HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage ReportDrainage Report
for
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
May 2012
Developer:
Caprock Texas
110 Lincoln Ave., Suite 103
College Station, Texas 77840
Owner:
Dunlap Family Trust
3104 Broadmoor Drive
Bryan, TX 77802
Prepared By:
Schultz Engineering, LLC
TBPE Firm No. 12327
P.O. Box 11995
College Station, TX 77842
2730 Longmire Drive, Suite A
College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 764-3900
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
ENGINEER
Schultz Engineering, LLC
P.O. Box 11995
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone: (979) 764 — 3900
OWNER
Dunlap Family Trust
3104 Broadmoor Drive
Bryan, Texas 77802
Phone: (979) 774 - 3550
DEVELOPER
Caprock Texas
110 Lincoln Ave., Suite 103
College Station, Texas 77840
Phone: (979) 307 - 0321
GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
This project consists of the development of Harper's Crossing Subdivision in College Station, Tx. This
PDD zoned site project will include the construction of sitework, utilities and other infrastructure.
This project is located at the northeast comer of the intersection between Barron Road and Hwy. 40
(William D. Fitch Parkway).
Area: 3.19 acres
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Proposed Land Use: PDD
Number of Lots: 2
Drainage Basin: Spring Creek Watershed
FEMA FIRM: #48041 CO200 — C, Dated July 2, 1992
Floodplain: None of the development lies within the floodplain.
HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS
The pre -development condition of the land is pasture with scattered large trees. The existing flow patterns
show that a majority of the property drains to Barron Road. The east and northeast portions of the property
drain onto the adjacent properties. Exhibit A shows the pre -development topography and the runoff flow
directions.
GENERAL STORMWATER PLAN
The drainage plan for this development will involve the installation of an onsite detention pond. The storm
runoff will collect in the parking area and flow into the detention pond through a series of curb cuts. The
detention pond will capture the proposed storm water runoff and convey it through the outfall structure into
a storm sewer pipe that will connect to an existing inlet in Barron Road. The proposed detention pond will
Page 1 of 5
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
capture the proposed storm runoff and discharge at a rate equal to or less than the design flows from the
City of College Station Plans of Proposed Roadway Improvements for Barron Road Phase 2, designed by
Jacobs Engineering, Inc. dated June 7, 2010. See Exhibit C for reference to the Barron Road designed
drainage areas. The detention pond was designed for a C value for full build out of lots 1 & 2 of 0.7.
Exhibit B shows the post development topography and the runoff flow direction.
COORDINATION & STORMWATER PERMITTING
The project will require a Site Notice be prepared to comply with the Texas Commission for Environmental
Quality storm water permitting for the construction site. No other permits are anticipated for this project.
DRAINAGE DESIGN
General Information: Stormwater runoff from the development will be collected and routed through
the detention pond and then discharged into an existing curb inlet on Barron
Road by an 1 S" pipe. The detention pond will reduce the peak runoff from the
developed site to a rate equal to or less than the design flow for the existing
storm sewer inlet.
The runoff enters the detention pond from the parking lot through openings in
the curb.
Storm Sewer Pipe Analysis
Design Discharge:
Detention pond outflow
Design Storm Events:
10 & 100-year (Storm Sewer)
Pipe Materials:
Concrete Pipe/HDPE Pipe
Manning's n Value:
0.012
Runoff Coefficients:
0.70 for contributing area
Design Constraints:
Max. water depth in the parking lot = 6 in. or 0.5 ft. for 100 year storm event.
Min. flow velocity = 2.5 fps
Max. flow velocity = 15 fps
Rational Equation: The rational equation is utilized to determine peak storm water runoff rates for
the storm sewer pipe design.
Q=CIA
Q = Flow (cfs)
A = Area (acres)
C = Runoff Coefficient
I = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr)
Design Software: Excel spreadsheets, AutoCAD Hydraflow Express, Hydraflow Hydrographs
The software was used to compute the storm sewer pipe sizing.
Design Results: The data presented in the Appendices indicates the storm sewer flow velocities
and size are in accordance with the requirements of the design guidelines. See
Appendix B for results.
Page 2 of 5
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
Detention Facilitv Analvsis
T,Methodology:
TR55
T, Minimum:
10 minutes
Design Storm Events:
2-year, 10-year, 25-year, 50-year and 100-year detention facility
Pond Discharge Pipe
Materials:
RCP & HDPE in accordance with ASTM C443, ASTM C76
Manning's n Value:
0.013
Runoff Coefficients.
0.70 for developed conditions
Design Constraints:
Post -Development peak runoff less than or equal to storm sewer design runoff
and is less than the pre -development flow from the site.
Rational Equation:
The rational equation is utilized to determine peak storm water runoff rates for
the Detention Facility design.
Q=CIA
Q = Flow (cfs)
A = Area (acres)
C = Runoff Coefficient
I = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr)
Design Software:
Excel spreadsheets, AutoCAD Hydraflow Express, AutoCAD Hydraflow
Hydrographs Extension
The software was used to compute the pond storage and discharge data and the
pre and post -development peak runoffs and the routing of the flow through the
detention pond.
Design Results:
The data presented in the Appendices and in the following tables indicates the
detention pond sizing and discharges are in accordance with the requirements of
the design guidelines.
Applicable Exhibits:
Exhibit A — Pre -development Drainage Area Map
Exhibit B — Post -development Drainage Area Map
Exhibit C — Jacobs Engineering — Barron Road Phase 2 Drainage Area Map
Appendix Al — Drainage Area Summary
Appendix A2 — Time of Concentration Calculations
Appendix B — Storm Sewer Pipe Summary
Appendix C — Detention Pond Data and Hydrographs
Appendix D — Technical Design Summary
Design Analysis:
The Pre -development Drainage area runoff flows are restricted by the City of
College Station Plans of Proposed Roadway Improvements for Barron Road
Phase 2, designed by Jacobs Engineering, Inc. dated June 7, 2010, not by the
Pre -development drainage area 101 as shown in Exhibit A. See Exhibit C for
reference to the Barron Road designed drainage areas.
The post -development drainage areas, DA 301 is shown on Exhibit B. The
Detention Pond designed for the 3.19 acres to be fully developed to a combined
C value of 0.70. The design data and descriptions of the detention pond outlet
structures, discharge pipes and overflow spillways are found in Appendix C.
Page 3 of 5
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
The peak flow out of the detention ponds were determined by a Storage Routing
Analysis based on the Continuity Equation as follows: (I1+I2)+((2s1/dt)-
0l)=((2s2/dt)=02). The time interval, dt, used was 1 minute. The calculations
and results of the Storage Routing Analysis were used to generate hydrograph
peak flows and graphs for the pre and post development conditions. A summary
of the peak flows from the site are shown in Table 1.
The detention pond discharges into an existing storm sewer inlet in Barron
Road. The inlet invert will be modified to promote positive drainage out of the
inlet.
TABLE 1— Pre- & Post -Development Peak Discharge Comparison
Tc
Area
Area #
C
(Acres)
(min.)
Pre
101
3.19
0.30
15
Pre (Exist. Storm
E3
1.88
0.30
17.75
Sewer)
Post
301
3.19
0.70
10
As shown in Table 2, the post -development peak outflow from the project site is
less than the allowable peak outflow for each design storm event. Additionally,
Tables 3 presents the maximum water surface and the amount of freeboard for
the Detention Pond. The peak flow out of the detention pond and the maximum
water surface was determined by the Storage Routing Analysis.
TABLE 2— Pre- & Post -Development Runoff Information — Detention Analysis
Q2
Q10
Q25
Q50
Q100
Location
cfs
cfs
cfs
cfs
cfs
Pre -Development
2.67
3.73
4.27
4.84
5.05
(Exist. Storm Sewer)
Pre -Development
4.97
6.88
7.88
8,93
9.31
(Area 101)
Post -Development with Pond
Into Pond
14.13
19.28
22.02
24.89
25.99
Post -Development
@ Outfall
2.38
2.65
2.77
4.00
4.99
(Area 301 Routed Through Pond)
Page 4 of 5
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
Decrease in Peak Flow 0.29 1.08 1.5 1 .84 1 0.06
TABLE 3 — Summary of Pond 1 Maximum Water Surface Levels
Storm Event
Peak Flow out of
Pond, (cfs)
Water Surface
Elevation, ft.
Freeboard
ft.
2-year
2.38
331.70
1.80
10-year
2.65
332.23
1.27
25-year
2.77
332.47
1.03
50-year
4.00
332.69
0.81
100-year
4.99
332.75
0.75
Top of Berm = 333.50', Spillway Crest = 332.75'
Max water surface w/outlet clogged = 333.00', Freeboard = 0.50'
The detention pond has an overflow spillway which discharges when the outlet
structure is clogged. The detention pond spillway elevation is set to 332.75' and
is a trapezoidal grass weir that will discharge into a drainage swale which will
convey the overflow discharge to Barron Road. The maximum depth of water in
the parking lot or drive will be 6". It is not anticipated that the overflow
spillway will be used as the pond can hold the 100-year storm event runoff.
The grading plan for the Detention Pond and the pond outlet structure and
discharge pipe details are shown on Exhibit B.
CONCLUSION
The onsite detention pond facility for the development will function within the requirements and
restrictions of the BCS Drainage Design Guidelines.
CERTIFICATION
"This report for the drainage design of Harper's Crossing Subdivision, was prepared by me in
accordance with the provisions of the Bryan/College Station Unified Drainage Design Guidelines for
the owners of the property. All licenses and permits required by any and all state and federal
regulatory agencies for the proposed drainage improvements have been issued."
Joseph P. Scli ltz, V.E.
Page 5 of 5
,I ,-( 2-
EXHIBIT A
Pre -Development Drainage Area Map
f
f
f
f
f
f
ff
I
f
f
f
f
f
i
f
f
f
�J
15' P.U.E.
Wi?
a
11
0' P.U.E.
9461/96
N
\ vi
\�k
S-PHASE i
PLATTEDED VOL.VO8305, PG. 233
SHANNON N/F
ZONED R-1 / / N/F
/ ILSE ZONED JAR RPORRAS
)�'P
NJENNIFER & RROLFES
ZO ED R-N/F ANITA WHITLEY
L _ ZONED R-1
® �_~ 15' P.U.E. / /'� 10' P.U.E. �...- I N/F 60 30 0 60
JONATHAN & BRION
rO�yy L
N
Z / ,,,. f.-- ZONEDONED R-1 SCALE IN FEET
h. tr 'o / / I N/F
BRENNAN PATRICK
/. BAJDEK
'S^�
k ZONED R-I � LOT 2. /
�I 5' P'U.E. / /. BLOCK 1 .-- / /
MICHAL &
GUESS
KIMBERLY
H
\ PRIVATE CROSS / q6� / I ZONED.GUGU SS
11 ACCESS EASEMENT / �' / - -�'
/ SONOMA - PHASE 2
o a`� i
.,.� / , >- I I SUZANNE & PLATTED VOL.JOSEPH 8502, PG.
O 07 I 10' P.U.E. I MCHUGH
4o \ I -� Ot m I ZONED R-1
i f52° 07 02 266. 338
' 10P.U.E.
/ I J I TOMMY D.
MCFALL
I ZONED R-1
�^ ®� ~ 4•. ,� o % 20' P.U.E.
f r \ ` Lo ( f 10' P.U.E.
rT LOT 1.`\`\,
mrp BLOCK I t f` r
25' P..E. N
J. AC
UHOMER JOSTA &
r \ \ f L\ ce) I I KIMBERLY KOEHLER
PRIVATE CROSS ACCESS EZONED R-1 30' P.U.E.
/I — — — — -� --• \ � \ IM ASEMENT
�z
10' P.U.E.
r- \ 20' PUBLIC ACCESS
EASEMENT
6918/231 + ..Nfeesy"-.,,,"'.
—
._,
ti
`�= STATE HIGHWAY 40
R.O.W. VARIES
�'jLhullz Engineering, LLC
]i]O Lonpmlre, SWIeP
s,a°p° ]upm,, ,x iiaas
'"
SIIPVEYED
DESIGNEO'64
OP"WN
gPPHWF➢
AaN0.
DATE
KLING
JPS
DLD
JPS
12-IN
MAY 2012
HARPER'S CROSSING �DT'°"`
SUBDIVISION '"-SCALE EXHIBIT
PRE —DEVELOPMENT _
W
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS DRAINAGE AREA MAP 11.1N°.AW. 1„
Fl�rvgmE: 12-IN
Post -Development Drainage Area Map
1 i
i I
I I
i
I
i \00
i
I
PROPOSED
JUNCTION BOX u,
I
I
OVERFL
o
i
i
I \3J
I d
i
I \3
i Q
I o3
I � O
Q C
I
I \
\�
`t9
t�
/ J
N/F / l
SHANNON WALTON SONOMA - PHASE 1
ZONED 11-1 _CT ED VOL. 8305. PG. 233
PROPOSED
18" RCP PUBLIC
STORM SEWER PIPE
PROPOSED N
18" HOPE ILSE & JARED PORRAS
PRIVATE STORM ZONED R-1
- SEWER PIPE - - - - -
N/F
JENNIFER & RAOUL I
ROLFES
ZONED R-1 I
10' P.U.E.
--- /-F -J
I I
I 160 30 0 60
1 1 SCALE IN FEET
I
N/F
ANITA WHITLEY
L- - - ZONED R-1
— 3313—
•� JJL I
hM• ✓ ry S� 15' P.U.E. 324- -.... i .../ I N/F
ON PROPOSED 70' P.U.E. JONATHAN & BRION
333 � 332 M i DETENTION POND �, I ZONEDPAMP
7
-
I J/ - 331332
)W WEIR ' /'S333334 I N/F
/ PROPOSED 336-' I BRENNAN PATRICK
BAJDEK
POND STRUCTURE OUTLET I I ZONED R-1
f /
5' P. U.E. w J/
PROPOSED 6 s /
CONC. FLUME y'S „-
I MICHAEL KIMBERLY
LOT 2, I H. GUESS
BLOCK i ( I ZONED R-1
I /
J33' I SUZANNE &
JOSEPH
10' P.U.E. I MCHUGH
ZONED R-1 --_
8
I 336 �'-�—� _" �j
3 I SONOMA -PHASE 2
7�. QZ"W - 266. `33 38
338 / 1 p PLATTED VOL 8502. PG.
70' P.U.E. I J I TOMMY D.
Vj
LOT 1, I J I MCFALZONED RL i
20'
338 BLOCK 1
"a P.U.E.
~ \ 1 to + Ij I 10' P.U.E.
PROPOSED c- _
MEDICAL CLINIC \
~ LwJ
V \
I 339 - �- ( �3s M P.U.E. HOMER JN ACOSTA &
r 1 KIMBERLY KOEHLER
' T. "" ` °''' 1✓�\�� f�0 I ZONED R-1
30' P.U.E. - -
20' PUBLIC ACCESS _
J 34 1 EASEMENT 339
- _10' P.U.E. - J
y r .:�;� r ., Y . ° .-- 'S55°3 fi 5 .�"�e 337 --- '_' J _ -- . -^ l J ✓ �
334- -
-334 _ _ - - -336 337 -_ - _ 335—.._ _._. _ _ - _ _ _
R _..
i — — -- — STATE HIGHWAY 40 a- — 3
~ R.O.W. VARIES
Schultz Engineering, LLC
] em .sworn
9R g xYM.i%]]9i5
Illy
GUPVEYEO
DEWGNED]�
OPPWN
PPPNOVEO
I I.... I
F,O
KLING
JPS
DID
JPS
12-190
MAY 2012
EmmWc
• cnouWD
INo
rrao
TYPICAL, POND
BERM DETAIL
N TS,
TOP cF NI9 µ e1Px 6'DC
L
1
Sm. ufT I�mN uuNCtE wVEP
A� ..P.
RE
... .PIt
IauE+wirvcE]LL - _
I6' MP PDxo wfrP w YwO.[
A
ac xDns
ELEVAT70N
........
L_....
�.
°`�
' e _
t. TAW ar xo wnotx omtxo aae w.r
vWnWm avo mWo Rxx a°w nPr m
a a mo txrmma aer wm tr wo
Pae Turw. ere wo omr aEr
PUN VIEW
Pa6i ro ePneE PMmc wrmWs ar
T TIE NEi.
w„a
y2�
Q070NAI
CURB INLET DETAIL
I.S.
px wtr
0.QEW. tG. �y
1E'I� AOOWN
flLME PN99)
coos.
1. Wwa WM uw Wau. wml Pvo soma arEu s cnvo
ro PWm anxr.
CONCRETE FLUME
DETAIL
Nr"I
e�ue°e''r ao�s
e°°OOMrorim
mW°eiix. amWw
aeon �°
ll0e
I'iE94 r
e
PPE I`
mmi�Aea�q,m. y_
wPmwaatam axtme 1Y le'L
BEDDING AND TRENCH BACEFILL
DETAILFOR PVC PIPES
Y.TS.
� aura.
9L l01 MA
,TUN ION BOX DE'I'AILBOX DETAIL
N:1'9.
POND OII1 LL'P STRUCTURE
N'rc
ACPM SIWIMMK
PAN
w°M� y��Rpy
wnW�wr oauu
fNN
®vc
aO v
/
wo-iomr �. I
WVA 1 c�rnP
III. .
aVACIm W18lM-
"'"hU°DMIX.
Aoi`TeY
Wei
M MMI l01'IW 9aLZ �
OV4vmnmFT.TIc INOY tY W.
YMll41T MCYY.11E Ar
o11v.Y K,mIE
uw awmiwe aaaer Pal M
IR mle6llMtl 101. XO[f
BEDDING AND TRENCH BACICFILL
DETAIL FOR HDPE & RCP STORM PIPE
N'N%
IiSCALE
SUBDIVISION
POST —DEVELOPMENT EXHIBR
ARCROSSING VENrGN
SUBDIVISIONxc9rzoxwL r=ur
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS DRAINAGE AREA MAP PEGrn„GEDA�: t„
PnE NAMe 12�198
i
,I
�I
--r
41
II 11
I II
, .. �....
/
u
_
1
�
�
L
1
0
l I F
\
-
.0'
lo,
E3of
)
I
J
:
:
r
t .._
i ._..._. _i:
SYSTEMS E. F. H. & I
DRAINAGE
AREA
NO.
DRAINAGE AREA (AC)
I
Tc
(MIN)
Tc
USED
(MINI
FRED
(YR)
INTENSIT
(IN/HR)
Q
(CFS)
TOTAL
PAVED
C=0.9
I RES.
1 C=0.5
UNIMP.
