Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout51 DP TDI Brooks International Laboratory T 14379 11-130Drainage Report for TDI/Brooks International -Laboratory Building South Dowling Road Brazos County, Texas September, 2011 Rev. November, 2011 Engineer: SCHULTZ ENGINEERING LLC TBPE Firm Registration No. 12327 P.O. Box 11995 College Station, TX 77842 2730 Longmire Drive College Station, Texas 77845 (979) 764-3900 Developer: TOI/Brooks International 1902 Pinon College Station, Texas 77842 (979) 693-3446 \\ -\~tJ Drainage Report For TDI/Brooks International -Laboratory Building ENGINEER SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC . P .O . Box 11995 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone/Fax : (979) 764-3 900 OWNER TOI/Brooks International, Inc. 1902 Pinon College Station, Texas 77845 Phone: (979) 693-3446 GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION Location: Description: •Area: • Proposed Land Use: • Ex isting Land Use: • Land Description: Adjoining Land Use: Primary Drainage Facility: Flood Hazard Information : FEMAFIRM: Floodplain: This project is located on a 54 acre tract of land located at the north east comer of the intersection of IG&N Road and South Dowling Road in Brazos County . 54 acres Commercial -Laboratory and Office Facilities Vacant -Agricultural Ground that slopes toward the southwest to IG&N Road. The site is bounded on the west by rural residential properties, on the south by IG&N Road and on the east by South Dowling Road. Tributary of Peach Creek # 48041 C0200 C No portion of this Phase lies within the floodplain of Peach Creek or its tributaries. HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS This phase of the development of this property will be located on the southwest portion of the property . This portion of the property drains to the existing detention/retention pond at the southwest into the right-of-way of IG&N Road. The current condition of the land is pasture with some scattered large trees . GENERAL STORMWATER PLAN The drainage plan for this development will involve the sheet flow of runoff collected into the private drive ditches, parking lot and drive aisles for the laboratory building. The runoff will then be discharged through curb cuts and culverts into swales and then into the existing detention pond . Page I of 3 COORDINATION & STORMW ATER PERMITTING The project will require that a NOi be filed and the TPDES General Permit TXR 150000 requirements be met as required by the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality . No other permits are anticipated for this project. DRAINAGE DESIGN General Information: Tc Methodology: Tc Minimum Design Storm Event: Pipe Materials: Manning's n Value: Runoff Coefficients: Design Constraints: Design Software: Design Analysis: Stormwater runoff from the site will flow into the ditches along the drives and the pavement areas, then into culverts which discharge into swales. The flow into the parking area and drive aisles is discharged from these areas through curb cuts. The flow then enters swales that direct the runoff to the existing detention pond . TR55 10 minutes 10-year -private storm sewer 100-year -private storm sewer HDPEPIPE 0.012 0 .35 Landscape Area, and 0 .95 for Pavement Areas Max . water depth in the parking lot = 6 in . or 0.5 ft. for 100 year storm event. Min. flow velocity = 2.5 fps Max. flow velocity = 15 fps Excel spreadsheets, DODSON HydraCalc Hydraulics, Civil 3D Hydraflow This software was used to compute curb opening capacity, flowrate and velocity through each curb opening and culvert pipe. All of this information is shown in the summary tables in Appendix A. The software was also used to compute the depth of flow and velocity in the swales. The Drainage Area Summary/Analysis in Appendix A has the runoff calculations, curb opening size and depth at each opening . Appendix A also includes the size of the culverts that the drainage areas with culverts require. An evaluation of the proposed drainage swales was only performed at one location, which has the greatest flow in a swale. This location is shown on Exhibit A. Since all swales have the same cross- section additional evaluation locations are not neces sa ry . Page 2 of 3 Design Results Applicable Exhibits: CERTIFICATION The data presented in the Appendices indicates the maximum water depth in the parking lot is in accordance with the requirements of the design guidelines. The private storm sewer pipes all pass the 10 year and I 00 year storm event runoff without overtopping the drives. The velocity in the proposed drainage swales is also in accordance with the design guidelines of being less than 4.5 fps for a grass lined channel. Exhibit A -Drainage Area Map Appendix A-Drainage Area Summary/Analysis I, Joseph P. Schultz, Licensed Professional Engineer No. 65889, State of Texas, certify that this report for the drainage design for TD/ Brooks International Corporate Headquarters Laboratory Building, was prepared by me in accordance with the provisions of the Unified Stormwater Design Guidelines. F-12327 SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC. Page 3 of3 APPENDIX A Drainage Area Summary/Analysis TOI-Brooks Corporate Headquarters Laboratory Building Appendix A Proposed Storm Sewer Analysis Drainage Area Summary/Analysis Area, A c le 10 year storm Area# 110 C10 (acres) (min) (In/hr) (cfs) 301 1.380 0 .400 37 .4 4 .318 2.38 302 0 .720 0.400 26.6 5 .298 1.53 303 0 .970 0.400 42.1 4 .007 1.55 304 0 .970 0.450 37 .6 4 .300 1.88 305 0 .220 0 .950 10.0 8 .635 1.80 306 1.520 0.400 23.5 5.683 3.46 307 0 .140 0 .950 10.0 8.635 1.15 308 0 .080 0 .950 10.0 8.635 0 .66 100 year storm Curb Opening/ Parking Lot Depth Pipe Size 1100 C100 (ft)/ Y10 Y100 (In/hr) (cfs) (In) (In) (In) 5.926 3 .27 15 ' 7 .225 2.08 15 ' 5 .513 2 .14 15' 5.902 2 .58 4' 3 .48 4 .30 11.639 2.43 15' - 7.734 4 .70 Ditch - 11 .639 1.55 2' 3 .99 4 .86 11 .639 0 .88 2' 2.74 3.35 'SEE ATTACHED SKETCHES FOR HEADWATER CALCULATIONS AND CULVERT INFORMATION. ALL HEADWATER FOR THE 100 YEAR STORM EVENT IS BELOW THE TOP OF THE ROAD . Area, A c le 1 O year storm 100 year storm Drainage Swale Drainage Swale Area# 110 C10 1100 C100 (acrea) (min) (In/hr) (cfs) (In/hr) (cfs) 306, 307 , & 308 1.740 0 .500 23.5 5 .683 4 .94 7 .734 6 .73 The Rational Method: Q=CIA I = b I (tc+d)• Q = Flow (cfs) tc =Time of concentration (min) le = L/(V*60) L = Length (ft A =Area (acres) C =Runoff Coeff . I = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) Brazos County: Weir Equation for Curb Openings: 1 o vear stonn b= 80 d = 8 .5 e = 0 .763 Q = 3.0 * L * y 312 c> y = (Q I (3 * L))213 Drainage Swale twlcal section: (Manning Equation> 8H:1V 2' Bottom width 1' Minimum Depth n = 0 .035 (grass lined channel) V = Velocity (ft/sec) 100 vear stonn b = 96 d = 8.0 e = 0 .730 1 .7% design slope at location of maximum peak runoff in swale . V10 V100 Y10 Y100 (fps) (fps) (ft) (ft) 2.19 2.40 0 .42 0.48 Cu.lvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD ® Civil 30® 2012 by Autodesk , Inc . Culvert for Area 301 10 year Invert Elev On (ft) Pipe Length (ft} Slope(%) Invert Elev Up (ft) Rise (in) Shape Span (in) No. Barrels n-Value Inlet Edge Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k Embankment Top Elevation (ft) Top Width (ft} Crest Width (ft) Elev (ft) 328 .00 = 324.03 = 52.50 = 0.80 = 324.45 = 15.0 = Cir = 15.0 = 1 = 0.012 = Projecting = 0.0045, 2, 0.0317, 0.69, 0.5 = 327.07 = 24.00 = 24.00 Culvert for Area 301 10 year Calculations Qmin (cfs) Qmax (cfs) Tailwater Elev (ft) Highlighted Qtotal ( cfs) Qpipe (cfs) Qovertop ( cfs) Veloc On (ft/s) Veloc Up (ft/s) HGL On (ft) HGL Up (ft) Hw Elev (ft) Hw/O (ft} Flow Regime Wednesday , Nov 23 2011 = 2.38 = 3.27 = (dc+0)/2 = 2.38 = 2.38 = 0.00 = 2.42 = 3.91 = 324.97 = 325.07 = 325.33 = 0.70 = Inlet Control Hw Oepth (II) 3.55 325.00 -j----t----------..._ ________ _ --+---+--0 55 324 .00 l---.--l-====F===i=:::::::::l==:::ir:::::=r==r=:I=I=I=I:[JLJ_ -O•S 323.00 --+----+----+---+---+---+---t----+---+----+----+---+---+---+--____,t----+--1 .45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 55 70 75 --Cir Culv 11t --HGL --Emb1nk ROlc h (ft ) Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extens ion for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2012 by Autodesk , Inc. Culvert for Area 301 100 year Invert Elev On (ft) Pipe Length (ft) Slope(%) Invert Elev Up (ft) Rise (in) Shape Span (in) No. Barrels n-Value Inlet Edge = 324.03 = 52.50 = 0.80 = 324.45 = 15.0 = Cir = 15.0 = 1 = 0.012 = Projecting Coeff. K ,M,c,Y ,k = 0.0045, 2, 0.0317, 0.69 , 0.5 Embankment Top Elevation (ft) Top Width (ft) Crest Width (ft) Elev (ft) 328 .00 = 327.07 = 24.00 = 24.00 326.00 --+----+---+--- Culvert for Area 301 100 year Calculations Qmin (cfs) Qmax (cfs) Tailwater Elev (ft} Highlighted Qtotal ( cfs) Qpipe (cfs) Qovertop ( cfs) Veloc On (ft/s) Veloc Up (ft/s) HGL On (ft) HGL Up (ft) Hw Elev (ft) Hw/O (ft) Flow Regime 325.oo -+-_.L-+-------------------- Wednesday , Nov 23 2011 = 2.38 = 3.27 = (dc+0)/2 = 3.27 = 3 .27 = 0.00 = 3.13 = 4.37 = 325.02 = 325.18 = 325.51 = 0.85 = Inlet Control Hw Depth (ft ) 355 --+--+--055 324.00 J _____ l~=:;:::=:+=::::::::::i:::=i==r=:::r=:r=I=I=I~[JLJ_ -045 323.00 --+---+---+---+---+---+--___,r-----+---+---+---+---+---+---t------t--+---1 .45 0 5 10 15 20 26 30 35 40 50 55 60 70 75 --ClrCulvort --HGL --Embank Reach (ft ) Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extens ion for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2012 by Autodesk , Inc . Culvert for Area 302 10 year Invert Elev On (ft) Pipe Length (ft) Slope(%) Invert Elev Up (ft) Rise (in) Shape Span (in) No . Barrels n-Value Inlet Edge Coeff. K,M,c,Y ,k Embankment Top Elevation (ft) Top Width (ft) Crest Width (ft) El..,. (11) 33'4 .00 l33.00 33200 33 1.00 330.00 329.00 328 .00 0 10 --Cir Culvtit = 329.97 = 52.50 = 0.80 = 330.39 = 15.0 = Cir = 15.0 = 1 = 0.012 = Projecting = 0.0045, 2, 0.0317, 0.69, 0.5 = 333.03 = 24.00 = 24.00 Culvert for A rea 302 10 year 15 20 25 30 35 --HGL --Emblnk Calculations Qmin (cfs) Qmax (cfs) Tailwater Elev (ft) Highlighted Qtotal ( cfs) Qpipe (cfs) Qovertop ( cfs) Veloc On (ft/s) Veloc Up (ft/s) HGL On (ft) HGL Up (ft) Hw Elev (ft) Hw/O (ft) Flow Regime Wednesday , Nov 23 2011 = 1.53 = 2.08 = (dc+0)/2 = 1.53 = 1.53 = 0.00 = 1.67 = 3.36 = 330.84 = 330.89 = 331.07 = 0 .54 = Inlet Control 45 50 55 60 66 70 75 R•ach {ft ) Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2012 by Autodesk, Inc. Culvert for Area 302 100 year Invert Elev On (ft) Pipe Length (ft) Slope(%) Invert Elev Up (ft) Rise (in) Shape Span (in) No. Barrels n-Value Inlet Edge Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k Embankment Top Elevation (ft) Top Width (ft) Crest Width (ft) Elev {ft) 334 .00 lll.00 332 00 331 .00 330 .00 = 329.97 = 52.50 = 0.80 = 330.39 = 15.0 = Cir = 15.0 = 1 = 0.012 = Projecting = 0.0045, 2, 0.0317, 0.69, 0.5 = 333.03 = 24.00 = 24.00 Culvert for Area 302 100 year Calculations Qmin (cfs) Qmax (cfs) Tailwater Elev (ft) Highlighted Qtotal ( cfs) Qpipe (cfs) Qovertop ( cfs) Veloc On (ft/s) Veloc Up (ft/s) HGL On (ft) HGL Up (ft) Hw Elev (ft) Hw/O (ft) Flow Regime Wednesday, Nov 23 2011 = 1.53 = 2.08 = (dc+0)/2 = 2.08 = 2.08 = 0.00 = 2.16 = 3.75 = 330.88 = 330.97 = 331.20 = 0.65 = Inlet Control Hw Depth (ft) 361 _...