The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDrainage Reports - 10/02/2002No Text ' October 26, 2001 Mr. Glen Schlueter, P.E. City of Fort Collins, Civil Engineer 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 IRE: Drainage Study for the Fort Collins VOA Elderly Housing Project JVA Job # 1084c Dear Glen: JVA has completed the design of the storm drainage system for the Fort Collins VOA Elderly Housing Project, located off West Horsetooth Road across from Seneca Street. The proposed site is located within Basin G as designated in the Foothills Basin Master Plan. The 1997 Foothills Master Drainage Plan Update and Westfield Park PUD Regional Detention Pond Analysis analyzed Basin G with a SWMM model, referencing the proposed site as the Burr Property, and determined a maximum 100-year release rate from the site of 1.5 cfs. JVA has designed the detention facility with enough ' volume for the 100-year release rate of 1.5 cfs with 1-foot freeboard as required by the City of Fort Collins. The site requirements for this restricted release rate have drastically increased the detention volume required and limited the area available for ' site development and usable landscaped areas. On behalf of the VOA, JVA requests a variance for the detention pond side slopes of 3:1 for this constricted site. ' Detention pond volume requirements and existing storm sewer elevations have made a storm sewer connection from the site to the developed West Horsetooth Road unobtainable. On behalf of the VOA, JVA requests that the developed West Horsetooth ' Road drainage, Sub -basin P as defined in this report, be allowed to continue in the drainage crosspan east past the VOA site to its historic swale. The VOA detention pond will provide excess storage for this offsite flow. ' The overflow from the Westfield Park detention pond is routed east across the VOA site. After crossing parking areas and Kunz Court, overflow runoff enters into the Brook Drive right-of-way, the historic overflow location for the Westfield Park Detention Pond. We have modeled overflow conveyance with the detention pond outlet pipe in a plugged condition. The western edge of the VOA site is the Pleasant Valley & Lake Canal Company. ' Presently, three laterals from this ditch cross the site heading eastward and feed properties located within the Skyline Acres Subdivision. Redesign and relocation of the laterals supplying irrigation water to the eastern properties has been coordinated with tboth the ditch company and the affected residents of Skyline Acres. The following Drainage and Erosion Control Report, and attached drainage map for the ' above referenced project, have been produced in accordance with the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards, and complies with JVA. Incorporated 1319 Spruce Street Boulder, CO 80302 Ph: 303.444.1951 Fax: 303.444.1957 JVA, Incorporated 4710 South College Ave. Suite 112 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Ph: 970.225.9099 Fax: 970.225.6923 Web site: www.jvajva.com E-mail: info®jvajva.com Principals Robert B. Hunnes David M. Houdeshell Thomas S. Soell Structural Engineering Christopher J. Chop Mark C. Cormier Lara Hirsch Michael R. Hope Nancy R. Hudson Ron L. Lindburg Natalie A. Mozer-Renn Oliver W. Rice Thomas P. Skinner Sarah E. Watts Charles B. Wilkerson Civil Engineering Kevin A. Tone Michael R. Kramer Office Manager Cindera L. Ward ' provisions thereof. It is our understanding that the information provided herein will be all that is required to complete your review of the drainage calculations for this project. ' If you have any questions regarding this submission, please give me a call. Very truly yours, ' JVA, ' vin A. Tone P.E. irector of Civil Engineering 1 cc: Robert A. Donahue - TSP Five Architects This report (plan) amending the 1997 Foothills Master Drainage Plan Update and Westfield Park PUD. Regional Detention Pond Analysis was prepared by me (or under my direct supervision) in accordance with the provisions of City Of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards, and was designed to comply with the provisions thereof. I understand that the City of Fort Collins does not and will not assume liability for drainage facilities designed by others. Drainage & Erosion Control Report Volunteers of America Elderly Housing Project in Fort Collins, Colorado JVA, Inc. Consulting Engineers 1319 Spruce Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 444-1951 fax (303) 444-1957 JVA Project No. 1084c October 26, 2001 CONTENTS DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL REPORT Contents•. Introduction..........................................................................................................1 HistoricDrainage.................................................................................................1 Proposed (Developed) Drainage....................................................................2 Irrigation Ditches and Laterals..........................................................................4 ErosionControl..............................................................:......................................4 Conclusions..........................................................................................................5 References........................................................................................................... 6 APPENDIX A Fort Collins VOA, Elderly Housing Project — Drainage & Erosion Control Report i DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL REPORT INTRODUCTION GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ' The Volunteers of America -(VOA) propose to construct affordable elderly multi- family housing units in the City of Fort Collins. Construction will include widening of Horsetooth Road, and a public street with a cul-de-sac providing access within the ' site, overlot grading for residential construction, parking lots, sidewalks, utility infrastructure work and a detention pond. The 8.69-acre parcel is located south of the intersection of West Horsetooth Road and Seneca Street. The property is bounded to the north by West Horsetooth Road, west and Westfield Park Subdivision, and east by Skyline Acres Subdivision. Zoning for the site is low density mixed use. The site slopes generally from west to east, and varies in elevation from 5103 to 5096 feet. Currently the site. is farmland with one house, several outbuildings, few trees and open pasture. PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed onsite development consists of eleven four and six -unit four and six - unit multi -family housing structures and a community center with dedicated City street access ending in a cul-de-sac. Site construction consists of parking lots, ' detached sidewalks, water and sewer mains, and a private storm sewer network including detention. In conjunction with site development, West Horsetooth Road will be widened incorporating a detached sidewalk as part of the design. Bike trail connections will be made to Richmond Drive to the east along the Brook Drive right- of-way and Mountain Ridge subdivision to the south and to the . Easements for the proposed public improvements will be granted as required by the City of Fort Collins. ' HISTORIC DRAINAGE Historic drainage is described in the "1997 Foothills Master Drainage Plan Update and Westfield Park PUD Regional Detention Pond Analysis"'(See Appendix B). The master plan update depicted the proposed site as the Burr property and incorporated it into the MODSWMM computer model, an updated version of the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District's Storm Water Management Model (UDSWM2PC). Due to constriction in the downstream storm sewer piping, this model determined that the 100-year release rate for the Burr property could not exceed 1.5 cubic feet per second (cfs). A storm sewer line was run east across the Burr property to connect the Westfield Park detention pond outlet to the Skyline Acres subdivision storm sewer Fort Collins VOA, Elderly Housing Project — Drainage & Erosion Control Report 1 ' system. This storm sewer provides adequate capacity for the maximum discharge of 1.5 cfs allowed for the Burr property. ' PROPOSED (DEVELOPED DRAINAGE ' DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA All proposed inlets have been designed to convey the initial 2-year storm event with ' the storm sewer system handling the majority of the 100-year event flows. The detention pond has been designed with sufficient storage volume to limit the 100-year release rate to 1.5 cfs as designated in the "1999 Final Report for Hydrologic Model Update for the Foothills Basin Master Drainage Plan" Z. The onsite drainage and storm sewer system has been designed according to the "City ' of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards."' The attached Developed Drainage Map shows the resulting drainage and storm sewer system, including sub -basin designations and design points. (For calculations, See ' Appendix A) BASINS AND SUB -BASINS ' The proposed site has been divided into a single major drainage basin as well as several sub -basins. Please refer to the Developed Drainage Map (see attached sheet C1.2). The major basin drains into the onsite detention pond. Sub -basin boundaries ' were established based on watershed tributary areas. Runoff from the site will flow overland across parking lots, via street gutters and grassed swales into the pond or into proposed storm sewers then to the onsite detention pond. Sub -basins A, B, and D each flow overland through grass across a parking lot to curb inlets. Flows from each of these inlets are routed into the storm sewer network ' connecting sub -basins C, E, F, G and H. Sub -basins C and G capture overland flows between the irrigation ditch top of bank and the graseds.area behind each building in area inlets. Piped flows from sub -basins ' D, E, and F enter the storm sewer network at design point 7, the collection point for sub basin G. Sub -basins E and F collect Kunz Court street flows in curb inlets and combine with flows from sub -basin D in the storm sewer system. Flows from sub -basins D, E, and F enter the storm sewer network at design point 7, the collection point for sub basin G. Sub -basins H captures overland flow from between the irrigation ditch top of bank and the grass areas behind each building in an area drain. Flows combine with piped flows from sub -basins A. B, C, D, E, F, and G at design point 8, where they are conveyed to the onsite detention pond at design point 15, the collection point for sub - basin O. Sub -basins I and K each flow overland through grass across a parking lot to curb inlets. Flows from each of these inlets are routed into the storm sewer network connecting sub -basins J, L, M and N. ' Fort Collins VOA; Elderly Housing Project — Drainage & Erosion Control Report 2 Sub -basins Q, R, S and T each convey flows offsite at less than historic release rates. Detention volumes have been increased to include flows conveyed offsite from these basins. Sub -basin U remains undeveloped and will convey flows offsite at historic release ' rates. Sub -basins J, L, M and N collect Kunz Court street flows in curb inlets. Drainage from these sub —basins combine with flows from sub -basins K and I in the storm ' sewer system. Flows from these sub -basins are conveyed to the onsite detention pond at design point 15, the collection point for sub -basin O. 1 Sub -basin P conveys the developed West Horsetooth Road drainage to its historic outfall location at the roadside ditch to the south. A variance has been requested to allow these flows to continue offsite undetained. Excess detention for the flows released offsite will be provided. ' The Brook Drive Right -of -Way was identified as an emergency drainage overflow conveyance path for the Westfield Park subdivision located west of the proposed project across the Pleasant Valley ditch. The designed conveyance path for Brook ' Drive has a maximum calculated carrying capacity of 31.50 cfs at a flow depth of 0.5 feet (See Appendix A). The overflow spillway release rate for Westfield Park of 21.1 cfs for the plugged outlet condition was obtained from the existing stage -storage ' rating curve for the Westfield Park Detention Pond (See Appendix B). This overflow rate was then added to the overflow release rate for the both the Westfield Park VOA site under plugged conditions to obtain a maximum overflow spillway release rate of ' 25.54 cfs. (See Appendix A) This overflow rate was then modeled through Brook Drive; the required depth of flow to convey this overflow through Brook Drive was determined to 0.46 feet. The curb depth for the Brook Drive has been designed at 0.5 ' feet. The maximum discharge of the street system was calculated to be 31.50 cfs without overtopping the curb. HYDROLOGIC METHOD AND DESIGN STORM FREQUENCIES ■ The Rational Method (Q=CfCIA) was computed to determine the storm runoff (Q) from this site, storm frequency adjustment factor (Cf), composite runoff coefficients ' (C) and contributing areas (A) for given design points in sub -basins can be seen in Appendix A. The 2-year runoff coefficients were computed using a storm frequency adjustment factor of 1.0. The 2-year weighted runoff coefficient values for each sub - basin were modified using the frequency adjustment factor of 1.25 to determine the 100-year runoff coefficients. Intensities (1) were calculated for the initial storm event at 2-year and 100-year intervals for all sub -basins, using the Rainfall Intensity ' Duration Frequency Table (Figure 3-la of the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards; see Appendix A). Sub -basin post development Time of Concentration calculations for the 2-year and 100-year events ' were weighted by applying Cf to the time of concentration calculations. Corresponding rainfall intensities, composite runoff coefficients, and storm flows for ' the 2-year and 100-year storms for each sub -basin are provided in the Appendix. ' Fort Collins VOA, Elderly Housing Project — Drainage & Erosion Control Report 3 Routed storm flows through each sub -basin using the Rational Method procedure, are also provided in the Appendix. ' Pipe sizing, flow capacities and velocities were estimated using computer program, Flowmaster v5.0, by Haestad Methods, Inc. ' RUNOFF AND DETENTION Runoff rates for the various design points have been shown on the included ' Developed Drainage Map. Calculations showing how the runoff rates were determined are shown in the Rational Method procedure (See Appendix). The onsite detention pond volume of 1.08 acre-ft (46,900 cubic feet) and release rate of 1.5 cfs ' was calculated using the FAA method of detention pond sizing (See Appendix A). At these volumes, the required one -foot freeboard has been provided. Proposed flows from this pond are