HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 07/23/2025
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR
LOTS 1 & 2, INTERSTATE P.U.D. FIRST FILING ,
NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
FEBRUARY 19, 2025
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM
970.221.4158
FORT COLLINS
GREELEY
This Drainage Report is consciously provided as a PDF. Please
consider the environment before printing this document in its entirety.
When a hard copy is necessary, we recommend double-sided printing.
City of Fort Collins Approved Plans
Approved by:
Date:
Matt Simpson
07/23/2025
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO Power Sports Expansion
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY COVER LETTER
February 19, 2025
City of Fort Collins
Stormwater Utility
700 Wood Street
Loveland, CO 80537
RE: LOTS 1 & 2, INTERSTATE LAND P.U.D. FIRST FILING
NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
Dear Staff:
Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final Drainage Report for your review. This report accompanies
the combined Minor Amendment submittal for the proposed Lots 1 and 2, Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing
(NOCO Power Sports Expansion). NOCO Power Sports Expansion is intended to tie into infrastructure completed
with Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing. The approved utility plans for Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing were
prepared by RBD, Inc., and dated July 31, 1996. The approved Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for
Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing was prepared by RBD, Inc., and dated July 31, 1996.
The purpose of this addendum is to document conformance with the assumptions made regarding the
development of subject property and to update the stormwater conveyance, infrastructure design, grading and
erosion control of the proposed improvements to current City of Fort Collins stormwater standards. This report
was prepared in accordance with the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM). We understand th e
review by the City of Fort Collins is to ensure general compliance with standardized criteria contained in the
FCSCM.
If you should have any questions as you review this report, please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.
Frederick S. Wegert, PE
Senior Engineer
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATION
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .......................................................... 1
II. DRAIN BASINS AND SUB-BASINS ..................................................................... 3
III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA .......................................................................... 4
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN ........................................................................... 6
V. CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................. 9
VI. REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 10
TABLES AND FIGURES
FIGURE 1 -- VICINITY MAP..................................................................................................... 1
FIGURE 2 – AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH ...................................................................................... 2
FIGURE 3 – FLOODPLAIN PER CITY OF FORT COLLINS FC MAPS ..................................... 3
TABLE 1 -- BASIN 3 EQUIVALENT BASIN PERCENT IMPERVIOUS AND FLOWRATES ....... 9
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A – HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS
APPENDIX B – HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX C –WATER QUALITY/LID COMPUTATIONS
APPENDIX D – EROSION CONTROL REPORT
APPENDIX E – USDA SOILS REPORT
APPENDIX F – FEMA FIRMETTE
APPENDIX G – EXCERPTS FROM FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR
INTERSTATE LAND P.U.D. FIRST FILING
MAP POCKET
DR1 – DRAINAGE EXHIBIT
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATION
I hereby attest that this report for the Final Drainage design for Lots 1 and 2, Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing
(NOCO Power Sports Expansion) design was prepared by me, or under my direct supervision, in accordance with
the provisions of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. I understand that the City of Fort Collins does not
and will not assume liability for drainage facilities designed by others.
_____________________________
Registered Professional Engineer
State of Colorado No.45018
2/19/2025
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 1 | 10
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. LOCATION
1. Vicinity Map
2. The Lots 1 and 2, Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing (NOCO Power Sports Expansion) project site is
in the southeast quarter of Section 16, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal
Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado.
3. The project site (refer to Figure 1) is bordered to the north by the Lake Canal, to the west by
Boxelder Creek, and to the south and east by I-25 SW Frontage Road.
4. The project site is surrounded to the north, west, and south by undeveloped land but owned by
Fort Collins/I-25 Interchange Corner, LLC; and to the east by Interstate 25.
5. The site is included in the Cooper Slough/Boxelder Master Drainage Basin. In particular, the site
drains into Boxelder Creek along the west edge of the project.
B. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
1. The NOCO Power Sports Expansion comprises of ±2.03 acres.
Project Site
Figure 1 -- Vicinity Map
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 2 | 10
2. The site is currently occupied by the NOCO Power Sports dealership, parking lots, concrete
sidewalks, landscaping, and gravel areas used to test drive their product.
3. The existing ground cover consists of native grasses, sod, and landscaping. The existing site
drains from the north via curb and gutter and storm sewer to an existing water quality pond in the
southwest corner. Offsite drainage includes the I-25 SW Frontage Road along the south and east
side of the property. The water quality pond discharges into Boxelder Creek. The west edge of the
site consists of Boxelder Creek and undeveloped areas draining directly into Boxelder Creek. The
slopes across this area vary between 1.5%± and 4%± with steeper slopes of 11%± and 20%± along
Boxelder Creek.
4. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) Soil Survey website:
(http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx), the site consists primarily of Kimy
loam (Hydrologic Soil Group B). A copy of the soils report is included in the appendices.
5. Boxelder Creek, along the west edge of the property, is the closest receiving water to the project
site. The existing water quality pond in the southwest corner of the site discharges directly into
Boxelder Creek.
Figure 2 – Aerial Photograph
Project Site
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 3 | 10
6. The proposed development will consist of a 7,725 sq. ft. expansion of the existing building to the
south. The building expansion will predominately occur in the existing parking lot, and additional
parking will be provided to the south and east of the expansion. The foundation will be slab-on-
grade. Other proposed improvements include replacing the existing drive, new parking, new
sidewalks, and additional landscaping.
7. The current land use is an all-terrain and sport vehicle dealership, and the land use will remain
the same with the expansion. This is permitted use in the General Commercial District (CG).
C. FLOODPLAIN
The proposed improvements are not located in a FEMA or City of Fort Collins regulatory floodplain. In
particular, the project site is not located within a FEMA designated 100-year floodplain per Map
Number 08069CO984H (Effective date: May 2, 2012) and revised per Letter of Map Revision 17-08-
1354P (Effective date: February 21, 2019). See Appendix F for the FEMA Firmette.
II. DRAIN BASINS AND SUB-BASINS
A. MAJOR BASIN DESCRIPTION
The NOCO Power Sports Expansion project is located within the City of Fort Collins Cooper
Slough/Boxelder major drainage basin. Specifically, the project site is situated in the south end of this
major drainage basin. The Cooper Slough/Boxelder drainage basin begins north of the
Colorado/Wyoming Border and extends south into east Fort Collins discharging into the Cache la
Poudre River. It encompasses 265 square miles in the city of Fort Collins, Larimer County, and
northern Colorado. The basin is primarily characterized by farmland with isolated areas of mixed
residential development and limited commercial development. The City of Fort Collins anticipates
the lower part of the basin will undergo urbanization in the future.
Figure 3 – Floodplain per City of Fort Collins FC Maps
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 4 | 10
B. SUB-BASIN DESCRIPTION
1. The site was previously analyzed in the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Interstate
Land P.U.D. First Filing, dated July 31, 1996 by RBD Engineering Consultants. The proposed
improvements are contained within Basin 3 of the RBD Engineering Drainage Report. The
proposed improvements will discharge into an existing water quality pond included as part of the
RBD Engineering Drainage Report. A copy of the drainage exhibit from the RBD Engineering
Drainage Report is included in the map pocket at the end of this report.
2. According to the RBD Engineering Drainage Report, the existing site can be defined with six (6)
sub-basins encompassing the entire project site. The proposed improvements will be located
within Basin 3 of the RBD Engineering Drainage Report.
3. The existing site runoff generally can be divided in three sections: Southwest Frontage Road, the
existing dealership and parking lots, and Boxelder Creek. Runoff will sheet flow across the
existing Southwest Frontage Road, collected in the west roadside curb and gutter, and conveyed
towards the existing water quality pond in the southwest corner of the property. Runoff in the
central portion of the site will sheet flow across the existing roofs and parking lots, collected by
curb and gutter and directed into a storm drain along the west side of the property, and
ultimately discharging into the existing water quality pond. The outlet structure and spillway for
the water quality pond was designed to discharge northwards into Boxelder Creek. The western
third of the site consists of the Boxelder Creek floodplain. No existing improvements are within
the Boxelder Creek floodplain.
4. The project site does not receive notable runoff from contiguous off-site properties.
III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
The project site is part of Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing development. The site conforms to the
drainage design of the approved development plans. Any items not clearly defined in the
development plans will conform to the FCSCM and are described in greater depth herein.
A. ORIGINAL PROVISIONS
There are no optional provisions outside of the FCSCM proposed with the NOCO Power Sports
Expansion.
B. DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA REFERENCE AND CONSTRAINTS
1. The subject property is part of the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Interstate Land
P.U.D. First Filing, dated July 31, 1996 by RBD Engineering Consultants.
2. The site plan is constrained to the north by the existing dealership and Lake Canal, to the east and
south by a public street (Southwest Frontage Road), and on the west by Boxelder Creek.
C. HYDROLOGICAL CRITERIA
1. The City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves, as depicted in Figure 3.4-1
of the FCSCM, serves as the source for all hydrologic computations associated with the NOCO
Power Sports Expansion. Tabulated data contained in Table 3.4-1 has been utilized for Rational
Method runoff calculations.
2. The Rational Method has been employed to compute stormwater runoff utilizing coefficients
contained in Table 3.2-3 of the FCSCM.
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 5 | 10
3. The RBD Engineering Report assumed a percent impervious of 91.3% for Basin 3 which contains
the Minor Amendment improvements. The percent impervious from the proposed improvements
will be 70%. The improvements from the Minor Amendment will not alter drainage patterns as
defined by the RBD Engineering Report.
Because of the proximity to Boxelder Creek, detention was not provided for the 100-Year Storm
Event for the site per the RBD Engineering Report. However, a water quality pond was provided
for the site (see Appendix G). Additional detention and water quality is not required for the
following reasons: 1) the percent impervious for the proposed improvements will be less than
the assumed percent impervious in the RBD Engineering Report and 2) the proposed
improvements will not alter the existing drainage patterns for the site.
4. Two separate design storms have been utilized to address distinct drainage scenarios. The first
event analyzed is the “Minor,” or “Initial” Storm, which has a ten-year recurrence interval. The
second event considered is the “Major Storm,” which has a 100 -year recurrence interval.
D. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA
1. The drainage facilities proposed with NOCO Power Sports Expansion project are designed in
accordance with criteria outlined in the FCSCM and/or the Mile High Flood District’s (MHFD)
Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual.
2. As stated in Section I.C.1, above, the subject property is located next to a FEMA designated
floodplain but is not located within the floodplain limits.
E. FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS COMPLIANCE
As previously mentioned, this project is located outside of the floodplain, and as such, it will not be
subject to any floodplain regulations.
F. MODIFICATIONS OF CRITERIA
No formal modifications are requested at this time. As discussed in Section III.C.3, City staff have
previously determined that detention will not be required with this project.
G. CONFORMANCE WITH WATER QUALITY TREATMENT CRITERIA
City Code requires that 100% of runoff from a project site receive some sort of water quality
treatment. Water quality treatment for this project is provided by an existing water quality pond as
described by Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing, dated
July 31, 1996 by RBD Engineering Consultants.
Due to the physical constraints associated with an infill project of this nature and the prohibition of
providing water quality facilities within the public right-of-way, there are some small, narrow areas
around the perimeter of the project that cannot be captured. On the NOCO Power Sports Expansion
project, the uncaptured areas tend to be narrow strips of asphalt, concrete flatwork, and landscaped
areas that link parking lots to the public right-of-way, public sidewalks or property lines. While these
small areas will not receive formal water quality treatment, most areas will still see some treatment
as runoff is directed through landscaped areas or across landscaped parkways before reaching the
roadway curb and gutter.
H. CONFORMANCE WITH LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID)
The proposed building expansion will occur in the existing south parking lot, with additional parking
along the east and south sides. According to conversations with City of Fort Collins Staff, only new
impervious areas will be required to meet the City’s LID requirements as is typical for the City’s Minor
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 6 | 10
Amendment Process. The new impervious area is towards the south and southeast of the existing
south parking lot. As shown in Appendix C, there is an additional 7,165 square feet of impervious area.
