Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPVH HEALTH SYSTEMS, HARMONY CAMPUS - MAJOR AMENDMENT - 32-98C - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - DRAINAGE REPORTPoudre Valley Hospital Profile B to Detention Pond 2B Revised for Addendum No. 1 2,15,20,3.,2,1,.8,500,300,.2,Y 1,100 , 1.35 , 28.5 , 10, .786 12 1,53.29,0,1,21,0,0,0 81.9,0, 1 ,.5,0,0,0,0,0 2,56.3,21,1,32,0,0,0 81.9,0, 1 ,.5,0,0,0,0,0 3,56.3,32,2,43,103"0,0 63.1,0,1,.5,0,0,0,0,0 4,58.52,43,2,54,84,0,0 3.7,0, 1,.5,0,0,0,0,0 5,58.89,54, 1,65,0,0,0 2.3,0, 1,.5,0,0,0,0,0 6,59.7,65, 1 ,76,0,0,0 1.2,0, 1,.5,0,0,0,0,0 7,59.7,76,0,0,0,0,0 1.2,0,1,.5,0,0,0.,0,0 8,59.77,84, 1 ,98,0,0,0 1.4,0, 1,.5,0,0,0,0,0 9,59.77,98,0,0,0,0,0 1.4,0,1,.5,0,0,0,0,0 10,57.7,103,1,1110,0,0,0 8.2,0,.01 ,.5,0,0,0,0,0 11,59,1110,1,1211,0,0,0 2.8,0,.11.1,0,0,0,0,0 12,59, 1211,0,0,0,0,0 2.8,0,.1,.1,0,0,0,0,0 11 21,484.3,.2,54.8,.013,1,0,3,43,68 32, 14.83,.54,54.88,.013,.051.25,3,43,68 43, 178.47,.39,54.25,.013, 1.32,0, 1 ,27,0 54,179.61,.97,55.49,.013,1.32,.5,1,21,0 65,72.4,.7,56,.013,.05,.25, 1, 18,0 76,.01 ,.7,56,.013,.25,0, 1 , 18,0 84,63.28,3.9,55.75,.013,.39,0,1,15,0 981.01,3.9,55.75,.0131.25,0,1,15,0 103,210,1,55.9,.013,.05,0,1,18,0 1110,63.71,1,56.14,.013,.1,0,1,12,0 1211,.1, 1,56.14,.013,.25,0, 1,12,0 -,1,18,0 1110,63.71, 1,56.14,.013,.1, U. Rio-1 *** SUMMARY OF ENERGY GRADIENT LINE ALONG SEWERS ------------------------------------------------ UPST MANHOLE SEWER JUNCTURE LOSSES DOWNST MANHOLE SEWER MANHOLE ENERGY FRCTION BEND BEND LATERAL LATERAL MANHOLE ENERGY ID NO ID NO. ELEV FT FT K COEF LOSS FT K COEF LOSS FT % ID FT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21.0 2.00 56.21 1.11 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 55.10 32.0 3.00 56.55 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.25 0.31 2.00 56.21 43.0 4.00 56.59 0.03 1.32 0.02 0.00 0.00 3.00 56.55 54.0 5.00 56.65 0.04 1.32 0.02 0.50 0.01 4.00 56.59 65.0 6.00 56.68 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.25 0.01 5.00 56.65 76.0 7.00 56.68 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 56.68 84.0 8:00 56.63 0.03 0.39 0.01 0.00 0.00 4.00 56.59 98.0 9.00 56.63 0.00 0.25 O.U1 0.00 0.00 8.00 56.63 103.0 10.00 57.84 1.27 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 3.00 56.55 1110.0 11.00 58.25 0.39 0.10 0.02 0.00 0.00 10.00 57.84 1211.0 12.00 58.30 0.00 0.25 0.05 0.00 0.00 11.00 58.25 BEND LOSS =BEND K* FLOWING FULL VHEAD IN SEWER. LATERAL LOSS= OUTFLOW FULL VHEAD-JCT LOSS K*INFLOW FULL VHEAD FRICTION LOSS=O MEANS IT IS NEGLIGIBLE OR POSSIBLE ERROR DUE TO JUMP. FRICTION LOSS INCLUDES SEWER INVERT DROP AT MANHOLE NOTICE: VHEAD DENOTES THE VELOCITY HEAD OF FULL FLOW CONDITION. A MINIMUM JUCTION LOSS OF 0.05 FT WOULD BE INTRODUCED UNLESS LATERAL K=O. FRICTION LOSS WAS ESTIMATED BY BACKWATER CURVE COMPUTATIONS. *** SUMMARY OF EARTH EXCAVATION VOLUME FOR COST ESTIMATE. THE TRENCH SIDE SLOPE = 1 MANHOLE GROUND INVERT MANHOLE ID NUMBER ELEVATION ELEVATION HEIGHT FT FT FT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.00 53.29 50.25 3.04 2.00 56.30 51.22 5.08 3.00. 56.30 51.30 5.00 4.00 58.52 52.00 6.52 5.00 58.89 53.74 5.15 6.00 59.70 54.50 5.20 7.00 59.70 54.50 5.20 8.00 59.77 54.50 5.27 9.00 59.77 54.50 5.27 10.00 57.70 54.40 3.30 11.00 59.00 55.14 3.86 12.00 59.00 55.14 3.86 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SEWER UPST TRENCH WIDTH DNST TRENCH WIDTH TRENCH WALL EARTH ID NUMBER ON GROUND AT INVERT ON GROUND AT INVERT LENGTH THICKNESS VOLUME FT FT FT FT FT INCHES CUBIC YD ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21.00 11.73 10.60 7.65 10.60 484.30 5.63 985.4 32.00 11.57 10.60 11.73 10.60 14.83 5.63 35.4 43.00 12.25 4.79 9.20 4.79 178.47 3.25 276.0 54.00 10.09 4.21 12.84 4.21 179.61 2.75 282.1 65.00 10.48 3.92 9.88 3.92 72.40 2.50 89.9 76.00 10.48 3.92 10.48 3.92 0.01 2.50 0.0 84.00 10.92 3.63 13.35 3.63 63.28 2.25 101.7 98.00 10.92 3.63 10.92 3.63 0.01 2.25 0.0 103.00 6.68 3.92 8.08 3.92 210.00 2.50 166.0 1110.00 8.39 3.33 7.06 3.33 63.71 2.00 47.2 1211.00 8.39 3.33 8.39 3.33 0.10 2.00 0.1 3 Zr R)<-- � lk°' 1 i 4 A ______________________________________________________________________ SEWER DESIGN FLOW NORMAL NORAML CRITIC CRITIC FULL FROUDE COMMENT ID FLOW 0 FULL 0 DEPTH VLCITY DEPTH VLCITY -VLCITY NO. NUMBER CFS CFS FEET FPS FEET FPS FPS 21.0 81.9 94.9 3.32 6.35 2.63 8.32 4.87 0.64 V-OK 32.0 63.1 155.9 2.05 8.79 2.34 7.38 3.76 1.24 V-OK 43.0 3.7 19.4 0.67 3.76 0.68 3.67. 