The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20093775.tifft Jer 's C4c 41200 APRIL 2010 RECEIVED APR - 9 2010 6�GM�►A�IikiitilidreD�l�s►at�,:x FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT Lonestar Saltwater Disposal Facility PREPARED FOR: LONESTAR, LLC PO BOX 1069 ANDREWS, TX 79714 (800) 367-4550 PREPARED BY: LAMP, RYNEARSON &ASSOCIATES, INC. 4715 INNOVATION DRIVE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525 (970) 226-0342 Copyricht © 2010 Lamp, Rynearson & Associates, Inc. All rights reserved. aQ'9 3775 PL02o31 .\1 AMMO APR 9 201 ihuij ?AMP; lift tom 4„attp April 9, 2010 Clayton Kimmi Weld County Public Works 1111 H Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 RE: USR 1708, Lonestar SWD Facility Response to Public Works Redline Comments LRA Project No. 0208037.00/3.0 Dear Mr. Kimmi: LAMP RYNEARSON & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS I SURVEYORS I PLANNERS 4715 Innovation Drive Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 [P] 970.226.0342 [F] 970.226.0879 www. LRA-Inc. corn APR 1 9 2010 togfatt644,Atto I have reviewed the preliminary drainage report redline comments provided by you. You asked that detailed analysis of off -site flows overtopping WCR 34 be completed. Since the facility does not contribute to the off -site discharge from the north and, since the discharge from the north does not pass through the facility due to the location of the facility at the high point of the property, we are confused as to the reasoning for the requested analysis. In addition, the discharge from the facility does not contribute to the drainage condition along the north side of WCR 34. Before we expend a great deal of effort completing the analysis, please provide more in-depth reasoning for the requested analysis. If you have any questions or need further information, please give me a call. Sincerely, LAMP RYNEARSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Daniel Hull, PE Senior Project Manager cc: Jim Lee, Lonestar, LLC Dave Bauer, Weld County Public Works Leaving a Legacy of Enduring Improvements to Our Communities... PURPOSE STATEMENT ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS Weld County Use By Special Review (USR) and Site Plan Review (SPR) FINAL Drainage Report Outline The following checklist is to be utilized as guidance, and may not be all inclusive. Other concerns may arise during the USR application process. The USR Final Drainage Report is stamped, signed, and dated by a registered P.E. licensed to practice in the State of Colorado. All submitted construction plan sheets are stamped, signed, and dated by a registered P.E. licensed to practice in the State of Colorado. I. Final Drainage Report inclusions 1. All preliminary report information is finalized. Proposed location and sizing of all storm sewers, swales, open channels, culverts, cross -pans, and other 2. appurtenances, including cross -sections of swales and open channels. Routing and accumulation of flows at various critical points for minor and major storm runoff is calculated 4' overflow facilities, are designed and supported with calculations. 3' and documented. Detention storage facilities and outlet works, including proposed 100 -year water surface elevations and 5. Location of all existing and proposed utilities are identified. 6. achieved. The minimum lowest opening elevations of residential and commercial buildings are above the 100 -year 7' water surface in streets, channels, swales, or other drainage facilities. Routing of off -site drainage flows through the development (but not through detention outlet pipe) has been 8. Proposed on -site and off -site private and public drainage easements are identified. All proposed culverts are identified and profiled in construction drawings with slope, pipe size, material, 9. invert elevations and stations, upstream 100-yr energy grade line (EGL loo), and hydraulic profile through the pipe are clearly indicated. Pipe hydraulics are supported with calculations. 10. 4iAr construction drawings. The elevations of manhole and inlet inverts in relation to project datum are identified and profiled in 11 Proposed water surface elevations for street encroachments for the minor and major storm are identified in report and supported with calculations.. 12. Critical hydraulic structure dimensions are identified in report and on construction drawings. 13. Orifice plate sizes are calculated in the report and identified on construction drawings. 14. Detention pond volumes are calculated in the report and indicated on construction drawings. 15. All other critical hydraulic elevations are calculated and documented in the report. 16. Operations and Maintenance instructions for the proposed stormwater drainage facilities Construction -phase erosion control calculations are provided and shown on the erosion control sheet in the 1• 7. •,construction drawings. 18 Permanent erosion and sediment control design calculations are provided and shown on the erosion control sheet in the construction drawings. Weld County Public Works Page 1 of 1 USR Final Drainage Report Checklist Form Updated 02-06-2008 ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this report for the final drainage design of Lonestar Saltwater Disposal Facility was prepared by me (or under my direct supervision) in accordance with the provisions of the Weld County Storm drainage criteria for the owners thereof. Daniel D. Hull, PE Colorado Registered Professional Engineer No. 39337 FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT LONESTAR SALTWATER DISPOSAL FACILITY WELD COUNTY I. General Location and Description A. Location The property is located in the Northwest Quarter of Section 18. "Township 3 North, Range 64 West of the 6th PM, Weld County, Colorado, More specifically, the property is located on the south side of Weld County Road ( SCR) 4, east of' WCR 49. See the vicinity map and Exhibit A in Appendix A for the location and legal description of the property. B. Description of Property The 37 -acre parcel is currently an abandoned dairy farm with native vegetation. The site also has two existing oil and gas wells and a tank battery to support the wells. Present soils consist mainly of Valent sand, classified as Type A soils in the NRCS Hydrologic Soils Groups. The site generally slopes from north to south. Ground slope varies generally from 1 to 5 percent. The 7.5 -minute quadrangle map shows a water feature to the south of the property and no water features on the site. A site visit confirmed that no water features are present on the site and the water feature south of the site was not visible. The proposed Use by Special Review is a Class II Commercial Underground Disposal Facility within the current agricultural zone and will serve the oil and gas industry. The facility will sit on approximately 2.7 acres. The facility will consist of an off-loading area and a tank farm for processing the flow back and produced water before injection into deep geologic formations. The off-loading area will be accessed by one access point from WCR 34. Trucks will off-load the flow back and produced water by pumping to a "flat tank", which is the starting point for the processing of the water by the tank farm. The processing system is a closed system. Once processed, the water will be injected in to the formations under pressure by means of a pumping system. The emptied trucks will leave the facility. To further support the operations of the facility, the facility will also include an office and a pump house. II. Drainage Basins and Sub Basins A. Major Basin Description The proposed site is not located within the Weld County Master Drainage Plan. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Weld County, Colorado, Panel No. 860 of 1075, Community Panel No. 080266 0775 C, dated September 28, 1982, the proposed development is located in Zone C. Currently the proposed property generally slopes from north to south, eventually conveying historic runoff to the existing parcel to the south. The property is bound on the west by WCR 49, on the north by WCR 34, on the east by an existing commercial Final Drainage Report Lonestar Saltwater Disposal Facility, Weld County Page 1 feedlot, and on the south by one large parcel zoned agricultural. The parcel currently is used as a residential property. Since the facility is located at the pinnacle of the property, no off -site flows will enter the facility. The historic basin shown on the Historic Basin Map defines where the facility will fall within that historic basin. Since the facility is at the pinnacle of the property, the facility will not affect off -site flows and off -site flows will not be routed through the facility. Analysis of off -site flows or delineation of off -site basins was not completed. Discharge from the facility will be released at a historic rate to the historic basin. Discharge from the historic basin and facility will follow the historic path to the south. Ultimately, historic discharge and discharge from the facility will enter Box Elder Creek. Refer to the Historic Basin Map in Appendix A for more detail. B. Sub -Basin Description The sub -basins for the proposed development were determined from the grading plan, layout of the site, and other factors that determine basin size and shape. The runoff from the proposed site will be captured in a detention system located south of the facility and then released at an attenuated rate within the property following the historic drainage path. The basins are shown on the Developed Basin Drainage Map (see Appendix A). III. Drainage Design Criteria A. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints The developed stormwater conditions were established using information and criteria from the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes I, II, and III, and the Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals, Volumes 1, 2, and 3, as well as good engineering practices. No known previous drainage studies have been conducted for this area and no site constraints exist. B. Hydrological Criteria The design storms used were the 5 -year (minor) and 100 -year (major) for the developed discharges and the 5 -year for historic discharge. The intensity duration frequency curves were created using NOAA Atlas 2, Volume III, and were used to obtain rainfall data for each storm specified. Because the site is less than 160 acres, the Rational Method was used to calculate historic and developed stormwater runoff. The stormwater detention system was designed using the Modified FAA Method. C. Hydraulic Criteria The stormwater conveyance systems were designed to capture and convey the minor and/or major event. The stormwater structures were designed using techniques developed or adopted by Weld County. The pond outlet will be designed to release at a controlled rate. The water quality capture volume (WQCV) will be released through exfiltration. Final Drainage Report Lonestar Saltwater Disposal Facility, Weld County Page 2 IV. Drainage Facility Design A, General Concept The basin for the proposed facility, Basin Dl, was used to calculate the stormwater discharge. Stormwater runoff from Basin D1 will be detained on -site in the detention system located south of the facility. Stormwater will be conveyed to the detention system by the proposed grading of the facility and natural topography of the property. The detention system has been designed utilizing a berm and the existing topography. The following is a list of the general drainage structures used within the facility to route or control the release of the stormwater: • Drainage swale adjacent to the entrance and east drive to capture and direct developed flow to the detention pond. • Drainage swale adjacent to the west drive to capture and direct developed flow to the detention pond. • Detention pond to the south of the facility to capture the developed discharge. • Detention pond outlet structure in the southeast corner of the detention pond to control the release of the developed discharge. • Detention pond emergency spillway to control the release of the 100 -year developed discharge in the event the orifice plate becomes plugged. B. Specific Details Since the soils are classified as Type A, the runoff coefficient for the 5 -year historic event is 0.00. A runoff coefficient of 0,00 produces no runoff when using the Rational Method to calculate runoff. Based on this, the allowed 5 -year historic discharge would be 0,00. Since Weld County requires stormwater detention systems to release captured stormwater within 72 hours, the allowable unit release rate was determined through iteration within the Modified FAA Method to determine the required detention volume. The attenuated rate was determined to be 0.08 cfs. The attenuated rate will be released from the detention system through a 12 -inch diameter, corrugated metal pipe with an orifice plate. The orifice plate will have a 1-1/4" diameter hole to control the release of the stormwater within the pond. An emergency spillway capable of passing the 100 - year developed discharge in the event tlie orifice plate becomes plugged has been provided and can be seen on the Developed Basin Drainage Map. The location of the spillway was chosen to minimize erosion in the event of an emergency release, e detention system has been modeled to include WQCV prior to the controlled elease. The WQCV will not be released, rather it will be allowed to exfiltrate. Per the soils report, this site has an average exfiltration rate of 30 feet per day, which easily exceeds the required rate of 0.5 feet per day necessary to drain the WQCV in 72 hours. Based on the layout of the site, maintenance of and access to the detention system will y be easily obtained.fF`. rr On -site drainage basin area routed to storage system 2.725 acres - , Off -site drainage basin area routed to storage system 0.00 acres Final Drainage Report Lonestar Saltwater Disposal Facility, Weld County Page 3 Allowed release rate (5 -year historic discharge) Average release rate Required Water Quality Capture Volume` Provided Water Quality