The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20080058.tiff • Vision • Teamwork • Commitment • Communication PIONEER JN: 3325 CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER tr R AINAGE REPORT Prepared to Pioneer. ;rrmilni i :,..� .. ..C er-IN Carroll & Lang e () Professional Engineers & Land Surveyors Sk 165 South Union Blvd., Suite 156 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 (303) 980-0200 Fax: (303) 980-0917 2008-0058 Carroll & Langee ("Si Professional Engineers&Land Surveyors Ski Lakewood • Loveland • Winter Park • April 25, 2007 JN: 3325 David Bauer Weld County Public Works 1111 H Street Greeley, CO 80632-0758 Re: Pioneer Change of Zone Master Drainage Report Dear David: Carroll & Lange, Inc. has utilized the Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes 1, 2, and 3, dated October 2006, to prepare the change of zone drainage report. Carroll & Lange, Inc. has also discussed with Weld County Staff that the change of zone drainage report content will not provide the high level of detail the standards request. Furthermore, a narrative of the items excluded will be provided with the change of zone drainage report. For example, street capacity calculations, storm sewer sizing, and swale sizing will not be • provided. This detail has not been provided with the submittal for this change of zone submittal is a Bubble Plan in nature. Should you have any questions or additional comments, please do not hesitate to contact us at any time. Sincerely, CARROLL & LANGE, INC. Clifford D. Netuschil, PE Senior Project Engineer cl Attachments cc: Tom DiRito, JF Companies Paull Nation, JF Companies Joy McGee, Reutzel and Associates E / R • 165 South Union Blvd..Suite 156•Lakewood.Colorado 80228•Main(303) 980-0200•Fax(303)980-0917 3985 South Lincoln Avenue,Suite 250'Loveland,Colorado 80537•Main(970)292-5635•Fax(970)292-5639•Denver Dir. (303) 865-5088 47 Cooper Creek Way,Suite 328•P.O.Box 3345•Winter Park,Colorado 80482-3345•Main(970) 726-8100•Fax(970) 726-9100•Denver Dir. (303) 980-9600 1.3.1 Change of Zone Drainage Report Contents • The Change of Zone Drainage Report shall be in accordance with the following outline and contain the applicable information listed: I. General Location and Description A. Location 1. Township, Range, Section, '/ Section. Included 2. Local streets within and adjacent to the development. Included 3. Major open channels, lakes, streams, irrigation and other water resource facilities within and adjacent to the proposed development. Included 4. Names of surrounding developments including jurisdiction (municipalities). Included B. Description of Property 1. Area in acres. Included • 2. Ground cover. Included 3. Major open channels and ownership. Included 4. General project description. Included 5. Existing irrigation facilities and utilities and ownership information. Included 6. Groundwater characteristics (where applicable) Not Included at this time II. Drainage Basins and Sub-Basins A. Major Basin Description 1. Reference to Weld County Master Drainage Plan(s) w here applicable. Included 2. Major basin drainage characteristics. Included 3. Identification of all irrigation facilities and utilities within 200 feet of the • property boundary. Included B. Sub-Basin Description 1. Historic drainage patterns on the subject property. Included 2. Offsite drainage flow patterns and impacts on the subject development. Included Ill. Drainage Design Criteria A. Regulations: Discussion of the optional criteria selected or the deviation from the WCSDC if any. Included B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints 1. Discussion of previous drainage studies (i.e., project master plans) for the subject property that influence or are influenced by the proposed drainage design and how the studies and plans will affect drainage design for the site. Included 2. Discussion of site constraints such as slopes, streets, utilities, existing • structures, and the proposed development or site plan impacts on the proposed drainage plan. Included C. Hydrological Criteria 1. Identify design rainfall (source of design storm depth information NOAA Atlas, UD&FCD maps, etc). Included 2. Identify design storm recurrence intervals. Included 3. Identify runoff calculation method(s) and any computer models. Included 4. Identify detention discharge and storage calculation method(s) and computer models. Included 5. Discussion and justification of other criteria or calculation methods used that are not presented in or referenced by the WCSDC. Included D. Hydraulic Criteria 1. Identify capacity references and any computer models. Included 2. Identify detention outlet type. Included • • 3. Identify check/drop structure criteria used. None specified at this time 4. Discussion of other drainage facility design criteria used that are presented in the WCSDC. Included IV. Drainage Facility Design A. General Concept 1. Discussion of concept and typical drainage patterns for historical conditions. Included 2. Discussion of compliance with off-site runoff considerations and constraints. Included 3. Discussion of the content of all tables, charts, figures, or drawings presented in the report. Included 4. Discussion of anticipated and proposed drainage patterns. Included B. Specific Details • 1. Discussion of compliance with drainage criteria (street, inlet and pipe capacities, etc). Not included at this time. 2. Discussion of drainage problems encountered and solutions at specific design points. Included 3. Discussion of detention storage and outlet design. Discussion of storage and conceptual outlet design included at this time. 4. Discussion of maintenance access and aspects of the design. Not included at this time. 5. Provide copies of Draft CDPHE or State Engineers permit applications (where applicable). Not included at this time. V. Conclusions A. Compliance with the WCSDC Included • B. Drainage Concept • 1. Effectiveness of drainage design to control damage from storm runoff. Generally and preliminarily discussed at this time. 2. Influence of proposed development on any applicable Weld County Master Drainage Plan recommendations. Included, this does not affect any existing Master Drainage Plans. 3. Identification of and written approval of affected irrigation company or other property owner(s). Weld County may require that the applicant provide evidence that offsite impacted jurisdictions have been notified of the proposed drainage plans and potential impacts. Not included at this time. VI. References A. Reference all criteria and technical information used. Included VII. Appendices A. Hydrology Computations • 1. Land use assumptions regarding adjacent properties. Included 2. Initial and major storm runoff computations at specific design points. Included, major storm was used to size infrastructure at this time, as the land plan progresses, the minor storm will be used to size smaller scale infrastructure. 3. Historic and fully developed runoff computations at specific design points. Included 4. Computer model input and output. Included B. Hydraulic Computations 1. Culvert sizing. Preliminary calculations included for major drainageways only at this time. 2. Storm sewer sizing. Not included at this time. 3. Street capacity elevation. Not included at this time. 4. Storm inlet sizing. Not included at this time. • 5. Swale sizing. Not included at this time. • 6. Open channel sizing. Preliminary calculations included. 7. Check dam and/or drop structure sizing. Not included at this time. 8. Detention pond area/volume capacity and outlet sizing. Only volume discussed at this time. 9. Changes to Calculation Methods — If applicant / design engineer modifies any portion of UD&FCD spreadsheets used for hydrologic or hydraulic calculations, the applicant / design engineer shall identify all changes to calculation assumptions or computer programs as to type of change and specific factors that were modified. Included 10. Computer model input and output. Included 1.3.2 Change of Zone Drainage Report Drawing Contents A General Location (vicinity) Map shall be provided at a scale of 1" — 2000' or larger in sufficient detail to identify upstream off-site drainage areas flowing into the development, downstream areas receiving site flows, and general drainage patterns in the project area. • A Drainage Plan of the proposed development shall be provided at a scale from 1" -- 100' or 1"- 200' on a 24" x 36" drawing. The plan shall show the following information: 1. Existing contours at 2-feet maximum intervals, contours should extend at least 200 feet from all project boundaries or further if necessary to show upstream and downstream drainage relationships impacting the development. The plans and report shall describe the horizontal and vertical datum (NGVD29, NAVD88, NAD83, etc) used on the plans and reconcile the differences where necessary. Included 2. Property lines, lot lines, utility crossings and easements. Property lines were included, the rest are not included at this time. 3. Streets with names. Included 4. Existing drainage facilities, pipes, structures, irrigation facilities, and sizes. Included 5. Overall drainage area boundary and sub-area boundaries. Included 6. Proposed contours and flow directions indicated with arrows. Included • ' CHANGE OF ZONE • MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT FOR PIONEER JN: 3325 April 23, 2007 Prepared for: tPioneer Communities, LLC 4643 South Ulster Street, Suite 1300 ' Denver, CO 80237 Fax: 303-843-0143 303-843-9742 Prepared by: Kevin Jennings, El p � �RE."�br. T • 4 x ' — t "` 4'' zo . 07 Cli or&�d etuschil P ;. Sr. Pr fee may, REVIEW 8t3 ' Carroll & Lange, Inc. C) 165 South Union Boulevard, Suite 156 Lakewood, CO 80228 ' Fax: 303-980-0917 303-980-0200 1 • I ENGINEER CERTIFICATION • I hereby certify that this Master Drainage Report for Pioneer was prepared by me (or under my direct supervision) in accordance with the provisions of section 24-7-110 of the Weld County Code and the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Criteria Manual for the owners thereof. CS tiF� J '. w L Cliffor "44EAtijschil� Date ce Colorado :10,1, : 1a ,, For and on betfflfbfOarroll & Lange, Inc. REVIEW COPY ONLY I . 1 I 1 • ' TABLE OF CONTENTS • • I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. Location 2 B. Description of Property 3 III. HISTORIC BASINS AND SUB-BASINS A. Major Basin Description 4 1. Box Elder Creek 4 2. Unnamed Creek g ' B. Sub-Basin Description 6 1. Box Elder Creek Sub-Basin (Basin HB) g 2. Unnamed Creek Sub-Basin (Basin HU) 7 3. Eastern Drainage Sub-Basin (Basin HA) 7 IV. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA ' A. Regulations 9 B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints g C. Hydrological Criteria 9 ' • D. Hydraulic Criteria 10 V. PROPOSED DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. General Proposed Concept 11 B. Specific Details 13 ' VI. CONCLUSION 20 VII. REFERENCES 20 I I I 1 . APPENDICES • APPENDIX A — Maps Vicinity Map Pioneer PUD Zone Plat ' FIRM Map Soil Type Map SCS Soil Map and Soil Descriptions ' Rainfall Zone Maps Existing Depressions Map APPENDIX B — Design Tables and Charts Table RA-4 — Factors for Preparation of Intensity-Duration Curves Table RO-3 — Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values ' Table RO-5 — Runoff Coefficients, C Figure RO-1 — Overland Flow Velocities Figures RO-3 - RO-5, RO-9, RO-15 - RO-17 — Watershed Imperviousness Table RO-6 —Typical Depression Losses Table RO-7 — Recommended Horton's Equation Parameters Table RO-8 — Incremental Infiltration Depths Table 5-2 — Soil Parameters used in HEC-HMS Model Typical Overlot Grading Templates • APPENDIX C — Historic Basin Calculations IBasin Soil Types Basin Time of Concentration Calculation HEC-HMS Output Summary APPENDIX D — Proposed Basin Calculations ' Basin Soil Types Basin Percent Impervious Calculations Time of Concentration Calculations Water Quality Volume Calculations HEC-HMS Major Basin Flows Detention Pond Summary Open Channel Design Culvert Design ' APPENDIX E — Streets Roadway Plan through Site APPENDIX F 1 Drainage Maps • ' CHANGE OF ZONE •' MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT FOR PIONEER I. INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared in accordance with section 24-7-110 of the Weld County Code as well as the Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Strom Drainage Criteria Manuals Volumes 1, 2, and 3. Due to the size of the site, HEC-HMS (Hydraulic Engineering Center, Hydrologic Modeling Software) will be used to model the hydrology of the site. The information provided in this report is a basis in which the Pioneer Development drainage concepts will be founded on. These concepts are preliminary and are subject to change as additional information is added and as ' the project progresses in the planning and development stages within Weld County. As part of the development the Hydrology for the existing conditions within the development area was evaluated using HEC-HMS. Pursuant to this analysis preliminary locations of regional detention facilities were determined. In most I • cases these ponds will discharge directly into Box Elder Creek and Unnamed Creek, the existing drainage ways that are aligned through the site. Additionally, preliminary grading, in conjunction with proposed planning areas, was used to ' formulate concept drainage patterns for the developed conditions. It is anticipated regional drainage ways will outfall the developed runoff, within the catchments, into the regional detention facilities. As more information becomes tavailable the major drainage infrastructure will be designed accordingly. This may include culvert crossing at major roadway, major drainage ways, and 1 detention pond outlet works. Hydrology for the existing drainage ways, Box Elder Creek and Unnamed Creek ' will be evaluated in a separate study. Carroll and Lange Inc. have prepared a Flood Hazard Area Delineation Study for the watershed. This study evaluates the existing and proposed conditions within the watershed and will ultimately delineate the existing and proposed 100-year flood plain. 1 • CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER , • Page 2 II. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. Location The project is located in Sections 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 17, and 18, Township 2 ' North; and Section 32, Township 3 North, Range 64 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian; Sections 12 and 13Township 2 North, Range 65 West of ' the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Weld, State of Colorado. Weld County Road 49 (WCR 49), a paved, 60-foot right-of-way is aligned north and south on the western boundary. Weld County Road 22 (WCR 22), a paved 60-foot right-of-way runs east and west in the southwest portion of the site, ending at its intersection with WCR 49. One mile of Weld County Road 51 (WCR 51), a 60-foot right-of-way gravel road, runs north and south ' in the mid-southern portion of the site. This road currently dead-ends approximately one mile in from the south. Box Elder Creek is a drainageway that bisects the property from south to I • north. This channel does not typically carry a consistent base flow. There is also an unnamed drainageway running south to north through the property, entering at the southeast corner and intersecting Box Elder Creek north of the project site. The Klug Ditch has been abandoned as evidenced pursuant to documents obtained from the State Engineers office. In addition, the reservoir that services it was breeched of the dam by the State Engineers Office. Therefore development may occur on this existing ditch. Several water, gas, and oil wells exist onsite and are owned as part of the ' subject property. The site is completely within Weld County and is surrounded by undeveloped agricultural land. A copy of the Vicinity Map showing the location of the site is located in Appendix A (Figure 1). • CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER • Page 3 B. Description of Property The project site comprises approximately 3,820 acres of undeveloped agricultural land. Ground cover consists of native weeds and grasses, including Yucca and Sage as well as a limited amount of agricultural crops. ' The surface terrain of the site contains many local depressions likely caused by wind blown sands. An exhibit has been included in Appendix A that shows the locations of these existing local depressions. The majority of ' the site slopes south to north, and towards Box Elder Creek. A portion of the northwest corner, as well as a portion of the southwest corner, slope westward towards the Beebe Seep, a drainageway that drains northward, ' west of the project site. As previously discussed, Box Elder Creek and another unnamed channel run through the site. None of these waterways are owned or maintained by any entity. The NERES Canal is owned and maintained by Farmers' Reservoir and Irrigation of Brighton. The former Klug Lake lies near the centroid of, but outside of, the Site along Box Elder Creek. It appears that the embankment for this lake was breached at some I • time, and Box Elder Creek now bypasses the reservoir along the northwest side. Klug Ditch meanders through the western half of Section 32 and is ' assumed to be abandoned along with Klug Lake. The majority of the site is covered by very soft sands. Soil data for the subject property was obtained from the United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soil Survey of Weld County, Colorado, issued in September 1980. Figure 3 in Appendix A reflects the I Pioneer property in relation to the SCS Soil Survey maps. A "Soil Type" exhibit has been prepared and included in Appendix A, which shows the major soil types throughout the site. The soils consist of 16 types, which fall within four soil type classifications: Sand, Loamy Sand, and Loam. The two predominant soil types overlaying the site are Osgood Sands, which are within hydrologic soil group B, and Valent Sands, which are within ' hydrologic soil group A. These soils have a high infiltration rate even when thoroughly wetted and consist chiefly of deep, well to excessively drained sands or gravels. Due to these sands being so well drained, it was assumed for this Change of Zone report that the Volume of Moisture Deficit was equal to the porosity of the soil. The parameters used as an assumption for the porosity for this report are included in Appendix B. On- site data will be obtained and used in this report as the project progresses through the change of zone process. 1 • CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT FOR PIONEER ' Page 4 III. HISTORIC BASINS AND SUB-BASINS A. Major Basin Description The site lies almost entirely within the basin tributary to Box Elder Creek. As stated previously, the site slopes inwardly from south to north and ' outfalls to Box Elder Creek. Box Elder Creek has a defined creek bottom but does not normally carry a base flow. Box Elder Creek continues north of the project site and confluences the South Platte River approximately 16 ' miles north of the project. ' According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Weld County, Colorado Community Panel No. 080266 0900C, dated September 28, 1982, there are portions of the site that are within the Zone A 100-year floodplain. ' Zone A is described as "areas of 100-year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined." A FIRMette is included in Appendix A (Figure 4), and the floodplain is indicated on the attached drainage maps. I The FIRM represents floodplain along Box Elder Creek and the unnamed • drainageway within the eastern portion of the site. The floodplain along Box Elder Creek ranges from approximately 2,300 feet to 4,500 feet wide throughout the project site. The average width of the floodplain associated with the unnamed drainageway is 850 feet. It is expected as development of Pioneer Communities progresses, that the existing floodplain for Box Elder Creek (100-year) will be evaluated and a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) will be submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Further, a Flood Hazard Development Permit will be required from Weld County. A detailed 100-year floodplain delineation of both onsite ' drainageways is being completed as a part of the Flood Hazard Area Delineation (FHAD) for Downstream Box Elder Creek Watershed, prepared by Carroll & Lange, Inc., November 2006, as a part of the Change of Zone ' application. 1. Box Elder Creek There are no known existing drainage related studies of Box Elder Creek or the unnamed creek in this area. As stated earlier, a Flood ' Hazard Area Delineation for Downstream Box Elder Creek Watershed is currently being prepared for Box Elder Creek and the unnamed • drainageway. This report utilizes existing reports and studies for 1 CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER • Page 5 ' upstream tributaries such as the Flood Hazard Area Delineation for Lower Box Elder Creek Watershed (FHAD) prepared by Wright Water Engineers, Inc., in September 2001. The FHAD study ends ' approximately nine miles upstream and south of the site at the Weld County/Adams County line (also, the northern boundary of UDFCD). ' The Flood Hazard Area Delineation for Downstream Box Elder Creek Watershed will delineate the 100-year floodplain for Box Elder Creek and the unnamed drainageway. The detailed delineation during the Change of Zone will combine the previously prepared hydrology from the FHAD study with hydrology and routing for Jim Creek and Horse ' Creek. The hydrology of the basins will be defined using HEC-HMS. The 100-year storm event will be analyzed for the existing and future conditions. HEC-RAS, a program provided by the Army Corps of ' Engineers, will be used to delineate the 100-year floodplain. Aerial photography and mapping will be used to map the floodplain. The downstream limits of this report will be the crossing of Box Elder Creek Iat WCR 49. Cross-sections at a minimum of every 500 feet shall be • run from WCR 49, through Klug Lake and through the subject property. The unnamed drainageway 100-year floodplain will also be delineated through the subject property using the described methods. A delineation of the floodplain for the existing conditions shall be prepared. Subsequent floodplain delineations may be performed based on proposed or potential improvements to the crossings of WCR 22 and WCR 49. Box Elder Creek and Jim Creek cross under the Union Pacific Railroad and Interstate 76 approximately three miles south of the project site. Box Elder Creek passes under a railroad via a bridge that has a ' clearance of approximately 150 feet wide and 9 feet high with a capacity of approximately 13,000 cfs, as per the FHAD for Downstream Box Elder Creek Watershed (9). The creek then passes ' under a frontage road and the east/west bound travel ways via bridges. These three bridges are all similar in size consisting of an open clearance of 180 feet wide and ten feet high, each with a capacity of approximately 16,000 cfs (9). Jim Creek passes under the railroad and interstate via dual box culverts. These dual culverts are approximately 12' x 10' and have a capacity of approximately 3,500 cfs ' with an inlet depth of 15 feet. Downstream of the confluence of Jim Creek with Box Elder Creek, the drainageway crosses under Weld I • County Road 22 via an arched corrugated pipe (7-feet tall by 15-feet CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER ' • Page 6 ' wide) with a capacity of approximately 800 cfs (9). Box Elder Creek continues to the north through the subject property to the former Klug Lake. A breach of the lake embankment is apparent near the northwest corner of the lake. Here, Box Elder Creek bypasses the previous lake control structures and continues to the northeast. The ' creek passes under Weld County Road 49 via an arched corrugated pipe (9 feet tall and 16 feet wide) with a capacity of approximately 1,200 cfs. ' 2. Unnamed Creek ' No known existing drainage studies have been completed for this drainageway. For the Change of Zone, the Flood Hazard Area Delineation for Downstream Box Elder Creek Watershed will analyze ' this basin and the existing and proposed 100-year floodplains shall be delineated using the same methods described for the Box Elder Creek basin above. I • B. Sub-Basin Description The project site currently contains three major basins. These basins were further subdivided into twenty-one (21) historic basins with design points that correspond to the locations of the proposed outfalls and detention ponds. 