HomeMy WebLinkAboutFolderFOR OFFICE USE~NL Y
P&Z CASE NO.: rvz;;...x.._~ JJ7....;...;:'--~'------
DATE SUBMITTED: 10 ,,.~ .. og
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
Planning & Developmem Services
FINAL PLAT APPLICATION
q~rjO
~
(Check one) 0 Minor
($300.00)
D Amending
($300.00)
~Final
($400.00)
0 Vacating
($400.00)
D Replat
($600.00)*
*Includes public hearing fee
Is this plat in the ET J? 0 Yes [XJ No Is this plat Commercial 0 or Residential ~
The following items must be submitted by an established filing deadline date for P&Z Commission consideration.
MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:
_1L_ $300 -$600 Filing Fee (see above) NOTE: Multiple Sheets -$55.00 per additional sheet
n/a $100 Variance Request to Subdivision Regulations (if applicable)
~ $200 Development Permit Application Fee (if applicable).
x $600.00 Infrastructure Inspection Fee (applicable if any public infrastructure is being constructed)
x Application completed in full.
n/a Copy of original deed restrictions/covenants for replats (if applicable).
_.:__ Fourteen (14) folded copies of plat. (A signed Mylar original must be submitted after approval.)
~Paid tax certificates from City of College Station, Brazos County and College Station l.S.D.
_x_ A copy of the attached checklist with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not.
~Two (2) copies of public infrastructure plans associated with this plat (if applicable).
n/a Parkland Dedication requirement approved by the Parks & Recreation Board, please provide proof of
approval (if applicable).
Date of Preapplication Conference: _______________________ _
NAME OF SUBDIVISION Great Oaks Phase 2
SPECIFIED LOCATION OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION (Lot & Block)---------------
APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary Contact for the Project):
Name Same as Engineer & Owner
Street Address ------------------City -----------
State _____ Zip Code _____ _ E-Mail Address -------------
Phone Number------------Fax Number _____________ ~
PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION (ALL owners must be identified. Please attach an additional sheet for multiple
owners):
Name Indivisa Corporation
StreetAddress 2121 Kirby, Ste. 19 E
State TX Zip Code 7 7 0 1 9
Phone Number 71 3 -8 7 4-11 2 2
ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION:
City _H_o_u_s_t_o_n _____ _
E-Mail Address -------------
Fax Number 7 13-652-492 6
Name Mc Clure & Browne Engineering/Surveying, Inc .
Street Address 1008 Woodcreelc Dr., Ste. 103 City College Station
State _T_·x ___ Zip Code 77845 E-Mail Address jeffr@mcclurebrowne.com
Phone Number 979-693-3838 Fax Number 979-693-2554
1 of5
Do any deed restrictions or covenants exist for this property? Yes __ No _x __
Is there a temporary blanket easement on this property? If so, pleas~rovide the Volume and Page # __ _
Acreage -Total Property ~ J . a9\t, Total #of Lots ~0 ~ R-0-W Acreage -----
Existing Use: Agriculture ProposedUse: Single Family Residential
Number of Lots By Zoning District 3 0 IR-1 B 2 I A-0 R __ _
Average Acreage Of Each Residential Lot By Zoning District
(),'!J'f'/ 1R-l B 1. 44 t A-OR ---'---
Floodplain Acreage ___ o ___ _
A statement addressing any differences between the Final Plat and approved Master Plan and/or Preliminary Plat (if
applicable):
None
Requested Variances To Subdivision Regulations & Reason For Same: _..:.N..:..o=n:...:e=-------------
Requested Oversize Participation: ...:N..:..o=n:...:e:;__ ________________________ _
Total Linear Footage of
Proposed Public: Parkland Dedication due prior to filing the Final Plat:
2,902
0
2,731
1,908
0
1,690 ---
0
Streets
Sidewalks
Sanitary Sewer Lines
Water Lines
Channels
Storm Sewers
Bike Lanes I Paths
ACREAGE:
___ No. of acres to be dedicated + $ ___ development fee
___ No. of acres in floodplain
___ No. of acres in detention
___ No. of acres in greenways
OR
FEE IN LIEU OF LAND:
__ No. of SF Dwelling Units X $900" = $ -------
----(date) Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory Board
• Projects that were vested prior to January 1. 2008, per Chapter 245 of the Texas Local Government Code
may be assessed a different amount. Please contact city staff for additional information.
NOTE: DIGITAL COPY OF PLAT MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FJUNG.
The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true,
correct, and complete. The undersigned hereby requests approval by the City of College Station of the above-identified
final plat and attests that this request does not amend any covenants or restrictions associated w;th this plat.
IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY,
THIS APPLICATION MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A POWER OF ATTORNEY STATEMENT
FROM THE OWNER.
o ~ ru...... //2 .. M·e1 • ..:r 0 ~ 1, -z..001
. I ~-~-~-------.'-~-~~--iQflattJreafld Tit I e ~ ~ Date
2 of5
I
SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT INFORMATION
Application is hereby made for the following development specific site/waterway alteratio~s:
Subdivision Construction in the Brazos River basin
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
1, ----------------' design engineer/owner, hereby acknowledge or affirm that:
The information and conclusions contained in the above plans and supporting documents comply with the current
requirements of the City of College Station, Texas City Code, Chapter 13 and its associated Drainage Policy and Design
Standards. As a condition of approval of this permit application, I agree to construct the improvements proposed in this
application according to these documents and the requirements of Chapter 13 of the College Station City Code.
Property Owner(s) Contractor
CERTIFICATIONS: (for proposed alterations within designated flood hazard areas.)
A. I, certify that any nonresidential structure on or proposed to be on this site
as part of this application is designated to prevent damage to the structure or its contents as a result of flooding from the
100 year storm.
Engineer Date
B. I, certify that the finished floor elevation of the lowest floor, including any
basement, of any residential structure, proposed as part of this application is at or above the base flood elevation
established in the latest Federal Insurance Administration Flood Hazard Study and maps, as amended .
Engineer Date ............. ,,,,,,,, ----..~ E. OF /~ '''t __.:i~~~:..!:....-f=.:+1-i.=---------· certify that the alterations or development covjr;f :,r'*·er~1f ~~II
flooa-car ing capacity of the waterway adjoining or crossing this permitted sit~-~-:~~~! ......... ~!~~~~~~~
ment ar~0~on=~~t:~~ ~~t~0~ed~~;~i~~~s.of the City of College Station City Cod~-~~.~:~~~?:~
t I '6 l1 ~ ... .·-if!.:: I 0 ·. f •• ::<J; 1 o'ZD r o 111~."~9.?.~.?&.Q -·~'l
Da e I\\\ StONA\.. €.f ... --,,,,,,,,, .... -
D. I, , do certify that the proposed alterations do not raise the level of the 100
year flood above elevation established in the latest Federal Insurance Administration Flood Hazard Study.
Engineer Date
Conditions or comments as part of approval:---------------------------
In accordance with Chapter 13 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, measures shall be taken to
insure that debris from construction, erosion, and sedimentation shall not be deposited in city streets, or existing drainage
facilities. All development shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer for the above named project. All of the applicable codes and ordinances of the City of College Station shall
apply.
3 of 5
GREAT OAKS PHASE 2
MBESI PROJ #: 10150002-008
Engineer's Estimate of Construction Costs
October 17, ~008
Item # I Description Unit Quantity Unit Price
Site Preparation
I Clearing and Grubbing I Ac. I 2.2 1 3,500.00
I I I I
Site Preoaration Subtotal
Paving Construction
2 Earthwork for Street C.Y. 4,845 6.00
3 6" Lime Stabilized Subgrade (6% by weight) S.Y. 11 ,609 3.75
4 6" Crushed Limestone Base S.Y. 9,127 8.90
5 2" HMAC Surface Course (including prime coat) S.Y. 8,362 10.00
6 Concrete Curb and Gutter (all types) L.F. 3,391 10.50
7 6" Reinforced Concrete Pavement S.Y. 594 45.00
8 End/Road Markers EACH 9 200.00
Paving Subtotal
rama2e 1ystem D . s c onstruct1on
8 18" HDPE Pipe, (ADS, N-12 or approved equal w/water-tightjoints) L.F. 82 43.00
9 18" RCP Pipe, (ASTM C-76, CL Ill) (Structural Backfill) L.F. 202 52.00
10 24" HDPE Pipe, (ADS, N-12 or approved equal w/water-tightjoints) L.F. 135 47.00
11 24" RCP Pipe, (ADS, N-12 or approved equal w/water-tightjoints) L.F. 45 60.00
12 30" HDPE Pipe, (ADS, N-12 or approved equal w/water-tightjoints) L.F. 193 61.00
13 30" RCP Pipe, (ASTM C-76, CL Ill) (Structural Backfill) L.F. 113 80.00
14 36" HDPE Pipe, (ADS, N-12 or approved equal w/water-tightjoints) L.F. 98 75.00
15 36" RCP Pipe, (ASTM C-76, CL Ill) (Structural Backfill) L.F. 634 110.00
16 42" RCP Pipe, (ASTM C-76, CL Ill) (Non-Str. Backfill) EACH 28 185.00
17 5'x.5' Reinf Box Culvert (ASTM C789) (Str. Backfill) EACH 160 325.00
18 Headwall and Wingwall for Box Culverts EACH 1 16,000.00
19 Slooed End Treatment for 18" Storm Pipe EACH 6 800.00
20 Sloped End Treatment for 24" Storm Pipe EACH 2 1,000.00
21 Slooed End Treatment for 30" Storm Pioe EACH 1 1,200.00
22 Slooed End Treatment for 36" Storm Pipe EACH 1 1,400.00
23 Sloped End Treatment for 42" Storm Pipe EACH 2 2,000.00
24 Junction Box for Detention Structure including Grates EACH 1 10,000.00
25 Standard 1 O' Recessed Inlet EACH 3 3,200.00
26 Standard 5' Recessed Inlet EACH 2 2,600.00
27 Standard Junction Box EACH 1 2,400.00
28 24"x45 deg. HDPE Bend EACH 1 400.00
29 Rock Rip-Rap Channel Lining, on Filter Fabric S.Y. 202 75.00
30 Grading for Detention Pond C.Y. 4,200 6.00
.IJrainage System Subtotal
Water S stem Construction
30 8" PVC, C909 Cl 200, Water Line, Str. Backfill L.F. 159 25.00
1 of3
Total
7,700
$7.700
29,070
43,534
81,230
83,620
35,603
26,746
1,800
$301.603
3,526
10,504
6,345
2,700
11,773
9,040
7,350
69,740
5,180
52,000
16,000
4,800
2,000
1,200
1,400
4,000
10,000
9,600
5,200
2,400
400.00
15,150
25,200
$275 508
3,975
Item #
31
32
33
34
35
35
35
36
37
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
GREAT OAKS PHASE 2
MBESI PROJ #: 10150002-008
Engineer's Estimate of Construction Costs
October 17, 2008
Description Unit Quantitv Unit Price
4" PVC, C909 Cl 200 Water Line, Str. Backfill L.F. 50 18.00
8" PVC, C909 Cl 200, Water Line, Non-Str. Backfill L.F. 788 26.00
6" PVC, C909 Cl 200 Water Line, Non-Str. Backfill L.F. 384 17.00
4" PVC, C909 Cl 200 Water Line, Non-Str. Backfill L.F. 527 14.00
12" Casing L.F. 30 25.00
Fire Hydrant Assembly EACH 4 2,600.00
8"x8" M.J. Tee EACH 1 400.00
8"x6" M.J. Tee EACH 1 350.00
6"x6" M.J. Tee EACH 1 350.00
6"x3" Taooed Plug EACH 2 250.00
8" M.J. Gate Valve EACH 3 925.00
6" M.J. Gate Valve EACH 3 710.00
8"x13" M.J. Anchor Coupling EACH 2 350.00
6"x13" M.J. Anchor Coupling EACH 6 300.00
8"x45 deg. Bend EACH 8 350.00
6"x45 deg. Bend EACH 2 300.00
3"x22.5 deg. Bend EACH 2 275.00
3"xl 1.25 deg. Bend EACH 1 275.00
2" Blow Off Valve Assembly EACH 5 850.00
Water Service, 1.5" type K Coover, short side(< 20') EACH 5 850.00
Water Service, 1" tvoe K Coover, short side(< 20') EACH 6 650.00
Water Service, 1.5" tvoe K Conver, long side(> 20') EACH 4 1,700.00
Water Service. l" type K Coover. long side(> 20') EACH 5 1,400.00
Water Svstem Subtotal
s c Sewer iystem onstruction
6" PVC, D-3034 SDR 26 L.F. 1,151 7.00
8" PVC, D-3034 SDR 26 L.F. 1,580 10.00
12" Steel Casing w/snacers and end seals L.F. 20 80.00
Str. Backfill (5'-8' Depth) L.F. 50 27.00
Str. Backfill (8'-10' Depth) L.F. 51 35.00
Str. Backfill (10'-12' Depth) L.F. 176 41.00
Non-Str. Backfill (5'-8' Denth) L.F. 665 16.00
Non-Str. Backfill (8'-10' Depth) L.F. 750 18.00
Non-Str. Backfill (10'-12' Depth) L.F. 858 22.00
Non-Str. Backfill (12'-14' Deoth) L.F. 73 30.00
Drop Connection EACH 1 1,500.00
Standard Manhole, 0-6 ft. deeo EACH 17 2,000.00
Extra Denth (> 6') V.F. 58 275.00
Short Side 4" Sewer Service ( < 20') EACH 9 450.00
Long Side 4" Sewer Service (>20') EACH 11 1,350.00
Trench Safetv (sewer) L.F. 2_731 1.00
Sewer System Subtotal
2of3
Total
900
20,488
6,528
7,378
750
10,400
400
350
350
500
2,775
2,130
700
1,800
2,800
600
550
275
4,250
4,250
3,900
6,800
7,000
$89 849
8,057
15,800
1,600
1,350
1,785
7,216
10,640
13,500
18,876
2,190
1,500
34,000
15,936
4,050
14,850
2,731
$154,081
.,.
Item # I
67
68
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
GREAT OAKS PHASE 2
MBESI PROJ #: 10150002-008
Engineer's Estimate of Construction Costs
October 17, 2008
Description Unit Quantity
Lift Station and Force Main Construction
4" PVC FORCE MAIN, C909 Cl 200 Water Line, Non-Str. Backfill L.F. 2,080
4" PVC FORCE MAIN, C909 Cl 200 Water Line, Str. Backfill L.F. 75
4 "xl 1.25 deg. Bend EACH 2
4"x45 deg. Bend EACH 8
Connect to Existing Manhole EACH 1
Install wet well, coating interior of proposed wet well, access hatch, etc. L.S. 1
Install yard piping and associated appurtenances L.S. 1
fustall submersible pumps, piping, rails and associated auourtennaces L.S. 1
fustall electrical system (includes oanel and wiring, etc.) L.S. 1
Unit Price
14.00
18.00
225.00
225.00
500.00
20000.00
4500.00
35000.00
5000.00
Lift Station and Force Main Construction
Erosion Control Construction
Erosion Control Plan & Sedimentation Control (per Item 106) (includes silt
fencing, construction exits, straw bale barriers, inlet protection, grass seeding, L.S. 1 15,000.00
and anv other sedimentation control devices)
Erosion Control Subtotal
Total
29,120
1,350
450
1,800
$500
$20,000
$4,500
$35,000
$5 000
$97,720
15,000
$15,000
Total Construction Cost \ $941,461
The above construction estimate is based on the engineer's preliminary opinion of probable construction costs. This estimate constitutes our
best judgment at this time. Please note that the engineer does not have any control over contractor or supplier workloads and the degree to
which inflation may affect project costs between now and the bid date. During construction, additional features may become apparent as the
work progresses, which will result in an increase in cost.
'Date'
3 of3
.,..,.,,,,,,,,,
---"":-<\ E. OF .,.€. ''t .: '\I'-········ :..t-... ''t
-c:, •. ··*··· -... . -* .. · ·· .. IS' ,, ,:' _.. · •. -+c I ~ *... ... * ~ ,,, ................................ : ..... ,'/. ~ JEFFERY L. ROBERTSON ~ ~· ·:.o· ;.· · · · · · · · · ·94 7 45 · · · · · · · · ·1 cc·~
,,,~·.. ..·q;,,, 10 ·. ··kl:: '11~~/(.<:.~~.'?.~?..-(s.~E \\\~\10NAL 'G.~--.:~ .... -
SEWER ANALYSIS
FOR
GREAT OAKS SUBDIVISION
PHASES 2-12
MB
111
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
OCTOBER 2008
MBESI# 1015-0002
SUBMITTED BY:
McCLURE & BROWNE ENGINEERING/SURVEYING, INC.
1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103 •College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 693-3838 • Fax: (979) 693-2554
SEWER SYSTEM ANALYSIS
FOR
GREAT OAKS SUBDIVISION, PHASES 2-12
General Information
Area encompassed by these phases: 112.4 acres
Anticipated land use:
Anticipated number of lots:
Single family residential
276 lots
Notes on surrounding development: Great Oaks is bordered by Phase 1 of the
subdivision to the west, the Quail Run subdivision
to the north, property owned by John and Linda
Kemp, David Borsack, Albert Ribisi and the Los
Palomas subdivision to the east, and property
owned by Grace Abbate to the south.