The LID treatment for the site will occur in two (2) rain gardens at the south end of the proposed
parking lot improvements.
The project site will conform with the requirement to treat a minimum of 75% of the project site using
an LID technique. Please see Appendix C for LID design information, table, and exhibit(s). As shown in
the LID table provided in the appendix, the project will provide LID treatment for 15,115 sq. ft. of
impervious area which exceeds the minimum required of 5,373 sq. ft.
I. SIZING OF LID FACILITIES
Rain Garden 1
1. The rain garden 1 was sized by first determining the required water quality capture volume
(WQCV) and minimum flat surface area for Basin 3-2 using the MHFD UD-BMP v3.07 spreadsheet. A
12-hour drain time was used in this calculation. It was assumed the maximum depth for a rain
garden is 12” per FCSCM requirements.
2. Once the WQCV and minimum flat surface was identified, a depression in the southeast corner of
the proposed improvements was graded for the rain garden. The rain garden will include an
underdrain and constructed per the standard City of Fort Collins details.
Rain Garden 2
3. The rain garden 1 was sized by first determining the required water quality capture volume
(WQCV) and minimum flat surface area for Basin 3-3 using the MHFD UD-BMP v3.07 spreadsheet. A
12-hour drain time was used in this calculation. It was assumed the maximum depth for a rain
garden is 12” per FCSCM requirements.
4. Once the WQCV and minimum flat surface was identified, a depression in the southeast corner of
the proposed improvements was graded for the rain garden. The rain garden will include an
underdrain and constructed per the standard City of Fort Collins details.
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A. GENERAL CONCEPT
1. The main objective of the NOCO Power Sports Expansion drainage design is to maintain existing
drainage patterns, while not adversely impacting adjacent properties.
2. No notable off-site runoff passes directly through the project site.
3. A list of tables and figures used within this report can be found in the Table of Contents at the
front of the document. The tables and figures are located within the sections to which the content
best applies.
4. In general, all runoff generated by the site is captured by the stormwater network on -site and
conveyed to an existing stormwater main. The existing stormwater main was previously designed
to receive the developed flows from the site.
5. This drainage report will be an amendment to the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for
Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing, dated July 31, 1996 by RBD Engineering Consultants. The overall
site drainage has been designed to adhere to (and utilize) the design items described in the
original report.
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 7 | 10
6. Drainage for the project site has been analyzed using nine (9) drainage sub-basins, designated as
Sub-Basins 1-1, 3-1 to 3-5, 4-1, 5-1, and 6-1. The drainage patterns anticipated for the basins are
further described below.
Sub-Basin 1-1
Sub-basin 1-1, approximately 0.51 acres, encompasses the existing building. This basin
corresponds to Basins 1 and 2 from the RBD Engineering Consultants report. The basin comprises
primarily of roof area and pavement in the rear of the existing building. No improvements are
proposed in Basin 1-1.
Runoff will drain via the building’s roof drain and downspout system to be captured by an
existing area inlet in the rear access driveway. The existing storm drain system will convey
stormwater to the existing water quality pond in Basin 5-1.
Sub-Basin 3-1
Sub-basin 3-1, approximately 0.45 acres, encompasses the existing parking lot in the northeast
corner of the site. This basin corresponds to the northeast quarter of Basin 3 from the RBD
Engineering Consultants report. The basin comprises primarily of existing pavement, concrete
sidewalk, and landscaping.
Runoff will sheet flow west across the parking lot to be captured by existing and proposed curb
and gutter. The curb and gutter will convey stormwater to a proposed area inlet and storm drain.
The storm drain will then convey the Minor Storm to the existing water quality pond in Basin 5-1
along the east and south sides of the proposed improvements. The Major Storm will overflow
into Basins 3-2, 3-3, and 3-5 and towards Design Point 3-5. An existing inlet and curb cut with rip-
rap channel will collect and convey the Major Storm towards the water quality pond in Basin 5-1.
Sub-Basins 3-2 and 3-3
Sub-basins 3-2 and 3-3, approximately 0.23 and 0.15 acres respectively, encompass most of the
proposed building and parking lot improvements. These basins correspond to the east half of
Basin 3 from the RBD Engineering Consultants report. These basins comprise primarily of
proposed building, parking lot, concrete sidewalk, and landscaping.
Runoff will sheet flow south and southeast across the proposed parking lot to be captured by
proposed curb and gutter. The curb and gutter will convey stormwater to proposed Rain Gardens
1 and 2. The rain gardens will discharge into the same storm drain mentioned as part of Basin 3-1
and ultimately into the existing water quality pond in Basin 5-1. The Major Storm will overflow
into Basins 3-3 and 3-5 and towards Design Point 3-5. An existing inlet and curb cut with rip-rap
channel will collect and convey the Major Storm towards the water quality pond in Basin 5-1.
Sub-Basin 3-4
Sub-basin 3-4, approximately 0.34 acres, encompasses the existing landscaping in the southeast
corner of the site. This basin corresponds to the southeast quarter of Basin 3 from the RBD
Engineering Consultants report. The basin comprises primarily of landscaped area utilized as a
test drive area all-terrain vehicles from the dealership. The RBD Engineering Consultants Report
assumed a 7,600 square foot building with a C-Factor of 0.95 within the approximate area of Sub-
basin 3-4. No improvements are proposed in Basin 3-4.
Runoff will sheet flow south across the landscaped area to be captured by existing small
depressions. The proposed improvements will reduce the depression storage, but they will not
eliminate the existing low point in Basin 3-4. The depressions will eventually overflow into the
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 8 | 10
existing curb and gutter along Southwest Frontage Road in Basin 4-1. The curb and gutter will
convey stormwater to the southwest to be collected by an existing inlet in the far southwest
corner of the site. The existing inlet will discharge into the water quality pond in Basin 5-1.
Sub-Basin 3-5
Sub-basin 3-5, approximately 0.35 acres, encompass the existing parking lot and driveway access
along the west edge of the site. This basin corresponds to the west half and southwest quarter of
Basin 3 from the RBD Engineering Consultants report. The basin comprises primarily of the
existing and proposed driveway and parking lot, the west half of the proposed building, and
landscaping.
Runoff will in the north half of the basin will be conveyed by the building’s roof drain system into
the existing storm drain along the west half of the site. Runoff from the south half of the basin
will sheet flow west across the parking lot to be captured by existing curb and gutter. The curb
and gutter will convey stormwater to an existing inlet and storm drain in the middle of the basin.
The inlet and a curb cut with rip-rap channel will collect and convey the Major Storm towards the
water quality pond in Basin 5-1.
Sub-Basin 4-1
Sub-basin 4-1, approximately 1.32 acres, encompasses Southwest Frontage Road. This sub-basin
is comprised of existing asphalt, curb and gutter, sidewalk and landscaping areas . This basin
corresponds to Basin 4 from the RBD Engineering Consultants report. Runoff will sheet flow into
the existing curb and gutter along the west edge of Southwest Frontage Road. The curb and
gutter will then convey stormwater to the south and southwest to ultimately discharge into the
water quality pond in Basin 5-1. No improvements are proposed for Basin 5-1.
Sub-Basin 5-1
Sub-basin 5-1, approximately 0.55 acres, encompasses the existing water quality pond. This sub-
basin is comprised primarily of landscaped areas. This basin corresponds to Basin 5 from the RBD
Engineering Consultants report. Runoff will sheet flow into the bottom of the pond to be
collected by the pond’s outlet structure and emergency spillway. The pond’s outlet structure
and spillway will discharge north into Boxelder Creek. No improvements are proposed for Basin
5-1.
Sub-Basin 6-1
Sub-basin 6-1, approximately 1.37 acres, encompasses the west edge of the site and Boxelder
Creek floodplain. This basin corresponds to Basin 6 from the RBD Engineering Consultants
report. This sub-basin is primarily undeveloped. No improvements are proposed for Basin 6-1.
A full-size copy of the Drainage Exhibit can be found in the Map Pocket at the end of this report.
B. SPECIFIC DETAILS
1. Due to the site’s proximity to Boxelder Creek, detention was not proposed for as part of the
original RBD Engineering Drainage Report. Furthermore, the proposed improvements will result
in a lower flowrate than assumed from the RBD Engineering Drainage Study (see Table 1).
Therefore, detention is not required with this site.
2. The impervious value assigned to the site in the original RBD Engineering Drainage Report for
Basin 3 equals 91.3%. The combined impervious value for Basins 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5, the
equivalent basins to Basin 3, equals 70%. Table 1 is a summary of the assumptions from the RBD
Drainage Report for Basin 3 compared to the values utilized in this study.
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 9 | 10
Basin ID
Percent
Impervious
Composite C Flowrate (cfs)
10-
Year
100-
Year
10-
Year
100-
Year
3-1 78% 0.78 0.98 1.5 3.9
3-2 85% 0.87 1.00 1.3 2.9
3-3 91% 0.88 1.00 0.6 1.4
3-4 32% 0.45 0.56 0.6 1.6
3-5 75% 0.76 0.95 1.2 3.3
CB-3 70% 0.73 0.91 5.1 13.8
Basin 3 per RBD Engineering Report 91% 0.89 7.5 15.0
Table 1 -- Basin 3 Equivalent Basin Percent Impervious and Flowrates
Since the total percent imperviousness for Basins 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5 is less than assumed
percent impervious for the equivalent area from the RBD Engineering Drainage Report, no
additional detention is required.
C. SIZING OF LID FACILITIES
LID, sized per FCSCM requirements, for the site will be provided by two rain gardens designed to
capture the runoff from the proposed parking lot improvements. The impervious area of the
contributing basins to the rain gardens are greater than Fort Collins LID requirements. Therefore, the
rain gardens will provide sufficient capacity to meet FCSCM LID requirements for the site’s new
impervious area.
V. CONCLUSIONS
A. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS
1. The drainage design proposed with the NOCO Power Sports Expansion complies with the City of
Fort Collins Master Drainage Plan for the Cooper Slough/Boxelder Basin.
2. There are no proposed improvements for the NOCO Power Sports Expansion in the FEMA
regulatory floodplain for Boxelder Creek.
3. The drainage plan and stormwater management measures proposed with NOCO Power Sports
Expansion project are compliant with all applicable State and Federal regulations governing
stormwater discharge.
B. DRAINAGE CONCEPT
1. The drainage design proposed with this project will effectively limit potential damage associated
with its stormwater runoff.
2. NOCO Power Sports Expansion development will not impact the Master Drainage Plan
recommendations for Cooper Slough/Boxelder major drainage basin.
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY 10 | 10
VI. REFERENCES
1. City of Fort Collins Landscape Design Guidelines for Stormwater and Detention Facilities , November
5, 2009, BHA Design, Inc. with City of Fort Collins Utility Services.
2. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, as adopted by Ordinance No.
159, 2018, and referenced in Section 26-500 of the City of Fort Collins Municipal Code.
3. Soils Resource Report for Larimer County Area, Colorado, Natural Resources Conservation Service,
United States Department of Agriculture.
4. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes 1-3, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District,
Wright-McLaughlin Engineers, Denver, Colorado, Revised April 2008.
5. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing, RBD Inc. Engineering
Consultants, Fort Collins, Colorado, July 31, 1996.
