Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Drainage Reports - 10/04/2017
r I IJ I I 1 I I I I City of Ft. Collin App ed Plans Approved By Date Prepared for: Brandon Grebe GYS LLC Real Estate / Development / Consulting Prepared by: NORTHERN ENGINEERING 301 North Howes Sliest, Sub 100 Fat Collin, Colorado 80521 Phone: 970.221.4158 Fas: 970.221.4159 vnvw.northemenglneertng,conn AThis 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. Nnrthrrn Enaineerine.rnm // 970.771.A158 Project Number: 1269-002 ■� NORTHERN ENGINEERING September 28, 2017 City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 RE: Preliminary Drainage Report for South College Storage Dear Staff: Northern Engineering is pleased to submit this Final Drainage Report for your review. This report accompanies the signed and recorded mylars for the proposed South College Storage. This report has been prepared in accordance with the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM). We understand that review by the City is to assure general compliance with standardized criteria contained in the FCSCM as well as maintaining the overall Master Drainage Plan set forth by the City. If you should have any questions as you review this report, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, NORTHERN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. Cody S PE Blaine Mathisen Pr ng�F Project Engineer co 52391 0 ENG2 `0 NAL 301 N. Howes Street, Suite 100, Fort Collins, CO 80521 970.221.4158 1 www.northernengineering.com ■� INORTHERN ENGINEERING South College Storage 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. General Location and Description............................................................................... 1 A. Location.....................................:.......................................................................................................1 B. Description of Property ................................. :................................................................................... 1 C. Floodplain..........................................................................................................................................2 II. drainage basins and sub-basins.............:.................................................................... 3 A. Major Basin Description....................................................................................................................3 B. Sub -Basin Description.......................................................................................................................3 ' III. A. drainage DESIGN CRITERIA...................................................................................... 4 Regulations ........................................................................................................................................4 B. Four Step Process..............................................................................................................................4 ' C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints ............................................ .....................5 D. Hydrological Criteria.........................................................................................................................6 ' E. Hydraulic Criteria..............................................................................................................................6 F. Floodplain Regulations Compliance..................................................................................................6 G. Modifications of Criteria ...................... 6 IV. drainage FACILITY DESIGN....................................................................................... 6 A. General Concept...............................................................................................................................6 B. Specific Details..................................................................................................................................8 ' V. CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................9 A. Compliance with Standards..............................................................................................................9 B. Drainage Concept..............................................................................................................................9 References.......................................................................................................................10 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 ,V NORTHERN ENGINEERING I LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES: Figure1 - Aerial Photograph................................................................................................. 1 Figure 2 - Proposed Site Plan............................................................................................... 2 Figure 3 - Fort Collins Floodplains......................................................................................... 3 MAP POCKET: Historic Drainage Exhibit Proposed Drainage Exhibit I Final Drainage Report NORTHERN ENGINEERING I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 P GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. Location 1. Figure 1 - Aerial Photograph 2. South College Storage is in a tract of land in southeast quarter of Section 11, Township 6 North, Range 69 West of the 6`h P.M., City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. 3. The project site is located at the southwest corner of Skyway Drive and College Avenue. 4. Currently the existing site has minimal storm infrastructure to convey runoff. Historically, the site sheet flows east towards Collage Ave. and is collected in an existing 30" FES at a low point along the western property line. From there the flow is conveyed via 30" RCP pipe east. The project site also has an existing drainage ditch running north to south near the southwest corner of the site. This ditch will be relocated to the west eventually but that will be associated with the future development to the south, the property owned by Trilby Holdings Group LLC. B. Description of Property 1. South College Storage is approximately 13.00 net acres. 2. The runoff generated from the project sheet flows west to east. The entire site will 1 sheet flows towards an existing 30" FES that will collect and convey the flows offsite towards Fossil Creek. The design engineers will maintain these existing flow patterns. 1 3. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey Skyways Storage consists of several native soil types. Most the site (70.0 percent) consists of Kim-Thedalund loams, 3 to 15 percent slopes, which falls into Hydrologic Soil Groups B. Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent Final Drainage Report z INORTHERN ENGINEERING I slopes, is roughly 18.1% of the site and falls into Hydrologic Soil Group B. Fort Collins loam consists of 10.7% and falls into Hydrologic Soils Group C. The remaining 1.3% of the site is made up of Midway clay loam, 5 to 25 percent slopes, which falls into Hydrologic Soils Group D. 4. The proposed development will clear all the existing vegetation along the newly proposed private drive aisle, building location, and associated parking lots (Tract A). South College Storage will not be modifying any of the area to the west of the private drive aisle (Outlot 8). Additionally, South College Storage will try to minimize the limits of disturbance to the east of the proposed parking lots and building (Tract 6). Water quality will be provided on -site by a rain garden. South College Storage will be detaining the 100-yr event and releasing at the historic 2-yr event. However, South College Storage will be bypassing regional flows through the site. This is discussed in more detail within Section IV. Figure 2 - Proposed Site Plan 5. There is currently an old irrigation ditch that runs south to north and is located near the southwest corner of the Outlot A. This ditch is currently abandoned and will be rerouted to run parallel along the western property line when the property to the south of the South College Storage begins development. 6. The project site is within a General Commercial (CG) Zoning District. The proposed use is permitted as a use within this zone district. C. Floodplain The property does not lie within a plottable FEMA floodplain. However, according to FIRM Panel 08069C1000F for Larimer County, dated December 19th, 2006, this tract lies in an area of minimal flood hazard, Zone X. 2. Additionally, the project does not lie within a City Floodplain either. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Final Drainage Report I ' NORTHERN ENGINEERING Fort Collins Maps N i .. ', Iptlbm Anull♦ 1, n ,,. t 13.719 Figure 3 - Fort Collins Floodplains II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS l�pYb �uYxeenri ruu uc v.r•- 1O• CJ GYlmlr��r min A. Major Basin Description 1. South College Storage straddles the boundary between the Mail Creek Basin and the Fossil Basin. South College Storage has been design in accordance with the Fossil Creek Master Drainage Plan. B. Sub -Basin Description 1. South College Storage has historically conveyed all the generated runoff via overland flow from west to east, to a low point adjacent to College Avenue where it is captured by an existing flared end section. These flows will bypass the detention and water quality amenities being proposed for South College Storage and head directly to the existing flared end section adjacent to College Avenue. 2. Historically, the total amount of flow passing through the project site from the west (H3 and OS1) is 2.19 cfs for the Historic 2-year, and 11.05 cfs for the Historic 100- year. These flows are being captured by a Type C Inlet (near the intersection of Skyway Drive and Mars Drive). From there the runoff is conveyed via 18" RCP pipe under Mars Drive and enters a swale that will route the runoff to the existing flared end section adjacent to College Avenue. 3. For a more in depth analysis for the areas within the property boundary three basins were delineated; H 1, H2, and H3. These basins were delineated in a way that would correspond with the proposed basins, in order to accurately determine the max allowable release rate for South College Storage site specifically. 4. Basin H1 is the area directly to the west of the College Avenue, where the existing flared end section is located (Outlot B in the proposed plat). Basin H1 is 100% Final Drainage Report 3 N I NORTHERN ENGINEERING 1 landscaping and this basin will remain, for the most part, completely untouched when , South College Storage is constructed. There will be some minor grading along the western portion of the basin as well as two separate swales cut during the construction but the imperviousness will remain the same. 5. Basin H2 corresponds to the area that will be being developed for South College Storage as well as half of the Mars Drive expansion. Basin H2 historically has been 100% landscaping with a Historic 2-year flowrate of 1.84 cfs. This flowrate was used to help determine our max allowable release rate from our site. More information on the max allowable release rate will be discussed further on in Section IV. 6. Basin H3 is the area to the west of the project site and east of the existing property boundary (Outlot A in the proposed plat). There is currently an abandon irrigation ditch running northwest to southeast across this basin. However, this ditch will be reconstructed to run north to south parallel to the western property line when this area is eventually developed. For analysis purposes, it was assumed that this ditch is full during a major storm event so any flow generated from this basin will flow east ' towards the ultimate design point of the existing flared end section in Basin H1. All flow generated in Basin H3 will bypass South College Storage. 7. Basin OS1 is the only offsite basin entering our site. The flow is generated by a small portion of landscaping to the west of Basin H3. Flow from OSi enter Basin H3 and then follow the conveyance path that Basin H3 uses. 8. Currently, at the intersection of College Avenue and Skyway Drive there is a 2' Curb Chase that is conveying runoff from Skyway to the existing flared end section in Basin H1. South College Storage is going to replace that 2' Curb Chase with a 10' Type R inlet to help convey any flows that are currently going through that curb chase to the historic location. 9. There are no known drainage studies for this associated project site. 10. A more detailed description of the project's proposed drainage patterns follows in Section IV.A.4., below. ' 11. A full-size copy (8 112" x 11") of the Historic Drainage Exhibit can be found in the Map Pocket at the end of this report. III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. Regulations , There are no provisions outside of FCSCM being proposed with South College Storage. South College Storage is releasing at a reduced Historic 2-year rate, providing adequate WQCV, and also meeting the LID standards set forth by the FCSCM. B. Four Step Process The overall stormwater management strategy employed with the South College Storage 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 ' Final Drainage Repoli 4 1 1 ,V (NORTHERN ENGINEERING South College Storage Several techniques have been utilized with the proposed development to facilitate the reduction of runoff peaks, volumes, and pollutant loads as the site is developed from the current use by implementing multiple Low -Impact Development (LID) strategies, including: K Reducing the sites footprint as much as possible and limiting the amount of land being disturbed to the west and east of the site within the property boundary. w Routing flows, to the extent feasible, through a Rain Garden to aid in the removal of pollutants from the runoff. �►= Providing on -site detention to increase time of concentration, promote infiltration and reduce loads on existing storm infrastructure. N= 100% of Basin M (which will be described in Section IV will receive its water quality from a Rain Garden. Please see Section IV for further explanation of drainage patterns and LID treatment. i 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 and provide the necessary BMPs required for water quality. A majority of the stormwater that is generated on the project site will be routed into a rain garden. For the portion of the site that is unretainable it will be flowing slowly over a large grass buffer as it makes its way to the existing flared end section. Step 3 — Stabilize Drainageways As stated in Section I.B.5, above, there is no major drainageway within the property boundary. While this step may not seem applicable to South College Storage, the proposed project indirectly helps achieve stabilized drainageways nonetheless. Once again, site selection has a positive effect on stream stabilization. By repurposing an undeveloped, under-utilized site, combined with LID, the likelihood of bed and bank erosion is greatly reduced. Furthermore, this project will pay one-time stormwater development fees, as well as ongoing monthly stormwater utility fees, both of which help achieve citywide r drainageway stability. Step 4 — Implement Site Specific and Other Source Control BMPs. South College Storage includes a three story building with an associated drive aisle, all of which will require the need for site specific source controls including: N= A localized trash collection system through use of individual bins stored internally. C. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints I1. There are no known drainage studies for the existing property. 2. There are no known drainage studies for any adjacent properties that will have any effect on the South College Storage project. 3. The subject property is essentially an "in -fill" development project, as the site 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: N= Mars Drive will need to tie into the existing elevation of Skyway Drive at the intersection. Existing vegetation to the east and west of the project site will be preserved. Final Drainage Report 5 (NORTHERN ENGINEERING N= The existing grades at the project site are too steep to develop on so these grades will be modified but historic drainage patterns will be maintained. 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 10-year recurrence interval. The second event considered is the "Major Storm," which has a 100-year recurrence interval. 5. 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 historically drains towards a flared end section located adjacent to College Avenue via overland flow. 2. All drainage facilities associated with the South College Storage project are in accordance with the 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 not located within any regulatory floodplain. 