The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20110234.tiff 1 '• Drainage Design Considerations for Twin Peaks at Iris Lane ' Weld County, Colorado Change of Zone Application ' January 20, 2009 Prepared for: ' Casseday Creative Designs 55 S. Elm Avenue, Suite 210 Easton, Colorado 80615 Prepared by: 1 _(/:\ ' Wohnrade Civil Engineers, Inc. 337 W. Main Street ' Barrington, Illinois 60010 Phone: (847)381-2745, Fax: (847)381-2746 Project Number:0702.00 TPI 2011-0234 1 Wohnrade Civil Engineers, Inc. • 337 W.Main Street Barrington,Illinois 60010 Phone:847-381-2745, Fax:847-381-2746 1 January 20, 2009 ' Weld County Department of Planning Services ' 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: Drainage Design Considerations for Twin Peaks at Iris Lane P.U.D. Weld County, Colorado ' Change of Zone Application Dear Staff: Wohnrade Civil Engineers, Inc. is pleased to submit this drainage study for Twin Peaks at Iris Lane P.U.D. for your review. This report complies with the storm drainage design and technical criteria defined in Section 24-7-130 of the Weld County Code, and the Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals. We acknowledge that review of this study by Weld County is for general conformance with submittal requirements, current design criteria and standard engineering principles ' and practices. If you should have any questions or comments as you review this report, please feel ' free to contact me at your convenience. ' Sincerely, ``..... WOHNRADE CIV4 1 'dfJC. ' rJ • o O Imo: ' Mary B. Wohnrac ycla. :c;. q,�ONA�t', s 1 1 '• t I hereby certify that this report for the Change of Zone drainage design of Twin Peaks at Iris Lane was prepared by me (or under my direct supervision) in accordance with the provisions of the Weld County storm drainage design criteria for the owners ' thereof. ' lvn Mary B. Wohnrade, P.E. ' Registered Professional Engineer ' State of Colorado No. 30325 t I TABLE OF CONTENTS '• VICINITY MAP Page No. I INTRODUCTION ' 1.1 Objective 1 1.2 Project History and Previous Studies 1 1.3 Mapping and Surveying 1 I1.4 Site Reconnisance 1 II SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ' 2.1 Site location 1 2.2 Site Description 1 ' III HISTORIC CONDITIONS 3.1 Historic Drainage Patterns 2 I3.2 Historic Drainage Basins 3 IV DEVELOPED CONDITIONS I 4.1 Proposed Site Development 3 4.2 Developed Drainage Patterns 3 4.3 Developed Drainage Basins 4 Ile 4.4 Septic Suitability 4 4.5 Detention Pond Design 5 I V DESIGN CRITERIA 5.1 Design References 6 5.2 Hydrologic Criteria 6 I5.3 Hydraulic Criteria 6 VI EROSION CONTROL I 6.1 Erosion Control Plan 6 6.2 Site Stabilization 7 6.3 Water Quality 7 IVII CONCLUSIONS 7.1 Compliance with Standards 7 I7.2 Variances 7 IREFERENCES 8 EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Exhibit 2 Typical Section - Local Street ' APPENDICES ' Appendix A: Historic Condition Hydrology Appendix B: Developed Condition Hydrology PLANS tSheet 1 of 2 Historic Condition Drainage Plan Sheet 2 of 2 Developed Condition Drainage Plan I. t 1 1 1 1 I 2------------.-. y •I'i N.', 31 3.2`N. I 33 PROJECT • \N.:"... % LQCATIbN �... s„r 1. STATE ti WAS' Aso J_ re SO 9 Niks Ir CC it, =� _ • ( ir..1 ,i �� wca R F+a __ --- ._B OA 461Ay'L�L00. - - ;n nce r e�pp '-, l / Welt,... • - __ �� ( .` I� GREAT _�-5050— 1 1-- I _ _ \ ft soop - � _ i i • lN // reject: TWIN PEAKS AT IRIS LANE � p'p�'� WOHNRADE CIVIL ENGINEERS, INC. 1 07 Sheet W 337 W Main Street VICINITY MAP Barrington.. MIllinois, 60010 L1ppp• Phone. (84'))301—D45, Far: (Ba))30t—vse 1 Designed n•e By. Sheett 1 Drainage Design Considerations ' for Twin Peaks at Iris Lane Weld County, Colorado Change of Zone Application January 20, 2009 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective ' This study documents the results of a comprehensive hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of both pre and post-development conditions for the proposed Twin Peaks at Iris Lane development. The existing site is within an Agricultural Zone District in Weld County. The intent of the P.U.D. application process is to allow a zoning change from agricultural to a P.U.D. residential subdivision, and will be ' processed by the County thru the specific development guide submittal. 1.2 Proiect History and Previous Studies ' There is one known study for this site which is entitled, Drainage Design Considerations for Twin Peaks at Iris Lane, Sketch Plan Submittal, dated May 18, 2007, and prepared by Wohnrade Civil Engineers, Inc. ' 1.3 Mapping and Surveying Field survey information and topographic mapping with a contour interval of 1- foot was obtained by Wohnrade Civil Engineers from Drexel, Barrell and Co., Greeley, Colorado. Additional topography outside of the project boundary was taken from USGS topographic mapping with a ten (10) foot contour interval. ' 1.4 Site Reconnaissance A site visit was conducted by the project engineer on May 17, 2007. Existing ' drainage patterns and structures have been field-verified for use in defining drainage basin boundaries and historic flow patterns. ' II SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1 Site Location ' The site is located in the west half of Section 5, Township 4 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Weld County, Colorado. The site is bounded by Weld County Road 3 on the west, and the Home Supply Ditch on the north ' (See Vicinity Map). 