HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 06/29/2016' City of Ft. Cdk Ap :rov Plans
June 10, 2016
Approved BY.; .
Date 6=29-�1
1 '
FINAL DRAINAGE AND
EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR
CAPSTONE COTTAGES
Fort Collins, Colorado
Prepared for:
Capstone Collegiate Communities
' 431 Office Park Drive
Birmingham, Alabama 35223
' Prepared by:
■� NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
1 301 N. Howes Street, Suite 100
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Phone: 970.221.4158 Fax: 970.221.4159
- www.northemengineenng.com
' This Drainage Report is consciously providedas a PDF. -
Please consider the environment before printing this document in its entirety.
When a hard copy is absolutely necessary, we recommend double -sided printing.. Project Number: 939-001
' NorthernEngineering.com // 970.221.4158
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
June 10, 2016
City of Fort Collins
Stormwater Utility
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
RE: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for
CAPSTONE COTTAGES
Dear Staff:
Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for your
review. This report accompanies the Project Development Plan submittal for the proposed
Capstone Cottages development.
This report has been prepared in accordance to Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM),
and serves to document the stormwater impacts associated with the proposed project. We
understand that review by the City is to assure general compliance with standardized criteria
contained in the FCSCM.
If you should have any questions as you review this report, please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.
000
Aaron Cvar, PhD, PE 0
:'4 ci:"t�►
Senior Project Engineer v q 1627Yr
G
301 N. Howes Street, Suite 100, Fort Collins, CO 80521 1 970.221.4158 1 www.northernengineering.com
■� I NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION....................................................................
1
'
A. Location.............................................................................................................................................1
'
B. Description of Property.....................................................................................................................
C. Floodplain.........................................................................................................................................5
3
'
II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS........................................................................ 5
A. Major Basin Description....................................................................................................................5
B. Sub -Basin Description.......................................................................................................................
6
III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA....................................................................................
6
A. Regulations........................................................................................................................................6
'
B. Four Step Process..............................................................................................................................
C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints............................................................................
6
7
'
D. Hydrological Criteria......................................................................................................................... 7
E. Hydraulic Criteria.............................................................................................................................. 7
'
F. Modifications of Criteria...................................................................................................................
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN.....................................................................................8
7
A. General Concept...............................................................................................................................
8
'
B. Specific Details..................................................................................................................................9
V. CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................11
A. Compliance with Standards............................................................................................................11
B. Drainage Concept............................................................................................................................11
APPENDICES:
APPENDIX A — Hydrologic Computations
APPENDIX B — Street Capacity Computations
APPENDIX C — Inlet Computations
APPENDIX D — Storm Line Computations
'
APPENDIX E — LID Design Information
APPENDIX F — Stormwater Management Model (SWMM); Detention Pond Calculations
APPENDIX G — Erosion Control Report
APPENDIX H — Larimer County Correspondence -Lincoln Channel
t
.1
Final Drainage Report
■�INORTHERN
ENGINEERING
LIST OF FIGURES:
Figure1 — Aerial Photograph..................................................................................................3
Figure2— Proposed Site Plan.................................................................................................. 4
Figure 3 — Existing Floodplains.....................................:......................................................... 5
MAP POCKET:
Proposed Drainage Exhibit
Final Drainage Report
.V NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
' A. Location
1. Vicinity Map
1
[I
1
[I
LOCATION t NORTH
' 2. The project site is located in the west half of Section 7, Township 6 North, Range 68
West of the 6`h Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of
Colorado .
' 3. The project site is located just northeast of the intersection of Lemay Avenue and
Lincoln Avenue.
' 4. The project site lies within the Dry Creek Basin. Detention requirements are to detain
the difference between the 100-year developed inflow rate and the historic 2-year
release rate. The historic release rate for this basin is 0.20 cfs per acre.
' 5. The Mulberry Street Walmart and the Buffalo Run Apartment complex exist just to the
south of the site, on the south side of Lincoln Avenue. The San Criso residential
development exists to the north of the site. The Sunward Condos development exists
' to the east of the site. The Lincoln Channel (Storm Drainage) runs along the southern
boundary of the project site, and will be utilized as the storm outfall for the majority of
' Final Drainage Report 1
.� I NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
1
t
developed site runoff.
6. No offsite flows enter the site from the west, south, or east. Currently, offsite flows
along the north side of the site are conveyed east via overland flow; however, as
shown on the Drainage Exhibit, we are anticipating some form of detention pond in
the future to occur at the northwest corner of the intersection of International Blvd.
and Duff Dr. We will design the proposed storm line in international Blvd. to take 5.0
cfs from this point through the site, based on an allowable release rate of 0.20 cfs per
acre per the the Dry Creek Basin Master Plan. We are not detaining this offsite flow,
and we will not increase site release rate to compensate for this offsite flow; rather,
we have designed the emergency spillway to safely pass flows from the offsite area in
both the future anticipated condition as well as the current existing condition.
7. The Lincoln Channel conveys regional flows from the west; this channel conveys flows
east along the southern boundary of the project site. The proposed site will release
into the Lincoln Channel at a rate of 0.20 cfs per acre per the Dry Creek Basin Master
Plan. We have met with the Larimer County Engineering Department and they have
indicated acceptance of this master planned release rate into the Lincoln Channel.
8. An existing 36-inch diameter storm line runs along the west side of the site, which
will be utilized in the proposed site design to serve as an outfall for the proposed
paver detention system shown in drainage Basin 4 on the proposed drainage exhibit.
The existing storm line will also serve as an outfall for the proposed inlets within the
future Realigned Lemay Avenue (drainage Basins 14a and 14b). The existing 36-inch
diameter line begins to the north of the proposed site and serves as the outfall for the
existing San Cristo neighborhood detention pond.
Final Drainage Report 2
1
1
1
1
J
1
1
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Capstone Cottages
B. Description of Property
1. The project area is roughly 25.9 net acres.
Figure 1 — Aerial Photograph
2. The subject property is an undeveloped parcel with native ground cover. Existing
ground slopes are mild to moderate (i.e., 1 - 6±%) through the interior of the
property. General topography slopes from northwest to southeast. The Lincoln
Channel, running along the southern boundary of the project site, collects the majority
of historic site runoff.
3. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey website:
hftp://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx,
the site consists of Caruso Clay Loam, Loveland Clay Loam, and Nunn Clay Loam,
which all fall into Hydrologic Soil Group C.
4. The proposed project site plan is composed of residential and commercial
development. Associated roadways, water and sewer lines will be constructed with
the development. Onsite detention for a portion of the site is proposed within the
subgrade of a permeable paver system. The remainder of onsite detention will be
provided within a surface detention pond located at the southeast corner of the site.
' Final Drainage Report 3
No Text
' ■� NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Capstone Cottages
C. Floodplain
' 1. The project site is not encroached by any City or FEMA 100-year floodplain. The site
is located within the FEMA-Regulatory 500-year floodplain (shaded Zone X) of the
Cache La Poudre River. As such, At -Risk Population and Essential Service Critical
' Facilities are not allowed within the limits of the 500-year floodplain.
1
1
1
t
FEMA High Risk - Floodway
O FEtdA High Risk - 100 Year
CI FEMA Moderate Risk - 100 1 500
Figure 3 —Area Floodplain Mapping
DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS
A. Major Basin Description
1. The project site lies within the Dry Creek Basin. Detention requirements are to detain
the difference between the 100-year developed inflow rate and the historic 2-year
release rate. The historic release rate for this basin is 0.20 cfs per acre. The site
outfall is the existing Lincoln Channel, running along the southern boundary of the
site. We have met with Larimer County and communicated the concerns that the City
of Fort Collins has regarding discharge into the Lincoln Channel. Larimer County's
position, as documented in the February 20, 2015 email from Larimer County (copy
provided in Appendix), is that Larimer County is in agreement with discharging into
the Channel as long as the release rate specified in the Dry Creek Basin Master
Drainage Plan is maintained.
' Final Drainage Report 5
' NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Capstone Cottages
B. Sub -Basin Description
1. The subject property historically drains overland from northwest to southeast. Runoff
from the majority of the site has historically been collected in the Lincoln Channel,
running along the southern boundary of the site. The Lincoln Channel captures
' regional flows from the west and conveys these flows east.
2. A more detailed description of the project drainage patterns follows in Section IV.A.4.,
below.
' III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
A. Regulations
' There are no optional provisions outside of the FCSCM proposed with the proposed
project.
' B. Four Step Process
The overall stormwater management strategy employed with the proposed project utilizes
' the "Four Step Process" to minimize adverse impacts of urbanization on receiving waters.
The following is a description of how the proposed development has incorporated each
step.
' Step 1 — Employ Runoff Reduction Practices
Several techniques have been utilized with the proposed development to facilitate the
' reduction of runoff peaks, volumes, and pollutant loads as the site is developed from the
current use by implementing multiple Low Impact Development (LID) strategies including:
Conserving existing amenities in the site including the existing vegetated areas.
Providing vegetated open areas throughout the site to reduce the overall impervious
t area and to minimize directly connected impervious areas (MDCIA).
Not Routing flows, to the extent feasible, through vegetated swales to increase time of
concentration, promote infiltration and provide initial water quality.
' Step 2 — Implement BMPs That Provide a Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) with
Slow Release
' The efforts taken in Step 1 will facilitate the reduction of runoff; however, urban
development of this intensity will still generate stormwater runoff that will require
additional BMPs and water quality. The majority of stormwater runoff from the site will be
' intercepted and treated using rain gardens prior to exiting the site.
Step 3 — Stabilize Drainageways
' There are no major drainageways within the subject property (the Lincoln Channel is
located outside of the property boundary). While this step may not seem applicable to
proposed development, the project indirectly helps achieve stabilized drainageways
nonetheless. By providing water quality where none previously existed, sediment with
' erosion potential is removed from the downstream drainageway systems. Furthermore, .
this project will pay one-time stormwater development fees, as well as ongoing monthly
stormwater utility fees, both of which help achieve City-wide drainageway stability.
' Step 4 — Implement Site Specific and Other Source Control BMPs.
The proposed project will improve upon site specific source controls compared to historic
' conditions:
' Final Drainage Report 6
■V NORTHERN
ENGINEERING Capstone Cottz
Nib Trash, waste products, etc. that were previously left exposed with the historic trailer
' park will no longer be allowed to exposure to runoff and transport to receiving
drainageways. The proposed development will eliminate these sources of potential
pollution.
' C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints
1
1
1
The subject property is surrounded by currently developed properties. Thus, several
constraints have been identified during the course of this analysis that will impact the
proposed drainage system including:
Nil Existing elevations along the property lines will generally be maintained.
ND As previously mentioned, overall drainage patterns of the existing site will be
maintained.
N7 Elevations of existing downstream facilities that the subject property will release to
will be maintained.
D. Hydrological Criteria
1. The City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency Curves, as depicted in
Figure RA-16 of the FCSCM, serve as the source for all hydrologic computations
associated with the proposed development. Tabulated data contained in Table RA-7
has been utilized for Rational Method runoff calculations.
2. The Rational Method has been employed to compute stormwater runoff utilizing
coefficients contained in Tables RO-11 and RO-12 of the FCSCM.
3. Three separate design storms have been utilized to address distinct drainage
scenarios. A fourth design storm has also been computed for comparison purposes.
The first design storm considered is the 80t' percentile rain event, which has been
employed to design the project's water quality features. The second event analyzed is
the "Minor," or "Initial" Storm, which has a 2-year recurrence.interval. The third
event considered is the "Major Storm," which has a 100-year recurrence interval.
The fourth storm computed, for comparison purposes only, is the 10-year event.
4. No other assumptions or calculation methods have been used with this development
that are not referenced by current City of Fort Collins criteria.
E. Hydraulic Criteria
1. As previously noted, the subject property maintains historic drainage patterns.
2. All drainage facilities proposed with the project are designed in accordance with
criteria outlined in the FCSCM and/or the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
(UDFCD) Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual.
3. As stated above, the subject property is not located in a City or FEMA regulatory
floodplain.
4. The proposed project does not propose to modify any natural drainageways.
F. Modifications of Criteria
1. The proposed development is not requesting any modifications to criteria at this time.
Final Drainage Report 7
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Capstone Cottage
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A. General Concept
1. The main objectives of the project drainage design are to maintain existing drainage
' patterns, and to ensure no adverse impacts to any adjacent properties.
2. Onsite detention will be provided within the subgrade of the proposed permeable
pavement systems for Basin 2, and in the pond within Basin 7 for the majority of the
' site (please see exceptions discussed below). Detention release rates will be
controlled through sub -surface control structures.
3. The site has been broken into 14 sub -basins for preliminary design purposes.
Anticipated drainage patterns for proposed drainage basins are described below.
' Basins 1, 5. 10, 13
Basins 1, 5, 10, and 13 consist of residential and commercial development, and will
generally drain via overland flow and curb and gutter flow into permeable paver
' systems (Basins 10 and 13 will not have a paver system), and a series of rain gardens
for pre-treatment of stormwater runoff prior to discharge into the constructed wetland.
The proposed series of permeable paver systems shown on the Drainage Exhibit will
be designed to both capture and collect runoff and then direct flows into storm line
' systems via a subdrain system, connecting to the proposed storm line system.
Detention for Basins 1, 5, 10,and 13 will be provided within the detention
pond/constructed wetland in the southeast corner of the site.
' Basins 2. 3. 6, 12
Basins 2, 3, 6, 12 consist of public right of way areas that will generally drain via
' curb and gutter flow into inlets and storm line systems within the project site. The
storm main collecting all runoff from these basins will include a Snout for pre-
treatment of runoff prior to discharge into the constructed wetland. Detention for
' Basins 2, 3, 6, and 12 will be provided within the detention pond/constructed
wetland in the southeast corner of the site. LID treatment will .be provided for these
basins as outlined in Appendix E. -
' Basin 4
Basin 4 consists of residential development, and will generally drain via overland flow
and curb and gutter flow into a permeable paver system, and underground storage
vault system. The permeable paver sub -grade material as well as the underground
vault system will be utilized for 0.99 acre-feet of onsite detention volume.
Basins 6c and 11
Due to grading constraints Basins 6c and 11 will be directed offsite undetained.
Basin 6c is 0.23 acre and will sheet flow primarily into the adjacent Lincoln Avenue.
' In a 100-year event this basin produces 1.1 cfs. Basin 11 is 0.04 acre and will flow
from curb and gutter to offsite property to the north. In a 100-year event this basin
produces 0.4 cfs. Release from the detention pond has been reduced by the total
undetained flow of 1.5 cfs from Basins 6c and 11.
Basin 7
Basin 7 consist of the proposed detention/constructed wetland area, and will drain
directly into the detention pond.
Final Drainage Report 8
1
■�INORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Basins 8 and 9
Basin 8 will be directed into a rain garden through a 5-foot curb cut, and will drain via
'
the rain garden's subdrain system into the adjacent detention pond/constructed
wetland in the southeast corner of the site. Basin 9 will be directed into a rain garden
through a 10-foot curb cut, and will drain via the rain garden's subdrain system into
the adjacent detention pond/constructed wetland in the southeast corner of the site.
Detention Basins 8 and 9 will be provided within the detention pond/constructed
'
wetland.
Basins 14a through 14e
Basins 14a defines future Lemay Avenue Right of way and will drain into proposed
inlets shown within the future Realigned Lemay Avenue, which will convey flows into
the existing 36-inch diameter storm line extending from. the north and running along
the west side of the site (discussed above in Section LA). Analysis of the capacity of
this line has been provided in Appendix D which shows the existing storm line has
capacity for this flow. The line does have additional capacity for additional flow as
well. Future flows from Basin 14e may also be accommodated in this line. Future
analysis will need -to occur when this area is developed.
