HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 11/16/2016City Of Ft. Co4%vPlans
Approved By
`'Date
MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE
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
Revised September 2016
Job No. 39704.00
X-U9700002O13970400%Word%eporu\Dnimge%Final Dnmage RepoitU970400 Dninage Repomdo
' This Minor Amendment to the Final Drainage Report for Affinity Fort Collins was
completed in order to reduce the amount of Pours Interlocking Concrete Pavers (PICP) on the
' site. Pavers were removed from the north and west side of the building and replaced with a LID
sand filter in Pond B. Runoff from the north and west side of the building is collected in sum
inlets and piped to the sand filter/ Pond B before being routed to Pond A. Pond B provides
' detention for the site as well as water quality though infiltration; Pond B has an impermeable
liner as well as an under drain that is connected to the outlet structure in Pond A. By replacing
' some of the pavers with a sand filter the requirement for treating 75% of the new impervious
area is still met. In total 75.3% of the new impervious area is treated by an LID. The general
concept and design of storm water drainage and detention for the site has not changed, only the
' Pond B area was modified slightly to accommodate a sand filter. The following report shows all
revisions as well as the new sand filter design for Pond B.
J•R ENGINEERING
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VICINITYMAP..............................................................................................................
GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION............................................................2
LOCATION AND EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS....................................................................................2
SITESOILS........................................................................................................................................................2
FLOODPLAIN....................................................................................................................................................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.................................................................................................................................7
HYDRAULICCRITERIA....................................................................................................................................8
DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN..................................................................................9
GENERALCONCEPT.......................................................................................................................................9
PROPOSED WATER QUALITY/DETENTION FACILITIES............................................................................. 10
OUTFALLSYSTEM......................................................................................................................................... 12
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION......................................................... 13
TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL.............................................................................................................. 13
PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL.............................................................................................................. 13
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
Page ii
(V J•R ENGINEERING
' Engineer's Certification Block
tI hereby certify that this Minor Amendment to the 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 Stormwater
Design Standards.
Jason M. Tarry, P.E.
Registered Professional Engineer
State of Colorado No. 41795
J•R ENGINEERING
Page iii
' VICINITY MAP
HORSETOO TH ROAD
Foxsnavf
EN
RA
O
PARK
LLJ
Z
WeffE
j
NE Y4
m
R68
m
v
PHARM
ARKaVr
OFRaVT
RANGE
f � RANGE
V
n�
•
WLACf
v
E HARMONY ROAD
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: 1 "-1200'
Page I
tJ•R ENGINEERING
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
ft) J•R ENGINEERING
Page 2 '
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.
I ft) J Page 3
•R ENGINEERING
Existing Ofisite Drainage Basins (OS):
Sub -basin OS 1 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 IS" 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 IS" 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 1 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 EXI 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 -I) enters the site along the
western boundary and joins on -site flows. Runoff generally flows northeasterly across basin EX-1, 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 11
LLC property. Existing slopes range from 0.60% to 2.50%.
ft)
Page 4
J-R ENGINEERING
' 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
sand filter/ detention pond at the north 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 sand filter/ detention pond at the north 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 sand filter/ detention pond at the north 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 sand filter/
detention pond at the north side of the property.
Sub -basin A5 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 sand filter/ detention pond at the
north 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 proposed sand filter. Runoff enters the sand filter and after being
Page S
J-R ENGINEERING
treated is conveyed to the proposed detention pond at the east side of the property.
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 is captured in the
sump inlet Piped flows are conveyed in the storm sewer to the south 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 63 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 BS 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.
Page 6
J-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 unless 75% of the site is
treated by an LID than the 25% porous pavement rule does not apply. 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 75.3% of the new impervious area
is treated by an LID, 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.
75% On -Site Treatment by LID Requirement
New Impervious Area
217,613
sq_ ft.
Required Minimum Impervious Area to be Treated
163,209
sq. ft.
(=75% of new impervious area)
Area of Sand Filter Sand Media (not included in total impervious area)
2,000
sq. ft.
Impervious Area Treated by Sand Filter
90,177
sq. ft.
Area of Paver Section
17,203
sq. ft.
Impervious Run-on area of Paver Section #3 (2.1:1)
35,245
sq. ft.
Area of Bio-Swale #1 Sand Media (Not included in total impervious area treated)
858
sq. ft.
Impervious Area Treated my LID Treatment Method #1- Bio-Swale #1
(7.2:1)
6,162
sq. ft.
Area of Bio-Swale #2 Sand Media (Not included in total impervious area treated)
2,052
sq. ft.
Impervious Area Treated my LID Treatment Method #2- Bio-Swale #2
7.4:1
15,096
sq. ft.
Total Impervious Area Treated
163,883
sq. ft.
Actual % of Impervious Area Treated
75.3
%
HYDROLOGIC CRITERIA
The rational method was performed to calculate the peak runoff rates for each basin. Weighted
J Page 7
•R ENGINEERING
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 t
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 '
method.
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 Coffins Amendments to the Urban
Drainage and Flood Control District Criteria Manual with respect to pipe slope, capacity, velocity, and
HGUEGL elevation.
Onsite detention ponds will be used to capture the developed conditions runoff from the site as
well as the portion 100yr 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.
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, 75.3 percent of this project's impervious areas pass through and are treated
in LIDS, which exceeds the minimum requirement of 75 percent, set by the City of Fort Collins.
Page 8
J-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, grass lined bio-swales are
proposed behind the garages on the north and west sides of the site, and a sand filter on the north
side of the building is proposed 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 IS"
' corrugated metal pipe with 2'x I' 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
J Page 9
•R ENGINEERING
proposed design. The existing 100-year flows are then routed north into the parking lot and drive
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
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 rats of the 2-year historic discharge, for the onsite and
offsite area) through the outlet structure.
Page 10
J-R ENGINEERING
' Pond A's emergency spillway is located along the east side of the pond. The emergency spillway is
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 proposed sand filter providing treatment for runoff from the northern portion of the
site as well as acting as a secondary detention facility that works in series with Pond A. Pond B has
' an outlet structure 3 feet tall that will detain the runoff and allow it to infiltrate through the sand
filter, once the pond reached 3 feet deep runoff will drain through the outlet structure and into
Pond A. Pond B also has an under drain system that drains the WQCV in 12 hours and is
' connected to the outlet structure in Pond A. See Appendix F for Sand filter details.
' 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 0.30
1 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 more than the headloss in the pipes between the ponds, Pond B
will reach the I00yr 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 (100yr Event)
Pipe
Flow cfs
Len ft.
Slope ft./ft.
Headloss
(ft.)
A6a 30"
18.5
76.5
0.005
0.13
A6b 30"
18.5
62.7
0.005
0.11
A7 30"
17.5
41.0
0.005
0.06
TOTAL
0.30
Data from Storm CAD model
Spillway Elev=
Pond 100yr WSEL--
Spillway Elev- 100yr WSEL=
[ft) J-R ENGINEERING
4938.13 ft.
4937.82 ft.
0.31 ft.
Page 11
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 Pond B is connected 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.
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 I OOyr event). In the 2yr event the outfall
system is 70% full and has an average velocity of 2.9 fps. In the IOOyr event the outfall system in
100% full and has an average velocity of 2.67 fps. Hydraulic calculations are presented in Appendix
J•R ENGINEERING
Page 12 ,
I 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,
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,
' 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
Page 13
J•R ENGINEERING
• 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 S years, or as needed to keep forebays ,
to less than 1 /3 full of sediment at all times.
J•R ENGINEERING
Page 14 '
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 I) 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.
Page 15
' J-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 IncorRorated 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: '
http://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
' APPENDIX A - FIGURES
' J•R ENGINEERING
�.0.0
_
`!|§E
5
:!
_Oul
co
�
k
\
/J..
■�
»
|�!
■ �
.2-
|48!/
2
§
E
§
!f,
§ |
7
F.E.
;{t�
§
o/!..!
N
B
!.
2
■
»
§
!
(�
90
/§
§
1»
,|�
% �
.
09
�
2
§)C!
LU
E
$
_
04
jG
�
41
Q
)
LO
(§
§
0
Cl)« �
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 Soils Data
December 1, 2015 1
$
❑o
R
M
N
a
R
v
$
i
Q
Z�
9Q�
i
m
S L? ° W �5�5��$a Ey� ° NEE
Z m "n ifi1m �iS uri
O
�, m m N mZ5 Eq �+
Q 3 Z VI N Z l] Z V N V Yj
m E m o W $ vm+S ¢ � M $ 3 W
O¢ m 4�W t U °V nEnr� N ¢a
Q' s Q
E m ems "
O 0 m o 3 J 3 E d§ O W J o 8 m o
S m..L ° � `v ° m E U c w n E
cc �oZ E c �y°o A o v o c m m $ n
Q m ro m L �m Jall m >
E ie m m�' oo�.o.�
$o
Eo�n
°E w
om16 E
y LW^ 9 c
m
8 >` m
mLm�mQi Hm °E (S Y5 am Qa°d$W .m
amO°Eig �°q CEwEno¢u o !ZQ
m
m
m " N
C Wp
9 yN N p
o N m 3 $ N
E m o m a
u ci ❑ z°
LU ❑❑❑om
x
w
-jEL
m m
a n
Q ¢ m N
C - '0 0
v
_ v `o 0
O z 0 d
¢ `o > m v
N m ❑ ❑ ❑ J ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 O O
m c c c
¢ y
V 'N
Custom Soil Resource Report
Table —Hydrologic Soil Group
Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit — Larimer County Area, Colorado (C0644)
Map unit symbol
Map unit name
Rating
Acres in AOI
Percent of A01
73
Nunn day loam, 0 to 1
percent slopes
C
0.5
4.3%
74
Nunn day loam, 1 to 3
percent slopes
C
11.0
95.7%
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
x
a
O
x
f
!a
.
i(!
\
z
, g
|��
!!||
]]
2 a
)§
k)
/(
2
\
&
e
-,an
: i
LL
a
8
Y
a
(IIIWI �
W
f
F
W
(sd)) "p -
f
,Sd1�J111) aLj ddld
W
o.
1%I ado)
a
(1i])MQd V
FW
(S,J, MO)j 1adlJ
C
r^
1%)adoi
%
(SP) ID
T
C
W
2
(,4N.)
n
J
(UIW) ]
(sV) rio
c
o
n
r
P V.-I
LL
(ri) V.
O
OO
O
O
Z
�
O
G
Q
IJaOJ jjoun
C
OO
O
IJV) ea
di arse
)u!Od u8isa
)
\k!
�
k
k z$$|
0
§ u
§
!
;
§
§
8
!%
§!
22
|3
CL
!E
|�4,#,w■.,,m,�r�
„
�
|�§4§■!!m%■a§#�§§,
$...l��;;;
FIR
,..»
$f|!!!!!!|!!!|!!!
!�§
§■■■§§*§■k■e,
ƒ§,even!§§!!§§■e
ta
)
9
N
O
1p
N
N
N
N
d
N
N
N
N
N
N
W
10
~ C
O
d
O
r
d
b
d
N
m
N
O
O
T
W
b
fl
Z
Cq
2
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
o
O
O
0
O
o
0
0
N
N
n
N
'1
N
'I
N
•'1
�4
m
N
e4
m
O �
V
=
r
O
m
m
N
.y
'n
.y
n
N
n
O��
m
o
d
O
.+
•+
m
O
m
O
N
.+
ti
T
n
H
O
ti
.y
d
d
O
O
n
d
aq
a0
a0
N
N
d
�+
1IYY'
LL
W
O
R
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
f
n
O
ti
0
0
ti
O
O
ry
ry
ry
ry
m
0
•+
e�
w
ry
in
u?
Z
n
vi
m
N
m
n
N
ry
ry
ri
ry
N
� rF
Zc
Qb
a
n
m
m
o
m
m
m
In0
qm
o
1O
m
m
N
N
N
N
010
T
0
N
0
N
0
N
u
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
ti
'1
V
b
0
p
d
0
m
d
0
d
N
6
O
N
6
N
b
0
N
N
0
n
N
0
N
d
0
O
N
0
W
b
a
m
b
0
O
N
0
N
Ln
0
O
N
0
ti
T
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
G
0
0
0
0
0
0
c�
C X
d
SIR
5;
p
o
ti
O
v
m
O
N
O
O
d
m
a
o
N
ij o
O
T �
U
V
U
U
V
U
U
V
V
U
V
V
U
V
U
U
m
n
IQry
N
W
b
Iq
C a
o
o
c
o
0
0 o
c
0
0 0
0
o
c
a
c
o
1
2
ti
NI
C
0
s
0
G
V
O
1,
u
ffi
�
6
tl
ffi
�,
ffi
ffi
6
�
�
ffi
tl
t
4Q#
JZ
d
(uf w)
CW
f
F
(sdl(kpga
QW
MI wm+
r
(MPUO ash OdId
u
's
Ixl
(SPIMW 7:aR
p�
N
(%)odor
R
wl
CR
CG
�
Z
w^
(ALM)
N
N
ry
N
ry
N
N
fV
N
'1
u
m
n
~
n
w
w
O
N
N
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
N
III
d
O
9
»
N
N
N
N
T
T
T
1!
Y(04M
ry
ry
ry
ry
N
N
N
M
N
N
N
IV
N
N
N
ry
m
o
n
»
e�
o
n
e•I
l0
N
m
W
(14tl
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
•O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q
01
Q
(UILU(�
lS
N
d
4d
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
w
G
C
Utlle
�
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
e
o
U"d UAW.y
n
m
o
N
w
n
4
a
.Oi
w
ti
ti
W
i
K
to;
C
O
LL
N Z
2 co o
C to d
0 O O
ag W
Q N f
C N QQ�
Z WSd
Z
N Z at
a—
K
O
2
c
Q
N
.ti
0
0 Q
a
W
E 8
Q
�
6
Sw
w
Q
tryy
Q
w�
�}
Q
Y�
Q
Q
pqp
Q
m
m
m
m
V
gQ
ym
(upu)
W
�
Isd11 AiPala
�J1
i
(sxpw) UM
s
(�
ISPI �1!
W
(sP)*Am taan
(W)
p
b
h
N
N
N
M
OI
O�
OI
O1
b
C
S1]vl
v.
a
a
N
1
a
a
e
w
(up) 3
2
2
N
(W)
R
R
8
5!
R
$
9
R
tS
R
R
R
R
R
0
8
INNU
'O
u;
.o
1
a;
a
a
a;
c
o;
o;
a
o;
o;
o;
a.
LL
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
O
Z
q
N
n
a
n
b
4
N
^
N
q
N
4
N
M
4
N
4
N
4
N
4
N
4
N
4
N
a!
b
p'
(up) ]
g
Hao7
a
a
a
a
a
d a
a
a
a
d a
a
d a
a
d a
a
a
a
e
q
a
m
0
R
w
0
e
a
n
a
a
a
(rAe
n
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a. mses
g
Q1
�f
S
a
v
a
V
m
21
M
a:9
u
o
AWd ASM
-
N
T
O
N
b
N
41
m
N
M
N
F
C
APPENDIX C-WATER QUALITY/DETENTION
CALCULATIONS
J•R ENGINEERING
V.
Ld
g
h
r
ch
'
C^
CO
x
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQooe000QooQo
F.Qmo�oo�nrv_oo�ae is�riN�o
(s:D) mcu
a�
m
m
a
h
3
to
Table - Node 596
Days
Hours
Volume
(fl3)
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 5.1 Page 1 1
Days
Hours
Volume
(M)
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 5.1 Page 2
t,
0
s
s
0
0
m
0
e
0
e
0
R
0
R
d
0
0
(•A810'i8%) OBels
Project: Alfinq Fort Collins
Basin ID: Onsile Detention Pond
4
STAGE -STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS
r1Y9r�
IM /
N.0
i. sery..
Deslon Infornwtion IImi
Check Bmin
Shape
Width of Basin Bonpm, W
= 20 00 fl Right Triangle
OR.
Length of Basin Bobom. L
= 160.00 8 Isosceles Tnangle
OR.
Dam Sideslope(H.V). Za
= 400 flm Rectangle
X
OR.
Cade I Ellipse
OR.
kregular
(Use Oserde values in celfs G32 G52)
MINOR
MAJOR
Storage Requirement from Street Modified FAA`.
0
3.16 acre-fl
Staae.Storaoe Relationship:
Storage Requirement [met Sheet'Hydrognph''
_ aC.4t
Storage Requirement from Sheet Full-Specbum':
acre It
Labels
for W OCV Minor
8 Malin Storage
Stages
(input)
fin
Side
Slope
(H V)
hill
Beale El
Basin
ill at
Stage
fl
au
Basin
Length at
Stage
h
lout 1
Surface
Area at
Stage
Itt
loin ul
Surface
Area at
Stage
tar User
(lveride
Volume
Beim,
Stage
fls
tau ul
Surface
Area at
Stage
ecre#
u ul
Volume
Bebw
Stage
acre-ft
lout nu
Target Volumes
to W OCV, Minor.
8 Major Storage
Volumes
tra aal soekl
k
et I
2000
260.00 -
S 200.0
0
0 000
0 000
20.00
262.00
5.2400
1,042
261
0024
0.006
20.00
266.00
6.320.0
5 595
3,579
0,128
0.082
20,00
2000
20.DO
2000
270.00
54111H
T33T
10045
0168
Ci
274D0
54800
8993
18 10
02M
0.418
0
278.00
5560V
11823
28618
U271
0667
4936.00
282.OD
5640.0
18337
43698
0,421
1.003
493700
20.00
296.00
5720.0
22475
64104
0516
1472
4938.00
2D.00
29000
5,800.0
26,069
88,376
0.590
2,029
Spillway Elev
4938.22
20.00
290.88
58176
26875
94M
B617
2.163
I'Fuseboatd
4938.72
20.00
29208
58575
30.608
108.571
11103
2492
RYA I
MA
WOCV WSEL
SWA
III_
#N/A
YWA
WOCV acal:
493251
_ ,
MA _
III
0.162
2-Year WSEL
_
#WA
SNIA L
#WA
RBA
2-Yen ac-8:
4934.11
RYA
0.442
III
100-Yesall'i
#WA
MA
111
#N/A
100-Year acd_
4937.82
RBA
1902.
#WA
- -
#WA
#NIA
Si
ill
Ill
EWA
#N/A
jL#NIARIIA
RYA
RYA
RYA
#WA
RYA
RYA
#WA
RYA
RYA
#WA
#WA
RYA
#N A
#WA
AIA
MA
RYA
#WA
#WA
#WA
XNIA
RYA
RIIA
RYA
RtlIA
RYA
39704000D-Delenbon v2 34 (12-02 15) As. Basin 1R112016, 11 14 AM '
STAGE -STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS
Pmjecc
B.Mm ID:
STAGE -STORAGE CURVE FOR THE POND
4939.52
493852
X1!00-YP-8.22
493752i.
