Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDrainage Reports - 03/02/1995PROPERTY OF T COLLINS UTILITIES Finla6Appru ed Perxirt LMIAIIVAUt AIVU rMUaIUly �,UIv I MUD nEPORT FOR VALUE PLASTICS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO WATER WASTE & LAND FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR VALUE PLASTICS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Prepared for: The Neenan Company 2290 East Prospect P.O. Box 2127 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Prepared by: Water, Waste & Land, Inc. 2629 Redwing Road, Suite 200 Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 February 13, 1995 ++• �4§QJ• �tiG\STEREO••• 16466 %� •: Sg �aG: - j :::: '4 `ter TF OF COVS.V 0 WATER WASTE & LAND �G February 14, 1995 Mr.Glen D. Schlueter City of Fort Collins Utility Services Stormwater 235 Mathews Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 2629 Redwing Rd. Suite 200, Fort Collins, Colorado 80526-2879 (303)226-3535 fax (303) 226-6475 RE: VALUE PLASTICS - FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT Dear Mr. Schlueter: Transmitted herewith is a copy of the subject report for your review and approval. All calculations for this report have been made in accordance with criteria established by the City of Fort Collins. If you have any questions or require any modifications please call me. Thank you. Sincerely, WATER, WASTE & LAND,71N JM�auri H. Lutkin, P.E. Manager, Civil Engineering Division Consulting Engineers and Scientists FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR A NEW BUILDING FOR VALUE PLASTICS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO DEVELOPMENT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Location A new, two-story building is planned for Value Plastics on a site along Timberline Road as shown on the enclosed Site Map. A site layout at a larger scale and a Drainage Study and Erosion Control Plan are included with the Utility Drawings. The site, containing approximately 4.65 acres, is within the block bounded by Danfield Court -_ on the south, Eastbrook Drive on the West, Vermont Drive on the North and Timberline Road on the east. Existing development within this block consists of -Value Plastics'.--,-: - present facilities in the southwest corner and an office building in the northwest corner. The northeast corner is the location for Fire Station 10. The site lies in the Southeast Quarter of Section 30, Township 7 North, Range 68 West, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. Property Description The property Value Plastics' new building will occupy is undeveloped.-- It is presently covered with native grasses and slopes from the southwest to the northeast at a gradient of approximately 1 %. An 18" storm drain provides drainage to the north...:::-- The storm drain upstream of an existing area inlet draining the existing office building parking lot will be abandoned. This was Design Point 1 in the Fire Station Drainage Study [4] and is labeled Design Point A in this study. This storm drain and the proposed swale along the east side of the Fire Station site will be utilized for draining this new Value Plastics development within the limitations set out in earlier work [4][5]. DRAINAGE BASIN IDENTIFICATION Description The proposed Value Plastics development lies in the Foothills Drainage Basin (Basin G). The Foothills Basin Drainage Master Plan [1 ] indicates that this area is served by Reach 2 of the major drainage way located north of Vermont Drive flowing generally from the southwest towards the northeast. Runoff from the Value Plastics development will be directed to this major drainage way via an existing storm drain system and new drainage work proposed in conjunction with the new Fire Station 10. P`arktid�oo�\i6• j DRAKE ROAD / Lake SAenaood � c < Z d V IXG7 a. a o F F i y a a rJ Dantieid Ct N.C.R. P.R.P.A. 0 HORSETOOTH ROAD Collindate Golf Courae public Service Warren Park a'arran -Las• R SCALE IN FEET 0 1000 2000 WATER octe: MAR 199a WASTE VALUE PLASTICS SITE MAP y � Project: & LAND 94406100 I !C. ' DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA Regulations The City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria [21 is being used as the basis for this report. ' Development Criteria Constraints The constraints are established by RBD, Inc., in their Final Drainage Study and response to comments letter for Fire Station 10 [4][51, included as Attachment A to this report. The report and letter establish two discharge points for release of stormwater drainage from the properties in the Timberline Plaza. P.U.D._bounded_by Danfield Court, Eastbrook Drive, Vermont Drive and Timberline.• -These discharge points, as shown on Drawing 3, are: ' Design Point A (DPA), the existing area inlet near the southwest corner of Fire Station 10 (RBD Design Point 1). • Design Point B (DPB), the discharge point to the proposed swale along the east = side of the Fire Station 10 property. ' The modeled capacity of the area inlet at DPA , as shown on Drawing 5, is 4.4 cfs during the 100-year storm [5]. Overflow from this inlet, in the RBD design, would be collected and conveyed in a 20 foot, east -west drainage easement to the proposed . _. swale along the east side of the Fire Station 10. This swale is designed to accept an additional 40.45 cfs at DPB from sources not generated by Fire Station 10 and convey this to the area inlet at the southwest corner of Vermont Street and Timberline Road ' (RBD Design Point 2). Based on these constraints the peak allowable discharge rate from the properties within the Timberline Plaza P.U.D., excluding Fire Station 10, is 44.85 cfs (4.4 cfs plus 40.45 cfs). The water surface during a 100-year storm is predicted to be a maximum of 4041.5 in Vermont Drive near Timberline Road [5]. This flood stage includes the 44.85 cfs from the remaining areas of Timberline Plaza P.U.D.. Hydrologic Criteria The Rational Method and the runoff from a 100-year storm were used to design the ' drainage system for the Value Plastic development. Calculations are included in Appendix 1. ' Calculations All calculations for this report have been made in accordance with criteria established ' by the City of Fort Collins. Variances ' No variances are requested. In fact we have detained the site discharge so that it is 7 cfs less than the discharge allowed by the constraints outlined above. ' DRAINAGE DESIGN Concept Referring to the print of the Value Plastics Grading and Drainage Plan appended at the end of this report, runoff from the future west parking area accessed from Eastbrook ' Drive, the roof of the future building and surrounding area to the south, and the existing office building will flow to a detention pond in the northeast corner of the site discharging at the confluence of the east swale and the Fire Station swale. The detention pond will be paved for parking. A new north -south road and parking lot will connect Danfield Court, Vermont Drive and the existing parking lot and office building to the northwest. These improvements will allow access to the proposed building. Runoff from this existing office building will now be directed east to the new parking lot south of the Fire Station 10 swale. Runoff ' from the roof area of the new building will flow to the east swale. This flow will be conveyed toward the Fire Station 10 swale via an open channel along Timberline Road. _ Details ' Three drainage basins were utilized in analyzing and routing runoff to two Design Points and a detention pond as shown on the Drainage Study and Erosion Control drawing appended at the end of this report. Basin 1 consists of the existing office ' building and parking lot at the southeast corner of Vermont and Eastbrook Drive. Basin 2 consists of the future west parking lot, the future building roof - area and the area west of the proposed building. Basins 1 and 2 were analyzed at the area inlet, DPA, (RBD Design Point 1 for the proposed Fire Station [4][51) before being routed to the new detention pond in the northeast corner of the site. Basin 3 consists of.the new. Value Plastics building roof, the south 1 /3 of the access road and the area south and east of the proposed building. The detention pond from the existing Value Plastics development to the southwest will remain intact. Runoff from this pond is discharged through a 6" PVC pipe. Runoff from this southwest detention pond was treated as a point source flow (PSF) of 0.45 cfs. The discharge from the area was analyzed at DPB where it combines with flows from Basin 1 and 2. In all cases, future development shown on this Plan was accounted for in determining the runoff that might be expected from a 100-year storm. It was