Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Drainage Reports - 12/03/2009
City of Ft. Colline::~ Plana Approved By . ~)AIL Date I :?,, -3-OJ NORTH COLLEGE MARKETPLACE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT Prepared for 1908 North College, LLC 1043 Eagle Drive Loveland, Colorado 80537 NORTH COLLEGE MARKETPLACE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT Prepared for 1908 North College, LLC 1043 Eagle Drive Loveland, Colorado 80537 AYRES ASSOCIATES P. 0 . Box 270460 Fort Collins , Colorado 80527 (970) 223-5556 , FAX (970) 223-5578 Ayres Project No. 32-1322.00 N-COLSTX.DOC August 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1.1 1.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................. 1.1 1.2 General Location and Description ....................................................................... 1 .1 1.3 Background ......................................................................................................... 1.1 2. Design Criteria ........................................................................................................... 2 .1 2.1 General ............................................................................................................... 2.1 2.2 Design Storm Frequencies .................................................................................. 2.1 2.3 Hydrologic Criteria ............................................................................................... 2 .1 2.4 Hydraulic Criteria ................................................................................................. 2 .2 3. Drainage Analysis ...................................................................................................... 3.1 3.1 Subsurface Investigations ................................................................................... 3.1 3.2 Historic Drainage Basin ....................................................................................... 3.1 3.3 Proposed Drainage Facility Design ..................................................................... 3.4 3.3 .1 Developed Basins ........................................................................................ 3.7 4. Water Quality and Erosion Control ............................................................................. 4.1 4 .1 Temporary Sediment/Erosion Control Methods ................................................... 4 .1 4.2 Permanent Sediment/Erosion Control Methods .................................................. 4.2 4.3 Materials Handling and Spill Prevention .............................................................. 4.2 4.4 Inspection and Maintenance ............................................................................... 4.4 4.5 Erosion Control Plan ........................................................................................... 4.5 4.6 Performance Standard ........................................................................................ 4.7 5. Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 5.1 APPENDIX A -Geotechnical Report .................................................................................. -- APPENDIX B -Wetland Delineation ................................................................................... -- APPENDIX C -Historic Map/Calculations ........................................................................... -- APPENDIX D -Proposed Map/Calculations ....................................................................... -- APPENDIX E -Detention Pond Calculations ...................................................................... -- APPENDIX F -Water Quality Calculations ......................................................................... -- APPENDIX G -Erosion Control Calculations ...................................................................... -- Ayres Associates LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. Vicinity Map .................................................................................................... 1.2 Figure 3.1. Wetland Map .................................................................................................. 3.2 Figure 3.2. Historic Map ................................................................................................... 3.5 Figure 3.3. Proposed Wetland Plan ................................................................................. 3.6 Figure 3.4 . Proposed Basin Map ...................................................................................... 3.8 Figure 3 .5. Stormwater Systems Map .............................................................................. 3.9 Figure 3.6. Detention Pond Outflow Curve ..................................................................... 3 .14 LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1. Inlet Summary ............................................................................................... 3.13 Table 3 .2 . Detention Pond Summary ............................................................................. 3.13 Table 3.3 . Water Quality Facilities .................................................................................. 3.15 Table 3.4. North Porous Landscape Detention Summary ............................................... 3.16 Table 3.5 . South Porous Landscape Detention Summary .............................................. 3.16 Table 3.6. Water Quality Pond Summary ....................................................................... 3.17 Table 4.1. General Wetland Seed Mixture ....................................................................... 4.3 ii Ayres Associates 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this report is to present the drainage characteristics tor the proposed development of a new supermarket -anchored retail center. 1.2 General Location and Description This Drainage and Erosion Control report has been prepared tor the North College Marketplace. The proposed construction occurs in the Southwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 8 North, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., City Of Fort Collins, County Of Larimer, State Of Colorado. A vicinity map tor the project area is included on the following page (Figure 1.1). The site is bounded by College Avenue to the west, Larimer and Weld Canal to the north , an undeveloped lot to the east, and Willox Lane to the south. Currently, a majority of the lot is undeveloped. The site is approximately 25 acres . The drainage area being analyzed is approximately 84 acres , of which 76 acres flows into the proposed detention/wetland pond, 4 acres flow to an inlet at the intersection of Willox Lane and Blue Spruce Drive and the remaining area flowing to an existing wetland without an outlet. The development of the site includes several reta il shops anchored by a King Sooper 's with associated parking lots and roadways. 1.3 Background The North College Marketplace project is being submitted to the City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Department as two separate packages: a Wetland Project Development Plan and a Site Project Development Plan. These packages will be submitted on different dates and undergo separate review processes. To ensure compatibility with the storm sewer facilities and the detention pond phased between these submittals , this drainage and erosion control report regards the site as one system functioning under the full build out condition. 1.1 Ayres Associates • I . __, . == . ; "" . igure 1.1. Vicinity Map. 1.2 Ayres Associates 2. DESIGN CRITERIA 2.1 General The procedures , criteria and standards for stormwater management in this design comply with the reference manual "City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards" and also "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual ," Volumes 2 and 3. 2.2 Design Storm Frequencies The initial and major design storm runoff drainage has been analyzed in this report. The initial design storm drainage system , based on a 10-year storm frequency, is designed to provide protection against regularly recurring damage , provide an orderly drainage system and offer convenience to the general public. The major design storm drainage system, based on a 100-year storm frequency , is that system which will convey the major storm runoff that will cause little or no major property damage or loss of life. 2.3 Hydrologic Criteria Ayres used existing survey information , flown aerial topography, and drainage structures to delineate existing and proposed basins for the project site. Design points were added to quantify the stormwater runoff where flow enters the system through proposed inlets and conveyance elements during the 10-and 100-year storm events. Basin parameters were collected for input into EPA SWMM 5.0.013 to generate peak runoff rates for each of these basins. Those parameters include : • Basin Area • Basin Slope • Overland Flow Width -determined based on the equation: A/Ur = Overland Flow Width Where : Ur= average length of overland flow path (300-foot maximum) A = basin area • The percent impervious was obtained using USDCM Table RO-3 and Figure RO-5. Using the weighted average of surface characteristics , a composite percent impervious was calculated for each basin. The infiltration parameters reflect the soil characteristics of a Type C soil, as defined by the City's Drainage Criteria Manual. The peak basin runoff flows generated from the hydrologic modeling were then used to determine the street capacities , on-grade inlet locations, and on-grade and sump inlet capacities using UDFCD's spreadsheet UD-lnlet_v2.14c.xls . The inlet capacities were analyzed and the necessary adjustments were applied to the runoff street flows based on the amount of runoff collected by on-grade inlets, and the sump inlets were sized all using the previous street capacity allowances. 2 .1 Ayres Associates I 2.4 Hydraulic Criteria Routing for the North College Marketplace project area was done using EPA SWMM 5.0.013 to design p ipe size and slopes , detention volume, the outlet orifice size , and develop the 10- and 100-year water surface elevations based on pond geometry and the corresponding stage-storage relationship . The pond was designed with an allowable release , in combination of the offsite runoff , equal to the 2-year historical peak runoff rate of 0 .2 cfs per acre. The storm drainage system has been designed to convey the minor and major storm events through the combination of storm sewer pipes , streets and swales. The storm pipes were designed such that the during the minor storm event, the 10-year storm , the flow spread leaves one lane free of water for residential collector streets and does not overtop the crown of the street for residential local streets. During the major storm event , the 100- year storm , the water depth was held to a maximum depth of 12 inches at the gutter flow line leaving a minimum of 1 foot freeboard to the top of a building foundation . The input requirements for the EPA SWMM 5.0.013 model include the following : • Pipe lengths , diameters , inverts and material • Reservoir stage vs. area information for each pond • Geometry of outlet structures , i.e., orifices. 2.2 Ayres Associates 3. DRAINAGE ANALYSIS 3.1 Subsurface Investigations Geotechnical Investigation. CTL Thompson performed a sub-surface investigation of the North College Marketplace area . The primary goals of the investigation were to evaluate the subsurface conditions and provide foundation recommendations , pavement design and geotechnical design criteria for the project. CTLs study revealed groundwater depths ranging from 1 to 14 feet below existing ground surface and various locations of unsuitable material. The complete geotechnical report prepared by CTL is included in Appendix A. Please refer to the report for the geotechnical recommendations and analysis on the project site. Groundwater Analysis. Ayres Associates performed a Subsurface Water Investigation of the Project area. The purpose of this study was to estimate the rate of groundwater inflow to an underdrain system and the potential drawdown effects of such a system. In addition , the seepage from the Larimer and Weld Canal were analyzed to determine the effects that site grading would incur on the wetlands. The analysis revealed that the underdrain system would contribute a peak seasonal inflow of 21 gpm to the proposed detention pond. The seepage analysis revealed that an increase of 0.5 gpm through the canal embankment would result from site grading near the channel. Please refer to the Subsurface Water Investigation for further information . 3.2 Historic Drainage Basin The existing site is located within the Dry Creek Drainage Basin and comprised mostly of native grasses. There are three properties with frame buildings located along the southeast side of College Avenue and several residential properties located just south of Grape Street. All of the structures located on these properties will be removed except for the restaurant and car dealership located at the corner of Willox Lane and College Avenue. Existing on site are three wetlands combining for an area of 7.01 acres. Wetland FTCWOO1 encompasses a large portion of where the proposed development will occur. Below is a photo looking west of wetland FTCWOO1 taken at the intersection of Blue Spruce Drive and Willox Lane. Wetland FTCWOO2 spans the northern portion of the site with no outlet. No development or impacts will occur in this wetland. Wetland FTCWOO3 is located on the southwest corner of the site and will be fully mitigated on-site. Figure 3.1 depicts the existing wetland delineation. This can also be found in Appendix B. Wetland FTCW001 -looking west 3.1 Ayres Associates f ✓,· ' • RAPE ---- I !L, I I f c r R) -·--. -f ~ -;-z- .. • 1 ' r - ;4fTCWO03 10.03ACRES • FTCW002 3.77 ACRES • FTCWOO1 3.21 ACRE'S WILLOXLANE -------- 1 "=150' VICINITY MAP LEGEND ENSR WETLAND DELINEATION 2006 CEDAR CREEK ASSOC IATES WETLAND DELINEATION 2008 PROPERTY BOUNDARY WETLAND DELINEATION FIGURE 3.1 AYRES ASSOCIATES I The site generally slopes from west to southeast with grades ranging from 2%-5%. The northern portion of the site is bordered by the Larimer and Weld Canal. The ditch road is elevated above the site at grades ranging from 10%-35%. The historic site is divided into five on-site and three off-site basins: Off-site basin E7 is a 49 acre basin located west of College Avenue and north of the Larimer and Weld Canal. This basin drains to a pond located in the southeast corner where the canal crosses College Avenue. This basin conveys 330 cfs during the 100-year storm event and 116 cfs during the 10-year event. An 8-inch outlet pipe releases water at 2.5 cfs creating the pond to overtop and discharge into the Larimer and Weld Canal. This 8-inch pipe crosses the Canal and runs south along the east side of College Avenue. The pipe discharges to the ground surface on the proposed site approximately 330 feet south of Grape Street. Off-site basin ES is located north of Grape Street and flows east into Off-site basin E9. Off-site basin E9 is comprised of existing wetland FTCWOO2 with no outlet. Off-site basin E2 is located just east of the property boundary and flows west into wetland FTCWOO1 on the site. Basin E4 is located just northeast of the intersection of College Avenue and Willox Lane. This basin flows south onto Willox Lane and east into Basin E3. Basin E3 encompasses Willox Lane and discharges into an existing inlet at the intersection of Blue Spruce Drive and Willox Lane. Basin E10 encompasses Willox Lane and the undeveloped land east of the site. It discharges into an existing inlet at the intersection of Blue Spruce Drive and Willox Lane. Basin ES is comprised of the east drive lane of College Avenue. This basin flows east onto Basin E1. Basin E6 is located just north of Grape Street and flows south into Basin E1. Basin E1 is a 22 acre basin encompassing a majority of the site. This basin flows from east to west into existing wetland FTCWOO1. Below is a photo taken from College Avenue looking east at Basin E1. Basin E1 -looking east 3.3 Ayres Associates Currently a perforated standp ipe located in wetland FTCWOO1 drains the site. T he standpipe is at an approximate elevation 1.5 feet above the basin bottom with 4 rows of 0.5- inch perforations spaced 6 inches apart. It is our understanding that the pipe is the upper end of an old field dra in and thought to run south and outlet into the Lake Canal irrigat ion ditch just east of Redwood Street. The historic basin characteristics are shown for information only. The 2-year historical peak runoff rate of 0.2 cfs per acre was used as the allowable release from the proposed site. The property encompasses 25 .03 acres; therefore a 5.01 cfs allowable release was used. The historic basin map (Figure 3.2) can be found on the next page and in Appendix C at the back of this report. The SWMM parameters , SWMM output , and calculations for historic runoff can also be found in this appendix . 3.3 Proposed Drainage Facility Design General Concept. The existing wetlands account for nearly one-third of the project area . Due to the quality and nature of the existing wetlands , a one to one mitigation plan is being imp lemented on-site . As mentioned previously , the northern wetland (FTCWOO2-3.77 acres) will experience no impacts to its overall characteristics. The eastern wetland (FTCWOO1-3.21 acres) will undergo considerable impacts with 2.33 acres being impacted while complete mitigation will be required for the small western wetland (FTCWOO3-0.03 acres). A total area of 2 .36 acres of wetlands is being displaced on-site. 0.30 acres will be created on the southeast portion of existing wetland FTCWOO2 and 0.06 acres created on the western edge of this same wetland . Originally, retaining walls around three sides of the proposed pond were incorporated to mitigate the remaining wetlands in the proposed pond bottom to maximize developable space while maintaining the natural characteristics of the site. Due to maintenance and ownership concerns , these walls have been removed and the pond graded in at a 3: 1 slope, allowing for the remaining 2.0 acres of wetlands to be created in the proposed detention pond. The proposed mitigation plan (Figure 3.3) can be found on the following pages and in Appendix B at the back of this report. The onsite drainage is directed around the proposed King Sooper's to the detention pond/wetland basin located along the southeast edge of the site. The pond will outlet through a new pipe constructed just east of Blue Spruce Drive and into the Blue Spruce Channel. Below is a photo looking north of the Blue Spruce Channel. The capacity of the Blue Spruce channel was analyzed with the North East College Corridor and Outfall (NECCO) project and was found to have adequate capacity to handle the additional flow from the proposed development. Blue Spruce Channel -looking north 3.4 Ayres Associates ~ LEGEND 87 .5 175 350 SCALE IN FEET EXISTING MAJOR CONTOURS EXISTING MINOR CONTOURS ~EXISTING BASIN AREA (AC~~~cr:,:i&is (%) ... FLOW DIRECTION BASIN FLOW SUMMARY BAS IN O,ooYR Q 10YR E1 53 .4 7.4 E2 2 .2 0 .4 E3 16.5 7 .8 E4 11.3 4.9 ES 8 .3 4.0 E6 7 .6 2.5 E7 330.4 116.4 ES 6.1 2.0 E9 13.2 1.8 E10 30 .0 9 .3 EXISTING DRAINAGE BASINS FIGURE 3.2 AWES ASSOCIATES u5 Jjr------ ..._ ________ _ ~ -------0 ---~ -----~~--.---. --- 11 ' -------- ... II I I C w ]I 1! 11 l -- 40 80 9 SC ALE IN FEET GENERAL WE1LAND SEED MIX TURE Species Preferred Rote Lbs /Acres PLS (Corps Designation) Varieties Planted (Broadcast) Seeded /Acre Alkoll socoton (F'AC) NA 1.00 1,175,000 Sporobolus oiroides American monnagross (OBL) NA 0.50 640,000 Gl.,ceria grondis Prairie cordgron (FACW) NA 2.00 349,000 Sporlina p«:tinato Switchgross (FAC) Nebrosko-28 4.00 1,556,000 Ponicum virgotum Nebraska sedge (OBL) NA 1,00 534.100 CordX n~shnsis Alkali bulrush (assume OBL) NA 1.00 162,600 BoboschOtlfJvs moritimus Olney threesquore (OBL) NA 2.00 359,600 SchC>ttttcplttetus ,wn9ans Soflstem bulrush (OBL) NA 1,00 550,000 Sh~opltH:tus lacustris Totals • 12.50 5,328,300 (N122 SNds/ 8q ft) Note 1: FAC. FACW and OB L spec ies ore inclu ded to account for the presumed vari ability in the soil moisture regimes to be created. Species selection is based, in port. on species present in wetlands on site. Note 2: Due to lim ited com mercial ovolloblllty, seed st ocks of wetland specie:!: should be acquired as soon os possible before the onset of planting. l.E.GElliL EXISTING WETLAND IMPACTS - - - - - - -MITIGATED WETLANDS NQIE..S. 1. THE WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN TO BE FOLLOWED TO CONSTRUCT THE REQUIRED WETLANDS IS CONTAINED IN THE DOCUMENT HE'llANO ,11/llGAllON PLAN FOR !HE NOR!H COt.L£C£ NARK£1PLAC£ PROJECT. ALL CONTRACTORS INVOLVED IN WETLAND CONSTRUCTION AND PLANTING MUST OBTAIN ONE COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT. THE CONTRACTORS MUST READ AND DEMONSTRATE KNOWLEDGE OF THIS DOCUMENT BEFORE INDIVIDUAL CONTRACTOR SITE WORK CAN COMMENCE. 2. SEED MIXTURES PROVIDED BY CEDAR CREEK ASSOCIATES. EX ISTING ON-SITE WETLANDS FTCW001 -3.21 ACRES FTCW002 -3. 77 ACRES FTCW003 -0.03 ACRES TOTAL -7.01 ACRES WETLAND IMPACTS FTCW001 -2.33 ACRES FTCW002 -0 ACRES FTCW003 -0.03 ACRES TOTAL -2.36 ACRES WETL ANDS CREA TE D ON-SITE SOUTH ERN MITIGATION AR EA FTCW001 -2.0 ACRES NORTHERN MITIGATION AR EA A -0.30 ACRES NORTHERN MITIGATION AREA B -0.06 ACRES 160 TOTAL -2.36 ACRES WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN FIGURE 3.3 AYRES ASSOCIATES Stormwater facilities are controlled by the existing elevation of the eastern wetland and the desired location of the proposed King Sooper's. To reduce the costly amounts of fill to the site , the pipes are designed at a minimum grade of 0.2% slope , minimum cover of 2.0 feet , and reinforced concrete box culverts where required to convey runoff. The site is graded to convey flow west to east from College Avenue. Flow is split into three directions; north through a porous landscape detention island to a low point , south through a porous landscape detention island to a low point , or between the center island to a low point. All of these are located to the west of the proposed King Sooper's building. The north low point enters the system through an inlet that conveys flow around the north side of the building into a proposed water quality pond . The center and south low points enter the system though inlets that conveys flow around the south side of the building into a proposed water quality pond. The water quality pond then discharges flow into the detention pond. The north, south and east sides of the building are graded to convey surface runoff to two low points located behind the building. The stormwater enters the system through inlets that discharges into the water quality pond. The site was graded to provide a minimum of 1 foot free board from the finished floor elevations to the 100-year water surface elevations (WSEL) of both the detention pond and the inlets located west of the store. 3.3.1 Developed Basins The site is divided into 9 main storm sewer systems, System A, B, D, E, F, G, J, K, L, and M. System A serves as the outlet to the detention pond/wetland basin while systems B, D, E, F, G, J, K, L, and M ultimately outlet into the proposed detention pond/wetland basin. Basins were broken down into each system accordingly to analyze point locations of street, inlet, and swale capacities . In addition , off-site basins were delineated to account for runoff entering the project boundary. The basin descriptions have been summarized per design point. The proposed basin map (Figure 3.4) and proposed stormwater systems map (Figure 3.5) can be found on the following two pages and in Appendix D of this report. Each Sub-basin is described as follows: Drainage System J and M: Basin P6 consists of 0.65 acres located at the southwest corner of the site. This basin accounts for the eastern half of College Avenue extending from the existing restaurant and dealership properties just north of the main entrance to the site. Flow will be conveyed via surface runoff and curb and gutter to basin P11. Basin P11 consists of 1.18 acres located at the southwest corner of the site. This basin accounts for the existing restaurant and dealership properties. Flow will be conveyed via surface runoff and curb and gutter to basin P12. Basin P12 is a 0.53 acre basin located on the northern half of Willox Lane just west of the round-about. Stormwater will be conveyed to System M through an on-grade single unit Type-13 inlet (M-01) via curb and gutter. The runoff intercepted by this inlet is delivered to System J, System G, and ultimately to the water quality pond while the remaining bypass flows are continued downstream to Basin P9 (and into the south PLO). 3.7 Ayres Associates OFFSITE ~ ~ OFFSITE ~ ~ IL-------- 3 1 I ~ ~ ~ I .------------. (@ 4 90 \ ----------....t 2 * GAS STATION PROVIDES OWN WQ TREATMENT AND WETLAND POND ACTS LIKE WQ FOR POND IT SELF PROVIDED WQ BOUNDARY WETLAND/ DETENTION* POND PROVIDES OWN TREATMENT .illilll •• • • I 0 30 60 120 SCALE IN FEET LE GEND EXISTING MAJOR CONTOURS EXISTING MINOR CONTOURS PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR -=-=-PROPOSED STORM ~PROPOSED BASIN AREA (AC)~PERCENT IMPERVIOUS(%) FLOW DIRECTION DESIGN POINT -■ ■ -BASIN BOUNDARY BASIN FLOW SUMMARY BASIN Q tOO YR Q 10YR P1 1.4 0.2 P2 0.7 0.1 P3 7.1 3.1 P4 3.1 1.5 PS 3.9 1.9 P6 6.5 3.2 P7 31.5 14.8 PS 8.3 3.7 pg 27.1 12.3 P10 3.2 1.5 P11 11 .8 5.8 P12 4.9 2.0 P13 4.8 2.3 P14 4 .4 2.1 P15 2.6 0.8 P16 1.0 0.5 P17 2.3 1.1 P1A 9.1 3.7 P19 5.5 0.9 p?n 1.6 0.8 P21 2.4 1.1 P22 4.0 1.8 P23 6.1 2.7 P24 0.3 0.1 P25 44 .8 21 .6 MO 7.3 1.0 P27 3.9 1.8 P28 1.3 0.6 poa 2.2 0.4 con 330.4 116.4 P31 4.4 2.0 p.o 30 .0 9.3 coo 0.5 0.1 p-... 5.1 2.5 '"' 1.0 0.5 p,a 0.03 0.02 DETENTION POND SUMMARY 100YR VOLUME (AC-FT) 6.28 WSEL (FT) 4974 .20 BOTTOM OF POND= 4971 INVERT OUT = 4971 .00 10YR 2.04 4972.58 ♦ TOP OF POND= 4976 ♦ 100YR RELEASE RATE= 4.93 CFS ' ALLOWED 100YR RELEASE RATE= 5.01 CFS • WATER QUALITY SUMMARY ~ ~ OFFSITE •,rr===~~~~~~§§§~~ WQ POND VOLUME VOLUME REQ WQ POND 0.76 AC-FT 0.46 AC-FT PLO SOUTH NORTH AREAREQ 577-7156 FT2 PROPOSED DRAINAGE BASINS FIGURE 3.4 AYRES ASSOCIATES ~~~~;;:=' ._ LARIMER A/IO WELD CANAL - ---7 -========::::.:::::::.::::::::::::::::::-_____ ---~ -------------....... --..::::::,. ::----...... ~---~ •• •. ---~------:~ /,--8£.-• • • • ~-~"' -1/~/\\ ••• ·_: • • . •.• . . . -So_~' V \.\) t D > 1/ ''o • • . . . \ \\ .j//4_ , ~ ') . . . . '\\\ ~, ·~, ' ~ , ~ r-\\ . . • . • • • ' '\ ff ~ ~ [? ., ' . """""" I ' \ ' <ff < .. ·.I ~-\\\ ~ ' I ~~ t:~ □ SJ ' \ ,....--" I g '[] -\ ·-'-.-~ \ \ .---~~~~;~~t9~7t[~~~=:=~~~~1 '-, ST-F-02_.. J \ --f -~-. . 0 ' ---l,TJ__:;:.,, I O . .., .. q!!2 1.\ C --------=b ------- UNIT TYPE 13 INLET -• ~ FTCW001 STORM ·D "-• ST-D-02 1 UNIT COMBO TYPE 13 INLET --•. -- ~ • \ o 88 ACRES NO IMPACT --. SAN _, II ORIFICE PLATE ST-A-03 15 FOOT TYPE R INLET 40 80 160 SCALE IN FE ET tiQIES_ T CONDITION TH IS DRAWING DEPIECDTSR~~wj._~L~Mi¼l6~~~NTS. BUILDING 1. PROPOS INCLUDOINNGS AND GRADING PLAN. PROVEMENTS LOCA Tl NUE ROADWA y IM WILLOX LANE AND C~~~~t6~NSUL TING GROUP. 2. ARE DESIGNED BY IN OVERALL STORMWATER SYSTEM FIGURE 3.S AYRES ASSOCIATES Basin P28 consists of 0.13 acres located southwest of the roundabout. Surface runoff is conveyed to a single unit type 13 inlet (M-02) in sump where flows enter System M. This inlet will intercept 100% of the minor and major flow events before being conveyed through System J, System G , and ultimately to the water quality pond. Drainage System K: Basin P10 is a 0.32 acre basin located in the proposed gas station. Flows will be conveyed through roof drainage and surface runoff to a single unit Type 13 combination Inlet (K-01 ). The gas station will provide on-site water quality, discharge to System K, delivered to Storm J and ultimately to the water quality pond. Drainage System L: Basin PS consists of 0.39 acres and accounts for the eastern half of College Avenue from the north entrance drive south to the main entrance into the site . Basin P5 will convey runoff via curb and gutter and enter System L through a five foot Type R inlet (L-01 ). The runoff intercepted by this inlet is conveyed into system L where flows are delivered to storm G and ultimately to the water quality pond. The remaining bypass flows are continued downstream to Basin P6. Drainage System G: Off-site Basin P30 is a 49.1 acre basin located west of College Avenue and north of the Larimer and Weld Canal. This basin drains to a pond located in the southeast corner where the canal crosses College Avenue. This basin conveys 330 cfs during the 100-year storm event and 116 cfs during the 10-year event. An 8-inch outlet pipe releases water at 2.5 cfs creating the pond to overtop and discharge into the Larimer and Weld Canal. This 8-inch pipe crosses the Canal and runs south along the east side of College Avenue where it will connect into inlet G-08. The runoff collected is delivered to the water quality pond . Basins P4 consists of 0.31 acres and accounts for the eastern half of College Avenue from the Larimer and Weld Canal to the northern entrance to the site. Basin P4 will convey runoff via curb and gutter and enter System G through a ten foot Type R inlet (G-08) that will connect an existing 8 inch pipe from off-site basin P30. The runoff intercepted by this inlet is delivered to the water quality pond and the remaining bypass flows are continued downstream to Basin P5. Basin P7 is a 3.19 acre basin centrally located on the site. Stormwater will be conveyed via curb , gutter, and surface runoff to a triple unit Type C inlet (G-05) in sump where it will capture 100% of the minor and major flows and enter System G. Basin P9 consists of 2.81 acres along the southern third of the main parking lot. Stormwater will be conveyed via surface runoff to a porous landscape detention island where flows will infiltrate during the initial flush and enter System G via a triple Type C inlet (G-04) in sump during the minor and major storm events . Basins P21 accounts for roof drainage of the retail shop located just south of the King Sooper's building. This basin totals 0.21 acres. Stormwater enters the system through roof drains that convey flow to System G and delivered to the water quality pond. Basin P31 is located at the roundabout and conveys flow onto the site via curb and gutter and into the porous landscape detention island located in Basin P9. This basin totals 0.45 acres. 3.10 Ayres Associates Basin P13 is located in the parking lot southwest of the King Sooper 's and totals 0.49 acres. Surface runoff will be conveyed to a curb cut along the southern gutter line where flows will enter a swale (basin 33) and ultimately into a double Type C inlet (G-02) in sump during the minor and major storm events. Basin P15 is a swale and some parking located just south of the store totaling 0.31 acres. This basin will drain to basin P13 and to the double Type C inlet (G-02) and ultimately to the water quality pond. Basins P20 accounts for roof drainage of the retail shop located just south of the King Sooper's building. This basin totals 0.16 acres. Stormwater enters the system through roof drains that convey flow to System G and delivered to the water quality pond. Basins P33 is a swale just south of the store totaling 0.07 acres. This basin will drain to the double Type C inlet (G-02) and ultimately to the water quality pond. Basin P35 is a canopy located at the southwest corner of the store totaling 0.03 acres. Stormwater enters the system through roof drains that convey flow to System G and delivered to the water quality pond. Basin P36 is a canopy located along the western entrance of the King Soopers store. This basin totals 0.1 O acres. Stormwater enters the system through roof drains that convey flow to System G and delivered to the water quality pond. Drainage System F: Basins P1 and P2 are off-site basins located north of Grape Street, combining for a total area of 0.39 acres. This area conveys surface runoff south to basin P25. Basin P25 consists of 4.51 acres located near the northern third of the main parking lot. Off-site basins P1 and P2 combine and contribute runoff where flow is conveyed to a porous landscape detention island where flows will infiltrate during the initial flush and enter System F via a triple Type C inlet (F-04) during the minor and major storm events. The runoff intercepted by this inlet is delivered to the detention pond/wetland basin. Bain P24 accounts for roof drainage of the pharmacy located just north of the King Sooper's building. This basin totals 0.03 acres. Stormwater is conveyed via roof drains to storm F and ultimately to the water quality pond. Drainage System E: Basins PB accounts for roof drainage to the east side of the store. This basin accounts for a total area of 0.87 acres. Stormwater enters the system through a roof drain that connects into a double unit Type 13 combination inlet (E-01) of System E and delivered to the water quality pond and ultimately into the detention pond/wetland basin Basin P16 consists of 0.1 O acres located near the north dock behind the store. Sheet flow will collect in the dock and enter System E through a single unit Type 13 combination inlet (E-03). This inlet will capture 100% of the flows during the minor and major storm events then delivered to the water quality pond and ultimately into the detention pond/wetland basin. 3.11 Ayres Associates Basin P18 consists of 1.00 acres located to the northeast of the store. Runoff will be conveyed through curb and gutter to a double Type 13 combinations Inlet (E-01) of System E. This inlet will capture 100% of the flows during the minor and major storm events then delivered to the water quality pond and ultimately into the detention pond/wetland basin . Drainage System D: Basin P14 consists of 0.44 acres located to the southeast of the store. Runoff will be conveyed through curb and gutter to a double Type 13 combinations Inlet (D-01) of System D. This inlet will capture 100% of the flows during the minor and major storm events then delivered to the water quality pond and ultimately into the detention pond/wetland basin. Basin P17 consists of 0.23 acres located near the south dock behind the store. Surface runoff will collect in the dock and enter System D through a single unit Type 13 combination inlet (D-02). The runoff intercepted by this inlet is delivered to the water quality pond and ultimately into the detention pond/wetland basin. Basins P23 accounts for roof drainage to the southeast side of the store. This basin accounts for a total area of 0.49 acres. Stormwater enters the system through a roof drain that connects into a double unit Type 13 combination inlet (D-01) of System D and delivered to the water quality pond and ultimately into the detention pond/wetland basin. Remaining Roof Drainage System: Basins P3 and P22 account for roof drainage to the back of the store. These basins combine for a total area of 1.19 acres. Stormwater is conveyed through roof drains that discharge directly into the water quality pond. Drainage System B: Basin P27 is located along the northern half of Willox Lane extending from the roundabout to the east entrance drive of the site. This basin totals 0.40 acres and conveys runoff via curb and gutter to a double Type 13 combination inlet (8-01 ). The runoff intercepted by this inlet is delivered to storm G and ultimately to the water quality pond. The remaining bypass flows are continued to basin P34. Drainage System A: Basin P19 is comprised of the proposed detention pond/wetland basin and totals 3.87 acres. Systems 8, D, E, F, G, J, K, L, and M ultimately discharge into this basin where flows are released through System A to the Blue Spruce Channel. Off-site Basin P29 consists of 0.45 acres located just east of the proposed detention/wetland basin. This is an offsite basin that drains into the proposed pond. Basin P32 is an offsite basin that accounts for 4.07 acres and is comprised of the north half of Willox Lane from a 15ft Type R inlet (A-03) to a high point approximately 900ft east. This inlet conveys flows during a 100-year and 10-year event to the Blue Spruce channel. Basin P34 is an offsite basin that accounts for 0.51 acres and is comprised of the north half of Willox Lane from inlet 8-1 to an existing sump and 15ft Type R inlet (A-03). This inlet conveys flows during a 100-year and 10-year event to the Blue Spruce channel. 3.12 Ayres Associates I Table 3.1 summarizes the flow and basins contributing to each inlet. The complete inlet calculations can be found in Appendix D of this report. Table 3 .1. Inlet Summary. 100-Year 10-Year Design Tributary 0100 HGL 010 HGL Point Inlet Sub-Basin cfs (ft) cfs (ft) P34 ST-A-03-(INLET) 34,32 30.2 4974.79 9.0 4972.16 P27 ST-8-01-(INLET) 27 3.9 4975 .27 1.8 4974.97 P14 ST-D-01-(INLET) 14 4.4 4974.19 2.1 4972.58 P17 ST-D-02-(INLET) 17 2.3 4974.19 1.1 4972.58 P18 ST-E-01-(INLET) 18 9.1 4974.19 3.7 4972.58 P16 ST-E-03-(INLET) 16 1.0 4974.19 0.5 4972.58 P25 ST-F-04-(INLET) 1, 2, 25 43.8 4976.52 19.5 4974.41 P33 ST-G-02-(INLET) 13,33, 15 9.6 4974.49 4.0 4972.58 9, 31, Inlet M-01 pg ST-G-04-(INLET) carryover 48.7 4975.20 22.3 4973.37 P7 ST-G-05-(INLET) 7 31.5 4975.28 14.8 4973.43 P4 ST-G-08-(INLET) 4 3.1 4978.13 1.5 4977 .97 PS ST-L-01-(INLET) 5 3.9 4979.65 1.9 4979.44 P12 ST-M-01-(INLET) 12, 11 21.8 4976.73 10.1 4976.18 P28 ST-M-02-(INLET} 28 1.3 4976.57 0.6 4976.03 P10 ST-K-01-(INLET) 10 3.2 4976.17 1.5 4975.71 Remaining Basins: Off-site Bain P26 consists of 5.20 acres of existing wetland FTCWOO2. This basin contributes no flow to the system. Detention/Wetlands Pond. EPA SWMM 5.0 was used to determine the pond size and outlet orifice sizing. In the Dry Creek Drainage Basin, the 2-year historic allowable release rate of 0.2 cfs per acre equates to 5.01 cfs for the project site. The proposed site discharges flow at a rate of 4.93 cfs. The discharge plate is bolted over the 18 inch outlet pipe placed with approximately a 12 inch opening. The 100-Year peak developed flow into the pond is 163 cfs. Thus the volume required to capture the 100-year runoff rate wile releasing at 4.93 cfs was calculated to be 6.28 ac-ft. The volume provided in the pond is 12.0 ac-ft. The pond is oversized to accommodate the needed area to mitigate wetlands on-site, however the hydraulics of the system within the parking lot and loading docks limit an increase in the tailwater elevation. Table 3.2 summarizes the pond characteristics. Table 3.2. Detention Pond Summary. Description Elevation Pond Volume Pond Depth (ac-ft) (ft) Pond Invert 4971 ------ Outlet Pipe Invert 4971 ------ Orifice Plate Elevation 4971 ------ 10-Year WSEL 4972.58 2.04 1.6 100-Year WSEL 4974.20 6.28 3.20 Top of Pond 4976 12.0 5.0 3 .13 Ayres Associates To ensure proper water retention for the wetland vegetation, the proposed pond bottom is flat and set an elevation of 4971. The outlet pipe is also set an elevation of 4971. Currently, a 24-inch perforated standpipe drains the site. The standpipe contains 4 rows of 0.5-inch perforations spaced 6 inches apart. It is the City's intent to mimic the drain time of the existing system. Under the designed system of discharging at the allowable release rate at 4.93 cfs through a 12-inch discharge plate, the pond will drain to a depth of 2 inches in approximately 40 hours during the 10-year storm event (Figure 3.6) and 54 hours during the 100-year storm event (Figure 3.6). Wetland monitoring will occur for three years after construction completion. The discharge plate can be adjusted if well measurements and plant development reveal higher than acceptable saturation. All pond calculations can be found in Appendix E. DETENTION POND OUTFLOW CURVE 3 .5 ■ 100-Year Storm Depth ■ 1 0-Year Storm Depth 1.5 0 .5 5 1 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 DRAIN TIME (HOURS) Figure 3.6. Detention Pond Outflow Curve. Water Quality Treatment: The detention pond/wetland basin will not be utilized as a water quality facility for the site. All stormwater will be treated prior to entrance into the pond to ensure proper plant development and survival. Areas not treated with this project are off-site developed basin P30, undeveloped basins P29, P32, and P34, off-site wetland basin P26 , detention pond/wetland basin P19, and the gas station basin P10 since water quality treatment will be provided for that lot. Offsite basin P29, P32, and P34 will provide its own water quality when they become developed. The wetlands basins P19 and P26 provide their own water quality to the storm water that outfall directly into the wetlands . The offsite basins entering the proposed wetlands pond and basin P19 are being treated with the project prior to entering the wetlands pond. Table 3.3 indicates the basin and the facility providing the treatment. Two water quality measures are implemented on-site: Porous Landscape Detention and a Water Quality Pond . The on-site treatable area totals 24.71 acres. Sixty one percent of the area is treated through the water quality pond, 15.5% of the area is treated through the southern PLO, while the remaining 23.5% is treated in the northern PLO. Each facility is described in detail below. Refer to Figure 3.4 for the water quality treatment provided for each basin. This figure along with all calculations and product literature can be found in Appendix F. 3.14 Ayres Associates Table 3.3. Water Quality Facilities. Sub-Basin North South Water Quality Designation Other PLO PLO Pond P1 X P2 X P3 X P4 X PS X P6 X P7 X PB X pg X P10 Gas Station P11 X P12 X P13 X P14 X P15 X P16 X P17 X P18 X P19 Detention Pond/ Wetland Basin P20 X P21 X P22 X P23 X P24 X P25 X P26 North Wetland P27 X P28 X P29 Off-Site Basin P30 Off-Site Basin P31 X P32 Off-Site Basin P33 X P34 Off-Site Basin P35 X P36 X Porous Landscape Detention (PLD). There are two PLO facilities on-site, each located on the north and south islands of the main parking lot. These swales were sized using UOFCO UO-BMP spreadsheet. These swales will utilize the underdrain system already implemented on-site due to high groundwater. The south PLO facility slopes at a 1.4% grade the length of the island while the north PLO facility slopes at a 1.5% grade the length of the island. 3.15 Ayres Associates North PLO. 4.91 acres contributes to the north PLO. This accounts for nearly 24% of the treatable area. The provided surface area of the island exceeds the area required , therefore providing full treatment. Inlet F-04 is a triple unit Type C inlet located at the downstream end of the island. The top of the inlet is 11.5 inches above the swale flowline provided to treat the initial flush. During the 10-year storm , just over 6 inches of ponding will occur within the parking lot and water will be spread to a distance of 45 feet across the drive aisle. Just over 13 inches of ponding will occur within the parking lot during the 100-year storm event and will spread to a distance of 116 feet south across the parking lot. It shall be noted that initial designs placed the inlet grate only 6 inches above the swale flowline, in turn reducing the depth of ponding in the parking lot and containing flow in the landscape island during the 1 0 year event and to iust outside the island during the 100 year event. City staff requested the grate be raised to the depth required to provide full water quality treatment in the PLO, thus increasing the water spread. Table 3.4 provides a summary of the north PLO. Table 3.4. North Porous Landscape Detention Summary. Impervious 77 % Contributinq Basin Area 213711 square feet Volume Required 4420 cubic feet PLO Surface Area Provided 4763 square feet PLO Surface Area Required 4420-8840 square feet South PLD. 3.26 acres contributes to the south PLO. This accounts for nearly 16% of the treatable area. The provided surface area of the island exceeds the area required , therefore providing full treatment. Inlet G-04 is a triple unit Type C inlet located at the downstream end of the island. The top of the inlet is 7.5 inches above the swale flowline provided to treat the initial flush. During the 10-year storm, just over 6 inches of ponding will occur within the parking lot and spread to 56 feet across the parking stall and drive aisle. Just over 14 inches of ponding is calculated to occur within the parking lot during the 100-year storm event , however an overflow path located to the south of the inlet is provided in the event that the inlet becomes clogged. This path contains a high point at elevation 4977.96 or just less than 16 inches above the grate flowline. Water will pond to this depth before overtopping into the parking lot located east of the round about. A curb cut is located along the south curbline to convey flow into the basin just north of Willox Lane. It shall be noted that initial designs placed the inlet grate only 6 inches above the swale flowline, in turn reducing the depth of ponding in the parking lot and containing flow in the landscape island during the 1 0 year event and to iust outside the island during the 100 year event. City staff requested the grate be raised to the depth required to provide full water quality treatment in the PLO. thus increasing the water spread. Table 3.5 provides a summary of the north PLO. Table 3.5. South Porous Landscape Detention Summary. Impervious 87 % Contributinq Basin Area 142106 square feet Volume Required 3578 cubic feet PLO Surface Area Provided 5611 square feet PLO Surface Area Required 3577-7155 square feet 3.16 Ayres Associates Water Quality Pond. The water quality pond is located in the proposed wetlands/detention pond. This water quality pond collects flows from upstream basins accounting for 12.67 acres. This is nearly 61% of the treatable area. The water quality capture volume provided and required is 0.76 and 0.45 ac-ft respectively with a 40-hour drain time. Table 3.6 provides a summary of the water quality pond. Table 3.6. Water Quality Pond Summary. Volume Depth Description Elevation (ac-ft) (ft) Invert 4971.0 -- Reauired WQCV 4972.43 0.46 1.43 Provided WQCV 4973 .00 0.76 2.00 3.17 Ayres Associates 4. WATER QUALITY AND EROSION CONTROL Construction of the North College Marketplace site improvements will require implementation of erosion control BMPs to minimize the amount of sediment carried off-site by wind and water. 4.1 Temporary Sediment/Erosion Control Methods The erosion control methods to be implemented during the construction of the proposed storm sewer can be seen on the Erosion Control Sheets in the construction plans. The City of Fort Collins erosion and sediment control construction notes are included in the construction plans. Erosion control BMPs for construction of the North College Marketplace will include wattle dikes set across all flow paths determined by the general grading plan. The wattle dikes are placed in the flow paths for each 2 feet of vertical drop to slow the conveyance of water and prevent significant erosion before vegetation is installed. Wattles are to be placed at a 45 degree angle toward flow in the street flowline, anywhere that the stormwater runoff and sediment may exit the site via curb and gutter. Silt fencing will be installed around the construction site as necessary to prevent sediment from leaving the site during construction. Silt fence will also be placed around the soil stockpiles and the wetland areas not to be impacted. Drop inlet protection will be installed around each existing and proposed inlet, grated manhole lid, and pond outlet structure to prevent sediment from leaving the project site and entering the Blue Spruce Channel or downstream stormwater facilities. Straw mulch will be applied after seeding to prevent erosion from runoff and help establish plant cover. A vehicle-tracking pad is to be installed at all pavement exist locations to prevent mud from being carried off site on vehicle tires. Vehicle tracking pads must also be provided at any other access locations to the worksite . Existing vegetation shall be preserved where possible. All disturbed areas not in the roadway or greenbelt shall have temporary vegetation seed applied within 30 days of initial disturbance. After seeding, hay or straw mulch shall be applied over the seed at a rate of 1.5 ton/ac minimum, and the mulch shall be adequately anchored, tacked, or crimped into the soil. Those roads that are to be paved as part of the project must have a 1-inch layer of gravel mulch applied at a rate of at least 135 ton/ac immediately after grading is completed. The placement structure shall be applied within 30 days after the utilities have been installed. If the disturbed areas will not be constructed upon within one growing season , a permanent seed shall be applied. After seeding, a hay or straw mulch shall be applied over the seed at a minimum rate of 1.5ton/ac, and the mulch shall be adequately anchored, tacked or crimped into the soil. The above structural practices are temporary and must be installed prior to any grading or construction on the project site. Temporary sediment control measures shall be checked regularly and after storms for silt buildup . Silt fence shall be properly installed and maintained including checking for undermining. Curb inlet protection shall be checked for openings and silt buildup, if necessary clean or replace gravel to maintain a protective barrier around all inlets which may receive stormwater. Erosion and sediment control measures must be replaced or repaired as needed during regular inspections. The temporary structures must be maintained until the site has uniform cover equivalent to 70% of existing site conditions. Cover may include vegetation in the interim condition. 4.1 Ayres Associates 4.2 Permanent Sediment/Erosion Control Methods Structural Practices Erosion Controls -the following practices will be used to prevent the erosion of soil after construction: 1. Scour Stop -Scour Stop shall be installed at the downstream ends of the storm sewer entering the detention pond/wetlands basin. Scour Stop shall also be placed at the outfall into the Blue Spruce Channel. Product literature can be found in Appendix G of this report. 2. Paving -All existing streets shall be repaved prior to the completion of the project. The post-construction condition for approximately 20% of the project site will be re-surfaced with concrete walkways , concrete curbs , gutters and asphalt pavement. Non-Structural Practices Erosion Controls -the following practices will be used to prevent the erosion of soil after construction: 1. Permanent seeding -All un-paved disturbed areas shall be reseeded to match native ground cover as soon after construction or grading as weather permits. This will provide the opportunity for pollutants to settle out of the stormwater runoff. 2. Wetland seeding-Wetlands shall be seeded to match the mixtures provided be Cedar Creek Associates below in Tables 4.1. Submit wetland and upland seed mix/type specifications from the supplier to the City 's environmental planner for approval prior to the installation. 3. Cleaning of Construction Site -Drainage ditches, pans , and culverts must be cleaned of debris and sediment. Following site construction , the goal is to achieve a stabilized cover condition to provide long term stormwater protection. Stabilization is quantified by achieving uniform cover equal to 70% of the pre-disturbance condition. Final stabilization shall be achieved by installation of permanent erosion control methods. Immediately after the storm sewer improvements have been constructed, permanent erosion control practices are to be installed and maintained. Temporary erosion and sediment control measures can be removed after establishment of permanent stable vegetation to the satisfaction of the City of Fort Collins inspector. 4.3 Materials Handling and Spill Prevention A project staging area shall be located in the temporary construction easement. The exact location of the staging area will be determined by the contractor. Measures should be undertaken to control building materials , waste and disposal of excess asphalt and concrete to ensure these materials do not leave the site and enter the detention ponds or Blue Spruce Channel. Asphalt, concrete, building materials, waste and cleanup by products should not be discharged into the on-site curb inlets and storm sewer systems nor should they be allowed to enter the detention ponds or Blue Spruce Channel. Measures should be undertaken to remove excess waste products from the site and dispose of these waste materials off-site in an appropriate manner. 4.2 Ayres Associates Table 4.1. General Wetland Seed Mixture. Rate Lbs/Acre Species Preferred Planted PLS (Corps Designation) Varieties (Broadcast) Seeded/Acre Alkali sacaton (FAC) NA 1.00 1,175,000 Sporobolus airoides American mannagrass (OBL) NA 0.50 640,000 G/yceria grandis Prairie cordgrass (FACW) NA 2.00 349,000 Spartina pectinata Switchgrass (FAC) Nebraska-28 4.00 1,556,000 Panicum virgatum Nebraska sedge (OBL) NA 1.00 534 ,100 Carex nebraskensis Alkali bulrush (assume OBL) NA 1.00 162 ,600 Boboschoenus maritimus Olney threesquare (OBL) NA 2.00 359,600 Schoenopfectus pungens Softstem bulrush (OBL) NA 1.00 550,000 Shoenopf ectus lacustris Totals= 12.50 5,326,300 (~122 seeds/ sq. ft.) Note1 : FAC , FACW and OBL species are included to account for the presumed variability in the soil moisture regimes to be created. Species selection is based, in part, on species present in wetlands on site . A temporary concrete washout area as well as a separate designated loading/unloading area shall be located in the project stag ing area. The exact location of the washout area will be determined by the contractor. It is the contractor's responsibility to ensure that the concrete is handled in the appropriate manner so as not to contaminate the detention ponds , Blue Spruce Channel or surrounding areas. Upon complet ion of the project the concrete in the concrete washout area shall be exposed of in an acceptable waste site. The concrete wash out area and designated loading/unloading areas shall be re-vegetated to existing or better conditions. The heavy equipment contractor shall be responsible for protecting the soil from Contamination due to any hydrocarbon or other hazardous spills associated with his contractual obligations. All chemicals used in maintenance (oil, antifreeze, hydraulic fluid , etc.) are to be stored offsite. Fertilizers are to be stored in the contractor staging area. The contractor shall be responsible for preventing contamination in the detention pond, Blue Spruce Channel and surrounding areas. Any periodic refueling of earthmoving equipment on site shall be carefully controlled to ensure these materials are not spilled on the site and will not enter any detention pond or The Blue Spruce Channel. It shall be the responsibility of the heavy equipment contractor to designate a fueling area and take appropriate actions to ensure pollution of stormwater does not occur. The fueling area shall be located within the contractor staging area. The fueling area shall be at least 100 feet from drainage channels and/or storm sewer systems and be enclosed by a minimum 12-inch high compacted berm capable of retaining potential spills. 4.3 Ayres Associates In the event of a spill from the site into an on-site curb inlet or storm sewer system appropriate measures should be undertaken immediately to contain spilled pollutants and properly remove the spilled materials along with all contaminated soils and prevent future spills from occurring. In addition , measures should be undertaken to limit off-site soil tracking of mud and debr is spillage from vehicles leaving the site . Mud and debris should not be tracked along roadways and allowed to enter any non-protected drainage path . Several measures are suggested to protect stormwater quality and prevent contaminates from migrating off-site. • Washing of vehicles or equipment into the storm drainage system is prohibited • Refueling operations should be done in the designated fueling area during dry weather conditions and on level ground • Potential flow paths for spills should be assessed prior to any fuel or hazardous substance transfer • Ample absorbent material and containment should be available to contain a spill • Any storm drain conveyance within a containment area should be protected with berms or plugs • Hazardous materials such as fuel , solvent or fertilizer used on site should be in a secure covered area • No dedicated concrete or asphalt batch plants shall exist on the site 4.4 Inspection and Maintenance The erosion control measures will be inspected daily during construction. The inspection must include observation of the construction site per imeter and discharge points (including into a storm sewer system), all disturbed areas , any areas used for material storage that are exposed to precipitation , any area used for washing of machinery , the vehicle tracking control pads , and any other erosion and sediment control measures . Silt fence and other barriers will be checked for undermining and bypass and repaired or expanded as needed . The temporary vegetation of bare soils will be checked regularly and areas where it is lost or damaged will be reseeded. Hazardous materials such as fuel , solvent or fertilizer used on site should be in a secure covered area . At a minimum the inspections shall occur for all BMPs every 14 days and after significant precipitation events (i.e., rainfall, snowmelt, etc.). Installations and modifications as required by the City of Fort Collins or authorized personnel will be implemented immediately or within 48 hours of notification. Mitigation measures shall be inspected for at least the following. • Accumulation of excess sediment and determination of whether or not the effectiveness of each structure is significantly reduced. Removal of accumulated sediment shall occur once a 50% reduction of the design storage capacity becomes evident. • Damage to structures that need repairing to ensure their effectiveness. Addition or elimination of sediment and/or erosion control measures that are designed to control the movement of soil particles in a practical and effective manner . • Immediate repair and/or replacement of necessary mitigation measures when total failures are found. 