PHASE III DRAINAGE STUDY FOR PROVIDENCE POINTjamesmill.com/download/HAES_PHASE3DRN_08-27-14.… · · 2014-08-27PHASE III DRAINAGE STUDY FOR PROVIDENCE POINT El Paso County, Colorado

D:\legacy\Haes\Drainage\Excel-n-Word\HAES PHASE3DRN Text.docx Page 1 of 11

PHASE III DRAINAGE STUDY

FOR

PROVIDENCE POINT

El Paso County, Colorado

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

PREPARED FOR

Marc and Cheryl Haes 16450 Farrar Road

Colorado Springs, CO 80908 (719) 232-5605

PREPARED BY

Legacy Engineering, Inc. 1626 Thatch Circle

El Paso County, Colorado 80109 (720) 200-4577

PHASE III DRAINAGE STUDY FOR CVR – Providence Point El Paso County, Colorado - August 27, 2014


ENGINEER’S STATEMENT:

The enclosed drainage report (PROVIDENCE POINT Phase III Drainage Study), and exhibits (for the Phase III Drainage Study) were prepared by me, or under my direct supervision, and are correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Said drainage report has been prepared in accordance with applicable El Paso County criteria and is in conformance with the master plan of drainage for the affected area. I accept responsibility for any liability caused by negligent acts, errors or omissions on my part in preparing this report. 08-27-14 Legacy Engineering, Inc. James J. Mill, P.E. (Colorado PE #29256) OWNER/DEVELOPER’S STATEMENT As Owner/Developer of land(s) identified within this report; I agree to proceed, implement and comply with all recommendations and requirements outlined herein. _____________ PROVIDENCE POINT Date Marc Haes EL PASO COUNTY APPROVALS: _____________ Engineering Division Date _____________ Development Services Director Date



TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION A. Location..................................................................................... 4 B. Description of Property.............................................................. 4 C. Irrigation Facilities..................................................................... 4 D. Land Use.................................................................................... 4

II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS A. Historic Drainage Patterns............................................................. 4

B. Major Basin Description............................................................. 4 C. Sub-Basin Description................................................................ 5

III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA A. Regulations................................................................................ 6 B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints...................... 6 C. Hydrological Criteria.................................................................. 6 D. Hydraulic Criteria....................................................................... 6 E. Sediment & Erosion Control....................................................... 6

IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN A. General Concept........................................................................ 7

V. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN......................................... 7

VI. CONCLUSIONS A. Compliance with Standards....................................................... 10 B. Drainage Concept..................................................................... 10 C. Summary.................................................................................. 10

VII. REFERENCES.................................................................................... 11

Figure Description

APPENDIX A - PROJECT INFORMATION 1 Vicinity Map 2 SCS Soils Map and Soil Properties. 2a Firm Map

APPENDIX B - HYDROLOGY 3 IDF Curve Rainfall Values 5 Composite “I” and “C” Calculations 6 Average Flow Velocities 7 Time of Concentration, Rational Method Calculation Sheet, 5&10 Year

APPENDIX C - HYDRAULICS 8 Culvert Calculations

Drainage Plan



I. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

This Phase III Drainage Study for PROVIDENCE POINT has been prepared to address onsite and

offsite drainage concepts in accordance with requirements of El Paso County, Colorado. The

Appendix to this report includes minimum criteria, design computations and reference information

to be used in subsequent phases of analysis and design. The attached Phase III Drainage Plan

summarizes the drainage concepts and conclusions of this study.

A. LOCATION

PROVIDENCE POINT, containing a total of 35.34 acres, located in El Paso County as depicted

on Figure 1 in the Appendix. The site is located in the northeast quarter of Section 25, Township

11 South, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M., El Paso County. The site is bounded by High Forest

Ranch Filing 2 on the west, Hodgen Road ROW on the north, Thal Sudvision on the east, and

Tract 7 of Eagle Crest Estates on the south.

B. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY

The site is to consist of 35.34 acres to be platted for 6 single family home sites. Existing vegetation

covers the site, which is not irrigated, consisting mainly of native grasses on rolling topography

ranging from 0% to 15%. The site drains to the east-southeast within existing arroyos and swales.

C. IRRIGATION FACILITIES

There are no active irrigation facilities on the site.

D. LAND USE

The development will NOT BE overlot graded for residential development. Providence Point is

zoned for 5 acre min parcels.

II. DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB-BASINS

A. HISTORIC PATTERNS

Historically, this site has drained to the east-southeast in exiting arroyos and swales. This pattern

will not change with this subdivision and the addition of 5 additional home sites to this 35 acres

will not increase or change the historic storm flows in a measurable way.

B. MAJOR BASIN DESCRIPTION

The drainage area which encompasses PROVIDENCE POINT drains entirely to an unnamed

tributary arroyo of E Cherry Creek; the confluence of which is approx. 2 miles to the northeast at

Franktown-Parker FPE-3 Reservoir. According to the FIRM dated March 17, 1997, Map Number

08041CO325 F (reference 3; Figure 2a), there are no mapped A or AE flood zones on this property.



A significant amount of off-site drainage enters the property. The existing drainage patterns will

remain exactly the same as a consequence of envisioned grading activities.

The predominant soil types for the site include Peyton Sandy Loams and Peyton Pring Complex

(see Fig. 2 and Ref. 4). Peyton Sandy Loams is a well-drained soil group and have medium runoff

with moderate erosion potential and are in the “B” hydrologic soils group classification and

represents 79% of the project. Peyton-Pring complex is a well-drained soil group with low runoff

with slight to moderate erosion potential and is classified as soil group “B” and represents 21% of

the project.

C. SUB-BASIN DESCRIPTION

Sub-basins for this site have been divided as follows: A through D.

Basin “A” drains to the southeast toward the eastern property line and the existing culvert under

Farrar Road. The total area of Basin A is 55.6 acres including offsite area to the northwest. The

total runoff from Basin A in the minor and major event are shown in the table below. Flows from

will continue in their historic manner only to be interrupted by a culvert for the proposed Haes

Heights private Road. This culvert is calculated to be a 30” CMP (See appendix for Calculations).

Basin “B” drains to the southeast towards the southern property line. The total area of Basin B is

6.6 acres comprised only of onsite flows. The total runoff from Basin B in the minor and major

event are shown in the table below. Flows from Basin B enter an existing offsite swale in Tract 7

that flows east towards an existing culvert under Farrar Road.