0.93 0.96 V-OK 54.0 2.3 15.6 0.45 4.65 0.58 3.30 0.96 1.44 V-OK 65.0 1.2 8.8 0.37 3.49 0.43 2.82 0.68 1.19 V-OK 76.0 1.2 8.8 0.37 3.49 0.43 2.82 0.68 1.19 V-OK 84.0 1.4 12.8 0.28 6.84 0.49 3.13 1.14 2.72 V-OK 98.0 1.4 12.8 0.28 6.84 0.49 3.13 1.14 2.72 V-OK 103.0 8.2 10.5 0.99 6.59 1.11 5.85 4.64 1.24 V-OK 1110.0 2.8 3.6 0.67 5.04 0.71 4.71 3.57 1.16 V-OK 1211.0 2.8 3.6 0.67 5.04 0.71 4.71 3.57 1.16 V-OK FROUDE NUMBER=O INDICATES THAT A PRESSURED FLOW OCCURS ------------------------------------- SEWER SLOPE -------------------------------- INVERT ELEVATION BURIED DEPTH COMMENTS ID NUMBER UPSTREAM DNSTREAM UPSTREAM DNSTREAM % (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 21.00 0.20 51.22 50.25 1.50 -0.54 NO 32.00 0.54 51.30 51.22 1.42 1.50 NO 43.00 0.39 52.00 51.30 4.27 2.75 OK 54.00 0.97 53.74 52.00 3.40 4.77 OK 65.00 0.70 54.50 53.99 3.70 3.40 OK 76.00 0.70 54.50 54.50 3.70 3.70 OK 84.00 3.90 54.50 52.03 4.02 5.24 OK 98.00 3.90 54.50 54.50 4.02 4.02 OK 103.00 1.00 54.40 52.30 1.80 2.50 NO 1110.00 1.00 55.14 54.50 2.86 2.20 OK 1211.00 1.00 55.14 55.14 2.86 2.86 OK OK MEANS BURIED DEPTH IS GREATER THAN REQUIRED SOIL COVER OF 2 FEET *** SUMMARY OF HYDRAULIC GRADIENT LINE ALONG SEWERS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SEWER SEWER SURCHARGED CROWN ELEVATION WATER ELEVATION FLOW ID NUMBER LENGTH LENGTH UPSTREAM DNSTREAM UPSTREAM DNSTREAM CONDITION FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET ---------------------------------`--------------------------___---------------- 21.00 484.30 484.30 54.80 53.83 55.84 55.10 PRSSIED 32.00 14.83 14.83 54.88 54.80 56.33 55.84 PRSSIED 43.00 178.47 178.47 54.25 53.55 56.58 56.33 PRSSIED 54.00 179.61 179.61 55.49 53.75 56.64 56.58 PRSSIED 65.00 72.40 72.40 56.00 55.49 56.67 56.64 PRSSIED 76.00 0.01 0.01 56.00 56.00 56.67 56.67 PRSSIED 84.00 63.28 63.28 55.75 53.28 56.61 56.58 PRSSIED 98.00 0.01 0.01 55.75 55.75 56.61 56.61 PRSSIED 103.00 210.00 210.00 55.90 53.80 57.50 56.33 PRSSIED 1110.00 63.71 63.71 56.14 55.50 58.05 57.50 PRSSIED 1211.00 0.10 0.10 56.14 56.14 58.10 58.05 PRSSIED PRSS'ED=PRESSURED FLOW; JUMP=POSSIBLE HYDRAULIC JUMP; SUBCR=SUBCRITICAL FLOW -sZ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STORM SEWER SYSTEM DESIGN USING UDSEWER MODEL Developed by Dr. James Guo, Civil Eng. Dept, U. of Colorado at Denver Metro Denver Cities/Counties & UDFCD Pool Fund Study -------------------- USER:Kelvin Gingery ........... ................. ............................... ON DATA 09-06-1999 AT TIME 16:02:50 VERSION=12-29-1995 *** PROJECT TITLE :Poudre Valley Hospital ^ •� " *** RETURN PERIOD OF FLOOD IS 100 YEARS RAINFALL INTENSITY FORMULA IS GIVEN *** SUMMARY OF HYDRAULICS AT MANHOLES --------- 7--------------------------------------------------------------------- MANHOLE CNTRBTING RAINFALL RAINFALL DESIGN GROUND WATER COMMENTS ID NUMBER AREA * C DURATION INTENSITY PEAK.FLOW ELEVATION ELEVATION .I -------- MINUTES INCH/HR- �CFS ------------------------------------- FEET FEET P ok 0.00 81.90 53.29' 55.10 NO 1.00 2.00 3.00 0.00 4.03 3.52 0.00 5.00 5.00 20.35 17.90 81.90 63.10 56.30 56.30 55.84 56.33 OK NO I 4.00 3.00 69.60 1.23 3.70 58.52 56.58 OK Q 5.00 1.50 50.34 1.53 2.30 58.89 56.64 OK 6.00 1.00 72.42 1.20 1.20 59.70 56.67 OK 7.00 0.50 24.12 2.40 1.20 59.70 56.67 OK 8.00 1.00 57.74 1.40 1.40 59.77 56.61 OK 9.00 0.50 18.05 2.80 1.40 59.77 56.61 OK 10.00 0.03 5.00 328.00 8.20 57.70 57.50 OK 11.00 0.02 5.00 140.00 2.80 59.00 58.05 OK 12.00 0.01 5.00 280.00 2.80 59.00 58.10 OK OK MEANS WATER ELEVATION IS LOWER THAN GROUND ELEVATION *** SUMMARY OF SEWER HYDRAULICS NOTE: THE GIVEN FLOW DEPTH -TO -SEWER SIZE RATIO= .8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SEWER MAMHOLE NUMBER SEWER REQUIRED SUGGESTED EXISTING ID NUMBER UPSTREAM DNSTREAM SHAPE DIA(RISE) DIA(RISE) DIA(RISE) WIDTH ID NO. ID NO. (IN) (FT) (IN) (FT) (IN) (FT) (FT) ------------------------------------------ 21.00 2.00 1.00 ARCH ------------------------------------ 52.59 54.00 43.00 68.00 32.00 3.00 2.00 ARCH 39.58 42.00 43.00 68.00 43.00 4.00 3.00 ROUND 14.52 15.00 27.00 0.00 54.00 5.00 4.00 ROUND 10.24 15.00 21.00 0.00 65.00 6.00 5.00 ROUND 8.53 15.00 18.00 0.00 76.00 