Primary outfall line:
Software model:
Average daily flow:
Peaking factor:
Pipe Material:
Manning 's Nvalue:
Spreadsheet Notes:
Conclusion:
Applicable Exhibits:
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Sewer System Analysis
A lift station & force main will utilized to pump sewage to a 12"
line in the Los Palomas subdivision that carries wastewater to the
Lick Creek WWTP .
Microsoft EXCEL Spreadsheed based on Manning's Equation
267 gpd per residential lot
4.0
PVC (03034)
0.013
The spreadsheet in Exhibit A computes the anticipated flowrates
from each area and the minimum slopes of the lines that serve
those areas. It compares the computed slope with the required
minimum slope and the design slope from the plans (when
available). If the computed slope is less than the minimum or less
than the design slope, the spreadsheet indicates the line is "OK".
If not, it indicates the line is "Flat".
All of the lines in the spreadsheet on Exhibit A indicate they
are OK and thus meet the design guidelines of the Cities of
Bryan and College Station. Therefore, we conclude that the
lines are adequately sized and will easily carry the sewage
flows that are expected to pass through them.
Schematic Sewer System Layout
Sewer Model Spreadsheet
Copy of Letter to TCEQ
Linc B ~] OI -8 Ii: z ".:l z -8 .., ; j ·.§ ~ From To ~ z ~ !. ~ ] ~] ~ 267 GPDpcr MH# MH# Lot GPD 1 3 23 6,141 -2 3 18 4,806 -3 5 0 -10,947 4 5 22 5,874 -5 7 0 -16,821 6 7 27 7,209 -7 9 0 -24,030 8 9 32 8,544 -9 13 0 -32,574 10 12 27 7,209 -11 12 26 6,942 -12 13 7 1,869 14,151 13 15 0 -48,594 14 15 37 9,879 -15 17 0 -58,473 16 17 38 10,146 -17 LS 0 -68,619 18 19 18 4,806 -19 LS 0 -4,806 Exhibit B Great Oaks, Phase 2 through 12 Sanitary Sewer Analysis Flow Calculations Manning Average Daily Infiltration Peaking Peak lnllide Friction Size Material Flows(ADF) (10%ADF) Factor Flows Diameter Slope ADF GPD CFS CFS CFS (in.) Inches % 6,141 0.0095 0.0010 4.00 0.04 8 D3034 7.754 0.0004 4,806 0.0074 0.0007 4.00 0.03 6 D3034 5.793 0.0010 10,947 0.0169 0.0017 4.00 0.07 8 D3034 7.754 0.0011 5,874 0.0091 0.0009 4.00 0.04 6 03034 5.793 0.0015 16,821 0.0260 0.0026 4.00 0.11 8 03034 7.754 0.0026 7,209 0.0112 0.0011 4.00 0.05 6 D3034 5.793 0.0023 24,030 0.0372 0.0037 4.00 0.15 8 03034 7.754 0.0054 8,544 0.0132 0.0013 4.00 0.05 6 D3034 5.793 0.0032 32,574 0.0504 0.0050 4.00 0.21 8 03034 7.754 0.0099 7,209 0.0112 0.0011 4.00 0.05 6 03034 5.793 0.0023 6,942 0.0107 0.0011 4.00 0.04 6 D3034 5.793 0.0021 16,020 0.0248 0.0025 4.00 0.10 6 D3034 S.793 0.0113 48,S94 0.0752 0.0075 4.00 0.31 8 03034 7.7S4 0.0220 9,879 0.0153 0.0015 4.00 0.06 6 D3034 5.793 0.0043 S8,473 0.090S 0.0090 4.00 0.37 8 03034 7.7S4 0.0318 10,146 0.01S7 0.0016 4.00 0.06 6 D3034 5.793 0.0045 68,619 0.1062 0.0106 4.00 0.44 8 D3034 7.754 0.0439 4,806 0.0074 0.0007 4.00 0.03 6 03034 5.793 0.0010 4,806 0.0074 0.0007 4.00 0.03 8 D3034 7.754 0.0002 Pipe Calculations Min. Manning Min. Ave. Daily Ave. Daily Friction Design Design Flow Flow Slope Slope Slope Velocity Depth Peak Peak ADF Flows Flows % fus Inches % % 0.40 0.74 0.00 0.0012 0.40 0.80 0.95 0.29 0.0035 0.80 0.40 0.91 0.78 0.0039 0.40 0.80 0.99 0.29 0.0053 0.80 0.40 1.05 0.78 0.0092 0.40 0.80 1.06 0.58 0.0080 0.80 0.40 1.15 1.16 0.0187 0.40 0.80 1.12 0.58 0.0112 0.80 0.40 1.24 1.16 0.0343 0.40 0.80 1.06 0.58 0.0080 0.80 0.80 1.06 0.58 0.0074 0.80 0.80 1.34 0.87 0.0393 0.80 0.40 1.41 I.SS 0.0764 0.40 0.80 1.17 0.58 0.0149 0.80 0.40 1.51 1.94 0.1106 0.40 0.80 1.17 0.58 0.0158 0.80 0.40 1.57 1.94 0.1523 0.40 0.80 0.95 0.29 0.0035 0.80 0.40 0.69 0.00 0.0007 0.40 Actual Slope for Existing or Designed Systems % 0.40 0.80 0.40 0.80 0.40 0.80 0.40 0.80 0.40 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.40 0.80 0.40 0.80 0.40 0.80 0.40 Pipe Peak Peak Slope Flow Flow Check Velocity Depth fnA Inches OK 1.15 1.16 OK 1.37 0.87 OK 1.33 us OK 1.49 0.87 OK 154 1.94 OK 1.55 1.16 OK 1.70 2.33 OK 1.64 1.16 OK 1.86 2.71 OK 1.55 1.16 OK I.SS 1.16 OK 2.00 1.74 OK 2.06 3.49 OK 1.72 1.16 OK 2.17 3.88 OK 1.76 1.45 OK 2.25 4.26 OK 1.37 0.87 OK LOS 0.78 10150002-Sewer.xls lO/lS/2008 ExhibitB
MB
ii 11 1
McCLURE & BROWNE ENGINEERING/SURVEYING, INC.
1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103 •College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 693-3838 •Fax: (979) 693-2554 •Email: McClureBrowne@Verizon.net
October 15, 2008
Mr. Louis C. Herrin, III, P.E.
TCEQ-MC 148
P. 0 . Box 13087
Austin, TX 78711-3087
Re: Chapter 317 Summary Transmittal Letter
Permit Number: TPDES WQ0010024006
Permittee: City of College Station
Project Name: Great Oaks, Phase 2
County: Brazos County
MBESI # 10150002
Dear Mr. Herrin:
The purpose of this letter is to provide the TCEQ with the information necessary to comply with the
requirements of §3 l 7. l(a)(3)(D) of the TCEQ's rules titled, Design Criteria for Sewerage Systems.
The necessary information includes:
1. Engineering Firm: McClure & Browne Engineering/Surveying, Inc.
1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103
College Station, Texas 77845
2. Design Engineer: Jeffery L. Robertson, P.E. No. 94745
3. Facility Owner: City of College Station, Brazos County, Texas
4. The plans and specifications which describe the project identified in this letter are in
substantial compliance with all requirements of Chapter 217.
5. Project Description: The wastewater improvements that are detailed within this project are
located within the City of College Station in Brazos County, Texas,
and are designed to connect to the existing wastewater collection
system. The project involves the extension of a sewer line into a new
phase of this residential subdivision located near the intersection of
Great Oaks Drive and Rock Prairie Road . The project consists of new
gravity wastewater lines and their associated appurtenances.
Wastewater from this subdivision will flow to the Carters Creek
Wastewater Treatment Plant. The following is a general description
of the new collection system:
Mr. Louis C. Herrin, ID, P.E.
October 15, 2008
Page2
Lift Station:
(See attached report)
Gravity Wastewater Lines:
Number of Lots: Residential: 31
Amount!fype of Wastewater Pipe to be Installed:
Pipe Size
(in.) Material
6 ASTM D3034, SDR 26 PVC
8 ASTM D3034, SDR 26 PVC
Number of Manholes: 17
Linear
Feet
1,767
924
Distance between manholes range from 34 LF to 298 LF.
Grade(%)
Min. MaL
0.80 2.11
0.40 0.40
The plans will be reviewed by the City of College Station and they will also provide construction
inspection. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact me at (979) 693-3838 .
cc: TCEQ Region 9 Office, Wastewater Program
.............. ,,,,,,,, --"':~ 'C. 0 F It:. ''' .:?-<.. ~ ............. -r-1 ,,, ... ~,..* ... IS' I ;'*/ ·· ... irl1 ~ * ... ... * ~ ~ ..... : ................................. '/. ~ JEFFERY L. ROBERTSON ~ ~ ................................. , ..... ~ ~ ""\ 94745 /$1
l1 ~... •• kj~ 11 ~ ... ~(CENSY:._?, .. ~ff .:f' •1, '''51('\ ............. ~v-.:-,\,~IONA\.. v ...... -
'''"''''''"'" City of College Station, Development Services Department
WATER ANALYSIS
FOR
GREAT OAKS, PHASE 2
AND LOS P ALOMAS SUBDIVISION
RB
I
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
MAY 2006
MBESI# 1015 .. 0002
SUBMITTED BY:
McCLURE & BROWNE ENGINEERING/SURVEYING, INC.
1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103 •College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 693-3838 •Fax: (979) 693-2554 •Email: McClureBrowne@Verizon.net
WATER ANALYSIS
FOR
GREAT OAKS, PHASE 2
AND LOS PALO MAS SUBDIVISION
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
MAY 2006
MBESI# 1015 .. 0002
SUBMITTED BY:
McCLURE & BROWNE ENGINEERING/SURVEYING, INC.
1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103 •College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 693-3838 • Fax: (979) 693-2554 ·Email: McClureBrowne@Verizon.net
WATER SYSTEM ANALYSIS
FOR
GREAT OAKS SUBDIVISION, PHASE 2
& LOS PALO MAS SUBDIVISION
General Information
Area encompassed by this phase:
Anticipated land use:
Anticipated number of lots:
Notes on surrounding development:
124 acres
Single family residential (Great Oaks)
and Duplex (Los Palomas Subdivision)
24 lots
The two subdivisions are bounded by Great Oaks
Phase 1 to the west, Jones-Butler Road to the east,
Quail Run Subdivision and property owned by
David Borsack to the north, and property owned by
Albert Ribisi and Grace Abbate to the south.
Water System Analysis
Primary water supply line:
Secondary water supply line:
Software model:
Estimated peak domestic demand:
Estimated fire demand:
Pipe material:
Most Hydraulically Remote Point:
Testing Method:
Water Model Parameters:
Existing 8" water line on Great Oaks Drive
Existing 4" line on Jones-Butler Road
PIPE2000 (Kentucky Pipe Network Model)
1.5 gpm per residential lot (per TCEQ
requirements)
1000 gpm
PVC (C909)
Node J-26 (See Exhibit A)
This is determined by calculating the lowest
pressure under static conditions.
Steven Cast with Wellborn S.U.D. performed the
fire flow test on May 18, 2006 (See Exhibit B). A
Pollard Hydrant Flow Gauge was used to measure
the flow at the existing fire hydrant located adjacent
to Great Oaks Drive. The reading on the gauge was
47 psi which corresponds to a flow of 1150 gpm
(see Exhibit C). The static and residual pressure
was also measured at an adjacent residence as
shown on Exhibit A.
The model has been setup to analyze the ''worst
case scenario". We have assumed that Great Oaks
Phase 2 and Los Palomas are fully developed and
we only have connections to the existing water
system at Great Oaks Drive and Jones-Butler Road.
The model will work under these conditions.
However as Great Oaks Phase 2 is developed,
Great Oaks Phase 2 and Los Palomas Su bdivision
MBESI #1015-0002
Re ulated Items
Conclusion:
Applicable Exhibits:
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Exhibit E
additional connections to the existing system will be
made. These connections will drastically increase
the pressures for the entire system during fire flow
conditions.
I 20 (min) i Fire flow conditions
I 12 (ma'\:) ; Fire flow conditions
The proposed water system exceeds the requirements of TCEQ
and the Cities of Bryan and College Station
Schematic Water System Layout
City of College Station Fire Flow Test Report 1
Pitot Gage Conversion Chart for Pollard Hydrant Flow Gauge
PIPE2000 Model Output for Great Oaks, Phase 2 and Los Palomas
Subdivision (static)
PIPE2000 Model Output for Great Oaks, Phase 2 and Los Palomas
Subdivision (fire)
Great Oaks Phase 2 and Los Palomas Subdivision
MBESI #1015-0002
Exhibit B
FIRE FLOW TEST PERFORMED
BY WELLBORN S. UD.
DATE: APRIL 18, 2006
PERFORMED BY: STEVEN CAST
WITNESSED BY: MICHAEL R. McCLURE
FLOW TEST RESULTS
NOZZLE SIZE: 2.5"
LOCATION: On Great Oaks Drive approx. 2100 feet north of the intersection of Rock Prairie
Road West and Great Oaks Drive
Pitot Reading: 4 7 psi
(GPM): 1150 (from chart)
Static PSI: 82 psi (measured at Lot 12, Block 2 of Great Oaks Subdivision, Phase 1)
Residual PSI: 48 psi
Exhibit B
FIRE FLOW TEST DAT A
Great Oaks, Phase 2 and Los Palomas Subdivision
Exhibit C
MAv-18-2006 THU 01 :26 PM Well born SUD FAX No. 9796901260
COMPUTATION TABLE
Flowing Capacities of Water-Free Flows Indicated in Gallons per Minute
r1 • (~;!f.ei-~~~~ I I -Coemcient .88 Inlet Edge Square/Sharp
~-.-Coefficient .7Hnlet Edge Square/Raised: .. ·
Coefficient 1.1 for Open Encl Pipe ·.
. • All ResU/ts Rainded to Nearest 5 GPM •
PITOT GAUGE
. 1>$1 1-1/2" .2" · a• s-112•
BO no 170 246 . 330
2 85
3 . 105 ~:· "' 240 .
290
.. :3:.4~· : ,'. 470 ...
420 570 .
435
615 .• -740
4 1:25
5 185
6 / · 1so
''7 180
a
9
10
11
12
. 13
14
175
180
190
200
210 .
220
230
220 246't
260 .
280
310
320
.3ll0
355
370
~o
405
!s z3s: .. -· ·4-15
16 240 430
17 :250 • 440
.18 205· .. ; o455 .• '
19 . 2155 .. •· ' '.A:135··
20 270 . 40 .
22
:24
26
:28
30.
36
•\, 40
-42
44
48 '
..,...46
50
52
54
56
58
265
295
310
320
·_330·
340
. 355
365
.375
sao
395
400
~10
420
430
435 .
445
.45.0
480
505 .
525
550
570
~90
610 s.2~ &45•
665
680
700
710
730.
740
i6o
ns
,785
. eeo
620
340
380
410
~o .
480
500
530
555
580 '
605
-490 · SSS ~,·
545 745
690 906
005 860
690 940 .
720 900
765 1040
800 10ll0
835 1136
e10 · 11as
. 630 ·'110 1235. . -eSI>· . -. ' 955 . 1.275
670 .... 985 1315
' 690 . 005 1350
7t'o · 1020 1890
730 . 1050 1430.
·750 . .1090 14-70
'790, 1140 ' 1660.
820 1180 1605
960 124() 1686
~-1280 17-45'
.920
. •950
~~~89:' . 'ib.\Q-
1040 '
. 1060
1090
1110
~t·
1199
1210
· 1230
1250
1280
1325
131o
.1410 .1~
1500 '
152S
1~0
1600 '
'1'840
1670-
1715 ..
174o
1770
18oo
1~
1805
1860
1920
'1980
2Q40
2075
2135 .
· 21'is·
223!5
iz75
233o
2370
2410
25CJ.O 25l0
a:ro
9Bo
1050
1140 .
1220 '
,1290
.1360
1420
. 1490
1550
'1610
1_661!
1720
1no
1830
1870
1920
2020
2110.
2190
' 22Bo
235o
2430
~10
.25eo
. 2650
27:20
2780
2860
2920
2980
3040
3100
3160
3220
3280
. 55o ..
775_
940 •.
1100 .
1220
. 1340 '
1440
1540 ....
16-40
: Boo·
960
•··116() 13eo ·.
·1s20.
1640
1760
1920
2000
G"
~BO
1380
1670
1000
2190
~60
2~
2785
".2.aeo
. 1730 2120 . 3060 .