Basin “C” drains to the southeast towards the southeastern property line. The total area of Basin

C is 32.8 acres including offsite area to the west. The total runoff from Basin C in the minor and

major event are shown in the table below. Flows from Basin C enter an existing offsite swale in

Tract 7 that flows east towards an existing culvert under Farrar Road.

Basin “D” drains to the east towards the southeastern property line. The total area of Basin D is

20.4 acres including offsite area to the west. The total runoff from Basin D in the minor and major

event are shown in the table below. Flows from Basin D enter an existing offsite swale in Tract 7

that flows east towards an existing culvert under Farrar Road.

Providence Point ‐ Runoff Summary

Basin ID Design Point Area 5 year Runoff 100 year Runoff

Basin A 1 55.6 ac 6.7 cfs 43.3 cfs

Basin B 2 6.6 ac 1.3 cfs 9.6 cfs

Basin C 3 32.8 ac 3.5 cfs 28.0 cfs

Basin D 4 20.4 ac 1.9 cfs 15.1 cfs



III. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA

A. REGULATIONS

Storm drainage analysis and design criteria are to be taken from the "City of Colorado Springs/El

Paso County Drainage Criteria Manual (1994 Revisions), Reference 1

B. DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA REFERENCE AND CONSTRAINTS

Development criteria shall be in accordance with El Paso County Public Works Department.

C. HYDROLOGICAL CRITERIA

The Rational Method was utilized to analyze and quantify runoff from the developed basins.

Design points were used to determine total flows at key points of interest. The 5-year storm event

was used for the initial storm analysis within residential areas and the 100-year storm frequency

was analyzed for the major storm.

D. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA

Sizing calculations for Haes Heights Culvert were completed using Hydraflow Express Storm

Sewers Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. (See Appendix C).

E. SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL

Site soils are typical of the area and will require careful erosion and sediment control methods.

Construction sedimentation will be controlled, to meet El Paso County Performance Standards.

Specifics of this erosion control plan will be demonstrated in the Grading, Erosion, and

Sedimentation Control Plan that will be included in the construction plan set at time of Final Plat.

No unsuitability of the site soils with regard to construction of this development have been

identified thus far.



IV. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN

A. GENERAL CONCEPT

The general concept is to convey storm water via natural drainage-ways, culverts, to the unnamed

E Cherry Creek tributary at the eastern boundary of PROVIDENCE POINT. Basins consist of

rural lots, 1 private roadway, natural drainage-ways and open space.

Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing approximately where the PROVIDENCE POINT development

is located. Figure 2 presents the soil classifications found within the site. Figure 2a presents a

“firmette” for Map Number 08041CO325 F. Figure 3 is the IDF Curve for El Paso County. Figure

4 contains the time-intensity-frequency curves for El Paso County. Figure 5 shows calculations

for a composite “I” value. Figure 6 presents average flow velocities for use with the rational

method. Figure 7 contains time of concentration calculations and peak storm flows using rational

method calculation sheets for the 5 and 100 year storm events, respectively for each basin. Figures

in Appendix C contain culvert design calculations. An overall drainage map is provided at the end

of this report.

Historic Basins: All existing basins and proposed basins shown in this development are exactly

the same.

V. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN

A. SITE DESCRIPTION

a) The proposed construction activity is development of single family homes with all

relevant infrastructure including, but not limited to, streets, utilities, and drainage

improvements.

b) The anticipated sequence of construction is as follows:

1. Installation of perimeter erosion control measures

2. Site clearing

3. Pad grading

4. Installation of temporary onsite erosion control measures and temporary

traps

5. Utility construction

6. Drainage improvements construction including sediment traps at inlets and

erosion protection at outfall locations.

7. Road grading



8. Street preparation

9. Street paving

10. Seeding and mulching of all disturbed areas

11. Removal of erosion control appurtenances after site is stabilized

c) The total area of the site is approximately 35 acres. The area of the site expected

to undergo grading activities is approximately 2 acres.

d) Soils data are identified in the Appendix.

e) Vegetation on the site consists mainly of native grasses covering 100% of the site.

f) Potential pollution sources include equipment refueling and maintenance, grading

operations, and concrete wash water.

g) No significant non-storm waters of runoff are anticipated.

h) The receiving water course is an unnamed tributary of East Cherry Creek, then East

Cherry Creek, then South Platte,

B. APPROPRIATE DRAWINGS

The appropriate maps, taken from the "Construction Plans include: Overlot Grading Plan; Erosion

Control Plan; Overlot Grading and Erosion Control Details. The drainage map is enclosed and

also provides additional relevant information.

C. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP) FOR STORMWATER POLLUTION

PREVENTION

a) Erosion and Sediment Control

1. Structural Practices: Overlot grading operations present the greatest

opportunity for pollution of State waters. Disturbed areas shall be contained

by a perimeter silt fence at downslope conditions which shall remain at the

downstream perimeter of all overland flow until non-structural ways and

means are established. Upon completion of the overlot grading, surface

runoff velocities shall be attenuated by slope reduction and erosion bales as

check dams. The grading improvements generally direct runoff to a central

point of site release thereby permitting point source methods of pollution

abatement management practices, more particularly the detention pond.

Surface areas remain denuded during utility construction, but the structural



elements remain in place. Maintenance procedures shall be recorded by the

developer's construction manager in a log book.

2. Non-structural Practices: Upon completion of the street hardscape, all

exposed portions of the site not slated for house construction shall be seeded

and mulched. Silt and sediment deposits shall be removed and spread

evenly in open areas and shall be seeded and mulched as necessary. Upon

establishment of surface vegetation, structural erosion control measures

shall then be removed whereby non-structural methods shall be practiced.

b) Materials Handling and Spill Prevention

Potential pollutant materials brought onsite would be fuels for earthmoving and trenching

equipment. Berms shall be provided at the fueling site as a containment measure. There will be

no permanent bulk fuel storage on this site. The Black Forest Fire Protection District is presumed

to be equipped for spill cleanup and any contaminated materials shall be properly disposed at the

contractor expense. Other potential pollutant materials include concrete wash water. This shall

be done in areas designated by the developer's construction manager and protected from runoff

and, after hydration, be buried in designated non-construction zones.

Building materials are expensive and shall be protected by storage outside of runoff areas. This

shall be performed by the owner of the materials so as to protect the inherent value. No additional

materials handling measures will be taken.

