Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 01/12/2016City of Ft. Collin r4Yed plans Approved By Date FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR VILLAGE ON REDWOOD Prepared by: Interwest Consulting Group 1218 West Ash, Suite A Windsor, Colorado 80550 Phone: 970.674.3300 Fax:970.674.3303 Prepared for: Fort Collins Housing Authority 1715 West Mountain Ave. Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Phone: 970.416.2910 December 11, 2015 Job Number 1237-112-00 INTERW BBT C O N S U LT ING G R O U P INTERINEST CON S U L T I N G G ROU P December 11, 2015 Mr. Wes Lamarque Fort Collins Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Final Drainage Report for Village on Redwood Dear Wes, We are pleased to submit for your review and approval, this Final Drainage Report for the Village on Redwood low-income housing development. I certify that this report for the drainage design was prepared in accordance with the criteria in the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Manual. I appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing this submittal. Please call if you have any questions. ,00 UCF gHOMAS ' • •: Ls <P . e122 Jason TI Interwest /:V 6 1218 W. ASH, STE. A, WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550 TEL. 970.674.3300 - FAX 970.674.3303 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS............................................................................................................. 3. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS...................................................................................................:.... 4. LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES....................................................................... 5. CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................... 6. REFERENCES............................................................................................................................... APPENDIX A - SITE DESCRIPTIONS, CHARACTERISTICS & REFERENCES .................. APPENDIX B - RATIONAL CALCULATIONS............................................................................ APPENDIX C - STORM CONVEYANCE SIZING....................................................................... APPENDIX D - DETENTION POND CALCULATIONS............................................................. APPENDIX E - LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS ...................................... .................... l ....................1 ....................2 ....................3 ....................4 ....................4 ................... A ................... B ................... C ................... D ................... E 1. INTRODUCTION ■ The project site currently is an undeveloped infill site located north of Nokomis Ct and west of Redwood St. The site is 9.61 acres with approximately 3.0t acres being an ' existing detention pond and approximately 6.6f acres of developable land. The property will be subdivided into two lots, one containing the existing detention pond and the other being the developed portion for low income housing. The project will consist of constructing 12 low income housing buildings, a community clubhouse, and associated ' pedestrian and vehicle accesses. This project will be completed in one phase of construction. 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS ' The project site is bound by Redwood St to the east and surrounded by previously developed properties on the north, south, and west. The site is currently undeveloped and ' appears to be vegetated with native grasses and wetland plants surrounding the existing detention pond. The existing detention pond encompasses the western portion of the site. Based on research of the site, it appears that this detention pond was constructed ' sometime after 1975. The site is within the Dry Creek basin and within the basin limits of the Northeast College Corridor Outfall (NECCO) improvements. The existing site is ' approximately 2.7% impervious, including the west half of Redwood St. The existing 100-yr peak runoff rate to Redwood St (Basin H1) and to the existing detention pond ' (Basin 1-12) is 14.10 cfs and 11.45 cfs, respectively. The runoff directed to Redwood St is conveyed to and collected by an existing 15' Type R inlet located near the southeast corner of the site. ' Upon further research of the surrounding storm drainage infrastructure, the design ' drawings and calculations were found. Referencing the "Redwood Street Improvements" plan set, dated September 1996 and prepared by Stewart & Associates, the existing storm ' drain within Redwood Street was sized and constructed to convey the 100-yr developed runoff from the proposed Village on Redwood site. The storm drain was anticipated to capture and convey 33.5 cfs from the site during a 100-yr storm event. Since this site is ' within the NECCO area plan, the site is constrained to matching the existing runoff rates for the developed condition. The existing runoff rates, stated above, are referenced for the stormwater release rates for ' the proposed improvements. All calculations and exhibits are attached. ' 3. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS ' The project proposes to develop this infill site with 12 low income housing buildings (with a total of 72 units), a community clubhouse and associated infrastructure and ' siteibuilding pedestrian and vehicle access. The property will be subdivided into 2 lots, one containing the existing detention pond and the remaining containing the proposed low income housing development. The project is required to detain the developed 100-yr runoff to the existing 100-yr runoff rate. The detention requirements will be provided through the use of a detention pond in the southeast corner of the site. Water quality capture volume and associated infrastructure is not required as part of this project, though implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques for water quality enhancement are required and proposed with this project. Similar to the existing conditions, the proposed project is divided into two major basins, one basin draining undetained to the existing detention pond to the west (Basin 137), and the remaining basin draining towards Redwood St (Basins D1 thru 136). In general, the basin limits are maintained for the areas draining to the existing detention pond and towards Redwood Street. This causes a slight increase to the existing pond and is considered negligible. Runoff from Basins D1 thm D5 are conveyed to the proposed detention pond in the southeast corner of the site, with the outfall being the connection to the existing storm drain within Redwood St. The undetained developed portion (Basin 136) drains to the existing inlet within Redwood St. Under the developed condition, the 100-yr peak runoff rates to the existing detention pond and Redwood Street are estimated to be 12.33 cfs and 26.57 cfs, respectively. Detaining the developed runoff to the existing 100-yr runoff rate for the basin draining towards Redwood Street, in addition to accounting for the undetained portions that drain directly to Redwood, requires a detention volume of 0.402 acre-ft. The undetained portion has a runoff rate of 7.14 cfs, combined with detention pond release rate of 6.96 cfs, has a peak 100-yr runoff rate of 14.10 cfs, equal to the existing 100-yr runoff rate. The storm drain pipe sizes were determined utilizing Hydraflow. The storm drain system ' has been designed to convey the 100-yr storm through a combination of the pipe and overland flow. The