-t-~-lnl ontrol --+-----+-0 61 329 .00 --+-----i-------+---+---+---l-----+---+-----1-------+---+---+---<1------1--.1.39 32 8.00 --+--+----+---t---r---r---r---t---i---+----+---t---r--+---r----+--2 .39 0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 TO 75 --Cir Cul v trt --HG L --Emb an k Reach (ft ) Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Au toCAD® Civil 3D® 2012 by Autodesk , Inc . Culvert for Area 303 10 year Invert Elev Dn (ft) Pipe Length (ft) Slope(%) Invert Elev Up (ft) Rise (in) Shape Span (in) No. Barrels n-Value Inlet Edge Coeff. K ,M ,c ,Y ,k Embankment Top Elevation (ft) Top Width (ft) Crest Width (ft) Elev (ft) 334.00 5 10 --Cir Cu l\!trt = 329 .94 = 53 .75 = 0.80 = 330 .37 = 15 .0 = Cir = 15.0 = 1 = 0.012 = Projecting = 0.0045, 2, 0.0317 , 0.69, 0.5 = 333.03 = 24 .00 = 24.00 1& 20 25 --HGL Culvert for Area 303 10 year 30 40 --Emban k Calculations Qmin (cfs) Qmax (cfs) Tailwater Elev (ft) Highlighted Qtotal ( cfs) Qpipe (cfs) Qovertop ( cfs) Veloc Dn (ft/s) Veloc Up (ft/s) HGL Dn {ft) HGL Up (ft) Hw Elev (ft) Hw/D (ft) Flow Regime Wednesday , Nov 23 2011 = 1.55 = 2.14 = (dc+D)/2 = 1.55 = 1.55 = 0.00 = 1.69 = 3.41 = 330 .81 = 330.87 = 331.05 = 0.55 = Inlet Control 45 50 .. 60 66 70 75 R•ach (ft) Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2012 by Autodesk , Inc. Culvert for Area 303 100 year Invert Elev Dn (ft) Pipe Length (ft) Slope(%) Invert Elev Up (ft) Rise (in) Shape Span (in) No. Barrels n-Value Inlet Edge Coeff. K,M,c,Y,k Embankment Top Elevation (ft) Top Width (ft) Crest Width (ft) Elev (ft) 334.00 333.00 332 .00 331.00 = 329.94 = 53.75 = 0.80 = 330.37 = 15.0 = Cir = 15.0 = 1 = 0 .012 = Projecting = 0.0045, 2, 0 .0317, 0.69, 0.5 = 333.03 = 24.00 = 24.00 Culvert for Area 303 100 yeer Calculations Qmin (cfs) Qmax (cfs) Tailwater Elev (ft) Highlighted Qtotal ( cfs) Qpipe (cfs) Qovertop ( cfs) Veloc Dn (ft/s) Veloc Up (ft/s) HGL Dn (ft) HGL Up (ft) Hw Elev (ft) Hw/D (ft) Flow Regime Wednesday, Nov 23 2011 = 1.55 = 2.14 = (dc+D)/2 = 2.13 = 2.13 = 0.00 = 2.20 = 3.76 = 330.86 = 330 .96 = 331.19 = 0.66 = Inlet Control Hw De pth (ft ) 3 63 ...-t-......__-1 et control -+-----+--0 63 330.00 -i--,..--l---r---r-..,.,,,,,F9F=t===t====t===t==+==+===~~-~--0.37 329 00 -+--+---+---+--+--+----Ir--+--+---+---+---+--+--+-----!--+--t.37 328 .00 --+-----+----+---+---+---+---i-----t---+-----+----+---+---+---+----1---+---2 .37 0 10 15 20 25 30 35 ol() 45 60 55 60 05 70 75 --Cir Co lv ert --HGL --Emban k Rea ch (ft ) Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Extens io n for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2012 by Autodesk , Inc. Culvert for Area 305 10 year Invert Elev Dn (ft) Pipe Length (ft) Slope(%) Invert Elev Up (ft) Rise (in) Shape Span (in) No . Barrels n-Value Inlet Edge Coeff. K ,M ,c ,Y ,k Embankment Top Elevation (ft) Top W idth (ft) Crest Width (ft) Elev (ft) 335.00 0 --Cir CohJ t rt 10 = 331.83 = 47.50 = 0 .80 = 332 .21 = 15.0 = Cir = 15.0 = 1 = 0.012 = Projecting = 0 .0045, 2, 0 .0317, 0.69 , 0 .5 = 334.62 = 24.00 = 24 .00 15 20 --HGL Culvert for Area 305 10 year 25 30 35 40 --Embank Calculations Qmin (cfs) Qmax (cfs) Tailwater Elev (ft) Highlighted Qtotal ( cfs) Qpipe (cfs) Qovertop ( cfs) Veloc Dn (ft/s) Veloc Up (ft/s) HGL On (ft) HGL Up (ft) Hw Elev (ft) Hw/D (ft) Flow Regime 45 50 55 60 65 Wednesday, Nov 23 2011 = 1.80 = 2.43 = (dc+D)/2 = 1.80 = 1.80 = 0.00 = 1.92 = 3.54 = 332.72 = 332.75 = 332.96 = 0 .60 = Inlet Control 70 Rea ch {ft ) Culvert Report Hydraflow Express Exte nsi on for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2012 by Autodesk , Inc. Culvert for Area 305 100 year Invert Elev On (ft) Pipe Length (ft) Slope(%) Invert Elev Up (ft) Rise (in) Shape Span (in) No. Barrels n-Value Inlet Edge Coeff. K,M,c,Y ,k Embankment Top Elevation (ft) Top Width (ft) Crest Width (ft) Elev (ft) 335.00 333 .00 ---+---+--~ = 331 .83 = 47 .50 = 0.80 = 332.21 = 15 .0 = Cir = 15 .0 = 1 = 0 .012 = Projecting = 0 .0045, 2, 0.0317, 0.69, 0.5 = 334 .62 = 24.00 = 24.00 Culvert for Area 305 100 year Calculations Qmin (cfs) Qmax (cfs) Tailwater Elev (ft) Highlighted Qtotal (cfs) Qpipe (cfs) Qovertop ( cfs) Veloc On (ft/s) Veloc Up (ft/s) HGL On (ft) HGL Up (ft) Hw Elev (ft) Hw/O (ft) Flow Regime Wednesday , Nov 23 2011 = 1.80 = 2.43 = (dc+0)/2 = 2.43 = 2 .43 = 0.00 = 2.46 = 3.94 = 332.77 = 332 .84 = 333.10 = 0 .71 = Inlet Control HwOopth (ft) 2 .79 ...-1---'--J!!!lnl!!!_jet ~n]!.!!!trol-4-O.T9 332 .00 ----+---.... -l--,---r--:-1-1-1-==1==r=::::::=f===f==F=--+-+ .o 21 33 1.00 --+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+----+----+----+---+-.1 21 330.00 --+---+---+---+---+---+----+----+----+---+---+----+----+---+---+--2 .21 0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 50 S5 60 65 70 --Cir Culve-rt --HGL --Emba nk Reich (ft ) EXHIBIT A Drainage Area Map Drainage Report for TDI/Brooks International -Laboratory Building South Dowling Road Brazos County, Texas September, 2011 Engineer: SCHULTZ ENGINEERING LLC - TBPE Firm Registration No. 12327 P.O. Box 11995 College Station, TX 77842 2730 Longmire Drive College Station, Texas 77845 (979) 764-3900 Developer: TOI/Brooks International 1902 Pinon College Station, Texas 77842 (979) 693-3446 • Drainage Report for TDl/Brooks International -Laboratory Building South Dowling Road Brazos County, Texas September, 2011 Engineer: SCHULTZ ENGINEERING LLC . TBPE Firm Registration No. 12327 P.O. Box 11995 College Station, TX 77842 2730 Longmire Drive College Station, Texas 77845 (979) 764-3900 Developer: TOI/Brooks International 1902 Pinon College Station, Texas 77842 (979) 693-3446 • Drainage Report For TDl/Brooks International -Laboratory Building ENGINEER SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC. P.O. Box 11995 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone/Fax: (979) 764-3900 OWNER TOI/Brooks International, Inc. 1902 Pinon College Station, Texas 77845 Phone: (979) 693-3446 GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION Location: Description: •Area: •Proposed Land Use: • Existing Land Use: • Land Description: Adjoining Land Use: Primary Drainage Facility: Flood Hazard Information: FEMAFIRM: Floodplain: This project is located on a 54 acre tract of land located at the north east corner of the intersection of IG&N Road and South Dowling Road in Brazos County. 54 acres Commercial -Laboratory and Office Facilities Vacant -Agricultural Ground that slopes toward the southwest to IG&N Road . The site is bounded on the west by rural residential properties, on the south by IG&N Road and on the east by South Dowling Road. Tributary of Peach Creek # 48041C0200 C No portion of this Phase lies within the floodplain of Peach Creek or its tributaries. HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS This phase of the development of this property will be located on the southwest portion of the property. This portion of the property drains to the existing detention/retention pond at the southwest into the right-of-way ofIG&N Road . The current condition of the land is pasture with some scattered large trees. GENERALSTORMWATERPLAN The drainage plan for this development will involve the sheet flow of runoff collected into the parking lot and drive aisles for the laboratory building. The runoff will then be discharged through curb cuts into swales and then into the existing detention pond. Page 1 of3 COORDINATION & STORMWATERPERMITTING The project will require that a NOI be filed and the TPDES General Permit TXR 150000 requirements be met as required by the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality. No other permits are anticipated for this project. DRAINAGE DESIGN General Information: Tc Methodology: Tc Minimum Design Storm Event: Pipe Materials: Manning 's n Value: Runoff Coefficients : Design Constraints: Design Software: Design Analysis: Stormwater runoff from the site will flow into the pavement areas, and out of the parking area and drive aisles through curb cuts . The flow then enters swales that direct the runoff to the existing detention pond. TR55 10 minutes 10-year -private storm sewer 100-year -private storm sewer n/a n/a 0.35 Landscape Area, and 0.95 for Pavement Areas Max. water depth in the parking lot= 6 in. or 0 .5 ft . for 100 year storm event. Min. flow velocity = 2.5 fps Max. flow velocity = 15 fps Excel spreadsheets, DODSON HydraCalc Hydraulics, Civil 3D Hydraflow This software was used to compute curb cut capacity, flowrate and velocity through each curb . All of this information is shown in the summary tables in Appendix A. The software was also used to compute the depth of flow and velocity in the swales. The Drainage Area Summary/ Analysis in Appendix A has the runoff calculations and curb opening size and depth at each opening. An evaluation of the proposed drainage swales was only performed at one location, which has the greatest flow in a swale. This location is shown on Exhibit A. Since all swales have the same cross-section additional evaluation locations are not necessary . Page 2 of 3 Design Results Applicable Exhibits: CERTIFICATION The data presented in the Appendices indicates the maximum water depth in the parking lot is in accordance with the requirements of the design guidelines . The velocity in the proposed drainage swales is also in accordance with the design guidelines of being less than 4.5 fps for a grass lined channel. Exhibit A -Drainage Area Map Appendix A -Drainage Area Summary/Analysis I, Joseph P. Schultz, Licensed Professional Engineer No. 65889, State of Texas, certify that this report for the drainage design for TDI Brooks International Corporate Headquarters Laboratory Building, was prepared by me in accordance with the provisions of the Unified Stormwater Design Guidelines. Page 3 of3 EXHIBIT A Drainage Area Map t I I ------- ..... ~· \ 301 "~, "· --, ·, A '._ 1. \ '#/ \ I I ,,~ Y--. ---. '-\ I ,_., I ·. \~ I / ~...... /,,,,.,.