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX A
HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS
FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL Hydrology Standards (Ch. 5)
3.0 Rational Method
3.4 Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves for Rational Method
Page 8
Table 3.4-1. IDF Table for Rational Method
Duration
(min) 2-year 10-year 100-year
Duration
(min) 2-year 10-year 100-year
5 2.85 4.87 9.95
39 1.09 1.86 3.8
6 2.67 4.56 9.31
40 1.07 1.83 3.74
7 2.52 4.31 8.80
41 1.05 1.80 3.68
8 2.40 4.10 8.38
42 1.04 1.77 3.62
9 2.30 3.93 8.03
43 1.02 1.74 3.56
10 2.21 3.78 7.72
44 1.01 1.72 3.51
11 2.13 3.63 7.42
45 0.99 1.69 3.46
12 2.05 3.50 7.16
46 0.98 1.67 3.41
13 1.98 3.39 6.92
47 0.96 1.64 3.36
14 1.92 3.29 6.71
48 0.95 1.62 3.31
15 1.87 3.19 6.52
49 0.94 1.6 3.27
16 1.81 3.08 6.30
50 0.92 1.58 3.23
17 1.75 2.99 6.10
51 0.91 1.56 3.18
18 1.70 2.90 5.92
52 0.9 1.54 3.14
19 1.65 2.82 5.75
53 0.89 1.52 3.10
20 1.61 2.74 5.60
54 0.88 1.50 3.07
21 1.56 2.67 5.46
55 0.87 1.48 3.03
22 1.53 2.61 5.32
56 0.86 1.47 2.99
23 1.49 2.55 5.20
57 0.85 1.45 2.96
24 1.46 2.49 5.09
58 0.84 1.43 2.92
25 1.43 2.44 4.98
59 0.83 1.42 2.89
26 1.4 2.39 4.87
60 0.82 1.4 2.86
27 1.37 2.34 4.78
65 0.78 1.32 2.71
28 1.34 2.29 4.69
70 0.73 1.25 2.59
29 1.32 2.25 4.60
75 0.70 1.19 2.48
30 1.30 2.21 4.52
80 0.66 1.14 2.38
31 1.27 2.16 4.42
85 0.64 1.09 2.29
32 1.24 2.12 4.33
90 0.61 1.05 2.21
33 1.22 2.08 4.24
95 0.58 1.01 2.13
34 1.19 2.04 4.16
100 0.56 0.97 2.06
35 1.17 2.00 4.08
105 0.54 0.94 2.00
36 1.15 1.96 4.01
110 0.52 0.91 1.94
37 1.16 1.93 3.93
115 0.51 0.88 1.88
38 1.11 1.89 3.87
120 0.49 0.86 1.84
FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL Hydrology Standards (Ch. 5)
3.0 Rational Method
3.4 Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves for Rational Method
Page 9
Figure 3.4-1. Rainfall IDF Curve – Fort Collins
Runoff Coefficient1
Percent
Impervious1 Project:
Location:
0.95 100%Calc. By:
0.95 90%Date:
0.50 40%
0.50 40%
0.20 2%
0.20 2%
Basin ID Basin Area
(sq.ft.)
Basin Area
(acres)
Asphalt, Concrete
(acres)Rooftop (acres)Gravel (acres)Pavers (acres)
Undeveloped:
Greenbelts,
Agriculture (acres)
Lawns, Clayey Soil,
Flat Slope < 2%
(acres)
Percent
Impervious
C2*Cf
Cf = 1.00
C5*Cf
Cf = 1.00
C10*Cf
Cf = 1.00
C100*Cf
Cf = 1.25
1-1 22,261 0.51 0.08 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 92%0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00
3-1 17,537 0.40 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 78%0.78 0.78 0.78 0.98
3-2 12,898 0.30 0.13 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 85%0.87 0.87 0.87 1.00
3-3 6,028 0.14 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 91%0.88 0.88 0.88 1.00
3-4 14,419 0.33 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 32%0.45 0.45 0.45 0.56
3-5 15,253 0.35 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 75%0.76 0.76 0.76 0.95
5-1 23,946 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.53 3%0.21 0.21 0.21 0.26
6-1 59,527 1.37 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 1.25 0.00 5%0.22 0.22 0.22 0.28
4-1 57,214 1.31 1.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 80%0.80 0.80 0.80 1.00
RG1 6,937 0.16 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 81%0.80 0.80 0.80 1.00
RG2 6,028 0.14 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 91%0.88 0.88 0.88 1.00
WQ 169,555 3.89 1.97 0.65 0.02 0.00 0.00 1.24 67%0.71 0.71 0.71 0.89
CB-3 66,135 1.52 0.85 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 70%0.73 0.73 0.73 0.91
Offsite Basins5
Lawns and Landscaping:
Combined Basins6,7,8,9,10
2) Composite Runoff Coefficient adjusted per Table 3.2-3 of the Fort Collins
Stormwater Manual (FCSM).
Lawns, Clayey Soil, Flat Slope < 2%
USDA SOIL TYPE: C
Undeveloped: Greenbelts, Agriculture Composite Runoff Coefficient2
1) Runoff coefficients per Tables 3.2-1 & 3.2 of the FCSM. Percent impervious per Tables 4.1-2 & 4.1-3 of the FCSM.
DEVELOPED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CALCULATIONS
Asphalt, Concrete
Rooftop
Gravel
Pavers
Streets, Parking Lots, Roofs, Alleys, and Drives:
Character of Surface:NOCO Power Sports Expansion
Fort Collins
F. Wegert
October 20, 2023
Notes:
1) Basin 1-1 consists of the existing building. It is aequavilent to Basins 1 & 2 of the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report
for Interstate Land P.U.D First Filing prepared by RBD Engineering Consultants and dated July 31, 1996.
2) Basins 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, & 3-5 consists of existing and proposed site improvements. They are equavilent to Basin 3 of the
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Interstate Land P.U.D First Filing prepared by RBD Engineering Consultants and
dated July 31, 1996.
3) Basin 5-1 consists of the existing water quality pond. It is equavilent to Basin 5 of the Final Drainage and Erosion Control
Report for Interstate Land P.U.D First Filing prepared by RBD Engineering Consultants and dated July 31, 1996.
4) Basins 6-1 & 6-2 consists of the undetained portions of the site draining into Boxelder Creek. It is equavilent to Basin 6 of
the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Interstate Land P.U.D First Filing prepared by RBD Engineering Consultants
and dated July 31, 1996.
5) Basin 4-1 consists of SW Frontage Road and surrounding landscaping areas. It is equavilent to Basin 4 of the Final
Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Interstate Land P.U.D First Filing prepared by RBD Engineering Consultants and
dated July 31, 1996.
6) Basin RG1 consists of Basin 3-2 and is the proposed improvements draining towards the east rain garden.
7) Basin RG2 consists of Basin 3-3 and is the proposed improvements draining towards the west rain garden.
8) Basin WQ is the area draining towards the existing water quality pond.
9) CB-3 includes all basins that are equivalent to Basin 3 of the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Interstate Land
P.U.D First Filing prepared by RBD Engineering Consultants and dated July 31, 1996 (Basins 3-1 to 3-5).
10) Rooftops in Basin 3-2 will drain directly into the storm sewer. Therefore, the area for RG1 doesn't include the rooftop
from Basin 3-2.
Page 1 of 3
Where:
Length
(ft)
Elev
Up
Elev
Down
Slope
(%)
Ti
2-Yr
(min)
Ti
10-Yr
(min)
Ti
100-Yr
(min)
Length
(ft)
Elev
Up
Elev
Down
Slope
(%)Surface n
Flow
Area3
(sq.ft.)
WP3 (ft)R (ft)V
(ft/s)
Tt
(min)
Max.
Tc
(min)
Comp.
Tc 2-Yr
(min)
Tc
2-Yr
(min)
Comp.
Tc 10-Yr
(min)
Tc
10-Yr
(min)
Comp.
Tc 100-
Yr
(min)
Tc
100-Yr
(min)
1-1 1-1 85 16.37 15.94 0.51%3.25 3.25 2.16 129 15.94 13.69 1.74%Gutter 0.013 3.61 19.18 0.19 4.97 0.43 11.19 3.68 5.00 3.68 5.00 2.60 5.00
3-1 3-1 68 19.04 17.53 2.22%3.76 3.76 1.45 132 17.53 16.43 0.83%Gutter 0.013 3.61 19.18 0.19 3.44 0.64 11.11 4.40 5.00 4.40 5.00 2.09 5.00
3-2 3-2 66 17.80 16.78 1.55%3.00 3.00 1.31 124 16.78 14.45 1.88%Gutter 0.013 3.61 19.18 0.19 5.16 0.40 11.06 3.40 5.00 3.40 5.00 1.71 5.00
3-3 3-3 100 17.36 14.12 3.24%2.75 2.75 1.26 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.00 10.56 2.75 5.00 2.75 5.00 1.26 5.00
3-4 3-4 44 14.89 14.01 2.00%6.41 6.41 5.30 153 14.01 13.85 0.10%Swale (8:1)0.033 8.00 16.12 0.50 0.92 2.79 11.09 9.19 9.19 9.19 9.19 8.09 8.09
3-5 3-5 45 16.17 15.94 0.51%5.36 5.36 2.39 209 15.94 12.54 1.63%Gutter 0.013 3.61 19.18 0.19 4.80 0.73 11.41 6.09 6.09 6.09 6.09 3.11 5.00
5-1 5-1 89 13.36 5.96 8.31%7.74 7.74 7.28 66 5.96 5.07 1.35%Swale (8:1)0.033 8.00 16.12 0.50 3.29 0.33 10.86 8.07 8.07 8.07 8.07 7.61 7.61
6-1 6-1 200 18.51 12.00 3.26%15.62 15.62 14.61 500 12.00 3.78 1.64%Swale (4:1)0.120 4.00 8.25 0.48 0.98 8.48 13.89 24.10 13.89 24.10 13.89 23.09 13.89
4-1 4-1 88 20.62 18.86 2.00%4.23 4.23 1.45 631 18.86 12.69 0.98%Gutter 0.013 3.61 19.18 0.19 3.72 2.82 13.99 7.05 7.05 7.05 7.05 4.28 5.00
3-2 RG1 66 17.80 16.78 1.55%3.88 3.88 1.31 124 16.78 14.45 1.88%Gutter 0.013 3.61 19.18 0.19 5.16 0.40 11.06 4.28 5.00 4.28 5.00 1.71 5.00
3-3 RG2 100 17.36 14.12 3.24%2.75 2.75 1.26 0 0.00 0.00 N/A N/A 0.000 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.00 10.56 2.75 5.00 2.75 5.00 1.26 5.00
5-1 WQ 44 14.89 14.01 2.00%3.86 3.86 2.11 153 14.01 13.85 0.10%Swale (8:1)0.033 8.00 16.12 0.50 0.92 2.79 12.54 7.60 7.60 7.60 7.60 5.86 5.86
140 13.85 12.69 0.83%Gutter 0.013 3.61 19.18 0.19 3.43 0.68
120 12.69 5.07 6.35%Swale (8:1)0.033 8.00 16.12 0.50 7.13 0.28
3-5 CB-3 68 19.04 17.53 2.22%4.37 4.37 2.21 483 17.53 12.54 1.03%Gutter 0.013 3.61 19.18 0.19 3.83 2.10 13.06 6.47 6.47 6.47 6.47 4.31 5.00
Combined Basins
Design
Point Basin ID
Overland Flow Channelized Flow Time of Concentration
Offsite Basins
DEVELOPED TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS
Location:
Maximum Tc:Overland Flow, Time of Concentration:
Channelized Flow, Velocity:Channelized Flow, Time of Concentration:
NOCO Power Sports Expansion
Fort Collins
F. Wegert
October 20, 2023
Project:
Calculations By:
Date:
Notes
S = Longitudinal Slope, feet/feet
R = Hydraulic Radius (feet)
n = Roughness Coefficient
V = Velocity (ft/sec)WP = Wetted Perimeter (ft)
(Equation 3.3-2 per Fort Collins Stormwater Manual)𝑇𝑖=1.87 1.1 −𝐶∗𝐶𝑓𝐿
𝑆ൗ13
𝑉=1.49
𝑛∗𝑅2/3 ∗𝑆(Equation 5-4 per Fort Collins Stormwater Manual)
𝑇𝑐=𝐿
180 +10 (Equation 3.3-5 per Fort Collins
Stormwater Manual)
𝑇𝑡=𝐿
𝑉∗60
(Equation 5-5 per Fort Collins
1) Add 4900 to all elevations.