grading design is such that when the hydraulic grade line exceeds the ' 2 ' pipe capacities at the inlets, the runoff will overtop the adjacent high point and convey ' overland ultimately to the proposed detention pond. The detention pond spillway has been designed to accommodate the 100-yr runoff rate t and directs flow to the Redwood Street right-of-way. The 100-yr water surface elevation is 4965.39'. The spillway has been designed by analyzing the narrow channel section (16' wide) adjacent to housing Unit H (located in the southeast corner of the site) along with the flow spread at the sidewalk along Redwood Street. Retaining walls are needed to establish the necessary width with the top of wall equal to the top of berm along the south ' side of the detention pond of 4966.25'. The spillway channel analyzed at the narrow section has a bottom elevation of 4965.40', providing a total depth of 0.85'. The channel was designed to not exceed half of the depth available, 0.43'. The flow spread at the sidewalk is estimated to spread approximately 58.3' and does not exceed half the depth ' available at the sidewalk and will not inundate that adjacent structures. The bottom of wall at the sidewalk is 4965.60' and with the top of berm/wall at 4966.25', 0.65' depth available. The flow depth at the sidewalk is estimated to be 0.24'. In addition to the overland flow spillway, the outlet structure is also designed to accept runoff with the outflow pipes being oversized beyond the pond release rate. All calculations and exhibits are attached for reference. ' 4. LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES In reference to the code requirements for implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques, the use of permeable pavers and a sand filter are necessary to satisfy these requirements. The main LID being proposed to be implemented on site are permeable pavers located in sections of the north and south drives. The remaining developed area will be treated by a sand filter located near the southeast corner of the site ' within the detention pond. The sand filter is designed to detain and infiltrate the required water quality capture volume and directly spill into the detention area for events beyond ' the capacity of the sand filter. The sand filter water quality capture volume is designed to have a depth of 12 inches. Underdrains are not required with. a full infiltration design. ' Percolation test was performed and is provided in the appendix. Based on the average percolation rate of 8.6 minutes per inch, it is estimated that the water quality capture volume will infiltrate within 2 hrs of filling. A Standard Operations Procedure will be ' provided to assist in ensuring that these BMPs will adequately perform over time. 1 3 All calculations are attached for reference. 5. CONCLUSION ' All computations that have been completed within this report are in compliance with the CoFC Stormwater Criteria Manual, and Urban Drainage and Flood Control District requirements and standards. The proposed drainage concepts presented in this report and on the construction plans adequately provide for stormwater quantity and quality ' treatment of proposed impervious areas. Conveyance elements have been designed to pass required flows and to minimize future maintenance. ' If, at the time of construction, groundwater is encountered, a Colorado Department of Health Construction Dewatering Permit will be required. 6. REFERENCES ' 1. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (Volumes 1, 2, and 3), Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001, Revised April 2008. ' 2. Storm Drainage Criteria Manual and Construction Standards, City of Fort Collins Storm Water Utility, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Updated January, 1997 with ' 2012 amendments. ' 3. "Hydrologic Group Rating for Larimer County Area, Colorado", USDA -Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Cooperative Soil Survey. Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov. [03/28/2014] 4 APPENDIX A - SITE DESCRIPTIONS, CHARACTERISTICS & REFERENCES VICINITY MAP PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88 CITY OF FORT COLLINS BENCHMARK #42-97 ON TOP OF A STORM INLET STRUCTURE ON THE EAST SIDE OF REDWOOD ST., 400 FEET SOUTH OF WILLOX LANE. ELEV= 4969.93 CITY OF FORT COLLINS BENCHMARK #43-97 ON THE SOUTH END OF THE WEST HEADWALL OF THE LAKE CANAL BRIDGE AT NORTH LEMAY AVE., 200 FEET SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF LEMAY AVE. AND CONIFER ST. ELEV= 4960.11 PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL DATUM. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29 UNADJUSTED FOR THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS. IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATIONS SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED = 4969.93 (NAVD88) - 3.18 = 4966.75 NGVD29 UNADJUSTED = 4960.11 (NAVD88) - 3.17 = 4956.94 2 06056bb 09056bb OE056bb 00056bb 00606bb O0646bb n � M.O.V e$OT t� 0 n v ry a O � Z dU) Z y c co o m 00 N0 � U Q m o � Z x :r 9 Q S O U d N y � O ppp 2 O O 2 m y r Z� m O Z U M.bT.b o60T 0 Z ,W V W J d N C C N O Q O ap rn y 0 0 V1 V m � o a Q P � w m m >0 cp y y r m m v N d y 3 � o CO T O m n _U Z m y U 'O N y p C U U U U y m E N V y L J N -O y E w N E C Y j 0 'O N « (n p U p y cli— U d y.0 C U 0 Ur m d L N m m y U m m N O m U 10CA� O ZT� Cm�O U pd' Q ««.+ y E m— N N d d m O L V Z U O L O E y ocNE 'OL m V) oyW m 0 y���o Z ¢ dN 3 y 0 L2m � E U .0 .0 0. � Q N v ym« d�a yo y U �n m 00) m mEpc y �du `ur) c°m Y CU m o m'o0(D CL > m « O L 3 p-yo C p 0 3 `y y N C ._ m omm Eo O Oj Uc a 0 p L E >, m y p°��c F �Ld Z y0E.0 y T y� 0 m U m_ U)0w o Z o v� Ey a (D n E >. m aYvd y y L y r J .oma-m V1 w C ?:m N y mj J � 3 y d w L C m E momi m m Z� �aE a�Q0M 4) m m 0N0, m E°Em m « mammN (D Cc m m `0rna�c EmL o c dm m�U, �'v 0 ° rnY yv dm m E p�T� oa o c m� ern £ 3� Q� ° t c v> o� d �maciA m E m m °'0c E °'o o Q°ma) v' o ° ZQ nm 4 o mom. Ld E m m5 yy cmico 2 10 0 L'� oW nm 7T rnm m� E ;� r �n O'a m m mOUy c�'mo mm my °moo 0Np n�m0U moyn0 w :E -Z 'o= -m o- — mo mEmE Lp 3 w E n m a E U 3 U nv Q U F« N N y o ❑ N F 0- `° Z m y C N L A o U t n La c ° o m E m o �° �° a m m 0 L' w `p m C U U ❑ Z (q Rm' 7 E 9 Q p�p ® Y 0 ' A t* I # \/ `j \ \ • m00 m m 5 m a m > > m m m m o c 6 c m c 0 o = N N Q O T W Y C C p N IL ❑ ❑ j O ❑ ❑ Q LL ❑ ❑ Q cm Q a m [L U U ❑ Z QR) a3 m m U U*r ❑`f Z Q a m m ma 04 N N m oa m Z 'Hydrologic Soil Group—Larimer County Area, Colorado Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit — Larimer County Area, Colorado (CO644) Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 64 Loveland clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes C 3.3 32.5% 73 Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes C 7.0 67.5% Totals for Area of Interest 10.3 100.0% Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long -duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (AID, BID, and CID). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. ' Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. ' Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (AID, BID, or CID), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 10/14/2015 Page 3 of 4 'Hydrologic Soil Group—Larimer County Area, Colorado Component Percent Cutoff.- None Specified ' Tie -break Rule: Higher USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/14/2015 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4 a .vWeQ PIOLG (TO '$�6E QELCXATGO) - F3LU1, SPQUCF- - — GENEQ&L WOTEs. I I. THE EX4!AVA710N A2EA DIIALL BE 670PPED 70A DEPTU OF SIX (6) 14ewG6 e E ZAVATION GUANTI nc--s A¢E BA3Svow dBRtAL T0R76RAPHIY CC2NTDUC$ P¢IO¢ TO EJ VATION. 