Capture Volume Bottom of Detention system Detention system outlet invert elevation Spillway elevation Detention system volume required (100 -year event) Detention system volume provided Freeboard Minimum opening elevation 0.0 cfs 0.06 cis 1.859 ft 1,904 ft; 4808.0 ft 4809.5 ft 4813.0 ft 18,823 ft3 P✓�" 30,167 ft3 1.0 ft 4814.0 ft Copies of the State of Colorado General Permit Application for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity and the Notice of Intent to Construct a Non - Jurisdictional Water Impoundment Structure have been provided in Appendix C. Refer to Appendix A for al] basin calculations. Refer to Appendix B for all detention volume and outlet computations. V. Operation and Maintenance A. Inspections: Owner shall inspect detention pond after major rainfall events, to check for obstructions/damage and to remove debris/ trash. B. Vegetation Management: Owner shall mow the detention pond and drainage swales on a regular basis to prevent erosion or aesthetic problems. C. Trash, Debris and Litter Removal: Owner shall remove any debris causing obstructions at the inlet, outlet, orifice or trash rack during periodic inspections and after every runoff producing rainfall event. D. Structural Component Check: Owner shall inspect the outlet works, inlet, orifice, and trash rack, on a regular basis E. Bank Erosion/Stabilization: All areas not vegetated shall be re -vegetated and stabilized immediately. F. Sediment Removal: Owner shall remove accumulated sediment from the bottom of the outlet structure and the pond yearly. G. Structural Repair/Replacement: Owner shall repair outlet structure or other structural components as needed. VI. Conclusions When developed, the site's runoff will be increased. The detention system will capture developed flows and release them at an attenuated rate within the existing property Final Drainage Report Lonestar Saltwater Disposal Facility, Weld County Page 4 following the historic drainage path. This drainage report complies with the Weld County Code and The Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. VII. References A. The Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (USDCM), Volumes I, II and III, published by the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado, June 2001 B. Weld County Code C. Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals, Volumes 1, 2, and 3, Weld County Code Article XI and Appendix 8L VIII. Appendices A. I)rainai e Calrutatiuns 1. Preliminary Drainage Report Checklist (Weld County Preliminary and Final Drainage Report Checklists) 2. Vicinity Map (map of surrounding area and site) 3. Exhibit A, Property Legal Description (Legal property description from Deed) 4. Soils Map and Classifications (Hydrologic soils group and map as reported by NRCS) 5. Flood Insurance Rate Map (map generated by FEMA) 6. Historic Basin Map (11x17) 17) (map showing the historic basin) 7, Developed Basin Drainage Map (11 x 17) (map showing the developed drainage basin) 8. Basin Impervious Calculations (breakdown of the basin's land uses, areas, and percent impervious calculations) 9. Basin Descriptions (description of basins and flow paths) 10. Time of Concentration Calculations (Time of Concentration calculations for all basins) 11. Storm Drainage Calculations (runoff calculations using the Rational Method for all basins) 12. IDF Table for Zone One in the State of Colorado (Calculations to determine the IDF curve, spreadsheet provided by UDFCD) 13. NOAA Maps (Maps provided by NOAA showing the precipitation for use in calculating the IDF curve) 14. Table RO-3, Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values (table from USDCM, Volume I, used to calculate the runoff coefficients) Pages A -1—A-4 Page A-5 Page A-6 Pages A -7--A-9 Page A-10 Page A-11 Page A-12 Page A-13 Page A -I4 Page A-15 Page A-16 Page A-17 Page A -18—A-29 Page A-30 Final Drainage Report Lonestar Saltwater Disposal Facility, Weld County Page 5 15. Table RO-4, Correction Factors (correction factors used in Page A-31 Equations RO-6 and RO-7 for calculating the runoff coefficients) 16. Table RO-5, Runoff Coefficients (table of runoff coefficients Pages A -32—A-33 calculated from equations RO-6 and RO-7 used in the Rational Method Equation) 17. Table RO-2, Conveyance Coefficient, C„ (table from USDCM, Page A-34 Volume I, used in Equation RA -3 to calculate the velocity) 18. Rainfall Intensity Equation, Equation RA -3 (equation provided in Page A-35 USDCM, Volume I, used to calculate the velocity for calculating the Time of Concentration) 19. Drainage Swale Calculations and Swale Protection Pages A -36—A-43 Calculations (calculations using Manning's Equation to design the drainage swales, and calculations using North American Green software to size the erosion control fabric, respectively) B. Storage System Calculations 1. Storage System Variables (summary of variables used in the detention and outlet design) 2. Detention Volume by Modified FAA Method (Calculations to determine the detention volume based on release rate determined from the 72 -Hour Release Outflow Rate spreadsheet provided by the UDFCD) 3. 72 -Hour Pond Outflow Rate (calculations showing an iterative process using the Unit Release Rate in the "UDFCD Detention Volume by Modified FAA Method" spreadsheet, to determine the detention pond release rate) 4. Water Quality Capture Volume (calculations to determine the WQCV, volume based on USDCM, Volume III, and calculations to determine adequate exfiltration of WQCV) 5. Exfiltration Rates and Map from Geotechnical Engineering Report (excerpt from geotechnical report for exfiltration rates) 6, Storage System Cross Sections from Bottom to Top (cross section of detention pond volume) 7. Pond Outlet Orifice Sizing (calculation showing the pond outlet orifice size based on pond release rate) 8. Pond Outlet Sizing and Riprap Calculations (calculations for sizing the culvert and riprap at the outlet of the culvert) 9. 100 -year Developed Spillway and Riprap Calculations (calculations for sizing the spillway and riprap) Page B-1 Page B-2 Page B-3 Page B-4 Pages B -5—B-6 Page B-7 Page B-8 Page B -9—B-25 Pages B -26—B-32 Final Drainage Report Lonestar Saltwater Disposal Facility, Weld County Page 6 C. Permit Apfications and Erosion Control Details 1, Copy of General Permit Application of Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity 2. Copy of Notice of Intent to Construct a Non -Jurisdictional Water Impoundment Structure 3. SWMP and Erosion Control Details (standard CDOT Temporary Pages C -6—C-12 Erosion Control Details M-208-1) D. 1Jrairiaac Mtt �s 1. Historic Basin Map, 24x36 (Scale 1" = 100') 2. Historic Basin Map, 24x36 (Scale 1" = 50') 3. Developed Basin Drainage Map, 24x36 4. Storm Water Management Plan, 24x36 Page C -1—C-4 Page C-5 Sleeve Sleeve Sleeve Sleeve Final Drainage Report Lonestar Saltwater Disposal Facility, Weld County Page 7 APPENDIX A Weld County Use By Special Review (USR) and Site Plan Review (SPR) FINAL Drainage Report Outline The following checklist is to be utilized as guidance, and may not be all inclusive. Other concerns may arise during the USR application process. } The USR Final Drainage Report is stamped, signed, and dated by a registered P.E. licensed to practice in the State of Colorado. All submitted construction plan sheets are stamped, signed, and dated by a registered P.E. licensed to practice in the State of Colorado. I. Final Drainage Report inclusions 1, All preliminary report information is finalized. Proposed location and sizing of all storm sewers, swales, open channels, culverts, cross -pans, and other 2' appurtenances, including cross -sections of swales and open channels. Routing and accumulation of flows at various critical points for minor and major storm runoff is calculated and documented. Detention storage facilities and outlet works, including proposed 100 -year water surface elevations and 4 overflow facilities, are designed and supported with calculations. 5. Location of all existing and proposed utilities are identified. Routing of off -site drainage flows through the development (but not through detention outlet pipe) has been 6 achieved. The minimum lowest opening elevations of residential and commercial buildings are above the 100 -year 7' water surface in streets, channels, swales, or other drainage facilities. 8. Proposed on -site and off -site private and public drainage easements are identified. All proposed culverts are identified and profiled in construction drawings with slope, pipe size, material, g. invert elevations and stations, upstream 100-yr energy grade line (EGL 4Q0), and hydraulic profile through the pipe are clearly indicated. Pipe hydraulics are supported with calculations. The elevations of manhole and inlet inverts in relation to project datum are identified and profiled in construction drawings. Proposed water surface elevations for street encroachments for the minor and major storm are identified in report and supported with calculations.. 12. Critical hydraulic structure dimensions are identified in report and on construction drawings. 13. Orifice plate sizes are calculated in the report and identified on construction drawings. 14. Detention pond volumes are calculated in the report and indicated on construction drawings. 15. All other critical hydraulic elevations are calculated and documented in the report. 16. Operations and Maintenance instructions for the proposed stormwater drainage facilities Construction -phase erosion control calculations are provided and shown on the erosion control sheet in the i7' construction drawings. Permanent erosion and sediment control design calculations are provided and shown on the erosion 18 control sheet in the construction drawings. 3. 10. 11. Weld County Public Works Page 1 of 9 USR Final Drainage Report Checklist Form Updated 02-06-2008 A-1 Weld County Use By Special Review (USR) and Site Plan Review (SPR) PRELIMINARY Drainage Report Outline The following checklist is to be utilized as guidance, and may not Ipe all inclusive. Other concerns may arise during the USR application process. The USR Preliminary Drainage Report is stamped, signed, and dated by a registered P.E. licensed to practice in the State of Colorado. All submitted construction plan sheets are stamped, signed, and dated by a registered P.E. licensed to practice in the State of Colorado. K X ,r I. General Location and Description A. Location 1. Township, Range, Section, Y4 -Section. 2. Local streets within and adjacent to the development. 3 Major open channels, lakes, streams, irrigation and other water resource facilities within and adjacent to proposed project site. 4. Names of surrounding developments including jurisdiction (municipalities), B. Description of Property 1 Area in acres. 2. Ground cover and soil types. 3. Major open channels and ownership. 4. General project description. 5. Irrigation facilities and ownership information within 200 ft. of property. 6. Groundwater characteristics (where applicable). II. Drainage Basins and Sub -Basins A. Major Basin Description 1. Reference to Weld County Master Drainage Plan(s) where applicable. 2. Major basin drainage characteristics. 3. Identification of all FEMA-defined 100 -year floodplains and floodways affecting the property. 4. On -site contours at minimum 2 -ft vertical intervals. B. Sub -Basin Description 1. Historic drainage patterns on the subject property and adjacent properties. Of site drainage flow patterns and impacts on the subject property ( minimum 200 ft outside property 2 boundary, or until no further off -site contributing flow area is encountered). Ill. Drainage Design Criteria A. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints Discussion of previous drainage studies (i.e. project master plans) for the subject property that influence or are influenced by the proposed drainage design for the site. Discussion of site constraints such as slopes, streets, utilities, existing structures, irrigation ditches, and the 2 site plan impacts on the proposed drainage plan. 1. Weld County Public Works Pagel of 3 USR Prelim. Drainage Report Checklist Form Updated 02-06-2008 A-2 B. Hydrological Criteria 1. Identify design rainfall (source of design storm depth information, NOAA Atlas, UD&FCD maps, etc.) 2. Identify design storm recurrence intervals. 3. Identify runoff calculation methods) and any computer models. 4. Identify detention discharge and storage calculation methods and computer models. C. Hydraulic Criteria 1. Identify conveyance capacities from County references and any computer models. 2. Identify conceptual detention outlet type. 3. Identify conceptual water quality outlet configuration. Discussion and justification of criteria or calculation methods (for water quality, check dams, drop 4 structures, rundowns. etc.) used that are not presented in Weld County CODE. IV. Drainage Facility Design A. General Concept 1. Discussion of concept and typical on -site drainage patterns. 2. Discussion of compliance with off -site runoff considerations and constraints. 3. Discussion of the content of all tables, charts, figures, or drawings in the report. 4. Discussion of anticipated hydraulic structures (channels, pipes, rundowns, etc.). B. Specific Details 1. Discussion of maintenance access and aspects of the design. 2. Provide copies of Draft CDPHE, CAFO, DRMS, or State Engineer's permit applications where applicable. V. Conclusions A. Compliance with the Weld County CODE 1. Statement of whether or not the preliminary design will meet Weld County Code. x B. Drainage concept 1. Effectiveness of drainage design to control damage from storm runoff. Influence of proposed development on any applicable Weld County Master Drainage Plan 2. recommendations. Identification of and intent to obtain written approval of affected irrigation company or other property 3. owner(s). Weld County may require that the applicant provide evidence that offsite impacted jurisdictions have been notified of the proposed plans. Reference all criteria and technical resources utilized. 4. VI. Appendices A. Hydrologic Computations 1. Land use assumptions regarding adjacent properties. 