2.2 Site Description ' The Twin Peaks at Iris Lane P.U.D. site is approximately 34.5 acres, and is currently used for agricultural purposes. The site is furrowed, and planted with corn. The site lies adjacent to the Home Supply Ditch along the north property boundary. An existing oil/gas well is also located on the north portion of the property. The project site is located outside of the regulatory floodplain, as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Community-Panel Number 080266 0725C ' Drainage Design Considerations Wohnrade Civil Engineers. Inc. ' Twin Peaks at Iris Lane-Change of Zone Application January 20, 2009 Page 2 (See Exhibit 1.) The adjacent properties to the north, east and south of the site are currently ' undeveloped, and are used for agricultural purposes. The Garcia P.U.D. Subdivision is located to the northeast, and the proposed Twin View Estates P.U.D. development is located roughly 311 feet to the south. ' Soil borings located throughout the site have revealed free groundwater at depths ranging from 10 feet to 12 feet below existing grade (see Reference 3). Surface soils consisted of lean clay with sand underlain by weathered sandstone. The depth of bedrock ranged from 11 feet to the maximum depth of exploration. III. HISTORIC CONDITIONS 3.1 Historic Drainage Patterns The historic drainage pattern of the site includes overland flow, which is ' conveyed to five general discharge locations. Basin H1 (15.7 acres) includes the south and eastern portions of the site, and drains overland generally from west to east at slopes ranging from 0.8% to 2.2% towards an existing concrete irrigation lateral located east of the site. This concrete lateral is owned by Twin View Estates, LLC, and conveys irrigation ' water to the south, to the proposed Twin View Estates residential development. Basin H2 (6.2 acres) includes the northern and central portions of the site, which ' drains overland, generally from southwest to northeast at slopes ranging from 0.9% to 2.3%, to an existing reinforced concrete culvert, which conveys stormwater runoff to the Home Supply Ditch. ' Basin H3 (7.9 acres) includes the northern and central portions of the site, which drains overland, generally from southwest to northeast at slopes ranging from ' 0.9% to 2.3%, into the Home Supply Ditch. Basin H4 (4.0 acres) includes a small portion of the northwest corner of the site, ' which drains overland, generally from south to north at slopes ranging from 0.8% to 2.2%, to an existing reinforced concrete culvert, which discharges stormwater to the Home Supply Ditch. ' Basin H5 (0.44 acres) includes an area within the County right-of-way, from the shoulder of the road to the west right-of-way line. Stormwater runoff is conveyed overland from t south to north in the roadside ditch to an existing reinforced concrete culvert, which discharges stormwater to the Home Supply Ditch. Stormwater runoff enters the site from offsite Basin O1 (6.8 acres), which is located adjacent to the south property line (see Drainage Plans). ' Drainage Design Considerations Wohnrade Civil Engineers. Inc. ' Twin Peaks at Iris Lane-Change of Zone Application January 20, 2009 Page 3 • 3.2 Historic Drainage Basins The site has been divided into five (5) historic drainage basins. Basin H1 is located in the south and eastern portions of the site , and is currently an agricultural use. The 5 and 100-year peak discharges at Design Point H1 are ' 2.0 cfs and 17.0 cfs respectively. Basin H2 is located in the northern and central portions of the site, and is ' currently an agricultural land use. The 5 and 100-year peak discharges at Design Point H2 are 0.9 cfs and 7.5 cfs respectively. Basin H3 is located in the northeastern portion of the site, and is currently an agricultural land use. The 5 and 100-year peak discharges at Design Point H3 are 1.1 cfs and 9.6 cfs respectively. ' Basin H4 is located in the western portion of the site, and is currently an agricultural land use. The 5 and 100-year peak discharges at Design Point H4 ' are 0.6 and 5.1 cfs respectively. Basin H5 is located within the County right-of-way, but excludes the gravel road. The 5 and 100-year peak discharges at Design Point H5 are 0.1 and 1.0 cfs respectively. IV. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS ' 4.1 Proposed Site Development The proposed development of the site will consist of 9 single-family estate lots with an average lot size of 2.0 acres, accessory uses, and a recreational trail ' system. The site is non-urban with a density of 9 dwelling units in 34.55 acres or, 0.26 units per acre. ' Access to the site is off of Weld County Road 3. Site improvements will include a cul-de-sac road with a paved surface, a potable water distribution system, and individual sewage disposal systems. Two onsite detention ponds will be ' required, and will be located in the north and eastern portions of the site. 4.2 Developed Drainage Patterns The 34.5 acre site has been divided into five (5) developed drainage basins. Basin 1 drains overland to the east to Detention Pond 1. Basin 2 drains overland to the north to Detention Pond 2. Stormwater runoff from Basins 3-5 will