6TRIPPINIA3 6YALl, B6 SPREAO IN ANARGA NORTH -OUR (2 FG . COW A4TERVAL). TOTAL 2%CAVA,TIpN Is BA9sDONA P,20pos ED OF rWS LAKE .617Q TO BG DC6i6.NATED BY TYE DE.VELLPER, TWF AMMA LAKB D¢(^rH aF IQ FEET, THE BID P¢ICI5 FO¢ TUB LAKE EKCAVATION 6YALL gQ WITHIN THE gOUN DAR163 GF WILLOX LANE RBpWOOD DTq EC.T SHALL 0E BA9@D ONALUMP SUM TOTAL PCIC@. CJUAN7ITV CHAN6E5 BLUE £PRUCB LRN6 AND NORTH GP TM1i6 LAKE :JITC, RESULTING PROM FIELD 44AN6ES OF THE P2017768D 10 FOCT VapTH 641ALL. Dr. ADDT, 02060UCTS BASED ON A UNIT p¢ICE PE¢ YAQD. TUE BID Z. AFTE¢ '->TRIPPINLP THE TOP SIX CC.) INGI T4E NEXT TWO PEST OFLNT � ALL INICLUOIS A LUMP SUM PQK6 =9M THE LA'Kfc TO66T41QC WITLI A UNIT a PI 0¢ Ig OOD CUBIC YA¢D6 6HALL BE aTceK PILED IN AN A¢EA TO 6E FaICE FO¢ ANY 17066161.5 ADDITIONAL Ca LESsoe VARDA6E. DESIYNATED IN LOTSIAND 2 BLOCKS"EVER6REEN PA[ZKl, 9. TO S SUA IIJ67AI2 CP A%Q LA KG >< =,UJ-L UQ ON A THE AND H1ATEalAL$ QA7F} I B TYB Q6 MAIN IN6 N.dTGRIAL FROM T'N@ LAKE 6uALL BG TRANCR7aTE D, � TO B6 ESTABLIS4GO AT 4i0MG cUTURG TIME. PEALED AND AU .1 ANY ALL E I K,6ATE171N6 cgNTGa LCCATCD IN BLAXKI •A sTOCKPILGD IN b IUTC gM6DIAT@ llJMPI_ETION P1=RCL NTA6e5 QPcA6�T0 BE DFgt6NATfaD INLOTIS 8¢I7 BLOGIc RBB L gNALL BE BASED ON EV6¢6QF-EN M¢K, VKIJAL B TIMATION3 AND/O¢ MI=AS1URIN6 7145 FILL VOLUM^S. PINAL ,g tOMF1Ef10N A4ALL pfE V6iRIP 1617 P1'( 5UQVEV G0056 SEGTIOLIS, A l MM4T60 MATERAL SMALL BE COMPA4TMD TO NINL9T r-PIVG Pe OGBNT (9RS'w) CJF MAXIMUM De N61T-e. MAXIMUM DENSITY gNALL me OEPIINmo It. OVEJ¢PLOW 6TRUCTLI¢ES AND THE OUTLET DITCLIES BYALL 6G B-f T"10 AS,T. M. CPEGI aICAT 10N D-[oPm C6TANDARD PRgCTOR), THE CONSTG'UCT 6D BY OTHE¢3. THE INLET DITCH 6HALL BE E✓<LAVATGD I DHVeLOp6¢ 4MALL BIG RC-JPI�N31BLd' FO¢ 70VYIN4, LJM PAGTION A6 Pd2TOF THB "term. I OPjJ�✓IT103. MATIE¢IAL �HALUL BE PLACED IN Cl (1.9AXIMUM)LIPT�. 12..�NT¢A-TOR SMALL CONFORM VJITH II'+ PTIMUM MOtGTL1 6- CURVB FOR M ANY L0PG 1AL DEBMED UNSUITABLE L F3 STRUCTURAL FILL by O MPACTION. REBDQT3 5WALL BQ (RR� DEVELOPERS 6s LC 6FI61NE6.¢ `HALL BE P¢ONDED BY THE DeveLppB2, IA 1A EF 021:D BUFFER -.STRIPS AIpIACENT T77 BWE 6PQLIGB O¢IVE BLOCK 3 D OC I lEV EQ6REcN Pd OIC 1, I I I \ 4 CONT2ACT0>Z 6HA BOB Rvf POUBIBLG FiD¢ANY 1,10419G6ACY DQ WATCRIN6 I RERUIRED Tp FJLCAVATE TYE LAKE. jT. f A 3H[ANDARy POND 15 0seMS0 NE!CL 36AaV' 6`f TWO COLITRACTCR FOR Ve WATGIIIIJCk FUQPoSLS IT SHALL tG LZLATcD EOUTHE. GTOF THC PIY IM--O N LAILG, THE LONTRAC.TO¢ GLIALL BB 126SPONSIBLE PO¢ 9tG.PL&41W& AND COMPACTING 746 MATERIAL F2071-IESECOND.ARY POND UPON I IN N I COMPLETION OP 714ff.`MAIN LAKE_ N I x ' C r- I - J--Ir OUTLE-�/�--- 1`- ?oa _Ll I A. 41 OVP¢F�gVy WEIR DE Ir t 1 I \\ 'SIT ANH.J 1:/\+ / �1_ �?q• \ INS I?ASLn l PorJE¢ SOLE �\p RCTCNnp NODLLAIG6 ,.4'1 TOP OFp6RM EL6VAT'L7N 494R.o 6LEV1�710N ZfL4,O 'tI lI GOTTCIL FvLE`VA-f' C) Iz IV = - Y • L�loaTu a2.00l _ - --_ 0 / I r I LAKE' I I 6. I a V _ PQELIMINAQY LAKE di2AOIW& PLAW A LAKE AREA-4. Pt AC¢E8 DE761,17I0W GT0¢A4m6 VOLUME- _8 S.6! A,REd-FEET " \ DETENTION TIME AT IONS OUTLET ry�' �. F-ATE = 10.3HOU2S(MAX.) EA12TNW0RIC OUANTITIES INLET OUTLET LAKE . rOTAL 6iTRIPPIN6 30041YDS 840CU.W1 J340&U'f CUYDS. CUT IWON.YD514404UM 71MOMY05 7 26T Y05, FILL 3t _.._ SWCdVDS SBOCUYO& . IAL :,HALWO @gT... (BEIpW FALL ugTGRML QON :,HALL BB PROM TOP TP .. eQ u710H� j _. ___ .. 1- G2ADIN6 PLAN FOR S-r ORM RETE1-1TION RDND ... 4xG.0 ...... ...-.._..._.. PA2 K, PORT laI LEST cC1ORALYJ 507TOM Op LAKE 6LOVATIOy 4956.0 I1;< t71'' 6fi �GG�✓°y SEGT10w A-0 --.'-": ,� �l,/N .4Y. I L!/�f ""'•—._ - onueewa aaoart,<crs au.wl�maa R04D.MRKER MACK HOAR A17.•6. n Rm RY.. II ':SAS C'i. •Tif D[wvER, eoLc°woo 00232 ao5-r91-nRl ��n: L.D. ��� I"mob' fn[IT: I a• I 495 •4 —Op- UrILM' PI.? N A.YITOV%L ... ...... Cl*':KCO 9W:.. c4ECKED aw: C4ECW) Ilk • 0,4 laOWCKM W: T is 4 47 A 13 . tf, P, MF� 'A i maceem PAR. 5«.� a I.j 4 - it 0 W qu 4) Ayr-:T--- t ss Id T lit rF VFt&is I r t 4L T --A--,---r--7 W W- -JZ'r 1,T W^ A, VAI-4 kv 33 V) Lai U." ZL -F 3i & A,, - �— I �;I I? P I �cr F= 0 i> MAI W^I A,O OPTHe LA.6 0-uO JOINTS FR. at 3 j roe^ DAAIV VII LL_5�:r^ Storm drain sized for 100 yr .0 e (33.5 cfs) developed flows from Village on Redwood site +ux 7 - - - - - 4W IN.C.L: 49Z� 44: 7. L....... .A- MAP.* .7 —AdUc 7-Of .-..7.0 -71 7. .0".-Ar it 9Z 7 49S zz r 7- :.T A. LL I — Alrk--, WEIS'- LI M"—L ZL �L �LLL —L LL - .-.— ��- I F-qd 1— T 77 . ... .... ... 7 =-4 7 E J+00 OfOe 4400 b"0 7160 10 #00 13+00 Ic—v 1 i, I Q. .w w M 1 tJ� HN lull IIII 0 POND/WETLAND jell It till t'11 I tl tl I lijll I l I ill i Assumed developed flows from Village on Redwood site, referenced for existing storm drain sizing (100-yr = 33.5cfs) '. ! ` r / ,. I 1 / ,i 2 3 4 5 s 7 /' / g \ ll i Ir,, iI / I 15 i. /(4 i 13 � r / I i / I I / 12 11 10 9rr Z 17 18 19 20 .21 22 i� \ - Zl 11-1 31_ 30 29 28 27 I 26�. / 25 24_ r Fl.t.ZORic-i:C?.6:.ZO— _7, a SMrr. .:H a ro R:rL :.. Qc.c• /•3[ ]ic'C'+ De�ccov¢o' Q • 1r 9L Q 33�FD 3a i VICINITY MAP FIFTH FILING PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN �reenbria.� Village P.U.D. City of Fort Collins, Colmsdo UTILITY PL,AN'AM'OVAL APPROVED:, �L1-/.n+i.•m.a 0166� CHECKED IW: A1� ... ii unrrm.+m. iticry - CHECKED W:'% CHECKED BY: Puts4 Re:remon � Doy CHECKED [Ir: .. 0—T CHECKED Ur: "' .: So 100 n:h e-3 1619 Sa-s m w nsr� n�u IS L x' HERm A ( - $ i [v�a sr°�AIEo A I FAR, _ Ta . S CIA. >-FM BMS I II f j r +...' "a= SUGGESTED ELEVATION 1. Low FACTOTt 1`�,31110 o ql 9 t' -..IZ •b ILEIIT, TYPE. '•b� ••�• F' L cnAmTE NIo1[CT10M Em ImBalolo 9HAIL tbM.r,.w.wYMw,Y.. mi STORM SEWER PIPE SUPPORTS N.T.S. •.r ram-,}. w��v�+�,� _ v �a .YrYrar w.w.�r BTA1�A� Cam' TB 11YF EEOOfB !e0 JO�I �DA�IF {/q� ...e 14.r wae•t�els w� m w..,..w weslsls ^' s a wA Amrr, CTIi1AG T)PC YY AfC) a aAW.ww MV. NRYJ�.TAI9 I �I W I I CAISII47 MAN RLI.QS I, WK. pT}AElP NOTE: CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WITH BUILDING PERSONNEL AS THIS DRIVEWAY IS THEIR ONLY �, lJPf ACCESS. (ACCESS SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT ALL NOTE: CONSTRUCT STORM SEWER SUPPORTS AT TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION.) J CROSSING W/ SANITARY SEWER. I (SEE DETAIL HEREON.) C,#/NY AON. \.I - �. � casnxc SYXWALK -- %,turrm ----------ln.----I-----____r—~__ it �k WOOG'STREETOF 12, M L5r ASPHALT PATCH TA 4184.82 E'er OMITS OF 12' STA. 0+84.02 �4 _sF.v ASPHALT PATCH �Y AfP11N.T AOAB BASE U051IN0� pLCIIBC CdHCLAT Al N.T E AL N.T. 4965 4960 4955 4950 I I �r i I �E1 1 \ I ah CLASS A BEOONG CLASS B BEDDING y •i, N 5��. ywhll- CLASS C BEDDING NOD( EMOINATION �- bl .. UNSTABLE B.emADE Tt sTIBDRAN DETAIL w "b w. e9l�eel0 IICOI�EEr ON OF FORT COIJJN% ODUCIFIVIAD L Y�6YY NrrW. i YY Y b rw .w,l, LEGEND ------ EXISTING PIPES ® PROPOSED INLET AND PIPE 1 PROPOSED INLET LOCATION j - ---- EXISTING 1' CONTOUR I --------- EXISTING 0.5' CONTOUR REMOVE / EXISTING RCP 7,J FUTURE SIDEWALK ♦(CONNECT �A STORM SEWER MANHOLE 01 TO EXISTIN 15RCP) � \ X 2E SIDEWALK CMSMW' AR I ese�gq6� w `gas Ig A e. co . §g N�a�W? •• z C ge �..b� e eTAIOYm MAMMA r r� DRADOO A6M y�KIM h N b YN •. Yiw.l � y -• o 40 80 = 40' I 1 4965 N O ELD O m m � 5 'i Q IS!! 0. (U y CY< NOTES: p ^�S a D O o 1. THIS SHEET REPLACES SHEET 3 OF 5 FROM Q m c _ yd 'REDWOOD STREET IMPROVEMENTS FROM w N 4 f= BAYBERRY CIRCLE TO CONIFER STREET UTIUTY PAINS' RT 1898, STEWSTORM SEWER OR SECTION SE A ASSOCIATES FOR SECTION) BAY FROM STA. 0+00 (THIS PLAN] TO BAYBERRY CAR. 2. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY THE LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. INCLUDING ALL SERVICE LINES. 