2. Initial and major storm runoff computations at specific design points. 3. Historic and fully developed runoff computations at specific design points 4. Computer model input and output. Weld County Public Works USR Prelim. Drainage Report Checklist Form Updated 02-06-2008 Page 2 of 3 A-3 by B. Hydraulic Computations 1. Preliminary culvert sizing. 2. Preliminary storm inlet sizing. 3. Preliminary swale or channel sizing. 4. Preliminary riprap or other revetment design. 5. Preliminary pond area/volume capacity and outlet sizing 6. Any computer model input and output. Weld County Public Works LISP Prelim. Drainage Report Checklist Form Updated 02-06-2008 Page3 of 3 VICINITY MAP SCALE 1" = 2000' i1 111 f �lfl# fl l f I[il III J��iIq M111 111111 3586828 12.f2gr2O 1.:ISP We Caanly,CO 2 of 2 p 11.00 p itaa Sion Moreno Clerk h linaafdar Ewa= "At" Tar N b,olimp bd VrEen of 9.14 Weld Camtyiya t 1otsdo, Wog mope �lil Ea3'! fxsciirt as kliu rs 3 Beghming a:i}s Nortbwet: cnwra (NV Co* of said Sv4itto 18 and =Main go Nordiliae artud Secban 1$ err basin $oak 84° 4K' 1'-" Fit, yP2h all other freria8� mat ainedharefasrtili4B rnat'at Th ncc 6oflsh84°d8' 12,1 ELe, alnpg tle Tlortb li tofQuid. Setthm ter, 6 dltwlwo or 3433.1z fat: Theme $oi tiOr 1G 57" Wersit, 66267 feat; 'atm a Notate CS' 17'59" Waft, 2454.03 ! 11174oe South 6D' 5Z' 37" Essr, gimsg daa W al u4e ultsld Scatlms 16. £32331ecsto dig Traci PogitoYT3 cginrzllr, Said de c, tbed p'tiroel of isDd cvatahu 37.327 i4rses, wog or but ladtadhrg aatrip diurnal 3D feet II DNA aicm ika West wdNor1b stdrs of ,isle Beutito I C farCtnrzey Road 134.1%-at''ilky ?imposts, mi. iE Fralsj o#'ta any hie-af gray or Dixie oa4mcam as rc-00.tbEattyfriTtritElIELEEtEllf mind or er aaw cam gn :aid cam! 4f lni Camp, of Wthl, Mat& of Coteredu Legal 5iscriptioa prepa<cd by Fraede Bggbadariog, 217 L 18thStn=, Org day. CO 60O1, 6R7,p Nii t3Pcr,'40576 X41& 3596926-Rout.002 El 'd 06[9 'ON 311[1 0100 3N NdO 16006 '91 'NV A-6 O• co co E N O O o O 77) co 0 o U //J lc I C O O (.7 0 C/7 0) O O >. 2 ,.9E .5E ,404 44 9E etia4 0 of a a Ot9 Sitr O£9 E911 a4 544 fl5EGS9v Map Scale: 1:4,680 if prin Led en A size (8.5"x 11") sheet e404 0 0 N 0 O O X, ..11 .9E eba4 0 z 0 O O N N A-7 MAP INFORMATION MAP LEGEND Map Scale: 1:4,090 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11") sheet. The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. O. co ra 8 }/ a. 8 0 in O. § 5 §2Q 2 © �}0 To �_- © 2 o 40 IS do zk# f EL) o k !+ ®§ 2a2 ao ®2§ a0 s )ru E k/) Area of Interest (AOl) l Area of Interest (AO!) Soils Soil Map Units Date(s) aerial images were photographed: E h O k kf oeuE Er) .O / 22j :k) { \fig §a<2 U a 2> 4- a [2e B=6§ 9\s« oV-a o. Ln o`V 0/0. oEEE c8a% �« 2 = § o § _ 2 O g q q q q q Not rated or not available Political Features a e Water Features 0 q Streams and Canals Interstate Highways ] ? ] / Local Roads k 2 / cvs U §8 ) A-8 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Lonestar Disposal Facility Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Map unit symbol Map unit name 35 70 72 Totals for Loup-Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes D A Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 'B percent slopes Area of Interest Rating Acres In AOI Percent of AOI 0.0 34.6 2.0 36.6 Description 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 -duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (ND, BID, 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 moderate rate of water transmission. 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 (A/D, BID, or CID), 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. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service 0.1% 94.3% 5.5% 100.0% Web Soil Survey 2.2 6/1/2009 National Cooperative Soil Survey A-9 - — ` \, \\\ \\ t \ \ _ ` - / 1'\ ---------- ---- -'" , r-_\ \\ -+79A- �' ) i / ' �-4900------- / / j — ^ � - - .. � - 4802 — — _ � — _ � — � \ ., — --_. RM.------�•- -- 2 N s � \ --N. OA N 1 � t 4 � � ▪ l I IEGENQ A H'E f OFFS S• • 014686/080, ® POWER RISER CR FIVER 1ETER kd TELEPHONE RUH m MATER PETER A CORHFAS SEE IS/6- MM NTH I I/4', YFLLOM PLASTIC DPP !TYPED PLS-]?OE1 • LOOFA FOI6'O • YFJSLPFD R60SONS P6 REBAR PVC POLV,WIL DAME • 05 BON • EECTRMR ANCPW • DENTS cIwTWR A = BASIN DESCRIPTION C 4E.ill ICI.rA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT D • - CO $'3 TE iW -VP RUNOFF COEFFICIENT BASIN TRAVEL PATH FLOM PATH tram, w NSFE _ dePpned by rePaHead by E�H a- u - C1 CO ca ct Sp CD L.CO MI r) rn rn C7 E GO 0 ▪ CCI P. Q ›;c4 o N c co Wy .•: I..L. —1 ▪ ,.tz HISTORIC BASIN MAP a us fob number -loofa book page s•Ir 9+1o'+lzo-T p sheet 01 of 02 A—Il Scales: 1" = 30' FSOR. a 3' VERT.2L N yman by I�IIJ tlxpwtl bF ✓ wM wtl by H?NSFti+I Ii�'F K.• ota MUM MI ------ • \ \\ o Bye` `1 PI▪ NED ACCESS Rgh6 SV.O.LE 1 , reps` 0_305 C1 -.Z8 X4`11 r ONSFI SG CPS UNE. IAAPRDAIUAT6 kE{JAnCH) -f_ F. ' f /f . x / /- / ti • 5• - N -�PPFF�iH INSTALL Mild— -ou LTA SIR4IIVcc I SEL L� uF SYTET cc 1� nACo5 till -\ w I00 YR �cL r / IRE fiQ S kr- 1'; CONSTRUCT 4456 IF 12' DIP O -617R NATWE BACKFlLL P09 REMIND 'xr,tar, GROUND t8 ./.312 1840 4707 0+00 0+30 0+60 0+P0 'EN 'VL 06 5_Ct•'3+= kE. FOMl5'1L" 3 NVRF+ Rg of A. e651 w'ADD_ L`:_G.0IR L By ',FEES NEED .'OGV!,LS +S FT'.:{'Mi _Dr APPRWYIATEL, +.R 00U44 ASPNAlT R4FC SUF IQE [CARER 79 END NDRi'IPEF-F �OL:APFEN: EECE ALCk IL Tk EAST LINE OF . ,<AL 771 Q'FAi E9_ .01 'EFT ID- FH: IRUL Ekl,c of BFGtlJmJu_ B` FEET; F (HAAND A E.DnD WORD MS FEET] FUS OF 14300 FEETR ARC LENGTH OF 316.3A F FEET, T, ISO FEET; ❑S FEET? 5• FEET'S S 55 FEET; 'IUw1/- I RADIUS OF 05.00 FEET µD A ONO CHORD BEARING FON AN RID LENITh OF I20 10 FEET; DE FEET; .34 FEET TO 111E POINT OF BEGINNING; 0 ACRES) OF SATE NORTHM'EST OWATFR lE 400174E5 TO BEAR NORTH 1G5 REFERENCED NERCO 'St r:lE2 E Rs OCT IEEE - to I 'd1' ulr ns . R5-37067) L'FGJ� 0MO-90115 }. 004009 N PROF IIMEC BO JAM PRORINH INE EBGE DF R010 (EON GRADE DIEM LOTS SF PWIBRO BLY.61R1 ` ASPHALT PRANG C CONCRLIF GRAVEL RIO 1R FUR 91RFALE !TUMOR OYECMI RILL PAM 01D OC110N RN PIP WNOEAI PARRFI0 PROPOSER CONTOUR A - BASIN DESCRIPTION B = MI 196 ACNL. C COwOSOE L-IH FISI.RIF COEFFICIENT D e 154P05110 100-rn 4w4FF COE°FIC1ENT BASIN TRAVEL PATH FLOW Mikan' gamma ElE7:!:iS:a:iz' _rtrs I 0-E_ CD CO C'M'S ' 6 op Ta En 613 6o rn rn LO 0 CJ 2 O C L � � mar3 50 m 3 E C7 3 2: aa Q Q M UJ L.! L.7 bb camber-taake 0206037 00 006 book page date 04/07/2010 ehee1 1 01 1 A-12 BASIN IMPERVIOUS CALCS 2 � Routed to detention pond Routed lo detention pond Routed to detention pond 0 §/) �k E K {OJf ;� k7@ 2}§ re al C LO w ( (00 7 § §2G % 6 §S3 2Tr ( k 000 m )' § 9 a . o }\§ Total Area, A Acres N f§§ Description J L. $k$ (/f \ 7kk _ L00 i� ��k\ Lamp Rynearson Storm Runoff Calculations 0208037.xlsx ON §k BASIN DESCRIPTION § -3 0 !y 2- 3 , 0 r $ a *S+ E ;f a mz !E I;; } a )`@ !@ # `G/ ne ' © ^ G ( ; ; e E § K & 0/ 2 ;22 `5E § 2 I F ! O q NW §I § S a |2d 0 § §0§ O 0 ood Basin Number Area Description %Imp (acres) K (§§ 1 ) HI • t ) = Qit Z 20O m moo nom da )w IA4 Lamp Rynearson Storm Runoff Calculations 0208097.xIsx A-14 IDF TABLE FOR ZONE ONE IN THE STATE OF COLORADO Zone 1: South Platte, Republican, Arkansas, and Cimarron River Basins Project: High Plains Disposal, Weld County Site #2A Enter the elevation at the center of the watershed: Elev = 4,808 (input) 1. Rainfall Depth -Duration -Frequency Table E t r the 6 -hour and 24 -hour rainfalk depths from the NOAH Atlas 2 Volume III in rightmost blue columns ne Return Period Rainfall Depth in Inches at Time Diira i.on 5 -min 10 -min 15 -min 30 -min 1 -hr 2 -hr 3 -hr a -hr 24 -hr (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) L) (7) (8) (9) (10) 2-yr out ut 0.30 out ut 0.47 out ut 0.59 out ut 0.82 output 1.04 output 1.16 out ut input input 1.25 1.40 1.70 5-yr 0.42 _ 0.66 0.83 1.15 . 1..46 1.61 1.72 1.90 2.20 10-yr 0.50 0.78 0.99 1.37 1.74 1.52 1.36 1.10 2.60 25-yr 0.61 0.94 1.19 1.65 2.09 2.28 2.42 2.65 3.00 50-yr 0.70 1.09 1.38 1.91 2.42 2.73 2.58 2.91 2.71 3.04 2.90 3.40 100-yr 0.79 1.23 1.56 2.16 3.25 3.80 Note: Refer to NOAA Atlas 2 Volume III Isopluvial maps for 6 -hr and 24 -hr rainfall depths. Return Period Rainfall Intensity in Inches Per Hour at Time Duration 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-yrr 3.60 2.80 2,36 1.64 1.04 0.58 0.42 D,23 0.07 5-yr _ 10-yr 5.08 6.05 3.94 3.33 2.31 1.46 0.80 0.57 0.32 0.09 4.69 3.96 2.75 1.74 0.76 0.45 0.18 0.11 25-yr 7.27 5.64 4,76 3.30 2.09 1.14 0.81 0.44 0.13 50-yr 8.42 _ 6.54 5.52 3.82 2.42 1.29 0.90 - 0.48 0.14 100-yr 9.51 7.38 6.23 4.32 2.73 1.45 1.01 0.54 _ 0.16 UD-RainZone v1.01a.xls, Z-1 5/29/2009, A-17 0 n 1- I • L � - 1 r--.--tI FFl 1 I t t a x z cc No nu. as o N = 13 0. J ` • 1' '- 5. I_ t IcE r _ t . I r I ' I ---'.J r:.r.:-r-tee:•ry.�L)� •l _ IA t A-18 A-19 A-20 ti 0 O m rn ,71 mm` 1 _ ---- f r I Intl-� - . I "•,___-, - �, 1 I �; r. I i. I I il I l ' -._�� 7 - I 1 1 _______I-----1 j i —`Y-_L - 1, �--ice r� »•-r I L. r'1' W 17 I 4-� I \ f'') I •- r Ii r I_r' I �'t: - — i is w'1 II`` ?_. '= I " !'7 r;'f�y il_ yam.P. Q - 12- �`i_ ii l V 0- 0 A-21 I • - _.I �l{ JI 1 1��.— J �� 1 :_ J �,\ I -i. I S " I L S_lrff ff1 _ —•'gym i s7 ff� LD F, I I 0 O 0 n 0 0 0 A-22 .il I t ! f 1 m � _ 4^� is y IR ,�. { Y G� I, I r _ _ I' + k� ti I i 777 —Y i — — i .z ll�- . 1. �., yG_ce f ^— - y-� .r 7 i fir: -i i .1 f r ., r--- I i` /ti y, -' i M I�•,L 1 y,1 S M1 �EtUY IL% 7 8.E ..y,-ri��•' mss` F ail u2� c 1 I 0 0 a A-23 '1 r r l h ___,-_,--------F---_-___•_- � IV ---\\--jr-----1-7 l - .., I' (--.0 n� i 2 F C•• ; 4Z. C I l w it r' '4/ IV I I I. '7�3 i r -- - I --r"1 I t f I I it -; 'I r' I IR I I ' C 1 r7. -..,II ,_ I 5 _ / 1 \ 4-,, .j I t _ I f' t 1 t , i ,'� I c 1 I 17 �� u "j`f] r .).472"nti .`Jr' L-11 r J1 r • I '1 a1 r {,•g _771 1.4 - I s' 4 s 1 I - t :"n 1r..J- siCC = C) m A-25 A-26 r A-27 Irk xo. 1 . ,�• I a 1 I { t- 4 • • -1 j _t I 1'� I a. T. ▪ • µ.V I I l .. MV Y� 5"� '`•1 LJ / ,l``I•S+Q' Stt L' ~ I.110:3 f 71 � Y ' }Y I i 1 I I- h W a a ti I1= oy — u. wz Ou. LA 0 - 41, } a▪ r N Z r V_{ S ,' )• ir • r • r• J�C4a�ll' lti C l = Leo ▪ ks q S $s E8— 2i2 N o 1 0 -•c O A-23 A-29 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF Table RO-3—Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values Land Use or ` Surface Characteristics I Percentage Imperviousness Business: Commercial areas 95 Neighborhood areas $5 Residential: Single-family * Multi -unit (detached) 60 Multi -unit (attached) 75 Half -acre lot or larger * Apartments 80 Industrial: Light areas 80 Heavy areas 90 Parks, cemeteries 5 Playgrounds 10 Schools 50 Railroad yard areas 15 Undeveloped Areas: Historic flow analysis 2 Greenbelts, agricultural 2 Off -site flow analysis (when land use not defined) 45 Streets: Paved 100 Gravel (packed) 40 Drive and walks 90 Roofs 90 Lawns, sandy soil 0 Lawns, clayey soil 0 * See Figures RO-3 through RO-5 for percentage imperviousness. CA = KA + (1.31i3 —1.4412 + 1,135i — 0.12) for CAL' 0, otherwise CA= 0 (RO-6) Cc") = K + (0.85813 — 0.78612 + 0.7741+ 0.04) (RO-7) = (CA + CcD)/2 2007-01 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District A-30 RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) in which: = % imperviousness/100 expressed as a decimal (see Table RO-3) CA= Runoff coefficient for Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Type A soils CB = Runoff coefficient for NRCS Type B soils CcD = Runoff coefficient for NRCS Type C and D soils KA = Correction factor for Type A soils defined in Table RO-4 KcD = Correction factor for Type C and D soils defined in Table RO-4 Table RO-4—Correction Factors KA and KCD for Use with Equations RO-6 and RO-7 Storm Return Period NRCS Soil Type C and D A 2 -Year 0 0 5 -Year -0.101+ 0.11 -0.081 + 0.09 10 -Year -0.181+ 0.21 25 -Year -0.281+ 0.33 -0.141+ 0.17 -0.191+0.24 50 -Year -0.331+ 0.40 -0.221+0.28 100 -Year -0.391+0.46 -0.251+0.32 The values for various catchment imperviousnesses and storm return periods are presented graphically in Figures RO-6 through RO-8, and are tabulated in Table RO-5. These coefficients were developed for the Denver region to work in conjunction with the time of concentration recommendations in Section 2.4. Use of these coefficients and this procedure outside of the semi -arid climate found in the Denver region may not be valid. The UD-Rafionai spreadsheet performs all the needed calculations to find the runoff coefficient given the soil type and imperviousness and the reader may want to take advantage of this macro -enabled Excel workbook that is available for download from the District's web site www.udfcd.orq under "Download" — "Technical Downloads." See Examples 7.1 and 7.2 that illustrate the Rational method. The use of the Rational method in storm sewer design is illustrated in Example 6.13 of the STREETS/INLETS/STORM SEWERS chapter. RO-10 2007-01 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District A-31 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) Table RO-5- Runoff Coefficients, C RUNOFF Percentage Imperviousness 2- r Type C and 0.15 D NRCS Hydrologic 10- r Soil 25-yr Groups 50-yr 100-yr 0% 0.04 0.25 0.37 0.44 0.46 0.47 0.49 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.50 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.57 5% 10% 0.08 0.11 0.18 0.21 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.33 0.35 0.28 0.30 0.32 D.34 0.36 0.38 0.39 0.41 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.47 15% 20% 0.14 0.17 25% 30% 0.20 0.22 35% 0.25 0.40 0.42 0.48 0.50 0.53 0.54 0.57 0.58 40% 0.28 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% 65% 0.41 0.45 0.46 0.51 0.57 0.60 0.63 0.65 0.49 0.54 0.59 0.62 70% 0.49 0.53 0.58 0.57 0.62 0.62 0.66 0.65 0.68 0.68 0.71 75% 0.54 80% 85% 0.60 0.66 0.63 0.66 0.70 0.72 0.74 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 0.89 100% 0.89 0.90 TYPE B MRCS 0.92 0.94 0.95 1 0.96 HYDROLOGIC 0.15 SOILS GstouP 0% 0.02 0.08 0.25 0.30 0.35 5% 0.04 0.10 0.19 0.28 0.33 0.38 10% 0.06 0.14 0.22 0.25 0.31 0.36 0.40 15% 0.08 0.17 0.33 0.38 0.42 20% 25% 0.12 0.15 0.20 0.22 0.27 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.44 0.37 r 0.41 0.46 30% 0.18 0.25 0.32 0.34 0.39 0.43 0.47 35% _ 0.20 D.27 0.41 0.44 0.48 40% 45% 50% 0.23 0.26 0.29 0.30 0.32 0.35 0.36 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.48 0.50 0.51 0.46 _ 0.49 0.52 55% 0.33 0.38 0.43 0.48 0.51 0.54 60% 0.37 0.41 0.45 0.46 0.51 0.54 0.56 65% 0.41 0.49 0.54 0.57 0.59 70% 0.45 0.49 0.53 0.58 0.60 0.62 75% 80% 0.51 0.54 0.58 0.63 0.62 r • 0.64 • 0.66 0.57 0.59 85% 0.63 0.66 0.69 W i i • 90% 0.71 0.73 0.81 0.75 0.83 0.92 0.85 0.94 0.87 0.95 0.88 0.96 95% 0.79 100% 0.89 0.90 2007-01 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District A-32 RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) TABLE RO-5 (Continued) —Runoff Coefficients, C Percentage Imperviousness RO-12 Type A NRCS Hydrologic Soils Group 2--yr 5- r 10- r 25- r 5D- r 100-yr 0% 0.00 ' 0.00 0.05 0.12 0.16 0.20 5% 0.00 0.02 0.10 0.16 0.20 0.24 10% 0.00 0.06 0.14 0.20 0.24 0.28 15% 0.02 0.10 0.17 0.23 0.27 0.30 20% 0.06 0.13 0.20 0.26 0.30 0.33 25% 0.09 0.16 0.23 0.29 0.32 0.35 30% 0.13 0.19 0.25 0.31 0.34 0.37 35% 0.16 0.22 0.28 0.33 0.36 0.39 40010 0.19 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.38 0.41 45% 0.22 0.27 0.33 0.37 0.40 0.43 50% 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 - 0.42 0.45 55% 60% 0.33 0.37 D.41 0.45 0A7 0.50 65% 0.37 0.41 0.45 0.49 0.51 0.53 70% 0.42 0.45 0.49 0.53 0.54 0.56 0.29 0.33 0.38 0,42 0.45 0.47 75% 80% 0.54 0.56 0.60 0.63 0.64 0.66 85% 0.61 0.63 0.66 0.69 0.70 0.72 90% 0.69 0.71 0.73 0.76 0.77 0.79 95% 0.78 0.80 0.82 0.64 0.85 0.86 100% 0.89 0.90 0.92 0.94_ 0.95 0.96 0.47 0.50 0.54 0.57 0.59 0.61 2007-01 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District A-33 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. 