Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 10/06/2016City of Fort Col i s Approv Pans AW wed by. Date: o�%�% FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR HOME2 SUITES AT HARMONY VILLAGE Prepared For: East Avenue Development LLC 1001 Cypress Creek Road #203 Cedar Park, TX 78613 May 04, 2016 Project No. 39705.01 Prepared By: JR Engineering, LLC 2900 South College Avenue, Suite 3D Fort Collins, CO 80525 TABLE OF CONTENTS Tableof Contents......................................:.......`.:.....`....r.....:.........................`.............................................. i VicinityMap.............................................................................................:..................:........................................ General Description and Location..................................................................................................................2 a Location And Existing Site Characteristics ........... ::...... ...... r..:..-...... ............................................... 2 SiteSoils...........................................................................................................................................................2 Floodplain......................................................:.................................................................................................2 DrainageBasins and Sub-Basins.......................................................................................................................3 MajorBasin......................................................................................................................................................3 HistoricSub-Basins........................................................................................................................................3 DevelopedSub-Basins....................................................................................................................................4 DrainageDesign Criteria..................................................................................................................................5 Regulations......................................................................................................................................................5 Low -Impact Development............................................................................................................................5 HydrologicCriteria........................................................................................................................................5 HydraulicCriteria..........................................................................................................................................6 DrainageFacility Design....................................................................................................................................7 GeneralConcept............................................................................................................................................7 Water Quality/ Detention Facilities............................................................................................................7 Stormwater Pollution Prevention....................................................................................................................8 TemporaryErosion Control........................................................................................................................8 Permanent Erosion Control.........................................................................................................................8 Summary& Conclusions...................................................................................................................................8 References...........................................................................................................................................................9 APPENDIX Appendix A — Site & Soil Descriptions and Characteristics Appendix B — Hydrologic Calculations Appendix C — Hydraulic Calculations Appendix D — Existing & Proposed Drainage Plans Appendix E — LID Exhibit J-R ENGINEERING , Page i Engineer's Certification Block I hereby certify that this Project Development Plan Drainage Report for Home2 Suites at Harmony Village was prepared by me (or under my direct supervision) for JR Engineering, LLC and the owners thereof and meets or exceeds the criteria of the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Design Standards. i imotnyj. naiopon, rt Registered Professional Engineer State of Colorado No. 37953 ' J•R ENGINEERING Page ii VICINITY MAP Revere / Ct tCapa Cod Clr Wheatonr z Ca y. 6 _ '^•,..,,, timberline HARMONY ROAD`- `^ nr W e> Z RcAe Dr uj Llve.Oak 4 Red Oak Ct -- 'savcoath P Q Ook Ct ` Mr7ilte Oak Ct US Spatllsh Ook < _J Twnherry Ct 9ak Leo Se+on St VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1'=1,000' C � Ar•,er Oay. J �\yV: Wisteria Barberry' -O t a U pV N p� E� n. In :0JE.C'T LOCATION Page I J•R ENGINEERING ' GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ' LOCATION AND EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS The proposed Home2 Suites at Harmony Village is located in the northeast one -quarter of Section ' 6, Township 6 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. More specifically, the Home2 Suites site is a 1.85 acre property that is currently partially undeveloped with an existing 96 space parking lot. The site is bounded by Texas ' Roadhouse on the north, Delany Drive on the east, shopping centers to the west, and Cinemark Theater to the south. The site is zoned HC — Harmony Corridor and will support the proposed hotel and associated parking requirements. The proposed use of the site is a 4 story extended stay ' hotel. ' The existing site generally slopes from the northwest to southeast with slopes ranging between 1% and 2.0%. Undeveloped portions of the property are generally covered with sparse native grasses. The western half of the site currently drains to the south lot line where runoff is collected in an ' existing sump area before exiting onto existing parking lots, both east and west of the Cinemark Theater. No existing storm infrastructure exists. All surface runoff infiltrates or exits the site via overland flow in the parking lots to the south and southeast. Due to the existing topography of the ' vacant land, the existing facilities allow standing water without treatment or a sufficient path for exiting the site without encroachment on to the Cinemark property. Special considerations are ' being taken to ensure the current situation is improved to provide better conveyance away from the Cinemark property. SITE SOILS The Home2 Suites at Harmony Village site soils consist of loamy soil, predominately Nunn clay ' loam. Nunn clay loam belongs to hydrologic soils Group C. Group C soils have 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. Nunn clay loam with 0-3 percent slopes generally has a combined surface layer thickness of approx. 30 inches. Runoff is moderately high, and the hazards of wind erosion ' are moderately low. Supporting figures can be found in the Appendix, page A-1. ' FLOODPLAIN The site is shown on FEMA FIRM panel 08069C I GOOF, eff. December 19, 2006. The site lies within an area determined to be outside the I OOyr floodplain, and in an area of minimal flood hazard. The ' "City of Fort Collins Floodplain Review Checklist for 50% Submittals" checklist is not applicable for this PDP Drainage Report. J-R ENGINEERING Page 2 DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS MAJOR BASIN The proposed Home2 Suites at Harmony Village site is located in the McClellands Drainage Basin. The master study for this area is the "McClellands Basin Master Drainage Plan" by Greenhorn and O'Mara, Inc., 1986. Harmony Village is sub -basin 301 and the detention pond associated with Harmony Village P.U.D. is conveyance element 301 of the most recent SWMM model for the McClellands Basin, dated July 1997. The majority of the Harmony Village P.U.D basin is developed and includes commercial and residential uses. Detention for the site is provided within the existing regional detention Pond A, located in the southeast corner of the Harmony Village Site There are no major drainageways located within or immediately adjacent to the site. The site is shown on FEMA FIRM