3. STORM SEWER TRENCH TO BE BACKFILLED W/ CLASS B CONCRETE (COOT 613.07 -FLOWFILL-). i 4. ALL STORM SEWER JOINTS SHALL BE PRESSURE SEALED WITH APPROVED RUBBER o GASKETS. 5. ALL WORK ON THIS DRAWING TO BE DONE IN m ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF FORT COLLINS. RONM OR,IMAGE CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MAY 1984. 6, MAINIAN PUBLIC ACCESS TO PRIVATE PROPERTY DURING CONSTRUCTION, 7. ALL MANHOI E COVERS TO CARRY THE LOGO 'STORM SEWER'. A B. REINCORCFD CONCRETE PIPE SHALL MEET CL THE REOUIREMENTS OF ASTM C76. 9. ALL PRECAST CONCRETE PRODUCTS SHALL BE IN GOOD CONDITION. FREE 01' CHIPS OR CRACKS. AND SHALL NOT EXHIBIT ANY EXPOSED STEEL. 10, WIDTH OF PATCH TO BE DETERMINED IN FIELD BY CITY INSPECTOR. PT®AI® INBER TIE DRI SM"FINMID1 OF m L of\ICIlola I8I0 2 > Q a a bu o � O Q N ~ W �Z LL,AI Q w City of Fort Collins, Colorado 4960 UTIUTY PLAN APPROVAL OL In���q� APPROVED-�`L. /�ADaNLL Inmw "- Oiclw el EnNinwirp CHECKED BY: _ M.L•97 Q N t •wepn.t�we/HY uuLI4 Dal. 4955 f 3 CHECKED BY: 4R. UIPII Del. W CHECKED BY: Dolr 51[CI CHECKED BY: 49$0 Date 0.MSET LJOBNO. NO. RECHECKED ev: Del. 0 I i w'S ' APPENDIX B - RATIONAL CALCULATIONS d 7 O tm LO c N N O oO N U , N C,4 cc N E Q 0) M p 04 H c Z C � c E 3 LLJ LL Z c c U m tT N N ❑ 0 a 0 LL D ❑ + n + ❑ ❑ 0 N O 01 � O d cc a Z co E a o E U U LL 2 ++ N 2 Y ^ N A a LQ Cl cy� 0 N N M O c O � 'O y N � O \° o e ` r a V N c U) N A v CO T N O p w L6 V O Q1 Q Y N l0 r„ v ai O V N T o N C O � A N � V C 0 « o 0 0 o m f o r N rL S £ N V N CO n O R 6 M O Q N C 'O N c O td m-oa 0 3 c Mn N 0: w O O .� O F �- SMN /J RIM=496>.4 /NV (N) 4961.6 3- PK I II INV (5) 496I.5 B- PK INV (W) 49611 @" PK ly, 0 NV (E) 4964.E B' PK INV (NW) 49648 B' PK — 4969 — I IIIII I COCF (X WA ICRI "III' -4969— i l _ i4968- R/M=4966.J INV) 4961.E @" (NPK INV M)4961.@@-PK I I I II I fi.22 0.35 ,4 RiM=49664 I I FO6f Ol Wa IFR \ 4 INV (NE) 496J E 15- RCP / ` INV (SW) 496T> 18- RCP CONCRE7E PIPES ON CROUNO a x I /' TRCf LWC`TREE LWE / / AREA MET�I /// \ / i% AREA CRA496@Z 1.1 TREE LINF /`�(� \ (18- CAP) _ Id CPP %/ /` / / % �� / / Z L L -✓ _ 4967 / / ///y66 T OMN /1 RIM- 655 /NV (NC) 4952.1 4 RCP INV(5W) 4952.0 2.5XI.5'RCP COCC OF WA TER GRAKL / l I t�� � ' //967 /�2069 b,J j1'�>I,I- RIM-49658 4961 = INV (ME) 4960> @" PK \II ( ` Q \INV(S) 1960>BPK a I I �/ 196�1969. 24' CPP �-I II EL=49654 24" CPP 40 20 O 40 80 SCALE: 1" a 40' LEGEND H01 BASIN DESIATION 1.28 0.30 BASIN COEFFIGNCIENT000YRI BASIN AREA ® DRAINAGEPOINT DRAINAGE FLOW ARROW - - DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY >� DRAINAGEBASIN FLOW PATH ix LLI 5 <� azo z z°m O cn N w D ONT rc ox J LLI y IL Z 3�m U LL O Ix LL a w X Z w J i 3 , Z m m w c II„� I - w x � 11 �� { w w o � � o I I J I L---J PROD. NO. 1Y 7-1 1 OF 1 Z O H Q J D V J O V 3W N Q U) O _ W W �a C � U 1 �y 2 Yo• LL o. 0 c9 OI � o N N LO 0 00 N U N N D >4)m> a .O m O C I Z O � rn E E C 7 W LL Z C C U .y .N o ui ooao I O O N rn a v N a) O O N N C U N_ 3 2 C O U 0 00 LL v m 6 Q y C .O CU N � v E 1i O C N m C N V O N Z O V E o 0/ E C a' z' �c aLi v O 1n Q V r L {L LL Q w � A O o°1ca N� V e ed v = cr al v In OI C In OI G In OI O o In O In N O 7 o �o w a a v O a •- E N N 9 o > o m > CL W p c a ato 3 d= v+ J N C 3 J W e C N m 1 m O m VI O d V cl N N ti �+ 0 O O C n V N M e e e e e j Z 0 a . O o O o ^ N 3 E F � 3 41 Obi ao m jW V O _� N N N E m d q w c O O O O N Y al W 0 0 0 0 a N m w rS V W o 0 0 0 +^. N aoo � N O v <O M O i+ O N N N O c � O x N x 0 .6 7 N U d z g 0 o� kLU 4)z �o ou "b 0) w_ >L) U . rx 40 � Lz . OL \ 04 \§# 2�E )f§K Q e£�z .. § b � t[E p z 5� k//j Q k 76 We @ c 7 g 2 ) /\ J q§ - \Z W\ U =N - �� � $ ) � \{ �\ �E §§ //-eE \ .0 ��//fie \\ - - \ 2a _= \ ' {k �E 6f /§ i uI )\#/K 0 x/ §R2 e 0 $ \ j 2 6 z j m f 2LL w ) a k �E M_ cl \k /{ }§§ k §§) /;qr ;_,,o ~ / 0- �.�}�\\} � w � uj -i k z« \ LU § §§ Co 7 / § L §( k � ) F- ui k\§ o J f „ � ?§ § 2 U) §z , §�__» a 7 O O O) � C T O y N O 00 N N N 2�2 T L > C n N Q N M p H C Z c .. D c 7 W LL Z C C U O O N d N N O N ooao O C O U 0 O LL a C N 0) m c T � O C 7 Ip 1 0 0 N l0 C c U m 3� d E V o � m y C c � U E Z o E O LL O C j 0 7 W air. 04 0 V L O c Co rn L N oO m O U C 6 C 0 0 w W a @ C T T T t0 G G m II p � II e e c U� II a i I 1 I 1 I 1 i ■ AREA IVLET GRA)E�lT I F2�l96B2 (IB DrRJ r EXISTING STORMWATER DETENTION POND INSTALL CONSIRUC110N BARRIER FENCE, w/ SI FENM AUDI , a NEST PROPDITY LIME (SEE NOTE 8)i II 1111 I II1J�1/ 11� - EDYx tr wAyER I I 'III I I��I111 I TRACTA i I IIIo I III Iel� I IIII1� w m� 4.06 2REc uNE s �' zo , �/ • \25rONY �/ ®TS // 967 a96966`9 g6 '• TI / i968 D5 IP 0.83 0. a''A 6 OF1 M�_ 3s�fferEg / LOT r /'. . . j - ........ D2 pwwwompall Iff Jill& =11111 o Il a�dry o ° i'c3wa31 F�Imsoeas�v.-.' a, COFC STANDARD EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES: I. THE CITY STORMWATER DEPARTMENT EROSION CONTROL INSPECTOR MUST BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST24 HOURS 5. THE PROPERTY MUST BE WATERED AND MAINTAINED ATALLTIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 50 AS TO PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THIS SITE. PREVENT WINCAUSED EROSION. ALL LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY DISCONTINUED WHEN D FUGITIVE DUST IMPACTS ADJACENT PROPERTIES, AS DETERMINED BY THE CRY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. 2. ALL REQUIRED BMPS MUST BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANT LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY ISTOCKPILING.STRIPPING. B. ALLRMPoRARY(SRUCTURAU EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE INSPECTED AND REPAIRED OR 1. ALL REQUIRED EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE INSTALLED AT THE APPROPRIATEMME IN GRADING. ETC RECONSTRUCTED AS NECESSARY AFTER EACH RUNOFF EVENT AND EVERY 14 DAYS IN ORDER TO ASSURE THE CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCEASINDICATED IN THE APPROVED PROJECT SCHEDULE.CONSTRICTION PLANS. CONTINUED PERFORMANCE OF THEIR INTENDED FUNCTION. ALL RETAINED SEDIMENTS. PARTICULARLY THOSE ON AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT. EROSION PAVED ROADWAY SURFACES, SHALL BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF IN A MANNER AND LOCATION SO AS NOTTO 3. PRE-D STURBANCE VEGETATION SHALL BE PROTECTED AND RETAINED WHEREVER POSSIBLE. REMOVAL OR CAUSE THEIR RELEASE INTO ANY DRAINAGEWAY. DISTURBANCE OF EXISTING VEGETATION SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE AREA REQUIRED FOR IMMEDIATE T. NO SOIL STOCKPILE SHALL EXCEED TEN(10)FEET IN HEIGHT, ALL SOIL STOCKPILES SMALL BE PROTECTED FROM CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS. AND FOR THE SHORTEST PRACTICAL PERIOD OF TIME. SEDIMENT TRANSPORT BY SURFACE ROUGHENING. WATERING. AND PERIMETER SILT FENCING. ANY SOIL 4. ALL SOILS EXPOSED DURING LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY (STRIPPING. GRADING, UTILITY INSTALLATIONS, STOCKPILE REMAINING AFTER 30 DAYS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED. STOCKPILING, FIWNG,ETCJ SHALL BE KEPT IN A ROUGHENED CONDITION BY RIPPING OR DISKING ALONG LAND B. CRY ORDINANCE PROHIBITS THE TRACKING, DROPPING. OR DEPOSING OF SOILS OR ANY OTHER MATERIAL ONTO NENT EROSIOND SOIFORI-S IN UNTIL MULC H. VEGETATIONTS CITY STREETS BY OR FROM ANY VEHIC LE. ANY INADVERTENT DEPOSITED MATERIAL SHALL BE CLEANED ACTIVITY FOR AREACONTOURSIDEPRJECTOF WERPERM SHALL REMAIN BY LANLISSTURBIG ACTT PROJECTSTREETEEFORE IMMEDIATELY BY THE CONTRACTOR. MORE THAN THI TY(30) REQUIRED TEMPORARY REXPoSEDBY ROSIONCON ROLE. MORE THAN THIRTY(30)DAYSBEFORE INSTALLED. UNLESS OTORPERMANENTEROSIONCONTROLIE.G. SEEDRMULCH. LANDSCAPING. ETC.) IS INSTALLED. UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE STORMWATER Low hnpecl Development Summary DEPARTMENT. Paverrent Area Slnnyary BASIN SUMMARY: Da& PNm �.