4.4 Ayres Associates A site log should be kept up to date to record inspections, repairs and maintenance. Additionally any spills should be fully documented . Include what the spill material was , reason for spill, date, time of start and finish of spill, quantity, location , weather conditions , who was contacted , how the spill was cleaned , impact to environment , and method of disposal of cleanup materials. All construction activities must also comply with the State of Colorado permitting process for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity. A Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment CDPHE Construction Permit will be required before any construction or grading activity can begin. 4.5 Erosion Control Plan The proposed erosion control program for this site will include the installation of structural erosion control measures including silt fencing , sediment basins and traps, rough cut street control and straw bale channel protection. Non-structural measures will include maintaining established grasses until striping is necessary and the establishment of temporary and permanent grasses in idol or completed areas during construction sequencing. BMP FOR STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION The following controls and measures will be implemented prior to and during the various sequence of construction: 1. Clearing and Grubbing -Install vehicle tracking pad at entrance to site . Define limits of clearing , place silt fence at all future toe of slope as defined by the approved erosion control plan . Designate area to stockpile topsoil. Follow requ irements of approved erosion control plan. 2. Grading -Construct sediment traps and basins as shown on approved erosion control plans. Install rock check structures and rough cut street protection along flow line of newly graded drainage channels and rough cut roads , and silt fencing at down slope side of newly disturbed areas. As construction progresses , designate areas for construction trailer , trash container , vehicle and equipment refueling, vehicle and equipment parking , and for material storage. Stored materials shall be free of contact with soil. Materials in containers shall be stored within a covered area. Fueling and storage areas shall be protected with a minimum 1-foot high berm , to prevent migration of any spills. 3 . Underground utility main installation (sanitary sewer , water and storm drain) -Maintain all previous contro ls and measures from clearing, grubbing and grading construction. Trenches shall be backfilled as soon as possible (after inspection). Excess material shall be salvaged when possible, waste material shall be disposed of in a proper manner. Empty containers that held hazard material such as solvents , lubricants , fuels , etc., shall be disposed of in a proper manner. Refueling and vehicle maintenance shall be done at designated areas. Fueling and storage areas shall be protected with a minimum 1-foot high berm, to prevent migration of any spills. During installation of the storm sewer system , inlet and outlet sediment protection will be provided. During flushing and testing of utilities sediment control measures shall be in place. 4.5 Ayres Associates When trenching for utilities located outside of protected areas , silt fencing and/or hay bales shall be provided , at down slope areas of disturbance . At completion of construction disturbed areas shall be reseeded. Erosion control measures shall remain in place until stabilization has been achieved. 4. Building Construction -Designate areas for vehicle fueling and maintenance, concrete truck washout , and material storage. Material stored outdoors will be free of contact with the soil and covered when possible. Materials in containers will be covered and stored in sheltered areas . All flammable materials shall be stored in proper containers and checked daily for leaks and spills. 5 . Paving and Curb and Gutter Installation -Designate areas for vehicle fueling and maintenance , concrete truck washout , and material storage. Material stored outdoors will be free of contact with the soil. Materials in containers will be stored indoors within covered areas. 6. Landscaping -Designate areas for vehicle fueling and maintenance , concrete truck washout , and material storage. Material stored outdoors will be free of contact with the soil and covered when possible . Materials in containers will be stored indoors within covered areas . Avoid excess watering and placing of fertilizers and chemicals. OTHER CONTROLS Control Practices for Cleared Vegetation -Remove only what is needed ; leave native vegetation in place when possible. Stockpile composting vegetation away from detention ponds or at regional composting areas. Erosion and Sediment Control Soil Stabilization Practices -Where significant ground cover exists on-site it will be left in place , if possible , or removed just prior to grading. Landscaping shall be installed as soon as possible after grading is completed. Sediment and Erosions Control Practices -Construct temporary sediment traps . Follow the approved erosion control plan . Tracking of Sediment onto Roads and Streets -Streets shall be kept clean and free of mud , soil, and construction waste . Street sweeping or other acceptable methods shall be used to prevent sediment from being washed from the project site . Streets shall not be washed with water if prohibited by local ordinances . Control Practices for Wind Erosion -Wind erosion shall be controlled on the site by maintaining appropriate levels of surface moisture , or application of surface bind ing materials if necessary , seeding and mulching of the site will occur as soon as practicable after completion of grading activities . NON-STORM WATER MANAGEMENT Non-storm water discharges will be eliminated or reduced to the extent feasible. No materials shall be discharged in quantities which will have an adverse effect on the receiving waters. The measures listed below will be implemented to achieve these objectives. • Proper and lawful disposal of all waste materials • Control any spills and leaks that may occur and clean up (mitigate) • Use of designated areas for equipment repair and cleaning • Careful application of irrigation water 4.6 Ayres Associates FINAL STABILIZATION AND LONG TERM STORM WATER MANAGEMENT Management of storm water after completion of construction will be accomplished by utilizing the practices listed below. • Upon completion of construction, the site shall be inspected to ensure that all equipment, waste materials, and debris have been removed. • The site will be inspected to make certain that all graded surfaces have been landscaped or seeded with an appropriate ground cover. • All inlet protection, perimeter fencing, rock check dams, and all other control practices and measures that are to remain after completion of construction will be inspected to ensure their proper functioning. • Permanent riprap basins will be installed at the storm sewer outfall to the detention ponds in order to minimize erosion and sedimentation at the discharge points. The property owner/contractor shall be responsible for maintaining the storm water controls in good working order and shall also be responsible for the costs incurred until such time as they are accepted by the County or no longer required, including removal of measures. 4.6 Performance Standard This development lies within the Moderate Rainfall Erodibility Zone and the Moderate Wind Erodibility Zone per the City of Fort Collins zone maps. There should be minimal to no erosion problems after completion of The North College Marketplace. Silt fence will be installed along the south and east sides of the site to prevent sediment from leaving and entering the site. The Rainfall Performance Standards for The North College Marketplace, during and after construction, were calculated to be 79 and 92.9, respectively. Therefore the erosion control plan shall be developed to contain 79% and 92.9% of the rainfall sediment that would normally flow off a bare ground site during a 10-year rainfall event during and after construction respectively. Effectiveness values for the site during and after construction were calculated to be 83.6 and 98.4, respectively. These values demonstrate that the developed Erosion Control Plan contains at least the minimum amount of rainfall sediment on-site required during and after construction, therefore, the erosion control plan below meets the City of Fort Collins requirements. Performance Standard During Construction 79 Performance Standard After Construction 92.9 Effectiveness During Construction 83.6 Effectiveness After Construction 98.4 The Performance Standard and Effectiveness calculations may be found in Appendix G. An erosion control escrow cost estimate of $76,401 is also included in the Erosion Control section of Appendix G. The Erosion Control Plan is included with the approved construction drawings. 4.7 Ayres Associates 5. CONCLUSIONS This drainage and erosion control report and plans comply with City of Fort Collins standards and the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria . The drainage system is designed to convey the runoff to the designated on-site detention facilities and provides water quality treatment prior to discharging to said detention. A 100-year release rate of 4.93 cfs is used which is the less than the allowable release of 5.0 cfs. 5.1 Ayres Associates APPENDIX A Geotechnical Report T CTLITHOMPSON I N C O R P O R A T i D GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Prepa red For: LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC 1 043 Eagle Drive Loveland , Colorado 80537 Attention: Mr. Blaine Rappe Project No. FC04442.001-125/135 August14,2008 351 Linden Street I Suite 140 I Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Telephone : 970-206 -9455 Fax: 970-206-9441 TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION SITE CONDITIONS PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Selsmiclty SITE DEVELOPMENT Existing Fill and Structures FIii Placement Excavation GROUND MODIFICATION Surcharging Stone Columns FOUNDATIONS FOR SUPERMARKET AND ADJACENT BUILDING Footings FOUNDATIONS FOR FUEL STATION Footings Drilled Piers Bottomed in Bedrock Laterally Loaded Piers BELOW GRADE AREAS FLOOR SYSTEMS PAVEMENTS Site FIii and Settlement Parking Areas, Access Drives, and Heavy Truck Traffic Areas Fuel Station WATER SOLUBLE SULFATES SURFACE DRAINAGE LIMITATIONS 1 1 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 5 6 7 8 8 10 11 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 19 19 20 23 24 25 TABLE OF CONTENTS FIGURE 1 -LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2-ESTIMATED ELEVATION OF BEDROCK SURFACE FIGURE 3-ESTIMATED ELEVATION OF GROUND WATER SURFACE FIGURE 4 -ESTIMATED DEPTH OF CUT AND FILL FIGURE 5 -PRELIMINARY SURCHARGE PLAN APPENDIX A -SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS APPENDIX B -RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING I, APPENDIX C -PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDIX D -SAMPLE SITE GRADING SPECIFIQATIONS .. II SCOPE This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed North College Market Place in Fort Collins, Colorado. The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions and provide foundation recommendations, pavement design and geotechnical design criteria for the project. The report was prepared from data developed during field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, and experience with similar conditions. The report includes a description of subsurface soil and bedrock conditions found in our exploratory borings and discussions of site development as influenced by geotechnical ~ considerations. Our opinions and recommendations regarding design criteria and I• construction details for foundations, floor systems,· and ~labs-on-grade, lateral earth loads, drainage, and pavement are provideq,. If the proj~ grading, development location or proposed construction changes, we should be notified. Our opinions are summarized in the following paragraphs. More complete descriptions of the subsurface conditions, results of our field and laboratory Investigations, and our opinions, conclusions and recommendations, are included in the subsequent sections of this report. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1. The subsurface conditions encountered in our borings were variable across the site. In general, the soils and bedrock encountered in our borings consisted of 1 to 13 feet of fill over clayey to gravelly sand and sandy clay over sandstone and claystone bedrock. Bedrock was encountered at depths ranging from 3 to 17 feet below the existing ground surface. 2. The majority of the overburden soils at the site are very soft to soft. These types of soils are subject to consolidation when loaded. Any placement of fill or structures over these materials will cause consolidation, resulting in significant settlement. Structures at the site should not be supported on the soft soils without ground modification to stabilize the foundation soils. Deep foundations may be used to support structures on the more stable bedrock that underlies the soft soils . Other improvements to the site including paved areas should be planned and constructed with care accounting for potential settlements as to reduce the risk for ponding water in paved areas and loss of grade required for site drainage. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, UC NORTH COUEGE MARKET PLACE CTLIT PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 ·125/135 1 3. Groundwater was encountered in our borings at depths ranging from 1 to 14 feet below the existing ground surface. Groundwater was observed at the ground surface in several locations forming wetland areas. A review of reports by others and visual verification indicates shallower groundwater conditions exist in the area of the proposed construction. Shallow groundwater will affect planned development at this site. 4. Existing fill was encountered in several borings at depths between 1 and 13 feet. Existing fill should not support foundations or floor slabs. We recommend removal and recompaction of the existing fill beneath structures. If beet spoils are encountered and are planned for reuse on the site, we recommend no more than 20 percent be mixed with site soils for fill material. 5. We have discussed several foundation options for the supermarket and adjacent building with our client including deep foundations or shallow foundations combined with ground , modification. Based on these discussions and site limitations, we rebommend surcharging the site or using stone columns with a geogrid system t or ground modification to reduce post construction settlement. D.esign and construction recommendation for shallow f<;>undations and surcharging are presented in this report. If requested we t, can· provide design and construction recommendations for deep foundatidns and geopier stabilization. I" •~I 6. For the fuel station, we believe footing foundations can be used to support the proposed building. The canopy should be supported by either shallow or deep foundations if necessary to resist uplift forces. A foundation discussion and criteria for footing and drilled friction pier foundations are provided in this report. 7. If a shallow foundation with ground modification is planned, we believe a slab -on-grade floor is appropriate for the buildings provided the ground modification extends to all areas below floors. Some movement of slab on-grade floors should be anticipated. We expect movements will be minor, on the order of 1 inch or less if, the recommendations in this report are followed. If the owner elects to use a deep foundation system or if no movement of the floor can be tolerated, we recommend a structural floor. 8. Our borings drilled in the proposed parking lot, access drives, and heavy truck traffic areas penetrated very soft to medium stiff clays and loose to medium dense sands . Fill was encountered in several borings up to 4 feet below the existing ground surface. Pavement recommendations and design criteria are presented in the body of this report. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION CTL I Thompson , Inc. performed a preliminary geologic and geotechnical investigation for this site (Job No. FC04442.000-115, dated May 20, 2008). Boring and LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 -125/135 2 laboratory data from our previous preliminary investigation are included in this report. In addition, we were provided with a report by Terracon for the site. They had conducted a preliminary geotechnical investigation (Project No. 20955013, dated June 29, 1995) and continued ground water monitoring at the site. CTL I Thompson is still continuing ground water measurements at this site. The previous investigations at the site encountered similar soft soils and shallow groundwater conditions. The reports and letters from these previous investigations were reviewed prior to preparation of this report. SITE CONDITIONS The North College Market Place is located northeast of the intersection of Willox Lane and College Avenue in Fort Collins, Colorado (Figure 1 ). The proposed construction area is generally flat with vegetation consisting of trees, grasses, and weeds. Existing fill materials, including possible beet spoils, were observed at the ground surface across portions of the site. The Larimer and Weld Canal forms the northern and eastern boundary of the site. At the time of our investigation, water levels in the canal were above existing grades in the area of the planned development. Several wetland areas are present on the site and Terry Lake Reservoir is located a quarter mile to the north. Wetland areas are located primarily on the eastern half of the site. Several old foundations and slabs-on-grade were observed in the south central potion of the site. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We understand that there are several building pads and other improvements associated with this project. Our investigation includes the supermarket and adjacent building to the south and a fuel station. Also included in our investigation are the pavement areas adjacent to these structures. The supermarket will likely be built with masonry block walls and have a finished floor elevation of 4979.5 feet. We understand column loads for the supermarket will be on the order of 50 kips for interior members and approximately 45 kips for perimeter members. The fuel station will include fuel storage tanks and a fuel center with a canopy over multiple islands with fuel dispensers. We understand in order to realize desired grades and have an appropriate separation from ground water up to 8 feet of fill will be placed at the site and the supermarket will be LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 -125/135 3 constructed over 6 feet of fill. Cuts in the area of the planned development are anticipated to be as deep as 7 feet below the existing ground surface. An estimated depth of cuts and fills is presented in Figure 4. We also understand that per our recommendations from our preliminary investigation, an underdrain system is being designed by Ayres Associates. INVESTIGATION Subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling 9 borings during our preliminary investigation and 13 additional borings in the area of the proposed construction for the design level investigation. The appro;,cimate locations of the borings for both investigations are shown on Figure 1. Our field 'representative observed drilling, logged the soils and bedrock found in the borings and obtained samples. Summary logs of the borings, including results of field penetration resistance tests, are presented in Appendix A. Samples obtained during drilling were returned to our laboratory and visually examined by the geologist and geotechnical engineer for this project. Laboratory testing included natural moisture content and dry density, swell-consolidation and time consolidation, unconfined compressive strength, Atterberg limits, and water-soluble sulfate tests . Results of laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B and summarized on Table B-1. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions encountered in our borings consisted of 1 to 13 feet of sandy clay and clayey sand fill over native sandy clay and clayey to gravelly sand underlain by sandstone and claystone bedrock. Bedrock was encountered at depths ranging from 3 to 17 feet below the existing ground surface. The majority of the overburden soils at the site are soft to very soft. These types of soils are subject to consolidation when loaded and can cause settlement of improvements founded on the materials. A more complete description of the subsurface conditions is presented in Appendix A. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 4 Groundwater was measured at depths ranging from 1 to 14 feet below the existing ground surface. Groundwater was observed at the ground surface in several locations forming wetland areas. A review of reports by others and visual verification indicates shallower groundwater conditions in the area of the proposed construction. Ground water levels will affect the planned site development. Seismicity Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in our borings and our understanding of the geology, the site classifies as a Seismic Site Class C (2003 International Building Code). Only minor damage to re~tively new, properly designed ;l- and built buildings would be expected . Wind loads, not seismic considerations , typically ' govern dynam ic structural design in th is area . • > SITE DEVELOPMENT Existing Fill and Structures Clayey sand and sandy clay fill was encountered in our borings to depths ranging from 1 to 13 feet below the existing ground surface. As the origin of the fill on the site is unknown , we must assume that it is uncontrolled. In addition to the presence of uncontrolled fill , we observed a white to gray material in several borings and on the ground surface in several areas of the site . Based on the results of laboratory testing and our experience , we believe these materials are spoils from sugar beet processing . The existing fill and beet spoils present a significant risk of differential movement of planned development areas. The existing fill and beet spoils can also affect exterior flatwork and grade critical wet utilities . Building and paved areas should not be constructed in areas of fill without mitigation. Existing fill in the area of the building should be removed . The fill removal area should extend beyond the footprint of the building at least 5 feet. If the excavations are deeper than about 1 a feet in planned building areas, additional measures should be considered to reduce the potential settlement of backfill. We should be advised if any of LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 5 ,F the excavations are deeper than 1 0 feet below the proposed floor. The excavation can be filled with on-site soils, moisture-conditioned and compacted to the specifications in Fill Placement, below. This procedure should remove the existing fill and provide more uniform support for improvements. Fill Placement Soft soils were encountered across the site . Recommendations for placing fill in areas of soft soils are addressed in the GROUND MODIFICATION section of this report. Some of the existing on-site soils are suitable for re-use as fill material provided debris or deleterious organic materials are removed . If possible beet spoils are encountered, ~ they should be removed and mixed with other soils with no more than 20 percent of the replacement fill containing beet spoils material . We understand a significant portion of the site is to be filled with imported fill materi~_ls and tt,e supermarket will be constructed ., over 6 feet of eng ineered fill. Import fill shou1ct'·~9,n,~in no more than 40 percent silt and •11· 11 clay sized particles (percent passing No. 200 sieve)~and exhibit a liquid limit less than 30 percent and a plasticity index less than 15 percent. We understand fill may be provided from the Distel Pit of Aggregate Industries. Based on laboratory testing provided by Earth Engineering Consultants (Project No. 1085001 B-2, dated February 2008), the pit soils classify as a COOT Class I structural backfill. This fill is acceptable as engineered fill at this site. Areas to receive fill should be scarified, moisture-conditioned and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). The properties of the fill will affect the performance of improvements. Sand soils used as fill should be moistened to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content. Clay fill soils placed below the building should be moisture conditioned to 1 to 3 percent above optimum moisture content. Clay fill placed exterior to the building can be moistened to between optimum and 3 percent above optimum moisture content. The fill should be moisture-conditioned, placed in thin, loose lifts (8 inches or less) and compacted as above. Placement and compaction of fill should be observed and tested by a representative of our firm during construction. Fill placement and compaction activities should not be conducted when the fill material or subgrade is frozen. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE en I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 • 125/135 6 Site grading in areas of landscaping where no future improvements are planned can be placed at a density of at least 90 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). Example site grading specifications are presented in Appendix D. Excavation The overburden soils found in our borings can be excavated using conventional heavy-duty excavation equipment; bedrock may require ripping. Groundwater will be encountered during utility construction. Dewatering may be accomplished by sloping excavations to occasional sumps where water can be removed by pumping or a series of well points. Dewatering design is not within our scope of work for this project. Ayres Associates is designing the permanent dewatering system. If requested, CTLIThompson can design a construction dewatering system. Excavations should be sloped or shored to meet local, State, and federal safety regulations. Based on our investigation and OSHA standards, we believe the clay soils classify as Type B soils and the sands as Type C soils. Type B soils require a maximum slope inclination of 1 :1 (horizontal:vertical) in dry conditions. Type C soils require a maximum slope inclination of 1.5:1 in dry conditions. Excavation slopes specified by OSHA are dependent upon types of soil and ground water conditions encountered. The contractor's "competent person" should identify the soils encountered in the excavation and refer to OSHA standards to determine appropriate slopes. Stockpiles of soils and equipment should not be placed within a horizontal distance equal to one-half the excavation depth, from the edge of excavation. The width of the top of an excavation may be limited in some areas. Bracing or ''trench box" construction may be necessary. Bracing systems include sheet piling, braced sheeting, and others. Lateral loads on bracing depend on the depth of excavation, slope of excavation above the bracing, surface loads, hydrostatic pressures, and allowable movement. For trench boxes and bracing allowed to move enough to mobilize the strength of the soils, with associated cracking of the ground surface, the "active" earth pressure conditions are appropriate for design. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, UC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTLIT PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 If movement is not 7 tolerable, the "at rest'' earth pressures are appropriate. We suggest an equivalent fluid density of 50 pcf for the "active" earth pressure condition and 65 pcf for the "at resr earth pressure condition , assuming level backfill. These pressures do not include allowances for surcharge loading such as truck traffic or for hydrostatic conditions. We are available to assist further with brac ing design if desired. Water, sewer, and underdrain lines are often constructed beneath pavement areas . Compaction of trench backfill can have a significant effect on the life and serviceability of pavements. We recommend trench backfill be moisture conditioned and compacted as above. Placement and compaction of fill and backfill should be observed and tested by a representative of our firm during constru~ion. GROUND MODIFICATION Our subsurface investigation identified soft soils in the area of the planned ~ construction. We also understand the area arou~d:''tpe supermarket building will receive a significant amount of fill to attain the planned grade. The soft soils will exhibit significant consolidation from this added weight resulting is settlement. Constructing the building on a shallow foundation without addressing the potential settlement will lead to unacceptable damage to the building. Mitigation of the settlement potential can be provided through a variety of methods. Through several meetings and discussions with the client , the most reasonable methods of mitigation, considering site limitations, appear to be either applying a surcharge load during construction to consolidate the soft soils or install a stone column or geopier type soil modification system. A typical deep foundation system such as drilled piers is an option, but floor support must also be considered. surchargjna Surcharging involves installing a temporary fill on the area of the planned building to consolidate the soft soils. The majority of anticipated settlement from planned site improvements would be obtained prior to construction of the building. Ground movements should be monitored during the surcharge period. Once adequate LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO . FC04442.001-125/135 8 settlement has occurred, the temporary fill can be removed and construction of the building can commence. By surcharging the site, the anticipated remaining potential settlement, which the structure will experience , should be less than 1 inch. To estimate the potential settlement of the soft soil, we performed 5 time consolidation tests on samples recovered from our borings at the site. Based on the results of this testing, it appears a surcharge temporary fill of approximately 4 feet of compacted soil or 6 feet of uncompacted soil (in addition to the planned site grading fill for the building pad) will be necessary. A preliminary plan for the limits of the surcharge is presented on Figure 5. This plan was developed for planning purposes. The delineated area for the surcharge covers approximately 115,000 square feet. If the surcharge is constructed with compacted soil (4 feet thick), we estimate the volume of the surcharge to be approximately 18,000 yards in place, excluding transport bulking factors. If the surcharge is constructed with uncompacted soil (6 feet thick), we estimate the volume of the surcharge to be approximately 26,000 yards of loose material. We estimate the surcharge will need to be in place for approximately 90 to 120 days, to be verified during construction with survey monitoring. Once construction plans for the building plan are more defined, a construction plan for the surcharge, along with monitoring specifications, can be provided. In terms of minimizing cost of moving and handling materials onsite, installing the building pad followed by the surcharge is a better option. However, depending on permitting requirements, the surcharge may need to be performed prior to construction of the building pad. A significant amount of fill will need to be placed for the building pad. The surcharge fill thicknesses provided above assume the pad will be installed prior to the addition of the surcharge. As an option, the surcharge can be performed prior to the installation of the site fill for the building pad. However, the thickness of the surcharge fill will need to be increased to include a weight equivalent to the building pad fill. We estimate a fill depth of 10 feet of compacted soil or 14 feet of uncompacted fill would be required in this option. For planning purposes, the limits of the surcharge would be approximately the same as presented on Figure 6. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL J T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 -125/1 35 9 ,F Construction monitoring of the settlement will be necessary during surcharge period to evaluate the surcharge effectiveness and determine when the surcharge can be removed. Construction monitoring would consist of installing a minimum of 5 settlement platforms which would be surveyed at the start of fill placement, at the completion of fill placement and every 7 days following until the desired settlement is reached and the surcharge is removed. Settlement platforms should conform to ASTM D 6598-07 (externally referenced settlement platform). The base plate should be installed at the top of the building pad and the riser should extend through the surcharge fill. The contractor will be responsible for protecting the settlement platforms from damage during this time period and maintaining accessibility of the riser top for survey measurements. Once it is determined adequate settlement has occurred the surcharge fill can be removed from the building pad area. Re-grading of the building pad will be necessary at that time. :,, L•~,: .. i1•~·, Stone Columns . \ .,., . As an alternative to surcharging, or if construction schedules do not permit the time necessary for surcharging, an alternative ground modification method could be the use of stone columns. This involves constructing columns of gravel through the soft soils to assist supporting the planned fill and structure above and reduce settlement potentials. The gravel is installed by either drilling a hole through the soft soils and ramming gravel into the hole, or vibrating an opening in the soil and placing gravel in the resulting void. These options are generally proprietary and designed by the foundation contractor. These systems have strength limitations, which, for this project, will require a layer of structural fill and potentially geogrid be installed between the foundation and the tops of the stone columns. The thickness of this layer, and any needed geogrid, would also be determined by the foundation contractor. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 -125/135 10 FOUNDATIONS FOR SUPERMARKET AND ADJACENT BUILDING We have discussed several options for foundation systems with our client including deep and shallow foundations. Based on our discussions, we recommend using footings bearing on modified ground. If requested we can provide design and construction criteria for alternative foundation systems. Where footings are used we recommend preloading the site as discussed in the Surcharging section of this report or using stone columns with a geogrid system for ground stabilization. Based on conversations with our client, we believe preloading the site will be more cost effective and we understand preliminary construction schedules can accommodate the time requirements. If requested, we can assist a specialtY, 9ontractor in their design of a stone column soil improvement. Design and construction criteria for footing foundations are provided below. These criteria were developed from analysis of1 field and laboratory data and our ··1 experience. The recommended foundation alterna\lve can be used provided all design and construction criteria presented in this report are followed. Footings 1. Footings will be supported on a minimum of 3 feet of densely compacted, engineered fill (see SITE DEVELOPMENT). All existing man-placed fill should be removed from under footings and within one footing width around footings and replaced with engineered fill. Where soil is loosened during excavations, it should be removed and replaced with on-site soils compacted following the criteria in the SITE DEVELOPMENT section of this report. 2. If a stone column system is used, footing-bearing capacities should be provided by the stone column producer. If a surcharging operation is used to provide soil improvement, footings can be designed for a maximum allowable soil pressure of 2,000 psf. The soil pressure can be increased 33 percent for transient loads such as wind or seismic loads. 3. Footing elevations should be kept 3 feet above groundwater elevation at a minimum. 4. Footings should have a minimum width of at least 20 inches. Foundations for isolated columns should have minimum dimensions of 24 LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442 .001 -125/135 11 inches by 24 inches. Larger sizes may be required depending on load and the structural system used. 5. The subsurface soils beneath footing pads can be assigned a coefficient of friction of 0.3 to resist lateral loads. The ability of grade beams, or footing backfill to resist lateral loads can be calculated for using a passive equivalent fluid pressure of 200 pcf. This assumes the backfill is densely compacted and will not be removed. Backfill should be placed and compacted to the criteria in the SITE DEVELOPEMENT Section of the report. 6. Exterior footings should be protected from frost action. We believe 30 inches of frost cover is appropriate for this site. 7. Foundation walls and grade beams should be well reinforced both top and bottom. We recommend the amount of steel equivalent to that required for a simply supported span of 15 feet. a. Completed footing excavations s~ould be obs~rved by a representative of our firm to confirm that the soil~'. are as we aritiqipated from our borings. Occasional loose soils may be' foun~ in foundation excavations. If this occurs, we recommend the loose. sqi,ls be treated as discussed in Item 1 above. FOUNDATIONS FOR FUEL STATION We considered several types of foundations to support the building and canopy, including shallow and deep foundations. We believe footings can be used to support the building. The canopy can be supported by either a footing foundation or a drilled pier foundation bottomed into bedrock if necessary to restrain the uplift loads. Due to the soil and water conditions at this site, drilled pier installation would likely be difficult. A helical pier system or a helical anchored footing system could be effective alternatives. If requested, we can provide helical pier recommendations. We estimate potential foundation movements of up to one inch could occur for foundations designed and constructed to the criteria below. Design and construction criteria for footing foundations are provided below. Criteria for drilled pier foundations follow. These criteria were developed from analysis of field and laboratory data and our experience. The recommended foundation alternative can be used provided all design and construction criteria presented in this report are followed. The builder and structural engineer should also consider design and LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTLIT PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 12 ~ construction details established by the structural warrantor (if any) that may impose additional foundation design and installation requirements. Footings 1. Footings should be supported on undisturbed natural soils or densely compacted , engineered fill (see SITE DEVELOPMENT). All existing fill should be removed from under footings and within one footing width around footings and replaced with engineered fill. Where soil is loosened during excavation, it should be removed and replaced with on-site soils compacted following the criteria in the SITE DEVELOPMENT section of this report. 2. Footings bearing on the natural clays can be designed for a maximum soil pressure of 1,000 psf (above approximate elevation of 2,974). Footings may be extended into the natural sands (below approximate elevation of 2,974). Footings bearing on the natural sands and/or engineered fill can be designed for a maximum soil pressure of 3,000 psf. The soil pressure can be increased 33 percent for transient loads such as wind or seismic loads. 3. Footing elevations should be kept 3 feet above groundwater elevation at a minimum. This may require an underdrain system in the area of the fuel station. 4. Footings should have a minimum width of at least 20 inches. Foundations for isolated columns should have minimum dimensions of 24 inches by 24 inches. Larger sizes may be required depending on load and the structural system used. 5. The soils beneath footing pads can be assigned a coefficient of friction of 0.45 to res'1st lateral loads. The ability of grade beams, or footing backfill to resist lateral loads can be calculated for using a passive equivalent fluid pressure of 300 pcf. This assumes the backfill is densely compacted and will not be removed. Backfill should be placed and compacted to the criteria in the SITE DEVELOPMENT Section of the report. 6. Exterior footings should be protected from frost action. We believe 30 inches of frost cover is appropriate for this site. 7. Foundation walls and grade beams should be well reinforced both top and bottom. We recommend the amount of steel equivalent to that required for a simply supported span of 15 feet. 8. Completed footing excavations should be observed by a representative of our firm to confirm that the soils are as we anticipated from our borings. Occasional loose soils may be found in foundation excavations . If this LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 • 125/135 13 occurs, we recommend the loose soils be treated as discussed in Item 1 above. Drilled Piers Bottomed in Bedrock 1. Piers should be drilled into the relatively unweathered bedrock and have a minimum length of at least 12 feet. 2. Piers should be designed for a maximum allowable end pressure of 25,000 psf and an allowable skin friction of 2,500 psf for the portion of the pier in bedrock. Skin friction should be neglected for the portion of the pier in overburden soils, weathered bedrock, or within 3 feet of grade beams. 3. Axial tension loads can be resisted using a skin friction value of 2,500 psf for the portion of pier in bedrock. 4. Piers should be designed with a length/diameter ratio less than 30 . 5. Pier drilling should produce shafts with relatively undisturbed bedrock exposed. Excessive remolding and caking of bedrock cuttings on pier walls should be removed. 6. Piers should be reinforced their full length and the reinforcement should extend into grade beams or foundation walls. A minimum steel-to-pier cross -sectional area ratio of 0.005 using Grade 60 steel is recommended. More reinforcement may be required by structural considerations. 7. A 4-inch contin4ous void should be constructed beneath grade beams, between piers, to concentrate structural deadload on the piers. 8. Grade beams should be well reinforced. The structural engineer should design the reinforcement. 9. Piers should have a center-to-center spacing of at least three pier diameters when designing for vertical loading conditions, or they should be designed as a group. Piers aligned in the direction of lateral forces should have a center-to-center spacing of at least six pier diameters. Reductions for closely spaced piers are discussed in the following section. 10. Concrete should have a slump of 6 inches (+/-1 inch). Concrete should be ready and placed in the pier holes immediately after the holes are drilled, cleaned, observed and the reinforcing steel is set. 11. Ground water was encountered in our borings. Where ground water is encountered during drilling, pump or tremie pipe placement of concrete may be required for proper cleaning, dewatering and placement of LOVELAND COMMERCIAL. LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 -125/135 14 concrete during pier installation. Concrete should not be placed by free fall in pier holes containing more than 3 inches of water. 12. We anticipate casing may be required for piers. Concrete should be ready and placed in the pier holes immediately after the holes are drilled, cleaned and observed and reinforcing steel set. At least 5 feet of concrete should be maintained above the ground water level prior to (and during) casing removal. 13. Some pier-drilling contractors use casing with an 0.0. equal to the specified pier diameter. This results in a pier diameter less than specified, typically on the order of 2 inches smaller in diameter. The design and specification of piers should consider the alternatives. If full size casing is desired (I.D. of casing equal to specified pier diameter) it should be clearly specified. If design considers the potential reduction in diameter, then the specification should include a tolerance for a smaller diameter for cased piers. 14. Some movement of the drilled pier foundation is anticipated to mobilize the skin friction. We estimate this 'movement to be on the order of 1/4 to 1/2 inch. Differential movement may be equal to the total movement. 15. The installation of the drilled pie'; f_oµndations should be observed by a representative of our firm to confirm t~e piers are bottomed in the proper bearing strata and to observe the contractor's installation procedures. Laterally Loaded Piers Several methods are available to analyze laterally loaded piers. With a pier length to diameter ratio of 7 or greater, we believe the method of analysis developed by Matlock and Reese is most appropriate. The method is an iterative procedure using applied loading and soil profile to develop deflection and moment versus depth curves. The computer programs LPILE and COM624 were developed to perform this procedure. Suggested criteria for LPILE analysis are presented in the following table. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO . FC04442.001 -1 25/1 35 15 TABLE A SOIL INPUT DATA FOR LPILE or COM624 ',-------·-----------, ------• ]~----] L__ ----·-_ . J· ,! ', \' _ C-':0/~:t 1 01 Cl'. : Ci:!!' "L ~ er, ~~.J lr Soil Type Stiff Clay w/o Sand Free Water Effective Unit Weight 0.07 0.07 (pci) Cohesive Strength, c 14 -(psi) Friction Angle -35 Degrees Soil Strain, Eso (in/in) 0.007 - p-y Modulus ks (pci) 500 90 The Eso represents the strain corresponding to 50 percent of the maximum principle stress difference. We believe the following formulas in Table B are appropriate for calculating horizontal modulus of subgrade reaction (K,,) values. Modulus of Subgrade Reaction Kt, (tcf) TABLE B MODULI OF SUBGRADE REACTION K =20 h d K = 20z h d Where d = pier diameter (ft) and z = depth (ft). BELOW GRADE AREAS K = 150 h d No basement areas are planned for the proposed building, for this condition, perimeter drains are not usually necessary around structures; however, we understand a 6-foot deep "pir area will be constructed with a portion of the supermarket. If ground LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 16 water cannot be controlled at this depth by the planned underdrain system, we recommend installing a perimeter drain both inside and outside the "pit" that discharges to the underdrain system directly or is pumped from a sump pit to an appropriate outfall. If other portions or the planned structures extend below groundwater levels , we should be contacted to provide additional foundation drain recommendations. The Fuel Station will likely have an underground fuel tank or tanks. Based on the depth of groundwater encountered during our investigation, the tank or tanks will require control of ground water during construction. Care should be taken to design the underground fuel tanks to resist buoyant forces created by the high groundwater. FLOOR SYSTEMS Floor support will be dependant on the ground modification method or foundation selected for this site. As discussed in the MODIFICATION section, the planned site improvements will cause substantial settlement in the area of the supermarket. A deep foundation such as drilled piers will support the building, but will not prevent floor movement. In this situation, a structural floor would be needed. Either surcharging or stone columns will reduce floor movement potential for conventional slab-on -grade systems to an acceptable level provided the recommendations provided below are followed. This will not eliminate potential movements of the slab. We believe ground modification will reduce movements due to settlement to less than 1 inch. If the movement potential for a slab-on-grade floor does not meet the requirements of areas particularly sensitive to movement, additional measures may be required such as slab stiffening, a structural slab, or a post-tension slab . The subgrade for slab-on-grade floors will be imported fill. Any fill placed for the floor subgrade should be built with densely compacted, engineered fill as discussed in the SITE DEVELOPMENT section of this report . The existing fill is not an acceptable subgrade for a slab-on-grade floor and should be completely removed from the subgrade under a floor. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE en. Ir PROJECT No. FC04442.001 -1251135 17 Groundwater levels in the footprint of the building were measured as shallow as 1 foot in our borings and were visually encountered at the ground surface. Slab-on grade floors should have a 5-foot separation from groundwater elevation. Slabs may be subject to heavy point loads. The structural engineer should design floor slab reinforcement. For design of slabs-on-grade, we recommend a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pci for on-site soils. If the owner elects to use slab-on-grade construction and accepts the risk of movement and associated damage, we recommend the following precautions for slab on-grade construction at this site. These precautions can help reduce, but not eliminate damage or distress due to slab movement. 1. Slabs should be separated from exterior walls and interior bearing members with a slip joint that allows free vertical movement of the slabs. This can reduce cracking if some movement of the slab occurs. 2. Slabs should be placed dire~y, on compacted fill. The need for a capillary break or vapor barrie·r will depend on the sensitivity of floor coverings to moisture. 3. Underslab plumbing should be eliminated where feasible. Where such plumbing is,.unavoidable, it should be thoroughly pressure tested for leaks prior to slab construction and be provided with flexible couplings. Pressurized water supply lines should be brought above the floors as quickly as possible. 4. Plumbing and , utilities that pass through the slabs should be isolated from the slabs and constructed with flexible couplings. Where water and gas lines are connected to furnaces or heaters, the lines should be constructed with sufficient flexibility to allow for movement. 5. HVAC equipment supported on the slab should be provided with a collapsible connection between the furnace and the ductwork, with allowance for at least 2 inches of vertical movement. 6. Frequent control joints should be provided in slabs to reduce problems associated with shrinkage and cracking, in accordance with ACI recommendations. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO . FC04442.001-125/135 18 PAVEMENTS Several borings were drilled within the proposed pavement areas . Laboratory tests on selected samples indicated the subgrade soils generally classify as AASHTO category A-6 with a group index of 4. Design of the pavement section is a function of paving materials, support characteristics of the subgrade, and our experience. Based on the existing fill and native soils encountered, we believe the subgrade conditions are unsuitable for pavement subgrade. We have provided pavement and subgrade stabilization recommendations below for parking areas, access drives, and heavy traffic areas as well as pavement areas associated with the fuel station. Site Fill and Settlement Large portions of the main parking area are planned to receive 3 to 4 feet of grading fill. The soft soils identified below the building footprint also extend through most of the parking area. The location and thickness of these soft soils vary. Surface settlement potentials of up to 3 inches can b~ expected in the portions of the parking area with thick fill. The settlement is anticipated to be gradual and should not significantly affect the subgrade improvement and pavement sections. However, the anticipated settlements could impact drainage patterns in the parking lot, possibly creating ponding areas where pavements are constructed with minimal drainage . Parking Areas, Access Drives, and Heaw Truck Traffic Areas All pavements should be placed on a stabilized subgrade. Below we have provided several alternatives for pavement sections based on two types of subgrade stabilization . For subgrade stabilization, we recommend two feet of engineered fill or one foot of COOT Class I structural backfill specified in the Fill Placement section of this report over one foot of fly ash stabilization. If planned, soil modification should include the loading areas and heavy truck access drives to provide an adequate subgrade. Pavement section recommendations are provided below in Table C. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO . FC04442.00 1-1 25/135 19 Fuel Station TABLE C RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT SECTIONS Cf@,riJ-'1U 1_i f.t</i r--_:_--_-_ ~r~.r?,;,c:iill.:.J~lr:f1Jrrfitir· · _L\'1It~ --_ -_ -:_] r-: :,,-~ ... :~,;I•:_, '111 l ------1 I I 1>1'1:I ,,.._· i"\' i',l.l, j (J:1 l~l1(>ll•(:f:J-i:'.', 1 ·11i· I L __________ J~-~--------------_ _______J 4" HMA / 6" ABC Main Parking OR 5"PCC 5.5" HMA / 6.5" ABC Access Drives OR 5.5" PCC Heavy Truck 5.5" HMA / r ABC OR Traffic Areas 6" PCC HMA = Hot Mix Asphalt ABC = Aggregate Base Course PCC = Portland Cement Concrete 4" HMA/r ABC OR 5" PCC 5.5" HMA / 7' ABC OR 5.5" PCC 5.5" HMA / r ABC OR 6"PCC Hot mix asphalt that comes into contact with fuel is more susceptible to chemical deterioration. We recommend susceptible areas use Portland cement concrete. To stabilize the subgrade we recommend two feet of engineered fill or one foot of structural backfill over one foot of fly ash stabilization (as described in the letter by EEC dated February 6, 2008) specified in the Fill Placement section of this report. Recommendations for pavements in the area of the canopy and storage tanks are presented in Table D below. TABLED RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT SECTIONS AT FUELING AREAS LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE Canopy Tanks CTLI T PROJECT NO . FC04442.001-125/135 6.0" + 0.0" 8.0'' + 6.0" 20 Our experience indicates rigid Portland cement concrete pavements generally perform better than asphalt pavements in areas where trucks stop and maneuver. In areas such as entrances , loading and unloading zones, and trash collection areas, we recommend Portland cement concrete pavement be used. Concrete pavement appears to perform better in these areas because the concrete better distributes wheel loads over a larger area resulting in lower subgrade stresses. The asphaltic concrete component of the pavement section was evaluated assuming at least a 1650-pound Marshall stability and asphalt aggregate that is relatively impermeable to moisture and well graded. We recommend a job mix design be performed and periodic checks at the job site are made to verify compliance with the specifications as asphaltic concrete is placed. The structural coefficient assumed for the aggregate base course in our above evaluation is an R-value of 78. The structural fill described in the previously referenced EEC letter will be acceptable. The Colorado Department of Highways Class 5 or Class 6 base courses will normally meet these requirements. Base course varies considerably and can be sensitive to change in moisture, therefore, we recommend the material planned for base course be laboratory tested prior to importing it to the site . Our designs are based on the assumed modulus of rupture (flexural strength) of 600 psi for concrete. We recommend concrete contain a minimum of 5.5 sacks of cement per cubic yard and between 5 and 7 percent entrained air. A mix design should be prepared for paving using the aggregate and cement that will be used during construction. If the construction material selected cannot meet the above requirements the pavement design should be re-evaluated using strength parameters for the available materials . Materials and placement methods should conform to the requirements of the Colorado Department of Transportation "Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction". All material planned for construction should be submitted and tested to verify compliance with the project specifications. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO . FC04442.001 • 125/135 21 A representative of our firm should carry out construction control and observations during subgrade preparation and paving operations. Concrete should be carefully monitored for quality control. To avoid problems associated with scaling and to continue strength gain, we recommend deicing salts not be used the first year after placement. Utilities such as water and sewer are usually placed beneath pavement. Utilities should be installed, tested, and approved prior to paving. There may be preexisting utility trenches across a portion of this site not identified during this investigation. If any are found, the top 2 feet of backfill should be replaced as fill compacted to 95 percent of ASTM D 698. If utility trench backfill was not moisture treated and densely compacted, differential settlement will result which will destroy the pavement. Placement and compaction of trench backfill should be observed, tested, and approved prior to paving. '· Careful attention should be paid to compaction at curb backs and around manholes. Excavation of completed pavemen~ for utility construction or repair can destroy the integrity of the pavement and result in a severe decrease in serviceability. To • restore the pavement top original serviceability, careful backfill compaction before repaving is necessary. The primary cause of premature pavement deterioration is infiltration of water into the pavement sy~tem. This increase in moisture content usually results in the softening of base course and subgrade and eventual failure of the pavement. We recommend pavements and surrounding ground surface be sloped to cause surface water to run off rapidly and away from pavements. Curb and gutter should be backfill compacted and sloped to prevent ponding adjacent backs of curbs and to paving. The final grading of the subgrade should be carefully controlled so the pavement design cross-section can be maintained. Low spots in the subgrade that can trap water should be eliminated. Seals should be provided within the curb and pavement and in all joints to reduce the possibility of water infiltration. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 -125/135 22 WATER SOLUBLE SULFATES Concrete that comes into contact with soils can be subject to sulfate attack. We measured water-soluble sulfate concentrations in eight samples from this site. Concentrations were measured at levels as high as 1.4 percent with five samples having sulfate concentrations greater than 0.2 percent. Water-soluble sulfate concentrations between 0.2 and 2 percent indicate Class 2 sulfate exposure, according to the American Concrete Institute (ACI). For sites with Class 2 sulfate exposure, ACI recommends using a cement meeting the requirements for Type V (sulfate resistant) cement or the equivalent, with a maximum water-to-cementitious material ratio of 0.45 and air entrainment of 5 to 7 percent. As alternative, ACI allows the use of cement that conforms to ASTM C 150 Type II requirements, if it m~ets the Type V performance 1.' ' requirements (ASTM C 1012) of ACI 201, or ACI allows a blend of any type of portland cement and fly ash that meets the performance requirements (ASTM C 1012) of ACI 201. In Colorado, Type II cement with 20 percent Class F fly ash usually meets these performance requirements. The fly ash content can be reduced to 15 percent for placement in cold weather months, provided a water-to-cementitious material ratio of 0.45 or less is maintained. ACI also indicates concrete with Class 2 sulfate exposure should have a minimum compressive strength of 4,500 psi. Sulfate attack problems are comparatively rare in this area when quality concrete is used. Considering the range of test results, we believe risk of sulfate attack is lower than indicated by the few laboratory tests performed. The risk is also lowered to some extent by damp-proofing the surfaces of concrete walls in contact with the soil. ACI indicates sulfate resistance for Class 1 exposure can be achieved by using Type II cement, a maximum water-to-cementitious material ratio of 0.50, and a minimum compressive strength of 4000 psi. We believe this approach should be used as a minimum at this project. The more stringent measures outlined in the previous paragraph will better control risk of sulfate attack and are more in alignment with written industry standards. The use of sulfate resistant concrete is most appropriate for foundation elements. Surface flatwork (such as sidewalks, driveways, and patios) is usually constructed with a LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 • 125/135 23 mix that exhibits moderate res istance to sulfate attack. We have rarely seen instances of sulfate attack on surface flatwork. SURFACE DRAINAGE Performance of pavements, flatwork , and foundations is influenced by changes in subgrade moisture conditions. Carefully planned and maintained surface grading can reduce the risk of wetting of the foundation soils and bedrock and pavement subgrade . We recommend the following precautions be observed during and maintained after the completion of the building: 1. Wetting or drying of the open foundation · excavation should be avoided. 2. Positive drainage should be provided away from foundations. We recommend a minimum slope of at least 5 percent in the first 1 O feet away from the foundations in landscaped areas, where possible. Pavements and sidewalks adjacent to the buildings should be sloped for positive drainage away from the building. Water should not be allowed to pond on pavements . 3. Backfill around foundations should be moisture treated and compacted as discussed in SITE DEVELOPMENT. 4 . Roof drains should be directed away from the buildings. Downspout extensions and splash blocks should be provided at discharge points. Where downspouts discharge onto pavement, the pavement should be sloped away from the structure . If roof discharge is piped below slabs or flatwork, the pipes should be solid and glued at joints. 5. Landscaping should be carefully designed to minimize irrigation. Irrigation should not be located within 5 feet of the foundation. Sprinklers should not discharge within 5 feet of foundations . Irrigation should be limited to the minimum amount sufficient to maintain vegetation; application of more water will increase likelihood of slab and foundation movements . 6. Impervious plastic membranes should not be used to cover the ground surface immediately surrounding the building. These membranes tend to trap moisture and prevent normal evaporation from occurring . Geotextile fabrics can be used to limit weed growth and allow for evaporation . LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTLIT PROJ ECT NO . FC04442.001 -1 25/135 24 LIMITATIONS Although our borings were spaced to obtain a reasonably accurate picture of subsurface conditions, variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated in our borings are always possible. We should observe foundation construction to confirm the subsurface conditions are as we anticipated from our borings. Placement and compaction of compaction fill, backfill, subgrade and other fills should be observed and tested by a representative of our firm during construction. We believe this investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of skill and care ordinarily used by members of the .profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the locality of this project: No warranty, express or implied, is made. If we can be of further service in discussing the co~tents of this report or in the analysis of the store expansion from the geotechnical point· of view, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, CTL I THOMPSON, INC. Spencer Schram, El Staff Engineer Reviewed by: R.B. "Chip• Leadbetter, Ill, P.E. Geotechnical Department Manager LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO . FC04442 .001-125/135 Robin Dornfest, PG Project Manager 25 0 APPROXIMATE SCALE : 1" = 200' 100' 200' LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NOR"lli COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-1 251135 ~ ,,,..,.. .?/ TH- - A ~ SUPERMARKET \ 'c, BUILDIN ~~ -< -~ " LEGEND: TH-1 • TH-1 • A r VICINITY MAP (FORT COLLINS AREA) NOTTO SCALE INDICATES APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING (PROJECT NO . FC04442-115, DATED APRIL 29, 2008). INDICATES APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING (PROJECT NO . FC04442.001-125/135, DATED JUNE 12, 2008). INDICATES APPROXIMATE CROSS-SECTION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS. T Locations of Exploratory Borings FIGURE 1 APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1• = 200' 0 100' 200' LOVELAND COMMERCIAL. LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL IT PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 11 II I II I I I I J.~' -. ~ ~ TH-10. (13.0) • T H-16 (14.0) 965 TH-12 TH-3 (15.0) -~~~~: :=A:(13.0) LEGEND: TH-1 • T INDICATES APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING (PROJECT NO . FC04442-115, DATED APRIL 29, 2008). TH-1 INDICATES APPROXIMATE LOCATION • OF BORING (PROJECT NO. FC04442 .001-125/135 , DATED JU.NE 12 2008). I (1 .0) INDICATES APPROXIMATE DEPTH TO BEDROCK. 4990 -INDICATES ESTIMATED ELEVATION OF BEDROCK SURFACE. Estimated Elevation of Bedrock Surface FIGURE2 APPROXIMATE SCALE : 1" = 200' 0 100' 200' LOVELAND COMMERCIAL. LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 -125/135 11 I I II I I I I II I I 49S5 TH-9 (4.0) _,,./"' ...illW!lU.W.lf i===-=' -. ~ ---====:::> 4985 TH-10. (5 .0) • • TH-20 TH-21 (1 .5)~•0> TH-8 (4.0). -------<1980 975 ~----14970 LEGEND: TH-1 • TH-1 • INDICATES APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING (PROJECT NO . FC04442-115 , DA TED APRIL 29, 2008). INDICATES APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING (PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 , DATED JUNE 12, 2008). (1 .0) INDICATES MEASURED DEPTH TO GROUND WATER (JUNE 17, 2008). 4990 -INDICATES ESTIMATED ELEVATION OF GROUND WATER SURFACE. NOTE: GROUND WATER WM NOT MEASURED IN TH-3 . Estimated Elevation of Ground Water Surface FIGURE3 APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1• = 200' 0 100' 200' LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL IT PROJECT NO. FC044-42 .001-1251135 T LEGEND: -1 APPROXIMATE DEPTH OF CUT. +1 APPROXIMATE DEPTH OF FILL. Estimated Depths of Cut and Fill FIGURE4 APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1"= 100' o 50' 100' I ffij ~111111'~ t+Ott+tH-H#D t+Ott+tH-H#D LLJlllll::::::v LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC MARKET PLACE NORlll COLLEGE NO FC04442 001 -1 25 / 135 CTL I T PROJECT · • i • TH-20 • TH-21 e TH-2 T SURCHARGE AREA Preliminary surcharge Plan FIGURES APPENDIX A SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS t:i w u. ' 5000 4990 4980 4970 TH-1 El. 4978 7/12 50/10 50/2 ~ 4960 ~ ...J w 50/2 50/2 4950 4940 4930 4920 LOVELAND COMMERCIAL. LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE TH-2 El . 4975 ~ 'Sl. CTL IT PROJECT NO. FC0444L001-1251135 9/12 2/12 26/12 50/3 TH-3 El. 4977 (ESTIMATED) 17/12 8/12 'Sl. 39/12 TH-4 El. 4975 6/12 8/12 50/3 50/3 50/2 50/2 50/1 TH-6 El. 4984 9/12 ~ 6/12 '¥- 50/11 50/1 50/2 5000 4990 4980 4970 ljj w u. . 4960 z 0 ~ w ...J w 4950 4940 4930 4920 SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE A-1 ~ I::' ... b (!) z ! u & en (!) 0 ..J ~ "' ~ 8 I u u. a: w E ...I z 0 j:: ~ w ...I w >a, "' (!) 0 ...I I-w w LL ' z 0 j:: ~ w ..J w 5000 4990 4980 4970 4960 4950 4940 4930 4920 TH-7 El. 4980 y 2/12 'SJ_ son 50/1 50/2 50/0 50/2 50/2 LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE TH-8 El . 4987 y_ 26/12 50/3 'SJ_ 50/2 50/0 CTL IT PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-1251135 TH-9 El. 4989 y 5/.. 6112 6112 30/12 5or, 50/3 TH-10 El. 4989 y 'SJ_ 5/12 2/12 18/12 50/9 TH-11 El. 4975 6112 4/12 4/12 50/8 5000 4990 4980 4970 4960 4950 4940 4930 4920 1-w w LL ' z 0 ~ ..J w SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE A-2 ... Cl. (!) <Ii (!) 0 ..J < ~ 0 "' N ~ g I ... a: w ~ -r z 0 ~ w ~ Cl) (!) g I-w w u. ' z 0 i= ~ w ...I w 5000 4990 4980 4970 4960 4950 4940 4930 4920 TH-12 El. 4975 'Sj_ 5/12 20/12 50/2 50/1 LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE TH-13 El. 4977 CTL IT PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-1251135 19/12 TH-14 El. 4975 17/125j_ y_ 14/12 18/12 TH-15 El. 4975 TH-16 El. 4975 4/12 TH-17 El. 4981 5000 4990 4980 8/12 2/12 12112il 25/12 4/12 4970 10/12 28/12 5012 50/0 18/12 3/12 2/12 I-w w u. ' 25/12 42/12 4960 z 0 j:: ~ w ...J 50/2 w 50/1 4950 4940 4930 4920 SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE A-3 ., L !) en (!) 0 J C ) N ij j u. .... '< ~ z u (!) w ..J -c > > z ) ~ ~ .J u D ,, I!) 0 ..J tii w ~ ' z 0 ~ w ..J w 5000 4990 4980 4970 4960 4950 4940 4930 4920 4910 TH-18 El. 4979 2/12 4/12 16/12 50/5 LOVEI.ANO COMMERCIAL. LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL IT PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 TH-19 El. 4975 'Sly 2/12 21/12 50/9 50/0 TH-20 El. 4979 . 'Sly_ . . . . ·-. 4/12 50/5 50/1 50/0 TH-21 El. 4979 y 'Sl. 2/12 50/5 50/0 50/0 50/1 50/0 TH-22 . El. 4979 6/12 'Sly . 50/12 son 50/4 .sz. TH-23 El. 4980 5/12 3/12 -y_ 42/12 45/12 50/1 5000 499 498 497 496 495 494 493 492 4910 I-w w ~ ' z 0 ~ ~ w ..J UJ LEGEND: ~ FILL, SANO, CLAYEY TO CLAY, SANDY, MOIST TO WET, LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MEDIUM ~ STIFF, BROWN, BLACK, RUST I Fill., POSSIBLE BEET SPOILS, MOIST TO~. WHITE TO GRAY [71 CLAY, SANDY, SIL TY TO SILT, SANDY, MOIST TO WET, VERY SOFT TO STIFF, BROWN TO l.1 DARK BROWN, GRAY, RUST, OLNE (CL, CH, ML) [-'?-] SAND, CLAYEY WITH OCCASIONAL GRAVELS, MOIST TO WET, LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, [ti BROWN TO DARK BROWN, RUST, RED (SC) r.:.'J SAND, GRAVB.LY, IMTH COBBLES, ~. VERYLOOSE TO VERY DENSE, RED, BROlM< (SP) ~ GRAVEL, SANDY TO SAND, VERY GRAVELLY WITH OCCASIONAL COBBLES, WET, VERY ~OENSE,RED(GC,SC) . ~ WEATHERED SANDSTONE ANO CLAYSTONE, MOIST TO WET, FIRM TO MEDIUM DENSE, r.tJ BROWN TO DARK BROWN, GRAY TO BLACK, OLIVE SANDSTONE, MOIST TO WET, MEDIUM HARD TO VERY HARD, GRAY, OLIVE , TAN ~ CLAYSTONE, SANDY, MOIST TO WET, MEDIUM HARD TO VERY HARD, RUST, BROWN TO .. DARK BROWN, GRAY TO BLACK DRIVE SAMPLE . THE SYMBOL 6/12 INOICATES 6 BLOWS OF A 140-POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE A 2 .5-INCH O .D. SAMPLER 12 INCHES . DRIVE SAMPLE. THE SYMBOL 6/12 INDICATES 6 BLOWS OF A 140-POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE A 2.0-INCH O.D. SAMPLER 12 INCHES . BULK SAMPLE FROM AUGER CUTTINGS. 'Sl. WATER LEVEL MEASURED AT TIME OF DRILLING . ,Y WATER LEVEL MEASURED SEVERAL DAYS AFTER DRILLING . T PRACTICAL DRILL REFUSAL . NOTES: 1. THE BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON APRIL 29, JUNE 12, AND JULY 22, 2008 USING 4-INCH DIAMETER CONTINUOUS-FLIGHT AUGERS AND A TRUCK-MOUNTED DRILL RIG . 2 . APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS WERE PROVIDED BY KING SURVEYORS . 3. THESE LOGS ARE SUBJECT TO THE EXPLANATIONS, LIMITATIONS ANO CONCLUSIONS IN THIS REPORT. SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE A-4 ~ 8 .., < < 0 ., ~ I L) IL a: w § z 0 ~ ili .., w t § Iii w u.. ' 4985 4980 4975 4970 4965 4960 4955 4950 4945 - - LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04«2.001 -125/135 TH-21 El. 4979 - •,: -~: /;_~~~:~_ - BUIL DING ENVELOPE TOS = 4979 .5' - 2/12 ••.. · •• • '• - :· ·:.·· '.~·::. •. :.-. ··<--:.:i·_.: .. ··:.:-> :·~_-.. ·· .. ·.:. · .. :--~-BOE= 4972.7' _ .... :.· ·. ·:•. TOS = ANTICIPATED TOP OF SLAB ELEVATION BOE = ANTICIPATED BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION ELEVATION NOTE: ELEVATIONS BASED ON SURVEY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTH ERS. SOIL BOUNDARIES BETWEEN BORINGS ARE BASED ON LIMITED INFORMATI ON AVAILABLE AND OUR EXPERIENCE. ACTUAL BOUNDARIES BETWEEN SOILS MAY DIFFER. - ---.-.·· ~ 5' 2 .5' O' TH-14 El. 4975 - O' TH-2 El. 4975 9/12 2/12 26/12 50/3 Cross-Section B -B' 25' 50' FIGUREA-5 4985 4980 4975 4970 li:i w u.. I 4965 ~ ~ iii ..J w 4960 4955 4950 4945 Iii w u.. . ~ ~ ili ...I w 4985 4980 4975 4970 4965 4960 TH-20 El . 4978.5 BU ILD ING ENVELOPE TOS = 4979.5' -- ~:· ·.....__,_ TH-4 El. 4975 -- TH-11 El. 4975 4985 4980 4975 6/12 4/12 4970 4/12 4965 50/8 4960 4955 4955 TOS = ANTICIPATED TOP OF SLAB ELEVATION BOE = ANTICIPATED BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION ELEVATION 4950 4950 NOTE: ELEVATIONS BASED ON SURVEY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS. 4945 4940 LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL IT PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 SOIL BOUNDARIES BETWEEN BORINGS ARE BASED ON LIMITED INFORMATION AVAILABLE AND OUR EXPERIENCE . ACTUAL BOUNDARIES BETWEEN SOILS MAY DIFFER. 5' 2.5' O' O' Cross-Section A-A' 25' 50' 4945 4940 FIGUREA-6 m ' ~ ~ ili ...I w APPENDIX B RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING ' r ' 3-------------------------------------- EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT 2 -_________ -,_ ---_ "_" _ .... _________ ... ____ , ___ ~ __ .PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING Z 0 0 in ~ Q. -1 >< w "#- z -2 0 ffl a: -3 Q. :E 0 (.) I 1 , I I I t I I I ' ' ' I • I I , I -.!. -.L -L ..!. _,_,_ -- --- -.!.. ---_,_ -_:_ -.1. -.L --.L ~ ' ' ' I 1 • t • < • 1 l ' ' I 1 -- - -- -~ - - - ----._ -..,. --,. -i-"'1 -1-;-- --- - -➔ --- -- --r----"T -r--, --1----- ----- --- - - - -._ ----~ ~ -4--------------------------------------0 .1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -KSF Sample of From CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT= MOISTURE CONTENT= 93 PCF TH-2 AT 4 FEET 29.6 % 3-------------------------------------- EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT 2 ----------------~ ---.. 0 _,_,_ ------~ ----·---,--~. PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING ' 1 ______ J _______ ~ ___ i_L J _________ i---~-----L -L--LJ ________ L ___ J __ ~--L-~J -Li I I ' I I I z 0 0 ------:..._ in z C Q. I • I I l 1 , I , ! I ' I 1 t I ' I -, --< >< -1 w "#- z 0 -2 in u, w a: Q. -3 2 0 (.) ' ----------~-----r-r----~-------r------,--r -r,-r T - -- - -- -- - -_,_ --I-- - - --1-...: _,_,_ --- ---- - - - - - - - --~ -"--- -..J -1 -- ---- -:... - ---- -....1 - -\... -1-_; -~ - -__________ 1 _________ '-• -•-_______ t ____ I ___________ I ____________ , __ I ____ •-___ _ ' ' -4--------------------------------------0 .1 APPLIED PRESSURE· KSF Sample of From CLAYSTONE TH-6 AT 14 FEET LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTI. I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 1 .0 10 DRY UNIT WEIGHT= MOISTURE CONTENT= 100 114 PCF 17.2 o/o Swell Consolidation Test Results FIGURE B-1 3------------------------------------ 2 ------..J - ---•-- - - -.l - - -I-..J -1-L ---- --..:. ----1---:_ -~ ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 1 -- -- --~ -- - -;- - --_ -j_ -~ -~ -. -:-•--- - - --~ - -- - -- -,- -, -+ :-'. -,-•--------;--------•--' ---,-I -, Z 0 0 en z C a. -1 ~ Z -2 0 in u, w a: -3 a. :I 0 0 ~-i-L_LJ~--------~---~-----•------ ' ' ' •---~: I I ------I ----I-------t -:---I • ----"'i ----,---,----; -7 -,----,---------------,----:-----. --- - --.... - ---•-- -..-- - ---, -r--1 -1----- ---- - -- ----1--~ -• -,-~ - ---- - - -- - -- -- - - -- -r - --•- --, -4------------------------------------0 .1 1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE· KSF Sample of From WEATHERED SANDSTONE TH-8 AT 4 FEET 10 DRY UNIT WEIGHT= MOISTURE CONTENT= 100 100 PCF 16.7 % 3------------------------------------ EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT 2 ------~ -------~ -~ ---._ ~ --------------•-------PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 1 ______ J ____ ~--L-~-L-~~~-~--------------·--~-~ -L~--------L ---~----------_ z 0 0 in ~ Q. >< -1 w -,/. z 0 -2 m w a: a. -3 ~ 0 I t 1 I t t ' • I I I l I ' I ' ---.-------------------- ----------·--------------·--· -~--~- ' ' ' ' ' -------------------------------------------------------------' ' I I I I -4------------------------------------0 .1 APPLIED PRESSURE· KSF Sample of From CLAY, SANDY (CL) TH-11 AT 2 FEET LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET Pl.ACE CTt. IT PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 -125/135 1.0 10 DRY UNIT WEIGHT= MOISTURE CONTENT= 100 95 PCF 28 .9 o/o Swell Consolidation Test Results FIGURE B-2 z 0 en z C D. >< w '#- z 0 fg w a: D. :I 0 CJ 1------------------------------------------I I • 1 I t 1 I I I I ' 6 _______ 1 ____ .:..--~--·--'--'-!.....J.~-------J.----·-· 5 4 3 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING t I I I I l I \ --' ! ' ! , • I ' -t ------• -,--I -------,----: --➔--,----·-,---.------------1 ----..;----,.--1-;-r -------1----~-----_,._..,._1---t _______ , ____ I _______ , __ 1 __ , 1 _______ , ________ ,_ ,_, _l _• t _______ , _______ , ____ ,_, __ I I • 1 I I • • • 2 -------, ------- -----r--, -r , --____ -___ -.l. --...! ----'---L .J -----__ ~ ----•---L -...! -.2 -i. --L L ___ -___ ,_ ---J. -__ , _ -L _ :,_ _,_.:. _: ' 0 ' ---------------~-~, -----------------,---.---. ----------.-----, --- -1 -- --- --t ----.1.. ---1 -__ -1--' -~ .... _. ___________ -·-__ 1-___ ....; _ J,. -· _ L-~ ______ -·-___ ~ __ _. ____ ~ -·-_ ~ -2 --------------: -----------------------------: -I -' -I ; -------:----I --'. ----: --: • -3 -4 - - - --- -' -- - -l. - -..! - - - -,_ - -!.. --· ------- - --- -' -- - -------_, -------- - - --- -l. -- ---~ --_ 1 -.:.. ...! -5 - - - --- -, -- - --- ------ ,--. ----; -i -- - ----T -- ---- -r -7 -7 -r -, -r r -------. ----~ --7 --r -, ---7 -6 ______ -· ____ :,. _______ 1-__ :... _ ...J ____ -_ ----_____ L -~ _ .J _ -_1 _ L .;.. _______ 1 _______ ..J __ L. _ L _t __ ..J -7 , I I I -' l t • I ' • r ' , I -&1----------------------------------------.. 0 .1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -KSF Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) DRY UNIT WEIGHT2 MOISTURE CONTENT::: 111 PCF From TH-13 AT 2 FEET LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 ----- 6.7 % ----- Swell Consolidation Test Results FIGURE B-3 3-------------------------------------- 2 -- ----...J ----,_ - -t... -..! -..! -:_ ..J _:_ L. -- -- - -~ ----- - -'---NO MOVEMENT DUE TO WETTING 1 I : , I , I 1 : ' I I ' I I I I I o , I I I I I, I I 1 • ' ! • t ! ! ' --- - - --1 -- - -,- - --- -- - -... ---;-- - - - - -.., - ---,---I--... -+ -~ - --- - -- -- - + - ---:---1-- - ---,--...; -4---------------------------------------0 .1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -KSF Sample of From WEATHERED SANDSTONE DRY UNIT WEIGHT= MOISTURE CONTENT= 102 PCF TH-13 AT 14 FEET 21.7 % 3-------------------------------------- EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT 2 --------------... -4 ---~ -_,_._ ----------_,_ -----• PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING I 1 ______ .J ____ •---. -• ___ • ._1 _, ________ .., ___ ·-------- z 0 o 0 z c( 0.. >< -1 w '#- z 0 -2 ~ a: I -3 0 0 I I I I I l , • , I I I ! I ' I I • I I ' ! ! - ___________ , _______ I ____ 1 _! ________________________________ • _ _ _ I _ _ I ________ _ I ' -4--------------------------------------0 .1 APPUEDPRESSURE-KSF Sample of From FILL, BEET SPOILS TH-16AT2 FEET LOVELAND COMMEROAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE en IT PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 1.0 10 DRY UN IT WEIGHT= MOISTURE CONTENT= 100 97 PCF 22.5 % Swell Consolidation Test Results FIGURE 8-4 z 0 in ~ Q. >< w ~ z 0 u5 ti) w a: Q. :I 0 (..) 1------------------------------------------ 6 -------·----' -----,_ -'-_, -' ' ' -------• ---_,_ . 5 ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING , I I \ I I I I I ! , I I -------,----, -,----, -,-1 '1 -----' ,-I • I I I I -t t ! I I 4 - ------t -- --.... --... --1--1--4 -~ ""t .... - - - ----.. - - --1-- -.... -~ --- --1 -.... ~ - - -- -- -·- - - -... ---: - -.. -"'" -1- -- 3 ! I I I l , J I I I _ I _ I _ , _, _ I t _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I _ _ , __ ! _ t _ L _ 1 I I I ' I ' ' I I I ' I I l I _______ I ____ !.. __ ~ ____ '-_1 _ L ...1 ..J _______ ..1. _ _ _ , ___ 1-_ ~ _ ~ _ J.. _1 _ L L _______ , ____ J. ___ , __ '-_ L _, __ ...J -1 -------1----,._ --..J ------I -:.. -l -' -------..;. -------L.. -..l -..J -!.. -1 -l.-!.. -------t ----.;.. ---l --~ -L--1-J. ~ -2 I , I , 1 J , , I I , I L l I -------, ----I ----------• ' --------' ----• --I t I ! 1 ! I I --I I -3 -------·- - - - --- ---1--i--: -r--t -t - -----------,-- -,--_. -'"1 -,-. --r T"" - ---- --i -- --'T ---, --r--r--,---, -4 _______ t _______ • ____ , __ r __ • ________ I ____ 1 ___ ' _ t ______ , I ___________ I __ , __ • ___ , __ _ I I I I -5 -------, ----T --'1 ----,-7 -r 1 7 -------T -------I -7 -, -T" -. -I t -----------"7 --7 --r -r -1-T 7 -6 ___ --__ t ____ .!.. __ -----L-_ -L ..! ..J -------..1. ---_,_ --I--.J -...: ----I---------•-------...; --L--L-_1_ -..: -7 1 + I I I -------,----I --> -------;-I --------------------I -7" -, -1---------,----I ---1 ----I -,-I 1 -a'-------------------------------------.. 0 .1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE -KSF Sample of SANDSTONE DRY UNIT WEIGHT= MOISTURE CONTENT= 106 PCF From TH-21 AT 9 FEET LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 -----19.5 % Swell Consolidation Test Results FIGURE 8-5 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 80 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. '200 "100 •50 •40 •30 ·1& ·10 ·e •4 3/8" 314• lli" 3• 5"6" a· 100 9() 80 ~ 70 loo ffi 50 ~ w n. 40 30 20 10 0 .001 0.002 .005 .0011 .019 .037 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) - .074 .149 .297 .590 0.42 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.76 9.52 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SANDS FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE ---I- 19. 1 36. 1 GRAVEL 0 10 20 30 0 •40 I ~ so w 80 ~ 70 80 90 100 76.2 127 200 152 COARSE COBBLES Sample of SAND, GRAVELLY, CLAYEY (SC) GRAVEL 42 % SAND 44% % % From TH -1 AT 9 FEET SILT & CLAY 14 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN . 15 MIN. 80 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. ·200 ·100 ·so •40 •30 ·1s ·10 ·a •4 3/8' 3/4' 1W 3' 5"6" a· 100 90 80 30 20 10 0 .001 ·- 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) -----r- .149 .m .5110 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.78 0.42 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SANOS FINE MEDIUM COARSE 9.52 19.1 38.1 GRAVEL FINE COARSE 0 10 20 70 80 9() 100 76.2 127 200 152 COBSLES Sample of FILL, BEET SPOILS, AND SAND, CLAYEY (SC) GRAVEL 1 % SAND 51 % % % From TH -4 AT 0-4 FEET LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE PROJECT NO . FC04442.001-125/135 SILT & CLAY 48 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX Gradation Test Results FIGURE B-6 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. BO MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. "200 '100 '50 '40 •30 '16 ·10 •9 •4 318" 314• 1\i' 3• s•5• 8' 100 90 BO 30 20 10 0 .001 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) Sample of SAND, CLAYEY (SC) From TH -11 AT 0-4 FEET 25 HR. 7 HR. 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 100 90 80 30 20 10 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS TIME READINGS BO MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. 0 -l--1 10 20 0 30 ~ 40 ~ ~ 50 w 0 ffi BO o.. ----+---,-70 BO 90 --1 -.--~-i---- .014 .149 .m .590 1.19 2.0 2.31 4.76 9.52 19.1 36.1 100 76.2 127 200 152 0.42 DIMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS ·200 SANDS GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE COBBLES GRAVEL 4 % SAND SILT & CLAY 45 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX SIEVE ANALYSIS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 51 % % % ·100 ·so •40 •30 °16 ·10 '8 •4 3/8" 314• 1 ½" 3• s·e· 8" 0 10 ,_,.._ 20 ·-f--- 30 0 ~ 40 ~ IC I- 50 z w BO ffi 0.. 70 ,.._ 80 90 100 0 .001 0.002 .005 .0011 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 .590 1.19 2.0 2.31 4.78 9.52 19.1 36.1 78.2 127 200 CLAY (PlASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) Sample of SAND, CLAYEY (SC) From TH -13 AT 0-4 FEET LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE PROJECT NO. FC04442.001-125/135 0.42 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SANOS MEDIUM GRAVEL COARSE FINE COARSE COB81..ES GRAVEL 14 % SAND SILT & CLAY 49 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX Gradation Test Results 37 % % % FIGURE 8-7 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25HR. 7 HR . TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 80 MIN. 19 MIN. 41-.tN. 1 MIN. •200 •1 00 •50 •40 •30 ·1s ·10 ·s •4 319• 314• 1W 3' 5•5• 8" 100 90 30 20 10 0 .001 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 ClAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON-PLASTIC) Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) From TH -13 AT 4 FEET HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7HR. 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 100 TIME READINGS 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. 90 80 j 70 !so !z ~50 >- ffi a. 40 30 20 10 0 .001 --f- >---· 0.002 .005 .0011 .019 .037 ClAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (OON-PLASTIC) Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) From TH -14 AT 9 FEET LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE PROJECT NO. FC04442.001·125/135 0 -J-l..-.....l 10 20 30 I 40 Ill a: 50 'z ~ 80 ~ 70 80 -t ----+--:. .074 .149 .297 .590 1.19 2.0 2 .31 4.78 9.52 19.1 36.1 90 100 76.2 127 200 152 0.42 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS ·200 SANDS GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE COB8LES GRAVEL 7 % SAND SILT & CLAY 71 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX SIEVE ANALYSIS U.S. STANOARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS ·100 ·so •40 •30 ·1s ·10 ·a •4 318" 314" 1W 3• 22 % % % 5•s· s· 0 10 20 30 ~ z 40 ~ a: 50 !z Ill u a: 80 ~ 70 60 .074 .1 49 .297 .590 1.19 2.0 2.31 4 .78 9.52 19.1 38.1 90 100 76.2 127 200 152 0.42 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SANOS FINE MEDIUM GRAVEL COARSE FINE COARSE COB8LES GRAVEL O % SAND 8 % ----------SILT & CLAY 92 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % ---------- Gradation Test Results FIGURE B-8 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25HR. 7HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. "200 •100 •50 •40 '30 ·1s ·10 ·a '4 3/8" 3/4' 1½" 3• 5'&' a· 100 90 80 30 20 10 0 ,0 10 20 70 80 .001 0 .002 .005 .0011 .019 .037 .074 .1 ◄9 .2'¥7 .SllO 1 .19 2 .02.311 4.76 9.52 19.1 36.1 ,90 100 78.2 127 200 152 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON·PLASTIC) Sample of FILL, BEET SPOILS From TH -16 AT 0-4 FEET HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS 0.42 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SANOS GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE COBBLES GRAVEL 3 % SAND SILT & CLAY 52 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX 45% % % --------- SIEVE ANALYSIS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 80 MIN. 19 MIN . 4 MIN. 1 MIN. •200 •100 ·so •40 ·ao '16 '10 '8 •4 311• 3/4' 1½' 3' 5•5• a· 0 100 90 30 20 10 0 .001 0.002 .005 .0011 .019 .037 .074 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NQM.PLASTIC) .149 .m .s110 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.7e 0.42 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SANDS FINE MEDIUM COARSE 9.52 19.1 38.1 GRAVEL FINE COARSE 10 20 30 0 !ii 40 ~ 50 ~ g 80 Cl. 70 80 110 100 76.2 127 200 152 COB8LES Sample of SAND, GRAVELLY, CLAYEY (SC) GRAVEL 36 % SAND 55 % % % From TH -17 AT 9 FEET LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE PROJECT NO. FC04442.001 • 125/135 -----SILT & CLAY 9 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX --------- Gradation Test Results FIGURE B-9 140 135 130 125 120 u. (.) D. > ... en 115 z w C > a: C 110 105 100 95 l -~--~-~---~----~--------------'. :::::'.::::: -: '.-": --r -:-'.--:--1--~-:-':-" ---:- TH4 -' -' ----,-- -. -' -' -_,_ - ' ' ' ---------- . I I ' I -I ---I --I -- - -' • CURVE r -; -, --i ----;--: --; --1 - ---r -, MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY 112.5 PCF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT 14.5 % I _ I __ I ____ I _ I _ i __ , ____ ! _ I _ I _ I ____ '-_ I _ t _ l __________ • _ I I I • l I t , I t I I ' 1 • I • \ I I I I o -, -, --, --i ----:--'7 ..., --, ----r -":'" --. --, ----r ---..,. --, ----~ -~ -,. --, ----- ----:---, -' I I I I I I 1 I I 1 ~----~-~-~-~----L-L_i_~----L-L_i ________ c _i_~_ I 1 , , I ----------____ 1 _, ____ i ____ i ------------' ------------ 1 _ 1 _ ! ' , I ! t I I I ' I -r-~-,-~--(-r-,-~-- ZERO AIR VOIDS SPECIFIC GRAVITY= 2.7 - -. - -- - --1 ---- I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I _ I ____ 1 __ , __ I ___ I ______ : _ I _ I ______ 1 ___ I _ I _ -I -________ _ ' ' ' ' -' -I - -- -,- - -~ -.:. ------_ I _ 1 ______ ! __ I ___ : -_, ____ I _ I _ 1 __ , ____ ,-_ 1 _ 1 _ : _ -1 -_______ 1 _ I -:-i-..,--,--1 -~-,-,--,--i--, -~ -... -....: --1----... -... -_. --t --1--- I t ' I , I ---, ------I -I -"1' -l ----I -~ -~ -7 --1--I--i'" -I -7 - ~ -....: --! - - - -... -~ -'"' --l --------.J. -....: -_I_ -.... -~ ---_. - -------' _.1,._..:_...J--(---L-.l.--'----: I ' ----------' ' . I -- ---- ----1----I , , . ' ' ' I I • , -------------------------------' I ! I • ! ' 0 -r 1-7--,-- ---..; ----1---.;.. -~ ----·------ --... - -- ---... -"'" -- _.1._.! _ _i __ 1 __ ----------,_ , -• , ! I , , • , , : : ' ------, -• -, ----1----, -• -, - ___ _! __ • __ , ___ , _, _ 1 _____ L_.l _,..! __ • ____ ~------'------------__ 1 ____ ..1 __ , ____ , __ :_. ___ ..J _ I I : : : : : =: :.: J : : : : : ~::: J -~ -~ -~ -_: ----~ ---~ -_· -_I _ -: ---~ -~ ----~ -~::::::: :~::::::: I I I I I I ----------~-L-~_J __ . __ i _L ___ J_~----L --->-~--~-L -L-~-~----L-~-i-~----~---i_J_ • I I . I ' -' ------' --1 -' -• ----' ----' -' -' ------: -----' --;------' ------' -I - - - --- ------ --- 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 MOISTURE CONTENT·% Unified Soil Clalllflcatton Syatem(USCS) Fill, Beet Spoils, and Sand, Clayey LIQUID LIMIT AASHTO Soll Claaaiflcatlon _A_-6'-(.._4.._) _________ _ PLAS11CITY INDEX LocaHon Boring TH 4 @ 0' to 4' Willox Commons CompacHon Test Procedure LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE PROJECT NO. FC04442 .001-125/135 ASTM D 698-91 METHOD A GRAVEL (USCS) SAND(USCS) SILT AND CLAY Com paction Test Results 34 % 23 % 1 % 51 % 48 % FIGURE B-10 MOISTURE DRY DEPTH CONTENT DENSITY BORING (FEET) (%) (PCF) TH-1 0-1 9.8 TH-1 4 14.8 111 TH-1 9 10.0 TH-2 4 29.6 93 TH-2 9 45.3 75 TH-2 14 20.4 105 TH-4 0-4 10.9 TH-4 4 24.8 101 TH-4 9 47.2 80 TH-4 24 24.9 TH-6 4 12.4 TH-6 9 15.4 120 TH-6 14 17.2 114 TH-7 9 19.2 107 TH-8 4 16.7 100 TH-8 9 18.5 TH-9 9 18.4 113 TH-10 4 TH-10 14 22.1 103 TH-11 0-4 TH-11 2 28.9 95 TH-11 4 TH-11 14 19.4 108 TH-12 4 TH-13 0-4 6.9 TH-13 2 6.7 111 TH-13 4 12.7 99 TH-13 14 21.7 102 TH-14 9 42.5 82 TH-15 4 23.7 100 "NEGATIVE VALUE INDICATES COMPRESSION. LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTLIT PROJECT NO. FC04442.00M25/135 TABLE B-1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING ATTERBERG LIMITS SWELL TEST RESULTS* PASSING LIQUID PLASTICITY APPLIED NO . 200 SOLUBLE LIMIT INDEX SWELL* PRESSURE SIEVE SULFATES (%) (%) (%) (PSF) (%) (%) DESCRIPTION 18 FILL, BEET SPOILS 35 SAND, CLAYEY (SC) 14 SAND,GRAVELLY,CLAYEY(SC) 0.2 1,000 CLAY, SANDY (CL) 72 56 68 CLAY(CH) 9 SAND (SP) 34 23 48 FILL, BEET SPOILS, AND SAND, CLAYEY (SC) 1.400 SAND, CLAVEY (SC) NL NP 60 SILT, SANDY (ML) 24 SANDSTONE 1.300 SAND, CLAVEY (SC) 32 SAND, CLAVEY (SC) 0.8 1,000 CLAYSTONE 0.011 SANDSTONE -0.1 1,000 WEATHERED SANDSTONE 13 SANDSTONE 43 SAND, CLAYEY (SC) NL NP FILL, SAND, CLAVEY 9 WEATHERED SANDSTONE 44 25 43 SAND, CLAYEY (SC) 0.2 1,000 CLAY, SANDY (CL) 0.600 CLAY, SANDY (CL) 12 SANDSTONE 0.800 CLAY, SANDY (CL) 26 22 49 SAND, CLAYEY (SC) 3.1 1,000 CLAY, SANDY (CL) 71 CLAY, SANDY (CL) 0.0 1,000 WEATHERED SANDSTONE 92 CLAY, SANDY (CL) 11 SAND (SP) Page 1 of 2 MOISTURE DRY DEPTH CONTENT DENSITY BORING (FEET) (%) (PCF) TH-16 Q-4 15.3 TH-16 2 22.5 97 TH-17 2 12.0 110 TH-17 9 8 .6 TH-18 4 19 .1 TH-18 9 23.7 100 TH-19 9 TH-20 9 19.0 107 TH-21 9 19.5 106 • NEGATIVE VALUE INDICATES COMPRESSION . LOVELAND COMMERCIAL, LLC NORTH COLLEGE MARKET PLACE CTL jT PROJECT NO. FC04442.00 1-125/135 TABLE B-1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING ATTERBERG LIMITS SWELL TEST RESULTS* PASSING LIQUID PLASTICITY APPLIED NO. 200 SOLUBLE LIMIT INDEX SWELL* PRESSURE SIEVE SULFATES (%) (%) (%) (PSF) (%) (%) DESCRIPTION 31 16 52 0.470 FILL, BEET SPOILS 0.7 1,000 FILL, BEET SPOILS SAND, CLAYEY (SC) 9 SAND, GRAVELLY (SP) SAND (SP) 12 WEATHERED SANDSTONE 0.020 SANDSTONE 8 0 .000 SANDSTONE -0.1 1,000 SANDSTONE Page 2 of 2 APPENDIX C PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS Experience has shown that construction methods can have a significant effect on the life and serviceability of a pavement system. We recommend the proposed pavement be constructed in the following manner: The subgrade should be stripped of organic matter, scarified, moisture treated, and compacted. Soils should be moisture treated to optimum to 2 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D 698 , AASHTO T 99). Utility trenches and all subsequently placed fill should be properly compacted and tested prior to paving. As a minimum, fill should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum standard Proctor dry density. After final subgrade elevation has been reached and the subgrade compacted, the area should be proof-rolled with a heavy pneumatic-tired vehicle (i.e. a loaded ten-wheel dump truck). Subgrade that is pumping or deforming excessively should be scarified , moisture conditioned and compacted. If areas of soft or wet subgrade are encountered, the material should be sub excavated and replaced with properly compacted structural backfill. Where extensively soft, yielding subgrade is encountered; we recommend a representative of our office observe the excavation. Aggregate base course should be laid in thin, loose lifts, moisture treated to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum modified Proctor dry density (ASTM D 1557, AASHTO T 180). Asphaltic concrete should be hot plant-mixed material compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum Marshall density. The temperature at laydown time should be near 235 degrees F. The maximum compacted lift should be 3.0 inches and joints should be staggered. The subgrade preparation and the placement and compaction of all pavement material should be observed and tested. Compaction criteria should be met prior to the placement of the next paving lift. The additional requirements of Larimer County and the Colorado Department of Transportation Specifications should apply. C-1 RIGID PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS Rigid pavement sections are not as sensitive to subgrade support characteristics as flexible pavement. Due to the strength of the concrete, wheel loads from traffic are distributed over a large area and the resulting subgrade stresses are relatively low. The critical factors affecting the performance of a rigid pavement are the strength and quality of the concrete, and the uniformity of the subgrade. We recommend subgrade preparation and construction of the rigid pavement section be completed in accordance with the following recommendations: Natural soils should be stripped of organic matter, scarified, moisture treated, and compacted. We recommend the top one-foot of the subgrade be moisture treated to between optimum and 2 percent above optimum moisture content. Soils should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99). Moisture treatment and compaction recommendations also apply where additional fill is necessary. The resulting subgrade should be checked for uniformity and all soft or yielding materials should be replaced prior to paving. Concrete should not be placed on soft, spongy, frozen, or otherwise unsuitable subgrade. The subgrade should be kept moist prior to paving. Curing procedures should protect the concrete against moisture loss, rapid temperature change, freezing, and mechanical injury for at least 3 days after placement. Traffic should not be allowed on the pav~ment for at least on~ week. A white, liquid membrane-curing compound, applied at the rate of 1 gallon per 150 square feet, should be used. Construction joints, including longitudinal joints and transverse joints, should be formed during construction or should be sawed shortly after the concrete has begun to set, but prior to uncontrolled cracking. All -joints should be sealed. Construction control and observation should be carried out during the subgrade preparation and paving procedures. Concrete should be carefully monitored for quality control. The additional requirements of the Colorado Department of Transportation Specifications should apply. The design section is based upon a 20-year Period. Experience in the Fort Collins area indicates virtually no maintenance or overlays are necessary for the design period. To avoid problems associated with scaling and to continue the strength gain, we recommend deicing salts not be used for the first year after placement. C-2 APPENDIX D SAMPLE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS SAMPLE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1. DESCRIPTION This item shall consist of the excavation, transportation, placement, and compaction of materials from locations indicated on the plans, or staked by the Engineer, as necessary to achieve building site elevations. 2. GENERAL The Soils Engineer shall be the Owner's representative. The Soils Engineer shall approve fill materials, method of placement, moisture contents and percent compaction, and shall give written approval of the completed fill. 3. CLEARING JOB SITE The Contractor shall remove all trees, brush, and rubbish before excavation or fill placement is begun. The Contractor shall dispose of the cleared material to provide the Owner with a clean, neat appearing job site. Cleared material shall not be placed in areas to receive fill or where the material will support structures of any kind. 4. SCARIFYING AREA TO BE FILLED All topsoil and vegetable matter shall be removed from the ground surface upon which fill is to be placed. The surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a depth of 8 inches until the surface is free from ruts, hummocks or other uneven features, which would prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. 5. COMPACTING AREA TO BE FILLED After the foundation for the fill has been cleared and scarified, it shall be disked or bladed until it is free from large clods, brought to the proper moisture content and compacted to not less than 95 percent of maximum density as determined in accordance with ASTM D 698. 6. FILL MATERIALS On-site materials classifying as CL, SC, SM, SW, SP, GP, GC, and GM are acceptable. Fill soils shall be free from organic matter, debris, or other deleterious substances, and shall not contain rocks or lumps having a diameter greater than three (3) inches. Fill materials shall be obtained from the existing fill and other approved sources. 7. MOISTURE CONTENT Fill materials shall be moisture treated. Clay soils placed below the building envelope should be moisture-treated to between 1 and 4 percent above optimum moisture content as determined from Standard Proctor compaction tests. Clay soil placed exterior to the building should be moisture treated between optimum and 3 percent above optimum moisture content. Sand soils can be moistened to within 2 percent optimum moisture 0-1 content. Sufficient laboratory compaction tests shall be made to determine the optimum moisture content for the various soils encountered in borrow areas. The Contractor may be required to add moisture to the excavation materials in the borrow area if, in the opinion of the Soils Engineer, it is not possible to obtain uniform moisture content by adding water on the fill surface. The Contractor may be required to rake or disk the fill soils to provide uniform moisture content through the soils. The application of water to embankment materials shall be made with any type of watering equipment approved by the Soils Engineer, which will give the desired results. Water jets from the spreader shall not be directed at the embankment with such force that fill materials are washed out. Should too much water be added to any part of the fill, such that the material is too wet to permit the desired compaction from being obtained, rolling and all work on that section of the fill shall be delayed unit the material has been allowed to dry to the required moisture content. The Contractor will be permitted to rework wet material in an approved manner to hasten its drying. 8. COMPACTION OF FILL AREAS Selected fill material shall be placed and mixed in evenly spread layers. After each fill layer has been placed, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than the specified percentage of maximum density. Fill materials shall be placed such that the thickness of loose material does not exceed 8 inches and the compacted lift thickness does not exceed 6 inches. Compaction , as specified above, shall be obtained by the use of sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other equipment approved by the Engineer. Compaction shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Compaction of each layer shall be cont inuous over the entire area. Compaction equipment shall make sufficient trips to insure that the required density is obtained. 9. COMPACTION OF SLOPES Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction operations shall be continued until slopes are stable, but not too dense for planting, and there is no appreciable amount of loose soil on the slopes. Compaction of slopes may be done progressively in increments of three to five feet (3' to 5') in height or after the fill is brought to its total height. Permanent fill slopes shall not exceed 3:1 (horizontal to vertical). 10. DENSITY TESTS Field density tests shall be made by the Soils Engineer at locations and depths of his choosing. Where sheepsfoot rollers are used, the soil may be disturbed to a depth of several inches. Density tests shall be taken in compacted material below the disturbed surface. When density tests indicate that the density or moisture content of any layer of D-2 fill or portion thereof is below that required, the particular layer or portion shall be reworked until the required density or moisture content has been achieved. 11. COMPLETED PRELIMINARY GRADES All areas, both cut and fill, shall be finished to a level surface and shall meet the following limits of construction: A. Overlot cut or fill areas shall be within plus or minus 2/10 of one foot. 8. Street grading shall be within plus or minus 1/10 of one foot. The civil engineer, or duly authorized representative, shall check all cut and fill areas to observe that the work is in accordance with the above limits. 12. SUPERVISION AND CONSTRUCTION STAKING Observation by the Soils Engineer shall be continuous during the placement of fill and compaction operations so that he can declare that the fill was placed in general conformance with specifications. All site visits necessary to test the placement of fill and observe compaction operations will be at the expense of the Owner. All construction staking will be provided by the Civil Engineer or his duly authorized representative. Initial and final grading staking shall be ~t the expense of the owner. The replacement of grade stakes through construction shalfbe at the expense of the contractor. 13. SEASONAL LIMITS No fill material shall be placed, spread or rolled while it is frozen, thawing, or during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy precipitation, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of previously placed materials are as specified. 14. NOTICE REGARDING START OF GRADING The contractor shall submit notification to the Soils Engineer and Owner advising them of the start of grading operations at least three (3) days in advance of the starting date. Notification shall also be submitted at least 3 days in advance of any resumption dates when grading operations have been stopped for any reason other than adverse weather conditions. 15. REPORTING OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Density tests made by the Soils Engineer, as specified under "Density Tests" above, shall be submitted progressively to the Owner. Dry density, moisture content, of each test taken and percentage compaction shall be reported for each test taken. 16. DECLARATION REGARDING COMPLETED FILL The Soils Engineer shall provide a written declaration stating that the site was filled with acceptable materials, or was placed in general accordance with the specifications. D-3 January 30, 2009 Loveland Commercial, LLC 1043 Eagle Drive Loveland, Colorado 80537 Attention: Mr. Blaine Rappe ,r CTLITHOMPSON INCORPO ■ATED Subject: Engineering Consultation for King Soopers Building Pad North College Market Place Fort Collins, Colorado CTLIT Project Number: FC04442.001-125/135 CTLIThompson, Inc. has completed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed King Soopers pad site and associated parking areas and access drives (CTLIT Project No. FC04442.001-125/135, dated September 2, 2008). You have recently informed us thatthe building location will be changing slightly with an approximate 12 foot move to the south of the location indicated in our report referenced above. Due to the soft soils at the site, CTLIThompson recommended the structure be constructed on a pad that has been over-excavated and surcharged. Surcharging involves installing a temporary fill over the area of the planned building pad to consolidate the soft soils . We were requested to evaluate the impact on the surcharging with respect to moving the building pad approximately 12 feet to the south. Moving the building to the south will result in an increased area of the building pad that will overlie soft soils. We recommend the surcharge area presented in our report referenced above be extended approximately 12 feet to the south to include the southern portion of the building pad. A revised preliminary surcharging plan is attached as Figure 1. Based on our understanding of the subsurface conditions and calculations, we do not anticipate moving the building pad to the south will significantly impact the amount of consolidation of the underlying soft soils or our estimate of the time required for the consolidation to occur. This letter should be considered in conjunction with our geotechnical report for the site referenced above. All of our recommendations contained in that report are valid and should be considered during the development of the site and construction of the planned improvements. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any questions regarding the information provided in this letter, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, CTLITHOMPSON, INC. ~~- Robin Dornf est, PG Geotechnical Department Manager R.B. "Chip" Leadb Division Manager 351 Linden Street I Suite 140 I Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Telephone : 970-206-9455 Fax: 970-206-9441 OMMERCIAL, LLC CE LOV~'i::-~gl~EGE MAR:tJ:i~~001-125/135 NOR PROJECT NO . CTLIT NEW STORE LAYOUT OLD STORE LAYOUT SURCHARGE AREA FIGURE 1 APPENDIX B Wetland Delineation APPENDIX C Historic Map/Calculations I North College Marketplace HISTORIC SWMM P ARAMETER INPUT Des ign Eng ineer: Design Firm : Project N umber: Date : DESIGN CRITERIA: L. Chalfant A yres Assoc iat e s 32-1322 .00 A ugust 11 , 200 9 Urban S t o rm D ra inage Crite r ia M an ual by Urb a n D ra inage and F lood C ontrol D istrict , J une 2001 City of Fort C olli n s S to rm D rain age Criteri a , Janua ry 1997 BASIN S: % Im p e rv ious valu e s fro m T able RO-3 and C Values o btai n ed from T a b le 3-3 in t he C ity of F o rt Co lli ns Sto rm D ra il for Hydrol o g ic Soil Classifi c atio n C C VALUE C s C ,o C,oo % Impervi ous Paved 0.90 0.90 0.95 100.0% La wns 0.15 0.15 0.25 0.0% Roofs 0.90 0.90 0.95 90.0% Gravel 0.50 0.50 0.50 40.0% *A 1otal A ,otal A paved A1awns A ,ools A gravel COMPOSITE Sub-bas i n Designation (acres) (sq . ft ) (ac res) (acres) (acres ) (ac res) C s C ,o C,oo E1 21.56 939128 .70 0.43 21.13 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.26 E2 0.45 19525.24 O.Q1 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.26 E3 1.68 73205 .06 1.60 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.86 0.92 E4 1.23 53746.43 1.05 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.85 ES 0.83 36284 .94 0 .79 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.86 0.92 E6 0.91 39446 .53 0.36 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.53 E7 49 .08 2138031 .63 22 .og 27.0 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.49 0.57 EB 0.87 37869 .06 0 .35 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.4 5 0.45 0.53 E9 5.54 241447 .81 0 .11 5.43 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.26 E10 4 .07 177177 .60 1.42 2.64 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.50 *Val u es ent e red in to EPA S W MM *Percent Im pe rvio us 2% 2% 95% 85% 95% 40% 45% 40% 2% 35% Overland Over l and Max Chan nelized Flowpat h Overall Flow Widt h 100yr Flow 10yr Flow Length Length Lengt h Lengt h Slope *AIL Notes Drains to ... (cfs} (cfs } (ft} 300(ft} (ft } (ft} •so (ModSWMM} (ft} 1600 300 1300 2900 0.50% 3130 Main drain age to t he southeast wetlands s outheast wetlan d s 53.4 7.4 200 200 0 200 2.50% 98 Offsite to the east southeast wetla nd s 2 .2 0.4 100 100 900 1000 0.51 % 732 Wil ox Avenue existinQ inlets on W ilox 16 .5 7 .8 300 300 75 375 1.14% 179 Existi ng Developme nt exis t inQ inlets o n Wilox 11 .3 4 .9 60 60 150 210 1.91% 605 College Avenue southeast wetl a nd s 8 .3 4 .0 100 100 0 100 1.1 6% 394 Offsite to t he north southeast wetl a n d s 7 .6 2 .5 300 300 2500 2800 1.00% 7127 Off Site area no rth of L&W Ex sitina sto rm sewer 330.4 116.4 135 135 0 135 0.50% 281 Offsite t o t he North nort h east wetlands 6 .1 2.0 300 300 530 830 0.44% 805 northeast wetlands northeast wetla nds 13 .2 1.8 150 150 530 680 1.40% 1181 Exist in g Willo x Inlet Inlet in Willox and Brist lecon e 30 .0 9.3 AYRES ASS OC IATeS EPASWMM : 100-year OUTPUT (existing) EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL -VERSION 5 .0 (Build 5.0.013) Analysis Options **************** Flow Units . . . . . . . . . CFS Infiltration Method HORTON Starting Date . . . . . . OCT-13-2008 00:00 :00 Ending Date .............. OCT-13-2008 12:00:00 Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0.0 Report Time Step ......... 00 :01:00 Wet Time Step ............ 00:05:00 Dry Time Step ............ 01 :0 0 :00 Runoff Quantity Continuity ************************** Total Precipitation .... . Evaporation Loss ........ . Infiltration Loss .. . Surface Runoff ... . Final Surface Storage Continuity Error (%) Flow Routing Continuity Dry Weather Inflow Wet Weather Inflow Groundwater Inflow RDII Inflow ............. . External Inflow ......... . External Outflow Internal Outflow ........ . Evap oration Loss ........ . Initial Stored Volume ... . Final Stored Volume Continuity Error (%) Subcatchment Runoff Summary Volume acre-feet 32 .949 0.000 10.449 22. 3 54 0.235 -0.271 Volume acre-feet 0 . 000 22.363 0.000 0 .000 0 . 000 22.363 0. 000 0 .000 0.000 0. 000 0. 000 Depth inches 4.586 0.000 1. 454 3 .111 0.033 Volume Mgallons 0.000 7.287 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 7.287 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Total Total Total Total Total Peak Runoff Precip Runon Evap Infil Runoff Runoff Runoff Coeff Subcatchment in in in in in Mgal CFS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- El 4.586 0.000 0.000 E2 4.586 0.000 0.000 E3 4 .586 0.000 0.000 E4 4.586 0.000 0.000 ES 4.586 0 .00 0 0.000 E6 4.586 0. 000 0 .000 E7 4.586 0 .0 00 0.000 EB 4.586 0. 000 0 . 000 E9 4.586 0.000 0 .000 ElO 4.586 0.000 0.000 System 4.586 0.000 0 :00 0 Analysis begun on : Mon Mar 09 07:46:17 2009 Analysis ended on: Mon Mar 09 07 :46:17 2009 Total elapsed time: < 1 sec 2.268 2.322 1. 359 53.373 0.506 1.951 2.646 0.032 2.249 0. 577 0.091 4 .420 0.202 16.535 0.964 0.282 4.241 0.142 11.335 0.925 0.090 4 .414 0 .099 8. 303 0.962 1 .131 3.432 0 .085 7.597 0.748 1.124 3.432 4.574 330 .360 0.748 1.187 3.374 0.080 6.140 0.736 2.293 2.297 0 .346 13 .162 0.501 1. 258 3.308 0.366 29.988 0.721 1. 454 3 .111 7.284 475.463 0.678 EPASWMM: 10-year OUTPUT (existing) EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL -VERSION 5.0 (Build 5.0.013) Analysis Opt.ions Flow Units . . . . . . . CFS Infiltration Method ...... HORTON St.art.ing Dat.e ........... . Ending Dat.e ............. . Antecedent Dry Days .... . Report. Time Step ........ . Wet. Time Step ........... . Dry Time Step .......... . Runoff Quantity Continuity ************************** Tot.al Precipitation ..... . Evaporation Loss ........ . Infiltration Loss ... . Surface Runoff .... . Final Surface Storage Continuity Error (\) OCT-13 -2008 00 :00 :00 OCT-13-2008 12:00:00 0.0 00:01:00 00:05:00 01:00 :00 Volume acre-feet 15.514 0. 000 8.828 6 . 4 91 0.235 -0. 265 Depth inches 2.159 0 .000 1.229 0.903 0.033 Flow Routing Continuity Volume acre-feet Volume Mgallons Dry Weather Inflow Wet Weather Inflow ...... . Groundwater Inflow ..... . RDII Inflow ............. . External Inflow ......... . External Ou tflow ........ . Internal Outflow ........ . Evaporation Loss ..... . Initial Stored Volume ... . Final Stored Volume .. . Continuity Error (%) Subcatchment. Runoff Summary 0. 000 6. 4 96 0 .000 0. 000 0. 000 6 . 4 96 0. 000 0.000 0 . 000 0. 000 0 .000 0.000 2 .117 0.000 0.000 0 .000 2 .117 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Total Total Total Total Total Peak Runoff Precip Runon Evap Infil Runoff Runoff Runoff Coeff Subcatchment in in in in in Mgal CFS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- El 2.159 0.000 0.000 E2 2.159 0.000 0.000 E3 2.159 0.000 0.000 E4 2.159 0.000 0.000 ES 2.159 0.000 0.000 E6 2.159 0.000 0.000 E7 2.159 0.000 0.000 EB 2.159 0.000 0.000 E9 2.159 0 .000 0.000 ElO 2.159 0.000 0.000 System 2.159 0 .000 0 .000 Analysis begun on : Mon Mar 09 07:44:51 2009 Analysis ended on: Mon Mar 09 07:44:51 2009 Total elapsed time : < 1 sec 1.858 0 .301 0.176 7.437 0.140 1 .709 0.454 0 .006 0.375 0.210 0.079 1.995 0.091 7 .829 0.924 0 .248 1.837 0.061 4.893 0.851 0.079 1.991 0.045 4.044 0.922 0 .996 1 .134 0 .028 2 .544 0.525 0.977 1 .144 1 .525 116.412 0.530 1.041 1.085 0.026 2.028 0.502 1.866 0 . 293 0 .044 1.818 0 .136 1 .107 1. 025 0 .113 9.299 0 .475 1.229 0.903 2.115 155.126 0.418 APPENDIX D Proposed Map/Calculations North College Ma rketpl ace PROPOS ED SW MM PARAMETER INPUT Design Engineer : Design Firm : Project Number: Date : DE I N RITERIA : L. C halfant Ayres Associates 32-1322 .0 0 August 11 , 2009 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District , June 2001 City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criter ia, January 1997 BA IN : % Impervious values from Table RO-3 and C Values obtained from Table 3-3 in the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criteria for Hydrologic Soil Classification C C VALU E c, C ,o C,oo % Impervious Paved 0.90 0 .90 0.95 100.0% Lawns 0.15 0.1 5 0.25 0.0% Roofs 0 .90 0 .90 0 .95 90 .0 % Gravel 0 .50 0 .50 0 .50 40.0 % ·A.011.i A,"" A,,.-, A,..,. A,-A, .. ,. COMPOSITE •Percent Sub-basin Designation Impervious (acres) (sq. tt) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) c, C ,o c, .. P l 0.26 11 230 0.0 1 025 0.00 0 .00 0.17 0.17 0 .26 2% P2 0 13 5846 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 026 2% P3 0.76 32g25 0.00 0.00 0.76 0.00 .... 0.90 0.95 .... P4 0.31 13325 0.30 0.01 0.00 0.00 .... 0 .88 0.93 .,.,,. PS O.J SI 17028 0.37 0.02 0.00 0.00 0 .86 0.86 0.92 05% P6 0.65 28425 0.63 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.93 97% P7 310 138944 2.42 0 '5 0.32 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.85 85% PO 0 87 37969 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 .... .... 