Waste building materials shall be collected by a reputable waste management company and

transported to a legal waste disposal facility. Site inspections shall be performed weekly to assure

onsite collection. No dedicated concrete or asphalt batch plants are proposed on the site.

D. FINAL STABILIZATION AND LONG TERM STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

After infrastructure construction is complete, runoff will be directed by a street network to a storm

sewer system and detention pond and then released. After completion of this project, the open

space areas are landscaped and maintained by the home owners association. The storm water is

then classified as urban runoff.



E. OTHER CONTROLS

Offsite soil tracking is limited by restriction of construction traffic to one access point and by

periodic maintenance. Implementation of the controls shall be by the erosion control plan which

is a part of the contract documents.

F. INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE

Maintenance procedures are outlined in the notes contained on the overlot grading and erosion

control plans and respective details. A log record noting all inspections and mitigation efforts shall

be kept with the construction manager.

VI. CONCLUSIONS

A. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS

This Phase III Drainage Study for PROVIDENCE POINT was prepared in compliance with the El

Paso County Public Works Regulations. In addition, no amendment to the Flood Hazard Area

Delineation for this area is required for this development. There are no impacts to any threatened

or endangered species that we are aware of. All Federal and State environmental permitting

requirements, should they be necessary, will be complied with – this includes a State of Colorado

Storm Water Discharge Permit.

B. DRAINAGE CONCEPT

The drainage designs and facilities presented in this report adequately convey developed runoff

through the site and into existing drainage ways without increasing the existing discharge.

C. SUMMARY

The report provides sufficient information to accommodate the planning process. Information

herein supports the viability of this proposed project.



VII. References

1) City of Colorado Springs/El Paso County Drainage Criteria Manual (1994 Revisions)

2) Flood Insurance Rate Map, Douglas County, Colorado, Map Number 08041CO325

March 17th, 1997, prepared by FEMA.

3) Soil Survey of El Paso County Area, Colorado, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil

Conservation Service, issued November, 1974.

4) Software used - AutoDesk Civil 3D 2015; Microsoft Excel 2013; Microsoft Word 2013;

UDFCD Excel Spreadsheets;

D:\legacy\CVR\CVR14\Drainage\CVR14 DRAINAGE APPENDIX Labels.docx A

APPENDIX A - PROJECT INFORMATION

James

Text Box

Fig 1

United StatesDepartment ofAgriculture

A product of the NationalCooperative Soil Survey,a joint effort of the UnitedStates Department ofAgriculture and otherFederal agencies, Stateagencies including theAgricultural ExperimentStations, and localparticipants

Custom Soil ResourceReport for

El Paso CountyArea, Colorado

NaturalResourcesConservationService

August 21, 2014

PrefaceSoil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. Theyhighlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information aboutthe properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for manydifferent users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners,community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also,conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal,and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhancethe environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may imposespecial restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil propertiesthat are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The informationis intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations onvarious land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complyingwith existing laws and regulations.

Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider areaplanning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases.Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. Formore detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State SoilScientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?cid=nrcs142p2_053951).

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils areseasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as afoundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septictank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements orunderground installations.

The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Departmentof Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the AgriculturalExperiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources ConservationService (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative SoilSurvey.

Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is availablethrough the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programsand activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and whereapplicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexualorientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of anindividual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibitedbases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means

2

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/

http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs

http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?cid=nrcs142p2_053951

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?cid=nrcs142p2_053951

for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) shouldcontact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file acomplaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272(voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider andemployer.

3

ContentsPreface....................................................................................................................2How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5Soil Map..................................................................................................................7

Soil Map................................................................................................................8Legend..................................................................................................................9Map Unit Legend................................................................................................10Map Unit Descriptions........................................................................................10

El Paso County Area, Colorado......................................................................1267—Peyton sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes...........................................1268—Peyton-Pring complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes......................................13

References............................................................................................................15Glossary................................................................................................................17

4

How Soil Surveys Are MadeSoil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areasin a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas andtheir location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitationsaffecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape ofthe slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; andthe kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile isthe sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from thesurface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from thesurface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and otherliving organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.

Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas(MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that sharecommon characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources,soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typicallyconsist of parts of one or more MLRA.

The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that isrelated to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area.Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind oflandform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneousareas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of thelandform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus,during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerabledegree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on thelandscape.

Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as theircharacteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soilscientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe onlya limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented byan understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verifypredictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.

Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. Theynoted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rockfragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them toidentify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining theirproperties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soilcharacteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis forcomparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomicclassification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character ofsoil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soilscientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the

5

individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so thatthey could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience andresearch.

The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; theobjective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that havesimilar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a uniquecombination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictableproportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components ofthe map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishesthe usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms andlandform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development ofresource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation isneeded to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale ofmapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, andexperience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specificlocations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number ofmeasurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. Thesemeasurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth tobedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content ofsand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary fromone point to another across the landscape.

Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges ofcharacteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Directmeasurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unitcomponent. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of otherproperties.

While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generallyare collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpretthe data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristicsand the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under differentuses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soilsin different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations aremodified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meetlocal needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information,production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on cropyields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and fromfield or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.

Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on suchvariables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over longperiods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soilscientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will havea high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that ahigh water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.

After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in thesurvey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs andidentified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields,roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Custom Soil Resource Report

6

Soil MapThe soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soilmap units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbolsdisplayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used toproduce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.