C=0.3
7
0.51
0.51
5.24
10.001
10
8.63
3.96
E2
0.29
0.29
5.58
10.00
10
8.63
2.25
E3
1.88
1.88
17. 75
17. 75
10
6.61
3.73
F1
1.25
0.64
0.61
17. 40
17.40
10
6.68
5.07
F2
2.71
0.39
2,32
19.01
19.01
10
6.38
6.68
F4
4.13
0.23
3.9
22.86
22. 86
10
5.77
7.95
F6
5.68
0.2
5.48
20.30
20.30
10
6.16
11.2
F6A
1.20
1.2
18.01
18.01
10
6.56
2.36
F8
1.79
0.27
1.52
1 20.46
20.46
10
6.13
4.29
FIN
5.59
0.38
5.21
20.48
20. 48
10
6.13
11.6
F
0. 73
0.64
0.06
0.03
5.00
10.00
10
8.63
5.31
F12
1. 12
0.34
0.78
11.73
11.73
10
8.06
5.61
F13
0.381
0.35
0. 33
9.16
10. 00
10
8.63
2.80
HI
1.70
0.74
0.96
17. 76
17. 76
10
6.61
6.31
H2
2.27
2.27
19. 64
19. 64
10
6.27
4.27
H3
0.11
0.11
2.27
10. 00
10
8.63
0.85
H4
0.05
0.05
1.05
10. 00
10
8.63
0.39
I1
3.64
3.64
18.78
18.7
10
6.42
7.01
12
0.21
0.21
3. 38
10.00
10
8.63
1.63
I3
0.21
0.21
3.38
10.00
10
8.63
1.63
r
LE1
z
J
3
0 100 200
Wmmm===kmm=lmi
SCALE: I''=200'
63282
JACOBS
JACOBS ENGINEERING, INC.
526 UNIVERSITY DRIVE EAST, SUITE A201
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840
(979) 764-9119 (9791 764-9229 FAX
FIRM REGISTRATION a 2966
OF COLLEGE STATION
NAn- PWACI= 9
DRAINAGE AREA MAP
o[s�cN:
DESmry M
DRAWN:
DRAW Ex:
SxEET W.
0 100 200
Wmmm===kmm=lmi
SCALE: I''=200'
63282
JACOBS
JACOBS ENGINEERING, INC.
526 UNIVERSITY DRIVE EAST, SUITE A201
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840
(979) 764-9119 (9791 764-9229 FAX
FIRM REGISTRATION a 2966
OF COLLEGE STATION
NAn- PWACI= 9
DRAINAGE AREA MAP
o[s�cN:
DESmry M
DRAWN:
DRAW Ex:
SxEET W.
APPENDIX Al
Drainage Area Summary
!
lif552
TH
lzi35/
\
] f99�i
\
®\�\)
�;»
;Y
\
!
Ǥ))
e
APPENDIX A2
Time of Concentration
k
`®•\
{
e
^
.
eq
\2
\/*r
Jh®-
|/2
)
!
a
1
■!`q
t
t
—
Z
2
-
,
y
\�
\\\{\
\
�
\
3
APPENDIX B
Storm Sewer Pipe Summary
Ln
�N
A
Q E
d E
7
d y
N d
E Q
a
O y
m cn 3
x v d
O
CL m a
0. ¢a`)
o
N
00
00
00
00
N
Lo
o
pt
pl
m
�
7
w
d
V
a
y
Ln
Ln
N
N
N
d
1
bh
N
C
L
L
L
N
H
C
"
0
0
a
a
Y
C
0
v
d
a
0
0
00
00
�-�
o0
L
O)
C
w
r-I
00
N
M
00
00
d
O.
v
"a
m
w
a
z
O
2
a
a
APPENDIX C
Detention Pond Data & Hydrographs
Detention Pond
Appendix C
Detention Pond Area -Capacity Data
Pond Volume Equation
V = H * {[Al+A2 + (Al*A2)111 131
V = volume, ftZ
A = area, ft2
H = difference in elevation, ft
Detention Pond Storage
Elevation
Depth
Area
Volume
Cumulative
90 % Cumulative
Volume
Volume
(ft)
(ft)
(ft2)
(fe)
(fe)
(ft)
328.5
0.0
320
262
329.0
------------- - - -----------
330.0
-----0=5---
1.5
--- - ---
2652
----- -- -----
1,693
-------- --- -------
1,984
1,786
2_5
3904
5_888
5,299
-------------33L0---
332.0
3.5
- ----- --
8,899
---
7,026
12,914
11,622
Detention Pond
Appendix C
Elevation - Discharge Data
Depth - Discharge Data
Pond
2" x 24"
Opening
24" x
24"Opening
Overflow
Total Design
Elevation
Depth
Flow
Flow
Spillway
Flow
(ft)
(ft)
(cfs)
(cfs)
Flow (cfs)
(cfs)
328.5
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
329.0
0.5
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.20
330.0
1.5
1.04
0.00
0.00
1.04
331.0
2.5
1.97
0.00
0.00
1.97
332.0
3.5
2.54
0.00
0.00
2.54
333.0
4.5
2.37
7.51
4.99
14.87
333.5
5.0
0.70
14.84
25.95
41.49
Notes: 1. The Outlet Structure is a concrete structure with a weir to
limit flow. The weir opening is 2" wide x 24" tall from Elev 328.50'.
2. The overflow spillway is a weir is a trapazoidal weir at 332.75'
with a width of 12'.
Detention Pond
Elevation - Discharge Data
Plugged Condition
Depth - Discharge Data
Pond
2" x 24"
Opening
24" x
24"Opening
Overflow
Total Design
Elevation
Depth
Flow
Flow
Spillway
Flow
(ft)
(ft)
(cfs)
(cfs)
Flow (cfs)
(cfs)
328.5
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
329.0
0.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
330.0
1.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
331.0
2.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
332.0
3.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
333.0
4.5
0.00
0.00
4.99
4.99
333.5
5.0
0.00
0.00
1 25.95
25.95
Notes: 1. The Outlet Structure and pipe are plugged under this scenario.
2. The overflow spillway is a weir is a trapazoidal weir at 332.75'
with a width of 12'.
Detention Pond
Appendix C
Storage Routing Analysis Parameters
t=60.q
Detention Pond
Elevation
Depth
Discharge
Storage
2 s/t
2 s/t + O
(ft)
(ft)
(O, cfs)
(s, cf)
328.50
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.00
329.00
0.5
0.20
261.7
8.7
8.92
330.00
1.5
1.04
1785.8
59.5
60.57
331.00
2.5
1.97
5299.0
176.6
178.60
332.00
3.5
2.54
11622.4
1 387.41
389.95
333.00
4.5
14.87
21262.0
1 708.7
723.60
333.50
5.0
41.49
27189.3
906.3
947.80
* The flow control structure is a 2" wide x 24" tall opening located in the
pond outfall structure. The overflow spillway is a 12' wide trapazoidal weir
with crest at Elev. 332.75'
Detention Pond - Plugged Condition
Elevation
Depth
Discharge
Storage
2 s/t
2 s/t + O
(ft)
(ft)
(O, cfs)
(s, cf)
328.50
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.00
329.00
0.5
0.00
261.7
8.7
8.72
330.00
1.5
0.00
1785.8
59.5
59.53
331.00
2.5
0.00
5299.0
176.E
176.63
332.00
3.5
0.00
11622.4
387.4
387.41
333.00
4.5
4.99
21262.0
1 708.71
713.72
333.50
5.0
25.95
27189.3
1 906.3
1 932.26
* The flow control structure is a 2" wide x 24" tall opening located in the
pond outfall structure. The overflow spillway is a 12' wide trapazoidal weir
with crest at Elev. 332.75'
Detention Pond
Appendix C
Detention Pond Summary
Detention Pond Storage
Design Storm
Inflow
Outflow
Plugged
W.S.
Plugged W.S.
Outflow
Elevation
Elevation
(yr)
(efs)
(efs)
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
2
14.13
2.38
0.00
331.70
332.09
--------------------------
----------------------------------
10
------------
19.28
--------------
2.65
----------------
0.00
----------------
332.57
----------------
25
22.02
2.77
0.63
332.81
---------
50
24.89
----
4.00
-----
3.89
E33275
332.96
100
25.99
4.99
5.04
333.00
*Top of Berm = 333.5' Freeboard = 0.50'
Pond Inflow & Outflow Hydrographs
li
0.00
0.00 1
0.00 1
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 1
0.00
0.00
1.41
0.01
1.93
0.02
2.20
0.02
2.49
0.03
2.60
0.03
0.00
$ 2.83
0.10
3.86
0.15
4.40
0.18
4.98
0,21
5.20
0.21
0.00
4.24
0.24
5.78
0.29
6.61
0.32
7,47
0.36
7.80
0.37
0.00
4 5.65
0.36
7.71
0.47
8.81
0.54
9.96
0.61
10.40
0.63
0.00
7.06
0.53
9.64
0.73
11.01
0.85
12.45
0.98
13.00
1.03
0.00
8.48
0.77
11.57
1.07
13.21
1.15
14.94
1.24
15.59
1.27
0.00
9.89
1.06
13.50
1.27
15.41
1.39
17.42
1.52
18.19
1,57
0.00
11.30
L23
15.42
1.52
17.62
1.66
19.91
1,77
20.79
1.81
0.00
9 i 4 12.71
1.43
17.35
1.74
19.82
1.87
22.40
1.98
23.39
2.01
0.00
1.65
194=`�2.Q�'E
203
':249,�'
2.1125.94'==
2.14
0.00
s'-a
17 13.42
1.80
18.32
2.05
20.92
2.14
23.65
2.23
24.69
2.26
0.00
12 ��,,;' 12.71
1.93
17.35
2.14
19.82
2.24
22.40
2.34
23.39
2.38
0.00
12.0t
2.01
16.39
2.22
18.72
2.33
21.16
2.44
22.09
2.48
0.00
11.30
2.06
15.42
2.30
17.62
2.41
19.91
2.53
20.79
2.56
0.00
10.60
2.12
14.46
2.36
16.52
2.48
18.67
2.58
19,49
2.61
0.00
9.89
2.16
13.50
2.42
15.41
2.54
17.42
2.63
18.19
2,66
0.00
9.18
2.20
12.53
2.47
1431
2.58
16.18
2.67
16.89
2.71
0.00
1$ „', r�' 8.48
224
11.57
2.52
13.21
2.62
14.94
2.71
15.59
2.75
0.00
I9, axS 7.77
2.27
10.60
2.55
12.11
2.65
13.69
2.74
14.29
2.78
0.02
7.06
2.30
9.64
2.58
1L01
2.67
12.45
2.77
13.00
2.91
0.40
6.36
232
8.69
2.60
9.91
2.70
11.20
2.86
11.70
3.26
1.55
5.65
2.34
7.71
161
8.81
2.72
9.96
2.95
10.40
3.80
2.70
4.94
2.35
6.75
2.63
7.71
2.73
8.71
3.31
9.10
4.25
3.78
4.24
2.37
5.78
2.64
6.61
2.75
7.47
3.64
7.80
4.66
4,49
3.53
2.37
4.82
2.65
5.51
276
622
3.86
6.50
4.90
4.90
263 At;y 2.83
2.38
3.86
2.65
4R0
2.76
4.98
3.98
5.20
2.12
�
289
>265 ,,:
330
,` "276..,.?<
3.73
3.90
4.95
4.97
ZR a 1.41
2.38
1.93
2.65
2.20
2.76
2.49
3.94
2.60
4,78
4.70
0.71
237
0.96
2.65
1.10
276
1.24
3.80
1.30
4.51
4.28
30_,""`.=:< 0.00
2.36
0.00
2.64
0.00
2.76
0.00
3.58
0.00
4.14
3.73
0.00
2.35
0.00
2.63
0.00
2.75
0.00
3.33
0.00
3.85
3.16
x 32 , 0.00
2.33
0.00
2.63
0.00
2.74
0.00
3.10
0.00
3.58
2.68
0.00
2.32
0.00
2.62
0.00
2.73
0.00
2.95
0.00
3.33
2.28
4•,,,.�' 0.00
2.31
0.00
2.61
0.00
2.72
0.00
2.92
0.00
3.10
2.03
0.00
2.30
0.00
2.60
0.00
2.72
0.00
2.89
0.00
2.95
1.81
0.00
2.29
0.00
2.59
0.00
2.71
0.00
2.85
0.00
2.92
1.61
0.00
2.27
0.00
2.59
0.00
2.70
0.00
2.82
0.00
2.89
1.43
xl 8 �a nV� 0.00
2.26
0.00
2.58
0.00
2.69
0.00
2.79
0.00
2.85
1.28
0.00
2.25
0.00
2.57
0.00
2.68
0.00
2.77
0.00
2.82
1.14
0.00
2.24
0.00
2.56
0.00
2,68
0.00
2.77
0,00
2.79
1.01
0.00
2.23
0,00
2.55
0.00
2.67
0.00
2.76
0.00
277
0.90
42 0.00
2.21
0.00
2.55
0.00
2.66
0.00
2,75
0.00
2.77
0.80
„
0.00
2.20
0.00
2,54
0.00
2.65
0.00
2.74
0,00
2.76
0.71
0.00
2.19
0.00
2.53
0.00
2.64
0.00
2.73
0.00
2.75
0.64
0.00
2.18
0.00
2.51
0.00
2.64
0.00
2.73
0.00
2.74
0.57
0.00
2.16
0.00
2.50
0.00
2.63
0.00
2.72
0.00
2.73
0.50
0.00
2.15
0.00
249
0.00
2.62
0.00
2.71
0,00
2.73
0.45
0.00
2.14
0.00
2.48
0.00
2.61
0.00
2.70
0.00
2.72
0.44
0.00
1 2.13
0.00
2.47
0.00
2.60
0.00
2.69
0.00
2.71
0.42
0.00
2.12
0.00
2.45
0.00
2.60
0.00
2.69
0.00
2.70
0.41
0.00
2.10
0.00 1
2,44
0.00 1
2.59
0.00 1
2.68
0.00 1
2.69
0.40
0.00
2.09
0.00
2.43
0.00
2.58
0.00
2.67
0.00
2.69
0.39
0,00
2.08
0.00
2.42
0.00
2.57
0.00
2.66
0.00
2.68
0.38
0.00
2.07
0.00
2,41
0.00
2.56
0.00
2.65
0.00
2.67
0.37
0.00
2.06
0.00
2.39
0.00
2.56
0.00
2.65
0.00
2.66
0.36
56
0.00
2.04
0.00
2.38
0.00
2.55
0.00
2.64
0.00
2.65
0.35
0.00
2.03
0.00
2.37
0.00
2.54
0.00
2.63
0.00
2.65
0.34
0.00
2.02
0.00
2.36
0.00
2.53
0.00
2.62
0.00
2.64
0.33
0.00
2.01
0.00
2.35
0.00
152
0.00
2.61
0.00
2.63
0.32
0.00
200
0.00
2.33
0.00
2.50
0.00
2.61
0.00
2.62
0.31
61 ,<
0.00
1.98
0.00
2.32
0.00
2.49
0.00
2.60
0.00
2.61
0.30
0.00
1.97
0.00
2.31
0.00
2.48
0.00
2.59
0.00
2.61
0.30
0.00
1.95
0.00
2.30
0.00
2.47
0.00
2.58
0.00
2.60
0.29
0.00
1.93
0.00
2.29
0.00
2.46
0,00
2.57
0.00
2.59
0.28
0.00
1.91
0.00
2.27
0.00
2.44
0.00 1
2.57
0.00
2.58
0.27
0.00
1.89
0.00
2.26
0.00
2.43
0.00
2.56
0.00
2.57
0.26
0.00 1
1,87
0.00
2.25
0.00
2.42
0.00
2.55
0.00
2.57
0.26
C$
0.00
1.85
0.00
2.24
0.00
2.41
0.00
2.54
0.00
2.56
0.25
69 ;; . :
0.00
1.82
0.00
2.22
0.00
2.40
0.00
2.53
0.00
2.55
0.24
0.00
1,80
0.00
2.21
0.00
2.38
0.00
2,52
0.00
2.54
0.24
0.00
1.78
0.00
2.20
0.00
2.37
0,00
2.51
0.00
2.53
0.23
0.00
1.76
0.00
2.19
0.00
1 2.36
0.00
2.50
0.00
2.52
0.22
0.00
1.74
0.00
2.18
0.00
2.35
0.00
2.48
0.00
2.51
0.22
0.00
L72
0.00
2.16
0.00
2.34
0.00
2.47
0.00
2.50
0.21
0.00
1.70
0.00
2.15
0.00
2.32
0.00
2.46
0.00
2.48
0.21
0.00
1.67
0.00
2.14
0.00
2.31
0.00
2.45
0.00
2.47
0.20
" 7'T r7-=
0.00
L65
0.00
2.13
0.00
2.30
0.00
2.44
0.00
2.46
0.19
78 _
0.00
1.63
0.00
2.12
0.00
2.29
0.00
2.42
0.00
2.45
0.19
79 ;." ��
0.00
1.61
0.00
2.10
0.00
2.28
0.00
2.41
0.00
2.44
0.18
0.00
L58
0.00
2.09
0.00
2.26
0,00
2.40
0.00
2.42
0.18
a A „�;�
0,00
1.55
0.00
2.08
0.00
2,25
0.00
2.39
0.00
2.41
0.17
0.00
1.52
0.00
2.07
0.00
2.24
0.00
238
0.00
2,40
0.17
,......83 g.'
0.00
1.49
0.00
2.06
0.00
2.23
0.00
2.36
0.00
2.39
0.17
0.00
1.46
0.00
2.04
0.00
2.21
0.00
2,35
0.00
2.38
0.16
q 0.00
i.a3
0.00
2.03
0.00
2.20
0.00
2.34
0.00
2.36
0.16
86 0,00
1.40
0.00
2.02
0.00
2119
0.00
2.33
0.00
2.35
0.15
8i 0.00
1.38
0.00
2.01
0.00
2.18
0.00
2.32
0.00
2.34
0.15
0.00
1.35
0.00
2.00
0.00
2.17
0.00
2.30
0.00
2.33
0.14
0.00
1.33
0.00
1.98
0.00
2.15
0,00
2.29
0.00
2.32
0.14
90 ., 0.00
1.30
0.00
1.97
0.00
1 2.14
0.00
2.28
0.00
2.30
0.14
0.00
1.28
0.00
1.95
0.00
1 2.13
0.00
2.27
0.00
2.29
0.13
0.00
1.25
0.00
1.93
0.00
2.12
0,00
2.25
0.00
2.28
0.13
...,.;" 0.00
1.23
0.00
1.91
0.00
2.11
0.00
2.24
0.00
2.27
0.13
J4 `; 0.00
1.21
0.00
L89
0.00
2.09
0.00
2,23
0.00
2.25
0.12
0.00
1.19
0,00
1.87
0.00
2.08
0.00
2.22
0.00
2.24
0.12
9C} r' "t 0.00
1.16
0.00
1.85
0.00
2.07
0.00
2.21
0.00
2.23
0.12
0.00
1.14
0.00
1.82
0.00
2.06
0.00
2.19
0.00
2.22
0.11
0.00
1.12
0.00
1.80
0.00
2.05
0.00
2.18
0.00
2.21
0.11
0.00
1.10
0.00
1.78
0.00
2.03
0.00
2.17
0.00
2.19
0.00
0.00
1.08
0.00
1.76
0.00
2.02
0.00
2.15
0.00
2.t8
0.00
N
T
N ?�
3 0
o w
w �
c o
-o v
c c
0 0
a a
1
0
ti
ti
o
1
I
1
1
r
i
m
[ �
[
0
V
!
