Loading...
Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan - Full PRELIMINARY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR CHANHASSEN SPECIALTY RETAIL CHANHASSEN, MN PREPARED BY: ERIC VOGEL, EIT 06/01/2015 Chanhassen Specialty Retail 06/01/2015 Stormwater Management Plan Page 2 PROJECT INTRODUCTION It is proposed that a specialty retail store be constructed on an undeveloped site in Chanhassen, Minnesota. The project will involve the creation of approximately 1.4 acres of impervious surfaces through construction of the store and its associated parking and drive surfaces. Located between Lake Drive and Pond Promenade in Chanhassen, the site is under stormwater permitting authority of the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD). The project has been designed to meet the requirements of the City, the Watershed, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Stormwater rate, water quality, and abstraction requirements are to be satisfied via the construction of an underground stormwater infiltration system and various in-line stormwater BMP devices, the details of which can be found in the corresponding sections below. EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing site is a 2.7 acre lot bordered by Lake Drive and Main Street to the southeast and parking to the northwest. Existing impervious on site measures approximately 0.50 acres and consists of pavement and gravel associated with the parking areas and drives surrounding the exterior of the site. The remainder of the site is covered in vegetation. Soils on site are clays, which may be classified as Hydraulic Soil Group type D. The west and central portions of site drain to the existing catch basin in the southwest. The northeast corners of the site drains to a catch basin in that area. The site receives offsite run-on from 0.31 acres of mostly impervious surfaces. The development drains to a regional pond, but there is no onsite stormwater management system in place. For clarification, the existing depression on the south portion of the site was created from an excavation for an underground garage on a project that never completed. This depression was never designed or intended to function as a stormwater pond. PROPOSED CONDITIONS As part of the project, approximately 1.4 acres of impervious surfaces will be created. These areas, consisting of the building, parking surfaces, sidewalk, and drive isles, will all be managed in order to satisfy the RPBCWD’s stormwater management requirements. Between the watershed and the MPCA, it is required that the site, after the new construction, treat stormwater runoff for water quality, limit the maximum rate of runoff to that of the pre-existing condition, and provide for 0.55 inches of abstraction over the site’s impervious surfaces. In order to satisfy these requirements, a pervious pavement system with underground storage and stormwater infiltration, as well as three separate in-line devices, will be constructed. Stormwater on site will either be captured by catch basins and treated by an in-line device or will be filtered by the pervious pavers before entering the underground infiltration basin. Here, the water will then flow to a final in-line device before being discharged to the storm sewer network along Lake Drive as was in the existing condition. The specialty retail store does not allow pervious pavers within the main drive isles, as shopping cards do not function well over this surface. Also, the exterior roadway will be re-platted as an Outlot and will be a shared drive/parking area for the adjacent businesses. No pervious pavers are to be considered for this area. Given this Chanhassen Specialty Retail 06/01/2015 Stormwater Management Plan Page 3 information, we have maximized the area of pervious pavers with the parking stalls and have provided rock/pipe storage under the bituminous pavement. Between the pervious pavement, the infiltration basin, and the in-line devices, all Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District and MPCA stormwater management requirements will be satisfied. RATE CONTROL The RPBCWD requires that following construction of a proposed project, existing maximum rates of runoff for the 2-, 10-, and 100-year storm events (in addition to the 10-year snowmelt) must not be exceeded for all points where discharge leaves the site. In order to model these events, HydroCAD software was utilized using Atlas 14 nested 24- hour rainfall distributions. It is of note that it was not possible to completely eliminate uncontrolled discharge of water on the eastern and southern edges of the site. Most of the existing site (catchment 1S and 2S in Appendix A) drains to the catch basin at the southwest corner of the site. This catch basin then discharges into the storm sewer network along Lake Drive. As a result of the proposed stormwater management features, total peak stormwater discharge rates for the site to the storm sewer network along Lake Drive will be greatly reduced. In order to maintain minimum slopes away from the building on the eastern edge of the site, it was necessary to discharge water to Main Street to the east. In this area, the width of the sidewalk was limited and pervious areas maximized. The catch basin that captures this water shares the same downstream storm sewer network with the catch basin at the SW corner of the site (the water’s existing flow path). Additionally, grades at the site have a strong northeast to southwest direction with approximately 8 feet of fall occurring across the site. For this reason, a very small amount of excess water will not be able to be captured along the southern edge of the site. This area is made of up green space in the boulevard between Lake Drive and the proposed parking lot. A small amount of the access drive will also be lost as fugitive. As was the case with the easterly fugitive water, the lost discharge will ultimately flow to the storm sewer network along Lake Drive which serves as the existing downstream discharge location for the area. The results of the runoff rate comparison are summarized in the table below. Please refer to Appendix A and Appendix B for drainage diagrams and detailed calculations respectively. Chanhassen Specialty Retail 06/01/2015 Stormwater Management Plan Page 4 Existing Maximum Rate of Runoff (cfs) Storm Event SW CB Area 3S Area 4S Area 5S Total Existing 2-year 7.22 0.01 0.50 0.06 7.72 10-year 13.32 0.02 0.80 0.09 14.13 100-year 25.21 0.04 1.32 0.16 26.59 10-day Snow 1.39 0.00 0.06 0.01 1.45 Proposed Maximum Rate of Runoff (cfs) Storm Event SW CB Area 3S Area 4S Area 5S Total Proposed 2-year 3.14 0.29 0.50 0.14 3.94 10-year 5.82 0.49 0.80 0.25 7.14 100-year 9.58 0.87 1.32 0.47 12.00 10-day Snow 1.02 0.04 0.06 0.02 1.12 WATER QUALITY It is required by the RPBCWD that the stormwater management devices achieve 90% TSS removal and 60% Total Phosphorus removal across the entire project site. In order to satisfy this requirement a collection of stormwater treatment devices will be utilized. The largest portion of the site will drain to areas of pervious pavement. This pavement will serve to filter the stormwater before it flows down into an underground infiltration basin. Other areas of the site will also flow to this basin, but will first be pre-treated by SAFL Baffle sump manhole devices in order to prevent the clogging of the underground filtration basin. Additionally, in order to achieve the levels of water quality required by the watershed, a Contech Jellyfish filtration device will be placed just downstream of the SW catch basin on site. This device will act to filter all the water that passes through it, collecting sediment and phosphorus from a large portion of the existing site as well as further filtering excess volume from the underground infiltration basin. In order to quantify pollutant removals across the site, the MIDS calculator was utilized. MIDS default removals for the pervious pavement, as well as the underground infiltration basin were used. In order to model the SAFL Baffle devices as well as the Contech Jellyfish Filter, “Custom” devices were utilized. The Minnesota stormwater Manual suggests that for flow-through structures such as the SAFL Baffle/sump manhole configuration, removal of 20% TSS and 10% TP can be suggested based on a NURP particle size distribution. Additionally, Contech states that removal rates removals for the Jellyfish filter are 89% for TSS and 59% for Total Phosphorus. Please refer to Appendix E for device removal rate documentation. It is of note that for the underground infiltration basin, a media porosity value was not an available input. Therefore, the area of media surface and surface areas at overflow for the device were reduced accordingly to provide for a 40% void space assumption on the rock storage medium. As the RPBCWD rule states, 90% TSS and 60% TP removals must occur from site runoff. For this reason, a separate MIDS calculation was run on the proposed site, not including areas of off-site run on. No BMPs were added to this separate calculation and it was used only as method to determine the annual TSS and TP loads from the Chanhassen Specialty Retail 06/01/2015 Stormwater Management Plan Page 5 property in question. The full MIDS model, as well as the HydroCAD model, fully considers the off-site run on condition. The results of both models can be found in Appendix C as well as summarized in the table below. Nutrient Analysis Required Removal (lbs/year) Provided Removal (lbs/year) Annual TP Load 4.39 60% Annual TP Load 2.63 Annual TP Removal 3.06 Annual TSS Load 798 90% Annual TSS Load 718 Annual TSS Removal 739 VOLUME REDUCTION It is required by the RPBCWD that abstraction of stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces on the parcel be provided. In this specific situation, a soils report prepared for the site (see Appendix D) determined that clay soils of hydrologic soil group Type D were found across the area. These soils are not conducive to infiltration and as a result, the proposed development falls under the watershed’s criteria for restricted sites. These criteria state that either 0.55 inches of runoff from site impervious surfaces be achieved, or else abstraction of runoff onsite achieved to the maximum extent practicable. Due to the extremely low infiltration rates (assumed 0.06 in/hour) for D-type soils, abstraction of the full 0.55 inches is exceedingly difficult. This is compounded by the fact that there is significant existing impervious surface area on site will be re-platted as an Outlot and will function as a shared drive/parking area for the adjacent businesses. Infiltration practices in those areas are not feasible. Methods such as rainwater harvesting were considered, but were ultimately abandoned due to the lack of significant grassy areas on site. Therefore, attempts were made to maximize the parking lot area for infiltration. In fact, the entirety of the parking lot area that is not to be used for truck traffic is proposed to be part of the underground infiltration system, approximately 26,000 SF along the basin bottom. The calculations for the required and provided abstraction volumes can be found below. 𝑅𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑎 𝐴𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑉𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑎(𝑎𝑙3 )=𝑉𝑖𝑛𝑓=0.55(𝑖𝑙)∗1 𝑎𝑙 12 𝑖𝑙∗𝑇𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑙 𝑂𝑙−𝑙𝑖𝑙𝑎 𝐼𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝐴𝑙𝑎𝑎 (𝑎𝑙2) 𝑉𝑖𝑛𝑓(𝑎𝑙3 )=0.55(𝑖𝑙)∗1 𝑎𝑙 12 𝑖𝑙∗32,154( 𝑎𝑙2)=4,325 𝑎𝑙3 Chanhassen Specialty Retail 06/01/2015 Stormwater Management Plan Page 6 Volume Control Analysis Total On-site Impervious Surface 32,154 sf Design Abstraction Rainfall Event 0.55 in Required Abstraction Volume 4,325 cf Maximum Allowable Infiltration Rate 0.06 in/hr Required Drawdown Time 48 hrs Maximum Live Storage Depth 0.24 ft Total Basin Bottom Area 25,962 sf Void Space of Storage Media 0.4 Provided Volume Below Outlet 2,492 cf Chanhassen Specialty Retail 06/01/2015 Stormwater Management Plan Page 7 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW The site was designed as such that in the event that the stormwater treatment practices on site were to overflow their boundaries; stormwater would not flood the building or any surrounding structures. Any overflow on site would proceed to the SW corner of the site and enter the catch basin. From there, water would either proceed to the storm sewer network along Lake Drive, or proceed overland to a separate structure along the same network. STORMWATER SYSTEM OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE All stormwater management structures and facilities on site have been designed for maintenance access and will be maintained in perpetuity. A maintenance and inspection plan will be provided as part of the project Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan and included with the construction documents. EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL A comprehensive Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan (SWPPP) meeting the requirements of the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District and the MPCA has been developed as part of the proposed plans. Requirements for all construction and post-construction phases have been satisfied by the proposed design. SUMMARY The proposed Chanhassen Specialty Retail project will meet the requirements of the City of Chanhassen, the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District, and the MPCA through construction of two SAFL Baffle devices, a pervious pavement/underground infiltration basin, and a Contech filtration device. These BMPs will provide the required rate control, water quality, and volume reduction improvements prior to discharging stormwater runoff from the site to downstream receiving waters. If you have any questions, comments, or additional information regarding this report, please contact me at evogel@sambatek.com or 763-476-6010. Eric Vogel, EIT APPENDIX A – DRAINAGE DIAGRAMS 10599 952.30 GRATE 5"TREE 6"TREE5"TREE 10734 950.18 WM B10735 949.84 WM E 11035 945.97 MAIL BOX 58 951.27 FND IP 14675 59 950.97 FND IP 14675 60 950.85 FND IP RLS? 61 949.35 FND IP 15812 62 949.88 FND IP 15612 63 943.46 FND MAG 15294 949.94 TNH SCALE IN FEET 0 50 May 28, 2015 - 10:24am - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\VEN20145.01\dwg\20145-DRNBASE.dwg 1/2 EXISTING DRAINAGE MAP XX XX XX XX LINK POND REACH SUB-CATCHMENT LEGEND 2S 3S 4S 1S 5S Project Location Approved:Drawn: Date Submittal / Rev.No. Certification Sheet Title Summary Revision History Sheet No.Revision Project No. By Client SPECIALTY GROCERY CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA MCB EAV VEN20145 VENTURE PASS PARTNERS, LLC 10599 952.30 GRATE 5"TREE 6"TREE5"TREE 10734 950.18 WM B10735 949.84 WM E 11035 945.97 MAIL BOX 10006 943.00 CB FL 10106 943.24 CB FL 10278 948.19 CB FL 10374 948.25 CB FL 10860 948.83 CB FL 10897 948.54 CB FL 10913 949.20 CB FL 10951 949.37 CB FL 15246 946.82 MH 15298 945.62 MH 15342 944.22 CB FL 15447 944.39 MH 15461 950.45 CB FL 5.55BLD 58 951.27 FND IP 14675 59 950.97 FND IP 14675 60 950.85 FND IP RLS? 61 949.35 FND IP 15812 62 949.88 FND IP 15612 63 943.46 FND MAG 15294 949.94 TNH T SCALE IN FEET 0 50 May 28, 2015 - 10:25am - User:549 L:\PROJECTS\VEN20145.01\dwg\20145-DRNBASE.dwg 2/2 PROPOSED DRAINAGE MAP XX XX XX XX LINK POND REACH SUB-CATCHMENT LEGEND 2S 3S 1S 5S 4S Project Location Approved:Drawn: Date Submittal / Rev.No. Certification Sheet Title Summary Revision History Sheet No.Revision Project No. By Client SPECIALTY GROCERY CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA MCB EAV VEN20145 VENTURE PASS PARTNERS, LLC APPENDIX B – HYDROCAD REPORT 1S To SW 2S Central Property 3S To West 4S To North 5S To S 8P CB SW CB 6L Total Routing Diagram for 20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model Prepared by Microsoft, Printed 5/28/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link 20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (selected nodes) Area (acres) CN Description (subcatchment-numbers) 2.036 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D (1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S) 0.985 98 Paved parking, HSG D (1S, 2S, 4S, 5S) 3.022 86 TOTAL AREA 20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Soil Listing (selected nodes) Area (acres) Soil Group Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 HSG A 0.000 HSG B 0.000 HSG C 3.022 HSG D 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S 0.000 Other 3.022 TOTAL AREA 20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 4HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (selected nodes) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.036 0.000 2.036 >75% Grass cover, Good 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.985 0.000 0.985 Paved parking 1S, 2S, 4S, 5S 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.022 0.000 3.022 TOTAL AREA 20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 5HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pipe Listing (selected nodes) Line#Node Number In-Invert (feet) Out-Invert (feet) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) n Diam/Width (inches) Height (inches) Inside-Fill (inches) 1 8P 938.15 937.42 67.0 0.0109 0.025 18.0 0.0 0.0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 6HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=18,079 sf 94.83% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.53"Subcatchment 1S: To SW Tc=7.0 min CN=97 Runoff=1.64 cfs 0.087 af Runoff Area=107,485 sf 19.36% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.34"Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Tc=7.0 min CN=83 Runoff=5.58 cfs 0.276 af Runoff Area=181 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.15"Subcatchment 3S: To West Tc=1.0 min CN=80 Runoff=0.01 cfs 0.000 af Runoff Area=5,250 sf 85.68% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.32"Subcatchment 4S: To North Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=0.50 cfs 0.023 af Runoff Area=629 sf 74.24% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.13"Subcatchment 5S: To S Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=0.06 cfs 0.003 af Peak Elev=940.48' Inflow=7.22 cfs 0.364 afPond 8P: SW CB 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' Outflow=7.22 cfs 0.364 af Inflow=7.72 cfs 0.390 afLink 6L: Total Primary=7.72 cfs 0.390 af Total Runoff Area = 3.022 ac Runoff Volume = 0.390 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.55" 67.39% Pervious = 2.036 ac 32.61% Impervious = 0.985 ac MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 7HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 1S: To SW Runoff =1.64 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=0.087 af, Depth=2.53" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Area (sf)CN Description 17,144 98 Paved parking, HSG D 935 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 18,079 97 Weighted Average 935 5.17% Pervious Area 17,144 94.83% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: To SW Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Runoff Area=18,079 sf Runoff Volume=0.087 af Runoff Depth=2.53" Tc=7.0 min CN=97 1.64 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 8HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Runoff =5.58 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.276 af, Depth=1.34" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Area (sf)CN Description 86,674 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 20,811 98 Paved parking, HSG D 107,485 83 Weighted Average 86,674 80.64% Pervious Area 20,811 19.36% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Runoff Area=107,485 sf Runoff Volume=0.276 af Runoff Depth=1.34" Tc=7.0 min CN=83 5.58 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 9HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 3S: To West [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff =0.01 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume=0.000 af, Depth=1.15" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Area (sf)CN Description 181 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 181 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 1.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: To West Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.011 0.011 0.01 0.01 0.009 0.009 0.008 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Runoff Area=181 sf Runoff Volume=0.000 af Runoff Depth=1.15" Tc=1.0 min CN=80 0.01 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 10HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 4S: To North Runoff =0.50 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.023 af, Depth=2.32" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Area (sf)CN Description 4,498 98 Paved parking, HSG D 752 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 5,250 95 Weighted Average 752 14.32% Pervious Area 4,498 85.68% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: To North Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Runoff Area=5,250 sf Runoff Volume=0.023 af Runoff Depth=2.32" Tc=5.0 min CN=95 0.50 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 11HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 5S: To S Runoff =0.06 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.003 af, Depth=2.13" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Area (sf)CN Description 467 98 Paved parking, HSG D 162 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 629 93 Weighted Average 162 25.76% Pervious Area 467 74.24% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5S: To S Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Runoff Area=629 sf Runoff Volume=0.003 af Runoff Depth=2.13" Tc=5.0 min CN=93 0.06 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 12HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 8P: SW CB [57] Hint: Peaked at 940.48' (Flood elevation advised) Inflow Area =2.883 ac,30.23% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.51" for 2-yr event Inflow =7.22 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.364 af Outflow =7.22 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.364 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary =7.22 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.364 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 940.48' @ 12.10 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.15'18.0" Round Culvert L= 67.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 938.15' / 937.42' S= 0.0109 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 1.77 sf Primary OutFlow Max=7.21 cfs @ 12.10 hrs HW=940.48' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 7.21 cfs @ 4.08 fps) Pond 8P: SW CB Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=2.883 ac Peak Elev=940.48' 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' 7.22 cfs 7.22 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 13HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 6L: Total Inflow Area =3.022 ac,32.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.55" for 2-yr event Inflow =7.72 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.390 af Primary =7.72 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.390 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 6L: Total Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=3.022 ac 7.72 cfs 7.72 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Existing HydroC Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 14HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=18,079 sf 94.83% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.92"Subcatchment 1S: To SW Tc=7.0 min CN=97 Runoff=2.55 cfs 0.136 af Runoff Area=107,485 sf 19.36% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.52"Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Tc=7.0 min CN=83 Runoff=10.78 cfs 0.519 af Runoff Area=181 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.27"Subcatchment 3S: To West Tc=1.0 min CN=80 Runoff=0.02 cfs 0.001 af Runoff Area=5,250 sf 85.68% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.70"Subcatchment 4S: To North Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=0.80 cfs 0.037 af Runoff Area=629 sf 74.24% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.48"Subcatchment 5S: To S Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=0.09 cfs 0.004 af Peak Elev=944.24' Inflow=13.32 cfs 0.654 afPond 8P: SW CB 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' Outflow=13.32 cfs 0.654 af Inflow=14.13 cfs 0.696 afLink 6L: Total Primary=14.13 cfs 0.696 af Total Runoff Area = 3.022 ac Runoff Volume = 0.696 af Average Runoff Depth = 2.77" 67.39% Pervious = 2.036 ac 32.61% Impervious = 0.985 ac MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Existing HydroC Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 15HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 1S: To SW Runoff =2.55 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=0.136 af, Depth=3.92" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Area (sf)CN Description 17,144 98 Paved parking, HSG D 935 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 18,079 97 Weighted Average 935 5.17% Pervious Area 17,144 94.83% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: To SW Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Runoff Area=18,079 sf Runoff Volume=0.136 af Runoff Depth=3.92" Tc=7.0 min CN=97 2.55 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Existing HydroC Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 16HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Runoff =10.78 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.519 af, Depth=2.52" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Area (sf)CN Description 86,674 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 20,811 98 Paved parking, HSG D 107,485 83 Weighted Average 86,674 80.64% Pervious Area 20,811 19.36% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Runoff Area=107,485 sf Runoff Volume=0.519 af Runoff Depth=2.52" Tc=7.0 min CN=83 10.78 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Existing HydroC Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 17HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 3S: To West [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff =0.02 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume=0.001 af, Depth=2.27" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Area (sf)CN Description 181 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 181 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 1.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: To West Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.02 0.019 0.018 0.017 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.013 0.012 0.011 0.01 0.009 0.008 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Runoff Area=181 sf Runoff Volume=0.001 af Runoff Depth=2.27" Tc=1.0 min CN=80 0.02 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Existing HydroC Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 18HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 4S: To North Runoff =0.80 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.037 af, Depth=3.70" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Area (sf)CN Description 4,498 98 Paved parking, HSG D 752 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 5,250 95 Weighted Average 752 14.32% Pervious Area 4,498 85.68% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: To North Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Runoff Area=5,250 sf Runoff Volume=0.037 af Runoff Depth=3.70" Tc=5.0 min CN=95 0.80 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Existing HydroC Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 19HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 5S: To S Runoff =0.09 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.004 af, Depth=3.48" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Area (sf)CN Description 467 98 Paved parking, HSG D 162 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 629 93 Weighted Average 162 25.76% Pervious Area 467 74.24% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5S: To S Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.1 0.095 0.09 0.085 0.08 0.075 0.07 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Runoff Area=629 sf Runoff Volume=0.004 af Runoff Depth=3.48" Tc=5.0 min CN=93 0.09 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Existing HydroC Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 20HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 8P: SW CB [57] Hint: Peaked at 944.24' (Flood elevation advised) Inflow Area =2.883 ac,30.23% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.72" for 10-yr event Inflow =13.32 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.654 af Outflow =13.32 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.654 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary =13.32 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.654 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 944.24' @ 12.10 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.15'18.0" Round Culvert L= 67.