panel 08069CI000F, eff. December 19, 2006. An annotated FIRM exhibit is included in Appendix A-2. HISTORIC SUB -BASINS Home2 Suites at Harmony Village is an infill development. It is governed by the City's Reasonable Use policy, in which the proposed drainage basins will need to follow the generally accepted principle. Note: The release rate for the regional detention pond was limited to 0.5 cfs/acre for the 100-year event and 0.2 cfs/acre for the 10-year event in accordance with the "McClellands Basin Master Drainage Plan". Therefore, historic (existing) runoff calculations are included solely as reference in this report. There are no substantial offsite areas that flow across the proposed development site. Referring to the "Existing Drainage Plan", included in Appendix D, the following describes the existing condition drainage basins. Existing Onsite Sub -Basins: The site has two existing drainage basins. Sub -basin EX consists of a 1.67 acre area. The western half of Basin EX is undeveloped open space with native grasses and weeds covering the majority of the ground and is assumed to be 5% impervious. The eastern half of this basin is an existing asphalt parking lot and is assumed to be 100% impervious. Runoff generally flows to the southeast across basin EX -I, at slopes ranging from 0.50% to 2.0%, generally leaving the site at the southeast corner, where it is enters the right-of-way of Delany Drive. This basin also includes runoff from the Cinemark Theater property crossing onto the southern boundary of the Home2 Suites site. Currently this runoff pools in an existing sump area before overtopping into the existing parking lot to the east. Adding to this poor drainage situation, the sidewalk and landscaping areas along the north end of the theater hardly drain to away from the building foundation. - ) J-R ENGINEERING ' Page 3 Sub -basin EX2 consists of a 0.28 acre area of undeveloped open space with the same ground cover and percentage imperviousness as sub -basin EX-1. Runoff in sub -basin EX-1 collects in an existing sump area north of the Cinemark Theater. Overflow from the sump area flows south to the southwest corner of the site where it conveyed off -site into an existing parking lot DEVELOPED SUB -BASINS t The proposed developed condition sub -basins have been designed to mimic the historic basins' runoff patterns. The following describes the proposed conditions on -site drainage basins. Refer to the "Proposed Drainage Plan" in Appendix D for review. ' Proposed Onsite Sub -Basins: ' Sub -basin All consists of 0.34 acres on the northwest portion of the subject property. Runoff from the proposed drive lanes and parking lot travels west and south to a proposed ' bioretention basin along the southern property line. From the bioretention basin (Basin A2), runoff flows east in a bioswale through another bioretention basin (Basin A3) and into the existing parking lot on the southern edge of the property. Sub -basin A2 consists of 0.31 acres on the southwest corner of the subject property. Runoff from this sub -basin, primarily the roof, is collected in a bioretention basin composing the southern half of this basin. From the bioretention basin, runoff flows south in a bioswale through another bioretention basin (Basin A3) and into the exiting parking lot on the ' southern edge of the property. Sub -basin A3 consists of 0.37 acres on the south central of the subject property. Runoff ' from this sub -basin, primarily the roof, is collected in a bioretention basin composing the southern half of this basin. From the bioretention basin, runoff flows into the exiting parking ' lot on the southern edge of the property. Sub -basin B I consists of 0.18 acres near. the northern boundary of the subject property. Runoff from the proposed northern patio and drive lane travels east and south through pervious pavers on the northern edge of the property and continues south along the front of the building where flows captured by the underdrain are piped to the bioretention basin (Basin A3). Overflow runoff not captured by the underdrain continues sheet flowing east through the existing parking lot and into sub -basin B2. ' Sub -basin B2 consists of 0.82 acres on the eastern half of the subject property. The existing parking lot drains to the east. Overflow from the pervious pavers area will flow to the east and join with runoff from sub -basin B2, continuing to flow east through the existing parking lot to the eastern edge of the property into Delany Drive. ' J-R ENGINEERING Page 4 Sub -basin C2 consists of 0.02 acres in the western portion of the subject property. Runoff from the proposed landscaping area is conveyed to an existing parking lot paralleling the western site boundary. This runoff is deemed nuisance flow and therefore considered negligible. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA REGULATIONS This report was prepared to meet or exceed the City of Fort Collins stormwater criteria. The City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Manual (with all current 2011 Revisions)(FCSDDCCM) and the Urban Drainage Flood Control District's (UDFCD) Drainage Criteria Manual (USDCM) Volumes 1, 2 and 3 were referenced as guidelines for this design. LOW -IMPACT DEVELOPMENT Volume reduction is an important part of the Four Step Process and is fundamental to effective stormwater management. Per City criteria, a minimum of 50 percent of new impervious surface area must be treated by a Low -Impact Development (LID) best management practice (BMP). The proposed LID BMPs will have the effect of slowing runoff through the site lot and increasing infiltration and rainfall interception by encouraging infiltration and careful selection of vegetative cover. The improvements will decrease the runoff coefficient from the site and are expected to have no adverse impact on the timing, quantity, or quality of stormwater runoff. Site -specific LID BMPs are discussed in the following sections of this report and an illustrative LID/Surface map is provided in Appendix E. In summary, the site is treating approximately 98% of the new impervious area with a variety of LID measures. HYDROLOGIC CRITERIA The rational method was performed to calculate the peak runoff rates for each basin. Weighted percent imperviousness and weighted runoff coefficients were calculated for each basin using USDCM Table 6-3, in addition to Table RO-I I —Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis (City of Fort Collins), based on Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Type C hydrologic soil classification and surface characteristics of each basin. The time of concentration was calculated using USDCM Equation RO-3 and the intensity was calculated using the corresponding storm rainfall depth and Intensity -Duration -Frequency Curves for Rational Method (Table RA-7 — City of Fort Collins). The City of Fort Collins area has 2-year, 2-hour rainfall depth of 0.98 inches and a 100-year, 2- hour rainfall depth of 3.67 inches. J-R ENGINEERING Page 5 HYDRAULIC CRITERIA This report demonstrates that the proposed stormwater concept is in compliance with the 100-year developed runoff condition planned for Lot I I A within the Master report. Basins 101 and 114 from the master report have runoff coefficients of 0.89 and 1.0, respectively. The proposed improvements have a maximum runoff coefficient of 0.90 with the majority of the site having a significantly lower coefficient and corresponding runoff. The Rational Method was used to determine both 2-year and 100-year peak runoff values for each sub -basin. Runoff coefficients were assigned using Table 3-2 of the SDDCCS Manual. The Rational Method is based on the Rational Formula, Q = CfCIA (1) where Q is the maximum rate of runoff in cfs, A is the total area of the basin in acres, Cf is the storm frequency adjustment factor, C is the runoff coefficient, and I is the rainfall intensity in inches per hour for a storm duration equal to the time of concentration. The frequency adjustment factor, Cf, is 1.0 for the initial 2-year storm and 1.25 for the major 100-year storm. The runoff coefficient is dependent on land use or surface characteristics. The rainfall intensity is selected from Rainfall Intensity Duration Curves for the City of Fort Collins (Figure 3.1 of SDDCCS). In order to utilize the Rainfall Intensity Duration Curves, the time of concentration is required. The following equation is used to