clogging Coefficient for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Clogging Factor for Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Effective (unclogged) Length of Multiple -unit Grate Inlet Minimum Velocity Where Grate Spash-Over Begins Interception Rate of Frontal Flow Interception Rate of Side Flow Actual Interception Capacity Carry -Over Flow = Qa Qa (to be applied to curb opening or next d/s inlet' Curb or Slotted Inlet Opening Analysis (Calculated) Equivalent Slope S. (based on grate carry-over) Required Length LT to Have 100 % Interception Under No -Clogging Condition Effective Length of Curb Opening or Slotted Inlet (minimum of L, LT) nterception Capacity Jnder Clogging Condition ,logging Coefficient ,logging Factor for Multiple -unit Curb Opening or Slotted Inlet ffective (Unclogged) Length 4ctual Interception Capacity Garry -Over Flow = Qwcanrei-Q, iiummary rotal Inlet Interception Capacity rota) Inlet Carry -Over Flow (flow bypassing inlet) 'anture Pementaae = 0_/0_ = MINOR MAJOR Type = CDOT/Denver 13 Combination aLorAL = 1.0 1.0 inch No= 3 3 L, = 3.00 3.00 ft W, = 1.73 1.73 ft CrG = 0.50 0.50 C,-C = 0.10 0.10 MINOR MAJOR 1.81 4.62 cfs T= 8.1 11.9 ft 3.9 5.3 d = inch 0.0 0.0 dcaowe = inch 0 606 0.437 E. = Q,= 0,72 2.61 cfs Qw = 1.10 2.02 ds 08ACK= 0,00 0.00 cfs A,= sgft 1,07 2.21 V. = fps 1.70 2.09 CILccnL = 4.9 6.3 inch MINOR MAJOR L=1 9001 9.00 ft EocsnTE = 1 05511 0.392 MINOR MAJOR V. =EMfps R, _ R. _ 0,=cfs MINOR MAJOR GrateCoef = 1 75 1.75 GrateClog = 0.29 0.29 L. = 6,37 6.37 ft V. = 10.50 10.50 fps R,= 1.00 1.00 R,= 0,84 0.79 Q, = 1.68 4.03 cfs Qp = 0.13 0.69 cfs MINOR MAJOR S. = 0.0804 0.0664 fUft LT = 2.43 5.22 ft MINOR MAJOR L = 2.42 11 1 5.21 It Q, = 0.06 0.30 cis MINOR MAJOR CurbCoef = 1.31 1.31 CurbClog = 0.04 0.04 La = 2.42 5.21 ft Q. = 0.06 0.30 cfs Q, = 0.06 0.30 cfs MINOR MAJOR Q = 1.75 4.32 cfs Q,, = 0.06 0.30 cfs C%= 96.51 93.6 % DP5A UD-Inlet v2.14c.xls, Inlet On Grade 12/2/2011. 10:48 AM 1 �I DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD ISLAMIC CENTER DP-5B Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow y J`FLOWf IJ I I STREET nvFLOWND ® F—GUTTER FLOW PLUS CARRY-O'YER FLOW ® E— GUTTER FLOW INLET INLET 112 OF STREET (local peak Flow for 112 of street. plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchments): * If you entered a value here, skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet eograp is Information:(Enter data in the blue ce s .Q =1 0.801 2.041cfs Subcatchment Area = Acres Percent Imperviousness - NRCS Soil Type = A, B, C, or D Site: (Check One Box Only) Slope (ft/ft) Length (ft) Site is Urban. X Overland Flow Site Is Non -Urban: Gutter Flow = —a ion: Inlensi I inc r = C, I I G' + 3 Minor Storm Maior Storm Design Storm Return Period, T, Return Period One -Hour Precipitation, P, C, C2 C 3 User -Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C User -Defined 5-yr Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C5 Bypass (Carry -Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments, Qb e of Concentration) for a Catchment: Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient, C = Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C5 = Overland Flow Velocity, Vo = Gutter Flow Velocity, VG = Overland Flow Time, to = Gutter Flow Time, to = Calculated Time of Concentration, T. _ Time of Concentration by Regional Formula, T, _ Recommended Tc _ Time of Concentration Selected by User, T. _ Design Rainfall Intensity, I = Calculated Local Peak Flow, Op = Total Design Peak Flow, Q = nor Storm Maior N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A0.861 2.34 ps ps ninutes ninutes ninutes ninutes ninutes ninutes nch/hr :fs :fs IUD-Inlet_v2.14c.x1s, Q-Peak 12/2/2011, 4:14 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project: ISLAMIC CENTER Inlet ID: DP-5B TBACK TCROWN S T, TMAx BRCK -W Tx Street -.-- Crown Hcua6 Yd S x I a 54 mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) zing's Roughness Behind Curb of Curb at Gutter Flow Line :e from Curb Face to Street Crown Depression Width Transverse Slope Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition ig's Roughness for Street Section Allowable Water Spread for Minor & Major Storm Allowable Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) .er Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) er Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) er Depth with a Gutter Depression ,vable Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) er Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) :harge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section Tx :harge within the Gutter Section W (QT - QX) :harge Behind the Curb (e.g., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) :imum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread i Velocity Within the Gutter Section Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth oretical Water Spread oretical Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T - W) er Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) oretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section Tx TH ial Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, (limited by distance TCROWN) :harge within the Gutter Section W (Qd - Qz) :harge Behind the Curb (e.g.. sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) it Discharge for Major & Minor Storm i Velocity Within the Gutter Section Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth e-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor (d > 6") Storm Flow Based on Allow. Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) ultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Applied) ultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) TBACK = 0.0 ft SBACK = ft. vert. / ft horiz nBACK HcuRB = 6.00 inches TCROWN = 30.0 ft a = 1.00 inches W = 2.00 ft Sx = 0.0300 ft. vert. / ft, horiz So = 0.0000 ft. vert. / ft. horiz nSTREET = Minor Storm Major Storm TMAx 15.01 15.0 ft dMAx = 3.801 3.80 inches X=yes Minnr Storm Maior Storm Sw = y= d= Tx- Eo= Qx= Qw' Qom_ Qr' V= V'd - TTN = Tx TH Eo = Qx TH = Qx= Qw= QBACK " Q= V= V•d = R= Qa' d= cICROWN 0.0717 0.0717 5.40 5.40 6.40 6.40 13.0 13.0 0.353 0.353 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SUMP SUMP 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Minor Storm Maior Storm 7.8 7.8 5.8 5.8 0.625 0.625 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SUMP SUMP SUMP SUMP Vft nches riches ft .fs ofs 1s cfs 'ps ofs