1. Box Elder Creek Sub-Basin (Basin HB) ' The remainder of the subject property in Sections 13 and portions of the west sides of Section 7, 18 and 6, drain directly to Box Elder Creek. Potions of section 12 and 13 lie within the 100-year FEMA defined Box Elder Creek floodplain. The western portions of Sections 7 and 18 provide more relief than the other sections and drain ' west toward County Road 49 and ultimately to Box Elder Creek. Basins HB-1 and HB-2 encompass portions of the site to the east of ' Box Elder Creek that are planned to be developed as a part of this project. Basins HB-1 and HB-2 encompass a total land area of 425 acres that drain to Box Elder Creek through the Pioneer site. Design ' points B1 and B2 approximate the historic discharge to the locations of the proposed detention ponds for this basin. Basins HB-3 is defined • as the land to the north of the site that drains to Box Elder Creek. CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER '• Page 7 Basin HB-3 is expected to remain undeveloped. See Table 1 at the end of this section for the 5-year runoff rates from this sub-basin. ' 2. Unnamed Creek Sub-Basin (Basin HU) The project site contains a number of sections that drain to the ' unnamed creek. Basins that historically drain to the unnamed creek through the Pioneer site have been designated as HU-1 through HU-13. These basins account for a total land area of 3,918 acres. This includes the eastern portions of Section 7 and 18, the southwestern portions of Section 9 and 32 and the land located within ' Sections 8, 15, and 17. Design Points B1 through B13 were designated along the east and west sides of the unnamed creek in order to approximate the historic outfalls at locations corresponding to the planned detention facilities. See Table / at the end of this section for the 5-year runoff rates from this sub-basin. I The existing Klug Ditch meanders through the western half of • Section 32. As described earlier, the ditch is assumed to be abandoned and may be modified with the proposed Pioneer ' development. Again, a number of local depressions lie within this basin. The drainage historically is held in these depressions without adequate relief to the defined drainage thalweg. Refer to the Existing Depressions map in Appendix A for the locations of these depressions. The offsite, upstream, unnamed creek basin is approximately 7.7 square miles and extends to the west side of Keensburg. This offsite basin consists of agricultural land and portions of Interstate 76. ' Approximately 509 acres of this upstream drainageway within Sections 18, 19, and 20 (a portion of basin HU-7) historically drains onto the Pioneer site. Offsite runoff will be routed around the Pioneer ' site as often as possible for the proposed development. This drainageway is very flat and a defined thalweg is not apparent. ' 3. Eastern Drainage Sub-Basin (Basin HA) A land area of approximately 1364 acres from the northeast corners of Sections 4, 5, 9, 29, 32 and 33 drains to the northeast, to another unnamed tributary to Box Elder Creek. This area has been delineated • with Basins HA-1 through HA-5. This area drains via sheet flow and I CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT I FOR PIONEER ' Page 8 I minor concentrated flow to the north and east onto adjacent agricultural uses, ultimately to the tributary drainageway. Design points Al through A4 were placed at locations to estimate the historic I runoff at locations corresponding to the future detention facilities. This tributary joins Box Elder Creek just north of the subject property near Weld County Road 32. See Table 1 below for a summary of historic 5- year runoff rates from this basin. TABLE 1 I5-YEAR HISTORIC FLOW RATES Basin Design Point Area (ac) Historic Q5 (cfs) IHA-1 Al 324 5.7 HA-2 A2 66 2.1 HA-3 A3 ... 173 3.0 HA-4 A4 12 0.5 _.._. ......... ....._............... ' 0 HA-5 A5 789 8.0 HU-1 U1 273 5.8 IHU-2 U2 107 3.7 HU-3 U3 214 4.8 HU-4 U4 363 4.8 HU-5 U5 .. 210 4.1 ' HU-6 U6 280 4.1 HU-7 U7 850 13.1 I HU-8 U8 372 5.9 HU-9 U9 545 8.3 ..... ....... HU-10 U10 176 3.9 1 HU-11 U11 506.7 8.4 HU-12 U12 105 3.2 IHU-13 U13 22 1.0 HB-1 B1 506.7 11.2 IHB-2 B2 105 3.1 • HB-3 B3 220 8.7 CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT FOR • PIONEER Page 9 IV. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. Regulations ' The Weld County Addendum to the Text of the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals, as well as the UDFCD Volumes 1-3, were used as the primary criteria for storm drainage infrastructure design. In accordance with ' Weld County criteria, Pioneer plans to detain the 100-year storm event in the developed condition and discharge the flow at the 5-year historic rate. ' B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints There are no previous drainage studies specifically for the Pioneer site or surrounding areas. Proposed drainage plans for the site will affect the major drainageways through the site. The effects to these drainageways will be evaluated in this report and in the Flood Hazard Area Delineation for Downstream Box Elder Creek Watershed. I • There are existing county roads throughout the site. The design of these ' existing county roads will be maintained as practicality permits. Also, as discussed earlier, there are many gas and oil wells throughout the site. The site plan and grading will minimize any modifications to these existing structures. The proposed drainage patterns will follow existing drainage patterns as ' closely as possible. As mentioned earlier, there are sections of land that have many local depressions. These local depressions will be filled in with the development to achieve positive drainage to the receiving ponds and channels. C. Hydrological Criteria ' A number of reports and maps were used in determining the rainfall depths for the Pioneer site. The FHAD study prepared for the Lower Box ' Elder Creek used a one-hour, 100-year rainfall depth of 2.6 inches (six- hour = 3.4 inches). This is consistent with NOAA Atlas 2, Volume III lsopluvials (Figure 5). However, reviewing the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume I (Figure 6), the 100-year, one-hour rainfall depth for this site is 2.7 inches. In order to be conservative, the 100-year, one- • hour rainfall depth shall be 2.7 inches. The 5-year and 10-year rainfall 1 CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT FOR PIONEER ' • Page 10 ' depths shall be 1.4 inches and 1.7 inches, respectively. Intensity-Duration- Frequency curves (5-, 10-, and 100-year) have been prepared based on the 1-hour rainfall depth. In accordance with Weld County criteria, the minor and major storm events that shall be evaluated with the site are the 10-year and 100-year storm events, respectively. The HEC-HMS computer program was utilized for analyzing the basin sizes within the program's parameters. Utilizing the one-hour depth for a specified event, a two-hour storm event was analyzed with HEC-HMS. ' HEC-HMS will be used for sizing the regional infrastructure such as major channels and detention facilities. The Rational Method (Q = CIA) shall be used for evaluating and sizing infrastructure related to smaller onsite basins. ' Each developed basin will ultimately drain to a regional detention facility ' prior to discharging offsite or into the major drainageway. These regional detention facilities will be owned and maintained by one of the Pioneer Metro Districts. Detention ponds for the site were sized using the proposed I HEC-HMS model. In the program, the release rate for the detention pond • was set using the 5-year historic runoff rate to the basin outfall. The pond was sized by accounting for the water quality volume with its associated ' release rate and then varying the 100-year storage volume to achieve adequate storage for the developed flows. This sizing method accounts for the inflow and outflow hydrographs based on the set release rate. ' In accordance with the Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Addendum to the Urban Drainage Criteria Manuals Volumes 1, 2, and 3, no extra volume beyond the 100-year detention volume will be required for water quality. The required water quality volume will be drained in a period of 40 hours in accordance with UDFCD. ' D. Hydraulic Criteria ' The Pioneer developed drainage plan utilizes multiple open channel systems throughout the site. The time of concentrations for the basins was determined by utilizing equation RO-3 and RO-4. The time of ' concentrations for the proposed basins was determined by utilizing an open channel conveyance element to more accurately model the increased flow velocity in the proposed open channels. The historic basins had non-well defined conveyance channels and therefore a conveyance coefficient of 12 was assumed to account for some small swale but generally bare sloping • • ground. The proposed channels have been preliminarily sized using CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT FOR PIONEER ' • Page 11 ' Haestad Methods FlowMaster 2005 software. These channels have been designed to conform to UDFCD grass lined channel criteria. The Froude number for the open channels was maintained at a maximum of 0.5 and the velocity for the channel was held to a maximum of four feet per second. Slopes for the proposed channels vary between 0.20 and 0.35 feet/foot. With these shallow slopes it is anticipated that drop structures will not be necessary for the proposed channels. ' Detention pond outlets are anticipated to consist of a controlled outlet structure and a protected emergency overflow weir and spillway. The outlet structure will conform to Weld County and UDFCD standard designs and will consist of orifice plates to control both the 100-year detention release rate and the water quality release rate. The outlet structures are expected to be reinforced concrete with an RCP outlet pipe. A spillway will be provided to convey emergency flows or any offsite flows that will not be detained. ' V. PROPOSED DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN • A. General Proposed Concept ' A copy of the land plan has been included in the Appendix A (Figure 2). The land plan has planning areas consisting of varying densities ranging in ' the low-density range 1 - 3.5 dwelling units per acre. To prevent an issue of varying densities, the most conservative assumption was made for all low density planning areas, therefore being assumed at 3.5 dwelling units per acre. This same approach was taken with the medium density planning area assumed at 6 dwelling units per acre. The assumption to take the highest density per acre per category gives us the greatest percent impervious, therefore, yielding higher runoff rates and larger detention ponds. If the planning areas change in density as the project advances, an upstream detention pond may be needed to account for the excess runoff. ' The Change of Zone is also proposing higher density residential neighborhoods, retail uses, schools, parks, agricultural areas, and land dedicated for subsurface mineral exploration and floodplain. A total of approximately 10,000 residential units are planned with this development. It is assumed that low and medium density planning areas will have 10% Ranch style homes, 40% split level style homes and 50% 2-story homes. These percentages were used in determining the composite percent • impervious for a given basin as shown on the Planning Area Description ' CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER • Page 12 ' spreadsheet in Appendix D. The percent impervious for the high density planning areas, the commercial and park were taken from Table RO-3 in Appendix B. The sewer plant was assumed to be heavy industrial and the ' water tanks have been assumed to be in a light industrial category. Stormwater runoff during the minor and major storm events will be carried through the site by a number of different means. Runoff from lots will enter the street right-of-way through a combination of sheet flow and minor concentrated flows within rear and side lot swales. Typical grading ' templates and drainage patterns for front and rear draining lots have been included in Appendix B. In medium to higher density areas of development, curb and gutter along the roadways will carry the initial runoff to a storm sewer system. Roadside ditches may be used in less dense areas to safely convey the runoff to larger drainage conveyance infrastructure. This infrastructure may include large storm sewer pipes or drainage channels. ' Preliminary grading concepts for the subject site include the use of a number of grass-lined channels, some with right-of-way widths I approximately 100 feet wide. The current site plan is a bubble plan as far • as the lots and local street alignments are concerned. As the project progresses more detailed calculations will be provided. iOffsite basins will be analyzed as they currently exist. In general, runoff from undeveloped and offsite basins surrounding the proposed ' development will be routed around the proposed development. It is anticipated, that should adjacent properties develop, they will be required to at a minimum detain and release at rates equal to the historic rate. Onsite ' detention will not be provided for any offsite properties and will be passed through or around the Pioneer regional detention facilities at its historic rate. Conveyance infrastructure shall be extended through the Pioneer ' community to the offsite upstream drainage basins as necessary to safely convey historic runoff generated from adjacent properties, however, most of the offsite areas drain away from the site. ' As previously noted, this site contains a number of local land depressions that currently hold stormwater. These areas were analyzed as if the ' depressions do not exist and that the land drains in the general direction of the catchment that the depression exists in. The major catchments are defined by what creek they are tributary to. Where these areas fall within ' proposed development, these depressions will be graded to provide an adequate outfall during the minor and major storm events. o CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT FOR PIONEER t • Page 13 Developed runoff shall generally not discharge directly into existing irrigation canals. Land adjacent to irrigation canals shall be graded to minimize sheet flow into the canals and major drainage crossing of the canal shall be either ipiped or bridged. Recommendations of drainage infrastructure at the proposed and existing street crossings of the drainageways will reference the Flood Hazard Area Delineation for Downstream Box Elder Creek Watershed study for flow rates ' within Box Elder Creek and the Unnamed Creek. B. Specific Details ' The current land plan for the Pioneer development accounts for four (4) major drainageway crossings. As previously discussed, there are existing ' arched culverts at the Weld County Road (WCR) 22 and WCR 49 crossings of Box Elder Creek. These culverts are undersized to pass the 100-year flow rate without overtopping the roadways. Preliminary calculations for I these crossings indicate that bridge crossings may be the most effective • method for passing the 100-year flow rate in Box Elder Creek. The developed 100-year flow rate at the WCR 22 is anticipated to be 11,695 cfs. ' Preliminary calculations show that a bridge with the approximate opening dimensions of 240 feet wide by 7 feet high would be able to pass the 100- year flow rate without overtopping the bridge. A bridge with the ' approximate dimensions of 192 feet wide by 9 feet high would be required to pass the developed 100-year flow rate in Box Elder Creek at the WQR 49 crossing of 11,810 cfs. As the site detail is provided, this evaluation will be ' finalized. Culvert calculations can be found in Appendix D. Two crossings of the unnamed drainageway are planned with the Pioneer ' development. The northern crossing is WCR 22 and is located to the east of basin C-3. The southern crossing does not have a street name at this point, but is located to the east of basin C-2. The 100-year flow rates of unnamed drainageway at the southern and northern crossings are 3,676 cfs and 3,768 cfs, respectively. Preliminary sizing for these crossings shows that 5-12 feet wide by 7 feet high concrete box culverts could pass the 100- year flow rate without overtopping the roadway at both of these locations if the roadway is located 4.5 feet above the top of the culverts. As the site detail is provided, this evaluation will be finalized. Further analysis and ' coordination will follow in subsequent reports. ,• 1 CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER V • Page 14 Conceptually, fourteen (14) regional detention facilities are planned within the Pioneer site boundary. The "Developed Basins" map in Appendix F generally shows the location of the facilities. This map represents anticipated developed drainage basins based on preliminary grading, conveyance, and outfall concepts. Proposed grading was developed using the Change of Zone Plan taking into account major roadways and planning areas. This grading was then used to create developed basin lines. These basin lines are as similar as possible to the historic basins to minimize earthwork operations. However, the local land depressions will require significant amount of earthwork to adequately drain these areas. Land uses identified to remain as agricultural on the Change of Zone shall ' be analyzed only if there is an affect to another onsite basin. For example, onsite basins within Sections 14 and 15 that will not impact the current use and do not impact adjacent onsite basin will not be evaluated. Drainage basins A-1 through A-3 are tributary to an unnamed drainageway ' to the east of the subject site. This unnamed creek joins Box Elder Creek • approximately one mile north of the subject site. These basins are composed entirely of sandy soils. Refer to Appendix D for soil compositions for each basin. Basins A-1 through A-3 are anticipated to use a combination of proposed streets, storm sewer and small drainage swales to convey runoff through the site. ' Basin A-1 lies within the eastern half of Section 9. This basin is approximately 211.7 acres and is composed of low-density single-family ' housing, school facilities, and open space, yielding a composite imperviousness of 46.5 percent. Calculations for composite imperviousness for all of the proposed developed basins can be found in Appendix D of this report. Generally the drainage for this basin is expected to flow in a north and easterly direction to detention pond A-1 near the site boundary at DP-1. This pond will release the 100-year developed runoff at the 5-year undeveloped rate of 5.7 cfs. Based on detention pond sizing using HEC- HMS, this detention pond will need a 100-year detention volume of 24.2 ac ft. The developed basin A-1 is expected to generate a peak runoff rate ' of 201 cfs in the 100-year storm event. Basin A-2 is approximately 88.9 acres, located mainly in the southwestern 1 corner of Section 4. This basin is composed of single-family, park, and open space land uses and is anticipated to have a composite • imperviousness of 49.8 percent. The basin is expected to generate a peak I CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER • • Page 15 runoff rate of 100 cfs in the 100-year storm event that will generally flow in a north and easterly direction to detention pond A-2, near the site boundary at DP-2. The proposed detention pond will need a 100-year detention volume of 11.1 ac-ft in order to release the runoff at the 5-year historic runoff rate of 2.1 cfs. Basin A-3 is located mainly in the eastern half of Section 32. This basin consists of 169.3 acres of low-density single-family developments giving the ' basin a composite imperviousness of 52.2 percent. The basin drains to detention pond 303 at the northern boundary of the site, near DP-3. Pond 303 will release at the 5-year historic rate of 3.0 cfs and will have a 100-year detention volume of 21.6 ac-ft. The peak runoff rate for basin A-3 is expected to be 150.2 cfs in the 100-year event. An unnamed creek bisects the site north-south. Basins B-1 through 8-6 account for portions of the site that drain to the unnamed creek from the east. Based on preliminary grading, these basins will have average slopes I of 1.0 percent from the high points to the proposed pond ouffalls. Refer to • the Appendix D for soil compositions for each basin. Basins B-1 through B-6 are anticipated to use a combination of proposed streets, storm sewer, and small drainage swales to convey runoff through the site. Basin B-1 is located in portions of Section 8 and Section 9. The basin is ' composed of 344.2 acres of mainly of medium and low-density single-family developments with portions of future school sites and park sites and has a composite imperviousness of 47.9 percent. The peak projected runoff rate for the basin is expected to be 292.6 cfs in the developed condition during a 100-year storm event. Runoff for the basin flows west, toward unnamed creek, to detention pond B-1 at DP-4. Detention pond B-1 will need a 100- year detention volume of 47.3 ac-ft with a 5-year historic release rate of 5.8 cfs. Basin B-2 is located north of basin B-1 and considerably smaller with a land area of 104.6 acres. Land uses are expected to be similar with a majority of the basin being composed of medium and low-density single-family ' developments, with some park areas. This land use is projected to give the basin an imperviousness of 42.1 percent. The basin flows generally to the east to DP-5, where it will be detained in detention pond B-2. Detention ' pond B-2 will have a volume of 10.5 ac-ft with the 5-year historic release rate of 3.7 cfs during the 100-year storm event. '• ' CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT FOR PIONEER • Page 16 ' Based on preliminary grading concepts for the site, Basin B-3 will drain a larger land area than historically drained to its outfall. The basin is 325.7 acres with a land use of mainly medium and low-density single-family developments, parks, open space and an elementary school, giving the basin an imperviousness of 41.3 percent. This basin will drain toward the west, to detention pond B-3 at DP-6. Due to vertical constrains along ' unnamed creek, it is expected that at least