HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 06/15/2016City of Fort Collins Approved Plans
Approved by. SX,14 d %
Date. G it
FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
AFFINITY FORT COLLINS
Prepared For:
AFFINITY FORT COLLINS, LLC
1620 N Mamer Road, Bldg. B
Spokane Valley, WA 99216
(509) 321-3215
Prepared By:
JR Engineering, LLC
2900 South College Avenue, Suite 3D
Fort Collins, CO 80525
(303) 740-9393
Contact: Jason Tarry, P.E.
March 2, 2016
Job No. 39704.00
X\3970000.aIR3970400\Word\Repora\Drainage\Final Drainage Report\3970400 Drainage Report.dooc
TABLE. -OF CONTENT!
VICINITYMAP.........:::....:.............................................................................................
GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION............................................................2
LOCATION AND EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS.....................................................................................2
SITESOILS........................................................................................................................................................2
FLOODPLAI N....................................................................................................................................................2
DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS....................................................................3
MAJORBASIN..................................................................................................................................................3
HISTORICSUB-BASINS....................................................................................................................................3
DEVELOPEDSUB-BASINS................................................................................................................................5
DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA..................................................................................7
REGULATIONS.................................................................................................................................................7
LOW -IMPACT DEVELOPMENT........................................................................................................................7
HYDROLOGICCRITERIA.................................................................................................................................8
HYDRAULICCRITERIA....................................................................................................................................8
DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN................................................................................ 10
GENERALCONCEPT.................................................................................................................................... 10
PROPOSED WATER QUALITY/DETENTION FACILITIES............................................................................. I I
OUTFALLSYSTEM......................................................................................................................................... 13
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION......................................................... 13
TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL.............................................................................................................. 13
PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL.............................................................................................................. 14
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS............................................................................ 15
EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS.................................................................................................. 15
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 16
APPENDIX
Appendix A — Figures
Appendix B — Hydrologic Calculations
Appendix C — Water Quality/Detention Calculations
Appendix D — Hydraulic Calculations
Appendix E — Referenced Information
Appendix F — LID Exhibits
Appendix G — Drainage Plans
[ft) J•R ENGINEERING
Page i '
Engineer's Certification Block
I hereby certify that this Final Drainage Report for Affinity Fort Collins 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 Sto�r Design -Standards. -- _
Jason M: Tarry, P.E
Registered Professional Engineer
State of Colorado No. 41795
m
J•R ENGINEERING
Page a
VICINITY MAP
HORSETOOTH ROAD-
Foxsrave
£Nl;�
RAN
Q
it
PARK
O
WE
NE Ya
W
Q WN2
m
R68W
h
Y
tt ^^
vJ
PARKaV
m
FRONr
I C� K c
►V
E HARMONY ROAD
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: 1"=1200'
Ift) J•R ENGINEERING
Page I '
GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
LOCATION AND EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Affinity Fort Collins is located in the southeast quarter of Section 32, Township 7 North, Range 68
' West of the 6th Principal Meridian in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. More
specifically, the Affinity Fort Collins site is an 8.35 acre property that is currently undeveloped and
' is being used for irrigated agricultural purposes. The site is zoned HC (Harmony Corridor District)
and will support apartments and associated amenities once developed. The proposed use of the site
is a three-story multi -family apartment complex and associated amenities. The proposed concept
' includes one main apartment building with separate garden area, pool building, and parking and
garages around the perimeter of the site. The proposed main building is 167,538 total square feet,
' with 153 dwelling units.
The existing site generally slopes from the southwest to the northeast with slopes ranging between
0.60% and 2.5%. The property is generally covered with sparse native grasses. The site currently
drains to the northeast and east. Runoff sheet flows off the east side of the property and a portion
of the runoff flows to a point in the north.
SITE SOILS
' The Affinity Fort Collins 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 Appendix A The site's geotechnical report is
included in Appendix E.
FLOODPLAIN
The site is shown on FEMA FIRM panel 08069C0994F, dated December 19, 2006. The site lies
within Zone X, areas which are determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. The
"City of Fort Collins Floodplain Review Checklist for 50% Submittals" checklist is not applicable for
this Final Drainage Report.
J Page 2
•R ENGINEERING
DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS
MAJOR BASIN
The proposed Affinity Fort Collins site is located in the Fox Meadows major basin. The Fox
Meadows Basin encompasses approximately 2.4 square miles in southeast Fort Collins. The basin is
bounded by Horsetooth Road on the north, Lemay Avenue on the west, Harmony Road on the
south, and the Cache La Poudre River on the east. The Fox Meadows basin is primarily developed
with residential development, some commercial areas and the Collindale Golf Course. The basin
does not include a major drainage way for conveying flows through the basin, so no regulatory
floodplain has been mapped. Storm runoff flows through a network of storm sewers, local drainage
channels and detention ponds.
The Fox Meadows Basin was studied by two earlier reports: the Fox Meadows Basin Drainage Master
Plan Update, prepared by ICON Engineering, Inc., dated December 2002 and revised February 2003;
and the Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Fox Meadows Basin Stormwater Master
Drainage Plan, prepared by ICON Engineering, Inc., dated October 2012. The site is located in the
second reach, which is generally located between Ziegler Road and Timberline Road. Proposed
improvements identified in the Master Plan documents consist of remedial improvements to
existing ponds which overtop in the major storm event, and a new detention facility, Ziegler Pond,
located east of the mobile home park. The Ziegler Pond was broken into six total detention ponds
placed in series in the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Front Range Village, Fort Collins,
Colorado, prepared by Stantec Consulting, dated February 2007.
There are no major drainage ways located within or immediately adjacent to the site. The site is
shown on FEMA FIRM panel 08069C0994F, dated December 19, 2006. The site lies within Zone X,
areas which are determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. An annotated FIRM
exhibit is included in Appendix A
HISTORIC SUB -BASINS
Affinity Fort Collins is an infill development piece of property. It is governed by the City's
Reasonable Use policy, in which the proposed drainage basins will need to follow the generally
accepted principle of releasing the 100-year developed condition flow rate at the same location and
magnitude as the 2-year pre -development condition flow rate. There are offsite areas that flow
across the proposed development site. Referring to the "Existing Drainage Plan", included in
Appendix G, the following describes the existing condition drainage basins.
J Page 3
•R ENGINEERING
Existing Offsite Drainage Basins (OS):
' Sub -basin OS I consists of 7.82 acres of the Harmony Mobile Home community that drains in a
northeasterly direction onto the subject property. In the existing condition, runoff from this portion
of the mobile home park (assumed 45% impervious based on approximately 8 units per acre and
Figure RO-3) is conveyed through the Affinity Fort Collins site.
An existing 15" corrugated metal pipe with 2'xl' square openings is located along the east edge of
the mobile home site. In the 100-year event, 15.25 cfs is captured in the pipe and conveyed north,
according to data provided by the City of Fort Collins. The flows are taken north and west of the
Affinity site to an existing offsite pond. This reduction in flows is assumed to only occur for the
100-year event, in the 2-year event all the flows are captured by the 15" pipe. The amount of
overflow from the Harmony Mobile Home community was modeled using EPA-SWMM and can be
' found in Appendix C.
Existing conditions offsite flows also enter the site from the south, from Pond 286 during the 100-
year storm event. At the 100-year level, Pond 286 located immediately south of the site, discharges
at 116 cfs over a concrete control weir located at the northeast end of the pond. These flows
currently sheet flow onto the Affinity Fort Collins site and continue to flow east to the Fort Collins
Land I LLC & Fort Collins Land II LLC property.
Existing Onsite Sub -Basins:
The site has two existing onsite drainage basins approximately delineated by a diagonal line
stretching from the southwest corner of the site to the northeast corner of the site with sub -basin
EX I on the north half and EX2 on the southern half.
' Sub -basin EX I consists of a 4.93 acre area of undeveloped open space with native grasses and
weeds covering the majority of the ground and is assumed to be 2% impervious. The 100yr
' overflow from the Harmony Mobile Home community (Sub -basin OS-1) enters the site along the
western boundary and joins on -site flows. Runoff generally flows northeasterly across basin EX -I, at
slopes ranging from 0.70% to 2.0%, generally leaving the site at the northeast corner near Kingsley
Court
Sub -basin EX2 consists of a 3.47 acre area of undeveloped open space with the same ground
' cover and percentage imperviousness as sub -basin EX-1. Overflow from Pond 286, just south of the
site boundary, enters sub -basin EX-2 during the 100 year storm, heads north before turning east
' and exits the site along the eastern boundary to the Fort Collins Land I LLC & Fort Collins Land II
LLC property. Existing slopes range from 0.60% to 2.50%.
t
J-R ENGINEERING
Page 4
DEVELOPED SUB -BASINS
The proposed developed condition sub -basins have been designed to mimic the historic basins'
runoff patterns, for both on- and off -site basins. The following describes the proposed conditions
on -site drainage basins. Refer to the "Proposed Drainage Plan" in Appendix G for reference.
Proposed Onsite Sub -Basins:
Sub -basin A I consists of 0.54 acres on the southwest corner of the subject property. Runoff from
the proposed building and parking lot travels north to a sump area inlet. Piped flows are conveyed
in the storm sewer around the north side of the property and are discharged into the proposed
detention pond at the east side of the property.
Sub -basin A2 consists of 0.63 acres on the west side of the subject property. Runoff from the
proposed building and parking lot is conveyed to a sump area inlet. Runoff from the proposed
garages discharges to a grass -lined bio-swale behind the garages, which discharges to the parking lot
and is captured in the inlet. Piped flows are conveyed in the storm sewer around the north side of
the property and are discharged into the proposed detention pond at the east side of the property.
Sub -basin A3 consists of 0.41 acres near the northwest corner of the subject property. Runoff
from the proposed building and parking lot is conveyed to a sump area inlet. Piped flows are
conveyed in the storm sewer around the north side of the property and are discharged into the
proposed detention pond at the east side of the property.
Sub -basin A4 consists of 0.31 acres on the north side of the subject property and includes part of
the proposed building, courtyard, and garden areas. Runoff is captured in a proposed area inlet,
surrounded by a grass buffer in the center of the sub -basin. Piped flows are conveyed in the storm
sewer around the north side of the property and are discharged into the proposed detention pond
at the east side of the property.
Sub -basin AS consists of 0.91 acres in the center north portion of the subject property and
includes the proposed building, garden area, and recreational area. Runoff is conveyed to a
proposed sump area inlet in the parking lot. Piped flows are conveyed in the storm sewer on the
north side of the property and are discharged into the proposed detention pond at the east side of
the property.
Sub -basin A6 consists of 0.17 acres on the east side of the subject property and consists of
parking lot area. Flows are captured in a sump inlet and are conveyed to the proposed detention
pond at the east side of the property.
Sub -basin A7 consists of 0.74 acres in the center -east portion of the site and includes a portion of
the proposed building and the upper pond of the two onsite detention ponds. Runoff enters the
upper pond and is conveyed to the proposed detention pond at the east side of the property.
Page 5 '
J-R ENGINEERING
Sub -basin A8 consists of 0.89 acres on the north side of the subject property. Runoff from the
proposed garages discharges to a grass -lined bio-swale behind the garages, which discharges to the
parking lot and is captured in the inlet. Piped flows are conveyed in the storm sewer around the
north side of the property and are discharged into the proposed detention pond at the east side of
the property.
Sub -basin B I is comprised of 0.16 acres at the southwest side of the proposed building. Flows are
captured in an area inlet and are conveyed in the proposed storm sewer around the south side of
the building to the proposed detention pond at the east side of the property.
Sub -basin B2 is comprised of 0.62 acres at the south side of the site. Flows are captured in an
area inlet and are conveyed in the proposed storm sewer around the south side of the building to
the proposed detention pond at the east side of the property.
Sub -basin B3 is comprised of 0.27 acres of parking lot at the south side of the proposed building.
Flows are captured in an area inlet in the parking lot and are conveyed in the proposed storm
sewer around the south side of the building to the proposed detention pond at the east side of the
property.
Sub -basin B4 is comprised of 0.22 acres of parking lot at the south side of the site. Flows are
captured in an area inlet in the parking lot and are conveyed in the proposed storm sewer to the
proposed detention pond at the east side of the property.
Sub -basin B5 is comprised of 0.81 acres of parking lot at the south side of the proposed building.
Flows are captured in an area inlet in the parking lot and are conveyed in the proposed storm
sewer around the south side of the building to the proposed detention pond at the east side of the
' property.
Sub -basin C is comprised of 0.87 acres of drive aisle on the east side of the subject property.
Flows are captured in an area inlet in the street and are conveyed directly to the proposed
detention pond at the east side of the property.
' Sub -basin D is a portion of the east side of the building and the proposed detention pond at the
east side of the property. The 0.67-acre sub -basin drains directly to the proposed detention pond.
Emergency Overflow In case the proposed inlets clog, the emergency overflow path for all inlets
is easterly through the street across the private drive and from there to the proposed level
spreader on the east property line which would convey flows east like the historical path. If the
inlets were to clog storm flows would not affect any structure, see calculation in Appendix D.
J Page 6
•R ENGINEERING
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 I, 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) as well
as 25% of the new pavement area must be treated by porous pavement. 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 composite runoff coefficient of the site and are expected to have no adverse
impact on the timing, quantity, or quality of stormwater runoff. The proposed site uses porous
pavers and bio-swales for the LID/BMP design elements. In total 56.6% of the new impervious area
is treated by an LID and 25.6% of the new pavement area is porous pavement, see the tables below
for treatment ratios and and additional detail on each LID. An illustrative LID/Surface Maps well as
sizing of the bio-swales is provided in Appendix F.
50% On -Site Treatment by LID Requirement
New Impervious Area
180,971 sq. ft.
Required Minimum Impervious Area to be Treated
90,486 sq. ft.
(=50% of new impervious area)
Area of Paver Section #1
2,314 sq. ft.
Impervious Run-on area for Paver Section #1 (2.0:1)
4,946 sq. ft.
Area of Paver Section #2
3,910 sq. ft.
Impervious Run-on area for Paver Section #2 (4.1:1)
15,836 sq. ft.
Area of Paver Section #3
1,590 sq. ft.
Impervious Run-on area for Paver Section #3 (3.4:1)
5,426 sq. ft.
Area of Paver Section #4
17,203 sq. ft.
Impervious Run-on area for Paver Section #3 (1.8:1)
30,272 sq. ft.
Area of Bio-Swale #1 Sand Media (Not included in total impervious area treated)
858 sq. ft.
Impervious Area Treated by LID Treatment Method #1 - BioSwale #1 (6.9:1)
5,952 sq. ft.
Area of Bio-Swale #2 Sand Media (Not included in total impervious area treated)
2,052 sq. ft.
Impervious Area Treated by LID Treatment Method #2 - BioSwale #2 (7.4:1)
15,096 sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area Treated
102,644 sq. ft.
Actual % of Impervious Area Treated
1 56.7
J•R ENGINEERING
Page 7 '
Table 2: 25% Porous Pavement Requirement
New Pavement Area
97,767
sq. ft.
Required Minimum Area of Porous Pavement (=25% of new pavement area)
24,442
sq. ft.
Area of Paver Section #1
2,314
sq. ft.
Area of Paver Section #2
3,910
sq. ft.
Area of Paver Section #3
1,590
sq. ft.
Area of Paver Section #4
17,203
sq. ft.
Total Porous Pavement Area
25,017
sq. ft.
Actual % of Porous Pavement Provided
25.6
%
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 Tables RO-3 and RO-5 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 USDCM Equation RA-3. To more closely match the City of Fort Collins
OF Curve, Coefficient 3 of the UDFCD's intensity formula was adjusted to 0.786. The City of Fort
Collins area has 2-year, 1-hour rainfall depth of 0.82 inches and a 100-year, I- hour rainfall depth of
2.86 inches. These depths do account for the 1997 adjusted rainfall depths. The 2- hour 100-year
rainfall total is 3.67 inches, based on the rainfall frequencies adopted by the City of Fort Collins.
The most recent version of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Stormwater Management
Model (EPA-SWMM) software (Version 5.1, May I, 2006) was used to determine the detention
volume requirements. The basins in SWMM were calibrated to match the flows from the rational
i=1•.
HYDRAULIC CRITERIA
This report demonstrates that the proposed stormwater detention concept is able to reduce the
' 100-year developed condition flows to the 2-year historical release rates; thereby satisfying the
City's Reasonable Use requirements. The EPA SWMM modeling software was used to size the
detention ponds in accordance with City criteria.
The ultimate Affinity Fort Collins storm drainage system will be designed to convey the minor and
' major storm events through the property with the proposed inlets, storm sewer pipes, and swales
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, all inlets and storm pipes will be
' designed to convey the 100-year storm flows. Pipe capacities were modeled in Bentley Storm CAD
V8i. All pipes have been designed to be in accordance with the Fort Collins Amendments to the Urban
Drainage and Flood Control District Criteria Manual with respect to pipe slope, capacity, velocity, and
HGUEGL elevation.
J•R ENGINEERING
Page 8
Onsite detention ponds will be used to capture the developed conditions runoff from the site as '
well as the portion I00yr overflow from the Harmony Mobile Home community that flows onto the
site. An outfall from the site, by others, will be used to convey detained releases east to the storm ,
drainage system in Ziegler Road. During the major storm event, the developed condition 100-year
storm, the accumulated water depth in the onsite detention ponds will be held to a maximum level
of one -foot below all building finished floor elevations. t
All Swale and pipe outlets will be protected with turf mat or riprap; whichever is most appropriate. ,
Storm sewer pipe outlets will be protected using the requirements set by the USDCM for the
protection of downstream conveyance channels and culverts. LID measures have been integrated
into this design. In all, 56.7 percent of this project's impervious areas pass through and are treated '
in LIDs prior to reaching the onsite water quality/detention ponds, which exceeds the minimum
requirement of 50 percent, set by the City of Fort Collins.
J Page 9
•R ENGINEERING
DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
GENERAL CONCEPT
The proposed improvements to the Affinity site will result in developed condition runoff being
conveyed around the proposed building and to the east via storm sewer and surface flow. Low -
impact development best management practices are proposed to improve the quality of runoff and
' aid in reducing peak flows and attenuating stormwater peaks. Specifically, permeable pavement
systems are proposed for portions of the parking lot and drive aisle and grass lined bio-swales are
proposed behind the garages on the north and west sides of the site to improve water quality.
Runoff from the site is captured in inlets located in the parking lot and in open areas adjacent to the
building. Runoff is conveyed in storm sewers in an easterly direction to the proposed detention
ponds at the east end of the site. Secondly, surface overflow paths have been provided, such that
the 100-year storm flows remain at least one foot below the finished floor elevation, in a fully
' clogged sub -basin condition.
An outfall design is proposed which will permit the Affinity site to discharge detained releases. This
' outfall will allow flows to reach the storm drain system in Ziegler, where it is allocated to pass to
the HP channel.
OFFSITE FLOWS
A portion of offsite flows from the Harmony Mobile Home community cross the western boundary
' of the development site and enter into Basin A2, only during the 100-year event. An existing 15"
corrugated metal pipe with 2'xI' square openings is located along the east edge of the mobile home
site. In the 100-year event, 15.25 cfs is captured in the pipe and conveyed north, according to data
provided by the City of Fort Collins. The flows are taken north and west of the Affinity site to an
existing offsite pond. This reduction in flows is assumed to only occur for the 100-year event, in the
' 2-year event all the flows are captured by the 15" pipe and piped north to the existing off -site pond.
The amount of overflow in the 100-year event from the Harmony Mobile Home community was
modeled using EPA-SWMM and can be found in Appendix C. The offsite overflows are collected in
' the grass lined bio-retention (soft-swale) along the western site boundary and conveyed to the
north where they are collected by sump inlets. The proposed system is intended to detain the
' offsite 100yr overflow from the Harmony Mobile Home community which will be routed through
the outlet structure of the pond at the historic 2 year rate for the offsite and onsite basin.
Existing conditions offsite flows also enter the site from the south, from Pond 286 during the 100-
year storm event. At the 100-year level, Pond 286 located immediately south of the site, discharges
at 116 cfs over a concrete control weir located at the northeast end of the pond. These flows
currently sheet flow onto the Affinity Fort Collins site and they continue to do so with the
proposed design. The existing 100-year flows are then routed north into the parking lot and drive
Page 10
J•R ENGINEERING
aisle, and flow into the proposed private drive at the east end of the Affinity site, to be conveyed
offsite across a level spreading concrete control weir onto the Fort Collins Land I LLC & Fort
Collins Land II LLC property. The proposed capacity of on -site storm sewer system is to convey
on -site flows and the overflow from the Harmony Mobile Home community. It is not intended to
obstruct or limit flows entering the site from pond 286, but to route them east to the Fort Collins
Land I LLC & Fort Collins Land II LLC property as in historic conditions.
PROPOSED WATER QUALITY/DETENTION FACILITIES
The City's Reasonable Use policy limits the rate of flow from developing properties to their 2- year
pre -development condition flow rate during the 100-year storm event. The proposed detention
pond's release rates were calculated combining the onsite 2-year historic flows with the offsite 2-
year historic flows. See Appendix G for a figure showing the on -site and offsite 2-year historic
flows and offsite 100-year historic flows.
The most recent version of the EPA SWMM software (Version 5.1) was used to determine the
detention volume requirements. The calculated water quality capture volume (WQCV) was added
to the total detention volume, and one foot of freeboard was included. The outlet structure was
designed in the most recent version of the UD-Detention (Version 2.35, January 2015) spreadsheet
and is based on releasing the 2-year event at historic rates (onsite and offsite) and the 100-year
event (onsite and offsite) through the outlet structure at the 2-year historic rate. The weir also
serves as an emergency overflow in the event that the outlet structure becomes blocked. See
Table I, below, for pond sizing and release rates. Water Quality/Detention calculations are
provided in Appendix C.
Table 3: Onsite Detention Pond Parameters
100-Year Volume Required
WQCV Total
Peak Inflow* Peak Outlet Discharge
I
Volume
(ac-fc)
(ac-ft) i (ac-ft)
:
...... ... ..... _.._............. ....... _... _......
(cfs) (cfs)
I
Pond A/B 1 1.74
0.162 1.902
47.6 2.1
*Includes Mobile Home flows. 17 cis
Pond A is a proposed onsite water quality and detention pond located on the east side of the site
and collects flows from all onsite basins. The pond detains the 100-year developed onsite flows as
well as the offsite flows that come from the Harmony Mobile Home community. In addition to the
constructed LID measures, water quality will be provided and will be released via a perforated
orifice plate to accomplish a 40-hour release of the WQCV. Pond A will detain the 100-year
developed condition runoff and release at a rate of the 2-year historic discharge, for the onsite and
offsite area) through the outlet structure.
Pond A's emergency spillway is located along the east side of the pond. The emergency spillway is
J Page II
•R ENGINEERING
' defined by a 65' long 2' wide earthen spillway adjacent to the back of curb along the private drive
aisle east of the pond. At a depth of six inches, the Pond A spillway can pass in excess of the total
' onsite and offsite undetained flows into the pond of 47.6 cfs. Above the six-inch flow depth, and
additional six inches of freeboard exists in and around the pond, in which no structures are affected.
' Calculations are provided in Appendix C.
The overflow path of Pond A is to the east across the private drive. A level spreader is proposed
' on the east property line which would convey flows east like the historical path.
Pond B is a secondary detention facility that works in series with Pond A. Pond B has no
' proposed restriction on the outlet, and drains into Pond A freely. In the event that the water
surface elevation in Pond A causes the north storm sewer system to surcharge, Pond B will act as
' additional storage for Pond A, essentially acting as one detention facility. Pond B's invert elevation
(4934.00) is located above Pond A (4930.52) to provide positive drainage to the outfall. In order
to ensure the pipe network is sufficient to convey flow from Pond A to Pond B without
' overtopping the Pond A spillway during the 100yr storm we have calculated the headloss between
the ponds. The headloss in the pipes between Pond A and B is a total of 0.31 feet (see table below).
' The 100yr water surface elevation is 4937.82 feet and the elevation of the spillway for Pond A is
4938.13 ft., a difference of 0.31 ft. Since the difference between the 100yr WSEL and the spillway
(0.31 ft.) is equal to the headloss in the pipes between the ponds, Pond B will reach the 100yr
WSEL before Pond A starts to flow over the spillway.
Table 4: Headloss between Pond A and B
Headloss for Ponds A and B in Series 100 r Event
Pie
Flow cfs
Length ft.
Slope ft.fft.
Headloss
ft.
Ma 30"
18.5
76.5
0.005
0.13
A6b 30"
18.5
62.7
0.005
0.11
A7 30"
15.5
41.0
0.018
0.07
TOTAL
0.31
Data from Storm CAD
model
Spillway Elev= 4938.13 ft.
Pond 100yr WSEL= 4937.82 ft.
Spillway Elev- 100yr WSEL= 0.31 ft.
Pond B has 3.36 feet of freeboard (low point at top of pond is located at the northeast corner,
4941.18). While Pond B does not feature an emergency spillway, any incidental overflow may
occur at the northeast corner of the pond, which is located at the back of sidewalk near the chase
drain. However, since the only inflow and outflow from Pond B is via the unrestricted storm sewer
connection with Pond A, the maximum water surface elevation in Pond B should never exceed the
water surface in Pond A, even in the event of a blockage.
J Page 12
•R ENGINEERING
The entire Pond A and Pond B detention system provides 2.17 acre-feet of storage with a minimum
of one -foot of freeboard below the finished floor elevations.
OUTFALL SYSTEM
An outfall system will be constructed to the east to Ziegler Road as part of the proposed
improvements. The Affinity site is located at the north end of the outfall system, located
downstream of the Harmony Mobile Home Park, and future developments' onsite water
quality/detention facilities to the east will tie into the system as they develop.
SWMM was used to evaluate the proposed outfall system for the detained release from the Affinity
site and to evaluate the effect of routing these flows as well as reconfiguring the existing weir of
pond 286 such that the overflow is directed to the east.
Per the 2007 Stantec Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Front Range Village, the maximum
peak discharge to the HP Harmony Campus drainage channel is 76.7 cfs. The existing outlet from
the English Ranch Subdivision discharges at a 100-year peak of 26.8 cfs, leaving 49.9 cfs for the
Paragon site and Front Range Village (23.3 cfs from "Pond A", 6.5 cfs from "Pond E", and 20.1 from
Pond 298; Stantec's "Pond A" has no correlation to the Affinity site's proposed Pond A).
Future Pond 298 will be located on the Sollenberger property east of Affinity. In total, two
ponds will release directly to the proposed Zielger outfall: the proposed Affinity Pond and future
Pond 298. The proposed two -pond system represents the original Pond 298 from the Stantec
report, which had a maximum release of 20.1 cfs. The proposed Affinity detention pond will
release at a peak rate of 2.1 cfs. Out of the 20.1 cfs allowed from the previous drainage
report to be released under Ziegler road, 2.1 cfs is being released from the Affinity
pond, leaving 18 cfs for future development on the property to the east of the Affinity
site.
The proposed Zielger outfall system from the Affinity site will be comprised of 12" ADS HDPE
pipe, with manholes at changes in horizontal alignment. The proposed system is placed at 0.30
percent due to cover restrictions based on existing grade, which functions adequately using the
peak design flows ( 1.5 cfs in the 2yr event 2.1 cfs in the 100yr event). In the 2yr event the outfall
system is 70% full and has an average velocity of 2.9 fps. In the 100yr event the outfall system in
100% full and has an average velocity of 2.67 fps. Hydraulic calculations are presented in Appendix
D.
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,
I ft) J Page 13
•R ENGINEERING
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
detention/water quality ponds, riprap pads placed for culvert outlet 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. A detailed Storm Water
Management and Erosion Control Plan, report, and cost estimate meeting all City requirements is
submitted under a separate cover.
■ MAINTENANCE
' The storm sewer system and water quality/detention ponds will be owned and maintained by the
property owner. The owner of the drainage facility is responsible for the maintenance of all
components of the drainage system located on their property; including inlets, pipes, culverts,
t channels, ditches, hydraulic structures, detention basins or other such appurtenances unless
modified by development agreement.
Maintenance access into Ponds A and B will take place from the parking areas and drive aisles
adjacent to the ponds. The side slopes of the ponds (4:1 H:V maximum) will permit access to each
' of the forebays and outlet structures.
Annual inspections should take place on both detention facilities to ensure they are functioning as
intended. At no time should the outlet structure of either facility be blocked by sediment or debris,
and consequently, minor maintenance should take place after significant storm events to remove
trash and debris buildup from the outlet structures of both facilities. Removal of accumulated debris
' should be scheduled annually as well, typically no later than May to ensure that each facility is
operating as designed before each storm season. Frequent mowing of vegetation will help the ponds
' with odor and insect control.
Annual maintenance operations should include:
' • Inspect outlet structure and pipes, check structural integrity
• Check pond sedimentation levels,
' • Trash and debris removal (each spring, before storm season)
• Wetland vegetation overgrowth mitigation, odor control, insect control as needed based on
observation or complaints
' • Scheduled sediment removal and disposal for every 5 years, or as needed to keep forebays
to less than 1 /3 full of sediment at all times.
