The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20121519.tiff S S � � • PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT • • FOR CUMMINS FIELD WATER INJECTION FACILITY • • • WELD COUNTY, COLORADO • • • • Prepared for: • • Noble Energy • 2115 117th Avenue • Greeley, Colorado 80634 • 0 • Prepared by: • TETRA TECH • 1900 South Sunset, Suite 1-F • Longmont, Colorado 80501 • • • Tetra Tech Job No. 133-35719-12001 • • • • February 2012 • • � [ThJ TETRA TECH • • • 2012-1519 • • • • • it TETRA TECH • • • • February 23, 2012 Clay Kimmi Weld County—Public Works 1111 H Street Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Preliminary Drainage Report for Cummins Field Tetra Tech Job No. 133-35719-12001 Dear Mr. Kimmi: On behalf of Noble Energy, we are submitting this Preliminary Drainage Report for Cummins Field Water Injection Facility. The proposed development includes a produced water injection . facility. The enclosed report provides information on the site's historic drainage patterns, and evaluates the site drainage design for the proposed facility. If there are any questions or comments concerning this report, please feel free to contact us. • • Sincerely, TETRA TECH • Steve E. Sciscione, P.E., LEED AP Project Civil Engineer • Enclosures Tel • Fax .. • P:A35719A133-35719-12001ADocs\ReportsVPreliminary DrainageADrainage Report.doc U TETRA TECH ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this report for the preliminary drainage design of the Cummins Field Water Injection Facility was prepared by me (or under my di ��._ '�� n) in accordance with the provisions of the Weld County storm drainage crite - qf ereof. CWARD ! 43:z Steph��;11 � ' ::4Rect; Registe 010 ngineer State of Co . ., . o. 46051 a • • • TABLE OF CONTENTS • . Page • 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 • 2.0 GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1 • 3.0 DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUBBASINS 1 • 3.1 Major Basin Description 1 • 3.2 Historic Drainage Patterns 2 • 3.3 Off-Site Drainage Patterns 2 • 4.0 DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA 2 • 5.0 DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN 3 • 5.1 General Concept 3 5.2 On-site Drainage 3 • 5.3 Off-site Drainage 4 • 5.4 Water Quality 4 6.0 CONCLUSIONS 5 • 7.0 REFERENCES 6 • • • • List of Appendices • • Appendix A: Vicinity Map Appendix B: FEMA Map • Appendix C: Hydrology Computations • Appendix C-1: Site Properties • Appendix C-2: Soil Reports . Appendix C-3: Historic and Offsite Runoff Calculations Appendix C-4: Developed Runoff Calculations • Appendix D: Hydraulic Computations Appendix D-1: Culvert Sizing Appendix D-2: Ditch Sizing Appendix D-3: Detention Pond Area/Volume Capacity and Outlet Sizing List of Drawings Historic Drainage Plan (C-200) Back Pocket Preliminary Developed Drainage Plan (C-201) Back Pocket Offsite Drainage Plan (C-202) Back Pocket • • • • U 0 1.0 INTRODUCTION • The purpose of this report is to identify and define conceptual solutions to storm drainage problems, which may occur as a result of the proposed development. The contents of this report are prepared, at a minimum, in accordance with Weld County Criteria for a Preliminary Drainage Report. This report examines the undeveloped flow patterns of offsite and onsite drainage basins and proposed stormwater facilities to maintain the controlled release at the 5-year historic rate for the developed 100-year storm event. . 2.0 GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Cummins Field site is located approximately 11 miles east of Ault, Colorado in the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 10, Township 7 North, Range 64 West of . the 6`h P.M., Weld County, Colorado. While no county roads are constructed adjacent to the property, the site is bound by right-of-way for WCR 84 to the north and by right—of-way for WCR 57 to the east. A vicinity map has been provided in Appendix A. Noble Energy is proposing a produced water injection facility. Water is brought from . intermediate areas around the proposed facility and will be conveyed to the site via local pipeline . from surrounding well heads in the Cummins Field area. 3.0 DRAINAGE BASINS AND S UBBASINS ▪ • 3.1 Major Basin Description The site is located outside any applicable Weld County or adjacent Master Drainage Plans; however, it should be noted that the project site is the future location of the Galeton Reservoir, to . be built as part of the Northern Colorado Conservancy District's Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) [1]. It is assumed that the facility operations will conclude prior to the construction of the reservoir. Drainage generally flows southwest to northeast into an unnamed natural drainage that flows offsite toward the southeast. According to the Soil Survey of Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part [2], the site soils belong mainly (-85%) to Hydraulic Soil Group (HSG) C; however HSG B soils also exist on the site. Renohill fine sandy loam and Manzanola clay loam are the predominant soil types on the site. Generally, slopes remain between 0 and 6 percent. A detailed soils report has been provided in Appendix C-1. Weld County Road 84 right-of-way runs adjacent to the property to the north and Weld County Road 57 right-of-way to the east. It appears as though no substantial ditches have been built along the roadways to intercept offsite drainage, and no irrigation ditches exist within 200 feet of . the site. Other than several oil and gas wells, the location around the site is largely undeveloped, with sparse vegetation. The property does not lie within a FEMA 100-year floodplain, as shown in Appendix B. - 1 - ID Preliminary Drainage Report Cummins Field February 2012 P.A35719A133-35719-12001ADocs\ReportsVPreliminary DrainageADrainage Report-doc U • • • • 3.2 Historic Drainage Patterns • • The site was divided into two sub-basins, Basin Aex and Basin Bex. Historic runoff coefficients • were calculated for the site soil type. The site rainfall depth information was obtained using the • Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency charts provided by the Urban Stonn Drainage Criteria • Manual, Volume 1, Ch. 4 [3]. Using the obtained rainfall depth information and soil map • average, site runoff coefficients were found. Historic runoff coefficients and peak flows for the 5-year storm event are shown in Table 1 below: • • Table 1: Historic 5-yr Runoff Summary • Basin ID Acres Runoff Coefficient,5-yr Peak Flow,5-yr(cfs) • Aex 4.49 0.17 1.1 • Bex 21.94 0.16 6.5 • Detailed historic drainage calculations have been provided in Appendix C-2. • • 3.3 Off-Site Drainage Patterns • Offsite Basins were subdivided into three sub-basins, Basin O1 (divided into Ola and O1b), and • O2. Basin O1 flows from the north, and contributes a considerably large watershed to the site. • Basin O1 consists of HSG B and C soils, consisting predominatly of Olney fine sandy loam (0 to • 6 percent) and Platner loam (0 to 3 percent). Basin O2 flows from the northwest to the southeast, • • consisting mainly of Renohill fine sandy loam (HSG C) at slightly steeper slopes (6 to 9 percent). Existing offsite runoff coefficients and peak flows for the 100-yr storm event are • shown in Table 2 below: • • Table 2: Offsite 100-yr Runoff Summary • Basin ID Acres Runoff Coefficient, 100-yr Peak Flow, 100-yr(cfs) Ol a 253.35 0.17 80.0 • O1 b 22.75 0.17 35.6 • O2 91.50 0.17 68.0 • • Detailed offsite drainage calculations have been provided in Appendix C-2. 4.0 DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA • This report was prepared in compliance with the Urban Stonn Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 1-3. The Criteria was followed in accordance with the Weld County Code [4] and the Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria • Manuals Volumes 1, 2, and 3[5]. 6-hr and 24-hr rainfall data was collected using the NOAA • Atlas 2, Precipitation-Frequency Atlas of the Western United States, Volume III-Colorado [6], • and then converted to 1-hr rainfall data using UDFCD's UD-RainZone v1.01a. Based on these . criteria, a 100-year storm was used as the major storm in evaluating the existing drainage facilities. • • - 2 - • Preliminary Drainage Report Cummins Field February 2012 P 35 19A133-35719-I 2001 ADocs'ReponsVPreliminary DrainageADrainage Report.doc • U S The Rational Method was used in stormwater runoff calculations for basins less than 90 acres. ' . Although the Rational Method may be used for basins up to 160 acres in the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, according to a technical paper published by Urban Drainage Flood Control District in 2008 titled Consistency Between CUHP and Rational Methods, 90 acres is considered a "more appropriate demarcation between small and large watersheds," and was used • in the analysis accordingly [7]. Runoff coefficients (C), applied in the Rational Method, were . weighted based on the historic and existing land use, and on the types of soils on the site. For basins larger than 90 acres, the CUHP method was used to calculate peak flows. Pipe Sizing: The site storm infrastructure has been evaluated using Manning's Equation. A . roughness coefficient (n) of 0.013 was used for concrete pipe. Access Drive Culverts (Culverts 1, 2, and 3) were sized for the 100-yr storm event to convey offsite drainage, and provide maintenance or emergency access, during a major storm event. Additionally, the outlet pipe from the detention pond was sized for a maximum release rate of the 5-yr historic flow with the . use of an orifice plate. Detailed pipe calculations have been provided in Appendix D-1. Ditch Sizing: Two perimeter ditches, along the northern and eastern site boundaries are proposed to route offsite flows around the site. These have been sized for the 100-yr storm event • using Manning's Equation. Additionally, an on-site ditch was designed to convey 100-year . flows from the newly developed site to the detention pond. Due to site topography, a very small portion of the existing site will not drain to the detention pond; however, additional water quality volume has been included in the pond to offset this area. Detailed ditch calculations have been . provided in Appendix D-2. Detention Pond Sizing: The detention pond volume was determined using the UDFCD's Detention Design— UD-Detention v2.2. The detention pond is designed to detain the 100-year storm event with 1 foot of freeboard for on-site flows (Basin B). An emergency spillway • (rectangular weir) has been proposed to convey the 100-year flowrate at a 6" depth, with 1' of freeboard. Detailed Detention Pond calculations have been provided in Appendix D-3. 5.0 DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN • 5.1 General Concept • Since the western portion of the site will not be developed, no runoff will be detained, and stormwater from Basin Aex will flow as it currently does. The majority of the eastern portion of . the site will flow into the detention pond and be discharged to the natural drainage way. The . 