4. The South College Storage project does not propose to modify any natural drainageways. F. Floodplain Regulations Compliance 1. As previously mentioned, all structures are located outside of any FEMA 100-year or City floodplain, and thus are not subject to any floodplain regulations. G. Modifications of Criteria 1. The proposed South College Storage development is not requesting any modification to the current criteria. IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. General Concept 1. The main objectives of the South College Storage drainage design is to maintain historic drainage patterns, and ensure no adverse impacts to downstream properties or existing downstream infrastructure. 2. As previously mentioned, there is off -site flows entering onto the project site. 3. A list of tables and figures used within this report can be found in the Table of Final Drainage Report 6 NORTHERN ENGINEERING South College Stora Contents at the front of the document. The tables and figures are located within the sections to which the content best applies. 4. The South College Storage project is composed of four major drainage basins, designated as Basins El, M, Wl, and OS.1. The drainage patterns for each major basin are further described below. Basin El Basin E1 is the exact same basin as the previously discussed historic basin, Basin H1. However, due to such steep grades some additional grading will occur on the western edges of this basin to eliminate the need for landscaping walls. There will also be two new swales cut in within Basin E1 to help better convey runoff from the off -site flows 1 and the released flows to the existing flared end section adjacent to College Avenue. Basin M Basin M corresponds to all the detainable area associated with the development of South College Storage and over half of Mars Drive. Basin M is further subdivided into ten (10) sub -basins, designated as Basins M1, M2, M3.a, M3.b, M3.c, M4,M5, M6, M7 and M8. Sub -basin M1 is composed of the private drive aisle and wraps around the eastern side of the proposed building. Sub -basin M2 consists of the sidewalk along ' the east side of Mars Drive as well as the western section of the private drive aisle adjacent to the west side of the building. Sub -basins M3.a, M3.b, and M3.c correspond to portions of the roof that will be conveyed to the drive aisle via down spouts.. Sub -basin M4 is composed of the southern private drive aisle and a small portion of landscaping area adjacent to the building. Sub -basin M5 corresponds to the area designated for the Rain Garden as well as the onsite detention pond. Sub -basin M6 is affiliated with a portion of the east side of Mars Drive between a local high and low point. Sub -basin M7 is affiliated with a portion of the west side of Mars Drive between a local high and low point. Sub -basin M8 corresponds to a small portion of Mars Drive that will be entering the site via a curb chase. All the flow generated within Basin M will be treated via Rain Garden and detained on site and released at a reduced Historic 2-year flow towards the existing flared end section. Flows generated in Basin M will be collected by roof leaders and inlets located within Mars Drive as well as inlets within the private drive aisles. Basin Wl Basin Wlis essentially the same basin as the historic basin H3. Runoff generated in this basin will bypass the South College Storage project site via a Type C Inlet and 18" RCP and it will be conveyed via swales to the existing flared end section in Basin El. Basin OS.1 Basin OS.1 is within the South College Storage project site but because of steep slopes and lack of existing storm infrastructure it is uncatchable and therefore will be ' sheet flowing offsite undetained and untreated. Basin OS.1 consists of a small portion of the paved intersection of Mars Drive and Skyway Drive as well as the landscaping areas on the backside of the private drive aisles. Because this area is leaving the site undetained the developed 100-year flow rate associated with Basin OS.1 (1.21 cfs) will be subtracted from the Historic 2-year flow rate from Basin H2 (1.84 cfs) for the allowable release rate (1.84 — 1.21 = 0.63 cis). Final Drainage Report 7 NORTHERN ENGINEERING 11 B. Specific Details 1. The main drainage problem associated with this project site is the deficiency of water quality present, and lack of existing stormwater infrastructure on the South College Storage site. The proposed site will mitigate these issues by instituting the following water quality devices and stormwater structures: The runoff generated from Basin M will be routed to a designed Rain Garden. All runoff generated from the proposed building roof will be routed to a designed Rain Garden as well. w The runoff generated from Basin M will be routed to a detention pond. The remaining runoff generated from Basin OS.1 is routed across landscape areas. A 18" RCP will help convey the flows associated with the neighborhood to the west through the South College Storage site into landscape areas. 2. The allowable release rate was established by calculating the historic 2-year peak runoff rate of the project area and reducing it by the 100-year peak runoff rate of the offsite flows associated with the South College Storage project area, resulting in an overall release of 0.63 cfs (Basin H2 = 1.84 cfs; Basin OS.1 = 1.21 cfs 4 1.84 — 1.21 = 0.63 cis) 3. Detention Pond and Water Quality Calculations Rain Garden M Rain Garden M was sized for the 12-hour Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV). Calculations for Rain Garden M, based on characteristics of Basin M, indicate a WQCV of 2496 cu. ft. The total WQCV provided is 2835 cu. ft. at a water surface elevation of 5024.25 feet. There are two separate emergency overflow paths within the rain garden. There is a monitoring well with a dome grate to capture the 10-year flows and route them to the bottom of Detention Pond M. Anything over the capacity of the 10-year pipe will over the emergency spillway and be conveyed to the detention pond. Detention Pond M The modified FAA method was used to quantify the required detention volume. Calculations for Detention Pond M, based on characteristics of Basin M and Basin OS.1 and an adjusted release rate of 0.63 cfs, indicate a detention volume of 38,627 cu. ft. The 100-year water surface elevation in Detention Pond M is at an elevation of 5024.15 feet. Detention Pond M will not be providing any additional water quality because Rain Garden M is treating the whole site and conveying the treated runoff to the Detention Pond. An Emergency Spillway has been set at the 100-year elevation just above the proposed outfall location. In the event that the outlet structure is compromised runoff will be conveyed through the emergency spill way and flow east towards the existing flared end section adjacent to College Avenue. The top of the pond along the remaining sides of the pond is set at an elevation of 5025.38. Therefore, more than a foot of freeboard has been provided on all the other sides of the detention pond. Final Drainage Report a ■� INORTHERN ENGINEERING South College Ston V. CONCLUSIONS A. Compliance with Standards 1. The drainage design proposed with South College Storage project complies with the City of Fort Collins' Stormwater Criteria Manual. 2. The drainage design proposed with the South College Storage project complies with the City of Fort Collins' Master Drainage Plan for the Fossil Creek Basin. 3. There are no regulatory floodplains associated with the South College Storage development. 4. The drainage plan and stormwater management measures proposed with the South College Storage development are compliant with all applicable State and Federal regulations governing stormwater discharge. B. Drainage Concept 1. The drainage design proposed with this project will limit potential damage associated with its stormwater runoff. South College Storage will detain based on characteristics of Basin M at a reduced allowable release rate. Water quality will be provided in Rain Garden M which is considered an LID treatment. [1 1 Final Drainage Report 9 ■y I NORTHERN ENGINEERING References 1. ify of Fort Collins Landscape Design Guidelines for Stormwater and Detention Facilities, November 5, 2009, BHA Design, Inc. with City of Fort Collins Utility Services. 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 10 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 North"nEnnin"Ona.com // 970.227.1758 I I I I I I I @ I I I I @ @ I zu �( � � I /E 00-00ae £® , JinCL t ■%t , mC5 $ �U�Q2 _ �1 a /§ |jf�M wm£ ^aa /FRS ci Z %e! E . � � ;Qc2 � S 0000 2,. k Q£2 §a, a, ��a e aa§ k|- ° , 2k- Sl' CL 2 a)2§ eoq $ ) § Cl ; u /§ §00 oe ! 