4936.52
m
4935 52
m
w
m
eta 4934.52 - -
� I
R 4933.94
493352
49325279" - - -
4931524
4930,52
0.00 0.50 100 1 50 200 250 3.00
Storage (acre-feet)
39704000D-Deteeme_v2.34 (12-02-15) As. Bam 1R7(1016, 11 14 AM
RESTRICTOR PLATE SIZING FOR CIRCULAR VERTICAL ORIFICES
Project Affinity Fort Collins
Basin ID: Onske Detention Pond
Siring the Restriaor Plane for Circular Vertical Orifices or Pioee Unveil
Water Surface Elevation at Design Depth
RpeNerowl Ord. Eft. Invert Elevation
Required Peak Flex through Onlfice at Desfgn Depth
Rpf,,N c l Onfice Dovnelar(ne,!ies)
Orifice Coefficient
Full-0ow Cagscity (Calculated)
FWI-flow a ni
Half Central Argh in Radwa
F WFflox capagly
Calorlatinn M Orifice Flow Condition
H26 Central Angfe (13�Theta<3 1416)
Flow area
Top width of Coo ie undies)
Height from Invert of nufia to Bohan gl Plate peel)
Efevahon of Sollom of Plane
Resullanl Peak Flow Though Onfiw at Design Deptl+
Width of Equivnlent Recningulm Vertical Orifice
Ceneoid Elevation of Equivalent Reaanguim Vedical Orifice
Elf, WS=
Elev Inver) =
D=
Du =
Co =
ill vertical
Oldies
nvetltcal
Orifice
4 7.92
4 930.50
2.10
120
0.62
heft
hset
cis
inches
At = 0.79 1 q it
Theta = 3.14 rid
Of- 102--L as
Percenl of Desgn Flux =i 48616
Theo=
106
A,=
0.16
sqM
T.=
10.46
inches
ye =
0.25
hat
Elev Plane Baran Edge =
4,930.75
_
fail
Q. =
2.1
ds
Equivalenf Width- s.Wfeel
Equiv. Cenheid El.- L930.O feet
39704000D-DeQmtM V2.34 (12-02-15).11S, Rr WXW Plate 1/21MI6, 11.16 AM
STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE WEIRS AND ORIFICES (INLET CONTROL)
prajea: Aflui Fon -c 1
Bari. ID: ie .1.a
t-. rme.l u2 ui q (kin m n U
txe� MT•nralr�n nwut
I
I T—
n [br¢
I
a ven
a r1or� n v.n
^.oaf Operwq D..1.
aM. -
Irclen
OR
R� OR—M Wg .F.
W-
282
061
ft
La96'(HeM I0r Ve W)
LorH•
2A2
11
1 am
It
['amrrage pl pyi Gies Nln T.. RMY REWcOoa
%open •
R
im
%
Omrs CceMma
[v•
aR
aa2
War Cp ,n
G-
aID
Pnim Eievmpn leunwn ro�vaeraa
E4•
49a.a4
4Mm 10
CeY.Man et.'_ 011tt1on Ca.e "
rva Op Ra Tram Wd Re4icmnl
A.
5.51
0.16
W-a
WTb L Wer.OMde NalOrt+m9 Arev
Ae'
sp fl
RaHpla M WaT Lmgm
L. -
90
It
OViIONAL IImrAaMe Wev Le
L.-mn
Top Fba440e0r VR Oltp OpwYy, Top • 4930 M a
e Bn4 w VRRR OTw ow", cee= 4930.0 it
Routing 3: Single Stage - Water flows through WOCV plM and IM 1lmiamntal opening into •1 vertical opening- This flow will be applied m
culvert sheet (tt vertical a hoAanr" openings is not used).
IaeJ
b YrOCv.eiv.
4MpSbge
Ws en.eve
1
W.
SlalerA
Boren
it
wocv
PYYRYR
fine
NersJ
st HwY n Yb
Wr 0
fig Roe
I
a IM JU la
wr OMm
floe floe
it de
o Vat
OOIeYon
cp
de
1 1
R VM
Colrwl
c4wY
m
1
TRIM
caeY4Ye
c✓9veeY
m
To v
WR .Y-
&a SP
wA.re
M b nee
4930,50
am
Om
9m
am Om
Om am
a"
-Y.W
e931 UO
493200
a"
Om
am
Om
am
am 0.0
0m 0
0,19 am
am Om
I ae0
a23
0]4
2-Year
a
--79r47m
11
493300
442
tm
11m
am Om
IM om
IM
4936nU
OSt
Mm
29M
aID am
1.4M am
IM
493500
493600
493700
am
_ 8186
N=0
MAD
4vAJ
4491
61.11
am 0m
am am
YID am
_ _ 1.6) 0m
1-05 am
101 Om
1Lr
Del
119
101
1 ear ds
IMY. WSEL
Olt
4
4938A0
On
a29.49
am
am am
2.16 am
114
10
SpUay Ele+
I Freeboard
493822
4938.72
am
241122
411,71
8211
06.71
am am
Om Om
2.19 am
am
in
on
211
RYA
MIA
fYA !IM
MIA Om
tall
RYA
RYA
RIM RYA
RYA am
RYA
RYA
MIA
RYA RYA
RYA am
RIM
RYA
RIp1
RYA RYA
RYl1 am
1W11
RYA
RYA.
RYA RYA
RYA 0Y0
Mal
RYA
RYA
414TA WA
RYA am
RYA
RYA
MM
RYA
MIA
RYA RYA
RYA JIM
MIA_ 0m _
MM am
MA
RYA
RYA
RYl1
RYA JIM
RIIA am
RW1
_
MM
MM
RIIA RYA
RYA am
RYA
RYA
RYA
RYA MIA
RYA am
RYA
RIM
RYA
MM MM
WP am
MM
MIA
RYA
RYA MM
RYA am
I RYA
RYA
RYA
RYA MM
RYA am
RYA
RYA
RYA
RYA AIIA
RYA am
MIA
RYA
RYA
RYM
MIA
_ ..
RYA RYA
RYA RYA
WA am
RYA am
RYA
MIA
RYA
RYA
RYA RYA
RYA OID
RYA
MIA
RYA
_
RYA RYA
RYA
Om
M
RYA
RYA
RYA
RYA RYA
RYA
RYA
RIIA
iNIA
111M RIIA
!YA a.m
IRYA
RYA
RYA
1WA RYA
RYA aID
RYA
RYA _
RYA
RYA
RYA
RYA RY/. _
RYA RYA
_ RYA 0m
41YA im
MA
4WA
RYA
RYA
RYA RYA
RYA am
RYA
RYA
RYA
RYA RYA
RYA am
aWA
RYA
RYA
RYA RYA
RYA am
MA
MA
44M
1WA MA
MA am
RYA
RYA
RYA
_
MA RYA
RYA am
ePM
RYA
RYA
RYA RYA
RYA DID
MM
RYA
11YA
MM RYA
RIM am
MM
RYA
RYA
MM
RYA
4W RYA
MM MA
RYA am
RYA am
MIA
RYA
397W0MVDeMr*aa-v234 (12-02-15)>t, OUIW 121MIG. 1122 AM
STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE WEIRS AND ORIFICES (INLET CONTROL)
Ba.sin D.I. ID AR�n' Fm Cdlins
: mne Amon �
STAGE -DISCHARGE CURVE FOR THE OUTLET STRUCTURE
493915
4938.15 - — — —
100-YR:, 49117.82
493715 -
i
d 493815
m
d
m
y 4935.15 -
m
R
N
4934.15 - /2-YR:
4933.15
493215
4931 15
493015
0 G`• 9
Discharge (cfs)
7970WWD-0eErN Q 34 (12-02-15).k . QMel 1121[201b, 11 22 AM
Cross Section for Pond A Overflow Spillway
Project Description
-a N e °or
Headwater Elevamon
Input Data
Discharge
47.60
ft-is
Headwater Elevgon
4938.56
ft
Crest El ev abon
4938,13
It
Tail water El evato,
4937,86
ft
Weir Coelfldertt
2,63
US
Crest Length
65 DO
ft
Cross Section Image
65 00 it
T
0 43 ft
1
v 10
Bentley Systems, Inc Haestad Methods solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [0801 071 00]
2","; 25 46 PM 27 Sremons Company Drive suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Worksheet for Pond A Overflow Weir
Project Description
Solve For
Headwater Elevation
Input Data
Discharge
47.60
tris
Crest Elevation
4938.13
ft
Tailwater Elevation
4937.85
ft
W ea Coefficient
2.63
US
Crest Length
65.00
ft
Results
Headwater Elevation
4938.56
ft
Headwater Height Above Crest
043
ft
Taihvater Height Above Crest
-0 28
ft
Equal Side Slopes
025
ft/ft (H:V)
Flow Area
27.76
W
Velocity
171
ft/s
Wetted Perimeter
65.88
ft
Top Width
6521
ft
Berday Systems. Inc. Haestad Medwds Solutlon Cerber BerrtNy Flowill 105.01.071.0111)
3MMIS 5:24:26 PM 27 Simons Company Drive Su to 200 W Watxtown, CT KM USA N-M-755-18H8 Faye 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 ft/fl
Normal Depth 0.55 it
Discharge 116.00 frIs
Cross Section image
4938.70
4938.60
4938.50
4938.40
4938.30
0
19 4936.20
d
u+ 4938.10
4938.00
493790
493780
493770
4937 60
0+00 0+10 0+20 0+30 0+40 0+50 0+60 0+70 0+80 0+90 1+00 1+10 1+20 1+30
Station
Bentley System, lnc Hasstad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster 108.01.071.00]
1 4/7/2016 11:09:00 AM 27 Siamons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Pap 1 of 1
Level Spreading Concrete Weir for 1OOyr Flow Conveyance
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Poi ula
Solve For Normal Depth
Input Data
Channel Slope 000065 Rift
Discharge 11600 W/s
Section Definitions
Elevation (R)
Roughness Segment Definitions
Start Station
=
Normal Depth
Elevation Range
Flow Area
Waited Perimeter
Top With
Normal Depth
Critical Depth
Critical Slope
Velocity
Velocity Head
Specific Energy
Froude Number
-0+05
0+00
0+15
0+29
1+29
1+33
(-0+05, 4938.53)
4937 85 to 4938 53 It
493853
493840
493809
493785
493785
493850
(1-33.4938 50)
055 ft
6432 ft'
13203 ft
13198 ft
055 ft
033 ft
000365 ft/ft
180 fus
005 ft
060 ft
046
RQQM M Codkot
0.013
Bartley System, Inc. HaKtad Mrrlhods Sotuaon Center Bentley FlowNasbr [08.O1.071.001
417/201611:07:50 AM 27 SMmons Company Drive, Suite 2W W NFxartown. CT 06785 USA +1-203.7461666 Papa 1 of 2
' APPENDIX D - HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS
J•R ENGINEERING
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
P¢aea. Atllnlry Folt Cdbnf PDP
Inlet ID: II II InSIDE lIlIlet Al
OVERFLOWED i I N SMEEF W I I FL MID
�1 ►`1., rid ►A
—
•a a-.
4 miniat aeamfea lwoWh Mp SbmWus
ImlmM mettt In>mm a+vsl�ea m.fen ' . m N Nlinlc '
' II vw onto, vulucf m 2w 11. fM tle rtal W Mn free[ aM ocnea to flleel O-ow ee M4L
apnc Mlvmemn:l rlertlYnFf lta )
You
SIM�LIfnC[ Nee -III1���1Lee^�y
CsnM eMtt veluef W O sla u— IM u D W.' M tle fame tlm Portent ImpervouM� �1�"
r ve Typtt e—De bled Fm NBCS SoiTra- B.C, uD
Slime Plllt
(j Nea l"be n., l'.'a' OvaIYM Fbw=
GutitrFloe =
m norm Ian. m[ x MmSttonn millces4cern
Owbn Sbrm Peavn Ponca. T, -
RepenPolMaOne-How Pre[IMIMun. P,' ntllea
C,=
C.•
Cr.
Ue>-DMne115bm Ruldl Culflme O�+m Wmll b easel a [tloYeM rYuel, C -
IYs.DeM1atl S1v iWd1 Cm0bsll PeMre Os bleA b eClXpl a ulaelO vYel. Cr
Bype ICrryOvnl Fbe Bam 1pMn AE[tl[1em.Mf, Q- OA 0.0
TaW OeN01 PefY flo,v, O � 08 1s
397M00 Into Al U6 nlK_,3 14 nl m. O'Pe 12I71=15, 9:M AM
It"
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
1— T
I Q��� rw T, TM�
—error W�� '� gtr••t
Ow �a�-! Crete
Xeres d Y >d- ss�
• do a
eum Allowable Wirth lar Spread Belund Curb
Slope Baited! Curb (leave blank la no conveyance credit behind curb)
tng's Ro ghoess Behind Curb (typ¢ally between 0 012 and 0 020)
Curb at Gu er Few Lme
here Cub Face to Street Crown
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typtcaky 2 mches over 24 mches a 0 083 Nth)
Longdudmal Slope - Enter 0 M sump condilton
g's Roughness for Street Section (lyptc ally between 0 012 and 0.020)
Allowable Spread for Minor & Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowlkw for Meer 8 Malor Storm
Flow Depth A Street Cmwn (leave blank for no)
T•CK _
narat= 0020
Xaae= 600 inches
Tawawa 240
W = 200
Sa= 0.037 XIP
Sw = 0.083 hit
So = 0.000 PoIt
nsfr�T= 0.016
Minor Slerm Slam
Tura= 175 1T5 it
4wa= 2.0 160 inches
❑ ❑ tilted = Yes
3 STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Sam Mgar Slam
R STORM Allowable Caoscity is based on Depth Criterion O.•..- SUMP SUMP ds
'form mu- allowable capacity GOOD gt water than flow given on sheet 'O-Peak'
39704001rOM Al UD Inlet_0 14 dsrn, O-Allow 127712015, 9.34 AM '
�y
A
L
U
�u
m
a
U
3
C]
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Pro*= AMndy FM CdSns POP
NI01 D: Ytle1 A2 II OVFLOW D I STREET
I7 FLAW D
`VI TV `YI 1y Stm Oua6
GUTTER FLOW GUTTER PUM CARRYOVER FLAN -�
_ _ - — ROADWAYRoADWAY CENTERl1NE _ _ _ —
91FlM:O y IBF I IiY S�fv1 MgOt{5b�n11�
IYaI RatMbt/1dval plpbiN dM•e!{ 'G.�=���f4 NiH155EC110N
0 cu ttXtt Yslaes In R 14 s - Ile 1-1 d Ow steel ut0 aceeE to Neel O-.Vow a Nes �Ilel
C�OnP6i 'Red Oebn 1 ILL NiRF SKTMJ<6
5<4� Mu • OM
Yw vN br O rM ue tO O a Ne eem< tim< V<YceV StWmoos
Sh i)ve: ISew MiO<d Fs: NtC55a1 Tp -
QM<.11"Men 1. OalwlCfbwa
O! FSsw
ottn uc t i a t Cum Sbm Rdlftl P T,.
R< Pnbl Otc-f1aY PI.Iftlh , Pt
C�•
llr-0elscO SVm Rune Coenrietl II<sre hs NeN b a¢eq a = vYel. C •
lhv.0e(�RE SH. fldefl CMfnml (kure b abA b s¢ay4 s abY1u1 sesel. Cs a
8Y (CrryDYttl Flw ham tpabea ftbc b* 0.
Td 0es10R Pest F . O • 0.5 J.0
3970400 t A2 UD t W Y3 14.6 . 0 Peas
1115WI6.215PM ,
I 1
' proles
Inlet ID'.
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 11
l�Ty� T
I g T. Tr✓T y
'�+ot W�� Ts C�awn
Cw
HiDo,lli d y Bs—
ds
mum Nlowable WxMh for Spread Behind Corb
Sbpe Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance credit behind curb)
nng's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0 012 and 0 020)
of Curb al Gutter Flow Lne
ce horn Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 ti over 24 inches a 0 083 N8)
Longitudinal Slope - Epter, 0 for s rnp condikon
tg's Roughness for Street Seclnrh (typically between 0.012 and 0 020)
Albrable Spread for Miner & Major Slam
Allowable Depth al Gutter Fbwkne for Moor & Major Storm
Flow Depth at Sheet Craven (flare lank lot rot
Tea=
R
Sups=
ON
neepc=
0.020
Haw=
6.00
itches
T. =
2d.0
0
W =
200
Ss -
MGM
RM
Sw =
0.083
Po0
So =
0 000
nsttffr=
0.016
Tres =
MmrSbrm
Sbnn
175
175
dives `
2.0
15.0
odtes
❑
❑ clad = yes
2 STORM Allowable Capacity m based on Depth Criterion Mm sham Maprsbtm
R STORM Ail,,.,,.,id. Depth Criterion O+y.- SI1MP SU11P
stwm mar. yr ,.te, than flow ghen on shert'O -Peak'
storm mew. elinw,,me .,n.a T1 e. p iu .rester then If.. Dive. o. eheet'O.PMWk'
1
3970400 In" A2 UD-Inlel_v3 14 ldsm, QAlow
No Text
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE41ALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Proplt Anhony Fort Collins PDP
We D: Inlet A3
OVERT D I II SIDE OVER WIAND
IN STREET
Ar DIM
Raov7a CEHTMNE - -
liuyl Fbs: ONLY a aYUEy aeleminea mrolGh alr mania Wv sail sYluSan
I. o.+b.b I,:.— oa a.s•..a a....n. •oe�- as zs ff
h r.....I- n.—ma1-1..en.III, .-1.1ih..a,. t end. . to. a.uh.. In..
SWrYCnen Rle. _
Yon .l min raluee lur O .nJ use on, O a me same Ume PetmM ImIMrvSYY4b -
5ee Type. rb.a r>...lop.i Foy MiCS SaF Type • R, C, u D
Sloae(ml lmgM (AI
[aaa Flh. -
mma�an: ixmv. im-T. r hY4 sum sisorsinnn
OSIT Slum Rehm PerbE, T, • Y.se
Rehrn PaoEOrslue Watlplam. T�
Q•
C-
C:-
Usw, e s RUMCaeOppN(I.eyebahhsib shs).0
lhs-Cana Syr WedlCselSme(lrsti WAbsaapl•tYa4letl.ehal.C.-
BYPiss, I[sryArarl Flan iron y0.® SrlllfJalmaee. Qy- . OA
Toni pMlpl P.Y Fld., Q- h.5 25 [fe
'.us sFcrloR
39704W WN A3 IATb1e_13 14 ealn, O-PeaA 17l77N15, W07 AN
Project
Inlet ID:
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
�T T
$ T. T.
T.
y— Dw\�Ox� SLro�w�.
