The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20193721.tiffUSE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES 1555 N. 17TH AVENUE * GREELEY, CO 80631 www.weldgov.com * 970-400-6100 FAX 970-304-6498 FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE: AMOUNT $ APPLICATION RECEIVED BY DATE RECEIVED: CASE # ASSIGNED: PLANNER ASSIGNED: Parcel Number: .(.Z5_._- - -- Address of site: (*A 12 digit number on Tax LID. information, obtainable at www.weldrov.com). Legal Description: -- a kji:L./ / A RE eta-Oil,O Section: 9j) Township: c N Range:i.pq W Zone District: C Acreage: 1L Floodplain: 1( 45Geological Hazard: Y(N Airport Overlay: Y0\10(FEE OWNER(S) OF THE PROPERTY:! l]�� Name: Sere ( c) \I c �c ois Company: Y a r3Q.s "7"; k Phone #: P io) qos Email: Street Address: BOO City/State/Zip Code: Ketc-)e i [`i7 O(nLfc.1( Name: Fecl L'Y1(1 \I 11 Y t5 Company: Phone #: (pr) (O) c 1 • c1L59 Email: Street Address: GOO City/State/Zip Code: Ke Name: Company: Phone #: Street Address: City/State/Zip Code: Email: APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT: (See below: Authorization must accompany all applications signed by Authorized Agents) Name: O V 1 OQI`!,V(]r Company: Pr\ 1w. , T rcl U 0 , Phone#: (oi`lU��2-) Email: ,e_, -c cn' Street Address: 2410 ALA . r_.I r LA tL i o City/State/Zip Code: Evctt-ts (i'7L PROPOSED USE: -Tr uLk-1v1 (' N'i i - Cog k \O -f ur mss" k Rct {,t(k Q ( - .te_ t ro_s\Pfx-V-A'k. - [ P are I (We) hereby depose and state under penalties of perjury that all statements, proposals, and/or plans submitted with or contained within the application are true and correct to the best of my (our)knowledge. Signatures of all fee owners of property must sign this application. If an Authorized Agent signs, a letter of authorization from all fee owners must be included with the app/ 'on. If a corporation is the fee owner, notarized evidence must be included indicating that the signatory has to legal au r on to sign for the co +oration. Date Signature: Owne/or Authorized Agent Date Print Name (rt,‘or- Rev 4/2016 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONNMENT 1555 NORTH 17TH AVENUE GREELEY, CO 80631 AUTHORIZATION FORM I, (We), Sereyn 4 E'1MA, \lcuJ m , give permission to .A1` Q� laupc (Owner --please print) (Authorized Agent — please print) to apply for any Planning, Building or Septic permits on our behalf, for the property located at (address or parcel number) below: I Oc3 `)1(1.t'i 1 C)( -- n - pAcc O,1 Legal Description: El N E 4 \ o- )k PSection Q1) , Township O-1 N, Range_ W Subdivision Name: Lot Block Property Owners CO ii Address: (: ESL, ¶ t _�' CO,ao( `4 Phone: (Q-76)95-1 `C'!()SG E-mail: �J ) A I- ' Authorized Agent Contact Information: h t 1,, ya Address: '-ft 01 C� .�� ,AVL i�l�(i lk� �p -T �i(1S C,6 i n Phone: 6110) 33C- 030e E -Mail: al tity(kr dtkkc,04oltlnn. ( cork Correspondence to be sent to: Owner D Authorized Agent Both / by Mail 0 Email Additional Info: Owner Signature: Date: qP / X --/C52 Owner Signature: Date: USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) QUESTIONNAIRE 18-023 Planning Questions: Planner on Call 970-400-6100 1. Explain, in detail, the proposed use of the property. The applicant is proposing to have up to 3 trucks on site (currently there are 3 trucks on site). The trucks are used for hauling water for oil and gas operations (flow back and freshwater). Hours of operation are 24/7. The applicant indicated that there may be up to 6 employees, for 3 trucks, associated with the business. There is a proposed future building, a 65x20 shop that will be used for business and personal storage. Along with a future residence on the North side of the property. 2. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the intent of the Weld County Code, Chapter 22 of the Comprehensive Plan. Chapter 22-1-120A "Private Property Rights. One (1) of the basic principles upon which the United States was founded, which it continues to preserve, and Weld County upholds, is the right of citizens to own and utilize their property. Private property rights are not unlimited rights but, rather, rights balanced with the responsibility of protecting community health, safety and welfare. It is the goal of the Comprehensive Plan to promote opportunities for County citizens, while protecting private property rights." Chapter 22-1-120F "Economic Growth. Land use policies have a significant impact on economic conditions in the County and should be structured to encourage economic prosperity and economic growth." This will be opening 6 more jobs in the community. Chapter 22-2-20G 1.A.Policy 7.1 "County land use regulations should support commercial and industrial uses that are directly related to, or dependent upon, agriculture, to locate within the agricultural areas, when the impact to surrounding properties is minimal, or can be mitigated, and where adequate services are currently available or reasonably obtainable." The Trucking company works with the oil and gas companies removing water and bringing fresh water to the gas and oil sites within the Ag area. Chapter 22-2-90B "These commercial Goals and Policies intend to further enhance and solidify the economic base of the County. It is critical to attract sustainable commercial growth and economic development. This is achieved by accommodating patterns that neither undermine the quality of life for County citizens, nor compromise the viability of the agricultural and industrial economies." and Chapter 22-6-20A2 "ECON.Policy 1.2. Promote the expansion and diversification of the commercial economic base to achieve a well-balanced commercial sector in order to provide a stable tax base and a variety of job opportunities for County citizens." This will bring in up to 6 Full time jobs to the community, which will also lead to more money spent in the community and more taxes brought in. 3. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the intent of the Weld County Code, Chapter 23 (Zoning) and the zone district in which it is located. Chapter 23 Division 4A "Uses by Special Review are USES which have been determined to be more intense or to have a potentially greater impact than the Uses Allowed by Right in a particular zone district. Therefore, Uses by Special Review require additional consideration to ensure that they are established and operated in a manner that is compatible with existing and planned land USES in the NEIGHBORHOOD. The additional consideration or regulation of Uses by Special Review, and the application to a Use by Special Review of Performance, Design and Operations Standards listed both herein and for applicable USES from any zone district, are designed to protect and promote the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the present and future residents of the COUNTY." This trucking company is similar to the active USR 15-0004 for a trucking company less than 1000 ft to the North East of this property. Therefore, they are establishing and operating in the same manner as their Neighbors. While helping promote safety, convenience and good general welfare to the residence of the County. Chapter 23-3-20A "One (1) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT and AUXILIARY QUARTERS per LEGAL LOT" Page I. of 5 USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) QUESTIONNAIRE 18-023 Sec. 23-3-40.M - Uses by special review "COMMERCIAL VEHICLES. Parking and operation of one (1) COMMERCIAL VEHICLE may be permitted on LOTS in an approved or recorded subdivision plat, or LOTS which are part of a map or plan filed prior to the adoption of any regulations controlling subdivisions in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, according to the procedure and zoning permit requirements outlined in Section 23-4-950 of this Chapter. Parking and operation of one (1) COMMERCIAL VEHICLE may be allowed on property of less than eighty (80) acres in size, when not a LOT in an approved or recorded subdivision or a LOT which is part of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling subdivisions, without a zoning permit. Without the appropriate land use permits, only one (1) tractor trailer and one (1) two -rear -axle vehicle are permitted on a parcel of land less than eighty (80) acres. Parking and operation of up to five (5) COMMERCIAL VEHICLES may be allowed on property equal to or greater than eighty (80) acres in size when used to haul agricultural goods, equipment or livestock, as long as the number of trips does not exceed sixty (60) per day to and from the property. No additional COMMERCIAL VEHICLES are allowed, unless part of a commercial or industrial USE otherwise permitted by Subsection 23-3-40.S. below Subsection 23-3-40.S " Any use permitted as a Use by Right, an ACCESSORY USE, or a Use by Special Review in the COMMERCIAL or industrial zone districts, provided that the property is not a Lot in an approved or recorded subdivision plat or lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling subdivisions. PUD development proposals shall not be permitted to use the special review permit process to develop. Chapter 23-3-230 4 and 13 "Gasoline service stations, car washes and VEHICLE SERVICE/REPAIR ESTABLISHMENTS" and "COMMERCIAL or private PARKING LOTS". This covers the maintenance bay for their Vehicles along with the Tractor/Trailer parking on the southern side of the property. As for Sec. 23-3-250. - Performance standards Our engineers and drafters follow these steps to insure everything falls within the guidelines of Weld County Performance standards to include site screening, drainage site layout to create a usable site. 4. Describe what type of land uses surround the site. Explain how the proposed use is consistent and compatible with surrounding land uses. The Site is surrounded by Ag land as well as other USR's. There is USR 15-0004 for Trucking Company less than 1000 Ft to the East from the property. Which has been allotted a 40x80 ft building. Half a mile to the north is USR 1140AM for 4000 dairy cows To the NE about 1600 ft there us USR CUP -31 And to the SE about a mile there is 2 USR's, one for cows and the other for a major facility. 5. What are the hours and days of operation? (e.g. Monday thru Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) Hours of operation are 24/7. Shift changes are at 6am and 6pm. There will be minimal traffic in between shift changes, as most will of the trucks will be traveling. There may be a truck in every so often for routine maintenance. 6. List the number of full time and/or part time employees proposed to work at this site. The applicant indicated Starting with 3 trucks being used for two shifts (1 Belly dump Truck and 2 Water Trucks). 6 employees using the site, with two shifts. 7. If shift work is proposed include the number of employees per shift. The company will start with 3 trucks and 6 employees, 3 employees per shift. One shift from 6am to 6pm and second shift from 6pm to 6am. 8. List the number of people who will use this site. Include contractors, truck drivers, customers, volunteers, etc. 6 drivers at the beginning along with a caretaker/maintenance worker Page 2 of 5 USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) QUESTIONNAIRE 18-023 9. If this is a dairy, livestock confinement operation, kennel, etc., list the number and type of animals. N/A There is a possibility of family pets at the residence 10. Describe the type of lot surface and the square footage of each type. (e.g. asphalt, gravel, landscaping, dirt, grass, buildings) Paved/Detention: 22809.79 SF Packed Gravel: 58060.63 SF Roofs/Concrete: 4080.00 SF Greenbelts/Landscaping 52025.19 SF 11. How many parking spaces are proposed? How many handicapped (ADA) parking spaces are proposed? On the south side of the property 3 parking spaces at set for the Tractor/Trailers and 3 parking spaces for the Employee parking. On the Northside of the Property where the proposed Residential will be there will also be a parking space for 3 residential parking spaces. 12. Explain the existing and proposed landscaping for the site. Residential Landscaping on Northern portion around the residence, helps screen view to the south. proposed screening with natural grass buffers on east, west and south sides. 13. Describe the type of fence proposed for the site (e.g. 6 foot chain link with earth tone slats) 6' chain link with earth tone slats on the Eastern and Western sides and plain chain link fencing on the south side 14. Describe the proposed screening for all parking and outdoor storage areas. If the site is located in a floodplain outdoor storage is restricted. proposed screening Natural grass buffers on east and west sides along with 6' chain link with earth tone slats and plain chain link fencing on the south side. 15. Explain any proposed reclamation procedures when termination of the Use by Special Review activity occurs. Revegetate with native grasses 16. Who will provide fire protection to the site? Platte Valley Fire Protection District 17. List all proposed on -site and off -site improvements associated with the use (e.g. landscaping, fencing, buildings, drainage, turn lanes, etc.) and a timeline of when you will have each one of the improvements completed. Upon approval of the USR he will begin to obtain grading permit to begin parking and detention. Engineering questions: 970-400-3750 1. Describe how many roundtrips/day are expected for each vehicle type: Passenger Cars/Pickups, Tandem Trucks, Semi-Truck/Trailer/RV (Roundtrip = 1 trip in and 1 trip out of site) The applicant indicated 3 trucks being used for two shifts. 6 employees using the site, with two shifts. The trucks will have approximately 12 trips (6 round trips) per day (3 trucks, 2 shifts, each shift coming and going once), passenger vehicles approximately 12 trips (6 round trips) per day. 2. Describe the expected travel routes for site traffic. Trucks: Employees: 75% to the East 80% to/from the west 25% to the West 20% to/from the East Please see attached Traffic Narrative Page 3 of 5 USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) QUESTIONNAIRE 18-023 3. Describe the travel distribution along the routes (e.g. 50% of traffic will come from the north, 20% from the south, 30% from the east, etc.) 25% to the West 75% to the East, then 37.5% to the North and 37.5% to the South 4. Describe the time of day that you expect the highest traffic volumes from above. 6-7 am and 6-7 pm 5. Describe where the access to the site is planned. At approved access point- Access # AP16-00479 Will submit new application for Commercial Access 6. Drainage Design: Detention pond summarized in a drainage report is required unless the project falls under an exception to stormwater detention requirements per code section 23-12-30 F.1 A. Does your site qualify for an exception to stormwater detention? If so, describe in a drainage narrative the following: 1. Which exception is being applied for and include supporting documentation. No exception is being applied for 2. Where the water originates if it flows onto the property from an offsite source No offsite flow 3. Where it flows to as it leaves the property In general, it flows to the east about 300'± then to the North 4. The direction of flow across the property West/South/East 5. If there have been previous drainage problems with the property A very flat site with poor drainage patterns B. Does your site require a stormwater detention pond? If so, the following applies: 1. A drainage report summarizing the detention pond design with construction drawings and maintenance plan shall be completed by a Colorado Licensed Professional Engineer and adhere to the drainage related sections of the Weld County Code. Drainage report and design by Alles, Taylor and Duke LLC 2. The drainage report must include a certification of compliance stamped and signed by the PE which can be found on the engineering website. Provided as required 3. A general drainage report guidance checklist is available on the engineering website. More complete checklists are available upon request. Acknowledged Environmental Health questions: 970-304-6415 x2702 1. What is the drinking water source on the property? If utilizing a drinking water well include either the well permit or well permit application that was submitted to the State -Division of Water Resources. If utilizing a public water tap include a letter from the Water District, a tap or meter number, or a copy of the water bill. Central Weld Water 2. What type of sewage disposal system is on the property? If utilizing an existing septic system provide the septic permit number. If there is no septic permit due to the age of the existing septic system, apply for a septic permit through the Department of Public Health and Environment prior to submitting this application. If a new septic system will be Page 4 of 5 USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) QUESTIONNAIRE 18-023 installed, please state "a new septic system is proposed". Only propose portable toilets if the use is consistent with the Department of Public Health and Environment's portable toilet policy. OWTS Mounted dosed system, for a 3 -bedroom residence, already completed by Alles, Taylor and Duke LLC. 3. If storage or warehousing is proposed, what type of items will be stored? Storage of Trucks and Trailers when not in use. No Warehousing, some storage for truck parts and tires 4. Describe where and how storage and/or stockpile of wastes, chemicals, and/or petroleum will occur on this site. See waste handling plan 5. If there will be fuel storage on site indicate the gallons and the secondary containment. State the number of tanks and gallons per tank. N/A 6. If there will be washing of vehicles or equipment on site indicate how the wash water will be contained. No 7. If there will be floor drains indicate how the fluids will be contained. None 8. Indicate if there will be any air emissions. (e.g. painting, oil storage, etc.) Some fluids to maintain trucks may be stored on site 9. Provide a design and operations plan if applicable. (e.g. composting, landfills, etc.) N/A 10. Provide a nuisance management plan if applicable. (e.g. dairies, feedlots, etc.) Dust abetment plan, waste handling plan Building questions: 970-400-6100 1. List the type, size (square footage), and number of existing and proposed structures. Show and label all existing and proposed structures on the USR drawing. Label the use of the building and the square footage. No existing Structures are on site 1 proposed residence,1 temporary 10'x12' shed for storage of truck maintenance supplies, truck tires and batteries, until the proposed future 30'x80' Maintenance building is built. 2. Explain how the existing structures will be used for this USR? No existing Structures are on site. 3. List the proposed use(s) of each structure. There are two proposed structures for this property. One will be a home for the Owner/Caretaker of the company on the North side of the property. As well as a building for Maintenance on the south side of the property. Page 5 of 5 f��.,• • �.; -'} ALLES TAYLOR & DUKE, LLC 3610 35TH AVE. UNIT #6 frl LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS EVANS, 80634 LICENSED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS 970-330-0308 ....,off December 19, 2018 Weld County Department of Planning, Engineering Review 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 RE: Traffic Narrative - Sergio Vargas Lot "A" RE 16.0160 Dear Madam/Sir: Using the information as provided by the property owner, Alles Taylor & Duke, LLC (ATD) is generating the following traffic narrative. The following is a copy of when a Traffic Impact Study is required on Weld County Roads. "A Traffic Impact Study can be waived, and a detailed Traffic Narrative submitted if the applicant agrees to traffic triggers. Any triggers based upon the traffic narrative or the traffic study will be included within the improvements and road maintenance agreement. The Traffic Narrative must include at the minimum: 1. The type (i.e. Trucks/passenger vehicles etc...) and number of vehicles per day 2. Peak hour traffic numbers 3. Expected routes 4. Trip distribution along the routes (i.e. 50% of traffic will come from the north, 20% from the south, 30% from the east) 5. Specifically agree in writing to the below improvements triggers. a. 10 vph during peak hour turning left into the facility -left deceleration lane b. 25 vph during peak hour turning right into the facility -right deceleration lane c. 50 vph during peak hour turning right out of the facility -right acceleration lane." All employee parking occurs on the property. The trucking business will start with three (3) trucks. The proposed trucking business is gas and oil support in nature, hauling fresh water to well sites for fracking and hauling production water from oil and gas sites for proper disposal. The trucking company will operate 24/7, when needed, shift changes will occur at 6 A.M. and 6 P.M. with on -site employee parking. 2018-023 ALLES TAYLOR 8E DUKE, LLC 3610 35TH AVE. UNIT #6 LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS EVANS, 80634 LICENSED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS 970-330-0308 The site is accessed by a Joint/ Shared access point for Lots "A" and "B" of RE 16-0160. The existing access point will need to be widened to a commercial access with 60' radius's. 1) The site is being used as semi-Tractor/Trailer parking for Vargas Trucking. The number of Tractor/Trailers is about three (3). 2) From information supplied by the site owner, shift change will occur at 6 A.M. and 6 P.M. It is assumed that the shift change will take about 1 hour. 3/4) Direction of Travel: From information provided by the owner, 75% of the truck traffic will head east from the site, on WCR 44, and from the east to the site on WCR 44. A breakdown of the of the directions and direction turned during peak hours will be provided below for the truck traffic. It is assumed that 80% of the employee traffic will access the site from the west on WCR 44, the remaining 20% will access the site coming from the east on WCR 44. A breakdown of the of the directions and direction turned during peak hours will be provided below for the employee traffic. 