2) Per Fort Collins Stormwater Manual, minimum Tc = 5 min.
3) Assume a water depth of 6" and a typical curb and gutter per
Larimer County Urban Street Standard Detail 701 for curb and gutter
channelized flow. Assume a water depth of 1', fixed side slopes, and a
triangular swale section for grass channelized flow. Assume a water
depth of 1', 4:1 side slopes, and a 2' wide valley pan for channelized
flow in a valley pan.
Page 2 of 3
Tc2 Tc10 Tc100 C2 C10 C100 I2 I10 I100 Q2 Q10 Q100
1-1 1-1 0.51 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 1.4 2.4 5.1
3-1 3-1 0.40 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.8 0.8 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.9 1.5 3.9
3-2 3-2 0.30 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.7 1.3 2.9
3-3 3-3 0.14 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.3 0.6 1.4
3-4 3-4 0.33 9.2 9.2 8.1 0.4 0.4 0.6 2.3 3.9 8.4 0.3 0.6 1.6
3-5 3-5 0.35 6.1 6.1 5.0 0.8 0.8 0.9 2.7 4.6 10.0 0.7 1.2 3.3
5-1 5-1 0.55 8.1 8.1 7.6 0.2 0.2 0.3 2.4 4.1 8.6 0.3 0.5 1.2
6-1 6-1 1.37 13.9 13.9 13.9 0.2 0.2 0.3 2.0 3.3 6.8 0.6 1.0 2.6
4-1 4-1 1.31 7.1 7.1 5.0 0.8 0.8 1.0 2.5 4.3 10.0 2.6 4.5 13.0
3-2 RG1 0.16 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.8 0.8 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.4 0.6 1.6
3-3 RG2 0.14 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 2.9 4.9 10.0 0.3 0.6 1.4
5-1 WQ 3.89 7.6 7.6 5.9 0.7 0.7 0.9 2.5 4.2 9.6 6.8 11.6 33.2
3-5 CB-3 1.52 6.5 6.5 5.0 0.7 0.7 0.9 2.7 4.6 10.0 3.0 5.1 13.8
DEVELOPED DIRECT RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS
Intensity (in/hr)Flow (cfs)
NOCO Power Sports Expansion
F. Wegert
October 20, 2023
Design
Point Basin
Intensity, I, from Fig. 3.4.1 Fort Collins Stormwater Manual.
Rational Equation: Q = CiA (Equation 6-1 per MHFD)
Area
(acres)
Runoff CTc (Min)
Combined Basins
Offsite Basins
Date:
Fort Collins
Project:
Location:
Calc. By:
Page 3 of 3
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX B
HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS
Project Description
Storm Sewer 10-Year Storm Revised.SPF
Project Options
CFS
Elevation
Rational
User-Defined
Hydrodynamic
YES
NO
Analysis Options
00:00:00 0:00:00
00:00:00 0:00:00
00:00:00 0:00:00
0 days
0 01:00:00 days hh:mm:ss
0 00:05:00 days hh:mm:ss
0 00:05:00 days hh:mm:ss
30 seconds
Number of Elements
Qty
0
0
13
12
1
0
0
0
12
0
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
Rainfall Details
10 year(s)
Antecedent Dry Days .................................................................
File Name ..................................................................................
Flow Units .................................................................................
Elevation Type ...........................................................................
Hydrology Method .....................................................................
Time of Concentration (TOC) Method ........................................
Link Routing Method .................................................................
Enable Overflow Ponding at Nodes ............................................
Skip Steady State Analysis Time Periods .....................................
Start Analysis On ........................................................................
End Analysis On .........................................................................
Start Reporting On .....................................................................
Storage Nodes ...................................................................
Runoff (Dry Weather) Time Step ................................................
Runoff (Wet Weather) Time Step ...............................................
Reporting Time Step ..................................................................
Routing Time Step .....................................................................
Rain Gages .................................................................................
Subbasins...................................................................................
Nodes.........................................................................................
Junctions ...........................................................................
Outfalls ..............................................................................
Flow Diversions ..................................................................
Inlets .................................................................................
Outlets ...............................................................................
Pollutants ..................................................................................
Land Uses ..................................................................................
Return Period.............................................................................
Links...........................................................................................
Channels ............................................................................
Pipes ..................................................................................
Pumps ...............................................................................
Orifices ..............................................................................
Weirs .................................................................................
This document was created by an application that isn't licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Node Summary
SN Element Element Invert Ground/Rim Initial Surcharge Ponded Peak Max HGL Max Min Time of Total Total Time
ID Type Elevation (Max)Water Elevation Area Inflow Elevation Surcharge Freeboard Peak Flooded Flooded
Elevation Elevation Attained Depth Attained Flooding Volume
Attained Occurrence
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft²)(cfs)(ft)(ft)(ft)(days hh:mm)(ac-in)(min)
1 Drain Basin A3 Junction 4911.52 4915.14 4911.52 4915.14 0.00 1.54 4912.87 0.00 2.27 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
2 Drain Basin A7 Junction 4912.38 4917.17 4912.38 4917.17 0.00 1.52 4913.47 0.00 3.70 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
3 Ex_Jct Junction 4905.53 4911.53 4905.53 4911.53 0.00 2.78 4907.44 0.00 4.09 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
4 Inlet A2-1 Junction 4911.52 4913.85 4911.52 4913.85 0.00 1.90 4912.78 0.00 1.07 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
5 Inlet A8 Junction 4912.96 4916.42 4912.96 4916.42 0.00 1.50 4916.42 0.00 0.00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
6 Inline Drain A4-1 Junction 4912.25 4916.32 4912.25 4916.32 0.00 0.11 4913.01 0.00 3.31 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
7 Inline Drain A7-1 Junction 4913.11 4916.83 4913.11 4916.83 0.00 0.03 4913.47 0.00 3.36 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
8 STMH A1 Junction 4905.36 4913.52 4905.36 4913.52 0.00 6.22 4907.23 0.00 6.29 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
9 Tee A2 Junction 4911.11 4914.44 4911.11 4914.44 0.00 3.44 4912.60 0.00 1.84 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
10 Wye A4 Junction 4911.78 4915.73 4911.78 4915.73 0.00 1.54 4913.01 0.00 2.72 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
11 Wye A5 Junction 4912.00 4916.48 4912.00 4916.48 0.00 1.63 4913.17 0.00 3.31 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
12 Wye A6 Junction 4912.31 4917.19 4912.31 4917.19 0.00 1.86 4913.38 0.00 3.81 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
13 Out-1Ex Storm Pipe 1 Outfall 4905.22 6.22 4906.23
This document was created by an application that isn't licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Link Summary
SN Element Element From To (Outlet)Length Inlet Outlet Average Diameter or Manning's Peak Design Flow Peak Flow/Peak Flow Peak Flow Peak Flow Total Time Reported
ID Type (Inlet)Node Invert Invert Slope Height Roughness Flow Capacity Design Flow Velocity Depth Depth/Surcharged Condition
Node Elevation Elevation Ratio Total Depth
Ratio
(ft)(ft)(ft)(%)(in)(cfs)(cfs)(ft/sec)(ft)(min)
1 Ex Storm Pipe 1 Pipe STMH A1 Out-1Ex Storm Pipe 1 42.21 4905.36 4905.22 0.3200 15.000 0.0150 6.22 3.18 1.96 5.34 1.13 0.90 0.00 > CAPACITY
2 Ex_Storm_Pipe_2 Pipe Ex_Jct STMH A1 53.49 4905.53 4905.36 0.3200 15.000 0.0150 3.46 3.17 1.09 4.21 1.25 1.00 1439.00 SURCHARGED
3 Storm Pipe A1 Pipe Tee A2 STMH A1 45.60 4911.11 4910.88 0.5000 12.000 0.0150 3.44 2.19 1.57 4.64 0.90 0.90 0.00 > CAPACITY
4 Storm Pipe A2 Pipe Drain Basin A3 Tee A2 82.39 4911.52 4911.11 0.5000 12.000 0.0150 1.54 2.18 0.71 1.96 1.00 1.00 1437.00 SURCHARGED
5 Storm Pipe A3 Pipe Wye A4 Drain Basin A3 31.81 4911.78 4911.62 0.5000 12.000 0.0150 1.54 2.19 0.70 2.58 1.00 1.00 1436.00 SURCHARGED
6 Storm Pipe A4 Pipe Wye A5 Wye A4 44.37 4912.00 4911.78 0.5000 12.000 0.0150 1.52 2.17 0.70 3.79 1.00 1.00 1435.00 SURCHARGED
7 Storm Pipe A4-1 Pipe Inline Drain A4-1 Wye A4 21.87 4912.25 4912.03 1.0100 6.000 0.0150 0.09 0.49 0.19 1.06 0.50 1.00 1436.00 SURCHARGED
8 Storm Pipe A5 Pipe Wye A6 Wye A5 62.13 4912.31 4912.00 0.5000 12.000 0.0150 1.63 2.18 0.75 3.98 1.00 1.00 1432.00 SURCHARGED
9 Storm Pipe A6 Pipe Drain Basin A7 Wye A6 13.97 4912.38 4912.31 0.5200 12.000 0.0150 1.86 2.23 0.83 4.78 1.00 1.00 1432.00 SURCHARGED
10 Storm Pipe A7 Pipe Inlet A8 Drain Basin A7 16.24 4912.96 4912.88 0.5000 6.000 0.0150 1.50 0.34 4.37 7.65 0.50 1.00 1440.00 SURCHARGED
11 Storm Pipe A7-1 Pipe Inline Drain A7-1 Drain Basin A7 22.55 4913.11 4912.88 1.0000 6.000 0.0150 0.02 0.49 0.04 0.55 0.43 0.86 0.00 Calculated
12 Storm_Pipe_A2-1 Pipe Inlet A2-1 Tee A2 23.98 4911.52 4911.11 1.7100 12.000 0.0150 2.47 4.04 0.61 6.16 1.00 1.00 1437.00 SURCHARGED
This document was created by an application that isn't licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Junction Input
SN Element Invert Ground/Rim Ground/Rim Initial Initial Surcharge Surcharge Ponded Minimum
ID Elevation (Max)(Max)Water Water Elevation Depth Area Pipe
Elevation Offset Elevation Depth Cover
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft²)(in)
1 Drain Basin A3 4911.52 4915.14 3.62 4911.52 0.00 4915.14 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 Drain Basin A7 4912.38 4917.17 4.79 4912.38 0.00 4917.17 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 Ex_Jct 4905.53 4911.53 6.00 4905.53 0.00 4911.53 0.00 0.00 0.00
4 Inlet A2-1 4911.52 4913.85 2.33 4911.52 0.00 4913.85 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 Inlet A8 4912.96 4916.42 3.45 4912.96 0.00 4916.42 0.00 0.00 0.00
6 Inline Drain A4-1 4912.25 4916.32 4.07 4912.25 0.00 4916.32 0.00 0.00 0.00
7 Inline Drain A7-1 4913.11 4916.83 3.73 4913.11 0.00 4916.83 0.00 0.00 0.00
8 STMH A1 4905.36 4913.52 8.16 4905.36 0.00 4913.52 0.00 0.00 0.00
9 Tee A2 4911.11 4914.44 3.33 4911.11 0.00 4914.44 0.00 0.00 0.00
10 Wye A4 4911.78 4915.73 3.95 4911.78 0.00 4915.73 0.00 0.00 0.00
11 Wye A5 4912.00 4916.48 4.48 4912.00 0.00 4916.48 0.00 0.00 0.00
12 Wye A6 4912.31 4917.19 4.88 4912.31 0.00 4917.19 0.00 0.00 0.00
This document was created by an application that isn't licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Junction Results
SN Element Peak Peak Max HGL Max HGL Max Min Average HGL Average HGL Time of Time of Total Total Time
ID Inflow Lateral Elevation Depth Surcharge Freeboard Elevation Depth Max HGL Peak Flooded Flooded
Inflow Attained Attained Depth Attained Attained Attained Occurrence Flooding Volume
Attained Occurrence
(cfs)(cfs)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(days hh:mm)(days hh:mm)(ac-in)(min)