�In Ary lawsl lrtmm) byr Peak Runoff 110yr Peak Runaff 100yr Peakf wff 14rM CwrT.141 CIA) Icaal CaemeY Ilranrl Dlmnl ILnaN CaeR.(C.) CIA) I.ea) IMemsy IkMvl QIWX) Rrrtan C ff.ICJ GA, Iaaea7 tine ty Ikkbrl Olmnl m DI 12W 600 OB2 to', 3.33 279 OB9 a." 409 342 •0B3 1.W A98 .74 M base am 0.67 0.0 S." 105 ox 0.0 4.37 2M am D.W 6.0 5.17 m W 1.011 665 OA] C.49 3.22 flee OAT 0.0 .3.9E to am 0.62 am 4M 04 04 1.107 S.m Meg 0.T6 am 2.81 049 036 4S1 345 GAS 0m 925 bE2 05 fJb QE2r 6T1 0.M 026 324 124 OA5 DBE 3.9E t. 0.5e 0.48 614 367 be m 1.053 Tea 0B7 bvt 349 20 Din Dn 4M 303 cm 2b6 6T4 zrJ m N am 5" 026 1Ba an 393 026 1W Am 463 033 1.W RAT 12M OF1 61 0025 500 an DDt 7m 0m 025 001 474 003 031 001 9.m 002 Total Pew! Ama. 43,851 so PamleaMe Paw Am'. 11.265 so Pem.1 Payment Ms as Permeable Pawn: 25.8% Ne�Added InVOW10w Ama Suirr arylnoorvlOw AMS Surmory Total Site Ilpw ims Ams'. 115.360 sgft Pop ae6 AmolPmm' 11,265 soft Asti tlmd Am Tinted by Paws: 30.431 "Ift Total Ama Tmaled by Paver: 41,6N el:0 Am to be Tinted by Sa W Fiftw: 15,M aglt Total Area TmaIed by LID: 67,695 KM Pemnt Impamlous AeaA Tmabd by LID: 50.0% iiiiiiiiiiia- �dft7--,�;mg J, 0, It MI Make; �l ,. TIN 0 !n%©1A7•tpC�i• AN�.NS� I . �L�Oi'j,5n! a61, �sl®®I f ® � WE 0 I 1 / NOTES: I. CONTROL OR MEASOPROVIDE IOR TO MAIAND TAIN ALL. HROUGH UT CONSTRUCTION. CONTR. • ' PLACES EROSION ONTES RIORTO PROTECTION AT ALL EXISTING THROUGHOUT LETION. DOWNSREAMFRO THE COROL NSTRUCTION REA.EROSION OSIOINLETS S DOWNSTREAM SHALL THE CONSTRUCTION AREA.STRUCTIONISCONTROL PROTECTIONSHALLREMAIN INPLACE OUNDUNTIL ADEQUATELY • / .� / / I COMPLETE RSAPPR IBTURBED E GROUND IS ADEQUATELY VEGETATED WITH OWNER'SAPPROVALFOR REMOVAL THE NX IT NI UFROSION CONTROL PROTECTION SMALL BE OBSERVED AND ADJUSTED AS NEEDED DURING CONSTRUCTION BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS AND THE PERFORMANCE OF THE EROSION CONTROL CONTROL MEASURES SHOWN. TO SUPPLYCONTROLVR SUFFICIENT EROSION CONTROL AND MINIMIZE DOWNSTREAM WATERWAY POLLUTION. DB , 3. LIMIT DISTURBANCE TO AREAS WITHIN EROSION CONTROL BOUNDARIES. ADJUST EROSION CONTROL BOUNDARIES AS NECESSARY TO ADEQUATELY COMPLETE PROPOSED WORK. ALL \\ DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED(SEEDED a MULCHED. �v 6 SURFACE ROUGHENING. ETCJ TO MINIMIZE EROSION POTENTIAL AND L p J �� / \N. / SOILMIGRATION. 4 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION COMMENCEMENT. ONN /r ` 9 RIM-496S5 5. SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN H FOR REVEGETATION METODSAND DETAILS. I \I DURING CONSTRUCTION. ANY SOIL DISTURBED AND NOT UNDER a9 W V (NE) 4B62.1 18 RCP ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED PER LCUASS WV (SW) 49620 25•X1.5' RCP STANDARDS. 6. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDETEMPoRART BIODEGRADABLE SLOPE : 3 CRIMPING IS LEJUTECRCALISHORT TERM) II / .PEN BIODEGRADABLE POUND LENOADABLE JUTE TEBOTTOM NJUTE TOPNET. T.J POUND III B I' ,ice _ STRAW FIBER MATRIX WITH ALONGEVITY OF 12 MONTHS. NORTH AMERICAN GREEN 5150BN OR ACCEPTED SUBSTITUTION. T. REFERENCE VILLAGES ON REDWOOD DRAINAGE AND EROSION -� 1 CONTROL REPORT. I II I B. MINIMIZE TO EXTENT POSSIBLE TO COMPLETE NEW WORK NOWORKUFFER NE SHALLOCCUR OUTSIDE OF LOT I PROPERTY LINE. NATURAL HABITAT AREA 15 TO BE MAINTAINED IN NATIVE LANDSCAPE. ntaurb: Mrx.l IIAI� .r.1 M+flM flTAIOn 14�n Oo6 nrblrtlsl r !da r4anbn 9oa'a: East Mans emmt ha¢ku BM rveure•neJrris• n Tavyrru.` wt1N lk.0 1 Mkh MRtluld ux NeR Av wiI MRmrld uu Pntl m: ra.an. •nba• nku.w,vvu• n>.mrdm Iw.nap Iris. ynnm• MYT. .aka. J4ti 11)(aa�axs•wtae w Alaaenmra..Io..aao .asena caN•k, mn....gvena_iuwlelop.._rn.nan raaa� arHr.M aa>, aa..amlew. r. nyyl �rlyer YtlbaN.Y}emr�aal �Mw30�7-- f� m t6. wte WlnSlie Berm-rltl �Mn ao -V - :ur1YaL A•Inir rnullatim Imrl.er,ns_.:n.trnnvry++e.Axv s Za D Ix = W 5 <�L04 a zC Z Z°um N w 3 OIL N D IL J R y J R Z � OOn) J In it U �LL O K 0 U z Z m c m ry £ G Z Y J J U < U U W I City of Fort Collins, Colorado D 0 M D u UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL APPROVED: Clb Ell.., pale CHECKED BY: Wmr B Wniwakr Van, wte CHECKED BY: SNmlw "I pm CHECKED BY: Tre . E,.-r pale PROD. NO. 123]112-00 CHECKED BY: Pane aMRmWm bete CHECKED BY: Ertu'v0nmenul Pbrvyr pale rJ OF ZZI CHECKED BY: vale E c E O N yo g V o n LL LL Q C 'O 2o a q q d N T d d ¢ o T O n O v e rd 'u O V N P N P N P O N N M Z o 0 0 gypp° 0 O A P Q O I E n fV d M„ �. 9 d R O O Y R d > q 6 d p C JN O. 3 6 = N 3 J g A O b P N O O O N V1 O P VI P P N N n O n N n O n VO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 6 S O V n n n P O n O N n O N O V p V O O O O O O O O O O O O A. O N O O O O O O O O O O O V O ,• X a' X X X X p1 a N N N b N N� O N e N Y e E 3 16 0 m o m m e w m m n a N jj€ N N m N C m N W m N m m N 0 0 0 0 0 m m m m Q m Q Q 1� a N IA � n N t7 n th N N e w ? a0 m V d tWO m O m � m 0 f0 Q Q m � m m n m t7 N N e n N r4i O a Cl s d Q N ,� N M m ni rA of �d of N m O N N O� N N� u G O Omi d o m m n m m n .`o n Ic 7 m O a � + a O1 0 0 0 0 o p - o m m x d � _ o F Z 0 Z V Z V U. 00 W R ~ >a 0 Q J = W C� w IL 0 O_ 7 0 u Q1 � C � 7 O to N O O N UO L N � > °2' r E C ri tD Q d M p c Z c .. > c�3 W LL Z c C U rnrnm ui ooao N O w u u O c O C O O U v W to Co U U U N ^ a 0 O N U o °) 'c II II > L w L O O N �o 0-0 N to N N I I O O u N M C C 7 E S L L E O O N N co • c W W + N C C m m O C y E E i > ti00 7 o M LO o Z O U LL O j II W o 0 y Y LL LL C C Q a a c s W U O Q Q u C o A o�� m n oNi v C E 0 (e a N to oti vi vi e � L th O t7 O C J, U + + C ap N t0 O N 7 0 E O o0 O tO a0 o6 O) 6 n co 0) o6 7 6 0 6 C a yy t O O E Ln o 0 rn 0 0 .r J W W a n O n n Co O O N a0 (O N O N O N M N O O U N N N N N N N N * v W N O F m J m a i i m T m N m b m N m b m T m T m N m W > m otm&mmmmmm a 3 a a a a a o a N m' m m' m' 'm m m w H ~ W_ m 0) M O) M O a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S z N N M 0 0 N J n cO N m to Z E oo, (o voi Q .... a 0 m (� n W•"• ro (on M > W 0 O N N 0 0 0 0 m y o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J g~ �_ 'X' N _ O p N N M t0 Z M W J W d N N w (D v O O N OD (MO O O O N O QV A O O M O 7 7 N N Q V flip (n0 (m0. (n0. p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z fA c Q a off. o N 0 M 0 C 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 0 a y y z 2 z N m a (o O n W p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 a C a O O 3LL LL Z O� NY N Q � W �a >a No Q J = W 1L 0 O_ 7 O 0 O IN rc— N N O O N N d �22�a > C n d Q d f7 Q F c , Z C N � C C 7 w ii z C C U N.Nc°3 d d m as 0 O ML. a r c6 iri rn v ao eb a of n N o o C C C Z M 00 O N O V ((P 7 m c of eo eo of � m rn of G' c Y d d » N N N O CD O Q � O UD N N m� C cp t+f O 0 0 � eD N aD N ap th th LL' ow � v o rn v vNi cq o d C 7« c o o ri v di ri v v Y N 10 d d Q V a n Cii n o 0 O O (D ll� N V (O N N DU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c m N O Vim M N I� N N - N - eD N- N N N 0 M O O O O C t+f N N (OD N N r aND c m c of of ci of of (+i of ri c � Y UM L m V p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C' c E o m C9 g n m o m ww N (NO. O O � O �- � C; O � M, (h 0O Q c m y N M< N N r ly N c OI C N O N m r o'ao 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 o p FCHA - Villages at Redwood Attenuated Flows for Pipe Sizing Design Engineer: T.ANa Design Firm: Interwest Consulting Group Project Number: 1237-112-00 Date: November 26, 2015 DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 City of Fort Collins - Storm Water Criteria Manual (1997) EQUATIONS: t, =1, +t1 -Equation RO-2 0.395(1.]