2018-023 ALLES TAYLOR & DUKE, LLC LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS LICENSED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS Traffic /Turning Direction Brake down. Peak Hour 6-7 AM/PM Trucks = Truck Traffic (75% to/from east 3 Turning in LH 2.25 Turning in RH Turning out LH Turning out RH 0.75 0.75 2.25 Turning in LH 0.6 Employee Traffic (Auto) (80% to/from west) Turning in RH Turning out LH Turning out RH 2.4 2.4 0.6 Total 2.85 3.15 3.15 2.85 Peak Hour 6-7 AM/PM Turning in LH 2.25 Trucks = Truck Traffic (75% to/from east) Turning in RH Turning out LH 3 Turning out RH 0.75 0.75 2.25 Turning in LH 0.6 Employee Traffic (Auto) (80% to/from west) Turning in RH Turning out LH Turning out RH 2.4 2.4 0.6 Total 2.85 3.15 3.15 2.85 5) Vargas Trucking by Sergio Vargas If you have any questions, please contact me. Respectfully submitted. Mark Taylor Colorado P.E. 46065 2018-023 4606 3610 35TH AVE. UNIT #6 EVANS, 80634 970-330-0308 WASTE HANDLING PLAN Vargas Trucking WCR 44, (Lot "A" RE 16-0160) Kersey, CO 80644 The trucking company that will use the site is expected to generate waste from truck maintenance and would include the following items. Used motor oil, worn out tires, used anti- freeze, used truck parts and general trash. The used motor fluids will be stored on site in separate containers until the storage container is close to be full. A waste disposal company will be contracted to remove the liquid waste from the site and disposed of properly, at this time is assumed that Tri-State Oil Reclaimers will be used for this service. In the event that a spill of hazardous materials occurs, all contaminated materials will be removed from the site and properly disposed of. The majority of the used truck parts will either be returned as parts cores or will be stored on site in a metal recycling bin. When the metal recycling bin is full, the metal parts will then be recycled at a metal recycling center. General trash will be collected in a trash dumpster, the dumpster will be placed in a trash enclosure. At the present time, it is assumed trash is collected by waste management. The trash service provider information will be provided to the Weld County Department of Health and Environment if and when there are changes to the trash collection services. Storage of used batteries, tires and other supplies, required to maintain the truck fleet, will occur in a 10' by 12' storage shed until the proposed maintenance build/shop is constructed. Use by Special Review (USR) , Landscape Maintenance Plan Parcel # 105320100013, Lot "A" RE 16-0160 The any native grasses on site will be watered by the use of a temporary irrigation until established to a level of 75%. Any native grasses on site will be mowed 2 to 3 times a year, or as needed, to keep the native grasses at or below the maximum height of 12 inches per Weld County Code. The trees and shrubs planted on site will be a drought tolerant species. The trees and shrubs will be watered by a temporary irrigation system as needed until established. All plantings that die will be replaced in a timely manner. The property owner shall not allow the growth of noxious weeds. Landscape maintenance will be performed by employees of Hill Petroleum. Landscape maintenance is on -going and shall not end upon final acceptance by the Department of Planning Services. Sergio Vargas Date Owner / Operator Use by Special Review (USR) Dust Abatement Plan Sergio Vargas Lot "A" RE 16-0160 Dust will be controlled on site by reduced speeds, Speed Limit 10 Miles per hour. Additional dust control will be obtained by the use of dust inhibitors applied on traffic areas annually and/or as needed. Water may also be used as needed. Tracking control is proposed for access onto WCR 44, the tracking control is proposed as a double cattle guard and recycled asphalt or road base, the recycled asphalt/road base is proposed as the drive/traffic surface on site. Any debris tracked onto the County Road will be sweep/cleaned off in a timely manner. Sergio Vargas Date 4276607 Pews: N d nr1..rru t7 i 1 ,1 w e. ;r•&'.as!Zee, ��nlq�dt�7 IJ1ih h4l�6WNi+7NJPrIhi7lYfdYYrh 11%1 hI WELD COUNTY ROAD 44 SITE ---5E2 .20 T4N R64W WELDCOUNTY ROAD 42 ,mcY.ATAP SCALE, 1'=1006'. 7CORNER SEG YU Iem RE., MusD 3X ALUMINUM cAP NGMWENE STWa0Mc ILLEGIBLE. IN A MONUMENT BOX 4 p ca --4 RECD. DED EXEMPT/ON NlVa /053-20-01 RECX/6-0/60 LOT B, RECORDED EXEAPTION NO. 1053-:20-1 RE -5082, BEING LOCATED WITHIN THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHEAST ONE -QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 64 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF WELD, STATE OF COLORADO. WELD COUNTY ROAD 44 cXISTNG 100046TO OPEN 8740 0' PE1 PER ROAD BODY 3 PAGE 436 (17/4/1664) APPROVED PER ROAD 9001( 3 PAGE 444 M 914'47' E 1310.4376) 01110 UAW NI/2 014/4 SEC 211 — — EAST 1/te CORNER COMMON TO MORONS 17 & 20. T4N. 18491 MOM RL" MBAR 6110 NO CAP. IN A MONUMENT BOX - AFFI)d]) A 129" AL0MIMIM CAP ✓S 57946. tr. iemulattH tioi aAGSAnt 1lrt(41 INA AD<Dlade Asp It ea. IX SLGIIM. 0088R diontont b. nitsSIlO 0.9.1841 WAS .11.0 PIXINO 1 BFBMN w2 PI4111I CAW. PIS 1342 1 C m qn r ' spay Al DUI ADD CORNER Ott DENOTES ALIDUOT CORNER AS DESCRIBED HEREON R DENOTES FOUND 1/2' REBAR WITH PLASTID CAP, PIS 4352 DENOTES FOUND 5/8' REBAR WRH PLASTIC CAP. PLS 37960 Ja DENOTES SFT 5/6' 602.40 WITH PLASTIC CAP, PLS 37908 wel!W?'eE0720100 BOUNDARY UNE - ---SECTION UNE NEW LOT UNE - --- EASEMENT UNE CENTERLINE OTER — — EXISTING ROAD ----- FUTURE ROAD R.O.W-. - --OIL/OAS SETBACKS 'GRAPHIC SCALE awn Ate Ka I leak . 200 R LINE TABLE UNE BEARING DISTANCE L4 5001410'* 191.30' LA 51299'16'6' 94 22' SQST6'41Ti g6_II L4 913.4141'E 13963' 544'13'31t 211' e 5'5523'02$ 66.03' L7 392'46LE E6/O' LB 37i1a743E 106 DO' LS $69.41 '13.E 151 73' LID 58412'03'E 50.05' Ill N41YSTOIT 49.0' 119 141716-09.1 104.00 L13 N6082'12T 9074' t2 143224'42'E 9A4u 1-15 Nc077'J71E L11 147147561 37.16' LI, SP1044320 7430' LIM 167'43'464 6539' 119 5(50105"E 107 42:' L20 4919y010 44.06' is. 440721090. 010.00' 422 4150'42'02T 86 91' L2. X137-HerE 10.19' L24 N50'0YSFE 5341' 105 RE 29.42' L26 NY7'4E' N'10031'F' 57.14' LOT Sg7'4S46)E 56.64' 120 SAVECr 6''E 10Z0 ' CENTER-EAAT 1/16 CCBNF0 1 41, 20. T444, R64W 1011!4 214' AUIMIMUM CAP MONUMENT. PS 9644 C 346.14YM) LOT A Not . PewIXr Tema •t 3 0 a1' 20.• EASEMENT DEDICATION CERTIFICATE; Din uninIN1ONFD, HEREBY DEDICATES Err THIS PLAT, FOR THE 004011 OF 1NE PROPOTnE5 SNDWN OR DESCRIBED HUMOR, EASEMEM0S FOR 110E PURPOSES M SHOWN is 11110001004) RENDR . aG OMREL L HI DEBDI MILL '� HATS"3F% 1321.NYlM) 1 I NonnNEART CORNER ill'. NARfN LINE EFf1 NCI, 4 S£FC. ZO 155T519G .{O 117, T4H. R64W ilE £ 3Ee.15Ra,]3 Name zeulcer. P1 -S 1E . CAP MD/T. PL5 1.999, IN A ( kIotimis T sax !X'5 NG 311 (H LE7 1 A.T.-- lo ) RICH -on-WAY 4 1 1 o RaOADRIGID-OF-WAY m 111 t ts'IIIl 4—y�{" -�{^- OAP 30' OF(000WAT)�I MD UTAH, EASEMENT iT�� 30' JONI ACCESS ND 0OFS:Cr P4 TN S PLAT I +' iy FOR THE DENET11 OF LOTS 1 3" A ADO D, RE0X16-4160 7414' 110(1 N1TIFST 1 4016001 LIN£ I I ADisr10MAL i111URE E`\ ROAD R'¢HtaF-WAT+l1-- lP.CrL5S (APtd-UW7a} I ANKI4�yB / r 3001119.96 T rF II y� 1 7 to 004'04'34'E 970,21 N 9914'36' E 2f50 L-39, 409,91' 111 18 -, V--)/ 41L/aA5 I [52099 45' 6112E GILJ/ORE CANAL PARCEL F▪ R 000( 405 PA3 453 WCAncitt Sr Olwt AS Irr£ID MEASURED .1JNE 2011 AND CONTAINS Azar ACRES THAT 15 10T INCLVOED TI118 tor Aando..s uUIED as▪ trossA8 nix LAID D:41,1413 SMALL IA RR amenne N, AS ALwm v aSTAACTLo LOTS t51 10 ACRES t44469 ACRES { ) ET) �� t- NRUB.arl'� 34g T E 3]604b5,4�\--- 150' WELL READ) SETBACK LSJE C 3e02M' Se.a5`T6'W 699 LOT .4 ME -50V Nor A won 0 -Pia eNner 5' 4'(M) SMITM'1sM4.t .11- /IN eaONG AAP" a-00478 (DITCH LI. ONLY) 41 EXISTING ` ACCESS (API6-00470) ses.DV29 W 423.42'(B) LOT A Wt A har se ma nines $60'O6'DB'W 1321.26'(.11 .9U. LIA'C 61/2 NEE/4 u5CF 20 422.02'(Y) EAST 1/4 CORNER 500, 20. 1444, R64W FO040 3G' ALUMINUM CAP WeeteE31T. PLO 37006 Mat PROPERTY DESCRIPTION. Soar,<: Fdality NO1ianol TOOK Pempany (545-F0497110-171-MSK) Lot B ol Recorded Exemption Not. 1063-20-1 RE -5082, eacordinp to the plat red.... September g. 2011 of Remotion No. 37414110, being located w441In the Cost h a f the Northeoet S of Section 20. Township 4 berth. Range 64 Walt of the 0M P.M., County Of Weld, Slide of Colorado. CONTAINS 54.24 ACRES (CROSS), MORE OR LESS. BY THIS SURVEY PROPERTY ONNER'S CERTIFICATE I, THE UNDERSIGNED, BEING THE OWNER IN Flt OF THE HEREON DESCRIBED PROPERTY 00 HEREBY SURINAME THE SAME AD SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED MAP. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS PROPERTY IS I,OGTEO IN AN AGRICULTURAL ZONE DIS I1f9I AND IS ALSO INTENDED TO PROVIDE AREAS FOR THE CONCUCT OF OTHER USED HY RIGHT, ACCESSORY USES AND USES 8Y SPEClOL REVIEW. OWNER: DARREL L HILL DARR£L L HILL 1 STATE OF COW9000 ) �jj iIan1� S5 COUNTY OF IA -+1 ) TH TIFICATE WAylCKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME 7N15 DAT a AO., T4f..l BY DARREL L HILL h OFB1111 HIIL . OWNER: DEW HILL P OEBEII HILL NOTARY PUBLIC L4Y COMMISSION EXPIRES, DEPARTMENT OF PLAN! THIS PLAT IS ACCEPTED AND/RPR D Hr THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING O'.Lt1E 4 ?10050 1041TARY 4L711 g;dl. 1.0 C0005000 NOTAd1ID 70 04024431 MT 115441MAGN LOINS 96d. 22. 7014 APPROVAL. DEPARTMENT or PLANNING 3ETry)CE5 DIRECTOR STATE OF COLORADO Wad )) COUNTY OF II:ItLd SS THE E,CITJEOOING CERTIFICATE WAS ACRNDWEEDGED BEFORE ME TH5 DAY OF ' Y4L,R,P1 . AD., 20/ , WITNESS 441 HAND AND OFFICIAL EA- dE@ES7RbS ■AINSEEAt — 1! �y � N4T NOTARY PUBLIC 4 �^ESAH 4)140 10 51246,666 NOTARY ID 2TF2r(050 3, MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Nis ap MY COMMISSION MIN ALNE 5. 2020 iimazfort.Issmardm 1, ROBERT M. EDMONDS, A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE CF COLORADO DO HEREBY CERBFY 1HAT THIS SURVEY REPRESENTED BT IRIS PLAT WAS MADE UNDER MY PERSONAL SUPERVISION. AND THAT THIS '.PUT IS AN ACCURATE REPRESENTATION THEREOF. 1 FURTHER CERTIFY 11107 THE SURVEY AND T015 PLAT COMPLIES OATH ALL APPLICARIF RULES. REGULATORS AND LAWS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO. STATE BRAND OF REGISTRATION FOR PROFES9331AT ENGINEERS AND PROFEa5IO4NL LAND SUCOUNTY. ROBERT M. EDMONDS. PLS 3/988 DATE SURVEYOR'S NOTES. t) THIS RECORDED EXEMPTION PLAT WAS PREPARED FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE WELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING. 2) THIS RECORDED EXEMPTION PLAT AND THE INFORMATION HEREON, MAY NOT BE IISFT) FOR PET ADOIBONAL OR 01004OEO PURPOSES BEYOND THAT FOR WHICH N WAS INTENDED AND MAY NOT BE USED BY ANY PARTIES OTHER TWIN 11403E 10 WHICH FT IS CODIFIED. 3) FIDELITY NATIONAL IDLE COMPANY'S TITLE COMMITMENT NO. 515-00407118-171-M$KM DATED NOVEMBER 16, 2014 AT 6:00 P.M. WAS RELIED UPON FOR EASEMF0415, RIOIR. OF -WAY AND ENCUMBRANCES OF RECORD FOR THIS PROPERTY. ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMERCE ANY LEGAL ACTON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN ND EVENT MAY ANT ACTON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN TEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERREIGT00 SHOWN HEREON. 5) GROSS AREA INCLUDES THOSE PORTIONS IWTH)N THE 3O' WIDE (1LA1F) COUNTY ROAD RIGHTS -OF -WAY. NIT AREA EXCLUDES THE 30' WIDE (HAT) COUNTY ROAD RIGHTS -OF -WAY. 6] THE UNEAL UNIT OF MEASUREMENT FOR THE SURVEY OF THIS PROPERTY IS U.S. SURVEY FEET. 7) THE LOCATIONS OF THE OIL/DAS WELLHEADS MD TANK BATTERIES ME SUBJECT TO CHANCE BASED ON RELOCATION. T10 ADDITION/REMOVAL OE 144E TANK 8017011 E5 AND/OR WELLHEADS CAN CHANGE THE SETBACK LOCATIONS. BASIS OF REARINL:S BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY ARE BASED ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE—OUARIER (NES) OF SECTON 20, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 64 WEST OF THE BTH P.M., BETWEEN TWO FOUND SURVEY MONUMENTS AS SHOWN AND DESCRIBED HEREON. SAID UNE BEARS 50020'53'E. BEING A GRID BEARING ON THE COLORADO STATE PLANE COORDINATE 5rb.e0. COLORADO NORTH ZONE, NA082/2011. COORDINATE DATA' THE COORDINATES USfEI) HEREON FOR THE OIL/GAS WELL AND TANK BATTERY SETBACKS ARE MODIFIED 'GROUND' COORDINATES, DERIVED_ PROW STATE PLANE VALUES (COLORADO NORTH 20NE. NA64953/2011 4Y US1442 A CALCULATED COMBINED FACTOR ElF 0.999735208 (1,000204862) SCALED FROM AN ORIGIN OF O,0) WELD ,OUNTY NOTES" 1) All prapaeed or eoHtloq structured win or 00 meet the minimum setback end f(Oet requirements far the s ne district In which the property le located. Punlanl to the deflnitian of 4etback In the Wald County Code, the reaug.4 seibark I. measured tram Dm Mere tight-ef-way fine. e No building Lueture co defined and limited to Vote oceupancks Carted as Croup. A, B. L. F, H. L M and R Tn Section 322.1 of the 2012 Intem0b0ho Ba110i00 Cub, ehe1 be constructed within a 200-1001 radius of any tank pottery or within a 100imt n4lu1 al any wellhead or within a 25 -fact radios of any Pugged or abandoned ei err gas welt. My construction widtln 200 foot mike of any tank battery or 150 -fool 'odium al any wellhead .hall require a variance from the terms of this Chapter in 000001x000 with Subsection 23-6_10,C of Bib Cods. 1) Any future 01nte10ree or uses on elle must oleoln the appropriate Hanel end building planate. 3) Lot A Le not ef1916k Volo future land exemption In acnerdonce .Th Seethan, 24-4-202.1 9f the Weld County Cade. 4) The largest lot of any recorded exemption may not be loss than thirty --Rut (35) ICres net ones. approved by true Weld County Hoard of Commissienen m accordance with Swollen 24-1-40.1 of the Wald County Cede. 5) Prior to the release of building permits, the applicant dhoti eubmh a recorded, rood dese4Gng the Lot upon which the building permit To roomette,' with the building proof, application.. The legal deer-dation on such deed eholl include the Lot deel9n0Uon end Recorded Emanation number. 6) Prior 10 the release al build - log Perellta. the eppticont nh411 .ubm0 evidence to the Department .4 Planning 9 rviee. that Lot A has en adequate water supply of eufiklant quality. quantity and dependability. 7) The property ceder shall central novice, weeds on the see. 6) The hbtericdl floe bottoms and n,naft 0maunte will be maintained 0n the elle. 9) Building permit. Medi be oblaimed prior to the co atrueben of any 001101114. 011)01-040 that moat the d,80lban of on Ay Exempt Bolding per the yeaudirernerms of Seetia 29-1-20 and Section 29-3-20.0.13 of the Weld County Code do rot need balding permits however, a 1107011100114 of Compliance must he (Jed with the Planning Deportment end an 410014414yl rub li permit requiredf electrical service to the building Or 00101 far oaring ar wo.hing of livestock or 4001117. 10) 8ulding Perrn4ts isorcd on th. prop0srd 1014 will be requiredto adhere to the fee alma -lure of the County —Fide Rood hnpoct Fee Program, 11) Buiiaing Permits ested on the proposed lots, will be required to adhere Le the fee structure of the County Facility Fe. and 040/5050 impact Fea Pap:JramE.. 12) Potential Purchaser, me tensity notified that a fn'eatack eanf1nernen1 operation (4,000 entity dairy) Is permitted by AWUSR-1145 and la located 40rihelest of to proposed Recorded Exemption. Speoi5eelly. 1auth and adjacent to County Road 46 and operaximalely 02 miles rt of Count' Recd 52, Oft —site impacts that may be .50020texed Include mho front troche, Motors ana equipment: dust :Dorn onimel pane and odor. from onirsol confinement.. slog. and manure. 13) Potential Purcheean an hereby notified that a commercial business inciuding se 1 —truck and trailer perking la perrnit4.d by USR15-0004 d is localad northwest of the prepared Recanted Evanculion. Specifically.north ond adjacent ha County Hoed 44 and oPgrosimaloly 0.35 miloe seat of County Rood 53. 011—ril, importa 11.01 Roy be 14100.10404204 include noise line duet Nam truest. Mc( e qupmed end other industry -stated actraitim. 14) RIGHT TO EXTRACT MINERAL RESOURCES STATEMENT: Weld County has some of the meet abundant min.raf resourans, including. but not limited to. Bond and grovel, 04. natural gad, rued 0001. Under TBe 34 W the Colorado R.v'aed Statute, minerals are vital nsourae0 beano. (a) sthe Rattis commercial mineral -deposits are .e117a1 to the etole'e .anony.� b} the p0pvloua count -Ice of the Mate loon t1 crelcal shortage of eueh deposits; d (0) each deposits should be attracted 4000eleg to a rational pion, colcu101.d to avoid wester of such dapue1te and cause the least practEmble disruption to the ecology and quality of Bfei of the e namor of the populous medico Of the .Set,. Mineral ranourco booboo are Ndespread awe throes halt 1h. Cavely tied persona me moving Into thee must recognise the various Impacts 6.eacoted,0hh -the d velahr tent Often Ones, mineral resource sites UM fixed to their geegmphical and g.ophr.EOol location.. Moreover, these resource arw protected properly ht. and mineral nere should be afforded the app040ity to extract the g11ne l 15) WEIR COUNTYS RIGHT TO FARM: Weld County 10 one of the mo,t, productive agrlcul5lrtN counties in the United States, typically ranking in tree lap ten 5001105, In the covnlry In total market voile of agricultural products sold. The rural ▪ nos of Wind County 04ay he open and specie.. but they ore Intefelkely owed for agriculture. remains moving SFna a rural area must recogntye add accept there are drawbacks Including rrects 4005 tang—standingogrioLdtulal' practices and a tower level M entice. Own in town. Along 011h the druwtatt a dome the ve Incentis 814th attmcl orlon dwellers to relocate to rural 0rsaml open' epaerourreees, Wildlife. look of city leoi., and ealgee0C1. om1 the NMI utmostler. and way of Me, Without neighboring farms, those leaatr.e which mi15et orlon dwellers to rrsel Weld County would quickly to gone forever, Agricultural users or the lend should not be expected to change their long—eet00110000 04400 oral practices to accommodate the intruv14 4 .t urban Were Into o rural a Well --run 0940Ml6074 oolMtie. 610 generate off —alt. impacts, Including noise from tractor* and ogipatant: eluw—mo'InO farm vehicles 011 rural roads.! dust tram animal pane, fish !work, harvest and gravel roadsr odor from entreat nneenent. elope and manure; smoke from di(eh b11,011gflea and nwsqultetel WAIN end trapping 0000ILlee shootiog elopes, 1egel ho; ag of numenee wildlife; d the use of pestlolde. and 1 dllizers In the fields Wedding the 4.14.1 of serial eprayin1. II b common omelet for agricultunal pod to utir1 00 m.ulatlon of o(111000101 machinery and supplies to 'meet" in their evicultand operations. A con rnrollon or miumelleneous agricultural rnoteriety Often produce. a wheel disparity betreen rum* 0rt6 urhon crepe of the County. Section 35--3.5-102. C,R.S. provides that 014 0414011ura1 opertAton shell nal be found to be a 8869 or private n :0an<e it th. aydeuNura) operates. alleged to be a An employs method prattees that pre 0a011000y or reaaonebly oeeaciated with agriau5uml PTaductfon. Water has been, end contemn to be. the Ille4ne for the agricultural 03/411 1141444_ K is unrealistic to oeeume that .Menem and neervaira may simply be moved 'oat of the way' of residential development When rowing to the County, properly ▪ rteni d residents moat 1.ol0e they Perrot take looter from InigotIon 41400.,, iekee, er ether etr044040., unless they hove on adjudicated tight to the water. Weld County coves a lord area of opproximot.ly feu, thous.00 (4,1100) .goore mile. in else (twice the elm of the State at Deland) with nom than three thousand weven hundred (3.700) mg.. of AM. and County roads outelde of mvdelpelArtw. Th. sheer mognRuche of the area to W 'erne elfetyher I0liloble nuourtee, Lew enforcement In hosed on response' La complaints mare n pater, el the County, and the dietoncee which mist be traveled Rey Rdeity all emergency r.oyonw, Including tae enforcement. enbobn0e, 474 fire. Fire prdpation le usually provided by -volunteers eh. meet Move their jobs and 400Elles to respond to emergencies Courtly gravel roods, no matter how otten they an bladed. will rot provth ide e eorte Mnd 01 portion e1ptcted from a pored reed. Slow removal P$OdIIfl mean thud roods Derr subdivisions to or -lariats may not -be cleared for saeml dove otter se major snowstorm. Service, in rural mee. will not be equivalent to moniclpol services. Rurp1 dwelhn mee▪ t. by tmin aasdty, be .more .e14—aolllcicol Men urban dwellers. people ore exposed to different hazard. in the County than kr an urban or suburban .citing. Fonn equipment and 011 Fold equipment ponds ond irrigation Michas, electrical power for pumps and center Prat opantlone• MP, speed 0440,0, mind burs. partaken, Meow. tenttarlal from dogs drop Eveetetit, and open burning present real threats. Controlling children's activities le important not only for their safety. burl oleo for the proleetlon o1 the forw'ar'd livelihood. 0 0 0 a PROJECT NCI.: 1L3 -O t4« SHEET f OF ! i rtr i'. { L :F ' ''.1.1' i ,�° b j ` w� . t r, 6 I F 1L 11111 _ r' �_ f - MAP SCALE I = 2000' 2000 99 OOQ 0 49 .J e. - _ r r ,� � � - 't „0"---- �( F-� 1--1 ►---�. 1----! FEET Ir�P •_ '+ ,� ►., I. 0.1111=TDC - ^,` 002.6 N.� I. , , � -,I..!..r t +. r; I ", �' �y - ____ - b I 1 �� J-_�- ,a,_".. -E r 1 y ""'P'' �; •J4.,.^^ - 4. a` x 3f . e „ f ,. }q,�yy �... ----i !— -' ,k ... - -1--^ - fi ^� `.4.1.-Y" ..r t _ '-t q a.'e 'itl•.,p, .a, •, `A'" .E X ` Y _ 4" ` .-,'�' „• •,-,„ .t._ ...7 - • . of _ narr3ejtieam .17n '. �'":1. �' - - - = • .t s e. ' . .r ( 111111111 11 1111111 jI4 PANEL 1775E •'f ... ^•^;�y�-R� �` -,a,"e - _ _. - .. — 1l,� - is -4..:_z ` ` -� . :�: '•' � ♦ ••°• .`t!!!, '! •• • • • t 11.~Qa!•!• ,•;•,•;•'`�a,�® ! a`•;.:: �.�.�.�. 1-7 a ® FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP WELD COUNTY, COLORADO AND INCORPORATED AREAS it-' ti _. .,,f" ,. L tr _� -� ..- _, _ k "�. -' ��-' •t 1- 1, �. .°A,,I.•t O i • . _'".,, y' _ .. .♦ �+ -. � . . I ;. �q , a I 24 e } ., ,� ,1- Z7€ • _ -<- 7,. �. - {. I` .- I . . _ - . I 1 K�. --. i,' try N �' 1.9 x' C..4 Sir �� i "TV _I - -.1 -1 r. - -- r - i'.• ', _ _ . ._ - r`+ - -' . / Si _ _-r---•--.,� . /yiy �i/. r.. -+# r,,_.�.�4`M" 2 rte,: -7a -.T.A .,.` K I RYA'..` :.1 y : ��py '+ lk .. ` ^ I .' r. - , t" I +f �- . y - + 261 i"` . 7 'l y � PANEL 1775 OF 2259 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT) CONTAINS. CONTAINS: i 1 COMMUNITY NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX ,. - YY �._ r -tY-41 { - - .ate -•.w: ,SID WELD COUNTY C80255 1775 E 1 t •c 4 6j,h� �• E.- r ,-P.--,- I i 1 { . Notice to User; The Map Number shown below should be used when p3acing map orders; the Community Number shown above should be used on insurance applications for the subject — �, _'. U w:t ...r' -_ ate _ y.. # z r t, - i y - ow w ' r ' . •. , '°s • 1 ur.l community. �� 5- r-. .e...14•:/ .x141 r? i,•., 2�5; - : . r , '4 • 3.0 - �LL _ 5 y � r..� ° .. ' �< n tQ"i 1 e! 1 __ t ``i - .� ¢ ` '. + -,r — - k 4. _ � ti to +, r k i i41� � II�� 1� %.= yr ,4 �� ` l-IHa s£� Federal Emergency MAP NUMBER 08123C1775E EFFECTIVE DATE JANUARY 20, 2016 Management Agency r-1 ..\,, _ Y k^ ,.r l.- . �'- ? • - 5_ti>-�:xr r 2 i. . _ _� , ` _' - 6 Ip , " . . = _ �, 4 _ - cJ .. '- -;i. ' ;�' ti•. d>.i • .r fin,, r f°, tj • i. - This is an official copy of a portion of the above referenced flood map. It was extracted using F -MIT Cm -Line, This map does not reflect changes - t ! or amendments which may have been made subsequent to the date on the q_ _- ., 7, - - r ;� ... - - - r' v,g , ate. ••,!4•!•_ ,' title block, For the latest product information about National Rood Insurance Program flood maps check the FEMA Flood Map Store at www msc.fema. gov Final Drainage Report ATD Job #2018-023 Sergio Vargas Located Within the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 4 North, Range 64 West of the 6' Principal Meridian, County of Weld, State of Colorado Sergio Vargas County Road 44 Weld County, Colorado September 25, 2018 Prepared by Dan Campbell EIT 74322 "I hereby attest that this report for the Final drainage design for Sergio Vargas was prepared by me, or under my direct supervision, in accordance with the provisions of the Weld County Storm Drainage Design Criteria for the responsible parties thereof. I understand that Weld County does not and shall not assume liability for drainage facilities designed by others." Mark A. Taylor Registered Professional Engineer State of Colorado No. 46065 Table of Contents General Location and Description 1 Location 2 Description of Property 2 Drainage Basins and Sub -Basins 4 Major Basin Description 5 Sub -Basin Description 5 Drainage Design Criteria 4 Development Criteria Reference and Constraints 5 Hydrological Criteria 5 Hydraulic Criteria 5 Drainage Facility Design 4 General Concept 5 Specific Details 5 Conclusions 4 Compliance with the Weld. County CODE 5 Drainage Concept 5 References 4 Appendices 4 Hydrologic Computations 5 Hydraulic Computations 5 Appendix A Table of Contents Page Data Al -6 Property Information A6-38 Site Soil Survey Data A39 Soil Characterization Log A40 FIRM A41-44 NOAA ATLAS 14 Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates A45 Interpolations for Rainfall Intensity Values A46 Interpolations for Runoff Coefficient, C A47-48 Intensity -Duration Curves for Rational Method A49-55 Drainage Calculations (Historic and Developed) A56 Proposed Site Surface Areas A57 Table 10-1 Percolation Rates A58-59 Modified FAA Method for Detention Pond Volume 2 A60-62 Time of Concentration Equations A63 Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values A64 Design Storm Frequencies A65 Runoff Coefficients, C — Table RO-5 A66-68 Flow Values for Swale A69-72 Capacity and Stability Checks for Swale A73 WQCV Depth in Detention Pond A74 Designed Detention Pond Volume A75-76 Detention Pond Release Time A77-78 Detention Pond Release Time with Infiltration A79 WQCV Notch Calculations A80 Restrictor Plate Sizing A81-85 Rock Chute Design Data 3 I. General Location and Description A. Location 1. The property (parcel number 105320100013) is located in the East half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 4 North, Range 64 West of the P.M., County of Weld, State of Colorado. 