HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 03/13/2017I
I
r
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
LA This Drainage Report is consciously provided as a PDF.
Please consider the environment before printing this document in its entirety.
When a hard copy is absolutely necessary, we recommend double -sided printing.
City of Ft. Collin peed Plans
G ,J
Approved ey _
Date
Prepared for:
Elevations Credit Union
1526 E. Harmony Road, Unit 130
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
Prepared by:
JW NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
301 North Howes Street, Suite 100
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Phone: 970.221.4158 Fax: 970.221.4159
www. northemengineen nil
Project Number: 207-016
NorthnrnFnninnnrinn.rnm // 970.771.415R
I
I
I W
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
February 13, 2017
City of Fort Collins
Stormwater Utility
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
' RE: Final Drainage Report for
Elevations Credit Union
Dear Staff:
Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final Drainage Report for your review.
' This report has been prepared in accordance with the City of Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria
Manual (FCSCM) and the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) Urban Storm
Drainage Criteria Manual and serves to document the stormwater impacts associated with the
' proposed Elevations Credit Union project. We understand that review by the City of Fort Collins is
to assure general compliance with standardized criteria.
I
I
I
I
n
I
1
If you should have any questions as you review this report, please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.
Nic
Via
Blaine Mathisen, El
Project Engineer
1 301 N. Howes Street, Suite 100, Fort Collins, CO 80521 1 970.221.4158 1 www.northernengineering.com
' (NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Elevations Cre
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
I.
GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION................................................................... 1
A.
Location.............................................................................................................................................1
B.
Description of Property ..................................................................................................................... 2
C.
Floodplain..........................................................................................................................................3
II.
DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS....................................................................... 5
A.
Major Basin Description....................................................................................................................5
B.
Sub -Basin Description.......................................................................................................................S
III.
A.
DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA...................................................................................6
Regulations........................................................................................................................................6
B.
Four Step Process..............................................................................................................................6
'
C.
Development Criteria Reference and Constraints............................................................................7
D.
Hydrological Criteria.........................................................................................................................7
'
E.
Hydraulic Criteria..............................................................................................................................8
F.
Floodplain Regulations Compliance..................................................................................................8
G.
Modifications of Criteria...................................................................................................................8
IV.
DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN ................... :................................................................. 8
'
A.
General Concept...............................................................................................................................8
B.
Specific Details................................................................................................................................10
'
V.
CONCLUSIONS......................................................................................................11
A.
Compliance with Standards............................................................................................................11
IB.
Drainage Concept............................................................................................................................12
References.......................................................................................................................
13
APPENDICES:
APPENDIX
A —
Hydrologic Computations
APPENDIX
B —
Hydraulic Computations
B.1 —
Storm Sewers
'
B.2 —
Inlets
B.3 —
Detention Facilities
APPENDIX
C —
Water Quality Design Computations
APPENDIX
D —
Erosion Control Report
APPENDIX
E —
Soils Resource Report
I
Final Drainage Report
1 INORTHERN
ENGINEERING Elevations Credit Union
1
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES:
1 Figure 1 Vicinity Map.......................................................................................................... 1
Figure2 Aerial Photograph...................................................................................................2
Figure3 Proposed Site Plan................................................................................................. 3
1 Figure 4 FEMA Map............................................................................................................4
Figure 5 City Floodplain Mapping.......................................................................................... 4
1 MAP POCKET:
C7.00 — Proposed Drainage Exhibit
C7.01 — Historic Drainage Exhibit
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
Final Drainage Report
■V (NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
I
I
I
1
1
iJ
I
I
I
C
GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. Location
1. Vicinity Map
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
2. Elevations Credit Union project site is located in the east half of the southeast quarter
of the northeast quarter of Section 23, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6"'
Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado.
3. The project site is located at 2025 College Avenue at northwest corner of the
intersection of College Avenue and Arthur Drive.
4. The project site lies within the Spring Creek Basin. The site drains via overland flow
and curb and gutter north towards Spring Creek, and ultimately discharges into the
Cache La Poudre River. The proposed impervious area for the site is 23,862 square
feet (0.548 ac.) and detention is required. The site must provide current City Low -
Impact Design (LID) requirements and water quality treatment as well. Water quality
treatment methods are described in further detail below.
5. As this is an in -fill site, the area surrounding the property is fully developed.
Final Drainage Report
i
' NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Elevations Credit
I
1
I
I
I
6. Offsite flows from Arthur Drive pass through from the south, cross the southwest
corner of the site, staying within the asphalt, curb, and gutter of Arthur Drive. No
offsite flows from the north, east or west enter the site.
B. Description of Property
1. Elevations Credit Union project is approximately 0.72 net acres.
Figure 2 Aerial Photograph
2. The subject property is currently composed of an abandoned gas station, asphalt,
concrete, and landscaping along College Avenue and the west end of the site. Existing
ground slopes are mild (i.e. 1 — 4%±) through the eastern two-thirds of the property.
A large retaining wall divides the upper two-thirds from Spring Court to the west.
Existing slopes for the wester third range from 5:1 to 3%±. General topography
slopes from south to north.
3. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey, the site consists of Altvan-Satanta loams,
which fall into Hydrologic Soil Groups B. The NRCS soils report is provided in
Appendix E.
4. The proposed development is composed of a proposed building along the eastern
property to include commercial and financial services. A hardscape parking lot with
landscaping islands is proposed. Associated site work, including water, sanitary
sewer, storm sewer, landscaped swales, and underground detention will be
constructed with the development. Current City Low -Impact Design (LID)
requirements will be implemented with the project, and will consist of several LID
features which are discussed in Section IV, below.
I
Final Drainage Report
2
' NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
It
I
1
1
11
i
wserrrrr�tr o "v .
-._._� n....w•.- --------------
•.
/ 1
I,r EUVATKM OIW UNION
I I
AH I
Figure 3 Proposed Site Plan
'
5. There are no known irrigation laterals crossing the site.
6. The project site is within a General Commercial District (C-G). The proposed use is
permitted within this zone district.
C. Floodplain
'
1. The northwest corner of the project site is encroached by the FEMA designated 100-
Year High Risk Flood Fringe according to FIRM Panel 08069C87G for Larimer
County, dated May 2, 2012.
2. Development is allowed within the flood fringe. It should be noted that no structures
1
will be constructed within the floodplain with the development of Elevations Credit
Union.
Final Drainage Report
3
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
3
Figure 4 FEMA Map
i
I
W
0
FE1.1A High Risk - Fbodway
C1 FEMA High Risk- 100 Year
D FEMA Moderate Risk - 100 / 500
Figure 5 City Floodplain Mapping
Final Drainage Report 4
(NORTHERN
ENGINEERING Elevations Credit Unior
' 11. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS
' A. Major Basin Description
1. The project site lies within the Spring Creek Basin. Detention requirements for this
site are to detain the difference between the 100-yr developed flow rate and the
' historic 2-yr release rate from the landscaping areas associated with the previous
onsite gas station. Historically, the site sheet flows all onsite runoff directly offsite
without any detention or water quality. However, Elevations Credit Union will release
' at a reduced historic rate and will also provide water quality. The proposed release
rate was determined by combining the historic 2-yr pervious runoff with the historic
100-yr impervious area, and reducing that release rate by the total off -site 100-yr
flows from Elevations Credit Union. Water quality will be provided for all the paved
areas via underground StormTech Isolator rows.
2. There are no previous drainage studies for the area associated with Elevations Credit
' Union project site.
B. Sub -Basin Description
' Elevations Credit Union historically drains overland from south to north. Runoff from
the site has historically flowed overland north towards Spring Creek and eventually
' enters the Cache La Poudre.
Basin HE Pervious
' Historic Basin HE Pervious is 0.06 acre from roughly the eastern 1/3 of the property,
and it is only comprised of landscaping area. Runoff generated in this basin
historically sheet flows directly into College Avenue and is then conveyed north via
curb and gutter until it enters Spring Creek. Basin HE Pervious has a 2-yr runoff of
' 0.04 cfs.
Basin HE Impervious
' Historic Basin HE Impervious is 0.14 acre from roughly the eastern 1/3 of the
property, and it is only comprised of the paved and roof areas. Runoff generated in
this basin historically sheet flows directly into College Avenue and is then conveyed
' north via curb and gutter until it enters Spring Creek. Basin HE Impervious has a 100-
yr runoff of 1.39 cfs.
' Overall Basin HE is 0.20 acres and has a combined release rate of 1.43 cfs (0.04 cfs
+ 1.39 cfs) from Basins HE Pervious and HE Impervious.