Basin 14b also defines future Lemay Right of Way and will drain into proposed inlets
t
shown within the future Realigned Lemay Avenue, which will convey flows into the
existing 18-inch diameter storm line running along the west side of the site. Analysis
'of the capacity of this line has been provided in Appendix D which shows the existing
storm line has capacity for this flow.
Basins 14c and 14d define onsite areas adjacent to the future Lemay Avenue Right of
Way and are primarily composed of landscaped areas and rooftops. We have
'
designed small pockets of detention cells to capture flows prior to discharge into Right
of Way. These small detention cells will release back into the existing 36-inch pipe
extending from the north and running along the west side of the site (discussed above
'
in Section LA).
Please see further discussion of water quality and detention requirements in Section
'
IV.B, below.
A full-size copy of the Drainage Exhibit can be found in the Map Pocket at the end of
this report.
B. Specific Details
'
1. Quantity detention is a requirement for the site, and portion (0.98 acre-feet) of
quantity detention is proposed to be provided within the underground vault
system and permeable paver sub -grade material within Basin 4. The majority
'
of the site will be directed into the onsite pond within Basin 7 to maintain the
required site release rate. The current stipulation for release rate is 0.20 cfs
per acre per the Dry Creek Master Plan. The project site encompasses 25.9
acres, thus, a release rate of 5.2 cfs for the overall site is required by this
'
criteria. A total detention volume of 4.80 acre-feet with a release rate of 3.70
cfs has been calculated for the detention/water quality pond in Basin 7. This
release rate accounts for Basins 6c and 11 releasing from the site undetained
as described above.
Final Drainage Report 9
■V INORTHERN
ENGINEERING
1
1
1
2. A detention volume of 0.98 acre-feet with a release rate of 1.25 cfs has been
calculated for the paver system detention in Basin 4. Detention volumes have
been estimated using the computer program EPA SWMM.
Table 1 — Detention Summary Table
100-Yr.
100-Yr.
Peak
Detention Vol.
Detention Vol.
300-Yr. WSEL
Release
Pond ID
(Cu-Ft)
(Ac-Ft)
(Ft)
(cfs)
Paver Subgrade
(Within Drainage
Basin 4)
38974
0.90
N/A
1.25
Detention Pond
(Within Drainage
Basin 7)
209376
4.80
4938.90
3.70
3. The stormwater management strategy employs a comprehensive treatment
train approach and low -impact development tactics recognized by the Urban
'
Drainage and Flood Control District. Once such component is minimizing
directly connected impervious areas (MDCIA).
The roof forms of the residential buildings disperse the runoff to multiple
'
downspout locations. Each downspout discharges to landscape buffer zones
with appropriate dimensions. Rooftop to landscape bed ratios range from
0.7:1 to 4:1, with a weighted average around 2.5:1. These are reasonable
'
ratios, providing a good first step at the upstream end of the treatment train.
The next major treatment mechanism is permeable interlocking concrete
'
pavers (PICP). The PICP areas are primarily designed to treat the private
parking lots and drive aisles. The targeted average run-on ratio of vehicular
parking pavement (asphalt/concrete) to PICP is roughly 3:1. Additional
rooftop area is also directed towards the PICP sections. With rooftop
'
impervious areas factored in, the targeted run-on ratios are in the 5:1 to 6:1
range. The increased overall run-on areas to the pavers are acceptable since
the rooftops are MDCIA and have a reduced sediment load. The geometric
configuration of run-on area to elongated paver intercepting edges further
works to the site's advantage. The Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute
'
views the sediment load and maintenance schedule as the key factors to
successful PICP, much more so than run-on ratios alone.
While the areas of permeable pavement are sized towards the minimum end of
recommended criteria, the next downstream treatment facilities are slightly
oversized. That is, all of the rain gardens exceed the water quality capture
volume requirements for their tributary areas. Most of the rain gardens'
primary function is to treat runoff from the surrounding public City streets.
1
Final Drainage Report 10
' ■V (NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
J
1
[1
1]
IF
L_1
F
1
The last designed water quality treatment measure is a sumped concrete
structure equipped with a heavy duty Snout hood and SAFL baffle. This
ensures that nearly every drop of water falling onto the site is treated, in many
cases multiple ways, prior to discharging into the detention pond/constructed
wetland located at the southeast corner of the site. While not quantified or
accounted for in the project design, the constructed wetland component in the
bottom stage of the detention pond will provide further water quality treatment
and polishing as well. Water quality benefits from the Isolator Row
component of the StormTech system have also been ignored.
Please see Appendix E for the treatment train table, design information, and an
LID exhibit.
4. The site plan provides approximately 23% of paved drive and parking areas as
permeable pavers. The paver system will greatly enhance filtration of storm
runoff, and will provide significant storm runoff infiltration.
5. Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) Manual shall be provided by the City of
Fort Collins in the Development Agreement.
6. Proper maintenance of the drainage facilities designed with the proposed
development is a critical component of their ongoing performance and effectiveness.
The constructed wetland within Basin 7 has been designed to be easily accessed by
maintenance staff via gentle slopes provided to the bottom of the pond.
7. The drainage features associated with the proposed project are all private facilities,
located on private property.
V. CONCLUSIONS
A. Compliance with Standards
1. The drainage design proposed with the proposed project complies with the City of Fort
Collins' Stormwater Criteria Manual.
2. The drainage design proposed with this project complies with requirements for the
Dry Creek Basin.
3. The drainage plan and stormwater management measures proposed with the
proposed development are compliant with all applicable State and Federal regulations
governing stormwater discharge.
B. Drainage Concept ,
1. The drainage design proposed with this project will effectively limit any potential
damage associated with its stormwater runoff by providing detention and water
quality mitigation features.
2. The drainage concept for the proposed development is consistent with requirements
for the Dry Creek Basin.
Final Drainage Report 11
(NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
References
1. City of Fort Collins Landscape Design Guidelines for Stormwater and Detention Facilities,
November 5, 2009, BHA Design, Inc. with City of Fort Collins Utility Services.
2. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, as adopted by Ordinance No.
174, 2011, and referenced in Section 26-500 (c) of the City of Fort Collins Municipal Code.
3. Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, Adopted January 2, 2001, Repealed and
Reenacted, Effective October 1, 2002, Repealed and Reenacted, Effective April 1, 2007.
4. Soils Resource Report for Larimer County Area, Colorado, Natural Resources Conservation
Service, United States Department of Agriculture.
5. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes 1-3, Urban Drainage and Flood Control
District, Wright -McLaughlin Engineers, Denver, Colorado, Revised April 2008.
Final Drainage Report 12
I
n
H
n
1
U
1
APPENDIX A
HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS
I
1
1
rz
4^
E E
a
N N
m m
ti a
m
m n
y
N m
N a
m M
m n
O m
rn m
N n
m m
n O
m m
m
m o
u' 3E
• m
N
r r
X' �
'`
Om000
0�0000
N
m
O �O�
0 a
00
m00
m
moo
00
nN
n m
+m
n.y
Z
S �
e
6Em' g
o
o.+o
o.+.+o
.: .:000000
O+m
mm
�
u
�m
J
1 Y
q
S
T 6 C
o o�,
"u
O m
-�000-•000000000000000
0 0
O a
0 m
V 0
0 n
m m
t0 t0
n m
1n N
u
It
u
u
�T
Y
(�
j
T$ c
N Eo
o uS
m m
o
rn m
v m
m n
m m
t0 t0
n 1D
O O
m N
O O
tLLS
O
O
J
S U
C C
V
-
^ 0
q
N
m m
m
m O
O O
O C
m m
N?
A N
q v� N Y
Om0':NO
�mOOmOON
Am
V
NOi
LC
V
Q 3 C •q•
O Q
6 O
O O
O O
616161616161611
O
�J
2
N 9
Ow j
9
u
Z
O
e
o x
q
r O
O N
N 0
0 0
0 0
0 S
0 0
0
0 0
0 0
Q
y
O N
O O
=
q
m;
O O
O O
O O
O G
C G
G G
G G
O 6
6 6
0 6
lO
N a
m N
a
Z
Q
w E
K
m
s
N
d
N
�
n
Z
c!-'
mmmrna
cy
p
v Ky
moo
v,m0000000000000�0
NCU
00000
00�
a`mLQ
o0000000000000000000
N
y
O N
A m
O N
N O
O m
A m
0 0
0
0
q y V
m
O
O
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 y
0 o
o 6
y
Q o
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
o o
G O
0 0
0 0
U
p
U
c
Acu
mmmoommacmrnm
O V
Cl! O
N
N A
S m
m$SSm0
N
R
0 0066666
m
m m
0 0
\
C
yq
V
i
•C
Y
pp
mm
A-"w
mNO-m-OmmO�O
pp
-
V W
O
C
_
�
.N •q
NNO
V
N�00�00.000
�
�-0�
W
q
LL
m
B
q
Q`
N O
vvn�c�v
m"'o..mm
n
m m
m 0
N
mn
m N
mMNnvnm
m
mmOO�nmmn
m V
O m
ti m
O
J
4i
�
YI
u
t
W
�pri
C
o.�mmmm
O
N
4' C
m
m
5
a
S m �' - L^ C �•
�'
�
•-�NmamtO
taO �Onm010
.rNM�p<V
a
�
m
goo
I
0
11
I
t
I
C
T
O f C
E
.^i
�
.Ni
.Ni
N
� 1n
1n ti
lA 4A
In In
IA �
Ol Ol
H ti
m
o
O
d
C
O F C
CO
O
m
m
N
O��(V
OO�OO�OON�O�
8
N
s
S.F 5
N
N
M
m
N
OICI
ICl�l0
i01O
IO
IO '�OO�Inm
O N
p
F
M r n
m Q
Q
T d
m
C
C
~
E
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
z Z
Q Q
z z
Q Q
Z z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
!ZEEQ
Z
a o
N
U
U
N
Q
C
>
Z
z
z
z
z
z z
z z
z z
z z
z z
z z
z z
z
ILL
d
d
7
y
0
3°
A°
d"
o°
d" d'
d' e
o o°
o° d'
d' o
o o°
o
_
V
N
O
O
O
o
o
o o
o o
o o
0 o
0 0
6 0
6 6
0
C J e
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0 0=
0=
0
0 0
0
N
d
J
2
O
c_
In
OD
IO
.+
a
MOM4
Iq
IOmIOQ
NO"rnQ
M
to
N
m
OD N
Z Z"M"O"Z
N N"O
Z
tl
O
O
0
0
0
00
a s
00000
a
0000
Q
o
7
ZZNNNNNZ
N NNNZ
O
"
>
C.>
d
2
0 o e
O
O y o
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
O
n
CCB
J
o
0
m
0
0
0O
rolom,�o
OWN
o�lloo
M"O
Zs
c
J
m
a
N
a
O�OOOO�rnMrn
"
"
""
2
O
� C
•E
1�
W
W
�rnrnn�rn
Ol
lOrnrn
OOONO?O
~ p
.Ni
o
In
6
°'o
o
0ti
0 O'+O
60
0ti0
O
���JJJ inop
a.0
cq
M
q
4
a"Ma
ar
trFMMO
Wm
W
Q E .tli N n G
f O E
.My
.y
l0
O
N
N
g� s s s s a
^
YJep
tl,
c
0"
m
`R
`ove..
M
V V
V V
V
O
M
Q
tl
f N'E
M
6
O
NMrn-
O
OmmN".
a
ago
o
aeaeae0000000000000
W
V/; e
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O N
O a
0
LQ
_O
N V
N
N
N
N
N
N NN
N
N N
NN
N N"+N"O
O
LL
L
In
In
o
'lloo�ll
u-,000000�ll
In
in In
�'
N
N
N
1�
N
V CNrn
V
„Ny a�ODN
NnrnM
W
J
N
o
m
O
m
m
m
0 0
0"
0 0
0 0
0"""
oc)
� j
o
O
-�
o
0
0.:""0"""""000000
000moo=cmmmmmm
T 0
�
In
In
IA
IA
IA
1Il lA
IA ILJ
Ili lA
lA Ill
IlJ In
IA Ln
Ln 1n
In
0 N
O
N
Ol
N
N
N
rn rn
rn N
rn rn
rn rn
rn N
N N
N N
N
W
U
0
0
0
0
000,00000000100006
LT
I
c 5N9
In In
In
In In
In
In to
ul
In
In
c n
C�
U~
N
rn
N
N
N
N
N
rn rn
rn N
rn rn
rn rn
rn N
N N
N N
N
' q N
O
O
O
O
O
O O
o 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
_C
N
* G m
I�.
Q
C O r` \ V N
N
V z
End O>
C
� N
O
z
O
z
O
z
O
z
O
z
O O
z z
O O
z z
O O
z z
O O
z z
O O
z z
o 0
z z
111111
0 0
z z
0
z
'8 E M -
tl
_ _
3 3
A
"
N
M
O
IA
1�COrn
�.'�..N.
ti-�
V V
V V
V
o o c
r- ILL W W
w
p d i M
m
t0 t0
tp
0 m
�y�
lan
cl�
d
v N +
11 J 2`D J
lo�IpnaDrn0^�
C
Z
00-
Un
r`
a
Ol
ti-i-y-yOLD
0I
UOcqu)ONI�
d
M
Lo
M
00
m
.4
�
M
0
O
M
M
ti
r-:
.^
N
0)
m
O
;t
t
0)
ISM
N
m
M
Ol
00
h
00O
0 Q U�o
uJ
N
N
M
-+O
C5
4
0
-4
-t
O-�
O
-v
O
N
O
Ol
00
N
Ol
to
0
0)
0
l0
l0
t0
0 N
LL d ri
Ol
4
,ti
^
W
10000
N
OOON.--i
.+00
Ol U
M � S
rn ¢ ¢
m
p H O
O
; o�
O
Ol
ID
.--i
Ol
N
N
M
wu)u)N
00
OI
OI
�
Min
OI
Ot
Ol
DLO
0)
0)
M'+NNN
O
N
V
OO
M
1
C _ 2
«
ID
Ol
n
ui
I-�
O
Ol
I,:
Ol
Ot
(Tl
Ot
O)
o0
o0
P�
O
-4
A
_
C
G
is
.N o L
r
C
O
N
1�
V
u")
M
u7
M
N
LL'1
N
10
00
M
IO
CO
V
n
00
V
O
LLq
Maa
n
N
n
CO
n
00
V'a
cq
N
n
M
Mf+1m
U]
IO
O
MMN
N
=
N�j
�^ t
O
n
N
N
00
t0
C
7
n
LL�
m
m
LL7
Cl)
IO
w
m
O
-It-
Il
m
O
O
a
N00
W
OCONOON00-+N
N
O
OIN
G
O
O
N-
C
-+
N
N
N
-�
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
o
gp�i
`~
gggq mM
o
O
00
O
O
O
NOID
�
00
0001001�
t000
hN
o001001OM
1
y O
O
tO
O
O.O
�00
Lq
OL
aC
� •
seem
ca
-,
o
-.
Z
ONryN�
OraHMM
a
o
-+
0
a
0
01
0
Ol
1
O
mmM
a
OI
M'�:
omI
OI
O
L7OJ�
n
N
001D
ID
mw
n
ID
u
n
N
a
O
O
O
.+
000000000000000
c
u
p
f..)