be ' released from the site undetained. Developed runoff patterns are intended to generally mimic historic flow patterns. Drainage Design Considerations Wohnrade Civil Engineers. Inc. Twin Peaks at Iris Lane-Change of Zone Application January 20, 2009 Page 4 4.3 Developed Drainage Basins The overall drainage pattern of the site will remain generally unchanged from historic to developed conditions. Site grading will be done sympathetically, with the intention to create a minimum amount of disturbance. Basin 1 (22.5 acres) will continue to drain overland, generally in a historic flow direction, towards Detention Pond 1. Estate Lots 5-9, and a portion of estate Lots 1-4, are located within this basin. The peak 5- and 100-year discharges at Design Point 1 are 5.7 and 29.5 cfs respectively. Basin 2 (7.9 acres) will drain overland in a historic pattern towards Detention Pond 2. This basin includes portions of Lots 1- 4. The peak 5- and 100-year ' discharges at Design Point 2 are 1.8 and 11.0 cfs respectively. ' Basin 3 (2.3 acres) will drain overland in a historic pattern towards the Home Supply Ditch. This basin will remain unchanged, and includes the oil/gas operations area and the concrete irrigation (Home Supply) ditch. The peak 5- and 100-year discharges at Design Point 3 are 1.1 and 5.1 cfs respectively. Basin 4 (1.2 acres) will drain overland in a historic pattern to the south and east undetained. This basin includes the pond embankment created for Detention Pond 1. The peak 5- and 100-year discharges at Design Point 4 are 0.2 and 1.8 cfs respectively. Basin 5 (0.45 acres) will drain overland from south to north in the existing roadside ditch to an existing reinforced culvert which discharges stormwater into ' the Home Supply Ditch. This basin will remain unchanged from its current condition. The peak 5- and 100-year discharges at Design Point 5 are 0.1 and 1.1 cfs respectively. Off-site runoff enters the site along the south property line from Basin O1 (6.8 acres, See Drainage Plans). The 5 and 100-year peak discharges from Basin ' O1 are 0.9 cfs and 7.8 cfs respectively. 4.4 Septic Suitability The Geologic and Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Northern ' Colorado Geotech (Reference 3) has been referenced to evaluate the suitability of the project site for individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS.) Depth to ' groundwater in potential building areas on Lots 1 through 9 ranges from 10' to 13' below existing grade. Field testing indicates that standard septic system should be feasible for the majority of the site. Site specific percolation tests will be required for each lot at the time of construction. I Drainage Design Considerations Wohnrade Civil Engineers. Inc. I Twin Peaks at Iris Lane-Change of Zone Application January 20, 2009 • Page 5 I 4.5 Detention Pond Design Two on-site detention ponds will be constructed to detain stormwater runoff from the developed portion of the site, which includes Basins 1 and 2. IAccording to Section 24-7-130 of the Weld County Code, "All stormwater detention facilities shall be designed to detain the stormwater runoff from the fully I developed subdivision from a one hundred year storm, and release the detained water at a quantity and rate not to exceed the quantity and rate of a five year storm falling on the undeveloped site". The total five year peak historic Idischarge from the site is 4.7 cfs. The allowable 5-year release rate from undetained Basins 3-5 are 0.5 cfs, 0.2 I cfs, and 0.1 cfs respectively. This is calculated using the same area and time of concentration as the developed basins, using the 5-year rainfall intensity, and a 5-year historic runoff coefficient of 0.08. The peak 100-year developed I discharge from each basin is reduced by the 5-year historic rate to determine the total undetained 100-year peak discharge from each basin. The 100-year discharge from Basin 3 is 5.1 cfs - 0.5 cfs= 4.6 cfs. The 100-year discharge from IBasin 4 is 1.8 cfs - 0.2 cfs= 1.6 cfs. The 100-year peak discharge from Basin 5 is 1.1 cfs - 0.1 cfs= 1.0 cfs. The total 100-year undetained release is 4.6+1.6+1.0= 7.2 cfs. This exceeds the allowable release rate of 4.7 efs.b It is not possible to detain runoff from Basin 3 (2.3 acres), which includes the I existing oil/gas operations area, and concrete irrigation lateral (Home Supply Ditch). These site constraints make it impossible to satisfy the requirements of Section 24-7-130. This dilemma was brought to the attention of the Weld I County Public Works Department, and staff concluded that the 100-year peak developed discharge should be released at a maximum rate of 0.5 cfs from each pond. This release rate is considered reasonable, and meets the intent of the IWeld County Code. Stormwater runoff from Basin 1 will be conveyed to Detention Pond 1 and I released to a proposed swale which will convey stormwater to an existing tail water ditch located east of the site. The tailwater ditch is located on property owned by the developer. The tail water ditch runs parallel to the Home Supply I Ditch (on the south side), and slopes from west to east. Stormwater runoff will not be released to the Home Supply Ditch, but will be conveyed to the east in a historic condition. Preliminary sizing of Detention