Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Reports - 05/04/2007City of Ft Collins Approved Plans 1 Apprond By 1 1 FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR 1 COYOTE RIDGE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL RIDGEWOOD HILLS P.U.D THIRD FILING TRACT U 11 1 1 1 1 I 1 u 1 11 1 FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR COYOTE RIDGE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL RIDGEWOOD HILLS P.U.D. THIRD FILING TRACT U Prepared for: Thompson School District 800 S. Taft Avenue Loveland, CO 80537 Prepared by: North Star Design 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor, Colorado 80550 (970)686-6939 January 23, 2006 Job Number 210-10 i� North Star `.design, inc. January 23, 2006 Mr. Basil Hamdan City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utility 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-0580 RE: Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for Coyote Ridge Elementary School at Ridgewood Hills P.U.D. Third Filing, Tract U Dear Basil, I am pleased to submit for your review and approval, this Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for the proposed Coyote Ridge Elementary School located at the northwest corner of Jansen Road and Avondale Drive. Hydraulic and hydrologic calculations have been completed in compliance with the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Manual. I appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing this submittal.. Please call if you have any questions. 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor, Colorado 80550 970-686-6939 Phone • 970-686-1 1 88 Fax ' TABLE OF CONTENTS ... TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................... ttt ' 1. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1.1 Location................................................................................................................... I 1.2 Description of Project..............................................................................................1 ' 2. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS 2.1 Master Basin Description.........................................................................................1 ' 2.2 Major and Sub -Basin Description............................................................................2 3. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA 3.1 Regulations..............................................................................................................2 3.2 Offsite Flow.............................................................................................................2 3.3 Development Criteria Reference and Constraints....................................................3 ' 3.4. Hydrologic Criteria............................................................... :.................................. 3 3.5 Hydraulic Criteria....................................................................................................3 ' 4. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN 4.1 General Concept.......................................................................................................4 ' 4.2 Specific Flow Routing............................................................. 4.3 Water Quality Considerations..................................................................................5 :................................ 4 4.4 Drainage Summary ........................................ :.......................................................... 5 ' 5. EROSION CONTROL 5.1 General Concept.....................................................:..................................................6 ' 5.2 Specific Details ............................................ :........................................................... 6 6. CONCLUSIONS 6.1 Compliance with Standards ........... ................................................ :........................ 6 6.2 Drainage Concept.....................................................................................................6 1 7. REFERENCES....................................................................................................................7 APPENDICES A Vicinity Map B Hydrologic Computations ' C Hydraulic Computations D Erosion Control Calculations E Excerpts from Previous Reports F Tables and Figures iii r GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1.1. Location The proposed Coyote Ridge Elementary School site is located in Ridgewood Hills P.U.D., Third Filing, Tract U between Jansen Dive and Strasburg Drive west of and adjacent to Avondale Road. The property is located in the SE quarter of Section 14, Township 6 North, Range 69 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. See vicinity map located in Appendix A. The project site is bounded on the north by a city park, on the east by Avondale Road and on the south and west by single family residential housing. 1.2. Description of Project This site is located on 7.2-acres of land. The land is naturally vegetated and slopes at approximately 2.5 %, toward Avondale Road. The property is currently undeveloped, containing emergency overflow drainage facilities for the surrounding development. Existing runoff sheet flows to Avondale Road where it is conveyed via curb and gutter, to an existing inlet and then to an existing detention pond. Drainage facilities for offsite flows include a drainage swale to convey emergency overflow from Agate Court, Prichett Court and Jansen Drive south and east to Avondale Road. The project is proposed to include a school building, drives, parking lot, play ground and sports fields. It is proposed to reroute the drainage swale through the site to accommodate emergency overflows from the existing development west of the site. Drainage patterns will remain similar to existing conditions. Refer to section 4 of this report for more detailed flow routing. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS 2.1. Major Basin Descriptions Tract U of Ridgewood Hills P.U.D., Third Filing is located in the Fossil Creek Drainage Basin as delineated by the City of Fort Collins. Runoff from the site was included in the drainage design of the Ridgewood Hills P.U.D., Third Filing by Nolte Engineering, dated June 2000. Both storm water and water quality detention are provided east of the site in p J ' the existing detention pond (Detention pond 1 from the Nolte report). 2.2. Sub -basin Description ' The property is located within the basin described in the Ridgewood Hills P.U.D., Third Filing design as basin 925. The drainage report for Ridgewood Hills P.U.D., Third Filing ' states that the expected developed runoff from this site during the 100-year storm event is 43.93-cfs with an expected overall runoff coefficient of 0.70 and 50% imperviousness. After development the proposed imperviousness for the site will be 45%, corresponding ' to a 100-year runoff coefficient of 0.59. The overall proposed 100-year runoff is 33.9-cfs resulting in a 10-cfs reduction in expected 100-year runoff for the site. The site was divided into 5-individual basins detailed in section 4.2. All basins drain to Avondale road. ' 3. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA 3.1. Regulations This report was prepared to meet or exceed the "City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage ' Design Criteria Manual' specifications. Where applicable, the criteria established in the "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual" (UDFCD), 2001, developed by the Denver ' Regional Council of Governments, has been implemented. 3.2. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints The runoff from this project will be routed to conform to existing drainage patterns. Offsite emergency overflow from basins 904, 905, 906, 907, 911 and 913 from ' Ridgewood Hills P.U.D., Third Filing were accounted for in the drainage design. These basins are directly adjacent to the site. ' Basins 911 and 913 are located to the south and runoff from these basins concentrates at an inlet by the southwest corner of the site. Basins 906 and 907 are located to the west of ' the site and runoff from these basins concentrates west of the site at the end of Prichett Court. Emergency overflow from these basins will be collected in the re-routed Swale. Basins 904 and 905 are located to the west of the site and runoff from these basins concentrates northwest of the site at the end of Agate Court. Emergency overflow from ' these basins will sheet flow to the bus loop where it will be directed to Avondale Road. 1 2 ' 3.3. Offsite Flows ' Swales were designed to route emergency overflow from offsite basins through the site in the Ridgewood Hills P.U.D., Third Filing drainage report. Swale section C-C was ' designed for emergency overflow from basins 904 and 905 (Agate Court) with a 100-year overflow rate of 10.96-cfs. ' Swale section D-D was designed for flow from swale C-C and additional emergency overflow from basins 906 and 907 (Prichett Court) with a cumulative 100-year flow rate ' of 31.63-cfs of this, basins 906 and 907 were expected to contribute 20.67-cfs of emergency overflow to the site. Swale section H-H was designed for emergency overflow from basins 911 and 913 (Jansen Drive) with a cumulative 100-year flow rate of 27.35- cfs. Drainage facilities were designed to accommodate the cumulative runoff from individual emergency overflow from each of these basins and onsite runoff at the designed ' confluence of the overflow and onsite runoff. The drainage swales were designed for failure of one drainage facility at a time. It was assumed that there is negligible probability of simultaneous failure of multiple drainage facilities. 