-+
O
-
tO
O
al
O
Ol
h
O
OI
O'
M
OI
M
a
OI
CI
'o
Il
00
N
N
O
LL1
O
M
n
00't
ID
u'1N
0
0
0.-
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
a
qynp
Q
e -.
4�
J
„
�ryN
3030 LLo
nN-N,NC)nu�
nu
nnu0MM
ao
W
O
e Z
U_
OH C
u7
M
N
0
M
N
O
to
ti
O
O
N
LL'1
M
.M.
U
rl
c
m
0
T C
~ •E
c0
LL�
M
M-;t
0
u)
M
N
�
O
M
LL7
to
-�O
O
Nu1N
m
N
.-�
-y
-y
N
ti
-y
q
0
E
o
N
�
Q H
N �
O
to
M
IO
B
n
I�
-+
a
NIOMNO-+M
l0
-+M
MMlO�
V
OMIO
BOO
SOON
OI
O.-i
Ol
�m
N
E V
t0
N
O
a
ui
-+0
C5
00-+00
0
O
-+
C
0
LL
0
U
O U
C U
C1 N d
U
w Q
l�o001N-i
M-i
a��
V
Q!
N
•�
N
M
V
IO
ISO
IO
w �C
O
U
ai
A U i —
ti A
OCD C
•�.O
ti
N
M
a
IOOtD
mn
U
W
Mr-y-y-+.�r��.ar
N
M
wd
Ua
N
II m
c w
lOn
Eo .q c
a
K LL Q' K
APPENDIX B
STREET CAPACITY COMPUTATIONS
J
t
1
1
1
[1
STREET CAPACITY SUMMARY
Project: 939-001
By: ATC
Date: 12/1/2015
Design
Street
Street
Street
2-Yr
2-Yr
100-Yr
100-Yr
Comment
Point
Name
Section
Slope
Flow
Capacity
Flow
Capacity
w/Reduction
w/Reduction
(CFS)
(CFS),
(CFS)
(CFS)
2
Duff Drive
Minor Collector
0.80%
3.04
4.9
11.78
128.20
Flow<Cap. .
3
Duff Drive
Local Residential
0.80%
1.37
4.9
5.38
128.20
Flow <Cap.
6a
International Boulevard
Local Residential
0.60%
1.9
4.2
7.8
111.20
Flow < Cap.
I
[1
t
II ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 11
Project: 939-001
Inlet ID: Design Point 2
,lam
r z
Ha • y
T —
w T
Street
Crown
Qw �x
9x-
• do
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
ring's Roughness Behind Curb
Tlwcx - 10.5
Se,�gx = 0.020
nencx' 0.016
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
Hwm =
3,90
inches
ce from Curb Face to Street Crown
TCRowR =
17.0
11
Width
W =
1.44
fl
Transverse Slope
Sx =
0.020
Wit
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 fVft)
Sw =
0,0W
Longitudinal Slope -Enter 0 for sump condition
50 =
0.008
ig's Roughness for Street Section
nsmeer =
0.016
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storrs
Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no)
STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Minor Storm Major Storm
TMnx = 17.0 17.0 if
tlMM = 3.9 12.0 inches
check = yes
Minor Storm Major Storm
=J 4.9 1 128.2 lcfs
_[ , m.axallowable capacity GOOD -greater than Flow given on sheet'O-Peak
storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
dp2-StrtCap-UDFCD.xlsm, D-Allow
12/15/2015. 1:32 PM
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
II ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 11
Project:
939-001
Inlet ID:
Design Point
r 7yRx T
ad,
W + Txow
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
ring's Roughness Behind Curb
of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
m from Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 fVft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ng's Roughness for Street Section
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no)
Is, =
10.5
ft
SUA:«
0.020
fVfl
nBAcx =
0.016
hic,," =al
inches
TcRpwR-W
=Sx
=
fVftS'
=
tit
So =�nBTREET = Q,Q16
Minor Storm Ma'or SWnn
T. = 17.0 17.0
dunx = 3,g 12.0 inches
check = yes
t STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Stone
R STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Cniw = 4.9 128.2 cfs
storm maxallowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
1 dp3-StrtCap-UDFCD.xlsm, C-Allow
i
i
1
1211512015,134 PM
1
I
I
I
I
I
Project:
Inlet ID:
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
�Qawsr�_ T. Trout �cwrnv��w tt'�
-•a++rvirr W Ts
Street
-! Crown
Ow a
How
• e �
or Geometry (Enter data in the blue cells)
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
iing's Roughness Behind Curb
it of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
once from Curb Face to Street Crown
it Width
it Transverse Slope
rr Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 Inches or 0.083 Poft)
it Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
iing's Roughness for Street Section
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor & Major Storm
Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no)
T erox 1ft
Sencx = 0.020.50 fttfl
nancx = 0.016
Houas = 3.90 inches
Tcnovm = 17.0 it
W = 1.44 fl
Sx= 0.020 fVft
S+' = 0.060 f /ft
So= 0.006 ff/ft
nST EIFT = 0.016
Minor Storm major Storm
T.:= 17.0 17.0 ft
dM" 3.9 12.0 inches
check = yes
i STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Mirror Storm Major Storm
R STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion QMMr, 4.2 1 111.1 JcfS
storm max. a1h 0o - c, ;hen flow given on sheet'Q-Peak'
Storm mas "7 - - '-gin f'cn oiven or. shoot'Q-Peak'
Idp6a-StrtCap-UDFCD.xlsm, C-Allow
I
I
I
12l15l2015, 1:36 PM
I
u
I
1
11
1
1
t
APPENDIX C
INLET COMPUTATIONS
[1
1
1
IJ
I
1
W
a
m
00
c
m
0
0
3
«.
o
c
.t
W
W
>
-o
0
v
>
C
c
a
0
0.
Y
V1
L
a>
L
>
a
c
c
c
LIDm
o
o
u
O
3
o
3
3
3
3
3
0°
0>>
0
0
0
0
0
o
a
s
o
w
w
o
w
w
w
c
c
c
W
W
W
W
W
U7
0
>
>
W
W
W
0
u
.a
L
0=
a
a
u
a
p
0
p
0
O
0
0
C
V
C
C
In
>O
>O
,p
'mo
�p
Y
Y
p�
V
U
U
U
U
V
x
0
>'
x
o
o
X
O
mp_
mp_
mp_
O.
O.
E
E
o
E
E
E
E
r+
££
E
E
u
u
u
u
u
3
0
3
0
0
3
0
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
w
v
w
c
U
v
p
c
U
U
c
U_
m
Y
•—
m
m
•—
m
U
U
U
V
V
p
a
C
0
p
C
p
W
W
W
W
W
W
Y
Y
m
U
W
Y
Y
Y
W
Y
Y
O.
�/1
2
of
O_
of
O.
ul
O.
ul
+'
+'
v
v
+'
O
O
O
O
O
w
u
w
w
w
00
>
o
>
>
N
N
N
N
N
3
>
E
O
?
O
O
>,
O
£
O
N
N
O
0Yi
W
O
CJ
N
N
N
N
N
V
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
u
N
u
++
n
m
C
in
n
000
0
0
0
0
y
^o
No
0
o
o
m
rn
o
0
o
o
a
LL
E
O
16
O
O
O
O
1lZ
n
N
0
6
6
6
6���
V
N
a
00
00
W
N
ci
e-I
rl
W
N
N
N
N
VI
w
w
°D
m
3
000
O
o
o
m
o
o
o
0
0
no
0
0
0
W O u_
V1
14
O
C
o0
6
00
a0
6
O
C
Gi
6
6
Li
Q1
U1
O LL V
V
rl
m
VI
I,
m
n
n
�--�
M
N
1,
N
N
In
co
oo
to £
T
T
T
T
T
L
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
I
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
CDO
O
CD
O
O
O
O
CD
CD
O
CD
CDO
C
O
Y
om
o.
a
o.
n.
o.
n
n
n
o.
o.
a
a
a
o.
o.
o.
w e
£
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
o
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
U
V)
V)
Vf
Ln
V1
V7
V)
VI
V1
[A
V)
Vf
Vf
V)
to
V1
Vf
O
a
o
f
0
0
0
o
o
o
o
W
c
E!
a°
a°
a°
E
E
E
a
a
E
E
E
E
ap
a
o
E
E
E
o
o
o
E
E
o
o
o
o
v
E
E
v
v
u
u
U
U
u
u
v
v
U
U
U
U
U
Q
U
U
Ln
�.
al
N
N
N
c-I
O.
.N..
V
O O
W
`
.�..
.q
W
W
W
V
v
W
W
W
W
.^..
O
a
a
a
22
z
a
a
z
W
22
Y W
W a
m
m
o0
w
m
>
>
>
ww
>
>
>
>
m
w0o
0:3
c
c
c
0
0
0
c
c
O
0
0
o
c
cnm
tD
n
0izm
n
nc
NO C
>, m
W O
N
m.
a
0
m
C
V
V)
EA
Vf
VI
N
0- m 0
0 1
'-1
N
N
to
V1
lD
ME
0
0
0
0
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project = 939 001
Wet ID = Design
LG (C)�
H-Curb H-Vert
Wo
Wp
W
Lo (G)
Wam�m
eI hlorrrullnn (inaAl
of Inel
"el Type:
DeP rnon(addi0orel to cortnxtoie goer otWessnn'a'from 0-AsuW)
>,'
er of Unti hiMa (Grate or Cub Gpenng)
Pro:
Depth N FbvAue (ounide of local deprss oon)
Ffon DapN'
0aorrroeon
h of a UM Grate
L. (G)'
of a Unit Grate
W.
Dperirg Rslo for a Grate ihptcal Vales 0.150 90)
A,:
ig Factor for a SYgle Grate(tyP vale 0.50-070)
4(G)'
Wei Coefficient (lyptcal vats 2.15 - 3.60)
C. (G)'
Onfroe Coeff i (lypiml vale 0.W-0.901
(G)'
0grrq Wonrolion
h of a urM Ciao 0,or ng
L. (C):
I of VentralCuo Op ng MI'd
Hz
1 of Curti 04. Th nlncic
ftt t,a
of Ttmat (see USDCM Fgue ST-5)
Theo-
Mmn for Depeeron Pen (typimsy lie peer vritlth of 2 feel)
W.'
.V FWor for a Sagle Cup Opering (typrrel vale 0.10)
CI (C)=
3per0g Wet, Coefficient (Wool va0e 2.3-3.6)
C. (C) 2
)pertrg Onfira Coefficlenl ayptml vale &W - c70)
C. (C)
I Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Q. e
1NG. Inlet Caparty bsa (fun 0 Peah for Muoi and Major Storms
0ftra6tourm'
amMg 1: URNnnon entered b not a typKal M n=_ion ton nwi type eperihed
MINOR MAJOR
Darner No. 16 Corrbaaaon
20D 2 W
2 2
en 120
3.00
3.W
1.73
1.73
0.31
0-31
0.50
0.50
360
360
O50
0.60
3AD
3 W
fi50
650
525
525
000
000
2.00
2 00
0.10
0.10
3.70
l 70
0.66
00
d ea
Was
sal
eel
Bel
rchm
"Cl r
I69raas
"t
Copy of UD Inlet 3.1-C*TA)oinlet-DPI-revised.rlsm. inlet In Sump 6/9/2016. 1'14 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project = 939-001
Inlet ID = Design PL2
.t-Lo (C)-,r
H-Curb H-Vert
Wo
Wp
W
Lo (G)
)esWn Information (Ingun
Ype of Inwn
Ire& Type
oral Dewe ion(additional to connuous guider depression 'a'from 'O-AIbW)
em
lumber of Unt Inns (Grate or Curb Open,)
No
Vale, Depth at Fko Alns (e inside of b®I depression)
Flow Depth
:Me lntomation
ength of a Und Grote
L. (G)
Vgth of a Und Gate
W.
area Opening Ratio for a Grate (typral value! 0 IM 90)
A.
llogging Feel., for a Singe Grew (typini value 0.W .0 70)
G (G)
late Weir Coefficbn (yplral value 2.15 - 3.60)
C. (G)'
;ate Odgrca Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - O.N)
C. (G)
:urb OpmMng Mama ion
englh of a Und Curb Opening
L. (C)'
leght of Vertical Cure Opening in Inches
IegN of Curb Ord. Throat m Inci
ogle of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Thalia
eoe Width for Depression Pan (typically the guider width of 2 feat)
W.'
:logging Factor for a Svgb Cub Opening (typical value 0.10)
Cn (C)'
:urb Oparng Wow Cdeff civell (typical value 2.3-3 6)
C. (C)'
:ub Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical value Ow - 0.70)
C. (C)'
Ibtal Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
- - ' -....
O ps.x neouaso'
MINOR MAJOR
Denier No, 16 Combination
2.00 bonos
4
8.0 12.0 Ixles
MINOR MAJOR
3.00 feet
1,73 feel
0.31
0.50 050
3.60
0.60
nuno
3.00
6.50
525
0.00
2.00
0.10
0.10
3.70
0.66
UD Inlet 3.1-combanlet-DP2.dsm, Inlet In Sump 12/1112015, 12:15 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project 939-001
Inlet to Design Pt.3
H-Curb H-Ven
We
Wp
W
Lo (G)
Warning
on Information Orwell
of Intel
trial Type
I Depression(addlboral to conhncus quitter depression'a'from 'O-AIbW)
•er
per of UM Inteb (Grate or Curt, Opening)
No
r Depth at Fb*jm (oublde of b®I depression)
Flow Depth
a blornration
M of a Um Green
L. (G)
1 of a Unt Grate
We
Opemg Ratio for a Grab (typlcel values 0.15-0,90)
A.
ling Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
Cn (G)
r Weir Coefficient fypncal value 2 15 - 380)
C. (G)
I Ortf" Coefficient (typical vahre 0 M - 0.80)
C. (G)
Gleaning Information
th of a Unit Curti Opening
L. (C)
1 of Vertical Curb Opening in Inches
His
Y of CIPtI Onfce Threat In InchM
HFSI
n of Throat I. USDCM Figure ST-5)
Theis
Width for Depsswon Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 f")
WP
ling Factor for a Singh Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
G (C)
Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 213.5)
C. (C)
Opening Od ice Coefficient Typical value 050 - 0 70)
C. (C)
al Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
�.
Capacay IS GOOD for Idi and Major Storms JIG PEAK)
D.e.R.rge®
art inn 1Dmension eme,ed s not a typical dimension for Met type specified
MINOR MAJOR
Denier No. 15 Combination
2.00
1
5.0 120
3.00
1.73
0.31
0.50
0.50
3.50
DBD
3.00
e.50
5.25
o.o0
2.00
0.10
010
3.70
016
TMS
aches
art
act
UD Inlet 3.1-comboiniet-DP3.msm. Inlet In Sump 12/11/2015. 12:21 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project = 9394101
Inlet lD = Design Pt.4
i�—Lo IC)—d
H-Cum
H-Vert
Wo
Wp
W
Lo (G)
Waco ng
in Information llnoutl
of 1.1
Ir1ef Type
Depression pedditiorel to continuous gltler depreselon'a'fmm'OAbW)
a.,.'
oar of Unit Inlets (Grate or Curb Opening)
No
r Depth at FloWi a (outside of local depression)
Few Depth
I Infometen
h of a Unit Grate
L, (G)''
i of a Unit Grate
W.
Orwarg Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.15-0 90)
A.
ping Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
Cr (G)
Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
C. (G)''
Ordice Coefficient (typical vane 0.60-OW)
Cc (G)'
Opening Information
In of a Unit Curb Opening
Le (C)'
A of Vertical Cum Opening In lutes
H,ea "
t of Cue Onfee Throat in Inches,
H.
of Throat (see USDCM Figure ST-5)
Trials
Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
W,''
ling Factor for a Single Cum Opening (typical value 0.10)
C, (C)'
OperYre Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-16)
C. (C)'
Opening Off" Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0 70)
C, (C)'
d Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
%.