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 938.15' / 937.42' S= 0.0109 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 1.77 sf Primary OutFlow Max=13.29 cfs @ 12.10 hrs HW=944.22' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 13.29 cfs @ 7.52 fps) Pond 8P: SW CB Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=2.883 ac Peak Elev=944.24' 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' 13.32 cfs 13.32 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Existing HydroC Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 21HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 6L: Total Inflow Area =3.022 ac,32.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.77" for 10-yr event Inflow =14.13 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.696 af Primary =14.13 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.696 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 6L: Total Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=3.022 ac 14.13 cfs 14.13 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Existing Hydr Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 22HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=18,079 sf 94.83% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.05"Subcatchment 1S: To SW Tc=7.0 min CN=97 Runoff=4.15 cfs 0.244 af Runoff Area=107,485 sf 19.36% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.42"Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Tc=7.0 min CN=83 Runoff=21.06 cfs 1.114 af Runoff Area=181 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.07"Subcatchment 3S: To West Tc=1.0 min CN=80 Runoff=0.04 cfs 0.002 af Runoff Area=5,250 sf 85.68% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.81"Subcatchment 4S: To North Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=1.32 cfs 0.068 af Runoff Area=629 sf 74.24% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.58"Subcatchment 5S: To S Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=0.16 cfs 0.008 af Peak Elev=957.98' Inflow=25.21 cfs 1.358 afPond 8P: SW CB 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' Outflow=25.21 cfs 1.358 af Inflow=26.59 cfs 1.436 afLink 6L: Total Primary=26.59 cfs 1.436 af Total Runoff Area = 3.022 ac Runoff Volume = 1.436 af Average Runoff Depth = 5.70" 67.39% Pervious = 2.036 ac 32.61% Impervious = 0.985 ac MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Existing Hydr Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 23HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 1S: To SW Runoff =4.15 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=0.244 af, Depth=7.05" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Area (sf)CN Description 17,144 98 Paved parking, HSG D 935 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 18,079 97 Weighted Average 935 5.17% Pervious Area 17,144 94.83% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: To SW Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 4 3 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Runoff Area=18,079 sf Runoff Volume=0.244 af Runoff Depth=7.05" Tc=7.0 min CN=97 4.15 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Existing Hydr Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 24HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Runoff =21.06 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=1.114 af, Depth=5.42" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Area (sf)CN Description 86,674 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 20,811 98 Paved parking, HSG D 107,485 83 Weighted Average 86,674 80.64% Pervious Area 20,811 19.36% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Runoff Area=107,485 sf Runoff Volume=1.114 af Runoff Depth=5.42" Tc=7.0 min CN=83 21.06 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Existing Hydr Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 25HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 3S: To West [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff =0.04 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume=0.002 af, Depth=5.07" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Area (sf)CN Description 181 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 181 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 1.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: To West Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.048 0.046 0.044 0.042 0.04 0.038 0.036 0.034 0.032 0.03 0.028 0.026 0.024 0.022 0.02 0.018 0.016 0.014 0.012 0.01 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.002 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Runoff Area=181 sf Runoff Volume=0.002 af Runoff Depth=5.07" Tc=1.0 min CN=80 0.04 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Existing Hydr Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 26HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 4S: To North Runoff =1.32 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.068 af, Depth=6.81" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Area (sf)CN Description 4,498 98 Paved parking, HSG D 752 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 5,250 95 Weighted Average 752 14.32% Pervious Area 4,498 85.68% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: To North Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Runoff Area=5,250 sf Runoff Volume=0.068 af Runoff Depth=6.81" Tc=5.0 min CN=95 1.32 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Existing Hydr Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 27HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 5S: To S Runoff =0.16 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.008 af, Depth=6.58" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Area (sf)CN Description 467 98 Paved parking, HSG D 162 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 629 93 Weighted Average 162 25.76% Pervious Area 467 74.24% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5S: To S Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Runoff Area=629 sf Runoff Volume=0.008 af Runoff Depth=6.58" Tc=5.0 min CN=93 0.16 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Existing Hydr Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 28HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 8P: SW CB [57] Hint: Peaked at 957.98' (Flood elevation advised) Inflow Area =2.883 ac,30.23% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.65" for 100-Yr event Inflow =25.21 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=1.358 af Outflow =25.21 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=1.358 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary =25.21 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=1.358 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 957.98' @ 12.10 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.15'18.0" Round Culvert L= 67.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 938.15' / 937.42' S= 0.0109 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 1.77 sf Primary OutFlow Max=25.14 cfs @ 12.10 hrs HW=957.88' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 25.14 cfs @ 14.23 fps) Pond 8P: SW CB Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Inflow Area=2.883 ac Peak Elev=957.98' 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' 25.21 cfs 25.21 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Existing Hydr Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 29HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 6L: Total Inflow Area =3.022 ac,32.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.70" for 100-Yr event Inflow =26.59 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=1.436 af Primary =26.59 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=1.436 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 6L: Total Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Inflow Area=3.022 ac 26.59 cfs 26.59 cfs 1S To SW 2S Central Property 3S To West 4S To North 5S To S 8P CB SW CB 6L Total Routing Diagram for 20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Snow Prepared by Microsoft, Printed 5/28/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link 20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Snow Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (selected nodes) Area (acres) CN Description (subcatchment-numbers) 2.036 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D (1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S) 0.985 100 Paved parking, HSG D (1S, 2S, 4S, 5S) 3.022 100 TOTAL AREA 20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Snow Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Soil Listing (selected nodes) Area (acres) Soil Group Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 HSG A 0.000 HSG B 0.000 HSG C 3.022 HSG D 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S 0.000 Other 3.022 TOTAL AREA 20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Snow Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 4HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (selected nodes) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.036 0.000 2.036 >75% Grass cover, Good 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.985 0.000 0.985 Paved parking 1S, 2S, 4S, 5S 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.022 0.000 3.022 TOTAL AREA 20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Snow Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 5HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pipe Listing (selected nodes) Line#Node Number In-Invert (feet) Out-Invert (feet) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) n Diam/Width (inches) Height (inches) Inside-Fill (inches) 1 8P 938.15 937.42 67.0 0.0109 0.025 24.0 0.0 0.0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Sn Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 6HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-284.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 28401 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=18,079 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.20"Subcatchment 1S: To SW Tc=7.0 min CN=100 Runoff=0.20 cfs 0.249 af Runoff Area=107,485 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.20"Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Tc=7.0 min CN=100 Runoff=1.19 cfs 1.481 af Runoff Area=181 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.20"Subcatchment 3S: To West Tc=1.0 min CN=100 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0.002 af Runoff Area=5,250 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.20"Subcatchment 4S: To North Tc=5.0 min CN=100 Runoff=0.06 cfs 0.072 af Runoff Area=629 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.20"Subcatchment 5S: To S Tc=5.0 min CN=100 Runoff=0.01 cfs 0.009 af Peak Elev=938.76' Inflow=1.39 cfs 1.730 afPond 8P: SW CB 24.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' Outflow=1.39 cfs 1.730 af Inflow=1.45 cfs 1.813 afLink 6L: Total Primary=1.45 cfs 1.813 af Total Runoff Area = 3.022 ac Runoff Volume = 1.813 af Average Runoff Depth = 7.20" 0.00% Pervious = 0.000 ac 100.00% Impervious = 3.022 ac Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Sn Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 7HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 1S: To SW Runoff =0.20 cfs @ 121.31 hrs, Volume=0.249 af, Depth=7.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-284.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Area (sf)CN Description *17,144 100 Paved parking, HSG D *935 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 18,079 100 Weighted Average 18,079 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: To SW Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2802702602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.22 0.21 0.2 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Runoff Area=18,079 sf Runoff Volume=0.249 af Runoff Depth=7.20" Tc=7.0 min CN=100 0.20 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Sn Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 8HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Runoff =1.19 cfs @ 121.31 hrs, Volume=1.481 af, Depth=7.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-284.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Area (sf)CN Description *86,674 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D *20,811 100 Paved parking, HSG D 107,485 100 Weighted Average 107,485 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: Central Property Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2802702602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 1 0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Runoff Area=107,485 sf Runoff Volume=1.481 af Runoff Depth=7.20" Tc=7.0 min CN=100 1.19 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Sn Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 9HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 3S: To West [49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt Runoff =0.00 cfs @ 121.23 hrs, Volume=0.002 af, Depth=7.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-284.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Area (sf)CN Description *181 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 181 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 1.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: To West Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2802702602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Runoff Area=181 sf Runoff Volume=0.002 af Runoff Depth=7.20" Tc=1.0 min CN=100 0.00 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Sn Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 10HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 4S: To North Runoff =0.06 cfs @ 121.28 hrs, Volume=0.072 af, Depth=7.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-284.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Area (sf)CN Description *4,498 100 Paved parking, HSG D *752 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 5,250 100 Weighted Average 5,250 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: To North Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2802702602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Runoff Area=5,250 sf Runoff Volume=0.072 af Runoff Depth=7.20" Tc=5.0 min CN=100 0.06 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Sn Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 11HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 5S: To S Runoff =0.01 cfs @ 121.28 hrs, Volume=0.009 af, Depth=7.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-284.