—C,)vL -Equation RO-3 r, = So.33 CONSTRAINTS: 300 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for developed condition 500 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for undeveloped condition V = C Sy.5 -Equation RO4 _ L 1` 60V Final I, = minimum of I, + I, and urbanized basin check recommended minimum 1, = 5 min for urbanized basins Q„ = n-yr peak discharge (cfs) I = rainfall intensity (iNhr) Qa = C„ L„ A C„ = n-yr runoff coefficient — 28.5 P1 P1 = one -hour point rainfall depth (in) 1„ = n-yr rainfall intensity (inlhr) (10 + 1') 0.796651) tc = time of concentration (min) A = drainage area (ac) P1,50 = 1.14 in. f i-1a1,= 1.40 in. PI-10D, = 2.86 in. BASINS: UD-Sewer- DPIManhole Headwall Contributing Basins D1+D2+D3 Contributing Area (acres) 2.99 C2 to C16 C100 Runoff Coefficients 0.60 0.75 Overland Flow Time Length (ft) 31 Slope (it/ft) 0.03 ((min) 3.46 Travel Time Type of Travel Length (fl) Slope (%) Surface C„ Velocity (ftfs) 1, (min) ' 529 0.68% Paved Areas 20 1.65 5.33 147 1.80% Paved Areas 20 2.69 0.91 Total Time 6.24 Final Time of Concentration - tc (min) t.(min) 9.70 Intensities (infhr) 5-yr 10-yr 100-yr 3.11 3.83 7.81 Discharge (cfs) 5-yr 10-yr 100-yr 5.58 6.86 17.51 'FCHA - Villages at Redwood Attenuated Flows for Pipe Sizing Design Engineer: T.ANa Design Firm: Interwest Consulting Group ' Project Number: 1237-112-110 Date: 11/25/2015 DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 City of Fort Collins - Storm Water Criteria Manual (1997) EQUATIONS: (� = 1, + I, -Equation R0.2 0.395(1. I — CS )J -Equation R63 li = s033 V = C�S°'S -Equation RO4 L 1, _ 60V CONSTRAINTS: 300 ft - Overland flow shall not exceed for developed condition 500 it - Overland flow shall not exceed for undeveloped condition Qn = n-yr peak discharge (cfs) Qa = Cala A Cn = n-yr runoff coefficient I - 28.5 P, In = n-yr rainfall intensity (in/hr) (10 + o0.786650 A = drainage area (ac) BASINS: Final t, = minimum of t; + 1, and urbanized basin check recommended minimum 1. = 5 min for urbanized basins I = rainfall intensity (in/hr) P, = one -hour point rainfall depth (in) t, = time of concentration (min) P'_5W= 1.14 in. Pi.tgn= 1.40 in. P,.tgay,= 2.86 in. UD-Sewer - DPIManhole Inlet 01 Contributing Basins D1+D2+D3+D4 Contributing Area (acres) 4.09 Cr to C16 C,qq Runoff Coefficients 0.62 0.78 Overland Flow Time Length (ft) 21 Slope (fUfl) 0.05 %(min) 2.38 Travel Time Type of Travel Length (R) Slope (%) Surface C, Velocity (ft/s) % (min) 529 0.68% Paved Areas 20 1.65 5.33 147 1.80% Paved Areas 20 2.69 0.91 76 0.26% Paved Areas 20 1.02 1.24 56 0.25% Paved Areas 20 1.00 0.93 Total Time 8.42 Final Time of Concentration - to (min) I, (min) 10.79 Intensities (infhr) 5-yr 10-yr 100-yr 2.99 3.67 7.49 Discharge (cfs) 5-yr 10-yr 100-yr 7.63 9.37 23.93 FCHA - Villages at Redwood Attenuated Flows for Pipe Sizing Design Engineer: T.ANa Design Firm: Intenvest Consulting Group r Project Number: 1237-112-00 Date: November 25, 2015 DESIGN CRITERIA: Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 City of Fort Collins - Storm Water Criteria Manual (1997) EQUATIONS: I,. = it +t, -Equation RO-2 0.395(1.1— Cs NFL .Equation R&3 t, = San V = C Sol -Equation R04 t _ L 60V CONSTRAINTS: 300 It - Overland flow shall not exceed for developed condition 500 it - Overland flow shall not exceed for undeveloped condition O6 = n-yr peak discharge (cfs) Qn = Cn In A Cn = n-yr runoff coefficient I = 28.5Pt 1„ = n-yr rainfall intensity (in/hr) (10 + tc f786650 A = drainage area (ac) BASINS: UD-Sewer- DP/Manhole Contributing Basins Contributing Area (acres) Runoff Coefficients Overland Flow Time Length (ft) Slope (ftlft) t; (min) Travel Time To Redwood D1+D2+D3+D4+D5 4.92 C2 to Cia Cim 0.60 0.75 21 0.05 2.51 Final Ic = minimum of I, + I, and urbanized basin check recommended minimum I, = 5 min for urbanized basins I = rainfall intensity (irdhr) Pt = one -hour point rainfall depth (in) tc = time of concentration (min) P1-6N = 1.14 in. Pt-tw, = 1.40 in. Pt-tgoy, = 2.86 in. Type of Travel Length (ft) Slope (%) Surface C, Velocity (ftts) 4 (min) 529 0.68% Paved Areas 20 1.65 5.33 147 1.80% Paved Areas 20 2.69 0.91 76 0.26% Paved Areas 20 1.02 1.24 56 0.25% Paved Areas 20 1.00 0.93 97 1.05% Paved Areas 20 2.05 0.79 pan from fes to headwall Total Time 9.20 Final Time of Concentration - tc (min) 1c(min) 11.72 Intensities (in/hr) 5-yr 10-Yr 100-yr 2.89 3.54 7.24 Discharge (cfs) 5-yr 10-Yr 100-yr 8.47 10.40 26.57 ' APPENDIX C - STORM CONVEYANCE SIZING C EL © , �a E O o co Ln N N N Q 0 Lo m C O m d E z 2 LO F- U Z) cn H W J F- f6 O O 0 Z O a 0 m N N O 2 H W J c) Z N O 2 E N Z _d LL u N 'o a ICA Ill u O No ■ CD C ■J 0 y m - v O - S O C O O O O 1P M O V 00 J 0 Y_ 0 0 O > ? C7 N y W O m c O O c Y V D L U O O O > Q H 0 0 0 0 o p y c 0 ui o o `w �? 0 0 0 0 0 u00 N N m V J > 0 m^co In r 0 tli 6 W m� v v v v v N (14 OV 0 0 OOi G o v 0 17 0 7 0 i L N E m H o^ (p m v v c eo > I.- U) In t7 Cl) `o c 17 17 1 o o $ Q .H.. t7 t`7 0) N N E Z L G i O N N i 0 Ol i N 01 _ x ` O O n r N J > V t0 1- M m S m v v v v v M � r 7 Ci r m Cl) m N N 0 > 0 0 t0 t0 0 C m v V Y Y Y Cl) O O O 7 O O C M O O J N co N m h Go M O v O O O O O N e O O O O 0 m m (q � IO t0 f- 0 Cl) v W 4) v v v v 0 00 N ON1 06 v v 0 0 - 0 >rs to 0co (00 N N E to 0 vi L6 v v LD C ` Q t- tNO, 1N0, 3 Q N N t7 t7 O XO .a O N Go u1 co IO IO --t M a O O) IO N d N tr7 IT co -II co o tp tp CcJJ> C0 tp s v v v= O GD N O O V O Ci 0 O T7 II U m > > t0 t0 t0 COt0 m x V v v v v _ to E n O N U' 10 GO t0 00 ; V (7 0 N t0 t0 N Z - C) 0) u 0 °/ 0)° rn m °' .� m ' O � O 10 ' O ' O LL N C Cl) t•1 t7 O c N Cl) V 10 d Z J J:hannel Report Iydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk®AutoCAD® Civil 31D® by Autodesk, Inc. Basin D1 Swale trapezoidal Highlighted Bottom Width (ft) = 2.00 Depth (ft) ide Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 4.00 Q (cfs) otal Depth (ft) = 1.25 Area (sqft) Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00 Velocity (fUs) lope lope (%) = 0.60 Wetted Perim (ft) = 0.015 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) Top Width (ft) calculations EGL (ft) ompute by: Known Q mown Q (cfs) = 8.74 Lev (ft) Section ,L.UV 01.50 11.00 ,0.50 1 00.00 In Gn Wednesday, Nov 25 2015 = 0.55 = 8.740 = 2.31 = 3.78 = 6.54 = 0.59 = 6.40 = 0.77 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 1 Reach (ft) Depth (ft) 2.00 1.50 MCC 0.50 we -0.50 Lhannel Report Iydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3136 by Autodesk, Inc. Basin D2 Swale trapezoidal Highlighted Bottom Width (ft) = 2.00 Depth (ft) ide Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 4.00 Q (cfs) otal Depth (ft) = 1.25 Area (sqft) Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00 Velocity (ft/s) lope (%) = 1.00 Wetted Perim (ft) -Value = 0.015 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) Top Width (ft) calculations EGL (ft) ompute by: Known Q mown Q (cfs) = 5.17 tlev (ft) Section Wednesday, Nov 25 2015 = 0.38 = 5.170 = 1.34 = 3.87 = 5.13 = 0.45 = 5.04 = 0.61 12.00 01.50 11.00 t0.50 100 00.00 19.50 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 1 Reach (ft) Depth (ft) 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 -0.50 IAPPENDIX D - DETENTION POND CALCULATIONS 100 Year This is to convert % imp. to a C value 100-year (must insert % imp. and C pervious). Required detention ft' acre-ft. C' value 0.6 17493.8<1 0.402 'C' • 1.25 1 0.751 Area 1 4.92 acres Modified Modified Release Ratq 6.96 M. FATER D. JUDISH C. LI 5/95 Nov-97 Nov-98 DETENTION POND SIZING TIME TIME INTENSITY Q 100 Runoff Release Required Required cum 100 year Volume Cum total Detention Detention mins) (secs) in/hr cfs (ftA3) (ftA3 (ftA3 Lc-ft 0 0 0 0.00 0 0.0 0.0 0.0000 5 300 9.950 36.72 