7.00 6.00 ROUND 8.53 15.00 18.00 0.00 84.00 8.00 4.00 ROUND 6.55 15.00 15.00 0.00 98.00 9.00 8.00 ROUND 6.55 15.00 15.00 0.00 103.00 10.00 3.00 ROUND 16.41 18.00 18.00 0.00 1110.00 11.00 10.00 ROUND 10.97 15.00 12.00 0.00 1211.00 12.00 11.00 ROUND 10.97 15.00 12.00 0.00 DIMENSION UNITS FOR ROUND AND ARCH SEWER ARE IN INCHES DIMENSION UNITS FOR BOX SEWER ARE IN FEET REQUIRED DIAMETER WAS DETERMINED BY SEWER HYDRAULIC CAPACITY. SUGGESTED DIAMETER WAS DETERMINED BY COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE SIZE. FOR A NEW SEWER, FLOW WAS ANALYZED BY THE SUGGESTED SEWER SIZE; OTHERWISE, EXISITNG SIZE WAS USED POUDRE VALLEY HOSPITAL - HARMONY CAMPUS PROFILE B TO DETENTION POND 2B UDSEWER = orofb.DAT 1 53.29 81.90 2 56.30 81.90 3 56.30 63.10 4 58.52 3.70 5 58.89 2.30 "6 59.70 _ 1.20 7 59.70 1.20 "8 59.77 1.40 9 59.77 1.40 10 - 21 484.30 32 14.83 43 178.47 54 179.61 65 72.40 76 0.01 84 63.28 98 0.01 10 yr site flow 103 tt �210.00 100 yr bld9 flow 11104`i 45i 63,71) 100 yr bldg flow UD Sewer 9/6/99 15:05 L:\JOBS\823-001\data\DRAINAGE\PDP\New Folder\]profb.xls]UD Sewer 0.20 51.22 54.80 1.00 0.00 43 0.54 51.30 54.88 0.05 0.00 43 0.39 0.97 52.00 53.74 54.25 55.49 1.320_25 1.32 0.50 27 21 0.70 54.25 56.00 0.05 0.25 21 0.70 5425 56.00 0.25 0.00 21 3.90 54.50 55.75 0.39 0.00 15 3.90 54.50 55.75 0.25 0.00 15 100 Year Water Surface = 54.9 ft "' Pipe Length 21, 32 are equivalent to 54" pipe. HERCP 43" x 68 pipe '. Node 6 and 8 - The developed flows at these nodes are from roof drains from Basin 12 and 14. The flows are restricted due to the pipe sizes that the architects are using. The flows at these nodes are from the architect Page 1 THE SEAR -BROWN GROUP u r Pr oJect: �� Project No. 3 By: r.=C Checked: Date: Sheet of O-206 r,rn^ 5t�• �� I' Ly Cuss, L- =SS.jQ IO y - 1 ,J 3.9 010 9 = o. 3 °. 8' 1 C1 n,- o C �' —� 0 L ) 39 . (o l x!2' ADS —� © r ,m - 5� 70 O1- -4' Rod c1woa,` 10V=5$602-1 O �i Poudre Valley Hospital - Harmony Campus Project: 823-001 .� L:\JOBS\893-001\data\drainage\[POND_R-1 -revised for oncology unit.XLS] asg TemporaryDetention Pond Release Rates and. Runoff "C" Values Detention Pond 393: Revision 1 Basins Contributing: Basin Area (Ac) Individual C Weighted C 1 2.32 0.7 0.08 12 0.53 0.95 0.03 14 1.11 0.95 0.05 15 1.27 0.76 0:05 16 0.86 0.82 0:04 17 1.46 0.72 0.05 18 1.03 0.65 0.03 19 0.56 0.7 0.02 19A 0.52 0.73 0.02 20 4.46 0.2 0.05 21 1.17 0.65 0.04 22 1.69 0.2 0.02 23 0.81 0.4 0.02 33 1.43 0.53 0.04 34 0.28 0.95 0.01 Total Area: 19.5 Composite C: 0.55 Weighted C = (Individual Area/Total Area)`Individual C Composite C = Sum of Weighted C's Runoff Coefficients: 10 Yr "C" = 0.55 100 Yr "C" = 1.25'0.61 = 0.68 'Allowable Release Rates per The Master Plan for McClellands Basin Are: 10 Yr Design Storm = 0.20 cfs/acre 100 Yr Design Storm = 0.50 cfs/acre Detention Pond #1 Release Rates 10 Yr. Storm = (0.20 cfs/acre)(19.5 acre) = 3.9 100 Yr. Storm = (0.50 cfs/acre)(19.5acre) = 9.75 Impery (Ac) Comments 1.54 0.53 1.11 0.95 0.71 1.01 0.67 divided into 18, 33, 34(revl)+ 0.37 0.37 0 0.7 0 0.22 0.62 Part of 18(rev 1) hir 0.28 Part of 18(rev 1) �f 9.08 46.56% y� 7 S- ". k8cDe^")OLA-� Vi b -1 me 5or.aravn 0'ay Pennine Valley Hospital - Harmony Campus 823-001 Storm Drainage System Preliminary Deshm (Fort Collins) Designer: dd, mg Sform: 100 yr Cl. 1.25 Design Basin(s) Ic lC C a Cf Intensity Area Remarks Length U/ D. ime Direct Other otal Slope Typnl Capacity Design lope Diameter apaciry Design Velocity Point (min) (it) Type (min) (min) (in/hr) (act (cis) (tits) (cfs) (%) 71FL (cfs) (cfs) (%) (in) (cfs) (ds) (fUs) 1 2 ] 4 Ie 4b 5 ] a 9 10 11 12 1] 14 14a 116 IS 19 1a 17 19 21 72 23 Individual Basins 1 1 8.7 8.7 0.17 7.71 2.32 15.6 15.6 22 14.0 14.0 0.76 6.23 3.58 16.9 16.9 33 8.6 8.6 084 7.73 2.79 IIIA 18.1 1.00 A 1 82.5 10.1 4 4 5.0 5.0 0.90 900 1.45 113 11.7 050 A 1 93:4 11.7 55 5.0 5.0 0.99 900 1.72 15.3 3.7 19.0 o..m. bva osy'9w 13 66 5.9 5.9 0,92 8.85 2S4 20.7 9.6 30.3 wabw. ban Hi16ifN7 7 7 5 0 5d 1.00 9.00 0.63 53 5.4 11.1 e..'naw uan w.' bran e 88 50 5.0 0.95 9.00 043 3.7 2.7 64 walba 1'.9+aibmin9 99 50 5.0 091 9.00 0.44 36 3.6 1010 50 5.0 1.00 9.00 0.76 &11 6.8 0.40 21 10.0 6.8 39 11 11 5.0 5.0 0.97 9.00 1.14 9.9 9.9 12 12 5.0 5.0 1.00 9.00 0.53 4.0 4.8 030 18 8.B 1.2 3.0 Flow restd. to Rf DM cap 13 13 5.0 5.0 1.00 9.00 0.53 4,8 4.8 2.50 18 