Page 14
J•R ENGINEERING
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The proposed concept for the development of the Affinity Fort Collins site involves surface flows
and piping of developed conditions flows to a proposed onsite detention pond. LID site
enhancements will treat the site runoff at the source before allowing the runoff to be conveyed to
the proposed detention pond. Offsite flows from the west will be conveyed through the site and
detained in the onsite detention pond. Offsite flows from Pond 286 to the south (100-year flows
only) will enter the site from the south and will be bypassed through the Affinity site and over the
level spreading concrete weir, across its 150 foot length during a major event; in the same
character, quality and rate as historically passed through the site.
EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS
The existing conditions drainage has two onsite sub -basins with different outfall points on the east
side of the subject property. The major differences between the existing condition and the
proposed condition are as follows:
1. In the existing condition, Design Point I (Basins OS- I and EX 1) discharges near Kingsley Court.
In the proposed condition, this offsite and onsite runoff is collected in the proposed storm sewer
and detention pond system, and these flows will be conveyed to the ultimate Ziegler Road outfall
with the remaining onsite flows.
2. The existing condition, flows from Basin EX2 and the 100-year offsite flows from Pond 286 (1 16
cfs) are both discharged across the east side of the subject property over the level spreading
concrete weir. The onsite basin EX2 has a variable concentrated flow path through the site and the
offsite flows from Pond 286 enter the Affinity site after being level -spread over the Pond 286 weir.
In the proposed condition, all onsite flows will be discharged from the onsite detention pond at
allowable historic rates, while the Pond 286 overflows that enter the site will be allowed to pass
over the detention pond's weir, thus providing no additional detention for the Pond 286 overflows.
All flows that pass over the onsite pond's weir will be level -spread over a proposed weir as the
flows leave the Affinity site on its eastern boundary.
The existing conditions drainage patterns are maintained in the proposed conditions. The proposed
improvements will have no adverse impacts on the flow rate, character, or quality of runoff leaving
the site.
The hydrologic and detention/water quality 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 report exhibits that the proposed detention meet or exceed the requirements
set forth in the City of Fort Collins "Storm Drainage Criteria Manual and Construction Standards",
along with all its addenda.
J Page 15
•R ENGINEERING
REFERENCES
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for Front Range Village. Fort Collins. Colorado: Stantec
Consulting, February 2007.
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Larimer County and Incorporated Areas (Map No.
08069C0994F); Federal Emergency Management Agency, December 19, 2006.
Fox Meadows Basin Drainage Master Plan Update; ICON Engineering, Inc., December 2002 and
revised February 2003.
Hydrologic Group Rating for Larimer County Area, Colorado; USDA -Natural Resources
Conservation Service, National Cooperative Soil Survey. Web Soil Survey URL:
httpd/websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov. [July 21, 2010]
Storm Drainage Criteria Manual and Construction Standards; City of Fort Collins Storm Water
Utility, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Updated January, 1997.
Stormwater Quality and Stream Restoration Update to the Fox Meadows Basin Stormwater Master
Drainage Plan; ICON Engineering, Inc., October 2012.
Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (Volumes I, 2, and 3); Urban Drainage and Flood Control
District, June 2001.
J•R ENGINEERING
Page I6
APPENDIXA - FIGURES
1* J•R ENGINEERING
Zt�\/
;!!!r
§�`
``
|`.
owe
k 7
!�§z|
`
b
CL
»
!;.
■ 2
i
|
\�\:|
§
■
m
)
|
2 c
§ § §
ƒ
|
�,l�!
§
§
-n
§ f
\ i
0
;
g
§
|||
#!�
■ !
U
u
:,j!
)
2
Q o
°
o
e
|r
0|
,l,;�
Lf),
■
■
■
b
§
!
§
\ !
�
�
�
�
k
�
§
o
§
.
�
!■{|.
%
/\,
2
k
§
)
§ §2
§|
||E
SE
�
u
c
\
!!!!§
CL
�
)M{
d
�eq
CN
�
w
»
'
Q
)
,
!
2
�w
LO
§
C3
L
Cl)
CO)
USDA United States
Department of
Agriculture
N RCS
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
Figure 2 . NRCS Solis Data
December 1, 2015 1
d99evr
M,% L e501
1
1
a
Qa2
'D
U O
7 �
O U
N
� O
CO T
E_
o
m �
U
1
1
M�,S SO
' 4
OVi9Bbb oi99ebb C859BW Ns9 ob9eb ffi9
6
o9nsevv
M,K I c T
F
u
+Y
u
'n
a
M
N
zm
6
�
R
�
$
to
a
to
Z
m.ee.t
.m
..■■(|��|�����E§■O■■�O(��_
,=q,lz:eo;,2>fl,2em,;>!
ƒ\
!■
_
}
{
�
■f
�II�
m
0� 0
`
°
°
{
Er
/
/
!
!
| (
e
$
--
°
>[
-a
f.
;l2;!
Egg a,
0
■!
■Ilm
'U
■
,
22�
-
ki
,
n
.,
;!
}§kw
3
§
!!!
,>
;\
#7;
5
'
_
2
[&
r\\}}
w
10
&\(|
\
(
.
}
0
§(y�&
.
)(z
§
\
\
\�}
(
\_\
\k
f
{7§2
,(
§_
EElf
$
§
\\\
)k($}
(ƒ|
7
2
{
/
(\
fi[\
f
!!
{}
/
|##}!
(ou
\
k
[
.\//
/
o
/(k!(
tea
o§}!
i
ƒ
a
�U;-�
:>!
§
!!�;
;
,
a
|
}(\`(k\\
))(
t
(((§
B
)
\[2|
\\
!
|0
}/!
CD A.
0
�`
- 0
-
12
Custom Soil Resource Report
Table —Hydrologic Soil Group
Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit — Larimer County Area, Colorado (CO644)
Map unit symbol I Map unit name I Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
73 Nunn clay loam, 0 to 1 C
0.5
4.3%
percent slopes
74 Nunn clay loam. 1 to 3 C
11.0
95.7 ro
percent slopes
Totals for Area of Interest
11.5
100.0%
Rating Options —Hydrologic Soil Group
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified
Tie -break Rule: Higher
25
APPENDIX B - HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS
-� J R ENGINEERING
A 3 18 8I SIg
E O > >
E z
z C u u
$
z
—
i
9 a
0
X
a
e
0
E
X
4
—
O
O
O U
J �
i
O
=
x
O
F
I
H
m
D
O
2
T
Q
n
a
z
A
2
O
f
m
0
Q
Z
A
1'1 9
u
D
N
g = 3 R
O
N
R K t O
A
g
a
3
o_
clu
r
LLIC
d
x
x
a
r
a
a
3
i
0
0
a
a
w
J
(sd)1 NpoP
W
H
(sapui) axis adid
(%)ado
n
(sp) Mogj ulssao
Ju
W
(sp)Mo(j)aaq
(%1 adol
(sp) tin
0
o
LL
i
(,y/ui)
F
UV)V
(uiw) o
(Sp)
d
a
o
n
r
(Wu)
ri
LL
pV) V.
s
O
m
O
•'
O
O
(uiw) l
O
C'Nao3
Uoun
pV) ear
m
P
Q
pl uiseg
0
V
is
wind URrsap
O
O�
m>
W
m
am
J
m
N
A
W
Fa
D
O
J
O
O
O
N O
N
O
J
O
N
O
T
O
4mp
O
P
O
O
m
O
O
A
O
W
O
6
y
i
Y
X
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
9
0
0
0
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
D
m
D
a
x
e
m
G
S
x
S
_
A
O
n
s"
N
X
X
U
U
U
U
U
N
N
U
U
3
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
s
a
G
�-
T
W
Y
Y
O
O
r
Y
W
W
O
W
O
X A
a
X
a
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Y
A
P
m
P
O
O
V
W
N
P
O
m
N
b
F
X q
o q
u
nm
w
N
yy
N
g
H
J
J
O
r
mW
Y
m
P
O
N
V
O
tp
N
D
q N
e
N
C
W
Q r..
O O
o
D
n
'-
O
�
O
u
�
O
O
3
v
O
LA
1
m
0
3
m
z
G
O
9
j 9 V1
C p n
v r
D
2
n < < o n C
�
$
O
S
�
C_
O
U
O
�
pO
�
d O > > d
m m
Z
Z u
d
LL F-
p S q Zj
F
C
O w
p Z
z O
Q U
LL
2O
Q
cW
� G
S
U
LL
N
OO
m
N
O
u1
N
N
N
N
m
�D
2
r �
O
O
O
n
O
b
O
N
M
N
o
O
T
m
�O
nl
F
a
$ 2
c �
Z
J
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
�
�
V
m
F
O
O
b
O
N
N
N
M
M
Y1
O
N
O
Y
.j
O
T
ry
C
ti
n
OO
ti
O
O
1
'1
T
n
F P
ry
0
Wj u
F
0
vi
o
0
0
0
0
w
ry
0
0
0
o
N
N
0
N ye
N
o
0
o
m
o
o
ry
o
m
n
N
o�
ry
o
o
r �
N
M
N
2
�o
a
n
T
m
T
m
o
N
M
M
ti
�.m
m
T
m
O
N
o
N
T
m
o
N
a
eV
N
+
y1
oy
G
N
g
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
mea'N
en
d
0
8
u"
0
0
0
0
b0
0
0
60
d 0
0
0
0 a
0
0
0
0
d
Y
0
0
0
0
a
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
p�p
S
R
S
R
8
S
8
R
8
M
8
8
8
K
a
c
o
v
Z
a
E
m
b
o
m
m
n
n
-I
I a
F
�8o
se�
o
O mp
Z N
V
V
V
V
V
Y
V
V
Y
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
0n
0
0
0
0
o
0
o
6
0
199
0
0
11
0
o
n
a
y
m
ign Point
O
g
n
n
n
n
g
n
aSin 10
Y'
ea (All
unotF Coen.
O
O
O
O
P
m
Q
e
a
o
c(min)
p
C
g
O
Np
•A (A<I
Z
O
(in/hr)
r
o
ar)
Tc (min)
0
O
A IAI
P
C
14
in/hrl
m
m
O
(ns)
ow M
P
m
treet Flaw (ch)
sign Flow Ids)
v
Slope J%I
v
ipe Size (inches)
ength(k)
m
elocity(to,)
y
3
t (min)
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
in
s
3
n
0
II,
0
N
O
aW
LL p
%A Z w
g Go'
cc W a
O CL�S 0
FW CH
Z
W ZO
N Z a
CQ
L
K
0
VI
c
0
V
c
E
E
m
O �
C
q
VI
9
W W
_
m
Q
w
a
�
m
y
d
" u
T_
o
C• y
W �
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
Q
O U
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
c
d
(uiw) 41
W
F
J
W
(Sdi)/a!wla
N114>sua
(satnulJ azg add
W
a
(S)J) MOB j UHISa
(W) Moll 4a -Q
I%l adolS
(SV)
"I
ui
oa
ti
m
vi
n
au
v
na
ri
ri
ri
b
Z
(jq/u!)
w
n
T
N
m
mcc
n
O
m
m
T
N
d
N
n
m
F
(w) V.3
O
'I
rl
N
0
O
O
n
O
O
O
O
O
.y
lulw)J
m
0
G
C
G
N
m
Y1
YI
m
Is�l
m
N
m
T
O
T
N
N
n
'I
O
m
T
O
Y
N
m
O
d
•'I
N
n
rl
m
YI
O
m
T
n
o
$
m
g
$
g
o
0
0
0
0
.
1�4/ul)
m
.
m
n
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
W
W
(W) V.2
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
m
N
O
w
O
N
m
O
ti
O
N
d
O
N
N
O
O
O
N
d
O
N
N
O
O
VI
N
O
N
m
O
m
T
O
j
o:
(ulw) a
..
1p
o
VI
O
10
II1
N
O
V1
e
1ff
N
O
N
o
N
O
YI
O
Vf
O
YI
o
MI
m
m
Gp
C
'yaoJ Hou^
w
0
w
0
N
0
b
0
n
0
N
o
Vml
1D
0
1q
0
m
0
m
0
1m0
6
n
0
li
0
toV
W
po
N
m
O
T
m
H
n
p0
m
N
b
N
N
m
m
N
(M ¢az
n
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
al UP
Q
no
¢
a0
¢
v0f
¢
Q
Q
m0
¢
m
m
m
m
V
O
.0.
lUIOd ""ISa
N
T
O
m
m
n
m
m
O
N
m
rn
APPENDIX C -WATER QUALITY/DETENTION
CALCULATIONS
J•R ENGINEERING
R
I
V-
3
O O
O O
O O
O
O O O
O O
O O
O O
O
O O O
O O
O O
O O O
(Sj0) NQd
s
C
m
a
0000000 000000000000000a000000000.... .......
e� `&v 3^ee'eoeM R.o 'R Ri7lR bY�R �'rNRnNRrrR O1m. m�'w �omm�mn�nry _o
(SAO) ^ 3
Table - Node 596
Days
Hours
Volume
(ft3)
Total Inflow
(CFS)
0
00:05:00
0.00
0.00
0
00:10:00
24.63
0.18
0
00:15:00
314.16
1.83
0
00:20:00
1282.39
4.85
0
00:25:00
4013.01
13.77
0
00:30:00
10865.10
34.22
0
00:35:00
23160.11
48.08
0
00:40:00
36772.21
44.27
0
00:45:00
48237.50
35.48
0
00:50:00
57032.96
26.91
0
00:55:00
63386.07
19.40
0
01:00:00
67706.97
13.58
0
01:05:00
70725.03
10.68
0
01:10:00
72892,36
7.80
0
01:15:00
74337,53
5.87
0
01:20:00
75231.84
4.14
0
01:25:00
75691.56
2.98
0
01:30:00
75875.77
2.31
0
01:35:00
75894.09
1.87
0
01:40:00
75811.83
1.64
0
01:45:00
75682.00
1.56
0
01:50:00
75534.16
1.51
0
01:55:00
75380.46
1.51
0
02:00:00
75226.98
1.51
0
02:05:00
75000.70
1.03
SWMM M Page 1 1
Days
Hours
Volume
(ft3)
Total Inflow -
(CFS)
0
02:10:00
74639.24
0.61
0
02:15:00
74177.42
0.35
0
02:20:00
73653.90
0.19
0
02:25:00
73092.81
0.10
0
02:30:00
72508.66
0.03
0
02:35:00
71911.09
0.00
0
02:40:00
71309.79
0.00
0
02:45:00
70709.55
0.00
0
02:50:00
70110.37
0.00
0
02:55:00
69512.27
0.00
0
03:00:00
68915.23
0.00
0
03:05:00
68319.28
0.00
0
03:10:00
67724.41
0.00
0
03:15:00
67130.62
0.00
0
03:20:00
66537.91
0.00
0
03:25:00
65946.30
0.00
0
03:30:00
65355.77
0.00
0
03:35:00
64766.34
0.00
0
03:40:00
64178.00
0.00
0
03:45:00
63590.82
0.00
0
03:50:00
63004.82
0.00
0
03:55:00
62420.00
0.00
0
04:00:00
61836.37
0.00
0
04:05:00
61253.93
0.00
0
04:10:00
60672.68
0.00
0
04:15:00
60092.64
0.00
' SWMM M Page 2
V Q
m m m dw
n • u u
O z
Z
F8
o0
3-088
=�;
s
2
ii
m0<g
0
44
z
$9
d
o
LP F
>
ti F
¢ Z c
2 U
U
D
Q
o
0 0
2
8
4
•
o
P
gg
U °
2
u
U • Y
J. o >
O
O
i
ow
: s a a i
LZ-ZZ1,zz,zz,l zzz�Cz,•r zzz4
m
6
n
K
C
R
rc
n
C
K
c
• <
0
o:
w W
c
L �
w>
� I
�
n,
�I
i
m'im
QQ QQ mN m o� ry m aaa aaa
E S o oo o -- - z z z z i z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z
a
o 0 o c o 0 0 0 0 0 o a a a a a x a x a x a a a a x a a a a x a a a a a t a a x a
_�Q5�
.� WWa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa << a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
z z z 3 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z
Y i i i
O o 0 o a x Y Y Y x Y Y Y i
, �'.�
¢m
S S B o 0 0 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z
����� i i i Y x i i i
d
�'m
m m
—
ocloo f� �;S z¢a as as«iYYiixY
¢ ¢ ¢ a a a ¢ < ¢ a ¢ f a ¢aaaaa
O.O O O O ry Z'i ZZ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ZI `Z Z Z Z Z Z 2 Z z z Z z
ci o 0 o O o O o 0 0 o iii• w •• Y' a a a x x x Y i a a a a x Y a Z. i •SEE i, x i i s
¢
¢ ¢ a < a, g ¢ ¢. ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢
z Z�;2zZ z.2 Zz2Zz2 ZI
I C O o 0 z i z z z a a a z a
m
d
C) C G 0 0 o Cl
n.<,.6.< oZ2ZZZ222z2222ZzZZz22 z Z
0occg8O
Nil,
nW WV d d
d d
V d
d
N
Ol 0 P
o n n n
e e e a
N
b
v - v
(na�a yaa�� a6e�g
0
G
h
O
8
G
rs
d
0
0
ro
g
N N N No
a e v a
i
m
s
STAGE -STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS
Nolaet: Affinity Fort Collins
Basin ID: Onslts Detention Pond
ma i �I _YMl3 elli
M; R •I
i
Yq i Y4r
.__t _s .. _. _........s Yaere L
Design Inbrmation Ilnputi'.
Check Basin Show
Wtdth of Basin Bottom. W =
20 DO h Right Tnangle
OR.
Lengdl of BasinSon=. L =
260.00 it isosceles Triangle
OR
Dam Side -slope (H'.V). Za =
4.00 tVft Rectangle
X
OR.
Circle I Ellipse
OR...
Irregular
(Use 0lende ♦alusc in coils G32 G52)
MINOR
MAJOR
Storage Requirement from Sheet'ModiM1etl FAN 028
1 3,16
acn-fl.
Stage -storage ReWtbnship:
Storage Requirement from Sheet'Hydrognph'.
acre-fl.
Storage Requirement from Sheet'Full-Specti
acre-ft.
Labels
for WOCV. Minor,
8 Ma1or Storage
StagesRM
(m ullBelow
Side
Sops
(H:V)
El.
Basin
Width at
Stagg
fl
out ul
Basin
Length at
Stage
fl
output)
Surface
Area at
Stage
K
ou t
Surface
Ana at
Stage
Its User
Ovarlde
Volume
Below
Stage
fl'
(Output,
Surface
Area at
Stage
acne
(output)
Volume
Below
Stage
acre-ft
out ut
Target Volumes
for WOCV. Minor,
8 Mato, Storage
volumes
for oalseek
14935
nn mil
2000
280.00
5200.0D
0
0.000
0.000
20.00
20.OD
26200
5240.0
1.042
281
3578
0.024
0.D06
2B8,00
5320.0
5595
_
0.128
0.002
MOD
Z0.00
ZT0.00
5400.0
7337
100�5 0188
18,210 0206
28,618 0 271
43�98 0 421
0,231
0 418
0 657
274.00
54800
8 9B3
20,00
278.00
5.500.0
11 823
4936 W
2D.00
282.00
5 040.0
18 337
1 003
493700
20.00
280.00
5720.0
22475
_
Ulu 0.518
88.376 _ 0.598
g4,200 0 617
1472
4938.00
20.00 _
20.00
290.00
290,58
5,000.0
5 817 6
5.857E
26 069
2.029
Spillway Elev
4938.22
26 875
2,103
t' Freeboard
aB3B.72
20.DO
202.88
30.608
10@571 0 703
2492
_
_
MIA
MIA _
WOCV WSEL
MIA
NIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
WOCV ac-8:
4932S1
0. 162
MIA
2-Year W SEL
MIA
2-veer ao-8
49N 11
_
-MA
MIA
_ MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
0442
100-Year WSBL
MIA
100-Year wft
4937 62
MIA
MIA
1902.
MIA_
MIA
MIA_
MM
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
M4fA
MNIA
MIA
MNIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
pNIA
pIA
MIA
MIA
MIA—
MIA
WA
MIA
WA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
pN/A
MIA
M4IA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
MIA
39704000D-Dalention_ U (12-02-15) ds. Basin V21 %016 11 14 AM '
STAGE -STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS
P,O,.CF
Basin 10'
STAGE -STORAGE CURVE FOR THE POND
4939,52
493852
493752
00•YR: 4938.22
38704000D-DetenM1on_Y2.74 (12d2-15),dc. Basin 1212018, 11:14 AM
RESTRICTOR PLATE SIZING FOR CIRCULAR VERTICAL ORIFICES
Project: Affinity Fort Collins
Basin IC: Onsite Detention Pond
S'i no the Resthetor Plate for Circular Vertical Critical or Pipes (Input)
Water Surface Elevation at Design Depth
PipeNarl cal Onfice Entrance Invert Elevation
Required Peak Flow through Orifice at Design Depth
Pipelifenical Orifice Diameter (mchea l
Orifice Coefficient
Full -flow Cawclty ICalculatetll
Full -flow area
Halt Central Angie in Radians
Full-ff. capacity
Calculation of Office Flow Condition
Hall Central Angle (0<Thefa<3.1416)
Flow area
Top vndtn of Onfice (inches)
Height from Inver of Orifice m Bottom of Plate (feet)
Elevation of Before of Plate
Resultant Peak Flow Through Orifice at Design Depth
Width of Equivalent Rectangular Vertical Orifice
Centroid Elevation of Equivalent Rectangular Vertical Orifice
Elev WS=
Elev Invert=
Q=
Dia =
C.
#2 VerticalOrifice
ffi
feet
feet
ets
inches
Af=I
079
sq ft
Thole =L
3.14
_
cad
Of=
10.2
ds
Percent of Design Flux =
486%
TlM
1.06
'red
!b
sq ft
T.=
1048
inches
Y.=
0.25
feet
Elev, Plate Bottom Edge =
4,930.75
feet
C.
21
L
Equivalent Width il
0.6
feet
Eque,.CentroldEl.mF
4=63
_
T
feet
39704000D-Detentim_v2.34 (12-02-15).As, Reatncft r Plate 11212016, 11'.16 AM
STAGE -DISCHARGE SONG OF THE WEIRS AND ORIFICES (INLET CONTROL)
Project AMInq Fon Collins
Basin to Onsne Detention Pond
ee
C..reni Routing Ord., io e.1
M.waa..
Daagn Wherein. ihoun.
#1 None,
IR FbR mvan.
X1Van
C.'c Open, DO W to 10.
Dia =
Irclba
OR
RO,t.,lar Open, WMMm Fed
W-1
20
084
n
Loop, (HOUR for VMlke)
Lor A=
292
O.ri
n
Permraepe of OPen Mee Aver Trash Reck Repiepap
%Open=
%
OMin Caafrlaaa
C.
wto CoaRlune
C.
Odke Elevation l9#1tone for Verllna
E.
Calcine lon of 9.1lia bh Caer;
Net Opned Ama leflw Trash Rack Reduc4onl
A.=
553
016
Ada
OPTIONAL UeepOrer.le Nd OpenAree
A,=
eR n
Pmlmper ea Wae LagN
t.=
90OPTIONAL
Uee, N . We"LeyT
Top E"bon of VOI OM OPOW, Top =49W 15 II
CO.., Ehon of Veltral Ordlce Open, Cep = 49M 63 II
Routing 3: Single Stage -Water flows through WQCV plate and #1 horizontal opening into #1 vertical opening. This flow will be applied to
culvert sheet (#2 vertical & horizontal openings is not used).
v.m-.I ndm.e
Levee
WOW, MMM,
W.S. Einlbe
Ut
Wasp
9ufem
Ekestn
A
ertedl
WOCV
Pleteeft.
Fbw
de
M1Me�A�A tr
H None #1 He.
War OMIn
Fbv Re.
de ofe
l0 1 l0 Nl
Q NOR Q Honx
Walr OMoe
Pow plow
ela cla
l0 a 1 1
mVan42Ven.
Colleellan
CapM4y
de
cobctor
Ceyeeiry
ds
l0 )
Total
CL9sdM
CMM lly
ds
Iw OI
Tew VeenwsIn
M WOW MMaMspr9npe
aMNorsoneae
vulmeeLn
IMwln seen493D.50
em
am
am
Om
am
am
am
am
4931.m
0.10
Om
am
am
Om
0A9
am
0.10
-YerWSEL-.
0832.00
029
Om
O.m
O.m
O.m
0.99
am
o10
2.Yw 0 ate4934.11
493300
On
042
1m
Was
11.m
Om
Om
in
am
12349U
051
29A3
am
am
1.49
am
faa4935
00
00
493700
n93800
O m
9169
182a0
245.m
33BA5
4043
Om
Om
Om
am
1w
am
t.sl49M
0.e1
Q.91
am
1.85
3A1
am
1.C5
tin-YearWSEL.
OT3
5411
am
am
2.01
"D.Ya 0 ds4937.82
pJ9
62.50
O.m
O.m
2.16
a.m
Nil
210
5 Illwa Dev
493822
Om
=M
61a1
am
am
219
am
2.19
1' Fro.top rd
49M 72
Om
41171
all
am
Om
229
am
229
WA
RYA
WA
WA
WA
am
ALA
WA
RYA
RYA
RYA
WA
Om
M IA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
am
WA
MA
WA
RYA
MLA
WA
#WA
eWA
MiIA
am
MLA
WA
WA
WA
WA
am
MYA
MYA
WA
WA
Om
WA
RYA
MWA
9WA
MA
Om
Om
MYAMIIA
RYA
WA
RW
WA
MIAMYA
W
WA
WA
RYA
Om
MIA
MIA
MIA
WA
WA
WA
WA
O,m
MIA
WA
WA
WA
WA
0m
MIA
MIA
WA
MYA
RYA
WA
(IM
MIA
MIA
WA
WA
MIA
M41A
RYA
am
MIA
RYA
RYA
RYA
RYA
Om
MIA
WA
WA
WA
aWA
WA
am
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
am
WA
WA
WA
MIA
MIA
a1m
WA
WA
WA
WA
"A
a.m
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
Om
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
Om
WA
#IYA
WA
WA
WA
WA
#NSA
awA
MIA
IWA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA WA
Om
WA
WA
WA
WA WA
am
WA
WA
WA
WA #WA
am.
WA
WA
WA
WA WA
a.m
WA
WA
WA
WA NIA
Om
WA
WA
MYA
WA 14A
Om
WA
WA
WA
WA WA
Om
WA
WA
WA
WA #WA
O:m
WA
WA
WA
WA WA
am
WA
*a
WA
WA WA
Om
WA
WA
M#`
WA WA
Om
WAWA
WA
WA
WA
WA
O.m
WA
MIA
WA
WA
oo
WA
391040000-Delenlmn_V1.34112-02-151.#s, Outlet 1M/2018, 11:22 AM
STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE WEIRS AND ORIFICES (INLET CONTROL(
Project: ABlnity Fort Colline
Basin ID'. OnvOe Detention Pon4
STAGE -DISCHARGE CURVE FOR THE OUTLET STRUCTURE
4939.15 —
4938.15
1'DO-YR:, 49 7.82
4937.15
m2 4938.15 -
4)
N 4935.15
cm
tD
U)
4934.15
4933.15
4932.15
4931.15
4930.15 - - —
0 05 15 2 2.5
Discharge (cfs)
397NOWD-Detention_Y2.34 (12m-15).tla, amet 1121/2016, 11 22 AM
Cross Section for Pond A Overflow Spillway
Project Description
o . e For
Headwater Elevffion
Input Data
Discharge
47.60
ft-is
Headwater Elevation
4938.56
ft
Crest Elevation
4938A3
ft
Tail water El evation
4937.85
it
Weir Coeffiaent
2.63
US
Crest Length
65.00
ft
Cross Section Image
E
T
0 43 It
I
Bentley Systems. Inc Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [06. 01.071.001
3l IN% 5:25:46 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown. CT 06795 USA ♦1-203.755-11666 Page 1 of 1
Worksheet for Pond A Overflow Weir
Project Description
Solve For
Headwater Elevation
Input Data
Discharge
47.60
fP/s
Crest Elevation
4938.13
ft
Tailwarter Elevation
4937.85
ft
Weir Coefficient
2.63
US
Crest Length
65.00
it
Results
Headwater Elevation
4938.56
ft
Headwater Height Above Crest
0.43
ft
Tailwater Height Above Crest
-0.28
ft
Equal Side Slopes
0.25
fUft (H: V)
Flow Area
27.76
ft'
Velocity
1.71
fUS
Wetted Penmeter
65.88
ft
Top Width
65.21
If
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster (08.01.071.001
3/2/2016 6:24:26 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 2D0 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 ,
Level Spreader Cross Section for 100yr Flow Conveyance
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Formula
Solve For Normal Depth
Input Data
Channel Slope 0.00065 ftift
Normal Depth 0.55 ft
Discharge 116.00 W/s
Cross Section Image
4938.70
4938.60
4938.50
4938.40
C 4938.30
4
4938.20
4938.10
4938.00
4937.90
4937.80
4937.70
4937,60
- -- - -- - — - -- - Station
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.071.001
4/7/2016 11:09:00 AM 27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA .1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Level Spreading Concrete Weir for 100yr Flow Conveyance
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Formula
Solve For Normal Depth
Input Data
Channel Slope 0.00D65 ft/ft
Discharge 116.00 WIS
Section Definitions
station (ft)
•0+05
0+00
0+15
0+29
1+29
1+33
Roughness Segment Definitions
(-0+05, 4938.53)
Elevaliat (ft)
4938.53
4938.40
4938.D9
4937.85
4937.85
4938.50
Ending Station
(1+33, 4938,50)
Normal Depth
0.55
ft
Elevation Range
4937.85 to 4938.53 it
Flow Area
64.32
W
Wetted Perimeter
132.03
ft
Top Width
131.98
ft
Normal Depth
0.55
It
Critical Depth
0.33
ft
Critical Slope
0.00365
ft/ft
Velocity
1.80
fvs
Velocity Head
0.05
ft
Specific Energy
0.60
ft
Froude Number
0.46
Roughrtaes Coaftfolerit
0.013
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster (08.01.071.001
4171201611:07:50 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2
' APPENDIX D - HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS
t J R ENGINEERING
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Project: Atlinity Fort Carl PDP
We IS: Inlet Al
OVER D
SIDE OVERLAND
STREET
I FLOW
I
61ex0Wlb
GU�FLDw
GUTTER PLUS CARRY0VER FLOW
ROADWAY CENTERLINE
teetly
van omerm Mlnor5lam
Meer Slam
Isxq Prik A•.n 1'S gsert,M psu„so MMtl 'On.....' 0.9
9.9 oh
zILL IN THIS SECTION
' H ou vuar values N Row L, ak
he neat 0 ttb atriN and proommad to alwl O-Allow o, Area Inlet.