NNG. Iniet C.Pacay We. Nan O P.1, for Minor St..
Greaaaeowm'
aming 1: D'anension entered 5 not a typical denension for mist type specified.
Denier No- %Comhirehon
2.00 inches
1
8.0 12.0 inches
MINOR MA CR
3.00 leer
1.73 teat
0.31
0.50 0,50
3.60
0.60
3.00
6.50
5.25
0.00
2.00
0.10
0.10
3.70
0.66
UD Inlet 3.1-combolnlet-DP4.dsm. Inlet In Sump 12/11/2015, 12.23 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project = 939-001
Inlet ID Design Pt-5
L. (C)--,�
H-Curc
H-V.n —
Wo
W
W P
o(G)
m Information (how
of Inel
Ined Type
Depresslan;aodiliria: 10 mrtnanus glue, depressbn'afrom'O�AFbW)
a..
er o1 Unit 1NoM (Grate or Curb Openrg)
No
r Depth W Flom. (..Isbe of local depression)
Flow DepM
Information
IF of a Unit Grate
L. (G)
of a Unit Grate
W.
Openng Raw for a Grate (typical values 0.1S0.90)
A.e'
ilrg Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 050 - 0.70)
Cr (G)'
Wee C.. iaert(typmal value 2. 15-3.50)
C. (G)=
Oofee Coefficient (typlcal value 0 60 - 0.60)
C. (G)
Opening Intomutbn
I of a Unit Curo Opeorg
Lo (G):
I of Veril®I Cure Opemp in to ri
H.ar =
I of Cum Orifice Thoet in Inches
H.— =
of TWoal (see USDCM Figrna ST-5)
Tlele:
Nidifi for Depmselon Pan (typically t e gutter vndtft of 2 teal)
W. _
rig Factor for a Single Caro Openrg (typical value 0-10)
G (C) =
3pening Weir CoeRiuert (typical value 2.3-3.6)
C. (C) =
3penrg Orifice Goefficen (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
C. (C) _
I Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Q.
:..IOR Stonn
O.s>a arolerp=
. .. I......... nor Inl.t type sM'rleif
MINOR MAJOR
Denver No. 16 Comlx�0on
2.00
2
80 2.0
3.00
3.00
1.73
170
0.31
0 31
0,50
0.50
3.60
3.6C
0.60
0.60
3.00
3.00
6.50
6 50
525
5.25
000
0.00
2.00
2.00
0,10
0.10
3.70
370
0.66
(166
roles
rhea
eet
eel
aet
robes
runes
legrees
eet
Copy of UD Inlet 3.1-comooin)e1-DP5.r rroxlsm, Inlet In Sump 6/912016. 1:11 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Projects 939-001
Inlet ID = Design Pt.6a
H-Curt, H-Van
W.
W
Lo (G)
Warning
m.Information llou6l
of that
INet Type
Depression (additional to mnbuous Beer depression'afrom'O-Abw)
8
,ar of Unit Inits (Grate or Curb Opening)
No
r Depth at Fbw9re (outside of bcal deprannon)
Flow Depth
r Information
'h of a Unit Grata
Ic (G)
1 of a Unit Grate
W.
Operwg Ratio for a Gnale (typical values 0.15 W)
A.
ping Factor for a Single Grate (typaol veue 0 50 - 0.70)
G (G)
i Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15. 3 60)
C. (G)
l Orifce CoeHldrM (typical vat a 0.60 - 0 80)
C. (G)
Operate mormadon
h of a UM Curt, Opening
L. (C)
9 of Vertical Curb Opening In Inches
Hwa
It of Curb Orifice Tlvost In Irchas
Ham
of Throat(see USDCM Figure ST-5)
TMIe
Width for Depmssion Pan (typically re goner redth of 2 feet)
Wa
ping Factor for a Single Coro Opemg (h rciii value 0.10)
G (C)'
Opening Wow Coefficient (typical value 2.33 6)
C. (C)
Opening Orifice Coenlaen (typical value 0 W - 0 70)
C. (C)
N Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Qe'
:opacity IS GOOD for Manor arm Major Stoma(>O PEAJ
Oluwaeasso'
laming 1' Dimension entered It, not a typical dimension for limit type speceled.
Denver No. 16 Cof bira8on
2.00 ircles
2
5.0 100 lrcras
MINOR MAJOR
3.00 Ifeat
1.73 feet
0.31
0.50 0.50
3.80
0.50
3.00
5.50
5.25
0.00
2.00
0.10
0 10
3.70
0.66
MAJOR
eel
aches
efes
egrees
eet
UD Inlet 3.1-comboinlet-DP6a.alsm, Inlet In Sump 1211112015. 12:36 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project = 939-001
Inlet ID Design P1.6b
.�-Lo (C)-,p
H-Curb H-Vert
Wo
Wp
W
Lo (G)
Wammg
an Information flitaial
of that
Intl Type
I Depriaebnsteditional to conenoue Oyler depresslon'e' hom'O-AlbW)
atrr
xr of Unit triers (Grata or Curb Opening)
No
r Depth at FloWsm (outside of local depression)
Flow Depth
1 Information
m of a Urn One.
L. (G)
1 of a Um Grate
W.
Opening Ratio for a Grate (tygral values 0.15 a())
tics
#g Factor for a Single Crate (typical vase 0 50 - 0,70)
G (G)
t War CoefOclent (typical Talus 2.15 - 3,60)
C. (G)
t OrKlca C..11hoM (typical value 0.60 - 0.60)
C. (G)
Openhhg Information
M of a Unit Curb Opening
L, (C)
1 of Ventral Curb Opening In Incres
Hw,
1 of Cum Onfioe Throat In Ircllas
Hw,w
i of They (wee USDCM Figure ST-5)
Thee
Width for Depression Pan (typealey Oe gulter width of 2 feet)
Wa
leg Factor for a Single Cure Open g (typical wake 0.10)
CG (C)
Opening Weir Coefficient Itypca value 2.3.3.6)
C. (C)
Opening Orifim OoeNkient(typical w.Lx 0 W 070)
C.(0)
al Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Q.
Capacity IS GOOD for %nor and Major Stomas (>O PEAK)
0,iemmouee
.min, 1 Onnar uon entered a not a typical on..nawn far Inlet typo specnled.
MINOR MAJOR
Denier No. 16 Combination
2.00
2
6.0 10 0
3.00
1.73
0.31
0.50
0.50
3.60
0.60
3.00
6.50
5.25
0.00
2.00
0.10
0.10
3.70
0.66
notes
xhes
eat
eei
set
rhos
xhes
legraes
set
LID Inlet 3.1-comboblet-DPWAsm, Inlet In Sump 12/11/2015. 12,45 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project . 93MBI
Inlet ID . Design Pt-10
,f--to (C) -a
N-Cum 1f-Vert
We
p
INW
La l01
on information Impun
of loot
fill Type
I Depression (additional to centime s gutter depreeaian'a' fom'0-All
a'
om of Unit Iriels (Greta or Cure Opening)
No +
n Depth at Flonine (.ueade of local depression)
Fbw Depth
I Information
Ih of a Unit Grate
to (G)'
1 of a Unit Grate
W.,
Opening Ratio for a Grate !typical vaues 0.15-0.90)
A.
ping Factor for a Single Gee (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
G (G)'
t Weir Coafflctent (typical vaiuo 215 - 3.60)
C. (G)'
t Orl Coefficient (typical value 0 60 - 0.W)
opening alfnmwort
in of a Unil Corp Opening
to (C)'
t of Vertical Coro Opening In Iril
R...'
't of CIeD OrBke Thrat in IrcJes
t of Throat (wee USDCM Figure ST-5)
Thsts
Width for Depression Pan (NpinaM tie gurter vadth of 2 feel)
Wo'
ping Factor for a Sri Curb Opening (typical value 0.10)
G (C)'
Opening Weir Coefflcbrt (typical view 2.33.6)
C. (C)'
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical vale 0.60-0.70)
Q. (C)'
all Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Q. a
Cao.co IS GOOD for etlnor and Mator Storms VO PEAKI
Otwaetoaleo'
aming 1. Dimension entered is not ,t typtcai dimonsron for inlet type specified.
Deriver No. 16 Comoee8on
2.00 inches
1
8.0 17.5 incies
MINOR MAJOR
3.00 Ifent
1.73 feel
0.31
0.50 0 SD
3.60
0.60
3.00
6.50
5.25
O.DD
2.00
0.1n
0 10
3.70
0.66
MINOR MAJOR
..I
ncres
xhes
agrees
eet
UD Inlet 3.1-comm;mle1-DP10.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 12/11/2015, 12:a6 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project = 939-001
Inlet ID = Design Pt.13
-Lo (C)
H-Curb H-Vad
We
Wp
W
Lo (G)
in Intormnlon tlnou0
of net
Inlet Type
Depression(a0tliuonal to caNlnnns guter depresilon's'fmm'O-AtloW)
ai y
ter of Unit Inists (Grate or Cub Opening)
No
r Depth at Fbwfine (outside of local depression)
Flow Depth
n hdnrmation
h of a Unit Grate
L. (G)''
I of a Urn Grate
W.
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0 15 0)
A.
ling Factor for a Single Grate (typical value 0.50 - 0.70)
Q (G)'
r Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3,W)
C. (G)''
Orifice Coefficient (typi®I value 0.60 - 0,80)
C, (G) "
Opening Momulbn
h of a Unit Cure Opening
L. (C)'
t of Vertical Cunt Opening in lrctles
H.i'
t of Cub Orifice Throat in Inches
Hlr.s'
I of Ttroal (see USDCM Fig. ST-5)
Thole'
Width for Depreaelon Pan (typically tie gutter with of 2 feel
W. "
prig Factor for a Single Cur, Opening (typical value 010)
G (C)'
Opening Weer Coefficient (typical value 2b3.6)
C. (C)'
Opening Orifice Coefficient (typical vale 0.60 - 0.70)
C. (C)'
d Inlet Interception Capacity (as6ume6 clogged condition)
Q.
J.,,,iy IS GOOD for Minor end Mafor Storms CC PEAK)
O.sarnaourep'
....... - pm., .xm MIlred a rim o typical dmenelun fm Inlet types nac,fied
MINOR MAJOR
Denier No. 16 Combirebon
2.00
1
8.0 12.0
3.00
1.73
1 ' -
0.31
0.50
0.50
3.50
F0
0.60
60
3.00
6.50
5.25
eW
2.00
0.10
0.10
3.70
0.86
tple5
rMs
sat
�I
UD Inlet 3.1-comboinlel-DP13.4sm, Inlet In Sump 12111/2015, 1Z49 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Protect = 939-001
Inlet ID = Design Pt. 14a
{Lo (C)-{
H-Curb H-Vert
We
Wp
W
Lo (G)
in Intimation dl
of VYet
Inlet Type
Depression(adMporel to cone.."er tlapession'a' f,orn,C W)
aiu
tw of UM Irlels (Gate or Cub Openng)
No
r Depth at Fbwltrc (outside of local depression)
Flow Depth
r Information
T of a Urn Grate
le (G)
r of a Uri Grate
W.
Openrg Ratio for a Grate (typical vales 0 15.0.90)
A.
ft Factor for s Sroe Grass (typical v&ue 0 50 - 0.70)
G (G)
, Wee Coelfitien(typical vale 2. 15-360)
C. (G)
t Orifice Coefficierl (typical vale 0.60 - 0 Bill
C. (G)
OPanne Intomwelon
11 of a Unit Curt, Opening
L. (C)
Y of Vertical C e Opening in Itches
H.
Y of Cub Oreice Thrhroat n Inches
He.
i of Throat (see USDCM Rgua ST-5)
Them
Wish for Depression Pan (typically tie gWw v4Nh of 2 foot)
W.
I rig Factor for a single Cub Openrg (ypcal value 0 10)
Cr (C)
Opening Weir Coeffeox hi (yprcat value 2 3.3 6)
G. (C)
Openrg Onfioe Cneflirien (typcal wale 0 W - 0 70)
C. (C)
at Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Capaciy 6 GOOD for Minor ant Major Stones I'D PFJV()
O.va cFON¢o
aming 1: Dmorn, o entered is rot a typcal dimension for not type specified
MINOR MAJOR
Denver No. 16 Cornbireuon
2.00
2
80 120
3.00
1.73
0.31
050
050
3,60
060
MINOR MAJOR
13.9 29.7
=6 206
ches
dies
set
eel
UD Inlet 3.1-comboinlel-DP14a tlem, nlel In Sump '1 11 2615. 1,08 PW
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project = 939-001
Inlet ID = Design Pt.141,
Lo (C),r
H-Curb H-Vert
We
WP
W
Lo (G)
Design Information flnpu0
Type of Inlet
Iola( Type
Loral Deponeuon(adeitiorel to continuous gutter depression'afmm'O.AIbW)
lid
Number of Unit Iner s (Gale or Cvb Opening)
No
Water Depth at Fko em (opolde of local depreaei0n)
Flow Depth
Grata Information
Length of a Unit Grata
Lo (G)
W,th of if UM Grate
W.
Area Opening Rat, for a Grate (typical values 0.150,90)
A.
Clogging Factor for a Single Grata (typical value 0,50 - 0.70)
Ct (G)
Grate Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.15 - 3.60)
C. (G)
Gate Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0,60 - 0,00)
C. (G)
Curb Opening Informal
Length of a Unit Curb Opening
Lp (C)
Height of Vertical Curb Opening In lichee
H w,
Height of Curb Orglce Threat In Inches
He,w
Angle of Thtoal (see USDCM Hove ST-5)
Trials
Side Width for Depression Pan (typically the gutter width of 2 feet)
%
Clogging Factor for a Single Curb Opening (typical Value 0.10)
GI (C)
Corb Opening Weir Coefficient (typical value 2.3-3.6)
C. (C)
Cont, Opening Orifice Coet ici.ol (typical value 0 60 - 0 70)
Co (C)
Total Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
inbt Capacny IS GOOD for Minor and if,.r Storms (-O PEAK)
Deccan arouaso
.arming I Dnnension entered s not a typical dimension for Inlet type specified
MINOR MAJOR
DaNi6mbi.0o2.01] inches
w2 re08.0 12inches
MINOR MAJOR
3,00 feet
1.73 eel
0.31
0.50 0.50
3.80
0.60
3.00
6.50
5.25
0.00
2.00
0.10
0.10
3.70
0.66
eat
-otter,
aches
agrees
.at
UD Inlet 3.1-comboinle4DP14b..1llsm, Inlet In Sump 12J1112015. 1:10 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project = 939-001
Inlet ID = Design Pt. 051
H-Curb H-Vert
Wo
WP
W
Ln tG)
h
Inmo Informetion flimert)
'ypa of man
kilet Type
ooal Depression(Willboral to mrltinous gutter diareanam 'from'O-AI&i
L'
lumber of Unit Inals (Grate or Cut, Opening)
No
Vater Depth at Fbwlire (oumide of local depression)
Flow Depth
:mb Momwtlon
argtb of a Unit Grate
Le (G)'
Volt, of a Unit Grate
W.
me Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical raluee 0.15 0.90)
A.