Basin HW Pervious
Historic Basin HW Pervious is 0.15 acre from the western 2/3 of the property, and it
is only comprised of landscaping area. Runoff generated in this basin historically sheet
flows offsite either into Arthur Drive or Spring Court. All flow that entered Arthur Drive
' eventually reaches Spring Court via curb and gutter and from there the runoff is
conveyed north towards Spring Creek. Basin HW Pervious has a 2-yr runoff of 0.11
cfs.
' Basin HW Impervious
Historic Basin HW Pervious is 0.37 acre from roughly the western 2/3 of the property,
and it is only comprised of the paved and roof areas. Runoff generated in this basin
historically sheet flows offsite either into Arthur Drive or Spring Court. All flow that
entered Arthur Drive eventually reaches Spring Court via curb and gutter, and from
' Final Drainage Report 5
■V (NORTHERN
ENGINEERING Elevations Credit Unio
there the runoff is conveyed north towards Spring Creek. Basin HW Impervious has a
100-yr runoff of 3.69 cfs.
' Overall Basin HW is 0.52 acres and has a combined release rate of 3.80 cfs (0.11
cis + 3.69 cfs) from Basins HW Pervious and HW Impervious. Therefore, the overall
historic release rate from the site is 5.23 cfs (3.80 cis + 1.43 cis). However, due to
' proposed offsite flows from Elevations Credit Union, which is discussed in Section
IV.A, the allowable release rate is reduced to 3.67 cis.
The previous development had a total impervious area of 22,249 sq. ft. and
'
Elevations Credit Union is proposing a total impervious area of 23,356 sq. ft.
Therefore, the difference in impervious area is 1,107 sq. ft., bringing the proposed
development 107 sq. ft. above the maximum allowable change without requiring
detention. Below in Section IV.13.2 is a more detailed description of Elevations Credit
Union detention.
1. A more detailed description of the project's proposed drainage patterns follows in
'
Section IV.A.4.
A full-size copy of the Historic and Proposed Drainage Exhibits can be found in the
Map Pocket at the end of this report.
III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
A. Regulations
There are no optional provisions outside of the FCSCM proposed with the Elevations Credit
Union project.
1
1
B. Four Step Process
The overall stormwater management strategy employed with the Elevations Credit Union
project utilizes the "Four Step Process" to minimize adverse impacts of urbanization on
receiving waters. The following is a description of how the proposed development has
incorporated each step.
Step 1 — Employ Runoff Reduction Practices
Several techniques have been utilized with the proposed development to facilitate the
reduction of runoff peaks, volumes, and pollutant loads as the site is redeveloped from the
current use by implementing multiple Low -Impact Development (LID) strategies including:
Providing as much vegetated open areas as possible along the north, east, west and
south portion of the site to reduce the overall impervious area and to minimize directly
connected impervious areas (MDCIA).
Selecting a site that has been previously developed to reduce development impacts.
Routing flows, to the extent feasible, through underground StormTech Isolator Rows
for water quality purposes. Stormwater will be routed through drain rock to increase
filtration and infiltration
m Providing on -site detention to increase time of concentration, promote infiltration and
reduce loads on downstream storm infrastructure.
m Routing runoff from the roof directly into Isolator Rows
Final Drainage Report
6
■V INORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Elevations Credit Unix
Step 2 — Implement BMPs That Provide a Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) with
Slow Release
' The efforts taken in Step 1 will facilitate the reduction of runoff; however, urban
development of this intensity will still generate stormwater runoff that will require
additional BMPs and water quality. The stormwater runoff from the site will be
' intercepted and treated using underground StormTech chambers with a water quality
capture volume.
Step 3 — Stabilize Drainageways
'
There are no major drainageways within the subject property. While this step may not
seem applicable to proposed development, the project indirectly helps achieve stabilized
drainageways nonetheless. By providing detention and water quality treatment where
'
none previously existed, sediment and flash flows with erosion potential are removed from
downstream drainageway systems. Furthermore, this project will pay one-time stormwater
'
development fees, as well as ongoing monthly stormwater utility fees, both of which help
achieve City-wide drainageway stability.
' Step 4 — Implement Site Specific and Other Source Control BMPs.
The proposed project includes a single story building, associated parking, retaining walls,
and pedestrian sidewalk paths all of which will require the need for site specific source
controls including:
' A localized trash enclosure placed in the parking lot.
The proposed development will provide LID features within StormTech Isolator Rows
to enhance water quality. The StormTech Isolator Row is designed to capture the first
' flush of a storm event; thus, eliminating sources of potential pollution previously left
exposed to weathering and runoff processes.
C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints
1. There are no known drainage studies for the existing property.
2. The subject property is a redevelopment project and is surrounded by currently
developed properties. As such, several constraints have been identified during the
course of this analysis that will impact the proposed drainage system including:
P0 Existing elevations along the north, south, east, and west property lines will be
maintained.
m Overall drainage patterns of the existing site will be maintained.
m Release rates can not adversely impact existing infrastructure.
D. Hydrological Criteria
'
1. The City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency Curves, as depicted in
Figure RA-16 of the FCSCM, serve as the source for all hydrologic computations
'
associated with this development. Tabulated data contained in Table RA-7 has been
utilized for Rational Method runoff calculations.
2. The Rational Method has been employed to compute stormwater runoff utilizing
coefficients contained in Tables RO-11 and RO-12 of the FCSCM.
3. The Rational Formula -based Modified Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
procedure has been utilized for detention storage calculations.
4. Two separate design storms have been utilized to address distinct drainage scenarios.
The first event analyzed is the "Minor," or "Initial' Storm, which has a 2-yr recurrence
Final Drainage Report
7
■� NORTHERN
ENGINEERING Elevations Credit Unioi
' interval. The second event considered is the "Major Storm," which has a 100-yr
recurrence interval.
' S. No other assumptions or calculation methods have been used with this development
that are not referenced by current City of Fort Collins criteria.
E. Hydraulic Criteria
1. As previously noted, the subject property maintains historic drainage patterns.
2. All drainage facilities proposed with the Elevations Credit Union project are designed
in accordance with criteria outlined in the FCSCM and/or the Urban Drainage and
Flood Control District's (UDFCD) Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual.
3. As stated in Section I.C.1, above, the subject property is encroaching a FEMA 100-
Year High Risk Flood Fringe.
' F. Floodplain Regulations Compliance
As previously mentioned, the project site is encroaching a FEMA 100-Year High Risk Flood
' Fringe along the northwest corner of the property. Development is allowed within the flood
fringe pursuant to Chapter 10 of the City of Fort Collins Municipal Code. It should be noted
that no structures will be constructed within the floodplain with the development of Elevations
' Credit Union.
G. Modifications of Criteria
' The proposed Elevations Credit Union development is not requesting any modifications.
IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
' A. General Concept
1. The main objectives of the Elevations Credit Union drainage design are to maintain
t existing drainage patterns and ensure no adverse impacts to any adjacent properties
or existing infrastructure.
2. As previously mentioned, there are no off -site flows draining onto the existing
' property. Additionally, on -site, LID feature will be provided which will enhance
downstream water quality. These measures are discussed further below.
' 3. A list of tables and figures used within this report can be found in the Table of
Contents at the front of the document. The tables and figures are located within the
sections to which the content best applies.
4. The proposed Elevations Credit Union project is has been divided into six (6) major
drainage basins, designated as Basins W.1, E.1, R.1, OS. 1, OS.2, and OS.3.
Drainage patterns for basins shown on the Proposed Drainage Exhibit are described
below.
Basin W.1
' Basin WA has a net area of 0.32 acre, which has an associated parking lot and
landscaping islands. Runoff generated in Basin WA will sheet flow, as well as curb
and gutter flow, east to west until it is collected by an inlet along the west side of the
parking lot. Runoff entering the inlet will be conveyed via storm pipes. The storm pipe
will convey the runoff into two separate Isolator Rows containing four (4) SC-740 cells
each. The additional runoff will continue to fill the non -Isolator Rows. The Isolator
Final Drainage Report 8
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING Elevations Credit Union
' Rows will be wrapped in a geotextile fabric to avoid sediment migration. Once Basin
W.1 goes through the treatment process within the StormTech system, it will be
' released into a sidewalk chase along Spring Court. Once the runoff is in Spring Court it
will then flow north as historically routed.