00000 ; S 2 J� ■ �:k 2 :)) } ) , !Q § #ck: % & ::$ - , } /\\,)k)\}\ m u ) I � \ $ I I I I I �} @ I @ I �\ @ 2 a� ! | | §2(0 )f$ | . � ƒ §\ƒ# � ! k n 0 § & ®`\ zz!! a % ; ««ff k� |ik | � Kk;:l,� Mill I / I I I $ @ I I I I I I \ I �\ � I JQ£Q<&G f ƒJ/§/\/ /\§OL § l:;elm4 $ )§ | a 2 | , ) 2 .;. _ _ o , CX. |®` A o ,--„ m \ }} \ ) k } f 0 \ \ 7 \ ] { I $ \ I I I I @ q � @ @ @ I § | | F:::$ 2 .:: 2 � 2 E 9i ...._\( \ |. allri D Ell® /k ( ;\ � � { In f '! ! z� rA m � az} � !|/ t!! 2 �.@ k�® q | ~` U % /-¥00 2 | u �,�,_ # �&\!■ � § liv I � (j \ I I I I / I @ § \ = 22 § ! , � b i n SL / K ! ( ¢f � | n 2 74 ! ,}r ■ I i «�j�• ' § o § § � §}/ � § | � / _ b . 2 E _ _» &, � ¢ AD §�7(� w I 1 I I I I I I I I i I 00 ^ N to O I V I� N ci 00 00 6 N d h 01 a,�M rnaoaa T C IO 00 u'1 tLl 00 O~ E N N T C 0 0 0 W N N~ E N M M M M M CI O O O O EN N O ry V N N N N O O O O Q Q N Co O Z N M� Q 2 = = O m Zf L L L L WO a c o (1) 00 Ln O d Noq ti N O v O N T C M N o~ E1O T C_ W 00 rl g M M C1 O O o m N ko N U O O N � n oa A� u N y p M 2 O OD = M 2 .a 2 zZ f- Z W O L O L c Cl) N O r• N co EL I ri I 1 x ,o n IQ 1 M y r.�00 V 01 m tnAn d TO Q T m � V (nON V ACO�N�t-O •-. � � �• A C W r N O l0 lD W O CDANN A �-' �' N N O W A W N A m A 4 A �O N a O : (n O O N N O f V C J O �€ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ; m j 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 V O-- 0 0 0 O O O O N 0 0 �"� n cn rnm000�m000moo g � R1 i o Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 00000 0 A C W 0000000 A - 000 y Nf+ Alp fT 1p �O tt y N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1�' i0 0 0 0 n O m O m� Q `trail v o O O O O O O O O O O O O O `N 60006 000 000 0 00 d oo a s Z Z� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 I? S, 00�°00�° u w O 3 C z C K^! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 D u Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V p y 00000000000050 00000000000000 C (' v (J 5N Q tr, O O W 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 A d a Q om"00 v �Oo m l bb7i ; W o m a s. � A a ON o_ _ 4 Z ~ w' 000000000000oo�3N� a W W N 00 m V N OD �O l0 l0 00 OJ N fl P S. O r• N W �O O1 O � (T (P m N V (r II v1 w O N () m m N o c Q W W W O O t OWOOO=Ow p N Q N p W iO = A W O OOOOO �' � A ' .• N tpOo N v u N N OT C] � A 00 N N O O O 3 V OO O O O N rMill I 1 l 1 1 I 1 1 r I 7-9 I T n a �+ n n 0 N � � O Q y F N r E N p m m No P' m O• c 4 Q 6 4 a¢ Q¢ Q¢ Q¢ a rl • N �JK J 2 d 2e de O O O be dN 3N 2e iN 2 � _ V Li iJ , • C eed� Ly O O N m N O O l4d k I — U J O g Wc CI "' • ~ E H N O N d N N N N ~ N E N N O 0 $ m X s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 W e y 0 o 0 o o d m O Ni 16 N N N N N N^ Lr N O N O N N N N N LL o Tf J � .4 J O O O O O O m d O O N 0 02 0 L 0 u m o o 0 o a o 0 In a m 0 o o ' In o m 0 0 C J ..: .: .: .: .: .: .: .. 4♦'s O n m 0 q O d N m m O1 0 Of m N m N m O O o 0' O O O G O 0' O O S T n u n N G m O O ONI O 01 o O m o N O o m o 0 N o m a • s s s N m N J ty ti 0 ti U N Tj N f� Vi O I� II C$ O Z O Z O Z Z O Z O Z O O Z O Z O Z O Z O Z O Z O Z I • 5 > > - S N r A 5 W `L `L � f � E `! � p � • L' N m � �L E O m } T T z N 11 S _L"o d E E E E E E E E E E_ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 z " » Y � O wt3.�w� �z m W vm�n An N.� m L � c pY n a ' - vv a y 0 3 a w rncn mto cn��m�mcn No N 3 y,� n wrnm cn mein cn cn in cn in No 3, y o _ 0 0 0 q neV � W NOD W V N DD tD t0 t0 00 W N u7 �'OJW ip Ot O�r lT V�(TNJ (T � a ^ C 0000a00000000 W NW ODJN OJ l0 l0 lD 00 O]N f1 . W W O O l0 W O O O O O O W - t k� n o tpA000o00 W DDN DD WOJW O� ��- y 2 W NA A A A A A A A A AN W Am O)O]OD W DJ mmm W v �' n Y n c � m V U� l0 t0 l0 l0 l0 l0 �' l0 tp tp i0 tp w lD W tp l0 i. t0 t0 D) � c y N O m cn cn cn to u+ <n to to U cn to A � � O Y m R N A K W D W m o N OIN O, OI m V.- W w OW Nw y O �O 3 s Cl N N � W W N 0^ O NO �O.�.�p W P T d �tONbA V NNINO OAi 01 OAlA �Atnm W (TN�OI �n AA V =- ! w i •. , :: .:: | |;!|I� tms ) §|||!|| § cc89W.O.16 ° EllI ITFIT�.% i § ; I | E !§!>�/ I � I I I / I I I I I @ \/ J- § �\ <§��\\ YJ » � G ; K ; § 2�{ ) ! !$- • k .. |� m !\, k �| q k�\ z | || q ( � m 7�791 \ \ ( it I I I I I ri I I I I I I I I I I \(\ # § / f / � » _ {®$ \ / / \ k 2 a § § - \ ! , |� m !\, % {&7 ! u § CJ k (E \ x m- - {�2 fl v 3 3 3 p y A Z (f Z 3 3 m m ww � W J O pap d c3Ji N A O to nco Z () W 3 (T N 00 N W N w n >mj1 O (�Ti A ON 00 N D O O O O W co D 00 N O O 0 O O co (T O O A 00 p 0 cn cn yn wo H 3 � o Ol O1 A Ol f� Fi N (P W O N O N OO ki W 1p Op N .0 v 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 O in w V� (P A N A �-' N r-- ZF; Z f 3 3 w w w m co D Z O A O O O, O O O O O O A � n 0 A N N O W A W N A Op A N N A 1p �O W N O m lO N O O O O O O O O O O O O O W N M Op V N m O M co N N 0 0 0 0 . O t7 w tD W to O O O O A w w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N W (I� (P (n tli (P N In (P lP W p+ N J 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O .- O o 0 0 0 o EL p IV m IV O) m w �I W OO m N l0 V N V W V N N O O O w Q QD W 9 I B.1 — Storm Sewers B.2 — Inlets 1 B.3 — Detention Facilities 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 Nnrth P—Fnninnnrinn. rnm // 91n. 721.41;A 1 I 1 I I I Wl29 - Vebcity Mlao NnrthwrnFnninww rinn.rnm // 97n 721.41 iR II II 11 1 1 I I k r w � r 0 N N_ � d O N N C O z Z r N E N Q E y 4 li 3 a 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 m w w ¢ < OD u' 1J f0 S W 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 utfall 63 In x � N m r v CD N Ul O n: 1 57 Inv. El. 6031 Out Inv. El. 5031 In v, g n: 2 57 Out No 0 0 OD tNT N IWD W chi W ro CD 04 MC Mi U O U O 1i U O U O 1i 1 a I I I 1 1 c 0 z c a O f c 0 O Z Z O N r N_ Co m c s O c W O) m OJZ O c M � J O c N aa M x�r Lf) L r O m C m m (i N Jcli l9 0. ^ c 2 :3 vOi vOi `O N r� m L C o N � E U ^ u0i vOi Z xo� OOf O c 0 O O O O 0 M m c� > J k^ c W v N Lf) r N V > J ^ C W x 10 LO O O (D c C N J m m 0 U U c J- L m C E C N ^ C L ti c _ ro M m a LL LO .V�. LO O N 0 m C J } O O o c c J 0 O m v v O. � C a a � a a a E F O m U) Z c O N JZ I I I r Z (A O w • N N A N ul ff p a m m v w �• W N < m N V (A m o o m= a r w � .ni W N f0 fJ1 n `c' 3 � •• y a m o � n o rn x m N N A 3 n m -4 rn w - v � o xam u po A A a 0 x En< mm G W r N A W tO0 O O a M O O O � m A O O 0 7 W < m A rZ O A N r fW0 O O f 0 N N 9 C V W Uf G Ot N NOOy x d A A G x W N < r O O O N O O .Z1 C 7 p OO 0 S m 0 0 0 N 7 7 f Q m N (p O V _ 6/2 ^a, W C n^^• ^YI W a CD _r CD n 3 no C rF O N �o 0 I I 1 1 J Ji yO T r r M m Ul CD OA G ON1 O A W N (n O O O O O O O utfall 58 Inv. El. 5028.8 In x G) r N VI m O r vt 0 V [T � O CD 0) 0 .i. N N U O V N Ln: 1 .05 Out c 0 W W W A N (A OO A OD (pA p O 0 O pN O 8 p� c O C 4 F c o � z c N M c 0 C C O C W O m ' G J Z m 0 U c J C ^ S� Ion 0 O tqo N to .- J C7 a ^ {+1 o d c S n x N w 0 c N E 00 In z LO c8 co^ I J U1� In N r n m� J ^ C W o In n C! t: c m 00 N CJ X _ W In ttpp CD J m m c W U J W co C N " J 6) 3 m LO O f/1 r N II C O J N Q I a m c a c m J N O z m c C fyq JZ I I 1 r Z w 7 m C m OD A m CID CL m o tr a ? m N < 0 [) OD II A II < r m (o N t O 3 m D O f N O d rn C a 10 m. o m mm G) wo < r o 0 0 toz M w 0 o m ?m< w < m r3 N (n W m = w < r O N N V � 2 � S c m o x d m m _ N N A O. Ln r N V O C 7 p m S m J p oCA d m N O t0 < V r O O m 0 d 'm 1 ✓2 C ` cAi'� ^G) ^^W 0. CD r CD O 3 C rF 1"F O CO) m m m n 0 N co N Of m N 0 V1 N C O N d E m Z c4 w 7 E N U E `o ci U N O d m 0 Q pp J O S O S O O O - Outfali O8 3 In = o r N O 0 r w 0 A O U O � U � O N n 3 v V O O O O J Ln: 1 N .11 Out 10 10 O N O U O U A S O S S O O >_ m e a '07 F c rl o Z o N 80 N m m c C 0 c W m m O J Z m ro c « J C MO ^ S -Of lon C_ (A 'L� o . OOR _ J (9 ¢ ^ 0 N m c S 7 'S N O � a c No SG� � o m c o J U) '\ O O a m� Cl) > J ^ C W o In M a0 Y C m � Q O > J x ^ C iy In L GD Uj m W C c ^ J m ap 1 m cW U J W U7 C N ^ - C J fO c _ o LL � } O O 0 � 11 m C 'O O c c U � J $ F O m c p � V1 2 JZ I I J 1 I n �1� 1 I I 1 1 z m o � o m r m • � � m cn n n c v F m O < m I I 1 b w 0 x x m m 0 CV < r V A O Q cy x a f cnnCA - m m 3 iD W xmm (n p, cn m m N r w o e � 0 0 � m P 3 N co co m W < m CD CA m �< w r 0o m o x m o — a z c o _ m c 0 wIn m 3 H C � d w N C om G $ < r N N M O 7 m a-< ID 00 m n 0 O a co' s$� pr N m m O � V 0 _ 7C m r O : o x o�3 0 02 N �G a C Y CL CD r C• n 3 C d O� U) 10 m 0 s cn Er 3 A a A .�i i 9 1 1 1 1 1 I J 1 I 1 1 1 8 I I I 1 I I 1 i I 1 1 1 1 1 1 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD < V N O N W N W N p W N .