-....... I ' --/ 1 ~ ' /I ,.~ \ I <,;; /':V-' I / ~ I . .,,.~ ~ 1 __ _./'i .,,._.. ··.;' --::---~j, N OTE: REFER TO \ '<t+ •. \ I I ·... I e ··-c~ I I I / I I '/ · ... / I I I I I e ) I I / / e / I / I .-'~ / ' I I, J 1. ' '~ / ... ' / ', ... , // \.\ ', / ... ' / e )· \.' ·. """/' / \ CO N STRUCTION -~"'1 / I DRAWINGS FOR CURB \ ~ \ \ / / CUT LOCATIONS G{ i '':' / / / / _./ ','-/ I \ ',/--.::--- /·. / ' / \I \ ii+---,.. // ·1 ' \ 0.26 -_j \.. I \ [ i ,_r-, \, ,,,1 ) xv-/ <".> ', ffi n. :,_.,-" ,/ \ -- v. ;s.43 ·.:; '-~ ii l I \ '-U ..... I )~1 I \ 1 1i ' / '1 \ 11{/1 I fl ' / ~ ,;1; / .ti y / \ I // / / / / / / / / / / I I I I I I I ~ I f~Y I \,_5,JJJ I ~; I / / / / / / / / / . ._ J / / I I / I / / J. / j / # .... ,_-1-1------+1 .-+-1 --11 ,_.~~=~=-~~=L=:,..~;_T:_~_::~~-~~:r._,1_N=R-·._R_R~I l\_-=r.~1 -.1.~r-=-~--~---1 D '-~-:~-~-:-~_:o_;_~-~-~-[-~R-~_?._~_~_i_:_;,_;_;~_~;_Po_:_u_ASr_E _, ._ __ b_~_i_i_~_-_A_n_!_E_v_E_A_~_o_f_A_M_~_N_A_~ __ APPENDIX A Drainage Area Summary/Analysis TOI-Brooks Corporate Headquarters Laboratory Building Appendix A Proposed Storm Sewer Analysis Drainage Area Summary/Analysis Area , A c tc 10 year storm Area# (acres) 301 1.470 302 0.170 303 0.550 304 0.260 305 0.740 Area# Area, A (acres) 301, 302 , & 305 2.380 The Rational Method: Q=CIA Q =Flow (cfs) A= Area (acres) C = Runoff Coeff. I = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) Brazos County: (min) 0.500 28 .7 0.950 10 .0 0.500 23 .5 0.600 23 .0 0.350 30 .0 c (min) 0.500 30 .0 I = b I (tc+d)0 110 010 (In/hr) (cfs) 5.067 3.72 8.635 1.39 5.684 1.56 5.753 0.90 4.936 1.28 1 O year storm 110 (in/hr) 4.936 010 (cfs) 5.87 le = Time of concentration (min) 100 year storm 1100 0100 (in/hr) (cfs) 6.919 5.09 11.639 1.88 7.736 2.13 7.827 1.22 6.746 1.75 100 year storm 1100 (in/hr) 6.746 0100 (cfs) 8.03 le= U(V*60) L = Length (ft V = Velocity (ft/sec) 1 O year storm b = 80 100 year storm b = 96 d = 8 .5 d = 8.0 e = 0 .763 e = 0 .730 Weir Equation for Curb Openings: Q = 3.0 * L * y 312 c> y = (QI (3 * L))213 Drainage Swale typical section: (Manning Equation) 8H:1V 2' Bottom width 1' Minimum Depth n = 0 .035 (grass lined channel) 1.7% design slope at location of maximum peak runoff in swale. curb Parking Lot Depth Opening (ft) Y10 (In) 5.00 4 .74 2.00 4.54 2.00 4.89 2.00 3.38 2.00 4.28 Drainage Swale V10 (fps) 2.25 V100 (fps) 2.51 Y100 (In) 5.83 5.54 6.01 4.15 5.27 Drainage Swale Y100 (ft) 0.41 0.47 Erika Bridges -FW: TDI-Brooks -south Dowling road From: "Jo e Schultz" <j oeschultz84 @veri zon.net> To: "Erika Brid ges " <Ebri dges@ cstx .g ov> Date: 1/1 7/201 2 2:18 PM Subject: FW: TDI -B ro oks -south Do wlin g ro ad Eri ka, Wellborn SUD acceptance of waterline . I tried to get a formal letter, but this is what I got. Thanks Joe From: Stephen Cast [mailto:wsud.sc@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 2:11 PM To: Joe Schultz Subject: Re: TDI-Brooks -south Dowling road Joe Schultz , P.E. Page 1 of 1 Wellborn Special Utility District has inspected and approved the water lines associated w ith improvements to t he TDIBrooks project. T hanks , Stephen Cast -----Orig inal Message ----- From: Joe Schultz To: Stephen Cast Sent: Monday, January 16 , 2012 4 :19 PM Subject: TOI -Brooks -south Dowling road Stephen, Just calling to see if I can get a letter of acceptance for the waterline Thanks Joe Joe Schul tz, P.E. Schultz Engineering, LLC 2730 Longmire , Suite A College Station, TX 77845 Office 979 .764 .3900 fi le://C :\D oc urnents and Settings\e brid ges\Local Settings\Temp\XP grpwise\4F 15 8325C ity of Clilll (lge!BQ Erika Bridges -Re: TDI Brooks Fire Flow From: To : Date: Subject: Er ika , Eric Dotson Erika Bridges 1/30/2012 10:55 AM Re : TDI Brooks fire Flow That's fine there are two hydrants to share and the buildings are sprinkled . Eric Dotson '06 Deputy Fire Marshal College Station Fire Department 300 Krenek Tap Road edotson@cstx .gov (979)764-3709 (979)764-3705 Fax (979 )764-3403 City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University® »>Erika Br idges 1/30/2012 10 :50 AM »> Eric , Page 1 of 1 We just received the fire flow test results , and one of the newly installed fire hydrants prov ided 1260gpm . The fire flow report states that they needed 1500gpm , but they did install a second hydrant which cou ld share the demand as well. Will the 1260gpm be suff icient or do they need to flow them aga in to get the 1500gpm? Thanks , Er ika file ://C:\Documents and Settings\ebridges\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F26772CCity of Qci.lWgi)~ FOR OFF(CE us~ ~ CASE NO. I~ I DATE SUBMITIED :· • I I CITY OF COILEGE STATION Hom e a/Texas A&M Uni vmity0 SITE PLAN APPLICATION GENERAL TIME : 4~10 STAFF:~ I MINIMUM SUBMITIAL REQUIREMENTS: [8] $932 Site Plan Application Fee . [8] $350 Non-Residential Architectural Standards Building Review Application Fee (if applicable). [8] $600 (minimum) Development Permit Application I Public Infrastructure Review and Inspection Fee . Fee is 1 % of acceptable Engineer's Estimate for public infrastructure , $600 minimum (if fee is > $600, the balance is due prior to the issuance of any plans or development permit). [8] Application completed in full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and may not be adjusted or altered . [8] Fourteen (14) folded copies of site plan . [8] One (1) folded copy of the landscape plan . (8] One (1) copy of the following for Non-Residential Architectural Standards building review or Northgate Building Review (if applicable). [8] Building elevations to scale for all buildings. [8] A list of building materials for all facade and screening . [8] Color samples for all buildings or list colors to be used from the approved color palette. [8] Electronic copy of Site Plan e-mailed to csuelectdesign@cstx.gov. [8] Two (2) copies of the grading, drainage, and erosion control plans with supporting drainage report. ,J,m] Two (2) copies of the Public infrastructure plans and supporting documents (if applicable). [8] Traffic Impact Analysis or calculations of projected vehicle trips showing that a TIA is not necessary for the proposed request (if applicable). (8] The attached Site Plan Non-Residential Architectural Standards Building Review and Northgate Building Review checklists (as applicable) with all items checked off or a brief explanation as to why they are not check off. Date of Optional Preapplication or Stormwater Management Conference _M_;.a..._y_4_,_, -"-2""'""0_11 ___________ _ NAME OF PROJECT TOI-Brooks International Center Corporate Headquarters -Laboratory Building ADDRESS 14379 South Dowling Road LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Lot, Block, Subdivision) Block 1, Lot 1, TOI-Brooks International Center APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project): Name James M. Brooks, Ph.D. E-mail drjmbrooks@aol.com Street Address 1902 Pinon Drive City College Station State Texas Zip Code _7_78_4_5 ____ _ Phone Number 979-693-3446 Fax Number 979-693-6389 ---------------- PROPER TY OWNER'S INFORMATION : Name GE03, Inc . E-mail jimbrooks@tdi-bi.com Street Address 1902 Pinon Drive City College Station State Texas Zip Code _7_78_4_5 ____ _ Phone Number 979-693-3446 Fax Number 979-693-6389 ~--------------- 1/11 Page 1 of 11 ... ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S INFORMATION: Name Schultz Engineering, LLC -Joe Schultz, PE Street Address 2730 Longmire Drive City College Station State Texas Phone Number 979-764-3900 Fax Number ---------------- 0 THE R CONTACTS (Please specify type of contact): Name Mike Record -Arkitex Studio Street Address 308 N . Bryan Ave. City Bryan Phone Number 979-821-2635 State Tx Fax Number ---------------- Current zoning A-0 Agricultural Open Present use of property Commercial -TOI-Brooks International Center Proposed use of property Commercial -TOI-Brooks International Center E-mail ;oeschultz84@verizon .net Zip Code 77845 979-764-3910 E-mail mrs@arkitex.com Zip Code 77803 979-775-8224 Number of parking spaces required 40 Number of parking spaces proposed 41 ------- Is there Special Flood Hazard Area (Zone A or Zone AE on FEMA FIRM panels) on the property? ~ Yes fX No This information is necessary to help staff identify the appropriate standards to review the application and will be used to help determine if the application qualifies for vesting to a previous ordinance. Notwithstanding any assertion made , vesting is limited to that which is provided in Chapter 245 of the Texas Local Government Code or other applicable law . Is this application a continuation of a project that has received prior City platting approval(s) and you are requesting the application be reviewed under previous ordinance as applicable? fX Yes I No If yes , provide information regarding the first approved application and any related subsequent applications (provide additional sheets if necessary): Project Name : TDI BROOKS INTERNATIONAL CENTER (PP) City Project Number (in known): 11 -00500084 Date I Timeframe when submitted : 05/18/11 1/11 Page 2of11 MULTl-FAMIL Y RESIDENTIAL Total Acreage Floodplain Acreage ____ _ Housing Units ___ #of 1 Bedroom Units ___ # of2 Bedroom Units #of 3 Bedroom Units --- #of 4 Bedroom Units --- FOR 2 BEDROOM UNITS ONLY #Bedrooms= 132 sq . ft. # Bedrooms < 132 sq . ft. --- PARKLAND DEDICATION (Fees due prior to the issuance of a Building Permit) # of Multi-Family Dwelling Units X$1646=$ #of acres in floodplain #of acres in detention #of acres in greenways Date dedication approved by Parks & ____ Recreation Advisory Board COMMERCIAL Total Acreage _5_1._71_9 ___ _ Building Square Feet _98_1_5 __ _ Floodplain Acreage ""'o ___ _ * Projects that were vested prior to January 1, 2008 , per Chapter 245 of the Texas Local Government Code may be assessed a different amount. Please contact city staff for additional information . The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true and correct. 