Basin E.1
Basin E.1 is located along the eastern side of the proposed building. Basin E.1 has a
net area of 0.04 acre, and is associated with concrete sidewalks and landscaping
swales. Runoff generated in Basin E.1 will sheet flow west to east until it enters one of
the two landscaping swale regions via trench drains. There are micro pools before and
'
after each trench drain to reduce sediment migration though the trench drains. Runoff
will flow south to north through a series of trench drains until it ultimately enters an
underground storm sewer, which routes the runoff to an Isolator Row within the SC-
'
740 chamber system. Runoff from Basin E.1 and Basin R.1 will enter the same
Isolator Rows as Basin W.1. The reason there are two (2) additional cells being
wrapped is because the chambers were configured in an optimal layout to avoid taking
up any landscaping areas and to keep the manholes out of the drive aisle. Once the
1
runoff is treated within the StormTech chambers, it will enter the storm sewer and be
released into a sidewalk chase located along Spring Court. Any event above the water
quality event will sheet flow west to east across the property until it reaches the curb
'
and gutter within College Avenue. From there, the runoff will be conveyed north as
historically routed.
'
Basin R.1
Basin R.1 has a net area of 0.12 acre, and is associated exclusively with the one-story
building roof runoff. Runoff created in this basin will sheet flow across the roof east to
west and enter one of two possible roof leaders. The roof leaders will convey the runoff
into the same Isolator Row that Basin E.1 is entering. Then, just like Basin W.1 and
'
E.1, it will be released into a sidewalk chase located in Spring Court.
Basin OS.1
'
Basin OS.1 has a net area of 0.05 acre, and is located along the northern edge of the
project site, it consists solely of landscaping and a portion of retaining wall. Runoff
generated in Basin OS.1 will overland flow north directly offsite, undetained into
'
College Avenue. The landscaped area will act as a water quality measure by reducing
runoff via infiltration and removing excess sediment.
'
Basin OS.2
Basin OS.2 has a net area of 0.04 acre, and is located along the eastern edge of the
'
project site. Basin OS.2 consists of a small portion of the drive entrance, pedestrian
sidewalk, and landscaping. Runoff generated in Basin OS.2 will overland flow directly
offsite into College Avenue undetained and untreated just like historic conditions. Once
1
in College Avenue, it will flow south to north as historically routed.
Final Drainage Report
9
' ■� INORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Elevations Credit Ur
' Basin OS.3
Basin OS.3 has a net area of 0.15 acre, and is located along the western and
southern borders of the project site. Just like historic patterns, Basin OS.3 will
overland flow directly offsite undetained and untreated into Arthur Drive and Spring
Court. Basin OS.3 consists of landscaping, drive entrance, and a portion of Arthur
Drive.
Design Point 1
Design Point 1 is associated with Basins W.1, R.1, and E.1. These three basins are
' all conveyed west towards Spring Court (same as Historic Basin HW) via overland and
pipe flow.
' Design Point OS
Design Point OS is associated with Basins OS.1, OS.2, OS.3. These three basins sheet
flow offsite undetained and untreated. Basins OS.1 and Basins OS.2 sheet flow north
into College Ave. Basin OS.3 sheet flows into Spring Court undetained and untreated.
The reason these three basins were analyzed together was to determine the 100-yr
flow rate (1.56 cis) that was used to.calculate the reduced historic release rate.
Therefore, the max allowable release rate for Elevations Credit Union is 3.67 cfs (5.23
cfs — 1.56 cis)
1 B. Specific Details
' 1. The main drainage problems associated with this project site are the deficiency of
existing stormwater infrastructure present, steep existing grades, and FEMA
floodplain. Currently the site drains to the east and west, but ultimately discharges in
the same location north of the site within Spring Creek. The proposed site will
mitigate these issues by instituting the following water quality and detention facilities:
StormTech Isolator Rows wrapped with a geotextile fabric to prevent sediment
' migration. The runoff collected by these chambers will then drain through open -
graded drainage rock.
StormTech chambers to release at a restricted rate by use of an orifice plate.
' 2. Detention Pond Calculations
Using the FAA Method to detain Basins W.1, R.1, and E.1 with a reduced release
rate of 3.67 cfs yields an overall detention volume of 615 cu. ft. This required volume
will be stored in conjunction with the WQCV StormTech SC-740 chambers.
3. Water Quality Results
�. UDFCD criteria for a 12-hour drain time was used to size the water quality amenity
being proposed with Elevations Credit Union. Water quality will be provided as a
portion of the underground SC-740 chambers via Isolator Rows for Basins W.1, E.1,
and R.1. Following UDFCD criteria, a calculated volume of 537 cu. ft. of storage
must be provided for the WQCV. In order to achieve this 537 cu. ft. of volume within
the SC-740 chambers, a minimum of 6 chambers must be used. However, due to the
' site configuration and optimizing the layout of the underground pond, a total of 8
chambers will be wrapped with geotextile fabric to reduce sediment migration within
the system and improve downstream water quality
' Final Drainage Report 10
.� (NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
it
I
I
I
t,
1
4. The underground pond will provide enough storage for the 615 cu. ft. required
for detention and the additional 537 cu. ft. required for the WQCV, bringing
the overall required total storage capacity of the system to 1,152 cu. ft. By
utilizing 16 SC-740 StormTech Chambers, an overall storage capacity of
1,198 cu. ft. will be provided. The underground pond has 4 rows with 4
chambers in each row; therefore, 8 chambers will be dedicated as Isolator
Rows to treat the WQCV. Internal weirs will guarantee that the Isolator Rows
are 100% full before runoff is conveyed to the cells dedicated strictly for
detention. Once the runoff has been treated and detained, it will discharge
into a sidewalk chase along Spring Court. From Spring Court, the runoff will
be conveyed north towards Spring Creek via curb and gutter.
Basin
UD
Area
Percent of
Basin ID
Treatment Type
Impervious Area
System
Treated bv
Im erviousArea
StormTech
WA
0.318ac.
Yes
0.318ac.
57%
Chambers
StormTech
EA
0.024ac.
Yes
0.024ac.
4%
Chambers
StormTech
R.1
0.121 ac.
Yes
0.121 ac.
22%
Chambers
o5.1
0.002ac.
Grass Buffer
No
N/A
0%
OS.2
0.037ac.
Grass Buffer
No
N/A
0%
OS.3
0.055ac.
Grass Buffer
No
N/A
0%
Total
0.557ac.
-
0.463ac.
a3%
5.
In the case that the inlet within Basin W.1 gets clogged, runoff will overtop
the curb and gutter, then overtop the retaining wall, and flow west into Spring
Court as it historically has.
V. CONCLUSIONS
A. Compliance with Standards
1.
The drainage design proposed with the Elevations Credit Union project complies with
the City of Fort Collins' Stormwater Criteria Manual.
2.
The drainage design proposed with the Elevations Credit Union project complies with
the City of Fort Collins' Master Drainage Plan for the Spring Creek Basin.
'
3.
The project site is encroached by a 100-Year High Floodplain Fringe along the
northwest corner of the property. However, the development will not adversely impact
any of the downstream infrastructure, as this floodplain is caused by the obstruction
of the College Avenue bridge.
4.
The drainage plan and stormwater management measures proposed with the
Elevations Credit Union development are compliant with all applicable State and
Federal regulations governing stormwater discharge.
C
Final Drainage Report
11
(NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
B. Drainage Concept
1. The drainage design proposed with this project will effectively limit potential damage
' associated with its stormwater runoff. The total difference in impervious area between
historic and proposed conditions is only 1,107 sq. ft., which is only 107 sq. ft. above
the maximum threshold for detention according to the City of Fort Collins Stormwater
Criteria Manual.
2. Elevations Credit Union will be releasing at reduced runoff rates from the historic
' condition to both College Avenue and Spring Court; therefore, there will be no
downstream impacts from this development.
3. Elevations Credit Union will provide water quality for a majority of the site (0.48
acres) with accepted LID treatments. The remaining portion of the project site will
receive water quality by crossing over landscaped areas. The areas receiving water
' quality via landscaping were uncatchable due to steep grades along the north, east,
and west.
' 4. The proposed Elevations Credit Union development will not impact the Master
Drainage Plan recommendations for the Spring Creek major drainage basin.
i
I
1
1
Final Drainage Report
12
(NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
IReferences
' 1. City of Fort Collins Landscape Design Guidelines for Stormwater and Detention Facilities,
November 5, 2009, BHA Design, Inc. with City of Fort Collins Utility Services.
I
1
L
i
1
2. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, City of Fort Collins, Colorado, as adopted by Ordinance No.
174, 2011, and referenced in Section 26-500 (c) of the City of Fort Collins Municipal Code.
3. Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, Adopted January 2, 2001, Repealed and
Reenacted, Effective October 1, 2002, Repealed and Reenacted, Effective April 1, 2007.
4. Soils Resource Report for Larimer County Area, Colorado, Natural Resources Conservation
Service, United States Department of Agriculture.
5. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes 1-3, Urban Drainage and Flood Control
District, Wright -McLaughlin Engineers, Denver, Colorado, Revised April 2008.