H d \ S.�
• do
mum Allowable Wtlnl for Spread BeMd Curb
Sbpe Belmd Curb (leave blank la no conveyance credd behind curb)
ung's Roughness Behind Curb (typ"ty between 0 012 and 0 020)
01 Curb al Galt, Flow L.
:e from Curb Face to Strang Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches a 0 083I1M)
Lorgdudlr,a] slope Enler 0 ku sanp co damn
,g s R. gtewss la Street Sean. (typcalty between 0 012 and 0 020)
Allowable Snead fa Mew B Mala St.,
Nbwabk Depth at Gutler Flovdme fm Minor 8 Mapr Storm
Fbw Depth al Street Crown (leave blank for no)
Ter"=
n
Sews =
Vn
r§.a =
0 am
Tl u: =
6 00
inches
TM -
240
n
W =
200
n
W =
o E
ern
$w
0 083
nor
So =
0.000
"M
nsrt 1 0 ill
Mary Stone Ma" Slam
T.. f71 i75 M
dw'x= 2.0 150 rches
❑ check yes
t STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Mawr Storm Malor Storm
R STORM Allowable Capacity is bored on rteoth Criterion Q,r,. - SUMP SUMP ds
,roam max. nliownbl.. c:q.... ity t,UUll (realer than glow given on shen.VQ Peak'
3970400 InW4 A3 U0.trdet_YS 14.dsrn, O-Allow
1217/2015, 10:07 AM '
b
%
\
§
f
/
i/
7)
f$
!»
!«
■
2 § 5 ! § ! $ § m 5 !°
#,Am*nbo
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Propcc Affinity Fort Collins PDP
Intel D: II Run"
LTAW O I N SSIDE ET 111
I FIAW D `
'VI N `C(I Iy
TTETR FLOW CUTTER PLUS CARRYOVER FLAW &w 011tagk
OU
_ _ _ _ ` ROADWAY CENTERLINE _ _ _ —
arpn br Yeekew0y oeenns.a seugnmsrrbrotr =1 sam ML
(aolpr Mlv lrzao.aa+re.a.aarwewe 'Do�� D.i I.I is ILL W 1nIS SFCIItrN
p erMerrWvan Row lA.4 We reY MrMe Yree.I ewE bMaefOabry Mes YJa.
. 0eM n Fp u41 ILL W THE SECtI'JN':
SOutrMrr AraA • LON
.ma enln .rsa ror o sa ree ln. o utvsw r me e.ne vme reavrl elpelvwes • —
merypn Ra•e lY.igd h: MtC55ak Type• R. C,uD
I .r R1 .1+• r eSlppe lAlkl L IA)
okn.»rlon-
Gptler f aw
en n wm ron: In r a . , Mnx Slam Miley stime
Deeg15bm fieWrn v.rwO, T,-Tr>•e
Um.CtNetl Sbm fta CneRenXReeceMai pMAbusryla:ycwxec=)I,CC-
Ueer-Def H Syr RUM Caol mot (b Ee nlrP ro xcepl a raicwaree ,uluel. n
Rypre lCrryOvnl Flaw ream uP.uean suocarcnmente, 4 0.0 0.o cfi
Tnlal oeavn Pea fl .O
397UM Inlet AE LID -Inlet _v31C v5m, GPeak IWW5, 10:07 AM
II
II
I 1
I 1
I 1
INM
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
t4y
T
T. T,wrW4r—T.G R
nun Almable Width for Spread Behnd Curb TRACK =
Sbpe Behrd Curb (leaye blank for no corweyance uedd behind cub)
rng's Roughness Belyd Curb (NpKaih between 0.012 and 0 020) r4n� 0 020
of Cub at Guher Fbw Lune
11 i =
6.00
hn
:e fount Curb Face to Street Grown
Tapy =
24.0
Wdtb
W=
2.00
Transverse Slope
SM =
0 039
ftM
Cross Slope (typxaly 2 inches over 24 aches a 0 083 fl/0)
Sw =
0.003
LagRudnal Slope -Enter 0 for sumo mMNon
Sp =
0 000
ig's Roughness fm Street Section (typtcally between 0012 and 0020)
nss•tr=
0.016
Allowable Spread! for Mrtor 8 Maim Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Flowtkte for Minor & Mapr Storm
Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no)
Mna Sloan Ma Sam
Tua. -1
17 5 17.5 Itcl s 20 1S0 nches
❑ n cht a = yes
i STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Mnor Slam Maly Stoo n
R STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterim Qyr.-J SUMP I SUMP Id,
slam it, (,0olt gieatci tbau llow given on sheet'O-Peek'
3970400 Inlet 44 Ualnlel_v3 14.dsm. O-Allaw 127l2015. 10.07 AM
P
maim=
mmm
----
mmmm
==Rum
mmmmm-m
mmmmm-m
--_,---m
--_---m
---,_--
.:
MMM\UMM
=====-
mmmm\mmi
mmmmmmm_
mmmmmmm
MMM-Mmhm_
mmmm
mlam
mmmmiA■Irm
-
_
MMMMMIMILM
mmmm
I
�1
(IP)
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
ProNmi: NIIn" Fort Collins PDP
Inlet D: IIpI�II IrM A
OVER D I IISTREET I SIDE
ROWED
`�I IV CCI
IV
elloW tMRatls
GUTTER FLOW GUTTER PLUS CARRYOVER FLOW
\T
ROADWAY CENTERUNE
m(9n Ion Lr rear xbnnmee nnwgn anammm. Lbrvsum
atyv smnn
_
Ibal o.a M1m b rr' a W.w aw pmnnes�vvrl "Omo.,, 1.]
6.a h
FILL IN THIS SECRDN
X vnu nnra vWenGtur 1e, 41 Ilw eeelmmu alreer uW n rerlm4rml Arl—m Aire lnlel.
DR
eopeplrrc YrIRmNprr: f. Eala m Ele We Mal
ILL IN THE SECTIONS
SWUIr'lmvp Aru =1�'
TLC^Tee-�_-
L OW
!.umrn eriler valrrce rq (] .m[I r®P the U r.11 �anr a Nre ume ume Vam[ Mpav4mm =
a.
Rr o..�r.n rn_ NRcs sNl Tx�=
ec.ao
pv iLn.n oWa.arow-®
elver Fb. -
orm � slum
D.yrr slNm Ratan PNb],
Pr,-
Mseri Paen00rs1br Praplm, ,-�
Cr
UFa DeNea sbrmR Cmmoem (kewes urrrbrceMarwWslea Ir !.c
Ldn-DeNruE SxR _ uoN CaelnceM (W.nr GrM III,vJe),1acaq • aIN�O e=
ttyP..e (C+NrA O Flo. Nan apmarlr fu6r11UlIrIe 0. o.o tls
TaM pn1YII Pan FbN, p- 11 60 tb
3970400 IrW A5 U0.1npt_014 x ., O-P 121I2015. 10.OB AN
Project:
Inlet ID:
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
T. Ttyx
y
a
r t nt r date in h bl I
Width br Spread Behad Curb
Mde
TRACK-
If
Slop Behind
Side Slope Behrnd Curb (leave danN for no conveyance cmd4 behind curb)
(l
Sy�pt =
M/ll
It
M.nownr s Roughness Behind Curb (typicallV belweam 0 012 and 0 020)
ne =
0.02D
Height of Curb at Gutter Fbw L.
Nr ul's
6.00
aches
D.U. lt= Curb Face to Street Crown
T� =
24.0
M
Goner Width
W -
201
If
Stmet T.vm. Slope
Sx =
OD42
IT
Goner Cron Slope (typxaly 2 etches over 24 rxhes or 0 0831VM)
Sw -
0 W3
ftm
Sheet Lorgaudinal Slope - Enter 0 br sianp condition
So -
0 0M
Wit
Manning i Rorghncss far Street Section (Typically between 0 012 and 0 020)
ny T =
0.016
Max Allowable Spread br Minor 8 Maim Storm
TttM =
kN n
17 5 24 0 M
Max Allowable Dc'Pto at CuUer Fbwline for Meer 8 Maim Storm
d: =
2 0
15 0
rich s
Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for no)
check = yes
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacily is based on Depth Criterion
Mrwr Storm Maim Sloan,
MAJOR STORM Allowable C..citv is beleA on Death Criterion
O,r,,,= SUMP SUMP cis
Minor storm maxallowable capacity GOOD greater than flow given on %heel'O.Peal,
Man to. max. allowable cal .pc GOOD Baler than flow alve on sheet '9 Veak'
3970400 Mel AS UD4nWt_J3. 14.dsrn, t]-Alrnv 12/712015, IMAM
L:
�C13
y
2S�
�U
��7
3U
a
a a
3 <
d
o e g g o 0 o s 8 8 0
R C6 ad w 16 vs ♦ wl N e
(sp)/ypedeo
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Pro(ecc Alfinny Fort CdOns PDP
YAH D: Wp A6
IIII BAN° I UI SMEEF SIDE UI I I �� '° l l l l
- ROADWAY CENTERLINE
Lv9+rear �twDph Te
Iby Frey eo�b1/IMftM IXi V�iil WeNl
SW(drCM Y
w .PPa wn v,wrs ur a>na P.r me a Ww,br r e. wr�e umv Pr,�e.. uPP�vo� _
$TIp� _ Rm Oewbyed Fv._ 1(tC$yyTpr= BC.vD
Q l r � .T � d. Skpr(Mll Lrgpi (nl
QQaal-Yrt.n rl:..r OaaW Ftr=®
Gulr Ft =
r r T r Sbw Refire Perioa, T. •�
Rdn Papa Q2-1IaF RraFeyvl P� •�
C'•
UaaJ)rTuM sbrm Rupp CoelTcay Dear en drA b ercW a oldam vev<I, C
Uec-De4�M SK. RvoB CM! +ml (kevr tic ObA b x.�M a TelWata r=,I Cr
Bypeee JCerry ) Flw ft. OPe . 606crclm C Q 0.0 0.0 ds
TdM Drupe Pe Fbv, p • OJ 1J cle
Il
1141 Hl'l [t(''."'I
III I I IE ti1 C I I(ML1
INI
39M400H A6 UD-MMr314.L ,D-PF INR015, IDNAM
Inlet
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
td
T7. 7rrr,.W�r 7.
H
mum Allowable Width for Spread Behmd Gnb
Slope BehM Curb leave thank is ro conveyance credit b.NM curb)
arg's Roughness BetwM Cub (lyptcaly between 0 012 and 0 020)
of Curb al Culler Flow L.
:e from Curb Face to Street Crown
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (types ly 2 aches mer 24 mches or 0 063 ttfll)
Longdudival Slope - Enter 0 for sunup coMmon
tg's Roughness for Street Section ityprrally belween 0 012 aM 0020)
Nlowrable Spead W M. & Ma cr Sloan
Nbwable Depth at Cutter Roane for Manor & Major Storm
Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank 1a out
Tyo =
S=
%&ct - 0.020
House= 6.00 hes
Tacwa= 2d.0
W = 200
S. 0 040
Set = 0.083
So= 0000
ns�'= ODi6
Mnor Storm Slam
Tara = 17.5 17.5 it
dau= 20 1SO nehes
❑ ❑ tick
i STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Mkar Sloan Mao Storm
R STORM Allowable Camcity Is based m Depth Criterion cfs
.corm ma.. sIluw.W capecity GOOD geeter than flow given of. sbeet'O Peek'
ye=
' 3970400 Wet AS UD-INeIv3 14 XISM, O-Alloy
12772015, 1009 AM
m
/
!
k
§
J)
!)
!)
2 2 ■ 5 m | § ■ ■ ■ ■
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Proles: AInnny Pon Cams PDP
wig o: mw AB
LAW DSIDE 01131
+ STREET { FLAW
ROADWAY CENTERLINE _ _ _
bw: ONLV a eeeatly Eelenny,etl A - I� WY TSYmT �Y�R JlOnnT
Iba p.a m.a ,cew.ww V��ww.wR �Dww.�-�Cle NTHIS SEC>1Q1
11 rniw va. RRow 1�, wlr Ilrr reel i,l Itr,n „n e.r nM to MNM O-AMOK w bN YIYI
GaapMAr[ :( eren 1 ILL N THE SECilpeS
Sbakrrba Ne. - LGW
.� c+.rr.a eKmr .we. tw a o r.lne.ea r me .eme eme Pvv4 `npmv�s. -
4iypa IVrw neMywd cv. MtC55aY Tpe- e, G,rtD
0 ` Sbp. 111m�
prnr r,rn. n.r v+gin Owen.rr Fbw•
C.m.r Fbw •
Days :brm RHum P ,. T,-
•R.. PnrO lM-tm FreuMmr. P,
C,-
lMrw-0reKO Sbrm RU Co Krae Ibs+. O,o elsA b.Re01 a trel.be •eebl. C
Uew-0rwKd Syr Rune Codsnvn I4wwe ewe elan b scowl • e� vdel. Cw
0y .(Cwry )Flo. nRrR sleralaw.ae,4- n orb
Tar Delp�P.V Fb..o. as 14 rn
3970400 Inlet AB UD-Inlel v314.1sm, D-Pe 121IQ015, 10'.10 AM
Inks ID,
I ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
— r
T. T.
as ! tlIR
y
Gov Geome En er data in ther.11SI
Maamurn Plowable Width for Spread Betwd Curb
Too =
Side Slope Belvid Curb (leave blank im m conveyance — belnd curb)
SM:
Manning s Roughness Behind Curb (Typically between 0 012 and 0020)
rya =
0.0211
Hight of Gab M Gulley Flow Low
Hpue, =
6,00
Distance frorn Curb Face to Street Crown
Tclaww v
24.0
Gallen Width
W =
zoo
It
Street Transverse Slope
S. =
0 039
ftfft
Gutter Cross Slope (typic2Ny 2 mines over 24 inches or 0 083 fo)
Sw =
0.083
RM
Street Longitudinal Slope - Enter 0 [or sump coodmon
So =
0.000
Will
Mamirg's Roughness lor Street Section (type ly between 0 012 and 0 020)
nor.. =
0.016
Max Allowable Spread la minor & Mapr Storm
Twx =
Mingm
17 5 175 0
Max Albwabk Depth al Gov FbvAne fir Minor & Maya Storm
41Ux =
2.0
15D
.0.
Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave blank for m)
I] deck = v,..,
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Minor Storm Motor Sloan
MAJOR STORM Albwahla Cabacits, is based on Du4h Criterion
ids
Minor worm max. allowablecapacity GOOD grcnar then flow given on shwl'O-Peak'
Mann srovn max, allowable capacity GOOD - eater than flow given on shaw'O-Peak'
3970400 Inlet A8 U0.1nlet v3.14.tdsm, O-Nim 12172015, 10 10 AM
N
O
ry8
V
fV
CY
O
O S S O S S O
I� M{ f ��� C4 G
(SP)(w
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASSAMED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
PfDjttt Alfindy Fw Cdfins PUP
Yiel p: Ytlet B1
SIDE
l FLOW D I ! STREET YI I I FLOW
VI IV <[l
IY BDmOBab
CURER FLDW (UTTER PLUS CARRYOVER FLOW
— _ _ _ — ROADWAY CIXfE RUNE _ _
--
Q.-I D1
I 1A Is Xt NI iH�S SCirgX
'n ema raNn mPv.. la ale iK rmdMd aM1M w4 to.Imee QfiMwAree bex
a0w[ rb Uaa bfe tAe
MTHE SECi1LW5
S4t9[finml MO
= LOM
!w unM alln raeea tar Q aM ex Ne Q okraw al t1s..me Yae Pam[ Impcnrm
= —
SbTry rbe 6abdr � MiC55Oi TA{!=
B. C,VD
® Q •.e .ui.0 w...te An Slope ln�l
L m9m InI
p naa eAe a.. rc.uo aal.�e rro.
culler Fb. _
a
Dam sbm, Ream Pnee. r,-
Ram Pa�aE qn-11av Reepeawl P, _�
wn.oerm seen rfinm cmrma (ieare ee we.e b aaep • calpadM •aeml, C =
uaa-Ddnca ix Ru.}I CPetrma Due ea bba b acceq a nbealra rae�l. Cs _
eypanlCsryAvnlrb. nwn Ivan<+m 5aernriiaeaa.4- o.o po na
rdr Daaw Pea r . Q
3920R00 Y BI UD- W r3 1R 1nm QPeal I2 R015. 10 12 A
I
1
Project:
Inlat l0:
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storrs) 11
T. T. 7c.,w.
nw n
Manta d y S.
' . do
sum Allowable Wrdm for Spread Behid Cab
Slope Behid Cab (leave blank I., no conveyar¢e credo behind cab)
iirg's Roughness Behind Curb (typically between 0 012 and 0 020)
of Curb at Gutter Flow]. me
:e froon Curb Face to Street Crown
Width
Transverse Slope
Cross Slope (typ"lly 2 mr bes over 24 erctes or 0083 flm)
Lagwdmal Slope - Eraer 0 for sump condrbon
g's Roughness for Street Section (typically between 0 012 and 0 020)
Allowable Spread la M.. & May. Slone
Allowable Depth at Guam Fbwbm for Meta d Major Slam
new Depth at Street Grown (leave blank for co)
Terot=
fl
soar=
Will
r4rac=
0.020
1'iaan=
BA0
btehe•�.
Trnatrx =
40.0
fl
W =
1.73
it
S.-
2 2D
Mfl
sw=
0.083
bill
so=
0.000
Mfl
rtsttaaa=
0.020
Mass Storm majorStorm
T,,,,-I
175 175 fl
dw.= 2.0 15.0 aches
l-) I I de k
i STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion M. Storm Mala stomt
R STORM Allowable Caoscin, is based on Depth Criterion Oy,. = SUMP SUMP cts
storm can. allowable capacity GOOD - greater than flow given on aheei o Peek'
1 3970400 Inlet 81 U0.lnlet_v3 14 slstn, O-Allow
121712015, 1012 AM
E3
(SPAPI&O
8
a
O
N
O
„8
T
d
d
d
d
d
e
a
N
o
g
n
n
0
d
10
d
e
ew
d
N
a
e
d
g
a
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
ProlecL 9Rtnity Fort Coleln POP
Inlet 0 Inlet 62
DYERW D SIDE I I WD
IN STREET
.a a
LY n esemF aMam.ea eewel, aamn,abm
I.. Ibnb, lad. OR adewe—I
suernm.- vw un,wl mrn vaNer Id o +„n ure Mir ulculMm M Ine rame hell,vmrom Impn,,de, Y000Y = x
sae T9e A eewbee Fwr Wcssoe Tpre= e. C. a V,
_ ., (il •,.. w- SloPe fMll Lm9e, In1
cues. Flow -
I- . , wvslom Yw
0®pn Sbm, ReYn PemY, T,
RlJIn Ppve Orbllar Preoyrp,. P
Q
L�-
C�-
Usdr )ebwd Sb,m nulM CaelM1me(brve M tYVY b e a rloWeO veYnl. C.
Ues-Deb,ee SM nuM Cwe9bM (bete YY l,led b. aWNlerbwl.C.-
eypre(CenyOvaF(Fellow emn mSlEWcbMe, 4-
Tool Dee9n PeM Flow. O -
39704DO wet 02 Uo-kDe1_e3. 14. qsm. O-Peak
120R015, 10 10 AM
Proillict
Irdet ID:
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
a-
7 Nag—
T. TessvT'mail
Ss
nvart
Allowable W dth lot Spread Behrld Curb
Slope Behind Curb (leave blank for no conveyance aedd behind cub)
rng's Roughness Boland Cub (yprzyy between 0 012 and 0 020)
of Curb at Gunter Flow Lme
ce from Cub Face to Slreet Crown
Width
Trareverse Slope
Cross Skye (typ"y 2 inches wer 24 aches a 0 083 Nh)
Lotgiludlnal Slope Enter 0 to, sunp condihai
i3 s Roughness for Street Seckan (typcal y behveen 0 012 atd 0 020)
Allowable Spread for Mrior H Major Storm
Allowable Depth at Gutter Fkndme for Mror & Major Slam
Flow Depth at Sheel Grown (leave blank for mf
TaA,:K Q;��
Sa0`oc
r4.