estimated that if the three basins discharged from the site the peak flow would be 38.25 cfs. With the use of a detention pond the actual discharge will be 33.1 cfs, more than 7 cfs less than the 44.85 cfs allowed by the constraints established by RBD (4][5]. A schematic of the flow path is shown on Figure 1. A summary of the areas, runoff coefficients, rainfall intensities and peak flows from each basin is provided in ' Table 1. r-�rcit- r.i r-)nit\IT n Inflow (100 YR.) Basin 1 Basin 2 Maximum Point Source Outflow 27.55 CFS �� 4.4 CFS i 23.15 CFS Overflow OPTION 1 OPTION 2 4800 CF NO _DETENTION POND POND 23.15 CFS 18 CFS Release Rate Inflow (100 YR.) Basin 3 15.1 CFS (The Maximum Allowable Release is 40.45 — 15.1 — 25.35 CFS) DESIGN POINT B Maximum Allowable Discharge 40.45 CFS NOTE: WITH OPTION 1, RUNOFF FROM A 100 YEAR STORM WILL BE RELEASED TO THE DCWNST:F�EAM SYSTEM AT 18 CFS. THIS IS MORE THAN 7 CFS LESS THAN WHAT IS ALLOWABLE. WATER FIGURE 1 Date: DEC 1994 WASTE VALUE PLASTICS & LAND SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM Project: 423 23 G' Table 1 DRAINAGE BASIN SUMMARY Basin ID Design Point Area (Ac) Runoff Coeff. "C" Time of Conc..Intensity "V (min.) Rainfall 100-Year (in./Hr) Peak Flow 100-Year (CFS) 1 B 2.07 0.64 8.5 7.3 12.2 2 B 2.08 0.72 6.8 7.9 14.9 PSF B - 0.45 3 B 2.28 1 0.86 13.6 6.13 15.1 Combined Peak Flow 42.6 ' Based on a 100-year storm, Basin 1, Basin 2 and the PSF generate a peak runoff at DPA of 27.55 cfs. A portion of this peak, 4.4 cfs [51, flows through the inlet at A and - the existing 18" storm drain to the north leaving 23.15 cfs of excess runoff. At this point two options were considered. One option was to discharge the excess runoff, at DPB without detention. The total runoff from Basins 1, 2 and NPS (23.15 cfs); plus Basin 3 runoff (15.1 cfs) deliver a total runoff of 38.25 cfs. This discharge is more than 2 cfs below the 40.45 cfs allowed. However, the second option which was to further reduce site runoff was chosen as the best option. A detention pond at DPB was developed. With this design the excess peak runoff from DPA will be attenuated in the new pond and released to DPB at the a maximum discharge rate of 18 cfs. An available pond storage of at least 4800 cf will contain the 5.15 cfs detained runoff. Basin 3 runoff will be routed to DPB via sheet and channelized flow without detention. The combined maximum peak flow from Basin 3 (15.1 cfs) and the detention pond (18 cfs) will be discharged from the site at DPB at the rate of 33.1 cfs. This discharge is 7.35 cfs less than the 40.45 cfs allowable. Table 2 provides a mass balance for the discharges from the site. i Ll 1 Table 2 WATER BALANCE SUMMARY FOR DISCHARGES FROM THE SITE Basin or Design Point Flow (cts) Peak discharge from Basins 1, 2 and PSF to DPA 27.55 Minus the outflow at DPA 4.4 Equals the excess runoff to the detention pond at DPB 23.15 Discharge from the detention pond at DPB 18.0 Plus the peak discharge from Basin 3 15.1. Equals the total runoff from Basin 1,2,3 and NPS 33.1 Minus maximum discharge allowable from the site at DPB 40.45 Equals the excess allowable flow not discharged at DPB L 7.35 ' The Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Fire Station 10 planned to route the overflow from Design Point 1 (DPA) via a swale in a 20' drainage easement flowing east along the south side of the Fire Station property and then north to an existing area ' inlet to a system carrying flow to the main drainage way of Foothills Basin G [6]. The drainage plan proposed for the new Value Plastics development modifies this routing and the required easements. The Value Plastics driveway paving between the main ' building and a garage will now be the route that carries the overflow to the detention pond. This route and the pond will be located within easements. The swale along the south side of Fire Station 10 will be narrowed as it will now only carry runoff from a ' portion of the Fire Station development. This redesigned swale will fit within a 10' easement at its western end. An analysis of inflow to the detention pond over time, (i.e. runoff from NPS, basins 1 and 2, less a constant discharge of 4.4 cfs at DPA during the storm) and the maximum discharge from the pond (18.0 cfs) required a detention pond volume of approximately 4,650 cubic feet. The detention pond as designed with a spillway elevation of 4,941 feet provides approximately 4,800 cubic feet of stormwater runoff storage. The peak flow of 15.1 cfs from basin 3, which contains the southeast portion of the new Value Plastics development, will be conveyed to DPB via a trapezoidal, drainage ' channel with a concrete invert on a slope of 0.5% and 4:1, horizontal to vertical, side slopes. The depth in the channel at DPB, during the peak flow from a 100-year storm of 15.1 cfs, is less than 1.0 foot. The channel provides adequate freeboard. A 15" ADS N12 plastic pipe was selected to drain the detention pond at the design release rate of 18 cfs. The pipe was designed for the 100-year storm event with the pond water surface at 4,941 feet and tailwater at elevation 4,939 and 4,940 feet. ' This will prove academic if runoff ponds in Vermont Drive to elevation 4,941.5 feet during a 100-year event [4][5][6]. Under this condition, water would pond in the northeast portion of the site, the extent of which would be determined by the shape ' of the runoff hydrograph. However, it would not affect the building floors in the garage and the main building of the new Value Plastics development, set at 4,942.0 and 4,944.5 feet, respectively. The swale located along the south boundary of Fire Station 10 will collect runoff from part of the Fire Station roof and a small portion of the developed site. WWL ' redesigned this channel allowing for the reconfigured flow patterns from the new Value Plastics development which routes all off -site (non -Fire Station) flows through the detention pond rather than the swale as detailed in the RBD report [4]. The new ' design consists of a triangular, grass -lined channel with a slope of 1.0 percent graded from west to east to DPB. The channel will have 4:1, horizontal to vertical, side slopes and will be contained with in a 10 foot easement which will merge with the ' drainage easement for the detention pond. Estimated peak flows for the 100-year, storm event vary from 0.3 to 1.3 cfs from the start of the swale to DPB where the channel merges with the east channel and the outfall from the detention pond. The ' channel at these flows will be stable for both pre -vegetative and vegetated conditions. The maximum depth of flow under an uncut grass condition would be less than 0.5 feet and adequate freeboard will be provided. 1 ' For a cross section of the channel and swale see the drawing entitled Drainage and Erosion Control Details appended at the end of this report. ' RAINFALL EROSION ANALYSIS 1 Site Soils The Larimer County, Soil Conservation Service Soils Report identifies the soils as I belonging to two similar soil units, the Nunn Clay Loam and the Fort Collins Loam, both of which are described as having moderate rainfall erodibility characteristics. The rainfall erosion season as detailed in the City of Fort Collins, Erosion Control Reference ' Manual (21 (the Manual) is between May 1 and October 31. The natural drainage of .._ _... ,_. the site is from the south and west to the northeast corner where any runoff is discharged to an open ditch flowing north along the west margin of Timberline Drive to a storm drain in the northeast corner of proposed Fire Station 10. A mixture of dryland grass and weed cover currently provides an estimated 50 percent cover over .. . the entire site. The Manual details the site as having moderate wind erodibility characteristics. The Manual states the predominant wind direction is from the west-northwest in this area. ' The wind erosion season as detailed in the Manual is between November 1 st and May 31 st. .' Construction at the site is estimated to begin March 1995 and continue through September,1995 Performance Standard _ The estimated "During Construction" and "After Construction" Performance Standard for the new Value Plastics site are 73.1 and 86.0, respectively. For the purpose of estimating the site's Performance Standard the entire site was broken into 2 separate basin areas based on the final development contours. The basins, as shown on the Drainage Study and Erosion Control Plan appended at the end of this report, consist ' of: • 1.1 1 acre Basin 2, located north and west of the proposed building and draining ' generally northeast to the detention pond, and • 2.28 acre Basin 3, located south and east of the building and including the proposed