HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 08/15/1990 (2)PROPERTY OF
FORT COLLINS 171mullum
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
REGENCY PARK P.U.D. SECOND FILING
FT. COLLINS, COLORADO
PREPARED FOR:
HONE FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN
ASSOCIATION OF THE ROCKIES
PREPARED BY:
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
PROJECT NO: 1005-19-89
0
WzUffi REiFF6�.B�
GUST, 1990
4836 S. College, Suite 12 Fort Collins, CO 80525 (303)226-5334
cr e ,�0 =' , �, tip, :� = W N
0 44--E.. J Q, Ham F g ,�x� S7/
OES d�OG�I P�OPO ¢ °m A{J�6�ao. o�N�o;OTOVW/NOSO
QSa: p9 0QP ��P �P\�J9 m}5 A��f� �'S ARBOROUG}fOGEAMA`�!!
OOTTEA.., : u u,.., �Wci JS,. /REF N ECi GE o -• :AVE::,C
AS . OR, �y..o < `BOG 1�..VALLE �--FOp �'3uCONCORDh QOeCi f(AINTRE
DAB
RASS/�_�••O� \l o ,// �t wGzu `DR':O?`�'�Q'� .(
�x ..... G 0 . �' BEPP
u R �ODI 0 t O
o._ •.:0 ( 210 t c,Y �KTOw J °���Py `'`�� SN, PO noo w ..
C'�HAVEN'JIrI.1
IRE
Z h o HAA(b I CE \ !� OR to'¢L HTFO T
TT k- 7k._._¢ LN
C--�NAq TJNG ::2'DRJ .�".. W!O v
■ O'. Or < W 2
• FAEMONTW 2¢d
C! �'. i .■�iYHOL. CT C)Q2_ 3'' jU a -0U•. WAG
Cr
OUGH DR ���i N.
i i I YLINED�iI yg wy �¢ j . �QO m Rocky Mtn.
isXINNISON.0EW SE'�OOo��iSWAt vyv—v) Y`_BQ!
w■DR O,,■■■ OgpRAj I ', y 0
MOFFET_._DR- ■ 2 2U 9EFFT GRAM ! /OUX':2 wBLVp O
f" �� orr� l°GNEZ
Q1
I• n BCIR.4: I n0 CiN � �P�RG
1 Y
q . LN
N J .
O PRIMROSE ,.. •
O'
$R2e�
SH RE < CIA.Q mGR QI `�
A, C1 �. PAP'' 441
co E� IRE9 Z'p. �.._y .._. G PTW /
w
l ¢
■ SgHHrr J O� Z i t1`ECT y.'. pw-
■ ER .GT2 O J 2
n,
•■■■■•■•■�■` N
r�O'y1jn��(�tG�
CASTLE ON
CIRH
■
1.[4,W JANE�;
'1 .,,......... 2, ST
2100 W
DALTONDR
.'
SAM
o l l� �f j . W�rsIR(/ v ,�_f5
E' 4'{�9 „/fq�NCS ROOK -DX �y
DR
G
t1
P�
ONV CT
to RIP p�l � : 04 C ..• y_ U"bl1 ... 'fAVEWJAS TA',i
1■ . O ORO° kr� pilrA09 YEm C s<
o ALTONDA ' Ili i;.,■ oANO•I�� ,DENivtSONS��W:�
POWECL W /J ■ :. Z ;•■■■■ ■■ M/CH/EEE C�pt�AVE BOULDER°
PL I I p ( . 'r w � 3� Q•A'
11 Vl 9 PEBBLB" Tou
Ly R.U, �' 2
W S FIE d • �- 4; UJSAULseunry¢'F
o ■ u 3 O CA,
DR■ > Y¢ Uq¢ WAB H
PL .� CT �,.'�, B TTE�zO_uW_,1uCj � S1S
38E O ■■r ■■ u■■i� ■■■■ ASS:Q-_.�...¢..yW3 Dfl, W
• .. .,_ W°i OOq,W�Uyp�pLAINS CTF
•OP. yp IOBI v0 i°our .vX WW�¢`EJ�l�wr :gin i
9R0C70NA ; REGENCY PARK P.U.D.
�
Z ..
SECOND FILING'A3
WESRSDEXiuDENOY O� G12� Nj i�C* \ \TONE C Cr,f
tj
�TNNp,TTICj H� • 5 o9pc sroN� C� a°L S GOLD QON
DOOLCTLE� o x RJQG1 9y .r .,. '... _I,NJ W Occ
BEDFOR;� $CJIG OSyF Oi iu■■ ■■■■u■��uu■■■■■■> ■u■■■u■ ■■u• u■■ tr
C 9O � �y 17
IIOI 3
1
1-Po
VICINITY MAP
No Scale
CT ■
PAGE 1
Project No: 1005-19-89
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing
GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. Location
1. Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing is located in the
Southeast Quarter of Section'34, WN, R69W of the 6th P.N.,
City of Ft. Collins, County of Larimer, Colorado.
2. Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing is a replat of Lots 16,
17, 18 and 19 of Belair P.U.D. and lies south of Regency
Park P.U.D., which was a replat of Lots 1 through 5 and Lots
6 through 14 of Belair P.U.D. Hilburn Drive is an existing
street which was platted and constructed with Belair P.U.D.
Harmony Road bounds Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing on the
south.
3. There is a major drainageway located within TRACT A of
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing (refer to Grading and
Drainage plan). Tract A is a 40' wide tract located north of
the northernmost R.O.W. of Harmony Road. This drainageway is
discussed in the "Final Drainage Report for Regency Park
P.U.D." by Parsons and Associates*. The drainage channel was
designed and constructed in order to route offsite runoff
around the Regency Park development area. This drainageway
conveys stormwater to a 42" culvert under Regency Drive.
Construction of grading and drainage improvements downstream
from the 42" RCP have not been provided as of the
preparation of the report. Stormwater is currently detained
within a small portion of the Tract A drainage channel and
42" culvert since there has not been appropriate grading
beyond the east invert of the 42" culvert. Drainage Report
Exhibit A by Parsons and Associates included with the final
drainage report of Regency Park P.U.D., indicates a drainage
channel on the east side of the Regency Drive R.O.W. This is
consistent with the approved Grading and Drainage plan for
Belair P.U.D., also prepared by Parsons and Associates.
However, the approved Grading and Drainage Plan for Regency
Park P.U.D., also prepared by Parsons and Associates,
indicates that the drainage channel would proceed to the
east. No design was provided for this alternate. The channel
from the 42" RCP to the detention pond was apparently never
completed, due to the lack of a dedicated easement which was
to be provided on the property east of Regency Drive.
Drainage improvements downstream from the existing 42" RCP
have been made a condition of approval for Regency Park
P.U.D. Second Filing. All plans reviewed to date in the
preparation of this report, indicates that stormwater in the
major drainage channel along Harmony must be conveyed to
Regional Detention Pond No. 1. This regional detention pond
was designed as a part of Pineview P.U.D.-Phase II by
Parsons and Associates. Regional Detention Pond No. 1 is
located on the southeast corner of Regency Drive and
Wakerobin Drive (See Reference Exhibit provided on the
Grading and Drainage plan).
* See Page 2
PAGE 2
Project No: 1005-19-89
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing
A copy of the final drainage report for Regency Park P.U.D. by Parsons
and Associates has been included with this report for reference.
Exhibits A and B to the final drainage report have not been included,
but are on file with the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Utility.
B. Description of Property
1. Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing is a 4.73 acre development
which includes the previously discussed 40' tract for the
major drainageway along Harmony Road.
2. The site has been partially developed. Utilities have been
installed on the site according to the previous multi -family
design included with Belair P.U.D. These utilities will be
abandoned or relocated to conform to the current design for
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing. Nonmaintained dryland
grasses currently cover the site.
3. There are no other major drainageways on or adjacent to the
site other than that previously discussed.
4. Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing will consist of 16 single
family residential lots. The flexibility for grading and
drainage design are somewhat limited for several reasons.
There is a brick fence located along the north boundary of
TRACT A (major drainageway). This brick fence eliminates the
Possibility for grading towards the major drainage channel
along Harmony Road. Grading and drainage must therefore be
designed to direct storm runoff to Hilburn Drive. Hilburn
Drive has been constructed with storm drainage facility
improvements downstream.