100-year developed storm event will be released at the 5-year historic rate. Offsite flows will be routed around the site. • 5.2 On-site Drainage • The site was delineated into two drainage basins. These basins, A and B, are within the subject parcel, and mimic the historic basins. Basin A in the historic and developed condition will . remain essentially the same, but as previously mentioned, will contain a very small portion of the • • parcel that will drain undetained to the natural drain way as it currently does. The 100-yr storm 0 - 3 - . Preliminary Drainage Report Cummins Field February 2012 P1357 I9\133-35719-12001\Docs\ReportsWreliminary DrainageVhainage Report doc S • event for Basin Bdev will be routed through the detention pond, and will be released at the 5-yr • i historic rate. Table 3 shows the unrouted and routed peak flows for on-site basins A and B. Table 3: Onsite 100-yr Runoff Summary (Unrouted) Basin ID Acres Runoff Coefficient, 100-yr Peak Flow, 100-yr(cfs) Adev 4A9 0.17 6A Bdev 21.94 0.17 69.7 • Once Basin B is routed through the detention pond, the flow will be attenuated accordingly, as • shown in Table 4, to the 5-yr historic rate. Table 4: Onsite 100-yr Runoff Summary (Routed) Basin ID Acres Peak flow, 100-yr(cfs) Note • Adev 4.49 6.4 Undeveloped • Bdev 21.94 6.5 Routed through Detention Pond • Detailed developed drainage calculations have been provided in Appendix C-3. • 5.3 Off-site Drainage • Offsite drainage will be routed around the site via the use of ditches and culverts. Basin Ola and • • O l will be intercepted from flowing through the site by a ditch running along the northern property line and conveyed to the natural drainage path to the west of the site. Basin O 1 a contributes to the most western part of the ditch, downstream of all access drives and culverts. • Basin O1b was used to size the eastern part of the ditch, including the culverts underneath of • both access drives. • Basin O2 will be intercepted from flowing through the site by a ditch running along the eastern property line and conveyed south off of the property. In order to mitigate downstream erosion, • level spreaders will be used to transition concentrated flows from pipes and ditches to sheet flow. 5.4 Water Quality • The proposed water quality feature for the site is a water quality capture volume and outlet • structure located in the detention pond. The water quality volume was sized in accordance with the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume /-3, and the water quality feature was designed to handle the runoff from the whole developed portion of the site. • The entire site's developed runoff flows are designed to go through the water quality feature • located in the detention pond. The required site water quality capture volume is 0.1 Acre*ft. Per Urban Storm Drainage Standards, 120% of the water quality volume will be provided for the • site. The proposed water quality volume drain time is 40 hours. A plate with water quality • perforations will be used as a water quality orifice for the pond. • • - 4 - • Preliminary Drainage Report Cummins Field February 2012 p.A35719A 133-35719-12001\DocAReponsTreliminary DrainageADrainage Repon.doc • U • • S . • The Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) has been added to the detention pond 100-year . volume in order to offset small portions of undetained flows from the existing site. Typically, Weld County allows the WQCV to be included within the 100-yr detention pond volume. A summary of the detention pond storage is listed below in Table 5. • . Table 5: Detention Pond Storage Summary Pond Storage ac-ft Notes Detention 2.6 . Water Quality Capture 0.1 0.04 (in) • Spill Containment 1.7 10,000 (barrels) TOTAL 4.4 + I'freeboard • 6.0 CONCLUSIONS • This report was prepared in compliance with the Weld County Code and the Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Stonn Drainage Criteria Manuals Volumes 1, 2 and . 3. In conclusion, the existing drainage system for Cummins Field Water Injection site will detain the developed 100-year runoff, and release at the historic 5-year rate, thus the drainage will not adversely affect the existing drainage patterns of the site and areas surrounding the site. • Upon Weld County's review and comment of this report, a Final Drainage Report will be completed, including a more detailed analysis and drawings that will provide ditch and culvert cross sections, detention pond profile and section, outlet structure and orifice plate details, riprap sizing, operations and maintenance instructions for the proposed stormwater drainage facility, • and spot grading elevations at all inverts and key hydraulic points. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • - 5 - Preliminary Drainage Report Cummins Field February 2012 P:�35719AI33-35719-12t 1ADocs\ReponsVPreGnunary DrainageAD©inage Repon doc • i O 7.0 REFERENCES 1. Northern Water. NISP Overview, Accessed February 2012. • http://www.northernwater.org/WaterProjects/NISP.aspx • 2. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station. Soil Survey of Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part, September 1980. 3. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume /-3, June 2001. 4. Weld County Code. Weld County, Colorado, September 6, 2008. • 5. Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals Volumes 1, 2, and 3. Weld County Public Works Department, October 2006. • 6. NOAA Atlas 2, Precipitation-Frequency Atlas of the Western United States, Volume . III-Colorado. U.S. Department of Commerce, 1973. . 7. Guo, James, Phd, P.E. and Ben Urbonas, P.E., D.WRD. Consistency Between CUHP IF. and Rational Methods. August 4, 2008. Accessed via Urban Drainage Flood Control . District website: http://www.udfcd.org/downloads/pdf/tech papers/Revisions%20to%20CUHP%20an d%20 Rational%20M ethod%202008,pdf • - 6 - Preliminary Drainage Report Cummins Field February 2012 . P:\35719\133-35719-I200I'Docs\Repons\Preliminary Drainage\Drainage Report.doc U • DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF • r 2.0 RATIONAL METHOD • For urban catchments that are not complex and are generally 160 acres or less in size, it is acceptable • that the design storm runoff be analyzed by the Rational Method. This method was introduced in 1889 • and is still being used in most engineering offices in the United States. Even though this method has • frequently come under academic criticism for its simplicity, no other practical drainage design method has • evolved to such a level of general acceptance by the practicing engineer. The Rational Method properly • understood and applied can produce satisfactory results for urban storm sewer and small on-site • detention design. 2.1 Rational Formula • The Rational Method is based on the Rational Formula: iQ=CIA (RO-1) • in which: • . Q=the maximum rate of runoff(cfs) C=a runoff coefficient that is the ratio between the runoff volume from an area and the average IP rate of rainfall depth over a given duration for that area • I=average intensity of rainfall in inches per hour for a duration equal to the time of concentration, tc . A =area(acres) • Actually, Q has units of inches per hour per acre(in/hr/ac); however, since this rate of in/hr/ac differs from cubic feet per second(cis)by less than one percent, the more common units of cfs are used. The time of • concentration is typically defined as the time required for water to flow from the most remote point of the • area to the point being investigated. The time of concentration should be based upon a flow length and • path that results in a time of concentration for only a portion of the area if that portion of the catchment • produces a higher rate of runoff. •S The general procedure for Rational Method calculations for a single catchment is as follows: 1. Delineate the catchment boundary. Measure its area. • 2. Define the flow path from the upper-most portion of the catchment to the design point. This flow • path should be divided into reaches of similar flow type(e.g., overland flow, shallow swale flow, • • • ( gutter flow, etc.). The length and slope of each reach should be measured. 3. Determine the time of concentration, tc,for the catchment. • • 08/2006 RO-3 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District • DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF ip• 2.4 Time of Concentration • One of the basic assumptions underlying the Rational Method is that runoff is a function of the average rainfall rate during the time required for water to flow from the most remote part of the drainage area • under consideration to the design point. However, in practice,the time of concentration can be an • empirical value that results in reasonable and acceptable peak flow calculations. The time of • concentration relationships recommended in this Manual are based in part on the rainfall-runoff data • collected in the Denver metropolitan area and are designed to work with the runoff coefficients also • recommended in this Manual. As a result, these recommendations need to be used with a great deal of • caution whenever working in areas that may differ significantly from the climate or topography found in • the Denver region. • For urban areas,the time of concentration, t, consists of an initial time or overland flow time, t,, plus the • travel time, t, in the storm sewer, paved gutter, roadside drainage ditch, or drainage channel. For non- • urban areas,the time of concentration consists of an overland flow time,t;, plus the time of travel in a • defined form,such as a swale, channel,or drainageway. The travel portion, 4, of the time of concentration can be estimated from the hydraulic properties of the storm sewer, gutter, swale, ditch, or drainageway. Initial time,on the other hand,will vary with surface slope, depression storage, surface • cover, antecedent rainfall, and infiltration capacity of the soil, as well as distance of surface flow. The e time of concentration is represented by Equation RO-2 for both urban and non-urban areas: • • � =t; +tt (RO-2) • in which: • • to=time of concentration(minutes) • t,=initial or overland flow time(minutes) • • t,=travel time in the ditch,channel, gutter, storm sewer,etc. (minutes) g.4.1 Initial Flow Time The initial or overland flow time, t<, may be calculated using equation RO-3: • • t = 0.3951.1—Cs)V (RO-3) 5.033 • • in which: • 4= initial or overland flow time(minutes) • C5=runoff coefficient for 5-year frequency(from Table RO-5) • • • • 08/2006 RO-5 • Urban Drainage and Flood Control District U RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) • L= length of overland flow(500 ft maximum for non-urban land uses, 300 ft maximum for urban land uses) S=average basin slope(ft/ft) . Equation RO-3 is adequate for distances up to 500 feet. Note that, in some urban watersheds, the overland flow time may be very small because flows quickly channelize. 2.4.2 Overland Travel Time For catchments with overland and channelized flow, the time of concentration needs to be considered in combination with the overland travel time, 4,which is calculated using the hydraulic properties of the swale, ditch,or channel. For preliminary work, the overland travel time,t,, can be estimated with the help of Figure RO-1 or the following equation(Guo 1999): . V=C,S as (RO-4) in which: V=velocity(ft/sec) cc=conveyance coefficient(from Table RO-2) Sw=watercourse slope(ft/ft) Table RO-2—Conveyance Coefficient, C, Type of Land Surface Conveyance Coefficient, C Heavy meadow 2.5 Tillage/field 5 Short pasture and lawns 7 Nearly bare ground 10 Grassed waterway 15 . Paved areas and shallow paved swales 20 The time of concentration,tc, is then the sum of the initial flow time,t,, and the travel time, 4, as per Equation RO-2. 2.4.3 First Design Point Time of Concentration in Urban Catchments Using this procedure, the time of concentration at the first design point(i.e., initial flow time, 0 in an urbanized catchment should not exceed the time of concentration calculated using Equation RO-5. � t° +10 (RO-5) 180 in which: ID • maximum time of concentration at the first design point in an urban watershed(minutes) RO-6 8/2006 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District II II DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF II . , Table RO3—Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values • Land Use or Percentage • Surface Characteristics 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 • IF Railroad yard areas 15 Undeveloped Areas: • Historic flow analysis 2 • Greenbelts, agricultural 2 • Off-site flow analysis 45 (when land use not defined) • 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. • • CA =KA + (1.31i' —1.440 +1.135i— 0.12)for CA ?