11014.65 2088.0 8926.7 0.2049 10 600 7.720 28.49 17092.08 4176.0 12916.1 0.2965 15 900 6.520 24.06 21652.92 6264.0 15388.9 0.3533 20 1200 5.600 20.66 24796.8 8352.0 16444.8 0.3775 25 1500 4.980 18.38 27564.3 10440.0 17124.3 0.3931 30 1800 4.520 16.68 30021.84 12528.0 17493.8 0.4016 35 2100 4.080 15.06 31615.92 14616.0 16999.9 0.3903 40 2400 3.740 13.80 33121.44 16704.0 16417.4 0.3769 45 2700 3.460 12.77 34471.98 18792.0 15680.0 0.3600 50 3000 3.230 11.92 35756.1 20880.0 14876.1 0.3415 55 3300 3.030 11.18 36896.31 22968.0 13928.3 0.3198 60 3600 2.860 10.55 37992.24 25056.0 12936.2 0.2970 65 3900 2.720 10.04 39143.52 27144.0 11999.5 0.2755 70 4200 2.590 9.56 40139.82 29232.0 10907.8 0.2504 75 4500 2.480 9.15 41180.4 31320.0 9860.4 0.2264 80 4800 2.380 8.78 42154.56 33408.0 8746.6 0.2008 85 5100 2.290 8.45 43095.51 35496.0 7599.5 0.1745 90 5400 2.210 8.15 44036.46 37584.0 6452.5 0.1481 95 5700 2.130 7.86 44800.29 39672.0 5128.3 0.1177 100 6000 2.060 7.60 45608.4 41760.0 3848.4 0.0883 105 6300 2.000 7.38 46494 43848.0 2646.0 0.0607 110 6600 1.940 7.16 47246.76 45936.0 1310.8 0.0301 115 6900 1.890 6.97 48121.29 48024.0 97.3 0.0022 120 7200 1.840 6.79 48885.12 50112.0 -1226.9 -0.0282 125 7500 1.790 6.61 49538.25 52200.0 -2661.8 -0.0611 130 7800 1.750 6.46 50368.5 54288.0 -3919.5 -0.0900 135 8100 1.710 6.31 51110.19 56376.0 -5265.8 -0.1209 140 8400 1.670 6.16 51763.32 58464.0 -6700.7 -0.1538 145 8700 1.630 6.01 52327.89 60552.0 -8224.1 -0.1888 150 9000 1.600 5.90 53136 62640.0 -9504.0 -0.2182 155 9300 1.570 5.79 53877.69 64728.0 -10850.3 -0.2491 160 9600 1.540 5.68 54552.96 66816.0 -12263.0 -0.2815 165 9900 1.510 5.57 55161.81 68904.0 -13742.2 -0.3155 170 10200 1.480 5.46 55704.24 70992.0 -15287.8 -0.3510 175 10500 1.450 5.35 56180.25 73080.0 -16899.8 -0.3880 180 10800 1.420 5.24 56589.84 75168.0 -18578.2 -0.4265 185 11100 1.400 5.17 57342.6 77256.0 -19913.4 -0.4571 190 11400 1.380 5.09 58051.08 79344.0 -21292.9 -0.4888 195 11700 1.360 5.02 58715.28 81432.0 -22716.7 -0.5215 200 12000 1.340 4.94 59335.2 83520.0 -24184.8 -0.5552 205 12300 1.320 4.87 59910.84 85608.0 -25697.2 -0.5899 210 12600 1.300 4.80 60442.2 87696.0 -27253.8 -0.6257 215 12900 1 1.280 4.72 60929.28 89784.0 -28854.7 -0.6624 220 13200 1.260 4.65 61372.08 91872.0 -30499.9 -0.7002 225 13500 1.240 4.58 61770.6 93960.0 -32189.4 -0.7390 230 13800 1.220 4.50 62124.84 96048.0 -33923.2 -0.7788 235 14100 1.210 4.46 62955.09 98136.0 -35180.9 -0.8076 240 14400 1.200 4.43 63763.2 100224.0 -36460.8 -0.8370 Page 1 Village on Redwood Critical Pond Elevations Design Engineer: T.Alva Design Firm: Interwest Consulting Group Project Number: 1237-112-00 Date: November 25, 2015 DESIGN CRITERIA Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, June 2001 (Revised April 2008) Stage Storage Volume (pond volume calculated using the prismoidal formula): V _ (A, + AZ + A,A2 Depth 3 CONTOUR (FT) AREA (FT') AREA (ACRE) VOLUME ACRE -FT DEPTH (FT) CUMULATIVE VOLUME ACRE -FT 4962.33 0 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.000 4963.0 2061 0.047 0.011 0.67 0.011 4964.0 6214 0.143 0.091 1.67 0.101 4965.0 9583 0.220 0.191 2.67 0.293 4966.0 15126 0.347 0.281 3.67 0.574 Required 100-yr Detention Volume (including WQCV) = 0.402 Acre -Ft Interpolates to an Elev. of 4965.39 ft DETENTION POND VOLUME VERSUS ELEVATION 4966.50 4966.00 I= 4965.50 U. 4965.00 p 4964.50 Q 4964.00 w 4963.50 w 4963.00 4962.50 4962.00 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 DETENTION POND VOLUME (AC -FT) 1237-112-00 PondCalcs.xls - Pond Stage Storage Page 1 of 2 Interwest Consulting Group Village on Redwood Circular Orifice Plate Sizing Design Engineer: T.Alva Design Firm: Interwest Consulting Group Project Number: 1237-112-00 Date: November 25, 2015 Orifice Equation CA 2 �j � A = Q Q= y g C 2g� Calculations where: C = Orifice Discharge Coefficient A, = Orifice Area (fe) g = Gravity (32.2 ft/s2) Ah = Difference in Elevation Head (ft) Do = Orifice Diameter (in) 100-yr Orifice Sizing ' Knowns: 100-yr Release Rate 6.96 cfs 100-yr WSEL 4965.39 ft ' Pond Outlet Invert 4962.33 It ' Discharge Coefficient 0.65 Tailwater Elevation 4963.00 ft ' Orifice Diameter 12 9/16 in Orifice Area 0.863 ft` ' Centroid Elevation 4962.85 ft Actual Release Rate 6.96 cfs 100-yr Orifice Rating Table Elevation A Discharge cfs Pond Volume ac-ft 4962.33 0.00 0.000 4964.00 4.50 0.101 4965.00 6.37 0.293 4966.00 7.80 0.574 1237-112-00 PondCalcs.xls - Outlet Orifice Plate Sizing Page 2 of 2 Interwest Consulting Group Worksheet for Narrow Channel Project Description Flow Element: Rectangular Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Bottom Width InputData Roughness Coefficient: 0.015 Channel Slope: 0.00500 fuft Normal Depth: 0.43 ft Discharge: 26.57 ft'/s ResultsF Bottom Width: 16.03 It Flow Area: 6.89 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 16.89 ft Top Width: 16.03 ft Critical Depth: 0.44 ft Critical Slope: 0.00463 ft/ft Velocity: 3.85 fUs Velocity Head: 0.23 ft Specific Energy: 0.66 ft ' Froude Number: 1.04 Flow Type: Supercritical ' GVF Iriput`Data Downstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft ' Number Of Steps: 0 GVF Qut ,yi: ate, Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft Profile Description: N/A Profile Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: 0.00 fus Upstream Velocity: 0.00 ft/s Normal Depth: 0.43 ft Critical Depth: 0.44 ft Channel Slope: 0.00500 ft/ft Critical Slope: 0.00463 ft/ft Narrow Channel Cross Section for Narrow Channel Project Description Flow Element: Rectangular Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Bottom Width Section Data Roughness Coefficient: 0.015 Channel Slope: 0.00500 ft/ft Normal Depth: 0.43 ft Bottom Width: 16.03 ft Discharge: 26.57 ft'/s 16.03 ft 0.43 ft v:10 L R 1 IWorksheet for Sidewalk Spill ' Project Description Flow Element: Irregular Section Friction Method: Manning Formula ' Solve For: Normal Depth Input Data Channel Slope: 0.02000 ft/ft Discharge: 26.57 ft3/s ' Options Current Roughness Weighted Meth( Improvedl-otters Open Channel Weighted Roughness Improvedt-otters Closed Channel Weighted Roughne Hortons Results Roughness Coefficient: 0.013 Water Surface Elevation: 65.84 ft Elevation Range: 65.60 to 66.25 ft ' Flow Area: 6.86 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 58.51 ft Top Width: 58.27 ft ' Normal Depth: 0.24 ft Critical Depth: 0.31 ft Critical Slope: 0.00461 ft/ft Velocity: 3.87 ft/s Velocity Head: 0.23 ft Specific Energy: 0.47 ft Froude Number: 1.99 Flow Type: Supercritical (0+00, 66.25) (0+01, 65.60) 0.013 (0+01, 65.60) (1+00, 66.00) 0.013 ' Section'Geometry Station Elevation 0+00 66.25 Worksheet for Sidewalk Spill ' StaLon - Elevafion t0+01 - — _ - - 66_25 _-- 0+01 65.60 1+00 66.00 ---- ---_ ' Sidewalk slope 0.4% Sidewalk Spill Cross Section for Sidewalk Spill Project Description Flow Element: Irregular Section Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Section Data Roughness Coefficient: 0.013 Channel Slope: 0.02000 tuft Normal Depth: 0.24 ft Elevation Range: 65.60 to 66.25 ft Discharge: 26.57 ft3/s 58.27 ft 0.24 ft V:10 L R1 APPENDIX E - LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS 'FCHA - Villages on Redwood Low Impact Development Design Engineer: T.Alva Design Firm: Interwest Consulting Group Project Number: 1237-112-00 Date: November 25, 2015 DESIGN CRITERIA ' Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, January 2010 City of Fort Collins - Ordinance No. 152 ' No less than 25% of any newly added pavement areas must be treated using a permeable pavement technology that is considered an LID Technique, and - No less than 50% of any newly added impervious area