-. O O O O O O O O O O O .T O o Sta 0+00.00 - Outfall Gmd. El. 5020.41 Inv. El. 5019.85 In S G) r o m G) o w 0 Sta 0+37.00 - Ln: 1 Gmd. El. 5024.25 A Inv, El. 5020.77 Out 0 CD o) n � o O 0 0 co O 0 o 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 O w 01 t0 N O O O O O O I 11 I 11 11 i m u c Z Z o N rn c C 0 V W _N to m OJZ c 0 rn v � U C ^ N 0 S-2 Lc)IWn 0 O m oef� O m C N Go � N J UI CL ^ r N N m C S 7 _ w O s rn rn a J ; O O Z (7 O ^ of in S Cy� a v m m c O N O J U) n rn S 06 m N N > J ^ CW O O n In Ln r m N > J C W K O O In In O �+ C c ^ J mom+ O Cl) t0 m m U U J.— L m 3 In u m m ^ C N c > J U1� �O t0 J co O LL El Lm y } N G u m B c J 0 M CL c n a G 'a 0. J E H 0 O m to Z JZ N I I 1 I I 1 r I I I (A N + r 7 0 � O m - r m n � - O CL C O O F N O < m n 1 V 0 V 0 N N N m ci < r O i0 co m(o o 0 w -4 d w m _ m }a O Y A CD N a mm x N N ID 0 A N < r O A W fl1 N O a M f0 O V O W e3 m A O O x- cI 0 o o N ism Or W w i0 W OD W N W � Z 7 C J N 10 m m 3 H A o — N 0) N m < � m rn n OI C) m m P W < r A A V 0 W O y" C � O 7 m w < N CP O f0 CD w O CD V _ x C"m y 7 V or o O W m � O I I I I I L � I I I I I I i I r r 0 N O N co m V/ N C O N Z N LU O N C1 ti U N O a` m LR ( N N (A N C.R N L" co V O W W (D W N O O O O O O O O O O O O � � tfall 52u 1 In 0 S r N O m � w r o A O m O v O N O1 O O 8 J O N O W O J A o Ln: 1 80 Out 0 i I :1 I I I I I I C 0 c c F c � o z o 0 N_ m m c C o 13 c W to m O J z a O c N � J C N - x3 � C_ N ^ G Cl) N J (7 a ^ N N c S7� Ln `o n m a c E (9 0 ^ voi z SCE � co N m Jfn O r a � m� > J ^ C W 10 t+ C 61 m O > J C W t` 1(1 r m O7 J m m m cW = U :3 J m N C N ^ C J V1 r. 42 f!1 } O N 11 m C 00 J co N G a W a m c J E y o m C fi z O J z .- u I I [I I I Fj I I I I r n O m (DCDN 11 m o � O Q u W v x X O CD < m A O � _ o r 'V A O x 0 W 9 7 v a � w a x w w m lu 3 co — o a� `d— Iv a o mm xm C) p < r OD A N x m W � x<m 0 m = <r o r N W � 9 Z w 7 c CD w x obi m H w < m 3 �d� o w a o m m x N V o a co m 3 A n 01 7C O x O A Co W O 0) V J T O Q �^ o x H 3 w a O r i 1 11 1 J Ll 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 Nnrt6PrnFnninnarinn.cnm !/ 970.221.415A Pr Dism MW lb: I ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE44ALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) a—Remilalul al AMM1 Bla t c Sion aelv.l Curb tlee.e m') tlrgi Ro.Mlmecz a riff CW (t vim ly betwe., 0,011 vH 0.02D) rt N Cab al G v. Flow Une rca nom CUT Faw to Sbe. Gown w'ian 1 Tl.n . safe nG Slope(IypiWly 2ircM1ee ae. la Ir J.e or 00S3 W) 1 Lon,9 nal Sbpe- Em. 0 to Gump aMsso. .,'n R.,hn. I. SOeet 5 on(W.Wly b.w'een 0.012 a 0.=) Allowable SpmaE for Minor 5 Me, Storm Allowable DnpN et Gutter Fiewllnn Iw Mi.6 Mqn Slam Fl— Dopin el Seem Craven )leevn blank Inr no) IR STORM Allowable Cepechy is bse an OpN Crbrlen DR STORM Allowable Cepacq Is boM on D"O CM.bn TrRI T.S ara 0]JO nbar a.OIJ Mo. a.ao blab T.WOW3 wn s.a.notSom MIn.91.M MIj.J1.ln T. X.0 ffi.D n Ave a0 a0 hayaa CIM . ye• Muv Slmn Ma'o Slam Or SUMP SUMP 'Iota UD-InM1 Inbt AI.Mam, Inset A2.1.1 W3713017, 9'.36 AM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Venlon e.04 Raises" November 2016 4' La (C) M N-CuA N-Vert Wo Wp W La (gJ ✓ CDDT T,,ce R Cute Opening T1ye • Depwdm (eddRorrd W Pali gone, V ne n 2FMVM) Fir .of LAA fewe (N or f:rN Opabq) No r Deg6 a Floelne (oo f da of kc V deorreml Pondif D.PWr r N of a and God L• (G) , of. J. Drab W.. OPe Repo fa a Grab (MN v U.16A.M) A—. )In0 FMor for a Slnele Graf. (typical vYl<0.50 -0.10) (+(a) I r Wag Coeffictord (tMwI valor 2.15- i.W) C. (G)' r aloof Coalfiaent (Iyplcd v ]. ow am) C. (G), Opening bdorae0on to of . Unit Curb DPINN L. (C) ,1 of Vatow Cab Opvbp b Inches M•n' ,t of Coro Orifice T.Pet in bvdee Nos' , of 1Troel lase USOCM F,,,. ST-5) Two' WeN for Decn suoo Pen (typ4ly ab Dueer c1dN of 2 feet) W. ,,, Fecal for a$ Intl. C W 'Rroi veuii 0,10) G(C)' Dw,oc Woo Lo o,,N nnoi l v4ve 2.13.1) L. (D)' 2nof., Office C ofiaad (lygml value alto 070) C. (C)' I frc G2. M..d o d—. i for C D enlrfc Wev Eousbon aeon rvnem OIN., Pfefono. RMAWUnn F. for Long icons RFr�r,• Oporun, Psoormace Re . Favor for Log Iran, RFy. 4 IN,, Perl.onn Reduction Fedor for Lag Inleln RFP„e Inlet Intarap0on Capacity (sa oufnes clogged condition) O. 15 GGGD for Mona.nd Mel-StormapO YI- a..elna I=Tpe R coat10 A00 :roc t 0.0 a0 YWr WJOR r GrenMe DCPM. WA Al� MINOR MAIM feetlode. feat ag WA .pA 0.n ass an an 1.00 1.00 WA WA UWnW_lnNt A2.MIm, Inlet A2/.1 W2712017, 9:36 AM pfoj� h1m 10: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor S Maj" Storm) I —Re lM f.MwMeM Mw—.-Yl .R I w 9wW1 Mn NIw.Me Wleel b Splatl B.bM1W Cut Stout Se11iM CUE hear. bMmr b rR fowMo atbt Eelerte aet) NrpY RaupMeR BWM Cut ItRA ally EMwwt 0.Otx.rte 0.020) It of CUN el Gulley Flow ua na Ir m Curt, Faro to Sbeet Crown a WIeT n Taavr.e Slope e cra. saps Or>Mw7 z menu orwr ze.wl a o ens") a I.sglmeltw smve - ems E b.unp mwnm mcy RouOMm lay SbaM semen (lypmlr Between E.otz rye aom) Nlowmle Spree for Mbar 6 M.lor Staten Nlaxeblp Deptl at GUX Flnwllno lay Mlnw a Major Storm Rl Deom 61$ber Gown uenrn b,.. to, no) )R STORM All —able Ciit c I. W..E on DepN CrX.rlan DR STORM NleweUb Cepac b Eases on DpM CM on T. s n 9MR, 01Ji0 MI Ora ams Rp.R d0] Etdm T. mo B IN zw R S. C.OX M S. mm Bn so eam ron rl.r�r OD)9 T. MmM81Mm M M8lR1n ]B.0 za0 ae, e.o e.o men.. tlMm=ya. !!r 5bnn M n Slam C6.. suMP BUMP d. Ubinlet_IRM" Islam, Intl A 12 9126/2017 3:39 PM INLET IN A SUMP OR SAG LOCATION Version 4A4 Relassad November 2016 ,tLa (C); H-0pIh X•VeM We w wr Le (0) M6�� =WTgsFt a 0p.nWrp _Tisis . 0.4ssrallstlblYbm6sn>.PW bwewan w were oeswe7 er• esrMUNIhY.(aMsor R0Pai0) No• r Do* M Reeiee(ouls ee of Well depee.iml ParlJrg Deplb �MmfmMton n m. unit arm .f . Um Gm. W.. Cp , Rev. lee(iron(Vince veer 0.160.W) Ae.• Io-q FM for. &,I. Girds (t," ems 0E11-11M) CF (0) Woo Done(Wial•el. 216- 0.01d) C.(G) obrw,, roemden mods v o. W - a.so) C. (0) consent Mlpmelbn m of a Unit Curb Opening L. (C) s of V000si Cwb Opelisp In Indnes Ron' s of Curb OMe®TIaM In bMm Hwr' � al Than! Iwe U6DCM Flpua bT$) 11W Wlam ear Depression Pon (ppiwly en tuber eian of 2Imn) W� sent fMonb a 5rgk Ceb DpY.flp (typl0l woe 0 IO) C, (C) Opens, Wee CaM dead (finical a s. Z13 C. (C)' Openrp Orifice COMRdes (1YMw v.lue 0.w. 0 701 C. (C) for Gres mod mb ve,..' for Curb Opersng Walr Equellm it ... ilneum INet Pmfmnence ReauNm Feclor for Larg Inlees RFc.,e.,r, Gpen., PMann. Re WI— Factor Isr Lan, heel. RF— C iNat oerlammu Red tem FMm for I Inlela RFC Inlet Interception Capacity (assumes clogged condition) Q 0wr eauel III©® Awm CO fTore R Curl iW heddtee t 0.0 0.0 WrAw I.IAJOR r O.wrles Deno. feM 6.00 0.W 4m 0.W m 110.40 2W 0.10 0.10 0.W mess WA WA om 01t a.n on 1.W 1.1110 WA NA w 0m n tse lag. NM R R UD-Inlet. Inlet A3 worn, Inlat A2 1 2 912W2011, 3:39 PM , AREA INLET IN A SWALE Piet 82 TT 41 dM ITe-I Grew T. LlmMne Mannlne'A o A 0.06 e o.04 0.3 0.0.03 E 1 0.024 r RCS VaBelal RelarJenrs lA, B, C. O, w EI A, B. C.O w E C. Sh,noln 's n (Leave tell 016 tllm to mmoelly ama So vM.o) n • W L•dYe M10M nennel lmM Slope Sy• OBIm 11Om WIUtb B • iQBs eft SM Slope Zi • 8.01 tsM swPa a• B.2s am Mae lMlowln eml ee: Olo�Orc: ANt Tum. Mn. VnIrcNr N.... l MaeGmW Mn IG.._..1 CMa.caMeM. uC NaGCdalve 5.00m 0.00 *MMn Cb6�ve 7.9 M am C M1vM Pevee WA WA MNV SIam M or Slam ex. Nlownble TW WiEM of Cnemel for Minor 6 Melot Stem T.:j 4 W Q w ryet px Nlowpbin Waler OpOmmCMxW ra MlrwrBMMot$tam d. I I= 11 MI STORM A $...bl• Cep¢tty N bnM an OpN Cn on STORM Allowable C... c, 1• W W eo Oeptn CotH.n POF Ft— Q _ to L cfs Mptb d-1 it. u exl Menw0misnt' wt N•nnn�manl' U6lnlq,ilnIM 82.dsm, Inlet B2 912W201 T, 4104 PM Varalon 4.04 Released Novemlo r 2016 AREA INLET IN A SWALE , South College sterap latest 02 Type WlMa COOT Two C(Depressed l Ww Tpa COOTTtpeL g)eprresaJ) Mple.f lnd1.ee Grate (moM L, W Eepmee) 6 • OPW WEN of Oren W . 3.01) Lergel of Oren L • 9.00 Open Arse oat. Arm on Hapm of lrWima Grate 11s 0.00 Gpppop F.Cm - F OAR Grne Oledrapa Coellipenl I Le OA4 Or,fua Coem.anl _ �r C. 0." War CaeRidmr r c. tat MINOR MAIOR WMa DepN el Inlet Ifn aeprea•eE IMele,1 foot le aEEeE 1n EeprecWm) per 1.41 10 UO-Inlet Inbl 33n1em, InMI Bp 6'1A Weir Report ' Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® CMI XM by Autodesk, Inc. Existing 2' Curb Chase (Skyway and College) Rectangular Weir Crest = Sharp 'Bottom Length (ft) = 2.