2.42 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, tr, can be estimated with the help of Figure RO-1 or the following equation (Guo 1999): V = C,, S,, o s in which: V = velocity (ft/sec) C, = conveyance coefficient (from Table RO-2) = watercourse slope (ft/ft) Table RO-2—Conveyance Coefficient, C, Type of Land Surface Heavy meadow Tillage/field (RO-4) Conveyance Coefficient, C, 2.5 Short pasture and lawns Nearly bare ground Grassed waterway Paved areas and shallow paved swales 5 7 10 15 20 The time of concentration, 1,, is then the sum of the initial flow time, t,, and the travel time, tr, as per Equation RO-2. 2.4.3 First Design_Paint 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=80+10 ` 1 (RO-5) in which: t, = maximum time of concentration at the first design point in an urban watershed (minutes) RO-6 2007-01 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District A_34 Worksheet for Swale 1 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Roughness Coefficient Channel Slope Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Discharge Results Normal Depth Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top Width Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Head loss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope Manning Formula Normal Depth Supercritical 0.020 0.02930 ft/ft 3.00 flft (H:V) 3.00 ft/ft (H:V) 1,10 ft'/s 0.32 ft 0.30 ft2 2.02 ft 1.91 ft 0.38 ft 0.01084 ft/ft 3.61 ft/s 0,20 ft 0.52 ft 1.59 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 0.32 ft 0.38 ft 0.02930 ft/ft 0.01084 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.065.00] 3/24/2010 6:65:16 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1.203-755.1666 Page 1 of i A-36 NORTH AGREE Material and Performance Specification Sheet A tensar Company SC150 Erosion Control Blanket North American Green 14649 Highway 41 North Evansville, IN 47725 800-772-2040 FAX: 812-867-0247 www.naoreen,com The extended -term double net erosion control blanket shall be a machine -produced mat of 70% agricultural straw and 30% coconut fiber with a functional longevity of up to 24 months. (NOTE: functional longevity may vary depending upon climatic conditions, soil, geographical location, and elevation). The blanket shall be of consistent thickness with the straw and coconut evenly distributed over the entire area of the mat. The blanket shall be covered on the top side with a heavyweight photodegradable polypropylene netting having ultraviolet additives to delay breakdown and an approximate 0.63 x 0.63 (1.59 x 1.59 cm) mesh, and on the bottom side with a lightweight photodegradable polypropylene netting with an approximate 0.50 x 0.50 in (1.27 x 1.27 cm) mesh. The blanket shall be sewn together on 1,50 inch (3.81 cm) centers with degradable thread, The SC150 shall meet requirements established by the Erosion Control Technology Council (ECTC) Specification and the US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects, FP -03 Section 713,17 as a type 3.B Extended -term Erosion Control Blanket. The SC150 is also available with the DOT SystemTM, which consists of installation staple patterns clearly marked on the erosion control blanket with environmentally safe paint. The blanket shall be manufactured with a colored thread stitched along both outer edges (approximately 2-5 inches [5- 12.5 cm] from the edge) as an overlap guide for adjacent mats. Matrix Nettings Thread 70% Straw Fiber 30% Coconut Fiber Top — Heavyweight photodegradable with UV additives Bottom — Lightweight Photodegradable Degradable Material Content SC150 is available in the following standard roll sizes: Width Length Weight ± 10% Area 6.67 ft (2.03 m) 108 ft (32.92 m) 44 lbs (19.95 kg) 80.0 yd2 (66.9 m2) Index Value Properties: Property Thickness Resiliency_ECTC Guidelines 75% Water Absorbency ASTM D1117 _ 285% Mass/Unit Area ASTM 6475 11.44 cz/yd2 (388 g/m Swell Smolder Resistance ECTC Guidelines Yes Stiffness Li ht Penetration Tensile Strength —MD 16ft(4.87m) 108 ft (32.92 m) 105.6 lbs (47.9 kg) 192 yd2 (165.5 m2) 0.35 Ibslyd2 (0.19 kg/m2) 0,15 Ibs yd2 (0,08 kg/m2) 3.0 lb/1000 ft2 (1.47 kg/100 m2) 1.5 ibll000ft2 (0.73 kg/100 m2)�` Test Method _ Typical ASTM D6525 0.39 in (9,91 mm ECTC Guidelines 30% ASTM D1388 1.11 oz -in ECTC Guidelines ASTM D6818 8.7% 146.6 Ibsift (2.17 kill -0 Elongation — MD ASTM D6818 26.9% Tensile Strength— TD ASTM O6818 Elongation — TD ASTM D6818 Bench Scale Testing* NTPEP): Test Method Parameters 50 mm (2 in)/hr for 30 min 100mm (4 in)Jhr for 30 min 150 mm (6 in)Ihrfor 30 min Shear at 0.50 inch soil loss ECTC Method 2 Rainfall ECTC Method 3 Shear Resistance ECTC Method 4 Germination 147.6 Ibsift (2.19 kNlm) 25.2% Results SLR** = 5.47 SLR** = 5.67 SLR** = 5.88 2.72 Ibslft2 Top Soil, Fescue, 21 day incubation 538% improvement of biomass • Bench Scale tests should nal be used to design purposes Sall Loss Ratio with Bare SoilfSoil Loss with RECP isvll loss is based pn regression ones sis = Soil loss Performance Design Values: Maximum Permissible Shear Stress Unvegetated Shear Stress Unvegetated Velocity 2.00 lbs/ft2 (96 Pe) 8.00 ftls (2.44 m/s) Slope Design Data: C Factors Sloe Gradients (S Slope Length (L) 5 3:1 3:1 — 2:1 a 2:1 5 20 ft (6 mJ 4.001 0.048 0.100 20-50 ft 0.051 0.079 0.145 ≥50ft(15.2m) 0,10 0.110 0 0.190 Roughness Coefficients• Unve , Flow Depth Manning's n s 0.50 ftg).15 m) 0.050 0.50-2.Oft 0050-0.018 2.0ft(0.60m) 0.018 Product Participant of: V'k IiF Vui ITV vcninuti Updated 3/09 A-37 n#,k**************irk****e*******e********i.** a********k*******irk**************7r* ORTH AMERICAN GREEN EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS DESIGN SOFTWARE VERSION 4.3 _ORTH AMERICAN GREEN CHANNEL PROTECTION - ENGLISH/S.I. USER SPECIFIED CHANNEL LINING BACK-UP COMPUTATIONS ROJECT NAME: Lonestar SWD Facility PROJECT NO.: 0208037.00 _COMPUTED BY: DDH DATE: 4/7/2010 FROM STATION/REACH: 0 TO STATION/REACH: 250 -RAINAGE AREA: .303 acres DESIGN FREQUENCY: 100 -year **Wk**************x:*******A.****-kol**k************'k***k******fir***fK********** INPUT PARAMETERS channel Discharge : 1.1 cfs (.03 m^31s) eak Flow Period : 0.5 hours Channel Slope : 0.029 ft/ft (0.029 m/m) -hannel Bottom Width :.0 ft (.00 m) eft Side Slope : 3:1 Right Side Slope : 3:1 l'hannei Lining : SC150 Staple D Permi. Shear(Tp) :2.00 psf (95.8 Pa) Phase = 0 CALCULATIONS -nitiai Depth Estimate = 0.16 * (1.1 /(0.02P0.5))A0.375 = 0,32 ft (.10 m) rinal Channel Depth (after 6 iterations) = .45 ft (0.14 m) Flow Area = (0.0 * 0.4)+(0.5 *0.45^2 * (3.0+3.0)) = 0.6 sq.ft (0.1 m"2) 'het Per. µ0,0 +(0.4*(((3,0^2)+1)^.5 +((3.0"2)+1)^.5)) = 2,8 ft (0.9 m) -lydraulic Radius = (0.6 / 2.8) = 0,2 ft (0.1 m) Channel Velocity =(1.486/0.050)*(0.2A0.667)*(0.029A.5) = 1.8 fps (0,6 m/s) channel Effective Manning's Roughness Calculated Shear (Td) = 62,4* 0.45 * 0.029 Bafety Factor = (Tp/Td) = (2.00 /0.82) = 0.050 = 0.82 psf (39.3 Pa) = 2.43 A-38 r{aial penena.' Grcen • EI MD5 vita„ 4 3 �PNEL'S tgAE Lars:: SW) Fzc4rr 45P4 _ T1ilGhkREatl-r. L 1t0 , IA71DIllr3EA:ri ." HYDRAIALIC RESULTS G.sel+e:gt in.! feel: Frew Per,cd Itr'sl Ye'recrry l lc: i 'Aire [:.-q RI I1.d.aac Red+ielkl fii.rre.1 Depth LIP 11.1 0.5 t I.a2 P.61 021 045 LINER Rr,^4 }LL Reach Mendip type Staple Pelham ,51.-65tyAn4te. I Vegetation Qlatactensecs Peinleeble SheerStrese (Pan Calculated Shear Strew Dal Safely Factor Remarks Phase Oats Type Ds.nrS, Straight SCC150 Unvegelded 200 0.82 243 STABLE Staple D _ 1O7/20IP r2l 12 GN1CaTFr f i [. EY TA ,H !PItOIEC; Np . 12E333l •S! bEiGIFLSGEAREA `03a.ec 13"SIGNFFEOi}ENCi'.'Uwe 5-n r -D li,�n t56I Not to Scale Width 2ba 0. -J1 Beck to Input Screen A- 39 Worksheet for Swale 2 Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Roughness Coefficient Channel Slope Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Discharge Results Normal Depth Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top Width Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope Manning Formula Normal Depth Supercritical 0.020 O05860 ft/ft 3.00 ft/ft (H:V) 3.00 ft/ft (H:V) 1.10 fts/s 0.28 ft 0.23 ft2 1.77 ft 4.68 ft 0.38 ft 0.01084 ft/ft 4.68 ft/s 0.34 ft 0.62 ft 2.21 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0.00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 0.28 ft 0.38 ft 0.05860 ft/ft 0.01084 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.00] 3/24/2010 6:55:31 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 260 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of NORTH AMERICAN A tensar Company Material and Performance Specification Sheet SC150 Erosion Control Blanket North American Green 14649 Highway 41 North Evansville, IN 47725 800-772-2040 FAX: 812-867-0247 www.nanreen corn The extended -term double net erosion control blanket shall be a machine -produced mat of 70% agricultural straw and 30% coconut fiber with a functional longevity of up to 24 months. (NOTE; functional longevity may vary depending upon climatic conditions, soil, geographical location, and elevation). The blanket shall be of consistent thickness with the straw and coconut evenly distributed over the entire area of the mat. The blanket shall be covered on the top side with a heavyweight photodegradable polypropylene netting having ultraviolet additives to delay breakdown and an approximate 0.63 x 0.63 (1.59 x 1.59 cm) mesh, and on the bottom side with a lightweight photodegradable polypropylene netting with an approximate 0.50 x 0.50 in (1.27 x 1.27 cm) mesh. The blanket shall be sewn together on 1.50 inch (3.81 cm) centers with degradable thread. The SC150 shall meet requirements established by the Erosion Control Technology Council (ECTC) Specification and the US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects, FP -03 Section 713.17 as a type 3. B Extended -term Erosion Control Blanket. The SC164 is also available with the DOT SystemTM, which consists of installation staple patterns clearly marked on the erosion control blanket with environmentally safe paint. The blanket shall be manufactured with a colored thread stitched along both outer edges (approximately 2-5 inches [5- 12.5 cm] from the edge) as an overlap guide for adjacent mats. Matrix 70% Straw Fiber 30% Coconut Fiber Top -- Heavyweight photodegradable with UV additives Bottom — Lightweight Photodegradable Degradable Material Content Nettings Thread SC150 is available in the following standard roll sizes: Width Length Weight ± 10% Area 6.67 ft (2.03 m) 108 ft (32.92 m) 44 lbs (19.95 kg) 80.0 yd2 (66.9 m2) Index Value Properties: Pro e Thickness Rasi[ienc Water Absorbency Mass/Unit Area Swell Smolder Resistance Test Method ASTM [7E525 ECTC Guidelines ASTM 01117 ASTM 6475 ECTC Guidelines ECTC Guidelines ASTM D1388 ECTC Guidelines ASTM D6818 ASTM D6818 ASTM 06818 ASTM D6818 16 ft (4.87 m) 108 ft (32.92 m) 105.6 lbs (47.9 kg) 192 yd2 (165.5 m2) T [cal 0.39 inJ2,91 mm) 75% 285% 11.44 cz/yd2 (388 gIntl 30% Stiffness Li lit Penetration Tensile Strength —MD Elongation— MD Tensile Strength — TD Elongation — TO Yes 1.11 or -in 8.7% 146 6 lbs/ft (2.17 kN/m) 26,9% 147.6 Ibslft (2.19 kN/m) 25.2% Bench Scale Testing(NTPEP): Results SLR*" = 5.47 SLR** = 5.67 SLR** = 5.88 2.72 Ibslft2 Test Method Parameters ECTC Method 2 Rainfall ECTC Method 3 Shear Resistance 50 mrn in)/hr for 30 min 100mm (4 in)ihr tar 30 min 150 mm (6 ]n)./hr for 30 min Shear at 0.50 inch soil loss ECTC Method 4 Top Soil, Fescue, 21 day 538% improvement of Germination incubation biomass Bench Scale lads should not he used for des rr ases Soil Loss Ratio - Soil oss with Sara SoiliScil Loss with IiECP (soil loss rs based on regression analysis) 0.35 Ibslyd2 (0.19 kgfm2} 0.15 lbsfyd2 (0.08 kg/m2) 3.0 lb/1000 ft2 (1.47 kg/100 n' ) 1.5 lb/1000 ft2 (0.73 kg/100 re Performance Design Values: Maximum Permissible Shear Stress Unvegefated Shear Stress 2.00 lbs/ft2 (96 Pa) Uwe getated Velocity 8.00 ftls (2 44 rn/s) Sla a Desi n Data: C Factors Slope Length (1.) 520ft(6mL` 20-50 ft 50ft(15.2m) Slone Gradients (S ≤3:1 3:1-2:1 a 2:1 0.001 0.048 0.100 0.051 0.079 0.145 0.10 0.110 0.190 Roughness Coefficients- Unveg, Flow Depth ≤0.50ft(0.15Ft) 0.50 - 2.0 ft z2.0ft(0.60m) Manninq's n 0.050 0.050 — 0.018 0.018 Product Participant of: PULL VrnlFln r A-41 Updated 3/09 i*k°kk**wfk•****ir****#***%'k rt********#***'*'k4fp*ir•k+k**#****ik***x w:Ir k****#***Nr�yr*f**:Ir*% ORTH AMERICAN GREEN EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS DESIGN SOFTWARE VERSION 4.3 ORTH AMERICAN GREEN CHANNEL PROTECTION - ENGLISH/S.I. USER SPECIFIED CHANNEL LINING BACK-UP COMPUTATIONS **ilk.F***kNtk***********-F***k****ti***k*****9,******fir*******`4•A'*'k*************i,w ROJECT NAME: Lonestar SWD Facility PROJECT NO.: 0208037.00 _ OMPUTED BY: DDH DATE: 4/7/2010 FROM STATION/REACH: 0 TO STATION/REACH: 210 RAINAGE AREA: .357 acres DESIGN FREQUENCY: 100 -year *k*'kyFY1.