0.95 -p g 2 ., 122600 2.31 0.30 02 1 0 .00 0.82 0.82 0.88 '"' P,o 0.32 14043 0.18 0.00 0,14 0 .00 0.90 0.90 0.95 96% P ll 1.18 51591 1.16 002 0.00 0.00 0 .89 0.89 0.94 98% Pl 2 0.53 23 103 0.32 021 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.68 61 % P 13 0.49 2 12 17 0.44 004 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.84 0.89 9 1" P1' 0.44 1'380 0 42 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.87 0.92 05% P l 5 0.3 1 13717 0.11 0.21 0.00 0 .00 0.40 0.40 0.48 33% Pl6 0.10 430Q 0 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.95 100% P17 0.23 10235 0.23 000 000 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.95 100% P18 1.00 437 14 0.611 0.32 000 0.00 .... 0 .66 0.73 68% P l O 3.87 16854 .. 0.04 367 0 00 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.27 3% P20 0.16 71 09 0 00 000 0,16 0.00 0 ... o ... 0.95 "°" P2 1 0.241 10291 0.00 0.00 024 0 .00 0 ... . ... 0.95 -P22 0.43 18630 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.90 .... 0.95 90% P23 0.64 27808 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.00 .... .... 0.95 90% P2' 003 1273 0.00 000 003 0.00 0 .90 o ... 0.95 90% P25 -4.51 196635 3 43 0.68 0.35 0.06 0.78 0 .78 0.84 83% P26 520 226373 0.10 5.00 000 0.00 0.17 0.17 026 2% P27 0 40 17639 0 .32 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.81 80% P28 0.13 5B29 0.11 0 03 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.80 79% P29 0.45 19428 0.01 0 44 0 00 0 00 0.17 0.17 026 2% P30 49.08 2138032 22.09 27.0 000 000 0.419 0.49 0.57 45% P31 0.'45 '9506 0.35 0 ,o 000 000 0.73 0 .73 0.79 "" P32 4 07 177177.60 1.42 2 64 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.50 35% P33 0 07 3 108 0 .01 0.07 0 00 0.00 0.21 0.2 1 0.31 '" P34 0 .5 1 222-4 1 0 .49 003 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.86 0.92 95% P35 0.003 138 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .... .... 0.95 """ P36 0.10 4340 0.00 0.00 0 10 0.00 .... 0 .90 0.95 90% Values entered into EPA SWMM Water Quality Provided Location ·A, .. A,.., Ap.-, A,,_ A,-A,, .... COMPOSITE •Percent (acres) (sq . tt) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) c, C ,o C ,oo Impervious A rea to North PL O 4,91 213711 .45 3.43 1.06 0.35 0.06 0.73 0 .73 0.79 "" Area to South PLO 3.26 142 106 2 65 o.•o 0.21 0.00 0.81 0.81 .... "" A rea to WO Pond 12.67 5520-48 7.63 1.4Q 3.55 0.00 0.81 0.81 0 .87 85% Detention Pond 3.87 168544 0 .04 3.67 0.00 0.15 0.17 0.17 027 3% Gas Station .. 0 .32 14043 0.18 0.00 0.14 0 .00 0.90 0 .90 0.95 .... To tal Area treate d 25.03 1090452 13.94 6.63 4.25 021 0.70 0 .70 0.76 71% .. Gas Srat,on to treat basm ons,te Release Rare Cal ula tions (King Soopers to tal A rea) Total Basin Areas 84 .34 3673704 38 .05 •1.83 4.25 0.2 1 0.53 0.53 0.60 SO% Ki nQ Sooo ers Area 25 .03 1090452 13.94 6.63 4.25 0.21 0 .70 0 .70 0.76 71o/. Offsite Basin A rea Trea ted 0.39 17076 0.01 0.38 0.00 0.00 0 .17 0.17 026 2% Offsite Basin Area 59.30 2583251 24.11 35.19 0 00 000 0.45 0.45 0.53 41 % Basin Check= KS+OS1+0S2 .. 34 3673704 38.05 41 83 -4.25 0.2 1 0.53 0.53 0 .60 SO% Allowable Release Ra te = A •0.2 A = 25.03 acres a = 5.01 els Provided Release Rate a= 4.93 els SWMM PARAMETERS-Fina l.xis -Basin Summary Overland Max Cha nnelized Flowpa th Overland Flow Overall Width •Lw wa 100yr Flow 10yr Fl ow Length Length Length Length Notes Water Quality Provided Other N PLO S PLO Pond (efs) (els) Slope •so (ModSWMM) (It) 300(ft) (fl) (ft) (ft) 75 75 0 75 0.50% 150 otfaite BHin (North) North Porous Landscape Detention X 1.4 0 .2 75 75 0 75 0.50% 78 otlaite Buin (North) North Porous Landscaoe Detention X 0 .7 0.1 283 283 23 306 1.00% 110 Roof Water Qualitv Pond X 7 .1 3 .1 5-0 50 250 300 1.50% 267 College Avenue Water Qualitv Pond X 3 .1 1 .5 50 50 150 200 1.50% 341 College Av.nue Water Oualitv Pond X 3 .9 1 .9 50 50 300 350 1.00% 569 College Avenue Water Oualitv Pond X 6.5 3.2 11 0 110 •S-O 560 2.00% 1263 Park ing Lo1 Water Oualitv Pond X 31 .5 14.8 24' 241 26 267 1.00% 158 Roof Water Quality Pond X 8 .3 3 .7 300 300 0 300 2.50% 400 Parktng lot t o aouth PLO South Porous Landscape Detention X 27 .1 12 .3 150 15-0 64 214 1.50'".4 .. Gu Station Gas Station • to treat onsile X 3 .2 1.5 so so 360 4 10 1.50% 1032 Existing development Water Oualitv Pond X 11 .8 5.8 5-0 50 274 324 0.50% 462 Willox Lane Water Qualitv Pond X 4 .9 2 .0 121 12 1 107 228 1.00% 175 Puking lot-to curb cut Water Oualitv Pond X 4 .8 2.3 50 so 300 350 1.25% 318 Ates behind King Soopers Water Qualitv Pond X 4 .4 2.1 60 60 2,, 308 1.00% 229 South ol King Soopers Water Quality Pond X 2 .6 0 .8 70 70 30 100 2.77% 02 Truck Ramp Water Quality Pond X 1 .0 0 .5 " 10 85 , .. 1.50% 530 Truck Ramp Water Oua1itv Pond X 2.3 1 .1 ,35 ,35 2,0 375 0.70% 324 ArH behind King Soopers Water Qualitv Pond X 9 .1 3 .7 300 300 350 850 0.10% 562 Wetlands Pond Wetlands X 5 .5 0 .9 •• 40 156 205 1.00% 145 Root Water Qualitv Pond X 1 .6 0.8 ., ., 114 "' 1.00% 127 Roof Water Quatitv Pond X 2.4 1 .1 283 283 ,. 301 1.00•.4 .. Roof Water Quality Pond X 4 .0 1 .8 231 23 1 85 3'6 1.00% 120 Roof Water Quality Pond X 6 .1 2 .7 22 22 24 " 1.00% 58 Roof-Pharmacy Water Qualitv Pond X 0 .3 0 .1 ., ., 758 799 2.50% ., .. Psrking lot to North PLO North Porous Landscaoe Detention X 44 .8 2 1 .6 300 300 250 550 0.10% 755 Existing Wetlands Wellands X 7 .3 1 .0 57 57 ... 423 0.50% 309 Willo1Lane Water Quali ty Pond X 3.9 1 .8 30 30 325 355 0.50% 104 Willo1 Lane Water Quality Pond X 1 .3 0 .6 200 200 0 200 2.50% 07 Otf Srte arH t o the east ot the pond Wetlands - To be treated olfsite when develooed X 2 .2 0.4 300 300 2500 2800 1.00% 7 127 Off Site area north of L&W Previoustv treated X 330 .4 116 .4 50 50 150 200 0 .50% 3,0 Entrance off of Willox South Porous Landscaoe Detention X 4.4 2 .0 150 15-0 530 680 1.40% 1181 Oft site Basin to Willox/Bristlecone Inlet To be treated offsite when develooed X 30 .0 9 .3 50 50 25 75 1.00% 62 Swale just north of building Water Qualitv Pond X 0 .5 0 .1 so 50 375 '25 0.50% 445 Wi110 1 lane Existing development X 5 .1 2.5 ' ' 83 ., 1.00% 17 Root-Revolving Door Water Quality Pond X 1.0 0 .5 12 12 15 27 1.00% 362 Roof-Front Enlr•nc• Water Quality Pond X 0.03 0.02 Page t ol l 12] ' ' P05-C oll?ge •----- ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' P25-PM:11g_~.-----+-----~, ___ , 11i2'-P.OOI' PC.3-P.cot --' --- POO-P.OOI' •--- P::::C-P.eo)T P07-Pail:11 g _Lot •---------- • .. PZJ..P.eo;T ________ . .__~- PC&Pan:11 g_Lot PJ;';-P.oc<T_P.~ll)IJl1 g •------~-------;9--~--- P:!1-f!ooT _ __._ .. _ -----. PJI-E11Ta1o; • P II-BUIid I!:: ■ - P::9-01tll' • Pl ~P o1cl -. PJHVlll:Jl' ., EP ASWMM Node Names ____________ ·----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ■ • ' ' '::,,--G-<&f.111 LET) ::,,--G-07-(1.1 H;, • ',, ::.1"-L-01-•J IILET) --. • • P-II C PLD-0:-111 •----- • • ' 6a.t1_9 1111:tA'G-05-(1111~ Cbnn-P.D-1-3 ' • ::.1lnr,-P, 0-H> ___________ .-,--- CT-G-01--/JI l!Cbnn -P. 0-1-: -. ,°:::T-G-04 .•.-rF',$1lnn-P.D-I-I r::-:-_-~· _ CT-l "-01 -iJ IILET)l,IHy G_-03-IJ~H):, ', ::.T-1 -0l -(li 111, q-G-0:-(.11 l!t_l1_n ,al!) / ' :::T✓--02-/J,IH) 0 :::T.f-03-(f,I H; ; (ill'_ i1"-LI-O:-(l11!l, 1111 .. ::.1"-0-0:-ilU LET _Doct;, • II • ::.1"-D-03-(P. IJ)·-0-0 1-(111 LET) •------. . . " __, • • ~ -8-01-(111 LET) • • I • :::T-.•.-01,-(1,IAII H(• Lf;u.~(111 LET) :::T-.•.-01-(& EIW) \,.,,.,,..c oau" :--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPASWMM Link Names 11-----------..... __ • St>nn-G07 • ■ .. PLO_tlo rtl P-1 lll_OI!! 111:tA' nro-P. 0-1-::: -----·• Cl)nn-FIX! ,' ':tlnn-P.D-1-1 .,_ ___ _._ -----• Cl)nn-G 04 !-. -, Cb nr,-r o 1::t,nn-J0 I Ill ,II ,~--• I ✓ , .; ; , -P-) lb_~=tini,-r.10 1 •,:,-;. ~'bnn-G cc S"bnro-G03 •---➔~------~---4r" S'tlITT1·60I • Cb nu-J S"bnr,-IA O::: • •• Ill • Cbnn -.•.o5 • Cbnn-.'.04 $"'bnn -.6fJ1 EPASWMM: 100-year OUTPUT EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL -VERSION 5.0 (Bui ld 5.0.013) Analysis Options **********•***** Flow Uni ts . . . . . . . . . . . . . CFS Infiltration Method ...... HORTON Flow Routing Method Starting Date .......... . Ending Date ..... . Antecedent Dry Days ..... . Report Time Step ........ . Wet Time Step ........... . Dry Time Step ..... . Routing Time Step .. Runoff Quantity Continuity Total Precipitation ..... . Evaporation Loss ........ . Infiltration Loss ....... . Surface Runoff ... Final Surface Storage .... Continuity Error (%) DYNWAVE OCT-13 -20 08 00:00 :00 OCT-15 -2008 23:00:00 0.0 00:01:00 00:05:00 01:00:00 1. 00 sec Volume acre-feet 32.220 0.000 7 . 611 24.360 0.350 -0.309 Depth inches 4.586 0.000 1.083 3.467 0.050 Flow Routing Continuity Volume acre-feet Volume Mgallons ********** .................... . Dry Weather Inflow Wet Weather Inflow Groundwater Inflow RDII Inflow ......... . External Inflow ......... . External Outflow ........ . Internal Outflow ...... . Evaporation Loss . Initial Stored Volume Final Stored Volume Continuity Error (%) Time-Step Critical Elements *************************** None Highest Flow Instability Indexes **************************•***** Link Orifice_Outlet (21) Link Storm-A05 (11) Routing Time Step Summary ************************* Minimum Time Step Average Time Step Maximum Time Step Percent in Steady State Average Iterations per Step Subcatchment Runoff Summary 0.000 23.529 0.000 0 .000 0.000 23.291 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0.238 0.002 0.86 sec 1. 00 sec 1. 00 sec 0.00 2.00 0.000 7.667 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.590 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0.078 Subcatchment Total Precip in Total Runon in Tota l Evap in Total Infil in Total Runoff in Total Runoff Mgal Pe ak Runoff Runo ff CFS Coeff -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- POl-offsite P 02-o ffsit e P03-Roo f P04-College P05-College P06-College P07 -Par king_Lot P08-R oo f P09-Parking_Lot Pl O-Gas_Stati on Pll-Ex Dev Pl2-Will ox Pl3-Parking Lot Pl4-Behind_KS Pl5-Swale Pl6-Truck_Ramp Pl7-Truck_Ramp Pl8-North_of_KS Pl9-Pond P20-Roof P21-Roof P22-Roof P23-Roof P24-Roof P2 5-Pa rking_Lot P26-Wetlands P27-Willox P28-Willox P29-offsite P30-offsite P31-Entrance P32-0ffsite P33-Swale P34 -Willox P36-Roof_Entrance P35-Roof_Revolving 4.5 86 4.586 4.5 8 6 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4 .586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4 .586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 4.586 0 .000 0 . 000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0 .00 0 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0. 000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0 .0 00 0 .000 0 . 000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 1 .926 1.920 0.186 0.054 0.090 0.054 0 .2 74 0 .1 85 0. 203 0 .072 0.036 0.72 4 0.165 0 .090 1.255 0 .000 0.000 0. 604 2 .605 0 .1 81 0 .182 0.186 0.185 0 .180 0 .308 2.637 0 .367 0 .383 1 .953 1 .12 4 0.422 1.258 1.732 0.090 0 .225 0.224 2.673 2.678 4.332 4.448 4. 4 14 4.448 4.243 4.333 4.3 15 4.436 4.4 65 3.819 4.349 4. 414 3 .316 4.499 4.497 3.933 1.981 4 .328 4 .330 4.332 4 .333 4.328 4.208 1 .950 4.156 4.140 2.645 3.432 4.103 3.308 2 .866 4.416 4.282 4.281 0 .019 0 .009 0 .089 0.037 0 .047 0.079 0.368 0.102 0 .3 29 0.039 0.1 4 3 0.055 0.058 0.053 0.028 0 .0 12 0 .0 28 0 .10 7 0. 208 0.019 0 .028 0.051 0.075 0 .004 0.515 0 .275 0.045 0 .015 0 .032 4.574 0.050 0.366 0.005 0 .06 1 0.012 0.000 1. 410 0 . 718 7 .090 3.10 4 3 .902 6.506 31.524 8 .251 27 .071 3.166 11 . 823 4.945 4 .831 4.401 2.606 1.003 2.308 9 .053 5 .5 45 1.5 96 2.38 4 4.014 6.086 0.299 44.830 7 .337 3 .9 17 1.285 2.237 330.360 4.393 29 .988 0 .5 28 5.09 1 0 .998 0 .030 0 .583 0.584 0. 945 0. 970 0.962 0.970 0.925 0 . 945 0 .941 0 . 967 0 .974 0 .83 3 0. 94 8 0.962 0.723 0 .981 0.981 0.8 58 0 .432 0 .944 0.944 0 . 945 0.945 0.944 0 .918 0 .425 0 .906 0.903 0.577 0.748 0 .895 0.721 0.625 0.963 0.934 0 .934 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- System Node Depth Summary ****************** 4.586 0 .000 0 .000 1 .083 3.467 7.937 583.789 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Type Average Depth Feet Maximum Depth Feet Maximum HGL Feet Time of Max Occurrence days hr:min --------------------------------------------------------------------- P-lla P-llb P-llc P30 -os PLD North PLD-South JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION Or ifi ce_A JUNCTION ST-A-01-(BEND) JUNCTION ST-A -02 -(MH) JUNCTION ST-A-03-(INLET) JUNCTION ST-A-04 -(MANHOLE) JUNCTION ST-B-01-(INLET) JUNCT IO N ST-D-01-(INLET) JUNCTION ST -D-02-(INL ET_Doc k ) JUNCTION S T-D-03-(RD) JUNCT I ON ST-E-01 -(INLET) JUNCTION ST-E-02-(BEND) JUNCTION ST-E-03-(INLET_Dock ) JUNCTION ST-E-04-(RD) JUNCTION ST-F-01 -(MH) JUNCTION ST-F-02-(MH) JUNCT I ON ST-F-03 -(BEN D) JUNCTION ST-F-04 -(Inlet In_PLD) JUNCTION ST-G-01-(MH ) J UNCTION 0 .0 1 0.02 0 .00 0 .4 7 0.02 0.02 0 .59 0 .43 0 .41 0.45 0 . 53 0 .01 0 .69 0.59 0 .61 0 .69 0.57 0. 56 0 .46 0 .52 0 .37 0 .32 0 .32 0 .79 0 .55 1.05 0 .33 11.12 0 .54 0.44 3 .44 4.16 3 .62 3 .98 3 . 71 0 .77 2 .91 2.74 2.77 2.91 2.69 2.67 2.83 2.76 3 .47 3 .80 4982.05 4980.55 4985.33 4994.6 2 4980.54 4980.44 4974.44 4974 .4 6 4974.30 4974.79 4974.6 3 497 5 .27 49 74 .19 497 4.1 9 4974.19 49 74.19 49 74 .1 9 49 7 4.1 9 4974.59 4974 .41 4975.52 4976. 02 4 .29 4 976.52 3.28 4974.43 0 0 0 0 0 01 :35 01 :36 0 1 :35 0 1 :35 0 1:35 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0 01 :3 3 0 01 : 33 0 01 :35 0 0 1: 3 5 0 01 :35 0 03 :21 0 03 :21 0 03 :21 0 03 :22 0 03 :22 0 03 :22 0 01 :35 0 01 :36 0 0 1:35 0 01 :36 0 01:36 0 01 :39 ST-G-02-(Inlet in _s wale) JUNCTION 0.51 0 .4 4 2 .85 4974 .49 2.96 49 74.78 0 01:39 0 01 : 38 ST-G-03-(MH) JUNCTION ST-G-04-(Inlet in PLO) JUNCTION ST-G-04_A-(RD_Tie~in) JUNCTION 0 .35 0 . 3 8 3 .1 0 4975 .20 3 .05 4975.05 0 0 1 :38 0 01:38 0.756 ST-G-05-(Inlet) JUNCT ION 0.22 2 .72 497 5.28 0 01:38 ST-G-06-(MH) JUNCTION 0 . 04 1. 77 4975 .64 0 01:38 ST-G-07-(MH) JUNCTION 0.03 1. 33 4977. 22 0 01 :35 ST-G-08 - ( INLET ) JUNCT ION 0.03 0 .95 4978.13 0 0 1:35 ST-J-01-(MH ) J UNCTION 0. 02 1. 2 4 4976.11 0 01:36 ST-M -0 1 -(Inlet ) JUNCTION 0.01 1. 01 4976 .73 0 01 :36 ST-J-03-(MH ) JUNCTION 0 .01 1.17 4976.57 0 01 :36 ST-M -02-(Inlet ) JUNCTION 0 .01 0.85 49 76 .5 7 0 01:36 ST-K-01-(INLET) JUNCTIO N 0.02 1.17 4976.17 0 01:35 ST-L-01-(INLET) JUNCTION 0 .01 0.60 4979.65 0 0 1: 35 Storm-RD-1-1 JUNCTION 0 .07 2.44 4975.76 0 01 :3 4 Storm-RD-1-2 JUNCTION 0 .05 2.20 4975.65 0 0 1:35 Storm-RD-1-3 JUNCTION 0 .03 2.67 4976.37 0 0 1:35 Basin _9_ Inflow JUNC TION 0 .00 0.22 4980.22 0 01 :35 Storm-RD-1-4 JUNCTION 0 .10 2.42 4975 .54 0 0 1 :35 Storm-RD-1-5 JUNCTION 0 .04 3. 20 49 76 .84 0 01 :3 5 Storm-RD-1 -6 JUNCTION 0. 15 1. 3 7 4974.19 0 03 :22 ST-J-02-(MH) JUNCTION 0 .01 1.13 4976.41 0 01:36 BlueSpruceChannel OUT FALL 0 .41 2 .50 4972 .57 0 01 :32 LW OUTFALL 0 . 02 1.11 4981.11 0 0 1 :3 5 Detent ion Pond STORAGE 0 . 93 3.19 4974.19 0 03 :22 ******************* Node In Flow Summary ******************* --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Type Maximum Lateral Inflow CFS Maximum Total Infl ow CFS Time of Max Occurrence days hr:min La teral Inflow Volume Mgal Total Inflow Volume Mgal --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- P-lla P-llb P-llc P3 0-os PLD_North PLD-South Orifi ce A ST-A-01-(BEND) ST -A -02-(MH) ST-A-03 - (INLET ) JUNCT I ON JUNCT ION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUN CTI ON JUNCTION JUNCT I ON JUNCTION JUNCTION ST-A-04-(MANH OLE) ST-B-01-(INLET) ST-D-01-(INLET) ST -D-02-(INLET_Dock) JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION ST-D-03-(R D) JUNCTI ON ST -E-01-(INLET ) JUNCTION JUNCTION ST -E-02 -(BEND ) ST-E-03 -(INLET_Dock) JUNCTION ST-E-04-(RD) ST-F-01-(MH) ST-F-02-(MH) ST-F-03-(BEND) JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION ST-F-04-(Inlet In PLD) JUNCTION ST-G-01 -(MH) JUNCTION ST-G -02 -(I nle t_in_swale) JUNCTION ST-G-03-(MH) JUNCTION ST-G-04-(Inlet in PLD ) JUNCTION ST-G-04 A-(RD Tie~in ) JUNCTION ST-G-05-(Inlet) JUN CT IO N ST-G-06-(MH) JUNCTION ST-G-07-(MH) JUNCTION ST-G-08-(INLET) JUNCTI ON ST-J-01-(MH ) JUNCTI ON ST-M-01-(Inlet ) JUNCTION ST-J-0 3-(MH) JUNCTION ST-M-02-(Inlet) JUNCTION ST-K-01-(INLET) ST-L-01-(INLET) Storm -RD-1-1 Storm-RD-1-2 Storm-RD-1-3 Basin_9_Infl ow Storm-RD -1-4 Storm -RD-1-5 Storm-RD-1-6 ST-J-02-(MH) Bl ueSpruceCha nnel LW JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCT I ON JUNCT I ON JUNCTION JUNCTION OUTFALL OUTFALL 11.82 4.94 6.51 330.32 46.24 27 .07 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.07 0 .00 3.92 4. 4 0 2 .31 6.09 9.05 0 .00 1.00 8.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 . 72 0.00 17.87 21.79 6.51 330.32 46 .2 4 27.07 4 .86 30 .23 30 .21 35 .07 4.87 3.92 12.79 2 .31 6.09 18.28 1.00 1.00 8.25 42.88 42.88 4 2 .61 43.75 88.77 9.56 85 .69 0 .00 79.68 4.39 77 .14 0 . 00 72 .22 0 .00 41.01 0.00 9 .55 0.00 9.76 3.10 5 .94 0.00 7.94 0 .00 4.04 0.00 5.15 1.28 1.28 3 .17 3.17 3.90 3.90 2.38 0 .03 1.00 31. 52 0. 3 0 7.09 4.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 .38 0 .33 1.00 31.52 0.30 7.09 4.0 1 5.14 30.28 3 27.22 0 01 :3 5 0 01:35 0 0 1 :3 5 0 01 :35 0 01 : 3 5 0 01 :35 0 01 : 3 5 0 01: 3 5 0 0 1 : 3 5 0 0 1:35 0 0 1:35 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0 0 1:35 0 0 1 :35 0 0 1 :35 0 0 1 :35 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 01:35 0 0 1:3 5 0 0 1:36 0 01:35 0 01 :34 0 01 :35 0 01:35 0 01 :35 0 01:35 0 01 :3 5 0 01:36 0 01 :36 0 01 :35 0 0 1 :3 5 0 0 1:3 5 0 01 :35 0 01:34 0 01 :35 0 01:35 0 0 1:35 0 0 1:3 5 0 01:35 0 0 1:36 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0.143 0.055 0.079 4.576 0.535 0.329 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0.427 0 .000 0 .045 0.053 0 .028 0.075 0.107 0 .000 0 .012 0.102 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0.009 0 .000 0 .110 0 .000 0.050 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.037 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0 .015 0.039 0 .047 0 .028 0 .000 0.012 0 .368 0 .004 0 .089 0 .051 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0.222 0 .277 0 .079 4 .576 0 .535 0 .329 2 .871 3.265 3.265 3.290 2.888 0.045 0.156 0.028 0.075 0 .221 0.012 0.012 0 .1 0 2 0 . 54 9 0.548 0.5 45 0 .542 1.6 10 1.564 1. 454 1 .332 1. 360 0 . 715 0 .336 0.335 0.289 0 .093 0 . 0 4 0 0 .055 0 .015 0 .039 0.0 47 0.028 0 .001 0 .0 12 0 .368 0 .004 0 .089 0 .05 1 0 .055 3.264 4.325 DetentionPond STORAGE 7.60 163.18 0 01: 36 0.241 2.937 Nod e Surcharge Summary Surcharging occurs when water rises above the top of the highest conduit. Node Orifice_A ST-A-01-(BEND) ST-A -02-(MH) ST-A-03-( INLET) ST -A-04-(MANHOLE) ST-D-01 -(INLET) Type JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION ST-D-02-(INLET_Dock) JUNCTION ST-D-03-(RD) JUNCTION ST-E-01-(INLET) JUNCTION ST-E -02 -(BEND) JUNCTION ST-E-03-(INLET_Dock) JUNCTION ST-E-04-(RD) JUNCTION ST-F-02-(MH) JUNCTION ST-F-03-(BEND) JUNCTION Hours Su r charged 0 .41 0 .11 0 .11 0 . 12 0.41 9. 83 15.48 18.66 9. 84 1 2. 55 12.36 14. 93 0 . 06 0. 07 Max. Height Above Crown Feet 1.938 1.659 1.122 1.476 2.214 0. 913 1.493 1.773 0 .912 1 .192 1.172 1.834 0 . 471 0.796 Min. Depth Below Rim Feet 1.562 6.1 01 6.978 1. 364 1.706 1.807 0.437 17 .227 1 .808 6 .068 0.438 17.166 3.619 6.384 ST-G-02-(Inlet in swale) JUNCTION ST-G-04_A -(RD_Tie-in) JUNCTION 6.78 2.95 0 .852 1.078 1.054 2 .846 Storm-RD-1-1 JUNCTION Storm-RD-1-2 Storm-RD-1-3 Storm-RD-1-4 Storm-RD-1-5 Storm-RD-1-6 JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION Node Flooding Summary No nodes were flooded. Storage Volume Summary ********************** Storage Unit DetentionPond Average Volume 1000 ft3 88.231 Outfall Loading Summary *********************** Outfall Node BlueSpruceChannel LW System Link Flow Summary ******************** Link Overflow_To_LW Flow Freq. Pent. 99. 71 4.35 52 .03 Type CONDUIT 0. 17 1.443 0 .14 1.201 0 .11 1.673 5. 21 1.753 0 .11 2.200 4. 59 0 .372 Avg Pent Full 15 Avg . Flow CFS 1. 72 53.13 54.84 Maximum Flow CFS 327.22 Maximum Volume 1000 ft3 332.007 Max Pent Full 57 Max . Flow CFS Total Volume 30 . 28 327.22 357 .50 Time of Max Occurrence days hr :min 0 01 :35 Mgal 3.264 4.325 7.589 Maximum Velocity ft /sec 13.88 17.557 17 .799 17.327 17.580 16 .800 18 .628 Time of Max Occurrence days hr :min 0 03:22 Max/ Full Flow 0 .01 Max/ Full Depth 0 .11 Maximum Outflow CFS 4.93 P-lla_Street P-llb_Overflow P-llb_Street P-llc _Street P30-os PLD_North PLO-Sou th Storm-AOl Storm-A02 Storm-A03 Storm-A04 Storm-A05 Storm-B01 Storm-D01 Storm-D02 Storm-D03 Storm -E Ol Storm -E 02 Storm-E03 Storm-E04 Stor m-FOl Storm-F02 Storm-F 03 Storm-F04 Storm-GOl Storm-G02 Storm-G03 Storm-G04_A Storm-G04_B Storm-GOS Storm-GOG Storm-GO? Storm-GOS Storm-JOl Storm-J03 Storm-MOl Storm-M02 Storm-KO l Storm-LO l Storm -RD -1 -1 Storm -RD-1-2 Storm-RD-1-3 Basin_9_Inflow Storm-RD-1-4 Storm-RD-1-5 Storm-RD-1-6 Storm-J02 Orifice _Outlet CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CO NDUIT CON DUI T CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDU I T CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CO NDUIT CONDU I T CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDU I T CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUI T CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDU IT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT ORIFICE Flow Classification Summary 17 .11 17 .22 4. 04 6 . 18 2. 84 43. 04 24.58 30.28 30.23 30 .21 4. 87 4.86 3.89 12.75 2.31 6. 08 18.26 1. 02 1. 00 8. 25 42. 92 4 2. 88 42. 61 4 2. 61 78 . 02 85 .14 76 . 79 71. 76 69 . 88 33.78 9 .11 9 . 55 5.89 7. 93 5. 14 4 . 04 1. 24 3.12 3. 88 2.38 0 .30 1. 03 31.37 0 .30 7 .09 4.00 5.16 4 . 86 0 01:35 0 01 :36 0 01: 3 6 0 OL 35 0 01 :35 0 01:35 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0 01:35 0 0 1 :35 0 OL 35 0 OL 35 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0 01 :35 0 01 :3 5 0 0 1:35 0 01 :35 0 01:35 0 01:36 0 01:35 0 01:35 0 01:35 0 01:38 0 01:35 0 0 1:3 5 0 01:36 0 0 1:34 0 01:34 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0 0 1 :35 0 0 1 :36 0 01:36 0 0 1:36 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0 01:35 0 0 1:34 0 0 1:35 0 01:35 0 0 1:34 0 01:35 0 01:35 0 0 1:36 0 01: 3 5 3.00 6.52 4.15 2.43 8.12 2.92 2 .60 6 .17 6.1 6 6 .1 5 3.7 6 3 .11 5 .06 5 .12 1 .88 7.75 6.32 0 .57 2.08 10 .5 0 6.96 6.16 6.03 6 .03 8 .17 1. 77 5 .11 4.50 4 .37 2 .37 5 .21 6 .1 8 4 .39 4 .38 3.56 2 . 96 2 .08 2 .21 6 .4 9 3 .58 0 .4 0 2 .02 6.14 1.85 9.02 6 .68 3 .4 7 0 .07 0 .15 0.73 0 .03 1. 61 0 .02 0 .01 1.47 1.47 1.51 0. 93 0. 77 0.32 0.81 0.50 2.38 1.1 6 0.14 0.1 4 1 .34 1 .29 1. 59 1. 42 1. 56 2.56 0.40 1. 09 1. 01 1.00 0.48 0.59 1.05 0.65 0.76 0. 77 0.30 0 .10 0.64 0 .26 0.51 0.06 0.22 0 .03 0 .18 1.15 0 .61 0.78 0 .40 0.26 0.74 0 .22 1.00 0 .22 0 .17 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 0 .45 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0 .96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0 .91 0.76 0.56 0. 77 0. 72 0.67 0. 80 0.37 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.22 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 0.79 1.00 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Conduit Adjusted /Actual Length Fraction of Time in Flow Class Up Down Sub Sup Up Down Dry Dry Dry Crit Cri t Crit Crit Avg. Froude Nu mber Avg. Flow Change ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Overflo w_T o_L W P-lla_Street P-llb_Overflow P-llb_Street P-llc_Street P3 0-os PLO No rth PLO -South Storm-A Ol Storm-A02 Storm-A03 Sto rm-A04 Storm-A05 Storm-B01 Storm-D01 Storm-D02 Storm-D03 Storm-EO l Stor m-E 02 Storm-E03 Storm-E 04 Storm-FOl 1 .29 1.00 1.00 1.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 2.79 1.00 1.00 0 .96 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .83 0 .0 0 0.00 0 .0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 0 .9 2 0 .25 0 .38 0 .36 0 .25 0 .36 0 .5 0 0 .36 0.00 0 .00 0 . 83 0. 00 0.95 0 . 04 0 .00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 .00 0 . 00 0 .00 0. 00 0.02 0 .11 0 .10 0 .10 0 .11 0 .14 0 .01 0.22 0. 0 0 0 .0 0 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .0 0 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0 .00 0 .13 0 .92 0 .00 0 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 0 .62 0 .52 0 .54 0.62 0 .50 0 .48 0 .41 0 .73 0.0 4 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .0 0 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.0 0 0.00 0 .00 1.00 1.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .0 4 0.0 1 0 .00 0 .00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 27 0.09 0.02 0.08 0 .02 0 .03 0 .13 0 .13 0 .14 0.59 0.59 0.56 0.59 0 .49 0.05 0.02 0.01 0 .02 0 .02 0 .00 0.00 0.02 0. 04 0.0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .00 00 0 .0000 0.0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0.0000 0 .0001 0 .0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0.0000 0.0000 Storm-F02 1.00 0.00 0. 00 0 .00 1.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 Storm-F03 1.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Storm-F04 2.28 0 .00 0. 00 0 .00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Storm-GOl 1.00 0 .00 0 . 00 0 .00 0 .99 0.01 0.00 0 .00 Storm-G02 1.00 0.00 0. 01 0 .00 0 .99 0.00 0.00 0 . 00 Storm-G03 1.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .98 0.01 0.00 0 .00 Storm-G04 A 1.00 0 .00 0. 00 0 .00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 Storm-G04 B -1.00 0.00 0.00 0 . 00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 Storm-GOS 1.00 0.00 0 . 67 0.00 0 .33 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 Storm-G06 1.00 0.67 0 .13 0.00 0 .17 0.02 0.00 0 .00 Storm -GO? 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ·O . 97 0 .03 0.00 0 .00 Storm-GOS 1.00 0. 00 0.00 0 .00 1 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 Storm-JOl 1 .00 0 .0 0 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 1. 00 Storm-J03 1 .00 0 .00 0. 00 0.00 1 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 Storm-MOl 1 .00 0.00 0.95 0.00 0 .05 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 Storm -M02 1 .00 0.00 0.95 0.00 0.05 0 .00 0.00 0.00 St orm-KOl 1.00 0 .00 0. 92 0.00 a .08 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 S t orm-LOl 1.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0 .00 1.00 Storm-RD-1-1 1.00 0.00 0.81 0.00 0 .18 0.00 0.00 0 .00 Storm-RD-1 -2 1.00 0 .00 0. 84 0.00 0 .16 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 Storm-RD-1 -3 1.00 0 .67 0 .19 0.00 0 .13 0.00 0.00 0 .00 Basin _9_ Inflow 1.00 0.92 0 . 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .08 S torm -RD-1-4 1 .58 0 .00 0 . 00 0 .00 0 .17 0 .00 0.00 0.82 Storm-RD -1-5 1.00 0.63 0. 24 0 .00 0 .11 0.00 0.00 0.02 Storm -RD-1 -6 1.00 0.63 0. 14 0.00 0.2 1 0.00 0.00 0 .02 Storm-J02 1.00 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 ************************* Conduit Surcharge Summary ************************* ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Conduit ---------Hours Full ------- Both Ends Upstream Dnstream Hours Above Ful l Normal Flow Hours Capacity Limited ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- P30-os 0. 81 0. 81 0.81 3 .28 0 .81 Storm-AOl 0. 11 0.11 0.1 1 a .12 a .11 Storm-A02 0. 11 0 .11 0 .11 a .12 0.10 Storm-AO) 0. 11 0.11 0 .11 0 .13 0 .11 Storm-A04 0. 41 0 .41 0.41 0 .01 0.01 Storm-ADS 0. 3 9 0 .39 0 .3 9 0.01 0.08 Storm-D01 9.83 9 .83 9 .83 0.01 0.01 Storm-D02 15. 48 15 .48 15 .48 0.01 0.01 Storm-D03 18.65 18 . 65 18.65 0.23 0.26 Storm-EOl 9 .8 4 9 . 84 9 .84 0.05 0.01 Storm-E02 12.54 1 2 .54 12.54 0.01 0.01 Storm-E03 12.36 12 . 36 12.36 0.01 0.01 Storm-E0 4 14.93 14 . 93 14 .93 0.09 0.14 Storm-FOl 0.01 0. 0 1 0.0 1 0.09 0.01 Storm-F02 0.01 0. 01 0 .01 0.14 0.01 Storm-F03 0.06 0.06 0 .06 0 .11 0.06 Storm-F04 0.07 0. 07 0.07 0.1 4 0.07 Storm-GOl 15 .09 15.09 15.09 2 .28 0 .26 Storm-G02 6.78 6.78 6.78 0 .10 0 .01 Storm -G03 4.87 4. 87 4.87 0 .09 0 .11 Storm-G04 -A 2 .94 2.94 2.95 0 .03 0 .10 Storm-G04 B -1 .87 1. 87 1.87 0. 01 0.11 Storm-GOS 0 .13 0 .13 0 .13 0.01 0.01 Storm -GO? 0 .01 0. 01 0 .0 1 0 .04 0.01 Storm-RD -1-1 0.17 0. 17 0.17 0 .01 0.01 Storm-RD-1-2 a .14 0. 14 0 .14 0 . 01 0 .01 S t orm-RD-1-3 a .11 0. 11 0 .11 0. 01 0 .01 Storm-RD-1-4 5 .21 5. 21 5 .21 0 . 0 1 0 .01 Storm-RD-1-5 a .04 0.04 0 .04 0 .05 0.04 Storm-RD-1-6 4.5 9 4.59 4.59 0 .01 0 .01 Analysis begun on : Thu Jul 30 16 :07:26 2009 Analysis ended on : Thu Jul 30 16 :07 :56 2009 Total elapsed time : 00:00:30 0.06 0.0000 0 .07 0.0000 0 .08 0.0000 0 .0 3 0 .0001 0.01 0.0000 0 .03 0 .0000 0 .02 0.0000 0.02 0.0000 0.01 0.0000 0.03 0.0000 0.07 0.0000 0.07 0.0000 0 .04 0.0000 0 .03 0.0000 0 .03 0.0000 0. 02 0.0000 0 .02 0.0000 0 .07 0.0000 0.01 0 .0000 0.00 0.0000 0.01 0.0000 0.11 0 .0 000 0.02 0 .0000 0.04 0 .0000 0. 04 0 .0000 0.02 0.0000 EPASWMM: 10-year OUTPUT EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL -VERSION 5.0 (Build 5.0.013) Analysis Options **************** Flow Units ............... CFS Infiltration Method ...... HORTON Flow Routing Method ...... DYNWAVE Starting Date ............ OCT-13-2008 00 :00:00 Ending Date .............. OCT-15-2008 23:00 :00 Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0.0 Report Time Step . 00 :01:00 Wet Time Step ............ 00:05:00 Dry Time Step ......... , .. 01:00 :00 Routing Time Step 1.00 sec Runo f f Quantity Continuity ************************** Total Precipitation .. Evaporation Loss ..... . Infiltration Loss Surface Runoff ..... . Final Surface Storage Continuity Error (%) Flow Routing Continuity Dry Weather Inflow Wet Weather Infl o w ...... . Groundwater Inflow ...... . RDII Infl o w ............. . External Inflow .. External Ou tflow Internal Outflow ........ . Evaporati o n Loss .. . Initial Stored Volume .... Final Stored Volume Continuity Error (%) Highest Continuity Er rors ****••······••*********** Node Orifice _A (-1.48\) Node DetentionPond (1.31%) Time-Step Critical Elements *************************** None Volume acre-feet 15 .17 0 0.000 6.374 8.49 6 0.350 -0 .326 Volume acre-feet 0.000 8.417 0.000 0.000 0.000 8.244 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 .172 0.0 1 5 Highest Flow Instability Indexes Link Orifice_Outlet (38) Link Storm-ACS (11) Routing Time Step Summary Minimum Time Step Average Time Step Maximum Time Step Percent in Steady State Average Iterations per Step 1.00 sec 1. 00 sec 1. oo sec 0 .00 2.00 Depth inches 2.159 0.000 0 .907 1.2 09 0.050 Vo lume Mgallons 0.000 2.743 0.000 0 .000 0.000 2.686 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.056 *************************** Subcatchment Runoff Summary *************************** Subcatchment POl -offsite P02-offsite P03-Roof P04 -College P05-College P06-College P07-Parking_Lot P08 -Roof P09-Parking _L ot PlO-Gas_Station Pll-Ex Dev P12-Willox P13-Parking_Lot Pl4-Behind_KS P15-Swale P16-Truck_Ramp P17 -T ruck_Ramp P18-North_of_KS P19-Pond P20-Roof P21-Roof P22-Roof P23-Roof P24 -Roof P25-Parking_Lot P26-Wetlands P27 -Willox P28-Willox P29-o ff site P30-offsite P3 1 -Entrance P32-0ffsite P33-Swale P34-Willox P36-Roof Entrance P35-Roof_Revolving System Node Depth Summary ****************** Node P-lla P-llb P -llc P30-os PLD _North PLO-South Orifice_A ST-A-01-(BEND) ST-A-02-(MH) ST-A-03 -( INLET) ST-A -04-(MANHOLE) ST-B-01-(IN LE T) ST-D-01-(INLET) ST-D-02-(INL ET _Dock) ST-D-03-(RD) ST-E-01-( INLET) ST-E-02-(BEND) ST -E-03-(INLET_Dock) ST -E-04-(RD) ST-F -01-(MH) ST -F-02-(MH) ST -F -03-(BEND) Total Precip in 2 .159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2 .159 2 .1 59 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2 .159 2.159 2.159 2 .159 2.159 2 .1 59 2.159 2 .159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2 .159 2.159 2.159 2.159 2 .159 2 .159 Type JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUN CTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION Total Runon in 0. 000 0 . 000 0 .000 0 . 000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 O. 000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0. 000 0 . 000 0.000 0.0 0 0 0 .000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0 . 000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Total Evap in 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Tota l Infil in 1 .692 1. 688 0.163 0 .047 0.079 0 . 04 7 0. 239 0.162 0.178 0.063 0.031 0.635 0 .144 0.079 1 .104 0.000 0 .000 0 .532 1.936 0.158 0 .159 0.163 0.162 0.158 0.269 1.957 0 .321 0 .3 3 4 1. 711 0 .977 0 .369 1.107 1.523 0.079 0.175 0 .175 0.907 Average Maximum Maximum Depth Depth HGL Feet Feet Feet 0.01 0. 01 0.00 0.41 0. 01 0. 01 0.34 0 .27 0. 26 0.28 0 .32 0 .01 0 .21 0.15 0.16 0.21 0 .14 0 .13 0 .08 0 .11 0.05 0.04 0.37 0.72 0.22 10.66 0. 40 0 .32 1. 09 1. 24 1 .21 1. 35 1.21 0 .47 1.30 1.13 1.16 1. 30 1.08 1.06 0.94 1. 67 1 .89 1. 94 4981 .87 4980.22 4985.22 4994.16 4980.40 4980 .32 4972 .09 4 971. 54 4971. 89 4972.16 4972 .13 4974.97 4972.58 4972 .58 4972.58 4972.58 4972 .58 4972 .58 4972.70 4973.32 4973.94 4974.16 Total Runoff in 0 .473 0.477 1.917 2.021 1. 991 2.02 1 1.845 1. 918 1 .904 2.010 2 .035 1. 475 1.936 1.991 1 .035 2.065 2.064 1.570 0.22 1 1.919 1.920 1.917 1.918 1. 918 1 .816 0.201 1.769 1 .757 0. 453 1.144 1 .724 1.025 0.642 1.9 93 1.906 1.907 To t al Runoff Mgal 0.003 0.002 0. 040 0 .017 0.021 0.036 0 .160 0. 0 45 0.145 0.0 1 7 0.065 0.021 0.026 0.024 0 .009 0.006 0 . 013 0.043 0.023 0 .008 0.013 0.022 0.033 0 .002 0.222 0.028 0.019 0.006 0.006 1 .5 25 0.02 1 0 .113 0.001 0.028 0.005 0 .000 Peak Runoff Runoff Coe ff CFS 0.243 0 .125 3 .136 1.514 1.901 3.169 14.755 3 .698 12.274 1. 511 5 . 770 2.010 2 . 271 2 .143 0.835 0 .490 1.129 3.684 0.905 0. 771 1.136 1.776 2 .734 0 .146 21. 591 0.961 1.785 0.603 0.372 116.412 1.983 9 .299 0.120 2 .464 0 .483 0.015 0 .219 0.221 0 .888 0. 936 0.922 0 .936 0 .855 0.888 0.882 0.931 0.943 0.683 0 .896 0.922 0 . 479 0.956 0.956 0.727 0.103 0.889 0 .889 0.888 0.888 0.888 0.841 0.093 0 . 819 0.8 14 0.2 1 0 0 .530 0.798 0.475 0 .297 0.923 0.883 0 .883 1.209 2 .768 224.100 0 .560 Time of Max Occurrence days hr:min 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 :35 01:36 01:35 01 :35 01:35 0 1: 36 01:35 01: 36 01 :3 5 01:35 01: 35 01:35 03:18 03:18 03 :17 03:18 03:17 03:17 01: 35 01 :37 01: 36 01:36 ST-F-04-(Inlet In_PLD) JUNCTION 0 .04 2.18 4974.41 0 01 :36 ST -G-01-(MH) JUNCTION 0.28 1.43 4972.58 0 03 :1 6 ST-G-02-(Inlet in swale) JUNCTION -0 .11 0 .94 4972.58 0 03 :1 6 ST-G-03 -(MH) JUNCT IO N 0 .08 1. 07 4972.89 0 01:37 ST -G-04-(Inlet _in_PLD) JUNCTION 0.04 1.27 4 973.37 0 01:36 ST-G-04_A-(RD_Tie-in ) JUNCTION 0.05 1. 23 4973 .23 0 0 1:36 ST-G-05-(I nlet ) JUNCTION 0.01 0.87 4973.4 3 0 01:36 ST-G-06 - (MH) JUNCTION 0. 04 0.93 4 974.80 0 01 :36 ST-G-07-(MH) JUNCTION 0 . 03 0. 91 4976.80 0 01 :35 ST-G-08-(INLET) JUNCTION 0 .03 0.79 4977. 97 0 01 :35 ST -J -01-(MH ) JUNCTION 0 .01 0 .8 0 49 75.67 0 01:36 ST-M-01 -(Inlet) JUNCTION 0.00 0.46 4976 .18 0 01 :36 ST-J -03-(MH) JUN CTIO N 0.01 0.64 4976.04 0 01:36 ST-M-02 -(Inlet) JUNCTION 0.00 0.31 4976.03 0 01:36 ST-K-0 1 -(INLET ) JUNCTION 0.01 0 . 71 4975.71 0 01 :36 ST-L-01-(INLET) JUNCTION 0 .01 0 .39 4979.44 0 0 1 :35 Storm -RD-1-1 JUNCTION 0.00 0 .33 4973.65 0 01:35 Storm-RD-1-2 JUNCTION 0 .00 0 .04 4 973 .4 9 0 01 :35 Storm-RD-1-3 JUNCT ION 0 .00 0.22 4973.92 0 0 1:35 Basin _9_ Inflow JUNCTION 0.00 0 .1 5 498 0 .1 5 0 0 1:35 Storm-RD-1 -4 JUN CTION 0 . 01 0 .83 4973.95 0 01:36 Storm-RD -1 -5 JUNCTION 0. 01 0 .62 4974.26 0 01:35 Storm-RD-1-6 JUNCTION 0.01 0. 46 4973.28 0 01:35 ST-J-02-(MH) JUNCTION 0 . 01 0.59 49 75 .87 0 01:36 BlueSpru ceChannel OUTFALL 0 . 26 1.17 4971. 24 0 01 :36 LW OUTFALL 0 .01 0.66 4980 .66 0 01 :35 De tent ionPond STORAGE 0 .4 1 1. 58 4972.58 0 03 :18 ******************* Node InFl ow Summary ******************* --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Type Maxi mum Lateral Inflow CFS Maximum Total Inflow CFS Time of Max Occurrence days hr :min Lateral Inflow Volume Mgal Total Inflow Volume Mgal ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------P-lla P -llb P -llc P3 0-os PLD North PLO-South Orifice _A ST-A-01-(B END ) ST-A-02-(MH ) ST-A-03-(INLET) ST-A-04-(MANHOLE) ST-B-01-(INLET) ST-D-01-(INLET) ST-D-02-(INLET_Dock) ST-D-03-(R D) ST -E-01-(INLET) ST-E-02-(BEND) JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION J UNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION S T -E-03 -(INLET _Doc k ) JUN CTI ON ST-E-04-(RD) JUNCTION ST-F-01-(MH) JUNCTION ST-F-02-(MH) JUNCTION ST-F-03 -(BEND) JUNCTION ST -F -04-(Inlet In_PLD) JUNCTION ST-G-01-(MH) JUNCTION ST-G-02-(Inlet in_swale) JUNCTION ST-G-03-(MH) JUNCTION ST-G-04-(Inlet in PLD) JUNCTION ST-G-04_A -(RD_Tie~in ) JUNCTION ST -G-05-(Inlet) JUNCTION ST-G-06 -(MH) JUNCTION ST-G-07-(MH) JUNCTION ST-G-08-(I NLET) JUNCTI ON ST-J-01-(MH) JUNCT I ON ST-M -0 1-(Inlet) JUNCTI ON ST-J-03-(MH) JUN CTIO N ST-M-02-(Inlet) JUNCTIO N ST-K -01-(IN LET ) JUNCTION ST-L-01-(INLET) JUNCTION Storm-RD-1-1 Storm-RD-1-2 Storm-RD-1-3 Basin_9 _Inflow JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION JUNCTION 5. 77 2 .0 1 3.17 116.33 21.78 12.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 11. 75 0 .00 1.78 2 .14 1 .13 2 .73 3.68 0.00 0 .49 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.66 10 .08 3.17 116.33 21. 78 12.26 2.80 9.37 9.50 11. 75 2 .80 1. 78 5.97 1.13 2.73 7.74 0 .4 9 0.49 3.70 19.45 19 .51 19 .46 0.12 19.47 0.00 46.56 3.99 47 .57 0.00 44.38 1 .98 4 0.30 0 .00 40.95 0.00 20.96 0.00 6.13 0.00 6 .19 1.51 4.32 0.00 3.45 0.00 1.66 0.00 2 .18 0.60 0.60 1.51 1.51 1.90 1.90 1.13 1 .13 0.01 0.01 0.48 0.48 14.74 14.74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:35 01 :35 01 :34 01 :35 01 :34 01:35 03 :18 01 :35 01:35 01:35 03:18 01:34 01:35 01 :34 01 :35 01 :35 01 :35 0 0 1:34 0 01:35 0 01:36 0 01:36 0 01:36 0 01 :36 0 01:37 0 01: 3 6 0 01 :36 0 01:35 0 01:36 0 01 :3 5 0 0 1 :35 0 01 :35 0 0 1:34 0 0 1:35 0 01 :36 0 01:36 0 01:3 4 0 01:3 4 0 01:3 4 0 01:34 0 01:34 0 01:3 4 0 01:3 4 0.065 0 .0 2 1 0 .03 6 1. 526 0.226 0 .145 0 .000 0 .000 0 .0 00 0 .141 0 .000 0 .0 1 9 0 .024 0. 013 0 .033 0 .043 0 .000 0 .0 06 0.045 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0.002 0 .000 0.044 0 .00 0 0.021 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0.017 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 0.006 0.017 0 .02 1 0.013 0 .000 0 .005 0 .16 0 0.10 1 0.122 0.036 1.526 0.226 0 .145 1.247 1 .388 1.388 1. 398 1 .266 0.0 1 9 0.070 0.013 0.033 0.09 4 0 .006 0 .006 0. 045 0.230 0 .230 0.228 0.228 0.8 19 0 .800 0.756 0 .7 05 0 . 717 0 .4 31 0.265 0 .265 0 .244 0.038 0 .0 14 0. 0 21 0 .006 0.017 0.021 0. 013 0.000 0.005 0 .1 60 Storm-RD-1-4 JUNCTION 0.15 0 .15 0 01:34 0 .002 0.002 Storm-RD-1-5 JUNCTION 3 .13 3 .13 0 01:35 0 .040 0.040 Storm-RD -1 -6 JUNCTION 1. 78 1. 78 0 01: 35 0 .022 0.022 ST-J-02-(MH) JUNCTION 0.00 2.16 0 01:36 0 .0 00 0 .021 BlueSpruceChannel OUT FALL 0 .00 9 .24 0 01:36 0.000 1.388 LW OUT FALL 0 .00 113. 42 0 01 :35 0.000 1. 299 DetentionPond STORAGE 1. 22 81 .21 0 01:37 0 .029 1. 311 Node Su rcharge Summary ********************** Surcharging occur s when wat er rises above the to p of the highest conduit . Node ST-D-03-(RD) Storm-RD-1-4 Node F lood ing Summary ********************* Type JUNCTION JUNCTION No nodes were f looded. Storage Volume Summary ********************** Storage Unit Detenti onPond Average Volume 1000 ft3 36.925 Ou tfall Loading Summary Outfall Node BlueSpruceChannel LW System Link Flow Summary ******************** Link Overflow_To_LW P-lla_Street P -llb _Overflow P-llb_Street P-llc Street P30-os PLD_North PLO -South Storm -AOl Storm-A02 Storm-A03 Storm-A04 Storm-A05 S t orm -801 Sto r m-D01 Flow Freq. Pent . 99.55 3.79 51.67 Type CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUI T CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDU I T CONDUI T Hours Surcharg ed Max. Height Above Crown Feet Min. Depth Below Rim Feet 3.0 4 0 .07 0.156 0 .16 0 Avg Pent Full Avg. Fl o w CFS 0 .73 1 7.94 18.67 6 Maximum Flow CFS 113 . 4 2 8.20 8.09 1 .66 2.97 2.81 19. 36 1 0 .84 9.24 9. 37 9.50 2 .80 2.80 1.77 5.95 Maximum Volume 1 000 ft3 147.161 Max Pe nt Full 25 Max . Flow CFS Total Volum e 9.24 113. 42 121.63 Time of Max Occurre nce days h r :min 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 01 :36 0 01 :36 0 01:35 0 01:35 0 01:36 0 01:36 0 01 :36 0 0 1:35 0 01 :35 0 03:18 0 03 :18 0 0 1 :3 5 0 01:35 Mg al 1. 388 1.299 2.686 Maximum Velocity ft/sec 10.38 2 .46 5 .24 2.87 1. 94 8 .05 2 .44 2 .1 5 3 . 94 3.96 3.79 3 .14 2.61 4.25 4 .16 18.844 1 9.173 Time of Max Occurrence days hr :min 0 03:18 Max/ Full Flow 0.00 0.03 0.07 0 .30 0.01 1. 60 0 .01 0.00 0 . 45 0 .46 0. 47 0.53 0 .44 0.14 0 .38 Max/ Full Dept h 0 .07 0.27 0.18 0.48 0.15 1.00 0 .16 0 .13 0 .48 0.49 0 .51 0 .85 0 .76 0.29 0 .67 Maximum Ou tfl ow CFS 2.80 Storm-D02 Storm-D03 Storm-EOl Storm-E02 Storm -E03 Storm-E04 Storm-FOl Storm-F02 Storm-F03 Storm-F04 Storm-GOl Storm-G02 Storm-G03 Storm-G04 A Storm-G04 _B Storm-GOS Storm-GOG Storm-GO? Storm-GOB S t o rm-J Ol Storm-J03 Storm-MOl Storm-M02 Storm-KOl S t orm-LOl Storm-RD-1-1 S t orm-RD-1-2 Storm-RD-1-3 Basin_9_Inflow Storm-RD -1 -4 Storm-RD-1-5 Storm-RD-1 -6 Storm-J02 Orif ice_Outlet CONDU IT CONDU IT CONDU I T CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDU I T CON DUI T CONDU IT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDUI T CO NDUIT CONDUIT CONDU IT CONDUI T CO NDUIT CON DUI T CONDU I T CONDU IT CO NDUIT CONDU IT CONDUIT CONDU IT CONDU IT CONDU I T CONDUIT CONDUIT CONDU I T CO NDUIT CONDUIT CONDUIT ORIFICE *************************** Flo w Class if ication Summa ry *************************** 1.12 2. 74 7 . 73 0 .57 0 .4 9 3.68 19. 23 19 .4 5 19.38 19.46 44.80 45 .14 44.22 40.94 3 9. 97 19. 83 6.08 6 .13 4.31 3.43 2.16 1. 66 0 .5 9 1. 48 1 .89 1.1 2 0 .01 0 .48 14 .66 0.13 3 .1 0 1. 77 2 .15 2 .80 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0 01 :37 0 01 :36 0 01 :36 0 01 :36 0 0 1 :38 0 01 :37 0 0 1:36 0 01 :36 0 0 1 :36 0 01 :35 0 01 :36 0 01:35 0 0 1 :35 0 01 :36 0 01 :36 0 0 1:36 0 01 :3 5 0 01:35 0 01 :35 0 0 1:35 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 01:35 0 01 :35 0 01 :35 0 01 :36 0 03:18 1.17 3. 48 4. 4 7 0 . 43 1. 70 4 .73 5 .28 4. 4 9 4 .11 3.79 6.22 1. 78 5 .88 4. 4 7 4.01 2 .3 6 5.29 5.40 4.27 3 .3 6 3.19 2.83 1. 71 1. 71 5 .44 2.80 0 .23 2 .11 5 .01 l . 91 6 .83 5 .8 5 2 .70 0 .24 1.07 0 .49 0 .0 8 0 .07 0.60 0 .58 0 .72 0 .65 0 .7 1 1 .47 0 .21 0.63 0 .58 0 .57 0 .28 0 .39 0 .67 0 .48 0.33 0 .33 0 .12 0.05 0 .30 0.13 0 .24 0.00 0 .10 0 .01 0 .08 0 .51 0 .27 0.33 0 .95 1.00 0 .67 0.79 0 . 71 0 .97 0 .51 0.59 0 .64 0 .6 9 0 .95 0 .5 9 0.48 0.57 0 .62 0.53 0 .45 0 .61 0 .56 0.36 0 .4 1 0 .37 0 .31 0 .50 0 .25 0 .67 0 .52 0.54 0 .1 5 1.00 0 .56 0 .41 0 .4 6 1.00 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Conduit Adjusted /Actual Length Fraction of Time in Flow Class Up Down Sub Su p Up Down Dry Dry Dry Crit Cr it Crit Crit Avg. Froude Numb e r Avg. Flow Change ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Overflow_To_LW P-l la_Str eet P-llb_Overflow P-llb_Street P-llc_Street P30-os PLD_North PLO-South Storm-AOl Storm -A02 Storm-A03 Storm-A04 Storm -AOS Storm-B01 Storm-D01 S t orm-D02 Storm-D03 Storm-EO l Storm-E02 Storm -E03 Storm-E04 S t o rm -FOl Storm-F02 Storm -F03 Storm-F04 Storm-GOl Storm-G02 S t orm-G03 Storm-G04_A Storm-G04_B Storm-GOS Storm-GOG Storm-GO? Storm-GOB Storm-JOl Storm -J03 1. 29 1.00 1.00 1.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 2.79 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 2.28 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 0 .96 0.00 0 .00 0 .8 3 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.96 0.83 0.05 0 .00 0.00 0 .0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .46 0 .11 0 .59 0.10 0 .57 0.10 0.46 0.11 0 .57 0.1 4 0 .71 0 .01 0.57 0.22 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.01 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .17 0 .00 0 .00 0 .1 2 0 .92 0 .00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 .00 0 . 41 0.31 0.33 0 . 41 0 .29 0 .28 0 .21 0 .52 1.00 1. 00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0 .98 1.0 0 1.00 0.21 0.93 0 .1 5 1.00 0 .00 1.00 0.04 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.07 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .02 0 .00 0 .02 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.07 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 1.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 1.00 0 .02 0.00 0 .00 0.02 0 .00 0 .00 0 .0 0 0 .48 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 1.00 0.00 0.06 0.02 0 .08 0.01 0.02 0.12 0 .13 0 .13 0 .56 0 .56 0 .54 0 .56 0.49 0.05 0 .02 0.01 0.01 0 .02 0 .00 0 .01 0 .02 0 .07 0 .0 8 0 .10 0 .11 O. 03 0.01 0.04 0 . 03 0. 0 4 0.02 0.11 0. 06 0.07 0 . 0 4 0. 03 0.0000 0.0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0.0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0.0000 0 .0001 0 .0000 0 .0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0.0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 .0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Storm-MOl 1.00 0 .00 a. 95 0.00 0 .05 Storm-M02 1.00 0.00 a. 95 0.00 0.05 St.orm-KOl 1.00 0.00 a . 92 0.00 0 .08 Storm-LOl 1.00 0 .00 a. oo 0.00 0 .00 Storm-RD-1-1 1.00 0 .00 a . 92 0.00 0.07 Storm-RD-1-2 1.00 0.00 a . 9s 0.00 a.as S to r m-RD-1-3 1.00 0.79 a .1s 0 .00 0.06 Basin_9_Infl ow 1.00 0 .93 a. oo 0 .00 0.00 Storm -RD-1-4 1. 58 0.00 a. oo 0.00 0 .00 St.orm-RD-1-5 1.0 0 0.84 a. 07 0.00 0.07 Storm-RD-1-6 1.00 0.84 a . 0 8 0.00 a.as Storm-J02 1.00 0 .0 0 a. 92 0.00 0 .08 ************************* Conduit Surcharge Summary ************************* Conduit ---------Hours Ful l ------- Both Ends Ups trea m Dnst.ream P30-os 0 .41 0 .41 Storm-D03 3 .0 1 3.01 Storm -GOl 0.0 1 0 .01 St.orm-RD-1-4 0.07 0.07 Analysis begun on , Thu Ju l 30 15,54,58 2009 Analysis ended on , Thu Jul 30 15 ,55,26 2009 Total elapse d time , 00,00,28 0.4 1 3.02 0.0 1 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.02 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.02 0.00 0 .00 1.00 0 .07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .01 0.00 0.00 0 .07 0 .1 0 0.00 0 .00 0.99 0 .04 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.05 0 .00 0.00 0 .02 0 .04 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .02 Hours Hours Above Full Capacit y Normal Flow Lim i ted 2 .94 0.41 0.02 0 .01 0 .58 0.0 1 0.01 0.01 0.0000 0.0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0 .0000 0.0000 0 .0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 .0000 North College Ma rketplace PROPOSED DRIANAGE SUMM ARY Des ign Eng ineer: Design Firm : Project Numbe r: Date : INLET SUMMARY TABLE DESIGN POINT Inlet DS Link TRIBUTARY SUB-BASIN P3 4 ST-A-03-(INL ET) Storm-A03 34 ,32 P27 ST -B-01-(INL ET) Storm-B0 1 27 P14 ST-D-01-(IN LET) Storm-D01 14 P17 ST -D-02-(INL ET ) Storm-D02 17 P18 ST-E-01-(INLET) Storm -E01 18 P16 ST -E-03-(INL ET) Storm-E03 16 P25 ST-F-04-(INL ET) Storm-F04 1, 2 , 25 P33 ST -G-02-(INL ET ) Storm -G02 13 , 33 , 15 pg ST-G-04-(INLET) Storm-G04 B 9, 31 , Inlet M-01 carryover P7 ST-G-05 -(INLET) Storm-GOS 7 P4 ST-G-08 -(1 NLET) Storm-GOB 4 PS ST-L-01-(IN LE T) Storm -L01 5 P12 ST-M -01 -(INLE T ) Storm-M-01 12 , 11 P28 ST-M-02 -(INLET ) Storm -M-02 28 P10 ST-K -01-(INLET) Storm-K01 10 SWMM PARAME T ERS -Fina l.xis -Inl et S um mary Invert Max FL Elevati on Depth Elevation Feet Feet feet 4970 .81 5 .34 4976 .15 4974.50 3.27 4977 .77 4971 .28 4.72 4976 .00 4971.45 3 .18 4974 .63 4971 .28 4 .72 4976 .00 4971 .52 3.11 4974 .63 4972 .23 4.73 4976 .96 4971 .64 3.93 4975 .57 4972.10 4 .54 4976 .64 4972 .56 4.44 4977 .00 4977 .18 12.31 4989.49 4979.05 8.87 4987.92 4975.72 3 .89 4979 .61 4975.72 3 .78 4979 .50 4975 .00 4 .49 4979.49 100-year 10-year @ Grade Number of Units a ,oo HGL a ,o HGL or in Inlet Type Requ ired COMMENTS cfs feet cfs feet Sump 30 .2 4974 .79 9.0 4972.16 Sump 15 foot Type R 1 On Willox 3 .9 4975.27 1.8 4974 .97 @ Grade Type 13 Combo 2 On Will ox 4.4 4974 .19 2.1 4972 .58 Sump Type 13 Combo 2 Inlet alo ng back of KS -sou thern inlet 2 .3 4974.19 1.1 4972 .58 Sump Type 13 Combo 1 Inlet in southern loading dock 9 .1 4974.19 3 .7 4972.58 Sump T ype 13 Combo 2 Inlet along back of KS -northern inlet 1.0 4974 .19 0 .5 4972 .58 Sump Type 13 Combo 1 Inlet in northern load ing dock 43.8 4976 .52 19 .5 4974.41 Sump Type C 3 In northern P LD 9 .6 4974.49 4 .0 4972 .58 Sump Type C 3 In southern PLD 48.7 4975 .20 22 .3 4973 .37 Sump Type C 3 In southern PLD 31 .5 4975 .28 14 .8 4973.43 Sump Type C 3 In Parking Lot 3 .1 4978.13 1.5 4977 .97 @ Grade 10 foot Type R 1 On College Avenue 3 .9 4979 .65 1.9 4979.44 @ Grade 5 foot Type R 1 On College Avenue 21 .8 4976 .73 10.1 4976.18 @ Grade Type 13 1 In Wil lox Entrance 1.3 4976 .57 0 .6 4976 .03 Sump Type 13 1 In W illox Entrance 3.2 4976 .17 1.5 4975.71 Sump Type 13 Combo 1 In Willox Entrance Pa ge 1 of 1 AYRES ASSOCIATES Project: North College Market Place LOCATION: North PLO Inlet ST F-4 (Basin 25) ... I _____________ c __________ __ . Type Inlet Co= Inlet Length = Inlet Width = # of Inlets= Ao (ft2 ) = g= Notes Elevation Head feet PLO FL 4976 .00 0 .00 RIM Elevation 4976 .96 0.00 PLO Overtoppinq 4977 .00 0.04 4978 .00 1.04 4979 .00 2.04 4979 .00 2.04 4980 .00 3 .04 O,oo= 44 4978 .12 O,o= 20 4977.55 Depth of Ponding in Parking Lot, 100-yr Depth of Ponding in Parking Lot , 10-yr 0.65 3 .198 2 .250 3 21 .586 32 .2 3 Q weir = CLH 2 C= Inlet Length = Inlet Width = # of Inlets= L = Clogging= Type C Inlet Orifice Flow cfs 0 .00 0 .00 18.02 91 .86 128.66 128.66 157.06 1 .16 0.59 1 .12 0 .55 Weir Flow cfs 0 .000 0.000 0 .273 36 .238 99.553 99.553 181 .100 13.471 6 .582 3 3.198 2 .250 3 19.896 0.80 Controling Flow cfs 0 .000 0.000 0.273 36 .238 99 .553 99 .553 157.056 Project: North College Market Place LOCATION: Parking Lot Sump Inlet G-05 (Basin P7) I Co= Inlet Length = Inlet Width = # of Inlets= A0 (ft2) = 9= Notes Elevation Head feet 4976.00 0.00 4976.50 0 .00 RIM Elevation 4977 .00 0 .00 4978.00 1.00 4979 .00 2 .00 4979 .00 2.00 4980 .00 3.00 0100= 32 4977 .94 O,o= 15 4977.44 Depth of Ponding in Park ing Lot , 100-yr Depth of Ponding in Parking Lot , 10-yr Type C Inlet 0.65 3.198 2.250 3 21.586 32.2 3 Q weir = C£H 2 C= Inlet Length = Inlet Width = # of Inlets= L = Clogging= Type C Inlet Orifice Flow Weir Flow cfs cfs 0.00 0 .000 0 .00 0 .000 0.00 0 .000 90.08 34.167 127.39 96 .639 127.39 96 .639 156.02 177.538 1.44 0.94 0.94 0.44 3 3.198 2 .250 3 19.896 0.80 Controling Flow cfs 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 34 .167 96 .639 96.639 156.019 Project: LOCATION: Notes PLO FL RIM Elevation PLO Overtopp inq 0100= 010= North College Market Place South PLO Inlet ST G-4 (Basin P9) --1 ------------~-------------. Type C Inlet Elevation 4976 .00 4 976 .64 4 977.00 4 978 .00 4 979 .00 4979 .00 4980 .00 67.5 29 Co= Inlet Length = Inlet Width = # of Inlets= A0 (ft2) = g= Head feet 0 .00 0.00 0 .36 1.36 2 .36 2 .36 3.36 4978 .19 4977.46 0 .65 3 .198 2 .250 3 2 1 .586 32 .2 3 - Q weir =CLH 2 C= Inlet Length = Inlet Width = # of Inlets= L = Clogging= Type C Inlet Orifice Flow Weir Flow cfs cfs 0 .00 0 .000 0 .00 0 .000 54.05 7.380 105 .05 54.190 138.38 123.873 138.38 123.873 165.12 210 .435 1.55 0.82 3 3.198 2 .250 3 19.896 0.80 Controling Flow cfs 0 .000 0 .000 7.380 54.190 123.873 123.873 165.115 Depth of Pond ing in Pa rking Lot , 100-yr 1.19 NOTE:Ponding will never reach these depths. Read "South PLD" section of the Drainage Report for further discussion. Depth of Po nding in Parking Lot, 10-yr 0 .46 Project: North College Market Place LOCATION: South of King Soopers Inlet G-02 (Basin P33) I Type C Inlet Q oiifice = C o A o .J2gH 3 Q o,: Q weir = CLH 2 Co= 0 .65 C= 3 Inlet Length = 3.198 Inlet Length = 3.198 Inlet Width = 2.250 Inlet Width= 2 .250 # of Inlets= 2 # of Inlets= 2 Ao (ft2) = 14.391 L = 15.396 g= 32 .2 Clogging= 0.80 Type C Inlet Notes Elevation Head Orifice Flow Weir Flow Controling Flow feet cfs cfs cfs RIM Elevation 4975 .57 0.00 0 .00 0.000 0.000 4976.00 0.43 39 .38 7.455 7.455 4977.00 1.43 71 .81 45 .212 45 .212 4978 .00 2.43 93 .61 100.152 93 .611 4979.00 3.43 111.22 167.954 111 .217 4980.00 4.43 126.39 246 .522 126.394 DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD North College Market Place Inlet ST A-03 (Basin 34) Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow I I LL -E-- t.. ------- Design t-low : u 1~L Y 11 alreaay aetermInea tnrougn other metnoos : (local peak flow for 1/2 of st reet, plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchmen ts ): ,J • If you entered a value here, skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet Q-A llowl ueographic Information : (Enter data In the blue cells): _J FLc. v. -- Minor Storm Major Storm ·a =I 10.001 31.00!cfs Subcatch ment A rea =a Acres Percent Imperv iousness = % NRCS Soil Type= A , B, C, or D Site : (Check One Box Only) Sl ope (fVft) Length (ft ) Site is Urban:I X I Overland Flow =1 I I Site Is Non-Urba n:'. Gutter Flow = Ha1nta11 1nto rmat1o n: Intensity 1 (incrvnr) = {.;1 I-', I ( l,;2 + I c) "l,;3 Minor Storm Major Storm Desi gn Storm Return Period , T, = years Return Period On e-Hour Precipita tion, P, = inches C ,= C2= C3= User-Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calcu lated value), C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficie nt (leave this b lank to accept a calculated val ue), C5 = Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , a. = 0.00 0.00 els Analysi s of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) fo r a Catchment : Minor Storm Majo r Storm Ca lculated Design Sto rm Runoff Coefficien t, C = N/A N/A Calc ulated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C5 = N/A N/A Overland Flow Velocity , V0 = N/A N/A fps Gutter Flow Velocity , VG= N/A N/A fps Overland Flow Ti me , lo = N/A N/A minutes Gutter Flow T ime , 1G = N/A N/A min utes Calculated Time of Concentrat io n, T, = N/A N/A minutes Time of Concentration by Regional Formula , T, = N/A N/A minutes Recommended T, = N/A N/A min utes Time of Concentration Selected by User , T, = NIA N/A minutes Design Rainfall Intensity, I = N/A N/A inch/h r Calculated Local Peak Flow , Op= N/A N/A cfs Total Des ign Peak Flow , Q = 10.00 31 .00 els 0 1-P 34 (ST A-03).xls , Q -Peak 8/11/2009, 3 :44 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Bas ed on Regulated Cr ite r ia for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project: ___________________ N..,o_rt.,.h...;.C,.;;o,..11..;.e..:g..;.e_M.,;;.;..a ..;.rk.;.;e,.;t ..;.P_l.;.,a_ce _________________ _ Inlet ID : __________________ In_le_t_S_T_A_-.;,;0..;.3_,,(_B _as_i_n_3_4"-) ________________ _ -T CROWN T' T MAX w Ow HcuRB d y I a -!..-- Gutter Geometrv /Enter data in the blue cells\ Maxi mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb Tx - _y _ Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) Manning's Roughness Behind Curb Height of Curb at Gutte r Flow Line Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown Gutter Depression Gutter Wi dth Street Transverse Slope Street Longitudinal Slope -Enter O for sump condition Manning's Ro ughness for Street Section Max. Allowable Water Spread for Minor & Major Storm Max. All owable Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm All ow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based On Allowable Water Smead Gutter Cross Slope (Eq . ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutt er Dep ression Allowable Spread fo r Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carri ed in Sectio n T x Discharge wi thin the Gutter Sect ion W (Or -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e .g., sidewalk, driveways , & lawns) Max i mum Flow Based On Allowable Water Sprea d Flow Veloci ty Within the Gutter Section V'd Prod uct: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Maximum Gutter Canac itv Based on Allowable Gutter Denth Theoretical Water Sp read Theo retical Spread fo r Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHW A HE C-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Theoretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x TH Act ual Discharge o utsi de the Gutte r Section W , (limited by distance T caowNl Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Oa -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e.g., sidewalk , driveways , & lawns) Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Sect ion V'd Product: Flow Vel oci ty Times Gutter Flowline Depth Slope-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor (d ?. 6") Storm Max Flow Based on Allow . Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Appl ied) Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Appl ied) Max. Allowabl e Gutter Caoac itv Based on Min imum of QT or Q, Street Crown TsACK=aft SaACK = ft . vert . / ft . horiz naACK = Hcuas = 6 .00 inches TcaowN = 28.0 ft a= 2.00 inches W = 2.00 ft Sx= 0.0200 ft . vert . / ft . ho riz So = 0.0050 ft . vert. / It. horiz n sTREET;::: 0.01 60 Minor Storm Major Storm TMAX= 28.0 28 .0 ft dMAX = 6 .00 18.00 inches X = yes Minor Storm Major Storm Sw = 0.1033 0.1033 It/ft Y = 6.72 6 .72 inches d = 8 .72 8.72 inches Tx= 26.0 26.0 ft Eo = 0 .218 0 .2 18 Ox = 21 .6 2 1.6 cfs Ow= 6.0 6.0 els Oa ACK = 0.0 0.0 els Or = 27.7 27 .7 els V = 4.8 4.8 fps V'd = 3.5 3.5 Minor Storm Major Storm Tr H = 16.7 66 .7 ft TxrH = 14.7 64 .7 ft Eo = 0 .378 0.086 Ox TH= 4.7 245 .7 els Ox= 4.7 183.4 els Ow= 2.9 23 .1 els OaACK = 0.0 0 .0 els 0 = 7.6 206 .4 els V = 3.6 8.3 fps V'd = 1.8 12.4 R = 1.00 1.00 Od= 7.6 206 .4 els d= 6.00 18 .00 inches dcaowN = 0 .00 9 .28 inches Minor Storm Major Storm a .11ow =I 7.6, 27.7 l cfs WARNING: MINOR STOR M max. a llowable capacity is less than flow gi ven on sheet 'Q-Pea k' WARNING: MAJOR STO RM max. a llowable capac ity is less than flow give n on sheet 'Q-Peak' 01-P 34 (ST A -03).xls , Q-A llow 8/11/2009 , 3 :44 PM 20 19 18 17 j 16 111 13 1 Cl) .c u C: 12 • .!: 11 I 6 5 - 4 3 2 0 0 .0 qJ I CJ 2.0 -G round elev . L. I I --- 4.0 0 1 St re et Section w ith Flow Depths I □ 6.0 I p D 8 .0 ·! 10 .0 I 0 ,. t I • )K I ::+(! -i ' 1 r ·1 D 12.0 14.0 Section of 1/2 Street (distance in feet) D Minor d-max Majord-max X Mino r T-max 1 Q = Ql Q Q Q l-E w = -.x 0 01-P 34 (ST A-03).xl s, Q-Allow i 1- 16 .0 f-.L J. 18.0 20 .0 ., I ::i:: Major T -max 8/11 /2009 , 3 :44 PM 20 .--....,---.,...----r----,------,--r€;}-------,-----;-------r----,---- 19 18 -1-- I +- I 17 -1-·--·-+ 16 i 15 ,...J 4 "' Cl) I 7313 C: I + +- J I -j - I [ EJ □ ,□ ~ :.:. o9 J:12 -a. I □ Cl) C 11 □ 3: □ 0 l □ U:::10 .-::. p ,t: [D ._.9 -~ "C i co q ~8 □l a. en 3: 7 0 u::: 6 ·•- 4 t- + r I I r ·-I +--- r ' I I 1--· I I I- ' -r - I i I + T + l I 0l:!t---------'--------------------'----_J 0 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Q for 1/2 Street (cfs) o Flow Depth (in.) □ Flow Spread (ft .) 