1Z-A-f/1-I / Date / 1/11 Page 3 of 11 CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT Owner Certification: 1. No work of any kind may start until a permit is issued . 2. The permit may be revoked if any false statements are made herein . 3. If revoked, all work must cease until permit is re-issued . 4. Development shall not be used or occupied until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued . 5. The permit will expire if no significant work is progressing within 24 months of issuance . 6. Other permits may be required to fulfill local, state, and federal requirements. Owner will obtain or show compliance with all necessary State and Federal Permits prior to construction including NOi and SWPPP . 7. If required , Elevation Certificates will be provided with elevations certified during construction (forms at slab pre- pour) and post construction. 8. Owner hereby gives consent to City representatives to make reasonable inspections required to verify compliance . 9. If, stormwater mitigation is required , including detention ponds proposed as part of this project, it shall be designed and constructed first in the construction sequence of the project. 10 . In accordance with Chapter 13 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, measures shall be taken to insure that all debris from construction, erosion, and sedimentation shall not be deposited in city streets , or existing drainage facilities. All development shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to and approved by the City Engineer for the above named project. All of the applicable codes and ordinances of the City of College Station shall apply. 11 . The information and conclusions contained in the attached plans and supporting documents will comply with the current requirements of the City of College Station , Texas City Code, Chapter 13 and associated BCS Unified Design Guidelines Technical Specifications, and Standard Details . All development has been designed in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances of the City of College Station and State and Federal Regulations . 12 . Release of plans to (name or firm) is authorized for bidding purposes only . I understand that final approval and release of plans and development for construction is contingent on contractor signature on approved Development Permit. 13 . I, THE OWNER, AGREE TO AND CERTIFY THAT ALL STATEMENTS HEREIN , AND IN ATIACHMENTS FOR TH EVELOPMENT PE IT APPLICATION , ARE, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, TRUE , AND CC RATE. Engineer Certification: 1111 1. The project has been designed to ensure that stormwater mitigation, including detention ponds , proposed as part of the project will be constructed first in the construction sequence . 2 . I will obtain or can show compliance with all necessary Local , State and Federal Permits prior to construction including NOi and SWPPP . Design will not preclude compliance with TPDES : i.e., projects over 10 acres may require a sedimentation basin. 3. The information and conclusions contained in the attached plans and supporting documents comply with the current requirements of the City of College Station, Texas City Code, Chapter 13 and associated BCS Unified Design GuideJ.LQf!So:~elopment has been designed in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances of the Ci~~I~~ ma and State and Federal Regulations . 4. I, THE~£~~ AND CERTIFY THAT ALL STATEMENTS HEREIN , AND IN ATTACHMENTS FOR Tl°i ~V EN"t; ~ MIT APPLICATION , ARE, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE , TRUE , AND ACC~+&~···••H••············:.!;. l ... ~Q~.~r.tl ~; .. 0 •• ~ • ~· ~ fj .--2-7-/ I Date Page 4of11 The following CERTIFICATIONS apply to development in Special Flood Hazard Areas. Required for Site Plans, Final Plats, Construction Plans, Fill / Grading Permits, and Clearing Only Permits:* A I, certify , as demonstrated in the attached drainage study, that the alterations or development covered by this permit, shall not: (i) increase the Base Flood elevation ; (ii) create additional areas of Special Flood Hazard Area ; (iii) decrease the conveyance capacity to that part of the Special Flood Hazard Area that is not in the floodway and where the velocity of flow in the Base Flood event is greater than one foot per second . This area can also be approximated to be either areas within 100 feet of the boundary of the regulatory floodway or areas where the depth of from the BFE to natural ground is 18 inches or greater; (iv) reduce the Base Flood water storage volume to the part of the Special Flood Hazard Area that is beyond the floodway and conveyance area where the velocity of flow in the Base Flood is equal to and less than one foot per second without acceptab le compensation as set forth in the City of College Station Code of Ordinances, Chapter 13 concerning encroachment into the Special Flood Hazard Area ; nor (v) increase Base Flood velocities. beyond those areas exempted by ordinance in Section 5.11 .3a of Chapter 13 Code of Ordinances. Engineer Date Initial D * If a platting-status exemption to this requirement is asserted, provide written j ustification under separate letter in lieu of certification . Required for Site Plans, Final Plats, Construction Plans, and Fill/ Grading Permits: B. I, , certify to the following : (i) that any nonresidential or multi-family structure on or proposed to be on this site as part of th is application is designed to prevent damage to the structure or its contents as a result of flooding from the 100-year storm . Engineer Date Additional certification for Floodway Encroachments: C. I, , certify that the construction , i mprovement, or fill covered by th is ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- permit shall not increase the base flood elevation . I w i ll apply for a variance to the Zoning Board of Adjustments. Engineer Date 1/11 Page 5of1 1 Required for all projects proposing structures in Special Flood Hazard Area (Elevation Certificate required). Residential Structures: D. I, , certify that all new construction or any substantial improvement of any residential structure shall have the lowest floor, including all util ities, ductwork and any basement, at an elevation at least one foot above the Base Flood Elevation . Required Elevation Certificates will be provided w it h elevations certified during construction (forms at slab pre-pour) and post construction . Engineer I Surveyor Date Commercial Structures: E. I, , certify that all new construction or any substantial improvement ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ of any commercial, industrial, or other non-residential structure are designed to have the lowest floor, including all utili ties , ductwork and basements, elevated at least one foot above the Base Flood Elevation Engineer I Surveyor Date OR I, , certify that the structure with its attendant utility , ductwork, basement and sanitary facilities is designed to be flood -proofed so that the structure and utilities, ductwork, basement and sanitary facilities are designed to be watertight and impermeable to the intrusion of water in all areas below the Base Flood Elevation , and shall resist the structural loads and buoyancy effects from the hydrostatic and hydrodynamic conditions. Required Elevation Certificates will be provided with elevations certified during construction (forms at slab pre - pour) and post construction . Engineer I Surveyor Date Conditions or comments as part of approval : 1/11 Page 6 of 11 CITY or C oll.EGE STAT ION Home of Texas A&M Univmity• SITE PLAN MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (ALL CITY ORDINANCES MUST BE MET) INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING: IE] Sheet size -24" x 36" (minimum). IE] A key map (not necessarily to scale). IE] T itle block to include: [8J Name , address , location, and legal description IE] Name , address , and telephone number of applicant IE] Name, address, and telephone number of developer/owner (if differs from applicant) [8J Name , address, and telephone number of architect/engineer (if differs from applicant) [8J Date of submittal [8J Total site area [8J North arrow . [8J Scale should be largest standard engineering scale possible on sheet. IE] Ownership and current zoning of parcel and all abutting parcels . [8J The total number of multi-family buildings and units to be constructed on the proposed project site . ~ The density of dwelling units per acre of the proposed project. [8J The gross square footage of all buildings and structures and the proposed use of each . If different uses are to be located in a single bu ilding , show the location and size of the uses with in the building . Build ing separation is a minimum of 15 feet w/o add itional fire protection . Locations of the following on or adjacent to the subject site: Designate between existing and proposed r.1~ The density of dwelling units per acre of the proposed project. IX'.! Phasing . Each phase must be able to stand alone to meet ordinance requirements . ~ Buildings (Existing and Proposed). 