OR
Griopriphk bhxanalbn:l nim erib In tle 011ie.,
ILL IN THE SECTIONS
SutrJtrhnl ArnArne,nen
s e
ELOW
nt I.. cannot a•, vmuea a. tm D .m e
tte D umulgo, a tM m crie rime P,neenl ImpervlouNess=
x
—
SbTmri:
-II'T���IIe
F•a O daw rgaJ tor: NRCS Sal Type
B. C, orD
r
_
I�JAo
Q 9h 1, ~
S4se[INeC
Sbpe (NI1)
LondN(R)
Q Ste ONp+UNn
Q uee I,ye6 nrintNn
Overlent=•
Guttin
ain e n Inc
r , t • s na Street
meorliblinot
Deal Stem Re l Rente, T,
m
Relent Prow Cne-Hn P,eclpibdal. P, •
Inaeri
User-Daln,en Siam Ruoff Coefficient (save Inn drink b accept a taaHelnl rNuel. C
Usn-Detnoo Syr Runoff C ec,ent Io or mn tbnk In eaent a calcukbn rWuel. Cs =
Bypries (Cu,y-0vri) Flow tam aMMm 9u0utctmenla. D• OA OA
Total Denton Prink atoll D • OA 99
3974)400 Inlet Al UD-inlet v314 elem. O-Peak 1WW15. 9.34"
' Project:
Inlet ID:
11 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
orgy comer pau rs
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
ring's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0 020)
nl of Curb of Gutter Flow Line
ince from Curb Face to Street Crown
!r Width
it Transverse Slope
!r Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0 083 MR)
it Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ring's Roughness for Street Section (typically bet v n 0.012 and 0 020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowbne for Mbar & Major Storm
Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for na)
Te = R
Seri =
in
r4.or =
0.020
Naas=
6.00
filches
Taara =
24.0
R
W =
2.DD
S. =
0.037
PoR
Sw =
0.063
MR
So=
O.D00
R/R
ns... =
0.016
Minor Storm Major Storm
T.
175
175
R
4vx=
20
15.0
Inches
❑
❑ check = yes
3 STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Crtterion Minor Storm Major Storm
R STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion o .,.. • SUMP SUMP ds
storm maa. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than Row given on sheet'O-Peak'
3970400 Inlet At UD-Inlet v3.14.dsm, Q-Allow 12172015, 9:34 AM
0
g
g
ci
d
e
ci
0
e
m
L
U
n
o
U
10
n
n
Uo
W
c
n
n
a
e
n
�
�
e
T
A
r
o
S
N
x
�
o
N
O
cr
e
M
iV
y
jn
N
o
n
0
T
Z
O
:i
e
n
N
O
O
N
O
ry8
fla
OO
Gr
O
n
O
OC
C
p C
O O O o o O
O O O O
d r'] N r' O
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Prelett: AIMIW Fort CDlltna POP
Went ID: Inlet A2
WFRLOW D I Sf IDET I OVERLAND
VERLA D
FLOW
GUM GUTTER PLUS CARRYOVER FLOW
ROADWAY CENTERUNE
aeon a.: ONLY elreeey eelamn thnou,;h chN,, Tateads Mnar Slm
''� snow Damlb
I., peY nw.l> 12 m m..l OR o,rH. Nvnvn 'El—_ = 0.5 1 3.0 �cia
It unonlon values In Raw IL, ekit, nln,b51.111111 .bM1 me vaceM W 11-1 G'A11OW n, Ann. Intel.
Oeopaplk Inforn,albn: (Enter agile In Dle due u el.
SubcNClmNa Amu• Avea
Youcannol nnio, values la, 0 anal av lM G VICYInla, nl IN...unne PgfT11TPeNaaNleel. Sin
r Site Type: Baas OeLebpee W. NRCS Sod Type • .8. C. ar D
0 wnipDa� 00aeetwaD SlopelNltl Larglb(a)
Q 9N 16 NnU,M Q .eeg lnaa m aMeen OveSe,M Flev,
Guam Flovfl.=
a n• n D 1, , L�vpr�Storrol
Daeyn Storm Return ParwE. T, =1 I 1 no Ral. P aoi Q Hprt PreclpltaMl. P, • 1e:
Usar-Debrce S1mm Ru,wR Ca cknt (leave Me blank to accept a ot,Wmeaa new). C •
User-DeIlrlvl Syr. Rume Caelbckell peeve MIs bknM M accept a WMelee vMus). Ce
6yyaas (CarryAver) Flow born upaeaam Suboatcamanb, Os • 0.0 b.0 ch
Total Deal, Fate Flow, 0 • 0.5 ).e ch
11.1. IN THIS SECTION
r
ILL IN THE SECTIONS
3SI I00 Inlet A2 UD-Inlet v3 14.IdMn. O-Peak U15R018, 2'15 PM
Project:
Inlet ID:
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 11
T —ayr
Tx
Gutter Geometry Enter data In the blue Fat
Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Teva =
Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no corweytrice credit behind cub)
St. =
tuft
Mannirg's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
never =
0 020
Height of Curb at Gu lei Flow Line
Hrxxis =
60 0
ewhes
Distance from Cum Face to Street Crown
Toaowe =
24.0
it
Gutter Width
W =
2.00
ft
Street Transverse Slope
Sx =
0.035
1Vft
Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.063 Will
Sw =
D.oa3
ftM
Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump wnditwn
So =
0.000
ftnt
Mannirg's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0012 and 0020)
ri.. =
0.016
Mklor Slam Major Storm
Max Allowable Spread for Mawr & Major Storm
Twa =
77.5
17.5
W
Max Allowable Depth at Gutter FlwAne for Minor & Major Storm
III =
2.0
15.0
inches
low Flow Depth at Sbeet Crown (leave blank for no)
11 check = yes
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Mina Storm Major Stone
MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity Is based on Death Criterion
Q. SUMP SUMP e/s
Minor store.._.. _,,cmlty GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
major storm maxallowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'0-Peak'
3970400 Inlet A2 UD4nlet v3.14.dsm, Q-Allow 111512016. 2:16 PM
No Text
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Pro}R: Affinity Fort Collins POP
Insist IO: Inlet N
SIDE
III 1 Fes`""° pl STREET III ° FL LA
w ND I
Slow Ibalg
— _ — ` AY CENTERLINE
_ _ _ —
NLY tlrmCyous mM1ptl nsOtlbr mMM1S.
Mhv Storm MNU Stmn
Ibdprsf.1v12Nsusslm p•rLLwadsh,$)
'4ue.n• 0.6 3.5 cK
11 you emrt values In Rw[ 14. Skip nw rKt at this sn••t ofol peousto to c1g01 O.Allow w AIM Yllel.
C"Mapllte Inlamalbn: (Enter EY In ate Ohre cs is)
BWaItlalNnl Alas•
es
fJnnol snln.alms for O NM ass ale O ulculNor N IN sane time
PertinI Imparvbo owss
r se• Tyw: r new p r•lep.a sec
NRCS W Tiflis
B. C a 0
Q veeuM
IIII a sir,tlrn,C.
SkA"(11a1) LmVth IRI
(]'. i. rl.m�.IrLyi
l OYea 1r46 aIn M�fr
IT/aWIp RIW
_
(itIM11 Fbn -
Desipn Storm Re urn GagE.
Return PerIN C Hour PreopMOm,
U,o, DeNM Storm Romon Coertfs nl Reeve Inn bNnx . e[ugl s W[NatM .Noel, C
User Denmp Syr R..R CCCR rterm l$r.- tMs bho* la sof pl a Ce WW of IM.), Cx
aypass (Carr Isl Flow from upseasm SulfatcM1mmb, Q 0.0 0.0 cis
Tolai Ofo,no Frisk Flow. O • OS 0.5 ds
i11 -HIS A. Lrh
IN THE SECTIONS
3910a00 lnlel A3 UD-Inlet v3.14. x1., C-Peak
12MA15, 10:01 AAI '
' Project:
Inlet ID:
11 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for rid conveyance credit behind curb)
snil Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0 a20)
ht of Curb at Guller Flow Line
trice from Curb Face to Street Crown
at Width
?t Transverse Slope
!r Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches a 0.003 Mfl)
a Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump oo dikon
ang's Roughness for Street Section Ityplcally between 0 012 and 0 020)
Allowable Spread for Mirror & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Dotter Flowime for Minor & Maim Slone
Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no)
Two =
fl
S==
fllfl
ty.pr =
0.020
Fkune =
6.00
inches
Toimwa =
24.0
fl
2.00
fl
W=
0.094
RIfl
Sw =
O.OB3
flM
So=
0.000
fUR
nsrneeT=
0,016
Minor Storm
Major Storm
T.wx =
17.5
17.5
itd.w.
=
2.0
15.0
Inches
❑
❑ check = yes
t STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Mknr Slam Major Storm
R STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Q. • SUMP SUMP CIS
storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'Q-Peak'
storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
3970400 Inlet A3 UD-Inlet A 14c1sm. O-Allow
12172015, 10:07 AM
h
im
„■
_■'■■
■■■1 ' ■'
J 2 r = V =
a� ag a�
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Pro}R: Affinity FOR Colllm MP
11Y•T ro: Inml M
ROADWAY CENIERLJNE
ow: NLYdene•dydemlrna MrtOlnnmMnp•5- MInp SIRm
Mypy
Imu MaY nowN l:=Anen piPu+mm wvMf 'OY,n..�� 0.2
1.] cif
' 11 o valuy In RMv la fYl Ina net nl rM1la sneel and r � 10 slNel OAllow O� AroG Inlet.
0"r•pM1lc Infamalbn: (Enmr deb m fie due cell.):
Supc.mnm.M Ama=
Ayes
pnn.1 Doter values I-Q..duse 11w 0ulculalar M IM..me lllne PerCMl lmpervlWV:=
S. Toe: Re.n Dr:mad Far. NRCS Sail Type =
. S, C. or D
j
o ;n it -"c" [7S
o uc vmtutn palM6 naXbn OvaMM FMw.
6uW FOx•
• •mM , � . Ills prlrl
Ma)or 8lolm
Oe ,,n Smnn Relum P . T, •IT�{ye�rs
Rawm fMrbd Olw-Hour Preclplletlon, p� al
I ImcMs
UferDefeled Smrm MIOR Ccelfoml Ilee+e en plerlk m evapl • neklleNO Yemsl. C e�
Uaerv0eGlaV }yr RMgR CmlfiOern Ilnve Mrs hIeIM m •raM s ulobRd vdlml. Cro=
BYpa• (C•rry.0ew) flow M1oln up•4•eln Bupc•ICNm•Me.OY • 0.0 0.0 cis
TOW D.Ao. Pavk Pbw, 0 • 0,3 1.T cf.
IN THIS SECTION
IN THE SECTIONS
397NM Inkl A4 lJO-Inlet v3 14 al 0-Peek 12ID2015, 10:0T AM
Project:
Inlet ID:
11 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
Gutter Geometry Enter data in the blue cells
Maximum Allowable Width lof Spread Behind Cum
Te.Or=
itSide
Slope Behind Cum (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
a
Saar =
R/R
Mannmp's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
ryrxr =r
0.020
Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
Hoaw
8.00
inches
D s ano f from Cum Face to Street Crown
T.
Gutter Width
W =
2-00
0
Street Transverse Slope
Sx =
0.039
Mh
Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches ever 24 inches or 0.0113 Mfl)
S. =
0.D83
in
Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
So =
0.DD0
Mg
Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
nor =
0,016
Minor Storm Major Storm
Max Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Tau =
17.5
175
111
Max Allowable Dept at Gutter Flow line for Minor 8 Melon Storm
cii. =
2,0
1 15.0
inches
Allow Flaw Depth at Street Crown (leave dank for no)
❑ check = yes
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity Is based on Depth Criterion
Minor Sloan Major Storm
MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Q. SUMP BUMP CIS
Minor storm maxallowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'Q-Peak'
Mai. i)acay GOOD- greater than flow given on sheet'Q-Peak'
1
1
1
3970400 Inlet A4 UD-Inlet v3.14 Aunt, Q-Aliow 12f72015, 1007 AM
Ll
1
v
ryN
V
(sh) /yeede3
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS•UNED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Project: Affinity Tort Collins POP
Inlet IO: inlet AS
ROADWAY CENTERLINE
lann1 ottem, roethocis MCY61am
mkkar nI
Ibelpot bxb tQy Wa{I OR lsan{ichanet
ILL IN THIS SECTION
• R ou aea vWa{ M Rw U { tla rwt W tltls she{t anal ensexed to then O-Allow of Ana Inlet
DR
CMOGr{Ptllt fM 1:
ILL IN THE SECTIONS
SWrAtrhnalt Area �yII�Ij-n—�''
ELOW
I. cante,lue anna) ante, vas to O altE w that a a that sane here, here,ReactedPe Ynpamrm v-
_
sae T.: Flaws lleekase Fo-: NRCSSWType-
B.C.orD
r
L�J'e
O s k n J Speet Ine6 Sloan (mil)
Lags (AI
IO'+=lsr wpn paelkanaN•an OeWtlFke=�
- Gaab Fkrx =
a re a n orma onam Imt t > {marmapoeSbare
O. n RaS{n PagS.
R.
RPerW One -Hour
ree ur PpbfiP, os, Pl=
I. Iles
Jeer-toineoll Stom Rt;RatCoeffesevi this to
UR,iyRtinaff oeffeIksee WEiane xcepl a calculalM vaka). C =�
to a¢epI a calculatM vNue). Cs=
Bypas )Cary nkl Ross non upstream SuGulch nenb, 4e
Total Design Peak floor, G•
M70000 Inlet AS UDINe1_v3. 14 tlem. QPeak 1�CM15. tOOBAkA
Project:
Inlet ID:
11 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
Inlet Ab
TQeQwa
T. T.
Tx iob
y
a
Glitter Geometry Entair data m the blue cells
Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Tycx =
It
Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
Sys =
8/0
Manning's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0 012 and 0 020)
as. =
0 020
Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Lie
Hn•e =
8.00
inches
Dstance from Curb Face to Sheet Crown
T.. =
24.0
8
Gutter Width
W =
2.00
It
Street Transverse Slope
S. =
0.042
Poft
Gutter Goss Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0 083 Poe)
S. =
0,083
Mft
Street Longa dinal Slope - Enter 0 M sump oondaion
So =
0.00o
p/b
Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
nsmrPr =
0.018
Mirror Storm Major Storm
Max. Allowable Spread for Mirror 8 Major Stamn
Taxi =
IT5
24.0
In
Max Allowable Depth at Garter Fkrwtine for Minor 8 Major Storm
de.x =
2,0
15.0
wctm
Allow Flow Depth at Streel Crown (leave blank for no)
check = yes
MINOR STORM Allowable Wpactty Is based on Depth Criterion
Mirror Storm Major Storm
MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
0.... • SUMP SUMP cis
Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'a-Peak'
Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O•Peak'
3970400 Inlet AS UD-Inlet v3.14.Asm, O-Allow 1217=15, 10:08 AM
� ]
/k
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Prplacr Affinity Fort Collins POP
Inlet ID: Inlw A6
SIDE
OVERLAND
IFl.OWD I
V STREET
I FLOW
KA
IV
GUTTER FLOWS
GUTTER PLUS CARRYOVER FLOW ��
ROADWAY CENIERl1NE
10n ow: ONLY
olmlrlor Slam
malor Slam
_
kolosuna.lrlrl�oeseNORgrewk•Cdnensl
'O.-- 0.]
1J
ch, FILL IN THIS SECTION
-I( o vauwam Row 1tY
IM,. or sib. and ine.less. O-Allmv In -Anne NM.
R
Wp•pllk lnlamaOon: I ..n
FILL IN THE SECTIONS
SYbodoh t=: Aan FLOW
'w amen l show smiles fa 0 W uM NM C "Iculson a1 thesem= time Pentent Imporocce 3S=
%
Sa Tlp•;
Ran DwekesJ Far:_ NRCS W Type=
A., C. or
p 9nn�e
slow ml
1�0:71M
Length tm
9n is Na,Jn
FkO
OvG"Fb=
M. Sloth
Mo. S.
Design 6knm Regan PenoO. TI =m1
Rel Pence! One -Hour PrtClwptlw. P�=1 1
'years
C�= 1
1lxM1ea
Usar-Whad Slane Runoff Coeflk4nl (wae ads blank W wmPl a ula0wed Vmeml. C =
Vaer-OelMed Syr. RevloO CpeticbM (leave deb OMnh b a¢epl a Weulehd vmewl. Cs=
TlypsslCanYOvaRFlowhoeneryalmm�aubueWmmls.Os• 0.0 0.0
Total Design Peal, Flow.0 • O.J 1.] cis
3970m)O Inlet A6 UD-IMely3. 14.x1son. O-Peak 121712015, 10:09 AM
Project:
Inlet ID:
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET )Minor & Major Storm)
e T. Trrrx �y
wW� =T
y
a
Gutter Geomet Enter data In the blue cells
Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Tre: =
it
Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
Sax, =
Manmrg's Roughness Behind Curb (rygwlly between 0.012 and 0.0201
ry�or =
G020
Height of Curb at Geller Flow Lire
H= =
g.0p
mr—
Distance from Cum Face to Street Crown
Tcwowe =
24.0
Golfer Width
W =
2.00
Street Transverse Slope
Sx =
0.040
Gutter Goss Slope (typically 2 Inches over 24 inches or 0.083 fl/h)
Be =
0.0113
gill
Street Longiludiml Slope - Enter 0 far sump condition
So =
0.000
g/&
Manning's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
r�r=
0.01g
Minor Storm Major Storm
Max Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Twxx =
17.5
17.5
it
Max Allowable Depth al Gutter Flowlire for Minor & Major Storm
dw r, =
2.0
15.0
inches
Allow Flow Depth at Siegel Crown (leave dank for rot
check = yes
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity Is based an Depth Criterion
Minor Storm Major
storm
MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacift is based on Depth Criterion
Qs_
OtIMP
LUMP crs
Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
Major storm max. allowable rapacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
3970400 Inlet AS LID -Inlet v3.14.xism, O-Allow 127712015, 10:09 AM
�
y
av
a_?
3v
01 m 1� t0 V1
(slo) f4!oedep
8 a O O
O
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Profett. A nfty FM Cdllm POP
Imet 10: I.w AS
Sipes OaMde
ROADWAY CENTERLINE
O*OqnLYIF&eaI,,hd meSctls- M.. St. Mao, $1
IIm1PYMb12a1tY CR psiW WaW)Dy�= OS 34
Suppe tttlarea= aces
r values 1u 0 antl use Ow 0 WCJaIw at 0u same Ibm PeroeM Impencuvess= °a
SL Tpa: Rene Dn+hpN! NRCS Sd Type= BC.uD
rQ src r.4rbn Lo
Le14N(11)
O yN Ie MrMaM uee Ir1e¢ n e McSn� Ovw41tl Fbx �J.J
G .Fb -
Dealpn 5b1m ReMn PetipO. T. _
AeWnPerbp 011e-/lov Pre�on. P,=I ' 'xtes
user-Oeinea SPoem RUMI CaeflrbM (bs:etln CYM b evsq a ubYbE vYrl. C
lhtt-0xTneC iyr Ruch COMIm4lbeseb tlslYbeo:epepYOYelvlel. Cs
Bypass 1Cwr jD"O 19 a hp111 W Wain 3ube80geneR•. 4
Tod DmIgn P Floe, 0 = BS lA
ILL IN THIS SECTI'DN
R
ILL IN THE SECTIONS
397(MOD Inky AS UD-IeVet Y314 LLv ¢Pedk 17/yl2m15. 10. 10AM
Project:
Inlet ID:
11 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
mum Allowable Wt= for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credd behind curb)
!Ing's Roughness Behlyd Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
it of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
nce from Curb Face to Streel Crown
!r Width
!I Transverse Slope
!r Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0 063 Nfl)
it Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
ang's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0 012 and 0 020)
Allowable Spread fa Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Rowfine for Minor & Major Storm
Flaw Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no)
T,pr_
nor = D.azD
H= 6.00 inches
Tcax:: vx= 240 fl
W= 200 fl
Se = OD39 tvft
S. = 0.D63 fl/tt
So = 0.000 hot
ram'= 0.016
Minor Storm Major Storm
T. 1T5 175 fl
4w = 2.0 15D inches
❑ ❑ check = yes
t STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Meer Storm Major Slone
R STORM Allowable Capacity Is based on Depth Criterion 01 r SUMP SUM► cis
storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
1 3970400 Inlet AS UO-Inlet_v3.14.dsm, O-Allow
1262015. 10:10 AM
No Text
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Pbajwb Affinity Fart Collins POP
Inlet I°: II Inlet B1
SIDE Flow ° I N STREET V I I,AW °
`CCl N R!i HV 911owEe4wk
CURER FLDW GUTTER PLUS CARRYOVER FLOW/
— ROADWAY CENfERIJNE _ _ --
Design pn LY K alreadydakrtnkled lhlokip mi. M. Maps Slwm
1. Wak nawb 12 W anal OR psWW cNaOWICla F IL L IN THIS EEC TION
• It you enter values In Rax N, SkIp Ibe eel 01 thin slwl and ror'w0 to skwl D ARnv, w Arta InW. IN
Geoc aphk MhmneBpn: (Enkr date In The blue of ll.I IN THE SECTIONS
Sueeamnmem Ame= Awes tLow
In.cannot onto, value. In,G and use HO o oalculamr .1 the samePercenttime lmpervbus =• %
_ talk Type: No. Denceel Fa.. NRCS Soil Type- .B.C, or
O .e. n idea®.n+M baea Skye (IMP Length Inn
Q .IL nNu ql.0 Q Mrn N4M1nnPlenum, P/MaM Fkak
Enter Five: a
a n o notanney rr. = v e MI. Strom Mepn Strom
Oeslpn Stem PaWrn Pmkd. T, =TT�ye�rs
• Ranen Pmkd One-Haur Prewpilaapn. PI =1 1 IlncMs
Usel-Dat"d Stoml Runoli COeRTeM Has. On blank 1. accept a calweand value), C =
Usm-Dellned 5-yr. BOOT CoeRcienl (leave On blank to accept a ukulated value). C„
Bypass Ma"Ovar) Flow Rom upstream Subcalchmwlts. Oa 0.0 OA
Total Design Peak Fkw.O • 01 1.0 obe
3970400 MW 81 UDJMeI_v3A4.bam, (]-Peak 12/ =15, 1D'.12 AM
Project:
Inlet ID:
I ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
Gutter Geomat Enter data in the blue calls
Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Taxes'
B
Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind cub)
Seri. -
Mannsp's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.072 and 0.020)
ne,.ot
0.020
Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Lie
Hcuee'MO
Itches
Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown
To_ =1t
Gutter Width
W =B
Street Transverse Slope
Sx =BIB
Curler Goss Slope (typically 2 Inches over 24 Inches or 0 08311M)
S. =ftM
Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condNun
So =nm
Mannlrp's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0 012 and 0 020)
n,. =
Minor Storm
Major Storm
Max. Allowable Spread for Major & Major Stone
T. =
175
1 175
B
Max Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowilne for Mirror & Major Storm
clew .1
2.0
1 15.0
inches
Ilow Flow Deptn at Street Crawl (leave blank for no)
❑
check = yes
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Minor Storm
Maim Storm
MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Oak..
SUMP
SUMP olio
Minor storm maxallowable opacity GOOD - greater than Bow given on sheet'O-Peak'
Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD -greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
3970400 Inlet B1 UD-Inlet v3.14.xlsm, Q-Allow 12(712015, 10. 12 AM
N
n �ri vex a $ a$li $ 8
($P)
e
8
C'
0
d
N
m
d
a
0
N
r
e
0
e
0
e �
e =
ci
0
pO
f
d
es
d
9
0
A
d
td
0
V
0
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE 4ALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Pill AMnity FRn Coll,. POP
Mist 10: Inlet M
OYG LAND SIDE G °
I p STREET I %N'
Wi Deb*
GUTTER FLOW GUf1ER PLUS CARRYOVER
ROADWAY CENTERLINE
Ign low: DNLY d Nready de4rmbed fta atlmr metl'otle Mew Storm
Mapr5
Iwaw VeaM eonH+]d OMM pM-awa d,wnwp 'Or--.,-..,= g.9
di
cle FILL IN T. S SK. uON
' 11 w auto+ raWez In Row 1a, sb Itie test of IMs sM1eei an0 +o[xd to sMe1 O-Allow or ArE_ I:"!r
nR
Gengf�111C N«matlon: Il:+M title bbe teas)
FILL IN TH=SECIIiONS
SWCM ImMI P+d -1�Ml5
6ELOVu
ou onlwt ante rapws Id O aM use tM p ulcWaw at rM sum tYrN PerRM pnpervwsleH -
A
-
r Sb T, Rsa Ow.M WFr NRCSS Tp
IS C. arD
Q Sbpe(")
Lergm lfll
Q 3rt is nor pAn Q 4ea IrbS Yi a A40n DVMroq Fbx
Gulbr Fbx =
a
a n a orma n. ere = � + a a epr
Oeapt15MnReNnPamd. T,=m
Kars
RM+Pvbd 0lwaMaPtanpWln. P+=I I
l�rtnes
nr-oallwl sbm Ruwrcas111ekn (kaw we uWt b eonot a ulcdsea value). c =
LW-D sr. llt ICaelSd tliilave eta err b arapt a c Wsw value). ca=
III (Cii WDI ) ilea ft. uPa0aun 5.WIlh.enls, 0, OA gA
TWID C, Paaa Fb .G gA a.1
3 71NIW IFIO 32 UD-inlet v314 II& . QII a 12l/17015, 10A0 AM
' Project:
Inlet ID:
11 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
I T ¢ +� T. T.
�a+nc W TR Saeat
_ (Phil
Q• QI _
d y a� B}
e dE
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb Ts c =
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb) Sy =
ring's Rouglness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 aid 0 020) rb}pr
it of Curb el Gufler Flow Lure Hcviw
me from Curt Face to Streel Crown Tcutwn =
Ir Width W =
II Transverse Slope S.=
n Cross Slope (typically 2 imlies over 24 inches or 0 083 Nfl) S. -F
4 Longitudinal Slope Enter 0 for sump condition So =
ring's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 a 0 a20) rymar =1
fl
-h-
If
fl
fl/fl
111111
Nft
40.0
1 73
0.020
0.DB3
0.000
0.020
Minor Storm
Major Storm
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm Twu, =
17.5
17 5
It
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flow me for Minor & Major Storm d. =
2.0
15.0
nch.