Pond 1 (as depicted on the I Developed Drainage Plan) has been done using the Modified Puls Storage Approximation. I Stormwater runoff from Basin 2 will be conveyed to Detention Pond 2, and released to an existing concrete culvert which discharges to the Home Supply Ili Ditch. Preliminary sizing of Detention Pond 2 (as depicted on the Developed Drainage Plan) has been done using the Modified Puls Storage Approximation. I I Drainage Design Considerations Wohnrade Civil Engineers. Inc. Ill Twin Peaks at Iris Lane-Change of Zone Application January 20, 2009 Page 6 • eV. DESIGN CRITERIA 5.1 Design References ' Drainage criteria outlined in the Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes 1-3 by the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (Reference 1), has been referenced in the preparation of this study. In addition, the Weld County Storm ' Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals has also been referenced (Reference 2). ' 5.2 Hydrologic Criteria Due to the relatively small basin size the Rational Method has been used to estimate peak stormwater runoff from the project site. Calculations made as part ' of this investigation along with other supporting material, are contained in Appendix A and Appendix B of this report. I The initial 5-year, and major 100-year design storm have been used to evaluate the proposed drainage system as per Table 24.2, Chapter 24 of the Weld County Code. Rainfall intensity data for the Rational Method has been taken I from IDF equations generated specifically for the Twin Peaks at Iris Lane site by the computer program "Watershed Modeling" by Eagle Point software. Input of precipitation amounts for the generation of intensity equations have been taken ID from the NOM Atlas 2, Volume HI-Colorado. I 5.3 Hydraulic Criteria The computer program HY8, developed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA, 1998), will be used to size all proposed culverts at the time of the Final I Plat application. This program references the procedures given in the Hydraulic Design of Highway Culverts, Hydraulic Design Series No. 5. I Energy dissipation will be provided at the outlet of all culverts using rip rap outlet protection. Where culverts are sized using the HY8 computer model, rip rap outlet protection will also been sized using the Dissipater design option in the I program. Design of energy dissipators is also provided in the Hydraulic Design of Energy Dissipater for Culverts and Channels, FHWA 2000. IVI. EROSION CONTROL 6.1 Erosion Control Plan I A proposed rainfall erosion control plan during construction will consist of temporary structural erosion control measures. Erosion control measures will be specified on the Grading and Erosion Control Plan at the time of the Final Plat Iapplication. P Straw bale inlet protection will be provided at the upstream end of all culverts, and rock riprap outlet protection will be provided at the downstream end to prevent scour. Vehicle tracking control will be provided at the entrance to the I Drainage Design Considerations Wohnrade Civil Engineers. Inc. ' Twin Peaks at Iris Lane-Change of Zone Application January 20, 2009 Page 7 e site to prevent sediment transport from vehicles exiting the site. A sediment siphon will be provided at the entrance to both pond outlet structures. I Permanent vegetative erosion control will be used in conjunction with landscaping surrounding future residences. Permanent revegetation of areas disturbed by construction will be the responsibility of the contractor. IA Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) for this project will be prepared by Wohnrade Civil Engineers, Inc., and submitted to the State of Colorado ' Department of Public Health and Environment at the time of the Final Plat application. I 6.2 Site Stabilization All areas disturbed by construction will be reseeded and mulched using the recommended varieties specified in the Grass Seeding Recommendations for I South Weld and West Adams Counties, by the Weld County Weed Division. The Weed Division will be contacted at the time of the Final Plat application to determine an appropriate seed mixture based on the Range Site. The Twin I Peak at Iris Lane development is located in the Sandy Plains Range Site. Seed varieties, quantities and application rates will be specified on the General Notes sheet of the Public Improvements Construction plans for Twin Peaks at Iris Lane, ID P.U.D. I 6.3 Water Quality Extended detention will be incorporated into the design of the on-site detention pond. An extended detention basin (EDB) utilizes an orifice plate containing very I small openings to extend the emptying time of the more frequently occurring runoff events to facilitate pollutant removal. The EDB's drain time for the water quality capture volume is 40 hours, which will remove a significant portion of fine I particulate. The Urban Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 3 has been referenced in the design of the extended detention basin, which will be designed as part of the Final Plat application. I VII. CONCLUSIONS I 7.1 Compliance with Standards All applicable drainage criteria have been implemented in accordance with the "Weld County Code". This study conforms to the guidelines specified in Section II27-6-50, paragraph B, item 7, of the Weld County Code. 7.2 Variances ' No variances are requested as part of this development. illi ' Drainage Design Considerations Wohnrade Civil Engineers. Inc. ' Twin Peaks at Iris Lane-Change of Zone Application • January 20, 2009 Page 8 r tREFERENCES 1) Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Urban Drainage and Flood Control ' District, Wright McLaughlin Engineers, Denver, Colorado, June, 2001. 2) Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals, Weld County Code Article XI and Appendix 8L, October, 2006. ' 3) Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Proposed Twin View PUD, Welc County Roads 3 and 48, Berthoud, Colorado, Northern Colorado Geotech., October 3, 2006. fp I e I I I I I I I I I I I Exhibits P I PROJECT LOCATION (Jr O WELD COUNTY �/ p% .�,/` L O i____, APPROXIMATE SCALE \\\ ^ xmoY �o Ham veer 6 )) 1.7 9 3 2 : I NATIONAL FLOOD INSItANCE PROGRAM I' \ J �, l—..•��` 3, GL Home SWvlrOlw FIRM li ( ... Evky FLOOR INSURANCE RATE MAP WELTY �^ KAHLER to BUDA II .WELD __ 8 III IIF-FI ' 1111 I1111111111 . . . . . . 111 I4 HI H Hyllll -- GREAT WESTERN II II COUNTY, ZONE C � COLORADO "\ UNINCORPORATED AREA ' enioi ® ( [SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS rem R umrn r �_ I PANEL OF 1075 III T 16 IS 19 II. �. 1' I / COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER � 080266 0725 C OO in!,t Ij; MAP REVISED: I pppA SEPTEMBER 28. 1982 ZONE A fade&emergency management eganry J II21 Te^'"P'R22 I 23 a. naa«.n....wcm. n 20 Mich \ wan'xci'Fe«uaiam�+imnwn.e ut r aleca n�a the ueY i•' Pa«n lm rips cw.a«Few Mad uw Mont Wm/Mee In.w IL. ...,j oject: TWIN PEAKS AT IRIS LANE 1 I: o)oz:Do Do WOHNRADE CIVIL ENGINEERS, INC. D) Sheet EXHIBIT 1 11) W. Main Street Barrington, )381 D Minds, NOO1O A. Phone: (80)181-2J95, Fax: (84))]81— /6 w OLCgned B,: FIRM MAP 080266 0725C sheetl l R.O.W. R.O.W. 60'-0" • 1- 30'-0" E.O.P. E.O.P. I- - 24'-0" I EL 4' 4' I SHOULDER SHOULDER -8'-0" '-0" 12'-0" 12'-0" ri_oi"_02_ 2%MIN. 2 MIN.IN. • . . . \ \.„,/,,„ .... .. P• , Y/,/ BITUMINOUS ASPHALT PAVEMENT GRAVEL SHOULDER GRAVEL BASE COARSE NOTE: PAVEMENT SECTION TO BE DESIGNED BY SOILS ENGINEER AND APPROVED BY COUNTY ENGINEER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION TYPICAL SECTION - LOCAL ROADWAY 24' PAVEMENT W/ 4' SHOULDERS NOT TO SCALE `�t" TWIN PEAKS AT IRIS LANE ' 2 WOHNRADE CIVIL ENGINEERS, INC. V Sheet EXHIBIT 2 W. Main 5"" Bonigf 047)381-2745. Binol—60010 TYPICAL STREET SECTION •Phone: ""'�' " `�` '"� 2 J \Sheett I I r I I I I I. I I I I I I Appendix A P I I I tComposite Percentage Imperviousness Calculations: Historic Condition, Basin H1 NRCS Soil Type B I Surface Characteristics Streets: Streets: Drives and Roofs Undeveloped Percent Imperviousness Gravel Walks, Areas Ditches ' Area(acres) 0 0 0 0 15.7 0.0200 Percent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 2 ITotal Area(acres) 15.7 Correction Factors KA and KDD for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 I NRCS Soil Type 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year C and D 0.000 0.106 0.206 0.324 0.393 0.452 A 0.000 0.088 0.167 0.236 0.276 0.315 ' Equations RO-6 and RO-7, Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 CA 0.00 -0.01 0.07 0.14 0.18 0.22 ' Ca 0.03 0.08 0.17 0.26 0.31 0.36 CCD 0.06 0.16 0.26 0.38 0.45 0.51 b Historic Condition, Basin H2 I NRCS Soil Type B Surface Characteristics Streets: Streets: Drives and Roofs Undeveloped Percent Paved Gravel Walks, Areas Imperviousness Ditches I Area(acres) 0 0 0 0 6.2 0.0200 Percent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 2 ' Total Area(acres) 6.2 Correction Factors Ka and KDD for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 ' NRCS Soil Type 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year C and D 0.000 0.108 0.206 0.324 0.393 0.452 I A 0.000 0.088 0.167 0.236 0.276 0.315 Equations RO-6 and RO-7,Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 CA 0.00 -0.01 0.07 0.14 0.18 0.22 I Ca 0.03 0.08 0.17 0.26 0.31 0.36 CCD 0.06 0.16 0.26 0.38 0.45 0.51 I ili ' S:\PROJECTS\TPI\DRNG\CHANGE OF ZONE\TPI-HistC.wpd I I • Composite Percentage Imperviousness Calculations: ' Historic Condition, Basin H3 NRCS Soil Type B I Surface Characteristics Streets: Streets: Conc.Drives, Roofs Undeveloped Percent Paved Gravel Walks, Areas Imperviousness Ditches ' Area(acres) 0 0 0.0 0 7.9 0.0200. Percent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 2 ITotal Area(acres) 7.9 Correction Factors KA and lc,for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 I NRCS Soil Type 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year100-Year C and D 0.000 0.108 0.206 0.324 0.393 0.452 A 0.000 0.088 0.167 0.236 0.276 0.315 Equations RO-6 and RO-7,Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 Cs 0.00 -0.01 0.07 0.14 0.18 0.22 ICs 0.03 0.08 0.17 0.26 0.31 0.36 CCD 0.06 0.16 0.26 0.38 0.45 0.51 I. IHistoric Condition, Basin H4 NRCS Soil Type B Surface Characteristics Streets: Streets: Conc.Drives, Roofs Undeveloped Percent I Paved Gravel Walks, Areas Imperviousness Ditches Area(acres) 0 0.0 0.00 0 4.00 0.0200 I Percent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 2 Total Area(acres) 4.0 I Correction Factors lc,and Km forUse With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 