5. There are no irrigation facilities affecting the drainage
design for this site. The Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal is
the nearest irrigation facility. It in no way affects the
drainage design for Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing
however, as it lies a ways east of Regency Drive and the
proposed development.
II DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS
A. Major Basin Description
1. The project is contained within the McClellands Master
Drainage Basin. All flows from the site are conveyed to
Regional Detention Pond No. 1 via storm drainage facilities
previously designed and constructed with Belair P.U.D. and
Regency Park P.U.D. The regional detention pond serves all
upstream development within the Master Drainage Basin. It
has been constructed and is currently functional. There is
minor grading remaining to be completed for the detention
pond to meet the approved grading design. These minor
grading modifications are planned for completion in 1990.
B. Sub -Basin Description
1. The portion of Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing north of
the 40' Tract A (major drainageway) and the southern half of
the Hilburn Drive R.Q.W. adjacent to Regency Park P.U.D.
Second Filing define the major drainage basin for this
project. It represents a slightly redefined subbasin
relative to previous drainage studies for Belair P.U.D. and
Regency Park P.U.D. The project subbasins have been defined
within the project major basin according to the attached
Grading and Drainage Plan.
PAGE 3
Project No: 1005-19-89
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing
B. Sub -Basin Description (continued)
2. There is minimal offsite contribution from the undeveloped
property to the west, although it is apparent that upon
development to the west, there will be some contribution of
additional storm runoff to Hilburn Drive. Preliminary
indications are that the capacity of Hilburn Drive will
allow for limited future contribution from the west. A
majority of offsite flows from the west will be routed
around Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing via the Tract A
drainage channel paralleling Harmony Road which was designed
and constructed for this purpose.
III DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
A. Regulations
1. There has been no deviation from the City of Ft. Collins
Storm Drainage Design Criteria, previously approved drainage
studies for the area or the Master Basin Drainage Plan
except as may be further discussed in this report.
B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints
1. The drainage design for Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing is
strongly influenced by existing development and previous
drainage design. Final drainage studies for Belair P.U.D.
and Regency Park P.U.D. influence the design for this
project. This study represents a revision or updated
analysis of the previous studies of which this site was a
part. Analysis of existing drainage facilities downstream
are made in this report for the change in proposed land use
for this project only.
2. The existing grade of Hilburn Drive, the existing storm
drainage facilities downstream on Hilburn Drive and the
existing brick fence along the south portion of the property
dictate final grading and drainage design for Regency Park
P.U.D. Second Filing.
C. Hydrological Criteria
1. In conformance with previous drainage studies and the City
of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, The 2-year
and 100-year storms were analyzed in order to evaluate the
downstream drainage facilities including inlet capacities
and street capacities.
2. The Rational Method for determining peak flows was used in
order to adequately compare drainage design values from
previous studies which also utilized the Rational Method.
3. This site has not been evaluated for onsite detention since
it was included in the total developed area analysed
previously for the design of the regional detention facility
located at Regency Drive and Wakerobin Drive.
D. Hydraulic Criteria
1. Capacities of existing downstream storm drainage facilities
have been evaluated. These include inlet capacities, storm
sewer capacities and street capacities. Capacity references
are included with this report.
PAGE 4
Project No: 1005-19-89
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing
IV DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A. General Concept
1. Drainage patterns will generally follow those presented by
previous drainage studies for the immediate Regency Park
drainage area. Detailed revisions to onsite project drainage
design will be made based on the current redesign concept
for onsite improvements. Major changes to approved offsite
drainage designs downstream have been made however.
Generally, these improvements may be considered temporary in
nature, as downstream drainage improvements made with this
project will not satisfy ultimate drainage design
requirements. Major downstream improvements will be required
as a condition of approval for development of the property
on the east side of Regency Drive.
2. There is, minimal offsite runoff contribution directly to
this site from the undeveloped property to the west
according to the field data obtained. No future offsite
contribution to Hilburn Drive has been evaluated, although
it is apparent that future development of the property to
the west will contribute some storm runoff to Hilburn Drive.
3. Capacity evaluations for the south half of Hilburn Drive and
the existing inlet on the south side of Hilburn Drive were
made for direct contribution from Regency Park P.U.D. Second
Filing without offsite contributions from the property to
the west being considered. This was done in an effort to
establish the adequacy of the existing system considering
current development.
4. The Tract A drainage channel was designed. to route offsite
flows from the west, around the Regency Park development. It
has been constructed and would be fully functional except
that grading east of the Regency Drive 42" RCP has never
been provided. This was discussed previously. The attempt to
continue stormwater conveyance from the existing 42" RCP (at
Regency Drive and Harmony Road) to Regional Detention Pond
No. 1 according to previously approved designs, was
dependent on the acquisition of a drainage easement or a
combination of an easement and additional Harmony Road
Right -of -Way from the owner of the property on the east side
of Regency Drive. Reasonable efforts were made to secure
appropriate easements from the owner of the property to the
east. Easements or Right -of -Way could not be obtained.
Drainage improvements within the Regency Drive Right -of -Way
have therefore been pursued. An 18" storm sewer will be
provided within the Regency Drive Right -of -Way with this
project. The installation of the 18" storm sewer will
provide an outlet for the 42" RCP. The decision to abandon
the 42" RCP east of the proposed manhole at Harmony Road and
Regency Drive, was made by City staff during the review
process of this project relative to all drainage conditions
in the immediate area of Harmony Road and Regency Drive. The
proposed manhole will therefore be installed without an east
invert.
PAGE 5
Project No: 1005-19-89
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing
IV DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN (continued)
A. General Concept (continued)
5. Abandoning of the easternmost section of the existing 42"
RCP will create a higher headwater potential at the west
invert of the 42" RCP. Regrading will be provided along the
north edge of the existing channel adjacent to Lot 15,
Belair P.U.D. where a condominium unit currently exists.
This is on the west side of Regency Drive. Regrading will be
done to provide a berm along the channel which will allow
the potential increase in stormwater backup, to overflow
directly into Regency Drive without adversely affecting the
condominium unit property.
6. The design of the Harmony Road improvements adjacent to the
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing tract was made a condition
of approval of Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing. Design of
the proposed ultimate Harmony Road cross-section was
provided. Drainage facilities within the Harmony Road
Right -of -Way adjacent to Regency Park have therefore been
analyzed at this time and made a part of this report.
B. Specific Details
1. No additional storm sewer will be required due to the direct
contribution of storm runoff from the Lots of Regency Park
P.U.D. Second Filing to Hilburn Drive.
2. An 18" RCP storm sewer has been designed within the Regency
Drive Right -of -Way in order to provide an outlet for storm
flows from the existing 42" RCP at Regency Drive and Harmony
Road. This design was pursued due to the failure to obtain
easements from the owner of the property on the east side of
Regency Drive.
V CONCLUSIONS
A. Compliance with Standards
1. All requirements of the City of Ft. Collins Storm Drainage
Design Criteria and previous drainage studies for the site,
have been met.
B. Drainage Concept
1. The drainage concept for the immediate Regency Park P.U.D.
Second Filing area has not been changed from those concepts
presented in previous drainage studies for which this
property was included. The storm drainage facilities
existing downstream appear to be more than adequate for the
current proposed land use. The Hilburn Drive capacities do
not appear to be exceeded due to either the current
development plans for Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing or
the previous development plans for this same site. The
existing storm sewer facilities are therefore more than
adequate and do not require further expansion. There may be
adequate capacity to serve future development to the west.
This may require further evaluation when development to the
west actually occurs.
2. Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing does not affect the
overall drainage plan for the area, relative to the Regional
Drainage Plan or the Master Drainage Plan.
PAGE 6
Project No: 1005-19-89
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing
V CONCLUSIONS (continued)
B. Drainage Concept (continued)
S. Final channel grading east of the 42" RCP located at Regency
Drive and Harmony Road, had never been provided according to
previously approved designs. Therefore, there is currently
potential for stormwater ponding within the limits of the
42" RCP. Currently, ponding within the pipe may reach depths
of 2.8' prior to releasing into the existing swale east of
the 42" RCP. The graded swale east of the 42" RCP is 2.8'
higher than the existing east invert of the 42" RCP and
directs drainage east parallel to Harmony Road. Existing
conditions and grades are noted on the Grading and Drainage
Plan for reference.