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Calculations Weir Coeff. Cw = 3.33 Compute by: Known Depth Known Depth (ft) = 0.50 Highlighted Depth (ft) Q (cfs) Area (sqft) Velocity (fUs) Top Width (ft) pth (ft) Existing 2' Curb Chase (Skyway and College) ' 1.00 ' 0,50 1 0.00 ' -0.50 Weir W.S. Thursday, Jun 15 2017 = 0.50 = 2.355 = 1.00 = 2.35 = 2.00 Depth (ft) I 1.00 0.50 -0.50 Length (ft) phoj. e Inlet ID: ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONENALF OF STREET (Minor 3 Major Storm) um A lowahle Wift Im Sprettl Behind Cure 9O Behind Cum (Ir.e blank for no Coe.e eince meedn oehlna won .n,k Rwphnw Behind Cum bm.— 0.012.m GG20) M1I of Cum el GMw Flow line uu. bore c race to Shen Clown . wham e Tom.. Saida e Gob Slag (typ sby 2 hoods a.w 241mSva or GM MI) It Lon telillwl Slope F 0 W send, aaMlben .not Rpglewe for sba.l Semwl "pally bem ew, 0012 and 0.020) Nloetlle Bpeed Iw min d Mejw Slmn .1..le ()bore el Gnaw FIPMine for Minor 6 Moen $I — Frew Gapm.l Sven Crown (1— blank lo, no) i STORM N o.wei. Cegclly le breed ae Sp d Creed— R 0. ONU AMoweble Cap" k breed on ftmad CMtM o in.—me.-ellow n;Ily G000-yr-, T. Q0 A Bawl• 0.aeo nn n.w• 0.o1a Maw• 600 kxmee T. 2s.o n w- 100 R B• 0.oa nnl Bw • noe.� nnl $• 0.025 fM nonei 0.013 Tale Mew 8bm Mew Beene 15.0 A tS0 d.,I, 0.0 tt.0 barer ones ' YeF eMw o....• 1Y.T 1pa ar. UD-Inlet Inlel C2 xkm. Inlet C2 912712017. 9'40 AM INLET ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE verelon A Robaeed November 2016 —La (C) N-Cub N-Vert Wo W J` a (GI m eromenpn nnbun nr iMel CDOT 11pRCwU Cwnlm 0".. (WNEo1W W pprW�RIR OVmr bypbYpr 1� Number m Ume In the Wan (6�Y vCub OPRIb9) nN.&Nle Um Iee(OresvCwb Ops V) are un.I Gme lmr.re MOppYl W.R N ) Ilrq Fn,v fora 619le"bee OIOIvI m v.lu.•Os) InW Intercepibn C� Intl Carry-0vr Fiber (!bw by lrq InW) Ualnbl Inbl C2. dem. InW C2 WMA17. b.4O RN Ol V N N 0 C�4 Q N O N U OMM Q N O If U � 2 w O) C > h n n A z 2 � m d aL.. � my L U N d` u u O 0! C O co 0 i v II A N f0 a 0 2.0 g�v u 02a CD Qcu o `f m I 6 E ; 0 0 � rowLn Q d O L A Weir Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Design Point m8 Rectangular Weir Crest = Sharp Bottom Length (ft) = 2.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 'Calculations Weir Coeff. Cw = 3.33 Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 1.15 1 Lpth (ft) ' 1.00 1 0.50 ' 0.00 1 -0.50 1 Weir W.S. Design Point m8 Highlighted Depth (ft) Q (cfs) Area (sgft) Velocity (fUs) Top Width (ft) Tuesday, Sep 26 2017 = 0.31 = 1.150 = 0.62 = 1.86 = 2.00 Depth (ft) I 1.00 0.50 biSQQ -0.50 Length (ft) Weir Report Hydreflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® CMI 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Design Point M4 Rectangular Weir Highlighted Crest = Sharp Depth (ft) Bottom Length (ft) = 20.00 Q (cfs) Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Area (sgft) Velocity (ft/s) Calculations Top Width (ft) Weir Coeff. Cw = 3.33 Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 20.08 Depth (ft) 1.00 0.50 t t1 Weir W.S. Design Point M4 Wednesday, Sep 27 2017 ' 1 = 0.45 = 20.08 = 8.99 , = 2.23 = 20.00 ' 1 Depth �) 1.00 , 0.50 , 0.00 -0.50 , 22 24 Length (ft) , Channel Report ' Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCADO Civil 3DO by Autodesk, Inc. Design Point M4 Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 10.00, 10.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.85 Invert Elev (ft) = 5024.25 Slope (%) = 1.29 N-Value = 0.020 'Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 26.70 , Highlighted Depth (ft) Q (cfs) Area(sgft) Velocity (ft/s) Wetted Perim (ft) Crit Depth, Yc (ft) Top Width (ft) EGL (ft) ' 133"a 0100 FOR DESIGN 03AT M4 ' Elev (ft) Section �VGO.VV 5025.50 1 0 1025.00 1 ,024.50 1 5024.00 1 lno,a cn Tuesday, Oct 3 2017 = 0.78 = 26.70 = 6.08 = 4.39 = 15.68 = 0.85 = 15.60 = 1.08 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 1 Reach (ft) Depth (ft) I 1.75 1.25 0.75 111Ki -0.25 -0.75 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3M by Autodesk, Inc. Swale for Storm Line B Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 6.00, 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 2.22 Invert Elev (ft) = 28.87 Slope (%) = 5.04 N-Value = 0.027 Calculations Highlighted Depth (ft) Q (cfs) Area (sqft) Velocity (ft/s) Wetted Perim (ft) Crit Depth, Yc (ft) Top Width (ft) EGL (ft) Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 14.70� 133% Q700 FOR BASINS H3 AND OS1 (HISTORIC) Elev (ft) 31.00 30.00 29.00 28.00 27.00 Section 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reach (ft) Tuesday, Oct 3 2017 , = 0.70 = 14.70 = 2.45 , = 6.00 = 7.14 , = 0.89 = 7.00 = 1.26 ' 1 1 Depth �) 2.13 1.13' 0.13' -0.87 1 87' 35 Protect InIM 0: I ALLOWABLE CAPACITY FOR ONE-HALF OF STREET (Minor & Major Storm) m•.•d M Re..f,s•e1 risued. M u..Lnn.n Au—s • Flmv re pM end speed\ bn um Nlnwe,le Width Im Stowed Behind Cure lope Befund Cut (IOeveblank for no mr^'eYalae trod B emedl Cut) ge Rou inns Betio Cut(tyyiW7 h,lween 0,012 and a 020) a Cut of Gone Flow Wle m theme Cue, F. W Shwf Crown Width To.. Slap, Chose Sop, (Bplmlfy 2 worse .2I iou• or BM Ml) Lmplhpine'$lope Er.a0Iv•unpoaMeon y'a RDupmwfo-Saense,uan(tyga7e,aw••no012. 0.020) Muses. Spud fa Mena a Melor Storm wow.M. Depth el Gutla Flosi Ip M. a New Steen Flow Depth M Shea Crpwn (Move hlah for no) W VORu allew.e,M C.,ofty M e,e•ed on Depth Criterion M arORM AapwCM C.p•,ffy Is based on Depth CMMan 'I.— mna. ell". T.:apm• 0]91 MI rlum• 0.020 Hwr•M0.013 T.W .a a.•ae•MODIFIED CURB HEIGHT pew • / Mlmr Slam mans Tuu• 06.0 06.0 R dew• a0 tOp hldrw leO • yea Mwr Slam MaiSNml O-u. • 72 ".1 cf. Slmel Capsary (Internal to S0e).tlem, Speed Cap. 9/2712Dt 1, 9:59 A V P— J D,, EL: Pp,,l I � I NnrthrrnFnnin,rrina. rom It 970. 721.4199 ■� NORTHERN ' ENGINEERING 1 I I 1 [1 1 C 1 DETENTION POND CALCULATION; MODIFIED FAA METHOD w/ Ft Collins IDF Project Number 1269-002 Project Name South College Storage Project Location Fort Collins, Colorado Pond No Detention Pond M Input Variables Results Design Point m5 Design Storm 100-yr C = 0.85 Tc = 5.00 min A = 3.64 acres Max Release Rate = 0.63 cfs Required Detention Volume 3i364 ft3 0.887 ac-ft Time (min) Ft Collins 100-yr Intensity Inflow Volume (ft3) Outflow Adjustment Factor Qev (ems) Outflow a Volume Storage Volume 5 9.950 9236 1.00 0.63 189 9047 10 7.720 14331 0.75 0.47 294 14048 15 6.520 18156 0.67 0.42 378 17778 20 5.600 20792 0.63 0.39 473 20319 25 4.980 23112 0.60 0.38 567 22545 30 4.520 25173 0.58 0.37 662 24511 35 4.080 26509 0.57 0.36 756 25753 40 3.740 27772 0.56 0.35 851 26921 45 3.460 28904 0.56 0.35 945 27959 50 3.230 29981 0.55 0.35 1040 28941 55 3.030 30937 0.55 0.34 1134 29803 60 2.860 31856 0.54 0.34 1229 30627 65 2.720 32821 0.54 0.34 1323 31498 70 2.590 33657 0.54 0.34 1418 32239 75 2.480 34529 1 0.53 0.34 1512 33017 80 2.380 35346 0.53 0.33 1607 33739 85 2.290 36135 0.53 0.33 1701 34434 90 2.210 36924 0.53 0.33 1796 35128 95 2.130 37564 0.53 0.33 1890 35674 100 2.060 38242 0.53 0.33 1985 36257 105 2.000 38984 0.52 0.33 2079 36905 110 1.940 39616 0.52 0.33 EN 37442 115 1.890 40349 0.52 0.33 2268 38081 120 1.840 40989 0.52 0.33 2363 38627 'Note: Using the method described in Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 2. 1269-002 FAAModifed MethodAs ' Page 1 of 1 NORTHERN ENGINEERING Project Title South College Storage Project Number 1269-002 Client Brandon Grebe Pond Designation Pond M a*. �M. ,,ww, """'' `..�....x,.�.......,..�.,. Date: Sepcemher27,2017 Colo Dr. B. MWhion Invert Elevation S019.70 -f Water Quality Volume O.D000.D000 ac-ft 100-yr Detention Volume 0.9870 ac-ft 0.8870 ac-ft V_D" A,+A,+ 7 2/ 3 D = Depth between contours (ft.) A, = Surface Area lower contour (ft') A, = Surface Area upper contour (ft') Pond M Volume Elevation Surface Incremental Incremental Total Vol. Total Vol. (ft) Area (ft) Depth (ft) Vol. (R3) (ac-ft) 5019.80 59.27 0.10 1.98 1.98 0.0000 5020.00 678.12 0.20 62.52 64.50 0.0015 5020.20 1179.73 0.20 183.49 247.99 0.0057 5020.40 2877.45 0.20 393.31 641.29 0.0147 5020.6D 4043+70 0.20 688.82 1330.11 0.0305 5020.81) 5274.32 0.20 929.08 2259.19 0.0519 5021.00 6576.08 0.20 1182.65 3441.94 0.0790 5021.20 7734.75 0.20 1429.52 4871.36 0.1118 5021.40 8662.38 0.20 1638.84 6510.20 0.1495 5021.60 9151.41 0.20 1781.16 8291.35 0.1903 5021.80 9557.17 0.20 1870.71 10162.06 0.2333 5022.00 9968.95 0.20 1952+47 12114.53 0.2781 5022.20 10386.77 0.20 203SA3 14149.96 0.3248 5022.40 10810.61 0.20 2119.60 16269.55 0.3735 5022.60 11240.48 0.20 22D4.97 19474.52 0A241 5022.90 11676.37 0.20 2291.55 20766.07 0.4767 5023,00 12118.30 0.20 2379.33 23145.40 0.5313 5023.20 12566.25 0.20 2468.32 25613.72 0.5880 5023.40 13020.23 0.20 2558-51 28172.23 0.6467 5023.60 13480.24 0.20 2649.91 30822.15 0.7076 5023.80 13946.29 0.20 2742.52 33564.67 0.7705 5024.00 