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Area (sf)CN Description *467 100 Paved parking, HSG D *162 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 629 100 Weighted Average 629 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5S: To S Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2802702602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000 0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Runoff Area=629 sf Runoff Volume=0.009 af Runoff Depth=7.20" Tc=5.0 min CN=100 0.01 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Sn Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 12HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 8P: SW CB [57] Hint: Peaked at 938.76' (Flood elevation advised) Inflow Area =2.883 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 7.20" for 10-Day Snowmelt event Inflow =1.39 cfs @ 121.31 hrs, Volume=1.730 af Outflow =1.39 cfs @ 121.31 hrs, Volume=1.730 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary =1.39 cfs @ 121.31 hrs, Volume=1.730 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-284.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 938.76' @ 121.31 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.15'24.0" Round Culvert L= 67.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 938.15' / 937.42' S= 0.0109 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 3.14 sf Primary OutFlow Max=1.39 cfs @ 121.31 hrs HW=938.76' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 1.39 cfs @ 2.58 fps) Pond 8P: SW CB Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2802702602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 1 0 Inflow Area=2.883 ac Peak Elev=938.76' 24.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' 1.39 cfs 1.39 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - Existing HydroCAD Model_Sn Printed 5/28/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 13HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 6L: Total Inflow Area =3.022 ac,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 7.20" for 10-Day Snowmelt event Inflow =1.45 cfs @ 121.31 hrs, Volume=1.813 af Primary =1.45 cfs @ 121.31 hrs, Volume=1.813 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-284.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 6L: Total Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2802702602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 1 0 Inflow Area=3.022 ac 1.45 cfs 1.45 cfs 1S (new Subcat) 2S (new Subcat) 3S (new Subcat) 4S (new Subcat) 5S (new Subcat) 5P (new Pond) 8P CB SW CB 6L Total Routing Diagram for 20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Model Prepared by Microsoft, Printed 6/1/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link 20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Model Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (selected nodes) Area (acres) CN Description (subcatchment-numbers) 0.313 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D (1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S) 2.417 98 Paved parking, HSG D (1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S) 0.292 98 Pervious Pavement, 0% imp, HSG D (2S) 3.022 96 TOTAL AREA 20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Model Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Soil Listing (selected nodes) Area (acres) Soil Group Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 HSG A 0.000 HSG B 0.000 HSG C 3.022 HSG D 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S 0.000 Other 3.022 TOTAL AREA 20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Model Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 4HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (selected nodes) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.313 0.000 0.313 >75% Grass cover, Good 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.417 0.000 2.417 Paved parking 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.292 0.000 0.292 Pervious Pavement, 0% imp 2S 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.022 0.000 3.022 TOTAL AREA 20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Model Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 5HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pipe Listing (selected nodes) Line#Node Number In-Invert (feet) Out-Invert (feet) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) n Diam/Width (inches) Height (inches) Inside-Fill (inches) 1 5P 942.34 941.84 50.0 0.0100 0.013 12.0 0.0 0.0 2 8P 938.15 937.42 67.0 0.0109 0.025 18.0 0.0 0.0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 6HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=25,791 sf 88.38% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.42"Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Tc=7.0 min CN=96 Runoff=2.29 cfs 0.120 af Runoff Area=94,918 sf 79.35% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.53"Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Tc=7.0 min CN=97 Runoff=8.63 cfs 0.459 af Runoff Area=3,616 sf 54.23% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.87"Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=90 Runoff=0.29 cfs 0.013 af Runoff Area=5,250 sf 85.68% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.32"Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=0.50 cfs 0.023 af Runoff Area=2,061 sf 34.59% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.55"Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=86 Runoff=0.14 cfs 0.006 af Peak Elev=943.08' Storage=10,356 cf Inflow=8.63 cfs 0.459 afPond 5P: (new Pond) Discarded=0.04 cfs 0.130 af Primary=1.73 cfs 0.329 af Outflow=1.77 cfs 0.459 af Peak Elev=939.21' Inflow=3.14 cfs 0.449 afPond 8P: SW CB 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' Outflow=3.14 cfs 0.449 af Inflow=3.94 cfs 0.491 afLink 6L: Total Primary=3.94 cfs 0.491 af Total Runoff Area = 3.022 ac Runoff Volume = 0.621 af Average Runoff Depth = 2.47" 20.02% Pervious = 0.605 ac 79.98% Impervious = 2.417 ac MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 7HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Runoff =2.29 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=0.120 af, Depth=2.42" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Area (sf)CN Description 22,795 98 Paved parking, HSG D 2,996 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 25,791 96 Weighted Average 2,996 11.62% Pervious Area 22,795 88.38% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Runoff Area=25,791 sf Runoff Volume=0.120 af Runoff Depth=2.42" Tc=7.0 min CN=96 2.29 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 8HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Runoff =8.63 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=0.459 af, Depth=2.53" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Area (sf)CN Description 75,317 98 Paved parking, HSG D 6,865 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D *12,736 98 Pervious Pavement, 0% imp, HSG D 94,918 97 Weighted Average 19,601 20.65% Pervious Area 75,317 79.35% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Runoff Area=94,918 sf Runoff Volume=0.459 af Runoff Depth=2.53" Tc=7.0 min CN=97 8.63 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 9HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.013 af, Depth=1.87" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Area (sf)CN Description 1,961 98 Paved parking, HSG D 1,655 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 3,616 90 Weighted Average 1,655 45.77% Pervious Area 1,961 54.23% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Runoff Area=3,616 sf Runoff Volume=0.013 af Runoff Depth=1.87" Tc=5.0 min CN=90 0.29 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 10HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.50 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.023 af, Depth=2.32" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Area (sf)CN Description 4,498 98 Paved parking, HSG D 752 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 5,250 95 Weighted Average 752 14.32% Pervious Area 4,498 85.68% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Runoff Area=5,250 sf Runoff Volume=0.023 af Runoff Depth=2.32" Tc=5.0 min CN=95 0.50 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 11HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.14 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume=0.006 af, Depth=1.55" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Area (sf)CN Description 713 98 Paved parking, HSG D 1,348 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 2,061 86 Weighted Average 1,348 65.41% Pervious Area 713 34.59% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87" Runoff Area=2,061 sf Runoff Volume=0.006 af Runoff Depth=1.55" Tc=5.0 min CN=86 0.14 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 12HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 5P: (new Pond) Inflow Area =2.179 ac,79.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.53" for 2-yr event Inflow =8.63 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=0.459 af Outflow =1.77 cfs @ 12.38 hrs, Volume=0.459 af, Atten= 79%, Lag= 17.2 min Discarded =0.04 cfs @ 7.50 hrs, Volume=0.130 af Primary =1.73 cfs @ 12.38 hrs, Volume=0.329 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 943.08' @ 12.38 hrs Surf.Area= 25,962 sf Storage= 10,356 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 331.4 min calculated for 0.459 af (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 331.7 min ( 1,098.6 - 766.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 942.10'30,933 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 77,626 cf Overall - 295 cf Embedded = 77,332 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 942.34'295 cf 6.0" D x 100.0'L Pipe Storage x 15 Inside #1 31,227 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet)(sq-ft)(cubic-feet)(cubic-feet) 942.10 25,962 0 0 942.34 25,962 6,231 6,231 945.09 25,962 71,396 77,626 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 942.34'12.0" Round Culvert L= 50.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 942.34' / 941.84' S= 0.0100 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013 Corrugated PE, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Discarded 942.10'0.060 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Phase-In= 0.01' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 7.50 hrs HW=942.13' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=1.73 cfs @ 12.38 hrs HW=943.08' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 1.73 cfs @ 3.87 fps) MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 13HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 5P: (new Pond) Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=2.179 ac Peak Elev=943.08' Storage=10,356 cf 8.63 cfs 1.77 cfs 0.04 cfs 1.73 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 14HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 8P: SW CB [57] Hint: Peaked at 939.21' (Flood elevation advised) Inflow Area =2.771 ac,81.28% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.94" for 2-yr event Inflow =3.14 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume=0.449 af Outflow =3.14 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume=0.449 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary =3.14 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume=0.449 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 939.21' @ 12.11 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.15'18.0" Round Culvert L= 67.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 938.15' / 937.42' S= 0.0109 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 1.77 sf Primary OutFlow Max=3.14 cfs @ 12.11 hrs HW=939.21' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 3.14 cfs @ 3.31 fps) Pond 8P: SW CB Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=2.771 ac Peak Elev=939.21' 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' 3.14 cfs 3.14 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr2y S1 2y 24hr 2-yr Rainfall=2.87"20145 - Proposed HydroCAD Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 15HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 6L: Total Inflow Area =3.022 ac,79.98% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.95" for 2-yr event Inflow =3.94 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.491 af Primary =3.94 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.491 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 6L: Total Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=3.022 ac 3.94 cfs 3.94 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Proposed Hydro Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 16HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=25,791 sf 88.38% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.81"Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Tc=7.0 min CN=96 Runoff=3.59 cfs 0.188 af Runoff Area=94,918 sf 79.35% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.92"Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Tc=7.0 min CN=97 Runoff=13.37 cfs 0.712 af Runoff Area=3,616 sf 54.23% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.18"Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=90 Runoff=0.49 cfs 0.022 af Runoff Area=5,250 sf 85.68% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.70"Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=0.80 cfs 0.037 af Runoff Area=2,061 sf 34.59% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.79"Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=86 Runoff=0.25 cfs 0.011 af Peak Elev=943.56' Storage=15,323 cf Inflow=13.37 cfs 0.712 afPond 5P: (new Pond) Discarded=0.04 cfs 0.129 af Primary=3.21 cfs 0.582 af Outflow=3.24 cfs 0.712 af Peak Elev=939.76' Inflow=5.82 cfs 0.770 afPond 8P: SW CB 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' Outflow=5.82 cfs 0.770 af Inflow=7.14 cfs 0.840 afLink 6L: Total Primary=7.14 cfs 0.840 af Total Runoff Area = 3.022 ac Runoff Volume = 0.970 af Average Runoff Depth = 3.85" 20.02% Pervious = 0.605 ac 79.98% Impervious = 2.417 ac MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Proposed Hydro Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 17HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Runoff =3.59 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=0.188 af, Depth=3.81" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Area (sf)CN Description 22,795 98 Paved parking, HSG D 2,996 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 25,791 96 Weighted Average 2,996 11.62% Pervious Area 22,795 88.38% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 4 3 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Runoff Area=25,791 sf Runoff Volume=0.188 af Runoff Depth=3.81" Tc=7.0 min CN=96 3.59 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Proposed Hydro Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 18HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Runoff =13.37 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=0.712 