18~ ,. 2.220 ' 31~'
1890 2320 3340·
1960 2420 348$
2040 . 2520 3625
·21os···~ -· zeoo· · :".3745"
21'80 ' 2880 3860 ' .. · 2235 27So ' 3976
.~10 '
. 2865
· 284o · .· 4090
. 292Q ' 4205,·
··. ' 24(iCI , ~00 4320
2550 3100 · . ·4650 ' :2"ae,li ' .. ' 3280 ' ' ' ~12D,; · ..
zno · 3440 4950 •.·
2aao. · 3560 s125 ·
. 2980
'3090
3170
.3260
3350·
344o
3520
3610
3890
3770
3860
3940
4()10
.4080
41So
3680 52.95
3600-5470
3920 '. 5840
4040 . 5815
.;.1eo 5996
~40 6105
4560 _6275
4440 6390
4~ 6565
4640 6660
4780 6850 '
4840 ' 8965'
.W20 7,080
5000
5120
1ioo
7370
p, 00 2
tt. . ·-;;~
JOSEPH G. POLLARD CO., INC.
200 A.TLA.Nnc AVENUE • NEW HYt>IE PARK. NY 11 040
·TEL: B00-437·1148 '.FA,)(: !118•'748-0852
Rec e i v e d Ti me May. 18. 1 : 19PM WWW.Pollardwater.Com
Exhibit C
Pitot Gauge Com·ersion Chart
Great Oaks, Phase 2 and Los Palomas Subdivision
Exhibit D
(S tatic Flow Analysis)
KYPIPE4
University of Kentucky Network Modeling Software
Copyrighted by KPFS 1998
Version 1. 200 -01/26/2000
Date & Time: Fri May 19 15:52:27 2006
INPUT DATA FILENAME --------------F: \ 1015-S-l \0002-G-l \Docs\WATERM-1\10150002. DT2
TABULATED OUTPUT FILENAME --------F: \1015-S-l \0002-G-l \Docs\WATERM-1 \10150002 .OT2
POSTPROCESSOR RESULTS FILENAME ---F: \1015-S-l \0002-G-l \Docs\WATERM-1 \10150002 .RS2
S U M M A R Y 0 F 0 R I G I N A L D A T A
U N I T S S P E C I F I E D
FLOWRATE ............ -gallons/minute
HEAD (HGL) • . . • • . . . . . -feet
PRESSURE . • . • • • . . . . . . = psig
P I P E L I N E D A T A
STATUS CODE: XX -CLOSED PIPE CV -CHECK VAL VE
P I P E
NAME
NODE NAMES LENGTH DIAMETER ROUGHNESS MINOR
#1 #2
P-1 VP-1 J-B
P-10 J-10 J-B
P-11 J-9 J-10
P-12 J-11 J-9
P-13 J-11 J-19
P-14 J-13 J-12
P-15 J-13 J-15
P-16 J-15 J-5
P-17 J-14 J-13
P-18 J-14 J-17
P-19 J-17 J-15
P-2 J-3 J-26
P-20 J -16 J-17
P-21 J-16 J-19
P-22 J-19 J-14
P-23 J-12 J-5
P-24 J-12 J-22
P-25 J-20 J-18
P-26 J-20 J-27
P-27 J-22 J-20
P-28 J-22 J-24
P-29 J-24 J-1
P-3 J-3 J-16
P-30 J-24 J-25
P-31 J-26 J-23
P-32 J-27 J-21
P-33 J-2 VP-2
P-34 J-23 J-2
P-4 J-4 J-3
P-5 J-4 J -7
P-6 J-7 J-6
P-7 J-7 J-10
P-8 J-8 J-11
P-9 J-9 J-4
P UM P/L 0 S S E L E H E N T DA
THERE IS A DEVICE AT NODE VP-1
HEAD FLOWRATE
(ft) (gpm)
138.46 0. 00
130.37 526. 00
106. OB 1052. 00
THERE IS A DEVICE AT NODE VP-2
HEAD FLOWRATE
(ft) (gpml
184. 62 0. 00
166.15 190.00
110. 77 380.00
(ft) (in) COEFF. LOSS COEFF.
683. 87
878.31
302. 79
593. 63
332. 29
328 .14
788. 02
289.76
306.28
947.39
302. 65
134. 82
301. 98
1152.42
294. 76
631. 94
474.24
62 6. 62
573.36
869. 68
420.58
518. 20
146.41
41. 66
649. 38
305. 98
110.28
469.91
183.SB
740. 02
135.43
389 .10
312.51
812. 60
TA
DESCRIBED BY
EFFICIENCY
(%)
1. 00
1. 00
1. 00
DESCRIBED BY
EFFICIENCY
(%)
1. 00
1. 00
1.00
B.07 120.0000
B.07 120.0000
B. 07 120. 0000
B.07 120. 0000
B.07 120.0000
B .07 120. 0000
6.07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
8 .07 120. 0000
6. 07 120. ODDO
8.07 120. 0000
8.07 120.0000
8 .07 120. 0000
6.07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
8 .07 120. 0000
6.07 120. 0000
8 .07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
8. 07 120.0000
8 .07 120 . 0000
3 .07 120. 0000
4.03 120. 0000
8. 07 120.0000
8. 07 120. 0000
6. 07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
8 .07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
THE FOLLOWING DATA:
THE FOLLOWING DATA:
0.00
0.00
0 .OD
0.00
0.00
0.00
0 .00
0.00
0. 00
0. 00
0 . 00
0.00
0 .00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o. 00
0.00
0 . 00
0. 00
0.00
0.00 o. 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0. 00
0. 00
0. 00
0. 00
0.00
0.00 o.oo
0.00
(ID-
(ID=
11
21
ExhibitD
Static Flo\Y Water Model
Great Oaks, Phase 2 and Los Palomas Subdivision
Exhibit D
(Static Flow Analysis)
END NODE DATA
NODE
NAME
J-1
J-10
J-11
J-12
J-13
J-14
J-15
J-16
J-17
J-18
J-19
J-2
J-20
J-21
J-22
J-23
J-24
J-25
J-26
J-27
J-3
J-4
J-5
J-6
J-7
J-8
J-9
VP-1
VP-2
NOOE
TITLE
EXTERNAL
DEMAND
(gpm)
2.25
28.50
12. 00
12. 00
0. 00
17. 25
5.25
25.50
21. 75
3.00
21. 75
o.oo
12.00
3. 75
6. 75
20.25
4.50 o. 00
20.25
8.25
3. 00
27.00
15.00
0. 00
18.00
21. 75
26.25
0 U T P U T 0 P T I 0 N 0 A T A
JUNCTION
ELEVATION
(ft)
308. 00
297. 00
292. 00
300. 00
296.00
294.00
314. 00
310. 00
315.00
310.00
294.00
308. 00
308.00
292. 00
302 . 00
308. 00
309. 00
309. 00
308. 00
297.00
308. 00
305. 00
310. 00
298.00
300.00
290.00
299. 00
290.00
308. 00
EXTERNAL
GRADE
(ft)
290.00
308. 00
OUTPUT SELECTION: ALL RESULTS ARE INCLUDED IN THE TABULATED OUTPUT
S Y S T E M C 0 N F I G U R A T I 0 N
NUMBER OF PIPES .....•.....•...••.• (p) = 34
NUMBER OF END NODES ............... (j I = 27
NUMBER OF PRIMARY LOOPS ........... I l) -6
NUMBER OF SUPPLY NODES .....•.....• (f) -
NUMBER OF SUPPLY ZONES ............ (z) -
Case:
RESULTS OBTAINED AFTER 7 TRIALS: ACCURACY = 0.00181
S I M U L A T I 0 N 0 E S C R I P T I 0 N IL A B E LI
PIPELINE RESULTS
STATUS CODE: XX -CLOSED PIPE
P I P E
N A M E
P-1
P-10
P-ll
P-12
P-13
P-14
P-15
P-16
P-17
P-18
P-19
P-2
P-20
P-21
P-22
P-23
P-24
P-25
NODE NUMBERS
#1 #2
VP-1 J-8
J-10 J-8
J-9 J-10
J-11 J-9
J-11 J-19
J-13 J-12
J-13 J-15
J-15 J-5
J-14 J -13
J-14 J-17
J-17 J-15
J-3 J-26
J-16 J-17
J-16 J-19
J-19 J-14
J-12 J-5
J-12 J-22
J-20 J-18
CV -CHECK VALVE
FLOWRATE HEAD MINOR LINE HL/
LOSS LOSS VELO. 1000
lgpm) lftl lftl lft/s) lft/ftl
14 .12 0. 01 0. 00 0.09 0. 01
9.68 0. 00 0.00 0.06 0. 00
22.05 0.01 0. 00 0.14 0. 02
-20. 02 0. 01 0. 00 0.13 0. 01
10. 07 0. 00 0 . 00 0.06 0. 00
28.55 0. 01 0.00 0.18 0. 03
-12 .07 0. 02 0. 00 0.13 o. 02
38.95 0. 01 o.oo 0 .24 0. 05
16.48 0.00 0.00 0.10 0. 01
-17. 85 0. 04 0.00 0.20 0.05
56.27 0. 03 0. 00 0.35 0.10
-281. 38 0. 26 0.00 1. 76 1. 94
95. 87 0. 08 0. 00 0. 60 0. 26
27.57 0 .12 0. 00 0. 31 0.11
15. 88 0.00 0. 00 0.10 0. 01
-23.95 0. 01 0. 00 0.15 0. 02
40.50 0. 03 0. 00 0. 25 0.05
3.00 0. 00 0. 00 0.02 0. 00
ExhibitD
Static Flow Water Model
Great Oaks, Phase 2 and Los Palomas Subdivision
Ex hibi t D
(Static Flow Analysis)
P-26 J-20 J-27 12. 00 0. 01 o. 00 0.13 0. 02
P-27 J-22 J-20 27 .00 0. 02 0. 00 0.17 0.03
P-28 J-22 J-24 6. 75 0. 00 0. 00 0. 04 0.00
P-29 J-24 J-1 2.25 0.00 0. 00 0. 01 0. 00
P-3 J-3 J-16 148. 93 0.09 0.00 0. 93 0.60
P-30 J-24 J-25 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0.00
P-31 J-26 J-23 -301. 63 l. 43 0. 00 1.89 2.20
P-32 J-27 J-21 3. 75 0.02 0.00 0.16 0 .07
P-33 J-2 VP-2 -321. 88 8.11 0. 00 8 .11 73.56
P-34 J-23 J-2 -321. 88 1.17 0. 00 2. 02 2.49
P-4 J-4 J-3 -129.45 0. 08 0. 00 0. 81 0.46
P-5 J-4 J-7 34 .13 0.12 0. 00 0. 38 0.16
P-6 J-7 J-6 0.00 o. 00 0. 00 o. 00 0.00
P-7 J-7 J-10 16 .13 0. 00 0. 00 0.10 0 . 01
P-8 J-8 J-11 2.05 0.00 o.oo 0. 01 0.00
P-9 J-9 J-4 -68. 32 0.11 o. 00 0. 43 0 .14
E N D N 0 D E R E S U L T S
NODE NODE EXTERNAL HYDRAULIC NODE PRESSURE NODE
NAME TITLE DEMAND GRADE ELEVATION HEAD PRESSURE
(gpm) (ft) (ft) (ft) (psi) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J-1 2.25 428.41
J-10 28. 50 428.45
J-11 12. 00 428.45
J-12 12.00 428. 43
J-13 0.00 428. 44
J-14 17 .25 428.45
J-15 5.25 428.46
J-16 25.50 428. 57
J-17 21. 75 428.49
J-18 3.00 428. 39
J-19 21. 75 428.45
J-2 0.00 431.52
J-20 12.00 428. 39
J-21 3. 75 428. 35
J-22 6. 75 428.41
J-23 20.25 430. 35
J-24 4. 50 428.41
J-25 o.oo 428.41
J-26 20.25 428. 92
J-27 8.25 428.37
J-3 3.00 428.66
J-4 27 .00 428.57
J-5 15.00 428. 45
J-6 0.00 428.46
J-7 18.00 428.46
J-8 21. 75 428.45
J -9 26.25 428.46
VP-1 428.46
VP-2 439. 63
NET SYSTEM INFLOW 336. 00
NET SYSTEM OUTFLOW 0.00
NET SYSTEM DEMAND a 336. 00
***** HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS COMPLETED *****
308. 00 120. 41
297.00 131. 45
292.00 136.45
300. 00 128.43
296. 00 132. 44
294. 00 134. 45
314. 00 114.46
310. 00 118. 57
315.00 113.49
310.00 118.39
294.00 134. 45
308 .00 123.52
308. 00 120. 39
292. 00 136.35
302. 00 126. 41
308. 00 122 .35
309. 00 119. 41
309. 00 119. 41
308. 00 120. 92
297. 00 131. 37
308. 00 120.66
305. 00 123.57
310.00 118.45
298.00 130.46
300. 00 128.46
290. 00 138.45
299. 00 129.46
290. 00 138. 4 6
308. 00 131. 63
52 .18
56. 96
59.13
55. 65
57.39
58.26
49.60
51.38
49 .18 ~ Low Pressure
51.30
58.26
53.53
52.17
59.09
54.78
53. 02
51. 74
51. 74
52.40
56. 93
52 .29
53.55
51.33
56.53
55.66
60. 00
56 .10
60.00
57.04
Exhibit D
Static Flow Water Model
Great Oaks, Phase 2 and Los Palomas Subdivision
Exhibit E
(Fire Flow Analysis)
K Y P I P E
University of Kentucky Network Modeling Software
Copyrighted by KPFS 1998
Version 1.200 -01/26/2000
Date & Time: Fri May 19 16:10:48 2006
INPUT DATA FILENAME --------------F: \1015-S-1 \0002-G-1 \Docs\WATERM-1 \10150002. DT2
TABULATED OUTPUT FILENAME --------F: \1015-S-l \0002-G-1 \Docs\WATERM-l \10150002 .OT2
POSTPROCESSOR RESULTS FILENAME ---F: \1015-S-1 \0002-G-l \Docs\WATERM-l \10150002. RS2
S U M M A R Y 0 F 0 R I G I N A L DATA
U N I T S SPECIFIED
FLOWRATE ............ -gallons/minute
HEAD (HGL) •..•...... -feet
PRESSURE . . . . . . . • • . . . .. psig
I P E L I N E D A T A
STATUS CODE: XX -°CLOSED PIPE CV -CHECK VALVE
P I P E
N A M E
NODE NAMES LENGTH DIAMETER ROUGHNESS MINOR
#1 #2
P-1 VP-1 J-8
P-10 J-10 J-8
P-11 J-9 J-10
P-12 J-11 J-9
P-13 J-11 J-19
P-14 J-13 J-12
P-15 J-13 J-15
P-16 J-15 J-5
P-17 J-14 J-13
P-18 J-14 J-17
P-19 J-17 J-15
P-2 J-3 J-26
P-20 J-16 J-17
P-21 J-16 J-19
P-22 J-19 J-14
P-23 J-12 J-5
P-24 J-12 J-22
P-25 J-20 J-18
P-26 J-20 J-27
P-27 J-22 J-20
P-28 J -22 J-24
P-29 J-24 J-1
P-3 J-3 J-16
P-30 J-24 J-25
P-31 J-26 J-23
P-32 J -27 J-21
P-33 J-2 VP-2
P-34 J -23 J-2
P-4 J-4 J-3
P-5 J-4 J-7
P-6 J-7 J-6
P-7 J-7 J-10
P-8 J-8 J-11
P-9 J-9 J-4
P UM P/L 0 S S E L E M E N T D A
THERE IS A DEVICE AT NODE VP-1
HEAD FLOWRATE
(ft) (gpm)
138. 46 0. 00
130.37 526.00
106.08 1052.00
THERE IS A DEVICE AT NODE VP-2
HEAD FLOWRATE
(ft) (gpm)
184. 62 0. 00
166.15 190. 00
110. 77 380. 00
(ft) (in) COEFF. LOSS COEFF.