Cfs cfs :fs ofs `ps cfs nches nches Minor Storm Major Storm Max Allowable Gutter Capacity Based on Minimum of QT or Q. Q,,,o =I SUMPI SUMP cfs MINOR STORM max. allowable capacity OK - greater than flow given on sheet'Q-Peak' MAJOR STORM max. allowable capacity OK - greater than flow given on sheet'Q-Peak' IUD-In1et_v2.14c.xls, Q-Allow 12/2/2011, 4 14 PM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Project = ISLAMIC CENTER Inlet ID = DP-5B -Lo(C).. - H-Curb H-Vert WP NN LI of Inlet il Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a'from'Q-Allow') iber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) e Information Ith of a Unit Grate h of a Unit Grate Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) ging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) e Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) e Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) i Opening Information Ith of a Unit Curb Opening ht of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches ht of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches e of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) ging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0,67) Ating Gutter Flow Depth for Grate Inlet Capacity in a Sump ging Coefficient for Multiple Units ging Factor for Multiple Units e as a Weir Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate, 0,86 cfs curb) Row Used for Combination Inlets Only Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate, 0.86 cfs curb) Row Used for Combination Inlets Only e as an Orifice Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate, 0.86 cfs curb) Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate, 0.86 cfs curb) Wing Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression tiling Gutter Flow Depth for Curb Opening Inlet Capacity in a Sump Sing Coefficient for Multiple Units Sing Factor for Multiple Units as a Weir, Grate as an Orifice Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cis grate, 0.86 cfs curb) Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate, 0.86 cfs curb) as an Orifice, Grate as an Orifice Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cis grate. 0.86 cis curb) Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate. 0.86 cfs curb) ilting Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression iltant Street Conditions Inlet Length Inlet Interception Capacity (Design Discharge from Q-Peak) Itant Gutter Flow Depth (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) Itant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) Rant Flow Depth at Street Crown MINOR MAJOR Type = au = inches No = MINOR MAJOR L.(G)= feet W, = feet A�.. q(G)_ C. (G) _ C.(G)= MINOR MAJOR L. (C) = 5.00 5.00 feet H,..,, = 4.00 4.00 inches H_ = 3.95 3.95 inches Theta= 63.4 63A degree W. = 2.00 2.00 feet q (C) = 0.20 020 C„, (C) = 2.30 230 C, (C) = 0.67 0.67 MINOR MAJOR Coef = N/A N/A Clog = NIA N/A d„; = inches d,,,,, _ = inches d,,, = inches d,,,,, , = inches MAJOR .. da = ,MINOR N/A N/A inches d„ = N/A NIA inches id,. = NIA NIA Inches MINOR MAJOR Coef = _ 1.00 1.00 Clog = 0.20 0.20 MINOR MAJOR cl�= 1.48 2.89 inches d.. = 1.61 3 14 inches MINOR MAJOR d,�= 1,88 2.61 inches d.. = 1.94 3.08 inches 0.94 2.14 inches MINOR MAJOR L = 5.0 5.0 feet 0.9 2.3 Q. = cfs d = 0.94 2.14 inches 3.2 T = 1.1 feet CDO7 Type R Curb Opening 1.00 1 00 1 1 NIA NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA NIA N/A N/A NIA N/A C 1 LID-Inlet_v2.14c.xls, Inlet In Sump 12/2/2011. 