NRCS Soil Type 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year C and D 0.000 0.108 0.206 0.324 0.393 0.452 IA 0.000 0.088 0.167 0.236 0.276 0.315 Equations RO-6 and RO-7,Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 ' Ca 0.00 -0.01 0.07 0.14 0.18 0.22 Cs 0.03 0.08 0.17 0.26 0.31 0.36 ICCD 0.06 0.16 0.26 0.38 0.45 0.51 ill ' S:\PROJECTS\TPI\DRNG\CHANGE OF ZONEITPI-HistC.wpd I I '� Composite Percentage Imperviousness Calculations: Historic Condition, Basin H5 illNRCS Soil Type B Surface Characteristics Streets: Streets: Conc.Drives, Roofs Undeveloped Percent Paved Gravel Walks, Areas Imperviousness I Ditches Area(acres) 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.44 0.0200 I Percent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 2 Total Aree(acres) - :.0.44 Correction Factors K,,and Kez for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 INRCS Soil Type 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year C and D 0.000 0.108 0.206 0.324 0.393 0.452 IA 0.000 0.088 0.167 0.236 0.276 0.315 Equations RO-6 and RO-7,Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 I Ca 0.00 -0.01 0.07 0.14 0.18 0.22 Cs 0.03 0.08 0.17 0.26 0.31 0.36 I. Ca) 0.06 0.16 0.26 0.38 0.45 0.51 I Offsite Basin, Basin 01 NRCS Soil Type B Surface Characteristics Streets: Streets: Conc.Drives, Roofs Undeveloped Percent Ill Paved Gravel Walks, Areas Imperviousness Ditches Area(acres) 0 0.00 0.00 0 6.8 0.0200 IPercent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 2 Total Area(acres) 6.8 ICorrection Factors KA and Ka,for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 NRCS Soil Type 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year I C and D 0.000 0.108 0.206 _ 0.324 0.393 0.452 A 0.000 0.088 0.167 0.236 0.276 0.315 I C,, Equations RO-6 and RO-7,Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 0.00 -0.01 0.07 0.14 0.18 0.22 Cs 0.03 0.08 0.17 0.26 0.31 0.36 ICo, 0.06 0.16 0.26 0.38 0.45 0.51 I' ' S:\PROJECTS\TPI\DRNG\CHANGE OF ZONE\TPI-HistC.wpd I I /« : O 7 O O aori ti IP ci ` ko r- � a E a r ! , . o 42) c w Vs } §w \ k E " ; ; . , § E k � f \ k � \ g 2 / / � � \ $ o API co // { % E \! I.. " (0 ! a I / //f § / ) f , ;74 / c A {$ . 2 ( � e O ) ! ky , w ! ; 0 _ ) ) « � \ /k g # Cl & ; § § § O , , 0 O E �# . , e ca tG § ! ! § ! ! > §C ` tN \, :o666646 9 _ b 13 Ill § . OOOOOO O O O O ci k / - C. ; § ; : . C) co ! % ] O O O O 0 7 ! ; 0 ° k { 3 § § ■ i : f ` ! | § § ! § ! • 0o - 0 a | | § § § § 2 • to Eci 9 ) ° 2 2 0o Li # fk L. 2 ; ! ! | y it. . 2 C iii o / ) § | _ _ _ _ _ 17 0. > 2 _ _ : : _ , CC f 3 / 3 & & Q , . I I I f« r "-- I®\ E # : ! B ! * »)LI ) 2I coC LL cc a EP_ / © ; ; . ) • §_ / \ k � \ Q \ % k cu m RI \ )• ) ) >. - t , § ; ! § n I a ??t § / ) ! !� »_ — .s— . 2 / # p { | ;! , y $ , I § _ ) § « p \ /\ - \ � - % § 2 2 § § § I E \ •? p ci . I k q | § § ! | § = ! > - le °CD } CV ca Cu 0 0 ci o 0 - / / \ \ o « < , I ® ! \- § ci5 ci 65 ci I cal 5 \ it ° 1 0 ■ § § § :: ■ - tz o °ci § § | n | lo I o C t! ili 22 IL 0 > !§ ° ■ | ! ■ § m z I O \ | o . / \ \ }\ - _ - ! ! ( • / P. ' ( _ co § \ co ) \ _ _ _ _ _ § IP \ ) CO , \ j � _ 6 k f 0 / \ / 4 co 2 ! 2 I DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF t 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, t,, 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 SWos (RO-4) ' in which: V= velocity(ft/sec) ' C = conveyance coefficient(from Table RO-2) S,,,=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, t,,, is then the sum of the initial flow time, t,, and the travel time, t„ 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, t,) in an urbanized catchment should not ' exceed the time of concentration calculated using Equation RO-5. t` 180 + 10 (RO-5) I 06/2001 RO-6 I DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF I e 50 30 I /7.1 F 20 /I, Z W! 4WC6 b v 10 tW !a1 V3 a='a.O O 3f VI y5 Zdt O !! O.W ft it !~! 'aS 3 f :f Wo3 tart v 2 W !4I !W• p at4o !Oa ic 1 •b 5 i It .1 .2 .3 .5 1 2 3 5 10 20 VELOCITY IN FEET PER SECOND I FIGURE RO-1 Estimate of Average Overland Flow Velocity for Use With the Rational Formula I ,.2--o I I I I el 06/2001 RO-13 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District I I User Name: Mary Date: 05-10-07 r Project: TPI - Twin Peaks at Iris Lane Time: 14:44 :43 Network: 00 - Page: 1 Rainfall Report IRainfall Type Western Rainfall Library Twin Peaks at Iris Lane IWestern Precipitation 2yr/6hr 1 .50 in 2yr/24hr 2.10 in I 100yr/6hr 3.60 in 100yr/24hr 5.00 in Elevation 5100.00 Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) I 5 min 15 min 30 min 60 min 6 hr 24 hr 2 yr 3.40 2.23 1.54 0.98 0.25 0.09 5 yr 4.80 3.15 2.18 1.38 0.34 0.12 10 yr 5.74 3.76 2.60 1.65 0.39 0.14 I 25 yr 6.95 4 .55 3.15 2.00 0.47 0.16 50 yr 8.07 5.29 3.66 2.32 0.53 0.19 100 yr 9.14 5. 99 4 .15 2.63 0.60 0.21 b BDE Values Intensity = B/ (Tc + D) "E B D E X Y 2 yr 26.59 9. 12 0.78 0.00 0.00 II 5 yr 37.53 9.12 0.78 0.00 0.00 10 yr 44 .82 9.12 0.78 0.00 0.00 25 yr 54 .30 9.12 0.78 0.00 0.00 50 yr 63.05 9.12 0.7B 0.00 0.00 II100 yr 71.44 9.12 0.78 0.00 0.00 I Rainfall intensity data, and IDF equations have been generated specifically for the Twin Peaks at Iris Lane site by the computer program "Watershed Modeling" by Eagle Point software. Input of precipitation amounts for the generation of intensity equations have been taken from Ithe NOM Atlas 2, Volume III-Colorado. I II ill I CI l \ I I I-- O , 5 It �1t1 ._ { �E Le o q.. . . .,.... , „.... Ti 4.1 ' .,..