2. Weld County Road 44 borders the property to the North. Weld County Road 53 is 0.13 +1- miles East of the site. No road is adjacent to the site to the South. A gravel access road borders the property to the West. The site is accessed by a shared access per RECX16-0160 as recorded on 2/8/2017 (reception number 4276877). 3. The Gilmore irrigation ditch is adjacent to the West side of the property. No other major open channels, lakes, streams, irrigation or other water resource facilities lie within or are adjacent to the project site. 4. To the North of the site past WCR 44 are three different properties including: a residential property owned by Mary Albee, a residential property owned by Mark and Kristine Fogle, and an agricultural property owned by Todd and Renee Perkins. To the South and to the East of the site is an agricultural property owned by Darrel and Debbi Hill and is classified as grazing land (46 Acres +/-) and waste land (5 Acres +/- ). To the West of the site is a residential property owned by Marvin and Betty James. No developments are located near the site. The land surrounding the property is either agricultural or single residential properties. B. Description of Property 1. The total area of the property is 3.14 +/- Acres 2. The existing ground cover is native vegetation and prairie grass that sparsely covers the property. Hydrophilic plants are present on the site, which is a good indicator of a high water table. According to the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) WebSoil Survey, the site is made up of approximately 100% Vona loamy sand with 3 to 5 percent slopes. Three different soil profile holes were excavated on the site and the soils were analyzed by ATD. The digging was stopped short of the usual 8 feet depth because ground water issues were immediately noticed in all three holes "groundwater assumed at 20 inches". Observations for the first profile hole are as follows: 0-20" is classified as sandy loam with the color being 7.5YR 4/3, 20-56" is classified as loamy sand with the color being 7.5YR 5/6. Observations for the second profile are as follows: 0-18" is classified as sandy loam with the color being 10YR 4/3, 18-60" is classified as loamy sand with the color being 7.5YR 5/6. Observations for the third profile hole are as follows: 0-16" is classified as sandy loam with the color being 10YR 4/3, 16-50" is classified as loamy sand with the color being 10YR 5/6. Redox features were not observed in the profile holes at the time of excavation. 3. The Gilmore ditch runs along the Western portion of the property. Ownership information for the Gilmore ditch was researched and could not be determined. 4. The proposed development of the property includes: a packed gravel parking surface for up to ten trucks, a residence structure, a maintenance shop, an on -site waste water treatment system, and two detention ponds. The detention ponds will be located on the East side of the property and will be connected with a twelve inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe. Stormwater runoff on the site will move from the West to 4 the East and will flow into the detention ponds. The proposed detention ponds will drain into the borrow ditch along WCR 44 by the use of a 12" CMP. 5. The Gilmore ditch runs along the Western portion of the property. Ownership information for the Gilmore ditch was researched and could not be determined. 6. From the Web Soils Survey, the depth to ground water is 6.5 feet or deeper. ATD does not agree with this assessment. Hydrophilic plants are present on the site, which was a good indicator of a high water table. The property to the East of the site contains surface water ponds, which was also a good indicator of a high water table. Soil profile holes were excavated on the site and groundwater was noticed at the time of digging at approximately 20" depth. II. Drainage Basins and Sub -Basins A. Major Basin Description 1. Weld County Public Works was contacted in regards to existing drainage reports and master drainage plans in the area. No information was available. 2. The site is located in the South Platte Drainage basin. The South Platte Drainage Basin includes much of the populated region of the Front Range extending outward to the Eastern plains of Colorado. The South Platte River Corridor has experienced a trend of increased urbanization in recent years. 3. Floodplain: the site is not affected by a floodplain per Firm Panel 08123C1775E, effective date January 20, 2016. Please see the attached map. 4. A topographical survey was conducted by ATD and on -site contours of 0.5 -ft vertical intervals are provided. B. Sub -Basin Description 1. Historic drainage patterns on the site are as follows: Stormwater runoff on the Southern half of the site flows in an East to West direction at approximately 0.6% slopes and reaches the Southwest corner of the site and eventually flows onto the agricultural property to the Southeast. Stormwater runoff on the Northern half of the site flows in a West to East direction at approximately 2% slopes and reaches the Northeast corner of the site and eventually flows into the borrow ditch along WCR 44. The site does have a few low spots located near the center and Southwest corner of the site where water most likely pools. Stormwater runoff on the property to the South and to the East of the site flows in an East and Northeastern direction until eventually reaching the borrow ditch along WCR 44. Stormwater runoff on the property to the West of the site flows in an Eastern direction across the site. Stormwater runoff on the property to the North of the site flows in a Southeast direction across the site. 2. All offsite stormwater flows from the West are intercepted by the Gilmore ditch and will not enter the site. All offsite stormwater flows from the North are intercepted by the borrow ditch along WCR 44 and will not enter the site. No offsite flows from the East and South will enter the site due to the slopes of the land. There are no offsite flows affecting this site. 5 III. Drainage Design Criteria A. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints 1. Weld County Public Works was contacted in regards to existing drainage reports and master drainage plans in the area. No information was available. 2. The site does have slope constraints that impact the drainage design. Historic drainage patterns on the site are as follows: Stormwater runoff on the Southern half of the site flows in an East to West direction at approximately 0.6% slopes and reaches the Southwest corner of the site and flows onto the agricultural property to the Southeast. Stormwater runoff on the Northern half of the site flows in a West to East direction at approximately 2% slopes and reaches the Northeast corner of the site and eventually flows into the borrow ditch along WCR 44. The proposed drainage plan is as follows: The site will be graded to allow stormwater runoff to flow in a West to East direction for the entire site (excluding the Southwest corner) and will eventually reach the detention pond. Stormwater in the detention pond will be released to the North in the borrow ditch along WCR 44. Historic drainage patterns will need to be altered in order for the stormwater runoff on the site to reach the detention pond. The Southwest corner of the site, which is 17,896 -SF (0.41 AC), will not be re -graded and stormwater flows from this area will flow onto the agricultural property to the South, all stormwater at the site and surrounding the site will eventually reach the borrow ditch along WCR 44, about 300' +/- east of the project site. B. Hydrological Criteria 1. Rainfall curves and tables were determined using the NOAA ATLAS 14 precipitation frequency data server and the Urban Drainage Spreadsheet Depth -Duration - Frequency and Intensity -Duration -Frequency Tables, please see the attached spreadsheet. The historic rainfall intensity values calculated with a time concentration of 12 minutes are as follows: 5 -year: 2.88in/hr, 10 -year: 3.59 in/hr, 100 -year: 6.78 in/hr. The developed rainfall intensity values calculated with a time of concentration of 13 minutes are as follows: 5 -year: 2.79 in/hr, 10 -year: 3.47 in/hr, 100 -year: 6.55 in/hr 2. The design stain' recurrence intervals used in this drainage report are the five (5) year, ten (10) year, and one hundred (100) year storm events. The detention pond will hold the 100-yr developed flows and will be released at the 5-yr historic flow rate. 3. The Rational Method was used to calculate stormwater runoff rates. 4. The detention discharge has been determined using the Five (5) year historic rate for an undeveloped site, which was calculated to be 0.09 CFS. The time of concentration, Te, has been determined using the equations given in the UDFC Urban Storm Drainage Manual, Chapter 6, Runoff. The time of concentration for historic flows was calculated to be approximately 12 minutes. All required detention discharge and storage calculations have been conducted using the Modified FFA Method provided by Urban Drainage to size the detention pond. The required detention volume was calculated to be 23,167 -CF. The water quality capture volume (WQCV) was calculated to be 1,962 -CF. The total required is 23,167 -CF + 1,962 -CF = 25,129 -CF. The designed detention pond volume has been calculated using the average area method with 0.1' contours around the detention pond. The designed detention pond volume was calculated to be approximately 27,382 - CF. The detention pond is oversized by approximately 8.23%. 6 C. Hydraulic Criteria 1. A capacity and stability check for the 10-yr storm event was conducted at the midpoint and endpoint of the swale that is located in the Southwest portion of the site. The flow rates for 10-yr storm event are as follows: Midpoint is 0.07 CFS and endpoint is 0.31 CFS. The swale will have no capacity or stability issues and meets all requirements for the channel criteria. Please see attached spreadsheet for reference. The velocities are less than the maximum 5.0 ft/sec and the Froude numbers are less than or equal to the maximum value of 0,8. 2. The designed detention outlet is a two -stage release. The first stage is for Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) which is designed to release the 1,962 -CF in 40 hours. The second stage is designed to release the rest of the pond at the historic 5 - year stormwater runoff rate of 0.09 CFS to mitigate downstream flooding and to control the flows off -site. The entire pond is designed to be released within 51.71 hours, which is under the 72 hours required per Colorado State Legislation. Initial calculations showed that the release time exceeded the maximum allowed 72 hours. Soil sampling was conducted from a location near the detention pond in order to determine the percolation rate. The percolation rate of 0.20 ft/hr was included in the release time calculations to account for the percent of stormwater infiltrated into the ground, which resulted in a release time of 51.71 hours. 3. The WQCV outlet will consist of a concrete structure with a straight -notch opening of 0.274 feet (3 and 5/16") wide by 0.42 feet (5 and 1/16") tall, which will allow the 1,962 -CF to be released in 40.0 hours. An orifice plate will be used to release the remaining pond water at the 5 -year historic flow rate of 0.09 CFS. The size of the orifice plate orifice is 1.6 inches (1 and 19/32") in diameter. 4. All criteria and calculation methods used in this report are presented in either Weld County Code, or in compliance with Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals Volumes I, II, and III dated June 2001 (revised in April 2008), per discussions with Weld County Public Works. IV. Drainage Facility Design A. General Concept 1. The existing varying slopes and the location of the proposed detention pond release structure make it difficult to maintain historic drainage patterns on the site. Historic drainage patterns on the site are as follows: Stormwater runoff on the Southern half of the site flows in an East to West direction at approximately 0.6% slopes and reaches the Southwest corner of the site and flows onto the agricultural property to the South. Stormwater runoff on the Northern half of the site flows in a West to East direction at approximately 2% slopes and reaches the Northeast corner of the site and eventually flows into the borrow ditch along WCR 44. The proposed detention ponds will be located on the Eastern side of the site. A driveway onto the site will divide the two ponds and they will be connected with a 12 inch reinforced concrete pipe under the driveway. The detained stormwater will be 7 released at the historic 5 -year release rate for storm events up to the 100 -year event, the result is a decrease in stormwater flow values for storm events larger than the 5 - year storm. Stormwater released from the detention pond will be released into the borrow ditch along WCR 44. The proposed drainage plan is as follows: The site will be graded to allow stormwater runoff to flow in a West to East direction for the entire site (excluding the Southwest comer) and will eventually reach the detention pond. Historic drainage patterns will need to be altered on -site in order for the stormwater runoff on the site to reach the detention pond. A drainage swale will be located on the Southwest area of the site and will help direct water to the East towards the detention pond. Off -site drainage patterns will remain intact. 2. The proposed drainage facilities will control the stormwater runoff that leaves the site, the controlled release rate is the historic 5 -year storm. The site does have constraints that makes it difficult for all of the stormwater runoff to reach the detention pond. The Southwest corner of the site, which is 17,896 -SF (0.41 AC), will not be re -graded and stormwater flows from this area will flow onto the agricultural property to the South and should eventually reach the borrow ditch along WCR 44. 3. The Depth -Duration -Frequency and Intensity -Duration -Frequency Tables have been created using the Urban Drainage Spreadsheets as obtained from the Urban Drainage Wed Site, using the NOAA ATLAS 14. The required detention pond volume was calculated using the Modified FAA Method found in the UDFCD Detention Basin Volume Estimating Workbook Version 2.34, Released November 2013. The restrictor plate sizing for circular vertical orifices spreadsheet, based on equations found in the City of Greeley Stormwater Design Criteria, was used and it was determined that an orifice plate is better suited for this project. A spreadsheet is included that shows the designed WQCV time of release and WQCV depth in the detention pond. A spreadsheet is included that shows the stormwater release time of the entire pond assuming no infiltration occurring. A spreadsheet is included that shows the stormwater release time of the entire pond including infiltration. A spreadsheet is included that shows the designed detention pond volume using the average area method. A spreadsheet is included that shows all drainage calculations using the Rational Method, orifice flow calculations, and emergency overflow weir calculations. A spreadsheet is included that shows the design of the WQCV weir notch calculations. A soil visual/tactile characterization log spreadsheet is included that shows the percolation rate for the detention pond. Drainage calculations are provided that show flow rates for the swale including stability and capacity checks. Spreadsheets are included that show interpolated values for Runoff coefficients and Storm Intensity values. A spreadsheet is included that shows the various surface areas that impact the drainage calculations. Table 10-1 is provided that shows percolation rates of various soil types. Table R0-5 from Urban Drainage Criteria Manual (V.1) is provided that shows Runoff Coefficients for type A soils. Soil information from NRCS Web Soil Survey Website is provided that includes: hydrologic soil group, soil description, unpaved local roads and streets, small commercial buildings, corrosion of concrete, corrosion of steel, depth to water table, dwellings with basements, and dwellings without basements. 8 4. The drainage structures for this drainage design includes: an emergency over flow weir for the detention pond, a release pipe from the detention pond, an orifice plate for the release of the detained stormwater at the historic 5 -year release for the site, the WQCV concrete structure with notch for release of WQCV stormwater, and a 12" reinforced concrete pipe that will link the two detention ponds. B. Specific Details 1. The required detention pond volume, which includes the 100-yr volume (23,167 -CF) and WQCV (1,962 -CF), is a total of 25,129 -CF. The designed detention pond volume was calculated to be 27,382.7 CF. The oversizing of the pond (by approximately 8.23%) is for the future sedimentation that will occur at the site. Once the site has stabilized, the detention pond will require cleaning every 5 to 10 years, after the completion of grading AND the site has been stabilized, the detention pond will require one cleaning. The side slopes of the detention pond are 4:1 slopes and most equipment will be adequate in mowing the detention pond as needed. Detention pond cleaning, silt removal, can be performed using small equipment such as a skid -steer loader. The drainage system, as designed, will be easily maintained. V. Conclusions A. Compliance with the Weld County CODE 1. The stormwater drainage design is in compliance with the Weld County Code. B. Drainage Concept 1. The drainage design will mitigate site stormwater runoff form the higher storm events. The stormwater will be released at the historic 5 -year rate, so all storm events higher than 5 -year events will be released at a lower rate which will help diminish downstream flows. The historic 5 -year flow rate is 0.09-CFS compared to the developed 100 -year flow rate of 7.65-CFS. 2. There are no foreseeable influences of the proposed development on any Weld County Master Drainage Plan recommendations. 3. The Gilmore ditch runs along the Western portion of the property. Ownership information for the Gilmore ditch was researched and could not be determined. VI. References a. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes I and II, dated June 2001 and revised April 2008. b. Weld County Addendum to the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, October 2006. c. Urban Storm Drainage Web Site for Spreadsheet Models. d. City of Greeley Storm Drainage Manual Vol. II, March 2007. e. Civil Engineering Reference Manual, Lindeburg Eleventh Edition. f. USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, Web Soil Survey, National Cooperative Soil Survey g. Weld County Engineering and Construction Criteria, April 2012, Draft Copy. h. NOAA Atlas 14 i. Weld County Online Mapping Website. www.weldgov.com/departmentsiassessor 9 VII. Appendices A. Hydrologic Computations 1. To the North of the site past WCR 44 are three different properties including: a residential property owned by Mary Albee, a residential property owned by Mark and Kristine Fogle, and an agricultural property owned by Todd and Renee Perkins. To the South and to the East of the site is an agricultural property owned by Darrel and Debbi Hill. To the West of the site is a residential property owned by Marvin and Betty James. No developments are located near the site. The land surrounding the property is either agricultural or single residential properties. 2. Stormwater runoff computations for different storm frequencies were calculated for the entire site and are attached to this report for reference. 3. Stormwater runoff computations for the entire historic and developed site were calculated and are attached for reference. 4. All computer calculations and inputs are attached for reference. These calculations include: Stormwater runoff rates for historic and developed flows, required detention volume by modified FAA method, designed detention pond volume, detention pond water release time, water quality release time, orifice flow calculations, and emergency overflow weir calculations. B. Hydraulic Computations 1. A 12" R.C.P. Culvert will connect the two detention ponds and is 78 feet in length with a slope of 0.23%. 2. The site will have one Swale located in the Southwest portion of the property to help direct water in an Eastern direction to the detention ponds. The swale has side slopes with 4:1 ratios and has a maximum depth of one foot. The swale has an approximate length of 429 feet with approximately 0.5% slopes. 3. Riprap will be along the downstream side of the emergency overflow weir structure. All riprap design information and calculations are included for reference. 4. The required detention pond volume, which includes the 100-yr volume (23,167 cubic feet) and WQCV (1,962 cubic feet), is a total of 25,129 cubic feet. The designed detention pond volume was calculated to be 27,382.7 cubic feet. The oversizing of the pond (by approximately 8.23%) is for the future sedimentation that will occur at the site. The orifice plate is designed to release the detention pond water at the historic 5 -year flow rate of 0.09 CFS. The diameter of the orifice on the plate is 1.6 inches and is designed to release the water within approximately 51.71 hours. The WQCV Release structure, which includes a straight notch opening, is designed to release the water within 40.0 hours. 5. All computer model input and output calculations are attached for reference. 10 7124!2018 Property Report Weld County PROPERTY PORTAL Property Information (970) 400-3650 Technical Support (970) 400-4357 Account: R8948137 July 24, 2018 Account Information Account Parcel R8948137 Space Account Type Tax Year Buildings Actual Value Assessed Value 105320100013 Agricultural 2018 069 030 Legal E2 NE4 20-4-64 LOT A REC EXEMPT RECX16-0160 Subdivision Block Lot Land Economic Area 6201 KERSEY Property Address Property City Zip Section Township Range 20 04 64 Owner(s) Account Owner Name Address R8948137 VARGAS SERGIO 800 1ST ST KERSEY, CO 806449762 R8948137 VARGAS EMMA Document History https://propertyreport.comeld.co.us/?account=R8948137 114 7/24/2018 Property Report Reception Rec Date Type Grantor Grantee Doc Fee Sale Date Sale Price 4276877 02-08-2017 RE RECORDED EXEMPTION RECX16-0.00 0160 0 4276877 02-08-2017 RE RECX16- 0160 RECX16-0.00 0160 02-08-2017 0 4369771 01-23-2018 WD HILL DARREL L; HILL DEBBIE VARGAS SERGIO, VARGAS EMMA 11.80 01-23-2018 118,000 Building Information No buildings found. Valuation Information Type Code Description Actual Value Assessed Value Acres Land SqFt Land 4147 GRAZING LAND- AGRICULTURAL 68 20 3.000 130,680 Land 4167 WASTE LAND 1 10 0.140 6,098 Totals - - 069 30 3.140 136,778 For Single Family Residential Houses, CLICK HERE to search for sales of similar properties using our Property Portal. Tax Authorities https://propertyreport.co,weld.co.us/?account=88948137 2/4 7/24/2018 Property Report Tax Area District ID District Name Current Mill Levy 0738 0700 AIMS JUNIOR COLLEGE 6.317 0738 0302 CENTRAL COLORADO WATER (CCW) 1.800 0738 0309 CENTRAL COLORADO WATER SUBDISTRICT (CCS) 1.353 0738 0738 0305 0305 (CWC) AL WELD COUNTY WATER 0 000 0738 1050 HIGH PLAINS LIBRARY 3.256 0738 0301 NORTHERN COLORADO WATER 1.000 0738 0515 PLATTE VALLEY FIRE 5.171 0738 0207 SCHOOL DIST RE7-KERSEY 10.642 0738 0100 WELD COUNTY 15.800 0738 1200 WEST GREELEY CONSERVATION 0.414 Total - - 45.753 Photo NO PHOTO Sketch NO SKETCH https://propertyreport.co.weld.co.us/?account=R8948137 3/4 7/24/2018 Property Report Copyright O 2018 Weld County, Colorado. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy & Disclaimer I Accessibility Information https://propertyrepart.co.weld.co,us/?account=R8948137 4/4 Pr WELD COUNTY 41NLI Ni: MAPPING Map Title ALBEE. MARV4 9:199 GIS Calcu laced Acres f63 52108045405a .5,7466 JAMES MARVIN FOGLEIMARKA VARGAS SERGIO HILL DARREL L 48:276 GIS PERKINS alc datedtAcres TODD RICHARD Calculated Acres 05-123-11634 417.7 0 208.84 417.7 Feet 1: 2,506 W GS_1984_We b_M ercator_Auxiliary_sphere © Weld County Colorado This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data lar rs that app-ar on this map may or ma not by accurate, current, or other ice reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Tom; C- Qc..urtr Legend Parcels A Weld Oil and Gas Location As: Floodplain - 500 Year Floodplain - 100 Year Zone A Floodplain -100 Year Floodwa Floodplain - 100 Year Zone AE ▪ Floodplain - 104 Year Zone AI- ▪ Floodplain - 100 Year Zone AC Septic Point i! Septic Tank Septic C bean Out [X1 Septic Diverter Valve ▪ Water Well Septic Distribution Box ri Septic Lift Station • Septic System 9 Other/Unknown — Septic Line Septic Polygon r I Septic Field ® Septic Percolation Area • Other/Unknown Weld County Maintained Road Paved Road Gravel Road to inthr Maintaincri Pnarie Notes 40° 18'20"N 40° i8' 11" N 535570 a yO 533830 53EE60 535590 536720 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part ® id Diltp ma 7 n'o4 f wmErd €±C 5JI gyllao Map Seale: 1:1,220 if printed on A portrait (8,5" x 11'') sheet 0 15 30 so 50 10:1 Meters Feet so 2W 300 Map projection: Web Mercator Comer c ordinates: WGS84 Edge 6a: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 County Road 44 536750 a N A 8 40° 18'20" N 40° 18' 11" N USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey i Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 1 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (Aol) Area of Interest (AOl) Soils Soil Rating Polygons A 0 A/D B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines A +wr ND B/D C r4y C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points D A ND B ® BID D O O C C/D D Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation + rr Rails ras Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background IN Aerial Photography MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 17, 2015 —Sep 22, 2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. USDA Natural Resources ;ilia Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 2 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 A percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest Description 4.3 4.3 Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long -duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, BID, and CID). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission, Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or CID), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition 100.0% 100.0% USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey alail Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 3 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Aggregation is the process by which a set of component attribute values is reduced to a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. A map unit is typically composed of one or more "components". A component is either some type of soil or some nonsoil entity, e.g., rock outcrop. For the attribute being aggregated, the first step of the aggregation process is to derive one attribute value for each of a map unit's components. From this set of component attributes, the next step of the aggregation process derives a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. Once a single value for each map unit is derived, a thematic map for soil map units can be rendered. Aggregation must be done because, on any soil map, map units are delineated but components are not. For each of a map unit's components, a corresponding percent composition is recorded. A percent composition of 60 indicates that the corresponding component typically makes up approximately 60% of the map unit. Percent composition is a critical factor in some, but not all, aggregation methods. The aggregation method "Dominant Condition" first groups like attribute values for the components in a map unit. For each group, percent composition is set to the sum of the percent composition of all components participating in that group. These groups now represent "conditions" rather than components. The attribute value associated with the group with the highest cumulative percent composition is returned. If more than one group shares the highest cumulative percent composition, the corresponding "tie -break" rule determines which value should be returned. The "tie -break" rule indicates whether the lower or higher group value should be returned in the case of a percent composition tie. The result returned by this aggregation method represents the dominant condition throughout the map unit only when no tie has occurred. Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Components whose percent composition is below the cutoff value will not be considered. If no cutoff value is specified, all components in the database will be considered. The data for some contrasting soils of minor extent may not be in the database, and therefore are not considered. Tie -break Rule: Higher The tie -break rule indicates which value should be selected from a set of multiple candidate values, or which value should be selected in the event of a percent composition tie. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey —41.11 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 4 of 4 Map Unit Description: Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes ---Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 73 —Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363s Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Vona and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Vona Setting Landform: Terraces, plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile Hi - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R0676Y024CO) Hydric soil rating: No USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey i" Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 1 of 2 Map Unit Description: Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes ---Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Minor Components Remmit Percent of map unit: 8 percent Hydric soil rating: No Valent Percent of map unit: 7 percent Hydric soil rating: No Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey r Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 2 of 2 40° 18'11"N a b A Unpaved Local Roads and Streets —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part S i I4l n- apt L:1O Wad @tt US8J WZACI, 533630 a'00 a b 0 15 30 0 50 1W Map projection: Web Meretor Corner coordinates: WGSS4 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 Map Scale: 1:1,220 if printed on A portrait (8.S' x 11") sheet 60 Meters 90 Feet 200 300 a fv 53.5750 536750 a N A 40° 18' 20" N 46' 1011"4 USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 1 of 4 Unpaved Local Roads and Streets —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Area of Interest (AOI) 171 Soils Soil Rating Polygons n Very limited MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOt) Somewhat limited Not limited Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines Very limited s Somewhat limited ,�► Not limited r Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points IN Very limited O Somewhat limited • Not limited [] Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation r —M —r- Rails war, Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background In Aerial Photography MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 17, 2015 —Sep 22, 2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 2 of 4 Unpaved Local Roads and Streets —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Unpaved Local Roads and Streets Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Component name (percent) Rating reasons (numeric values) Acres in AOI Percent of AO1 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest Not limited Vona (85%) 4.3 100.0% 4.3 100.0% Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOl Not limited 'Totals for Area of Interest Description 4.3 4.3 100.0% Unpaved local roads and streets are those roads and streets that carry traffic year round but have a graded surface of local soil material or aggregate. Description: Unpaved local roads and streets are those roads and streets that carry traffic year round but have a graded surface of local soil material or aggregate. The roads and streets consist of (1) the underlying local soil material, either cut or fill, which is called "the sub - grade"; (2) the surface, which may be the same as the subgrade or may have aggrate such as crushed limestone added. They are graded to shed water, and conventional drainage measures are provided. These roads and streets are built mainly from the soil at the site. Soil interpretations for local roads and streets are used as a tool in evaluating soil suitability and identifying soil limitations for the practice. The rating is for soils in their present condition and does not consider present land use. Soil properties and qualities that affect local roads and streets are those that influence the ease of excavation and grading and the traffic -supporting capacity. The properties and qualities that affect the ease of excavation and grading are hardness of bedrock or a cemented pan, depth to bedrock or a cemented pan, depth to a water table, flooding, the amount of large stones, and slope. The properties that affect traffic - supporting capacity are soil strength as inferred from the AASHTO group index and the Unified classification, subsidence, shrink -swell behavior, potential frost action, and depth to the seasonal high water table. The dust generating tendacy of the soil is also considered. 100.0% 1 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 3 of 4 Unpaved Local Roads and Streets —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Aggregation is the process by which a set of component attribute values is reduced to a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. A map unit is typically composed of one or more "components". A component is either some type of soil or some nonsoil entity, e.g., rock outcrop. For the attribute being aggregated, the first step of the aggregation process is to derive one attribute value for each of a map unit's components. From this set of component attributes, the next step of the aggregation process derives a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. Once a single value for each map unit is derived, a thematic map for soil map units can be rendered. Aggregation must be done because, on any soil map, map units are delineated but components are not. For each of a map unit's components, a corresponding percent composition is recorded. A percent composition of 60 indicates that the corresponding component typically makes up approximately 60% of the map unit, Percent composition is a critical factor in some, but not all, aggregation methods. The aggregation method "Dominant Condition" first groups like attribute values for the components in a map unit. For each group, percent composition is set to the sum of the percent composition of all components participating in that group. These groups now represent "conditions" rather than components. The attribute value associated with the group with the highest cumulative percent composition is returned. If more than one group shares the highest cumulative percent composition, the corresponding "tie -break" rule determines which value should be returned. The "tie -break" rule indicates whether the lower or higher group value should be returned in the case of a percent composition tie. The result returned by this aggregation method represents the dominant condition throughout the map unit only when no tie has occurred. Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Components whose percent composition is below the cutoff value will not be considered. If no cutoff value is specified, all components in the database will be considered. The data for some contrasting soils of minor extent may not be in the database, and therefore are not considered. Tie -break Rule: Higher The tie -break rule indicates which value should be selected from a set of multiple candidate values, or which value should be selected in the event of a percent composition tie. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 4 of 4 40° 18'11"N 3 O N 0 15 30 Small Commercial Buildings —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Lao fn`-r€raj'nall I 1]ll !cif f tBa ao Map Scale; 1:1,220 if printed on A portrait (6,5"x 11") sheet Meters 60 90 eet 7Y 0 50 1 DO 2D0 300 Map projection; Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: WM Zone 13N WCS84 a iyV 400 18' 20' N 400 !8' I1" N USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey WINE Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 1 of 5 Small Commercial Buildings —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOl) Area of Interest {Adl) Soils Soil Rating Polygons Very limited Somewhat limited Not limited Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines ,.�.r Very limited Somewhat limited ,,,r Not limited r Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points S Very limited O Somewhat limited ® Not limited ▪ Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails �.. Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads MAP INFORMATION Background The soil surveys that comprise your AOl were mapped at N o Aerial Photography 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 17, 2015 —Sep 22, 2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 2 of 5 Small Commercial Buildings —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Small Commercial Buildings Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Component name (percent) Rating reasons (numeric values) Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest Somewhat limited Vona (85%) Slope (0.00) 4.3 100.0% 4.3 100.0% Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Somewhat limited Totals for Area of Interest 4.3 4.3 100.0% 100.0% USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey r Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 3 of 5 Small Commercial Buildings —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Description Small commercial buildings are structures that are less than three stories high and do not have basements. The foundation is assumed to consist of spread footings of reinforced concrete built on undisturbed soil at a depth of 2 feet or at the depth of maximum frost penetration, whichever is deeper. The ratings are based on the soil properties that affect the capacity of the soil to support a load without movement and on the properties that affect excavation and construction costs. The properties that affect the load -supporting capacity include depth to a water table, ponding, flooding, subsidence, linear extensibility (shrink -swell potential), and compressibility (which is inferred from the Unified classification of the soil). The properties that affect the ease and amount of excavation include flooding, depth to a water table, ponding, slope, depth to bedrock or a cemented pan, hardness of bedrock or a cemented pan, and the amount and size of rock fragments. The ratings are both verbal and numerical. Rating class terms indicate the extent to which the soils are limited by all of the soil features that affect the specified use. "Not limited" indicates that the soil has features that are very favorable for the specified use. Good performance and very low maintenance can be expected. "Somewhat limited" indicates that the soil has features that are moderately favorable for the specified use. The limitations can be overcome or minimized by special planning, design, or installation. Fair performance and moderate maintenance can be expected. "Very limited" indicates that the soil has one or more features that are unfavorable for the specified use. The limitations generally cannot be overcome without major soil reclamation, special design, or expensive installation procedures. Poor performance and high maintenance can be expected. Numerical ratings indicate the severity of individual [imitations. The ratings are shown as decimal fractions ranging from 0.01 to 1.00. They indicate gradations between the point at which a soil feature has the greatest negative impact on the use (1.00) and the point at which the soil feature is not a limitation (0.00). The map unit components listed for each map unit in the accompanying Summary by Map Unit table in Web Soil Survey or the Aggregation Report in Soil Data Viewer are determined by the aggregation method chosen. An aggregated rating class is shown for each map unit. The components listed for each map unit are only those that have the same rating class as listed for the map unit. The percent composition of each component in a particular map unit is presented to help the user better understand the percentage of each map unit that has the rating presented. Other components with different ratings may be present in each map unit. The ratings for all components, regardless of the map unit aggregated rating, can be viewed by generating the equivalent report from the Soil Reports tab in Web Soil Survey or from the Soil Data Mart site. Onsite investigation may be needed to validate these interpretations and to confirm the identity of the soil on a given site. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 4 of 5 Small Commercial Buildings —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Rating Options Aggregation Method. Dominant Condition Aggregation is the process by which a set of component attribute values is reduced to a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. A map unit is typically composed of one or more "components". A component is either some type of soil or some nonsoil entity, e.g., rock outcrop. For the attribute being aggregated, the first step of the aggregation process is to derive one attribute value for each of a map unit's components. From this set of component attributes, the next step of the aggregation process derives a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. Once a single value for each map unit is derived, a thematic map for soil map units can be rendered. Aggregation must be done because, on any soil map, map units are delineated but components are not. For each of a map unit's components, a corresponding percent composition is recorded. A percent composition of 60 indicates that the corresponding component typically makes up approximately 60% of the map unit. Percent composition is a critical factor in some, but not all, aggregation methods. The aggregation method "Dominant Condition" first groups like attribute values for the components in a map unit. For each group, percent composition is set to the sum of the percent composition of all components participating in that group. These groups now represent "conditions" rather than components. The attribute value associated with the group with the highest cumulative percent composition is returned. If more than one group shares the highest cumulative percent composition, the corresponding "tie -break" rule determines which value should be returned. The "tie -break" rule indicates whether the lower or higher group value should be returned in the case of a percent composition tie. The result returned by this aggregation method represents the dominant condition throughout the map unit only when no tie has occurred. Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified Components whose percent composition is below the cutoff value will not be considered. If no cutoff value is specified, all components in the database will be considered. The data for some contrasting soils of minor extent may not be in the database, and therefore are not considered. Tie -break Rule: Higher The tie -break rule indicates which value should be selected from a set of multiple candidate values, or which value should be selected in the event of a percent composition tie. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/7018 Page 5 of 5 40° 18' 20' N 40° 18' 11" N 536570 a � N Corrosion of Concrete —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 535650 53690 Map Scale: 1:1,220 if printed on A portrait (8,5" x 11") sheet 0 15 30 Meters 90 Feet 0 50 100 200 303 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge res: UTT1 Zone 13N WGS84 535720 536750 40° 18'20'N 40° 18' li"N USDA Natural Resources r Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 1 of 4 Corrosion of Concrete —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (A01) Area of Interest (AO') IN Aerial Photography Soils Soil Rating Polygons n High Moderate Low Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines , High r r Moderate ..rte Low K Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points • High ▪ Moderate O Low O Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation - Rails ,. Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background The soil surveys that comprise your ADl were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 17, 2015 —Sep 22, 2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 2 of 4 Corrosion of Concrete —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Corrosion of Concrete Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 Moderate percent slopes 'Totals for Area of Interest Description 4.3 4.3 100.0% 100.0% "Risk of corrosion" pertains to potential soil -induced electrochemical or chemical action that corrodes or weakens concrete. The rate of corrosion of concrete is based mainly on the sulfate and sodium content, texture, moisture content, and acidity of the soil. Special site examination and design may be needed if the combination of factors results in a severe hazard of corrosion. The concrete in installations that intersect soil boundaries or soil layers is more susceptible to corrosion than the concrete in installations that are entirely within one kind of soil or within one soil layer. The risk of corrosion is expressed as "low," "moderate," or "high." Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Aggregation is the process by which a set of component attribute values is reduced to a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. A map unit is typically composed of one or more "components". A component is either some type of soil or some nonsoil entity, e.g., rock outcrop. For the attribute being aggregated, the first step of the aggregation process is to derive one attribute value for each of a map unit's components. From this set of component attributes, the next step of the aggregation process derives a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. Once a single value for each map unit is derived, a thematic map for soil map units can be rendered. Aggregation must be done because, on any soil map, map units are delineated but components are not. For each of a map unit's components, a corresponding percent composition is recorded. A percent composition of 60 indicates that the corresponding component typically makes up approximately 60% of the map unit. Percent composition is a critical factor in some, but not all, aggregation methods. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 3 of 4 Corrosion of Concrete —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part The aggregation method "Dominant Condition" first groups like attribute values for the components in a map unit. For each group, percent composition is set to the sum of the percent composition of all components participating in that group. These groups now represent "conditions" rather than components. The attribute value associated with the group with the highest cumulative percent composition is returned. If more than one group shares the highest cumulative percent composition, the corresponding "tie -break" rule determines which value should be returned. The "tie -break" rule indicates whether the lower or higher group value should be returned in the case of a percent composition tie. The result returned by this aggregation method represents the dominant condition throughout the map unit only when no tie has occurred. Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified Components whose percent composition is below the cutoff value will not be considered. If no cutoff value is specified, all components in the database will be considered. The data for some contrasting soils of minor extent may not be in the database, and therefore are not considered. Tie -break Rule: Higher The tie -break rule indicates which value should be selected from a set of multiple candidate values, or which value should be selected in the event of a percent composition tie. USDA Natural Resources r Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 4 of 4 40° 15'11" N Corrosion of Steel —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part iI NI p 1l7w n©f be w8OBd atki. ufaua, 538570 538800 b A S Map Scale: 1:1,220 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet 5330 0 15 30 w Meters 93 Feet 0 50 100 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WCSR4 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 2(0 303 336500 536720 3 535750 536750 a N 40° 15' 20" N 40° 18' 11" N USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 1 of 4 Corrosion of Steel —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (API) Area of Interest (A0I) Soils Soil Rating Polygons High Moderate Low n Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines High r • Moderate em,r` Low . • Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points ■ 0 High Moderate Low O Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Background The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at NE Aerial Photography 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017 Transportation 4-4-t Rails ,,.rm Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 17, 2015 —Sep 22, 2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 2 of 4 Corrosion of Steel —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Corrosion of Steel Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 High percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest Description 4.3 4.3 100.0% 100.0% "Risk of corrosion" pertains to potential soil -induced electrochemical or chemical action that corrodes or weakens uncoated steel. The rate of corrosion of uncoated steel is related to such factors as soil moisture, particle -size distribution, acidity, and electrical conductivity of the soil. Special site examination and design may be needed if the combination of factors results in a severe hazard of corrosion. The steel in installations that intersect soil boundaries or soil layers is more susceptible to corrosion than the steel in installations that are entirely within one kind of soil or within one soil layer. The risk of corrosion is expressed as "low," "moderate," or "high." Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Aggregation is the process by which a set of component attribute values is reduced to a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. A map unit is typically composed of one or more "components". A component is either some type of soil or some nonsoil entity, e.g., rock outcrop. For the attribute being aggregated, the first step of the aggregation process is to derive one attribute value for each of a map unit's components. From this set of component attributes, the next step of the aggregation process derives a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. Once a single value for each map unit is derived, a thematic map for soil map units can be rendered. Aggregation must be done because, on any soil map, map units are delineated but components are not. For each of a map unit's components, a corresponding percent composition is recorded. A percent composition of 60 indicates that the corresponding component typically makes up approximately 60% of the map unit. Percent composition is a critical factor in some, but not all, aggregation methods. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2015 Page 3 of 4 Corrosion of Steel —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part The aggregation method "Dominant Condition" first groups like attribute values for the components in a map unit. For each group, percent composition is set to the sum of the percent composition of all components participating in that group. These groups now represent "conditions" rather than components. The attribute value associated with the group with the highest cumulative percent composition is returned. If more than one group shares the highest cumulative percent composition, the corresponding "tie -break" rule determines which value should be returned. The "tie -break" rule indicates whether the lower or higher group value should be returned in the case of a percent composition tie. The result returned by this aggregation method represents the dominant condition throughout the map unit only when no tie has occurred. Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Components whose percent composition is below the cutoff value will not be considered. If no cutoff value is specified, all components in the database will be considered. The data for some contrasting soils of minor extent may not be in the database, and therefore are not considered. Tie -break Rule: Higher The tie -break rule indicates which value should be selected from a set of multiple candidate values, or which value should be selected in the event of a percent composition tie. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 4 of 4 40° 18' 2Cf' N 40° 1'r 11" N 535570 A ti 5.12630 Depth to Water Table —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 5?5530 535650 Map Scale; 1;1,220 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet 0 15 30 60 0 50 100 200 Map projection: Web Mercator Comer coordinates: WGS84 Edge ha. LPN Zone 13N WGS84 Meters 00 Feet 390 526750 3 fV 40° 18' 20" N 40° 18'11"N USDA Natural Resources :1mMs Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Web Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 1 of 4 Depth to Water Table —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AO1) Area of Interest (A01) Soils Soil Rating Polygons n 0-25 25-50 n 50 - 100 100-150 150 - 200 Q > 200 Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines 0-25 ✓ X 25 - 50 • w 50-100 • • 100 - 150 150 - 200 > 200 . x Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points ■ 0-25 O 25 - 50 ® 50-100 100-150 ▪ 150 - 200 • > 200 ® Not rated or not available The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation - Rails ry Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background mhi Aerial Photography Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 17, 2015 —Sep 22, 2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 2 of 4 Depth to Water Table —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Depth to Water Table Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating (centimeters) Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 >200 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest Description 4.3 100.0% 4.3 100.0%1 "Water table" refers to a saturated zone in the soil. It occurs during specified months. Estimates of the upper limit are based mainly on observations of the water table at selected sites and on evidence of a saturated zone, namely grayish colors (redoximorphic features) in the soil. A saturated zone that lasts for less than a month is not considered a water table. This attribute is actually recorded as three separate values in the database. A low value and a high value indicate the range of this attribute for the soil component. A "representative" value indicates the expected value of this attribute for the component. For this soil property, only the representative value is used. Rating Options Units of Measure: centimeters Aggregation Method: Dominant Component Aggregation is the process by which a set of component attribute values is reduced to a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. A map unit is typically composed of one or more "components". A component is either some type of soil or some nonsoil entity, e.g., rock outcrop. For the attribute being aggregated, the first step of the aggregation process is to derive one attribute value for each of a map unit's components. From this set of component attributes, the next step of the aggregation process derives a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. Once a single value for each map unit is derived, a thematic map for soil map units can be rendered. Aggregation must be done because, on any soil map, map units are delineated but components are not. For each of a map unit's components, a corresponding percent composition is recorded. A percent composition of 60 indicates that the corresponding component typically makes up approximately 60% of the map unit. Percent composition is a critical factor in some, but not all, aggregation methods. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey dial Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 3 of 4 Depth to Water Table —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part The aggregation method "Dominant Component" returns the attribute value associated with the component with the highest percent composition in the map unit. If more than one component shares the highest percent composition, the corresponding "tie -break" rule determines which value should be returned. The "tie -break" rule indicates whether the lower or higher attribute value should be returned in the case of a percent composition tie. The result returned by this aggregation method may or may not represent the dominant condition throughout the map unit. Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified Components whose percent composition is below the cutoff value will not be considered. If no cutoff value is specified, all components in the database will be considered. The data for some contrasting soils of minor extent may not be in the database, and therefore are not considered. Tie -break Rule: Lower The tie -break rule indicates which value should be selected from a set of multiple candidate values, or which value should be selected in the event of a percent composition tie. Interpret Nulls as Zero; No This option indicates if a null value for a component should be converted to zero before aggregation occurs. This will be done only if a map unit has at least one component where this value is not null. Beginning Month: January Ending Month: December USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 4 of 4 40° 18 20" N 44° 18'11"N 535570 3 g N Dwellings Without Basements —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part EI g wend ¶ U gc 119. Map Scale: 1:1,220 if printed on A portrait (8,5" x 11") sheet 0 15 30 50 Meters 90 Feet 300 4 50 100 Map projection: Web Mercator Comer coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 200 535500 531750 a 7v A 40° 18 24" N 40° 18 11" N USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 1 of 5 Dwellings Without Basements —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (ADl) n Area of Interest (A0l) Aerial Photography Sells Soil Rating Polygons n Very limited Somewhat limited Not limited Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines .y Very limited • r Somewhat limited ,, Not limited • Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points • Very limited O Somewhat limited Not limited Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation 44--0- Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 17, 2015 —Sep 22, 2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5123/2018 Page 2 of 5 Dwellings Without Basements —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Dwellings Without Basements Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Component name (percent) Rating reasons (numeric values) Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest Not limited Vona (85%) 4.3 4.3 100.0% 100.0"% Rating Not limited Acres in AOI 4.3 Percent of AOI [Totals for Area of Interest I 4.3 100.0% 100.0%1 USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 3 of 5 Dwellings Without Basements —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Description Dwellings are single-family houses of three stories or less. For dwellings without basements, the foundation is assumed to consist of spread footings of reinforced concrete built on undisturbed soil at a depth of 2 feet or at the depth of maximum frost penetration, whichever is deeper. The ratings for dwellings are based on the soil properties that affect the capacity of the soil to support a load without movement and on the properties that affect excavation and construction costs. The properties that affect the load -supporting capacity include depth to a water table, ponding, flooding, subsidence, linear extensibility (shrink -swell potential), and compressibility. Compressibility is inferred from the Unified classification of the soil. The properties that affect the ease and amount of excavation include depth to a water table, ponding, flooding, slope, depth to bedrock or a cemented pan, hardness of bedrock or a cemented pan, and the amount and size of rock fragments. The ratings are both verbal and numerical. Rating class terms indicate the extent to which the soils are limited by all of the soil features that affect the specified use. "Not limited" indicates that the soil has features that are very favorable for the specified use. Good performance and very low maintenance can be expected. "Somewhat limited" indicates that the soil has features that are moderately favorable for the specified use. The limitations can be overcome or minimized by special planning, design, or installation. Fair performance and moderate maintenance can be expected. "Very limited" indicates that the soil has one or more features that are unfavorable for the specified use. The limitations generally cannot be overcome without major soil reclamation, special design, or expensive installation procedures. Poor performance and high maintenance can be expected. Numerical ratings indicate the severity of individual limitations. The ratings are shown as decimal fractions ranging from 0.01 to 1.00. They indicate gradations between the point at which a soil feature has the greatest negative impact on the use (1.00) and the point at which the soil feature is not a limitation (0.00). The map unit components listed for each map unit in the accompanying Summary by Map Unit table in Web Soil Survey or the Aggregation Report in Soil Data Viewer are determined by the aggregation method chosen. An aggregated rating class is shown for each map unit. The components listed for each map unit are only those that have the same rating class as listed for the map unit. The percent composition of each component in a particular map unit is presented to help the user better understand the percentage of each map unit that has the rating presented. Other components with different ratings may be present in each map unit. The ratings for all components, regardless of the map unit aggregated rating, can be viewed by generating the equivalent report from the Soil Reports tab in Web Soil Survey or from the Soil Data Mart site. Onsite investigation may be needed to validate these interpretations and to confirm the identity of the soil on a given site. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 4 of 5 Dwellings Without Basements —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Aggregation is the process by which a set of component attribute values is reduced to a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. A map unit is typically composed of one or more "components". A component is either some type of soil or some nonsoil entity, e.g., rock outcrop. For the attribute being aggregated, the first step of the aggregation process is to derive one attribute value for each of a map unit's components. From this set of component attributes, the next step of the aggregation process derives a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. Once a single value for each map unit is derived, a thematic map for soil map units can be rendered. Aggregation must be done because, on any soil map, map units are delineated but components are not. For each of a map unit's components, a corresponding percent composition is recorded. A percent composition of 60 indicates that the corresponding component typically makes up approximately 60% of the map unit. Percent composition is a critical factor in some, but not all, aggregation methods. The aggregation method "Dominant Condition" first groups like attribute values for the components in a map unit. For each group, percent composition is set to the sum of the percent composition of all components participating in that group. These groups now represent "conditions" rather than components. The attribute value associated with the group with the highest cumulative percent composition is returned. If more than one group shares the highest cumulative percent composition, the corresponding "tie -break" rule determines which value should be returned, The "tie -break" rule indicates whether the lower or higher group value should be returned in the case of a percent composition tie. The result returned by this aggregation method represents the dominant condition throughout the map unit only when no tie has occurred. Component Percent Cutoff None Specified Components whose percent composition is below the cutoff value will not be considered. If no cutoff value is specified, all components in the database will be considered. The data for some contrasting soils of minor extent may not be in the database, and therefore are not considered. Tie -break Rule: Higher The tie -break rule indicates which value should be selected from a set of multiple candidate values, or which value should be selected in the event of a percent composition tie. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/23/2018 Page 5 of 5 SOIL VISUAL/TACTILE CHARACTERIZATION LOG ClientlAddress Legal Description Investigation Date: Sergio Vargas (18-023): Section 20, Township 4N, Range 64W, Kersey, CO Log 1 of 1 716118 Soil Parent Material(s) [Mark all that apply] Till Outwash Lacustrine Notes: Iluvium I Loess Organic Mat'l Bedrock Landscape Position (Circle one) Summit Notes: IlBack/Side Slope !Foot Slope Toe Slope Slope Shape: LL Linear Level Vegetation: Prairie Grass and Hydrophilic Plants Soil Survey Map Units: 73 Slope: 1% +/- Notes: No constraints with digging Weather Conditions: Hot and Dry Equipment: 302.7D Mini Excavator TIME: On = 1000 +/- Off = 1200 +1 - Depth (in,) Texture Soil Type Reg Table Rock Fragment % Matrix Color(s) Mottle Color(s) Redox Kind(s) Depth Structural Shape Structural Grade Consistence 0-16 Gritty Type 2 Sandy Loam <5% 10YR 4/3 None Granular Weak Loose Concentratiorl Depletions Gleyed Platy Moderate Friable Blocky Strong Firm _ Prismatic Loose Extremely Firm Moisture = Dry Single Grain Rigid Ribbon = <1" Massive _ 16-50 Gritty Type 1 <5% 10YR 5/6 None Granular Weak Loose Loamy Sand aJ -- a c U E, ap 0 -Blocky %.,) [7 Platy Moderate Friable Strong Firm Prismatic Loose Extremely Firm Moisture = Moist Single Grain Rigid Ribbon = None Massive Granular Weak Loose Concentratiori Depletions Gleyed Platy Moderate Friable Blocky Strong Firm P Prismatic Loose Extremely Firm Moisture = Single Grain Rigid Ribbon = _ Massive Granular Weak Loose Concentration Depletions l a- o Platy Moderate Friable Blocky Strong Firm Prismatic Loose Extremely Firm Moisture = Single Grain Rigid Ribbon = Massive _I G Granular Weak Loose Concentration Depletions 0 m t7 Platy Moderate Friable Blocky Strong Firm Prismatic Loose Extremely Firm Moisture = Single Grain Rigid Ribbon = — Massive Comments: Percolation Rate for type 2 soils is 16-25 MPI. 25 MPI will be used for infiltration calculations 25 minutes per inch = 0.2 feet per hour 9/12/2018 Precipitation Frequency Data Server NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2 Location name: Kersey, Colorado, USA* Latitude: 40.2993°, Longitude: -104.5213° Elevation: 4659.77 ft** "source: ESRI Maps ** source: USGS POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES Sonja Perica, Deborah Martin, Sandra Pavlovic, Ishani Roy, Michael SL Laurent, Carl Trypaluk, Dale Unruh, Michael Yekta, Geoffery Bonnin NOM, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland PF tabular i PF graphical I Maps & aerials PF tabular PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)1 Duration 5 -min 10 -min 15 -min 30 -min 60 -min 2 -hr 3 -hr 6 -hr 12 -hr 24 -hr 2 -day 3 -day 4 -day 7 -day 10 -day 20 -day 30 -day 45 -day Average recurrence interval (years) L 1 0.245 {0.196-0.306) 0.359 (0.290.0.446) 0.437 (0.353-0.546) (0.587 I (0.474-0.733) 0.728 (0.589-0.909), 0.870 (0.708-1.08) 0.952 (0.779-1.17) 1.10 (0.905-1.34) 1.28 I (1.06-1.55) 1.52 (1.27-1.82) 1.74 (1.47-2.07) 1.91 (1.62-2.25) 2.32 (1.99-2.71) k2.56 .20-2.98) 2 J 0.297 (0.239-0.370) 0.434 (0.350-0.542) 0.530 (0.427-0.662) 0.709 I (0.572-0.886) 0.868 (0.700-1.08) 1,03 (0.834-1.27) 1.11 (0.908-1.37) 1.29 (1.06-1.57) 1.52 I (1.26.1.84)! 1.78 (1.49-2.14) 2.06 (1.74-2.45) 2.23 (1.89-2.63) 2.36 (2.01-2.78) 2.69 (2.30-3.15) 2.98 (2.56-3.46) 3.28 3.78 (2.85-3.78) (3.27-4.35) J 3.87 4.43 (3.37.4.43) (3.86-5.07) 60 -day 4.58 (4.01-5.21) 5.24 (4.59-5.97) 5.16 5.93 5 0.394 (0.317-0.493) 0.577 (0.464.0.723) 0.703 (0.565-0.881) 0.941 (0.756-1.18) 1.14 (0.918.1.43) 1.34 (1.09-1.67) 1.44 (1.18-1.78) 1.67 (1.37-2.04) 1.96 (1.62-2.38) 2.27 (1.89-2.73) 2.61 (2.19-3.11) 2.79 (2.35-3.30) (2.48-3.45)] 2.93 3.32 (2.83-3.89) 3.67 (3.14.4.28) 4.58 (3.95-5.29) 5.33 (4.62-6.12) 6.29 (5.49-7.19) 7.14 (4.53-5.85) (5.21-6_73) (6.25-8.12) 10 0A87 (0.389-0.613) 0.713 (0.569-0.897) 0.869 (0.694-1.09) 1.16 (0.929-1.46) 1.42 (1.13-1.78) 1.67 (1.34-2.08) 1.79 (1.45-2.22) 2.05 (1.67-2.53) 2.39 (1.96-2.91) 2.72 (2.25-3.28) (2.59-3.72! 3.11 3.28 (2.75.3.91) 3.43 (2.88-4.06) 3.86 (3.27-4.55) 4.24 (3.61-4.97) 5.23 (4.49-6.07) 6.05 (5.22-6.88) 7.13 (6.18-8.18) 8.09 (7.04-9.24) 25 0.633 (0.494.0.848) 0.927 (0.724-1.24) 1.13 (0.883-1.51) 1.51 (1.18-2.03) 1.86 (1.46-2.50) 2.20 (1.74-2.95) 2.36 (1.89-3.16) 2.69 (2.16-3.55) 3.05 (2.45-3.94) 3.41 (2.75-4.34) 3.83 (3.10-4.79) 4.01 (327.4.99) 4.16 (3.40-5.15) 4.63 (3.79-5.65) 5.04 (4.14-6.09) 6.11 (5.05-7.28) 7.02 (5.82-8.30) (6.85-9.65)] 8.23 9.32 (7.78-10.9) 50 0.760 (0.574.1.02)1 1.11 (0.841-1.50). 1.36 (1.02-1.83) 1.82 (1.38-2.46) 2.25 (1.70-3.05) 2.67 (2.05.3.60) 2.89 (223.3.88) 3.26 (2.53-4.32) 3.62 (2.82-4.72) 4.00 (3.13-5.14) 4.43 (3,49-5.60) 4.62 (3.66-5.81) 4.77 (3.79-5.97) 5.24 (4.19-6.48) 5.66 (4.53-6.94) 6.78 (5.47-8.20) 7.74 (6.27.9.29) 9.04 (7.36-10.8) 100 0.899 (0.652.1.24) 1.32 (0.955-1.82) 1.61 (1.17-2.22) 2.16 (1.57-2.98) 200 1.05 (0.728-1.50) 1.54 (1.07-2.19) 1.88 (1.30-2.67) 2.53 (1.75-3.59) 2.68 3.17 (1.95.3.73) (2.20.4.52)I 3.21 (2.36.4.43) 3.48 (2.57-4.78) 3.90 (2.90-5.29) I 4.25 (3.18-5.67) 4.63 (3.49-6,10) 5.06 (3.84-6.56) 5.25 (4.01-6.77) 5.41 (4.14-6.94) 5.87 (4.52-7.44) 6.29 (4.86.7.90) 7.43 (5.79-9.21) 8.44 I (6.60.10.4) 9.81 (7.71-12.0) 3.82 (2.67-5.40) 4.16 (2.93.5.85) 4.62 (3.28-6.43) 4.95 (3.54-6.78) 5.33 (3.84-7.20) 5.73 (4.16-7.64) 5.93 (4.33-7.86) 6.09 (4.46-8.02) 6.53 (4.81-8.50) 6.93 (5.12-8.95) 8.09 (6.03-10.3) 9.13 (6.84-11.5) 10.6 (7.94-13.2) �� 11.0 1 11.8 (8.34-12.1) {8.71-13.4) (8.94.14.6) I 500 1.28 (0.844-1.86) 1.87 (1.24-2.73) 2.28 (1.51-3.32) 3.07 (2.03-4.48) 3.89 (2.58-5.69) 4.71 (3.15-6.83) 5.16 (3.47-7.44) r 5.68 I (3.86-8.11) 5.95 (4.07-8.37) 6.32 (4.36-8.78) 6.68 (4.64.9.14) 6.88 (4.82-9.37) 7.04 (4.94-9.53) 7.42 (5.24-9.94) 7.78 (5.52-10.3) 8.93 (6.39-11.7) I 1000 1.46 (0.932-2.14) 2.14 (1.36-3.13) 2.61 (1.66-3.82) 3.52 (2.24-5.15) 4.49 (2.86-6.57) 5.46 (3.52-7.91) 6.00 (3.89-8.64) 6.57 (4.30-9.38), 6.78 (4.48-9.57) 7.13 (4.76-9.97) 7.43 (5.01-10.3) 7.65 (5.18-10.5) 7.80 (5.31-10.7) 8.12 (5.58-11.0) 8.43 (5.82-11.4) 9.56 (6.67.12.8) 10.0 10.6 (7.20-13.0) (7.48-14.1) 11.5 12,1 (8.31-14.8) (8.58-18.0) 12.8 (9.30.16.4) 13.5 (9.57-17.7) 1 Precipitation frequency (PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS). Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates (for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values. Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information. Back to Top https://hdsc.nws+noaa.govihdscipfds/pfds_printpage,himPlat=40.2993&lon=-104.5213&date=depth&units=english&series=pds 1/4 9/12/2018 Precipitation Frequency Data Server PF graphical PDS-based depth -duration -frequency (DDF) curves Latitude: 40.2993°, Longitude: -104.5213° Precipitation depth (in) Precipitation depth (in) 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000 NIOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2 Average recurrence interval (years) Created {GMT): Wed Sep 12 18:57:58 2018 Sack to Top Maps & aerials Small scale terrain Average recurrence interval {years) 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000 Duration -- 5 -min 10-mmn 15 -min 30 -mm 60 -mm 24'r 3 -hr 6 -hr 12 -hr 24 -hr 2 -day 3 -day 4 -day 7 -day 10 -day 20 -day 30 -day 45 -day 60 -day https://hdsc.nws.noaa.govlhdsclpfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=40.2993&Ion=-104.5213&data=depth&units=engfish&series=pds 2/4 9/12/2018 Precipitation Frequency Data Server 1 -4 3km rl 2mi Large scale terrain Cheyenne • Ghee►ey ,.— w Longrnolt Idea, Denver r 1 0Okm 6Omi Large scale map I Fort Collins jCheyerrne - Gr1eley Loncmonr `` Boulder v er r�� I 100km 60mi Large scale aerial https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=40.2993&Ion=-104.5213&data=depth&units=english&series=pds 3/4 9/1212098 Precipitation Frequency Data Server Back to Top US Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Weather Service National Water Center 1325 East West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 Questions?: HDSC.Questions@noaa.gov Disclaimer https://hdse.nws.noaa,gov/hdso/prdsfpfds_printpage.html?lat,=-40.2993&lon•=-104.5213&data=depth&units=english&series=pds 4/4 Interpolated I Values from Intensity Duration Curves (5-yr, 10-yr, 100-yr) Historic 5 -Year 10 -Year 10 12 15 I= 10 12 15 I= 100 -Year 10 12 15 1= Developed 5 -Year 10 -Year 10 13 15 1= 10 13 15 I= 100 -Year 10 13 15 I= 3.08 x 2.59 2.88 3.84 x 3.22 3.59 7.25 x 6.08 6.78 3.08 x 2.59 2.79 3.84 x 3.22 3.47 7.25 x 6.08 6.55 Interpolations of Runoff Coefficients for Historic and Developed Flows (5-yr, 10-yr, 100-yr) Historic 5 -Year 10 -Year 0 2 5 C= 0 2 5 C= 100 -Year 0 2 5 C= Developed Entire Site (D1) 5 -Year 35 37 40 C= 10 -Year 35 37 40 C= 100 -Year 35 37 40 C= 0 x 0.02 0.01 0.05 x 0.1 0.07 0.2 x 0.24 0.22 Southwest Corner (D2) 5 -Year 0.22 0 0 x 2 x 0.25 5 0.02 0.23 C = 0.01 0.28 x 0.3 0.29 0.39 x 0.41 0.40 10 -Year 0 0.05 2 x 5 0.1 C = 0.07 100 -Year 0 0.2 2 x 5 0.24 C = 0.22 Intensity -Duration Curves for Rational Method From NOAA Atlas 14 1 -HOUR POINT RAINFALL DEPTHS 2 -YEAR 0.868 5 -YEAR 1.140 10 -YEAR 1.420 25 -YEAR 1.860 50 -YEAR 2.250 100 -YEAR 2.680 = Input Fields Equation 5-1 28.5 Pi = (10 + Td)0.7S6 I = rainfall intensity (inches per hour) P1 = 1 -hour point rainfall depth (inches) Td = storm duration (minutes) Time (minutes) ' Intensity -Duration (inches per hour) 2 -year 5 -year 10 -year 25 -year 50 -year 100 -year 5 2.94 3.87 4.82 6.31 7.63 9.09 10 2.35 3,08 _3.84 5.03 6.09 7.25 15 1.97 2.59 3.22 4.22 5.11 6.08 20 1.71 2.24 2.79 3.66 4.43 5,27 25 1.51 1.99 2.47 3.24 3.92 4.67 30 1.36 1.79 2.23 2.92 3.53 4.20 35 1.24 1.63 2.03 2.66 3.22 3.83 40 1.14 150 I 1.87 2.45 2.96 3.53 45 1.06 1.39 1.73 2.27 2.75 3.27 50 0.99 1.30 1.62 212 2.57 3.06 55 0.93 1.22 1.52 1.99 2.41 2.87 60 0.88 1.15 1.44 1.88 2.27 2.71 65 0.83 1.09 1.36 1.78 2.15 2.57 70 0.79 1.04 1.29 1.69 2.05 2.44 75 0.75 0.99 1.23 1.61 1.95 2.33 80 0.72 0.95 118 154 1.87 2.22 85 0.69 0.91 1.13 1.48 1.79 2.13 90 0.66 0.87 108 1.42 1.72 2.05 95 0.64 0.84 1.04 1.37 1.65 1.97 100 0.61 0.81 1.01 1.32 1.59 1.90 105 0.59 0.78 0.97 1.27 1.54 1.83 110 0.57 0.75 0 94 1.23 1.49 1.77 115 0.56 0.73 0.91 1.19 1.44 1.72 120 0 54 0 71 0.88 1.16 1.40 1.67 125 0.52 0.69 0.86 1.12 1.36 1.62 130 0.51 0.67 0 83 1.09 1.32 1 57 135 0.49 0.65 0.81 1.06 1.28 1.53 140 0.48 0.63 0.79 1.03 1.25 1.49 145 0.47 0.62 0.77 1.01 1.22 1.45 150 0.46 0.60 0.75 0.98 119 1.41 155 0.45 0.59 0.73 0.96 1.16 1.38 160 0.44 0.57 0.71 0.94 1.13 1.35 165 0.43 0.56 0.70 0.91 1.11 1.32 170 0.42 0.55 0.68 0.89 1.08 1.29 175 0.41 0.54 0.67 0.88 1.06 1.26 180 0.40 0.53 0.65 0.86 1.04 1.24 OOZ 081 (sainuiw) uo!leina waoiS 091 Obi OZ1 00T 08 _wait -001 1 Jeah-05 t— Jeah SZ eah-OT 09 017 Jeah_S -- Jeah-Z--.— pOL AJ Ieuon. a04 sananf uoiEeanQ-4sualuf OZ 00'1 00'Z 00'2 00'17 00'S 00'9 00'L 00'8 00'6 00'01 (iq/ui) in©q aad sayaui DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS Job Name Sergio Vargas Job No. Date HISTORIC CONDITIONS 2016-023 5/25/2018 PERCENT IMPERVIOUS HISTORIC Site Area = Existing Site Conditions Paved Packed Gravel Roofs/Concrete Landscaping/Undeveloped 136976 0 0 0 136976 f12 ft7 ft7 ft` = 314 AC Constant or linked from boxes above Input value or note Calculated value Value that seldom changes Percent Imperviousness from Table RO-3 Paved Gravel Roofs/Concrete Greenbelts/Landscaping Percent Imperviousness Existing (Calculated) 0 02 = i Cs = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) (`Note Soil Type) C15 = runoff coefficient for 10 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) ("Note Soil Type) Ciw = runoff coefficient for 100 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) (Note Soil Type) TIME OF CONCENTRATION t, HISTORIC 1G =1,+t, Equation RO-2 to Ms = computed time of concentration (minutes) t; = overland (initial) flow time (minutes) t,= channelized flow time (minutes) t; _ (0.395(1.1-05)(L,°'))/So m Equation RO-3 t; = initial or overland flow time (minutes) C5 = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) (`Note Soil Type) L = length of overland flow (ft), not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) So = average slope along overland flow path (ft/R) Histonc Condition Path 1 I L, = Delta = 0.73 ft 0.01 0 07 0.22 t,= t, = L,/{(60T,,)*(S„u5)) = L,f60V, Equation RO-4 1, = channelized flew time (minutes) C, = Conveyance Coefficient (Table R0-2) L; = length of channelized flow (ft) = average slope along channelized flaw path (fUft) 430.75 73.37 0.002 0.01 1.00 0.40 0.90 0.02 Soil Type A ft, not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) ft/ft Table 6-5 Therefore; 4his = So = C5 minutes L1= 0 ft Della = 0 ft Sw = K= 0,0000 0 tt=I 0.00 73.37 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CHECK t n, _ (U180)+10 tc his= minutes minutes fUft Table RO-2 Equation RO-5 T. not to exceed equation RO-5 at first design pt t<hm = computed time of concentration (minutes) L, = length of flow path (ft) i = imperviousness in decimal = average slope along channelized flow path (ft/ft) L,= Delta = 12.39 Histonc Condition Path 2 t, _ 1, = L,/((60*C.)*(Sw°5)) = 460V, Equation R0-4 t, = channelized flow time (minutes) C. = Conveyance Coefficient (Table RO-2) L, = length of channelized flow (ft) N,, = average slope along channelized flow path (fttft) L; _ Delta = 251 83 5.07 ft, not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) ft 24.79 0.020 0.01 ft/ft Table 6-5 Sn C5 = minutes L, = C ft Delta = C ft Sw_ K= 0.0000 0 fUft Table R0-2 0.00 minutes Therefore, tchs= 24 79 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CHECK tc = (L/180)+10 hs= minutes Equation RP -5 T, not to exceed equation RO-5 at first design p1 = computed time of concentration (minutes) L, = length of flow path (ft) = imperviousness in decimal S, = average slope along channelized flow path (ftift) i= L, = 251.83 ft Delta = 5.07 ft 0.02 11.40 HISTORIC FLOW VALUE FOR 5 -YEAR Q=CIA Equation RO-1 QS.H5toric = S, = 0.020 ft/ft minutes Use to hx = 12 ' t. of 12 minutes will be used for design O = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient 1= avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given t, A = area (AC) C5 15 = 2 SP, in/hr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (to =12 min.) A = 3.14 AC 001 0.09 HISTORIC FLOW VALUE FOR 10 -YEAR Q=CIA Equation RD -1 Qm,rrsmric CFS 0.03 I CFSIAC Q = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given t, A = area (AC) I 0 79 CID= Ito = A- 3.14 AC 0.07 3 59 in/hr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (to =12 min.) HISTORIC FLOW VALUE FOR 100 -YEAR Q=CIA Equation RO-1 Qtoa.Hlr.era = CFS = 0 25 I CFS/AC O = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given t, A = area (AC) Ctm = l,03 = 0.22 6.78 n/hr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (to =12 min.) A = 3.14 AC DEVOLOPED CONDITIONS 4.68 CFS PERCENT IMPERVIOUS DEVELOPED (D1, Entire Site) Site Area = 136976 112 Proposed Site Conditions Paved/Detention Pond Packed Gravel Roofs/Conn Landscaping/Undev. Percent Imperviousness Proposed (Calculated) 0.37 = i Cs = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) ("Note Soil Type) C,a = runoff coefficient for 10 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) (*Note Soil Type) C,D° = runoff coefficient for 100 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) ('Note Soil Type) TIME OF CONCENTRATION to DEVELOPED t. ua. = ti+t, Equation RO-2 = computed time of concentration (minutes) f, = overland (initial) flow time (minutes) t,= channelized flow time (minutes) t;=(0.395(1.1-05)(Lcs))ISo w EquationRO-3 = overland (initial) flow time (minutes) C5 = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) (*Note Soil Type) L, = length of overland flow (ft), not greater than 300' (urban) or 50D' (rural) S, = average slope along overland flow path (ft/ft) 22810 58061 4080 52025 ft2 f12 ff2 ft' 1.49 3.14 CFS/AC Percent Imperviousness from Table RO-3 Paved Gravel Roofs/Concrete Greenbelts/Landscaping AC 0 23 029 0.4 1.00 0.40 0.90 0.02 Soil Type A Developed Path 1 go = C5 = t, =I 9.98 minutes = L/((60'C„)'(S,„D5)) = L,/60V, Equation RO-4 t, = channelized flow time (minutes) L, = length of channelized flow (ft) S,, = average slope along channelized flow path (fUft) Therefore; kdev= ft, not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) ft L1= 427.54 ft Delta = 1.9 ft c 0.0044 15 t,=i 7.13 17 11 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CHECK tot. = (L/180)+10 to de minutes minutes ft/ft Table 6-5 C, = Conveyance Coefficient (Table RO-2) ft/ft Table RO-2 Equation RO-5 To not to exceed equation RO-5 at first design pt t".= = computed time of concentration (minutes) L, = length of flow path (ft) i ry imperviousness in decimal St= average slope along channelized flow path (ft/fl) i= 0.37 L = 503.84 ft Delta = 3.9 ft 12.80 Developed Path 2 St minutes L, = Delta = 0.008 Use ft do, = ft/ft T' 165 05 4.99 ft, not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) ft So = Cs = 0.030 0.23 ft/ft Table 6-5 t; = 14.01 minutes 1, = L,/((60'C,y (S, ° 5)) = Lt/60V, Equation RO-4 t, - channelized flow time (minutes) C - Conveyance Coefficient (Table RO-2) L, = length of channelized flow (ft) S,„ = average slope along channelized flow path (ftft) Therefore; todee = L,= 0 ft Delta = 0 ft SW = C, = t,=l 0.00 0.0000 0 14.01 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CHECK t,„ = (L1180)+10 'le der = minutes minutes ft/ft Table RO-2 Equation RO-5 To not to exceed equation RO-5 at first design pt 4 n� = computed time of concentration (minutes) L, = length of flow path (ft) i = imperviousness in decimal S, = average slope along channelized flow path (ft/ft) = 0.37 L, = 165.03 ft Delta = 4,99 ft 10 92 Developed Path 3 = tt = L,/((60*C„)*(S„''')) = L,/60V, Equation RO-4 t, = channelized flow time (minutes) C„ = Conveyance Coefficient (Table R0-2) L, = length of channelized flow (ft) S„ = average slope along channelized flow path (fttft) 5, minutes L, Delta 0.030 ft/ft Use todev= 11 203 46 5.25 ft, not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) ft 16.39 0.026 0.23 ftlft Table 6-5 80 = Cs= minutes L, = 0 ft Delta = 0 ft 5 = 00= t,=I 0.00 0.0000 0 minutes ft/ft Table RO-2 Therefore; 16.39 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CHECK t, h, = (U180)+10 fag= minutes Equation RO-5 To not to exceed equation RO-5 at first design pt t ne = computed time of concentration (minutes) L, = length of flow path (ft) i = imperviousness in decimal S, = average slope along channelized flow path (flat) i= 0.37 L, = ft Delta = ft 203.46 5.25 11.13 Developed Path 4 S, = minutes L, Delta = 18.16 0.026 ft/ft use t.de„= 231.64 5.33 ft, not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) ft so Cs = minutes 0.023 0.23 ff/fl Table 6-5 = L,/((60'Cv)`(Sw° 5)) = L,160V, Equation RO-4 4 = channelized flow time (minutes) C„.= Conveyance Coefficient (Table RO-2) L1= length of channelized flow (ft) S, = average slope along channelized flow path (ft/ft) Therefore; L1= 0 ft Delta = 0 ft 1,=r 0.00 c„= 0.0000 18 16 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CHECK to.„,(L/180)+10 to&. = minutes 0 minutes ft/ft Table RO-2 Equation RO-5 T, not to exceed equation RO-5 at first design pt tvh = computed time of concentration (minutes) L, = length of f ow path (ft) i = imperviousness in decimal S, = average slope along channelized flow path (ft/ft) L = 231.64 ft Delta = 5.33 ft 0.37 11.29 Developed Path 5 1; _ tl = LI((60"C„)"(5w°'5)) =1460V, Equation RO-4 t, = channelized flow time (minutes) C„ = Conveyance Coefficient (Table RO-2) L, = length of channelized flow (ft) Sw = average slope along channelized flow path (ft/ft) St = minutes 1;= Delta = 0.023 ft/ft Use tede„= 11 187.76 3.00 ft, not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) ft 18.44 Therefore; tv dev = 0.016 0.23 ft/ft Table 6-5 50_ Cs = minutes L, = 0 ft Delta = 0 ft SW _ C„= 0.0000 0 0.00 18.44 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CHECK fc ms = (U180)+10 dev= minutes minutes ft/ft Table RO-2 Equation RO-5 TO not to exceed equation RO-5 at first design pt = computed time of concentration (minutes) L, = length of flow path (ft) = imperviousness in decimal S, = average slope along channelized flow path (ft/ft) 0.37 L,= 187.76 ft Delta = 3 ft 11.04 St = minutes 0.016 ft/ft Use t<d, = 11 t0 of 13 minutes will be used for design DEVELOPED FLOW VALUE FOR 5 -YEAR (Dl, Entire Site) Q=CIA Equation RO-1 05,Develeped = Q = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg Intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given to A = area (AC) C5 15 = 2.79 in/hr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (to =13 min.) A= 3.14 AC 0.23 2.02 CFS = 0.64 1 DEVELOPED FLOW VALUE FOR 10 -YEAR D1, Entire Site) 0=CLA Equation RO-1 Qso,ce„eloped CFS/AC Cl = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given to A = area (AC) CID Its A= I 3.16 0.29 3.47 3.14 CFS = in/hr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (to =13 min.) AC 1.01 DEVELOPED FLOW VALUE FOR 100 -YEAR (D1, Entire Site) Q=CIA Equation RO-1 CFSIAC Q = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given to A = area (AC) C100. Ism = A= Q1au,oeeeiooed =1 8.24 0,4 6.55 4 inlhr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables 0. =13 min.) AC CFS = 2.62 ICFS/AC PERCENT IMPERVIOUS DEVELOPED (02, Southwest Corner) Site Area = 17896 ftz Proposed Site Conditions Paved/Detention Pond 0 ft2 Packed Gravel 0 ft? Roofs/Conc 0 ft' Landscaping/Undev. 17896 ft` = 0.41 AC Percent Imperviousness Existing (Calculated) 0.02 = i C5 = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) ('Note Soil Type) C10 = runoff coefficient for 10 -year frequency (from Table 5O-5) (`Note Soil Type) = runoff coefficient for 100 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) ('Note Soil Type) TIME OF CONCENTRATION t, DEVELOPED 4 =1,+t, Equation RO-2 4dav = computed time of concentration (minutes) t, = overland (initial) flow time (minutes) y= channelized flow time (minutes) k = (0.395(1.1-05)(1-;us))/Soo 33 Equation RO-3 t, = overland (initial) flow time (minutes) C5 = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) (`Note Soil Type) L = length of overland flow (ft), not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) So = average slope along overland flow path Mt L = 175.32 ft, not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) Delta = 1.29 ft Percent Imperviousness from Table RO-3 Paved Gravel Roofs/Concrete Greenbelts/Landscaping 0.01 0.07 0.22 Developed Path 6 (D2, Southwest Corner) 1, _ t, = L/((60"Ce)'(Sw05)) = L,/60V, Equation RO-4 t, = channelized flow time (minutes) C„ = Conveyance Coefficient (Table RO-2) L1= length of channelized flow (ft) So, = average slope along channelized flow path (flit) 1.00 0.40 0.90 0,02 Soil Type A Therefore; 28.83 I 0.007 0.01 ftft Table 6-5 So = C5 = minutes = 0 ft Delta = 0 ft �w = C„ = 0.0000 0 0,00 minutes 28.83 minutes Mt Table R0-2 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CHECK Equation RO-5 I. (L/180)+10 T, not to exceed equation RO-5 at first design pt to hs = computed time of concentration (minutes) L, = length of flow path (ft) = imperviousness in decimal S, = average slope along channelized flow path (ft/ft) = L, = Della = 0.02 175.32 1.36 ft ft S<= 0.008 fUft day = 10.97 minutes Use tcdav = 11 " Use Tc of 13 minutes from D1, Entire Site DEVELOPED FLOW VALUE FOR 5 -YEAR (02, Southwest Corner) Q=CIA Equation RO-1 Q5.Davawpad O= peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given 1, A = area (AC) Cs = IS = 2.79 in/hr_ using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (4 =13 min.) A = 0.41 AC I 0.01 0.01 CFS = 0.03 DEVELOPED FLOW VALUE FOR 10 -YEAR (D2, Southwest Corner) Q=CIA Equation RO-1 Qto,u000iapad = CFS/AC Q = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given to A = area (AC) C10= lID = 0,07 3.47 in/hr, using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (t0 =13 min.) A = 0.41 AC 010 CFS = 0.24 I DEVELOPED FLOW VALUE FOR 100 -YEAR (02, Southwest Corner) Q=CIA Equation RO-1 Q1on0evalopad = CF S/AC Q = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given to A = area (AC) C100 _ = 6.55 inlhr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDE Tables (t0 =13 min.) 0.22 A = 0.41 AC 0.59 CFS = 1.44 CFS/AC DEVELOPED FLOW VALUES FOR DESIGN POINT 1 (Actual = Entire Site (D1) - Southwest Corner (D2)) Q5 = 2.02 CFS - 0.01 CFS = 2.01 CFS Qs.r smi = 2.01 CFS = = 3.16 CFS-0.10 CFS = 3.06 CFS Qdo,acn,al =I 3.06 CFS Q,pp= 8.24 CFS-0.59 CFS = 7.65 CFS Q,00, Actual = 7,65 CFS = EMERGENCY OVERFLOW WEIR CALCULATIONS Q = CLH'r` City of Greeley Eq. 11.4.3.A(1) G= L = Length (ft) = H = Depth of Flow (ft) _ Q= L 0.73 1.12 2.80 2.6 8.4 0.5 7.72 CFS > or = WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME CALCULATIONS WOCV = a(0.91i3-1.1912+0.76i) For 40 hr Release a = 1 Required Storage = (WQCV/12)*Area FAA Method = Area (AC) _ Required WQCV Storage = 0.045 100 YR = WQCV Total Detention Pond Volume = FS/AC CFS/AC CFS/AC From table 11-1 City of Greeley manual 7.65 Page SQ-24 Page SQ-24 1962 I ft' 0.37 3.14 23167 1962 25129 AC -ft = fta Ito ft' POND VOLUME CALCULATIONS Average Area Method = ((Al + A2)/2) * Stage Depth = Stage Volume (CF) Elevation (NAVD 29) Contour Area (ft)z Volume of Stage (ft3) Accumulative Volume (ft3) 93.0 24628 87 2432.9 27382 7 92.9 24029.54 2373.7 24949.8 92.8 23445.28 2316.1 22578.0 92.7 22877.15 2260.2 20259.9 92.6 22327.14 2206.1 17999.7 92.5 21795.17 2153.8 15793.6 92.4 21280.72 2103.2 13639.8 92.3 20783.67 2054.4 11536.6 92.2 20303.87 2007.2 9482.2 92.1 19839.96 1961.5 7475.0 92.0 19390 95 1917.4 5513.4 91.9 18956.54 1823.4 3596,1 91.8 17511.33 1256.9 1772.7 91.7 7628.53 416.4 515.8 91.6 700 79 67.2 99.4 91.5 643 75 32.2 32.2 91.4 0.01 0.0 0.0 ORIFICE FLOW CALCULATIONS Q = CA(2gh)'° City of Greeley Eq. 11.4.3.B Cd. Orifice Coefficient A = area (ft) = g = gravitational constant (ftlsec)= h = head on orifice measured from centerline (ft) = Q= 0 65 0.01 32.2 1.5334 0.0900 CFS WEIR ELEVATION = 93.0 Required Detention Pond Volume = 25,129 CF Designed Detention Pond Volume = 27,382.7 CF Detention Pond is oversized by 8.23% BOTTOM OF POND ELEVATION = 91.4 radius of orifice (r) = r= d= use d = 0.0666 ft 0.7992 in 1.5984 in 1.6 in Proposed Site Condition Surface Areas (ft2): Entire Site (D1) Paved/Detention Packed Gravel Roofs/Concrete Greenbelts/Landscaping 20930.16 58060.63 2400 52025.19 1879.63 1680 Total 22809.79 58060.63 4080 52025.19 Total 136975.6 ft2 Southwest Corner (02) Greenbelts/Landscaping 17896 ft2 Table 10-1 Soil Treatment Area Long-term Acceptance Rates by Soil Texture, Soil Structure, Percolation Rate and Treatment Level Soil Type, Texture, Structure and Percolation Rate Range Long-term Acceptance Rate (LTAR); Gallons per day per square foot Soil Type USDA Soil Texture USDA Soil Structure- Type USDA Soil Structure- Grade Percolation Rate (MPI) Treatment Level 1' Treatment Level 2' Treatment Level 2N' Treatment Level 31 Treatment Level 3N1* R >35% Rock (>2mm): See Table 10-1A >35% Rock (>2mm): See Table 10-1A 1 Sand Loamy Sand Single Graln Structureless 5-15 040 1.40 1.40 1.55 155 2 Sandy Loam Loam Silt Loam Prismatic Blocky Granular Moderate Strong 16.25 0.60 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 2A Sandy Loam Loam Silt Loam Prismatic Blocky Granular Massive Weak Structureless 26-40 0.50 0.80 0.80 0.90 0.90 3 Sandy Clay Loam Clay Loam Stity Clay Loam Prismatic Blocky Granular Moderate Strong 41-60 0.35 055 0-55 0 65 0.65 3A Sandy Clay Loam Clay Loam Silty Clay Loam Prismatic Blocky Granular Massive Weak Structureless 61-75 0.30 0.45 0.45 0.55 0.55 4 Sandy Clay Clay Silty Clay Prismatic Blocky Granular Moderate Strong 76.90 0 20 O30 0.30 0.30 O. O 4A Sandy Clay Clay Silty Clay Prismatic Blocky Granular Massive Weak Structureless 91-120 0.15 0 20 0.20 y 0.20 ' 0 20 5 Soil Types 2-4A Platy Weak Moderate Strong 121+ 0.10 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 NOTE: Shaded areas require system design by a professional engineer. 1 Treatment levels are defined in Table 6-3. Higher long-term acceptance rates for Treatment Level 3N may be allowed for DWTS required to have a discharge permit, if the capability of the design to achieve a higher long-term acceptance rate can be substantiated. 66 -67 DETENTION VOLUME BY THE MODIFIED FAA METHOD Project: Sergio Vargas 1S-023 Basin ID: (For catchments lass than 160 acres only. For larger catchments, use hydrograph routing method) (NOTE: for catchments larger than 90 acres, CUSP hydrog rap and routing are recommended) Determination of MINOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method Determination of MAJOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method Design Information (Input): I,= A = Type = T = Tc = g = Pr = C, = Cc= C,= percent acres A, B. C. or D years (2, 5, 10. 25. 50. or 100) minutes cis/acre inches Design information (Input): I. A = Type = T = T'c = q =Il^ P, =1 C, - Cs= C,= 3700 percent Ac B, C. or D years (2. 