4:14 PM AREA INLET SIZING WITH 50% CLOGGING FACTOR LL N c0 V c0 LL N N � N G. 0 M bo a.� '(n V 0 co C VJ co O_ O z C C c m .2 C t`6 Z N >i 2 t0 N (O OJ O tN'f a Q Q A a C f/1 N N O N to o0 V O d S N [7 C7 Q CD CD L m 'COD 1 y _N m m m m T � m m N N L � I `I � L c)i o ..l T N LL N � O O NJ NJ O N o O ^ d k �n1 o O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 � aD tC 0 0 0 o g � � N 0 0 o o � O -'•F� WATER QUALITY OUTLET STRUCTURE & OVERFLOW WEIR 11 -ginsid Sox = G / T,, I(S-f Grade C1,e�k 1�rea l r-S �3 Z c-v, �_ 5OZ T O3 i0l' �R cJSE� = 5-0 Z9 3_ r4iGC L") = Ch Z� = 0 5/ (2,93) 5-0 flEa� &nl4?-- O, a( CFI GJ r � = C�/f 3/2 �r 17Z_ 30 C�= 3 (���t�(03)3/z - 337 Cis q,a5n D14 I7 - 327 309 3 Z 7 - = 3 10 0- f =.0g% FTz •©10 FTC Q=o �s Ql0gO ,o?ql=iZ Q=os( DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V.3) STRUCTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 1 U.0 - 6.0 EXAMPLE: DWQ = 4.5 ft /Z 4.0 WQCV = 2.1 acre-feet SOLUTION: Required Area per Row = 1.75 in2 2.0 EQUATION: WQCV a= K 40 1.0 in which, K40=0.013DWQ +0.22DWO -0.10 0.60 b`� (0 0.40 0.20 O� ti 0.10 0.06 Qr O 0.04 0.02 n n1 if 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.20 0.40 0.60 1.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 Required Area per Row,a (in.2 ) A = .375 Dlwe�tr = pXv.687.5, (Zl rt � FIGURE EDB-3 Water Quality Outlet Sizing: Dry Extended Detention Basin With a 40-Hour Drain Time of the Capture Volume 9-1-99 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District S-43 N J 0 u ° U E � m J m a� 2 C m N L L vLi � W W W d m > > > (O � O OI p 0 NO O OI j 0 I O' II 11 oz x3 II II II 11 II voa¢a° cy — of a `o d m ?la m n E Lo x� m ma 0 6 c c c u A O O `i G + N d < > U CO CO � m O m m w m m mvas C O O O 0 L L a m c c o m o E t0 O m m n o N g o E a m a > n y m o 0 II II II II II II � � � q E ° Q `O J E Z E w acc. m L a y u a E c z u E _ E c m m a g E ... U O m a U y O cr U c ' f U Cc o > - o € o c O m o c o N 00 > U L O N C O O y J _ � oy . o No Text _1 Z O Y d (� OU CD LLJ�Y^- of U I- Z U O U I,yJ Z� w� �w 3o z , � o� 0 511 �+ —w Cr_ _1 W o �. W U a Q w co ^' W W cn m Vn �V) w w O O w O O O Oao I►�r 1. 2 4 H Z w Z d O m¢ w 0 p 3 3 3 w 3 z¢ cn Q J o .-, <cn w zLJ cy O J • Q a N w F �i � Y MW m p 7W 7 m w Q O r — O _ z w �_ U O W co O Z p Z<> W mZZa 11 o w c� o w ? m � o o w J Q Z v a W LO ('XVW) - w p (n ¢ >" W? \� .6 �m�J U O O O �{ O-Lw� w LL• hr U n O _ LLJ . •a . a. • CD ME Q O m z � Q J a W W Z Z O N UJ Q m Q J Z� I d U Z��ti U t o vo <QN0 U) ~ � o O Z J ud CQ Wcn Nz JO tr H �� g ~ � w a =w U cnO X Cn r J W N qz V7 d p w� Q pMj J \ Q J U J W M m W W O J� O 3z�cnw CD OCL 0 O o wo ~ O cn J Q U N W V) a E- U O O W U Q m 0 Q V WO Z w Q o= O �N oZ z O oo' :z �W z o o� �� w Q ~ ZZ w^��m Z�at` �N wU, ao Z ¢ �� �o a< a a4 cc LLJ O w Qo z� O W� C!j NZ w m U F �o wa W C\2 iz3: U J cn cn w U o w ~ � � z H C\2 W _ W H Z a m U W 3 U -� _I Z< N ' Ln °� Q Iwo w 0 m Z ¢ C V) V�I O� QN O Q — V Ui v W W V) U S U S m F+•I O ' m 'nN a Q V) Z J= 9 ZZ �� mW _ mN O U1 x J N U Z m ~ Y J Z O ¢J¢ Ln LLJO V�(n a 0 O Z O w U WQ �2 WCL'J V 4 J�QV� /F��� I Q Z�SM Z/SM U U` III. uj o a U J goo a U W N U Li^ CN 0 U Z W a Z O III O N \Z¢ 3 O LLJ Z p O 0 W U) Z a 1Ul �i ill ii, Z x W Q C' Z W a z N N Z C.