683. 87
878. 31
302. 79
593. 63
332.29
328 .14
788. 02
289. 76
306.28
947. 39
302. 65
134 . 82
301. 98
1152 .42
294. 76
631. 94
474 .24
626. 62
573. 36
869. 68
420.58
518. 20
146.41
41. 66
649.38
305. 98
110. 28
469.91
183.58
74 0. 02
135. 4 3
389.10
312. 51
812. 60
T A
DESCRIBED BY
EFFICIENCY
(%)
1. 00
1.00
1.00
DESCRIBED BY
EFFICIENCY
(%)
1.00
1. 00
1. 00
8. 07 120. 0000
8. 07 120.0000
8.07 120.0000
8. 07 120.0000
8.07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
6.07 120. 0000
8. 07 120.0000
8. 07 120.0000
6. 07 120.0000
8.07 120.0000
8.07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
6.07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
8 .07 120 .0000
8.07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
6.07 120.0000
8.07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
8.07 120 .0000
3. 07 120. 0000
4.03 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
6. 07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
8.07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
8. 07 120. 0000
THE FOLLOWING DATA:
THE FOLLOWING DATA:
0.00
0. 00
0. 00
0. 00
0. 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0. 00
0. 00
0 . 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0. 00
0.00
0 .00
0.00
0.00
0 .00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0. 00
0 .00
0.00
0.00
0.00
(ID=
(ID"'
11
2)
Exhibit E
Fire Flow Water Model
Great Oaks, Phase 2 and Los Palomas Subdivision
Exhibit E
(Fire Flow Analysis)
END NODE DATA
NODE
NAME
J-1
J-10
J-11
J-12
J-13
J-14
J-15
J-16
J-17
J-18
J-19
J-2
J-20
J-21
J-22
J-23
J-24
J -25
J-26
J-27
J-3
J-4
J-5
J-6
J-7
J-8
J-9
VP-1
VP-2
NODE
TITLE
EXTERNAL
DEMAND
(gpm)
2 .25
28.50
12. 00
12.00
0 .00
17. 25
5. 25
25.50
1021. 75
3.00
21. 75
0. 00
12.00
3. 75
6. 75
20.25
4. 50
0.00
20.25
8.25
3.00
27 .00
15.00
0. 00
18.00
21. 75
26.25
0 U T P U T 0 P T I 0 N D A T A
JUNCTION
ELEVATION
(ft)
308. 00
297. 00
292.00
300. 00
296.00
294. 00
314 . 00
310. 00
315.00
310. 00
294.00
308. 00
308. 00
292. 00
302. 00
308. 00
309. 00
309. 00
308. 00
297 .00
308 .00
305.00
310. 00
298. 00
300. 00
290. 00
299. 00
290.00
308. 00
EXTERNAL
GRADE
(ft)
290.00
308. 00
OUTPUT SELECTION: ALL RESULTS ARE INCLUDED IN THE TABULATED OUTPUT
S Y S T E M C 0 N F I G U R A T I 0 N
NUMBER OF PIPES ..............•••.. (p) 34
NUMBER OF END NODES ••..•.•....•••• (j I 27
NUMBER OF PRIMARY LOOPS .......•••• ( 11 = 6
NUMBER OF SUPPLY NODES ............ (fl 2
NUMBER OF SUPPLY ZONES ............ ( z) = 1
Case:
RESULTS OBTAINED AFTER 5 TRIALS: ACCURACY 0.00018
S I M U L A T I 0 N D E S C R I P T I 0 N (L A B E L)
P I P E L I N E R E S U L T S
STATUS CODE:
P I P E
N A M E
P-1
P-10
P-11
P-12
P-13
P-14
P-15
P-16
P-17
P-18
P-19
P-2
P-20
P-21
P-22
P-23
P-24
P-25
XX -CLOSED PIPE
NODE NUMBERS
Hl #2
VP-1 J-8
J-10 J-8
J-9 J-10
J-11 J-9
J-11 J -19
J-13 J-12
J-13 J-15
J-15 J-5
J-14 J-13
J-14 J-17
J-17 J-15
J-3 J-26
J-16 J-17
J -16 J-19
J-19 J-14
J-12 J-5
J-12 J-22
J-20 J-18
CV -CHECK VALVE
FLOWRATE HEAD MINOR
LOSS LOSS
lgprn) (ft) lft)
922. 38 11.95 0. 00
-318.26 2.14 0.00
-171.14 0. 23 0. 00
47.30 0. 04 0.00
523. 07 2.03 0.00
200.34 0. 34 0 . 00
96. 78 0.85 0. 00
-132.84 0 .14 0.00
297 .11 0.66 0.00
134. 93 1.89 0.00
-224.36 0.39 0 .00
-373.13 0. 44 0.00
662. 45 2.86 0. 00
-52. 02 0.39 0.00
449. 30 1. 36 0 . 00
147.84 0. 37 0 . 00
40. 50 0.03 0. 00
3.00 0. 00 0 . 00
LINE HL/
VELO. 1000
lft/s) lft/ft)
5. 78 17. 41
2.00 2. 44
1. 07 0. 77
0. 30 0.07
3. 28 6.11
1. 26 1. 03
1. 07 1. 08
0.83 0. 48
1. 86 2 .14
1. 50 2.00
1. 41 1. 27
2. 34 3. 27
4.15 9. 47
0. 58 0. 34
2. 82 4. 61
0. 93 0. 59
0.25 0. 05
0. 02 0. 00
Exhibit E
Fire Flow Water Model
Great Oaks, Phase 2 and Los Palomas Subdivision
l
Exhibit E
(Fire Flow Analysis)
P-26 J-20 J-27 12 .00 0. 01 0. 00 0.13 0. 02
P-27 J-22 J-20 27. 00 0. 02 0. 00 0.17 0. 03
P-28 J-22 J-24 6. 75 0.00 0.00 0. 04 0. 00
P-29 J-24 J-1 2 .25 0.00 0.00 0. 01 0. 00
P-3 J-3 J -16 635 . 93 1.28 0. 00 3.99 8. 78
P-30 J-24 J-25 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 o.oo
P-31 J-26 J-23 -393. 38 2. 34 0.00 2.47 3. 61
P-32 J-27 J-21 3. 75 0.02 0.00 0.16 0.07
P-33 J-2 VP-2 -413.63 12.91 0. 00 10. 42 117. 04 ~ High Velocity
P-34 J-23 J-2 -413.63 1.86 0.00 2.59 3. 96
P-4 J-4 J-3 265.81 0. 32 0. 00 1. 67 1. 74
P-5 J-4 J-7 -100. 62 0. 86 0. 00 1.12 1.16
P-6 J-7 J-6 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 0 . 00
P-7 J-7 J-10 -118.62 0 .15 0.00 0. 74 0. 39
P-8 J-8 J-11 582.37 2 .33 o. 00 3. 65 7. 46
P-9 J-9 J-4 192 .19 0. 78 0.00 1. 21 0.96
E N D N 0 D E R E S U L T S
NODE NODE EXTERNAL HYDRAULIC NODE PRESSURE NODE
NAME TITLE DEMAND GRADE ELEVATION HEAD PRESSURE
(gpm) (ft) (ft) (ft) (psi) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J-1 2.25 384.88
J-10 28 .50 389. 48
J-11 12. 00 389. 29
J-12 12. 00 384.91
J-13 o. 00 385. 24
J-14 17. 25 385. 90
J-15 5.25 384.39
J-16 25.50 386. 87
J-17 1021. 75 384. 01
J -18 3.00 384.86
J-19 21. 75 387.26
J-2 0.00 392. 79
J -20 12. 00 384. 86
J -21 3. 75 384. 82
J-22 6. 75 384.88
J -23 20.25 390. 93
J -24 4. 50 384.88
J-25 0.00 384. 88
J-26 20.25 388.59
J-27 8 .25 384.85
J-3 3.00 388.15
J-4 27 .00 388.47
J-5 15. 00 384. 53
J-6 0 . 00 389. 33
J-7 18. 00 389.33
J-8 21. 75 391 . 62
J-9 26.25 389. 25
VP-1 4 03. 57
VP-2 405. 70
NET SYSTEM INFLOW • 1336.00
NET SYSTEM OUTFLOW = 0.00
NET SYSTEM DEMAND = 1336. 00
***** HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS COMPLETED *****
308 .00 76. 88
297 .00 92. 48
292. 00 97.29
300. 00 84.91
296. 00 89. 24
294.00 91.90
314. 00 70. 39
310.00 76. 87
315.00 69.01
310.00 74 .86
294. 00 93.26
308 .00 84.79
308. 00 76.86
292. 00 92. 82
302. 00 82.88
308. 00 82. 93
309. 00 75.88
309. 00 75.88
308. 00 80.59
297. 00 87.85
308. 00 80.15
305.00 83.47
310. 00 74 .53
298. 00 91.33
300. 00 89. 33
290.00 101. 62
299. 00 90.25
290.00 113. 57
308. 00 97. 70
33.31
40. 08
42 .16
36.79
38. 67
39. 82
30.50
33. 31
29.90 -E-Low Pressure
32. 44
40.41
36. 74
33. 31
40. 22
35. 91
35. 94
32. 88
32. 88
34 .92
38. 07
34.73
36.17
32 .30
39.58
38. 71
44. 04
39.11
49 .21
42. 34
Exhibit E
Fire FlmY Water Model
Great Oaks, Phase 2 and Los Palomas Subdivision
DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
GREAT OAKS SUBDIVISION
PHASES 2-12
llB
11 11
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
OCTOBER 2008
MBESI# 1015-0002
SUBMIITED BY:
tf1/l~.o<b
w·?w%
McCLURE & BROWNE ENGINEERING/SURVEYING, INC.
1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103 • College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 693-3838 •Fax: (979) 693-2554
Great Oaks, Phases 2-12
Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report
MBESI # 1015-0002
PART I-Executive Summary Report
Section 1 -Contact Infonnation:
Project Designer:
Project Developer:
Submittal Date:
McClure and Browne Engineering and Surveying, Inc.
1008 Woodcreek Drive, Suite 103
College Station, TX 77845
979-693-3838
Jndivisa Corporation
2121 Kirby, Ste. 19 SE
Houston, Tx 77019-6066
713-874-1122
October 20, 2008
Section 2 -General Infonnation:
Great Oaks is a fourteen phase residential subdivision to be constructed in west College Station. The total
area of the development is approximately 225 acres with a total of 297 lots. The plan is based on the Preliminary
Plat submitted January 16, 2007 and approved by the Planning and Zoning Board on February 1, 2007.
Section 3 -Project Location:
Great Oaks is located in west College Station at the intersection of Great Oaks Drive and Rock Prairie
Road. The entire project site is located within the city limits of College Station. To the north the project site is
bounded by the Quail Run Subdivision. To the east the project site is bounded by property owned by John and
Linda Kemp, David Borsack, Albert Ribisi, and the Los Palomas Subdivision. To the south the project site is
bounded by property owned by Grace Abbate and to the west by Great Oaks Phase 1.
The entire site is located within the Brazos River drainage basin. No portion of the site is shown to be
within the 100-year floodplain, so it is not currently regulated under the National Flood Insurance Program. (Fema
Firm Map# 48041C0182C, July 2, 1992).
Based on Table B-1, Appendix B of the Unified Stormwater Design Guidelines, this site is not located in a
drainage basin defined in the table. After evaluating the site, we determined that detention for Phases 2-12 will be
necessary.
Section 4-Hydrologic Characteristics:
The project site is mostly wooded pasture with a defined drainage swale through the center of the tract.
This drainage swale conveys stormwater south to the Brazos River. The land cover is mostly dense vegetation and
trees except for a few clearings in the north half of the site for an oil well.
There are three upland drainage areas. The headwaters for the creek that flows through the site is located
just northwest of the site in the Quail Run Subdivision. This drainage area consists of 73. 7 acres and is identified as
Drainage Area #1 on Exhibit B. There is an additional offsite drainage basin in Quail Run that sheet flows into
Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report Page 1 of2
Great Oaks, Phases 2-12
Great Oaks . This basin is 30.6 acres and is identified as Drainage Area #2 on exhibit B. Drainage Area #3 consists
of 28.5 acres and is located on the property owned by Jack and Linda Kemp and David Borsack. This drainage
enters the Great Oaks site in a small creek. Drainage within the site generally flows to the centrally located creek
that continues through Phase 1 of the development and eventually to Rock Prairie Road West.
There is a 40' drainage easement located on the back of some of the lots in Phase 1 of the development..
With the proposed phases of the development, drainage easements and ROW will be as necessary near structures.
Section 5 -Stormwater Management:
As stated in Section 3, detention will be provided for this project. Stormwater will be conveyed by curb
and gutter to recessed inlets. The stormwater will be discharged directly into the existing creek or to the proposed
detention structure. The proposed structure is located on Mulberry Drive. It will consist of (2) 42" RCP pipes
connected to a junction box with grate inlets located @ elevation 282.5. The structure will serve to back water into
a storage area created off channel just north of Mulberry Drive. The 42" pipes will work to contain the 2 and 5 year
flows. The grate inlets are utilized under the larger storm events (10 -100). The 100 year water surface elevation
has been calculated to be 286.91 '. The road low point elevation is 287.50' which provides 0.59' of freeboard for
the 100 year storm.
The table below shows that the post-development flow for all design storms is reduced compared to the
pre-development flows .
Pre-Development
2-yr 277.4 cfs
5-yr 459.7 cfs
10-yr 593.3 cfs
25-yr 706.0 cfs
50-yr 865.1 cfs
100-vr 1001.9 cfs
Section 6 -Coordination and Permitting:
No coordination or permitting is required for this development.
Section 7 -Reference:
Report
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C-1
Exhibit C-2
Exhibit C-3
Exhibit C-4
Exhibit D
Exhibit E-1
Exhibit E-2
Technical Design Summary Report
Drainage Area Map (Storm Drain Sizing)
Drainage Area Map (HBC-HMS)
Rational Formula Drainage Area Calculations
Inlet Computations
Pipe Size Calculations
Culvert Sizing Spreadsheets
Drainage Area Parameters
Detention Pond Structure Design
Stage-Storage and Stage-Discharge Curves
Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report
Great Oaks, Phases 2-12
Post-Development Water Surface
244.1 cfs 281.16'
397.9 cfs 282.48 '
552.8 cfs 283 .76'
652.2 cfs 284.59'
765 .6 cfs 285 .85 '
848.5 cfs 286.91 '
Page 2 of2
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 Ill (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 Ill 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 to
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 1of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
applications that are in process with either City: plat(s), site plans, zoning requests,
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 ET J 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 I 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."
Part 2 -Project Administration I Start (Page 2.1)
Engineering and Design Professionals Information
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 2 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Engineering Firm Name and Address: Jurisdiction
{'l'i f. C!vrc City: Bryan 1 r5towAe !(li~ed'1~,l5N111~y~~ ~ loo~ lJooJ. cte,e~ or. ~.+e lo:3 College Station
~.,[( t'il $1-'*';I\. :-Ix 71f>4-5 Date of Submittal:
Jo/i.c/o<t.
Lead Engineer's Name and Contact lnfo.(phone, e-mail, fax): Other:
~e:ri\ L · fo~e1fs0.J , ~tJS·3'b3i 1 ~Af'r '--tr'\ccJ rt broi.Ji'e. CoJ'VI
Supporting Engineering I Consulting Firm(s): Other contacts:
... . Developer I Owner /Applicant lnformation ' i ., .
Developer I Applicant Name and Address: Phone and e-mail:
lndivi~A ~~A{~" (713) 1'74-J\?'Z
Z.ll \ K,·,.~.., !'i-&
Uo,,-'..{-t>.1 ii t>f 't
Property Owner(s) if not Developer I Applicant (&address): Phone and e-mail:
_,, . ... .:·,·:,; . + '\ :1::i·:,::1: Project Jdentificatioil I .. ,·,. ' .... . ·.F'.:·i ,;., . .'•
Development Name: bf't>~t t) A k "S , <p4 ,ge 7.-
Is subjec~ property a sitlJi~j7ct'. a single-phase subdivision, or part of a multi-phase subdivision?
fl'1ufrr fl~~ S" r(/1~~,j If multi-phase, subject property is phase ~ of l4-
Legal description of subject property (phase) or Project Area:
(see Section II, Paragraph B-3a)
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. rhri'?~ J ~A6 4v,~rireJ ~ t°"t>-frvcfe~ ,,., 2ttQO.
General Location of Project Area, or subject property (phase):
'f!.ocfc fl.tt1t1~ fd/. N~tif' ~e, ~ i"f erscc:L~I\ f: GreJ ~A~S J.,ue. I
' '
In City Limits? Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (acreage):
Bryan: acres. Bryan: College Station:
College Station: 2-l . 2:'Z~ acres. Acreage Outside ET J:
Part 2 -Project Administration I Continued (page 2.2)
Project Identification (continued)
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 3 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Roadways abutting or within Project Area or
subject property:
£1~t ~AK~ Pfl;vG
Abutting tracts, platted land, or built
developR1ents: ~ Vi~ frHt1As. 511bo;-1,~1~,J
f!l'AC(. Abb~~ 1"1 ~~
Named Regulatory Watercourse(s) & Watershed(s): Tributary Basin(s):
i\'\20b 'R,~ (,,('
· ., < ' " · Plat ,lnformationFor Project C>r Subj~ct Property (or Phase) .
Preliminary Plat File#: ___ _ Final Plat File#: -----Date: ____ _
Name: Status and Vol/Pg:
If two plats, second name: File #: ____ _
Status: Date: ___ _
··: :·:';1·:::1·::·· ·:. ·'zO.nifig 1rlt0rn1a~f9h f~rPr,ojecfSr,.~ubjed~ropeftY to{~haset :. ·:.. · ;; ..
Zoning Type: e --\ B ~or Proposed? Case Code: ____ _
Case Date ____ _ Status: U,f\;tldi 1.JA.S. (t.dvJeJ. 1"1 4ilt'\e)(.Ah~I\ ,,-
Zoning Type: Existing or Proposed? Case Code: ____ _
Case Date ____ _ Status:
Planning Conference(s) & Date(s): Participants:
No~t--
Preliminary Report Required? N Submittal Date-----Review Date ____ _
Review Comments Addressed? Yes __ 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.
Part 2-Project Administration I Continued (page 2.3)
.. .