1 Drain Basin A3 1.54 0.00 4912.87 1.35 0.00 2.27 4912.86 1.34 0 16:07 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
2 Drain Basin A7 1.52 0.00 4913.47 1.09 0.00 3.70 4913.47 1.09 0 17:46 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
3 Ex_Jct 2.78 2.78 4907.44 1.91 0.00 4.09 4907.44 1.91 0 18:29 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
4 Inlet A2-1 1.90 1.90 4912.78 1.26 0.00 1.07 4912.78 1.26 0 15:19 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
5 Inlet A8 1.50 1.50 4916.42 3.46 0.00 0.00 4915.92 2.96 0 00:00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
6 Inline Drain A4-1 0.11 0.02 4913.01 0.76 0.00 3.31 4913.00 0.75 0 23:40 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
7 Inline Drain A7-1 0.03 0.02 4913.47 0.36 0.00 3.36 4913.47 0.36 0 22:25 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
8 STMH A1 6.22 0.00 4907.23 1.87 0.00 6.29 4907.23 1.87 0 04:56 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
9 Tee A2 3.44 0.00 4912.60 1.49 0.00 1.84 4912.60 1.49 0 14:09 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
10 Wye A4 1.54 0.00 4913.01 1.23 0.00 2.72 4913.00 1.22 0 01:46 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
11 Wye A5 1.63 0.00 4913.17 1.17 0.00 3.31 4913.17 1.17 0 05:26 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
12 Wye A6 1.86 0.00 4913.38 1.07 0.00 3.81 4913.38 1.07 0 14:00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00
This document was created by an application that isn't licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Pipe Input
SN Element Length Inlet Inlet Outlet Outlet Total Average Pipe Pipe Pipe Manning's Entrance Exit/Bend Additional Initial Flap No. of
ID Invert Invert Invert Invert Drop Slope Shape Diameter or Width Roughness Losses Losses Losses Flow Gate Barrels
Elevation Offset Elevation Offset Height
(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(%)(in)(in)(cfs)
1 Ex Storm Pipe 1 42.21 4905.36 0.00 4905.22 0.00 0.14 0.3200 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
2 Ex_Storm_Pipe_2 53.49 4905.53 0.00 4905.36 0.00 0.17 0.3200 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
3 Storm Pipe A1 45.60 4911.11 0.00 4910.88 5.52 0.23 0.5000 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
4 Storm Pipe A2 82.39 4911.52 0.00 4911.11 0.00 0.41 0.5000 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
5 Storm Pipe A3 31.81 4911.78 0.00 4911.62 0.10 0.16 0.5000 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
6 Storm Pipe A4 44.37 4912.00 0.00 4911.78 0.00 0.22 0.5000 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
7 Storm Pipe A4-1 21.87 4912.25 0.00 4912.03 0.25 0.22 1.0100 CIRCULAR 6.000 6.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
8 Storm Pipe A5 62.13 4912.31 0.00 4912.00 0.00 0.31 0.5000 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
9 Storm Pipe A6 13.97 4912.38 0.00 4912.31 0.00 0.07 0.5200 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
10 Storm Pipe A7 16.24 4912.96 0.00 4912.88 0.50 0.08 0.5000 CIRCULAR 6.000 6.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
11 Storm Pipe A7-1 22.55 4913.11 0.00 4912.88 0.50 0.23 1.0000 CIRCULAR 6.000 6.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
12 Storm_Pipe_A2-1 23.98 4911.52 0.00 4911.11 0.00 0.41 1.7100 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 1
This document was created by an application that isn't licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Pipe Results
SN Element Peak Time of Design Flow Peak Flow/Peak Flow Travel Peak Flow Peak Flow Total Time Froude Reported
ID Flow Peak Flow Capacity Design Flow Velocity Time Depth Depth/Surcharged Number Condition
Occurrence Ratio Total Depth
Ratio
(cfs)(days hh:mm)(cfs)(ft/sec)(min)(ft)(min)
1 Ex Storm Pipe 1 6.22 0 14:40 3.18 1.96 5.34 0.13 1.13 0.90 0.00 > CAPACITY
2 Ex_Storm_Pipe_2 3.46 0 00:00 3.17 1.09 4.21 0.21 1.25 1.00 1439.00 SURCHARGED
3 Storm Pipe A1 3.44 0 05:09 2.19 1.57 4.64 0.16 0.90 0.90 0.00 > CAPACITY
4 Storm Pipe A2 1.54 0 04:14 2.18 0.71 1.96 0.70 1.00 1.00 1437.00 SURCHARGED
5 Storm Pipe A3 1.54 0 16:07 2.19 0.70 2.58 0.21 1.00 1.00 1436.00 SURCHARGED
6 Storm Pipe A4 1.52 0 06:47 2.17 0.70 3.79 0.20 1.00 1.00 1435.00 SURCHARGED
7 Storm Pipe A4-1 0.09 0 00:02 0.49 0.19 1.06 0.34 0.50 1.00 1436.00 SURCHARGED
8 Storm Pipe A5 1.63 0 00:00 2.18 0.75 3.98 0.26 1.00 1.00 1432.00 SURCHARGED
9 Storm Pipe A6 1.86 0 00:00 2.23 0.83 4.78 0.05 1.00 1.00 1432.00 SURCHARGED
10 Storm Pipe A7 1.50 0 00:00 0.34 4.37 7.65 0.04 0.50 1.00 1440.00 SURCHARGED
11 Storm Pipe A7-1 0.02 0 10:50 0.49 0.04 0.55 0.68 0.43 0.86 0.00 Calculated
12 Storm_Pipe_A2-1 2.47 0 00:00 4.04 0.61 6.16 0.06 1.00 1.00 1437.00 SURCHARGED
This document was created by an application that isn't licensed to use novaPDF.
Purchase a license to generate PDF files without this notice.
Notes:
1) All inlets and storm sewers are designed for the 10-Year Storm. The 100-Year Storm will be conveyed through the proposed existing and proposed curb and
gutter to the existing inlet at Design Point 3-5.
2) Inlet A2-1 will overtop to the west during the 100-Year Storm to eventually be collected by the existing inlet at Design Point 3-5.
3) Inlet A8 will overtop to the south during the 100-Year Storm to eventually be collected by the exisitng inlet at Design Point 3-5.
Project:
Inlet ID:
Gutter Geometry:
Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb TBACK =0.0 ft
Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)SBACK =ft/ft
Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)nBACK =0.020
Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line HCURB =6.00 inches
Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TCROWN =44.0 ft
Gutter Width W =2.00 ft
Street Transverse Slope SX =0.020 ft/ft
Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 ft/ft)SW =0.083 ft/ft
Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition SO =0.000 ft/ft
Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)nSTREET =0.012
Minor Storm Major Storm
Max. Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm TMAX =44.0 44.0 ft
Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm dMAX =6.0 6.5 inches
Check boxes are not applicable in SUMP conditions
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Storm
MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Qallow =SUMP SUMP cfs
MHFD-Inlet, Version 5.01 (April 2021)
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
(Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread)
NOCO Power Sports Expansion
Inlet A2-1
MHFD-Inlet_v5.01.xlsm, Inlet A2-1 10/20/2023, 2:06 PM
Design Information (Input)MINOR MAJOR
Type of Inlet Type =
Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from above)alocal =2.00 2.00 inches
Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)No =1 1
Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression)Ponding Depth =6.0 6.5 inches
Grate Information MINOR MAJOR
Length of a Unit Grate Lo (G) =3.00 3.00 feet
Width of a Unit Grate Wo =1.73 1.73 feet
Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90)Aratio =0.43 0.43
Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)Cf (G) =0.50 0.50
Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)Cw (G) =3.30 3.30
Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.80)Co (G) =0.60 0.60
Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR
Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) =3.00 3.00 feet
Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches Hvert =6.50 6.50 inches
Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hthroat =5.25 5.25 inches
Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)Theta =0.00 0.00 degrees
Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)Wp =2.00 2.00 feet
Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)Cf (C) =0.10 0.10
Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.7)Cw (C) =3.70 3.70
Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)Co (C) =0.66 0.66
Low Head Performance Reduction (Calculated)MINOR MAJOR
Depth for Grate Midwidth dGrate =0.523 0.564 ft
Depth for Curb Opening Weir Equation dCurb =0.33 0.38 ft
Combination Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCombination =0.94 1.00
Curb Opening Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFCurb =1.00 1.00
Grated Inlet Performance Reduction Factor for Long Inlets RFGrate =0.94 1.00
MINOR MAJOR
Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)Qa =3.6 4.4 cfs
Inlet Capacity IS GOOD for Minor and Major Storms(>Q PEAK)Q PEAK REQUIRED =1.9 4.3 cfs
CDOT/Denver 13 Combination
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
MHFD-Inlet, Version 5.01 (April 2021)
H-VertH-Curb
W
Lo (C)
Lo (G)
Wo
WP
CDOT/Denver 13 Combination
Override Depths
MHFD-Inlet_v5.01.xlsm, Inlet A2-1 10/20/2023, 2:06 PM
Inlet Name:Drain A4-1 Project:
10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.02 Location:
100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.02 Calc. By:
Type of Grate:0.35
Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,916.32
0.50
Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation
(ft)
Shallow Weir
Flow (cfs)
Orifice Flow
(cfs)
Actual Flow
(cfs)Notes
0.00 4,916.32 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.03 4,916.35 0.02 0.16 0.02 Major & Minor Storms
0.05 4,916.37 0.04 0.21 0.04
0.10 4,916.42 0.10 0.30 0.10
0.15 4,916.47 0.18 0.36 0.18
0.20 4,916.52 0.28 0.42 0.28
0.25 4,916.57 0.39 0.47 0.39
0.30 4,916.62 0.52 0.51 0.51
0.35 4,916.67 0.65 0.55 0.55 Sidewalk / Overflow
0.40 4,916.72 0.79 0.59 0.59
0.45 4,916.77 0.95 0.63 0.63
0.61 4,916.93 1.50 0.73 0.73 Grade Against Building
Depth vs. Flow
Nyloplast 8" Dome
2054-001
NOCO Power Sports Expansion
F. Wegert
Reduction Factor:
AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE
Governing Equations
If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir.
Input Parameters
Rim Elevation (ft):
Open Area of Grate (ft2):
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70
Di
s
c
h
a
r
g
e
(
c
f
s
)
Stage (ft)
Stage - Discharge Curves
Series1
Series2
At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation:
* where P = π * Dia. of grate
* where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline
At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following
equation:
* where A equals the open area of the inlet grate
* where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross -
sectional area (A).
𝑄=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5
𝑄=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY
Inlet Name:Drain A7-1 Project:
10-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.02 Location:
100-Year Design Flow (cfs)0.02 Calc. By:
Type of Grate:0.35
Diameter of Grate (ft):0.67 4,916.83
0.50
Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation
(ft)
Shallow Weir
Flow (cfs)
Orifice Flow
(cfs)
Actual Flow
(cfs)Notes
0.00 4,916.83 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.03 4,916.86 0.02 0.16 0.02 Major & Minor Storms
0.05 4,916.88 0.04 0.21 0.04
0.10 4,916.93 0.10 0.30 0.10
0.15 4,916.98 0.18 0.36 0.18
0.20 4,917.03 0.28 0.42 0.28
0.25 4,917.08 0.39 0.47 0.39
0.30 4,917.13 0.52 0.51 0.51 Grade Against Building
0.35 4,917.18 0.65 0.55 0.55
0.40 4,917.23 0.79 0.59 0.59
0.45 4,917.28 0.95 0.63 0.63
0.65 4,917.48 1.65 0.76 0.76 Sidewalk / Overflow
Depth vs. Flow
AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE
2054-001
NOCO Power Sports Expansion
F. Wegert
Governing Equations
If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir.