5, 10, 25, 50, or 100) =notes cfalacre Catchment Drainage Imperiousness Catchment Drainage Area Predenelopment NRCS Soil Group Return Peron for Delenton Control Time al Concentration of Watershed Allowable Unit Release Rate One -hour Precipitation Design Rainfall IDF Formula i - C," P,7(CreT,I'C, Coefficient One Coefficient Two Coefficient Three 37.00 Catchment Drainage Irnpervlwesness Catchment Drainage Area Predevelopment NRCS Soil Group Return Period for Detention Control Tome of Concentration of Watershed Allowable Unit Release Rate One -hour Precipitation Design Rainfall lDF Formula I -Ce P,1(Cs0Tr)"C, Coefficient One Coefficient Tem Coefficient Three 3.140 3 140 A A 5 100 13 13 0 03 0.03 1.15 2.71 finches 28.50 28.50 10 _ 10 0.785 0.759 Determination of Average Outflow from the Basin (Calculated): Determination of Average Outflow from the Basin (Ca)culatedl: Runoff Coefficient Inflow Peak Allowable Peak C= Runoff Op-tn= Outflow Rate Op -out = Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume- Mod. FAA Minor Storage Vatume - <- Enter Raofall Duration incremental Increase Value 0.23 c1$ els cubic feet acre -ft for 5 -Minutes) Runoff Coefficient C= inflow Peak Runott Op -In = Allowable Peak Outflow Rate Op -out s Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume- Mat FAA Major Storage Volume- 0.40 cfs cis cubic feel sore -f 1.99 8.17 0-09 0.09 3,763 23.167 0.088 0.532 80 Here leg 6 Rainfall Duration minutes (Input) Rainfall, Intensity inches I hr (pinarit) I080w Volume acre -feel (output) Adjustment Factor "m" Output) Average Outflow cis (output) Outflow Volume acre -fed (output) Storage Volume acre-feet (output) Rainfall Duration minutes Iinpel) Rainfall Intensity inches1 hr (output) Inflow Volume aera.rest (output) Adjustment Fodor "m" (aut0811 a,arage Cad ow de loutautl Outflow Volume me -feet (output) Storage Volume acre-feet (output) 0 000 0000 0.00 000 0.000 1_000 0 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0000 0000 04 1.15 0.068 0.61 _ 0.06 0.005 0.064 60 2.70 0.281 0.61 046 0005 0.276 120 0.70 0.084 0.55 aos 0.009 0.075 120 1.66 0.344 0 58 0.05 0.008 0.336 180 0.52 0.093 0.54 0 05 0.013 0.054 180 123 0363 a54 0.05 0.013 0.370 240 042 a.100 0.53 _ 0.05 0.016 0.084 240 0.09 0.411 0,53 0.05 0.016 0305 300 0.35 0.106 0.52 0.05 0.020 0056 300 0.84 0.434 0.52 0.05 0.91111 0.414 360 0.31 0-110 as2 0.05 0.024 0.008 300 0.73 0453 0,52 0.05 0.024 0.429 430 027 0.114 0,52 005 0.020 0.086 420 0.05 0.469 0.53 0.05 0.028 0441 450 0.20 0.118 0.61 0.05 0032 0.086 480 0.58 0.484 0.61 0,05 0.032 0452 540 028 0.121 0.51 0.05 0.036 0.085 540 0.53 0497 051 0,05 0,036 0.461 800 0.21 0.124 0.51 0.05 0.040 0084 800 049 0.509 0.51 0.65 0.040 0.469 080 919 0.127 0..51 0.95 0.044 0.093 680 0.46 0.625 061 0.05 0,044 0.476 720 0.18 0.129 0:51 0.05 0.048 0.082 720 0.43 0.530 0.01 0.05 0.049 0.452 780 0.17 0.132 0.51 006 0.051 0050 780 0.40 0 539 0.51 0.05 0.051 0.459 840 0.16 0.134 0,51 085 0.055 0.079 840 0.38 , 0.548 0.51 005 0056 0.493 000 015 0.134 0.51 0.05 6.059 0.077 500 0.36 0.556 051 0.05 0059 0497 960 014 0.138 0.51 0.05 0083 0.075 980 5.34 0 584 061 0 a5 0.053 0.501 1026 6.14 0140 0.51 0.05 0.067 0.073 1020 0.32 0572 0.51 0.05 0.067 0.505 1080 0.13 0.141 9,51 0.05 0.071 0.070 1085 0.31 0.579 0.51 0.05 0,071 0.008 1140 0.13 0,143 0.51 0.45 0.075 0.066 1140 0.30 0.556 0.51 0.05 0076 0511 1200 0.12 0.145 0.51 0.05 0.078 0.066 1200 0.29 0.063 051 0.05 0.079 0.514 1260 0.12 0.146 0.51 005 0.093 0094 1260 027 0.599 0.51 0.05 0.053 0 810 1320 011 0.140 950 0.05 0.086 0.061 1320 9.26 0035 0.60 0.05 0.088 0.519 1380 0.11 0.149 0.50 0.05 0.000 0.069 1350 0.26 0,611 050 0,05 0.090 0.520 1440 0.11 0.150 0 0 0.05 0.094 0056 1440 0.25 0610 0.50 0.05 0.004 0.522 1500 0.10 0.152 0.50 0.05 0098 0.254 1500 924 0.622 0.50 0.05 0.088 0.524 1560 4.10 0.153 0.50 0.05 0.102 0.051 1560 0,23 0627 0.50 0.05 5.102 5.525 1620 0.19 0.154 0.55 0.05 0.108 0045 1620 0.23 0832 350 5.05 0.105 0.526 1880 0.09 0.156 0.50 0 05 0,110 0.040 1660 022 0.637 0.50 0.05 0.110 0.628 1740 0.05 0.157 0.50 045 0.114 0.043 1740 0.21 0.642 0.50 0.05 0.114 0526 1800 9.09 0.158 9.50 005 0.118 0.040 1800 0.21 0647 0.50 005 0.118 0.529 1460 009 0.155 0.50 0.00 0.122 0.037 1060 0.20 0.651 060 _ 055 0.122 0 530 1520 008 0.160 9.55 0.06 0125 0.035 1820 0.20 0.655 0.50 0.05 0.125 0.531 1980 0.39 0.161 0.50 0,05 0 129 0 032 1980 015 0960 0.50 0:05 0.129 0.531 2040 006 0.102 050 005 0033 0029 2010 0,19 0.665 0.50 0.05 9.133 0.531 2100 0.00 0.163 050 0.05 0.137 0.020 2100 015 0.569 0.50 005 0.137 0.51101 2160 088 0.184 050 005 0.141 0.023 2760 0.18 0.873 050 005 0.141 0.53178 2220 0,07 0185 0-50 0 55 0 145 0020 2220 0.10 0677 0.50 0.05 0.145 0.03185 2280 0.07 0.166 050 0.05 0.149 0,017 2280 017 0.681 0.50 095 6149 0.53589 2340 0.07 0 16 0-50 005 0.153 0014 2340 017 0.061 0.50 0.05 0.153 0.53175 2400 0.07 0.186 050 005 0.157 0011 2400 0.17 0.086 0.50 005 0.157 003158 2460 0.07 0.169 9.50 0.05 0.180 0.008 2460 0.18 0.802 050 0.05 0.160 0.531 2520 0.07 0,170 0.50 0.00 0.164 0005 2520 015 5695 0,50 0.05 0.169 0.531 2583 0.07 0,171 0.50 0.05 0.168 0002 2680 0.16 0599 0.50 0.05 0.198 0.531 2642 0.07 0.171 0.60 0.05 0.172 -0.001 2640 0.15 0.702 0.59 005 0,172 0.530 2700 0.06 0.172 0.00 005 0.175 -0-004 2700 0.15 0 703 0.60 0.05 0,178 0.530 2760 0.03 0,173 0.00 0.05 0.180 -0.007 2780 0.15 0.709 0.53 905 0.169 9.529 2820 056 0.174 0,50 0.05 0.184 -0.010 2829 0.18 0.712 0 00 _ 0.05 0.184 0.525 2880 0.06 0.175 0.50 005 0188 -0.013 2690 2.11 0 716 0.50 0.05 0158 0.528 2540 0.06 0.175 ' 0.50 0.05 0.192 4.016 2940 014 0.715 050 005 0.192 0.527 3000 0.08 0.176 0.53 005 0.195 -0.019 3000 0.14 0.722 0.59 0.05 0.195 0526 3080 0.05 6177 0.50 0.05 0.199 -.023 3060 0.11 0.725 0.50 0.05 0109 6525 3120 0.08 0.178 0.50 0.05 _ 0200 4026 3120 0.13 0 72 3.50 o.p5 0203 0.525 3150 0.06 0.178 0.50 0.00 5.207 -0028 _ 3180 0.13 0.731 300 0.05 0.207 0.524 3240 0.06 0.179 0.50 005 0211 -0932 3240 0.13 0,704 0 5 0.05 0.211 0523 3300 0 25 0.180 5.50 0,05 0,215 -0.035 3300 013 0.737 0.50 0.05 0.215 0.522 3364 035 0.180 0.50 0.05 0.219 -0.038 3360 0.13 0,739 0.50 0.05 0.219 0.521 3420 0.05 0.181 0.50 0.05 0223 -0.042 I 3420 0.13 0.742 0.50 005 0223 0:520 3480 0.05 0.162 0.50 0.05 0,227 -0045 3480 0.12 0545 0.50 0,35 0.227 0.015 3540 0.05 0-162 4.50 0.05 0 231 -0.048 3540 0.12 0.748 0.50 0 05 0.231 0.617 3500 0.95 0.183 _ 0.50 0.06 0234 -0.051 )) 3500 0 12 0.750 050 4 05 0 234 0.515 Mod. PM Minor Storage Volume 4cubic 11.1- 3,763 Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume (cubic 54= 23.167 Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume pore-rt.). 0.0864 Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume (acre -ft.). 0.5318 UDFCD DETENTION BASIN VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 2.34, Released November 2013 ModKled_FAA.els, Modified F/..1, 9r5/2015, 1:22 FM DETENTION VOLUME BY THE MODIFIED FAA METHOD Project: Sergio Vargas 18.023 Basin ID: Inflow and Outflow Volumes vs. Rainfall Duration 0.8 0.7 0.6 Volume (acre-feet) 0.5 0.4 0,3 0.2 0.1 ••• 0 •• • •• 00••••••••••••••••l i• • O • • OO a„ OO O OOOO 0000000 000p000piaJ 500 1000 1500 2000 Duration (Minutes) 2500 3000 3500 4000 LIDFCD DETENTION BASIN VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 2.34. Released November 2013 Maddietl_FM,* ModdFed F; 9/5,1018. 1 22 PM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF 2.4 Time of Concentration One of the basic assumptions underlying the Rational Method is that runoff is a function of the average rainfall rate during the time required for water to flow from the most remote part of the drainage area under consideration to the design point. However, in practice, the time of concentration can be an empirical value that results in reasonable and acceptable peak flow calculations. The time of concentration relationships recommended in this Manual are based in part on the rainfall -runoff data collected in the Denver metropolitan area and are designed to work with the runoff coefficients also recommended in this Manual. As a result, these recommendations need to be used with a great deal of caution whenever working in areas that may differ significantly from the climate or topography found in the Denver region. For urban areas, the time of concentration, t,, consists of an initial time or overland flow time, tr, plus the travel time, t„ in the storm sewer, paved gutter, roadside drainage ditch, or drainage channel. For non - urban areas, the time of concentration consists of an overland flow time, t;, plus the time of travel in a defined form, such as a swale, channel, or drainageway. The travel portion, tt, of the time of concentration can be estimated from the hydraulic properties of the storm sewer, gutter, swale, ditch, or drainageway. Initial time, on the other hand, will vary with surface slope, depression storage, surface cover, antecedent rainfall, and infiltration capacity of the soil, as well as distance of surface flow. The time of concentration is represented by Equation RO-2 for both urban and non -urban areas: tc = t + tt in which: t, = time of concentration (minutes) t, = initial or overland flow time (minutes) tt = travel time in the ditch, channel, gutter, storm sewer, etc. (minutes) 2.4.1 Initial Flow Time The initial or overland flow time, t;, may be calculated using equation RO-3: 0.395(1.1-05}VT S°33 in which: = initial or overland flow time (minutes) C5= runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) 2007-01 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (RO-2) (RO-3) RO-5 RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) L = length of overland flow (500 ft maximum for non -urban land uses, 300 ft maximum for urban land uses) S= average basin slope (ft/ft) Equation RO-3 is adequate for distances up to 500 feet. Note that, in some urban watersheds, the overland flow time may be very small because flows quickly channelize. 2.4.2 letifintland Travel Time For catchments with overland and channelized flow, the time of concentration needs to be considered in combination with the overland travel time, t,, which is calculated using the hydraulic properties of the swale, ditch, or channel. For preliminary work, the overland travel time, t,, can be estimated with the help of Figure RO-1 or the following equation (Guo 1999): / ,11 V = C, Swo.s in which: V= velocity (ft/sec) C, = conveyance coefficient (from Table'RO-2) S„, = watercourse slope (ft/ft) Table RO-2—Conveyance Coefficient, C„ Type of Land Surface ,5, = -/ Heavy meadow 5/ -_L Tillage/field Short pasture and lawns l74.r,� / Nearly bare ground :1'1,x,„,?„. ! Grassed waterway Paved areas and shallow paved swales C: (RO-4) Conveyance Coefficient, C, 2.5 5 7 10 '.15`) L 20 The time of concentration, lc, is then the sum of the initial flow time, t;, and the travel time, t,, as per Equation RO-2. 2.4.3 First Design Point Time of Concentration in Urban Catchments Using this procedure, the time of concentration at the first design point (i.e., initial flow time, t;) in an urbanized catchment should not exceed the time of concentration calculated using Equation RO-5. t _ +10 180 in which: (RO-5) = maximum time of concentration at the first design point in an urban watershed (minutes) RO-8 2007-01 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF L = waterway length (ft) Equation RO-5 was developed using the rainfall -runoff data collected in the Denver region and, in essence, represents regional "calibration" of the Rational Method. The first design point is the point where runoff first enters the storm sewer system. An example of definition of first design point is provided in Figure RO-2. Normally, Equation RO-5 will result in a lesser time of concentration at the first design point and will govern in an urbanized watershed. For subsequent design points, the time of concentration is calculated by accumulating the travel times in downstream drainageway reaches. 2.4.4 Minimum Time of Concentration Should the calculations result in a r. of less than 10 minutes, it is recommended that a minimum value of 10 minutes be used for non -urban watersheds. The minimum re recommended for urbanized areas should not be less than 5 minutes and if calculations indicate a lesser value, use 5 minutes instead. 2.4.5 Common Errors in Calculating Time of Concentration A common mistake in urbanized areas is to assume travel velocities that are too slow. Another common error is to not check the runoff peak resulting from only part of the catchment. Sometimes a lower portion of the catchment or a highly impervious area produces a larger peak than that computed for the whole catchment. This error is most often encountered when the catchment is long or the upper portion contains grassy parkland and the lower portion is developed urban land. 2.5 Intensity The rainfall intensity, I, is the average rainfall rate in inches per hour for the period of maximum rainfall of a given recurrence frequency having a duration equal to the time of concentration. After the design storm's recurrence frequency has been selected, a graph should be made showing rainfall intensity versus time. The procedure for obtaining the local data and drawing such a graph is explained and illustrated in Section 4 of the RAINFALL chapter of this Manual. The intensity for a design point is taken from the graph or through the use of Equation RA -3 using the calculated re. 2.6 Watershed Imperviousness Ail parts of a watershed can be considered either pervious or impervious. The pervious part is that area where water can readily infiltrate into the ground. The impervious part is the area that does not readily allow water to infiltrate into the ground, such as areas that are paved or covered with buildings and sidewalks or compacted unvegetated soils. In urban hydrology, the percentage of pervious and impervious land is important. The percentage of impervious area increases when urbanization occurs 2007-01 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District RO-7 DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF Table RO-3—Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values Land Use or Surface Characteristics Percentage Imperviousness Business: Commercial areas 95 Neighborhood areas 85 Residential: Single-family * Multi -unit (detached) 60 Multi -unit (attached) 75 Half -acre lot or larger Apartments 80 Industrial: Light areas 80 Heavy areas 90 Parks, cemeteries 5 Playgrounds 10 Schools 50 Railroad yard areas 15 Undeveloped Areas: Historic flow analysis 2 Greenbelts, agricultural 2 Of site flow analysis (when land use not defined) 45 Streets: Paved 100 Gravel (packed) 40 Drive and walks 90 Roofs 90 Lawns, sandy soil 0 Lawns, clayey soil 0 * See Figures RO-3 through RO-5 for percentage imperviousness. CA = KA + (1.3113 —1.4412 + 1.135i— 0.12) for CA ≥ 0, otherwise CA = 0 (RO-6) Ca) = Ka + (0.85813 - 0.78612 + 0.7741+ 0.04) (RO-7) CB _ (CA + Ca, )/2 2007-01 Urban Drainage and Flood control District RO-9 Table 5-10 Design Storm Frequencies Design Storm Frequency Land use Residential 5 year Open space 5 year Commercial 10 year Public buildings 10 year Industrial 10 year Road crossing conducting drainage' Local road 10 year Collector road 25 year Arterial road 50 year Natural drainages 25 year 1 Road overtopping not to exceed 6 inches in the 10 -year event or 16 Inches in the too -year event It should be noted that storm drainage facilities designed in accordance with the above design storm frequencies will be flooded in storm events exceeding the return period shown. In no case shall a 100 - year design storm cause inundation to any structure or pose a hazard to the public. 5.8.2 Design Criteria The design criteria outlined in Section 5.7 should be followed when designing minor drainage. 5.8.3 Erosion Protection Design Criteria Protecting minor drainage channels from erosion is critical for maintaining channel stability. Channels need to be designed so that they remain stable until they are fully constructed or vegetated. It may be necessary to install riprap, straw bales, erosion control logs, or erosion control blankets in the channels to ensure that they remain stable. The BMPs outlined in the UDFCD Manual (Volume 3) should be used to ensure stability. 5.9 HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES This section presents concise, practical guidelines for the design of hydraulic structures such as bridges, rundowns, etc. For more information regarding the design of hydraulic structures, refer to Chapter 8 of the Weld County Code and the hydraulic structures chapter of the UDFCD Manual (Volume 2). 5.9.1 Design Flows Hydraulic structures need to be designed for the 100 -year design event and other minor design discharges as applicable. 5.9.2 Design Criteria The design criteria for check and drop structures, conduit outlet structures, bridges, transitions and constrictions, bends and confluences, and rundowns should follow the design criteria outlined in the hydraulic structures chapter of the UDFCD Manual (Volume 2). Additionally, bridges must be designed WELD COUNTY ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA Page 46 ZOoS RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) TABLE RO-5 (Continued) —Runoff Coefficients, C Percentage Imperviousness Type A NRCS Hydrologic Soils Group 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 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 D.23 0.29 0.32 0.35 30% 0.13 0.19, 0.25 0.31 0.34 0.37 35% 0.16 0.22 0.28 0.33 0.36 0.39 40% 0.19 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.38 0.41 45% 0.22 0.27 0.33 0.37 0.40 0.43 50% 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.42 0,45 55% 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 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 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 0.86 100% __ 0.89 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.96 RO-12 2007-01 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS (Flow Values for Swale Design) Job Name Sergio Vargas Job No. Date Swale (Midpoint) Site Area = 2018-023 9/6/2018 11532 ft� Existing Site Conditions Paved ft� Packed Gravel ft° Roofs/Concrete ft" Landscaping/Undeveloped 11532 ft2 = 0.26 AC Percent Imperviousness Existing (Calculated) 0.02 = C5 = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) (*Note Sail Type) C1° = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) (`Note Soil Type) C1o, = runoff coefficient for 100 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) (*Note Sail Type) Constant or linked from boxes above Input value or note Calculated value Value that seldom changes Percent Imperviousness from Table R0-3 Paved Gravel Roofs/Concrete Greenbelts/Landscaping 001 0 07 0 22 TIME OF CONCENTRATION t, t,5, = t,+t, Equation RO-2 t, h„ = computed time of concentration (minutes) t; = overland (initial) flow time (minutes) t,- channelized flow time (minutes) t, = (0.395(1.1-05)(L°5))/S,033 Equation RO-3 t; = initial or overland flow time (minutes) C5 = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) (*Note Soil Type) L; = length of overland flow (ft), not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) 6, = average slope along overland flow path (ft/ft) L, = 256 ft, not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) Della = 2.66 ft Assumed condition t; _ t, = L,1((60'C,)*(S,,° 5)) = L,/60V, Equation RO-4 t, = channelized flow time (minutes) C, = Conveyance Coefficient (Table RO-2) L, = length of channelized flow (ft) S„ = average slope along channelized flow path (fUft) 1.00 0.40 0.90 0,02 Soil Type A 31.09 Therefore; 0.010 0.01 ft/ft Table 6-5 S5 = Cs = minutes L, = 0 ft Delta = 0 ft K 0.0000 1ft/ft 0 Table RO-2 0.00 31.09 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CHECK t nK = ([/180)+10 is 5= minutes minutes Equation RO-5 T, not to exceed equation ROS at first design pt = computed time of concentration (minutes) Lt = length of tow path (ft) i = imperviousness in decimal S, = average slope along channelized flow path (fuft) = 0.02 L, = 256.00 ft Delta = 2.66 ft 11,42 S, = minutes 0.0000 ft/fl Use 1 d, = 11 FLOW VALUE FOR 5 -YEAR Q=CIA Equation RO-1 O = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient 1= avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given to A = area (AC) Q5 I 0.01 FLOW VALUE FOR 10 -YEAR 0=CIA Equation RD -1 010= C5 = 0.01 Is = 2 98 inlhr, using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (to =11 min.) A = 0.26 AC CFS = 0.030 CFS/AC Q = peak rate of runoff (CFO) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given I, A = area (AC) C15 = 110 = A= 0.26 AC 0.07 3 72 inlhr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (to =11 min.) 0.07 FLOW VALUE FOR 100 -YEAR Q=CIA Equation RO-1 01°0 = Swale (Endpoint) Site Area = CFS = 0.260 CFS/AC Q - peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given I, A = area (AC) = 1100 = A= 0 22 7 02 0.26 in/hr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (t, =11 min.) AC 0.41 29577 ft2 Existing Site Conditions Paved ft2 Packed Gravel 5389 ft2 Roofs/Concrete ft2 CFS = 1.544 CFS/AC Percent Imperviousness from Table RO-3 Paved Gravel Roofs/Concrete Greenbelts/Landscaping Landscaping/Undeveloped 24187 ft2 = 0.68 AC Percent Imperviousness Existing (Calculated) 0.09 = i C5 = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) ('Mote Soil Type) C1° = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) ('Mote Soil Type) C1, = runoff coefficient for 100 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) ('Mote Soil Type) 0 05 0 13 I 0 27 TIME OF CONCENTRATION to to = fit, Equation RO-2 4 h;a = computed time of concentration (minutes) t; = overland (initial) flow time (minutes) t,= channelized flow time (minutes) t; _ (O.395(1.1-05)(L50))! 