.. Coordination For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 4 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Note: For any Coordination of stormwater matters indicated below, attach documentation
describing and substantiating any agreements, understandings, contracts, or approvals.
Coordination Dept. Contact: Date: Subject:
With Other
Departments of
Jurisdiction
City (Bryan or
College Station)
Coordination With Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
Non-jurisdiction
City Needed?_L
Yes __ No
Coordination with Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
Brazos County
Needed?
Yes_No-4-
Coordination with Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
TxDOT Needed?
Yes __ No :p.__
Coordination with Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
TAMUS Needed?
Yes __ NoL
' ·~ ,,
Permits For Project or Subject PropeltY {or t:>hase)
,.,,,,, ·-·--:.
. ~ :;-::· ... <"
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 in spaces below.
Entity Permitted or Status of Actions (include dates) Approved?
US Army Crops of \Jor-k;"~ .J,'\V.. c ... "~ J' €,,,,,.ee.t-~ .l--lc-Engineers
No __ Yes1._ fl'1'4Y'·t\;~~ \lt-Jer ~it\-i"'~'oe fec..,Tt ~zq.
US Environmental
Protection Agency
No x_ Yes_
Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality
No_L_ Yes --
Brazos River
Authority
No-X-Yes_
Part 3 -Property Characteristics I Start (Page 3.1)
Nature and Scope of Proposed Work
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 5 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Existing: Land proposed for development currently used, including extent of impervious cover?
Site __ Redevelopment of one platted lot, or two or more adjoining platted lots.
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 projects: building use(s), approximate floor space, impervious cover ratio.
Describe Subdivisions: number of lots by general type of use, linear feet of streets and
Nature and drainage easements or ROW.
Size of Ld\~ = '3' (~-1 5)
Pro12osed --Project ~I'~~ 'l,7~~ Lf
Is any work planned on land that is not platted If yes, explain:
or on land for which platting is not pending?
l(_No __ Yes
' ' FEMA Floodplains ''""' Is any part of subject property abutting a Named Regulatory Watercourse I No_L Yes __ (Section II, Paragraph B1) or a tributary thereof?
Is any part of subject property in floodplain I No_ Yes Rate Map 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 --
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.
Part 3 -Property Characteristics J Continued (Page 3.2)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase)
Has an earlier hydrologic analysis been done for larger area including subject property?
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 6 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Yes Reference the study (&date) here, and attach copy if not already in City files.
--
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. i 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. ~ at"' kt-(n\-1k16 i6 ~e irsi fh~e.. 11~ re~~ !>Jt'141 • ortr~f' [' {k. ktt(opmerl (PhttseS=> 2.--Jz\ ~orN1w~e1 D-re~1~11 l.r 41( ~ phll'e!o f.J; [I k f~dt.(),f.Q i.J1-k ?hA$( 2,
Do existing topographic features on subject property store or detain runoff? ---2{_ No --Yes
Describe them (include approximate size, volume, outfall, model, etc).
Yes Any known drainage or flooding problems in areas near subject property? 4-No --Identify:
Based on locati?n of stud~ propN:tn i watershed~ is ~pe 1 Detention (flood control) needed?
(see Table B-1 in Appendix B) ei41re& 10 :fft''1Dt~x 1>
__ Detention is required. Need must be evaluated. __ Detention not required. --
What decision has been reached? By whom? 1)e-\{v\~ro" r1/_,f,kj_ If the need for
Type 1 Detention How was determination made?
must be evaluated: r\'o~e.vY tfo~llt-e, ('
Part 3 -Pro12em Characteristics I Continued (Page 3.3)
. .
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase) (continued)
Does subject property straddle a Watershed or Basin divide? _x_ No --Yes If yes,
describe splits below. In Part 4 describe design concept for handling this.
Watershed or Basin
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
I
I
Page 7 of 26
Larger acreaQe I Lesser acreaQe
I
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Above-Project Areas(Section II, Paragraph 83-a)
Does Project Area (project or phase) receive runoff from upland areas? __ No 2(_ Yes
Size(s)ofarea(s)inacres: 1) 71.1 2) '?JO.{, 3) zi.~ 4)
Flow Characteristics (each instance) (overland sheet, shallow concentrated, recognizable
concentrated section(s), small creek (non-regulatory), regulatory Watercourse or tributary); y tre_ef -:;) (wo $ffl~f1 Ctte/<5
~ over l"~ ~ ~
Flow determination: Outline hydrologic methods and assumptions: A • .{; Hcc-~"'s v.51'1~ ~cs v11it "r-,r-/)r"-M(:ikcls. ~~""'"'.,J\b "ff/
C.vt \J"-NON\kK) feC'le~ iMperv/011E>, . .f II~ +;.,.., f !1-1~ ''"c> J..ne ~ ?ID"flfw"*i
Does storm runoff drain from public easements or ROW onto or across subject property?
--No --Yes If yes, describe facilities in easement or ROW:
Are changes in runoff characteristics subject to change in future? Explain Y~?, ~,..~& k.Jelo1m°'-l i' "'~tu-."'" f"'"f~,f,~ J$ ro"~:blc.
Conveyance Pathways (Section II, 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).
Part 3 -Pro~ertv Characteristics I Continued (Page 3.4)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase) (continued)
Conveyance Pathways {continued)
Do drainage If yes, for what part of length? % Created by? __ plat, or
easements
exist for any __ instrument. If instrument(s), describe their provisions.
oart of
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 8 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
T
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
pathway(s)?
_.:;L No
__ Yes
Pathway
Areas
Nearby
Where runoff must cross lower properties, describe characteristics of abutting lower
property(ies). (Existing watercourses? Easement or Consent aquired?)
Describe any built or improved drainage facilities existing near the property (culverts,
bridges, lined channels, buried conduit, swales, detention ponds, etc).
tv/ve"t V~u;iz flocJ< fr~r· e ~t7
Drainage 1------------------------------____, Facilities Do any of these have hydrologic or hydraulic influence on proposed stormwater
design? ~No __ Yes If yes, explain:
Part 4 -Drainage Conce12t and Design Parameters I Start (Page 4.1)
·, ..... . ... .... . ...... ...... ... .
. .... Stormwater 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.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 9 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised Februarv 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
ef' t vltler-fa e;fe" dN1irll6e WAjS w'r~ be_ l~C4/?.fo f'Jel. .
\t\ta tfvre. -fl> ltCCOW?M~J'-fe fk ~ s if-e ~/'Alli~ f M~e<:::>
A..~ ~~oi-Jr'I. Dr\ ~ r~Jm;t7Af' p!1l·
Discharge(s) To Lower Property(ies) (Section II, Paragraph E1)
Does project include draiKe features (existing or future) proposed to become public via
platting? __ No Yes Separate Instrument? X No Yes
Per Guidelines reference above, how will __ Establishing Easements (Scenario 1) runoff be discharged to neighboring
property(ies )? --4..-Pre-development Release (Scenario 2)
Combination of the two Scenarios --
Scenario 1: If easements are proposed, describe where needed, and provide status of actions
on each. (Attached Exhibit# )
Scenario 2: Provide general description of how release(s) will be managed to pre-development
conditions (detention, sheet flow, partially concentrated, etc.). (Attached Exhibit# )
Det ~f\~l-of\
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
owner(s) of receiving property(ies)? No --Yes Explain and provide
documentation.
Part 4 -Drainage Conce12t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.2)
.. Stormwater Management Concept (continued) ....
Within Project Area Of Multi-Phase Project
Will project result Identify gaining Basins or Watersheds and acres shifting:
in shifting runoff
between Basins or
between
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 10 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Watersheds? What design and mitigation is used to compensate for increased runoff
-X-No from gaining basin or watershed?
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# )
2. For Overall Project Area (type & location of facilities): (Attached Exhibit# )
:Petef\TiM ~o~ ~~ ·.;/~-+. ~&fl'rAM k' Mu f Pe<'~ Vo\te.
3. By phase (or site) project: Describe planned mitigation measures for phases (or sites) in
subsequent questions of this Part.
Are aquatic echosystems propose.d? __ No --Yes In which phase(s) or
project(s)?
C'· 'O
Q) en
i: Q) Are other Best Management Practices for reducing stormwater pollutants proposed? ffi >-a: No Yes Summarize type of BMP and extent of use: en ----
i: Cl 'ii)
Q) 0 Oz
li If design of any runoff-handling facilities deviate from provisions of B-CS Technical
Specifications, check type facility(ies) and explain in later questions.
Q) --Detention elements --Conduit elements --Channel features ..... <( Swales Ditches __ Inlets __ Valley gutters __ Outfalls ----
--Culvert features __ Bridges Other
Part 4 -Drainage Concel;!t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.3)
.. ::· :·· StOrinwater Management Concept (continued) .. : .
Within Project Area Of Multi-Phase Project (continued)
Will Project Area include bridge(s) or culvert(s)? __ No _x Yes Identify type and
general size and In which phase(s).
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
f~Me-1. -
Page 11of26
(-z) f;'y5' box cvfver:'r;s
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
If detention/retention serves (will serve) overall Project Area, describe how it relates to subject
phase or site project (physical location, conveyance pathway(s), construct~n sequence): ~ w·, \I pe cofl~Nc,,~ J w! i't:ts f h't$~ tr»•it~~ z ).
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):
,J /A -£\c c-~r-1,·er-l'et>e~·
Identify whether each of the types of drainage features listed below are included, extent of use,
and general characteristics.
C'-· "C
Q) VI VI Q)
::::i >-VI
Q) 1 .c .B :0
Q) :g 0
VI Z
~ I ~ <t:
VI .c Q) ~ ~ >-4 .c Q) ,... VI ·~ ~
VI Q) a>~ 0 ~~zl Q) c: .... ro <t:
Typical shape? , 1 r. J I Surfaces? "-~ V\f\f>e~
Steepest side slopes: Usual front slopes: Usual back slopes:
4:' 4-: I
Flow line slopes: least I.~ <> S'f.
typical 1. 'IJ7. greatest l, tl Z
"°t~ I
Typical distance from travelway:
(Attached Exhibit# * )
151
Are longitudinal culvert ends in compliance with B-CS Standard Specifications?
X Yes No, then explain:
At intersections or otherwise, do valley gutters cross arterial or collector streets?
>( No __ Yes lfyesexplain:
Ar:yalley gutters proposed to cross any street away from an intersection?
_A No __ Yes Explain: (number of locations?)
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.4)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
lo .... Gutter line slopes: Least {).;fo O 'f. Usual 1107. Greatest
l· ''"' .... Q) :::s ~ C'· (.) ::::i "C Are inlets recessed on arterial and collector streets? Yes No lf"no",
Cl Q) ~ "C ~ identify where and why.
~ c: ro
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
~(~
Page 12 of26
----
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
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.
Will inlet size and placement prevent exceeding allowable water spread for 10-year
design storm throughout site (or phase)? -X-Yes --No If no, explain.
Sag curves: Are inlets placed at low points? -A-Yes --No Are inlets and
conduit sized to prevent 100-year stormflow from ponding at greater than 24 inches?
-1£._ Yes --No Explain "no" answers.
Will 100-yr stormflow be contai?(d 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.
C'·
" Pipe runs between system I Typical Q) VJ Longest ~ Q) access points (feet):
E >-~~ Are junction boxes used at each bend? _· _Yes h No If not, explain where
and why. 0(\l!. >sJel\J j \lb-\° vr?·he.qlf'! A ~t',q~wAll i'~ VJ
.5 0 ~z \J~uJ... " I E ..... 0 Are downstream soffits at or below upstream soffits? Least amount that hydraulic iii
..!!? Yes _x_ No __ If not, explain where and why: grade line is below gutter line
(system-wide):
Part 4 -Drainage Conce12t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.5)
Stormwater Mariag~lnerit Concept (continued).····•
::: . : .. :
.... •·. . .. . .. ...... "
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Q) Q) ' Describe watercourse(s), or system(s) receiving system discharge(s) below
:;--"~ ~ (include design discharge velocity, and angle between converging flow lines). ro ·-) ..... > 2 :g_e-]! 1) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle? ::; Q) c..
~VJQ)I "S c: CJ> I 0 ;;.. 0 ..c:
-VJ
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 13 of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
2) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
3) Watercourse (or system}, velocity, and angle?
For each outfall above, what measures are taken to prevent erosion or scour of
receiving and all facilities at juncture?
1)
2)
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):
C'-· Ul .... Q)
~ Ul .... Q) Flow line slopes (minimum and maximum): Ul >-c: ~ I
"'O 0 ~z Outfall characteristics for each (velocity, convergent angle, & end treatment). :::J ~~ Ul
Q) ..... Will 100-year design storm runoff be contained within easement(s} or platted drainage <i::
ROW in all instances? --Yes --No If "no" explain:
Part 4 -Drainage Conce12t and Design Parameters J Continued (Page 4.6)
··· .. Stormwater Management Concept (continued) ·
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
rQ Ul Are roadside ditches used? __ No ~Yes If so, provide the following:
Ul Q) Is 25-year flow contained with 6 inches of freeboard throughout?± Yes __ No rg Q) i3
0 ~ Are top of banks separated from road shoulders 2 feet or more? Yes No 0:: 0 Are all ditch sections trapezoidal and at least 1.5 feet deep? ~Yes T No ....
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 14 of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
"""'
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
For any "no" answers provide location(s) and explain:
Wt ~('e__ 1V1 A.t~;"'j *"'(, ~~ (cA f sect;ofl 5hooJ/\ -1~ ~
If conduit is beneath a swale, provide the following information (each instance).
Instance 1 Describe general location, approximate length:
en Q) >-
lw Is 100-year design flow contained in conduiUswale combination? --Yes --No
If "no" explain:
c:: o m z iii Space for 100-year storm flow? ROW Easement Width ~~ Swale Surface type, minimum Conduit Type and size, minimum and maximum
0 and maximum slopes: slopes, design storm:
:;:;
C'· '6 en
Qj "O m c:: >. Inlets Describe how conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inlets by type): c:: m c:: ..c: m
(.) .._
c:: .E
Q) c:: c.. 0 0 :;:; Access Describe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into conduit): -m 0 E ::J .._
~ .E c:: .5 Q)
"O E Instance 2 Describe general location, approximate length: Q) m en en ::J
en Q)
c:: "O
.Q ·:;: Is 100-year design flow contained in conduiUswale combination? Yes No iii 0 -- --.._ If "no" explain: c:: 0..
:.0 Qi E Q)
0 ..c: Space for 100-year storm flow? ROW Easement Width (.) en ..... Q) Swale Surface type, minimum Conduit Type and size, minimum and maximum ::J iii "O .._ and maximum slopes: slopes, design storm: c: m
0 c.. (.) Q) .._ en ~ c:: Inlets Describe how conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inlets by type): ro .£. 3: en ~
Q) ,_
<( Access Describe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into conduit):
Part 4 -Drainage Concel;!t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.7)
. .· .. . . . ... .
.. .. Stormwater Management Concept (continued) .
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
"O If "yes" provide the following information for each instance: en Q) ~ '§ ~ Instance 1 Describe general location, approximate length, surfacing: m .o; 3: ...,. I en ::J
-0' =..c:' ~j
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 15 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
~ -
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Is 100-year design flow contained in swale? --Yes --No Is swale wholly
within drainage ROW? --Yes --No Explain "no" answers:
Access Describe how maintenance access is provide:
Instance 2 Describe general location, approximate length, surfacing:
Is 100-year design flow contained in swale? --Yes --No Is swale wholly
within drainage ROW? __ Yes --No Explain "no" answers:
Access Describe how maintenance access is provided:
Instance 31 41 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 -- --
C'-· shaped, see "Swales" in this Part. If creating side banks, provide information below.
"C .5 Q) Will design replicate natural channel? Yes No If "no", for each instance VJ co 0 ------0. 0. describe section shape & area, flow line slope (min. & max.}, surfaces, and 100-year 0 x ._ LU design flow, and amount of freeboard: 0.
VJ VJ Instance 1: c Q)
Q) >-
E I Q) > 0 Instance 2: .... 0. E o ·-z ]~ Instance 3:
(..)
Part 4 -Drainage Concei;!t and Design Parameters J Continued (Page 4.8)
. '·'•.<< ... ,,. Stormwater Management Concept (co~ti~uedF c . ·, .
. ···'
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Existing channels (small creeks): Are these used? ~ No --Yes
VJ "E::: If "yes" provide the information below.
Q) Q) I
c E Will small creeks and their floodplains remain undisturbed? __ Yes No How
ffi ~ ·' many disturbance instances? Identify each planned location: ..c 0 (..) Ci I E ,
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 16 of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
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.
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
existing and proposed section size and shape, surfaces, alignment, flow line changes,
length affected, and capacity, and provide full documentation of analysis procedures
and data. Is full report submitted? Yes --No If "no" explain:
All Proposed Channel Work: For all proposed channel work, provide information
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.
Will 100-year flow be contained with one foot of freeboard? --Yes --No If
not, identify location and explain:
Are ROW I easements sized to contain channel and required maintenance space?