7

8

Custom Soil Resource ReportSoil Map

4324

190

4324

270

4324

350

4324

430

4324

510

4324

590

4324

670

4324

750

4324

190

4324

270

4324

350

4324

430

4324

510

4324

590

4324

670

4324

750

523410 523490 523570 523650 523730 523810 523890

523410 523490 523570 523650 523730 523810 523890

39° 4' 19'' N10

4° 4

3' 4

6'' W

39° 4' 19'' N

104°

43'

25'

' W

39° 3' 58'' N

104°

43'

46'

' W

39° 3' 58'' N

104°

43'

25'

' W

N

Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS840 150 300 600 900

Feet0 45 90 180 270

MetersMap Scale: 1:3,140 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

Area of Interest (AOI)Area of Interest (AOI)

SoilsSoil Map Unit Polygons

Soil Map Unit Lines

Soil Map Unit Points

Special Point FeaturesBlowout

Borrow Pit

Clay Spot

Closed Depression

Gravel Pit

Gravelly Spot

Landfill

Lava Flow

Marsh or swamp

Mine or Quarry

Miscellaneous Water

Perennial Water

Rock Outcrop

Saline Spot

Sandy Spot

Severely Eroded Spot

Sinkhole

Slide or Slip

Sodic Spot

Spoil Area

Stony Spot

Very Stony Spot

Wet Spot

Other

Special Line Features

Water FeaturesStreams and Canals

TransportationRails

Interstate Highways

US Routes

Major Roads

Local Roads

BackgroundAerial Photography

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 causemisunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil lineplacement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrastingsoils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for mapmeasurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation ServiceWeb Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.govCoordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)

Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercatorprojection, which preserves direction and shape but distortsdistance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as theAlbers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accuratecalculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as ofthe version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: El Paso County Area, ColoradoSurvey Area Data: Version 10, Dec 23, 2013

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 15, 2011—Sep 22,2011

The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines werecompiled and digitized probably differs from the backgroundimagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shiftingof map unit boundaries may be evident.


9

Map Unit Legend

El Paso County Area, Colorado (CO625)

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

67 Peyton sandy loam, 5 to 9percent slopes

28.8 78.9%

68 Peyton-Pring complex, 3 to 8percent slopes

7.7 21.1%

Totals for Area of Interest 36.5 100.0%

Map Unit DescriptionsThe map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soilsor miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with themaps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.

A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or moremajor kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and namedaccording to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomicclass there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape,however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variabilityof all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extendbeyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomicclass rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomicclasses. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areasfor which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classesother than those of the major soils.

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in themap unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are callednoncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in aparticular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have propertiesand behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require differentmanagement. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generallyare in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used.Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identifiedby a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, thecontrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along withsome characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have beenobserved, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especiallywhere the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observationsto identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulnessor accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomicclasses but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments thathave similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segmentson the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If


10

intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed todefine and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Eachdescription includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil propertiesand qualities.

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except fordifferences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizonsthat are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.

Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity,degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of suchdifferences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on thedetailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonlyindicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.

Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.

A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricatepattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. Thepattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in allareas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.

An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils ormiscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present oranticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practicalor necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern andrelative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas thatcould be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similarinterpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion ofthe soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can bemade up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made upof all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil materialand support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.


11

El Paso County Area, Colorado

67—Peyton sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes

Map Unit SettingNational map unit symbol: 369dElevation: 6,800 to 7,600 feetMean annual air temperature: 43 to 45 degrees FFrost-free period: 115 to 125 daysFarmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit CompositionPeyton and similar soils: 85 percentEstimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Peyton

SettingLandform: HillsLandform position (three-dimensional): Side slopeDown-slope shape: LinearAcross-slope shape: LinearParent material: Arkosic alluvium derived from sedimentary rock and/or arkosic

residuum weathered from sedimentary rock

Typical profileA - 0 to 12 inches: sandy loamBt - 12 to 25 inches: sandy clay loamBC - 25 to 35 inches: sandy loamC - 35 to 60 inches: sandy loam

Properties and qualitiesSlope: 5 to 9 percentDepth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inchesNatural drainage class: Well drainedRunoff class: MediumCapacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20

to 0.60 in/hr)Depth to water table: More than 80 inchesFrequency of flooding: NoneFrequency of ponding: NoneAvailable water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.3 inches)

Interpretive groupsLand capability classification (irrigated): None specifiedLand capability classification (nonirrigated): 4eHydrologic Soil Group: BEcological site: Sandy divide (R049BY216CO)

Minor Components

Other soilsPercent of map unit:

PleasantPercent of map unit:


12

Landform: Depressions

68—Peyton-Pring complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes

Map Unit SettingNational map unit symbol: 369fElevation: 6,800 to 7,600 feetFarmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit CompositionPeyton and similar soils: 40 percentPring and similar soils: 30 percentEstimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Peyton

SettingLandform: HillsLandform position (three-dimensional): Side slopeDown-slope shape: LinearAcross-slope shape: LinearParent material: Arkosic alluvium derived from sedimentary rock and/or arkosic

residuum weathered from sedimentary rock

Typical profileA - 0 to 12 inches: sandy loamBt - 12 to 25 inches: sandy clay loamBC - 25 to 35 inches: sandy loamC - 35 to 60 inches: sandy loam

Properties and qualitiesSlope: 3 to 5 percentDepth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inchesNatural drainage class: Well drainedRunoff class: LowCapacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20

to 0.60 in/hr)Depth to water table: More than 80 inchesFrequency of flooding: NoneFrequency of ponding: NoneAvailable water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.3 inches)

Interpretive groupsLand capability classification (irrigated): None specifiedLand capability classification (nonirrigated): 4cHydrologic Soil Group: BEcological site: Sandy divide (R049BY216CO)


13

Description of Pring

SettingLandform: HillsLandform position (three-dimensional): Side slopeDown-slope shape: LinearAcross-slope shape: LinearParent material: Arkosic alluvium derived from sedimentary rock

Typical profileA - 0 to 14 inches: coarse sandy loamC - 14 to 60 inches: gravelly sandy loam

Properties and qualitiesSlope: 3 to 8 percentDepth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inchesNatural drainage class: Well drainedRunoff class: LowCapacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (2.00 to 6.00 in/hr)Depth to water table: More than 80 inchesFrequency of flooding: NoneFrequency of ponding: NoneAvailable water storage in profile: Low (about 6.0 inches)

Interpretive groupsLand capability classification (irrigated): None specifiedLand capability classification (nonirrigated): 3eHydrologic Soil Group: BEcological site: Loamy park (R048AY222CO)

Minor Components

PleasantPercent of map unit: Landform: Depressions

Other soilsPercent of map unit:


14

ReferencesAmerican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004.Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling andtesting. 24th edition.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification ofsoils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification ofwetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceFWS/OBS-79/31.

Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.

Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.

Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soilsin the United States.

National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.

Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S.Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262

Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for makingand interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service,U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577

Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580

Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service andDelaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, WetlandsSection.