00.33 Equation R0-3 t; = initial or overland flow time (minutes) C5 = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5) ("Note Soil Type) = length of overland flow (ft), not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) So = average slope along overland flow path (ft/1t 4 = 500 ft, not greater than 300' (urban) or 500' (rural) Delta = 3.88 ft Assumed condition I, _ t, = L,1((60'C)'(Sw° 5)) = L,/60V, Equation RO-4 tr = channelized flow time (minutes) C, = Conveyance Coefficient (Table RO-2) L, = length of channelized flow (ft) 5,, = average slope along channelized flow path (fUft) L,= 3.84 ft Delta 0.02 ft 1.00 0.40 0.90 0.02 Soil Type A 46.09 0.008 0,05 ft/ft Table 6-5 Therefore; lc 5, = So = C0 = minutes Sw = I< _ t,=I I 0.08 0.0052 15 46,15 minutes minutes ft/ft Table RO-2 TIME OF CONCENTRATION CHECK Equation RO-5 tc hs = (LI180)+10 T, not to exceed equation RO-5 at first design pt t ns computed time of concentration (minutes) L, = length of flow path (ft) i = imperviousness in decimal S, = average slope along channelized flow path (ft/ft) = L,= ft Delta = ft 503.84 3.88 12 80 FLOW VALUE FOR 5 -YEAR Q=CIA Equation RO-1 O5= S, _ minutes 0.0080 ft/ft Use tc his = 13 O = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given t, A = area (AC) C5 = is = 2.79 in/hr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (t, =13 min.) A = 0.68 AC I 0.09 FLOW VALUE FOR ID -YEAR Q=CIA Equation RO-1 Q10 0.05 CFS 0.140 I CFS/AC Q = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given 1L A = area (AC) I 0.31 FLOW VALUE FOR 100 -YEAR Q=CIA Equation RD -1 Q100 = C,5= 110 = A = 0.68 AC 0.13 3.47 in/hr. using linear `interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (t, =13 min.) CFS = 0.451 CFS/AC Q = peak rate of runoff (CFS) C = Runoff coefficient I = avg intensity of rainfall for a duration equal to given t, A = area (AC) Cioo = l,co _ A= 1.20 0.27 655 0.68 CFS in/hr. using linear interpolation from Rainfall IDF Tables (1 =13 min,) AC 1.789 I CFS/AC 0.09 Normal Flow Analysis - Trapezoidal Channel Project: Channel ID: Sergio Vargas 18-023 Capacity Check: Swale Midpoint - 10-yr Design Information (Input) Channel Invert Slope Manning's n Bottom Width Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Freeboard Height Design Water Depth So = 0.0100 ftlft n = 0.035 B = 0.00 ft Z1 = 4.00 ft/ft Z2 = 4.00 ft/ft F= 000ft Y= 0.15 ft Normal Flow Condtion (Calculated) Discharge Froude Number Flow Velocity Flow Area Top Width Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Hydraulic Depth Specific Energy Centroid of Flow Area Specific Force Q= Fr = V= A= T= P= R= D= Es = Yo = Fs = 0.07 cfs 0.48 0.74 fps 0.09 so ft 1.20 ft 1.24 ft 0.07 ft 0.08 ft 0.16 ft 0.05 ft 0.00 kip Capacity Check Swale Midpoint - 10-yr.xls, Basics 9/6/2018, 3:31 PM Normal Flow Analysis - Trapezoidal Channel Project: Channel ID: Sergio Vargas 18-023 Capacity Check: Swale Endpoint - 10-yr T El Yo B Z2 1 Design Information (Input) Channel Invert Slope Manning's n Bottom Width Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Freeboard Height Design Water Depth So = 0.0080 ft/ft n = 0.035 B = 0.00 ft Z1= 4.00 ft/ft Z2 = 4.00 ft/ft F = 0.00 ft Y = 0.28 ft Normal Flow Condtion (Calculated) Discharge Froude Number Flow Velocity Flow Area Top Width Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Hydraulic Depth Specific Energy Cenfroid of Flow Area Specific Force Q= Fr= V= A= T= P= D= Es = Yo = Fs = 0.31 cfs 0.47 1.00 fps 0.31 sq ft 2.22 ft 228 ft 0.13 ft 0.14 ft 0.29 ft 0.09 ft 0.00 kip Capacity Check Swale Endpoint - 10-yr.xls, Basics 9/25/2018, 3:30 PM Normal Flow Analysis - Trapezoidal Channel Project: Channel ID: Sergio Vargas 18-023 Stability Check: Swale Midpoint - 10-yr F Y' T ZI Yo B Z2 1 Design Information (Input) Channel Invert Slope Manning's n Bottom Width Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Freeboard Height Design Water Depth So = 0.010 ft/ft n = 0.020 B = 0.00 ft Z1 = 4.00 ft/ft Z2 = 4.00 ft/ft F = 0.00 ft Y= 0.12 ft Normal Flow Condtion (Calculated) Discharge Froude Number Flow Velocity Flow Area Top Width Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Hydraulic Depth Specific Energy Centroid of Flow Area Specific Force Q= Fr = V= A= T= P= R= D= Es = Yo = Fs = 0.07 cfs 0.80 1.12 fps 0.06 sq ft 097 ft 1 00 ft 0.06 ft 0.06 ft 0.14 ft 0 04 ft 0 00 kip Stability Check Swale Midpoint.xls, Basics 9/6/2018, 3:32 PM Normal Flow Analysis - Trapezoidal Channel Project: Channel ID: Sergio Vargas 18-023 Stability Check: Swale Endpoint - 10-yr Design Information (Input) Channel Invert Slope Manning's n Bottom Width Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Freeboard Height Design Water Depth So = 0.008 ft/ft n = 0.020 B = 0.00 ft Z1 = 4.00 ft/ft Z2 = 4.00 ft/ft F= 0.00 ft Y = 0.23 ft Normal Flow Condtion (Calculated) Discharge Froude Number Flow Velocity Flow Area Top Width Wetted Perimeter Hydraulic Radius Hydraulic Depth Specific Energy Centroid of Flow Area Specific Force Q= Fr = V= A= T= P= R= D= Es = Yo = Fs = 0.31 cfs 0.80 1.52 fps 0.20 sq ft 1 80 ft 1.86 ft 0.11 ft 0.11 ft 0.26 ft 0.07 ft 0.00 kip Stability Check Swale Endpoint.xls, Basics 9/6/2018, 3:32 PM WQCV Depth in Detention Pond (18-023) Elevation Volume (ft3) 91.90 3596.10 91.89 3413.76 91.88 3231.42 91.87 3049.08 91.86 2866.74 91.85 2684.40 91.84 2502.06 91.83 2319.72 91.82 2137.38 91.81 1955.04 91.80 1772.70 WQCV Volume = 1,962 CF WQCV Elevation used is 91.82 POND VOLUME CALCULATIONS Average Area Method = ((Al + A2)/2) * Stage Depth = Stage Volume (CF) Elevation (NAVD 29) Contour Area (ft2) Volume of Stage (ft3) Accumulative Volume (ft3) 93.0 24628.87 2432.9 27382.7 92.9 24029.54 2373.7 24949.8 92.8 23445.28 2316.1 22576.0 92.7 22877.15 2260.2 20259.9 92.6 22327.14 2206.1 17999.7 92.5 21795.17 2153.8 15793.6 92.4 21280.72 2103.2 13639.8 92.3 20783.67 2054.4 11536.6 92.2 20303.87 2007.2 9482.2 92.1 19839.96 1961.5 7475.0 92.0 19390.95 1917.4 5513.4 91.9 18956.54 1823.4 3596.1 91.8 17511.33 1256.9 1772.7 91.7 7626.53 416.4 515.8 91.6 700.79 67.2 99.4 91.5 643.75 32.2 32.2 91.4 0.01 0.0 0.0 POND 1 93.0 92.9 92.8 92.7 92.6 92.5 92.4 92.3 92.2 92.1 92.0 91.9 91.8 91.7 23040.61 22510.17 21993.96 21493.03 21009.37 20542.91 20093.12 19659.88 19243.05 18841.26 18453.52 18079.54 16693.91 6867.85 POND 2 93.0 92.9 92.8 92.7 92.6 92.5 92.4 92.3 92.2 92.1 92.0 91.9 91.8 91.7 91.6 91.5 91.4 WEIR ELEVATION = 4693.0' Required Detention Pond Volume = 25,129 CF Designed Detention Pond Volume = 27,382.7 CF Detention Pond is oversized by 8.23% +/- BOTTOM OF POND ELEVATION = 4691.4' TOTAL 1588.26 93.0 24628.87 1519.37 92.9 24029.54 1451.32 92.8 23445.28 1384.12 92.7 22877.15 1317.77 92.6 22327.14 1252.26 92.5 21795.17 1187.6 92.4 21280.72 1123.79 92.3 20783.67 1060.82 92.2 20303.87 998.7 92.1 19839.96 937.43 92.0 19390.95 877 91.9 18956.54 817.42 91.8 17511.33 758.68 91.7 7626.53 700.79 91.6 700.79 643.75 91.5 643.75 0.01 91.4 0.01 Orifice Plate Release Time WS Elevation Invert Elev Dia Co Q initial Qfinal QAvg Radius Volume of Stage Time to empty stage (hr) 93.0 91.4 12 0.65 0.09000 0.08700 0.08850 0.0666 2432.9 7.64 92.9 91.4 12 0.65 0.08700 0.08390 0.08545 0.0666 2373.7 7.72 92.8 91.4 12 0.65 0.08390 0.08070 0.08230 0.0666 2316.1 7.82 92.7 91.4 12 0.65 0.08070 0.07740 0.07905 0.0666 2260.2 7.94 92.6 91.4 12 0.65 0.07740 0.07390 0.07565 0.0666 2206.1 8.10 92.5 91.4 12 0.65 0.07390 0.07020 0.07205 0.0666 2153.8 8.30 92.4 91.4 12 0.65 0.07020 0.06640 0.06830 0.0666 2103.2 8.55 92.3 91.4 12 0.65 0.06640 0.06220 0.06430 0.0666 2054.4 8.87 92.2 91.4 12 0.65 0.06220 0.05780 0.06000 0.0666 2007.2 9.29 92.1 91.4 12 0.65 0.05780 0.05310 0.05545 0.0666 1961.5 9.83 92.0 91.4 12 0.65 0.05310 0.04790 0.05050 0.0666 1917,4 10.55 91.9 91.4 12 0.65 0.04790 0.04200 0.04495 0.0666 1823.4 11.27 91.8 91.4 12 0.65 0.04200 0.03510 0.03855 0.0666 1256.9 9.06 91.7 91.4 12 0.65 0.03510 0.02650 0.03080 0.0666 416.4 3.76 91.6 91.4 12 0.65 0.02650 0.01330 0.01990 0.0666 67.2 0.94 91.5 91.4 12 0.65 0.01330 0.00600 0.00965 0.0666 32.2 0.93 91.4 91.4 12 0.65 0.00600 0.00000 0.00300 0.0666 0.0 0.00 120.56 WQCV is from elevation 91.82' to the bottom of the pond. The last 0.42' of the pond is released in 40.00 hrs assuming no infiltration Ini ial Q Values -0.10000 -0.05000 93.2 93.0 92.8 92.6 92.4 92.2 92.0 £. 91.8 • 91.6 .•' S. 91.4 • 91.2 0.00000 ORIFICE FLOW CALCULATIONS Q = CA(2gh) City of Greeley Eq. 11.4.3.B Cd = Orifice Coefficient = A = area (ft2) = g = gravitational constant (ft/sec2)= h = head on orifice measured from centerline (ft) = Q= C 0.05000 0.10000 065 001 32.2 0 0900 1 5334 CFS Calculated Q Values from U0 - Detention • Interpolated Q Data Poly. (Calculated Q Values from UD- Detention) radius of orifice (r) = Water Depth 0 0666 16 ft WS Elevation Invert Elev Dia (ft) Co Qinitial (cfs) QfinalI (cfs) QAvg (cfs) Volume of Stage a (ft ) Area of Stage (ftz ) * Perc Rate (ft/hr) Volume through Orifice (ft3) Volume Infiltrated (ft3) Percent through Orifice Percent Infiltrated Time to empty stage (hr) 93.00 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.090 0.087 0.0885 2432.9 24628.87 0.2000 147.8 2285.12 6.1% 93.9% 0.464 92.90 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.087 0.084 0.0855 2373.7 24029.54 0.1882 151.2 2222.58 6.4% 93.6% 0.491 92.80 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.084 0.081 0.0823 2316.1 23445.28 0.1765 154.8 2161.35 6.7% 93.3% 0.522 92.70 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.081 0.077 0.0791 2260.2 22877.15 0.1647 158.7 2101.50 7.0% 93.0% 0.558 92.60 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.077 0.074 0.0757 2206.1 22327.14 0.1529 163.0 2043.16 7.4% 92.6% 0.598 92.50 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.074 0.070 0.0721 2153.8 21795.17 0.1412 167.4 1986.35 7.8% 92.2% 0.646 92.40 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.070 0.066 0.0683 2103.2 21280.72 0.1294 172.4 1930.83 8.2% 91.8% 0.701 92.30 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.066 0.062 0.0643 2054.4 20783.67 0.1176 177.7 1876.71 8.6% 91.4% 0.768 92.20 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.062 0.058 0.0600 2007.2 20303.87 0.1059 183.3 1823.93 9.1% 90.9% 0.848 92.10 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.058 0.053 0.0555 1961.5 19839.96 0.0941 189.4 1772.10 9.7% 90.3% 0.949 92.00 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.053 0.048 0.0505 1917.4 19390.95 0.0824 196.0 1721.40 10.2% 89.8% 1.078 91.90 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.048 0.042 0.0450 1823.4 18956.54 0.0706 196.7 1626.68 10.8% 89.2% 1.216 91.80 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.042 0.035 0.0386 1256.9 17511.33 0.0588 149.2 1107.66 11.9% 88.1% 1.075 91.70 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.035 0.027 0.0308 416.4 7626.53 0.0471 98.3 318.09 23.6% 76.4% 0.886 91.60 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.027 0.025 0.0258 67.2 700.79 0.0353 53.1 14.16 78.9% 21.1% 0.572 91.50 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.025 0.020 0.0225 32.2 643.75 0.0235 27.1 5.07 84.2% 15.8% 0.335 91.40 91.40 1.00 0.6 0.020 0.000 0.0100 0.0 0.01 0.0118 0.0 0.00 0.0% 0.0% 0.000 * Assumes a decaying percolation rate Pond down to WQCV 11.71 WQCV assuming no infiltration 40 Total Release Time 51.71 Total 11.71 Initial Q Values 93.50 93.00 92.50 92.00 91.50 91.00 9d.50 90.00 -0.020 0.000 0.020 0.040 D.060 0.080 0.100 • Calculated Q Values from U D -Detention • Interpolated Q Values Linear (Caiculated Q Values from UD- Detention) WQCV Weir Notch Calculations Q = CL(H)3/2 Where: C2 = flow (CFS) C = weir coefficient (see table 11-1) L = horizontal length (ft) H = total energy head (ft) City of Greeley Eq.11.4.3.A(1) (Weir Flow) C= L= H= 2.600 0.274 ft flow depth ft Time to Time to Stage Volume Qi of Stage Qf of Stage Qavg of release stage release Elevation (CF) Depth (ft) (CFS) (CFS) Stage (CFS) (Sec) stage (Min) 91.82 1370.20 0.42 0.194 0.187 0.190 7193.90 119.90 91.81 1313.55 0.41 0.187 0.180 0.184 7153.45 119.22 91.80 1256.90 0.40 0.180 0.174 0.177 7106.49 118.44 91.79 1172.85 0.39 0.174 0.167 0.170 6891.28 114.85 91.78 1088.80 0.38 0.167 0.160 0.164 6655.00 110.92 91.77 1004.75 0.37 0.160 0.154 0.157 6395.35 106.59 91.76 920.70 0.36 0.154 0.148 0.151 6109.69 101.83 91.75 836.65 0.35 0.148 0.141 0.144 5795.05 96.58 91.74 752.60 0.34 0.141 0.135 0.138 5448.00 90.80 91.73 668.55 0.33 0.135 0.129 0.132 5064.61 84.41 91.72 584.50 0.32 0.129 0.123 0.126 4640.38 77.34 91.71 500.45 0.31 0.123 0.117 0.120 4170.07 69.50 91.70 416.40 0.30 0.117 0.111 0.114 3647.60 60.79 91.69 381.48 0.29 0.111 0.106 0.108 3519.09 58.65 91.68 346.56 0.28 0.106 0.100 0.103 3372.89 56.21 91.67 311.64 0.27 0.100 0.094 0.097 3206.29 53.44 91.66 276.72 0.26 0.094 0.089 0.092 3016.09 50.27 91.65 241.80 0.25 0.089 0.084 0.086 2798.44 46.64 91.64 206.88 0.24 0.084 0.079 0.481 2548.70 42.48 91.63 171.96 0.23 0.079 0.074 0.076 2261.25 37.69 91.62 137.04 0.22 0.074 0.069 0.071 1929.20 32.15 91.61 102.12 0.21 0.069 0.064 0.066 1544.04 25.73 91.60 67.20 0.20 0.064 0.059 0.061 1095.18 18.25 91.59 63.70 0.19 0.059 0.054 0.057 1123.41 18.72 91.58 60.20 0.18 0.054 0.050 0.052 1153.94 19.23 91.57 56.70 0.17 0.050 0.046 0.048 1187.09 19.78 91.56 53.20 0.16 0.046 0.041 0.043 1223.27 20.39 91.55 49.70 0.15 0.041 0.037 0.039 1262.95 21.05 91.54 46.20 0.14 0.037 0.033 0.035 1306.75 21.78 91.53 42.70 0.13 0.033 0.030 0.032 1355.43 22.59 91.52 39.20 0.12 0.030 0.026 0.028 1409.96 23.50 91.51 35.70 0.11 0.026 0.023 0.024 1471.60 24.53 91.50 32.20 0.10 0.023 0.019 0.021 1542.04 25.70 91.49 28.98 0.09 0.019 0.016 0.018 1639.39 27.32 91.48 25.76 0.08 0.016 0.013 0.015 1757.55 29.29 91.47 22.54 0.07 0.013 0.010 0.012 1905.01 31.75 91.46 19.32 0.06 0.010 0.008 0.009 2096.02 34.93 91.45 16.10 0.05 0.008 0.006 0.007 2356.54 39.28 91.44 12.88 0.04 0.006 0.004 0.005 2740.15 45.67 91.43 9.66 0.03 0.004 0.002 0.003 3379.57 56.33 91.42 6.44 0.02 0.002 0.001 0.001 4722.50 78.71 91.41 3.22 0.01 0.001 0.000 0.000 9039.87 150.66 91.40 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.274 ft 3.29 in Accumulative Time (Min) 119.90 239.12 357.56 472.42 583.34 689.92 791.75 888.34 979.14 1063.55 1140.89 1210.39 1271.18 1329.83 1386.05 1439.49 1489.75 1536.39 1578.87 1616.56 1648.71 1674.45 1692.70 1711.42 1730.66 1750.44 1770.83 1791.88 1813.66 1836.25 1859.75 1884.27 1909.97 1937.30 1966.59 1998.34 2033.27 2072.55 2118.22 2174.55 2253.25 2403.92 2403.92 Total (hr) = 40.07 RESTRICTOR PLATE SIZING FOR CIRCULAR VERTICAL ORIFICES Project: 18-023 Sergio Vargas Basin ID: X Sizing the Restrictor Plate for Circular Vertical Orifices or Pipes (Input). Water Surface Elekalicn at Design Depth PipeNertical Orifice Entrance Invert Elevation Required Peak Flow through Orifice at Design Depth PipeNertical Orifice Diameter (inches) Orifice Coefficient Full -flow Capacity (Calculated) Fut-flow area Halt Central Angle in Radians Full -flow capacity Calculation of Orifice Flow Condition Half Central Angle (0<Theta<3.1416) Flow area Top width of Orifice (inches) Height from Invert of Orifice to Bottom of Plate (feet) Elevation of Bottom of Plate Resultant Peak Flow Through Orifice at Design Depth Width of Equivalent Rectangular Vertical Orifice Elev: WS = Elev: Invert = O= Dia = = Af = Theta = Of= Percent of Design Flow= Theta = Ae= To = Yo= Elev Plate Bottom Edge = #1 Vertical Orifice #2 Vertical Orifice 93.000 91.40 009 12.0 0.60 0.79 3.14 4.0 4411% feet feet cis inches sq ft rad JCfs 0.46 0.02 5.26 0.05 91.45 O,= 0.1 Equivalent Width = 0.40 1 O=D Ff = a-tO 4 in be -H-.4,- op3Zgn r S 1prlT-,mac ., T (-+e- rad sq ft inches feet teat Cfs feet Restrictor _Plate_UD-Detention_v2.34.sly, Restrictor Plate 8131/2018, 3:00 PM Rock_Chute.xis Page 1 of 3 Rock Chute Design Data (Version WI -July -2010, Based on Design of Rock Chutes by Robinson, Rice, Kedavy, ASAE, 1998) Project: Sergio Vargas 18-023 Designer: Dan Campbell Date: September 7, 2018 Input Geometry: County: Weld Checked by: Mark Taylor Date: 09/07/18 Upstream Channel Bw= 8.4 ft. Side slopes = 1.0 (m:1) Velocity n -value = 0.013 Bed slope = 0.0010 ft-Ift. Chute Bw = 8.4 ft. Factor of safety = 1.50 (F5) 1.2 Min Side slopes = 4.0 (m:1) 2.0:1 max. Bed slope (4:1) = 0.250 ft.fft — 3.0:1 max. Note: n value = a) velocity n from waterway program Freeboard = 1.0 ft. or b) computed mannings n for channel Outlet apron depth, d = 0.5 ft. Downstream Channel Bw=8.4 ft, Side slopes = 8.0 (m:1) Velocity n -value = 0.022 Bed slope = 0.0500 ft,/ft. Base flow = 7.7 cfs Design Storm Data (Table 2, FOTG, WI-NRCS Grade Stabilization Structure No. 410): Apron elev. --- Inlet =93.0 ft. Outlet 91.3 ft. --- (Hdrep = 1.2 ft.) Qh,mh = Runoff from design storm capacity from Table 2, FOTG Standard 410 Q5 = Runofff from a 5-year,24-hour storm. ()high= 7.7 cfs High flow storm through chute _ Q5 = 0.1 cfs Low flow storm through chute Note: The total required capacity is routed through the chute (principal spillway) or in combination with an auxiliary spillway. Input tailwater (Tw) ; Tw (ft.) = Program Tw (ft.) = Program Profile and Cross Section Out ut): Starting Station = 0+00.0 hp = 0 08 ft (0.01 ft.) Hpe = 0.46 ft. Energy Grade Line t Hp= 038ft Inlet ' (0 03 ft.) ChannelI) Yn = 0.44 ft (0.04 ft.) h,= 0.13 ft (0.01 ft. ) Hce= 041 ft. i yo= 028ft. x".. 002 ft) ---10yc=?ft. 40(D50) = 11 ft Velocitytneet = 1.97 fps radius at normal depth Slope check upstream is OK Note: When the normal depth (y5) in the inlet channel is less than the weir head (Hp), ie , the weir capacity is less than the channel capacity, restricted flow or pondrng will occur This reduces velocity and prevents erosion upstream of the inlet apron 0715y,= 02ft. 01 ft Typical Cross Section — Freeboard = Geotextile - Notes 1) Output given as High Flow (Low Flows values 2) Tailwater depth plus d must be at or above the hydraulic jump height for the chute to function. 3) Critical depth occurs 2yr - 4y, upstream of crest 4) Use WI Const Spec. 13, Class I non -woven geotextile under rock t <•Hdrop = 1.2 ii. sto o Rock Chute Bedding =017ft .1(0,01 ft.) �� - 1 Hydraulic Jump Height, z2= r 10.03 ft ) Tw+d= 0.16 ft - Twok (0 68 ft) - Tw o k. 0 26 ft. (0 18 ft) 2.5 r Outlet Apron' Outlet Channel Shope = 0.05 ft./ft. 7777L f₹. -- '— d = 5 4 (1 ft. minimum 15(D55)(Fs) suggested) Velocityo hhet = 5.51 fps at normal depth Profile Along Centerline of Chute Berm Geotextile Rock Chute _` ��ar�1�,. Bedding Use H along chute "It"—' t'- 8'4 - -� Rock thickness= 10 r�- but not less than z2. B' Fs = Zi_ n -value = D5o(F5) _ 2(D50)(F5) = Tw+d= z2 = *** The outlet Equivalent unit discharge 1.50 Factor of safety (multiplier) 0.17 ff. Normal depth in chute 0.046 Manning's roughness coefficient 5 in Minimum Design D50* 10 it Rock chute thickness C 761t. Tailwater above outlet apron 0.43 ft. Hydraulic jump height will function adequately High Flow Storm Information Rock_Chute.xls Page 2 of 3 Rock Chute Design Calculations (Version WI -July -2010, Based on Design of Rock Chutes by Robinson, Rice, Kadavy, ASAE, 1998) Project: Sergio Vargas 18-023 County: Weld Designer: Dan Campbell Checked by: Date: 9/7/2018 Date: I. Calculate the normal depth in the inlet channel High Flow Low Flow Yn = Area= Qhigh Scupstreamchannel = 0.44 ft, 3.9 ft2 7.7 cfs 0.003 ft/ft II. Calculate the critical depth in the chute High Flow Yc = 0.28 ft. Area = 2.7 ft2 Qhigh = 7.7 cfs Hce = 0.41 ft. hcv = 0.13 ft. 10yc = 2.82 ft. 0.715yc = 0.20 ft, Yn = Area = Ql0w = 0.04 ft. (Normal depth) 0.3 ft2 (Flow area in channel) 0.1 cfs (Capacity in channel) Low Flow yc = 0.02 ft. (Critical depth in chute) Area = 0.2 ft2 (Flow area in channel) ()low = 0.1 cfs (Capacity in channel) HCe = 0.03 ft. (Total minimum specific energy head) hc„ = 0.01 ft. (Velocity head corresponding to yc) (Required inlet apron length) 0.715yc = 0.01 ft. (Depth of flow over the weir crest or brink) III. Calculate the tailwater depth in the outlet channel High Flow Tw = 0.26 ft. Area = 2.8 ft2 Qhigh = 15.3 cfs H2 = 0.00 ft. Low Flow Tw = Area = Qlow = H2 = 0.18 ft. (Tailwater depth) 1.8 ft2 (Flow area in channel) 7.8 cfs (Capacity in channel) 0.00 ft. (Downstream head above weir crest, H2 = 0, if H2<0.715*yc) IV. Calculate the head for a trapezoidal shaped broadcrested weir Cd = High Flow Hp = 0.44 ft. Area = 3.9 ft2 Vo = 0,00 fps hp„ = 0.00 ft. Qhigh = 7.7 cfs 1.00 (Coefficient of discharge for broadcrested weirs) 0.38 ft. (Weir head) 3.4 ft2 (Flow area in channel) 2.27 fps (Approach velocity) 0.08 ft. (Velocity head corresponding to Hp) 7.7 cfs (Capacity in channel) Trial and error procedure solving simultaneously for velocity and head Low Flow Hp= 0.03 ft. Area = 0.2 ft2 Vo = 0.00 fps hp„ = 0.00 ft. Blow = 0.1 cfs 0.03 ft. 0.2 ft2 0.61 fps 0.01 ft. 0.1 cfs (Weir head) (Flow area in channel) (Approach velocity) (Velocity head corresponding to Hp) (Capacity in channel) Trial and error procedure solving simultaneously for velocity and head Rock_Chute.xls Page 3 of 3 Rock Chute Design Calculations (Version WI -July -2010, Based on Design of Rock Chutes by Robinson, Rice, Kadavy, ASAE, 1998) Project: Sergio Vargas 18-023 Designer: Dan Campbell Date: 9/7/2018 County: Weld Checked by: Date: V. Calculate the rock chute parameters (wlo a factor of safety applied) High Flow q1= 0.08 cros/m D50 (mm) = 84.42 -- (3.32 in.) n = 0.046 z1= 0.17 ft. A1= 1.5 ft2 Velocity= 4.95 fps zmean = 0.16 ft. 2.19 Lrock apron = 4.15 ft. F1 = 2*Slope = 11.79 Bottom = 8.65 Total = 20.44 ft. Low Flow = 0.00 cros/m (Equivalent unit discharge) D54 = 10.12 mm (Median angular rock size) n = 0.033 (Manning's roughness coefficient) z1 = 0.01 ft. (Normal depth in the chute) Al = 0.1 ft2 (Area associated with normal depth) Velocity = 1.21 fps (Velocity in chute slope) Zmean = 0.01 ft. F1= 1.89 VI. Calculate the height of hydraulic lump height (conjugate depth) High Flow z2 = 0.43 ft. Qhigh = 7.7 cfs A2 = 4.4 ft2 Low Flow z2 = Qhigh = A2 = (Mean depth) (Froude number) (Length of rock outlet apron = 15*D50) 0.03 ft. (Hydraulic jump height) 0.1 cfs (Capacity in channel) 0.2 ft2 (Flow area in channel) VII. Calculate the energy lost through the jump (absorbed by the rock) High Flow E1 = 0.55 ft. E2 = 0.48 ft. RE = 13.04 % Calculate Quantities for Rock Chute Rock Riprap Volume Area Calculations Length @ Rock CL h = 0.43 inlet = 9.94 x1 = 4.12 Outlet = 6.16 L = 1.77 Slope = 6.97 A,= 1.77 2.5:1 Lip= 1.24 x2= 4.00 Total = 24.31 Ab = 12.65 Rock Volume Ab+2*As= 16.19 ft2 14.58 yd3 ft. Geotextile Quantity Width Length (a? Bot. Rock Total = 24.30 ft, Geotextile Area 55.18 yd2 Low Flow E, = E2 = RE= 0.04 ft. 0.03 ft, 7.41 % (Total energy before the jump) (Total energy after the jump) (Relative loss of energy) Bedding Volume Area Calculations h = 1.43 xi = 0.00 L = 5.90 A, = 0.00 x2 = 0.00 Ab = 0.00 Ab+2*AS = 0.00 ft2 Bedding Thickness t2 = 0.00 in. Length (li Bed CL Total = 24.30 ft, Bedding Volume 0.00 Yd3 Note: 1) The radius is not considered when calculating quantities of riprap, bedding, or geotextile. 2) The geotextile quantity does not include over - overlapping (18 -in. min.) or anchoring material (18 -in, min. along sides, 24 -in. min. on ends). Rock Chute Design - Plan Sheet 11 ft. (Version WI -July -2010, Based on Design of Rock Chutes by Robinson, Rice, Kadavy, ASAE, 1998) Project: Sergio Vargas 18-023 _ County: Weld Designer: Dan Campbell Checked by: Date: 9/7/2018 Date: Minimum Design Values 5.0 in D50 dia = 10.0in. 3 ft. Rock,„„ thickness = Inlet apron length = 6 ft, Outlet apron length = Radius = Enter Plan Values 600 in. 12.00in, 10.00ft. 6.00 ft. 17 ft. Rock Gradation Envelope % Passing Diameter, in. (weight lbs.) D10 D85 D50 D10 9-12(52-122) 8-11 (34 - 89) 6-9(15-52) 5-8(8-34) Will bedding be used? I`: Notes e Rock, bedding, and geotextile quantities are determined from the x -section below (neglect radius) b Geotextile Class I (non -woven) shall be overlapped and anchored (18 -in. min. along sides and 24 -in. min. on the ends). Upstream Channel Pe = 0.001 ft.ift. Rock Chute Bedding Stakeout Notes Sta. Elev. (Pnt) 0+00.0 93 ft (1) 0+07.9 93 ft. (2) 0+10.0 92,9 ft. (3) 0+120 925ft (4) 0+16 8 91 31 ft (5) 0+22.8 91.31 ft. (6) 0+24.0 91.81 ft. (7) Class I non -woven Radius = 17 f;. Rock gradation envelope can be met with DOT Light riprap Gradation Geotextile c— Inlet apron elev = ft. Rock thicknesz= 1 I' Quantities e Rock = ' . yd3 Geotextile (WCS-13)b = ``-3 Bedding = 0 Excavation = 0 Earthfill = !� Seeding = Degree of angularity = yd2 yd3 yd3 yd3 acres 1 1 50% angular. 50% rounded 2 100 % rounded Outlet apron elev. = 91.31 ft Downstream Channel -A- Outlet apron '•'.t ( f+.----� d = L _ Profile Along Centerline of Rock Chute Freeboard = 7 — Rock Chute Cost Estimate Unit Unit Cost Cost Rock Geotextile Bedding Excavation Earthfill Seeding $10.001yd3 $150.00 $12.001yd2 $672.00 $12.001yd3 $0.00 $12.001yd3 $0.00 $1.001yd3 $0.00 $2.00 lac. $0.00 Total $822.00 1 —r 2 5 Sl&':..> = rb.c **Note: The outlet will function adequately Top width = '2 t . 8ft. Geotextile Rock Chute Bedding Rock thickness— * Use Hp throughout chute B' = 8. r . but not less than z2. Rock Chute Cross Section Profile, Cross Sections, and Quantities 4NRCS Natural Resources Censeva:on berme (laded Swees Depoleemal Ayncueue Sergio Vargas 18-023 Weld County Dale Designee Dee Cenpbell Orem Checked APP, le Name *enMng Nave Page 1 of 1 Rock_Chute.xls for construction plan Rock Chute Design - Cut/Paste Plan (Version WI -July -2010, Based on Design of Rock Chutes by Robinson, Rice, Kadavy, ASAE, 1998) Project: Sergio Vargas 18-023 Designer: Dan Campbell Date: 9/7/2018 County: VVeld Checked by: Date: Design Values D5O dia. = 6.0 in. Rockch 1e thickness = 12.0 in. Inlet apron length = 10 ft. Outlet apron length = 6 ft. Radius = 17 ft. Will bedding be used? No Rock Gradation Envelope Passing Dioo D85 D10 Diameter, in. (weight, lbs.) 9 - 12 (52 -122) 8-11 (34 - 89) 6-9(15-52) 5 - 8 (8 - 34) Coefficient of Uniformity, (D50)/(D10) < 1.7 Rock = 15 Geotextile (WCS-13)b = 56 Bedding = 0 Excavation = 0 Earthfill = 0 Seeding = 0.0 acres Quantities a yds yd2 yd3 yd3 yd3 Notes: a Rock, bedding, and geotextile quantities are determined from x -section below (neglect radius) Upstream Channel • b Geotextile Class I (Non -woven) shall be overlapped and anchored (18 -in. minimum along sides and 24 -in. minimum on the ends) --- quantity not included. Slope = 0.001 ft./ft. Stakeout Notes Sta. Hey. (Pnt) 0+00.0 93 ft. (1) 0+07.9 93 ft. (2) 0+10.0 92.9 ft. (3) 0+12.0 92.5 ft. (4) 0+16.8 91.31 ft. (5) 0+22.8 91.31 ft. (6) 0+24.0 91.81 ft. (7) Notes: C O Inlet apron elev. = 93 ft. 2 3 Radius = 16.68 fit Geotextile Rock thickness 12 in. 7 ft. Point No. 2 3 4 Outlet apron elev. = 91.31 ft. < Profile Along Centerline of Rock Chute Freeboard = 1 ft. —1 1 Rock gradation envelope can be met with DOT Light riprap Gradation 4' Description Point of curvature (PC) Point of intersection (PI) Point of tangency (PT) Downstream Channel Slope = 0.05 ft./ft. 6 f. - z51 —d= 0.5 ft. %Rock Chute .Top width = 12 ft. Bedding B-rm Geotextile = 0.43 ft. � iT � Rock Chute Bedding 8 ft. Rock thickness= 12 in. = 8.7 ft. * Use Hp throughout chute Rock Chute Cross Section but not less than z2. Profile, Cross Sections, and Quantities o NRCS a Niel Resources Consurrakon Scram United stales Department of AgrkWWre Sergio Vargas 18-023 Weld County Cate Designed Dan Camphor 7N8YT Checked ApFrrne! Ftle Name Drawing Name Sheet _Of r Ili 4. Hello