determine the time of concentration tc = ti + tt (2) where tc is the time of concentration in minutes, ti is the initial or overland flow time in minutes, and ti is the travel time in the ditch, channel, or gutter in minutes. The initial or overland flow time is calculated with the SDDCCS Manual equation: it, = [1.87(1.1 - CCf)LO.s]/(S)0.33 (3) where L is the length of overland flow in feet (limited to a maximum of 500 feet), S is the average slope of the basin in percent, and C and Cf are as defined previously. All hydrologic calculations associated with the sub -basins shown on the attached drainage plan are included in Appendix B of this report. The Home2 Suites at Harmony Village surface drainage system will be designed to convey the minor and major storm events through the property with the curb and gutter, soft swales, and LID measures for the flows being calculated by this report. Per the requirements provided by the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Manual, conveyance elements will be designed to convey the 100-year storm flows. During the major developed condition 100-year storm, the accumulated water depth in the ponds will be held to a maximum level of one -foot below all building finished floor elevations. Additionally, this report dictates that no changes are expected to the offsite conditions or flows. The improvements with this proposed site are in conformance with the Harmony Village master study drainage assumptions. J•R ENGINEERING Page 6 All Swale outlets will be protected with turf mat or riprap; whichever is most appropriate. Lid measures have been integrated into this design on higher levels than most City of Fort Collin's projects to date. In all, 98% of this project's impervious areas pass through and are treated in LID's prior to reaching their historic outfall locations. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN GENERAL CONCEPT The proposed improvements to the Home2 Suites at Harmony Village site will result in developed condition runoff being conveyed around the proposed buildings and to the southeast via curb and gutter and sheet flow across paving. Low -impact development best management practices are proposed to improve the quality of runoff and aid in reducing peak flows. Specifically, permeable pavement systems are proposed for portions of the drive lanes along the northern property line and near the eastern entrance. No storm sewer systems exist in the area to accommodate the system outfall of the permeable pavement systems but underdrains will be used. The underdrain will be used to connect the permeable pavers sections with the rock infiltration gallery, described below, in an effort to increase infiltration. Two bioretention basins and one bioswale are proposed on the southern side of the site to improve storm runoff water quality. The western bioretention basin will include an underdrain that will outfall into the eastern bioretention basin. The bioswale will provide overflow conveyance from the western to eastern basin. The east basin will incorporate a rock infiltration gallery to increase soil absorption rates of detained runoff. The rock gallery is proposed because an underdrain cannot be provided since no storm sewers exist in the area. Large runoff events will overtop the eastern basin and flow into the parking lot to the east. WATER QUALITY/ DETENTION FACILITIES Water quality will be provided for the site through the use of the bioretention basins and the bioswale. The total required water quality volume for our proposed site is 1374 ft3 (0.03 ac-ft). Detention will be provided for the site through the existing regional detention Pond A in the southeast corner of the Harmony Village site. The proposed bioretention basins will retain minor storm runoff from the site and release the major storm runoff to the regional detention facility. J•R ENGINEERING Page 7 ' STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION ' TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL A temporary erosion control plan is to be implemented for the site during construction. ' Temporary erosion control measures include, but are not limited to, slope and swale protection, silt fence placed around downstream areas of disturbance, construction vehicle tracking pad at entrances, a designated concrete truck washout basin, designated vehicle fueling areas, inlet protection, and others. All temporary erosion control measures are to be removed after they are deemed unnecessary. ' PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL Permanent erosion control measures include, but are not limited to, the constructed LID basins, ' boulder linking placed for overflow protection, seeding and mulch placed to enable and established vegetative growth, etc. Long-term maintenance of these erosion control measures shall be the responsibility of the owner of the property. JR will provide a detailed Storm Water Management and Erosion Control Plan at the time of the FDP submittal that will meet all requirements of the City of Fort Collins. ' SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS ' The existing conditions drainage has two onsite sub -basins with nearby outfall points along the southern boundary of the subject property. The proposed drainage condition was designed to ' mimic the historic basins' runoff patterns. The existing conditions drainage patterns are maintained in the design of the project. The proposed improvements will have positive impacts on the timing, ' flow rate, and quality of runoff leaving the site, and will reduce potential impacts for minor storm flooding downstream of this site. ' The hydrologic and LID calculations were performed using the required methods as outlined in the City of Fort Collins Amendments to the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Criteria Manual. The proposed drainage improvements meet or exceed the City's requirements. This PDP Drainage Report and the complimenting drainage plans and LID plans propose appropriate grading, permanent landscaping, LID BMPs, and onsite facilities (e.g. pervious paver, lid basins, etc.) that are ' shown in their preliminary configuration and will be designed for construction in the Final Drainage Report along with supporting calculations. ' The proposed concept for the development of the Home2 Suites at Harmony Village site involves routing developed condition flows to proposed onsite LID basins. LID site enhancements will treat 1 the site runoff at the source before allowing the runoff to be conveyed to the existing outfall points in the parking lot The site's stormwater surface facilities are sized to meet the City of Fort Collins "Storm Drainage Criteria Manual and Construction Standards". ' J•R ENGINEERING Page 8 REFERENCES I. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (Volumes I, 2, and 3), Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Updated November 2010. 2. Storm Drainage Criteria Manual and Construction Standards, City of Fort Collins Storm Water Utility. City of Fort Collins. Colorado, Updated February, 2013. 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. [Sept 25, 2010] 4. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Harmony Village P.U.D., prepared by JR Engineering, Ltd., Updated September, 2014. Page 9 ' J•R ENGINEERING APPENDIX A SITE & SOIL DESCRIPTIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS VJ•R ENGINEERING USDA United States Department of Agriculture NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Larimer County Area, Colorado Home2 Suites Soil Properties September 25, 2015 I I I y $ €�€ S o o� a Z Q M.ff Z DSOI 6 11 m J.M O ��pp U O C Qi O 9 J C m u m v E v N d = x E E y m J �U cli q m 6 m mW `� O'empppO OZ E mg1t Emgm H mami`t' z —pv =m $mm r Q m 3 N 5 m %Zy oaW omZ2o °��m95 t mN m ;2� mmEE S m m N U py N rNp N 4 N ZS� t so pR O O. O >. > L O Lo Ti O J 3` ��m 0 to mT@cam ; Ooi n O o m T E_m ? a o Q,a m � v my no � EL' n m m 3 c a$aon p X 5 3 main 0o mm 'pj 3 no0 m9rm.. Q m E no m n Zir .0 d Q$ v= J m m oNo' £ a EEs 5�' D.tdvv o,y iom m m poi m Jp O C m ZN tt 9 ova o C m~ U �` E W J 7 C N m m N 6 m N E C C @ >a, m� tmZ' o L m ara ES m� uv dw E'omow���p '�m$'m'S m moEE f- 3 �mQo wEn0 SE to 3:8 �6VaU �26 o� wool o= w)m ow h�._ C N y d c = a S m 8 a m g 2 w E a; a m N > o 3 O y N p @ Kd tt 5 E � a e w ! eC) ; m w J a — d N to V5 0 pp pO '5 t 8S m m a a O C 0� � � C 2� o 6 � N 4) tR N r7j in d p Cl yy 0 )p w q ` q �6 Q N I 1 F r L 1 1 1 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Larlmer County Area, Colorado (CO644) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres In AOI Percent of AOI 73 Nunn day loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 1.0 48.4% 74 Nunn day loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes 1.0 51.6% Totals for Area of Interest 20 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits forthe properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If Custom Soil Resource Report intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example., An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha - Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report ' Table —Hydrologic Soil Group (Home2 Suites Soil Properties) 1 1 Hydrologic'Soll Group"Summaryby Map Unit _ Latimer County Area; Colorado (COti44) ` Map unit symbol Map unit name „ ,`� Rating,`,"-,AcresJn API' Percent of A01� 73 Nunn day loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes C 1.0 48.4% 74 Nunn day loam, 1 to 3 C percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 1.0 51.6% 20 100.0% Rating Options —Hydrologic Soil Group (Home2 Suites Soil Properties) Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition ' Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified Tie -break Rule: Higher 16 r _ y # 3kf iEr" M1 —_ : A�•('1, _ _ � •. icy .4 . a ••�� �e ` IR 71 •i ''NOOMbYYY h{• 3 l `.yyYi` l ✓ y ' y . 4•y� :w.. '. W 3 cn a ♦ �f J � _ u '� µ✓ r `v N J �J N Q � E o o loom ■s■ I APPENDIX B HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS (%) J-R ENGINEERING © ■ o SR6U410 d O Y, is adi fsy Z Z �EiC Y w O O v w v q w r� O Qw aH H� CA z L� r W ]t I N VI n xt N N d N C -O d a a a y 3 m y d H � N C 6 N d N L N �p n L °c E C 9 8 ^ c a � 3 mm�$�uoim 3m c00000 0 0 o U r r m m c c 'n a m 9 O O O O O o 0 mE o°f O?000 w$ oN6 000 O d a m o o c 3 U o 0 0 66 0 3 u u .m.. O r N O O O .m.. O � N O O O L O m O 0 0 N 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 ` m O 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IC G U N N N N W N N W �E m m m m m m r W W W W ag O o o c o 0 0 K Zd O O O O O O t O O O E m n m C> C m O goo O N 3� c��oui o � 3U 000coo u u Cm 0 0 00 0 0 0 y G O O G O G C € W y G O a o o G a C G m O U o cc 0 o 0 E N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 m€ �oN� 3'o "8 00000g mW x;U m3�m! m N O � E te n o. o 0 0 0 0 o > am m m m m T c K u u o 0 0 o c c o 0 0 o c o H 0 p O Q Q m 67 U y Q Q Q m tl1 U mQ m I I c � ��:...... §\ )� � 4 �7 4 i®k yf\see==e 2: jkkk %k § 3 2%GAA It- 7 l55ff9 \�}! u!- I) ; ) ° 3: Z L f_1 7 L 1 (11) Section 4.0 is amended to read as follows: 4.0 Intensity -Duration -Frequency Curves for Rational Method: The one -hour rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency tables for use the Rational Method of runoff analysis are provided in Table RA-7 and in Table RA-8. Table RA-7 - City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency Table for Use with the Rational Method (5 minutes to 30 minutes) Duration (min) 5 2-Year Intensity (in/hr) 2.85 10-Year Intensity (in/hr) 4.87 100-Year Intensity (in/hr) 9.95 6 2.67 4.56 9.31 7 2.52 4.31 8.8 8 2.4 4.1 8.38 9 2.3 3.93 8.03 10 2.21 3.78 7.72 11 2.13 3.63 7.42 12 2.05 3.5 7.16 13 1.98 3.39 6.92 14 1.92 3.29 6.71 15 1.87 3.19 6.52 16 1.81 3.08 6.3 17 1.75 2.99 6.1 18 1.7 2.9 5.92 19 1.65 2.82 5.75 20 1.61 2.74 5.6 21 1.56 2.67 5.46 22 1.53 2.61 5.32 23 1.49 2.55 5.2 24 1.46 2.49 5.09 25 1.43 2.44 4.98 26 1.4 2.39 4.87 27 1.37 2.34 4.78 28 1.34 2.29 4.69 29 1.32 2.25 4.6 30 1.3 2.21 4.52 33 Table RO-11 Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis Character of Surface Runoff Coefficient Streets, Parking Lots, Drives: Asphalt 0.95 Concrete 0.95 Gravel 0.5 Roofs 0.95 Recycled Asphalt 0.8 Lawns, Sandy Soil: Flat <2% 0.1 Average 2 to 7% 0.15 Steep >7% 0.2 Lawns, Heavy Soil: Flat <2% 0.2 Average 2 to 7% 0.25 Steep >7% 0.35 (4) A new Section 2.9 is added, to read as follows: 2.9 Composite Runoff Coefficient Drainage sub -basins are frequently composed of land that has multiple surfaces or zoning classifications. In such cases a composite runoff coefficient must be calculated for any given drainage sub -basin. The composite runoff coefficient is obtained using the following formula: 11 O(C; * AJ A, Where: C = Composite Runoff Coefficient C; = Runoff Coefficient for Specific Area (A) A; = Area of Surface with Rtmoff Coefficient of C;, acres or feet2 n = Number of different surfaces to be considered A,= Total Area over which C is applicable, acres or feet2 (5) Anew Section 2.10 is added, to read as follows: EF (RO-8) 2.10 Runoff Coefficient Adiustment for Infrequent Storms The runoff coefficients provided in tables RO-10 and RO-I I are appropriate for use with ' the 2-year storm event. For storms with higher intensities, an adjustment of the runoff coefficient is required due to the lessening amount of infiltration, depression retention, evapo-transpiration and other losses that have a proportionally smaller effect on stonn runoff. This adjustment is applied to the composite runoff coefficient. ' These frequency adjustment factors are found in Table RO-12. Table RO-12 ' Rational Method Runoff Coefficients for Composite Analysis 1 1_ I Storm Return Period Frequency Factor ears C 2 to 10 1.00 11 to 25 1.10 26 to 50 1.20 51 to 100 1.25 Note: The product of C times Cr cannot exceed the value of 1, in the cases where it does a value of 1 must be used (6) Section 3.1 is deleted in its entirety. (7) Section 3.2 is deleted in its entirety. (8) Section 3.3 is deleted in its entirety. (9) Anew Section 4.3 is added, to read as follows: 4.3 Computer Modeline Practices (a) For circumstances requiring computer modeling, the design storm hydrographs must be determined using the Stormwater Management Model (SWMM). Basin and conveyance element parameters must be computed based on the physical characteristics of the site. (b) Refer to the SWMM Users' Manual for appropriate modeling methodology, practices and development. The Users' Manual can be found on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) website(http://www.eva.gov/ednnrmrl/modcls/swmm/index.htm). (c) It is the responsibility of the design engineer to verify that all of the models used in the design meet all current City criteria and regulations. ' 4.3.1 Surface Storaee. Resistance Factors. and Infiltration Table RO-13 provides values for surface storage for pervious and impervious surfaces and the infiltration rates to be used with SWMM. Table RO-13 also lists the appropriate ' infiltration decay rate, zero detention depth and resistance factors, or Manning's "n" values, for pervious and impervious surfaces to be used for SWMM modeling in the city of Fort Collins. 42 APPENDIX C HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS J•R ENGINEERING � � 111111111 �■■■■■■■ =0000011 �-■■■■■■■ Imillull, �■■■■■■■ �■■■■■■■ �■■■■■■■ IM IMMIMIN �■�■■�■■ No Text ( ! | . ( � ƒI))}I, Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Mar 29 2016 Design Point 1 (3.3 cfs-100yr) Rectangular Highlighted Bottom Width (ft) = 3.00 Depth (ft) = 0.33 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Q (cfs) ' = 3.300 Area (sqft) = 0.99 Invert Elev (ft) = 1.00 Velocity (fUs) = 3.33 Slope (%) = 0.50 Wetted Perim (ft) = 3.66 ' N-Value = 0.013 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.34 Top Width (ft) = 3.00 Calculations EGL (ft) = 0.50 ' Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 3.30 r Reach (ft) Weir Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Design Point 2 - Overflow Weir (6.0 cfs-100yr) Trapezoidal Weir Crest Bottom Length (ft) Total Depth (ft) Side Slope (z:1) Calculations 'Weir Coeff. Cw Compute by: Known Q (cfs) ' Depth (ft) 2.00 1.50 1.00 ' 0.50 ' 0.00 = Sharp = 4.00 = 1.00 = 4.00 = 3.33 Known Q = 6.00 Highlighted Depth (ft) Q (cfs) Area (sqft) Velocity (ft/s) Top Width (ft) Design Point 2 - Overflow Weir (6.0 cfs - 100yr) Tuesday, Mar 29 2016 = 0.48 = 6.000 = 2.84 = 2.11 = 7.84 Depth (ft) 2.00 1.00 N&M M ' 0.50 i i i i i i -0.50 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Weir W.S. Length (ft) You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer (http://www.novapdf.com) Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3130 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Bio-Swale Section - Southern Property Line (9.4 cfs - 100yr) Rectangular Highlighted Bottom Width (ft) = 4.00 Depth (ft) Total Depth (ft) = 1.50 Q (cfs) Area (sqft) Invert Elev (ft) = 4960.50 Velocity (ft/s) Slope (%) = 0.60 Wetted Perim (ft) N-Value = 0.030 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) Top Width (ft) Calculations EGL (ft) Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 9.40 Elev (ft) 4963.00 ----1 !fiIcY�7i7 4961.00 4960.50 4960.00 J .5 1 1.5 2 Section Tuesday, Mar 29 2016 , = 0.86 = 9.400 = 3.44 = 2.73 = 5.72 = 0.56 = 4.00 = 0.98 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Reach (ft) ' Weir Report ' Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Mar 29 2016 ' Design Point 3 - Overflow Chase Drain (9.4 cfs-100yr) - 3 in. Overtop Sidewalk Compound Weir Highlighted = Sharp Depth (ft) = 0.70 'Crest Bottom Length (ft) = 16.00 Q (cfs) = 9.400 Total Depth (ft) = 0.75 Area (sgft) = 4.70 Length, x (ft) = 3.00 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.00 Depth, a (ft) = 0.50 Top Width (ft) = 16.00 Calculations ' Weir Coeff. Cw = 3.33 Compute by: Known Q ' Known Q (cfs) = 9.40 ' Depth (ft) Design Point 3 - Overflow Chase Drain (9.4 cfs-100yr) - 3 in. Overtop Sidewalk Depth (ft) ' 1.00 1.00 1 0.50 0.50 ................... ..... ...... ... ..