--Yes --No If not, identify location(s) and explain:
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.9)
. . . '• Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
How many facilities for subject property project? l For each provide info. below.
c:: For each dry-type facilitiy: Facility 1 Facility 2 0 ~CJ') zq3Ac... c:: <ll Acres served & design volume+ 10% <ll:;:: C'
Q) = J;Z..'H ~~ ~ is,, p.,.. t 0 al 100-yr volume: free flow & plugged
<ll LL. 4-~~m €10{,~5 .... Design discharge (10 yr & 25 yr) ~
( Spillway crest at 100-yr WSE? _:i_yes no __ yes no ----
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 17 of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Berms 6 inches above plugged WSE? I ~yes --no l __ yes --no
Explain any "no" answers:
For each facility what is 25-yr design Q, and d,esign of outlet structure?
Facility 1: r;{o cfs -('2.) +2" fZ.c f 1 &t~k/e f11 Ct!.'r.
Facility 2:
Do outlets and spillways discharge into a public facility in easement or ROW?
Facility 1: __}(__Yes --No Facility 2: --Yes --No
If "no" explain:
For each, what is 1ocity of 25~r design discharge at outlet? & at spillway?
Facility 1: 1. t, ~ & JJ A. Facility 2: &
Are energy dissipation measures used? • No
location: \.J,~WA~ ' {Zcdt. f•p-~ ___1_ Yes Describe type and
For each, is spillway surface treatment other than concrete? Yes or no, and describe:
Facility 1:
Facility 2:
For each, what measures are taken to prevent erosion or scour at receiving facility?
Facility 1: \.Ji'~wAll f ~ ~,'p-~
Facility 2:
If berms are used give heights, slopes and surface treatments of sides.
Facility 1:
Facility 2:
Part 4 -Drainage Conceet and Design Parameters l 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":
rn
Facility 1; '(e.s Q) :;::; =s (.) Q)
<1l :::i u.. c: c: :.;:::; Facility 2: 0 c: :;::; 0 c: (.) Q) ~
Qi 0
For additional facilities provide all same information on a separate sheet.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 18 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Are parking areas to be used for detention? ~ 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:
C'-· rn
C> .5 rn Are culverts parallel to public roadway alignment? __ Yes No Explain: rn 0 --.... rn (.)
Q) Q)
ro >-
> I ·;:: Creeks at Private Drives: Do private driveways, drives, or streets cross drainage a. ro ways that serve Above-Project areas or are in public easements/ ROW?
"O 0 No Yes If "yes" provide information below. Q) z ----~~ How many instances? Describe location and provide information below.
Q) Location 1: ~
:::J (.)
Q) 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.
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.11)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
.. ·.-'•, '--:
"" . . .
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
rn g Named Reaulatorv Watercourses C& Tributaries): Are culverts proposed on these
t.O facilities? __ No _.25.._ Yes, then provide full report documenting assumptions,
Q) :::J criteria, analysis, computer programs, and study findings that support proposed > a.
"5 -design(s). Is report provided? ~Yes __ No If "no", explain: (.) Cll
~~. <( rn :::J
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 19 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Arterial or Major Collector Streets: Will culverts serve these types of roadways? i No Yes How many instances? For each identify the --location and provide the information below.
Instance 1:
Instance 2:
Instance 3:
Yes or No for the 100-year design flow: 1 2 3
Headwater WSE 1 foot below lowest curb top?
Spread of headwater within ROW or easement?
Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11)?
Explain any "no" answer(s):
Minor Collector or Local Streets: Will culverts serve these types of streets?
No ')( Yes How many instances? z. for each identify the ----location and provide the irtformat!on below: /.._
Instance 1: M11l~eT'"\ ~ w"'-~~tlt~OO
Instance 2: Nl11lkt) f h>r-~j ~'~
Instance 3:
For each instance enter value, or "yes" /"no" for: 1 2 3
Design yr. headwater WSE 1 ft. below curb top? '{e? Ye"'
100-yr. max. depth at street crown 2 feet or less? '{es Yf!S
Product of velocity (fps) & depth at crown (ft) = ? µ/A tJ/A.
Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11 )? \les ~e.,S
Limit of down stream analysis (feet)? 50' 60'
Explain any "no" answers:
Part 4 -Drainage Conce12t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.12)
Stormwater Management Concept (contif!ued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
All Proposed Culverts: For all proposed culvert facilities (except driveway/roadside
rn 'O ditch intersects) provide information requested in next eight boxes.
t:: Q) Do culverts and travelways intersect at 90 degrees? _L Yes __ No If not,
(IJ ~ identify location(s) and intersect angle(s), and justify the design(s): ~ :;::::;
:::l c: uo ~
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 20 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Does drainage way alignment change within or near limits of culvert and surfaced
approaches thereto? .l{_ No --Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe
change(s}, and justification:
Are flumes or conduit to discharge into culvert barrel(s)? _K__ No __ Yes If yes,
identify location(s) and provide justification:
Are flumes or conduit to discharge into or near surfaced approaches to culvert ends?
__K_ No __ Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe outfall design treatment(s):
.
Is scour/erosion protection provided to ensure long term stability of culvert structural
components, and surfacing at culvert ends? --4-Yes __
locations and provide justification(s):
No If "no· Identify
Will 100-yr flow and spread of backwater be fully contained in street ROW, and/or
drainage easements/ ROW? x_ 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 8-CS Tech. Specifications?
_){_Yes --No If not, explain in Special Design Section of this Part.
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.13)
. -. . . . . .. ·. ,.
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)'
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Is a bridge included in plans for subject property project? _x__ 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?
'
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 21of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
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
iii Plan (SW3P) :J
0 established for ..... project construction? (!)
~ --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:
Part 4 -Drainage ConceQt and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.14)
.· Stormwater Management Concept (continued) ... .····
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Special Designs -Deviation From 8-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
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
I Justification for Deviation (attach additional sheets if needed)
Page 22 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
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) .. · . ,. ·"···> ... '<:. Design Parameters ....... ,.. ·.· ... :.· W< . .. .... . ... ,... .. . ....... ••. · ...... :" ..
Hydrology
Is a map(s) showing all Design Drainage Areas provided? .......c_ Yes --No
BrieflJ'._ summarize the r~nge of applicati~ns m_!3de of the Rational Formula: ?;11"~ (" tci~ t -s-tor,..,.. Pr"'" V're5
What is the size and location of largest Design Drainage Area to which the Rational Formula
has been applied? z,!ie:, acres Location (or identifier):
Part 4 -Drainage Conceet and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.15)
..
Design Parameters (contiriued) .
Hydrology (continued)
In making determinations for time of concentration, was segment analysis used? 'X'. No Yes In approximately what percent of Design Drainage Areas? %
As to intensity-duration-frequency and rain depth criteria for determining runoff flows, were any
criteria other than those provided in these Guidelines used? ...2C_ No __ Yes If "yes"
identify type of data, source(s), and where applied:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 23 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
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 /0 (tJO to
Open channels
Swale/buried conduit combination in lieu of channel
Swales
Roadside ditches and culverts serving them -v.; loo z~
Detention facilities: spillway crest and its outfall Z ~ to z~ So I«> loo
Detention facilities: outlet and conveyance structure(s) 2~ '" 'Z~ 50 too ~ fdo9 ,,
Detention facilities: volume when outlet plugged too ( ()0
Culverts serving private drives or streets
Culverts serving public roadways 1,.5 /Oo 2.6"
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)
Lowest (feet per second)
Streets and Storm Drain Systems Provide the summary information outlined below:
Roughness coefficients used: For street gutters: b.01~
For conduit type(s) JCLf -t) .01'3 ~6 .... o.orz. Coefficients:
Part 4 -Drainage Conce12t and Design Parameters I 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?
Yes Inlet coefficients? -2_ No __ Yes Head and friction losses _..2(_ No --Explain any "yes" answer:
In conduit is velocity generally increased in the downstream direction? _A_ Yes --No
Are elevation drops provided at inlets , manholes, and junction boxes? _L Yes --No
Explain any "no" answers:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 24 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
IO 25 !iJ:> /CO
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Are hydraulic grade lines calculated and shown for design storm? --Yes __b_ No
For 100-year flow conditions? __ Yes _A_ No Explain any "no" answers:
<Ji f ( f,MIV Dl\c.e_ we \(~.t~e CoMr\/le~s MoM ~e cJ tve ~
What tailwater conditions were assumed at outfall point(s) of the storm drain system? Identify
each location and explain: 100 .j~ wSl ~ Pot1b
Open Channels If a HEC analysis is utilized, does it follow Sec Vl.F.5.a? ..K_ 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?
~ tvl\lt~ A-1.'\~Sl$
Entrance, friction and exit losses:
&~l'Mce. -o.6 £')(1f -/.o fi.. idio/lo -'l:: l).(JIJ
Bridges Provide all in bridge report
Part 4 -Drainage Conceet and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.17)
,, ... ,,,,. Design Parameters (continued). ' 'i '• i,' ..,,
·'··'•· . ., ., " ; '
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
~t"c-Kt\'16 '3. o. I
N\,~~l--r &c..~ \ 'ltxJ3
Part 5 -Plans and Seecifications
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 25 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Requirements for submittal of construction drawings and specifications do not differ due to use of a
Technical Design Summary Report. See Section Ill, Paragraph C3.
Part 6 -Conclusions and Attestation
Conclusions
Add any concluding information here:
· Attestation ·
Provide attestation to the accuracy and completeness of the foregoing 6 Parts of this Technical
Desi n Summa Draina e Re art b si nin and sealin below.
"This reporl (plan) for the drainage design of the development named in Parl 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 properly. 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."
State of Texas PE No .. _q ............ tf_1_f_b __
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 26 of 26
(Affix Seal)
,.;_, ....... ,,,,,,,
-=-"°:~ 'C. OF r€ \\\ -=-..... ~ ............ :.r-1 ''· .::' e;, .... * ·· .. QI ., ;' * .·· · .. iC ,, ;' * :' · .. * ~ ~ ...... : ................................. "' ~ JEFFERY ~:.~S1~~~~~~~ .. ~ ~".:.0\""'""94745 /$ ~ ~~... .:u;~ 111?~,;.:-•. ~(CENS~~ .• ·",.#.£ ., ''S. .............. ~V' .::'
'''' SJONA\.. ~---,,,,,,,,,..,.
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised February 2008
EXHIBITC
Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report
Great Oaks, Phases 2-12
< s:
K! Q g w ..J < ~ a. < LL
0 I-Q w I= z < z 0 ..J z < ~~ w 0 ~~ ~ w :::E ..J Q ..J
~ ~ iii ~ ~ ~i ~ K! < ~ Q :::> < a. o~
NO. AC. 0.4 0.49 0.9 ft.
1 2.56 0.00 2.56 0.00 1.25 437.0
2 0.48 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.24 33.0
3 1.60 0.00 1.60 0.00 0.78 263.0
4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.0
5 1.31 0.00 1.31 0.00 0.64 271 .0
6 0.58 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.28 33.0
7 1.34 0.00 1.34 0.00 0.66 290.0
8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.0
9 2.09 0.00 2.09 0.00 1.02 321 .0
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.0
11 2.25 0.00 2.25 0.00 1.10 294.0
20 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.23 33.0
21 2.18 0.00 2.18 0.00 1.07 228.0
22 2.20 0.00 2.20 0.00 1.08 317.0
23 1.72 0.00 1.72 0.00 0.64 278.0
24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.0
25 0.56 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.27 13.0
26 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.98 540.0
27 1.48 0.00 1.48 0.00 0.73 270.0
28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.0
29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.0
30A 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.24 32.0
308 0.65 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.32 32.0
40 2.11 0.00 2.11 0.00 1.03 212.0
EXHIBIT C-1
Rational Formula Drainage Area Calculations
Great Oaks, Phase 2
s: 0 s: s: ..J LL 0 0 Q ..J ..J z LL LL ~ ~ :J
er:~ er: 0 {!. {!. ~i ~ :J 0 c.i w ~< ..J :::> < ~ ii en N tO 0 LL o~ 0 LL 0 :::> £:! a !!! a
ft. ft. ft. lt/s min min In/Hr cfs In/Hr cfs
6.0 373.0 2.2 1.1 12.8 12.8 5.62 7.1 6.9 8.6
0.3 373.0 2.2 1.4 4.8 10.0 6.33 1.5 7.7 1.8
4.0 266.0 2.5 1.2 7.3 10.0 6.33 5.0 7.7 6.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 10.4 0.0 10.0 6.33 0.0 7.7 0.0
5.0 217.0 2.0 1.2 6.6 10.0 6.33 4.1 7.7 4.9
0.3 544.0 6.0 1.9 5.1 10.0 6.33 1.8 7.7 2.2
5.0 187.0 1.1 1.1 7.2 10.0 6.33 4.2 7.7 5.1
1.0 1.0 1.0 10.4 0.0 10.0 6.33 0.0 7.7 0.0
6.0 231 .0 1.4 1.1 8.0 10.0 6.33 6.5 7.7 7.9
1.0 1.0 1.0 10.4 0.0 10.0 6.33 0.0 7.7 0.0
6.0 107.0 2.0 1.2 5.5 10.0 6.33 7.0 7.7 8.5
0.3 367.0 2.2 1.4 4.8 10.0 6.33 1.4 7.7 1.7
3.0 367.0 2.2 1.1 8.7 10.0 6.33 6.8 7.7 8.2
3.0 116.0 1.0 0.8 8.7 10.0 6.33 6.8 7.7 8.3
3.0 248.0 1.9 1.0 8.7 10.0 6.33 5.3 7.7 6.5
1.0 1.0 1.0 10.4 0.0 10.0 6.33 0.0 7.7 0.0
0.1 316.0 1.9 1.5 3.7 10.0 6.33 1.7 7.7 2.1
7.0 114.0 1.0 0.9 12.2 12.2 5.76 5.6 7.0 6.9
3.5 110.0 1.0 1.0 6.6 10.0 6.33 4.6 7.7 5.6
1.0 1.0 1.0 10.4 0.0 10.0 6.33 0.0 7.7 0.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 10.4 0.0 10.0 6.33 0.0 7.7 0.0
0.3 490.0 6.0 1.9 4.5 10.0 6.33 1.5 7.7 1.8
0.3 490.0 6.0 1.9 4.5 10.0 6.33 2.0 7.7 2.5
2.0 133.0 1.0 0.9 6.4 10.0 6.33 6.5 7.7 8.0
0 tO 0 ... tO a :!: a £:!