**.********k..,,,**** #*****.*sir***********:E ************************ INPUT PARAMETERS -:hannel Discharge : 1.1 cfs (.03 m"3/s) peak Flow Period : 0.5 hours Channel Slope : 0.059 ft/ft (0.059 m/m) ,hannel Bottom Width :.0 ft (.00 m) .eft Side Slope : 3:1 Right Side Slope : 3:1 Thannel Lining : SC150 Staple D Permi. Shear(Tp) :2.00 psf (95.8 Pa) Phase = 0 e**#*****'k*t�:****•k%***#itX'.�Y-'Yr+4x�.••k�F•k+k*-k***-k•ks�r aryr*Jr+4*•kfF.*J-***it#:k*x•k sF*�k***#'k**Yl"k�k** CALCULATIONS �'W*+k�e*'Yr•k'irdr*••k�E*�k*sF:FA'i�:lr**�4 fh'ie�leio*#*'k**�kYt%�r�lt�k �e�r �r•k*�4'##kYrk•rY•*•k �e �lrk*#**'k*�kk*'k:1r*Yl••k dr*i: it 'initial Depth Estimate = 0.16 * (1.1 /(0.059"0.5))"Q.375 = Q.28 ft (.09 rn) 1; inal Channel Depth (after 7 iterations) = .39 ft (0.12 m) Flow Area = (0.0 * 0.4)+(0.5 *0.39"2 * (3.0+3.0)) = 0.5 sq.ft (0.0 m^2) Wet Per. =0.0 -x(0.4*(((3.0"2)+1)^.5 +((3.0"2)+1 )".5)) = 2.5 ft (0.8 rrx) -lydraulic Radius = (0.5 / 2.5) = 0.2 ft (0.1 m) Channel Velocity =(1.486/0.050)*(0.2"0.667)#(0.059^.5) = 2.4 fps (0.7 rn/s) Channel Effective Manning's Roughness Calculated Shear (Td) = 62.4 * 0.39 * 0.059 Safety Factor = (Tp/Td) = (2.00 /1.44) 0.050 = 1.44 psf (69.1 Pa) 1.39 A-42 vnivarrrrkanGieen• EGI•rP5 Vcrpon ✓<.3 ;R72tii9 r@19aJ+,i3UkaPil EL. 1W DUII ITTICIJFCI MAME: 1..c,e;ItS SWa F c k i7RCJby ETAF 10H/R€AL11 0 ttC 5FA rDN/REACH 219 HY03AU -IC F4E$.4I Discharge Peek Flow 4efocyr(tpal Ana tag IIJ Hydreic Nocmd fcis1 Paindlksl Rediva1R) Depth RI pl 0,5 2.35 0.47 019 039 Reach Melberg Type Slagle Pattern 90150 Staple D SirhTly A•�4yn: Urrwegelated Vagele1en Chamatelgllcs ON N4, 9 1` aT.60 DRAINAGE Ea 357aaea rw E SIGN FRE 011 ERC-r` 1Wwaa: Pnate 0442 Type De n:a� 51;1zn [a.1 IJ -JI 5-0o5No / • X111 -16 Penh:A a Calculated Sheer Shen Shear Street Ipa{} [pall 203 1 44 • / oot/ Wldhkl- 0.0011 0 Not to Scale Safety Factor 1 39 Remarks p,1A@LE Back la Inpl Screen I A-43 APPENDIX B Lonestar Disposal Facility Weld County, Colorado 3/24/2010 0208037.00 STORAGE SYSTEM VARIABLES Basins: Pond: 1 Historic Basin Area 2 Onsite area contributing to pond = 3 Offsite area contributing to pond = 4 Total area contributing to pond = 5 5-yr historic discharge 7 Average release rate 8 WCQV Required = 9 Bottom of system = 10 System outlet Invert = 11 Outlet 12 Spillway Elevation = 13 Depth of system from bottom to spillway = 14 Minimum bank slopes = 15 Pond bottom slope = 16 Downstream Outlet Invert = 17 Minimum building opening elevation = 11.392 acre 2.725 acre D.00 acre 2.725 acre ';x .' 0.0 cfs 0.08 cfs Based on a 72 hour release for the calculated pond volume 1869.00 ft3 4806.00 ft 4809.50 ft Orifice Plate 4813.0 ft 5.00 ft 3:1 2.0 4805.3 ft 4814.00 ft Designed to release volume in 72 hours (Spillway + 1.0') Lamp Rynearson B_I Storage System.XLS DETENTION VOLUME BY MODIFIED FAA METHOD (see USDCM Volume I Runoff Chapter for description of method) Project: Basin ID: Lonester Oisposal Facility Di (For catchments less than 160 acres only. For larger catchments, use hydrograph routing methods) (Note: for catchments larger than 90 acres, CUHP hydrograph and routing are recommended) The user must fill in all of the blue cells for these sheets to function. 1Desi ii1iforrna ran npui)r 'Catchment Drainage Impervloueness Catchment Drainage Area .Predevelopment NRCS Soli Group Retum Period for Detention Control rime of Concentration of Watershed Allowable Unit Release Rate (See Table A) Doe -hour Precipitation 22 percent A = -' . ` . ; ?.77 aaas Type= AA,B,C, or T = 100 years (2, 5, 10, 25, 50, or 100) Tc= 14 minutes g = 0.03 cfs/aore P1 = 273 Inohee Design Rainfall IDF Formula I = Cl" P1f(C2+Tc)°C3 Coefficient One C1 = Coefficient Two 02 = Coefficient Three C3 = 28 50 10.00 0 79 ❑eterrninanon of Average Outflow from the BaeIrl 1Ca1 ulatgdj} Runoff Coefficient Inflow Peak Runoff Allowable Peak Outflow Rate Ratio of Op-ouVCp-In Cc Op•In Op -out = 058 8.81 es 0.09 ofs Ratio= 0.01 Table A Recommended Unll Flow Releeee Rate In als/acre of tributary cetehmentwlflln UDFCD boundaries t. hiltd. 2 -year )year 1 rypear 25•veer DMow na alt'n diDaterrEon wolumo Using Minllned FAA Method r• Enter Rorntnit Durehcn Inrrdmanlnl Incraaso VnOVo Morn lug, 5lor 5-P,4nult,r 1 Rainfall Duration minutes (b irchl Rainfall I Intensity ' inchealhr (coulee Inflow Volume cubic Feel loufoul Adjustment Faebr icuinu❑ Average Outflow of. I ,., tl Outflow Volume cubic feet louloull r Storage Volume cubic feet 'Cutout) 5 I 0.18 may,• 150 0.08 4 2.821 125 1.61 12.636 I 1146 0.05 340 0.96 14.874 i 0.53 DLO IlMainli 1406 365 5.72 lease WEE= 8,51 D04 IMEZIM 15.408 465 0.05 ® 0.04 16.208 805 0.49 031 0-04 MEM I 11.800 725 0.42 19587 MEEMIMEMI 20201 =ME= .t• 17736 848 0.38 0.04 995 0,34 I MO - , 0.00 =ECM 17.901 1085 • '1 20.028 0.61 0.04 2.593 1205 5' - 21. '5 051 D.04 2,089 18,316 1325 028 ff V 211.747MEM= 0.04 3,288 14.494 7445 === MEM0.04 0.74 18500 1585 '29IMEMBII %••` 1505 Y - 2.^.502 =Ian 0.54 4,188 15,735 1 1805 0.21 23242 WEIN 050 0.04 4.460 1925 020 23.585 6,64 604 4.755 10,610 2045 0.19 251572 0.69 5.049 19.823 2165 0-111 24,104 01,80 0.04 11.242 15,521 22B5 0.1? 14•.414 050 404 =I, 18,801 2405 0.17 24.713 0.60 6.04 5.932 2325 0.10 1150 0.04 18,744 2545 0.15 26.219 0.62 0,04 5.520 19598 2765 0.15 25.458 030 0.04 8.816 19,843 2555 0.14 25.985 0.80 9.114 7.109 19,580 3605 0.14 25-.018 0.04 7,403 I 15510 3125 0.13 28.130 0.60 0.04 7.888 15432 3245 0.13 25340 0.50 0.04 7.882 18,345 3355 0,13 25,543 050 0.09 8.288 1 1&757 3488 o 12 28,742 0.24 0.04 0.581 ! 15,181 9505 S 0.12 20,054 0.50 004 MEM 12080 3725 0.12 27.172 0.60 0.04 9.189 17,' •9 3946 0.11 I '®-' 0.04 06483 17,:42 9995 0.11 MD= INZIEIMII 27.528 WEIIIMII 0.04 _ _ 9,755 I 17.72; 41)55 D.11 0.55 I 0.04 10,1152 I 17 : r 4205 0.11 0.30 jr 0.04 10.348 114: 4.925 l 0,10 0-50 6.n4 i r. 41 _ 17.354 Stormwater Detention Volume (Cubic Feet( • 18.823 Stormweter Detention Volume {Acre Feet). 0.4321 UDFCD DETENTION VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 1.03a, Released .420461 20(35 UD-Detentlon_v1.03a Requlred.xle, Modified FAA 3/24/2010, I B-2 Lonestar Disposal Facility Weld County, Colorado 72 Hour Pond Outflow Rate 1 2 3 4 Unit Release Rate Peak Outflow Rate (cfs) Volume Calculated by FAA Method (cu -ft) Time of Release (hours) guess #2 Divided by #3 0.01 0.03 24448 226 0.02 0.05 21021 117 0.03 0.08 18823 65 0.04 0.11 17387 44 0.05 0.14 16335 32 0.06 0.16 15508 27 <= Maximum Release Notes: To determine the release rate for a 72 hour drain time, the FAA method was used to determine the discharge and volume that would yield a 72 hour drain time. This was done by iterating the Unit Release Rate in the UDFCD DETENTION VOLUME BY MODIFIED FAA METHOD . Lamp Rynearson 3/24/2010 0208037.00 B-3 Storage System.XLS Design Procedure Form: Extended Detention Basin (EDB) - Sedimentation Facility Designer: DDH Company: Lamp, Rynearson & Associates Date: June 1, 2009 Project: Lonestar Disposal Facility Location: Weld County Colorado 1. Basin Storage Volume A) Tributary Area's Imperviousness Ratio (i = la / 100) B) Contributing Watershed Area (Area) C) Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) (WQCV =1.0 * (0.91*r I' - 1.19 : I` + 0.78' I)) D) Design Volume: Vol = (WQCV /12) ' Area * 1.2 IB = K2.OD i = 132 Area = 2;73" acres WQCV = -0.16 watershed inches Vol = 0.O425 acre-feet 17..913 ?` Qu�1 j 1 } (7• f 14 I ' /4c. / t7 B-4 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Pump House and Separator Facility Terracon Project No. 21095002 Terracon Soil and Bedrock Conditions: As presented on the Logs of Borings, poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silt was encountered at the surface and extended to depths of about 13 to 26 feet below existing site grade. Clay with varying amounts of sand was encountered below the sand material in Test Borings Nos. 3 and 4 and extended to a depth of about 19-1/2 feet below existing site grade. Claystone bedrock was encountered below the sand and clay overburden soils and extended to the full depth of exploration of about 25 to 30 feet below site grade. Field and Laboratory Test Results: Field test results indicate that the sand soils vary from very loose to medium dense in relative density. The clay soils vary from medium stiff to stiff in consistency. Laboratory test results indicate that subsoils at shallow depth have non- to low expansive potential. Laboratory tests indicate a negligible water soluble sulfate content of less than 100 ppm. Percolation testing conducted in the area of the proposed soil absorption bed is summarized as follows: Test Hole Soil Type at Approximate Bottom of Percolation field Depth to Bedrock (ft.) Depth to Groundwater (ft.) Percolation Rate (min, lin.) P1 Poorly Graded Sand Not encountered Not encountered 4 P2 P3 Poorly Graded Sand Poorly Graded Sand Not encountered Not encountered Not encountered Not encountered 4 6 ` P4 Poorly Graded Sand Not encountered Not encountered 3 P5 Poorly Graded Sand Not encountered Not encountered P6 Poorly Graded Sand Not encountered Not encountered 7 Field test results indicate that a standard septic system and leach field (soil absorption bed) is feasible for construction on the site at the location of percolation test holes 1 through 6. The system should be designed in accordance with Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulations dated August 15, 2005. An average percolation rate of four (4) minutes per inch is recommended for design purposes. Based upon Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulations dated August 15, 2005, a percolation rate faster than five (5) minutes per inch is considered un-acceptable for a soil absorption bed. However sandy soils that percolate faster than five (5) minutes per inch, but slower than three (3) munites per inch, may be allowed if requirements of section 30-5-30.A.2.a are met. Groundwater was not encountered in the soil profile boring located at the proposed soil absorption bed. According to Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulations 4 B-5 N _ ,,._ -`� �� - .1� WELD COUNTY RD.'34 , v, , e \l N N \ \ N N ti j N ff N N Project Mgr. Drawn By. CMG DJS Checked By. JM Project N. 21095302 Sole; use. 06101109 ARgwed By; JM OIfP \ `, \ TANK AREA SURVEYED TO OUTSIDE TOE ..„, i--��--�' 1 1 t 11 \N )-- LT Orc£ BUILDING ALTERNATIVE PERC U � / _ BUILDING yf LOCATION! #€ TI1 `{ ~ ! , !ti N/" / No. 1 ♦ rt 1 '- \, No.4 N P1 P2 P3 H-110 PROFIL 4. P5 P6 No. 3 INJEIkT1ON \ suitbilfo \ .- • \ \ \ \ / / ABSORPTION- BED _OPTION #1 ti 1 1 CONCRETE UNLOADING PAD\i \ .— — -- 4 \ / — _ ---r I / N / s \ CONCRETE TANK PAD s--- r\ / - / f ``fa / f /-- '! ,I 1 / 4 ( / ,\, cd LEGEND 0 - APPROXIMATE TEST BORING LOCATIONS - APPROXIMATE PERCOLATION TEST BORING LOCATIONS lrerracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists Sot M, HOWES FORTCOLLI1S, CO 80521 PH {VaIaEi.M5 FAX. 11704484-0454 30 60 FIGURE 1: BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM PROPOSED PUMP HOUSE and SEPARATOR FACILITY SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WELD COUNTY ROADS 34 & 49 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO taIr.rojecls-Oliiot UifrcaBLUTGcIQy Office lc. 2il11695062+CA6D32169`a9U2•t.tlwy FIG. No 1 B-6 Lonestar Disposal Facility Weld County, Colorado 3/24/2010 0208037.00 STORAGE SYSTEM X -SECTION FROM BOTTOM TO TOP Xsection Elevation (ft) Surface Area (sq-ft) Incremental Pond Volume (ft) Cumulative Volume (ft) Water Quality Capture Volume (ft3) Provided Storage (ft) 1 4808.0 0 0 0 0 2 4808.5 697 174 174 174 3 4809.0 1751 612 786 786 4 4849.5 2722 1118 1904 1904 0 5 4810.0 4134 1714 3618 1714 6 4810.5 5763 2474 6092 4188 7 4811.0 7547 3327 9419 7515 8 4811.5 9407 4238 13657 11753 9 4812.0 11312 5180 18837 16933 10 4812.5 13227 6135 24972 23068 11 4813.0 15168 7099 32071 30167 12 4813.5 17224 8098 40169 38265 13 4814.0 20906 9533 49702 47798 Lamp Rynearson Top of Water Quality Storage Provided B-7 Storage System.XLS Worksheet for Pond Outlet Orifice Project Description Solve For input Data Discharge Headwater Elevation Centroid Elevation Tailwater Elevation Discharge Coefficient ;Results Diameter Headwater Height Above Centroid Tailwater Height Above Centroid Flow Area Velocity Diameter 0.06 ft3/s 4813 00 ft 4609.56 ft 4805.30 ft 0.65 0.10 ft 3.44 ft -4.26 ft 0.01 ft2 9.67 ft/s Bentley Systems, Inc. Haeatad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.00] 3/24/2010 9:42:31 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, GT 06795 USA +1-203.755.1666 Page 1 of 1 B-3 Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report Pond Outlet Peak Discharge Method: User -Specified Design Discharge 0.08 cfs Check Discharge 0.00 cfs Grades Model: Inverts Invert Upstream Length Drop 4,809,50 ft Invert Downstream 44.50 ft Slope 4.26 ft 4,805.24 ft 0.095730 ft/ft Headwater Model: Maximum Allowable HW Headwater Elevation 4,813.00 ft Tailwater Conditions: Constant Tailwater Tailwater Elevation 4.805.94 ft Name Description Discharge HW Elev. Velocity x Trial -1 1-12 inch Circular 0.08 cfs4,809.67 ft 0.14 ft/s Title: Lonestar Disposal Facility Project Engineer: DDH p:1...lfinal drainagelculvertslculverts.cvm Lamp, Rynearson & Associates I CulvertMaster v3.1 [03.01.009.00] 03/24/10 10:33:04 AIVBentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page B-9 Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report Pond Outlet Design:Trial-1 Solve For: Headwater Elevation Culvert Summary Allowable HW Elevation Computed Headwater Elev4 Headwater Depth/Height Inlet Control HW Elev. Outlet Control HW Elev. 4,813.00 ft Storm Event 4,809.67 ft Discharge 0.17 Tailwater Elevation 4,809.61 ft Control Type 4,809,67 ft Design 0.08 cfs 4,805.94 ft Entrance Control Grades Upstream Invert Length 4,809.50 ft 44.50 ft Downstream Invert Constructed Slope 4,805.24 ft 0.095730 ftlft Hydraulic Profile Profile Slope Type Flow Regime Velocity Downstream CompositeS' S2 Steep N/A 0.14 ftis Depth, Downstream Normal Depth Critical Depth Critical Slope 0.70 ft 0.08 ft 0.12 ft 0.023724 ft/ft Section Section Shape Section Material Section Size Number Sections Circular Mannings Coefficient 0.025 CMP Span 1.00 ft 12 inch Rise 1.00 ft 1 Outlet Control Properties Outlet Control HW Elev. Ke 4,809.67 ft 0.50 Upstream Velocity Head 0.04 ft Entrance Loss 0.02 ft Inlet Control Properties Inlet Control HW Elev. 4,809.61 ft Flow Control Unsubmerged Inlet Type Headwall Area Full 0.8 ft' K 0.00780 HDS 5 Chart 2 M 2.00000 HDS 5 Scale 1 C 0.03790 Equation Form 1 Y 0.69000 Title: Lonestar Disposal Facility Project Engineer: DDH p:1...lfinal drainagelculvertsculverts.cvm Lamp, Rynearson & Associates I CulvertMaster v3.1 [03.01.009.00] 03/24/10 10:33:04 AO/Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Pag B-10 r-tJr ' ©c) O CHART 4 3 cfs /2/f lw- OL z r 6,7 as 6 5 � 4 I — a. 3 Id J 4 V 2 I. - a to 14 t2 10 6 4 5. 