� - QC1J W O U m m CO a J Z_ O a Wa0 a O W J p �LLJ O~< 'If L m2�a Cn Cw? �` J m p Z UFw-O a0 (n (n O M 00�a alY W= p _Z �Od' m a:: a _ N NN rr\im UO �S\¢ _ pJW x 0 ® N� r\ 11 rn N Ca'� , x M / co 1 M O N 1 � U a is --� L c a \ ~ J x z W O 0, � Q. 9 U Z O N U x Q 0o<L5 N ~ Z\ Q Z r7 > > /'1 ao�o a- w N a. Q LJ Z m CJ W J J O~ C� pp _O � N J (n K00 cno a\ -I Z o BCD z oQ � U 4,WQ� 0 Id-UU M O QCL HV) m mN OZH \CD� 0 3w rU I V N 'W^ VJ O O w �aO Oa m m i CO p U Y ..♦ in 2 W z J t p m U C] W O W w � Z U W 0 M( d W O� Z O moo M(n C a_ rW- a Z`En a 3z w,LLI S3i�dn oM S3iadn Z O �' d- � w w w W o W Q0Q � W F= Q J Z(n0 \�MFO--- L) 11-- W W 3aUN Z Or (nw a W S I- ZL�J „9 W a W „9 W w J J N w U z OU V) Ln L SM � w J cn ui W J „9 w OM 4 90/LO/Z l 6MP'940\10nu0w oua;uo\J3MwjS\:l M M M O _ O O O � cD CD I� n N N M M cD \ M 0 0 0 0 � U'1 to M (/ i Z W � J o � a o 0 Z U O O Q m U W O J J J (n O J Q 1 ? w O S �m U \ I oa _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 111�^rC. 13z18 FT- Z / 3 ,51 x = 6 (l17cu se i�>o rj /fie 1�on� Fl: = SDZ`� zo td �oWj30 2 U �too 3 ( ozo ) �/z WEST SIDE WEST PARKING LOT PAN CALCULATIONS No Text I O .O, ALp� r ! o "1 Lof Tkr� = O.I� A�e�s C=•zs Con(-, _ H q 3 rf z fi 473 F-I Z = D.0Z f�cr`S C=.95 Tv' (87 (,f-,35v-I-?-5 (z.s9 P/3 Tr oV L-0. Z.S f T_= 5,92 rn;n z� - H.5�F 910 1,0p (035) �I, g (a1�1) = O• z2 CFI QIon=1z5 (035��.3� �/W� =0a5T C�"S WEST SIDE PAN Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet WEST PAN- 1 Flow Element Irregular Chani Method Manning's Forr Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Slope 005000 ft/ft Discharg, 0.57 cfs -- ca Options Current Roughness Methc �ved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting wed Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weightinc Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficiei 0.015 Water Surface Elev 31.23 ft Elevation Range .02 to 31.64 Flow Area 0.4 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 3.79 ft Top Width 3.76 ft Actual Depth 0.21 ft Critical Elevation 31.22 ft Critical Slope 0.007282 ft/ft Velocity 1.51 ft/s Velocity Head 0.04 ft Specific Energy 31.26 ft Froude Number 0.84 Flow Type Subcriticai Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+07 0,015 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+00 31.30 0+03 31.14 0+04 31.02 0+05 31.14 0+07 31.64 Ci r DW iS GO����dl �t-0 / f:\projects\islamiccenter\civil\drainage\ispan.fm2 LANDMARK ENGINEERING LTD. FlowMaster v6.1 [614o] 07/28/11 03:21:58 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet WEST PAN- 1 Flaw Element Irregular Chani Method Manning's Forr Solve For Channel Deptl- Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.015 Slope 0.005000 ft/ft Water Surface Elev 31.23 ft Elevation Range .02 to 31.64 Discharge 0.57 cfs 31 .7 0 31 .30 -- 0+00 0+01 0+02 0+03 0+04 0+05 0+06 0+07 VA HA NTS f:\projects\islamiccenter\civil\drainage\ispan.fm2 LANDMARK ENGINEERING LTD. FlowMaster v6.1 [614o] 07/28/11 03:22:20 