4. An 18" RCP storm sewer has been designed within the limits
of the Regency Drive Right -of -Way in an effort to provide an
outlet for current and future ponding situations within the
42" RCP. The design consists of the placement of 18" storm
sewer parallel with the Regency Drive east curb and gutter
(See Grading and Drainage Plan) and tieing into an existing
24" storm sewer approximately 297 feet north of the 42" RCP.
A 5' diameter manhole will be required at the intersection
of the 42" RCP and the 18" RCP. Future Harmony Road
improvements have been shown on the Grading and Drainage
Plan to identify possible conflicts between the manhole
location and future Harmony Road improvements. No conflicts
are apparent. The 18" storm sewer serves as a release from
the 42" RCP but by no means is intended to serve for the
conveyance of major storm flows which concentrate at the
intersection of Regency Drive and Harmony Road. Future major
drainage improvements will be required on the property east
of Regency Drive, to adequately convey major storm flows to
Regional Detention Pond No. 1 according to the area Master
Drainage Plan, the Master Plan of the Villages at Harmony
West P.U.D. and the previously approved drainage designs for
stormwater conveyance to Regional Detention Pond No. 1.
5. An analysis of the hydraulics of the proposed 18" RCP storm
sewer as designed, indicated that there will be no change to
the current hydraulic conditions which occur along the route
of the 18" storm sewer, especially at the intersection of
Regency Drive and Hilburn Drive. This intersection
represents a sump condition. Ponding potential at the
intersection is unchanged and overflow to the east at the
Regency Drive low point remains unchanged. Currently, the
top and back of walk at the inlet on the east side of
Regency Drive represents the intersection overflow.
Stormwater which may overtop the walk during potential
ponding situations at this sump point, continues overland in
a sheet flow condition to the north and east towards
Regional Detention Pond No. 1. The maximum water depth in
Regency Drive during potential ponding situations is 0.50'
prior to overflow. Potential ponding at the intersection of
Hilburn Drive and Regency Drive is delineated on the Grading
and Drainage Plan for reference.
PAGE 7
Project No: 1005-19-89
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing
V CONCLUSIONS (continued)
B. Drainage Concept (continued)
6. The abandoning of the easternmost section of the existing
42" RCP will create a higher headwater potential at the west
invert of the existing 42' RCP than currently exists. In
order to allow additional stormwater backup, a berm will be
constructed along the north side of the channel adjacent to
Lot 15 of Belair P.U.D. with a top of berm elevation of
5007.75 being provided. A single sidewalk chase will be
installed on the west side of Regency Drive with a total of
5' of opening. Stormwater backup within the channel will
spill through the chase section provided and over the top
and back of walk, as well as the edge of aspalt, directly
into Regency Drive. Design sections for the proposed berm
grading and the chase section location are included in the
appendix of this report. Grading of the berm and the chase
section detail have been provided on the Grading and
Drainage Plan.
7. The future Harmony Road ultimate full width improvements
adjacent to Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing includes the
provision for a Type R curb inlet with an opening of 20'
with an 18" RCP storm sewer lateral to the Harmony Road
drainage channel. The inlet will be located at the southwest
PCR of the intersection of Harmony Road and Regency Drive.
Runoff contribution for a SO -year storm (developed
conditions) would be 7.70 cfs at the type R inlet location
concentration point. The 20' type R inlet will only
intercept a portion of this flow however. Approximately 5.9
cfs will be intercepted by the inlet (see appendix; Harmony
Road Calculations). The theoretical capacity for the north
side of Harmony Road at this point is 13 cfs. The allowable
gutter flow at this point is 10.4 cfs utilizing the
appropriate reduction factor. The actual contributing runoff
determination was based on several assumptions. These
assumptions include:
a. The drainage channel on the north side of Harmony Road
will continue to the west with the extension of Harmony
Road to the west.
b. Direct contribution to Harmony Road will be within the
limits of the Harmony Road Right -of -Way only with no
direct contribution from from adjacent properties on
the north.
c. The Arapahoe/Mountainridge Farm Master Plan indicates
that the next intersection west of Regency Drive may be
located approximately 1,750 feet away. The assumption
used in this report may therefore provide conservative
estimates of storm flows actually contributing to the
type R inlet.
Should the section of Harmony Road adjacent to Regency Park
P.U.D Second Filing be incorporated with the design for a
larger section of Harmony Road, final drainage analysis, and
possibly, revised drainage facility design, would need to be
made at that time.
PAGE 8
Project No: 1005-19-89
Regency Park P.U.D. Second Filing
V REFERENCES
*City of Ft. Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction
Standards.
*Final Drainage Report for Regency Park P.U.D.; Parsons and
Associates; dated April 27, 1987; Project No: 86.29 REG.
VII APPENDICES
attached
APPENDIX
REGENCY PARK P.U.D. SECOND FILING
SITE CALCULATIONS
CIAI,E Ito
FDATL
L_z af.�
3
4
G
0' rA 910
0. zo
W_
A re:7 49 zr el'022 veo so
& 0
7
9
10
li
12
13
14
15
17
la
19
20
22
24
25
27
23
-.1. 11. .. . ............ ......
2i
i
✓(���� (+C�.r J_��LrN'• y���QY.I_C3Kt�_C
�unrr. !Z/ �p
!Q
0.72Qareo
Z/ a6uo
7
a��e//,/�--//
� !O(�LG Q_�ca.
yss RGteo
- J
10
//JJ �J
Xoz/ alma elan KlbLLb�� �.�I- U0.
L ,04 4;G 4ft
/
_`Lee z, kc.Gf.G
12
.ol.� auk s � a.� ; L', 0 90 O.8/Q�,r,�✓
_ '''
I ,I
l�,w�c accGi [acco[f� � �- d 20 2 8( Q G1Qp
''
To upo
0.`�ll 907 o.-t18�o.-9a� f Z 8� (o.20 )
G
17
l a
�=�u.LcaX C�.uc.e.. o f L'OY1CL1�t �G.�Gow
`
10
zy7 M
/. - -
21
22
23
24
'G
2G
27
rr.crt;ur 20.
Ll�Ala-n1el
lip.
CDAU
14 ?--d�/Olo rp-�fl� J-
Ley = l5 /yj Gtyu
J
,o
Aiwa QZ.. �'<?C,c D.'SiG l.9� /.l02 /o = z�/�
12
Lioa, S� Gw AOC4.1, s O.Y% �S8/ /.6Z/.zs-) SS�cf�
13
it
,'A t Ile . r.,p _,,• ,�,, = Z 3/acmes
IG
7
13
19
20
12
22
23
24'
�15,2W
2J
G00% S�u�/�ew, Arco � Z..3Y azo% .?�
^G
I
A
LAG 4i
2
�_P;ICFnF�[D'JY `�c,�, o,,rE
5
fE BLS GF 2. o rft Ice, z cC, - -;2,m
2Z
0<<ov
/Z
�E
7
10
11
D.4/(o (/.?Sl 01 s.,00,0 2 % !K J ,</5.2c-4
10
11
16
17
19
1`J
20
21
22
23
24
25
2G
27
r
c,recrtr.rus" 23
u
�ZC
X
—
V
IOOOO
9000
8000
T000
I
„
L
n IS ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT IN MANNINO
FORMULA APPROPRIATE TO MATERIAL IN
BOTTOM OI CHANNEL
I IS RECIPROCAL OF GROSS SLOPE
V� `O 6000 REFERENCE: N: A. I PA«Ex DINo! ,G.G.