35' 1D 20 30 100 F — 200 c CANNOT EXCEED TOP OF PIPE 40 50 60 TO 80 90 100 DISC HARGE-0-CFS 800 900 1000 it cs do CANNOT EXCEED TOP OF PIPE 300 400 500 600 DISCHARGE-G-CFS 700 J Q I � I .I \1 .r' r i 4c CANNOT EXCEED TOP OF PIPE //;::. 441 -,..... A Ad 1000 BUREAU OF PUBLIC ROADS JAN. 1964 DISCHARGE —Q -CPS 184 8 1— W 0 CRITICAL DEPTH CIRCULAR PIPE B-11 INSTALL CONCRETE CUTOFF COLLARS SEE DETAIL, SHEET C6 INSTALL LOW TAILWATER RIP RAP BASIN SEE DETAIL, SHEET C6 48 481 481 481 480 480 480 4-80 479 -0+30 0 0 0 0 O Q GIN 12" F.E.S. 0+44.50 N OUTLET BOX -4! 8 SEE Gm POND STRUCTURE SHEET C6 o ca OU INSTALL LET ETAIL 2._.,_ PROPOSED GRADE I 4! 100 YR HGL / f i rn LE. (12")(SW) 4 (12")(NE) 4805 EXhST1NG GROUND NATIVE w CONSTRUCT 4 12" CMP © BACKFILL FOR .50 LF 9.57% BEDDING 0+00 0+30 0+60 Scales: 1" = 30' HOR. 1"=3'VERT. 21 18 15 12 09 06 03 00 97 0+90 Lonestar Disposal Facility Weld County, Colorado 4/7/2010 0208037.00 Design of Low Tallwater Riprap Basin for Pond Outlet Outlet Variables Pipe diameter, Do Slope, So Discharge, Qc Manning's n Invert elevation Tallwater elevation Depth of tailwater Riprap Basin Calculations Step 1: Yt = Oo13 = Is yt < Do13? Step 2: Ofull = Step 3: Qo/Qfull = From Figure HS -20a, d/D = Step 4: Qo/DoA2.5 =- From Figure HS -20b, d/D = Step 5: Choose the smaller of the d1D ratios = Outlet Depth, d = d/D*Do = From Figure HS -20a, A/Afull = Step 6: A=A/Afull*Afull= V = Qo/A Step 7: Pd = (VA2+g*d)A.5 From Figure HS -20c, Riprap size = D50 Recommendations? 12 inches 9.57% 0.08 cfs 0.025 4805.24 ft 4805.2 ft 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0.33 ft Yes 6 cis 0.01 0.10 0.08 ft 0.12 Assumed no tailwater for rip rap calculation. Worst case senerio Since Dc+D/2 was used, will assume this is a low tailwater basin 0.10 From Step 3 0.10 ft 0.06 0.05 sq ft 1.70 fps 2.22 fps 9 in 12 in Step 8: Minimum thickness of Riprap, T = 21 in Step 9: Minimum length of basin Length of the Basin, L = DA.5 *V12 = or4*D= Type L Type M 1ft 4 ft 4*D Controls Step 10: Width of the Riprap, W = 4 * D = 4 ft Step 11: Cutoff Wall Depth, B= D/2+T Summary Riprap Type = Thickness = Length = Width = Bedding Bedding Depth Underdrain Cutoff Wall Depth 27 in 36 Inches minumum Type M 21 in 4ft 4ft Type II 12 in No 36.00 in Note: Type L rip rap shall be mixed with native topsoil, covered with topsoil and revegtated. See Table MD -11 for CDOT equivalent Table MD -12 *12" inch layer used in lieu of two layer filter Reference The Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (USDCM), Volumes it, published by the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado, June 2001, Revised April 2008 Lamp Rynearson B-13 HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 2) 3.3 Pipe Outlet Rundowns 3.3.1 Baffle Chute Rundown The baffle chute developed by the USBR (1958) has also been adapted to use at pipe outlets. This structure is well suited to situations with large conduit outfalls and at outfalls to channels in which some future degradation is anticipated. As mentioned previously, the apron can be extended at a later time to account for channel degradation. This type of structure is only cost effective if a grade drop is necessary below the outfall elevation. Figure HS -17 illustrates a general configuration for a baffled outlet application for a double box culvert outlet. In this case, an expansion zone occurs just upstream of the approach depression. The depression depth is designed as required to reduce the flow velocity at the chute entrance. The remaining hydraulic design is the same as for a standard baffle chute using conditions at the crest to establish the design. The same crest modifications are applicable to allow drainage of the approach depression, to reduce the upstream backwater effects of the baffles, and to reduce the problems of debris accumulation and standing water at the upstream row of baffles. Flow entering the chute should be well distributed laterally across the width of the chute. The velocity should be below critical velocity at the crest of the chute. To insure low velocities at the upstream end, it may be necessary to provide a short energy dissipating pool. The sequent or conjugate depth in the approach basin should be sized to prevent jump sweep -out, but the basin length may be considerably less than a conventional hydraulic jump basin since its primary purpose is only to reduce the average entrance velocity. A basin length of twice the sequent depth will usually provide ample basin length. The end check of the pool may be used as the crest of the chute as shown in Figure HS -17. 3.3.2 Grouted Boulder Chute Rundown Another option for rundowns at outlets of larger pipes is to use a grouted boulder rundown illustrated in Figure 18. This type of rundown has been used successfully for several large storm sewers entering the South Platte River. It is critical that the details shown in Figure 18 be strictly followed and the grout and the actual filling of spaces between the boulders with grout closely adhere to the recommendations for grouted boulders provided in the Major Drainage Chapter of this Manual. If the exit velocities of the pipe exceeds 12 feet per second, an approach chute for the baffle chute rundown described above should be considered and provided. If this approach chute is lined with grouted boulders in a manner called for in the Major Drainage Chapter, the stilling basin sill can be eliminated. Ali— * 3.4 Low Tailwater Riprap Basins at Pipe Outlets 3.4.1 General The design of low tailwater riprap basins for storm sewer pipe outlets and at some culvert outlets is HS -64 2008-04 Urban Drainage & Flood Control District B-14 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 2) HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES necessary when the receiving or downstream channel may have little or no flow or tailwater at time when the pipe or culvert is in operation. Design criteria are provided in Figures HS -19a through HS -20c. 3.4.2 Objective By providing a low tailwater basin at the end of a storm sewer conduit or culvert, the kinetic energy of the discharge is dissipated under controlled conditions without causing scour at the channel bottom. Photograph HS -12 shows a fairly large low tailwater basin. 3.4.3 Low Tailwater Basin Design Low tailwater is defined as being equal to or less than '/ of the height of the storm sewer, that is: D H y,≤3 or yt 3 in which: y1 = tailwater depth at design D = diameter of circular pipe (ft) H= height of rectangular pipe (ft) 3.4.3.1 Finding Flow Depth and Velocity of Storm Sewer Outlet Pipe The first step in the design of a scour protection basin at the outlet of a storm sewer is to find the depth and velocity of flow at the outlet. Pipe -full flow can be found using Manning's equation. Q furl 1.49 / �z n )2/3Afurr(Rfuus( Then and the pipe -full velocity can be found using the continuity equation. Vfu11 = QM) IAfull (HS-16a) (HS -16a) The normal depth of flow, d, and the velocity in a conduit can be found with the aid of Figure HS -20a and Figure HS -20b. Using the known design discharge, Q, and the calculated pipe -full discharge, QQ,,,, enter Figure HS -20a with the value of Q/Q ,,, and find d/D for a circular pipe of d/Hfor a rectangular pipe. Compare the value of d/D (or d/H) with the one obtained from Figure HS -20b using the Froude parameter. Q /D2.5 or Ow1/1/5) (HS -16a) Choose the smaller of the two (d/D or dIH) ratios to calculate the flow depth at the end of the pipe. d = D(dI D) or d = H(d/H) (HS -16b) Rev. 2008-04 Urban Drainage & Flood Control District HS -65 B-15 HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 2) Again, enter Figure HS -19a using the smaller d/D (or d/H) ratio to find the it/AA,„ ratio. Then, A=(A/Afuul`AfJ, Finally, (HS -16c) V = WA (HS -16d) In which for Equations 16a through 16d above: Afi,,, = cross-sectional area of the pipe (ft2) A = area of the design flow in the end of the pipe (ft2) n = Manning's n for the pipe full depth Oa = pipe full discharge at its slope (cfs) R = hydraulic radius of the pipe flowing full, ft pm, = D/4 for circular pipes, Rh,,, = 4r,/(2H+ 2w) for rectangular pipes, where D = diameter of a circular conduit, H = height of a rectangular conduit, and w = width of a rectangular conduit (ft)] S,, = longitudinal slope of the pipe (ft/ft) V = design flow velocity at the pipe outlet (ft/sec) Vfi,,! = flow velocity of the pipe flowing full (ft/sec) 3.4.3.2 Riprap Size For the design velocity, use Figure HS -20c to find the size and type of the riprap to use in the scour protection basin downstream of the pipe outlet (i.e., B18, H, M or L). First, calculate the riprap sizing design parameter, Pd , namely, Pd .(T72. + gdrz (HS -16e) in which: V= design flow velocity at pipe outlet (ft/sec) g = acceleration due to gravity = 32.2 ft/sec2 d = design depth of flow at pipe outlet (ft) HS -66 2008-04 Urban Drainage & Flood Control District HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 2) Photograph HS -12 --Upstream and downstream views of a low tailwater basin in Douglas County protecting downstream wetland area. Burying and revegetation of the rock would blend the structure better with the adjacent terrain. .Q •� .�t• ? _ : rS... • ri -7 When the riprap sizing design parameter indicates conditions that place the design above the Type H riprap line in Figure HS -20, use B18, or larger, grouted boulders. An alternative to a grouted boulder or loose riprap basin is to use the standard USBR Impact Basin VI or one of its modified versions, described earlier in this Chapter of the Manual. After the riprap size has been selected, the minimum thickness of the riprap layer, T, in feet, in the basin is set at: T=1.75D50 in which: D50 = the median size of the riprap (see Table HS -9.) Table HS -9 —Median (i.e., D50) Size of District's Riprap/Boulder Riprap Type DS —Median Rock Size (inches) L 9 M 12 H 18 B18 18 (minimum dimension of grouted boulders) (HS -17) 3.4.3.3 Basin Length The minimum length of the basin, L, in Figure HS -19, is defined as being the greater of the following: for circular pipe: L = 4D or L =0)112(f) (HS -18) Rev. 2008-04 HS -67 Urban Drainage & Flood Control District HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 2) for rectangular pipe: L = 4H or L = (H)h12 [ 2) (HS -19) in which: L = basin length H= height of rectangular conduit V= design flow velocity at outlet D = diameter of circular conduit 3.4.3.4 Basin Width The minimum width, W, of the basin downstream of the pipe's flared end section is set as follows: for circular pipes: W = 4D for rectangular pipe: W = w + 4H in which, W= basin width (Figure HS -19) D = diameter of circular conduit w = width of rectangular conduit 3.4.3.5 Other Design Requirements All slopes in the pre -shaped riprapped basin are 2H to 1V. Provide pipe joint fasteners and a structural concrete cutoff wall at the end of the flared end section for a circular pipe or a headwall with wingwalls and a paved bottom between the walls, both with a cutoff wall that extends down to a depth of: D H B= —+T or B= —+T 2 2 in which, B = cutoff wall depth D = diameter of circular conduit T= Equation HS -17 The riprap must be extended up the outlet embankment's slope to the mid -pipe level. HS -68 (HS -20) (HS -21) (HS -22) 2008-04 Urban Drainage & Flood Control District B-1 B. DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 2) W or D. H or D E B r is r {�.r r' �`,: r fir' ,`• ' see note L Plan W.S. HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES tom-_ 3r—i tit• T L'.=. Lii.2L.CFrallm Profile W 1Z r1 layer of granular Type 2 bedding ry t 0.5D or 0.5H -- Perforated underdrain to daylight (optional) Note: For rectangular conduits use a standard design for a headwall with wingwalls, paved bottom between the wingwalls, with an end cutoff wall extending to a minimum depth equal to B Figure HS -19 —Low Tailwater Riprap Basins for Storm Sewer Pipe Outlets — Low Tailwater Basin at Pipe Outlets (Stevens and Urbonas 1996) Rev. 2008-04 HS -79 Urban Drainage & Rood Control District B-19 HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES HS -80 Plan View Install Joint Restraints 8" (min.) Thicness - Concrete Cutoff Wall Section at Centerline DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 2) End View Figure HS -19a —Concrete Flared End Section with Cutoff Wall for all Pipe Outlets 2008-04 Urban Drainage & Flood Control District B-20 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 2) HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0,7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.7D A/AFULL CIRCULAR A/AFULL RECTANGULAR /QFULL RECTANGULAR / . 4 I / f z r , _ I I f i '+f / CI I FULL .~� .} i CIRCULAR lr+r =_te - ._y.; -1 i 0.0 0. 