- 0, otherwise CA=0 (RO-6) • • Ca =Kco +0.85813 -0.78612 + 0.774i+0.04) (RO-7) • iii CB =ICA +CmO • 08/2006 RO-9 • Urban Drainage and Flood Control District IP DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF S. , Table RO-5—Runoff Coefficients,C • Percentage Imperviousness Type C and D NRCS Hydrologic Soil Groups • 2-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr • 0% 0.04 0.15 0.25 0.37 0.44 0.50 5% 0.08 0.18 0.28 0.39 0.46 0.52 . 10% 0.11 0.21 0.30 0.41 0.47 0.53 • 15% 0.14 0.24 0.32 0.43 0.49 0.54 . 20% 0.17 0.26 0.34 0.44 0.50 0.55 25% 0.20 0.28 0.36 0.46 0.51 0.56 • 30% 0.22 0.30 0.38 0.47 0.52 0.57 . 35% 0.25 0.33 0.40 0.48 0.53 0.57 40% 0.28 0.35 0.42 0.50 0.54 0.58 • 45% 0.31 0.37 0.44 0.51 0.55 0.59 • 50% 0.34 0.40 0.46 0.53 0.57 0.60 55% 0.37 0.43 0.48 0.55 0.58 0.62 • 60% 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.57 0.60 0.63 • 65% 0.45 0.49 0.54 0.59 0.62 0.65 70% 0.49 0.53 0.57 0.62 0.65 0.68 • 75% 0.54 0.58 0.62 0.66 0.68 0.71 • 80% 0.60 0.63 0.66 0.70 0.72 0.74 • 85% 0.66 0.68 0.71 0.75 0.77 0.79 90% 0.73 0.75 0.77 0.80 0.82 0.83 • 95% 0.80 0.82 0.84 0.87 0.88 0.89 (beg. (� 100% 0.89 0.90 - 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.96 TYPE B NRCS HYDROLOGIC SOILS GROUP • 0% 0.02 0.08 0.15 0.25 0.30 0.35 • 5% 0.04 0.10 0.19 0.28 0.33 0.38 10% 0.06 0.22 0.31 0.36 0.40 ,N • 15% 0.08 0.17 0.25 0.33 0.38 0.42 • 20% 0.12 0.20 0.27 0.35 0.40 0.44 25% 0.15 0.22 0.30 0.37 0.41 0.46 • 30% 0.18 0.25 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.47 • 35% 0.20 0.27 0.34 0.41 0.44 0.48 40% 0.23 0.30 0.36 0.42 0.46 0.50 • 45% 0.26 0.32 0.38 0.44 0.48 0.51 • 50% 0.29 0.35 0.40 0.46 0.49 0.52 55% 0.33 0.38 0.43 0.48 0.51 0.54 • 60% 0.37 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.54 0.56 • 65% 0.41 0.45 0.49 0.54 0.57 0.59 • 70% 0.45 0.49 0.53 0.58 0.60 0.62 75% 0.51 0.54 0.58 0.62 0.64 0.66 • 80% 0.57 0.59 0.63 0.66 0.68 0.70 • 85% 0.63 0.66 0.69 0.72 0.73 0.75 90% 0.71 0.73 0.75 0.78 0.80 0.81 • 95% 0.79 0.81 0.83 0.85 0.87 0.88 • 100% 0.89 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.96 • (• • • • 08/2006 RO-11 Urban Drainage and Rood Control District • • • • DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF •• 3.0 COLORADO URBAN HYDROGRAPH PROCEDURE • 3,1 Background • The Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure(CUHP)is a method of hydrologic analysis based upon the • unit hydrograph principle. It has been developed and calibrated using rainfall-runoff data collected in • Colorado(mostly in the Denver/Boulder metropolitan area). This section provides a general background • in the use of the computer version of CUHP to carry out stormwater runoff calculations. A detailed • description of the CUHP procedure and the assumptions and equations used, including a hand • calculation example, are provided in Appendix A to this chapter. For more detailed information regarding • the latest CUHP computer model including data requirements,data format, and model execution, the • reader is directed to the program's users' manual. The latest version of CUHP macro-enabled software is • CUHP 2005 and users' manual are available for downloading from the District's Web site www.udfcd.org • under"Downloads". • 3.2 Effective Rainfall for CUHP • Effective rainfall is that portion of precipitation during a storm event that runs off the land to drainageways. • Those portions of precipitation that do not reach drainageways are called abstractions and include • • interception by vegetation, evaporation, infiltration, storage in all surface depressions, and long-time surface retention. The total design rainfall depth for use with CUHP should be obtained from the • RAINFALL chapter of this Manual. This RUNOFF chapter illustrates a method for estimating the amount 411 of rainfall that actually becomes surface runoff whenever a design rainstorm is used. • • 3.2.1 Pervious-Impervious Areas • As was described in Section 2.6,the urban landscape is comprised of pervious and impervious surfaces. • The degree of imperviousness is the primary variable that affects the volumes and rates of runoff • calculated using CUHP. When analyzing a watershed for design purposes, the probable future percent of • impervious area must first be estimated. A complete tabulation of recommended values of total percentage imperviousness is provided in Table RO-3 and Figures RO-3 through RO-5. References to • • impervious area and all calculations in this chapter are based on the input of total impervious areas. The pervious-impervious area relationship can be further refined for use in CUHP as follows: • • 1. DC/A—Impervious area portion directly connected to the drainage system. • 2. U/A—Impervious area portion that drains onto or across impervious surfaces. • • 3. RPA—The portion of pervious area receiving runoff from impervious portions. • 4. SPA—The separate pervious area portion not receiving runoff from impervious surfaces. • ip This further refinement is explained in some detail in the CUHP users'manual and shown schematically • • • 08/2006 RO-19 • Urban Drainage and Flood Control District S RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) S• • in Figure RO-A6 in Appendix A at the end of this chapter. 3.2.2 Depression Losses Rainwater that is collected and held in small depressions and does not become part of the general surface runoff is called depression loss. Most of this water eventually infiltrates or is evaporated. Depression losses also include water intercepted by trees, bushes, other vegetation, and all other . surfaces. The CUHP method requires numerical values of depression loss as inputs to calculate the . effective rainfall. Table RO-6 can be used as a guide in estimating the amount of depression(retention) • losses to be used with CUHP. • Table RO-6--Typical Depression Losses for Various Land Covers • (All Values in Inches. For use with the CUHP Method) • Land Cover Range in Depression(Retention)Losses Recommended Impervious: • Large paved areas 0.05-0.15 0.1 • Roofs-flat 0.1 -0.3 0.1 • Roofs-sloped 0.05-0.1 0.05 Pervious: • Lawn grass 0.2-0.5 0.35 • a Wooded areas and open fields 0.2-0.6 0.4 • When an area is analyzed for depression losses,the pervious and impervious loss values for all parts of • the watershed must be considered and accumulated in proportion to the percent of aerial coverage for • each type of surface. • 3.2.3 Infiltration • The flow of water into the soil surface is called infiltration. In urban hydrology much of the infiltration occurs on areas covered with grass. Urbanization can increase or decrease the total amount of • infiltration. • • Soil type is the most important factor in determining the infiltration rate. When the soil has a large • percentage of well-graded fines, the infiltration rate is low. In some cases of extremely tight soil,there • may be,from a practical standpoint, essentially no infiltration. If the soil has several layers or horizons, • the least permeable layer near the surface will control the maximum infiltration rate. The soil cover also • plays an important role in determining the infiltration rate. Vegetation, lawn grass in particular,tends to • increase infiltration by loosening the soil near the surface. Other factors affecting infiltration rates include • slope of land, temperature, quality of water, age of lawn and soil compaction. As rainfall continues,the infiltration rate decreases. When rainfall occurs on an area that has little • • antecedent moisture and the ground is dry,the infiltration rate is much higher than it is with high • • RO-20 8/2006 • Urban Drainage and Flood Control District 5 • • DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF • • • antecedent moisture resulting from previous storms or land irrigation such as lawn watering. Although • antecedent precipitation is very important when calculating runoff from smaller storms in non-urbanized • areas, the runoff data from urbanized basins indicates that antecedent precipitation has a limited effect on • runoff peaks and volumes in the urbanized portions of the District. • There are many infiltration models in use by hydrologists. These models vary significantly in complexity. • Because of the climatic condition in the semi-arid region and because runoff from urban watersheds is not • very sensitive to infiltration refinements, the infiltration model proposed by Horton was found to provide a good balance between simplicity and reasonable physical description of the infiltration process for use in • CUHP. Horton's infiltration model is described by Equation RO-8 and is illustrated graphically in Figure • RO-9. • .f=.f0 + V i —.fi a ar (RO$) • • in which: • f=infiltration rate at any given time t from start of rainfall(in/hr) • fa=final infiltration rate(in/hr) • A f=initial infiltration rate(in/hr) •• e=natural logarithm base • a=decay coefficient(1/second) • • t=time(seconds) • In developing Fgivatinn RO-8, Horton observed that infiltration is high early in the storm and eventually • decays to a steady state constant value as the pores in the soil become saturated. The coefficients and initial and final infiltration values are site specific and depend on the soils and vegetative cover complex. • It is possible to develop these values for each site if sufficient rainfall-runoff observations are made. However,such an approach is rarely practical. • Since 1977,the District has analyzed a considerable amount of rainfall-runoff data. On the basis of this • analysis,the values in Table RO-7 are recommended for use within the District with CUHP. The NRCS • Hydrologic Soil Groups C and D occur most frequently within the District; however, areas of NRCS Group • A and B soils are also fairly common. Consult NRCS soil surveys for appropriate soil classifications. • • • • • 08/2006 RO-21 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District • IP • RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) • • Table RO-7—Recommended Horton's Equation Parameters • NRCS Hydrologic Infiltration(inches per hour) Decay . Soil Group Initial- Final j Coefficient—a A 5.0 1.0 0.0007 • B 4.5 0.6 0.0018 • C 3.0 0.5 0.0018 D 3.0 0.5 0.0018 • • To calculate the maximum infiltration depths that may occur at each time increment, it is necessary to • integrate Equation RO-8 and calculate the values for each time increment. Very little accuracy is lost if, • instead of integrating Equation RO-8, the infiltration rate is calculated at the center of each time . increment. This"central"value can then be multiplied by the unit time increment to estimate the . infiltration depth. This was done for the four NRCS hydrologic soil groups, and the results are presented • in Table RO-8. Although Tables RO-7 and BO-8 provide recommended values for various Horton equation parameters,these recommendations are being made specifically for the urbanized or urbanizing • watersheds in the Denver metropolitan area and may not be valid in different meteorologic and climatic • regions. • • , Table RO-8—Incremental Infiltration Depths in Inches` . NRCS Hydrologic Soil Group • Time in Minutes" A B C and D 5 0.384 0.298 0.201 • 10 0.329 0.195 0.134 lb 15 0.284 0.134 0.096 20 0.248 0.099 0.073 • 25 0.218 0.079 0.060 30 0.194 0.067 0.052 5 35 0.175 0.060 0.048 • 40 0.159 0.056 0.045 45 0.146 0.053 0.044 • 50 0.136 0.052 0.043 • 55 0.127 0.051 0.042 60 0.121 0.051 0.042 65 0.115 0.050 0.042 • 70 0.111 0.050 0.042 75 0.107 0.050 0.042 • 80 0.104 0.050 0.042 85 0.102 0.050 0.042 90 0.100 0.050 0.042 • 95 0.098 0.050 0.042 100 0.097 0.050 0.042 • 105 0.096 0.050 0.042 • 110 0.095 0.050 0.042 115 0.095 0.050 0.042 • 120 0.094 0.050 0.042 • • 'Based on central value of each time increment in Horton's equation. Time at end of the time increment. • RO-22 8/2006 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District S S • • j APPENDIX A - VICINITY MAP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • • • 0 0 0 0 S S 0 0 0 S 0 0 S r 0 • • 0 0 0 0 S • • � 64W, �^ i S SIT • • f L. N 4_.