af, Depth=3.92" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Area (sf)CN Description 75,317 98 Paved parking, HSG D 6,865 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D *12,736 98 Pervious Pavement, 0% imp, HSG D 94,918 97 Weighted Average 19,601 20.65% Pervious Area 75,317 79.35% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Runoff Area=94,918 sf Runoff Volume=0.712 af Runoff Depth=3.92" Tc=7.0 min CN=97 13.37 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Proposed Hydro Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 19HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.49 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.022 af, Depth=3.18" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Area (sf)CN Description 1,961 98 Paved parking, HSG D 1,655 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 3,616 90 Weighted Average 1,655 45.77% Pervious Area 1,961 54.23% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Runoff Area=3,616 sf Runoff Volume=0.022 af Runoff Depth=3.18" Tc=5.0 min CN=90 0.49 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Proposed Hydro Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 20HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.80 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.037 af, Depth=3.70" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Area (sf)CN Description 4,498 98 Paved parking, HSG D 752 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 5,250 95 Weighted Average 752 14.32% Pervious Area 4,498 85.68% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Runoff Area=5,250 sf Runoff Volume=0.037 af Runoff Depth=3.70" Tc=5.0 min CN=95 0.80 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Proposed Hydro Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 21HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.25 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.011 af, Depth=2.79" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Area (sf)CN Description 713 98 Paved parking, HSG D 1,348 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 2,061 86 Weighted Average 1,348 65.41% Pervious Area 713 34.59% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27" Runoff Area=2,061 sf Runoff Volume=0.011 af Runoff Depth=2.79" Tc=5.0 min CN=86 0.25 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Proposed Hydro Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 22HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 5P: (new Pond) Inflow Area =2.179 ac,79.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.92" for 10-yr event Inflow =13.37 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=0.712 af Outflow =3.24 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume=0.712 af, Atten= 76%, Lag= 15.8 min Discarded =0.04 cfs @ 7.11 hrs, Volume=0.129 af Primary =3.21 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume=0.582 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 943.56' @ 12.36 hrs Surf.Area= 25,962 sf Storage= 15,323 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 240.4 min calculated for 0.712 af (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 240.6 min ( 994.0 - 753.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 942.10'30,933 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 77,626 cf Overall - 295 cf Embedded = 77,332 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 942.34'295 cf 6.0" D x 100.0'L Pipe Storage x 15 Inside #1 31,227 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet)(sq-ft)(cubic-feet)(cubic-feet) 942.10 25,962 0 0 942.34 25,962 6,231 6,231 945.09 25,962 71,396 77,626 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 942.34'12.0" Round Culvert L= 50.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 942.34' / 941.84' S= 0.0100 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013 Corrugated PE, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Discarded 942.10'0.060 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Phase-In= 0.01' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 7.11 hrs HW=942.13' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=3.21 cfs @ 12.36 hrs HW=943.56' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 3.21 cfs @ 4.08 fps) MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Proposed Hydro Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 23HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 5P: (new Pond) Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=2.179 ac Peak Elev=943.56' Storage=15,323 cf 13.37 cfs 3.24 cfs 0.04 cfs 3.21 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Proposed Hydro Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 24HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 8P: SW CB [57] Hint: Peaked at 939.76' (Flood elevation advised) Inflow Area =2.771 ac,81.28% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.34" for 10-yr event Inflow =5.82 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume=0.770 af Outflow =5.82 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume=0.770 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary =5.82 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume=0.770 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 939.76' @ 12.11 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.15'18.0" Round Culvert L= 67.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 938.15' / 937.42' S= 0.0109 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 1.77 sf Primary OutFlow Max=5.82 cfs @ 12.11 hrs HW=939.76' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 5.82 cfs @ 3.82 fps) Pond 8P: SW CB Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=2.771 ac Peak Elev=939.76' 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' 5.82 cfs 5.82 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr10y S1 10y 24hr 10-yr Rainfall=4.27"20145 - Proposed Hydro Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 25HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 6L: Total Inflow Area =3.022 ac,79.98% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.34" for 10-yr event Inflow =7.14 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.840 af Primary =7.14 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=0.840 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 6L: Total Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=3.022 ac 7.14 cfs 7.14 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Proposed Hy Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 26HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=25,791 sf 88.38% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.93"Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Tc=7.0 min CN=96 Runoff=5.89 cfs 0.342 af Runoff Area=94,918 sf 79.35% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.05"Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Tc=7.0 min CN=97 Runoff=21.78 cfs 1.280 af Runoff Area=3,616 sf 54.23% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.23"Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=90 Runoff=0.87 cfs 0.043 af Runoff Area=5,250 sf 85.68% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.81"Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=1.32 cfs 0.068 af Runoff Area=2,061 sf 34.59% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.76"Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=86 Runoff=0.47 cfs 0.023 af Peak Elev=944.55' Storage=25,571 cf Inflow=21.78 cfs 1.280 afPond 5P: (new Pond) Discarded=0.04 cfs 0.133 af Primary=4.70 cfs 1.147 af Outflow=4.73 cfs 1.280 af Peak Elev=941.67' Inflow=9.58 cfs 1.489 afPond 8P: SW CB 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' Outflow=9.58 cfs 1.489 af Inflow=12.00 cfs 1.624 afLink 6L: Total Primary=12.00 cfs 1.624 af Total Runoff Area = 3.022 ac Runoff Volume = 1.757 af Average Runoff Depth = 6.98" 20.02% Pervious = 0.605 ac 79.98% Impervious = 2.417 ac MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Proposed Hy Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 27HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Runoff =5.89 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=0.342 af, Depth=6.93" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Area (sf)CN Description 22,795 98 Paved parking, HSG D 2,996 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 25,791 96 Weighted Average 2,996 11.62% Pervious Area 22,795 88.38% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Runoff Area=25,791 sf Runoff Volume=0.342 af Runoff Depth=6.93" Tc=7.0 min CN=96 5.89 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Proposed Hy Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 28HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Runoff =21.78 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=1.280 af, Depth=7.05" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Area (sf)CN Description 75,317 98 Paved parking, HSG D 6,865 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D *12,736 98 Pervious Pavement, 0% imp, HSG D 94,918 97 Weighted Average 19,601 20.65% Pervious Area 75,317 79.35% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Runoff Area=94,918 sf Runoff Volume=1.280 af Runoff Depth=7.05" Tc=7.0 min CN=97 21.78 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Proposed Hy Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 29HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.87 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.043 af, Depth=6.23" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Area (sf)CN Description 1,961 98 Paved parking, HSG D 1,655 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 3,616 90 Weighted Average 1,655 45.77% Pervious Area 1,961 54.23% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Runoff Area=3,616 sf Runoff Volume=0.043 af Runoff Depth=6.23" Tc=5.0 min CN=90 0.87 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Proposed Hy Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 30HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Runoff =1.32 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.068 af, Depth=6.81" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Area (sf)CN Description 4,498 98 Paved parking, HSG D 752 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 5,250 95 Weighted Average 752 14.32% Pervious Area 4,498 85.68% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 1 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Runoff Area=5,250 sf Runoff Volume=0.068 af Runoff Depth=6.81" Tc=5.0 min CN=95 1.32 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Proposed Hy Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 31HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.47 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=0.023 af, Depth=5.76" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Area (sf)CN Description 713 98 Paved parking, HSG D 1,348 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 2,061 86 Weighted Average 1,348 65.41% Pervious Area 713 34.59% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.52 0.5 0.48 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.4 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41" Runoff Area=2,061 sf Runoff Volume=0.023 af Runoff Depth=5.76" Tc=5.0 min CN=86 0.47 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Proposed Hy Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 32HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 5P: (new Pond) Inflow Area =2.179 ac,79.35% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 7.05" for 100-Yr event Inflow =21.78 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=1.280 af Outflow =4.73 cfs @ 12.47 hrs, Volume=1.280 af, Atten= 78%, Lag= 22.8 min Discarded =0.04 cfs @ 6.65 hrs, Volume=0.133 af Primary =4.70 cfs @ 12.47 hrs, Volume=1.147 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 944.55' @ 12.47 hrs Surf.Area= 25,962 sf Storage= 25,571 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 171.8 min calculated for 1.280 af (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 171.8 min ( 915.1 - 743.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 942.10'30,933 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 77,626 cf Overall - 295 cf Embedded = 77,332 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 942.34'295 cf 6.0" D x 100.0'L Pipe Storage x 15 Inside #1 31,227 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet)(sq-ft)(cubic-feet)(cubic-feet) 942.10 25,962 0 0 942.34 25,962 6,231 6,231 945.09 25,962 71,396 77,626 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 942.34'12.0" Round Culvert L= 50.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 942.34' / 941.84' S= 0.0100 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013 Corrugated PE, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Discarded 942.10'0.060 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Phase-In= 0.01' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 6.65 hrs HW=942.13' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=4.70 cfs @ 12.47 hrs HW=944.55' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 4.70 cfs @ 5.98 fps) MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Proposed Hy Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 33HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 5P: (new Pond) Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Inflow Area=2.179 ac Peak Elev=944.55' Storage=25,571 cf 21.78 cfs 4.73 cfs 0.04 cfs 4.70 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Proposed Hy Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 34HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 8P: SW CB [57] Hint: Peaked at 941.67' (Flood elevation advised) Inflow Area =2.771 ac,81.28% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 6.45" for 100-Yr event Inflow =9.58 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=1.489 af Outflow =9.58 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=1.489 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary =9.58 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume=1.489 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 941.67' @ 12.10 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.15'18.0" Round Culvert L= 67.