1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 6,10 d/D or d/H Figure HS -20a —Low Tailwater Riprap Basins for Storm Sewer Pipe Outlets — Discharge and flow Area Relationships for Circular and Rectangular Pipes (Ratios for Flow Based on Mannng's n Varying With Depth) (Stevens and Urbonas 1996) Rev. 2008-04 HS -81 Urban Drainage & Flood Control District HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 I -a 0.5 0 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 O. DRAINAGECRITERIA MANUAL (V, 2) s r i d:D k''''',,._ / l'> 7"..." r r e le, s 7 +f iJ e e i I ., 2.0 4. Q/D2'6 Dr Q/wH1.5 Figure HS -20b —Low Tailwater Riprap Basins for Storm Sewer Pipe Outlets — Brink Depth for Horizontal Pipe Outlets (Stevens and Urbonas 1996) HS -82 2008-04 Urban Drainage & Flood Control District B-22 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 2) 30 25 H- 20 CD E 6- 15 C 0' 10 O 5 4 HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Storm Sewer Diameter, D, or Height, H, in ft. Figure HS -20c —Low Tailwater Riprap Basins for Storm Sewer Pipe Outlets— Riprap Selection Chart for Low Tailwater Basin at Pipe Outlet (Stevens and Urbonas 1996) Rev, 2008-04 HS -83 Urban Drainage & Flood Control District B-23 Lonnalar Disposal Facility Weld County. Colorado 6/112009 0206037 90 TABLE MD -7 Classification and Gradation of Ordinary Riprap Riprap Designation Type VL % Smaller Than Given Size by Weight 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 Intermediate Rock Dimensions (inches) 12 9 6 2 Type L 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 15 12 9 3 Type M Type H 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 21 18 12 4 Type VH 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 30 24 18 6 d50 (inches)* 6** 9** 12** 18 42 33 24 9 24 * d5o = mean particle size (intermediate dimension) by weight. ** Mix VL and L riprap with 30% (by volume) topsoil and bury it with 6+ inches of topsoil, all vibration compacted, and revegetate. Pond Outlet Lawteitaater Cale XLS Lamp Ryneereon B-24 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) MAJOR DRAINAGE Table MD -11 —Gradation for Granular Bedding Percent Weight by passing Square -Mesh Sieves U.S. Standard Sieve Size 3 inches 1% inches % inches --- 20-90 Type II CDOT Sect. Type I CDOT Sect. 703.01 703.09 Class A 90-100 3/ inches 100 #4 95-100 0-20 #16 45-80 #50 10-30 #100 2-10 #200 0-2 0-3 The Type I and Type II bedding specifications shown in Table MD -11 were developed using the T -V filter criteria and the fact that bedding which will protect an underlying non -cohesive soil with a mean grain size of 0.045 mm will protect anything finer. Since the T -V filter criterion provides some latitude in establishing bedding gradations, it is possible to make the Type I and Type II bedding specifications conform with Colorado Division of Highways' aggregate specifications. The Type I bedding in Table MD -11 is designed to be the lower layer in a two -layer filter for protecting fine-grained soils and has a gradation identical to Colorado Department of Transportation's (CDOT's) concrete sand specification AASHTO M-6 (COOT Section 703.01). Type 11 bedding, the upper layer in a two -layer filter, is equivalent to Colorado Division of Highways' Class A filter material (Section 703.09 Class A) except that it permits a slightly larger maximum rock fraction. When the channel is excavated in coarse sand and gravel (50% or more of coarse sand and gravel retained on the #40 sieve by weight), only the Type II filter is required. Otherwise, a two -layer bedding (Type I topped by Type II) is required. Alternatively, a single 12 -inch layer of Type II bedding can be used, except at drop structures. For required bedding thickness, see Table MD -12. At drop structures, a combination of filter fabric and Type II bedding is acceptable as an alternative to a two -layer filter. Table MD -12 —Thickness Requirements for Granular Bedding Riprap Designation Minimum Bedding Thickness (inches) Fine -Grained Soils Coarse -Grained Soil& Type I Type II Type II VL(d50=6in), L(d50=9 in) M (d50 = 12 in) 4 4 6 4 4 6 H(d50=18in) VH(d50=24 in) 4 4 6 8 6 • 8 May substitute one 12 -inch layer of Type II bedding. The substitution of one layer of Type II bedding shalt not be permitted at drop structures. The use of a combination of filler fabric and Type II bedding at drop structures is acceptable. Fifty percent or more by weight retained on the # 40 sieve. Rev. 04/2008 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District MD -67 B-25 Worksheet for Emergency Spillway, 100 -year Developed Project Description Solve For Input Data Discharge Crest Elevation Tailwater Elevation Crest Surface Type Crest Breadth Crest Length Results Headwater Elevation Headwater Height Above Crest Tailwater Height Above Crest Weir Coefficient Submergence Factor Adjusted Weir Coefficient Flow Area Velocity Wetted Perimeter Top Width Headwater Elevation Paved 6.50 fte/s 4813.00 ft 4613.00 ft 0.67 ft 10.00 ft 4813.35 ft 0.35 ft 0.00 ft 3.09 US 1.00 3.09 US 3.54 ft2 1.84 ft/s 10.71 ft 10.00 ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.00] 6/112009 11:16:30 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203.755-1666 Page 1 of 1 B-26 -Op LAMP RYNEARSON & ASSOCIATES Client �Gc Job # Project /? rl �s� t 1' 7Calculations for Made by it> AL Date 14,k_ /O Checked by Date Sheet / of ire/ . C';rw' �/�CJfA,�- _f ',rcc��-w• asp', f. / 3 .o 4'6/, / D. ['At. alp`' fr s•-� /67 40 7 7e -- / - .. • t - i f /.2 Fes.- .- !' .17"."4 <-1'C) fa B-27 Worksheet for Spillway Rundown Project Description Friction Method Solve For Input Data Roughness Coefficient Channel Slope Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Bottom Width Discharge Results Normal Depth Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top Width Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow Type 'GVF Input Data Downstream Depth Length Number Of Steps GVF Output Data Upstream Depth Profile Description Profile Headloss Downstream Velocity Upstream Velocity Normal Depth Critical Depth Channel Slope Critical Slope Manning Formula Normal Depth Supercritical 0.030 0.33330 ft/ft 3.00 ft/ft (H:V) 3.00 ft/ft (H:V) 10.00 ft 6.50 ft'/s 0.10 ft 1.06 ft' 10.65 ft 10.62 ft 0.23 ft 0.02203 ft/ft 6.13 ft/s 0.58 ft 0.69 ft 3.42 0.00 ft 0.00 ft 0 0,00 ft 0.00 ft Infinity ft/s Infinity ft/s 0.10 ft 0.23 ft 0.33330 ft/ft 0.02203 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inn. Heestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.00] 4/7/2010 7:31:50 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1.203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) MAJOR DRAINAGE the boulder layer and build up the grout from the bottom up, while using a vibrator or aggressive manual rodding. Inject the grout to a depth equal to one-half of the boulders being used and keep the upper one- half ungrouted and clean. Remove all grout splatters off the exposed boulder portion immediately after grout injection using wet brooms and brushes. 4.4.1.3 Wire -Enclosed Rock (Gabions) Wire -enclosed rock, or gabions, refers to rocks that are bound together in a wire basket so that they act as a single unit. The durability of wire -enclosed rock is generally limited by the life of the galvanized binding wire that has been found to vary considerably under conditions along waterways. Water carrying sand or gravel will reduce the service life of the wire dramatically. Water that rolls or otherwise moves cobbles and large stones breaks the wire with a hammer -and -anvil action, considerably shortening the life of the wire. The wire has been found to be susceptible to corrosion by various chemical agents and is particularly affected by high -sulfate soils. Wire -enclosed rock installations have been found to attract vandalism, and flat mattress surfaces seem to be particularly susceptible to having wires cut and stones removed. For these reasons, the District discourages the use of wire -enclosed rock. If the designer chooses to utilize gabions, they should be placed above the low -flow channel or 2 -year water surface elevation. All flat mattresses must be filled with topsoil and then covered with a 6 -inch layer of topsoil. 4.4.2 Desi n Criteria The following sections present design criteria for riprap-lined channels. Additional information on riprap can be found in Section 7.0 of this chapter. 4.4.2.1 Design Velocity Riprap-lined channels should only be used for subcritical flow conditions where the Froude number is 0.8 or less. 4.4.2.2 Design Depths There is no maximum depth criterion for riprap-lined channels. Wire -enclosed rock sections shall be used on banks only above the low -flow channel or 2 -year flood water surface, placed on a stable foundation. 4.4.2.3 Riprap Sizing The stone sizing for ordinary riprap can be related to the channel's longitudinal slope, flow velocity, and the specific gravity of the stone using the relationship: d (G _ l)n,br. =45 in which: V= mean channel velocity (ft/sec) (MD -13) Rev. 04/2008 MD -63 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District MAJOR DRAINAGE DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) S = longitudinal channel slope (ft/ft) d50 = mean rock size (ft) Gs= specific gravity of stone (minimum = 2.50) Note that Equation MD -13 is applicable for sizing riprap for channel lining. This equation is not intended for use in sizing riprap for rundowns or culvert outlet protection. Information on rundowns is provided in Section 7,0 of the HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES chapter of this Manual, and protection downstream of culverts is discussed in Section 7.0 of this chapter, as well as in the HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES chapter, Section 3.0. Table MD -10 shall be used to determine the minimum size of rock type required. Note that rock types for ordinary riprap, including gradation, are presented in Table MD -7 and Figure MD -11. Table MD-10—Riprap Requirements for Channel Linings vs0.17 .. Rock Type G —1)0.56 (Gs s < 3.3 VL: (d50 = 6 inches) ≥ 3.3 to < 4.0 L" (d50 = 9 inches) ≥4.0to<4.6 _ M(do =12 inches) ≥ 4.6 to < 5.6 H (d50 = 18 inches) ≥ 5.6 to 6.4 VH (d50 = 24 inches) Applicable only for a Froude number of < 0.8 and side slopes no steeper than 2H:1V. Use G,= 2.5 unless the source of rock and its density are known at time of design. Table MD -10 indicates that rock size does not need to be increased for steeper channel side slopes, provided the side slopes are no steeper than 2.5H:1 V (District 1982). Rock -lined side slopes steeper than 2.5H:1 V are considered unacceptable under any circumstances because of stability, safety, and maintenance considerations. Proper bedding is required both along the side slopes and the channel bottom for a stable lining. The riprap blanket thickness should be at least 1.75 times d50 (at least 2.0 times d50 in sandy soils) and should extend up the side slopes at least 1 foot above the design water surface. At the upstream and downstream termination of a riprap lining, the thickness should be increased 50% for at least 3 feet to prevent undercutting. 4.4.2.4 Riprap Toes Where only the channel sides are to be lined and the channel bottom remains unlined, additional riprap is needed to protect such lining. In this case, the riprap blanket should extend at least 3 feet below the channel thalweg (invert) in erosion resistant soils, and the thickness of the blanket below the existing M D-64 04/2008 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B--30 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) MAJOR DRAINAGE Table MD -7 —Classification and Gradation of Ordinary Riprap Riprap Designation % Smaller Than Given Size by Weight Intermediate Rock Dimensions (inches) dso (inches)* Type VL 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 12 9 6 2 6** Type L 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 15 12 9 3 9** Type M 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 21 18 12 4 12** Type H 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 30 24 18 6 18 Type VH 70-100 50-70 35-50 2-10 42 33 24 9 24 * dso = mean particle size (intermediate dimension) by weight. ** Mix VL, L and M riprap with 35% topsoil (by volume) and bury it with 4 to 6 inches of topsoil, all vibration compacted, and revegetate. Basic requirements for riprap stone are as follows: • Rock shall be hard, durable, angular in shape, and free from cracks, overburden, shale, and organic matter. • Neither breadth nor thickness of a single stone should be less than one-third its length, and rounded stone should be avoided. • The rock should sustain a loss of not more than 40% after 500 revolutions in an abrasion test (Los Angeles machine ASTM C-535-69) and should sustain a loss of not more than 10% after 12 cycles of freezing and thawing (AASHTO test 103 for ledge rock procedure A). • Rock having a minimum specific gravity of 2.65 is preferred; however, in no case should rock have a specific gravity less than 2.50. 