Input Parameters
Nyloplast 8" Dome Open Area of Grate (ft2):
Rim Elevation (ft):
Reduction Factor:
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70
Di
s
c
h
a
r
g
e
(
c
f
s
)
Stage (ft)
Stage - Discharge Curves
Series1
Series2
At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation:
* where P = π * Dia. of grate
* where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline
At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following
equation:
* where A equals the open area of the inlet grate
* where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross -
sectional area (A).
𝑄=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5
𝑄=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY
Inlet Name:Inlet A8 Project:
10-Year Design Flow (cfs)1.50 Location:
100-Year Design Flow (cfs)3.90 Calc. By:
Type of Grate:2.68
Length of Grate (ft):1.98 4,916.42
Width of Grate (ft):1.354166667 0.50
Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation
(ft)
Shallow Weir
Flow (cfs)
Orifice Flow
(cfs)
Actual Flow
(cfs)Notes
0.00 4,916.42 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.05 4,916.47 0.11 1.61 0.11
0.10 4,916.52 0.32 2.28 0.32
0.15 4,916.57 0.58 2.79 0.58
0.20 4,916.62 0.89 3.22 0.89
0.25 4,916.67 1.25 3.60 1.25
0.29 4,916.71 1.56 3.88 1.56 10-Year Storm
0.36 4,916.78 2.16 4.32 2.16 Overflow to the south
0.40 4,916.82 2.53 4.55 2.53
0.45 4,916.87 3.02 4.83 3.02
0.50 4,916.92 3.54 5.09 3.54
0.55 4,916.97 4.08 5.34 4.08 100-Year Storm
Depth vs. Flow
Fabricated
2054-001
NOCO Power Sports Expansion
F. Wegert
Reduction Factor:
AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE
Governing Equations
If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir.
Input Parameters
Rim Elevation (ft):
Open Area of Grate (ft2):
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60
Di
s
c
h
a
r
g
e
(
c
f
s
)
Stage (ft)
Stage - Discharge Curves
Series1
Series2
At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation:
* where P = 2(L + W)
* where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline
At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation:
* where A equals the open area of the inlet grate
* where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area
(A).
𝑄=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5
𝑄=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY
Inlet Name:Existing Project:
10-Year Design Flow (cfs)5.10 Location:
100-Year Design Flow (cfs)13.80 Calc. By:
Type of Grate:6.00
Length of Grate (ft):3.00 4,912.54
Width of Grate (ft):2 0.50
Depth Above Inlet (ft)Elevation
(ft)
Shallow Weir
Flow (cfs)
Orifice Flow
(cfs)
Actual Flow
(cfs)Notes
0.00 4,912.54 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.13 4,912.67 0.70 5.81 0.70 Curb Cut / Overflow
0.20 4,912.74 1.34 7.21 1.34
0.30 4,912.84 2.46 8.83 2.46
0.40 4,912.94 3.79 10.20 3.79
0.50 4,913.04 5.30 11.40 5.30 10-Year Storm
0.65 4,913.19 7.86 13.00 7.86
0.80 4,913.34 10.73 14.42 10.73
0.95 4,913.49 13.89 15.71 13.89 100-Year Storm
1.10 4,913.64 17.31 16.91 17.31
1.25 4,913.79 20.96 18.03 18.03
1.43 4,913.97 25.65 19.28 19.28 High Point in Driveway
Depth vs. Flow
AREA INLET PERFORMANCE CURVE
2054-001
NOCO Power Sports Expansion
F. Wegert
Governing Equations
If H > 1.792 (A/P), then the grate operates like an orifice; otherwise it operates like a weir.
Input Parameters
Fabricated Open Area of Grate (ft2):
Rim Elevation (ft):
Reduction Factor:
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Di
s
c
h
a
r
g
e
(
c
f
s
)
Stage (ft)
Stage - Discharge Curves
Series1
Series2
At low flow dephs, the inlet will act like a weir governed by the following equation:
* where P = 2(L + W)
* where H corresponds to the depth of water above the flowline
At higher flow depths, the inlet will act like an orifice governed by the following equation:
* where A equals the open area of the inlet grate
* where H corresponds to the depth of water above the centroid of the cross-sectional area
(A).
𝑄=3.0𝑃𝐻1.5
𝑄=0.67𝐴(2𝑔𝐻)0.5
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX C
WATER QUALITY/LID DESIGN COMPUTATIONS
Project Number:2054-001 Calc. By:F. Wegert
Project Name:NOCO Power Sports Date:October 20, 2023
Project Location:Fort Collins, Colorad
Description Surface Area (ft2)Percent Impervious Impervious Area (ft2)
Rooftop 18,833 100%18,833
Concrete 5,586 100%5,586
Asphalt 36,370 100%36,370
Pavers 0 40%0
Gravel 2,721 40%1,088
Landscaping 24,885 0%0
Total 88,395 70%61,877
Description Surface Area (ft2)Percent Impervious Impervious Area (ft2)
Rooftop 28,531 100%28,531
Concrete 6,966 100%6,966
Asphalt 33,546 100%33,546
Pavers 0 40%0
Gravel 0 40%0
Landscaping 19,352 0%0
Total 88,395 78%69,043
7,166
IMPERVIOUS AREA CALCULATIONS
Historic Impervious Areas
Developed Impervious Areas
Net Increase in Impervious Area
Note:
1) Impervious calculations do not include Basins 4-1, 5-1, and 6-1. No improvements are proposed in
Basins 4-1, 5-1, and 6-1.
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY
M
H2O
UD
UD
E
E
E
H2O
NORTH
EXISTING VS. PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREAS
FORT COLLINS, CO
NOCO POWER SPORTS
E N G I N E E R N GI
EHTRON R N
10.20.2022
P:\2054-001\DWG\SHEETS\DRAINAGE\2054-001 IMPV.DWG
( IN FEET )
0
1 INCH = 80 FEET
80 80
EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREAS DEVELOPED IMPERVIOUS AREAS
ROOFTOP
CONCRETE
ASPHALT
PAVERS
TOTALS 88,600 61,877TOTAL=
GRAVEL
LANDSCAPE
TOTAL PERCENT IMPERVIOUS = 70%
SURFACE
AREA (SF)% IMPERV.IMPERV.
AREA (SF)
18,833 100%18,833
5,586 100%5,586
36,370 100%36,370
0 40%0
2,721 40%1,088
24,885 0%0
ROOFTOP
CONCRETE
ASPHALT
PAVERS
TOTALS 88,600 69,042TOTAL=
GRAVEL
LANDSCAPE
TOTAL PERCENT IMPERVIOUS = 78%
SURFACE
AREA (SF)% IMPERV.IMPERV.
AREA (SF)
28,531 100%28,531
6,966 100%6,966
33,546 100%33,546
0 40%0
0 40%0
19,352 0%0
Project Number:Calc. By:
Project Name Date:
Project Location:
Sq. Ft.Acres
1-1 22,261 0.51 92%n/a n/a 0 22,261
3-1 17,537 0.45 78%n/a n/a 0 13,603
3-2 12,898 0.23 85%RG1 Rain Garden 260 11,551
3-3 6,028 0.15 91%RG2 Rain Garden 174 5,484
3-4 14,419 0.34 32%n/a n/a 0 4,791
3-5 15,253 0.35 75%n/a n/a 0 11,354
4-1 57,214 1.32 80%
5-1 23,946 0.55 3%
6-1 59,527 1.37 5%
Sq. Ft.Acres
RG1 6,937 0.16 85%RG Rain Garden 155 5,590
RG2 6,028 0.14 91%RG Rain Garden 165 5,484
Total 12,964 0.30 155 11,074
88,395 ft2
61,877 ft2
69,043 ft2
7,166 ft2
11,074 ft2
57,969 ft2
3,583 ft2
5,374 ft3
11,074 ft2
155%
Total Impervious Area Treated by Rain Garden
Total Impervious Area Treated by Existing Water Quality Pond
50% Required Minimum Area of Net Proposed Impervious Area to be Treated
October 20, 2023
Existing Impervious Area
Proposed Impervious Area
Treatment Type Treatment
Volume (ft3)
Total
Impervious
75% Required Minimum Area of Net Proposed Impervious Area to be Treated
Total Impervious Area with LID Treatment
Net Proposed Percent Impervious Treated by LID
LID SUMMARY
F. Wegert
Net Proposed Impervious Area
LID Site Summary
Total Site Area with Improvements
Treatment Type Required
Volume (ft3)
Impervious
Area (ft2)
LID Summary per Basin
Basin ID Area Weighted %
Impervious LID ID
2054-001
NOCO Power Sports
Fort Collins, Colorado
No Proposed Improvements
No Proposed Improvements
No Proposed Improvements
LID Summary per LID Structure
LID ID2 Area Weighted %
Impervious
Subbasin
ID
Note:
1) Impervious calculations do not include Basins 4-1, 5-1, and 6-1. No improvements are proposed in Basins 4-1, 5-
1, and 6-1.
2) Rooftops in Basin 3-2 will drain directly into the storm sewer. Therefore, the area for RG1 doesn't include the
rooftop from Basin 3-2.
UD
UD
E
E
E
H2O
0.51 ac.
1-1
0.40 ac.
3-1
0.30 ac.
3-2
0.35 ac.
3-5
0.14 ac.
3-3
1.31 ac.
4-1
0.33 ac.
3-4
0.55 ac.
5-1
1.37 ac.
6-1
RAIN GARDEN 2
(RG2)
RAIN GARDEN 1
(RG1)
NORTH
PROPOSED STORM SEWER
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PROPOSED INLET
A
DESIGN POINT
DRAINAGE BASIN LABEL
DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY
A
LEGEND:
LID EXHIBIT
FORT COLLINS, CO
NOCO POWER SPORTS
E N G I N E E R N GI
EHTRON R N
10.20.2023
P:\2054-001\DWG\SHEETS\DRAINAGE\2054-001 LID TABLE.DWG
( IN FEET )
0
1 INCH = 80 FEET
80 80
IMPERVIOUS AREA TREATED BY EXISTING
WATER QUALITY POND
IMPERVIOUS AREA TREATED BY RAIN GARDEN
LID Site Summary
Total Site Area With Improvements 88,395 sq. ft.
Existing Impervious Area 61,877 sq. ft.
Proposed Impervious Area 69,043 sq. ft.
Net Proposed Impervious Area 7,166 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area Treated by Rain Garden 11,074 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area Treated by Existing Water Quality Pond 57,969 sq. ft.
50% Required Min. Area of Net Proposed Impervious Area to be Treated 3,583 sq. ft.
75% Required Min. Area of Net Proposed Impervious Area to be Treated 5,374 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area with LID Treatment 11,074 sq. ft.
Net Proposed Percent Impervious Treated by LID 155%
LID Summary per Structure
LID ID Area Weighted %
Impervious
Treatment
Type
Required
Volume
(cu. ft.)
Design
Volume (cu.
ft.)