Bcw = 5.00 aches
Tamwrr= 40.0
W = L73
e-ss= 0.020 h7h
Sis
Sa= a-000
nsnr£r= 0.020
Mmr Slam a.
Tra= 17.5 175 a
dots = 2.0 15.0 ktch.
❑ ❑ check = vs
t STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm M"M Storm
R STORM Allowable Caoaciry is based an Depth Criterion Q . - SUYP SUMP da
su.rm man. ullowat hr , opacity GOOD - greater than Clow gi.. on sheet *Q-P"k'
3970400 hu" B2 U6lnlet_v3.14.)dsm, O-Allen
12172015, 10.10 AM ,
F
\
\
a
f!
\!
2!
f § ■ 5 § § § ! m m § !°
(W)¥
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Project: AIAnay Fort CNkns POP
YYct D: AOet 83
OVER wRIAND I I III S&IDE
I FLOW OVERLAND I
GUREm nmw GUI ER PLUS CARRYOVER FLOW 81w D
_ ROADWAY CFNIERUNE
✓.'nn !nv'. l�Nl r d �µ-a3i) M1+�+�+M Svu911 lilp $9)T MqR $b!!1
.. _. tF va-tiewrp 'Ors n 5 I t CIS
inn enM w.O aceNb Neer p-Abw ar MU wl1
SWarinin+ava.IIIF�1I•x'—`' 3Lur..
'm �nrA stet reM br O wtl r We Oellilr e! ie erne! fbmil bpevmnrae =1�!'
B.c,
—
arra Brr dw�rd fv: Ines sa rra. rO
p tea lae n eev �>� Fb+=
oeey! stir r.�en cebo, r, _
flden P!W (1C-tbV iFeg2eifl, P�=
C,=
C.=
C.:
tler-0�elNStrm Well fntlOmOlM�re Fi blrr. b r[q1 a ala0ln riel. C
lb-Belnetl 5-N.(Nv,lC Bypr Crrr-0rrlc" )F EYi be¢NtarYa�lEviol. Ca
Flat trrn 1ptrew! liaOCYrJrrn; 0. • 0.0
rwr Be+lm ttziFa,o= os xr
397MM IWt 83 UD-Inlet_v3. 14. , O-Pa3A 1�M)15, 10' 13 AM
Project:
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
T. Ties,
y
a Geametre (Enter dale in the blew cells)
Sum Allueuble, Width for Spread had Curb
T _
Slope Behind Cwb (leave bank for no comeyace cedo behind cwb)
So =
rrg's Roughness Betwsl Curb (NPitaIN between 0012 and 0 020)
rarne =
DD16
A of Curb al Gutter Flow Lew
House =
6.00
inche,
oce from Curb Face to Street Crown
To ces,
2d p
rr Width
W =
100
t Transverse Slope
Ss
0 @0
tUh
.r Crass Slope (type.* 2lnches over 24 etches or 0.063 fUh)
Sa =
O.W3
"M
1 LorgautilW Sbpa Enter D for slenp oorldibal
Sp =
p-Op0
hlh
ag's Roughness for Street Section (NPdly between 0 012 and 0 020)
n, -
p.020
Miss Sbm
Manor Sloan
Allowable Spread for Mnor & Mapr Sloth
Teiu =
175
175
llrxhes
e
Allowable Depth at Gutter Foehoe to Minor & Maim Steen
deµ -
20
15.0
Flow Depth at Street Crown (leave bbnk for no) ❑ EJ
i STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion Minor Storm Mapr Storni
R STORM Allowable Celwcit. . based m Depth Criterion O,ew - SUMP SUMP dl
storm mac. allowable ceprity GOOD - greater than It.. given on sham 'O Peak'
storm mac. allowable capacity GOOD - Wooer than flow given on sheel'O Peak'
3970400 Inlet B3 UD-Inlet v3 14 Idsm, O-Allow 1217M15, 10.13 AM
5
0
a
S o 0 o S o S
a N d
(s�ol xu oede�
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
Protect: Nanny Fon Collins PDP
Inlet D: I Wa
ll
SIDE STREET W `LAND
N" I
'ill _ ll _ CI'—Cl1TTElt
Snow Datalk
FLDM�� CIITIER PLUS GARTDVER FLOW-�'
— — — — ROADWAY aNTERUNE — — — —
low: IXYYYraOylebmklW Yvaga aYsnleYpYa tYYvMI—
IbWpNaaawblRdY�l00ysiwYdrwwa:
1] FILLINTMIS=IDN
'Y eMs ]Yw wRs1 getiMllr. ]Iw1 wq to ]nwt ONowv Nw WR
1H
L' Orma40a: n 1
uL IN TMF SECTIONS
$WdtlmnY Nv • ELOVI
w fs�M min aYua Yx O wM vae [ne O utW xloi d mt nine nme MCdY YnI✓an'IPIYnar •
—
SiTf9R _ FL>♦d:�Y#dFs:� M2a$O/TWa-
.a. C.OD
Ne".e, nO.nbEFlow-
GuOer Fbw -
Dngn I�WvSam, hiaturSaIwet
Helurn Patin, T1'l
Hn Ppba Onee Mom - Pen rP'Iaaul,P
Return l
l pyya
Uen-D� rep Smrm Furun Caemcsm Ilene [ha oblt b accept a rdcululcl:.7!. C =
Wp-Odt tSys nurna COa1FIc.(.a— tM YIapk Ta[cecl a."lletW relYel. C.
9ypeu (Carry-0 .,j Flow hum upaaemm Sutwxtcnnrenb, a 0A
Inlul D—,Yn c-A Fiona. Q. OA 1]
39�W In1N 61 UD-Inkl a3 14 YISm, O-Peak 171/2915. 1a 13 A
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm)
Getter e met Enter data in the blue Calls)
Malunu t Allowable Widd1 for Spread Behnd Curb
Tye
Side Slope Bwld BhCeave urb (lWard, fa no conveyance trade tw1nM curb)
S.:
PUE016
Manning's Roughness Bet" Curb (typically between 0 012 and 0 020)
nawo, =
Height of Curb at Gutter Flow L.
N,aa =
6.00
aches
D.Unce ham Curb Face to Street Crown
Tapa =
240
h
Gutter Width
W =
1.73
It
Sine, Transverse Slope
Sx =
0.020
Itm
Gutter Cross Slope (typwaly 2 itches aver 24 inches w 0 083 NB)
Sw =
0.083
hlk
Street Lo gdudirul Slope - Enter 0 br sump condition
So =
O.00O
h/h
Mammg s Roughness for Street Section (Wy lly between 0 012 and 0.020)
ns =
0.@0
M!2 Storm Sbm
Mao Allowable Spread for Mkwr 8 Mapr Sloan
Tw a =
17 5
17.5
0
Max. AllowabW Depth at Gutter Flow. far Mew, 6 Maim Storm
dw. =
2.0
15 0
n h.
Allow Flow Depth at Street Crown (Wave blank for no)
❑ 0ch m* =yes
MINOR STORM Allowable Capaefty is based on Depth Crherion
Minor Storm Mapr Storm
IM&IOR STORM Allow r De.11h C heri
Q .. - SUMP SUMP da
Minot snnm max. allowable Capacity ld)(11) Tenn, than flow given on sheet '0 Peek'
M nor storm max..11ov,nble ca{auN GOOD yreetw 11um llow given on sheet'p Peak'
3970400 In" 134 UD-INe1_v3 141dsm, O-Allow 12l7/2015, 10:13 AM
8
H
w
e
d
a6
e
e
n
ci
6
O
$
8
ig a
2
V
e
9
e
A
0
A
cs
H
N
O
e
N
O
H_
d
e_
d
H
e
d
a
(sp(dpxde�
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
W o1ec1: Aftmty f oft ldhns PDP
Wet D: "el B5
LV Snlrr Detsb
ROADWAY CENtERUNE
9pn ow: Nl ek MermkleJ kfn
Ib peY la. IV lR... gm r..aw 'Ok.o�=r 1.1 I 53 I[t9 el Minh: �1 i.-inns
II'� n•le�ealunmPow li nkl Rt rotdal ZOMW e0loflrctl QAYwa NU ml
eop ew1:1 tl� n al 0.L M Tlff SFSnONs
514i�telere Nee Lox
�ae�9WSlrpa�s WOublra VtOe MIY YnI! ibul9 blpe m -
SYT1pv R°"�r MiC55ai Troe �llll��ii��6. C.aD
p usurer. ®soM4W
SIpe 1x91 1a9k11111
!J .R eNe+14u Q M�Le9•L,J 411u OmWtl Ma/
fila Floes
Otlll • � I • Sb11n Sdin
D�9^ Sum Resin hme. T, �
Rdm Pam O2lbe HegiliR P, 9 i�
1ha.D�lea sum Ruvr Cotlfm9 (b.e fls dra b eaml a rwoYb! vVel. C.
Uka-Defi1c1 iyr. lLem CaeiRme (4se ti n�lk b e¢yl a (eloleklJ.e91e1. C. -
ByP.e9lcaryMal ebl. glom Iv9ner.R 91vya.ea9.4 o n ua
raw Detipl Peek ib..o- v1 sa
391 ffl Y 85 UU-bM vl 14 LL O-Pe IWMIS, 10. 14 AM
Inlet
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 11
T, Tura
y
Ginter Geom,tr, M the talue cells)
Maxenum Allowable Wirth lor Spread Behind Curb
Tom=
It
Side Slope Behind Curb (leave Wank for no conveyance aed4 behind curb)
Sbkok =
}yq
Manning's Rougtness Behind Curb (typcay between 0 012 and 0.020)
naw =
0.016
Height of Cub at Gilder Flow Lm
Hoe, =
6.00
ncltes
Distance from Curb Face to Street Crown
Totowa =
21.0
0
Gutter Width
W =
1 73
Street Tmmsverse Slope
Sur =
0.021
Geer Cmss Slope (typically 2 inches over 24 inches or 0 063 W t)
Sw =
0.083
fdlt
Street Longitudinal Slope - Eaer 0 her sump condition
So =
D000
Marwng's Roughness for Sheet Seem, (typically between 0.012 and 0.020)
nor =
0.020
Mmr Sturm Major Storm
Max Allowable Spread for Meer A Major Storm
Tea =
17 5
175
Max Alarable Depth at Gutter Flowline for Minor 3 Maim Storm
dwa =
2.0
15 0
Idra
law Flow Liam al Street Crown (Nave blank M m)
Ll I check = yes
INOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Minor Storm Major Storm
AJOR STORM AI wnbk Casaw;hh, is based! on Depth Critettorn
Q. SUMP I SUMP cfs
111�)f smnn nakz. allowable capacity GOOD - greeter than flow given on sheet'O. Peak'
hle capacity GOOD -greater than flow 91.. on aheet'0 Peak'
397D400 Inlet 85 UD-Ink4_v3 14 xlsm, (}Allow 12f712015, 10 14 AM
IN
e
DESIGN PEAK FLOW FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET
OR GRASS -LINED CHANNEL BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
PmlecC AR1n ft Fon callne POP
Iaa 0, Intel
III1 °�� ° I I pl STSIDE REU II I I FLOW I I I
8tw De ft
- ROADWAY CENTMNE - - - —
Ly .eaa menam-
IY,d p.+lls Y. Iaar.w at asrmwx.r< 'De,e..,
$W®IcnmeM Nee= P[rq
Y-1-1.OeM IM UM OxalbY�pr el lM1e ebne tlbe Portent lmpervaw,ws� %
.Types aos ee�dfm NRCS Spe Type= P. R C, w o
D'.Yr elA� ®SY,ai lnpY SY,pe1M11 Lagm let
_.l '.n. yu.. iA.n Q N..x bbf� W nIx.IM OrMW xYb'®
fwbr FYw
am n ormalcn: c I = , , a I IYv�Ygv � Oeelpl Sqm RYIIIn PwO, T, �F--��.
ReYn PaoEdallae Pra�Yrm, v,-, p�
Ven�DelYaW SYxm RIMI CmIWM (bn'eti OY.tbscMeabWed+eYbl.0
Usa-MmeE 5 N Rugll CMlllme 9eble by L1�lY b Cgll • dv�WG vVnl. C,
9ypue(ce -ovb1 Flay halo suepwolm+a4
Tp Dnipn P Flay, O- 13 68 cle
397NW InWt C UO-Inlet 01C. xlsm, O-Peak 17/772015, 10'.15 AM
Project:
ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) 11
Sumer Gem t fEmer data in the blue cells)
Ma arman Allowable Width lot Spread Behind! Curb
Tyq =
p
Side Slope Behmd Cwb (Inoue blank for no cornveyanrce credo behnd cob)
Sya =
Wit
Mammng's Roughness Behind Crrb (tymrafly between 0.012 and 0 020)
nya =
0.016
Heght of Curb A Glitter Flow Lave
Ham.=
6.00
—has
Iran
Distance Cleo Face to Street Crown
Tc;
p
Gutter Width
W =W0.020
it
Street Tram;v Slope
Sx=ll0[
Ginter Cress Slope (typ�N 2 arches war 24 ktrhes or 0.003 f M)
Sw =NIl
Street Largdudloal Slope - Enter 0 fa snnp condition
So =ttm
Manning's Rerglnsss for Streel Secloon (typr�lly between 0 012 and 0.(120)
esnasr =
Manor Storm Map Storm
MaxAllowable Spread for M. & Map Storm
Tye) =
22.0
22.0
it
Max Allowable Depol at Guitar FlowAre for Mexr & Major Storm
dwu =1
2.0
1 15.0
inches
Allow Flow DeW at Street Crown (leave Wank for no)
check = yvs
MINOR STORM Allowable Capacity is based on Depth Criterion
Mon Storm Major Storm
MAJOR STORM Allow it is based on Depth CriterionQ.e.
a SUMP SUMP cps
Yf„r.or storm max. allowable capacity GUUU -greater Ihan Iluw given un wheel 'O Peak'
Maior storm max. nllownMe capaclly LOUD - Vrealei than Ilow sheet 'O Peak'
3970400 Intel C UD-Inlet v3 14 dsm, O-Allow 12f7f2015, 10: 15 AM
0
S•
1■1■1-
_
-momm--
---,,,
mmm
---."„--
mmmmmmMMMMMmm
------„-
------.-
----,jI--IN
----u--
l
----mo-ia,,
--om---'s
q 8 S g 8
O O N V aV
44
i
e
I
avf
I
No Text
i
I
SN"
F
No Text
N
O
N
88
k±
3
O
W yy
?a
z
W 8 zt
4f M � � IA O M 00 n M 00 .�. .M.
O
C O O Q O N '+ 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 0p 0
0
O p p C p C p p p G p p p p
OOO OOOMOMOOOOOOOOOOIff m OOO OOOOS
Ln
O O 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 6 0 66 6 6 0 0 0 0 O
C
N N N N N ry ry N N ry N fV fV N N N N ry N ry N ry N N ry N fV N N
.. .. .r .. .............. .. .. .. .. ................ .... .. ..
N
O O O O O O co O O O O O O O O O O O O O CD O O O O 0O 0
0
00 C O COC C G C G CC C C OC O GGO G (6 G O cs csci
C
G
O O �.p ONO ITTN. ^D s O N M* N pp N n 0 0pp An M W Linn LFQ M MN O
N fV en N N M N M O N N rn C4 V m � O M N N N N N N N Ii m
N
O m im O ry .. N O 0% CD .. .. M O v 0% OD CD .. m en O O O O O 0% N N
at
T` O CD M O f` O U1 Itt0 %0 O 0% N M N f` T` O CA%0 01 C % C % CA 0% 00O '+
%0
N cli "i fV Pi fV fNV I+j cV PJ fV ri (Ii P9 (V fV HI C4 C4 (V fV C-4 C4 Zvi vi
fV
OPi
�4
pMi
is
n OSc�+1O(ONN O^D OND S P; N`is:° S � M 8$ 8st st& 8!
O N
p^i
N M M M ry vi fV O V' N1 V• N N M M v M 6 16 N M N N N N N N N M
N
1A M OD N N .. V1 Ln M Ln N 7 m O O M N M N N CD O OD .. O O 0 N v
v
t0 N m M m N "
t0
T` n %6 6 r` V' %6 li 4 ? �G %6 V1 6 %6 V' V' V' C OD ri %6 LA V' V' Pi Pi tV
rV
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
Oi O� T Ch Oi 01 at 0% 0% O% O� O� O+ O+ O� O� O� O1 Ot Of 0% CA CA O% ON CA O+
N
v v v v v v v v V> V' V' V> v v a v V' V' v V' v V' V> v V' V' V' V' V'
v
.+ M T` M .+ V' N O v N m0 O N v at N M N M Ln N N .+ m go.. m O U9
co
O v O .. V; V' O N .. LA do m n M N Ln N %0 .. N CD N .+ V1 n OD N M M
%0
T` n f\ %d T` 6 n V' V' V' 6 n %6 %6 6 %6 V1 V' V'_; C CD n V %6 ui ' V' f.l fV
fV
M 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
O!Of 01 O1 C� m T T O� O� O� 01 m CA 0% Of 0% at 0% 0% 0% m 0%
ry
CA
vvvvvvvvvvvV v,V:, vavvvvvvvvvv
v
at f` m en %D f\ OD N .+ .+ .+ N n O O N w .. N to .+ 0% co .+ at O N n
.+
N O V. N O V1 %0 .. �+ .. '+ OD M %D O n V. .. �+ T. �+ .+ Ul %n CD N M O O
of
f; n %6 LA n V' %6 V' V' V` V` %6 %6 LA vi ui V' V' V' C CD f\ %6 V) V' V' 1+1 C4 fV
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
0% O1 CA 4m O+ Cn O� O� O+ O+ T im (it m 01 O� T O� O�
N
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvavvvv
O% co N CD N N to O .. Uf m 0+ N N N O V' 1, N V1 V' OD %D 1, OD %0 YY O
z
r�
N ON N %O f at in cA .. �+ en N Ln M .. M O CD .� to ti CA V. Ln MD.� N
Ln
n n %6 V1 K LA tG i V' i V1 n %6 %6 LA %6 LA i V' .4 C OD ;C %6 LA V' V' r4 fV
fV
M 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
at 4m 0% 0% at 0% C1 at O! a O. O. O. O. C!