„..t. s�> } C ip "\---? ...._... F, \.,.,-,. ... . 7 ,' \ el •» tit lir\II. : 1 / I' \\ -yam - , Y .. , t•-(Z W J- t is is tr 1 /.:Hi, ,...... , ... . , ,� w Cr: 1 • \\,....) •�• . .._.yy- .-.....-..++ _• u 1 b LL , ..... .. . F- - . . .. .�.... , _.____............ ' /es., ,., W r o Zi •; 1 4.� i r4 , .—.• till W • i�� I f F� ' ,•%,.. k.:.(.1"4'. I \ a \ f,�r .� / 4 ;k .sy� . 4 �..�'I' It -+. \ ./ l 4t : us I'n -• �•'i� /f'Art ji Z I • i - '- • '--, s r.- - .................r...-••••ta-a- I VW: i : WW c �4 :� j t -. L `Z t Co) 133:1000 OL£4.4 W M lir I1333 000 OEE i ' DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF I IP TABLE RO-5 Runoff Coefficients, C I 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 I 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 I 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 I 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 I 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 I 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 Ile 90% 0.73 0.75 0.77 0.80 0.82 0.83 95% 0.80 0.82 0.84 0.87 0.88 0.89 100% 0.89 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.96 eiW i Ai 0 C`. \< I Type B NRCS Hydrologic Soils Group 0% 0.02 0.08 0.15 0.25 0.30 0.35 @ ,E I5 Lift-{ . 5% 0.04 0.10 0.19 0.28 0.33 0.38 I 10% 0.06 0.14 0.22 0.31 0.36 0.40 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 I 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 I 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 I 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 I 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 I 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 06/2001 RO-11 Table RO-3 • RECOMMENDED PERCENTAGE IMPERVIOUSNESS VALUES Land Use or Percent Surface Characteristics Impervious BllSIC�; Commercial Areas 95 Neighborhood Areas 85 IRacidantial. Single-Family Figures RO-3 through RO-5 Multi-Unit (detached) 60 Multi-Unit (attached) 75 1/2 Acre Lots or Larger Figures RO-3 through RO-5 Apartments 80 I IpsjiataUL Light Areas 80 Heavy Areas 90 ' Parkc Cemetariav 5 Plavnmunds. 10 ISrhgQ15; 50 ,Railroad Yard Anzac. 15 lel lndavalnnad Araar Historic Flow Analysis, 2 Greenbelts,Agriculture, 2 I Offsite Flow Analysis 45 (When land use not defined) Satz I Paved 100 Gravel(Packed) 40 I f)rivac and Walks. 90 B�pfg� 90 ILawns, Sandy Soil 0 Lawns,Clayey Soil 0 IUrban Drainage and Flood Control District, 06/2001 ---) '0)0200 TABLE RO-3 WOHNRADE CIVIL ENGINEERS, INC. 1 ""\ 09 07 URBAN DRAINAGE AND Sheet FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT P„o e: (a°>,in Street Fan: (847)361-2746 MBwn.d By: PERCENT IMPERVIOUSNESS 1 \Sheets t • I. ' Appendix B I I elComposite Percentage Imperviousness Calculations: I Developed Condition, Basin 1 NRCS Soil Type B Surface Characteristics Streets: Streets/Drives/ Conc. Drives, Roofs Undeveloped Percent I Paved Trail: Walks, Areas, Imperviousness Gravel Ditches Lawns Area(acres) 1.04 1.26 0.46 0.90 18.84 0.1230 I Percent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 0 Total Area(acres) 22.5 I NRCS Soil Type Correction Factors Kr,and KCD for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year C and D 0.000 0.098 0.188 0.296 0.359 0.412 IA 0.000 0.080 0.153 0.217 0.253 0.289 Equations RO-6 and RO-7, Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 ICA 0.00 0.08 0.15 0.22 0.25 0.29 CB 0.06 0:15 0:23 0.32 0.37 0.41 isCCD 0.12 0.22 0.31 0.42 0.48 0.54 I Developed Condition, Basin 2 NRCS Soil Type B Surface Characteristics Streets: Drives/Trail: Conc.Drives, Roofs Undeveloped Percent I Paved Gravel Walks,Patio, Areas, Imperviousness Ditches Lawns Area(acres) 0.0 0.25 0.05 0.45 7.15 0.0696 IPercent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 0 Total Area(acres) 7.9 I Correction Factors KA and KC,for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 NRCS Soil Type 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year C and D 0.000 0.103 0.197 0.311 0.377 0.433 ' A 0.000 0.084 0.160 0.227 0.265 0.303 Equations RO-6 and RO-7, Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 ICA 0.00 0.04 0.11 0.18 0.22 0.26 Ca 0.05 0.12 0:20 0.29 0.34 0.39 ICCD 0.09 0.19 0.29 0.40 0.47 0.52 OD ' S:\PROJECTS\TPI\DRNG\CHANGE OF ZONE\TPI-DevC.wpd I I Composite Percentage Imperviousness Calculations: ell I Developed Condition, Basin 3 NRCS Soil Type B Surface Characteristics Streets: Chives/trail: Conc.Drives, Roofs Undeveloped Percent Paved Gravel Walks, Areas, Imperviousness IDitches Lawns Area(acres) 0.0 0.27 0.33 0.0 1.7 0.1761 I Percent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 0 Total Area(acres) 2.3 I Correction Factors KA and Km for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 NRCS Soil Type 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year C and D 0.000 0.092 0.178 0.281 0.342 0.391 ' A 0.000 0.076 0.145 0.207 0.241 0.276 Equations RO-6 and RO-7,Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 ' CA 0.04 0.12 0.19 0.25 0.28 0.32 CB 0.10 0.18 0.26 0.34 0.39 ' 0.43 leCap 0.16 0.25 0.33 0.44 0.50 0.55 IDeveloped Condition, Basin 4 NRCS Soil Type B I Surface Characteristics Streets: Streets: Drives and Roofs