16.6 1.1 4 6 Flow restd. b Rt Dm cap 14 14 5.0 5.0 1.00 9.00 1.11 10.0 10.0 0.40 12 2.3 2.5 3.1 Flow restd. to Rf Dm cap 1515 5.0 - 5.0 0.95 9.00 1.27 10.9 11.1 22.0 a.eav ban oesp'au+ 12.14 1616 50 50 IM 9.00 OB6 7.7 7.7 1717 5.0 5.0 0.90 9.00 1.46 11.8 11.8 1818 5.0 5.0 0.84 9.00 1.03 7.8 7.8 1919 50 5.0 0.87 9.00 0.56 4.4 4A 0.85 c 7 83;7 4.4 0.40 18 6.6 4.4 3.5 19A 19A 50 5.0 0.92 9.00 0.52 4.3 4.3 20 20 25.1 25.1 0.25 4.54 4.46 5.1 5.1 1,30 c 1 '1 5.1 2121 7.4 7A 081 8,20 1.17 7.8 7.8 0.40 21 /00 7.8 4.0 2222 22.0 22.0 0.25 4.91 1.69 2.1 2.1 2323 12.6 12.6 050 6.56 081 2.7 2.7 24 24 14.0 14.0 0.55 6.23 3.34 11,5 11.5 2525 42.1 42.1 0.25 3.28 4.58 3.0 3.8 26 28 34.7 34.7 0,25 3.73 9.09 8.5 8.5 27 27 33.6 33.6 0.25 3.81 9.42 9.0 9.0 2828 35.8 35.8 0.25 3,65 13.13 12.0 12.0 2929 41.9 41.9 0.31 3.30 14.82 15.1 15.1 30 30 55.3 55.3 0.25 2.73 7.07 4.8 4.6 3131 32.2 32.2 0.25 3.91 5.46 5.3 5.3 3232 6.0 6.0 0,74 881 1.43 9.3 9.3 33 33 5A 5.4 0.67 9.70 1.40 8S 8.5 1. 18 10.5 85 5.8 34 34 5.0 5.0 1.00 9.00 0.28 Z5 2.5 ggre9ated Basins 11 10.11 5.0 5.0 0.98 9,00 1.90 16.7 16.7 040 27 19.6 163 4.9 9 9.10.11 5.0 124 11 as 0.4 5A 0.97 9.08 2.34 20.5 -2.7 17.9 0.40 27 19.6 17.9 5.0 am aw • cer a'a ea. 8 0.9,10.11 5.4 53 9 ss 0.2 5.6 0.96 8.99 2.77 24.0 -5.4 18.6 0.40 30 25.9 78.6 5.0 7 7,B,9,10,11 5.6 60 a ss 0.2 5.8 0.97 889 3,40 29.3 .9.6 19.7 0.40 33 33.4 19.7 5.0 5.8 82 7 ss 0.3 6.1 0.95 8.76 594 49.4 49.4 0,40 42 63.6 49.4 6.4 :A 66.11 13 6-11,13 6.1 IN ass 0.3 6.4 095 8.63 6.47 53.3 .3.7 49.6 0.40 42 63.6 49.6 ou,w no. &na,mw(wmsn 5) 55-11,13 64 201 im as 0.5 6.9 0.96 840 8.19 66.1 66.1 040 42 63.6 66.1 6.9 72A 12,(1/2)14 1.2 11 2.3 %.=dagzwN 99' fl.ha I 14A 12.14 2.3 14 3.7 0.40 24 14.3 3.7 3.3e •u412a esldaaxban 14 33 1.33.34 5.0 5.0 0.81 9.00 4.t10 29.1 29.7 1.00 27 31.0 29.1 7.9 15,18 15.18 6.0 6.0 0.90 B.80 2.30 18.3 18.3 e+.1 na'y wes b'e wrro. 15.181,15.18 18.3 3.7 22.0 den sa. frn 14e dre aeeae 16.17 16.17 5.0 5 0 0.94 9.00 2,32 19.5 19.5 flow for idel sizing 15-10 1.12.14-18,33.34 &0 to ss &0 0.89 8.80 10,26 80.3 80.3 0.40 de 90.8 80.1 7.2 19 9A. '>tiadt ta3a5.0 ' ia?� w RoK5. RU5.89 ayia9.00 S-5 E06 6 8.7 #i m4i8.7 . _. t4:2i,-`.7'tYu 3k"�.0:40 i2CE§21 10.6 t;-t=A7 ,'Y`-_�4:7 Future s temp:^:4sa.. e Roof Drain Overflow from basins 12,13,14. Per archltectual drawings, the drains am 3•' through 10• pipes. 0.40 10 1.4 1212 4.8 3.6 13 13 Overflow = 700 yr developed flow - roof drain ca adty 4.8 3.7 14 14 10.0 7.5 Notes: 1. Column 4a Identifies the type of channel used to calculate the velocity for Me travel fine calculations 2. Column 14a Identifies whether the street is a main arterial, mllector, or local sueet for use in the street capacity calculations. 3. For final design submi"Is, channel & pipe velocities are shown elsewhere in Bus report. Wsn'" Tee Sur-emw Dmnp Poudre Valley Hospital - Harmony Campus 823-001 Storm Drainage System Preliminary Deslon (Fort Collins) Designer lid, asg Storm: 10 yr Cf= 1.00 Design Basin(s) Ic tC C s Ct Intensity Area Remarks Length U/S OF Time Direct Other Total Slope Type/ Capacity Desgn Slope Diameter ? ap ty Design Velocity Point (mm) (A) Type (mm) (mm) (iMm) (ac) (cis) (cis) (�) (96) NFL (cis) (cis) 176) 1 (in) (�) (t1s1 (lys) 1 2 3 4 4e M 5 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 11e U9 -15 19 is 17 la 21 22 ^.. 23 IrldMdual Basins 1 1 10.1 10.1 0.70 C41 2.32 7.1 7.1 22 15.3 15.3 0,60 369 358 8.0 8.0 3 3 10.0 10.0 0,67 - 4 43 2.79 BJ 8.3 1.00 A 1 - 0,�'' 8.3 4 4 6.1 6.1 0.72 5.19 1.45 5.4 5.4 0.50 A 1 5,4 55 5 0 5.0 0,79 5.60 1.72 7.6 1.7 9.3 ovnlow from if @ osn 13 68 7.2 7.2 0.74 4.97 2.54 9.3 9.3 " 7 7 5.8 5.8 0.81 5.28 0.63 2.7 2.7 8 8 5.7 5.7 0.76 5,31 0,43 1.7 1.7 9 9 5.6 5.6 0.73 5.33 0,44 1.7 1.7 roof drain negligaloe 1010 5.0 5.0 0,80 5fi0 0.76 3.4 3.4 0.35 27 18.3 3.4 30 1111 5.0 5.0 0.77 560 1.14 4.9 4.9 12 12 5.0 5.0 0.95 5.60 0.53 2.8 2.8 0.70 18 8.8 1.2 3.0 Flow resld. b RI On, cap 13 13 5.0 5.0 0.95 5,60 0.53 2S 2.6 2.50 18 16.6 1.1 4.6 Flow restd. to Rf Om cap 14 14 5.0 5.0 0.95 5.60 1.11 5.9 5.9 0.40 12 2.3 2.5 3.1 Flow restd. to Rf Dm cap 15 15 5.8 5.8 0.76 5.28 1.27 5.1 5.0 10.1 ovAlow from rf hsn 12.14 1616 5.0 5.0 0.82 5.60 0,86 3.9 3.9 1717 5.8 5.8 0.72 5.29 1.46 5.5 5.5 18 18 5.4 5A 0,67 5.39 1.03 3.7 3.7 1919 5.0 5.0 0.70 5.60 056 2.2 2.2 0,85 c 1 0A 2.2 19A 19A 5.0 51) 