3.4. Hydrologic Criteria Runoff computations were prepared for the 2-year minor and 100-year major storm ' events utilizing the Rational Method. All hydrologic calculations associated with the basins are included in Appendix B of this report. Standard Form 8 (SF-8) provides time of concentration calculations for all sub -basins. Standard Form 9 (SF-9) provides a ' summary of the design flows for all sub -basins and design points associated with this site. 3.5. Hydraulic Criteria All hydraulic calculations, including pipe and swale sizing, for this site are based on the 100-year storm in accordance with the City of Fort Collins Drainage Criteria. Hydraulic elements have been designed to convey onsite 100-year flows and emergency overflows ' from the adjacent basins to Avondale Road. Existing hydraulic elements are in place to convey the 100-year runoff from Avondale Road to Detention Pond 1. 3 r 4. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN ' 4.1. General Concept Proposed flow patterns will match existing patterns and those required by adjacent developments as closely as possible. Runoff will be directed to drainage facilities on ' Avondale Road. Emergency overflow from offsite has been accounted for in the drainage design and will be routed to Avondale Road with onsite flow. The swale from the Nolte Engineering design was originally designed to convey the full runoff flow rate from all offsite drainage basins simultaneously. The re-routed swale, ' directing offsite overflow to Avondale Road was sized to accommodate runoff from the site and flow from each offsite- concentration point assuming one overflow event at a ' time. 4.2. Specific Flow Routing ' There are 5 basins within this project including 2 offsite basins. The following is a ' summary of the 100-year flow routing from the site: Sub -basin 1 contains the northeast half of the proposed school building, kindergarten ' play areas and the bus loop. The basin area is 1.64-acres with a calculated developed runoff coefficient 0.46. Runoff sheet flows to the bus loop where it is conveyed east to ' Avondale Road. The calculated 100-yr flow rate from this basin is 9.0-cfs. ' Sub -basin 2 includes the west portion of the building, proposed future modular classrooms, grass sports fields and the play ground. The basin area is 3.55-acres with a developed runoff coefficient calculated to be 0.28. Runoff sheet flows to the rerouted ' drainage swale near the south property boundary and is conveyed to Avondale Road. The swale was designed to accommodate flow from this basin and the offsite basins including emergency overflow from basin 904, 905, 906, 907, 911 and 913 from the Ridgewood Hills P.U.D Third Filing drainage report. The calculated 100-yr flow rate from this basin ' is 13.1-cfs. The maximum cumulative flow assumed for the design from this basin, basin 0-1, basin 0-2 and emergency overflow is 47.5-cfs. Sub -basin 3 includes the east portion of the building and the parking lot. The basin area is 2.01-acres with a developed runoff coefficient of 0.59. Runoff sheet flows to the east ' 4 I side of the parking lot were it is directed to the Avondale Road. The calculated 100-yr flow rate from this basin is 13.0-cfs. Sub -basin 0-1 and 0-2 are small offsite basins, both within basin 925 of the Nolte report, draining onto the site from the west and the south. These basins are 0.78 and 0.94 acres respectively containing parts of the surrounding residential area and shared community landscaping. The existing runoff coefficients were calculated to be 0.24 and 0.36 respectively. Runoff from the basins sheet flows through basin 2 into the drainage swale, which was sized to accommodate this runoff. The calculated 100-yr flow rate from these combined basins is 6.6-cfs. 4.3. Water Quality Considerations The Ridgewood, Hills P.U.D., Third Filing design provides detention ponds with water quality structures for the development. The site is located in basin 925 of that design and was included in water quality volumes calculations for the development using a percent imperviousness of 50%. The storm sewer on Avondale Road is the collection point for this site. That storm sewer directs runoff to detention pond 1 from Ridgewood Hills P.U.D Third Filing. Pond 1 provides 10.67 ac-ft of detention storage and 0.75 ac-ft of storage for water quality. The proposed site was calculated to have a smaller percent imperviousness than was used in the Ridgewood Hills P.U.D., Third Filing design and will conform the water quality constraints of that design. No onsite water quality detention is proposed with this project. 4.4. Drainage Summary Drainage patterns for this project will meet the requirements of the City of Fort Collins Drainage Criteria. Drainage has been designed to adequately convey the 100-year storm event to existing drainage facilities. Emergency overflow from offsite basins has been provided for in the design of the onsite drainage facilities without inundating the proposed school building. The City of Fort Collins will be responsible for maintenance of the existing and proposed storm drainage facilities located within the right-of-way. These facilities will be Class III RCP to conform to the City of Fort Collins criteria. The drainage facilities located outside of the right of way (including all private storm sewer systems, and the landscape and roof drain system and inlets) will be maintained by the property owner. M 5. EROSION CONTROL ' 5.1 General Concept The potential exists for silt movement from the site and into the existing drainage areas on the east side of the site. Potential also exists for tracking of mud onto existing streets ' which could then wash into existing storm systems. The required performance standard for the site is 81%. All reasonable erosion control measures are proposed. Due to the site ' configuration and offsite location of the detention, maximum onsite performance will be reached with implementation of soil roughening, silt fence, straw barriers and inlet protection. ' The erosion control escrow amount is $8,069. ' 5.2 Specific Details ' To limit the amount of silt leaving the site several erosion control measures shall be implemented during construction. A vehicle tracking pad shall be installed at the location ' shown on the plan to control mud from being tracked onto the existing pavement. Inlet protection will be used around all inlets throughout construction. During overlot grading, disturbed areas are to be kept in a roughened condition and watered to reduce wind erosion. Silt fence will be used to prevent non -point erosion where possible. Wattles will be used within drainage swales to prevent erosion along the concentrated flow path. ' 6. CONCLUSIONS ' 6.1. Compliance with Standards ' All computations that have been completed within this report are in compliance with the Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual. No variances are requested at this time. 6.2. Drainage Concept ' All runoff from the site will be directed to existing drainage facilities in Avondale Road. The proposed drainage concepts presented in this report and on the construction plans ' adequately provide protection from flooding. Conveyance elements have been designed to pass required flows and to minimize future maintenance. G� ' If, at the time of construction, groundwater is encountered, a Colorado Department of ' Health Construction Dewatering Permit will be required. ' 7. REFERENCES ' 1. City of Fort Collins, "Storm Drainage Criteria Manual", (SDCM), dated March, 1986. ' 2. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual", Volumes 1 and 2, dated June 2001 and Volume 3, dated September 2001. ' 3. City of Fort Collins, "Stormwater Basins Map", dated June 1, 2004. 4. Final Drainage Report for Ridgewood Hills P.U.D. Third Filing by Nolte ' Engineering dated June 16, 2000. 1 ' 7 APPENDIX A VICINITY MAP RIDGEWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITUATE IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO AUGUST 15, 2006 PROJECT SITE N VICINITY MAP APPROYIM�TE $CKE' �-100 BENCHMARK'. AZIMUTH MARK ON THE NORTH SIDE WEST TRILBY RD. ONE HALF MILE WEST OF COLLEGE AVE. AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PROPERTY AT 508 WEST TRILBY ROAD. (FORT COLLINS GOOD SAMARITAN RETIREMENT CENTER). ELEV-5090.58 SHEET t OF I I DATE: 8/15/06 RIDGEWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 'North Star SCALE: NTS am- design, inc. 700 Automation Drive, Unit I DESIGNED BY' R08 Windsor, Colorado 80550 VICINITY MAP Phone: 970-686-6939 JOB NO.: 210-10 Fax: 970-686-1188 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 t 1 y , x v e• I11V rTA g1A.Q SWALE SUMMARY SECTION X Y D W 0100 1 GRADE B1-BI 4 4 0.83' 4.00' 11 r,(s 0.507. B2-B2 4 4 I.00' 6.00' 27.7 cfs 0.50% C-C 4 4 1.41- 4.00' 143.6 refs 1 0.50% 0-0 4 1 S 1 1.43' 1 4.00' 147.5 cfs 1 0.50% SECTION A -A ONLY — _ --............ � 46* \ ♦``.o ® �I'rI� tin BASIN SUMMARY TABLE BASIN OmW PmD A11G G 16 IY Oro t t l.m a4B 1a4 hp La 2 z 1 ass an I" 1.9 I&I 3 3 as am as Lit n9 G-1 z an a24 tee a4 2e O-2 z am am 11 ay rxere 4W STANDARD EROSION AN DI SEDIMENT CONTROL CONSTRUCTION PLAN NOTES smtmw. mo3 I. Tbo women ewe✓ii in.P.ols ewe be ee9f n! of lo®t twenty-four (2q Iwun i.iee to my emstr.aim m tni. Yte 2. Then. Nm ac no ewih-dslurtip «U.ly mloede the knits dAti rieted An the o,mioo ao.. 1 AN rwneee pwimatw eel and cm-Wctnh feeling .hap be. n.WAd I dl to my 'And dstobing activity (I1«Oging. SU"W i. aodYw.(etc), Al other r.gnirel weeien cm✓a nears. fhm a h.tm.d of the mPrwrale time in the emnhuctnn tacump es inoloetw in the o phyno moire t .dreuo, cesWchon ama. mU wa.bn om✓ol report. 4. At a tines den9 cmatrActbn, the O.vNgpw .nap a rewmsw. W N.yot" and om✓mnp m-site Amon ieludig i«Pie, the mepstY wf6cimUy won~ w ee to miNmi o win, blown «dinent. me DeWPar fnm glm p re.pmatla for neemip gM mgntgnnq m demon ombd fgcYtM..1wwn harem. S. Ph-Asev6wav . bhtim Nap W prel«lod wW ndoird yye«r ppppee. Rernod or metbo imc. g1 o.nlwg «palate Map 0e GMted le the wee(.) rewiod for nmMigl. cwwNrclim gwgUmi mC Iw IM angriest Peeled pwbd el tine. 6. Ab am. efpefed "Ana IaW dMurhng «tly r (W[P&% modna utility nslmelionA slmkpin4 been, otc.) MAP Ce kept In A rmghmed smmim by roping w ethin9 long Imd cede. eta mW., «goblin. or otnw Pwrhetle11 .pact metre" Why w. nnm.E Ne .en. n .r mlfbe Noi«t .beet rytta-.l-woy del ren.n emacM tar two dntumnq wtvAty W mete Umt only (SD) foie bofwe rew&ea ia,p w pdmmet An eien owntrd (.4 seed/mWd. lee«mr4l..to.) b n.lmog. udr coon approved by the aly/Cwwty. >. n moo, to mnw inise e.ien mtmtw. a tmywety (Nruelwd) wmleA metre, memwac Nap: A Be nm«lod Al, a mnYwwit of once ever, two (2) ehdn and of er each similimlt henn eyot And repo a room bnot. he necemy in odd to ova the canthwed pwewmmw of thou into iler m nrtc9. B. Rw in place mG etch the, w m too w r.,m, dnivhed wear on wlficnnUY aleii[sd the dotoormed by UN wo.ion cm✓d'ngpnbe. a Bo rw w grew 1M eN hap gem wMdmUY slme[ehe « delemned by Uw motion n cm✓d ngecW. 4�-toal glenpmary motion metre" neawrac etµ Ut. 0eneopw Anon be remmaDls wIho mom m and or1 All A.dhnmi otd dmrh boom a drdngge hmbucNn oM ~pile hfditice. 9. IM em✓«tw Nm e.00dgldy dam up my emsh— ne, ih.t W. nWnh-t—", depWted on orbtnq a✓AAM sidewdi4 oe oth. P k rigi of «1 ond mme acme .Wet. and Ammacn we domed cat the od el each owing day. 10. NI nitinW .edi, hat , pmt ihwy theme on poyed mego.y Audocet. Nap X rrmwed wW ghpoeoi of in o mvwor m0 lAoACm ac ac tact to omac than mare into my waters of the United states. 11. NA w .lodple Nap e«i. im (10) feet in height N .m .t«ipAe. Nap bo aaeeted ban monont ✓mewl by olooA ro ghee wolwn% end pminhow Pr bW,n% any .m mlerhpi. rmhmnn9 gnw they (w) don etoll to riled oM mWm.d 12. Tat. At... Mom omeetly of dnmlbn corgi " be, reflwW and dam .ewe In« we, to dMm rgen cmeHtkh of tho Pnpd And won, twhn9 the mantra env to the oy/cowry ce Ifan.ownen ..edgy Do"). 13. Oil Ordnmee And Cmwada D hoyw9. Pdmil Systdn (COPS) re uYwtvrta mgW it mn eU to diametge w dbw the diwlwgo of my pceulmt or ohnionented oad M1m, emeMelnn ale. pNdmis iende, Wt ea hot M1nnw he dbcwded Wong motww. —to eta 9-L cnehiom. m ad goy minim". Stew, mC screwy «eta Dw de.tlmd One gl m u is. im. ohgtmw epee. an acc essory to rare the crape, cmtarunot and deposed of pmutmU ee Ibe she In «cerdxe with my and An gggmde lead. State. gM fedora r.NAadm. 14. A gacimnted wino Nap bin We tl an at. W Cowane fn i del. wgmm, thew Nap eo, mesenoted ac a. ta contain emnaut molwfel .N locvlac At Neel fin, (m) fact away ban my wotw.ay timing raw ho Lion Upon emwMbn At awe✓ eenon Wyetnet thA omeete, acmpul mm.idi etch ac renAye, and etmenY ds0good of prior to Uw mew tang ,e.twal 1s. to nh . thn onfina t dam hot moos off of n6n]yd Any min At ewe of the fgeomwiq aeainm</rare 'iyet B1We Nap W :eased And modnthoW mU the toy oa erfnctwnUY dgbm[ei, m datwmnac by the ream cm✓ol in.pgcW. (1Nthn lwdond Dlr LYats amy). . A Be. a mttw doohmuds. B. We to &anomie home. C. Nmq bi pwiertw. 0. other tacntnn. it hooded. Is. CohdxYN. In th. Redd moy .momt .pie eehol macwrac In mdtimh t0 what 4 Nam m th..e dap. Th. D..dm. dw9 nnpl.mhl .nate.w Ann e.et ao detwmned n«.mr. as aAet.d by 9n City/O y. LEGEND — — PRrolxtt 1xxNDARr — — AD.amlr amPmtt (.1E — — — — — EADI.G vsEis]lr lwE — — — — — — — — — — PROPasED EAsortnr tRL ... .__ ... --. -- .- .- .-, -- Da51N0 —. -- —.9/p— .-. I. CWIDRS — EiIINC S NrIrQe15 PRWfi4T 11' WII1lI11R5 �910-- PROPosTn. s• mNfoems PROPOSED r C'ONCRCIE Pew PROPOSD) DRANAQ POPE _ mfini DRApAOE PIPE t• plt P Beste mUNDARY F�_V ..:SY.::sJ RAM Urv��,( m r FABRIC (W "10C) QOEAOI PONT "sit' atlE a� Q s-W 1hIN6y CO(iPOF11I MEA N AQfE$ f net m cnoe O3(if 0.r FOAM O® yoen ffi E cAo NAr111 NIEf pRoI cfioh . CALL UTUTY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF COLORADO 1-800-922-1987 C•NL 2-131 N 5 OAK Net ADYAAAX BEFORE YOU D MADE. of (=AVAM FOR INE NAfIXNO Or UNDIRfAWNO WIADS! UTIUTES City of Fort Collins, Colorado UTILITY PLAN APPROVAL APPROVED: city Endow oht. CHECKED BY: .An, k whatewhiw Uiiily ante CHECKED BY: stdm«tw unity Date CHECKED BY: Pan. & RRwwtim Dot. CHECKED BY: uoirc Erpne. out. CHECKED BY: notwa Ce u Aldl' K 13M xwm. slfm,m oNle-.i obbi,b.a m Om. on. Tap >tm.m.ms &K aNOF3E lbfpwrBmmO NNrli BNrlem maN�forgtree 1nINrlLmmml G/DdUmODlxrr W0017AmFes NPati1R mmw.D.moRalr Oeewv CD0022T ]0m 1m405a06i Fe E1.BCnWI ENG0033t116 R! mNYLAuodWA Yc Gmt N.tmf apWIt em Wm 03f0.1m0 WDaTDaOEt Fe 87RJC11f VL ENGINEERING aN1E1Nf1�EfpnNSIIG 6W0111m11matw ?W4334N DDmNm MM01 TlPT>SOmBiQ CI LE1aN411191ll/q Notinswouivi.IC 701) bdflmm DOeRIM1 viligbv,O011ollm ONDt>e0,1/m Fla INNXW-V% LniadNN1D�Y1G mDE IsilYr.-Ata swill,tm Om De11ew,ODBfpN mzaa3tgse 004T]BBOmPa ' Wra NEI OO ® TAM ]PIIO•a tiro` pu COGOI ran mssloo® mseaamFa TEIEOmY1MCw7x>® CONSILTANT 12mmilmNN 30 M4= mA4Ti0NTfc FNEAINWOm®LTANT INmdplfifbl emN Fa1rrA.o OrleR COBO>7N 3W404mmFin 71WAtANIbYRa Fd11OIATIRE�ie0o Ali a novel t RWNANemer oil*=B tigiiiint sty a DRRNAGELElWmDNG0NMOL" C3.1 iL 7 U APPENDIX B HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS u 1 H F I Lei I I 1 N 7 O o Z o 0 0 0 oC)oo' O O D_ 0) 0) � E Y Dl a R V) CU O O O_ N W � j R a co ao`av o O R C Co06W O C O N O N U 3 H R Z CO W fU ' MA A I, LL LL Z o N n N N On N W D 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 LL O LL o W ;l ( b rmf O M V N Z U 0LL o 0 0 0 0 o c o LL LL: N N N Z W U '7 (i N (1 7 O 0000010 00 � U LL O W N � U Q N IQ M N l'1 O j O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � U Z o gt Q E 3 w oN w OD w m Q N N t7 J ul Q C O O O w v o W o 0 0 o Q n (9 � _ Q' W N GOD O O N O U Q N N O O N W z (o Q GO (O N n O U Q Q C W r 0 0 N 2 Q N (O O O O w C O a.N 4 N v Q O W N r tMi p a00 Q. Q N O) (O O m n O Q 1� W l7 N n 0 N '^s: ^ Ci Op aD 00 < .. Q '� N Gn m r ao o (n v N M M Q F W ti GOD O n m N oi ai O Q �° C6 N O O (O O) A G) Z 0 j N e7 O 0 0 0 vri d N N W LL ZW p D N N S O U o 0 0 0 � U c o 0 0 LL LL IL: O LL N W U (OBI N fNI N U 0 0 0 0 LL IL: O LL N U M N N j 0 0 0 0 0 � U J O o a E _ Z Q N V O D7 O W N Q Q N (n CD N M J W o O o O < H m O w W Z Q O ck O p O U J Q W 2 a Q v m m Q N Q N N co Q _ F N I N 0 W O a o fmV co r J Q W u F-- O Q WOWN N G V z N N ru) R U N X 0 Z QO F Z W C9 V LL Z 0 U) U LL 0 c{!J _G h z 60 � u E" W a U p F 0 9 0 .a 04 u Y 6 ° v w a 0 0 c c 0 c � ¢ fY K K K Q C + Q fp N fp n n N n LL Qp + C p m< fp n n N Q ][ m O E V tV O fV V lh NI tC Z O O = W II U N �F Qm J � � C N m t0 Q t0 fO t0 II u + LL J _ N (O OI W m m CI O) aD m N $ fV O Cl 0 0 O O x a O IL U Ii U U U U u m u 7 � W n m t0 m m m m aD N c0 w o m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m- o 0 o o o a o 0 0 0 f N N m t00 w K m "' Q t00 n t�l tm0 t0 (O�l 10 t0 l0 1'I co t7 f J C m t0 n O m N ' E� r ai to 'o o ro o ai w F p o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2Q fin- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W .�L J Q J F $ U lij co O m N rn m v N so C) m N n rn 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 O O m m m 0 c0 m m d U ly t0 m O r p N O O NCC Ol O1 F z N Q N 0co N y m 0 O W ¢ n N a m Z U, Z Z (n O — N f7 N N N M f7 wa O Y K N � T Z O t xm °D E� lri of U U Z 7 F M I7 N °!m �•- J W N O m m m = Q S U LL, rr r O w c r U U U U ? w W o m g f m-- o00 f J W L c C r o o m W ` N m N f. J -T 'E� ci Zvi w f w coo 0 o � pp v1 �- o0 0 Wes mce p v m�lo J J F- $ U m h N N O O O m r m a � z m 0 } N N N m Cb N 10 N Z F _Z W Q aLi N N N f] m fV o IA p n o O 0 ui � 0 n N T J 6 N N M c c c o t U m x mo i= 0 c o N J •� V N U n ui Z v 0 In � a r + W CY u u u W m U 0 LL LL O z D a W IL � O } U) H N W J Q Z O Q Q U II C7 r z o0 z � U 0 2 0 Ca m m N w N N (;5 �5 Y r L 2 C $ r Q °c c c cui c c A a m �^n Q w c J ~ W 0 F N O O (7 t0 dry 0 ra' c Q E rn c 'o Q o a ❑ m rn N IT n 0 r cq °r w _ m m m rn m o N N of of vi co 0) LL w O Z 7 f0 m C) O N CD h W N N N (i N C] F O O O O O O 0 0 w w K wN c0 ? aD Q N N N O 1- N N .N- t�I N O O N D) N N a ai 0 a lL N Z C7 Z N Q � N l7 N N N CI M w a N Y Q w W K N a m U w c J f 0 N {�jl d Ti 0 r Q E 0 'o U o m : p a cn Cl! co d �"i" N V N N •- Cl! J E N N 7 LL LL Q Z N N GD U N Cl! F a O O U w K 0 n a0 u Q v (O f0 Cl! Z N N m ❑ } N N 0 N co Z t- �Z_ �r cn W Q N N N pLL d < \ 0 )k) k - k � � m k\k \ k\ WIW f � # 2§ / 22 f §J ° � §00 - { §§§§§§ §§ { §\c6 22 �� / ° /§2§/§ 7§ �G K § „ 7 ) _ p �n66 Mn , 6 / ] C )\ WCL \ § { � # �§ # §§ 4 E.0 o�aCL §§§ }/ � §& .