M 500o PACE 150. EQUATION 1141
0 p
p• 4000
'57S EXAMPLE ISCC DASHED LINEEI
000 GINENI S 0.00 100
N so
D O To
n Qx1 E/n • Ixoo LL JO
0 2000 > ' 0" U xo
Li •—�TINDT --
OL
Ul —
10
08
07
06
ILL .05
.04
LL
- 2.0
tut
.80
.70
.60
0
.40
) — 3 1 z
1000
900 _02__—_'�
80o W
C
\ 700 ^
.20
s (n
500
t( 0 400 ~ x Z
tJ INSTRUCTIONS Ur I
m a 300 O0
T W \1
CL
011 Ey 1. CONNECT 21A RATIO WITH SLOPE ISI Q ,OS "f
0
T- x� AMTH ul THESE TWO LIHCS MUST CONNECT DISCHARGE I0I WITH ��SS••�� ` •OO6
\l \ 200 DEP0
D J Z I—
''1y0Q .007
,• 'U INTERSECT AT TURNING LINE roN yV) / .2 � v' .10
COMPLETE SOLUTION. Q .01 /\ ,006 W
V,J I.FOR SHALLOW ` r I V .005 w •08
O100 v-f.APED CHANNEL > ILLW •07
I� 90 AS SHOWN USE NOMOGRAPH 0 0
II so WETH I • r .004 .06
70 y w 0
\N 60 0. 0 .05
1 0 50 S TO OETERMINE r' 0 .003
40 DISCHARGE 0• IN T' ° N ,04
PORTION 01 CHANNEL I — (ii
00
HAVING .1OT. A: 0
Lo`• \/Y,�I 30 DE T,1RM INE OE t" > roA TOTAL DISCHARGE IN .002 \J
O O ENTIRE SECTION a THEN USE NOMOGRAPH TO H 03
DETERMINE 0A IN SECTION a FOR DEPTH20
Q
A TO DETERMINE OISCHARGE > /S� .02
IN COMPOSITE SECTION,..
>:
w
I+ FOLLOW INSTRUCTION !
r r(1 10 .001
TO OBTAIN DISCHARGE IN
`1nU SECTION a AT ASSUMED •ICI>•>1
D(PI. > OBTAIN OA IBA
From BPR SLDRE RATIO IA AND OLPTH,J THEN Or .O,.a
WF�I 5 Figure 4-1 ,01
v1 NONOGRAPH FOR FLOW IN TRIANGULAR GUTTERS
(From U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads, 1965)
MAY 1984
4-3
DESIGN CRITERIA
No Text
0
F-
Z
20
w
a
Z
w 10
a
0
w 5
U
w
D
0
c 3
w
Q
3
O
4v
0
Flo
o=
j
o
�
P
J
V
to
3�
2 QP
CP
O
V�
0P
Q.
3 �4i
4
. QOe
o
4P
�
hS �P
2
7P
U
o
P
Q
.2 .3 .5 1 2 3 5 10 20
50
30
20
ut
5
3
2
5 .5
.I .2 .3 .5 1 2 3 5 10. 20
VELOCITY IN FEET/SECOND
Figure 4.4.1.4-1 AVERAGE VELOCITIES FOR ESTIMATING TRAVEL
TIME FOR OVERLAND FLOW.
(From: USDA, Soil Conservation Service, 1977)
4.4 --- 14
REGENCY DRIVE 18" RCP STORM SEWER
AND
HARMONY ROAD/REGENCY DRIVE CHANNEL BERM
i
r��.�r,.,RCO E,,.
0;1NO '-
// �AA'',,,,,, U Ct,aE
40
4
/07 X?''
r
�b SOGI.d o
9
10
/J
J/ /�,, Jn
ezaci/-
2
4
_ "
��=6%�t�s� ,� /.9G%SF . P- f/%/,CT• IZ O.� FT
i y9
013 ���7i o i�3�oi�s>�Z = /�� ens
,5
ecce44cuC,
17
Wolf 1po �l
e
GG O�C'leQ oL ,QQGleew ��/- S ",; ,2lY✓te�x[ o to ft
20
21
'35c�s
22
zs
24
25
/
.047 4M /2�„I ZZ4
_
ze
/
,�.Qrm Ono�xaca� d� f/lL�rr�orrh l�cl�uruC tea/ �i.��a-,
77
ti('/1 !o S�isyc, fCa Gp Qb
ek�ruliva` 28
/p
!1/2/� �GLAU;LG L1 QO.ir� `0 �'.5/0 ou.st°6 e4
OF
�� '
fmege.-Oml—A - 44—� rp-f7if I —[,ED BY
�/lGuG �lf.�cr�ti/O u/
2
4w/ / 1
�/
3
ow
0on
y o.�o' �ay^eiaAe I�.Pae� oco�cq d,��o%'�clecva� J
10
ow cu �
12
13
y 3� yZfO
14
SO 10
,5
721 4, Akv,aal o
,7
18
B'/IcP = /l 3 �5 ; xB -,loco
' 9
J. S e4 Sw�a�c C� mac, s e" cox
21
22
23
24
25
/i
—lea l Ir/ A ve u .5mac, � 01 W&Yu� a YIZ
26
27
,J/1o4otCrc UP/1r� G�l�Clc, l�ao !L rnu�c�,+�� �ao ��u►w of
execu(ivv^ 28
V
//O77r
li
i
!Hl
il
fill
if
ilp
:z
72 C)
LL) V-
k d
ol
itit
lei
All
U
LQ
cc
m
Po
HARMONY ROAD CALCULATIONS
PAGE
— 1
2I
5I
s 1d14
9
12
13
s � c�i°P—•�oxu.�c.oz
17
n
18
20
21
22
23
24
v
6
:II PREPNIEU
:G!tr.G ut
dll� = �00 LF � Z jZ0
OL 2
25 Gaon - %U u� /�k-�.. �CLoO 0.7i0?,O / �Z.�/(>�.Z�� ��.o C]►$,
27
28
ni
—`
PF,C-!i
I
'
�G�//_/!� Iw� ��.•fI./L W ��I_I_O���i/ PIRD"1n,[C7CiY��—
f/loi '.Clo: /Dot-/9-bJ
2
3
GOrJ canto
_
age
s
.T
s
'
6
T ,� uc �C �?�,eo` aE cacti-roec,�ion, off' �;a�rrro��oa� aura
1011
a a o o�/D Ue�,t&,,f, co aotl �d�
2
13
_
6
cum an x %%=eoloc� le c�
s
. 17
/
o% • f -f ccc (a /Eld uGtcorc ,LGt/°,c+2ox
�. air X 90 l• 59 e-.A Z-o
6
/=
, 911
20
21
22
6(/IH7 /Gallo[ II.Lu[G/t
23
A
! [p!
24
L1CLtm e. S A.V A44 ev ux,
2s
26
� ��7�� �GGCGi C�•LO�/L
27
ac s Norio
eAecuLrve 26
��yJ fau�C /
�l�r����k .iftOLeJK.Ozs.. L�L,'LG�OC.Pit. PLQtt�
vv
Dq
a.
Ile w
fr-1
C.'3 >-
a o
W...'o w o \ }
w, a
�.
fly , 3nlaq AJN303N
VT
kk: -
E a l 1i�.•.. t
Xt
- __ - _ __ �� �' � �•�\I __ •� ,} I _....r. {III :�• � _
LU
v''. L/ 4'''0 .' W ..
W
W+I _1 +1 W
00
w
U Q W
•.. Z
+; L¢L
�W
r z=
C/7 w
ui
� y`�o. � � � _ �. /mil • J \" � a ..
Z
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
2000
1000
900
800 =
C
YWT00
=_
0 Z
r400
O
~
H
Q
300
cr
200
100
90
80
70
60
44
20
m
From BP
I E,
T— —
L
EQUATION: a • 0.3E (A) S1 >,~
....,..-n.c,c NUcrr.Nlcn• •H ..WWRN
.10
FORMULA APPROPRIATE TO MATERIAL IN
EOTTOM Or CHANNEL
I IS RECIPROCAL Or GROSS SLOPE
.08
REFERENCE: N. 0, • PROCEEDINGS INR,
•07
PACE ISO, EQUATION 1141
06
EXAMPLE (SEE DASHED LINES)
.OS
OIVEIII 1 • 0.03
IOO
0
\
CIO3o
n • .OE Ian . IEoo
LL.
S
1_:.04
a • o.0
U
30
xo
FIND, Q 2.0 crs
_.
3
z
2.0
1Ei
.80
.70
.60 Q%
.30
•.02 T
01
W
I. CONNECT t/n RATIO WITH SLOP[ I51
0'
AND CONNECr DISCHARGE 101 WITH
=
O
.006
DEPTH Ill THESE Two LINES MUST
-
�U/�
,Ox
•007
INTERSECT AT TURN -NO LING TOR
yA
COMPLETE SOLUTION.