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 WEST PAN CHASE Worksheet for Rectangular Channel Project Description Worksheet WEST PAN CH/ Flow Element Rectangular Ch< Method Manning's Form, Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.013 Slope 026300 ft/ft Bottom Width 2.00 ft Discharge 0.57 cfs[ Results Depth 0.08 ft Flow Area 0.2 ft' Wetted Perimi 2.17 ft Top Width 2.00 ft Critical Depth 0.14 ft Critical Slope 0.005675 ft/ft Velocity 3.38 ft/s Velocity Head 0.18 ft Specific Enerc 0.26 ft Froude Numb, 2.05 Flow Type Supercritical f:\...\civil\drainage\west pan chase.fm2 LANDMARK ENGINEERING LTD. FlowMaster v6.1 [6140] 07/28/11 03:27,08 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Rectangular Channel Project Description Worksheet WEST PAN CH/ Flow Element Rectangular Chi Method Manning's Formi Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coeffic 0.013 Slope 026300 ft/ft Depth 0.08 ft Bottom Width 2.00 ft Discharge 0.57 cfs 0.0ft --------- -- 2.00 ft- - VA H:1 NTS f:\...\civil\drainage\west pan chase.fm2 LANDMARK ENGINEERING LTD. FlowMaster v6.1 [614o] 07/28/11 03:27:37 PM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 I � R,R �ry I w M _--- ° _ NV_W/.0 !rvY=b[ZR5 WEST LAKE STREET I I I! �soa ol. I 1014 �OF / 0.14 SUMMER STREET (60 R—O—W) PROSPECT ROAD u �101 . x .e.. ... _. ` WA Fr 0 PM THE TOP OF FOUNOARON EIFVATON HOW IS THE MINIMUM EIEVARON REWIRED OR PROTECDON FROM THE IOO—YEAR STORM. T _ 5 QS DESIGN POINT MEAN W. 0.97 BARN MARKER 6AW11 RfEA (Aces) m m = m BASIN BOUNDARY --4 ROW ARROW —50%— PROPOSED CONTOURS - - 5030-- EAS➢NG MAM CONTOUR 5031- EASING MINOR CONTOUR AREA NUT 0 10' TYPE R INIET 2' CONCRETE PAN SLOPE a 0.50% It kw 2 cmua w nmA ftt R 011 0(01 MXL E. 53 q¢TT. I wavly uCILRIIa LtlIR[�y ApE'ir REQUIEM cvv-Oa Aaerr. Nrowm wLwna utt41. NO R2FA4 RAIFPM 6S DEV IINM YMO VDIM % ME FL O E Nms POM MfMlOR. w PMM UP OF IEINMW ENL-50XW PER D--5®.® REF IE 51.w PARR DEVIX.OLY 01a 11[FS GRAPHIC SCALE Is�Y i baE_M N BAMX OEMGNPOIM Ot01CHU a0010FM INLET PIPED T 1 om x�. W f!u/E,96SE5 P Ie.wNF -m -IM SMEETFL WA LOCKWOOD ARCHITECTS ONJSlIlC3� Eng� au Lu J _ \ 23 Q �� N xU J N U LL IEvidao2scavna art ORD. DEVELOPED DRAINAGE BASIN MAP Pmjv numfr. IGAmi dM DIN'. FEB. W12 o mm IX'. Am Rr,N..e ly JOU ci. W JOD scan O DRG Na 1 OF 1 I — XLSEAna. ..aa I m a.aR� LEND LOT 13 YAUREaawmo,..,e•�s lo,a.,00...Tn. a a�XM.Xam I"IMUM a�.,aT�r., .... _ X,M. L —I L J L _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _So _ _ _ ___ ___--- �• —503] MfP03B tlM1PIR5 - a. -_ _ _ u T p c•c. --_ EMMC YAM tlY11GA '5019. Z- -GAS Gti - ---GAS- GAS-` -GAS -GAS -GAS � u ENs1NL uWA CCIIRXR WyJ oot- NEST LAKE STREET %e.Rr PRMo;Ev slots ME 0.M s — ( A w v AREA N¢T TT _ ----- rcTwTlu� PBro RErw�t wu� Sair � � ,e \ _ _ _ _ Q __ _. 1 ... ]S ! —_a— WNB RAIL NI PCP LL R1MBM \ 3 - RlD RLWNG II4L t R l 1 ,y 5 TN4 R IgET I' •/ I — .. COM61E P.W Q • a _ XP-]I• CIXBMEMN INEr J ' PM -.—_ I uN •�vL �Hmm. Q _ f - I. 1. PKIRLiCPON FNACc<_ m m 1. PMpT A!TRUCMXI "pIM' gWXX6 I - - _.. 2 DLAX' XiRI51INCN4 _ Q Vil1Y TM .u. f DUMP; sTNcTUR[ mflcxl A FINAL nANXIAM aHHa ua lotoawCt ana u< a NxsmurnM TIAML oesM.Mx ¢sawlM Yo u @LAY >' 2. J. ♦ f$9 O BATTLES FLTNL A WQY2 PN T O I 2 1. IOM� ® BATTLE pE1NL B u IItl I: 2. ]. 