� �� _ • I 1 1\ .esr,„, \ • / }. _ • 9 • 1 • •6, I ( < • \ \ _ sU I o I L_ \ CU 1 . • • ' I ,, \\ \ I T7N • M' �) '• 15 16 , —.I Gala -- __-- • a • 0g - �' �► • o ' I -t 1p I I 1 ( ) • ?i W1R 80 49 4Alfi �p Pa • CC 5/l U K D 0 1 ek. airI \ • 1 ^ • W ( ) `1 2 1 9Il _' BN2 W 2 I ib • U y I I ,'.'J0. - 1 I I `. ^c o •'J _ _ I I • H N _ 1n R7' \ I do m• N • M G��y,tri 0 100O 2000' • - SCALE:1'=2000' IC '� • NOBLE ENERGY ProJed No.: 133-35719-12001 r • Ila l Q TETRA TECH CUMMINS FIELD WATER INJECTION WELL Date: 2-10-12 m • - _. Designed By: JJA N www.tetratech.com VICINITY MAP Exhibitcn 0 1900 S.SUNSET ST.,STE 1-F o • o LONGMONT,CO80501 1 U • 303 772 5282 N 1iiiiil Bar Measures 1 inch • I • • • • • • • • • • APPENDIX B - FEMA MAP • • • • • • • • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • IP ! I O � G .. i z GE-2 22 x a - " . a04 i �sl 3UU -- k ( I. - .i E (_ 0 2 e. 2I II ��/ —_ I, - - - -_- _ -I : T- - ��i�lI, II / O II 11 1 L_ �-�., ��VA //4 nil 11 I Ill II _� q ILI II i I iIll ��f� II I�a��_ -_-- - _- ___-itil 1 V I lb 2 7. i li a,/ • I / • Clr r f I • i III m m i11 I I ZI / � Ill I I 11lb lb II i \ I r _� _-tiY p�I� j li I 0 -------„,„__IA % it A II III III M / I m I _ 7 o / 5 2 li y� % / I III '¢ % ( 111 Ill III• -> 2 __L ,\\� _ _ - - - _— _—III _ Lil II I iII I I' . / II a // I // I . _ J� mom_ I • r------T I 0 IC • 0 M m .--- M 59 H I I 2 m_ D • • • •▪ • • • • • • APPENDIX C - HYDROLOGY COMPUTATIONS • • • • APPENDIX C-1 SITE PROPERTIES • APPENDIX C-2 SOIL REPORTS • APPENDIX C-3 HISTORIC AND OFF-SITE RUNOFF CALCULATIONS • APPENDIX C-4 DEVELOPED RUNOFF CALCULATIONS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • �• • • • 0 • • • •S . • • • • APPENDIX C-1 • •• SITE PROPERTIES • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Precipitation Frequency Data Output . • NOAA Atlas 2 . Colorado 40.595014 °N 104.525733°W Site-specific Estimates . Ma Precipitation Precipitation P (inches) Intensity (in/hr) 2-year 1 .29 0.21 . 6-hour . 2-year 1. 67 0. 07 24-hour 100-year 3 . 15 0. 53 . 6-hour . 100-year 3. 73 0. 16 24-hour 11 . Hydrometeorological Design Studies Center - NOAA/National Weather Service 1325 East-West Highway - Silver Spring, HD 20910 - (301) 713-1669 . Wed Jan 25 12:39:22 2012 ID • • • • • S • • • • • • S 11, lb • IDF TABLE FOR ZONE ONE IN THE STATE OF COLORADO • Zone 1:South Platte, Republican,Arkansas, and Cimarron River Basins • • Project: Cummins Field • Enter the elevation at the center of the watershed: Elev = 4,860 (input) • • 1. Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency Table Enter the 6-hour and 24-hour rainfall depths from the NOAA Atlas 2 Volume III in rightmost blue columns • Return Rainfall Depth in Inches at Time Duration Period 5-min 10-min 15-min 30-min 1-hr 2-hr 3-hr 6-hr 24-hr • (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (6) (9) (10) • output output output output output output output input input 2-yr 0.27 0.42 0.53 0.73 0.92 1.05 1.14 1.29 1.67 • 5-yr 0.39 0.61 0.78 1.08 1.36 1.53 1.65 1.85 2.10 • 10-yr 0.48 0.74 0.94 1.30 1.65 1.80 1.92 2.10 2.45 25-yr 0.58 0.91 1.15 1.59 2.01 2.23 2.39 2.65 2.95 50-yr 0.68 1.06 1.34 1.86 2.35 2.54 2.68 2.90 3.25 . 100-yr 0.78 1.20 1.53 2.11 2.68 2.84 2.96 3.15 3.73 Note: Refer to NOAA Atlas 2 Volume III isopluvial maps for 6-hr and 24-hr rainfall depths. • • 2. Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Table Return Rainfall Intensity in Inches Per Hour at Time Duration Period 5-min 10-min 15-min 30-min 1-hr 2-hr 3-hr 6-hr 24-hr • • (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) output output output output output output output output output • 2-yr 3.22 2.50 2.11 1.46 0.92 0.52 0.38 0.22 0.07 . 5-yr 4.74 3.68 3.11 2.15 1.36 0.76 0.55 0.31 0.09 10-yr 5.74 4.45 3.76 2.61 1.65 0.90 0.64 0.35 0.10 • 25-yr 7.00 5.43 4.59 3.18 2.01 1.12 0.80 0.44 0.12 • 50-yr 8.19 6.36 5.37 3.72 2.35 1.27 0.89 0.48 0.14 100-yr 9.31 7.23 6.10 4.23 2.68 1.42 0.99 0.53 0.16 • • • • • • • • • •• • • UD-RainZone v1.01a.xls, Z-1 2/17/2012, 9:25 AM • • • • One-Hour Rainfall Depth Design Chart • • 3.00 • • 2.68 • • 2.50 • • 2.35 • • • • 2.00 - --2.04.• - — • • • 1.65 ♦ • L 1.50 a d • 1.36 • • • • • 1.00 . -- • 0.92 • • 0 0.50 - — • • • 0.00 • 2-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr • Return Period • • • • • • • i • • • UD-RainZone v1.01a.xls,Z-1 2/17/2012, 9:25 AM • • II lip 5 z-- ,C-4--4 o 0. c_p_ 0 I } { { 1 ! I I 1 1 ! # - {}N. .2 .1 I i t S' I c �~l # ._! ___'L ' t ry -� > 3 z. q h- -^C t ifil. I r ��' • C . it _ 0 t'',4-:,'.. ...:'.....:-:,- fr---•,-/I' I I ' /:".•-) .- i . . s.,..ir, ._ ._,r - I •� I: # I ,,W / : I j # _I� gad :;i c : f ca. r '- - # i. 2C'^ I - 1 '41 .h._ ' . --- `,; — I I I • + { x y, • ..n •7•- -r 1. . O # -. ��T_ J• :.�. l 4� �i yam ea A. C �r�y e • S fi _ — _ .} �+ r-+. -.> f J da l-.R .�f 6q '�o f ; • •re+ j M .' �.: Ate ;'., ,r ij�` t }" —'` J� . } +- � �~tea �3 �, ft i l S ' I �.�b . mot• ` � Z. y. — t • • • • k L es •' C 1 r . 7 4 a M :•;.r _- ' "' - 1' , I I `3 I I `^ I'�+gin' 4 E f,..—._.... `.•.� .-. e t Y v f y • I r^ v1- -_.-.-,. r 1 iii/ }-__-I�.y I �,��. Y� .. . n 0 E t I l\ 4 vt E { 1 I _ — _". . ..1I— fir, G [ C • _ it I ! t 4_.• f ♦ 4 n �� 1 ,f, 1V ,f s f • .n _.�� —lily 1 •+c y�r } f• - 11 '₹ ...-.I''-_:!;'4, .-: • • .�'- , '�' r, o ___-- 5 y CCJ — p 's. a� I _ .F�' cep`i usu�'� .a1 C SP s w , mss•' �w 7• t 1 � T, i • Yf p �t a • • � .,.'- _ �.T.1f • ,. yy .�• S ilk + - -'.4..-1,0•4p,,'•:".,=7j-, :-41._'-' , • ''- ' . -4 ...i - ' " .. •• ,c, —� i r rr .. � . 1 :Y it LC • - r v c a • IP 0 lit o _ ' II gg r 1 I S 7 ' _1,- L I 1 'C' \ r II t J " 1 0 �� rte_ ,,.11 ''',:, e:—17:: : • o ._ '( ___ "I-7_""___ _ 7.. L1 1 77, I" I e F7 ID ti i. � `=� Y 1 1 / ` ` � -- - 1(� - �t 4 C _ + a r, .. r ..._., o qk . '�� Ii-• - 7,7 0 'l;I d 1 A c\ i 1 S Ig• :. >-. _..c'r '1+''. te�aa.. 1 '1 0 $ ,1 111 O . IlO L.. L. h::i1� � r../ i 7 < Y a • S dZ"��/ "� r i 0 SS f R , ' • t� 1 � � �c il}l 34, vr" 01 o S f cd ` n i * . j±1 f '_ . -{ .�- r-7 • A � .; � P I r t s - U • 1..r. • r ii it C• •o L. E O. T "-'. _ .,.. -m _ . • tCTPTiT ; \ I T {."f T iT. q-(=it F.� Y�f �� *Y r.7- l . --,.."1 . ' � ."K i L-� 1 � 1r J r"T C a 34"-�,.- f 4 . -Y.. I Q1-` -. ( ok; J I. 'w' �`_: 'ft.?* ✓ ? 1, rf"g';x +, . 4! "fix. 4 } ,i ;yfi � 1g4 ]a El y t u. 41) 0-1 " � � - '"�"'sai✓ ''Mx.'S i1 `m"' ' N • PI t ;�$ oe ' i}N}�,t � fpe"*S'° s.. 4@ - � �; �# H I i4 Js f$= gx � V 7'7A � Y� IY�Y ,22',4:::.c..:,. . ....L2',.:„ -_ .� �$- a .;I; 1 r — to —.._-. — • VI • a Na S •O N C likl %9 n • ,i' Y .7' 3 1 a ► ( ] . I 1 t'-'\... 1 `- V I. -- t 1 14y CJ . 1 „ ,.. ,, , . ..,` r _� t 1 j 1 •-1.._,:,....4 t _ . , • ...• �, xls, t ; __.„. ..... j• , , .. • -� . t t 1- - . H t t'A / '- 1 ) .. '!f_ • ► ^mac i r;-t Nt-{ _-{„.'i s t 1. 1 '1 1( ley S_ „�—t ��t -S r:�j� • o ►. -, i --J : t 4 1 • � 1 i_ 1 ► I ! • T�� r� h ue.° ""�'a' A ! Z S li• _ '..-:-.4)•:: '.- 46: • iiri - - fir, +� —aff�-1PI� - ,, ^'.�. / "% • I . uc:;3► r � #'i :4 NQ _.:��'•>�` i� ms 's e 111 a —r .- �+ }� `� �! of —'1 Z �• 1 �' ,� 't0 1 .... 1 ' •k.+ k /id —a� • ('�4ti.v v. .P- i1, - iL �,, ^ (±: J% it(i ' �L°i�•_ �. `Fr�I'm r n ".r� y + _/ �ip.�` �,j3 -i rlb >° / .', •o )�y4 • tC • ...,,,--,-.., ,...--,. ,-„t„.,,.. ,..,...... frt.tjt • • v n v p. : / x t''. .•4,.'::.-' is ..:� i S .t a i' ` r - ��. O IF1 ? • i - .r wea Pik ri O • cr . c�i 4 ,-, C O ,Ai L �.. r c M I 1 _ j �...r t-r -t jd c 1 •• 1 I { • N a t •, I 1 s Y of L O I. $ 1 i Si a. ( -1-i—.4).," L l* t 1 • . • il � 1 4 1 rte. ,t...--;\-,...1 I I r• 1 r 1 1 . g I , 4= i ,{ + t — 1 + ti i r ice ; � — j 1 .1-.*--1-,....,. i-,:.j c l 1 �-x i ^ ` "t ,I.I - ,-, J vf$ V S t ___ 1 7 - 6 t 8H ' 1 1 • 1-;,. .. Y ...�1'L- �-� ;P� �— ` .l. �-�� ^ r r0 ' C1\ . V.. ,.. Itl E ip 9 ),I •"`' �, `�� 333 ,4_, fil - ��Sli. 11 1 4 4 d) i1 .z of O f9 ' s 1! rar. '7A. C "115` £ ; o N ...� Y Lk t aSI • ,,'7- - (+i*- �.i f s\/M1Mfr/ �,• � r ^! F• � ; n k ..��:w''��1f"` � r -.:i • . if1 1 • • • bra • �cy.,.� Y k,�, - .:, .' ,( S: :,:" --.: -° '� LJ '� ` �f11� t cc Q 0 ' 1 jID • 0 f —‘.,;', •=',',,• • • �,. `• .k:�.t`Y art. }r. t' .:•`��y.� /_w (� �: l z e}1�r 13.� =r - 1 .. CJ . lVry,.LS. n >c t:"�``'t.1i�.y », sin y '.1.1 { C "'h"--111. 41.-•?4','—: ;' � g g. o • N 1 • 1 N O lir'_ ` N No ...--j) CV • v i ___...-........H_ter �,I • ryj- T--- - Jc • t. ,,.,,.v 1 { i f I 1 •✓ ,J • 1` r 1 1 t I r` - - --- -{ t I I 1•t I _ ! f+ _ • 3 x :.t o lY r- -----t .' - . • 7• \.1 t.,• I ., ',! .i I ID I ~ • x' �,i 1 y I i ff r • ,- I I - , I I sus --� \ • a 1 , 1 I�- _ -F o s •s I = \` d t ; • . • .- rte c -�� %. ✓ �f r~�' Y,y�c � -- ' .<'• E j` ,. -C • • r /' -� �+J % gam `� it bi • j .... 1 11 8 , _ :, �., ,.!!� .• •..- • ? -1 „......., . .,„ -) ilk J • ••.. - n f � • �. .I/,+. .r J: a ��i�ae'�nt\ .A fll�lrar :1 r /- 7w: .,,• ,_ -J4 O• eu ► � ( ate i' • . k i a1<�"'•!I � o/- 16 Y om... .•�Q '.=+ . f . I.:-.` l { :[ ' '" v�1 N • _ ;�Is�.rte , J +� ' r• .) • I I fJ• C r I S 4 _- t ti Li.3: © ?L n • r\. 0 C3 st3 RS , r•.• i.• r' - r � .�� art ►:, • 1 • ✓ f q[ 1 (� II 0 I= :a? fit;• y c fe 1• • • .4•7:4•'(..tIt ! i. �1 0 • •r .. - • - ......„. rf r1.9."-_-.J .--I 0 • • M L 0-1 1-.. N C see CN m • ,, f-: per_ —r-- _ h4I. _.� ——f--- �}^ m • r t E .., 7 1 � �`i� f_� 1 a 1 1 - 1 1 I. fl 3 ,' , i i !n i { j�7t •• � � 1 n i_ i I• � ! E r- 1 , ,A*R vr••, �', 2 , y I .} r ' I �--1 I l S � Si F, d�rri/ 1 n` a Y 0 I ' '' ' , s ,,,�1�r•VC"Y�—'� �� _. ,/ a i �s it a ! < l g b • 4 + i a ¢ a O .� y9, 2•r I a ' 'b• ' 3• 2� '' t t C-,w• ,ea • y ^^^{{{ � �� J^,y,, .,;�.. _r a it --- ` } ~}q yy% I � R r • • 0 1 a e t;\ •� ��' _s_ A -, "�a g(1 i cZd ,f � th ��c 'I�-% �4.'��Y") Q (. xr t t .a _ Alf' IliCr 9 ��\ �_ r� t� '.1 L '' cC II I ,e-'--7, ! 1 n I 1 i. U j • ao �� i . Y� 1. ,�F ,I 1 ^I' _,�,. I 7'. _ O • Y <• w • • • • • • • • • • APPENDIX C-2 • • SOIL REPORTS • • • • • • • • • w • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • �• • • • • wr Ill USDA United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource Department of Cooperative Soil Survey, Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for States Department of ip S . 4 Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State Weld County , III Natural agencies including the Resources Agricultural Experiment Co I o ra d o Northern Conservation Stations, and local Service participants Part • Offsite Basin Soil Data III 0 0 III 0 III III • • 7 It _ lill 1 : I n I • a . fl I II ill I It I il II II 1. II N 1 II a III wI II II (E..4 �I I a, 22 II P January 25, 2012 U ▪ • Preface p Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, . community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,protect,or enhance . the environment. . Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.The information . is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses.The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. • Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning,onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/)and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center(http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app? agency=nrcs)or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://soils.usda.gov/contact/ state_offices/). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or . underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation . Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. . Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Soil Data Mart Web site or the NRCS Web Soil Survey. The Soil Data Mart is the data storage site for the official soil survey information. . The U.S. Department of Agriculture(USDA)prohibits discrimination in all its programs . and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual . • orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal,or because all or a part of an ID individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means 2 • • • • for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.)should • contact USDA's TARGET Center at(202)720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 • Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 • (voice)or(202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. • • • • • • • • ✓ S • S O i • p p p p p p p I I I I I I I p i • p p 3 p S • • • • • • • • • Contents • . Preface 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made 5 ill Soil Map 7 . Soil Map 8 Legend 9 ID Map Unit Legend 10 . Map Unit Descriptions 10 Weld County, Colorado, Northern Part 12 5 36—Manzanola clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 12 . 44—Olney fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes 13 45—Olney fine sandy loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes 14 ID 54—Platner loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 15 . 55—Renohill fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes 16 56—Renohill fine sandy loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes 17 57—Renohill-Shingle complex, 3 to 9 percent slopes 18 5 • 65—Terry sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes 20 Soil Information for All Uses 22 Soil Properties and Qualities 22 5 Soil Qualities and Features 22 Hydrologic Soil Group 22 Ill References 27 • 5 4 OP lb How Soil Surveys Are Made • • Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas . in a specific area.They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of . the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the . surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently,soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas . (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically • • consist of parts of one or more MLRA. . The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of . landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform,a soil scientist develops a concept,or model,of how they were formed.Thus, . during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their . characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. . Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock . fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to . identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil . characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic • classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of II soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the S 5 . Custom Soil Resource Report 0 • individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that . they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the . objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have . similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable . proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of . the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and . landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. . The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of . mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil- landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific . locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. ▪ • Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of . characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are . modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. . Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and • identified each as a specific map unit.Aerial photographs show trees,buildings,fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. . 6 S • • Soil Map S The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil . map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. • • 7 • Custom Soil Resource Report Ill Soil Map O o . N v N b M M °Ill o v O O o ill 539100 539400 539700 540000 540300 540600 540900 541200 •° 37' 8" 40° 37' 8" • I 0 II0 o m 0 rn Ill 0 0 . o a0i Ill v ID o 0 II 0 U) to un . i rn v III . 0 0 u> U, in U) . O A v Q . O a 0 O N N Ili a) O) Q V Q IP �r . • O O O 0) a> . Q a) Q v Q IIII O . 4 O O . O O Q v 0) co `t �f1� i Q ID S 8 ID en N F.) Q rn rn in- v Q v Ill Ill IIIo 0 0 0 __ Ill 0 0 0 0 r) n a> rn . v Q 1 . o 0 o 40° 35 25" rn rn 40° 35' 25" III v 539100 539400 539 00 540000 540300 540600 540900 541200 c S . N II Map Scale: 1:15,100 if printed on A size (8.5"x 11") sheet N M "'• N Meters °v II0 0 100 200 400 600 0 n Feet ID /� 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 I ID S . o n O o) o m u) a c E Co m t N_ 9 > ta c ha 9 N N Co U p� CoN 0 m C_ . • m Z m y a ,O 0 o . N 9 U N U C C p c m E N Com a C N o U N 5 N a O o U U t NN .N n N O x E 0 m L. m 0 m t . - v o 2 i.m U m F., v m h y 2 z a o E m • Q L N Q .0 N y5j Z an O ("J a CO d a) a) O d a 7 -0 a v N N y 0 ¢ o N N N C rn a. II O a d o y 3 N E Sad 2 o O a t a E 2 Z C 'd d re t 2 0 2 U N N N a VI •IllF d E O. E 0 N N N d N 3 d O.t w • 4 .0 CoL Z �' N = > N O N o 2 C ^ co U) in 5 y- c,m o m E o a > a . r >` C .N. 6 T ma, in _ co O N O C al- (n a ¢ N N L la a s • .j N ` E 2_ O) ) j 0 O N ''t0 O 2 '9N- 'c a d Ooc o .` z ¢ Co tda, ' 0 N N N U �N O. N O co O -p. N N • Co .c 00 o 0 o Ea) 5a Co L O N E 2 F a E to 0 H .r- 00 0 Ho ._ ` o • 't O • a cC • U 6. • a • • a c Co • O °a ° Co r Nan m N m co N • J O ` N N d o 0 v U u) 0. 0 a m E A o cc ¢ • — N d ' C N ` y Co N E K 5z y a0 = o L_ _ Nm ca i c N 2 0 > 3 L_O c 0 m O . U :iii o cc a D 2 J • Q C a co N p w # c Z Z a a 3 • W J • a - ;, N • 4 Ti ra. N N E Z '0' 0 0 • N ^ 112 O o j J O O 6 EN N >i N O. N ¢ a W UJ d Co 6 p a O ° a > O O C - J N (7 ' N • 5 o m m J 3 y v Co m = a = `o O v >, 0 o o w ¢ C Q N t o 0 w > > `v m C c m a v c c ≥ = v o .o O TA v .a 5 o o ea O m N > Co m o Co m v ) o o. 3 • ¢ m .o m m U U (� E a m w w m in m m m i a C ° N 0 ® X • X .: 0 < 1 & O O > + . . Ill O .0. R III o • m .p N ¢ an • • • • • • • • I/ I . Custom Soil Resource Report • Map Unit Legend IP I Weld County,Colorado,Northern Part(CO617) I Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name I Acres in AOI I Percent of AOI . 36 Manzanola clay loam,0 to 3 percent slopes 32.9 8.1% . 44 Olney fine sandy loam,0 to 6 percent slopes 180.4 44.2% . 45 Olney fine sandy loam,6 to 9 percent slopes 0.7 0.2% . 54 Platner loam,0 to 3 percent slopes 41.4 10.1% 55 Renohill fine sandy loam,0 to 6 percent 13.1 3.2% . slopes . 56 Renohill fine sandy loam,6 to 9 percent 133.4 32.7% slopes . _... _. 57 Renohill-Shingle complex,3 to 9 percent 1.9 0.5% . slopes • 65 Terry sandy loam,3 to 9 percent slopes 4.3 1.1% . Totals for Area of Interest 408.1 100.0% • • Map Unit Descriptions • • The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils • or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. • A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more • major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named • according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils.On the landscape, • however,the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability • of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic • class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic • classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes • other than those of the major soils. le Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the • map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called • noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different . management.These are called contrasting,or dissimilar,components.They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified . by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the • contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with • some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been . observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially • • 10 U . Custom Soil Resource Report . . where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations . to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. . The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic . classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that . have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If . intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to . define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. . Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for . differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. O Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such . differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly • indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 . to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. . Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. 5 A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate ▪ • pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.The . pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. • An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or • miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or . anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha- . Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. . An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. ▪• O 11 . Custom Soil Resource Report • ip Weld County, Colorado, Northern Part 36—Manzanola clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes • Map Unit Setting . Elevation:4,400 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches • Mean annual air temperature:46 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 140 to 180 days • Map Unit Composition Manzanola and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent . • Description of Manzanola • Setting Landform: Stream terraces, swales, plains Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Linear • Parent material: Calcareous clayey alluvium Properties and qualities • Slope: 0 to 3 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained • • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to • moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent • Gypsum, maximum content: 3 percent • Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 15.0 • Available water capacity: High (about 9.6 inches) • Interpretive groups • Land capability(nonirrigated):4e • Ecological site: Clayey Plains (R067BY042CO) • Typical profile 0 to 3 inches: Clay loam • 3 to 25 inches: Clay • 25 to 48 inches: Clay 48 to 60 inches:Clay loam • Minor Components • Aver Percent of map unit: 15 percent • •• • • 12 S Custom Soil Resource Report • • • • • 44—Olney fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes • Map Unit Setting • Elevation: 3,500 to 5,800 feet . Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature:46 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 125 to 175 days • Map Unit Composition Olney and similar soils: 85 percent . Minor components: 15 percent Description of Olney • Setting . Landform: Plains Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Linear . Parent material: Calcareous loamy alluvium • Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 6 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches . Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high • (0.57 to 2.00 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None . Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) • Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.1 inches) • Interpretive groups • Land capability(nonirrigated):4c . Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) Typical profile • 0 to 6 inches: Fine sandy loam • 6 to 18 inches: Sandy clay loam 18 to 60 inches: Sandy loam • 60 to 64 inches: Sandy loam • . Minor Components . Stoneham Percent of map unit:9 percent • Ascalon Percent of map unit:6 percent . 