building, draining to the east drainage channel. The Performance Standard for the site was estimated using the methods detailed in the ' Manual and the estimated, average slope length and slope for each basin. Flow lengths and slopes developed for calculation of the "During Construction" Performance Standard is presented on Standard Form A in Appendix II. The Performance Standard was taken from Table 5.1 of the Manual. The "After Construction" Performance Standard is calculated by dividing the "During Construction" Performance Standard by 0.85. Practice Factor Measures Sediment control practice measures for the Value Plastics development will consist of the construction of a silt fence, one straw bale dikes, two gravel filters and the roughening of the upper surface of the topsoil stock pile. The location and details of these practice measures are shown on the Drainage Study and Erosion Control drawing and the Grading and Erosion Control Details drawing appended at the end of this report. Practice factor measures for the site after construction will be dismantled and thus a weighted P - Factor of 1.0 was used to calculate the effectiveness. The calculations for the weighted P - Factor for each basin during and after construction are presented on Standard Form B in Appendix II. Cover Factor Measures ' Cover factor measures for the site during construction will consist of the building and the parking areas and the bare ground areas. The building and paved areas were assigned a C - Factor value of 0.01. The bare ground areas were assigned a C - Factor value of 1.0. The topsoil stockpile area will be placed in the south east quadrant of the property. ' Cover factor measures for the site after construction is completed will consist of implementation of the landscaping plan which calls for establishment of the grass ' cover of at least 60 percent cover over the disturbed areas of the site. Grass will be established with the use of hay or straw mulch applied and secured at a rate of 2 tons per acre. The mulched and revegetated areas were assigned C - Factor values of 0.06 as selected from Table 5.2 and Figure 5.1. Cover factor values for the paved areas ' and the undisturbed grassed areas were not changed from during construction conditions. The calculations for the weighted C - Factor for each basin during and after construction are presented on Standard Form B in Appendix II. "During Construction" Effectiveness Evaluation ' The Net Effectiveness for the erosion control measures at the site during construction was calculated as 75.2 percent and exceeds the "During Construction" Performance Standard value of 73.1 percent. The Net Effectiveness was calculated using basin ' effectiveness values of 70.6 and 77.3 percent for the Basin 2 and Basin 3, respectively. Calculations of the basin effectiveness value and the Net Effectiveness for the site are presented on Standard Form B in Appendix II. "After Construction" Effectiveness Evaluation ' The Net Effectiveness for the erosion control measures at the site after construction was calculated as 96.3 percent and exceeds the "After Construction" Performance Standard value of 86.0 percent. The Net Effectiveness was calculated using basin effectiveness values of 97.0 and 96.0 percent for the Basin 2 and Basin 3, respectively. Calculations of the basin effectiveness value and the Net Effectiveness for the site are presented on Standard Form 6 in Appendix II. ' WIND EROSION ANALYSIS The surface soils at the new Value Plastics site are rated as moderately wind erodible. ' Construction at the site will begin by March, 1995 near the end of the wind season of November to May and the site does not fall under any of the exclusions available in the Manual. Construction disturbance at the site as detailed above will occur across the entire site except for the future expansion area in the southern third of lot 3. The limited size of the construction area and the necessary access in this area will restrict the available ' area for placement of a wind barrier. For this reason the wind erosion features to be constructed at the site will consist primarily of natural features at the site, water ' erosion controls and the features to be constructed. The wind erosion control measures which will be implemented during construction will ' include the items listed below and are detailed on the Grading and Drainage Plan. • The east drainage channel along the east margin of the development. • The silt fence along the southeast margin of the property. '• The topsoil stockpile area located to the south of the proposed building in the future expansion area. ' • The stormwater detention pond berm to the north of the proposed building. The walls and structural fill of the building. ' • The paved parking and walk areas. • The garage and existing landscaping along the eastern margin of the EVP ' property. • The existing office building and landscaping to the northwest of the property. Wind erosion control measures which will be implemented after construction will consist of mulching and seeding the disturbed areas. Hay or straw mulch will be ' applied and crimped into the soil surface at a rate of 2 tons per acre after seeding of the site. The silt fence and topsoil stockpile will be removed when the mulch is applied. The remainder of the wind erosion control features will remain intact to ' counter soil loss during vegetative establishment. I ' INSTALLATION SCHEDULE ' Construction of the new Value Plastics property is proposed to start in March 1995 and continue during the summer with the floors, grading and paving completed by Mid - June of 1995. The approximate date of implementation of the erosion control measure during construction are shown on Standard Form C in Appendix II. As shown on Form ' C the gravel inlet filters, silt fence, the eastern and northern drainage channels and the hay bale dikes will be constructed prior to overlot grading. Soils grading and topsoil stockpile areas, which will not be disturbed during construction until final grading and ' landscaping, will be roughened. Paving of the parking and walk areas is scheduled to begin in mid -April and be complete by mid -June. Permanent vegetation will be seeded and mulched after the completion of the project during the spring to be established, ' by August prior to the next wind erosion season. The hay bale dike at point B will be left in place through mid -September or until establishment of the permanent grass cover. All other features may be removed upon seeding and mulching. EROSION CONTROL SECURITY ' The erosion control security requirement for the new Value Plastics site was estimated based on the specification of Section 2.0 of the Manual. The cost of the erosion ' control measures at the site as detailed above were estimated to cost $700 with a security requirement of $1,050. The estimated cost to revegetate the disturbed areas with a dryland grass mix according to the city's 1993 mulch and revegetation bid was ' $2,067 with a security requirement of $3,101. The larger amount is required prior to construction. Both cost estimates are detailed in Appendix 11. REFERENCES 1 . Resource Consultants, Inc., Foothills Basin (Basin G) Drainage Master Plan. February, ' 1981. 2. City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards, May 1984, Revised January 1991. 3. Denver Regional Council of Governments, Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes I and II, March, 1969, 6th Printing Vol I September 1978. 4. RBD Inc., Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Fire Station No. 10, Fort ' Collins, Colorado, January 1993. 5. RBD Inc. Letter to G. D. Schlueter, City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility, February 22, 1993, Maximum Off -Site Flow Allowed Into The Proposed Swale, Along The South ' Property Line of Fire Station No. 10, To Limit Vermont Drive Overtopping to 0.5 Feet. ' 6. RBD Inc., Sheet No. 2, Fire Station No. 10 Utility, Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan, November 1992. ' 7. James H.Stewart & Associates, Drainage Report, Value Plastics P.U.D., Part Lot 3, New Hampshire Subdivision, December 1983. 8. James H. Stewart & Associates, Sheet 1, Value Plastics P.U.D. Grading, Drainage & ' Drives, December 1983, Revised February 1984. APPENDIX I HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS-:.` WATER Project: Calculated By: vv W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: ANC. A N ` f ej _ s•N 7o 7gt AeFA �i+'I P£R v I-a5 '�£R Vto+S 6), �.�,�z a,oe /•39 d•6g9 /3.1-5,N3 a.aa l 98 o.3C-O 77'AL s A a } 2 -- ---- - 7T.4•2r-/:1,- .2. o 9 0, i69 ReRveUVS �z>q D.CIO 39,3�9 I,pgpivious4aril /. 