Final Drainage Report
13
APPENDIX A
HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS
rr6nrnFn nin mrinn rnm I/ 070 771 41 GA
I
2
S
m
m
D
al
N N
2
5
T
A O N
rn
r
m
C
W
O]
,
O
_
N >.
j' W
a
(n
m
AW
0)
w
.";D
a
g D
cn0000
3
m
Y
�
v
N
O
O
O
0
0
W
9L
V.-o,W
Y
v
c
0
O
000N�
£
0
1�
Y
N
rn
N
O
O
O
o
0
D
a
O
N-'00�-'
C10000)
fY'f Sy
y
W
W
O
O
_
O
O
R1
00000
_on
N
O
O
O�
d n o Y
d
f+
V
W
NOO(n
Oo
co
...
nn
O
0
0
0000o
zn
,'„
o0
0000o
A
w
o00rn
S
0Lnn
tD
0LnnM
o
n
,'
chili
Q
m
o
~
C
N
m
_ �
Z
O
0000
6/ D
w
NlDAlO�
0
0
0
0
0
0
d y
ae
N
0
0
0
0
(/
O
000
V
e
die
a°e
°c
y
3
°Yo
z_
O
Z
C
ON
00000
vn
x
00000
W < d
0
0000
l
`"�
3
C
Z
c
O
0
A
N
O
O
O
O
O
a
N
60�`o
N T
n• N Y
P
0
00)
0
3
q
r
n
O
5 6
m
O
[)
^',
` J
0 A
'S
V
N
iD
N
Nip
m
R °�'
.-
� 2
m
0
n
nT
a
00000
A0
C
V
�3
'�
a w
N
t
Ut
NNl0
(Trw
n
O•
W N
N K w
Or
°
O
o W m
3
Z
O
--
o
CD
n CY
c 3 0
o
" 3
owi.w0
Q�S
W
O
O—
N
O
Q. 'o
R
N C)
v N m
u O n
Ol
M
ko
3
O
O
P,
f4
N
m
CD
d
0
C-)
(D
a
c
I
/
/
2
I
/
I
I
I
I
/
I
I
�
■ k ® { � �
OF % 3■
PI
;7�
}
f=
f
§
§��
�|
0w
m»�2
k
§
®®F
A
E
.91
�0 g\a '|
$
-
a
(�`"
�#k
�
~
( |f
{
/
m
r §
�
_
2
��:
§
\
)
r
o
a
,
�z0«�
2
0
�
®
�
®�f
(/(
4
=
,7�§E
I
9
11
[J
11
'1
e
1
S
S
F J n
m
m
co
X
m
2
2
In
�
3 " '� c•_
t7 �
v
o_
T
0
0
0
p
p
A
Q
V
V
y
�- D
H
rn
0
O
w
N
n
cn
cn
cn
cn
3
m
N
O
O
0
r
n
cn
cn
cn
Ul
n a `ryn
p
o
o
p
00M� O
tD
N
N
iD
�
i
:10
p
iD
p
N
p
N
p
tD
�' n
u
h
1
O1-
0o
0
CD
CD
o
N
N
N
N
_=
ry
00
00
00
N N
Ln
N
7
A
A
A
A
2 Ip
0D
00
CO
00
3 0
�
n
d
c
�
d
to
lD
ID
tD
X.
Z
"•
ID
cn
to
to
1D
cn
iD
cn
o >
> e
O c
o ED m
ro �
O
O
O
T
w
o
o
O o
3 o.
�^
m
N �
O a
0
0
0�
N o F
(T
V
W
N
j
r
p
p
w
p m
W
c
A
to
y o
�O
co
v
t0
ra
�v
m
o
O m
N
Z
Z
m
2
=
ca
—
3
�
-0
3
_ D
O N
m
2
CD
2
2
-0
Z
A
T
cn
V
D
r
0
0
0
0
n
l0
U1
N
CTI
N
U1
U1
cn
N
O
0
Cl)
O
W
W
O
p
Cn
Ul
Cn
LnI
3 N
L1
Ln
cn
Up
O
O
O
O
O
1
i•+
W
O
O
N N
W
tD
OJ
A
V
T
l0
� o
1
I
1
Ocn
OO�m�
p
w
o
a d m t D
m
ct
p p
T
W
w
Ol
D)
0)
ONw
N
O
(IT
rJ
�'
W
d
�^•
�• R C
W
w
O
—
co
W
O
iD(DOA
A
N
d
m
m
O
at
C
W
oC)00000
m
V.
N
(n
6
w
6"
A
NAN
O
w
N
nD
R
n
C
0
O
N
V
O]
N
O
0
a
0
000000
d
N
( O
O
N
o
O
0
O
0
O
o
O
N
V
y
'w
(D
O)
OOOO
w
V +
e o
m
o
1.
V
m
y
0000000
�
Y
m.
�
�+
f+
000
w
w
O
O
O
00
N
N
_o
V
O
V
N
O
A
A
q�
CZ
3
0000000
>
00
00000
�_
a
O(M
0
to
r
000
0
0
... �,
n
��
ul
(W/I
A �
0
d
o
y
b
_
3
Z
O
o00
0o
ddm
oo
Wr
0000
00
^< d
o
o
N0000
ny
0
O
000
0
00
00
00
v �•
az
0
0 p
p0
0
0
0
0
°c
y
3
odo
0
0
N
O
0
0
0
0
00
_' fl D
d d N
6
j
O
O
O
O
<
0000
00
a�
3
Z
c
O
0
n
N
r
r
c
W
0000000
W
W
ai
N
n
a
P
O
00000
n
tdi 0e�i
3
II
co
00
(n
ONN
v y
•- a
w'
, t
m
d
T0000000�3�
V
Ut
(D
N
(D
D)
(D
O
d
C
^a
0
000000
N
V
m
lD
N
w
m
w
^ 7 •� `t
O '9
(JI
(n
W
(n
cn
0
� H y
d G 3
R
O `Wfr
°i mm
0 3 o
O
0 0
(p: m m
Z
0
0
.-
o
�
o
.-•
v 0
3
ic,0)6,w0000
w
w
0
n
o
o
^ .0
s ?�
7 d
� A
N O
N N �
0 0 n
D1 C
e
u 0
�
0
V
w
to
(D
(n
(D
3
3
H
AO'p
O�
O
o
o
o
e
O
N
(gyp
N
WmJ
m Z
�CD
z �
.n =
�m
_;a
n Z
m
(o
d
0'
N
0
CD
_a
C
7
O_
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
�
I
k/
f
®
\
{ 23 / \
If|
_
(
I
C?
{ } f
$§\
;\$
i
�
}
)
§j
\\\\
7,
■
o
`
S
/// §�
i
m
w
_
§
n
`f
3.
z
2
»�k
:
� f
Id
7a
�i7
3
_ ,
t(
3
!}/
9
N�k
�
\B
�
_z
I
1
_uDi
7
W
C.
x
o
O
o
m<
N
_ g m
T
v
n o
- o
`0 A
o_
T
O
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
n co
g
A d
=
(n
A
Vl
N
A
N
y
N
s
0
d
N
O
00
n
�+
3. 1 �
m
cn
to
cn
cn
cn
cn
d
1
n
T
N
v
v
0
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
V OVuo
0
0
0
0
0
0
uaom t
(n
LD
N
lD
D,
to
(n
co
(n
Cn
O
n }K
n
0
0
0
0
00
C
o
iQ
�
cnk
W
cn
co
o
u �
n
O
3
m
W
O
W
O
w
0
0
n y
C
O
(n
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
07
OD
CO
00
Ou
00
S N
y
in
cn
in
cn
cn
cn
-. .
N
3
A
A
A
A
A
A
_
ry
00
00
Ou
Oo
00
W
o
V
V
V
V
V
V
v y
f7
d
A
_
C
N
lD
lD
lD
lD
lD
lD
lD
lD
lD
lD
tD
lD
(ll
(n
U,
Ln
VI
IJI
G
co
N i
o m m_
n �
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
O
w
O
D o
3 p o
co
?
N
O
A
W
00
N
�-
N a
o -
0
0
0
0
0
W
o
(n
o
O
O
O
o
w
p T
iD
W
w
V
V
A
00
o
m Z
�0
z �
m =
m m
z 'w
Z
m
w
0
N
n
(D
a
c
0
I
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
��`�
°
��/f�
�
no..
fig
66
M9
F
It
;
__.!|�|
al&4.
-pp
§;:;
!||
�
`!|`k
\�\
.Ono
Ong
SL
(�\
tI¥
_
k
.z
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,!!
®
- !
\ a
\ \�
I
-
zzz]
. §
,!