must be treated using one or a combination of LID ' techniques Low Impact Development Summary Pavement Area Summary ' Total Paved Area: 43,661 sqft Permeable Paver Area: 11,265 sqft Percent Pavement Area as Permeable Pavers: 25.8% ' Newly Added Impervious Area Summary Total Site Impervious Area: 115,390 sqft Proposed Area of Pavers: 11,265 sqft Additional Area Treated by Pavers: 30,431 sqft ' Total Area Treated by Pavers: 41,696 sqft Area to be Treated by Sand Filter: 15,999 sqft Total Area Treated by LID: 57,695 sgft ' Percent Impervious Area Treated by LID: 50.0% Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden I RG) Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: J. Claeys Company: Interwest Consulting Group Date: November 25, 2015 Project: Villages at Redwood Location: 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, I, I, = 100.0 % (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) ' B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = 1.1100) i = 1.000— C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =r 0.40 1watershed inches (WQCV=0.8"(0.91-i'-1.19-it+0.78"i) ' D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 16,000 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume Vwmv =�---� Cu it Vol = (WQCV / 12) " Area ' F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of ds = 0.43 in Average Runoff Producing Sic" G) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, VwavOTRER = 533.3 cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume Vwocv Us R - cu ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry A) WQCV Depth (12-inch maximum) Dwmv = 12 in B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., horiz. dist per unit vertical) Z = 4.00 ft / ft ' (Use "0" 0 rain garden has vertical walls) C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area Au;, = 356 sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area A„ m = 359 sq it E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area) ATE = 707 sq ft F) Rain Garden Total Volume VT= 533 cu it ' (VT=((AT.+Ae )l2)"Depth) 3. Growing Media moose One QQ 18" Rain Garden Grov4rg Media O Other (Explain): 4. Underdrain System A) Are underdmins provided? moose one O YES QQ NO B) Underdrain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time ' i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y= N/A 1t Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours VGlrr=[— N A cu it iii) Orifice Diameter, 3/8" Minimum Do = N/A i in 1237-112-00 UD-BMP v3.03.xlsm, RG 11/25/2015, 4:36 AM Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) ' Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: J. Claeys Company: Interwest Consulting Group Date: November 25, 2015 ' Project: Villages at Redwood Location: ' S. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric Choose One — r Q YES A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity I ONO ' of structures or groundwater contamination? ' 6. Inlet / Outlet Control Choose One Q Sheet Flow- No Energy Dissipation Required ' A) Inlet Control Q Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided Choose One 7. Vegetation Q Seed (Plan for frequent weed control) Q Plantings ' Q Sand Grown or Other High InFlitratlon Sod 8. Irrigation Choose One TO Q- A) Will the rain garden be irrigated? IQ NO Notes: 1 1237-112-00 UD-BMP_v3.03.xlsm, RG 11/25/2015, 4:36 AM • I N C O R P O R A T E D ' September 15, 2015 Interwest Consulting Group 1218 Ash Street, Suite C Windsor, Colorado 80550 Attention: Mr. Jason T. Claeys, PE, LEED AP ' Subject: Percolation Testing FCHA Redwood Development ' Fort Collins, Colorado CTLIT Project Number: FC06667.001-130 ' CTLIThompson, Inc. is'pleased to present.you with the results of our percolation testing for the proposed rain garden at the FCHA Redwood Development in Fort Collins, Colorado. A profile hole was drilled, in the area of the proposed pond to determine the subsurface conditions. Six.percolation tests were performed in the vicinity of the profile hole (Figure 1). ' Soils encountered in our profile hole consisted of about 4 feet of sandy clay over sand and gravel to the depth explored of 10 feet (Figure 2). Groundwater was 'encountered at a depth of 6 feet during drilling and 4.5 feet'when measured several days ' later. The percolation holes were terminated within the sand and gravel. Percolation rates measured averaged 8.6 minutes per.inch as shown on Figure,3. ' We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this. project. If you have any questions regarding the information provided 'in this letter, please do not hesitate to contact us. ' Sincerely, CTLITHOM S. Spence Project ' 400 N Link Lane I Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Telephone:970-206-9455 Fax:970-206-9441 ' APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1" = 100' 0' 50' 100, LEGEND: TH-1 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING DURING PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION ' PRO-1 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROFILE HOLE ' P-1 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PERCOLATION HOLE INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP FCHA REDWOOD DEVELOPMENT CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC06667.001-120 WILLOX LN h O SITE o w Q CONIFERST VICINITY MAP (FORT COLLINS, COLORADO) NOT TO SCALE Locations of Exploratory Borings FIGURE 1 PRo 1. 5� 18a12- LEGEND:: CLAY, SANDY, SLIGHTLY MOIST TO MOIST, BROWN, DARK BROWN (CL) fl SAND AND GRAVEL, RELATIVELY CLEAN TO CLAYEY, MOIST TO WET, MEDIUM DENSE TO VERY DENSE, BROWN, REDDISH BROWN (SP, GP) DRIVE SAMPLE, THE SYMBOL 14/12 INDICATES 14 BLOWS OF A 140-POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUI_RE_D TO DRIVE A 2.5-INCH O.D. SAMPLER 12 INCHES. 4 WATER LEVEL MEASURED AT TIME OF DRILLING: L WATER LEVEL MEASURED SEVERAL DAYS AFTER DRILLING. NOTES: 2- THE BORING WAS DRILLED ON SEPTEMBER 8;:2015, USING 4-INCH DIAMETER CONTINUOUS -FLIGHT AUGERS AND A TRUCK -MOUNTED DRILL RIG. THIS LOG IS SUBJECT TO THE EXPLANATIONS, LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS IN THIS REPORT. INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP FCHA REDWOOD DEVELOPMENT CTL I T'PROJECT NO. FC0666TC01-130 Summary, Log of Exploratory Boring FIGURE 2 Percolation Test Results 10 24.75 26.25 1.50 6.7 10 26.25 27.50 1.25 8.0 10 27.50 28.63 1.13 8.9 10 28.63 29.75 1.13 8.9 10 29.75 30.88 1.13 8.9 10 20.50 22.38 1.88 5.3 10 22.38 24.13 1.75 5.7 2- 10 19.38 19.38 0.00 >80 10 19.38 19.50 0.13 80.0 10 19.50 19.50 0.00 >80 10 19.50 19.63 0.13 80.0 10 19.63 19.75 0.13 80.0 10 19.75 19.75 0.00 >80 10 19.75 19.88 0.13 80.0 10 19.88 20.00 0.13 80.0 3 10 20.25 22.00 1.75 5.7 10 22.00 23.63 1.63 6.2 10 23.63 25.25 1.63 6.2 10 25.25 26.63 1.38 7.3 10 26.63 27.88 1.25 8.0 10 27.88 29.25 1.38 7.3 10 29.25 30.13 0.88 11.4 10 30.13 31.00 0.88 11.4 4 10 17.25 18.63 1.38 7.3 10 18.63 19.88 1.25 8.0 10 19.78 21.00 1.22 8.2 10 21.00 22.00 1.00 10.0 10 22.00 23.13 1.13 8.9 10 23.13 24.00 0.88 11.4 10 24.00 24.88 0.88 11.4 10 16.88 18.00 1.13 8.9 5 10 22.00 24.25 2.25 4.4 10 24.25 26.38 2.13 4.7 10 26.38 28.25 1.88 5.3 10 28.25 29.88 1.63 6.2 10 29.88 31.25 1.38 7.3 10 31.25 32.63 1.38 7.3 10 32.63 33.88 1.25 8.0 10 33.88 35.13 1.25 8.0 6 10 22.88 31.25 8.38 1.2 10 31.25 38.00 6.75 1.5 10 28.25 35.25 7.00 1.4 10 35.25 41.75 6.50 1.5 10 41.75 45.00 3.25 3.1 10 21.75 30.50 8.75 1.1 10 30.50 37.63 7.13 1.4 10 37.63 41.63 4.00 2.5 Average Percolation Rate (mpi): 8.6 •Perc hole 2 was neglected for our average percolation rate INTER W EST CONSULTING GROUP FCHA REDWOOD DEVELOPMENT CTL I T PROJECT NO. FC06667.001-130 FIGURE 3