in conformance with the "1999 Final Report for Hydrologic Model ' Update for the Foothills Basin Master Drainage Plan" STREETS, OPEN CHANNEL FLOW, AND CULVERTS ' No street flows are anticipated to enter the site from the drainage on West Horsetooth Road with the installation of an intersection crosspan. Runoff from the site will flow ' overland across parking lots, via street gutters or grassed swales to the pond or into proposed storm sewers then to the onsite detention pond. IRRIGATION DITCHES AND LATERALS To the west of the proposed site is an irrigation ditch owned by the Pleasant Valley & Lake Canal Company. Three headgates control flows heading east to the Skyline Acres Subdivision via shallow open ditch laterals. Redesign and relocation of these laterals has been coordinated with the ditch company and has received approval from the homeowners of Skyline Acres. The northern lateral will be relocated into a closed concrete channel adjacent to the West Horsetooth Road right-of-way. The irrigation lateral crossing the middle of the site will be redesigned to be a partially covered open concrete channel, and the lateral to the south will not be disturbed. All properties currently served by the three laterals will continue to be served by the redesigned lateral system. EROSION CONTROL ' All erosion control features will be established prior to onsite construction and overlot grading. Erosion control measures, proposed and existing, will be maintained until the completion of the project, and until vegetation is established. The site is considered to have moderate erosion properties as defined in the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards. Wind erosion is naturally minimized by an irrigation canal berm that is an average of four feet above ' the proposed site grades. Construction will begin with implementation of all erosion control devices specified on the erosion control plan and the Stormwater Management Report located herein. Vehicle tracking control will be used at the site construction entrance off West Horsetooth Road and silt fence will be installed according to plans. Fort Collins VOA, Elderly Housing Project — Drainage & Erosion Control Report 4 The detention pond and storm sewer network will be constructed during overlot grading to settle out sedimentation prior to leaving the site. Erosion control for the ' storm sewer system, including straw bale inlet protection and channel protection BMP's to minimize velocities in swales and further minimize erosion, are indicated on the construction plans. Non-structural erosion controls including project schedule, ' and other pollution prevention measures are specified in the Erosion Control Plan. (See attached sheet C 1.3). ' All flared end section outlet will be protected from erosion with riprap. The Westfield Park detention pond overflow spillway will be protected from erosion with grouted riprap (see Appendix A for calculations). The overflow' spillways for Westfield Park and VOA will be soil reinforced with erosion control matting. Calculations for slope stability and erosion control were completed using North American Green erosion control design software. Output from this program details the type.of erosion matting and it's effectiveness in erosion control. Calculation for performance standards and effectiveness of erosion control can be found in Appendix A. ' The stormwater management plan will be included in the Erosion Control Plan and detail sheets within the bid document package for the site construction with all ' structural BMP's shown as required (See attached Erosion Control Plan). CONCLUSIONS ' All developed conditions at the proposed site will be directed to the onsite detention pond, the sub -basin to the south will remain in historic condition and runoff from the parcel will not be detained. Flows from West Horsetooth Road will continue downstream undetained to the storm sewer ' system at Shields Street and West Horsetooth Road without detention. Developed conditions and release are in ' conformance with the current master plan. Calculations and other reference materials used are attached in Appendix A. Excerpts from the master drainage plan reports are included in Appendix B and have been incorporated into the calculations in Appendix ' A. The referenced Developed Drainage Map depicts the drainage design points and configuration of the proposed storm drainage system. The recommendations of this report are in conformance with all applicable storm drainage regulations and criteria ' of the City of Fort Collins. Fort Collins VOA, Elderly Housing Project — Drainage & Erosion Control Report 5 REFERENCES ' 1. "1997 Foothills Master Drainage Plan Update and Westfield Park P.U.D. Regional Detention Pond Analysis", Fort Collins, Colorado, Faucett Engineering Services, December 1997. t2. "Final Report for Hydrologic Model Update for the Foothills Basin Master Drainage Plan", Fort Collins, Colorado, Anderson Engineering, revised December 1, 1999. 3. "City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards", City of Fort Collins, Revised April 12, 1999. 1 ' Fort Collins VOA, Elderly Housing Project — Drainage & Erosion Control Report 6 APPENDIX A VICINITY MAP n 0 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO LARIMER COUNTY (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) COMMUNITY -PANEL NUMBER 080102 0011 C MAP REVISED: MARCH 18, 1996 Federal Emergency Management Agency Spring Creek NE AE Larimer County AREA NOT INCLUDED e a 00 0 w WEST vrivare urive L STREET HULL ST ROAD 0-se CT SITE T( ag 63 N f+ C N C V O Y� O O = U v L O E N O o W NS rr O m) c � w O > 0 N Q E V O /O Ci U p aU�` 4) {L a O E H `y d O N O N n Y p O > QH V U04 YO ,W In ON)) I coO O O m Q m m i7 n m c m V m OQ c > > p m m m o J d. a K E E o�OMrMo'�?ciclU rN' y C •" t�NOjOIL N 0w �Oi ricON O 0M0 + Y L � E n]OO) 01.-at�� (O lO fp N rOf7M MI0 aDrN U O O O C N O O O O O N 0 0 0 0 N 'Y C y .0. W CO W 0 NMO M 10r OMQ) V 00 O r N 0) n 000, N N N r N N N M N N j m N J 'O O U 11 O. O C N �NMr M4M ry RED ?Mcq co E 6 r.: oo C 1N �10f w Oi�M V (C fOr ��NQ1�N CO) + co-ro----... .. to M r...o Cl) E CV CV O�*O1� O O i x N 0) 0) M Lq E o r ; N N N �� Ci 6� zzf m o0 rnm o0000 00 )n0000 m J «I ' t C no r co O n N M M m J r^ C C N N M O f0 M M r a O V V V O ? m 00 m K E 66oi W 76l6 666 6�N m (0 ES F J m O O O O O O 10 O O O O O O O O O O a 0 0 0 0 C o M100tDOON t070100N0(O V 0010100 m O r €L m m w 100ON N�n �MMf00a ��a fODm t� NN it .F v me n rn °a m m a )0 )0 M (000)000 M r MO)0 0N)0100t O rC;c;66ciMr6 OU CVi O N cic;o 0M(OMN r r U r W O O O C G C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 II LL >. C N U of U oU 10 rcf O) 010 CO0M R NO Of 0 OOM M M Q (7 V R f O 7 7 O N N M 7 N r 7 7 O 7 7 "U Q U M U) M LON(0 NMN�O ON )0 Q O O O O O O O O O O 0 6 6 6 6 O O 0 0 000 0 0ca ca C 'c O •m CO N rf010 (010t0a0(ONMN r r (D @°EE1 fi^ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C d •N pp m vv)nvrm)noMMmmMrnrrnomNMv c W C O �NM V 10w r CO 0)0 � C 0(0 f-OD00M ma N o C_ C 13'�-¢mUowaf7x-�YJgZOaC,7�cn�� m � ca N ,4 C t) C to tj= :r+ R 0 �0 t = V L 0 U a . Q W W 0 U C w` C U N Q C E O 0 V C (.) V- v p 0 Q o LE � r 0 d o Y Q�Q o U-UYO C E u OO�OOv 0 oo W cl0OLQON N J' IL •C� h�O^ �1n 1n�aD�NN��0�)O W Lm W W o0� W �sf W IO W NnOmmm)O W n N 0 O O C (V �� 0 0 0 0' O0 0 0 � .Y N W ^ W mONm V1n a W W m1O 0) F N � � N 7 J U + �cjNNNc6 16 NRR IOm oW N H U C_ W W N m n O q E N N O C O W x N. U O a N N N N E g j �� m oe rn0 00000 oo In0000 oo J c v)o ,ono WBo v J "� E N�N th fV W.-N N 17 f77�� 6 V t0 N N (n v ES J rrll N o 0 0 0 0 0 )O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o W O o 0 C Y O e m LL) O f 0 0 0 N W 7 O N O I O O W O 0 0 l O I O O t O O L y :E E mT N y N W n m O N m O O O W 0 O m 10 �� IlIN�n�Om W W (D W O�0) N II s n J D O^ U a m T 0 7 O N O N n W o m m W W o l O W N t O n n d 0t X x N IL 0 o A 0 0 v o W n W m 0 n W W n CO m n V m 0 W �oooc00000000000000 0 a N 00U UU U O W U p j )O)Om W 00o mmou>.-o W o It W nI W W n m W l O 7 m n W co co W W m <O m N n n (V U O O O O O O O O O O G G C G O O O C O O U ? Inn 7 oIO IO m IO W 7 N0)01 M 00 0 f777 Q m.-m CO , ,ONNm—Nn, �O Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C G O Q Q U) W IO N W N m N co O N IO 8 U [[8� Lo � O O O O 000,00 0 O 000 000 GG GG C O C C 0 _ O Q ° O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Vl m V 7) O 7 n 0) O O m m W W m o n 0 0 o N m It aO O N O m -: 0 0 0 0 7 0 o N 0 0 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c c ' .y p�-Nm71OWn co 0) o—^- O^ W W 0 0 ^� a — - N N O C C ca'0 QmUO W LL(�2—�YJ�ZQd(7�(nH lq Co 0 1 1 • A •Ill�l��llllllllllllllllllll �116111�;� �8 :11��1�111111��11111111111111111111 ��Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 111111111111111111111111111111111111 �811111�111111111illllllllllllilinl �IBB�111111911�1111111111111111111111 . �11IIL��IIIIIIIAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �811111111nllnlllllll�llnn1111111 �Illlllllnllllllllllllllllllllllllll �1.11111111..111 �•11111 :111:111�11111 �a�onulnnunnnnllllnwnu •, �1 �1�1111: �IIIIII � 1. � :111�111 . . . �1111.:.1111 :111111111111��1. ; - �O •• =111�1111,.1 . i1111111�18111111111', �C:11.�111��11:111111191"11111111111' 'llllllllll�llnl. �0611116�16 • 111.j1 - 00110111. IIOIIII1111111ei111I111111. �ooe01011110eeelllllillll�f lOnlllllll �0161�C11�1 t.11111111111111C�1111111 ,1 �01�11IIIIIEIII@I�11111111A111111111 lO��II�IL�11101l�EII0111IIIu1A14111E111. Q Z 0 W 0 Z �cn �C) J � W N a. Wcn ~ lJ T } C CD W M�M Z Uc �-o U� �LL 0 2 cc J Q U a. No Text C m m m m m m m m m m m m m o- U (.) U :. U U U U U U U U U 'C 'L 'C 'C C 'C 3 U U U C.) U U U U a a a a a a a a a a a a a o > > a > > > > > > > > > > O N O O M M O N M 'M O 0 0 m(,yON�hO� N O OO M U7 M C 0 0 0 0 0 My 0 0 O'O O O O O O O O O O O W W O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O m 0 0 0 0 �- 0 0 0 0 6666 (O v 0 0 0 0 21 w as.v mMmm(om(omm Lam- 000?oo(oo(0000 0CD00 N 7 V V 7 N V V V V N V N V V v 0 � E O O m W y E 10 a) 0)m N� to m m(o 0) Co m m O) M O M M M L M co M m c0 M M ao M N V N N N d a) L V m W h CO N m m O m 1, N O O 7 E O N M Q7 M O m O M ao W 0> O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O LL- Z U m 45) mmOmhN MN00o �(O It O (O V O a7 M M M M a c o o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 U W 10 U .- M y O N m N N CO t` CO O B _ e- 7 V7 7 7'. N N O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'y MmMM O M M(Om v m OO (O O O M O 1-- n M LO N N N M M M M M M N N N N M M a) yo Orr-m m)n Ov�MN(O Cl) 1: O (M m m O Co fh N c0 t\ 14, y m M y Cl) M 'a' M coN N N Cl) V a LL coo CDmNcommMvv(ococo Un d M V V M V O CO CO N N N V O O U � o0000000000000 a) I O N M M N (O N M O O O ao M "T q N CO co L .L U co v )� O W N N co V U N v O O N V' �F O O o OC O O O N O O O O N O N O 0 0 O. m(o.-e} Nn.-awwN O N N O O Q" m V; O ('7 O O N V C 000 O O.- � 0000 00 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v IT v O O v v v v v v v v v 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o O o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 m co M M MMM M .- co co M co Co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c U 00 00 0 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 0 a) (-�° a a aU(Laaa0a0aIa. a a d U U U> U U U U> U> U U U n is wwwn.w�wwn.wa��0� 0) C C) N N CO v j .- O O. N(o v 0(oh 0 cN a) J N N N N N N N N a N N N N N N 'a C6 m E E •� co .V O 2� L. W W G� O COaO N E .= O O co U L O L E 3 O U. LO co co a) Y 0 U UQQ o Y O T N O Z U N n a) O T r cc �co00 0) a a) N a7 a) 70 Fo N a) c6 70 76 O7 m O U U U U U U U U U U U U U U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o n a n a a a a a a a a a LL 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 (n (O cn (n cn (n In (O (O (n 0 V) V) In O N N LO (O N N N N M N N N (D 'D ccO- a) (D (D M r� N ww O N N ,It to (O (O v It N It It -Kt 0 tt 0 0 00 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) 0 0 0 0 0 LL O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0* a) ^ m w ) O m m N r M 0) m (D m (0 0) Q) a)M r O O O O (O M O O (D O O o 0 0 N V' v v v N v N v v v O LL E a) 7 E (`6 y. 0) 0) 0) N .- (D 0) 0) (D 0) to 0) 0) 0) L w M M coM m co co cD M M co v M v v v v N v N v v v co N `U' CD ` 'O m M co c0 M (O O M co It It co OD 00 OD 7 E r- v, v, ti(n v, vv M cD OD 'It vv E 7 O O p 0 06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LLZ U OT) U 1� I- 'a N 1-- h NCC) (D I-- I-- n M M V v M M (� O M M M aC M W Cc 0 Cc N 0) I- v 0) r- a) N N N N. N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r m I- r M n h r a)aO) m M M' M co M M M M M M co a) o m co (D (O W ao O co ao N M (D w (D 2— O N N 6 M N N N O v N N N LL LL cc� LO�LOto0,��to a r-00�� CO00CDL,to 0000co C" o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 U a) cornrn0o0)cornrnco(DrnrnO)a) L�^ V v m (M O co M '7 0 0) co co co L) co v v CS 'It v v v N ... C (O (O (O N (O (O (O (O N (O N tO (O iO L 0) (D (D 0 0 r a) O M M v w (D 0 a OD OD a (O (0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 a r'TV0tov'It vvvv'IT v'IT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rn CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CoU 06000000 000666 `tea LLLL LL Q. a n. n. d LL LL (L a n.LL a cu U U U U U U U U U U U U U U O) N N co v j C 7 a0 7 p N M r� (O (D r- e- r- 0 i i i Oi 1 N A V LL7 O r � ' O � N M v 0 O T >. T T T T T T L a) J O O O O O O O C) O T T T j� O O O O a O O O O O O O p e o 0 0 0 o "a p co City of Fort Collins ' Rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency Table for using the Rational Method (5 minutes - 30 minutes) Figure 3-1a Duration (minutes) 2-year Intensity in/hr 10-year Intensity in/hr 100-year Intensity in/hr 5.00 2.85 4.87 9.95 6.00 2.67 4.56 9.31 7.00 2.52 4.31 8.80 8.00 2.40- 4.10 8.38 9.00 2.30 3.93 8.03 10.00 2.21- 3.78 7.72 11.00 2.1 a. 3.63 7.42 12.00 2.05 3.50 7.16 13.00 1.98 3.39 6.92 14.00 1.92 3.29 6.71 15.00 1.87 3.19 6.52 16.00 1.81 3.08 6.30 17.00 1.75 2.99 6.10 18.00 1.70 2.90 5.92 19.00 1.65 2.82 5.75 20.00 1.61 2.74 5.60 21.00 1.56 2.67 5.46 22.00 1.53 2.61 5.32 23.00 1.49 2.55 5.20 24.00 1.46 2.49 5.09 25.00 1.43 2.44 4.98 26.00 1.40 2.39 4.87 27.00 1.37 2.34 4.78 28.00 1.34 2.29 4.69 29.00 1.32 2.25 4.60��j 30.00 1.30 2.21 4.52 TRAVEL TIME VELOCITY FOR RATIONAL- METHOD 50 l 30 I 1— 2 0 z w U cr a 10 z INS NINE Among a O NONNI 5 w cr 3 D O CU Cc 2 F 3 1 MEMO son .51 .1 .2 .3 .5 1 2 3 5 10 20 VELOCITY IN FEET PER SECOND I WRC ENG. REFERENCE: "Urban Hydrology For Small Watersheds" Te hnical Release No. 55. USDA, SCS Jan. 1975. I r —644— 0.8 0.7 w 0.6 EXAMPLE 2 0.5 Cr w > 0.4 0 a 0.3 w C7 Z 0.2 0 Z O a 0.1 8 0.0 1 I I I Ii I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I i l l l, l l l l l l l. I - - i 1 1 1 1- „ 1 0 1 2 3 4 FLOW INTO INLET PER SO. FT. OF OPEN AREA (CFS/FT2) Figure 5-3 CAPACITY OF GRATED INLET IN SUMP (From: Wright -McLaughlin Engineers, 1969) 5 MAY 1984 5-11 DESIGN CRITERIA 0000 7000 6000 5000 4p00 I [, r — tov.ncr: a • o.a•(A) s'b n Is •IO•.I.CIS OactnaEMr Ir ......