%~~� k» a2; mm \ ) 11 m Z 7 U LL 0 E 0 w a. N w ` d N U W N U C p� LL Y C LL p a �o z 1 II 11 d Y Q W a Q o w a O m W C7 � v J Q z O F-- O C O C 0 0 a O O O O O O W J J J J 7 c rc �Q�w (X IrIr A a A N U U w C A p �~ TJ Ol m m fV l7 N m r � Q y� w Q U 0 E rn c . 0 Q p'mm�,;N nn CC fp fp O 6 r r N r I� ro m w to ro ro ci C Q fD N tD r r N n m LL O 2 m n Q. N U o u1pi 0 0 umi 0 a. 0 0 0 0 0 V O U O N 0 Q 0 a m W. m ID m N l7 fV a O 10 O) W Z N q 0 N m O w O m N m 66 O O W 7 a N rI Z F � Z o a E 0 11 m m m II C C VVQ O) rn N U C d o 0 E E N o 'k a eoo 111 9 o v rc a a a A a U C to to F Q n Q Q Q p N N N 0 rc C 3 a E c t U w o v' 0 3 c b N N r LL O 2 7 OD N N of U o 0 0 U p a (O r (O (O N N Z N Iv D N N f)J 7 N N Z _L W 0 C N N V N N oa N 0 b I APPENDIX C HYDRAULIC COMPUTATIONS 0 11 J North of Future Expansion Q100 with Overflows Worksheet for Irreggular Channel secl;on Al Project Description ' Worksheet North of Future Expansion Q100 - with overflows Flow Element Irregular Channel ' Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data ' Slope 0.5000 % Discharge 14.40 cfs Options Current Roughness Method Improved Lotter's Method ' Open Channel Weighting Method Improved Lotter's Method Closed Channel Weighting Horton's Method ' Method Results Mannings Coefficient 0.035 ' Water Surface Elevation 0.72 ft Elevation Range 0.00 to 5.00 Flow Area 7.1 ft2 ' Wetted Perimeter 12.95 ft Top Width 12.77 ft Actual Depth 0.72 ft ' Critical Elevation 0.46 ft Critical Slope 2.4927 %' Velocity 2.02 ft/s Velocity Head 0.06 ft Specific Energy 0.79 ft Froude Number 0.48 Flow Type Subcritical ' Roughness Segments Start End Mannings ' Station Station Coefficient 0+00 0+39 0.035 Natural Channel Points Station Elevation (ft) (ft) 0+00 5.00 0+20 0.00 0+27 0.00 ' 0+30 0.75 0+39 0.90 Title: Ridgewood Project Engineer: Ryan Banning ' nA... ldrainage\all designs g100 11-10-06.fm2 North Star Design, Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 [614n] 11/10/2006 3:39 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 ' Through Play Area - B1 Q100 with Overflows ' Worksheet for Trapezoidal Channel 5ec��on �1-BI Project Description ' Worksheet Through Play - B1 Q100 with overflows Flow Element Trapezoidal Channel ' Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data ' Mannings Coefficient 0.030 Slope 0.5000 % ' Left Side Slope Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V 4.00 H : V Bottom Width 4.00 ft Discharge 14.40 cfs Results Depth 0.83 ft Flow Area 6.1 ftz Wetted Perimeter 10.83 ft Top Width 10.63 ft Critical Depth 0.60 ft t Critical Slope 1.7676 % Velocity 2.38 ft/s Velocity Head 0.09 ft ' Specific Energy 0.92 ft Froude Number 0.56 Flow Type Subcritical ' L m 0 Title: Ridgewood Project Engineer: Ryan Banning ' n:\...\drainagetall designs g100 11-10-06.fm2 North Star Design, Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 [614n] 11/13/2006 12:40 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc: 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 Through Play Area - 132 Q100 with Overflows Worksheet for Trapezoidal Channel SCA'O'n Ba-d) Project Description Worksheet Through Play - B2 Q100 with Overflows Flow Element Trapezoidal Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.030 Slope 0.5000 % Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Bottom Width 6.00 ft Discharge 27.70 cfs Results Depth 1.00 ft Flow Area 10.0 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 14.25 ft Top Width 14.01 ft Critical Depth 0.73 ft Critical Slope 1.6304 % Velocity 2.77 ft/s Velocity Head 0.12 ft Specific Energy 1.12 ft Froude Number 0.58 Flow Type , Subcritical Tide: Ridgewood Project Engineer: Ryan Banning n:\...\drainage\all designs g100 11-10-06.fm2 North Star Design, Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 [614n] 11/13/2006 12:41 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 ' East of Soccer Field Q100 with Overflows ' Worksheet for Trapezoidal Channel Seca�o,n C-C Project Description ' Worksheet East of Soccer Field Q100 with overflows Flow Element Trapezoidal Channel ' Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data ' Mannings Coefficient 0.030 Slope 0.5000 % Left Side Slope 4,00 H : V ' Right Side Slope 4.00 H : V Bottom Width 4.00 ft Discharge 43.60 cfs Results Depth 1.41 ft Flow Area 13.6 ft' Wetted Perimeter 15.65 ft Top Width 15.31 ft Critical Depth 1.09 ft ' Critical Slope 1.5078 % Velocity 3.20 f /s Velocity Head 0.16 ft ' Specific Energy 1.57 ft Froude Number 0.60 Flow Type Subcritical 1 1 Title: Ridgewood Project Engineer: Ryan Banning ' n:\...\drainage\all designs g100 11-10-06.fm2 North Star Design, Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 [614nj 11/14/2006 10:57 AM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 To Avondale Q100 with Overflows Worksheet for Trapezoidal Channel Project Description Worksheet To Avondale Q100 with Overflows Flow Element Trapezoidal Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.030 Slope 0.5000 % Left Side Slope 4.00 H : V Right Side Slope 5.00 H : V Bottom Width 4.00 ft Discharge 47.45 cfs Results Depth 1.43 ft Flow Area 14.9 ftz Wetted Perimeter 17.17 ft Top Width 16.86 ft Critical Depth 1.11 ft Critical Slope 1.5038 % Velocity 3.19 ft/s Velocity Head 0.16 ft Specific Energy 1.59 ft Froude Number 0.60 Flow Type Subcritical Title: Ridgewood Project Engineer: Ryan Banning n:1..%drainage\all designs g100 11-10-06.fm2 North Star Design, Inc. FlowMaster v6.1 [614n) 11/20/2006 1:56 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA (203) 755-1666 Page 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i 1 1 1 1 t t CURB CUTS RECTANGULAR WEIR EQUATION CE REFERENCE MANUAL - 7TH - LINDEBURG 19-10-14 LOCATION: Ridgewood Elementary PROJECT NO: 210-10 COMPUTATIONS BY: ROB SUBMITTED BY: North Star Design DATE: 11/20/2006 CURB CUT MINIMUM WIDTH Qa = (2/3)*C,.b*sgrt(2g)*H^(1.5) where Q. = flow (cfs) co = discharge coefficient 0.62 g = gravitational acceleration = 32.2 ft/s b= width of curb opening H= height of curb opening Design Point 2 Q required = h= solve for: b = check: Q = USE FIND ACTUAL DEPTH: h= 2.3 cfs 0.50 ft 1.96 ft 2.30 cfs 2.0 FOOT CURB CUT 0.49 ft Project: Pipe ID: Design Information (input) Pipe Invert Slope ......................... So 0.0135:ft/ft Pipe Manning's n-value ......................... n Pipe Diameter D 21,00.: inches .......... ...... Design discharge 4 CfS Full -flow Capacity (Calculated) Full -flow area Af ............. sq ft Full -flow wetted perimeter Pf 515,0% It Half Central Angle Theta rad Full -flow capacity Qf cfs Calculation of Normal Flow Condition Half Central angle (0<Theta<3.14) Theta 1 91 rad Flow area An =77771,70isq ft Wetted perimeter Pn ft Flow depth Yn 4'. it: It Flow velocity Vn fps Discharge Qh cfs Calculation of Critical Flow Condition Half Central Angle (0<Theta-c<3.14) Theta rad Critical flow area Ac sq ft Critical top width T c ft Critical flow depth Yc .1 ft Critical flow velocity Vc fps Froude number Fr Culvert 1.xIs, Pipe 11 /20/2006, 3:06 PM I I Project: lit Pipe ID: I I I I I I I I I I lesign Discharge 'ipe Diameter ilet Edge Type (choose from pull -down list) filet Invert Elevation )utlet Invert Elevation 'ipe Length -, lanning's Roughness n-value end Loss Coefficient At Loss Coefficient ailwater Water Surface Elevation Cross Sectorial Area �rt Slope ial Flow Depth al Flow Depth Depth by Inlet Control ailwater Depth for Design riction Loss Coefficient over Culvert.Length um of All Loss Coefficients eadwater Depth by Cutlet Control Ratio = Inlet Type = Q =.:�:: ...:,.,14.4cfs D 21.D0 inches 1. 5108.70: ft 0, 51 D,8.33.. ft L 27.5 ft n Kb K, ............. ............. El. Yt ::::516qA6:ft .. A. ............ so ft/ft Y. ft . .... Y. .......... . . . . . .. .. . 10 a]: ft Mt ft ft ICulvert I.As, HW-Pipe 11 /20/2006, 3:06 PM Project: Pipe ID: Culvert 2.xls, Pipe Design Information (input) Pipe Invert Slope So ............ 0 0209.. ft/ft Pipe Manning's n-value n . .. ......... .... .. .. 00430 Pipe Diameter D Q inches Design discharge Q 2716 cfs Full -flow Capacity (Calculated) Full -flow area Af sq ft Full -flow wetted perimeter ... Pf ....... ...... ...... 85, ft Half Central Angle Theta rad Full -flow capacity Qf cfs Calculation of Normal Flow Condition Half Central angle (0<Theta<3.14) Theta rad Flow area An sq ft Wetted perimeter P n = ft Flow depth Yn 120 ft Flow velocity Vn fps Discharge Qn cfs Calculation of Critical Flow Condition Half Central Angle (O<Theta-c<3.14) Theta-c rad Critical flow area Ac sq ft Critical op width Tc 1-2,25. ft Critical flow depth Yc 79. ft Critical flow velocity Vc fps Froucle number Fr C' 0 11/20/2006, 3:03 PM I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 Project RjdcIi oW. ; Elementary School Pipe ID. Cut felt 2 QC ti`QA ign Discharge Q 27,6 cis Diameter D 30 00 inches Edge Type (choose from pull -down list) Inlet Type = Square' Endvvith Headwalt Invert Elevation Ie _.; 51.0 .62 it et Invert Elevation OQ 5106.93 ft Length L ning's Roughness n-value n 0.013: 1 Loss Coefficient Kb 010: Loss Coefficient K, 1.00: vater Water Surface Elevation EI. Yt 51fl6 33.ft Cross Sectional Area ....................... ...................... ....................... ...................... A. G 91 sq ft rt Slope S, fl 0209:ft/ft ial Flow Depth Y 120 ft al Flow Depth Y� 1 79 ft dwater Death by Inlet Control Iwater Depth by Inlet Control HW inlet- dwater Death by Outlet Control ....................... ater Depth for Design ...................... ....................... d 21S .ft Dn Loss Coefficient over Culvert Length K, fl 30 of Ail Loss Coefficients Ks 190 Iwater Depth by Outlet Control HW-outlet-.:,,:,.:,.::2.8.8: ft ign Headwater Depth HW 2.92;ift Ratio 1 Culvert 2.x1s, HW-Pipe 11/20/2006, 3:03 PM i 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 North Star Design, Inc. 