46=152% O WAS INLET wAillE PROIECMN SETUP II� na MB,Mom ve I Y WIT 2. A ♦ MAM4 snow.. ' 4\\ - O pE1gMN POND .ACCESS j I I. z J. ♦ Bi—$F- r MT II ® . c O MM IHIET WATTLE MIER �— T, x. ® PEYPMANv S(DEM TooTooOYBXT aABN IFNT / IXr-xAREA) D CMIRACIM WAY WN CEIpMN M91 IETMIXE BULL MN WM KIM MUM AS A 1pPO1MY YPlpi AN MLE OO ` 5 LMiR LMSPNLTM. LAME RLY FILMuMA FDA SUBMIT U A M INFRONT O Y815pRpl BYPONT AMET SMJUMF. JJ/ RO}t ELFIN YMA A MY 9LT DOMM Solo S IMAMM MOR TB 9RfRp Ma MIL .V.®TAVS M iN91 MKm TEIFIIMM ' y 1 WllpE FRAMING CM1RGl PA➢ — L- T r IIIII IIIIIIIII )✓/ � IY� SUMMER STREET\➢"' 6 2,3 wxp¢TE MaT AREA (60' R—O—W) ❑ MA we aa' Boom to k4 J MIT♦ qOi SAM BUFFER (UM) +r ___ ___ _ _� jjjjjljjjjl � g 2 M ♦ (� MASS BUFFER (MAIME (GRAMS)jII IT �— _ _ _ _ _I_ t OR e O � _ _ — _ I _ _ _ •O Boom (D ss BarrenEIFNnM ratio s¢o ulx) IN 2 •® EXTENLEB LBIpTM BASH '"trS I U 2 CMMER PM' 2 EARTo PAN wr.a •DENOTES PERMANENT BMP M19'. Mom 2 I FAMED BUTTES SEED INC. 2 I CRECO ELEC SDaA wag: faCPaNneebutteneedcan Sada DISNRBED AREAS SEED NIX PBS Low GM Native _ nil (IMI) Anima Fmme XCX) WnEpgg/Canby Bluegrass (IDS) Wky Mountain Fescue (LOX) Bq Blu Nr0n X ♦ AB 000 sIB/1.Logo AT. Arm DETENTOII POND SEED NIX (MIL Mr Uc Svs. Q III PB5 Native Prairie Nia Gan (33X) Doe a --'--W Gen NM ImwM `S ' r I (30X) 5leaale GvqnOH J ;os`.. (25S) XPeMn MQtgraw _ ( sMl 1sDrwMUI /LB�U_ __ _____ 5PLSTB/Ac ,/ �cW.9M6E PROSPECT ROAD — — — — — NOE ALL Y15 EXPOSED pAW4 LAND OSBf®PIL KTNIY (SMPoo 1AApy4 UNIY GRAPHIC SCALE INUALLOMi. SYNDPIM2 RwxQ EFL.) SULL S NOT N A RMMINM CCNOnM o BY MRX6 M Omxt . LIM LCHMM pIM WXM. VEMTAMN, OZ BTEP PEWAMBT EMBUN CMTIX MPS ARE IxsTA TEE xo SOLS 91ALL MAN OpYEB L a ra l BY LAM LRILFMIL ArnNIY FOR NMB THAN MRn (M) DAYS SPdE REQUIRED I Iacb 9J BE TBIPFµY M PEIYloo UOSON CMwa (EG ¢EDMULOI. LAMX 'Mfn ET.) Is STM1M, UI OTERREE AMMYM BY M on T FORT rAVM LOCKWOOD ARCHrrECTS 970,M1M33m I'll wootoolIll En- W a Mai J (n y0 �U y j N m N C O U � ly REV REwBIMMy1MIM DATE DRG TITLE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN ",Nm numa IGMMI XT3 Del,.. FEB. M12 ona"ay'. BRW Rmewee toy ADD Dnec,m by: .IDo Salar=w DRG. NO 1 of 1 i I I I c0.aM�a nAR wA. ���;K w ITT, 11 a= � � I � lo�rers I � _____ _ _ ___ __ __ ____ .i'S'p1lT ___ _ _____ RVY,AJ .pPS?Jt 11 $ _� -GAS _GAS -GAS ,E. JSy -G S - GA ._ - i_GAS-� x A�J c a.-,rorrv,♦ WEST LAKE STREET <ya fc wuv yz AS yBzo- s�rzx GJ --SAN — SA^I — N— SIIP W AN��� W $AN �.w= _� W, — W — W _ _ T Y W W _WV - _ —•••—_ - M1y LF Vi^ V WV �b - - T? y I L'� I e m, �E I /� �I LOT -- OTTER ALIT aLLr I I I BASIN NORTH HISTORIC DRAINAGE 2,65 .a.T6 �ACRES TO NEW R.O.W. I a ..vr rucs fw I 1 I .-L. ••I -L...� SUMMER STREET (60' R—O—W) • LOT xe. k w� �J — — —i— I o /%INE/, I I BASIN SOUTH II II 0.42 ACRES �j TO EX. R.O.W. �/` I I I IILL ib �... PROSPECT ROAD LEGEND ROW ARROW m m m m BASN BOUNDARY --- v10 EXISTING MA" CONTWR ^»� EXISTING MINOR CONTWR BABIN 2-YEAR HISTORIC IN-YEARHMITORIC RUNOFF RUNOFF XgilX e8BCT5 1. G]C Fe 9GITn FAA GRAPHIC SCALE e p IRmTI I�B=sa k LOCKWOOD ARCHITECTS 010.1911OTl� Eng� a Q Q UJN0 JJN J_3c \ N ao U L2 li REv XmeMx oeBrAwloX wTE w G. TME. HISTORIC DRAINAGE EXHIBIT Fml rwrr eL OBBAdl OeY: FEBRUMYE12 Ommb(. BXW RFAnroO Br goo c Na BF im DRG. R41 OF 1