13 Custom Soil Resource Report ▪ • • • • 45—Olney fine sandy loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes • Map Unit Setting Elevation: 3,500 to 5,800 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature:46 to 54 degrees F • Frost-free period: 125 to 175 days Map Unit Composition • Olney and similar soils: 85 percent • Minor components: 15 percent • Description of Olney • Setting • Landform: Plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear • Parent material: Calcareous loamy alluvium •• Properties and qualities Slope:6 to 9 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches • Drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high • (0.57 to 2.00 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None • Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) • Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.1 inches) • Interpretive groups . Land capability(nonirrigated): 6e • Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) Typical profile • 0 to 6 inches: Fine sandy loam • 6 to 18 inches: Sandy clay loam 18 to 60 inches: Sandy loam 60 to 64 inches: Sandy loam • • Minor Components • Stoneham Percent of map unit: 5 percent • • Vona • Percent of map unit: 5 percent • 14 S . Custom Soil Resource Report • Ascalon . Percent of map unit: 5 percent 54—Platner loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes • Map Unit Setting . Elevation:4,500 to 5,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 17 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature:46 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 140 to 165 days Map Unit Composition . Platner and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent • Description of Platner • Setting Landform: Stream terraces, plains Down-slope shape: Linear . • Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material:Calcareous loamy alluvium Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to . moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None . Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) . Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.9 inches) . Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated):2e Land capability(nonirrigated): 3e • Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) . Typical profile 0 to 4 inches: Loam 4 to 24 inches: Clay • 24 to 60 inches: Sandy loam Minor Components • Ascalon Percent of map unit: 8 percent . 15 C Custom Soil Resource Report • • • Manzanola . Percent of map unit:6 percent • Nunn . Percent of map unit:6 percent • • • 55—Renohill fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes . Map Unit Setting Elevation: 3,600 to 6,200 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 16 inches . Mean annual air temperature:46 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 160 days • . Map Unit Composition Renohill and similar soils: 85 percent • Minor components: 15 percent Description of Renohill Setting • Landform: Plains • Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear • Parent material: Calcareous, clayey loamy residuum weathered from shale Properties and qualities . Slope: 0 to 6 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock • Drainage class:Well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) • Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None • Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent • Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) . Available water capacity: Low(about 5.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability(non irrigated): 4e • Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) . Typical profile 0 to 5 inches: Fine sandy loam • 5 to 18 inches: Clay . 18 to 32 inches: Clay loam . 32 to 36 inches: Unweathered bedrock • • • • • 16 U . Custom Soil Resource Report ▪ • Minor Components Shingle Percent of map unit: 5 percent Midway . Percent of map unit:4 percent . Ulm . Percent of map unit: 3 percent Other soils Percent of map unit: 3 percent 56—Renohill fine sandy loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting Elevation:3,600 to 6,200 feet . Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature:46 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 160 days Map Unit Composition • Renohill and similar soils:85 percent . Minor components: 15 percent Description of Renohill Setting . Landform: Plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Calcareous, clayey loamy residuum weathered from shale . Properties and qualities Slope:6 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature:20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock . Drainage class:Well drained . Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) . Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None . Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: Low (about 5.0 inches) Interpretive groups . Land capability(nonirrigated): 6e • Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) • 17 5 . Custom Soil Resource Report • • • Typical profile . 0 to 4 inches: Fine sandy loam 4 to 17 inches: Clay • 17 to 29 inches: Clay loam • 29 to 33 inches: Unweathered bedrock Minor Components Platner . Percent of map unit: 5 percent Midway . Percent of map unit: 5 percent . Other soils Percent of map unit: 3 percent • Ulm • Percent of map unit: 2 percent • • • • • 57—Renohill-Shingle complex, 3 to 9 percent slopes • • Map Unit Setting . Elevation: 3,600 to 6,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 16 inches • Mean annual air temperature:46 to 48 degrees F • Frost-free period: 100 to 160 days Map Unit Composition . Renohill and similar soils:50 percent Shingle and similar soils: 35 percent • Minor components: 15 percent ID Description of Renohill Setting Landform: Breaks, ridges, plains . Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear • Parent material: Calcareous, clayey loamy residuum weathered from shale Properties and qualities . Slope: 3 to 9 percent . Depth to restrictive feature:20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock Drainage class:Well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to . moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None . • Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent • • . 18 OP • • Custom Soil Resource Report • • • Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) • Available water capacity: Low (about 5.0 inches) Interpretive groups • Land capability(nonirrigated):4e • Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO) • Typical profile 0 to 4 inches: Fine sandy loam • 4 to 13 inches:Clay • 13 to 29 inches: Clay loam • 29 to 33 inches: Unweathered bedrock • Description of Shingle • Setting • Landform: Breaks, plains, ridges Down-slope shape: Linear • Across-slope shape: Linear • Parent material: Calcareous loamy residuum weathered from shale • Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 9 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to paralithic bedrock . Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) . Depth to water table: More than 80 inches • Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None . Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) • Available water capacity:Very low (about 2.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6s Land capability(nonirrigated): 6s • Ecological site: Shaly Plains (R067BY045CO) Typical profile • 0 to 4 inches:Clay loam 4 to 11 inches: Clay loam 11 to 15 inches: Unweathered bedrock Minor Components Midway 1 Percent of map unit:8 percent Tassel . Percent of map unit: 7 percent ▪ • . 19 U . Custom Soil Resource Report . 65—Terry sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting . Elevation:4,000 to 6,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature:46 to 48 degrees F . Frost-free period: 120 to 180 days Map Unit Composition . Terry and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent . Description of Terry . Setting Landform: Plains Down-slope shape: Linear . Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Calcareous sandy residuum weathered from sandstone . • Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock . Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to high (0.06 to 2.00 in/hr) . Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None . Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.4 inches) Interpretive groups . Land capability(nonirrigated): 6e Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) Typical profile 0 to 5 inches: Sandy loam . 5 to 17 inches: Fine sandy loam, sandy loam 17 to 32 inches: Fine sandy loam, sandy loam, gravelly sandy loam 32 to 36 inches:Weathered bedrock . Minor Components Tassel Percent of map unit: 5 percent ▪ • Olney Percent of map unit:4 percent 20 IP • . Custom Soil Resource Report • • • Renohill • Percent of map unit:3 percent Vona . Percent of map unit: 3 percent • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • Ill ill • ••• • • 21 V I Soil Information for All Uses I I Soil Properties and Qualities I . The Soil Properties and Qualities section includes various soil properties and qualities . displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in the selected area of interest.A single value or rating for each map unit is generated by aggregating . the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This aggregation process is defined for each property or quality. Soil Qualities and Features . • Soil qualities are behavior and performance attributes that are not directly measured,but are inferred from observations of dynamic conditions and from soil properties. Example soil qualities include natural drainage, and frost action. Soil features are attributes that are not directly part of the soil. Example soil features include slope and depth to restrictive layer.These features can greatly impact the use and management . of the soil. Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long- p duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (ND, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet.These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that . have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a p moderate rate of water transmission. . 22 I • Custom Soil Resource Report . Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils . of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water • transmission. • Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, . soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the . surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. . If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (ND, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for • drained areas and the second is for undrained areas.Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. • • • • • • • • • • • •SI • • • 23 Custom Soil Resource Report . Map—Hydrologic Soil Groupo = N Q . el N 0 co ° IIQ O r Ill iii. 539400 539700 540000 540300 540600 540900 541200 •° 37' 8" 40° 37' 8" • I O a) rco v II 1 II O o a Z . v,Ir a . 0 co 0 O o N Q) ol . v yr rr Q P • • Oo O 0 in in vr Tr • 10 • 0 o O N N WI tr) • O O O C Ill . O O • ao o Ill a) Of O a v v • ,,, • o 44 O • 5� Tr a' Tr , v ✓ y = a • I '�4ti • o �, I o . o O r) no, I M °� c a • ICI o O • NI o 'I' o yr • - jAah 1' } v � I �'. � • ,l 6 I _ - 0 1 F o ael el ii tr 1 ii • o O 40° 35' 25' rn 40° 35' 25" • v 539100 539400 539700 540000 540300 540600 540900 541200 v Ili :. N • Map Scale: 1:15,100 if printed on A size (8.5"x 11") sheet N O `" N Meters • 0en o 0 100 200 400 600 0 n Feet Ill /� 0 500 1 ,000 2,000 3,000 • • ■ ■ ID @ ■ 0 ■ } a 45 : ■ ° & \ ■ 6 : / (f - I ` ! § ; r Ill / CO \ zII { ) } \ /§ } \\ \ § \ \ ■ 4 N — co - _• ± ! � ill r‘ o co ` ` • \ /\\0 ■ \ - 0 f C ° « E ! E { ) 112 PH�PH ®vo \ ) { ! [ ■ 4 \ En V 0 = Z a) \ \ en \ \j \ ■ { { it }i / { ! \ } ° - ■ - = ,T2>' | ! _ \o [{ /\ \ 0 coID } co o co j \ \ }- \ \ } / { (\ ■ Ill } ■ CD ■ ■ fili ■ A ■ Eo ID \ ■ « - _ _ to ■ Z 22 - 0 o — ■ oLU ! — 0 i ■ \ \ \ f < $ = 2 , 8 : \ ) ) � \ ! ! \ \ } \ v. ! DENUDED \ . I II ` ■ < ; ! ! i— 2 Z k ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ . ID ■ ■ ■ ■ • • • Custom Soil Resource Report • • • Table—Hydrologic Soil Group • Hydrologic Soil Group—Summary by Map Unit—Weld County,Colorado,Northern Part(CO617) • Map unit symbol I Map unit name Rating I Acres In AOI Percent of AOI • 36 Manzanola clay loam,0 to 3 percent C 32.9 8.1% • slopes . 