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor, CO 80550 Riprap Calculations for Circular Pipe Outlets LOCATION: Ridgewood Elementary School PROJECT NO: 210-10 COMPUTATIONS BY: ROB SUBMITTED BY: North Star Design DATE: 11/20/2006 From Urban Strom Drainage Criteria Manual volume 2, June 2001 (Referenced figures are attached at the end of this section) Q = discharge, cfs D = diameter of circular conduit, ft d = tailwater depth, ft Pd = riprap sizing design parameter V = design flow velocity at pipe outlet, ft/s g = accelleration due to gravity 32.2 ft/sec2 Culvert 1 - Section 61-81 21" PVC or N12 ADS Q = 14.4 cfs D = 21 in = 1.75 ft d = 1.16 ft From StormCad Model V = 8.5 ft/s From StormCad Model Pd = (V 2 + g*d) 5 = 10.5 (From Figure HS-20, use Type L riprap) Riprap Depth: From Table HS-9, D50 = 9 in From Equation HS-17. Riprap depth = 1.75 ' D50 = 16 in Basin Length: From Equation HS-18, L = 4 ' D = 7.0 ft From Equation HS-19, L = D" V/2 = 5.6 ft Basin Width: From Equation HS-20, W = 4D = 7.0 ft Depth of Cutoff Wall: From Equation HS-22, B = D/2 + 1.75 ' D50 = 2.2 ft USE: 10' W x 10' L x 16" Type L Riprap Riprap2.xls Page 1 11 /20/2006 North Star Design, Inc. 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor. CO 80550 Riprap Calculations for Circular Pipe Outlets LOCATION: Ridgewood Elementary School PROJECT NO: 210-10 COMPUTATIONS BY: ROB SUBMITTED BY: North Star Design DATE: 11/26/2006 From Urban Strom Drainage Criteria Manual volume 2, June 2001 (Referenced figures are attached at the end of this section) Q = discharge, cfs D = diameter of circular conduit, ft d = tailwater depth, ft Pd = riprap sizing design parameter V = design flow velocity at pipe outlet, ft/s g = accelleration due to gravity 32.2 ft/sec2 Culvert 2 - Section B2-B2 30" PVC or N12 ADS 27.6 cfs D = 30 in = 2.5 ft d = 1.2 ft From StormCad Model V = 11.9 ft/s From StormCad Model Pd = (V 2 + g•d) 5 = 13.4 (From Figure HS-20, use Type L riprap) Riprap Depth: From Table HS-9, D50 = 9 in From Equation HS-17. Riprap depth = 1.75 ' D50 = 16 in Basin Length: From Equation HS-18, L = 4 ` D = 10.0 ft From Equation HS-19, L = D.5 , V/2 = 9.4 ft Basin Width: From Equation HS-20, W = 4 • D = 10.0 ft Depth of Cutoff Wall: From Equation HS-22, B = D/2 + 1.75 ' D50 = 2.6 ft USE: 10' W x 10' L x 16" Type L Riprap 11/20/2006 Riprap2.xls Page 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a APPENDIX D EROSION CONTROL CALCULATIONS I I I I I I r I I @ I I I I U E <z 3 § . }( me sE § 09 )\ ]]) \ )\ §§§ / k ] 2 � §§§ k> 2 ■.§ @SA §§i � § §/ e o2 a /ƒ §a 2§ Vie\ 2 - � ƒ)g R)Q \;\ K\( Alf a te/ J7 7Q 2� «[) t \\� \\0 k /§ §t gAa�[ J7« ])¥® 2)g\[ L. ƒ\a. )/}�k j7 §)\ JD 2)A3$ §)] North Star Design 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor, CO 80550 EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS PROJECT: Ridgewood Elementary STANDARD FORM B COMPLETED BY: ROB DATE: November 17, 2006 EROSION CONTROL C-FACTOR P-FACTOR METHOD VALUE VALUE COMMENT BARE SOIL 1.00 1.00 SMOOTH CONDITION ROUGHENED GROUND 1.00 0.90 SEDIMENT BASIN 1.00 0.50 ROADS/WALKS 0.01 1.00 GRAVEL FILTERS 1.00 0.80 PLACED AT INLETS SILT FENCE 1.00 0.50 STRAW MULCH 0.06 1.00 ESTABLISHED GRASS 0.08 1.00 STRAW BARRIERS 1.00 0.80 EFF = (I-C*P)*100 MAJOR SUB BASIN AREA EROSION CONTROL METHODS BASIN BASIN (Ac) 1 1.86 BARE SOIL 0.00 Ac. ROADS/WALKS 0.72 Ac. STRAW MULCH 0.00 Ac. ROUGHENED GROUND 1.14 Ac. ESTABLISHED GRASS 0.00 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.62 NET P-FACTOR 0.36 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 = 77.8% 2 3.55 BARE SOIL 0.00 Ac. ROADS/WALKS 0.46 Ac. STRAW MULCH 0.00 Ac. ROUGHENED GROUND 3.09 Ac. ESTABLISHED GRASS 0.00 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.87 NET P-FACTOR 0.36 EFF = (I-C*P)*100 = 68.6% 3 2.01 BARE SOIL 0.00 Ac. ROADSIWALKS 1.22 Ac. STRAW MULCH 0.00 Ac. ROUGHENED GROUND 0.79 Ac. ESTABLISHED GRASS 0.00 Ac. NET C-FACTOR 0.40 NET P-FACTOR 0.36 EFF = (1-C*P)* 100 = 85.6% TOTAL AREA = 7.42 ac TOTAL EFF = 75.5% _ (94.0%*29.77 ac. +.. +99.6%*0.40 ac)/I. 14 ac REQUIRED PS = 81.0% Erosion.xls 1 of 1 1.14 1.45 2.44 1.72 5.60 North Star Design 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor, CO 80550 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE STANDARD FORM C PROJECT: Ridgewood Elementary COMPLETED BY: ROB DATE: November 17, 2006 Indicate by use of a bar line or symbols when erosion control measures will be installed. Major modifications to an approved schedule may require submitting a new schedule for approval by the City Engineer. MONTH 1 1 2 1 3 1 4, 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 10 11 12 Demolition Grading Wind Erosion Control: Soil Roughing Perimeter Barrier Additional Barriers Vegetative Methods Soil Sealant Other Rainfall Erosion Control Structural: Sediment Trap/Basin Inlet Filters Straw Barriers Silt Fence Barriers Sand Bags Bare Soil Preparation Contour Furrows Terracing Asphalt/Concrete Paving Other Vegetative: Permanent Seed Planting Mulching/Sealant Temporary Seed Planting Sod Installation Netti ngs/Mats/Blan kets Other BUILDING CONSTRUCTION STRUCTURES: INSTALLED BY: VEGETATION/MULCHING CONTRACTOR: CONTRACTOR MAINTAINED BY: DEVELOPER TO BE DETERMINED BY BID APPROVED BY CITY OF FORT COLLINS ON: Page 1 North Star Design 700 Automation Drive, Unit I Windsor, CO 80550 Project: Prepared by: EROSION CONTROL COST ESTIMATE Ridgewood Elementary ROB ITEM IQUANTITY JUNIT COST/UNIT ITOTAI COST Silt Fence 550 LF $3 $1,656 Wattle Barrier 8 EA $150 $1,200 Gravel Inlet Filter 4 EA $150 $600 Construction Entrance 1 EA $550 $550 Subtotal Contingency (50%) Total $4,000 $2,000 $6,000 CITY RESEEDING COST Reseed/Mulch 7.42 ACRE 1 $725 $5,380 Subtotal Contingency (50%) Total $5,380 $2,690 $8,069 EROSION CONTROL ESCROW AMOUNT $8,069 Page 1 APPENDIX E EXCERPTS FROM PREVIOUS REPORTS 11 1 I NCUM Final Drainage & Erosion Control Study " "' " " ` ` a I " G Ridgewood Hills A U D., Filing No- 3 In general, developed flows (See Appendix B) realized in the northern one-third of the Site flow overland and through grass -lined swales into curb and gutter, and eventually enter the storm drain systems through Type 'R' and No. 16 combination curb inlets. Ultimately, the developed flows out fall to Pond 41 from Storm Drain Systems C, D, E, and H. , 100-year developed flows in basins 909, 910 and 912 concentrate to a low point in Jansen Drive at D.P.'s 910 & 912. These flows combine in Storm Drain System "C" and "D" with 100-year developed flows from basins 911 and 913 (D.P.'s 911 & 913). 100-year developed flows in basins .900 and 908 (Combined Q,00= 12.10 cfs) concentrate to a sump 10' Type 'R' inlet at D.P. 900. 100-year developed flows in basins 901 and 902 (Combined Q100= 14.60 cfs) concentrate to sump 10' Type 1 R' inlet at D.P. 901. These flows are conveyed east via Storm Drain System "D This system outfalls to Storm Drain System "C", which ultimately outfalls to Pond 4 t . ' Basins 903, 906 and 907 combine at D.P.'s 906 & 907 (Prichett Court cul-du-sac). ' 100-year developed flows (Q,00 20.67 cfs) are fully captured in a sump 15' Type ' R' inlet. Likewise, Basins 904 and 905 combine at D.P.'s 904 & 905 (.Agate Court cut -du -sac). 100-year developed flows (Q,(,a= 10.96 cfs) are fully captured ' in a sump 10' Type 'R' inlet. Developed flows from these basins and the aforementioned upstream basins combine in Storm Drain System "'C". ' Basins 925 (future school site), 914 and 922 combine at D.P. 925. Runoff from the future school site was evaluated using runoff coefficients (i.e., C,=0.45, 10 N:\FC004i.NEW\Drainage\Word\DrngRpt041100.doc 1 ' Final Drainage & Erosion Control Study " Ridgewood Hills.-P. U.D., Filing No. 3 C100= 0.70 & 50% impervious) from Table 3-1 of the Manual. C,00 0.70 was used ' in place of 1.25'C to more conservatively estimate the 100-year developed flows. 100-year developed flows from basin 922 and 33% of the 100-year developed school site flows are captured in the low point of Avondale Road at D.P. 922 by a ' sump 20' Modified Type 'R' inlet. (Note: 100% of the developed school site flows were included in the outfall system design.) The high point in Avondale ' road was taken into consideration at D.P. 922. The inlet's 25.2 efs 100-year capacity is based upon a maximum ponding depth of 0.57' which is maintained ' from the difference in elevation from the low point at the inlet to the high point in the vertical curve to the north. 100-year developed flows of 7.59 cfs at D.P. 923 (east FL of Avondale Road) are captured by a sump 10' Type 'R' inlet. The 100-year capacity of this inlet was limited to 0.16' depth for the same reasons as the inlet at D.P. 922. Basins 1005 and 1006 concentrate 100-year developed flows to D.P.'s 1005 and 1006. respectively. 