:logging Factor for a Single Grate (yplwl vetue 0.50 - 0.70)
CI (G)'
fmte Weir CoaKnienl (typloal value 2.15 - 3.60)
Ce (G)'
Irate Orifice Coef iclem (typlwl value 0.60 - 0.80)
C. (G)'
:tort, Opening Information
mum of a Unit Cub Opening
L° (C)'
(eight of Venlc it Cum Opening in Interim
Ham'
IeigN of Cub Office Tlmet in hales
Heat'
ngle of Throat (aee USDCM Fig" ST-5)
Throat,
ide Width for Depression Pan (typically the guner width of 2 feat)
W.
:bggtng Factor for a Slrgb Cub Opening (typical value 0, 10)
C, (C)
:ub Opening Wei Coeffinen (ypical new 2.33.6)
C. (C)+
:too Opening Own" CoefOcierr (typical vane 060 - 0.70)
Cu (C),
.otal Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Q. °
,lot cap•t,11y 1S GOOD to, Minor 1rio Major Stam,s r>O PEAK,
O.sa arp,srn'
W.,nne� 1 0 ....oe entered 6 not a typicnl Cimensioa for blet type apeeiiied.
Demer No. 16 Combination
2.00 thorns
2
8.0 12.0 incnee.
MINOR MAJOR
3.00 eel
1.73 T feet
0.31
0.50 0.50
3.60
0.60
3.00
6.50
525
0.00
2.00
0.10
a 10
3.70
0.66
eat
xhi
nomm
legrees
eel
UD Inlet 3.1-combomlet-OS1-alsm, Inlet In Sump 12/11/2015, 1:32 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project = 939-001
Inlet l0 . Des19n Pt OS2
it -to fCl-'r
H-Curb H-Vert
Wo
INWp
Lo (G)
�eslon Information IInoutl
ype of hvet
heat Type
oral Depass.n(Wdib.r to mMe . Outer tlepression'a'fmm'O-AVOW)
�
lunoar of UNI Yeas (Grate or Cut Olamfg)
NO
Vater Depth at FloWme (outside of bcal depninu l
Flow DepN
lrave Mormatlon
egth of a Unll Cx nr
La(G)
Vpthof a urn Grate
W.
ma Opening Ratio for a Grate (lymml values 0 15 1,90)
A.
(logging Factor for a Single Grate (typical Value 0.50 - 0 70)
Cr (G)
;rate Weir CoaHtlaM pypiral value 2.15 - 3 60)
C. (G)
;rota Ord" Coefficient (typical value 0.60 -O 80)
Co (G)
urn Opening lydormatlon
enplh of a Unit Cum Opening
L. (C)
leight of Vertical Cub Opening in Inches
11 a
IeIgN of Cum Office TNoat In Inches
Ho.
angle of TNoal (seat USDCM Figure ST-5)
Theta
Ide Width for Depraaelon Pan (typically the outer width of 2 feet)
Wa
:lapping Factor for a Single Cuo Opening (typical value 0.10)
G (C)
:urb Opening War Coanicent (typ" value 2.3-3.6)
C. (C)
:uro Opening Oflim Coefficient (typist vaw 0,60 - 0,70)
C. (C)
'otal Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Q.:
filet Capacity LS GOOD for Minor and Major Stones (>0 PEAK)
D reN(Rgo.
.,min9 1: bunension entered k not a typical dimension for Inlet typo syecfled.
MINOR MAJOR
Denver No, 16 Comblrebon
2.00 inches
2
8.0 12.0 inches
MINOR MAJOR
300 Ifeet
1.73 feet
0.31
0.50 0.50
3.60
0.80
3.00
6.50
5.25
0.00
2.00
0.10
010
3.70
0.66
eel
ncnes
nchB.
legrees
eel
UD Inlet 3.1-combomlet-OS2.alsm, Inlet In Sump 12/11R015, 1:33 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
Project = 939-001
Inlet ID = Design Pt. OS4
-F--Lo (C)-d
H-Curb
H-Van
We
W
Lo (G)
Warning
3n Information (input)
of Intel
Inial Type
Dsprestbrn(Wadionol toconttneus gaiter deprasalon'a'fmm'O-AWW)
%u
xer of Unit Wets (Grate or Cu9 Ope eg)
No
r Depth at Floelin s (outside of local depression)
Flow Depth
I information
n of a Um Grata
L. (G)
I of a Unit Grate
We
Opening Ratio for a Grate (typical values 0.150.90)
A.
ling Factor for a Single GreN (typical vale 0.50 -0 70)
G (G)'
Weir Coefficient(typiml vahe 2. 15-3,60)
C. (G)'
I Orfim Coe6icent (typical value 0.60 - 0.60)
Co (G)"
Opening Information
n of a Unil Carta Opening
L. (C)'
a of Vertical Cuo Opening in leaves
Hera"
t of Cub Orfos Thoat in Inches
Ife.s'
r of Throat lase USOCM Figure ST-5)
TMte'
Wldm for De ranobn Pan(ypiralty the gaiter wioth of 2 feet)
We"
IIIg Factor for a Single Curb Opening WWI value a.10)
G (C)
Opening Wen Coeffivant (typical Valle 2.}3.6)
C. (C)'
Oper i g Orifice Coefficient (typical value 0.60 - 0.70)
C. (C) "
it Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
:apacay IS GOOD for Minor and Major Stomas (>O PEN()
0..
n imin9 1-. D..... entered E net Is typ.1 denenalpn far net type spe.ihad.
MINOR MAJOR
Oelrvmo. 1 N6 Combintabn
2.00 Ifla Ircnas
1 )
6.0 12.0 InI
MINOR MAJOR
3.00 feet
1.73 feel
0.31
0.50 0.50
3.60
0.50
3.00
6.50
525
0.00
2.00
0.10
a 10
3.70
0.66
.at
nctes
nctas
Iegrees
.1
UD Inlet 3.1-combomlet-OS4.xlsm, Inlet In Sump 12111/2015, 1:33 PM
INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION
projects 939-001
Inlet ID Design Pt. OS5
N-Curb N-Vea
We
Wp
W
L. iG)
Wsnnt9
in information rimpull
of Ine1
IntN Typo
Depression (additional to mreiruola culler depresalon'a'train O-Ali
aou'
wr of Until Wets (Grate or Curl Openii
No
r Depin at Flo Abe (oup ids of local dapresswn)
Fbw Dalai'
I *fornelion
In of a Unit Grate
Le (G)
i of a Unit Grate
W.
Opening Rath tar a Grata (Iyplfal vales 0.1M 90)
A.
lag Factor for a Single Grate (t lvalue 050-070)
Ci(G)
Weir Coefficient tlypical.1. 215. 3.60)
C., IS)'
Orifice Coefficient (typical vebe 0.60 - 0.80)
C. (G)
Opening Iniomosboa
n of a Unl Cunb Opening
L. (C)'
t of Vertical Curb Opennc in Inches
RM
a of Cub Onfice Tnoal In lacings
H .s"
of Tial lava USDCM Figure STd)
Tleb'
Width for Depressor, Pan (tyolcary tin cutter odtb of 2 feen
W'
ling Factor for a Sing* Cub Opannc (yowl value 0.10)
G (C)'
Opening Wei Coefficient (typical value 2.13.6)
C. (C)
Opening Orrice CoeKmlerif (spiral value 0.60 - 0.70)
C. (G)
N Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition)
Q• `
Zapacdy 15 GOOD for Miwr antl Malar Stoma PO PEAK)
O �xasoud:o
arcing 1: Dimension emend is not i typical dimension for won t,, Viper: f-f
MINOR MAJOR
Denier W. 16 Combire5on
2,00 ircnes
1
8.0 12, i.raa
MINOR MAJOR
3.00 set
1.73 eel
0.31
0.50 0.50
3.60
0.60
3.00
6.50
5.25
O.DD
2.D0
0.10
0.10
3.70
0 efi
MINUR MA um
:el
cites
canes
agrees
eel
UD Intel 3.1-combotnlel-OS5.bsm, Inlet In Sump 12111/2015. 1:33 PM
"°'
...
♦a
cy -�
>
♦
.
a . s
. . .
of
w
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
♦
.
/
/
\
♦ a
r
Z
}
a W
$
^ \
. ♦
♦ . ♦
1��
a
♦ ,
t
q
Z
'c al \
a�
♦',
/
w
/
LL
LL
w ~ ��1
i
♦ ♦ ♦
♦ a
\
x
/
♦
/
i
♦
♦♦
A
.
/
M
O
N
/
+
i
dw
l
m
�
/ �
I � 4tid'
ix
N
'
•
N
^
D
V
W
\
•
N
'
LL
�y
/
I
X
a
ILL
w
/
I X
Au
LL
'
ILL
X
\
p Z
I
v
^
\\
/
�
/
w v
42
C�
/ w~ /
O v�
a
W /
/
v
/ v
'
a
$ /
\ a
\
-V7
.W
F
W
�
m
a
el
/
gym•'
�pw
i/ �
__
�
1
Weir Report
'
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.
<Name>
Trapezoidal Weir
Crest
= Sharp
Bottom Length (ft)
= 25.00
Total Depth (ft)
= 0.75
'
Side Slope (z:1)
= 3.00
Calculations
'
Weir Coeff. Cw
= 3.10
Compute by:
Q vs Depth
No. Increments
= 10
' Depth (ft)
1.00
0.50
1
' 0.00
-0.50
<Name>
Thursday, Jun 9 2016
Highlighted
Depth (ft)
= 0.08
Q (cfs)
= 1.603
Area (sqft)
= 1.89
Velocity (ft/s)
= 0.85
Top Width (ft)
= 25.45
Depth (ft)
1.00
0.50
OO
-0.50
Weir W.S.
Length (ft)
Depth
Q
Area
Vetoc
TOpW_idth
,...G -
.iw- .t
-.`•a- i - EiY -
S. 4_- °iY: _ �Y�
-_m
0.08
1.603
I 1.89
I 0.85
25.45
0.15
4.567
3.82
1.20
I 25.90
0.23
8.450 - -
5.78 -
-- 1.46
26.35
0.30 -
I 7.77
26.80 ^
13.10
1.69
---- -_.
0.38
_.. _ -
18.44
- -- - .i
9.80
-
1.88 _ '-
-
27.25
0.45
.24.41
11.86
� 2.06
27.70
0.53
30.97
13.95
2.22
28.15
0.60
38.09
16.08
2.37
28.60
0.68
-
45.76
-- - 53.96 -- -
18.24
- - - 20.44 ---
2.51 _ _
- - 2.64
- _ 29.05
29.50----
-
0.75
1
t .
Hydraflow Express - Weir Report - 06/9/16
I
Islois
r
Weir Report
rHydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.
<Name>
Trapezoidal Weir
Highlighted
' Crest
= Sharp
Depth (ft)
Bottom Length (ft)
= 12.00
Q (cfs)
Total Depth (ft)
= 0.75
Area (sqft)
' Side Slope (z:1)
= 3.00
Velocity (ft/s)
Top Width (ft)
Calculations
Weir Coeff. Cw
= 3.10
r
Compute by:
Q vs Depth
No. Increments
= 10
r
1
rDepth (ft)
<Name>
1.00
'
0.50
r
-
r
_
r 0.00
=
r
-
Weir W.S.
Thursday, Jun 9 2016
= 0.08
= 0.776
= 0.92
= 0.85
= 12.45
Depth (ft)
1.00
0.50
0.00
-0.50
Length (ft)
Depth
Q
Area
Ueloc
Top_.,idth -
0.08
I 0.776
0.92
0.85
12.45
-- -- 0.15 --- - -
--- y2.226 -� .-1-
--1.87-------I-_
-_ -1.19----------
_---12.90 -----
--
- -
0.23
4.149
6.479
2.85
3.87
1.45
1.67
13.35
0.30
13.80
0.38
9.183 �
12_24-
4.92
6.01
1.87
2.04
{ 14.25
14.70
- _
0.53
15.64
713
2.19
15.15
0.60
19.36
8 28
2.34
15.60
0.68
--0.75 -�
_
23.42 i
27.79----
9.47
10.69-._.__.
2.47
- -
16.05
--- ---
2.60
16.50
Hydraflow Express - Weir Report - 06/9/16 1
�I
I
[1
1
1
1
t
APPENDIX D
RIPRAP & STORM LINE DESIGN COMPUTATIONS
r,
J
1
1
CALCULATIONS FOR RIPRAP PROTECTION AT PIPE OUTLETS
Project: 939-001
Date: Feoruary 1, 2016
Calculation by: ATC
���?"$.'�'
" Y.�INPUTe�^
� %$t�'M
�°r{•�.�Y.� : `yCA000@ATE
_ OUTWT
Culwt Parameters
Circular
Rectargular
Expansion
Urban
Drainage
2,dm
Pipe
Pipe
Froude
MQ307
RlPray
Y„
Flare MD-211
IFi re MQ22)
Factor
IA2tangl
Paremeter
z
Type
Spec
Spec
Depth
of
Greular
Bar Culvert
sign
Tallwata
1
Length
Width
RIprap
Starts Um/Culw41 label
Discharge
D or D„
H or H„
yy
Depth
(From
MaxD6.0
A=ON
lAZtanp)'
(From
(it)
(CIS)
Pipe
Calved
Culvert
(0)
Y✓D
0/Dr'6
O1D2s
Y✓H
QhVH°'a
Figure
or
(ttl
[AVYtI-WI
Figure
Riprap
Riprap
Diameter
Heigh
Wbth
0(WH �s
MD-21 or
(10
lttl
(ttl
Ittl
DO
MD or
Max 8.0
(tt)
MD-22)
for l2
-2
MP24)
Storm Une 1
98.00
4.50
2.25
0.50
10.27
2.28
N/A
N✓A
5.37
2.28
16.33
14.82
Type M
16.00
14.00
1.5
Exin Storm E#ended
105.0
4.00
2.00
0.50
1 13.13
1 3.28
N A
N A
4.37
3.28
21.00
28.40
Type M
30.00
20.00
1.5
1
11
i
1
Hydraflow Plan View
� � a
to
0 u«e
� win
Project File: SWrml REV.stm No. Lines: 17 02-15-2016
1
1
Storm Sewer Summary Report Page
1
n
1
i
1
i
i
1
1
1
1
1
i
i
i
1
i
Line
Line ID
Flow
Line
Line
Invert
Invert
Line
HGL
HGL
Minor
HGL
Dns
No.
rate
size
length
EL Dn
EL Up
slope
down
up
loss
Junct
line
WS)
(in)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
N
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
No.