17 Cc = �o,.7s, 3�g,E-2S -� Cc = 0,6,41 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226--6475 WATER Project: Calculated By: I/ W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: .2- R,e v,c.,s�A = 0•689 3o 0ia.8y �,n PAR .Jro.,_%�R<,q= �•301 6o,SY8. �/c) -.. -. z` SS'9.1Y0 It ) D 6 o ys BO �tZ Cc = O, �z IA. PZQufo,.s /�RF,a �. 98 Q6, 2v8. 8c) cc, = co,�s�c i3,®�S.Oo�E2) f Co,9s)(86,aYP. soLE2) 99, 3/6. So �r Z cc = b, S 6 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COWNS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 WATER Project: Calculated By: W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: LAND Task: Date: & -r r_ Fo /tuft o� `oNGt. /his5v a 5i.e -Z� -1614CJ (Ne &. -6-0. ,e -Zo 04L5.9 - L=0,b,4 5—%l G�L( [ye/' t�o(,✓ h0-�. / L'+ G✓25.,gh �ocr��' /�. 7a a.07CJ rs Z� = L Ir-= a.o ��s F,4 60S /G = S•;�f8E � e' ;I 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 WATER Project: vv W A S T E Project No.: & LAND Task: Z5 T ON Calculated By: Checked By: Date: -�/w LLo y o� Du.��'.�. Z<o Z!� 2a S sv.W0.f2.. C%gr�i+a.l' �A/Ao wJ ce..^-Zc �Ldc3 f%¢ c o r 'p/u Q K G w / ale. i� /�v ZL 13 . L. = oz 3s'� 5/ode Low i .. wow /E s e Ll 5 T /c /00 ,- SL4arw/��-OC.�/�.r 1! 9 3 Tom= 1 3. 6 ,.., :.•.1 3. 6 ..-, :.... 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS. COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 WATER Project: Calculated By: W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: INI. 7-, fo- ?o.c !'a Ste„ Ar P. 7.g;01-/ I"` F?u e,v /i•�/`" G C. �O� - C �i. �7 Chi �'j r:. F.�/hnJ z 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS. COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FPJ 22c-54-5 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 WATER Project: Calculated By: WASTE Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: r Y O, �y> /, ZS J2,.2- C- Qoo CC- Cs !� k TO 1��( Z05 6474 oOs Sao 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 WATER Project: Calculated By: v/ W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: INC. C J� CdAL r� L O W UgE I- doic s T S LA� c E _�Ps_�. 4 /Gv (4 Gam✓ . __`_-'_--___-' ioa pp CI1 O. rPA Cn4s.. �Pi Lr G C- s e /C'ohareie n = o.oiS /3wct'z�e� /free S(ei� P5. — �2e� -- /S,1 1 c�5 S�e ffn�y s . S ©VT p ci % 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 Trap;z-zoidai Channel Analysis z Design Opcn Channall - u11 i'f urm f i OW rtvl ns1/cE'L I,c17tC: Value Plastic -- n. C-a7niiieilt: CCxSt JVdaie Channel ' Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Ecttcm,Wi d t 4. 00 f t Left Side Slope.. 4.00a 1 (H. VI Right Side Slops. 4.00.1 (H:V1, Manning's n...... 0.025 C iannel Slope.... 0.0050 -ft, t Discharge........ .- 15.10 cfs Computed Results: u2ptli...... .... O.i7 ft IV c lccimay......... 2.15 -reps Flow Area........ 5.41 sf Flow Top width... 10.19 -ft tatted Perimeter. 10.3O ft C.`" t YL t.l L 1t A. Dept_Il... V.OL ft Critical Slope... 0.0t Froude Nunber.... 0.66 (flow is Subcritical) Cpcl.l Channel hQni21 Flow 1yIIdU1 e' vcEsi ri3ti.41 %ui1Ura 771 Haan t J Mat1� J-{{ f. s. 'Waterbury, .1 Y L. Ct "16.7 mzj I �IQC"J' LQU IIC 1111JUJ� Inc. �� J� UI�IJVfv�L de IlU �* WGLCf IJ Liry � IrV `J'JI �l'j Trapezoidal Charnel Analysis`` & Design Open Channel - Uni Torm flow Wo ks'eat Na+i1C: IVall ue Plastic Comment: Gast Swale Channel 1-33% of Max. Flow Solve For Depth .. .. ' Si : input Data: L+ULLUiII dth. - . . - Width, //11 . Y. •iv 1 t LeftSide rt e'1 t ]i'u2 Slope— . q ^^ I+ 11! -r. !+V. 1 (H- Y !"sight Side Slopa. 4.00:1 (H:'V3 Manning's n...... u/r�yyS Channel Si upe.... rrO��l. V . 0l/=Tt%Tt l Di SG arge.------- 20..10--=ifs Co1Tlpu Leu 1-lint-.: na ut.r Upth - • - - - -- - -- - V.07 Tt +I,...t "t.y-........ V C14.+L1 l_ �.47 fps _ - Flow Area.....--- b.76 sf Fiuw Trip Width... 11.14 ft Wetted Perimeter-. 11.376 Tt Critical Depth... 0.72 -ft Critical Slope... 0.0117 Tt>ft Froude Number.... 0:67 (flow is Subcritical) Opar. Channel Plow Module, trute. Version 3.41 .Ti !♦c) 19711. 1"IaCSL U IiCUIUd�� Inc. •�i tv oi:+ �il+C 1'l' ,�a col uS..ir rr9 11c, •.] WATER Project: Calculated By: I/ W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: INC 45 ? ,? Lf TO /D F S r drN /�C i �v T � • /C -Lieo Cc C-S z (0.8 3 13.6 6.13 0,86 /..25 .2.2$ /S,/ �J i/��ow..�'e /✓:= a /.a.' G y 1 i �o.e /3rr3.. ✓ /f/ .21 /e',...e FF T f rf (0.64/)(*a,07ZAt) Y'(/O. Crow .3L� Sc�J/¢zltE rC �F 5) /I ' iI Q' a,33 o2s, 3S * ti.y Mom, �i/.w�/� p•s;J., �f A Q 61 Q psF _ - o•�� /��•/Ld Ts /"rC✓.ay :J��c�orqP �5 a �c S ` �'�/¢/C, /��/OWaG�r' 21579 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 i I I I I 1 1 I I r WATER Project: Calculated By: WASTE Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: ING '/� V£LO/O I�£TCN SioN OnJ /� VOLtJ Vo /?.vs eo/ oNZ eziCe a�=.�/adze 0.f( s y 8`�`� cS- I /J -C/^o j e .� o. C Leo .-7 e. `1 9,q l 1,,_ _ Ra„✓.>: opt/eb Ta:/,-twer Al YeO- Qr•'�AK,= °�l.�SCJS. - Z<oSC'•.y i.-,/,'., �:s�q.9c gv;d"il'..e5 �R 5 4/D 0/L) wr� e G kS oc /_ -L}DS /V /.2 ,,�/g s z��c ,Z"ae T�C2 ��/o..,/ CrrT�?P[0. VSeai' fer- ��S•��. A/AZe -W II:w s C o o T�wrto/ RS Pfcssure �'Pe 5��1�%0� y9vl Q y /N rer t N9 3°c � �4ti1 Tnrn,4 'd939 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COWNS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 WATER, WASTE & LAND, INC. PROJECT: Value Plastics P.U.D. PRJ. NO.: 423 POND: POND B DATE: O1/27/95 INPUT VALUES TRAPEZOIDAL INCREMENT CUMULATIVE ELEV AREA VOLUME VOLUME (FT) (SF) C CF 39.50 320 .00 1,700 459 459 P400.50 4,100 17407 1,866 .00 7,840 2,935 4,801 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 'I V N cn r- Z O•y� CQ pr G Obi U>U�GC W Q v��zwA QaQ¢O �aaaAa cn 00 d 0 Cn O N E 00 r- N �p 00 rl l ^ 'O l' in CD M - C, m" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) 0m EIC) E 0 0 0 0 00 N �c 0 0 0 0 O � \O 00 0� Nt N > lzr O \O N N V-� Cn C\ OH eenn rN-1 rH m `u 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ° " r1 rl rl rl rl e•-I rl rl rl rl rl a " O C% N (= 00 �c (— rt cn N o N W) ~ d' �o O rl N l- O c?" d^ CD M �o C O \O xn O N et \O cn h O rI rI N N N M M M M V• O O O O q N C) C) N WO 000^ N�� N00 O 1 T" r N M In l� OC) V1 to l— IT n r M to N N1� N 00 00 0 00 O " ri to rl 00 - '-C Z O r- O Vi M t+1 N N .--1 r-1 r4 �--� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U Vi vi W) vi W) to kn to V') V) =n Q .-1 rl —! rl r1 -1 rl rl - 1 r•1 jjrti �t�r�i'v'd'�•vvvvv ° �000000v10 N N M �O �O 00 -t 00 O 01 [� V•1 of M fV rl �--1 ti °- 0 0 O C O O O O O O O 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c U �p \O �O �O �O \O \O \D \O �O a' o o c o c o 0 0 0 0 0 F"= oknoknokno000 0000 E �q r1 N N CO) d• \0 a Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design ' Circular Pipe ' Worksheet Name: VALUE PLASTICS Comment: PIPE DISCHARGE NO TAILWATER tSolve For Diameter Given Input Data; Elevation @ 1..... ~ - Pressure @ i........ 39.40 0.67 ft psi =- Elevation @ 2..... 39.00 ft ' Pressure @2....- Discharge... . 0*00 psi gpm Length.... -.55.00 ft Hazen -Williams C..-150.00 :-Computed Results:_.:. Diameter.......... 14.64 in ' Velocity•... Headloss........ __15.40 1.95 fps fit Energy Grade @ -1.. -----44.63 ft Energy Grade @ 2.. 42.69 ft ' Friction Slope.... 35.376 ft/1000 ft 1 ' Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.41 (c) 1991 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 t t Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design ' Circular Pipe ' Worksheet Name: VALUE PLASTICS Comment: PIPE DISCHARGE 1FT TAILWATEP ' Solve For Diameter - Given Input Data: Elevation @ 1..... -39.40 ft Pressure @ 1.....'. 0.67 psi Elevation @ 2.. 39.00 fit Pressure @ 2...... _Discharge....,. 0.43_psi 8078.00_gpm Length, ..:'.... ;".:`:"=':55,0c� fit Hazen —Williams C.. 150.00 ` - _ .__Computed ResUIts: Diameter.. 16.95 in Velocity.......... 11.49 fps - - t Headloss........... 0.95 ft Energy Grade @ 1.. 43.00 ft Energy Grade @ 2.. 42.04 ft ' Friction -Slope .... 17.340 ft/1000 fit 1 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.41 (c) 1991 ' Haestad Methods, Inc. * _7 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 e Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design ' Circular Pipe ' Worksheet Name: VALUE PLASTICS Comment: PIPE DISCHARGE NO TAILWATER ' Solve For Discharge Given Input Data: - -•.- :<-- Elevation @ i..... .-_-- >_---_=.-_..Pressure @ i...... -- •-; v.9.44 -4.67 ft psi Elevation @ 2..... 39.00 ft Pressure @ 2...... - --------- Diameter.... 0.00 15.20 psi in Length.. . ... -:::55.00 :ft Hazen -Williams C.. ^-150.00 ---Computed Results-. _ Discharge..... 8916.34 gpm . - V 1 -t oci y.......... 1 . fps.. Headloss....,.,... 1.95 fit Energy Grade @ i.. 44:81-fit _. - _-- '- Energy Grade @ 2.. Friction Slope..:. -42.66 fit - 5.376 ft/1000 ft _ Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.4.1. (c) 1991 ' Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 WATER Project: !