10' and 6' No. 16 combination inlets at D.P.'s 1005 and 1006 respectively. capture most of the developed flows from these basins. Carryover flow at D.P. 1005 is 0.37 cfs, and at D.P. 1006 is 0.26 cfs. The Developed Basin Comparison Exhibit (See Appendix B) compares relative areas that contribute developed flows to Filing No. 2. In general. a net reduction in the total developed area flowing to Filing No. 2 results from the conditions we are proposing. Specifically, the total developed area in Basins 500 and 501 (per The Sear Brown Group) has been reduced. Total developed flows have therefore been reduced in these areas and the downstream capacity of facilities designed in Filing No. 2 have not been adversely impacted. II N:\FC0045.NEWADrainagc\Word\DmgRpt041100.doc Final Drainage & Erosion Control Study '� YONp IN G I N I IN I.NG "• Ridgewood Kills P. U.D., Filing No.: 3 ' Basins 920, 921 and 924 combine at D.P. 924. A 26' on -grade combination inlet ' captures 20.16 cfs of 100-year developed flow with 0.29 cfs bypassing to Shenandoah P.U.D. At D.P. 919 a 46' on -grade combination inlet captures 35.71 ' cfs of the 100-year developed flow for the Phase 3 temporary drainage (discussed later in Detention Pond Design) with 0.22 cfs bypassing to Shenandoah. At the ' build out of Avondale Rd., the flow at D.P. 919 will reduce to 4.36 cfs which will be caught in its entirety by the combination inlet. 4.3 Detention Pond Design ' A total of six SWM1vl Models (See Appendix D) were developed to size the detention ponds. The first two are for the orifice controlled outfall and the ' plugged outlet condition for Pond #l. The second two are for the orifice controlled outfall and the plugged outlet condition for Pond 92. The final two ' models are for the temporary drainage for the construction of Phase 3 (see plan ' sheets 21d and 21e). Pond volume calculations (See Appendix D) show that Pond I41 and Pond 92 have -brim full* capacities of 10.67 ac-ft and 18.89 ac-ft. ' t respectively. The results of the SWIM runs indicate required storage capacities in Pond #1 of 7.05 ac-ft (W.S.E.L.=5076.25) which includes the 0.75 ac-ft water. ' 2u! l ty sto r�,, and 14.4 ac-ft (W.S.E.L.=5066.54) in Pond #2 which includes the 1.40 ac-ft water quality storage. During the construction of Phase 3. the proposed Traffic Circle on Avondale Rd. will be temporarily re -graded with concrete curb and gutter on the east side so that flows from the north flowline of Kim Dr. will travel to D.P. 919 and enter Pond #1. This will allow the construction of Phase 3 without the construction of Pond #2 and the related offsite outfall system. The ' required storage capacity for this is 8.55 ac-ft (W.S.E.L. = 5077.09). The south flowline of Kim (Basin 807) will temporarily be retained in Pond #3 (temporary 12 N:\FC004i.NEW\Drainage\Word\DmgRpt041100.doc Final Drainage A ' Erosion Control Study ` O"° " G IN l I O N G Ridgewood Hills A U.D., Filing No. 3 1 ' pond) which has a storage of 0.31 ac-ft which is twice the 100 year requirement. This temporary pond will have no outfall and will empty through evaporation. ' The results from the plugged outlet run for the temporary condition show that the required storage will be 9.0 ac.-ft. with a 100 yr. W.E.S. = 5077.90. The crest of ' the spillway for Pond 91 is at 5078.00. At the buildout condition of Avondale Rd.. flows from Kim Drive will route to Pond #2 through Storm Drain Systems G ' and E respectively. Refer to Appendix D for a schematic diagram of the SWMM model conveyance elements and ponds, S WMM Basins exhibit, input data ' summaries and input/output files. ' In each pond. there is sufficient storage volume to capture and detain the entire ' 100-year storm event. Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) and maintain at least one foot of freeboard. As a precaution though, an emergency spillway was ' sized to discharge 53% (106.3 cfs) from Pond #1 to Triangle Dr. from where the discharge will flow onto Shenandoah P.U.D. The spillway in Pond #2 was sized to. carry the 373.0 maximum inflow to the pond. The discharge from the spillway will flow- east in the historic drainage path toward the intersection of U.S. Hwy. ' 287 and C.R. 32. Erosion protection on the back side of the Pond #2 embankment will be maintained with American Green P300 Erosion Control/Turf ' Reinforcement Matting. The. outlet system for Pond #1 will regulate the release rate at 9.9 cfs (Q2ms 9.9 cfs) through'a, 11.5" diameter orifice plate. Pond #1 will discharge into an ' existing 21" RCP that exists as part of the Shenandoah P.U.D., First Filing storm drainage improvements. J 13 N:\F00045.N E W\Drainage\ Word\DmgRptO4I I00.doc Final Drainage & ' Erosion,.Control Study 7Pond Ridgewood Hills P. U.D., Filing No. 3 ater downstream of our outlet structure was accounted for in the design l. The downstream system was originally designed to accept 25 cfs Site. We re-evaluated the downstream tailwater condition using the 91 release rate of 9.9 cfs. The outlet structure will operate under ' inlet control. Refer to Appendix E for portions of the approved, Final Drainage Report for Shenandoah P.U.D., First Filing. The outlet system for Pond 92 regulates the release rate at 10.1 cfs (Q2HIS=10" ' cfs) through.a 11-U2" diameter orifice plate. Pond 92 discharges to the proposed off -site storm drainage system (See Appendix D). The design of the system is ' included as part of the Ridgewood Hills P.U.D., Filing No. 3 drainage ' improvements. The Pond 92 outfall connects to .the proposed off -site system at a manhole in the ' directly southeast comer of the Site. From here, the system heads east and across ' the property owned by Colorado Land Source. A letter of intent from Colorado Land Source (dated December 14., 1998) has been submitted to the City of Fort ' Collins. The developed runoff will be piped under College Avenue and across the Colland Center Third Filing property in existing road right-of-way and an existing ' drainage easement. The pipe will daylight east of the Colland Center Third Filing property into an existing swale. Nolte Associates, Inc. is working with the ' engineer for Colland Center Third Filing, Northern Engineering Services, Inc., to design a common outfall for this line and the outfall from their proposed detention ' pond. The- existing swale has a capacity of approximately 124 cfs (Note: representative cross -sections downstream of the proposed outfall, which were ' selected following a site visit, are included in Appendix Q. Please refer to Appendix F for an 11 "x 17" copy of the Colland Center Third Filing Plat. 14 N:\FC004i.NEW\Drainage\Word\DmgRpt041100.doc Pam; FC0045 pe6jtxl Name: RidgevmW F011s P.U.D. Fling 03 C46a1uod By: ME Culdu-sacs Anew fll La Anq Its 24M C� 0.95 Type 1 6004 4 Aw+le Slope ®Fi of sv,ak 2% 0.25 Type 2 7005 Tad Ffdde Tod Tod Taal Tod C • .. e ~�•'� Averse ASO" AWMW Cahmm Lot Culdu- Impervious Pervious 2 yr. 2 yr. 100 yr. 1007r. � Slope Basin Arts Am Sidewa0l Sidervah Am Flaly3Ytdtl4 Ara M Las Are 8 Culdu•sscs Type Ate Are Ara Ca414pmim'C CI CCt Cr ..CCe Besot R % ft % .2 1 r A4 a r a4 a4 At As 800 713.669.77 7.25 IIto 24730 21 16 38400 1 1 6004 69154 246.485.77 0.40 1.00 0.40 1.23 .' O30 E00 95 lost II]D 730 t01 110,999.30 2.55 1130 23730 21 t 192W 0 0 0 42930 68.069.30 0.32 1.00 0.S2 1.25 0.63 $01 60 200 1130 330 t02 203.793.99 4.68 760 17480 27 19 45W 1 1 6004 69094 134.709.99 0,49 1.00 0.19 1.25 ' .0.61 802 ISO 200 685 3.50 103 96.226.14 1.911 775 16275 21 6 14400 0 0 0 30675 55.551.14 0.50 1.00 0.50 L25 0.62 $03 30 200 740 1.10 504 121.525.61 279 815 "- 17115 21 11 26400 1 2 loos 50520 7I,003.61 0.34 - I.00 0.54 1.25 0.61 804 90 200 SOS 3.10 $05 144,701.33 3.32 790 18170 23 8 19200 0 0 0 37370 107,331.33 0.43 Lost- _0.17 1.25 O-U . am 110 200 770 1.50 906 31,678.q 1.19 610 14070 23 { 9600 0 0 0 2]670 211,048.a1 0.57 1.00 O.S7. 1.23 .0.71 t06 IIO lost 220 210 307 101,059.00 232 1384 29064 21 12 28800 0 0 0 57864 43.195.00 0.65 1.00 ;. 0.65 1.25 - 0.81 .: $07 65 2.00 1325 230 808 176.337.40j4.09 1195 25M 21 25 60000 0 0 0 Ils"s 93,242.40 0:S8 1.00 ". . O38 Ili 0.73 •-: SOB 5o 200 1235 235 =820.72 350 7330 21 11 26400 1 2 7005 40755 82,065.72 0.48 1.00 t 0.49 1.25 - 0.60. �. =9 230 200 535 3.95 t004 71,895.39 695 14595 21 9 216M 0 0 0 36195 35.700.39 0.60 1.00 <::0.60 - 1.25 : '0.75•: 80% 210 200 285 3.00 $to 96.510.93 630 14490 23 8 192W 1 2 loos 40695 43.84S.98 0.59 1.00 `' as$ 1.25 ... -.0.72 ,:: $10 130 200 550 IAS U2.872.60 890 30170 2714 33600 1 2 7WS 61075 71.797.60 0.57 1.00 0.S7:.. 