1%1 Setbacks according to UDO, Article 5. Geography [8J Water cou rses. IE] 100 yr. floodplain and floodway (if applicable) on or adjacent to the proposed project site . Please note if there is none on the site with confirming FEMNFIRM map number. ~ Existing topography (2 ' max or spot elevations) and other pertinent drainage information . (If plan has too much information , show dra inage on separate sheet.) IE] Proposed grading (1 ' max for proposed or spot elevations) and other pert inent drainage information . (If plan has too much information, show drainage on separate sheet.) 1/11 Page 7 of 11 Streets, Parking, and Sidewalks [g] Existing streets and sidewalks (R.0.W .). [8] Existing Driveways, both opposite and adjacent to the site according to UDO , Article 7 . [8] Proposed drives. Minimum drive aisle width according to UDO, Article 7 [8] Indicate proposed driveway throat length according to UDO , Article 7 ;.$ Proposed curb cuts. D For each proposed curb cut (including driveways, streets, alleys , etc.) locate existing curb cuts on the same and opposite side of the street to determine separation distances between existing and proposed curb cuts. [8J Proposed curb and pavement detail. [g] A 6" raised curb is required around all edges of all parts of all paved areas without exception . (To include island, planting areas, access ways, dumpster locations , utility pads , etc.) No exception will be made for areas designated as "reserved for future parking". 4N Proposed medians. [g] Proposed sidewalks (both public and private). [8J Proposed pedestrian/bike circulation and facilities for non-residential buildings (UDO, Article 7). [8J Off-Street parking areas with parking spaces drawn, tabulated , and dimensioned . [8] Designate number of parking spaces required by ordinance and provided by proposal. [8] Handicap parking spaces . [8) Parking Islands drawn and dimensioned with square footage calculated according to UDO, Section 7 .2 or 7 .9 fornon- residential buildings. [8J Parking setback from R.O .W . to curb of parking lot as required . [8J Wheelstops may be required when cars overhang onto property not owned by the applicant or where there may be conflict with pedestrian or bike facilities, handicap accessible routes or above ground utilities , signs or other conflicts . ~ Security gates , showing swing path and design specs with colors . rd]-Guardrails. Include design and colors . [8J Traffic Impact Analysis for non-residential development (UDO , Article 7). [8J Please note if none is required . [8] Will there be access from a TxDOT R.O .W.? O Yes [8) No If yes , then TxDOT permit must be submitted with this application . Easements and Utilities [8] Easements -clearly designate as existing or proposed and type (utility, access , etc.) [8] Utilities (noting size and designate as existing or proposed) within or adjacent to the proposed site , including bu i lding transformer locations , above ground and underground service connections to buildings, and drainage inlets. [8J Sewer Design Report (if applicable}. ~ Water Design Report and/or Fire Flow Report (if applicable). 5 ,J.,~.g.,.J .,.i : ~ f~ ~ \ f /1;-t [8] Drainage Report with a Technical Design Summary . [8] Meter locations , existing and proposed (must be located in public R.O .W. or public utility easement). ~ Provide a water and sanitary sewer legend to include D Minimum water demands L D Maximum water demands .-...1 } O Average water demands in gallons per minute , and [8J Maximum sewer loadings in gallons per day [8] Will there be access from a TxDOT R.O.W.? D Yes [8J No If yes, then TxDOT permit must be submitted with this application . 1/11 Page 8of11 Fire Protection [8] Show fire lanes . Fire lanes with a minimum of 20 feet in width with a minimum height clearance of 14 feet must be established if any portion of the proposed structure is more than 150 feet from the curb line or pavement edge of a public street or highway . [8] Show proposed and existing fire hydrants. Fire hydrants must be located on the same s ide of a major street as a project, and shall be in a location approved by the City Engineer. Any structure in any zoning district other than R-1, R-1A, or R-2 must be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant as measured along a public street, highway or designated fire lane . NOTE: Fire hydrants must be operable and accepted by the City, and drives must have an all weather surface before a building permit can be issued. [8] Will building be sprinkled? [8] Yes 0 No If the decision to sprinkle is made after the site plan has been approved, then the plan must be resubmitted . If Yes , [8] Show fire department connections . FDC's should be within 150' of the fire hydrant. In no case shall they be any further than 300' apart, and they shall be accessible from the parking lot without being blocked by parked cars or a structure . Landscaping [8] Landscape plans as required in Article 7 of the Unified Development Ordinance. The landscaping plan can be shown on a separate sheet if too much information is on the original site plan . If requesting protected tree points , then those trees need to be shown appropriately barricaded on the landscape plan . Attempt to reduce or elim inate plantings in easements. Include information on the plans such as: [8] required point calculations [8] additional streetscape points required . Streetscape compliance is required on all streets. 1v1 calculations for # of street trees required and proposed (proposed street tree points will accrue toward total ~ landscaping points .) [8] proposed new plantings with points earned [8] proposed locations of new plantings [8] screening of parking lots, 50% of all shrubs used for screening shall be evergreen . 1v1 screening of dumpsters, concrete retaining walls , off street loading areas , utility connection points , or other ~ areas potentially visually offensive . [8] existing landscaping to remain 1v1 show existing trees to be barricaded and barricade plan . Protected points will only be awarded if barricades are ~ up before the first development permit is issued . [8] Buffer as required in Article 7 of the Unified Development Ordinance. [8] Show irrigation system plan. (or provide note on how irrigation system requirement will be met prior to issuance of C. 0 .) All plans must include irrigation systems for landscaping. Irrigation meters are separate from the regular water systems for buildings and will be sized by city according to irrigation demand subm itted by applicant and must include backflow prevention protection . [8] Is there any landscaping in TxDOT R.O .W .? O Yes [8] No If yes , then TxDOT permit must be submitted at the time of application. Other ,im Common open spaces sites ~ Loading docks ~ Detention ponds ~ Retaining walls ~ Sites for solid waste containers with screening . Locations of dumpsters are accessible but not visible from streets or residential areas. Gates are discouraged and visual screening is required . (Minimum 12 x 12 pad required .) ~Are there impact fees associated with this development? O Yes ~ No NOTE: Signs are to be permitted separately . 1/11 Page 9of11 CITY OF CoILEGE STATION Home ofTexm A&M University" NRA BUILDING REVIEW MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (ALL CITY ORDINANCES MUST BE MET) INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING: Refer to UDO Section 7.9 Non-Residential Architectural Standards, as appropriate. ~ Sheet size -24" x 36" (minimum). ~ Title block to include : ~ Name, address , location , and legal description ~ Name, address, and telephone number of applicant ~ Name, address , and telephone number of developer/owner (if differs from applicant) ~ Name, address, and telephone number of architecUengineer (if differs from applicant) ~ Date of submittal ~ Scale should be largest standard scale possible on sheet. ~ List of colors from the City of College Station color palette to be utilized or proposed equivalents. ~ Color samples. ~ List of materials to be utilized . ~ Elevations of each non-residential building and screening structure . Show placement of materials and colors on the facades according to UDO Section 5 .6 .B or 7 .9. ~ Include the following dimensions: ~ Total vertical square footage minus openings (for each fayade separately) ~ Total vertical square footage of transparency (for each fa9ade separately in Northgate) ~ Total vertical square footage of each building material (for each fa9ade separately) ~ Total vertical square footage of each color (for each fa9ade separately) ~ Graphic representation and/or description of existing buildings in building plot to show material , color , and architectural harmony . 1 /11 Page 1 O of 11 C ITY OF C ou ,EGE STATION Home o/TtxaJ A&M University• 1/11 NORTHGATE BUILDING REVIEW MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (ALL CITY ORDINANCES MUST BE MET) INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING: Refer to UDO Section 5.6. Design Districts, B. Northgate Districts (NG) D Sheet size ; 24 " ~ 36" (minimum). D Title block to include : D Name, address , location , and legal descript ion D Name , address , and telephone number of applicant D Name , address , and telephone number of developer/owner (if differs from applicant) D Name, address, and telephone number of architect/engineer (if differs from applicant) D Date of submittal D Scale should be largest standard engineering scale possible on sheet. D List of colors from the City of College Station Northgate color palette to be utilized or proposed equ ivalents with color samples . D List of materials to be utilized . D Elevations of each building and screening structure . Show placement of materials and colors on the facades and identify public entrances . Include the following dimensions : D Total vertical square footage minus openings (for each fa9ade separately) D Total vertical square footage of each building materia l (for each fa9ade separately) D Total vertical square footage of each color (for each fa9ade separately) D Total vertica l square footage of transparency between zero and eight feet (0-8 ') above ground level (for each non-residential fa9ade) D Graphic representation and/or description of existing buildings i n building plot to show material , color, and architectural harmony. Page 11 of 11 December 1, 2011 Erika Br idges, EIT Graduate Civil Eng ineer Department of Public Works 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Re: TOI BROOKS INTERNATIONAL CENTER (FP) -11-00500106 Dear Ms. Bridges: Office : 979 .764.390 0 Fax: 979.764 .3910 Attached are 3 copies of the revised construction drawings, and 1 -11x17 copy of the grading and erosion control plan . If you have any questions , please do not hesitate to call. Very tru ly yours , Schultz Engineering, LLC. P.O . Box 11995 • Co llege Station , Tex as 77842 schu ltze ngineeri ng llc.com -·-, Water Design & Fire Flow Analysis Report for TDI-Brooks International Center Laboratory Building College Station, Texas August, 2011 Prepared Bv: TBPE Firm Registration No. 12327 2730 Longmire, Suite A College Station, Texas 77845 979 .764.3900 F~12327 SCHULTZ ENt;INEERING, U,C . ~ General Information 0\ Location: TDI-Brooks International C ter is located on the northeast side of the intersection of South Dow!