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps ofEngineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station TechnicalReport Y-87-1.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084

15

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262






http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, theCaribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053624

United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Landcapability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf


16

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242




http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf

D:\legacy\CVR\CVR14\Drainage\CVR14 DRAINAGE APPENDIX Labels.docx B

APPENDIX B - HYDROLOGY

Basin A Total clustered lot area 38.6 acresArea Description Area "I" Imperv Area Notesfootprints in Lots 0.7 acres 100% 0.7 acres 6 home sites

Roadways 1.7 acres 100% 1.7 acresUndisturbed 53.2 acres 2% 1.1 acres

total 55.6 acres 3.4 acres6.1% Hist = Dev

Basin Bfootprints in Lots 0.1 acres 100% 0.1 acres 1 home site



Basin Cfootprints in Lots 0.1 acres 100% 0.1 acres 1 home site



Basin Dfootprints in Lots 0.1 acres 100% 0.1 acres 1 home site



Phase III drainage studyCOMPOSITE "I"

CALCULATED BASIN "I" VALUE =




Providence Point

Impervious D:\legacy\Haes\Drainage\Excel-n-Word\HAES i C and TC Calculations.xlsx 8/26/2014

I i 2-Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year

CCD 6.1% 0.061 0.08 0.19 0.28 0.40 0.46 0.52

CA 6.1% 0.061 0.00 0.03 0.11 0.17 0.21 0.25

CB 6.1% 0.061 0.04 0.11 0.19 0.29 0.34 0.38

% B type? 100.00% 0.11 0.38

CCD 3.7% 0.037 0.07 0.17 0.27 0.39 0.46 0.51

CA 3.7% 0.037 0.00 0.01 0.08 0.15 0.19 0.23

CB 3.7% 0.037 0.03 0.09 0.18 0.27 0.32 0.37

% B type? 100.00% 0.09 0.37

C CD 2.3% 0.023 0.06 0.17 0.26 0.38 0.45 0.51

C A 2.3% 0.023 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.14 0.18 0.22

C B 2.3% 0.023 0.03 0.08 0.17 0.26 0.32 0.36

% B type? 100.00% 0.08 0.36

CCD 2.6% 0.026 0.06 0.17 0.26 0.38 0.45 0.51

CA 2.6% 0.026 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.14 0.18 0.22

CB 2.6% 0.026 0.03 0.08 0.17 0.26 0.32 0.37

% B type? 100.00% 0.08 0.37

Storm Return Period

Providence Point

Phase III Drainage Study 8/26/2014 15:22

Project

Job Description

Percentage Imperviousness

Runoff

Coefficients (by soil group)

Basin A

Basin B

Basin D

Basin C

C Determination D:\legacy\Haes\Drainage\Excel-n-Word\HAES i C and TC Calculations.xlsx 8/26/2014

Revised by: Date:

Ti Ti Tt Tt Tt Tt Ti+Tt

AREA C(5) C(100) LENGTH SLOPE Ti LENGTH SLOPE SWALE VEL Tt COMP TOTAL FINAL

Basin Ac Ft % Min L-total Ft % CODE* FPS Min Tc LENGTH Tc

Basin A 55.6 0.11 0.38 150 3.8% 14.2 2629.0 2479 5.1% 2.5 0.6 73.5 87.7 2629 n 24.6 87.7

Basin B 6.6 0.09 0.37 150 5.6% 12.8 907.0 757 6.7% 2.5 0.6 19.5 32.3 907 n 15.0 32.3

Basin C 32.8 0.08 0.36 150 8.3% 11.3 2299.0 2149 5.8% 2.5 0.6 59.6 70.8 2299 n 22.8 70.8

Basin D 20.4 0.08 0.37 150 3.0% 11.3 2056.0 1030 4.6% 2.5 0.6 73.5 87.7 2629 n 24.6 87.7

*SWALE CODES ARE:

MEADOW AND FORREST 2.50 Regional Time of Concentration Urbanized Time of ConcentrationTILLAGE 5.00

LAWN 7.00

BARE GROUND 10.00

GRASSED WATERWAY 15.00

PAVED WATERWAY 20.00

Urb

aniz

ed?

Urb

aniz

ed C

heck

Figure 7.0

Proposed Drainage BasinsStandard Form SF-2

Storm Drainage System Design

Providence PointJJM

8/26/2014 8/26/2014

3

5i

S

LC1.10.395T 10

180

LTc

Tc Determination D:\legacy\Haes\Drainage\Excel-n-Word\HAES i C and TC Calculations.xlsx 8/26/2014

DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF

06/2001 RO-13 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District

FIGURE RO-1 Estimate of Average Overland Flow Velocity for Use With the Rational Formula

Bas

in ID

Des

ign

Poin

t

Are

a

5 ye

ar R

unof

f

100

year

Run

off

Basin A 1 55.6 ac 6.7 cfs 43.3 cfs

Basin B 2 6.6 ac 1.3 cfs 9.6 cfs

Basin C 3 32.8 ac 3.5 cfs 28.0 cfs

Basin D 4 20.4 ac 1.9 cfs 15.1 cfs

Providence Point - Runoff Summary

HAES Phase II Drainage Summary in SF-3 format-Figure 7.1.xlsxSummary 1 of 3

y

Project:

Calc'd by: Date: 5 YearRevised by: (Mannings value = 0.013) P 1 : 1.43 inches

Remarks

Bas

in ID

Des

ign

Poin

t

Are

a (a

c)

Tc (M

in)

Run

off C

oeffi

cien

t C

Inte

nsity

(in/

hr)

C*A

(acr

es)

Dire

ct R

unof

f (cf

s)

Tc (M

in)

Inte

nsity

(in/

hr)

C*A

(acr

es)

Tota

l Run

off (

cfs)

Inte

rcep

ted

(cfs

)

Byp

ass

(cfs

)

Des

ign

Flow

(cfs

)

Slop

e (%

)

Pipe

Siz

e (in

ches

)

Leng

th (f

t)

Velo

city

(fps

)

Trav

el T

ime

(Min

)

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21)

Basin A 1 55.6 87.7 0.11 1.1 6.1 6.7 At Haes Heights Culvert

Basin B 2 6.6 32.3 0.09 2.1 0.6 1.3 Sheet flow at Property Line

Basin C 3 32.8 70.8 0.08 1.3 2.7 3.5 Swale in Lot 4

Basin D 4 20.4 87.7 0.08 1.1 1.7 1.9 Swale in Lot 5

Figure 7.1a

JJM 08/27/14 Design Storm:JJM

Direct Runoff Total Runoff Inlet Storm Sewer Travel Time


Storm Drainage System Design(Rational Method Procedure)