125 ., :0.71 -: all 110 200 825 2.90 tl_ 208)7499 1090 25070 27 17 40800 1.5 1 9006 74876 1)I,49t.99 0.50 1.00 .1: 'OSO. 1.25 0.63. $12 275 6.40 900 1.00 26.632.69 785 8855 23 4 9600 0.5 1 3002 21457 S,175.69 0.91 1.00 0.81 1.25 ':�I.OD .' $13 40 200 350 4.83 t14 23.677.97 605 12705 21 2 4800 0 0 0 17505 11.172.97 0.68 1.00 a." 1.25 - OAS $14 30 200 300 1.00 43.030.22 655 Ism 23 4 96W 0 0 0 24665 IBj65.22 0.65 1.00 0.6S 1.25 0.81 815 45 200 $75 730 . tl6 211,09548 0.64 465 10695 23 3 7200 0 0 0 17995 10,2WA8 0.70 1.00 0.70 - L25 0.67 - $16 43 200 410 1.75 tI7 IM774.80 282 430 11040 23 1st 24000 0 0 0 35M 87,734.90 0.45 L00" 0.45 1.25 0.S6. $17 330 9.30 300 1.80 tIt 109.292.15 2.51 $60 18060 21 14 33600 0.5 1 3002 54662 54.620.15 0.60 LOD 0.60 125 ' 0.75 11111 45 200 1210 3.40 do 65,974.11 1.31 590 12190 21 8 192W 0.5 1 30D2 34382 31492.11 0.62 1.00 0.62 1.25 0." $19 60 200 625 3.80 I:o 126.825.23 2.91 685 14385 21 14 33600 0 0 0 47985 78,840.28 0.51 I.00 0.51 1.25 0.64 820 160 200 550 1.85 I L'1 134.027.56 5.37 0 0 0 - 7 16800 0 0 0 16800 217,223.56 0.30 1.00 - 030 1.25 Q38 QI .105 11.40 710 3.50 C 403.30723 9.26 0 0 0 15 36000 0 0 0 36000 367,307.23 0.11 1.0003I - 1.23 -Q39 822 160 17.30 330 1.15 40p 121.155.56 278 995 20895 21 9 21600 0 0 0 42495 78.660.56 0.50 1.00 - 0.30 1.25 0.62 900 130 200 $40 1.70 4O4 102.912.20 2.36 995 20895 21 11 264W 0 0 0 47295 55.617.20 0.57 1.00 0S7 Im 0.71 901 90 2.00 910 1.70 Or 29,661.70 0.68 365 ' 8395 23 2 4900 0 0 0 13195 16.466.70 0.56 1.00 0.56 1.25 0.70 9022 60 ZOD 110 2-M 101 I 23 763,40 0.55 165 8395 23 2 4900 0 0 0 13195 10,573.40 '0.64 1.00 0.64 1.25 0.30 903 55 ZOO 260 220 44H 36337.36 0.83 440 9240 21 3 7200 0.5 1 3002 19442 16.895 36 0,62 Lost 0.62 1.25 0.73 904 60 zoo 500 2OD am 38,i38.37 0.99 440 9240 21 3 72W 0.5 1 3002 19442 18.696.37 061 LOD 0.61 1.25 076 905 60 20D 475 zoo 106 1 1:0.828.18 2.77 410 9610 21 11 26400 0.5 2 35023 38512.5 82,315.69 0.47 1.00 0.47 125 0.59. 906 370 2.00 390 1.53 •� I !19.06794 2.71 600 12600 21 10 24000 0.5 2 3502.5 40102.5 77,965.44 0.49 1.00 0.49 1.25 0.61 907 130 200 690 2I5 Von 1 1.346 41 0.40 210 4830 23 - 0 0 0 0 0 4830 ' 12.51641 0." 1.00 0.44 1.25 0.56 909 Its 2,00 Ito 520 4• i 3a S64:5 2.06 - --575--- - 13225 23 6 14400 0 0 0 27623 62.239.2.5 047 1.00 0.47 1.25 "s 909 1 110 200 375 200 wo 2.47312 1.43 560 12980 23 5 12000 0 0 0 24390 37,593.12 0.53 1.00 0.53 1.23 0.66 910 60 2.00 420 :4S In I :7,4:765 063 375 9625 23 2 4800 0 0 0 13425 13,99365 0.59 too 0.59 - 1.25 0.74 911 65 zoo 350 2-70 w; 1 53.368 50 1.24 275 6325 23 5 12000 0 0 0 18325 35.543.60 OA9 1.00 0.49 1.25 0.61 912 120 2.00 280 1-40 M1 W.-410 0.42 275 6325 23 2 4800 0 0 0 11125 9,599.10 063 1.00 0.63 1.25 0.79 913 65 200 275 240 - w• IS.9t052 083 '450 10350 23 5 12000 0 0 0 22730 17.630.32 0.68 1.00 0.68 1.25 0.E6 914 65 lost 785 450 -> •rs 18a3:934 am:e0.01307 4.23 3,67 1215 27945 23 1st 34187 1 2 7003 69137 115.192.34 0.51 100 0.51 1.25 0.64 915 120 200 790 2.55 1170 23730 21 19 49481 0 0 0 73211 86,802.07 0.57 1.00 0.57 1.25 0.71 916 115 200 940 1.65 r7' M,914t8 1.95 905 27602.1 30.5 4 96W 0 0 0 37202.5 47.712.38 0.56 1.00 '0.56 1.25 0,70 917 110 200 650 250 24 N824 w f :1.39129 0.57 443 680 760 2C740 17190 30.5 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20740 17480 4,15024 3,611.29 0.83 0.83 1.00 100 0.83 0.83 1.25 1.25 1.00 1.00 918 919 IS 20 zoo 200 470 210 420 a. - 1 n � 74 Ih�v7 ''_.01 196 965 33U 19895 6930 23 21 6 8 14400 192W 0 0 - 0 0 0 -0 3a295 :-2613G 57125 74 59.238.97 0.53 046 L00 I.00 0.52 0.46 L25 1.25 0.65 0.57 920 921 t5 235 lost 20D 790 790 450 200 3.00 :4-3726 0.33 558 14237.26 25.5 0 0 0 0 0 14237,26 0.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.25 1.00 9= IS 200 - 4S0 ` 093 43 J•7 19 .713064 43`32 141 064 9•4 565 635 0 17232.5 30.5 5 12000 0 0 0 29232.3 32,11069 0.58 1.00 0.58 1 `5 0.73 913 to lost 485 0.95 13335 21 2 48M 0 0 0 18135 9,695,64 0.71 1.00 0.71 0,45 1.25 0.1E 0.70 914 9'-5 45 SOD 200 150 621D 0 300 000 0 0 I 7200 0 0 0 7200 395.122.32 4t1-b79/ 326 0 0 0 5 12000 0 0 0 12000 129.96797 0.31 L00 0.31 L25 0,39 926 co I500 2W 125 m 1 21 1 2 4800 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 7200 2400 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,25 It lob Vmebn' FC''eu! Pmmcl ItW%C%ood Hill, P U D Filiy O Dam Wa It. Jxxl Gkulamd 9> HHF Cetip Smm. I�xl.ev �dnebpedl f 4' 1!.li mie Ip for AI!.91l-91 e 6! mie a!vae'G' IIOwtime) 6 ]! min IIIVn' time m ie4Y1 ve$ceeel Sim —8A51n -Jot-� _.� I M �umecr FC••u. Pmom Rid,ew HiW P li 0 Fliul .i .. C+kubwd B, MMF Daip Sam. lul.ar•d clowdl ®®®®®mmsmmm m®m.®mmmmmm ®®®®m®®mmmm ®mm®®®®mmmm ®m®®m®mmmm ®®mmmm ®® ®m®mmmm ®®m®®mmm®®mm ®®®mmmmmm m® ®m®mmmm ®m®®mmm®®mm ®®®®mmsmm ® m®mmmm ®��m®mmmmm m®mm®mmm ®m®mmm®m®® ®®m mmmmm �mmmrmmm®m®m ®®sue®®mmmmm ®®m.ommmm®m m®mmm®®mm m.®®®mmmm ®®®®m®mmmm ®®®mmmmm ®m.®m®mmmm ®m®mmm�m �®m®mmm®®mm �®m®mmm®m®m m.®®mmmmm ®®®mmmmmm ®®®®mmmm ®mm.mmmm®®m ®®®mmmmmm ®®mm®mmmm m®®mmm®mmm �®®m.mmmmmmm. ®m®®mmmm ®®®®®m®mmmmmi ®®®m®mmmmi ®m®m®mmmmm. M-m-M NEW ®®®®mmmmm ME MEN 0 �mm ®®mmmmmmm -&51,4 V5 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M—(tz W/M/W Q3lL MYO 7N's3wON Acid Nz A O3 awuwIYa t NI O1. NVId IOd.LN07 NOISON3 ONV 39VNIVd(3e�t•-+� E DN11H " an'd S111H QOOM D( Rl Ron, .1Z L33HS 335 j _\. -�....�_ DR 133NS 335 1' ,ce � of ty •t 1 \\ \1 � - a y Y3 c - 1 fl. ppg�a THY E ([ e r 6pA�l�" �� T° ISa$ Erb dy 1: btl i}91 �UN. � pl9 cITE° EI E .i�3 .Qi .l-e a „:t• �I I 1 .E—:� I I: �.;., ��' 1 C tl 1 ., ��. �•. Y 11 ! II11' r I 1 11 1' e3 zr YI Y} I I ldl�J � iyl-•� r}I:� � 1';. 1'i / i °� /•^ J Cf NO v ¢ i if;Le E66�p55 T®yT-$ a���F�•°&i2a�al, 'a �� E � ;= 1 , � �- .�_- �. `:3'!-.`-�✓' 111 III; i�\�/i .. :.,'�.� '/ �c � ;� tl\ '1 fl r. II O y - �e �o ado Xc - < u PO lo H r It�p.Y Y Of eg. Ye g g :` g $e a E�uy >J `� 1 Ajl.'ll� 2 3T� 1.4 b 7 9g9g No Text a3luwaa 31r0 x+'s3woH �aosri �tloa o3ara3aa Imuw.0 .....Ia....I.It�> m mvnm oa .w. va llc..l..w • OMIIE°MIDM° OMOl°O N1fpd 102i1N0:) NOISOi13 4NV 39VNM10 IZ C DNIll3 " QYYd SIIIH QOOM30a18 `� 6 r tl �qq � x � P a■ $ ° � 8 gg$g 88qdq ggg6g eg$I�{ gga gg$ a g :AN F Z tl w ISp Y b� g ° @ G e e pi • ySiY rasp g, itE :f9� �ig Ey $} 4= all45 y€p�tl 12 mei tgig�j !p•tl Cpa !'P3WgE� col; Ai ♦i as FG ♦e3 t gF � 4 p tl` ye 7 a1 5 ba iiGp @ G -ou gap q ppp:; ° gq!li6b °i@aIg 0Y ?Sg!}E�gggY �E¢ 4pfij °`664y #•�i H fag 4nd A�-�'�11t ;tl f 4= Y§ F$ptt #Fain �� p°��f iFF pYEgt1 e? epeya aigXX 7,1112 _, N4q NY/1G^i S ' 1 i i 3NO ON17/d :3NO OM71d 1 . pppppp ' '0'n-0 HVOONVN3HS ' 'p'n d HVOO N3HS ;/. ' ii I i I I I I N I 1 I I I i I. I ' O d• I I V _ — WON `-�il � _ter. � l—'—� $rqq=• r I~tl 1� ;.'! i r__� r{� 11 w I L �_ y 1=� i;' R •I/ I I I __-- ♦� -__ +ails I RxY 'J 3 I r l APPENDIX F TABLES, AND FIGURES I L� No Text City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency Table for using the Rational Method (5 minutes - 30 minutes) Figure 3-1a year ensity /hr 10-year Intensity in/hr 100-year Intensity in/hr.85 4.87 9.95 .67 U 4.56 9.31 .52 4.31 8.80 .40 4.10 8.38 .30 3.93 8.03 .21. 3.78 7.72 11.00 2.13 3.63 7.42 12.00 2.05 3.50 7.16 13.00 1.98 3.39 6.92 14.00 1.92 3.29 6.71 15.00 1.87 3.19 6.52 16.00 1.81 3.08 6.30 17.00 1.75 2.99 6.10 18.00 1.70 2.90 5.92 19.00 1.65 2.82 5.75 20.00 1.61 2.74 5.60 21.00 1.56 2.67 5.46: 22.00 1.53 2.61 5.32 23.00 1.49 2.55 5.20 24.00 1.46 2.49 5.09 25.00 = 1.43 2.44 4.98 26.00 1.40 2.39 4.87 27.00 1.37 2.34 4.78 28.00 1 1.34 2.29 4.69 29.00 1 1.32 2.25 4.60 30.00 1 1.30 2.21 4.52 City of Fort Collins Rainfall Intensity -Duration -Frequency Table for using the Rational Method (31 minutes - 60 minutes) Figure 3-1 b Duration (minutes) 2-year Intensity in/hr 10-year Intensity in/hr 100-year Intensity in/hr 31.00 1.27 2.16 4.42 32.00 1.24 2.12 4.33 33.00 1.22 2.08 4.24 34.00 1.19 2.04 4.16 35.00 1.17 2.00 4.08 36.00 1.15 1.96 4.01 37.00 1.13 1.93 3.93 38.00 1.11 1.89 3.87 39.00 1.09 1.86 3.80 40.00 1.07 1.83 3.74 41.00 1.05 1.80 3.68 42.00 1.04 1.77 3.62 43.00 1.02 1.74 3.56 44.00 1.01 1.72 3.51 45.00 0.99 1.69 3.46 46.00 0.98 1.67 3.41 47.00 0.96 1.64 3.36 48.00 0.95 1.62 3.31 49.00 0.94 1.60 3.27 50.00 0.92 1.58 3.23 51.00 0.91 1.56 3.18 52.00 0.90 1.54 3.14 53.00 0.89 1.52 3.10 54.00 0.88 1.50 3.07 55.00 0.87 1.48 3.03 56.00 0.86 1.47 2.99 57.00 0.85 1.45 2.96 58.00 0.84 1.43 2.92 59.00 0.83 1.42 2.89 60.00 0.82 1.40 2.86 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 2) HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES . 3 N 2 ' 1..L� L 2 m � 1 0 . tT w 0 V 1 *Grouted -BIB Boulders--- t5,\� �1.. �.t. ,:1', t . Ct"ket� l - -- -- - - -. - - -- -- - - -- . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Storm Sewer Diameter, D, or Height, H, in ft. FIGURE HS-20 ` Low Tailwater Riprap Basins for Storm Sewer Pipe Outlets—Riprap Selection Chart for Low Tailwater Basin at Pipe Outlet (Stevens and Urbonas 1996) 06/2001 HS-79 Urban Drainage & Flood Control District R-M-P Medium Density Planned Residential District — designation for medium density a wadasoFAMuse and buildingplacements with a minimum lot area of 6.000 square feet R-L--M Low Density Multiple Family District— areas containing low density multiple family j units or any other use in the R-L District with a minimum lot area of 6.000 square feet ' for one -family. or two-family dwellings and 9,000 square feet for multiple-famity dwellings. M-L Low Density Mobile Home District — designation for areas for mobile home parks ' containing independent mobile homes not exceeding 6 units per acre. M-M Medium Density Mobile Home District — designation for areas of mobile home parks containing independent mobile homes not exceeding 12 units per acre. ' B-G General Business District — district designation for downtown business areas, including a variety of permitted uses. with minimum lot areas equal to 1 /2 of the total _ fWF area of B-P Planned Business District — designates area planned as unit developments to provide business services while protecting the surrounding residential areas with minumum lot areas the same as R-M. H-B Highway Business District — designates