one outfall will occur that will need to be piped or conveyed via open channel to the pond at a slope ranging from 0.2 to 0.5 percent parallel to the drainageway. Pond B-3 will have a 100-year detention volume of 33.6 ac-ft and will release at the 5- year historic release rate of 4.8 cfs. This basin is expected to release a developed 100-year peak runoff rate of 243.1 cfs. ' Basin B-4, in contrast to basin B-3, will drain a smaller land area than the historical basin to DP-7. Runoff from this 230.4-acre basin will drain to the west to detention pond B-4. Land uses within the basin are a combination of low density single-family developments, a school campus that may have elementary, middle school, and high school uses, and open space, giving • the basin an imperviousness of 49.8 percent. Detention pond B-4 will require a 100-year detention volume of 28.5 ac-ft in order to release the 5- year historic runoff at the minimum release rate of 4.8 cfs. The developed ' peak 100-year runoff rate is expected to be 206.2 cfs for this basin. Basin B-5 is located within Section 32 and is composed entirely of low- density single-family developments, parks and open space. This land use gives the 241-acre basin a relatively low imperviousness of 43.9 percent. The 100-year peak runoff rate from this basin is expected to be 195.8 cfs. Runoff will generally flow to the west, toward detention pond B-5 at DP-8. Detention pond B-5 will need a 100-year detention volume of 26.6 ac-ft in ' order to release the 100-year storm event at the 5-year historic release rate of 4.1 cfs. ' The final basin that is tributary to unnamed creek from the east is basin B-6. This 317.0-acre basin is located within Sections 5 and 32 towards the northern edge of the subject site. The predominant land uses for this basin include low-density single-family developments, a school campus, open space, and a sewer plant located in the northwestern corner of Section 32. The composite imperviousness for the basin is expected to be 55.1 percent. This basin is expected to produce a 100-year peak runoff rate of 272.1 cfs. Runoff from the site will generally travel northwest through the basin toward • detention pond B-6 near DP-9. Detention pond B-6 will need a 100-year 1 CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER ' • Page 17 detention volume of 44.2 ac-ft to release the 100-year developed runoff at the 5-year historic release rate of 4.1 cfs. Basins C-1 through C-4 account for the portions of the site that lie to the west of unnamed creek and are tributary to unnamed creek. In the historic condition, these basins are characterized by a relatively steep ridge towards ' the top of the basins and expansive and very flat areas at the bottom of the basins, near the drainageway. In order to minimize the amount of fill material needed in the developed condition, these basins will need to use a ' series of grass-lined open channels stemming from the drainageway and extending through the basins as far as practical. At the time of final design for these basins, feasible alternatives to open channels may be used if they ' are deemed more acceptable or efficient. Preliminary grading for this area showed that swales would need to be of a shallow slope (ranging from 0.20 to 0.35 percent) to prevent erosion of the sandy soil. Slopes from 0.25 to 0.30 percent were used for the preliminary drainage and grading concept of this area. I • Basin C-1 is composed of 818.9 acres within Sections 17, 18, 19, and 20 that historically drains to the north, onto the subject site. There is no development planned for this area and for that reason, the runoff from this basin should be diverted from the developed portions of the subject site. An interceptor channel should be installed along the southern side of Weld ' County Road 20.5 and along the proposed development to divert the runoff from this basin directly to unnamed drainageway. This basin is composed of agricultural land, which is within the Pioneer boundary but is not planned to be developed, and undeveloped land. This basin is 2 percent impervious and is expected to produce a peak 5-year runoff rate of 13.1 cfs and a 100- year peak runoff rate of 26.7 cfs. ' Basin C-2 accounts for approximately 448.5 acres within Sections 7, 8, 17, and 18. Land use within this basin is widely varied with low and medium ' density single-family developments, high-density multi-family town homes, schools, commercial uses, and parks with a composite imperviousness of 52.8 percent. Grading concepts for this basin included the use of approximately 6,500 feet of grass-lined open channels at 0.25 to 0.30 percent. The size and locations of these swales can be found in the Developed Basins map in Appendix F of this report. The use of the swales at a shallow slope allows the site to be graded towards the reaches of the channels rather than strictly towards the outfall. This allows the amount of • fill material near the unnamed creek to be minimized in the previously 1 ' CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER • • Page 18 discussed existing depressions. The basin is then expected to utilize a series of high points and low points within the streets to drain into the channel reaches. The basin in general slopes to the east, towards detention pond C-2 at DP-11. Basin C-2 is expected to produce a 100-year peak runoff rate of 326.8 cfs. Detention pond C-2 will need a 100-year detention volume of 59.0 ac-ft in order to release the 100-year developed runoff at the 5-year historic rate of 5.9 cfs. If in the final design of this basin it is found that multiple detention ponds may be more beneficial than a single large pond, this modification can be made, provided the peak 100- year release rate to the unnamed drainageway is equal to 5.9 cfs. Basin C-3 accounts for 231.2 acres of medium and low-density single-family ' developments and a regional park site. This basin may utilize shorter reaches of the grass-lined open channels as described above in order to minimize the amount of fill required. Runoff from this basin is tributary to ' detention pond C-3 near DP-12 along the unnamed creek. The 100-year peak runoff rate of 186.5 cfs will be detained in the 22.6 ac-ft detention pond and will be released at the 5-year historic release rate of 8.3 cfs. • Basin C-4 will be very similar in concept to basin C-2. It is anticipated that ' this basin will utilize approximately 7,000 feet of grass-lined open channels with a similar overall drainage and grading concept as stated in the basin C-2 description. The size and locations of these swales can be found in the ' Developed Basins map in Appendix F of this report. Land use for this 428.7-acre basin is composed of a mix of medium and low-density single- family developments, schools, parks, and open space, yielding a composite ' imperviousness of 48.7 percent. This basin generally drains to the east towards detention pond C-4 near DP-13. The proposed detention pond will need a 100-year detention volume of 52.4 ac-ft in order to detain the 100- year peak runoff rate of 272.4 cfs and release it at the 5-year historic release rate of 3.9 cfs. Basins D-1 and D-2 account for areas of the proposed development that will drain directly to the Box Elder Creek from the east side of the creek. This basin is bisected by Weld County Road 49 north-south and by Weld County ' Road 22 east-west. These basins have more relief than the other proposed developed basins throughout the site. Runoff conveyance is expected to consist mainly of proposed and existing streets, storm sewer, and small drainage swales. I. ' CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT FOR PIONEER • Page 19 ' Basin D-1 consists of 304.3 acres of medium density single-family developments, high-density multi-family town homes, and commercial uses. This is a much higher density than the majority of the developed portions of ' the site with a composite imperviousness of 60.3 percent. For this reason, the peak runoff rate per area is higher than the other basins with a 100-year peak runoff rate of 488.0 cfs. The basin will generally drain to the west, towards detention pond D-1 near DP-14. Detention pond D-1 will need to have a 100-year detention volume of 46.1 ac-ft in order to release the developed runoff at the 5-year historic release rate of 11.2 cfs. If it is found in the final design that two ponds may be more feasible for this basin, this may be an acceptable alternative, provided that the total release rate to the Box Elder Creek for the same overall basin size is equal to 11.2 cfs. ' Basin D-2 is located within the northwest corner of Section 7 and encompasses 149.7 acres of land. Land uses for this basin include medium ' density single-family developments, multi-family townhomes, parks, and open space. The composite imperviousness of this basin was found to be 49.6 percent. Basin D-2 generally slopes to the west, towards detention I • pond D-2 near DP-15. Preliminary drainage concepts for this basin utilize approximately 1,800 feet of grass-lined open channel at 0.30 percent along the northern edge of the property. This proposed swale will allow the basin to be drained to detention pond D-2, rather than draining the planning are between two detention ponds. The peak 100-year developed runoff rate for ' the basin was found to be 179 cfs. Detention pond D-2 will need a 100-year detention volume of 18.3 ac-ft in order to release the developed runoff at the 5-year historic release rate of 3.1 cfs. This pond will discharge into Box ' Elder creek underneath Weld County Road 49 and downstream of the existing Klug Lake. 1 ,• CHANGE OF ZONE MASTER DRAINAGE REPORT ' FOR PIONEER ' • Page 20 VI. CONCLUSION ' This master drainage report provides the necessary existing hydrology analysis and proposed hydrology concepts for the preliminary drainage concepts of the subject site. This report identifies key runoff rates, proposed drainage concepts, ' and preliminary sizing of major onsite facilities such as detention ponds and major channels in order to control storm runoff and protect life and property during major storm events. This report was conducted in accordance with Weld County and Urban Drainage and Flood Control District drainage criteria. More detail will be added to this report as the project progresses. ' For information concerning the proposed floodplain delineation through the site, refer to the Flood Hazard Area Delineation for Downstream Box Elder Creek Watershed. VII. REFERENCES 1. Weld County Ordinance Code, Chapter 24, Weld County, December 2002. 2. Appendix 8-1, Weld County Addendum to the Text of the Urban Drainage Criteria Manuals, obtained from the Weld County website www.co.weld.co.us. 3. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volumes 1, 2, and 3, Urban ' Drainage and Flood Control District, March 2001 . 4. Soil Survey of Weld County, Colorado, U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, September 1980. 5. Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 080266 0850C, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Flood Insurance Program, September 28, 1982. 1 6. Flood Hazard Area Delineation for Lower Box Elder Creek Watershed, Wright Water Engineers, Inc., September 2001. 7. NOAA Atlas 2, Volume Ill, Figure 25 — lsopluvials of 100-year, 6-hour Precipitation. ' 8. Klug Ranch Quadrangle map, prepared by USGS, dated 1978; Milton Reservoir Quadrangle map, prepared by USGS, dated 1975; and Keensburg Quadrangle map, prepared by USGS, dated 1950. 9. Flood Hazard Area Delineation for Downstream Box Elder Creek Watershed, Carroll & Lange, Inc., September 2006. '• 1 1 . 1 1 I . I I ' APPENDIX A — Maps Vicinity Map Pioneer PUD Zone Plat ' FIRM Map Soil Type Map SCS Soil Map and Soil Descriptions ' Rainfall Zone Maps Existing Depressions Map 1 . I I • 1 • LAM ER COUNTY I • ...7.�-✓' 1 e I _ S a _Mn LOEH CDU. V ILS iF Ei. Ar� ; z I o F at 1 i 1 i I _1 LLD COUNTY 1 • /` \\ { ICI \ ,-_ ■ O S DAMS COUNTY is 1/i.,►4 16 ERSON COO iY �■ ra1��1� f� I 1�nri�i�roa i .. I ✓--.J\'�1 a. oea ! • _ \4�...� LEGEND l_ - \.._._ Drano e i .Earam ny 1 ► ��nr. �E,: Ill�ual�e� ■'o � . ©B allom.M Ewe --.1- __ Ar....� a • .req as I C..HOE cquNrr 1.ea'11�14�laaerE AO��=aryaEs "v,,,,:c NW a,.rlw.. lamDemutireawno..Mmor CwnBaucu¢e -I 'TJr s411�1 'AI � �l.ma�. - .Y= N.,,,xxe. DOUGLAS co �->- ELEearcluxrr 1 Be+a.tM:nm.wx+n✓T^Muybnlmcm NOM nFall.......be[r w• l IY w.v.* lMMd.l ill • REGIONAL CONTEXT rTM"-'W"+^.09.0.»+..w+...xI�.I+"m�.I...,.RaleDi.I„ •loxoea GOMMUNITI[a INC. ALN.EE ' �' ® �C. I eStH6B It0el'ee7crw n5, S31nJOSSv u 3 roao�oo w n�V mucrorsu.arou� Uaa UOIIVJlitluv di, Told euoZ and c s ld 2I33NOId 8 000i 8 1 S �4k§ fey d3 0 a S°{'s - lycc E" - t R I .�Y� e vii yp BGyY g, .y 43 st ...t.y�45' at �b,c . y 1 i�� , Z '�YCk4\,3 la a Sip .... p I \\ yy '� - °as'9 2/' i k Y ,i4fr q $Y-a‹* 'M4en : q ti $ 4`p•:' L ..w / Rig Q aM 4E mm"'mmm a nn I nnmmflNnnnnnnnnnanmmmmm r t a`� ''inan l m nnmm�nm� v ja __ e I �I BIl0 „ , 1 It I S egg r 1 of i It �, e i. t a , 3) I l i' [II� J si v � ,. � �� F * tt� �� ts -. , P..� . i , mnmm�m m m mnn nn1 m m m mm m mmm�m m m n ' D /'- am$n m�nn a�nm am n9 nm no i i \ ;�� g� I Ia@91n @I II nn�911nn �._.; 2 4II 3 yes . pe O II ! 1ANe, w ' II 1.III . I...9NP \ i C..d 11 J " > 4 r r56 L- i Iw E • 5o' gww I op _ __I rc7- <oa'vvE u oaoaa:; a 0 a dr erdf` / G, /b'9EX4 IW 40 IDIL loon Ito 4u L$xI I. 000 asnpuel au0Z;0°Buoy°laau01 O - ` d 800-11;(O\11)8 L-b\sine°e889\ Odd `: Hl0\a0uapuodsa»o0\9 'EE\d I L. W A C y=.^ Ill I J 3 c. 0 E� W l9� m fm's 7 e i� 3 flee �+ �_ �� Q 1 , 1114, a s� E ! � ' z lI e m '�i p '�c _ t j ihi POI1 N r. a '3Cs $8� e. I i sF[L{tI lii I - �T bat Prt ,, Lo. I / �' I / illi I / I 1 ...:_itii'ic.10,-, -.bro. o eopkipiptai;:it I I r z I l �?„¢Tu � v�i✓ tit i I n r>3� rh9 �3ari!`i 54.....r. .,..—%. /t8 ` f 1 • is i> . c„ Ibillr: -W I 4.3 • II .1% �, "— riAuwe y I I LEGEND wan ,sstsfa SAND ic. � 0000'000 LOAMY SAND Fi ! �� 0°0°0°0°0°0 O 000 000q ��Ticvie LOAM I `y <',1 '.� �o, .�\� 4000000 iktst1/44\%"„1/4 : ‘,:`.‘,.‘ ‘ I ..,i 1st ter. \N ‘.7 47 t,"a*Z1VD;k ',%:ov.44/ , jv, . . ', Ilk ,-xt....owor s „N: '1� 0p,p� �ppp0D0pit �� O p°O p O� ' 'g?? p �.g000 0 0000 ;��.��.�.,�.�,� f 1 o o 0 0 0 0 1 ‘1°- 0°0 ��b'p°oR°0o' A !.. • k.\k"k\H\,.{n urary I ^A y .14444. 1; ; f'. 1 ! N _ ryz i 4" x 1 4 _ _ R n 1 0 moo 2000 4000 PIONEER SOIL TYPE MAP Carroll&Lange= ORIGINAL GRAPHIC SCALE " A E R nano0 1 kit: �0409.rvGCM V °C. gy p � Crti • S o- 9 � F $. s'4'14/11., �r # ✓ ii r e ' y7y F1 f F. Nxt Fzty 44. kri p � � ?" g^�n, is m pl h w C } h p F?' F t -.4;>•:', Y £ H I o — (� AMC( 1 `��{E� :;,� Y - - • Y Cd e ,4 fn F.Tr . 'H `v• iNat' ' tip f _ Nn �' 1 YA V .. a . ` x" j .e ( @@@yyy yam( • • .y w 3's „r ( `a •M xF ,h �Y. h xed r f' i u � 5:.,e s'' a `tsp�r 4.:.=-..+_.... i4L ^ L .z....3 '-`':::,±7:',7:: w r:' q 4 .X B Y j s`t .L x. per. .-y J !R a� + �+- '�' -.,./� C, ` ' c:!!! crjrse .It! R JV 10. !r` ci.,,,,.._. , r , \ r � � . ., , _,. . , . ., ,,,,,itisi.. __.arii,..:44, ,, ._ „, ,, , . , 1 Q OOL:bin, 00 :660 001 666II 008 666 Dos bb6 ooz 646 006:666 n i r a _ r r P— + ( N C } V Q 1 d 0 �E9. f �, i S O 1cl`,3 ,, .. `3 N 4. .._: . - ' Q § a a z R. . H r. m cc p 1co °o • • N I 404_ : .... 0 Q 'A1 p 1O , Ufd p 2o z Fs, y ) i. <r 4. x r 5 X i o �b } rG''K„'aFfi i o 1 W R. `tr - m t � a. inN2 1 § 1 -b44 in cx . it t, ggzu' 00L90176 0068666 0018660 008L660 00911717000ZLKN 0069666 = I 009.Obb 00.•bOb 0..•bbb 00. 6b6 000 669 oo9bb04 0.•-46b 000b6bb I ,ID v § ry' h t { a < --17 "-"g44-.. " 8 $ I v CD O % LL O en O 4 k .4:- ,.0 O O C! O cr • 2 ,- ..r. fx O • __ . _icrLn O � O • H • W S ' ,'�p /r o I Li- O o o (.0 g , Y coCa o m g O n TS e v i 009966p 0069694 00096117009914t 00Z9bbb 001317117I700969b0 0006bbp I 0CL t00 00' Wt CDL PPP 00Bttt4 00S ttt 00Z 660 006 904 f W N O • F N tn N W vg ' R =', R Lip o Q O ' t I.q.9 4 .` < g , csi o ll w 11 a{ O 0 ' Tto o O g < o • • U e > d 0 U. • Lu L- R �' f�. r. ;VY' - i s„' t M•' . 1 o , " O co -..a.... .. naao .: -•, 8 I i. _� ;• ,� 4 ..tt J n'1 p Y pp '*• a o ! S icii P, En �1 ' 'Iiir TIt Lt-CH O0 [ 00LS646 00ttt st 001.3600 0010th 0091,01,6 00Zt046 00set64 I 0026666 006 666 0.• 666 0a 666 000 666 OOL 666 006 666 I . o s� k S '. . .... 3 dp 4"4 vS LLL O II • . .-4.:' V 44 y 8 f iti O O CO- . 0 8 • n § 0 L° 0 , . p a li.:_ 4 ,� N1 W n O H II o D o 8 '1_ p to h cA 8 ❑ .. . n p Q L a d s q cn aai o P ❑ > -8(5 d z J o 1-4 al i CD I LL 8 e :3/44. . . 0 ti , t; I y# to ' ,+. v $ -z D 8 a ka ., T $ p. $ :2 • I Q t . - * t ID { p U •' • _ ec oa o� . _. 8 I a 1 8 . p . • O } loR O M r M E . • ` qzZ uS OOZ6660 OO6E666 009fbb6 OOEEPfl 000[666 OOLZ666 OODZ666 I _ / 4 toe" )kC - ` ® ct to � ca\ [ \ ) \ \\ CC ( ( fE ` ± Z § 0 — • E < ° o 2 \ ° \ /\ § v.\ ft O ) - \ \a \ _ \\ \ o - -CO $ / } } \ k \ a y I c 2 ) \ § % ya /k { ) ~ ! >. < gE 0i ( - d - ID 8- � ° b O. _1 r- 5 m ! « _ ( E / / ) ( / _ ) / j 2 }) /( : a I . I---aco a o _45 ;»7,8 g = / $ U o § I 2 { \ ) E I \ \ \ t = \ , 02f ® t ® - ->. 2 � � � , . § : EE ; , = ® \ i ; ; | f = : r { lJt : ; « ffal' a / : # I § \ \ 0osccgf ] ] ! ! ! j | 4 ± l6672 ! ) / ) § $ ! \ ! # ! f ( !I 2 Iii } \ } \ ( , m , - . : . . SC - © ) . , * , : , » � ? |k I }) A C Iw I Soil Survey of Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part Pioneer Soil Type Map IMap Unit Legend Summary • Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part ' Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in A. 01 Percent of AOI 1 �' , arm `k Aquepts, 4.1 =.gt * r 5 Ascalon sandy loam, 1 to.3'4,077 106.7 1.4 percent slopes I 10 Bankard sandy loam,0 to 3 149.4 2.0 percent slopes .,, 7 1 w-�tl#I 18 Colby-Adena loamy 3 to 9 1.0 0.0 percent slopes „gift 25 Haverson loam,0 to 1 308.1 4.1 Ipercent slopes I . 35 Loup-Boel loamy sands,0 141.4 1.9 to 3 percent slopes tt o Bunn loam O.tc, k pexcenl 9 __ 43 Nunn loamy sand, 0 to 1 406.3 5.5 percent slopes I 1ney--loamy sand, I toy " 4I I x 1 _ _: is erne t s7dpxs. ,z-, ' ect "�, T I 47 Olney fine sandy loam, 1 11.7 0.2 to 3 percent slopes Osgood sand,0 to 3 1,21' f�� { pereentslopes 'i v 69 Valent sand,0 to 3 percent 821.2 11.0 slopes I ipl aleAlE sa 3 to 9 per llt 6 n 4 . . . singe �.`� s 72 Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 145.8 2.0 I percent slopes a' ." a -c� I -3'd 3'II 77 Vona sandy loam,3 to 5 16.9 0.2 percent slopes • IUSDA Mann]Resourcea Web Soil Survey 1.1 4/2/2007 Conservation ServiceNational Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4 I Soil Survey of Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part Pioneer Soil Type Map Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part • Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI -- ... _.-..F.. 1 • ' • USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1.1 4/2/2007 fooserrxlou Serrkc National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4 1 I WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SOUTHERN PART . . • 83 I more. Surface runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is ment, especially in areas of intensive agriculture. Range- low. land wildlife, for example, the pronghorn antelope,can be wIn irrigated areas this soil is suited to the crops corn- attracted by developing livestock watering facilities, only grown in the area. Perennial grasses and alfalfa or managing livestock grazing,and reseeding where needed. I close grown crops should be grown at least 50 percent of Rapid expansion of Greeley and the surrounding area the time. Contour ditches and corrugations can be used in has resulted in urbanization of much of this Olney soil. irrigating close grown crops and pasture. Furrows, con- The soil has good potential for urban and recreational Itour furrows,and cross slope furrows are suitable for row development. The only limiting feature is the moderately crops. Sprinkler irrigation is also desirable. Keeping til- rapid permeability in the substratum, which causes a lage to a minimum and utilizing crop residue help to con; hazard of ground water contamlratlon from sewage trol erosion. Maintaining fertility is important. Crops lagoons. Lawns, shrubs, and trees grow well. Capability respond to applications of phosphorus and nitrogen. subclass IIIe irrigated, IVe nonirrigated; Sandy Plains In nonirrigated areas this soil is suited to winter wheat,i range site. barley, and sorghum. Most of the acreage is planted to 49—Osgood sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes.This is a deep, yy winter wheat. The predicted average yield is 26 bushels well drained soil on smooth plains at elevations of 4,680 to 7f� Iper acre. The soil is summer fallowed in alternate years 4,900 feet. It formed in eoilan sands. Included in mapping to allow moisture accumulation. Generally precipitation is are small areas of soils that have a subsoil within 20 too low for beneficial use of fertilizer. inches of the surface. Also included are small areas of Stubble mulch farming,striperopping, and minimum til- soils that have a loam and sandy clay loam subsoil. Ilage are needed to control soil blowing and water erosion. Typically the surface layer of this Osgood soil is gray- Terracing also may be needed to control water erosion. ish brown sand about 22 Inches thick. The subsoil is The potential native vegetation on this range site is brown sandy loam about 12 inches thick. The substratum dominated by sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, and blue to a depth of 60 inches is pale brown loamy sand and Igrams Needleandthread, switchgrass, sideoats gram; sand. and western wheatgrass are also prominent. Potential Permeability is moderately rapid. Available water production ranges from 2,200 pounds per acre in favora- capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 ble years to 1,800 pounds in unfavorable years. As condi- inches or more. Surface runoff is very slow, and the ero- Ition deteriorates, sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, and sion hazard is low. switchgrass decrease and blue grams, sand dropseed, and This soil is suited to limited cropping. Intensive sand sage increase.Annual weeds and grasses invade the cropping is hazardous because of erosion. The cropping site as range condition becomes poorer. system should be limited to such close grown crops as al- I ge ment of vegetation on this soil should be based fella, wheat, and barley. This soil also is suited to ir- -half and leaving half of the total annual produc- rigated pasture. A suitable cropping system is 3 to 4 n. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. years of alfalfa followed by 2 years of corn and-small Sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, switchgrass, sideoats grain and alfalfa seeded with a nurse crop. Igrama, blue grama, pubescent wheatgrass, and crested Closely spaced contour ditched or sprinklers can be wheatgrass are suitable for seeding. The grass selected used in irrigating close grown crops. Contour furrows or should meet the seasonal requirements of livestock. It can sprinklers should be used for new crops. Applications of Ibe seeded into a clean, firm sorghum stubble,or it can be nitrogen and phosphorus help in maintaining good produc- drilled into a firm prepared seedbed. Seeding early in tion. i spring has proven most successfuL The potential vegetation on this soil is dominated by Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, switchgrass, sideoats suited to this soil. Soil blowing, the principal hazard in gram; nedleandthiead, little bluestem, and blue grama. I establishing trees and shrubs, can be controlled by cul- Potential production ranges from 2,500 pounds per acre in tinting only in the tree row and by leaving a strip of favorable years to 1,800 pounds in unfavorable years. As vegetation between the rows. Supplemental irrigation range condition deteriorates, the sand bluestem, Imay be needed at the time of planting and during dry switchgrass, sand reedgrass, sideoats grams, and little periods_Trees that are best suited and have good survival bluestem decrease; forage production drops; and sand are Rocky Mountain juniper, eastern redcedar, ponderosa sage increases. Undesirable weeds and annuals invade pine, Siberian elm, Russian-olive, and hackberry. The and "blowout" conditions can occur as range condition Ishrubs best suited are skunkbush sumac, lilac, and Siberi- becomes poorer. an peashrub. Management of vegetation on this soil should be based Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soiL The on taking half`and leaving half of the total annual produc- cropland areas provide favorable habitat for ring-necked tion. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. IPheasant and mourning dove. Many nongame species can Sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, indiangrass, switchgrass, be attracted by establishing areas for nesting and escape sideoate grams, little bluestem,and blue grams are suits- cover. For pheasants, undisturbed nesting cover is essen- ble for seeding. Because this soil is susceptible to soil Bel and should be included in plans for habitat develop- blowing, the grasses should be seeded with an interseeder I 1 � I I 94 SOIL SURVEY 1 or drilled into a firm, clean sorghum stubble. Seeding tivating only in the tree row and by leaving a strip of early in spring has proven' most successful. Brush vegetation between the rows. Supplemental irrigation I • management can also help to improve deteriorated range. may be needed at the time of planting and during dry Windbreaks and environmental plantings are fairly well periods.Trees that are best suited and have good survival suited to this soil. Blowing sand and low available water are Rocky Mountain juniper, eastern redcedar, ponderosa capacity are the principal hazards in establishing trees pine, Siberian elm, Russian-olive, and hackberry. The ' and shrubs. This soil is so loose that trees should be shrubs best suited are skunkbush sumac,lilac, and Siberl- 1 planted in shallow furrows, and vegetation is needed an peashrub. between the rows.Supplemental irrigation may be needed Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil. to insure survival. Trees that are best suited and have Ring-necked pheasant, mourning dove, and ninny non- 1 good survival are Rocky Mountain juniper, eastern game species can be attracted by establishing areas for redcedar, ponderosa pine, and Siberian elm. The shrubs nesting and escape cover. For pheasants, undisturbed best suited are skunkbush sumac, lilac, and Siberian nesting cover is essential and should be included In plans peashrub. for habitat development, especially in areas of intensive IWildlife is an important secondary use of this soil. The agriculture. cropland areas provide favorable habitat for ring-necked Rapid expansion of Greeley and the surrounding area pheasant and mourning dove. Many nongahe species can has resulted in urbanization of much of this Otero soil. be attracted by establishing areas for nesting and escape This soil has excellent potential for urban and reerea- I cover. For pheasants,undisturbed nesting cover is essen- tional development. The only limiting feature is the tial and should be included in plans for habitat develop- moderately rapid permeability in the substratum, which ment, especially in areas of intensive agriculture. Range- ,causes a hazard of ground water contamination from land wildlife,for example,the pronghorn antelope)can be sewage lagoons. Lawns, shrubs, and trees grow well.. I attracted by developing livestock watering facilities, Capability subclass Its irrigated. managing livestock grazing,and reseeding where needed. 51—Otero sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes. This is a Few areas of this soil are in major growth and nr- deep, well drained soil on plains at elevations of 4,700 to banized centers. The chief limiting feature is the rapid 6,250 feet. It formed in mixed outwash and eolian I permeability in the substratum, whleh causes a hazard of deposits. Included in mapping are small areas of soils that ground water contamination from seepage. Potential for have loam and clay loam underlying material recreation is poor because of the sandy surface layer. Typically the surface layer is brown sandy loam about Capability subclass IVe irrigated, Vie nonirrigated; Deep 12 inches thick. The underlying material to a depth of 60 ISand range site. inches is pale brown calcareous fine sandy loam. 50—Otero sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes. This is a Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is deep, well drained soil on smooth plains at elevations of moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or 4,700 to 5,250 feet. It formed in mixed outwash and eolian more. Surface runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is I deposits.Included in mapping are small areas of soils that low. have loam and clay loam underlying materiaL This soil is used almost entirely for irrigated crops. It Typically the surface layer is brown sandy loam about is suited to all crops commonly grown in the area. Land 12 inches thick. The underlying material to a depth of 60 leveling, ditch lining, and installing pipelines may be I inches is pale brown calcareous fine sandy loam. - needed for proper water application. Permeability is rapid. Available .water capacity is All methods of irrigation are suitable, but furrow ir- moderate. The effective rooting depth. is 60 inches or rigation is the most common. Barnyard manure and corn- more. Surface runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is mercial fertilizer are needed for top yields. I low. In nonirrigated areas this soil is suited to winter wheat, This soil is used almost entirely for irrigated crops. It barley, and sorghum. Most of the acreage is planted to is suited to all crops commonly grown in the area,includ- winter wheat. The predicted average yield is 28 bushels I ing corn, sugar beets, beans, alfalfa, small grain,potatoes, per acre. The soil is summer followed in alternate years and onions.An example of a suitable cropping system is 3 to allow moisture accumulation. Generally precipitaiton is to 4 years of alfalfa followed by corn; corn for silage, too low for beneficial use of fertilizer. sugar beets, small grain, or beans. Generally, such charac- ' Stubble mulch farming, striperopping, and minimum til- 1 teristics as a high clay content or a,rapidly permeable lage are needed to control water erosion. Terracing also substratum slightly restrict sdme crops. may be needed to control water erosion. All methods of irrigation 'are suitable, but furrow ir- - The potential native vegetation on this range site is rigation is the most common. Proper irrigation water dominated by sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, and blue Imanagement is essential. Barnyard manure and commer- grams. Needleandthread, switchgrass, sideoats grama, cial fertilizer are needed for top yields. and western wheatgrass are also prominent. Potential Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally production ranges from 2,200 pounds per acre In favors- suited to this soil. Soil blowing, the principal hazard in ble years to 1,800 pounds in unfavorable years. As range 1 establishing trees and shrubs, can be controlled by mil- condition deteriorates, the sand bluestem,sand reedgrass, . lI i I I 4.4 ' SOIL SURVEY to allow moisture accumulation. Generaly precipitation is Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is low. • too low to make beneficial use of fertilizer. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Surface ' Stubble mulch farming, strlperopping, and minimum tUI- runoff is medium,and the erosion hazard is moderate. lage are needed to control soil blowing and water erosion. The potential native vegetation is dominated by little Terracing also may be needed to control water erosion. bluestem, sideoats grams, sand reedgrass, blue grams, The potential native vegetation Is dominated by hairy grams, switchgrass, and needleandthread. Potential ' western wheatgrass and blue grams. Buffalograss is also production ranges from 700 pounds per acre in favorable present. Potential production ranges from 1,000 pounds years to 200 pounds in unfavorable years.As range condi- per acre in favorable years to 600 pounds in unfavorable tion deteriorates, the tall and mid grasses decrease, blue years. As range condition deteriorates, a blue grama-buf- grams and hairy grams increase, and forage production ' falograss sod forms. Undesirable weeds and annuals in- drops. vade the site as range condition becomes poorer. Management of vegetation should be based on taking Management of vegetation on this soil should be based half or less of the total annual production.Deferred graz- on taking half and leaving half of the total annual produc- nag is practical in improving range condition. Seeding and ' tion. Range pitting can reduce runoff.Seeding is desirable mechanical treatment are impractical. if the range is in poor condition. Western wheatgrass, Windbreaks and environmental plantings generally are blue grams sideoats grams buffalograes, pubescent not suited to these soils. Onsite investigation is needed to wheatgrass, and crested wheatgrass are suitable for seed- determine if plantings are feasible. ' ing. The grass selected should meet the seasonal require Wildlife populations are limited because the necessary require- ments of livestock It can be' seeded into a clean firm habitat elements are lacking.Because most of.the acreage into a firm prepared is rangeland, only rangeland wildlife, for example sealed sorghum stubble, or it can be drilled ' quail and antelope,are typical. Extreme care is needed in seedbed. Seeding early in spring has proven most success fuL managing livestock grazing in order to provide suitable Windbreaks and environmental plantings of trees and habitat on these soils. commonly grown in the area are generally well Potential is poor for urban and recreational develop- shrubs, suited to this soil. Cultivation to control competing ment. The chief limiting soil features are the loose, coarse vegetation should be continued for as many years as textured soil, steep slopes, and rapid permeability. Capa- possible following planting. Trees that are best suited and bility subclass VIIs irrigated, VIIs nonirrigated; Gravel have good survival are Rocky Mountain juniper, eastern Breaks range site. ' redcedar,ponderosa pine, Siberian elm, Russian-olive,and 69—Valent sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes. This is a deep, 4. •hackbeny. The shrubs best suited are akunkbush sumac, excessively drained soil on plains at elevations of 4,650 to IN lilac, Siberian peashrub,and American plum. 6,100 feet. It formed in eolian deposits. Included in Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil The mapping are small areas of soils that have lime within a ' cropland areas provide favorable habitat for ring-necked depth of 40 inches. pheasant and mourning dove. Many nongame species can Ter thiy the surface layer is brown sand about 8 be attracted by establishing areas for nesting and escape inches thick The underlying material to a depth of 60 p inches is brown sand. cover. For pheasants, undisturbed nesting cover is essen- Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is ' tial and should be included in plans for habitat develop- moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or ment, especially in areas of intensive agriculture. Range- more. Surface runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is land wildlife, for example, the pronghorn,antelope, can be low, attracted by developing livestock watering facilities, This soil is suited to limited cropping. Intensive ' managing livestock grazing, and al for reseeding eedin andreneeded. ed recreational cropping is hazardous because of erosion. The cropping This soil has system should be limited to such close development_ Slow permeability and high shrink swell fen, wheat, and barley. The soil alsoroIsss crops d to ir- cause problems in dwelling and road construction. Capa- rigated pasture. A suitable cropping system is a to 4 ' bility subclass IIIe irrigated, IVe nonirrigated; Clayey years of alfalfa followed by 2 years of corn and small Plains range site. grain and alfalfa seeded with a nurse crop. 68—Ustic Torriorthents, moderately steep. These are Closely spaced contour ditches or sprinkers can be used deep, excessively drained soils on terrace breaks and in irrigating close grown crops. Contour furrows or sprin- escarpments at elevations of.',450 to 6,100 feet. They kiers should be used for new crops. Applications of bar- formed in gravelly alluvium and have slopes of 9 to 25 nyard manure and commercial fertilizer help to maintain percent. Included in mapping are small areas of soils that good production. ' have pockets of sandy loam and loam in the underlying The potential vegetation is dominated by sand Typically the surface layer i8 pale brown bluestem, sand reedgrass, switchgrass, sideoats grams, about 10 inches thick. The underlying material toa depth tial needproduction aranges f little rom 2,5000 anpondlue grams.acre in of 60 inches is pale brown gravelly sand. favorable years to 1,800 pounds in unfavorable years. As ' I • I I WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SOUTHERN PART 46 I range condition deteriorates, the sand bluestem, The potential vegetation is dominated by sand switchgrass, sand reedgrass, sideoats grams, and little bluestem, sand reedgrass, switchgrass, sideoats grama, • bluestem decrease, forage production drops, and sand needleandthread, little bluestem, and blue grams. Poten- t sage increases. Undesirable weeds and annuals invade tial production ranges from 2,600' pounds per acre in and "blowout" conditions can occur as range condition favorable years to 1,800 pounds in unfavorable years. As becomes poorer. range condition deteriorates, the sand bluestem, Management of vegetation on this soil should be based switchgress, sand reedgrass, sideoats grams, and little on taking half and leaving half of the total annual produc- bluestem decrease, forage production drops, and sand tion.Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. . sage increases. Undesirable weeds and annuals invade Sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, indiangrass, switchgrass,_ and "blowout" conditions can,occur as range condition sideoats grams, little bluestem, and blue grama are suite- becomes poorer. t ' ble for seeding. Because this soil is susceptible to soil Management of vegetation on this soil should be based blowing, it should be seeded using an interseeder, or the .on taking half and'leaving half of the total annual produc- seed should be drilled into a firm,clean sorghum stubble., tion. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. Seeding early in spring has proven most successful Brush Sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, indiangrass, switchgrass, ' management also can help in improving deteriorated side-oats grama, little bluestem,and blue grama are suite- range. ble for seeding. Because this soil is susceptible to soil Windbreaks and environmental plantings are fairly well blowing, it should be seeded using an interseeder or the suited to this soil. Blowing sand and the moderate avails- seed should be drilled into a firm, clean sorghum stubble. ble water capacity are the principal hazards in establish- Seeding early in spring has proven most successful Brush II ing trees and shrubs.The soil is so loose that trees should management can'also help in improving deteriorated be planted in shallow furrows, maintaining vegetation range. between the rows. Supplemental irrigation is needed to Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally I insure survival. Trees that are best suited and have good not suited to this.soil. Onsite investigation is needed to survival are Rocky Mountain juniper, eastern redeedar, determine if plantings are feasible. ponderosa pine, and Siberian elm. The shrubs best suited Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil. Ran- are skunkbush sumac, lilac,and Siberian peashrub. geland wildlife, for example, the pronghorn antelope, can ll Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil The be attracted by developing livestock watering facilities, cropland areas provide favorable habitat for ring-necked managing livestock grazing,and reseeding where needed. pheasant and mourning dove. Many nongame species can This soil has fair potential for urban development. The be attracted by establishing areas for nesting and escape chief limiting soil features are the rapid permeability and ' • cover. For pheasants, undisturbed nesting cover iseessen- the susceptibility to soil blowing, Septic tank absorption tial and should be included in plans far habitat develop fields function properly,.but in places the sandy sub- ment, especially in areas of intensive agriculture. Range- stratum does not properly filter the leachate. Sewage land wildlife, for example, the pronghorn antelope,can be lagoons must be sealed. Once established, lawns, shrubs, attracted by developing livestock watering facilities, and trees grow well. Capability subclass VIe irrigated, Managing livestock grazing,and reseeding where needed. Vie nonirrigated; Deep Sand range site. This soil has fair potential for urban development. The 71—Valent-Loup complex, 0 to 9 percent slopes. This ' primary limiting soil features are the rapid permeability level to moderately sloping map unit occupies hills,ridges, and the susceptibility to soil blowing. Septic tank absorp- and depression or pothole-like areas in the sandhills at tion fields function properly, but in places the sandy sub- elevations of 4,670 to 4,700 feet.The Valent soil makes up stratum does not properly filter the leachate. Sewage about 60 percent of the unit, the Loup soil about 35 per- , lagoons must be sealed: Once established, the lawns, cent. About 6 percent is dune sand. The Valent soil oceu- shrubs, and trees grow well. Capability subclass IVe ii~ pies the hills and ridges and the Loup soil the depressions rigated, VIe nonirrigated; Deep Sand range site. or potholes. 70—Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes. This is a deep, The Valent soil is deep and excessively drained. It ' excessively drained soil on plains at elevations of 4,650 to formed in eolian deposits. Typically the surface layer is 5,100 feet. It formed in eolian deposits. Included in brown sand about 8 inches thick. The underlying material mapping are small areas of soils that have lime within a to a depth of 60 inches is brown sand. depth of 40 inches. Also included are small areas of soils Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is ' that have sandstone between 40 and 60 inches. moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or Typically the surface layer of the Valent soil is brown more. Surface runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is sand about 6 inches thick. The underlying material to a low. depth of 60 inches is brown sand. The Loup soil is deep and poorly drained. It formed in ' Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is sandy alluvium. Typically the surface layer is very dark moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or grayish brown, mottled loamy sand about 16 inches thick. more. Surface runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is The underlying material to a depth of 60 inches is light low. brownish gray,mottled loamy sand and sandy loam. I 1• � I I • iv r �. y i1 rYt a"'4• r'• r /rayy• 4 •a..:.. F ;:",;13�i' . s S: .t �. 4 l• ,sst i . j. S �A k .i,•,1,- 'i r c.� x gr ., 11 jr J } • L �. • .:..,....;,.;:-:,...,4;',.....,r z 411._ - ‘.-,••••-..,,'-• .n.',...4.,;,-.-.,..,' vt g� ...• f i•i.,„ s>l. • -: i } sy �.y r' t 4r�{ S r.. L ;t.-t•!•,::Rp •�rrf,;7•ty� ... N _ a i r tL' 7 y , -.',:.1,14E,,..:7:1: : tt.. :; it j I a"C yJ�s, , t 7.h + "FJ '`rT' ;y (` ypy7 .#3'•: ; ,� ' 'u i;l= �I„ \ r ,i. (' r ,,..c...,...4,3,,,!3,.,! +d-70r K s s i., '';'..., --,'1,''',, k •,,,. fix•'i a,� i 1] k ' i � `` ti{+�u•. df iF s eL • �t�J; ,Q • • r i 1• rr e ti I krrr}Pyi 7 t `1 .'1, Sd,'kpnr , '''•' -..'t''''' f 3 rA tkii 'assn. 1C'3ii, r . 0._ ':':-.',0:.,!..'-d,.....-0&;•.,..,1-_, --,':..' '.1,•_'-':•••••••t i '1„rae, rl ti, 4 tiX'^�:..f • ` • � , ••'lam+�,,f},M.,Ri I '...41,•••••,;,-.:4:(4.t'4,4'.'.,..;',•4 ; ��1��.4i., js i. � 4 t▪ r( I ..'''.:,1%:', t'r'.•:-1-.-...- i,•r 1 s .� Q �y yc�{ � 1� '5,'":,':?-3,' 'np��•.�.a, , ��..,,�� :Ti C •:•,.. 1 r •P'4e....2'�K� �1}4� � r i �� ~ t�• l yy"Wp14 rs a��y�i'�,�`s` , I e ��I i O^ e Y :�` 1 �� r :: R e ••• .P H�• s�is i'fi, "jam` f�p+ .a �.< ' �1 ;fit_.,'': '�Er � •.f.�i''�7 v��,.�.. • 'I • • i �. •s.s 4��,j`� S{e�' a t r 4 fS'7 r'�- .i� .''..-47.41 ,!••••;•0 .j•l E• i k!'0, -4'� � :. Ittvf t Hr • 1•. "4 L. Y •'5+1•;,ta J ;� r. 1 s.s y 'f •� S t' V f• � s4.<`n St.f^'':.'. '•i:`': �fc; f .}a fr .�� 2 '.^`;1 'X�+ 5M ,�7i �/� �I�rE r;•,.�;� .�sG:`aN .'It•t':Sr' t• ,.-ve�. .»� yr`6•�6jt� ti � .� i�-r ^ �i.. ,�!`•'i :>'sL.71k '" ,'A'j' b,�r tr e.k �▪ei; �'+. •Y;�',:••',..•:,`,.;•• �:,.yk:;,-A ii.. i� ,l.: t 1 I • j. . ,s y: .'r'"C44,,:,i,;,--.....,..i 1 id �Fi-aani IssCA' r•• 'f 1..-1.I,.i f',.t ri.:fil n hlt, ,y:-,E?i4ta • •��. ! .4:,',1‘'.../k.,:;:"c) ,`• r@ .. $. �4 1-i:i x :t 1�';ti �I j_. ' X1i i �` �y • 7 f , r}ts � K 11l J` .�.tit : =' sr aass'c' Vt..:.c1 ... • l • rat i . 51 yK .'' %.Q• k � i''. .r eC..," 4 ''., d.:..l '-- N1 -1Yi , [7,,,. ` t d v. . C•.. r r �sL • rr il" f � )„�'°� +'tn vrT T' f!f t'•7,"?r`�u @s'Y#,:i) 9a fi' ip is � _, • -::: � . a "r.r'� �'��w. a �i rr!�',a t�.1 rr �c�.�}y"'.:•.��,.';ci.r f,iT(�' �:4=�'r��4 •1.}` -- 1 [[ J � '4',..4 ...!,1,4'• - if' .aF N ''1't, t.4• ��Y'I d �n' A � A t �•. R�:_' - •tt a% � in re.. .2.1.17_,::•4,\., �„:.. "'�. :5f,e.. ‘-'4-144',„,,V; -��f'�R ` p.. r e ��"+r 5t1 L,w 4'� k ,Y�.+p I. -1..n �'y I tIr' f /1 a- ✓ l� II i,, i 4 y, + R •iJ 'Qe.yc,�,a, r';a •: :..,tf lr� / s 1 -`'t�rl. j. 1 _ 1 • c r Elf tStt J 1 �� ' • �`✓_ 'rte „,.,..1..,104.0.,,..„..,...,.w..:,7, /,,,4..4'ri 'r- I! ', , . f .,.. �. ;"• . �Y:i-i' •_� l, r�.i" + `6S' -f •1� `q j. rt..,.. l Zy• r Y.. r -„ r 3 ``'`'J 4,tc r .'''st fS{ri .4 t .c. : l ��.3-1 -r,I,,,,,r;:-.:10-1.,,,16-1-;,;,!‘\ \+ri gfr 5a Iti S[6a V. , �y 7� `'�i n ,L , i_.�.- •'s ••may..-51/. 1� 1 '.a tS3•a ! .t T ,i... 'u `, a S R% s -!Gi`F+II r ..\ f {E' 1 } 1 •c - __ 39 ��q wt .46.}.,..,:‘,..s h..•V?g a •7"..' i :4* , of .,. i0'A i n. !},,`•`s,,, - t. �r t 1. Y,,. ,1 _ .1 7ti` s' > !. ','-';').)." :',.'7'• , .yp�s ,,,, Rs,, bt RIf: 4 • —J f `U ,! f. `"r, V iaP• A�' !C'7 A,��'{w tit�v,al"; /-µ�te)?! p , Izt.0,s�pAg30 j S ! 0.i 1 a p•jN�lc r Y"rY ~ + `- (.041:11., 4p 1F 'V:�ts �: •_t q. lrL f ,,b--.1.i s ii �r,- JJ ! 1 �r F� ;0;4.1,�'t = .• 4•, �I l` t, ?N rz•itSr t✓arr ,% it tta1-4i I. r'• ! �: refit ;Rk.Sie 1 1'h ji �a. 4, r f,� : ,r Jr � i`�� })i.1� _ _i ;f�! \) — . --,+'777777.:. : n -11 t • ~ Y/,tR°�Ytistr��!\ ,file t$i' I >> PLY.l19 1 __i• I _ } �A�s� , "n .�tSJ` Jy�!'lt.: r f, ti C }�r .' k1'�.:_� �4� �� •-J� t : . .