• 1 .10 r0•rrL. A•..Oa4Arr ro rU[•,.L u IOrroM or CMa*" t IS .ECIP"Cµ 0/ Ca"S SLOP[ .08 .[tE•au . • I ••octto- s .«a. .07 M/[ ISO. Eo tw Pal .06 2.0 1.0 .60 .70 EXAMPLE tSEt oas.co v.Est a • t• a/n • .too N TO so ~ .05 .04 .50 LL n o • t.• Cn -- 03 .40 Z ----_-- __`� Z _ 1000 �� a Z .30 900 r I , —__ .02 T C 600 700 - C� = 3S11-- _ r1 CY -- ru 600 •DIy .-. S00 = .20 r O -400 W Z INSTRUCTIONS ar3oo GT W ..ol ,. co.•tct tin •41.0 a Q. .Ir, $.o.( Is. Q .O7 Z ..a co.•CCI CIS, .A•c[ to) PIMP = O3 Z -008 200 OErr. vI T-tsa TWO LIOts .usr V'/^� .Ox �''-AA-• I.ir.ttcr at 1.0.4 ".[ .0. VI Z .007 VI .10 CO.•L[,C fOLY MO• Q .01 V .006 W a. ' W .08 t. POO S"ALSO. F 100 ..,"...0 C.A..aL u- .005 W 07 90 O o so .s S.C.. use wrcc•..•. t ' .004 .06 70 W Cr 60 CL O .05 50 s TO ot,E•.T.E �• O .003 cc 4p aac..•cc o, 04 00.1.0. or C..." Oc,ta...t at-,. , Ica *or.L OISE... GE I• .002 t.T..t sacr.n• a T"t• USE .Oroc•AP" To .03 ,20 /t tt•r•.[ O, �. St CT.u. . te. ot•,. Q • • to otrt•rLt Onc".•cc �r f" • •. Co.nO/ni "C,w. - I . rOLLo• I.traucr.o. S i i• Q. W .02 10 (• to COT... o•SC..•c[ I..001 Q SWIG" . at ASSUMED • t,u-i i 0101" , p GOT.w o ram From BPR [LOPE ..T.O t, ..0 OCIT. , ,.C. a,. Q. . o Figure 4-1 t- .01 NONOGRAPH FOR FLOW IN TRIANGULAR GUTTERS (From U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads, 1965) MAY 1984 4-3 DESIGN CRITERIA Cross Section A @ 6.06 CFS Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheel Cross Section. Flow Element Irregular Cham Method Manning's Fort Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Slope 020000 ft/ft Discharge 6.06 cfs Options Current Roughness Methoved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting wed Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficie( 0.030 Water Surface Elev 100.97 It Elevation Range ).60 to 101.75 Flow Area 2.7 ft' Wetted Perimeter 14.67 ft Top Width 14.65 ft Actual Depth 0.37 ft Critical Elevation 100.96 ft Critical Slope 0.023357 ft/ft Velocity 2.26 ft/s Velocity Head 0.08 It Specific Energy 101.05 ft Froude Number 0.93 Flow Type Subcritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+55 0.030 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+00 101.75 0+32 101.00 0+41 100.60 0+48 101.00 0+55 101.70 Notes: Cross Section A with 100 year flows at design point 3 of 6.06 cfs assuming plugged system Project Engineer. Kevin Tone j:\1084c\flowmaster\cross sections.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e] 10/05/01 08,17:30 AM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section A Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Cross Section. Flow Element Irregular Chant Method Manning's Fort Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.030 Slope 0.020000 ft/ft Water Surface Elev 100.97 It Elevation Range ).60 to 101.75 Discharge 6.06 cfs 101.80 100.40 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 0+55 VAN HA N TS Project Engineer. Kevin Tone j:\1084c\flowmaster\cross sections.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e) 10/05/01 08:16:42 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section B @ 6.06 cfs Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description ' Worksheet Cross Section Flow Element Irregular Chan Method Manning's Fon ' Solve For Channel Depth Input Data ' Slope 020000 ftlft Discharg4 6.06 cfs ' Options Current Roughness Meth<wed Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting wed Lotter's Method ' Closed Channel Weightint Horton's Method Results ' Mannings Coefficiei 0.030 Water Surface Elev 100.11 ft Elevation Range .70 to 101.00 Flow Area 2.6 ft' ' Wetted Perimeter 13.84 ft Top Width 13.80 ft Actual Depth 0.41 ft Critical Elevation 100.10 ft ' Critical Slope 0.023072 ft/ft Velocity 2.31 ft/s Velocity Head 0,08 It Specific Energy 100.19 ft Froude Number 0.93 Flow Type Subcritical ' Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient ' 0+34 0+52 0.030 ' Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) ' 0+34 100.15 0+40 100.00 0+45 99.70 0+49 100,00 0+52 101.00 Notes: Cross Section B with 100 year flows ' at design point 3 of 6.06 efs assuming plugges system Project Engineer: Kevin Tone ' j:\1084c\8owmaster\cross sections.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e] 10/05/01 08:25:38 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section B Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Cross Section Flow Element Irregular Cham Method Manning's Fon Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.030 Slope 0.020000 ft/ft Water Surface Elev 100.11 It Elevation Range .70 to 101.00 Discharge 6.06 cfs 101.00 100.2011 99.60 0+34 0+36 0+38 0+40 0+42 0+44 0+46 0+48 0+50 U+0L V:1 N H:1 NTS Project Engineer: Kevin Tone j:\1084cVlowmaster\cross sections.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e) 10/05/01 08:18:10 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section C @ 6.06 cfs Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Cross Section Flow Element Irregular Chani Method Manning's Fort Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Slope 020000 ft/ft Discharge 6.06 cfs Options Current Roughness Methoved Lotters Method Open Channel Weighting wed Lotters Method Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficiel 0.030 Water Surface Elev 98.80 It Elevation Range .50 to 100.00 Flow Area 3.1 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 20.32 It Top Width 20.31 ft Actual Depth 0.30 ft Critical Elevation 98.79 It Critical Slope 0.025019 ft/ft Velocity 1.98 ft/s Velocity Head 0.06 ft Specific Energy 98.86 ft Froude Number 0.90 Flow Type Subcritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+46 0.030 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+00 99.10 0+14 98.85 0+32 98.50 0+40 99.00 0+46 100.00 Notes: Cross Section C with 100 year flows at design point 3 of 6.06 cfs assuming plugged system Project Engineer: Kevin Tone j:\1084c\flowmaster\cross sections.fm2 JVA Inc - FlowMaster v6.0 [614e] 10/05/01 08:24:59 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section C Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Cross Section Flow Element Irregular Cham Method Manning's Fon Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.030 Slope 0.020000 fUft Water Surface Elev 98.80 ft Elevation Range .50 to 100.00 Discharge 6.06 cfs 100.00 98.40 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 VA HA N TS Project Engineer: Kevin Tone j:\1084c\flowmaster\cross sections.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e] 10/05/01 08:25:09 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section D @ 18.87 cfs Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Cross Section Flow Element Irregular Chani Method Manning's Fon Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Slope 020000 ft/ft Discharge 18.87 cfs Options Current Roughness Methoved Lotters Method Open Channel Weighting wed Lotters Method Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficiei 0.030 Water Surface Elev 99.69 ft Elevation Range .04 to 100.05 Flow Area 5.7 ft' Wetted Perimeter 17.68 ft Top Width 17.63 ft Actual Depth 0.65 ft Critical Elevation 99.69 ft Critical Slope 0.019102 f tft Velocity 3.30 ft/s Velocity Head 0.17 ft Specific Energy 99.86 It Froude Number 1.02 Flow Type Supercritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+39 0.030 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+00 100.05 0+09 99.97 0+14 99.92 0+26 99.04 0+39 100.00 . Notes: Cross Section C with 100 year flows at design point 7 of 18.87 cfs assuming pluged system Project Engineer: Kevin Tone ' j:\1084c\flowmaster\cross sections.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e) 10/05/01 08:26:53 AM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section D Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Cross Section Flow Element Irregular Cham Method Manning's Fort Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.030 Slope 0.020000 ft/ft Water Surface Elev 99.69 ft Elevation Range .04 to 100.05 Discharge 18.87 cfs 100.20 99.00 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 VAN HA N TS Project Engineer: Kevin Tone j:\1084c\nowmaster\cross sections.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e] 10/05/O1 08:27:21 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 ❑ JVA, Incorporated 1319 Spruce Street Boulder, CO 80302 Ph: 303.444.1951 Fax: 303.444.1957 9Ro6K t72 vE-�L�uar �• 1, 1 ❑ JVA, Incorporated 4710 South College Ave. Suite 112 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Ph: 970.225.9099 Fax: 970.225.6923 Date: By: Job No: Project: Client: ❑ Preliminary Page: of Chkd. By: I,JE> -. OJ�iLr�ca.!...� C.�L1�< CEXISTIAIG DESIGN) RPPE"n1-b/y i3 102� NTH( L _ `':i'DrcA(.7 - 111lcw(?IE41C 'IZ 1'1)(, O.:!c.`.; E.L-LUA.7,,,% �".f i- ` 'FIDE Or W�L;�R_ L`I"_{�I�iKGI. GF s ') S'bV-AtrC VoL- Ac- F Soq(I O o a 5 C)9 0 U t. S 501? G G 3.7 rtDo O O Iu.Z` :1vI 0 0 1LI,4C) lo1.i 0 O 1"1.5Z s, oz.2 0 0 19•�9 �tpz 0 al.I aa.CI 4' AsSuHi(Je- •PI-uGCaL� Coexc,^otr o VOA ELDEZLY 1100 SIA-)(n USIrJ� FAA NG-TpoI- WlTrl rPLIAtb:D OV7t.ET Corup1•7701-) 7"C 011 o2RE5?or�flin�(r -rD VOA l7, F:7 rr1-i 0 oA) ( IOU - r + C E o f� D yPa oILA(E. ✓ot_uM1; Wf> tS y.yq CFS ( SEt FAA pe rp.vr), S�R,tPCJe wz kT )/of CV&-XF'Low 5Pn 1 LoT / iZ -LL--nsc IkAre) F- I�l�,r=!gin OVEV-r-Low a- VOA Ouerzl=Lhw T67AL t31/e-'ZrLU'v -Tbl� fAL(,Wkkr FoM eXooK -a1ZIyr ❑ Final iP'.2S.5I CFS Volunteers of America Overflow Spillway Release Rate Job No C1084 _ By: Checked by: CWK KAT Date: October 5, 2001 100-year _ ! 'C2' value _ 0.54 .C' . 1.25 0.675 --- -- ---I-- - -- Area5.48 Release Release Ratel 0 I --- -- TIME TIME INTENSITY Q 100 Runoff Release Required Required cum 100 year Volume Cum total I Detention Detention mins secs inlhr cis ft^3 ft^3 ft^3 ac-ft 0 0 0 0.00 0 0.0 0.0 0.0000 5 300 9.950 36.81 11041.52 0.0 11041.5 0.2535 10 600 7.720 28.56 17133.77 0.0 17133.8 0.3933 15 900 6.520 24.12 21705.73 0.0 21705.7 0.4983 20 1200 5.600 20.71 24857.28 0.0 24857.3 0.5706 25 1500 4.980 18.42 27631.53 0.0 27631.5 0.6343 30 1800 4.520 16.72 30095.06 0.0 30095.1 0.6909 35 2100 4.080 15.09 31693.03 0.0 31693.0 0.7276 40 2400 3.740 13.83 33202.22 0.0 33202.2 0.7622 45 2700 3.460 12.80 34556.06 , 0.0 34556.1 0.7933 50 3000 3.230 11.95 35843.31 0.0 35843.3 0.8228 551 3300 3.030 11.21 36986.3 0.0 36986.3 0.8491 60 3600 2.860 10.58 38084.9 0.0 38084.9 0.8743 65 3900 2.720 10.06 39238.99 0.0 39239.0 0.9008 .70 4200 2.590 9.58 40237.72 0.0 40237.7 0.9237 75 4500 2.480 9.17 41280.84 0.0 41280.8 0.9477 80 4800 2.380 8.80 42257.38 0.0 42257.4 0.9701 85 5100 2.290 8.47 43200.62 0.0 43200.6 0.9917 90 5400 2.210 8.17 44143.87 0.0 44143.9 1.0134 95 5700 2.130 7.88 44909.56 0.0 44909.6 1.0310 100 6000 2.060 7.62 45719.64 0.0 45719.6 1.0496 105 6300 2.000 7.40 46607.4 0.0 46607.4 1.0700 110 6600 1.940 7.18 47362 0.0 47362.0 1.0873 115 6900 1.890 6.99 48238.66 0.0 48238.7 1.1074 120 7200 1.840 6.81 49004.35 0.0 49004.4 1.1250 125 7500 1.790 6.62 49659.08 0.0 49659.1 1.1400 130 7800 1.750 6.47 50491.35 0.0 50491.4 1.1591 135 8100 1.710 6.33 51234.85 0.0 51234.8 1.1762 140 8400 1.6701 6.18 51889.57 0.0 51889.6 1.1912 145 8700 1.630 6.03 52455.52 0.0 52455.5 1.2042 1501 9000 1.600 5.92 53265.6 0.0 53265.6 1.2228 155 9300 1.570 5.81 54009.1 0.0 54009.1 1.2399 160 9600 1.540 5.70 54686.02 0.0 54686.0 1.2554 165 9900 1.510 5.59 55296.35 0.0 55296.4 1.2694 170A 1.480 5.47 55840.1 0.0 55840.1 1.2819 175 1.450 5.36 56317.28 0.0 56317.3 1.2929 180 1.420 5.25 56727.86 0.0 56727.9 1.3023 185 1.400 5.18 57482.46 0.0 57482.5 1.3196 190 1.380 5.10 58192.67 0.0 58192.7 1.3359 195 1.360 5.03 58858.49 0.0 58858.5 1.3512 200 1.340 4.96 59479.92 0.0 59479.9 1.3655 205 1.320 4.88 60056.96 .0.0 60057.0 1.3787 210 12600 1.300 4.81 60589.62 0.0 60589.6 1.3909 215 12900 1.280 4.73 61077.89 0.0 61077.9 1.4022 220 13200 1.260 4.66 61521.77 0.0 61521.8 _ 1.4123 225 13500 1.240 4.59 61921.26 0.0 61921.31 1.4215 230 13800 1.220 _ 4.51 62276.36 0.0 6227_6.4 1.4297 235 14100 _ 1.210 4.48 63108.64 0.0 63108.6 1.4488 240 14400 1.200pnn 63918.72 0.0 63918.7 1.4674 Brook Drive Overflow - Design Flow ' Worksheet for Irregular Channel ' Project Description Worksheet Brook Drive Design Overflow: Flow Element Irregular Channel ' Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data ' Slope 005100 ft/ft Discharge 25.54 cfs ' Options Current Roughness Methrwed Lotter's Method . Open Channel Weighting wed Lotter's Method ' Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method Results ' Mannings Coefficiei 0.013 Water Surface Elev 0.46 ft Elevation Range ).00 to 1.32 Flow Area 7.1 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 24.60 ft Top Width 24.00 ft Actual Depth 0.46 It Critical Elevation 0.49 ft Critical Slope 0.003703 tuft Velocity 3.58 ft/s Velocity Head 0.20 ft ' Specific Energy 0.66 ft Froude Number 1.16 Flow Type supercritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings ' Station Station Coefficient -0+30 0+06 ' Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) -0+30 1.32 ' -0+24 0.82 -0+24 0.32 0+00 0.00 ' 0+00 0.50 0+06 1.00 0.013 f Project Engineer: Kevin Tone ' j:\1084c\8owmast8r\brook-drive.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e] 10/08/01 02:37:24 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Brook Drive Overflow Design Flow Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Brook Drive Design Overflow: Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.013 Slope 0.005100 ft/ft Water Surface Elev 0.46 ft Elevation Range .00 to 1.32 Discharge 25.54 cfs 1 0 0. 0. -0+30 -0+25 -0+20 -0+15 -0+10 -0+05 0+00 0+05 0+10 V:5.0 HA N TS 1 t Project Engineer: Kevin Tone ' j:\1064c\flowmaster\brook-drive.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e] 10/08/01 02:37,19 PM m Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Brook Drive Overflow - Max Flow Worksheet for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Brook Drive Max Overflow Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Slope 005100 ft/ft Discharge 31.50 cfs Options Current Roughness Methc)ved Lotter's Method Open Channel Weighting wed Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method Results Mannings Coefficiei 0.013 Water Surface Elev 0.50 It Elevation Range ).00 to 1.32 Flow Area 8.1 ft' Wetted Perimeter 24.68 ft Top Width 24.00 ft Actual Depth 0.50 ft Critical Elevation 0.54 ft Critical Slope 0.003559 ft/ft Velocity 3.89 ft/s Velocity Head 0.23 ft Specific Energy 0.73 It Froude Number 1.18 Flow Type supercritical Roughness Segments Start End Mannings Station Station Coefficient -0+30 0+06 0.013 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) -0+30 1.32 -0+24 0.82 -0+24 0.32 0+00 0.00 0+00 0.50 0+06 1.00 Project Engineer: Kevin Tone j:\1084c\flowmaster\brook-drive.