S
[ o
o
i
�
3
x
O
=
Q
c
o
¢
w
E
c
c
I o
V
=
0
E
a
[
L
}
E �
N
[
� I
m O
N I M
E
O
O
------
4
L17
0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
(sp) a8ae4osia
0
N ;
3 °
O Y
3
C Q
"O 'O
C C
O O
d a
1
I
0
r
0
0
m
N
2
Q
y
O
-p
I
x
I
c
I o
w V
7
o =
p
3: a
!
'c
w
V-
-a
o
I
o
a
I
}
I o
0
N
1
m
1 0
Di
�
O
0
O
O
O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O
O O O O
O O O O
ry
Ory o6
(s;o) a2�eyasia
T
N
N
N ?�
3 0
O yam,
w 0
E O
c c
0 0
is a
f I
0
I
�
1
0
ti
I m
V1
1
a
to
I
�
I
=
I
C
1 O
�
I
Y x
O v
1
cla o=i
d
w
c
I
a°
I
m
1
,n
1
N
I
1 m
i
I o
I` N
` O
O
O
O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O
O O O O O
N
N ON o6 ck6-I e�-� N O
W tp a N O
(sP) 8SM43sid
0
0
n
O
d'
O
m
0
N
O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
(SM a8ie4osia
APPENDIX D
Technical Design Summary
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
The Cities of Bryan and College Station both require storm drainage design to follow these
Unified Stormwater Design Guidelines. Paragraph C2 of Section III (Administration) requires
submittal of a drainage report in support of the drainage plan (stormwater management plan)
proposed in connection with land development projects, both site projects and subdivisions.
That report may be submitted as a traditional prose report, complete with applicable maps,
graphs, tables and drawings, or it may take the form of a `Technical Design Summary". The
format and content for such a summary report shall be in substantial conformance with the
description in this Appendix to those Guidelines. In either format the report must answer the
questions (affirmative or negative) and provide, at minimum, the information prescribed in the
"Technical Design Summary" in this Appendix.
The Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report shall include several parts
as listed below. The information called for in each part must be provided as applicable. In
addition to the requirements for the Executive Summary, this Appendix includes several
pages detailing the requirements for a Technical Design Summary Report as forms to be
completed. These are provided so that they may be copied and completed or scanned and
digitized. In addition, electronic versions of the report forms may be obtained from the City.
Requirements for the means (medium) of submittal are the same as for a conventional report
as detailed in Section III of these Guidelines.
Note: Part 1 — Executive Summary must accompany any drainage report
required to be provided in connection with any land development project,
regardless of the format chosen for said report.
Note: Parts 2 through 6 are to be provided via the forms provided in this
Appendix. Brief statements should be included in the forms as requested,
but additional information should be attached as necessary.
Part 1 — Executive Summary Report
Part 2 — Project Administration
Part 3 — Project Characteristics
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Part 5 — Plans and Specifications
Part 6 — Conclusions and Attestation
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY REPORT
Part 1 — Executive Summary
This is to be a brief prose report that must address each of the seven areas listed below.
Ideally it will include one or more paragraphs about each item.
1. Name, address, and contact information of the engineer submitting the report, and
of the land owner and developer (or applicant if not the owner or developer). The
date of submittal should also be included.
2. Identification of the size and general nature of the proposed project, including any
proposed project phases. This paragraph should also include reference tc
applications that are in process with either City: plat(s), site plans, zoning requests,
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 1 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
or clearing/grading permits, as well as reference to any application numbers or
codes assigned by the City to such request.
3. The location of the project should be described. This should identify the Named
Regulatory Watershed(s) in which it is located, how the entire project area is
situated therein, whether the property straddles a watershed or basin divide, the
approximate acreage in each basin, and whether its position in the Watershed
dictates use of detention design. The approximate proportion of the property in the
city limits and within the ETJ is to be identified, including whether the property
straddles city jurisdictional lines. If any portion of the property is in floodplains as
described in Flood Insurance Rate Maps published by FEMA that should be
disclosed.
4. The hydrologic characteristics of the property are to be described in broad terms:
existing land cover; how and where stormwater drains to and from neighboring
properties; ponds or wetland areas that tend to detain or store stormwater; existing
creeks, channels, and swales crossing or serving the property; all existing drainage
easements (or ROW) on the property, or on neighboring properties if they service
runoff to or from the property.
5. The general plan for managing stormwater in the entire project area must be
outlined to include the approximate size, and extent of use, of any of the following
features: storm drains coupled with streets; detention / retention facilities; buried
conveyance conduit independent of streets; swales or channels; bridges or culverts;
outfalls to principal watercourses or their tributaries; and treatment(s) of existing
watercourses. Also, any plans for reclaiming land within floodplain areas must be
outlined.
6. Coordination and permitting of stormwater matters must be addressed. This is to
include any specialized coordination that has occurred or is planned with other
entities (local, state, or federal). This may include agencies such as Brazos County
government, the Brazos River Authority, the Texas A&M University System, the
Texas Department of Transportation, the Texas Commission for Environmental
Quality, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the US Environmental Protection Agency,
et al. Mention must be made of any permits, agreements, or understandings that
pertain to the project.
7. Reference is to be made to the full drainage report (or the Technical Design
Summary Report) which the executive summary represents. The principal
elements of the main report (and its length), including any maps, drawings or
construction documents, should be itemized. An example statement might be:
"One -page drainage report dated , one set of
construction drawings (____sheets) dated , and a
-page specifications document dated comprise
the drainage report for this project."
STORMWATER DESIGN_ GUIDELINES Page 2 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 — Proiect Administration Start (Page 2.1)
Engineering and Design Profession aislInformation
Engineering Firm Name and Address:
Jurisdiction
Schultz Engineering, LLC
City: Bryan
P.O. Box 11995
✓ College Station
College Station, Tx 77842
Date of Submittal:
May 2012
Lead Engineer's Name and Contact Info.(phone, e-mail, fax):
Other:
Joseph P. Schultz, PE email. joeschultz840verizon.net
Phone: 764-3900 lax: 764-3910
Supporting Engineering / Consulting Firm(s):
Other contacts:
N/A
=Develo
"erlownee ApOlicantlrifoeination''.
Developer / Applicant Name and Address:
Phone and e-mail:
Caprock Texas
979.307.0321
110 Lincoln Ave., Suite 103
College Station, Texas 77840
Property Owner(s) if not Developer / Applicant (& address):
Phone and e-mail:
Dunlap Family Trust 3104 Broadmoor Drive Bryan, Texas 77802
979.774.3550
Projeot Identification.'',`
Development Name: Harper's Crossing Subdivision
Is subject property a site project, a single-phase subdivision, or part of a multi -phase subdivision?
If multi -phase, subject property is phase of
Legal description of subject property (phase) or Project Area:
(see Section II, Paragraph B-3a)
Block 1, Lots 1 & 2- 3.19 Acres
If subject property (phase) is second or later phase of a project, describe general status of all
earlier phases. For most recent earlier phase Include submittal and review dates.
General Location of Project Area, or subject property (phase):
This project is located at the northeast corner of the intersection between Barron Road and Hwy. 40
(William D. Fitch Parkway).
In City Limits?
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (acreage):
Bryan: acres.
Bryan: College Station:
College Station: 3.19 acres.
Acreage Outside ETJ:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 3 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
I Part 2 — Project Administration I Continued (page 2.2)
Roadways abutting or within Project Area or Abutting tracts, platted land, or built
subject property: developments:
Barron Road & State Highway 40 Sonoma Phase 1 (Vol. 8305, Pg. 233) to the North &
Sonoma Phase 2 (Vol. 8502, Pg. 285) to the east
Named Regulatory Wa
Peach Creek Watershed
Zoning Type: Existing or Proposed? Case Code:
Case Date Status:
Planning
N/A
Preliminary Report Required? N"A Submittal Date Review Date
Review Comments Addressed? Yes NIA No_ In Writing? When?
Compliance With Preliminary Drainage Report. Briefly describe (or attach documentation
explaining) any deviation(s) from provisions of Preliminary Drainage Report, if any.
N/A
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 4 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 — Project Administration
Continued (page 2.3)
Coordi6af6n
For Project or Subject Property (or Phase) '
Note: For any Coordination of stormwater matters indicated below, attach documentation
describing and substantiating any agreements, understandings, contracts, or approvals.
Dept.
Contact:
Date:
Subject:
Coordination
With Other
Departments of
Jurisdiction
City (Bryan or
College Station)
Coordination With
Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
Non -jurisdiction
City Needed?
Yes —No ✓
Coordination with
Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
Brazos County
Needed?
Yes _ No ✓
Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
Coordination with
TxDOT Needed?
Driveway Permit Required
Yes ✓ No _
Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
Coordination with
TAMUS Needed?
Yes No ✓
Petmits'For Project or Subject Property (or Plisse) �,
As to stormwater management, are permits required for the proposed work from any of the entities
listed below? If so, summarize status of efforts toward that objective ins aces below.
Entity
Permitted or
Status of Actions (include dates)
'
Ap roved .
US Army Crops of
Engineers
No ✓ Yes _
US Environmental
Protection Agency
No ✓ Yes
Texas CommissioJon
GeneralPermit
It will be filed by the Construction Contractor.
Environmental Qu150000
No Yes
Brazos River
Authority
No ✓ Yes
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 5 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 — Property Characteristics
Start (Page 3.1)
Nature and Scope of proposed Work
Existing: Land proposed for development currently used, including extent of impervious cover?
None - Vacant
Redevelopment of one platted lot, or two or more adjoining platted lots.
Site
Development
Building on a single platted lot of undeveloped land.
Project
Building on two or more platted adjoining lots of undeveloped land.
(select all
Building on a single lot, or adjoining lots, where proposed plat will not form
applicable)
a new street (but may include ROW dedication to existing streets).
Other (explain):
Subdivision
Construction of streets and utilities to serve one or more Platted lots.
Development
✓ Construction of streets and utilities to serve one or more proposed lots on
Project
lands represented by pending plats.
Site proiects: building use(s), approximate floor space, impervious cover ratio.
Subdivisions: number of lots by general type of use, linear feet of streets and
Describe
drainage easements or ROW.
Nature and
Size of
2 Commercial Lots
Proposed
Project
Is any work planned on land that is not platted
If yes, explain:
or on land for which platting is not pending?
✓ No Yes
PEMA.Floodplains
Is any part of subject property abutting a Named Regulatory Watercourse
No ✓ Yes
(Section II, Paragraph B1) or a tributary thereof?
Is any part of subject property in floodplain
No ✓ Yes Rate Map 48041CO200C
area of a FEMA-regulated watercourse?
Encroachment(s)
Encroachment purpose(s): Building site(s) Road crossing(s)
into Floodplain
_
areas planned?
Utility crossing(s) Other (explain):
No ✓
N/A
Yes
If floodplain areas not shown on Rate Maps, has work been done toward amending the FEMA-
approved Flood Study to define allowable encroachments in proposed areas? Explain.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 6 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 — Property Characteristics
Continued (Page 3.2)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property
(or Phase)
Has an earlier hydrologic analysis been done for larger area including subject property?
Reference the study (& date) here, and attach copy if not already in City files.
Yes
Is the stormwater management plan for the property in substantial conformance with the
earlier study? Yes No If not, explain how it differs.
No
If subject property is not part of multi -phase project, describe stormwater management
plan for the property in Part 4.
If property is part of multi -phase project, provide overview of stormwater management plan
for Project Area here. In Part 4 describe how plan for subject property will comply
therewith.
Do existing topographic features on subject property store or detain runoff? ✓ No Yes
Describe them (include approximate size, volume, outfall, model, etc).
Any known drainage or flooding problems in areas near subject property? ✓ No Yes
Identify:
Based on location of study property in a watershed, is Type 1 Detention (flood control) needed?
(see Table B-1 in Appendix B)
Detention is required. Need must be evaluated. Detention not required.
What decision has been reached? By whom?
Detention is Required
If the need for
How was determination made?
Type 1 Detention
Existing lot is undeveloped and development on the lot will increase storm runoff;
must be evaluated:
so detention is required to mitigate storm runoff" increases.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 7 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 — Property Characteristics
Continued (Page 3.3)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase) (continued)
Does subject property straddle a Watershed or Basin divide? ✓ No _ Yes If yes,
describe splits below. In Part 4 describe desi n concept for handlin this.
Watershed or Basin
Lar er acreage I
Lesser acreage
Above -Project Areas(Section Il, Paragraph B3-a)
Does Project Area (project or phase) receive runoff from upland areas? ✓ No _ Yes
Size(s) of area(s) in acres: 1) 2) 3) 4)
Flow Characteristics (each instance) (overland sheet, shallow concentrated, recognizable
concentrated section(s), small creek (non -regulatory), regulatory Watercourse or tributary);
Flow determination: Outline hydrologic methods and assumptions:
Does storm runoff drain from public easements or ROW onto or across subject property?
✓ No Yes If yes, describe facilities in easement or ROW:
Are changes in runoff characteristics subject to change in future? Explain
N/A
Conveyance Pathways (Section 11, Paragraph C2)
Must runoff from study property drain across lower properties before reaching a Regulatory
Watercourse or tributary? ✓ No Yes
Describe length and characteristics of each conveyance pathway(s). Include ownership of
property(ies).
The runoff will now through the proposed detention facility and outfall into the existing storm sewer
system on Barron Road.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 8 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 — Property Characteristics
I Continued (Page 3.4)
Hydroiogic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase)
'(contiriued}'
Conveyance Pathways (continued)
Do drainage
If yes, for what part of length? % Created by? _ plat, or
easements
instrument. If instrument(s), describe their provisions.
exist for any
part of
pathway(s)?
✓ No
Yes
Where runoff must cross lower properties, describe characteristics of abutting lower
property(ies). (Existing watercourses? Easement or Consent aquired?)
Pathway
Areas
Describe any built or improved drainage facilities existing near the property (culverts,
bridges, lined channels, buried conduit, swales, detention ponds, etc).
Existing Storm Sewer System on Barron Road
Nearby
Drainage
Facilities
Do any of these have hydrologic or hydraulic influence on proposed stormwater
design? ✓ No Yes If yes, explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 9 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Start (Page 4.1)
Stormwatei Management Concept
Discharge(s) From Upland Area(s)
If runoff is to be received from upland areas, what design drainage features will be used to
accommodate it and insure it is not blocked by future development? Describe for each area,
flow section, or discharge point.
N/A
Discharge(s) To Lower Property(ies) (Section II, Paragraph E1)
Does project include drainage features (existing or future) proposed to become public via
platting? ✓ No _Yes Separate Instrument? No Yes
Per Guidelines reference above, how will
Establishing Easements (Scenario 1)
runoff be discharged to neighboring
V Pre -development Release (Scenario 2)
property(ies)?
Combination of the two Scenarios
Scenario 1: If easements are proposed, describe where needed, and provide status of actions
on each. (Attached Exhibit # )
No easements are needed.
Scenario 2: Provide general description of how release(s) will be managed to pre -development
conditions (detention, sheet flow, partially concentrated, etc.). (Attached Exhibit # B )
The proposed detention pond will release the runoff at or below the existing peak runoff flow designed
for the existing storm sewer system.
Combination: If combination is proposed, explain how discharge will differ from pre -
development conditions at the property line for each area (or point) of release.
If Scenario 2, or Combination are to be used, has proposed design been coordinated with
owners) of receiving property(ies)? No Yes Explain and provide
documentation.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 10 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.2)
Stormwaier Management Concept (continued]
Within Project Area Of Multi -Phase Project
Identify gaining Basins or Watersheds and acres shifting:
Will project result
in shifting runoff
between Basins or
What design and mitigation is used to compensate for increased runoff
between
Watersheds?
from gaining basin or watershed?
✓ No
Yes
How will runoff from Project
1. With facility(ies) involving other development projects.
Area be mitigated to pre-
2 ✓ Establishing features to serve overall Project Area.
development conditions?
Select any or all of 1, 2,
3. On phase (or site) project basis within Project Area.
and/or 3, and explain below.
1. Shared facility (type & location of facility; design drainage area served; relationship to size of
Project Area): (Attached Exhibit # B )
Runoff will flow through the proposed detention ponds designed for the Harper's Crossing Subdivision,
Lots 1 & 2. The detention pond is designed for full build out oflots 1 & 2 to a C value of 0.70.
2. For Overall Project Area (type & location of facilities): (Attached Exhibit #�
3. By phase (or site) project: Describe planned mitigation measures for phases (or sites) in
subsequent questions of this Part.
Are aquatic echosystems proposed? ✓ No —Yes In which phase(s) or
project(s)?
r
a
>
Are other Best Management Practices for reducing stormwater pollutants proposed?
a
No ✓ Yes Summarize type of BMP and extent of use:
Silt Fence, Construction Exit, Seeding, Grass Block Sod, Inlet Protection
N
N O
❑ Z
If design of any runoff -handling facilities deviate from provisions of B-CS Technical
n (
Specifications, check type facility(ies) and explain in later questions.
N
Detention elements Conduit elements Channel features
Q
Swales — Ditches Inlets Valley gutters _ Outfalls
Culvert features Bridges Other
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 11 of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters I
Continued (Page 4.3)
St6r6w6ter Management concepf(continuedj
Within Proiect Area Of Multi -Phase Project (continued)
Will Project Area include bridge(s) or culvert(s)? ✓ No Yes Identify type and
general size and In which phase(s).
If detention/retention serves (will serve) overall Project Area, describe how it relates to subject
phase or site project (physical location, conveyance pathway(s), construction sequence):
The proposed Detention Pond is on the northeast boundary of the tract and will be for the entire
development.
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site)
If property part of larger Project Area, is design in substantial conformance with earlier analysis
and report for larger area? ✓ Yes No, then summarize the difference(s):
Identify whether each of the types of drainage features listed below are included, extent of use,
and general characteristics.
Typical shape?
Surfaces?
0
a
N N
Steepest side slopes:
Usual front slopes:
Usual back slopes:
N
N
Le
Flow line slopes: least
Typical distance from travelway:
ao
typical greatest
(Attached Exhibit # )
z
a
°
Are longitudinal culvert ends in compliance with B-CS Standard Specifications?