- 1 ......... — _... .,... ---... - ...................... ... ... ...... --- ---- 0.50 -- --- —................._.............---...- ......._......_._ ._....... ............. _... _........ ._................. .......... .... __ ... ........ -0.50 ' 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Weir W.S. Length (ft) ' You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer (http://www.novapdf.com) Water Quality Sizing Subdivision: Halmou Villa a Project Name: Home2Suites Location: Foil Collms Project No.: 39705.01 Calculated By: DRC Checked By: Date: 330/16 WQCV = (0.911' - 1.19I2 + 0.781)' At 12 Forebay release rate = 2% of 100-year in flow imnrnved Racinc Basin Area % Impervious Al 0.34 83.9 A2 0.31 61.2 A3 0.37 68.2 Bl 0.18 84.1 C 0.02 M TOTAL 1.22 72.1 C:`.Vtas`FCi)dttp'Hwve: Stites FM C.M.139'0601D,.m C1kssls Fag1dI 329=6 Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) Sheet 1 of 2i Designer: JMF s Company: JR Engineering Date: February 9, 2016 Project: Home2 Suites Fort Collins Location: Rain Garden #1 1. Basin Storage Volume t A) Effective Imperviousness of Tributary Area, I, i, = 84.8 % _ (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of rain garden) g4 zr B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = IJ100) n =f � 0.848 '^ C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-tour Drain Time WOCV =` - 0.29, watershed inches (W QCV= 0.8' (0.91' 0- 1.19' ?+ 0.78' i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 28,314 sq ft E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume Vwocv -.^"< 681 :' cu ft Vol = (WQCV 112) • 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. VwaEvorHEa -.17 :t cu ft Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume H) User Input of Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Volume VWOC/USER = LU ft (Only if a different WQCV Design Volume is desired) 2. Basin Geometry 'f c4 A) WQCV Depth (124nch maximum) Dwocv = 12 in 8) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., hor¢. dist per unit vertical) Z = 4.00 ft / ft (Use'0' if rain garden has vertical walls) C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AN -; . 454 'sq ft D) Actual Flat Surface Area A� = 475 sq ft t E) Area at Design Depth (fop Surface Area) AT, = 1346 sq ft ^' F) Rain Garden Total Volume Vr-i 77, 911 . ', cu ft ^i'v (VT= ((AT,+A�)12)Depth) Choose One N 3. Growing Media QQ 18' Raln Garden Growing Medal ,".- 0 Other (Explain): a' f lD 4. Underdrain System Choose One A) Are underdrains provided? YES Q NO B) Underdmin system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time i) Distance From Lowest Elevation of the Storage y= 2.0 It Volume to the Center of the Orifice i it) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours VGlni=� .,.. 681 cu it iii) Orifice Diameter, 318' Minimum F Do ='. 0.60in 1 3970501(RG #1) UD-BMP_v3#1.xlsm, RG 21912016, 4:43 PM Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) Sheet 2 of 2 Designer: JMF Company: JR Engineering Date: February 9, 2016 Project: Home2 Suites Fort Collins Location: Rain Garden 91 Choose One 5. Impermeable Geomembrene Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric YES f A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to prordmity r O NO of structures or groundwater contamination? PROVIDE A 30 MIL (MIN) PVC LINER WITH COOT CLASS B GEOTEXTILE ABOVE IT. USE THE SAME GEOTEXTILE BELOW THE LINER IF THE SUBGRADE IS ANGULAR Choose One 6. Inlet I Outlet Control r I O Sheet Flaw- No Energy Dissipation Required A) Inlet Control Ill Q Concentrated Flow- Energy DlssIpation Provided 7. Vegetation O Seed (Plan for frequent weed mntrol) Oe Plantings O Sand Grown or Other High trfiltradon Sod Choose One .. B. Irrigation �O YES - A) Will the rein garden be irrigated? O NO Notes: 3970501(RG #1) LID-BMP_v3#1.Xlsm, FIG 21912016, 4:43 PM I .1 Design Procedure Form. Rain Garden (RG) Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: JMF Company: JR Engineering Date: February 9, 2016 Project: Home2 Suites Fort Collins - Location: Rain Garden 02 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of TributaryArea, I, le = 88.4 % . (100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of ram garden) B) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = I,/100) C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) for a 12-hour Drain Time WQCV =' 0.31 5viatershed inches (WQCV= 0.8 • (0.91• i- 1.19?+ 0.78 • i) D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Area = 16,117 sq It E) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV)Desgn Volume Vwo=�'417' n, 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 Regan. VW..'. = '� 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 maximum) Dwo,r = 12 in B) Rain Garden Side Slopes (Z = 4 min-, hor¢. dirt per unit vertical) Z = 4.00 ft I ft (Use'0' if rain garden has vertical walls) . C) Mimimum Flat Surface Area AH„ _ ----. 278 sq It - D) Actual Flat Surface Area A� = 280 sq it E) Area at Design Depth (Top Surface Area) Ar,p = 622 sq It F) Rain Garden Total Volume - VT=! - 451 cu it - (VT= ((AT,+Aunts) / 2) • Depth) CNx>se One 3. Growing Media QQ I8• Rain Garden Growing Media [0 Other (Explain):.._.. lF I i' f'l 4. Underdrain System Cheese One O YES A) Are underdrains provided? f49 B) Underdain system orifice diameter for 12 hour drain time r i) Distance From lowest Elevation of the Storage y= NIA it ' Volume to the Center of the Orifice ii) Volume to Drain in 12 Hours V0112= `NIA 'cu it 94 f; Liii) Orifice Diameter, 318• Minimum Do = NIA in ' 3970501(RG #2 & Pavers)) UD-BMP—v3#1.xlsm, RG 21912016, 4:47 PM Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) Sheet 2 of 2 fi Designer: JMF Company: JR Engineering Date: February 9, 2016 Project: Home2 Suites Fort Collins 44f Location: Rain Garden #2 L' E' 6'- Choose One , (. 5. Impermeable Geomembrane Liner and Geotextile Separator Fabric W Q YES A) Is an impermeable liner provided due to proximity Q NO ! of structures or groundv ater contamination? -'--' PROVIDE A 30 MIL (MIN) PVC LINER VATH COOT CLASS B GEOTEXTILE ABOVE fr. USE THE SAME GEOTEXTILE BELOW THE LINER IF THE SUBGRADE IS ANGULAR m Choose one 6. Inlet / Outlet Control r - rQ Sheet Flow- No Energy Dssipaton Required A) Inlet Control QQ Concentrated Flow- Energy Dissipation Provided 7. Vegetation Q Seed (Plan for frequent weed wmml) Q Plantings Q Sand Grown a Other High infiltration Sad ChooseOne _ 8. Irrigation Q YES A) Will the min garden be irrigated? Q NO 0' Notes: 3970501(RG #2 & Pavers)) LID-BMP_v3#1.xlsm, RG 2/9/2016, 4:47 PM I Ag- Y Design Procedure Form: Permeable Pavement Systems (PPS) Sheet 1 of 2 Designer: JMF ' Company: JR Engineering Data: February 10. 2010 Project: Home2 Suites Fort Collins ' Location: Permeable Pavers r� /. Type of Permeable Pavement Section (it No Infiltration ' A) What type of section of permeable pavement is used? O Pardal Infiltration Sevbn ";- (Based on the land use and activities, proximity to adjacent =" structures and soil characteristics.)O FW Infiltration Section .....Onedse'One .