01-P 34 (ST A -03).xls, Q-Allow Q for 1/2 Flow Depth Flow Street (cfs) (in .) Spread (ft.) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 2.18 1.76 0.50 2.55 2.28 0.75 3.19 4.96 1.00 3.47 6.12 1.25 3.69 7.05 1.50 3.88 7.84 1.75 4.04 8.52 2.00 4.19 9.14 2.25 4.33 9.70 2.50 4.45 10.21 2.75 4.56 10.69 3.00 4.67 11 .13 3.25 4.77 11 .56 3.50 4.87 11 .95 3.75 4.96 12.33 4.00 5.04 12.69 4.25 5.13 13.04 4.50 5.21 13.37 4.75 5.28 13.69 5.00 5.36 14.00 5.2 5 5.43 14.30 5.50 5.50 14.59 5.75 5.57 14.87 6.00 5.63 15.14 6.25 5.69 15.40 6.50 5.76 15.66 6.75 5.82 15.91 7.00 5.87 16.15 7 .25 5.93 16.39 7.50 5.99 16.62 7.75 6.04 16.85 8.00 6.09 17.07 8.25 6.15 17.29 8.50 6.20 17.51 8.75 6.25 17.72 9.00 6.30 17.92 9.25 6.35 18.12 9.50 6.39 18.32 9.75 6.44 18.52 10.00 6.49 18.71 10.25 6.53 18.90 10.50 6.58 19.09 10.75 6.62 19.27 11 .00 6.67 19.45 11.25 6.71 19.63 11.50 6.75 19.80 11.75 6.79 19.97 12.00 6.83 20 .14 12.25 6.87 20 .31 12.50 6.91 20.48 8/11 /2009 , 3:44 PM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Project = ________________________ _;.;N.;;o,;.rt;;.h;;.C~o,;.11.;;.eg,..e.;..;.M,;.a;;.;r.;.k.;;e.;.t.;.P.;.la;..c;..e;_ _______________________ _ Inlet ID = ________________________ l_n_le_t_S_T_A_-_o_3_.(_B_a_si_n_3_4 ... l _______________________ _ ;---Lo(C)-- -,----- H-Curb w~ __ ::,;~- --Lo ~G\ Oesian Information llnoutl MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type= COOT Type R Curb Opening Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter de pression 'a' fro m 'Q-Allow') 8-= 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (G rate or Curb Opening) No= 1 1 Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate L0 (G) = N/A N/A feet Width of a Unit Grate Wo = N/A N/A feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0. 15-0.90) ~-lio = N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 -0.70) C1 (G)= N/A NIA Grate Wei r Coefficient (typical value 3.00) C. (G)= N/A NIA Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) C0 (G) = NIA N/A Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening L.(C) = 15.00 15.00 feet Heig ht of Vertical Curb Open ing in Inches H-,= 5.00 5.00 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches H lhr01.1= 4.95 4.95 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta= 63.4 63.4 degrees Side W idth for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) W P= 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0. 10) C1 (C)= 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3 .00) c. (C) = 2.30 2.30 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) c. (C) = 0.67 0.67 Resultina Gutter Flow Death for Grate Inlet Caoacitv in a Sumo MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = N/A NIAi Clogg ing Factor for Multiple Units Clog= N/A N/A Grate as a Weir Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate, 10 els curb) d-.i: NIA NIA inches This Row Used for Combination Inlets Only da.b-1#\= N/A NIA inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate , 10 els curb) d-= N/A N/A inches This Row Used for Combination Inlets Only d curb-d = N/A NIA inches Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate , 10 els curb) doi = N/A NIA inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate, 10 els curb) cl..= N/A NIA Inches Resultina Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression d a.Grate = N/A NIA inches c ... ..,. .. ltina GuttAr Flow Oeoth for Curb Qn~n ina Inlet ,.."'"8C itv in a Sumo MINOR MAJOR Cloggin g Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef =1 1001 1 001 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0.10 0.10 Curb as a Weir, Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogg ing (0 els grate, 10 els curb) d~=1 490 1 10.93,inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate , 10 els cu rb) ct.,= 5.26 11 .73 inches Curb as an Orifice , Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate, 10 els curb) d01 = 3.09 11.97 inches Flow Depth at Local Dep ression with Clogging (0 els grate , 10 els curb) do.a= 3.30 14.26 inches Resulting Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression d •. curb = 3.26 12.26 inches Resultant Street Cnnditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L = 15.0 15.0 feet Total In let Interception Capacity (Design Discharge from Q-Peak) a.= 9.0 30 .0 cfs Resultant Gutter Flow Depth (based on sheet Q-Alfow geometry) d= 3.26 12.26 inches Resultant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allo w geometry) T= 5.3 28.0 ft. >T-Crown Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown dcRowN = 0.00 3.60 inches 01 -P 34 (ST A-03).xls , Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009, 3:44 PM 40 ---i 39 • -+--· .J.. -·t 38 ----+-. -T --r-,. -7 37 T .i_ --· I ·-· 36 -,---t--j l- 35 1-I-I 1--;----t 34 -I-+---+ --, -' -r·--, ,-I 33 t 1· ·t -4 ·-4-I .!. 32 --"'" --" -1 --,--, -+-I I 31 --r T ➔--+- I ! 30 --,--!---·1-· -1--- 29 --_j______ --i ! l-I-I ' I I I I I 28 .I.. __j ----i--f ·X --X -X---X-X-X---X---~ X--),(-X--),( ~- 27 ---1-··--➔-X +--L. 1 t I 26 L + -f T ----I T --t + J. I >< -1--25 1--I -,, i- 24 I 1 I I ){ I + 4 :: 1 r- i 1 I -i T I -1-23 -1 + + i + !=, ! ! "C 22 i +x I .. I I l [ 2 1 ..!. * ,--1 ~ 20 I ~ I I 'in X l G) 19 ,s: r I "' I. -1-I :§. 18 I f ,- I a 17 - 1 I ·x G) i 0 16 i l 15 j ~ 'r 14 I t; X -1 13 r r,-I 12 r I /! 11 - I i 10 *-,1 9 ·I I X 8 7 * I I .l 6 T 5 -X I I_: I 4 3 - 2 o . 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 a for 1/2 Street (cfs) -6--CurbWeir -+-Curb Ori!. -S-Not Used 0 Not Used • Reported Design X • Reported Design Flow Depth (in.) Fklw Depth (in) Flow Depth (in.) Flow Spread (11.) 01-P 34 (ST A-03).xls, Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009, 3:44 PM Q Intercepted Curb Weir J Flow Curb Ori!. ]Flow Not Used Not Used Reported Design Reported (els) Depth (in.) Depth (in .) 7 Flow Depth (in.) Design l Flow Spread (11.) 0.00 0 .00 0 .21 0.21 0 .17 1.00 0 .00 0 .23 0.23 0 .19 2 .00 0.00 0.27 0 .27 0.22 3 .00 0 .53 0.33 0.53 0.43 4 .00 1 .06 0.43 1.06 0.85 5 .00 1.55 0 .55 1.55 1.25 6 .00 2.01 0 .69 2.01 1.62 7 .00 2.44 0 .87 2.44 1.97 8 .00 2 .86 1.07 2.86 3 .58 9 .00 3 .26 1.30 3.26 5 .25 10.00 3 .64 1.55 3.64 6.83 11 .00 4.01 1.83 4.01 8 .37 12 .00 4 .37 2 .14 4.37 9 .87 13 .00 4.72 2.47 4 .72 11.33 14 .00 5 .06 2 .84 5 .06 12 .75 15.00 5.39 3 .22 5 .39 14.12 16.00 5 .71 3 .64 5.71 15.46 17.00 6 .03 4.08 6.03 16 .79 18.00 6.34 4 .55 6 .34 18.08 19.00 6 .65 5.04 6 .65 19.37 20 .00 6 .95 5 .57 6 .95 20 .62 21 .00 7.25 6 .12 7 .25 21 .87 22 .00 7 .54 6.69 7 .54 23 .08 23 .00 7.82 7 .29 7 .82 24.25 24.00 8 .11 7 .92 8 .11 25.46 25 .00 8 .39 8 .58 8 .58 27.42 26 .00 8.66 9 .26 9.26 28 .00 27.00 8 .93 9 .97 9 .97 28 .00 28 .00 9 .20 10 .71 10.71 28 .00 29 .00 9 .47 11.47 11.47 28 .00 30 .00 9 .73 12.26 12.26 28.00 3 1.00 9 .99 13.08 13.08 28 .00 32 .00 10.24 13.92 13.92 28 .00 33 .00 10.50 14.79 14 .79 28 .00 34 .00 10.75 15 .69 15.69 28 .00 35 .00 11 .00 16.61 16 .61 28 .00 36.00 11 .24 17 .56 17.56 28 .00 37 .00 11.49 18.54 18.54 28.00 38 .00 11 .73 19.54 19 .54 28.00 39 .00 11 .97 20 .57 20 .57 28 .00 40 .00 12.21 21.63 21 .63 28 .00 01 -P 34 (ST A-03).xls, Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009 , 3:44 PM DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD North College Market Place lnelt ST B-1 (Basin P27) Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow r. r E. l, t t •l t .I., '" ' tr ----~~I ---T F - .k=... E. 1 cEf -------- Design t-low : ui.L Y 11 alreaay determinea tn rougn other methoas: Mi nor Storm Major Storm (local peak flo w fo r 1/2 of st reet, plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchment s): ·a =I 2.001 4.0 0 !cfs * If yo u ente red a valu e here, sk i p the re st of thi s sh eet and pro c eed to sheet Q-A ll ow) Geographic Information : (Enter data in the blue cells): Subcatchmen t Area =aAcres Percent Imperviousness = % NRCS Soil Type= A, B, C , or D Site : (Check One Box Only) Slope (IVtt) Length (ft) Site is Urban :I X I Overland Flow =1 I I Site Is Non-Urban :'. Gutter Flow= Ramlall Information : Intensity I (inctvhr) = c , I-' 1 / ( C2 + I c ) /\ L,3 Minor Storm Major Storm Design Storm Return Period , T, = years Retu rn Period One-Ho ur Precipi tation , P, = inches C ,= C2= C,= User-Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient (leave th is blank to accept a calculated value), C5 = Bypass (Carry-Ove r) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , Qb = 0.00 0.00 cfs Analysi s of Flow T ime (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment : Minor Storm Major Storm Ca lcu lated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient , C = N/A N/A Ca lculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient , C5 = N/A N/A Overland Flow Velocity , V0 = N/A N/A fps Gutte r Flow Velocity, V8 = N/A N/A fps Overland Flow Time , lo = N/A N/A minutes Gutter Flow Time, t8 = N/A N/A minu tes Ca lculated Time of Concentration , T, = N/A N/A minutes Time of Concentration by Regional Formula , T, = N/A N/A minutes Recommended T, = N/A N/A minutes Time of Concentration Selected by User, T0 = NIA N/A minutes Design Rainfall Intensity , I = N/A N/A inch/hr Calculated Local Peak Flow, Op = N/A NIA els Total Design Peak Flow, Q = 2.00 4.00 cfs 02 -P27 (ST B-1 ).xis , Q-P eak 8/11 /2009 , 3:47 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria fo r Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project: North College Market Place Inlet l □:-----------------,-ln-e""lt""s"'T=-a"'-""'1""(""B'""a-si'""n""P=,2"'1"") ________________ _ --T BACK s ---BA C I( y HcuAB d Gutter Geometrv (Enter data in the blue cells\ Maximum Allowable Width fo r Spread Behind Curb T C R OWN Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) Manning's Roughness Behind Curb Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown Gutter Depression Gutter Width Street Trans verse Slope Street Longi tudinal Slope -Enter O for sump condition Manning's Roughness for Street Section Max. All owable Wate r Spread for Minor & Major Storm Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) M:nimum Gutter Canacitv Based On Allowable Water Snread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression Allowable Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W ) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x Discharg e within the Gutter Section W (Or -Ox) Discharge Behi nd the Curb (e .g., sidewalk, driveways , & lawns) Maximum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section V"d Product : Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based on Allowable Gutter Denth Theoretical W ater Spread Theoretical Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutte r Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Theoreti cal Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x TH Actual Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , (limited by distance T c Aow,l Discharge within the Gutter Section W (O. -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e.g., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Flow Velocity Wi thin the Gutter Section V"d Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Slope-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Mino r (d ?. 6") Storm Max Flow Based on Allow . Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Applied) Result ant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) Max . Allowable Gutte r Caoacitv Based on Minimum of QT or Q TeAcK=aft SsACK = ft . vert. I ft . horiz n sACK = HcuAB = 6.00 inches T c ROWN := 29 .9 ft a= 2.00 inches W= 2.00 ft Sx= 0 .0274 ft . vert. I ft. horiz So = 0 .0033 ft . ve rt . I ft . ho riz nsTREET = 0.0160 Minor Storm Major Storm TMAX = 15 .0 17.9 ft dMAX= 6 .00 18.00 inches X= yes Minor Storm Majo r Storm Sw= 0.1107 0.1107 It/ft Y= 4.93 5.89 inches d= 6.93 7.89 inches Tx= 13.0 15.9 ft Ea = 0 .394 0.330 Ox= 4 .7 8 .0 cfs Ow= 3.0 3.9 cfs OsACK = 0 .0 0.0 cfs Or= 7.7 11 .9 els V = 3.3 3.6 fps V"d = 1.9 2.4 Minor Storm Major Storm TrH = 12 .2 48.7 ft TxrH = 10 .2 46.7 ft Ea = 0 .482 0.116 Ox TH= 2.4 141 .3 els Ox= 2.4 128 .9 els Ow= 2 .3 18.6 els OsACK = 0.0 0.0 els 0 = 4.7 147.4 els V= 2 .9 6.7 fps V"d = 1.5 10.0 R= 1.00 1.00 a .= 4.7 147.4 els d= 6.00 18 .01 inches dcAOWN = 0 .00 6.17 inches Mi nor Sto rm Major Sto rm a .now =I 4.7 1 11.9 l cfs MINO R STORM max . allowa b le capacity O K -greater t han flow given on sheet '0 -Peak' MAJOR STORM max. all owable ca oacity OK -oreate r t han f lo w o iven o n sheet 'Q-Peak' 02-P27 (ST B-1 ).xls , a-Allow 8/11/2009 , 3 :47 PM Street Section with Flow Depths 20 7· r 19 ---j--+ i- 18 17 1" r -~-..,. I 16 • -~-t--t I· 15 -i" I I 14 r i f/1 13 • + Q) I t .s::. 12 L ·I ~ u + f· I· + + C I .: 11 r T ·+ ~ I l. C. 10 I- Q) I e. 9 l 1 + 1: 8 } I I i en * )j( )K )19 ;:IC )K )i( I )K )K ' ;:tc 'Qi ::c: 7 ~ * I I I * Lx r :X · -x,-i>< , X i' I I I I 6 [i] 0 D D D p D I 5 4 3 2 f 0 0 .0 2 .0 4 .0 6.0 8 .0 10 .0 12.0 14.0 16 .0 18 .0 20 .0 Section of 1/2 Street (distance in feet) -Ground elev . □ Minor d-max Majord-max X MinorT-max ::K MajorT-max 1 02-P27 (ST B-1 ).xls , Q-Allow 8/11/2009, 3:47 PM 20 Q for 1/2 Flow Depth Flow 19 I --.l Street (els) (in.) Spread (ft.) I ' i 18 ---r--t -+- 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .25 2.43 1.83 0 .50 3.10 3 .36 17 -0.75 3.54 4 .69 1.00 3.86 5.67 1.25 4.12 6.46 16 f-1.50 4.35 7 .14 1.75 4 .54 7 .73 15 2.00 4.71 8.2 6 2.25 4.87 8.75 .-J 4 -2 .50 5.02 9.20 11'1 Cl) .s::. 0 13 - C: 2.75 5.16 9 .61 3.00 5.2 9 10.01 3 .2 5 5.41 10.37 :=., 3 .50 5.52 10.72 .S::.12 .• i· -3 .75 5.63 11.06 a. [I] Cl) 0 11 ~- == □, □' 0 r □-I I U::10 ~ □ = ~ -9 - I "C (ti I ~8 lp 4 .00 5.74 11.37 4 .25 5.84 11 .68 4 .50 5.93 11.97 4 .75 6.03 12 .25 5.00 6.11 12.52 5.25 6.20 12.78 5 .50 6.28 13.04 5 .75 6.36 13.28 6 .00 6.44 13.52 a. □ en □I == 7 0 6 .2 5 6.52 13.76 6 .50 6.59 13.98 6 .75 6.67 14.20 u:: □ 7 .00 6.74 14.42 6 □ 7 .25 6.81 14 .63 7.50 6.87 14.83 5 7.75 6.94 15.04 8 .00 7.00 15.23 4 .I 8 .2 5 7.07 15.43 8 .50 7.13 15.61 8.75 7.19 15.80 3 9 .00 7.25 15.98 9 .25 7.31 16.16 2 9 .50 7.37 16.34 9 .75 7.43 16 .51 10.00 7.48 16.68 10.25 7.54 16 .85 10.50 7.59 17.01 OL 't-----,---+-----~---~--~----~--------10.75 7 .64 17 .17 0 4 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 11 .00 7.70 17.33 Q for 1/2 Street (cfs) 11 .25 7 .75 17.49 11 .50 7.80 17.64 11 .7 5 7.85 17.79 o Flow Depth (in.) D Flow Sp read (ft .) 12 .00 7 .90 17.94 12 .25 7.95 18 .09 12 .50 7.99 18.24 02-P27 (ST B-1}.x ls , a-Allow 8/11/2009, 3:47 PM INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE Project : ______________________ N_o,;..rt_h..,;C_o_ll_e_.g.;.;e_M_a_r_k_e_t _P_la_c_e ____________________ _ Inlet ID: ______________________ .;.;ln.;.;e;.;.lt;.;.S;,.T,;...;;;B_-1,;..,>e(B;,.a:;.s;..i..,;n_P..;;2 __ 7.:..) _____________________ _ Lo (C) T H-Curb w w~~ Wo Lo (G) Desian Information llnoutl MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type= COOT/Denver 13 Combination Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' lrom '0-AUo\A/) acoc ... = 2.0 2.0 inches Total Number of Units in the Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) No= 2 2 Length of a Single Unit Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) Lo= 3.00 3.00 ft Width of a Un it Grate (cannot be greater than W from Q-Allow) W o ::::: 1.73 1.73 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical min . value= 0.5) C1-G= 0.50 0.50 Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical min . value= 0.1) C1-C= 0.10 0.10 Street Hvdra lies: OK -Q < maximum allow :1 ble from sheet '0-Allow ' MINOR MAJOR Design Discharge for Half at Street (from Sheet Q-Peak) Oo = 2.00 4.00 els Water Spread Width T= 8.3 11.4tt Water Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) d= 4.7 5.7 inches Water Depth at Street Crown (or atT •A>V d cAOWN = 0.0 0.0 inches Ratio of Gutter Flow to Design Flow Eo = 0.668 0.513 Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carried in Section T1 0 11 = 0.66 1.95 els Discharge within the Gutter Section W 0.,.,= 1.34 2.05 els Discharge Behind the Curb Face OeACK = 0.00 0.00 els Street Flow Area A.= 1.10 1.93 sq tt Street Flow Velocity V,== 1.82 2.07 fps Water Depth for Design Condition d LocAL = 6.7 7 .7 inches Grate Analv sis /Calrutatedl MINOR MAJOR Total Length of Inlet Grate Open ing L =I 6.001 6.00ltt Ratio of Grate Flow to Design Flow E~GRArE = 0.620: 0.470 Under No-Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Minimum Velocity Where Grate Spash-Over Begins Vo = 9.98 9.98 fps Interception Rate of Frontal Flow R,= 1.00 1.00 Interception Rate of Side Flow Rio:= 0.79 0.75 Interception Capacity Qi = 1.84 3.47 els Under Cloggin g Condition MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple-un it Grate Inlet GrateCoef = 1.50 1.50 Clogging Factor for Multiple-unit Grate Inlet GrateClog = 0.38 0.38 Effective (unclogged) Length of Mu ltiple-unit Grate Inlet Le = 3.75 3.75 ft Minimum Velocity Where Grate Spash-Over Begins Vo= 7.15 7.15 fps Interception Rate of Frontal Flow R,= 1.00 1.00 Interception Rate of Side Flow R,.;:: 0.57 0 .51 Actual Interception Capacity a.= 1.67 2.96 els Carry-Over Flow= Q,-0 , (to be applied to curb opening or next dis inlet) O,= 0.33 1.04 els Curb or Slotted Inlet Ooenina Anatvsi s ICaleufatedl MINOR MAJOR Equivalent Slope s. (based on grate carry-over) s.=, 0.13881 0.1129I1Vfl Required Length Lr to Have 100% Interception Lr = 2.65 4.87 tt Under No-Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Effective Length of Curb Opening or Slotted Inlet (minimum of L, Lr) L=1 2641 4.861ft Interception Capacity 0 ,= 0.17: 0.52 els Under Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient CurbCoef = 1.25 1.25 Clogging Factor for Multiple-un it Curb Opening or Slotted In let CurbClog = 0.06 0.06 Effective (Unclogged) Length L,= 2.64 4.86 tt i ~ct ual Interception Capacity 0 ,= 0.17 0.52 els arry-Over Flow = a b(GRATff a . a ,= 0.17 0 .52 els I~ MINOR MAJOR !Total Inlet Interception Capacity 0= 1.83 3.48 els ITotaf Inlet Carry-Over Flow (ffow bypassin g inlet) O,= 0 .17 0 .52 els !Capture Percentage = QJ Q0 = C¾= 91 .7 86 .9 % 02-P27 (ST B-1).xls, Inlet On Grade 8/11 /2009, 3:47 PM ., ., .c u :§.. .c C. ., C 3: 0 ii: g C: 3: 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 O 12 u I ,_:. olS 11 1-,, .. ~ 10 a. en 3: .2 9 u. ~ .!:!. 8 ,, ., Cl) Cl) ~ >, I : 6 ,, .. C. I ~ 5 £ 0 4 1---1 + -i ~ -i- 10 11 a for 1/2 Street {e ls) o a Intercepted (ds) □ 0 Bypassed (els) 0 Spread T (11), Nol Limited by X Flow Depth d (inches) T-C AOWN t l-1-, 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 6. Spread T (It), Limited byT•CAOWN 02-P27 (ST B-1 ).xis, Inlet On G rade 8/11/2009, 3:47 PM a for 1/2 Street a Intercepted a Bypassed (cfs) Spread T (ft), Spread T (ft), Not Flow Depth d (cfs) (cfs) Limited Limited by (inches) by T·caow• T-cRowN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.49 0.01 3.36 3.36 3.11 1.00 0.96 0.04 5.67 5.67 3.87 1.50 1.40 0.10 7.14 7.14 4.35 2.00 1.83 0.17 8.26 8.26 4.72 2.50 2.26 0.24 9.20 9.20 5.03 3.00 2.67 0.33 10.0, 10.01 5.29 3.50 3.08 0.42 10.72 10.72 5.52 4.00 3.48 0.52 11.37 11.37 5.74 4.50 3.88 0.62 11 .97 11.97 5.94 5.00 4.27 0.73 12.52 12.52 6.12 5.50 4.65 0.85 13.04 13.04 6.29 6.00 5.01 0.99 13.52 13.52 6.45 6.50 5.36 1.14 13.98 13.98 6.60 7.00 5.71 1.29 14.42 14.42 6.74 7.50 6.04 1.46 14 .83 14.83 6.88 8.00 6.37 1.63 15.23 15.23 7.01 8.50 6.69 1.8 1 15.61 15.61 7.13 9.00 7.00 2.00 15.98 15.98 7.26 9.50 7.31 2.19 16.34 16.34 7.37 10.00 7.61 2.39 16.68 16.68 7.48 10.50 7.91 2.59 17.01 17.01 7.59 11.00 8.20 2.80 17.33 17.33 7.70 11 .50 8.48 3.02 17.64 17.64 7.80 12.00 8.76 3 .24 17.94 17.94 7.90 12.50 9.04 3.46 18.24 18.24 8.00 13.00 9.32 3.68 18.53 18.53 8.09 13.50 9 .59 3.91 18.81 18.81 8.19 14.00 9.85 4 .15 19.08 19.08 8.27 14.50 10.12 4.38 19.35 19.35 8.36 15.00 10.38 4.62 19.61 19.61 8.45 15.50 10.63 4.87 19.86 19.86 8.53 16.00 10.89 5.11 20.12 20.1 2 8.62 16.50 11 .14 5.36 20.36 20.36 8.70 17.00 11.39 5.61 20.60 20.60 8.77 17.50 11 .64 5.86 20 .84 20.84 8.85 18.00 11.88 6.12 21 .07 21.07 8.93 18.50 12.12 6.38 21.30 21.30 9.00 19.00 12.35 6.65 21.52 21.52 9.08 19.50 12.59 6.91 21 .74 21 .74 9.15 20.00 12.83 7.17 21 .96 21.96 9.22 02-P27 (ST B-1).xls, Inlet On Grade 8/11 /2009 , 3:47 PM DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD North College Market Place ST D-1 (Basin P14) Des ign Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow I ' L !. I t [j . t n -LJ L-=.: :--;-. :::--.l... ,L -----------Design Flow : u1~L Y 11 al ready determined through other methOds: Minor Storm Maj or Storm (local peak flow for 1/2 of street , plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchments): ·a =I 2.001 5.00!cfs * If you entered a value here, skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet a-Allow) Geographic Information : (Enter data in the blue cells): Subcatchment Area =aAcres Percent Imperviousness = % NRCS Soil Type = A, B, C, or D Site: (C heck One Box Only) Slope (fVft) Length (ft) Site is Urban :I X I Overland Flo w =1 I I Site Is Non-Urban :: Gutter Flow= Ramlall IntormatIon : Intensity I (inch/hr) -L:1 f-' 1 / ( L:2 + I c ) " L,3 Minor Storm Major Storm Design Storm Return Period, T, = years Return Period One-Hour Preci pitation , P , = inches C ,= C2= C3= User-Defined Sto rm Run off Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a ca lculated value), C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient (leave this blan k to accept a calculated valu e), C5 = Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , ab = 0.00 0.00 els Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment : Minor Storm Major Storm Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient , C = N/A N/A Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient , CS = N/A N/A Overland Flow Velocity, V0 = N/A N/A fps Gutter Flow Velocity , VG= N/A N/A fps Overland Flow Time, t0 = N/A N/A minutes Gutter Flow Time , tG = N/A N/A minutes Calculated Time of Concentration , Tc = N/A N/A minutes Time of Concentra tion by Region al Formula , Tc = N/A N/A minutes Recommended Tc = N/A N/A minutes Time of Concentration Selected by User , Tc = N/A NIA minutes Design Rainfall Intensity , I = N/A N/A inch/hr Calcu lated Local Peak Flow, Op = N/A N/A cfs Total Design Peak Flow , a= 2.00 5.00 cfs 03 -P14 (ST D-1 ).xis , Q-Peak 8/1 1/2 009 , 3:47 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-H ALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulat ed Crit eri a for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project: ___________________ N..;.o.;.rt.;.,h,.,.;;C..;o.;.11..;.e.=g.;.e..;.M_;.;,;;a ..;.r k.,.;e_t ..,P,..l.;..ac_e _________________ _ Inlet ID : __________________ S;..T....;..D_-1...;(:..B..;.a..;.s_in_P_1_4.:.) _________________ _ T C ROWN T, TMAX - Y I d I a w Ow Gutter Geometrv !Enter data in the blue ce lls\ Maxim um Al lowable W idth !or Spread Behind Curb Tx :y_ Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) Manni ng's Roughness Behind Curb Height of Curb at Gutte r Flow Line Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown Gutter Depression Gutter W idth Street Transverse Slope Street Longitudinal Slope -Enter O for sump condition Manning 's Roughness fo r Street Section Max . Al lowable Water Spread for Minor & Major Storm Max . Allowabl e Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) Max imum Gutter Caoacitv Based On All owable Water Soread Gutter Cross Sl ope (Eq . ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression Allowable Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Fl ow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq . ST-7 ) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Sect ion T x Discharge within the Gutter Section W (0,. -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e .g ., sidewalk, driveways , & lawns) Maxi mum Flow Based On Allo wable Water Spread Flow Veloci ty Within the Gutter Section V"d Product : Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Max i mum Gutter Caoacitv Based on Allowable Gutter Deoth Theoretical Water Spread Theoretical Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Theoretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, ca rried in Section TxTH Actual Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , (limited by distance T cRowN) Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Od -Ox) Discharge Behind the Cu rb (e .g., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) Total Discharge fo r Major & Minor Storm Flow Veloci ty Within the Gutter Section v·d Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Slope -Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor (d?. 6") Storm Max Flow Ba sed on Allow. Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Appl ied) Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (S afety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) 11u~v. Allowable Gutter Caoacitv Based on Mini mum of QT or O. Street Crown Te,cK=a.0lt Se,cK = It . vert . / ft . horiz n sACK = HcuRB = 6 .00 inches TcAOWN = 25 .0 ft a= 2.00 inches W= 2.00 ft Sx = 0.0200 ft . vert . / ft . horiz So= 0 .0060 It. vert . / It . horiz nsTAEET = 0.0160 Minor Storm Major Storm TMAX= 12.5 12.5 ft dMAX = 6.00 6 .00 inches X = yes Minor Storm Major Storm Sw = 0.1033 0.1033 fVft Y= 3.00 3.00 inches d = 5.00 5.00 inches Tx = 10.5 10.5 ft Eo = 0.502 0 .502 Ox= 2.1 2.1 cfs Ow = 2.1 2.1 cfs OeACK = 0.0 0.0 cfs Or= 4.2 4 .2 els V = 3.4 3.4 fp s V"d = 1.4 1 .4 Minor Storm Major Storm TTH = 16.7 16.7 ft TxTH = 14 .7 14 .7 ft Eo = 0.378 0 .378 OxTH = 5.1 5.1 cfs Ox= 5.1 5.1 els Ow= 3.1 3 .1 cfs Oe,cK = 0.0 0 .0 cfs 0 = 8 .3 8.3 els V = 4.0 4.0 fps V"d = 2.0 2 .0 R = 1.00 1.00 Od= 8 .3 8.3 el s d = 6.00 6.00 inches dcAOWN = 0 .00 0 .00 inches Minor Storm Major Storm O a11ow=I 4.21 4 .2 l cts 1 1:1:i,R STOR M max. all o wable capacity OK -greate r tha n flow given o n sheet 'Q-Peak' NIN G: MAJOR STOR M max . allowable capacity is less t ha n flow g iven on sheet '0-Peak' 03-P14 (ST D-1 ).xls , Q-Allow 8/11/2009 , 3 :47 PM Street Sect ion w ith Flow Depths 20 -I .. i. -- I I 19 r + ~ ., - 18 1 I ·-· !_ , -t I i 17 • -+ .j ~ t· 16 -1---· __ _J.__. 1 15 f "t 14 _j I Ill 13 QI .s::. u 12 C: ·= 11 :2 _!_ C. 10 I -j l QI e, 9 I + ,_ -, I .E en : l '4i l :t: .I I ~l lr1 I r1 I I Ir, 6 r1 r1 r1 r1 n r1 ri r1 t f f I . ~ :le . ~1 %: 5 i~ I I I 4 I 3 2 0 0 .0 2 .0 4 .0 6.0 8.0 10 .0 12 .0 14 .0 16.0 18.0 20.0 Section of 1/2 Street (distance in feet) -Grou nd elev . □ Minor d-max Major d•max x-Mino r T-max :K Major T-max 1 E =-----------0 l + [ /• ~S, ]st3 l + 111 1 X -l (T I W)-l 03-P 14 (ST D-1 ).xls , O -Allow 8/11/2009 , 3:47 PM 20 19 18 17 16 15 ,-l 4 1/) Cl) °ti13 C: ::, .C:12 -C. Cl) ! 0 11 == 0 U::::10 """ .t:: -9 "C ctl ~8 C. Cl) == 7 0 u:::: 6 5 4 0 2 -+ + I ,- I <- :□ '□ □ 0 er D D D D D p qi q. 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Q for 1/2 Street (cfs) o Flow Depth (in .) □ Flow Spread (ft .) 03-P14 (ST D-1 ).xls , a -Allow Q for 1/2 Flow Depth Flow Street (els) (in.) Spread (ft.) 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.25 2.11 1.70 0.50 2.53 2 .21 -I-0.75 3.10 4 .59 1.00 3.38 5 .75 ~ 1.25 3.60 6 .67 1.50 3.78 7 .44 1.75 3.94 8 .11 2.00 4.09 8.72 2 .25 4.22 9.26 2.50 4.34 9.76 2.75 4.45 10.23 3.00 4.56 10.67 3.25 4.66 11 .08 3 .50 4.75 11.47 3.75 4.84 11 .83 4.00 4.92 12.19 4.25 5.00 12 .52 4.50 5.08 12.85 4.75 5.16 13.16 5.00 5.23 13.46 5 .25 5.30 13.75 5.50 5.37 14.03 5.75 5.43 14.30 6.00 5.49 14.56 6.25 5.55 14 .82 6.50 5.61 15.07 6 .75 5.67 15.31 7 .00 5.73 15.55 7 .25 5.79 15.78 7 .50 5.84 16.00 7 .75 5.89 16.22 8.00 5.94 16.44 8 .25 5.99 16.65 8 .50 6 .04 16.86 8 .75 6.09 17.06 9 .00 6 .14 17.26 9 .25 6 .19 17.46 9 .50 6.23 17.65 9.75 6.28 17 .84 10.00 6 .33 18.03 10.25 6.37 18.21 10.50 6.41 18.39 10.75 6.45 18.57 22 24 11.00 6.50 18.74 11.25 6.54 18.91 11.50 6.58 19 .08 11 .75 6.62 19 .25 12 .00 6.66 19.42 12 .25 6.70 19 .58 12 .50 6.74 19 .7 4 8/11 /2009, 3 :47 PM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Projeet= ________________________ ....:.;N;;;o,;.;rt:.:h;..C;;:.::;o,;.;11.=eii!g.=e..:;M,;.;a::r..:;k:.:e,;.;t,;.;P.:;la::e:;.;e;_ _______________________ _ Inlet ID = ________________________ S;..T_D;..-_1 ... ('-"B.;..a.;..si_n_P_1_4.:..l ______________________ _ L o(C)- H-Curb 1 l_ Desian Information llnauO MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type= COOT/Denver 13 Combination Local Depression (add itional to continuous gutter depression 'a' fro m 'Q-Allow') a..,.,= 2.00 2 .00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate o r Curb Opening) No= 2 2 Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Le ngth of a Unit Grate L,,(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) A.atio = 0.47 0.47 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0 .50 - 0. 70) C1 (G)= 0.50 0 .50 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) C. (G) = 3 .00 3 .00 Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) C0 (G) = 0 .67 0 .67 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 H-,= 6 .50 6 .50 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches H 1twoa1 = 5.25 5.25 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta= 0.0 0 .0 degrees Side W idth for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) W P= 2 .00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Cu rb Opening (typical value 0 .1 0) C1 (C)= 0 .10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2 .30-3.00) C.(C) = 2 .30 2 .30 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0 .67) C0 (C) = 0.67 0.67 R.,.c:::, ltina Gutter Flow 0eoth for Grate Inlet Caoacitv in a Sumo MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coe!= 1.50 1.50 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0.38 0 .38 Grate as a Weir: The Controlling Factor Will Be : Curb Opening as Weir Curb Opening As Weir Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (2 cfs grate, O els curb) d""'= 6 .09 9.46 inches Flow Depth (Curb Opening Only) without Clogging (0 els grate , 2 el s curb) d curb-un = 2.42 4.46 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (2 els grate , 0 els curb) dwa = 7 .56 12.18 inches Flow Depth (C urb Opening Only) with Clogging (0 els g ra te, 2 els cu rb) d cUfb-a= 2.49 4.58 inches Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate, 2 els curb) doi= 2.44 4.47 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate , 2 els cu rb) d oai :: 2 .54 4 .67 inches Resultina Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression d a-Grata = 0.54 2 .67 inches c.,,~ultinn GuttPr Flow Denth for Curb QnPninn Inlet Canaritu in a Sumn MINOR MAJOR loggi ng Coefficient for Multiple Units Coe! =1 1 251 1251 _,logging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0.06 0 .06 urb as a Weir, Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (O cfs grate, 2 els curb) d~:1 2.441 4.471 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (O els g rate , 2 els cu rb) d--2.54 4.67 inches Curb as an Orifice , Grate as an Orifice MINO R MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (O els grate, 2 cfs curb) doi= 2.42 4 .25 inches =1ow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate, 2 els cu rb) do,,= 2.49 4 .38 inches Resultina Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression da.curb = 0.54 2.67 inches Resultant ~treet Conditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L = 6 .0 6.0 feet Total Inlet In terception Capacity (Design Discharge from O-Peak) a .= 2.0 5.0 el s Resultant Gutter Flow Depth (based on sheet Q-Al/ow geometry) d= 0.49 2 .58 inches Resultant Street Flow Spread {based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) T= 0.4 2.4 feet Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown dcROWN = 0.00 0 .00 inches 03-P14 (ST D-1).xls, Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009, 3:47 PM 40 -r----:----------,---.--------.-------,-------,----------,--r--,------,---, 39 38 37 36 35 ·- 34 ·- 33 ·-- 32 • 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 ! 23 :; 22 .. f!! 21 a. (/). 20 ., _! 19 ... :§.18 t 17 · ~ 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 - 3 2 ,-· +- + -I +- -t- + X X j-·1 .. r ' I +- T r I X I t - T i I x -I x- X <D :i< I I L 0 I I • ' ' • + T 7 ., 0 <D . Q 7 + +· t-- I 0 1 , , , 1 , X ;f X )l( X )i< X )i< X )l(·X -)r:-X f X >K X ->K X -X -X X 0 )K ·'-o <p . ' 0 i 0 IRl-15il--!Ai".'&-~---------------------------------'----- o 2 4 6 03-P14 (ST D-1).xls , Inlet In Sump 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 -6-Grate Weir Flow Depth (in.) o Cum Opening Only Flow Depth (in.) Q for 1 /2 Street (els) ~Comb.Ori!./ Weir Flow Depth (in.) • Reported Design Flow Depth (In.) -&-Comb . Orif J Ori!. Flow Depth (in.) X Reported Design Fk>w Spread (It.) 8/11 /2009, 3 :47 PM Q Intercepted Grate Weir JFlow Comb. Orif./ Weir Comb. Orif./ :i Orif . Curb Opening Only Reported Design Reported (cfs) Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in.) 7 Flow Depth (in .) JFlow Depth (in.) Design J Flow Spread (It .) 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.54 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 2.00 2 .89 0 .00 0 .00 0.48 0.48 0.39 3.00 3 .76 0.00 0.41 1.26 1.26 1.02 4.00 4 .53 0 .12 0.92 1.95 1.95 1.57 5 .00 5 .25 0.46 1.27 2.58 2.58 2.42 6.00 5 .91 0.78 1.32 3.17 3 .17 4 .87 7 .00 6.49 1.08 1.43 3.73 3.73 7 .21 8.00 7 .00 1.36 1.57 4.26 4.26 9.42 9 .00 7.46 1.64 1.73 4.87 4.60 10.81 10.00 7 .88 1 .90 1.91 5.72 4.90 12.06 11.00 8.32 2.16 2 .10 6.66 5.21 13.37 12.00 8 .72 2.47 2.34 7.87 5 .53 14 .71 13 .00 9 .08 2 .80 2 .61 9.58 5 .85 16.02 14 .00 9.46 3 .12 2.91 11.43 6 .19 17 .44 15.00 9 .83 3.45 3.22 13.42 6.53 18.85 16 .00 10 .18 3.78 3 .57 15.55 6.88 20.31 17.00 10.52 4.12 3.93 17.81 7.23 2 1.77 18.00 10 .88 4.45 4.32 20.2 1 7.60 23.33 19.00 11.21 4 .78 4 .73 22 .74 7 .97 24 .87 20.00 11 .52 5 .10 5 .16 25.42 8.34 25 .00 21 .00 11 .84 5.43 5 .62 28 .23 8 .73 25.00 22 .00 12.16 5 .76 6.10 31 .17 9.13 25 .00 23.00 12.45 6.08 6 .60 34 .26 9.53 25 .00 24.00 12 .78 6.41 7.12 37 .48 9 .95 25 .00 25 .00 13.05 6 .73 7 .74 40 .84 10.40 25 .00 26 .00 13.36 7 .05 8.43 44.33 10 .90 25 .00 27 .00 13.64 7 .36 9 .15 47 .97 11.40 25 .00 28.00 13.93 7 .68 9 .90 51.74 11 .92 25 .00 29.00 14 .23 7.99 10.68 55.64 12.46 25.00 30.00 14 .48 8.30 11.49 59.69 12.99 25.00 3 1.00 14 .76 8.61 12.32 63.87 13 .54 25.00 32 .00 15 .05 8 .92 13 .18 68.19 14 .12 25 .00 33 .00 15 .32 9 .23 14 .07 72 .64 14 .70 25.00 34.00 15 .56 9 .53 14 .98 77.23 15.27 25.00 35 .00 15.83 9.83 15 .93 81 .96 15.93 25.00 36 .00 16 .10 10 .13 16.90 86 .83 16.90 25.00 37 .00 16 .37 10.43 17 .89 91 .83 17 .89 25.00 38 .00 16.63 10.73 18.92 96 .97 18 .92 25.00 39.00 16.88 11 .02 19 .97 102.25 19 .97 25 .00 40 .00 17 .12 11 .31 21 .05 107 .67 21 .05 25 .00 03-P14 (ST D-1).xls , Inlet In Sump 8/11/2009, 3:47 PM DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD North College Market Place ST D-2 (Basin P17) Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow .I1 t r•L t t r, t 7 I. -f-------J' L, \, -- Design Flow : O NLY 11 al ready determined th rough other methods : Minor Storm Majo r Storm (loca l peak flow for 1/2 of street , plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchmen ts): ·a =I 2 .001 3.00lcfs • If you entered a value here, skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet a-Allow) lieograpnIc lntormatlon : (l::nter aata in tne blue cells): Subcatchment Area =aAcres Percent Imperviousness = % NRCS Soil Type= A, B, C , or D Site : (Check One Box Only) Slope (fVft) Length (ft) Site is Urban:I X I Overland Flow =1 I I Site Is Non-Urban :: Gutter Flow = Haintan 1n1ormatlon : intensity 1 (incnmrJ = \.,1 I' 1 / ( L,2 + I cJ "\.,3 Minor Storm Major Storm Design Storm Return Period , T, = years Return Period One-Hou r Precipitatio n, P, = inches C ,= C2= C3= User-Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coeffi cient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C5 = Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , ab = 0.00 0.00 els Analys is of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment: Minor Storm Majo r Storm Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient, C = N/A N/A Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, CS = N/A N/A Overland Flow Velocity, V0 = N/A N/A fps Gutter Flow Velocity, VG= N/A N/A fps Overland Flow Time , 10 = N/A N/A minutes Gutte r Flow Time , IG = N/A N/A minutes Calculated Time of Concentra tion , Tc = N/A N/A minutes Time of Concentration by Regional Formula , Tc = N/A N/A minutes Recommended T, = N/A N/A minutes Time of Concentration Selected by User , T, = NIA N/A minutes Design Rainfall Intensity, I = N/A N/A inch/hr Calculated Local Peak Flow, Op = NIA N/A els Total Design Peak Flow, a = 2.00 3.00 cfs 04-P17 (ST O-2).xls, 0 -Pea k 8/11 /2 009, 3:48 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project : No rth College Market Place In let IO:-------------------,S""'T"""'D"""-2,-:("'B,...a_s,..in""'P""1.,..7..,.) _________________ _ a Gutter Geometrv /Enter data in the blue cells\ Maximum Allowable Width for Sp read Behind Curb TaAcK=a.Oft Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) SaAcK = ft . vert. I ft . horiz Manning's Roughness Behind Curb n sACK = Height of Curb at Gutte r Flow Line Hcuaa = 6.00 inches Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown TcaowN = 24.0 ft Gutter Depression a= 2.00 inches Gutter W idth W= 2.00 ft Street Transverse Slope Sx = 0 .0104 ft . vert . / ft . horiz Street Longitudinal Slope -Enter O for sump condition So = 0 .0000 ft . vert . /ft . horiz Manning's Roughness for Street Section n sTREET = 0.0 160 Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Water Spread for Mino r & Major Storm TMAX = 24 .0 24 .0 ft Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm dMAX = 6 .00 6.00 inches Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) X = yes Max imum Gutter Caoacitv Based On Allowable Water Soread Mino r Storm Major Storm Gutter Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) Sw= 0 .0937 0 .0937 ft/ft Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq . ST-2) Y= 3.00 3.00 inches Water Depth with a Gutter Dep ression d = 5 .00 5.00 inches All owable Spread for Discharge outside the Gutt er Section W (T -W) Tx = 22 .0 22 .0 ft Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Ea = 0.304 0.304 Discharge outside the Gutte r Section W , carried in Section T x Ox = 0 .0 0 .0 cfs Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Or -Ox) Ow= 0.0 0 .0 cfs Discharge Behind the Curb (e .g., sidewalk, driveways , & lawns) OaACK = 0.0 0 .0 cfs Maximum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread Or = SUMP SUMP els Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section V= 0 .0 0 .0 fps v·d Product : Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowl ine Depth v•d = 0.0 0.0 Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based on Allowable Gutter Deoth Minor Storm Major Storm Theoretical Water Spread TTH = 32.1 32 .1 ft Theoretical Spread for Discharge outside the Gutte r Section W (T -W) TxTH = 30.1 30 .1 ft Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq . ST-7) Ea = 0.217 0 .217 Theoretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x TH Ox TH= 0.0 0.0 cfs Actual Discharge outside the Gutt er Section W, (limited by distance T caowN) Ox= 0 .0 0.0 cfs Discharge within the Gutter Section W (O. -Ox) Ow= 0.0 0.0 cfs Discharge Behind the Curb (e .g., sidewalk , driveways, & lawns) OaAcK = 0.0 0.0 cfs Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm 0 = 0.0 0.0 els Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section V= 0.0 0.0 fps v·d Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth V•d = 0.0 0.0 Slope-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor (d?. 6') Storm R= SUMP SUMP Max Flow Based on Allow. Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) a .= SUMP SUMP els Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Applied) d= inches Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) dcaow N = inches Minor Storm Major Storm Max. Allowable Gutter Caoacitv Based on Mi nim um of QT or Q. C allow =I SUMP I SUMP !cfs MINOR STORM max . allowable capacity OK -greater than f low given on sheet 'Q-Peak' MAJOR STORM max. allowable capacity OK -qreater than flow gi ven on sheet 'Q-Peak' 04-P17 (ST D -2).xls, Q -A llow 8/11/2009, 3:48 PM II) CII .r: u .!: .!: --.. .r: i:i. CII 0 ---1: 0) "aj :r 19 .L 18 +-- 17 , -, 16 ---+- 15 + I 14 13 12 I - 11 10 -/ 9 ' 8 -T t -, I I -r r 7 1 6 5 4 3 2 0 o.o I 1 r1 ·-r-- I --1- 2 .0 4.0 Street Section with Flow Depths - -, +-i / .. ! I L 1--~ '---+ r -, L T -I -r 1--i J -r 6.0 8.0 Section of 112 Street (distance in feet) 10.0 12.0 14.0 1 -Ground elev. 16.0 18.0 20.0 I o Minor d-max Major d-max X -Minor T-max % Major T-max Q ===-&_. Q Q Q 1 -E ' ''' === -.t 0 1 Eocc s I S 1 ~IJ X + I ,... ~ [1+~] -1 (T I W)-1 04-P17 (ST D-2).xls , 0-Allow 8/11 /2009, 3:48 PM --1 20 Q fo r 1/2 Flo w Depth Flow 19 • +-Street (els) (i n .) Spread (ft.) 0.00 18 + + 0.25 0.50 17 ·-r 0.75 1.00 1.25 16 ___ .J_ i 1.50 1.75 15 I ,-2.00 2.25 .-1 4 2.50 1/) 2.75 Q) I "fi13 j. I C :.::,. 3.00 3.25 3.50 .C:12 -3.75 a. Q) 4.00 C 11 4.25 ~ 4.50 0 U::10 t 4.75 5.00 -::. i ::: -e -0 t'0 5.25 5.50 5.75 ~8 6.00 a. en 6.25 ~7 ·I 0 6.50 6.75 u:: 7.00 6 I 5 ·f 7.25 7.50 7.75 8.00 4 -t 8.25 8.50 8.75 3 9.00 9.25 2 9.50 9.75 10.00 10.25 10.50 0 !--, --------;---,----;---,---~--,-----~-------10.75 0 2 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 11 .00 Q for 1/2 Street (cfs) 11 .25 11 .50 11.75 o Flow Depth (i n .) D Flow Spread (ft .) 12.00 12.25 12.50 04-P17 (ST D-2).xls , a-Allow 8/11/2009, 3:48 PM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Project = _______________________ .;..N.;..o.;..,t;.;.h.;..C.;..o.;..l.;..le'-'g"'e.;..M=a.;..rk..;e.;..t _P_la.;..c.;..e ______________________ _ Inlet ID = _______________________ ..;S;;_T.;..D:;.·..:2;..:(.;;B.;;a;;.s i.;..n..;P_l.;..7.,_) ______________________ _ Lo (C)· H-Curb 11n ... ..,,;,.. ... Information flnnut\ MINOR MAJOR ype of Inlet Type= COOT/Denver 13 Combination ocal Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from '0-Allow') 8-= 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate lo(G) = 3 .00 3.00 feet W idth of a Unit Grate W o ::: 1.73 1.73 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0.90) A,.lio ;:: 0.47 0.47 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 • 0. 70) C,(G)= 0 .50 0 .50 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) c. (G) = 3 .00 3.00 Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0 .67) C0 (G) = 0 .67 0 .67 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 H_,: 6 .50 6 .50 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches H lhr~1= 5.25 5 .25 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta= 0 .0 0.0 degrees Side Wid th 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) C, (C)= 0 .10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3 .00) C.(C) = 2 .30 2 .30 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0 .67) C0 (C) = 0 .67 0.67 RPsultinn GuttPr Flow Oenth for Grate Inlet Caoacitv in a Sumo MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef = 1.00 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0 .50 0.50 Grate as a Weir : The Controlling Factor Will Be : Curb Openin g as Weir Curb Opening As Weir Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (2 cfs grate, 0 els curb) dw1= 5 .99 7 .23 inches Flow Depth (Curb Opening Only) without Clogging (0 els grate , 2 els curb) d curb-uo = 3.11 4 .07 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (2 cfs grate , O cfs curb) dw1 = 8.34 10.32 inches Flow Depth (Curb Opening Only) with Clogging (0 cfs grate, 2 els curb) d curb-c1 = 3.20 4.20 inches Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate , 2 cfs curb) da = 3.12 4.09 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate, 2 els curb) d oa :;:;: 3 .35 4 .38 inches Resultina Gutter Flow Depth Outsi de of Loca l Depression d a-cr111 = 1.35 2 .38 inches ~esultinn (;;utter flnw Denth fnr C rb Ooeninn Inlet Caoa citv in a Sumo MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Goel =1 1001 1001 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0 .10 0.10 Curb as a Weir , Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate , 2 cfs curb) d~=1 3.121 4 .091'nches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate, 2 els curb) d.,= 3 .35 4 .38 inches Curb as an Orifice , Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate , 2 cfs curb) d.,;= 3.11 4.07 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate, 2 els curb) doa= 3.20 4.20 inches Resulting Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depres sion d,-curb = 1.35 2.38 inches Resultant Street r.onditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L= 3.0 3 .0 feet Total Inlet Interception Capacity (Design Discharge from O-Peak) 0,= 2.0 3.0 els Resultant Gutter Flow Depth (ba sed on sheet O-Allow geometry) d= 1.20 2 .20 inches Resultant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) T= 1.1 2 .0 feet Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown d cAOWN = 0 .00 0.00 inches 04-P17 (ST D-2).xls, Inlet In Sump 8 /11 /2009, 3 :48 PM 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 _, 33 -- 32 -~ 31 + 30 --r I 29 28 27 26 25 24 t 23 LL :;-22 I '" [ 21 (/). 20 I u, Cl) 19 .s::. u ,§. 18 - 'E_ 17 Cl) C 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 0 2 04-P17 (ST D-2).xls , >nlet In Sump 7 I t 1 X I- 4 --1 --t I -r + I i--0 - X X X X· X-X X X X X X X )k- l 1 , , 1 1' I . I o . f <D I I 'f I / I ifJ I /, - f I -i ---t-- 7-- ,._ -~-- -t 4- ---t r --! I i- T l ·I- -X X ;,k-x X X ->:< X >k X X X X -X 1 I ! I 1 I I I ·-X >,< X I 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 --tr-Grate Weir Flow Depth (in.) O Curt, Openlng Only Flow Depth (in .) a for 1/2 Street (els) -.-Comb.Orif J Weir Flow Depth (in.) • Reported Design Flow Depth (in.) -a-Comb. Ori!./ Ori!. Flow Depth (in .) X Reported Design flow Spread (It.) 8/11/2009 , 3:48 PM a Intercepted Grate Weir .J Flow Comb. Orif./ J Weir Comb. Orif./ -;Orif. Curb Opening Only Reported Design Reported (els ) Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in.) J Flow Depth (in.) l Flow Depth (in .) Design J Flow Spread (It .) 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 1.00 2.63 0 .00 0 .02 0 .02 0 .02 0 .02 2 .00 4.18 0 .09 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.07 3.00 5.48 0.74 1.41 2.20 2.20 1.96 4 .00 6 .59 1.31 1.74 3 .09 3 .09 8 .73 5 .00 7 .51 1.84 2.19 6 .10 4.85 22 .83 6 .00 8 .34 2.43 2 .81 8 .71 5.58 24 .00 7 .00 9 .09 3 .03 3.55 12 .58 6 .32 24 .00 8 .00 9.82 3.64 4.40 17 .04 7 .11 24.00 9 .00 10.52 4 .24 5.38 22 .10 7 .95 24 .00 10.00 11 .18 4.82 6.47 27 .75 8 .83 24.00 11.00 11 .83 5 .40 7 .76 34.00 9.80 24 .00 12.00 12.44 5.97 9.41 40.84 10 .93 24.00 13.00 13 .04 6.53 11 .21 48.28 12 .13 24.00 14 .00 13.63 7 .07 13.15 56 .31 13 .39 24.00 15 .00 14.19 7 .61 15.24 64 .94 15 .24 24.00 16 .00 14 .73 8 .14 17.47 74 .16 17.47 24.00 17 .00 15.30 8 .67 19.84 83.98 19 .84 24 .00 18 .00 15 .80 9 .18 22 .36 94 .39 22 .36 24.00 19 .00 16.34 9 .69 25 .03 105.40 25 .03 24.00 20 .00 16 .86 10.19 27.83 117 .00 27 .83 24.00 21 .00 17.36 10.68 30 .79 129 .20 30.79 24 .00 22.00 17.84 11 .17 33.88 141.99 33.88 24 .00 23.00 18.32 11 .65 37.12 155 .38 37 .12 24.00 24 .00 18 .80 12 .12 40 .51 169 .37 40 .51 24.00 25 .00 19.28 12 .59 44 .03 183.94 44 .03 24.00 26 .00 19 .76 13.05 47 .71 199.12 47.71 24 .00 27 .00 20 .23 13.51 51.52 214 .89 51 .52 24.00 28 .00 20 .68 13 .96 55.48 231.25 55.48 24 .00 29 .00 21 .12 14 .41 59 .59 248 .21 59 .59 24.00 30 .00 21.56 14 .85 63.83 265 .76 63 .83 24.00 31 .00 22 .02 15.29 68 .22 283 .91 68.22 24.00 32 .00 22.43 15 .72 72.76 302 .65 72 .76 24.00 33 .00 22 .88 16 .15 77.44 321 .99 77.44 24.00 34 .00 23.29 16 .58 82.26 341 .92 82 .26 24.00 35 .00 23 .72 17 .00 87 .24 362.45 87 .24 24.00 36 .00 24 .13 17.42 92.35 383 .57 92 .35 24.00 37.00 24 .56 17 .84 97 .61 405 .29 97.61 24.00 38 .00 24.95 18 .25 103.01 427 .61 103.01 24.00 39 .00 25 .37 18.66 108 .55 450 .51 108.55 24 .00 40 .00 25 .76 19 .06 114.24 474 .02 114 .24 24.00 04 -P17 (ST D-2).xl s, Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009 , 3:48 PM DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD North College Market Place ST E-1 (Basin P18) Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow i I t ii. r. i t 1r·-..c:~I -J, IT L.F f r1• F 1-:..=--=··::"'-J ,f-,. [-- iii! f" JF ~ -T -----------uesIgn t-Iow : UNL Y if already determined through otner metnods: Mino r Storm Ma jor Storm (local peak flow for 1/2 of street, plus flow bypass ing upst ream subcatchments): ·a =I 4.00! 1 O.OO!cfs • If you entered a value here , skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet Q-Allow) Geographic In1ormat Ion: (l::nter data in the blue cells): Subcatch ment Area =aAcres Percent Impe rviousn ess = % NRCS Soil Type = A, B, C, or D Site : (Check One Box Only) Slope (IVft) Length (ft) Site is Urban :I X I Overland Flow =1 I I Site Is Non-Urban:'. Gutter Flow = Rainfall Information : Intensity I (incrvnr) -c , .... , I ( c , + I c ) "l..,3 Minor Storm Major Storm Design Storm Return Period , T, = years Return Period One-Hour Precipitat ion , P, = inches C,= C,= C3= User-Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C5 = Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , Qb = 0.10 0.33 els Analys is of Flow T ime (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment : Minor Storm Major Storm Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient , C = N/A N/A Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient , CS = N/A N/A Overland Flow Velocity, V0 = N/A N/A fps Gutter Flow Velocity, Vr;, = N/A N/A fps Overland Flow Time , 10 = N/A N/A minutes Gutter Flow Time , ta = N/A N/A minutes Calcu lated Time of Concentration, T, = N/A N/A minutes Time of Con cen tration by Regional Formula , T, = N/A N/A minutes Recomme nd ed T, = N/A N/A min utes Time of Concentrati on Selected by User , T, = NIA NIA minutes Design Rainfall Intensity, I = N/A N/A inch/hr Calculated Local Peak Flow , Op= N/A N/A els Total Des ign Peak Flow, Q = 4 .10 10.33 els 05-P1 8 (ST E-1).xls, Q -P eak 8/11/2009, 3:48 P M ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Cr iteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project : North College Market Place Inlet ID:-------------------,s=-=r:-,:,E-"""1""'(:':eB,-a-s"'"in"""P""1,..,a"') _________________ _ y H C UAB d a -:---..:J. Er Geometrv /Enter data in the blue cells\ mum All owabl e W idth fo r Sp read Behind Curb Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) ng's Roughness Behind Curb !H eight of Cu rb at Gutter Flow Line Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown Gutter Depression Gutter Wi dth Street Transve rse Slope St reet Longitudinal Slope -Ente r O for sump condition Manning 's Ro ughness for Street Section Max. Allowable Water Spread fo r Minor & Major Storm Max. Allowable Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown {leave blank for no) Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based On Allowable Water Soread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq . ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq . ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Dep ression All owable Sp read fo r Discha rge out side the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq . ST-7) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Or -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e .g ., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) Maximum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread Flow Veloci ty Within the Gutte r Section V"d Product: Flow Veloci ty Times Gutter Flowline Depth Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based on Allowable Gutter Denth Theoretical Water Spread Theoretical Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Rati o by FH WA HEC-22 method (Eq . ST-7) Theoreti cal Discharge outside the Gutte r Section W , ca rried in Sectio n TxTH Actual Discharge outsi de the Gutte r Section W, (li mited by distance T cRowN) Discharge within the Gutter Section W (0• -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e.g ., sidewalk, driveways , & lawns) Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Flow Velocity Within the Gutte r Section V"d Product: Flow Veloci ty Times Gutter Flowline Depth Slope-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor (d ~ 6") Storm Max Flow Based on Allow . Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowl ine (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) Max . Allowable Gutter Caoacitv Ba sed on Minimum of Q T or Q TaAcK=a.Oft SaACK = ft. vert . / ft. horiz n eACK = Hcuaa = 6.00 inches T cROWN = 25 .0 ft a= 2.00 inches W= 2.00 ft Sx = 0 .0200 ft . vert. /ft. horiz So = 0 .0000 ft . ve rt . / ft . horiz n sTAEET = 0 .0160 Minor Storm Major Storm TMAX = 12 .5 12 .5 ft dMAX = 6.00 6.00 inches X = yes Minor Storm Major Storm Sw = 0 .1033 0.1 033 ft/ft Y= 3.00 3.00 inches d= 5.00 5.00 inches Tx= 10.5 10 .5 ft Ea = 0 .502 0.502 Ox= 0.0 0 .0 cfs Ow= 0.0 0.0 cfs OaACK = 0.0 0.0 cfs Or= SUMP SUMP cfs V= 0 .0 0.0 fps V"d= 0 .0 0.0 Minor Storm Major Storm TTH = 16.7 16 .7 ft TxTH = 14.7 14 .7 ft Eo= 0.378 0 .378 OxrH = 0.0 0.0 cfs Ox= 0 .0 0.0 cfs Ow= 0.0 0 .0 cfs Oa ACK = 0 .0 0.0 cfs 0= 0.0 0.0 els V = 0 .0 0.0 fps V"d= 0.0 0 .0 R= SUMP SUMP a .= SUMP SUMP cfs d = inches dcaowN = inches Minor Storm Major Sto rm a .now =I SUMP ! SUMP l cts MINOR STORM max. allowable capacity OK -g reate r tha n flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' MAJOR STORM max . allowa ble capacity OK -weater than flow g i ven on sheet ·a-Peak ' 05-P1 8 (ST E-1}.xls, Q-Allow 8/11/2009, 3:48 PM 20 - 19 l-----r I i 18 17 i --! 16 j ---1 15 I 14 I r VI 13 Cl) .c I-u 12 I -I ·= I ·= 11 t i + '.2 .... 10 t i I a. Cl) I t e, 9 1 .E 0) 8 i ·1 ·a; ::c I I 7 I I ; I I 6 r7 r1 r1 r1 I I I 5 :k *· r 4 3 2 0 0.0 2 .0 -Gro und elev . D 05-P18 (ST E-1).xls , O-Allow Street Section with Flow Depths T ,.-. ~ ,--t I J -,- --, - ! -r I --+ t----\ T ! --i ,- ! I. I 7 !- ,- 1r1 I r7 r1 I r1: fl r·1 fl I rl I ·::I< ; ::I( ::i:::1 ~ .I I 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12 .0 14.0 16.0 18 .0 20 .0 Section of 1/2 Street (distance in feet) Minor d-max Major ct-ma x X Mino r T-m ax )I( MajorT-max I E =-----=--,-=---- a I S,1, I Sx + ~3 [ I + S,1, / S x ] -1 (T /W)-1 8/11 /2009 , 3:48 PM 20 19 1 --· 18 17 --- 16 15 ..-J 4 I 1/1 Cl) 'fi13 ·• C: :::.. .C:12 -a. Cl) 0 11 - 3: 0 U::10 .....::. ~9 'O (ti ~8 a. Ch 3: 7 0 u:: 6 5 4 3 2 I I _ __t I I i· l T !_ -r- 1- + I ~ ' I -· + --1 t ·!-t T -, 1_ I I i r ~ I t --i-- I I i o-----~-~--+--~--~--+----~--------__J 0 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Q fo r 1/2 Street (cfs) o Flow Depth (in .) D Flow Spread (ft .) 05-P18 (ST E-1).xls, Q-Allow Qfor 1/2 Flow Depth Flow Street (els) (in .) Spread (ft .) 0.00 0.2 5 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50 3.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.2 5 5.50 5.75 6.00 6.25 6.50 6.75 7.00 7.2 5 7.50 7.75 8.00 8.25 8.50 8.75 9.00 9.25 9.50 9.75 10.00 10.25 10.50 10.7 5 11 .00 11 .25 11 .50 11 .75 12.00 12.25 12.50 8/11/2009 , 3:48 PM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Project = _______________________ ;.;N;..;o;.;rt;;.h;;.C;..;o;..;l;;.le'-'g'-'e;;.M=a;..;rk;..;e;..;t .;.P.;.la:,;c;..;e;;... _____________________ _ Inlet ID = ________________________ S_T_E_-_1_.(_B_a_si_n_P_1_8.:...) ______________________ _ Lo(C) H-Curb -~ Lo lG) n ... sinn Information llnout\ MINOR MAJOR : :ype of Inlet Type= COOT/Denver 13 Combination ocal Depression (additional to continuous gutter depress ion 'a' from 'Q-Allow') -= 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit Inlets (G rate or Curb Opening) No= 2 2 Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Un it Grate L0 (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) Arauo = 0.47 0.47 Clogg ing Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70) C, (G)= 0.50 0.50 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) c. (G) = 3.00 3.00 Grate Orifice Coefficien t (typical value 0.67) C0 (G)= 0.67 0.67 Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening L0 (C)= 3.00 3.00 feet Heigh! of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches H,,dl,= 6.50 6.50 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches H itwoat = 5.25 5.25 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta= 0.0 0.0 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) w,= 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) c, (C)= 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) c. (C) = 2.30 2.30 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0 .67) c.(Cl = 0.67 0.67 Resultina Gutte r Flow Oeoth for Grate Inlet Caoacitv in a Suma MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Goel= 1.50 1.50 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0.38 0.38 Grate as a Weir: The Controlling Factor Will Be : Curb Opening as Weir Curb Opening As Vertical Orifice Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (4 .1 els grate, 0 els curb) d.,..= 8.55 14.05 inches Flow Depth (Curb Opening Only) without Clogging (0 els grate , 4.1 els curb) deu1t,.un = 3.91 7.44 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (4.1 els grate, 0 els curb) dwa = 10.93 18.45 inches Flow Depth (Curb Opening Only) with Clogging (0 els grate, 4.1 els curb) d curl>d = 4.01 8.02 inches Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogg ing (0 els grate, 4.1 els curb) d01 = 3.92 7.44 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (O els grate, 4.1 els curb) d oe::: 4.09 8.02 inches Resulting Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression d •. c,.,. = 2 .09 6.02 inches Resultina Gutter Flow Oeoth for Curb Ooenina Inlet Caoa citv in a Sumo MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Goel =1 1251 1251 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0.06 0.06 Curb as a Weir, Gra te as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate, 4. 1 els curb) d•=I 3.921 7.25I inches Flow Depth at Local Depres sion with Clogging (0 els grate , 4.1 els curb) d., = 4.09 7.57 inches Curb as an Orifice , Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR low Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (O els grate , 4.1 els curb) doi= 3.91 7.44 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate , 4.1 els curb) do.