· g Road and I &GN Road. General Note: A 12 " water line will onnect to the existing 12 " water line on the southwest side of the roperty , run east then north to the proposed developed area. 2" 6 ' ines will be extended to the building for water service and the fire sprmkler system. These lines will be private lines. As noted in the previous report for this subdivision, a residual pressure in the existing 12" line of 67.54 psi with a 2,500 gpm demand was used for the analysis of the proposed line. The results in this report are conservative since the 2,500 gpm flow is not required. Land Use: Commercial/Office Design Criteria/ Analysis Primary Water Supply: Existing 12" water line along the southeast side of the property. Domestic Demand: Max. Demand Flow: 52 gpm 2" Water Meter -Note: The water meter size is based on adding an office building to this meter in the future . Fire Flow: Proposed structure is 9,815 sf commercial laboratory building and is proposed to be Type III-B construction per the International Building Code. In accordance with Table Bl 05.1 of the International Fire Code, the minimum required fire hydrant flow is 2,250 gpm. The building will have a fire sprinkler system, therefore, the hydrant flow is reduced to 1,500 gpm. Flow Hydrant: Proposed FH2 Flowrate : 1,500 gpm Exhibits: Exhibit A -Water Layout Exhibit B -Pipe and Junction Analysis -Domestic Demand Exhibit C -Pipe and Junction Analysis -Fire Flow Demand Conclusion The proposed 12" water line is in accordance with the BCS Water Design Guidelines . This report provides the results of the water system analysis under the fire flow & domestic conditions for the commercial laboratory building. The lowest residual pressure in the system with the fire flow and domestic demands (1,552 gpm) is 52.6 psi. The lowest residual pressure in the system with only the domestic demand (52 gpm) is 55 psi. Each of these pressures exceeds the 20 psi and 35 psi minimum pressure requirements . The maximum velocity in all pipes is less than 12 fps . The maximum velocity in the 12" pipe will be 4.4 fps with a fire flow of 1,500 gpm . The proposed 2" water service to the building and J - \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 111 S CH ULTZ E NGI NEER I NG LL C TW'I I«>. ln2"1 !?J.O a..-.:..J•-r. htt.-.. c .. ,,.,.. SU.0-Tu '.•• na~ r.'916,.3909 ~ ---I I _, I ,,. I --~ft U ·fCR I ~1 3Dft D .... -TD_I_-_B_1l_O_O_'K.:S_ ... ~L-'N~,?;-!_'RN._:A_T._1_0_'li_:A_L_, '--------------' 1--SCAL£----1 I ~A•m I .o. z.n PROPOSED 1fATERLINE --- LABORATORY BUILDING LAYOUT --,., ~ n..1.nOJt,, rz ._._ ....ll;!I!.,.._ Pipe Number P-3 P-4 P-5 P-6 P-7 Length {ft) 446 20 25 22 764 Exhibit B WaterCAD Analysis Summary Pipe Analysis -Domestic Flow Hazen- Size (in) Material WilliamsC 12 PVC 150 12 PVC 150 12 PVC 150 12 PVC 150 12 PVC 150 Exhibit B WaterCAD Analysis Summary Junction Analysis -Domestic Flow Total Elevation Demand Pressure Junction (ft) (gpm) (psi) J-1 307.06 0 67 .2 PROPOSED FHl 333 .26 0 55.9 J-4 335.32 52 55 PROPOSED FH2 335.25 0 55 J-6 335.16 0 55 Flow Velocity (gpm) (ft/s) 52 0 .15 0 0 0 0 -52 0.15 52 0 .15 .. ( .. Exhibit C WaterCAD Analysis Summary Pipe Analysis -Fire Flow for Commercial Building Use -1,500 gpm Pipe Number P-3 P-4 P-5 P-6 P-7 Length (ft) Size (in) Material 446 12 PVC 20 12 PVC 25 12 PVC 22 12 PVC 764 12 PVC Exhibit C WaterCAD Analysis Summary Hazen-Flow Williams C (gpm) 150 1,552 150 1,500 150 0 150 -1,552 150 1,552 Junc_tion Analysis -Fire Flow for Commercial Building Use -1,500 gpm Total Elevation Demand Pressure Junction (ft) (gpm) (psi) J-1 307 .06 0 67.2 PROPOSED FHl 333 .26 0 54.4 J-4 335.32 52 52 .6 PROPOSED FH2 335 .25 1,500 52.6 J-6 335.16 0 52.7 Velocity (ft/s) 4.4 4.26 0 4 .4 4.4 August 26 , 2011 Matt Robinson Senior Planner Planning & Development Services 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Re: TOI BROOKS INTERNATIONAL CENTER (SP)-11-00500130 Dear Mr. Robinson : Office: 979 .764 .3900 Fax : 979 .764.3910 Attached are 2 copies of the Water Design & Fire Flow Report for the TOI-Brooks International Center Laboratory Building . If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, Schultz Engineering, LLC. P.O. Box 11995 • College Station , Texas 77842 schultzengineeringllc.com September 15 , 2011 Alan Gibbs, P.E. City Engineer Development Services City of College Station College Station, Texas Office : 979 .764.3900 Fax : 979.764 .3910 RE: Letter Acknowledging City Standards -TDI-Brooks International Corporate Headquarters -Laboratory Building Dear Mr. Gibbs: The purpose of this letter is to acknowledge that the construction plans for the Site, Drainage , Utility and Pavement improvements for the above-referenced project, to the best of my knowledge, does not deviate from the B/CS Design Guideline Manual. I also acknowledge that , to the best of my knowledge, the details provided in the construction plans are in accordance with the B/CS Standard Details. ph P. Schultz, P.E. Civil Engineer P.O . Box 11995 • College Station , Texas 77842 schultzengineeringllc.com November 21, 2011 Erika Bridges, EIT Graduate Civil Engineer Department of Public Works 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Re: TOI BROOKS INTERNATIONAL CENTER (FP)-11-00500106 Dear Ms . Bridges : Office: 9 79.764.3900 Fax : 979 .764.3910 Attached are a copy of the revised waterline construction drawings and 2 copies of the Revised Engineer's Estimate for the waterline construction . The waterline alignment and fire hydrant locations have been revised slightly to accommodate the revised location of the proposed driveway and parking lot for this project. The length of the waterline decreased so the cost estimate decreased also . The easement location for this waterline has been revised on the Final Plat and a copy of the plat is attached . If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Very tru ly yours , Schultz Engineering, LLC. P.O. Box 11995 • College Sta tion, Texas 77842 schu ltzengineerin gllc.com Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 SCHULTZ ENGINEERING, LLC. 2730 Longmire Drive, Suite A College Station, Texas 77845 Firm No. 12327 TDI-Brooks International Center Engineer's Estimate of Waterline Construction-Revised Description I Unit Estimated Quantity Water System Mobilization, Staking and Site Preparation LS 1 Erosion and Sediment Control LS 1 12" C900 Water Pipe LF 1200 6" C900 Water Pipe Non-Structural LF 55 20 " Steel Casing for 12" Waterline, with Spacers and End Caps LF 72 Mechanical Wet Bore LF 72 Fire Hydrant Assembly (w/valve , vert. extension) EA 2 12" x 12" M.J . Tee EA 1 12" x 6" M.J . Tee EA 3 12" M.J . Gate Valve EA 7 6" M.J . Gate Valve EA I 12" 45 ° M.J. Bend EA 2 12" 22 .5° M.J . Bend EA 2 12" 11.25 ° M.J. Bend EA 1 4 " Blo woff Assembly EA 1 Connect to Existing Water Line EA I Unit Price 2000 .00 1500 .00 30.00 22.00 60.00 50 .00 3000.00 650 .00 400.00 2,150 .00 950.00 600 .00 500 .00 500 .00 1,650.00 500 .00 ESTIMATED WATERLINE CONSTRUCTION I F-12327 ENGINEERING, LLC. Total 2 ,000 1,500 36,000 1,210 4,320 3,600 6 ,000 650 1,200 15 ,050 950 1,200 1,000 500 1,650 500 $77.330 Detention Pond Drainage Report for A New Laboratory and Office Facility for TDI/Brooks International South Dowling Road Brazos County, Texas April, 2011 Revised September, 2011 Revised September 30, 2011 Engineer: SCHULTZ ENGINEERING LLC TBPE Firm Registration No. 12327 P.O. Box 11995 College Station, TX 77842 · 2730 Longmire Drive College Station, Texas 77845 (979) 764-3900 Developer: TOI/Brooks International 1902 Pinon College Station, Texas 77842 (979) 693-3446 Detention Pond Drainage Report For A New Laboratory and Office Facility for TDl/Brooks International ENGINEER SCHULTZ ENGINEERING LLC P .O. Box 11995 College Station, Texas 77842 Phone/Fax: (979) 764-3900 OWNER/DEVELOPER GE03, Inc. 1902 Pinon College Station, Texas 77845 Phone: (979) 693-3446 GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION Location: Description: •Area: • Proposed Land Use: • Existing Land Use: • Land Description: Adjoining Land Use: Primary Drainage Facility: Flood Hazard Information : FEMAFIRM: Floodplain: This project is located on a 52 acre tract of land located at the north east corner of the intersection of IG&N Road and South Dowling Road in Brazos County. The tract is Block 1, Lot 1, TDI-Brooks International Center. 