E
Yes No, then explain:
a
At intersections or otherwise, do valley gutters cross arterial or collector streets?
°N
QC'.}
No Yes If yes explain:
0 U �
Are valley gutters proposed to cross any street away from an intersection?
d o, z
No Explain: (number of locations?)
N
_ _Yes
C
a
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 12 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.4)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Gutter line slopes: Least Usual Greatest
Are inlets recessed on arterial and collector streets? _ Yes No If "no",
identify where and why.
Will inlets capture 10-year design stormflow to prevent flooding of intersections (arterial
with arterial or collector)? Yes No If no, explain where and why not.
C1
3
Will inlet size and placement prevent exceeding allowable water spread for 10-year
design storm throughout site (or phase)? Yes No If no, explain.
m
Sag curves: Are inlets placed at low points? Yes _ No Are inlets and
g -
conduit sized to prevent 100-year stormflow from ponding at greater than 24 inches?
L
Yes No Explain "no" answers.
_
N
N
N
tq
d
Will 100-yr stormflow be contained in combination of ROW and buried conduit on
whole length of all streets? Yes No If no, describe where and why.
Do designs for curb, gutter, and inlets comply with B-CS Technical Specifications?
Yes _ No If not, describe difference(s) and attach justification.
Are any 12-inch laterals used? ✓ No Yes Identify length(s) and where
used.
r
N
Pipe runs between:
Typical 110 Longest 110
u
r
access points (feet):
Are junction boxes used at each bend? ✓ Yes No If not, explain where
and why.
o
�Z
E
E
Are downstream soffits at or below upstream soffits?
Least amount that hydraulic
u
Yes ✓ No If not, explain where and why:
grade line is below gutter line
(system -wide):
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 13 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.5)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)'
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Describe watercourse(s), or system(s) receiving system discharge(s) below
(include design discharge velocity, and angle between converging flow lines).
1) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
c
The proposed storm sewer pipes convey runoff from the detention pond to existing inlet.
a)
o
--
,-,
E
2) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
c o
c
o
NE
3) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
Co
T
�v
�
O
'o
o n
E
For each outfall above, what measures are taken to prevent erosion or scour of
2 N
receiving and all facilities at juncture?
1) Pipe outfalls into an existing storm inlet.
a
(U
2)
a
0
3)
Are swale(s) situated along property lines between properties? No Yes
Number of instances: For each instance answer the following questions.
Surface treatments (including low -flow flumes if any):
C1.
m
E
y
N }
c
Flow line slopes (minimum and maximum):
m
0
z
Outfall characteristics for each (velocity, convergent angle, & end treatment).
m
m�
N
N
¢`
Will 100-year design storm runoff be contained within easement(s) or platted drainage
ROW in all instances? _ Yes No If "no" explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 14 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.6)
$tormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Are roadside ditches used? ✓ No Yes If so, provide the following:
LIs
25-year flow contained with 6 inches of freeboard throughout ? — Yes _ No
Are top of banks separated from road shoulders 2 feet or more? Yes _ No
o
_
Are all ditch sections trapezoidal and at least 1.5 feet deep? Yes No
—
N
For any "no" answers provide location(s) and explain:
a
0
0
If conduit is beneath a swale, provide the following information (each instance).
Instance 1 Describe general location, approximate length:
°
Is 100-year design flow contained in conduit/swale combination? _ Yes — No
If "no" explain:
U
0 �m
Space for 100-year storm flow? ROW Easement Width
Z c
Swale Surface type, minimum
Conduit Type and size, minimum and maximum
> Ic
and maximum slopes:
slopes, design storm:
0
vi a
d
Inlets Describe how conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inlets by type):
c T
c G
as as
L
U
O
�
o
Access Describe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into conduit):
00
m
0 E
b `0
0 w
Instance 2 Describe general location, approximate length:
E
Is 100-year design flow contained in conduit/swale combination? —Yes No
° 'o
If "no" explain:
� n
c
E aa)
Space for 100-year storm flow? ROW Easement Width
° N
U
Swale Surface type, minimum
Conduit Type and size, minimum and maximum
m
and maximum slopes:
slopes, design storm:
0
Inlets Describe how conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inlets by type):
3
°
°
Access Describe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into conduit):
_.._...........
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 15 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.7)
Stormweter Management Concept` (continued}
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
If "yes" provide the following information for each instance:
Instance 1 Describe general location, approximate length, surfacing:
c
0
o w
� 6
Is 100-year design flow contained in swale? —Yes —No Is swale wholly
rj
within drainage ROW? Yes No Explain "no" answers:
0
Access Describe how maintenance access is provide:
O
�z
01�
Instance 2 Describe general location, approximate length, surfacing:
c c1
d
o E
3
Is 100-year design flow contained in swale? _ Yes _ No Is swale wholly
within drainage ROW? Yes No Explain "no" answers:
_ o
a
O
0�
Access Describe how maintenance access is provided:
U
9
C
tl
Instance 3. 4. etc. If swales are used in more than two instances, attach sheet
providing all above information for each instance.
"New" channels: Will any area(s) of concentrated flow be channelized (deepened,
widened, or straightened) or otherwise altered? _ No Yes If only slightly
shaped, see "Swales" in this Part. If creating side banks, provide information below.
c
Will design replicate natural channel? _ Yes No If "no", for each instance
o Q
describe section shape & area, flow line slope (min. & max.), surfaces, and 100-year
o w
design flow, and amount of freeboard:
C-
�
Instance 1:
N
N
}I
V-Shaped channel with 4:1 Side slopes, 0.5' depth, slopes between 0.50% and 1.0%.
m "
'o
Instance 2:
n
E o
z
_
d
�
c
Instance 3:
m
L
U
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 16 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.8)
Stormwater Management Concept ('continued}
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Existing channels (small creeks): Are these used? ✓ No Yes
If "yes" provide the information below.
Will small creeks and their floodplains remain undisturbed? —Yes —No How
many disturbance instances? Identify each planned location:
For each location, describe length and general type of proposed improvement
(including floodplain changes):
For each location, describe section shape & area, flow line slope (min. & max.),
surfaces, and 100-year design flow.
a
c
c
Watercourses (and tributaries): Aside from fringe changes, are Regulatory
Watercourses proposed to be altered? ✓ No Yes Explain below.
Submit full report describing proposed changes to Regulatory Watercourses. Address
E
existing and proposed section size and shape, surfaces, alignment, flow line changes,
length affected, and capacity, and provide full documentation of analysis procedures
a
and data. Is full report submitted? Yes No If "no" explain:
E
m
N/A
c
c
°c
All Proposed Channel Work: For all proposed channel work, provide information
U
requested in next three boxes.
If design is to replicate natural channel, identify location and length here, and describe
design in Special Design section of this Part of Report.
N/A
Will 100-year flow be contained with one foot of freeboard? ✓ Yes _ No If
not, identify location and explain:
Are ROW / easements sized to contain channel and required maintenance space?
✓ Yes _ No If not, identify locations) and explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 17 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.9)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued] ,777777
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
How many facilities for subject property project? For each provide info. below.
For each dry -type facility:
Facility 1
Facility 2
Acres served & design volume + 10%
3.19
3.51
100-yr volume: free flow & plugged
19,136
21,546
Design discharge (10 yr & 25 yr)
2.65
2.77
Spillway crest at 100-yr WSE?
✓ yes no
yes no
Berms 6 inches above plugged WSE?
✓ yes _ no
yes no
Explain any "no" answers:
Berm is 0.5' above plugged WSE. The detention pond is designed to detain to the existing
storm sewer system design and has enough volume to contain the 100 yr storm event.
a
m
}
For each facility what is 25-yr design Q, and design of outlet structure?
Facility 1: Inflow:22.02 cfs Outflow:2.77cfs, Riser Structure with 2" x 24" opening
0
Z
Facility 2: and 24" x 24" grate opening
Do outlets and spillways discharge into a public facility in easement or ROW?
Facility 1: ✓ Yes No Facility 2: —Yes —No
v
If "no" explain:
a)
0
O
D_
O
rL
For each, what is velocity of 25-yr design discharge at outlet? & at s ilg Iwav?
Facility 1: 2.03 & 0 Facility 2: &
5
Are energy dissipation measures used? ✓ No _ Yes Describe type and
m
L-
location:
o
The pond outlet pipe discharges directly into an existing storm sewer inlet.
m
0
a)
For each, is spillway surface treatment other than concrete? Yes or no, and describe:
Q
Facility 1: Yew, Spillwayisgrass
Facility 2:
For each, what measures are taken to prevent erosion or scour at receiving facility?
Facility 1: Discharge point is an existing storm sewer inlet.
Facility 2:
If berms are used give heights, slopes and surface treatments of sides.
Facility 1: 5, 4:1, Grass
Facility 2:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 18 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.10)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Do structures comply with B-CS Specifications? Yes or no, and explain if "no":
Facility 1; Yes
N
N
LL
Facility 2:
0
o
+o
0
For additional facilities provide all same information on a separate sheet.
o
Are parking areas to be used for detention? _Z_ No Yes What is
maximum depth due to required design storm?
Roadside Ditches: Will culverts serve access driveways at roadside ditches?
_ No _ Yes If "yes", provide information in next two boxes.
Will 25-yr. flow pass without flowing over driveway in all cases? _ Yes _ No
Without causing flowing or standing water on public roadway? Yes _ No
Designs & materials comply with B-CS Technical Specifications? Yes —No
Explain any "no" answers:
C1
N
O)
C
N
Are culverts parallel to public roadway alignment? Yes No Explain:
0
U N
N �
a
Creeks at Private Drives: Do private driveways, drives, or streets cross drainage
m
ways that serve Above -Project areas or are in public easements/ ROW?
0
z
No Yes If "yes" provide information below.
How many instances? Describe location and provide information below.
>
Location 1:
2
Location 2:
Location 3:
For each location enter value for:
1
2
3
Design year passing without toping travelway?
Water depth on travelway at 25-year flow?
Water depth on travelway at 100-year flow?
For more instances describe location and same information on separate sheet.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 19 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.11)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued),
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Named Regulatory Watercourses (& Tributaries): Are culverts proposed on these
facilities? ✓ No Yes, then provide full report documenting assumptions,
criteria, analysis, computer programs, and study findings that support proposed
design(s). Is report provided? Yes —No If "no", explain:
Arterial or Maior Collector Streets: Will culverts serve these types of roadways?
No Yes How many instances? For each identify the
y
�
location and provide the information below.
00) m
Instance 1:
r a
0
Instance 2:
c
o
Instance 3:
c
0
O ;U
Yes or No for the 100-year design flow:
1
2
3
z E
o
Headwater WSE 1 foot below lowest curb top?
Spread of headwater within ROW or easement?
m N
Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11)?
m m
Explain any "no" answer(s):
2 C
U
S
N U
3 �
o
Minor Collector or Local Streets: Will culverts serve these types of streets?
No Yes How many instances? for each identify the
a
location and provide the information below:
a o
Y
Instance 1:
NInstance
2:
N o
Instance 3:
For each instance enter value, or "yes" / "no" for:
1
2
3
N
Design yr. headwater WSE 1 ft. below curb top?
d
100-yr. max. depth at street crown 2 feet or less?
E
Product of velocity (fps) & depth at crown (ft) = ?
o
Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11)?
Limit of down stream analysis (feet)?
Explain any "no" answers:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 20 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Desian Parameters
Continued (Page 4.12)
Stormwater Management Concept (eontinuedj
=
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
All Proposed Culverts: For all proposed culvert facilities (except driveway/roadside
ditch intersects) provide information requested in next eight boxes.
Do culverts and travelways intersect at 90 degrees? _ Yes No If not,
identify location(s) and intersect angle(s), and justify the design(s):
Does drainage way alignment change within or near limits of culvert and surfaced
approaches thereto? No _Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe
change(s), and justification:
Are flumes or conduit to discharge into culvert barrel(s)? No _ Yes If yes,
identify location(s) and provide justification:
Are flumes or conduit to discharge into or near surfaced approaches to culvert ends?
No Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe outfall design treatment(s):
c
0
0
w
C
>
Is scour/erosion protection provided to ensure long term stability of culvert structural
0
components, and surfacing at culvert ends? Yes _ No If "no" Identify
locations and provide justification(s):
Will 100-yr flow and spread of backwater be fully contained in street ROW, and/or
drainage easements/ ROW? _ Yes _ No if not, why not?
Do appreciable hydraulic effects of any culvert extend downstream or upstream to
neighboring land(s) not encompassed in subject property? _ No Yes If
"yes" describe location(s) and mitigation measures:
Are all culvert designs and materials in compliance with B-CS Tech. Specifications?
Yes _ No If not, explain in Special Design Section of this Part.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 21 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.13)
Stormwater Management Coricept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Is a bridge included in plans for subject property project? ✓ No _ Yes
If "yes" provide the following information.
Name(s) and functional classification of the roadway(s)?
What drainage way(s) is to be crossed?
N
N
Q)
to
A full report supporting all aspects of the proposed bridge(s) (structural, geotechnical,
hydrologic, and hydraulic factors) must accompany this summary report. Is the report
provided? Yes _ No If "no" explain:
Is a Stormwater
Provide a general description of planned techniques:
Pollution Prevention
ConstructionEXtts, Sediment Pond, Silt Fence, Revegetation
Plan (SW3P)
c7
established for
u
project construction?
m
No ✓ Yes
Special Designs — Non -Traditional Methods
Are any non-traditional methods (aquatic echosystems, wetland -type detention, natural stream
replication, BMPs for water quality, etc.) proposed for any aspect of subject property project?
✓ No —Yes if `yes" list general type and location below.
Provide full report about the proposed special design(s) including rationale for use and
expected benefits. Report must substantiate that stormwater management objectives will not
be compromised, and that maintenance cost will not exceed those of traditional design
solution(s). is report provided? Yes No If "no" explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 22 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.14)
stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Special Designs — Deviation From B-CS Technical Specifications
If any design(s) or material(s) of traditional runoff -handling facilities deviate from provisions of
B-CS Technical Specifications, check type facility(ies) and explain by specific detail element.
Detention elements Drain system elements Channel features
_ Culvert features Swales Ditches Inlets _Outfalls
Valley gutters Bridges (explain in bridge report)
In table below briefly identify specific element, justification for deviation(s).
Specific Detail Element
Justification for Deviation (attach additional sheets if needed)
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Have elements been coordinated with the City Engineer or her/his designee? For each item
above provide "yes" or "no", action date, and staff name:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
77 Design Parameters', ;
_t
Hydrology
Is a map(s) showing all Design Drainage Areas provided? ✓ Yes No
Briefly summarize the range of applications made of the Rational Formula:
Detention design and storm sewer sizing
What is the size and location of largest Design Drainage Area to which the Rational Formula
has been applied? 3.19 acres Location (or identifier): 101 & 301
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 23 of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.15)
Design Parameters (continued)
Hydrology (continued)
In making determinations for time of concentration, was segment analysis used?
—No ✓ Yes In approximately what percent of Design Drainage Areas? 100 %
As to intensity -duration -frequency and rain depth criteria for determining runoff flows, were any
criteria other than those provided in these Guidelines used? ✓ No _Yes If "yes"
identify type of data, source(s), and where applied:
For each of the stormwater management features listed below identify the storm return
frequencies (year) analyzed (or checked), and that used as the basis for design.
Feature
Analysis Year(s)
Design Year
Storm drain system for arterial and collector streets
-
Storm drain system for local streets
10 & 100
10
Open channels
-
Swale/buried conduit combination in lieu of channel
Swales
Roadside ditches and culverts serving them
-
Detention facilities: spillway crest and its outfall
2, 10, 25, 50, 100
100
Detention facilities: outlet and conveyance structure(s)
2, 10, 25, 50,100
100
Detention facilities: volume when outlet plugged
100
100
Culverts serving private drives or streets
-
Culverts serving public roadways
10& 100
10
Bridges: provide in bridge report.
-
Hydraulics
What is the range of design flow velocities as outlined below?
Design flow velocities;
Gutters
Conduit
Culverts
Swales
Channels
Highest (feet per second)
5.94
6.97
Lowest (feet per second)
4.84
6.44
Streets and Storm Drain Systems Provide the summary information outlined below:
Roughness coefficients used: For street gutters:
For conduit type(s) RCP HDPE Coefficients: 0.012 0.012
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 24 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.16)
Design Parameters (continued)
Hydraulics (continued)
Street and Storm Drain Systems (continued)
For the following, are assumptions other than allowable per Guidelines?
Inlet coefficients? ✓ No _ Yes Head and friction losses ✓ No _ Yes
Explain any "yes" answer:
In conduit is velocity generally increased in the downstream direction? ✓ Yes _ No
Are elevation drops provided at inlets, manholes, and junction boxes? ✓ Yes _ No
Explain any "no" answers:
Are hydraulic grade lines calculated and shown for design storm? ✓ Yes _ No
For 100-year flow conditions? ✓ Yes _ No Explain any "no" answers:
What tailwater conditions were assumed at outfall point(s) of the storm drain system? Identify
each location and explain:
Open Channels If a HEC analysis is utilized, does it follow Sec VI.F.5.a? _ Yes _ No
Outside of straight sections, is flow regime within limits of sub -critical flow? _ Yes _ No
If "no" list locations and explain:
Culverts If plan sheets do not provide the following for each culvert, describe it here.
For each design discharge, will operation be outlet (barrel) control or inlet control?
Entrance, friction and exit losses:
Bridges Provide all in bridge report
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 25 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARI
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.17)
Design Parameters {continued)
Computer Software
What computer software has been used in the analysis and assessment of stormwater
management needs and/or the development of facility designs proposed for subject property
project? List them below, being sure to identify the software name and version, the date of the
version, any applicable patches and the publisher
Excel spreadsheets, Hydraflow Express, HydraflowHydrographs
Part 5 — Plans and Specifications
Requirements for submittal of construction drawings and specifications do not differ due to use of a
Technical Design Summary Report. See Section III, Paragraph C3.
Part 6 — Conclusions and Attestation
:.:�Gonclusions
Add any concluding information here: The storm sewer system and detention facilities are designed in
accordance with the BCS Drainage Design Guidelines.
Ei
k t,
:.; Attegtat➢oar .
Provide attestation to the accuracy and completeness of the foregoing 6 Parts of this Technical
Design Summary Drainage Report by signing and sealing below.
"This report (plan) for the drainage design of the development named in Part B was prepared
by me (or under my supervision) in accordance with provisions of the Bryan/College Station
Unified Drainage Design Guidelines for the owners of the property. All licenses and permits
required by any and all state and federal regulatory agencies for the proposed drainage
improvements have been issued or fall under applicable general permits."