Q
,01
!,
V
•006
L.rON SHALLOW
T
05
a
.0
V-SNRPGO CHANNEL
AS SHOWN USE NOMOGRAPH
O
T
.004
w(TM I .
r
W
a
3 TO DETERMINE r' O .003
DISCHARGE 0A IN F
>` V'
PORTION 01 CHANNEL
RAVING WIDTH
DETERMINE OEPrN i FOR TOTAL DISCHARGE IM ,002
EF TIN( SECTION W THEN USE NOMOGRAPH TO
OETLRMINE OR IN SECTION O TOM DEPTH
i
r' A TO DETERMINE DISCHARGE
IN COMPOSITE SECTION.- I O
l'
roLLDW INsrRucTIDN 3 I x ,001
TD DETAIN DISCHARGE IN '1�_A_- Irjc
SECTION It AT ASSUMED
DEPTH > ; OITAIN 0' FOR
RSLOPE RATIO 1. AND DEPTH J THEN 0, • 0. • 0
Figure 4-1
NONOGRAPH FOR FLOW IN TRIANGULAR GUTTERS
(From U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads, 1965)
FOR HARMONY ROAD
.20
F--
z
O
La
1-�
(n .10
W
a
W oe
W .07
06
.05
m
D_ .04
U
F03
—
raE�
i
~ .02
Q-
W
0
IIm
9i
MAY 1984
4-3
DESIGN CRITERIA
i
Sx (Cross Slope)
STREET
S Longitudinal Slope)
SIDE
B 4-1
A41 `ov
0
(Gutter Flow) I- 3
CARRY
OVER
Fronde Na at This Point
_ �Fw
Curb
W QI
B
(Intercepted Flow)
L
(Length of Opening)
A4J
11
a
`off
Cd
oCL
no
0,0
7
8"
P LAN
_ original Gutter Line'
S
x,
Gutter Depression at Inlet
SECTION A —A
SECTION B-B SECTION B-B
( Straight Cross Slope) (Fort, Collirs Standard .6" Vertical CaG)
NOTE: THE FORT COLLINS STANDARDS HAVE
GUTTERS WITH CROSS SLOPES STEEPER THAN SX.
FIGURE 5-4
STANDARD CURB -OPENING INLET
MAY 1984 5-12 DESIGN CRITERIA
No Text
No Text
Q(act)= 7.000 cfs DIA= 18 inches SLOPE= 0.50000 X
Q(cap)= 7.427 cfs V(cap)= 4.203 ft/sec
REQ. SLOPE= 0.94241 X Q(act)/Q(cap)= 0.444 n= 0.013
V(full)= 3.961 f/s H(full)= 0.243
depth/Dia.=0.863 V(act)/V(cap)=1.024 DEPTH= 1.294 feet
V(act)= 4.305 f/s H(act)= 0.287 Area= 1.767 sq.ft.
1.0
.9
.8
.7
Cr
o .6
I—
U
Q
<L
Z
0 .5
U
O
w .4
cr
.3
.2
an
s=06°/
F= 0.8
s=0.4%
F=0.5
I
I BELOW MINIMUM
ALLOWABLE
I STREET GRADE
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
SLOPE OF GUTTER (%)
Figure 4-2
REDUCTION FACTOR FOR ALLOWABLE GUTTER CAPACITY
Apply reduction factor for applicable slope to the theoretical gutter capacity to obtain
allowable gutter capacity.
(From: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads, 1965)
MAY 1984 4-4 DESIGN CRITERIA
'5.3.5 Grates for Pipes
Where a clear and present danger exists such as a siphon, a drop in elevation adjacent to a
sidewalk or road, a, long pipe with one or more manholes, or at pipes which are near play-
grounds, parks, and residential areas, a grate may be required. For most culverts through
embankments and crossing streets, grates will not be required.
When called for on the plans, grates shall meet the following requirements:
a. Grating shall be constructed of steel bars with a minimum diameter of 5/8". Reinforcing
bars shall not be used.
b. Welded connections shall be-1/4" minimum.
c. Spacing between liars shall normally be 6" unless site conditions are prohibitive.
d. All exposed steel shall be galvanized in accordance with AASHTO M 111.
e. Welded joints shall be galvanized with a rust preventive paint.
f. Grates shall be secured to the. headwall or end section by removable devices such as
bolts or hinges to allow maintenance access, prevent vandalism; and prohibit entrance by
children.
'5.4 Inlets
Storm inlets shall be installed where sump (low -spot) conditions exist or street runoff'carrying
capacities are exceeded.
The curb inlets shown in the Standard Details, pages D-7, 8, 12 &.13, shall be used in all City Streets.'
If larger inlets are required, the Colorado Department of Highways Type R Curb Inlet, Standard M-604-
12, shall be used. For drainageways other than streets (for example, parking.lots, medians, sump
basins) an Area Inlet similar to the detail on page D-9 shall, be used.
The outlet pipe of the storm inlet shall be sized on.the basis of the theoretical capacity of the. inlet, with
a minimum diameter of 15 inches, or 12 inches if elliptical or arch pipe is used.
All curb openings shall be installed with the opening at least 2 inches below the flow line elevation. The
minimum transition length shall be 3'6" as shown on the standard details previously listed.
Because of debris plugging, pavement overlaying, parked vehicles, and other factors which decrease
inlet capacity, the reduction factors listed in Table 5-4 shall be utilized.
Table 5-4 .
INLET CAPACITY REDUCTION FACTORS
Percentage of
Drainage Condition _ Inlet Type Theoretical Capacity ..
Sump or Continuous-Grade_...............................:..........._CDOH_Type-R=Curbs
Opening
580%
10, 85%
15' 9000=
Street—Sump.............................................................. 4' Curb Opening 80%
Street — Continuous Grade .......................................... 4' Curb Opening 80%
Parking Lots, Medians ................................................... Area Inlet 80%
The theoretical capacity of inlets in a low point or sump shall be determined from Figures 5-2 and 5-3.
The theoretical capacity of curb openings on a continuous grade shall be determined from Figures 5-4,
5-5 and 5-6.
The standard curb -opening is illustrated by Figure 5-4 and is defined as having a gutter depression
apron W feet wide at the inlet opening which extends W feet upstream and downstream from the open-
ing, has a depression depth (a) equal to W/12 feet at the curb face, and a curb opening height (h) of at
least 0.5 feet. The graph as presented by Figure 5-5 is based on a depression apron width (W) equal to
2 feet and depression width (a) equal to 2 inches. The pavement cross-section is straight to the curb
MAY 1984 5-8 DESIGN CRITERIA
FINAL. DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
REGENCY PARK P.U.D.
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
April 27, 1987
Prepared by: Parsons & Associates Consulting Engineers
432 Link Lane Plaza
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
(303) 221-2400
Project No. - 86.29 REG
PROPOSED LAND USE
The proposed, development for this site will consist of 42 single
family lots. The existing streets, Hilburn and Craig, along with
i. the three proposed Cul-De-Sacs will provide the interior traffic
circulation from these units to Seneca Street and Regency Drive.
r'
HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS
The Rational Method has been used to calculate the stormwater
„runoff flows for the developed 2- and-100-year return period
storms for the Regency Park P.U.D. The design plans define 'sub -
basins A through E-E, and Table I summarizes the results pf the
hydrologic analysis of these sub -basins.
The historic runoff flows will not be considered for this
development since the proposed regional Detention Pond No. 1 for
II the Mail Creek Drainageway is located adjacent to the site at the
t Southeast corner of the intersection of Wakerobin Lane and Regency
Drive.
i
I.; Offsite runoff generated from sub -basins 75 and 80, as shown on-/
Figure 1, has not been included in the analysis. The 100-year
developed runoff from sub -basin 75 will be routed through the site
in an open channel along the North side of Harmony Road. The
developed runoff from sub -basin 80 will be assumed to flow along
the Northwestern side of Seneca Street then Southeast along
1 Regency Drive to the regional detention facility.
` HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
i
The hydrologic•analysis for this site utilized the existing public
streets as the major conveyance of stormwater. The results of the
study assume that all water is carried by the streets; however,
` the capacity of Hilburn Drive is �exceededlby the initial storm
�.. approximately 200 feet West of Regency Drive.— At this location, a
storm sewer system has been initiated which flows into Detention
l Pond No. 1. Inlets and curb chases are provided at low points in
the flowline of the curb and gutter or as previously mentioned
where the gutter capacity of the street is exceeded.