14418.35 0.20 2936.33 36401.00 0.8357 5024.20 14896.44 0.20 2931.35 39332.35 r 0.9 229 Total Vol 5024.40 25390.56 0.20 3027.57 42359.92 0.9724 5024.60 15870.70 M20 3125.00 45484.92 1.0442 5024.80 16366.89 0.20 3223.63 48708.55 1.1182 5025.00 16869.10 0.20 3323.47 52032.02 1.1945 5025.20 17377.33 0.20 3424.52 55456.54 1.2731 Elevation Depth Volume 100.yr Detention Overall Detention 5024.15 5024.15 4.45 4.45 0.8870 0.8870 1 1 i i A NORTHERN °°""' D M. Mw.w M«�. H11� �00 SrTE "" ""'. ` ENGINEERING Project Title South College Storage Date: September 27, 2017 Project Number 1269-002 Calcs By: B. Mathisen Client Brandon Grebe Pond Desianation Pond M Q= Release Rate (cfs) C = Discharge Coefficients (unitless) A. = Area Allowed of Opening (ft') g = Gravity (32.2 ft/s') E„ = High Water Surface Elevation (ft) E, = Elevation of Outlet Invert (ft) Ec = Elevation of Outlet Centroid (ft) Circular Orifice 100-Year Orifice Orifice Size (in.) 3 - 1/4 in. Area (in') 8.24 sc-in Q 0.62 cfs Rectangular Orifice 100-Year Orifice Orifice Height (in.) 3 - 5/16 in. Orifice Width (in.) 2 - 1/2 in. Area(in) 8.24 sq-in Q 0.62 cfs Q= 0.63 cts C = 0.65 E, = 5024.15 ft Ei = 5019.70 ft E,=5019.83ft Circular E, = 5019.84 ft Rectangular 0.057253792 ft A. _ 8.244546 in' v n NnrthnrnFnninr.rinn-cnm 11 97n.221 415A I I Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) A Sheet 1 of 2 Designee B.YMWn Comps yY Northern Engineering Date: SaptionMr 21, 2017 Protect: South college Storage Loudon: Rain Gard..M 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Effochn. Imperviousness of Tnbutary Afm. 1. 1. = 60 0 % (100 . e all pave t and m01etl areas upetroem 01 rein ganiUm) B) Tributery Areas Imperviousness Ratio (I=1./1W) - 0.600 C) WSW Quay Cepuro Volume (W OCV) W a lNiour Drain Time WOCV - a 19 vreterahmi lncnes (W OCV• 0.6' (0.81' f . 1.19. I'+ 0.78' p D) Contributing Watershed Area (including rain garden area) Arse = 158,558 aq S E) Water Quality Capture Volume(VVOCV) Design Volume V..-+ n+0 Vol - (WOCV 112)-Anse F) For Watersheds Douala o1 the Denver Region, Depth of d.. 0,43 Average Runoff Producing Stonn G) For Watersheds Outside of the Deriver Region, Vwxv o.wN = 2,406.3 cu ff Water Duality Capture Volume (WOCV) Dell Volume H)User Input WaterDuelily Capture Voumes(WOCV) Donn Volume Vw. ways` rya (Only d a different W CCV Design Volurro a desired) 2. Bash Deferral A) WOCV Depth (12-lnOh m9simum) DN. ` 12 in B) Rays Garden Side SbPes (2 - 4 min., hom list per unit venial) 2 = 4A0 Rift (U. -0- if rein geNen has venial walls) C) Minimum Fiat Surface Area A_ - 1664 eq e 0) Acual Fiat Surface Arm A, = 2382 sq a E) Arse at Design Depth (Top Sunace Ani Arm • 3286 sq e F) Rain Genlm Total Volume V.= 2,835 u q (Vr ((A.,, - A.m,.) 12)' Depth) Growing Medle r Cwmo CrisCrisJ. Q 16' pain 6wden G o m (Mein): 4. Undeidhan System r o�oosr arw A) Are underdnims provided? Q NO B) Underdmin system orISOa diameter for 12 hour train Ome 1) Dh arce From Loweel Elevation of the Storage Y. 0.5 a Volume to the Canter of me OnOce ii) Volume to Drain In 12 Hours Vo1n' 2,486 u e III) Or i Diameter, 31B' Minimum DO = 1.53 In RalnGsrdens BMP-Basin M.dsm, RG 9127)2017, 11:19 AM Design Procedure Form: Rain Garden (RG) sheet 2 of 2 De.lgner: B. Mehl... Company: Northern Engineering Dome- SeptemMr 27, 2017 Project: Spurt College Stores. Lxaflon: Rein WrdenM 5 Imperrneehle Geome rbrane Uner and Gedteadle SaMirlsor F.hno r 0ivose 0n0 —� 0�s A) Is an impermeable liner provked doe to gOnmily Q NO Of stNLlures or go,ordWater contamination] 6. low 10" Control Delete One Q 9 mK Rw No Eregy Dlespeem Regulreol A) Inlet Control Q (cnmNeme nor Energy olsplpz6m Roete'1 Owme 0 e ]. Vegetegdn Q 6ced (Rm fer freeuerR weN aaNtl) O Niede, Q Sed Green er Other Nigh hegtretlm se! S. Irrigation dmoe.0ne • A) WWI Me In gente inpM en Eed Ir wi � NO Picket: I I d I t t I I l C RelnGiHrds._BMP Be.In MAsm, RG 9127/2017, 11:19 AM ' of —.-,b & at's � oumrwtLasq EEDR&-r vw N 0 r tk rrn Fnn in er r inn sn m / I () 70 7 7 1 41 SR ■V INORTHERN ' ENGINEERING South College Storage A separate Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (along with associated details) has been included with the FDP submittal. 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 Sheets C0.01 of the Utility Plans. The Utility Plans 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 APPENDIX E ' Soils Resource Report NnrthwrnEnalnwwrinn.rom 11 970.771.415A No Text I 1 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. 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 planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nres/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering ' applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (hdps://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/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 I alternative means 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. 1 .1 1 1 i 1 i L� I i i L 1 1 1 1 1-1 t C I Contents Preface.................................................................................................................... 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 SoilMap.................................................................................................................. 8 SoilMap................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 ' MapUnit Legend................................................................................................ Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 11 Ladmer County Area, Colorado......................................................................13 35—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes..............................................13 ' 54-4Cim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes.......................................................... 5"m-Thedalund loams, 3 to 15 percent slopes .................................... 14 15 65—Midway clay loam, 5 to 25 percent slopes...........................................17 References................................................:........................:..................................19 1 I I 1 I 1 ' 4 I I How Soil Surveys Are Made I. 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 1 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and I 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, clay, 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 I 1 1 i 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. 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 I I P I I I 7 I i t 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. I I 1 [1 L I 8 1074'SBw 2 �o o $ x m A i I 4= 4487260 4481"4'X> 4483340 4483W e 6a 44834Z 105^ 4' Sr w 1 lara3aw 44M= z Z C O rl N I @ I I I I I I I I I / I \ §ƒ|| | « !!]E. k !BE z \ a.=0 ! f «;|)\ ) | E ,7| ° r E!�$ k )! ® ` \k)k � E k k |![]0 l�� 0 ( \®� § k k!`22 2! f# \ 0 §§} = I f`» | ! Ek\{] ;- 2 ■/!! ■ : - 2 . !, {f e{ IL \ \/�) 2\k \k«; !! f! \ )7ff [ a «§( « ! ! { ! E�( �� k7||! Sm /0 �( ` / § m -!§m Sk �k� {}!As %k �` ®� ® \aE § E (kk�� �| kkk {«§[! \` \\ \� /{\/ ky « !!!§| EL !!& £{J2§ 2{ a! &§ !\ wv!! ( \ _ r !&)6 0) j.\\�w1!0 f ` 2 )IA §CL ■ � . ■ - - - ! - �! } !k$\!f{!� �) 13ia@■ek0k4k00 i =% I Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Larimer County Area, Colorado (CO644) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres In A01 Percent of AOI 35 Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 1.9 32 10.7% 54 Klm loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes 18.1 % 56 IOm-Thedalund loams, 3 to 15 percent slopes 12.5 70.0% 65 Midway day loam, 5 to 25 percent slopes 02 1.3% Totals for Area of Interest 17.9 100.0% 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 for the 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 I I I I I J 11 1 Custom Soil Resource Report 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. 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. 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Larimer County Area, Colorado 35—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes , Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 2tinc Elevation: 4,020 to 6,730 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 48 degrees F Frost -free period: 143 to 154 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition ' Fort collins and similar soils. 