/ rocs Calculated By: JT✓ WAS T E Project No.: `�� Checked By: & LAND . Task: CJVJWA)F, Date: > 1 TS`�G : �S �L!''I HL / D! ✓ 5nRt-t KL"J,)rr= F�GM l�itr- <LuTH 15A--S.iu 1, t/t 41777Pi"'fi u /-0 Cd ,, Lzoxp e4 Aize4 �ni fir- ►��+G CHAAJa=�. Ste=` �1 � 1�� Qr ►�Z.` 4-rs�,—�^,� AKtA, Z) I Z) /I Goo 3 5zo 1)75-0 v 6.&6 - ... o3 fL46 O LC i O. ; 6.31 �o i /IF— '6?3 4EOWINC ?Cn_ SUIT: _00 NRT CCL-;NS. :;..:' A00 805Z6 ;JOJ;=26-35J5 =b( ;30`: _=6 -5+75 y.STS -� WATER Project: _ Co cuiated By: �— W A y T E Project No.: L/Cb Checked By: & LAND Task: /o2i-�+ GNN� Date: 0 AT i';i CUk_2�r,,�T (S �Z cam � GJ� Tff,0E A1-J � �s C0AJF_L "aQC.r, 6P A-10 T4 ( EHAOJalIF_� 5�i� of T� ✓ �- _ o ( Ott 6<_ / - 6 %, Ids ,r —;7— ��D�2-� C�zay-, ;. y: / // E6 V �� :c29 RED'BING RC;C i�:7c ':00 FORT CCI.,.:NS. CCLCRnOC d0526 (JC21 225-3=35 =A.1 (3C]: ?=6 -54-5 SEDCAD+ ERODIBLE CHANNEL DESIGN ------------------------------- iP VALUE PLASTICS, NORTH STORMWATER CHANNEL Limiting Velocity Technique Clear Water INPUT VALUES: Shape Discharge Slope Sideslopes Manning's n Max. Velocity Material Freeboard TRIANGULAR 0.31 cfs 1.00 t 4.00:1 (L) 0.020 2.50 fps ORDINARY FIRM LOAM 0.5 ft . RESULTS: Actual Discharge 0.31 cfs Depth 0.22 ft with Freeboard 0.72 ft Top Width 1.72 ft with Freeboard 5.72 ft Velocity 1.65 fps Cross Sectional Area 0.19 sq ft Hydraulic Radius 0.10 ft Froude Number 0.89 4.00:1 (R) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Tr, iar.c;ular , Channel Analysis gat Design upan Channel - Ltnifars. flow Wo r LJ.LIeei VSI.C. VALUE PLASTIC^ JCo-r1 n.0mment: VALUE* FLn,C. I j k-o+, NORTH CHANNELJ/ GR r S COVER Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Left Side cL ..C.. 4.00:1 (H:V) ,sight Side Slope. 4.00:1 tu:V) Manning's n...... 0.040 Channel Slope.... 0.0100 ft/ft Discharge........ 0.::1 cfS Computed Results: _ _----.•._...__._..-- ._ -- Dept............. 0.23 ft Velocity ......... 0.98 f fa- .. Flow ATeC..... SIT r O..:It S'f r 1.1: VL r10:: Top ..L\JL.F .... ` 'Tc it .:.; . •. Y.CtLCted LI 1 G 2ri Tic �to cr. � �I-LL .•1:. ,.. Cr i cal Depth... 0.21 ft r._ L= . r �. 2 �.ca,. olape... c t7 r i / t J.O..1V . L/ . t FroudNumber Nuer.... 0.4& (TiOu is Subcritical) VVCI. I..II I�tl.l.t'S 1 LVn VVVLC. VCI �L Vii �1. '.L lLl 17%L 11'. oCO L alJ "IIath1UuJsT Inc. " •!i ear V�n.OLLaC I�� Ha LC? t.,'al _ �_ _. SEDCAD+ ERODIBLE CHANNEL DESIGN ------------------------------- VALUE PLASTICS, NORTH STORMWATER CHANNEL Limiting Velocity Technique Clear Water INPUT VALUES: Shape Discharge Slope Sideslopes Manning's n Max. Velocity Material Freeboard TRIANGULAR 1.03 cfs 1.00 °s 4.00:1 (L) 0.020 2.50 fps ORDINARY FIRM LOAM 0.5 ft RESULTS: Actual Discharge 1.03 cfs Depth 0.34 ft with Freeboard 0.84 ft Top Width 2.71 ft with Freeboard 6.71 ft Velocity 2.24 fps Cross Sectional Area 0.46 sq ft Hydraulic Radius 0.16 ft Froude Number 0.96 4.00:1 (R) 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 Triangular Channel ATal-rsis y Design Cpar. Channel - Uniform. flow W-zrkshaet Na/ae: VALUE PLASTICS, ".D T In 1 E n ASTTIC3 MI'l H r.a.,,- y. VALUE 4nu11.111 GZr11.. YI"ILL1L rLl'1J1 Llr../, .VL.RTIi A wR W/ ORASS rN •ER L.r{nIJ.VC,L WI 1../1t1"IaA`.% i.i 4�:.l1 CHANNEL Solve For Depth Lh wiveh Input Data: Left Side Slope.. 4.00:1 (I;: ) Right Side Slope. 4.00.1 (H:V) iManning's n...... �.�-... Channel Slope.... 0.0100 fti ft Discharge........ 1.03 cfs Co...puted Results: D2pth............ 0.44 ft Velocity......... 1.3,17 fps Flaw Area........ 0.73 sf Flow Tap Wi dt.L.... 3. Sdr f t :vetted Perimeter. Ft Critical Depth... 0.-3Z ft Critical Slope... 0.0441ftlft CrCYd1 'Number.... 0.50 (cLYY1s CY4.Vriticai V W I I I..I U U a e, Version� •J . T♦ `..� / 1 % 1 IhesLaU IICLIIL.aJ'J. ♦1.4... ./ V`� UVr.�iUC 11.J WC\Vci vY. � � r_ .V `!lam. SEDCAD+ ERODIBLE CHANNEL DESIGN ------------------------------- VALUE PLASTICS, NORTH STORMWATER CHANNEL Limiting Velocity Technique Clear Water INPUT VALUES: Shape Discharge Slope Sideslopes Manning's n Max. Velocity Material Freeboard TRIANGULAR 1.39 cfs 1.00 °s 4.00:1 (L) 0.020 2.50 fps ORDINARY FIRM LOAM 0.5 ft RESULTS: Actual Discharge 1.39 cfs Depth 0.38 ft with Freeboard 0.88 ft Top Width 3.04 ft with Freeboard 7.04 ft Velocity 2.41 fps Cross Sectional Area 0.58 sq ft Hydraulic Radius 0.18 ft Froude Number 0.98 4.00:1 (R) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 Triangular O.ar mel , Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform Tlow 1.1..rk L Name: VALUE 11TIS nr.T w►a. ksheel. 1V41Ti �': VnLI..iC JI a►.J7 1YU1\1 CoI.manL. ..,E n AaTT "►lilrItL J7 ..IRTCHA14. A-IRrT.+J Cuv Solve For Depth 1'^74 well Input Data: Left Side .Shope.. 4. 00:1 (H: V) Right Side Slope. 4.00:1 (H:Il) Manning's n...... 0.040 Channel Slope.... 0.0100 ftlft Discharge........ 1.:,9 cfS Computed Results: Depth ............ 0.49 ft ValacitY......... 1.-T, IPS Flow Ar-ea........ 0.97 sf Flow TI_;p Width... 'Z.94 ft Watted Perimeter. 4.06 Tt Cr iticai Dapt,... 0.33 it Critical Slope... 0.04224 ft/tt Fraud2 `.um, 'Iar.... 0.51 (flow is Suhcri%. c I3 1•T��...� I"L T ^� H�.'1..7 I1.....�i T1 t \ fl!7. uuam. Cli4anrlal i-'L cw cduI, aa. •CI si on 7-to rcN 19^J. . III L Jp LL _J� 7 7 B I. : J� J M lI IG`—.. , ar.v. % 'i ur Ovn.�a va Iy. •J wa �cr..I _:. _ _ 7r. 4tJ\I��,.-'.:r r.. - 1.. .:: .: ._'.. \.1� �.i t• .Z J. 1,�. t..l ..� .._ .' ..1 .!•.J 1. .�. 1 ._\ ._ .11 1.1 . • :l i .J.1.•\I .� �; J; 4I1/C• • • • tJ r. VJ. •J\./ 1 _.,1 _ ll 1 TT .• (- - ly. _._:_ V f 1 Af . 0. 5-11 I _ t tJl 4. _ I I I ' N z . y W ' � U>UC14CC W ' U Q� rn�z[i7C a Q ¢ C ........r...r.r- 00 v C` 0000 ttnn M M 00 O O c to to I� r O O to O O M C\ 0 0 n°. N •--! H cM to 00 ti N and OtnOtnOtnOOOO A E V C\ cM 00 N C` O Itt O 00 O v 00 00 [- to M to t0 O > ti N N M�\0 rn 00 N rO to r-� ti N v � W) kn to to to to to to ev m �� H •" t �� rI i`•'I �� r`V ''•1 C"1 �� v M M M (+1 M M M M M M M a N N N N N N N N N N N m O N c 00 \IC r- ' M N _ ° E N t 0 O M t0 CN CD\0 to C)° try (7 N "i, � r--+ c+'i Vf t0 O .--� �--� N N N M M M M'Rt c 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 OM N to 00 t` t0 00 N „ � C\ N M c tntnr`'It [� ti M MNNr,000O N 00 00 ry r In '-I 00 r q \D - C� %c O r- %d In M M N N V" r-i r" H O O O O O O O c c 0 0 U to to to to to to to to to to to Q rl �--I rl eti -1 �� '•'I �� "'1 H ri r _• �000000tnor- -ttn e v= 0 M O N %C N M \O 00 ct O to 4 d' M CV t- O CDC CDO O O O CD 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r V "C \0 \,0 \O \.c \0 \0 \O \0 \0 �O a o 6 0 6 0 o c o c o 6 = ot,.iOt„Ot„OOco It110 N 00 lto -+ N N M Ct t ' N Qd 1-4 z O (C U a � W Q CAColl Z A �a�Ao .c a�00� .eq e 00. C.en M N O, N y N DD 00 ri M vOM vO 0 ti N m m CD in CD�n O �n O CN� A fi to p ti r+ N 't N M "I' "O � 000 00 V) r, u N 00 p (M � 0 N OMO "p N M > 'N-i N M � � CN M 00 N m wl en vn v) tn v) cn en vn kn M M M M N kn VI In M M M M Vi In to Vi M M M to Vi kri O ai f4 N N N N N N N N N N N u Ilzr O Cn N O 00 �,C r r-i M N °e v1 -1 � � O 1-4 N [— O ? N - O O M �c O\ O 110 to O ' to O\ N 'Rt \.o ti M to %-O O .--� N N N M M M M et o 0 p CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) O O q 0 O O N \O CT W) 00 r- \O 'It N 00 G M .--i kn kn l- 7 M N N r- N 00 O0 p 00 O G �--i W-3 .-ti 00 \0 - C� M M N N '-i r-a r-� .--4 O O O O O O O O O O O U kn W W to to to kn to to a 0 0 0 O O O Wn O [- d N v1 r'i N 4 r4 .4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o av o0 0o ao 00 0o ao 0o Oo 00 c U �O \C a o o c o 0 0 0 o c o (=5 oW)oW)otr)o000 'RT \O C14 0000 en O\ I 1 I I 1 1 APPENDIX II RAINFALL AND WIND EROSION CALCULATIONS 0 1 WATER Project: Ukiu- Calculated By: W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: 1tf-n-'cF- ST¢NZ> 1� S ?Ca .Q %f& f R O Po.S f li a 7£,2 TV f"T /� 0. G /� TR / L r00/ C U . /i '• Q I• . Nn l.! �.s1 .. w{�Y JO L / �/ /' ,/ G�.v SC-S 73 C�� a. � 036 /-T or tCo 11,, s 0.26 ma, /erR f e T' 7,4nJCP_ ST�Npfr-R�7s 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 I 1 r 1 1 1 WATER Project: U% Le Afs < Lc Calculated By: W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: P fsc5c.rlee S - /'t re a.5 / .. Z._ A i 6-mud or, l Far blra Qfr. Q T/- . e�ZL' Wes.-llc5 d �i�.lair.• �.C7�o t3 a r-Q G-ro u „aD 1.,z /r L t Z .,r�ee ,% /:'Ff'O w.L. / � / � /r�", e G7 r h1P r S.p1 Q C '~ L(•Cr_'. �JJi 10[ i nCi / 7`Or N�� fL Ls 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLONS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 WATER Project: Calculated By: 46-0 IV W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: h /0p 5ce / S -ZaC k- 2'�i yJ ) �7`SSun..p 1 en /3 0. S Q r e cam. Ck gfQS; . 