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e] 10/08/01 02:37:54 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Brook Drive Overflow Max Flow Cross Section for Irregular Channel Project Description Worksheet Brook Drive Max Overflow Flow Element Irregular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficiei 0.013 Slope 0.005100 ft/ft Water Surface Elev 0.50 ft Elevation Range .00 to 1.32 Discharge 31.50 cfs 1.40 oil V :5.0 HA NTS Project Engineer. Kevin Tone ' j:\1084c\flowmaster\brook-drive.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e) 10/08/01 02:38:03 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 R=M-P Medium Density Planned Residential District — designation for medium density areas planned as a unit (PUD) to provide a variation in use and building placements with a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet. ' R-L-M Low Density Multiple Family District — areas containing low density multiple family units or any other use in the R-L District with a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet for one -family or two-family dwellings and 9,000 square feet for multiple -family dwellings. ' M-L Low Density Mobile Home District — designation for areas for mobile home parks containing independent mobile homes not exceeding 6 units per acre. M-M Medium Density Mobile Home District — designation for areas of mobile home ' parks containing independent mobile homes not exceeding 12 units per acre. B-G General Business District — district designation for downtown business areas, including a variety of permitted uses, with minimum lot areas equal to 1 /2 of the total ' floor area of the building. B-P Planned Business District — designates areas planned as unit developments to provide business services while protecting the surrounding residential areas with minumum lot areas the same as R-M. H-B Highway Business District — designates an area of automobile -orientated busi- nesses with a minimum lot area equal to 1 /2 of the total floor area of the building. ' B-L Limited Business District — designates areas for neighborhood convenience centers, including a variety of community uses with minimum lot areas equal to two times the total floor area of the building. ' C Commercial District —designates areas of commercial, service and storage areas. I-L Limited Industrial District=designates areas of light industrial uses.with a minimum area of lot equal to two times the total floor area of the building not to be less than 20,000 square feet. I-P Industrial Park District —designates light industrial park areas containing controlled industrial uses with minimum lot areas equal to two times the total floor area of the building not to be less than 20,000 square feet. ' I-G General Industrial District — designates areas of major industrial development. T Transition. District — designates areas which are in a transitional stage with regard to ultimate development. For current and more explicit definitions of land uses and zoning classifications, refer to the Code of the City of Fort Collins, Chapters 99 and 118. ' Table 3-3 RATIONAL METHOD RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS FOR COMPOSITE ANALYSIS Character of Surface Runoff Coefficient Streets, Parking Lots, Drives: Asphalt................................................................................................ 0.95 Concrete............................................................................................. 0.95 ' Gravel................................................................................................. 0.50 Roofs.......................................................................................................... 0.95 Lawns, Sandy Soil: Flat<2'/u............................................................................................. 0.10 Average2 to 7%.................................................................................. 0.15 Steep>7%.......................................................................................... 0.20 ' Lawns, Heavy Soil: Flat<2%............................................................................................. 0.20 Average2 to 7%.................................................................................. 0.25 ' Steep >7%.......................................................................................... 0.35 ' MAY 1984 3-4 DESIGN CRITERIA 3.1.7 Time of Concentration ' In order to use the Rainfall Intensity Duration Curve, the time of concentration must be known. This can be determined either by the following equation or the "Overland Time of Flow Curves" from the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. included in this report (See ' Figure 3-2). t Tc=1.87 (1.1 —CC,) D"Z S� ' Where Tc =Time of Concentration, minutes S = Slope of Basin, % C = Rational Method Runoff Coefficient D = Length of Basin, feet Ct = Frequency Adjustment Factor Time of concentration calculations should reflect channel and storm sewer velocities as well as overland flow times. ' 3.1.8 Adjustment for Infrequent Storms The preceding variables are based on the initial storm, that is, the two to ten year storms. For ' stomas with higher intensities an adjustment of the runoff coefficient is required because of the lessening amount of infiltration, depression retention, and other losses that have a proportionally smaller effect on storm runoff. These frequency adjustment factors are found in Table 3-4. Table 3-4 RATIONAL METHOD FREQUENCY ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ' Storm Return Period Frequency Factor (years) C, ' 2 to 10 1.00 11 to25 1.10 26 to 50 1.20 51 to 100 1.25 ' Note: The product of C times C, shall not exceed 1.00 3.2 Analysis Methodology ' The methods presented in this section will be instituted for use in the determination and/or verification of runoff at specific design points in the drainage system. These methods are (1), the Rational Method and (2) the Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure (CUHP). Other computer methods, such as SWMM, STORM, and HEC-1 are allowable if results are not radically different than these two. Where ' applicable, drainage systems proposed for construction should provide the minimum protection as determined by the methodology so mentioned above. 3.2.1 Rational Method ' For drainage basins of 200 acres or less, the runoff may be calculated by the Rational Method, which is essentially the following equation: Q=C,CIA ' Where Q = Flow Quantity, cfs A = Total Area of Basin, acres Cr = Storm Frequency Adjustment Factor (See Section 3.1.8) C = Runoff Coefficient (See Section 3.1.6) I = Rainfall Intensity, inches per hour (See Section 3.1.4) 3.2.2 Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure ' For basins larger than 200 acres, the design storm runoff should be analyzed by deriving synthetic unit hydregraphs. It is recommended that the Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure be used for such anaiysis. This procedure is detailed in the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 1, Section 4. ' MAY 1984 3-5 DESIGN CRITERIA Table 5-3 MINIMUM ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENTS FOR CONDUITS A. Concrete / Cast Iron /.Vitrified Clay Pipe All Diameters:n = 0.013 B. Corrugated Metal Pipe - Steel Corrugations Annular 22/3X1/2 Helical 1 1/2x114 22/3012 ANDia. 9" 10" t2" 18" 24" N. 48" W. Unpaved ................... 25% Paved ............... Fully Paved .............. .024 .021 .012 .012 .014 .011 .014 .016 .015 .012 .019 .017 .012 .020 .020 .012 .021 .019 .012 Corrugations Annular 30 Helical W A9 Dia. 48" 54" 60" 66" 72" 78" Unpaved ................... .027 .023 .023 .024 .025 .026 .027 25% Paved ............... .023 .020 .020 .021 .022 .022 .023 Fully Paved .............. .012 .012 .012 .012 .012 .012 .012 Corrugations 6u2 Diameters 60" 72" 120" 180" Plain - Unpaved .................................. 25% Paved ......................................... .033 .028 .032 .027 .0309- .026 .028 .024 Reference: 'Modern Sewer Design' AISI. 1980 u MAY 1994 5- DESIGN CRITERIA Volunteers of America Detention Pond Sizing Job No C1084 By: CWK Date: September 10, 2001 Checked by: KAT 2-year Composite 'C' 0.54 Area 5.48 Release Rate 1.5 cum 100 0 0 5 300 10 600 15 900 20 1200 25 1500 30 1800 35 2100 40 2400 45 2700 50 3000 55 3300 60 3600 65 3900 70 4200 75 4500 80 4800 85 5100 90 5400 95 5700 100 6000 105 6300 110 6600 115 6900 120 7200 0 2.850 2.210 1.870 1.610 1.430 1.300 1.170 1.070 0.990 0.920 0.870 0.820 0.770 0.730 0.690 0.660 0.630 0.610 0.580 0.560 0.540 0.520 0.510 0.490 Volume Cum total Detention Detention I 0.00 0 0.0 8.43 2530.116 450.0 6.54 3923.899 900.0 5.53 4980.334 1350.0 4.76 5717.174 1800.0 4.23 6347.484 2250.0 3.85 6924.528 2700.6 3.46 7270.754 3150.0 3.17 7599.226 3600.0 2.93 7909.942 4050.0 2.72 8167.392 4500.0 2.57 8495.863 4950.0 2.43 8735.558 5400.0 2.28 8886.478 5850.0 2.16 9072.907 6300.0 2.04 9188.316 6750.0 1.95 9374.746 7200.0 1.86 9507.91 7650.0 1.81 9747.605 8100.0 1.72 9783.115 8550.0 1.66 9942.912 9000.0 1.60 10067.2 9450.0 1.54 10155.97 9900.0 1.51 10413.42 10350.0 1.45 10440.06 10800.0 0.0 0.0000 2080.1 0.0478 3023.9 0.0694 3630.3 0.0833 3917.2 0.0899 4097.5 0.0941 4224.5 0.0970 4120.8 0.0946 3999.2 0.0918 3859.9 0.0886 3667.4 0.0842 3545.9 0.0814 3335.6 0.0766 3036.5 0.0697 2772.9 0.0637 2438.3 0.0560 2174.7 0.0499 1857.9 0.0427 1647.6 0.0378 1233.1 0.0283 942.9 0.0216 617.2 0.0142 256.0 0.0059 63.4 0.0015 -359.9 0.0083 Volunteers o__f America Detention Pond Sizing Job No By: J{KAT CWK Date: October 5, 2001 Checked by: 100-year _ - - - _ T _ 'C2' value 0.54 i- ----�- - - Area 5.48 Release Rate 1.5 _ TIME TIME INTENSITY Q 100 1 Runoff I Release I Required Required cum 100 year Volume Cum total Detention Detention mins secs in/hr cfs ft^3) ft^3 ft^3 ac-ft) 0 0 0 0.00 0 0.0 0.0 0.0000 5 300 9.950 36.81 _ 11041.52 450.0 10591.5 0.2431 10 6001 7.720 28.56 17133.77 900.0 16233.8 0.3727 15 900 6.520 24.12 21705.73 1350.0 20355.7 0.4673 20 1200 .5.600 20.71 24857.28 1800.0 23057.3, 0.5293 25 1500 4.980 18.42 27631.53 2250.0 25381.5 0.5827 30 1800 4.520 16.72 30095.06 2700.0 27395.1 0.6289 35 2100 4.080 15.09 31693.03 3150.0 28543.0 0.6553 40 2400 3.740 13.83 33202.22 3600.0 29602.2 0.6796 45 2700 3.460 12.80 34556.06 4050.0 30506.1 0.7003 50 3000 3.230 11.95 35843.31 4500.0 31343.3 0.7195 55 3300 3.030 11.21 36986.3 4950.0 32036.3 0.7355 60 3600 2.860 10.58 38084.9 5400.0 32684.9 0.7503 65 3900 2.720 10.06 39238.99 5850.0 33389.0 0.7665 70 4200 2.590 9.58 40237.72 6300.0 33937.7 0.7791 75 4500 2.480 9.17 41280.84 6750.0 34530.8 0.7927 801 4800 2.380 8.80 42257.38 7200.0 35057.4 0.8048 851 5100 2.290 8.47 43200.62 7650.0 35550.6 0.8161 901 5400 2.210 8.17 44143.87 8100.0 36043.9 0.8275 951 5700 2.130 7.88 44909.56 8550.0 36359.6 0.8347 100 6000 2.060 7.62 45719.64 9000.0 36719.6 0.8430 105 6300 2.000 7.40 46607.4 9450.0 37157.4 0.8530 110 6600 1.940 7.18 47362 9900.0 37462.0 0.8600 115 6900 1.890 6.99 48238.66 10350.0 37888.7 0.8698 120 7200 1.840 6.81 49004.35 10800.0 38204.4 0.8771 125 7500 1.790 6.62 49659.08 11250.0 38409.1 0.8818 130 7800 1.750 6.47 50491.35 11700.0 38791.4 0.8905 135 8100 1.710 6.33 51234.85 12150.0 39084.8 0.8973 140 8400 1.670 6.18 51889.57 _ 12600.0 39289.6 0.9020 145 8700 1.630 6.03 52455.52 13050.0 39405.5 0.9046 150 9000 1.600 5.92 53265.6 13500.0 39765.6 0.9129 155 9300 1.570 5.81 54009.1 13950.0 40059.1 0.9196 160 9600 1.540 5.70 54686.02 14400.0 40286.0 0.9248 165 9900 1.510 5.59 55296.35 14850.0 40446.4 _ _ 0.9285 170 10200 1.480 5.47 55840.1 15300.0 40540.1 0.9307 175 10500 1.450 5.36 56317.28 15750.0 40567.3 0.9313 180 10800 1.420 5.25 56727.86 16200.0 40527.9 0.9304 _ 185 11100 1.400 5.18 57482.46 16650.0 40832.5 0.9374 1901 11400 1.380 5.10 58192.67 41092.7 0.9434 -� 195 --- 117001 1.360 5.03 58858.49 _17100._0 17550.0 41308.5 _ 0.9483 200 120001 1.340 4.96 59479.92 18000.0 41479.9 _ 0.952_2 _ 205 123001 1.320 4.88 60056.96 18450.01 41607.0 0.9552 Page 1 12600 1.300 4.81 60589.62 18900.0 41689.6 0.9571 12900 1.280 4.73 61077.89 19350.0 41727.9 0.9579 2201 13200 1.260 _ 4.66 61521.77 19800.0 41721.8 0.9578 225 13500 1.240 4.59 61921.26 20250.0 41671.3 0.9566 230 13800 1.220 4.51 62276.36 20700.0 41576.4 0.9545 235 .14100 1.210 4.48 63108.64 21150.0 41958.6 0.9632 240 14400 1.200 4.44 63918.72 21600.0 42318.71 0.9715 Page 2 j'B7VA, Incorporated 1319 Spruce Street Boulder, CO 80302 Ph: 303.444.1951 Fax: 303.444.1957 ❑ JVA, Incorporated 4710 South College Ave. Suite 112 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Ph: 970.225.9099 Fax: 970.225.6923 Wn-I� �UAL.ITY Cr1�-ruzE V/o�urlc �c,JC�CV ) -PEVr=(-ovt-'p 5rT(-7 S. 7 8 hC- LFWD5CRVED AZEP� Z. 6 O ftc IHPERvrou s AP -CA 2 .8 8 AC % /H Pejzv/ wS 5 3 & Date: * o 1 Page: % of Z By: Cu ) K Chkd. By: Job No: /0 &qf- Project VO/et 'FT 60LL/N5 Client: ❑ Preliminary X1 Final IASL= _L�IKECTW COUJJ✓ 0VD /NPLXVOvS f)R-C-AS (Dcln's� V-CDUGC- Ta y0 % n �p +t, UIZQfI/J 'DR_R)n1R(sE" FI(ruZE SG2'Z L-)Qcv a) fi%t-TLCE/JT1 LF Ida N p F F EUe7L1T ` OQN = O. / 8 LJnTE�sut& // 1c/IES V k-)QC\1 K AKER = 12 yigX 5. y 8 J= iz 08 Ac c- - rT (3 580 IMI yP I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r- kn M N --� (iA-no) agvxos.s m I a\ 0 I M 01 O to :1 JVA, Incorporated 1319 Spruce Street Boulder, CO 80302 Ph: 303.444.1951 Fax: 303.444.1957 (al f}Tt'TZ OuALIrY a-rLe-r 1 =S/e�nJ 1 C)0CV = 0•08Ar--F7- ❑ JVA. Incorporated 4710 South College Ave. Suite 112 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Ph: 970.225.9099 Fax: 970.225.6923 GVA-TM QttAL.ITy d0tUfAE -bEFPTN - I.EOO (17f.OGl Us1r'1G 1, R-6piti `Ti1;(htJA& 'Fr/ EDg-'3 (, QCV a= Kti0 z Yo = o,613 6.2ZC7D")- O./ = 6,013011500 012z0'(00) -p./ o. 29 a = 0.68 _ 0. 28 /,7z 0.29 Date: 7 Zy of Page: 3 of 3 By: CLO K Chkd.By: Job No: 1 0 8 g c Project VoR FT �OLC.IA1$ Client: ❑ Preliminary Final I- �7w)QcV 93.yb IQV %, ` 7-oM -P16 S w:,c 3-3/8 -D/pr }IOLE5 -Pee 7zot') w/ 30 oc SPAC,aG Gu-r L6'T `�- A7E 5N9LL PEE 'Dt 5/GNED R5 FOLLd-05 J ✓ J O O Q I 0 I Q a J/ II 3- '1S ��IoLES 3 oc • +Iprzl-Z Z�OG YEKT Srk`EL 'PLRTt: �' gE J$II-1�IIC� �j I FltIJLESS ��EL_ COLIC 1zc7-E- OPE7J1F.JG - WATCRR OuAL17y SH/�LL e)e- IOIIwIDa- x 811+II�H 'FOR O(1TLC r 7, nLA I._. VOA Detention Pond Pipe Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Worksheet Detention 15" RCP < Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coeffic 0.013 Slope 004000 ft/ft Diameter 15 in Discharge 1.50 cis Results Depth 0.52 it Flow Area 0.49 ft' Wetted Perime 1.76 ft Top Width 1.23 ft Critical Depth 0.49 ft Percent Full 41.9 % Critical Slope 0.005305 ft/ft Velocity 3.07 ft/s Velocity Head 0.15 It Specific Energ; 0.67 ft Froude Numbe 0.86 Maximum Disc 4.39 cis Discharge Full 4.09 cfs Slope Full 0.000539 ft/ft Flow Type 3ubcritical Project Engineer: Kevin Tone j:\1084c\f1owmaster\voa pond.