an area of automobile -orientated busi- nesses with a minimum lot area equal to 1/2 of the total floor area of the building. B-L limited Business District — designates areas for neighborhood convenience ' centers. including a variety of community uses with minimum lot areas equal to two times the total `floor area of the building. C Commercial District —designates areas of commercial, service and storage areas. ' I-L Limited Industrial District —designates areas of light industrial uses with a minimum lot to two times the total floor area of the building not to be less than area of equal 20.000 square feet ' I-P Industrial Park District —designates fight industrial park areas containing controlled industrial with minimum tot areas equal to two times the total floor area of the uses building not to be less than 20.000 square feet I-G General Industrial District —designates area of major industrial development. T Transition District — designates areas which are in a transitional stage with regard to ultimate development ' For current and more explicit definitions of land uses and zoning classifications, refer to the Code of the City of Fort Collins, Chapters 99 and 118. Table 3-3 RATIONAL METHOD RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS FOR COMPOSITE ANALYSIS Hof surface Runottcoetrcient '. Streets. Parking Lots, Drives: 0.95 Asphalt.._....................._..........._......._.....__........ ... ...... _....._........ 0.95 ' Concrete....... .......... ................... _....._............................ _.._............. Gravel ...._......__ ........... ..... ..... .................................................. 0.50 Roofs. -------- _.—--------- - ----- _--- --- .._ . _ ............. __.._..._......_.:........... 0.95 Lawns. Sandy Soil: Flat<2% ........... ____.. __... _......._... ....__......._.............. 0.10 0.15 Average2 to 7%..... .............................................. .......... _...... 020 Steep>70/6 ............ ........... ............................................ _.................... ' Lawns. Heavy Soil: Flat <2°.6........................... 020 .---••..........................._..........................._.. 025 Average2 to 70/6...................... _........................................ .................. Steep>7%...........••........................................................................... 0.35 ' MAY 1964 3-4 OES*N CRttERIA DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF TABLE RO-3 Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values Land Use or Surface Characteristics Percentage Imperviousness Business: Commercial areas 95 Neighborhood areas 85 Residential: Single-family` Multi -unit detached 60 Multi -unit attached 75 Half -acre lot or larger ' Apartments 80 Industrial: Light areas 80 Heavy areas 90 Parks, cemeteries 5 Playgrounds 10 Schools 50 Railroad yard areas 15 Undeveloped Areas: Historic flow analysis 2 Greenbelts, agricultural 2 Off -site flow analysis when land use not defined 45 Streets: Paved 100 Gravel(packed) 40 Drive and walks 90 . Roofs 90 Lawns, sandy soil 0. Lawns, clayey soil 0 See Figures RO-3 through RO-5 for percentage imperviousness. Based in part on the data collected by the District since '1969, an empirical relationship between C and the percentage imperviousness for various storm return periods was developed. Thus, values for C can be determined using the following equations (Urbonas, Guo and Tucker 1990). CA = KA 4.31i 3 -1.44i Z + 1.135i — 0.12) for CA 2: 0, otherwise CA = 0 (RO-6) CcD = KcD + (0.858i3 — 0.786iZ + 0.774i + 0.04) CS = (CA + CCD /I2 In which: i = % imperviousness/100 expressed as a decimal (see Table RO-3) (RO-7) 06/2001 RO-9 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District o DtDt000 o m vvinlntn mmeomm O • at at ata�000000 O O • • • • • • • • • • V V �' fA t!1 !n to IL1 to mat at0�a1atOlO�es+Otatat000 o 44va vaavQvv aaai�ii ' o rCOComai06Mat0%0%ata%0%0% ajM0%0%Ma% • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • N mmwmmwwmwmmmmmmmmmmm ' o . nmmmmmm ........................... O o vvvvvvvvvvvvvVvvvvvvvvvvVv G 91 mmmmmmCDcowCDCDODm0wwww Owwwwmmm . . . . � r I r CD m m evvvvvvv a mc�vvvvva . • . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . vvvvvavvvvvv UwmaoaoCOCowDomCDmComCDmaomcoCDCDCDmmmmm O WON mV VmInoovWWWwvvIowwt`t`t-t� t`t- a1 m e'+vvv4VVVVv4V�VVVVVVVVVVVVvat z m wwwwwwwwwmmmwmmmmmaDmmaDmmCoco a0 . . Vm N fn m V V V V, tn In tn gn in in In In tn to W WWAoWr- . . . . . O n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �envvvvvvvvvvvavvavavvvvvver U wmmCID mmCDCoCoODmmmmmCo. CDm:mm,mmmmmCC) O . OWOD0•i•iNNmencv)c� V,V,atd'd`V V V'IntninIn W%0 .......................... O s0 c4 v4 c l v v v v v 4 4; 4; v v v v v v v v v 1; 4 4 4 ' w w m m CD m aD CD m w CO CD aD em CD eo CD m m w m m m m m m CD a O . o . m N to h N N N tp a% O O rl rl rl N N Pf e•1 e9 en m w w V V, . . . mtsW Mtn . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. Ac4c4AA4VVVVVVV'VVVVVVVVVVVV ' W to W mwCCmm000Omwmm0OmmmCID CDCDCtlmmmmmmm C�Ia0 Cin r aDP4mvininWw r,r-t mwwmmmmatala%00000 4 a� NNenme•f(nmehe'feoe'f(nMtn meneommlme7vvvvv Ez to mmmmmmmmwmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmCl) •2 o eo In m o .-i N m v V In In to Io eo eo to eo n t� e� e� m m m o+ 0% (o V 94NNmV)e7eoNAAe7e7N4A Ae74ehNAe7e•f e4Ae4 wmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmQDCDmmCDCD rXI .. U In rlrltnt�m00.fm:NMroMvVVVvtotnlnw%0%oPt` N rf4t4eV4e74e7e7e9NAe4e4e4e4e4t4NNAe7e4e4Ar4 mmCDmmmODmmODmmCDmmmmmCDmmmmmmm ruO O mN40ma1oreNcicv)mm V V V V V V 0 91 in In to %0 %0 %D W t7 0 N N N N N N N N N N eV N N ` CL N N N N N m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m . a m OOa,NmvOtonrnm0wim0% ►rno%.0%000000 . . . . . . N . . . . . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . .04 ri m m m m m m 0 m w m m m m m m-m m CO m m'm Co m m m z O M . alnOe•1wlOmma1000.irtrrreNNNNPfP1e9r7etieh . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . S N W • . . • wOt000coo 0rI r1 •i ri rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl •i rl rl n r m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m In wNCID ri V 0l�t�ma1a100rIr/rlrlr�mcm04mPfenenen 1Dmm010►0;0;0►0;0;0;000000000000000 t�t%l�rmmmmmmmmmmmmm m m O 10e'f OeTt�010r1Nmm V V m m m m W W Wt or-n%0 w w T rI V W t� I� t� t� CD co co CD CD co m w m m co m CD m m m m m m CD rt`rrnrnnrre�t�nrrrt�rrt�re�rnre� In at O V to t` CO m t` I` t` W tD W to v V eo eh N N a% t0 V rt 0% t0 O ONNeVNNNNNNNeV NNNNNNNN•-Irertrio0 ' t`rr-e-t.rne%nrt-rrrrnrrnrrrrrrr 3E-. OaF4 00000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000 �zzw r+Ne7vWtOPm0l0V4mmVInl N w m 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 a r! r+ rr r, rr r, rt rr rt rr N N P'f eo v v In c MARCH 1991 > DESIGN CRRERU r0� Collins LroSr`on 6VIIJ Table 88 C-Factors and P-Factors for Evaluating EFF Values. Treatment GFactor P-Factor / BARE SOIL Packed and smooth................................................................ Freshlydisked 1.00 1.00 ...................................................................... Roughirregular surface........................................................... 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 SEDIMENT BASIN/TRAP................................................................. 1.00 0.50111 ' STRAW BALE BARRIER, GRAVEL FILTER, SAND BAG ......... ........... :... 1.00 0.80 SILTFENCE BARRIER..................................................................... 1.00 0.50 ASPHALT/CONCRETE PAVEMENT ................................................... 0.01 1.00 ESTABLISHED DRY LAND (NATIVE) GRASS .......................... See Fig. 8-A 1.00 SOD GRASS ................ TEMPORARY VEGETATION/COVER CROPS................I.................... 0.450 1.00 HYDRAULIC MULCH @ 2 TONS/ACRE........................................... 0.10Q1 1.00 SOILSEALANT.................................................................... 0.01-0.60µ1 1.00 EROSION CONTROL MATS/BLANKETS MULCH 'GRAVEL Mulch shall consist of gravel having a diameter of appm)dmately 1 /4" to 1 1 /2" and applied at a rate of at least 135 tons/acre. 0.05 1.00 OR STRAW DRY MULCH 'HAY After planting grass seed apply mulch at a rate of 2 tons/acre (minimum) and adequately anchor, tack or crimp material into the soil. . Slope (%) 1 to 05.............. .............................................................0.06 6 m 10 1.00 ................................ ...... ..... ............:................ ..... 11 to 15 0.06 1.00 ' .......... .............. ..... ....... ........................................ 16 to 20...... .......... ..... .............. .............:.....:................. ���� 0.07 0.11 1.00 1.00 21 to 25 25 to 33 0.14 l000 .............................................................................0.17 >33 1.00 .......................................................................... NOTE Use 0.20 1.00 of other Cfacoor « P-Factor �rakies reported in this table must be meted by do=y aatioM '(1) Must be constructed as the first step in overlot grading. (2) Assumes planting by dates identified in Table 11-4, thus dry or hvdmL& mochas are not mr. ed. (3) Hydraufic mulches shag be used only between March 15 and May 15 unless irrigated. (4) Value used must be substantiated by documentation. 1 1 MARCH 1991 8-6