7
f
`
§§ww0-
K§§-
ocom
000m
(
m$»�$
-
k
�
7�!'
o
\§»a-
!
)
m
»tea
1 r`
\
- !
o
`bo
§
#mot
k
�
/ ®f
|
`
ZZ
3;3.
|\k
7[E
„
f
LL
a ,
m
i
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
d II
N �
cn
om-
o0
m
o
N
r
Q
O
W
o
.Z
O
N
0
O
O
O
O
3
o
,
P,
N
corn
OD
V D
u
d
m
0
w
_
3
cn
cn
cn
to
,i
n
p
v
0
..
O
cn
Ncn
cn
�. �1�
0
^
T
W
p
�. N.•N
p
`c
•o00o -� .�
1O
a o
(1 V
rti
O
O
O
„
O
N
Go
W
(.n
"
V
lD
W
a €
m
O^
�
O
O
O
n
u
(
n
C
N
O
Oo
c
Z
Dl
V
(O
w
S L
O
V E q
Y Y Y Y
O
OO
oDi
• yh
C
N
co
N
bo
N
Oo
N
0o
� (p
N N
�UlU,�
- 7
O
N
W
a0
au
W
o ic
ic
�
n
d
n
c
w
to
lD
1D
ID
A
o
m m 2
o ao
_m
n fD
OO�'O
T
W .d_*
W
?
N
A
p f
Q O
�
fD
N a
i
_O
m
0(co0)
S F
1
I
I
-0 v
cn
in
Li
1 Z
O
O
X
N
W
c
Z
m
O
N
W
0
0
0
0
n p
O
�-
A
N
00
m
00
A
N
.000
n
N
W
m
cn
N
m
V
(o
W
O
O
O
01
0
O
O
O
Ol
6
nLnulfn3
Iry
0
0
o
N
^
(n
(n
(n
(n
3 O
0
0
0
0
5 o
1
0.
0
D
W
A
N
W
Ol
Io
O
A
�
� A
00
O
00
J
A
W
O
o
-Vv
00
N
oN
;.
f
m
_o y
W
N
.
ZLi
Z
W
O
O
O
;U
m
v y
W
N
Z
0
0
0
0
0
0
�� p
r-
O
O
O
W
(n
A
Ln
N
A
N
N T D
r
0
0
0
0
0
o
n
Ut
io
N
(0
Ln
10
N
.-
(It
00
cn
(n
O
o
O
—
O
n
O
O
W
O
m
0
0
(n
cn
(n
cn
(n
(n
(n
cn
(n
(n
cn
(n
,� o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
K
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
N
O
W
O
00
y� N
N
0
A
W
00
N
0
0
4-1
ow(0
WN
W
0
Cn
-lI
1
A
m
O
rn
c�
m
0
N
n
CD
d
'i
c
7
O
I
1
I
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
B.1 — Storm Sewers
B.2 — Inlets
B.3 — Detention Facilities
N nr. ,, arnrnnin rr.rm r. rnm �i?:". .7t Lt i.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B.1
STORM SEWERS
vI/2o - vaoc,ry 14#Ad
FAO
F nninaa jinn �nm // 07n 771 A SF
I
r
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
�3
a
T
N
3
N
3
O
d
Z
Q
N
O
ID
N
v
d
0
N
O
N
_O
T
wi
m_
A
A
A
A
A
A
CD
(pOo
O
tD
CD
(O
ED
W G
AOD
O
W
W
CO
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Sta 0+00.00 - Outfall
Gmd. El. 4989.12
Inv. El. 4987.03 In
x
O
r c
m
�
N
r O
w
0
Sta 0+36.00 - Ln: 1
Rim El. 0
Out
A
O
C
CD
a)n
W
O
v
O
CD
O
O
O
d
V
O
S
S
O
O
O
O
!AO
OD
4993.8
Inv. El. 4986.02
IAO
m
m to
m ftAtppO
W 01
im�pp
(p
i
i
i
C�
F]
I
1
L
I
I
1
I
zr
J
Q
z
CD
C0
0-
m
;D
a
c
a
O
c
m
�
m
d
a
a
CD
m
u
N
o
m
G
�
m
O
�
W
1
� »
V
^CAr
�ma
OD
�r
�
s�
vo
o
r
CO m
o
�
0
r F
A
.2
m
co
O
W
r 7
A
W
CD
O
N
O 7
-4
`� m
c
Ico
r
3
�°
�
m
0
m
to
xM G
m
r
�
� V
m
g
o
1
w
C
co
VI
2r
�71
V
M
7
O
0/
zra
m
m
O>>
a
�m
N
N
N
O_
3
O
O_
y 3
N
O
3
@
i
@
I
11
I
@
I
I
@
I
�
j
@
@
q
I
�7
,
@\
z
M
§
=
m
E�
ƒCLCL
\
3
,
4
CA
o
°
}
0
3 ■
o
ID
-
°
(
�
E
\
/
2
�0
(/
—
OD
2
cn
z
a
c
co
i
cr
5
_
OD
PD
�
I
� �
§
§
M
a VOD
<
)CL
J
o
§
..
CCD
§
Q
2
r
E
I
�
e
CR
M
CO)
0
�
CA
@
$
�
@
cr
�
@
0
�
/
I
1
I
Ci
I
11
I
I
// 970.221.4159
O
J as 10 O
O O O O O
A r
O
A
C
Poo.
o
m
=
�
'a to
n
m m
m
ci
In
m m
`n
rn
�
P
s
0'. m
AMceo,..m ED Pond
1
l
6 '
IflArl Po..a wwr ED (f w Ch.." P. a.crnnr
)IJ
FO j�11Vtllr.d
Errirr�/rv1 D1!Irnl,w, P... vwlr.l
ANnm Nrnn.wl Wat, k_ i
En'r.'Tr'ncY'
- Oullwb
Div LD Pcr.v]____._
NM E D PoM
lk-,_
orthernEnaineerina.com // 970.221.4158
1
■� NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
i
H
I
I
I
DETENTION POND CREC MTIONwW'DIFIED FAA METHOD w/ Ft C s I
Project Number 207-016
Project Name Elevations Credit Union
Project Location Fort Collins, Colorado
Pond No Underground Pond - Detention
Input Variables Results
Design Point 1
Design Storm 100-yr
C = 1.00
Tc = 5.00 min
A = 0.48 acres
Max Release Rate = 3.67 cfs
Required Detention Volume
615 ft3
0.014 ac-ft
Time (min)
Ft Collins
100-yr
Intensity
in/hr
Inflow
Volume
3
(ft)
Outflow
Adjustment
Factor
Oar
(cfs)
Outflow Volume
3
(ft)
Storage
Volume
3
(ft )
5
9.950
1433
1.00
3.67
1101
332
10
7.720
2223
0.75
2.75
1652
572
15
6.520
2817
0.67
2.45
2202
615
20
5.600
3226
0.63
2.29
2753
473
25
4.980
3586
0.60
2.20
3303
283
30
4.520
3905
0.58
2.14
3854
52
35
4.080
4113
0.57
2.10
4404
-291
40
3.740
4308
0.56
2.06
4955
-646
45
3.460
4484
0.56
2.04
5505
-1021
50
3.230
4651
0.55
2.02
6056
-1404
55
3.030
4800
0.55
2.00
6606
-1806
60
2.860
4942
0.54
1.99
7157
-2214
65
2.720
5092
0.54
1.98
7707
-2615
70
2.590
5221
0.54
1.97
8258
-3036
75
2.480
5357
0.53
1.96
8808
-3451
80
2.380
5484
0.53
1.95
9359
-3875
85
2.290
5606
0.53
1.94
9909
-4303
90
2.210
5728
0.53
1.94
10460
-4731
95
2.130
5828
0.53
1.93
11010
-5182
100
2.060
5933
0.53
1.93
11561
-5628
105
2.000
6048
0.52
1.92
12111
-6063
110
1.940
6146
0.52
1.92
12662
-6516
115
1.890 1
260
0.52 1
1.91
13212
-6952
120
1.840
6359
0.52
1.91
13763
-7403
'Note: Using the method described in Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 2.
207-016 DetentionVolume FAAModified Method.xls
' Page 1 of 1
1 12/52016
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
[1
ADS StormTech Design Tod
St01'mTecft
El
User -Inputs
Results-
-
Chamber Model
SC-740
Outlet Control Structure
Yes (Outlet)
System Volume and Bed Size
Project Name
Elevations Credit Union
Installed Storage Volume
1198 cubic ft.
Project Engineer
B. Mathisen
Storage Volume Per Chamber
74.90 cubic ft.