Total Impervious
Area (sq. ft.)Sq. Ft.Acres
RG1 6,937 0.16 85%Rain Garden 155 304 5,590
RG2 6,028 0.14 91%Rain Garden 165 306 5,484
Total 12,964 0.30 155 610 11,074
LID Summary per Basin
Basin ID
Area Percent
Imperviou
s LID ID
Treatment
Type
Total
Impervious
Area (sq. ft.)Sq. Ft.Acres
1-1 22,261 51%92%n/a n/a 22,261
3-1 17,537 45%78%n/a n/a 13,603
3-2 12,898 23%85%RG1 Rain Garden 11,551
3-3 6,028 15%91%RG2 Rain Garden 5,484
3-4 14,419 34%32%n/a n/a 4,791
3-5 15,253 35%75%n/a n/a 11,354
4-1 57,214 132%80%No Proposed Improvements
5-1 23,946 55%3%No Proposed Improvements
6-1 59,527 137%5%No Proposed Improvements
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =81.0 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.810
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.27 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area =6,937 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =155 cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =12 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical)Z =4.00 ft / ft
(Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =112 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =178 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =431 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=304 cu ft
(VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth)
3.Growing Media
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.0 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =155 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =5/16 in LESS THAN MINIMUM. USE DIAMETER OF 3/8"
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Frederick S. Wegert
Northern Engineering
October 20, 2023
NOCO Power Sports - Rain Garden 1
Fort Collins, Colorado
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
UD-BMP_v3.07 RG1.xlsm, RG 10/20/2023, 1:39 PM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6.Inlet / Outlet Control
A) Inlet Control
7.Vegetation
8.Irrigation
NO SPRINKLER HEADS ON FLAT SURFACE
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated?
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Frederick S. Wegert
Northern Engineering
October 20, 2023
NOCO Power Sports - Rain Garden 1
Fort Collins, Colorado
Choose One
Choose One
Choose One
Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required
Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided
Plantings
Seed (Plan for frequent weed control)
Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod
Choose One
YES
NO
YES
NO
UD-BMP_v3.07 RG1.xlsm, RG 10/20/2023, 1:39 PM
Sheet 1 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
1.Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, Ia Ia =91.0 %
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = Ia/100)i =0.910
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =0.33 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 * (0.91* i3 - 1.19 * i2 + 0.78 * i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)Area =6,028 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV =165 cu ft
Vol = (WQCV / 12) * Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of d6 = in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VWQCV OTHER =cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWQCV USER =cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2.Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)DWQCV =12 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical)Z =4.00 ft / ft
(Use "0" if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AMin =110 sq ft
D) Actual Flat Surface Area AActual =175 sq ft
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)ATop =436 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT=306 cu ft
(VT= ((ATop + AActual) / 2) * Depth)
3.Growing Media
4.Underdrain System
A) Are underdrains provided?1
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y =1.0 ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours Vol12 =165 cu ft
iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum DO =5/16 in LESS THAN MINIMUM. USE DIAMETER OF 3/8"
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Frederick S. Wegert
Northern Engineering
October 20, 2023
NOCO Power Sports - Rain Garden 2
Fort Collins, Colorado
UD-BMP (Version 3.07, March 2018)
Choose One
Choose One
18" Rain Garden Growing Media
Other (Explain):
YES
NO
UD-BMP_v3.07 RG2.xlsm, RG 10/20/2023, 1:39 PM
Sheet 2 of 2
Designer:
Company:
Date:
Project:
Location:
5.Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric
A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity
of structures or groundwater contamination?
6.Inlet / Outlet Control
A) Inlet Control
7.Vegetation
8.Irrigation
NO SPRINKLER HEADS ON FLAT SURFACE
A) Will the rain garden be irrigated?
Notes:
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Frederick S. Wegert
Northern Engineering
October 20, 2023
NOCO Power Sports - Rain Garden 2
Fort Collins, Colorado
Choose One
Choose One
Choose One
Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required
Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided
Plantings
Seed (Plan for frequent weed control)
Sand Grown or Other High Infiltration Sod
Choose One
YES
NO
YES
NO
UD-BMP_v3.07 RG2.xlsm, RG 10/20/2023, 1:39 PM
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX D
EROSION CONTROL REPORT
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY EROSION CONTROL REPORT
EROSION CONTROL REPORT
A comprehensive Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (along with associated details) has been included with the
final construction drawings. It should be noted; however, any such Erosion and Sediment Control Plan serves
only as a general guide to the Contractor. Staging and/or phasing of the BMPs depicted, and additional or
different BMPs from those included may be necessary during construction, or as required by the authorities
having jurisdiction.
It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure erosion control measures are properly maintained and
followed. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is intended to be a living document, constantly adapting to
site conditions and needs. The Contractor shall update the location of BMPs as they are installed, removed, or
modified in conjunction with construction activities. It is imperative to appropriately reflect the current site
conditions at all times.
The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall address both temporary measures to be implemented during
construction, as well as permanent erosion control protection. Best Management Practices from the Volume 3,
Chapter 7 – Construction BMPs will be utilized. Measures may include, but are not limited to, silt fencing and/or
wattles along the disturbed perimeter, gutter protection in the adjacent roadways , and inlet protection at
existing and proposed storm inlets. Vehicle tracking control pads, spill containment and clean-up procedures,
designated concrete washout areas, dumpsters, and job site restrooms shall also be provided by the Contractor.
Grading and Erosion Control Notes can be found on Sheet CS2 of the Utility Plans. The Final Utility Plans will also
contain a full-size Erosion Control Plan as well as a separate sheet dedicated to Erosion Control Details. In
addition to this report and the referenced plan sheets, the Contractor shall be aware of, and adhere to, the
applicable requirements outlined in any existing Development Agreement(s) of record, as well as the
Development Agreement, to be recorded prior to issuance of the Development Construction Permit. Also, the
Site Contractor for this project may be required to secure a Stormwater Construction General Permit from the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Water Quality Control Division – Stormwater
Program, before commencing any earth disturbing activities. Prior to securing said permit, the Site Contractor
shall develop a comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) pursuant to CDPHE requirements and
guidelines. The SWMP will further describe and document the ongoing activities, inspections, and maintenance
of construction BMPs.
NNORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX E
USDA SOILS REPORT
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Larimer County
Area, ColoradoNatural
Resources
Conservation
Service
October 2, 2023
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
Soil Map..................................................................................................................8
Soil Map (NOCO Power Sports)...........................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
Map Unit Legend (NOCO Power Sports)............................................................11
Map Unit Descriptions (NOCO Power Sports)....................................................11
Larimer County Area, Colorado......................................................................13
22—Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slope...............................................13
24—Connerton-Barnum complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes............................14
35—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes..............................................16
54—Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes..........................................................17
76—Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to 3 percent slopes.........................................18
Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................21
Soil Properties and Qualities..............................................................................21
Soil Erosion Factors........................................................................................21
K Factor, Whole Soil (NOCO Power Sports)...............................................21
Soil Qualities and Features.............................................................................24
Hydrologic Soil Group (NOCO Power Sports).............................................24
References............................................................................................................29
4
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
Custom Soil Resource Report
6
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8
9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map (NOCO Power Sports)
44
9
0
9
7
0
44
9
1
0
0
0
44
9
1
0
3
0
44
9
1
0
6
0
44
9
1
0
9
0
44
9
1
1
2
0
44
9
1
1
5
0
44
9
1
1
8
0
44
9
1
2
1
0
44
9
0
9
7
0
44
9
1
0
0
0
44
9
1
0
3
0
44
9
1
0
6
0
44
9
1
0
9
0
44
9
1
1
2
0
44
9
1
1
5
0
44
9
1
1
8
0
44
9
1
2
1
0
499700 499730 499760 499790 499820 499850 499880
499700 499730 499760 499790 499820 499850 499880
40° 34' 18'' N
10
5
°
0
'
1
2
'
'
W
40° 34' 18'' N
10
5
°
0
'
4
'
'
W
40° 34' 9'' N
10
5
°
0
'
1
2
'
'
W
40° 34' 9'' N
10
5
°
0
'
4
'
'
W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84
0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 15 30 60 90
Meters
Map Scale: 1:1,230 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado
Survey Area Data: Version 18, Aug 24, 2023
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 2, 2021—Aug 25,
2021
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
10
Map Unit Legend (NOCO Power Sports)
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
22 Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1
percent slope
1.4 21.1%
24 Connerton-Barnum complex, 0
to 3 percent slopes
1.2 17.6%
35 Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent
slopes
0.9 13.4%
54 Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes 2.9 44.4%
76 Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to 3
percent slopes
0.2 3.6%
Totals for Area of Interest 6.6 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions (NOCO Power
Sports)
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
12
Larimer County Area, Colorado
22—Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slope
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jpvt
Elevation: 4,800 to 5,500 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F
Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Caruso and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Caruso
Setting
Landform:Flood-plain steps, stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Mixed alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 35 inches: clay loam
H2 - 35 to 44 inches: fine sandy loam
H3 - 44 to 60 inches: gravelly sand
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table:About 24 to 48 inches
Frequency of flooding:OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R067BY036CO - Overflow
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Loveland
Percent of map unit:9 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
13
Landform:Terraces
Ecological site:R067BY036CO - Overflow
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Fluvaquents
Percent of map unit:6 percent
Landform:Terraces
Hydric soil rating: Yes
24—Connerton-Barnum complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jpvw
Elevation: 5,000 to 6,000 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 18 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 47 to 49 degrees F
Frost-free period: 115 to 130 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Connerton and similar soils:50 percent
Barnum and similar soils:40 percent
Minor components:10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Connerton
Setting
Landform:Fans, flood plains, stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Mixed alluvium derived from sandstone and shale
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 8 inches: fine sandy loam
H2 - 8 to 60 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:1 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high (0.20
to 0.60 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.8 inches)
Custom Soil Resource Report
14
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R049XB202CO - Loamy Foothill
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Barnum
Setting
Landform:Fans, terraces, valleys
Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Mixed alluvium derived from sandstone and shale
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 10 inches: loam
H2 - 10 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: R049XY036CO - Overflow
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Garrett
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Otero
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
15
35—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2tlnc
Elevation: 4,020 to 6,730 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 48 degrees F
Frost-free period: 135 to 160 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Fort collins and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Fort Collins
Setting
Landform:Interfluves, stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve, tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Pleistocene or older alluvium and/or eolian deposits
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 4 inches: loam
Bt1 - 4 to 9 inches: clay loam
Bt2 - 9 to 16 inches: clay loam
Bk1 - 16 to 29 inches: loam
Bk2 - 29 to 80 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.20 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:12 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.1 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Custom Soil Resource Report
16
Ecological site: R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Nunn
Percent of map unit:10 percent
Landform:Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Vona
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Interfluves
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve, side slope
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R067BY024CO - Sandy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
54—Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jpwy
Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F
Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Kim and similar soils:90 percent
Minor components:10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Kim
Setting
Landform:Fans
Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Mixed alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: loam
H2 - 7 to 60 inches: clay loam
Custom Soil Resource Report
17
Properties and qualities
Slope:3 to 5 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Thedalund
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Ecological site:R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Stoneham
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Ecological site:R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Fort collins
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Ecological site:R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Aquic haplustolls
Percent of map unit:1 percent
Landform:Swales
Hydric soil rating: Yes
76—Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: jpxq
Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F
Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days
Custom Soil Resource Report
18
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Nunn, wet, and similar soils:90 percent
Minor components:10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Nunn, Wet
Setting
Landform:Alluvial fans, stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 10 inches: clay loam
H2 - 10 to 47 inches: clay
H3 - 47 to 60 inches: gravelly loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:1 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.60 in/hr)
Depth to water table:About 24 to 36 inches
Frequency of flooding:RareNone
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:10 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R067BY038CO - Wet Meadow
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Heldt
Percent of map unit:6 percent
Ecological site:R067BY042CO - Clayey Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Dacono
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Ecological site:R067BY042CO - Clayey Plains
Hydric soil rating: No
Mollic halaquepts
Percent of map unit:1 percent
Landform:Swales
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
19
Custom Soil Resource Report
20
Soil Information for All Uses
Soil Properties and Qualities
The Soil Properties and Qualities section includes various soil properties and
qualities displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in
the selected area of interest. A single value or rating for each map unit is generated
by aggregating the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This
aggregation process is defined for each property or quality.
Soil Erosion Factors
Soil Erosion Factors are soil properties and interpretations used in evaluating the
soil for potential erosion. Example soil erosion factors can include K factor for the
whole soil or on a rock free basis, T factor, wind erodibility group and wind erodibility
index.