3 /µ Ao-^e /7a -k;^7 I. es,_ .2, � t 2 /- t. 95S-2 X 9Sf�, 5 z<e��p; /e /o�. Z.e . ✓� S. �. Cor-..er 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 RAINFALL PERFORMANCE STANDARD EVALUATION PROJECT: o�z P l It l5 t i c s STANDARD FORM A COMPLETED BY: Ay- kJ W W L DATE: / a A /9 DEVELOPED ERODIBILITY Asb Lsb Ssb. Lb Sb PS SUBBAqIN ZONE (ac) (ft) (t) (feet) M M - 3, 30( =7 CONS 77 r,,J �E Foaw�i4tuc�:: S OAR O.8 MARCH 1991 8-14 DESIGN CRrrERIA EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS PROJECT: .V�� e a �As><%c S STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: %�G 1� ! (J W t- � ems.. � n -DATE: a 9 9 Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor Method Value Value. Comment fjury Apcpq 0.01 /.O LoT..vl is - �i�zREN Soi&. /• 0 1. ci Hopi- pofvea woe Sq �9�2/IULL �LTLQ fNtET /,0 �.� i}rea,./n.�e7<- f�es;9r.Pz�%9 GRA-o&_ 1',!-7EP_1pLzr /. 0 O. S Ovt/e t.:e ; %0e{e. MAJOR PS SUB AREA BASIN BASIN (Ac) CALCULATIONS.`_. ppl9�Ei> 0; SO V"f� �' F Lor='C�O,OIxO.bf�•H_I•�XO•SJ� - ac c 7 ./ // C 10S (O. y6 y 0. 6 L4x/oa MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS PROJECT: U a, /jQ P1'5 5 0, 0 ;;, _) STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: �GU� . W t,J L �.P s /.J _-_---,--DATE: a �9 Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor Method Value Value Comment MAJOR PS SUB AREA BASIN ($) BASIN (Ac) CALCULATIONS`:; 3 ate_ /jf T -� -� 3, 3 i _/f/rf \ \\ 44 L` t 3:3q MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS 1 i 1 1 i 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PROJECT: (j „e P/4sf,-cs A eer��5.1,v, -STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: #6-W , W w L. G�f+s .,� 2 DATE: Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor Method Value Value Comment VC 0 /TfLsA ©. 0/ /. 0 L o i W W.. e_ 51=fo # �4wda . 0.06 i, o MAJOR PS SUB AREA _ BASIN ($) BASIN (Ac) CALCULATIONS:;.- 0 4c �(o 0(- 0, 0 3 /'(pvy LY✓G S V7AtiIPl' A T5 / PMO ✓�'/ U 0,s ►C MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA 1 1 1 1 1 i i 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS PROJECT: v L. P/q, s c s Jw :..� G..str .. E: o STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: DATE: Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor >=_ Method Value ValueComment_: Fu£p /¢R£A 0.0 / /,O- ,Eno;ps.*j 545.l, /, 0 /. o 0vo,., -PgvtC /4-PF0-1 %SAY/DALE CHECK PAI-k /.O 018 Fno�4,4�c�a�i�� MAJOR PS SUB AREA. BASIN ($) BASIN (Ac) CALCULATIONS- 73.1, fR£ /Jo,rro-.� .7..28 A� C lti�dl ►�-F0.�z�r = (a, o,al MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 1 EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS PROJECT: U4ue �4s � (f,^SSTANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: !rGW (AjLAJL DATE: Erosion Control C-Factor P-Factor _--,-- . Method Value Value Comment --= P14*vfD/4p- a /. S �e e ^r'r /C v �G�rP r� MAJOR PS SUB AREA BASIN ($) BASIN (Ac) CALCULATIONS 86 C' _ ©,aA4 i.02x,od� 5 6 1. /l >. 1?7,0)+ (e�,ogx ?0/� Nt T 3.3 9 = � � , 3 > 94, (0 c/ 4�1, j r r MARCH 1991 8-15 DESIGN CRITERIA CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE PROJECT: UP P / /a S r ; c S STANDARD FORM C ' SEQUENCE Indicate FOR 19 L ONLY COMPLETED BY: �� (. 6A_)L DATE: J.2 /Z 9 by use of a bar line or symbols when erosion control measures will be installed...._. Major modifications to an approved schedule may require submitting a new schedule for ....:. ....... approval by the City Engineer. - MONTH 1 = OVERLOT GRADING 'WIND EROSION CONTROL -Soil Roughening Perimeter Barrier Additional Barriers Vegetative Methods Soil Sealant otherG;i y�J xsfea iLecorsit✓cTiJn Leo f UIPj RAINFALL EROSION CONTROL STRUCTURAL: Sediment Trap/Basin Inlet Filters Straw Barriers Silt Fence Barriers Sand Bags Bare Soil Preparation Contour Furrows Terracing Asphalt/Concrete Paving ' Other 1 VEGETATIVE: Permanent Seed Planting Mulching/Sealant ' Temporary Seed Planting Sod Installation Nettinge/Mats/Blankets Other /M T J STRUCTURES: INSTALLED BY MAINTAINED BY VEGETATION/MULCHING CONTRACTOR ' DATE SUBMITTED APPROVED BY CITY OF FORT COLLINS ON IMARCH 1991 8-16 DESIGN CRITERIA I 1 1.. 1 I 1 7 7 WATER Project: UAL l..F kea rle Calculated By: / �J W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: Date: w� Z,JzoS/o� (:�mNTRc4- MSrPSvR -S t./Tv to C,��:/�..------.'--'----'------ �e.v�gQt�'te- /�r ?zac 1 /� )CjocC•n.at t Tr«�, .� vale /.. /e G�..� PC b(ac 2 9S,o0 �QveT�Seo i ../f�7eo� ga/�-ff2xs0.oly9��fZ=��1�5.ao /o YO. op oC) �7. ao X5 Co s T 70 CD X S'o /a o UCf7- 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (303) 226-6475 A 1 I I 11 WATER Project: VA,L Js PJ-kCT1/ Calculated By: W A S T E Project No.: Checked By: & LAND Task: 27,eo s Date: INC �iQd S F O ^J Coo N 77Ror— 5£C cJ Q t ! `/ i Y of J ' �05� FOP, kZ ue o-£7A T/o.J 411 Uc c%///v Cr C O S T -7 � o?, C) 6 7-/4L CI rY 2629 REDWING ROAD SUITE 200 FORT COLLINS. COLORADO 80526 (303) 226-3535 FAX (302) 226-6475 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 i ATTACHMENT A SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Engineering CansuMants 209 S. Mehimm Fort Coi6ns. Cakwado 80521 303/482.5922 FAX: 3=482-6368 February 22, 1993 Mr. Glen D. Schlueter City of Fort Collins Utility Services Stormwater 235 Mathews Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 RE: MAXIMUM OFF -SITE FLOW ALLOWED INTO THE PROPOSED SWALE, ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE OF FIRESTATION NO. 10, TO LIMIT VERMONT- DRIVE OVERTOPPING TO 0.5 FEET 187-018 Ref: (1) Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study For Fire Station No. 10, Fort Collins Colorado, January 13, 1993. ■ (2) Fire Station No. 10 Utility, Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan, February 1993. ' Dear Glen: As you requested, we have determined the maximum off -site flow that can be transported in the proposed swale along the southern property line of Fire Station No. 10, and not ' exceed overtopping Vermont Drive by 0.5 feet. The maximum high. water level over Vermont Drive required for this criteria to be met is 4941.5 feet ' From the Drainage and Erosion Control Study (Ref.1 ], it was assumed that Lot 3 in Sub - basin 2, would sheet flow into the proposed swale along the northern property line of lot 3. Lot 3 is currently undeveloped. Run-off from Sub -basin 1 would concentrate at design ' point 1 (Ref. 21. At design point 1, a portion of the flow will be removed by an existing area inlet The over flow would then enter the proposed swale at design point 1. Lot 2 of Sub -basin 1 is currently undeveloped and Lot 1 is fully developed. In order for the high water level over Vermont Drive not to exceed 0.5 feet, the maximum ' allowable flow in the proposed swale, along the south property fine of Fire Station No. 10, was determined to be 40.45 cubic feet per second (cfs). Run-off from Sub -basins 1 and 2 were investigated separately for this study. Omer Ofecec Denver 3=4%SM - Vail 3=476-QW I 1 1 I 1 1 I The first alternative we looked at was to restrict run-off from Lot 3, assuming future de_velo—eed flow from Sub -basin 1 would be totally trans orted . b_y_tswale. The mawmum allowable run-off from Lot 3, Sub -basin 2, r this alternative was determined to be 13_17 cis. This would result in 15.27 cis being detained from the assumed developed flow of 28.44 cfs (Ref. 1] on Lot 3. 3v crs The second alternative would be to limit the run-off from Sub -basin 1, while allowing the . total assumed future flow from Lot 3, Sub -basin Z to enter the proposed Swale along its northern property line. With this option, the ma)amum allowable flow entering the Swale from Sub -basin 1 was determined to be 16.41 cis. The future assumed developed' undetained flow from Sub -basin 1, at design point 1, is 31.68 cis [Ref.1]. The inlet at design point 1 will remove 4.4 cis (Ref. 1], resulting in 2728 cfs available to.enter the . proposed Swale. Therefore, this aftemative would require 10.87 cis of the 27.28 cis of water to be detained within Sub -basin 1. We appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing these- calculations. --Please call _ .: _ 7-- if you have any questions. - Respectfully, RBD Inc. Engineering Consultants Tracy K►ttell Design F.