Open channels will be provided to route offsite runoff through or
around the development in addition to stormwater generated within
the site. The channel North of Harmony Road is sized to carry 56
c.f.s. (design flow X 1.33) at a depth of 1.4 feet. An existin5-
42" R.C.P. culvert under Regency Drive routes this runoff to the-'
regional detention pond. The open channel along Seneca Street is
sized to carry 274 c.f.s. at a depth of 2.65 feet. The runoff
then crosses under Seneca Street through existing double 42"
R.C.P. culverts. These culverts will have the capacity to carry
M
the 10-year developed flow of 102 c.f.s.. Runoff in excess of the
10-year storm will flow into;.Regency Drive, down Regency Drive to
Wakerobin, then down Wakerobin where it will flow over the
sidewalk into the detention pond and into the 27" X 43" concrete
arch pipe provided farther to the East.
DETENTION STORAGE
Stormwater generated from this project as well as subsequent
developments upstream to the West will be detained in regional
Detention Pond No. '1. This facility will have an approximate
surface area of 7.3 acres at a high water surface elevation of
5101.0. It has been designed to detain the 100-year developed
runoff from approximately 195 acres upstream, of which Regency
Park P.U.D. is a part. .
CONCLUSION
Drainage from the Regency Park P.U.D. has been accomplished by
means of existing street, open channel and storm sewer conveyance
to regional Detention Pond. No. 1. Only 2- and 100-year developed
flows have been considered in the analysis due to the proximity of
this facility. The existing storm sewer system has been
incorporated into the design to reduce the initial storm.runoff
flowing in the streets and at low points in the curb and gutter
flowline.
The proposed 42 lot single family developmentto the north of
Hilburn Drive and the proposed multi -family development to the
south of Hilburn Drive will not affect the capacity of the
existing storm sewer system. It will continue to function without
modification. If -the multi -family development alignment should be
changed for its final submittal. A new report for its portion
will be submitted for review.
Prepared under the direct 'supervision of:
.Q s
t
13131 W
r�.
4grF of Co °.�•`.
r: •
771L 5082 •` -
�. ■ e Norse•foo'f�• Ro d 63
\ ■ ,��
of
■ I ■ •
is �• • .. r . I I
l _
■ ■ :\
I ` J �49 \i • I N.T.S. �J �87- `
• • r I 8 II 48 \ C) 47,• 20.� 44 e2.5
79 �52.8/ 45 r •
%i1 � 1709 ice. I y� t--t74 �
l' 1\r1 �� I v t 2 .3� 1
��24 0� `� t
` .
= Area Tom` co �� O I
�� \
29
rn
1 1 ``.pA t� O• N ^. 0
R k Dcteniion/ N
C. o .t Pond rJo i 1 -c i
.^ 54
dr
"\. 47
J
00
87
ice• .,,`_`� ``,• . •\ ,y`'♦ \ 38,5/
i
Fgure 1
TECHNICAL APPENDIX
w O\ O\ LnM
U i'7 .T -z r` O N m .•1 ••1 .•i o0 o0 ON N r1 O . -1 M t+1 .7 O\ h wD 0 Ln N 00 " i
O M cn .-1 M N .-4 -d .-4 M .4 1-4 N C%�D �11
•d O
a O•
0
v
v m
Q W n 00 U1 d O M .-4 t` .O C4 00 iO tb M ' .t U1 M N /
N M M M M N N Min .7 .7
U M .Y .7 N .7 .7 �O U.7 . •-1 %0 �O %O oD .7 OD t\ -,t a
t\ � O% N M
N --I 14 .--1 N •-1 N
a
H
.0
41 O .1 m O r� U1 N M %O U1 M U1 M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 000
"4 .-i
r0 H O. Ln .t .7 M r+1 9 9 9.9 9 9 9 999
q
ry
H OD O% M %O N r\ 00 O (7% O U) .7 01% ON M O O .4 N O N M G% M M M O M .7 O
N
.-i H •4 -ti -4 N .4 .4 14 1: N N M M M M M M i+1 M N M M M CM N r1 M
H
W
l
C
co
a
0
O O O O O O O O O Q O O N c O
q U M N M O O O\ 9 OD U1 L 1 rn U1 U'1 U1 rn U1 U) ul U'1 rn rn U1 U1 r, M o
Ol E4 .4 r1 M N .7 N .4 .4 r4 N N
u
C
O
U , 00 n .1 %O O rn w .-+ .7 Nn N N. O% , Ln O rn O� %O ON U1 O %0 O O O n 00 N O
W N
O U CO n U1 U1 .t O 00 O% r1 00 Ln •%o 'Ln U1 Ul U1 U1 Ul U1 U1 �O U1 U1 U1 �O N %O
E-1 N -1 M N .7 N N .- 4 .-1 N N M •--�
W
w
W U1 rn Ln U1 U1 M U1 U1 U1 Ul U1 . U1 Ln U1 U1 Ul Ul Ln . U1 Ul Ln Ul U1 U'1 U1 U1 M O O U1
W U N N N N N N N N N N N N O% 01 O% O% Q% O% O% O% O% O\ m m m m m r` w m
O
U
y
to d
n
00
r-
rn
.r
Ln
O
r
0
M
M
rr
O
r�
U1
r�
U1
M
.4
W
M
-�T
It
M
%:I'
U1 00 -r
N H
W
. O%
M
%O
.-4
m
r`
O
00
O
r`
r�
U1
.7
r+
-d
.4
.7
M
N
N
N
U1
N
N
M
oo O co
H U
•
•
•
.
.
r^ 6 6
.•i
.-i
ti r1
41
00C
vi •'i
-4
N
M
.7
Ln
%
n
W
ON
O
M
.7
U1
�O
r`
M
ON
O
.
N
M
.7
u'1
%O
n
00 m O
N O
1-1
vi
14
1-1
1-4
1-1
.-1
.-4
'-I
r 4
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N M
Aa
..•
�j
Q V
p
6
Q
U
Q
W
R
U
x
H
h
.a
z
O
N
Cl
a
W
H
Q
>
3
DC
>+
N
I
r
.�-.
6
04 U Q
p
v�
_
No Text
r.^
PARSONS & CLIENT JOB./ NO,�/�'�/�� 2
ASSOCIATES PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR_
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Ft. CDillns• Colorado 80524 MADE BY �•V DATE � 2'�ro CNECKED BY DATE_'SHEET '' OF �� J
r-
PARSONS & CuENT JOB NO. 77Z / 99Lq ^�7
ASSOCIATES. PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR �IuI MI ivL �I�, I (V Vr'�,
CONSULTING ENGINEERS I
i,\/ Ft. Collins. Colorado 80524 MADE BY, Lb DATE .2,� CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF 34
FPARSONS &
ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
I. Fl. C.M.Q. Colorado $0524
CLIENT JOB No.
PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR6A,94,c4ew 00
I
MADE BY DATE_ CHECKED By DATE- SHEET OF --jj
S
I.0 12
5
II 10 4
.9
8
i. 10 6 3
.8 F
9 00 2
i.... U-
.4
i tL
7. x 3 ��
8 w z 1.5
a
vi 2
.6 7
imp y z I.0
_ z
.5 �_---- zv _elrrpl'ipo' rt'a I.0 z 9
�. w
5.5 o a .8
cn . 6 O
F- ui u.
I 1w 5 ' U z o .7
i s u. .4 Z z .4 �-
w _
? 4.5 z a .3 co 6
L:. - 0 w
�..`. O 4 = _ .2 0 .5
z z
c� o
{.;:.
a •3 3.5' w z '4
0 0- .� 1 a-
o w
u- w o .08 �-
f:
_ .25 3 = ~o .06 3
L .>
co c� � Z
= 2.5 = w .04 w .25
I:
2 ° .03 a
a .02 0 .2
' a
iL
a
.15 .01 0 .15
( L tL
L:.. O
O
�• . 1..5 --- -- - -- -- yo
1.