0.73 5.60 052 2.1 2.1 1.30 0 1 i2 2.1 20 20 26.6 26.6 0,20 2.74 4.46 2.4 2.4 2121 8.1 8.1 0,65 4.78 1.17 3.6 16 0.40 18 6.6 3.6 3.3 22 22 23.2 23.2 0.20 2.96 1.69 1.0 1.0 23 23 14.1 14.1 840 3.83 0.81 1.3 1.3 24 24 - 15.4 15.4 0.44 3.67 3.34 5.4 5.4 25 25 44.6 44.6 0,20 1.97 4.58 1.8 1.8 2626 36.6 36.6 0.20 2.25 9.09 4.1 4.1 27 27 35.1 35.1 0,20 2.31 9.42 4.3 4.3 28 28 37.5 37.5 0.20 - 2.21 13.13 5.8 5.8 29 29 44.3 44.3 025 1.98 14,82 7.3 7.3 30 30 57.3 57.3 0.20 1.65 7.07 2.3 2,3 31 31 33.5 33.5 020 2.38 5.46 2.6 2.6 32 32 8.8 6.8 0.59 5.03 1.43 4.3 4.3 31 33 6.7 6.3 0.53 5.16 1.40 3.0 3.8 34 34 5.0 5.0 0.95 5.60 0.28 1.5 1.5 Aggregated Basins I110,11 5.0 5.0 0.78 5.60 1.90 8.3 8.3 040 21 10.0 8.3 4.1 9 9,10,11 5.0 124 11 SS 0.5 5.5 0.77 5.35 2.34 9.7 9.7 0.40 21 10.0 9.7 4.3 8 8,9,10,11 5.5 53 9 SS 0.2 5.7 0.77 5.30 2.77 11.3 11.3 0.40 24 14.3 11.3 4.4 7 7,8,9,10,11 5.7 60 a SS 0.2 5.9 0.78 5.24 3.40 13.9 13.9 0.40 24 14.3 13.9 4.7 6 6-11 7.2 SS 7.2 0.90 4.96 5.94 26.6 26.6 0.40 36 422 26.6 S4 Tc is from ease 6 arty 13A 6-11, 13 7.2 109 a SS 0.3 7.5 0.92 4.89 6.47 29.2 29.2 0.40 36 42.2 29.2 56 5 5-11.13 7.5 201 I3A SS 0.6 at 0,90 4,76 8.19 ' 35.3 35.3 ?ti$ 0.40 36 42.2 35.3 5.9 12A 12, (1a)14 2.3 23 Clow = hid 12 and portion now 1 1412.14 5.0 5 5.0 0.95 5M 1.64 8.7 -50 37 0.40 21 10.0 3.7 3.3 33 1.33.34 5.0 5.0 0.37 5 fi0 4.00 8.2 82 0.50 21 11.2 8.2 4.4 15.18 1,15,18,33,3d 5.0 212 33 SS 0.8 5.8 0.68 528 6.30 2126 22.6 0.40 30 25.9 22.6 5.3 15,1815,18 5.8 5A 0.72 5.28 2.30 8.8 8.8 16.1716,17 5.8 5.8 O.7fi 5.28 2.32 9.3 9.3 . 15.18 I J2,14-18,33,J4 5.4 i8 1e SS 0.1 5.4 0.78 5.38 10.26 ' 42.8 42.8 0.40 54 124.1 42.8 6.0 {§Y 'iDF� :0 - _ >^:L8;0 0.7.1 L' 860 «1.08 4.3'*` .,.ft '4:3 NO 7 W.":'_ i.^AM-0,'40 Notes: 1. Column 4a Identifies the type of channel used to calculate the velocity far the travel time calculations 2. Callum 14a Identifies whethor the street Is a main arterial. Collector, or local street for use in me street capacity calculations. 3. For final design submittals, channel 8 pipe velocities are Shawn elsewhere in tits report. ffi-e,99 The Sear-Bmwn Gmup Poudre Valley Hospital - Harmony Campus Time of Concentration (Fort Collins) Designer: tid, asg Storm: 100 yr Cf = 1.25 ti = 1 67t1 1- c . cnMnm S^(1/3) tc = ti + tL 823-001 tc Remarks Basin Area C C x Cf Length Slope ti Length Slope Velocity It. (ac) (ft) M) (min) (it) N (fUs) (min) (min) 1 2 3 3a 4 5 6 7 1 7a 8 9 10 11 12 1 2.32 0.70 0.87 30 2.00 1.9 630 GW 1.00 1.54 6.8 8.7 2 3.58 0.60 0.76 30 2.00 2.8 900 PA 0.50 1.34 11.2 14.0 3 2.79 0.67 0.84 30 2.00 2.1 850 PA 1.30 2.18 6.5 8.6 4 1.45 0.72 0.90 30 2.00 1.7 706 PA 4.00 3.88 3.0 5.0 5 1.72 0.79 0.99 50 5.00 0.9 300 PA 1.90 2.65 1.9 5.0 6 2.54 0.74 0.92 70 12.00 1.2 600 PA 1.25 2.14 4.7 5.9 7 0.63 0.81 1.00 50 1.50 1.2 317 PA 1.30 2.18 2.4 5.0 8 0.43 0.76 0.95 55 1.50 1.8 201 PA 1.30 2.18 1.5 5.0 9 - 0.44 0.73 0.91 70 1.50 2.6 80 PA 2.00 2.72 0.5 5.0 10 0.76 0.80 1.00 40 15.00 0.5 338 PA 1.82 2.59 2.2 5.0 11 1.14 0.77 0.97 30 15.00 0.6 282 PA 2.50 3.05 1.5 5.0 12 0.53 0.95 1.00 0 2.00 0.0 115 PA 2.00 2.72 0.7 5.0 13 0.53 0.95 1.00 0 2.00 0.0 115 PA 2.00 2.72 0.7 5.0 14 1.11 0.95 1.00 0 2.00 0.0 250 PA 2.00 2.72 1.5 5.0 15 1.27 0.76 0.95 60 2.00 1.7 246 PA 1.30 2.18 1.9 5.0 16 0.86 0.82 1.00 5 2.00 0.3 230 PA 1.00 1.91 2.0 5.0 17 1.46 0.72 0.90 55 2.00 2.2 255 PA 2.00 2.72 1.6 5.0 18 1.03 0.67 0.84 100 6.00 2.7 190 PA 2.90 3.29 1.0 5.0 19 0.56 0.70 0.87 30 2.00 1.9 140 PA 0.85 1.75 1.3 5.0 19A 0.52 0.73 0.92 30 2.00 1.5 140 PA 1.30 2.18 1.1 5.0 20 4.46 0.20 0.25 250 1.00 25.1 0 GW 1.00 1.54 0.0 25.1 21 1.17 0.65 0.81 30 15.00 1.2 535 PA 0.58 1.44 6.2 7.4 22 1.69 0.20 0.25 250 1.50 22.0 0 GW 1.50 1.89 0.0 22.0 23 0.81 0.40 0.50 95 2.00 8.6 380 PA 0.70 1.59 4.0 12.6 24 3.34 0.44 0.55 75 2.00 7.0 500 PA 0.40 1.19 7.0 14.0 25 4.58 0.20 0.25 500 0.60 42.1 0 GW 1.00 1.54 0.0 42.1 26 9.09 0.20 0.25 500 1.40 31.8 200 PL 2.70 1.14 2.9 34.7 27 9.42 0.20 - 0.25 500 2.40 26.5 450 PL 2.40 1.07 7.0 33.6 28 13.13 0.20 0.25 500 1.90 28.7 400 PL 1.90 0.94 7.1 35.8 29 14.82 0.25 0.31 500 1.25 30.7 500 PL 1.25 0.75 11.2 41.9 30 7.07 0.20 0.25 500 1.20 33.4 1500 GW 0.55 1.14 21.9 55.3 31 5.46 0.20 0.25 250 1.50 22.0 700 GW 0.55 '1.14 10.2 32.2 32 1.43 0.59 0.74 20 3.00 2.1 550 PA 1.50 2.35 3.9 6.0 33 1.40 0.53 0.67 50 8.00 2.9 390 PA 1.80 2.58 2.5 5.4 34 0.28 0.95 1.00 95 2.00 1.4 0 PA 1.50 2.35 0.0 5.0 - .........r...............r.,.............,.._. PA = Paved Area, PL = Pasture& Lawns, GW = Grassed Waterway Figure 3-2. Estimate of average flow velocity for use with the Rational Method from the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District was used to determine the velocities. A copy of Figure 3.2 can be found in the tables and figures section of this report. 