N
V' V' V' V' V' V' V' V' V- v V- v v v V' V' V' V' V' V` V' V' V' mr
V1 T O V 00 O O O 01 V' t0 0% m m 0% GA M O CID M N %D It Vf %D V' %D O O
O
OD V' O %0 OD O Ln 0% Ln N OD to GD '+ en en OD vi N .+ Lm M 00 Of O of V1 V1 \0
N
K6 %6 %d V` %6 V` %6 N fV r4 fV %6 vi V1 V' M1 9+1 N N C n %6 Ui V' V' m fV r4
lV
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
Ci Cn Oi at Oi at Oi a Oi 0% O% (7% Of m at 0%
N
4m
v v v v v a v v v v v a a v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v
v
M V1 0% O n m CD OD CD .. %0 Ln 0% m M Of M N CO m N %0 IT U9 %0 It %0
It
f" co V Y1 .. to N N 4m N v O '+ O %D 4m M CD v m �+ U1 m OD T O m w n
N
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
T. �O �0 1!1 n V' �D M N M Ifl r` �O 1fl V' M V' M M O O n tp IP1 V' V' M N �+
.
N
M M m M M M M M M st 9 st M N1 M M M M M M M N N N ry N ry ry N
Ci O� 0� T T 0? Ci Oi O� OI OI OI O� Ci O� O� Oi Ci OI O- O± OI O- OI OI OI O- OI OI
N
Ci
V' V' V. V V` V' Ir w V' V- w V' P V. V. V V' IT w V' w V' V' V' V' V' V' V' v
V'
Ln V' N 01 N V' N M V' V. IT O v Ln O M N cn m M m M M M M
v1
S S S S S S S S S S O S S S S O S O O S S S S S S S S S S
S
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C c C CD C C C CD C o 0 0 6 6
C
inUiNRNRC?CpGq"U f*tvN V;.+oy..nCQnapQ�OQLnLn0P) V;Q%oo V;
'n
N CD N .�. IA V' IMfl n� It n n O� %0 Ln S OD M N T S n S S n N
n
0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O
OD OD co V' N V' N N N C CD V: N 7 V' 00 N N N tV fV fV fV fV fV
.. .. .. NN .-� .r N� N
V'
n.ti �.r O
Mr
7 M VN M M
N N NpppnN
pN01
n N 1, n W %6 r4 toN N 1, N vi r4� c4� fV fV fV cV rp4 1!1
M L N
pM pM pN
pn pi
O� M M 0� N O� N 17f IA M O O O O M 7 V V' .T ? � � � V' O�
Or:
S
O fV C vi M M C C '+ .. ry �+ M M ti .-i ti .-i ti .-i .-i .-i ti .-i fV
C
- OD CD 7 iV V' ' OV V V V V, V V
NN�N
OD N C4 m 8.V
D ......, .. a . CD
ODa a�
��wogo�$MX aa0wu0oo0
�
1=
r
0
0
SS
co
�0
C
J � 2
SYS2n' m
n
1
yC
D
N
O
w
TOO O O OOOnaDmo, aao a
W
A
ya�{a�a
W �1 N N N N N O A A N CD N N O O O N A N L co OD
Oo
O N N N N N N N N N 0% A A to OD V to r W V OD OD A r tD Ot Gt W
g
8igS R igo99; 6
r
N r N OL{I-nN N N N N N Pi NJ WN%O Vr W VhI -4 VN N V V
ON ��WO O
L'nWNO
A
O N N N N N N N N N GD A A N OD OD N N O O O N A N A OPD OPD Oro
.
.
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
W WWW W
W W Wt+
W N W tV C C tV W t0
N+ O+� 8 V V A rA N Vt V!In A W Ort NN~ pmp N
V
Ln
rN
A b bt b A W b Lt Ln Lo bo V bo V d V iN V Lt N bo O b b in Ln
O
O O O O
Op Op
8
pO pO pO pO pO pO pO pO pO pO pO pOp pOp pOp pOp pOp pOp pOp pOp pOp pOp
pOp pOp
O O O O O O O O O W Ln O S O S O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S
Ln
W W W W W W W W W V W O W A O A A A W V A to VI W A VI A A A A
A
A A A A A A A A D. A
i0N
tA iAD iA iA0 �D ZA
iA
ZA ZA
�AD iA iA iA iA iA
tA iA iA iA
6 O D 'W0 'W0 iWD 'WD iW0 D D DWDWO �W0
0N 0 0N 0 0 i0N 'N0 D D D
W
N
r N W A A to Ct V O O W W A U A W Ot V VI W N W Ot A V N Ot Ot V
. . .
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lm Ln
r W W
d
Ot A OOi to d ON N W O V W to to tD Ln ON nV+ 0 CO CO V O tD W W
A
A A 4Y d 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
;0 iO 2 iD ;0 -0 80 i0 i0 -D ID iD tD iO i0 iO 8 6 t0 tD t0 �D i0 iD i0
N
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
N
� N N W A A NI Ot V O N N W W A W !n Of N W N N Ot A Ot A Ot Ot Ot
N
Ot to in in b t0 b W VI 1+ N to Oo W W r Oo O1 OD L1 to ZD to b CD 0% b A CD
O
O O Ot A Ot W A Of N W OD OD W tD t0 W t0 t0 Ot A t0 Cl O O OD A O t0 N
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
i0
iD i0 iD ;D i0 2 i0 i0 8 6 t0 iD i0 6 i0 i0 iD �D i0 %D %0 iD i0 �0H
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 WW
W W to to G1 V OD t0 O 1+ V OD ODt0 OD t0 !O !0 OD OD V m OD OD OD OD �0W
ic ND w to �l1 W
N O W
VWI t0J1 IOJI W OOD V O OiD tell tD W O O{W!1 V N FN+ A V O O t
A
A A A A A A A A A A d A A A A A A A A A A A�� A A d A
t0
to i0 i0 t0 to t0 �D t0 i0 �0 �O t0 6 %D to i0 iD %D to to to %0 t0
N
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
W W 4 to to Ot V OD tD O V V OD Oo OD OD �O %0 V CO V CO CO V OD OD OD tD %D
OO
r CD O ;+ V Ct Ot LO A CD b b I-- in in Ot A N CD ;+ CD b Ct 00 V W 4m i+ A
t0
N t0 Ot 0% tD OD CO t+ go A N N O Oo Co Ot N V N W N r Ot N t0 N Ot t0 Gt
A
A A A A A A A A A A A44. A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
t0
i0 t0 iD i0 i0 i0 i0 tD i0 i0 tD t0 tD �Ap t0 t0 t0 i0 t0 i0 i0 iD i0 i0 i0 i0 tD iD ip
W W W W W W W W W
N
A
A
N N N N N N N N W W W W W aD W 41 W 6D W
W A VI YI Ot V co t0 t+ 1+ OD OD co O OD tD iO to OD OD co OD OD 01 OD D) tD t0 10
Ln
OD b V V Ot Li Ln b A f+ A ZO N V b% Ot Ot t0 A I-- {J Oo Of tD Oo 1+ Ot 0+
Ot
t0 Gt O+ t0 t0 co t+ t0 I+ N t+ W O Ot co OD t0 A to Gt A W do O tD A OD
A
A A A A A d A A A A A A A A A A A A � A d A A A A A
tD
i0 to t0 tD t0 ip ip i0 i0 �0 i0 �D t0 i0 �0 iD i0 i0 t0 i0 t0 t0 ip t0 i0 �O �0 �0 i0
NJ
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
W A 4 to W Gt V co t0 t+ co Oo OD t0 co OD to t0 co Oo co OD co OD co OD co t0 t0
LI
V b r IV \O V V A Ln b b i+ A Al V 10 ut LI i+ W b /J V i+ GD A OD W to
N
M O V V O tD t0 N t0 W O A W tD O N A t0 W VI A W W A Ot Gt A OD A
Of
N N N N N N N N W Wa A A Of A M+ Wp W W N
Ac6 W1 WV1 WV1 N A N
OOKp;
1 pNp yu V C
C N
N V V V V V V V N O
N W N O V V Ot r
ti0
O W 01 V V CAatOt 01 Vil till
Ot
to N N N N N N N A W W A A 0% N A N f+ A W W W N A N W W W N
W
b Gt b% Ct Ct 01 Gt On i+ i+ ? in in V CD b Co N A in V V i+ to i+ b A L N
V
t0 V V V V V V V A O to N VI W V W V ON V V V Ot to O1 Ot to Ln r
Ot N N N N N N N N W Wy A A 01 A t+ A Wv N A N Wp W W N
W{�n WVV
y0%
y pp"p ppNpp { v p
OV C1 9 ion,
N V V V V V V V V N V Gt r
Of
O Lnn t�Jl {VJI W W V V V tNn tin
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
C C b C C C C C O C C C O C G C C C G C G C O C C O O G G
Y
N
1+ 1+ 1+ 1+ 1+ 1+ 1+ 1+ I+ Ir Ir Ir 1+ Ir I+ I+ I+ I+ !+ I+ N K) 1� w Ir Ir Ir Ir Ir
N N N N N N N N N N N IQ N No N N N N N N N N N N N N N
O O 40 O O CD CD CD O O O Ip+ O O
pO pO pO pO pO pO pO pO
O W O W W S 8 t0J1 Ln #A LnLnLn8 iA LA
t011
O
O O O O O O O O O O O tOn "
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
Op
O O O O O O Oo O O O O CD O C61 D O CD
0Op O M I O O O O O
ON
0p O 0pp
t O p p y
O t0 N
p p
N V V V V N OVD W OD W ONt
A
W tD 10 Vil I~+ tN0 OD OV1 tOn 01 1~+ I~+ !~-� VI
N
No Text
C
s
k K A h 3 K K k% �, x % k Si R R Ft S F - ��' S
k E 6 G & R&
9 a 2 9 R E@ 9 3 R 8 8 4 3 r E 8 9 3& 8 4 F B R
I
W."...1.
�1
_88Wk8WYR8:W88kYRSRB�R%WkY$SR4 �.$WWk$WYRifi '�YBWk YXYR:tl-3%S#k�RS
aa'sax`a°a3a`a'a'xuuaca:eases'e'aaa•a`a6`a"au6a'cG'sa"aa"saa�i�"a�a.a"a `a"c5�"a��
%YK;6M;M%:KMM%Mq;XK�KKKK%q;%i�MK%Xqq;K%:MMgXS{q;M%:M%MX.E q;gF:RMR
ddeddddn v.WWnW iiiiiiidN N,i iiNn ndNN
�.._ +, ruraraaua....raaa+(L, a'.Ni-rraaarr+..araa.ra..rrra....a
%T,R%AAARi M%M R FMARAA%AAa%. AA ,aft.. .........
-- ---- 9 R$ S ss F. 8 9 8 6 R 8 i
im .rrr
G
G
8$$ R R R$$$ Y R 8$ 2 Y R 8 9 2 S? R R 9 9$ 8$ 9 9$$ 8 2 Y R 8 8 9 2£ 8 E 2 5
ILI�n�M�
Y.
No Text
3
rt
I
F
yL$
�Y
J-�
axaMa.aaaa'xaas�;: eaaaL�a aizaa�sa:sTaa� aim as
n a r 4 4 n n n n r 4 4 4 n n a r a n r 4 a r r a a a a a a a r.. n_
�Li IIOII�N��a
(1 J N
d laia$Rid 3r' e's A da2.: Rt. �./„./.g.p 2 4AA! ":.
S AAAABbl �IA&�AAaA:ARASA2&BE68GAAF6MA: A A AA:aBA aA:eAAC::
:ia...aa.a..a.a..a.aa.a.113 i.: i 41 ii.................... a..
(a)..P Is
'e�'Y^yy eRn Vn 4'1'Y •e•ow ¢•ne •exp'�y.................. n'nseeaae-ve'
9 YY �RRRR RRRR�RI��CAR$�RRAtRFF ��R RNY(Sd#%WRx Vie'-'.CSX.'etRRa �a �xx7
(y) uegeul3
f:
K
cr
°SR9kSRYRW48Y%kYRYRR48R8kbRYR£38b
R R R R R R R R R R R% R R R R R R R R a%% i. ?, � i i l.:1 " '_1 :t m
r n r n u n u u u u u� .r � r e r u a u r a' IN) uaYn93P .. �� .. .. s i r .. .� � .. e r r
Y
• (Y) wIw+
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 Wit
Normal Depth 0.86 It
Discharge 32.10 W/s
Cross Section Image
41.60
41.50
41 40
41.30
41.20
41 10
41.00
Q 40.90
40,80
w 4070
40 60
40.50
4040
40.30 1
40,20
40.10
40.00
-0+10 0+00 0+10 0+20
Station
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Mahods Solution Cents Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.071.001
1 202016 9 26 50 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 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 fPls
Cross Section Image
40.90
40.80
40.70
40.60
40.50
40.40
40.30
.`2 40.20
>6 4010
d
w 40.00
39.90
39 80
39.70
39.60
39.50
39,40
0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25
Station
Bentley Systems. Ine. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [06.01.071.00]
12012016 9:25:53 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 067" USA +1-203-755-1666 Pape 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 tuft
Discharge 116-00 wis
Section Definitions
stow (ft)
Elevation (it)
Roughness Segment Definitions
Start Station
V7MR7
Normal Depth
Elevation Range
Row Area
Wetted Perimeter
Top Width
Normal Depth
Critical Depth
0+00
0+12
0+25
0+25
0+27
0+59
0+60
0+61
0+83
0+86
0+89
En6ng Station
(0+00. 4942.00)
4938,79 to 4942 00 It
494200
4941.19
494060
4940.10
494000
4938.88
493879
493887
493883
493923
494000
(0+89,4940 00)
0.71 ft
2290 W
4621 ft
4612 ft
0.71 ft
0.81 ft
Roughness Codkwlt
0 013
Bentley Systems, Inc. Maestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.071.00]
1/2612016 3:50:37 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA. +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2
Worksheet for South Access Drive XS
Results
Critical Slope
0.00300
fVft
Velocity
5.06
ft/s
Velocity Head
0.40
ft
Specific Energy
1 11
ft
Froude Number
1 27
Flow Type
Supercritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth
0.00
it
Length
0.00
ft
Number Of Steps
0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth
000
If
Profile Description
Profile Headloss
000
ft
Downstream Velocity
Infinity
fVs
Upstream Velocity
Infinity
ft/s
Normal Depth
071
ft
Critical Depth
081
ft
Channel Slope
000500
f m
Critical Slope
0.00300
ft/ft
Bentley Systems. Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley Flow Master [08.01 071.001
112612016 3:50'37 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown. CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2
Cross Section for South Access Drive
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Formula
Solve For Normal Depth
Input Data
Channel Slope 0.00500 tt/ft
Nonnal Depth 0.71 it
Discharge 116.00 tv/s
Cross Section Image
4942,00
4941,50
4941 00
15 4940,50
w
4940.00
4939.50
4939W
u-uu VTlu u+vu I.r+vu u.e.
Station
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Sakti= Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.071.00]
1/26=16 3:51:41 PM 27 Siemens Company Drive Sute 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Pape 1 of 1
APPENDIX E - REFERENCED INFORMATION
' J•R ENGINEERING
MEMORANDUM
ft)
J•R ENGINEERING
A Westrian Company
To: Mr. Mark Ossello
' From: Jason Tarry, PE and Ken Merritt, APA, RLA
' Date: March 3, 2015
Subject: Affinity Living Communities- SWMM Drainage Analysis
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 Affmity 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 I below). The results of the analysis show that routing the
' undetamed 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 comer 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 LID SWMM model analyzing the series of ponds on the Front
I 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 LTD SWMM model. In total, four models were made in EPA SWMM including: existing
' 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 11130 Fast Kiowa Street, Suite 400 192900 South College Avenue, Suite 31)
' Centennial, C080112 Colorado Springs, C080903 Fort Collins, C080525
303-740-9393 • Fax 303-921-7320 719-593-2593 9 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
APPIUMMCMANIAM
RAWO r PAW q�f4� POro 7S6Iche
aoa�a/ITY ! FF04T PANGS AUACF
v � _ cE,e4rrN Pao a+s OVEFRjOW
O
40
UNO
Figure 1. Affinity Drainage
07200 South Ali= Way, Suite C400 0130 Fast xiow Street Suite 400 92900 South College Avenue, Suite 3D
Ceutmmal, C080112 Colorado Springs, CO80903 Fat Collins, CO90525
303-740-9393 a Fan. 303-921-7320 719-593-2593 a Fax 303-921-7320 970491-9888 a Fax 303-92t-7320
LEGEND
tBASIN ID
A: SUB -BASIN DESIGNATION
El: AREA (AC)
C: PERCENT IMPERVIOUS
Q0ESIG7N POINT
PROPOSED FLOW PATH /[ y'r-j 9 • �(` I ./-" a ._ 0 .� .�O __�,����% e ��'- — —� FLOW PATH
lt_A�ra _`."��.(' 4[C'-•"jJN L.� �=� rb • p � � � 0 «""`y.��•..�� � ' � • M � SUB -BASIN
SIN DRAINAGE AREA
Is
1 595
I � 95 _ _6• -
-69
kk
� •a 256
l � �• 4.5 � '���r-7 0 1 � - ' O6 �.v/' 1 o p
?5 287
• � � 207 `l7 770
~ 32.4.008G 2uA —
090
206
17.86
c_/ 1 q o 0
• I � o
\� � • .: '3 23, ova a , {j _ s
TO
�v � o s® 1 s
5.2 g p a 1 p 200 100 0 200 400
'. � g e 6
ORIGINAL SCALE: 1• - 200'
2a2_ 745 ; 47 • 244 2a6 I - I_� t—� -_��
29 244
AFFINITY DRAINAGE
JOB NO. 39704.01
03/02/15
SHEET 1 OF 1
J•R ENGEgEM ING
A W..W. CWW+rY
Colffn l 303—r4J-M • coo *r gs i5-bR3-a 3
Fan Cd1m 970-09r9518 • W.wrwrjwNR
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
500
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(%) 1
90
1 90
0
m
O
pppp
tp
.�
y
p
b
pp
OD
g
p
00
V�
V
1p
Of
0�1
p1
O
1p
01
VWi
N
yp1
N
MN•
ypJ
1+
�p.1
O�
p
01
y
W
p
01
p
P
V
{A!�
N
J�
•I N_
A
N
N
V
�
tD
10
V1
O
O
•
N
N
N
0 0001111
O
N
•
N
N
01
O�
Q
N
n
N
3
A
1
U
N
O
Ow
O(�,�
O
W
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
m
w
dN
6
d
r
�
1n
�
dNd
a
W
A
�
dN
$�
A
�
w
N
N
N
W
In
'
'
W
1n
W
�n
IY
N
IY
N
W
to
Y
O'
'
IY
A
•
ii
V�
IN
Ni
}a
IA
W
N�
?
ff
3
5
A
"'•
V
V
W
V
V
V
g
g�
V
V
V
N
"'•
N
"'•
N
N
O
N
01
r
O1
N
N
W
N
r
N
r
N
N
T
J
m
N
N
N
O
N
C
01
N
01
yy��
01
{y/��
N
�1
O
N
O
N
��pp
01
N
W
O
A
O
A•
imp
O
VNi
1N11
p Np
V
N
tp
W
F+
V
{I�
OWi
ONO
O
W
W
pV�1
O
pN�
O
E
C
r
r
tp
OD
00
01
T
<
A'
3
—3
N
r
m^
o
3
a
r0000000��"i�oo
�
ou�u•�n�n�n00000000
w
w
w
w
l
o
o
o
o
0
a
ng
3
5
,g
y
T
m'
ro
T
r
r
V
r
V
r
W
r
V
r
V
r
V
P
A
W
r
V•
01
01
r
r
N
r
r
V1
V
m
to
N
N
N
N
m
T
01
w
N
N
O
r
N
O
r
O�
in
1p
O�
y1
00
Of
y1
OD
V•
O
b
N
O
b
N
W
b
Q1
p�
pp1�
01
✓
A
1p
�+
A
ID
O
iu
O
O
iY
O
Ln
in
VI
LI
A
Y'
N
ppp�
01
V
V
Y1
iO
1n
W
r
1p
V
V1
W
01
N
N
ap
W
o
O
r
L.w
W
r
In
W
bn
0
O
0
O
g
CL
y
3
3
y
N
3
�
J
Yr+O
W
W
OOOOoo$oOoON��vWi
tWnOOOOOOOO
n
3,9
$
T
d
x
�
r
cc
r
40
r
r
r
r
r
A
A
N A
N
A
r
r
No
No
T
W
o
o
m
V
A
V
A
aD
N
do
N
00
N
N
t0
V
i0
V
V
V
V
O
ip
r
r
N
p
V
V
p
p
3
I+
1
C
3
`°
�
a
dN
`o
(Os
yOa
WOOO(OO`o
roO
OOOOOOOOO(OuOOOO
w
w
o
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
w
w
w
3
3
5
$
T
T
o'
�_a
rrrrrrr
e
W,,,
r
r
o
O�tntnrr�'O�'OPA�nArrNN
Of
OI
P
A
W
V
r
N
OD
00
r
r
G
r
r
O�
01
Of
V1
N
N
W
y,�
y�
�•
—3
3
i+
c
1
3
c
$oo''oWWWWWW�ww
W
to
to
u��n
u�0000'b"6"b'o
w,s
a
3
g9
—S
m
i
0 0
o a
8 8
00
0
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
21:30:00
22:45:00
3
0:00:00
1:15:00
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
Volunw(acre-ft)
III
<
I
I
0
0
S A
CL
'V
0
CL
N
00
01
r_
3
m
E
6
»
%D
«
M
§
a
M
)
\
\
;
\
)
)
$
.