Providence Point

786.01

10

5.28

cTPI

HAES Phase II Drainage Summary in SF-3 format-Figure 7.1.xlsx 5 yr 2 of 3

y

Project:

Calc'd by: Date: 100 YearRevised by: (Mannings value = 0.013) P 1 : 2.60 inches

Remarks

Bas

in ID

Des

ign

Poin

t

Are

a (a

c)

Tc (M

in)

Run

off C

oeffi

cien

t C

Inte

nsity

(in/

hr)

C*A

(acr

es)

Dire

ct R

unof

f (cf

s)

Tc (M

in)

Inte

nsity

(in/

hr)

C*A

(acr

es)

Tota

l Run

off (

cfs)

Inte

rcep

ted

(cfs

)

Byp

ass

(cfs

)

Des

ign

Flow

(cfs

)

Slop

e (%

)

Pipe

Siz

e (in

ches

)

Leng

th (f

t)

Velo

city

(fps

)

Trav

el T

ime

(Min

)

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21)

Basin A 1 55.6 87.7 0.38 2.0 21.4 43.3 At Haes Heights Culvert

Basin B 2 6.6 32.3 0.37 3.9 2.5 9.6 Sheet flow at Property Line

Basin C 3 32.8 70.8 0.36 2.3 11.9 28.0 Swale in Lot 4

Basin D 4 20.4 87.7 0.37 2.0 7.5 15.1 Swale in Lot 5

Figure 7.1b

JJM 08/27/14 Design Storm:JJM

Direct Runoff Total Runoff Inlet Storm Sewer Travel Time


Storm Drainage System Design(Rational Method Procedure)

Providence Point

786.01

10

5.28

cTPI

HAES Phase II Drainage Summary in SF-3 format-Figure 7.1.xlsx 100 yr 3 of 3

D:\legacy\CVR\CVR14\Drainage\CVR14 DRAINAGE APPENDIX Labels.docx C

APPENDIX C - HYDRAULICS

Culvert ReportHydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Aug 26 2014

Circular Culvert

Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 36.88Pipe Length (ft) = 80.50Slope (%) = 4.39Invert Elev Up (ft) = 40.41Rise (in) = 30.0Shape = CircularSpan (in) = 30.0No. Barrels = 1n-Value = 0.016Culvert Type = Circular Corrugate Metal PipeCulvert Entrance = HeadwallCoeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.0078, 2, 0.0379, 0.69, 0.5

EmbankmentTop Elevation (ft) = 45.93Top Width (ft) = 24.00Crest Width (ft) = 100.00

CalculationsQmin (cfs) = 6.70Qmax (cfs) = 6.70Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical

HighlightedQtotal (cfs) = 6.70Qpipe (cfs) = 6.70Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 8.87Veloc Up (ft/s) = 4.50HGL Dn (ft) = 37.41HGL Up (ft) = 41.27Hw Elev (ft) = 41.54Hw/D (ft) = 0.45Flow Regime = Inlet Control

Culvert ReportHydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Tuesday, Aug 26 2014

Circular Culvert

Invert Elev Dn (ft) = 36.88Pipe Length (ft) = 80.50Slope (%) = 4.39Invert Elev Up (ft) = 40.41Rise (in) = 30.0Shape = CircularSpan (in) = 30.0No. Barrels = 1n-Value = 0.016Culvert Type = Circular Corrugate Metal PipeCulvert Entrance = HeadwallCoeff. K,M,c,Y,k = 0.0078, 2, 0.0379, 0.69, 0.5

EmbankmentTop Elevation (ft) = 45.93Top Width (ft) = 24.00Crest Width (ft) = 100.00

CalculationsQmin (cfs) = 43.30Qmax (cfs) = 43.30Tailwater Elev (ft) = Critical

HighlightedQtotal (cfs) = 43.30Qpipe (cfs) = 43.30Qovertop (cfs) = 0.00Veloc Dn (ft/s) = 9.49Veloc Up (ft/s) = 9.49HGL Dn (ft) = 39.07HGL Up (ft) = 42.60Hw Elev (ft) = 45.03Hw/D (ft) = 1.85Flow Regime = Inlet Control

D:\legacy\CVR\CVR14\Drainage\CVR14 DRAINAGE APPENDIX Labels.docx E

APPENDIX E

STATE OF COLORADO

GENERAL PERMIT APPLICATION

STORMWATER

DISCHARGES ASSOCIATED WITH

CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY

For Agency Use Only

Permit Number Assigned

COR03-

Date Received /_ /_ Month Day Year

COLORADO DISCHARGE PERMIT SYSTEM (CDPS) STORMWATER DISCHARGE ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES APPLICATION

PHOTO COPIES, FAXED COPIES, PDF COPIES OR EMAILS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

Please print or type. Original signatures are required. All items must be completed accurately and in their entirety for the application to be deemed complete. Incomplete applications will not be processed until all information is received which will ultimately delay the issuance of a permit. If more space is required to answer any question, please attach additional sheets to the application form. Applications must be submitted by mail or hand delivered to:

Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment

Water Quality Control Division

4300 Cherry Creek Drive South

WQCD-P-B2

Denver, Colorado 80246-1530

Any additional information that you would like the Division to consider in developing the permit should be provided with the application. Examples include effluent data and/or modeling and planned pollutant removal strategies.

PERMIT INFORMATION Reason for Application: NEW CERT

RENEW CERT EXISTING CERT #

Applicant is: Property Owner Contractor/Operator

A. CONTACT INFORMATION - NOT ALL CONTACT TYPES MAY APPLY * indicates required

*PERMITTEE (If more than one please add additional pages)

*ORGANIZATION FORMAL NAME: 1) *PERMITTEE the person authorized to sign and certify the permit application. This person receives all

permit correspondences and is legally responsible for compliance with the permit.