Flow Depth at Street Crown leave blank for m)
Ej
check = yea
IR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Mkpr Storm
a Storm
OR STORM Allowable Camattv is based on Depth Criterion Oro. •
SUMP
SUMP
cfs
,storm maxallowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
r storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
1 3970400 Inlet R2 UD-Inlat_v3.14.xlsm, O-Allow
12772015, 10:10 AM
Capacity A
;
;
E
a�
a4
/}
)(
(7
(/
®;
®■
J®
J#
e
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS{INED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Pfal"I A(Rnity Fort Collins POP
Inlet m: inlet 83
ROADWAY CENTERLINE
LY eveWydeknnvlN Ovdgh dlwrm MIrIW SI�m Mapr 9tam
Ibtw mr nm.. IV IRdbM OR pra'Rood al Olwm= 0.5 3.1
P m emer valwc In POW L. 5 kip the nod of that shams and ro[standsed le stands OAJosellow M AInM.
fvh,
FILL IN THIS SECTION
OR
FILL IN THE SECTIONS
rodnphk tabrmetkn: l ntm data in the bMw oe 11
Submr1chNdwtAb= Run
ELOw
.snot W. whin la O moduea Its,O ml[ulalm a11M same nma Pdr.f lmpasH. az=
%
Sits TyN; Fns, Onnaddad fv. NRCS Sol Type=
R, B. C. RrD
r09RIs
UM 0SPmt Mali Skye(111) Lavin (e)
0 Wrtrllyl Q oae lFb6neMeOn Ovfrand Flou^�
CMM FW« _
•n sIt I. Suids mmorSdons
Demalis Stood Return Pedsd. T, =�Ye
ta Ram Perbd PxHoor PrenpWeeb..m.P,=
Inc11oe5
U.-DeM1xd Sodm RucP Caanklenl Ilewe Was dYIX to e0.Wl a obtledd vtlwl. C -
llaer-peM1lad Syr. Rugg CoeTcbd Reeve OIIs IHW b sued s ukulNe! vMnl. Ls=
Ilyllev IGrry43aer1 Flow kom IIFo1F®n eu5rmdsmwdr, W 0.0 0.0 cle
Total Oaaldn Paeh Flow, O • 0.5 t.1 de
N704W InW B3 UNnM_v3. 14.Rism, C-PellN 1P M15, 10:13 AM
Project:
Inlet ID:
II ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
Gutter Geome[ Enter data In the bim ells
Mumum Allowebie Width for Spread Behind Curb
Ty =
Side Slope Behind Curb (leave blank far no conveyance credit behind curb)
S1,vxx _
Mani Roughni Behind Curb (rygcally between 0 012 and 0 020)
ni v k
Height of Curb al Gutter Flow Lim
H==
6.00
Inches
Distance from Cub Face to Street Crown
Tea =
24 0
ft
Gutter Width
W =
DO
it
Transverse Slope
Sx =
7170,07
0.020
Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches war 24 inches or 0.083 nm)
S.-S.-F
0.083
IMI
Street Longitudinal Slam - Enter 0 for sump condition
So =
DWO
Will
Manning's Roughness for Sheet Section (typically between 0 012 and 0 020)
ran w =I
0,020
Motor Storm Major Stone
Max Alkmaole Spread for Minor & Major Stan
Tv , =
17.5
17.5
it
Max Allowable Depth 0 Gutter FlaMin2 for Mlrtor & Major Slam
duxx =
2 0
15.0
inches
Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave dank for no)
❑ check = yes
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Minor Storm Major Storm
MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Qa..
SUMP SUMP cis
Minor storm max. allowable rapacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
-Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than Row given on sheet'Q-Peak'
1
1
1
1
1
3970400 Inlet B3 UD-Inlet v3.14.xlsm, Q-Allow 12r7l2015. 10:13 AM
O
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Ro1M'. Affinity Fort Collins POP
We 10, Inlet B•
C[I Ill 'ALL
IV
ellvx Oeleil
GUTTER ROW GUTTER PLUS CMRYGVER FLOW!
OADWAY CENTERLINE
rctlOroup aev meOtoes- Mkwr bYwm
Meer Strom
_
Ile �pd�SwbtrzNmw IXt paesara NmrMl: 'Qye.,,= Od
1.i cfa
ILL IN
' H ou eMar valves In ROY 1� skip IN rest of thin m—t and proceat to sMll p Taw a 11rw Nkt
R -
OaopnpNkNlomaBpl:l tlNe In blue onn)
ILL IN
SWUKM1nmING=
as
F10N
yew cannot enter vahrs for 0 and use tlw 0 okulatal aI Ilk same fine PeamR Npwvmrms=
X
na Ts . r'w=s Oanlwa3 Fa:� NRCSStWTRse=
r�
B.C.v0
r
p vm lx •.,n.,
mtttlnm
SYye 11k10
kmviltlN
Q �..e4�nu2n
0 wee lrhe na Helm
Ovelu10 Flpx=®
crmerFlwv-
eina norma�on i,ei I I a e mym
Oesgn Sarin Rekm PlSW. T, =1
Retum PUWU pr`tbw PraipaaEm. Px=
1
lypn
eene
UscDelvwE Stem Rawlf Caffciml Ikave tlus Gank b User-D!M1 V Syr Rwnfl CoeHKImI lkev! WS blank b aasar<pp1 a Nmkvn). C
=aCy
Bypass (Canv4.) Flow fom upsmSUal... Oa Y-0 0.0 ds
Total Uasbn Peak Flow. 0 Be 1.i
THIS SECTION
THE SECTIONS
39i0100Inlet Bd UD-Irtlet_v3 14 ahm. 0-Peak 1217/2015, 10:13 AM
Inlet ID:
11 ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 9
y
Gutter Geometry Enter data In the blue cells
Maximum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
T. =
fl
Side Slope Behind Cub (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
S.: =
Mfl
Marring's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
rw= =
o.016
Height of Curb at Gutter Flow Lire
Hcow =
6.DD
inches
Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown
T. =
24.0
Gutter Width
W =
1.73
fl
Street Transverse Slope
S. =
0,020
Mfl
Gutter Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches a 0,003 Nfl)
S. =
0.063
Ill
Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 fa sump condihon
So =
0.000
RM
Man ing's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0 020)
ns m =
OA20
Minor Storm
Near Storm
Max Allowable Spread fa Minor & Maim Storm
T. =
17.5 1
17.5
it
Max. Allowable Depth a Gutter Flowline for Minor 8 Maim Storm
dun =
2,0
15 D
inches
Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no)
El
ci check -
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity Is based on Depth Criterion
Mirror Storm
Maim Storm
MAJOR STORM Allowable Capacity Is based an Depth Criterion
0. •
9UAAP
6UTAP cis
Minor storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater Man flow given on smet'O-Peak'
Major storm max. allowable capacity GOOD -greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
3970400 Inlet B4 UD-Inlet v3.14xlsm, O-Allow 12/7/2015. 10:13 AM
Capacity
(cis)
O O O O
C o 0 0
O
0
O
0
O
0
00
O
0
O
0
O O
o e
0
g
,
e
Si
!J
�J
e
e
8
e
N
O
O
N
U
O
Y
O
O� P
p) o
{J ry p
N n VU
oz
C_
ro T Q' q
MC (per
N V
o�m
O
O ~
J
U
m
0
0
a
U
O
V
0
0
is
U
O
O
0
u
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE 4ALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
ISIOfRt; AMLINy Fort Collins POP
Will Miss m
I�
ROADWAY CENTERLINE
DMNM Flil ONLY If eveeEy conarmated Waxh after nottooks M. BIdtM Mr
(. pra na. Ia 10 d. ON arYaew2 dra'MR 'Clhi.. = it
StAcelchmenl Nee ={^��II'e',� s
olar You cannot svalues Im 0 and use culalm e the 0 calat tpe mII Sae m Percad Imprve:xmidl -1�
Ir !Hs Type: HawD adedrEastNRCS STe yp=IIAB, C, or
ptW klAl.ei IIr®.n.e ideRSave (w) LAl1aM 11h
•.er�Na, �ea.n C Ne:, NFR HaMwIN� OvGlaM FIPv=®
GYba! Fbw
Rainfall n orma onm.Ind,n, Mqm Slam
Destpn Stun Rehm Parlod. T, =II��--�Iyears
RMum Paved One-Hom Pleo astc, P, al I IMord",
Uea-IMItwG Slone Ronddf CoeMcwa Reeve MIS Nalk to accept a calcwaled vekpl, C=
uaa Wiry d Sr. Pundit Cde? mmt heave Mn blank to arssol n ulculetM vli Cy=
Bypass (Carty-0van Flow "o, upstream Sadood- tman6, 06- 0.0 OA
Total Osslyn Peak Flow, 0 a 1.1 5J
IN THR SECTION
IN THE SECTIONS
397MO tn1e1 E15 LID -Inlet v3 14sbm, O-Paak 1Y =15, 10.14 AM
Project:
Inlet to
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 11
or .ieOmelN (triter Cara in the, pals, CeaS1
rum Allowable Width for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no mnveyanoe credit behind cub)
ung's Roughness Behind Curb (histally between 0.012 and 0.020)
it of Curb at Gutter Flow Line
once from Cum Face to Street Crown
r Width
r1 Transverse Slope
rr Goss Slope (typically 2 ntlres over 24 ndres a 0 06311M)
d Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump oandi0or(
hno's Roughness for Street Sechon (typically between 0 012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor 6 Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowlire for Minor & Major Stone
Flows Depth A Street Crown (leave blank for rat
T,: = 6
Se. - Nil
ne.cs= 0016
Hcwm= 6.� inches
Toil 24.0 n
W W173 n
S.full
Sw notSitnlfi
n8n6xr
Mina Stone Major Storm
Tww = 17.5 17.5 n
d. - 20 15.0 Inches
El ❑ check = yes
2 STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Major Slam
R STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion 0. SUMP SUMP cis
storm may, allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
storm max, allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet 'O-Peak'
3970400 Inlet BS 1.10-Inlet_v3.14.xlsm, O-Allow lZ7/2015, 10:14 AM
e
N
U
3N
xU
8oU
S
S•
rnv
q e
3 v
mmim
-1■m
m
MMRl
-
.■'■'■,-
-_■,■,■'-_
_
mmmmm
mmmmmmmm
--
,■
mmm
mmimmmmmm
-._-_,,ommm
_
___._"'■__
",
-----'.-
------,,,_
------„kv
.---so—limm
-mm
,mm
.I
1,
`
in
mmmi.��
g g g g S
C 0 b OO tV
C�
O
C
e
C
pOO =
b
O�
R
c;
m
R
b
m
e
d
0
0
0
c
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR ORASS-UNED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Protect Affinity Fort Collins PDP
IRIat ID: Inlet C
show DdWb
ROADWAY CENTERLINE
Ign M
Ilmrpa+flw.ln 12d.gi ysMdrwrwg 'Qu,o.,,= 1] 8.0 cis nL IN TF$$ECTIJN
'll weMH rilWs kR4w 1a, 5ti tM rMId R1I551roM yq o[eBJ to Slwet Plgbww Mea Yrkt .JR
GeoOraekk ormatbn:lEnb llakmM Mw mhl' ILL IN TFE SECTIONS
$rEGdmM1ATA= ELOVI
ov cann.tmixral.fct DaM use 1M oTakurator a11M same lime Percent knperrbuNcm=
r S Try.: n OaralapaG N, NRCS Shc Type = A. B. C. or D
0 Saab ltb. a 't. k.", Slope ((lm) Length if )
m p sn 1, ra.r rla.+r p r.ea pttM. ti efh.un (:N v AAm =�
Duper Flor: _
kv a9er tam
13 s n 51dm Rewrn Genpe, T, yeYS
• Retwn Pere] One -Boor prec,ptasm. PreNlles
llsc-Defm Se>1n Ruree COMkxnl Ika.e mrs dam 1p accept a rekulnea vNwl. C=
llse+-CeTmM S)T Rrmall CaM21en114ave N.5 da-F to accep: a rzlofahtl raUel. Cs
Bypass lCany-0vrtl Flow from upstream Sul lcfiments.4 00 00
Total Design Peak Flow, D 1J 60
39TO Inlet C UO,lnlM_v314 qvn, CI -Peak 1] lMi5. 10 I5A10
' Project:
Inlet ID:
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 11
T. T.
Tx
y
K, d
a de
num Allowable Wdm for Spread Behind Curb
Slope Behind Curb )leave blank for no conveyance medg behind curb)
ing's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0 012 and 0.020)
of Curb at Gullet Flow Line,
x from Cam Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slow (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0.083 Poft)
Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 for sump condition
g's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0.012 and 0 020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Manor Storm
Allowable Depth at Gulter Flow ine fa Minor S Manor Storm
Flow Depth al Sheet Crown (leave blank for no)
Tsw=
ft
Sew
ft/0
row =
0 016
Hc. =
6DID
aches
Tamwa=
240
ft
W=
173
ft
Sx=
0020
ftnt
Sw =
0.083
fun
So =
0.000
fun
nsrarzr, =
0.020
Maxx Storm
Major Stoma
T. -1
220
1 220
If
dwx =
2.0
15D
mches
El
ncheck =yes
t STORM Allowable Capacity Is based on Depth Criterion Minor Slam Major Storm
R STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Q.— q--S—UMFT-3—U—MP`-1 cfs
storm max. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peok'
storm max, allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on sheet'O-Peak'
1
3970400 Inlet C UD-Inlet_v3.14.xlsm, O-Allow 12/72015. 10:15 AM
1
Capacity (cfs)
g
0
0
0
g o 0 0 0
o
e
g
'
o
U
O
O
IRV�/�
•,
_
'
U
O
O
O
o
N
U
O
O
Z
0
O
U
O
�
'
d
m
O>
�
o
N
rn
2
e
x
Co
ar
N N
N
a]
�
O
0 O a
O
fD
O � m
N
'
A
o
J
�
O
d
e
n
u
�
o
S
d
o
0
o
7v
N
�
-
'
0
0
U
O
�
mx
I
C g
p
C p
V
n 0
'cT O
R
i
i
C
JP4
No Text
C
LU 0
Cl.
7
-i
H w
Cl
C _
N ;_
> Oe
t,E 0
n
7
W �
C
C p �
J �
L
I
C N C
J V1 -
: C
U lT V
1dQ� y t
u Ov
O
�LL
q�
N N N 0^0 N O O ti M N n .N-L t00 L^ m O v m 0 M OOD N M c00 '+
O
O O O O LV .; O O O O O O O
O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O
tf1 o O N N m In N n m N O O O O O O O O O N LA O O N O O O O
Ln
O O O O O O M O M O O O O O O O O O O LA M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-i .+ O _; .+ _; .4
O
tV . N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O
O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O
O, tD V- N m O m N N M v N N M 7 w O v, m t0 LA N N m LA a1 M Ln
V1
O O .ti M O n O tr .-! O O N M N f0 N n O OD M M CO M M M t0 N
O,
N N f•1 N N M N O N N M Nv: pi .4 O ri N N N N N tV N f•1 M
N
N N N
rZ O O M O N O m v N t0 O m N M O m t0 0, a1 a, O, O1 m O .q
t0
N P'I M M N M N N .4 N N N N L'6 C6 P'1 M M N N f•1 N N fV N N N 1•1 M
N
co M 01 m m 00 M N N n N" m LD'N V. t0 t0 " M N O O O O O m N N
n
n O O M O N O N N M O O 0 N M
N f11 M M N f+I N tr NV N N f,'1 f•1 V f•1 t0 t0 N M N N tV N N N N f•1
N
0 N N M M N N
LN•1 .M-L In m ti LOf1 n .�i .M-I .N" � ay, V: N: O t0 .M-I -i 0o t00 n 471
n n m N t0 7 m m O 0o n tD N R r4 f„1 M N
N
M M M m M M N N N N N N N N N
fM M M M m m m m m m m
M m m m
N
a, m m m m 0 m m m
O1 O, Qt O, O1 T T O1 O1 O, O, O, O, O1 O1 O1 a, O1 a, O, a1 O, a, O1 O� O, O, O1 O,
m
O1
N .ti 01 O .y m O LA
00
n n n t0 n N nv: v V' 6 n 6 6 N 6 N O' 7 O c0 N tD LA ? m tV
N
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M ....... N
N
m 01 m C1 m m m 01 m 0, a, O, 01 01 m O, 0, O, m O1 O1 C1 m 0% O, m O, M 0,
O1
O1 n M? t0 f` w N .+ O .+ N N O O m Z .ti . N L " m w" m O tV N
N O v N O m O .-L .� .� .+ w m w O N .+ .+ n"" m m w N M O O
to
n n O 6 n 7 6v V' v R 6 t0 LA 6 LA v? V O co n t0 Vf 7 7 f l ( i N
N
m M M M M M m fn m m M M M 1+1 en f•1 M M M M N N N N fV N N N N
N
o, a1 a, rn rn rn o, m m a+ a, rn rn rn rn rn a, a, a, a, m rn rn m rn rn rn a, m
rn
V- v v v v v V v V v Vq� v v v c V V V v V v V'V v V "r v v
v
a1 cD N co m M t0 O " cn to en at N N LA O � n N m O' co to n co t0 LA CD
t0 N a1 a, M N 0, " .� N N N N m .� M O O .+ t0 .-L a, V. "m t0 .'t N
Ln
N N t0 LA n V1 t0 v R v LA n t0 t0 LA t0 LA v: v .-i O LD t0 t0 N v: t7 M N
N
m m m m m M M M en M m m m M M m f,'1 m m m m N N N N tV N tV N
Of a, a, m a, a, 01 m O, a, m a, a, 0, 61 a, 0, a, a, O, m O, m a, a1 a, a, a, O,
N
a,
V V v"r v a' V V V e -I v- V V VV V V eV vr v V V V
v
m m O ? co co O O O O ,o O1 O, M 0, a, M Oo co M N t0 -w Vf t0 R t0 O O
O
Oo v- O t0 fo n LA 0? LA Oo oo t0 00 . M M co LA N " N M OD a? O LA LA LA t0
tV
t0 t0 t0 V, t0 M t0 N N M N t0 LA N R LA M N N O n 6 NV: V f•1 N N .+
N
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M N N N N N N N N N
N
a1 c3l a, O, a1 01 a1 O, a, a, a, 461 a, O1 a, a, a, a, O, a, a, O, a1 O, 61 a, a, O, O,
a1
v v v v v v v v v v R R v 7 7 V- 7? I- V-? V, 7 V v V- V- V- 7
•t
m m 0, O n V O O O 0 t0 N m O, M .� m M N CD N t0 R m w v w"
V-
m w v m .-L t0 f\ rl m O V O '+ O t0 O? M aD lf1 .-I m m w m O IA m N
N
n t0 t0 VI n ? t0 ri N V, � n O LA v:N O' f•1 vi O O n 6 LA v: -i M N
M m m m m m M M M m m m m M M m fn m M M 1,'1 N N N N N N N N
LV
m O, a1 m m m 471 m m m m m m O, m 01 m 0, a, O, O1 m 0, m O, 0, O, 0, a1
O,
O o 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 M 0 0
O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O
Ln LA O O O lq: N LA n O n V: .! "i '+ n LD n 00 c0 LA Ln O M V: O t0 O R
Vl
" O, N t0 co R m t0 N . v, m t0 O . .y co M a, .+ en m LA O O LA M O sY
n
tV co N- LA " IA n to v- O, N N o1 to LA M cD M N a1 0 n O O n M N M
.ti " N N M M .-L m m .-L M
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O
Ni Ni
Oho W ctiD N N N
N .-L N .-L M M fn .M .-L .y W .N-t .N-L .N-L - .N-� .Ni .N+ fn
n N n Ln N m N -i O N n n ui ri ui N 0, N ri N N N N N N N N
ti
M M
O0o0o000000000000o0M(nmO,0,0,ON0,o,o
a1
0% m M 0• N M N LA LA m m N .-L t0 O .-L .-L .y m 7 R? 7 V v-Ir w V.
m
O .+ .+ .ti O N O (•1 f•1 O O O f•l f•1 14 .V .-L 1;CO
w
OD �� N M M coDN M
N-1
N
c4 .N-L
N .Nr N
ti M .0NQ1 .N- co .N-L .Ni
OD .NL .Ni ti .N-, .N-I .N-L
O0
ry
Q N Q M Q Q Q Q Q Q Q m C4 en Lnm m to co '� 0 N M vv N t0 n W 01
co�mmm00000O0Nooai �
0
om
to
m
m
m
0_ W
M O O o o O O O R O O O O W m W T m m m g aaaa a n��� D
Ln LnCn W N A
-i f+
tO m V 01 w W N f+ '+ V O� 01 A A 1-`
O O- a$ C Ol Q Q no (w Q OI
0?
h+ f+ f+ f+ h+ N N F+ m f+ N f+ f+ h+ + W f.. 00
p N N N N N N N N N ' A N A m m N N 0
N
m?
0 O N A m m
m
O N N N Al N N Al N N CA A A to m V to 1-` W A m m 1-` A tO 0% Ct W
O
O W W W tO N O O VI O V1 V1 V W V Ot r r tD
O
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
"
N f+ N h+ r W W W N f+
V
to Al N N N N N N W N to to to W to V V N m r r `+ N Vt N to V V V
t0
W N O r r r r r i- h+ V t0 VI m W H t✓ V W A A A V l* V to N N N
CD
N f+ tD (D O O o 0 A W O A V V to t0 to O t0 �` N NJ CD O O O O
N
W N I 1 V I W W W F+ N f+ N F+ F+ h+
A
O N N N N N N N N N m A A N A m m N N O O O N A N A m m m
O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W W W N N. r
W N W V O O V tD tD N W oD W to Ct t0 V V t0 A 0% V to N m N
V
A O W /n O O W W W. t0 W m f+ f+ O Ot W A N ON VI A m ON N W
Ln
A O Ot O:N Lo O to to m m V m V r r f+ ? V O V to N A 0 0 0 to ut
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O o O 0
0
0 o c o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 0 o c o o c o 0 0 0 0 0 0
O
O O O O O O O O O O W O O pp O O N O O O O O O O O O O
Vt
W W W W W W W W V W O to A O A A A W V to to Vt to A to A A A A
A
A A A A-0 A AA A A A A AAA A A A? A A A A A A A A�00%D%D%DZo00�0i0i0ZO%DZD%0%0to%0%0%0%000%0t0iokOIo%to
tttttttt0
N
N N N N N N N N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
N
r N W? A V1 O V O O W W A In A to Ot V In -Cl N W Ot A V to Ot Ot V
Lq Lo
A
Fv+ Ot A 01 tkn A ON N W O V W tD r W %00 t0 (Oil OAt O O M 000 N V O tA0 tmJf W
.4� A A ��.4 A A�
tD
tD t0 %0 iD t0 %0 i0 tD t0 i0 iO t0 i0 t0 i0 t0 tD t0 t0 t0 %D t0 t0 t0 t0 to t0 i0 0
N
tN` N N W-4? Ln ONt V O N N W Cnn A Ln Ln OWt N W N N CA W CA A CA T OWt
N
Ot In In In O to m W to i+ N to m Lo W m 01 m m V1 t0 in V m Ct O A m
O
O O O+ A Ot to A Ot N W m m W t0 D W t0 to Ot 0 to O O m m A 0 t0 Vt
A
A A A 4 A A ? A�? A N A A A A?. A.4 A A A A A-N
ID
W W t0 t0 t0 t0 t0 tO tD i0 t0 %0 to iO to i0 to to iO %D tD iO tD tD t0 %D i0 iD t0
N
N N N N N N N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W A A
A
A A to ON V m m O r 4 m m t0 m t0 t0 to CO m V m to m t0 t0 tD O O
A
f" A in N N V O i+ in t0 VI W Ot A V1 Ot On i+ t0 i+ W m A N in O f+
V
Ct t0 m N r v A D m W O m to Ot Al V t l 0 to W A A m m W t0 W m
A
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
%D
tD t0 iD iD t0 i0 i0 tD t0 t0 tO i0 t0 t0 t0 t0 t0 t0 i0 t0 t0 t0 t0 t0 i0 t0 t0 to tD
N
N N N N N N N N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W A
A
A A A to ON V m m 0 f+ V V m m m m tO tD V m V m tp m tO m tD tD O
A Ct V W N N m O N W OD f+ Ln LnCt -0 Ln CO F+ W O N r 4/ i0 N V O
W
O W O O W N N to N N N N O CO m 0% N V N to W VI V O W V A
W
tD tD to W i0 to t0 tD %D ID i0 tD ID t0 t0 to i0 to 0 Zo t0 i0 t0 %o %0 t0 %o tD t0
N
N N N N N N N W W W W W W A W W W W W W W W W W W W W A A
A
A A In O+ V m ao O .- .- m m m 0 00 tp tp tp m m m m tp %O tp %O %D 0 0
t0
A Gt V W W N OD i+ W V t0 N V Ot T pt t0 �` �` W A N to W V N N
m
W CD O W W NJ to W CD �' W O Ot m m W A �` 0% to Ot O to V V r Ot
?
A A A A A A4� A A A N4� A A NA A A A A N A N A A-N A A
t0
W i0 kD t0 W tD t0 0 %0 W LD tO t0 CD iD tD W LD %D %D i0 tD to tD tD tD tD t0 iD
N
N N N N N Iu N N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W A
A
A A A to T V m m Om m m 0 m m t0 t0 m m m m t0 m tO t0 to tD O
t0
W VI V m W W tD f+ W O f+ A N V t0 to to ;+ F+ O N W A a O A to t+
A
Ot A W W ON W A O A W to O N A t0 W 0% A W P+ V A A N Ot r
to
In N N N N N N N N N W A A Ot " A N f+ A O W W N A N W W W N
V
V Ot in Ot Ot Ot in Ot Ut Ot A to un V m O m Al A m V V to r O A A N
W
N V V V V V V V V V O In to to W V W V (A t+ V V 0% V1 Ct T Vl ut r
VI
A N N N N N N N N N W A A ON N A N r A O W W N A N W W W N
V
f+ Cn Ot Oh Ot pt ph Ct ph Ct 41 VI V1 V m O m N A m V V r V1 r O A A N
V V V V V V V V V O to to to W V W V m r+ V V Ot to m Ot to to f+
w
A N N N N N N N N N W A A Ot N A N F+ A O W W N A N W W W N
W
%O0 V V V V V V V V V O V1 to to W V W V 0t W V V Ut to 0% ON to
O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
G
C O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O C C C C
r
f+ f+ F+ r F+ F+ H. r r. r r.. `i r r.. r r r r r NJ r r
N
.
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
O
r r f+ F+ O r r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r 0 0
in
O O O O VOl O O Ln turn O O O O O O O O O CACACA Ln tOn Cnn Ln Ln Zn O COn CA
O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0000000.�.�00000000000000000000
po
bo Om W W N
V
.p
Ot Ot tO N %D%D%DD N V V OWt r W V Ch to tOn 00 O •+ W r r ON .9�
No Text
tl.mlun (*I
8 9 A 8$$ 8$$ S 8$$ S R 8$$ S R 8 8 n 8$$ 3
.. a .. R R R ..:...... a .. W .... a^
Bw MMn (R)
0 o v e s a v o v o e 4 v
0
C
C
0
v
8 �
P
a
a
_S$SR8$:SS_8$S$SS$�5:8$S8S$8$&:888K8$:$8�888�8$:�S�88S�eS:
aaaaa`aaaa`aaa"c��x�axRRga��AIRAR71RA4iC�,2aaa^a^^aaaaa�daaa�daaaaaa
. ........................ (a)Yen..•"...... ................ ....
x
a
.. W.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
w
S R S S S9 S S
.....................................
$aa ^>
ngg.nn�di�nn_eiena9innn�ox�nou�i�nrv=ommnunimn�n&82Sr;RR:'. F.&min%: .4R"'a.',
. T T.,m �aa�^aGn "�'wwwabwwmuaaa*" �Raa a'aHa �'amaaaPa^
.,..»............................:(u)ao Yna�a »» „»,...................,.
..........................................
jowls
:Y: :YAW NxN%XP�ktW" a%iCCY��n
g
a
......... '%
a 3a34aaaaiaa:::::Y saar LpnRsawas-----a:sL- w
I. mw.(e)
1 3 9 C C C Y Y Y Y Y:. M g o X L3 L•yg `gffi�o'e3 %OOeYe$YPY'P:Y
x
S
8
3„
3=
S
Y
g
No Text
x
0
1
6
Ell
e& e e 8 9A A _
r .r • r r r r r r r r r a r r r r r r r r+ IL) Ye�Yw�yi r r r r r r r r r r r r e r a r e r r r r r
llwaHon (Rj
...................e.........................................
9
R
Cross Section for North Side Overflow Street Capacity at DP5
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Formula
Solve For Normal Depth
Input Data
Channel Slope 0.00700 ftttt
Normal Depth 0.86 ft
Discharge 32.10 ft'ls
Gross Section Image
41.60
41_50
41.40
41.30
41.20
41_10 -
41.00
`0 40.90
ra 40.80
w 40.70 .
40.60 .