44 Olnpeey fine sand cent slopes loam,0 to 6 B 180.4 44.2% • 45 Olney fine sandy loam,6 to 9 B 0.7 0.2% • percent slopes . 54 Plainer loam,0 to 3 percent slopes C 41.4 10.1% 55 Renohill fine sandy loam,0 to 6 C 13.1 3.2% • percent slopes • 56 Renohill fine sandy loam,6 to 9 C 133.4 32.7% percent slopes • 57 Renohill-Shingle complex,3 to 9 C 1.9 0.5% . _ percent slopes • 65 Terry sandy loam,3 to 9 percent C 4.3 1.1% slopes • Totals for Area of Interest 408.1 100.0% • • • Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group • • Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition • Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified • Tie-break Rule: Higher • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 26 • • • References • • American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO).2004. • Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. • American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of • soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of • wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. • Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. • Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. • Hurt,G.W.,and L.M.Vasilas,editors.Version 6.0,2006. Field indicators of hydric soils • in the United States. ▪ • National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. • Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://soils.usda.gov/ • Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy:A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://soils.usda.gov/ Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to soil taxonomy. 10th edition. U.S. Department of . Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://soils.usda.gov/ • Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of . Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical . Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://soils.usda.gov/ United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.glti.nrcs.usda.gov/ . United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://soils.usda.gov/ . United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. • 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. . http://soils.usda.gov/ O 27 . Custom Soil Resource Report • • United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. •• ••• • 28 • • • • • • • • • APPENDIX C-3 • HISTORIC AND OFF-SITE RUNOFF CALCULATIONS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• w • • • a 0 O 0 . ,. g 'C a o . 40_ _ 1 } O m } n . e . c} m 2. . 12 " 1>." }a zNo- • F5 Gm • FE5 � V. • FE . } m • } } • o AlP o a -. ..>. ,,h } H E C } Ca x? co a C U d ° . t} co . „ E „ } c m c „ fi c • e m •noo . . 9LItzE a z z`o` • d ,V. z • • . C s o c4 ace c c: Z. O I m c c 66o o o FS 5 d _ ry cc c $ L 6. • e r E. e N E5 • v mN and ` U mmc.. m" . e e -r * o ` a m a- • 2 m' L~ - • • 0 II II - 0 mo 0. 0 • m � P LL • xg Ys Of • — E • `0 0 0 N Q 2 O Q q • E a E r „ n o n m • W a. 81 ,18 • • d „ _ ,0 W d t O O al D3 a ' c m j 'a' m m • _ 0 0 t a n o s _ E i E 3 0cc w mal a P.'n `o m . ...a. 3 oma a E .n — v m c • a m a Si . E a • o m x a 3 c •`n � Nl c • O 3E w — • j m o al NC' . W n o 0 V WI K I, a . 3 V O O J • e U • a m • q . c a` E • .Q V N W • D L E E • cu V • EE. aco co • _5 8 o x x . o • I 0 0 • • C E E o i • m E • E 0 O O CO V i a▪ � tfl . 0 . OFF Es�e £c mn c D}` . =c r . =ry • PI p E O F II t O . • °� V> 3p ..' _ . ;L• z▪ V - = e zu a li ii . cA E S S E E4 = e` c 0 mx 5 s = = =__ Lcc E Er4R2IrI_0 a •om ii 3 • • <-;"(E .d. 0 — 0 1 I • • • •• • • • • • APPENDIX C-4 • • • DEVELOPED RUNOFF CALCULATIONS • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 0 ! ■ @ , ■ 22 )Ct} \\ ■ 1<! ----7 \ / 6,■ ■ /- ` • / - - e j ! 4c ■ g#;):: • ; {: : • Pit e , .5- .e _ ■ § _ ■ - e 0 - " e / � : >: ® \\ ) ■ $ : : : e ) ■ f , , _■ \} , e e : °F 200 ` : O ■ 1Ld e 2. 1 3(.2co _ -- - ri e / cc. ` . @ u : ■ _ _ , __ _ ( • . @ ; _ - e ) $2 2 : 6. e ( ` - ; ! !jt ol • I <to {■ . } e e @ 0 0 j APPENDIX D - HYDRAULIC COMPUTATIONS • III APPENDIX D-1 CULVERT SIZING • APPENDIX D-2 DITCH SIZING • APPENDIX D-3 DETENTION POND AREA/VOLUME CAPACITY • AND OUTLET SIZING • III • • • • • �0 • • • • • • • • • APPENDIX D- 1 • • CULVERT SIZING • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• w • • • • Il QENaRL PX&IM $rz,,v& Culvert Analysis Report ▪ • Culvert-1,2,3 . Culvert Summary . Computed Headwater Elevt 4,850.44 ft Discharge 35.60 cfs lvo,emi Inlet Control HW Elev. 4,850.44 ft Tailwater Elevation 2.30 ft f--- C/G>OivBL Z . Outlet Control HW Elev. 4,850.44 ft Control Type Outlet Control NU/PnI*- pertIli . Headwater Depth/Height 1.22 . Grades • Upstream Invert 4,848.00 ft Downstream Invert 4,846.00 ft Length 40.00 ft Constructed Slope 0.005000 ft/ft • • Hydraulic Profile • Profile M2 Depth,Downstream 1.52 ft • Slope Type Mild Normal Depth N/A ft Flow Regime Subcritical Critical Depth 1.52 ft • Velocity Downstream 6.95 ft/s Critical Slope 0.007220 ft/ft • • Section • Section Shape Circular Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Section Material Co rete Span 2.00 ft • Section Size 24 inch Rise 2.00 ft • Number Sections 2 • U DAL 2q"RcP • Outlet Control Properties • Outlet Control HW Elev. 4,850.44 ft Upstream Velocity Head 0.60 ft Ke 0.20 Entrance Loss 0.12 ft •• Inlet Control Properties • Inlet Control HW Elev. 4,850.44 ft Flow Control Submerged • Inlet Type Beveled ring,33.7°bevels Area Full 6.3 fi' K 0.00180 HDS 5 Chart 3 . M 2.50000 HDS 5 Scale B • O 0.02430 Equation Form 1 Y 0.83000 • • • • • • • • • Si• • 5 Project Engineer:steve.sciscione p:l..lculverts and ditchesklual culverts.cvm EAS-IMRUSA CulvertMaster v3.3[03.03.00.041 • 02/17/12 10:47:03 AMC Bentley Systems,Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown,CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 • 6eg,4- P$rgM Performance Curves Report ID • Culvert-1,2,3 Range Data: Minimum Maximum Increment Discharge 0.00 36.50 36.50 cfs . Performance Curves 4850.5 —a— HW Elev. 4850.0 0 j 4849.5 a) TO • o 4849.0 2 • • 4848.5 • • 4848.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 • Discharge • (cfs) • • • • • • • S • Project Engineer:steve.sciscione • p:\..Aculverts and ditches\dual cuNerts.cvm EAS-IMR-USA CulvertMaster v3.3[03.03.00.043 02/17/12 10:47:47 AM®Bentley Systems,Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown,CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 S S • S S S • • Worksheet for Outlet Pipe • • • Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Discharge • E,,�� i-, ` t-» tru-..i. .^ F - 1. j Z. E..'! - .T„lT {� y i f•• Roughness Coefficient 0.013 Channel Slope 0.00500 ft/ft • Normal Depth 1.09 ft E- (,pN77eo L4.CD BY OP/r/Ce PI-A7 ' • Diameter 1.50 ft S Discharge 6.55 ft'/s - 5 H/51DR 1 C M TV- • Flow Area 1.38 ft2 • Wetted Perimeter 3.07 ft Hydraulic Radius 0.45 ft • Top Width 1.33 ft • Critical Depth 0.99 ft • Percent Full 72.9 % Critical Slope 0.00651 ft/ft . . Velocity 4.74 ft/s • Velocity Head 0.35 ft • Specific Energy 1.44 ft Froude Number 0.82 • Maximum Discharge 7.99 IWs • Discharge Full 7.43 fN/s • Slope Full 0.00389 ft/ft • Flow Type SubCritical �, .,,,, !f(* y i. ..y .. -T ,,''' z„t e °.t . E c w :c 'ir.'�� ->;a III • Downstream Depth 0.00 ft Length 0.00 ft • Number Of Steps 0 • �. is iq t —,-.,?---41t 's fi .G „.z.' _ii,.)...- _, ?r'3 ,. tvsT`, ti.iII'';'H i?�i-.`. _ _... n...r�,.w,.. n,:ta�.'-_.` ` �,�'-,t,. ;s�_dK,_,�.. • Upstream Depth 0.00 ft • Profile Description • Profile Headloss 0.00 ft • Average End Depth Over Rise 0.00 0/0 • Normal Depth Over Rise 72.93 % Downstream Velocity Infinity ft/s • .__...—_—__-__-._...—__..___._..----____ ____—_ • • Bentley Systems,Inc. Haestad Methods Soldidie$iiioterMaster V8i(SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.031 • 21171201210:49:32 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown,CT 08795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 • • • S •• Worksheet for Outlet Pipe • . ' �{ r..: o Y '.. k�.`. �..`Yam. ,..�..., •;:., . .r�'w"�`'P. x. ... %x , ,. " 'r • Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Normal Depth 1.09 ft • Critical Depth 0.99 ft • Channel Slope 0.00500 ft/ft • Critical Slope 0.00651 ft/ft • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Bentley Systems,Inc. Haestad Methods SoBtif eStEi1wMaster V81(SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.031 • 2/17/2012 10:49:32 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown,CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 • • • • • • APPENDIX D-2 DITCH SIZING S S S S ▪ • S ID S S S S S S w S S • II •• • . Worksheet for North Channel 1 - Triangular • C❑ • Friction Method Manning Formula IISolve For Discharge • c ~ k.. •.... • Roughness Coefficient 0.030 Channel Slope 0.00100 ft/ft• Normal Depth 2.30 ft 4" 0.I FiC ',80/W—P Ill Left Side Slope 4.00 ft/ft(H:V) . Right Side Slope 4.00 ft/ft(H:V)Ill Discharge 35.61 fN/s . Flow Area 21.14 ft2 . Wetted Perimeter 18.96 ft Hydraulic Radius 1.12 ft Top Width 18.39 ft . Critical Depth 1.38 ft . Critical Slope 0.01547 ft/ft • Velocity 1.68 ft/s III Velocity Head 0.04 ft 5 Specific Energy 2.34 ft . Froude Number 0.28 Flow Type Subcritical y ..Jri?��..,.R',f'W_. �'r.,;_r�'174:g:s. _r F. ..C MY..:,.,v ..'`yi, :4-rd110 tr . Downstream Depth 0.00 ft Length 0.00 ft III Number Of Steps 0 illVa N ._ '{. 3� :.a 74 :�, ,: if +.}N — i a °i Yk. ri TH �r`L.11Fi Ill Upstream Depth 0.00 ft IIIProfile Description II Profile Headloss 0.00 ft . Downstream Velocity Infinity Ws Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s II Normal Depth 2.30 ft III Critical Depth 1.38 ft . Channel Slope 0.00100 ft/ft IIICritical Slope 0.01547 ft/ft ID III . Bentley Systems,Inc. Haestad Methods So didte¢fiderMaster V8i(SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 2/17/2012 10:48:31 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown,CT 06795 liSA +1-2D3.755-1665 Page 1 of 1 is is is •op • Worksheet for North Channel 2 - Triangular • R4:11141-1x _ ' �� Ott a . Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Discharge • x' 7'+N`o ma k`✓_ A ?i�j� '7 T ,i-,}ir A i t ) P--,-E-_, "!', t��YGf�'rx', af)t21 II Jk!.14AWS1,.• Roughness Coefficient 0.030 Channel Slope 0.00100 ft/ft Ill Normal Depth 3.22 ft -f 0,5- tRF&-BO D . Left Side Slope 4.00 ft/ft(H:V) e Right Side Slope 4.00 ft/ft(H:V) . ,�' • rx y�y, fig -{ aJz"S.t6n 'F� r +,t F+y,�;:, ;''F _. _ _ _.. s,ii a •iailM:c�` ' �d'. .�c_F rL7�+�'6,��', " jnl 1•q 1 . J t, pf,.��,r.L ..C . Discharge 87.45 ft'/s . Flow Area 41.47 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 26.55 ft ID Hydraulic Radius 1.56 ft . Top Width 25.76 ft Critical Depth 1.97 ft . Critical Slope 0.01372 ft/R 0 Velocity 2.11 fUs 5 Velocity Head 0.07 ft . Specific Energy 3.29 ft Froude Number 0.29 . Flow Type Subcritical • G'fF Input Data r zl 4 K K -r * ID Downstream Depth 0 00 ft Length 0.00 ft . Number Of Steps 0 :r. GVFU}�t tt ata r :.r t t., lot gam++ .: i al O.T �� .�:_. �.��,��_;�'`:-.'- r j�s,�, ..> . ,�,_ ...#.. � .>v . __�t ��ia�`'� u,� "; 4 µ • Upstream Depth 0.00 ft . Profile Description ID Profile Ileadloss 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity Infinity ft/s. Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s 5 Normal Depth 3.22 ft ID Critical Depth 1.97 ft . Channel Slope 0.00100 ft/ft Critical Slope 0.01372 ft/ft I • • Bentley Systems,Inc. Haestad Methods SolBlfotivMaster V8i(SELECTseries 1} [08.11.01.03] 5 2114/2012 2:02:32 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown,CT 06795 USA +1.203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 • • •• • Worksheet for East Channel - Triangular T�3 1" r• j '' . Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Discharge . ylikra . Roughness Coefficient 0.030 Channel Slope 0.00100 ft/ft • Normal Depth 2.93 ft ••1 O,S -WIC 6°A-12-D . Left Side Slope 4.00 ft/ft(H:V) . Right Side Slope 4.00 ft/ft(H:V) . Discharge 67.99 ft'/s . Flow Area 34.34 ft' Wetted Perimeter 24.16 ft • Hydraulic Radius 1.42 ft . Top Width 23.44 ft 5 Critical Depth 1.78 ft IllCritical Slope 0.01419 fUft 4„ Velocity 1.98 ft/s . Velocity Head 0.06 ft . Specific Energy 2.99 ft Froude Number 0.29 . Flow Type Subcritical . .YF.:lr1 ut Data, II Downstream Depth 0.00 ft II Length 0.00 fl 5 Number Of Steps 0 Illi'1 .:,,;,,,,,,.„„..,-,.„+,...,j, ryy" :. fyi�y t+.`$' y .a. .za. b _ _ "'.'1� �;��:rr µ,� Output Data =�f7 l } Ng-F �F.,q i;j 1.hjK yp �p�� ws 4n ri+ ,� :,kMi ....,..t . .,... 1k �.'•+.'. _-_:. ,`!`r.:§... .: .:_t°.1-.na, ":S S tS.rd^.it x..3-4 .� ,i „ t f.*. • Upstream Depth 0.00 ft . Profile Description II Profile Headloss 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity Infinity fUs Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s 5 Normal Depth 2.93 ft . Critical Depth 1.78 ft Ill Critical Slope 0.00100 ft/ft Critical Slope 0.01419 ft/ft II II . Bentley Systems,Inc, Haestad Methods SolBfiod*FittwMaster V8i ISELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 52114/2012 2:03:20 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown,CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 C S • APPENDIX D-3 DETENTION POND AREA/VOLUME CAPACITY AND OUTLET SIZING 0 0 0 O w S S 0 S 0 0 0 O 0 0 • or ID r DETENTION VOLUME BY THE MODIFIED FAA METHOD 5 (See USDCM Volume 2 Storage Chapter for description of method) . Project:Cummins Field-Noble Energy — . Basin D:Basin B(Developed) (For catchments less than 160 acres only.For larger catchments,use hydrograph routing method) 1007E:for catchments larger than 90 acres,CUHP hydrograph and routing are recommended) . Determination of MNOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method Determination of MAJOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method . Dealan Information Ilaput)i C oealon Information Itrt4uU; 0 dnre MDryln.Omen. I,= 550 percent °renege lememcuv,oss I,- 5.50 percent Catchment O, naoe Area A• 21.940 ace. Catdnm4 Damage Arm A• 21540---acme . Pr.dentopment MCS 5d Group Type= C ,A.B.C,n D Pndewlopmen 1R(.5 Sao GroupType= C A D,C,a 0 them Pebe for Detrrean Conine :i 10 years(2.5.f0,75.50.or 1110) Rehm Period for Detention Control T r[-__ 100 I ye an(2,5,10,25.50,or I DO) . Time orConte,erlbn or Nnearalte0 Tc=i 13 messes 7 m of Cencwrleeon or~althea Tc= 13 mm<n ,4608745ld'a Re'eee Rem q=1 020 adore Unit Rebate Rabe4= 0.50 chhcre One had PredpWen P. 1.85 1,.7,55 Ore-how Prerykaor. P,- 2.65 .15. . Design Ralnha l0F Formula f•C f P,fC,oTJ'C, Design R4a all'CIF Formula P,4G'TJ C, CankwnOne C,- 2950 CoefacientOne C,. 25.50 ----- CoalTM d Two C,= 10 Coefficient Two G= 10 . Caefidet Three C,= 0789 Ca!5W14 Than, C,- 0788_,.., Detern6nation of Averao0 Dutfow front She Basin IC010014tedl' 110 570Jnatlon of Average Outtlowirom the BaeIR ICakulalmdl- . Runoff Coe15c0n: c= 0211_-_- Runo6Cwf6d4H Co 0.52-- bdowPeak fan0tl Op 2108 cf, 4,4508 Peak Rua!! Own= 7257 ols 'e-. p �-J�p Q� . Ararmh esae Outflow Rob Op-0o0 A.20 °cis AowtlaPetl OV1 Pw Ride Opus 664`r'sot. 5YK NI S!t'hl / I/ Mod.FM kiln.50045.Vole 27522 eupk feet Mat FM Maid 761404 Ydurrm. 111 867 cubic 0001 Mod.FMMlrwr Storage Volume ';,:+:,,0.944 -,:;Sa0n11 Mod.FM Major Storage Volume.,.•.i:23775in7:`.4.$4m j'(Z Srt1/2A 6E . 5 s-Onto'Rules Oudan l'00000b Indeed ee Value Hera 17 5.S for 54.4.044) Rental Rarte Inflow . A4ntrrnt Avenge Ouetow Stomp. Ratan Radii Ir6ow Adj serer A 1,7705 Q/nvw Stomp Qaation In0endly Voluna Factor Ovdm., VOcP,e Votnne Oureon IB.0eity Value. Facto. 0UMow Werra Vo4me . mane echos 1T cubic feel 'm- ch cu Ncreel aerie he mr,5.. ie 11!00 cubic 1441 'e' ch 5167.hot ct,chM 105041 (a,lMul1 Rope) 55441941 (aubull ,)o,�1a1 foulpu0 75006 1/116104 10000 70,500 70070510 lovime1 is mein) , 11 ,--0.00 _ 0 010 I 000 0 0 0 0.69 0 0.00 010 0 0 _ -__—_ .t_S ss 5.35 10,237 .69 715 AV..1 __._.__.._5 047 _60 { 7,861 2e,eB7 10 1 4.Q 18,707 7.00 4 1.00 � /31 .-�2z63J 1 .....15.0_74; f0 7.10 40130167 1.00 636 100 r 6.36 3,824 {5,280 _- td -�-_-y71 20,511 0.04 4.14 __y._.3725 _•-76�7ee -•- 16 y-.-6.03 _ 81871 _--WM .f 8.71 5,558 56,313 Ill % - ]21 _._.._.__.043 I 345 I 4,304 19,3011 20__ 1 7.32 71,042 OW 5Ab T 6,310 •__6/,%1 23 loo______ _....--__SLIM: 0.77--_~330- 5.042 2f,17J •'�26 1 442 79,075 0.77 6.01 11 7.522 71,663 __.— _..__.,. -+-___.—te _.—._. - %_.—...�__ 2.38 28 t2 0.77 --_�- -- .__.. ..... —f ._..._ __L_-3.17......._1...._._5.700._- .._22512 117-1-----4.16 55,402 11.77 4.72 5,`194 .7-e _ --35 2.33 311,0% 0.69 ].OS 75436 23,741 % �� 00. 7 _._._O ._.,_., 4320 5400 51,707 10 2.15 31,055 Olt t 2.82 7,416 71,839 40 1 7.40 %,487 _0,67____ 1.36 •_ -___ F-_ 1- _ -,� - 50,468 85,011 . _43 199 032 016 284 ).._ 7475 _25336 15 825 %.611 DES 424 11.131 60,10 • -__.._50 t% 34.246 401t 275 5373 I 25.%5 SD r.,.3.02 125,306 063 - 4.14 121!3 60 u 173 x,367 012 272 1,481 26J% 55 r 214 708744 012 417 13515 93,330 . 69 1.86 38.117 041 y_745 t 0549 2678) 69 217 105835 081 100 1, 14307 964!6 ..--7-15307 ._. _----�. 65 _. ...136 3/,55'1 410 1••__744 ngag 65 2.53 112,664 080 3,04 15379 W438 -..70 • 1 11 30233 OA 2111 10.%8 27 287 70 2.41 115,727... 0.�......- 310 1 331 _..__-.._..4•. ,624 0.,_--_-_%.901 75 111 .. .35060 OM 231 1 11,621 27 26 75 Y- 238 157,713 459 3115 17,343 140.431 - --- 1 Oa 1 Js 39 17...__ 011 2.71 ��12,262 27535 so 219 1201% .--058 �S_fl�_ 76725 /01.757 85 126 40.539 036 2.54 12940 27000 85 ....210 172283 0.50 3.70 _ ..19307 102,976 Ill 00 171 4yR1 047 - 232 IJ,S% - 2734 80 202 124,341 0.57 370 29,269 101,052 93_ •-110 (1886 077 , xso 14757 .... 37811 05 ...... 160 126292 057 E 573 71271__ 106521 too 1.15 611._467 037 i 2/9 1 ..14015 27566... 100 ,67 - 176145 057 3.71 22.253 106./4_ . 105 1.11 43070 ` 011! 1 2A7 ...._15,573 j 27,497 505 ... 1.51 12Y 011 026 -.�- 309 23 21ST 105,067 110 N f_2155__31.. , 031 x-246 16.231 27500; t w 1.76 u16fo r 4.56 ?.e7_ 24217 107 713 . 1 1.04 4416 ! 09 ill 6 27271 115 I 149 !77,23+ 058 705_ 115 _._ .--- �__-. _.. ..,. 73.1% 1%.032 --- ._.. 125 _ 1.01 44864 056 2.44 1 47,546 27137 120 104 134,766 056 J•M 20,151 1%607_ 125 016 40161 O SS L. 24J•._*._ 11301..__.....26 973 136786 0 53 L .362 2716)_-_t0y122_ . 130 Q% ....43,630 1_.......035 247 i 18,864 20795 130 • 750 137,717 053_ `i 3_111 1 26,145_--109,512- 135 093 451211 0.55 241 r 19,522 i... 26516 1!S 151 1981/9 0.55 7. 3.60 21,127 101161 140 010 4& 6 005 240 20 180 I 26365 140 f 1 47 140463 _ 015 7 355 30 109 1 110354 . 143 0.86 /6987 ,OSS � 2<0 � 20839 26156 115 143 1/1714 07�_ 957 •�_,J1r00/ 110,673 150 066 /7{15 DS/ 1..._,_239 21187 25911 150 139 1/3055 054 ( 3.56 32,073 110%2-" 155 014 47020 .._054 4 235 __nip 25665 155 I lY 144247 154 355 33055 111192 _ . 180 0.12 /6211 054 778 22113 23400 180 ._.1.73- 145431 ._ 054 ,. '.. 3.55 31037 101317- ... .._.-......▪___ .__. .. __ 185 080 411596 054 2.37 2 471 251x3 _ 165 l 1,20 104568 054 3.54 35,018 111560 c.._ 070 oft 48100 _li. 0.54 ._237 34,130 24639 ... 170 j 1.27 147710... 0.34 1 337 36,001 1/1,709-.-. f _ 175 075 40330 0.54 235 74,716 24547 175 1'14 160503 011 __!.S?J as,%3 ,11408 100 055 41653 054 274 ▪ 26,469 24,237 180 } 122 149187 054 `-1 352 77905 111102 185 073 50029 .054 235 25514- 169 ,41 1 160%8 954 1. 3.31 18,947. 111,%1 tOO 072 50363 OS/ 2.35 1 ,.26751 , 23101 1% __1.17 151,918 DS/ 3.50 109]0 1119!9 105 071 30,592 059 23. T7521 1 /% 1.15 152900 - 4.55 I 930 40912 111597 200 069 51,003 0.53 23433 I 26079 22933 200 1.12 153076 0 349 41,604 111.912 205 0_69 51326 053 734 28,737 22509 205 170 154621 OS] 349 42,676 111,941- 210 0.67 St 632 1 0.53 2.33 29305 I x7237 210 1 1.051 155747 0.53 340 43158 111508 215 046 .....51877 1 0.5] I .233 30053ttt .-____ . ---. x1 476 ... 215 .. 146 107 540 ],..- 053 3.4 41,810 i 111,113 220 904 52,227 F-. O5S 1 ..233 .i. 3 712 7,5,5 220 ,OS tS7 549 033 3.47 + 46,822 t n 715 225 003 32.510 053 4_ 232 {__.31370 21145 215 103 151409 013 3,17 40001 I 111 6.„_1_:16_- 1111 213 0.62 �19S F 0 53 232 32 020 20770 230 101 159,282 � 053 L 7.40 47 748- 111.470 - __.._ 235 581 .03,075 i... 553 272 32,186 i 20309 233 ,00 160008 1 055 j 349 49796 111,770 - 240 0.60 53347 053 1 232 33314 2000.3 240 0.98 100,919 J 053 342 40750 1 11f1N . 215 0.59 I 5341/ t 0 53 2.31 34113 19112 715 0.% 1 161 725 0.53 3.45 50,732 110.903 290 0.56 SJ 877 053 I _271 J/161 18216 250 OAS 151516 053 345 51,714 110502 . 255 esti 54134 1 053 r 231 i 35319 10815 255 044 163294..... 053 : SM --_52,696 _ SWIMS 280 0.57 '../388 053 71------„. 111 36,077 1611 t 780 1_ 002 104,056, 023 341 57-,674 ,156011 205 056 I 506]7 053 i 2.30 36,895 10%2 _ 265 991 164610 053 3.44 644.680_ 115050_ . 272 0 55 54,882 5 52 230 37,204 . { 175116 270 0 00 103549... _, 0.62 _ 3.43 _ 53.842- I 109,907•W 275 0 54 55123 c 51 230 37.952 1 17.171 273 g 65 186277 032 • 3.4] 58,61< F 101155? 200 054 815,31110 52 270 i 0.610 16.751 240 0.87 169,%2 0.62 • 3.43 57,606 4.I 109386 265 053 5524 t 052 230 ]9268 r 78728 265 •- ON I 167607 052 • 343 • amass i t0e100- . --290 t 0.52 55121 057 219 39921 15095 ... 290 0631 166392_- 062 _ 342 59570 1 106111 S 295 _ __052 56.051 ) 052 270 10 Say 15.166 205 OM I 140073 052 3.12 60.30? 1065x7 �. 300 0.31 55274 I 0.52 220 _ 41,243 15,032 300 0,63 169,740 452 3.42 1 11,3!4 j-106.715 Mod.FM Miner 561405 Vdunme(cube 0)• 27.622 MW,FM Ngoeso.5.Vden.(eu04e 1J- 111,087 Mot FMMInor Storage Volume(ac re-n)• 08341 blot PMMalor Stan:e Volume 1a0r4.R)- 2.5711 5 UOFCD DETENTION VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 2.2,Released January 2010 . UD 04946041_2.2141,04060!4 FM 211777012,10 54 AM IP ID • • DETENTION VOLUME BY THE MODIFIED FAA METHOD 5 (Sae USDCM Volume 2 Storage Chapter for description of math odl 5 Project:Cummins Field-Noble Energy . Basin o:Basin B(Developed) . I Inflow and Outflow Volumes vs.Rainfall Duration I 5 180,000 .• - . 1 i _ .... _ . .. ._ 160,000 : ' `— I S •140,000 [ l t 1 EtIDi . 120000 : t l — l IDI ..----.7 s *•••••••4ii•!•i• m 700,000 l • ••-•• • r 1 .i..•. E 80,000 • ( l t ( •I i t I • t ID 60,000 • S. I • 5 40.000 ( --_.... c,00000ccc 000co c0000t�. ' i z0,000 rte_`"._ • _ .... .. =c)n00 oo oeco QobO.. . 5 0 I ,F,.,00,3 06 IIIrt - - .._.,..._.s..----.__. .__ -._.._-.. _.__.. .. I 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 5 Duration(Minutes) ' Minor StormInflow Volume -o-Al nor Storm Oumow Volume M nor Storm Storage Volume ID -4D-PAM*Storm'name Volume -a-Major Storm Outflow Volume • Major Storrn Storage Volume ID ID ID ID I ID ID ID 0 5 UOFCD DETENTION VOLUME ES i;MATING WORKBOOK Version 2.2,Released January 201D . VO_Dereaeon_2 2„s,MoOsed FAA 2111/2012 1056 AM I • . TETRATECH • Professional Engineers • .▪ • Client: 'V obt- y yy Job No.: 133-3 /g-JZao/ Sheet / of Description: t/tlI CV — 72e4e. hm^ 1 DellX0 Designed By: SECS Date: ZilLAZ Checked By: NT6 Date: 1-D-fA ( fl-req ( So n �dev) - at 9'l ,4c gip= S.S°7o Y)QC✓ - O, g( J - 1, /9G2t O.: e...( 9b. jeroIrd ,n fine-) • = d icv (O. 05-5-)3 g/, l (D.on-)2--I- 0,78(0,osir) = 0, 0 • PGSTrr Vo(usnf ( V) _ fry C✓ h eot ,x i , 7_ (S lnaV -dloy, Fact»✓ ) �O,/ti) 2.) 9 `7 X I, Z. = O, O 9 4c - 0, / • Preliminary Drainage Report contains oversized Maps Historic Drainage Plan Developed Drainage Plan • Off-Site Drainage Plan Please See Original File • • File contains CD with digital copy of Application Materials • Please See Original File • Hello