- l I Ds • rb,ry ,eoje. fZ`r{�/.s � j�l"'°�fti a �tx ~t ,' Y. l`a r i yt(~s _ _ —.I� .G ;i ,r ,,� " ra ,a4_^• �Sp' }r ��.� .+�: Fip��' �'�6T r } �� .,r ��"�9P 'b€�'•'/S��.�• � ,��'l �lr^".,'`�.�, �t f e.� �,24'i '� 0 .c1`„ ,-.�'� � ii, [tY' �r a e f�l i S r ij r its !d �`�� is�t. t4 f "t k�t r,F'j .�(t I wn " + '� I c ,1 _j' _-r- . — — c i 111* 1:•-''I ri 1 r i'd,' tet Y;f,t,,,o-r{ i 1 ,_+.> �--.!• r: - , ... .44Z, Y� :sl. Cf�. 4[1'.) 1,r''' =',1,..e t tt s•n '�,4 �)3 ':,t., i � k1 ja' .f'r ��rri. ty1ll kk ', l`Z` ;/<.4 ). ', o 'Zy=1 I / ' �'(1txl r\ C" �.• ^<sJs ri,�/ F _Y -'� / R. ..y.. rwYlYt � x ' i. /•r\f-may'}J _ a•l$ ..a •••-,A,„1,7"*'' ,. l i l . 1 t p� t �'!,. r .: ��)'• a�2 n.4 i:(t� first p Y. �r 4P,k. ! i i 'i.G.. .• -''?' .•d%-7,Q I , r, • - l',0(..: __,, ii.�stt. }h:�(.': 44:: J�«4'� f.._" ,d . ,'f'''_ / '- �,\ l ''fir !--,-ir, �,r e l—. t + ,'t)f',44:-.P Z' .1_a .s • _,,,:,,,b_......,,_-_ •;:n'-',t,, . .7,. i lti "�.-, ''-'1.4• ]t 1 u ywiYt r, • v + -.....:..,,.•-:„.,- ,.. i r Tit b �, N - r iIRKf 7, p�(may (i ::_:':1-,..:'';:,..:'...,1...'1:::-. ': - •yr 3'I "',s t n a.4,J• W'fF1i`It` N�64 l P4EOIPRi}TioN ' :r... .. o �� j .:-'. h � t' i ...,..-:.-..: ',„&,-. .-..:..... 1Q6 ', 104 • VP' I•. i A#. • Est- . . ,.. :'I:, ,�'g;4':r: f! - ;t.'_. • - ,:I 11 Er F14uRg S. IRAINFALL DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) 10 R71 W R 70W R60W R66 W R67W R66W R65III R54 W R53W 2.4 2.5 r.65 2.7 2.7 2..j 2.65 2.7 x r n 2'• LONDMOIIr [- \ I w. .- wi i NWroT 1 • _ ...1 ry 1 F IU' I) I ' I r ) / WELD I . 2,3 eaicHrD. EA / GI D, , R cn w, iVtu1t o �ENVFRI * 2.15 2.1 � 2.7 r EVE'::.ENAl 1 in N ' I W g OE 2.65 ` c A' .AIDE MLIBERT 2.650 MFER , r I C 'GI AS EIgERi 1 •_ \ Wo I .A E' j 5 F to I 2.05 `6E!uEuin 2.6 `NAnro Wh 1 •--+ 2.5 i I M I fl JlYi•2 N )0.1 2.15 Z269 W 2.3 KA W R R 50W P 61 w R fi'fi X115 i fi: W I q gd W R 63 W Figure RA-6—Rainfall Depth-Duration-Frequency: 100-Year,1-Hour Rainfall I all0112004 ' Urban Drainage and Flood Control District r.-...e.. I— �� J J: .. �� ',, ® � l F ! J Ai J Lam, k _�:, ( 'T"- t l&"(25NF,' C J — ea+ �_ � Ay � < � / 1e ) ; q i F 8 m a°' c/ 4.Lek .1, a r a e 1, /s v c0 x. / >$a r l '� 'a, 0o r,.�/d.67 , Asa ^ o + / q ≥ `b `$W`4 y,645 2-v a . //, , O - W g 7 / r ,. on. ¢'% � / tea/ 'I /it -I4 YSJ d .g+ S e / / v � / /� r /� d a . ,r, A , L4 ...v e C S, 3 1 r, /, —a- \ //' © ;,:4,- 1 Sy cii d d $ ..: v d/ d � 1 p : P a PIONEER Record Documents y _ Carroll Lange= _ -o u "'' $ y65 South Union Blvd I,` Prelessional EnDlreers 8 Land surveyors � ^ •��= m$ Lakewood.Colorado 80228e 156 No. Revisions Dote By OM ❑maws*m s e EXISTING DEPRESSIONS " lFA 3o3j B�o-eo9t)00 SEE MASTER REVISION/TRACKING TABULATION ❑mom Aver se�N NNJW.CARROLL-LANGE.COM ❑"1°' Deslansel BY TAL I Checked By. ram,.Yesc me ❑ mn �.m..wa..c 1 1 1. 1 1 1 1 i 1 Is 1 1 1 APPENDIX B — Design Tables and Charts 1 Table RA-4 — Factors for Preparation of Intensity-Duration Curves Table RO-3 — Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values 1 Table RO-5 — Runoff Coefficients, C Figure RO-1 — Overland Flow Velocities Figures RO-3 - RO-5, RO-9, RO-15 - RO-17 — Watershed Imperviousness 1 Table RO-6 —Typical Depression Losses Table RO-7 — Recommended Horton's Equation Parameters Table RO-8 — Incremental Infiltration Depths 1 Table 5-2 — Soil Parameters used in HEC-HMS Model Typical Overlot Grading Templates 1 RAINFALL DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) • 4.0 INTENSITY-DURATION CURVES FOR RATIONAL METHOD To develop depth-duration curves or intensity-duration curves for the Rational Method of runoff analysis take the 1-hour depth(s)obtained from Figures RA-1 through RA-6 and multiply by the factors in Table RA-4 to determine rainfall depth and rainfall intensity at each duration. The intensity can then be plotted as illustrated in Fiqure RA-15. TABLE RA-4—Factors for Preparation of Intensity-Duration Curves ' Duration(minutes) 5 10 15 30 60 Rainfall Depth at Duration (inches) 0.29P, 0.45P, 0.57P, 0.79P, 1.0P, Intensity(inches per hour) 3.48P1 2.70P1 2.28P1 1.58P, 1.OP, Alternatively,the rainfall intensity for the area within the District can be approximated by the equation: 1 28.5 P j= o. ac (RA-3) (1o+ Tc) in which: /=rainfall intensity(inches per hour) ISP, = 1-hour point rainfall depth (inches) To=time of concentration (minutes) I I I I RA-6 01/2004 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District 1 I ' DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF ' IP Table RO-5—Runoff Coefficients, C Percentage Imperviousness Type C and D NRCS Hydrologic Soil Groups I 0% 2-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 0.04 0.15 0.25 0.37 0.44 0.50 5% 0.08 0.18 0.28 0.39 0.46 0.52 I 10% 0.11 0.21 0.30 0.41 0.47 0.53 15% 0.14 0.24 0.32 0.43 0.49 0.54 20% 0.17 0.26 0.34 0.44 0:50 0.55 25% 0.20 0.28 0.36 0.46 0.51 0.56 I 30% 0.22 0.30 0.38 0.47 0.52 0.57 35% 0.25 0.33 0.40 0.48 0.53 0.57 40% 0.28 0.35 0.42 0.50 0.54 0.58 45% 0.31 0.37 0.44 0.51 0.55 0.59 I 50% 0.34 0.40 0.46 0.53 0.57 0.60 55% 0.37 0.43 0.48 0.55 0.58 0.62 60% 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.57 0.60 0.63 I 65% 0.45 0.49 0.54 0.59 0.62 0.65 70% 0.49 0.53 0.57 0.62 0.65 0.68 75% 0.54 0.58 0.62 0.66 0.68 0.71 80% 0.60 0.63 0.66 0.70 0.72 0.74 I 85% 0.66 0.68 0.71 0.75 0.77 0.79 90% 0.73 0.75 0.77 0.80 0.82 0.83 95% 0.80 0.82 0.84 0.87 0.88 I 0.89 III 100% 0.89 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.96 TYPE B NRCS HYDROLOGIC SOILS GROUP 0% 0.02 0.08 0.15 0.25 0.30 0.35 5% 0.04 0.10 0.19 0.28 0.33 0.38 I 10% 0.06 0.14 0.22 0.31 0.36 0.40 15% 0.08 0.17 0.25 0.33 0.38 0.42 20% 0.12 0.20 0.27 0.35 0.40 0.44 I 25% 0.15 0.22 0.30 0.37 0.41 0.46 30% 0.18 0.25 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.47 35% 0.20 0.27 0.34 0.41 0.44 0.48 40% 0.23 0.30 0.36 0.42 0.46 0.50 I 45% 0.26 0.32 0.38 0.44 0.48 0.51 50% 0.29 0.35 0.40 0.46 0.49 0.52 55% 0.33 0.38 0.43 0.48 0.51 0.54 I 60% 0.37 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.54 0.56 65% 0.41 0.45 0.49 0.54 0.57 0.59 70% 0.45 0.49 0.53 0.58 0.60 0.62 75% 0.51 0.54 0.58 0.62 0.64 0.66 I 80% 0.57 0.59 0.63 0.66 0.68 0.70 85% 0.63 0.66 0.69 0.72 0.73 0.75 90% 0.71 0.73 0.75 0.78 0.80 0.81 I 95% 0.79 0.81 0.83 0.85 0.87 0.88 100% 0.89 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.96 I a • 06/2002 RO-11 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District I I ' RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) I MP TABLE RO-5(Continued)—Runoff Coefficients, C Percentage Type A NRCS Hydrologic Soils Group Imperviousness I 2-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 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 I 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 I 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 40% 0.19 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.38 0.41 I 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% 0.29 0.33 0.38 0.42 0.45 0.47 60% 0.33 0.37 0.41 0.45 0.47 0.50 I 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 75% 0.47 0.50 0.54 0.57 0.59 0.61 I 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 0.84 0.85 0.86 I • 100% 0.89 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.96 I I I I I I • RO-12 6/2002 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District I I ' DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF s • 50 30 z 20 r I W I it* r�f Q ; w v� r r it 10 _ e ` 44 r • It+ t su rov t oe8' .� ar c ,3+ t N 5 V ~y :it if teW c y�' O y W r � bb i rb'v "4 " I 0 3 a1 a ttt tw ntt W $ - tb =W O 3 ° G2 4. .O br� bt F Wb ' 4r t ' ; 4� , A at 1 5 t1 ) 1 2 3 .5 1 2 3 5 10 20 VELOCITY IN FEET PER SECOND IFigure RO-1—Estimate of Average Overland Flow Velocity for Use With the Rational Formula 1 I I 1• • 06!2002 RO-13 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District I ' DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF ' • Table RO-3---Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values Land Use or Percentage Surface Characteristics Imperviousness I Business: Commercial areas 95 4,- Neighborhood areas 85 IResidential: Single-family * I Multi-unit(detached) 60 F Hryti Dens,Fy Multi-unit(attached) 75 Half-acre lot or larger ' I Apartments 80 Industrial: Light areas 80 E--_[J.+te lank IHeavy areas 90 4 "Sewer pi.nt Parks, cemeteries 5 ( I Playgrounds 10 Schools 50 ( Railroad yard areas 15 I • Undeveloped Areas: Historic flow analysis 2 Greenbelts, agricultural 2 E-- IOff-site flow analysis 45 (when land use not defined) Streets: I Paved 100 Gravel (packed) 40 I Drive and walks 90 Roofs 90 Lawns, sandy soil 0 1 Lawns, clayey soil 0 'See Figures RO-3 through RO-5 for percentage imperviousness. IBased in part on the data collected by the District since 1969, an empirical relationship between C and the percentage imperviousness for various storm retum periods was developed. Thus,values for C can Ibe determined using the following equations(Urbonas,Guo and Tucker 1990). CA =KA + 6.31i' —1.44i2 +1.135i—0.12)for CA≥0, otherwise CA =0 (RO-6) I I • 06/2002 RO-9 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District I I DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF • II 90 5.000 sq,ft homes , Iso 4,000 sq.R.homes• .. Law awst»' •� MEDitln1 I 70 637- ' 094.52773,000 sq.R homes 1 a 0 60 I s • • I $ 50 ' • 0 2,000 sq.R homes r - - • A •—• • r r I /0 -Si / X40 / - di. i- • / � 1.000 sq.R.homes - 0 so" 1 �� 10 .. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Single Family Dwelling Units per Acre IFigure RO3—Watershed Imperviousness,Single-Family Residential Ranch Style Houses I I I I • 06/2002 RO-15 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District I IRUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) I • 60 ---- 5,000 sq.R homes p � I 64) • 0ruszry ' .000 sq.ft.homes I70 5 -�� , / , • 3.0Mitt U.q e 6000 sq.ft homes . De1J5TTy i G0 •-- 62'/ IE / • • ' 2,000 sq.ft hones — ••••• • r a. 44 • /• •• , • :° c / 1,000 sq.Ii.homes I- 30 • • • I ••• • •••• / .• / 20 • 10 10 I I I o 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Single Family Dwelling Units per Acre IFigure RO-4—Watershed Imperviousness,Single-Family Residential Split-Level Houses I I I I in I • RO-16 6/2002 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District I I DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) RUNOFF • 0 so-- - LOW -f 000 eq.n.hones itY s&Y. r' • / 10 740 • poop SQ.ft.homes'` 1 1 °° fr' ,.. • d '.... UM ♦• ♦ ...r 5q.Q.honteg I DE".rSZTV#. . .. . - [ ° .- 5 5 Z.1 / J' ♦ . • ' 11000 sq.n.homes]. O / 30' if ♦ ' sr ""� ". 1,000 sq.R.homes I :too 10 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 5 Stngle Family Dwelling Units per Acre I • Figure RO-5—Watershed Imperviousness,Single-Family Residential Two-Story Houses I 100 e.00.l • I 0J0 0.80 -s_50-yr -4-2 010r a it i o zo ir,�,.� M" �'t--'mil t •- 000 • e.c:,... ._._.__.__....:........,,..�_._.�..�........_.__... ._..:...._..._.�—___,...._�._.. I 0% 10% 20K 30% 40% 50% 80% r0% 801E 90% ----100% Wtiorshed Percant,geImperviousness Figure RO-6--Runoff Coefficient, C,vs.Watershed Percentage Imperviousness NRCS Hydrologic ISoil Group A III I06/2002 RO-17 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District 1 RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL(V. 1) ' • 3.2.2 Depression Losses Rainwater that is collected and held in small depressions and does not become part of the general surface runoff is called depression loss. Most of this water eventually infiltrates or is evaporated. Depression losses also include water intercepted by trees, bushes, other vegetation, and all other surfaces. The CUHP method requires numerical values of depression loss as inputs to calculate the ' effective rainfall. Table RO-6 can be used as a guide in estimating the amount of depression (retention) losses to be used with CUHP. ' Table RO-6—Typical Depression Losses for Various Land Covers (All Values in Inches) (For Use With CUHP Method) ' Land Cover Range in Depression (Retention)Losses Recommended Impervious: ' Large paved areas 0.05-0.15 0.1 Roofs-flat 0.1 -0.3 0.1 Roofs-sloped 0.05-0.1 0.05 ' Pervious: Lawn grass 0.2-0.5 0.35 Wooded areas and open fields 0.2-0.6 0.4 ' • When an area is analyzed for depression losses, the pervious and impervious loss values for all parts of the watershed must be considered and accumulated in proportion to the percent of aerial coverage for each type of surface. 3.2.3 Infiltration The flow of water into the soil surface is called infiltration. In urban hydrology much of the infiltration occurs on areas covered with grass. Urbanization can increase or decrease the total amount of ' infiltration. Soil type is the most important factor in determining the infiltration rate. When the soil has a large ' percentage of well-graded fines,the infiltration rate is low. In some cases of extremely tight soil,there may be,from a practical standpoint, essentially no infiltration. If the soil has several layers or horizons, the least permeable layer near the surface will control the maximum infiltration rate. The soil cover also plays an important role in determining the infiltration rate. Vegetation, lawn grass in particular, tends to increase infiltration by loosening the soil near the surface. Other factors affecting infiltration rates include ' slope of land,temperature, quality of water, age of lawn and soil compaction. As rainfall continues, the infiltration rate decreases. When rainfall occurs on an area that has little ' antecedent moisture and the ground is dry, the infiltration rate is much higher than it is with high antecedent moisture resulting from previous storms or land irrigation such as lawn watering. Although I • RO-20 6/2002 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District I RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) II •I Table RO-7—Recommended Horton's Equation Parameters NRCS Hydrologic Infiltration (inches per hour) Decay Soil Group Initial—f Final—f, Coefficient--a IA 5.0 1.0 0.0007 B 4.5 0.6 0.0018 IC 3.0 0.5 0.0018 D 3.0 0.5 0.0018 I To calculate the maximum infiltration depths that may occur at each time increment, it is necessary to integrate Equation RO-8 and calculate the values for each time increment. Very little accuracy is lost if, instead of integrating Equation RO-8, the infiltration rate is calculated at the center of each time Iincrement. This"central"value can then multiplied by the unit time increment to estimate the infiltration depth. This was done for the four NRCS hydrologic soil groups, and the results are presented in Table I RO-8. Although Tables RO-7 and RO-8 provide recommended values for various Horton equation parameters, these recommendations are being made specifically for the urbanized or urbanizing watersheds in the Denver metropolitan area and may not be valid in different meteorologic and climatic Iregions. Table RO-8—Incremental Infiltration Depths in Inches* I fb T NRCS Hydrologic Soil Group Time in Minutes** A B C and D 5 0.384 0.298 0.201 I 10 0.329 0.195 0.134 15 0.284 0.134 0.096 20 0.248 0.099 0.073 25 0.218 --^-- 0.079 - _ 0.060 ' -- 30 0.194 0.067 0.052 35 0.175 0.060 0.048 40 0.159 0.056 0.045 45 0.146 0.053 0.044 I 50 0.136 0.052 0.043 55 0.127 0.051 0.042 60 0.121 0.051 0.042 I 65 0.115 0.050 0.042 70 0.111 0.050 0.042 75 0.107 0.050 0.042 80 0.104 0.050 0.042 I85 0.102 0.050 0.042 _ 90 0.100 0.050 0.042 95 0.098 0.05O 0.042 100 0.097 0.050 0.042 I 105 0.096 0.050 0.042 110 0.095 0.050 0.042 115 0.095 0.050 0.042 120 0.094 0.050 0.042 I *Based on central value of each time increment in Horton's equation. **Time at end of the time increment. I . IRO-22 6/2002 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District I • IChapter 5 Computing Runoff Volumes with HEC-HMS • f • Wetting front suction. This can be estimated as a function of pore size distribution,which can, in turn, be correlated with texture class. Table 5-2 provides estimates of this. r • Volume moisture deficit. This is(0- 0,) in Equation 5-8, the soil porosity less the initial water content.Rawls and Brakensiek(1982)and Rawls,et al. I (1982)have correlated the porosity with soil texture class; Table 5-2 shows this relationship.The initial water content must be between zero and 0. For example, if the soil is saturated, B,=0; for a completely dry soil, 0, =0. EM 1110-2-1417 suggests that the initial water content may be related to an I antecedent precipitation index. Table 5-2. Texture class estimates(Rawls,et al., 1982) P Texture class Porosity, 0Hydraulic Wetting front (cm3/cm) conductivity, a, suction(cm) saturated(cm/hr) PSand 0.437 21.00 10.6 I' Loamy sand 0.437 6.11 14.2 Sandy loam 0.453 2.59 22.2 Loam 0.463 1.32 31.5 Ill • Silt loam 0.501 0.68 40.4 Sandy clay loam 0.398 0.43 44.9 P Clay loam Silty 0.464 0.23 44.6 clay loam 0.471 0.15 58.1 Sandy clay 0.430 0.12 63.6 ill Silty clay 0.479 0.09 64.7 Clay 0.475 0.06 71.4 IP Continuous Soil-moisture Accounting (SMA) Model IP Models described thus far in this chapter are event models.They simulate behavior of a hydrologic system during a precipitation event, and to do so,they require specification of all conditions at the start of the event. The alternative is a p continuous model—a model that simulates both wet and dry weather behavior. The HEC-HMS soil-moisture accounting model (SMA) does this. p Basic Concepts and Equations The HEC-HMS SMA model is patterned after Leavesley's Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System(1983)and is described in detail in Bennett(1998).The model p simulates the movement of water through and storage of water on vegetation,on the soil surface, in the soil profile, and in groundwater layers. Given precipitation and potential evapotranspiration(ET),the model computes basin surface runoff, • groundwater flow, losses due to ET, and deep percolation over the entire basin. r 43 P I I Z • < J ? Jf ' > a < wa 0 - N N I J a o i O5 J w, a'o OU -co I � z > w < J _ g:ii wa 55 X X _w < 2 _ o'^ a tE U N 0 N co to w to 0 0 I- > Z H I 2 r--, J Q, 0 c 9 I n_n _ V- • I 0 o o J o m �y� wJ I' + O 1 U H I M/a-o ' M/21-� Moe-,j 8-b Lo I a N Lil 0 J P 1 wF CO a I Li o� a ii • 0 Oo w o _J 0 04.° 3 Z 0 ill ad ~ o� I wa. des, ~v \\z*59 a W • f / Z ,,I`— m F I 0o O ce ?F I II I o2 CO Oa I II O� of � m t o$ w I ~ CL ` _ o is H i° 40'ZL w i-a 6 ct x r co ow a O Li.J I6'59 0. a V) S Oa w 03 z >- N W a 3 Is_ l A F O w ' (Ni I-5-0 a o o Z wZ wvai Nw w a o z I wo 2'J V w -E. m W Z W 0 a Z Z w a w°- W F `nO CO aCrti J I W Z a 2 Go �w o u z o J Ls_ �— Z Q re oo zo E 0 ' or. is _ 00 Lm w c9 c Lu ~ z I/ Z* mF ~ I 0o O ao ec CCF I I 3w I �w m 0 �� HJ QH —1 WO O W o (J �p O 5 LLJ In 1q %YIN O 0 o Ln GO F a H- ' ° 0x /. x OF w 2y a o 0 cp. z_I _ -J > �s 3 _Z a 3 N (1- * Li 0 I all N O N Z I I I. I I I I I to I I I APPENDIX C — Historic Basin Calculations IBasin Soil Types Basin Time of Concentration Calculation IHEC-HMS Output Summary I I I . I IProject : Pioneer Calculated By : KNJ • Project Number: 3325 Date : 4/3/2007 I Green and Ampt Loss Parameters (Values from Table 5-2 of HEC-HMS Technical Reference Manual) Hydraulic Wetting IPercentage Loamy Porosity Conductivity Front Description Impervious Sand Sand Loam (in3/in) (in/hr) Suction (in) Basin HA-1 ic 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 Basin HA-2 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 IBasin HA-3 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 Basin HA-4 i 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 IBasin HA-5 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 5 8.268 4.173 ' Basin HU-1 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 '&268 4.173 Basin HU-2 2.0% 57.0% 43.0% 0.0% 0.437 5.747 4.783 IBasin HU-3 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 Basin HU-4 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 I • Basin HU-5 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 ' Basin HU-6 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 Basin HU-7 2.0% 35.6% 13.8% 50.6% 0.450 3.539 8.532 IBasin HU-8 2.0% 75.4% 24.6% 0.0% 0.437 6.826 4.522 Basin HU-9 2.0% 76.1% 23.9% 0.0% 0.437 6.867 4.512 Basin HU-10 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 Basin HU-11 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 ' Basin HU-12 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 IBasin HU-13 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 Basin HB-1 2.0% 90.6% 7.4% 0.0% 0.428 7.669 4.194 IBasin HB-2 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0,437 8.268 4.173 ' Basin HB-3 2.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 • 3325- C Values Lookup HISTORIC.xls Lookup Pag@age 1 / 1 4/3/2007 4:00 PM U o m • • co I '. Z J' O H N O M co O 7 co co co N co d, V O co d' V' co co co R N Z, 3 to tT O M (O r co (o 6 M CO N in N (O N W co CO to r 6 LL,'^H a LO N (O r V N V C) LO CO N- N- N- V CO N r N N r CO d r I Q L Z_ M in N CO tT co 10 O r r O LO O CO r r co N Li W M g r W O M to (n O) tO O lb tO V R. N N CO. r O) C Or N N lb 7 h tb N N N N- V N V M M I co O O) r r co co M co W in N O co N- co LO LO O O to LO lb 6 rt M M O W M R g R O (O O r V O N ...; O co r N- a) LO N et N LU O) O) O) V' co N N r I Z W _J M M N-- N N- LO LO O) (O N N N V M r LO CO to r CO Ln N W CL O 2_. > W r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r N N V H H r ( Z J t� u o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H W'~ d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 .r 0 c 0 0 0 Z >s O o r O• ? O N.-- O LO h O O r M O1 (` N CO O (O O LC) W �€ r r r N O r N r r r r r r O r r r M M r M p) O H':- M a Z _ CO O I C U O r (o co Q) r O O (O r N CO CO tO CO C >_ CO W I) N 6 O (O co co O co (D N N-- CO CO CO O N- CO N '. m O N Z LL r If) N - O) CO CO r r O) O7 07 LO LO CO CO N O) W V al W tO tO V N 7 co' 7 R. O O V (O c.1 r W OO J 113 r BL ' •H d _ V co N- r co co r co W N n N V V tO LO co N- L` N N 2 0`.. H O N O N NN r M M CON O cd O N CO O) 6 O (O O 2 Z N CO N N N N N N C O Q MNM N 2 I-Llo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o X W ~ Q. 