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614e) 09/17/01 09:19:38 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 VOA Detention Outlet Worksheet for Generic Orifice Project Description Worksheet Detention Outlet Orii Type Generic Orifice Solve For Opening Area Input Data Discharge 1.50 cfs Headwater Elevat 36.40 ft Centroid Elevatior31.90 ft Tailwater Elevatio 31.84 ft Discharge Coeffic 0.65 Opening Area 0.14 ft' Results Headwater Height Above 4.50 ft Tailwater Height Above Ci -0.06 ft Velocity 11.06 ft/s Project Engineer: Kevin Tone j:\1084c\Flowmaster\voa pond.fm2 JVA Inc FlowMaster v6.0 [614ej 09/17/01 09:24:19 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 STORMWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT 0.50 0.45 0.40 y 0.35 m 0.30 M m 0.25 3 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 - 0 00 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 3) wwww l 1' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 __ _---1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 '0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Total Imperviousness Ratio (i = 1,9/100) FIGURE SQ-2 Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV), Wh Percentile Runoff Event SQ-24 9-1-99 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District l 1' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 __ _---1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 '0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Total Imperviousness Ratio (i = 1,9/100) FIGURE SQ-2 Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV), Wh Percentile Runoff Event SQ-24 9-1-99 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V.3) ' 10 2 ' m 0.6 m co ' E 0.4 E aD 7 N 0.2 U co C O °' 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.02 0.01 STRUCTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES .v 6.0 4.0 0 6 4 EXAMPLE: DWQ = 4.5 ft WQCV = 2.1 acre-feet SOLUTION: Required Area per Row = 1.75 in 2 .0 EQUATION: WQCV a K 40 0 in which, K40=0.013DWQ +0.22DWQ -0.10 0 ,moo_ 0 a� 0 ry�l h � J� ' 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.20 031 0.40 0.60 1.0 . 2.0 4.0 6.0 Required Area per Row,a (in.2 ) FIGURE EDB-3 ' Water Quality Outlet Sizing: Dry Extended Detention Basin With a 40-Hour Drain Time of the Capture Volume ' -99 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District S-43 Orifice Plate Perforation Sizing Circular Perforation Sizing Chart may be applied to orifice plate or vertical pipe outlet. Hole Dia (in) • Hole Dia (in) Min. Se (in) Area per Row (sq in) n=1 n=2 n=3 1 4 0.250 1 0.05 0.10 0.15 5 16 0.313 2 0.08 0.15 0.23 3 8 0.375 2 0.11 0.22 0.33 7/16 - 0.438 2 0.15 0.30 0.45 1/2 0.500 2 0.20 0.39 0.59 9 16 0.563 3 0.25 0.50 0.75 5/8 0.625 3 0.31 0.61 0.92 11 16 0.688 3 0.37 0.74 1.11 3 4 0.750 3 0.44 0.88 1.33 13 16 0.813 3 0.52 1.04 1.56 7 8 0.875 3 0.60 1.20 1.80 15 16 0.938 3 0.69 1.38 207 1 1.000 4 0.79 1.57 2.36 1 1 16 1.063 4 0.89, 1.77 2.66 1 1 8 1.125 4 0.99 1.99 2.98 1 3 16 1.188 4 1.11 2.22 3.32 1 1 4 1.250 4 1.23 2.45 3.68 1 5/16 1.313 4 1.35 2.71 4.06 1 3 8 1.375 4 1.48 2.97 4.45 1 7 16 1.438 4 1.62 3.25 4.87 1 1 2 1.500 4 1.77 3.53 5.30 1 9 16 1.563 4 1.92 3.83 5.75 1 5 8 1.625 4 2.07 4.15 6.22 1 11 16 1.688 4 2.24 4.47 6.71 1 3 4 1.750 4 .81 7.22 1 13 16 1.813 4 .16 7.74 1 7 8 1.875 4 JjL6 .52 8.28 1 15 16 1.938 4 .90 8.84 2 2.000 4 .28 9.42 n = Number of columns of perforations Minimum steel plate thickness 1/4 " 5/16 " 3/8 " • Designer may interpolate to the nearest 32nd inch to better match the required area, if desired. Rectangular Perforation Sizing Only one column of rectangular perforations allowed. Rectangular Height = 2 inches Rectangular Width (inches) = Required Area per Row (sq in) 2" Rectangular Hole Width Min. Steel Thickness 5" 1 4 6" 1 4 ' 7" 5/32 " g" 5/16 " 9" 11/32 " 10" 3/8 " Urban Drainage and Figure 5 Flood Control District WQCV Outlet Orifice Drainage Criteria Manual (V.3) Perforation Sizing Fee: Detees.dwg O o,rn000 o vvinlntn to WWmWW o tTc%0%0%000000 o vv��Inlnlnlniclln WWWWmmmmWW 0 oornrno+rno,o,o+mo+o+rn000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o vvvvvvvvavvvtnlnln M . . .... .............. N W W W W m W W W W W W W W W m m m W W W 0 oe�vtntOtotOtorrrrrrnrnrrnW W W W W W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O o v V v v v a v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v A H W W W W W W W W W W W W W W MOD W W 0000 W W W W W W O o WNMVInInIn%0%0%0%0%0%OrrrrnrrnrrWWW U WWWWWWWWWWmWWWWmWWWWWWmmmW 0 tD o N M v v to to In In W tD t0 tD tD tD tD tD tD tD n r r r n r U]W c44;; V v; v v.v vv ;444 V V V vv 44 V 44 z W W m W W m m W m W W W m W W m W m W W W m m W m W H aO V Ot ri N M M d' v v V In W In In to In In In In tD tD tD tD tD tD n O n M M v v v V V V V V V v v V V v v v V 4 V v V v v 4 U aocOmWmmmWmWmmWWmmmWmmWWWWmW a o OtD W OririNNMMMMvvvvvvvvinlnlnlntOtD .. .. . .... .. ..... O to mmMgwNrvwervvvvvvvvwvverer�vv�� 44 m W W m W m m W W W W W m W W m m W m W W W W Co W W .-.0 W (A00ri.-IHr4NNNNMMMM V V V V 1 00 InNlnn MV AP co W v In N M M M M M V' V' V' V' V' V' V' V' V' V' V' V' V' V V V V V V V W W W W W W mW W W m W W W m m W W W m W W W W W W W W W �Ax ad In H W riM VlnlnWWNr-nmW W WmW OI.OtON0. 0. 0. 00 ar N. N P. M 14 C. . M M M M M M M M M. M. M. M. M. M. iC H0 rnoocococommmWWmmmmmWmmmWWWmmmmW o tDlclmorlNMaalnlnlntOtOtOtOtOnr.rrmWmrnrn Ui V i N. N M M M M M M M M M M r. M M.M.M M M M M M M A W W W m W W W W m W W W m m W W m W m W W W W W W W W In .-i r4 to n co O O rI N N M M M V V' v V V In In In tD tD tO n n M 4 N N. N N M M M M r4 M M c4 M M M r4 M M M M M M M MM W 00 W W W W W W W W W W W W W m W W W W W W W W W W W O MN`1Om 010 rINNMMM V'V V V V'V In 1n In 111 tD tO t01D • a (n o.-Ir-i.-i r1N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NN aco oommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmWWmmWmm a In 0mmNMv00ro Nr Ww0M00%(h(ACAat000000 a N Ot O O rI ri ri rr rl ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri N N N N N N r M 00 00 W W GO W W W W W W W W W m W W W W W W W W W z O vin CMto w m m D\ 00 o r♦ ri rl rl N N N N M M M M MM N co D\ O O O O O O 0 r1 rl ri ri rl ri rI ri 44 ri ri 44444 r n m 00 W W m m W m W m m W W W m m m m m m W W W W In co W ri v to r- N co aA m 0 0 rq r4 r4 rq V-4NNNMMMMM . . rl tp W. W. D\0. T. D\Oc. O. . O. C. . 00. . 0. . . . . 0. 0. O. O. nnrnnnnnnnnmmWmWmmWmWmWWWm O tnMnn1o1O10 .. ... .... .. ri vtnnrnrmWco1ocoWm.W. coWm.W. WWWWc MMM nnnnnrrrrrnrnrrnrrnrrnrrnn to D10-vor, Wmrnrt00%oInv VMMNNa,%ovria%%o C. . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . O ONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNrlrtrlri00 r lr n n r n n n r n n r n r n r n r r In n r r r r n x 00000000000000000000000000 O O H 00000000000000000000000000 azk• rINMVIntOnWOtOriNMvtntOrm010tnOtnOtnO kr a �-' ri ri r♦ ri ri rr ri ri ri rI N N M M v v In MARCH 1991 8-4 DESIGN CRITERIA RAINFALL PERFORMANCE STANDARD EVALUATION PROJECT: VolA •F7 STANDARD FORM A COMPLETED BY: C�QK DATE: 911.7) o1 DEVELOPED ERODIBILITY Asb Lsb Ssb Lb Sb PS SUBBA§IN ZONE (ac) (ft) ($) (feet) ($) ($) ft Moncr �Z d. 35 114L 2.30 6 M ontRATt o.17 t i z Z. So C N°Dc'knTr: o,3y 1 5B ' D MOT' C$RT>= /(, E tA00 'RNT5 0.yq 3Z S p.too 7 M°DtxP E o. y� 32� 6.fe0 (? MoDcx.FTE b mS 74U /, ZS N MODGAA 0.13 7Z z-(moo ztt t-311 'lr7 N°e 1 Mdzoz 0.15 T MohugrE /o3 3 ti OOEzPTL O. OF g / K uovtea.r o.zq /3-7 o.�e L uoDERA•iF p, 32- 2 00 1. U H s�ara o3z 10-7 1-0 MbDt'�.NTE Q, 1 / -- 1 yo d N°OtYF �'Z f 81.Sy Q Mont�tra ;> o 1. O q 1Z Ih(01)1_RATC p 11 93 p Ob 5 MonV.vlvrc I.l / MARCH 1991 8-14 DESIGN CRITERIA EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS PROJECT: VOA 1•� (0LL1Q5 STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: C w K DATE: 9 b -7 l Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor Method Value Value Comment I10 O,C) CALCLILfrro�:,a e+15CTJ SEDINE�JT TRRP I.0 O.5 4r- AL-i- ZoADS 1 Alt« w GRAVEL. 'FiLTEKS 1-0 :T?Aw A.,�?L.E gPR c� - OO � L..1 E't v..�ok. C d- �E'jLl�l7 oJJ a{A^( /-IlaLCq Po uD GoyAPLETI `b O. oCv 1.0 SILT- FCOCE 1.0 p,S ?-OATOSal 6wy` u(, 6t)gpLE-r MAJOR PS SUB AREA BASIN ($) BASIN (Ac) CALCULATIONS uo¢ili '7 0.3,T Luvr� C-T=*m or- (o./Cfx o.n(,) -'-(0. 11, ko_p1) "� Qa+uoi O.C�`I O. 35 WTD r--'F AC10M- (0. Kq x l.O') + (0.16 ) x 1, 0 (O.SxO, .3S •. SEDHtiuT TF#d'i GRAVEL i1AY#Am.Ultb ?AtIE Li SFr > CI- Cx7D) x(oo krt) C-FACTOR (0. oY r O,DO� + (0 /3X 6,01) C•��1-f�ND (. ly Aav6D) 0-0 0)+ (0',3x1.0) %1 O.S Y08=o.yo V17 ScDmEv T)LAV 6xAUEt rLrbic- HAY Nuui!L"l' I:FFc (I' C xP�xlpp C O. 3 lsi'D C-F�1Cl-DR bb� ai < 9AuED) 03`� W7U 'a. Tpc rcrt (,33 X/,o)+(o.o� xla x o.S xp:g = 0.4 , 3`( " SE=HELIT TYAf �IAti' NULCHtD'� 'VAULT STIZ&u PALE GPrc�I'L 6,51 V,17D GFAC*fXL (. 2, i.AvED) WTD P-'Fpcq)rz rD,Sx 3r 0.8 = 0• yp . c SE7>,AA I.,T iZKj, (,ZAJCt i.LT&I't" +[,A `. ff ULC.'Cj� PAV&T �F = 61-C KP),1(oo - 9g7 tMARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS t-m-e C- o } (e PROJECT: voa r-T COLL105 STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: /)( 1 K DATE: y 1 -) I o / Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor Method Value Value Comment CowntjvcD (-<er v4F I c4 G) BASIN ($) K�arZ:rq ~n 3R51e BASINS (Ac) ' CALCULATIONS E G•`l9 (.22-1-,BauNo (a7-PAl1=:D) wrD-C-i+cro,2 Co.2zro.o(o)'lo.z7xp.w) - WTD P- FPCTbft (0.2Z r 1,0) a- (O.Z7 x (.o) • St'ZiMEu-r -rRP: 1 C'IT�AI/t2 71{ TFR; VIEW Mutcliel) PAvr-r-) t%"PF c Cl'GXA)X BOO= _.. y� - .--------- -------------- - -_ L,TrP c-FRc1bR Co•r-, Xo.(�()'�y.'zGxo-ol) O.`ds zc. - PAuCb w-b P-F&-Imz. (o, l9 x i. o) t (0. z6 r/.o) �t7JINClTi 7'7z-A-P•� 41y}^( MVLC.k Cp I PAV61>1 67ZAUL-2 'frLTL;7< (-G%P) fi.o c q9 S G O. (os WrT C- FACTp2 (.Sr[O.(Xn) , (o.ib z b.o(a b FWvEu WTD P-DicTD2 (O.S :&IS, • St"D�nt'r�r rr[AP F;?'r �.iil (,('t�kA PAU"., 51-2q,u i+,Atl f?.ARRIt'•2 EPP = �)_c rP).r00z 9sf O. �3 _. ...._ . . •13 WTU P-rRCrtUR (.13YL O) •StArMENr-r;zfP� NA7 Nu�.c&4t7) 7T7ZAW (3ALC 3fi2z1t'R �=FF 0-cxP)xio6 - 801 MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS PMr 7, -c/_ `PROJECT: V 0 A T-7 (o(.CJ o s STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: S I , DATE: q 1(-7a Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor Method Value Value Comment Con1?IrJYE1� SEA nr ACE 1 a� 4 MAJOR PS SUB AREA BASIN (t) BASIN (Ac) CALCULATIONS Ajorcttl -7-7 -M 1 AL Z. 8 9 -r (17grZ, X. /7) f (4 �3 X . 3 /� i ��B !` r • 3/ j FI—H [+ cy9 K ,v5) + <99 S X, vs), s — �?8g -'.65) 4-- (86,1. X. /3) Z 8`% 97 4JTb Cc7w-xm (.o9xO.OL)* ,OyrD•0/1 GRSwP7 r7= D,IS • 07 (&r A)7) anv PPe tD WTn P- FAeTM o• ' ScD'IL'-,-,'I T/LM' i C 2A�"L [1�TE'R • +t,Fy PULE V.Ci PftJL,1 i s o.o� ---------------------- ------ -- ----._ --- -- - WTn GFRc.NR (•43 K. v6}w (•6SKa�(� l_- -03 6gi x�- .bs �k,En ofr wTu P-FAcnp- X s> oz , •St'D,He`NT Tiehp - E� t2 flTESZ �4If5^f !-f:ft.c -v�AvE V WTD C-GAc•r»z (;eax.oy}af �rx0-OI . dfr (�ucuuD � G.03 ,Ib Pgvt'A .2'i IiJTI) P. CACZri • C)" 4. - 2y - o.�/ • SEGHL-vr TXAP '� 62F.uc`L z!L-IrTk •, liFY kt1LL4(r'U j PhuD MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS PROJECT: VbA FT C64- IOUS STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: Ie, DATE: e Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor Method Value Value Comment C0u-770U > CSc r 7�W E 1o1 to ) BASIN ($) BAsr � 50UTV I 77 6Rsr� SUB I ARE) BASIN_ (Ac) CALCULATIONS L 0.37- W7D C-FAcup, (.IIx.oto) +(.zlxoDo u L.ra ,n 13Z -0:U3 .zl o,IvED P-TACIb2 WTp (IIK I)+(zr pr� ScDrME"N7 'T7tAP't/A'Y M'q-r-HE'D� P/�y6'Si, C�R�uEtfr4T2'fZ EFFs(/_cKp)Xl�o c99j (� b,32 __.__.----- wrb c-P!>LtptZ CIbX.06)t(.I6xo"o/�- Oy O•/b (t1P{c<up �2 J I�P/W Wrz) P-FAcmfz /I -3z $t"��HtTJY TTiRP � y.IRY l.I yV( PC[) FAJ4"/�'r (-RAJ" r,lTlR O•I I 4JTTD G-GRcrbt 0,11 119 . l9 Spa r4(;'111T 772RP') w/ty Nu�C+rcD j'atw�D I c�2lhk"L '-,a_rtR row- �-rJx.32)+(9y8 (46'x •,S �--- X�3z)J+- I.3 98 > 77S ��E�E�v2� kAtJ I s MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS OPAL-� PROJECT: VOA Fr Cot.L.l 05 STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: C(A)K DATE: pl Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor Method Value Value Comment CON71nlUt'll CSt-� '�fWE l a4 (� SILT FC*)CE , 0 O:S d�5lis BAye.�S' ooLy MAJOR PS SUB AREA BASIN (t) BASIN (Ac) CALCULATIONS CTr-b C'FAC DR (1.13 o,D6) +(o.f6Xoa1) fb PMzL-L IvTD ' Farorc �ll3xl)�(.16X/) =� Sc-DiHe'n>r +7i .� {j{wl6AtE 8RR?JM . 5 AA'7'1 NAY Hua.crtF9 - �-FF �s SDoN+ s•y8 (9� 3) �`l7� J ET=FECnVE' SE-b"'L yr Coy, rR�L T WiZI� IC WE:S2Lp i - P14((,R To LAV,)b scF\PINO d C.oU� .`:EE'}vJL In�Si�1LLA77o" -6F Fs 1T1= Low. t� t� 6.•71 kYTD C rcroZ 256,rzov4n 7n 4z r3tvEr> P- TACrDa -Zqx(,V 71 V.Sx, 4. SILT fc"cc ' HAYHytcrreD � C^a��-�,. r Me-aff.-n. Q 7(,.1 WTP C FhcTD2 ( /ZC .6b�<�03X ot) I,IROWun r O.OS • v5 vo3 wrn � FAc-rv/Z (r2Xl!z. 4Z / F�Nz E 1 uh9 ilu�[, Hk.Df (yRAU�'�- E'iJ!RRCIe_ r �FYc `I-CrP)./uo= /D4LArJ ckAi MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS IPA11- AS A.0 6 PROJECT: von r-r cc6ous STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: DATE: 17 io I Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor Method Value Value Comment MAJOR PS SUB AREA BASIN ($) BASIN (Ac) CALCULATIONS K 7y o,u LOTH c-yrc rorc o`rK.� �•Oz. �.Or -d7 6F."m. oz aAuty Uj Tp P• FA -Mir- K-Sx.B = SILT Pk'- cc }IAN Mu . -cHt"n 1 �rr jG Ml-'.i. ftjl�Rlt-ti qq a iJ D cl rn4 x i? D s k"riS C - F AC.fu2 I..Vol V. u r. i =•06 r. r t wTP P- FiA4 rot MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA 15f'JVA, Incorporated 1319 Spruce Street Boulder, CO 80302 Ph: 303.444.1951 Fax: 303.444.1957 ❑ JVA, Incorporated 4710 South College Ave. Suite 112 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Ph: 970.225.9099 Fax: 970.225.6923 LJE5'r C>VeR FLow -'P)L.- aAY 21?RPV' C ALCuALPnOug CLvr..k J�2a.pc NuwEErc Fb2 5PiLLwF'f at V Z.ff V' ('5rzo) = 9, it tas _1! ___ Z ll qK,32 LM r .2 r.5) Date: 9117/01 Page: I of I By: C wie- Chkd. By: Job No: IJyc Project: VU'P Client: ❑ Preliminary .Final NP:FJNIJ.)f„ (-_OuAlloO —D CALGUL.F Z VL"LOCr+Y Rt-xJ -JDSl_flE I.,I4 Z,3 �z �/= ✓� R 5 _ _ oy5 JZ'PP-AV) A P�Ltfl /.y9 Zf3 K. P = W=r•c1. pi Klt+ETeU- A Z V= o,oy5 `P (0.33) 331� 5 =Vf C kcu U1T1- -raRAP 51"LE Ol-1 .f7 � V • 5 _ i1. -7I (.33) 7. q 5.5-rl." (1,5)Z(a.5-1)," (I.5)"L - r Fo2 SrR6LE [ }IAON k2 18, 121PiLAP 2. (" t� is ?':_ -� �szour R,artf 10 -4LI:UCC I:)gU Ooc 5I-LG V c ` !"2 js_ E'' +'..i'•,F 1.'l ✓ 1 'L:t:.L P j l t,J ML,'ICF_ North American Green_ -Erosion Control Materials Design Software Ver_4.11 - Slop_e_-_.. 