----- .. ----------- - --. B) What type of wearing course? Q PICP ' O Concrete W Pavement .' O Pervious Concrete O Porous Gravel 2. Required Storage Volume A) Effective Imperviousness of Area Tributary to Permeable Pavement I, 4 = 84A % B) Tributary Area's imperviousness Ratio (1= 41100) 1 6.1141 - C) Tributary Watershed Area Ar�= 71916 sq if (Including area of permeable pavement system) D) Area of Permeable Pavement System AWs= 3,447 sq It (Minimum recommended permeable pavement area = 2343 sq ff) - E) impervious Tributary Ratio Rr (Contributing Impervium Area ! Permeable Pavement Ratio) F) Water Quality Capture Volume(WQCV) Based on 12-hour Drain Time WaCV 188 cult - (WaCV = (0.8' (0.91 • is - 1.19 Y a 0.78p / 12)' Area) _ arose One G) Is Mod control volume being added? O Y6 i NO j 3. Depth of Reservoir A) Minimum Depth of Reservoir D„ y, = 18.0 inches (Minimum recommended depth is 6 inches) Choose One ". B) Is the slope of the reservoir/subgrade Interface equal to 0%? O YES- Rat a Stepped installation � 0 NO- Sloped Installation `. C) Porosity (Porous Grovel Pavement <0.3. Others <0.40) P = 0.20 D) Slope of the Base CourseRubgrade interface S = 0.003 11111 - ° E) Length Between Lateral Flow Barriers (max=181.48 ff.) L = 75.0 8 js F) Volume Provided Based on Depth of Base Course cu ft $' Flat or Stepped: V = P' ((Dv,,,.,Y12)' Area 8'SL-1 ` Sloped: V = P' ((D„e,. (D,,,,,- )) / 12]' Area Volume eaeumos undorm elope 8 lateral flaw barrier spacing. Calculate the volume of each coil individually when this varies. 4. Lateral Flow Banters Choose One I A) Type of Lateral Flow Bariers OQ Corcrete Walls; O.PVC ffo nibraneInstalled normal tenon, O N/A. Flat Installation ; O Other (Describe): I s B) Number of Permeable Pavement Cells Cells = 4 ' 3970501(RG #2 & Pavers)) UD-BMP_v3#1.xlsm, PPS 21102016, 11:45AM 5. Perimeter Barrier A) Is a perimeter barrier provided on all sides of the pavement system? (Recommeded for PICP, concrete grid pavement, or for any wAnfiltretion section.) Oxbne One C No 7 3970501(RG #2 & Pavers)) U6BMP_v3gl.xlsm, PPS 211012016, 11:45 AM n [_l 1 p Design Procedure Form: Permeable Pavement Systems (PPS)` .� Sheet 2o 2`` Designer: JMF Company: JR Engineering Date: February 10, 2016 Project: Homs2 Suites Fort Collins Loudon: Permeable Pavers 6. Fi ter Material and Underdrain System , Chmse One A) Is the underdrain placed below a 6-inch thick layer of O COOT Class C filter material? O NO O NtA Oros° One B) Diameter of Slotted Pipe (slot dimensions Per Table PPs-2) �O 4-inch 0 6-hKh C) Distance from the Lowest Elevation of the Storage Volume y = 0.3 ft (i.e. the bottom of the base course to the center of the orifice) 7. Impermeable Geomembraa Liner end Geotextile Separator Fabric Onose One A) is there a minimum 30 mil thick impermeable PVC geomembrane „ liner on the bottom and sides of the basin, wdending up to the top YES of the base course? O NO Choose One • 8) COOT Class B Separate Fabric s; O nacedabaethellner O Plated above ono below the liver 8. Outlet (Assumes each cell has sunAar area, subgrade slope, and length between lateral barriers (unless wbgratle is flat). Calculate cells individually where this "ties.) - A) Depth of WOCV in the Reservoir Dwocv =:. 4.62.--inches (Elevation of the Flood Control Outlet) _ B) Diameter of Orifice for 12-tour Drain Tune Do, _" 0 48 i inches (Use a minimum orifice diameter of 3/8-inches) Notes: H ' 3970501(RG #2 8 Pavers)) UD-81413_v381.xism, PPS 2110/2016, 11:45 AM POND VOLUME CALCULATIONS Subdisislon Hamtony Village Location Fort Collins Volume—V3 x Depth x (A+B+(A*B)^0.5) A - Upper Surface B - Lower Surface r in 12-1- /Fl Project Name: Home2Suites Project No. 39705.01 By: DRC Checked Bv: Date: 3/30/16 Stage Stage Elevation Stage Surface Area (square feet) Stage Volume (cubic feet) Cumulative Volume (cubic feet) Cumulative Volume (acre feet) 0.00 4960.00 475 0 0 0.00 0.25 4960.25 713 147 147 0.00 0.50 4960.50 958 208 355 0.01 U.75 4960.75 1,211 271 626 1 0.01 1.00 4961.00 1.346 319 945 0.03 125 4961.25 1,717 382 1,327 1.50 4961.50 1976 461 1,788 0.04 Volume (acre feet) Volume Water Surface Elevation CAU, TCT e u %H.Z Swi Fan Colliwl�9'O�OIGbuupe_Cdc� zism Pape 1 of 1 V29:^016 POND VOLUME CALCULATIONS Subdivision Harmony Village Location Fort Collins Volumr-1/3 x Depth x (A+B+(A'B)^0.5) A - Upper Surface B - Lower Surface 1.111 Racin H7 Project Name: Home2Suites Project No. 39705.01 Bv: DRC Checked By: Date: 3/30/16 Stage Stage Elevation Stage Surface Area (square feet) Stage Volume (cubic feet) Cumulative Volume (cubic feet) Cumulative Volume (acre feet) 0.00 4959.50 270 0 0 0.00 0.25 4959.75 360 78 78 0.00 0.50 4960.00 427 98 176 0.00 0.75 1 4960.25 1 497 1 115 1 291 1 0.01 1.00 4960.50 610 138 429 1.25 4960.75 816 178 607 0.01 1.50 4961.00 1,190 249 856 0.02 Volume (acre feet) Volume Water Surface Elevation C:lUurv'.F -Dm pWw 2S zi Fm Capi 1910501Dramp_Caln.4+m Pw1d1 3119i:016 Minimum 90-me HDPE brpervlous Membrane (Required fbr Building ProtK*m) Minimum COT No. 4 Aggregate Abwe and Bebw PUI: Pipe «•.•^.. Yam' _tl ..+.,yp. �{•;` t. w+^.i...;'�. Sol /JA., /Jsrb.�e/ // r'l/////// surface Structure PwWing Depth Minimum 12* Thick Layer of Bioretendon Sand Marla (eee Blorstention Sand Media SpedFlmtlon ft rn aty of Fort Collins) Minimum 6' Thick Layer of Pea t nwW Di.phrogm Minimum 60 Thick Layer ar mOT No. 4 Aug ogem Mlnlmum ,VPrg PYC Pipe (Opt� Depending au ngI Solt CandRlontl) BIORETEN110N / BIOSWALE CROSS SECTION G7!! DETAIL STORMWATER CAM 7J17/s!ota lle� nCONSTRUC110N DETAILS —53 I DRWM BY: 0. MWEN APPENDIX D ' EXISTING & PROPOSED DRAINAGE PLANS ' v J•R ENGINEERING FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT HARMONY VILLAGE P.U.D. Prepared for: Dial Companies 11506 Nicholas St., #200 Omaha, Nebraska 68154 (402)493-2800 Prepared by: JR Engineering, Ltd. 2620 E. Prospect Road, Suite 190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 (970)491-9888 November 6, 1998 Revised January 6, 1999 Revised February 6, 1999 Revised September 15, 2014 Job Number 9168.00 J Local drainage facilities were designed to convey peak flows from the 100-year storm event ' calculated using the Rational Method. Regional hydrology was evaluated using UDSWM2- PC RainfaWRunoff Prediction and Watershed Simulations Program (SWMM) endorsed by the ' Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. 1.5 Master Drainage Basin ' Harmony Village P.U.D. is included in the McClellands Drainage Basin. The master study for ' this area is the "McClellands Basin Master Drainage Plan" by Greenhorn and O'Mara, Inc., 1986. Harmony Village is sub -basin 301 and the detention pond associated with Harmony ' Village P.U.D. is conveyance element 301 of the most recent SWM model for the McClellands Basin, dated July 1997. ' 2. HISTORIC (EXISTING) DRAINAGE The historic (existing) flows for this site consist of the flows from the site. There are no off - site flows entering the property. The drainage pattern for the property is via overland flow in ' a southeasterly direction at approximately 1- percent slope. The existing drainage from the existing warehouse site to the west of Harmony Village P.U.D. is routed southerly in an existing swale around the east edge of the warehouse site onto the Harmony Village P.U.D. property, diverted westerly to the railroad right-of-way, diverted southerly and conveyed along the railroad tracks to an existing downstream detention pond. This drainage pattern is being maintained with the development of the ' Harmony Village P.U.D. site. ' Note: The release rate for the detention pond was limited to 0.5 cfs/acre for the 100-year event and 0.2 cfs/acre for the 10-year event in accordance with the "McClellands Basin Master Drainage Plan". Therefore, historic (existing) runoff calculations are not included as part of this report. 2 3. LOCAL DEVELOPED DRAINAGE DESIGN 3.1 Method The Rational Method was used to determine both the 10-year and 100-year flows for the sub - basins indicated in this drainage report. A detailed description of the hydrologic analysis is provided in Section 3.4 of this report. 