= 4.01 8.02 inches Resultina Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression d ■•C urb = 2.09 6.02 inches Resultant Street Conditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L= 6.0 6.0 leet Total Inlet In terception Capacity (Design Discharge from O-Peak) a .= 4.1 10.3 el s Resultant Gutter Flow Depth (based on s hee t Q-Allow geometry) d= 2.01 6.02 inches Resultant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) T= 1.6 16.8 feet Resultant Flow Depth at Stre et Crown dcRowN = 0.00 0.00 inches 05-P18 (ST E-1).xls, Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009 , 3:48 PM 40 -·1 I J 39 . ------t---I- t i f 38 . I J -. 1-+ -1 t I <D L 37 I +--1 ·-·-r ·i 36 -t I-~ + I 35 -. i 34 .I Q 33 ---r· r -r· l I J 32 -I· T -,- 31 ·-J. __ CD i ---i ---- 30 L I I -I I I 29 • ·t + ·l + + J. I I 28 I 0 i-··t I I 27 -+ "t + i i I +--i + -l L. 26 • r T t CD : I I I I I I I I 25 -I *f X f X¥X~X ~X ¥X~XXXf~XX 24 i. + I I .i t l 23 )f'. 0 i' "0 22 t X "' [ 21 I >:< (/). 20 · 1 -i q, U) I GI 19 .J::. -,-'f-0 i i I ,g_ 18 t * 0 i 17 I GI I C 16 I X L 9) 15 -I t· I r 14 I X 0 I 13 12 :k I 1y17 CD 11 X I ' " 10 i * -~ I • 9 -1 I • 8 I ' I • • 7 x ' • 0 • 6 t • • • I 5 ,Q • 4 @ I 3 @ 2 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Q for 1/2 Street (els) ~Grate Weir ---9-Comb . Orif J -Er-Comb. Ori! J Flow Deplh (In.) Weir Flow Depth (in.) Ori!. Flow Depth (In.) 0 Curb Opening Only • Reported Design X Reported Design Flow Oeplh (In.) Flow Deplh C,n .) Flow Spread (II.) 05-P18 (ST E-1).xls , Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009, 3:48 PM Q Intercepted Grate Weir J Flow Comb . Orif./ l Weir Comb . Orif./ 7Orif. Curb Opening Only Reported Design Reported (cfs} Depth (in.} Flow Depth (in.} Flow Depth (in .} J Flow Depth (in.} J Flow Depth (in.} Design J Flow Spread (ft.} 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 1.00 1.54 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 2 .00 2 .89 0.00 0 .00 0.48 0.48 0 .39 3 .00 3 .76 0 .00 0.41 1.26 1.26 1.02 4 .00 4 .53 0 .12 0 .92 1.95 1.95 1.57 5 .00 5 .25 0.46 1.27 2.58 2 .58 2.42 6 .00 5.91 0 .78 1 .32 3.17 3 .17 4 .87 7 .00 6.49 1.08 1.43 3 .73 3 .73 7.21 8 .00 7.00 1.36 1 .57 4 .26 4 .26 9.42 9.00 7.46 1.64 1 .73 4 .87 4 .60 10.81 10.00 7 .88 1 .90 1.91 5.72 4 .90 12 .06 11 .00 8 .32 2 .16 2.10 6.66 5 .21 13.37 12.00 8 .72 2.47 2 .34 7 .87 5 .53 14 .71 13.00 9 .08 2 .80 2 .61 9.58 5 .85 16.02 14.00 9 .46 3 .12 2.91 11.43 6.19 17.44 15 .00 9 .83 3.45 3 .22 13.42 6 .53 18 .85 16.00 10.18 3.78 3 .57 15.55 6 .88 20.31 17 .00 10.52 4 .12 3 .93 17.81 7 .23 2 1.77 18 .00 10.88 4.45 4 .32 20 .21 7 .60 23 .33 19.00 11 .21 4 .78 4.73 22 .74 7 .97 24 .87 20 .00 11.52 5.10 5 .16 25.42 8 .34 25 .00 21.00 11 .84 5.43 5 .62 28 .23 8 .73 25 .00 22 .00 12 .16 5 .76 6 .10 31 .17 9 .13 25 .00 23 .00 12.45 6 .08 6 .60 34 .26 9 .53 25.00 24 .00 12 .78 6 .41 7.12 37 .48 9 .95 25 .00 25 .00 13.05 6 .73 7 .74 40 .84 10.40 25 .00 26 .00 13 .36 7.05 8 .43 44 .33 10 .90 25 .00 27.00 13.64 7 .36 9 .15 47 .97 11.40 25 .00 28 .00 13.93 7 .68 9 .90 51.74 11 .92 25 .00 29 .00 14 .23 7.99 10.68 55 .64 12.46 25 .00 30 .00 14.48 8 .30 11.49 59 .69 12 .99 25 .00 31 .00 14.76 8.61 12.32 63 .87 13.54 25 .00 32 .00 15.05 8 .92 13 .18 68 .19 14 .12 25 .00 33 .00 15 .32 9 .23 14 .07 72 .64 14.70 25 .00 34.00 15 .56 9 .53 14.98 77 .23 15.27 25 .00 35 .00 15 .83 9 .83 15 .93 81 .96 15 .93 25 .00 36 .00 16 .10 10.13 16.90 86 .83 16 .90 25 .00 37 .00 16 .37 10.43 17.89 91 .83 17 .89 25 .00 38 .00 16 .63 10.73 18.92 96 .97 18 .92 25 .00 39 .00 16 .88 11 .02 19 .97 102 .25 19.97 25 .00 40 .00 17 .12 11 .31 21 .05 107 .67 21.05 25 .00 05-P18 (ST E-1).xls, Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009, 3:48 PM DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD North College Market Place ST E-3 (Bas i n P16) Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow t E , I t :i t t .. t k =-JI -E-- ::...-= ' [I L -~--t .h 1 IL .T ·1 F ~I --- - - --- Design How: U NL Y II a1reaay aeterm1ned tnrougn otne r metnods: Minor Storm Majo r Storm (local peak flow fo r 1/2 of st reet , plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchments): ·a =I 0.50! 1.00!cts * If vou entered a value here, skip the rest of this sheet and pro ceed to sheet Q-Allow) ueographic Information : (Enter data 1n the blue cells): Subcatchment Area =a Acres Percent Impe rv iousness = % NRCS Soil Type= A, B, C, or D Site : (Check One Box Only) Slope (ft/ft) Length (ft) Site is Urban :I X I Overland Flow =1 I I Site Is Non-Urban:: Gutter Flow = Hainra11 1nrormatIon : 1ntens1ty 1 \lnC1v11rJ -l,1 t-' 1 / \ l,2 + I c ) " l,3 Minor Storm Major Storm Design Storm Retu rn Period , T, = years Return Period One-Hour Precipi tation , P , = inches C ,= C2= C3= User-Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C5 = Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , 0 0 = 0 .00 0 .00 els Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment : Minor Storm Major Storm Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient, C = N/A N/A Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coeff icie nt , C5 = N/A N/A Overland Flow Veloci ty , V0 = N/A N/A fps Gutter Flow Velocity, VG= N/A N/A fps Overland Flow Time , t0 = N/A N/A minutes Gutter Flow Time , tG = N/A N/A minutes Calculated Time of Concentration , Tc = N/A NIA minutes Time of Concen tration by Regiona l Form ula , Tc = N/A N/A minutes Recommended Tc = N/A N/A min utes Time of Concentrat ion Selected by User , Tc = NIA NIA minutes Design Rainfall Intens ity, I = N/A N/A inch/hr Ca lculat ed Loca l Peak Flow, Op= N/A N/A cfs Total Design Peak Flow , Q = 0.50 1.00 els 06 -P 16 (ST E -3 ).xls, Q -P eak 8/1 1/2009, 3:49 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Cri te ria for Maximum Allowab l e Flow Dep t h and Spread) Project : North College Market Place Inlet ID:------------------S~T"""E'"'-3""'("8,..a_s.,..in""""'P1.,..6"') _________________ _ Gutter Geometrv /Enter data in the blue cellsl Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) Manning's Roughness Behind Curb Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown Gutter Depression Gutte r Width Street Trans verse Slope Street Longitudinal Slope -Enter O for sump condition Manning's Roughness for Street Section Max. Allowable Water Spread for Minor & Major Storm Max. Allowab le Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based On Allowable Water Soread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq . ST-8) Water Depth wi thout Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression Allowable Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W ) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq . ST-7) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x Discharge within the G utter Section W (Or -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e.g., sidewalk , driveways , & lawns) Max imum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section v·d Product : Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowl ine Depth Maximum Gutter Canacitv Based on Allowable Gutter Denth Theo re tical Wate r Spread Theo retical Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Theoretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , ca rried in Section TxTH Actual Discharge outside the Gutt er Section W , (limited by distance T cRowNl Discharge within the Gutter Section W (O. -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e .g., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section V'd Prod uct: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Slope-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor (d?. 6') Storm Max Flow Based on Allow . Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Applied ) Res ultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) IIM~Y Allowable Gutter Caoacitv Based on Min imum of QT or Q, Street Crown TaACK =aft SaACK = ft . vert. / ft . horiz neACK = HcuRa = 6.00 inches TcROWN = 24 .0 ft a= 2.00 inches W= 2.00 ft Sx = 0 .0104 ft . vert . / ft. horiz So = 0 .0000 ft . vert . / ft . horiz n sTAEET = 0.0160 Minor Storm Major Storm T.,AX= 24.0 24 .0 ft dMAX = 6.00 6.00 inches X = yes Mi no r Storm Major Storm Sw = 0 .0937 0 .0937 ft/ft y= 3.00 3.00 inches d= 5.00 5.00 inches Tx = 22.0 22 .0 ft Eo = 0.304 0 .304 Ox = 0 .0 0 .0 els Ow= 0.0 0.0 cfs OaACK = 0 .0 0 .0 els Or= SUMP SUMP els V = 0.0 0 .0 fps v ·d = 0.0 0.0 Minor Storm Major Storm TTH = 32 .1 32 .1 ft TxrH = 30 .1 30 .1 ft Eo= 0.217 0 .2 17 Oxrn = 0 .0 0 .0 cfs Ox= 0.0 0 .0 els Ow= 0 .0 0 .0 cfs OaACK = 0.0 0 .0 els 0= 0.0 0 .0 els V = 0.0 0.0 fps V'd = 0.0 0 .0 R = SUMP SU MP a .= SUMP SUMP cfs d = inches dcRowN = inches Mino r Storm Major Storm a .11ow=I SUMP I SUMP j cfs 11::J~~ STORM max. allowable capacity OK -greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' R STORM max. allowable capacity OK -greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak' 06-P 16 (ST E-3).x ls , a-A llow 8/11/2009 , 3:49 PM 20 Street Section with Flow Depths 19 ~-- 18 17 16 15 14 Ill GI 13 ! ~ (J 12 .!: .!: 11 ....... ~ -10 Q, GI 9 I e. -~ 0) 8 ·; :r I 7 .. 6 r1 ri s 4 J 3 2 0 o.o 2.0 -Ground elev . 06-P 16 (ST E-3).xls , 0-Allow ··-r---,_ I I --,. j ..L 1--! 7-- -1 r -1-/-7 I -f-I T -r /-/. I -1 -/ T 7 I t l T j I I ·/ -r ! I I i r ! I I ~l I I. fl ri fl I ri ri fl/ fl/ fl ·1 ri fl Ill I fl , r1 n ~ I . ~~~~ I I I I I I / I I 4 .0 6.0 8 .0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 Section of 112 Street (distance in feet) o Minor d-max Majord -max X-Minor T-max ::t Major T-max 1 Eo :::S ''/' S" 1 +~ [1+~)813-1 (T I W)-1 8/11 /2009, 3:49 PM 20 ,------,---,,-------,----,------.------,------,------,,----, Q for 1/2 Flow Depth Flow 19 St reet (els ) (i n.) Spread (ft.) 0.00 18 -7 0 .25 0.50 17 0.75 1.00 1.25 16 I· t· -·-i -1.50 1.75 15 2.00 2.25 ..-J 4 2 .50 1/) 2.75 Cl) "f;13 C: 3.00 3.25 :.::.. 3.50 .C12 -3.75 a. Cl) 4.00 C 11 4 .25 ,: 4.50 0 U::::10 4.75 5.00 ~ ::: 5.25 -9 -5.50 "O Ill 5.75 ~8 6.00 a. Cl) 6.25 ,: 7 0 6.50 6.75 u:::: 7 .00 6 7 .25 7 .50 5 7.75 8.00 8.25 4 8.50 8.75 3 9 .00 9 .25 2 9 .50 9 .75 10.00 10 .25 10.50 10.75 0 6 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 11 .00 Q for 1/2 Street (cfs) 11 .25 11.50 11 .75 o Flow Depth (in .) □ Flow Spread (ft .) 12.00 12 .2 5 12.50 06-P 16 (ST E-3).xls , a-All o w 8/11 /2009 , 3 :49 PM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Project= ________________________ N __ o_rt_h_C_o ... l_le'"g._e ... M_a_rk_e_t_P_la_c_e ______________________ _ Inlet ID = _______________________ .,..S;..T;_..:;;E·..;3..;(..;B..;a.;;.s i ... n ... P_l ... 6,_) ______________________ _ Lo(C)· H-Curb ~ Oesi an Information llnoutl MINOR MAJOR Type of lnlel Type= COOT/Denver 13 Combination Local Depression (additional to conlinuous gutter depression 'a' from 'Q-Allow') a.x.i= 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit lnlels (Grale or Curb Opening) No= 1 1 Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate L0 (G) = 3.00 3.00 /eel Width of a Unit Grate W.= 1.73 1.73 fe et Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15·0.90) Ar.uo = 0.47 0.47 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0 .50 - 0. 70) C1 (G)= 0.50 0.50 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) c. (G) = 3.00 3.00 Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) C0 (G) = 0.67 0.67 Curb Opening Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening L.(C) = 3.00 3.00 feet Height of Venical Curb Opening in Inches H..,..,= 6.50 6 .50 inches Height of Curb Ori/ice Throat in Inches H h091= 5.25 5.25 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta= 0 .0 0.0 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (iypically the gutter width ol 2 feet) W p = 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0 .10) C,(C)= 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) C.(C) = 2.30 2 .30 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) C0 (C) = 0.67 0.67 c ... sultina Gutter Flow Oe nth for Grate Inlet Canacitv in a Sumn MINOR MAJOR logging Coefficient for Mu ltiple Units Coef = 1.00 1.00 logging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0.50 0.50 Grate as a Weir : The Controlling Factor Will Be : Cur b Opening as Weir Curb Open in g As We ir Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0.5 cfs grate , 0 cfs curb) dWI= 3.48 4 .51 inches Flow Depth (C urb Opening Only) without Clogging (0 cfs grate , 0.5 cfs curb) d CUlb-un = 1.23 1.96 inches Flow Depth at Local Depress ion with Clogging (0 .5 cfs grate , O cfs curb) d-= 4.51 5.99 inches Flow Depth (Curb Opening Only) with Clogging (0 cfs grate , 0 .5 cfs curb) d <U't>-ci = 1.27 2.02 inches Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate , 0.5 cfs curb) da = 1.25 1.97 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (O cfs gra1e, 0.5 els curb) doa = 1.34 2.11 inches Resulting Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression d •. c,.,. = 0.00 0.11 inches Resultinn Gutt~r Flow Oenth fnr Curb QnAni no Inlet Canacitv in a Sumn MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coef =1 1.001 1.001 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0.10 0.10 Curb as a Weir, Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate , 0.5 cfs curb) d~=1 1.25 1 1.971'nches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate , 0.5 cfs curb) d •• = 1.34 2.11 inches Curb as an Orifice , Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 cfs grate , 0.5 cfs curb) da = 1.23 1.96 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate, 0.5 cfs curb) do.= 1.27 2.02 inches Resulting Gutter Fl ow Depth Outside of Local Depression da.cu,b = 0.00 0.11 inc hes Resultant Street Conditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L= 3.0 3.0 feet Total Inlet Interception Capacity (Design Discharge from O-Peak) a .= 0 .5 1.0 cfs Resultant Gutter Flow Depth (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) d= 0.00 0 .02 inches Resu ltant Street Flow Spread (based on s heet Q-Allo w geometry) T= o.o 0.0 feet Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown dcROWN = 0.00 o.oo inches 06-P 16 (ST E-3).xls , Inlet In Sump 8/11/2009, 3:4g PM 40 r--------,-~-----.;,--,--,--------,----lr----------:-------;---,---,----, :: l 37 -----1- 36 35 -- 34 -- 33 - 32 - 31 30 29 - 28 - 27 26 25 24 i t 23 ' u. I :;;-22 "' e 21 C. I (/)" 20 · ,., I ~ 19 u i §_ 18 ·1 I 17 C 16 1 5 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 0 i - T --·+ J_ - 7~ I J I 2 06-P 16 (ST E-3).xls , Inlet In Sump -+ ,- J ___ I Ii • I ·I j 4 ---j •--I I ·-l -j I 0 +-,- + I t -4- -l- 1 I' <p '! ' . _j_ i- J I i - t-- ,. + T +- -J I· r i. i -~ +-i-~ I 1 I -1-+-- •➔ . ' I ; 1 • ; J ; I -X -X X X->.< X X X -X X >.<--X X -X >.< ! ; I I i i , 1 r . -, I r I --I -! T 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 --tr-Grale Weir Flow Oeplh (in.) 0 Curb Oper,ng Only Flow Depth (in.) a for 1/2 Street (els) ~ Comb. Oril J Weir Flow Depth (in.) • Repor1ed Design Flow Depth (in.) -S-Comb. Cril l Ori!. Flow Depth (in.) X Reported Design Flow Spread (It .) 8/11/2009, 3:49 PM Q Intercepted Grate Weir 7 Flow Comb. Orif./ J Weir Comb . Orif./ J Orif. Curb Opening Only Reported Design Reported (els) Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in .) JFlow Depth (in.) J Flow Depth (in.) Design J Flow Spread (ft.) 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 1.00 2.63 0.00 0 .02 0 .02 0 .02 0.02 2.00 4.18 0 .09 1 .20 1.20 1.20 1.07 3 .00 5.48 0.74 1.41 2.20 2.20 1.96 4 .00 6 .59 1.31 1.74 3.09 3 .09 8 .73 5 .00 7 .51 1.84 2 .19 6.10 4.85 22 .83 6 .00 8 .34 2.43 2 .81 8 .71 5 .58 24 .00 7 .00 9 .09 3.03 3 .55 12.58 6 .32 24 .00 8.00 9 .82 3 .64 4.40 17.04 7 .11 24 .00 9.00 10.52 4.24 5.38 22.10 7.95 24.00 10 .00 11.18 4.82 6.47 27 .75 8 .83 24 .00 11.00 11.83 5.40 7 .76 34 .00 9 .80 24 .00 12 .00 12.44 5.97 9.41 40 .84 10.93 24 .00 13.00 13 .04 6 .53 11.21 48 .28 12 .13 24.00 14.00 13.63 7.07 13.15 56 .31 13.39 24 .00 15 .00 14 .19 7.61 15 .24 64.94 15 .24 24 .00 16 .00 14 .73 8 .14 17.47 74.16 17.47 24 .00 17 .00 15.30 8 .67 19.84 83 .98 19 .84 24 .00 18 .00 15.80 9 .18 22.36 94 .39 22.36 24 .00 19 .00 16 .34 9.69 25.03 105.40 25 .03 24 .00 20 .00 16 .86 10 .19 27 .83 117 .00 27.83 24 .00 21 .00 17.36 10 .68 30 .79 129 .20 30 .79 24 .00 22.00 17.84 11 .17 33.88 141 .99 33 .88 24 .00 23 .00 18 .32 11 .65 37 .12 155 .38 37 .12 24.00 24.00 18 .80 12.12 40 .51 169 .37 40 .51 24 .00 25 .00 19 .28 12 .59 44 .03 183 .94 44 .03 24 .00 26 .00 19 .76 13.05 47 .71 199.12 47 .71 24 .00 27 .00 20 .23 13.51 51 .52 214 .89 51 .52 24 .00 28 .00 20 .68 13.96 55.48 231.25 55.48 24 .00 29.00 21 .12 14.41 59.59 248.21 59 .59 24 .00 30 .00 21.56 14 .85 63.83 265.76 63 .83 24 .00 31.00 22.02 15.29 68.22 283 .91 68 .22 24.00 32 .00 22.43 15.72 72 .76 302 .65 72.76 24 .00 33 .00 22 .88 16.15 77.44 321.99 77 .44 24 .00 34 .00 23 .29 16 .58 82.26 341.92 82 .26 24 .00 35 .00 23 .72 17.00 87.24 362.45 87 .24 24 .00 36 .00 24 .13 17.42 92.35 383 .57 92.35 24 .00 37 .00 24 .56 17.84 97.61 405.29 97 .61 24 .00 38 .00 24.95 18.25 103.01 427.61 103.01 24 .00 39 .00 25 .37 18 .66 108 .55 450 .51 108 .55 24.00 40 .00 25 .76 19 .06 114.24 474 .02 114 .24 24 .00 06-P 16 (ST E-3).xls, Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009, 3:49 PM DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD ·I;-l ~, ~L w --•r---·:i1 '= !I _L, IT it I JI r North College Market Place ST G-7 (Bas in P4) Des ign Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow r I ;i-=;::-_ t. T -----------Design flow : u ,~L Y 11 already determined througn othe r metnods: Minor Storm Majo r Storm (loca l pea k flow for 1/2 of street , pl us flow bypass ing upstrea m subcatchments): ·a =I 2.001 4.00!cts • If you entered a value here, skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet Q-All ow) ueograpnic In1ormatIon : \t:nter data in the blue cells): Subcatchment Area =aAcres Percent Imperviousness= % NRCS Soil Type = A. B, C, or D Site: {Check One Box Only) Slope (fl/ft) Length (ft) Site is Urban :I X I Overland Flow =1 I I Site Is Non-Urban:: Gutter Flow= Haima11 1n1ormat1on : ImensIty 1 \inc,rnrJ -1..,1 I"' 1 / \ l.,2 + I c ) "l,3 Minor Storm Major::;torm Design Storm Return Period, T, = yea rs Re turn Pe riod One-Hou r Precip itation. P , = inches C,= C2 = C3= User-Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient {leave this blank to accept a calculated value). C5 = Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , a. = 0.00 0.00 cfs Analysis of Flow Time {Time of Concentration) for a Catchment : Mino r Sto rm Major Storm Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient, C = N/A N/A Calculated 5-y r. Runoff Coefficient, C5 = N/A NIA Overland Flow Velocity, V0 = N/A N/A fps Gutter Flow Velocity, VG= N/A N/A fps Ove rland Flow Time, t0 = N/A N/A min utes Gutter Flow Time, 1G = N/A N/A minutes Calculated Time of Concentration. Tc = N/A N/A min utes Time of Concentration by Reg iona l Formu la , Tc = N/A N/A min utes Recommended Tc = N/A N/A minutes Time of Concentrat ion Selected by User , T c = NIA N/A minutes Design Rainfall Intensity, I= N/A N/A inch/hr Calculated Local Peak Flow, Op= N/A N/A cfs Total Design Peak Flow, a= 2.00 4.00 els 07-P4 (ST G-8).xls, Q-Peak 8/1 1/2009, 3 :49 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project : North College Market Place Inlet ID:-------------------,,S"'T,..G""-'"'7""("'8-as""'i,...n""'P,...4"'") _________________ _ I y d a Gutter Geomet~ /Enter data in the blue cellsl Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance cred il behind curb) Manning's Roughness Behind Curb Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown Gutter Depression Gutter W idth Street Transverse Slope Street Longitudinal Slope -Enter O for sump condition Manni ng's Roughness for Street Section Max. All owable Water Spread for Minor & Major Storm ~ I~;-Allowable Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm w Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based On Allowable Water Soread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq . ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq . ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression All owable Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC -22 method (Eq . ST-7) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Or -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e.g ., sidewa lk, driveways , & lawns) Maximum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Sect ion V'd Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based on Allowable Gutter Deoth Theoretical Water Spread Theoretical Spread fo r Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC -22 method (Eq . ST-7) Theoretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x TH Actual Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , {limi ted by distance T CROWN) Discharge within the Gutter Section W (0. -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e .g ., sidewalk , driveways , & lawns) Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Flow Veloci ty Within the Gutter Section V'd Product: Flow Veloc ity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Slope-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor (d?. 6") Storm Max Flow Based on Allow . Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) Resul tant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) Max . Allowable Gutter Canacitv Based on Minimum of Q. or Q. Ts ACK=§ft SaACK = ft . vert . I ft. horiz n aACK = HcuRB = 6 .00 inches TcROWN = 42.0 ft a= 2 .00 inches W= 2 .00 ft Sx = 0 .0209 ft . vert . I ft. horiz So = 0 .0103 ft. vert . I ft . horiz n sTREET = 0 .0160 Minor Storm Major Storm TMAX = 21 .0 30 .0 ft dMAX = 6 .00 18.00 inches X= yes Minor Storm Maj or Storm Sw= 0 .1042 0 .1042 ft/ft Y= 5.27 7 .52 inches d= 7 .27 9 .52 inches Tx = 19 .0 28.0 ft Eo = 0.294 0 .201 Ox= 14 .5 40.7 cfs Ow= 6.0 10.2 cfs OsACK = 0.0 0 .0 cfs Or= 20.5 51 .0 els V= 6 .0 7.4 fps V'd = 3.6 5.9 Minor Storm Major Storm TTH = 15.9 63 .8 ft Tx TH = 13.9 61 .8 ft Eo = 0.392 0.090 OxrH = 6.4 336 .2 cfs Ox= 6.4 315.3 cfs Ow= 4.1 33 .1 cfs OsACK = 0.0 0 .0 cfs 0= 10.4 348.4 els V = 5.2 11 .8 fps V'd = 2.6 17 .8 R= 1.00 1.00 Od= 10.4 348 .4 els d= 6.00 18.00 inches d cROWN = 0.00 5.47 inches Minor Storm Major Storm O alk>w =I 10,41 51 .0!cfs MINOR STOR M max . allo wab le capac ity OK -greater than flow given on s heet 'Q-Peak' MAJOR STORM max. allowable cap acity OK -Qreater than flow gi ven on sh eet 'Q-Peak' 07-P4 (ST G-8).xls , Q-Allow 8/11/2009, 3:49 PM r- Street Section with Flow Depths 20 I 19 • -j ·t 18 17 --I j -J. I I 16 -; ,- 15 14 ·r--l 7 VI 13 T Q) I ., .c u 12 • r C I C 11 i + I-1- :2 I I ! -10 I * 1· C. * Q) f i :;l( i :;l( )t( f 1 1 * e, 9 I -8 I I I .c D) ~ .cii I * :I: 7 * ~ * >:< >< ~ )i( >:< >:< I I I 6 qJ D I [J 0 0 5 I 4 3 2 0 . 0 .0 2 .0 4.0 6.0 8 .0 10.0 12 .0 14 .0 16.0 18.0 20 .0 Section of 1/2 Street (distance in feet) -Ground elev. D Minor d-m ax Majo r d-max X MinorT-max )K Majo rT-max 1 0 = Qx Q Q Q ~ 1-E 11'= -.x 0 07-P4 (ST G-8).xls , Q-Allow 8/11/2009 , 3:49 PM 20 Q for 1/2 Flow Depth Flow 19 Street (els ) (i n.) Spread (ft .) 0.00 0.00 0.00 18 0.25 1.91 1.53 0.50 2.48 1.98 17 0.75 2.58 2.31 1.00 3.13 4.52 1.25 3.35 5.40 16 1 I-r 1.50 3.53 6.12 1.75 3.69 6.75 15 2.00 3.83 7.30 2.25 3.95 7 .80 ..-l 4 2.50 4.07 8.26 1/1 Q.I ti13 C: 2.75 4.17 8.68 3.00 4.28 9.08 3.25 4.37 9.45 :::.. 3.50 4.46 9.80 .C:12 .,. -3.75 4.54 10.14 C. Q.I 4.00 4.62 10.45 C,1 4.25 4.70 10.76 == [I] 0 I U:::10 I □q .....:: □ .:i:: □ -9 "O □ ra I □ Q.I ... 8 I C. 10 en [I] == 7 ., 0 q U::: I 6 □' I 4.50 4.77 11 .05 4.75 4.84 11 .33 5.00 4.91 11 .60 5.25 4.97 11.86 5.50 5.04 12.11 5.75 5.10 12.35 6.00 5.16 12.59 6.25 5.21 12.81 6.50 5.27 13.04 6.75 5.32 13.25 7.00 5.38 13.47 7.25 5.43 13.67 Cl I 7.50 5.48 13.87 5 7.75 5.53 14.07 □ 8.00 5.57 14.26 4 r .. 3 8.25 5.62 14.45 8.50 5.67 14.64 8.75 5.71 14.82 9.00 5.76 15.00 ~ 2 9.25 5.80 15.17 9.50 5.85 15.34 9.75 5.89 15.51 10.00 5.93 15.68 10.25 5.97 15.84 10.50 6.01 16.00 0Ltt----~-----------...._------~----~_J 10.75 6.05 16.16 0 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 11 .00 6.09 16.31 Q for 1/2 Street (cfs) 11.25 6.13 16.46 11.50 6.16 16.61 11.75 6.20 16.76 o Flow Depth (in .) □ Flow Spread (ft.) 12.00 6.24 16.91 12.25 6.27 17.05 12.50 6.31 17.20 07-P4 (S T G-8).xls , Q -Allow 8/11 /20 09 , 3:49 PM INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE Project : _______________________ N_o_r_t_h..;C;,.o;.;l;.;le'-'g'-'e;,.M=a.;.rk.;.e;;..tc..P_l;;;a.;;c.;;e ______________________ _ Inlet ID : ______________________ S;:.T.;...:G;,.-7;..,,;(B:..;a:..;s.;_;in;.;;,.P4-")'----------------------- r Lo (C)· H-Curb Wo w Lo (G) Oe~ion lnform::rition flnn11t\ MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type= CDOT Type R Curb Opening Local D ep ression (additional to continuous gutter depress ion 'a' from '0-Altow') 8 LOCAL:::: 2.0 2.0 inches Total Number of Units in the Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) NO= 1 1 Length of a Single Unit Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) Lo = 10.00 10.00ft Width of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W from Q-Allow) Wo = N/A NIA ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical min . value= 0.5) C1-G= N/A NIA Cloggi ng Facto r for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical min. value= 0. 1) C1-C= 0.10 0.10 Street H"dr;ii ulics: OK -Q < maximum allowable from sheet 'O-Allow' MINOR MAJOR Design Discharge for Half of Street (from Sheet Q-Peak) Oo= 2.00 4.00 els Water Spread W idth T= 7.3 10.5 ft Water Depth at Flowtine (outside of local depression) d= 3.8 4.6 inches Water Depth at Street Crown (or at T .. ..J d tROWN :::: 0.0 0.0 inches Ratio of Gutter Flow to Design Flow Eo = 0.761 0.584 Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T. Ql:::: 0.48 1.66 cfs Discharge within the Gutter Section W a.= 1.52 2.34 cfs Discharge Behind the Curb Face O oACK = 0.00 0.00 cfs Street Flow Area A.= 0.72 1.31 sq ft Street Flow Velocity v.= 2.77 3.06 fps Water Depth for Design Condition d LOCAL = 5.8 6.6 inches Grate Analvsis /Calculated\ MINOR MAJOR Total Length of Inlet Grate Opening L=I I 1ft Ratio of Grate Flow to Design Flow E ~GRAlE = Under No-Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Minimum Velocity Where Grate Spash-Over Begins q I r Interception Rate of Frontal Flow Interception Rate of Side Flow Interception Capacity Qi = cfs Under Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple-unit Grate Inlet GrateCoef = Clogging Factor for Multiple-unit Grate Inlet GrateClog = Effective (un clogged) Length of Multiple-unit Grate Inlet L.= ft Minimum Velocity Where Grate Spash-Over Begins Vo = fps Inte rception Rate of Frontal Flow R,= Interception Rate of Side Flow A11:= Actual Interception Capacity a .= NIA NIA els Carry-Over Flow = 0 0 -0 , (to be applied to curb opening or next dis inlet) a ,= NIA NIA els Curb or Slotted Inlet Ooenina Analvsis /Calculated' MINO R MAJOR Equ ivalent Slope S, (based on grate carry-over) S,=1 0.14781 0.1183,ft/ft Required Length Lr to Have 100% Interception Lr = 7.66 11 .71 ft Under No-Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Effective Length of Cu rb Opening or Slotted ln lel (minimum of L, Lr) L =1 7 651 10.001ft Interception Capacity 0 ,= 2.00 3.87 els Under Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coeffi cien t CurbCoef = 1.00 1.00 Clogging Factor for Mu ltiple-unit Curb Opening or Slotted In let CurbClog = 0.10 0.10 Effective (U nclogged) Length L11 = 7.65 9.00 ft Actual Interception Capacity a .= 2.00 3.71 els Carry-Over Flow • O b(GRATE1·0 • a ,= 0.00 0.29 els l~ummarv MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity 0= 2.00 3.71 els Total Inlet Carry-Over Flow (flow bypassing inlet) O,= 0.00 0.29 els Capture Percentage == QJ Q0 = C%= 100.0 92.8 % 07-P4 (ST G-8).xls , Inlet On G rade 8/11/2009, 3:49 PM 07-P4 (ST G 20 19 18 17 ., QI 16 .c u ·= ~ 15 Q. ~ ~ 14 U:: I g 13 i e 12 u i-!. ~ 11 .,, ~ c. 10 - (/) ,: ~ 9 ,l!! ~ 8 .,, ., "' "' ~ 7 ... ID oil .,, $ Q. ~ s $ .E a 4 -8).xls , Inlet On G i- L rade -I f l o a lnlercepted (els) ◊ Sp,-eadT (It) T .CROWN ' Not limited by r 10 11 a tor 1/ 12 2 Street (els) 13 a a Bypassed (cfs) X Fl ow Depth d (inches) 14 15 + I 16 17 18 19 8/1 1/2009 3 • :49PM a for 1/2 Street a Intercepted a Bypassed (els) Spread T (ft), Spread T (ft), Not Flow Depth d (els) (cfs) Limited Limited by (inches) by T·cAOWN T-c ROWN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 0 .00 1.98 1.98 2.48 1.00 1.00 0.00 4.52 4.52 3.13 1.50 1.50 0.00 6.12 6.12 3.54 2.00 2.00 0.00 7.30 7.30 3.83 2.50 2.50 0.00 8.26 8.26 4.07 3.00 2.97 0.03 9.08 9.08 4.28 3.50 3.36 0.14 9.80 9.80 4.46 4.00 3.71 0.29 10.45 10.45 4.62 4.50 4.03 0.47 11 .05 11 .05 4.77 5.00 4.32 0.68 11 .60 11.60 4.91 5.50 4.58 0.92 12.11 12.11 5.04 6.00 4.83 1.17 12.59 12.59 5.16 6.50 5.07 1.43 13.04 13.04 5.27 7.00 5.29 1.7 1 13.47 13.47 5.38 7.50 5.50 2.00 13.87 13.87 5.48 8.00 5.71 2.29 14.26 14 .26 5.58 8.50 5.90 2.60 14.64 14.64 5.67 9.00 6 .08 2.92 15.00 15.00 5.76 9.50 6.26 3.24 15.34 15.34 5.85 10.00 6.44 3.57 15.68 15.68 5.93 10.50 6.60 3.90 16.00 16.00 6.01 11 .00 6.76 4.24 16.31 16.31 6.09 11 .50 6.92 4.58 16.61 16.61 6.17 12.00 7 .07 4.93 16.9 1 16.9 1 6.24 12.50 7 .22 5.28 17.20 17.20 6.31 13.00 7.37 5.63 17.48 17.48 6.38 13.50 7.5 1 5.99 17.75 17.7 5 6.45 14.00 7 .65 6.35 18.01 18.01 6.52 14.50 7 .78 6.72 18.27 18.27 6.58 15.00 7.91 7.09 18.53 18.53 6.65 15.50 8.04 7.46 18.77 18.77 6.71 16.00 8 .17 7.83 19.02 19.02 6.77 16.50 8.30 8.20 19.25 19.25 6.83 17.00 8.42 8.58 19.49 19.49 6.89 17.50 8 .54 8.96 19.72 19.72 6.95 18.00 8.66 9.34 19.94 19.94 7.00 18.50 8 .77 9.73 20.16 20.16 7.06 19.00 8 .89 10.11 20 .38 20.38 7.11 19.50 9 .00 10.50 20.59 20.59 7.16 20.00 9 .11 10.89 20.80 20.80 7.22 07-P4 (ST G-8).xls, Inlet On Grade 8/11 /2009, 3:49 PM DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD North College Market Place ST L-1 (Basin PS) Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow '~ r t ~ t r r;--:-=-----::: --,r "" ·L ----- Design t-low : ur,L Y 11 aIreaay aetermmea tnrougn otner metnoos: Minor Storm Major Storm (local peak flow for 112 of street, plus flow bypassing upstream subcatch ments): ·a =I 2 .00 1 4.solcts • If vou entered a va l ue here , skip the rest of this sheet and p roceed to sheet O-Allow) ueographic Information : (Enter data in the blue cells): Subca tchment Area =a Acres Percent Imperviousness= % NRCS Soil Type= A, B, C, or D Site: (Check On e Box Only) Slope (fVlt) Length (It) Site is Urban:! X I Overland Flow =1 I I Site Is Non-Urban:: Gutter Flow= HaIn1a11 In1ormatIon : intensity 1 (lnC11111rJ -1.,1 t-'1 / ( \_;2 + I c ) "\.,3 Minor Storm Major Storm Design Storm Return Period , T, = years Return Period One-Hour Precipitation, P, = inches C,= C,= C,= User-Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C5 = Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , a.= 0 .00 0 .00 els Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment : Minor Storm Majo r Storm Ca lculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficie nt, C = NIA NI A Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient , CS = NIA NIA Overland Flow Veloci ty , V0 = NIA NIA fps Gutter Flow Velocity, VG= NI A NI A fps Overland Flow Time , lo= NIA NIA minutes Gutter Flow Time, tG = NI A NI A minutes Calculated Time of Concentration , T, = NI A NI A minute s Time of Concen tration by Regiona l Formula, T, = NIA NIA minutes Recommended T, = NIA NIA min utes Time of Concentration Selected by User , T, = NIA NIA minutes Design Rainfall Intensity, I = NIA NI A inch/hr Ca lculated Local Peak Flow , Op= NIA NIA els Total Design Peak Flow , a= 2.00 4.50 els 08 -P5 (ST L-1 ).xis, Q -Peak 811112009, 3:49 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteria for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project : North College Market Place Inlet ID: __________________ ""'S""T'"'L--""'1"'(B"'a-s""'i-n ""'P,-5"'") _________________ _ T , T,..Ax HCU RB d y a Gutter Geometrv /Enter data in the blue cells\ Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) Manning's Roughness Behind Curb Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown Gutter Depression Gutter Width Street Trans verse Slope Street Longitudinal Slope • Enter O for sump condition Manning's Roughness fo r Street Section Max. Allowable Water Spread for Minor & Major Storm Max. All owable Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) Maximum Gutter Canacitv Based On Allowable Water Snread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq. ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression Allowable Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHW A HEC-22 method (Eq . ST-7) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Or -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e.g ., sidewalk, driveways , & lawns) Maximum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread Flow Veloci ty Withi n the Gutter Section V"d Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based on Allowable Gutter Death Theoretical Water Sp read Theoretical Spread for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHW A HEC-22 method {Eq . ST-7) Theoretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T xrH Actual Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, {limited by distance T cRowNl Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Od -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb {e.g ., sidewalk, driveways , & lawns) Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section V"d Product : Flow Vel ocity Times Gutte r Flowline Depth Slope-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor {d?. 6") Storm Max Flow Based on Allow . Gutter Depth {Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) Max . Allowable Gutter Caoacitv Based on Minimum of 0 -or Q Street Crown TeAcK=a ft SeAcK = ft. vert. I ft. horiz nsACK = HcuRB = 6.00 inches TcRowN = 33 .0 ft a= 2 .00 inches W = 2 .00 ft Sx = 0 .0281 ft . vert ./ft. horiz So = 0.0145 ft. vert. I ft . horiz n sTREET;;;; 0.0160 Minor Storm Major Storm T MAX = 16.5 21 .0 ft dMAX = 6.00 18 .00 inches X= yes Minor Storm Major Storm Sw= 0.111 4 0.1114 ft/ft y= 5.56 7 .08 inches d= 7.56 9.08 inches Tx = 14 .5 19.0 ft Eo = 0.357 0.279 Ox= 13.7 28.1 cfs Ow = 7.6 10.9 cfs OaACK = 0.0 0.0 cfs Or= 21.3 39 .0 els V = 7.3 8.4 fps V"d = 4.6 6.4 Minor Storm Major Storm TTH = 11.9 47.4 ft TxrH = 9.9 45.4 ft Eo = 0.491 0.119 OxTH = 4.9 288.0 cfs Ox= 4.9 274.4 cfs Ow= 4.7 38.9 els OaACK = 0.0 0 .0 cfs 0= 9 .6 313 .3 els V = 6.1 14.0 fps V'd = 3.0 21 .0 R= 1.00 1.00 Qd= 9 .6 313.3 els d= 6.00 18.00 inches dcRowN = 0.00 4 .88 inches Minor Storm Major Storm O alk>w =I 9 .61 39 .0l cfs MINOR STORM max. all owable capa c ity OK -great er tha n flow given on sheet 'O-Peak' MAJOR STORM max. a ll owable capacit y OK -greater than flow ~iven on sheet 'Q-Peak' 08-PS (ST L-1 ).xis , Q-Allow 8/11/2009 , 3:49 PM Street Section with Flow Depths 20 • -T 19 18 17 I T .,. -j· 16 .l 15 --l. 14 UI 13 Q) .s::; (.) 12 .!: I C 11 .I ,. 'E' C. 10 i Q) t I ~1 I ~ e, 9 :f )j( ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~- .E Cl 8 . I I 'iii ~ X x X >,< 1 X IX X X X ::c I 7 ' i ! 6 ~ □ □ 0 □, 0 I 5 4 · 3 r 2 . 0 0 .0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8 .0 10.0 12 .0 14 .0 16.0 18 .0 20 .0 Section of 1/2 Street (distance in feet) -Ground elev . D Minor d-max Major d-max X Minor T-max ::i:: Major T-max 1 l+[ /·t r l + lll / X -l (T /W)-1 08-PS (ST L-1).xls , Q-Allow 8/11 /2009 , 3:49 PM ,- 2 0 ,---~------,---,-----,-----,-~----.--~ ·1 19 , -· 18 1 7 16 15 _,_ .-,l 4 ,_ 1/1 a, ..c (J13 -,- C: :.=- ..S:::.1 2 ,_ 0.. a, 0 11 i ~ 0 u:::,o g g "O ca I ~ 8 C. Cl) ~7 0 u::: 6 5 4 3 .L. -+-· -~-- + I I -··+ I· + I ·I -1· I I ' I I I I -., l ·-· ·t i +- -t + T -! i t- 0Ltt------+----~-~--~-~--~-~--;...-.--------_J 0 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 2 4 a for 1/2 Street (cfs) o Flow Depth (in .) □ Flow Spread (ft.) 08-P5 {ST L-1).xls , a-Allow I Q for 1/2 Flow Depth Flow Street (els) (in .) Spread (ft .) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 1.85 1.38 0.50 2.39 1.79 0.75 2.78 2.08 1.00 2.78 2 .31 1.25 3.30 3.86 1.50 3.50 4.45 1.75 3.67 4.96 2.00 3.82 5.41 2.25 3.96 5.82 2.50 4.08 6.19 2.75 4.20 6.53 3.00 4.30 6.84 3.25 4.41 7.14 3.50 4.50 7.42 3.75 4.59 7.69 4.00 4.67 7.94 4.25 4.76 8.18 4.50 4.83 8.41 4 .75 4.91 8.64 5.00 4.98 8.85 5.25 5.05 9.06 5.50 5.12 9.26 5.75 5.18 9.45 6.00 5.25 9.64 6.25 5.31 9.82 6.50 5.37 9.99 6.75 5.42 10.16 7 .00 5.48 10.33 7 .25 5.54 10.50 7.50 5.59 10.65 7.75 5.64 10.81 8.00 5.69 10.96 8.25 5.74 11 .11 8.50 5.79 11 .26 8.75 5.84 11.40 9.00 5.89 11 .54 9.25 5.94 11 .68 9.50 5.98 11 .81 9.75 6.03 11 .95 10.00 6.07 12.08 10.25 6.11 12.21 10.50 6.15 12.33 10.75 6.20 12.46 11 .00 6.24 12.58 11 .25 6.28 12.70 11 .50 6.32 12.82 11 .75 6.36 12.93 12.00 6.40 13.05 12.25 6.43 13.16 12.50 6.47 13.27 8/11 /2009, 3:49 PM INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE Project : ______________________ N_o;;.rt....;.;h ...:C...:o..:.l ...:leg=e..:.M..:.a...:r...:k..:.e;;.t .;,.P...:la...:c..:.e ____________________ _ Inlet ID : ______________________ ;;.ST...:..;;L..:.-1..:.(,;:B...:a...:s...:in..:.P..:.5:,) _____________________ _ Lo (C)- H-Curb w -~ Wo Lo (G) Oesian Information llnout\ MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type= COOT Type R Curb Opening Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from '0 -AUow'} au:x:AL = 2.0 2.0 inches Total Number of Units in the Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) No = 1 1 Length of a Single Unit Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) Lo= 5.00 5.00 ft Width of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W from Q-Allow) Wo = N/A N/A ft Clog ging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical min . value= 0.5) Cr G= N/A N/A Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical min . value= 0.1) c,-c = 0.10 0.10 Street Hvdraulics: OK • Q < max imum allo wable from sheet '0-Allow' MINOR MAJOR Design Discharge for Half of Street (from Sheet Q-Peak) Q Q ;;; 2 .00 4 .50 cfs Wate r Spread Width T= 5.4 8.4 ft W ate r Depth at Flowline (outside of local depression) d= 3.8 4.8 inches Wate r Depth at Street Crown (or at TMAXl dcROwN = 0.0 0.0 inches Ratio of Gutter Flow to Design Flow Eo = 0.857 0.657 Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section Ta Oi = 0.29 1.55 els Discharge within the Gutter Section W O w= 1.72 2.96 els Discharge Behind the Curb Face QBACI( = 0 .00 0.00 els Street Flow Area A.= 0.58 1.16 sq tt Street Flow Velocity V,= 3.47 3.89 fps W ater Depth for Desian Condition d lOCAL = 5.8 6 .8 inches nr-,.,0 Anatv sis ICatculated\ MINOR MAJOR otal Length of Inlet Grate Opening L=1 I I" Ratio of Grate Flow to Design Flow E~GAATE = Under No-Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Min imum Velocity W here Grate Spash-Over Begins :::I I r Interception Rate of Frontal Flow Interception Rate of Side Flow Inte rception Capacity O,= els Under Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient far Multip le-unit Grate Inlet GrateCoel = Clogging Factor for Multiple-unit Grate Inlet GrateClog = Effective (unclogged) Length of Multiple-unit Grate Inlet Le = ft Minimum Velocity W here Grate Spash-Over Begins V o : fps Interception Rate of Frontal Flow A1: Interception Rate of Side Flow A,: Actual Interception Capacity a.: NIA NIA els Carry-Over Flow = a.-a, (to be applied to curb opening or next dis inlet) a .= NIA NIA cfs Curb or Slotted Inlet Ooenino Analvsis /Calculated\ MINOR MAJOR Equivalent Slope S, (based on grate carry-over) S,=1 0.17101 0.137611Vft Requi red Length Lr to Have 100% Interception Lt = 7.78 12.46 ft Under No-Clogging Condition MIN OR MAJO R Effective Length of Curb Opening or Slotted Inlet (minimum of L . Lr) ~=I 5.001 5.001'1 Interception Capacity 1.69 2.71 els Under Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient CurbCoef = 1.00 1.00 Clogging Factor far Multiple-unit Curb Opening or Slotted Inlet CurbClog = 0.10 0 .10 =ttective (Unclogged) Length L 11 : 4.50 4.50 tt A.ctual Interception Capacity a .= 1.58 2.49 els arry-Over Flow = a b(GRAreI-a. Ob = 0.42 2 .01 els ::., mmarv MINOR MAJOR Total Inle t Interception Capacity a= 1.58 2.49 els Total Inlet Carry-Over Flow (flow bypass ing inlet) a .= 0 .42 2.01 els Capture Percentaae = a.1a0 = Co/o = 78 .9 55 .4 o/o 08-P5 (ST L-1).xls, Inlet On Grade 8/1 1/2009, 3:49 PM 08-P5 (ST L g C :I ~ 12 • ..:. ~ 11 "O ~ c. 10 UI :I ~ 9 · "O ., ii ~ 5 .!! .E I O 4 -1).xls, Inlet On G l I -;- i L i o O lntercepled (els) <> Spread T (ft T -CROWN ), Not Limited by rade 10 11 12 a for 1/2 Street (els) o a Bypassed (cfs) :0: Flow Depth d {inches) 13 [i] I □ I qi D 14 15 G 6 Spread T (f • by T-CAo~N Limited [D [p D I 7 20 8/11 /2009 3· • .49 PM a for 1/2 Street a Int ercepted a Bypassed (els) Spread T (f t ), Spread T (ft), Not Flow Depth d (els ) (els) Limited Limi ted by (inche s) byT •CRowN T -cAowN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 1.79 1.79 2 .39 1.00 0.96 0.04 2.31 2.31 2.78 1.50 1.30 0.20 4.45 4.45 3.50 2.00 1.58 0.42 5.4 1 5.4 1 3.82 2.50 1.81 0.69 6.19 6.19 4.09 3.00 2.01 0.99 6.84 6.84 4.31 3.50 2.18 1.32 7.42 7.42 4 .50 4.00 2.34 1.66 7.94 7.94 4 .68 4.50 2.49 2.0 1 8.41 8.41 4.84 5.00 2.63 2.37 8.85 8.85 4 .98 5.50 2.76 2.74 9.26 9.26 5.12 6.00 2.88 3.12 9.64 9.64 5.25 6.50 2.99 3.5 1 9.99 9.99 5.37 7.00 3.10 3.90 10.33 10.33 5.48 7.50 3.21 4.29 10.65 10.65 5.59 8.00 3.30 4.70 10.96 10.96 5.70 8.50 3.40 5.10 11.26 11 .26 5.80 9.00 3.49 5.51 11 .54 11 .54 5.89 9.50 3.58 5.92 11 .81 11 .81 5.9 8 10.00 3.67 6.33 12.08 12.08 6.07 10.50 3.75 6.75 12.33 12.33 6.16 11 .00 3.83 7.17 12.58 12.58 6.24 11 .50 3.91 7.59 12.82 12.82 6.32 12.00 3 .99 8.01 13.05 13.05 6.40 12.50 4 .07 8.43 13.27 13.27 6.48 13.00 4.14 8.86 13.49 13.49 6 .55 13.50 4.21 9.29 13.71 13.71 6.62 14 .00 4 .28 9.72 13.92 13.92 6.69 14 .50 4.35 10.15 14 .12 14.12 6.76 15.00 4.4 2 10.58 14.32 14 .32 6.83 15.50 4.4 9 11.01 14 .51 14.51 6 .89 16.00 4.55 11.45 14 .71 14.71 6.96 16.50 4.62 11 .88 14.89 14.89 7.02 17.00 4.68 12.32 15.08 15.08 7.08 17.50 4.74 12.76 15.26 15.26 7.15 18.00 4 .80 13.20 15.43 15.43 7.20 18.50 4 .86 13.64 15.60 15.60 7.26 19.00 4 .92 14.08 15.77 15.77 7.32 19.50 4.98 14 .52 15.94 15.94 7.38 20.00 5.03 14 .97 16.11 16.11 7.43 08 -P5 (ST L-1).xls, Inlet On Grade 8/11 /2009, 3:49 PM DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD North College Market Place ST M-1 (Basin P12) Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow ----- Design Flow : u l\lL Y it already determined th rough other methods : Minor Storm Major Sto rm (local peak flow for 1/2 of street , p·lus flow bypassing upstream subcatchments): ·a =I 10 .S O! 24.00lcfs • If you entered a value here , skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to sheet a -Allow) ueograpnIc In1ormatIon : (t::nter aata in tne blue cells): Subcatchment Area =aAcres Percent lmpeiviousness = % NRCS Soil Type= A, B, C, or D Site : (Check One Box Only) Slope (ft/ft) Leng th (ft) Site is Urban:I X I Overland Flow =1 I I Site Is Non-Urban :: Gutter Flow = Haintall In1ormatIon : Intensity I (incrvnr) -t.;1 I-' 1 / ( l,;2 + I c) "l,;3 Minor Storm Major Storm Design Storm Return Period, T, = years Return Period O ne-Hou r Precipita tion . P, = inches C,= C2= C3 = User-Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a ca lculated val ue), C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coeffi cient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C5 = Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , a b = 0 .04 0.40 els Analys is of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment : Minor Storm Major Storm Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient , C = N/A N/A Calcu lated 5-y r. Runoff Coefficient , CS = N/A N/A Overland Flow Veloci ty, V0 = N/A N/A fps Gutter Flow Velocity , VG= N/A N/A fps Overland Flow Time , lo= N/A N/A minutes Gutter Flow Time, tG = N/A N/A min utes Calculated Time of Concentration , Tc = N/A N/A minutes Time of Concent ration by Regional Formula , Tc = N/A N/A min utes Recommended Tc= N/A N/A minutes Time of Concentration Selected by User, Tc = NIA N/A minutes Design Rainfall Intensity, I = N/A N/A inch/hr Calculated Local Peak Flow , Op = N/A N/A els Total Des i gn Peak Flow , Q = 10.54 24.40 els og.p1 2 (ST M -1 ).xis, Q -P eak 8/11 /200 9, 3 :50 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regu l ated Crite ri a for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project : North College Market Place Inlet ID : -------------------,,S""T""M,.,...,-1,-,(;:,B,-a_s.,..in""'P""1""2"") _________________ _ y HCU AB d a Gutter Geometrv (Enter data in the blue cells\ Maximum Al lowable Width fo r Spread Behind Curb Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) Manning 's Roughness Behind Curb Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown Gutter Depression Gutte r W idth Street Transverse Slope Street Longitudinal Slope -Enter O for sump condition Manning 's Roughness for Street Section ~ I~;-Allowabl e W ater Spread for Minor & Major Storm x. All owable Depth at Gutter Flow Line fo r Minor & Major Storm w Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based On Allowable Water Soread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq . ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq . ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression Allowable Spread for Dis cha rg e outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutte r Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC -22 method (Eq . ST-7) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W, carri ed in Section T x Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Or -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e .g ., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) Ma ximum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section v ·d Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutte r Flowline Depth Maximum Gutter Cao acitv Based on Allowable Gutter Deoth Theoretical Water Spread Theoretical Sp read for Discharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq. ST-7) Theoretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T xrH Actual Discharge outside the Gutte r Section W , (limited by distance T cAowNl Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Od -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e .g ., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns) Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Flow Veloci ty Within the Gutter Section v·d Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Slope-Based Depth Safety Reducti on Factor for Major & Minor (d?. 6") Storm Max Flow Based on Allow. Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Appl ied) Res ultant Flow Depth at Stre et Crown (Safety Factor Applied) Max . Allowable Gutter Caoacitv Based on Minimum of Q. o r Q TaACK=aft SaAcK = It. vert. / ft. horiz neACK = Hcu As = 6.00 inches T cROWN == 50 .0 ft a= 2 .00 inches W= 2 .00 ft Sx = 0 .0200 ft . vert. / ft. horiz So = 0.0100 It . ve rt . /ft . horiz nsTAEET = 0.0 160 Minor Storm Major Storm TMAX= 26 .0 26 .0 ft dMAX = 6 .00 18 .00 inches X = yes Minor Storm Major Storm Sw= 0.1033 0 .1033 ft/ft y= 6.24 6 .24 inches d = 8.24 8.24 inches Tx= 24.0 24.0 ft Ea = 0.236 0 .236 Ox= 24 .7 24.7 cfs Ow= 7.6 7.6 cfs OBACK = 0.0 0 .0 cfs Or = 32 .4 32.4 els V= 6.6 6.6 fps v·d = 4.5 4 .5 Minor Storm Major Storm TTH = 16.7 66.7 ft TxTH = 14.7 64 .7 ft Ea = 0.378 0.086 OxrH = 6.6 347.5 el s Ox= 6.6 338.1 cfs Ow= 4.0 32 .6 els OaACK = 0.0 0 .0 els 0 = 10.7 370 .7 cts V = 5.1 11 .7 fps v·d = 2 .6 17.5 R= 1.00 1.00 Q d : 10.7 370 .7 els d = 6.00 18.00 inches dcAOWN = 0 .00 4.00 inches Minor Storm Majo r Storm a .uow =I 10 .11 32 .4!cts MINO R STO RM max. allowab le capacity O K -greater than flow given on sheet 'Q-Peak ' MAJO R STO RM max. allowable capacity OK -greate r than flow gi ven on sheet 'O-Peak' 09 -P 12 (ST M -1).xls , a -Allow 8/11/2009 , 3 :50 PM St reet Section with Flow Depths 20 r r-..,- T 19 t r 18 17 T I i --•--, j-+ 16 r ~ -I ··I ·r 15 i· 14 .., f/1 Cl) 13 ! - .r; u 12 ; C: C: 11 i- '.c C. 10 Cl) 9 1 e. 1 I .E f I Cl 8 :f ::le_ + I ~ ,::,:: ::le * : ::le ~ "Qi ::c: 7 I I I 6 m dJ □ □ □ 0 D; n ~ 5 4 3 2 0 0 .0 2 .0 4 ,0 6.0 8 .0 10.0 12 .0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20 .0 Section of 1/2 Street (distance in feet) I -Ground elev . D Minor d-max Major d-max X MinorT-m ax ~ MajorT-max 1 09-P12 (ST M-1}.xls , Q-Allow 8/11 /2009 , 3:50 PM 20 191 ._ a Q for 1/2 Flow Depth Flow Street (els) (in.) Spread (ft.) 0.00 0.00 0.00 18 -,---0.25 1.92 1.55 0.50 2.49 2.01 17 0.75 2.56 2.33 1.00 3.13 4.72 1.25 3.35 5.62 16 1.50 3.52 6.36 1.75 3.68 7.01 15 2.00 3.82 7.58 2.25 3.94 8.10 ...-J4 2.50 4.05 8.57 VI Q) "513 C: 2.75 4.16 9.01 3.00 4.26 9.42 3.25 4.35 9.80 :::., 3.50 4.44 10.1 6 .C:12 -j-3.75 4.52 10.50 a. Q) 4.00 4.60 10.83 0 11 4.25 4.67 11.14 == 4.50 4.74 11.44 0 ' U::::10 4.75 4.81 11 .73 5.00 4.88 12.01 -~9 "O 10 Cll 5.25 4.95 12.28 5.50 5.01 12.54 5.75 5.07 12.79 ~8 D 6.00 5.13 13.03 a. [D (/) 6.25 5.18 13.27 q == 7 I 0 u:::: 6.50 5.24 13.50 6.75 5.29 13.72 7.00 5.34 13.94 6 7.25 5.39 14.15 7.50 5.44 14.36 5 7.75 5.4 9 14.56 8.00 5.54 14.76 4 8.25 5.59 14.96 8.50 5.63 15.15 8.75 5.68 15.34 3 9.00 5.72 15.52 2 ~ j 9.25 5.77 15.70 9.50 5.81 15.88 9.75 5.85 16.05 10.00 5.89 16.22 10.25 5.93 16.39 10.50 5.97 16.55 0Lct------+-----~-------~----'------+----_J 0 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 10.75 6.01 16.72 11 .00 6.05 16.88 Q for 1/2 Street (cfs) 11.25 6.09 17.03 11 .50 6.12 17.19 11 .75 6.16 17.34 o Flow Depth (in .) □ Flow Spread (ft.) 12.00 6.20 17.49 12.25 6.23 17.64 12.50 6.27 17.79 09-P12 (ST M-1).xls, a-Allow 8/11/2009, 3:50 PM INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE Project : ______________________ N_o;.,.r_t_h..;C..;o;..11..;e.;/l.g.;;.e;..M;..a;;.;r..;k.;;.et..;;..P..;;la..;c.;.e ____________________ _ Inlet ID : ______________________ S_T_M_-_1_(_B_a_si_n_P_1_2 ... ) ____________________ _ H-Curb Wo w Lo (G) o~~ion Information llnout\ MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type= COOT/Denver 13 Valley Grate Local Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from '0-Allow') "tOCAL = 2.0 2.0 inches Total Number of Units in the Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) No= 1 1 Length of a Single Unit Inlet (Grate or Curb Opening) Lo = 3.00 3.00 ft Width of a Unit Grate (cannot be greater than W from 0-Allow) Wo = 1.73 1.73 ft Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Grate (typical min . value= 0.5) C,-G= 0.50 0.50 Clogging Factor for a Single Unit Curb Opening (typical min . value = 0.1) c,-c = N/A NIA Street Hxdraylic s: OK • g < maximum allo wab le from sheet 'Q-Allow ' MINOR MAJOR Design Discharge for Half of Street (from Sheet Q-Peak) Oo= 10.54 24 .40 els Waler Spread W idth T= 16.6 23 .3 ft Water Depth at Flowtine (outside of local depression ) d= 6.0 7.6 inches Water Depth at Street Crown (or at T .,..) d cROWN = 0.0 a.a inches Ratio of Gutter Flow to Design Flow Eo = 0.381 0.266 Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T • 0,= 6.53 17.91 els Discharge within the Gutter Section W o.= 4.02 6.50 cfs Discharge Behind the Curb Face OeACK = 0.00 0.00 el s Street Flow Area A,= 2.91 5.58 sq ft Street Flow Velocity v .::; 3.62 4.37 fps Water Depth for Design Condition d LOCAl = 8.0 9.6 inches Grate Analv~i~ lCalc:ulated\ MINOR MAJOR Total Length of Inlet Grate Opening L =1 3.001 3.001ft Ratio of Grate Flow to Design Flow E~GRArE = 0.347: 0.240: Under No-Clogging Condition MINO R MAJOR Minimum Velocity Where Grate Spash•Over Begins Vo = 6.17 6.17 fps Interception Rate of Frontal Flow R1 = 1.00 1.00 Intercept ion Rate of Side Flow A.= 0.14 0.11 Interception Capacity 0 ;= 4.63 7.80 els Under Clogging Cond it i on MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple-unit Grate Inlet GrateCoef = 1.00 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple-unit Grate Inlet GrateClog = a.so 0.50 Effective (unclogged) Length of Multiple-unit Grate Inlet L. = 1.50 1.50 ft Minimum Velocity Wh ere Grate Spash -Over Begins Vo= 3.86 3.86 fps Interception Rate of Frontal Flow A1 = 1.00 0.95 Interception Rate of Side Flow R,= 0.03 0.02 Actual Inte rception Capacity a.= 3.88 6 .02 els :arry-Over Flow = 0 0 -0 , (to be applied to curb opening or next dis inlel) a .= 6.66 18.38 els ""rb or Slotted Inlet "=nina Analvsis /Calculated\ MINOR MAJOR •quivalent Slope S, (based on grate carry-over) S,=I I l~t Required Length Lr to Have 100¾ Interception Lr= Under No-Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR Effective Length of Curb Opening or Slotted Inlet (minimum of L , Lr ) ~=I I I~,s Interception Capacity Under Clogging Condition MINOR MAJOR :logging Coefficient Cu rbCoef = logging Factor for Multiple-unit Curb Opening or Slotted Inlet CurbClog = •ttective (Unclogged) Length L.= h Actual Interception Capacity a.= NIA NIA els Carry-Over Flow = Q b(GRATEl-Q• a .= NIA NIA cfs Summarv MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Interception Capacity 0= 3.88 6.02 els Total Inlet Carry-Over Flow (flow bypassing inlet) O,= 6.66 18.38 cfs Capture Percentage = 0 ,10 0 = C%= 36 .8 24 .7 % 09-Pl 2 (ST M-1 ).xis, Inlet On Grade 8/11 /2009 , 3:50 PM 09-P1 2 (ST M ., ., J::; " ~ J::; Q. ., C 3: .2 ... g C: ~ u ,.:. ,a I- "0 ., ~ Q. (Jl 3: 0 u: "0 ., ., 20 19 18 17 16 I ., ~ 7 >Ill ,a "0 ., Q. ~ 5 ., £ - 0 -1 ).xis, Inlet 0 -+ I -+ n Grade t ,o 1f I I 7 Q -r --j + I 0 T ~ 0 -8 0 -~ 0 I ~ r 0 + o Q Intercepted (els) O SpreadT (ti) T -CROWN ' Not Limited by r ~ I t· 0 qi 10 11 a for 112 s t reet (els) □ a Bypassed (cfs) X Flow Depth d 1· inches) D [ff 12 r I 0- q:J 13 I o[il (j] : D I q:i 14 15 16 t::. Spread T (II) L' • by T -C:RowN ,m,ted D 17 El □I Q 18 19 20 8/11/2009, 3:50 PM a for 1/2 Street a Intercepted a Bypassed (els ) Spread T (ft), Spread T (ft ), Not Flow Depthd (els ) (els) Limited Lim ited by (inc hes) byT-caowN T-cRowN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.46 0.04 2.01 2.01 2.48 1.00 0.84 0.16 4.72 4.72 3.13 1.50 1.14 0.36 6.36 6.36 3.53 2.00 1.39 0.61 7.58 7.58 3.82 2.50 1.60 0.90 8.57 8.57 4.06 3.00 1.80 1.20 9.42 9.42 4.26 3.50 1.98 1.52 10.16 10.16 4.44 4.00 2.15 1.85 10.83 10.83 4.60 4.50 2.31 2.19 11.44 11.44 4.75 5.00 2.4 6 2.54 12.01 12.01 4.88 5.50 2.61 2.89 12.54 12.54 5.01 6.00 2.75 3.25 13.03 13.03 5.13 6.50 2.88 3.62 13.50 13.50 5.24 7.00 3.01 3.99 13.94 13.94 5.35 7.50 3.14 4.36 14 .36 14.36 5.45 8.00 3.26 4.74 14.76 14 .76 5.54 8.50 3.38 5.12 15.15 15.15 5.64 9.00 3.50 5.50 15.52 15.52 5.73 9.50 3.61 5.89 15.88 15.88 5.81 10.00 3.72 6.28 16.22 16.22 5.89 10.50 3.83 6.67 16.55 16.55 5.97 11 .00 3.94 7.06 16.88 16.88 6.05 11.50 4.04 7.46 17.19 17 .19 6.13 12.00 4.1 4 7.86 17.49 17.49 6.20 12.50 4.25 8.25 17.79 17.79 6.27 13.00 4.35 8.65 18.08 18.08 6.34 13.50 4.44 9.06 18.36 18.36 6.4 1 14 .00 4 .54 9.46 18.63 18.63 6.47 14.50 4.62 9.88 18.90 18.90 6.54 15.00 4.70 10.30 19.16 19.16 6.60 15.50 4 .78 10.72 19.42 19.42 6.66 16.00 4.86 11.14 19.67 19.67 6.72 16.50 4 .94 11.56 19.92 19.92 6.78 17.00 5.02 11 .98 20.16 20.16 6.84 17.50 5.09 12.4 1 20.39 20.39 6.89 18.00 5.16 12.84 20.63 20.63 6.95 18.50 5.23 13.27 20 .85 20 .85 7.00 19.00 5.31 13.69 21 .08 21 .08 7.06 19.50 5.38 14 .12 21 .30 21 .30 7.11 20.00 5.44 14.56 21 .51 21 .51 7 .16 09-P12 (ST M-1).xls, Inlet On Grade 8/11 /2009, 3:50 PM DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD North College Market Place ST J -5 {Basin P28) Design Flow = Gutter Flow + Carry-over Flow r I j T ------ s: Minor Storm Major Sto rm , bcatchments): 1 .001 2.00jcfs kip the rest of this sheet and roceed t o sheet Q-Allow) r data tn the blue ce s : Subcatchment Area =aAcre s Percent Imperviousness = % NRCS Soil Type= A, B, C, or D Site: (Check One Box Only) Slope (It/ft) Length (ft ) Site is Urban:I X I Site Is Non-Urban : .. ,_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ .... _, Overland Flow =1 Gutter Flow =1-------11-------1 ,__ _______ ,__ ____ _, am a n orma I0n : ntensIty Design Storm Return Period , T, = Return Pe riod One-Hour Precipitation , P 1 = C ,= C2= C3= User-Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a ca lculated value), C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coeff icient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value), C5 = Bypass (Carry-Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , a .= Minor Storm 0.00 Analys is of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment : Minor Storm 10-P 28 (ST M-2 ).x ls, Q-Peak Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient, C = Calculated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficien t , C5 = Overland Flow Velocity , V0 = Gutter Flow Velocity , VG = Overland Flow Time, to= Gutter Flow Time, tG = Calcu lated Time of Conce ntratio n, T, = Time of Concentration by Regional Formula , T, = Recommended T, = Time of Concentration Se lected by User , T, = Design Rainfall Intensity , I = Calculated Local Peak Flow , Op= Total Design Peak Flow, Q = N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.00 Major Storm 0.00 Major Storm N/A N/A years nches i cfs N/A f ps N/A f ps minutes minutes minutes minutes minu tes minutes nch/hr els N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A i N/A 2.00 els 8/11 /2009, 3:50 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteri a for Max i mum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project : North College Market Place Inl et ID:-------------------,S=-:T,,...,J--5--(::,,B_a_s .,.in""'P""'2,;..8.,.)..;..;,.;... _______________ _ HCUA B d y a Gutter Geometrv /Enter data in the blue cells\ Maximum All owable Width for Spread Behind Curb Side Slope Behind Cu rb {leave blank for no conveyance cred it behind curb) Manning's Roughness Behind Curb Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown Gutter Depression Gutter Width Street Trans verse Slope Street Longitudinal Slope -Enter O for sump condition Manning 's Roughness for Street Section Max. Allowable Water Spread for Minor & Major Storm Max. Allowabl e Depth at Gutter Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) Maximum Gutter Caoacitv Based On Allowable Water Soread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq . ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq . ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression Allowable Spread for Di scharge outside the Gutter Section W (T -W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq . ST-7) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Or -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e.g ., sidewalk , driveways , & lawns) Max im um Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section V"d Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth M;,vimum Gutter Caoacitv Based on Allowable Gutter Deoth Theoretical Water Spread Theoretical Spread for Discharge outside the Gutte r Section W (T -W ) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq . ST-7) Theoretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T xTH !Actual Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , (limited by distance T CROWN) Discharge within the Gutter Section W (Od -Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e .g ., sidewalk , driveways, & lawns) Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Flow Veloci ty Within the Gutter Section V"d Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Slope-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor fo r Major & Minor (d?. 6") Storm Max Flow Based on Allow . Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) Max . Allowable Gutter Caoacitv Ba se d on Minimum of Q . or Q TaACK =§ft SaACK = It . ve rt . I ft . horiz n sACK :;; HcuRa = 6 .00 inches TcROWN = 15.6 ft a= 2 .00 inches W = 2 .00 ft Sx = 0.0215 It. vert . I ft . horiz So = 0 .0000 ft . vert . I ft . horiz n srREET; 0.0160 Minor Storm Major Storm TMAX = 7 .8 7.8 ft dMAX= 6 .00 18 .00 inches X = yes Minor Storm Major Storm Sw= 0.1048 0 .1048 ft/ft y= 2 .01 2.0 1 inches d = 4.01 4 .01 inche s T x = 5.8 5.8 ft Eo = 0.725 0.725 O x = 0 .0 0 .0 els Ow= 0 .0 0.0 els OaACK = 0 .0 0 .0 els Or = SUMP SUMP els V= 0 .0 0.0 fps V"d= 0 .0 0 .0 Minor Storm Major Storm TrH = 15 .5 62 .0 ft Tx TH = 13.5 60 .0 ft Eo = 0.401 0.092 Ox TH= 0 .0 0.0 els Ox= 0 .0 0.0 els Ow= 0 .0 0.0 els OaACK = 0.0 0.0 els 0= 0 .0 0.0 els V= 0.0 0.0 fps V"d= 0 .0 0.0 R= SUMP SUMP Od= SUMP SUMP els d= inches dcaowN = inches Minor Storm Major Storm a .,1ow =I SUMP I SUMP !cfs MINO R STORM max. allowable capacity OK -greater than f low given on sheet 'Q-Peak' MAJOR STOR M max . allowable capacity OK -greater than fl o w given on sheet '0-Peak' 10-P28 (ST M-2).xls, Q-Allow 8/11/2009 , 3:50 PM 20 ·r 19 • 18 17 16 15 t· 14 U) 13 • Q) .s:. 0 12 C -~ 11 :2' 10 ~--C. Q) e. 9 E 8 t en 'Qj ::c: 7 ! 6 m 5 4 3 2 0 0 .0 2 .0 I i -Ground elev . ,- 4.0 Street Section with Flow Depths + 6.0 8 .0 10.0 12 .0 I 1 14.0 Section of 1/2 Street (distance in feet) □ Minor d-max Majord-max x Minor T-max 1 1 I I- 16.0 18.0 20 .0 ::K Major T-max Q = Ql Qll, = Q-Q,l 1-E 1 S,,. / Sx + 8 /3 [ l + S w I Sx ] -1 0 (T /W)-1 10-P28 (ST M-2).xls , a -Allow 8/11 /2009 , 3:50 PM 20 1J l I r r-T a t or 112 Flow Depth Fl ow Street (els) (in.) Spread (ft .) 0.00 18 ,- ·-·---! l . l -+ i ! 17 r-i I 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 -I i 16 1.25 1.50 I 1.75 15 T I I 2.00 2.25 .-J 4 2.50 1/1 2.75 Cl) .s::. l 3 I 7 I .S::.12 - 3.00 3.25 3.50 3.75 C. Cl) 4.00 0 11 4.25 == 4.50 0 U::10 4.75 5.00 ,..::, ::: I ;-s I I l ·1 nl 5.25 5.50 5.75 ~8 6.00 C. (/) 6.25 == 7 0 6.50 6.75 u:: 7.00 6 7.25 7.50 5 7.75 8.00 8.25 4 8.50 8.75 3 9.00 9.25 2 I ·1 9.50 9.75 10.00 10.2 5 10.50 o~-~----------+--~--+------'----'------'-___J 10.75 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 11.00 Q for 1/2 Street (cfs) 11.25 11.50 11.75 o Flow Depth (in .) D Flow Spread (ft.) 12.00 12.25 12.50 10-P28 (S T M-2).xls, O-Allow 8/11/2009, 3:50 PM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Project = ________________________ N..;o..;rt.;.h.;.C.;;..;.o ..;lle.;.9,.ce;..;;.M..;a.;.rk..;e;.;t..;P..;l;:.ac;.;e;..;;. _____________________ _ Inlet ID = ________________________ s_T_J_·5""(._B_a_si_n_P_2_a .... ) ______________________ _ Lo (C) --~- ·1..oi.G) , .... rion Information llnnut\ MINOR MAJOR ype of In let Type= COOT/Denver 13 Combination ocal Depression (additional to continuous gutter depression 'a' from 'Q-Allow') -= 2.00 2 .00 inches ~umber of Unit Inlets (Grate or Cu rb Opening) NO= 11 1 Grate Information MIN OR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate Lo(G)= 3 .00 3.00 feet W idth of a Unit Grate Wo= 1.73 1.73 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0 .15-0.90) A.atio = 0.47 0.47 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0 .50 -O. 70) C,(G)= 0 .50 0.50 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) c. (G) = 3.00 3.00 Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0 .67) C0 (G) = 0 .67 0.67 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 H Y8fl= 6 .50 6 .50 inches He ight of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches H itwa.1 = 5.25 5.25 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta= 0.0 0 .0 degrees Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) W P= 2 .00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0 .10) C1 (C)= 0 .10 0 .10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) c. (C) = 2.30 2.30 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) C0 (C) = 0 .67 0 .67 Resultina Gutter Flow Oeoth for Grate Inlet r:i:anacitv in a Sumo MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coe!= 1.00 1.00 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0 .50 0.50 Grate as a Weir: The Controlling Factor Will Be : Curb Opening as Weir Curb Opening As Weir Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (1 cfs grate, 0 els curb) d.= 4 .63 6.1 1 inches Flow Depth (Cu rb Opening Only) without Clogging (0 els grate , 1 els curb) d Cl.llb-un :: 1.96 3.11 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (1 els grate , O els curb) d_,= 6.11 8.46 inches Flow Depth (C urb Opening Only) with Clogging (0 cfs grate, 1 els cu rb) d (.Ub-a = 2 .02 3.20 inches Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate , 1 els curb) d01 = 1.97 3.12 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate , 1 els curb) d~= 2.11 3.35 inches Resulting Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression da-Gta1a = 0.11 1.35 inches Resultina Gutter Flow Death for Curb Ooenina Inlet Caoacitv in a Sumo MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Units Coe! =1 1001 1.001 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 010: 010: Curb as a Weir1 Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate , 1 els curb) d•=1 1.971 3.12Iinches Flo w Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate , 1 els curb) dw,= 2.11 3.35 inches Curb as an Orif ice , Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogg ing (0 els grale , 1 cfs curb) d01 = 1.96 3.11 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate, 1 els curb) doa= 2 .02 3.20 inches Resulting Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression d •. curb = 0.11 1.35 inches Resultant Street Conditions MINOR MAJOR Total In let Length L= 3.0 3.0 feet Total Inlet Inte rception Capacity (Design Discharge from Q-Peak) Oa= 1.0 2 .0 els Resultant Gutter Flow Depth (based on sheet O·Allow geometry) d= 0.02 1.20 inches Resultant Street Flow Spread (based on sheet O·Allow geometry) T= o.o 0.95 feet Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown dcROWN = 0.00 0 .00 inches 10-P28 (ST M-2).xls , Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009 , 3:50 PM 40 39 '- 38 •--!-t .I. i I 37 -+ l 36 + i ·- 35 -! -.j - 34 r 0 33 • •i 32 ·-·1-·-i 3 1 7 I 30 -+ 29 ,- 28 • 9 ~ .j +- 27 • I-I' ! + 26 I. + ! I 25 i l I I 24 --j '! !23 -, ;-22 0 i I - "' 1 ., I [ 2 1 t t ~ 20 I -;;;- ~ 19 • (,) ,§_ 18 I .<: ~ j i5. 17 I-'P i I I I I I Q) I I I I i c 16 I I . ! I I I ' I • i I ~ xixtx>r:xf >K X >f X );( X f X )K X );( X >f X );( X ~ X rx 15 f , I I . . I ' I l I ' I 14 I 13 I l 0 I ~ 12 I 11 >,< 10 -~ 9 ; 8 I I • /1 1, • I 7 I 9 • 6 I ' 5 4 3 t 2 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 a for 1/2 Street (els) --0-Grate Weir -&-Comb. OrifJ -£-Comb. Orill Flow Depth (in.) Weir Flow Depth (in.) Ori!. Flow Depth (in.) 0 Curb Opening Only .. Reported Design X Reported Design flow Deplh (in.) Flow Depth (In .) Flow Spread (fl.) 10·P28 (ST M-2).xts , Inlet In Sump 8/11/2009 , 3:50 PM a Intercept ed G rate Weir JFlow Comb. Orif./ ,Weir Comb. Orif./ J Orif. Curb Opening Only Re ported Design Report ed (cfs) Depth (in .) Flow Depth (in.) Flow Dep th (in.) J Flow Depth (in.) Flow Dep th (in.) Desig n J Flow Spread (ft .) 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 1 .00 2.74 0 .00 0 .02 0 .02 0 .02 0 .02 2 .00 4.29 0 .13 1.20 1.20 1.20 0 .95 3 .00 5.60 0.7 9 1.45 2.20 2.2 0 1.75 4 .00 6.68 1.38 1.79 3.09 3 .09 4 .22 5.00 7.6 1 1.92 2 .24 6.10 4 .93 11.34 6 .00 8.43 2.47 2 .85 8 .71 5 .6 4 14.11 7 .00 9.20 3.07 3.59 12.58 6.40 15.60 8 .00 9.92 3.67 4 .45 17 .0 4 7 .19 15 .60 9 .00 10 .62 4.27 5.43 22 .10 8.03 15 .60 10.00 11 .26 4 .8 5 6 .52 27.75 8 .89 15.60 11 .00 11 .9 1 5.43 7 .8 2 34 .00 9 .87 15 .60 12 .00 12 .53 5.99 9.47 40 .84 11.00 15.60 13.00 13 .13 6 .55 11 .27 48 .28 12 .20 15.60 14 .00 13.7 1 7 .10 13.21 56 .3 1 13.46 15.60 15 .00 14 .26 7.63 15.30 64 .94 15 .30 15 .60 16 .00 14.84 8 .16 17.53 74 .16 17 .53 15 .60 17.0 0 15.37 8 .69 19 .90 83.98 19 .90 15.60 18 .00 15.92 9 .20 22 .4 2 94 .39 22.42 15 .60 19 .00 16 .4 1 9 .70 25 .09 105.40 25 .09 15.60 20 .00 16 .93 10.20 27 .89 1 17 .00 27 .89 15.60 2 1 .00 17 .45 10 .70 30 .8 4 129 .20 30 .8 4 15.60 22 .00 17.95 11 .18 33.94 141 .99 33.94 15 .60 23.00 18.4 4 11 .66 37 .18 155 .38 37 .18 15.60 24 .00 18 .92 12 .13 40 .57 169 .37 40 .57 15.60 25 .00 19.39 12 .60 44 .09 183 .94 44 .09 15.60 26 .00 19 .85 13 .06 47 .77 199 .12 47 .77 15.60 27 .00 20 .30 13.52 5 1.58 2 14 .89 51 .58 15.60 28 .00 20 .75 13 .97 55.54 23 1.25 55 .54 15 .60 29 .00 21 .20 14.42 59 .64 248 .21 59 .64 15 .60 30 .00 2 1.66 14 .86 63.89 265 .76 63 .89 15 .60 3 1.0 0 22 .08 15 .30 68 .28 283 .9 1 68 .28 15 .60 32 .00 22 .52 15 .74 72 .8 2 302.65 72 .82 15 .60 33.00 22 .96 16 .17 77 .50 32 1.99 77.50 15 .60 34.00 23 .36 16 .59 82 .3 2 341 .92 82 .32 15 .60 35.00 23 .81 17 .01 87 .30 362.4 5 87 .30 15 .60 36 .00 24 .20 17 .43 92.41 383.57 92.41 15 .60 37 .00 24 .63 17.85 97 .67 405 .29 97.67 15 .60 38.00 25 .0 4 18 .26 103.07 427 .6 1 103 .07 15 .60 39 .00 25.44 18 .67 108.61 450 .51 108.61 15 .60 40 .00 25 .86 19 .07 11 4.30 474 .02 1 14 .30 15 .60 10-P28 (ST M-2).xls , Inlet In Sump 8/11/2009 , 3:50 PM DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET BY THE RATIONAL METHOD North College Market Place ST K-1 (Basin P-10) Des ign Flow = G utter Flow + Carry-ove r Flow I .l C. L.. ' I t l.1\' t '--1[ ·= ·11 :.,_ 11 T c ,. I t <'IC ,L t t L ~ --I'll --- ues 1gn Flow: ONLY it already determined through other methoas : Minor Storm Major Storm {loca l peak flow for 1/2 of street , plus flow bypassing upstream subcatchments): ·a =I 2.001 4 .oo!cfs * If you entered a value here , skip the rest of this sheet and proceed to s heet Q-Allow) Geographic Info rmati on : (ente r data in the blue cells): Subcatchment Area =a Acres Percent Imperviousness = % NRCS Soil Type= A, B , C , or D Site: {Check One Box Only) Slope (It/ft) Length (ft) Site is Urban :I X I Overland Flow =1 I I Site Is Non -Urban :: Gutter Flow = Hamra11 1mormauon : ImensIty 111nc,u11rJ -v 1 t' 1 / \ v 2 + I cJ L,3 Minor Storm Major Storm Design Sto rm Return Period , T, = years Ret urn Period One-Hour Precipitation, P , = inches C ,= C2= C3= User-Defined Storm Runoff Coefficient (leave this blank to accept a calculated value). C = User-Defined 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient (leave thi s blank to accept a calculated value), C5 = Bypass (Car ry-Over) Flow from upstream Subcatchments , Q b = 0.00 0.00 els Analys is of Flow T ime (T ime of Conce ntration) for a C atchment : Minor Storm Major Storm Calculated Design Storm Runoff Coefficient, C = N/A N/A Calcu lated 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient , CS = N/A N/A Overland Flow Velocity, V0 = N/A N/A fps Gutter Flow Velocity , VG= N/A N/A fps Overland Flow Time , lo = N/A N/A minutes Gutter Flow Time , tG = N/A N/A min utes Calculated Time of Concentration, Tc = N/A N/A minutes Time of Concentration by Regional Formula , Tc = N/A N/A minutes Recomme nded Tc= N/A N/A min utes Tim e of Concentrat ion Selected by User, T c = NIA NIA minutes Design Rainfall Intensity , I = N/A N/A inch/hr Calculated Local Peak Flow , Op = N/A N/A els Total Design Peak Flow , Q = 2 .00 4.00 els 11-P10 (ST K-1 ).xis, Q -Peak 8/1 1/2009, 3:50 PM ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) (Based on Regulated Criteri a for Maximum Allowable Flow Depth and Spread) Project : North College Market Place Inlet ID:-------------------,,S"'T""'K"'-..,.1""'(;;,B-as""'i,..n-:P"""·.,..10,,..,..) ________________ _ y H CU RB d a r. .. tter Geometrv /Enter data in the blue cells\ Maxim um Allowable Width for Sp read Behind Curb Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) Manning's Roughness Behind Curb Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown Gutte r Depression Gutter Width Street Trans verse Slope Street Longitudinal Slope • Enter O for sump condition Manning's Roughness for Street Section Max. All owable Water Spread for Minor & Major Storm Max. Allowable Depth at Gutte r Flow Line for Minor & Major Storm Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no) lhvimum Gutter Caoacitv Based On Allowable Water Soread Gutter Cross Slope (Eq . ST-8) Water Depth without Gutter Depression (Eq. ST-2) Water Depth with a Gutter Depression All owable Spread for Discharg e outsi de the Gutter Secti on W (T • W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC -22 method (Eq . ST-7) Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , carried in Section T x Discharge wi thin the Gutter Section W (Or • Ox) Discha rge Behind the Cu rb (e .g ., si dewalk , driveways, & lawns) Maximum Flow Based On Allowable Water Spread Flow Velocity Within the Gutter Section v ·d Product : Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth M~v im um Gutter Caoacitv Based on Allowable Gutter Deoth Theoreti cal Water Spread Theoretical Spread for Discha rge outside the Gutter Sectio n W (T • W) Gutter Flow to Design Flow Ratio by FHWA HEC-22 method (Eq . ST-7) Theoretical Discharge outside the Gutter Section W , ca rried in Section T x TH Act ual Discharge outside the Gutter Secti on W. (limited by di stance T caowNl Discha rge within the Gutter Section W (O. • Ox) Discharge Behind the Curb (e.g., sidewalk, driveways, & lawns ) Total Discharge for Major & Minor Storm Flow Velocit y Within the Gutter Section v·d Product: Flow Velocity Times Gutter Flowline Depth Slope-Based Depth Safety Reduction Factor for Major & Minor (d?. 6') Storm Max Flow Based on Allow. Gutter Depth (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Gutter Flowline (Safety Factor Applied) Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown (Safety Factor Applied) x . Allowable Gutter Caoacitv Based on Minimum of Q . or Q Ta,cK=§ft SaACK = ft . vert . / ft . horiz naACK = HcuA B = 6.00 inches TcAowN = 25 .5 ft a= 2.00 inches W= 2.00 ft Sx = 0.0100 ft . vert. /ft . horiz Sa = 0 .0000 ft . vert . I ft . horiz n sTREET = 0 .0160 Minor Storm Major Storm :::1 !5~1 25 .5r 18.00 inches X= yes Minor Storm Major Storm Sw= 0.0933 0 .0933 ft/ft Y= 3.06 3 .06 inches d= 5.06 5.06 inches Tx = 23.5 23.5 ft Ea= 0.287 0.287 Ox = 0.0 0 .0 els Ow= 0.0 0 .0 els Oa,cK = 0 .0 0 .0 els Or = SUMP SUMP els V= 0.0 0 .0 fps v ·d = 0.0 0.0 Minor Storm Major Storm Tm= 33.3 133 .3 ft TxTH = 31.3 131.3 ft Ea = 0.210 0 .044 Ox rH = 0.0 0.0 els Ox= 0.0 0 .0 els Ow= 0 .0 0 .0 els Oe,cK = 0.0 0 .0 els 0= 0 .0 0.0 els V= 0.0 0 .0 fps V·d = 0 .0 0 .0 R= SUMP SUMP a .= SUMP SUMP els d= inches dcaowN = inches Minor Storm Major Storm a .now =I SUMP I SUMP !cfs OR STOR M max. allowable capacity OK -greater than flow given on sheet 'O-Peak ' JOA STORM max. allowable caoacitv OK· greater than flow given on sheet 'O-Peak' 1 1-P 10 (ST K-1 ).xls, Q-Allow 8/11/2009, 3 :50 PM 20 Street Section with Flow Depths 19 + a 18 r-- I 17 • r -+ t--16 -i j --1 ·- I I I 15 ·1 f-- + -i-., 14 4-VI 13 , Q) ~ J 12 L CJ .E ; .E 11 ·1 ...... ~ ~ r -/- Q, 10 1 Q) L e. 9 I -I J: 8 I 0) 'ai ::r: I I -, 7 I f I I I I I I l o I 6 D D D D □1 0 q p 0 D D D D 0 D ~I I 5 * ~ PK )K )K I ;:/(! ::if ;:/( 1)K )K )K ; )K / )K )K /)K )K I I I I 4 ~ I -1 I I j I 3 I 2 0 I o.o 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 Section of 112 Street (distance in feet) -Gro und elev. o Minor d-max Q ==_g_, Q Q Q 1-E I 11'::::: -.t 0 l l-P10 (ST K-1 ).xls, 0-A/low Major d-max X Minor T-max ~ Major T-max I E 0 == S I S l ~....,_y + I ~ ~ [I+~] -1 (T I W)-1 8/11/2009, 3 :50 PM I 20 19 ---__ J_ Q for 1/2 Flow Depth Flow Street (els) (in .) Spread (ft.) 18 .! j 0.00 0.25 0.50 17 -1 -t 0.75 1.00 1.25 16 4-I 1.50 1.75 15 ---t T J_ 2.00 2.25 .-J 4 1/) 2 _50 2.75 Cl) 1313 -+-+ r C: 3.00 3.25 ::=.. 3.50 .C:12 -3 _75 -C. Cl) 4 .00 0 11 L 4 .25 :: 4 .50 0 4 .75 [:10 1-5.00 £ 5.25 -9 5.50 'O ca 5.75 ~8 6.00 C. (/) :: 7 I 0 1 6.25 6.50 6.75 ii: 7.00 6 7 .2 5 7.50 5 7 _75 8.00 8.25 4 8 _50 8.75 3 9.00 9 .25 2 9.50 9 .75 10.00 10.25 10 .50 0 !--. --~---~-------~-------------------' 10.75 0 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 11 .00 Q for 1/2 Street (cfs) 11 .25 11.50 ! 11.75 o Flow Depth (in .) D Flow Spread (ft.) 12 .00 12.25 12 .50 11-P10 (ST K-1).xls , Q-Allow 8/11 /2009 , 3:50 PM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Project = ________________________ ..,;,.N,;.o,;.rt.;;h.;..;;C,;.o.;,;11,;.e,.g.;.e.;.M:.;.a;;;r.;.k;.;e:.;.t ,;.P.;.la;;;c;;.e;.... _______________________ _ Inlet ID = ________________________ s _T_K_-_1 .,_(B_a_s_in_P_-1_0_.) ______________________ _ L o(C) T H•C urb w~ L.;t<>l Desian Information (lnoutl MINOR MAJOR Type of Inlet Type = COOT/Denver 13 Combination Local Depression (addition al to continuous gutter depression 'a' fro m 'O·Allow') a-= 2.00 2.00 inches Number of Unit ln lels (G rate or Curb Opening) NO= 1 1 Grate Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Grate L.(G)= 3.00 3.00 feet W idth of a Un it Grate W o::::: 1.73 1.73 feet Area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15·0.90) Ai allO::; 0.47 0.47 Clogging Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50. 0.70) C1 (G)= 0.50 0.50 Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 3.00) Cw (G)= 3.00 3.00 Grate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) C0 (G) = 0.67 0.67 Curb Open in g Information MINOR MAJOR Length of a Unit Curb Opening Lo (C) = 3.00 3.00 feet Height of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches H va11= 6.50 6.50 inches Height of Curb Orifice Throat in Inches Hno.a = 5.25 5.25 inches Angle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5) Theta= 0.0 0.0 degrees Side W idth for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet) W P= 2.00 2.00 feet Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical value 0.10) C,(C) = 0.10 0.10 Curb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.30-3.00) Cw(C) = 2.30 2 .30 Curb Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.67) c. (C) = 0.67 0.67 Resultina Gutter Flow Deoth for Grate Inlet Caoacitv in a Sumo MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient for Multiple Un its Goel= 1.00 1.001 Clogging Factor for Multiple Units Clog= 0.50 0.50 Grate as a Weir : The Controlling Factor Will Be : Curb Opening as Weir Curb Opening As Weir Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogg ing (2 els grate , 0 els curb) d,,...= 5.99 8.34 inches Flow Depth (Curb Opening Only) without Clogging (0 els grate, 2 els curb) d curb-un = 3.11 4 .93 inches Flow Depth at Local Depressi on with Clogg ing (2 els gra te , 0 els curb) dwa = 8.34 12 .07 inches Flow Depth (C u rb Opening Only) with Clogging (0 els grate , 2 els curb) d c::urb-d = 3.20 5.09 inches Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate , 2 els curb) d01= 3.12 4.95 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 els grate, 2 els curb) doa:; 3.35 5.31 inches Resultina Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression d a•Grat•= 1.35 3 .31 inches ~PSUltinn Gutter Flow Oenth for Curb Qn,:.ninn Inlet Canacitv in a Sumo MINOR MAJOR Clogging Coefficient tor Multiple Units Coef =1 1.001 1 001 Clogging Facto r for Multiple Units 0.10: Clog= 0 .10 Curb as a Weir, Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR low Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate , 2 cfs curb) dM=1 3121 4 .95I inches "low Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate , 2 cfs curb) dw, = 3.35 5.3 1 inches Curb as an Orifice, Grate as an Orifice MINOR MAJOR Flow Depth at Local Depression without Clogging (0 els grate , 2 els curb) doi = 3.11 4 .93 inches Flow Depth at Local Depression with Clogging (0 cfs grate, 2 cfs curb) doa= 3.20 5.09 inches Resulting Gutter Flow Depth Outside of Local Depression da•Curb = 1.35 3.31 inches Resultant Street Conditions MINOR MAJOR Total Inlet Length L= 3.0 3.0 feet Total Inlet Inte rception Capacity (Design Discharge from O-Peak) 0 ,= 2.0 4.0 cfs Resultant Gutter Flow Depth (based on sheet Q-Allow geometry) d= 1.20 3 .09 inches Resultant Street Flow Spread (base d on sheet Q-Allow geometry) T : 1.1 9 .1 feet Resultant Flow Depth at Street Crown dcRO WN = 0 .00 0.00 inches 11-P1 0 (ST K-1).xls , Inl et In Sump 8/11 /2009, 3:50 PM 40 -.--.----------,---~-~-~--,------+----,-----;------,---.----r--.--.------, 39 - 38 -+ 37 36 - 35 34 33 - 32 -- 31 --i 30 ·-1 29 ----+ 28 • 27 - 26 25 24 ~ 23 :; 22 "' ~ 21 • (I)_ 20 en 1 19 " I §._ 18 -g_ 17 ~ 16 15 14 13 12 1 1 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 0 1- I 2 11 -P10 (ST K-1).xls , Inlet In Sump ><_1_· r I! 11 I ,, •I II * ii 4 j---- !-0 -I ;: -. r · -~ T -t i + ' -~ . / ' . " + • : © ' -j i I J. -, j I . , . • . . I , ' ' I I ' + L I I t I I I l I I I X ;,r:-x -xl X ->;<X--X -X>i(X>i(-XX1-X ·):(X):(X)f;X):(X):(XfXXX>;<X):( ·):( T I ! ➔ I f I , t I t 0 -' ;· I!] I I I 1-- t: I~. l 1 0 i 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 ---6-Grate Weir Flow Depth (in.) 0 Curb Opening Only Flow Depth On.) Q for 1/2 Street (els) ~Comb.Ori!./ Weir Flow Deplh (in.) • Reported Design Flow Deplh Qn .) -S-Comb.Otif.l Oril. Flow Depth (in .) X Reported Design Flow Spread (ft.) 8/11 /2009 , 3:50 PM a Intercepted Grate Weir -,Flow Comb . Orif./ • Weir Comb . Orif./ ,Orif . Curb Opening Only Reported Design Reported (cfs) Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in.) Flow Depth (in.) l Flow Depth (in.) J flow Depth (in.) Design J Flow Spread (ft .) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 1.00 2.62 0.00 0.02 0 .02 0 .02 0 .02 2 .00 4.18 0.09 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.07 3 .00 5.48 0 .74 1.41 2 .20 2.20 1.96 4.00 6.58 1.31 1.74 3.09 3 .09 9.08 5 .00 7.51 1 .84 2.19 6.10 4.85 23.75 6 .00 8.34 2.42 2 .81 8 .71 5.58 25.50 7 .00 9 .09 3 .03 3 .55 12.58 6 .32 25 .50 8.00 9.82 3 .64 4.40 17.04 7 .11 25 .50 9 .00 10 .52 4.23 5.38 22 .10 7.95 25.50 10.00 11.18 4 .82 6.47 27.75 8.83 25.50 11 .00 11.83 5.40 7 .76 34.00 9 .80 25 .50 12.00 12.44 5.97 9.41 40.84 10 .93 25.50 13 .00 13.04 6 .53 11 .21 48 .28 12.13 25.50 14.00 13.63 7.07 13.15 56.31 13.39 25 .50 15.00 14.19 7 .61 15 .23 64 .94 15 .23 25.50 16.00 14.73 8 .14 17.47 74 .16 17.47 25.50 17 .00 15 .29 8.67 19.84 83 .98 19 .84 25.50 18.00 15.80 9 .18 22.36 94 .39 22 .36 25 .50 19.00 16 .34 9 .69 25 .02 105.40 25 .02 25.50 20 .00 16.86 10.19 27 .83 117 .00 27.83 25 .50 21 .00 17 .36 10.68 30 .78 129.20 30 .78 25.50 22 .00 17.84 11 .16 33 .88 141.99 33.88 25 .50 23 .00 18.32 11 .64 37 .12 155.38 37 .12 25.50 24.00 18 .80 12.12 40 .50 169 .37 40 .50 25 .50 25 .00 19.28 12.59 44 .03 183.94 44 .03 25 .50 26 .00 19 .76 13.05 47 .70 199 .12 47 .70 25 .50 27 .00 20 .23 13.51 51 .52 214 .89 51 .52 25.50 28 .00 20 .67 13.96 55.48 231 .25 55.48 25.50 29 .00 21 .11 14.41 59 .58 248 .21 59 .58 25 .50 30 .00 21.56 14 .85 63 .83 265.76 63.83 25.50 31 .00 22.01 15.29 68 .22 283 .91 68 .22 25.50 32 .00 22.43 15.72 72 .76 302 .65 72 .76 25 .50 33.00 22 .88 16 .15 77 .44 321 .99 77 .44 25 .50 34 .00 23.29 16.58 82.26 341 .92 82 .26 25.50 35 .00 23.72 17.00 87 .24 362.45 87 .24 25.50 36 .00 24.13 17.42 92 .35 383 .57 92 .35 25 .50 37 .00 24.56 17.84 97 .61 405.29 97 .61 25.50 38 .00 24 .94 18 .25 103 .01 427.61 103.01 25 .50 39 .00 25.37 18 .66 108 .55 450 .51 108 .55 25.50 40 .00 25 .76 19 .06 114 .24 474 .02 114 .24 25 .50 11 -Pl0 (ST K-1).xls , Inlet In Sump 8/11 /2009, 3:50 PM Curb Cut Summary Curb Cut Basin Curb Cut Total Basin Flow Flow to Curb Cut Notes Capacity 0 100 (cfs) 0 10 (cfs) a,oo (cfs) a,o (cfs) 6ft P13 11 .2 4 .8 2 .3 4 .8 2 .3 All of basin drains to curb cut 2ft P15 3 .16 2 .6 0 .8 1.3 0.4 1/2 of basin drains to cu rb cut 4ft P25 7.13 45 .8 21.8 5.7 2.7 2 curb cut in bas in: aooroximately 118th of basin drains to 4ft curb cut 2ft P25 3 .16 45.8 21 .8 2 .9 1.4 14 curb cuts in basin , approximatley 1116th of basin drains to each curb cut 4ft pg 7 .13 29.2 13 3 .7 1.6 1 curb cut in basin : aooroximately 118th of basin drains to 4ft curb cut 2ft pg 3 .16 29 .2 13 1.8 0.8 14 curb cut s in bas in , approx imatley 1116th of basin drains to each curb cut Sidewalk Chase/Trench Drain Summary Sidewalk Basin Curb Cut Total Basin Flow Flow to Curb Cut Notes Chas e Capacity a,oo (cfs) 0 10 (cfs) 0 100 (cfs) a,o (cfs) 2ft P7 3.16 31 .5 14 .8 2 .0 0 .9 1 curb cut in basin, aooroximately 1/16 of basin drains to 2 ft curb cut 2ft P25 3 .16 45 .8 21 .8 2 .9 1.4 2 Sidewalk chases , 2 trench drains in basin , approximately 1 /16 of basin drains to each drain Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Roughness Coeffic ient Channel Slope Normal Depth Left S ide Slope Right Side Slop e Bottom W idth Results Discharge Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top W idth Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Ve locity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headless Downstream Veloc ity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Criti cal Slope 3/7/2009 9 :07:49 AM &FT CURB CUT Manning Formula Discharge Subcrit ical 0.0 16 0 .00500 ft/ft 0.50 ft 0.00 ft/ft (H:V) 0.00 ft/ft (H:V) 6.00 ft 11 .20 ft'/s 3.00 ft2 7.00 ft 6 .00 ft 0.46 ft 0 .00636 ft/ft 3.73 ft/s 0.22 ft 0.72 ft 0.89 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0 .00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 0.50 ft 0.46 ft 0 .00500 ft/ft 0 .00636 ft/ft ------- Bentley Systems, Inc . Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.071 .00] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown , CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Roughness Coefficient Channel S lope Normal Depth Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Bottom Width Results Discharge Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top Width Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Ve locity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 317/2009 9 :07 :19 AM 4" CURB CUT Mann ing Formula Discharge Subcritical 0.016 0.00500 ft/ft 0.50 ft 0.00 ft/ft (H:V) 0 .00 ft/ft (H:V) 4 .00 ft 7.13 ft'/s 2.00 ft2 5.00 ft 4 .00 ft 0.46 ft 0.00636 ft/ft 3.57 ft/s 0.20 ft 0.70 ft 0.89 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 0.50 ft 0.46 ft 0.00500 ft/ft 0.00636 ft/ft Bentley Systems , Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08 .01.071.00] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown , CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Project Description Friction Method So lve For Input Data Roughness Coefficient Channel S lope Norma l Depth Left Side Slope Right Side S lope Bottom W idth Results Discha rge Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top W idth Critica l Depth Criti ca l Slope Velocity Ve locity Head Spec ific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downst ream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profil e Descripti on Profile Headless Downstream Ve locity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope 3/7/2009 9:07 :30 AM 3FT CURB CUT Manning Fo rmula Discharge Subcritica l 0 .0 16 0 .00500 ft/ft 0.50 ft 0.00 ft/ft (H:V ) 0 .00 ft/ft (H:V) 3.00 ft 5.12 ft'/s 1.50 ft2 4 .00 ft 3.00 ft 0 .46 ft 0 .006 36 ft/ft 3.41 ft/s 0.18 ft 0 .68 ft 0 .89 0.00 ft 0 .00 ft 0 0 .00 ft 0 .00 ft In fi nity ft/s Infin ity ft/s 0 .50 ft 0.46 ft 0 .00500 ft/ft 0.00636 ft/ft ---- Bentley Systems , Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster (08.01 .071 .00] 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown , CT 06795 USA +1-203 -755-1666 Page 1 of 1 2FT CURB CUT Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Discharge Input Data Roughness Coefficient 0.016 Channe l Slope 0.00500 ft/ft Norma l Depth 0 .50 ft Left Side Slope 0.00 ft/ft (H :V) Right Side Slope 0.00 ft/ft (H:V ) Bottom Width 2 .00 ft Results Discharge 3 .16 ft'/s Flow Area 1.00 ft' Wetted Perim eter 3.00 ft Top W idth 2.00 ft Crit ical Depth 0.46 ft Critical Slope 0.00636 ft/ft Velocity 3.16 ftls Velocity Head 0 .15 ft Specific Energy 0.65 ft Froude Number 0.89 Flow Type Subcritical GVF Input Data Downstream Depth 0 .00 ft Length 0 .00 ft Number Of Steps 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Depth 0 .00 ft Profile Descripti on Profile Headless 0 .00 ft Downstream Velocity Infinity ftls Upstream Velocity Infinity ftls Normal Depth 0 .50 ft Critical Depth 0.46 ft Channel Slope 0.00500 ft/ft Critical S lope 0.00636 ft/ft Bentley Systems , Inc . Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster (08 .01 .071 .00] 3/7/2009 9 :07 :38 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown , CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 12" RCP Project Description Fri ction Method Mann ing Fo rm ula Solve For Full Flow Capac ity Input Data Roughness Coefficient 0.013 C hanne l Slope 0.0 1000 ft/ft Normal Depth 1.00 ft Diameter 1.00 ft Discha rge 3.56 ft'/s Results Discha rge 3 .56 ft'/s Cr,o o --3 .~ ~I D --/. 2.. Normal Dep t h 1.00 ft Flow Area 0 .79 ft2 Wetted Pe ri mete r 3 .1 4 ft Top Width 0.00 ft C riti ca l Dep th 0.81 ft Percen t Fu ll 100.0 % Critical Slope 0.01032 ft/ft Ve locity 4 .54 ft/s Velocity Head 0 .32 ft Speci fi c Energy 1.32 ft F roude Num ber 0.00 Maximum Discharge 3.83 ft '/s Discharge Fu ll 3.56 ft'/s Slope Full 0.0 1000 ft/ft Flow Type SubCritical GVF Input Data Downstream Depth 0.00 ft Length 0.00 ft Number Of Steps 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Dep t h 0.00 ft Profile Description Profile Head less 0.00 ft Average End Depth Over Rise 0.00 % Normal Depth Over Rise 100.00 % -------------- Bentley Systems , Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08 .01 .071 .00] 3n/2009 9:08 :55 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 12"' RCP GVF Output Data Downstream Velocity Infin ity ft/s Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Normal Depth 1.00 ft Critical Depth 0 .81 ft Channel Slope 0 .01000 ft/ft Critical Slope 0 .0 1032 ft/ft ----------------------- Bentley Systems , Inc . Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08 .01 .071 .00] 3/7/2009 9:08 :55 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown , CT 06795 USA +1 -203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 APPENDIX E Detention Pond Calculations North College Marketplace Critical Pond Elevations Design Enginee r: Design Firm : Project Number : Date : DESIGN CRITERIA Linsey Chalfan t Ayres Associates 32 -1322 .00 August 11 , 2009 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual , Urba n Drainage and Flood Contro l District , June 2001 Detention Pond / Wetlands Stage Storage Volume (pond volume calculated using the prismoidal formula): CONTOUR AREA{FT2) AREA(ACRE) (FT) 4971 86670 0 4972 95702 2 .197 4973 10 1053 2.320 4974 132607 3 .044 4975 137381 3 .154 4976 143289 3.289 Invert Out Elevation = 4971.00 Bottom of Pond Elevat ion = 4971 .00 100-year WSEL = VOLUME (ACRE- FT) 0 0 .732 2 .2 58 2 .674 3.099 3 .221 6.28 Acre-Ft Interpolates to an Elev. of 10-year WSEL = 2.04 Acre-Ft Interpolates to an Elev . of Pond Stage Storage , PondCalc s .xls DEPTH (FT) 0 1.00 2.00 3 .00 4.00 5.00 4974.20 4972 .58 Page 1 of 1 CUMULATIVE VOLUME (ACRE-FT) 0 0 .732 2 .990 5 .664 8 .763 11 .985 ft ft 8/28/06 APPENDIX F Water Quality Calculations North College Marketplace Critical Pond Elevations Des ign Engineer : Design Firm: Project Number: Date : DESIGN CRITERIA Linsey Chalfant Ayres Associates 32 -1322 .00 8/11 /2009 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual , Urban Drainage and Flood Control District , June 2001 Water Quality Pond Stage Storage Volume (pond volume calculated using the prismoidal formula): Water Quality Bio-Swale l.uNTUUR AREA(FT2) AREA(ACRE) VOLUME (ACHE-DEPTH (FT) CUMULATIVE VOLUME IFTI FT\ I ACRE-FT\ 4971 .17 0 0 .000 0 0 .00 0 4971.20 2139 0 .049 0 .000 0 .03 0.00 4971.40 8748 0 .201 0.023 0.23 0 .02 4971 .60 13658 0 .314 0.051 0.43 0.07 4971 .80 17248 0.396 0 .071 0 .63 0.15 4972 2 1057 0.483 0 .088 0 .83 0 .23 4973 .0 24896 0.572 0 .527 1.83 0 .76 Water Quality Volume Provided= 0.76 Acre-Ft Interpolates to an Elev . of 4973 .00 ft Water Quality Volume Required= 0.46 Acre-Ft Interpolates to an Elev . of 4972.43 Bio Swale Stage Storeage , Water Quality Pond-Final Page 1 of 1 8/28/06 North College Marketplace Water Quality Pond Design Engineer : Des ign Firm : Project Number: Date : DESIGN CR IT ER IA : Li nsey Chalfant Ayres Associates 32-1322.00 August 11 , 2009 Urban Storm Drainage Cri teria Manual (US DCM) Volume HI , Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 Weld Co unty Storm Dra inage Cri teria Addend um to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria! Manual , June 2006 REQUIRED WATER QUALITY CO NTROL VOLUME (WQC V): Tributary Are a, A Composite. Impervious ness, I WOCV (wa tershed inches) Req uired WQCV ( WQCV) Volume= - 1 - 2 -•Area Add for Sediment Requi red WQCV Basin P3 P4 PS P6 P7 PS P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 P16 P17 P18 P20 P21 P22 P23 P24 P27 P28 P33 P35 P36 Water Quality Pond WQCV & OUtlet Structure-North, Water Qua lity Pond-Final Area (acreJ 0.76 0.3 1 0 .39 0.65 3.19 0.87 1.18 0.53 0 .49 0.44 0.3 1 0.10 0.23 1.00 0.16 0.24 0.43 0.64 0.03 0.40 0.13 0 .07 0 .00 0 .10 12.67 ~acres ~ 0.36 inches 0 .38 acre-feet C3 % 1.2 • 0.40acre-ft = 0.46 acre-feet 1% 90% 97% 95% 97% 85% 90% 98% 61 % 9 1% 95% 33% 100% 100% 68% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 80% 79% 8% 90% 90% 85% 0 .50 0.45 0 .40 j 0 .35 40-Hour Drain Time (Fig SQ-2) I a .30 ~ 0 .25 Minimum 20% ~ ;: 0 .20 u ~ 0 .15 0 .10 0 .05 0 .00 0 Page 1 of 1 vKJCV=o"(09ti 1-I 19'1 +0.78i} 6-hrdroiintime o=0.7 12-hr drontime D =0 (\ 24-hr chin time a = 0 9 40-hr«an llm8 o = 1.0 0 .1 0 .2 0 .3 0.4 0 .5 0 .6 0 .7 Total Imperviousness Ratio(/ =/""'/100) FIGURE SQ -2 0 .8 Water Quality Captu re Volume (WQCV), 801h Percentile Runoff Event 0 .9 8128/06 Project: North College Marketplace Project Number: 32-1322.00 Location: Water Quality Ponds Water Quality Pond 40-hour Drain Time Orifice Plate Sizing Equations= Q o,ifice = C 0 A 0 ,J2 g H Drain Time= Time Duration = WQCV= 40 hrs 0.1 hrs 0.45 ac-ft Orifice Hole Size Number of holes = 1 Hole Spacing (in) = 0 (i nvert to inv ert ) b (in)= h (in)= A,, (in 2) = Area (in2) = Dia (in)= 0 (ft) 2.600 b (ft) = 2.600 h (ft) = 5 .309 A0 (ft2) = Equivalent Orifice Hole Area 5 .31 Area (ft2) = 2.6 0 Dia (ft) = Equivalent Orifice Hole Area Each Pipe 0.217 0 .217 0 .037 0.037 0 .22 Area (in 2) = 0.88 Area (ft2) = 0 .006 Dia (in)= 1.06 Dia (ft)= 0 .09 Water Quality Pond Volume 0.65 32 .2 0 .50 .--------------------------------------~ 0 .45 0 .40 E' 0 .35 • ! 0.30 G> 0 .25 • § 0 .20 • • 0 l---------------~=:::::::::::'."~ ................... ___ J > 0 .15 0.1 0 0 .05 0 .00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Time (hours) Design Procedure Form: Porous Landscape Detention (PLO) Designer : LRC Company : Ayres Associates Date : August 11, 2009 Project : North College Shopping Center Location : South PLO 1. Basin Storage Volume ( 1. = 100% if all paved and roofed areas u/s of PLO} 1. = 87 % A} Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = 1.1100} i= 0.87 B} Contributing Watershed Area Includ ing the PLO (Area} Area= 142,106 square feet C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV} WQCV = 0.30 wate rshed inches (WQCV = 0.8 • (0.91 • 13 • 1.19 • 12 + 0 .78 • I)) D} Design Volume: VolpLD = (WQCV / 12} • Area Vol= 3 ,578 cubic feet 2. PLO Surface Area (APLO} and Average Depth (d,v} ApLD= 5,611 square fee t (from 3577.76 square feet to 7155.51 square feet } (d0 ,: =(Vol / ApLD}, Min=0 .5', Max=1 .0'} d av = 0 .64 feet 3. Draining of PLO (Check A, or B, or C, answer D} Infiltration to Subgrade with Permeable Based on answers to 3A through 3D, check the appropriate method Membrane: 3(C} checked and 3(E} = no A} Check box if subgrade is heavy or expansive clay E9 Underdrain with Impermeable B} Check box if subgrade is silty or clayey sand Liner: 3(A} checked or 3(E} = yes C} Check box if subgrade is well-draining soil X Underdrain with Woven Geotextile Fabric (See note 1 }: D} Check box if underdrains are not desirable or I I 3(8} checked and 3(E} = no if underdrains are not feasible at this site. 16-Mil. Impermeable Membrane with No Underdrain: E} Does tributary catchment contain land uses that may have 3(0} checked -Evapotranspiration only petroleum products, greases, or other chemicals present, such as gas station, y_es no Other: hardware store , restaurant , etc.? I X I I 4. Sand/Peat Mix and Gravel Subbase (See Figure PLD-1} A} Heavy or Expansive Clay (NRCS Group D Soils} Present ; 18 ' Minimum Depth Sand-Peat Mix with 8' Gravel Layer . 16-Mil. Perforated HOPE Underdrain Used . Impermeable Liner and a 3' to 4' Perforated HOPE Underdrain . B} Silty or Clayey Sand (NRCS Group C Soils) Present; Perforated HOPE Underdrain Used . X 18" Minimum Depth Sand-Peat Mix with 8' Gravel Layer and a 3' to 4' Perfo rated HOPE Underdrain w/ Non-Woven Pemeable Membrane. C) No Potential For Contamination And Well-Draining 18" Minimum Depth Sand-Peat Mix with Non-Woven (NRCS Group A or B Soils} Are Present; Underdrains Elliminated. Pemeable Membrane and No Underdrain (Direct Infiltration). D) Underdrains Are Not Desirable Or Are Not Feasible At This Site . 18" Minimum Depth Sand-Peat Mix with An Additional 18' Minimum Layer Sand-Peat Mix or Sand-Class 'A' Compost Bottom Layer (Total Sand-Peat Depth of 36.). 16-Mil. Impermeable Liner Used . E} Other: Other: Notes: 1) Woven geotext,le fabric sha ll meet ASTM D475 1 • AOS U.S. Std. Se ,ve #50 to #70, ASTM D4633 m,n. tra pezoida l tea r stre ngth 100 x 60 lbs, min . COE specified open area of 4%. 2) It is critica l that vegetation planting be in accordance with USDCM V3 guidelines for PLD's UD-BMP .xls, PLD south 8/1 1/2009 , 2:45 PM Design Procedure Form: Porous Landscape Detention (PLD) Designer : LRC Company : Ayres Associates Date: August 11, 2009 Project : North College Shopping Center Location : North PLO 1. Basin Storage Volume ( 1. = 100% if all paved and roofed areas u/s of PLD} 1. = 77 % A) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = 18 / 100} i = 0 .77 8) Contributing Watershed Area Including the PLD (Area} Area = 213 ,711 square feet C} Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) WQCV = 0 .25 watershed inches (WQCV = 0 .8 • (0 .91 • 13 -1.19 • i2 + 0.78 • I)) D} Design Volume : VolPLo = (WQCV / 12) • Area Vol= 4 ,420 cub ic feet 2 . PLD Surface Area (A pLo} and Average Depth (d .,} APLO = 4,763 square feet (from 4419 .92 square feet to 8839.83 square feet} (d •• : =(Vol/ APLO}, Min=0 .5', Max=1 .0'} d av = 0.93 feet 3. Draining of PLD (Check A, or 8, or C, answer D} Infiltration to Subgrade with Permeable Based on answers to 3A through 3D , check the appropriate method Membrane : 3(C} checked and 3(E) = no A) Check box if subgrade is heavy or expansive clay §g Underdrain with Impermeable 8) Check box if subgrade is silty or clayey sand Liner: 3(A} checked or 3(E} = yes C} Check box if subgrade is well -draining soi l X Underdrain with Woven Geote xtile Fabri c (See note 1 }: D} Check box if underdrains are not desirabl e or I I 3(8) checked and 3(E} = no if underdrains are not feasible at this site . 16-Mil. Impermeable Membrane with No Underdrain : E) Does tributary catchment contain land us es that may have 3(D) checked -Evapotranspiration only petroleum products , greases , or other chemicals present , such as gas station , :tes no Other: hardware store , restaurant , etc .? I I X I 4. Sand/Peat Mix and Gravel Subbase (See Figure PLD-1} A} Heavy or Expansive Cl a y (NAGS Group D Soils} Present ; 18' Min imum Depth Sand-Peat Mi x with 8' Gravel Layer . 16-Mil. Perforated HDPE Underdrain Used . Impermeable Liner and a 3' to 4' Perforated HDPE Underdrain. 8) Silty or Clayey Sand (NRCS Group C Soils) Present; Perforated HDPE Underdra in Used . X 18" Minimum Depth Sand-Peat Mix with 8" Gravel Layer and a 3' to 4" Pe rforated HDPE Underdrain w/ Non-Woven Pemeable Membrane. C} No Potential For Contamination And Well-Drain ing 18' Minimum Depth Sand-Peat Mix with Non-Woven (NAGS Group A or 8 Soils) Are Prese nt; Underdra ins Ell iminated . Pemeable Membra ne and No Underdra in (Direct Infiltration). D} Underdrains Are Not Desirable Or Are Not Feasible At This Site . 18' Minimum Depth Sand-Peat Mix with An Additional 18" Minimum Layer Sand-Peat Mi x or Sand -Class 'A' Compost Bottom Layer (Total Sand -Peat Depth of 36"}. 16-Mil. Impermeable Liner Used. E} Other: Oth er: Notes: 1) W oven geotext1le fabric shall meet ASTM D4751 -AOS U.S. Std. Se1ve #50 to #70 , ASTM D4633 min . trapezoidal tear strength 100 x 60 lbs, min. COE specified open area of 4%. 2) It is critical that vegetation planting be in accordance with USDCM V3 guidelines for PLD's UD-BMP .xls, PLO north 8/11 /2009, 2:45 PM APPENDIX G Erosion Control Calculations North College Marketplace PROPOSED SWMM PARAMETER INPUT Desi gn Engi neer: Desig n Fi rm: Proj ect Number : Date : L. Ch alfant Ayres 32 -1322 .00 Augu st 11 , 200 9 RAINFALL PERFORMANCE STANDARD EVALUATION: DEVELOPED ERODIBILITY SUBBASIN P1 P2 P3 P4 PS P6 P7 PB pg P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 P16 P17 P18 P19 P20 P21 P22 P23 P24 P25 P27 P28 P31 P33 P34 P35 P36 To tal EQUATIONS Lb = sum(AiLiYsum(Ai) = Sb= sum(AiSiYsum(Ai) = PS (during construction)= PS (after construction) = ZONE Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Mod erate Moderate Moderate Moderate 473 .3 1.42 ft % Asb Lsb Ssb 1% (ac) (ft) (%) 0 .26 75 0.50 0.02 0 .13 75 0 .50 0 .02 0 .76 306 1.00 0.90 0 .31 300 1.50 0 .97 0 .39 200 1.50 0 .95 0 .65 350 1.00 0 .97 3 .19 560 2.00 0 .85 0.87 267 1.00 0 .90 2.81 300 2.50 0.89 0 .32 214 1.50 0.96 1.18 410 1.50 0 .98 0.53 324 0.50 0 .61 0.49 228 1.00 0 .91 0 .44 350 1.25 0 .95 0 .31 308 1.00 0 .33 0 .10 100 2.77 1.00 0 .23 104 1.50 1.00 1.00 375 0 .70 0 .68 3 .87 650 0 .10 0 .03 0 .16 205 1.00 0.90 0 .24 195 1.00 0 .90 0 .43 301 1.00 0 .90 0.64 316 1.00 0 .90 0.03 46 1.00 0 .90 4 .51 799 2.50 0 .83 0.40 423 0 .50 0 .80 0.13 355 0.50 0.79 0.45 200 0.50 0.77 0 .07 75 1.00 0 .08 0 .51 425 0 .50 0 .95 0 .00 91 1.00 0.90 0.10 27 1.00 0 .90 25.54 79.0 (from Table BA) 79 .0 /0 .85 = 92 .9 Lb Sb PS (ft) (%) (%) 0 .8 0 .01 0.4 0.00 9 .1 0.03 3.6 0.02 3 .1 0.02 8 .9 0 .03 69 .9 0 .25 9.1 0.03 33.1 0 .28 2.7 0 .02 19 .0 0.07 6 .7 0.01 4.3 0 .02 6 .1 0 .02 3 .8 0 .01 0 .4 0.01 1.0 0.Q1 14.7 0.03 98 .5 0.02 1.3 0.Q1 1.8 0.0 1 5 .0 0.02 7.9 0 .02 0 .1 0 .00 141 .2 0.44 6 .7 0.Q1 1.9 0 .00 3 .5 0.01 0 .2 0 .00 8 .5 0 .0 1 0 .0 0.00 0 .1 0 .00 473 .30 1.42 79 .0 AYRES ASS OCIATeS North College Marketplace PROPOSED SWMM PARAMETER INPUT Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: L. Chalfant Ayres Associates 32-1322.00 August 11 , 2009 EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS: Erosion Control Number Method 3 Bare Soil -Rough Irregular Surface 4 SedimenVBasin Trap 5 Straw Bale Barrier 6 Gravel Filter 8 Silt Fence Barrier 38 Gravel Mulch 39 Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope) 14 Established Grass Ground Cover -50% SUB SUB AREA BASIN Total Area I AREA (ac) C-Factor Value 1 1 1 1 1 0 .05 0 .06 0 .08 Practice DURING CONSTRUCTION P1 0 .26 0 .02 Impervious 0 .01 38 P1 0 .26 0.02 Pervious 0 .25 14 P2 0 .13 0 .02 Impervious 0 .00 38 P2 0 .13 0 .02 Pervious 0 .13 14 P3 0 .76 0.90 Impervious 0 .68 6 P3 0 .76 0.90 Pervious 0 .08 6 P4 0 .31 0 .97 Impervious 0 .30 6 P4 0 .31 0 .97 Pervious 0 .01 6 P5 0 .39 0 .95 Impervious 0.37 6 P5 0 .39 0 .95 Pervious 0 .02 6 P6 0 .65 0.97 Impervious 0 .63 38 P6 0 .65 0.97 Pervious 0.02 39 P7 3.19 0.85 Impervious 2 .71 38 P7 3 .19 0 .85 Pervious 0.48 39 PS 0 .87 0 .90 Impervious 0.78 6 PS 0 .87 0 .90 Pervious 0 .09 6 pg 2 .81 0 .89 Impervious 2 .50 38 pg 2 .81 0 .89 Pervious 0 .32 39 P10 0.32 0.96 Impervious 0.31 38 P10 0.32 0 .96 Pervious 0.01 39 P11 1.18 0 .98 Impervious 1.16 38 P11 1.18 0 .98 Pervious 0 .02 14 P12 0.53 0 .61 Impervious 0 .32 38 P12 0.53 0 .61 Pervious 0.21 39 P13 0.49 0 .91 Impervious 0.44 38 P13 0.49 0 .91 Pervious 0 .04 39 P-Factor Value 0 .9 0.5 0 .8 0 .8 0 .5 1 1 1 C*A P*A 0 .000 0 .005 0 .253 0 .126 0 .000 0 .003 0 .132 0.066 0.680 0 .544 0 .076 0 .060 0 .296 0 .237 0.010 0.008 0.371 0.297 0.020 0 .016 0 .032 0.631 0.001 0 .022 0 .136 2 .711 0.029 0.479 0 .784 0 .628 0 .087 0 .070 0 .125 2.495 0 .019 0 .319 0 .015 0 .308 0.001 0.014 0 .058 1.161 0.024 0 .012 0 .016 0.322 0 .012 0 .208 0.022 0.445 0 .003 0 .042 SUB SUB AREA Practice C*A P*A BASIN Total Area I AREA (ac) DURING CONSTRUCTION P14 0.44 0.95 Impervious 0.42 38 0.021 0.425 P14 0.44 0.95 Pervious 0.02 39 0.001 0.020 P15 0.31 0.33 Impervious 0.11 38 0.005 0.105 P15 0.31 0.33 Pervious 0 .21 39 0.013 0.210 P16 0.10 1.00 Impervious 0.10 38 0.005 0.099 P16 0.10 1.00 Impervious 0.00 39 0.000 0.000 P17 0.23 1.00 Pervious 0 .23 38 0.012 0.235 P17 0.23 1.00 Impervious 0.00 39 0.000 0.000 P18 1.00 0.68 Pervious 0.69 38 0.034 0.687 P18 1.00 0.68 Impervious 0.32 39 0.019 0.317 P19 3.87 0.03 Pervious 0.10 38 0.005 0.103 P19 3.87 0.03 Impervious 3.77 39 0.226 3.766 P20 0.16 0.90 Pervious 0.15 6 0.147 0.118 P20 0.16 0.90 Impervious 0.02 6 0.016 0.013 P21 0.24 0.90 Pervious 0.21 6 0.213 0.170 P21 0.24 0.90 Imp erv ious 0 .02 6 0.024 0.019 P22 0.43 0 .90 Pervious 0.38 6 0.385 0.308 P22 0.43 0.90 Imp ervious 0.04 6 0.043 0.034 P23 0.64 0 .9 0 Pervious 0.57 6 0.575 0.460 P23 0.64 0 .90 Impervious 0.06 6 0.064 0.051 P24 0.03 0.90 Impervious 0.03 6 0.026 0.021 P24 0.03 0 .90 Pervious 0.00 6 0.003 0.002 P25 4 .51 0.83 Impervious 3.77 38 0.188 3.765 P25 4 .51 0.83 Pervious 0.75 39 0.045 0.749 P27 0.40 0.80 Impervious 0.32 38 0.016 0.324 P27 0.40 0.80 Pervious 0.08 39 0.005 0.081 P28 0.13 0.79 Impervious 0.11 38 0 .005 0.106 P28 0.13 0 .79 Pervious 0.03 39 0.002 0.028 P31 0.45 0.77 Impervious 0.35 38 0.017 0.345 P31 0.45 0.77 Pervious 0.10 39 0.006 0.102 P33 0.07 0 .08 Impervious 0.01 38 0.000 0.006 P33 0.07 0.08 Pervious 0.07 39 0.004 0.066 P34 0.51 0.95 Imp ervious 0.49 38 0.024 0.485 P34 0.5 1 0.95 Pervious 0.03 39 0.002 0.026 P35 0.00 0.90 Pervious 0.00 6 0.003 0.002 P35 0.00 0.90 Impervious 0.00 6 0.000 0.000 P36 0.10 0.90 Pervious 0.09 6 0.090 0.072 P36 0 .10 0.90 Impervious 0.01 6 0.010 0.008 Cnet = 0.21 Pnet = 0 .77 EFF = {1-C*P)100 = 83.6 Calculate1 > 79.0 Required ~ Comment Remarks Gravel Mulch Silt Fence Barrier Gravel Mulch Silt Fence Barrier Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1 -5% slope) Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mul ch (1-5% slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope) Gravel Mulch Silt Fence Barrier Gravel Mul ch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1 -5% slope) Remarks Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% s lop e) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% s lope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch {1-5% slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch {1-5% slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or $!raw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope) Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch {1-5 % slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5 % slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch {1-5 % slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch {1-5 % slope) Gravel Mulch Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1-5% slope) Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter Gravel Filter id PS Before I PS Before North College Marketplace PROPOSED SWMM PARAMETER INPUT Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: L. Chalfant Ayres Associates 32-1322.00 August 11 , 2009 EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS : Erosion Control C-Factor Number Method Value 9 Asphalt/Concrete F Asphalt/Concrete Pavement O.Q1 12 Establ ished Grass Ground Cover -30% 0 .15 14 Established Grass Ground Cover -50% 0.08 16 Established Grass Ground Cover -70% 0 .04 18 Establ ished Grass Ground Cover -90% 0 .025 SUB SUB I AREA Practice BASIN AREA (ac) P-Factor Value 1 1 1 1 1 C *A AFTER CONSTRUCTION P1 Impervious 0 .005 9 0 .0001 P1 Pervious 0 .253 12 0 .0379 P2 Impervious 0 .003 9 0.0000 P2 Pervious 0 .132 12 0 .0197 P3 Impervious 0.680 9 0 .0068 P3 Pervious 0 .076 18 0 .0019 P4 Impervious 0 .296 9 0 .0030 P4 Pervious 0 .010 18 0.0003 PS Impervious 0 .371 9 0 .0037 PS Pervious 0 .020 18 0 .0005 P6 Impervious 0.631 9 0.0063 P6 Pervious 0 .022 18 0.0005 P7 Impervious 2.711 9 0 .0271 P7 Pervious 0.479 18 0.0120 PS Impervious 0.784 9 0.0078 PS Pervious 0 .087 18 0 .0022 pg Impervious 2.495 9 0 .0250 pg Pervious 0 .319 18 0 .0080 P10 Impervious 0 .308 9 0 .0031 P10 Pervious 0.014 18 0 .0004 P11 Impervious 1.161 9 0 .0116 P11 Pervious 0 .024 18 0.0006 P12 Impervious 0 .322 9 0 .0032 P12 Pervious 0 .208 18 0.0052 P13 Impervious 0.445 9 0 .0044 P13 Pervious 0 .042 18 0.0011 P14 Impervious 0.425 9 0.0042 P14 Pervious 0 .020 18 0 .0005 Comment P *A I Remarks 0.005 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0.253 Established Grass Ground Cover -30% 0.003 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0.132 Established Grass Ground Cover -30% 0 .680 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0 .076 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 0 .296 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0.010 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 0 .371 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0.020 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 0 .631 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0 .022 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 2.711 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0.479 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 0 .784 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0 .087 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 2.495 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0 .319 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 0.308 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0 .014 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 1.161 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0.024 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 0 .322 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0 .208 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 0 .445 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0 .042 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 0.425 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement 0.020 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% AWES ASSOCIATl!!S SUB I SUB I AREA I Practice I C*A I P*A I Remarks BASIN AREA (ac) AFTER CONSTRUCTION P15 Impervious 0 .105 9 0 .0011 0.105 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P15 Pervious 0 .210 18 0 .0052 0.210 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P16 Impervious 0 .099 9 0 .0010 0.099 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P16 Impervious 0.000 18 0.0000 0.000 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P17 Pervious 0.235 9 0.0023 0 .235 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P17 Impervious 0.000 18 0 .0000 0 .000 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P18 Pervious 0 .687 9 0.0069 0 .687 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P18 Impervious 0 .317 18 0.0079 0 .317 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P19 Pervious 0 .103 9 0 .0010 0 .103 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P19 Impervious 3.766 18 0 .0941 3.766 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P20 Pervious 0 .147 9 0 .0015 0.147 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P20 Impervious 0 .016 18 0 .0004 0 .016 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P21 Pervious 0.213 9 0 .0021 0 .213 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P21 Impervious 0 .024 18 0 .0006 0 .024 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P22 Pervious 0.385 9 0 .0038 0 .385 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P22 Impervious 0 .043 18 0 .0011 0.043 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P23 Pervious 0.575 9 0.0057 0 .575 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P23 Impervious 0.064 18 0 .0016 0 .064 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P24 Impervious 0 .026 9 0 .0003 0 .026 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P24 Pervious 0.003 18 0 .0001 0 .003 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P25 Impervious 3 .765 9 0 .0377 3 .765 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P25 Pervious 0 .749 18 0 .0187 0.749 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P27 Impervious 0 .324 9 0 .0032 0 .324 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P27 Perviou s 0.081 18 0.0020 0 .081 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P28 Impervious 0.106 9 0 .0011 0.106 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P28 Pervious 0 .028 18 0.0007 0.028 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P31 Impervious 0.345 9 0.0035 0.345 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P31 Perviou s 0 .102 18 0 .0026 0.102 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P33 Impervious 0 .006 9 0 .0001 0.006 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P33 Pervious 0 .066 18 0 .0016 0 .066 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P34 Impervious 0.485 9 0.0049 0.485 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P34 Pervious 0 .026 18 0 .0006 0.026 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P34 Pervious 0 .003 9 0 .0000 0 .003 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P34 Impervious 0 .000 18 0 .0000 0 .000 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% P35 Pervious 0 .090 9 0 .0009 0 .090 Asphalt/Concrete Pavement P35 Impervious 0 .010 18 0 .0002 0 .010 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% Cnet = 0.016113 Pnet = 1.00 EFF = (1-C*P)100 = 98 .4 Calculated PS After > 92.9 Required PS After AVRES ASSOCIATES Flow L. Slope --> (ft) 0 .5 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 70.9 72 72.4 72 .6 72.7 72 .8 72 .8 72 .7 72 .7 72 .7 72.6 72.6 72 .6 72 .5 72.4 72.4 72 .3 72.3 72.2 72 .2 71.9 71 .6 71.4 71.1 70 .9 70 .6 74 .6 76 .3 77 77.4 77 .7 77 .9 78 78 .1 78 .2 78 .3 78 .3 78.4 78.4 78.5 78 .5 78 .5 78 .5 78 .6 78 .6 78 .6 78 .6 78 .7 78 .7 78 .6 78 .6 78.6 1.5 2 2.5 76 .8 78.4 79 .5 78 .2 79 .5 80 .5 78 .8 80 80 .9 79 .1 80 .3 81 .2 79.4 80 .5 81 .3 79 .5 80 .6 81.4 79.7 80.8 81 .5 79 .7 80 .8 81 .6 79 .8 80 .9 81 .7 79 .9 81 81 .7 79 .9 81 81 .7 80 81 81 .8 80 81.1 81.8 80 .1 81.1 81.8 80 .1 81 .1 81.9 80.1 81.1 81.9 80 .1 81 .2 81 .9 80 .1 81 .2 81 .9 80 .2 81 .2 81.9 80 .2 81 .2 81 .9 80 .2 81 .3 82 80 .3 81 .3 82 80 .3 81 .3 82 80 .3 81 .3 82 80 .3 81 .3 82 80 .3 81.3 82 "Table 8-A" 3 3 .5 4 4 .5 80 .3 81.1 81 .6 82.1 81 .2 82.1 82 .5 82.8 81 .6 82 .5 82 .8 83 .1 81.8 82.7 83 83 .3 81 .9 82 .8 83 .1 83.4 82 83 83 .2 83 .5 82 .1 83 83.3 83.5 82 .2 83 .1 83.4 83 .6 82 .2 83 .2 83.4 83 .6 82 .3 83 .2 83 .5 83 .7 82 .3 83 .3 83 .5 83 .7 82 .3 83 .3 83 .5 83 .7 82.4 83.3 83 .6 83 .8 82.4 83.4 83 .6 83 .8 82.4 83.4 83 .6 83.8 82 .4 83 .4 83.6 83 .8 82.4 83 .4 83 .6 83.8 82.4 83.4 83 .7 83 .8 82 .5 83 .5 83.7 83 .9 82 .5 83.5 83.7 83 .9 82 .5 83 .5 83 .7 83 .9 82 .5 83 .6 83 .8 84 82 .6 83 .6 83 .8 84 82 .6 83 .6 83 .8 84 82 .6 83 .7 83 .9 84 82.6 83.7 83.9 84 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 20 30 40 50 82 .5 83 83.4 83.6 83.8 84 84 .7 84 .8 84.9 84.9 83.2 83.6 83.9 84 84 .2 84 .3 84 .8 84.9 84 .9 84.9 83 .5 83 .8 84 .1 84 .2 84 .3 84.4 84 .8 84 .9 84 .9 85 83 .7 84 84 .2 84 .3 84.4 84 .5 84.8 84 .9 84 .9 85 83.8 84 .1 84 .3 84.4 84.5 84.6 84 .9 84 .9 85 85 83 .9 84 .1 84 .3 84.4 84 .5 84 .6 84.9 84 .9 85 84 84 .2 84.4 84 .5 84.5 84 .6 84.9 84 .9 85 84 84.2 84.4 84 .5 84 .6 84 .6 84 .9 84 .9 85 84 .1 84 .3 84.4 84 .5 84 .6 84 .7 84.9 84 .9 85 84 .1 84 .3 84.4 84 .5 84 .6 84 .7 84 .9 84 .9 85 84 .1 84 .3 84 .5 84 .6 84 .6 84 .7 84 .9 84 .9 84 .2 84 .3 84 .5 84 .6 84 .6 84.7 84 .9 84 .9 84 .2 84.4 84 .5 84.6 84 .6 84 .7 84 .9 85 84.2 84.4 84 .5 84.6 84 .7 84.7 84.9 85 84 .2 84.4 84 .5 84 .6 84 .7 84 .7 84 .9 85 84 .2 84.4 84 .5 84 .6 84 .7 84 .7 84.9 84 .3 84.4 84.5 84 .6 84 .7 84 .7 84 .9 84 .3 84.4 84.5 84 .6 84 .7 84 .7 84 .9 84 .3 84.4 84.5 84.6 84.7 84 .7 84 .9 84 .3 84.4 84 .6 84 .6 84.7 84 .7 84 .9 84 .3 84 .5 84 .6 84 .7 84 .7 84 .8 84.4 84 .5 84 .6 84 .7 84 .7 84 .8 84.4 84.5 84.6 84.7 84 .7 84.8 84.4 84 .5 84 .6 84 .7 84 .8 84 .8 84.4 84 .6 84.6 84 .7 84 .8 84.8 84.4 84.6 84 .7 84 .7 84 .8 84 .8 Erosion Control Methods and Costs # Method Bare Soil -Packed and smoolh 2 Bare Soil -Freshly disked 3 Bare Soil -Rough Irregular Surface 4 SedimenVBasin Trap 5 Straw Bale Barrier 6 Gravel Filler 7 Sand Bag 8 Silt Fence Barrier 9 AsphalVConcrete Pavement 1 0 Established Grass Ground Cover -10% 11 Established Grass Ground Cover -20% 12 Established Grass Ground Cover -30% 13 Established Grass Ground Cover -40% 14 Established Grass Ground Cover -50% 15 Established Grass Ground Cover -60% 16 Established Grass Ground Cover -70% 17 Established Grass Ground Cover -80% 18 Established Grass Ground Cover -90% 19 Established Grass Ground Cover -100% 20 Sod Grass 21 Temporary Vegetation 22 Cover Crops 23 Hydraulic Muich C 2 tons/acre 24 Soil Sealan t 25 Soil Sealant 26 Soil Sealant 27 Soil Sealant 28 Soil Sealant 29 Soil Sealant 30 Soil Sealant 31 Soil Sealant 32 Soil Sealant 33 Soil Sealant 34 Soil Sealant 35 Soil Sealant 36 Soil Sealant 37 Erosion Control Mats/Blankets 38 Gravel Mulch 39 Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1 -5% slope) 40 Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (6-10% slope) 41 Hay or Straw Dry Mulch ( 11-15% slope) 42 Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (16-20% slope) 43 Hay or S1raw Dry Mulch (21-25% slope) 44 Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (25-33% slope) C-Factor 0.01 0.31 0.22 0.15 0.11 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.01 0.45 0.45 0.1 0.0, 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.1 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.11 0.14 0.17 "TABLE 88" P-Factor 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.5 Unit ea ea LF ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac ac Unit Cost $150 $300 $3 $1 ,350 $500 $500 $500 ssoo $500 $500 Comment Must be conslructed as the first step in overlot grading. Assumes planting dates listed below, thus dry or hydrauhc mulches are not required . Assumes planting dates listed below, thus dry or hydrauhc mulches are not required . Hydraulic muk:hes shall be used only between March 15 and May 15 unless irrigated . Value used must be substantiated by documentation . Value used must be substantiated by documen tation . Value used must be substantiated by documenlation. Value used musl be substantiated by documentalion . Value used must be substantiated by documentation . Value used must be substantiated by documentation. Value used must be substantiated by documentation. Value used must be substantiated by documentation. Value used must be substantiated by documentation. Value used must be substantiated by documentation . Value used must be substantiated by documentation. Value used must be substantiated by documentation. Value used must be substantiated by documentation. Mulch shall consist of gravel having a diameter of approximately 114• to 1 112· and applied at a rate of at least 135 tons/acre . After planting grass seed, apply mulch at a rate of 2 tons/acre (minimum) and adequately anchor, tack or crimp material into the soil. After planting grass seed, apply mulch at a rate of 2 tons/acre (minimum) and adequately anchor, tack or crimp material Into the soil. After planting grass seed , apply mulch at a rate of 2 tons/acre (minimum) and adequately anchor , tack or crimp material Into the soil. After planting grass seed, apply mu}Ch at a rate of 2 tons/acre (minimum) and adequately anchor, tack or crimp material into the soil. After planting grass seed , apply mulch at a rate of 2 tons/acre (minimum) and adequatety anchor, tack or crimp material into the soil. After planting grass seed , apply mulch at a rate of 2 tons/acre (minimum) and adequatety anchor, tack or crimp material into the soil. Erosion Control Methods and Costs # Melhod C-Factor 45 Hay or Slraw Dry Mulch (>33% slope) 0.2 46 Contoured Furrow Surface (1-2% basin slope) 47 Conioured Furrow Surface (3-5% basin slope) 48 Conloured Furrow Surface (6-8% basin slope) 49 Conioured Furrow Surface (9-12% basin slope) SO Contoured Furrow Surface (13-16% basin slope} 51 Conloured Furrow Surface (17-20% basin slope) 52 Conloured Furrow Surface (>20% basin slope) 53 Terracing (1 -2% basin slope) 54 Terracing (3-8% basin slope) 55 Terracing (9-12% basin slope) 56 Terracing (13-16% basin slope) 57 Terracing (17-20% basin slope) 58 Terracing (>20% basin slope) 59 Seeding (Nalive) 60 Seeding (Lawn) 61 Seeding (Shrub) 62 Seeding (Wellands) 63 Mulching "TABLE 88" P-Factor Unit ac 0.6 ac 0.5 ac 0.5 ac 0.6 ac 0.7 ac 0.8 ac 0.9 ac 0.12 ac 0.1 ac 0.12 ac 0.14 ac 0.16 ac 0.18 ac ac ac lb ac ac Unit Cost Comment $500 After planting grass seed, apply mulch at a rate of 2 tons/acre (minimum) and adequately anchor, tack or crimp material Into the soil. Maximum length = 400'. Must be maintained throughout the construction period, otherwise P-Factor = 1.00. Maximum length refers to the down slope length. Maximum length= 300'. Must be maintained throughou t the construction period, otherwise P-Factor = 1.00. Maximum length refers to the down slope length. Maximum length = 200'. Must be maintained throughout the construction period , otherwise P-Factor = 1.00. Maximum length refers to the down slope leng th. Maximum length = 120'. Must be maintained throughout the construction period , otherwise P-Factor = 1.00. Maximum length refers to the down slope length. Maximum length = 80'. Must be maintained throughout the construction period, otherwise P-Factor = 1.00 . Maximum length refers to the down slope length . Maximum length = 60. Must be maintained throughout the construction period, otherwise P-Factor = 1.00. Maximum length refers to the down slope length . Maximum length = 50'. Must be maintained throughout the construction period , otherwise P-Factor = 1.00. Maximum length refers to the down slope length. Must contain 10-year runoff volumes , without overflowing, as determined by applicable hydrologic methods , otherwise P-Factor = 1.00 . Must contain 10-year runoff volumes , without overflowing, as determined by applicable hydrologic methods, otherwise P-Factor = 1.00. Musi con lain 10-year runoff volumes, withoul overflowing , as delermined by applicable hydrologic melhods, otherwise P-Faclor = 1.00. Must contain 10-year runoff volumes , without overflowing , as determined by applicable hydrologic methods, otherwise P-Factor = 1.00. Musi conlain 10-year runoff volumes, wilhoul overflowing , as delermined by applicable hydrologic melhods, olherwlse P-Faclor = 1.00 . Must contain 10-year runoff volumes, without overflowing , as determined by applicable hydrologic methods, otherwise P-Factor = 1.00. $305 COOT • 1994 COOT -1994 $52 COOT · 1994 $696 CDOT • 1994 $334 COOT · 1994 North College Marketplace PROPOSED SWMM PARAMETER INPUT Design Engineer: Design Firm: Project Number: Date: L. Chalfant Ayres Associates 32-1322.00 August 11, 2009 EROSION CONTROL CO ST ESTIMATE : EROSION CONTROL MEASURES Number Method Quantity Unit Vehicle Tracking Mat 20 CY 6 Gravel Filter 10 ea 8 Silt Fence Barrier 5120 LF 38 Gravel Mulch 7 ac 62 seeding wetlands 3 ac 39 Hay or Straw Dry Mulch (1 -5% slope) 18 ac Subtotal Escrow Amount Total Security Unit Total Cost Cost Notes $30 $600 $400 $4,000 $5 $25 ,600 $1 ,350 $9 ,735 $696 $2 ,088 $500 $8 ,911 $50 ,934 1.5 $76,401 $76,401 Page 1 of Michaelsen, Jaclyn From: Michaelsen , Jaclyn Sent: Saturday, March 07 , 2009 7:37 AM To: Michaelsen , Jaclyn Subject: FW : Scour Stop Design-Fort Collins Co Attachments: RR to Mats Chart b&w .jpg ; CSU ScourStop calculator King Soaper.xis; RIPRAP APRON DESIGN MINIMUM TAILWATER CONDITl.pdf =rom: Tom Carpenter [mailto:tom@scourstop.com] ent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 1:02 PM o: Chalfant, Linsey :c: Ron@bowmanconstructionsupply.com; Chris Eller ~ubject: RE: Scour Stop Design-Fort Collins Co nan ks for continuing to wor k with ScourStop on projects. Here is a new chart that we have developed t o co ordinate with the ~aditional rip rap curve s chart that engineers utilize when designing for rip rap aprons. Also, I have enclos ed the CSU calculator 1owing the inputs for th e 24 inch pipes on the project, and indicating an 8 X 8 ScourStop protection ar ea {I feel 4 ft of width is J1enty for these lower velociti es, as the CSU calc is quite conservative. At the larger outlet with 4 cfs, at least 4 ft of ScourSto p .,· t on each side of the pipes (not knowing their separation distances and overall width), and 16-20 ft of downstream apron . lease get back if you have a qu estion or extra thoughts or needs! Thanks again. -1iomas Carpenter, CPESC 15-202-0568 ,vww .scourstop.com rom: Chalfant, Linsey [mailto :ChalfantL@AyresAssociates.com] ,ent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:48 AM ro: Tom Carpenter c: Michaelsen, Jaclyn _ubject: Scour Stop Design -Fort Collins Co iood morning Tom. I am working on a King Sooper's site in Fort Collins where I would like to incorporate scour stop in several ,cations. I have attached a PDF ind icat ing 5 outlet locat ions . Up t o this point I have used your design guide to size each spot . The ~ity of Fort Coll ins has requested that the manufacturer design a nd provide necessary calculat ions rather than what I have previous!