1
STRM PIPE 1.0
98.00
54 c
32.5
4929.96
4930.07
0.338
4932.80
4933.12
1.12
4934.24
End
2
STRM PIPE 1-213
60.40
48 c
148.2
4930.27
4930.79
0.351
4935.02'
4935.24'
0.05
4935.29
1
3
STRM PIPE 1-3
60.40
48 c
348.0
4930.79
4932.01
0.350
4935.29
4935.76
0.06
4935.82
2
4
STRM PIPE 1-4
60.40
48 c
101.2
4932.01
4932.36
0.346
4935.82
4935.91
0.41
4936.32
3
5
STRM PIPE 1-5
60.40
48 c
23.7
4932.36
4933.08
3.040
4936.32
4936.21
0.08
4936.29
4
6
STRM PIPE 1-5a
24.90
42 c
48.0
4933.27
4933.44
0.354
4936.67
4936.69
0.09
4936.78
5
7
STRM PIPE 1-7A
18.16
24 c
62.8
4933.44
4933.76
0.509
4936.78'
4937.12'
0.24
4937.36
6
8
STRM PIPE 1-8
18.10
24 c
113.4
4933.76
4934.32
0.494
4937.36'
4937.98'
0.52
4938.50
7
9
PIPE 1-7
4.00
18 c
46.4
4933.71
4934.17
0.991
4936.81'
4936.87'
0.06
4936.93
6
10
PIPE 1-7A
4.00
18 c
50.0
4934.18
4934.43
0.500
4936.93'
4936.99'
0.01
4937.00
9
11
PIPEA-7A.2
2.00
18 c
10.7
4935.82
4937.42
14.940
4937.06
4937.96
n/a
4937.96j
10
12
STRM PIPE 1-2A
37.60
30 c
23.1
4931.46
4931.58
0.520
4934.46'
4934.63'
0.42
4935.05
1
13
STRM PIPE 1-2A.1
25.60
30 c
25.4
4931.58
4931.71
0.512
4935.54'
4935.62`
0.06
4935.68
12
14
STRM PIPE 1-2A.1 (
12.10
30 c
6.4
4931.71
4931.74
0.474
4936.01'
4936.02'
0.01
4936.03
13
15
STRM PIPE 1-2A.1 (
12.10
30 c
21.5
4931.74
4931.84
0.464
4936.03'
4936.05'
0.01
4936.06
14
16
STRM PIPE 1-2A.2 (
12.10
24 c
94.2
4932.04
4932.99
1.009
4936.06'
4936.29`
0.22
4936.52
15
17
STRM PIPE 1-2A.3
12.10
24 c
64.1
4932.99
4933.63
0.999
4936.52`
4936.67`
0.23
4936.90
16
Project File: Storml REV.stm
Number of lines: 17
Run Date: 02-15-2016
NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b = boll
00-YR ANALYSIS
rcharged (HGL above crown). ; j -Line contains hyd. jump.
Fiydmflm Stone sewers 2005
I
1
1
I
1
I
1
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 1
Line
Size
Q
Downstream
Len
Upstream
Check
JL
Minor
Coeff
loss
Invert
HGL
Depth
Area
Val
Vol
EGL
Sf
Invert
HGL
Depth
Area
Val
Val
EGL
Sf
Ave
Enrgy
elev
elev
head
elev
elev
elev
head
elev
Sf
loss
(in)
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(a9ft)
(ftfs)
(ft)
(ft)
(%)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(soft)
(fUs)
(ft)
(ft)
(%)
(%)
(ft)
(I)
(ft)
1
54
98.00
4929.96
4932.60
2.84
10.58
9.27
1.34
4934.14
0.403
32.5
4930.07
4933.12
3.05
11.49
8.53
1.13
4934.25
0.328
0.365
0.119
0.99
1.12
2
48
60.40
4930.27
4936.02
4.00
12.56
4.81
0.36
4935.37
0.151
148
4930.79
4935.24
4.00
12.57
4.81
0.36
4935.60
0.151
0.151
0.223
0.15
0.05
3
48
60.40
4930.79
4935.29
4.00
12.56
4.81
0.36
4935.65
0.151
348
4932.01
4935.76
3.75
12.24
4.94
0.38
4936.14
0.130
0.140
0.489
0.15
0.06
4
48
60.40
4932.01
4935.82
3.81
12.34
4.89
0.37
4936.19
0.131
101
4932.36
4935.91
3.55
11.80
5.12
0.41
4936.32
0.134
0.132
0.134
1.00
0.41
5
48
60.40
4932.36
4936.32
3.96
12.55
4.81
0.36
4936.68
0.139
23.7
4933.08
4936.21
3.13
10.55
5.73
0.51
4936.72
0.165
0.152
0.036
0.15
0.08
6
42
24.90
4933.27
4936.67
3.40
9.55
2.61
0.11
4936.78
0.046
48.0
4933.44
4936.69
3.25
9.32
2.67
0.11
4936.80
0.045
0.046
0.022
0.77
0.09
7
24
18.10
4933.44
4936.78
2.00
3.14
5.76
0.52
4937.29
0.546
62.8
4933.76
4937.12
2.00
3.14
5.76
0.52
4937.64
0.546
0.546
0.343
0.47
0.24
8
24
18.10
4933.76
4937.36
2.00
3.14
5.76
0.52
4937.88
0.546
113
4934.32
4937.98
2.00
3.14
5.76
0.52
4938.50
0.546
0.546
0.619
1.00
0.52
9
18
4.00
4933.71
4936.81
1.50
1.77
2.26
0.08
4936.89
0.124
46.4
4934.17
4936.87
1.50
1.77
2.26
0.08
4936.95
0.124
0.124
0.057
0.73
0.06
10
18
4.00
4934.18
4936.93
1.50
1.77
2.26
0.08
4937.01
0.124
50.0
4934.43
4936.99
1.50
1.77
2.26
0.08
4937.07
0.124
0.124
0.062
0.15
0.01
11
18
2.00
4935.82
4937.06
1.24
1.56
1.28
0.03
4937.08
0.030
10.7
4937.42
4937.96J
0.54"
0.57
3.49
0.19
4938A5
0.403
0.217
n1a
1.00
nla
12
30
37.60
4931.46
4934.46
2.50
4.91
7.66
0.91
4935.37
0.717
23.1
4931.58
4934.63
2.50
4.91
7.68
0.91
4935.54
0.716
0.716
0.166
0.46
0.42
13
30
25.60
4931.58
4935.54
2.50
4.91
5.22
0.42
4935.96
0.332
25.4
4931.71
4935.62
2.50
4.91
5.22
0.42
4936.04
0.332
0.332
0.084
0.15
0.06
14
30
12.10
4931.71
4936.01
2.50
4.91
2.47
0.09
4936.11
0.074
6.4
4931.74
4936.02
2.50
4.91
2.46
0.09
4936.11
0.074
0.074
0.005
0.15
0.01
15
30
12.10
4931.74
4936.03
2.50
4.91
2.47
O.09
4936.13
0.074
21.5
4931.84
4936.05
2.50
4.91
2.46
0.09
4936.14
0.074
0.074
0.016
0.15
0.01
16
24
12.10
4932.04
4936.06
2.00
3.14
3.85
0.23
4936.29
0.244
94.2
4932.99
4936.29
2.00
3.14
3.85
0.23
4936.52
0.244
0.244
0.230
0.97
0.22
17
24
12.10
4932.99
4936.52
2.00
3.14
3.85
0.23
4936.75
0.244
64.1
4933.63
4936.67
2.00
3.14
3.85
0.23
4936.90
0.244
0.244
0.156
1.00
0.23
Project File: Storml REV.stm
Number of lines: 17
Run Date: 02-15-2016
Notes: ; " Critical depth.; j-Une Contains hyd. jump.
HyM1albw ebmi Sexan 2005
1
' Hydraflow Plan View
outreo
t
2
3
Project File: storm3.stm No. Lines: 3 12-15-2015
You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer (http:/twww.novapdf.com)
Hyde beam beware Z
Storm Sewer Summary Report Page t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
; p;
rge
You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer (http://www.novapdf.com) nnsawem2005
I
LJ
1
u
' You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer (http://www.novapdf.com)
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 1
Line
Sae
a
Downstream
Len
Upstream
Check
JL
Minor
COS H
loss
Invert
HGL
Depth
Area
Val
Val
EGL
Sf
Invert
HGL
Depth
Area
Vol
Vol
EGL
Sr
Ave
Enrgy
elev
at"
head
elev
elev
elev
head
at"
Sf
loss
(in)
fats)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(50)
(ftfs)
(ft)
(ft)
(W
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(sgft)
(ft/9)
(ft)
(ft)
(%)
(Yd
(ft)
(H)
(ft)
1
24
23.30
4931.42
493241
0.99
1.55
15.04
3.52
4935.93
0.837
55.1
4934.60
4936.32
1.72"
2.87
8.11
1.02
4937.34
0.837
0.837
n1a
0.91
We
2
18
17.80
4934.80
4936.32
1.50
1.77
10.07
1.58
4937.90
2.449
63.9
4935.12
4937.69
1.50
1.77
10.07
1.58
4939.46
2.448
2.449
1.565
0.24
0.38
3
18
8.90
4935.12
4939.45
1.50
1.77
5.04
0.39
4939.64
0.612
37.9
4935.30
4939.68
1.50
1.77
5.04
0.39
4940.07
0.612
0.612
0.232
1.00
0.39
Project File: stomr3.stm
Number of lines: 3
Run Date: 12-15-2015
Notes:: "Critical depth.
Hydelbw amrm Sewem a105
I
1
1
1 Hydraflow Plan View
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
4 2
1
Outfal
Project File: storm4.stm No. Lines: 4 12-15-2015
1
You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer (hftp:/Avww.novapdf.com)
1
1
1
np„ro. sm� sa... mn
i
Storm Sewer Summary Report Page t
F
t
t
Line
Line ID
Flow
Line
Line
Invert
Invert
Line
HGL
HGL
Minor
HGL
Dns
No.
rate
size
length
EL Dn
EL Up
slope
down
up
loss
Junct
line
(cfs)
(in)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(%)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
No.
1
Pipe - (26)
32.80
36 c
123.6
4933.67
4934.09
0.340
4935.50
4936.17
0.61
4936.78
End
2
UD PIPE 4
0.40
6 c
139.9
4934.39
4935.79
1.001
4937.33'
4937.94'
0.06
4938.00
1
3
Pipe -(26)(2)
0.40
36 c
57.4
4934.09
4934.28
0.331
4937.39'
4937.39'
0.00
4937.39
1
4
PIPE 4
32.00
18 c
8.3
4934.09
4934.17
0.967
4936.78'
4937.44'
5.10
4942.54
1
Project File: storm4.stm
Number of lines: 4
Run Date: 12-15-2015
NOTES: c = cir; e = ellip; b =
100-YR ANALYSIS urcharged (HGL above crave).
You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer (http://www.novapdf.com) M Sewers 2005
I
t
�I
11
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 1
Line
Size
G
Downstream
Len
Upstream
Check
A
Minor
coeff
loss
Invert
HGL
Depth
Area
Val
Vol
EGL
Sf
Invert
HGL
Depth
Area
Val
Vol
EGL
Sf
Ave
Enrgy
at"
elev
head
elev
elev
elev
head
elev
Sf
loss
(in)
We)
(ff)
(fl)
(II)
(sgfl)
(fus)
(fl)
(N)
(V
(fl)
(fl)
(fl)
(ft)
(sgfl)
(flfs)
(fl)
(fl)
(%)
(%)
(fl)
(K)
(fl)
1
36
32.80
4933.67
4935.50
1.83
4.50
7.28
0.82
4936.32
0.437
124
4934.09
4936.17
2.08
5.22
6.29
0.61
4936.78
0.303
0.370
0.458
1.00
0.61
2
6
0.40
4934.39
4937.33
0.50
0.20
2.04
0.06
4937.39
0.434
140
4935.79
4937.94
0.50
0.20
2.04
0.06
4938.00
0.434
0.434
0.607
1.00
0.06
3
36
0.40
4934.09
4937.39
3.00
7.07
0.06
0.00
4937.39
0.000
57.4
4934.28
4937.39
3.00
7.07
0.06
0.00
4937.39
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.00
0.00
4
18
32.00
4934.09
4936.78
1.50
1.77
18.11
5.10
4941.88
7.916
8.3
4934.17
4937.44
1.50"
1.77
18.11
5.10
4942.54
7.913
7.914
0.655
1.00
5.10
Project Fla stonn4atm
Number of lines: 4 -
Run Date: 12-16.2015
Notes:: " Critical depth.
You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer (hftp://www.novapdf.com)
Hyd Se sewer zoos
' EXISTING STORM LINE ANALYSES
(Existing North Storm Line and Existing West Storm Line)
1
11
1
i
I \ �
/ LEMAYAVENUE
r i THIRD ANNEXATION
of F61TE F:Ol va n
021rr1GE / RF- IF-
66.L-G.1L.A 0^1
Extfin.4% OF�rrr,-
I il�I/
/ 021 FicE
o ��S,p� WADE
/ p.bo' Nioet►
/ OeIFiGE.
/ i' / Lbt..GJ�.14Tto�S
i
ORIFICE RATING CURVE
Existing Oifsite Pond
1 00-yr Orifice
PROJECT: 939-001 -
DATE: 2110116
BY: ATC
ORIFICE RATING
Orifice Area (sf) 1.0800
Orifice invert (ft) 100
Orifice Coefficient 0.65
Stage
FT
Outlet
release
CFS
100.00
0.0
100.20
0.0
100.40
0.0
100.60
0.0
100.80
5.0
101.00
5.6
101.20
6.2
101.40
6.7
101.60
7.1
101.80
7.6'
102.00
8.0.
102.20
_ -. 8:4
102.40
8.7
102.60
9.1
102.80
9.4
103.00
9.8 _
103.20
10.1
103.40
10.4
103.60
10.7 T
103.80
11.0
104.00
11.3
104.20
11.5
104.40
11.8 A
op of Box.
pprox. Pond Crest
1
Hydraflow Plan View
1
t
a
'ama
Project File: ExistN.stm No. Lines: 7 02-15-2016
Hydmf Slam Saxes MS
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 1
Line
Size
Q
Downstream
Len
Upstream
Check
JL
Minor
coeH
loss
Invert
HGL
Depth
Area
Val
Val
EGL
Sf
Invert
HGL
Depth
Area
Vol
Vol
EGL
Sf
Ave
Enrgy
slay
elev
head
elev
elev
elev
head
elev
Sf
loss
(in)
(afs)
(ft)
(it)
(it)
(sVR)
(ftls)
(R)
(it)
(°A)
(H)
(t<)
(it)
(n)
(s9H)
(tt/s)
(R)
(it)
N
N
(it)
(K)
(it)
1
36
29.00
4933.67
4936.67
3.00
7,07
4.10
0.26
4936.93
0.161
181
4934.28
4936.91
2.63
6.56
4.42
0.30
4937.21
0.146
0.153
0.278
0.00
0.00
2
36
29.00
4934.28
4936.95
2.67
6.64
4.37
0.30
4937.25
0.143
221
4935.02
4937.21
2.19
5.52
5.26
0.43
4937.64
0.208
0.175
0.388
0.00
0.00
3
36
29.00
4935.08
4937.37
2.29
5.80
5.00
0.39
4937.76
0.185
165
4935.41
4937.68
2.26
5.72
5.07
0.40
4938.07
0.191
0.188
0.310
0.00
0.00
4
36
29.00
4935.41
4937.81
2.40
6.07
4.78
0.36
4938.17
0.168
239
4935.88
4938.21
2.33
5.89
4.93
0.38
4938.59
0.179
0.174
0.416
0.00
0.00
5
36
29.00
4935.88
4938.32
2.44
6.17
4.70
0.34
4938.67
0.163
134
4936.15
4938.53
2.38
6.01
4.83
0.36
4938.89
0.172
0.167
0.224
0.00
0.00
6
30
14.50
4936.15
4938.74
2.50
4.91
2.95
0.14
4938.88
0.107
162
4936.32
4938.92
2.50
4.91
2.95
0.14
4939.05
0.107
0.107
0.173
0.00
0.00
7
30
11.80
4936.32
4938.96
2.50
4.91
2.40
0.09
4939.05
0.071
280
4936.98
4939.13
2.15
4.50
2.62
0.11
4939.24
0.065
0.068
0.190
0.00
0.00
Project File: EzistN.stm
Number of lines: 7
Run Date: 02-15-2016
t Hydraflow Plan View
1
0
6
5
3
2
1
outfd
Project Fite: ExistW.stm No. Lines: 6 02-15-2016
HySalbw Stain Seven =5
t
1
Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 1
Llne
Size
D
Downstream
Len
Upstream
Check
JL
Minor
cosR
loss
Invert
HGL
Depth
Area
Val
Val
EGL
Sf
Invert
HGL
Depth
Area
Vet
Vol
EGL
Sf
Ave
Enrgy
elev
elev
head
elev
elev
elev
head
elev
31
loss
(in)
(cfs)
(R)
(R)
(R)
(BaR)
(wa)
(R)
(R)
l%)
(R)
(R)
(R)
(ft)
(snR)
(ws)
(R)
(R)
(%)
(%)
(R)
IKI
IRI
1
18
7.50
4934.00
4935.50
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4935.78
0.435
21.4
4934.05
4935.55
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4935.83
0.434
0.434
0.093
0.40
0.11
2
18
7.50
4934.05
4935.66
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4935.94
0.435
58.9
4934.28
4935.92
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4936.20
0.435
0.435
0.256
0.30
0.08
3
18
7.50
4934.28
4936.00
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4936.28
0.435
208
4935.01
4936.91
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4937.19
0.435
0.435-
0.906
0.15
0.04
4
18
7.50
4935.01
4936.95
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4937.23
0.435
37.4
4935.14
4937.11
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4937.39
0.435
0.435
0.162
0.15
0.04
5
18
7.50
4935.14
4937.15
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4937.44
0.435
105
4935.56
4937.61
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4937.89
0.435
0.435
0.455
0.80
0.22
6
18
7.50
4935.56
4937.83
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4938.11
0.435
83.5
4935.50
4938.20
1.50
1.77
4.24
0.28
4938.48
0.435
0.435
0.363
0.60
0.17
Project File: ExistW.stm
Number of lines: 6
Run Date: 02-15-2016
Hydralbw atom aewmr Ms
1
APPENDIX E
LID DESIGN INFORMATION
' 1
1
1
' NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
LEGEND'
CAPSTONE COTTAGE
WATER QUALITY I LID EXHIBIT
CAPSTONE COTTAGE
WATER QUALITY I LID EXHIBIT
c
PICP RUN-ON AREA COMPUTATIONS
Project No: 939-001
By: N. Haws
Date: 04.21.2016
Basin
ID
Basin
Area
(sq.ft.)