9/12/2U0 0937 AM_, C_0_MPUTED BY:_CWK PROJECT NAME_VOA Slope (Prptectedl I PROJECT NO.: 1084 SLOPE DESCRIPTION: West Detention Pond Overflow _ Country State/Region Colorado F City Ft. Collins Annual R Factor 30Slope Gradient =.33:1 0 Total Slope Length (ft) Protection Type Permanent i' Protection Period (months) C350 Re'vrf. Veg Beginning Month Adjusted R Value 30. . .. — i 30 Slope Gradient [H_1) 1.33 . Soil Type Silt Loam K Factor D.33 Not to Scale Soil Loss Tolerance (in) 0.03 J React Cum- Dist- Material Vegetation Type Growth Habit Density LS C ASL bare (in) ASL mat (in) SILT (in) SF I Remarks Begin (ft) End (ft) 1 0 130 C350 Reinf. Mix (Both Sod/Bunch) 50-75% 4.47 0.002 0.264 0.001 0.03 56.9 STABLE 2 3 , 0 30 Composite 1 1 10.264, 0.901 Vegetation Density=Percentage of soil coverage provided by vegetation C=Cover material performance factor (Fraction of soil loss of unprotected) ASLbare=Average Sail Loss potential of unprotected soil (uniform inches) ASLmat--Average Sod Loss potential w/material (uniform inches) MSLbare=Maximum Soil Loss potential on unprotected sod (uniform inches) MSLmat=Maximum Soil Loss potential w/material (uniform inches) SLT=Sod Loss Tolerance for slope segment (uniform inches) SF=Safety Factor Composite --Average soil loss ham total slope length (uniform inches) North American Green __Erosion Control _Materials _Design Software Ver. 411 -Slope,.__, , 9/12ac[a 09:25AM C0f±1.P..UTED BY. LWK - --- - PROJECT NAME: VOA Slope [Unestablishedl_) PR0JECT_N0._ 1084 �_ SLOPE DESCRIPTION: East Detention Pond Overflow Country' State/Region Colorado TEA City Ft. CoOins HIT] Annual R Factor ; Slope Gradient = 0.33:1 ' 0 Total Slope Length (ft) 11 Protection Type Temporary �� Protection Period (months) 12 I SC150IBN Beginning Month July Adjusted R Value 30. i 11 Slope Gradient (H_1) 10.33 i Soil Type Silt Loam K Factor 0.33 Not to Scale Soil Loss Tolerance (in) eac Cum. Dist. Material Vegetation Type Growth Habit Density LS C ASL bare (in) ASL mat Fin) MSL bare (in) MSL mat (in) SLY (in) SF Remarks Staple Begin [k) End (ft] 1 0 11 SC150BN 1.12 0.063 0.066 0.004 0.118 0.007 0.25 33.7 STABLE B 2 3 0 11 Composite 0.066 0.004 Vegetation Density=Percentage of soil coverage provided by vegetation C=Cover material performance factor (Fraction of soil loss of unprotected) ASLbare-=Average Soil Loss potential of unprotected soil (uniform inches) ASLmat,Average Sad Loss potential w/material [uniform inches) MSLbare=Maximum Soil Loss potential an unprotected sod (uniform inches) MSLmat=Maximum Soil Loss potential w/material (uniform inches) SLT=Sod Loss Tolerance for slope segment [uniform inches) SF=Safety Factor Composite=Average soil loss from total slope length (uniform inches) Country State/Region Colorado City FL Coffins Annual R Factor Total Slope Length (It) 11 Protection Type Permanent Protection Period (months) �— Beginning Month �— Adjusted R Value 30. Slope Gradient (1-1:1) 033 Soil Type it Loam K Factor 0.33 Sol Loss Tolerance (in) 0.03 Slope Gradient = 0.33:1 D Not to Scale leact Cum. Dist. Material Vegetation Type Growth Habit Density LS' C ASL bare (in) ASL mat (in) SLT (in) SF Remarks Begin (It) End (it) , 1 0 11 Estb. Veg. Sod Former >=95% 2.43 0.003 0.143 0.000 0.03 69.7 STABLE 2 3 0 11 Composite 0.143 0.000 Vegetation Density=Percentage of soil coverage provided by vegetation C=Cover material performance factor (Fraction of soil loss of unprotected) ASLbare=4verage Sail Loss potential of unprotected soil [uniform inches) ASLmat--Average Soil Loss potential w/material (uniform inches) MSLbare=Maximum Sol Loss potential on unprotected soil (uniform inches) MSLmat=Maximum Soil Loss potential w/material (uniform inches) SLT=Sol Loss Tolerance for slope segment (uniform inches) SF=Safety Factor Composite=Average soil loss from total slope length (uniform inches) )4JVA, Incorporated 1319 Spruce Street Boulder, CO 80302 Ph: 303.444.1951 Fax: 303.444.1957 ❑ JVA, Incorporated 4710 South College Ave. Suite 112 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Ph: 970.225.9099 Fax: 970.225.6923 T.E OU-r (_.L'T ?R a-rLC:! r)f..; (Tf p PILL.' OILTt,-ETr AT ld0rz-rV t.r-it-, OF ��g�tx1^'),•T1) F:ati- k5)NG VOL. 2 71G 5-'7 d. ATIACtItD `E)PRfvp <<z, )G CNu xr'. 5 FES b 77'9c L- rL19RA9 t Date: q I Page: I of ` By: CLAJK Chkd.By: Job No: (0&4, Project:y6A Client: ❑ Preliminary S'Final 1Z122A? rFO �pPC DowJtuAt�a PiT I:I y.o PE '7a LS'7,d: 9 .--i-+ f2�vcLAR 1, 13 F)EE'P -f-{ DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL N -i N J RIPRAP 11-15-82 URBAN DRAINAGE 5 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT I DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL n � 0 2 3 0 RIPRAP MEN No ONE rJOHNE Fa SHEMMEENE 00 .2 1 .4 .6 .8 1.0 Yt/H Use Ho instead of H whenever culvert has supercritical flow in the barrel. **Use Type L for a distance of 3H downstream. FIGURE 5-8. RIPRAP EROSION PROTECTION AT RECTANGULAR CONDUIT OUTLET. 11-15-82 URBAN DRAINAGE 8 FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT APPENDIX B FINAL REPORT for HYDROLOGIC MODEL UPDATE FOR THE FOOTHILLS BASIN MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN PREPARED FOR: City of Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80521 PREPARED BY.- Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc. 2900 South College Avenue, Suite 3B Fort Collins, CO 80525 (ACE Project No. COFC98.15) July 15, 1999 (Revised December 19 1999) ANdERSON CONSUITINq ENgiNEERS, INC Civil 9 Water Resources • Environmental l l9 SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION PAGE: 4 MODEL AFFECT OF WATER QUALITY DEVICE ON OUTFLOW FROM POND PROJECT: WESSTFIELD PARR P.U.D. DATE: 06/02/97 PROJECT NO : loos-44-94 BY HBO NOTE: ASSUME ZERO (0) RELEASE UP TO FILE: NEWPOND ' ELEVATION 96 INPUT FOR OUTLET STRUCTURE 1 - LOWER ORIFICE DIM. (Et) . 0.48 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR LOWER ORIFICE INV. (Et) . 94.00 WEIR LENGTH (ft) . 20.00 LOWER ORIFICE COST. (Cl) . 0.65 WEIR INVERT (ft) . 101.70 PRIMARY WEIR LENGTH (ft) . NA WEIR COST. (CW) . 2.60 WEIR INVERT (ft). . NA TOP OF BERM (ft) . 102.20 WEIR CORP. (CW) . NA INIT. DELTA (ft) . 1.00 100 YR RELEASS RATE (cfa). 2.50 DELTA HEAD (ft) . 1.00 OUTLET PIPS DIM. (ft) 100 YR WSEL REQUIRED (ft). 101.23 !� LA'1�"R a PIPS SLOPE (t) - S(fC- UF'Y1 PC,, NANHINrS n ♦*..fell ♦**..... ...11fw .O[TTPUT. •..f 1f .. f.lf♦1f! lflff w• ♦lffflff PIPS AREA (SF) . 1.23 WETTED PERIMETER 3.93 FEET HYD. RAO (FT) a 0.313 FEET R-2/3 0.4603 OUTLET PIPS CAPACITY 4.57 CPS LOWER ORIFICE AREA (A) . 0.1910 SQUARE FEET •ffflff f111fff ffflff• *OUTPUT. •1f*ff• f.... *. ♦ffflff ' EMERGENCY OVERFLOW HEAD BLEV. OVER LOWER HEAD OVER WEIR TOTAL BLEV. CUM LOWER ORIFICE WEIR FLOW FLOW VOLUME ORIFICE FLOW ft ft cfs ft cfa cfs ..... vv.. ft .00. 'ae-ft ...... ...... ....... ,- 94.00 0.00 ....... 0.00 ..... 0.00 0.00 0.00 94.00 0.00 (0 --v �95.00 95.00 0.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00. 0.27 L 96.00 1.76 1.25 0.00 0.00 1.25 96.00 0.96 97.00 2.76 1.57 0.00 0.00 1.57 97.00 2.46 96.00 3.76 1.63 0.00 0.00 1.93 96.00 4.66 99.00 4.76 2.06 0.00 0.00 2.06 99.00 7.57 100.00 5.76 2.27 0.00 0.00 2.27 100.00 11.22 �I�Y�CW 101.00 6.76 2.45 0.00 0.00 2z.a Ss 101.00 IS.H6 �� 101.10 5 16. :iQir Irl:'Qr} 102.00 7.76 2.93 0.30 8.54 11.17 102.00 19.02 �CIti 102.20 7.96 2.66 0.50 18.18 21.05 102.20 20.75 C Vt 4 101.20 6.96 2.49 0.00 0.00 2.49 101.20 16.25 p F 101.23 6.99 2.50 0.00 0.00 2.50 101.23 16.40 101.70 7.46 2.SB 0.00 0.00 2.58 101.70 18.46 11..f... ♦...111f ♦.f ...1f f.ff.lf. f....1f• ffflff.♦ •....1ff ..1f..1f ORIFICE EQUATION: CA(2gH)%/2 WEIR FLOW BQTN. : CWLB'•3/2 NOTE: BEAD OVER ORIFICE . BEAD OVER CENTER OF ORIFICE CONCLUDB:POND AND OUTLET STRUCTURE ARC ADEQUATE WITH WATER QUALITY STRUCTURE IN PLACE 1 9.11(c Ico.y r :J_� 1 �• too., f .. u.. ANdERSON CONSU[TINq ENqINEERS, INC Civil a Water Resources a Environmental Owner -Project f aofhA &51v+ subject 6l park 1C14011Toni (Por`A l0� Project Number Pape COfeQB' 15 By Date &11) 0? Checked By Date M -1e wl%yh5•-i6lha84 e A,4are rah eu(Je to re nu5f (&,eaw✓v8d �5 Jeut(oped ivi e.onjonc6m d�gk BU�krvce, ,nf Ig97 sth(ahn9 evr✓e 15 mod&J � reasais00 la reno✓e At We +orajr -Pro7 dc4115brA9e 0 �v Meng Oe ra � ers +o eo(ian 57o9-inch 'dhox rcd#All ev?n�. -Ie, WON15 m6at,P Lbelo,)eleu61,OA 5o9b), 4,4voltYne15 removed Fromall s,,hse9✓eni eJeuahons. 'ifK G_A I"{ At el �eponJ oAJ aevelopervPQft wIAPtrk reachA a reemesi oa rof5'inqq 4e hem 61n l weir e1e✓at>vn o� fo 51 oa,l and 51od•a � rt,5 ptc #,e(y. The 45f d p1,045 .art AC sforAemeorporafe G' ealevlafian5 frpM Felavary Iggl;iVr fie re-8e5ill o� �iePonA. 66,Ahvn TPipe orip'icee Weir Dq6% `IbfjJ_N/charIe %ra99ecVolome 59% b D o 0 �bq% o 1. 5 6 59q$ I.& D Ir8 3.10 sxi9 . 2- I o 5100 a.3 o 0?-3 to.ab 5101 a-5 n a,5 1q,40 510117 ),6 a a,G 51na, a. I a(,1 1 P*otdr fax Note 7671 °a"-S-1(8 -11 at I ' Tb vllfi� �kn gran t} t_c.t co. F Fc, r FF11 ", • ZZI U0700 ' Fax G.l� LZI Fax • LZt lQJ`"`l3 2- buy dJs CEa4krs) (u,uk 3 - r outL 40W -b d"IIXL IA do of lofS a CCLl% a wt%ul¢ U4LC{ LI Vo1j c r te'� C6 CLL etc inu Kda�Cu a� ' a recL (Ofs - &Lw tk <4 �. I ep, ( cress -of !UG I rs (4 SEA) -» e"r.L CE 1c2 uty d ro s ra fk 40 c Atb r;�-) L -Lc, UAL-c' m 15. 2. c.Gs ' �iot.vs z- PAI .tky-vR GYQ�.� (p { Aw- W �I!JQ►r' ' w01 (• IS •.. 510Z.Z , .1 weA f T� 1 5014 509(y o-I to 1.Z5 O �,ZS Wit Cuvl.o.. ' 5091 I.5 2.`{(0 1.51 O 1.57 InsariAo in+o 50R6 z.� 4.4 1,65 i"roka, da{' ' So9q S lop 3.4f I L Z.Z Z.Z7 0 Z. ZI 510 Z.&Z ' S102,2 .`ice 2D.-15 Zdo7 O 2.101 e-'d os '16% AA(e 5loZ.'1 -.12., Z3 61 Z,�6 18.36 21.oto ' XQ 1 = )8.38 I .1 L ._ ... ...IL n .mil PRIM M n 1 1 1 W„W�J�W $WwWjj NNu11 uViW 66 a 1 �AARRR,'j � 3 1� 1 1 1 1 1 5our-r-<- ® (}IYu^k _y �int AcS _ C1�}c drs�n is used to C�.- l a l t° 23c�S �,.a► d.s oJn t-�.lcc t, = 2-5 c�s -}- i-s c f s err•, 17l lsr� F<YV. c0661�GiN-Iv- C_or-ners Q = 21 cis 3 E4 �., u�scx�rcrp'YiFrsts a -to _ (.52Av-cs Csl•: ads ; f Z o r� s C rEv au) 4.32 a�cncs �G ( fob.. l) = I i /k i r\ = = S.% iol k^ I.52C 95i + 2.8 t *2) 4.3 Q = 0.47(►.25� r;5= ±i (4.32� _ � •S �s 30 ' HYDROLOGY FOR UDSEWER ANALYSIS 3'l REPORT OF STORM SEWER SYSTEM DESIGN USING UDSEWER-MODEL VERSION 4 DEVELOPED BY JAMES C.Y. GUO ,PHD, PE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER IN COOPERATION WITH URBAN DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT DENVER, COLORADO *** EXECUTED BY DENVER CITY/COUNTY USE ONLY ...................................... ON DATA 11-01-1997 AT TIME 12:36:42 *** PROJECT TITLE RELEASE FROM WESTFIELD PARK + BURR PROP: = 4CFS_ * RETURN PERIOD OF FLOOD IS 100 YEARS *** SUMMARY OF HYDRAULICS AT MANHOLES i ---------- MANHOLE ----------- CNTRBTING --------- RAINFALL ---------- RAINFALL ---------- DESIGN ---------- GROUND ---------- WATER --------- COMMENTS ID NUMBER AREA * C DURATION INTENSITY PEAK FLOW ELEVATION ELEVATION MINUTES INCH/HR CFS FEET FEET ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.05 5072.81 5072.06 OK 1.00 200.00 195.26 0.25 50.05 5077.78 5072.43 OK 2.00 195.00 194.51 0.26 50.05 5076.97 5073.49 OK 3.00 10.00 57.50 1.45 14.50 5075.31 5074.21 OK 4.00 5.00 18.18 2.90 14.50 5075.31 5074.47 OK 5.00 180.00 197.12 0.23 42.21 5076.14 5075.24 OK 6.00 175.00 196.33 0.24 42.21 5077.23 5076.50 OK 7.00 10.00 218.24 0.06 0.55 5078.70 5077.05 OK 8.00 .5.00 211.76 0.11 0.55 5078.70 5077.05 OK 9.'00 160.00 194.07 0.26 41.66 5077.91 5077.43 OK 10.00 155.00 194.11 0.26 40.31 5078.05 5077.72 OK 11.00 150.00 197.04 0.24 35.28 5079.49 5078.69 OK 12.00 20.60 221.76 0.03 0.50 5082.42 5079.08 OK 13.00 15.00 - 220.78 0.03 0.50 5080.99 5079.09 OK 14.00 10.00 218.82 0.05 0.50 5081.00 5079.14 OK 15.00 5.00 212.94 0.10 0.50 5081.60 5079.14 OK 16.00 10.00 218.82� 0.05 0.50 5081.50 5079.08 OK 17.00 5.00 212.94 0.10 0.50 5081.50 5079.08 OK 18.00 115.00 189.13 0.30 34.78 5081.67 5079.52 OK 19.00 10.00 172.94 0.44 4.40 5080.23 5079.94 OK FOOTHILLS MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN UPDATE AND, WESTFIELD PARK P.U.D. REGIONAL DETENTION POND ANALYSIS Prepared for: The City of Fort Collins & Progressive Living Structures Prepared by Faucett Engineering Services 1010 Ashford Ct. Ft. Collins, CO 80526 (303)223-5481 December 1, 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS i DESCRIPTION 1 PAGE INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND I 1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY 1 ' 1.3 PREVIOUS DRAINAGE STUDIES 2 II. ANALYSIS OF STUDY AREAS ' 2.1 HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS 2 2.2 DRAINAGE CRITERIA 2 2.3 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS 3 2.4 HISTORIC SWMM UPDATE 5 2.5 DEVELOPED SWMM UPDATE 7 ' III. SUMMARY 8 IV. REFERENCES 10 APPENDIX 11 VICINITY MAP 12 TECHNICAL APPENDIX 17 UDSEWER ANALYSIS .18 ' SWMM ANALYSIS 39 HISTORIC SWMM ANALYSIS 40 HISTORIC FLOWS 2 YEAR STORM 44 HISTORIC FLOWS 10 YEAR STORM 65 HISTORIC FLOWS 50 YEAR STORM 82 HISTORIC FLOWS 100 YEAR STORM 99 DEVELOPED SWMM ANALYSIS 116 SWMM FILE STOCKMOE.DAT 117 POND RATING CURVE FOR WESTFIELD PARK 119 SWMM FILE STOCKMOD.DAT 150 SWMM FILE STOCK101.DAT 175 SWMM FILE STOCK102.DAT 206 SWMM FILE STOCK]03.DAT 245 DEVELOPED FLOWS 100 YEAR STORM 246 DEVELOPED FLOWS 2 YEAR STORM 288 DEVELOPED FLOWS 10 YEAR STORM 302 DEVELOPED FLOWS 50 YEAR STORM 316 DESIGN OF AREA INLET FOR SKYLINE ACRES 330 BASE SWMM MODEL USED FOR THIS STUDY BY RBD, APR. `96 336 EXHIBITS 365 n I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background ' The Westfield Park, P.U.D. is a single family development located in the Northeast Quarter of Section 34, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6' P.M., Larimer County ' Colorado. The development site is bounded on the north by Horsetooth Road and on the east by the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal. A vicinity map for Westfield Park is included in the Appendix. The original Foothills Basin (Basin G) Drainage Master Plan, which was prepared by Resource Consultants, Inc. in February 1981 called for a regional detention pond to be located on the Westfield Park property. This detention facility was labeled as detention pond # 19 in the original master plan. A copy of Figure 8 from the Master Plan Report, which depicts detention pond 19 is included in the Appendix. In addition Table 5 is included which shows the release rate from pond #19 to be 23 cfs for ' all storms. Since the time that the original master plan was prepared many changes have occurred in the Foothills Basin. The original SWMM was most recently updated in April 1996 by RBD, Inc., for the Warren Farms improvements. This model which was last updated by RBD was used as the base model for this study, since it is the most current model. 