06-Sep-99 The Sear -Brown Group Poudre Valley Hospital - Harmony Campus Time of Concentration (Fort Collins) Designer: lid, asg Storm: 10 yr Cf = 1.00 ti = f 87n 1- C x COD-(V2 S^(1/3) tc= ti+tL 823-001 tc Remarks Basin Area C C x Cf Length Slope ti Length Slope Velocity tL (ac) (it) M (min) (it) (%) (it/s) (min) (min) 1 2 3 3a 4 5 6 7 7a e 9 10 11 12 1 2.32 0.70 0.70 30 2.00 3.3 630 GW 1.00 1.54 6.8 10.1 2 3.58 0.60 0.60 30 2.00 4.0 900 PA 0.50 1.34 - 11.2 15.3 3 2.79 0.67 0.67 30 2.00 3.5 850 PA 1.30 2.18 6.5 10.0 4 1.45 0.72 0.72 30 2.00 3.1 706 PA 4.00 3.88 3.0 6.1 5 1.72 0.79 0.79 - 50 5.00 2.4 300 PA 1.90 2.65 1.9 5.0 6 2.54 0.74 0.74 70 12.00 2.5 600 PA 1.25 2.14 4.7 - 7.2 7 0.63 0.81 0.81 50 1.50 3.4 317 PA 1.30 2.18 2.4 5.8 8 0.43 0.76 0.76 55 1.50 4.1 201 PA 1.30 2.18 1.5 5.7 9 0.44 0.73 0.73 70 1.50 5.1 80 PA 2.00 2.72 0.5 5.6 10 0.76 0.80 0.80 40 15.00 1.4 338 PA 1.82 2.59 2.2 5.0 11 1.14 0.77 0.77 30 15.00 1.4 282 PA 2.50 3.05 1.5 5.0 - 12 0.53 0.95 0.95 0 2.00 . 0.0 115 PA 2.00 2.72 0.7 5.0 13 0.53 0.95 0.95 0 2.00 0.0 115 PA 2.00 2.72 0.7 5.0 14 1.11 0.95 0.95 0 2.00 0.0 250 PA 2.00 2.72 1.5 5.0 15 1.27 0.76 0.76 60 2.00 3.9 246 PA 1.30 2.18 1.9 5.8 16 0.86 0.82 0.82 5 2.00 0.9 230 PA 1.00 1.91 2.0 5.0 - 17 1.46 0.72 0.72 55 2.00 -4.2 255 PA 2.00 2.72 1.6 5.8 18 1.03 0.67 0.67 100 6.00 4.4 190 PA 2.90 3.29 1.0 5.4 19 0.56 0.70 0.70 30 2.00 3.3 140 PA 0.85 1.75 1.3 5.0 19A 0.52 0.73 0.73 30 2.00 3.0 140 PA 1.30 2.18 1.1 5.0 20 4.46 0.20 0.20 250 1.00 26.6 0 GW 1.00 1.54 0.0 26.6 21 1.17 0.65 0.65 30 15.00 1.9 535 PA 0.58 1.44 6.2 8A 22 1.69 0.20 0.20 250 1.50 23.2 0 GW 1.50 1.89 0.0 23.2 23 0.81 0.40 0.40 95 2.00 10.1 380 PA 0.70 1.59 4.0 14.1 24 3.34 0.44 0.44 75 2.00 8.5 500 PA 0.40 1.19 7.0 15.4 25 4.58 0.20 0.20 500 0.60 44.6 0 GW 1.00 1.54 0.0 44.6 26 9.09 0.20 0.20 500 1.40 33.6 200 PL 2.70 1.14 2.9 36.6 27 9.42 0.20 0.20 500 2.40 28.1 450 PL 2.40 1.07 7.0 35.1 28 13.13 0.20 0.20 500 1.90 30.4 400 PL 1.90 0.94 7.1 37.5 29 14.82 0.25 0.25 500 1.25 33.1 500 PL 1.25 0.75 11.2 44.3 30 7.07 0.20 0.20 500 1.20 35.4 1500 GW 0.55 1.14 21.9 57.3 31 5.46 0.20 0.20 250 1.50 23.2 700 GW 0.55 1.14 10.2 33.5 32 1.43 0.59 0.59 20 3.00 2.9 550 PA 1.50 2.35 3.9 6.8 33 1.40 0.53 0.53 50 8.00 3.8 390 PA 1.80 2.58 2.5 6.3 34 0.28 0.95 0.95 95 2.00 2.2 0 PA 1.50 2.35 0.0 5.0 Note: Column 7a codes the channel type for velocity calculations. PA = Paved Area, PL = Pasture& Lawns, GW = Grassed Waterway Figure 3-2 Estimate of average flow velocity for use with the Rational Method from the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District was used to determine the velocities. A copy of Figure 3-2 can be found in the tables and figures section of this report. 06-Sep-99 The Sear -Brown Group Poudre Valley Hospital - Harmony Campus 823-001 Composite Rational Method Runoff Coefficients (Fort Collins) Designer. tld, asg Surface Impervious I Pervious 0.951 0.20 Basin Area Fercent Impervious PercentRunoff Pervious Coefficient Remarks Total Impervious (ac) (ac) C 1 2.32 1.54 66.4% 33.6% 0.70 2 3.58 1.93 53.9% 46.1 % 0.60 3 2.79 1.75 62.7% 37.3% 0.67 4 1.45 1.00 69.0% 31.0% 0.72 5 1.72 1.35 78.5% 21.5% 0.79 6 2.54 1.82 71.7% 28.3% 0.74 7 0.63 0.51 81.0% 19.0% 0.81 8 0.43 0.32 74.4% 25.6% 0.76 9 0.44 0.31 70.5% 29.5% 0.73 10 0.76 0.61 80.3% 19.7% 0.80 11 1.14 0.87 76.3% 23.7% 0.77 12 0.53 0.53 100.0% 0.0% 0.95 13 0.53 0.53 100.0% 0.0% 0.95 14 1.11 1.11 100.0% 0.0% 0.95 15 1.27 0.95 74.8% 25.2% 0.76 16 0.86 0.71 82.6% 17.4% 0.82 17 1.46 1.01 69.2% 30.8% 0.72 18 1.03 0.65 63.1 % 36.9% 0.67 19 0.56 0.37 66.1 % 33.9% 0.70 19A 0.52 0.37 71.2% 28.8% 0.73 20 4.46 0.00 0.0% 100.0% 0.20 21 1.17 0.70 59.8% 40.2% 0.65 22 1.69 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.20 23 0.81 0.22 27.2% 72.8% 0.40 24 3.34 1.08 32.3% 67.7% 0.44 25 4.58 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.20 26 9.09 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.20 27 9.42 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.20 28 13.13 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.20 29 14.82 0.94 6.3% 93.7% 0.25 30 7.07 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.20 31 5.46 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.20 32 1.43 0.75 52.4% 47.6% 0.59 33 1.40 0.62 44.3% 55.7% 0.53 34 0.28 0.28 100.0% 0.0% 0.95 SITE: . 