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 W O >'W O o rn O R- (o to g o M rn ry co b to (o to to co r r r r N6 r N O r r r M M r M CN I QH CO H 2 N ' Z' H OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ' N O L O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O - (9 Z CO M CO CO M M CO CO M M M M M CO CO M CO M M M M ' 2 W J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O coo O O O O co I an O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q in Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O co O I- O O O O O , N W QV • M • O) M I- -4 M6 6 (o (O 6N • O . M N O N- N N t- o r (Q r CO LID r V O O N M N M Q co co r N- N r N M N N N M LO r up r N CO of N d C OZ I N Q Q r N CO 7 to r N M 7 I.O (o CO O) r0 r N CO r N CO ) M °? H C Q Q Q Q Q 7 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 CO CO COI w CO? 0 m 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 O D O m M or— co C ii N LE I Project : Pioneer HEC-HMS Basin Model : Historic Apr 24 10:59:26 MDT 2007 HEC-HMS \ . HUI13 fs'S+ HA-3 _ HA-5 ! HU1 4 r I I H B-3 HHU ,U-3 H � H -1 1 HU-9 HB-1 €5 8 HU-1 I . • HU-7 i "4r I i I I I I • i 1 I5- YEAR HISTORIC • -IEC-HMS 3.0.1 [P:13325\Drainage\Master\HEC-HMS\Pioneer_HEC_HMS\Pioneer_HEC_HMS.. IHydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume Element (MI2) (CFS) (AC-FT) HA-1 0.5063 5.69 01Jan2000, 01:33 0.87 jHA-2 0.1031 2.14 01Jan2000, 00:51 0.18 I 'HA-3 0.2703 3.02 01Jan2000, 01:33 0.47 'HA-4 0.0188 0.51 01Jan2000, 00:39 0.03 HA-5 1.2328 _ 7.99 01 Jan2000, 02:51 2.13 1 HB-1 0.5344 11.21 01Jan2000, 00:51 0.92 HB-2 0.1328 3.09 01Jan2000, 00:45 0.23 I HB-3 0.3438 8.74 01Jan2000, 00:42 0.59 .HU-1 0.4266 5.79 01Jan2000, 01:15 0.74_ HU-10 0.2750 3.92 01Jan2000, 01:12 0.48 IHUi1 0.7917 8.37 01Jan2000, 01:39 1.37 HU-i2 0.1641 3.22 01Jan2000, 00:54 0.28 HU-13 0.0344 1.03 01Jan2000, 00:36 0.06 IHU-2 0.1672 3.70 01Jan2000, 00:48 0.29 ,HU-3 0.3344 4.76 01Jan2000, 01:12 0.58 I 0 HHU-4 0.5672 4.79 01Jan2000, 02:09 0.98 HU-5 0.3281 4.13 01Jan2000, 01:21 0.57 HU-6 0.4375 4.05 01Jan2000, 01:57 0.76 IHU-7 1.3281 13.09 01Jan2000, 01:48 2.29 HU-8 0.5813 5.90 01Jan2000, 01:45 1.00 1 'HU-9 1 0.8516 8.28 01Jan2000, 01:51 1.47 I I I I •I . I I 1 100-YEAR HISTORIC • -IEC-HMS 3.0.1 [P:\3325\Drainage\Master\HEC-HMS\Pioneer_HEC_HMS\Pioneer_HEC_HMS.. IHydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume Element (MI2) (CFS) (AC-FT) IBHA-1 0.5063 11.67 01Jan2000, 01:39 1.68 HA-2 0.1031 4.23 01 Jan2000, 00:57 0.34 HA-3 0.2703 6.20 01Jan2000, 01:39 0.90 HA-4 0.0188 0.99 01Jan2000, 00:45 0.06 HA-5 1.2328 15.78 01Jan2000, 02:51 4.10 I HB-1 0.5344 22.09 01Jan2000, 00:57 1.78 HB-2 0.1328 6.01 01Jan2000, 00:51 0.44 HB 3 0.3438 16.86 01Jan2000, 00:48 1.14 HU-1 0.4266 11.85 01Jan2000, 01:21 1.42 HU-10 0.2750 8.00 01Jan2000, 01:18 0.92 IHU-11 0.7917 17.14 01Jan2000, 01:45 2.63 HU-12 0.1641 6.40 01Jan2000, 01:00 0.55 HU-13 0.0344 1.96 01Jan2000, 00:42 0.11 I HU 2 0.1672 7.24 01Jan2000, 00_54 0.56 HU-3 0.3344 9.72 01Jan2000, 01:18 1.11 IHU 4 0.5672 9.64 01Jan2000, 02:12 1.89 ,0 HU-5 _ 0.3281 8.47 01Jan2000, 01:27 1.09 HU-6 0.4375 8.21 01Jan2000, 02:00 1.46 HU-7 1.3281 26.69 01Jan2000, 01:51 4.42 :HU-8 0.5813 12.05 01Jan2000, 01:48 1.93 IHU-9 0.8516 16.87 01Jan2000, 01:54 _ 2.83 I I I 1 lip I I I ' • HISTORIC BASIN SUMMARY HISTORIC DESIGN BASIN 5-YR HISTORIC 100-YR HISTORIC BASIN POINT AREA(ac) RELEASE (cfs) RELEASE (cfs) ' Basin HA-1 Al 324.0 5.7 11.7 Basin HA-2 A2 66.0 2.1 4.2 ' Basin HA-3 A3 173.0 3.0 6.2 Basin HA-4 A4 12.0 0.5 1.0 I Basin HA-5 A5 789.0 8.0 15.8 Basin HU-1 U1 273.0 5.8 11.9 I Basin HU-2 U2 107.0 3.7 7.2 Basin HU-3 U3 214.0 4.8 9.7 Basin HU-4 U4 363.0 4.8 9.6 IBasin HU-5 U5 210.0 4.1 8.5 Basin HU-6 U6 280.0 4.1 8.2 ' Basin HU-7 U7 850.0 13.1 26.7 Basin HU-8 U8 372.0 5.9 12.1 I Basin HU-9 U9 545.0 8.3 16.9 Basin HU-10 U10 176.0 3.9 8.0 Basin HU-11 Ulf 506.7 8.4 17.1 IBasin HU-12 U12 105.0 3.2 6.4 Basin HU-13 U13 22.0 1.0 2.0 illBasin HB-1 B1 342.0 11.2 22.1 Basin HB-2 B2 105.0 3.1 6.0 ' Basin HB-3 B3 220.0 8.7 16.9 I I I I I • i 1 I . 1 i 1 1 1 1 I . 1 1 1 APPENDIX D — Proposed Basin Calculations 1 Basin Soil Types Basin Percent Impervious Calculations 1 Time of Concentration Calculations Water Quality Volume Calculations HEC-HMS Major Basin Flows 1 Detention Pond Summary Open Channel Design Culvert Design 1 1e 1 I I Project : Pioneer Calculated By: KNJ Project Number: 3325 Date : 4/23/2007 i Ili IGreen and Ampt Loss Parameters Table 5-2 of HEC-HMS Technical Refer(Values from Reference Manual) Hydraulic Wetting ' Loamy Porosity Conductivity Front Description Sand Sand Loam (in3/in) (in/hr) Suction (in) Basin A-1 100.0% '; 0.0% I 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 I f r.' Basin A-2 100.0% ` 0.0% 0.0% 0.431 8.2 8 4X73 ' Basin A-3 100.0% ; 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 ?73 Basin A-4 E 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268; x 4.173 IBasin B-1 i 65.4% 34.6% 0.0% 0.437 6.240 4 Basin B-2 3 100.0% I 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 826$ 473 IBasin B-3 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 Basin B-4 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 622$8 4.173 I d Basin B-5 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 ' 8.268 --4.173 I • Basin B-6 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8;268 4.173 Basin C-2 73.6% 26.4% 0.0% 0.437 - 6.720 4: 47 IBasin C-3 66.9% 33.1% 0.0% 0.437 6.328 4.642 ' Basin C-4 93.2% 6.8% 0.0% 0.437 . 7.869 :4,,,,2:69 Basin D-1 92.0% 8.0% 0.0% 0.437 7.7b9 4,7286 Basin D-2 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.437 8.268 4.173 I I I, a• 3325- Proposed Soil Properties.xls Lookup Page Page 1 / 1 4/23/2007 11:35 AM I I ISteet Sections - Composite Percent Impervious Calculations • S Date : 04/23/07 Project Number : 3325 Project : Pioneer Calculations By: TAL I Urban Local Residential 60' ROW Width (ft) Description % Impervious W* %Imp I 24.0 traffic lanes 100.0% 16.0 parking lanes 100.0% 5.0 curb and gutter pan 100.0% t; 00 1 10.0 concrete walk 100.0% 5.0 landscaping 5.0% Total Width (ft) Composite % Impervious C10 = 0.77 I60.0 92.1% C100= 0.82 I Urban Local Employment/Regional Commercial 60' ROW Width (ft) Description %Impervious W* °/.3Imp 36.0 traffic lanes 100.0% u': 0 5.0 curb and gutter pan 100.0% ., 12.0 concrete walk 100.0% • 7.0 landscaping 5.0% r Total Width (ft) Composite % Impervious C10= 0.71 60.0 88.9% C100= 0.77 Urban 2-Lane Collector ' 80' ROW Width (ft) Description % Impervious W* %Imp 24.0 traffic lanes 100.0% ' ,r, I 31.0 turn lanes/median /bike lane 100.0% 5.0 curb and gutter pan 100.0% 16.0 concrete walk 100.0% ' 4.0 landscaping 5.0% Total Width (ft) Composite % Impervious C10= 0.83 I80.0 95.3% C100= 0.87 I I I. 3325 -C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Street Sd? gesi /3 4/23/2007 10:47 AM 1 I ' Urban 4-Lane Arterial 110' ROW ' Width (ft) Description % Impervious W* %Imp 50.0 traffic lanes 100.0% 35.0 turn lanes/median /bike lane 100.0% I 5.0 curb and gutter pan 100.0% 16.0 concrete walk 100.0% 4.0 landscaping 5.0% ITotal Width (ft) Composite % Impervious C10= 0.85 110.0 96.5% C100= 0.89 IUrban 2-Lane Arterial (80' ROW) 80' ROW I Width (ft) Description % Impervious W* %Imp 24.0 traffic lane 100.0% 31.0 turn lanes/median/bike lane 100.0% I 5.0 curb and gutter pan 100.0% 16.0 concrete walk 100.0% 4.0 landscaping 5.0% ITotal Width (ft) Composite % Impervious C10= 0.83 80.0 95.3% C100= 0.87 I . Urban 2-Lane Arterial (120' ROW) 120' ROW Width (ft) Description % Impervious W* %Imp 24.0 traffic lanes 100.0% 31.0 turn lanes/median /bike lane 100.0% I 5.0 curb and gutter pan 100.0% 16.0 concrete walk 100.0% 44.0 landscaping 5.0% ITotal Width (ft) Composite % Impervious C10= 0.45 120.0 65.2% C100= 0.53 I I I li I 3325- C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Street Sages /3 4/23/2007 10:47 AM I I ' 6-Lane Strategic Roadway(Major Arterial) • 140' ROW ' Width (ft) Description % Impervious W* %Imp 72.0 traffic lanes 100.0% 38.0 turn lanes/ median /bike lane 100.0% I 8.0 curb and gutter pan 100.0% 16.0 concrete walk 100.0% 6.0 landscaping 5.0% ITotal Width(ft) Composite '1/0 Impervious C10 = 0.84 140.0 95.9% C100 = 0.88 IRural 2-Lane Arterial 80' ROW I Width (ft) Description % Impervious W* %Imp 24.0 traffic lanes 100.0% 31.0 turn lanes/median /bike lane 100.0% I 5.0 curb and gutter pan 100.0% 16.0 concrete walk 100.0% 4.0 landscaping 5.0% ITotal Width (ft) Composite % Impervious C10 = 0.83 80.0 95.3% C100= 0.87 • 1 I I I I I. 3325 -C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Street SERItges4/3 4/23/2007 10:47 AM I I IPlanning Area Descriptions Date: 04/23/07 Project Number: 3325 IIII Project: Pioneer Calculations By: KNJ Planning Max Zoning Home Styles(%Impervious) Percent Area Description Area(ac) Density(DU/ACj 2-Story Split Level Ranch Impervious I PA-01 :Agricultural Land 225.5 ' 2.0% 2.0% PA-02 Agricultural Land 723.2 2.0% 2.0% PA=03 !Agricultural Land F 185.4 � _ 2.0 _ _ 2.0% 20% I PA-04 High Density Residential 20.5 10.0 60.0% 60.0% PA-05 !High Density Residential 45 = -0� 60.0% L. PA-06 !High Density Residential 44.7 I 10.0 60.0% 60.0% I PA=07 High Density Residential 41.5 10.0 60.0% 60 0°Ic PA-08 Medium Density Residential { 38.2 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% 32 2 _ ff 55.0% 62.0% 70.O%Pd-09 Medium Density Residential �y PA 10 !Parks 11.9 5.0% 5.0% PA 11 ,Medium Density Residential { 30.2 �_ LSD 55:0% I 62.0% 70.0°/° .0% r PA-12 :High Density Residential i 27.4 10.0 60.0% 60.0% I PA-13 ;Medium Density Residential f -20.6 `6.0 =55.0% I 62.0% I 70:0% M PA-14 School 75.1 50.0% 50.0% k'15 !Medium Density Residential 473 ? *i'A-_. , 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 3.f "' IPA 16 Medium Density Residential 30.3 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-17 Medium Density Residential i ;26 $.t i 55.0% 62.0% 70M%.".: 59'3% PA-18 High Density Residential ; 20.5 10.0 60.0% 60.0% 1 • t' • PA-19 Commercial' X35 2 95.0% ,.- - PA-20 High Density Residential ( 17.9 10.0 60.0% 60.0% PA-21 :Medium Density Residential ! 27.1 6:0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% .59.3'/0= PA-22 Medium Density Residential 48.2 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA 23 Agricultural Land 156.7 ; 2.0% 20% PA-24 Medium Density Residential 53.3 6.0 55.0% I 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-25 :School 12.0 50.0% ;11ii, PA-26 'Medium Density Residential 12.5 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% I PA-27 Low Density Residential 23.1 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA-28 Parks 51.0 5.0% 5.0% PA-29 Low Density Residential 273 3.5 52,0% 57.0% 63.0% 55:1k% 1 PA-30 Medium Density Residential 26.3 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-31 Low Density Residential 24.6 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA-32 Medium Density Residential 43.0 ' 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% Ill PA-33 Medium Density Residential 23.1 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA 34 Parks 10.4 5.0% 5.0% PA-35 School 12.0 50.0% 50,0% I PA-36 Medium Density Residential 8.0 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-37 Medium Density Residential 18.2 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-38 Low Density Residential 29.9 ' 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% IPA-39 ,Medium Density Residential 27.6 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 593% PA-40 Parks 47.3 5.0% 5.0% 1 III 3325-C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Planning Areas Page 1/3 4/23/2007 10:47 AM I IPlanning Area Descriptions . Date: 04/23/07 Project Number: 3325 I Project: Pioneer Calculations By: KNJ Planning ' Max Zoning Home Styles(%Impervious} Percent Area Description Area(ac) Density(DU/AC) 2-Story ' Split Level Ranch Impervious I PA-41 1Medium Density Residential 55.6 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-42 i Low Density Residential 31.2 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA-43 'Medium Density Residential 26.9 6.0 55:0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% I PA-44 !!Medium Density Residential 61.9 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PR-45Agrieultural Land 149.2 2.0% 2:0% PA-46 3WaterTank 1.2 ' 80.0% 80.0% Ill PA-47 !Medium Density Residential 19.7 i 6.0 55.0% II 62:0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-48 I Medium Density Residential 13.6 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-49_ Medium Density Residential 38.4 6.0 • 551k%_"-_ 62.0% 70.0% 5S. b PA-50 i Medium Density Residential 44.8 I6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-51 1Low ensityResidential 27.2 9.5 2.0%a 57x0"/o 63.0% 55.1% PA-52 `Low Density Residential 59.8 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA.5 (School 103.EI. 50.0% *0% -. PA-54 :Low Low Density Residential 78.4 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% -5-5'..1% P 155__*ow Density Residential 12/ ' 35 . 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 553% PA 56 i Low Density Residential 33.5 3.5 52 0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA-57 ;Medium Density Residential 23.1 ' 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% _ 59.3% PA-58 !Parks 37.0 5.0% 5.0% . .41) _ -'PA-59 ;School 12.1 50.0% 50:0% PA-60 Medium Density Residential 16.4 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% I PA-61 'Low Density Residential 25.0 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA-62 'Parks 52.4 5.0% 5.0% PA-63 Medium Density Residential 39.5 6.0 55.0% . 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-64 ,Medium Density Residential 14.9 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA.65 ':Medium Density Residential 24.3 6.0 55.0% 62.0% 70.0% 59.3% PA-67 Low Density Residential 32.7 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% I PA-68 Low Density Residential 30.7 3.5 52.0% 57,0% 63.0% 55.1% PA 69 :tow Density Residential 31.4 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA-70 Parks 10.7 5.0% 5.0% I PA-71 !Low Density Residential 33.4 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA-72 :Low Density Residential 70.8 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA-73 "School 12.1 50.0% 50.0% I PA-74 Low Density Residential 22.5 3.5 52.0% I 57.0% I 63.0% 55.1% PA-75 Parks 18.9 5.0% 5.0% PA-76 Low Density Residential 68.3 3.5 52.0% I 57.0% I 63.0% 55.1% I . PA-77 Parks 10.8 5.0% 5.0% PA-78 Low Density Residential 28.1 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA-79 Low Density Residential 30.7 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% IPA-80 Low Density Residential 54.4 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% PA-81 Low Density Residential 30.6 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 63.0% 55.1% • 3325-C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Planning Areas Page 2/3 4/23/2007 10:47 AM I I I Planning Area Descriptions • Date: 04/23/07 Project Number: 3325 1 Project: Pioneer Calculations By: KNJ Planning Max Zoning Home Styles(%Im ervlous) Percent Area Description Area(ac) Density(DU/AC) 2-Story Split Level Ranch Impervious PA-82 Low Density Residential 202.7 3.5 52.0% 57.0% I 63.0% 55.1% PA 83 (Parks 6.4 5.0% 5.0 PA-84 jLow D@nsity#3esidential 42.3 3.5 52.0% 57.0% 55.1% 1 PA-85 Low Density Residential 83.9 3 5 52.0% 57 0% 6633100'Z 55.1% -PA-$ tfRadta 10.3 5.0% PA-87 Low Density Residential 88.9 3.5 52.0% I 5577.'000%k 7.0% I 63.0% 55.1 ' PA-88 _School 12.4 50.0% 50.0% PA 89 Low Density Residential 76.4 3.5 52.0% I 57.0% I 63.0% 55.1 PA-$Q;_$etvar Plant_ 40.5 90.0% ` 90.0% PA-91 Parks 11.9 5.0% 5.0% ' n e 3.9 --,,..-E- 'Ar-3^� 5.0% 53.5 s-�. A 5.0% Ief"m _ __ F 312 ,' 5.0°ro F C#',r n. e 76.5 NA ` _ 5.0% ' _ 2.5 v NA _' 5.0% • 7aot -� Y�.n,6aSe.. 65.5 x JA 5.0% raC{t}{.'; g, `.cep. 50.7 #JA 5.0% I4a6ta '..ro $pace 4.4 J,we _ a$ 38.1 -NA t v pen$ ie T. 20.5 _ Tt € en.p`rate: -<.' _ 12.4 _ .' Tract =$um 1`gcrg P Spaces 56.0 NA 5.0% I I I I. 3325-C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xIs Planning Areas Page 3l 3 4/23/2007 10:47 AM I I IComposite Basins - Percent Impervious Calculations • Date: 04/24/07 Project Number: 3325 ' Project: Pioneer Calculations By: KNJ Basin A-1 I PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp PA-53 School 68.20 50.0% ,., PA-54 Low Density Residential 100.40 55.1% I Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 1.00 5.0% Tract G Open Space 34.60 5.0% Urban 2-Lane Collector 7.50 95.3% Total Area(acres) Composite%Impervious C,°= 0.00 211.70 46.5% C100 = 0.00 Basin A-2 I PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) % Impervious Area*%Imp PA-07 High Density Residential 33.31 60.0% 9.99 PA-70 Parks 10.70 5.0% PA-72 Low Density Residential 39.19 55.1% I Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 2.00 5.0% PA-69 Low Density Residential 3.70 55.1% 1 • Total Area(acres) Composite%ImperviousC10= 0.00 88.90 49.8% Cum= 0.00 ' Basin A-3 PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp I PA-89 Low Density Residential 58.44 55.1% .. PA-81 Low Density Residential 2.07 55.1% Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 2.00 5.0% . . PA-82 Low Density Residential 88.56 55.1% I Tract L Open Space 12.40 5.0% 2 Lane Urban Arterial 5.83 95.3% ITotal Area(acres) Composite%Impervious C1°= 0.00 169.30 52.2% C1°°= 0.00 I I Ile • 3325-C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Composite Basit age 1 /7 4/24/2007 10:47 AM I IComposite Basins - Percent Impervious Calculations • Date : 04/24/07 Project Number: 3325 ' Project: Pioneer Calculations By: KNJ Basin B-1 I PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp PA-50 Medium Density Residential 44.80 59.3% 26.57 I PA-51 Low Density Residential 27.20 55.1% 14.99 PA-52 Low Density Residential 59.80 55.1% 32.95 PA-53 School 8.94 50.0% 4.41 PA-47 Medium Density Residential 16.49 59.3% +.74 I PA-49 Medium Density Residential 28.74 59.3% 7.C4 PA-56 Low Density Residential 1.02 55.1% 0.55 PA-57 Medium Density Residential 13.92 59.3% 8.25 PA-58 Parks 34.22 5.0% 1.71 IPA-59 School 12.10 50.0% 6 0.1,PA-60 Medium Density Residential 16.40 59.3% -.r; PA-61 Low Density Residential 3.04 55.1% 1 Tract E Open Space 15.59 5.0% 0.73 Tract F Open Space 2.50 5.0% 0.13 Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 6.00 5.0% 5.30 2-Lane Collector 9.14 95.3% 5 / I 4-Lane Urban Arterial 21.61 95.3% 20.5O Undeveloped 22.69 2.0% 0 45 I • Total Area(acres) Composite°/0 Impervious C10= 0.00 344.20 47.9% C400= 0.00 IBasin B-2 PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp I PA-47 Medium Density Residential 4.18 59.3% 2.4". PA-48 Medium Density Residential 13.60 59.3% .5 05 PA-49 Medium Density Residential 10.64 59.3% PA-61 Low Density Residential 21.92 55.1% . I PA-62 Parks 31.69 5.0% Tract E Open Space 7.94 5.0% i ' Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 1.00 5.0% C(; 2-Lane Collector 7.40 95.3% .. I4-Lane Urban Arterial 6.23 96.5% ,,v1 I Total Area(acres) Composite%Impervious C,0= 0.00 104.60 42.1% C100= 0.00 I I I. 3325-C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Composite BasiRsage 2/7 4/24/2007 10:47 AM I IComposite Basins -Percent Impervious Calculations II• Date : 04/24/07 Project Number: 3325 ' Project: Pioneer Calculations By: KNJ Basin B-3 I PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) % Impervious Area"%Imp PA-54 Low Density Residential 3.71 55.1% 21)4 I PA-55 Low Density Residential 12.70 55.1% Lf)0 PA-56 Low Density Residential 32.50 55.1% 17,01 PA-57 Medium Density Residential 4.53 59.3% 2.00 PA-62 Parks 20.71 5.0% 1.04 I PA-63 Medium Density Residential 39.50 59.3% 23.42 PA-64 Medium Density Residential 14.90 59.3% 8.84 PA-65 Medium Density Residential 24.30 59.3% 14.41 PA-67 Low Density Residential 32.70 55.1% 18.02 I PA-68 Low Density Residential 28.81 55.1% itt37 PA-69 Low Density Residential 2.70 55.1% 1.40 PA-76 Low Density Residential 8.34 55.1% 4.00 I Tract G Open Space 30.08 5.0% 0 Tract H Open Space 50.70 5.0% 2 54 Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 6.00 5.0% 0.30 2-Lane Collector 4.12 95.3% 0 02 4-Lane Urban Arterial 9.40 95.3% 8.05 Total Area (acres) Composite%Impervious C10= 0.00 I325.70 41.3% C1°°= 0.00 I Basin B-4 PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp PA-68 Low Density Residential 2.35 55.1% 1.2'+ I PA-69 Low Density Residential 25.84 55.1% ?2_ PA-72 Low Density Residential 33.31 55.1% PA-73 School 12.10 50.0% PA-74 Low Density Residential 22.50 55.1% ,I0 I PA-75 Parks 18.90 5.0% PA-76 Low Density Residential 60.99 55.1% PA-77 Parks 2.22 5.0% _ . PA-78 Low Density Residential 4.15 55.1% I PA-79 Low Density Residential 2.86 55.1% PA-80 Low Density Residential 28.87 55.1 Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 4.00 5.0% I 2-Lane Collector 7.45 95.3% .. 4-Lane Urban Arterial 0.50 95.3% Undeveloped 4.36 2.0% . ITotal Area(acres) Composite%Impervious C10= 0.00 230.40 49.8% C100= 0.00 I '. 3325-C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Composite BasiWage 3/7 4/24/2007 10:47 AM I IComposite Basins - Percent Impervious Calculations ' • Date : 04/24/07 Project Number: 3325 Project: Pioneer Calculations By: KNJ Basin B-5 I PA DESCRIPTION Area (acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp PA-77 Parks 8.54 5.0% O43 I PA-78 Low Density Residential 20.64 55.1% 1'i 3/ PA-79 Low Density Residential 25.71 55.1% 14.t 7 PA-80 Low Density Residential 11.45 55.1% 6.31 PA-83 Parks 6.40 5.0% 032 I PA-84 Low Density Residential 28.34 55.1% 15.6?_ PA-85 Low Density Residential 82.90 55.1% 45.68 PA-87 Low Density Residential 11.02 55.1% /i.0/ Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 4.00 5.0% 0.20 I Tract J Open Space 38.10 5.0% 1.91 2-Lane Collector 3.90 95.3% 3.71 ITotal Area(acres) Composite%Impervious C10= 0.00 241.00 43.9% Cioo= 0.00 IBasin B-6 PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp I • PA-79 Low Density Residential 2.07 55.1% 1.14 PA-80 Low Density Residential 14.71 55.1% " t PA-81 Low Density Residential 28.43 55.1% .._ ..., I PA-82 Low Density Residential 64.11 55.1% PA-84 Low Density Residential 17.79 55.1% PA-86 Parks 10.30 5.0% .,...._ PA-87 Low Density Residential 76.88 55.1% I PA-88 School 12.40 50.0% PA-89 Low Density Residential 17.76 55.1% PA-90 Sewer Plant 40.50 90.0% _. .- . Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 3.00 5.0% I Tract K Open Space 20.50 5.0% 2-Lane Urban Arterial 8.55 95.3% ITotal Area (acres) Composite%Impervious C10= 0.00 317.00 55.1% C100= 0.00 I I it I is 3325-C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Composite Basifrage 4/7 4/24/2007 10:47 AM I I IComposite Basins - Percent Impervious Calculations ii • Date : 04/24/07 Project Number: 3325 ' Project: Pioneer Calculations By: KNJ Basin C-1 I PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp Rural 2-Lane Arterial 13.80 95.3% '!:3.S4 ' PA-46 Water Tank 1.20 80.0% Undeveloped 803.90 2.0% :; 1)3 I Total Area(acres) Composite% Impervious C10= 0.00 818.90 3.7% C100= 0.00 ' Basin C-2 PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp I PA-19 Commercial 15.60 95.0% 14.82 PA-22 Medium Density Residential 47.20 59.3% 2�99 PA-21 Medium Density Residential 24.00 59.3% f4.23 PA-20 High Density Residential 11.40 60.0% I PA-24 Medium Density Residential 52.30 59.3% PA-25 School 12.00 50.0% PA-27 Low Density Residential 23.10 55.1% PA-28 Parks 36.70 5.0% L; • PA-29 Low Density Residential 24.80 55.1% PA-26 Medium Density Residential 3.40 59.3% PA-30 Medium Density Residential 1.10 59.3% .I ,. PA-43 Medium Density Residential 25.90 59.3% PA-44 Medium Density Residential 60.90 59.3% PA-41 Medium Density Residential 11.40 59.3% PA-42 Low Density Residential 3.30 55.1% .. Tract E Open Space 38.30 5.0% . -. Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 7.00 5.0% 2-Lane Urban Arterial 40.40 95.3% ...... ,. Outparcel 9.70 45.0% 1 Total Area(acres) Composite%Impervious C10= 0.00 448.50 52.8% Cm= 0.00 I I I 3325-C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Composite Basif4age 5/7 4/24/2007 10:47 AM 1 Composite Basins -Percent Impervious Calculations • Date : 04/24/07 Project Number: 3325 ' Project: Pioneer Calculations By: KNJ Basin C-3 IPA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp PA-40 Parks 47.30 5.0%I PA-28 Parks 14.30 5.0% PA-26 Medium Density Residential 9.00 59.3% PA-30 Medium Density Residential 19.50 59.3% PA-31 Low Density Residential 14.80 55.1%I PA-38 Low Density Residential 13.70 55.1% PA-42 Low Density Residential 28.80 55.1% PA-41 Medium Density Residential 45.10 59.3% PA-39 Medium Density Residential 18.20 59.3% I Tract D Open Space 8.20 5.0% Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 8.00 5.0% 2-Lane Collector 0.30 95.3% ..._.7. 