Basin
Area
(ac)
Area of Vehicular Pavement (sq.ft.)
Rooftop Areas (sq.ft.)
PICP Run-on Ratio
PICP
Asphalt
Concrete
Residences
Carports
Vehicular
Only
w/Residential
Rooftops
1
239421
5.50
25305
69572
6375
54119
15840
3.0:1
5.1:1
2
114407
2.63
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
32743
0.75
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4
181478
4.17
1 14760
44953
4303
39519
5616
3.3:1
6.0:1
5
228285
5.24
22646
57238
4362
52980
10512
2.7:1
5.1:1
6a
72480
1.66
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
6b
13461
0.31
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
6c
10193
0.23
-
-
-
-
-
7
47523
1.09
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8
8363.52
0.19
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
15855.94
0.36
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10
49827
1.14
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
11
1931
0.04
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
12
15333.12
0.35
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
13
26063
0.60
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
14a
84942
1.95
-
-
-
-
-
-
14b
43707
1.00
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
14c
35864
0.82
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
14d
21317
0.49
-
-
-
-
-
-
14e
83756
1.92
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
OS3,4,5
128356
2.95
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NOTE: Carport rooftops are shown for informational purposes only. Since the areas underneath are at -grade asphalt parking stalls, still subject to sheet flow,
these surface areas are treated as traditional asphalt in WO/LID comoutations (i.e., the influence of the carport rooftops is inanoredl.
r
I
1
1
I I
1
1
I
t
t
WATER QUALITY / LOW -IMPACT DEVELOPMENT / TREATMENT TRAIN SUMMARYTABLE
Project No: 939-001
BY: N. Haws
Date: 04.21.2016
Basin
ID
Basin
Area
(sq.tE)
Basin
Area
(ac)
Minimized Directly Connected
Im Mous Areas MDCIA
Permeable Interlocking
Concrete Pavement PICP
Biaretemlon Rain Gardens
Underground
Proprietary BMP
100%
Treatment
Train
Receiving
Treatment?
DD
Technique
Receiving
Treatment?
Vehicular
Pavement to
PICP
Rurwn Ratio
Impervious
(Inc roofs) to
PICP
Ru o atio
Receiving
Treatment?
Rainganten
ID
Receiving
Treatment?
Snout-
or
StormTeche
1
239,421
5.50
partial (low)
grass buffers
yes
.3.0:1
5.1:1
no
yes
Snout
YES
2
114,407
2.63
yes
rain garden
no
yes
A
yes
Snout
YES
3
32,743
0.75
no
no
no
yes
Snout
Na
4
181,478
4.17
partial (low)
grass buffers
yes
3.3:1
6.0:1
no
yes
StormTech
YES
5
228,285
5.24
partial (low)
grass buffers
yes
2.7:1
SAA
no
yes
Snout
YES
63
72,480
1.66
yes
rain garden
no
yes
B
yes
Snout
YES
61,
13,461
0.31
no
no
- no
yes
Snout
Na
6c
10,193
0.23
no
no
no
no
Na
7
47,523
1.09
yes
multiple
yes
-
-
yes
all
yes
smnasw ,n
YES
8
8,364
0.19
yes
rain garden
no
yes
D
no
YES
9
15,856
0.36
yes
rain garden
no
yes
C
yes
Snout
YES
10
49,827
1.24
yes
rain garden
no
yes
C
yes
Snout
YES
11
1,931
0.G4
no
no
no
no
Na
12
15,333
0.35
yes
rain garden
no
-
-
yes
C
yes
Snout
YES
13
26,063
0.60
yes
rain garden
no
yes
C
yes
Snout
YES
14a
94,942
1.95
no
no
no
no
Na
14b
43,707
1.00
no
no
no
no
-
Na
W
35,864
0.82
yes
WQ Pond
no,
no
no
Na
14d
21,317
0.49
Partial(Iow)
grass buffers
M
-
no
no
Na
14e
83,756
1.92
no
no
no
no
-
Na
OS3,4,5
128,356
2.95
Partial (low)
grass buffers
no
-
-
no
-
no
Na
NOTES: 1. Grass Buffers are not engineered sections. They are the landscaped areas surrounding all residential rooftops over which runoff passes prior to flowing into the nest downstream drainage facility.
2. Grass Buffers are not represented as providing a WQN. However, they do satisfy MDCIA in a comprehensive treatment train approach.
3. Residential rooftops generally produce cleaner ruroff than at grade Impervious areas. Therefore, when buffered upstream across landscape areas they are not subject to the same PICP ratio limits.
1
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) II
Designer:
N. Haws
'
Company:
Date:
Northern Engineering
April 21, 2016
Project:
939-001
Location:
Rain Garden A i Duff Dr. & International Blvd. (Basin 2) Treatment
1
1
1.1
t
1. Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, I,
I, =
41.0
%
(100% d all paved and roofed areas upstream of min garden)
B) Tdbutary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = IW100)
i =
0.410
C) Water Quality Capture Vol me (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time
WQCV =
0.15
watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8' (0.91" P- 1.19-?+0.78 - i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including min garden area)
Area =
114,407
sq it
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
Vw,,, =
1,392
cu it
Vol = (WQCV / 12) - Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of
dS =
_
in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region,
VWQW mHER =
0.0
cu ft
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
J
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
VWay USER =
cu ft
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2. Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch ma)mmum)
Dwo� =
12
in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical)
Z =
4.00
ff / ft
(Use "0" ff rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Minimum Flat Surface Area
AM„ =
928
sq it
D) Actual Flat Surface Area
Au =
1054
sq it
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)
ATm =
2039
sq it
F) Rain Garden Total Volume
Vr=
1,547
cuff
(VT= ((Arm + Ae ) 12) * Depth)
3. Growing Media
Choose One
Q 18" Rain Garden Growing Media
10
Other (Exlaln):
4. Underdrein System
a. c?ne
0 YES
A) Are underdmms provided?
ONO
B) Urderdmin system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain lime
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage
y=
ft
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours
V0112=
WA
cu 0
till Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum
Do =
WA
in
UD-BMP_v3.02_RG-A, RG 4/21/2016, 2:32 PM
1
n
0
C
I
1
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Designer: N. Haws
Company: Northern Engineering `
Date: April 21, 2016
Project: 939-001
Location: Rain Garden B i International Blvd. B North Roundabout (Basin 6a) Treatment
1. Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, I,
I, =
34.0
%
(100% if all paved and roofed auras upstream of min garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = 1.1100)
1=
0.340
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time
WQCV =
0.13
watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 • (0.91' i3- 1.19' ?+ 0.78' i)
.
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)
Area =
72,480
sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
VwOdv=
790
cuff
Vol = (WQCV 112)' Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of
de =
in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region,
Vwocv OTHER =
0.0
cu It
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
Vwocv USER =
cu It
(Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2. Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch mammum)
Dwocv=
12
in -
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical)
Z =
4.00 ,
fl / fl
(Use "0" If rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Fiat Surface Area
Aw„ =
528
sq ff
D) Actual Flat Surface Area
A� =
531
sq It
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)
ATw =
1372
sq It
F) Rain Garden Total Volume
VT=
952
cu It
(VT= ((Arw+ Ax ) / 2)Depth)
3. Growing Media
Choose One
Q 18' Rain Garden Growing Medal
Q Other (Explain):
4. Underdmin System
- Chonve Coe
0 YES
A) Are underdmins provided?
Q NO
B) Underdmin system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
t) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage
y=
It
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
.
it) Volume to Drain in 12 Fours
VOlrz=
N/A
cu It
iii) Orifice Diameter, 318" Minimum -
DO =
N/A
in.
' UD-BMP_v3.02_RG-B, RG 4/21/2016, 2:35 PM
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG)
Designer: N. Haws
Company: Northern Engineering
Date: April 21, 2016
Project: 939-001
Location: Rain Garden C i Basins 9 , 10, 12,13 Treatment .
1. Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, I,
I, =
74.0 %
(1DO% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (t = 1.1100)
1 =
0.740
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-lour Drain Time
WQCV =
0.24 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8 - (0.91* I3- 1.19' ?+0.78' I)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area)
Area =
107,079 sq ft
E) Water Quality Capture Volume(WQCV) Design Volume
Vwo,,=
2,101 cu it
Vol = (WQCV / 12)' Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of
da =
in
Average Ruoff Producing Stomn
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region,
VWay OTHER =
0.0 cu ft
Water Ouality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
Vwacv ussm =
cu It
(ONy If a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2. Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)
Dwom=
12 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist par unit vertical)
Z =
4.00 ft / ft
(Use "Or if rain garden has vertical walls)
C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area
Aw„ =
1401 sq it
D) Actual Flat Surface Area
A, =
3897 sq 0
E) Neu at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)
Arm =
6887 sq ft
F) Rain Garden Total Volume
VT=
5,392 cu ft
(VT= ((ATw + Awsr) / 2)' Depth)
3. Growing Media
Goose One
Q 18' Rain Garden Growing Media
Q Other (Explain):
4. Underdrein System
A) Are underdrains provided?
axo GMe
YES
(g 140
B) Underdrein system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage
y=
ft
Vol me to the Center of the Orifice
it) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours
V0112 =
WA cu ft
III) Orifice Diameter, 30 Minimum
Do =
WA in
UD-BMP_v3.02_RG-C-exp, RG
4/21/2016, 2:39 PM
Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) II
Designer:
N. Haws
'
Company:
Date:
� Northam Engineering
April 21, 2016
Project:
939-001
Location:
Rain Garden D I Webster (Basin 8) Treatment
t
1
11
t
1. Basin Storage Volume
A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, I,
I, =
98.0 %
(100% If all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden)
B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = I,/100)
i =
0.980
C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-tour Drain Time
WQCV =
0.38 watershed inches
(WQCV= 0.8' (0.91' IS- 1.19 - ?+ 0.78' i)
D) Contributing Watershed Area (indudirg rain garden area)
Area =
8,364 sq It
E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
Vwo, =
267 cu If
Vol = (WQCV / 12) - Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of
dB =
in
Average Runoff Producing Storm
G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region,
VW acv o,RER =
0.0 cuff
Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume
VWop, USER=
Ca it
(Only 8 a different WQCV Design Volume is desired)
2. Basin Geometry
A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum)
Dwory =
12 in
B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., loriz. dist per unit vertical)
_ Z =
4.00 ft / ft
(Use'0' if rain garden has vertical vralls)
C) Mimmmum Flat Surface Area
Arr„ =
178 sq It
D) Actual Flat Surface Area
A� =
231 sq It
E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area)
A,w =
539 sq R
F) Rain Garden Total Volume
V,=
385 cu it
(VT= ((AT. + As ) / 2) . Depth)
3. Growing Media
Choose One
QQ 18' Rain Garden Growing Media
Q Other (Explain);
4. Underdrain System
A) Are underdreuns provided?
Clrecre one
0 YES
ONO
B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 tour drain time
i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage
y=
it
Volume to the Center of the Orifice
ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours
V0112 =
WA cu it
III) Orfice Diameter, 3/8' Minimum
Do =
WA in
UD-BMP_v3.02_RG-D, RG 4/21/2016, 2:42 PM
I
FI
L
11
APPENDIX F
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MODEL (SWMM); DETENTION POND CALCULATIONS
EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - VERSION 5.0 (Build 5.0.022)
______________________________________________________________
NOTE: The summary statistics displayed in this report are
based on results found at every computational time step,
not just on results from each reporting time step.
++++++++++++++++++*+*++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++**++
++++++++++++++++
Analysis Options,
++++++++++++++++
Flow Units ...............
CFS
Process Models:
Rainfall/Runoff ........
YES
Snowmelt ...............
NO
Groundwater ............
NO
Flow Routing ...........
YES
Ponding Allowed ........
NO
Water Quality ..........
NO
Infiltration Method ......
HORTON
Flow Routing Method ......
KINWAVE
Starting Date ............
NOV-21-2012 00:00:00
Ending Date ..............
NOV-21-2012 06:00:00
Antecedent Dry Days ......
0.0
Report Time Step .........
00:15:00
Wet Time Step ............
00:05:00
Dry Time Step ............
01:00:00
Routing Time Step ........
30.00 sec
**************************
Volume
Depth
Runoff Quantity Continuity
acre-feet
inches
Total Precipitation ......
7.996
3.669
Evaporation Loss .........
0.000
0.000
Infiltration Loss ........
1.451
0.666
Surface Runoff ...........
6.466
2.967
Final Surface Storage ....
0.127
0.058
Continuity Error (%) .....
-0.604
Volume
Volume
Flow Routing Continuity
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
acre-feet
_________
10^6 gal
---------
Dry Weather Inflow ....
0.000
- 0.000
Wet Weather Inflow .......
6.466
2.107
Groundwater Inflow .......
0.000
0.000
RDII Inflow ..............
0.000
0.000
External Inflow ..........
0.000
0.000
External Outflow ..........
2.199
0.717
Internal Outflow .........
0.000
0.000
Storage Losses ...........
0.000
0.000
Initial Stored Volume ....
0.000
0.000
Final Stored Volume ......
4.267
1.390
Continuity Error (%) .....