52 acres Commercial -Laboratory and Office Facilities Vacant -Agricultural The ground slopes toward the southwest to IG&N Road . The site is bounded on the north and east by rural residential properties, on the west by IG&N Road and on the south by South Dowling Road. Tributary of Peach Creek # 48041 C0200 C No portion of this Phase lies within the floodplain of Peach Creek or its tributaries. HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS This phase of the development of this property will be located on the southwest portion of the property. This portion of the property drains to the southwest into the right-of-way ofIG&N Road. The pre-development condition of the land is pasture with some scattered large trees and a wooded area where the pond is located. The topographic survey of the property identified a small existing pond which collects the stormwater runoff from a small portion of the tract. Exhibit A . shows the existing, pre-development topography and the runoff flow direction. Page 1 of5 GENERALSTORMWATERPLAN The drainage plan for this development will involve the installation private storm sewer pipes, inlets, and ditches which will collect and transmit the runoff into the existing detention pond previously constructed for this phase of the development. The detention pond will discharge into the existing drainage way so that the runoff enters the IG&N Road right of way at the same location as the pre-development condition. This development will increase the stormwater runoff from this property. The detention pond was constructed for this development so that the post- development peak discharge from this development will be equal to or less than the pre- development flow onto the adjacent property. The detention pond will also be a retention pond that permanently holds water so it can be used as an amenity. COORDINATION & STORMWATERPERMITTING The project will require that a Notice oflntent be submitted to the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality. No other permits are anticipated for this project. DETENTION DESIGN General: Tc Methodology : Tc Minimum Design Storm E vents : Pond Discharge Pipe Materials: Manning 's n Value: Runoff Curve Number (CN): Design Constraints: Design Software : Applicable Exhibits : There is an existing detention pond for this site. Refer to Exhibit B for its location. TR55 10 minutes 2, 10 , 25, 50 and 100-year storms-detention analysis Steel Pipe with smooth interior 0.013 CN=81 -undeveloped property, 0% Impervious , CN=81 -developed property, 50% Impervious Post Development flow less than or equal to Pre-Development flow 6" free board on pond berm for 100 year storm with outlet clogged HEC-HMS , Excel spreadsheets, DODSON HydraCalc Hydraulics The HEC-HMS software was used to compute the pre and post development flow and the routing of the flow through the detention ponds. The other programs are used to compute the pond storage and discharge input data for the HEC-HMS program. Exhibit A -Pre Development Drainage Area Map Exhibit B -Post Development Drainage Area Map Exhibit C -Pond Design Appendix A -Detention Pond elevation-storage data & elevation- discharge data Appendix B -HEC -HMS computer model output Page 2 of 5 DESIGN ANALYSIS: The pre-and post-development runoff information for the detention pond evaluation is shown in Table 1. The pre-development drainage area is shown on Exhibit A. The REC-HMS computer computes the peak flow and it is shown in Tab le 2. · TABLE 1 -Pre-& Post-Deve lo pm e nt Runoff I nformation -Detention Analysis Area # Pre 101 Post 201 Area Acres 10.74 10.56 CN 81 81 Ofo Im . 0 50 Tc. Min. 36.8 25 Lag Min. 22.0 18.0 The post-development drainage area is shown on Exhibit B. The REC-HMS computer program routes the runoff through the detention pond, and the resulting peak flows are shown in Table 2. The post- development flows shown in Table 2 are for the currently proposed development. Additional development of the site will require an evaluation to see if the peak flows after the additional development are still less than the pre-development flows . A description of the detention pond outlet structures, discharge pipes and overflow spillways is found in Appendix A. TABLE 2-Pre -& Post-Development Peak Discharge Comparison Location Q2 QlO Q25 Q50 QlOO cfs cfs cfs cfs Cfs Pre- Development 14.7 31.4 38.8 44.8 50.3 ~Outfall Post- Development 1.2 12.7 20.5 29.1 38.3 thru Pond Total @ Outfall 1.2 12.7 20.5 29.1 38.3 Decrease in Peak Flow 13 .5 18.7 13 .3 15 .7 12.0 As shown in Table 2 , the post-development peak outflow at the outfall less than the allowable peak outflow for each design storm event. Add itionally, Table 3 presents the maxim um water surface and the amount of freeboard for the Detention Pond . The peak flow out of the detention ponds and the maximum water surface was determined by the REC-HMS program . Page 3 of5 TABLE 3 -Summary of Pond 2 Maximum Water Surface Levels Storm Water Flow Thru Free board Velocity in Velocity Event Surface Overflow ft. Overflow Downstream Elevation, Spillway cfs Spillway, fps ·of Overflow ft Spillway, fps 2-year 323.5 0 1.85 0 0 10-year 324.3 10.7 1.05 1.9 2.5 25-year 324.4 18.4 0.95 2.3 3.1 50-year 324.5 26.9 0.75 2.6 3.6 100-year 324.6 36.0 0.65 2.9 4.0 The pond has an overflow spillway which discharges when the outlet structure cannot handle all of the discharge . This spillway will be a 15' wide channel, grass lined and have a flat crest at elevation 324 . The spillway is also used if the outlet structure is clogged. The HEC-HMS model was run with the outlet clogged and the maximum water surface determined for the pond . The results were a water surface elevation of 324. 7, which results in more than 6" of freeboard still provided in the pond. The grading plan for the detention pond and the pond discharge pipe details are shown in the Exhibit C. The pond discharge pipe is an 8" steel siphon pipe. The detention pond for the TD I-Brooks Laboratory Building was designed and constructed prior to annexation of the property. The design of the existing detention pond does not comply with the BCS Stormwater Design Guidelines, Section VI, E, 3, 6, 4, that requires the elevation of the weir crest to not be less than the water surface elevation resulting from the design 100-year storm, assuming a fully operating discharge structure. Typically this is not a requirement for ponds other than detention ponds. Generally, principal spillway structures are designed to pass the pond discharge from all storms except for the 50 to 100 year storm peak discharges. A principal spillway structure that will accomplish this is costly and requires maintenance. The property owner has selected a siphon pipe discharge structure which will require less maintenance cost. The overflow spillway will not discharge for a 2-year storm, but does have flow through it for 10 -year through 100-year storms. The discharge through the overflow spillway has been added to Table 2 as well as the velocity in the spillway channel and downstream of the spillway. The maximum computed velocity in the overflow spillway or downstream channel is 4.0 fps for the 100 year storm which is less than the 4.5 fps maximum design velocity for a grass lined channel. (Table C-11 ofBCS Design Guidlines). The property owner is aware that the overflow spillway may have to flow through it occasionally and is willing to perform maintenance, if any, of the overflow spillway and the area downstream of the spillway. The embankment for the existing pond is 16' in height and the total pond storage capacity is approximately 14 acre-feet. Since the height is less than 25', with a storage capacity less than 15 acre-feet, Chapter 299 of the TCEQ Dam Safety Program does not apply. Page 4 of5 CONCLUSION The drainage system and detention facility described in this report is designed in accordance with the standards in the BCS Drainage Design Guidelines except as noted in this report . The pond is designed in accord a nce with accepted engineering standards . The post development peak runoff flowrate into the adjacent property will be less than the predevelopment flowrates for all storm events . The post development runoff from this property for the 100-vear storm event will not adversely affect the properties just downstream o(this property. CERTIFICATION "This report for the drainage design of A New Laboratory and Office Facility for TD I/Brooks International, was prepared by me in accordance with the provisions of the Bryan/College Station Unified Drainage Design Guidelines for the owners of the property. All licenses and permits required by any and all state and federal regulatory agencies for the proposed drainage improvements have been issued." Jose~~ Page 5 of 5 APPENDIX A Detention Pond Elevation -Storage Data & Elevation -Discharge Data Elevation (ft) 322 .35 323 .00 324 .00 324.50 325 .00 325 .35 TOI/Brooks Laboratory & Office Facility Detention Pond Depth -Discharge Data Pond Discharge Overflow Total Design Depth Pipe Spillways Flow (ft) Flow (cfs) Flow (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0 .0 0.0 0.0 0.65 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.65 1.8 0.0 1.8 2 .15 2 .2 21 .3 23 .5 2.65 2 .5 72 .8 75 .3 3 .0 2 .8 126.4 129.2 Notes: 1. The Outlet Structure is an e ight inch diameter siphon pipe with an overflow spillway with a bottom width of 15 feet and a crest elevation of 324.00 TOI/Brooks Laboratory & Office Facility Detention Pond Area-Capacity Data V = H * {[A1+A2 + (A1*A2)112] / 3} V = volume , ft2 A= area ft2 ' H = difference in elevation, ft Elevation Depth Area (ft) (ft) (ft2) 322 .35 0.00 63,631 323.00 0 .65 67 ,043 324 .00 1.65 73 ,566 324 .50 2 .15 76,530 325 .00 2 .65 79,494 325 .35 3.00 81 ,000 Area -Capacity Data Area Volume (acres) (ft3) 1.46 0 1.54 42 ,464 1.69 70 ,279 1.76 37,522 1.82 76 ,511 1.86 104 ,292 90% 90% Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Volume Volume Volume (ft3) (ft3) (ac-ft) 0 0 0.00 42,464 38 ,218 0.88 112 ,743 101,469 2.33 150,265 135 ,239 3.10 189,254 170 ,329 3.91 217 ,035 195 ,332 4.48 APPENDIXB HEC-HMS Computer Model Output HEC-HMS Pre-Development Peak Runoff Project: TDl-Pond2 Simulation Run: Pre 2 yr 12 yr Subbasin: DA 101 Start of Run: 28Mar2011, 18:00 Basin Model: Pre Dev End of Run: 29Mar2011, 06 :00 Meteorologic Model: 2 yr 12 hr Compute Time: 10Sep2011, 17:23:53 Control Specifications: Storm !Computed Results Peak Discharge : Total Precipitation : Total Loss : L Total .Excess : Volume Units: IN 14 .7 (CFS) (IN) 1.76 (IN) 1.58 (IN) Date/Time of Peak Discharge : Total Direct Runoff : Total Baseflow : Discharge : 29Mar2011, 00:30 1.56 (IN) 0.00 (IN) 1.56 (IN} Project: TDl-Pond2 Simulation Run : Pre 1 Oyr 12hr Subbasin : DA 101 Start of Run: 28Mar2011 , 18:00 Basin Model: End of Run: 29Mar2011, 06:00 Meteorologic Model : Compute Time: 10Sep2011 , 17:23 :47 Control