4-Lane Urban Arterial 4.00 96.5% . .. Total Area(acres) Composite%Impervious C10= 0.00 ' 231.20 40.7% Cum= 0.00 Basin C-4 I • PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp PA-17 Medium Density Residential 20.90 59.3%I _ PA-11 Medium Density Residential 17.30 59.3% PA-13 Medium Density Residential 8.20 59.3% PA-14 School 75.10 50.0% _. _.. PA-15 Medium Density Residential 13.30 59.3%I _ PA-16 Medium Density Residential 30.30 59.3% PA-32 Medium Density Residential 42.00 59.3% PA-29 Low Density Residential 2.40 55.1% _. PA-30 Medium Density Residential 6.10 59.3% PA-31 Low Density Residential 9.30 55.1% PA-33 Medium Density Residential 23.10 59.3% PA-34 Parks 10.40 5.0% _. PA-35 School 12.00 50.0% I PA-36 Medium Density Residential 8.00 59.3% PA-37 Medium Density Residential 18.20 59.3% PA-38 Low Density Residential 15.40 55.1%I PA-39 Medium Density Residential 10.40 59.3% Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 3.00 5.0% Tract A Open Space 69.80 5.0% Tract B Open Space 3.90 5.0% I 2-Lane Urban Arterial 9.90 95.3% 4-Lane Urban Arterial 19.70 96.5% I Total Area(acres) Composite%Impervious C10= 0.00 428.70 48.7% Cm= 0.00 li • 3325-C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Composite BasiRkige 6/7 4/24/2007 10:47 AM I IComposite Basins - Percent Impervious Calculations • Date : 04/24/07 Project Number: 3325 ' Project: Pioneer Calculations By: KNJ Basin D-1 I PA DESCRIPTION Area (acres) % Impervious Area*%Imp PA-04 High Density Residential 20.50 60.0% 12.3:1 I PA-05 High Density Residential 44.90 60.0% " PA-06 High Density Residential 43.70 60.0% `22 PA-07 High Density Residential 40.50 60.0% .... Is,. PA—08 Medium Density Residential 37.20 59.3% I PA-15 Medium Density Residential 23.05 59.3% PA-17 Medium Density Residential 5.59 59.3% PA-18 High Density Residential 19.50 60.0% IPA-19 Commercial 18.44 95.0% PA-20 High Density Residential 16.90 60.0% PA-21 Medium Density Residential 3.11 59.3% PA-91 Parks 11.90 5.0% __I _. Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 6.00 5.0% ".311 4-Lane Urban Arterial 13.01 96.5% ;2.52' I Total Area(acres) Composite%Impervious Coo= 0.00 304.30 60.3% C,00= 0.00 ' • Basin D-2 PA DESCRIPTION Area(acres) %Impervious Area*%Imp I PA-10 Parks 11.90 5.0% PA-09 Medium Density Residential 32.20 59.3% PA-11 Medium Density Residential 12.90 59.3% PA-12 High Density Residential 27.40 60.0%I ... PA-13 Medium Density Residential 12.40 59.3% PA-15 Medium Density Residential 10.10 59.3% Tract M Sum of 1 Acre Open Spaces 3.00 5.0% .. ... Tract A Open Space 23.20 5.0% I 2-Lane Urban Arterial 7.90 95.3% 4-Lane Strategic 8.70 95.9% ' Total Area(acres) Composite%Impervious C,°= 0.00 149.70 49.6% Cioo= 0.00 I I 1 • 3325-C Values Lookup DEVELOPED.xls Composite BasiR.sage 7/7 4/24/2007 10:47 AM I U O ti ' n C0C0O m 0 ti N 0 n 0 F 0 t- 0 E 21- N4 0 C 0 1- 0 In 0 m O LT N 0 0 C 0 0 0 A0O+ < Z • m N r CO O O a LL ~ co s O s O N O O N Y OI ' 0 CO TI 0 I m 0..F M N CO CO N 0 CO O NOD 0 O m O n m N 0 N N umi N ' 0 6 W LL O O. N f 0 0O 0 I� N 0 r) 0 0 N I N Ul N t- E !- a ,�e a e ry 0 e o e e e o e a 0 e OI 0 O O I� N m 0 0 OI 0 Ill 0-1 . . . ' 6 r '- O �' O O O O N r � I - > N O O O N O O O N U) 0 0 r w V C LL O Oi m N 0 c0 0 cJ N n 10 V) co co 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO CO 0 CO_ 0 z o < < < < < < < < < < < < < < x 0 Z > co N N 0 O CO 0 0 N CO. m O N I a 0 V in m m_ N m m m m m m m m m N � < < < < < d < d d d d < d < S LL ^ 0 N N 0 < 0 0 0 N co 0 FN 0 N 0 0 m ' m` 0 1i m 0 0 h m a N m 10 J N N 0 Ni p N CO cp O C C F. N 0 0 - - 0 < 0 0 O) I F F 0 0 O N O)0 r N 0 0 x 0 6 0 < 0 < < 0 < < 0 a 0 N 0 I Z O _i , 0 CO. n n CO CO n CO m m CO r CO m m > a = o o 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w e e e w w LL < e cn e 4. 4. 0 N I 0 ° r r O co r r' < 0 0 < m N N 0 Z 0 O r o W N 0 0 N VI 0 0 0 1. N m m O N w u F r sr LL. 0 m m 0 m m m ro m 0 0 m m m 2 o_ w y < 0 < < < < < < < 0 < 0 < 0 F d I • 0 w 0 m m N m 0 m w m w N m CO N m 0 co Q. W o 0 LL 10 0 0 m 0 < m n N- N n N a 00 M 0 n ry < O 1'I 0 N < < CO < CO W N Ni N N N N 0 F < I . N- O 2 N M O o M 0 0 0 f- 0 N < R N N O N 00 0 N N m 1- N N 1- IL ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° Li_ O N 2 ' 2 o o 9 N 9 e P 0 x' m' o n o 0 o n, r o o n � 0 n o z m — o r r r 0 0 r 0 r r o5 0 r) I w O W ` F c.4 r n N N co0 r o o m mr m m E 0 LL" a a a a a a a a a a < m < < r o P I Z = LL 0 m r LO N CO CO CO 0 N r C')) M 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a Z R �,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i LL In O O O co O O O N O N N N m N 6 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 `r) 6 al 0 0 mco 0 — 0 0 0 0 0 0 nx a ' cc g �, In N 0 1p n n COn o COn Ino O N 00 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w r m In N co n < 0 0 IO N n r) n w 0 a C r 0 0 W < V °) 1° 0 Or 0) N N CO e N a 0 Or S Z N m r N O n o mH (7 v Y) O N r) v '- N N gi m p 2 -- ¢ Q ¢ O m m 0 m m 0 0 0 0 O CO • o 0 m V y m I it I IWATER QUALITY VOLUME CALCULATIONS • PIONEER •I 04/23/07 DEVELOPED BASINS Impery WQCV Volume Release BASIN ID: AREA (ac.) (Watershed (%) (Acre-Feet) Rate (cfs) inches) IA-1 211.7 46.5% 0.20 4.17 1.26 A-2 88.9 49.8% 0.21 1.83 0.55 ' A-3 169.3 52.2% 0.21 3.60 1.09 B-1 344.2 47.9% 0.20 6.90 2.09 B-2 104.6 42.1% 0.19 1.94 0.59 B-3 325.7 41.3% 0.18 5.97 1.81 B-4 230.4 49.8% 0.21 4.74 1.43 ' B-5 241.0 43.9% 0.19 4.58 1.39 B-6 317.0 55.1% 0.22 7.00 2.12 I C-2 448.5 52.8% 0.21 9.60 2.91 C-3 231.2 40.7% 0.18 4.20 1.27 C-4 428.7 48.7% 0.20 8.69 2.63 ' D-1 304.3 60.3% 0.24 7.22 2.18 D-2 149.7 49.6% 0.21 3.07 0.93 • I I I I I I I n Project : Pioneer HEC-HMS Basin Model : PROPOSED HEC-HMS Apr 24 11:28:34 MDT 2007 '- r-1 i P• '•1 . w_.-, . .f v i I ; � 1 , , �, ir } E I } ;liP` nd DF2 1 L p Florid a-1 ~ i.4p i Fond 0-1 - _b y , a`-1. r• . I ! i - 4 i -C h o +x Di ' F : `:, ; , I�drrd -1 I \ �and C-R ,,i-\ I I I I I I . ig I I100-YEAR PROPOSED MODEL 0 -IEC-HMS 3.0.1 [P:\3325\Drainage\Master\HEC-HMS\Pioneer_HEC_H MS\Pioneer_HEC_HMS.. 1 Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume Element (MI2) (CFS) (AC-FT) IA-i 0.3300 201.14 01Jan2000, 01:27 25.53 ;A-2 0.1400 99.95 01Jan2000, 01:21 11.60 A-3 0.2600 150.15 01Jan2000, 01:42 22.58 I !B-1 0.5400 292.64 01Jan2000, 01:39 43.04 B-2 0.1600 97.61 01Jan2000, 01:18 11.21 I B-3 0.5100 243.07 01Jan2000, 01:39 35.05 B-4 0.3600 206.21 01Jan2000, 01:39 29.83 !B-5 0.3800 195.84 01Jan2000, 01:36 27.76 U !B-6 0.5000 272.14 01Jan2000, 01:54 45.84 'C-2 0.7000 326.77 01Jan2000, 02:06 61.50 I C-3 0.3600 186.51 01Jan2000, 01:30 24.38 C-4 0.6700 272.43 01Jan2000, 02:12 54.29 D-2 0.2300 179.03 01Jan2000, 01:12 18.98 ID1 0.4800 488.77 01Jan2000, 01:09 48.16 Pond A-1 0.3300 5.68 _ 01Jan2000, 04:03 4.62 Pond A-2 0.1400 2.07 01Jan2000, 03:51 -x..73. 1 • Pond A-3 0.2600 2.99 01 Jan2000, 05:03 -248- Pond B-1 _ 0.5400 5.80 01Jan2000, 04:54 4.82- Pond B-2 0.1600 3.69 01Jan2000, 03:33 2.01• Pond B-3 0.5100 4.80 01Jan2000, 04:51 4.80• 56-6-.. p Pond B-4 _ 0.3600 4.70 01Jan2000, 04:45 3.87- pu r' u I ;Pond B-5 0.3800 4.10 01Jan2000, 04:42 3.40 Pc 5R Pond B-6 0.5000 4.10 01Jan2000, 05:54 3.44- OFTt.uTc I •Pond C-2 _ 0.7000 _ 5.90 01 Jan2000, 06:24 4.85 Vd L u M e Pond C-3 0.3600 8.28 01Jan2000, 03:54 6.43. Pond C-4 0.6700 _ 3.90 01 Jan2000, 07:03 3 IPond D 1 0.4800 11.19 01Jan2000, 03:18 9.26 Pond D-2 0.2300 3.09 01 Jan2000, 03:39 2.62 _/ 1 Project : Pioneer HEC-HMSSimulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond A-1 ' • Start of Run : 01 Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm ' Volume Units : AC-FT —Computed Results— Peak Inflow : 201.14 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:27 t Peak Outflow : 5.68 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01 Jan2000, 04:03 Total Inflow : 25.53 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 24.19 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 4.62 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) • 1 1 1 • 1 Project : Pioneer HEC-HMS Simulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond A-2 • • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm Volume Units : AC-FT —Computed Results Peak Inflow : 99.95 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:21 ' Peak Outflow : 2.07 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 03:51 Total Inflow : 11.60 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 11.13 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 1.73 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) 1 • 1 1 1 1 • Project : Pioneer HEC-HMSSimulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond A-3 ' • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm Volume Units : AC-FT ' —Computed Results Peak Inflow : 150.15 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:42 Peak Outflow : 2.99 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 05:03 Total Inflow : 22.58 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 21.64 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 2.48 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) 1 t • Project : Pioneer HEC-HMSSimulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond B-1 ' • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01 Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm ' Volume Units : AC-FT —Computed Results Peak Inflow : 292.64 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:39 ' Peak Outflow : 5.80 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 04:54 Total Inflow : 43.04 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 41.26 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 4.82 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) I• • 1 1 1 I 1 1 • 1 Project : Pioneer HEC-HMS Simulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond B-2 ' • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm ' Volume Units : AC-FT —Computed Results Peak Inflow : 97.61 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:18 Peak Outflow : 3.69 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 03:33 Total Inflow : 11.21 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 10.48 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 2.91 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) 1 1 • 1 Project : Pioneer HEC-HMSSimulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond B-3 1 • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm 1 Volume Units : AC-FT 1 —Computed Results Peak Inflow : 243.07 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:39 1 Peak Outflow : 4.80 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 04:51 Total Inflow : 35.05 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 33.60 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 4.00 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) 1 1 1 Is 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 i • 1 Project : Pioneer HEC-HMSSimulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond B-4 ' • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm Volume Units : AC-FT ' -Computed Results Peak Inflow : 206.21 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:39 ' Peak Outflow : 4.70 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 04:45 Total Inflow : 29.83 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 28.46 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 3.87 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) 1 1 I • 1 • 1 1 Project : Pioneer HEC-HMSSimulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond B-5 ' • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm ' Volume Units : AC-FT ' �-Computed Results Peak Inflow : 195.84 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:36 Peak Outflow : 4.10 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 04:42 Total Inflow : 27.76 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 26.57 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 3.40 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) 1 1 • 1 t• I Project : Pioneer HEC-HMSSimulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond B-6 ' Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm ' Volume Units : AC-FT —Computed Results Peak Inflow : 272.14 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01 Jan2000, 01:54 ' Peak Outflow : 4.10 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 05:54 Total Inflow : 45.84 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 44.24 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 3.44 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) 1 • 1 • Project : Pioneer HEC-HMSSimulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond C-2 ' . Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm Volume Units : AC-FT -Computed Results Peak Inflow : 326.77 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 02:06 ' Peak Outflow : 5.90 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 06:24 Total Inflow : 61.50 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 58.97 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 4.85 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) 1 1 • • Project : Pioneer HEC-HMS Simulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond C-3 1 • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm Volume Units : AC-FT Computed Results Peak Inflow : 186.51 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:30 ' Peak Outflow : 8.28 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 03:54 Total Inflow : 24.38 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 22.55 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 6.43 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) 1 1 I . it • Project : Pioneer HEC-HMS Simulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond C-4 ' • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm ' Volume Units : AC-FT -Computed Results Peak Inflow : 272.43 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 02:12 ' Peak Outflow : 3.90 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 07:03 Total Inflow : 54.29 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 52.36 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 3.27 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) • 1 • 1 t ' Project : Pioneer HEC-HMSSimulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond D-1 ' • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm Volume Units : AC-FT ' - Computed Results— Peak Inflow : 488.77 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:09 ' Peak Outflow : 11.19 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 03:18 Total Inflow : 48.16 (AC-FT) Peak Storage : 46.07 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 9.26 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) • • ▪ • Project : Pioneer HEC-HMSSimulation Run : 100-YEAR PROP Reservoir: Pond D-2 • Start of Run : 01Jan2000, 00:00 Basin Model : PROPOSED End of Run : 01Jan2000, 12:00 Meteorologic Model : 100-Year Storm Compute Time : 24Apr2007, 11:26:04 Control Specifications : 2-hr Storm ' Volume Units : AC-FT —Computed Results Peak Inflow : 179.03 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : 01Jan2000, 01:12 ' Peak Outflow : 3.09 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : 01Jan2000, 03:39 Total Inflow : 18.98 (AC FT) Peak Storage : 18.32 (AC-FT) Total Outflow : 2.62 (AC-FT) Peak Elevation : (FT) • • 1 ▪ • Cross Section for Channel A-A • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth t Section Data [. Roughness Coefficient. 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00350 ft/ft Normal Depth: 0.44 ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) ' Bottom Width: 4.00 ft Discharge: 3.80 ft'/s • 1 0.44 ft ' I 4.00 ft I, V_ 2 t H: 9 1 I llWorksheet for Channel A-A ' • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: ' Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Input Data Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00350 tuft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) IRight Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 4.00 ft IDischarge: 3.80 ft'/s Results Normal Depth: 0.44 ft IFlow Area: 2.75 ft2 Wetted Perimeter: 8.52 ft Top Width: 8.43 I ft Critical Depth: 0.27 ft Critical Slope: 0.02211 ft/ft I Velocity: 1.38 Ns • Velocity Head: 0.03 ft Specific Energy: 0.47 ft I Froude Number: 0.43 Flow Type: Subcritical GVF ' :Input Data. Downstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft Number Of Steps: 0 I GVF'.Output Data Upstream Depth 0.00 ft I Profile Description: Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: Infinity ' Ns Upstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s Normal Depth: 0.44 ft Critical Depth: 0.27 I ft Channel Slope: 0.00350 ft/ft I 1 Cross Section for Channel B-B • Project.Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Section Data Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope. 0.00270 ft/ft 1 Normal Depth: 1.23 ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) 1 Bottom Width: 4.00 ft Discharge: 26.70 ft'/s i 1 I . 1 1,23ft f-4.00n 1 1 V 2 L. 1 H4 1 1 . 1 I IWorksheet for Channel B-B •1 • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ISolve For: Normal Depth Input Data IRoughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00270 ft/ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) IRight Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(I-1:V) Bottom Width: 4.00 ft I Discharge: 26.70 ft3/s Results Normal Depth: 1.23 ft IFlow Area: 12.51 ft2 Wetted Perimeter: 16.56 ft Top Wdth: 16.32 ft ICritical Depth: 0.80 ft Critical Slope: 0.01644 ft/ft Velocity: 2.13 fUs I • Velocity Head: 0.07 ft Specific Energy: 1.30 ft Froude Number: 0.43 I Flow Type: Subcritical GVF Input Data IDownstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft I Number Of Steps: 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft I Profile Description: Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: Infinity fUs I Upstream Velocity: Infinity fUs Normal Depth: 1.23 ft I Critical Depth: 0.80 ft Channel Slope: 0.00270 ft/ft I I Cross Section for Channel C-C ' • Project Description i. Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Section Data '. Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00270 ft/ft Normal Depth: 2.44 ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 fUft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 10.00 ft Discharge: 187.00 ft3/s 1 I . 1 2aan 10.00 ft ' V. 2 r\ H1 • I ' Worksheet for Channel C-C '• • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ISolve For: Normal Depth Input Data I Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00270 ft/ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) IRight Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 10.00 ft IDischarge: 187.00 ft''s Results Normal Depth: 2.44 ft IFlow Area: 54.19 ft2 Wetted Perimeter: 34.89 ft Top Width: 34.41 ft ICritical Depth: 1.67 ft Critical Slope: 0.01273 ft/ft Velocity: 3.45 ft/s I5 Velocity Head: 0.19 ft Specific Energy: 2.63 ft I Froude Number: 0.48 Flow Type: Subcritical GVF Input Data IDownstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft I Number Of Steps: 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft I Profile Description: Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: Infinity ft's ' Upstream Velocity: Infinity ft's Normal Depth: 2.44 ft I Critical Depth: 1.67 ft Channel Slope: 0.00270 ft/ft I I. II Cross Section for Channel D-D • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Section Data ' Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00270 ft/ft Normal Depth: 2.33 ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 10.00 ft Discharge: 170.00 ft'/s • 57 2,33.3ft 10.00 ft V 2 6� H1 • I IWorksheet for Channel D-D Project f)escriptiofi Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ' Solve For: Normal Depth Input Data I Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00270 ft/ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) IRight Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 10.00 ft I Discharge: 170.00 ft'/s Results Normal Depth: 2.33 ft Flow Area: 50.52 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 33.78 ft Top Wdth: 33.32 ft ICritical Depth: 1.59 ft Critical Slope: 0.01290 ft/ft Velocity: 3.37 ft/s I • Velocity Head: 0.18 ft Specific Energy: 2.51 ft I Froude Number: 0.48 Flow Type: Subcritical GVF Input Data IDownstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft Number Of Steps: 0 I GVEOutput Data. Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft I Profile Description: Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s IUpstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s Normal Depth: 2.33 ft Critical Depth: 1.59 ft IChannel Slope: 0.00270 ft/ft Ill I 1 1 Cross Section for Channel E-E ' • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Section Data 1 Roughness Coefficient: 0.035 Channel Slope: 0.00250 ft/ft Normal Depth: 2.42 ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) 1 Bottom Wdth: 30.00 ft Discharge: 327.00 ft'/s 1 1 I • i T i 242it 30€/O n I L i 1 V: 2 N H': 1 1 • 1 I IWorksheet for Channel E-E I • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ISolve For: Normal Depth InputData '.. IRoughness Coefficient: 0.035 Channel Slope: 0.00250 ft/ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 30.00 ft I Discharge: 327.00 ft'/s Results Normal Depth: 2.42 ft IFlow Area: 101.77 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 54.66 ft Top Width: 54.18 ft I Critical Depth: 1.42 ft Critical Slope: 0.01697 ft/ft ' Velocity: 3.21 ft/s • Velocity Head: 0.16 ft Specific Energy: 2.58 ft I Froude Number: 0.41 Flow Type: Subcritical GVF Input Data I Downstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft I Number Of Steps: 0 GyP Output Data Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft I Profile Description: Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s IUpstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s Normal Depth: 2.42 ft I Critical Depth: 1.42 ft Channel Slope: 0.00250 ft/ft 1 • I ICross Section for Channel F-F I • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Section beta I Roughness Coefficient. 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft Normal Depth: 1.85 ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:U) Bottom Width: 10.00 ft I Discharge: 110.70 ft3/s I I ' 1.85 ft F loft I v: 2 N, H 1 1 I II I IWorksheet for Channel F-F ' • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Input,Data 6 IRoughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 10.00 ft I Discharge: 110.70 ft3/s Results Normal Depth: 1.85 ft IFlow Area: 35.51 ft2 Wetted Perimeter: 28.83 ft Top Width: 28.46 ft ' Critical Depth: 1.26 ft Critical Slope: 0.01375 ft/ft Velocity: 3.12 ft/s I • Velocity Head: 0.15 ft Specific Energy: 2.00 ft I Froude Number: 0.49 Flow Type: Subcritical GVF.Input Data IDownstream Depth 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft I Number Of Steps: 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft IProfile Description: Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s IUpstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s Normal Depth: 1.85 ft I Critical Depth: 1.26 ft Channel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft I I I ICross Section for Channel G-G 1 • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ISolve For: Normal Depth Section Data . 1 Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0 00300 ft/ft Normal Depth: 1.11 ft 1 Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) I Bottom Width: 4.00 ft Discharge: 22.40 ft'/s I I I . I I 1.11 ft II 4.00 ft I I V2N I H1 I 1 0 I I IWorksheet for Channel G-G ' • Project Description ',. Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ISolve For: Normal Depth Input Data I Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0 00300 fUft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) IRight Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 4.00 ft I Discharge: 22.40 ft/s Results Normal Depth: 1.11 ft IFlow Area: 10.57 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 15.30 ft Top Width: 15.08 ft ICritical Depth: 0.73 ft Critical Slope: 0.01686 ft/ft Velocity: 2.12 ft/s I 5 Velocity Head: 0.07 ft Specific Energy: 1.18 ft I Froude Number: 0.45 Flow Type: Subcritical GVF Input Data I Downstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft Number Of Steps: 0 IGVF Output Data Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft I Profile Description: Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s IUpstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s Normal Depth: 1.11 ft Critical Depth: 0.73 ft IChannel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft I I Cross Section for Channel H-H • Project Description. Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel ' Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Section bate ' Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope 0.00270 ft/ft ' Normal Depth: 2.12 ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) ' Bottom Width: 10.00 ft Discharge: 140.00 ft'/s • ' 2,42 fl ' I 10.09 ft ' Vr. 2 L H: 1 • I IWorksheet for Channel H-H • • Project Description S Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ' Solve For: Normal Depth Input Data I Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00270 ft/ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 10.00 ft I Discharge: 140.00 ft/s Results. Normal Depth: 2.12 ft I Flow Area: 43.81 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 31.66 ft Top Width: 31.24 ft ICritical Depth: 1.43 ft Critical Slope: 0.01327 ft/ft Velocity: 3.20 ft/s I • Velocity Head: 0.16 ft Specific Energy: 2.28 ft I Froude Number 0.48 Flow Type: Subcritical GVF Input Data IDownstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft Number Of Steps: 0 II GVF Output Data Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft I Profile Description: Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s I Upstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s Normal Depth: 2.12 ft Critical Depth: 1.43 ft ' Channel Slope: 0.00270 ft/ft I I . i 1 Cross Section for Channel I-I 1 • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel 1 Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Section Data ' Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft Normal Depth: 0.53 ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) ' Bottom Width: 4.00 ft Discharge: 5.00 ft'/s 1 1 I I . i 4 0 53 ft 1 ! 4.00ft 1 1 V2 E; H. 1 1 1 I IWorksheet for Channel I-I • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ISolve For: Normal Depth Input.Data ' Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00300 fUft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 fUft(H:V) Bottom Width: 4.00 ft I Discharge: 5.00 ft/s Results . Normal Depth: 0.53 ft I Flow Area: 3.54 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 9.42 ft Top Width: 9.32 ft ICritical Depth: 0.32 ft Critical Slope: 0.02114 ft/ft Velocity: 1.41 fUs II • Velocity Head: 0.03 ft Specific Energy: 0.56 ft I Froude Number: 0,40 Flow Type: Subcritical GVF Input Data ' Downstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft Number Of Steps: 0 IGVFVF;Output Data Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft I Profile Description: Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s IUpstream Velocity: Infinity fUs Normal Depth: 0.53 ft I Critical Depth: 0.32 ft Channel Slope: 0.00300 fUft I 0 Cross Section for Channel J-J • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Section flats Roughness Coefficient: 0.035 Channel Slope: 0.00250 ft/ft ' Normal Depth: 2.37 ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) ' Bottom Width: 25.00 ft Discharge: 272.00 ft'/s 1 1 1 2.37'ft 1 25.00 ft I ' V2 \ H: t I I • I I llWorksheet for Channel J-J ' • Project Description '... Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ISolve For: Normal Depth Input Data I Roughness Coefficient: 0.035 Channel Slope: 0.00250 ft/ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) I Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 25.00 ft IDischarge: 272.00 ft3/s Results Normal Depth: 2.37 ft IFlow Area: 87.35 ft2 Wetted Perimeter: 49.17 ft Top Width: 48.70 ft ICritical Depth: 1.40 ft Critical Slope: 0.01721 fUft Velocity: 3.11 ft/s I . Velocity Head: 0.15 ft Specific Energy: 2.52 ft I Froude Number: 0.41 Flow Type: Subcritical I GVP',Input Data Downstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft I Number Of Steps: 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft I Profile Description: Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s IUpstream Velocity: Infinity ft/s Normal Depth: 2.37 ft I Critical Depth: 1.40 ft Channel Slope: 0.00250 ft/ft • I I ICross Section for Channel K-K ' • Project Description. Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ISolve For: Normal Depth Section Data I Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft Normal Depth: 1.83 ft ILeft Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) I Bottom Wdth: 20.00 ft Discharge: 179.00 ft'/s I I I . I I 1 S3ift 1 I 20.00 ft I I I I V2N I H1 I Ill 0 I IWorksheet for Channel K-K Ill'• Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ISolve For: Normal Depth I InpatData Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 fUft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Wdth: 20.00 ft IDischarge: 179.00 ft'/s Normal Depth: 1.83 ft I Flow Area: 53.27 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 38.64 ft Top Width: 38.28 ft ICritical Depth: 1.22 ft Critical Slope: 0.01330 ft/ft ' Velocity: 3.36 ft/s • Velocity Head: 0.18 ft Specific Energy: 2.00 ft I Froude Number: 0.50 Flow Type: Subcritical GYP Input Data IDownstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft Number Of Steps: 0 I GVF Output Data Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft I Profile Description: N/A Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: 0.00 ft/s IUpstream Velocity: 0.00 ft/s Normal Depth: 1.83 ft Critical Depth: 1.22 ft I Channel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft I II• • 1 I Cross Section for Channel L-L I • Project Description Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel ' Friction Method: Manning Formula Solve For: Normal Depth Seet(hn Data Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft Normal Depth: 1.55 ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Right Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H V) ' Bottom Width: 40.00 ft Discharge: 243.00 ft'/s i I I � I I 55tt 40.00 ft I I V. 2 N H; 1 1 I I. I I 1 Worksheet for Channel L-L I • Project Deeddption Flow Element: Trapezoidal Channel Friction Method: Manning Formula ' Solve For: Normal Depth Input Data '. I Roughness Coefficient: 0.030 Channel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft Left Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) IRight Side Slope: 5.00 ft/ft(H:V) Bottom Width: 40.00 ft I Discharge: 243.00 ft'/s Results Normal Depth: 1.55 ft 1 Flow Area: 74.13 ft' Wetted Perimeter: 55.83 ft Top Width: 55.52 ft ICritical Depth: 1.00 ft Critical Slope: 0.01365 ft/ft Velocity: 3.28 ft/s I • Velocity Head: 0.17 ft Specific Energy: 1.72 ft I Froude Number: 0.50 Flow Type: Subcritical GVP Input Oata IDownstream Depth: 0.00 ft Length: 0.00 ft I Number Of Steps: 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Depth: 0.00 ft I Profile Description: N/A Headloss: 0.00 ft Downstream Velocity: 0.00 ft/s IUpstream Velocity: 0.00 ft/s Normal Depth: 1.55 ft I Critical Depth: 1.00 ft Channel Slope: 0.00300 ft/ft I g• • I Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report 1 Box Elder Creek - CR22 Existing • Analysis Component Storm Event Design Discharge 11,672.00 cfs Peak Discharge Method: User-Specified Design Discharge 11,672.00 cfs Check Discharge 0.00 cfs Tailwater properties: Irregular Channel 1 Tailwater conditions for Design Storm. Discharge 11,672.00 cfs Actual Depth 0.00 ft Velocity 0.00 ft/s 1 Name Description Discharge HW Elev. Velocity ' Culvert-1 1-178.6 x 122.3 inch Artli,672.00 cfs 5,114.32 ft 97.63 ft/s Weir Not Considered N/A N/A N/A • I I I •Title: Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\_..\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll&Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.0003] 11/29/06 09:26 17 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 I Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report IBox Elder Creek - CR22 Existing • Component:Culvert-1 Culvert Summary Computed Headwater Elew 5,114.32 ft Discharge 11,672.00 cfs I Inlet Control HW Elev. 5,114.32 ft Tailwater Elevation 0.00 ft Outlet Control HW Elev. 5,090.05 ft Control Type Inlet Control Headwater Depth/Height 25.94 ' Grades Upstream Invert 4,850.00 ft Downstream Invert 4,849.76 ft 1 Length 44.70 ft Constructed Slope 0.005369 ft/ft Hydraulic Profile I Profile CompositeM2PressureProfile Depth,Downstream 10.19 ft Slope Type Mild Normal Depth N/A ft Flow Regime Subcritical Critical Depth 10.19 ft ' Velocity Downstream 97.63 fUs Critical Slope 1.154529 ft/ft I Section Section Shape Arch Mannings Coefficient 0.034 Section ME9eelaitructural plate 31 In CR Span 14.88 ft Section Size 178.6 x 122.3 inch Rise 10.19 ft • Number Sections 1 Outlet Control Properties I Outlet Control HW Elev. 5,090.05 ft Upstream Velocity Head 148.18 ft Ke 0.20 Entrance Loss 29.64 ft ' Inlet Control Properties Inlet Control HW Elev. 5,114.32 ft Flow Control N/A I 3hletcTypkt structural plate, 33.7 bevels Area Full 119.5 ft' K 0.00300 HDS 5 Chart 36 M 2.00000 HDS 5 Scale 3 C 0.02690 Equation Form 1 Y 0.77000 I I I I I. Title: Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll 8 Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.0003] 1 11/29/06 09:26:17 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 Culvert Analysis Report ICulvert-1 • Culvert Summary IComputed Headwater Elew 5,114.32 ft Discharge 11,672.00 cfs Inlet Control HW Elev. 5,114.32 ft Tailwater Elevation 0.00 ft Outlet Control HW Elev. 5,090.05 ft Control Type Inlet Control ' Headwater Depth/Height 25.94 Grades I Upstream Invert 4,850.00 ft Downstream Invert 4,849.76 ft Length 44.70 ft Constructed Slope 0.005369 fUft Hydraulic Profile Profile CompositeM2PressureProfile Depth, Downstream 10.19 ft I Slope Type Mild Normal Depth N/A ft Flow Regime Subcritical Critical Depth 10.19 ft Velocity Downstream 97.63 ft/s Critical Slope 1.154529 fUft Section Section Shape Arch Mannings Coefficient 0.034 I Section Mittructural plate 31 In CR Span 14.88 ft Section Size 178.6 x 122.3 inch Rise 10.19 ft Number Sections 1 ' • Outlet Control Properties Outlet Control HW Elev. 5,090.05 ft Upstream Velocity Head 148.18 ft IKe 0.20 Entrance Loss 29.64 ft I Inlet Control Properties Inlet Control HW Elev. 5,114.32 ft Flow Control N/A 3AtetcTttR structural plate,33.7°bevels Area Full 119.5 ft' K 0.00300 HDS 5 Chart 36 I M 2.00000 HDS 5 Scale 3 C 0.02690 Equation Form 1 Y 0.77000 I I I I •I . Title:Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll&Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.0003] 1 11/29/06 09:26:28 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report Box Elder Creek - CR22 Proposed • Peak Discharge Method:User-Specified Design Discharge 11,695.00 cfs Check Discharge 0.00 cfs Grades Model: Inverts Invert Upstream 4,850.00 ft Invert Downstream 4,849.76 ft Length 130.00 ft Slope 0.001846 fUft Drop 0.24 ft Headwater Model:Allowable HW/Height Headwater Depth/Height 1.50 Tailwater properties: Irregular Channel Tailwater conditions for Design Storm. Discharge 11,695.00 cfs Actual Depth 0.00 ft Velocity 0.00 ft/s Name Description Discharge HW Elev. Velocity x Trial-1 6-12 x 12 ft Box 11,695.00 cfs 4,865.46 ft Trial-2 14-12 x 7 ft Box 11,695.00 cfs 4,859.61 ft • • 1 I • •Title:Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll&Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.0003] 1 11/29/06 09:26:50 AM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1.203-755-1666 Page 1 of 3 I Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report IBox Elder Creek - CR22 Proposed • Design:Trial-2 ISolve For: Headwater Elevation Culvert Summary I Allowable HW Elevation 4,860.50 ft Storm Event Design Computed Headwater EIew 4,859.61 ft Discharge 11,695.00 cfs Headwater Depth/Height 1.37 Tailwater Elevation 0.00 ft I Inlet Control HW Elev. 4,859.61 ft Control Type Inlet Control Outlet Control HW Elev. 4,859.56 ft I Grades Upstream Invert 4,850.00 ft Downstream Invert 4,849.76 ft Length 130.00 ft Constructed Slope 0.001846 ft/ft ' Hydraulic Profile I Profile M2 Depth, Downstream 5.32 ft Slope Type Mild Normal Depth N/A ft Flow Regime Subcritical Critical Depth 5.32 ft Velocity Downstream 13.08 ft/s Critical Slope 0.003289 ft/ft I Section I • Section Shape Box Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Section Material Concrete Span 12.00 ft Section Size 12 x 7 ft Rise 7.00 ft INumber Sections 14 Outlet Control Properties I Outlet Control HW Elev. 4,859.56 ft Upstream Velocity Head 2.10 ft Ke 0.70 Entrance Loss 1.47 ft IInlet Control Properties Inlet Control HW Elev. 4,859.61 ft Flow Control N/A Inlet Type 0°wingwall flares Area Full 1,176.0 ft2 I K 0.06100 HDS 5 Chart 8 M 0.75000 HDS 5 Scale 3 C 0.04230 Equation Form 1 Y 0.82000 I I I. Title: Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll&Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.0003] ' 11/29/06 09:26:50 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 3 of 3 Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report 1 Box Elder Creek - CR49 Existing • Analysis Component Storm Event Design Discharge 12,089.00 cfs Peak Discharge Method: User-Specified Design Discharge 12,089.00 cfs Check Discharge 0.00 cfs Tailwater properties: Irregular Channel 1 Tailwater conditions for Design Storm. Discharge 12,089.00 cfs Actual Depth 0.00 ft Velocity 0.00 fUs Name Description Discharge HW Elev. Velocity ' Culvert-1 1-195.4 x 130.2 inch Artg,089.00 cfs 214.17 ft 87.47 ft/s Weir Not Considered N/A N/A N/A • 1 1 1• Title: Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll&Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.0003] 11/29/06 09:27:27 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report IBox Elder Creek - CR49 Existing • Component:Culvert-1 ' Culvert Summary Computed Headwater Elew 214.17 ft Discharge 12,089.00 cfs I Inlet Control HW Elev. 214.17 ft Tailwater Elevation 0.00 ft Outlet Control HW Elev. 196.54 ft Control Type Inlet Control Headwater Depth/Height 19.72 ' Grades Upstream Invert 0.25 ft Downstream Invert 0.00 ft Length 50.00 ft Constructed Slope 0.000000 ft/ft Hydraulic Profile I Profile CompositeH2PressureProfile Depth, Downstream 10.84 ft Slope Type Horizontal Normal Depth N/A ft Flow Regime Subcritical Critical Depth 10.84 ft Velocity Downstream 87.47 fUs Critical Slope 0.842310 ft/ft I Section Section Shape Arch Mannings Coefficient 0.034 Section Miileeialtructural plate 31 In CR Span 16.28 ft Section Size 195.4 x 130.2 inch Rise 10.85 ft • Number Sections 1 Outlet Control Properties I Outlet Control HW Elev. 196.54 ft Upstream Velocity Head 118.76 ft Ke 0.20 Entrance Loss 23.75 ft ' Inlet Control Properties Inlet Control HW Elev. 214.17 ft Flow Control N/A I Milt-Fr/pa structural plate, 33.7°bevels Area Full 138.3 W K 0.00300 HDS 5 Chart 36 M 2.00000 HDS 5 Scale 3 C 0.02690 Equation Form 1 ' Y 0.77000 I I li'•Title: Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer: Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis,cvm Carroll 8 Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.0003] ' 11/29/06 09:27:27 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report Box Elder Creek - CR49 Proposed • Peak Discharge Method: User-Specified Design Discharge 11,810.00 cfs Check Discharge 0O0 cfs Grades Model: Inverts Invert Upstream 0.25 ft Invert Downstream 0.00 ft Length 230.00 ft Slope 0.001087 ft/ft Drop 0.25 ft Headwater Model:Allowable HW/Height Headwater Depth/Height 1.00 1 Tailwater properties:Irregular Channel Tailwater conditions for Design Storm. 1 Discharge 11,810.00 cfs Actual Depth 0.00 ft Velocity 0.00 ft/s Name Description Discharge HW Elev. Velocity x Trial-1 10-12 x 9 ft Box 11,810.00 cfs 12.25 ft Trial-2 6-12 x 12 ft Box 11,810.00 cfs 17.88 ft Trial-3 16-12 x9 ft Box 11,810.00 cfs 9.02 ft I • I 1 1 1 1 i 1 I•Title:Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll&Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.0003[ 11/29/06 01:08:01 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 4 ' Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report ' Box Elder Creek - CR49 Proposed • Design:Trial-3 ' Solve For:Headwater Elevation Culvert Summary I Allowable HW Elevation 9.25 ft Storm Event Design Computed Headwater Elev: 9.02 ft Discharge 11,810.00 cfs Headwater Depth/Height 0.97 Tailwater Elevation 0.00 ft I Inlet Control HW Elev. 8.81 ft Control Type Outlet Control Outlet Control HW Elev. 9.02 ft I Grades Upstream Invert 0.25 ft Downstream Invert 0.00 ft Length 230.00 ft Constructed Slope 0.001087 ft/ft ' Hydraulic Profile I Profile M2 Depth,Downstream 4.90 ft Slope Type Mild Normal Depth 7.36 ft Flow Regime Subcritical Critical Depth 4.90 ft Velocity Downstream 12.56 ft/s Critical Slope 0.003214 ft/ft I Section I • Section Shape Box Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Section Material Concrete Span 12.00 ft Section Size 12 x 9 ft Rise 9.00 ft Number Sections 16 I Outlet Control Properties Outlet Control HW Elev. 9.02 ft Upstream Velocity Head 1.65 ft IKe 0.70 Entrance Loss 1.16 ft ' Inlet Control Properties Inlet Control HW Elev. 8.61 ft Flow Control Unsubmerged Inlet Type 0°wingwall flares Area Full 1,728.0 ft2 I K 0.06100 HDS 5 Chart 8 M 0.75000 HDS 5 Scale 3 C 0.04230 Equation Form 1 Y 0.82000 I I ' • Title:Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll A.Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.00031 ' 11/29/06 01:08:01 PM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 4 of 4 Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report Unnamed Creek - Northern Crossing Proposed • Peak Discharge Method: User-Specified Design Discharge 3,768.00 cfs Check Discharge 4,826.00 cfs Grades Model: Inverts Invert Upstream 0.40 ft Invert Downstream 0.00 ft Length 150.00 ft Slope 0.002667 ft/ft Drop 0.40 ft Headwater Model:Allowable HW/Height Headwater Depth/Height 1.50 • Tailwater properties: Irregular Channel Tailwater conditions for Design Storm. Discharge 3,768.00 cfs Actual Depth 0.00 ft Velocity 0.00 ft/s Tailwater conditions for Check Storm. Discharge 4,826.00 cfs Actual Depth 0.00 ft Velocity 0.00 ft/s I • Name Description Discharge HW Elev. Velocity x Trial-1 3-12 x 9 ft Box 3,768.00 cfs 13.30 ft Trial-2 5-12 x 7 ft Box 3,768.00 cfs 9.42 ft 1 •Title: Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll&Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.00031 11/29/06 09:28:33 AM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 3 Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report IUnnamed Creek - Northern Crossing Proposed • Design:Trial-2 ' Solve For:Headwater Elevation Culvert Summary I Allowable HW Elevation 10.90 ft Storm Event Design Computed Headwater Elev 9.42 ft Discharge 3,768.00 cfs Headwater Depth/Height 1.29 Tailwater Elevation 0.00 ft I Inlet Control HW Elev. 8.91 ft Control Type Outlet Control Outlet Control HW Elev. 9.42 ft I Grades Upstream Invert 0.40 ft Downstream Invert 0.00 ft Length 150.00 ft Constructed Slope 0.002667 ft/ft ' Hydraulic Profile I Profile M2 Depth, Downstream 4.97 ft Slope Type Mild Normal Depth 5.33 ft Flow Regime Subcritical Critical Depth 4.97 ft Velocity Downstream 12.64 ft/s Critical Slope 0.003226 ft/ft I Section I • Section Shape Box Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Section Material Concrete Span 12.00 ft Section Size 12 x 7 ft Rise 7.00 ft INumber Sections 5 Outlet Control Properties Outlet Control HW Elev. 9.42 ft Upstream Velocity Head 2.20 ft IKe 0.70 Entrance Loss 1.54 ft ' Inlet Control Properties Inlet Control HW Elev. 8.91 ft Flow Control N/A Inlet Type 0°wingwall flares Area Full 420.0 ft2 I K 0.06100 HDS 5 Chart 8 M 0.75000 HDS 5 Scale 3 C 0.04230 Equation Form 1 ' Y 0.82000 I I 'Eli Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll&Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0[3.0003] ' 11/29/06 09:28:33 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 3 of 3 Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report ' Unnamed Creek - Southern Crossing Proposed • Peak Discharge Method:User-Specified ' Design Discharge 3,768.00 cfs Check Discharge 4,826.00 cfs Grades Model: Inverts Invert Upstream 0.25 ft Invert Downstream 0.00 ft Length 110.00 ft Slope 0.002273 ft/ft Drop 0.25 ft Headwater Model:Allowable HW/Height Headwater Depth/Height 1.50 Tailwater properties: Irregular Channel Tailwater conditions for Design Storm. Discharge 3,768.00 cfs Actual Depth 0.00 ft Velocity 0.00 ft's Tailwater conditions for Check Storm. Discharge 4,826.00 cfs Actual Depth 0.00 ft Velocity 0.00 ft/s I • Name Description Discharge HW Elev. Velocity x Trial-1 3-12 x 9 ft Box 3,768.00 cfs 13.15 ft Trial-2 5-12 x 7 ft Box 3,768.00 cfs 9.22 ft 1 •Title:Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer:Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll&Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster v3.0 p.0003) 11/29/06 09:36:09 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 3 Culvert Designer/Analyzer Report IUnnamed Creek - Southern Crossing Proposed • Design:Trial-2 ' Solve For: Headwater Elevation Culvert Summary I Allowable HW Elevation 10.75 ft Storm Event Design Computed Headwater Elev 9.22 ft Discharge 3,768.00 cfs Headwater Depth/Height 1.28 Tailwater Elevation 0.00 ft I Inlet Control HW Elev. 8.76 ft Control Type Outlet Control Outlet Control HW Elev. 9.22 ft Grades I Upstream Invert 0.25 ft Downstream Invert 0.00 ft Length 110.00 ft Constructed Slope 0.002273 ft/ft Hydraulic Profile Profile M2 Depth, Downstream 4.97 ft I Slope Type Mild Normal Depth 5.65 ft Flow Regime Subcritical Critical Depth 4.97 ft Velocity Downstream 12.64 fUs Critical Slope 0.003226 ft/ft I Section I • Section Shape Box Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Section Material Concrete Span 12.00 ft Section Size 12 x 7 ft Rise 7.00 ft Number Sections 5 IOutlet Control Properties Outlet Control HW Elev. 9.22 ft Upstream Velocity Head 2.10 ft IKe 0.70 Entrance Loss 1.47 ft I Inlet Control Properties Inlet Control HW Elev. 8.76 ft Flow Control Unsubmerged Inlet Type 0"wingwall flares Area Full 420.0 ft2 I K 0.06100 HDS 5 Chart 8 M 0.75000 HDS 5 Scale 3 C 0.04230 Equation Form 1 Y 0.82000 I I I I . Title: Pioneer-Existing Conditions Project Engineer: Todd Lyon p:\...\culvert analysis\3325-culvert analysis.cvm Carroll&Lange,Inc. CulvertMaster vat]3.0003] ' 11/29/06 09:36:09 AM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 3 of 3 1 I 1 • 1 i 1 1 APPENDIX E -Streets ' Roadway Plan through Site I i . QI I`I I 0 :)I IoCD: Bi\\ L O tea% U Ow a = =79, ," I )- 0 • LED- E N a I I wF zo \ /\ ? v`�i I a ' z b4 0_, a om 74- ow \J wW I OJ O F E\ \\\ \Q a'Q \ 1 ,(7',w F wo UMW I 0 Iwina 1 -1 ii,-� I IZOU !I \1 1• \11 II II N IIN U II 1 I J,I, __� II L ,\ / _ I III/ 'll J �I �. i 2i�M _ • I s' IY� \ VI l £5 �M 1 �� y— IS a3A k i I I �� 1 II -� � V `, i I is 213eic?i I I 1 '' 1-. , I \ ii I it If f_ ( �� . " I , 1."3 ,1 .b 6t 63M — 64 ?JAM I. 6b 2:13M ., 1_. �`--- k III O N 311 er 11 I 1 I S'Sb 3M I N N K O 3 Z:1::g L-£e'WV ZS:4S:8 L00Z/SZ/4'SAVMOVOiJ'6MP'SSV1O-02YfVW-SZ£EVa4serAeee'^'1a\SZ££\ I I 1• I I I I I I. I I 1 ' APPENDIX F Drainage Maps I I I I . I • File contains oversized maps • Please see original file • Hello