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of the mapunit. ' Description of Fort Collins Setting ' Landform: Interfluves Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Pleistocene or older alluvium derived from igneous, metamorphic ' and sedimentary rock and/or eolian deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 4 inches: loam , Bt1- 4 to 9 inches: clay loam Bt2 - 9 to 16 inches: clay loam Bk1 -16 to 29 inches: loam Bk2 - 29 to 80 inches: loam 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 (0.20 to 2.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding. None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 12 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.1 to 1.0 mmhos/cm) ' Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 0.5 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) Hydric soil rating: No 13 Custom.Soil Resource Report Minor Components Nunn Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Terraces Landlbnn position (three-dimensional): Tread ' Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) Hydric soil rating. No Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interfluves Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) ' Hydric soil rating. No I� ' 54—Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. jpwy Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost -tree period. 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Kim and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kim Setting ' Landform: Fans Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope ,. Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material. Mixed alluvium Typical profile H1- 0 to 7 inches. loam H2 - 7 to 60 inches: loam, clay loam, sandy clay loam H2 - 7 to 60 inches: H2 - 7 to 60 inches: 1 14 Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 5 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): high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding. None I Moderately high to i Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 26.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067XY002CO) Hydric soil rating. No Minor Components Thedalund Percent of map unit. 4 percent Hydric soil rating: No Stoneham Percent of map unit. 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Fort collins Percent of map unit: 2 percent Hydric soil rating. No Aqulc haplustolls Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Swales Hydric soil rating: Yes 56—Kim-Thedalund loams, 3 to 15 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpx0 Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 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: Not prime farmland 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Composition 1 Kim and similar soils: 45 percent Thedalund and similar soils. 35 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of the mapunit. Description of Kim Setting Landform: Valley sides, fans Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Mixed alluvium Typical profile I H1- 0 to 7 inches: loam H2 - 7 to 60 inches: loam, day loam, sandy clay loam H2 - 7 to 60 inches: H2 - 7 to 60 inches: Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 7 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium ' 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: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 26.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067XY002CO) Hydric soil rating: No Description of Thedalund ' Setting Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Material weathered from sandstone and shale Typical profile H1- 0 to 4 inches: loam H2 - 4 to 33 inches: day loam, loam, sandy clay loam H2 - 4 to 33 inches: weathered bedrock H2 - 4 to 33 inches: H3 - 33 to 37 inches: 16 Custom Soil Resource Report Properties and qualities Slope: 7 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to high (0.06 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: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to moderately saline (0.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 15.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067XY002CO) Hydric soil rating. No Minor Components Renohill Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Midway Percent of map unite 9 percent Hydric soil rating. No Aquic haplustolls Percent of map unit. 1 percent Landforrn: Swales Hydric soil rating: Yes 65—Midway clay loam, 5 to 25 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. jpxb Elevation: 4,800 to 5,800 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: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Midway and similar soils. 90 percent 17 Custom Soil Resource Report Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of the mapunit. Description of Midway Setting Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope ' Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Material weathered from shale Typical profile H1- 0 to 4 inches. day loam H2 - 4 to 19 inches: day, day loam, silty clay loam H2 - 4 to 19 inches., weathered bedrock H2 - 4 to 19 inches: H3 - 19 to 23 inches: Properties and qualities Slope: 5 to 25 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 6 to 20 inches to paralithic bedrock ' Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding. None ' Frequency of ponding. None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Gypsum, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 1 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 15.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Shaly Plains (R067BY045CO) Hydric soil rating. No ' Minor Components Renohill Percent of map unit. 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No 18 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. hftp://www.nres.usda.govtwps/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/detai I/national/soilsncid=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.govtwps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres l42p2_053580 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://www.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/ detai I/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb 1043084 19 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 43041. http://www.nres.usda.govtwps/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://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/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.nrcs.usda.gov/lntemeVFSE—DOCUMENTS/nrcsl42p2_052290.pdf 171 I I I I I ' 20 MAP POCKET HISTORIC DRAINAGE EXHIBIT PROPOSED DRAINAGE EXHIBIT ••i NnrthurnEnninnnrinn.rnm // 970 721.415R sift- #1 n a r"_` atw -!•.tom �• , .a,.� J� N �..�� � `_.. � LLl� r1wow ° .. ` 0. . I Ojr , - 7 • • -- —" 1— --- --- --J -- -- - , . IK S RUNOFF SUMMARY TABLE: TOTAL 2-yr 100-yr DESIGN BASIN AREA C2 C100 Tc Tc Q2 Q100 POINT ID (acres) (min) (min) (ds) (cfs) hl H1 4.81 0.25 0.31 20.0 18.6 1.93 8.77 hl H2 4.07 0.25 0.31 16.0 14.8 1.84 8.42 hl H3 4.12 0.26 0.32 26.5 24.5 1.47 6.76 hl OSl 1.55 0.25 0.31 31.9 1 29.6 0.49 2.20 06.15.2017 NORTHERN EPIGINEERING n:vxarcnu:ba.00rmwwexcu:ss.aox u.Mu . 0 LEGEND: EXISTING CONTOUR — — EXISTING OVERLAND FLOW DIRECTION EXISTING CONCENTRATED FLOW DIRECTION DRAINAGE BASIN ID DRAINAGE BASIN MINORIMAJOR COEFF. wo.2 DRAINAGE BASIN AREA DESIGN POINT Aa3 SOUTH COLLEGE STORAGE FORT COLLINS, CO I IF ® NORTH w 6 w n XCH-QUFNEET LEGEND: EXISTING CURBAGUTTER FLOM BE PROPOSED SULFUR CURB PROPOSEDUNDERDRUMN FUTURE CURB AND GURI uXOPEF Everw.a 1-o-___ IWIDIMED EX� DFLOW DIRECTION w� CONCENTRATED ROW DIRECTION y PROPOSED aow.mC ELEvnnrn EXISTING INLET FIRL.TE EXISTING USED TREE EXISTINGSONIC TREE EXISTING TIGHT TUBE a EXIETINDETUMP DFUMNAGEOISINID ry M�IIgm1M.lCe LIJ C wwtucEansry = DEscry POINT Q W z E O " z ZW 8 RUNOFF SUMMARY TABLE: OMN FOIXT Wall ID � (II I e: c3a0 Tc (min) 100yr (min) 02 lag aim Irle EI pl 025 0.31 300 16.6 193 6.77 ml MI 050 Son, 1 W 50 50 1.24 6.W mt M3 an Pn I'm 50 50 On 2.St IF! MI 0n 0.05 l.00 50 5.0 BOB 2.95 mt MI 0.12 096 LOl SO 50 on lie m2 M3.t 0X1 0.0 I.00 10 5.0 112 111 0.33 021 I.00 50 6.0 D.P 3.32 m5 MS 1m M on 6.0 60 041 3.b me on a NOTES: 1. REFERi0ilE4xNOPYMWFRFPDXfMMMIXI¢YEOE 8TpU9E'n KFIFEM E.wIXEENXO, M9lhplmynl3 Fp1.\WIFKKIKIMgWipN. FOR DRAINAGE REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FALL UTILITY NOTIFIGTXx CENTER OF COLORADO AR . Call ImI you dig. City of Fort, Colho3. Colorado UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL APPRO\ED'. TAX Emm... D.I. CHECXED BY: O.C., WRwlea.Le. Four O.le CHECKED BY'. btn. Dale Cl1EOMB BY'. 0 CHECKED BY: D r..!er9 RY;� �__.w.,...o1 P,....., --- Dae Ilb@ 3s 2� (1 111 111 Sheet C7.00 21 of 21