Project Location
Fort Collins -Detention Pond
Number Of Chambers Required
16
Project Date
12/02/2016
Number Of End Caps Required
20
Measurement Type
Imperial
Rows/Chambers
6 row(s) of 2
Required Storage Volume
1,152 cubic ft.
chamber(s)
Stone Porosity
40%
Leftover Rows/Chambers
4 row(s) of 1
Stone Foundation Depth
6 in.
chamber(s)
Amount of Stone Above Chambers
6 in.
Maximum Length
21.44 ft.
Average Cover Over Chambers
18 in.
Maximum Width
49.60 ft.
Design Constraint
WIDTH
Approx. Bed Size Required
1000 square ft.
Design Constraint Dimension
50 ft.
System Components
Amount Of Stone Required
102 cubic yards
Volume Of Excavation (Not Including
130 cubic yards
Fill)
Non -Woven Filter Fabric Required
274 square yards
Length Of Isolator Row
14.24 ft.
Non -Woven Isolator Row Fabric
13 square yards
Woven Isolator Row Fabric
16 square yards
TPAVEMENT
LAYER (DESIGNEE)
BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER)
81
'
18" (2.4 m)
(450mm)MINI'I MAX
6'(150 mm)MIN J
- - -T
30.
(7W mm)
51" (1295 mm)
(150 mm) MIN
L DEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINED
BY DESIGN ENGINEER 6" (150 mm) MIN
- 12" (300 mm) TYP
III, TO OM OF FlFUN PAVEMEM FOR"AVED
INSTALLATIONS WHERE RATTING FROM VEMQES MAY OGOOR
INCREASE CGVER TO 24' MM.)
® ADS StormTech 2015
1 http://stormtechcalc.azurewebsites.net/ 1l1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX C
WATER QUALITY DESIGN COMPUTATIONS
Nnrf6nrnFnninnarinn rnm 11 O7A'))1 Al SR
I
Project Title
Project Number
Client
Basins
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
Elevations Credit Union
207-016
W1,R1,&El
Date: December 5, 2016
Calcs By: B. Mathisen
WQCV=a0.91i'-1.19i2+0.78f Drain Time 12hr
0.8
WQCV = Watershed inches of Runoff (inches) d = 88.00%
a = Runoff Volume Reduction (constant)
i = Total imperviousness Ratio (i = l m/300) CV = W70.308 in
ter' ua' i ap ure o'ume
0.5
0.45 WQCV =a(0.91i'-1.19i2+0.78i)
L_
0.4
c 0.35 - — --
u 0.3
L
0.25 0.231
« 6�I
3 0.2 E
> 0.15 — N
m.
3 0.1
0.05
o--- - - -
' o a o 0 0 0 0 0 o o
f+ N W A tn O) V 00 1p
Total Imperviousness Ratio (i = I,,,a/100)
' Figure EDB-2 - Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV), 80th Percentile Runoff Event
V — r WQCV 1 * A 0.48 ac
' l 12 J _
0.0123 ac-ft 537
V = Water Quality Design Volume (ac-ft)
WQCV = Water Quality Capture Volume (inches)
A = Watershed Area (acres)
= a
P
2
L I
1
1
1
r 1
NORTHERN
ADDRESS:
JOt N Nowen Street. Swte 100
MIONE:
970.2 21.4158
WEBSITE:
ENGINEERING
Fon Collins. CO M0$21
FAX:
www.narthwrnnngineoring.0om
970.221.4159
Subsurface Stormwater Management"
FAA Modified Required Detention =
615
cu. ft.
StormTech chambers used =
SC-740
Required Water Quality volume=
537
cu. ft.
Total Volume Required=
1152
cu. ft.
Total required number of chambers=
16
Required number of WQCV Chambers=
6
Actual number of WQCV chambers=
8
SC-740 Cross -Section
PAVEMENT LAYER (DESIGNED
By SITE DESIGN ENGINEER)
t
So(150 mm)MIN
— a
30"
(7W mm)
6" — 51" (1296 rnrn 1
(150 mm) MIN
1 6.
18" (2.4 m)
(450 mm) MINI!) MAX
1
i
_ DEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINED
BY DESIGN ENGINEER 6" (150 mrn) MIN
12" (300 rnrn) TYP
III 10150"CUrf rt FXM4F MVFUFN1 raa lK'AbFh
INCTALLATII ,Alt of a1ITTIWI MMI VTrti; r^ MAY M'nR
1
APPENDIX D
EROSION CONTROL REPORT
� j' ,% �\ �l �,` �•__ _ _`__-
\\ I
r
-� A E+ . ar-mF••� r
na au.r.
v-- abcv 1 w
nninoorinn.rnm // 970-221-415R
■� (NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
1,
1
L
I
1
I
I
1
A comprehensive Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (along with associated details) is included with
the final construction drawings. It should be noted, however, that any such Erosion and Sediment
Control Plan serves only as a general guide to the Contractor. Staging and/or phasing of the BMPs
depicted, and additional or different BMPs from those included may be necessary during
construction, or as required by the authorities having jurisdiction.
It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure erosion control measures are properly
maintained and followed. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is intended to be a living
document, constantly adapting to site conditions and needs. The Contractor shall update the
location of BMPs as they are installed, removed or modified in conjunction with construction
activities. It is imperative to appropriately reflect the current site conditions at all times.
The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall address both temporary measures to be implemented
during construction, as well as permanent erosion control protection. Best Management Practices
from the Volume 3, Chapter 7 — Construction BMPs will be utilized. Measures may include, but are
not limited to, silt fencing along the disturbed perimeter, gutter protection in the adjacent roadways
and inlet protection at proposed storm inlets. Vehicle tracking control pads, spill containment and
clean-up procedures, designated concrete washout areas, dumpsters, and job site restrooms shall
also be provided by the Contractor.
Grading and Erosion Control Notes can be found on Sheet C0.01 and C5.00 of the Utility Plans.
The Utility Plans will also contain a full-size Erosion Control Plan, as well as a separate sheet
dedicated to Erosion Control Details. In addition to this report and the referenced plan sheets, the
Contractor shall be aware of, and adhere to, the applicable requirements outlined in any existing
Development Agreement(s) of record, as well as the Development Agreement, to be recorded prior
to issuance of the Development Construction Permit. Also, the Site Contractor for this project will
be required to secure a Stormwater Construction General Permit from the Colorado Department of
Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Water Quality Control Division — Stormwater Program,
before commencing any earth disturbing activities. Prior to securing said permit, the Site Contractor
shall develop a comprehensive StormWater Management Plan (SWMP) pursuant to CDPHE
requirements and guidelines. The SWMP will further describe and document the ongoing activities,
inspections, and maintenance of construction BMPs.
Final Erosion Control Report
I
1
7
11
r-I
APPENDIX E
Soils Resource Report
11 970.221.4158
I
I
1
I
J
I
1
Il
I
I
L�
I
I
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
I
July 1, 2016
I
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They
highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about
the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many
'
different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners,
community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also,
conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal,
and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance
the environment.
1 Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties
that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information
is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on
various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying
with existing laws and regulations —
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
Although
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases.
Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.govtwps/portal/
nres/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For
'
more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (http://
offices.sc.egov.usda.govAocator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nres142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic
tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or
underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department
'
of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural
Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil
Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs
and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where
applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual
orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an
individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited
bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means
I
I
for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should
contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a
complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400
Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272
(voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA Is an equal opportunity provider and
employer.
I
I
H
1 3
I
I
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
SoilMap..................................................................................................................7
SoilMap................................................................................................................8
Legend..................................................................................................................9
MapUnit Legend.............................:..................................................................10
MapUnit Descriptions........................................................................................10
Larimer County Area, Colorado......................................................................12
3—Altvan-Satanta loams, 0 to 3 percent slopes.........................................12
IReferences............................................................................................................14
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
7
1
I
I
I
How Soil Survevs Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas
in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and
their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations
affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of
the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and
the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is
the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the
surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the
surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other
living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas
(MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share
common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources,
soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically
consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is
related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area.
Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of
landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous
areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the
landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus,
during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable
degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the
landscape.
' Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by
an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify
predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to
identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of
soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
L�
ICustom Soil Resource Report
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confine data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have
similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique
combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of
the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes
'
the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and
landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of
resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is
needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and
experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil -
landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific
locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of
measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These
measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to
bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of
'
sand, silt, day, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from
one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
'
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
'
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret
the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed characteristics
'
and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different
uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils
in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are
modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet
local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information,
production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop
yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from
field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.
I Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such
variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long
periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil
scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have
' a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a
high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields,
roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
I
i
1
Soil Map
'
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil
map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
'
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
1
1
1
1
i
1
11
1
1
f]
' IW r41'W
z
o o
N
y*W
O is
o
N �
o X
1OD
A
i
1
1
MP 4' 36' W
1
Or S i
4 4
tl �i
z i
IW r41'W
^a
c
y
O
3
cc
Cl) o,
oCD
v °c
m
r
m
0
IOV r36-W
LJ
I
1
I
1
I
11
1
1
m 1
� �
� L]
!�
+
0
®
q�
Yam' 0 ''
yr
X 0 T
yq /�
0 C-
�.
9
33_t
i
o m
to m
m m
o m
3
3
o m
o a
�' o 0
0
Q�
p
o
d d
d
0 D
0
'O N
—
tD
m
.Q V
o o
C Ol
j
m O
O
N f rn
V O O
o
-0W
V o
c c
D
c
a
I
a m
NGG
m
N
O
O
G
N
j
J
N N
D
O
D
Yy
O
N
r
^m^
m
m
N
m
0
m y
7
C J J
4,
(no
O
m
En CO
a
non
'D xl A
c
3
cn
m v
(
n>•
cn
o o
o
g $
N
r- o
'n
o
�
m
J
N
m
N
7
rjp
O d
o(n
O
to(n
c O
g 1
m 7
nv
Q 0 d
n (n
O 0
3v_
m m
oa3m
d J
d
3 CD_O
m '�. O
topap
' m
3 3
m VI
m 'O
C 7 m 41
m
n a fl
N N
V'
to d
3
CD
d
' 'a
y
0
O m 0 0
y O, En m0
C CD
m m
3
d m m m
5
'C p O
m
H
(
p
O d p rJ
d m
(n C m
CD
O
=
j 7
O
Z
�
% a D
d
�Cj
m to
d
G
0
iri
a m p 0
0 0
to
m'
�'. P
"0
t^ 0m' my m
m�
Ccr
3rmd
3
d
v
5
O
mEF
p
H
c
m
r
< d
nm
61
m
3Dmm
O .'p
d
-�
myoH
O'
3
D
m
CD o o'
f
m
a
3 3
a
m O m O
O v m m�
C
m
m
m p V
m> a�
`G
O
Qd
d
m
m
d`O 0 c
7
C
oni
m0
m 0
Z
3cm
0
0
0
03
F
mm0n�
d0.Om�
vm
mf
'
o06 a
m
m
v�3
o
d
p°c
�
ESoEF
<
d
�<
0
Q
m
N
N
m Q
C
m N N O m
d Q M
n
N 3 N
C
D 0
ff�N
v D
(n
m' �� ' a
o N
7
d �v �i CD -0v
D
� m
D
1 a a
-u C
v
0 3
D 0 7
N 3 7
n
w
Nn
0 s
PL a
D
N
m N d 3
N
£O
m
7 rs
D
O o
X
n
0 O
C 0 a
�,m
W
m
an d O. a
m
O
m m
3
to 0
Ul
N m
a m
m d
N
'
m
3
Z
O N O
N
N
L
G
O
O
m Q
C—
J O
`-'C O
p
CD N n>
CO
m 0
—
N
N
0
c1.
Md
3 N O. m
En
G
3
p0
N
m
p
t0
p' C N
o
d
H
a
d
0
`OG J
d
n
3
CD
O< m
a p m
y
b
O
O
N
f01 0
N O m
A
tD
7
N
w
N
c
OD m O
m S.
O
t0
)
O
O
o
N
(D
W,
1
[i
Custom Soil Resource Report
1
I
1
I
1
Map Unit Legend
L.artmer County Area, Colorado (CO644)
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres In AOI
Percent of AOI
3
AltvanSatanta loams, 0 to 3
percent slopes
0.8
100.0%
Totals for Area of Interest
0.8
100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils
or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the
maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits forthe properties of the soils. On the landscape,
however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability
of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend
beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic
class rarely, If ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic
classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas
for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes
other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally
are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used.
Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified
by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the
contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with
some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been
observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially
where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations
to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness
'
or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic
classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments
on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If
intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to
define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
10
Custom Soil Resource Report
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each
description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties
and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons
that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity,
degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such
differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the
detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly
indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0
to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The
pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all
areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or
anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical
or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and
relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha -
Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that
could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of
the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be
made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up
of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material
and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
11
ICustom Soil Resource Report
' Larimer County Area, Colorado
3—Altvan-Satanta loams, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol. jpw2
Elevation: 5,200 to 6,200 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches
' Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F
Frost -free period. 135 to 150 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
' Map Unit Composition
Altvan and similar soils: 45 percent
Satanta and similar soils: 30 percent
' Minor components: 25 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and trensects of the mapunit.
Description of Altvan
'
Setting
Landform: Benches, terraces
Landthim position (three-dimensional): Side slope, tread
'
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Mixed alluvium
'
Typical profile
H1- 0 to 10 inches: loam
H2 - 10 to 18 inches: clay loam, loam, sandy day loam
'
H2 -10 to 18 inches: loam, fine sandy loam, silt loam
H2 -10 to 18 inches: gravelly sand, gravelly coarse sand, coarse sand
H3 -18 to 30 inches:
H3 -18 to 30 inches:
'
H3 - 18 to 30 inches:
H4 - 30 to 60 inches.
H4 - 30 to 60 inches.
H4 - 30 to 60 inches:
Properties and qualities
'
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class. Well drained
Runoff class: Low
'
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
'
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent
Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 13.2 inches)
'
Interpretive groups
Land capability classiflcetion (irrigated): 3e
'
Land capability classification (noni►rigated): 3e
1
12
Custom Soil Resource Report
I
1
1
1
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Description of Satanta
Setting
Land1brm: Structural benches, terraces
Landforrn position (three-dimensional): Side slope, tread
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material. Mixed alluvium and/or eolian deposits
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 9 inches. loam
H2 - 9 to 18 inches: loam, clay loam, sandy clay loam
H2 - 9 to 18 inches: loam, day loam, fine sandy loam
H2 - 9 to 18 inches:
H3 - 18 to 60 inches:
H3 - 18 to 60 inches:
H3 -18 to 60 inches:
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class. Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding. None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent
Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 27.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3c
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Minor Components
Nunn
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Larim
Percent of map unit. 10 percent
Stoneham
Percent of map unit. 5 percent
13
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004.
Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and
testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils
in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S.
Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http:/twww.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/
detail/national/soils/?cid=nres 142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff.1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making
and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://www.nres.usda.govtwps/portal/
n res/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres 142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=n res 142p2_0,53580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http:/twww.nres.usda.govtwps/portal/nres/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nres 142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/
detail/national/land use/rangepastu re/?cid=stel prdb 1043084
1
14
Custom Soil Resource Report
' United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
' nres/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nres142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the
' Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.
http:/twww. nres.usda.govtwps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nres142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrr,s.usda.gov/lntemeVFSE DOCUM ENTS/n res 142p2_052290.pdf
l
LI
1
15
J
n
I
1
F
1
MAP POCKET
HISTORIC DRAINAGE EXHIBIT
PROPOSED DRAINAGE EXHIBIT
// 970.221.6158
8
i
COMMERCIAL
EL. DESIGNATION
NAVD BB
A
4985.45
D
50I1.35 ET (ROLE)
C
499135 FT
REWIATORY FI
PROMIGITON
ELEVATION
4986.95 FT
LOBI WA
-
BEI-\
\ \ \ \mow - \SaoOSA
x I
_\\ I 05.3 I
PROPOSED Ipp 1 1thN VFaBrmMwu.xwlLr \ �"� \ I,. I
wtaf � 1p
u � FLooDMwE� 11 � \
Z_..:-.., /// zCMltll1lPM -_- _ OS.Z
d r I
OU SAM
{ii O• /'mil / I
• I D
PAm1w
\ LOT
It $
., lot\OVIFxi 1 ; \\ ; � � PRSnED BIDEwAu ,
06, •• / 10
/. �• p i ;/ \\ wATFAaIAuly \ I •' 1
z anewux .... �. /• co / ; ._... M'A s+RDCME \''�..._...
rwM! / ll `aowcoliTlaL \\ i `\♦ 6 B
AXI
If
rXIA
i\BI
A
\ ! C y. i c"AKBMB \ --`I I I `
W.1 11 : I
i3 l i E.1
TI TFExw DFAx tiiS (i .e]
3 \ TEBwIw
_ =2
FFEA5.15 � \
/ ggFRI
1 MET 1KN I 1BPM Y�y�IFI
ETAIN wI
R
1 \ FEIN`41 So
■■y \ i / / j 1 J'� / / I I iRFxcTxqux
■ / / 1 .Fr i I 1 \
/ / 1
B
IF
v_=
M�
-------------
FOR DRAINAGE REIBI ONLY
NOT FOR CONSTRUOTION
® NORTH
10 0 10 A m
IN IMN, II
ft
LEGEND:
sT EZETINGSTORMQRUN
EXISTINGwcSSWITE�R FL .