K Factor, Whole Soil (NOCO Power Sports)
Erosion factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by
water. Factor K is one of six factors used in the Universal Soil Loss Equation
(USLE) and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) to predict the
average annual rate of soil loss by sheet and rill erosion in tons per acre per year.
The estimates are based primarily on percentage of silt, sand, and organic matter
and on soil structure and saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat). Values of K range
from 0.02 to 0.69. Other factors being equal, the higher the value, the more
susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill erosion by water.
"Erosion factor Kw (whole soil)" indicates the erodibility of the whole soil. The
estimates are modified by the presence of rock fragments.
Factor K does not apply to organic horizons and is not reported for those layers.
21
22
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map—K Factor, Whole Soil (NOCO Power Sports)
44
9
0
9
7
0
44
9
1
0
0
0
44
9
1
0
3
0
44
9
1
0
6
0
44
9
1
0
9
0
44
9
1
1
2
0
44
9
1
1
5
0
44
9
1
1
8
0
44
9
1
2
1
0
44
9
0
9
7
0
44
9
1
0
0
0
44
9
1
0
3
0
44
9
1
0
6
0
44
9
1
0
9
0
44
9
1
1
2
0
44
9
1
1
5
0
44
9
1
1
8
0
44
9
1
2
1
0
499700 499730 499760 499790 499820 499850 499880
499700 499730 499760 499790 499820 499850 499880
40° 34' 18'' N
10
5
°
0
'
1
2
'
'
W
40° 34' 18'' N
10
5
°
0
'
4
'
'
W
40° 34' 9'' N
10
5
°
0
'
1
2
'
'
W
40° 34' 9'' N
10
5
°
0
'
4
'
'
W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84
0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 15 30 60 90
Meters
Map Scale: 1:1,230 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Rating Polygons
.02
.05
.10
.15
.17
.20
.24
.28
.32
.37
.43
.49
.55
.64
Not rated or not available
Soil Rating Lines
.02
.05
.10
.15
.17
.20
.24
.28
.32
.37
.43
.49
.55
.64
Not rated or not available
Soil Rating Points
.02
.05
.10
.15
.17
.20
.24
.28
.32
.37
.43
.49
.55
.64
Not rated or not available
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data
as of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado
Survey Area Data: Version 18, Aug 24, 2023
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 2, 2021—Aug
25, 2021
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
23
Table—K Factor, Whole Soil (NOCO Power Sports)
Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
22 Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1
percent slope
.32 1.4 21.1%
24 Connerton-Barnum
complex, 0 to 3
percent slopes
.20 1.2 17.6%
35 Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3
percent slopes
.43 0.9 13.4%
54 Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent
slopes
.28 2.9 44.4%
76 Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to
3 percent slopes
.24 0.2 3.6%
Totals for Area of Interest 6.6 100.0%
Rating Options—K Factor, Whole Soil (NOCO Power Sports)
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified
Tie-break Rule: Higher
Layer Options (Horizon Aggregation Method): Surface Layer (Not applicable)
Soil Qualities and Features
Soil qualities are behavior and performance attributes that are not directly
measured, but are inferred from observations of dynamic conditions and from soil
properties. Example soil qualities include natural drainage, and frost action. Soil
features are attributes that are not directly part of the soil. Example soil features
include slope and depth to restrictive layer. These features can greatly impact the
use and management of the soil.
Hydrologic Soil Group (NOCO Power Sports)
Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are
assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the
soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation
from long-duration storms.
The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and
three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows:
Custom Soil Resource Report
24
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly
wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or
gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These
consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained
soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils
have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or
soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water
transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell
potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at
or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material.
These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is
for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their
natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes.
Custom Soil Resource Report
25
26
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map—Hydrologic Soil Group (NOCO Power Sports)
44
9
0
9
7
0
44
9
1
0
0
0
44
9
1
0
3
0
44
9
1
0
6
0
44
9
1
0
9
0
44
9
1
1
2
0
44
9
1
1
5
0
44
9
1
1
8
0
44
9
1
2
1
0
44
9
0
9
7
0
44
9
1
0
0
0
44
9
1
0
3
0
44
9
1
0
6
0
44
9
1
0
9
0
44
9
1
1
2
0
44
9
1
1
5
0
44
9
1
1
8
0
44
9
1
2
1
0
499700 499730 499760 499790 499820 499850 499880
499700 499730 499760 499790 499820 499850 499880
40° 34' 18'' N
10
5
°
0
'
1
2
'
'
W
40° 34' 18'' N
10
5
°
0
'
4
'
'
W
40° 34' 9'' N
10
5
°
0
'
1
2
'
'
W
40° 34' 9'' N
10
5
°
0
'
4
'
'
W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84
0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 15 30 60 90
Meters
Map Scale: 1:1,230 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Rating Polygons
A
A/D
B
B/D
C
C/D
D
Not rated or not available
Soil Rating Lines
A
A/D
B
B/D
C
C/D
D
Not rated or not available
Soil Rating Points
A
A/D
B
B/D
C
C/D
D
Not rated or not available
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area, Colorado
Survey Area Data: Version 18, Aug 24, 2023
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 2, 2021—Aug 25,
2021
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
27
Table—Hydrologic Soil Group (NOCO Power Sports)
Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
22 Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1
percent slope
D 1.4 21.1%
24 Connerton-Barnum
complex, 0 to 3
percent slopes
C 1.2 17.6%
35 Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3
percent slopes
C 0.9 13.4%
54 Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent
slopes
B 2.9 44.4%
76 Nunn clay loam, wet, 1 to
3 percent slopes
C 0.2 3.6%
Totals for Area of Interest 6.6 100.0%
Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group (NOCO Power Sports)
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified
Tie-break Rule: Higher
Custom Soil Resource Report
28
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
29
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf
Custom Soil Resource Report
30
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX F
FEMA FIRMETTE
National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250
Feet
Ü
SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT
SPECIAL FLOOD
HAZARD AREAS
Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)
Zone A, V, A99
With BFE or DepthZone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR
Regulatory Floodway
0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas
of 1% annual chance flood with average
depth less than one foot or with drainage
areas of less than one square mileZone X
Future Conditions 1% Annual
Chance Flood HazardZone X
Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to
Levee. See Notes.Zone X
Area with Flood Risk due to LeveeZone D
NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X
Area of Undetermined Flood HazardZone D
Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer
Levee, Dike, or Floodwall
Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance
17.5 Water Surface Elevation
Coastal Transect
Coastal Transect Baseline
Profile Baseline
Hydrographic Feature
Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)
Effective LOMRs
Limit of Study
Jurisdiction Boundary
Digital Data Available
No Digital Data Available
Unmapped
This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of
digital flood maps if it is not void as described below.
The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap
accuracy standards
The flood hazard information is derived directly from the
authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map
was exported on 6/30/2023 at 4:17 PM and does not
reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and
time. The NFHL and effective information may change or
become superseded by new data over time.
This map image is void if the one or more of the following map
elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels,
legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers,
FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for
unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for
regulatory purposes.
Legend
OTHER AREAS OF
FLOOD HAZARD
OTHER AREAS
GENERAL
STRUCTURES
OTHER
FEATURES
MAP PANELS
8
B 20.2
The pin displayed on the map is an approximate
point selected by the user and does not represent
an authoritative property location.
1:6,000
105°0'27"W 40°34'29"N
104°59'50"W 40°34'2"N
Basemap Imagery Source: USGS National Map 2023
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
APPENDIX G
EXCERPTS FROM FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR
INTERSTATE LAND P.U.D. FIRST FILING
Water Quality Pond calculations per Final Drainage and
Erosion Control Report for Interstate Land P.U.D. First Filing.
NORTHERNENGINEERING.COM | 970.221.4158 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT: NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION
FORT COLLINS | GREELEY APPENDIX
MAP POCKET
DR1 – DRAINAGE EXHIBIT
BL
BL
BL BL BL BL BL BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL BL
BL
BL
BL
BL BL BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
BL
940
1BFE
=
4
9
1
0
.
2
3
9686
BFE=
4
9
1
0
.
9
4
UD
UD
UD
UD
UD
UD
UD
UD
UD
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
/ / / / / / / /
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
DS
DS
DS
DS
SOUTHWEST
FRONTAGE
ROAD
EXISTING WATER
QUALITY POND
BO
X
E
L
D
E
R
C
R
E
E
K
EXISTING BUILDING
PROPOSED BUILDING
LA
K
E
C
A
N
A
L
10
10
0.14 ac.
3-3
1.37 ac.
6-1
0.33 ac.
3-4
1.31 ac.
4-1
0.55 ac.
5-1
0.51 ac.
1-1
0.36 ac.
3-5
0.40 ac.
3-1
0.30 ac.
3-2
3-4
6-1
4-1
5-1
1-1
3-5
3-3
3-1
3-2
DS
DS
RAIN GARDEN 2
(RG2)RAIN GARDEN 1
(RG1)
CURB CUT
CURB CUT
EXISTING AREA INLET
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
EXISTING STORM INLET
VALLEY INLET
CURB INLET
EXISTING STORM INLET
EXISTING CURB INLET
EXISTING SPILLWAY
EXISTING RIPRAP
RUNDOWN
STORM DRAIN LINE A
SEE SHEET 10
STORM DRAIN LINE A1
SEE SHEET 10
EFFECTIVE 100-YEAR
FLOODWAY
EFFECTIVE 100-YEAR
FLOOD PLAIN
2.
2
%
DS
20'
30' ELCO
ESMT
31' ELCO
ESMT
20' ELCO
ESMT
11'
ELCO
ESMT
30 ELCO
ESMT
DS
Sheet
NO
C
O
P
O
W
E
R
S
P
O
R
T
S
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
of 27
DR1
DR
A
I
N
A
G
E
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
27
CALL 2 BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE BEFORE YOU
DIG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATE FOR THE MARKING OF
UNDERGROUND MEMBER UTILITIES.
CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF
COLORADO
Know what'sbelow.
before you dig.Call
R
NORTH
( IN FEET )
1 inch = ft.
Feet03030
30
60 90
PROPOSED CONTOUR
PROPOSED STORM SEWER
PROPOSED SWALE
EXISTING CONTOUR
PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PROPOSED INLET
A
DESIGN POINT
FLOW ARROW
DRAINAGE BASIN LABEL
DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY
PROPOSED SWALE SECTION
11
NOTES:
1.REFER TO THE FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR LOTS 1 & 2, INTERSTATE P.U.D. FIRST
FILING, NOCO POWER SPORTS EXPANSION PREPARED BY NORTHERN
ENGINEERING AND DATED FEBRUARY 19, 2025, FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
2.REFER TO THE COVER SHEET (SHEET 1) FOR PROJECT BENCHMARKS AND BASIS
OF BEARING.
3.ALL PROPOSED STORM SEWER AND RAIN GARDENS WILL BE PRIVATELY OWNED
AND MAINTAINED.
4.THERE ARE NO PROPOSED OR EXISTING STRUCTURES OR EARTHWORK LOCATED
WITHIN THE EFFECTIVE 100-YEAR FEMA DESIGNATED FLOODPLAIN AND FLOODWAY
FOR BOXELDER CREEK. PROPOSED LANDSCAPING WILL NOT IMPACT THE
EFFECTIVE 100-YEAR FEMA DESIGNATED FLOODPLAIN AND FLOODWAY.
5.THE FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION OF 4917.80 IS ABOVE THE 100-YEAR BASE FLOOD
ELEVATION OF 4910.94.
A
LEGEND:
FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
DSPROPOSED DOWNSPOUT
FEMA 100-YR FLOODWAY
EROSION BUFFER ZONE BL
FEMA 100-YR HIGH-RISK FLOODPLAIN
MAJOR STORM OVERFLOW PATH
NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER ZONE
BOXELDER CREEK WETLANDS
CROSS-SECTION WITH BASE FLOOD ELEV.
9314
BFE=4910.77
C10 C100 Q10
(cfs)
Q100
(cfs)