_
S
0
/
}
�(�ne) _¥n,
r•lZq� 11 f.
r
,
4 �
• J -+
Ab
(a" report ten)
4 y_ ••• 11 Golden Meadow Pond
5 - • Retrofit Existing Pond to accommodate
t I Wa for Ouawy Volumc
04
X,
•J t�
I r-hGINEERING, INC
Collins
-5
Fox Meadows Pond
• Retrofif Existing Ports to accommodate
Water Quality Volume
It I I II
unstone Village Reoional Porrd
Retrofit Existing Pond to accommodate
WatM'Oualuy Volume
it
x
s'
t
1� I
3
W4.-
`
} .
Ali
Slone Ridoe Pond FCR1D Ports
• Alternadw to FCRID location fEDBD)
• New Pond to aecommoda to
water Quality Volume
.1 r? t1 ey rt.;
r,
Fox Meadows Basin
Selected Plan - Water Quality Improvements
Fox Meadows Basin
Proposed BMP Basin Type
Flood Control Only
Water Quality Only
Flood Control and Water Quality
Proposed Improvements
Proposed Selected Plan
"'°°"a Water Quality Alternatives
0 Soo ,.000 1.500 2
, inch It soo f e
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.coml
Prepared by:
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
4396 Greenfield Drive
Windsor, Colorado 80550
EE7]0
EARTH ENGINEERING
CONSULTANTS, LLC
December 15, 2014
Inland Group
1620 North Mamer Road, Building B
Spokane, Washington 99203
Attn: Mr. Mark Ossello (markpAinlandconstruction.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 Engiammg 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
Jacob J. Silverman, E.I.T.
Project Engineer
JJS/LLL/dla
Reviewed by:
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 thru 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 B-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.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 2
EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
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 fiu ther 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 CONDMONS
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.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 4
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.
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 comer 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.
EEC 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
In -situ
Dry Density,
Inundation.
Swell Index,
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
11
2
Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean
11.2
114.4
150
(+) 10.8
Clay with Sand
Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean
12
4
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
(+) 7.3
16
9
Brown Lean Clay with Sand
15.8
116.7
500
(+) 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.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 6
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 Preparation
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
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 7
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
of foundation and/or slab heave; but movements should be reduced and tend to be more uniform.
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 Bearin¢ 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 MOT 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,
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 8
and a minimum of 3 feet of separation below the exterior perimeter footings, assuming a minimum
frost depth of 30 inches.
Spread Footing 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 father 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.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 9
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
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 structura lgranular 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 (11)
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.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 10
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.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 11
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
Sotl Type
On -Site Low Plasticity Cohesive
Imported Medium Dense Granular
Wet Unit Weight
115
135
Saturated Unit Weight
135
140
Friction Angle (0) — (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 Buildine Desien 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.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 12
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 laterallyl-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 — Desisn 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.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 13
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
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 shnnk/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
IC*RM
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 14
RECOMMENDED XVffMUM PAVEMENT SECTIONS
Automobile
Heavy Duty Areas
Parldng
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. Alljoints
' 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:
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 15
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
• 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 minimise 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 fast 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 carefidly evaluated at the time ofpavement
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.
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 16
Soil Corrosivity
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 I/H 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.
EEC Project No. 1142094
December 15, 2014
Page 17
GENERAL COMMENTS
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
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 failing 30 inches on a 2-inch O.D. split spoon, except where noted.
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:
WL : Water Level WS : While Sampling
WCL Wet Cave in WD : While Drilling
DCL 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 day with sand, trace gravel, stiff
(CL); silty sand, trace gravel, medium dense (SM).
CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS
Unconfined Compressive
Strength, Qu, psf Consistency
<
500
Very Soft
500 -
1,000
Soft
1,001-
2,000
Medium
2,001-
4,000
Stiff
4,001-
8,000
Very Stiff
8,001 -
16,000
Very Hard
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
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:
Hard Can be scratched easily with knife, cannot be
scratched with fingernail.
Moderately Can be scratched with fingernail.
Hard
Soft Can be easily dented but not molded with
fingers.
Sandstone and Conglomerate:
Well Capable ofscratching a knife blade.
Cemented
Cemented Can be scratched with knife.
Poorly Can be broken apart easily with fingers.
Cemented
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
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 (lean Gravels Less Cu�4 and 1<G53E GW Well -graded gravel `
more than 50% 509A of coarse than 5% fines
retained on No. 200 fraction retained on Cu<4 and/or I>Cc>3E GP Poorly -graded gravel F
sieve No. 4 sieve Gravels with Fines GH
Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel
more than 12%
fines Fines Classify as CL or CH GC Clayey Gravel F,GH
Sands 50% or more Clean Sands Less Cu26 and 1<Ccs3E SW Well -graded sand'
coarse fraction than 5% fines
passes No. 4 sieve Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc>3E SP Poorly -graded sand'
Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G•HJ
more than 12%
fines Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand GH/
Fine -Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above "A' Line CL Lean day
50% or more passes Liquid Umit less
the No. 200 sieve than 50 PI<4 or plots below "A" Line ML Silt 'J-m
organic LiquidLimit- ovendried Organic day 'W"H
<0.75 OL
Liquid Limit - not dried Organic silt x,L"40
Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above 'A" Line CH Fat day RUa
Liquid Limit 50 or _
more PI plots below 'A' Une MH Elastic Silt KLr"
organic Liquid Limit - wen dried Organic day M.Mlp
<0.75 OH
Liquid Limit - not dried Organic silt x,tpE,o
Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
rased on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) eGu=D®/Da Cc- (Dn) `d soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add 'with sand'
sieve D. x D. or lwith gravel', whichever is predominant
*If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or of soil contains>_ 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 t15%sand, add 'with sand' to "If soll contains>30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel,
°Gravels with 5 to 12% fines required dual symbols: ad fines classify as CL-ML. use dual symbol GC- add "gravelly' to group name.
GWGM well graded gravel with silt CM, or SC -Sot. 'PL>4 and plots on or above "A* line.
GWGC well -graded gravel with day "If fines are organic, add 'with organic fines" to 0PL<4 or plots below "A* line.
GP -GM poorly -graded gravel with sift group name IPI plots on or above "A* line.
GP -GC poortygraded gravel with day cif soil contains >15% gravel, add *with gravel' to aPI Plots below *A" line.
'Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: group name
SW-SM weM graded sand with silt 'If Atterberg limits plots shaded area, soil is a a -
SW -SC well -graded sand with day ML, Silly day
SP-Sot poorly graded sand with silt
SP-SC poorly graded sand with day
60
50
2
v
a �
10
,
A
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 so 90 100 110
uQUID OMIT ILL)
For Classification of fine-
grained soils and
fine-grained fraction of coarse -grained
sods.
Equation ot'A'-line .J
Horizontal at Pk4 to LL=255
O�
PJ�
then PI-0.73(LL-20) `\
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
A.r
AFFINITY of FORT COLLiNS
FORT Couj NS. COLORADo
EEC PROJEcr No. 1142094
NovEni3ER 2014
r�L
EEC
°s
n
g3o'3
o
0.
JT7 ���.;�I .H.,IIIIII - iIIIIIII
43
tp
F 7
F-------�
i
r
mm
r
m
r
m
m
n
-
o.
-
`r)
I
Z
"
c a O W
Gl
N'
o, om
M
:6
na �
E
�O
�O
r—i
N 7 ti
dN r+
O
z
mm
r
G
N
ai m L
O O
ti
o n
(D
3
N
O
t
W
�
w
o4
Ll
r
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-1
SHEET I OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
1112512014
WHILE DRILLING
21'
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11125M14
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
o
■
cU
w
oo
aamrs
-zoo
swat
LL
N
PItESEIAtE
• b00 MF
T'PE
wem
mowwn
msq
tW
01Ut
M
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAPID (CL)
i
br
stiff to wny stiff
2
with c* a deposit
_ _
16
900M
11.1
105.8
CS
3
4
wdi traces of gravel Ess
5
11
900D•
8.7
6
_7
_8
_9
brown I bed [Cs
10
18
-9000•
8.6
119A
35
22
60.3
2,000 pst
1.3%
11
12
13
14
Ess
15
9
900D•
17.1
16
17
18
19
frown I tan I hurt CS
20
13
2500
21A
1092
stiff
21
22
23
24
_
CLAYEY SAND 8 GRAVEL (SCW)
33
2000
17.3
br Igrey I rust, dense
SS
25
Continued on Sheet 2 of 2
eartn engineering consultants, LLc
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-1
SHEET 2 OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE; CMFS
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: OG
START DATE
11125M14
WHILE DRILLING
21'
AUGER TYPE: 4- CFA
FINISH DATE
1112512014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
■
Du
w
oo
naDDra
aao
swat
LL
R
P10=55IWE
S SOC PfF
T1PE
lFt£Flmmnwn
{SFI
I%1
NFf.F)
(�)
Cowed bm Shred 1 of 2
26
CLAYEY SAND & GRAVEL (SC/GP)
_
br / am I nM
27
28
CIAYSTONE I SILTSTONE I SANDSTONE
br I gmy I rus
hard
29
CS
30
5018"
9000•
16.9
113.5
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 30-U
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 82
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11252014
WHILE DRILLING
Nate
AUGER TYPE: 4- CFA
FINISH DATE
11252014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA,
SPT KAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
o
■
au
w
oo
wamrs
-zao
awaL
LL
I PI
PRESSURE
% SOD PSF
TYPE
WEE.,
OLO.Wn
"F)
1%1
(PCF)
I%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
bm
2
stiff to very stiff
-3-
with fakar¢aus deposft
_4
[Cs
5
19
9000•
9.6
107.1
41
27
79.1
2,500 psf
2.9%
6
_7_
8
_9
brown / red ['s
10
10
9000•
99
11
12
13
14
brown / / nal CS
15
32
9000
125
1205
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.(r
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Eartn r=n jinB@11n9 COHSUItants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING BJ
SHEET I OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
111252014
WHILE DRILLING
16,
AUGER TYPE: r CFA
FINISH DATE
11/2512014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
u
N
Ou
t
no
moors
-mo
s1Fal
u
R
PRESSIDIE
% b MF
i1FE
wEEn
mLowwo
WsF)
In)
(PCF1
1%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
Worm
2
very stiffen stiff
with cakareous deposBs
3
_4
FCS
5
19
9000•
7.7
1173
81000 Psf
6.7%
6
_7
8
_9
Fss
10
11
14
900D-
83
CLAYEY SAID wdh GRAVEL (SC)
red
12
medaun-dense
— —
13
14
ECS
15
14
7500
6.0
1183
16
17
18
19
20
SANDY L EM CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAID (CL) SS
9
3500
24.8
brown Itan Igrey
_ _
stiff tD nmcbm stilt
21
22
23
z4
br IgreyIrust
6
5W
19.3
111.7
CS
25
Contmod m Stwel2 of 2
earmn Inngmeenng uonsunanls, LI.0
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094 LOG OF BORING B3 DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 2 OF WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG START DATE I II2wn14 WHILE DRILLING I IF
AUGER TYPE: V CFA FINISH DATE 11252014 !AFTER DRILLING WA
SPT HAEBAER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV NIA 24 HOUR WA
XAL Ut31lWY IIUN
Tyre
e
�T
C rdnod Iran Shed / of 2
26
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY Wdh SAPID (CL)
27
broom I cgmy I rust
28
29
CIAYSTONE I SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE
brown / tyey I rust
SS
30
weatlmed.
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 30.9
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
■ I Ge I ■C I w
-zoo
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-4
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMFSS
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
1125/2014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
11252014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
N
UU
w
oo
wamrs
,tss
sYFEi1
u
R
PRESSURE
% S MF
;;W
fffft/
IhLLMSRT)
(PSn
0n
1
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
hhosm
2
very stiff to stiff with depth
with talc u deposits
3
4
CS
5
17
9000•
93
107.1
1,100 psi
12%
6
7
s
9
ESS
10
15
900W
9.8
11
12
13
14
CS
15
10
9000•
17.4
108.4
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.(Y
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
earn tnglneenng aonsunants, J.J.a
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING BS
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
112SM14
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4- CFA
FINISH DATE
11125M14
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
N
QU
w
Do
0.1DQfs
-244
Swat
LL
R
PRESSURE
% S MF
TYPE
WEM
(SLOwi "
WSF1
RI
91
(%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAID (CL)
-2-
txO
stiff mvery s59
_ _
% 1WPSF
13
9000+
11A
111A
3,5D0
4.5%
with deposes CS
3
4
Ess
5
9
9000
122
6
_7_
8
_9
CS
10
30
900D•
12.5
120.7
11
12
13
14
SS
15
16
8
4000
19.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH ISE
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 Bb
SHEET 1 OF i
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11R512014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
111252014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
n
■
oU
me
w
wt.oms
aao
suh3�
LL
W
PRESSImE
f 500 VSF
;;
(Fffll
m mnwn
vsF1
04
^F)
(x)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY wdh SAND (CL)
brown
2
stiff to with depth
with falw deposits
3
_4_
ECS
5
14
9000•
11.2
106.3
6
_7
8
_9
ESS
10
16
9000+
9.7
11
12
13
14
(:S
15
5
2500
18.4
107A
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.9
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
eartn engineering consumants, LLc
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-7
SHEET IOF2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CUE55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11252014
WHILE DRILLING
16S
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
11252014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
N
RU
■c
m
aamrs
.xo
sWa�
U
m
PRESSURE
% M PSF
TPPE
(FEET)
pllGWWr/
MSF)
(%)
(PCF)
1%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown I tan
2
Stiff t0 Mdu DIM m soft with depth
E
_ _
10
9000-
11.8
1082
3
_4_
Ess
5
11
9000•
11.9
6
7
8
9
_ _
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC)
L.10
32
900M
10.0
1 115.8
31
19
45.8
1,3W pet
1.1%
red
dense
11
12
13
14
_ _
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
7
3000
21.0
brown SS
15
rrcdmrF 0 to soft war depth
_ _
16
17
18
19
lS
20
3
500
23.6
105.3
21
22
23
24
CIAYSTONE I SLLTSTONE
browar I gw I ntd I ohm
_ _
28
8500
22.5
Wft weathered, nndwidely hard to hard SS
25
Continued m Sheet 2 of 2
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLG
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-7
SHEET 2 OF
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: OG
START DATE
11252014
WHILE ORILIMG
16S
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
112SM14
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
N
ou
w
oo
n
s
-zoo
swtiL
LL
m
PnESSURE
I WPSF
T1TE
(FFM
(BLMWM
(PSF)
(PCF)
Ixl
Conmsred km Sheet 1 of 2
26
CLAYSTONE I SILTSTONE _
27
brown I grey I rust I olive
highly weathered
28
bard
29
CS
30
50IV
99000•
17.7
113.E
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 30-W
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: DG
START DATE
11f252014
WHILE DRILLING
1T
AUGER TYPE: 4- CFA
FINISH DATE
1125M14
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
R
cU
rc
m
wamrs
sw
swELL
LL
n
PRESSURE
% MMF
T*PE
Rgn
Mowwn
msn
1%1
PTn
fxl
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY wdh SAND (a)
1
lxo Itan
_
StifitDIM&M, S08
2
with traces of Tavel
3
_4
EcL
5
11
9000•
10.3
108-5
6
_7
8
_9
Ess
10
6
9000•
9.6
11
12
13
14
Mown Ecs
15
6
500
22.9
103A
16
17
18
19
Ivown I yey I nut SS
20
13
2000
20.7
wdh W panel leans
_ _
21
22
23
24
CS
25
16
C nbmmd m Sheet 2 of 2
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-0
SHEET 2OF2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11125rA14
WHILE DRILLING
1T
AUGER TYPE: r CFA
FINISH DATE
1112512014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
o
R
Ou
11c
oo
A1mrs
ass
5w
LL
Pr
PRESSURE
% SOS PSF
iTPE
VF Tt
MLOWWM
IPSFI
(w
1
Conhoued from Sheet i of 2
26
27
CLAYSTONE I SILTSTONE
b=m / grey I rust
moderately had
28
29
Fss
30
31
46
9000•
18.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 30.9
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 89
SHEET 1 OF f
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11252014
WHILE DRILLING
Nana
AUGER TYPE: C CFA
FINISH DATE
11252014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
■
w
■c
w
na.oms
,xao
Sw
LL
%
PnESSUNE
% 300 PSF
FT;w
WEEn
mmum
ww)
PN
olcn
I%)
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
frown
I
stiff
_
2
with mft u deposft
[Cs
_ _
11
9000•
11.1
115.1
3
_4_
Ess
5
9
9000•
11A
6
_8
_9
10
CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL (SC) CS
20
9000•
5.1
1205
25
13
39.1
900 psf
0.5%
and
mednunde
it
12
13
14
_ _
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
9
6000
18.6
Lwwn
SS
15
sli8
16
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.9
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Eartn Engineenng consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING 1310
SHEET 1 OF 2
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
1125Q014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
11252014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
MIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
n
ou
me
DD
warors
- m
arnsi
LL
PI
PRESSURE
a S00 PSF
;;w
tFEEiI
NB�DWSIFi)
NPS
I*a
Wcfl
(%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY wdh SAND (CL)
down
2
stiff to wry stiff
with donous deposi6
3
_4
[Cs
5
13
9000
10.5
110A
45
30
84.6
4,000 psl
4.0%
6
_7
8
_9
brown Itan Ess
10
24
9000•
8.5
11
12
13
14
brown
CS
15
22
9000•
10.6
121.4
16
17
18
19
frown I grey I rust SS
20
11
4500
22.5
ithtes whaof mesa sad
_ _
21
22
23
24
CIAYSTONEISILTSTONE
28
9000•
19.5
109.8
brown I grey I rust, soft to moderately had (S
25
Continted on Sheet 2 of 2
earn engineering cODSUR81nT5, LLG
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING 13-10
SHEET 2 OF
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11/25/2014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: C CFA
FLUSH DATE
1112512014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
M
w
rc
DD
n s
-200
SYrBI
LL
m
PIES E
Y 600 MF
TTPE
IFEEf)
msn
11H
PK' l
M1I
Cordnied from Sheet 1 D7 2
26
_m==L
CLAYSTONE/ SILTSTONE I SANDSTONE
27
brown I grey I naL noder2iely hard
28
29
Fss
30
31
2014-
9000•
15.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 3D.5'
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLG
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-11
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11262014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE -
1126F1014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
M
ou
rc
m
wa.00rs
aao
5w
u
Ph
PRESSURE
x 500PSF
TYFE
(FEET)
WMMWq
"9
(x)
(PCF)
(x)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
_1_
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
bh
2
way Sidi
_ _
x ISO MF
30
9000•
112
114A
-11,500
10.8%
with F2I�IeOIA dew CS
3
4
Ess
5
19
9000•
99
6
_7
_8
_9
[SS
10
11
23
9000
9.1
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 109
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: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-12
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMES5
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11262010
WHILE DRILLING
Noce
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
11260014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
%
Qu
we
DD
w s
aw
awELL
LL
R
PnESSURE
• 500 PSF
TYPE
(FEm
mwwwn
wsn
1%)
MCF)
(%)
TOPSOIL 8 VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAID (CL)
brown
2
stiff
with ralpre depDsas
3
_4_
C s
5
11
9000-
10.6
112.6
3,000 psl
33%
6
7
8
_9
Ess
10
9
9000•
93
11
12
13
14
cs
15
8
3000
18.5
106.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.(r
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Earth Engineering COnSURantS, 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: CMES
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11R60014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4- CFA
FLUSH DATE
111262014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
N/A
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
■
DU
w
END
a{wDrs
LL I
R
PREfE1D1E
% S00 PfF
TYPE
(FEM
ML=Wn
(PS.)