(Affix Seal)
Licensed Professional Engineer
State of Texas PE No.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 26 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised February 2009
Permit to Construct Access Drivewa Facilities Form 1058
y (Rev. 11110)
on Highway Right of Way Page i of
PERMIT NUMBER:
TxDOT ENTER PERMIT NUMBER HERE
GPS`
ROADWAY
REQUESTOR
LATITUDE, LONGITUDE
HWY NAME I SH 40
30.55467222,96.292119444
FOR TxDOTs USE
NAME
DUNLAP FAMILY TRUST
CONTROL
4-DIGIT
SECTION
2-DIGIT EX. 01
MAILING ADDRESS
3104 BROADMOOR DRIVE
CITY, STATE, ZIP
BRYAN, TX 77802
PHONE NUMBER
979.774.3550
•GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM COORDINATES AT INTERSECTION OF DRIVEWAY CENTERLINE WITH ABUTTING ROADWAY
The Texas Department of Transportation, hereinafter called the State, hereby authorizes ;=72," W -TJ2 --5- ",
hereinafter called the Permittee, to ® construct / ❑ reconstruct a Commercial (residential, convenience
store, retail mall, farm, etc.) access driveway on the highway right of way abutting highway number SH 40 in Brazos
County, located 0.07 miles Southeast of the intersection of SH 40 and Barron Road in College Station, Texas.
USE ADDITIONALSHEET$ AS NEEDED
Subject to the Access Driveway Policy described on page 2 and the following:
1. The undersigned hereby agrees to comply with the terms and conditions set forth in this permit for construction and maintenance
of an access driveway on the state highway right of way. _
2. Design of facilities shall be as follows and/or as shown on sketch on page 2 and is subject to conditions st�tTB+V.z�€
See attached drawing.
olfte
All construction of materials shall be subject to inspection and approval by the State
3. Maintenance of facilities constructed hereunder shall be the responsibility of the Permittee, and the State reserves the right to
require any changes, maintenance or repairs as may be necessary to provide protection of life or property on or adjacent to the
highway. Changes in design will be made only with approval of the State.
4. The Permittee shall hold harmless the State and its duly appointed agents and employees against any action for personal injury or
property damage sustained by reason of the exercise of this permit.
5. Except for regulatory and guide signs at county roads and city streets, the Permittee shall not erect any sign on or extending over
any portion of the highway right of way, and vehicle service fixtures such as fuel pumps, vendor stands, or tanks and shall be
located at least 12 feet from the right of way line to ensure that any vehicle services from these fixtures will be off the highway right
of way.
6. The State reserves the right to require a new access driveway permit in the event of a material change in land use or change in
driveway traffic volume or vehicle types.
7. This permit will become null and void if the above -referenced driveway facilities are not constructed within six (6) months from the
issuance date of this permit.
8. The Permittee will contact the State's representative Jc--
telephone, (9-J61 )"�t least twenty-four (24) hours prior to beginning the Work authorized by this permit
9. The requesting Permittee will be provided instructions on the appeal process if this permit request is denied by the State.
Date of Issuance StqWAUthonZed Representative
The undersigned hereby agrees to comply with the terms and conditions set forth in this permit for construction and maintenance of an
access driveway on the highway right of way. C�/!� �, ':
Date: .'.� '- 2 [ Signe J �v.;� Ck ^. �L. I x
(Property Inerorowners rt entative)
Form 1058
(Rev, 92004)
Page 2 of 2
Access Driveway Regulations
The Texas Transportation Commission, in recognition of its responsibility for the safety and utility of public highways under its jurisdiction, has
directed the department to adopt access driveway standards to accomplish a coordinated development between highways and abutting property.
For this purpose, the booklet entitled "Regulations for Access Driveways to State Highways", was published and adopted, setting out
departmental policies to regulate construction and maintenance of access driveway facilities.
Sketch of Installation
SH 40
CS MED Clinic
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
ACCESS DRIVEWAY
SEE ATTACHED PROVISIONS
July 30, 2012
RE: SH 40 (North ROW)
@ Barron Road (East ROW)
East (350') of Barron Road
CS IVIED Clinic
College Station, Texas
Access Driveway Permit - W = 24' w / 24" x 75' RCP & SET's + 10' x 23' Sidewalk
SPECIAL PROVISIONS (Access Driveway Permit):
1)
Traffic Control plan is required per TMUTCD
prior to start of construction work in
the SH 40 right-of-way.
2)
Areas within ROW disturbed by
construction
shall be restored to equal or better
conditions than existing prior to
construction.
3)
Contractor shall be responsible
for locating
all utilities within the right-of-way
construction site. Contacts with
local utility
companies and utility locators are
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
required.
Temporary erosion control measures shall be provided to avoid siltation of
existing drainage structures and roadway.
Street width (24% typical sections, radii, etc. shall be in accordance with
City of College Station's / TxDOT's Standard Details & Specifications. Roadway
pavement shall be as per plan details as shown. (See Sheet 6 & Standard Details)
Standard Details.
9) SET's (6:1) shall be required as indicated on driveway pipe ends (See Attached).
10) Rock rprap may be required on downstream end of 24" RCP entrance structure to
prevent erosion. Riprap shall be according to City of College Station / TxDOT
Standard Details & Specifications. Riprap sections shall have a 12" toe -wall.
11) Ditch sections @ proposed access roadway shall be graded to drain.
12) Sidewalk construction in SH 40 right-of-way shall be in accordance with new
TxDOT ADA requirements. (Max. cross -slope = 2%) (See PED-05 Standards).
13) Pavement surface shall be kept clear of mud, debris, etc. Erosion controls shall
be installed as required.
14) Contact Jeffrey Holland @ TxDOT Brazos Maintenance (778-8054) or Jeffrey.Holland@
TxDOT.gov, 48 hours prior to starting construction.
NOTES:
"DEPRESSED SHOULDER TEXTURING", if existing, @ Roadway Entrance shall be
removed by Processes as directed by a TxDOT representative.
as directed, Painted white turn arrows 0 apron shall be required,
t�^F,i✓'P Trt�T�.„^�° iM'=sA'�PT9 Sir3 7t {Fl '. �N*F . �' , F nMC^mr ";'5w;'P °nwrn 4,.. i.".
339.04' TP 1 1
338.60' TP
335.00' FL _
�SAW CUT EXI!
& REPAIR
R A
` 3;l
> E
r
339.04' TP %
-_-� PROPOSED 24"
�338.40' TP RCP CULVERT
75. LF 0 1.33%
W/ 6H:1V'S.E.T
ONNEEACH
-{END
= 334.00' FL
337,80, TP--
STATE HIGHWAY 40 - R.O.W. VARIES
DRIVEWAY DETAIL
F:20'
STV13Q MIS MaNVZS
Y NOId,VIS 9O3TI00 . NVUR
p
= o V Cw
}
Imu
L
$
6„S
o„
$
W �
"off
!0 1MOd s
'� •I� g�o�$� Ros 00> Z
5
6-2
yqg dow h i
es
80
q-
LE
a ff" �
<w
aaw
w�
W�w � I
We w
��I o
x gJi � o
'3
mi3
183A
Al
Q
A.
vi
som
„ga
'Y&dud
eiPPi aas
W3 Pa,eO°1
v
N
H
N
W
z
a
a
W
o
a
B
z
Z
w
ac«h_
� a
dv
°°€
as-o ov5
0
n Q
d
HE
o€fig"
Q ~
_
o
r
_
`°'_ zm
of oa �' -•I o .I $ ��
¢a Nf-
�w a'll as
QLL _ FUl
_ 0¢
NN v W
_ o
z
w
°,d
wed cii
,IP1 ddd`N .1
_-
:-
\
&\{—
}§
\4§y• -(\��
ut §
/ } ) \\
\2\/\\-
\\off\\� �.1S
\ w \
\�
�
w\\
\I}� /
°
�\
\
\ x
(,c)g §
!:LA 2
�CL \
\\
2 )w
wit
-
-8.9
-
1.
oE+on%
oF" _ - _
G S (D (D 0 (D
aRi
u
_rc
of
u"
=C
a
m
_
roar
62,
I
N
pp
'Ea«T
O
O
I
= u
a
N
O
A z'
U
_
a/
J
v
G
�c
4Eo
-lc �
-
oF8-oa
W�
0�-
v`c
Z05
-
_ gcc
_
_
u
Q U
a
WW
Jy
!Eo v
w
F:a
a'r
a
z
W n d
cr a
aL oiJ
�a w
x`A W owa
a
Nil
o r a
} t
wo w
w a
V ~
a�§
Lo
"
Fu
EIS
M"
re
,-
fie k
o
b.-
pt,s3
S
o
Oz
r
+N
m'�o`
":
_
iYo ucm' v`
.z
N
m
.
op,'p
d�
So -:
�Y
a
y,mJ .-,
x «ff
5b 5 lo-
Iox
�00%
d�k
•8a
�kfi€
c
E .b«o
-
oF`m�°Vo
.�.,e
ocn
L
}O
O
•c
QO
.o-.z
millllllu
x
0
fi
cfi m
AFC
�
mG
F8�5
h
�ggA
`6E
,�99
- m'B
h�
olio
o•ko
2*Io
-
S
Oc
oo
h.
F
of
cY
m
1 �. m._m,
oc
^.
-8�
882o
Sx6om
308
w
a
"R
/@
g%t§
!
!
!
�
\
!(
� \
�
W
S
ys
a
-
N
Ou
p
Z
z
Q
Z
<
nI~
'
p
Z
a
�
j
o
J
N
H
F
$
2 `.
Om
N
a
\\
' �
w ¢
O
o
LL
`
NF
u
CP OSSMPLN
wF
�
J
4
y
1
w
4
aN
�
r
w
F-
N
.l& o
July 30, 2012 *(AMENDED October 2, 2012)
RE: SH 40 (North ROW)
@ Barron Road (East ROW)
East (350') of Barron Road
CS MED Clinic
College Station, Texas
Access Drivewav Permit - W = 24' w / 24" x 75' RCP & SET's + 10' x 23' Sidewalk
SPECIAL PROVISIONS (Access Driveway Permit):
1) Traffic Control plan is required per TMUTCD prior to start of construction work in
the SH 40 right-of-way.
2) Areas within ROW disturbed by construction shall be restored to equal or better
conditions than existing prior to construction.
3) Contractor shall be responsible for locating all utilities within the right-of-way
construction site. Contacts with local utility companies and utility locators are
required.
4) Temporary erosion control measures shall be provided to avoid siltation of
existing drainage structures and roadway.
5) Street width (241), typical sections, radii, etc. shall be in accordance with
City of College Station's / TxDOT's Standard Details & Specifications. Roadway
pavement shall be as per plan details as shown. (See Sheet 6 & Standard Details)
6)
7)
8)
Standard Details.
9) SET's (6:1) shall be required as indicated on driveway pipe ends (See Attached).
10) Rock riprap may be required on downstream end of 24" RCP entrance structure to
prevent erosion. Riprap shall be according to City of College Station I TxDOT
Standard Details & Specifications. Riprap sections shall have a 12" toe -wall.
11) Ditch sections @ proposed access roadway shall be graded to drain.
12) Sidewalk construction in SH 40 right-of-way shall be in accordance with new
TxDOT ADA requirements. (Max. cross -slope = 2%) (See PED-05 Standards).
13) Pavement surface shall be kept clear of mud, debris, etc. Erosion controls shall
be installed as required.
14) Contact Jeffrey Holland @ TxDOT Brazos Maintenance (778-8054) or Jeffrey. Holland@
TxDOT.gov, 48 hours prior to starting construction.
NOTES:
"DEPRESSED SHOULDER TEXTURING", if existing, Cal Roadway Entrance shall be
removed by Processes as directed by a TxDOT representative.
Access Driveway shall be "RIGHT -IN, RIGHT -OUT" only, Painted divider island
w/ Reflectorized White Delineators (4) shall be installed (a) SH 40 Access Driveway
as directed. Painted white turn arrows (a) apron shall be required,
9 PAINTED DIVIDER ISLAND W/DELINEATORS IS NOT REOUIRED,
SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC.
2730 Longmire Drive, Suite A
College Station, Texas 77845
Firm No.12327
CRT CS Med Clinic
Median Improvements, Public Sidewalk & Public Storm Sewer Construction
Engineer's Estimate of Construction
Item
Description
Unit
Estimated
Quantity
Unit Price
Total
General Items
I
Mobilization, Overhead and Construction Staking
LS
1
$ 1,500.00
$ 1,500.00
2
Site Preparation, Clearing and Grubbing, complete in place
LS
l
$ 1,500.00
$ 1,500.00
3
Erosion & Sediment Control - SWPPP Implementation & Maintenance, Silt
Fence, Construction Exit, Rock Filter Dam, etc., complete in place
LS
1
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
4
Hydroseed and Hydromulch, complete in place
SY
500
$ 0.60
$ 300.00
General Items Subtotal
$ 5,300.00
MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS, PUBLIC SIDEWALK & PUBLIC STORM SEWER
5
Remove Concrete Sidewalk
SF
630
$ 2.00
$ 1,260.00
6
18" RCP Pipe, complete in place (Structural)
LP
50
$ 45,00
$ 2,250.00
7
Junction Box, complete in place
EA
1
$ 2,500.00
$ 2,500.00
8
Tie -In & Modify to Existing Inlet, complete in place
EA
1
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000,00
9
Concrete Sidewalk- 4" thick, complete in place
SF
127
$ 6.00
$ 762,00
10
ADA Ramps - Detectable Warning Surfaces, complete in place
EA
2
$ 500.00
$ 1,000.00
I I
Remove & Modify Irrigation System
LS
1
$ 500,00
$ 500.00
12
Remove Concrete Pavement & Monolithic Curb
SY
50
$ 4.00
$ 200.00
13
Excavate Median
CY
140
$ 10.00
$ 1,400.00
14
Reinforce Concrete Pavement - 8" Thick W/ Monolithic Curb, complete in
place
SF
2400
$ 5.50
$ 13,200.00
15
Cement Stabilized Crushed Limestone Base Material - 8" Thick, complete in
place
SY
267
$ 16.00
$ 4,272.00
16
Brick Median Pavers, complete in place
SF
311
$ 7,50
$ 2,332.50
17
Traffic Control Items, complete in place
LS
1
$ 5,000.00
$ 5,000,00
Left Turn Items Subtotal
$ 31,676.50
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION1 S 36,976.50
SCHULTi ENGINEERING, =
Y-1 Z
Page 1 of 1
Sewer System Report
for
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
May 2012
Prepared Bv:
Schultz Engineering, LLC
TBPE Firm No. 12327
P.O. Box 11995
College Station, TX 77842
2730 Longmire Drive, Suite A
College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 764-3900
l% 2
F-12327
SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, U.C.
General Information
Location: Harper's Crossing Subdivision is located at the intersection of Barron
Road and State Highway 40, William D. Fitch Parkway.
General Note: The proposed sewer line will flow from Manhole No. 1 into Manhole
No. 2 and then into an existing manhole on the adjacent property.
Land Use: Commercial
Design Criteria
Primary Sewer Outfall:
An existing 8" sewer line.
Domestic Demand:
Total Fixture Unit Count: 77
Total Peak Demand: 38 gpm
10%Infiltration Assumed
Pipe: PVC ASTM D 3034 SDR 26
Applicable Exhibits: Exhibit A — Sanitary Sewer System Layout
Appendix A — Fixture Unit Determination
Appendix B — Sanitary Sewer Analysis Spreadsheet
Conclusion
The proposed 8" line flows into an existing manhole on the adjacent
property. The analysis in Exhibit B checks the calculated slope required
to pass the estimated flow against the design slope shown on the plans.
The spreadsheet indicates the design slope is greater than the minimum
computed slope, so we conclude that the system is more than capable of
carrying the anticipated flows from this phase and future phases of the
subdivision.
Exhibit B also shows the full flow velocity in the proposed line between
Manhole I and 2 to be 4.81 fps and the calculated peak flow velocity is
2.38 fps. The full flow velocity in the proposed line between Manhole 2
and the Existing Manhole is shown to be 4.16 fps and the calculated peak
flow velocity is 2.29 fps.
3
•
PUM
r � I
• • • 1
V • r • • '•'////%
r
loss
MM4 M
avow Noaava
81-M 91--M 81-M 9l-M 9l-M 84
04
b
5,
i
Appendix A
Normal Flow Calculations
Fixture Count Determination
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
Fixture Unit Value
Fixture Tvue # of Fixtures Load Factor
Total = 76.6
Demand - 38 gpm
O
Z
9
�
�
a e
m d
•q
Y a
a�
`a
x
W
c pG
o
d
N
�
>
LL
N
a
O
V
V
o
IL LGi.
W
v
W
c
W u,Qv,
m
o to
m
a' u
yo'� U
OHO
0
W
w
U
o
o
0
v
a
o
0
v
A
�
p• �
w
U
o
o
0
c
5
o
0
m W
d
d
u
8
yyo
o�o
a°
3
0
u
U
o
d
0
d
U
�W
O
O
4
eNp�
A
L
l7
Q
sapoN uaagsdp
um} moI3
9mmG!Auop
apoN oa
o
e
V
apoN uioid moi,d
(sosugd 8upsixo)
c°
Ro-1lapuapisaa
o
slo-I )equap�sa�
'o
n p
o
0
V
°°°gyypl
4
�•
Fire Flow Analysis Report
for
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
May 2012
Prepared By.
Schultz Engineering, LLC
TBPE Firm Registration No. 12327
2730 Longmire, Suite A
College Station, Texas 77845
979.764.3900
/Z
F-12327
SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC.
General Information
Location: Harper's Crossing Subdivision is located at the intersection of Barron
Road and State Highway 40.
General Note: An 8" water line will connect to the existing 24" water line on the north
side of State Highway 40, William D. Fitch Parkway and run north into
the proposed developed area. A 1 1/2" line will be extended to the
building for water service. This line will be private.
Land Use: Commercial
Design Criteria/Analysis
Primary Water Supply: Existing 24" water line along the north side of SH 40.
Domestic Demand:
Fixture Units: 77
Max. Demand Flow: 38 gpm
I " Water Meter
Estimated Future Domestic Demand: 50 gpm
Fire Hydrant Flow: The building is 5,240 sf and is proposed to be Type II-B construction per
the International Building Code. In accordance with Table B 105.1 of the
International Fire Code, the minimum required fire hydrant flow is 1,500
gpm. The building will not have a fire sprinkler system. One fire
hydrant is proposed for this project.