Responsible Position (Title):

Currently Held By (Person):

Telephone No:_

email address

Organization:

Mailing Address:

City:_ State: Zip: This form must be signed by the Permittee (listed in item 1) to be considered complete. Per Regulation 61 In all cases, it shall be signed as follows:

a) In the case of corporations, by a responsible corporate officer. For the purposes of this section, the responsible corporate officer is responsible for the overall operation of the facility from which the discharge described in the application originates.

b) In the case of a partnership, by a general partner. c) In the case of a sole proprietorship, by the proprietor. d) In the case of a municipal, state, or other public facility, by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official

page 1 of 5 revised April 2011

2) DMR COGNIZANT OFFICIAL (i.e. authorized agent) the person or position authorized to sign and certify reports required by the Division including Discharge Monitoring Reports *DMR’s, Annual Reports, Compliance Schedule submittals, and other information requested by the Division. The Division will transmit pre-printed reports (ie. DMR’s) to this person. If more than one, please add additional pages. Same As 1) Permittee



Telephone No:_

email address

Organization:

Mailing Address:

City:_ State: Zip:

Per Regulation 61 : All reports required by permits, and other information requested by the Division shall be signed by the permittee or by a duly authorized representative of that person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if: (i) The authorization is made in writing by the permittee (ii) The authorization specifies either an individual or a position having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated facility or activity such as the position of plant manager, operator of a well or a well field, superintendent, position of equivalent responsibility, or an individual or position having overall responsibility for environmental matters for the company. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position); and (iii) The written authorization is submitted to the Division

3) *SITE CONTACT local contact for questions relating to the facility & discharge authorized by this permit

for the facility. Same As 1) Permittee



Telephone No:_

email address

Organization:

Mailing Address:

City:_ State: Zip:

4) * BILLING CONTACT if different than the permittee



Telephone No:_

email address

Organization:

Mailing Address:

City:_ State: Zip:

Page 2 of 5 revised April 2011

5) OTHER CONTACT TYPES (check below) Add pages if necessary:

ResponsiblePosition (Title):


Telephone No:_

email address

Organization:

Mailing Address:

City:_ State: Zip:

o Pretreatment Coordinator

o Environmental Contact o Biosolids Responsible

Party o Property Owner

Inspection Facility Contact

Consultant

Compliance Contact

Stormwater MS4 Responsible Person

Stormwater Authorized Representative

Other

B. Permitted Project/Facility Information

Project/Facility Name

Street Address or cross streets

(e.g., “S. of Park St. between 5th

Ave. and 10th

Ave.”, or “W. side of C.R. 21, 3.25 miles N. of Hwy 10”; A street name without an address, intersection, mile marker, or other identifying information describing the location of the project is not adequate. For linear projects, the route of the project should be described as best as possible with the location more accurately indicated by a map.)

City, Zip Code County

Facility Latitude/Longitude— (approximate center of site to nearest 15 seconds using one of following formats

001A Latitude . Longitude . (e.g., 39.703°, 104.933°’) degrees (to 3 decimal places) degrees (to 3 decimal places)

or

001A Latitude º ’ " Longitude º ’ " (e.g., 39°46'11"N, 104°53'11"W) degrees minutes seconds degrees minutes seconds

For the approximate center point of the property, to the nearest 15 seconds. The latitude and longitude must be provided as either degrees, minutes, and seconds, or in decimal degrees with three decimal places. This information may be obtained from a variety of sources, including: o Surveyors or engineers for the project should have, or be able to calculate, this information. o EPA maintains a web-based siting tool as part of their Toxic Release Inventory program that uses interactive maps and

aerial photography to help users get latitude and longitude. The siting tool can be accessed at www.epa.gov/tri/report/siting_tool/index.htm

o U.S. Geological Survey topographical map(s), available at area map stores. o Using a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit to obtain a direct reading. Note: the latitude/longitude required above is not the directional degrees, minutes, and seconds provided on a site legal

description to define property boundaries.

C. MAP (Attachment) If no map is submitted, the permit will not be issued.

Map: Attach a map that indicates the site location and that CLEARLY shows the boundaries of the area that will be disturbed. Maps must be no larger than 11x17 inches.

D. LEGAL DESCRIPTION

Legal description: If subdivided, provide the legal description below, or indicate that it is not applicable (do not supply

Township/Range/Section or metes and bounds description of site)

Subdivision(s): Lot(s): Block(s): OR

Not applicable (site has not been subdivided) page 3 of 5 revised April 2011

E. AREA OF CONSTRUCTION SITE

Total area of project site (acres): Area of project site to undergo disturbance (acres):

Note: aside from clearing, grading and excavation activities, disturbed areas also include areas receiving overburden (e.g., stockpiles), demolition areas, and areas with heavy equipment/vehicle traffic and storage that disturb existing vegetative cover

Total disturbed area of Larger Common Plan of Development or Sale, if applicable: (i.e., total, including all phases, filings, lots, and infrastructure not covered by this application)

Provide both the total area of the construction site, and the area that will undergo disturbance, in acres. Note: aside

from clearing, grading and excavation activities, disturbed areas also include areas receiving overburden (e.g., stockpiles), demolition areas, and areas with heavy equipment/vehicle traffic and storage that disturb existing vegetative cover (see construction activity description under the APPLICABILITY section on page 1).

If the project is part of a larger common plan of development or sale (see the definition under the APPLICABILITY section on page 1), the disturbed area of the total plan must also be included.

F. NATURE OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY

Check the appropriate box(s) or provide a brief description that indicates the general nature of the construction activities. (The full description of activities must be included in the Stormwater Management Plan.)

Single Family Residential Development

Multi-Family Residential Development

Commercial Development

Oil and Gas Production and/or Exploration (including pad sites and associated infrastructure)

Highway/Road Development (not including roadways associated with commercial or residential development)

Other – Description:

G. ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE

Construction Start Date: ___________________________ Final Stabilization Date: _____________________________

Construction Start Date - This is the day you expect to begin ground disturbing activities, including grubbing, stockpiling, excavating,

demolition, and grading activities.

Final Stabilization Date - in terms of permit coverage, this is when the site is finally stabilized. This means that all ground surface disturbing activities at the site have been completed, and all disturbed areas have been either built on, paved, or a uniform vegetative cover has been established with an individual plant density of at least 70 percent of pre-disturbance levels. Permit coverage must be maintained until the site is finally stabilized. Even if you are only doing one part of the project, the estimated final stabilization date must be for the overall project. If permit coverage is still required once your part is completed, the permit certification may be transferred or reassigned to a new responsible entity(s).

H. RECEIVING WATERS (If discharge is to a ditch or storm sewer, include the name of the ultimate receiving waters)

Immediate Receiving Water(s):

Ultimate Receiving Water(s):

Identify the receiving water of the stormwater from your site. Receiving waters are any waters of the State of Colorado. This includes all water courses, even if they are usually dry. If stormwater from the construction site enters a ditch or storm sewer system, identify that system and indicate the ultimate receiving water for the ditch or storm sewer. Note: a stormwater discharge permit does not allow a discharge into a ditch or storm sewer system without the approval of the owner/operator of that system.


