HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage ReportDrainage Report ·
for
The Barracks II Subdivision Section 200
College Station, Texas
March 2013
Owner/Developer:
Heath Phillips Investments, LLC
3302 General Parkway
College Station, TX 77845
Prepared By:
Schultz Engineering , LLC
TBPE Firm No. 12327
P.O. Box 11995
College Station, TX 77842
2730 Longmire Drive, Suite A
College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 764-3900
ENGINEER
Drainage Report -Executive Summary
The Barracks II Subdivision, Section 200
College Station, Texas
SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC.
P.O. Box 11995
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone: (979) 764-3900
Fax: (979) 764-3910
O\VNER/DEVELOPER
Heath Phillips Investments, LLC
3302 General Parkway
College Station, TX 77845
Phone: (979) 690-5000
GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
This project consists of the development of Section 200 of the Barracks II Subdivision in College Station. Section
200 is a single-family residential development, which will include the construction of utility and roadway
infrastructure.
Location:
Description:
• Area:
• Proposed Land Use:
• #of Lots:
• Existing Land Use:
• Land Description:
Primary Drainage Facility:
Flood Hazard Information:
FEMAFIRM:
Floodplain:
Section 200 is located southeast of Section 100 of the Barracks II Development.
The Barracks II Subdivision is a 108-acre development located midway between
Rock Prairie Road and Cain Road in south College Station. It is bounded on the
west by Holleman Drive South and on the east by Old Wellborn Road.
5.928 Acres
Single Family Residential
28 lots
Vacant
The terrain slopes generally towards the north.
Tributary B.3 of Bee Creek
#48041C0305E, Dated May 16, 2012
None of this phase of the development lies within the floodplain.
HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS
The existing site is cleared. The elevations range from 309 to 302, sloping generally in a northerly direction. The
runoff will be directed to the roadways and the proposed storm sewer system will discharge into the existing storm
sewer system constructed with Deacon Drive and then discharges into the existing detention facilities. Ultimately,
this runoff flows into Tributary B.3 of Bee Creek.
GENERALSTORMWATERPLAN
The drainage plan for this development will involve the installation of storm sewer pipes and inlets, which will
collect and convey the runoff into the existing storm sewer system and then to the existing detention pond. The
runoff that is collected by the existing detention ponds will be discharged into tributary B.3 of Bee Creek.
The detention pond analysis and design for this phase is covered under the drainage report titled, "The Barracks
Detention Facility Design City of College Station, Texas, Dated July 2012" prepared by Kimley-Horn.
-
COORDINATION & STORMW ATER PERMITTING
This project has a Notice of Intent filed with the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality. No other permits
are anticipated for this project.
DRAINAGE DESIGN
General Information:
Street Design:
Tc Methodology:
Tc Minimum:
Design Storm Event:
Pipe Materials:
Manning's n Values:
Runoff Coefficients:
Design Constraints:
Design Software:
Stormwater runoff from Section 200 of the subdivision will be collected by a
storm sewer system and will ultimately discharge into tributary B3 of Bee
Creek. The location of the drainage areas for evaluation of the gutter depth
check, inlet sizing, pipe evaluation and channel sizing are shown on Exhibit A &
B. Refer to Exhibit B for the locations of the inlets and storm sewer pipes.
Typical Streets:
Standard Cross-Section (3% cross-slope, 27' B-B Residential Roadway)
Lay down curb and gutter on residential streets
Towers Parkway:
Collector Street Cross-Section (3% cross-slope, 38' B-B)
Standard Curb and gutter
Concrete Pavement
Standard recessed curb inlets (5' & 10' in length)
TR55
10 Minutes
10 year design storm & 100 year analysis for residential and collector streets &
storm sewer
Class III RCP, Profile Gasket in accordance with ASTM C443, ASTM C76 and
Corrugated HDPE Storm Sewer Pipe with smooth interior
0.013 for pipes
0.018 for Streets
0.55 for developed lots
0.40 for undeveloped land upstream of property
Max. water depth in gutter: 4.5" or 0.375' for the 10 year design storm for
residential and collector streets
Min. pipe flow velocity: 2.5 fi:>s
Max. pipe flow velocity: 15 fi:>s
100-yr storm runoff maintained within the ROW (3" above curb)
25% reduction of cross-sectional area of pipes less than 24" in diameter
Min. 1' freeboard for the 10 year design storm depth of flow
Excel Spreadsheets, Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD Civil 3D 2013,
& Autodesk Civil 3D Storm Sewer Analysis.
The software was used to compute pipe capacities, flow rates and velocities,
compute hydraulic grade line elevations, headwater elevations, gutter depth &
inlet sizing.
..
Design Results:
Detention Analysis:
Applicable Exhibits:
CONCLUSION
The requirement for a 25% reduction in cross sectional area of pipes less than
24" diameter is achieved by using internal pipe diameters that are less than the
standard diameter. The 24" diameter pipe areas were reduced by 25% and a
20.6" diameter pipe was used in the analysis and the 18" diameter pipe areas
were reduced by 25% and a 15.6" diameter pipe was used in the analysis.
The data presented in the Appendices indicates the gutter depth, inlet sizing,
pipe sizes and channel sizing is in accordance with the requirements of and the
City of College Station.
The stormwater runoff from the Barracks II Subdivision was previously studied
and detention ponds were designed for the entire development including this
phase. See the drainage report titled; "The Barracks Detention Facility Design
City of College Station, Texas, Dated July 2012".
Exhibit A -Drainage Area Map -Overall Layout
Exhibit B -Drainage Area Map -Storm Sewer System Layout
Appendix Al -Drainage Area Summary
Appendix A2 -Tc Calculations Post Development
Appendix Bl -Depth of Flow in Gutter
Appendix B2-Storm Sewer Inlet Summary
Appendix C-Storm Sewer Pipe Summary
Appendix D -Technical Design Summary
The storm sewer, culverts & channel drainage system for Section 200 of the Barracks II Subdivision will function
within the requirements and restrictions of the BCS Design Guidelines.
CERTIFICATION
I, Joseph P. Schultz, Licensed Professional Engineer No. 65889, State of Texas, certify that this report for the
drainage design for The Barracks II, Section 200, was prepared by me in accordance with the requirements of the
Bryan/College Station Unified Drainage Design Guidelines for the owners of the property. All licenses and permits
required by any and all state and federal regulatory agencies for the proposed drainage improvements have been
issued.
SCHULTZ ENGINEERING; LLC .
-
EXIDBITA
DRAINAGE AREA MAP
OVERALL DESIGN
EXHIBITB
DRAINAGE AREA MAP
STORM SEWER SYSTEM LAYOUT
APPENDIX A
DRAINAGE AREA SUMMARY
APPENDIX A The Barracks II Section 200 Drainage Area Summary Area# Area, A (acres) 301 24.73 302 8.03 303 13.92 305 0.58 306 0.06 307 0.43 307a 0.11 307b 0.31 308 2.09 308a 0.43 308b 1.66 309 0.58 309a 0.38 309b 0.20 310 .0.75 311 0.80 312 0.37 312a 0.10 312b 0.22 313 3.92 313a 0.10 313b 3.82 The Rational Method: Q = CIA I = b I (tc+d)8 c tc (min) 0.400 45.0 0.400 29.0 0.400 38.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 19.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 19.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.550 10.0 0.400 40.0 0.550 10.0 0.400 40.0 10 year storm 100 year storm 110 010 1100 0100 (in/hr) (cfs) (in/hr) (cfs) 3.840 37.99 5.291 52.34 5.036 16.18 6.878 22.09 4.274 23.80 5.868 32.67 8.635 2.75 11.639 3.71 8.635 0.28 11.639 0.38 8.635 2.04 11.639 2.75 8.635 0.52 11.639 0.70 8.635 1.47 11.639 1.98 6.381 7.33 8.657 9.95 8.635 2.04 11.639 2.75 6.381 5.83 8.657 7.90 8.635 2.75 11.639 3.71 8.635 1.80 11.639 2.43 8.635 0.95 11.639 1.28 8.635 3.56 11.639 4.80 8.635 3.80 11.639 5.12 8.635 1.76 11.639 2.37 8.635 0.47 11.639 0.64 8.635 1.04 11.639 1.41 4.139 6.49 5.688 8.92 8.635 0.47 11.639 0.64 4.139 6.32 . 5.688 8.69 Q =Flow (cfs) tc =Time of concentration (min) tc = U(V*60) L = Length (ft A = Area (acres) V =Velocity (ft/sec) C = Runoff Coeff. I = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) Brazos County: 2 vearstorm I 0 y_ear storm 2 5 y_ear storm 50 y_ear storm b= 65 b= 80 b= 89 b= 98 d= 8 d= 8.5 d= 8.5 d= 8.5 e= 0.806 e = 0.763 e= 0.754 e= 0.745 JOO y_ear storm b= 96 d= 8.0 e= 0.730
APPENDIXA2
Tc CALCULATIONS POST DEVELOPMENT
-
AppendixA2
POST DEVELOPMENT TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS
The Barracks II Section 200
T "'"' = time of concentration for sheet flow (hr)
l = length (ft)
n = Manning's roughness
P2 = 2-yr rainfall intensity (in/hr) for Brazos Co. = 4.5 in/hr
S = slope (fVft)
Drainage Sheet Flow
Area# n Length Slope T..,...
ft % min.
301 ,,0,24 '•· :Yl 100. 1.i1 ,,. 14
302 D.24 100 ·1.7 13
303 .t.0.2' . 100 "•. 1.49 ' 14
308 " '"Q.24 ' . 82 ~ ;a 7
3088 ·.,..-·"; ---7
313 •• o.24 . 'S> 10(J. • Q.83 17
3138 lli D.24, •; . ..; •. ~100 .• ""' tUJ3. · 17
Concentrated Flow
Length Slope Velocity
ft % ft/sec
'kl 1421 •." :"% 1.25 ""' 0.8;•., .. 587 (l.91 A, 0.7 ,;
1183 ' . '1.1 O.B
' 586 >i 0.8 . ' !).8
°"""'" 1 ....... 0.a~.
851 , . ,I• 1.1 . 0.7 .'
'" .$51' , I~."' l,1 :"i .~~ .0.7
TR-55 Method
Ve""'= water velocity in ditch (ft/sec)
S = slope of ditch (ft/ft)
V .., •• , = water velocity in gutter (ft/sec)
S = slope of gutter (fVft)
Section 200
Gutter Flow -1
T unpavea Length Slope Velocity
min ft % ft/sec
30 ,,,•>! ""'," .,. "''',,.
14 " 0.0
23 ., .. ,~· 0,0
12 i• "' I• ~· .. ;. 0.0
12 ... . ·~· 0.0 ..
22 '0,0
22 r· ''<. ,r .. ,·o.o ·.;'
T P•Yed
min
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Length
ft
:. '" l':
300
147
88
98 . "'
T = travel time through ditch or gutter (min)
L = length of travel path (ft)
V = velocity (fVsec)
Gutter Flow -2
Slope Velocity T p•vect Total
% ft/sec min min
; -~ '" 0 45
1 2.0 1 2 29
1.25 ' 2.3 · 1 38
... 0.0 0 19 ... " 0.0 0 19
1.29 2.3 1 40
. '1.29 2.3 1 40
Tc
Design
min
. -,.45
.... 29 '
38 "
19
I 19
' 40
jt· "'° ""
APPENDIX Bl
DEPTH OF FLOW IN GUTTER
..
APPENDIXB1
The Barracks II Section 200
Depth of Flow in Gutter
(Refer to Exhibit B for Gutter Locations)
Gutter/Inlet A
Location c Area# (acres)
82001 A 309A 0.380 0.55
82001 6 3096 0.200 0.55
82003 310 0.750 0.55
82005 A 312A 0.100 0.55
82005 6 3126 0.220 0.55
S2006A 313A 0.100 0.55
82006 6 3136 3.820 0.40
82008 311 0.800 0.55
82011 A 307A 0.110 0.55
82011 6 3076 0.310 0.55
82021 A 308A 0.430 0.55
82021 6 3086 1.660 0.55
82031 305 0.580 0.55
Standard Curt> -10-yr stonn max design depth -4.5"
Transverse !Crown) slope (ft/ft)
27 street = 0.0300
38 street " 0.0300
Slope ic
(ft/ft) (min)
0.0061 10.000
0.0061 10.000
0.0061 10.000
0.0061 10.000
0.0072 10.000
0.0061 10.000
0.0072 40.000
0.0061 10.000
0.0061 10.000
0.0060 10.000
0.0061 10.000
0.0061 19.000
0.0069 10.000
5t[!lght Crown Flow 15olytd to find actyal depth of flow In gytter. vl;
Q • 0.58 • (zln) • 5112 • y111 '* y •(QI [0.58 • (zln) • 5112]}211
n = Roughness Coefficient = 0.018
S = Street/Gutter Slope (ft/ft)
y = Depth of flow at inlet (ft)
z = Reciprocal of crown slope:
I,.
(In/hr)
6.327
6.327
6.327
6.327
6.327
6.327
2.870
6.327
6.327
6.327
6.327
4.563
6.327
10-year stonn
010 Q10 +bypass Y11NK:tu~ v
(els) (els) (fl) (In) (fps)
1.80 1.86 0.243 2.91 1.84
0.95 0.95 0.189 2.27 1.60
3.56 -0.310 3.72 2.23
0.47 -0.146 1.75 1.34
1.04 -0.190 2.28 1.74
0.47 -0.146 1.75 1.34
6.32 0.373 4.47 2.73
3.80 -0.317 3.81 2.26
0.52 -0.151 1.81 1.38
1.47 -0.223 2.68 1.77
2.04 2.13 0.255 3.07 1.88
5.83 5.83 0.373 4.47 2.52
2.75 -0.275 3.30 2.19
I The Barracks II Section 200 Depth of Flow in Gutter (Refer to Exhibit B for Gutter Locations) Gutter/Inlet A Location c Area# (acres) 82001 A 309A 0.380 0.55 82001 8 3098 0.200 0.55 82003 310 0.750 0.55 82005A 312A 0.100 0.55 82005 8 3128 0.220 0.55 82006A 313A 0.100 0.55 82006 8 3138 3.620 0.40 82006 311 0.600 0.55 82011 A 307A 0.110 0.55 82011 8 3078 0.310 0.55 52021 A 306A o.~30 0.55 82021 8 3088 1.660 0.55 82031 305 0.580 0.55 Transverse !Crown) slope lft/ftl 27 street = 0.0300 38 street = 0.0300 Slope le (ft/ft) (min) 0.0061 10.000 0.0061 10.000 0.0061 10.000 0.0061 10.000 0.0072 10.000 0.0061 10.000 0.0072 40.000 0.0061 10.000 0.0061 10.000 0.0060 10.000 0.0061 10.000 0.0061 19.000 0.0069 10.000 Straight Crown Flow !Solved to find actual depth of flow In gutter. yl: Q" 0.56 • (z/n) • S112 • y113 ~ y •(QI [0.56 • (z/n) • S11'])311 n = Roughness Coefficient = 0.018 S = StreeUGutter Slope (ft/ft) y = Depth of flow at inlet (ft) z = Reciprocal of crown slope: 27' street = 33 1100 0100 (In/hr) (cfs) 11.639 2.43 11.639 1.26 11.639 4.60 11.639 0.64 11.639 1.41 11.639 0.64 5.668 6.69 11.639 5.12 11.639 0.70 11.639 1.96 11.639 2.75 6.657 7.90 11.639 3.71 APPENDIXB1 100-year stonn 100-year stonn 0100 + bypass Y100 Allowable v Top of Gutter Gutter ROW Freeboard (cfs) (fl) (In) Depth (fps) Curb FL Runoff, Elev. Elev. fl. 2.73 0.280 3.37 6" 1.66 304.63 304.33 304.61 305.06 0.45 1.26 0.211 2.53 6" 1.72 304.83 304.33 304.54 305.06 0.52 -0.347 4.16 6" 2.40 307.00 306.50 306.85 307.23 0.38 -0.163 1.95 6" 1.45 308.96 306.46 306.64 309.21 0.57 -0.212 2.55 6" 1.66 306.96 306.46 306.69 309.21 0.52 0.163 1.95 6" 1.45 306.96 306.46 306.64 309.21 0.57 -0.420 5.04 6" 2.96 306.96 306.46 306.90 309.21 0.31 -0.355 4.26 6" 2.44 307.00 306.50 306.66 307.23 0.37 0.169 2.02 6" 1.46 305.16 304.66 304.63 305.39 0.56 -0.250 3.00 6" 1.91 305.16 304.66 304.91 305.39 0.46 3.14 0.295 3.55 6" 1.69 305.16 304.66 304.96 305.39 0.43 7.90 0.418 5.01 8" 2.72 305.16 304.86 305,06 305.39 0.31 -0.308 3,69 8" 2.36 305.42 304.92 305.23 305.65 0.42
APPENDIXB2
STORM SEWER INLET SUMMARY
-
-
APPENDIXB2
The Barracks II Section 200
Storm Sewer Inlets in Sump -Design Analysis
Inlet Length 010 010 010 0100 0100
No. ft. cf s ft. in . cfs ft.
S2001 10 2.81 0.221 2.65 4.01 0.280
S2005 5 1.52 0.233 2.80 2.05 0.284
S2006 10 6.80 0.399 4.79 9.33 0.492
S2011 5 1.99 0.279 3.35 . 2.69 0.341
S2021 10 7.95 0.443 5.31 11.04 0.551
* ROW elevation is 8" above gutter line so 100-yr storm runoff is contained within ROW
Assume 10% clogging for design
0100*
in.
3.37
3.41
5.91
4.09
6.61
-
APPENDIX 82
The Barracks II Section 200
Storm Sewer Inlets on Grade -Design Analysis
Inlet Length Street 010
No. ft. Slo~e cfs
S2003 10 0.61% 3.56
S2008 10 0.61% 3.80
S2031 10 0.69% 2.75
* Inlet S2031 Drains into existing Hayes Street
Assume 10% clogging for design
Se = Sx + (a/w)* Eo
Eo= Ow/O = 1 - [ 1 -Wrr]2·67
L=Kc*Q0.47*S0·3*(1 /( n*Se ))0·6
L10,ft.
Design
11 .05
11.39
10.16
W = Width of Depressed Gutter (ft) = 2
Sx=Cross fl ow of Road Surface 0.03
T=Total Spread of water in gutter (ft) 12.5
a=Gutter depression depth (ft)= 0.33
n=Manning's Roughness Coefficient= 0.018
Kc= 0.6
Qw=Flow in width, W
E=Efficiency of inlet or percentage of interception
S=Longitudinal Slope
Li=Curb opening length
Se = Sx + (a/w)* Eo
Eo= Ow/O = 1 - [ 1 -W/T]2'67
0.091412
0.372194
Bypass
cf s
0.05
0.09
0.00
0100 L 100, ft. Bypass
cf s Design cfs
4.80 12.71 0.30
5.12 13.10 0.38
3.71 11.69 0.11
APPENDIX Cl
STORM SEWER PIPE SUMMARY
APPENDIX C1
The Barracks II Section 200
Storm Sewer Pipe Design Analysis (10 yr Storm)
HG10
pepth
Pipe Pipe Pipe Pipe
Size Length Slope No. (Inches) (feet) (%)
Nonnal Depth Surcharged
Q10 V10 Depth HG10 V10
(cfs) (fps) (feet) Slope (fas)
Downstream
Top Pipe
Structure Elev. FL
Upstream
Top Pipe HG10
Structure Elev. FL Elev.
Below
Gutter
(feet)
2002 42 56.37 0.50 43.64 5.74 2.59 0.19% 4.54 $2001 304.83 298.89 $2002 306.13 299.17 302.00 3.63
2003 42 147.82 0.50 43.61 5.39 2.74 0.19% 4.54 $2002 306.13 299.27 52003 307.00 300.01 302.76 3.74
2004 42 452.66 0.50 43.73 6.14 2.43 0.19% 4.55 $2003 307.00 300.11 52004 309.00 302.37 304.58 3.92
2005 42 74.42 0.50 43.71 6.27 2.39 0.19% 4.55 $2004 309.00 302.47 52005 308.98 302.84 305.51 2.97
2006 36 48.79 0.50 43.76 6.77 2.58 0.43% 6.19 S2005 308.98 303.34 $2006 308.98 303.59 306.62 1.86
2007 36 49.61 0.50 37.75 5.35 2.97 0.32% 5.34 52006 308.98 303.69 $2007 309.12 303.94 307.11 1.51
2008 24 31.01 0.50 3.66 3.80 1.08 0.03% 1.17 $2003 307.00 301.61 $2008 307.00 301.76 302.77 3.73
2011 42 142.08 0.55 37.05 5.73 2.30 0.14% 3.85 52001 304.83 298.89 52011 305.16 299.67 301.98 2.68
2012 42 125.51 0.30 37.12 5.26 2.41 0.14% 3.86 $201 1 305.16 299.77 52012 305.53 300.14 302.60 2.43
2021 30 31.01 0.35 9.80 4.26 1.19 0.06% 2.00 52011 305.16 300.77 52021 305.16 300.88 302.21 2.45
2031 24 126.83 0.20 2.70 3.09 0.99 0.01o/o 0.86 $2012 305.53 301.64 $2031 305.42 301 .9 302.77 2.15
2101 30 63.90 0.35 0.09 0.30 1.52 0.00% 0.02 $2005 308.98 303.84 $2101 307.93 304.14 305.51 1.92
2111 30 75.01 0.50 16.05 4.98 1.62 0.15% 3.27 $2012 305.53 301.64 $2111 305.27 302.02 303.20 1.57
2211 36 75.51 0.50 23.60 5.22 2.14 0.12% 3.34 $2012 305.53 300.64 $2211 305.36 301.02 303.18 1.68
Notes
1. Friction losses and minor losses for 18' diameter pipe are computed as for a 15.6' diameter pipe which represents a 25% reduction in pipe flow area.
2. Friction losses and minor losses for 24' diameter pipe are computed as for a 20.8" diameter pipe which represents a 25% reduction in pipe flow area.
3. HG at downstream end of Existing 42' Pipes Is 298.00.
I APPENDIXC1 The Barracks II Section 200 Storm Sewer Pipe Design Analysis (100 yr Storm) HG10 Depth Pipe Pipe Pipe Pipe Size Length Slope No. (Inches) (feet) (%) Normal Oepth Surcharged Q100 V100 Depth HG100 V100 (els) (fps) (feet) Slope (fps) Downstream Top Pipe Structure Elev. FL Upstream Top Pipe HG100 Structure Elev. FL Elev. Below Gutter (feet) 2002 42 56.37 0.50 54.83 6.19 3.19 0.30% 5.70 S2001 304.83 298.89 S2002 306.13 299.17 302.63 3.00 2003 42 147.82 0.50 54.81 5.77 3.43 0.30% 5.70 82002 306.13 299.27 82003 307.00 300.01 303.54 2.96 2004 42 452.66 0.50 54.74 6.15 3.11 0.29% 5.69 82003 307.00 300.11 82004 309.00 302.37 305.16 3.34 2005 42 74.42 0.50 54.91 6.39 3.00 0.30% 5.71 S2004 309.00 302.47 S2005 308.98 302.84 306.14 2.34 2006 36 48.79 0.50 55.07 7.90 2.90 0.68% 7.79 82005 308.98 303.34 82006 308.98 303.59 307.40 1.08 ..-:,,7:, . 2007 36 49.61 0.50 47.15 6.67 3.00 0.50% 6.67 82006 308.98 303.69 S2007 309.12 303.94 308.12 o.so':J" .. · 2008 24 31.01 0.50 4.61 4.01 1.71 0.04% 1.47 82003 307.00 301.61 82008 307.00 301.76 303.54 2.96."f•\ 2011 42 142.08 0.55 50.69 6.05 2.95 0.25% 5.27 82001 304.83 298.89 82011 305.16 299.67 302.67 1.99 2012 42 125.51 0.30 50.81 5.58 3.15 0.25% 5.28 82011 305.16 299.77 82012 305.53 300.14 303.54 1.49 2021 30 31.01 0.35 13.62 4.69 1.85 0.11% 2.78 82011 305.16 300.77 52021 305.16 300.88 302.67 1.99 2031 24 126.83 0.20 3.56 3.34 1.68 0.02% 1.13 82012 305.53 301.64 82031 305.42 301.9 303.54 1.38 2101 30 63.90 0.35 0.14 0.40 2.15 0.00% 0.03 82005 308.98 303.84 82101 307.93 304.14 306.14 1.29 2111 30 75.01 0.50 21.85 4.75 2.38 0.28% 4.45 82012 305.53 301.64 S2111 305.27 302.02 303.88 0.89 2211 36 75.51 0.50 32.30 5.43 2.95 0.23% 4.57 S2012 305.53 300.64 S2211 305.36 301.02 304.01 0.85 Notes 1. Friction losses and minor losses for 18* diameter pipe are computed as for a 15.6' diameter pipe which represents a 25% reduction in pipe flow area. 2. Friction losses and minor losses for 24• diameter pipe are computed as for a 20.8' diameter pipe which represents a 25% reduction in pipe flow area. 3. HG at downstream end of Existing 42* Pipes is 299.71
-
APPENDIXD
TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
The Cities of Bryan and College Station both require storm drainage design to follow these
Unified Stormwater Design Guidelines. Paragraph C2 of Section 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 111 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 August 2012
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 prin cipal watercourses or their tributaries; and treatment(s) of existing
watercourses. Also, any plans for reclaiming land within floodplain areas must be
outlined.
6. Coordination and permitting of stormwater matters must be addressed. This is to
include any specialized coordination that has occurred or is planned with other
entities (local, state, or federal). This may include agencies such as Brazos County
government, the Brazos River Authority, the Texas A&M University System, the
Texas Department of Transportation, the Texas Commission for Environmental
Quality, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the US Environmental Protection Agency,
et al. Mention must be made of any permits, agreements, or understandings that
pertain to the project.
7. Reference is to be made to the full drainage report (or the Technical Design
Summary Report) which the executive summary represents. The principal
elements of the main report (and its length), including any maps, drawings or
construction documents, should be itemized. An example statement might be:
"One __ -page drainage report dated one set of
construction drawings ( sheets) dated ____ , and a
___ -page specifications document dated ____ comprise
the drainage report for this project."
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page2 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 -Project Administration I Start (Page 2 .1)
Engineering and Design Professionals Information ..
Engineering Firm Name and Address: Jurisdiction
Schultz Engineering, LLC City: Bryan
P. 0 . Box 11995 ./ College Station College Station, Tx 77842 Date of Submittal:
March2013
Lead Engineer's Name and Contact lnfo.(phone, e-mail, fax): Other:
Joseph P. Schultz, PE email:joeschultz84@verizon.net
Phone: 764-3900 fax: 764-3910
Supporting Engineering I Consulting Finn(s): Other contacts:
nla
Developer I Owner I Applicant Information
Developer I Applicant Name and Address: Phone and e-mail:
Heath Phillips Investments, LLC 979-690-5000
3302 General Parkway
College Station, TX 77845
Property Owner(s) if not Developer I Applicant (&address): Phone and e-mail:
Project Identification •
~ -
Development Name: The Barracks II Subdivision, Section 100
Is subject property a site project, a single-phase subdivision, or part of a multi-phase subdivision?
Multi-Phase Subdivision If multi-phase, subject property is phase 5 of 13
Legal description of subject property (phase) or Project Area:
(see Section II, Paragraph B-3a)
Crawford Burnett League, A-7
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.
Housing construction is complete and on-going in the previous phases (Sections 100-102 & 300)
General Location of Project Area, or subject property (phase):
Between Old Welborn Road and Holleman Dr. South, North of Rock Prairie Road West and South of Cain
Rd.
In City Limits?
Bryan: acres.
College Station: 5.928 acres.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (acreage):
Bryan: College Station:
Acreage Outside ET J:
Page 3 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 -Project Administration I Continued (page 2.2)
Project Identification (continued)
Roadways abutting or within Project Area or Abutting tracts, platted land, or built
subject property: developments:
Old Wellborn Rd. The Barracks Section 100, 101 & 300, and CSISD
Holleman Drive South Tract
Named Regulatory Watercourse(s) & Watershed(s): Tributary Basin(s):
Bee Creek TribB.3
Plat Information For Projector Subject Property (or Phase)
Preliminary Plat File #: 12 -OOSOOJ4l Final Plat File #: NIA Date: March 2013
Name: THE BARRACKS II (PP) Status and Vol/Pg: submitted with this project
If two plats, second name: File#:
Status: Date:
Zoning Information For Project or Subject Property (or Phase) '"T ' ;';,,
Zoning Type: PDD Existing or Proposed? Existing Case Code:
Case Date Status:
Zoning Type: Existing or Proposed? Case Code:
Case Date Status:
. ' Stormwater Management Planning For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
~ , .
Planning Conference(s) & Date(s): Participants:
NIA
Preliminary Report Required? NIA 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.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page4 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 -Project Administration I Continued (page 2.3)
Coordination For Project or Subject Property (or Phase)
Note: For any Coordination of stormwater matters indicated below, attach documentation
describing and substantiating any agreements, understandings, contracts, or approvals.
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?
Yes __ No-1._
Coordination with Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
Brazos County
Needed?
Yes --No _{_
Coordination with Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
TxDOT Needed?
Yes --No _{_
Coordination with Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
T AMUS Needed?
Yes No ./ --
Permits For Project or Subject Property (or Phase) -
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
Approved?
US Army Crops of Permitted Engineers
No --Yes_.:{__
US Environmental
Protection Agency
No ./ Yes -
Texas Commission on Approved Environmental Quality
No Yes ./ --
Brazos River
Authority
No -1_ Yes -
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Status of Actions (include dates)
Permit approved.
NOI for entire Subdivision
Page 5 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Progerty Characteristics I Start (Page 3.1)
Nature and Scope.of Proposed Work
Existing: Land proposed for development currently used, including extent of impervious cover?
Proposed development is residential subdivision. High density. Impervious cover= 65%
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 28 Jots. Approximately 1442' of Streets.
ProQosed
Project 1. 72 ac. -ROW
Is any work planned on land that is not platted If yes, explain:
or on land for which platting is not pending?
./ No Yes -- --
FEMA Floodplains ~ "'.
' ,, ..
Is any part of subject property abutting a Named Regulatory Watercourse I No_{_ 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.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page6 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
· As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Progerty Characteristics I Continued (Page 3.2)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase) '
Has an earlier hydrologic analysis been done for larger area including subject property?
Yes Reference the study (&date) here, and attach copy if not already in City files.
./ Kimley-Hom Study ljuly 2012) -Analyzed downstream flooding potential and detention pond --design.
Is the stormwater management plan for the property in substantial conformance with the
earlier study? Yes_ ./ _ No - -
If not, explain how it differs.
No If subject property is not part of multi-phase project, describe stormwater management
plan for the property in Part 4.
--If property is part of multi-phase project, provide overview of stormwater management plan
for Project Area here. In Part 4 describe how plan for subject property will comply
therewith.
Do existing topographic features on subject property store or detain runoff? _L No --Yes
Describe them (include approximate size, volume, outfall, model, etc).
Any known drainage or flooding problems in areas near subject property? __ No _./_ Yes
Identify:
The area around Cain Road and Old Wellborn Road.
Based on location of study property in a watershed, is Type 1 Detention (flood control) needed?
(see Table B-1 in Appendix B) Already Provided in previous phase
_!_ Detention is required. --Need must be evaluated. __ Detention not required.
What decision has been reached? By whom?
If the need for How was determination made? Type 1 Detention
must be evaluated:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 7 of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Pro~ert)l Characteristics I Continued (Page 3.3)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase) (continued)
Does subject property straddle a Watershed or Basin divide? _{_No --Yes If yes,
describe splits below. In Part 4 describe design concept for handlinQ this.
Watershed or Basin Larger acreage Lesser acreage
Above-Project Areas(Section 11, Paragraph 83-a)
Does Project Area (project or phase) receive runoff from upland areas? __ No _L Yes
Size(s) of area(s) in acres: 1) 24.73 2) 3.92 3) 8.03 4) 13.92
Flow Characteristics (each instance) (overland sheet, shallow concentrated, recognizable
concentrated section(s), small creek (non-regulatory), regulatory Watercourse or tributary);
Each instance is overland sheet flow and shallow concentrated flow.
Flow determination: Outline hydrologic methods and assumptions:
Rational Equation. C-value of0.40
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
Yes. As adjoining tracts de velop and install detention ponds, their outflows will be conveyed through
this tract by the proposed storm sewer.
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).
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 8 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
-1u..·-..:.··· APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 -Progert~ 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 __ instrument. If instrument(s), describe their provisions.
exist for any
part of
pathway(s)?
_L No
Yes --
Where runoff must cross lower properties, describe characteristics of abutting lower
property(ies). (Existing watercourses? Easement or Consent aquired?)
Existing watercourse crosses the downstream properties. See Kimley Horn Report
Pathway
Areas
Describe any built or improved drainage facilities existing near the property (culverts,
bridges, lined channels, buried conduit, swales, detention ponds, etc).
Detention Ponds constructed with previous phases.
Nearby
Drainage Do any of these have hydrologic or hydraulic influence on proposed stormwater Facilities design? No _:f_ Yes If yes, explain: --
See Kimley Horn Report, Phase 100 Report by Phillips Engineering and Phase 101 & 300
Report by Goodwin-Lasiter, Inc.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 9 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
,,.
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce(!t 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.
Runoff from upland areas wi/1 be captured in publicly owned storm drain systems as the subdivision
develops.
Discharge(s) To Lower Property(ies) (Section II, Paragraph E1)
Does project include drainage features (existing or future) proposed to become public via
platting? --No _ ./ _Yes Separate Instrument? _ ./ -No -_Yes
Per Guidelines reference above, how will __ Establishing Easements (Scenario 1) runoff be discharged to neighboring _:/___ Pre-development Release (Scenario 2) property(ies)? Combination of the two Scenarios --
Scenario 1: If easements are proposed, describe where needed, and provide status of actions
on each . (Attached Exhibit# )
Scenario 2: Provide general description of how release(s) will be managed to pre-development
conditions (detention, sheet flow, partially concentrated, etc.). (Attached Exhibit# )
Detention Pond.
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)?
documentation.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
./ No
Page 10 of 26
--Yes Explain and provide
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.2)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Project Area Of Multi-Phase Project
Will project result
in shifting runoff
between Basins or
Identify gaining Basins or Watersheds and acres shifting:
between f-W_h_a_t -de-s-ig_n_a-nd-m-iti-. g_a_ti_o_n-is-us_e_d_t_o_c_o_m_p_e_n_sa_t_e_f_o_r -in-c-re_a_s-ed-ru_n_o...,,.ff,-------1
Watersheds? from gaining basin or watershed?
./ No
Yes
How will runoff from Project
Area be mitigated to pre-
development conditions?
Select any or all of 1, 2,
and/or 3, and explain below.
1. __ With facility(ies) involving other development projects.
2. __:/__Establishing features to serve overall Project Area.
3. __:{__On phase (or site) project basis within Project Area.
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# A )
Existing detention ponds will serve the proposed development.
3. By phase (or site) project: Describe planned mitigation measures for phases (or sites) in
subsequent questions of this Part.
C'-·
"O Cl> (/) c: Cl> ~ >-a:
(/) c: Cl 'iii
Q) 0 Oz
(ij J.tl
~
Are aquatic echosystems proposed? __ No
project(s)?
__ Yes In which phase(s) or
Are other Best Management Practices for reducing stormwater pollutants proposed?
__ No _L Yes Summarize type of BMP and extent of use:
Silt fences, construction exits, rock check dams, seeding and erosion matting.
If design of any runoff-handling facilities deviate from provisions of B-CS Technical
Specifications, check type facility(ies) and explain in later questions.
__ Detention elements __ Conduit elements __ Channel features
__ Swales __ Ditches __ Inlets __ Valley gutters __ Outfalls
__ Culvert features __ Bridges Other
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 11of26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.3)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Project Area Of Multi-Phase Project (continued)
Will Project Area include bridge(s) or culvert(s)? _L No __ Yes
general size and In which phase(s).
Identify type and
If detention/retention serves (will serve) overall Project Area, describe how it relates to subject
phase or site project (physical location, conveyance pathway(s), construction sequence):
The detention ponds constructed with the previous phases will serve this phase. Runoff will enter the
pond through the underground stonn drains.
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? _L Yes No, then summarize the difference(s):
Identify whether each of the types of drainage features listed below are included, extent of use,
and general characteristics.
C'-· "'C
Q) C/l C/l Q)
::J >-C/l
Q) I ..c: .B '5
Typical shape? I Surfaces?
Steepest side slopes: I Usual front slopes: 1 ·Usual back slopes:
Flow line slopes: least. ____ _ Typical distance from travelway:
typical greatest ___ _ (Attached Exhibit# )
Are longitudinal culvert ends in compliance with B-CS Standard Specifications?
___ Yes No, then explain:
At intersections or otherwise, do valley gutters cross arterial or collector streets?
./ No __ Yes If yes explain:
Are valley gutters proposed to cross any street away from an intersection?
_:f_ No __ Yes Explain: (number of locations?)
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 12 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.4)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
C'· -0
Q) I/)
I/) Q) ~ >-E i"I I/)
c: -~ ~
Gutter line slopes: Least 0.60 Usual 0.60 Greatest 1.50
Are inlets recessed on arterial and collector streets? _!!._Yes
identify where and why.
__ No If "no",
Will inlets capture 10-year design stormflow to prevent flooding of intersections (arterial
with arterial or collector)? _L_ 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)? _ ,/ _Yes __ No If no, explain.
Sag curves: Are inlets placed at low points? _L_ Yes __ No Are inlets and
conduit sized to prevent 100-year stormflow from ponding at greater than 24 inches?
_L_ Yes __ No Explain "no" answers.
Will 100-yr stormflow be contained in combination of ROW and buried conduit on
whole length of all streets? ~Yes __ No If no, describe where and why.
Do designs for curb, gutter, and inlets comply with B-CS Technical Specifications?
,/ Yes __ No If not, describe difference(s) and attach justification.
Are any 12-inch laterals used? _L_ No
used.
___ Yes Identify length(s) and where
Pipe runs between system I Typical 108' Longest 452 access points (feet): ----------
Are junction boxes used at each bend? ,/ Yes __ No If not, explain where
and why.
i I f----------------------------------~----------------___, iii Are downstream soffits at or below upstream soffits? Least amount that hydraulic
.!!!. Yes _!!._ No __ If not, explain where and why: grade line is below gutter line
(system-wide):
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 13 of 26
0.5'
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.5)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Ui' Q)
(.) c: ro iii .!:
Q) .... -o -g E
::::l ....
. !: .E C:· 0 .E (.) c: -·-~ ~ ..... ro VJ VJ ~ Q)
c: 32 ·-> ~ e "O a. E «>
.8 ~ en VJ
2 ~ ro a. Q)
VJ
Describe watercourse(s), or system(s) receiving system discharge(s) below
(include design discharge velocity, and angle between converging flow lines).
1) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
Bee Creek Trib B.3 @ 0°, < 2 fps
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) Outfall from this development will occur into downstream pipes from prev. phases
2)
c: ..2. 3)
C'-· VJ Q)
~ VJ
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):
iii Q) Flow line slopes (minimum and maximum): fl -g 0
~ z Outfall characteristics for each (velocity, convergent angle, & end treatment).
iY'I
VJ
Q) ~ Will 100-year design storm runoff be contained within easement(s) or platted drainage
ROW in all instances? __ Yes __ No If "no" explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 14 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.6)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
en Are roadside ditches used? _L_ No __ Yes If so, provide the following:
Q) Is 25-year flow contained with 6 inches of freeboard throughout? __ Yes No .s::: --(.) Are top of banks separated from road shoulders 2 feet or more? __ Yes No ..... --iS Are all ditch sections trapezoidal and at least 1.5 feet deep? Yes No Q) -----0 For any "no" answers provide location(s) and explain: 'iii
-0 C1l 0 0:::
If conduit is beneath a swale, provide the following information (each instance).
Instance 1 Describe general location, approximate length:
en Q) Is 100-year design flow contained in conduit/swale combination? Yes No >-----lj If "no" explain:
c: Space for 100-year storm flow? ROW Easement Width 0 C1l z iii Swale Surface type, minimum Conduit Type and size, minimum and maximum ,,~ and maximum slopes: slopes, design storm:
0 :.;:::;
C'· '6 en -0 Inlets Describe how conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inlets by type): cu C1l c: >-c: C1l c:
.s::: C1l
(.) .....
c: .E
Q) c: Access Describe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into conduit): a. 0 0:.;:::; ...... C1l 0 E :J .....
~ .E .5 .5 Q) Instance 2 Describe general location, approximate length:
-0 E Q) C1l en en :J en Q) Is 100-year design flow contained in conduit/swale combination? Yes No c: -0
0 "> ----:.;:::; 0 If "no" explain: C1l .....
c: a.
:c Q) Space for 100-year storm flow? ROW E Q) Easement Width
0 .s:::
0 en Swale Surface type, minimum Conduit Type and size, minimum and maximum ..... Q) ·s -ro and maximum slopes: slopes, design storm: -0 ..... c: C1l
0 a.
0 Q) Inlets Describe how conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inlets by type): Q> en
ro c:
~ -2-en
Q) Access Describe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into conduit): ..... <{
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 15 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concept and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.7)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
c: "(i'j c.. E x 0 UJ ~
If ''yes" provide the following information for each instance:
Instance 1 Describe general location, approximate length, surfacing:
:g Iii Is 100-year design flow contained in swale? __ Yes __ No Is swale wholly
c: a> within drainage ROW? __ Yes __ No Explain "no" answers:
.; ,.I f--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---1
u Access Describe how maintenance access is provide: ~ 0 ;z
~ 'I 1--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--< ~ Instance 2 Describe general location, approximate length, surfacing:
Q) ·c <'· ::J (/) ..c c :5 Q) o E .L:: Q) -(/) '§ m
(/) ~ Q) 0 ~~ (/) 0
~~
C'-·
"'C
]5
::J c..
.£ Q) (/) m 0 -c.. c.. 0 x ..... UJ c..
(/) (/) -Q) c: >-Q)
E I Q) > e c.. -~ 0 z
Qi 'I c: c: m .L:: (.)
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 3, 4, etc. If swales are used in more than two instances, attach sheet
providing all above information for each instance.
"New" channels: Will any area(s) of concentrated flow be channelized (deepened,
widened, or straightened) or otherwise altered? __ No __ Yes If only slightly
shaped, see "Swales" in this Part. If creating side banks, provide information below.
Will design replicate natural channel? __ Yes __ No If "no'', for each instance
describe section shape & area, flow line slope (min. & max.), surfaces, and 100-year
design flow, and amount of freeboard:
Instance 1:
Instance 2:
Instance 3:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 16 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.8)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Existing channels (small creeks}: Are these used? ~ No --Yes
If ''yes" provide the infonnation below.
Will small creeks and their floodplains remain undisturbed? __ Yes No How
many disturbance instances? Identify each planned location:
For each location, describe length and general type of proposed improvement
(including floodplain changes):
For each location, describe section shape & area, flow line slope (min. & max.),
surfaces, and 100-year design flow.
'C Qi
::J c :e Watercourses (and tributaries}: Aside from fringe changes, are Regulatory 0 Watercourses proposed to be altered? ~No Yes Explain below. ~ --
I/) c Submit full report describing proposed changes to Regulatory Watercourses. Address
Qi existing and proposed section size and shape, surfaces, alignment, flow line changes, E Qi length affected, and capacity, and provide full documentation of analysis procedures > 0 and data. Is full report submitted? Yes No If "no" explain: ..... --a. E
Q) c c ell All Proposed Channel Work: For all proposed channel work, provide information ..c.
t) 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:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 17 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage ConceQt 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? For each provide info. below.
For each dry-type facilitiy: Facility 1 Facility 2
Acres served & design volume + 10%
100-yr volume: free flow & plugged
Design discharge (10 yr & 25 yr)
Spillway crest at 100-yr WSE? __ yes --no __ yes --no
Berms 6 inches above plugged WSE? __ yes --no __ yes --no
Explain any "no" answers:
en Cl.) >-
I For each facility what is 25-yr design Q, and design of outlet structure?
Facility 1:
0 z Facility 2:
11 Do outlets and spillways discharge into a public facility in easement or ROW?
Facility 1: __ Yes No Facility 2: Yes No -- -- --C'-· If "no" explain: "C Cl.) en 0 c.. 0 .... a.. For each, what is velocity of 25-yr design discharge at outlet? & at spillway? en Cl.) Facility 1: & Facility 2: & ~ '(j Are energy dissipation measures used? No Yes Describe type and ro ----u_ location: c: .Q c Cl.) -Cl.)
0
Cl.) 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:
Facility 2:
If berms are used give heights, slopes and surface treatments of sides.
Facility 1:
Facility 2:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 18 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce[!t and Design Parameters I 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":
I/)
Facility 1;
Q) :.;:; =u ~ Q) Facility 2: u. :::J c: c :+:: 0 c: :.;:; 0 c: u Q) ~
Qi For additional facilities provide all same information on a separate sheet. 0
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'· I/)
Cl c: "Vi Are culverts parallel to public roadway alignment? __ Yes No Explain: I/) 0 --.... I/) u Q)
2 >-ro
I > ·;:: Creeks at Private Drives: Do private driveways, drives, or streets cross drainage a.
iii ways that serve Above-Project areas or are in public easements/ ROW?
1:l 0 No Yes If "yes" provide information below. Q) z ----~~1 How many instances? Describe location and provide information below.
Q) Location 1: > ::; u
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.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 19 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
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)
Named Regulato!)l Watercourses {&Tributaries}: Are culverts proposed on these
facilities? No __ Yes, then provide full report documenting assumptions,
criteria, analysis, computer programs, and study findings that support proposed
design(s). Is report provided? __ Yes --No If "no", explain:
~ Arterial or Major Collector Streets: W ill culverts serve these types of roadways?
Q) No Yes How many instances? For each identify the .s::. Cf) ----
Q) location and provide the information below. -Cf) ro Instance 1: Q) ..... >-~ I~ Instance 2:
Instance 3: c 0 :;:::; Yes or No for the 100-year design flow: 1 2 3 o ro z E ~1~ Headwater WSE 1 foot below lowest QUrb top?
Spread of headwater within ROW or easement?
E C'· ro Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11 )? Cf) Cf) g> -0 Explain any "no" answer(s): ·-c ~ ro
0 c ..... 0 U:.;:; >. ro ro u ~..Q
-0 Q) ro ..c Minor Collector or Local Streets: Will culverts serve these types of streets? 0 ·-..........
(.) (.) No Yes How many instances? for each identify the ·-Cf) -----Q) -g -0 location and provide the information below: a. Q)
-a. Instance 1: ro >. --0 >. Instance 2: Q) c
C/l ro ::J-Instance 3: Cf) 0 t::'. Cf)
Q) Q)
For each instance enter value, or "yes" I "no" for: 1 2 3 ~ (.) ::Jc u ro Design yr. headwater WSE 1 ft. below curb top? Q) iii ..... c <( ·-100-yr. max. depth at street crown 2 feet or less? Q) ..... 0 Product of velocity (fps) & depth at crown (ft) = ? E ..... g Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11 )?
Limit of down stream analysis (feet)?
Explain any "no" answers:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 20 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage ConceQt and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.12)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued) .
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
All Proposed Culverts: For all proposed culvert facilities (except driveway/roadside
ditch intersects) provide information requested in next eight boxes.
Do culverts and travelways intersect at 90 degrees? Yes No If not, ----identify location(s) and intersect angle(s), and justify the design(s):
Does drainage way alignment change within or near limits of culvert and surfaced
approaches thereto? __ No --Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe
change(s), and justification:
Are flumes or conduit to discharge into culvert barrel(s)? __ No __ Yes If yes,
identify location(s) and provide justification:
'O
Are flumes or conduit to discharge into or near surfaced approaches to culvert ends?
<I) --No --Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe outfall design treatment(s):
:J c: :g
0 ~
(/) t <I) Is scour/erosion protection provided to ensure long term stability of culvert structural > "3 () components, and surfacing at culvert ends? __ Yes __ No If "no" Identify
locations and provide justification(s):
Will 100-yr flow and spread of backwater be fully contained in street ROW, and/or
drainage easements/ ROW? __ Yes --No if not, why not?
Do appreciable hydraulic effects of any culvert extend downstream or upstream to
neighboring land(s) not encompassed in subject property? --No --Yes If
"yes" describe location(s) and mitigation measures:
Are all culvert designs and materials in compliance with 8-CS Tech. Specifications?
--Yes --No If not, explain in Special Design Section of this Part.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 21 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Dra inage Conce~t 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? _L 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?
(ii'
Q)
Cl "C ·;::: co
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 rock riprap, silt fence installation and inlet protection :!: iii Plan (SW3P) ::J 0 established for .... project construction? Q)
~ --No _L 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?
_L 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?
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
EffecUve February 2007
Yes ----
Page 22 of 26
No If "no" explain:
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX ·
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters J Continued (Page 4.14)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Special Designs -Deviation From B-CS Technical Specifications
If any design(s) or material(s) of traditional runoff-handling facilities deviate from provisions of
B-CS Technical Specifications, check type facility(ies) and explain by specific detail element.
Detention elements __ Drain system elements Channel features ----
--Culvert features --Swales --Ditches --Inlets __ Outfalls
__ · Valley gutters __ Bridges (explain in bridge report)
In table below briefly identify specific element, justification for deviation(s).
Specific Detail Element Justification for Deviation (attach additional sheets if needed)
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Have elements been coordinated with the City Engineer or her/his designee? For each item
above provide "yes" or "no'', action date, and staff name:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
' ~· .fl··: Design Parameters --·-~ · . .
' -f:·,, ~ .. .l. •• .:« .... ·, .. ~:.t '.1~· .,.,.,
Hydrology
Yes No Is a map(s) showing all Design Drainage Areas provided? __!f_ --
Briefly summarize the range of applications made of the Rational Formula:
Pipe Design, Inlet Design and Gutter Depth Check
What is the size and location of largest Design Drainage Area to which the Rational Formula
has been applied? 34.73 acres
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Location (or identifier): 301
Page 23 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce~t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.15)
Design Parameters (continued) '·'·
Hydrology (continued)
In making determinations for time of concentration, was segment analysis used?
No ./ Yes In approximately what percent of Design Drainage Areas? JOO %
As to intensity-duration-frequency and rain depth criteria for determining runoff flows, were any
criteria other than those provided in these Guidelines used? _:f_ No __ Yes If "yes"
identify type of data, source(s), and where applied:
For each of the stormwater management features listed below identify the storm return
frequencies (year) analyzed (or checked), and that used as the basis for design.
Feature Analysis Year(s) Design Year
Storm drain system for arterial and collector streets 10& 100 JO
Storm drain system for local streets 10& 100 10
Open channels NIA NIA
Swale/buried conduit combination in lieu of channel NIA NIA
Swales NIA NIA
Roadside ditches and culverts serving them NIA NIA
Detention facilities: spillway crest and its outfall NIA NIA
Detention facilities: outlet and conveyance structure(s) NIA NIA
Detention facilities: volume when outlet plugged NIA NIA
Culverts serving private drives or streets NIA NIA
Culverts serving public roadways NIA NIA
Bridges: provide in bridge report. NIA NIA
Hydraulics
What is the range of design flow velocities as outlined below?
Design flow velociti es; Gutters Conduit Culverts Swales Channels
Highest (feet per second) 2.96 6.77 NIA NIA NIA
Lowest (feet per second) 1.34 0.30 NIA NIA NIA
Streets and Storm Drain Systems Provide the summary information outlined below:
Roughness coefficients used:
For conduit type(s) RCP
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
For street gutters:
HDPE
Page 24 of 26
0.018
Coefficients: 0.013 0.013
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D-TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Conce(;!t 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?
Inlet coefficients? _L No Yes Head and friction losses _L No Yes ----
Explain any "yes" answer:
In conduit is velocity generally increased in the downstream direction? _L Yes --No
Are elevation drops provided at inlets, manholes, and junction boxes? _L Yes --No
Explain any "no" answers:
Are hydraulic grade lines calculated and shown for design storm? ~ Yes --No
For 100-year flow conditions? _L Yes --No Explain any "no" answers:
What tailwater conditions were assumed at outfall point(s) of the storm drain system? Identify
each location and explain:
Yes, the storm drain system was designed taking into account a tail water of 298.0' (10 yr storm) and
299.7' (JOO yr storm).
Open Channels If a HEC analysis is utilized, does it follow Sec Vl.F.5.a? __ Yes __ No
Outside of straight sections, is flow regime within limits of sub-critical flow? __ Yes __ No
If "no" list locations and explain:
Culverts If plan sheets do not provide the following for each culvert, describe it here.
For each design discharge, will operation be outlet (barrel) control or inlet control?
Entrance, friction and exit losses:
Bridges Provide all in bridge report
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 25 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012
-
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D -TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 -Drainage Concel;!t and Design Parameters I Continued (Page 4.17)
Design Parameters (continued) ..
Computer Software
What computer software has been used in the analysis and assessment of stormwater
management needs and/or the development of facility designs proposed for subject property
project? List them below, being sure to identify the software name and version, the date of the
version, any applicable patches and the publisher
Excel spreadsheets, Autodesk Civil 3D Storm Sewer Analysis and Hydroflow
Part 5 -Plans and Sl;!ecifications
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 informati on here: . . . . . . The storm sewer system and detention facilities are designed m
accordance with the BCS Drainage Design Guidelines.
'ft~·· -···· -.o..~ = -Attestation :H: ,,.,;;;,, ·~
Provide attestation to the accuracy and completeness of the foregoing 6 Parts of this Technical
Design Summary Drainage Report by signing and sealing below.
"This report (plan) for the drainage design of the development named in Part B was prepared
by me (or under my supervision) in accordance with provisions of the Bryan/College Station
Unified Drainage Design Guidelines for the owners of the property. All licenses and permits
required by any and all state and federal regulatory agencies for t.!J.~~~d drainage
impro 'ements have been issued or fall under applicable general ~~-~~00?'~'~o ~ jJ_J_ (Affix Se'f'. :,···· * ····~<!' lt1 \ . I!*: . ·!~ ~o•.,•ooooo•'#Joe•••o••P•90•111~eeo:'ct•~••~
L" >/d p ,/e · / E · ~ JOSEPH P. SCHULTZ ~ 1cens ro ess1ona ng1neer ~OH .. OH .. OOHoe .. H .. UOOU'1eoooo.J! ,~. 6 "I:!;~
State of Texas PE No. 6fB8 °1
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Effective February 2007
Page 26 of 26
~i\1> 5889 / ltJif • •• ~ <;;,,~ • ([,-d!1 ~~ •o/~ I STE~ 0°
00 ~ .# ?. ~li.s:~·~ •••.•••• k,0.a -ZZ-f3
-~, .. '"'iVAL v~l!W'
APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
As Revised August 2012