3.2 General Flow Routing Flows within this site will take the form of overlot, Swale, gutter, and pipe flow. The existing drainage patterns have been maintained where possible. All grading has been designed to carry flows away from structures to the proposed drainage facilities. The proposed drainage facilities for this site consist of proposed sump inlets, curb cuts, swales, drainage pipes and a box culvert. The majority of the site will drain to the proposed detention pond located in the southeast corner of the property. The detention pond outlets to the existing storm system for the Harmony Crossing Subdivision located to the south. Flows from Harmony Village P.U.D. and Harmony Crossing enter the McClellands Drainageway and eventually reach the Cache La Poudre River. The southern portion of the site was included in the detention calculations and drainage report for Harmony Crossing. This includes the assisted living area, Wilmington Drive, the tot lot, and the western parking lot. This area will be free released to the south and detained in the existing pond for Harmony Crossing as stated in the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Harmony Crossing, P.U.D. (RBD, 1994). 3.3 Proposed Drainage Plan A qualitative summarization of the drainage patterns within each sub -basin and at each design point is provided in the following paragraphs. Discussions of the detailed design of drainage facilities identified in this section are included in the following sections. Runoff from Subbasin 101 is conveyed via sheet flow, gutter flow and through cross - pans to a proposed sump condition curb cut located at Design Point 1. The curb cut outlets into a proposed grouted boulder channel in Subbasin 105, the upper portion of the large detention pond (Pond B). -- --�� Basin too large, needs to be subdivided to determine Qs in Delaney Drive gutter. Runoff from Subbasin 110, the large detention pond (Pond A) is conveyed to the ' outlet structure in the southeast comer of the said pond at Design Point 10. (See below for discussion of Detention Pond.) ' Subbasin 111 includes the west half of Timberline Road adjacent to the southerly portion of Harmony Village P.U.D. Runoff is conveyed via gutter flow along the west side of Timberline to an existing detention pond in the southeast corner of Harmony Crossing as described in the approved drainage reportfor that development. Calculations in Appendix C show that the additional flow to the 10' curb inlet willnot exceed its capacity for the 100-year event. Subbasin 112 is conveyed via sheet flow and gutter flow to a proposed curb cut located at Design Point 12. The curb cut outlets into a proposed concrete channel in Subbasin 105, the upper portion of the large detention pond (Pond B). Runoff from Subbasin 113, is conveyed via sheet flow and gutter flow to a proposed sump condition inlet on the east side of Delany Street south of Timberwood Drive at Design Point 13. The inlet outfalls into a proposed underground storm sewer pipe system that outlets into Subbasin 110, the large detention pond (Pond A). Any flow that is unable to enter the inlet during the 100-year event will proceed easterly into the proposed parking lot via sheet flow and gutter flow to the proposed inlet in Subbasin 109. moff from Subbasin 114, is conveyed via sheet flow and gutter flow to a proposed) mp condition inlet on the east side of parking lot adjacent to Delany_Street south of mberwood Drive at Design Point 14 The inlet outfalls into a proposed underground, rrm sewer pipe system that Louis the storm sewer pipe from Subbasin 113 and; tlets into Subbasin 110 the large detention pond (Pond A) If any clogging ofthe: ! et occurs, the runoffwill begin to pondthin the parking lot until rt begins to flow out entrance to Delany. At this point, the runoff will flow easterly across Delany, ive toward Design Point 13 in Subbasin 113. The excess flow proceeds east into _Pr osed arkul lot via sheet flow utteo theproposed ,,_prop _ p_ _ . _ gand r flow t.. _ --g_ r __inlet in ibbasin_ Runoff from Subbasin 115 is conveyed via sheet flow and gutter flow south along Delany Drive to Design Point 15. From here, runoff is conveyed to the existing detention pond in the southeast corner of Harmony Crossing as described in the approved drainage report for that development. Runofffrom Subbasin 116 is conveyed via sheet flow and gutter flow to Wilmington Drive. Flows are conveyed easterly along Wilmington Drive to Delany Drive within Harmony Crossing at Design Point 16. The flows are then conveyed to the existing detention pond in the southeast comer of Harmony Crossing as described in the approved drainage report for that development. 5 Table 3.1 - Drainage Summary Table Design Point Tributary Sub -basin Area (ac) C (10) tc (10) (min) 0(10)tot (cfs) C (100) tc (100) (min) Q(100)tot (cfs) DRAINAGE STRUCTURE /REMARKS 1 101 11.72 0.72 14.4 32.06 0.89 11.6 70.4 10' Curb Cut 2 102 0.65 0.84 5.0 3.05 1.00 10.0 4.6 2' Curb Cut 3 103 0.53 0.95 5.0 2.80 1.00 10.0 3.8 5' Curb Cut & Sidewalk Chase 4 104 3.84 0.68 7.5 15.00 0.86 10.0 27.2 10' Curb Cut 105 0.66 0.13 12.4 0.35 0.16 12.4 0.7 5 101-105 + 112 17.88 0.70 18.8 42.18 0.88 18.8 84.1 2 x8' box 6 106 0.39 0.88 5.0 14.07 1.00 10.0 50.6 8' Curb Cut 7 107 0.25 0.50 5.7 0.67 0.62 10.0 1.1 Double Combination inlet 8 108 0.39 0.82 5.0 1.78 1.00 10.0 2.8 Double Combination inlet 9 109 0.60 0.64 5.9 2.04 0.80 10.0 9.2 8' Type R inlet 110 1.28 0.10 11.6 0.54 0.13 10.0 1.1 10 101-114 29.00 0.71 18.9 69.14 0.89 18.9 137.9 11 111 0.45 0.95 7.5 2.11 1.00 10.0 4.1 free release 12 112 0.48 0.91 5.0 2.45 1.00 10.0 3.4 2' Curb Cut 13 113 1.16 . 0.68 8.9 3.67 0.85 10.0 14.5 5' Type R inlet 14 114 6.46 0.84 16.4 19.50 1.00 14.0 39.9 15' Type R inlet 15 115 0.19 0.59 5.0 0.61 0.74 10.0 1.0 free release 16 116 2.83 0.74 8.7 9.88 0.93 10.0 18.7 free release 17 117 0.81 0.27 13.9 0.84 0.34 13.9 1.7 free release 18 118 0.88 0.95 5.0 4.66 1.00 10.0 6.3 2' Curb Cut & Sidewalk Chase 19 119 1.60 0.44 12.1 2.90 0.55 11.1 6.0 free release 20 120 10.10 0.10 5.6 0.05 0.13 10.0 0.1 0-1 OS-1 4.54 0.71 16.8 11.44 0.89 16.8 22.8 0-2 OS-2 1.02 0.49 10.6 2.19 0.62 10.2 27.2 4. REGIONAL DRAINAGE EVALUATION 4.1 Detention Pond Design Detention is required and will be provided for on the Harmony Village site. The proposed detention pond area is located in the southeast corner of the site. The proposed outlet structure connects to the existing pipe under Rockport Court and outlets into an existing swale parallel to Timberline Road that drains to the existing detention pond for the Harmony Crossing Subdivision. The proposed detention pond for Harmony Village consists of two areas that are interconnected by a box culvert under Timberwood Drive. The box culvert connecting the ponds was sized so that peak 100-year flow can pass freely without being 9 7. REFERENCES t1. City of Fort Collins, "Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards" ' (SDDCCS), May 1984. 2. "Preliminary Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Harmony Village P.U.D.", JR ' Engineering, Ltd., May 1, 1998, Revised July 15, 1998. ' 3. "Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Harmony Crossing P.U.D., Fort Collins, Colorado", RBD, Inc.. Engineering Consultants, January 28, 1994. ' 4. "McClellands Basin Master Drainage Plan", Greenhorn and O'Mara, 1986. 5. Soil Survey of Larimer County Area, Colorado. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service, 1980. ' 6. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual", Volumes 1 and 2, dated March 1969, and Volume 3, dated September 1992. .1 1 15 p v a' �I=fYNI GSf$Npp rry2� 4965 #Aw 4 IE smVCRAR - CYWWE]F 9 -- RETANINC WALL-- 4963 - ---E%ISTED IRRIGATION DITCH �- _TO BE AB_ANDONEO---- - .54 0.II JJ JHANAEL6 DRAINAGE SUMMARY TABLE pfNgi Pelt IRulv1 P s AR0 (.1 L (10) k (10) k+el TIROXI1 (Nel C(lm) 14 om) (•W) QBI INN I76a97 NI 1 1 144 um 1 n4 aAaaL 3 iIM as a I'm It 4 161 am 15 1 1 1 14 a 0 112 -1IT0t1IlNoo0N 1 14 1 7 0. o. In a" am 100 12 110 125 GIs 116 am 013 Ka Is - m .M 071 TO 61 1A9 U19 7s 274 1 as 100 41 12 112 Am 991 10 4 1. 116 am ] NO 145 14 am 164 1 1 AM 1I] 50 ED 1A0 1. IB b B] M a93 2 1To 0111 19 AT TZU am III &a am v _ am art Ito at TV BUILDING A 6.WO SF 49W3 MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET 8 OF 26 DETENTION SUMMARY POND A & B 10-YR EVENT 100-YR EVENT MAX. WSEL 4954.45' 4955.50' DETENTION VOLUME PROVIDED 2.45 AC -FT 4.26 AC -FT DETENTION VOLUME REWIRED 2.40 AC -FT 4.06 AC -FT MAX. RELEASE RATE 5.7 CPS 14.2 CFS MAX. ALLOWABLE RELEASE RAZE 5.8 CFS 14.5 CFS W1LEi CONDITIONS 27' PIPE W/ 11.25" LOU ORIFICE 27- PIPE W/ 16.0' DIA, ORIFICE NOTES L EROSION CONTROL DETAILS ARE SHOWN ON SHEET 22 ORIFICE PLATE AND OUTLET DETAIL PRE SHOWN ON SHEET 20 SPECIAL DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DETAILS ARE SHOWN ON SHEETS 22-24 2. PIXNDS A & B ARE MODELED AS ONE PONT WE TO HYDRAULIC CONNECTIVITY 3. ALL AREAS NOT TO RECEIVE PAVEMENT AND DISTURBED FOR MORE MAN 30 DAYS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHLU. 4. DEIENTON PONDS SHALL BE SODDED M SEEDED AND MULCHED. ME STANDARD EROSION CONTROL NOTES INOICATE THE FRAMES - SF E CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE sr rw lemon w4W� r p6 If Of RI Uml AN. ooLuar F.. vMrIItRI � TRIP UddImmiI WRONG wrt rye wmmpr onurom ¢rtiln ae — S $ 3 M S69V2.372. 