1.2 Purpose and Scope of Study ' The purpose of this study is to update the Foothills Basin SWMM to reflect existing and proposed developments which are planned for that portion of the Foothills Basin southwest of the intersection of Horsetooth Road and Shields Street. This update included incorporating the specifics of the following developments: 1.Westfield Park PUD - proposed 2.Imperial Estates - existing 3.Skyline Acres - existing 4.Horsetooth Stables - existing ' 5.Cobblestone Corners - existing 6.Portion of Mountain Ridge Farms - existing 7.Mountain Range Baptist Church - existing 8.Shields Street improvements - proposed 9.Burr property (east side of Westfield) - proposed ' The RBD SWMM had four sub -basins depicting this area for the developed condition. None of the existing detention facilities had been incorporated and the percent impervious cover for the 1981 developed condition was shown as 40% for all four basins. A portion of the SWMM exhibit for the current Foothills Master plan is included in the Appendix, this exhibit shows the four sub -basins (1,2,4 and 5) as currently modeled in the SWMM. This exhibit also shows the location for three proposed detention ponds, (ponds 102, 105 and 201). Pond 102 represents the proposed regional detention.pond in the Westfield Park PUD. Pond 105 is shown on the site of the existing Mountain Range Baptist Church, a detention pond was constructed on this site, however since the site was not part of the city limits at the time of development a regional facility was not built. The ' location of pond 201 is now a gas station, thus the proposed regional tdetention facility was not constructed either. kkoeuer,Cv- 64'-- ��-ficu is prm0idtd. ' 1.3 Previous Drainage Studies The Foothills Basin Master Drainage Plan (RCI 1981) defined general drainage patterns ' and presented a preliminary design for the major drainage facilities within the Foothills Basin. The update which was done in 1996 incorporated changes made to the basin from the Warren Farms Improvements. 1 Many changes have occurred in the Foothills Basin in the vicinity of the proposed Westfield Park PUD developments. Since a proposed regional detention facility was planned at the location of the Westfield Park PUD an update of the model was necessary. II. ANALYSIS OF STUDY AREA 2.1 Hydrologic Analysis MODSWMM was used to simulate the basin response to the storm events modeled. MODSWMM is an updated version of the Denver Urban Storm Drainage and Flood ' Control District's Storm Water Management Model (UDSWM2PC). The MODSWMM model was selected because it incorporates the capability to simulate up to 99 detention ponds or diversion nodes. In addition, more than 399 Sub -basin and conveyance ' elements can be evaluated by the model. The rainfall hyetograph, surface runoff resistance factors, surface storage values and infiltration parameters were taken from the Foothills Basin Master Drainage Plan. The remaining subcatchment parameters (area, width, slope and percentage of imperviousness) and conveyance .parameters (diameter, length and slope) were taken from the proposed grading and drainage plans for each development. Both existing and developed condition parameters are presented in Tables 1 and 2. Documentation of basin parameters is included in the Technical Appendix. 2.2 Drainage Criteria The first step in designing the proposed regional detention facility (pond 102) was to determine if the original master plan criteria of a 23 cfs release rate from the facility was still valid or feasible. As stated earlier many changes had occurred in the Foothills Basin since the time the original model was prepared. One of the major changes was the construction of a 36" storm sewer on the west side of Shields Street which runs from the Mountain Range Baptist Church to the north and out falls into an existing ditch behind the Cunningham Corners development. This storm sewer will have to convey the outfall 1 from pond 102. Because of this it was necessary to determine the available capacity of this storm sewer. The capacity of this storm sewer would become the limiting factor in the release rate from pond 102 rather than the Master Plan rate of 23 cfs. 1 2.3 . Hydraulic Analysis + In order to determine the available capacity in the existing storm sewer system adjacent to Shields Street it was necessary to do a hydraulic analysis of the pipe. The UDSewer program which was developed by Dr. James Guo for the Denver Urban Drainage Control District was used in this study. The first step in this analysis was to field verify the storm drain lengths, slopes, diameters etc. and the invert and ground elevations of all the manholes and inlets. The survey data is included in a back pocket of this report. ' Following this, it was necessary to determine all of the developments, streets, ponds, etc. that were discharging into this system and how much they were contributing during the 100 year storm. All of the drainage reports for the developments that discharge into the pipe were researched to determine areas, c factors and detention pond discharge rates (all of the supporting documents are included in the Technical Appendix). Following this, the hydrology for the storm sewer was determined and is included in the Technical Appendix of this report. Based on the UDSewer analysis, the system could not handle the proposed discharge rate of 23 cfs. It should be noted that the Burr property which is located to the east of the Westfield Park PUD also will discharge into the existing storm sewer system adjacent to Shields Street. Taking the two developments into account, it was determined that the total combined release from the two developments the existing storm sewer system could handle was 4 cfs. Since the 2 year historic release rate from TABLE 1 FOOTHILLS MASTER PLAN/WESTFIELD PARK REGIONAL DETENTION POND SUB -BASIN DATA HISTORICAL CONDITION SUB -BASIN AREA D.S. BASIN %IMP. SLOPE LOCATION H (AC) CONVEY. WIDTH COVER % ELEMENT 70 20.0 400 20.0(43560)/180= 18 1.1 IMPERIAL 4840 71 47.8 401 47.8(43560)/180= 19 1.2 IMPERIAL 11566 72 29.2 158 29.2(43560)/877= 6 1.1 WEST- 1450 FIELD PUD 3 12.3 402 12.3(43560)/800= 8 1.3 HORSE- 670 TOOTH 75 8.9 154 8.9(43560)/1300= 6 1.25 BURR 298 4 37.4 153 37.4(43560)/1340= 12 0.95 SKYLINE 1215 78 5.5 104 5.5(43560)/140= 53 0.7 COBBLE- 1710 STONE 76 2.6 105 2.6(43560)/70= 78 1.25 CHURCH 1618 77 5.57 6 5.57(43560)/40= 50 0.4 SHIELDS 6066 TABLE 2 FOOTHILLS MASTER PLAN/WESTFIELD PARK REGIONAL DETENTION POND SUB -BASIN DATA FULLY DEVELOPED CONDITION SUB -BASIN # AREA (AC.) D.S. CONVEY., ELEMENT BASIN WIDTH % IMP. COVER SLOPE % LOCATION 75 8.9 413 8.9(43560)/150=2584 40 1.25 BURR 76 2.6 105 2.6(43560)/70=1618 78 1.25 CHURCH 4 37.4 152 * 37.4(43560)/1340=1215 12 0.95 SKYLINE 3 12.3 410 12.3(43560)/400=1340 40 1.3 HORSE - TOOTH 71 47.8 401 47.8(43560)/180=11566 19 1.2 IMPERIAL 70 20.0 400 20.0(43560)/180=4840 18 1.1 IMPERIAL 72 5.35 161 5.35(43560)/50=4660 44 0.8 WEST - FIELD 73 9.03 158 9.03(43560)/50=7867 44 1.0 WEST - FIELD 74 9.69 155 9.69(43560)/50=8442 26 0.8 WEST - FIELD 77 5.83 6 5.83(43560)/40=6349 50 0.4 SHIELDS 78 5.5 104 5.5(43560)/140=1710 53 0.7 COBBLE- STONE 79 5.0 156 5.0(43560)/50=4356 44 1.0 WEST - FIELD *For the final S WMM run Stock 103.dat a dummy pond was input (414) to represent the area inlet being built for the Skyline Acres Subdivision. This inlet will control the release from Skyline acres to the 2 year current historical rate which is 10.3 cfs. Therefore, for that run sub -basin 4 will drain into dummy pond #414. the Bun property was 1.5 cfs, this left 2.5 cfs available as the discharge quantity from the ' proposed regional detention facility within Westfield Park. ' 2.4 Historic SWMM Update After completing the UDSewer analysis the Foothills SWMM was updated. Two SWMM models were prepared for this study. The first model reflects the historic condition, i.e. all currently existing developments and ponds from the study area were incorporated into the Foothills Basin SWMM. Basins 1,2 and 4 from the original SWMM (see Figure 3 in the Appendix) were removed and replaced with basins 70, 71, 72, 75, 4, 76, 77 and 78 (see Figure I). Basin 5 from the original SWMM was reduced in size to reflect that a portion of it (basin 3 which represents Horsetooth Stables) was redirected, and now drains across Horsetooth Road, which accurately reflects the existing condition. Following is a list of the new sub -basins in the historic SWMM and what they represent: 1. Basin 70 -20 acre portion of Imperial Estates - no detention ' 2. Basin 71 - 47.8 acres portion of Imperial Estates - no detention 3. Basin 72 - 29.2 acres undeveloped Westfield Park 4. Basin 75 - 8.9 acres undeveloped Burr property ' 5. Basin 4 - 37.4 acres existing Skyline Acres - no detention 6. Basin 76 - 2.6 acre Mountain Range church - detention pond 105 7. Basin 77 - 5.83 acres existing Shields Street and Basins 10,11 and 12 1 Mountain Ridge Farms and portion of Horsetooth Road adjacent to Church - no detention 8. Basin 78 - 5.5 acres Cobblestone Corners - detention pond 104 ' 9. Basin 3 - 12.3 acres Horsetooth Stables - no detention Table 3 which follows depicts the differences in sub -basins between the RCI SWMM and this update. As stated earlier the four basins which depicted the area to the west of Shields Street and south of Horsetooth Road in the RCI Master Plan model were revised to reflect the current existing condition. 1 p L3 ;WU r- LO vi 1 1 TABLE 3 RESOURCE CONSULTANTS `81 FAUCETT ENGINEERING UPDATE `97 BASIN 1 - 69.2 ACRES BASIN 70 - 20 ACRES BASIN 71 - 47.8 ACRES TOTAL - 67.8 ACRES BASIN 2 - 46.9 ACRES BASIN 72 - 29.2 ACRES BASIN 4 - 66.6 ACRES BASIN 75 - 8.9 ACRES BASIN 4 - 37.4 ACRE$ BASIN 77 - 2.6 ACRES BASIN 78 - 5.5 ACRES TOTAL - 54.4 ACRES BASIN 77 - 5.83 ACRES BASIN 5 * - 37.1 ACRES BASIN 3 - 12.3 ACRES TOTAL - 219.8 ACRES TOTAL - 169.53 ACRES * Includes basin 3 The difference in acreage between Basin 2 (RCI MP) and Basin 72 (FES Update) is now ' in the McClellands/Mail Creek Basin. The difference in acreage between Basin 4 of the RCI MP and Basins 4, 75, 77 and 78 of the FES Update also goes to McClellands/Mail Creek. The remainder of Basin 5 (after subtracting out Basin 3) is still in the Foothills Basin; however the outfall is to the east to Shields Street. Basin 3 which primarily, represents the Horsetooth Stables property will outfall to the south into the swale along the south side of Horsetooth, then into the Westfield Park PUD pond. In the developed SWMM the discharge from the future Horsetooth Stables pond has been accounted for in the inflow to the Westfield Park regional pond. ' The 2, 10, 50 and 100 year storms were run for this model and are included in the Technical Appendix. As in the original SWMM this portion of the study area still ' connects to the model at conveyance element 6. The RBD Foothills SWMM showed a peak 100 year flow value at conveyance element 6 of 45.7 cfs, the revised historic model shows a 100 year flow value at conveyance element 6 of 284.2 cfs. A copy of the input and output files for the RBD Foothills SWMM model used for this study is included in the last section of the Technical Appendix. The difference in flow values at conveyance element 6 reflects the lack of detention in the basin as currently developed, and also the ' different modeling methodologies that were used in the RCI Foothills SWMM. The 2 year historic peak flow rates are presented in Table 4. I S F Io 1 I ! ui 1C zc JJ ,1 ! i 7� ill i! ill li, Ill III k ess i 5 z L , u_ Z l: Z Z � C C iV. 41 N I I TABLE 4 DEVELOPMENT 2 - YR HISTORIC PEAK FLOW Skyline Acres 10.3 cfs Horsetooth Stables 2.8 cfs Westfield Park 5 cfs Burr Property 1.5 cfs 2.5 Developed SWMM Update For the fully developed SWMM update basin 72 was divided into 4 different basins which reflect the Westfield Park PUD development (see Figure 2). In addition, the Horsetooth Stables and Burr property were revised to reflect a 40% impervious cover ' value representing future build out of these basins (see Table 2). Several iterations of the fully developed SWMM were done within this study to determine detention volume requirements for Westfield Park, as well as Horsetooth Stables and Burr. The first two models which were done (STOCKMOE.dat, STOCKMOD.dat) were used ' to determine the volume of detention that Westfield Park PUD would need to provide for their development alone, with no regional detention requirements. Based on a historic release rate from the site of 5 cfs which was determined in the historic SWMM discussed above the volume required for Westfield Park alone would be 4.7 ac-ft. The next models prepared were STOCK 101..dat and STOCK102.dat. The purpose of ' these models was to determine the approximate volume of detention required for the Burr property and Horsetooth Stables. These models were first based on a zero release rate from the site, and then using that approximation and the two year historic release ' rates (established in the historic SWMM) the final volumes were determined. For Horsetooth Stables with an allowable release rate of 2.8 cfs, 1.8 ac-ft of detention will be required when they ultimately develop. For the Burr property with an allowable release ' rate of 1.5 cfs, 1.4 ac-ft of detention will be required. Please note that these volumes are based on a 40% impervious cover value. If the developments ultimately have a higher ' percent impervious cover the required detention volumes will increase. The STOCK IO2.dat SWMM also approximated the required volume for a regional ' detention pond (pond 102) within the Westfield Park development. Based on a zero release rate that volume was 17.6 ac-ft. ' The final SWMM prepared for this study was STOCK] 03.dat. This model reflects the analysis and design that was used for the Skyline Acres subdivision and also the final design of the regional detention facility located within Westfield Park. The Skyline ' Acres development as it currently exists does not have an outlet for their runoff other than ' flowing over Shields Street. This weir flow across Shields Street does not occur however, until after the water exceeds elevation 4982.00. This will remain unchanged after the South Shields Street improvements are made because the proposed grades are ' being held almost identical to the existing grade. Because Skyline acres has no means to drain the runoff from their development an area inlet will be provided as part of the extension of the Shields Street Storm Sewer improvements for the Skyline Acres ' Subdivision. This area inlet will allow 10.3 cfs into the Shields Street Storm Sewer system from the Skyline acres development. This flow rate is equal to the 2 year historic flow rate from Skyline Acres as established in the updated historic SWMM (see Table ' 4) The STOCK103.dat model was also used to determine the actual volume of detention that is required for a regional detention pond within the Westfield Park PUD, with a release rate of 2.5 cfs. That volume as shown in Table 5 is 16.1 ac-ft. This model also I incorporated the detention ponds which were sized for the Burr and Horsetooth Stables properties and a two point rating curve for both. The STOCK103.dat SWMM which most accurately reflects the fully developed conditions within the study area was run for ' the 2, 10, 50 and 100 year storms and is included in the Technical Appendix. Table 5 presents the pond release rates and volumes required for the Burr, Horsetooth Stables and Westfield Park properties. . TABLE 5 PROPERTY NAME RELEASE RATE - CFS VOLUME - AC -FT Burr Property 1.5 cfs 1.4 ac-ft Horsetooth Stables 2.8 cfs 1.8 ac-ft Westfield Park 2.5 cfs 16.1 ac-ft * 100 year water surface elevation in pond 5101.2 (see Technical Appendix for rating curve) ' I11. SUMMARY As stated earlier the RBD Foothills SWMM shows a 100 year peak flow value at conveyance element 6 of 45.7 cfs. This historic SWMM model update done as part of this study shows the 100 year peak flow at design point 6 to be 284.2 cfs. Finally the fully developed SWMM STOCK103.dat which reflects the ultimate build out of the study area shows a 100 year peak flow rate of 48.9 cfs. The 100-year peak flows for both the existing and developed conditions from the pertinent reports are presented in Table 6. The majority of the 48.9 cfs is coming from the undetained basin 77 which represents the proposed Shields Street improvements, the Mountain ridge Farms basins and the area of Horsetooth Road adjacent to the church. The 100 year peak flow from basin 77 is shown in the STOCK103.out SWMM to be 45.2 cfs. TABLE 6 100 - YR PEAK FLOW RATES AT CONVEYANCE ELEMENT 6 REPORT EXISTING FLOW DEVELOPED FLOW RCI, `81 178.77 cfs 137.8 cfs (Alternative 2) RBD, `96 N/A 45.7 cfs FES, `97 284.2 cfs 48.9 cfs As presented in Table 6, comparing both the RBD, `96 model and the FES `97 model at conveyance element 6, downstream of the most recent changes to the Foothills Basin (see original SWMM schematic in exhibits) to the original RCI master plan done in `81 shows the benefits of the master plan recommended pond in Westfield Park to downstream areas. Also, more accurate input parameters and modeling techniques explain the.difference between the RCI master plan and the more recent models. ' IV. REFEUNCES , 1. Foothills Basin (Basin G) Drainage Master Plan by Resource Consultants, Inc. ' February 1981. 