1%1
wm
1%)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY wdh SAND (CL)
brown
2
stiff
% uo PSF
10
9000•
11.1
1093
40
23
77.5
7,000 Pat
10.4%
with calcareousdeposRs CS
3
_4
ESS
5
13
9000•
10.0
6
7
8
_9
with gravels
_ _
15
9000•
9.0
Fss
10
II
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.s
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: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-14
SHEET I OF I
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11262014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: r CFA
FINISH DATE
11262014
AFTER DRILLING
WA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
N
Ou
m
w
MAM
am
svFai
LL
m
PRESSURE
w WQMF
;;
AFffn
M
04
0n
I%)
TOPSOIL 8 VEGETATION
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
brown
2
Stiff to wary Stiff
with ralweous deposi s
3
4
[Cs
5
13
900M
11.8
111.1
3.2M pal
3.1%
6
_7
8
_9
Ess
10
23
9000•
8.0
i1
12'
13
14
OS
15
11
8500
17.4
111.3
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.9
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
earm EO9111eeT109 GOOSuITffiTTS, LLG
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-15
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CMES5
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11262014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FLASH DATE
11262014
AFTER DRILLING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
NIA
24 HOUR
NIA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
o
■
oU
rc
m
namrs
aoo
ey"al
LL
n
PRESSURE
% 000 PSF
TTPE
R>£TI
Pu TI
(PSF)
(%)
(PCF)
1%)
TOPSOILS VEGETATION
1
LEAN CLAY wdh SAND (CL)
_
brown
2
Very stiff t0 nw m-5b8 with depth
[Gs
_
% 150 PSF
18
9000.
10.7
104.8
41
24
82.0
4,000 psf 1
7.3%
with ralfareous a trams of Taw
3
4
[SIS
5
14
9000•
8.6
6
—7
8
_9
brown I tan Fss
10
11
7
9000•
99
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.9
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: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-16
SHEET I OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
112612014
WHILE DRILLING
None
AUGER TYPE: 4' CFA
FINISH DATE
1126M14
AFTER ORD-LING
NIA
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
SURFACE ELEV
WA
24 HOUR
WA
SOIL DESCRIPTION
u
R
aU
me
00
nlmri
sPo
SNHl
LL
Pn
PRESUME
a MPSF
IYPE
vmn
MLOWWn
MSFl
M
04w)
M
SANDY LEAN CLAY / LEAN CLAY wdh SAND (CL) - FILL
1
dark brown/grey/not
Stiff to very stiff
2
3
13
9000•
2A
SS
_4_
brown/not
5
18
9000•
12.9
SS
_ _
6
7
8
_9
10
LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL) CS
brown
14
9000•
15.8
1 1167
41
25
86.4
25M PSI
0.9%
stiff to very stiff
11
with artraremrs deposits
12
13
14
brown/tarn
15
9000•
13.3
SS
F
15
16
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.9
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
s
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO: 1142094
LOG OF BORING B-17
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: DECEMBER 2014
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
11252014
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
■
ouith
h�
oo
a s
am
swat
u
W
Pfd:sSUIM
% 500 PSF
TTFE
1Fa11
Ie�owshF9
WSF)
(%)
v-cn
I%)
TOPSOIL&VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY I LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL)
bhown
2
wny stAi m Saft to M&M Sti8
_ _
19
9000•
10.6
113.7
wmft o deposits & traces of coarse sand CS
3
_4
with sandy seams Ess
5
2
9000•
11.6
6
7
8
_9
Fss
10
11
7
7500
12.7
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 10.9
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
eartn engineering consultants, LLc
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown, Reddish Sandy Lean Gay (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 1, Sample 3, Depth 9'
Liquid Limit: 35
JPlasticity 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
y
4.0
2.0
c
m
E
m
2 0.0
c
m
B
a -2.0
water
Added
-4.0
0
-6.0
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load ��
Project.
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project M.
1142094
Date:
December 2014
E
EC
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 2, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: 41
JPlasticity Index: 27
% Passing #200: 79.1%
Beginning Moisture: 9.6%
JDry Density: 101.9 pc
JEnding Moisture: 22.7%
Swell Pressure: 2500 psf
% Swell @ 500: 2.9%
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
c
m
E
m
2
0.0
c
C
m
a _2 0
Water
Added
-4.0
0
M
�4
W
-6.0
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (7'SF)
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 3, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit - -
IPlasticity Index: - -
% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 7.7%
JDry Density: 117.9 pcf
I Ending Moisture:
Swell Pressure: 8000 psf
% Swell @ 500: 6.7%
10.0
8.0
6.0
y
4.0
2.0
c
m
E
m
2
0.0'-T
c
m
B
a. -2 0
Water
Added
4.0
0
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSB
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 4, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit - -
Plasticity Index - -
% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 9.3%
JDry Density: 94.9 pcf
IlEnding Moisture: 26.4%
Swell Pressure: 1100 psf
% Swell @ 500: 1.2%
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
r 2.0
C
m
E
m
a
0.0
c
m
7�
V
>r
m
a
-2.0
Water
Added
-4.0
0
Y
-6.0
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load ��
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
EEC,
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Gay / Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 5, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit - -
IPlasticity Index: - -
% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 11.4%
lbry Density: 111.4 pcf
IlEnding Moisture: 18.0%
Swell Pressure: 3500 psf
% Swell @ 150: 4.5%
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
c
m
E
m
0.0
M
C
m
o_
Water
Added
-2.0
-4.0
0
Y
-6.0
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSF)
Project: Affinity of Fort Collins
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado
Project M. 1142094
Date: December 2014
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown, Red Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC)
Sample Location: Boring 7, Sample 3, Depth 9'
Liquid Limit: 31
Plasticity Index: 19
% Passing #200: 45.8%
Beginning Moisture: 10.0%
Dry Density: 115.8 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 14.1 %
Swell Pressure: 1300 psf
% Swell @ 500: 1.1%
10.0
8.0
6.0
ca
4.0
2.0
e
0
E
m
0.0
c
m
E�
m
a
-2.0
Water
Added
-4.0
0
M
^z
W
-6.0
-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
EEC
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Red Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC)
Sample Location: Boring 9, Sample 3, Depth 9'
Liquid Limit: 25
Plasticity Index: 13
°k Passing #200: 39.1%
Beginning Moisture: 5.1%
Dry Density: 115.7 pcf
IlEnding Moisture: 13.8%
Swell Pressure: 900 psf
% Swell @ 500: 0.5%
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
e
m
E
m
0.0
c
m
B
o
-2 0
Water
Added
-4.0
0
-6.0
-8.0
-10.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSB
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 10, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit: 45
JPlasticity Index: 30
% Passing #200: 84.6%
Beginning Moisture: 10.5%
JDry Density: 107.7 pct
JEnding Moisture: 22.2%
Swell Pressure: 4000 psf
% Swell @ 500: 4.0%
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
c
0
E
m
0.0
c
m
m
a
-2.0
Water
Added
-4.0
0
-6.0
-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
EIE]
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay / Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: _Boring 11, Sample 1, Depth Z
Liquid Limit - -
Plastiaty Index: - -
% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 11.2%
JDry Density: 117 pct
JEnding Moisture: 19.2%
Swell Pressure:-10,000 psf
% Swell @ 150: 10.8%
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
C
m
E
m
2
2.0
c
C
m
tr
m
a
0.0
Water
Added
-2.0
0
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (MF)
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project P.
1142094
Date:
December 2014
rEEC
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
y
6.0
4.0
c
m
E
m
2.0
M
C
m
d
0.0
2,0
Water
Added
0
Y
-4.0
-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 Lean Clay with Sand (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 13, Sample 1, Depth 2'
Liquid Limit: 40
JPIasticity Index: 23
% Passing #200: 77.5%
Beginning Moisture: 11.1%
Dry Density: 111.5 pcf
JEnding Moisture: 19.1%
Swell Pressure: 7000 psf
% Swell @ 150: 10.4%
12.0
10.0
8.0
y
6.0
4.0
m
E
m
2
2.0
C
c
m
m
a
0.0
Water
Added
-2.0
a
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (MF)
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 14, Sample 1, Depth 4'
Liquid Limit - -
Plasticity Index: - -
% Passing #200: - -
Beginning Moisture: 11.8%
JDry Density: 100.3 pct
JEnding Moisture: 22.5%
Swell Pressure: 3200 psf
% Swell @ 500: 3.1 %
12.0
10.0
8.0
y
6.0
4.0
c
m
E
m
2.0
«
C
L
a
0.0
Water Added
-2.0
0
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load ��
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
1131asticity Index: 24
% Passing #200: 82.0%
Beginning Moisture: 10.7%
JDry Density: 104.6 pct
JEnding Moisture: 23.0%
Swell Pressure: 4000 psf
% Swell @ 150: 7.3%
12.0
10.0
8.0
Co
6.0
4.0
c
0
E
2.0
r
C
G
m
a
0.0
Water
Added
-2.0
0
a
r�
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Loads
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
'
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Gay (CL)
Sample Location: Boring 16, Sample 3, Depth 9'
Liquid Limit: 41
JPlasticity Index: 25
% 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
N
6.0
4.0
c
m
E
m
i
2.0
C
c
m
m
IL
0.0
_2
Water
Added
0
Y
-6.0
-8.0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Load (TSB
Project:
Affinity of Fort Collins
Location:
Fort Collins, Colorado
Project #:
1142094
Date:
December 2014
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 I/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 mm)
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:
133, S3, 14
Sample Desc.:
Red Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC)
Date:
December 2014
Finer by Weight (%)
m
9"
T
CD
S' o S 8 8
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
13-1
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
S-2
4'
260
0.03
6
B-17
S-1
2'
230
0.02
June 10, 2015
Inland Group
1620 North Mamer Road, Building B
Spokane, Washington 99203
Attn: Mr. Mark Ossello (marko6bWandconstruction.com)
Re: Subsurface Exploration Report — Addendum No. 2
Proposed Affinity at Fort Collins Apartments
2600 East Harmony Road
Fort Collins, Colorado
EEC Project No. 1142094
Mr. Ossello:
40
EARTH ENGINEERING
CONSULTANTS, LLC
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 fiuther 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
Fmm Engineering Consult, u.0
EEC Project No. 1142094
June 10, 2015
Page 2
The borings were completed using a truck mounted, CUE-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
EEC Project No. 1142094
June 10, 2015
Page 3
Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC '
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 stormwater 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,
onsultants, LLC
David A. Richer, P.E.
Senior Project Engineer
1 W r w
OI`
O�
,r 3AAla My _
ua 1136
Q a co N OD
z
w
! /
< ar u
1 I ' PV I I
aw
I
1 �C
V y V
I� N I w
N
Z% N O c
�~ k' CZx
- Q
8 O O
U
3 O L vi O
- s U w C fV
I u
3
—
Q O
V
',. 9
Q
O
QJ
1_
U
LL
-
-
s
LV
1
r
le
�
I
3
r
O
I-
X
U-
I
O* C
C
7
c
tiO
Q l7 w s
rvl l7
l�
p
c
114_F 1
1
I I I ! -
--- -- —
I
m p
a m
Ya
tj�
l7
y
co G
U >
-
_—
—
}
18
:3 EcEcvCc
C w
X 0 X 0 L/ � O C L' Qi
rna� m s mm my s r.�sr_ xn s -man un s —�. L E O 's+ O 's>+ 'Gj; $ sistt
7 1 a �a Qw Q Wu7U 02 Z2� �z°
AFFINITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
PROJECT NO. 1142094
LOG OF BORING PZ-1
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: JUNE 2015
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
61112015
WHILE DRILLING
15
AUGER TYPE: r CFA
FINISH DATE
61112015
24 HOUR
15.6
SPT HAMMER: AUrOMATX
APPROX
SURFACE ELEV
97.6
When Checked 64-15
15.5
SOIL DESCRIPTION
D
N
DU
■C
m
wiRDrs
2os
Surat
LL
N
PRESSURE
f Sro PSF
TYPE
mun
mwwwn
vsq
PH
MCFI
Irr
TOPSOIL a VEGETATION
1
LEAN CLAY (CL)
_
mown
2
MY SIR W StiI
with caMareas deposrfs
3
4
ESS
5
8
9000•
11.3
37
21
86.5
6
7
8
_9
Ess
10
15
9000•
11A
17
12
13
14
b�/tan
6
3000
20.5
SS-
15
16
17
18
19
_
SILTY CLAYEY SAND (SMISC)
7
22.6
Norm
lase
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 PZ2
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: JUNE 2015
RIG TYPE: CUE55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
611IM5
WHILE DRILLING
155
AUGER TYPE: 4" CFA
FINISH DATE
6112015
24 HOUR
15Z
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
APPROR.
SURFACE ELEV
96.3
When Checked 6-8-15
15.0'
SOIL DESCRIPTION
o
N
qU
Yc
On
naams
-t00
SwEtL
LL
m
PhsFsawes
Y soo PSF
SrPE
IFffil
mowsffn
WSFI
04
(PcF)
M1I
TOPSOIL a VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)
frown
2
very stiff 1a SIM
with cal o dwasils
3
_4_
Ess
5
7
900M
10.8
6
_7
8
_9
with traces of gavel
_ _
5
9000•
10.4
35
20
62.9
SS
10
11
12
13
14
Ess
15
6
3500
20.8
16
17
18
19
_
LEAN CLAY (CL)
5011-
—
12.6
with gavel I rock seams
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 PZ3
SHEET 1 OF i
DATE: JUNE 2015
RIG TYPE: CME55
WATER DEPTH
FOREMAN: DG
START DATE
611R015
WHILE DRILLING
16.0'
AUGER TYPE: 4- CFA
FLASH DATE
6112015
24 HOUR
15.0'
SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC
APPROX.
SURFACE ELEV
97.5
When Checked 64-15
14.6'
SOIL DESCRIPTION
0
■
0u
rc
00
wa0ars
aw
arrELL
LL
R
PNESEIINE
Y SM MF
TTPE
R7�T)
MLMMFn
WSF)
IY)
VP n
(Y)
TOPSOIL & VEGETATION
1
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)
bmw
2
very sb f In stiff
with bus deposits
3
_4
ESS
5
10
7000
10.7
6
_7
8
_9
Ess
10
5
9000•
11.1
11
12
13
14
FSS
15
6
3000
19.6
16
17
18
19
•dass£ed as LEAN CLAY (CL) SS
20
15
8000
192
45
30
90
21
22
23
24
SS
25
22
17.6
BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5
Earth Engin2enn9 Consultants, LLG
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 of the
ditch and off -site flows enters the ditch through an 18-inch culvert from an irrigation ditch
that runs 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 runoff 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 runs 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 comer 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.
CZ 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
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
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 runoff which is discharged through
�,UIV�UL wiuc. c.ivgici i.Vnu. My iVuuug Lne vusue nows uuougn rona U In rnis 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 ModSWMM 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 Fare 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 1
Front Range Village
' City of Fort Collins Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study
'iCopies 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
iThe 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 .. access..to-the.HP_.drainage channel..-..
lb ut having to reconstnict Ziegler Road- ,The future development to the North of the_1
Front Range Village wi�"11 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 t e site is 20.1 cfs.
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:
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
ME
11111n
U
Z
w
N
5
a
o
w
a
<
U
� Q
s
C
0 v�i
a
FE.'IIASl2I
100% PLANS
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
:amrxy M7
F..iNt M.Me'181010251
sM AG
Dm vf& C-152
RwYM 4M
LEGEND
MODSWMM BASIN BOUNDARY
1
D1 DIVERSION
®
PIPE / CHANNEL
103
BASIN
104
DETENTION POND
A
DIRECT FLOW NODE 1
/
DESIGN POINT
I
D�C NOTE: RUNOFF FROM THE HARMONY
COMMUNITY IS ROUTED THROUGH POND D
AND WILL OVERFLOW INTO BASIN 296.