201T9' z £ 50' 25' 0 50' I W' SCALE: 1' = 50' �o CID 3 co ;Da Off E 5$w G WALL _ LEGEND �d N aga ;p e+ 10 DESIGN POINT �i C) 0 ppY BASIN CRIMEAco28 1.20 l3 RUNOFF COEFFICIENT o '- El AREA IN ACRES f FLOW DIRECTION aa m EPSN BOUNDARY Iy-1 m EXISTING PIPES 7IR PROPOSED INLET AND PIPE yI 5 c m w DO as Cq ' FLARED END SECTION TO >U G w - \ W SIDEWALK CULVERT cI I L, .. I SB moommiIillf EROSION BALES •CO 111 PROPOSED INLET LOCATION Z EXISTING 5' CONTOUR � E%15i1NC t' CONTOUR PROPOSED 5' CONTOUR PROPOSED 1' CONTOUR 1 O SILT FENCE IP INLET PROTECTION o CE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE $T SEDIMENT TRAP PROPOSED RIPRAP POND B 100 R P 4955. 100-YR INUNDATION AREA 10 53 .95 TOP OF BERM=4956.5 11,CUT 1r TOPSaL r LOU OR wsEL '\ 1B TYPE RIPRAD 4955.5 AID (BURIED) 22V o EMERGENCY SPILLWAY CROSS SECTION N.T.S d 3 6 E = a PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECT SUP[FNSION OF kas Da M TO NTeI CE J1 Cc CRETE TRICKLE CHANNEL O C) SO DETAIL SHEET 20 J It J''. Q D- B FT 0= 0.E5, d J S 0.005 LEI FT/FT n = 03 LL CROSS SECTION A - 7 ZO Z N'T'S FOR AND ON BEHALF OF JR [NCINEEwrvn Lm. a a -J J W Z J Oily of Fort Collins, Colorado j 00 O UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL } Z O U Q Z CI APPROVED: Daeew, If ce9eelmin9 Dole O p OB O ° O 4 CHECKED BY: *IA,k Woelaeale� UNITY 'to Q W J DO = Q CHECKED BY: Dnfe Slwm.olm VIi11Y D = ITT D = 03 C.F.S. 5 0.005 FT/FT n .035 CHECKED BY: vmee At Revaplbn Dole CROSS SECTION SWA —B CHECKED BY: SHEET ] OF 26 N.T.S AIR CHECKED BY: JOB N0. REV. Dme 9168.00 0 __ 1' GHANN L 4 I qR S- 4.54 .)1 WILLING I I' CONCREtE�' 54.920 SF TICKLE PAN THEATER \ 2' CHANNEL 'S' LONG TRANSITION '"AN TO Y CHANNEL) Y CHANNEL 5.46 Ain __..a 2' CONCRETE 1 TRICKLE CHANNEL S = 0 2% p O CQNC. PAN CURB gal IT s no Y BUILDING H ASSISTED LIVING 35.000 SF STANDARD ERUSION CONTROL CONSTRUCTION PLAN NOTES 1 July, 1996 The City of Fort Collins Stormwater JURY erasion central inspector must be notified at lease 24 hours prior to any construction an this site. All required perimeter sill fencing sholl be installed prior to any land disturbing activity (stockpiling, stripping, grading, etc.), All obtain required erosion control measures shall be installed at the appropriate time in the construction sequence on indicated in the approved pm ct schedule, construction plane and potion control report. st . Removal w disturbance al existing vegetation shall be limited to the men uirel fur immediate Pre -disturbance vegetation shall be protected and retained wherever possb e 9 re9 rml n f the shortest practical trod of time. aa,atmabon operations and w t o pin v 1 utility Ile ions Receptive, Rllin etc. shall bar kept in roughened condition b w dicing alga land conAll tolls apposed during lets on or r perm (stripping, grading, uL ty itala t p re 9. ) p rights ro g y ripping g g o loon unh mulch, vegetation a other permonmt < pe control er stalled No s is tr eat miside capig, street instof way shall remain egmsN by land disturbing activity fur more than thirty (30) days be/ore required temporary orpermanenterosion embd (e.. red/mulch, landscaping, etc) 1s installed, unless otherwise approved by [M1e Starmwaler Utility. The property shall he watered and maintained at all items during construction odlNlies on to prevent wind -caused erosion All land disturbing activities shall he immediately discontinued when fugitive dust impacts adpcent properties, as determined by the City I oFort Cdlins Engineering Department. All temporary (structural) erosion control measures shall be contacted and Fall or reconstructed a r necessary after each runoff event in order to assure continued performance of d their 'intended function. All retained sediments,parlcularly these on paved rand way stbfaces, shall bar removed and disposed of in a mann er and location o as not to muse their release into any tlranageway No soil stockpile shall exceed ten (10) feet in height All soil stockpiles sM1dl be prol9<ted from sediment transport by surface roughening, wotenng and perimeter silt fencing. Any soil stockpile remuming otter 30 date sholl be seeded and mulched. I City Ordinance prohibits the tracking, dropping, or depositing of safe or any other m0terial onto City streets by or From any vehicle. My imdmtlent deposited material shall be cleaned immediately by the centra nr — SEE SHEET 7 OF 25 15' TYPE R INLET 0 DESIGN POINT A BASIN CRITERIA Eta J3 flUNOFF COEFFICIENT AREA IN ACRES FLOW DIRECTION BASIN BOUNDARY -- -- EXISTING PIPES PROPOSED INLET AND PIPE ' RATIFIED ENO SECTION IIIIIIIIII C,v B �E R IINLI i I I I vi •(�{ 6,000 SF 16'X16' JUNCTION BOX SEE DETAIL SHEET 23 FF-sa a3 COURT WPA I Le �mlmmmWll we pPn Ix p NlrnrnilM .c ..emu muo FVS)M'G P4-Al I 50' 25 10 - SCALE: 1' LEGEND SIOEWALN CULVERT P O Bg �� EROSION RATES CE 0 PROPOSED INLET LOCATION EXISTING 5 CONTOUR ST EXISTING 1' CONTOUR PROPOSED 5' CONTOUR PROPOSED 1' CONTOUR O3 IF IF SILT FENCE err L� 1 --2%B' CO ETE Box I E ET SHEET N C o SI S € u � e � 4 - a d� a� 8 5 4 a 8 SgCID 0)Pie Sa w N °so, � gg40 =; CIO g6it Rao no vKD a yen w C $Vial N bf m& a gaoa Vyy� V O L 6 N c 3 N FREPIAED UNDER THE DIRECT AIP@NAM OF y 0 � 2 Q a a w o� Zp < a a FUR Age ON BEHALF cf LITTIONEERINC, LID. J I_ PROTECTION City of Fort Collins Colorado _1Z — w CD O Q UsO UTILITY PLAN PPROVAL RUCTION ENTRANCE APPROVED: Z Q Z AT of EngineeringDole O p ort NT TRAP • � O CHECKED By 4 1L.� •Dale W Wat"Gw Q 1SED RIPRAP �*- / _M = CHECKED BY: TJLs stamwal. wetly Dme R INUNDATION AREA CHECKED BY. - Fares i bereatlm Dote CHECKED BY: SHEET 8 OF 26 Dote CHECKED BY: JOB N0. REV Date 916B.00 0 HOME2 SUITES HARMONY VILLAGE EXISTING DRAINAGE CONDITIONS s y ]EXAS ROADHOUSE I , 1 % , L 11 11 I I III � � III I(1yl . II I I �II I II 1 +1 / --------------4+�s--------'' L-- -----� 1 I EX1 ROME2 suites BJ 39 J4 ♦♦1 6 MOR �AM�TO PAAWm LOT E=RWGS WW EMSEML SY/MP AgEA W7014 ,.1��- I� l Poo // / ,♦*i H HHM N H� 1/I r f l I/ l l /i�-- /"\ l � � OYHEAFR U.l II l l /p 7HEAIER M� N / \ _tea= al i / I IN, ------ L______J I R*14:P: — --6I00— — EMSTNG MA" CONFOUR EASING INTERMEDIATE CONTOUR EASING STORM SEWER/ACP A BASIN ID N BASIN DESIGNATOR B C B: AREA (AC) D C: MINOR STORM COEMCIIENT D: MAJOR STORM COUTICIENT Q DRAINAGE DISCHARGE DESIGN POINT Sy BASTING FLOW DIRECTON •"Nommmm• EASPNC BASIN DRAINAGE AREA ETds RImoff SturryTable BVMW Am Cx• G 1 M+•M _0 nM1 l (Enl PSI nM nA IBM LI fl6 as m67 um 1 on 1 ram lox nl os I I I I I I I I I I I I � 1 I I I 1 I j 4 _ �r9co• 1/5 F ow ED ? L CHECKED eo TD o 20 KnowAnzrs below. o.Er"m MUNAI SCALE: I' = 20' Call before you dig. WECrcFD WEC D MENT ENGINEER'S STATE <,. PREPARED UNDER MY DIREC W o'• ➢MOTHY JAMBS HALOPOFF, P.E. f ••.•, , • �\ TE SS/ •ACE COICRADO NO. 3J953 RErEw[o FOR AND ON BEHALF orJR ENCIN of Fort Collins, Colorado ITY PLAN APPROVAL I I I 1 / 1 / IJ f /1 HOME2 SUITES HARMONY VILLAGE JOB NO. 3-9705.01 1/20/16 SHEET 10 OF 15 ® J'R ENGINEERING AWeWIanC Nmy Jt •PPe r�, �^.t JR / r / / / / I I 1 I I - I LEGEND 100— — EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR -- EXISTING INTERMEDIATE CONTOUR PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR PROPOSED INTERMEDIATE CCNTOJR PROPOSED STORM SEWER/RCP - — PRCPSEO SWALE A BASIN ID G A: BASIN DESIGNATOR g B: AREA (AC) D C: MINOR STORM COEFETCIEXT 0: MAJOR STORM CCEFFIGENT Q DRAINAGE DISCHARGE DESIGN PONT y PROPOSED ROW DIRECTION M BASIN DRAINAGE AREA HOME2 SUITES AT HARMONY VILLAGE PROPOSED DRAINAGE CONDITIONS II t3roff3nt®ry1>,de _ hs(ms pm te ) AE A[ OJf QW O QA S0 }3 AE 0]1 QRI QA S0 !Q4 2]A3 QTI Q91 Q'IS 0 31RE Qb QW QA S0 LeOdt L0 Q® AN ]bQZ Q21 S0 01 20 TO 0 20 Q ORIGINAL SCALE: I_= 20' Lf tl O wE::D V Keewwhal's below. CAECRED iABllbefore you dig. chECREO PREPARED UNDER MY DIRECT SUPEMM90N TIMOTHY JAMES HALOPOEF. P.E. COLORADO NO. 37953 FOR AND ON WHAT OF JR ENGINEERING. LLD. 37953 CHEIXO PLAN I 1 I I D.e UNNr A HOME2 SUITES AT HARMONY VILLAGE Ir D°te JOB NO. 3-9705.01 04/03/16 TAIte SHEET 11 OF 17 ate ow Ak ® J•R ENGINEERING EsI• AWm0II mmprt/ I Colond0 APPROVAL GTtlenM 3D-1do-9193 HOT C AIDS 91D� • WMW/Dl N3QT 1� Este I 3 I I I 1 I APPENDIX E LID EXHIBITS ' -J J•R ENGINEERING 811