Existing System Pressure Tests:
Flow Hydrant: Hydrant S-104 at 2840 Barron Road
Flowrate: 1,300
Static Hydrant: Hydrant 5-105 at 2668 Barron Road
Static Pressure: 80 psi
Residual Pressure: 80 psi
Exhibits: Exhibit A —Water Layout
Appendix A — Normal Flow Calculations
Appendix B — Pipe & Junction Analysis — Domestic Flow
Appendix C — Pipe & Junction Analysis — Fire Flow
Water System Analysis:
WaterCad was used to model the proposed water system. The model
was run using the domestic flow only as well as the domestic flow and
required fire flow at the proposed hydrant. The diagram of the system is
shown on Exhibit A and the results for each scenario are included in
Appendices B & C. The lowest residual pressure in the system with the
peak domestic flow of 88 gpm is 79.9 psi. The lowest residual pressure
in the system with a fire flow of 1,500 gpm at the proposed hydrant is
79.9 psi. Both of these minimum pressures exceed the required 35 psi
for domestic flow and 20 psi for fire flow. The maximum velocity in the
system is 10.14 fps in 8" pipe no. 3.
Conclusion
The proposed water line and fire hydrant provide the required fire flow. The proposed 8" water
line meets or exceeds all of the design criteria for the City of College Station. They will provide
adequate water pressure, flowrate and velocity for domestic demands and fire flow.
0
U
J
J
VCO le�ge Station Utilities
Reliable, Affordable, Community Owned
Date test completed Monday March 12, 2012
Time completed
Test completed by
9:00 A.M.
Gerald Borths
Comments Requested
Appendix A
Normal Flow Calculations
Fixture Count Determination
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
Fixture Unit Value
Fixture Type # of Fixtures Load Factor Fixture Units
Kitcken Sink
4
1.4
15.8
Lavato
14
2
28
Water Closet tank
4
10
40
Service Sink
11
3
3
Total = 76.6
Demand - 38 gpm
Appendix B
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
Pipe Analysis - Domestic Demand
Hazen -
Pipe
Pipe
William C-
Pipe Flow
Velocity
Number
Length (ft)
Size (in)
Material
Value
(GPM)
NO
P-2
370
24
PVC
150
-88
0.06
P-1
5
18
PVC
150
-88
0.11
0.56
P-3
51
8
PVC
150
88
P-4
2
8
PVC
150
88
0.56
P-5
3
8
PVC
150
0
0
P-RES
7
18
PVC
150
-88
0.11
Appendix B
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
Junction Analysis - Domestic Demand
Junction
Demand
(GPM)
Pressure
(PSI)
J-2
0
81.4
1-1
EXISTING FH
0
0
79.9
79.9
PROPOSED FH
J-3
0
88
81.2
81.2
J-4
0
81.2
Appendix C
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
Pipe Analysis - Fire Flow & Domestic Demand
Hazen -
Pipe
Length
Pipe
William C-
Pipe Flow
Velocity
Number
(ft)
Size (in)
Material
Value
(GPM)
NO
P-2
370
24
PVC
150
-1,588
1.13
P-1
5
18
PVC
150
-1,588
2
P-3
51
8
PVC
150
1,588
10.14
P-4
2
8
PVC
150
88
0.56
P-5
3
8
PVC
150
0
0
P-RES
7
18
PVC
150
-1,588
2
Appendix C
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
Junction Analysis - Fire Flow & Domestic Demand
Junction
Demand
(GPM)
Pressure
(PSI)
1-2
0
81.4
J-1
0
79.9
EXISTING FH
0
79.9
PROPOSED FH
1,500
80.4
J 3
88 —
80.4
-—
J4
0
80.4
Drainage Report
for
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
May 2012
Rev. July 2012
Developer:
Caprock Texas
110 Lincoln Ave., Suite 103
College Station, Texas 77840
Owner:
Dunlap Family Trust
3104 Broadmoor Drive
Bryan, TX 77802
Prepared By:
Schultz Engineering, LLC
TBPE Firm No. 12327
P.O. Box 11995
College Station, TX 77842
2730 Longmire Drive, Suite A
College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 764-3900
Drainage Report
for
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
May 2012
Rev. July 2012
Developer:
Caprock Texas
110 Lincoln Ave., Suite 103
College Station, Texas 77840
Owner:
Dunlap Family Trust
3104 Broadmoor Drive
Bryan, TX 77802
Prepared Bv:
Schultz Engineering, LLC
TBPE Firm No. 12327
P.O. Box 11995
College Station, TX 77842
2730 Longmire Drive, Suite A
College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 764-3900
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
ENGINEER
Schultz Engineering, LLC
P.O. Box 11995
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone: (979) 764 — 3900
OWNER
Dunlap Family Trust
3104 Broadmoor Drive
Bryan, Texas 77802
Phone: (979) 774 - 3550
DEVELOPER
Caprock Texas
110 Lincoln Ave., Suite 103
College Station, Texas 77840
Phone: (979) 307 - 0321
GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
This project consists of the development of Harper's Crossing Subdivision in College Station, Tx. This
PDD zoned site project will include the construction of sitework, utilities and other infrastructure.
This project is located at the northeast corner of the intersection between Barron Road and Hwy. 40
(William D. Fitch Parkway).
Area: 3.19 acres
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Proposed Land Use: POD
Number of Lots: 2
Drainage Basin: Spring Creek Watershed
FEMA FIRM: #48041 CO200 — C, Dated July 2, 1992
Floodplain: None of the development lies within the floodplain.
HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS
The pre -development condition of the land is pasture with scattered large trees. The existing flow patterns
show that a majority of the property drains to Barron Road. The east and northeast portions of the property
drain onto the adjacent properties. Exhibit A shows the pre -development topography and the runoff flow
directions.
GENERAL STORMWATER PLAN
The drainage plan for this development will involve the installation of an onsite detention pond. The storm
runoff will collect in the parking area and flow into the detention pond through a grate inlet. The detention
pond will capture the proposed storm water runoff and convey it through the outfall structure into a storm
sewer pipe that will connect to an existing inlet in Barron Road. The proposed detention pond will capture
Page 1 of 6
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
the proposed storm runoff and discharge at a rate equal to or less than the design flows from the City of
College Station Plans of Proposed Roadway Improvements for Barron Road Phase 2, designed by Jacobs
Engineering, Inc. dated June 7, 2010. See Exhibit C for reference to the Barron Road designed drainage
areas. The detention pond was designed for a C value for full build out of lots 1 & 2 of 0.7. Exhibit B
shows the post development topography and the runoff flow direction.
COORDINATION & STORMWATER PERMITTING
The project will require a Site Notice be prepared to comply with the Texas Commission for Environmental
Quality storm water permitting for the construction site. No other permits are anticipated for this project.
DRAINAGE DESIGN
General Information: Stormwater runoff from the development will be collected and routed through
the detention pond and then discharged into an existing curb inlet on Barron
Road by an 18" pipe. The detention pond will reduce the peak runoff from the
developed site to a rate equal to or less than the design flow for the existing
storm sewer inlet.
The runoff enters the detention pond from the parking lot through a grate inlet
and storm sewer pipe.
Storm Sewer Pine Analysis
Design Discharge:
Detention pond outflow & Grate inlet capture
Design Storm Events:
10 & 100-year (Storm Sewer)
Pipe Materials:
Concrete Pipe/HDPE Pipe
Manning's n Value:
0.012
Runoff Coefficients:
0.70 for contributing area
Design Constraints:
Max. water depth in the parking lot = 6 in. or 0.5 ft. for 100 year storm event.
Min. flow velocity = 2.5 fps
Max. flow velocity = 15 fps
Rational Equation: The rational equation is utilized to determine peak storm water runoff rates for
the storm sewer pipe design.
Q = CIA
Q = Flow (cfs)
A = Area (acres)
C = Runoff Coefficient
I = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr)
Design Software: Excel spreadsheets, AutoCAD Hydraflow Express, Hydraflow Hydrographs
The software was used to compute the storm sewer pipe & inlet sizing.
Design Results: The data presented in the Appendices indicates the storm sewer flow velocities
and size are in accordance with the requirements of the design guidelines. See
Appendix B for results.
Page 2 of 6
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
Detention Facility Analysis
T, Methodology:
TR 55
T, Minimum:
10 minutes
Design Storm Events:
2-year, 10-year, 25-year, 50-year and 100-year detention facility
Pond Discharge Pipe
Materials:
RCP & HDPE in accordance with ASTM C443, ASTM C76
Manning's n Value:
0.013
Runoff Coefficients:
0.70 for developed conditions
Design Constraints:
Post -Development peak runoff less than or equal to storm sewer design runoff
and is less than the pre -development flow from the site.
Rational Equation:
The rational equation is utilized to determine peak storm water runoff rates for
the Detention Facility design.
Q=CIA
Q = Flow (cfs)
A = Area (acres) -
C = Runoff Coefficient
I = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr)
Design Software:
Excel spreadsheets, AutoCAD Hydraflow Express, AutoCAD Hydraflow
Hydrographs Extension
The software was used to compute the pond storage and discharge data and the
pre and post -development peak runoffs and the routing of the flow through the
detention pond.
Design Results:
The data presented in the Appendices and in the following tables indicates the
detention pond sizing and discharges are in accordance with the requirements of
the design guidelines.
Applicable Exhibits:
Exhibit A — Pre -development Drainage Area Map
Exhibit B — Post -development Drainage Area Map
Exhibit C — Inlet Drainage Area Map
Exhibit D — Jacobs Engineering — Barron Road Phase 2 Drainage Area Map
Appendix Al — Drainage Area Summary
Appendix A2 — Time of Concentration Calculations
Appendix B 1— Inlet Design Summary
Appendix B2 — Storm Sewer Pipe Summary
Appendix C — Detention Pond Data and Hydrographs
Appendix D — Technical Design Summary
Design Analysis:
The Pre -development Drainage area runoff flows are restricted by the City of
College Station Plans of Proposed Roadway Improvements for Barron Road
Phase 2, designed by Jacobs Engineering, Inc. dated June 7, 2010, not by the
Pre -development drainage area 101 as shown in Exhibit A. See Exhibit D for
reference to the Barron Road designed drainage areas.
The post -development drainage areas, DA 301 is shown on Exhibit B. The
Detention Pond designed for the 3.19 acres to be fully developed to a combined
C value of 0.70. The design data and descriptions of the detention pond outlet
structures, discharge pipes and overflow spillways are found in Appendix C.
Page 3 of 6
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
The peak flow out of the detention ponds were determined by a Storage Routing
Analysis based on the Continuity Equation as follows: (Il+I2)+((2sl/dt)-
0l)=((2s2/dt)=02). The time interval, dt, used was 1 minute. The calculations
and results of the Storage Routing Analysis were used to generate hydrograph
peak flows and graphs for the pre and post development conditions. A summary
of the peak flows from the site are shown in Table 1.
The detention pond discharges into an existing storm sewer inlet in Barron
Road. The inlet invert will be modified to promote positive drainage out of the
inlet.
TABLE 1— Pre- & Post -Development Peak Discharge Comparison
Tc
Area
Paea #
C
(Acres)
(Min.)
Pre
101
3.19
0.30
15
Pre (Exist. Storm
E3
L88
0.30
17.75
Sewer)
Post
301
3.19
0.70
10
Inlet
401
1.07
0.70
10
As shown in Table 2, the post -development peak outflow from the project site is
less than the allowable peak outflow for each design storm event. Additionally,
Tables 3 presents the maximum water surface and the amount of freeboard for
the Detention Pond. The peak flow out of the detention pond and the maximum
water surface was determined by the Storage Routing Analysis.
TABLE 2— Pre- & Post -Development Runoff Information — Detention Analysis
Q2
Q10
Q25
Q50
Q100
Location
cfs
cfs
cfs
cfs
cfs
Pre -Development
2.67
3.73
4.27
4.84
5.05
(Exist. Storm Sewer)
Pre -Development
4.97
6.88
7.88
8.93
9.31
(Area 101)
Post -Development with Pond
Into Pond
14.13
19.28
22.02
24.89
25.99
Page 4 of 6
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
Post -Development
@ Outfall
2.27
2.61
2.75
3.31
4.36
(Area 301 Routed Though Pond)
Decrease in Peak Flow
0.40
1.12
1.52
1.53
0.69
TABLE 3 — Summary of Pond 1 Maximum Water Surface Levels
Storm Event
Peak Flow out of
Pond, (cfs)
Water Surface
Elevation, ft.
Freeboard
ft.
2-year
2.27
331.50
2.08
10-year
2.61
332.14
1.44
25-year
2.75
332.44
1.14
--TO-year
3.31
332.75
0.83
--TOO-year
4.36
332.84
0.74
Top of Berm = 333.58', Spillway Crest = 332.84'
Max water surface w/outlet clogged = 333.08', Freeboard = 0.50'
The detention pond has an overflow spillway which discharges when the outlet
structure is clogged. The detention pond spillway elevation is set to 332.84' and
is a trapezoidal grass weir that will discharge into a drainage swale which will
convey the overflow discharge to Barron Road. The maximum depth of water in
the parking lot or drive will be 6". It is not anticipated that the overflow
spillway will be used as the pond can hold the 100-year storm event runoff.
The grading plan for the Detention Pond and the pond outlet structure and
discharge pipe details are shown on Exhibit B. The detention pond retaining
wall and inlet are shown on Exhibit C.
CONCLUSION
The onsite detention pond facility for the development will function wiihin the requirements and
restrictions of the BCS Drainage Design Guidelines.
Page 5 of 6
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Harper's Crossing Subdivision
College Station, Texas
l
CERTIFICATION
"This report for the drainage design of Harper's Crossing Subdivision, was prepared by me in
accordance with the provisions of the Bryan/College Station Unified Drainage Design Guidelines for
the owners of the property. All licenses and permits required by any and all state and federal
regulatory agencies for the proposed drainage improvements have been issued."
r
*!r* Joseph SchiAtz, P.E.
*- -
F-12327
SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC
Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT A
Pre -Development Drainage Area Map
EXHIBIT B
Post -Development Drainage Area Map
EXHIBIT C
Inlet
Drainage Area Map
EXHIBIT D
Jacobs Engineering — Barron Road Phase 2
Drainage Area Map
APPENDIX Al
Drainage Area Summary
I
m
o
m
r
F
e
d
T
o;
co
T
W
M
M
Lo
r
C U
d
w
T
d
a;
N
n
L
T
N
a
N
Vi
m
W
Fi
OG
v
T
e
�
O
m
T
a
E
M
r
o
a
o
0
C
a�{
v
�
U
0
0
o
c
o
r
a
Q
� u
�
0
A
�
a
c
^�
o
s
F
11 II II II
a a ¢ U
..I
9
APPENDIX A2
Time of Concentration
}
)��
\
k@
.§I
)
\��
k
(
;
/
!
)
�
\
\
}
�«ir
s
)})}}
)
�
)
�
Q
APPENDIX BI
Inlet Design Summary
C
O
N
T
O
N
N
❑
O
N
�
�
N
a
"•'
O
G
O
N
�
� u
�
c
"'
ri
T
t
€
a
tlJ
�
w
N
N
�
O
0
n
ro
N
Q 0
C U
O1
N C
OW
e
N
O
V
b0
C
6
= v
0
O
Y a
C
0
V
Qa
x
M
a
N
°1 a
z
LO
con
C
C
L_
w
tll
N
N
�
N
�
N
y
y
R
O
„
o
c
N
v
0
C_
Oco
J CY
+.7
p
y
C
c
Z 11 w
T
@
d
E
.
m
a
LU
C
Y
s
3
3
C
CL
a
o
O
(�
O
G/
'o
.c
L
II
n
g
Q
11
?
o
N
a
N
t
N
@
dl 3
E
11
K
Ci
APPENDIX B2
Storm Sewer Pipe Summary
Al).N
{� M
a` 10
d E
N N
N d
E
'a
m to 3
x V y
:O N N
O
a E
C
o `o
QCL IL v)
I
C
tD
CO
CL
O
N
>
Sri
ui
vi
a
N
t0
t0
w
r
M
M
CJ
O
00
V
V
c
N
i
Ol
w
>
a
r
Lo
A
a
7
N
C
lD
N
N
t
b0
L
Up
L
=
f6
L
f6
L
�
0
v
h
U
H
G
t
rn
a
a
c
c
c
Y
0
Y
C
O
U
d
w
m
n
o
�
rn
oq
L
Y
00
J
N
M
c
m
0)V
a
'a
O
w
z°
O
=
2
d
aO
a
CC)co
_
Cl.
APPENDIX C
Detention Pond Data & Hydrographs
Detention Pond
Appendix C
Detention Pond Summary
Detention Pond Storage
Design Storm
Inflow
Outflow
Plugged
W.S.
Plugged W.S.
Outflow
Elevation
Elevation
(yr)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
2
14.13
2.27
- -----------
0.00
331.50
331.91
--------
10
19.28
-
2.61
- ----
0.00
•-•-- •---------
332.14
-------------------------
332.55
----------------------------------
25
----------------------------
22.02
2.75
---- ---------
----------------
0.49
-------
-----------------
332.44
--------------------------
332.87
---------------- ------------------
50
---- 24.- -----
24.89
3.31
4.36-----
4.36
----- 332. ------
332.75
-------------------------
333.04
100
25.99
4.36
5.75
333.84
333.08
*Top of Berm = 333.58' Freeboard = 0.50'
Detention Pond
Appendix C
Elevation - Discharge Data
Depth - Discharge Data
Pond
2" x 24"
Opening
24" x
24"Opening
Overflow
Total Design
Elevation
Depth
Flow
Flow
Spillway
Flow
(ft)
(ft)
(cfs)
(cfs)
Flow (cfs)
(cfs)
328.5
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
329.0
0.5
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.20
330.0
1.5
1.04
0.00
0.00
1.04
331.0
2.5
1.97
0.00
0.00
1.97
332.0
3.5
2.54
0.00
0.00
2.54
333.0
4.5
2.80
4.37
3.20
10.37
333.5
5.0
0.86
14.49
26.78
42.13
Notes: 1. The Outlet Structure is a concrete structure with a weir to
limit flow. The weir opening is 2" wide x 24" tall from Elev 328.50'.
2. The overflow spillway is a weir is a trapazoidal weir at 332.84'
with a width of 15'.
Detention Pond
Elevation - Discharge Data
Plugged Condition
Depth - Discharge Data
Pond
2" x 24"
Opening
24" x
24"Opening
Overflow
Total Design
Elevation
Depth
Flow
Flow
Spillway
Flow
(ft)
(ft)
(cfs)
(efs)
Flow (cfs)
(cfs)
328.5
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
329.0
0.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
330.0
1.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
331.0
2.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
332.0
3.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
333.0
4.5
0.00
0.00
3.20
3.20
333.5
5.0
0.00
0.00
26.78
26.78
Notes: 1. The Outlet Structure and pipe are plugged under this scenario.
2. The overflow spillway is a weir is a trapazoidal weir at 332.84'
with a width of 15'.