In/Hr cfs In/Hr cfs
7.7 9.7 8.9 11.1
8.6 2.0 9.9 2.3
8.6 6.8 9.9 7.7
8.6 0.0 9.9 0.0
8.6 5.5 9.9 6.3
8.6 2.5 9.9 2.8
8.6 5.7 9.9 6.5
8.6 0.0 9.9 0.0
8.6 8.8 9.9 10.1
8.6 0.0 9.9 0.0
8.6 9.5 9.9 10.9
8.6 1.9 9.9 2.2
8.6 9.2 9.9 10.5
8.6 9.3 9.9 10.6
8.6 7.3 9.9 8.3
8.6 0.0 9.9 0.0
8.6 2.4 9.9 2.7
7.9 7.8 9.1 8.9
8.6 6.3 9.9 7.2
8.6 0.0 9.9 0.0
8.6 0.0 9.9 0.0
8.6 2.1 9.9 2.4
8.6 2.8 9.9 3.1
8.6 8.9 9.9 10.2
~ ~ a
In/Hr cfs
10.0 12.6
11 .1 2.6
11 .1 8.7
11 .1 0.0
11 .1 7.2
11 .1 3.2
11 .1 7.3
11 .1 0.0
11 .1 11.4
11.1 0.0
11.1 12.3
11.1 2.5
11.1 11 .9
11.1 12.0
11.1 9.4
11.1 0.0
11.1 3.1
10.2 10.0
11.1 8.1
11.1 0.0
11.1 0.0
11.1 2.7
11.1 3.6
11.1 11 .5
0 0 0 0 ... :!: a
In/Hr cfs
11 .3 14.1
12.5 2.9
12.5 9.8
12.5 0.0
12.5 8.0
12.5 3.6
12.5 8.2
12.5 0.0
12.5 12.8
12.5 0.0
12.5 13.8
12.5 2.8
12.5 13.4
12.5 13.5
12.5 10.6
12.5 0.0
12.5 3.4
11.5 11.3
12.5 9.1
12.5 0.0
12.5 0.0
12.5 3.0
12.5 4.0
12.5 13.0
10/1612008
10150002-008-dra2.xls
Exhibit C-1
cfs
1 3.0 9.7 0.0 9.7 27
2 6.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 27
3 5.0 6.8 0.4 7.2 27
4 na 0.0 0.0 0.0 27
5 7.0 5.5 1.0 6.6 27
6 11.0 2.5 0.0 2.5 27
7 9.0 5.7 0.4 6.1 27
8 na 0.0 0.0 0.0 27
9 na 8.8 0.0 8.8 27
10 na 0.0 0.0 0.0 27
11 na 9.5 0.0 9.5 27
20 23.0 1.9 0.0 1.9 27
21 22.0 9.2 0.0 9.2 27
22 23.0 9.3 0.0 9.3 27
23 na 7.3 0.0 7.3 27
24 na 0.0 0.0 0.0 27
25 na 2.4 0.0 2.4 27
26 na 7.8 0.1 7.8 27
27 26.0 6.3 0.0 6.3 27
28 na 0.0 0.0 0.0 27
29 na 0.0 0.0 0.0 27
30A na 2.1 0.0 2.1 27
308 na 2.8 0.0 2.8 27
40 na 8.9 0.0 8.9 27
EXHIBIT C-2
INLET COMPUTATIONS
Great Oaks, Phase 2
DESCRIPTION
1.5% l 9.7 Recessed Inlet on Grade
0.1% 2 2.0 Recessed Inlet on Grade
0.9% 3 7.2 Recessed Inlet on Grade
0.0% 4 0.0 Prooosed Junction Box
0.7% 5 6.6 Recessed Inlet on Grade
0.1% 6 2.5 Recessed Inlet on Grade
0.6% 7 6.1 Recessed Inlet on Grade
0.0% 8 0.0 Prooosed Junction Box
1.3% 9 8.8 Culvert
0.0% 10 0.0 Proposed Junction Box
1.5% 11 9.5 Culvert
0.1% 20 1.9 Recessed Inlet on Grade
1.4% 21 9.2 Recessed Inlet on Grade
1.4% 22 9.3 Recessed Inlet on Grade
0.9% 23 7.3 Recessed Low Point Inlet
0.0% 24 0.0 Proposed Junction Box
0.1% 25 2.4 Recessed Inlet on Grade
1.0% 26 7.8 Recessed Inlet on Grade
0.6% 27 6.3 Recessed Inlet on Grade
0.0% 28 0.0 Proposed Junction Box
0.0% 29 0.0 Proposed Junction Box
0.1% 30A 2.1 Recessed Low Point Inlet
0.1% 30B 2.8 Recessed Low Point Inlet
1.3% 40 8.9 Recessed Low Point Inlet
Curb Inlet
cfs ft ft
0.62 15.71 15
0.62 3.29 5
0.62 11.67 10
0.62 10.64 10
0.62 3.97 5
0.62 9.81 10
0.62 3.15 5
0.62 14.93 15
0.62 15.06 15
2.33 3.13 5
0.62 3.83 5
0.62 12.70 15
0.62 10.13 10
2.33 0.89 5
2.33 1.18 5
2.33 3.82 5
0.4
0
0
0.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
Grate Inlet
ft cfs sq-ft sq-ft
10/16/2008
10150002-008-dra2.xls
Exhibit C-2
e 0 < E-4 u Q z fi;l;l -rJ'.l E-4 g ~ -~ fi;l;l ~ "' i5 0 0 !.I QJ
E-4 E-4 E-4 = # # Ac. min yr
1 2 1.3 12.8 10
2 4 1.5 13.0 10
3 4 0.8 10.0 10
4 6 2.3 14.0 10
5 6 0.6 10.0 10
6 8 3.2 14.6 10
7 8 0.7 10.0 10
8 10 3.9 15.3 10
9 10 1.0 10.0 10
10 11 4.9 16.1 10
11 Out 6.0 16.1 10
20 21 0.2 10.0 10
21 22 1.3 10.3 10
22 23 2.4 11 .7 10
23 24 3.2 12.6 10
24 26 3.2 13.0 10
25 26 0.3 10.0 10
26 28 4.5 13.5 10
27 28 0.7 10.0 10
28 29 5.2 13.6 10
29 30B 5.2 15.6 10
30A 30B 0.2 10.0 10
30B HW31 5.8 15.9 10
40 HW40 1.0 10.0 100
*Includes 33% Flow Increase for pipe sizes <27" dla.
EXHIBIT C-3
PIPE SIZE CALCULATIONS
Great Oaks, Phase 2
= ~ ... = « "' QJ -~ « = QJ QJ "' Q. Q.
"C QJ "' ... .s = QJ ~ QJ Q. rJ'.l -"C ""' "' ~ = QJ QJ = -~ .9 .... .., « ....
"C IC: .=. IC: Q IC: -fi;l;l
CIS Q !.I ~ =-"C Q = Q ·c j;:;) ~ < 1£: z 1£: ~ rJ'.l
cfs cfs # cfs % "
9.7 12.6 1 12.6 0.36 24
11.5 14.9 1 14.9 0.50 24
6.8 8.8 1 8.8 0.81 18
16.9 22.0 1 22.0 1.09 24
5.5 7.2 1 7.2 0.54 18
23.3 23.3 1 23.3 0.37 30
5.7 7.4 1 7.4 0.57 18
27.5 27.5 1 27.5 0.52 30
8.8 11.5 1 11.5 0.30 24
33.9 33.9 1 33.9 0.79 30
41.6 54.1 1 54.1 173.25 13
1.9 2.5 1 2.5 0.07 18
11.0 14.3 1 14.3 0.46 24
19.1 19.1 1 19.1 0.25 30
25.1 25.1 1 25.1 0.43 30
24.7 24.7 1 24.7 0.42 30
2.4 3.1 1 3.1 0.10 18
33.8 33.8 1 33.8 0.78 30
6.3 8.1 1 8.1 0.69 18
39.1 39.1 1 39.1 0.40 36
36.7 36.7 1 36.7 0.35 36
2.1 2.7 1 2.7 0.43 13
40.3 40.3 1 40.3 0.42 36
13.0 16.8 1 16.8 0.64 24
-See Plan & Profile for pipe slope used (Pipe slope >or= Friction slope)
= E-4 ~ J z ~ fi;l;l
~
fps '
4.0 30
4.7 282
5.0 29
7.0 281
4.1 49
4.7 186
4.2 29
5.6 259
3.7 45
6.9 8
58.6 13
1.4 30
4.6 374
3.9 211
5.1 116
5.0 158
1.7 30
6.9 50
4.6 82
5.5 634
5.2 98
2.9 13
5.7 36
5.4 177
QJ .5 E-4
~ ~
""' E-4
min
0.12
0.99
0.10
0.67
0.20
0.65
0.12
0.77
0.21
0.02
0.00
0.35
1.37
0.90
0.38
0.52
0.29
0.12
0.30
1.91
0.31
0.07
0.11
0.55
"C = E-4 = fi;l;l ~ E-4 @ ~ EZ !.I E-4 = min ' '
12.97
13.96
10.10
14.63
10.20
15.29
10.12
16.06
10.21
16.08
16.08
10.35
11.72
12.62
13.00
13.52
10.29
13.64
10.30
15.55
15.87
10.07
15.97
10.55
10/16/2008
10150002-008-dra2.xls
Exhibit C-3
Culvert#1
Culvert Description
24"CMP
at Intersection
of Mulberry
Drive and Forsythia
Culvert Design Criteria
Circular
Pipe No.
!Dia. (ft.) Pioes
2.00 1
Culvert Analvsls Calculations
Total Flow per Critical
Design Flow Pipe Depth(ft.)
Storm (cfs) (cfs) de
5 7.90 7.90 1.00
10 8.80 8.80 1.05
25 10.10 10.10 1.15
50 11.40 11.40 1.20
100 12.80 12.80 1.30
Elhi = Hwi + ELI
ho= TW or (de + D)/2 (Whichever is Greater)
n
0.024
Normal
Depth
(ft.)
1.49
1.66
2.00
2.00
2.00
Invert Outlet
Elev. (ELI) Elev. (ELo)
(ft.) (ft.)
289.20 288.92
EXHIBITC-4
CULVERT ANALYSIS
GREAT OAKS, PHASE 2
Culvert Top
Length Slope of
(ft.) (ft/ft) Road
55.57 0.0050 292.38
ELhl 4= Topof Road ~ELho ~:-i;--------~ H
_j----------TW Eli Proposed Culvert __:::/" - - --'-_
ELo
Outfall Channel Desi n Criteria
Lt. Side Rt. Side Bottom
Slope Slope Slope Width n
ke I ft/ft ?:1 ?:1 ft.
0.50 I 0.0100 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.024
HEADWATER CALCULATIONS Control Type Outlet
INLET CONTROL
HWVD HWI ELhl
0.89 1.79 290.99
0.93 1.86 291 .06
0.99 1.97 291 .17
1.05 2.11 291.31
1.13 2.26 291.46
H = 11+ke+((29•(n'2)"L)/R'1.33))'((v"2)/2g)
ELho=ELo+H+ho
TW
0.77
0.81
0.85
0.89
0.93
OUTLET CONTROL
de (de+ Dl/2 ho H
1.00 1.50 1.50 0.38
1.05 1.53 1.53 0.47
1.15 1.58 1.58 0.62
1.20 1.60 1.60 0.78
1.30 1.65 1.65 0.99
HW of
Elho Elev. Control
290.80 290.99 Inlet
290.91 291.06 Inlet
291.11 291.17 Inlet
291.30 291.31 Inlet
291.56 291.56 Outlet
Velocity Freeboard
(fl"lll) m.>
3.14 1.39
3.16 1.32
3.21 1.21
3.63 1.07
5.92 0.82
10/16/2008
10150002-008-cul-1.xls
Exhlblt C-4
EXHIBITD
Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report
Great Oaks, Phases 2-12
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed ~ # DA l Ex. DA l Pr. DA2Ex. DA2Pr. DA3Ex. DA3 Pr. DA4 Ex. DA4Pr. DA4.l Pr. DA4.2 Pr. DA4.3 Pr. DA4.4 Pr. DAS Ex. DAS Pr. DA6 Ex. DA6Pr. ~ ~ ~~ ACRES 68.29 68.29 28.23 26.96 27.25 27.25 62.46 9.98 7.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 58.38 54.16 31.87 18.99 v.i ~ ~~~ 5 ~ v.i ~~ ~~ 0 v.i 8 ~ ~ v.i o~ ACRES ACRES ACRES 5.18 0.00 0.00 5.18 0.00 0.00 2.37 0.00 0.00 3.64 0.00 0.00 l.29 0.00 0.00 l.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.10 12.03 0.00 2.03 2.58 0.00 2.92 3.79 0.00 2.42 3.18 0.00 3.56 6.04 0.00 7.12 0.00 0.00 9.15 2.19 0.00 l.51 0.00 0.00 7.61 6.78 0.00 ~~ 00 :i:: ...... 0 v.i :E ~ ACRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ExhibitD Drainage Area Parameters General ~ ~ v.i ~ ~~ v.i ~ ~ ~ ~ ::::> 0 ell u ACRES ACRES ACRES MILES LENGTH 0.00 0.00 73.47 O.ll48 2862 0.00 0.00 73.47 O.ll48 2862 0.00 0.00 30.60 0.0478 1607 0.00 0.00 30.60 0.0478 1607 0.00 0.00 28.54 0.0446 1319 0.00 0.00 28.54 0.0446 1319 0.00 0.00 62.46 0.0976 2447 0.00 0.00 28.ll 0.0439 2447 0.00 0.00 12.43 0.0194 1345 0.00 0.00 6.71 0.0105 ll33 0.00 0.00 5.60 0.0088 921 0.00 0.00 9.60 0.0150 1895 0.00 0.00 65.50 0.1023 3041 0.00 0.00 65.50 0.1023 3041 0.00 0.00 33.38 0.0522 2499 0.00 0.00 33.38 0.0522 2499 Existing Cond. PLAN I ., = 0 ~ ~ 'E ~ 0 8. ~ ....i ll v.i DROP Ff/Ff # % 48 0.017 77 7 48 0.017 28 0.017 77 8 28 0.017 22 O.Ql7 76 5 22 O.Ql7 22 0.009 75 0 22 0.009 22 0.016 22 0.019 18 0.020 24 0.013 48 0.016 75 11 48 0.016 32 0.013 75 5 32 0.013 j MIN 37.82 23.28 20.76 47.77 42.63 40.60 Proposeed Cond. PLAN2 ., = 0 ~ .E 8. 0 ll j # % MIN 77 7 37.82 78 12 22.62 76 5 20.76 81 22 40.06 79 16 19.39 86 44 12.31 86 43 10.42 85 37 24.13 78 14 38.95 81 23 34.35 ExhibitD Drainage Area Parameters 10150002-lag2.xls
EXHIBITE
Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report
Great Oaks, Phases 2-12
EXHIBIT E-1
PROPOSED DETENTION FACILITY ROUTING
PROPOSED DETENTION FACILITY STRUCTURE
Pipe lnwrt
lnwrtout
Pipe Diameter (It)
Pipe Area (sq. fl)
Length of Pipe
Pipe Slope (Mt)
n
barrels
Emergency Spllway
Length of Spllway
NO!TT181 Water Sl.fface
275.49
274.87
3.50
9.62
88.00
0.0070
0.0120
2.00
288.00
100.00
Pond Stage
llt.l
275.49
276.00
2n.oo
278.00
279.00
280.00
281 .00
282.00
283.00
284.00
285.00
286.00
287.00
288.00
Mamlngs
lcfsl
0.00
8.40
70.90
158.45
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
PlpeQ
Ortllce DeslgiQ
lcfsl lcfsl
0.00 0.00
0.00 8.40
0.00 70.90
94.23 107.15
143.40 143.40
179.58 179.58
209.60 209.60
235.83 235.83
259.42 259.42
281.04 281.04
301.11 301.11
319.93 319.93
337.69 337.69
354.57 354.57
Riser Elev.
Riser Wldtl (fl)
Riser War Length (fl)
Riser Grate Area (sq. fl)
Barrel lrM!rt
Barra Wldtl (fl l
Barrel Heigrt (It.)
NIOTber of Barrels
Riser 1 Q
Ortllce Weir
lcfsl lcfsl
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
136.19 118.79
235.88 617.27
304.53 1328.16
360.32 2200.09
408.56 3207.44
451.68 4333.94
Riser No. 1
DeslgiQ
lcfsl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
118.79
235.88
304.53
360.32
408.56
451.68
Stage/Storage and Stage/Discharge
282.50
4.00
14.00
40.00
275.49
5.00
5.00
2.00
Ortllce
lcfsl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
215.49 216.00 2n.oo 218.00 219.oo 280.oo 281.00 282.00 283.oo 284.oo 285.oo 286.00 281.00
Waler Surface Elevotlon (ft)
2.50
2.50
Riser 2 Q
Weir
lcfsl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
19.63
19.63
DeslgiQ
(cfs)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Riser No. 2
Riser Elev. 313.00
RJserWldtl (It.) 4.96
Riser Weir Length (It.) 24.80
Riser Grate Area (sq. It.) 16.50
Type AD Grate
Width 2.48
Length 2.48
NIOTber of Grates Wide
1.00
NIOTber of Grates Long
4.00
Grate Open Area
4.125
BarrelQ SpllwayQ
Ortllce Weir
lcfsl lcfsl
0.00 0.00
200.58 10.93
345.14 55.67
28.09 119.30
282.27 197.28
398.21 287.33
487.30 388.02
562.45 498.30
628.68 617.42
688.57 744.76
743.65 879.82
794.93 1022.18
843.09 1171.48
888.64 1327.42
Weir
lcfsl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Discharge c: ~aceAre1
lcfsl Isa. Ill
0.00 0.00
8.40 634.75
55.67 4921.45
28.09 35738.66
143.40 85143.15
179.58 107298.88
21111.eo 114039.07
236.83 120n3.83
378.22 127953.48
516.93 135224.46
606.64 142536.82
680.2!1 142536.82
746.26 142536.82
806.26 142536.82
Riser P~e
WEl POND
&rfaceArel
IAcrel
0.000
0.015
0.113
0.820
1.955
2.463
2.618
2.n3
2.937
3.104
3.272
3.272
3.272
3.272
TYPICAL WET POND
Voklne
IAae-Ft
0.00000
0.00248
0.05604
0.41263
1.34714
2.20403
2.54022
2.69491
2.85460
3.02048
3.18789
3.27220
3.27220
3.27220
STORM WATER DETENTION FACILITY
l~I
Vol IAc.-ltl
0.000
0.002
0.059
0.471
1.818
4.022
8.eel
11.2&7
12.112
15.133
18.320
21.593
24.865
28.137
0.00
0.17
1.11
0.56
2.87
3.59
4.19
4.72
7.56
10.34
12.11
13.60
14.93
16.13
EXHIBIT E
10/16/2008
Det-Strucl-3.JC!s
700.00
600.00
500.00
~ 400.00 a
300.00
200.00
100.00
EXHIBIT E-2
Stage/Storage and Stage/Discharge
275.49 276.00 277.00 278.00 279.00 280.00 281 .00 282.00 283.00 284.00 285.00 286.00 287.00
Water Surface Elevation (ft)
25.000
20.000
-=. u C'G -(cfs) 15.000 -;
E -Incremental Vol.
::I 0 >
10.000
5.000
EXHIBITF
Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report
Great Oaks, Phases 2-12
Exhibit F-1 (HEC-HMS Results)
2 year Flood
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 [F:\1015-Steve Arden\0002-Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\JLR_PR2\JL...