I. REQUIRED SIGNATURES (Both parts i. and ii. must be signed) Signature of Applicant: The applicant must be either the owner and/or operator of the construction site. Refer to Part B of the instructions for additional information.

The application must be signed by the applicant to be considered complete. In all cases, it shall be signed as follows: (Regulation 61.4 (1ei) a) In the case of corporations, by the responsible corporate officer is responsible for the overall operation of the facility from which the discharge

described in the form originates b) In the case of a partnership, by a general partner. c) In the case of a sole proprietorship, by the proprietor. d) In the case of a municipal, state, or other public facility, by either a principal executive officer, ranking elected official, (a principal executive officer

has responsibility for the overall operation of the facility from which the discharge originates).

STOP!: A Stormwater Management Plan must be completed prior to signing the following certifications!

i. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION “I certify under penalty of law that a complete Stormwater Management Plan, has been prepared for my activity. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the Stormwater Management Plan is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for falsely certifying the completion of said SWMP, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.”

XX Signature of Legally Responsible Person or Authorized Agent (submission must include original signature) Date Signed

Name (printed) Title

ii. SIGNATURE OF PERMIT LEGAL CONTACT

"I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations."

“I understand that submittal of this application is for coverage under the State of Colorado General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity for the entirety of the construction site/project described and applied for, until such time as the application is amended or the certification is transferred, inactivated, or expired.”

XX

Signature of Legally Responsible Person (submission must include original signature) Date Signed

Name (printed Title

DO NOT INCLUDE A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN DO NOT INCLUDE PAYMENT – AN INVOICE WILL BE SENT AFTER THE CERTIFICATION IS ISSUED.


Inactivation Form

Inspection Form

Appendix B of the Stormwater Regulation Guide

Modified EPA SWPPP Template, Version 1.1, September 17, 2007Created 3/17/11

Stormwater Construction Site Inspection ReportGeneral Information

Project Name

County SWQ Permit No. Location

State Stormwater Permit No. Start/End Time

Date of Inspection

Inspector’s Name(s)

Inspector’s Title(s)

Inspector’s ContactInformationDescribe present phase ofconstruction

Type of Inspection: Regular Pre-storm event During storm event Post-storm event

Weather InformationHas there been a storm event since the last inspection? Yes NoIf yes, provide:Storm Start Date & Time: Storm Duration (hrs): Approximate Amount of Precipitation (in):

Weather at time of this inspection? Clear Cloudy Rain Sleet Fog Snowing High Winds Other: Temperature:

Have any discharges occurred since the last inspection? Yes NoIf yes, describe:

Are there any discharges at the time of inspection? Yes NoIf yes, describe:



A. Site-specific BMPsNumber the structural and non-structural BMPs identified in your ESC Plan on your site drawingsand list them below (add as many BMPs as necessary). Carry a copy of the numbered site mapwith you during your inspections. This list will ensure that you are inspecting all required BMPsat your site.Describe corrective actions initiated, date completed, and note the person that completed thework in the Corrective Action Log.

BMP BMPInstalled?

BMPMaintenanceRequired?

Corrective Action Needed and Notes

1 Yes No Yes No

2 Yes No Yes No

3 Yes No Yes No

4 Yes No Yes No

5 Yes No Yes No

6 Yes No Yes No

7 Yes No Yes No

8 Yes No Yes No

9 Yes No Yes No

10 Yes No Yes No

11 Yes No Yes No

12 Yes No Yes No

13 Yes No Yes No

14 Yes No Yes No

15 Yes No Yes No

16 Yes No Yes No

17 Yes No Yes No

18 Yes No Yes No



BMP BMPInstalled?

BMPMaintenanceRequired?


19 Yes No Yes No

20 Yes No Yes No

B. Overall Site IssuesBelow are some general site issues that should be assessed during inspections. Customize this list asneeded for conditions at your site.

BMP/activity Implemented? MaintenanceRequired?


1 Are all slopes anddisturbed areas notactively being workedproperly stabilized?

Yes No Yes No

2 Are natural resourceareas (e.g., streams,wetlands, mature trees,etc.) protected withbarriers or similarBMPs?

Yes No Yes No

3 Are perimeter controlsand sediment barriersadequately installed(keyed into substrate)and maintained?

Yes No Yes No





4 Are discharge pointsand receiving watersfree of any sedimentdeposits?

Yes No Yes No

5 Are storm drain inletsproperly protected?

Yes No Yes No

6 Is the construction exitpreventing sedimentfrom being tracked intothe street?

Yes No Yes No

7 Is trash/litter fromwork areas collectedand placed in covereddumpsters?

Yes No Yes No

8 Are washout facilities(e.g., paint, stucco,concrete) available,clearly marked, andmaintained?

Yes No Yes No

9 Are vehicle andequipment fueling,cleaning, andmaintenance areas freeof spills, leaks, or anyother deleteriousmaterial?

Yes No Yes No

10 Are materials that arepotential stormwatercontaminants storedinside or under cover?

Yes No Yes No





11 Are non-stormwaterdischarges (e.g., washwater, dewatering)properly controlled?

Yes No Yes No

12 (Other) Yes No Yes No

Non-Compliance

Describe any incidents of non-compliance not described above:



CERTIFICATION STATEMENT

“I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under mydirection or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnelproperly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person orpersons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information,the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I amaware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility offine and imprisonment for knowing violations.”

Print Name and Title: ________________________________________________

Date: _____________________________________________________________

Signature: _________________________________________________________



Appendix I – ESC Plan Corrective Action Log

Project Name: _____________________________________ESC PLAN Contact: _________________________________

Amendment No. Description of the Amendment Date of Amendment Amendment Prepared by[Name(s) and Title]



Appendix K – ESC Plan Amendment Log

Project Name: _____________________________________ESC PLAN Contact: _________________________________

Amendment No. Description of the Amendment Date of Amendment Amendment Prepared by[Name(s) and Title]

Documents

PHASE III DRAINAGE STUDY FOR PROVIDENCE POINTjamesmill.com/download/HAES_PHASE3DRN_08-27-14.… · · 2014-08-27PHASE III DRAINAGE STUDY FOR PROVIDENCE POINT El Paso County, Colorado