Detention Pond
Appendix C
Storage Routing Analysis Parameters
t=60s
Detention Pond
Elevation
Depth
Discharge
Storage
2 s/t
2 s/t + O
(ft)
(ft)
(O, cfs)
(s, cf)
328.50
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.00
329.00
0.5
0.20
401.1
13.4
13.57
330.00
1.5
1.04
2413.4
80.4
81.49
331.00
2.5
1.97
6772.4
225.7
227.72
332.00
3.5
2.54
13098.5
436.6
439.16
333.00
4.5
10.37
20556.5
685.2
695.59
333.50
5.0
42.13
25620.4
854.0
896.15
* The flow control structure is a 2" wide x 24" tall opening located in the
pond outfall structure. The overflow spillway is a 15' wide trapazoidal weir
with crest at Elev. 332.84'
Detention Pond
Elevation
Depth
Discharge
Storage
2 s/t
2 s/t + O
(ft)
(ft)
(O, cfs)
(s, cf)
328.50
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.00
329.00
0.5
0.00
401.1
13.4
13.37
330.00
1.5
0.00
2413.4
80.4
80.45
331.00
2.5
0.00
6772.4
225.7
225.75
332.00
3.5
0.00
13098.5
436.6
436.62
333.00
4.5
3.20
20556.5
685.2
688.42
333.50
5.0
26.78
25620.4
854.0
880.79
* The flow control structure is a 2" wide x 24" tail opening located in the
pond outfall structure. The overflow spillway is a 15' wide trapazoidal weir
with crest at Elev. 332.84'
Pond Inflow & Outflow Hydrographs
Appendix C
VAUJID
5
Aiinicnil,
Q(cfs)
Q(cfs)
Q(cfs)
Q(cfs)
Q(cfs)
Q(cfs)
Q(cfs)
Q(cfs)Q(cfs)
Q(cfs)
Q(cfs)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Mo
0.00
0.00
1.41
0.01
1.93
0.01
2.20
0.01
2.49
0.02
2.60
0.02
0.00
3
2.83
0.05
3.86
0.08
4.40
0.10
4.98
0.12
5.20
0.13
0.00
424
0.17
5.78
0.23
6.61
0.25
7.47 1
0.28
7.80
0.28 1
0.00
5.65
028 1
7.71
0.36
8.81
0.40
9.96
0.45
10.40
0.47
0.00
7.06
0.40
9.64
0.54
11.01 1
0.62
12.45
0.71
13.00
0.74
0.00
8.48
0.57
11.57
0.80
13.21 1
0.93
14.94
1.06
15.59
1.08
0.00
e-
9.89
0.79
13.50
1.09
15.41
1.18
17.42
1.28
18.19
1.32
0.00
11.30
1.05
15.42
1.28
17.62
1.41
19.91
1.55
20.79
1.60
0.00
2.71
121
17.35
1.51
19.82
1.66
22.40
1.77
23.39
1.81
0.00
4-11
139
"'AMIJ1.72
1&L
1.85
j'�k4 I
1.97
2S49zd
2.00
0.00
13.42
1.59
18.32 1
1.88
20.92
2.01
23.65
2.10
24.69
2.14
0.00
1
1.71
17.35
2.01
19.82
2.11
22.40
2.22
23.39
2.26
0.00
12.01
1.82
16.39
2.10
18.72
2.21
21.16
2.33
22.09
2.37
0.00
11.30
1.91
15.42
2.18
17.62
2.30
19.91
2.42
20.79
2.46
0.00
10.60
1.98
14.46
2.25
16.52
2.37
18.67
2.50
19.49
2.55
0.00
9.89
2.03
13.50
2.31
15.41
2,44
17.42
2.57
18.19
2.61
0.00
9.18
2.08
12.53
2.36
14.31
2.50
16.18
2.63 1
16.89
2.67
0.00
8.48
2.12
-1-1757-
--2.-41
13.21
156
14.94
2.68
15.59
2.72
0.00
7.77
2.15
1 10.60
2.46
12.11
2.60
13,69
2.72
14.29
2.77
0.00
20
7.06
2.18
9.64
2.49
11.01
2.63
12.45
2.76
13.00
2.81
0.24
J�
6.36
2.21
8.68
2.53
9.91
2.66
11.20
2.80
11.70
2.84
1.37
5.65
2.23
7.71
2.55
8.81
2.69
9.96
2.82
10.40
2.94
3.11
4.94
2.24
6.75
2.57
7.71
2.71
8.71
2.85
9.10
3.40
4.44
24
4.24
2.26
5.78
2.59
6.61
2.73
7.47
2.87
7.80
3.75
5.30
3.53
2.27
4.82
2.60
5.51
2.74
6.22
3.06
6.50
4.14
5.72
2.83
3.86
2.60
4.40
-3.30
2.75
4.98
3.23
5.20
4.34
2.12
2.27
2.89
-,,q-,-� jmx,llfv
73
3.90
5.48
1.41
2.27
1.93
2.61
2.20
2,75
2.49
3.30
2.60
4.23
4.97
0.71
2.26
0.96
1 2.60
1 1.10
2.75
1.24
3.20
1.30
3.97
4.35
0.00
2.25
OM
1 2.59
0.00
2.74
0.00
3.02
0.00
3.66
3.60
0.00
2.24
0.00
2.58
0.00
2.73
0.00
2.87
0.00
3.40
2.90
3 0.00
2.23
0.00
2.57
0.00
2.72
0.00
2.86
0.00
3.17
2.38
OM
2.22
0.00
2.56
0.00
1 2.71
0.00
1 2.85
0.00
2.195
1.95
0.00
2.20
0.00
2.55
0.00
2.70
0.00
2.84
0.00
2.86
1.60
0.00
2.19
0.00
2.54
0.00
2.69
0.00
2.83
0.00
2.85
1.31
0.00
2.18
0.00
2.53
0.00
2.68
0.00
2.82
0.00
2.84
1.08
0.00
2.17
0.00
2.52
0.00
2.67
0.00
2.81
OM
2.83
0.88
0.00
2.15
0.00
2.50
0.00
2.66
0.00
2.80
0.00
2.82
0.73
0.00
2.14
0.00
2.49
0.00
165
0.00
2.79
0.00
2.81
0.69
0.00
2.13
0.00
2.48
0.00
2.63
0.00
2.77
0.00
2.80
0.65
0.00
2.12
0.00
2.47
OM
2.62
0.00
2.76
0,00
2.79
0.61
0.00
2.11
0.00
2.46
0.00
2.61
0.00
2.75
0.00
2.78
0.58
0.00
2.09
0.00
2.44
0.00
2.60
0.00
2.74
0.00
2.77
0.54
0.00
2.08
0.00
2.43
0.00
2.59
0.00
2.73
0.00
2.76
0.51
0.00
2.07
0.00
2.42
0.00
2.58
0.00
2.72
0.00
2.75
0.48
0.00
2.06
0.00
2.41
0.00
2.57
0.00
2.71
0.00
2.74
0.46
:47 0.00
2.04
0.00
239
0.00
2.56
0.00
2.70
0.00
2.73
0.43
0.00
2.03
0.00
2.38
0.00
2.55
0.00
2.69
0.00
2.72
0.41
0.00
2.02
OM
2.37
2�02
0.00
2.71
0,00
01
2.01
0.00
00
2.36
�22
0 00
213
0 0
1 2 �6�1
1 0.00
2.70
0.36
Inflow;
Outflow'.
Tnflaw',
Outflow,
-xInf]ow
.Outflow:'}
]nflaw'
(7�tflaw ,Inflow-,
Outflow,'
4utffow:,:
40*,
0.00
2.00
0.00
2.35
0.00
2.52
0.00
2.66
0.00
2.69
0.34
0.00
1.98
0.00
2.33
0.00
2.51
0.00
2.65
0.00
2.68
0.32
0.00
1.97
0.00
2.32
0.00
2.49
0.00
2.64
0.00
2.67
0.30
0.00
1.96
0.00
2.31
0.00
2.48
0.00
2.63
0.00
2.66
0.28
0.00
1.94 1
0.00
2.30
0,00 1
2.47
0.00 1
2.62
0.00 1
2.65
0.27
6.
0.00
1.92
0.00
2.28
0.00
2.46
0.00
2.61
0.00
2.64
0.25
0.00
1.90
0.00
2.27
0.00
2.44
0.00
2.60
0.00
2.63
0J4
0.00
1.89
0.00
2.26
0.00
2.43
0.00
2.59
0.00
2.62
0.22
0.00
1.87
0.00
2.25
0.00
2.42
0.00
2.58
0.00
2.61
0.21
0.00
1.85
0.00
2.24
0.00
2.41
0.00
2.57
0.00
2.60
0.20
0.00
1.83
0.00
2.22
0.00
2.40
0.00
2.56
0.00
2.59
0.19
0.00
1.82
0.00
2.21
0.00
2.38
0.00
2.55
0.00
2.57
0.18
0.00
1.80
0.00
2.20
0.00
2.37
0.00
2.54
0.00
2.56
0.17
64
0.00
1.78
0.00
2.19
OM
2.36
0.00
2.52
0.00
2.55
0.16
-4�0
0.00
1.76 1
0.00
2.17
0,00
2.35
0.00
2.51
0.00
2.54
0.15
0.00
1.75
0.00
2,16
0,00
2.34
0.00
2.50
0.00
2.53
0.14
0.00
1.73
0.00
2.15
0.002.32
0.00
2.49
0.00
2.52
0.13
0.00
1.71
0.00
2.14
0.00
2.31
0.00
2.48
0.00
2.51
0.12
0.00
1.69
0.00
2.13
0.00
2.30
0.00
2.46
0.00
2.50
0.12
0.00
1.68
0.00
2.11
0.00
2.29
0.00
2.45
0.00
2.48
0.11
0.00
1.66
OM
2.10
OM
2.27
0.00
2.44
0.00
2.47
0.10
0.00
1.64
0.00
2.09
0.00
2.26
0.00
2.43
0.00
2.46
0.10
0.00
1.62
0.00
2.08
0.00
2.25
0.00
2.41
0.00
2.45
0.09
7
0.00
1.61
0.00
2.06
0.00
2.24
0.00
2.40
0.00
2.44
0.09
0.00
1.58
0.00
2.05
0.00
2.23
0.00
2.39
0.00
2.42
0.08
0.00
1.56
0.00
2.04
0.00
2.21
0.00
2.38
0.00
2.41
0.08
0.00
1.53
0.00
2.03
0.00
2.20
0.00
2.37
0.00
2.40
0.07
0.00
1.51
0.00
2.02
0.00
2.19
0.00
2.35
OM
2.39
0.07
0.00
1.48
0.00
2.00
0.00
2.18
0.00
2.34
0.00
2.37
0.06
0.00
1.46
1 0.00
1.99
0.00
2.16
0.00
2.33
0.00
2.36
0.06
UW*
OM
1.44
0.00
1.98
0.00
2.15
0.00
2.32
OM
2.35
0.06
0.00
1.42
0.00
1.97
0.00
2.14
0.00
2.30
0.00
2.34
0.05
0.00
1.39
0.00
1.95
0.00
2.13
0.00
2.29
0.00
2.33
0.05
0.00
1.37
0,00
1.93
0.00
2.12
0.00
2.28
0.00
2.31
0.05
0.00.00
1.35
0.00
1.92
0.00
2.10
0.00
2.27
0,00
2.30
0.05
mi
0.00
133
0.00
1.90
OM
2.09
0.00
2.26
0.00
2.29
0.04
0.00
1.31
0.00
1.88
0,00
2.08
0.00
2.24
0.00
2.28
0.04
.....
0.00
1.29
0.00
1.86
0.00
2.07
0.00
2.23
0.00
2.26
0.04_
Tg1k,", i""I""
0.00
1.27
0.00
1.85
0.00
2.05
0.00
2.22
0.00
2.25
0.04
-99 �i--"P�l
0.00
1.25
0.00
1.83
0.00
2.04
0.00
2.21
0.00
2.24
0.03
0.00
1.23
0.00
1.81
0.00
2.03
0.00
2.19
0.00
2.23
0.00
1F22
0.00
1.79
0.00
2.02
0.00
2.18
0.00
2.22
0�032
0.00
1.20
0.00
1.78
0.00
2.01
0.00
2.17
0.00
2.20
0.03
0.00
1.18
0.00
1.76
0.00
1.99
0.00
2.16
0.00
2.19
0.03
0.00
1.16
0.00
1.74
0.00
1.98
0.00
2.15
0.00
2.18
0.03
INA
NO
1.72
0.00
1.97
0.00
2.13
0.00
2.17
0.02
-e"'mi-HOOF
0.00
1.82
0.00
2.06
0.00
219
0.00
2.22
0.11
"RO
0.00
1.11
0.00
1.80
0.00
2.05
0.00
2.18
0.00
2.21
0.11
9$axa
0.00
1.10
8
2
203
0.00
2.17
0.00
2.19
0.00
0.00
IM
1 NO2
0
7
00
2.15
0.00
2.18
0,00
� N
T
N ?�
3 �
Y- 3
C Q
C C
O O
a a
0
ti
0
(
o
rn
=
m
�
o
�
bA
0
O
�
8
_
(
o
3
!
p
U
3
•-
�
oiS
a
�
tO c
O
Q
y
�
E
't=
o
C
o°
(
L
}
(
a
N
n (
N
N (
O
M
(
O
t
O
s
0
o
S S o S a
o 0
0
�D
e-1
V N O 00 l0
rl N N
d' N
O
(sP) aBM43sia
L o
~ 3
3 0
O N
W �
O
c c
a a
I'
I
0
N
0
~
i
i
I m
N
L
1
O.
i
tio
O
O
T
O
I o
«
I
X
3 x
Ov
I
06 y
3 CL
o
I
'c
I
c
actl
I
I
}
o
�
I v
~I
N �
m
i
o
1 N
N
`
c-I
O
s ~
0
O
0
O O O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o
O O O
O o 0
N
oN o ad �o
v ni o
(s;o) OBJe43si4
0
0
5
Flq
0
m
0
N
O
ti
O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N ON �O-1 '�-I cN-I O 00 1p d' cV O
(s}a) a3je43sia
L
o 0
�n 3
g o
o V=
c O
v v
c c
0 0
a a
I 1
I
0
ti
0
i
1
( o
rn
s
1
m
1
v`
1
_
1
oU
1 0
7 X
1
O �
1
0
w a
1
£
1
E
c
0
a
1
L
Y
1 O
0
1 a
LM
i
• i o
" m
r
1
i 0
C
N
`
•
O
r
r
O
O
O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O
N
N N N ON N N N 00 W O
N O
(sp) a2je43s'a
/ /)b I I I
SONOMA - PHASE 1
PLATTED VOL 8305. PG. 233
NF
SHANNON WALTON / / JENNIFER/& RAOUL
ZONED R-1 / /. N/F ROLFES
/ ILSE ZONED RJARED ZONED R-1
—/ — J
i — �PU.E.fiM
� l,! / / 10' .
15' P.U.E. /
Nr7
v7 huh / LOT 2,
M 5' P.0U.. E. / , BLOCK 1 /
I i \ PRIVATE CROSS / 1y
�.I \ ACCESS EASEMENT 1
0 U� 0� � I 10' P.U.E.
\ *5ZLL—Q7'
1(02'1266.
0' P.U.E.I'
( ff A \ \ I
m
0 LOT 1,\ \ L
o r0 _ ` _ BLOCK 1oil
I
\ A
30' P.U.E.
1 L _ - 10' PUE. -
20' PUBLIC ACCESS
EASEMENT
ti
20' P.U.E.
c
`STATE HIGHWAY 40 `� -,
N
ANITA WHITLEY
ZONED R-1
NIF
JONATHAN & BRION
PAMPELL
ZONED R-1
N
BRENNAN PATRICK
BAJDEK
ZONED R-1
N/F
MICHAEL & KIMBERLY
H. GUESS
ZONED R-1
N
SUZANNE &
JOSEPH
MCHUGH
ZONED R-1
SCALE IN FEET
SONOMA - PHASE 2
PLATTED VOL 8502, PG.
285
Schuttz engineering; LLG:
2Ya0tonpMn.9uXeP
C IM 91eYw.lX]1Bd6
9lIPVEYW OE9IGNED' I lAWN APMg D J09N0, 04TE
� ING JPS owJP9 12-198 MAY2012
PRIVATE CROSS
ICI �i
I I I II
25' P.U.E.) I
(I ,
ACCESS EASEMENT
KIMBERIY KOEHLER
N/F
TOMMY D.
MCFALL
ZONED R-1
P.U.E.
10' P.U.E.
N
HOMER J. ACOSTA &
ZONED R-1
IIARPER'S CROSSING � SCALE EXHIBIT
PRE —DEVELOPMENT °�°
SUBDIVISION DRAINAGE AREA MAP °FR9 iA ,• 4N
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS PIATIING9GLE: 1:1 1
FIt£NPME: 12-198
I
I
I \
I \
I 1�
O ,
{
PROPOSED
(JUNCTION BOX
{ 4
OVERFLOW WE
I
Ito
I t.
\,
u'rz
o 3j
X 6
Z Q�
O
� o
Q �
m
N/F / Yl
/ SHANNON WALTON SONOMA - PHASE i
ZONED R-1 _1TTED VOL. 8305. PG. 233
PROPOSED
18" RCP PUBLIC
STORM SEWER PIPE
PROPOSED N
18" HDPE ILSE & JARED PORRAS
PRIVATE STORM - ZONED R=1 -
SEWER PIPE
rr
N
JENNIFER & RAOUL I
ROLFES
ZONED R-1 I
', P.U.E.I
I I
III
I 160 30 0 60
1 1 SCALE IN FEET
.y'Sry' �"m��
tN-PROPOSED -10' P.U.E.
333 �335� �.�-�.�._j „_/3 DETENTION POND,
334
/ El<��jm
PROPOSED /
f 333 / M POND OUTLET /
STRUCTURE / {
5' P.U.E. PROPOSED /
18" HDPE
PRIVATE STORM
33R 33yY i SEWER PIPE / rLOT 2.
BLOCK 1
10' P.U.E.
-` 6 -
33B 07' 02" - 2631
`,1 = 338 '
3y
10' P.U.E. 4Y
LOT 1, (I II tll
BLOCK 1 f
�. PROPOSED
MEDICAL CLINIC \ i
N
25' P.U.E,I
e
20' PUBLIC ACCESS
-3q. EASEMENT - - �339•
7
339
- - - - - -,STATE HIGHWAY-
1� a R.O.W. VARIES
� 00,
N/F
ANITA WHITLEY
ZONED R-1
I
N/F
JONATHAN & BRION
PAMPELL
ZONED R-i
N/F
BRENNAN PATRICK
BAJDEK
ZONED R-1
N/F
MICHAEL & KIMBERLY
H. GUESS
ZONED R-1
1r.1—
N
SUZANNE &
JOSEPH
MCHUGH
ZONED R-1
-�
SO -PHASE 2
-�- PLATTED
VOL.8502, PG.
28
285
I
I TOMMY D.
MCFALL
I ZONED R-1 / y
20' P.U.E. �
..r- 10P.U.E.
4 N
I HOMER J. ACOSTA &
KIMBERLY KOEHLER
I ZONED R-1
I 30' P.U.E.-7
L
STANDARD FLUME SECTION
OP Oi BFRN
"
Ne
GROUND
GRW
1 1
ME IN
Po
u TYPICALPOND
BERM DETAIL
N.T.S
mM
fr—
�
Wa vsv. m
t
,n w law ner
wv..mst•
NP aP M 9,AS e'mFt Sl1B A� SN. Das M MAXMOIP vnWe
NxD! M'D mwE '
jl
1 Trm.
ELEVATION
r
r� mo+ml noDw
t. LW oR Avo wuoW wslxo Um nEr
.... E __ r_o. EvfveDll mo vmw Nu aEe NnET ro
cB.T BREteo11 VNDM.
a � xw BPBom tun Wm tr Ba
E mr °o a aw°s°EPosn < wu'�wz ovr
PLiN PIG4V sne euT
W�
5LQl0NA--I
CURB INLET DETAIL
N.T.>. 1RA91 RACK
eats Ir mc.E.w e�jRM n
SIDE WAILS 1 BMS
4.0'
FROjjf"j(t�d( y eA BARS C O.C.EW.
TOP k 8(mcm
Eu95 POND OUTLET STRUCTURE
1. WO P11YyL 31NCMC 91ILL 4 F.WtID YO SMIED
coloWtB to w1Re1 aPu : wxo PDtw a stx no fr•-
� mwaxr nc wlwxc nc mw wu wmI nc
1n% s
—10' P.U.E.
5
tz Engineering, LLG
L
z mm�ams� smLA
aNs. smuom Txneas
SUPVEYFD
I ESI.N.
MI..
APPROVED
I.N.
KLING
JPS
DW
RE
t2490
MAY 2012
Y.TS
M wlwt� a[�a
INN..
oo Ae•w
raA.
I_ rmE.
SrLMON A.A
JUNCTION BOX DETAIL
N.TS.
'LL SIR1�116
s1B11o,EWu
0M wY9 = `RA .AMIO
// 11A11
11�14AMW. .T
f 4CVACRO taort WWI
R Na taw uwu PPe
We tlmul eomu a1w. w NNwruv mxwlWArz Al
ne exen enllml su xolu
BEDDING AND TRENCH BACKFILL
DETAIL FOR HDPE & RCP STORM PIPE
N: .IS.
B SCALE EXHIBIT
HARPERS CROSSING POST —DEVELOPMENT `
SUBDIVISION MOBIWNBL V,W
COLLEGE STATION TEXAS DRAINAGE AREA MAP %OTRNGWAP . 1:1
Flt£NPME 12-198
141 Schultz lEnglneering, LLC
E 3YLonB In SuImP
cog.y. smaoo Txneas
SUPVEVEO oesx; eo , aPPwry PPPAaveo .loe rvo. oA*E
KLING JPS DLO JPS 12.1m MAY 2012
e�
suc�i
L <[�eFll
M «I6 ,r ,YPe
vx. cr aN THaoucH wau
I�
r .nacc.
—17r nws.+r accw
r
- u
z,m
mmNNe r�°Nu.
mw ewmL
�wmiwsrx.m to ssm'q'�vaa
mxm,c vemr
°u�IwWr�woir� ram+' rr°'vrm100f mrwiwc
PAVIN CONCRETE WALL
r
M a , uwin wm k uv" M
tevallM Patl!)e1eJ �e�'meaw�awo Wa�ni. mve
777
WAILLOPIION t-ttPICAL GRANNY MSE WALL
uona w.�.bv.�.� sma
,. sac nve ,xo ma w wroi wwoa
AL_ _JA
ruN
ANry �Poao.�
«wxs <• air... I—r aw .• .
v s eormu 5EMONA-A
SINGLE GRATE INLLT
BARPER'S CROSSING INLET
SUBDIVISION DRAINAGE AREA MAP
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
SCALE EXHIBIT
,�PNWA c
PwnNoscete Lt _
Fl. Nurc 1210
WE
SYSTEMS E F. H. & I
DRAINAGE
AREA
N0.
DRAINAG AREA (AC)
Tc
(MIN)
Tc
USED
(MIN)
FREQ
(YR)
INTENSIT
(IN HR)
0
(CFS)
TOTAL
PAVED
C=0.9
RES.
C=0.5
UNIMP.
C=0.3
E1
0.51
0.51
5.24
10.00
10
8.63
3.96
E2
0.29
0.29
5.58
10.00
10
8.63
2.25
E3
1.88
1.88
17. 75
17. 75
10
6.61
3.73
Fi
1.25
0.64
0.61
17.40
17. 40
10
6.68
5.07
F2
2.71
0.39
2.32
19.01
19.01
10
6.38
6.68
F4
4.13
0.23
3.9
22.86
22.85
10
5.77
7.951
F6
5.68
0.2
5.48
20.30
20.30
10
6.16
11.2
F6A
1.20
1.2
18 01
18. 01
10
6.56
2.36
F8
1.79
0.27
1.52
20.46
20.46
10
6.13
4.29
F10
5.59
0.38
5.21
20.48
20.48
10
6.13
11.6
F11
0.73
0.64
O.Q6
0.03
5.00
10. 00
10
8.63
5.31
1.12
0. 34
0.78
11.73
11, 73
10
8.06
5. El
_F12
F13
0.38
0.35
0,03
9.16
10. 00
10
.63
2.80
H1
1.70
0.74
0.96
17.76
17.-76
10
6.61
6.31
2.27
19.64
19. 64
10
6.27
4.27
0.11
0.11
2.27
10.00
10
8.63
0.85
0.05
0.05
1.05
10.00
10
8.63
0.39
MH22.27
3.64
3. 64
1878
18. 78
10
6. 42
7.01
0.21
0. 21
338
10.00
10
8.63
I. 30.21
0.21
3.38
1 10.001
10
8.63
1.63
ri
0 100 200
SCALE: 1"-200'
JACOBS
JACOBS ENGINEERING, INC. -
526 UNIVERSITY DRIVE EAST, SUITE A201
COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840
(979) 764-9119 (979) 764-9229 FAX
FIRM REGISTRATION u 2966
CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOP
RON ROAD -PHASE 2
DRAINAGE AREA MAP
SHEET I OF 3
O ESICN: I RMR OAT E: SKET N0.
�4L
DOWNS
SONO A-PHASEI I
_ B„ANNOMENNL PLATTED V L. 8305, PG. 233 1 W n�
SCALE w FEET I , \ zNEDw,iOx J "� oawS E. ,ENN EEtON. R;ROLFEB i ; t.NEO a.,
".1 LLSEe,AN P p,u
-T- zvxm an
595' 57 13'E-348 AV
- —� % =—
REP
\ J BASE
.IONPiHAN 6BP ONPPmPELL
.
R I
/ 1
BRENNP2O o1pN BV0EN
LOT 2--
/ I
MICHA EPLYn.OLE55
EL eiORSON-,
y , /
"l LE
I SONOMA PHASE 2
\ _ «T•! / = "� PLATTED VOL 8502, PG. 265
i NR
+o OUE m suznnnEiEoaxmcxuvN
1 1 PNVATE / ^ '
I rC ml I cabs AccEss,--.j — /_ t�
O 1 VE C yC'�-�"' VC V[ VC N52'0]'82 -211B 3T /
O - _ M
\tea/ 1 ➢\ , ..E. I I Mv0Mcf
m\ h� Aj 11 ! l I 1 20' POD,
I
BLOCK
Ak ; -LOT I
25'PB
* N�eCC R, ED
-vas ( � I 's, �•— -•�- �N A\ � � 6R�SL '
wS EAC ME 1 z
--
\ TN
RIMB
rnx
vo
DETAim MISS.. _
_j 1YRi
.y_'. _ - -- =S _ATEEIGHWAY40
E ,..... st - :.Y=•=.. _ t- = -- - - - - -- --f2OW/ARIES_
- - - -
remna[. ^^E oo/
uvreF, .x[o
rnaeA .o+.cexr r PY s, ET1 sr[ [xruxr'[
!'ECTIONAA°rem.ot
CONSTRUCTION EXIT SILT CONTROL
IIIL "I
NA. a uxW
RPP
SILT FENCE ASSEMBLY
IF —
\ __ _
w'
_ — SCALE IN FEET
YAJI -- - - - - -- MULTI -USE PATH GRADING - - - -- - f - - - -- -
O®-
M�
=
A
m
Schultz Engineering, LLG
2]3o Lo B-1,!OIAA
COIle6e 5tatioryienzi]845
'9"!9 ]64.3900 TBPF N0. 1232]
suavEYEO DEs1vNSD NPwn PROVE ,N No DATA
NUNS MMC MMC APJPS B 12-198 JUNE.12
mrvslRucnory xoTm:
. SHALL RE PERICIMS F F„R VER MNO WE EMAC'F LMAIPoN
1 .1EALL EXIST. VNDEIDWIP ° VrI0MI OPENC 1MN OF WE U,NItt
MPPN ES M HWfls IN IDVPHCE OF
COXSIPVCXON RECLINED.
OC T. (BDO) 300 .Sn
ATMCs ENI (BW) 505 III
(Boo) 544-Ba77
.DOE, LNE C.... XPAPDOS: (9>9) B.s-2az9
REM20N: (BOO) 3H-BSi
] R 5 T,E RESPOPERLPY Cl IF CONTRACT. IF LSE WIMTEVEP MEANS
00.. TO TMX M C (BOND. AND PREVENT SE°MEW ATOM LEAVING WE
ECi SCE. S ....ES WD STAWI ON OF A CONSIRULT°N EXT AND
4LT FENCE AS WED.
] WE CON@ OX IS flE5PONESIS FOR 11,FIEDWIS ME MA+MNNMC THE DODSON
AND SEGMENT CONIROL DEVICES INSPCCDONs SHALL BE DONE EVERY 14 DNS
0 MIEfl EVER, I. EYEM OF I °R MOPE THE COMMCNA SNAIL
REM. ALL ME° CIRCE'. OX ME ADNCFNr siPEETS IS A PFSULT M ME
COXSTRUA CN OF 1. PPO,FLr.
A' "ooE°"Nroe.°'LO"rtWEER
sEewPERMIT xn n,Eo VREMES YEOMEN
c
E PERMVIEM REOET . YMLL RE ESIABLSHm ON ME WSNRBm ARCS AFlER
CMONSWEXPON IS C°MPLEIE BY M9ROMIRCN NG ANN $EFDINC All °ISN"BE°
GS.
S, AY CgislRwnN CHA_L RE M ACWRDANCE 11M mE IDID Gn OF
.NYM/C°NECE sTAI.B DAN. SPEGFIGTONs AND VITAILE 'DO WAWB.
SEWFA AND SOEWALK/MULn-LSE PAW. ALL 1VN.00DN F-ALL RE
W CP°IxATED MW ME GTr ENSIMPER'A WI
]. nrE CANSTNCnN SHALL COMPLY MW OSHA sTPNDAm 29 6R PANT 192B
mwP
SUBPART P FN 1RENCN SAFETY NEM ACE
B. ME COMPACTOR SNALL REM°K ME EPNI°N CONTROL MFASL VE ONCE CRASS
L$ ESTA°L...
9, INW PROTLOWN M BE INSiA11£D AT ALL PROPOSED AND WSTNO MLfls
MNCEM TO IF PRMECT XWE
1°. CO CURS SHOWN PPE MOM NELO SURJLY WTA h MOPE TOPOGRAPHY
PREPARED BY MLNO INISINFERINS IE SUPVEFFS,
11 WB, MR FFETMIHESEM MMOEVI , AF ANN, SHOWN OR REFERENCE WE
WAVY
EOUEM BET OF
RVCNON PLANS WESSYS PLAY SUBMRTPI.
g M um u.. PAW
scnAGE
D ASIDE
AD
MAX ix
A.
C0. SLOPE
2
B+'NMAZ COPE
-usE
M F
P.
MAX, CI
s .1 x. E
1ECIIOK'Ad'
NI11L]T-I. lE PAT] I'IYPI CAL REM) V
N T.S
1. SEE 1. vCR FOR Mul.n LSF PAW SPOT EIEALBCD,
S. MVLT APSE PAT. SNAL BE CONSIRUDEAC PER 'CS S+MSAMB "C"NER
FILEV.BNs AND BR.NLs (SEE F1GDM sw SAI OB Sxi B2 S S BV -
C`1_D3)
3 VI"EEION`oF ME M E,SNALL SNVL NE N MCOROANQ AWN WE LVES1
LEGEND
S.
FRE LARD
FIRE WAMJNC
PRICE. PAVER
AM I
IN, FENCE
Ws O%UMENr Is
SCALE SHEET'
LL LAYOUT,
HARPER' S CROSSING
OMY UNOFR 1xE
SUBDIVISION MULTI —USE PATH & GalroNi "°
2
umisE xB. GSF89.
N MAY v. 2m2 rt Pmmrvv sG,E: 1:1
rs NDTro BE Bsm COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS EROSION CONTROL PLAN
mR BIDpNG Ufl FILEnPME 12-198
coLaslRucnox
PUPPo56.
IOo 5050®0
SCALE IN FEET
_._._, ..
M I �we>,
'A \
\--
L
---
zu
VICINITY MAP
SH E0
sx w/.nxe m o�J xAx
Lam
u u u x vuv""MOCf VL
URllNAOk:ANFe llE1'11L
ms.0a
� PROPosEB
zT
]]B a0' R RCD COLVEPi
_
iD >J LF ®1.J3F
ON EACN
ENO
JJ5 W' R 3f 3
TAW Ni E%ST HNAC
/
_
_ REPAIR As RECAREO
--_. _ Br TOOT
E%SIIxG INN LANE
STATE HIGHWAY 40 — R.O.W. VARIES
DRIVEWAY DETAIL
1':20'
o.+.si: Aw,00""r o{.woA `xa°" wl
. np[ oe. wivA uu[ a �rrz �vm
e—eA
Wn lip. +.uz rnnwuuPixanEnrce ro.{f tatl
Schultz Engineering,LLG
THE SELL APADRxG ON THS
°°`°"E w�AO..1P.
O1.
JOOOT P LA E UGET
li
xET fis. oN nxE a
n3`W gmi s'eA
mnR see i as neat TOPE NO, UA27
9>9.I6E 39W
ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION
WPVErtO
EGW.
°DUD
N.
�PPWFD
MBNO.
GATE
HUNG
DUD
PH
11198
1 DUNE 2o12
17
>r ITT E' R. 1
II—
i=oC----
IT
50 2s®o
SCALE IN FEET
U
SPirz° 2 PH..e.
z05
/
CA
F CPOUNC.
I
II I
n
_
III
I
�jt
_ — --
kI -
dd
--- ---
-- r
tuv. NNx LANE '--I• EX 511NG
'All, HOLY AN
AmxN�.xo wx 8� or gmw.:w,.,a
w F ZHAANA
aw{ aN— ..on El PA.
,.
mP u-e.1
mE uN6 mwRE
mN.a�
rn�° WAY
®mm®
m®®mom
CrY
IV
Mnmimr 1
tn[cu, su[ry u'o mu*tx+l
I�^,A"� JGHLt onccl
llW� ANEW MEDICAL CLINIC �EP»EAL 6
Y j. H°PI20MAL 1'2H
v CRT CS MED CLINIC TxDOT DRIVEWAY PLAN15181
ry
— 2849 BARRON ROAD Pwire+BGGALe T.T /
;` COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS me NANE 1z-1se
i }
Q 1
pogo ( 3 I I
wDwc
pNFAO Q
i
WARNNG vG I F
'I I
:) GE
O
i i fxo _ RNI
I pOpy wDpK I .I PPNONG SIGN
XG 31G (LW[ -5l) 36 x ]6 OflUMS MlN WARNING JIGY WppNING .VIF/D
WpRXINC vG I DRUMS MiM "AGE
DEMONS (CW20-5E) l6' % 36' (CNR0.1) ]fi N J6'
ORUNS 'MM C C —
1
CHEMOHaT _—
_
BARRON ROAD 3zD' ._.. __
_.— __� ._ __._.
BARRON
-- ' EMI
ww' Ruus xTw
pfF➢ Uauus Wm \ EVRMs —y - �=T^ N afcVulPMS xG st' CXEMMs
wA MIND NGN -j (as -]A) µA"N"D ]6 w ]G c c A0P°
(cweo w)ai6 x w' / ¢Wzo EL) 36' x 36' mwr ) I )' I \\ 1 %Lv ARNxO vG A (CWm sy J6' x Aw
wow ECDuroar vcX I I � �J I I I wwr (crzo-z) 36' x �e
Wren Elq norm
pw+lxc vcx eAwiax po. 77 -,I � 1
wAMNIA. v
— 1
-----------------
Arlon r _
'1 SE,
36" i )
1
CItt CONME RT IISION$
fi/19/12
MARK
NI6
N.TE
Al
Schultz Engineering, LLC
111111:
L
E)309J91an6mire, SNlteA
Colle LNUFlory Te,as]]eC3
6a 39C0 TBPf N°. 1E3I7
suRMPvm osslcnm ORAwN PPPPWm Jos No. a
KIJNG DID DLD JP$ 12-198 JUNE 20T2
TreAFr c cONrROL NOTES'
1. ALL TENPMARr 1RAFFIN CGNUNUL DENCLsS ONALL eE PER ENE LATEST VRSAN OF ME
FRuc FANS
MANUAL ON UNIFORM TS1111 TPOL GEMCES AND NDOi BARRICADE AND
noN STANDARD SUEEK
rz UNES SHALL LANE MAG E SHALL` UA�TIC ME At ME EN i OFAGI WORKING NWRS AND SOM
3 It ISIIM OF MEACTORS ipESPDNSI.1 iD MAINTAIN ALL TRPRIC CONTROLS FOR ME
.LiO
• �w�nG sl6x
EuzlNc DENCE
A
THUS WC.. Is SCALE SHEET
Rom`°`°" A NEW MEDICAL CLINIC
PVPPDSE OF
PR'lEW VEAtICPL /�
DNE.,I,NE BARRON ROAD /
A""'°°"""°"0"" CRT CS MED CLINIC P.OF UNDER
PME xoPRONTPI r:3o
UCEN6E... 66s6°. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN %
ON IMME V. zmz. N 2849 BARRON ROAD nemue scue t)
Is N. TO BE USED
FON AUN .. Olt COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS FpsNPME: Tz-rse
'DN,
GON
PURPo5E5.