9 US
Figure 5-2
NOMOGRPAH FOR CAPACITY OF CURB OPENING INLETS IN SUMPS, DEPRESSION DEPTH 2"
Adapted from Bureau of Public Roads Nomograph
MAY 1984 5-10 DESIGN CRITERIA
r• -
ram,
2.0
1 J
_
EQUATION' 0. 0.50
10000
-n IS IIouGNN({{ catmC1cni IN MANMIND
.10
9000
FORMULA APPROPRIATE TO MATERIAL IN
8000
BOTTOM OF CHANNEL
'
7000
S 13 RECIPROCAL OF CROSS SLOP(
.08
1.0
'
6000
REIEMENQI N. a a PROCEEDINGS n.A.
.07
5000
PAGC nO. EGUATI011 6.41
.80
06
4000
JO
..
EXAMPLE 'SEE DA{H(D LIME{1
'
.05
SIY[RI { • 0.93 to \
.60
1 • 1 • (i%
ao
04
E/n . IEoo
n .
'.50
2000\.`
1. 0.11 30 LL
U
\ find I o . 1.0 CPS -20
•03
.40
10
7
- -c
t��1
-
.02'
^
C
800
700
[
W
=
V
X7
600
= a .7 N
20
500
c
p .3
\
O
400
~
W .x
Z
I
INSTRUCTIONS UE
J
Q
300
�' .07
\a
01
O
ry
G�
L CONNECT E/n RATIO WITH SLOP[ ISI .03 'Z
W
AND CONNECT DISCHARGE 101 WITH =' 0� Z
.008
l�
TOO
DEPTH 1J1. THESE TWO LINES MUST U
.01. Q
f"-
I"
.INTER{(CT AT TURNING LINE FOR W
.007
N
.IO
COMPLETE wwnoN. 0 .01 '�,•V
.006
W
�
I
T \
W
.08
E.FOR {MALLOW _
J LL
.o O5
W
IOU
90
7-SNAPED CHANNEL
O
.OT
80
AS SHOWN USE NOMOGRAPH
..004
.06
TO
WITH E • f
W
60
d
• O
.05
50
3. TO DETERMINE 0
�:
.003
m
40
DI{(HAR{E 0. IN N IA
J VA
.04
PORTION or CHANNEL .I7I
30
HAYING WIDTH C! I-t-
DETERMINE DEPTH J FDA TOTAL DISCHARGE IN
.002
.03
ENTIRE SECTION A. THEN USE NOMOGRAPH TO
H
2O
DETERMINE GA IN SECTION . TOM DEPTH
Q
r' J' W
_
r
4. TO OETERNIME DISCHARGE 1J
IN COMPOSITE SECTION._ J A
FOLLOW INSTRUCTION, 3. I
n�
LA-
W
.02
IO
TO OSTA14 DISCHARGE IN 1.�Arzr,.]A
•OOI
Q
SECTION A AT ASSUMED • SA IJ'J 1
DEPTH J , OBTAIN 0. FOR
From BPR SLOPE RATIO BA AND DEPTH J' THEN OT•OA. GA
Figure 4-1
.01
NONOGRAPH FOR FLOW IN TRIANGULAR GUTTERS
(From U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads, 1965)
MAY 1984
4-3
DESIGN CRITERIA
.J
PARSONS & CLIENT JOB NO.
ASSOCIATES PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR /iLT c+?�l 6;'02e-
�• CONSULTING ENGINEERS
FI. Colllns.Colorado 80524 • MADE BY DATE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET--�I— OF-3—�_
I.
1
i. .
� 1804 f(" 11 Q OK-S RuIaOFf r-ao" 3,asit4s i ?I �, kl (,IRIX . C�
%rr Ll ,ten- = 4, oti n".
l
2.0
tJ
_
L
,
EQUATION. 0 • 0.54 (fiJ S1 J
10000
n IS RDYGHNESS COEFFICIENT IN MANNING
•10
9000
FORMULA APPROPRIATE TO MATERIAL IN
8000
BOTTOM OF CHANNEL
•
7000
I Is RECIPROCAL Or CROSS SLOPE
.08
1.0 .
6000
REFERENCE. R. A. A. PROCEEDINGS ISM.
•07
5000
PAGE 410. EOYATION GQ
.BO
.06
4000
.70
EXAMPLE 1{[[ DAtNLo LIN[SI �
.05
`3000a1WEN-
a 0.03 Poo
.60N
\�
a eA To \
DL
I/n • Ia00
n .30
.04
•.50
U.
LL
xo
FIND I D . 1.0 Crs
.40
---
` to
.03
Z
1000
� 3 ?
.30
900
02
Boo
i
700
+ a I
600
N
500
`•
.20
.3
400
~ Ll1
Z
INSTRUCTIONS, CD,
Q
30o
...1
X
.01
Q
:OT
L CDNNCCT I/n RATIO WITH SLOPE 1;v, Q 03
�•�=
CL
AND CONNECT DISCHARGE 10) WITH
03 z
.0 B
200
DEPTH IYL THESE TWO LINES MUST U/1 .O= Q
•O 07
'^
...
INTCRSECT AT TURNING LINE PDX yF
1V./,
•
COMPLETE tOLYTIOM. 0 ;01 ♦1
w. V
•006
W\\_
�
T
LU
VB
I.FOR SHALLOW
•005
LLl
too
U-SHAPED CHANNEL J
•07
90
BO
AS SHOWN USE NOMOGRAPH
T
-..
70
• Y
WETH IUj
.001
.06
60
(L
A
.05
50
3. TO DETERMINE • rJ O
.003
CIS
A ••
40
DISCHARGE 0, IN J
(i�
Q_
04,
PORTION OF CHANNEL _ (TJ
•�
30
HAYING WIDTH RI
DETERMINE DEPTH J FOR TOTAL DISCHARGE UI
.002
.03
ENTIRE SECTION. a. TMCN USE NOMOGRAPH TO
L
20
DETCAMIIIE OR IN SECTION N FOR DEPTH
Q
;.
r'
F—
A. TO 0[T[RYIML DISCHARGE
.O2
-•
IN COMPOSITE SECTION-- J • R
FOLLOW INSTRUCTION a.
¢�
Si
IO
OOI
0
TO OBTAIN DISCHARGE IN Rom- E.r
SECTION • AT ASSUMED •LR IJJ )
DEPTH J I OBTAIN OR FOR
.:.
From BPR SLOPE RATIO BR AND DEPTH ; THEN 0, . Q. .OR
Figure 4-1
.01
NONOGRAPH FOR FLOW IN TRIANGULAR GUTTERS
(From U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads,1965)
MAY 1984
4-3
DESIGN CRITERIA
J
1.0
.9
.8
7
.5
t-
w
uw.. .4
■
0
z_
z .3
W
a
0
.2
.15
;A,- q
12 5
II 10 4
8
10 6 3
� F
w
9 00 4 2
a U.
8 a 3 z 1.5
vi 2'
7 por1� ti '0
z _ 1.0
6-- EzampfePart_ J z .9
-.8- w .8
5.5 V 6 ao
5 = z o .7
z z .4' F-
4.5 z. o ,3 w 6
w x
4 0 2 0 .5
co x
z -
0
3.5 w w '4
Q. —1 1
0 w
0 0 .08
3 = 0 .06 L 3
L0,, z
2.5 = x .04. x .25
w w
a .03
� a
� 3
a .02 0 .2
a =
a
.01 0 .15
L 1t
0
0
1•.5 -- - - x
.10
1.2
Figure 5-2
NOMOGRPAH FOR CAPACITY OF CURB OPENING INLETS IN SUMPS, DEPRESSION DEPTH 2"
Adapted from Bureau of Public Roads Nomograph
MAY 1984 5-10 DESIGN CRITERIA
- •
1.0
12
5
11
18
4
9
10
6
3
.8
F
00
H
2
9
w 4
7
8
w 3
i���
�
z
1.5
a
...
'6
vi 2 �
� ti
0
E�
z
1.0
.5
-6- Ex°mPlepart_
—
0
- z
•9
_
w
5.5
0--_
_— _ a
0
.8
w
5 i
z .6
U.
0
.7
uw.