�ginn6er encl: Calculations Kevin Gingery, Project Manager rrcxUVWAuaurour uw I % 1 3113 FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL STUDY ' FOR FIRE STATION NO. 10 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO ' I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ' A. Location _ The proposed Fire Station No. 10 is located in a subdivision and replat of ' lot 3 of the Timberline Plaza P.U.D., located an the southwest comer of Timberline Road and Vermont Drive. The site can also be described as ' being located in the Southeast Quarter of Section 30, Township 7 North, , Range 68 West, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado, containing approximately 0.624 acres.. A site location plan is included in the - ' Appendix of this report 1 n LL 1 1 1 J B. Description of Property The Fire Station No. 10 site is presently undeveloped. The study site is being proposed to contain a two -bay fire station with 12 off-street parking spaces for employees and visitors. Native grasses presently cover the property. The topography of the site is generally from the southwest to northeast at approximately 1%. The adjacent private access drive and the water and sanitary sewer are already constructed. Existing storm drainage improvements consist of storm drains to the west and north of the Fire study site, per page 2 in the Appends. The western storm drain system begins at an area inlet approximately 300 feet south of the Fire Station site in an unimproved area of lot 3. This inlet is assumed to be inoperable at this time because a grate has notbeen installed an the inlet and the catch basin is currently covered with plywood. A second area inlet is located near the southwest comer of the proposed Fire Station No. 10 site, within a private access road, shown at design point 1 on the drainage and erosion control plan (pocket). This inlet collects runoff from developed lot 1 to the west, undeveloped lot 2 to the southwest, and the drainage easement between lots 1 and 2 and lot 3. Flaws collected by this inlet are piped north under the private access road for approximately 142 feet where it tums east and ultimately discharges north of Vermont Drive to a major open drainage way about 500 feet north of Vermont Drive. Two four foot curb inlets are located on each side of Vermont Drive which remove stone runoff from Timberline Road and Vermont Drive. This system parallels the other system and discharges into the same open drainage system, per page 2 in the Appendix. 1 DRAINAGE BASINS I' A. Malor Basin Description I' The proposed Fire Station No. 10 site lies within Basin 50 Figure 2 in Appendix) of the Foothills Basin (Basin G) Drainage Master Plan (1] and is comprised of portions of the Timberline Village P.U.D., Timberline I' Apartments P.U.D., Timberline Plaza P.U.D., and New Hampshire Subdivision. The basin is also a portion of the Southeast Quarter of Section 30, Township 7 North, Range 68 West in the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. A natural drainageway runs from west to east through the approximate center of Basin 50. III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. Regulations [ , The City of Fort Collins Storrs Drainage Design Criteria (2] is being used for { this study. (, B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints From the Foothills Basin (Basin G) Drainage Master Plan, no detention structures are required for flows leaving the project site. The developed storm flows will be routed to the open drainage way via a combination of open channel flow and storm sewer system. C. Hydrological Criteria The rational method for determining surface runoff was used for the study site. The 10 and 100 year storm event criteria, obtained by the City of Fort Collins.. was used in calculating runoff values. These calculations and criteria are included in the appendix. D. Hydraulic Criteria All hydraulic calculations within this report have been prepared in accordance with the City of Fort Collins Drainage Criteria and are included in the Appendix. r' .1 .1 N 1 ' E. Variances from Criteria ' Two storm drainage variances are being requested for the Fire Station No. 10 site. The first variance requested is for the trickle pan requirement within ' the proposed open channel along the south side of the site. This channel is to be used exclusively as an overflow channel. An underdrain is proposed, instead of the trickle pan, to remove any minor flows from the channel and prevent minor ponding. The second variance requested is for the depth of water over Vermont Drive. The calculated depth of flow over Vermont drive was determined to be 0.57 feet, an increase of 0.07 feet above the Fort Collins standard. A large portion of the sub -basins are currently undeveloped, therefore the i' runoff coefficients used for these sub -basins were assumed Because of the uncertainty of the future development, the assumed C values are conservative, increasing the calculated runoff more than what may ultimately ' be discharged from the study site. IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. General Concept ' Engineering Professionals, Inc. (EPI) (3] performed a previous drainage study for the proposed Fire Station No. 10 site in August 1990. The EPi ' study was evaluated and determined to be a good basis of design. Drainage concepts proposed in the EPI report were utilized for this study since the proposed land use is consistent and the facility layout was not ' changed significantly. Foothills Basin (Basin G) Drainage Master Plan used undetained storm flows ' in calculating peak discharge flows downstream of the project site. Therefore, no on -site detention facTmties are required for this site. The storm ' drainage improvements proposed were designed to pass the minor (10 year) and major (100 year) storm flows without any detention. 3 The existing storm sewer system was determined to be inadequate to completely pass either the minor or major storm flows. The excess storm flows will overtop Vermont Drive and discharge to the North into the adjacent open drainageway, without ponding within the fire station parking lot or building improvements. The overtopping flow will be routed to the existing open channel drainageway by a utility access and parking easement platted as part of Timberline Apartme:ns P.U.D. [4]. B. Specific Details The study area has been broken into five sub -basins. The sub -basins are shown on the Utildy, Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan in the Appendix of this report. An overflow channel crossing portions of Lot 3 was initially proposed by Stewart and Associates (5] as part of the initial drainage improvements for the Timberline Plaza P.U.D. The channel was intended to allow excess flows to be diverted from a area inlet located within the private access road. The proposed storm drainage improvements for this study utilizes this channel concept as the basis of design. The proposed storm drainage improvements primarily consist of an open channel routing off -site flows in excess of the existing area inlet and grate (design point 1), located at the southwest comer of the project site within ' the private access road, around the project site to a proposed area inlet I located in the northeast comer of the project site (design point 2). The proposed channel within the on -site easement along the eastern lot fine of ' the project site was sized to convey the developed 100 year storm flows ' from the remaining area of lot 3 and the excess flow from the existing area inlet at design point 1. In addition, storm runoff from the proposed parking lot will exit through a curb opening into a rip rap lined open channel to the proposed inlet The existing eight foot drainage and utility easement will be widened to 20 feet where the proposed channel, crosses the Fire Station site. It will be ' necessary to obtain both a construction and a permanent easement from the adjacent property owner to construct and ensure that the channel will be a permanent part of the drainage plan. The existing on -site storm sewer system was investigated and determined to be inadequate to pass the full minor or major storm flows. The maximum flow the existing system can transmit was found by RSD's storm sewer hydraulic analysis (pg. 14-20 in the Appendix) to be 19.0 cubic feet per second (cfs) of water for the 10 year storm, and 14.0 cfs of water for the ' 4 .I ' 100 year storm, assuming the ultimate condition [7]. The capacity of the existing storm sewer system decreases between the minor and major storms because of an increase in the water surface elevation in the regional detention pond (system outlet). ' The excess flows from the 10 and 100 year storm flows (9.32 cfs and 47.20 cfs respectfully) will pond to a depth of three feet at design point 2 before ' overtopping the channel into Vermont Drive, This excess flow plus the previous flow at design point 3 (0t0 = 4.28 cfs 0,00 = 8.32 cfs) exceeds the existing inlet within Vermont Drive by 55.2 cfs and 13.6 cfs for the 100 and ' 10 year floods respectively. This excess flow well overtop Vermont Drive 0.57 feet over the road crown and be routed to the open channel drainage way via utility access and parking easements within Timberline P.U.D. 1 V. EROSION CONTROL A. General Concept The proposed project site lies within