Undeveloped Percent Imperviousness Gravel Walks, Areas, Ditches Lawns I Area(acres) 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0000 Percent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 0 Total Area(acres) 1.2 ICorrection Factors KA and K.for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 NRCS Soil Type 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year IC and D 0.000 0.110 0.210 0.330 0.400 0.460 A 0.000 0.090 0.170 0.240 0.280 0.320 IEquations RO-6 and RO-7,Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 CA 0.00 -0.03 0.05 0.12 0.16 0.20 Cs 0.02 0.06 0.15 0.25 0.30 0:35 Coo 0.04 0.15 0.25 0.37 0.44 0.50 ei ' S:\PROJECTS\TPI\DRNG\CHANGE OF ZONE\TPI-DevC.wpd I I eComposite Percentage Imperviousness Calculations: Developed Condition, Basin 5 NRCS Soil Type B Surface Characteristics Streets: Streets: Drives and Roofs Undeveloped Percent Paved Gravel Walks, Areas, Imperviousness Ditches Lawns I Area(acres) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.45 0.0000 Percent Imperviousness 100 40 90 90 0 Total Area(acres) 0.45 Correction Factors KA and Kw for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7 NRCS Soil Type 2Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year IC and D 0.000 0.110 0.210 0.330 0.400 0.460 A 0.000 0.090 0.170 0.240 0.260 0.320 IEquations RO-6 and RO-7, Drainage Criteria Manual,Volume 1 CA 0.00 -0.03 0.05 0.12 0.16 0.20 b Ca 0.02 0.06 0.15 0.25 0.30 0.35 CCD 0.04 0.15 0.25 0.37 0.44 0.50 I I I I I I I IP ' S:\PROJECTS\TPI\DRNG\CHANGE OF ZONE\TPI-DevC.wpd II Ill fA _ - 7 C , a lii § kk �a / ) G ®` ; § „ ca 17 k al� ) \ ( - } a \ , . ) ll — a & JC ecoR0k 2% { /# 5 § § | ! ) /\w § / k ! « } ® {) | 9 ; ! §_ § eeo \ a # \ « CC \ /k ' 05 # \ 2 • � � . n I E 0 . « . . I \ q 8 \ § ! ! ft ( . co a /t 0.° ° ° 00 48 co I $ 7« : .6 6 _ C I - * \ t% \ 7 o ! \# § ® § § © 1 E. I 0o ^ \® t ; 2 C tall ` ! | ai o \ \ ° ° \ / wni iil o t re , a ci ci 0 2 % ® § 0 k CD 2-- \ in', , ,- VI re 6 ( ` \ OD \ \ CO \ ) 1 ..' z - \ k \ - , 0) , t as / 0 & 4 / & §! I I I /! ; ti ci \ - , , , , \ e o is k § \\ ; ; ; m w f I fa.. § � R � �, ; c 2 r W $ / ° ° 22 � \ � k2 •/ 2 / a , Imo . / _ \ any IP 2 g E N e ! ! -Q. /\/ § kk ! ` . . . � c ) \k en e ! ! § ! g _ a >t —co \ ® 4-0 k® \ 2 N : co a I E o ` ( q § § ! | | ` - en } ° ° ° ° a !! , , , , ; / a I C \ , ,0 C I � 8 a 4 a)a ! k# a § § § § o § a ;e ■ § gi t2 0 >a) ° 0-r | ! m I El \ �ik! \ \ \ . U- • ) \ / cc! \ } en 7! § r d• ez • 0 • 0 \ ` i ° \0 co en ) } : , o OD \ �: , V a. f 0 & G & & CI re I I I /# ' ,- • E ,0. LO , ile lo ; . ) } q § 15 j§ ) § ° . � � § . ®! lEN , � aC Ji co • . . La / \ k / \ © ` ® . ) • e ) Ia ! ; cumecim• 2 % E /! E 2 ! | § _,) /\} § / ) ! ! C / 2 .9 rp /! ! ! ® 8 ! 0 I & § \ J \ // ` ° t E 0 \ / § : § I E / , 0 . . . . . . .` Ill J , \# \ § | | § O ° e : / »r . . . . . a ta D. I B {« : 0 , 6 6 C I 3 2. / CI 2 % * a ` 6 6 6 ) I - ° ° / k + ci I \« § § : C ci ! |- 7 . LI- ni § 2o { ° ! § ! ! ! 111 \ kCD \ / Li \ U ; : el r bre I 0 � \ O tic{ ir.° }CI ) } \ j § k \ , , co f > & g II & /! I I w i\1 e co co z 0 O J M N (n II Z y. O O Ja o r wLi OJ O <(8 I ZIll 0 ( • n O � cc < W N o � V) z � � Nv' o � > of o Z/� re W o in O O O ^O u 00 O co L_LJ in > O < 5 i V/ J O - 0 w i= co < r Y C0Ir O II Y U1 (jd' 0 F J D x J w ) U L O c Q < 0 o < Oct w L 0 ' � Q aw r o � � o O osl W >- U II < < www CY >- w 0. W " w kJ (1) > oW OOO < N o 0 I - W o EF— D ER ≥ << < wn = J w a o w a o w Z F- L g aaa J - in •:__. At � wwUU (nwwUU JJJ _Z (n O � : "' 0a. Z O < Z Z w o < Z z $ 55 I N ) O x < O o o Z O o o OOO O ,-,o .-.r� J (I) � � c� oo oa: 000 H H H zr < Ni r0 o_ I N im ST -* La O I ¢ zm ' F o a O 313 h)w w� 3 3: ¢ w a MIX Mw w oI i I N Q Ll 1 I NO In OI w' O W wn QU <0 U F: 0 Z II R DI W U zm W ;€ % n aovaois na > o Q V a1 . sa. ' oo_ O I 8 6 8 a rf I I I JUtk N ., mw<' Boa wa P . it 1 ! J I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I Plans OD I NY1d 3JYNIYd4 OIUOISIH "" ° t i ' I' y k itiglili NO Situ3ONVHO3NV1 lY S)IY3d NIMl i` . _ -- g - v 3 0 H {. 4 c9 g Egg 3 g gi fj 11 "sry , 1ell<- O Z l l S— LLIN � u Zr l@ge „ c 17 ' O—01 ii 1 _ @� .. I E 3I Mil li V^ , o—\\ '' -,a 1 \ QQv co �` f \ i �o o i 11 N . , ;, . N i. wi i E ur:, : $ 8 • \ / • ♦ i f \ ♦♦ i • i \ . $ N -. N • PP-.-. -. \ ♦ 2 � @,' ♦ it ♦ \ g • ■t i •♦' i • ■ ■ y.�\* áflflPfl *ip♦ N ♦♦ n ♦♦44 ♦♦ ■ li *• *1 \ i Oa; lis ♦ • ♦ ♦ N• 5 ■ Y OVOY Alle00 alEM auoistai _ NVld 3OVNIVdd a3dOl3A30 .3:z_tmz.., woe v4.11.,.,.Z_t1104•0),. .o �ii��lr;t, it, ,I LI iv I. 8 k A- sV NOI LVOnddV 3NO2 AO 3ONVH3 �y 3NV1 SIMI IV S)IV3d NIMl I 5 1 m U- = O F Cla U U g 11 II " Skl l. ii ! Hill q a4 i a • X al a 4 Ei W W $ I I 1 a 1 w v Q11.1 N 1 i 'l 1 " / '_po CV I ? ` sit 11 11 ma 11 1 z 01 1 1 el 1 1 11I; a- s g i l - f1 t : 11� 1 , 1i i i$ i I I Aga Aii it it li ll tii\)j 1 CV• p N 1 Iii III 2';o OZ g ho 0 O Q' 13 JQ .13 6-1 tip / w $j o � \ I it w � �' 'I ii ,c, Ilk 5 I ` I \ / 1- 1 s 1 ♦ I I e II CO ii ao o I� \ / r �__ 1 4 / ik al / ` ♦ I Ii;- r_�\ 11* N Ilrr• ' � IIr 11I 44 7I --_I /1 I II 1 o r-------------J I ■ I , / i _I I gI 11 ti l� slat ; \ ©� i 1;i I N I I f i I I I i r!! � _� :;, 1:E . I 111 rE III I N , ! Q Jj -J I 1 �; o / /,' I I I I L J L ty--� ( ` J I t er i MIMI •wt�A.11•100 WNW*--- — '� —_ N,OHIin 61d1012412111a II !!1 o 1 I in Ln R; Hello