.4
z
z .4'
w
E-
x
?
4.5 z
° 3
0
CD
w
6
L
.-.
s
4
LL
0
2
x
0
.5
0
z
z
x
F-
F-
w
'3
3.5 WE
o
a,
4
CL i 0
0
w
0 ILL
0 0 .08 F~-
f . .25 3 .06 .3
0
c� 0
U-
z
_ = x .04. x .25
2.5 w w
.2 .03 Q
a- .2
a .02 0
0-
x
2 0 a
.15 .Oi 0 .IS
L w
0
0
--- -- — Yo a
1.5 -- -- x
0=2h .10
.I 1.2
a Figure 5-2
NOMOGRPAH FOR CAPACITY OF CURB OPENING INLETS IN SUMPS, DEPRESSION DEPTH 2"
Adapted from Bureau of Public Roads Nomograph
MAY 1984 5-10 DESIGN CRITERIA
PARSONS & CLIENT ��•IV/lr'l I I JOB NO. Z�
F�- ASSOCIATES PROJECT I�ILl7"t'+��"1 1'�w ` •4• l� CALCULATIONS FOR VI-
' CONSULTING ENGINEERS
% FI.Collln%. Colorado 80521 MADE BY ' • OATE`'rnnr��
'��'� CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF. �
No Text
PARSONS & cS��yL. J�Oe�,/N,,O..^._/�/2/�q RFG¢3
ASSOCIATES PROJECT 1\, �"J��iC.N GLCUUTIONS FOR 1/� C..J L-1�S
CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1, '5r2�
' ( Ft. CoI11na.Colorado 80524 MADE DY 0, DATE CNECKED BY DATE SHEETy OFOF
1qtmf-
140fvul� sl-
- 2f
FPARSONS
CUENT
JOBfN"O,--.
ASSOCIATES
PROJECT
CALCULATIONS FORc
46o
Q15
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
90524
MADE BY t�)•
DATE 3,7-4-61tcHECKED BY DATE-
SHUT OF
Fi. Collins. Colorado
-oat,"
U-..
PARSONS & CLIENT 1rSAL
ASSOCIATES !94X7�H<%GI' I,�UL �•U.✓.
JOB NO.f:N✓ 17-1
CALCULATIONS FOR ;l/r'Aa iS
ram- PROJECT
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
1�' CHECKEO BY
7
Ft. Collins. Colorado 80524 MADE BY `� DATE
DATE SHEET OF
40..5
+4.a,�.A,�
......
I .
8
n 9s
1W
l
'i II5
i !
(''
l :
� � �, D.zS) C �,IS)� L•I�� � D, 34 C,�S
Qy -
q Lo izS)C5.4
r
L�.
PARSONS & CLIENT-
ASSOCIATES PROJECT Pup- JOB NO.
CALCULATIONS FOR
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
MADE �-L4,5-ICHEC�ED BY
Ft.Colli...Colo,ada 80524 OATEDATE- SHEET OF
swl,:711T�. Cc ��sf k-4 F
PARSONS & CLIENT if1�T Tl"11.1,1�iPI{�✓1��1, ��� JOB ND._ v`I�r �'�
Irk- ASSOCIATES PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
! MADE BYL, o • DATE BY DATE SHEET OF
F I. Collin, Golorrrdo 8052� ,
I . J
No Text
PARSONS & U.NT-44nown.- JOB NO. 2EX4.
ASSOCIATES PROJECT CALC1JLATONSFOR _-r?11q Q�
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Fl. Collins. Calur&do 80324 MADE BY Le DATE 9'14'81 CHECKED BY, DATE_SHEET OF
FPARSONS & CLIENT JOB NO.
/��tk
ASSOCIATES PROJECT - CALCULATIONS FOR. 'Yi On
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Fl. Colfina. Colorado 80524 MADE BY DATE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET-4—OF.3q
IC�f { IDS �z<-, J, 1
fPARSONS & CUENT_
Ie�l ASSOCIATES PROJECT_
r CONSULTING ENGINEERS
i.
i FI. Collins. Colorado 80521 MADE B7—
JOB No.
CALCULATIONS FOR_ r I CMS
DATE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF
J
I... I. 0.2� 3 0 = o = 28.Zn►t�l
No Text
f3 PARSONS & CLIENT Joe NO.
nASSOCIATES PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Ft. Collins. Colorado 80524 MADE BY DATE_ CHECKED BY DATE_ SHEET OF.
6):-z 45,45I.-V M
1 6-2,Pk'-j
l
No Text
PARSONS::& CLIENT---
JOB No.
ASSOCIATES PROJECT
------- CALCULATIONS FOR
CONSULTING ENGINEERS '2 Ft. Collin.. Colorado 80524 -32
MADE BY DATE' CHECKED BY DATE- SHEET OF,
D.
z
1,93
47
q
o
oo�
Qi
f PARSONS &
Irk- ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
FL ColOna,Color�do 80524
CLIENT_
PROJECT
MADE BY DATE CHECKED BY
JOB NO.
CALCULATIONS FOR ✓I -* 1-7
QIS
DATE SHEET OF
PARSONS & CLIENT JOB NO.
MASSOCIATES PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR VPI*- 16
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
F,.CoIIi.%.Colv,.do 80524 MADE BY DATE— CHECKED BY DATE— SHEET OF .31
�j = LOIgs)��,D)(.� 14�) = .13 Gas
PARSONS & CLIENT JOB NO.
ASSOCIATES PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR Ll •%Jfy'—I �I�
CONSULTING ENGINEERS �{
Ft. Collins. Colorado B052d. MADE BY DATE CHECKED BY OATS SHEETOF 3
i
p[ CLIENT
5PARSONS
ASSOCIATES PROJECT
rJ(O�B�N�/Oy.�.
CALCULATIONS FOR_ 5I G I VIS
_
' CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Ft. Colli...Colorade 80524 MADE BY DATE
'
CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF 3�
s
z
3.0 3., C4A4.4- 5Amps, /Mr�ltn�tur~.�
t�
�.< 0,.5-1 ig
D;$3
I
ti
co 19iXi 10) co,
J
r
(', �:
�':
L:
RPA SONS & CLIENT �JJOOBB NNo. �f �1
Irk PARSONS
PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR / Li �IS
CONSULTING ENGINEERS '31
FI. C0111r11.00101Ad0 80524 MADE BY DATE CHECKED B.Y DATE SNEET�� OF?
No Text
FMPARSONS & CLIENT JOB NO.
ASSOCIATES PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR 411:
CONSULTING ENGINEERS 2
! Fr. Collin.. Colorado 00524 MADE BY DATE. CHECKED BY DATE SHEET J � OF��
I
"pasiGA . ?T
PARSONS &
Irk ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Fr. Collins. Colorado 00524
CLIENT
PROJECT
MADE BY
JOB NO.
CALCULATIONS FOR
DATE CHECKEO BY DATE SHEET�OF 3R
PARSONS &
ASSOCIATES
r` CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Lf- FI. Collin.. Colorado 80524
CLIENT JOB
NO.
PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR �✓� 1 S
MADE BY DATE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET ✓� 'OF q
Q LdFt7�clo)
PARSONS &
8-2ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Fl. Collins. Colorado BOS20
JOB
NO.
PROJECT CALCULATIONS FOR ✓Z I 2/—
MADE BY DATE CHECKED BY DATE SHEET 3� OF
m
r�PARSONS.& CLIENT {%JOB NnO.e
r-1- ASSOCIATES PROJECT CALCULATIONS FORy ,
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
PI. Co11im,Coloudo 80524 MADE BY L. DATE 2' CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF
0•51
L...
1
PARSONS &
/ram- ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Ft. Collin.. Coloudo BOS24
CLIENT_
PROJECT
MADE BY • DATE '3 L" CHECKED BY
y..C'. 'lX2.3S�(1.18i 3 1.9G�5
91
�]]JOB
CALCULATIONS FORYPk� 312 �{ J I
DATE SHEET OF
PARSONS &
lei ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Ft. Collin.. Col.,.d. 80524
CLIENT
PROJECT
MADE BY DATE CHECKED BY
JOB NO.
CALCULATIONS FOR6wf�e-il4 nP-1:Z)(,
I I
DATE_ SHEET ?J7 OF