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Junction-1 0.0299 35.59 01Jun2007, 12:20 3.05
Junction-2 0.0387 49.74 01Jun2007, 12:15 3.18
Junction-3 0.0537 64.71 01Jun2007, 12:20 3.27
Reservoir-1 0.3048 187.70 01 Jun2007, 12:50 2.62
Reservoir-2 0.4071 214.22 01Jun2007, 13:10 2.61
a DA-1 0.1148 77.93 01Jun2007, 12:45 2.36
b DA-2 0.0478 44.86 01Jun2007, 12:25 2.55
c DA-3 0.0446 38.78 01Jun2007, 12:25 2.25
d Junction-1 0.2072 150.63 01 Jun2007, 12:35 2.39
e DA-4 0.0439 35.46 01Jun2007, 12:45 2.96
e DA-4.1 0.0194 20.34 O 1 Jun2007, 12:25 2.71
e DA-4.2 0.0105 16.89 01Jun2007, 12:15 3.66
e DA-4.3 0.0088 14.74 01Jun2007, 12:10 3.65
e DA-4.4 0.0150 17.94 01Jun2007, 12:25 3.49
QDA-5 0.1023 74.07 01Jun2007, 12:45 2.59
i DA-6 0.0522 46.03 01Jun2007, 12:40 2.99
· Junction-4 0.4593 244.05 01 Jun2007, 13:00 2.66
z 2@54"ASP 0.0478 44.75 01 Jun2007, 12:25 2.58
z 2@72" ASP 0.1148 78.04 O 1 Jun2007, 12:45 2.36
z 3@36" CMP 0.0446 38.75 01Jun2007, 12:25 2.28
Exhibit F-1 (HEC-HMS Results)
5 year Flood
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 [F:\ 1015 -Steve Arden\0002 -Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\JLR_PR2\JL...
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Junction-1 0.0299 53.90 01 Jun2007, 12:20 4.61
Junction-2 0.0387 74.38 01Jun2007, 12:15 4.76
Junction-3 0.0537 96.28 01Jun2007, 12:20 4.86
Reservoir-1 0.3048 275.87 01 Jun2007, 12:55 4.12
Reservoir-2 0.4071 352.53 01Jun2007, 13:05 4.11
a DA-1 0.1148 127.04 01 Jun2007, 12:40 3.81
b DA-2 0.0478 71.60 01Jun2007, 12:25 4.04
c DA-3 0.0446 64.08 01Jun2007, 12:25 3.68
d Junction-1 0.2072 245.09 01 Jun2007, 12:30 3.86
e DA-4 0.0439 54.17 01 Jun2007, 12:45 4.51
e DA-4.1 0.0194 31.95 01Jun2007, 12:20 4.23
e DA-4.2 0.0105 24.38 01Jun2007, 12:15 5.30
e DA-4.3 0.0088 21.33 01Jun2007, 12:10 5.29
e DA-4.4 0.0150 26.25 01Jun2007, 12:25 5.12
gDA-5 0.1023 117.47 01Jun2007, 12:45 4.08
i DA-6 0.0522 70.10 01Jun2007, 12:40 4.54
i Junction-4 0.4593 397.91 01 Jun2007, 13:05 4.16
z 2@54"ASP 0.0478 71.44 01 Jun2007, 12:25 4.09
z 2@72" ASP 0.1148 126.93 O 1 Jun2007, 12:40 3.81
z3@36"CMP 0.0446 64.06 01 Jun2007, 12:25 3.74
Exhibit F-1 (HEC-HMS Results)
1 O year Flood
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 [F:\1015-Steve Arden\0002-Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\JLR_PR2\JL...
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Junction-1 0.0299 66.98 01Jun2007, 12:20 5.74
Junction-2 0.0387 91.94 01Jun2007, 12:15 5.90
Junction-3 0.0537 118.72 01Jun2007, 12:20 6.01
Reservoir-1 0.3048 422.57 O 1 Jun2007, 12:45 5.23
Reservoir-2 0.4071 484.20 01Jun2007, 13:00 5.21
a DA-1 0.1148 163.03 01Jun2007, 12:40 4.89
b DA-2 0.0478 90.93 01 Jun2007, 12:25 5.14
c DA-3 0.0446 82.54 01Jun2007, 12:25 4.75
d Junction-1 0.2072 315.19 01Jun2007, 12:30 4.95
e DA-4 0.0439 67.54 01Jun2007, 12:45 5.64
e DA-4.1 0.0194 40.32 01Jun2007, 12:20 5.34
e DA-4.2 0.0105 29.65 01Jun2007, 12:15 6.48
e DA-4.3 0.0088 25.99 01Jun2007, 12:10 6.46
e DA-4.4 0.0150 32.12 O 1 Jun2007, 12:25 6.28
gOA-5 0.1023 148.84 01Jun2007, 12:45 5.17
i DA-6 0.0522 87.29 01Jun2007, 12:40 5.67
· Junction-4 0.4593 552.84 01Jun2007, 12:55 5.26
z 2@54"ASP 0.0478 90.91 01 Jun2007, 12:25 5.20
z 2@72" ASP 0.1148 162.88 01 Jun2007, 12:40 4.89
z 3@36" CMP 0.0446 82.56 01 Jun2007, 12:25 4.83
Exhibit F-1 (HEC-HMS Results)
25 year Flood
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 [F:\ 1015 -Steve Arden\0002 -Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\JLR_PR2\Jl...
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Junction-1 0.0299 77.91 01 Jun2007, 12:20 6.69
Junction-2 0.0387 106.60 01Jun2007, 12:15 6.86
Junction-3 0.0537 137.43 01Jun2007, 12:20 6.97
Reservoir-1 0.3048 529.67 01Jun2007, 12:40 6.16
Reservoir-2 0.4071 569.56 01Jun2007, 13:00 6.15
a DA-1 0.1148 193.35 01Jun2007, 12:40 5.81
b DA-2 0.0478 107.16 01Jun2007, 12:25 6.07
c DA-3 0.0446 98.09 01Jun2007, 12:25 5.66
d Junction-1 0.2072 373.55 01 Jun2007, 12:30 5.88
e DA-4 0.0439 78.71 01Jun2007, 12:45 6.59
e DA-4.1 0.0194 47.33 01Jun2007, 12:20 6.28
e DA-4.2 0.0105 34.03 01Jun2007, 12:15 7.46
e DA-4.3 0.0088 29.85 01Jun2007, 12:10 7.44
e DA-4.4 0.0150 37.01 01Jun2007, 12:25 7.26
oDA-5 0.1023 175.18 01Jun2007, 12:40 6.10
i DA-6 0.0522 101.75 01Jun2007, 12:35 6.62
· Junction-4 0.4593 652.17 01Jun2007, 12:55 6.20
z2@54"ASP 0.0478 107.04 01 Jun2007, 12:25 6.15
z2@72" ASP 0.1148 193.30 01Jun2007, 12:40 5.81
z3@36"CMP 0.0446 98.16 01 Jun2007, 12:25 5.76
Exhibit F-1 (HEC-HMS Results)
1 00 year Flood
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 [F:\1015-Steve Arden\0002-Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\JLR_PR2\JL. ..
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Junction-1 0.0299 106.30 01Jun2007, 12:20 9.21
Junction-2 0.0387 144.69 01 Jun2007, 12:15 9.39
Junction-3 0.0537 186.00 01 Jun2007, 12:20 9.51
Reservoir-1 0.3048 768.23 01Jun2007, 12:35 8.66
Reservoir-2 0.4071 739.95 01Jun2007, 13:00 8.64
a DA-1 0.1148 272.68 01Jun2007, 12:40 8.25
b DA-2 0.0478 149.47 01 Jun2007, 12:25 8.54
c DA-3 0.0446 138.78 01 Jun2007, 12:25 8.09
d Junction-1 0.2072 525.64 01Jun2007, 12:30 8.37
e DA-4 0.0439 107.71 01Jun2007, 12:45 9.10
e DA-4.1 0.0194 65.59 01Jun2007, 12:20 8.77
e DA-4.2 0.0105 45.39 01Jun2007, 12:15 10.03
e DA-4.3 0.0088 39.87 01Jun2007, 12:10 10.01
e DA-4.4 0.0150 49.66 01Jun2007, 12:25 9.81
gDA-5 0.1023 244.48 01 Jun2007, 12:40 8.57
i DA-6 0.0522 139.35 01Jun2007, 12:35 9.13
· Junction-4 0.4593 848.45 01Jun2007, 12:55 8.69
z 2@54"ASP 0.0478 149.51 01Jun2007, 12:25 8.65
z 2@72" ASP 0.1148 272.60 01Jun2007, 12:40 8.30
z3@36"CMP 0.0446 138.63 01 Jun2007, 12:25 8.24
Exhibit F-2 (HEC-HMS Results)
2 Year Flood Existing Conditions
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 [F:\1015 -Steve Arden\0002 -Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\1015002_EX\1 ..
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Junction-1 a 0.1594 108.23 O 1 Jun2007, 12:35 2.33
a DA-1 0.1148 77.93 01Jun2007, 12:45 2.36
b DA-2 0.0478 41 .50 01 Jun2007, 12:25 2.39
c DA-3 0.0446 38.78 O 1 Jun2007, 12:25 2.25
d Junction-1 0.2072 147.23 01Jun2007, 12:35 2.34
e DA-4 0.0976 50.71 01Jun2007, 12:55 2.03
f Junction-2 0.3048 187.98 01 Jun2007, 12:35 2.24
aDA-5 0.1023 62.45 01 Juri2007, 12:50 2.30
h Junction-3 0.4071 247.01 01Jun2007, 12:40 2.26
i DA-6 0.0522 31 .14 01 Jun2007, 12:45 2.16
· Junction-4 0.4593 277.35 01Jun2007, 12:40 2.25
k DA-7 0.3567 159.63 01Jun2007, 13:10 2.12
I Junction-1 0.8160 402.92 01Jun2007, 12:50 2.19
m DA-8 0.3247 91.22 01Jun2007, 14:25 2.09
n Junction-1 1.1407 435.88 01 Jun2007, 12:55 2.16
Exhibit F-2 (HEC-HMS Results)
5 Year Flood Existing Conditions
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 [F:\1015 -Steve Arden\0002 -Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\1015002_EX\1 ..
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Junction-1 a 0.1594 177.56 01Jun2007, 12:35 3.78
a DA-1 0.1148 127.04 01Jun2007, 12:40 3.81
b DA-2 0.0478 67.64 01 Jun2007, 12:25 3.85
c DA-3 0.0446 64.08 01 Jun2007, 12:25 3.68
d Junction-1 0.2072 241.77 O 1 Jun2007, 12:30 3.79
e DA-4 0.0976 86.47 01Jun2007, 12:55 3.43
f Junction-2 0.3048 312.02 01 Jun2007, 12:35 3.68
aDA-5 0.1023 102.56 01Jun2007, 12:45 3.73
h Junction-3 0.4071 408.44 01Jun2007, 12:40 3.69
i DA-6 0.0522 52.27 01 Jun2007, 12:45 3.57
· Junction-4 0.4593 459.73 01Jun2007, 12:40 3.68
k DA-7 0.3567 269.40 01 Jun2007, 13:10 3.52
I Junction-1 0.8160 673.37 01 Jun2007, 12:50 3.61
m DA-8 0.3247 153.65 01 Jun2007, 14:20 3.47
n Junction-1 1.1407 733.52 01Jun2007, 12:50 3.57
Exhibit F-2 (HEC-HMS Results)
1 O Year Flood Existing Conditions
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 (F:\1015 -Steve Arden\0002 -Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\1015002_EX\1 ..
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Ju nction-1 a 0.1594 228.08 01 Jun2007, 12:35 4.85
a DA-1 0.1148 163.03 01Jun2007, 12:40 4.89
b DA-2 0.0478 86.66 01 Jun2007, 12:25 4.93
c DA-3 0.0446 82.54 O 1 Jun2007, 12:25 4.75
d Junction-1 0.2072 310.75 01Jun2007, 12:30 4.87
e DA-4 0.0976 112.78 01Jun2007, 12:55 4.47
f Junction-2 0.3048 402.78 01Jun2007, 12:35 4.74
gDA-5 0.1023 132.21 01Jun2007, 12:45 4.79
h Junction-3 0.4071 526.53 01 Jun2007, 12:40 4.76
i DA-6 0.0522 67.80 O 1 Jun2007, 12:45 4.62
· Junction-4 0.4593 593.26 01 Jun2007, 12:40 4.74
k DA-7 0.3567 350.24 01Jun2007, 13:10 4.56
I Junction-1 0.8160 872.03 01Jun2007, 12:50 4.66
m DA-8 0.3247 199.82 01Jun2007, 14:20 4.49
n Junction-1 1.1407 953.97 01 Jun2007, 12:50 4.62
Exhibit F-2 (HEC-HMS Results)
25 Year Flood Existing Conditions
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 [F:\1015 -Steve Arden\0002 -Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\1015002_EX\1 ..
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Junction-1 a 0.1594 270.64 01 Jun2007, 12:35 5.77
a DA-1 0.1148 193.35 01Jun2007, 12:40 5.81
b DA-2 0.0478 102.66 01 Jun2007, 12:25 5.86
c DA-3 0.0446 98.09 01Jun2007, 12:25 5.66
d Junction -1 0.2072 368.87 01 Jun2007, 12:30 5.79
e DA-4 0.0976 135.17 01 Jun2007, 12:50 5.37
f Junction-2 0.3048 479.40 01Jun2007, 12:35 5.65
ciDA-5 0.1023 157.28 01Jun2007, 12:45 5.70
h Junction-3 0.4071 626.21 01 Jun2007, 12:40 5.67
i DA-6 0.0522 80.93 01Jun2007, 12:45 5.53
· Junction-4 0.4593 706.02 01 Jun2007, 12:40 5.65
k DA-7 0.3567 418.71 01Jun2007, 13:10 5.46
I Junction-1 0.8160 1040.07 01Jun2007, 12:50 5.57
m DA-8 0.3247 239.01 01Jun2007, 14:20 5.38
n Junction-1 1.1407 1140.99 01Jun2007, 12:50 5.51
Exhibit F-2 (HEC-HMS Results)
50 Year Flood Existing Conditions
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 [F:\1015 -Steve Arden\0002 -Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\1015002_EX\1 ..
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Junction-1 a 0.1594 330.53 01 Jun2007, 12:35 7.07
a DA-1 0.1148 236.03 01Jun2007, 12:40 7.12
b DA-2 0.0478 125.17 01Jun2007, 12:25 7.17
c DA-3 0.0446 119.98 01Jun2007, 12:25 6.96
d Junction-1 0.2072 450.70 01Jun2007, 12:30 7.10
e DA-4 0.0976 166.97 01Jun2007, 12:50 6.64
f Junction-2 0.3048 587.42 O 1 Jun2007, 12:35 6.95
oDA-5 0.1023 192.67 01Jun2007, 12:45 7.00
h Junction-3 0.4071 766.75 01 Jun2007, 12:40 6.96
i DA-6 0.0522 99.48 01 Jun2007, 12:45 6.81
· Junction-4 0.4593 865.05 01 Jun2007, 12:40 6.95
k DA-7 0.3567 515.47 01Jun2007, 13:10 6.74
I Junction-1 0.8160 1277.37 O 1 Jun2007, 12:50 6.86
m DA-8 0.3247 294.66 01Jun2007, 14:15 6.63
n Junction-1 1.1407 1405.71 01 Jun2007, 12:50 6.79
Exhibit F-2 (HEC-HMS Results)
100 Year Flood Existing Conditions
HEC-HMS 3.0.1 [F:\1015 -Steve Arden\0002 -Great Oaks Ph 2\Docs\Hec-HMS\1015002_EX\1 ..
Hydrologic Drainage Area Peak Discharge Time of Peak Volume
Element (Ml2) (CFS) (IN)
Junction-1 a 0.1594 381.98 01Jun2007, 12:35 8.21
a DA-1 0.1148 272.68 01 Jun2007, 12:40 8.25
b DA-2 0.0478 144.48 01Jun2007, 12:25 8.30
c DA-3 0.0446 138.78 O 1 Jun2007, 12:25 8.09
d Junction-1 0.2072 520.99 01Jun2007, 12:30 8.23
e DA-4 0.0976 194.36 01 Jun2007, 12:50 7.76
f Junction-2 0.3048 680.31 o 1 Jun2007, 12:35 8.08
gDA-5 0.1023 223.15 01Jun2007 , 12:45 8.12
h Junction-3 0.4071 887.62 01Jun2007, 12:40 8.09
i DA-6 0.0522 115.44 01Jun2007, 12:45 7.93
· Junction-4 0.4593 1001.85 01 Jun2007, 12:40 8.07
k DA-7 0.3567 598.84 01Jun2007, 13:10 7.85
I Junction-1 0.8160 1482.00 o 1 Jun2007, 12:45 7.98
m DA-8 0.3247 342.77 01Jun2007, 14:15 7.73
n Junction-1 1.1407 1634.11 O 1 Jun2007, 12:50 7.91