4.4.1.2 Grouted Boulders Table MD -8 provides the classification and size requirements for boulders. When grouted boulders are used, they provide a relatively impervious channel lining which is less subject to vandalism than ordinary riprap. Grouted boulders require less routine maintenance by reducing silt and trash accumulation and Rev. 04/2008 MD -61 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B--31 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) Table MD -11 —Gradation for Granular Bedding MAJOR DRAINAGE U,S. Standard Sieve Size Percent Weight by Passing Square -Mesh Sieves Type I CDOT Sect. 703.01 Type II CDOT Sect. 703.09 Class A 3 inches --- 90-100 11/2 inches --- -- 3.4 inches ---^ 20-90 16 inches 100 #4 95-100 0-20 #16 45-80 #50 10-30 _ ----- #100 2-10 -- #200 0-2 0-3 The Type I and Type II bedding specifications shown in Table MD -11 were developed using the T -V filter criteria and the fact that bedding which will protect an underlying non -cohesive soil with a mean grain size of 0.045 mm will protect anything finer. Since the T -V filter criterion provides some latitude in establishing bedding gradations, it is possible to make the Type I and Type II bedding specifications conform with Colorado Division of Highways' aggregate specifications. The Type I bedding in Table MD -11 is designed to be the lower layer in a two -layer filter for protecting fine-grained soils and has a gradation identical to Colorado Department of Transportation's (CDOT's) concrete sand specification AASHTO M-6 (CDOT Section 703.01). Type II bedding, the upper layer in a two -layer filter, is equivalent to Colorado Division of Highways' Class A filter material (Section 703.09 Class A) except that it permits a slightly larger maximum rock fraction. When the channel is excavated in coarse sand and gravel (50% or more of coarse sand and gravel retained on the #40 sieve by weight), only the Type II filter is required. Otherwise, a two -layer bedding (Type I topped by Type II) is required. Alternatively, a single 12 -inch layer of Type II bedding can be used, except at drop structures. For required bedding thickness, see Table MD -12. At drop structures, a combination of filter fabric and Type II bedding is acceptable as an alternative to a two -layer filter. Table MD -12 —Thickness Requirements for Granular Bedding Riprap Designation Minimum Bedding Thickness (inches) Fine -Grained Soils- Coarse -Grained Soils Type I Type II Type II VL (d50= 6 in), L (d50 = 9 in) 4 4 6 M(dm =12 in) 4 4 6 H (d50 = 18 in) 4 6 8 VH(d50=24 in) 4 r 6 8 May substitute one 12 -inch layer of Type II bedding. The substitution of one layer of Type II bedding shall not be permitted at drop structures. The use of a combination of filter fabric and Type II bedding at drop structures is acceptable. Fifty percent or more by weight retained on the # 40 sieve. Rev. 04/2008 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District B-32 M D-67 APPENDIX C STATE OF COLORADO Oodlculol to pro',odoa all+ inl;uuyhly tho hon15 and Inybul,Inpn, of Inn peupla of GplOrlllln 43300 Glints Cruet Di. & Orr1Y6f. t0iorxrlp 66240.1636 Plwno;,:inZ 6g2.206p Ton I Inc i:Vly ni.7rVa lucalrn1;u eloogIak, CCWI San hl1p Ur rvw,c6pVIe,®INIr,CJ,V5 Clturtc.: De -000o( ar1PnbtkFf I h nLl Voviel11114L'ILe For Agency Use Only Permit Nuiuber Assigned COR03- E arc Received / / Meath bay Ycur STORMWATER DISCHARGE ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES APPLICATION PHOTO COPIES, FAXED COPIES, PDF COPIES OR WAILS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Please print or type Original signatures are required This application must be considered complete by the D1vis!on before it will initiate permit prooesaing, Tho Division wilt notify that applicant if additional information is.needed to complete the application. If more space is required to answer any question, please attach additional sheets to the application €orm. Applications must be mailed or delivered to: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Water Quality Control Division 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South WQCD-P-22 Denver, Colorado 80246.1530 PERMIT INFORMATION Applicant is: El Property Owner ❑ Contractor/Operator 1. CONTACT INFORMATION Permit Applicant Company Name: legally F2asponsibie Person: First Name: J}m - _ -•- --� Lest Name: Lba Title,: Owner Mailing Address: City, State and Zip Cods: Phone: Email Address: p0 Box 26 Andrews, TX 78714 (800) 367.4550 jirn_lee cipelmertank.net Local Facility Contact ✓ same a5 Applicant Local Contact Parson? First Nape: Title: Phone: I3IiiI7rg Contact _Last Name: Email Address: same as Applicant Biting Contact Person: First Name: Tltif;: Mailing Address: City, State and Zip Code: Phone: Company Narne Small Address; Authorized Agent • Last Name: Arrant may sfpn repoMI-PMr.sd1C . ea ragytrud by tire perrltl Agent Name: Email address Authorized Position Position Title Currently held by: Page 9 of 3 Title Phone a Phone # Email: Revised 2/010 L/Ed WdEtr :0T OT02 rz TOSEE E.ESt' : '0N Xdd C-1 : Weed _ 2. PEI MITTED„ FACILITY IN FORMATION Name of Plan, Project or Development: Location of construction site: Lonestar Saltwater Disposal f=acility Street Address (or cross streets): 15968 Weld County Rd 49 Le City (if unincorporated, so InSalle (unrnoarporeted) Weld CourrlX. State and Zip Code: Colorado 80645 Latitude and Longitude (approximate center of site to nearest 15 seconds using one of following toimats) 11O4° 35' 40.30" 40° 13' 52.66 Latitude: " OR degrees /minutes/ seconds Longitude: degrees/ m inutesr seconds 39"42'11", 104'55'67") Latitude: _ Lon9ltudo: _ {e.g., 39.703°, 104.933') degrees -Ito 3 decimal places) degrees (to 3 decimal places) 3. MAP {Attachment} ._ — • • Map: Attach a map that Indicates the site location and that CLEARLY shows the boundaries of the area that will be disturbed. Maps must be no larger than 99x97 Inches, 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION ---- — •-- Legal description: If subdivided, provide the legal description below, or indicate that It is not applicable (do not supply Townshipil nge/Section or metes and bounds description of sits) Subdivision(s); Lot(e); ,,,,, t3lock(s): OR 0 Not applicable (site has not been subdivided) d. AREA OF CONSTRUCTION SITE 5O Total area of project site (acres): _ Area of project site to undergo disturbance (acres): 5'0 N/A Total disturbed area of Larger Common Plan of Development or Sale, if applicable: (I•e., total, including all phases, filings, lots, and infrastructure not covered by this appiicetion) 6. NATURE OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY -- --- Check the appropriate box(a) or provide a brief description that indicates the general nature of the construction activities. (The full deacrlptlon of activities must be Included in the Stcrmwater Management Plan.) SIngle Family Residential Development Mufti -Family Residential Development Commercial Development Oil and Gas Production and/or Exploration (including pad sites and associated infrastructure) Highway/Road Development (not including roadways essoulatod with commercial or residential development) Class ll Saltwater Infection Facility Other, Describe W - 7. AN11CIPATRD CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Construotlon Start Date; May.1, 201O _.. Final Stabilization Date: May ; 2011 Revised 2/20'10 page 1 of 3 C-2 L/2d Wd2b:OT EtT©E CO 'aEl•J Tt0S62aS?2G: 'ON XbIA WO Jd B. RECEIVING WATERS of d'laeherae Ib to a ditch or V,arn+sewer, include the name of the ultimata rQcaiv rN.waters1 Immediate I'iedelving Water(a): Box Elder Creek Ultimata Receiving Water(s): South Platte River s. REQUIRED SIOPZATURES (Both parts I. and Ii. moat be sitttied) Signat=ure of Applicant: The applicant must be either the owner amilpr operator of the construction site. Refer to Part B of the Instructions for additional Informatidn. The ep'pliaation must k ionect by the applicant to be considered coniplete. In alf ewes, it sliah he signed as follows; a) In the case of corporations. by a princtp it executive officer of at least the lever of vice-president or his or her citify authorized representative, if such representative is responsible for the overall operation of the facility trorn which the discharge described in the application originates. b) fo the c;asin of a partnersht*, by a goeierel partner. c) ir} the case of a sale proprietorship, by Erie proprietor, d) in the case of a municipal, state, or other ptrbiic facility, by either a priAdipal executive officer, ranking eloctcd official, or other duly authorized empfoyee if such representative is respoilsitale for the overall operation of the facility from which the discharge described in the form oilglnates. STOP!: A StnrrliwatePlan roust be corn 1eted orlor to signing the foilour�lnQcertificpttonsl I. Etormwater Management Plan Certification certify under penalty of low that a carnplato Storntwatir Management Pion, as deraalhert in Appendix A of this application. has been prepared for niy acrivity. Based on my inquiry or thu parson or personn who manage [Au system, or ;i,pSd porsans directly resporis'bl, for gathering the irsformetion, the Stormweter Manugeman; Plan is, to the bast of my knowledge erld 0 Jlef. true. accurate, nod complete I em aware that there are signifhGant penaitJsa for faEseiy oortlfying the compiettvn of said SWkIP, ircludrng the possibility of tins aro imprisonment for Iu ing Viyia ns," Name tprinted) signature of Permit Legal Contact '1 certify under psi Fly of raw that I hisva p+irsanatly examined end am ramlliErr u1'Ith the Ii,fdnrlation submitted :n this appllealicsn arc ail aftarnment5 grid that, based on any Inquiry of thost ardiviCivals immediately responsible for obtaining the information. i believe had ilie inrarmatinri is true, acrurato and cori'ptete I am t:rat ;Hare rim srgniricant periaitiao fur strttrviitting false inforrmaLon, Including Eire passibility of fine or imprisonment. 1 ixr<iiorstanrl that strbmittal of this epplivation i.s for coverage antler the State of Colorado Ge=neral Permit for Stdrrnwater LJlsoheirges Asiimisted with Construction Activity for the entirety Rfthe construction sitelproJnct described and applied for, until such time as the nppiIiatiou is amended or the certillcntlnn is transferred, inaatIvatod, or expired ' k4 ‘i 1 Signauture pf LOO*ii } ..onsible person or Authorized Agent rsuLrnisylon roust Ericiyd ofiwr)al SS(lna1i.rf_ } ]ate Signed 7.7 Title Name~ (printed Page 2 of 3 Dare Shxnod .suLirninji2.4 i fist Include original sic)natura - i 3. Titie DO NOT INCLUDE A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN DO NOT INCLUDE PAYMENT —AN INVOICE WILL BE SENT AFTER THE CERTIFICATION IS ISSUED. Revised 2/2010 C-3 L/trd Wd2tr :OZ BZOZ 02 ',tied TIZ EZZSE2' : '0N XU.d W0JA LOINFSTAFI DISPOSAL FACILITY 1.5988 WCR 49 LASALLE, COLORADO 80545 STORMWATER DISCHARGES ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES MAP SCALE 1"_-1000' WCR 34.5 NERES CANAL WCA 49 PURL IC IMPROVEMENTS LIMITS OF 0IS7 JRBAN0E PROPERTI' rn O OIL6 FACILITY WCR 34 LAMP RYNEARSON & ASSOCIATES 4715 Innovation Drive, Fort Collins, Co www.LkA•Inc.com 970,226.0342 I P 970,2_26.0B70 I F —FACILITY LIMITS OF DISTURMANCE drawn byi £KM d*ylnar EKIA Job nurnbdr-lacta' 02oao37,00 d4& MARCH 2010 Cc4kl flip name,- rylication 1,j421 JW , kId 'P :0T OTOE 02 - W I0962ES2.2b : 'ON XH.d C-4 : NO JA OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 303.566-35 BI DAM NAME FOR OFFICE USE ONLY NO, WATER DIV: DIST: NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSTRUCT A NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATER IMPOUNDMENT STRUCTURE1 This notice is required per Section 37.87.125, C.R.S. (1998). This notice must be submitted to the Division Engineer's Office a minimum of 45 days prior to construction (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE N OTICEI OWNER INFORMATION Name Loneatar, r LLC _ Telephone: ( 800 ) 367-4550 Address: 1701 North Idighway 385 Andrews l'eXae 70714 Street / P.Q. Box/ Rural Route City State Zip Code Responsible Person: Jim free Telephone: i 432 ) 523-9601 Address: 1'701 North Highway 38S Andrew Street / P_D, Box/ Rural Route City Contractor: !Jones tarr LLI{; STRUCTURE INFORMATION Name of Darn: Loz'resta:e" #1 '%a!'Ea Sect: NE '/, of the NW %; Sect: 18 , Township: 3N , Range: 04W , 6 P.M Distance of dam from Section lines 43 a ft from NN S, 2 2 0 4 ft from Texas 70714 State Zip Code Telephone: ( 800 ) 3E7-4550 Water Division: 1 Water District: 1 Location'?: . Option 1 OR . Option 2—D- Utilizing CPS: Set to UTM Datum, Measured on crest of dam above strearnlineioutlet, Northing m Easting m, Note: GPS settings must be NAM CDNUS, Dam Oimensi0ns Vertical Height': '7 . 7 ft., Length: 400.0 ft., Slopes: UtS; 3 : 1 H:1V, D/S 3 : 1 _ H:1V Reservoir: Surface Area'; 0.35 acres, Capacity': 0,74 acre feet, Drainage Area: _2.75 acres Emergency Spillway: V\Idth: 10 . 0 ft., Side Slopes: 4 : 1. H:1V, Freeboard; 1 0 ft Outlet Drain: Type: D . N - P_ Culvert'. Size: 12 , 0 inches, Location: SW cornier of _pond Stream Name or Water Sources: south L tat to River _ - Proposed Water Use: St ortnwat Water Court c se No. (If applicable) DIVISION ENGINEER'S REQUIREMENTS: 3 kCN of Owner Date DWH (oa/o7) Signature of Division Engineer Date A "Non-JUri dlOllOnel Skrl.Qiure' 1c dsm wselinlg s reservoir with it eapecity or 'IOD acro-feet or less Nnr' a surface area of 20 acres or leNa slid a vertical hclphl (Ise !vows laa5- h Please see exi:n5pla wi rovarpc slii0 {a,Aaga 2V of rhis corm 'veni. rieignI" rM1dR5urtd ircnt the ele a1,ar of +na lawcst pcim c,r 11E name wiirece of the ground where that point occurs Wong the longitudinal nentar1ine of the darn uir'o the crr.3t ur the einerger ,y pin way of the darn. 'rradli3flrd- is me vr:fllera+ dhlaM8 rrorrl trw beltorn of apiYlway t•) +na tics' Oi Ilse dim, ▪ Ir:ana;n,c:i�r m e rrvCrlr inlerOpl requi;ad t'A0I permit applications can he found at www.wat*r.ctsta.00 usrpubarforrnamp) 2/Ed N l2l:OT OTOE 6E '.tey1 TO96SESE217: '0N XOd C-5 1OLd IL WILD Pirrti— Gm g SECTION A - POST Dr,ie x I%2" NOIbN1L 0 0 z z co Sheet No. 1 of 7 Issued By: Project Development Branch on July 04, 2006 tro 4 ee rn E C 0 0 C C E 0 C LL C} C G C 4 Lunt J.Foctr,calmv, Oalr: N O O 5 4' F 3 0 26 s s5 CA SOIL RETENTION BLANKETS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 96. Gr a oo 4- O z aa aa coo 0 0 0 , 0 "a fi^ c3 DRAIN PILE; PROTECTION O PLAN VIEW PLAN VIEW PLAN VIEW SECTION A -A SECTION B -B STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION (TYPE R) STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION (TYPE C OR D) (TYPE C OR D) INLET EROSION BALE FILTER STANDARD PLAN NO. 00 r \ / \ n O f24 „,5 0 L) O •� rojeck Devecpment Ora 0 \ 4 F 0 \ ru / ! 632 C-8 0 ( SECTION VIEW ALONG DITCH FLOWLINE TEMPORARY SLOPE DRAIN MOI. COVER OVER WM SECTION DETAIL CHECK DAM FOR EROSION CONTROL DIVERSION DAM STANDARD PLAN NO. Q O O tl By: Project Development Brunch an IT 0 /` ( 2 \ 1.1 § )$ E a O ! 13. }) b 0 ./¢ id —id— — 1d� T Erk 1 �l �§ L —id— —• HH ELEVATION SECTION 0 F w ce N O 0 V Ed CONCRETE WASHOUT STRUCTURE P WE. E EA m e SECTION A -A STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EWATERING STRUCTURE cc F r ❑ w U, STANDARD PLAN NO Sheet No. 5 of 7 Issued By: Project Devebpment Brunch un July 04, 2DDS r O a 0 U, YYo ii 0 iX 3 W a TYPICAL SECTION tl FRONT VIEW FRONT VIEW SILT BERM -VELOCITY CHECKS FOR DRAINAGE DITCH SILT DIKE -INSTALLATION FOR DRAINAGE DITCH PLAN NO. 00 a Sheet No. 6 of 7 Issued By: Project Development Brunch an July 04, 2006 v_ iY N L Vl r,reolon Dn!e: 07/UR106 $ creea,4 rin ilo-n 3 Z L i • G —l1 LL 1 C-12 APPENDIX D Hello