-0.003
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Highest Flow Instability Indexes
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
All links are stable.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Routing Time Step Summary
Minimum
Time Step
30.00 sec
Average
Time Step
30.00 sec
Maximum
Time Step
30.00 sec
Percent
in Steady State
0.00
Average
Iterations per Step
1.00
Subcatchment Runoff Summary -
Total Total Total Total Total Total
SWMM 5
Peak Runoff
Page 1
Precip
Runon
Evap
Infil
Runoff
Runoff
Runoff
Coeff
Subcatchment in
in
in
in
in
10^6 gal
CFS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Basins 3.67
0.00
0.00
0.70
2.94
1.75
146.50
0.801
Basin2 3.67
0.00
0.00
0.51
3.12
0.35
34.37
0.851
++++++++++++++++++
Node Depth Summary
++++++++++++++++++
Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max
Depth Depth HGL Occurrence
Node Type Feet Feet Feet days hr:min
_____________________________________________________________________
Outlet_Overall OUTFALL 0.00 0.00 96.00 0 00:00
Pond STORAGE 2.45 2.89 99.89 0 02:16
Detention Pavers STORAGE 2.22 2.69 99.69 0 02:09
+*++*+++++***++****
Node Inflow Summary
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Maximum Lateral
Lateral Total Time of Max Inflow
Inflow Inflow Occurrence Volume
Node Type CFS CFS days hr:min 10^6 gal
Outlet Overall OUTFALL 0.00 4.95 0 02:16 0.000
Pond STORAGE 146.50 146.50. 0 00:40 1.753
Detention Pavers STORAGE 34.37 34.37 0 00:40 0.354
*+****+***************
Node Surcharge Summary
Surcharging occurs when water rises above the top of the highest conduit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Max. Height Min. Depth
Hours Above Crown Below Rim
NodeTypeSurcharged Feet Feet
-_--
Pond STORAGE 6.01 2.894 7.106
Detention Pavers STORAGE 6.01 2.694 7.306
Node Flooding Summary
No nodes were flooded.
++++++++++++++++++++++
Storage Volume Summary
----------------------
Average
Avg
ESI
Volume
Pcnt
Pent
Storage Unit__________
1000_ ft3____
Full-
Loss
--------------------------------------------
Pond
163.700
7
0
Detention Pavers
28.541
5
0
Outfall Loading
Summary
Outfall Node
Outlet -Overall
System
SWMM 5
Total
Inflow
Volume
-10^6 gal
0.717
1.753
0.354
------------------------------------------
Maximum
Max
Time
of Max
Maximum
Volume
Pcnt
Occurrence
Outflow
1000 ft3
Full
days
hr:min
CFS
----------------------- 209.387
8
0
02:16
3.70
39.155
7
0
02:09
1.25
V
----------------------------------------
Flow
Avg
Max.
Total
Freq.
Flow
Flow
Volume
Pcnt.
CPS
CFS
10^6 gal
----------------------------------------
---97_23------9-56------9-95-------0_717
97.23
4.56
4.95
0.717
Page 2
++++++++++++++++++++
Link Flow Summary
++++++++++++++++++++
-------------------------
Link Type
--------------------------
Outlet DUMMY
Outlet Pavers DUMMY
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Conduit Surcharge Summary
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
No conduits were surcharged.
------------------------------
Maximum Time of Max Maximum
IFlowl Occurrence lVelocl
CFS days hr:min ft/sec
______________________
3.70 0 02:16
1.25 0 00:44
Analysis begun on: Wed Apr 20 16:20:26 2016
Analysis ended on: Wed Apr 20 16:20:26 2016
Total elapsed time: < 1 sec
Max/ Max/
Full Full
Flow Depth
------------
SWMM 5
Page 3
II v
+x
tIX
'
x
Node Detention Pavers Volume
00
—
00
00 —
00
00
.0
00
00
00
Elm Tme(o )
SWMM 5
Page 1
0�
1
1
swum 5
1
5 fi
Page 1
Node Pond Volume
o a
eia�ae n��a m�i
SWMM 5
1
Page 1
Link Outlet Flow
]5
$5
1U
i5
I
�p
05
00
SWMM 5 Page 1
I
LLI
L
1
DETENTION STAGE STORAGE CURVE
PROJECT: 939-001
DATE: 1211115
BY: ATC
Contour
Elevation
(FT)
Contour
Area
(SF)
Depth
(ft)
(FT)
Incremental
Volume
(CU-FT) _
Cumulative
Volume
(CU-FT)
Cumulative
Volume
(AC -FT)
4,930.00
9,600.72
N/A
N/A
0
0.000
4,930.20
10,373.62
0.2
1997
1997
0.046
4,930.40
11,135.60
0.2
2150
4147
0.095
4,930.60
11,868.64
0.2
12300
6447
0.148
4,930.80
12,564.73
0.2
2443
8890
0.204
4,931.00
13,580.22
0.2
2614
11504
0.264
4,931.20
14,833.57
0.2
2840
14345
0.329
4,931.40
15,307.82
0.2
3014
17359
0.399
4,931.60
15,783.04
0.2
3109
20468
0.470
4,931.80
16,259.16
0.2
3204
23672
0.543
4,932.00
16,736.63
0.2
3299
26971
0.619
4,932.20
17,217.37
0.2
3395
30367
0.697
4,932.40
17,702.50
0.2
3492
33858
0.777
4,932.60
18,193.55
0.2
3589
37448
0.860
4,932.80
18,690.98
0.2
3688
41136
0.944
4,933.00
19,195.42
0.2
3789
44925
1.031
4,933.20
19,707.02
0.2
3890
48815
1.121
4,933.40
20,226.11
0.2
3993
52808
1.212
4,933.60
20,752.19
0.2
4098
56906
1.306
4,933.80
21,284.11
0.2
4204
61109
1.403
4,934.00
21,821.91
0.2
4310
65420
1.502
4,934.20
22,365.61
0.2
4419
69839
1.603
4,934.40
22,915.40
0.2
4528
74367
1.707
4,934.60
23,471.25
0.2
4639
79005
1.814
4,934.80
24,033.40
0.2
4750
83755
1.923
4,935.00
24,601.69
0.2
4863
88619
2.034
4,935.20
25,175.76
0.2
4978
93596
2.149
4,935.40
25,755.35
0.2
5093
98689
2.266
4,935.60
26,341.37
0.2
5210
103899
2.385
4,935.80
26,934.65
0.2
5327
109227
2.507
4,936.00
27,533.98
0.2
5447
114673
2.633
4,936.20
28,140.50
0.2
5567
120241
2.760
4,936.40
28,752.53
0.2
5689
125930
2.891
4,936.60
29,372.46
0.2
5812
131742
3.024
4,936.80
29,998.65
0.2
5937
137679
3.161
4,937.00
30,651.84
0.2
6065
143744
3.300
4,937.20
31,315.16
0.2
6197
149941
3.442
4,937.40
31,983.98
0.2
6330
156270
3.587
4,937.60
32,659.16
0.2
6464
162735
3.736
4,937.80
33,341.16
0.2
6600
169335
3.887
4,938.00
34,030032
0.2
6737
176072
4.042
4,938.20
34,726.83
0.2
6876
182947
4.200
4,938.40
35,431.57
0.2
7016
189963
4.361
4,938.60
36,152.78
0.2
7158
197121
4.525
4,938.80
36,892.19
0.2
7304
204426
4.693
4,939.00
37,648.14
0.2
7454
211880
4.864
4,939.20
38,448.14
0.2
7610
19
2489
5.039
4,939.40
139,248.14
10.2
17770
1227259
15.217
CE RATING CURVE
1
Orifice
T: 939-001
F
1/16
ORIFICE RATING
Orifice Dia (in)
6.70
Orifice Area (so
0.2448
Orifice invert (ft)
4930
Orifice Coefficient
0.65
u
f]
L-
1
I
1
I
I
Ut 1 tN 11UN FUND CALCULATION; FAA METHOD
Project Number 939-001
Project Location Fort Collins
Calculations By: ATC
Pond No : 2
Input Variables L Results
Design Point 14c
Design Storm 100-yr
Required Detention Volume
Developed "C" = 1.00
Area (A)= 0.82 acres
3125 ft'
Max Release Rate = 2.00 cfs
0.07 ac-ft
100-yr
Inflow
Outflow
Storage
Time
Time
Intensity
Q100
(Runoff)
(Release)
Detention
Volume
Volume
Volume
(mins)
(secs
in/hr
cfs
(ft )
(W)
(fC)
5
300
9.950
8.16
2448
600.0
1847.7
10
600
7.720
6.33
3798
1200.0
2598.2
15
900
6.520
5.35
4812
1800.0
3011.8
20
1200
5.600
4.59
5510
2400.0
3110.4
25
1500
4.980
4.08
6125
3000.0
3125.4
30
1800
4.520
3.71
6672
3600.0
3071.5
35
2100
4.080
3.35
7026
4200.0
2825.8
40
2400
3.740
3.07
7360
4800.0
2560.3
45
2700
3.460
2.84
7660
5400.0
2260.4
50
3000
3.230
2.65
7946
6000.0
1945.8
55
3300
3.030
2.48
8199
6600.0
1599.2
60
3600
2.860
2.35
8443
7200.0
1242.7
65
3900
2.720
2.23-1
8699
7800.0
898.6
70
4200
2.590
2.12
8920
8400.0
520.0
75
4500
2.480
2.03
9151
9000.0
151.2
80
4800
2.380
1.95
9368
9600.0
232.3
85
5100
2.290
1.88
9577
10200.0
623.2
90
5400
2.210
1.81
9786
10800.0
-1014.1
95
5700
2.130 1
1.75
9956
11400.0
-1444.4
100
6000
2.060
1.69
10135
12000.0
-1864.8
105
6300
2.000
1.64
10332
12600.0
-2268.0
110
6600
1.940
1.59
10499
13200.0
-2700.7
115
6900
1.890
1.55
10694
13800.0
3106.4
120
7200
1.840
1.51
10863
14400.0
-3536.6
i
a
WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS
Detention/Water Quality Pond 2
IBy: ATC
6/1/16
:QUIRED STORAGE & OUTLET WORKS:
BASIN AREA =
0.820
<-- INPUT from impervious talcs
BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS PERCENT =
82.00
<--INPUT from impervious calcs
BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS RATIO =
0.8200
<--CALCULATED
WQCV (watershed inches) =
0.341
<-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-2
WQCV (ac-ft) =
0.028
<-- CALCULATED from UDFCD DCM V.3 Section 6.5
WQ Depth (ft) =
0.500
<-- INPUT from stage -storage table
AREA REQUIRED PER ROW, a (in 2) =
0.139
<-- CALCULATED from Figure EDB-3
CIRCULAR PERFORATION SIZING:
dia (in) =
3/8
<-- INPUT from Figure 5
n =
2
<-- INPUT from Figure 5
t (in) =
1/4
<-- INPUT from Figure 5
number of rows =
1
<-- CALCULATED from WQ Depth and row spacing
I
1
1
E
11
1
J
Pond Volume Calculations
Pond 2
Project: 939-001
By: ATC
Date: 06/01 /16
Note: Volume calculations utilize Conic Method
Pond Stage
4940.22
Depth
0.00
Surface Area
of Contour
S
0
Incremental
Volume
Cu-Ft
Total Volume
Cu-Ft
Total Volume
Ac-Ft
4941
4942
4942.8
0.78
1.00
0.80
1206
2165
4607
313
1661
2645
313
1974
4619
0.007
0.045
0.106
' ORIFICE RATING CURVE
Pond 2
100- r Orifice
PROJECT: 939-001
' DATE: 6/1/16
BY: ATC
1
11
IJ
I�
ORIFICE RATING
Orifice Dia (in)
Orifice Area (si)
Orifice invert (fl)
Orifice Coefficient
6.75
0.2485
4940.22
0.65
Stage
FT
Outlet
release
CFS
4940.22
0.0
4940.30
0.1
4940.40
0.2
4940.50
0.3
4940.60
0.4
4940.70
0.6
4940.80
0.7
4940.90
0.8
4941.00
0.9
4941.10
1.0
4941.20
1.1
4941.30
1.2
4941.40
12
4941.50
1.3
4941.60
1.4
4941.70
1.4
4941.80
1.5
4941.90
1.5
4942.00
1.6
4942.10
1.6
4942.20
1.7
4942.30
1.7
4942.40
1.8
4942.50
1.8
4942.60
1.9
4942.70
1.9
4942.80
2.0
4942.90
2.0
APPENDIX G
EROSION CONTROL REPORT
■� NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
C
11
EROSION CONTROL REPORT
A comprehensive Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (along with associated details) HAS BEEN
PROVIDED BY SEPARATE DOCUMENT. It should be noted, however, that any such Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan serves only as a general guide to the Contractor. Staging and/or phasing of
the BMPs depicted, and additional or different BMPs from those included may be necessary during
construction, or as required by the authorities having jurisdiction.
' It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure erosion control measures are properly
maintained and followed. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is intended to be a living
document, constantly adapting to site conditions and needs. The Contractor shall update the
' location of BMPs as they are installed, removed or modified in conjunction with construction
activities. It is imperative to appropriately reflect the current site conditions at all times.
' The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall address both temporary measures to be implemented
during construction, as well as permanent erosion control protection. Best Management Practices
from the Volume 3, Chapter 7 —Construction BMPs will be utilized. Measures may include, but are
not limited to, silt fencing along the disturbed perimeter, gutter protection in the adjacent roadways
and inlet protection at existing and proposed storm inlets. Vehicle tracking control pads, spill
containment and clean-up procedures, designated concrete washout areas, dumpsters, and job site
restrooms shall also be provided by the Contractor.
Grading and Erosion Control Notes can be found on the Utility Plans. The Final Plans will contain a
t full-size Erosion Control sheet as well as a separate sheet dedicated to Erosion Control Details. In
addition to this report and the referenced plan sheets, the Contractor shall be aware of, and adhere
to, the applicable requirements outlined in the Development Agreement for the development. Also,
the Site Contractor for this project will be required to secure a Stormwater Construction General
' Permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Water Quality
Control Division — Stormwater Program, prior to any earth disturbance activities. Prior to securing
said permit, the Site Contractor shall develop a comprehensive StormWater Management Plan
' (SWMP) pursuant to CDPHE requirements and guidelines. The SWMP will further describe and
document the ongoing activities, inspections, and maintenance of construction BMPs.
1]
1
' Final Erosion Control Report
APPENDIX H
LARIMER COUNTY CORRESPONDENCE-LINCOLN CHANNEL
I
' Aaron Cvar
From: Traci Shambo <shambotl@co.larimer.co.us>
' Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 5:18 PM
To: Aaron Cvar
Cc: tshambo@larimer.org; Nick Haws
Subject: Re: Capstone Project
Aaron -
' Yes we are in agreement with the release rate that is consistent with the master plan. Thanks for checking.
' On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Aaron Cvar <aaron(@northemen ing eering com> wrote:
Hello Traci,
I have attached the preliminary drainage sketch that we discussed today, as well as portions of the City of Fort
Collins review comments relevant to site drainage. Specifically, the City would like your confirmation
regarding the Lincoln Channel and release rate into the channel (COFC Comment # 5, January 2014; Comment
#2, January 2015), and wants to ensure that Larimer County is in agreement with allowing the development to
release at the Dry Creek Basin Master Plan rate of 0.20 cfs per acre (2-year historic rate).
' So we would like your confirmation that Larimer County is in agreement with our preliminary design, using
the Master Plan release rate for the site of 0.20 cfs per acre.
' Thank you!
Aaron Cvar, PE
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
' 970-568-5401
' Traci Shambo, P.E.
' Larimer County Engineering Department
200 West Oak St, Suite 3000
P.O. Box 1190
Fort Collins, CO 80522
MAP POCKET
DRAINAGE EXHIBITS