Specifications: r computed Resu lts j Peak Discharge : I Total Prec ipitation : I Total Loss : Total Excess : I Volume Units: IN 31.4 (CFS) (IN) 2.13 (IN) 4 .08 (IN ) Date/Time of Peak Discharge : Total Direct Runoff : Total Baseflow : Discharge : ...._~~~~~~·~--- Pre Dev 1 O yr 12 hr Storm 29Mar2011 , 00 :25 4.02 (IN) 0.00 (IN) 4 .02 (IN) Project: TDl-Pond2 Simulation Run : Pre 25yr 12 hr Subbasin : DA 101 Start of Run : End of Run: Compute Time: Corrputed Results Peak Discharge : Total Precipitation : Total Loss : Total Excess : 28Mar2011, 18 :00 29Mar2011, 06:00 10Sep2011, 17:23 :50 Volume Units : IN Basin Model : Meteorologic Model: Control Specifications: 38.8 (CFS) (IN) Date/Time of Peak Discharge : 2.22 (IN) 5.19(1N) Total Direct Runoff : Total Baseflow : Discharge : Pre Dev 25 yr 12 hr Storm 29Mar2011 , 00 :25 5 .12(1N) 0 .00 (IN) 5.12 (IN) Project: TDl-Pond2 Simulation Run : Pre 50yr 12 hr Subbasin: DA 101 Start of Run: 28Mar2011, 18:00 Basin Model: Pre Dev End of Run : 29Mar2011, 06:00 Meteorologic Model: 50 yr 12 hr Compute Time : 10Sep2011, 17:23 :57 Control Specifications: Storm Computed Results -- Peak Discharge : Total Precipitation : Total Loss : Total Excess : Volume Units: IN 44 .8 (CFS) (IN) 2.28 (IN) 6.17 (IN) DatefTime of Peak Discharge : Total Direct Runoff : Total Baseflow : Discharge : 29Mar2011 , 00 :25 6.07 (IN) 0.00 (IN) 6 .07 (IN) L Project: TDl -Pond2 Simulation Run: Pre 100 yr 12 hr Subbasin: DA101 Start of Run : 28Mar2011, 18:00 Basin Model : End of Run: 29Mar2011, 06 :00 Meteorologic Model : Compute T ime: 10Sep2011, 17 :23:43 Control Specifications : Computed Results Peak Discharge : Total Precipitation : Total Loss : Total Excess : Volume Units: IN 50 .3 (CFS) (IN) 2.33 (IN) 7.17 (IN) Date/Time of Peak Discharge : Total Direct Runoff: Total Baseflow : Discharge : --·----- Pre Dev . 100 yr 12 hr Storm 29Mar2011 , 00 :25 7.07 (IN) 0.00 (IN) 7.07 (IN) HEC-HMS Post-Development Peak Runoff and Pond Hydrographs Project: TDl -Pond2 Simulation Run : Post-2yr-12hr Reservoir : Pond2 Start of Run: End of Run: Compute Time : : · Corrputed Results Peak Inflow : Peak Outflow : Total Inflow : Total Outflow : ' Basin Model : Meteorologic Model : 28Mar2011 , 18:00 29Mar2011 , 06:00 10Sep2011 , 17 :23 :28 Control Specifications : Post Dev 2 yr 12 hr Storm Volume Units : IN 22 .8 (CFS) 1.2 (CFS) 2.44 (IN) 0.65 (IN) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : Date/Time of Peak Outflow : Peak Storage : Peak Elevation : 29Mar2011, 00 :20 29Mar2011 , 03 :00 1.7 (AC-FT) 323 .6 (FT) ". ·-· -~·-·-·-·····--~--..···----.. Reservoir "Pond2" Results for Run "Post-1 Oyr-12hr" I=' 3.0 LL I ~ 2.0 324.40 -j---+---t---t-1~.::::::;;;::~====~~~~r-324.03 ----+-----il-------+---------1----<1-323.67 f -Q) g> 1.0 ,_ 0 ...... 323.30 ';' -t----+---·-1-----~~--------i----·1-322.93 Q) w 1=====t=::::::::::~::t::::=::~--i------r---t---r-322.57 (/) 0.0 322.20 40 35 30 25 ......... (/) LL 20 () -$: 15 0 LL 10 5 0 {\ I \ ~\ :-, I \ \ I f:\ l -J I~ I __/ _j Cl ....____ I I I I I I I I 18:00 20:00 22:00 00 :00 02:00 04 :00 06:00 · 28Mar2011 I 29Mar2011 - - - ---Run :POST-10YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Storage ---· Run :POST-10YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result: Pool Elevation --Run :POST-10YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Outflow - - -Run :POST-10YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Combined Inflow Project: TDl-Pond2 Simulation Run : Post-1 Oyr -12hr Reservoir : Pond2 Start of Run: 28Mar2011 , 18:00 Basin Model: End of Run : 29Mar2011, 06:00 Meteorologic Model : Compute Time: 10Sep2011 , 17 :23 :19 Control Specifications : Corrputed Results Peak Inflow : Peak Outflow : Total Inflow : Total Outflow : Volume Units : IN 39 .0 (CFS) 12 .7 (CFS) 5.09 (IN) 2.46 (IN) Date/Time of Peak Inflow: Date/Time of Peak Outflow : Peak Storage : Peak Elevation : Post Dev 10 yr 12 hr Storm 29Mar2011, 00 :20 29Mar2011 , 01 :00 2 .7 (AC-FT) 324 .3 (FT) Reservoir "Pond2" Results for Run "Post-25yr-12hr" -I-i+ 3.0 (.) ~ 2.0 ,,,.-......__ // ---...._- '• ;; I' Q) Cl ~ 1.0 0 ...... I /, -------__/ -----(f) 0 .0 50 45 40 35 -30 (f) LL 25 (.) -........ 20 3 0 15 LL 10 5 A I \ ~\ 1-\ ~ ' (~ J / I ~ 'J L.----"' J I I I I I I 0 18:00 20:00 22 :00 00:00 02 :00 28Mar2011 I Run :POST-25YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Storage Run :POST-25YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Pool Elevation --Run:POST-25YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Outflow - - -Run:POST-25YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Combined Inflow I I 324.60 324.26 323.91 f=' 323.57 ~ 323.23 5) 322 .89 w 322.54 322.20 04 :00 06 :00 29Mar2011 Project: TDl-Pond2 Simulation Run: Post-25yr-12hr Reservoir: Pond2 Start of Run : End of Run : Compute Time : .·-Cor11Juted Results Peak Inflow : Peak Outflow : Total Inflow : Total Outflow : 28Mar2011 , 18:00 29Mar2011, 06:00 10Sep2011 , 17 :23 :24 Volume Units: IN Basin Model : Meteorologic Model : Control Specifications : 46.4 (CFS) 20 .5 (CFS) 6 .24 (IN) 3.59 (IN) Date/Time of Peak Inflow: Date/Time of Peak Outflow : Peak Storage : Peak Elevation : Post Dev 25 yr 12 hr Storm 29Mar2011, 00 :20 29Mar2011 , 00 :50 . 3.0 (AC -FT) 324.4 (FT) Reservoir "Pond2" Results for Run "Post-2yr-12hr" ........... I-1.6 LL I 0 1.2 <( ........... ~ 0.8 ro 0.4 ..... 0 +-' (f) 0.0 ........... (f) LL 8 10 [\ I \ I \ I \ /-\ 20 15 ~ LL 5 I \ j \ _J ~~ 0 I I I 18:00 20:00 22:00 00 :00 02 :00 28Mar2011 I Run :POST-2YR-12HR Elemen t:POND2 Resul t:Storage Run:POST-2YR -12HR Element:POND2 Result:Poo l Elevat ion Run :POST-2YR -12HR Element:POND2 Resul t:Outflow - - -Run :POST-2YR-12HR Elemen t:POND2 Result:Comb ined In flow 323.44 323.13 322.82 322 .51 322.20 I I 04 :00 06 :00 29Mar201 1 ........... I- LL > Q) w Project: TDl -Pond2 Simulation Run: Post-50yr -1 2hr Reservoir: Pond2 Start of Run : 28Mar2011, 18:00 Basin Model : End of Run: 29Mar2011, 06:00 Meteorologic Model: Compute Time : 10Sep2011 , 17 :23 :32 Control Specificat ions: · Corrputed Results Peak Inflow : Peak Outflow : Total Inflow : Total Outflow : Volume Units : IN 52 .5 (CFS) 29 .1 (CFS) 7.23 (IN) 4 .56 (IN) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : Date/Time of Peak Outflow : Peak Storage : Peak Elevation : Post.Dev 50 yr 12 hr Storm 29Mar2011, 00 :20 29Mar2011, 00 :45 3.2 (AC-FT) 324 .6 (FT) Reservoir "Pond2" Results for Run "Post-50yr-12hr" .......... I-3.0 LL I (.) ~ 2 .0 --.------.,--------,----.------~----.---------;----r-324.60 -+-----+----+----1-f.1:........:::...._...::....,,,,+------1------1-324 .26 -1-----t----t----rjl---f---==l====t-323.91 ~ ----+-------l,__----t-17-------+-----+------1-323.57 ~ (].) Ol ~ 1.0 323 .23 ii) -1 ----+-----11---,,_...:::...,."-+----+----+----·I-322.89 L1J 0 -(j) 0 .0 lJ:==~:;~~~~~==~~:Jt:~===t=====t=====t=====t 322.54 322.20 60 50 40 ,~ I \ I ~ .......... (j) LL 30 (.) ......... ~ 20 0 LL 10 I~ 1 \ _/~ I . I I I I I I I 18:00 20:00 22 :00 00:00 02 :00 04:00 06:00 28Mar2011 I 29Mar2011 ----- -Run:POST-50YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Storage - - -· Run:POST-50YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Pool Elevation Run:POST-50YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Outflow -- -Run :POST-50YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Comb ined Inflow Project: TDl-Pond2 S imulation Run : Post-1 OO-yr -12hr Reservoir : Pond2 Start of Run : 28Mar2011 , 18 :00 Basin Model : End of Run: 29Mar2011, 06 :00 Meteorologic Model : Compute Time: 10Sep2011 , 17:23 :15 Control Specifications : Corrputed Results - Peak Inflow : Peak Outflow : Total Inflow : Total Outflow : Volume Units : IN 57.8 (CFS) 38 .3 (CFS) 8.25 (IN) 5 .57 (IN) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : Date/Time of Peak Outflow : Peak Storage : Peak Elevation : Post Dev 100 yr 12 hr Storm 29Mar2011 , 00 :20 29Mar2011 , 00 :40 3.3 (AC-FT) 324 .6 (FT) Reservoir "Pond2" Results for Run "Post-100-yr-12hr" f=' u, 3.0 () $ 2.0 Q) O> ~ 1.0 0 +-' (f) 0 .0 60 50 40 'Ji LL 30 () .......... ~ 20 LL 10 ~ - I /"".... I ~~ l /, 4 ~ I~ I \ I \ I~ ~ \\ j \ ) ~ _ _/ I u I I I I 18 :00 20 :00 22 :00 00 :00 02:00 28Mar201 1 I Run : POST-1 OO-YR-12HR Element: PON 02 Result: Storage Run :POST-1 OO -YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result: Pool E levation Run :POST-100-YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Outflow - - -Run :POST-100-YR-12HR Element:POND2 Result:Combined Inflow 324 .80 324.43 324.06 323.69 323 .31 322.94 322 .57 322 .20 I 1 04 :00 06 :00 · 29Mar2011 ........... I- LL .......... > Q) w HEC-HMS Post Development Peak Runoff and Pond Hydrographs with Output Structure Clogged Project: TDl-Pond2 Simulation Run : Post-1 OOyr-Clogged Reservoir: Pond2 Start of Run: 28Mar2011, 18 :00 Basin Model : End of Run : 29Mar2011 , 06:00 Meteorologic Model: Compute Time : 10Sep2011 , 17:23:10 Control Specifications: Volume Units: IN Computed Results Peak Inflow : 57 .8 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Inflow : Peak Outflow : 39 .5 (CFS) Date/Time of Peak Outflow : Total Inflow : 8.25 (IN) Peak Storage : Total Outflow : 5.51 (IN) Peak Elevation : l _____ _ ------·----- Post Dev clogged 100 yr 12 hr Storm 29Mar2011 , 00 :20 29Mar2011 , 00:40 3.4 (AC-FT) 324 .7 (FT) ........... I-3.0 LL I () $ 2.0 Q) O> ~ 1.0 0 +-' (f) 0.0 60 50 40 ........... (f) LL 30 () '"--" 3: 20 0 LL 10 Reservoir "Pond2" Results for Run "Post-1 OOyr-Clogged" 324 .80 324.43 ~----+---1----+f---+~=-~~""""'<:==~ 324.06 !=' -i----+------l---~·-----+-----+----·1-323.69 LL 323.31 5> -i----t-----+--:::--5-""'---t----t-----+-----I-322 . 94 w 322 .57 ...t:;;;;;;;;:;;;,=:=:t::=_ __ L_ __ _!_ __ _J_ ___ L_ __ _!_ 322.20 I~ I \ I I ---l-----·-I ~ --\- I \\ ) ~--=i--_ _./ I --.c I ---1 I I I I I 18:00 20:00 22 :00 00:00 02:00 04:00 06:00 28Mar2011 I Run :Post-100yr-Clogged Element:POND2 Result:Storage Run:Post-100yr-Clogged Element:POND2 Result:Pool Elevation Run :Post-100yr-Clogged Element:POND2 Result:Outflow Run : Post-100yr-Clogged Element: POND2 Result: Combined Inflow 29Mar2011 EXHIBIT A Pre-Development Drainage Area Map