103.82 acres 06-Sep-99 The Sear -Brown Group Project: Project Title Project #. 893001 Location: ONCOLOGY Rectanaular Area Inlet in Su Grate: (specify) NEENAH R-3397 Open length, L = 1.3 ft Open width, W = 0.9 ft Clogging, c = 20% Stage interval, dh = 0.4 ft Weir equation: Qw=CPCH^1.5 C = 3.0 Pc = c 2(L+W) Pc = 3.4 ft H Qw Qo (ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0'.00 0.00 0.40 259 2.69 0.80 r 7.33 3.80 1.20 1r3.4T 4.65 1.60 T4 5.37 2.00 6.01 2.40 38.10 6.58' 2.80 48.01 3.20 58.66 ` ; 7'60 3.60 70.00 8.06 4.00 4.40 81.98 94.58 849; 891° 100 60 60 40 20 Designer: MTC Date: 06-Sep-99 Checked: Orifice equation: Qo = C Ac (2gH)^0.5 C = 0.6 Ac= c(LW) Ac = 0.9 ft2 Q(100) = 0.34 cfs d(100) = 0.05 ft _ r -------------------- - - - - -t ----- -------------------■--__---_--- ■ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ L - - _ _ - - - _ _ _ - - - _ - - - - - - - - - W - • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 0 1 2 3 4 Head (ft) -■- Weir -t OnSce �Controlling 5 APPENDIX APPENDIX 2. Erosion Control Reference Manual for Construction Sites by the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, January 1991, revised January 1997. 3. McClellands Basin 100-Year Master Plan Update, by RBD, Inc., Fort Collins, Colorado, April 1, 1996. 4. McClellands Basin Master Drainage Plan, by Greenhorne & O'Mara, Inc., Fort Collins, Colorado, June 20, 1986. 5. Final Drainage Report for Timberline Road, by Northern Engineering Services, Inc., Fort Collins, Colorado, July 15, 1994. 6. Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for The Hamlet at Miramont P.l_l.D., Fort Collins, Colorado, by RBD, Inc., March 1996. m W I V. STORM WATER QUALITY. A. General Conce-t No changes have been made. B. Specific Details No changes have been made. VI. EROSION CONTROL A. General Concept No changes have been made. B. Specific Details No changes have been made. VII. CONCLUSIONS A. Compliance with Standards No changes have been made. B. Drainage Concept No changes have been made C. Storm Water Quality No changes have been made. D. Erosion Control Concept No change has been made. 1. Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards by the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, May 1984, revised January 1997. C. Hydrologic Criteria The SWMM hydrologic model that was previously used in the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Study for the Hamlet at Miramont P.U.D., by RBD, Inc., has been utilized and updated in this report in order to analyze the hydrologic conditions of the proposed Poudre Valley Hospital site. D. Hydraulic Criteria All calculations within -this study have been prepared in accordance with the City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Criteria and are included in the appendix. IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. General Concept The storm drainage will continue to drain as it was shown in the original drainage report except with the addition of an inlet and additional piping B. Specific Details Overall Drainage Plan The Overall Development Plan drainage report has not been revised. This is because there is no significant increase in impervious area. Oncology Unit The Oncology Unit and the office addition add a small amount of impervious surface area to the site. The drainage from the roof of the oncology unit will discharge to a 12-inch diameter private drain that will tie into a 5-foot type R inlet. A eighteen -inch diameter pipe will then carry the flows to the previously designed 25-foot long type R inlet. From that point the inlet flows are piped as previously shown with no significant effect on the hydraulic grade line. SWMM Model The SWMM model has not been changed as the total area and the impervious area have not changed significantly. The explaination for the lack of increase in hard area, is the re-evaluation of hard area. This shows that the original study overestimated the hard area. Please refer to the revised appendix page 75. Please note that we have not used the updated Rainfall data to remain consistent with the original report. 