2. Final Design of Regional Detention Pond 247 and Outfall For the McClellands and Mail Creek Basin, by RBD, Inc. October 1994. ' 3. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Westfield Park PUD, by Shear Engineering, October 1997. 4. Storm Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Mountain Range Baptist Church, by Stewart & Associates, May 1992. 5. Final Storm Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Cobblestone Corners, by Stewart & Associates, October 1993. ' 6. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Kingston Woods P.U.D. 2nd Filing, by Shear Engineering, February 1993. 7. Final Drainage Report for Lot 2 The Market at Horsetooth Commons, by Shear Engineering, September 1990. 8. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Seven Oaks P.U.D., by Water, ' Waste & Land, Inc. December 1994. 9. Warren Farms Alternative Components to the Foothills Basin Master Plan (lower portion of Reach & Basin G) Fort Collins, Colorado, RBD, April 24, 1996 ' (revised). ' r n jll III I_wcORN RMM AITH2 s1_-1-ev W REBM MM 3 1/3 ALkAW. C MONUMENT 90BOXS4AYPEO 'UM OF COLU Pgti NLOXS. LS OA9]. 193r III ) III III 1� SKYLINE/I �-yAA WNrlYwvmh I sDribvi` AAU TRACT B .D PARK 15• ns W/ 1.5 CU-m me M L RIFRW MEN 2 v()X E E "M my, Our. uxImos iul i It It \ i III I 222 XII I pppppp IIII I IIII I / __ -. jva�. Jv.w b.IIv • .yrj6i:a=.1Wp.LI. ��4 y(`��}1A\')v?v: `.. _: � 1 ( N I I 11 / Y s:Bljl�- INLET r JVA.. WORPoRATEO BIISHXXESl WMAXRW m FAX M44 wm i' CURB MFT(T" 1 ��//''�� PIUSANT LAIO A VJJIEY IRPoG1pN MEN REON DRIVE OVERRUN SP LBUY B YYY 50 1 W SCALE N FEET W/ 1.5 OI-m BIPED ' 1YPE L APRM II DE8IDREDBY: cAIL / lw -YR YbE a 5086.E DBAMNKNO CYN 2-YR WSE a 5093a MNECNCDn: UT ❑ AREA DRAW `XOM/ a SW3.1 DA10140 1' QIRB NLEi DATETE 1OMN(AM% `2' TRCXE a,uW10- -� FLARw BD SECTION W/ IOXW (C)BWINANC ww/�BAiEAOmw A 5 .RUR� M]EFFWSIEJNAnDRI (SEE 9EEr M.1) .5 1.0 1.0 = AREA AWS SRYN MANHOLE p BASIN MESON PONT I PANIE OWIFLOW SPLLWAY DRRECTNN OF ROW (DEVELOPED) Z N DESIGN - -..:..CRITERIA . .. •. DESIGN BASIN DESIGN PDRNi AREA AC 2m COEfi COfiP Iwm;4,R19.21 0D A I 0.8 0.B5 1.0 Q B 2 0.12 0.75 0.91 OD c 3 MH all 0.11 06 D 1 0.31 &N 1.0 09 E 5 0.19 0.w IN 85 F 6 0.15 0.59 0.71 93 H 8 613 0.w 0.32 .211 9 0.15 an 0.9E .♦6J 10 MW M63 Mn O6N 11 0.N 0.69 08S .99 SAX W 13 0.32 LLw 0.M 1M TN N 11 0.19 M5 Bw 1.08 IN O m BUM P 1 15 1 1111 0.5 10.75 1&87 S.B5 0 19 0.15 O39 0.M 0.12 QSB R 18 0.11 0.25 aM 0.0E 0.22 S 1 19 Imml OY6 1 M95 1 0.16 0.85 T I NI I MID 1170 10.87 10.15 0.80 u 1 ZI 11.19 10.14 1 at] 10.35 1.49 ETENTIBN BAST DRAINAGE ABDUNARY 00 d Q V9L (AC FT) 1.DE sD PDPOSED S10fi1 MAN � Q 91N WAVER 50 m A AOW UK W p J O Q Z WADE mom 5096.w Xv- NODE DRUN CRY of Fort Cdk% Cdwedo W SINFALE U71M PLAN APPRDVAL Q Z 5U8ADE 50931 itPENCEPENCEµppl{O _ O > J 13 ,yA DE (CFs) 1.5 �J PROPOSED INDEX CITY ENOEER DATE U Z O U d p CONTW ONTWPS CNEfXw BY: - J ~ J %w (OS) 1.5 WATER h WASTEWATER UTAItt DALE 'i J [Y EWQLJ *� OPM MIEcNED In. OO > m V0. ULLFEFG S SMINWARR UTILITY DAM IOVEIL Ia MCIXw Y PAS AND KZREATIM ) DAM O wA TOURS 1 MIEWD BY: _ `4jll EASTNG INTERI4LIATE IRAfFIt FNOIEOt OATS _ CONTMRS CKOXEO BY: N I DATE _f �NTERVAL 1 FOOT SHEETNO SEE I;Mq UCMAI PLANS FOR PONSIRICTIOY DETAILS SEE CO6NNMTIOI PUNS FOR TMITIOI POND NOTES C1.2 ACRES NIS 0 i Didof I � r z WDIOE TRACKING EMT 4110 I %' AREA CRAW ME: a ' i % i� aphygmnax(rw) - TRACT B SQUAW eM[ f , I r I IL " ��.. fR®W BIAPoER(re) - M,,./WESTFIELD PARK Pm MBIA+m MPRW (3 UT CIA HAP MY [MOWN CON Y �i MI E 40 BD (SEE 9EET ON L .,:..[a ro.'• herwL:. �?,AI; , IGITY.S ':Iyy xe.J., - SCALE: 1 .4 __ — —`' ai�i ;'`� 4' rn'`.:t3a3;!R??' "1r 'I! ?' mmM SLOPEPROM ME PROPOSED CONSMUCRON (CONSISTS OF ROADWAY, UTIUNES, GRADING CO6IRUCTON IN MOMNT TRAP CONSTRUCTED AROUND R IN PAM AREAS, 1MS TRAP W19SIS Or mosm OEM CONUMCTON AM ME CONSPRUCTON OF THE FT. COLWAS VNTEERS OF AMERICA ODEWY CONCRETE BLOCK, SCREEN ARID GRAVEL TO PETER OE SIOIN RUNOFF AIW ALEN Warr SILT (ME SET HOUSING PR0.1ECi . THE TOTAL MEA AFFECTED IS MpR ATELY" ACRES. 11E TO SETAE W 1. IN FIMOS MIS TRAP CONSISTS OF STRAW BONES DETAILS OF TIE ESTIMATED SEQUENCE OF CUNSi1RUC11ON STARTS IS AS FOLLO'W5: DESCRIBED EROSION CONTROL MEASURES ARE MORENO IN ME WNSM OM MkddE E ROAD M DWEIEOT GRmtre; - OCTOBER. 2001 ITEMS ME SCHEDULED TO BE IMPLEMENTED ACC(MRDING TO ME CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE µ UTNY CLNSTRUCH ON - NOVEEMBER, 2001 MWM PROCEEDS, IMPUMMIA110N OF INOINDUAL BMPS 15 M WNOK MM ME �N0941 �R SEE CONSTRUCTIOA - NOWNBTR, 2001 CONSTRUCTION THEREBY MITI THE EXPOSURE OF UNPROTECTED AREAS ME KMWNT ST�� PLM �� PAMNG - MAY, 2001 FENCE, INLET PROTECTOR, AND SINALOA OF THE CONSMUCTON ENTRANCE DULL BE Unluay, 2m0 97 RESTGRAEM - AMOUNT. 0001 PREFORMED MEN ME ESPOING BEGINS. FUGHIWE DUST EMISSIONS RESULTING FROM MMM ACTMPES AND/M MINE �f1ALL BE CONTROLLUD USING ME BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL Me City of Fart Wiens Sta W Dy WMt Naiad ME PRESENT 97 CONSISTS Of MOSEY FMMW . COMPOSED PRIMARILY OF TREES AND TECHNOLOGY AS DEFINED �1' ME COLOtACO DEDMMENT OF HEALTH AT ME THE O tmlrol iupentn must be IwUW at Nast 24 Mn psW to NATI E MAKES, ME 9R ITS LOCATED SWAP OF ME INTERSECTION OF MST HMSETWM GRADING. THE DRAWLING IS TO BE MAINTAINED AND EIH DWIED AS WNSTRUCTIOI any construction m 1 e8e AWE, MD SENECA St. NO q[F9TE FLOWS CONTRIBUTE TO MIS DEVELOPMENT, OMSIR pROGRESMS ESPECALLY / MNO ME BUILDING 9R FLOWS ARE INTERCEPTED AND 6ARMED TO AN ONSITE DETENTION POND LOCATED ALONG THE AN remid POMOW At fining e1101I be inshad MIX W WESTERN EDGE OF THE pRGPEBTY STORM RUNOF ANALYSIS IS THUS LIMITED TO M97 AT ME COMPLETION O E MASS GRADING. ALL WEDGED Met AREAS DULL HAWS THE any Mil dNtu g ac4.fly (slrcApi striainq, grobtg. DEVELOPMENT. A PHASE III DI$MNAGE REPORT HAS BEEN WNIUE0 TO ENGINEER FOR TIME SURFACE ROUGHENEDµ PLµTED YAM A REYEMTATION SEED MIX. WaTANCH 6 TO BE etc). NI often reglrid Nosier control meomrm shall be CITY O FT. W'CLINS STORMWAI)En UTUTES DEPARTMENT. ME FINDINGS O MIS µAL9S MAINTAINED MROUGNW CONSTRUCTON BY N CONTRACTOR UHT( AREAS ARE Nstaled at Nr omrmrwte Tone n the crosthii HALL NOT BE REPEATED MERE. PERMANENTLY LµDSC am as MlRcatd n Ne WOr propel nh le, AFPUCATON OF THESE BMPS I!M STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ME FOR CMSMUCMIN ME INLET PROTECTION W. 'SE MSTALLFE AS Pe- ntUrb pans ma NONon control raIXt. PERILED µD ARE CONSDEREI) TEMPORARY, POST-DEWELOPMENT STORMWATER MMM BT TO BE KU 3KR STRUCTURES ARE pre dsturbmce MannXn dd be p M Of caN stand CONSTRUCTED. ME SMNS ME MPS m. IB K REYMfO ONO PERMANENT nergeecer a ANN Rmed t IX e wed m of siding IS PROMDED MRCUCH W£GETARO LMOSCMEO AREAS, A STORM COLLLCPON SYSTEM µ0 A LMDSCAMNG INSTALLATIINS ME COAMETE. L t 5hY1 e r tea to Me ma u.ed lIX PERNANFHT DFIEunOu POND. i m es 1 t lm apaatlaa. ma Iw IM1e enateet ME EROSION MENTA AND SEgNEI(T CONTROL-PLANMAY BE MmINOI BY µMORIEFO pr lictl peod 1 father REPREffNTATIWE A$ nu COIOngS WNMµi. NONSTRUCTURAL BMPS WILL BE IMF PS MEO 1G THE NOINGN PROCESS POSSIBLE. ME I µ T etyin during; ns. ooddi partially i shag, UTILIZATIN OF NONSM E NUMN UPS DULL SE µ ONGOING RREC PROCESS DIRECTED AT � YCT CONTRACTOR ST Yme mrobm kept r tatty t II 1 A ladpippi Meg Nid shall be PREWTNTING EROSION. ME PHYFUSE VEY L UPS NLL RECEIVE CONTINUOUS ETUR AN ON SITE FROM I Mi ,Wa BECTCN TUNED AND µD EQUIPYFXi N CONDKD AREAS kept c gh T I ve by ma en P d RMI IF ME m) FnPCTCN BLCAUSE MET AVERT PROBLEMS BEFORE THEY CIX.LR AND ON 511E FROM MI RUNNFF DULL BE C n throuO AND NLIFAED WIFMALS ALL BE -"jlaM lours ti ICM1 agNalkry IX ON PmmalMml am rF Txc Am) [nn gMIICINRPL UPS. _ _Rrlwan rc[ Tls GRFNNn "Ain""rNRDW('lFn mrM_tw. TMe'dr,i Ervwn' M xNMsiL 45wT ) N lYNdeLN 'wpe NayA.pul�iiaru ACIARESS AIMED AT ACWEMNU ME GUAL (A MINMZINU LXu9LW. IUNIHMM t, CONTACT MTH SURFACE CONSMUCTON PERSOMNEL WILE BE INSTRUCTED AND MKRVMD IN CONSTRUCTION METHODS DESIGNATED AREA AND CONSISTENT WTH EROSION PREVENTION PRACTICES. THE CONSTRUCTION ACCESS MD PANS. MLL SE 1 To PARKING WI BE GRACED AND ,WNTRM MM A OWSHEO STONE BASE COURSE DURING DJNSINUCGGN. All 01 AREAS MILL HAVE ME SURFACE ROUGHENED AND MLL BE WvlM. PERMMENTLY LANDSCAPED IN THE NON-IRRIGATEN AREAS OR TEMPORARILY SEEDED UNTIL ME EROSION CONTROL L 111E PLANNED INSTALLATIONS ARE COMPLETED. SEEDING RECCWIMMDATIONS WE PROMDED CONTRACTOR. SILT FEE BELOW, SET MAY BE MCOFW TO MAKE ME BEST USE OF RATING GRUBBwGS AND BYPASS AND RWMKD I STMWINGS, SOILS WILL BE CHECKED REhiEDED. AT MINIMUM PLANNED STRUCTURAL BMPS FOR EROSION AND MOMENT CONTROL ARE SDµ W MIS DAYS MG AFTER SWIM DRAWNG. MOWN MD SEDII,MENTATICN CONTROL CONSIST OF KW RAL MEASURES 10 LIMIT REOUT ED BY Ott O F1 MOSSI , MIS P.FN MTH DIETAILS ON ERO90N CCNMGL MEASURES SHOULD MINIMIZE NUISANCE SILT AND KDIMENTAb1DN EXITING ME SW AND PWW T CLOSING EXISTING STORM SEMERS . IENIALION 9fML w ME RUNOFF PROCEEDS ACROSI THE PRWERtt IS PMMARLLY WEST TO EASE. THUS, A SILT FENCE WILL BE CONSMUCRD ALONG ME EAST ANDNORTH DOES M ME ER W. MI5 TEMPORARY FENCE MLL REM'§',R1t1 1 ME 9R HAS BEEN SEEDED AND FINK WEOIATION IS ESTMNSHM THE FENCE SHP1L BE INSTALLED MD MAINTANEO UNTIL THE STORM KKR STRUCTURES ARE COMPLETED. 'NTNMCE WILL BE PROMDED AT ACCESS OFF OF WEST A STABGZED CONSTRUCEM SALE BARRIERS WLL BE INSTALLED AS SHOWN AND MAINTAINED HORYTOOTH AVE. STRAW ME WHERE FUTURE GRASS -LINED SWWES WLL CARRY THE AT LOCAIIONS AROUND THE SHIDSCAPING OF ME SITE, THEY BAKERS MLL REDUCE ME STORM RUNOFF. PRIM TO LVES AND ALLOW ME DISNRWED SOL TO SETTLE OUT. FLOW VELOCITY W THESE STALE 9DEOATS GRMA SLUE G ANA MOUNTAIN MCME CANADA MLDRYE SLENDER WIEATRASS WESTERN MHEATGRASS BEARDLESS WEATpUSS M OR TRALLER. M EARTHEN DIKE MR SE CONSTRUCTIPD ME MEL STORAGE AREA TO PREWNT MATERIALS FROM VOFF. EOOPMFRT MNNTENAWE MR BE KW MED N A NATO MNNTEIeNCE PROUGGI SUCH AS ME UK OE MR VAIN PETROLEUM M MUCM rURES MR BE INSPECTED DAILY [DURING CONSTRUCTION BY THE AND HAYRAR BARRICIG NU BE CHECKED FOR UNDERMINING MO EXPANDED AS NEEDED ME TEYPCRMY VEGETATION OF BARE iIRMLY AND AREAO WHERE IT 6 LOST OR DAMAGED MR BE CONTRACTOR OR HIS AGENT SHALL NSCCT ALL GIMPS EVERY 14 Ni PRECIPITATION EWENIS, INSfA S MD UMFICATMS M :0.LINS ALL BE IMPLEMENTED WMN M NWRS OF NOnFICATCN. FA9m ILL INCLUDE SOMMO, KUM% AND TREES AND SNUB RMIIINS ING CONVINCE. RAME so MIX BOUIELOIA CURIPFIOOA RZ NACIE BipIU A GRANTI6 1.I NAx ELTMI 5.0 NANTE FLYMUS.%µ/AN95 10 IF/ANTE PISCROVRAOIITAUU6 2.2 //ANTE ��aasa�� SNMIX 4.8 //ACES �'""7CDDL�gEM 4.5 //ACRE protect T or any vas rearrami rapperho by Maw disturMg activity fin more IM1m thirty (30) dap helm NNred tmpwary OF perm ant Hawn m ird (e.g. mM/mulA. landscaping, etc.) A YM unless athereia NNNWa by Me Sto wta DWo mmL Me p ty Ad be wtN ma mml at nil l OFF durNnW construction mtnlln a a toNesmt e dc ddFJ All hand dnWNrg mlmtlm end be mm"atay eimmt W ohm WgMM dust ion 1s W Wp t peferlim, as delamWM by Me City of Fat CNMs FngneNNg Dw"wt. mimporary (s Wrd) vow control I rm nd N spected card repmred Or reconsbuchol as Irmmy of ry each rvroff ewll in vdu to myrt cml'nuN pvlummm of Men ntenhd lunctim, NI ret6rctl WnmtA part mMrhy Nase on paevi] rmdeoy wrWm Mall be mar and dmmd of n o manner and location For as not to Poser their re ow into my deanargenay, No 1 stockpile shell raced ton (10) fret in height. NI seat stocEples shol be protected from mtment bmspM by MNace raqvinvig. notdng, and perilwW PDT forcing My WT ModoI rmanng awe SO Np to be sedd and mlldhd. Oty EkrM lla pm ib the MaL'ng, drsppng, IX dMmitng of mats ere my o8M match onto City shots by IX hm my Mhdr My'0 d tmt deposited mated rid be deaetl Non toy by Me mnWcla. k A CNefferu Ca •Yrad'uaA Pu l � Gal Fill,, FSerWd yiaFnc— SECTION A -A Garranal Nolen 1. 1 Pasect red Ranwve fi tNne am, in Ell M1m oM II of Mn NNE dep No Nerin bled. Removed aalmmt aMl N aepoelnn in an erne vMa VToa ve nt bann or sane attack; ,.accounts. 2. Sae maM wr of stall be tn:d=.drl remand Team Mav6M any of roads. AREA INLET PROTECTION DETAILn TUTS `1-1/Y TO Sr ROCK 1/Y - 3/4' PLIER LAYER EROSION CONTROL MEAsSURES fWMENT BURED MALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL RPRAR &O PROTECTION LANDSCAPING IS COMPLETED (S E WET CLO) VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL r1 IRS Place a d Stake SL ew e les aWx-"'R. iaca r :Eafunce Bales .. v V BidRe-. -Shaw B:N ,p .aaAra eaaxeu ,Eurr IIM sIp � FRul np � rrr General Moron: 1. when met as a math us perimeter filter earns tm,lnwnum tributary arrom is Ilmtea to 0.215 acres par 100 feet ofa 'r 2 Inspect, 'pin, And repai ION neceia l me RMen after each sto 2. Alrcolesemust be replaced afteC1$ hantN uman O Maaol a grbnud. by Ne EnginNring PNscrn 101 lower use. STRAW BALE EROSION BARRIER DETAIL �� NIS yy F Er nY, I FLAN VIEW" Ova FD .LW :er know aS I xaI re'd SW ;I ! c.,b Tel win: buiplarre an repair filtersLNr each evI.MMOVO sadinwm when ere m storm aria �4nn me mar p has F me " low and .emmem shall "'or. CURB INLET SECTION Vlc"W GeMml Novi 1. TM motlmum UNI area M hernI in 0.25 acne PN 100 Not of anise. 2. inspect and after fence after each Adirent then oraMr dams SILTFENCEEROSION BARRIER DETAIL /el Sfmma U711JEr CHECKED OF PAIMS All KtYEAMN CIEOEO BY 1RAfF1C ERgXFDt NA, INCO OMMD oM.p: 'aeame"Mi FAX WENT, Tea dhdrw,ems oEewrEDBY'. Aix gU"W RUX CHEGIEDBY: KAT J ; d W� o U W ui Z O J zV SO J K � O Ms.O W C1.3