40.50
40.40
40.30
4020
40.10
40.00
-0+10 0+00 0+10 0+20
Station
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.071.00]
1/20/2016 9:26:50 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-766.1666 Page f of 1
Cross Section for South Side Overflow Street Capacity West of DP10
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Formula
Solve For Normal Depth
Input Data
Channel Slope 0,00700 ft/ft
Normal Depth 0.47 ft
Discharge 14.30 ft'/s
Cross Section Image
40.90
40.80
40.70
40.60
40.50
40.40
40.30
0 40.20
> 40.10
m
w 40.00
39.90
39.80
39.70
39.60 till
39.50
39.40
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25
Station
Bentley Systems, Inc. Naested Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.071.001
1120/2016 9:25:53 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203-755.1666 Page 1 of 1
Worksheet for South Access Drive XS
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Formula
Solve For Normal Depth
Input Data
Channel Slope 0.00500 ft/ft
Discharge 116.00 fN/s
Section Definitions
swam (M
Elevetlon (ft)
Roughness Segment Definitions
Start Station
Results
Normal Depth
Elevation Range
Flow Area
Wetted Perimeter
Top Width
Normal Depth
Critical Depth
1/26/2016 3:50:37 PM
0+00
0+12
0+25
0+25
0+27
0+59
0+60
0+61
0+83
0+86
0+89
Ending Station
(0+00, 4942.00)
4938.79 to 4942.00 It
4942.00
4941.19
4940.60
4940.10
4940.00
4938.88
4938.79
4938,87
4938.83
4939.23
4940,00
0+89. 4940 00 )
0.71 ft
22.90 it-
46.21 ft
46.12 It
0.71 ft
0.81 it
Roughness Coefficient
0 013
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08-01.071.001
27 Slemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 09795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2
1
Worksheet for South Access Drive XS
Results
Critical Slope
0.00300
ft/ft
Velocity
506
ft/s
Velocity Head
0A0
If
Specific Energy
1.11
it
Froude Number
1.27
Flow Type
Supercritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth
0.00
it
Length
0.00
it
Number Of Steps
0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth
0.00
ft
Profile Description
Profile Headloss
0.00
fl
Downstream Velocity
Infinity
fVs
Upstream Velocity
Infinity
fits
Normal Depth
0.71
1t
Critical Depth
0.81
/t
Channel Slope
0.00500
fUft
Critical Slope
0.00300
M
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley Flow Master [08.01.071.001
1 t26/2016 3:50:37 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA .1-203-766.1666 Page 2 of 2
1
Drive
Cross Section for South Access
Project Description
'
Friction Method
Manning Formula
Solve For
Normal Depth
'
Input Data
Channel Slope
0.D0500 tiff
Normal Depth
0.71 n
Discharge
116.00 fl'/s
Cross Section Image
4942.00
4941.50
4941.00
4940.50
w
4940.00
4939.50
4939.00
,•-VV V �V VStation V VV V VV
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster (08.01.071.00]
1/262016 3:51:41 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA .1-203-766.1666 Page 1 of 1
11
APPENDIX E - REFERENCED INFORMATION
QK
J R ENGINEERING
tl
' MEMORANDUM
1
To: Mr. Mark Ossello
From: Jason Tarry, PE and Ken Merritt, APA, RLA
' Date: March 3, 2015
Subject: Affinity Living Communities- SWMM Drainage Analysis
ft)
J•R ENGINEERING
A Westrian Company
' Introduction: JR Engineering, LLC has completed a conceptual storm drainage analysis for the Affinity
Living Communities at Front Range Village site. The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate an alternative
outfall system for the detained release from the Affinity site and to evaluate the effect of routing these flows
' in addition to undetained flows from the Harmony Park mobile home development into the existing Front
Range Village detention pond (pond 286) as well as reconfiguring the existing weir of pond 286 such that the
overflow is directed to the east (see Figure 1 below). The results of the analysis show that routing the
undetained Harmony Park mobile home flows and the Affinity site detained flows into pond 286 and
' reconfiguring the weir, will have little to no effect on the drainage system downstream of this pond and that
the total flows onto the Sollenberger property will be decreased compared to existing conditions. Therefore
routing the flows from the Harmony Park Mobile home and the Affinity site into pond 286 is a viable option
' for Affinity drainage.
Analysis: Currently, the site drains from west to east with some off -site flows coming from the Harmony Park
mobile home development to the west of the site. During the 100-year storm event, some of the mobile home
park's off -site flows are captured by cut-outs in a 30" corrugated metal pipe (cmp) and are piped to an off -site
detention pond, while the remaining flows continue onto the Affinity site (13.3 cfs). A preliminary drainage
study for the site was completed in September, and found that the existing Front Range Village detention
pond (pond 286), south of the site, directs its excess emergency overflow onto the southeasterly corner of the
Affinity site. Presently, all flows entering the Affinity site, including on -site, off -site and pond 286 overflow,
drain east to the Sollenberger property and to the outfall at Ziegler Road. This historic flow path will remain.
' The site was also previously studied in the Front Range Village Drainage Report completed by Stantec
Consulting Inc. in 2007. This report provided a UD SWMM model analyzing the series of ponds on the Front
Range Village site including pond 286 as well as the downstream storm sewer and ponds. UD SWMM does
not provide a good representation of the ponds so new models of the existing drainage system as well as the
proposed drainage system were created in EPA SWMM 5.1. The existing drainage system routes flows from
the Harmony Park mobile home site, from the Affinity site and from pond 286 overflow onto the Sollenberger
' property. The proposed drainage system routes the flows from the Harmony Park mobile home site into a
Swale that drains to pond 286, and the flows from the proposed Affinity site into a detention pond on the
Affinity site that releases 1.1 cfs into pond 286. The proposed overflow weir for pond 286 still flows onto the
' Sollenberger property, thus maintaining the historic flow path. These new models were then calibrated by
adjusting the subcatchment parameters to obtain peak flow values at the design point similar to the values
found in the UD SWMM model. In total, four models were made in EPA SWMM including: existing
t calibrated model, proposed calibrated model, existing un-calibrated model, and proposed un-calibrated model.
The existing calibrated model shows the existing condition with the calibration made to match flows in the
UD SWMM model. The proposed calibrated model shows the proposed condition with the calibrations. The
07200 South Alton Way, Suite C400 0130 East Kiowa Street, Suite 400 92900 South College Avenue, Suite 3D
' Centennial, C080112 Colorado Springs, C080903 Fort Collins, C080525
303-740-9393 • Fax 303-921-7320 719-593-2593 • Fax 303-921-7320 970491-9888 • Fax 303-921-7320
existing un-calibrated model shows the existing condition with no calibration, using actual areas and time of
concentrations. The proposed un-calibrated model shows the proposed condition with no calibrations. A
schematic of the EPA SWMM 5.1 existing and proposed models as well as a table comparing the changes
made to the subcatchments for the calibration are attached.
Results: After analyzing the different models in SWMM there were only slight variation between the four
EPA SWMM Models and the UD SWMM model. A table comparing the peak flow and time for each model
is attached. From this table one can see that the calibrated models match very closely with the UD SWMM
model and that the un-calibrated models in general have lower flows but similar peak times. When Comparing
the existing condition models to the proposed condition models, the proposed condition has a higher inflow
into pond 286 and flow out of the weir of pond 286, but does not affect the flow downstream of pond 286.
While the flow through the weir of pond 286 increased in the proposed condition, the total flow onto the
Sollenberger property (design point 296) decreases in the proposed condition. Also attached is a hydrograph
showing the inflow into pond 286 as well as charts showing the volume of pond 286 for each of the EPA
SWMM models. These charts show that in the proposed condition the pond peaks sooner and will detain
water longer than in the existing conditions model.
Conclusion: In conclusion, routing the Harmony Park mobile home flows and the Affinity site detained flows
into the existing Front Range Village Pond 286 will have little to no effect on the drainage system
downstream of this pond and the total flows onto the Sollenberger property will be decreased The detention
release from the Affinity property into pond 286 will likely not require any downstream improvements to the
Front Range Village existing drainage infrastructure including: pipes, detention ponds, or outlet structures. In
the proposed condition pond 286 will reach its peak sooner and will detain water longer than in its current
condition. The current configuration of pond 286 is large enough to detain the proposed flows but may need
some modification to maintain a foot of freeboard.
MAMMAla
N#F)XPN PAWFFCFCBW POND 78
DEIBJICN PUO ats sgA13wwy �
�O -- *4%I
Figure 1. Affinity Drainage
07200 South Alton Way, Suite C400 11130 Fast xiowa Street, Suite 400 92900 South College Avenue, Suite 3D
Centennial, C080112 Colorado Springs, C080903 Fort Collins, C080525
303-740-9393 • Fax 303-921-7320 719-593-2593 • Fax 303-921-7320 970-491-9888 • Fax 303-921-7320
oaVie
s
1 ' W ,
W � a
J
Y j
v: I
t 1 1 11�
n
CUHP Subcatchment Conparison
Subcatchment
Name
Subcatchment Parameter
Un-calibrated
Model
Calibrated to match
UD SWMM Model
Delta
206
Area(acre)
53.6
54.1
0.5
Length to Centroid (ft)
450
420
-30
Length (ft)
1400
1400
0
Slope (ft/ft)
0.017
0.0176
0.0006
Percent Impervious(%)
81.2
82
0.8
207
Area(acre)
4
4.6
0.6
Length to Centroid (ft)
110
120
10
Length (ft)
350
400
50
Slope (ft/ft)
0.013
0.013
0
Percent Impervious(%)
81.6
85
3.4
208
Area(acre)
17.86
17.86
0
Length to Centroid (ft)
200
185
-15
Length (ft)
1200
1000
-200
Slope (ft/ft)
0.02
0.02
0
Percent Impervious(%)
89.5
90
0.5
209
Area(acre)
17.47
17.47
0
Length to Centroid (ft)
300
390
90
Length (ft)
800
900
100
Slope (ft/ft)
0.015
0.015
0
Percent Impervious(%)
88.7
88.7
0
243
Area(acre)
5.2
6
0.8
Length to Centroid (ft)
75
75
0
Length (ft)
900
1100
200
Slope (ft/ft)
0.02
0.02
0
Percent Impervious(%)
92.7
92.7
0
244
Area(acre)
2.5
2.64
0.14
Length to Centroid (ft)
75
75
0
Length (ft)
450
S00
50
Slope (ft/ft)
0.017
0.017
0
Percent Impervious(%)
85
90
5
245
Area(acre)
2.9
3.14
0.24
Length to Centroid (ft)
75
75
0
Length (ft)
450
500
50
Slope (ft/ft)
0.017
0.02
0.003
Percent Impervious(%)
85
90
5
300
Area(acre)
23.1
26
2.9
Length to Centroid (ft)
320
320
0
Length (ft)
1000
1100
100
Slope (ft/ft)
0.008
0.008
0
Percent Impervious(%)
40
40
0
301
Area(acre)
17.2
23.4
6.2
Length to Centroid (ft)
430
320
-110
Length (ft)
1000
1100
100
Slope (ft/ft)
0.008
0.01
0.002
Percent Impervious(%)
40
40
0
302
Area(acre)
4.5
4.5
0
Length to Centroid (ft)
280
280
0
Length (ft)
705
705
0
Slope (ft/ft)
0.008
0.008
0
Percent Impervious(%)
40
40
0
595
Area(acre)
7.3
7.3
0
Length to Centroid (ft)
200
200
0
Length (ft)
565
565
0
Slope (ft/ft)
0.01
0.01
0
Percent Impervious(%)
90
90
0
v
a
O
�
�
E
v
o0000000u+m
�n
u+�nOOOOmO00000000m
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
C
0
0
0
0
rl
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
a
E
c
7
ti
cN
N
CL
L
V
3
V
n
lD
n
t0
Y
N
N
T
T
N
0
N
n
n
N
n
N
O
N
O
N
M
m
D
N
O
N
CO
N
N
oq
mnnmoo
Q
Q
oq
T
m
0
Q
VI
p
00
GO
N
e4
N
T
1�
Ir'1
Q
10
tD
N
ry
4
6
r4
e4
N
lC
1D
t0
e4
e4
�
udi
Y
N
N
ey
e4
Q
Vf
N
�
Ol
lD
ul
N
rl
N
T
�
�
Ol
T
T
T
N
Vf
N
Q
00
00
'y
o
a
A
w
Q
a
d
w
_
c
00
E
9
v_
OO000000T
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
N,n
m
m
ninO
m
T
m
Oni
T
T
.+
OO
m
T
m OOOOOO
m
m
m
m
m
O
m
q
a
E
u
c
v
�
w
t0
l0
N
N
N
N
00
00
00
O
O
O
Q
16
00
N
,-I
Y1
N
T
!�1
Ol
Q
Q
16
e�
ry
10
O
4
Y1
,G
,D
�p
.-I
rl
�O
EO
C
LL
N
N
e4
e4
Q
V1
Yl
Yl
01
10
�
rl
r-1
N
O
,O
O
O
T
m
T
Y1
Yf
In
Q
00
00
•„�
i+
y
Q
Q
Q
e4
l0
e4
e4
rl
,-1
eV
r-1
e4
N
x
W
A
y
a
01
a
c
o
E
OVO
m
in
O
en
O
M
O
M
O
T
O
M
O
T
of
T
n T
-i
T
of
T
of
T
O
T
O
T
O
T
O
T
n
O
0
T
0
M
0
M
0
M
0
M
0
T
0
M
0
M
0
M
-
7i
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
rl
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
c
�
A
E
H
V
A
n
,y
O
�
V
�
N
W
E
N
aN
O
ON
TN
TN
OVTI
WlN0
bv'�i
nt'p.
OmNui
N6
Om
OM
qQ00
�QOG
�rU0f
N
Nm
3H
LLp3
N
om,rny
r-.:�nO
6N
6
m
n
n
n
T
n
n
„may
p
LL
n
y
A
N
VI
e4
e4
N
lO
,O
'1
rl
rl
e1
e4
e4
rl
Y
^
C
A
a
a
a
d
v
=
o
E
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Y1
N
Vf
v1
u1
O
0
0
OC
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.i
y
A
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
ti
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
m
E
a
H
q
V
ti
T
Y
NCOO
0aN
TN�n
T�Nn
0N.+
TN'�
O�'11
NO'�1
nnO
�YN1
Vmram„f
Nv•„i
Om
Nn
Nn
Qn
o,D
1111
q
q
Nn
LL3O
N0in
�Orvp
�
N
M
6
60
n
n
n
T
N
n
n
ti
N
y
A
N
In
rl
e4
N
lD
lD
e4
,-,
r4
e9
'1
'1
.y
W
�
a
c
E
V
N
N
VI
N
Q
tD
Y1
V1
U1
VI
V1
Vf
N
to
Q
tp
Q
O
Y1
rl
00
A
E
�
w
F
a
0
f
i_
f
3=
0
3
1D
,O
N
N
N
O
10
Y1
N
N
O
O
N
mT
T
m
n
n
n
n,
N
n
N
n
N
N
Y
e4
rl
rl
ei
A
W
a
m
N
p C
N
Q
n
Q
y
Q
l0
Q
T
Q
M
lD
O
O
O
O
rl
N
N
O
N
N
N
Ot
lD
01
O
�O
i0
00
lD
m
n
0
n
n
ap
a0
O
00
W
p�
O
M
00
W
O
n
d
N
.......
m
m
m
T
T
Y1
in
T
N
N
N
N
N
N
H
N
N
N
N
N
m
m
zz�`
J
�
S
8
vI
---------------------
`
'i V
a
a
O
0:15:00
1:30:00
2:45:00
4:00:00
5:15:00
6:30:00
7:45:00
9:00:00
10:15:00
11:30:00
12:45:00
14:00:00
15:15:00
16:30:00
17:45:00
19:00:00
20:15:00
3 21:30:00
A 22:45:00
3 0:00:00
3 1:15:00
m 2:30:00
3:45:00
5:00:00
6:15:00
7:30:00
8:45:00
10:00:00
11:15:00
12:30:00
13:45:00
15:00:00
16:15:00
17:30:00
18:45:00
20:00:00
21:15:00
22:30:00
23:45:00
Volume (acre-ft)
S
X
O
Y
G
C
.Nr
'O
.ter
3
m
-3
oo
c
m
w
oy n
c
n
z
1. W
m or
c m
@
m
w
Q
d
n
m
n
D
n
5.
c n
11 22
�. 0
Q v
'0 ((.
0
f.
f� 00
O.
j4
2.00
2 f'00
?9 00
�00.
�? j'0J
S,
1
m Y 0
Y.'p.
s.
Q'00 3
o.
90
.00
't 00
s40
A00
s�s0
or. '0
s
e� rb
6,.0V.
7
. 000
0
Volume (acre-ft)
p In O to O
<
I
0
x
x
C O
C
w
N
t
d
c
-
c
d
I
a
m
n
w K
A
a
m
n
o n
00
0
3
a
N
00
0
C
3
�
7
VI
t �
A
f
C
if
O
Q
w
o
o
m'
o
�
o
m
a
o
a
a
0
o$
m
N
G
3
LL
a
a
Q W
a3
a
�
I�
FT=�
l
u�
V
L
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT
PROPOSED AFFINITY AT FORT COLLINS APARTMENTS
2600 EAST HARMONY ROAD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT NO. 1142094
Prepared for:
Inland Group
1620 North Mamer Road — Building B
Spokane Valley, Washington 99216
Attn: Mr. Mark Ossello (marko@inlandconstruction.com)
Prepared by:
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
4396 Greenfield Drive
Windsor, Colorado 80550
rEC
EARTH ENGINEERING
CONSULTANTS, LLC
December 15, 2014
' Inland Group
1620 North Mamer Road, Building B
Spokane, Washington 99203
tAttn: Mr. Mark Ossello(marko(c�r�,inlandconstruction.com)
' Re: Subsurface Exploration Report
Proposed Affinity at Fort Collins Apartments
2600 East Harmony Road
' Fort Collins, Colorado
EEC Project No. 1142094
Mr. Ossello:
Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the geotechnical subsurface exploration completed by Earth
' Engineering Consultants, LLC personnel for the referenced project. For this exploration,
seventeen (17) soil borings were completed at "pre -determined" locations across the site to
' obtain information on existing subsurface conditions. This exploration was completed in general
accordance with our proposal dated November 11, 2014.
' In summary, the in -place subgrade soils in the site improvement areas consisted of cohesive
sandy lean clay / lean clay with sand, exhibiting relatively dry, very stiff to stiff, near surface
' moderately to highly expansive zones. We recommend reworking the top 6 feet of subgrade
materials in the building(s) and flatwork areas to reduce the potential for post -construction
' heaving of the overlying improvements with expansion of in -place subgrade soils. The
overexcavation depth could be reduced to 2 feet in the pavement areas although a greater amount
of post -construction heaving would be expected with the reduced overexcavation depth. We
' believe the site building(s) could be supported by footing foundations bearing on the site fill
materials. Fly ash stabilization of the pavement subgrades should be expected with the moisture
' conditioned subgrades.
' 4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE
WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550
(970) 545-3908 FAX (970) 663-0282
www.earth-engineering.com
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014 '
Page 2
Geotechnical recommendations concerning design and construction of the proposed site '
improvements are provided within the attached report. We appreciate the opportunity to be of
service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning the enclosed report, or if we
can be of further service to you in any other way, please do not hesitate to contact us. ,
Very truly yours,
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC Reviewed by:
.Jacob J. Silverman, E.I.T.
Project Engineer
JJS/LLL/dla
Lester L. Litton, P.E.
Senior Project Engineer
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT
PROPOSED AFFINITY AT FORT COLLINS APARTMENTS
2600 EAST HARMONY ROAD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT NO. 1142094
December 15, 2014
The subsurface exploration for the proposed apartment building, pool building, parking garages and
drive/parking pavements for the proposed Affinity at Fort Collins development in Fort Collins,
Colorado, has been completed. For this exploration, seventeen (17) soil borings were completed at
"pre -determined" locations across the site to obtain information on existing subsurface conditions.
Borings 13-1 thm B-8 were located within the proposed apartment building area and were extended
to approximate depths of 15 to 30 feet below existing site grades. Borings B-9 and B-10 were
extended to depths of approximately 15 to 30 feet within the proposed pool building area and
borings 13-11 thru B-17 were located within proposed garage and pavement areas and extended to
approximate depths of 10 to 15 feet below present site grades. Individual boring logs and a site
diagram indicating the approximate boring locations are provided with this report.
We understand this project involves the development of the Affinity at Fort Collins complex North
of East Harmony Road and west of Corbett Drive in Fort Collins. The complex will include a pool
building, a play/pickle ball court, community garden and access/parking pavement areas and garages
in addition to an approximate 56,000 sf (plan area) 3-story wood frame apartment building.
Foundation loads for the apartment building are expected to be less than 4 klf for continuous wall
loads and less than 150 kips for individual column loads. Floor loads will be light. We expect site
flatwork will include patio areas and an indoor pool deck with low tolerance for movement. Site
pavements will carry low to moderate volumes of light vehicle traffic. We expect cuts and fills less
than 5 feet will be completed to develop design site grades.
The purpose of this report is to describe the subsurface conditions encountered in the completed test
borings, analyze and evaluate the test data, and provide geotechnical recommendations concerning
design and construction of the building(s) foundations and support of floor slabs, flatwork, and
pavements.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 2
EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC I
The boring locations were established in the field by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC)
personnel using a hand held GPS unit with coordinates referenced from Google maps. The
approximate locations of the test borings are indicated on the attached boring location diagram. The
locations of the test borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods
used to make the field measurements.
The test borings were drilled using a truck mounted, CME-55 drill rig equipped with a hydraulic
head employed in drilling and sampling operations. The boreholes were advanced using 4-inch
nominal diameter continuous flight augers. Samples of the subsurface materials encountered were
obtained using split barrel and California barrel sampling procedures in general accordance with
ASTM Specifications D1586 and D3550, respectively.
In the split barrel and California barrel sampling procedures, standard sampling spoons are advanced
into the ground with a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows
required to advance the split barrel and California barrel samplers is recorded and is used to estimate
the in -situ relative density of cohesionless soils and, to a lesser degree of accuracy, the consistency
of cohesive soils and hardness of weathered bedrock. In the California barrel sampling procedure,
samples of the subsurface soils are obtained in removable brass liners. All samples obtained in the
field were sealed and returned to our laboratory for further examination, classification, and testing.
Laboratory moisture content tests were completed on each of the recovered samples. In addition, the
unconfined strength of appropriate samples was estimated using a calibrated hand penetrometer.
Atterberg limits and washed sieve analysis tests were completed to evaluate the quantity and
plasticity of fines in the subgrade samples. Swell/consolidation tests were completed on selected
samples to evaluate the potential for the subgrade and foundation bearing materials to change
volume with variation in moisture and load. Soluble sulfate tests were completed to help evaluate
the potential for sulfate attack on site cast concrete. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the
attached boring logs and summary sheets.
As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory and classified in
accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System, based on the
soil's texture and plasticity. The estimated group symbol for the Unified Soil Classification System
is indicated on the boring logs and a brief description of that classification system is included with
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 3
this report. Classification of the bedrock was based on visual and tactual evaluation of auger
cuttings and disturbed samples. Coring and/or petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types.
SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The proposed Affinity at Fort Collins development will be located on an approximate 7.22 acre
parcel north of East Harmony Road and west of Corbett Drive in Fort Collins. The development
property is presently open field with sparse vegetation ground cover. Ground surface in this area
generally slopes toward the east and north with maximum difference in surface elevation across the
site on the order of 5 feet. No evidence of prior building construction was observed in the field by
EEC personnel, however, there is an approximate 6-foot stockpile of soil located at the south end of
the property on the west half. Prior to use of the stockpile materials, an investigation should be
conducted to determine if the material is suitable for fill/backfill.
An EEC field engineer was on site during drilling to evaluate the subsurface conditions encountered
and direct the drilling activities. Field logs prepared by EEC site personnel were based on visual and
tactual observation of disturbed samples and auger cuttings. The final boring logs included with this
report may contain modifications to the field logs based on the results of laboratory testing and
evaluation. Based on the results of the field borings and laboratory evaluation, subsurface
conditions can be generalized as follows.
In summary, sparse vegetation and topsoil was encountered at the surface at the boring locations.
The underlying soils generally consisted of lean clay with varying amounts of sand and occasional
gravel. Calcareous zones were typically observed within the cohesive soils. Occasional zones of
clayey sand with gravel were observed at varying depths. The cohesive soils were underlain in a
portion of the borings by weathered sandstone/siltstone/claystone bedrock at depths ranging from
approximately 23 feet to 29 feet. The site borings were terminated at depths of approximately 10 to
30 feet in either cohesive subgrade soils or underlying bedrock.
The near surface cohesive soil was generally relatively dry and dense, exhibiting moderate to high
swell potential. The deeper soils generally showed increased moisture and generally exhibited lower
swell potential. The near surface soils were generally very stiff to stiff in consistency becoming stiff
to medium stiff with increased depth. The occasional clayey sand and gravel layers were generally
dense to medium -dense. The underlying bedrock was generally moderately hard to hard.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 4
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of
changes in soil and rock types. In -situ, the transition of materials may be gradual and indistinct.
GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
Observations were made while drilling of the borings to detect the presence and depth to hydrostatic
groundwater. At the time of our field exploration, groundwater was encountered at depths generally
in the range of approximately 16 to 21 feet below existing site grades. Groundwater was not
observed at all boring locations. The water level measurements completed at the time of our
exploration are indicated in the upper right hand corner of the attached boring logs.
Fluctuations in groundwater levels can occur over time depending on variations in hydrologic
conditions and other conditions not apparent at the time of this report. Monitoring in cased borings,
sealed from the influence of surface infiltration, would be required to more accurately evaluate
groundwater levels and fluctuations in the groundwater levels over time.
Zones of perched and/or trapped groundwater may occur at times in more permeable zones in the
subsurface soils. The location and amount of perched water is dependent upon several factors,
including hydrologic conditions, type of site development, irrigation demands on or adjacent to the
site, and seasonal and weather conditions. The observations provided in this report represent
groundwater conditions at the time of the field exploration, and may not be indicative of other times,
or at other locations.
ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Swell — Consolidation Test Results
The swell -consolidation test is performed to evaluate the swell or collapse potential of soils to help
determine foundation, floor slab and pavement design criteria. In this test, samples obtained directly
from the California sampler are placed in a laboratory apparatus and inundated with water under a
predetermined load. The swell -index is the resulting amount of swell or collapse after the inundation
period expressed as a percent of the sample's preload/initial thickness. After the inundation period,
additional incremental loads are applied to evaluate the swell pressure and/or consolidation.
tEEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 5
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
For this assessment, we conducted fourteen (14) swell -consolidation tests on soil samples obtained
from the California barrel sampler. The swell index values for the in -situ near surface soil samples
generally revealed moderate to high swell characteristics as indicated on the attached swell test
' summaries. The (+) test results indicate the soil materials swell potential characteristics while the (-)
test results indicate the soil materials collapse/consolidation potential characteristics when inundated
' with water. The following table summarizes the swell -consolidation laboratory test results for
samples obtained during our field explorations for the subject site.
Swell Consolidation Test Results
Boring
No.
Depth,
ft.
Material Type
yp
In -Situ
Dry Density,
Inundation
Swell Indez,
Moisture
PCF
Pressure, psf
%
Content, %
1
9
Brown, Reddish Sandy Lean Clay
8.6
119.4
500
(+) 1.3
2
4
Brown Lean Clay with Sand
9.6
107.1
500
(+) 2.9
3
4
Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean
7.7
117.9
500
(+) 6.7
Clay with Sand
4
4
Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean
9.3
107.1
500
(+) 1.2
Clay with Sand
5
2
Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean
11.4
111.4
150
(+) 4.5
Clay with Sand
7
9
Red Clayey Sand with Gravel
10.0
115.8
500
(+) 1.1
9
9
Red Clayey Sand with Gravel
5.1
120.5
500
(+) 0.5
10
4
Brown Lean Clay with Sand
10.5
110.0
500
(+) 4.0
l l
2
Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean
11.2
114.4
150
(+) 10.8
Clay with Sand
12
4
Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean
10.6
112.6
500
(+) 3.3
Clay with Sand
13
2
Brown Lean Clay with Sand
11.1
109.3
150
(+) 10.4
14
4
Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean
11.8
111.1
500
(+) 3.1
Clay with Sand
15
2
Brown Lean Clay with Sand
10.7
104.8
150
(+) 73
16
9
Brown Lean Clay with Sand
15.8
116.7
500
1 (+) 0.9
' Colorado Association of Geotechnical Engineers (CAGE) uses the following information to provide
uniformity in terminology between geotechnical engineers to provide a relative correlation of slab
' performance risk to measured swell. "The representative percent swell values are not necessarily
measured values; rather, they are a judgment of the swell of the soil and/or bedrock profile likely to
influence slab performance" Geotechnical engineers use this information to also evaluate the swell
potential risks for foundation performance based on the risk categories.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 6
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC ,
Recommended Representative Swell Potential Descriptions and Corresponding
Slab Performance Risk Categories
Slab Performance Risk Category
Representative Percent Swell
(500 psf Surcharge)
Representative Percent Swell
(1000 psf Surcharge)
Low
0to<3
0<2
Moderate
3 to < 5
2 to < 4
High
5 to < 8
4 to < 6
Very High
> 8
> 6
Based on the laboratory test results, the in -situ samples analyzed for this project were commonly within
the moderate to high range near surface and lower swell with increased depth. The higher swell -index
values were of dry and dense subgrade samples obtained at depths of 2 to 4 feet. In our opinion, these
subsoils when over -excavated, moisture conditioned and properly placed and compacted as
engineered/controlled fill material would most likely reveal generally low swell potential results.
Site Prmaration
All existing topsoil/vegetation should be removed from the site improvement areas. The variability
of the existing subsoils (please refer to the boring logs presented in the Appendix of this report and
note the moderately to highly expansive near surface cohesive soils) at approximate foundation and
slab subgrade elevations could result in significant total and differential movement of conventional
foundation and floor slab -on -grade should the expansive soils become elevated in moisture content.
The swell index values for the samples analyzed revealed low to moderate to high swelling
characteristics on the order of (+) 0.5 to (+) 10.8% at varying loading conditions, with an overall
average of about (+) 4.1%. Without an extensive over -excavation and replacement concept,
movement of conventional foundations and floor slabs is estimated to be on the order of 4 to 6
inches or more. Therefore, to reduce the potential movement of foundation and floor slabs, included
herein are recommendations for an over -excavation and replacement concept. If the owner cannot
tolerate the amount of floor slab movement predicted with the overexcavation process, consideration
could be given to the use of a structural floor system, supported independent of the subgrade soils.
A common practice to reduce potential foundation and slab movement/heave involves over -
excavation of the expansive soils and replacing these materials with low to non -expansive moisture
conditioned engineered fill material and/or with an approved imported structural/granular fill
material. This alternative over -excavation and replacement concept will not eliminate the possibility
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 7
of foundation and/or slab heave; but movements should be reduced and tend to be more uniform.
1 Constructing improvements (i.e. buildings, flatwork, pavements, floor slabs, etc.) on a site which
exhibits potential for swelling is inherently at high risk for post construction heaving, causing distress of
site improvements. The following recommendations provided herein are to reduce the risk of post
construction heaving; however, that risk cannot be eliminated. If the owner does not accept that
risk, we would be pleased to provide more stringent recommendations.
After removal of all topsoil/vegetation within the planned development areas, as well as removal of
unacceptable or unsuitable subsoils and removal of overexcavation materials, and prior to fill
placement and/or site improvements, the exposed soils should be scarified to a minimum depth of 9
inches, adjusted in moisture content to within — 1 to +3% of standard Proctor optimum moisture
content and compacted to within the range of 94 to 98% of the material's standard Proctor maximum
dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698.
Foundation Bearing Strata Preparation
To reduce the potential of foundation movement and allow for the use of a conventional spread
footing foundation system, we recommend the entire building(s) footprint be over -excavated. The
over -excavation should extend to a depth of at least 6 feet below existing site grades or final site
grade, (whichever results in the deeper excavation), and be replaced with either on -site subsoils
reconditioned to (-) 1% to (+) 3% of the material's optimum moisture content and compacted to be
within the range of 94 — 98% of standard Proctor maximum dry density or with an approved
imported structural fill material. The over -excavated areas should extend laterally in all directions
beyond the edges of the foundation a minimum of 5 feet.
Fill materials used to replace the over -excavated zone and establish the conventional spread footing
foundation bearing zone, after the initial zone has been moisture conditioned/stabilized as discussed in
the "Site Preparation" section, should consist of approved on -site cohesive subsoils moisture
conditioned and compacted as previously described or an imported structural fill material which is free
from organic matter and debris. Structural fill consisting of CDOT Class 6 or 7 aggregate base course
(ABC) materials or approved recycled concrete could be considered. Structural fill material should be
placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick and adjusted to a moisture content range of +/-3% of
optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95% of standard Proctor maximum dry density as
determined by ASTM Specification D698. The over -excavation and replacement concept when
completed will in essence, provide a minimum 6 foot separation from bottom of the finish floor slab,
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 8
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
and a minimum of 3 feet of separation below the exterior perimeter footings, assuming a minimum
frost depth of 30 inches.
Spread Footine Foundation System Recommendations
Footing foundations bearing on a zone of approved engineered reconditioned on -site subsoils or a zone
of imported structural fill material, placed and compacted as previously outlined, could be designed for
a maximum net allowable total load bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Total loads include full dead and
live load conditions. We estimate the long-term settlement of footing foundations, designed and
constructed as outlined above, would be approximately 1-inch.
After placement of the fill materials, care should be taken to avoid excessive wetting or drying of
those materials. Bearing materials which are loosened or disturbed by the construction activities or
materials which become dry and desiccated or wet and softened should be removed and replaced or
reworked in place prior to construction of the overlying improvements.
The outlined steps for preparing bearing materials will significantly reduce but not eliminate the
potential for movement of the building with heaving of the underlying materials. Over -excavation to
a greater depth of material could be considered to further reduce the potential for post -construction
movement.
Exterior foundations and foundations in unheated areas should be located at least 30 inches below
adjacent exterior grade to provide frost protection. We recommend formed continuous footings have
a minimum width of 12 inches and isolated column foundations have a minimum width of 24 inches.
Floor Slab/Flatwork Design and Construction Recommendations
Assuming the owners are willing to accept total and differential movements of the floor as outlined
herein, an over -excavation and replacement concept could be considered. As previously
recommended the entire building should be over -excavated to a depth of at least 6 feet below
existing site grades and replaced either moisture conditioned on -site engineered fill material and/or
approved imported structural fill material. An underslab gravel layer or thin leveling course could
be used underneath the concrete floor slabs to provide a capillary break mechanism, a load
distribution layer, and as a leveling course for the concrete placement.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 9
Failure to limit the intrusion of water from any source (i.e., surface water infiltration, seepage from
nearby detention ponds if applicable, and/or adjacent utility trenches bedding zone, run-off, etc.) into
the underlying expansive subgrade materials could result in movement greater than those outlined
' herein.
The following table provides estimates for the total and differential amounts of movement which
could be expected with an over -excavation replacement concept with either on -site reconditioned
on -site subsoils or with a non -expansive imported structural/granular fill material, should the soils
underlying the over -excavated zone become elevated in moisture content to a reasonable depth.
Calculated Heave Potential
Depth of Removal of Expansive Soil
and Replacement with Low to Non
Expansive Fill Materials (ft)
Calculated Heave Potential, Inches
Re -Conditioned On -Site Cohesive
Soils as Engineered Fill Material
Imported Structural/Granular Fill
Material
0
> 5"
> 5„
4
2-1/2"
1-1/2'
6
< 1-1/2"
< 1"
It should be noted that the heave potential is the heave that could occur if subsurface moisture
increases sufficiently subsequent to construction. When subsurface moisture does not increase, or
increases only nominally, the full heave potential may not be realized. For this reason, and assuming
some surface water run-off will be controlled with grading contours, drainage swales, etc., we
provided surface slope and drainage recommendations in our report to reduce the potential for
surface water infiltration. With appropriate surface features to limit the amount infiltration, we
would not expect the full amount of potential heave to occur.
Additional floor slab design and construction recommendations are as follows:
• Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all
foundations, columns or utility lines to allow independent movement.
• Control joints should be provided in slabs to control the location and extent of
cracking.
• Interior trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in a similar manner
as previously described for imported structural fill material.
• Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade.
• Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in the ACI Design Manual,
Section 302.1R are recommended.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 10
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
Positive drainage should be developed away from the building with a minimum slope of 1 inch per
foot for the first 10 feet away from the structure within landscape areas. Flatter slopes can be
developed in flatwork areas provided positive drainage is maintained away from the structure.
Seismic Conditions
The site soil conditions consist of approximately 23 to 27-feet of overburden soils overlying
moderately hard bedrock. For those site conditions, the 2012 International Building Code indicates
a Seismic Site Classification of D.
Lateral Earth Pressures
For any site improvements being constructed below grade, including the swimming pool, those
improvements will be subject to lateral earth pressures. Passive lateral earth pressures may help
resist the driving forces for site retaining walls or other similar site structures. Active lateral earth
pressures could be used for design of structures where some movement of the structure is
anticipated, such as retaining walls. The total deflection of structures for design with active earth
pressure is estimated to be on the order of one half of one percent of the height of the down slope
side of the structure. We recommend at -rest pressures be used for design of structures where
rotation of the walls is restrained. Passive pressures and friction between the footing and bearing
soils could be used for design of resistance to movement of retaining walls.
Coefficient values for backfill with anticipated types of soils for calculation of active, at rest and
passive earth pressures are provided in the table below. Equivalent fluid pressure is equal to the
coefficient times the appropriate soil unit weight. Those coefficient values are based on horizontal
backfill with backfill soils consisting of essentially on -site cohesive subsoils or approved imported
granular materials with friction angles of 25 and 35 degrees respectively. For the at -rest and active
earth pressures, slopes down and away from the structure would result in reduced driving forces with
slopes up and away from the structures resulting in greater forces on the walls. The passive
resistance would be reduced with slopes away from the wall. The top 30-inches of soil on the
passive resistance side of walls could be used as a surcharge load; however, should not be used as a
part of the passive resistance value. Frictional resistance is equal to the tangent of the friction angle
times the normal force.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 11
Soil Type
On -Site Low Plasticity Cohesive
Imported Medium Dense Granular
Wet Unit Weight
115
135
Saturated Unit Weight
135
140
Friction Angle (�) — (assumed)
250
350
Active Pressure Coefficient
0.40
0.27
At -rest Pressure Coefficient
0.58
0.43
Passive Pressure Coefficient
2.46
3.70
Surcharge loads or point loads placed in the backfill can also create additional loads on below grade
walls. Those situations should be designed on an individual basis.
The outlined values do not include factors of safety nor allowances for hydrostatic loads and are
based on assumed friction angles, which should be verified after potential material sources have
been identified. Care should be taken to develop appropriate drainage systems behind below grade
walls to eliminate potential for hydrostatic loads developing on the walls. Those systems would
likely include perimeter drain systems extending to sump areas or free outfall where reverse flow
cannot occur into the system. Where necessary, appropriate hydrostatic load values should be used
for design.
Pool / Pool Buildina Design and Construction
As currently planned, the proposed project will include the construction of a swimming pool in a
freestanding building. The construction and performance of the pool and surrounding structure will be
dependent upon the amount of seepage from the pool impacting the in -situ moderate to high swell
potential subsoils. Based on the field results from Borings B-9 and B-10, it appears the pool will be
excavated and constructed within the overburden/cohesive zone. The sandy lean clay / lean clay with
sand overburden within the proposed pool building footprint, as evident by the swell -consolidation test
results presented with this report, exhibited moderate to high swell potential. Groundwater was not
encountered in Borings B-9 and B-10, however groundwater was observed at approximate depths of 16
to 21 feet below existing site grade across the site. Special precautions will be necessary to address the
expansive subsoils and, depending on final site grades, the potential presence of groundwater during
the construction of the proposed pool building.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 12
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
Following the removal of existing topsoil/vegetation as recommended in the "Site Preparation"
section, EEC recommends the building foot print be over excavated 6 feet below the bottom of
swimming pool grade and replaced with either moisture conditioned on -site engineered fill material
and/or approved imported structural fill material reworked in the pool buildings area as recommended
in the "Foundation Bearing Strata Preparation "to reduce the potential for the moderate swell in -place
soils causing excessive post -construction heaving of the overlying pool. The over excavation should
extend laterally) -foot for every foot of over excavated material outside the perimeter of the pool
building. Following the removal of over excavation materials, the exposed soils should be scarified,
moisture conditioned and compacted and fill/backfill materials placed and compacted as recommended
in the "Foundation Bearing Strata Preparation " section. A drainage system should be provided
around and beneath the pool according to general industry standards.
To reduce possible damage that could be caused by movement of the subgrade soils, we recommend:
• deck slabs be supported on fill material with no, or very low expansion or
compressibility characteristics,
• strict moisture -density control during placement of subgrade fills
• placement of effective control joints on relatively close centers and isolation joints
between slabs and other structural elements
• provision for adequate drainage in areas adjoining the slabs
• use of designs which allow vertical movement between the deck slabs and adjoining
structural elements
Pavements — Design and Construction Recommendations
Since movement of pavements is generally more tolerable, we suggest the over excavation depth in
the pavement areas could be reduced to 2 feet. We expect the site pavements will include areas
designated primarily for light-duty/automobile traffic usage and areas for heavy-duty/garbage truck
traffic. For design purposes we are using an assumed equivalent daily load axle (EDLA) rating of 5
to be used in the light -duty areas and an EDLA rating of 25 in the heavy-duty areas. Based on the
subsurface conditions encountered at the site we recommend the on -site parking area be designed
using an R-value of 5.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 13
Due to the expansive characteristics of the overburden material zone, we recommend over -excavating a
minimum of two (2) feet of the overburden subsoils and replacement of these soils as moisture
conditioned/engineered fill material beneath pavement areas. Due to the potential pumping
conditions, which could develop in a moisture treatment process of on -site cohesive soils; we would
suggest in conjunction with the over -excavation process, for subgrade stabilization purposes,
incorporating at least 12 percent by weight, Class C fly ash, into the upper 12 inches of subgrade. An
alternate to fly ash and the 2-foot reconditioned fill material would be to over -excavate and/or "cut to
grade" to accommodate a minimum 2-foot layer of non -expansive granular soils to be placed and
compacted beneath the pavement section.
If the fly ash alternative stabilization approach is.selected, EEC recommends incorporating 12% (by
weight) Class C fly ash, into the upper 12-inches of subgrade. Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) pavement
materials underlain by crushed aggregate base course (ABC) materials with a fly ash treated subgrade,
and non -reinforced concrete pavement are feasible alternatives for the proposed on -site paved sections.
Pavement design methods are intended to provide structural sections with adequate thickness over a
particular subgrade such that wheel loads are reduced to a level the subgrade can support. The support
characteristics of the subgrade for pavement design do not account for shrink/swell movements of an
expansive clay subgrade or consolidation of a wetted subgrade. Thus, the pavement may be adequate
from a structural standpoint, yet still experience cracking and deformation due to shrink/swell related
movement of the subgrade. It is, therefore, important to minimize moisture changes in the subgrade to
reduce shrink/swell movements.
The subgrades should be thoroughly evaluated and proofrolled prior to pavement construction.
Recommended pavement sections are provided in the table below. The HMA pavement materials
should be grading S (75) with PG 58-28 oil. The ABC materials should be CDOT Class 5 or Class 6
materials. Portland cement concrete should be an exterior pavement mix with a minimum 28-day
compressive strength of 4,000 psi and should be air entrained.
Composite HMA underlain by ABC pavements may show rutting and distress in truck loading and
turning areas including trash removal trucks. Concrete pavements should be considered in those
areas.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 14
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
RECOMMENDED MINIMUM PAVEMENT SECTIONS
Automobile
Heavy Duty Areas
Parking
18-kip EDLA
5
25
18-kip ESAL
36,500
182,500
Reliability
70%
75%
Resilient Modulus
3025
3025
PSI Loss
2.5
2.0
Design Structure Number
2.43
3.25
Composite:
Hot Mix Asphalt - (0.44 strength coefficient)
3-1/2"
4"
Aggregate Base Course - (0.11 strength coefficient)
4"
8"
Fly Ash Treated Subgrade (0.05 strength coefficient)
12"
12"
Design Structure Number
(2.58)
(3.24)
PCC (Non -reinforced) — placed on a stable subgrade
5-1/2"
7"
The recommended pavement sections are minimums and periodic maintenance should be expected.
Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed in concrete pavements for
expansion/contraction and isolation. The location and extent of joints should be based upon the final '
pavement geometry. Sawed joints should be cut in accordance with ACI recommendations. All joints
should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer.
Since the cohesive soils on the site have some shrink/swell potential, pavements could crack in the '
future primarily because of the volume change of the soils when subjected to an increase in moisture
content to the subgrade. The cracking, while not desirable, does not necessarily constitute structural
failure of the pavement. Stabilization of the subgrades will reduce the potential for cracking of the
pavements.
The collection and diversion of surface drainage away from paved areas is critical to the satisfactory
performance of the pavement. Drainage design should provide for the removal of water from paved
areas in order to reduce the potential for wetting of the subgrade soils.
Long-term pavement performance will be dependent upon several factors, including maintaining '
subgrade moisture levels and providing for preventive maintenance. The following ,
recommendations should be considered the minimum:
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
. EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
' Page 15
' • The subgrade and the pavement surface should be adequately sloped to promote proper surface
drainage.
• Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting (e.g. garden
' centers, wash racks)
• Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately,
• Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to minimize or prevent moisture
' migration to subgrade soils;
• Placing compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter;
and,
' • Placing curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk directly on approved proof rolled subgrade soils
without the use of base course materials.
Preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on -going pavement
management program. Preventive maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement
deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventive maintenance consists of both
localized maintenance (e.g_ crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g. surface
sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement
maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Prior to
implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the
type and extent of preventive maintenance.
Site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. ,However as construction
proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic, desiccation, or
rainfall. As a result, the pavement subgrade may not be suitable for pavement construction and
corrective action will be required. The subgrade should be carefully evaluated at the time of pavement
construction for signs of disturbance, rutting, or excessive drying. If disturbance has occurred,
pavement subgrade areas should be reworked, moisture conditioned, and properly compacted to the
recommendations in this report immediately prior to paving.
Please note that if during or after placement of the stabilization or initial lift of pavement, the area is
observed to be yielding under vehicle traffic or construction equipment, it is recommended that EEC be
contacted for additional alternative methods of stabilization, or a change in the pavement section.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 16
Soil Corrosivity
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
The results of the soluble sulfate tests completed for this project have indicated low potential for sulfate
attack on Portland cement concrete. ASTM Type I Portland cement may be suitable for concrete on
and below site grade within the overburden soils. However, if there is no, or minimal cost differential,
use of ASTM Type IM Portland cement is recommended for additional sulfate resistance of
construction concrete. Foundation concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of
the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4.
Other Considerations
Positive drainage should be developed away from the structures and pavement areas with a
minimum slope of 1-inch per foot for the first 10 feet away from the improvements in landscape
areas. Flatter slopes could be considered in hardscape/pavement areas. Care should be taken in
planning of landscaping adjacent to the building and parking and drive areas to avoid features which
would pond water adjacent to the pavement,"foundations or stemwalls.
Placement of plants which require irrigation systems or could result in fluctuations of the moisture
content of the subgrade material should be avoided adjacent to site improvements. Lawn watering
systems should not be placed within 5 feet of the perimeter of the building and parking areas. Spray
heads should be designed not to spray water on or immediately adjacent to the structure or site
pavements. Roof drains should be designed to discharge at least 5 feet away from the structure and
away from the pavement areas.
Excavations into the on -site soils may encounter a variety of conditions. Excavations into the on -
site clays and underlying bedrock formation can be expected to stand on relatively steep temporary
slopes during construction. The individual contractor(s) should be made responsible for designing
and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the
excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety
following local and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety
standards.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 17
GENERAL COMMENTS
The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from
the soil borings performed at the indicated locations and from any other information discussed in this
report. This report does not reflect any variations, which may occur between borings or across the
site. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If
variations appear evident, it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report.
It is recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained to review the plans and specifications
so comments can be made regarding the interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical
recommendations in the design and specifications. It is further recommended that the geotechnical
engineer be retained for testing and observations during earthwork and foundation construction
phases to help determine that the design requirements are fulfilled.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Inland Group for specific application to the
project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices. No warranty, express or implied, is made. In the event that any changes in
the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions
and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are
reviewed and the conclusions of this report are modified or verified in writing by the geotechnical
engineer.
DRILLING AND :EXPLORATION
DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS:
SS: Split Spoon - 13/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted
PS: Piston Sample
ST: Thin -Walled Tube - 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted
WS: Wash Sample
R: Ring Barrel Sampler - 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D. unless otherwise noted
PA: Power Auger
FT: Fish Tail Bit
HA: Hand Auger
RB: Rock Bit
DB: Diamond Bit = 4", N, B
BS: Bulk Sample
AS: Auger Sample
PM: Pressure Meter
HS: Hollow Stem Auger
WB: Wash Bore
Standard "N" Penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2-inch O.D. split spoon, except where noted.
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:
WL : Water Level
WS : While Sampling
WCI: Wet Cave in
WD : While Drilling
DCI: Dry Cave in
BCR: Before Casing Removal
AB : After Boring
ACR: After Casting Removal
Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time indicated. In pervious soils, the indicated
levels may reflect the location of ground water. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of ground water levels is not
possible with only short term observations.
DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification
system and the ASTM Designations D-2488. Coarse Grained
Soils have move than 50% of their dry weight retained on a
#200 sieve; they are described as: boulders, cobbles, gravel or
sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight
retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as : clays, if they
are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non -plastic.
Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor
constituents may be added according to the relative
proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation,
coarse grained soils are defined on the basis of their relative in -
place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their
consistency. Example: Lean clay with sand, trace gravel, stiff
(CL); silty sand, trace gravel, medium dense (SM).
CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS
Unconfined Compressive
Strength, Qu, psf Consistency
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF BEDROCK
DEGREE OF WEATHERING:
Slight
Slight decomposition of parent material on
joints. May be color change.
Moderate
Some decomposition and color change
throughout.
High
Rock highly decomposed, may be extremely
broken.
HARDNESS AND DEGREE OF CEMENTATION:
Limestone and Dolomite:
Hard
Difficult to scratch with knife.
Moderately
Can be scratched easily with knife.
Hard
Cannot be scratched with fingernail.
Soft
Can be scratched with fingernail.
Shale. Siltstone and Claystone:
<
500
Very Soft
Hard
Can be scratched easily with knife, cannot be
scratched with fingernail.
500 -
1,000
Soft
1,001-
2,000
Medium
Moderately
Can be scratched with fingernail.
2,001-
4,000
Stiff
Hard
4,001-
8,000
Very Stiff
Soft
Can be easily dented but not molded with
8,001-16,000
Very Hard
fingers.
RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE -GRAINED SOILS:
N-Blows/ft
Relative Density
0-3
Very Loose
4-9
Loose
10-29
Medium Dense
30-49
Dense
50-80
Very Dense
80+
Extremely Dense
Sandstone and Conelomerate
Well Capable of scratching a knife blade.
Cemented
Cemented Can be scratched with knife.
Poorly Can be broken apart easily with fingers.
Cemented
4
tartn tngmeenng consultants, LLL
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Soil Classification
Group
Group Name
Criteria for Assigning Group
Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests
Symbol
Coarse -Grained Soils Gravels more than
Clean Gravels Less Cu>_4 and 1<Cc<_3E
GW
Well -graded gravel E
more than50% 50%ofcoarse
than S%fines
retained on No. 200 fraction retained on
Cu<4 and/or 1>Cc>3E
GP
Poorly -graded gravel F
sieve No. 4 sieve
Gravels with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH
GM
Silty gravel G,"
Fine -Grained Soils
50% or more passes
the No. 200 sieve
Sands 50%or more
coarse fraction
passes No. 4 sieve
Sifts and Clays
Liquid Limit less
than 50
Silts and Clays
Liquid Limit 50 or
more
more than 12%
fines
Fines Classify as CL or CH
Clean Sands Less
Cu>_6 and 1<Cc<_3E
than 5% fines
Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc>3E
Sands with Fines
Fines classify as ML or MH
more than 12%
fines
Fines classify as CL or CH
inorganic
PI>7 and plots on or above "A" Line
Phil or plots below "A" Line
organic Liquid Limit - oven dried
Liquid Limit - not dried
GC Clayey Gravel r'G'"
SW Well -graded sand'
SP Poorly -graded sand'
SM Silty sand1'"'1
SC Clayey sand G'"'1
CL Lean clay KLM
ML Silt K'LM
Organic clay KL.KN
<0.75 OL
Organic sift KLM'o
inorganic Pl plots on or above "A" Line CH Fat clay x,LM
PI plots below "A" Line
MH Elastic Siltc'LM
organic Liquid Limit - oven dried Organic clayK'
<0.75 OH
Liquid Limit - not dried Organic silt K.LM,o
Highly organic soils
Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
"Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm)
ECu=Dw/Dte Cc= (D30)i
Kif soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand"
sieve
Dto x Dm
or "with gravel", whichever is predominant.
elf field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or
Elf soil contains 2 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand,
both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to
add "sandy" to group name.
group name.
`If soil contains 215%sand, add "with sand" to
MY soil contains 230% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel,
GGravels with 5 to 12%fines required dual symbols:
GIf fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-
add "gravelly" to group name.
GW-GM well graded gravel with silt
CM, or SC-SM.
"PI24 and plots on or above "A" line.
GW-GC well -graded gravel with clay
"If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to
oP1s4 or plots below "A" line.
GP -GM poorly -graded gravel with silt
group name
°PI plots on or above "A" line.
GP -GC poorly -graded gravel with clay
11f soil contains >15%gravel, add "with gravel" to
oPl plots below "A" line.
°Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols:
group name
SW-SM well -graded sand with silt
)if Atterberg limits plots shaded area, soil is a CL-
SW-SC well -graded sand with clay
ML, Silty clay
SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt
SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
EEC
60
50
40
0
2
30
u
F
20
a
10
For Classification of fine-grained soils and
fine-grained fraction of coarse -grained
soils.
J°e'er,
Equation of"A"-line
Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5
then PI-0.73 (LL-20) `�
Equation of "U"-line
Vertical at LL-16 to PI-7,
then PI=0.9 (LL.8)
&
MH o
OH
oP
ML
OL
L- L�
0
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
Earth Engineering LonsultantS, LLL
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
EEC PROJECT No. 1142094
NOVEMBER 2014
EEC
r,
--�00)
O
---
N
q
C E
40
Ti
❑ILL
'� v
O
O
O
O T,
Tv
61I i V
O
O
a
C �_ U -
o-
z
O C 0
Q Zf-
-.-
N
C
O
QV `
#;
N —
O v
0�U-
E
m _0 D
.. —
Cz
m Yv
W
N
d1 —
O
C-
V
W
W
3
c
0 o3
a
ao
v�uv
v
Q o
�S-02
_ J VI
S
z
J
vl
F
z
Q
J
v1
z
O
U
z
c
w
w
_z
0
z
w
2
I—
C
Q
w
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B•1
SHEET 1 OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11/2512014
WHILE DRILLING
2V
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11/2512014
AFTER DRILLING
N/A
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
N/A
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
N
oU
YC
00
A MrTs
-IN
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
%Q SWPSF
TYPE
(FEET)
(BLOWSIFT)
IPSn
1%)
(PCF)
1%I
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
1
brown
stiff to very stiff
2
with calcareous deposits
16
9000+
11.1
105.8
CS
3
4
with traces of gravel [Ss
5
11
9000+
8.7
6
_7_
8
_9_
brown / red CS
10
18
9000+
8.6
119.4
35
22
60.3
2,000 psf
1.3%
11
12
13
14
Fss
15
9
9000+
17.1
16
17
18
19
brown / tan / rust CS
20
13
2500
21.4
109.2
stiff
21
22
23
24
CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SC/GP)
33
20.
17.3
brown / grey / rust, dense
SS
25
Continued on Sheet 2 of 2
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 11420%
LOG OF BORING B•1
SHEET 2 OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
11125MO14
WHILE DRILLING
21'
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
11/25I2014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
N
DU
rrc
DO
auras
.2w
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
%Q 500 PSF
TYPE
(FEET)
(BLOWS/Fn
MSF)
(%)
IMF)
(%)
Continued from Sheet 1 of 2
26
CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SC/GP)
brown I grey / rust
27
28
CLAYSTONE/SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE
brown I grey / rust
_
hard
29
CS
30
5018"
9000+
16.9
113.5
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 30.fr
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-2
SHEET 1 OF i
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
1112512014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11252014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
R
oU
rc
Do
/write
Qw
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
%Q saov
nPe
*wn
(aLowwrt
men
I%)
(PCF)
(%1
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
stiff to very stilt
with calcareous deposits
3
4
CS
5
19
9000i
9.6
107.1
41
27
79A
2,500 psf
2.9%
6
_7_
8
_9
brown I red [SS
10
10
9000i
9.9
11
12
13
14
brown / gmy/ rust CS
15
32
9000
12.5
120.5
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.9
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tarin tngmeenng consunan>s, L.u:
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-3
SHEET 1 OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
1112512014
WHILE DRILLING
Is,
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
1112512014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
0u
rc
oD
smu
LL
PI
PRESSURE
%Q SWPSF
TYPE
(FEET)
(Kowswf)
(PSF)
I%)
(PCF)
(%1
TOPSOIL 8 VEGETATION
.
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
very stiff to stiff
with calcareous deposits
3
4
CS
5
19
9000+
7.7
117.9
8,000 Psi
6.7%
6
_7_
8
_9_
SS
10
11
14
9000+
8.3
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC)
red
12
medium -dense
_
13
14
CS
15
14
7500
6.0
118.3
16
17
18
19
20
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL) SS
9
3500
24.8
brown I tan / grey
_ _
stiff to medium stiff
21
22
23
24
brown / grey / rust
6
500
19.3
111.7
CS
25
Continued on Sheet 2 of 2
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-3
SHEET 2 OF
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMES5
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
11125MO14
WHILE DRILLING
16'
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
1112S2014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SIFT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
N
cU
Nc
00
A41MM
-2D0
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
% No PSF
TYPE
(FEET)
(BLOWSIM
(PSF)
1%1
(PCF)
I%)
Continued from Sheet 1 of 2
26
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY With SAND (CL)
27
brown I grey / rust
28
29
CLAYSTONE I SILTSTONE I SANDSTONE
28
7000
11.1
brown I grey I rust
SS
30
hiahly weathered. moderatety hard
31
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 30.5'
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
EOfm tnginBBnn9 GODSUItantB, LLG
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-4
SHEET 1 OF i
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
11/252014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11252014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
0U
re
DD
A-UMrrS
-me
swELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
%Q SOD PSF
TYPE
(FEET)
(BLowsi )
Inn
I%)
IPCF)
I%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
very stiff to stiff with depth
with calcareous deposits
3
_4
CS
5
17
9000+
9.3
107.1
1,100 PSf
1.2%
6
7
8
_9_
Ess
10
15
9000+
9.8
11
12
13
14
CS
15
_
10
9000+
17.4
108.4
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 11420M
LOG OF BORING 0-5
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMESS
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
111252014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
112512014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
OU
Mc
DO
A4JMRS
400
SWEU
LL
PI
PRE99URE
%@ NO PSF
1YPE
IFEE-r)
mowslm
(Psn
1%)
(PCF)
(%I
TOPSOIL 8 VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
stiff to very still
_ _
% IW �
13
9000+
11.4
111.4
3 500
4.5%
with calcareous deposits CS
3
4
Fss
5
9
9000
12.2
6
_7_
_8
_9
CS
10
30
9000+
12.5
120.7
11
12
13
14
FSS
15
16
a
4000
19.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
farm tngineerin9 consultants, LLG
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-6
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMESS
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11/25/2014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11/25/2014
AFTER DRILLING
N/A
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE
ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
N/A
SOIL DESCRIPTION
b
N
a
me
Do
A
Qm
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
% @ 500 PSF
TYPE
(FEET)
(BLOWSIFT)
(PSF)
(%)
(PCF)
I%)
TOPSOIL 8 VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
stiff to medium -serf with depth
with calcareous deposits
3
4
CS
5
14
9000+
11.2
106.3
6
7
8
9
[Sq
10
16
9000+
9.7
11
12
13
14
CS
15
5
2500
18.4
107.0
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.a
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142OU
LOG OF BORING 8-7
SHEET 1 OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
111125120114
WHILE DRILLING
16.5'
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11252014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
Du
Nc
DD
A4AUTS
.200
SWELL
LL
FI
PRESSURE
% Stp PSF
TYPE
(FEET)
(suwmFr)
(pan
I%)
(POF)
I%)
TOPSOIL 8 VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown / tan
2
stiff to medium -stiff to soft with depth
10
9000+
11.8
108.8
CS
3
4
FSS
5
11
9000+
11.9
6
—7-
8
_9_
_ _
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC)
32
9000+
10.0
115.8
31
19
45.8
1.300 psf 1
1.1%
red CS
10
dense
_
11
12
13
14
_ _
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
7
3000
21.0
brown SS
15
medium -stiff to soft with depth
16
17
18
19
CS
20
3
500
23.6
1 105.3
21
22
23
24
CLAYSTONE/SILTSTONE
brown / grey / nut I olive
_ _
28
8500
22.5
highly weathered, moderately hard to hard FSS
25
Continued on Sheet 2 of 2
tarin engineering Consukanis, LL%,
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-7
SHEET 2 OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
1112512014
WHILE DRILLING
16.5'
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
1112512014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
aU
Yc
DD
A.LJMrrS
-250
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
% Q SOD PSF
TYPE
(FEET)
(BiowslFT)
(Pan
(%)
(PCF)
I%)
Continued from Sheet 1 of 2
26
CLAYSTONE/SILTSTONE
27
brown / grey / rust / olive
highly weathered
28
hard
29
CS
30
50I10"
9000+
17.7
113.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 30.0'
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-8
SHEET 1 OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
1112512014
WHILE DRILLING
1 r
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11125*014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
DU
Mc
DD
A-Ll
30s
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
% s00PSF
TYPE
(FEET)
tuowswn
(Pan
I%)
(PCF)
(%)
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
1
brown / tan
stiff to medium stiff
2
with traces of gravel
3
_4_
CL
5
11
9000+
10.3
108.5
6
_7_
_9_
Fss
10
6
9000+
9.6
11
12
13
14
brown CS
15
6
500
22.9
103.0
16
17
18
19
brown / gray / rust Fss
20
13
2000
20.7
with light gravel seams
21
22
23
24
CS
25
16
Continued on Sheet 2 of 2
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING &9
SHEET OF
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMESS
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
11125120'14
WHILE DRILLING
17'
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
111252014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
DU
we
DD
A411mS
400
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
%e SWPSF
-FY
(FEET)
BLawwn
IPSFI
1%1
IPCFI
I%I
Continued from Sheet i of 2
26
27
CLAYSTONE I SILTSTONE
brown I grey I rust
moderately hard
28
29
Fss
30
31
46
9000+
18.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 30.5'
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING BA
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
1112512014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
1112512014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
oU
IIC
Do
A-Lt
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
%Q 500 PSF
TTPE
(FEET)
(BLllwsrm
Inn(%)
MCF)
(%)
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
1
blown
stiff
2
with calcareous deposits
_ _
11
9000+
11.1
115.1
CS
3
_4_
Fss
5
9
9000+
11.4
6
_7_
8
_9_
10
CLAYEY SAND wi0i GRAVEL (SC) CS
20
9000+
5.1
120.5
25
13
39.1
900 PSf
0.5%
red
medium -dense
11
12
13
14
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
9
6000
18.6
brown
SS
15
stiff
16
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
earm engmeenng consultants, LLc
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-10
SHEET 1 OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
111252014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11252014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
N
0U
Nc
DD
-W
SWELL
LL
I pi
PRESSURE
%415mPSF
nPE
(FEET)
(eL.owa/Fr1
(PsF)
1%)
(Pcn
(%1
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
stiff to very stiff
_ _
-
with
with calcareous deposits
3
_4_
CS
5
13
9000
10.5
110.0
45
30
$4.6
4,000 psf
4.0%
6
7
8
9
brown I tan FSS
10
24
9000+
8.5
11
12
13
14
brown
_ _
22
9000+
10.8
121.4
CS
15
16
17
18
19
Drown / grey / rust FSS
20
11
4500
22.5
with traces of coarse sand
21
22
23
24
CLAYSTONE/SILTSTONE
28
9000+
19.5
109.8
brown / grey / rust• soft to moderatey hard CS
25
C rnfinued on Sheet 2 of 2
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-10
SHEET 2OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
1112512014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
11/252014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
DU
Mc
DD
I MRS
1w
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
% Sw PSP
T'PE
(FEFM
(BLD11SrFn
(PSF)
(%)
(PCFl
I%)
Continued from Sheet 1 of 2
26
CLAYSTONE I SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE
27
brown I grey / rust, moderatety hard
28
29
FSS
30
31
2014"
9000+
15.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 30.6
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B•11
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMESS
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11/2812014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11/2612014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
OU
mc
DD
na.ntls
-m
SWELL
E
Q Soo PSFiT
%I
FEET)
(SLOWSIFT)
(PSF)
TOPSOIL 8 VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
very sDO
30
9000+
11.2
114.4
-",Soo pst
10.8%
with calcareous deposits CS
3
4
[SS
5
19
9000+
9.9
6
_7_
8
—9—
SS
10
11
23
9000
9.1
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.6
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Earth Engineering consultants, LLc
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142M
LOG OF BORING B-12
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMESS
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11262014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11262014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
w
YC
DD
A-U
-m
sweu
LL
PI
PRESSURE
r %@ 500 PSF
TYPE
WEFT)
(B"mffn
men
(%)
(PCF)
(%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
still
with ml� deposits
3
4
CS
5
11
9000*
10.6
112.6
3,000 psf
3.3%
6
7
8
9
FSS
10
9
9000+
9.3
11
12
13
14
CS
15
6
3000
18.5
106.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.0'
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-13
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMESS
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
11262014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
- 1126/2014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
au
me
DD
ALIIRS
3W
SWELL
LL
PI
PRE95URE
%Q Soo PSP
TYPE
(FEET)
BLOWWn
(PSFl
(%)
(PC
(%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY With SAND (CL)
bmmn
2
stiff
_ _
%g tw PSc
10
9000+
11.1
109.3
40
23
77.5
7,000 pst
10.4%
with calcareous deposits CS
3
4
[SS
5
13
9000+
10.0
6
7
8
—9—
with gravels
15
9000+
9.0
SS
10
11
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Cann tOgineenng %.on5WW1II5, LL%.
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 11420S4
LOG OF BORING B-14
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11/26/2014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11126/2014
AFTER DRILLING
N/A
SIFT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
N/A
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
oU
me
OD
A11YfT8
- m
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
%Q Soo PBF
TYPE
(FEET)
(BLOMM
(PBF)
(%)
IP<Fl
I%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
stiff to Wary stiff
with calcareous deposits
3
4
CS
5
13
9000+
11.8
111.1
3,200 psf
3.1%
6
7
8
_9_
F
10
23
9000i
8.0
11
12
13
14
CS
15
11
8500
17.4
111.3
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.(r
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-15
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
11126/2014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11/26/2014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
o
N
W
YC
oo
A-U&M
-m
SWELL
LL
I PI
PRESSURE
%Q 500PSF
TYPE
0fEen
(mmwswT)
men
I%)
(PCF)
I%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
very stiff to medium -stiff with depth
_ _
%g 150 PSF
18
9000+
10.7
104.8
41
24
82.0
4,000 psf
7.3%
with calcareous deposits & traces of gravel CS
3
4
FSS
5
14
9000+
8.6
6
7
8
_9_
brown 1 tan SS
10
11
7
9000+
9.9
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.5
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Farm Engineering G011suna tts, LLG
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B46
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11/262014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CPA
FINISH DATE
112612014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
DU
Yc
DD
A4AYrT9
- W
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
% SW PSP
TYPE
(FEET)
(B1.0WBffT)
1PSF)
t%)
(PCF)
I%)
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL) - FILL
1
dark brown / grey / rust
still to very stiff
2
3
13
9000+
2.4
SS
_4
br I rust
5
18
9000+
12.9
SS
6
_7_
_8_
_9_
10
LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL) CS
14
9000+
15.8
116.7
41
25
86.4
2,500 pst
0.9%
brown
stiff to very stiff
11
with calcareous deposits
12
13
14
brown / tan
_ _
15
9000+
13.3
SS
15
16
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-17
SHEET 1 OF T
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMESS
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
111252014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: V CFA
FINISH DATE
112512014
AFTER DRILLING -
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
R
ou
Mc
Do
A4JIM
-mo
SWELL
LL
PI
PREnURE
% Soo PSF
TYPE
(FEET)
tmmwswT)
(PSFl
(%)
(PCF)
I%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
very stiff to soft to medium stiff
_ _
19
9000+
10.6
113.7
with micareous deposits & traces of coarse sand CS
3
_4_
with sandy seams Fss
5
2
9000+
11.6
6
7
8
_9_
SS
10
11
7
7600
12.7
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.6
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tarui Cr19111eering %,omuitantb, LLt.
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown, Reddish Sandy Lean Clay (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 1, Sample 3, Depth 9'
Liquid Limit: 35
IPlasticity Index: 22
% Passing #200: 60.3%
Beginning Moisture: 8.6%
JDry Density: 114.9 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 17.4%
Swell Pressure: 2000 psf
% Swell @ 500: 1.3%
10.0
8.0
6.0
3
U
4.0
2.0
c
m
E
0
>
0.0
M
C
m
V
L
d -20
Water
Added
-4.0
0
cc
0
N
0 -6.0
U
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project: Affinity of Fort Collins
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #: 1142094
Date: December 2014
EEC
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 2, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: 41
Plasticity Index: 27
% Passing #200: 79.1%
Beginning Moisture: 9.6%
JDry Density: 101.9 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 22.7%
Swell Pressure: 2500 psf
% Swell @ 500: 2.9%
10.0
8.0
6.0
m
3
4.0
2.0
c
m
E
m
g
0.0
w
C
m
O
m
a -2 0
Water
Added
-4.0
0
cc
v
0
N
0 -6.0
U
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project: Affinity of Fort Collins
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #: 1142094
Date: December 2014
F
CI
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 3, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: - -
Plasticity Index: - -
°� Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 7.7%
JDry Density: 117.9 pcf
Ending Moisture:
Swell Pressure: 8000 psf
% Swell @ 500: 6.7%
10.0
8.0
6.0
m
3
rn
4.0
2.0
c
m
m
i 0.0
c
m
u
m
IL -20
Water
Added
-4.0
cc
0
o -6.0
0
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 4, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: - - IPlasticity
Index: - -
% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 9.3% JDry
Density: 94.9 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 26.4%
Swell Pressure: 1100 psf
% Swell @ 500: 1.2%
10.0
8.0
6.0
a�
3
U
4.0
2.0
c
m
E
0
>
0.0
C
c
cmi
m
d -2.0
Water
Added
-4.0
0
cc
0
o -6.0
U
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
EEC
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 5, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: - -
I Plasticity Index: - -
% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 11.4%
Dry Density: 111.4 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 18.0%
Swell Pressure: 3500 psf
% Swell @ 150: 4.5%
10.0
8.0
6.0
m
3
4.0
2.0
c
m
E
m
0.0
c
m
0
a
Water
Added
-2.0
-4.0
0
is
a
0
N
0 -6.0
U
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
EEC
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown, Red Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC)
Sample Location: Boring 7, Sample 3, Depth 9'
Liquid Limit: 31
JPlasticity Index: 19
% Passing #200: 45.8%
Beginning Moisture: 10.0%
JDry Density: 115.8 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 14.1%
Swell Pressure: 1300 psf
% Swell @ 500: 1.1 %
10.0
8.0
6.0
m
3
4.0
2.0
c
m
m
g
0.0
c
m
m
IL -2 0
Water
Added
-4.0
0
ca
v
0
N
0 -6.O
U
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
EEC
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Red Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC)
Sample Location: Boring 9, Sample 3, Depth 9'
Liquid Limit: 25
JPlasticity Index: 13
% Passing #200: 39.1%
Beginning Moisture: 5.1%
Dry Density: 115.7 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 13.8%
Swell Pressure: 900 psf
% Swell @ 500: 0.5%
10.0
8.0
6.0
m
3
U
4.0
2.0
c
m
E
m
0.0
m
7
INS
0
m
a -20
Water
'T
Added
-4.0
0
m
v
0
N
o -6.0
U
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
E
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 10, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: 45
IPlasticity Index: 30
% Passing #200: 84.6%
Beginning Moisture: 10.5%
JDry Density: 107.7 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 22.2%
Swell Pressure: 4000 psf
% Swell @ 500: 4.0%
10.0
8.0
6.0
m
3
4.0
2.0
c
0
E
m
0.0
c
m
m
a -20
Water
Added
-4.0
0
a
0
N
o -6.0
U
11
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
EEC
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 11, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: - -
Plasticity Index: - -
°� Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 11.2%
Dry Density: 117 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 19.2%
Swell Pressure:—10,000 psf
% Swell @ 150: 10.8%
12.0
10.0
8.0
rn
6.0
4.0
c
m
E
m
2.0
M
C
m
u
V
d
IL
0.0
Water
Added
-2.0
0
cc
0
N
oo -4.0
U
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project: Affinity of Fort Collins
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project M 1142094
Date: December 2014
L:7-7�E
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 12, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: - -
Plasticity Index: - -
% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 10.6%
JDry Density: 112.6 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 19.8%
Swell Pressure: 3000 psf
% Swell @ 500: 3.3%
12.0
10.0
8.0
m
3
6.0
4.0
c
m
E
0
2.0
c
m
m
a
0.0
-2.0
Water
Added
0
M
v
�o
W
o -4.0
U
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load(TSF)
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
E
EC
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description:
Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location:
Boring 13, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 40
IPlasticity Index: 23
% Passing #200: 77.5%
Beginning Moisture:
11.1%
IDry Density: 111.5 pcf
I Ending Moisture: 19.1%
Swell Pressure: 7000 psf
% Swell @ 150: 10.4%
12.0
10.0
8.0
m
3
6.0
4.0
c
m
E
m
2.0
c
m
m
a
0.0
Water
Added
-2.0
0
v
�o
N
o
-4.0
U
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project: Affinity of Fort Collins
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #: 1142094
Date: December 2014
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 14, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: - -
Plasticity Index: - -
°� Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 11.8%
Dry Density: 100.3 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 22.5%
Swell Pressure: 3200 psf
% Swell @ 500: 3.1%
12.0
10.0
8.0
m
3
rn
6.0
4.0
c
m
E
m
0
2.0
e
m
v
m
IL
0.0'-7
7-4
Water Added
-2.0
0
.6
v
0
o -4.0
U
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project: Affinity of Fort Collins
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #: 1142094
Date: December 2014
EEC
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 15, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 41
Plasticity Index: 24
% Passing #200: 82.0%
Beginning Moisture: 10.7%
JDry Density: 104.6 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 23.0%
Swell Pressure: 4000 psf
% Swell @ 150: 7.3%
12.0
10.0
8.0
m
3
U
6.0
4.0
c
m
E
m
2.0
c
m
n
m
a
0.0
Water
Added
I
-2.0
0
ca
0
N
o -4.0
U
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
EEC
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 16, Sample 3, Depth 9'
Liquid Limit: 41
IPlasticity Index: 25
%o Passing #200: 86.4%
Beginning Moisture: 15.8%
Dry Density: 112.9 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 19.2%
Swell Pressure: 2500 psf
% Swell @ 500: 0.9%
12.0
10.0
8.0
d
3
U
6.0
4.0
c
m
E
2.0
c
0
m
a
0.0
7/
-2 0
Water
Added
0
cc
v
0
N
o -4.0
U
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
E
EC
EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Sieve Analysis (AASHTO T 11 & T 27 / ASTM C 117 & C 136)
Sieve Size
Percent Passing -
6"
(152.4 mm)
100
5"
(127 mm)
100
4"
(101.6 mm)
100
3"
(76 mm)
100
2 1/2"
(63 mm)
100
2"
(50 mm)
100
1 1/2"
(37.5 mm)
100
1"
(25 mm)
100
3/4"
(19 mm)
100
1/2"
(12.5 mm)
100
3/8"
(9.5 mm)
92
No. 4
(4.75 mm)
86
No. 8
(2.36 mm)
80
No. 10
(2 ram)
78
No. 16
(1.18 mm)
72
No. 30
(0.6 mm)
64
No. 40
(0.425 mm)
59
No. 50
(0.3 mm)
54
No. 100
(0.15 mm)
45
No. 200
(0.075 mm)
34.1
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project No:
1142094
Sample ID:
B3, S3, 14
Sample Desc.:
Red Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC)
Date:
December 2014
(EECj
O
O
0
%) 146i9M Aq jaws
N
c
cc
CD
Water Soluble Sulfate Ion - Measurement
Project No: 1142094
Project Name: Affinity at Fort Collins
No. of Samples: 6
Test Standards: CP-1-2103 / ASTM-C1580
Measurement Date: 12/10/2014
Sample ID
Soluble Sulfate Content (SO4)
(mg/I or ppm)
(% of Soil by Wt)
1
B-1 S-2 4'
300
0.03
2
B-4 S-2 9'
300
0.03
3
B-7 S-2 4'
280
0.03
4
B-9 S-2 4'
180
0.02
5
B-13 5-2 4'
260
0.03
6
B-17 5-1 2'
230
0.02
' June 10, 2015
' Inland Group EARTH ENGINEERING
1620 North Mamer Road, Building B CONSULTANTS, LLC
Spokane, Washington 99203
' Attn: Mr. Mark Ossello (marko@,inlandconstruction.com)
' Re: Subsurface Exploration Report — Addendum No. 2
Proposed Affinity of Fort Collins Apartments
2600 East Harmony Road
Fort Collins, Colorado
EEC Project No. 1142094
Mr.Ossello:
' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) conducted a subsurface exploration study for the
Affinity at Fort Collins Apartment Development project at the referenced site in December of
2014. For further information, please refer to our "Subsurface Exploration Report" dated
December 15, 2014, EEC Project No. 1142094. As requested, EEC personnel recently
completed a supplemental subsurface exploration associated with the on -site detention ponds as
presented on the enclosed site diagrams.
Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the supplemental subsurface exploration completed by EEC
personnel for the two (2) detention ponds situated along the northern an eastern boundaries of the
subject site. For this phase of the project three (3) additional borings, (converted to short term/2-
week duration piezometers), were located and drilled within the proposed detention ponds as
shown on the enclosed site diagram. This supplemental study was completed in general
' accordance with our proposal dated May 19, 2015.
' EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
The supplemental detention pond related test borings were located in the field by representatives
' of EEC by pacing and/or estimating locations relative to identifiable site features. The
approximate boring locations are indicated on the attached boring location diagram. The ground
' surface elevations were based on surveyed information relevant to a temporary benchmark
TBM), which consisted of the northwest bonnet bolt of the fire hydrant located within the cul-de-
sac roadway alignment as shown on the enclosed site diagram. An assumed elevation of 100.00
was applied to the TBM. The location of the borings and surveyed information should be
considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used to make the field
' measurements.
4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE
WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550
(970) 545-3908 FAX (970) 663-0282
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
June 10, 2015
Page 2
The borings were completed using a truck mounted, CME-55 drill rig equipped with a hydraulic
head employed in drilling and sampling operations. For this study, as shown on the enclosed site
diagram, three (3) test borings were extended to depths of approximately 20-1/2 to 25-feet below
site grades, (i_e., PZ-1 through PZ-3). Upon completion of the drilling operations the borings
were converted to short-term piezometers via hand/field slotted PVC casings installed in each
borehole. Groundwater measurements were recorded the day of drilling, the following day, (i.e.,
24 hours after drilling), then a supplemental time period on June 9, 2015. The PVC casings
were then removed after the final groundwater measurements were recorded as per the State of
Colorado — Division of Water Resources guidelines.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
In summary, the soils encountered within the three (3) supplemental detention pond borings
completed on this site generally consisted of moderately plasticity lean clay with sand and/or
sandy lean clay subsoils, which extended to the depths explored. Groundwater was observed in
the completed test borings/short-term piezometers at approximate depths of 14-1 /2 to 16-1 /2 feet
below existing site grades.
As part of our supplemental geotechnical engineering assessment we prepared a groundwater
contour map, included in the Appendix of this report, based on the final groundwater level
readings obtained. The contour elevations were based on the approximate ground surface
elevations at each boring location, and the approximate depth at which water was encountered on
June 9, 2015. As shown on the Groundwater Contour Map, the hydrologic gradient/piezometric
surface flow of measureable amount of water is in the northeast direction. The groundwater
contour map presented herein on approximate 1-foot interval is for illustration purposes only;
variations may exist between boring locations across the site.
ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
We understand these areas are site are planned as detention ponds. Subsurface conditions within
the planned detention pond areas in general consisted of cohesive lean clay with sand and sandy
lean clay subsoils. Groundwater was encountered at approximate depths of 14-1/2 to 15-1/2 feet
below existing site grades.
Detention ponds are typically designed to collect surface water, pavement and roof runoff for the
project as a temporary "holding basin' over time and eventually discharge the water into the
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
' EEC Project No. 1142094
June 10, 2015
Page 3
' storm sewer drainage system. A detention pond is a low lying area that is designed to
temporarily hold a set amount of water while slowly draining to another location. They are more
or less around for flood control when large amounts of rain could cause flash flooding if not
dealt with properly. Normally it is a grassy field with a couple of concrete culverts running
' towards a drainage pipe or outlet release mechanism.
A storm water detention pond, by definition, detains water. When an area is paved, or covered
with a building, water runs off the property much faster than when it is in a natural state. The
stormwater detention pond should be designed to temporarily detain the water and keep the
' runoff to the desired rate. When the rain ends, though, the water detention pond will empty
shortly afterwards. As part of the "temporary holding capacity" soil percolation is important in
the design of a stonnwater detention pond.
' The percolation rates in detention ponds can be affected over time by several factors including,
but not limited to siltation and vegetative growth. For preliminary design purposes we would
' suggest a soil percolation rate of approximately 80 minutes per inch be used for the on -site
cohesive lean clay subsoils encountered within the detention pond areas.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions
concerning this report, or if we can be of further service to you in any other way, please do not
hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours,
Earth Enaineeri
Consultants, LLC
David A. Richer, P.E.
Senior Project Engineer
"-
N00'it -.1'E
31.97
J
z
D2Z
Z!o r) >
rn
�D.r'�
--
S
e
Q`
�. C y ^. 0
^. O
3 0
',Z..
5 GW fXU(£
5 fXt �M/.i.E
* C4: GfR�;;F
5 GARGYI �fE
m 7
7 "�`aJ 373.O-.JC
O J ti
00 G) y
w
N 0 N
N ry
= c o 0 c Ll Ll w u I -all
] J a C C Cl 0-0 Y ..
J y m
a
<
y
7
a
J
a
C
µ 0
J
O N
y
N
to
pax
^
�
ti
C
O
� I
a
m
m
n
G)
�. 0
n Ty-3
n�ti
p rr-D'
NJ�. o
oN To
Win°
o
0
�yoc
rD Q
O LA La
y y
3
N
LWW
r
r
C Q�1
/447
N
�o
fl
jwwwN--' ww — ,I
IITE DRIVE
— - -
_i
500"33'57'W 421.6G_
—
�xZ0
o
�g
oof
a�SN12
jngo
���
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 11420S4
LOG OF BORING PZ-1
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: JUNE 2015
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
6111201S
WHILE DRILLING
15'
AUGER TYPE: 4• CFA
FINISH DATE
611/2015
24 HOUR
15.6'
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
'APPRO)L SURFACE ELEV
97.6
When Checked 6-8-15
15.5'
SOIL DESCRIPTION
o
N
au
Nc
oo
AilNrfS
-mo
swELL
LL
I PI
PRESSURE
%@ 5WPSF
TYPE
(FEET)
(BLOWSIFT)
(Psn
1%)
(I'm
I%)
TOPSOIL 8 VEGETATION
1
LEAN CLAY(CL)
brown
2
very stiff to stiff
with calcareous deposits
3
4
[SS
5
8
9000+
11.3
37
21
86.5
6
_7_
8
9
E
10
15
9000+
11.4
11
12
13
14
brown / tan
_ _
6
3000
20.5
SS
15
16
17
18
19
_ _
SILTY CLAYEY SAND(SM/SC)
7
22.6
brown
loose
SS
20
21
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 2O.5'
22
23
24
25
Earth engineering consultants, LLc
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING PZ-2
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: JUNE 2015
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
61112015
WHILE DRILLING
15.6
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
611I2015
24 HOUR
152
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
APPROX.
SURFACE ELEV
96.3
When Checked 68-15
15.0'
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
ou
Mc
DO
A.0 ITS
-2W
SWELL
LL
f»
PRESSURE
%@ 500 PSF
-FYW
(FEET)
wtowwn
IPSF1
1%1
(Pcn
1%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)
brown
2
very stiff to stiff
with calcareous deposits
3
4
FSS
5
7
9000f
10.8
6
_7_
8
_9_
with traces of gravel
5
900W
10.4
35
20
62.9
FSS
10
11
12
13
14
FSS
15
6
3500
20.8
16
17
18
19
_ _
LEAN CLAY(CL)
5orr
12.6
with gravel I rock seams
SS
20
21
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 2O.5'
22
23
24
25
tarn tnguleenng consunants, LLc
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING PZ-3
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: JUNE 2015
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DO
START DATE
6/1/2015
WHILE DRILLING
16.0'
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
611/2015
24 HOUR
15.0'
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
APPROX. SURFACE ELEV
97.5
When Checked 6.8.15
14.6'
SOIL DESCRIPTION -
01
N
ou
w
00
n-UMITs
-m
SWELL
LL
PI
PRESSURE
%a 5w PSF
TYPE
(FEET)
(SLowsi )
(pan
(%)
(PCF)
(%)
TOPSOIL 8 VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)
bnnvn
2
very stiff to stiff
with caloareous deposits
3
_4_
ESS
5
10
7000
10.7
6
_7_
8
_9
ESS
10
5
9000+
11.1
11
12
13
14
F9S
15
6
3000
19.6
16
17
18
19
'classified as LEAN CLAY (CL) Fss
20
15
8000
19.2
45
30
90
21
22
23
24
Fss
25
22
—
17.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5'
tarLn tngmeenng uonsulianLs, L.L.L.
Final Drainage and
Erosion Control. Study for
Front Range Village
Fort Collins, Colorado
February 2007
PREPARED FOR.
Bayer Properties, Inc.
2222 Arlington Avenue
Birmingham, Alabama 35205
PREPARED BY:
Stantec Consulting Inc.
209 South Meldrum
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Front Range Village
CIty of Fort Collins
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study
mile, where it turns to the east and discharges into an 18-inch culvert. The culvert conveys
the water from the irrigation ditch, under Ziegler Road, to a swale on the Hewlett-Packard
(HP) Harmony Campus.
The irrigation ditch on the site currently collects some of the on -site stormwater as well as
some offsite flows. The irrigation ditch collects on -site stormwater from the area west ofthe
ditch and off -site flows enters the ditch through an 18-inch culvert from an irrigation ditch
that nms along the south side of Harmony Road.
An existing area inlet, located in the median on Harmony Road, collects flows from the
median and discharges them to the North; into the irrigation ditch within the site.
The on -site runoff from the area east of the irrigation ditch flows overland to an on -site
detention pond which discharges to two 18-inch storm culverts under Ziegler Road. The two
culverts carry the stormwater under Ziegler Road to a drainage channel on the HP Harmony
Campus.
' Off -site nmoff from the eastern portions of the Harmony Mobile Home Park currently passes
through the site during the 100-year storm event. Currently, flows from the mobile home
park travel to an 18" storm sewer system that nuns adjacent to the West side of the site. This
' storm sewer system conveys lower frequency storm flows to a small detention facility located
at the northeast comer of the mobile home park. It is assumed that runoff from the less
frequent, high intensity storm events exceeds the capacity of the existing storm sewer,
' causing runoff to overtop and enter into two existing small swales adjacent to the existing
storm sewer system. When the capacity of these two swales is exceeded, the swales then
overtop and discharge into the Front Range Village project site.
Flows from the Paragon site and a small portion of the Front Range Village property drain to
a detention pond located in the Southeast corner of the Paragon site. This detention pond
' currently discharges to the eastern part of the Front Range Village site. These flows travel
overland to existing dual 18-inch storm sewer culverts under Ziegler Road. These culverts
convey the storm water under Ziegler Road to the HP Harmony Campus drainage channel.
C.2 Developed Drainage Concept
' Runoff from the Front Range Village development will be conveyed to the on -site ponds via
overland flow, curb and gutter, cross -pans, inlets and storm sewer systems. See the proposed
t drainage basin map located in a pocket in the Appendix. On -site runoff will drain to six
proposed on -site detention ponds, Ponds A, B, C, D, E and F, which are located in the North
and East portions of the site. Off -site flows from the Pads at Harmony development will also
' be routed via storm sewer to Pond D. Detention and water quality for this offsite
development will be provided in Pond D. Combined, the six detention ponds will provide
approximately 33.6 acre-feet of detention, including WQCV. An additional existing offsite
pond on the Paragon property provides an additional 5.3 acre-feet of detention for the
' Paragon property as well as some areas of the Front Range Village development
Stantec Consulting, Inc. - 2 - December 2006
1
Front Range Village
City of Fort Collins
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study
Off -site flows from the Harmony Mobile Home Park that exceed the capacity of the existing
Harmony Mobile Home Park storm sewer system will be collected and routed into Pond D
via storm sewer. However, Pond D and its outlet structure have been sized to detain on -site
and Pads at Harmony runoff only. As a result, during the 100-year storm event, runoff
entering Pond D from the Harmony Mobile Home Park will be discharged through the Pond
D spillway and will not be detained within Pond D. This runoffwhich is discharged through
e Pond D spillway will rain into the undeveloped fia tot the north of the ront ange
Village deve opmen and will ow along the path that it has historically tote existing
culvert under Ziegler er oa . By routing the oftsite flows through on to this way the
extra detention capacity avat able in Pond D during storm events smaller than the 100-year
storm can be utilized for the offsite flows. With the construction of Pond D and the storm
sewer systems within the Front Range Village development, the volume of runoff which
drains to the existing culvert under Ziegler Road from the Harmony Mobile Home Park will
be held to historic levels. Overflow from English Ranch will be allowed to enter the
inadvertent detention area along Ziegler as it has historically and will be passed through the
existing 18" PVC storm culvert. The inadvertent detention along Ziegler will overflow
slightly onto Ziegler Road. The overflow is consistent with the historic conditions shown by
the City of Fort Collins' ModSWMM model. This ponding will be alleviated with the
construction of the Future Ziegler Pond.
Detention ponds A, B, C and D will function in series. The ModS WMM model for this site
was used to generate the input hydrographs for the EPA SWMM 5.0 model, which uses
dynamic wave routing to route Ponds A through D in series. The off -site Paragon pond,
Pond E and Pond F will also function in series. The discharge from the off -site Paragon
pond will pass through Ponds E & F prior to being discharged into the existing 18" culvert
under Ziegler Road. The existing 18" culvert discharges into the drainage channel on the HP
Harmony Campus site. Detention ponds A, C, D, E and F will require individual outlet
control devices. The combined peak release rate from the Front Range Village site and the
Paragon site will be approximately 26.9 cfs. Please refer to section B.3 Proposed Detention
Ponds for a detailed explanation of how this release rate was determined.
Stormwater detention and water quality has been provided for the undeveloped lots that front
Harmony Road. A drainage easement has been dedicated to allow the undeveloped lots to
connect into the proposed Front Range Village storm sewer system. Connection points to the
proposed storm drain system have been specified in the construction drawings and must be
adhered to by future developers.
Stantec Consulting, Inc. - 3 - December 2006
Front Range Village
City of Fort Collins
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study
Basins 243, 244 and 245 represent different portions of the proposed Pads at Harmony Road
development, currently under development by others.
The Harmony Mobile Park Basins 300, 301, 243, 244, and 245 drain to Pond D, node 360.
Basin 302 drains directly to Basin 296. Per an agreement with the neighboring developer
detention for basins 243, 244 and 245 will be provided in Pond D. During the 100-year
event, the flows from the Harmony Mobile Park Basins 300 and 301 will pass through the
Pond D spillway and will be routed to the undeveloped field north of the site, Basin 296.
Front Range Village Basin 207 drains to Pond C (287). Front Range Village Basin 208
drains to Pond B (288). Front Range Village basin 209 drains to Pond A (289). Front Range
Village basin 210 drains to Pond E (200). Front Range Village basin 250 drains to Pond F
(249). Ponds A, B, C, D, E, and F are denoted as nodes 209, 208, 207, 360, 200, and 249,
respectively, in the ModSWMM model.
The six detention ponds will be hydraulically connected with storm sewer pipe. Detention
Pond D drains to detention Pond C, which drains to detention Pond B, which drains to
detention Pond A. Detention Pond A discharges through a proposed storm drain that
connects to an existing 30" storm drain running under Ziegler Road. Detention pond F
receives inflows from the existing Paragon detention pond (205). Detention pond F drains to
detention Pond E. Detention pond E will discharge through the existing 18" storm sewer
pipe under Ziegler Road to the existing channel on the East side of Ziegler Road. The peak
discharge rate from Ponds A and E was limited so that the combined peak discharge rate in
the drainage channel on the HP Harmony Campus from the Front Range Village site will be
limited to 29.8 cfs or less during the 100-year storm event.
The future development north of the Front Range Village is divided into two basins, Basin
296 and 297. The future development basin 296, along with the Harmony Mobile Park basin
302, will drain to node 296. Node 296 and overflows from the English Ranch Pond (214)
then drain to the future Ziegler detention pond (298). Basin 297 drains to the future Ziegler
Pond.
The future Ziegler Pond (298) will be located approximately where the existing irrigation
ditch crosses under Ziegler Road. This ditch starts approximately 400 feet west from the
Paragon parking lot entrance and runs north approximately half a mile where it takes a turn
east to a drainage culvert. This culvert takes the water collected from the ditch under Ziegler
Road to a swale on the HP Harmony Campus, conveyance element 212 in the City's Master
Drainage Plan. The future Ziegler detention pond will be constructed with the development
of basins 296 and 297. This pond, once constructed will release at a maximum rate of 20.1
cfs.
Stantec Consulting, Inc. - 7 - December 2006
Front Range Village
City of Fort Collins
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study
Copies of the ModSWMM Schematic for the proposed conditions along with the
input/output from the modified City of Fort Collins Master Drainage Plan ModSWMM
model can be found in the map pockets and in Appendix B of this report respectively.
B.3 Proposed Detention Ponds
The proposed detention ponds will detain the water quality capture volume for
approximately 40 hours before draining into the HP Harmony campus channel per the
requirements from the City of Fort Collins Master Stormwater Drainage Plan. The
existing City Master Plan hydrologic model has a peak discharge of 76.7 cfs entering into
the drainage channel on the HP Harmony Campus.
After construction of Front Range Village and the property to the North is complete, a
total of four storm drain systems will discharge into the drainage channel on the HP
Harmony Campus. The first is an existing 30" storm drain system that originates from
the English Ranch Subdivision detention pond. The second will be a storm drain system
out of Pond E. The Pond E storm drain outlet will connect the existing 18-inch storm
culvert that cross under Ziegler Road. The third storm drain system, which Pond A will
tie into, is an existing 30" storm culvert that runs under Ziegler Road. It is believed that
this storm culvert was constructed to achieve_easy_access-to-the-H.Pnn .drainage_chaelywithQ,......
ut having to reconstruct Zie er Road. ,The future.development to the North of the
Front Range Village will tie into the other existing 30" culvert at Ziegler Road. ��--
The existing outlet, from the English Ranch Subdivision, discharges at a rate of 26.8 cfs
during the 100-year storm, thus the two future developments north of the site, the existing
Paragon site and the Front Range Village can discharge at a total combined rate of 49.9 cfs.
In order to determine the allowable release rates of each of these areas, it was decided that
each development would release at a rate comparable to the percent of land that it
encompasses. The total tributary area to design point 212, not including the English Ranch
contribution, is approximately 226.6 acres. The combined tributary area of the two
undeveloped parcels to the north of the site and of the Harmony Mobile Park is 91.4 acres, or
40.33% of the total. The combined tributary area of the major portion of Front Range
Village property and of the commercial Pads at Harmony Road is approximately 105.6 acres,
or 46.61 % of the total. The combined tributary area of the remainder of the Front Range
Village development and of the Paragon site is 29.6 acres, or 13.06% of the total. Applying
these ratios to the allowable combined release rate of 49.9 cfs yields a release rate of 23.3 cfs
from Pond A, 6.5 cfs from Pond E, and 20.1 cfs from the future Ziegler Road pond. Thus,
the computed maximum allowable release rate for ponds A and E, which includes the Front
Range Village development, the commercial Pads at Harmony Road development, and the
existing Paragon site, is 29.8 cfs. The maximum allowable release rate for the future Ziegler
Pond (298) on the future development north of the site is 20.1 c s.
As ModSWMM cannot do the dynamic wave routing necessary to analyze ponds in series,
within the ModSWMM model we have routed the flow from Ponds A, B, C and D directly to
node 212. This was done in order to determine a preliminary detention pond size needed for
Stantec Consulting, Inc. - 8 - December 2006
Front Range Village
' City of Fort Collins
Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study
each of the on -site basins and to provide the inflow hydrographs for each pond that were
needed for the EPA SWMM 5.0 model.
EPA SWMM 5.0 was then used to calculate the backwater effects of interconnecting the
ponds and to size the pipes that interconnect the ponds. The stage -discharge hydrographs for
the proposed ponds were taken from the output of the EPA SWMM 5.0 model and
interpolated to get a volume -discharge rating curve. The detention volume provided in each
of the six proposed on -site detention ponds was shifted from one basin to another with some
ponds over detaining tributary runoff to compensate for ponds that cannot detain enough
volume due to area constraints in that part of the site. In this way, the combined peak total
discharge from the Front Range Village property, the commercial Pads at Harmony Road,
and from the Paragon property will be restricted to a release rate of 26.9 cfs.
Proposed detention ponds A, D, E, and F will also provide additional capacity to
accommodate water quality capture volume. These ponds were sized for the worst -case
scenario where it is assumed that the proposed ponds are already filled with the water quality
capture volume prior to the 100-year storm event occurring.
The six proposed detention ponds were designed with side slopes of 4:1 and provide the
required volume between the spillway elevation and bottom of the pond to detain the
developed 100-year storm event. If the outlet structure for any of these ponds should ever
become plugged, each pond's spillway is designed to provide a controlled release while
maintaining one foot of freeboard. In the event that the pond outlet becomes clogged, the
stormwater from Pond D will overflow to the undeveloped field north of the site, Pond C will
overflow into a grated manhole just east of the overflow spillway and continue to Pond B,
overflow from Pond B will be released through a spillway and be directed to a grated
manhole and then conveyed to Pond A. Ponds A, E and F will overflow onto Ziegler Road.
Required Pond Volumes:
I)
WQCV
Required
Detention
Volume
Required
Total
Volume
Required
Pond A
1.55
6.09
7.64
Pond B
N/A
2.23
2.23
Pond C
N/A
1.37
1.37
Pond D
1.83
17.95
19.78
Pond E
0.15
0.77
0.92
Pond F
0.28
1.41
1.69
Total
3.81
29.82
33.63
Stantec Consulting, Inc. - 9 - December 2006
71V
' <_ :I
J:I AdInU
�rS'.. IySTy4[. P
^�A
�e
-
I
a
�
���T. w I 3
ilkfi
-- •
.I .
"C
1
' I
1x3f iisi 9
MMMg} iBAA3 �
9
9➢
7�
A i
AQ;eaPi[
R
Y.
sbw=M1__
_
allp$��x� ga
III
1
8
81.ew CeNryR
!
p BAYEH PROPERTIES, INC.
III
i
m�w.ow.
P
• S
III
4
FRpHI RANGE VILLAGESo
SWIAM
wulw,cE Exxlert
o.
aM.wra�.
MYE
8 � SAVER PROPERTIES, INC
r�
FRONT RMIGE VILLAGE
Ail Rr
Ism
may.
10�L
S imfmAn. LO
—
—
SWMMSGHEMATIC �� ^ �— rr
— „�.
--
�i• :G
DRAINAGE EXHIBIT
APPENDIX F - LID EXHIBITS
Ift) J•R ENGINEERING
No Text
No Text
r
Design Procedure Form: Grass Swale (GS)
sheet 1 of 1
Designer: BAB
Company: JR Engineering
Date: January 21, 2016
Project: ARmity, Fort Collins
Location: BioSwale 91
1. Design Discharge for 2-Year Return Period
0,-
0.70
cfs
2. Hydraulic Residence Time
A) : Length of Grass Swale
Ls=
275.0
ft
B) Calculated Residence Time (based on design velocity below)
Tas=
9.1'.
minutes
3. Longitudinal Slope (vertical distance per unit horizontal)
A) Available Slope (based on site constraints)
S„„i =
O.OD5
Il! ft
B) Design Slope
So =
0.003
ft / ft
4. Swale Geometry
A) Channel Side Slopes (Z = 4 min., honz. distance per unit vertical)
Z =
4,00
ft / ft
B) Bottom Width of Swale (enter 0 for triangular section)
W e =
0.00
it
Choose One
5. Vegetation
A) Type of Planting (seed vs. sod, affects vegetal relardancefactor)
QQ Grass From Seed
O Grass From Sod
6. Design Velocity (0.917 ft / s maximum for desirable 5-minute residence time)
V_ =
0.50
MIS
7. Design Flow Depth (1 fool maximum)
D; =
0.59
It
A) Flow Area
A; =
1.4
sq ft
B) Top Width of Swale
Wr =
4.7
h
C) Froude Number (0.50 maximum)
F =
0.16
D) Hydraulic Radius
R„ =
0.29
E) Velocity -Hydraulic Radius Product for Vegetal Retarcianoe
VR =
0.14
F) Manning's n (based on SCS vegetal retardance curve E for seeded grass)
n =
0.071
G) Cumulative Height of Grade Control Structures Required
Ho =
0.60
it
Chimse One
AN UNDERORAIN II,
6. Underdrain
(Is an underdrain necessary?)
r
0 YES
0 NO
REQUIRED IF THE
DESIGN SLOPE - 2.0%
9. Sail Preparation
(Describe soil amendment)
10. Irrigation
r
I Q Temporary
Q Permanent
Notes:
3970400 UD-BMP_v3.03- Bic -Swale #1.xlsm, GS 1/21/2016, 9:13 AM
Design Procedure Form: Grass Swale (GS)
Sheet 1 of 1
Designer BAB
Company: JR Engineering
Date: January 21, 2016
Project: Affinity Fort Collins
Location: BioSwale #2
1. Design Discharge for 2-Year Return Period
02= 0.50 CIS
2. Hydraulic Residence Time
A) : Length of Grass Swale
L, = 580.0 it
B) Calculated Residence Time (based on design velocity below)
TNs= 26.5 minutes
3. Longitudinal Slope (vertical distance per unit horizontal)
A) Available Slope (based on site constraints)
5,,,,, = 0.004 ft / ft
B) Dasign Slope
So = 0 003 tt r ft
4. Swale Geometry
A) Channel Side Slopes (Z - 4 min., honz. distance per unit vertical)
Z - 4.00 ft / ft
B) Bottom Width of Swale (enter 0 for triangular section)
We = 0.00 ft
Choose One
S. Vegetation
A) Type of Planting (seed vs. sod, affects vegetal retardance factor)
Grass From Seed O Gras From Sod
6. Design Velocity (1 ft / s maximum)
V2 - 0.43 ft / s
7. Design Flow Depth (1 foot maximum)
D2 = O54 It
A) Flow Area
A2 - 1.2 sq It
B) Top Width of Swale
WT = 4.3 R
9
C) Froutle Number 10.50 maximum)
F = 0.15
D) Hydraulic Radius
R. = 0.26
E) Velocity -Hydraulic Radius Product for Vegetal Retardance
VR = 0.11
F) Manning's IT (based on SCS vegetal retardance curve E for seeded grass)
n = 0.077
G) Cumulative Height of Grade Control Structures Required
Ho = 0.70 It
ChWSe One AN UNDERDRAIN IS
B. Underdrain
(Is an underdram necessary?)
r REQUIRED IF THE
I O YES O NO DESIGN SLOPE < 2.0%
9. Soil Preparation
(Describe soil amendment)
10. Irrigation
r
I Q Temporary Q Permanent
p=. Nows:
id
3970400 UD-BMP v3.O3- Bio-Swale #2 xlsm. GS 1/2112016. 9:15 AM
' APPENDIX G - DRAINAGE PLANS
J•R ENGINEERING
1
\
W,
`�\ Ir _2 11-\
t \
WIN, INLET A3
ENGLISH RANCH
SUBDMSION
T 9
AB
N9 .27
II
1 I I \
I I I \
911p NIET AS `
A5
A2 sump W4ET M
1 1
3bA2 1 ,
1 A4 \\ 1
` os 57
I
1 `
PROPOBm AFFIIETY 1
INET Al I \\ , FORT OOLLNS SITE ,
Ell
j 0.166 42-
.64
Will
-----------------
BASIN SUMMARY TABLE
TAIMAW
5unbrin
Ase.
Lenn
4
co,
Y
W,)
or
Ienl
an
Len)
met
4f,
At
Um
Obi
U75
Son
Q9
3.9
Ta R,md" (wm
Az
OM
OAO
Ono
QvO
US
v
Ta Rom uue
A3
M41
049
am
6'10
0.5
]5
T C,b G,m
A4
ill
U4
OSI
sm
U
IT
21 Pfne RJ - Ov
AS
A6
u91
an
Om
am
OA
OR
$..11
5ID
13
03
6A
13
70 c,dra
]aCr6
AT
QT4
NS
4"
5.16
US
4L
.N - JX-
0
am
037
0.9
I41
U
3A
E Ua J On
RI
0.16
OR
054
51111
QI
10
IT PCJvsmn Own
tlt
OQ
0m0
0®
Am
69
41
3a Om6Gre
m
om
am
am
flO
us
it
Witold" uv
IN
aR
00
QAL
sa
n4
IT
z6Rm". Owe
RS
C
ot,
097
Om
055
oma
0l1
5ID
SA1
1.1
1.3
53
60
Sa3'CUA(ev¢
TaTdAtrart
D
067
1"
u55
fl94
03
h0
.R1cn11oe WW A
O1
TIn
031
0�
I&P
U
A9
-
POND SUMMARY TABLE
Food
Iwnvanee
Re eN �xni
wQ(W
r.H1
T"vaurt
xrtli
LNnvauoe.
RaddN
P,LRon"
(16)
Pvh man
01so6v elvis
11 Ain
174
U.16
19n
117
476
21
---------------
- SOXOnSheTnFmwnL uD inlwnwm
180.B11
New InNO Axe _ __
_-
90,Mn
9.
reSM I mpaMoirea—ro9e rNMee i
I-so%d�wlmw�waa. New
eau
E
__ -
ro wv saimn
1.91n
e411.
mNmwWm .0 narea fore Station AI_im --
of Paw Sclm lx
0.910.vSm.
I%W
N.nppa.
YnpaWwn Rwn ma $ecM1M e2(0.1;1
1.
c41.
WP 5 "
6AID %R.
Fnpwscu qu alaP 5 0 /9 (911) _
ofp section 4
1T.S3 R'n'
mcerMcon Firron woufa, Paww 5 M1 n(IRA)
a.
KoaWZfB Swat XISaMMdbI (Hal IW:tl in loltlmpaaxi
a9
mqM A T le]q LIDi MNM1M Yt B Swat olY1(69169:1)1)
M1.
re9 o18 5 al9 eT SaN MBY_INYncWtlM nlmM e as reared)
ZoKSo
I
YnEav us Arm Tffled LID TrceOnnrA MCIMJ tl2-&Swale X211.11)
15096 spM1
50%or i
anot Arms
. 1Dx�544 N.X.
ACIWI%al lmceMaus AR9 T/ae1e1
f AfarI
W'T 54
ss%v«9m PwwinenL m9wrewwnl
Area YTT6T Sp t
�pB.H�'Paremrl or Porous Pawmoni Pa+•°/e or ex pasemeni Dora) 22314 se A.
Area d Pefa SwlWn it 1,910 Sp fl
Area of 1191
dP 5 Lon p2 Y0
%R
ArmMP S p3 _ _ _ 1590 %O A.
Ana -_
Areal oon IT,TCO 5.n.
Saannik
Total Pucua paronml Area SAv
FoPa"aas
.n.
Actual % Porws Pa�emad pr6tl.1 m'a
%
IM1 I II
I I II
I
Soup
101/ INLET
___ _
LEGEND NOTESI
SEE SHEET 4 FOR OWRAl LEGEND
BASIN DESIGNATION ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FLOINUNE, UNLESS NOTED OR
G
1•D• SHOWN OTHERWISE
e AIDLNIID
A Ao MA" STtlCO6RdENT
@RINCP STORM
AREA
ACRES
QBA9N AflEA IN AgLFS
QDE904 PONT
City of Fort Calling, Colorado
- BASIN DEUIunDN
Unf-TTY PLAN APPROVAL
P AD fO
aTagWe=
ENGINEER'S STATEMENT
p.DD
4e
`"EO`Ep B3` caner Wore Nee foray
PREPARED UNDER MT SUPERVISION
O:
/y�'.
y�0
aEoon BY -
&umvam WORT
m 41NB fNEPtEO BN -
Pv6nAamlun
COLON M. TARRY. P.F. lE :.. ev
COLORA11 P.E 41795 �S..........
WA.Tr.6e Eogioeer
FOR AND OLI BEHALF OF JR ENGINEERING. LLC
pECItED Br' _
CmY®memY Phnm
m 15 0 30 NO NCCIIEO Br: _
ORIGINAL SCALE: 1' - 30
I ' \
-E�-
_ T�
1
1
1
I
-• T _ y � I
` I
I
I �
Know what's below.
Call before you dig.
O
V)
0-
%
a
o
2
Do
w
N
Q
Q
z
of
0
Q
SHEET 16 OF 35
JOB No. 39704.00
EXISTING DRAINAGE ANALYSIS
r_--_-a.�_wcrcry rOAD_ / IN
/ ---' ------ - --- --- , Q \� ( " ENGLISH RANCH'
--
-- --- - --- R _ - -
-- SUBDIVISION_ �., .I _ I 1 \ =------------
OP 1- POINT FLOW ) \�
Pal I �___�-_' -a!� 19 y \ \ \ BASIN ISO
!
/ IF /^`\ ` \ \ •••^\--' \IM ' `` ` \ \ _ \ INA ROW - 11R OFS
`1
/ r i (� !�, ��," i •••• i ill r017
l \\ ``\\;, \ �` �I `\ ••• \ -: \
i \ .' `?- ••� // it 'I\ \\ • C \�\ ••�•
\/ / _,-- /-'_ ■_"__�-,\ \ _ I 1 \ \ 0*0
ExI WEEL ROW •• \\
/ / - ■ �, I 1 \ \ zrR ROW - Da CPS \ •• \ ' -
\ % /' �' / ■�/' W ``- 1 I \ 1 1 \ \ IMIR ROW - 13.6 CFS `+•• CV Y- SHEET ROW \
I)) zm iLOW - 1 kc�wV \ \ s� •••�\ `.,� zm FLOW BASIN LFs
// / \ \ -`�/■ 1GOVR ROW-ae.B as II \\ `�\ •• �\
/ �- ■ \- I 1WYN 15' CMP CAPIIIRFDI 1&3 65 • \ \ '1DOM ROW 11.5 CFS
WNnnuE rojRow EAsr,TD ro T- ue as 11� `\\ -.` �'N\ AFFINITY PROPERTY / •••••••
ice/ � i/ Q / � � ••• ili ,I \I / I \.. Ii i \\ �` � �\ •••• \^ ��_, ' L
/ / // f' /''\_ -� \�_ ' �•• `ll/,1 1 \I r_%/ \ \ 1 . /' %�i� __`\•�\ ♦♦ ; 'c-��� % DP n- VAflIASLE caNCENmnrto \�
/ -1 i j \ ♦ \ �' 1 I . I 1 I I / t ' ^. 1 oB , rtaw PATH s ,
/ , , I 1 1 I ♦� I \ \� �` �__ \_` .aT stROW. 116.2 CIS
HARMONY
\ \ ' ,\I I \`\ \ \I ``1 \`/ •� _\�N-� IX25HEET ROW
MOBILE HOME 1 ( so! 1 -, Q`\\JNWtRMOW.1 as
COMMUNITYI\ \ L \_.p•••��_,, I �11 1 I \\ \\\ ,\`1,
1 •� _ \\ `\ , `= 1 1 1\III t ,
j Our
- -- ==}�-----------=-�- 1-�- rursu�
I O j 1 1 I // //- __ _. __-—_ _ _—_ -:—___ _= - - ------ ----- `\ \ `r\
PRID fee
(I/�/ 11a2Ra5 a'owb�ow \ \I 4
illpl �(e.1.5�_—.—---'--- -----' _ (zW'WIDEx See' DEEP)
C
/ \ ' �
'IIINN
-_-_- -
if I If
11 I NN \ I' If fit
lli ll'[If
lilt
if
Iui
I I r
/ \l \� \i\ =-= __ `` ; .\ lil ll 1
llldl NIo LEGEND
I 1 I I
IIII�I "If \\\\\\\ \1i / \ 111 IIII I — �,� — METRIC MA" CONTOUR
-��--
♦ 1 !/ / (' 1 ,/�, i 11 IIII\ \\` = j/� r`/ \\\\�-____-__-____ //l _________ EMOTING INTERMEDIATE ca+TWR
r _�� \` ♦♦ ,/ _/ i �/ 01 I I I; ` _aBN/ \\`- _ _ _ -- _— _ /%/� ca EwSnNG STORM SEWER/CMP
♦� / `__� / ``_.'i/' • 11 I \\ 4 �_ _� -� _ — J BASIN ID
\ l • 11 Illl \ F' ____ \ _ {— A A. BASIN DESIGNATION
♦♦ \. �, / \\ \\ 1 .• I \ \\ 11 ; J �i' �\ \p B C 0: AREAMINO(AC) COEFFICIENT
____ -
�/) ♦♦ j \\ \ / \ 1 ♦♦ I \\�\I11 / c 1� LJ I/' D: MAJOR STORM LOEFIRGENT
\.. \ 1 NN \, I 1 ' ■\1\IIII/
DRAINAGE
POINT
♦♦♦ `` \ / 1 / j \ 1 ■ \II IIII / � - _._ - -, - -� �`_ � Desmry PGwT
♦ `\ \ \ � \\ a-�''/ i ♦ / % ■III III _ / / b Exlsnrvc PLDw DwecnoN
♦ \ / \ �-' �•/� I ■ llll '� - . '- EXISTING BASIN DRAINAGE AREA
♦ / ■ [fill FRONT RANGE VILLAGE
\` ♦ 1 1 ( / ■ 111 III 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
♦♦«1 ! / I / r (� I •••••••• i / \ ■ i iilllj '—/ — JOB NO. 39704.00
♦ ice` ( y / / �jj ■��?������\�• , \ 1■l 11 III / %' i ' I 01/27/16
'♦ ,, \ ■.����� �����T ' \■' Illll E� / I SHEET 1 OF 1
flli
IIIII lilt[
0 lilt
a till •••1 I 1 0I ti ,■ 11 It 1 • W10Txs OF STORM Row coxeErAxcEs MARE APPROXIMATE J'R ENGINEERING
/ , i 1 WE TO THE NATURE OF n1E GRgD CONDITIONS AT THE INAwnehn conP+^r
50 5 0 50 1
IIIII TIME OF THE IN TR slpW EVENT.
ORIGINAL SCALE: 1' - 50'
CeltGrial D}i40-W Gba1c San 7191.64i 1-25
' FOI Ohs 9A-d9F9BE • wxxjmymigmn
i