13 ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO THE DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR THE POUDRE VALLEY HOSPITAL HARMONY CAMPUS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO I. . GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. Location The oncology addition to the Poudre Valley Hospital Harmony Campus site is located on the north end of the north wing of the Medical Office Building. B. Description of Property The oncology unit is located at the north end of the north wing of the medical office building and consists of 0.28 acres of floor space. There is also an addition small office area south and east of the oncology unit that is located along the east wall of the north wing of the medical office building. II. DRAINAGE BASINS A. Basin Description Both additions are located in what was part of basin 18 in the original report. Basin 18 is now divided into basins 18, 33 and 34. These basins drain to the east to type R inlets at design points 33 and 18. III. DRAINAGE BASIN CRITERIA A. Regulations The City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria is being used for the subject site. B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints The criteria and constraints from The McClellands Basin 100-Year Master Plan and the subsequent update dated April 1, 1996 are being utilized in this Drainage Study. The Poudre Valley Hospital site is currently being utilized as agricultural land, and the McClellands Basin Master Plan for the site does not include on -site detention facilities for the future development. C! I v TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION PAGE I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. LOCATION 1 B. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 1 II. DRAINAGE BASINS A. MAJOR BASIN DESCRIPTION 1 III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. REGULATIONS 1 B. DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA REFERENCE AND CONSTRAINTS 1 C. HYDROLOGICAL CRITERIA 2 D. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA 2 IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. GENERAL CONCEPT 2 B. SPECIFIC DETAILS 2 OVERALL DRAINAGE PLAN 2 ONCOLOGY UNIT 2 SWMM MODEL 2 V. STORM WATER QUALITY A. GENERAL CONCEPT 3 B. SPECIFIC DETAILS 3 VI. EROSION CONTROL A. GENERAL CONCEPT 3 B. SPECIFIC DETAILS 3 VII. CONCLUSIONS A. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS 3 B. DRAINAGE CONCEPT 3 C. STORM WATER QUALITY 3 D. EROSION CONTROL CONCEPT 3 REFERENCES 3 APPENDIX PAGE REVISIONS 1 /' 1 ITOI 1U_ \ • TO THE FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT POUDRE VALLEY HOSPITAL HARMONY CAMPUS FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Addendum date September 7, 1999 THE SEAR -BROWN GROUP FULLrSERVICE DESIGN PROFESSIONALS 209 SOUTH MELDRUM FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521-2603 970-482-5922 FAX:970-482-6368 September 7, 1999 Mr. Basil Hamdan City of Fort Collins Storm Water Utilities 700 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 RE: Addendum No. 1 to The Final Drainage And Erosion Control Report For the Poudre Valley Hospital, Harmony Campus, Fort Collins, Colorado. Dear Basil, We are pleased to submit to you, for your review and approval, this Addendum No. 1 to the Final Drainage and Erosion Control Report for the Poudre Valley Hospital, Harmony Campus, Fort Collins, Colorado. The purpose of this addendum is to address the modifications to the drainage system caused by the addition of an oncology unit to the north end of the building. All computations within this report have been completed in compliance with the City of Fort Collins, Storm Drainage Design Criteria. We appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing this submittal. Please call if you have any questions. Respectfully The Sear -Brown Group Prepared by: Jim Allen -Morley, P.E Project Engineer cc: File 823-001 Boulder Associates Reviewed by: Bob Gowing, P.E. Senior Project Manager NEW YORK•PENNSYLVANIA COLORADO•UTAH•WYOMING STANDARDS IN EXCELLENCE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER