HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater ReportDrainage Report
for
Castlegate II Subdivision Section 103
College Station, Texas
August2013
Owner/Developer:
3-D Development
4490 Castlegate Drive
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
Drainage Report — Executive Summary
Castlegate II Subdivision, Section 103
College Station, Texas
ENGINEER
SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC.
P.O. Box 11995
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone: (979) 764-3900
Fax: (979) 764-3910
3-D Development, LLC
4490 Castlegte Drive
College Station, TX 77845
Phone: (979) 690-7250
GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
Section 103 is the eighth phase being constructed in the Castlegate II Subdivision. It lies on the west portion of the
subdivision, and is adjacent to Section 100. It consists of 39 residential lots, and includes an extension of Victoria
Avenue, Etonbury Drive, Kimbolton Drive and Warkworth Lane. All of Section 103 lies within the Spring Creek
Drainage Basin and will drain into the previously constructed detention pond. That pond was designed to
accommodate runoff from Section 103 and all assumptions associated with its design are still valid. No additional
stormwater detention is being proposed with Section 103.
Description
9 Area:
Proposed Land Use:
• #of Lots:
• Existing Land Use:
• Land Description:
Primary Drainage Facility:
Flood Hazard Information:
FEMA FIRM.-
Floodplain:
9.605 Acres
Single Family Residential
39 lots
Vacant
The terrain slopes generally towards the southeast.
Spring Creek
12-06-1841P, Dated May 18, 2012
None of this phase of the development lies within the floodplain.
HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS
The existing site is wooded with some cleared areas. The elevations range from 318 to 326, sloping generally in a
southwesterly 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 Sections 100 & 201 and then discharges into the
existing detention facilities. Ultimately, this runoff flows into Spring Creek Tributary A2A.
GENERAL STORMWATER PLAN
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 Spring Creek Tributary A2A.
The software was used to compute pipe capacities, flow rates and velocities,
compute hydraulic grade line elevations, headwater elevations, gutter depth &
inlet sizing.
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.
Design Results: 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,
Detention Analysis: The stormwater runoff from Castlegate 11 Subdivision was previously studied
and detention ponds were designed for the entire development including this
phase.
Applicable Exhibits: Exhibit A — Drainage Area Map — Overall Layout
Exhibit B — Drainage Area Map - Storm Sewer System Layout
Appendix A —Drainage Area Summary
Appendix A2 — Post Development — Time of Concentration Computations
Appendix Bl — Depth of Flow in Gutter
Appendix B2 — Storm Sewer Inlet Summary
Appendix C — Storm Sewer Pipe Summary
Appendix D — Technical Design Summary
CONCLUSION
The storm sewer, culverts & channel drainage system for Section 103 of Castlegate 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 Castlegate II, Section 103, 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.
o'
F 12327
SGHULTZ ENGINEERING, LW.
z6r( 3
Jose P. S ultz, P.E.
EXHIBIT A
DRAINAGE AREA MAP
STORM SEWER SYSTEM LAYOUT
f3531
E34
_ �O59 -O:�.�79 101 15 I'Y
0 33,
5) -440)
17
1 20
8
--- 5L
356 IN
0.03 ("]1 F2171'Afe-8 ASPF1tPVMT, 50'
309 310
0.8 0.50
O
11 1.5
6 4 3
405
P
16 BI 13 7 6 3 2
17,34 ❑ to a kuAff . I p YA 6 w
0.6 40
gllln . I --\ 0,418
ol, .1.v 112 1L3 1,[ ---46
7435 204 206
0.70 on Uvenue o.21 0.28
000i
406
22
0.12
7.12 ---
eeee'�
0—v'
400 /40'9N
4 7 7
2
207 208
2.08 1.13- 114
201 .05 1
2.00
J
Schultz Engineering, LLC
2730 Weloill, Inion A
College Station, Talon 77US
Schultz
tf979.764.3900 '3'C NO. 12327
suite DISIGNOD DoNala MF`RY D 04I
KERR JPS RCF JPS 13-260 AUGUSTM13
1 '0" No I
SCALE EXHIBIT
CASTLEGATE 11 SUBDIVISION DRAINAGE AREA MAP — '-- N/A
SECTION 103 K,,Voo,u 1'=IW
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS OVERALL LAYOUT pw"INGSCIle 1:1
.. HNNE: 13-20
EXHIBIT B
DRAINAGE AREA MAP
GUTTER DEPTH LOCATION
34D 15 1 15 7 160 15
3521% /403AN
0.63 320 i
0.59 330
341
0.79 �s
3)
-,B) 09403 1.04
9 t8 8 16 8 NLEf aoa 8 16 5
402A
INLET 403 3
4j OCK 2A,-,
nOA
404AJB 401
\PIPE 43D
%li O�28 0.15 . .....
PIPE 500
I'S 36" RCP PIPE
30' RCP PIPE INLET 501
12 I I 2 12
4 A qH I INLET 430) INLET
t t PIPE 501
L
t 2-36* RCP PIPE
/ INLET 440 I 3 13 —T
309 31(
0.52 5
B
PIPE 441 INLET 441
14 1
t t
PIPE 502
2-36" HDPE PIPE
15 5 1, 1
41D511 tit 4048 —
1.59
.59 D5 to 1.59 1
I I e 403E of a028 (I IBLOCK
1.48 0.93 401A 400A
17 7 17 I t 0.27
J t
17.34 10
is 110 8
PIPE 503
PE 2-W HDPE Pi PIPE 520
PIPE
505 18* Ri PIPE
BLOCK 22 G2-]36:HXDPEE MPIPE
19 9 19 0.36
/ INLET SOS 21 4008 11
BL( Gp; 21 PIPE 507(PIPE 506 BI[C 21 1 0
_36. RCP
PIPE H- 5 0.29 12
LP' 406A
as PE 118 PIPE)_ J�ieaaaaaaia ai 2-38' HOPE PIPE 2
36- _RCt t 20 t
0
INLET 506 .04
t PIPE 310
000 408B -r.— — 4 1 36, RCP PIPE 204
00*0 T 0.61 408A 406E N 021
Etoribury Avenue 0.10 0.08 1
00000 J8 503
0000, PIPE 504
PIPE 522 2-36* HDPE PIPE
/01' 18" RCP PIPE PIPE 530
PIPE 5 INLET 522 18* RCP PIPE
IP M50
P �j
G �O- :RP C1 RCP PIPE
P �E
PIPE 540 PIPE 52 INLET 521 203
(a 4098 24' RCP PI/ ` PE 18* RCP PIPE 1.12
1.33
409A 40
0.65
411 407A
if 7.9 0.97
Schultz Engineering, LLC
2730 Le"grair", Suite A
CoReSet Station, Texas 77945
41LU�I!z979.76E,3900 TSPE NO. 12327
Sit... OESIGN10 OnxVon "MOVED "'ON N unne KERR JPS See JPS 131 ALIMST2013
CASTLEGATE II SUBDIVISION DRAINAGE AREA MAP — EXHIBIT
SCALEus",im NIA
SECTION 103 CUTTER DEPTH
p,on,en.a. ;I
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS L 0 CA TION Fli 13-260
APPENDIX A
DRAINAGE AREA SUMMARY
APPENDIX A
Castlegate II Section 103
Drainage Area Summary
Area #
Area, A
(acres)
C
4
(min)
10 year storm
100 year storm
110
(inlhr)
Q10
(cfs)
1100
(in/hr)
4100
(cfs)
309
0.80
0.550
10.0
8.635
3.80
11.639
5.12
309A
0.28
0.550
10.0
8.635
1.33
11.639
1.79
309B
0.52
0.550
10.0
8.635
2.47
11.639
3.33
310
0.50
0.550
10.0
8.635
2.37
11.639
3.20
310A
1 0.15
0.550
10.0
8.635
0.71
11.639
1 0.96
310E
0.35
0.550
10.0
8.635
1.66
11.639
2.24
319
0.71
0.550
10.0
8,635
3.37
11.639
4.55
320
1.04
0.650
10.0
8.635
4.94
11.639
6.66
400
0.48
0.550
10.0
8.635
2.28
11.639
3.07
400A
0.19
0.550
10.0
8.635
0.90
11.639
1.22
400B
0.29
0.550
10.0
6.635
1.38
11.639
1.86
401
0.63
0.550
10.0
8.635
2.99
11.639
4.03
401A
0.27
0.550
10.0
8.635
1.28
11.639
1.73
401B
0.36
0.550
10.0
8.635
1.71
I1.639
2.30
402
1.54
0.550
15.0
7.194
6.09
9.732
8.24
402A
0.62
0.550
10.0
8.635
1 2.94
11.639
3.97
402B
0.92
0.550
15.0
7.194
3.64
9.732
4.92
403
3.09
0.550
16.0
6.969
11.84
9.434
16.03
403A
1.60
0.550
16.0
6.969
6.13
9.434
8.30
403B
1.49
0.550
15.0
7.194
5.90
9.732
7.98
404
1.76
0.550
15.0
7.194
6.96
9.732
9.42
404A
0.16
0.550
10.0
8.635
0.76
11.639
1.02
404E
1.60
0.550
15.0
7.194
6.33
9.732
1 8.56
405
1.82
0.550
15.0
7.194
7.20
9.732
9.74
405A
0.23
0.550
10.0
8.635
1.09
11.639
1.47
405B
1.59
1 0.550
15.0
7.194
6.29
9.732
8.51
406
0.12
0.550
10.0
8.635
0.57
11.639
0.77
406A
0.04
0.550
10.0
8.635
0.19
11.639
0.26
406B
0.08
0.550
10.0
8.635
0.38
11.639
0.51
407
2.23
0.350
22.0
5.896
4.60
8.016
6.26
407A
0.97
0.350
21.0
6.048
2.05
8.217
2.79
407E
1.26
0.350
22.0
5.896
2.60
8.016
3.54
408
0.70
0.550
10.0
8.635
3.32
11.639
4.48
408A
0.10
0.550
10.0
8.635
0.47
11.639
0.64
408E
0.60
0.550
10.0
8.636
2.85
11.639
3.84
409
1.98
0.350
22.0
5.896
4.09
8.016
5.56
409A
0.65
0.350
22.0
5.896
1.34
8.016
1.82
409E
1.33
0.350
24.0
5.617
2.61
7.647
3.56
410
17.34
0.300
29.0
5.036
26.20
6.878
35.78
411
27.98
0.300 1
32.0
4.749
39.86
1 6,4987
54.54
The Rational Method:
Q = CIA
Q = Flow (cfs)
A = Area (acres)
C = Runoff Coeff.
I = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr)
Brazos County:
I = b / (te+d)° t0 = L/(V"60)
tc = Time of concentration (min) L = Length (ft
V = Velocity (ff/sec)
10 year storm 100 year storm
b = 80 b = 96
d= 8.5 d= &0
e = 0.763 e = 0.730
APPENDIX A2
POST DEVELOPMENT
TIME OF CONCENTRATION COMPUTATIONS
C_
E
N
J
O1
U)
z
O
r
a
IL
2
O
c.�
z
O
M
O
N Z C
ui
K V d
zN
O
LL
N U =
CL O
a W 0
H
z
W
2
a
O
J
W
W
G
F-
N
O
a
APPENDIX III
DEPTH OF FLOW IN GUTTER
e
a
N
t7
<
✓j
N
C
N
Y
f'
N
CI
lV
N
CI
N
(J
N CI
(V
M
3
T
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
yo
T
a�lyyyy
yy
o
ry
6
m "'
DD
O
C
o
pp
OO
OO
o
U
0
o
0
0
v
d
d
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
a
m
¢
m
o
o
n m
m
m
a
m
a
m
a
a
a
a m
a
m
$N
Jd
m
NN
m
U
0
Z
a
Sys
SJ
V
V
tm�l
M
Y Cml
N
(V
M
h V
ry
N m
tl O
mm
N
y
C
y
N N
O
O
N
y�
O
O
OO
O
OO
o
p
O
O
O
0' O
O
O O
OV
O O
O
O
O
O
LL
f��
nmm,
i 1
P T
OOI
OO+
Oai Oai
yO y
< d
f
(OV
M
(
th
M M
O
O
N
N
w
"'�
"`3mR
rc
nln
I'n
o'r
n In
�n
In
Inm
wm
MM
`�'w'M
o
u
w
�
�
`roM
m
in
in
M
M
m M
in
in
inM
m
t�
mn
mm
mm
rc
LL
CJ
OJ
m
m
Cf
N �
�
M CJ
�
Cl
(�
tN+1
CNI
�i
e`�i
m
m
1,
S§
m
m m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
w w
w
w
w w
w
w
to w
_ O
a
'c
�
m
< Y
N
<
N
Y
'f°v
N
CI
CI
IV
O1 uNi
N N
m umi
m
a
'PiM
N (V
rvm
nm
(V M
T
{pC
y
ry
m
ryry
yy
y
apy�
N
T
O
O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O O
O
O
0 O
O
O
O O
a �
#
o
N
w
a
(V
umi
w
�
OO
ryry
C
ygg
Om
mM
88
g�S
o0
00
0
00
oa
wa
m—oa
oa
o0
om
V
N
O
Yml
O
O O
O
O
N
O
M
O
h
O
N
O
O
O
O 0
N h
O
N
O
N
O
N N
O O
m
O
m
O
M
O O
ggO
Q
mqy
m
¢
m
¢
m
¢
m
¢ m
¢¢j
¢
m
¢ m
¢
m
¢ m
VQ
ssx
x
a
s
$
N
y
$�mj
N
N fn
o
N
N
N N
f9
(�% N
N
y
N m
APPENDIX B2
STORM SEWER INLET SUMMARY
00
h
00
M
(0
(0
co
N
IIt
Cl)
00C
d'
O
0)
W
O
07
M
CO
7
4)
'
L6
O
O
L6
N
M
(O
(M
7
V
4
O
O
M
(3)
r-
(O
0)
O
Cl)
00
It
N
Cl)
P�
0)
V
(N
(OO
V
7
I
M
M
M
M
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
OO N
N
O
n
V
N
1
CO
�
d0'
O
co
(OO
(01' �
0)
d)
M
(A
7
O
d'
c')
CO
(O
O
C_
(O
0)
I-
(O
n
N
0)
Lr)
h
n
0)
c-
L
_O
V
N
0)
O
(O
N
M
d'
0)
(O
(0
't
3
L6
7
7
1-
ci
4
N
M
M
vi
.O
N
C
(6
N
C
m
O
V
It
O
M
r-
((00
N
V~'
O
O
00
Mn
x
Q$
Cl?
V
V
V
c
N
Cl)
N
Cl)
M
N
Q
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Z V:
C
W y
IL
E
a
Q
_O N
0)
O
W
O
N
(D
0)
Il
M
O
00
0)
0)
Il
(n
N
M
00
N
O
(0
0)
O
N
�,
C
r�
O
N
M
N
O
M
N
zi
.4
C1
a
y
r
d
N
o
c
Q
a
T
F-
O
LO
O
O
O
N
I
O
LO
O
O
C
C G
>
O y
a `o
i+ d
rn
N C
(n
Xk
(0
N
Cl)
tO
V'
O
0)
(O
00
O
N
0)
a0 c
m
CD
N
O
7
O
7
O
V
O
V
Cl)
O
Cl)
O
'IT
O
d'
O
d'
O
d'
O
7
O
d'
Q
O U
l0 d
O
tm
0)
CD
N C;
CD
Cl)
M
OV'
V
O
O
O
O
ON
N
NN
E
((0
U)
U)
co
(4
(n
co
(A
(4
U)
U U)
APPENDIX Cl
STORM SEWER PIPE SUMMARY
E
O 6��g �i W
O ON
m
H
�
H
N
t'!
tV
W
d
v
x w
S
� w
v
J�
Ji
VNi
y
N
41
N
N
N
h
�
N
N
N
i0
�
y
N
d LL
N
VI
N
<
<
<
BOO
VI
N
M
E
j
m
�
n
n
m
la-
M
l�-
m6
F WY
(�V
N
N
r
ON
lV
�Yy
IV
Nm
tV
�
(OV
N
ryV
N
d
�n
in
m
m
m
m
m
in
m
m
�n
0
E
y
C
N
qi
N
U O
m
Cl
N
$
rn
N
m
<
<
P
N
o
D
2 N
.g
n
u�i
v�i
ry
o
o
ry
�2
a
$
$
o
�1
P
O
�
W
N
M
N
yr�
N
P
Ong
ry
m
�
00
OO
m
n O e
N
y N
o
6 0
J
p
j
y
N
V
O
O
S
o0
If
o m
C
O
N
i
a
FL O O�
OI
OI
�
O
r
N
t7
O
N
P
O
n
n
e�
n
n
io
n
ry
4ry0
o
n
o
F�
w
'N
ryo
tyro
M
m
m
in
m
in
N
fT
N
Ul
N
y
N
h
y
N
N
h
y
N
�
N
N
N
6
M
N
M
N
uJ
OO
N
<
<
<
N
N
Cl
M
E
o b
h
m
ryry
h
o
"
`�
i3
kY
O
x
N
S ^
IM1
N
N
l2
t
OWi
N
N
N
2
Oi
(S
l7
W
1�
V
6��
N
N
M
Cl
M
N
Oj
Cl
N
N
N
Oy
E
j�
6
of
d
6
v
d
o
d
N
N
.
.
u�
o
s�
a
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
The Cities of Bryan and College Station both require storm drainage design to follow these
Unified Stormwater Design Guidelines. Paragraph C2 of Section III (Administration) requires
submittal of a drainage report in support of the drainage plan (stormwater management plan)
proposed in connection with land development projects, both site projects and subdivisions.
That report may be submitted as a traditional prose report, complete with applicable maps,
graphs, tables and drawings, or it may take the form of a `Technical Design Summary". The
format and content for such a summary report shall be in substantial conformance with the
description in this Appendix to those Guidelines. In either format the report must answer the
questions (affirmative or negative) and provide, at minimum, the information prescribed in the
"Technical Design Summary" in this Appendix.
The Stormwater Management Technical Design Summary Report shall include several parts
as listed below. The information called for in each part must be provided as applicable. In
addition to the requirements for the Executive Summary, this Appendix includes several
pages detailing the requirements for a Technical Design Summary Report as forms to be
completed. These are provided so that they may be copied and completed or scanned and
digitized. In addition, electronic versions of the report forms may be obtained from the City.
Requirements for the means (medium) of submittal are the same as for a conventional report
as detailed in Section III of these Guidelines.
Note: Part 1 — Executive Summary must accompany any drainage report
required to be provided in connection with any land development project,
regardless of the format chosen for said report.
Note: Parts 2 through 6 are to be provided via the forms provided in this
Appendix. Brief statements should be included in the forms as requested,
but additional information should be attached as necessary.
Part 1 — Executive Summary Report
Part 2 — Project Administration
Part 3 — Project Characteristics
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Part 5 — Plans and Specifications
Part 6 — Conclusions and Attestation
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY REPORT
Part 1 — Executive Summary
This is to be a brief prose report that must address each of the seven areas listed below.
Ideally it will include one or more paragraphs about each item.
1. Name, address, and contact information of the engineer submitting the report, and
of the land owner and developer (or applicant if not the owner or developer). The
date of submittal should also be included.
2. Identification of the size and general nature of the proposed project, including any
proposed project phases. This paragraph should also include reference to
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 1 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 — Project Administration
Start (Page 2.1)
Engineering:and
Design Professional'sllnformation
Engineering Firm Name and Address:
Jurisdiction
Schultz Engineering, LLC
City: Bryan
P.O. Box 11995
College Station, Tx 77842
✓ College Station
Date of Submittal:
November 2012
Lead Engineer's Name and Contact Info.(phone, e-mail, fax):
Other:
Joseph A Schultz, PE email.joeschultz84@verizon.net
Phone:764-3900 ax:764-3910
Supporting Engineering / Consulting Firm(s):
Other contacts:
n/a
Developer
/Owner / Ap IjGant
Information
.
Developer / Applicant Name and Address:
Phone and e-mail:
3-D Development, LLC
979-690-7250
4490 Castlegate Dr
College Station, Tx 77845
Property Owner(s) if not Developer / Applicant (& address):
Phone and e-mail:
Projer{t Identification
> '
Development Name: Castlegate II Subdivision, Section 103
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 8 of 16
Legal description of subject property (phase) or Project Area:
(see Section II, Paragraph B-3a)
Robert Stevenson League, A-54, Tract 25
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 beginning in the previous sections (Sections 200-202 & 100). Road and utility
construction is beginning in Section 101
General Location of Project Area, or subject property (phase):
Immediately northuvest of Greens Prairie Road, about 1.3 miles Southwest of the Arrington Rd -Greens
Prairie Intersection.
In City Limits?
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (acreage):
Bryan: acres.
Bryan: College Station:
College Station: 9.605 acres.
Acreage Outside ETJ:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 3 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 — Proiect Administration Continued (page 2.2)
Projoct Identification (continued)' ,
Roadways abutting or within Project Area or
Abutting tracts, platted land, or built
subject property:
developments:
Victoria Avenue, Warkworth Lane & Kitnbohon
Castlegate Subdivision, Sections 100 & 201
Drive
Named Regulatory Watercourse(s) & Watershed(s):
Tributary Basin(s):
Spring Creek
Spring Creek Tributary A2A
Plat Information For Project or Subject Properly (oriPhase�
Preliminary Plat File #: 12- 00500004 Final Plat File #: NIA Date: August 2013
Name: CASTLEGATE II (PP) Status and Vol/Pg: submitted with this project
If two plats, second name: File #:
Status: Date:
Zoning information For Rroject or Subject Property
(or Phase),'
Zoning Type: R-1 Existing or Proposed? Existing Case Code:
Case Date Status:
Zoning Type: Existing or Proposed? Case Code:
Case Date Status:
Stormwater Management'Planning
For Projector Subject Property (or Phas6
Planning Conference(s) & Date(s):
Participants:
N/A
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 Page 4 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 2 — Project Administration Continued (page 2.3)
Coorojnatjon for.Project or Subject I Property (or Phase)
Note: For any Coordination of stormwater matters indicated below, attach documentation
describing and substantiating any agreements, understandings, contracts, or approvals.
Dept.
Contact:
Date:
Subject:
Coordination
With Other
Departments of
Jurisdiction
City (Bryan or
College Station)
Coordination With
Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
Non -jurisdiction
City Needed?
Yes _ No ✓
Coordination with
Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
Brazos County
Needed?
Yes _ No ✓
Coordination with
Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
TxDOT Needed?
Yes No ✓
Coordination with
Summarize need(s) & actions taken (include contacts & dates):
TAMUS Needed?
Yes _ No ✓
PermitsFor'ProjectoirSubject,Propertr;(orPhase)-777777
As to stormwater management, are permits required for the proposed work from any of the entities
listed below? If so, summarize status of efforts toward that objective ins aces below.
Entity
Permitted or
'
Approved .
Status of Actions (include dates)
US Army Crops of
Permitted
Permit approved.
Engineers
No Yes ✓
US Environmental
Protection Agency
No ✓ Yes
Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality
No Yes ✓
Brazos River
Authority
No ✓ Yes
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 5 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 — Property Characteristics
Continued (Page 3.2)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase)
Has an earlier hydrologic analysis been done for larger area including subject property?
Yes
Reference the study (& date) here, and attach copy if not already in City files.
Detention & Drainage System Report for
Castlegate H Subdivision, Section 200
April, 2011
Is the stormwater management plan for the property in substantial conformance with the
earlier study? Yes_ ✓ _ No_ _ If not, explain how it differs.
No
If subject property is not part of multi -phase project, describe stormwater management
plan for the property in Part 4.
If property is part of multi -phase project, provide overview of stormwater management plan
for Project Area here. In Part 4 describe how plan for subject property will comply
therewith.
Do existing topographic features on subject property store or detain runoff? ✓ No Yes
Describe them (include approximate size, volume, outfall, model, etc).
Any known drainage or flooding problems in areas near subject property? ✓ No Yes
Identify:
Based on location of study property in a watershed, is Type 1 Detention (flood control) needed?
(see Table B-1 in Appendix B) Aheady 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 Page 7 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised Auqust 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 — Property Characteristics
Continued (Page 3.3)
Hydrologic Attributes of Subject Property (or Phase)
(continued)
Does subject property straddle a Watershed or Basin divide? ✓ No Yes If yes,
describe splits below. In Part 4 describe design concept for handling this.
Watershed or Basin
Larger acreage
Lesser acreage
Above -Project Areas(Section II, Paragraph B3-a)
Does Project Area (project or phase) receive runoff from upland areas? _ No ✓ Yes
Size(s) of area(s) in acres: 1) 2.23 2) L96 3)17.98 4) 17.34
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,Jlow
Flow determination: Outline hydrologic methods and assumptions:
Rational Equation. C-vahre of 0.30
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
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 Page 8 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 3 — Property Characteristics
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
J
instrument. If instrument(s), describe their provisions.
exist for any
part of
pathway(s)?
No
Yes
Where runoff must cross lower properties, describe characteristics of abutting lower
property(ies). (Existing watercourses? Easement or Consent aquired?)
Pathway
Areas
Describe any built or improved drainage facilities existing near the property (culverts,
bridges, lined channels, buried conduit, swales, detention ponds, etc).
Detention Pond constructed with previous phase.
Nearby
Drainage
Facilities
Do any of these have hydrologic or hydraulic influence on proposed stormwater
design? No ✓ Yes If yes, explain:
Proposed storm drains will ran directly into detention pond. The Proposed storm drain design
has taken into effect the pond filling from a 100yr storm.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 9 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
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.
Discharge(s) To Lower Property(les) (Section 11, 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 # )
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.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 10 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters Continued (Page 4.2)
Stormwater Management Goncept (continued)
Within Project Area Of Multi -Phase Project
Identify gaining Basins or Watersheds and acres shifting:
Will project result
in shifting runoff
between Basins or
between
What design and mitigation is used to compensate for increased runoff
Watersheds?
from gaining basin or watershed?
✓ No
Yes
How will runoff from Project
1. With facility(ies) involving other development projects.
Area be mitigated to pre-
2 Establishing features to serve overall Project Area.
development conditions?
Select any or all of 1, 2,
3. On phase (or site) project basis within Project Area.
and/or 3, and explain below.
1. Shared facility (type & location of facility; design drainage area served; relationship to size of
Project Area): (Attached Exhibit # )
2. For Overall Project Area (type & location of facilities): (Attached Exhibit # )
3. By phase (or site) project: Describe planned mitigation measures for phases (or sites) in
subsequent questions of this Part.
Are aquatic echosystems proposed? No Yes In which phase(s) or
project(s)?
v
>_
Are other Best Management Practices for reducing stormwater pollutants proposed?
o-
No Yes Summarize type of BMP and extent of use:
N
C
U
.y
N O
0 Z
If design of any runoff -handling facilities deviate from provisions of B-CS Technical
o ✓
Specifications, check type facility(ies) and explain in later questions.
a)Detention
elements Conduit elements Channel features
Q
Swales Ditches Inlets Valley gutters _ Ouffalls
Culvert features Bridges Other
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 11 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised Auaust 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
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)? ✓ No Yes Identify type and
general size and In which phase(s).
If detention/retention serves (will serve) overall Project Area, describe how it relates to subject
phase or site project (physical location, conveyance pathway(s), construction sequence):
The detention pond constructed with the previous phase will serve this phase. Runoff will enter the
pond through the underground storin 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? ✓ Yes No, then summarize the difference(s):
Identify whether each of the types of drainage features listed below are included, extent of use,
and general characteristics.
Typical shape? Surfaces?
a
Steepest side slopes:
Usual front slopes:
Usual back slopes:
N }
N
Flow line slopes: least
Typical distance from travelway:
0
typical greatest
(Attached Exhibit # )
o
Z z
a
2 ✓
Are longitudinal culvert ends in compliance with B-CS Standard Specifications?
Yes No, then explain:
u
At intersections or otherwise, do valley gutters cross arterial or collector streets?
Co }T
✓ No Yes If yes explain:
d
:✓
Are valley gutters proposed to cross any street away from an intersection?
aa) :3 0
✓ No Yes Explain: (number of locations?)
_
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 12 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.4)
Stormwater Management
Concept (continued);
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Gutter line slopes: Least 0.60 Usual 0.80 Greatest Z03
Are inlets recessed on arterial and collector streets? ✓ Yes No If "no",
identify where and why.
Will inlets capture 10-year design stormflow to prevent flooding of intersections (arterial
with arterial or collector)? ✓ Yes No If no, explain where and why not.
C1.
0
W
Will inlet size and placement prevent exceeding allowable water spread for 10-year
gdesign
storm throughout site (or phase)? ✓ Yes No If no, explain.
M
rn
ca CD
Sag curves: Are inlets placed at low points? ✓ Yes No Are inlets and
g w
conduit sized to prevent 100-year stormflow from ponding at greater than 24 inches?
r
✓ Yes No Explain "no" answers.
w
N
Will 100-yr stormflow be contained in combination of ROW and buried conduit on
a
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.
a
Ny
Pipe runs between system
Typical 92' Longest 317'
access points
r
2
Are junction boxes used at each bend? ✓ Yes No If not, explain where
✓
N
and why.
c o
z
E
Are downstream soffits at or below upstream soffits?
Least amount that hydraulic
w
Yes ✓ No If not, explain where and why:
grade line is below gutter line
(system -wide):
0.5'
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 13 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.5)
Stormwater Maftagement Concept
(continued);
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Describe watercourse(s), or system(s) receiving system discharge(s) below
(include design discharge velocity, and angle between converging flow lines).
U
1) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
w
.o
Pipe 430 Oulfall: Velocity 4.98 fps.
`o
'
E
2) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
Pipe 440 Outfall. Velocity 7.74 fps.
c d
4Ei m
3) Watercourse (or system), velocity, and angle?
N
Pipe 500 Outfall: Velocity 6.72 fps.
�o
O
o
o a
E
For each outfall above, what measures are taken to prevent erosion or scour of
Nreceiving
and all facilities at juncture?
1) Outfall from this development will occur into downstream pipes from prey. phases
a
0
2) On[fall from this development will occur into downstream pipes from prev. phases
N
0
3) Oulfall from this development will occur into downstream pipes from prev. phases
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-flowflumes if any):
C1•
N
N
N
N )
c
Flow line slopes (minimum and maximum):
v
0
NZ
Outfall characteristics for each (velocity, convergent angle, & end treatment).
m✓
3
N
N
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 Page 14 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.6)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Are roadside ditches used? ✓ No Yes If so, provide the following:
t
Is 25-year flow contained with 6 inches of freeboard throughout ? No
w
_Yes
Are top of banks separated from road shoulders 2 feet or more? Yes No
m
_ _
Are all ditch sections trapezoidal and at least 1.5 feet deep? _ Yes No
y
For any "no" answers provide location(s) and explain:
m
0
If conduit is beneath a swale, provide the following information (each instance).
Instance 1 Describe general location, approximate length:
N
Y
Is 100-year design flow contained in conduit/swale combination? Yes _ No
N
If "no" explain:
d
U
U
Space for 100-year storm flow? ROW Easement Width
Z c
Swale Surface type, minimum
and maximum slopes:
Conduit Type and size, minimum and maximum
slopes, design storm:
c
0
N
m
Inlets Describe how conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inlets by type):
c
c c
s m
U �
O
C
0 o
Access Describe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into conduit):
o `°
E
0 w
Instance 2 Describe general location, approximate length:
a)
N
c
Is 100-year design flow contained in conduit/swale combination? Yes No
° 2
_ _
If "no" explain:
c a
o t
Space for 100-year storm flow? ROW Easement Width
c
.. m
Swale Surface type, minimum
Conduit Type and size, minimum and maximum
S
and maximum slopes:
slopes, design storm:
c
Inlets Describe how conduit is loaded (from streets/storm drains, inlets by type):
m c
3 0
Access Describe how maintenance access is provided (to swale, into conduit):
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 15 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Desian Parameters
Continued (Page 4.7)
Stormwater Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
If "yes" provide the following information for each instance:
Instance 1 Describe general location, approximate length, surfacing:
c
a
o
w
L
W
4� o;
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:
o
Z
v
c ✓ 0
Instance 2 Describe general location, approximate length, surfacing:
v
a:
c �
� N
N
o E
.G N
3
Is 100-year design flow contained in swale? —Yes No Is swale wholly
o
within drainage ROW? Yes No Explain "no" answers:
_
N p
W
Access Describe how maintenance access is provided:
U
d
a
Instance 3. 4. etc. If swales are used in more than two instances, attach sheet
providing all above information for each instance.
"New" channels: Will any area(s) of concentrated flow be channelized (deepened,
widened, or straightened) or otherwise altered? No Yes If only slightly
shaped, see "Swales" in this Part. If creating side banks, provide information below.
c
Will design replicate natural channel? _ Yes No If "no", for each instance
o o.
describe section shape & area, flow line slope (min. & max.), surfaces, and 100-year
o 'uf
design flow, and amount of freeboard:
o
Instance 1:
c
d
E
N
o
Instance 2:
n
E O
.o Z
Instance 3:
m
L
U
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 16 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.8)
Storinwater Management Concept
(continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Existina channels (small creeks): Are these used? No Yes
If "yes" provide the information below.
Will small creeks and their floodplains remain undisturbed? _ Yes _ No How
many disturbance instances? Identify each planned location:
For each location, describe length and general type of proposed improvement
(including floodplain changes):
For each location, describe section shape & area, flow line slope (min. & max.),
surfaces, and 100-year design flow.
v
c
c
Watercourses (and tributaries): Aside from fringe changes, are Regulatory
0
Watercourses proposed to be altered? No Yes Explain below.
Submit full report describing proposed changes to Regulatory Watercourses. Address
E
existing and proposed section size and shape, surfaces, alignment, flow line changes,
length affected, and capacity, and provide full documentation of analysis procedures
and data. Is full report submitted? Yes No If "no" explain:
n
E
c
c
vAll
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 / easements sized to contain channel and required maintenance space?
Yes _ No If not, identify location(s) and explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 17 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised Auqust 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
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:
w
a�
For each facility what is 25-yr design Q, and design of outlet structure?
Facility 1:
O
Z
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:
0
O
O.
O
LL
For each, what is velocity of 25-yr design discharge at outlet? & at s ilo IwaX?
W
Facility 1: & Facility 2: &
Are energy dissipation measures used? No _ Yes Describe type and
LL
location:
c
O
.c
N
N
E
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 Page 18 of 26 APPENDIX, D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.10)
St6rmwat6r Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Do structures comply with B-CS Specifications? Yes or no, and explain if "no":
Facility 1;
LL :3
Facility 2:
c a.,
o c
G U
oFor
additional facilities provide all same information on a separate sheet.
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:
C1•
w
m
c
oAre
culverts parallel to public roadway alignment? Yes No Explain:
m
a
Creeks at Private Drives: Do private driveways, drives, or streets cross drainage
m
ways that serve Above -Project areas or are in public easements/ ROW?
NZ
No Yes If "yes" provide information below.
N �/
How many instances? Describe location and provide information below.
>
Location 1:
0
U
2
Location 2:
Location 3:
For each location enter value for:
1
2
3
Design year passing without toping travelway?
Water depth on travelway at 25-year flow?
Water depth on travelway at 100-year flow?
For more instances describe location and same information on separate sheet.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 19 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.11)
; Stormwater Management Concept 11 (continuedI
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Named Regulatory Watercourses (& Tributaries): Are culverts proposed on these
facilities? No Yes, then provide full report documenting assumptions,
criteria, analysis, computer programs, and study findings that support proposed
design(s). Is report provided? Yes _ No If "no", explain:
d
Arterial or Maior Collector Streets: Will culverts serve these types of roadways?
(D
No Yes How many instances? For each identify the
location and provide the information below.
Instance 1:
aa)
Instance 2:
o
Instance 3:
c
0
o w
Yes or No for the 100-year design flow:
1
2
3
z
E
o
Headwater WSE 1 foot below lowest curb top?
✓
c
Spread of headwater within ROW or easement?
E
w N
o�
Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11)?
y m
Explain any "no" answer(s):
2 c
U •-
T i0
(0 U
3 0
ca
o
Minor Collector or Local Streets: Will culverts serve these types of streets?
No Yes How many instances? for each identify the
location and provide the information below:
an
L
Instance 1:
Nc
Instance 2:
v o
Instance 3:
r W
For each instance enter value, or "yes" / "no" for:
1
2
3
o �
Design yr. headwater WSE 1 ft. below curb top?
T
100-yr. max. depth at street crown 2 feet or less?
E
Product of velocity (fps) & depth at crown (ft) = ?
o
Is velocity limited per conditions (Table C-11)?
Limit of down stream analysis (feet)?
Explain any "no" answers:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 20 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
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:
Are flumes or conduit to discharge into or near surfaced approaches to culvert ends?
No _ Yes If "yes" identify location(s), describe outfall design treatment(s):
G
C
O
U
tq
r
>
Is scour/erosion protection provided to ensure long term stability of culvert structural
� j
components, and surfacing at culvert ends? Yes _ No If "no" Identify
locations and provide justification(s):
Will 100-yrflow and spread of backwater be fully contained in street ROW, and/or
drainage easements/ ROW? Yes No if not, why not?
Do appreciable hydraulic effects of any culvert extend downstream or upstream to
neighboring land(s) not encompassed in subject property? No Yes If
"yes" describe location(s) and mitigation measures:
Are all culvert designs and materials in compliance with B-CS Tech. Specifications?
Yes _ No If not, explain in Special Design Section of this Part.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 21 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.13)
Stormwater
Management Concept (contlmued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Is a bridge included in plans for subject property project? ✓ No _ Yes
If "yes" provide the following information.
Name(s) and functional classification of the roadway(s)?
What drainage way(s) is to be crossed?
U)
m
m`
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, siltfence installation and inletprotection
3
Plan (SW3P)
Cf
established for
v
project construction?
is
No ✓ Yes
Special Designs — Non -Traditional Methods
Are any non-traditional methods (aquatic echosystems, wetland -type detention, natural stream
replication, BMPs for water quality, etc.) proposed for any aspect of subject property project?
✓ No —Yes If "yes" list general type and location below.
Provide full report about the proposed special design(s) including rationale for use and
expected benefits. Report must substantiate that stormwater management objectives will not
be compromised, and that maintenance cost will not exceed those of traditional design
solution(s). Is report provided? Yes No If "no" explain:
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 22 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Desian Parameters
Continued (Page 4.14)
Stormwater
Management Concept (continued)
Within Or Serving Subject Property (Phase, or Site) (continued)
Special Designs — Deviation From B-CS Technical Specifications
If any design(s) or material(s) of traditional runoff -handling facilities deviate from provisions of
B-CS Technical Specifications, check type facility(ies) and explain by specific detail element.
Detention elements Drain system elements Channel features
Culvert features Swales Ditches Inlets Outfalls
Valley gutters Bridges (explain in bridge report)
In table below briefly identify specific element, justification for deviation(s).
Specific Detail Element
Justification for Deviation (attach additional sheets if needed)
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Have elements been coordinated with the City Engineer or her/his designee? For each item
above provide "yes" or "no", action date, and staff name:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Design Parameters
Hydrology
Is a map(s) showing all Design Drainage Areas provided? ✓ Yes No
Briefly summarize the range of applications made of the Rational Formula:
Pipe Design, Inlet Design and Canter Depth Check
What is the size and location of largest Design Drainage Area to which the Rational Formula
has been applied? 27.98 acres Location (or identifier): 411
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 23 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.15)
Design Parameters (continued)
Hydrology (continued)
In making determinations for time of concentration, was segment analysis used?
No ✓ Yes In approximately what percent of Design Drainage Areas? 100
As to intensity -duration -frequency and rain depth criteria for determining runoff flows, were any
criteria other than those provided in these Guidelines used? ✓ No _Yes If "yes"
identify type of data, source(s), and where applied:
For each of the stormwater management features listed below identify the storm return
frequencies (year) analyzed (or checked), and that used as the basis for design.
Feature
Analysis Year(s)
Design Year
Storm drain system for arterial and collector streets
N/A
N/A
Storm drain system for local streets
10 & 100
100
Open channels
N/A
N/A
Swale/buried conduit combination in lieu of channel
N/A
N/A
Swales
N/A
100
Roadside ditches and culverts serving them
N/A
N/A
Detention facilities: spillway crest and its outfall
N/A
N/A
Detention facilities: outlet and conveyance structure(s)
N/A
N/A
Detention facilities: volume when outlet plugged
N/A
N/A
Culverts serving private drives or streets
N/A
N/A
Culverts serving public roadways
N/A
N/A
Bridges: provide in bridge report.
N/A
N/A
Hydraulics
What is the range of design flowvelocities as outlined below?
Design flow velocities;
Gutters
Conduit
Culverts
Swales
Channels
Highest (feet per second)
3.97
11.44
N/A
N/A
N/A
Lowest (feet per second)
1.13
Z87
N/A
N/A
N/A
Streets and Storm Drain Systems Provide the summary information outlined below:
Roughness coefficients used: For street gutters: 0.018
For conduit type(s) RCP HDPE Coefficients: 0.013 0.013
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 24 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.16)
Design Parameters(continued) .
Hydraulics (continued)
Street and Storm Drain Systems (continued)
For the following, are assumptions other than allowable per Guidelines?
Inlet coefficients? ✓ No _ Yes Head and friction losses ✓ No Yes
Explain any "yes" answer:
In conduit is velocity generally increased in the downstream direction? ✓ Yes _ No
Are elevation drops provided at inlets, manholes, and junction boxes? ✓ Yes _ No
Explain any "no" answers:
Are hydraulic grade lines calculated and shown for design storm? ✓ Yes _ No
For 100-year flow conditions? ✓ Yes _ No Explain any "no" answers:
What tailwater conditions were assumed at outfall point(s) of the storm drain system? Identify
each location and explain:
Yes, the storm drain system was designed taking into account the detention pond being full.
Open Channels If a HEC analysis is utilized, does it follow Sec VI.F.5.a? _ Yes _ No
Outside of straight sections, is flow regime within limits of sub -critical flow? _ Yes _ No
If "no" list locations and explain:
Culverts if plan sheets do not provide the following for each culvert, describe it here.
For each design discharge, will operation be outlet (barrel) control or inlet control?
Entrance, friction and exit losses:
Bridges Provide all in bridge report
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 25 of 26 APPENDIX. D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised Auoust 2012
SECTION IX
APPENDIX D — TECHNICAL DESIGN SUMMARY
Part 4 — Drainage Concept and Design Parameters
Continued (Page 4.17)
DesignrPara�teters (antinugd)
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 HydroJlow
Part 5 — Plans and Specifications
Requirements for submittal of construction drawings and specifications do not differ due to use of a
Technical Design Summary Report. See Section III, Paragraph C3,
Part 6 — Conclusions and Attestation
w
Cc�t0*00
Add any concluding information here: Tire
storm sewer system and detention facihlres are designed in
accordance with the BCS Drainage Design Guidelines.
i 3L,i. !}•+ f '* Y iattttic►1.;
i,;
Provide attestation to the accuracy and completeness of the foregoing 6 Parts of this Technical
Desi n Summary Draina a Report by signing and sealing below.
"This report (plan) for the drainage design of the development named in Part B was prepared
by me (or under my supervision) in accordance with provisions of the Bryan/College Station
Unified Drainage Design Guidelines for the owners of the property. All licenses and permits
required by any and all state and federal regulatory agencies for the proposed drainage
Improvements have b ihed fall under applicable general(AffixSeal�P�'1�°ee'�s
/ I...... eenaae.z.aoaee.aaeae.o
Lice •ed ne
rofessional Engineer d i05�i'N P. SCiIULT c
State of Texas PE No. l¢�fi¢saGS&a?>`a�g.��rr.
STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES Page 26 of 26 APPENDIX, D: TECH. DESIGN SUMMARY
Effective February 2007 As Revised August 2012
Water System Report
for
Castlegate II Subdivision, Section 103
College Station, Texas
August, 2013
Prepared Bv:
Schultz Engineering, LLC
TBPE Firm Registration No.12327
2730 Longmire, Suite A
College Station, Texas 77845
979.764.3900
P 12327
SCHULTZ ENGINEERING; LLC,'
luiluopisa'd sliuze,q olBuiS ao3 u[d2 000` I :mold and
Mill pazlsaanp/m AjumuznS sisAluut; — Q llglllxg
soziS aul l paainba-d omen w/m A.ieu tunS sisSleuV — D Iigigxg
lsodag Iso L mold sollllpfl uollelS a$alloj — g Ilgiuxg
saulrl pazlsaanp — InoXu- aalem — Z V Ilglgxg
saziS ouij pazmba21 uzniulul— InoAt-j aalem — l\; Ilgigxg :sllgluxa
Isd gg : a insEdad 1vnppa21
Isd 06 :a.inssadda11v1S
wd8 0£S'1 : alv rmold
g llq!yxd aa5 - luv ipdjl mold
: s1sa,L adlissadd ulalEds 8u11s1xg
*Due -I glaom31nm 3uolu auil
aalum „q Ouilsixo ue put, aniaQ uolloqun}l Suolu cull aalum „Z 12uilsixg : d lddng jalvAl ,Gvwlaj
sissleud/1q.1311a3 u21Isa(l
Ielluapis01llluie3 alBuiS :asn puv7
001 uolloaS I'I oluialISED
glim palonalsuoo sem legl auilaalem «ZI sullslxa uu of SIDauuoo COT
uollaaS •luaucdolaeap aql 3o sasegd aanlnl lie ui 8uidool apieoad of pasn
aq pim scull gloq put `scull osagl 3o gaeo of palaauuoo sem OOZ uollaaS
•alu$allsuD 3o L uollaaS ul luauaasea ue ui salt MIT auil „g ue pue anuanV
ulaololA uo ouil .,g guilslxa uu Xq papinoad si ooinaas aalum alei?allsup :,Clddng ia1vAj d avugd(l
•uaau agl ui luouidolanap
aanln3 ao3 A11D aql Xq paainbaa u3lsap cull aalem <,Zl pazlsaaeo aql
Put ssol ao „ g 3o sazls auil aalem 2uisn uzalsXs ouolu-pools u se uopoun3
uea Ii legl alealsuoulap of COT uollaaS Jej polonpuoo aaam sasAluue omZ
'I IOZ liadV pasinaa `„svxa,L `uol7vls 0201103 00Z uolloas
71 a1v8011SVO a43 JdOdag WOJsds d0jVll „ pollil Suyoouigug sdiltigd
Xq laodaa agl of aa3ag wau agl ul luouidolanap aanln3 ao3 XID agl iq
pannbaa oq Amu Xogl giinogl uana ,iaussaaau IOU OR scull azls a34.01 Iegl
olualsuouiap of ssal ao „ g 3o sazls cull aalem gllm palanpuoa sem slsAleue
sins -suollipuoo padolanap ,illn3 aapun slot Ito anaas of Xliliqu sli aansuo
of IualsXs salum IT aluBallsLD aailua alll uo palanpuoD sum sislleue uV :01oN11vd0u0D
•uollaaS slgl ni sloi 6£ 30 lelol u smogs
leld Iuuld agl •uollelS 3;I0110D Of I0I uollaaS `uoislnipgnS II ale?allsuD
gupsixo oql 3o Isamglnos XIaleipowmi padolanap i?uraq uolsinipgns
lelluaptsaa 010E-509.6 e sl COT uollaaS `uoisinlpgnS II ale8allsLD any :uollvao7
uol;eluao}ul Iu.Iauag
Domestic Use 1.5 gpm per lot for Single Family Residential
Section 103 — 39 Lots = 58.5 gpm
Development Under Construction (Section 102) — 26 Lots = 39 gpm
Development Under Construction (Section 101) — 42 Lots = 63 gpm
Existing Development (Section 100) — 42 lots = 61.5 gpm
Future Development (Section 103) — 39 Lots = 58.5 gpm
Future Development (Section 104) — 44 Lots = 66 gpm
Future Development (Section 105) — 40 Lots = 60 gpm
Future Development (Section 106) — 44 Lots = 66 gpm
Future Development (Section 107) — 41 Lots = 61.5 gpm
Total Domestic Demand = 475.5 gpm
The proposed 12", 8" & 6" water lines are in accordance with the BCS
Water Design Guidelines. This report provides the results of the water
system analysis under the fire flow and domestic demand requirements,
(1475.5 gpm) which produced the lowest pressure in the system.
Water System Summary of Section 102
Summary of Calculations
w/ Minimum Required Line Sizes
Domestic Demand
Fire Flow Demand FH 6
Fire Flow Demand FH 7
Domestic Demand
Fire Flow Demand FH 6
Fire Flow Demand FH 7
Conclusion
Pressure Min.
77.9 psi
Velocity Max.
3.04 fps
j Pressure Min.
70.3 psi
Velocity Max.
'{ 11.72 fps
Pressure Min.
70.3 psi
Velocity Max.
j 11.72 fps
w/ Oversized Lines
Pressure Min.
i
77.9 psi
Velocity Max.
3.04 fps
Pressure Min.
70.3 psi
Velocity Max.
11.72 fps
Pressure Min. i
70.3 psi
Velocity Max.
11.72 fps
As shown above the system exceeds the minimum required
pressures of 35 psi for domestic flow and 20 psi for fire flow in
both analyses. The maximum velocity of 11.72 fps is less than the
required maximum of 12 fps.
The proposed 12", 6", 8", and 4" water lines meet or exceed all of the
design criteria for the City of College Station. They will provide
adequate water pressure, flowrate and velocity for both domestic and fire
flow demands. This could also be achieved using an 8" pipe in place of
the oversized 12" pipe.
EXHIBIT Al
WATER LAYOUT- MINIMUM REQUIRED LINE SIZES
-- -- -_ ---- - -- - - - -- -- - ---- --. - ---
PROPOSED _
r8" WATERLINE -- — r— — EXISTING
WATER
LIN
B1,0(; 23 19 7.8 17 M 15 14 13 12 11 1.6 1.5 14 1.3 12 11 10 9
Wal-kworthl hane
- .._. - --- ------...._. -- . -- -- -. ---- -- — — _ — - - -- -
�-- i11.c� :K 17
PRO 4 SED Tit 0C K 1' ' EXISTING 8"
WATERLINE
6" VITERLINE EXISTING 12"
WATERLINE
10 9 8 6 S 4 3 2 l 5 7 6
f OPOSED 2 1 1
WATERLINE
--------- +- _ { _ - i - -{ -------i------- -E - -{-- --- a-- ---- - --i --- - i -- -- �-
---
20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 16 1.5 1.4
3L(K"K 17 13
PROPOSED 17
�e" WATERLINi1' _— 1.0
)POSED I-
WATERLINE Kirrlllolto 7.� ..- --_- n Dive EXISTING 12"
WATERLINE -
a w �� I)11� L, �C lub�tto
ROPOSED \2 i1,(3(,K.
� "WATERLINE 0
Ilil(l{^1i 1 L 1-0CK ?1
Al
9 S i G 5 4 3 2 1 16
15
PROPOSED
8" WATERLINE / ,.. 14
Victoria vellUe
)POSED
WATERLINE
Schultz Engineering, LLC
3]]DLpgnJn.3�AaR
Cdpe3lellm.l%]I&5
- '9I8.]01.d5W LSPf NO. t]3]I
sumMD oE316N:n oMWN PPMI D aoe NO. Dn
JPS RCF JPS 13QW AUGUSTM3
1 ® \ w_ I
CASTLEGATE II SCALE EXHIBIT
WATER LAYOUT °Efli
SECTION > 03 mmz D„,u ,•=,3�
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS MINIMUM REQUIRED LINE SIZES PWill„DSDNE: 1:1
A I
FlIENurse 13833
EXHIBIT A2
WATER LAYOUT - OVERSIZED LINES
- --- - - _
PROPOSED
8 WATERLINE EXISTING 1 '
WATERLIN
IiLO(:K 23 19 18 17 t6 15 14 13 12 11 ( 16 15 14 13 12 11 Ili 9
Warkworill Lane `J 1 � oo
I
`R.._ cll kWOt 7 al1i. PTOO
--
r
1tI
PRO SED C>CIC'. EXISTING 6"
WATERLINE
6" TERLINE ( EXISTING 12-4
WATERLINE
10 9 6 5 4' 3 2 1 8 6
I �
--- -. - - - �------- - - - ----------
20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 16 15 14
PROPOSED �T.O(1( 17 13
6" WATERLIN
12 a
— s --
-TOPOSED'"e,.��-�..,.. _ x.�,. _ _-..�_ ��.m-.�..�....k..... xl..,".-..�,.�,x .-..a...m �,.-m,-M _ _ .—__... ..
6" WATERLINE Kii-r1boifon Drive I j K mbol1011 Drivo EXISTING
XISTI G 12"WATE
-12 _. W 12_ W 1 __ _.. N!- 12 �..w.I�W=.2-._ _ _ 11L 12....
...----- ----., -._.- -- - - ---- -....... - -- ---- ----- - -
ROPOSED �O♦ .LC)(11 14
2 2" WATERLINE_l-----
1 1.Uf�K 21
131�OCh;. ]
9 8 6 5 4 3 L 1 1716-
15
PROPOSED
12" WATERLIN 1 I 1 ♦J _
..._.-._ ._. -_-- ___..-- _ __--- __.-_._ .. .-.-____ . ___-. ----- _---- .-------- .-_..._ -_-._ .____ _.___.-_ _.-..._.._. ........... -. 12
�.—. 9 11
I (1 ,)
Victoria Avenue
)POSED
G7
WATERLINE
41 Schultz Engineering, LLC'
91. LwgmA" 9..A
CWOBn Sbtlm iXiIWS
" W9.101,J9A LBpE Np.l]3E]
suFVEYEo oEaGNEo oMNM MPfloVEo JOBI DATE
JPS RGF JPS 132W AUGUST 2013
L
CASTLECATE II SCALE EXHIBIT
WA TER LAYOUT HOB W
SECTION 103 Boa=�� 1'=1W
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS OVERSIZED LINES pLOilIHO Sf.AE: 1;1
A2
FlIE WJAE 132E0
EXHIBIT B
COLLEGE STATION UTILITIES FLOW TEST REPORT
EXHIBIT C
PIPE & JUNCTION ANALYSIS - MINIMUM REQUIRED LINE SIZES
Exhibit C
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Minimum Required Line Sizes
Pipe Analysis - Domestic Demand
Pipe Number
Length (ft)
Size (in)
Material
Hazen -
Williams C
Flow (gpm)
Velocity (ft/s)
P9-2
243
6
PVC
150
0
0
P9-1
183
6
PVC
150
0
0
P200-1
476
8
PVC
150
477
3.04
P100-1
328
12
PVC
150
477
1.35
P100-3
399
12
PVC
150
268
0.76
P100-4.2
504
6
PVC
150
-66
0.75
P100-4.1
58
6
PVC
150
-78
0.88
P100-2.2
91
12
PVC
150
-171
0.49
P100-2.1
453
12
PVC
150
-188
0.53
P-res
18
8
PVC
150
477
3.04
P-101-3
284
12
PVC
150
129
0.37
P-102-1
177
8
PVC
150
68
0.43
P-101-4
41
6
PVC
150
54
0.61
P-101-5
525
6
PVC
150
42
0.48
P-101-6
52
6
PVC
150
56
0.63
P-101-7
527
6
PVC
150
42
0.48
P-101-1
169
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-101-2
122
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-102-2
184
8
PVC
150
63
0.4
P-102-4
585
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-5
10
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-7
75
8
PVC
150
29
0.18
P-102-6
122
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-2
592
8
PVC
150
162
1.03
P103-1
125
8
PVC
150
0
0
P-104-1
29
8
PVC
150
0
0
P203-1
_
101
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-3
290
8
PVC
150
108
0.69
P105-1
168
8
PVC
150
99
0.63
P-103-4
630
6
PVC
150
45
0.51
P-104-3
28
6
PVC
150
33
0.37
P-104-2
27
6
PVC
150
33
0.37
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Oversized Lines
Junction Analysis - Domestic Demand
Junction
Elevation
junction
Demand
(gpm)
pressure (psi)
J9-2
320.8
0
85.7
J9-1
315.91
0
87.9
J-200-1
311.96
0
89.6
J200-2
316.93
0
86.7
1100-1
319.66
21
85.4
J100-3
326.65
0
82.4
J100-4
322.96
21
83.9
FH-2
323.07
12
83.9
J-100-2
318.88
9
85.7
FH-1
319.45
17
85.5
J-101-2
330.19
7
80.8
J-101-2
335.81
6
78.4
1-102-1
336.97
5
77.9
FH-3
330.45
12
80.7
J-101-5
325.21
42
83
FH-4
334.67
14
78.9
J-101-7
327.42
42
82
1-101-1
329.58
0
81.1
J-102-2
336.25
17
78.2
FH-5
329.45
0
81.1
J-102-5
329.16
18
81.3
J-102-7
328.14
29
81.7
J-102-6
328.39
0
81.6
1-103-2
323.87
21
83.6
J-103-1
323.21
0
83.9
J-104-1
323.81
0
83.6
J-203-1
323.1
0
83.9
1-103-3
325.48
21
82.8
J-105-1
327.03
99
82.1
FH-7
325.64
33
82.8
FH-6
324.42
33
83.3
Exhibit C
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Minimum Required Line Sizes
Pipe Analysis - Fire Flow Demand (FH-6)
Pipe
Number
Length (ft)
Size (in)
Material
Hazen-
Williams C
Flow (gpm)
Velocity (ft/s)
P9-2
243
6
PVC
150
0
0
139-1
183
6
PVC
150
0
0
P200-1
476
8
PVC
150
1,477
9.43
13100-1
328
12
PVC
150
1,477
4.19
P100-3
f 399
12
F PVC
150
519
1.47
P100-4.2
504
6
PVC
150
-316
3.59
P100-4.1
58
6
PVC
150
-328
3.73
P100-2.2
91
12
PVC
150
-921
2.61
P100-2.1
453
12
PVC
150
-937
2.66
P-res
18
8
PVC
150
1,477
9.43
P-101-3
284
12
PVC
150
129
0.37
P-102-1
177
8
PVC
150
68
0.43
P-101-4
41
6
PVC
150
54
0.61
P-101-5
525
6
PVC
150
42
0.48
P-101-6
52
6
PVC
150
56
0.63
P-101-7
527
6
PVC
150
42
0.48
P-101-1
169
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-101-2
122
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-102-2
184
8
PVC
150
63
0.4
P-102-4
585
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-5
10
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-7
75
8
PVC
150
29
0.18
P-102-6
122
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-2
592
8
_
PVC
150
912
5.82
P103-1
125
8
PVC
150
0
0
P-104-1
29
8
PVC
150
0
0
P203-1
101
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-3
290
8
PVC
150
-142
0.91
P105-1
168
8
PVC
150
99
0.63
P-103-4
630
6
PVC
150
295
3.35
P-104-3
28
6
PVC
150
33
0.37
P-104-2
27
6 1
PVC
150
1,033
11.72
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Minimum Required Line Sizes
Junction Analysis - Fire Flow Demand (FH-6)
Junction
Elevation
junction
Demand
(Bpm)
Pressure
(psi)
J9-2
320.8
0
83.9
19-1
315.91
0
86
J-200-1
311.96
0
87.7
J200-2
316.93
0
79.6
J100-1
319.66
21
77.9
1100-3
326.65
0
74.8
1100-4
322.96
21
74.7
FH-2
323.07
12
76.1
1-100-2
318.88
9
77.8
FH-1
319.45
17
77.6
J-101-2
330.19
7
73.2
J-101-2
335.81
6
70.8
J-102-1
336.97
5
70.3
FH-3
330.45
12
73.1
1-101-5
325.21
42
75.3
FH-4
334.67
14
71.3
1-101-7
327.42
42
74.4
J-101-1
329.58
0
73.5
J-102-2
336.25
17
70.6
FH-5
329.45
0
73.5
J-102-5
329.16
18
73.6
J-102-7
328.14
29
74.1
J-102-6
328.39
0
74
1-103-2
323.87
21
72.6
J-103-1
323.21
0
72.9
J-104-1
323.81
0
72.7
J-203-1
323.1
0
73
J-103-3
325.48
21
72
1-105-1
327.03
99
71.3
FH-7
325.64
33
71.9
FH-6
324.42
1,033
71.7
Exhibit C
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Minimum Required Line Sizes
Pipe Analysis - Fire Flow Demand (FH-7)
Pipe
Number
Length (ft)
Size (in)
Material
Hazen-
Williams C
Flow (gpm)
Velocity (ft/s)
P9-2
243
6
PVC
ISO
0
0
P9-1
183
6
PVC
150
0
0
P200-1
476
8
PVC
150
1,477
9.43
13100-1
328
12
PVC
150
1,477
4.19
P100-3
399
12
PVC
150
563
1.6
P100-4.2
504
6
PVC
150
-361
4.09
P100-4.1
58
6
PVC
150
-373
4.23
P100-2.2
91
12
PVC
150
-876
2.49
P100-2.1
453
12
PVC
150
-893
2.53
P-res
18
8
PVC
150
1,477
9.43
P-101-3
284
12
PVC
150
129
0.37
P-102-1
177
8
PVC
150
68
0.43
P-101-4
41
6
PVC
ISO
54
0.61
P-101-5
525
6
PVC
ISO
42
0.48
P-101-6
52
6
PVC
150
56
0.63
P-101-7
527
6
PVC
150
42
0.48
P-101-1
169
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-101-2
122
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-102-2
184
8
PVC
150
63
0.4
P-102-4
585
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-5
10
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-7
75
8
PVC
150
29
0.18
P-102-6
122
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-2
592
8
PVC
150
867
5.54
P103-1
125
8
PVC
150
0
0
P-104-1
29
8
PVC
150
0
0
P203-1
101
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-3
290
8
PVC
150
813
5.19
P10S-1
168
8
PVC
ISO
99
0.63
P-103-4
630
6
PVC
150
340
3.86
P-104-3
28
6
PVC
150
1,033
11.72
P-104-2
27
6
PVC
150
33
0.37
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Minimum Required Line Sizes
Junction Analysis - Fire Flow Demand (FH-7)
Junction
Elevation
junction
Demand
(8Pm)
Pressure
(psi)
19-2
320.8
0
83.9
J9-1
315.91
0
86
J-200-1
311.96
0
87.7
J200-2
316.93
0
79.6
1100-1
319.66
21
77.9
J100-3
326.65
0
74.7
J100-4
322.96
21
74.2
FH-2
323.07
12
76.1
J-100-2
318.88
9
77.9
FH-1
319.45
17
77.7
J-101-2
330.19
7
73.2
J-101-2
335.81
6
70.8
J-102-1
336.97
5
70.3
FH-3
330.45
12
73.1
1-101-5
325.21
42
75.3
FH-4
334.67
14
71.3
1-101-7
327.42
42
74.4
J-101-1
329.58
0
73.5
1-102-2
336.25
17
70.6
FH-5
329.45
0
73.5
J-102-5
329.16
18
73.6
J-102-7
328.14
29
74.1
J-102-6
328.39
0
74
J-103-2
323.87
21
72.9
J-103-1
323.21
0
73.2
J-104-1
323.81
0
73
J-203-1
323.1
0
73.3
1-103-3
325.48
21
71
1-105-1
327.03
99
70.4
FH-7
325.64
1,033
70.2
FH-6
324.42
33
72.7
EXHIBIT D
PIPE & JUNCTION ANALYSIS - OVERSIZED LINES
Exhibit D
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Oversized Lines
Pipe Analysis - Domestic Demand
Pipe Number
Length (ft)
Size (in)
Material
Hazen -
Williams C
Flow (gpm)
Velocity (ft/s)
P9-2
243
6
PVC
1S0
0
0
P9-1
183
6
PVC
150
0
0
P200-1
476
8
PVC
150
477
3.04
P100-1
328
12
PVC
150
477
1.35
P100-3
399
12
PVC
150
247
0.7
P100-4.2
504
6
PVC
150
-45
0.51
P100-4.1
58
6
PVC
150
-57
0.64
P100-2.2
91
12
PVC
150
-192
0.55
P100-2.1
453
12
PVC
150
-209
0.59 _
P-res
18
8
PVC
150
477
3.04
P-101-3
284
12
PVC
150
129
0.37
P-102-1
177
8
PVC
1S0
68
0.43
P-101-4
41
6
PVC
150
54
0.61
P-101-5
525
6
PVC
150
42
0.48
P-101-6
52
6
PVC
150
56
0.63
P-101-7
527
6
PVC
150
42
0.48
P-101-1
169
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-101-2
122
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-102-2
184
8
PVC
150
63
0.4
P-102-4
585
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-5
10
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-7
75
8
PVC
150
29
0.18
P-102-6
122
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-2
592
12
PVC
150
183
0.52
P103-1
125
12
PVC
150
0
0
P-104-1
29
12
PVC
150
0
0
P203-1
101
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-3
290
8
PVC
150
129
0.83
P105-1
168
8
PVC
150
99
0.63
P-103-4
630
6
PVC
150
24
0.27
P-104-3
28
6
PVC
150
33
0.37
P-104-2
27
6
PVC
150
33
0.37
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Minimum Required Line Sizes
Junction Analysis - Domestic Demand
Junction
Elevation
Junction
Demand
(6pm)
pressure (psi)
19-2
320.8
0
85.7
19-1
315.91
0
87.9
J-200-1
311.96
0
89.6
J200-2
316.93
0
86.7
J100-1
319.66
21
85.4
J100-3
326.65
0
82.4
J100-4
322.96
21
83.9
FH-2
323.07
12
83.9
J-100-2
318.88
9
85.8
FH-1
319.45
17
85.5
J-101-2
330.19
7
80.8
J-101-2
335.81
6
78.4
J-102-1
336.97
5
77.9
FH-3
330.45
12
80.7
J-101-5
325.21
42
83
FH-4
334.67
14
78.9
J-101-7
327.42
42
82
J-101-1
329.58
0
81.1
J-102-2
336.25
17
78.2
FH-5
329.45
0
81.1
J-102-5
329.16
18
81.3
J-102-7
328.14
29
81.7
1-102-6
328.39
0
81.6
1-103-2
323.87
21
83.5
1-103-1
323.21
0
83.8
J-104-1
323.81
0
83.5
_
J-203-1
323.1
0
83.8
J-103-3
325.48
_
21
82.7
J-105-1
327.03
99
82.1
FH-7
325.64
33
82.7
FH-6
324.42
33
83.2
Exhibit D
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Oversized Lines
Pipe Analysis - Fire Flow Demand (FH-6)
Pipe
Number
Length (ft)
Size (in)
Material
Hazen-
Williams C
Flow (gpm)
Velocity (ft/s)
P9-2
243
6
PVC
150
0
0
P9-1
183
6
PVC
150
0
0
P200-1
476
8
PVC
1S0
1,477
9.43
P100-1
328
12
PVC
150
1,477
4.19
P1OO-3
399
_
12
PVC
150
376
1.07
P100-4.2
504
6
PVC
150
-173
1.97
P100-4.1
58
6
PVC
150
-185
2.1
P100-2.2
91
12
PVC
150
-1,064
3.02
P100-2.1
453
12
PVC
150
-1,080
3.06
P-res
18
8
PVC
150
1,477
9.43
P-101-3
284
12
PVC
150
129
0.37
P-102-1
177
8
PVC
150
68
0.43
P-101-4
41
6
PVC
150
1 54
0.61
P-101-5
525
6
PVC
150
42
0.48
P-101-6
52
6
PVC
150
56
0.63
P-101-7
527
6
PVC
150
42
0.48
P-101-1
169
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-101-2
122
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-102-2
184
8
PVC
150
63
0.4
P-102-4
585
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-5
10
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-7
75
8
PVC
150
29
0.18
P-102-6
122
8
PVC
1S0
0
0
P103-2
592
12
PVC
150
1,O55
2.99
P103-1
125
12
PVC
150
0
0
P-104-1
29
12
PVC
150
0
0
P203-1
101
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-3
290
8
PVC
150
1
0
P105-1
168
8
PVC
150
99
0.63
P-103-4
630
6
PVC
150
152
1.73
P-104-3
28
6
PVC
150
33
0.37
P-104-2
27
6
PVC
150
1,033
11.72
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Oversized Lines
Junction Analysis - Fire Flow Demand (FH-6)
Junction
Elevation
Junction
Demand
(gprn)
Pressure
(psi)
19-2
320.8
0
83.9
19-1
315.91
0
86
1-200-1
311.96
0
87.7
J200-2
316.93
0
79.6
J100-1
319.66
21
77.9
J100-3
326.65
0
74.8
J100-4
322.96
21
75.9
FH-2
323.07
12
76.3
J-100-2
318.88
9
77.7
FH-1
319.45
17
77.5
J-101-2
330.19
7
73.3
J-101-2
335.81
6
70.8
J-102-1
336.97
5
70.3
FH-3
330.45
12
73.1
J-101-5
325.21
42
75.4
FH-4
334.67
14
71.3
J-101-7
327.42
42
74.4
J-101-1
329.58
0
73.5
J-102-2
336.25
17
70.6
FH-5
329.45
0
73.6
J-102-5
329.16
18
73.7
J-102-7
328.14
29
74.1
J-102-6
328.39
0
74
J-103-2
323.87
21
75
J-103-1
323.21
0
75.3
J-104-1
323.81
0
75
J-203-1
323.1
0
75.3
J-103-3
325.48
21
74.3
J-105-1
327.03
99
73.6
FH-7
325.64
33
74.2
FH-6
324.42
1,033
74
Exhibit D
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Oversized Lines
Pipe Analysis - Fire Flow Demand (FH-7)
Pipe
Number
Length (ft)
Size (in)
Material
Hazen-
Williams C
Flow (gpm)
Velocity (ft/s)
P9-2
243
6
PVC
150
0
0
P9-1
183
6
PVC
150
0
0
P200-1
476
8
PVC
150
1,477
9.43
P100-1
328
12
PVC
150
1,477
4.19
P100-3
399
12
PVC
_
150
466
1.32
P100-4.2
504
6
PVC
150
-264
2.99
P100-4.1
58
6
PVC
150
-276
3.13
P100-2.2
91
12
PVC
150
-973
2.76
P100-2.1
453
12
PVC
150
-990
2.81
P-res
18
8
PVC
150
1,477
9.43
P-101-3
284
12
PVC
150
129
0.37
P-102-1
177
8
PVC
150
68
0.43
P-101-4
41
6
PVC
150
54
0.61
P-101-5
525
6
PVC
150
42
_
0.48
P-101-6
52
6
PVC
150
56
0.63
P-101-7
527
6
PVC
150
42
0.48
P-101-1
169
12
PVC
150
191
0.54
P-101-2
122
12
PVC
1S0
191
0.54
P-102-2
184
8
PVC
150
63
0.4
P-102-4
585
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-5
10
8
PVC
150
47
0.3
P-102-7
75
8
PVC
150
29
0.18
P-102-6
122
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-2
592
12
PVC
150
964
2.74
P103-1
125
12
PVC
150
0
0
P-104-1
29
12
PVC
150
0
0
P203-1
101
8
PVC
150
0
0
P103-3
290
8
PVC
150
910
5.81
P105-1
168
8
PVC
150
99
0.63
P-103-4
630
6
PVC
150
243
2.75
P-104-3
28
6
PVC
1S0
1,033
11.72
P-104-2
27
6
PVC
150
33
0.37
WaterCAD Analysis Summary
w/ Oversized Lines
Junction Analysis - Fire Flow Demand (FH-7)
Junction
Elevation
junction
Demand
(gpm)
Pressure
(psi)
J9-2
320.8
0
83.9
J9-1
315.91
0
86
1-200-1
311.96
0
87.7
J200-2
316.93
0
79.6
J100-1
319.66
21
77.9
J100-3
326.65
0
74.8
J100-4
322.96
21
75.2
FH-2
323.07
12
76.2
1-100-2
318.88
9
77.8
FH-1
319.45
17
77.6
J-101-2
330.19
7
73.2
J-101-2
335.81
6
70.8
J-102-1
336.97
5
70.3
FH-3
330.45
12
73.1
_
J-101-5
325.21
42
75.4
FH-4
334.67
14
71.3
J-101-7
327.42
42
74.4
J-101-1
329.58
0
73.5
1-102-2
336.25
17
70.6
FH-5
329.45
0
73.5
1-102-5
329.16
18
73.7
1-102-7
328.14
29
74.1
1-102-6
328.39
0
74
J-103-2
323.87
21
75.2
J-103-1
323.21
0
75.4
J-104-1
323.81
0
75.2
J-203-1
323.1
0
75.5
J-103-3
325.48
21
73
J-105-1
327.03
99
72.3
FH-7
325.64
1,033
72.2
FH-6
324.42
33
74.9