3'
302
F 74
I
07
N
302
rARMONY
COM�dUNiTV
(M LE HOME PARK)
"
—
3
301
I oP oo
a
oe mom
301 HARMONY COMMUNITY m e
(MOBILE HOME PARK)— P FRONT,
D DD D
300 D D
' D D
0 D
HARMONY COMMUNITY I
3300 (MOBILE HOME PARK) D D D D
le dNt19Fa41^«-!ili^!0
k
ENGLISH RANCH POND 97
UNDEVELOPED LAND
C POND B � T
INADVERTENT
DETENTION
�_
I
--
A=
i
•
HARMONY ROAD
22
o � .DD epo
a
I
HP CAMPUS
(AVAGO)
City of Fort Collins. Colorado
UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL
TRIES[ PLANS HAVE KEN REVIE'NED By THE
LOCAL ENTITY FOR CONCEPT ONLY. THE
AFPRGVEO
REVIEW DOES NOT AWLY RESPDN61BARY In
City E"~ le
THE REVEIWNG DEPARTMEW. THE LOCAL
CHECKED BY'
EMPTY ENGINEER, OR THE LOCAL ENTITY FOR
WOW ! YIRNR.PI.F UIK, Date
ACCUPA^ AND CORRECTNESS of THE
CALQAAnONS. FURTHERMORE. THE REVIEW
CHECKED BF:
DOES HOT WPLr THAT DuwTRES OF REWS
Sbnm,aW UUYty �U
ON THE PLANS ARE ME FINAL OIANTRIES
CHECKED BY:
REQUIRED. THE REVEW SHALL NOT BE
PoM k RAenPDPA Do1R
CONSTRUED IN MY REASON AS ACCEPTANCE
OF nNMOCLIL RESPONSANEfN BY THE LOCAL
CHECKED BY'
T.Wmc EWBGNKY p
ENTITY FOR ACOTICKAL ouAmES OF HEMS
SHOWN THAT UAY BE REOIARED OURPNG THE
CHECKED Br:
CONSIRUCMN PHASE.
I
I I
2
W
g
"c
z
>
w
g=
CJ 0
iQ
3
QS
gr
U_
b
U3
PNNAlISNO
1DD% PLANS
NOT FOR CONSMR T.CN
J...n M07
q.Hp H .
F► we c-Ia NN.
DUARIp RE C•153
9_Yelm- l m
0 29 of
APPENDIX F - LID EXHIBITS
' J•R ENGINEERING
II Design Procedure Form: Grass Swale (GS) '
Sheet 1 of f
Designer'. BAB
Company: JR Engineering
Date: January 21, 2016
Project: Affinity For: Collins
Location: Bio-Swale 01
1 Design Discharge for 2-Year Return Period
02 =
070
cis
2 Hydradlc Resdence Time
A) Length of Grass Swale
Ls =
2750
II
B) CakiYated Residence Tune (based on design velocity below)
T„„=
9.1
mndes
3 Lorlgiltxhnal Slope (vertical distance per unit horizontal)
A) Available Slope (based on site constraints)
S,,,,, =
0 005
f / it
B) Design Slope
So =
0 003
R / ff
4 Swale Geometry
A) Channel Side Slopes (Z = 4 mn , tiaradistance per unit vertical)
Z =
400
It / it
B) Bottom Width of Swale (enter 0 for triangular sectrpn)
W. =
0 W
It
Dhp One
5. Vegetation
A) Type of Planing (seed vs sod, affects vegetal retardance factor)
'Oil Grass From Seed
� , Gass From Sod
6 Design Velocity (0 917 It / s maximum for desirable 5-minute residence trine)
V, =
ObO
fl / s
7 Design Flow Depth (1 fool ma,urrxan)
D_ =
0,59
it
A) Flow Area
A2=
1A
sqn
B) Tap Width of Swale
W T =
4.7
It
C) Fo de Ntanber (0.50 malamlan)
r =
0.16
D) Hydraulic Radius
RN =
029
E) Velocrty-Hydraulic Radius Product for Vegetal Relanfance
VR =
0.14
F) Mannig's n (based on SCS vegetal retanlance curve E for seeded grass)
n =
0 071
G) Cumulatrw Heejrt of trade Gor ind Struclhres Requred
Ho =
060
it
_ choose One
AN iJ'NDf R1rRAIN IS
8 Undenlrain
Rf(JUIRL06 THE
(is an urderdrain necessary?)
0 YES
�_ NO
DE SIGN SLOPE - 20%
9 Sod Preparabon
(Describe sal amendment)
10. Irrigation
r
_. Temporary
'_.
Permanent
Nines
3970400 UD-BMP v3 03- Bo -Swale Al dsm, GS 1/212016, 9.13 AM
a
I Design Procedure Form: Grass Swale (GS)
Designer: BAB
Company:
JR Engineering
Dab:
January 21, 2016
Project:
Afriniry, Fort Collins
Location:
Bio-Swale 92
1. Design Discharge for 2-Year Return Period
oz =
050
cis
2. Hydraulic Residence Time
A) -. Length of Grass Swale
L, =
6800
ft
8) Calculated Residence Time (based on design velocity below)
T,
26.5
minutes
3 Longitudinal Slope (vertical distance pet unit horizontal)
A) Available Slope (based on site constraints)
S,,,,, =
0 004
ft / ft
B) Design Slope
Sp =
0 003
ft / ft
4 Swale GGeanetry
A) Channel Side Slopes (Z = 4 min, hart distance per unit vertical)
Z =
4.00
ft / ft
B) Bottom Width of Swale (enter 0 lot triangular section)
W e =
000
it
0 o Ore
5 Vegetabon
A) Type of Planing (seed vs sod, affects vegetal retardance faclor)
Grass From Seed
C) Grass From Sod
6 Design Velocity (1 ft / s maiumemi)
V, =
0.43
ft / s
7. Design Flow Depth (1 foot rts a nnum)
Dz =
0.54
it
A) Flaw Area
Ai =
12
sq If
B) Top Width of Swale
Wr =
4.3
it
C) Froude Number (0 50 ma imum)
F =
0.15
0) Hydraulic Radius
R.
0.26
E) Velocity -Hydraulic Radius Product for Vegetal Retardance
VR =
0.11
F) farming's n (based on SCS vegetal retardance curve E for seeded grass)
It =
0 077
G) Cumulative Height of Grade Control Structures Requited
Ho =
0.70
it
❑apse One
AN UNDERDRAIN I5
8. Underdmin
(is an underdram necessary?)
YES
_- NO
REQUIRED IF THE
DESIGN SLOPE <2.0.4
9 Sal Preparation
(Descnbe sal amendment)
10. Inigailm
_, Temporary
Q pennant
notes
3970400 UD-8MP v3 03- Bo -Swale !l2 Asm, GS 1 /21/2016, 9 15 AM
Design Procedure Form: Sand Filter (SF)
Designer:
JMF
Company:
JR Engineering
Date:
Jurre 14. 2016
project
Affinity Fart ollins
Location:
Sand Filter pond B
I Basin Slorage Volume
A) Effacuve Irepervousness of Tnhutary Area, I,
I, =
61.6
%
(100% if all paved and roofed areas upstream of sad filler)
B)Tnhufary Area s Impervuusness Ratio (i=IJ100)
=
0616
C) Water Duality Capture Volume (WOCV) Based on 12,horr Dram Time
WOCV =
0.22
watershed macs
WQCV=0.9'(0.91', 1.19-fa 078-t
D) Contritan" Watershed Area (including sand filler area)
Areai =
154,401
sq ft
E) Water Duality Capture Volume (WQCV) Design Vdrne
Vwow =
2,798
cu it
Vwo, = WOCV (12 - Area
F) For Watersheds Outside of the Denver Region, Depth of
de =
0.82
in
Avenge Runoff Produnrg Storm
G) For Watersheds Outsde of the Denver Region.
V.e cree, =
5,336
cu 0
Wales Quality Capture Vol me (WOCV) Design Volume
H) User Input of Water Quarry Capture Voume (WDCV) Design Volume
V.r "E. =
cur 0
(Drily it a different WOCV Din ge Volume Is desired)
2. Basin Geometry
A)WOCV Depth
Dwacv=
30
0
B) Sand Filter Side Slopes (Horizontal distance per and vertical.
Z =
000
1t 18
4 1 or fla8er preferred) Use "0' d sand liter has vertical walls
C) Mhmhmum Filter Area (Flat Surface Area)
Ara, =
1186
sq ft
D) Actual Filter Area
Ar ue =
sq 0
E) Vohrne Provided
Vr =
cu ft
3 Filter Material
Q lW oDOT pass C Rlter Matenai
Other (hptan):
a Undeneran Syslem
Chose One
'
mr,
A) Ane und.d,as uMedv
Q NO
B) Un lendsm m , systeonfice dumater for 12 tad ,urn hme
i) Distance From Lowest Elevator; of the Storage
y =
Z0
8
Volume to the Center of do Ord¢e
n) Volume to Drat In 12 Hours
Vo1p =
5,336
cu It
III) Office Dumeter, 3I8- Minimum
Do =
1 -518
1 3970400 UD BMP v3 03- Sand Fitter dsm, SF GM4r2016, 4 12 PM
Design Procedure Form: Sand Filter (SF)
Designer JMF
Company: JR Entilneeitog
Date: June 14, 2016
Prolecr Affinity Fort offim
f. ncaiiore Sond Filter Pond B
QIOp➢e one
Impermeable Geomembrann Liner and Geolexlde Separator Febre
A) Is an mpermeable Imer pmnded due In proAmdy
YES O No
of stnatrrres or grotxrxl, r conl iromtronv
PROVIDE A W ML (lWl PVC GEOIEIIDRAME PER TABLE
SF• WRH SEPARATOR FABRIC IPER TABLE SF-3) ABOVE 11.
PROVIDE SEPARATOR FABRIC BELOW THE GEOMEIMBMNI.
AS VELL F SUBGRADE IS AMGULAR OR COULD OTHFRVI(St
PINICfINE THE GEOW IIIII
b I Inlet I pullet Works
A) Descnbe the type of erwgv dasipaeon it islet ponts and means of
ccmev,ng flaws n excess of Me WOCV through the outlet
Notes
397D400 UD-BMP v3 03 Sand Filler alsm, SF 61140016, 4 12 PM 1
APPENDIX G - DRAINAGE PLANS
1
' J•R ENGINEERING
No Text
EXISTING DRAINAGE ANALYSIS
IIHI
' r ' /'� ✓ ' S`F%---_ -- -- ' . Jj�II 11 ■ / \ \\ . ------ -- - -- _
_A\ 1ir ■ i J - _--' _"-- y __ ` /--- "_- \ % -� \\ • 11 ! I ('/ I I\ \ `l �'
f IT
:�ll 1 ■ __ �_-�_\ -\ /'__\ - -11
/ - ------ --------- --- _ Q -` \ �■, " ENGLISH RANCH'
_
� __ r" ■ �` �' `� SUBDIVISION 5i\ it _ ' i ��\._ � ____ _—____ �
' ` ' ' I \_ \_ ♦ II \ 1 I /' CP 1- PgNT FLOW I \•
_�-! -- / �. / ,^\ \. / \ ♦♦� 1� 1 2m ROW - 27 USI
�_-'' r''•' i i i \ \ ♦�♦ `_- I\ �\ \ - ,aom ROW - zzG z s
'IN
r i � �' ] �`.i ♦♦♦ / /' 'II it \\ `\'' \ - \`. �+,�g9 -�' II
` � t_ \ ---i ;_ ♦♦♦ / — J \ \ 11 I II _-` \ r3 sl �» \ ♦♦♦++ \`\ 0 Q
__ d \ a _ dl 1 N. `\ Fx sHEEr now ♦♦♦♦ \ z
�\ ■ o . ��\ �/ I 1 \ \ 2M FLOW-0.7 US \ p -.
`\ - • I / l II 1 \ \ 1WWi now. uG OF s �+ { DP z- SHEET aow \
yp. GET SHEET FLOW \ \ •� Gyi BASS E%2
1 2Y a0W - 1.0 US \2VR ROW 0,5 US
/ \ \ /■ ,__� 100m a0w-zar US \ �`\ \ �+ \ \ 4 loom aow - ns cFs
1Wm 1Y CMP CAPTURED- ia3 OFFS III \_ `� ` \ ♦♦1 �`\ \ \
AFFINITY PROPERTY
_, / / r--J ♦♦ •'�^"\\ !--i i /`
jam' i/ Q r ♦♦♦ ill \I r I \\.. �i �_ \\ `\. \ `I ♦1♦♦� \n --�_/
IN
` . ♦ X/ or v IAaHF c coR D \
' % / % ' \ ♦ 1 I I 1 `r I � \� I \ I \ 1_ \`—� ` '' .4].08 t00m �W GA 6.2 CFS 3 p \
` �♦ HARMONY -' \ - / 1 \,-`_ 5, \, ?
'i MOBILE HOME i N. ) \I i No ` ca BEET FLOW
\ 1
I 1 1 I I + ^— \\\�\ 2Wi fLOW-0.5 CFS
�� LON - Its aW
i!� — _ \
COMMUNITY J - 171 \ y3.♦f-- \,`\ `. `. i i\IIIII ` HI b \
�' � i �\ �/ /_ �/---'' 1j-_-" _-_•_-�- � (�_i II 1' /j II C+1]��+i�++ `�\_\= __ _—_ _ =�,/mil � ` \ W \\\-
\\\ o+}��++ r- �__ ' ■/+■
__ _ _ _ _ _
/-- __ _- - \ I rx
POND Zee I
116z OFTOF\III \ l
(200'M10E .are• DEEP) It Il11
i
If III-------'_i-'--' ----
' I ��`\ / ; 11 IIII ICI , n
11 I \ � "'.A \ (i I 1111IIIII III . , '-`----' - -- 1
/` \I J
'\ i /( 1 1
% f\.-\ �iil�l11
\it
i it ilii'illiill -`- ullill'II 11
I
� LEGEND
\ ` `I,^ `-- 1 j I III \•
IIIIIII1411 //qi `� \\\\\\`\ (�' __-�. `\jlll�l —`610 — EXISTING MAJOR! CwrouR
i
! i / -1 .'i'i li III III 1\\\. = , �,/ \O\\ — — — — `_____-__ ` I'/// I/ EXISTING INTERMEDIATE CONTCLR
Q\` ♦ /' ,'/ 1 \ % _ �A940' \\ __ _ __ �/ EXISTING STORM YNER/CMP
\ IIII I \� / • \ _y__ __
I \ i I \ / _—_.---- ----�_ _
\ i \I I �♦ `\ / `\\ �`.\ ♦♦♦ d IIlk \\ U �__�-__- — — A aasgayH ozsGnnnary
/ 1 ♦ 1 \ \\-___�\\ -- -___ B C IT AREA (AG)
j j ♦.♦ \) C \ \ `\ i 1 ♦ 1 \\\\\ I i J _ �'/� -' ° `, '� 0 C MINOR STORM COEFFICIENT
_---- O 1� 0'. MAJOR STORM COEFFICIENT
. \\ \ w i /i/ , ♦ 1 I : ilI IIII '' - ' _ - DESIGN DRAINAGEDISCHARGE
AN If
�_i�i/ l ♦, / / ■ IIIII �� _ - p EXISTING FLOW DIREC70N
\ - ■ [it III '"-- EXISTING BASIN DRAINAGE AREA
♦� '- ■ III III NI""FRONT RANGE VILLAGE -
I / I ♦�
♦♦i Alik` .�ryryaa/I / r, }+���■��■1�♦♦•+••+ \i / \ �Iilllll J ii — JOB N0. 3970400EXISTING NS
\ ♦♦ —. 1\ `\■+�+�F-� /�/��/�+■ i \ YIII SHEET 1 I II yll
I-L_ i / I /6OF 1
■ 11 III
\' ♦♦ ' ►+++�+++� . ■ IIIIII I ;
/ ♦♦ +++�+ / I ■ it Ili
] +++++++ I ``\ I 1 () I i ^\ IIIIII 1 • TMEMS OF STpiN FLOW CCNKrANCIS ARE APPRowMATE J•R ENGINEERING
IIII DUE TO THE NATURE CE THE GROUND CONDITIONS AT ME 50 H25 0 50 loo
♦ '_�'`\ Ir_- ( �\ / US. %iJ I\ ■L IH.11, DME OF THE TOO STORM EVENT. AwwWNn Odnprry
ORIGINAL SCALE: 1• - 50'
Cmennal 3 740-9 30 • Cdndo *qs l6iZH-'b5l
i FOl Cdlns 9 91-9888 • NwWIW9F�E9Gxn
ENGLISH RANCH
SUBDIVISION
0411 AS
.50 _
-- — -
I IF
INLET AS '
I
®® 1 wmom
on
;
m
I m
BASIN SUNVIIARY TABLE
TeWbry
8V4,min
AIM
lwq
4
CIO
4
(ON)
0
(eh)
Nx
"A
SAN
lWa
At
O.N
"I
M75
510E
69
39
2V SaNmy GO,
A2
am
atl
am
1!G
AS
18
31 Rm],,Gov
A3
CAL
AO
0.Q
670
a5
11
APDVAmIe
A4
031
aM
0.11
IN
a3
L7
3YDimla1We50mO1*
T cjAO.M
AS
a91
ab
aN
111
13
60
A6
&0
am
an
5.m
a3
1.3
T#'CUAC1.b
AT
aA
am
057
5,36
0.7
AS
Dnm�ov PwMB
AS
0.6
W
a9
14,23
AS
34
E4.OMmeIaPMnl�m fay
BI
am
Go
am
SW
a3
00
N'DimnerPe I,, GrOc
m
(La
am
068
fW
a9
al
3 Cvo(kYe
BJ
aZ5
am
o.w
lW
a5
21
r4lbNwv Cage
N
as
aA9
1W
a4
v
31TIbWv.+GN
m
avl
a.SD
0�
1W
I.1
SO
hTaAmba
C
aQ
aS5
a71
1W
13
60
W.00A43ka1e
D
Q
am
n56
8W
U
30
.Dsm'.PoaAA.
OBI
1Q
AM
aW
161T
A4
389
POND SUAIAIARY'1'ABLE
0
15 0
30
60
ORIGINAL
SCALE
1" =
3
NON ,
N .,.
®�� b N6 1 I
-- ! v
--- --_------- __ - ---_-_-_-_---_---------_-__--_-__ -----_
EXISTING POND 28B
- - - - - - -
— —Cam- — �-EXISTING MEN EIEV.-4939.W -r ��•� A ��
- 7.0 AC -FT (116.2 CES) \ \ 6 \
OF
LEGEND NOTESE
SEE SHEET 4 FOR OVERALL LEGEND III
I DBASIN DEGGRATION - ALL DIMENSIONS ME TO FLOWNE, UNLESS NOTED OR /� I I / \
CB I.D.: BASIC IDENTDER SHOWN OTHERWISE
A &MAJOR STORM COEFFICIENT
B:MI STOMA CCEFTI
C:BASN AREA IN ACRES
QCE4W PANT
BASIN DELINEATION :Aly Of FDA LoIuDR ColDeHao
UTI PLAN APPROVAL
AVRf01f & i `
CHECKED BY: Al
®� D `
ENGINEER'S STATEMENT N°° Lm w kIYMLCW q De
PREPARED UNDER MY SUPE NSION �• -Tgpyo PECKED Br:i
3mmwam. d'uy Dv 1
1"' PB6 COCKED BY, MA
JASON M. TARRY. P.E. e. - - Pv6 kAeaam� 0.
COLORADO P.E. 41795 •^ '•....�'•(i� CHECKED Bn
FOR MD ON BEHALF OF JR ENGINEERING, LLC /OVAL 0� T ��v5�5 la"
Know where below.
Call before you
R A
NO
J
o
m
z
m
>
w
O
I
SHEET 16 OF 35
JOB NO, 39704.00