~ 'rovided . Can you help me out wit h th is or pu t me in contact w it h someone that can . Thanks fo r you r help Tom and please call if yOL ave any questi ons . insey Chalfant ~yres Associates 665 JFK Parkway , Bu ilding 2, Su ite 200 ort Collins , CO 80525 =>hone (970)223-5556 ax (970 )223-5578 :halfan t L@AyresAssociates.com www .A:Y.rnsAssociates.com 3/7/2009 USER INPUT Pipe Diamter: Long . Pipe Slope : Manning n: 30 in . 0.002 ft/ft 0.0 13 sift 113 0 MODEL OUTPUT Max. Pipe Exit Velocity: 5.15 ft/s Associated Discharge: 30.42 cfs Installation Type A&B Installation Type C&D Transition Mat Width : 12.00 ft Transition Mat Width: 12.00 ft Transition Mat Length : 8.00 ft Transition Mat Length : 8 .00 ft Coveraqe Area : 96 .00 ft 2 Coverac::ie Area : 96.00 ft 2 Note: Descriptions of installation types , definitions of parameters, and further discussion on calculation methedology can be found in the Design Guidelines Manual. Note: Installation Type C&D is limited to pipe exit velocities less than 14 ft/s and requires a Turf Reinforcement Mat (TAM) that has been tested and verified to withstand a velocity of no less than 5.5 ft/s in an unveaetated condition . USER INPUT Pipe Diamter: Long . Pipe Slope : Manning n: 36 in . 0.002 ft/ft 0.013 sift 113 0 MODEL OUTPUT Max. Pipe Exit Velocity: 5.15 ft/s Associated Discharge: 30.42 cfs Installation Type A&B Installation Type C&D Transition Mat Width : 12.00 ft Transition Mat Width: 12.00 ft Transit ion Mat Length : 8.00 ft Transition Mat Length: 8.00 ft Coverage A rea : 96.00 ft2 Coverage Area: 96.00 ft 2 Note: Descriptions of installation types , definitions of parameters , and further discussion on calculation methedology can be found in the Design Guidelines Manual. Note: Installat ion Type C&D is limited to pipe exit velocities less than 14 ft/s and requires a Turf Reinforcement Mat (TRM) that has been tested and verified to withstand a velocity of no less than 5 .5 ft/s in an unveaetated condition . USER INPUT Pipe Diamter: Long . Pipe Slope: Manning n: 24 in. 0.002 ft/ft 0.013 sift 113 0 MODEL OUTPUT Max. Pipe Exit Velocity: 3.93 ft/s Associated Discharge : 10.32 cfs Installation Type A&B Installation Type C&D Transition Mat Width: 8.00 ft Transition Mat Width: 8.00 ft Transition Mat Length : 4.00 ft Transition Mat Length: 8.00 ft Coveraqe Area : 32.00 ft2 Coverage Area : 64.00 ft 2 Note: Descriptions of installation types , definitions of parameters , and further discussion on calculation methedology can be found in the Design Guidelines Manual. Note: Installation Type C&D is limited to pipe exit velocities less than 14 ft/s and requires a Turf Reinforcement Mat (TRM) that has been tested and verified to withstand a velocity of no less than 5.5 ft/s in an unveqetated condition. Channel Width and Length and Side Slopes Background • Native • Urban • Parking Lot Channel Slopes • >2% Slope • Flat • Steep Flow Velocities • Intensities • Watershed What is ScourStop™? • Part of permanent, post -construction Stormwater Treatment Practice (STP). • Fac ili tat es a vegetated stormwater conveyance system that promotes infiltration for groundwater recharge, and pollutant collect ion . What is scour and shear? ScourStop '" transition mat is a new, ... patented, ... and proven solution to scouring directly below and downstream of a pipe or culvert outlet. It is a biotechnical alternative for rip rap. ScourStop '" is a semi-rigid, high density polyethy lene plastic mat ( 4 ft X 4 ft X .5 in ) combining vegetation with modern polymer material technology to mechanically protect the soil from scour and erosion until the shear forces have dissipated. Transition mats must be used over another best management practice (BMP) cover, typically a turf reinforcement mat (TRM), sod, or combination of the two, for immediate and long term soil loss protection. ScourStop '" is formulated with 10 year, UV protection; coloring it a dark green . However, once vegetated, the mat is mostly shielded from the sun and undetectable -making it a permanent BMP. Scour is erosion at the outlet area caused by the shear forces in the water -a combination of velocity and the weight of flowing water. Shear is compounded by the increasing velocity of the water as it rapidly expands from the confined pipe out into a channel. Conversely, just a few feet below the outlet, shear forces become relatively insignificant. The water loses its concentrated weight, and thus its shear force, by expansion into a wider channel Sl»IU'Sfop Ptot&cts HlgPl.Sbtll:tr Ara-a and becoming a shallow flow. l..awlR' 611"'1' APlil De&\gDB<I 'EIMP ► Cri.ti.cal Desi.gn Elements 1 ScourStop™ transition mats mechanically protect the soil from scour until this shear force is diminished as the water expands into the open channel. 2 Shear is the culprit, and that shear is normally only a factor in the scour area of 1 -12 ft. (O -3 m) downstream of the outlet. Shallow velocity is a manageable factor in a design scheme. Additionally, specifiers rarely design flows greater than 8 fps, so high velocity is not a significant factor in most designs. 3 ScourStop'" must be used with another BMP soil cover. Bare soil is quite erosive, and some type of soil cover is required under ScourStop™ for a proper, effective installation. 4 The installation must be considered 'all or nothing'. Once storm water begins piping under the mats, or 'head-cutting' - rill erosion from downstream uphill - the system has failed, and re installation is required. [However, an additional benefit of ScourStop'" is that the product does not disintegrate, so it can be reinstalled from a failure, or from a temporary installation, with primarily only labor cost.] Critical Design Elements 5 NPDES -Phase II Minimum requirement #5 calls for inspection and maintenance of post construction BMPs to ensure adequate and long-term operation of controls. ScourStop'" facilitates a vegetated solution and provides long term mechanical protection, for a no maintenance, post-construction STP. Cahmtato Downslffl an, Flow Vo odlle.s, and Volumas 100' 6 Downstream flow velocities must be calculated by the designer and then dealt with by an appropriate channel lining system (Stormwater Treatment Pra ctice). Evaluate and design STP to the receiving waters. The goal is minimal scour potential and a long slope,< 4%, to allow pollutant filtration and ground water recharge. CAUTION: TRM Performance ratings are based on fully-vegetated conditions. There are several software packages available from blanket manufacturers to aid in channel design and flow characteristics which indicate BMP application ranges. Two examples are from Propex, Inc. at www.fixsoil.com and North American Green at www.nagreen.com . Slornwri1110r P•po C~lc ula li oo 'I.Yl E'r11111-11 r1y hm• How Many Mats are Needed? Typical outfall calculation. What confi.gurati.on should be used? An engineered design for ScourStop '" calculator is available in Excel format. PIPE DISCHARGE ScourStop '" NUMBER OF DIAMETER (CFS) Width x Length ScourStop '" Rule-of-thumb table. 12" 8 4' X 4' 1 24" 30 4' X 8' 2 36" 75 8' X 12' 6 48" 100 12' X 16' 12 60" 150 12' X 20' 15 As a limi t ed discharge area is often a sign ificant factor in t he design, mid channel use of ScourStop'" mats may be necessary at slope changes. The assoc iated scour areas will be at t he toe of the slope as May Naed Ad ditio nal St:au·rStap at Chan ge 11 Slopfl \ runoff velocity is greatest there, and directly downstream of the change in slope. Extra soil protection, such as additional mats, wil l be requ ired. MI NIMUM TRANSl'TI MAT ,COVERAG£ FO R SLOPES DO~STREAM PF··oUTrAil. .•• '•!..t.:.'''t. .:., ;-.T1,r ; ·r ..1.,.. 1.-r i'l".,...-;. Ifs okay to say no to some installations. Additional Design Considerations Installers must understand all of these critical design elements and alert the designer if a proposed site is not appropriate for a certain installation or ScourStop '" BMP system. If there are some lingering questions, contact the manufacturer for further clarification. • Saturated soils generally become unstable or are susceptible to heavy flows which can cause erosion . Core out these wet soils and replace with manageable, fertile soil. If the application does have trickle flows, installing a sub -surface drainage system is highly recommended. Construct the system such that the low flow can drain from the outlet immediately and quickly - you do not want it ponding on the surface, having to filter down through vegetation, or seep through slits in plastic pipe -it takes too long and puts high stress on the vegetation. • Also consider a TRM vegetated with wetland sod, native seeds, and/or wetland plugs to stabilize the outlet as soon as possible. You may not have to excavate the wet soil if you can stabilize the installation with TRMs and ScourStop '" anchored securely. • Composite TRMs should only be used on sites where vegetation is likely and expected flows prior to vegetation are below calculated TRM design parameters. 1.en1 atte , low IJl>W -typ11 c • Compo,I TAM ~ ,ar ~i;i;i,p I ■ " . ' "' ' ' f .. \ ''"""-' ~-,,. ,•. ' I ... \ ,._ •• ·i \ ,,. ./ ·( .._ ' ,,,.. j • • Lateral outlets discharging into a water conveyance must be carefully designed, and the affected streambank areas well-protected. Sod would be highly recommended over seeding in most applications . Geo-ridge· • Outlets in minimal sunlight conditions require the combination of ScourStop'" and a permanent, High-Performance TRM as sod may not thrive in a low light environment. • Consult with the manufacturer for designing streambed applications. Under low volume flows and moderate sediment loads, a High-Performance TRM under ScourStop'" mats should protect the soil from erosion and allow sediment to accumulate for an aesthetic, natural landscape. TRM combinations with a geotextile component to protect the erosive soil particles have proven very effective. See installation details. • Installing sod over a HP -TRM has shown great effectiveness. If the vegetation (sod) becomes securely rooted in the mat, the application will be extremely effective against erosive forces . • Temporary option -to slow the water down until vegetation has established, you might want to utilize a product called 'Geo-ridge•' or Enviroberm ® -an open mesh triangular structure which dissipates water energy. "\ '• . ' ' ' \ ,, ,, \ " ... ''< ' ... ......_ ~ ., '\ .. .,, ,, Installation Modes TYPE A TYPE B :\ ... . \ A~ l .... '· ,,, " . .• Several different installation modes enable a broad range of transition mat applications on construction sites and permanent vegetation projects. Transition mats must be used over another BMP cover, typically a TRM, sod, or combination of the two, protecting the soil from erosion. Type A is an installation over plain sod. Sod protects the soil particles and provides instant vegetation, with no risk of poor seed germination. Sod is the fastest means for vegetative cover because it is ready -made with near surface root mat and good surface cover foliage. It clearly eliminates the risks and provides multiple benefits for minimizing erosion, while maximizing the benefits of the t urf reinforcement mats when used in combination with them. Type B provides for ScourStop'", sod, and a turf reinforcement mat (TRM) combination for higher volume and velocity flows, and also a higher level of protection and security for a permanent installation. " •· .. " '\ f \ .. . ' l, " ' ..... "'", ... 11: \ ,,, ,~ . I Installation Modes continued 7\ } ' \ ..... ·, l' L \ I .... '· ' ,,,.. l .. Type C is a combination ScourStop '" and TRM for low flow, low shear, and low velocity installations such as at level, rural driveway culverts or temporary construction outlets. Seeding under a TRM requires germination time and often a bit of luck avoiding a storm event that washes away the seed. This mode supports a composite TRM where vegetation is likely and expected flows prior to vegetation are below calculated TRM design parameters. TYPE C Installati.on Modes continued Type D is a combination ScourStop'" and High-Performance TRM installation where the minimum rating for the unvegetated TRM is 5.5 fps. In some instances, a geotextile under the ScourStop'"/TRM combination has resisted flows greater than 21 fps and 8 lbs. of shear. It might be specified for construction outlets; DOT highway applications; arid areas where the installation may not completely vegetate for 2-3 years; or streambeds -possibly in an area where vegetation is unlikely where sediment and gravel will primarily accumulate, for example. TYPED Manufacturers of High-Performance TRMs (HP -TRM) have found installing sod over their product is quite effective. If it becomes rooted down before a large storm event erodes it away, it can easily revegetate from the roots which were protected by the HP TRM. Turf Rei.nforcement Mats-TRMs A dense grass cover provides one of the best defenses against soil erosion, provided the velocity of water flowing over the surface is not of sufficient duration and intensity to degrade the vegetative cover. If there is a risk of degradation, the vegetation must be reinforced by turf reinforcement mats (TRMs) and mechanically anchored to the soil. A turf reinforcement mat consists of various UV-stabilized synthetic fibers and filaments processed into permanent, high -strength, three-dimensional matrices that reinforce either the stems or roots of vegetation. This three-dimensional mat functions as an open , stable matrix for the entanglement of plant roots, stems, and soil, which together form a coherent, living matrix. They are designed for permanent and critical hydraulic applications such as drainage channels where expected discharges result in velocities and tractive shear stresses that exceed the limits of mature, natural vegetation . With any mat, it is essential to minimize seepage flow between the mesh and ground surface. The flexibility of the mesh and the method of installation must be adequate to avoid bridging between the mesh and soil. TRMs alone generally can not resist the high shear forces at the transition area below a storm water outlet, and therefore are highly complimented by ScourStop '" transition mats. ' f ,, \ ~-..... ' • .. , "' ,,.,~ I ., 1" .... "t •. .. - I / ' J!.I l ... 'f ' . I' I . Storm water flows -both duration and intensity -are significant factors for consideration. The erosion resistance of reinforced grass systems can be considered in terms of hydraulic loading parameters velocity and duration of flow. Velocity controls the tractive forces act ing at the bed fluid interface. Duration of flow is an important variable because even moderate flow velocities can cause severe Hfl iiild of ~tior, "d,e-cr~a,se, ,,,tllocily;· f)tCh1n,o· or. lo w I~ erosion damage over a longer time period. An intuitive deduction from known test data strongly suggests that a vegetated TRM under ScourStop'" would be much more effective than the unvegetated TRM results in the curren t research . In most cases the ScourStop'" system is providing a 3X safety factor over the known results. TRMs have variable permissible stress limits, depending on upon the stage of vegetative establishment in the mat. These values are generally available and included in software programs designed to help engineers design channels for TRMs, and must be consulted in the design process. Beware - results and computations are based on vegetated conditions! \ f ' -, • '-:· .... ' ""~ ~ .......... ' ... ,,,. .., .. ' ! ·- I NPDES Phase II Includes Six Minimum Controls Non -structural Planning such as LID projects, and BMPs like buffer strips, etc. Structural Infiltration BMPs: Infiltration BMPs are designed to facilitate the percolation of runoff through the soil to ground water, and, thereby, result in reduced stormwater quantity and reduced mobilization of pollutants. Examples include infiltration basins/trenches, dry wells, and porous pavement. Vegetative BMPs: Vegetative BMPs are landscaping features which -with optimal design and good soil conditions -remove pollutants, and faci litate percolation of runoff, thereby mainta ining natural site hydrology, promoting healthier hab itats, and increasing aesthetic appeal. Examples include grassy swales, filter strips, artificial wetlands, and rain gardens. n ' ·-•-~ .. \ \ J.: :1 I ... 'l ,._ ' "'··,... I • ' Post-Construction Runoff Minimum Control Measure The Phase II Final Rule requires an operator of a regulated small MS4 to develop, implement, and enforce a program to reduce pollutants in post construction runoff to their MS4 from new development and redevelopment projects that result in land disturbance of greater than or equal to one acre. The small MS4 operator is required to: • Develop and implement strategies which include a combination of structural and/or non-structural best management practices (BMPs); • Have an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism requiring the implementation of post-construction runoff controls to the extent allowable under State, Tribal, or local law. • Ensure adequate long-term operation and maintenance of controls; • Determine the appropriate best management practices and measurable goals for this minimum control measure. ... the immediate downstream waterways will not be subject to: • Deterioration of existing culverts, bridges, dams, and other structures • Deterioration of biological functions or habitat • Accelerated streambank or streambed erosion or siltation • Increased threat of flood damage to public health, life, property There are several basic water quality strategies for treating runoff: • Infiltrate runoff into the soil • Retain/detain runoff for later release with the detention providing treatment • Convey runoff slowly through vegetation • Treat runoff on a flow-through basis using various treatment technologies NPDES Phase II Continued Solutions should be based on an understanding of the water quality and economic benefits inherent in construction of systems that utilize or mimic natural drainage patterns. Site designs should be based on site conditions and use these strategies as the basis for selecting appropriate stormwater quality controls. Strategies for infiltration, retention/detention, and bio-filtration: • Vegetated basins (ephemeral-seasonally wet) • Constructed ponds and lakes (permanent-always wet) • Crushed stone reservoir, base rock under pavement or in sumps • Cisterns and tanks • Infiltration basins • Drainage trenches • Dry wells • Others ... Self-treating site design techniques include: • Conserved Natural Spaces • Large Landscaped Areas (including parks and lawns) • Grass/Vegetated Swales • Turf Block Paving Areas The infiltration and bio-treatment inherent to such areas provides the treatment control necessary. These areas therefore act as their own BMP, and no additional BMPs to treat runoff should be required. How does this biotechnical system work? Interception Bio-technical stabilization provides attractive, cost-effective, and environmentally compatible ways to protect soil against surfic ial erosion. It utilizes mechanical elements in combination with living vegetation to arrest and prevent erosion . Both biological and mechanical elements must function together in an integrated and complimentary manner to increase the resistance to erosion above that of grass alone, and to improve the growth and establishment of the grass itself. The protective role of vegetation is: Interception -Foliage and plant residues absorb rainfall energy and prevent soil detachment by raindrop splash. Restraint -Root systems physically bind or restrain soil particles while aboveground portions filter sediment out of runoff. 1Restra int Retardation Retardation -Stems and foliage increase surface roughness and slow velocity of runoff. Infiltration -Plants and their residues help to maintain soil porosity and permeability, thereby delaying onset of runoff. The most effective vegetative cover is grasses and forbs with dense, near surface root mat and good surface cover foliage. Infiltration Desi.gn Methodology NPDES Phase II Post-Construction BMP The design methodology is a system of three inter-related elements each dependent on the other for a long term, permanent Stormwater Treatment Practice (STP). 1 the landscape setting -urban manicured lawn areas, or outlying low maintenance areas; 2 the actual scour area -soil conditions, slope, width, and length; 3 the downstream channel configuration - slope, length, and width . A quick overview of the elements helps to think about the design as a system. 'Landscape Setting' refers to your site -is it a lawn, parking lot, backwoods, ditch, wetlands, etc? The 'scour area' is immediately downstream and consists of the soil conditions, slope, width, length, and cover. The 'downstream channel configuration' also consists of soil conditions, slope, width, length, and cover. As with many BMPs in the toolbox, there might be 2-3 different alternative solutions, and the decision comes down to subjective factors, risk/reward, economics, and aesthetics. The landscape setting is our first element. Generally any residential site or commercial frontage involving a manicured landscape would be a priority for using sod under transition mats. But sod is also applicable to no-maintenance areas, as it provides great soil protect ion and often does fine growing wild. Other low visibility settings might be options for a TRM and ScourStop '" application where native grasses would flourish, under low maintenance. Knowing your 'setting' might short-cut your decision -making process as to a certain installation type. • Native -backlot • Urban -residential • Parking Lot -commercial The scour area is the next design element. The first step is to determine what soil environment you have to start with, and then to determine what you want to end up with . Is the location dry and Prop_erty Installed manageable; wet on top, but stable underneath; or maybe saturated with 'no bottom'? Whatever the soil environment, it must be created or designed for a solid foundation, whether vegetated or not. The quality of the installation usually determines whether or not a BMP will be effective, and this is especially true here, because you are building a long term structure that must deal with large variances in degrees of stress. Not Pro The scour area must be reasonably smooth to ensure consistent contact with the cover BMP, and fairly level to avoid concentrating the storm water runoff. G111de Dlstl'illroe Are~ Fht bid Uijel As suggested in the RUSLE formula , the scour area should be designed as wide, level, and long as possible, especially avoiding an abrupt change in slope downstream if possible. Consider sod and/or sod/TRM combina ti ons on all slopes greater than 10:1 . AvQ1d 'W.atertall 11 [m pact No G~11ter Than 25'/4 Ctmn In Sf op Do Nol Cfl t Impact Erosion lln.Ms.1ti'C;~d 8cp n~ • RAducoi. V:a loc lry • ,Dllubi:$ We r Co~tn, • ri Avoid impact erosion onto the mats aris i ng from a 25% change in slope between the discharge and outlet chann el slope. A 25 % change would be either a 'waterfall' type impact, or a 'collision ' type impact where the discharge is directed into a level channel area. lX Adding an additional one, two, or four ScourStop '" mats over the primary layer of mats at the scour area has shown to improve the scour protection on unvegetated installations, especially recommended for pipes and culverts > 36". Over-lapping ScourStop 'M mats at the end of storm water discharges larger than 42" has also shown to increase the installation safety factor. Scour area width is extremely important in the design specification. The minimum channel bottom width should be at least 3 times the pipe diameter to enable water expansion and thus velocity dissipation as soon as possible, but four-five times the pipe diameter is the desired width . If the channel width is less than 3 times the width of the outlet, lining the two sides with ScourStop '" mats to half the height of the outlet is recommended. The discharge channel configuration is the third consideration. This area downstream of the scour area is the last component of this Stormwater Treatment Practice. Phase II encourages vegetated channels, and requires maintenance of post-construction BMPs, so designing this system properly saves long term annual dollars as well as protect i ng the environment. May Need Additional Scau·rStDp at Change i" Slo_pr, \ The designer should first attempt to make the discharge channel as wide, level, and long as possible. A wide open discharge area will allow velocity in the storm water to dissipate quickly, and generally requires a lesser degree of soil protection. As a limited discharge area is often a significant factor in the des ign, mid-channel use of ScourStop '" mats may be necessary at slope changes. The associated scour areas will be at the toe of the slope as runoff velocity is greatest there, and directly downstream of the change in slope which will require extra soil protection such as additional mats. Erosion from the lower end is called head-cutting, and must be dealt with appropriately. Caicutato Downstroiam f low Voto~llu nd V<dum() Preferred Design • Long, flat, and wide as possible. • Scour area: maximum slope 10:1. • Downst ream channel: as much slope length at 4:100 as possible. • Discharge into receiving waters at about the same elevation, avoiding lateral water forces on your drop down structure. Co~a,Ii,4,-Sod aJMf.10 r ill $Qdrrfi!M Com b n.atlon cin All S lopll':II ~TG;im r Th;m iO! 1 Hr 1' Design Applications for ScourStop Transition Mats Up to, 60" Gul-.,art:s and Pipe~ • • .ZIS.Chnfi111 11-:h pt: -t,{;,.,,,.-1 Ul>r,l•\'•l l<i: . -Sl.n1L•io<I :/loill, C,,,l nJ :.:..: f 1,..,.. ~N UI son Cover BMP w t h ScourStop ln&taiht»o o ~n I . eat Paar !~d • t'I 71' Water Level Geo t extile with ScourStop '" mechanical support holds soil part icles in place and protects soil from water energy and erosion. Vegetated stream banks ma inta i n natural aesthetics and keep stream hydraulic dynamics in equilibrium . Initial Installation Operation Dur ing Storm Event Before After • . \ f ,t.1, .... ~, l .\ ~ ,..--~. 'I ~ ·, t ,JI. • . ......_ ., ... D.esigner Check:list Comp lete ntlre h ck-I t f r EV Y o u et Date ~ _________ _ Locatio n ofO'utlet:•~~~-~ ........ -··-· --~-......... ------_______ ....,. Compiany Pmject # ..... ----'-........ --------~ ti ~'g r, Goat A Y.~lat~ stomu •.•ter· R1.morf ~ve1 , l's.; • Re.d·uce ru .,if 9:,;til \t8'1r.A:it y ,~~ e >:pansioo of-1h 8 als-=harJ;Ei .araa • Utilize Ieng oi :s lope t.o 'i(ni ee.s a·imil ra lic:n and 1iround~,·ale r re r?l e!'ge • U~iliz.e leng!n ol'slope to lncraA-s e polluta t _'3-moval • N fJ D ES c·ompl ianec u 2 .fng-a. >m tenanca S.otm,ratar Traat.fl1en 1 !P arct ics (ST'P.), Sto nn E\'e_nt 2 y ear l!it'Ofm __ _ Com p ute rtow voliJ~!I-ar.u;:1v e1oc rt1 es; 1 ~ JU Di s,::ll arg Outfa fr p ~ -----'cf::. 2J Al E:fll!I o l lr 9'l ~l ope ; tp-9 s 3} AJ , 9-f :scv".nl slope: rp:: d:; , : Al em~ .of doo,,.ins·.re . l ,::h l\l nl'lef: ___ rps ~ --:~I.Its~ p r/¥ ,. _ . _u_rj,tcip ns-d_rr, l]Ur'8 1(1 • il8l .Sf ~ ,. . • l~li -' Other __ _ I • r~,f . NORTH AMERICAN GAE~ MATERIAL SPECIFICATION C350 The composite turf reinforcement mat (C-TRM) shall be a machine-produced mat of 100% coconut fiber matrix incorporated into a permanent three-dimensional turf reinforcement matting. The matrix shall be evenly distributed across the entire width of the matting and stitch bonded between a super heavy duty UV stabilized bottom net with 0.50 x 0.50 inch (1.27 x 1.27 cm) openings, an ultra-heavy duty UV stabilized, dramatically corrugated (crimped) intermediate netting with 0.50 x 0 .50 inch (1.27 x 1.27 cm) openings, and covered by a super heavy duty UV stabilized top net with 0 .50 x 0.50 inch (1.27 x 1.27 cm) openings. The corrugated netting shall form prominent closely spaced ridges across the entire width of the mat. The three nettings shall be stitched together on 1.50 inch (3.81 cm) centers with UV stabilized polypropylene thread to form a permanent three dimensional turf reinforcement matting. The C350 shall meet requirements established by the Erosion Control Technology Council (ECTC) Specification and the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration's (FHW A) Standard Specifications For Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects, FP-03 2003 Section 713.18 as a Type 5A, B, and C Permanent Turf Reinforcement Mat. Installation staple patterns shall be clearly marked on the turf reinforcement matting with environmentally safe paint. All mats shall be manufactured with a colored thread stitched along both outer edges (approximately 2-5 inches [5-12.5 cm] from the edge) as an overlap guide for adjacent mats . The composite turf reinforcement mat shall be the North American Green C350, or equivalent. The C350 permanent composite turf reinforcement mat shall have the following physical properties: Material Content Matrix Nettings Thread 100% Coconut Fiber (0.50 lb/yd2) (0 .27 kg/m2) Top -Super Heavy Duty UV Stabilized Polypropylene 8.00 lbs/1,000 ft2 (3.91 kg/100 m2) Mid -Corrugated Ultra-Heavy Duty UV Stabilized Polypropylene 24 lb/1,000 ft2 (11.7 kg/100 m2) Bottom -Super Heavy Duty UV Stabilized Polypropylene 8.00 lbs/1,000 ft2 (3.91 kg/100 m2) UV Stabilized Polypropylene C350 is Available with the Following Physical Specifications Per Roll [English Units (Metric Units)] Width Length Weight± 10% Area 6.50 ft (2 .00 m) 55 .50 ft (16.90 m) 37 .00 lbs (16.80 kg) 40 .00 yd2 (33.40 m2) Stitch Spacing for All Rolls = 1.50 inches (3.81 cm) Updated 1/2004 SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATION AM~ GREEN' C350 The composite turf reinforcement mat (C-TRM) shall be a machine-produced mat of 100% coconut fiber matrix incorporated into a permanent three-dimensional turf reinforcement matting . The matrix shall be stitch bonded between a super heavy duty UV stabilized bottom net with 0.50 x 0.50 inch (I .27 x 1.27 cm) openings , a ultra heavy duty UV stabilized , dramatically corrugated ( crimped) intermediate netting with 0 .50 x 0 .50 inch (1.27 x 1.27 cm) openings, and covered by a super heavy duty UV stabilized top net with 0.50 x 0.50 inch (1.27 x 1.27 cm) openings. The corrugated netting shall form prominent closely spaced ridges across the entire width of the mat. The three nettings shall be stitched together on 1.50 inch (3 .8 I cm) centers with UV stabilized polypropylene thread to form a permanent three-dimensional turf reinforcement matting . Typical 0.67 in (17 mm) 90% Property Thickness Resiliency Density Mass per Unit Area Porosity Test Method ASTMD6525 ASTMD1777 ASTMD792 ASTMD6566 0.528 oz/in3 (0.913 g/cm3) 12.57 yd2 (426 g/m2) 99% Stiffness Light Penetration MD Tensile Strength MD Elongation ECTC Guidelines ASTM Dl388/ECTC ECTC Guidelines ASTM D6818 [05035] ASTM D6818 [05035] ASTM D6818 [05035] ASTMD6818 [05035] 3.83 oz-in (42,710 mg-cm) 9.0% TD Tensile Strength TD Elongation C350 PERMANENT TURF REINFORCMENT MATTING ONLY 625 lbs/ft (9.12 kN/m) 22% 768 lbs/ft (11.21 kN/m) 15% Property Test Method Typical Thickness ASTM D6525 0.49 in (12.45 mm) UV Stability ASTM D4355* 86% MD Tensile Strength ASTM D5035 564 lb s/ft (8.23 kN/m) MD Elongation ASTM D5035 37% (658 lbs/ft (9 .60 kN/m)] [8.50%] (910 lbs/ft (13.28 kN/m)] [10.90%] TD Tensile Strength ASTM D5035 780 lbs/ft (11.38 kN/m) TD Elongation ASTM D5035 18% *ASTM D1682 (4 inch strip) Tensile Strength and % Strength Retention of material following 1000 hrs exposure in Xenon-Arc Weatherometer; MD -Machine direction ; TD -Transverse direction Bench Scale Testin2t Test Method -Descriotion Parameters Results ECTC Method 2 -Determination of 50 mm (2 in)/hr for 30 min Soil loss ratio*= 18 .32 unvegetated RECP's abi lity to protect soil 100 mm (4 in)/hr for 30 min Soil loss ratio*= 19.65 from rain sp lash and associated runoff 150 mm (6 in)/hr for 30 min Soil loss ratio* = 20.48 ECTC Method 3 -Determination of Shear: 4 .72 lbs/ft2 for 30 min Soil loss : 127g unvegetated RECP's ability to protect soil Shear: 5.74 lbs/ft2 for 30 min Soil loss : 195g from hydraulically-induced shear stress. Failure criteria= 0.50 inch soil loss Shear: 5.91 lbs/ft2 for 30 min Soil lo ss: 255g Shear at 0.50 inch soil loss (450g) 7.5 lbs/ft2 ECTC Draft Method 4 -Determination of temporary RECP performance in Top soi l; Fescue (Kentucky 31 ); 21 day Percent improvement = 243% enco uraging seed germination and plant incubation 27 ° C ± 2° & approximately (increased biomass) growth 50%RH * Soil Loss Ratio = Soil Loss with Bare Soil / Soil Loss with RECP (NOTE: Soil los s based on regression analysis) teench Scale Performance Testing Bench scale tests are index property tests . These tests are not indicative of field performance and therefore should not be used in design to establish performance levels for rolled erosion control products. Bench scale tests are performed according to methods developed by the Erosion Control Technology Council (ECTC). Updated 1/2004 ~orth American Green ECMDS Version 4.3 -Slope Protection Design, Output Form • '-,'~' ~:'!? ~ ___ .. Fie Input Mode Specfications Run Options ~ !ENGLISH . lusrn leERMANENT 131112009 loa:58 AM Country State/Region Cit,, Annual R Factor T,.otal Slope Length (ft) Protection Type Beginning Month Adiusted R Value Slope Gradient (H:1) Soil Type IC. Factor Soil Loss Tolerance (in) Reach Cum. Dist. Begin End (ft) (ft) 1 0 50 2 3 0 50 !color~ ! Ft. Collins J Permane_nt _ j Sandy Loam J0.19 ..:] Material Vegetation T11pe Growth Habit C350 Reinf. V Bunch Type 50 DensitJ ASL ASL bare mat (in) (in) <=50% 0.132 0.003 0.132 0.003 Not to Scale SLT (in) 0.03 SF 11.372 Remarks '*********************************************************************** ORTH AMERICAN GREEN EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS DESIGN SOFTWARE VERSION 4.3 .ORTH AMERICAN GREEN SLOPE PROTECTION -ENGLISH/S.I. JSER SPECIFIED -PERMANENT BACK-UP COMPUTATIONS *********************************************************************** )ROJECT NAME: KING SOOPERS OMPUTED BY : LOPE DESCRIPTION : WATER QUALITY BERM PROJECT NO .: DATE : 3/7/2009 ***** INPUT PARAMETERS***** ,lope Gradient: 3 :1 lope Degrees= tanA(-1) (1/3) = 18.43 degrees lope Length: 50 feet (15 .2 meters) ,oil Type: Sandy Loam -Factor: K= 0 .19 t*ac*h/l00*ac*ft*tonf*in (K= 0.03 t*ha*h/ha*MJ*mm) nnual R Factor: 30 l00ft*t*in/ac*hr*yr (511 MJ*mm/ha*h*y) for United States, Colorado, Ft. Collins )RECIPDIST = 100 REACH CUMULATIVE DISTANCE MATERIAL TYPE Density C NO. TO END OF REACH FACTOR 1 50 feet/15.2 meters C350 Reinf . Veg Bunch Type 0.020 LT = 0.03 inches (0 .08 centimeters) ~DJR = 30 * 100.0 / 100 =30 .0 l00ft*tonf*in/ac*hr*yr (510 .6 MJ*mm/ha*h*yr) -oil Loss Factor (SLF) = 1.46 inches (3 .72 cm) *****CALCULATIONS***** ~EACH NUMBER: ***1*** :UMHORZLl =50 * cos(18.4) = 47 .4 feet (14.5 meters) S 1 Factor= 3.89 umulative LS 1 Factor= 3.89 ~SLBARE 1 = .00595 * 30 * 0.19 * 3.89 -SLBARE 1 = .00595 * 30 * 0.19 * 1 .46 SLMAT 1 = 0.02 * 0.132 1SLMAT 1 = 0.02 * 0.193 ~F 1 = 0 .030 / 0 .003 =11 .372 =0.132 in (0.335 cm) *3.89 =0.193 in (0 .490 cm) =0.003 in (0 .007 =0 .004 in (0 .010 cm) cm) _OMPASLBARE 1 =0.132 * [( 50 -0) / 50] = 0 .132 in (0 .335 cm) TOTCOMPASLBARE = 0.132 in (0.335 cm) OMPASLMAT 1 =0.003 * [( 50 -0) / 50] TOTCOMPASLMAT = 0.003 in (0 .007 cm) = 0 .003 in (0.007 cm) ~or additional computation details, see the North American Green Users Manual nd the Natural Resource Conservation Service RUSLE Documentation . NORTH AMERICAN GREEN• MATERIAL SPECIFICATION C125BN The long-term coconut fiber erosion control blanket shall be a machine-produced 100% biodegradable blanket with a 100% coconut fiber matrix with a functional longevity of up to 24 months (NOTE: functional longevity may vary depending upon climatic conditions, soil, geographic location , and elevation). The blanket shall be of consistent thickness with the coconut fiber evenly distributed over the entire area of the blanket. The blanket shall be covered on the top and bottom sides with 100% biodegradable woven , natural , organic fiber netting . The top netting shall consist of machine directional strands formed from two intertwined yams with cross directional strands interwoven through the twisted machine strands ( commonly referred to as a Leno weave) to form an approximate 0 .50 x 1.00 inch (1.27 x 2 .54 cm) mesh. The blanket shall be sewn togeth er on 1.50 inch (3 .81 cm) centers (50 stitches per roll width) with biodegradable thread . The Cl25BN shall meet requirements established by the Erosion Control Technology Council (ECTC) Specification and the U .S. Department of Transportation , Federal Highway Administration 's (FHWA) Standard Sp ecifica tions For Constru ction of Roads and B r idges on Fed eral High way Projects, FP-03 20 03 Sec tio n 713.1 7 as a Typ e 4. Lo ng-term Erosion Control Blanket. The Cl25BN is also available upon request with the DOT System™. The DOT System™ consists of installation staple patterns clearly marked on the erosion control blanket with environmentally safe paint. The blanket shall be manufactured with a colored lin e or thread stitched along both outer edges (approximat ely 2-5 inches [5-12.5 cm] from the edge) to ensure proper material overlapping . The long-term erosion control blanket sh all be C125BN as manufactured by North American Green , or equivalent. The coconut fiber erosion control blanket shall have the following propertie s: Material Content Matrix Netting Thread 100% coconut fiber (0.50 lb /yd2) (0.27 kg /m2) Top -Leno woven 100% biodegradable organic jute fiber (9 .30 lbs/1 ,000 ft2 [4 .50 kg /100 m2) approximate weight) Bottom -100% biodegradable organic jute fiber (7 .7 lbs/1 ,000 ft2 [3 .76 kg /100 m2] approximate wei ght) Biodegradable C125BN is Available with the Following Physical Specifications Per Roll [English Units (Metric Units)] Width±5% Length± 5% Weight± 10% Area 6 .67 ft (2.03 m) 108 .00 ft (32.92 m) 52.22 lbs (23 .69 kg) 80.00 y d2 (66.89 m2) Stitch Spacing for All Rolls = 1.50 inches (3 .81 cm) Updated 1/2004 NORTH AMERICAN GREEN• SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATION C125BN The North American Green C125BN long-term erosion control blanket is constructed of 100% biodegradable materials containing a 100% coconut fiber matrix and has a functional longevity of up to 24 months . (NOTE: functional longevity may vary depending upon climatic conditions, soil , geographic location, and elevation). The coconut fiber shall be evenly distributed over the entire area of the blanket. The blanket shall be covered on the top and bottom with 100% biodegradable natural organic fiber netting woven into an approximate 0 .50 x 1.00 inch (1.27 x 2.54 cm) mesh. The blanket shall be sewn together with biodegradable thread on 1.50 inch (3.81 cm) centers . The following list contains further physical properties of the Cl25BN erosion control blanket. Property Thickness Test Method ASTM D5 l 99 /ECTC Resiliency ECTC Guidelines Mass per Unit Area ASTM D6475 Water Absorption ASTM D 1117 /ECTC Swell ECTC Guidelines Stiffness/Flexibility ASTM Dl388 /ECTC Light Penetration ECTC Guidelines Smolder Resistance ECTC Guidelines MD Tensile Strength ASTM D5035 MD Elongation ASTM D5035 TD Tensile Strength ASTM D5035 TD Elongation ASTM D5035 **Material is smolder resistant according to specified test MD -Machine Direc tion TD -Transverse Direction Bench Scale Testin2t Test Method -Description Typical 0.26 in (6 .60 mm) 85 % 8 .83 oz/yd2 (300 g/m2 ) 155 % 40% 0 .11 oz-in (1 ,218 mg-cm) 16.40% Yes** 342.00 lbs/ft (4 .98 kN/m) 7.60 % 211 .00 lbs/ft (3.08 kN/m) 11.10% Parameters Results ECTC Method 2 -Determination of 50 mm (2 in)/hr for 30 min Soil loss ratio * = 6 .83 unvegetated RECP's ability to 100 mm (4 in)/hr for 30 min Soil loss ratio* = 10.76 protect soil from rain splash and 150 mm (6 in)/hr for 30 min Soil loss ratio* = 16 .95 associated runoff ECTC Method 3 -Determination of Shear : 1 .40 lbs/ft2 for 30 min Soil loss : 370g unvegetated RECP 's ability to Shear: 2 .06 lbs/ft2 for 30 min Soil loss: 996g protect soil from hydraulically-Shear: 2.73 lbs /ft2 for 30 min Soil loss: 1578g induced shear stress. Failure criteria = 0.50 inch soil loss Shear at 0.50 inch soil loss (450g) 3.13 lbs/ft2 ECTC Draft Method 4 -Top soil; Fescue (Kentucky 31 ); Determination of temporary RECP Percent improvement = 401 % performance in encouraging seed 21 day incubation 27 ° C ± 2° & (increased biomass) germination and plant growth approximately 50% RH * Soil Loss Ratio = Soil Loss with Bare Soil / Soil Loss with RECP (NOTE : Soil loss based on regression analysis) tBench Scale Testing Bench scale tests are index property tests . These tests are not indicative of field performance and therefore should not be used in design to establish performance levels for rolled erosion control products . Bench scale tests are performed according to methods developed by the Erosion Control Technology Council (ECTC). Updated 1/2004 NORTH AMERICAN GREEN,. Material and Performance Specification Sheet North American Green 14649 Highway 41 North Evansville , IN 47725 800-772-2040 it FAX: 812-867-0247 www.nagreen .com A tensar. Comp any C1258N Erosion Control Blanket The long-term double net 100% biodegradable erosion control blanket shall be a machine-produced mat of 100% coconut fiber with a functional longevity of up to 24 months. (NOTE: functional longevity may vary depending upon climatic conditions, soil, geographical location , and elevation). The blanket shall be of consistent thickness with the coconut evenly distributed over the entire area of the mat. The blanket shall be covered on the top and bottom sides with 100% biodegradable woven , natural , organic fiber netting . The top netting shall consist of machine directional strands formed from two intertwined yarns with cross directional strands interwoven through the twisted machine strands (commonly referred to as a Leno weave) to form an approximate 0.50 x 1.00 (1 .27 x 2.54 cm) mesh. The blanket shall be sewn together on 1.50 inch (3.81 cm) centers with degradable thread . The C125BN shall meet requirements established by the Erosion Control Technology Council (ECTC) Specification and the US Department of Transportation , Federal Highway Administration 's (FHWA) Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects, FP-03 Section 713 .17 as a type 4 Long-term Erosion Control Blanket. The C125BN is also available with the DOT System™, which consists of installation staple patterns clearly marked on the erosion control blanket with environmentally safe paint. The blanket shall be manufactured with a colored thread stitched along both outer edges (approximately 2-5 inches [5-12 .5 cm] from the edge) as an overlap guide for adjacent mats . Material Content Matrix 100% Coconut Fiber 0.5 lbs/yd 2 (0 .27 kg/m 2) Nettings Top-Leno woven 100% biodeqradable orqanic jute fiber 9.3 lb/1000 ft2 ( 4.5 kq/100 m2) Bottom -100% biodeqradable orqanic iute fiber 7.7 lb/1000 ft2 ( 3.76 kg/100 m2) Thread Biodegradable C125BN is available in the following standard roll sizes: Width 6.67 ft (2 .03 m) Length 108 ft (32 .92 m) Weight± 10% 52 .22 lbs (23 .69 kg) Area 80 .0 yd 2 (66 .9 m2) Index Value Properties: Performance Design Values: Property Test Method Typical Thickness ASTM 06525 0.28 in (7 .11 mm) Resiliency ECTC Guidelines 85% Maximum Permissible Shear Stress Water Absorbencv ASTM 01117 365% Unveqetated Shear I 2.35 lbs/ft2 (112 Pa) Mass/Unit Area ASTM 6475 8.83 oz/yd 2 (300 g/m 2) Unveqetated Velocity I 10.00 ft/s (3.05 m/s) Swell ECTC Guidelines 40% Smolder Resistance ECTC Guidelines Yes Slope Design Data : C Factors Stiffness ASTM 01388 0.11 oz-in Slope Gradients (S Lioht Penetration ECTC Guidelines 17.7% Slope Lenqth (L) 5 3:1 3:1 -2:1 ~ 2:1 Tensile Strenqth -MD ASTM 06818 141 .6 lbs/ft (2 .1 kN/m l 5 20 ft (6 m) 0.0001 0.018 0.050 Elonqation -MD ASTM 06818 14% 20-50 ft 0.003 0.040 0.060 Tensile Strenqth -TD ASTM 06818 222 lbs/ft (3 .29 kN/m) ~ 50 ft (15 .2 ml 0.007 0.070 0.070 Elongation -TD ASTM 06818 14.3% Bench Scale Testinq* (NTPEP): Roughness Coefficients-Unveq. Test Method Parameters Results Flow Depth Mann ing 's n ECTC Method 2 50 mm (2 in)/h r for 30 min SLR**= 6.83 5 0.50 ft (0 .15 m) 0.022 Rainfall 100mm (4 in)/hr for 30 min SLR**= 10.76 150 mm (6 in)/hr for 30 min SLR**= 16.95 0.50 -2.0 ft 0.022-0.014 ~ 2.0 ft (0 .60 m) 0.014 ECTC Method 3 Shear at 0.50 inch soil loss 3.13 lbs/ft2 Shear Resistance ECTC Method 4 Top Soil , Fescue , 21 day 401 % improvement of Germination incubation biomass • Bench Scale tests should not be used for desian ourooses Product Participant of: " Soil Loss Ratio = Soil loss with Bare Soil/Soil Loss with RECP (soil loss is based on regression analysis) Updated 3/09 ..,~_,,...,,......_,=-,,..,-...,-.""E"'0<"'os""v"" .. ..,..,.=,..-,---------1en1/2CQ9 kxioa PM ki>MPuTED BY: liwe,Dwln fAOJECT N.AME: floith eaieoeM.wt.etNc.e J'ftOJECT HO. 32-1322 $LOPE DESCRiPTIOtt Counl1J jl.lnied States ..:.J s, .. .,.,.,... '""""" ii ""' '""""" ii SlapeG11CMri•ll ,., .... rnr..... JiJ lotllS ... l.Niglhlfl) ,~ .. ~---- P,otoctiool-,,_.., ii Pralec:.tir.PNOdla,rw61) I ... "----~ ,_ .. _ ,.... ii .......... v... '.,."",----- Slope GtNteftl (H:1) so1 ,_ I•'""''°"" l hclOf I0.1s Soillon l .,we (in) I0..25 Reach Cua. Did. ........ Vc~Mionf,l'fle Oen1it, ASL ASL MSL MSL SLT Sf R_._, ., .... 'i,li ... Gr~hHobit .... -.... -(It) (in) tin) linJ linl (in) 1 0 "' C1 2"'N ., .. Q001 .,,. 0002 025 ... ,.., STABLE C 2 J 0 ., Coepolit• ., .. QOOI Ve,gat-.iD~olsoil~aga p owiedbJvegel.~ C-COWWNllrillpdaNneetadcWf111dion of soilonol1q11otectedl ASL.bale-A.,..9 SdlonpolttCitl ol1q11cteaed rol (W'icnlnc:t.l) ASUNl .. ,,...1gitSoiLo11patwti.alwllNlerill~Olfflnct.f) MSLIMrMi4 ...... Soilonpotenlial onf6¥11oledtid tol(triomrdwtl MSLNt-M .... Sollor1 polenliilwtalleriallirior•.-.::hnl SLT•Sollcm T•anot lCl dopei~(ric.rd-ilt) sr.s.,..,rlC:lof ~ ....... a.o11ou:froatota1sk:c>e-vti(~idies) Designer's Guide: Temporary Erosion Control Blankets (ECBs) l Cover Tensile Strength Product Product Description Roll Dimensions Functional Suggested Factor Permissible Longevity I Applications Ranges* MDxTD** Shear Stress I S75 Single photodegradable 6.67 X 108 ft 12 months 0.029-115 x 94 lbs/ft net , 100 % straw matri x (2.03 X 32.92 m) 0.190 (1.68 x 1.37 kN/m) 1.55 lbs/ft2 ·-4:1 -3:1 Slopes (74 Pa) DS75 Single photodegradable 6.67 X 108 ft 2 months 1 0.029-115 X 94 lbs/ft net , 100 % straw matr ix (2.03 X 32.92 m) Low Flow 0.190 (1 .68 x 1 .37 kN/m) Channe ls S75BN Single biodegradable net , 6.67 X 108 ft 12 months 0 .029 -267 x 267 lbs/ft 1.60 lbs/ft2 E (BioNet ) 100 % straw matrix (2.03 X 32.92 m) \ 0.190 (3 .9 x 3.9 kN/m) (76 Pa ) ... Q) I-;-\ t::'. 0 Two photodegradable 6.67 X 108 ft 0.004-156 x 108 lbs/ft .s:: S150 12 months Cl) nets, 100 % straw matri x (2.03 X 32.92 m) I 0.180 (2.27 x 1.57 kN/m) ! 3:1 - 2 :1 Slopes 1. 75 lbs/ft 2 I (84 Pa) DS150 Two photodegradable 6.67 X 108 ft 2 months Moderate Flow I 0.004-156 X 108 lbs/ft nets , 100 % straw matri x (2 .03 X 32.92 m) Channels I 0.180 (2 .27 x 1.57 kN/m ) S150BN Two biodegradable nets , 6.67 X 108 ft 12 months I 0 .00014-323 x 238 lbs/ft 1.85 lbs/ft2 (BioNet) 100 % straw matr ix (2 .03 X 32 .92 m) 0 .100 (4 .71 x 3.47 kN/m) (88 Pa) E Two photodegradable 6.67 X 108 ft 0.001-205 x 152 lbs/ft 2.00 lbs/ft 2 ... SC150 nets, 70 % straw/ 30 % (2.03 X 32.92) 24 months 0.190 (3.0 x 2.22 kN/m) (96 Pa) Q) coconut fiber matrix 2 :1 -1:1 Slopes I-;- "'C Q) -.... I Medium Flow "'C Two biodegradable nets, C: SC150BN 6.67 X 108 ft Channels 0.00009 -281 x 205 lbs/ft 2 .10 lbs/ft2 Q) x (BioNet) 70 % straw / 30 % coconut (2 .03 X 32.92 m) 18 months 0.120 {4.10 x 3 .0 kN/m) (100 Pa) LU fiber matrix .,-I I i r I Two photodegradable 6.67 X 108 ft I 0.001-214 x 209 lbs/ft ! 2.25 lbs/ft2 i i C125 nets , 100 % coconut fiber 36 months 1 :1 & Greater I E ! (2 .03 X 32.92 m) 0 .110 ' (3 .12 x 305 kN/m) (108 Pa) <ii matri x i Slopes I-"QI) Two biodegradable nets , C: C125BN 6.67 X 108 ft High Flow 0 .00009 -342 x 211 lbs/ft 2.35 lbs/ft2 0 100 % coconut fiber 24 months _J (BioNet) (2.03 X 32.92 m) Channels 0.070 (4.98 x 3.08 kN/m) (112 Pa) matrix NOTE: This guide is for general reference purposes only. Actual product selection should be developed using North American Green's Erosion Control Materials Design Software (ECMDS®). * Cover factors are variable depending on slope steepness and length. Please consult ECMDS for speci f ic cover factor values. * * Tensile strength tests are performed according to ASTM D5035. MD = Machine Direction TD = Transverse Direction Max. Flow Velocity 5 .00 ft/s (1.52 m/s) 6 .00 ft/s (1.83 m/s) 8.00 ft/s (2.44 m/s) 10.00 ft/s (3.05 m/s ) Designer's Guide: Permanent Turf Reinforcement Mats (TRMs) I ---Permissible Shear Stress Tensile lbs/ft2 (Pascals) Product Product Roll Dimensions Mass/Unit ' Strength Suggested Permissible Velocity Description Area Applications Bare Soil Vegetated i MDxTD** 0.5 hrs 50 hrs 0 .5 hrs 50 hrs I ~ Three UV Stable 520 X 784 Slopes up to 1:1 & Unvegetated : Polypropylene 17.88 lbs/ft Greater 9.5 ft/s (2.9 m/s) SC250 Nets , 6.5 X 55 .50 ft 3.0 2.5 10.0 8.0 Vma x3 70 % Straw / 30 (2.00 X 16.91 m) oz/yd 2 (606 Medium to Flow Fully Vegetated : (144) (120) (478) (383) g.1m 2) (7 .59 X 11.44 % Coconut Fiber kN/m) High Flow 15 ft/s (4.6 m/s) Matrix Channels Three UV Stable 658 X 910 Slopes up to 1:1 & U nvegetated: Heavyweight Greater C350 Polypropy lene 6 .5 X 55.50 ft 12.57 lbs/ft 10.5 ft/s (3.2 m/s) 3.2 3.0 12.0 10.0 Vma x3 Nets, (2 .00 X 16.91 m) oz/yd 2 (426 High Flow (153) (144 ) (576) (478) g/m 2) (9.60 X 13 .28 Fully Vegetated : 100 % Coconut kN/m) Drainage 20 ft/s (6.0 m/s) Fiber Matrix Channels Three UV Stable Extra Heavy 1381x 1523 Slopes up to 1:1 & Un vegetated: P550 Weight 6.5 X 55.50 ft 21.5 oz/yd 2 lbs/ft Greate r 12.5 ft/s (3.8 m/s) 4.0 3 .25 14.0 12.0 Vmax3 Polypropylene (2 .00 X 16.91 m) (728 g/m 2) (191) (156) (672) (576) Nets, 100 % (20.15 X Extremely High Fully Vegetated : Polypropylene 22 .23 kN/m) Flow Channels 25 ft/s (7.6 m/s) Fiber Matrix Two UV Stable 379 X 403 Slopes up to 1 :1 Unvegetated: Polypropylene 6.67 X 108 ft 12 oz/yd 2 lbs/ft Extended 9.0 ft/s (2 . 7 m/s) 3.0 2.0 8.0 8.0 P300 Nets , 100 % Polypropylene (2.03 X 32.92 m) (407 g/m 2) (5.53 X 5.88 Overland Flow Fully Vegetated: (144) (96) (383) (383) Fiber Matrix kN/m ) Areas & High Flow 16 ft/s (4.9 m/s) 11 \\I l Channels LJ \_J~ LJ L LJ NOTE: This guide is for general reference purposes only. Actual product select ion should be developed using North American Green 's Erosion Contro l Materials Design Software (ECMDS®) * Cover factors are variable depending on slope steepness and length. Please consu lt ECMDS for specific cover factor values. ** Tens ile strength tests are performed according to ASTM D5035. MD= Machine Direction TD= Transverse Direction