the Moderate Wind ErodibTity Zone and the Moderate Rainfall ErodibTity Zone per the City of Fort Collins zone maps. The Erosion Control Performance Standard (PS) for the site was computed to be 73.5% per the City of Fort Collins Erosion Control Reference Manual for Construction Sites (8]. The Effectiveness (EEF) of the proposed erosion control plan was calculated to be 74.9%. Therefore, the erosion control plan as detailed in the Appendix and on the Utility, Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan meets the City of Fort Collins requirements. B. Snecfftc Details After channel grading has been completed, all disturbed areas within the drainage right-of-way well have temporary vegetation seed applied After seeding, a hay or straw mulch will be applied over the seed at a rate of two tons per acre minimum, and the mulch should be adequately anchored, tacked, or crimped into the sail. Due to the construction timing, the mulch is intended to provide erosion protection prior to seed germination. yvea.kS All structures specified on the Erosion Control Plan, welt constructed in accordance with the Construction Sequence schedule If parking lot and/or the driveway have not been paved within sR weeks of overact grading, a temporary vegetation seed should be applied to these areas. A hay or straw mulch will also be applied with the same specifications as the channel. 5 ' VI. CONCLUSIONS A. Compllance with Standards ' All computations that have been completed within this report are in compliance with the City of Fort Collins Erosion Control Reference Manual for Construction Sites [e] and the Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual [2]. In addition, all computations are in compliance with the Foothills Basin (Basin G) Drainage Master Plan (1]. S. Drainage Concept ' The proposed drainage concepts presented in this report and on the construction plans adequately provide for the transmission of developed on - site runoff to the drainage facilities at the north-eastern comer of the study site. These concepts are consistent with those proposed by Engineering Professionals, Inc. in 1990. A combination of street flow in Vermont Drive and the storm sewer system will provide for the 10 and the 100 year developed flow to reach the existing open drainageway. The flow within Vermont Drive will not exceed Vermont Drive's crown elevation by more ' than 0.57 feet ' At the time of construction, if any groundwater is encountered during construction, A Colorado Department of Health Construction Dewatering Permit will be required. C. Erosion Control Concept The proposed erosion control concepts adequately provide for the control of wind and rainfall erosion on the project site. Through the construction of the proposed erosion control concepts, the City of Fort Collins performance standard will be met. The proposed erosion control concepts presented in this report and shown on the Erosion Control Plan (Appendix) are in compliance with the City of Fort Collins Erosion Control Criteria. REFERENCES 1. Resource Consultants, Inc., Foothills Basin (Basin G1 Drainage Master Plan. February, 1981. 2. City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Stone Drainage Desion Criteria and Construction Standards May 1984,. Revised January 1991. N CONNECTICUT 0l, cn MASS. ST. SUB BASIN 50 ' BOUNDARY I I CT. a I l TIMBERLINE VILLAGE P.U.D. N 1 W I EXIST. > i STORM cc _ I SEWER ii VERMONT DRIVE LOT 1 J'%ANHOLES/ ST. EXIST. INLET--,,. Y LOT 2 O cc LOT 3 m N a W VALVE PLASTICS DANFIELD COURT BASIN MAP NOT TO SCALE J hl III III III III III III III III 1� DRAINAGE SUB BASINS VERM_ONT_DRIVE_ (— SUB BASIN 3 I 1 I( SUB BASIN I S. I SUB BASIN I I 4 I I ` FIRE S�ATiON 10 Sl E I I cri I is LOT 1 I I I� I I .I W ( TIMBERLINE P P.U.D. I I a I I= SUB BASIN 1 0 I 0� zcc Z I I 03 l X LOT 2 mul I a I LOT 3 _ W. I I F- L SUB BASIN 2 • Q45 CfS WATER I OFFSITE FLOW I I I I I I VALVE PLASTICS I I I I I I L _,,-_-SUB BASIN 3__—� DANFIELD COURT' J I' CUENT PRDJEC Engineering Consultants MADE BYTK DATE/ FE ` CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF: ...... !gbTuNQEAGE A,vOO.... S ER-DJ�ONNaACRciN7�R3ot STAT/N. . ! !., D£.rERr!/I/f . C/9x/Pl�.H... Qico_..� N �?w;,9LE;._FOR ..._. .... _ . 7 0VE',67- 0"PPlNG " "o,c VE P1rOilT OQ .......... _ ��T_9—�Oyon OEsl� iV PQ_LaiT C?-�7_-�E--ZAIL ET_ Fo R A IVO S 3,2 � s. Cps X/.7e) - - - - -- - 1).1_.V[E.T ;.cgPA.4/TL i ..t__ _ __. _.. J. ti c- 3i Qioo_.. O.ve VERhou7".O4eFcR H.J..... i 4) CAPAc2T)j 9F DES/4n/ Po//vl 'Z St! J,ll SEwEJ2 ' /9.0 :fsy/-'�) 5� C/iPRC/T.Y.O.F.S./¢N.:.PO/NT_�L.—lNL6_r__ g. g c{I j �) Sua • DAs,v �` O/oo TO DES/t•u ^'SO�uTic/v_�� LfSs_E�oc LN. _VFR./7G�iT OR "�9 DOES/C- v-:PCiu7" 3 ..... _ FR.opt-"?SvQ: B9S'il/f �gNOS.1:_ _ ! - ....� : 2 f/.GLr/- /N SwAtE._AL0N6 Sc!jK_7 ,�N QoF FIaE. r471oa _ ' - _ I _ ../%AX FLOlw RErlovEp :4.T {NLeT . .. /9.0.-- - --- — - t ' f 1 31 cfi9, ! 3 A53G-r/E RuV"OFF f/PoH oT,3 uw/tL Q�,.RESr�f7` p. i 4 T :DES/C N .PO/NT i9s - - . - - - • r FOR THE: ORAjNAC E .9N0 ERO�!GN.CovT e�o[; sTuo�/9?9 1 T w A3 ASJ IV )YJE D ZAA>..., RN,V OFf ._.�kO h':,. rT �^ B•Q. . ........._.:....kilt[.'• s'//EET._fio4i NoRT'/,F � iwra"' -'Y.yE "PRaws'E'y s4••Q�F�_ _.. loco _ ,I CLIENT JOB NO. 41 k7-e7,,j-,F- INC y PROJECT flffTrA)'IOAol CALCULATIONS FOR Engineering Consultants MADE BY 7"C -DATE/L,!j-1,e CHECKED BY DATE �SHEET-OF —7 --------------- 0 0- 9_5-C 4S --- - -- - ------ - - --------- .......... .... 10 A) a ....... ....... ...... .. .. ......... 7 _J ... ... ........ .. ------- 7 7 ... ....... ----------- ...... 4 77 ....... ... 7 ....... . ...... .... .. 7 4' e -_ - 4 [ Ifl} `__ _-__—p"Gl w ___ _. _-__--___ --. - ---- ----- -- ----- - - P __.- -- '� [ H t'Lf T _ LCU[I!4 1^q.I ri DRAINAS r T - K DRIVE (54' R.O.W) -° D x 1 E ocN c ii I IT I. EASMR00 it �� : y — — I _I i r1 NOTES+ITT • t all, 1 I CEDIMEMP CONTROL FECATUAES ARE HOT TV PC BENEFIT YYMILN{ Y • I IICHADD COVER AMID LiFFESDABUIC HAS BEEN ESIABOSNED, y �— UNOSCAPIMO 4p01LANDSCAPING N FOR gSO01RE0 • I }P; • I 1 'M I•� - E _ _ _ I o EROSION 0 IA [U ACCEPTANCE SUHAI c�Y, ;VA It Np ii z SEDIMENT A• FORTSTANDARDS 1 ' 1 T • _ — ITO IT Y 1 CL N ` ry9 BIE FOR MAINTENANCE U INDITE 11 V'4 L x x l • 1 -x — P 1. 5 A OR THE 5i0P DRAINS S U ON C?S - I r- I BASIN 1 4, ALL AIIIFOTF MUST COMPLY *LTH THE STATE -II -- BASIN 2 NAE ��a"� E + U OR O PLfl 1 c PROCESS 5 R E J • ` ' - 1 ~ -- CONTROL DIVISION OGO E U4 x PERMITS k ENFORCEMENT FAA L_, II III_ ■ , i 1 a' CI COl UO C Gl WATER 0 IY II • ,I 1 . i �'SyTMc I� I P JSF CONTACT 1 L— M CL PHONECICIPPIO t) 1 [ )59 g I \\,� CIA I P »>111 YXIrnEKS RA , _ - = I C PEPGA'i N F 11r XG W 1[XS OF i LE Efl r [. c a.arc :: _. r_ . • i Ali E L STEPS STATES. y 1 • 1 _ Y r RS psOIYE CONTROLS E S ai .. _ N [ IB INSTALLED N 1 L • __ _ P CE WITH SCHEI ON RELATIVE BASS FROM 'r p 1 1 i - 4' j _ STAR[ DATE. n� _ •..+ J T SEE SHEET p FOR BRAD NG AND DRAINAGE DOTAL SO {� vY�B T -� --T r I I Y I. — -- __ _ 1 1 __ '■ 1 I Y 1 1 1 3 r r __t- �. 1 I ( 1�- i 1 I I 1 R— IS, ,,BE IS i y F L 4 V D S1aN POINT A lEr l [R 2 4 -- - -- FIT 1IA -- p _ 1 �� t __,� i I. I r �d 1� u �, M.A p....»{ 11 I IJJ J li r-_ \ .-_.- - aye! i� • 1 - _ _ ______ -- *M I. ■HI .IF I j 0.45 CFS . I . . I I . I . . . . . . . . . I I . . I I I l les ______—_ __ ___ H♦____ _____ _ — ______-V_ ___ y py W ` -p— 1 -f 2 _ _ _ _ __ r _ __ A 1�Il'N. r I a - \ `• - { -_ _. _— Exs le' Ins _ so _ cxs le 0.QP __ a ' r EnsTw ♦i. r .r F.)a'. - _— T I 1 _ _ x 7 AVAVENENr ' ♦ i I - \� _ _ w Ruc ss - _ v s — j 1 ITS 1 . r..aR » S. 14 iIS :,=i _. ♦'•. BASIN 2 µ i i /\ \ \.'S \ '�/ _: _. 1 3.. Fmow ElgvellaN :.wua 1 p * 1 ' <. taigf lboommoNs IT �� ti I IT L ) �\ A \/ \//\ VALUE PLASTICS I i E A: �\ \\\\ '�\J• %\ /\�: FlxlsHtll npm Elxv - An n.w ■ _ 1 AA - ///10P,I /// /� /�� i � 1 \\] f r' IS MA I F "BASIN 3 �� f f _gym �` IAUTO I 1-1 .✓' s Nf IGYl 'FEET 1. _ \ °sr.... il ♦♦I r.. I )o o By v r�SR �� IS US ELI sLuw xRI ss pn w d wMxu ■ W» �♦ Cav of r0RW cowrvs. cu0a oo iA { e 411, INT unury PAN APPROVAL"JiF —f „ , `-SFxAllauc Y „r I I A— ✓ yly / '� CKED - -----_ --- -lp ---11 - --- - — — — ----_ + w— ---- -- ;C ww 55 - - ----- --- __—_� I ulmxp WALK _ - ¢+.D or _ 1 I li ® `T Fl ° _ _ _ - - r _ - ' i� . ,a.\l TIMBERLINE -ROAD (120' R.O W.) `4lgd,... 9ti;i.`ba�airM"wR,da.F'z,T _ ----- - .. IIRV —T h 1 _ CHECKED 9Y I POI IS Oes' a By aN1. D. DRAINAGE STUDY AND a�n' o mL'D aeW s%vs VALUE PLASTICS OVOI 3 of 6 „ Nlen"ekea MxC tz/sa EROSION CONTROLILI F C REGRAGENG MHl ILL 4/5/95 pRE AP OV[tl Xi$. FORM PMnING URN A> — p sa Peon , pr :fla pale P - 'e<t No 9442d11)D x i .U. 1• y , y 00 I 3 ... n.� .. _ !..: _ .. .-,.. ,. 9..r. d .... .L''w�.{.Yx-..9.SG�SFiii'iA'lS i.9 `.F. >4SY =,'—.__i4�YSPE::1�[fj.3TiSGc:.'YY'�Si1J$'.tl N�. _