■�������• wumnGELLAWN
PROPOSED
�N WENT INLET
PROPOSED
LOI
® - PROPOSEDa ALTFIUTFALL uaBlcDrrER ELowLmE
PROPOSED INSIDE
CCMOI,ryVPB:GVnEP FLONlIXE
�4950- PROPOSED
----4990---- F%ISiIHGCdrtOF O
W. PPOPOSEOOVEPLWOFWW g1EC1KK1
uGE I-\-. Exlsnw�RLua FLQwolunox
ti CGNCEXTRATEDFLa MIN CTIW
�W PROPOSED FLO1xmE ELEVATwx
® EXISTING INLET SENATE O>-13.1 "``TTTTTIIIii
EXISTING OECD TRUE
MSTxccamE TREE .......
EXISTING LIGHT FUELS
EXISTING
DRAINAGEMM� IT
BmxGxDPGEFF w�
SIR
Bu = w
QDESIGN POINT Z E
z
zw
RUNOFF SUMMARY TABLE:
TOMAL �0
OESWH BA91N ARIAaCIOO Ta lTIC W-w iton Doe
s
MINT
10
Iwul
fmNl
(min)
lehl
°IOD
hhl
AT
W.1
0.93
0.%
LW
6.0
9.0
0.@
9.IB
El
EI
OW
0.0
P81
5.0
5.0
0.W
0.30
F.1
R.1
0.19
D.%
1.00
5.0
5.0
0.19
1.21
nl
RI
0.015
On
0.95
6.0
5.0
ON
0.1]
rt
C6.2
pM
0.%
LW
5.0
!D
0.10
0,37
.a
asa
pl!
D.el
0.0
Bo
!.D
b r±E
NOTES:
+. RFFFA iUTEMiidLLoi ARFIB.INLF@EE. EABFME1rtB, LDi mg .m'f
lw x T qu+Lm EABEYEMR.OTHFA F/SEMFN+9.MDOTIER9{IRvEv LL -
I.OREVATK
3 ALL ELNAEWOOF FORT COLLCTED INS
SWERUSS NEw CONNEOXMWs uADINGSTED REax ARE
PER THE GETS cowxsvERTrxwHTROLwiuu MBYDSB)
v AFLWUSE PERMIT SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR EACH STRUCTURE AND EACH
A
CONSTRUCTION E LEMENT(RETENTIM MVW BIDE PAINS, PARKING LOT.
UgIDES. ETC) IN THE HIGH al MK ROOD PENCE AND FL¢O W AC
♦ Me STOUCE OF MATERIALS ON EWRENi Y1NL BE ALLOWED IN THE
FLDWAY
PEFWMANENTWIµDSCAPING SHALL ALSO MEET EREO09EMENTS FEW NO
FaSEmTXEFLW WAY.
s. REFER TO THE F I Det REPORT FEW ELEVATIONS CREDIT MBr
NORTHERN GGINEENNG, DATED FEBRWRY 11 W17 FOR AWNIOIUL
INFORMATION
B. RISE MEDICATION iSPEVOFOR FAR WOW WITHIN ME FLttQWAY OSUCASiLIMSPXOCURB AND ETC
T ALL EASE EWiPNFNT IS TO BE LOCATED OR THE RWFTEp CF ME BTROCTIPE. Z J
a LSTRRUUC ` aS WITHIN THE FLwvwAY(PicNIC TABLES. MAKE RACKS. ETC.) !�
RED
9. DUMPB�TEa SPHALL BE SECURED TO PREVENT OFFICE FLOATATION WRING
o a
+oxoCwTWUFACIurms oxUSES MAY lscPu.TEOIN.Nr nooD zaxE. W W
SHALL BE
DED AGE AFFERWAND
1,
WEDNG RAGA TO THE EXVNICEE OF A CERTIPRFA g160CCWUANCY FOR FEE 00
(L4Z
V) III
VI
City
of Fort Collins, Colorado
UTILITY
PLAN APPROVAL
APPRD\ED,
C1y atlR�F
DRY
91ECKED BY
Mar WWMmUr GWLLr
D.Y
OHECKED BY:
P�TWTmws T 1'y
D.Y
OHECKED BY.
Tali Te hm
pey
FLECKED BY:
DIU
CHECKED BY:
Sheet
C7.00
6 of 17
T
1
xNEXI
)RUNT
rc
8
O
L'
MR
J'A
_r — ..1-1118- ...r. .
�Mh
h"�
roaE VArATEn .emnm , I
• I o,7HoE.zo
i 83 ac
J-00
J/
on,
\
JI
— —_- `
------------
FOR DRAINAGE
NOT FOR COI`
f1
® NORTH
I INFEEII
LEGEND:
�51♦ EASTWGSTARMSEWEN LINE
FxlSTwcunaWTTFR nanmE
■■■■■■■■■ DnLN.GEB.EIN �
---ra�o---- EKlsnxac(OrRWR
wP PRw(OseoovEwwD aowowECTDx
ED4IED DYER W ID how dREGID,H
y caDwlRr FLow ECTIcx
■ EKlsnxomLETGRATHE
wnlNDoecO. TREE z°
ECESGMGCONIF. TREE
A EKISTIxGeorv:FULE �pL90 uGc,
"ISEPTUSTUMF o:o 'Nltij:.".frF
��I�GEEAS,NMNORMADRWEFF :
03.13
QOESIGNPOINT 555
UJI f
= w
O Z
Z IYI
RUNOFF SUMMARY TABLE:
8
MIM
W 1074 3yF 106yr
w PpM Ybx MG aC100 Te ITSWU GIN
4Pm1 IDNI (mYJ
a
BeO.Ot 0.)6 A99 9A 9A 1.11 Bas
J E ON 03 0.99 9A OA OAR Ibl &�
U
NOTES:
1. REFER TO TIE FEET FOR LOT M . TRACT SUEE„EASEMERn, Lm m
DIMENSIONS. UTILITY E M MOTx .Nb OTHER SUNNY
TION j
1 A EIEVAnpBOEFCFEDINPV VIEWPNOBEHCN LI0TEDHEEOx LIE a0 D @Y
PER THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS VERTIMAL CONTROL OATUM(IUWM)
S AnM N BEER MEANT SHALL BE REOUIREO FM EACH GIRUCTURE AND EACH
SIDE CONSTRUCTIONFLELENT IOETENTIdIPCHDS BIKE PATH$. PMRINOLOT, L
UTILITIES,ETC) IN THE HIOH RISC FLOOD VERDE AND FLOOOWAY. � •S
l NB OR EOUPNE AT SHALL 9E AL LEANED IN THE
FLODOWAY.WROTE ETTIEMPawaY(DAMON CONS TRUCTION) OR R gd g,l
D EPANNExI. IANOpW ARNO SRALLAISO NEETTHE REWWEMFNTS FOR NO
IN THE
S MEER TO THE FI NAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR ELEVATIONS CREW WbH By
INORTHERNENGINEERED TYPED PEEN 10, Al7 FORADDITIONAL
TION
0. 19E IMTIFICATIOXISREWIRDOF WCPRNRHWTPE FLOOMAY
BWIATUT IES. LANWIWBIG OFRBAHOWTTERETC.
7. AI WR EOUIPMENTISTOBELOCATEDp THERWFTOPOFTRE TRUCNIE
IL ME.TRUCTRESWITHIN THE FLMo"nAY KNOW TF$EB. BIKE RACHB ETC.)STRA�1
BEWAPETER SHALL BE SHELVED TO PREVENT OFFSITE FLOATATION DURING A L g
10OXYEAR STORM. O a
IB AD CRITICAL FACILITIES ON USES MAY BE CREATED IN ANY FLOW ZONE. 11'
H. A FEW ELEVATION CE AT IF SHELL BE PROCEED AND APPROVED FOR THE W
BULdNR NORTH TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIEIfATHAN OF (OCCUPANCY ` ,^
Z
cAuuTDnxOTIFIc..nPIN CENTER OF
COLORNEN V
• O '0'^
KmCall
defom you
019.UNDERACYAND MEANT UTILITIES
H V
Q Z
City of Fort Collins, Colorado LU
UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL W X
A0 E6 W
Our disimser
—� CHECKED By.
MARC CHIEF
CHECKED Br
m
CHECKED er:
CHECKED BY. Shee[
E ONLY 7,.IL� re"" MA °"` C7, i
U TION aEDrtO BY w9.
17 of 17