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 938.15' / 937.42' S= 0.0109 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 1.77 sf Primary OutFlow Max=9.57 cfs @ 12.10 hrs HW=941.67' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 9.57 cfs @ 5.41 fps) Pond 8P: SW CB Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=2.771 ac Peak Elev=941.67' 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' 9.58 cfs 9.58 cfs MN-RPBCWD_v1_Atlas14 24-hr100y S1 100y 24hr 100-Yr Rainfall=7.41"20145 - Proposed Hy Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 35HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 6L: Total Inflow Area =3.022 ac,79.98% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 6.45" for 100-Yr event Inflow =12.00 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=1.624 af Primary =12.00 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=1.624 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 6L: Total Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420 Fl o w ( c f s ) 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=3.022 ac 12.00 cfs 12.00 cfs 1S (new Subcat) 2S (new Subcat) 3S (new Subcat) 4S (new Subcat) 5S (new Subcat) 5P (new Pond) 8P CB SW CB 6L Total Routing Diagram for 20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_Snow Prepared by Microsoft, Printed 6/1/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link 20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_Snow Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (selected nodes) Area (acres) CN Description (subcatchment-numbers) 0.313 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D (1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S) 2.417 100 Paved parking, HSG D (1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S) 0.292 100 Pervious Pavement, 0% imp, HSG D (2S) 3.022 100 TOTAL AREA 20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_Snow Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Soil Listing (selected nodes) Area (acres) Soil Group Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 HSG A 0.000 HSG B 0.000 HSG C 3.022 HSG D 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S 0.000 Other 3.022 TOTAL AREA 20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_Snow Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 4HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (selected nodes) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.313 0.000 0.313 >75% Grass cover, Good 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.417 0.000 2.417 Paved parking 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.292 0.000 0.292 Pervious Pavement, 0% imp 2S 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.022 0.000 3.022 TOTAL AREA 20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_Snow Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 5HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pipe Listing (selected nodes) Line#Node Number In-Invert (feet) Out-Invert (feet) Length (feet) Slope (ft/ft) n Diam/Width (inches) Height (inches) Inside-Fill (inches) 1 5P 942.34 941.84 50.0 0.0100 0.013 12.0 0.0 0.0 2 8P 938.15 937.42 67.0 0.0109 0.025 18.0 0.0 0.0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_S Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 6HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-264.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 26401 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=25,791 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.20"Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Tc=7.0 min CN=100 Runoff=0.28 cfs 0.355 af Runoff Area=94,918 sf 86.58% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.20"Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Tc=7.0 min CN=100 Runoff=1.05 cfs 1.307 af Runoff Area=3,616 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.20"Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=100 Runoff=0.04 cfs 0.050 af Runoff Area=5,250 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.20"Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=100 Runoff=0.06 cfs 0.072 af Runoff Area=2,061 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=7.20"Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Tc=5.0 min CN=100 Runoff=0.02 cfs 0.028 af Peak Elev=942.80' Storage=7,452 cf Inflow=1.05 cfs 1.307 afPond 5P: (new Pond) Discarded=0.04 cfs 0.713 af Primary=0.79 cfs 0.595 af Outflow=0.82 cfs 1.307 af Peak Elev=938.72' Inflow=1.02 cfs 0.950 afPond 8P: SW CB 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' Outflow=1.02 cfs 0.950 af Inflow=1.12 cfs 1.101 afLink 6L: Total Primary=1.12 cfs 1.101 af Total Runoff Area = 3.022 ac Runoff Volume = 1.813 af Average Runoff Depth = 7.20" 9.68% Pervious = 0.292 ac 90.32% Impervious = 2.730 ac Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_S Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 7HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.28 cfs @ 121.31 hrs, Volume=0.355 af, Depth=7.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-264.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Area (sf)CN Description *22,795 100 Paved parking, HSG D *2,996 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 25,791 100 Weighted Average 25,791 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Runoff Area=25,791 sf Runoff Volume=0.355 af Runoff Depth=7.20" Tc=7.0 min CN=100 0.28 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_S Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 8HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Runoff =1.05 cfs @ 121.31 hrs, Volume=1.307 af, Depth=7.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-264.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Area (sf)CN Description *75,317 100 Paved parking, HSG D *6,865 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D *12,736 100 Pervious Pavement, 0% imp, HSG D 94,918 100 Weighted Average 12,736 13.42% Pervious Area 82,182 86.58% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 1 0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Runoff Area=94,918 sf Runoff Volume=1.307 af Runoff Depth=7.20" Tc=7.0 min CN=100 1.05 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_S Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 9HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.04 cfs @ 121.28 hrs, Volume=0.050 af, Depth=7.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-264.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Area (sf)CN Description *1,961 100 Paved parking, HSG D *1,655 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 3,616 100 Weighted Average 3,616 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.044 0.042 0.04 0.038 0.036 0.034 0.032 0.03 0.028 0.026 0.024 0.022 0.02 0.018 0.016 0.014 0.012 0.01 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.002 0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Runoff Area=3,616 sf Runoff Volume=0.050 af Runoff Depth=7.20" Tc=5.0 min CN=100 0.04 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_S Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 10HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.06 cfs @ 121.28 hrs, Volume=0.072 af, Depth=7.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-264.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Area (sf)CN Description *4,498 100 Paved parking, HSG D *752 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 5,250 100 Weighted Average 5,250 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 4S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Runoff Area=5,250 sf Runoff Volume=0.072 af Runoff Depth=7.20" Tc=5.0 min CN=100 0.06 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_S Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 11HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Runoff =0.02 cfs @ 121.28 hrs, Volume=0.028 af, Depth=7.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-264.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Area (sf)CN Description *713 100 Paved parking, HSG D *1,348 100 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 2,061 100 Weighted Average 2,061 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min)(feet)(ft/ft)(ft/sec)(cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 0.025 0.024 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.02 0.019 0.018 0.017 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.013 0.012 0.011 0.01 0.009 0.008 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001 0 Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20" Runoff Area=2,061 sf Runoff Volume=0.028 af Runoff Depth=7.20" Tc=5.0 min CN=100 0.02 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_S Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 12HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 5P: (new Pond) Inflow Area =2.179 ac,86.58% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 7.20" for 10-Day Snowmelt event Inflow =1.05 cfs @ 121.31 hrs, Volume=1.307 af Outflow =0.82 cfs @ 122.12 hrs, Volume=1.307 af, Atten= 22%, Lag= 48.5 min Discarded =0.04 cfs @ 52.13 hrs, Volume=0.713 af Primary =0.79 cfs @ 122.12 hrs, Volume=0.595 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-264.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 942.80' @ 122.12 hrs Surf.Area= 25,962 sf Storage= 7,452 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 548.1 min calculated for 1.307 af (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 548.1 min ( 7,769.9 - 7,221.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 942.10'30,933 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 77,626 cf Overall - 295 cf Embedded = 77,332 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 942.34'295 cf 6.0" D x 100.0'L Pipe Storage x 15 Inside #1 31,227 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet)(sq-ft)(cubic-feet)(cubic-feet) 942.10 25,962 0 0 942.34 25,962 6,231 6,231 945.09 25,962 71,396 77,626 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 942.34'12.0" Round Culvert L= 50.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 942.34' / 941.84' S= 0.0100 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013 Corrugated PE, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Discarded 942.10'0.060 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Phase-In= 0.01' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 52.13 hrs HW=942.13' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.78 cfs @ 122.12 hrs HW=942.80' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.78 cfs @ 3.26 fps) Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_S Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 13HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 5P: (new Pond) Inflow Outflow Discarded Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 1 0 Inflow Area=2.179 ac Peak Elev=942.80' Storage=7,452 cf 1.05 cfs 0.82 cfs 0.04 cfs 0.79 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_S Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 14HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 8P: SW CB [57] Hint: Peaked at 938.72' (Flood elevation advised) Inflow Area =2.771 ac,89.45% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.11" for 10-Day Snowmelt event Inflow =1.02 cfs @ 121.87 hrs, Volume=0.950 af Outflow =1.02 cfs @ 121.87 hrs, Volume=0.950 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary =1.02 cfs @ 121.87 hrs, Volume=0.950 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-264.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 938.72' @ 121.87 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.15'18.0" Round Culvert L= 67.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 938.15' / 937.42' S= 0.0109 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.025 Corrugated metal, Flow Area= 1.77 sf Primary OutFlow Max=1.02 cfs @ 121.87 hrs HW=938.72' (Free Discharge) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 1.02 cfs @ 2.44 fps) Pond 8P: SW CB Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 1 0 Inflow Area=2.771 ac Peak Elev=938.72' 18.0" Round Culvert n=0.025 L=67.0' S=0.0109 '/' 1.02 cfs 1.02 cfs Spillway 1-day 10-day 10-Day Snowmelt Rainfall=7.20"20145 - HydroCAD Proposed Model_S Printed 6/1/2015Prepared by Microsoft Page 15HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 00887 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Link 6L: Total Inflow Area =3.022 ac,90.32% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.37" for 10-Day Snowmelt event Inflow =1.12 cfs @ 121.81 hrs, Volume=1.101 af Primary =1.12 cfs @ 121.81 hrs, Volume=1.101 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-264.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 6L: Total Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2602502402302202102001901801701601501401301201101009080706050403020100 Fl o w ( c f s ) 1 0 Inflow Area=3.022 ac 1.12 cfs 1.12 cfs APPENDIX C – MIDS CALCULATIONS Project Information Calculator Version:Version 2: June 2014 Project Name:Total Wine User Name / Company Name:Eric Vogel/Sambatek, Inc Date:05/27/2015 Project Description:On-Site Only Sediment Model Site Information Retention Requirement (inches):0.55 Site's Zip Code:55317 Annual Rainfall (inches):29.9 Phosphorus EMC (mg/l):0.3 TSS EMC (mg/l):54.5 Total Site Area Land Cover A Soils (acres) B Soils (acres) C Soils (acres) D Soils (acres) Total (acres) Forest/Open Space -Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land 0 Managed Turf -disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed 0.254 0.254 Impervious Area (acres)2.459 Total Area (acres)2.713 Site Areas Routed to BMPs Land Cover A Soils (acres) B Soils (acres) C Soils (acres) D Soils (acres) Total (acres) Forest/Open Space -Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land 0 Managed Turf -disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed 0 Impervious Area (acres) Total Area (acres)0 Summary Information Performance Goal Requirement Performance goal volume retention requirement:4909 ft3 Volume removed by BMPs towards performance goal:ft3 Percent volume removed towards performance goal % Annual Volume and Pollutant Load Reductions Post development annual runoff volume 5.381 acre-ft Annual runoff volume removed by BMPs:acre-ft Percent annual runoff volume removed:% Post development annual particulate P load:2.41 lbs Annual particulate P removed by BMPs:lbs Post development annual dissolved P load:1.98 lbs Annual dissolved P removed by BMPs:lbs Percent annual total phosphorus removed:% Post development annual TSS load:798 lbs Annual TSS removed by BMPs:lbs Percent annual TSS removed:% BMP Summary Performance Goal Summary BMP Name BMP Volume Capacity (ft3) Volume Recieved (ft3) Volume Retained (ft3) Volume Outflow (ft3) Percent Retained (%) Annual Volume Summary BMP Name Volume From Direct Watershed (acre-ft) Volume From Upstream BMPs (acre-ft) Volume Retained (acre-ft) Volume outflow (acre-ft) Percent Retained (%) Particulate Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Dissolved Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) TSS Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) BMP Schematic Project Information Calculator Version:Version 2: June 2014 Project Name:Total Wine User Name / Company Name:Eric Vogel/Sambatek, Inc. Date:05/27/2015 Project Description: Site Information Retention Requirement (inches):0.55 Site's Zip Code:55317 Annual Rainfall (inches):29.9 Phosphorus EMC (mg/l):0.3 TSS EMC (mg/l):54.5 Total Site Area Land Cover A Soils (acres) B Soils (acres) C Soils (acres) D Soils (acres) Total (acres) Forest/Open Space -Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land 0 Managed Turf -disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed 0.604 0.604 Impervious Area (acres)2.417 Total Area (acres)3.021 Site Areas Routed to BMPs Land Cover A Soils (acres) B Soils (acres) C Soils (acres) D Soils (acres) Total (acres) Forest/Open Space -Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land 0 Managed Turf -disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed 0.52 0.52 Impervious Area (acres)2.362 Total Area (acres)2.882 Summary Information Performance Goal Requirement Performance goal volume retention requirement:4826 ft3 Volume removed by BMPs towards performance goal:2492 ft3 Percent volume removed towards performance goal 52 % Annual Volume and Pollutant Load Reductions Post development annual runoff volume 5.4877 acre-ft Annual runoff volume removed by BMPs:0.9554 acre-ft Percent annual runoff volume removed:17 % Post development annual particulate P load:2.46 lbs Annual particulate P removed by BMPs:1.96 lbs Post development annual dissolved P load:2.02 lbs Annual dissolved P removed by BMPs:1.1 lbs Percent annual total phosphorus removed:68 % Post development annual TSS load:814 lbs Annual TSS removed by BMPs:739 lbs Percent annual TSS removed:91 % BMP Summary Performance Goal Summary BMP Name BMP Volume Capacity (ft3) Volume Recieved (ft3) Volume Retained (ft3) Volume Outflow (ft3) Percent Retained (%) 1 -Infiltration basin/Underground Infiltration 2492 3534 2492 1042 71 1 -Permeable pavement 0 1390 0 1390 0 Jellyfish Filter 0 2224 0 2224 0 Building Roof -SAFL Baffle 1 0 1134 0 1134 0 North Pavement Area -SAFL Baffle 2 0 1010 0 1010 0 Annual Volume Summary BMP Name Volume From Direct Watershed (acre-ft) Volume From Upstream BMPs (acre-ft) Volume Retained (acre-ft) Volume outflow (acre-ft) Percent Retained (%) 1 -Infiltration basin/Underground Infiltration 0 4.0236 0.9554 3.0682 24 1 -Permeable pavement 1.7126 0 0 1.7126 0 Jellyfish Filter 1.2999 3.0682 0 4.3681 0 Building Roof -SAFL Baffle 1 1.2101 0 0 1.2101 0 North Pavement Area -SAFL Baffle 2 1.101 0 0 1.101 0 Particulate Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) 1 -Infiltration basin/Underground Infiltration 0 1.07 0.25 0.82 24 1 -Permeable pavement 0.77 0 0.63 0.14 82 Jellyfish Filter 0.58 0.82 0.98 0.42 70 Building Roof -SAFL Baffle 1 0.54 0 0.05 0.49 10 North Pavement Area -SAFL Baffle 2 0.49 0 0.05 0.44 10 Dissolved Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) 1 -Infiltration basin/Underground Infiltration 0 1.39 0.33 1.06 24 1 -Permeable pavement 0.63 0 0 0.63 0 Jellyfish Filter 0.48 1.06 0.69 0.85 45 Building Roof -SAFL Baffle 1 0.44 0 0.04 0.4 10 North Pavement Area -SAFL Baffle 2 0.4 0 0.04 0.36 10 TSS Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) 1 -Infiltration basin/Underground Infiltration 0 339 80 259 24 1 -Permeable pavement 254 0 188 66 74 Jellyfish Filter 193 259 402 50 89 Building Roof -SAFL Baffle 1 179 0 36 143 20 North Pavement Area -SAFL Baffle 2 163 0 33 130 20 BMP Schematic APPENDIX D – GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Table of Contents Description Page A. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 A.1. Project Description .............................................................................................................. 1 A.2. Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 1 A.3. Previous Site Experience ..................................................................................................... 1 A.4. Scope of Services ................................................................................................................. 2 A.5. Site Conditions..................................................................................................................... 2 B. Results .............................................................................................................................................. 2 B.1. Boring Locations and Elevations .......................................................................................... 2 B.2. Exploration Logs .................................................................................................................. 3 B.2.a. Log of Boring Sheets ............................................................................................... 3 B.2.b. Geologic Origins ..................................................................................................... 3 B.3. Geologic Profile ................................................................................................................... 3 B.3.a. Topsoil and Fill ........................................................................................................ 4 B.3.b. Swamp and Alluvial Deposits ................................................................................. 4 B.3.c. Glacial Deposits ...................................................................................................... 4 B.3.d. Penetration Resistance Testing .............................................................................. 4 B.3.e. Groundwater .......................................................................................................... 5 B.4. Laboratory Test Results ....................................................................................................... 5 C. Basis for Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 6 C.1. Design Details ...................................................................................................................... 6 C.1.a. Proposed Structure ................................................................................................ 6 C.1.b. Pavement Improvements ....................................................................................... 6 C.1.c. Utility Improvements ............................................................................................. 6 C.1.d. Project Schedule ..................................................................................................... 7 C.1.e. Precautions Regarding Changed Information ........................................................ 7 C.2. Considerations Impacting Design and Construction ........................................................... 7 C.2.a. Building Support ..................................................................................................... 7 C.2.b. Pavement Areas ..................................................................................................... 8 C.2.c. Reuse of Onsite Soils .............................................................................................. 8 C.2.d. Impacts of Surface and Groundwater .................................................................... 9 C.2.e. Disturbance of Onsite Soils .................................................................................... 9 D. Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 9 D.1. Building Subgrade Preparation ........................................................................................... 9 D.1.a. Excavations ............................................................................................................. 9 D.1.b. Groundwater Control ........................................................................................... 10 D.1.c. Selecting Excavation Backfill and Additional Required Fill ................................... 11 D.1.d. Placement and Compaction of Backfill and Fill .................................................... 11 D.2. Spread Footings ................................................................................................................. 11 D.2.a. Embedment Depth and Frost Protection ............................................................. 11 D.2.b. Net Allowable Bearing Pressure ........................................................................... 12 D.2.c. Settlement ............................................................................................................ 12 D.3. Interior Slabs ..................................................................................................................... 12 D.3.a. Subgrade Modulus ............................................................................................... 12 D.3.b. Moisture Vapor Protection .................................................................................. 12 D.4. Exterior Slabs ..................................................................................................................... 13 D.4.a. Subgrade Improvement ....................................................................................... 13 Table of Contents (continued) Description Page D.4.b. Frost Protection .................................................................................................... 13 D.5. Pavements ......................................................................................................................... 13 D.5.a. Pavement Subgrade Preparation ......................................................................... 13 D.5.b. Construction Delay ............................................................................................... 14 D.5.c. Assumed R-value .................................................................................................. 14 D.5.d. Bituminous Design Sections ................................................................................. 14 D.5.e. Concrete Pavement Design .................................................................................. 15 D.5.f. Materials and Compaction ................................................................................... 15 D.5.g. Subgrade Drainage ............................................................................................... 15 D.5.h. Pavement Maintenance ....................................................................................... 16 D.6. Utilities .............................................................................................................................. 16 D.6.a. Subgrade Stabilization .......................................................................................... 16 D.6.b. Selection, Placement and Compaction of Backfill ................................................ 17 D.7. Construction Quality Control ............................................................................................ 17 D.7.a. Excavation Side Slopes ......................................................................................... 17 D.7.b. Observations ........................................................................................................ 17 D.7.c. Subgrade Proof-Roll ............................................................................................. 17 D.7.d. Materials Testing .................................................................................................. 18 D.7.e. Cold Weather Precautions ................................................................................... 18 D.7.f. Special Inspections of Soils ................................................................................... 18 E. Procedures...................................................................................................................................... 18 E.1. Penetration Test Borings ................................................................................................... 18 E.2. Material Classification and Testing ................................................................................... 19 E.2.a. Visual and Manual Classification .......................................................................... 19 E.2.b. Laboratory Testing ............................................................................................... 19 E.3. Groundwater Measurements ............................................................................................ 19 F. Qualifications .................................................................................................................................. 19 F.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions .................................................................................. 19 F.1.a. Material Strata ..................................................................................................... 19 F.1.b. Groundwater Levels ............................................................................................. 20 F.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility .......................................................................... 20 F.2.a. Plan Review .......................................................................................................... 20 F.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing ............................................................... 20 F.3. Use of Report..................................................................................................................... 20 F.4. Standard of Care ................................................................................................................ 20 Appendix Boring Location Sketch Log of Boring Sheets ST-100 to ST-106 Log of Boring Sheets ST-1 to ST-11 (Braun Intertec project B13-06640) Subsurface Boring Logs 1 to 4 (AET project 01-00617) Descriptive Terminology A. Introduction A.1. Project Description This Geotechnical Evaluation Report addresses the proposed construction of a 14,000 square foot retail/grocery facility and its associated pavements in Chanhassen, Minnesota. We understand the proposed development will consist of a one-story 14,000 square foot commercial structure along with supporting site improvements. There may be a potential second phase to this project which would include construction of another retail building and pavements in the southern portion of the site. This site is currently vacant but has been subject to past grading activities. As part of the project, Braun Intertec has been contracted by Venture Pass Partners, LLC to perform soil borings and a geotechnical evaluation. A.2. Purpose The purpose of our geotechnical evaluation was to characterize subsurface geologic conditions at selected exploration locations and evaluate their impact on the design and construction of the proposed retail building and its associated pavements. A.3. Previous Site Experience We performed a geotechnical evaluation on this site in 2013 for a project that was not constructed. The general geologic profile encountered in our previous borings across the site consisted of a variable layer of previously placed fill to depths of 1 to 17 feet over glacial soils associated with the Des Moines Lobe glacial advance. Localized deposits of swamp deposited and alluvial soils were also encountered below the fill at a few locations. The fill depths were typically greater in the southern and western portions of the site. The available information would appear to indicate that the fill soils on this site were not placed in an engineered fashion. We also reviewed a Report of Subsurface Investigation performed by American Engineering Testing (AET) under project 01-00617 that was dated December 21, 2000. The subsurface conditions encountered in AET’s soil borings were similar to those encountered in our previous borings. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 2 A.4. Scope of Services Our scope of services for this project was originally submitted as a Proposal for Geotechnical Evaluation, dated September 5, 2014. Geotechnical evaluation related tasks performed in accordance with our authorized scope of services for the project included:  Reviewing previous geotechnical information for this site.  Staking soil borings and clearing exploration locations of underground utilities.  Performing 7 standard penetration test borings to nominal depths of 11 to 21 feet below grade across the site.  Classifying soils recovered from the borings and preparing Log of Boring sheets.  Performing laboratory tests on selected penetration test samples recovered from the borings.  Performing engineering analysis and formulating recommendations for design and construction of foundations, interior and exterior floor slabs, utilities, and pavements.  Preparing this report containing a CAD sketch, exploration logs (new and previous), a summary of the geologic materials encountered, results of laboratory tests, and geotechnical recommendations. A.5. Site Conditions The project site is the 2.71 acre parcel bounded by Lake Drive to the south, Main Street to the east, and Pond Promenade to the north and west. The parcel is currently vacant and lightly vegetated. A shallow pond is present across the south side of the site. We understand the pond is not a storm water feature, but a product of grading and water accumulation. We understand the site has undergone significant grading operations during initial development; however, records documenting the previous grading activities were not available. B. Results B.1. Boring Locations and Elevations We performed 7 standard penetration test borings for the project, denoted as ST-100 to ST-106. The approximate boring locations are shown on the Soil Boring Location Sketch included in the Appendix. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 3 The approximate locations of our previous borings, denoted as ST-1 through ST-11, as well as those previously performed by AET, denoted as 1 through 4, are also shown on the sketch. The boring locations of our recent and previous borings were staked by Braun Intertec personnel. Surface elevations and locations were acquired with GPS technology through the use of the State of Minnesota’s permanent GPS base station network. B.2. Exploration Logs B.2.a. Log of Boring Sheets Log of Boring sheets for our penetration test borings are included in the Appendix. The logs identify and describe the geologic materials that were penetrated, and present the results of penetration resistance tests performed within them, laboratory tests performed on penetration test samples retrieved from them, and groundwater measurements. Strata boundaries were inferred from changes in the penetration test samples and the auger cuttings. Because sampling was not performed continuously, the strata boundary depths are only approximate. The boundary depths likely vary away from the boring locations, and the boundaries themselves may also occur as gradual rather than abrupt transitions. B.2.b. Geologic Origins Geologic origins assigned to the materials shown on the logs and referenced within this report were based on: (1) a review of the background information and reference documents cited above, (2) visual classification of the various geologic material samples retrieved during the course of our subsurface exploration, (3) penetration resistance testing performed for the project, (4) laboratory test results, and (5) available common knowledge of the geologic processes and environments that have impacted the site and surrounding area in the past. B.3. Geologic Profile The general geologic profile encountered at our recent and previous borings across the site consisted of a variable layer of previously placed fill over glacial soils associated with the Des Moines Lobe glacial advance. Localized deposits of swamp deposited and alluvial soils were also encountered below the fill at a few locations. The following subsections discuss the strata in greater detail. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 4 The profile encountered at our exploration locations was similar to the profile depicted within the previous AET borings. B.3.a. Topsoil and Fill Where identifiable filled topsoil was encountered, the topsoil typically consisted of dark brown to black sandy lean clay and clayey sand that was 6 to 18 inches thick. Buried topsoil was encountered in Boring ST-105 between the 4- and 6-foot depths. Fill was present at all exploration locations ranging in depths from less than 1 foot to approximately 17 feet below grade. Fill was also encountered to the termination of Boring ST-8 (16 feet). The fill generally consisted with brown, dark brown, black and gray sandy lean clay and lean clay, with lesser amounts of silty sand and clayey sand also present. The fill contained variable amounts of gravel and roots and varied from moist (near its probable optimum moisture content) to wet (above its probable optimum moisture content). Portions of the fill were determined to be slightly organic to organic or were mixed with organic soils, such as topsoil or swamp deposited soils. Slightly organic to organic fill soils were encountered within Borings ST-5 to ST-10. It is likely the organic fill soils were previously stripped from other portions of the development. B.3.b. Swamp and Alluvial Deposits A layer of swamp deposited and/or alluvial soil was encountered below the fill at Borings ST-106, ST-5 and ST-10. The swamp deposited and alluvial soil consisted of black organic clay and dark gray lean clay that were wet and ranged in thickness from about 2 to 8 feet. B.3.c. Glacial Deposits Glacial deposits were encountered below the fill or swamp/alluvial deposits at all boring locations, except ST-8, which terminated in existing fill. The glacial soils predominantly consisted of brown to gray clayey sand and sandy lean clay, with lesser amounts of silty sand . The glacial soils contained variable amounts of gravel and have the potential to contain cobbles and boulders. B.3.d. Penetration Resistance Testing The results of our penetration resistance testing from the borings are summarized below in Table 1. Comments are provided to qualify the significance of the results. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 5 Table 1. Penetration Resistance Data Geologic Material Classification Range of Penetration Resistances* Comments Fill SM, SC, CL 4 to 21 BPF Variably compacted Swamp/Alluvial OL, CL 6 to 8 BPF - Glacial SC, CL 4 to 20 BPF Locally rather soft and very stiff, generally medium to stiff *BPF – Blows per Foot B.3.e. Groundwater Groundwater observations at the boring locations during drilling operations and after auger withdrawal, prior to backfilling, are provided in the table below. Only borings where groundwater was observed are included. Please note these observations are based on a limited observation period and should be considered approximate. Table 2. Approximate Observed Groundwater Levels at the Borings Boring Surface Elevation Shallowest Observed Depth (feet) Observed Elevation ST-2 950.5 9 1/2 941 ST-5 943.9 19 925 ST-9 944.0 12 932 ST-100 949.4 20 929 ST-101 945.2 20 925 ST-102 940.9 20 921 ST-103 949.0 20 929 Seasonal and annual fluctuations of groundwater levels should also be anticipated. B.4. Laboratory Test Results We performed moisture content, sieve analysis (percent passing the number 200 sieve tests), organic content tests and unconfined compression (hand penetrometer) tests on samples recovered from the soil borings in accordance with ASTM procedures. The laboratory test results are shown on the Log of Boring Sheets included in the Appendix, across from the associated soil sample. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 6 C. Basis for Recommendations C.1. Design Details C.1.a. Proposed Structure We understand that the building will consist of a one-story, slab-on-grade structure encompassing an area of 14,000 square feet. We assume that the building will be rather lightly loaded, with perimeter loads not exceeding 4 kips per foot and column loads not exceeding 150 kips. We assume that the floor slab load will not exceed 125 psf. We understand the building will have a finished floor elevation of 951.5. Based on the surface elevations of the borings, fill depths above existing surface grades will generally range from about 2 to 6 feet for most of the building, with the south central portion of the building requiring up to 10 feet of fill. Based on our conversation with the Civil Engineer for the project, we understand that this site will require a significant amount of soil to be imported to achieve the design grades. C.1.b. Pavement Improvements Based on the preliminary plans provided to us by Sambatek, the project civil engineer, there will be both standard and heavy duty bituminous pavements, as well as heavy duty concrete pavement in the loading dock area. Although traffic loads were not available to us, we assume that the standard duty traffic loads will be less than 75,000 ESALs over a 20 year design life and the heavy duty traffic loads will be less than 150,000 ESALs over a 20 year design life. Grades changes within the new parking areas will consist of fills ranging from about 2 to 4 feet for most of the pavement areas. C.1.c. Utility Improvements Standard below grade utilities, including storm sewer, sanitary sewer and watermain pipes are anticipated for construction as part of the project. Utilities are assumed to have invert depths within approximately 8 feet of final surface grades. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 7 C.1.d. Project Schedule We understand that the preferred project schedule would be to perform the mass grading/soil corrections and install footings and foundation walls in November of this year and wait until March of 2015 to construct the rest of the building, install utilities and pavements. If the required approvals cannot be obtained in time to allow earthwork to begin in November, then the mass grading/soil correction and installation of foundations would likely begin in March of 2015. C.1.e. Precautions Regarding Changed Information We have attempted to describe our understanding of the proposed construction to the extent it was reported to us by others. Depending on the extent of available information, assumptions may have been made based on our experience with similar projects. If we have not correctly recorded or interpreted the project details, we should be notified. New or changed information could require additional evaluation, analyses and/or recommendations. C.2. Considerations Impacting Design and Construction C.2.a. Building Support Based on the results of the soil borings and our understanding of the current building design, we anticipate the site is suitable for support of the proposed building using typical spread footing foundations and a ground supported slab. However, a soil correction approach will be required to remove topsoil and previously placed fill, which are locally mixed with organic soils and do not appear to consist of engineered fill, and underlying organic swamp deposited and soft to rather soft alluvial and glacial clays to control settlement and improve bearing capacity. Based on the soil boring data, soil correction depths are anticipated to range from about 1 to 7 feet below current site grades across the north half of the building pad and from about 5 to 12 feet below site grades across the southern portion of the building. Subsequent backfill depths to establish building grades will range from less than 1 foot up to 16 feet. Given the time of year that the soil correction will be done and based on the moisture contents and occasional organic material within the existing fill, a significant amount of the excavated soil will likely not be suitable for reuse as structural fill within the building pad and will require replacement with imported backfill. To facilitate construction, provide a material that can be readily compacted in cool and wet conditions, reduce the risk of frost heave, as well as reduce the risk of long term settlement in the deeper fill areas, it is our opinion that imported select granular borrow (MnDOT Specification 3149.2B2) be utilized as replacement backfill within the proposed building pad. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 8 The silty and clayey materials excavated from the building pad can be placed as fill within the existing low area in the southwestern portion of the site. C.2.b. Pavement Areas Subgrade soils within the proposed pavement areas consist of poorly to moderately compacted fill soils overlying localized organic deposits, soft alluvial soils and glacial till soils. With the planned raise in grade of 2 to 4 feet across the pavement areas, it should be anticipated that there will be additional consolidation and settlement of the fill, organic and alluvial soils. To reduce the risk of the additional settlement affecting the long term performance of the pavements, we recommend delaying placement of the curb and pavements for at least 45 days after reaching design grades. Subgrade preparation within the pavement areas should be anticipated to primarily involve stripping of the surface vegetation and toposoil, proofrolling the subgrade, and then scarification, moisture conditioning and compaction of the exposed subgrade soils. Given the clayey nature of the subgrade soils, some subcutting and replacement of soft and/or wet clayey soils may also be required, particularly given that the schedule will have earthwork being performed in November or March/April, depending upon the City approval process. We would anticipate that it will be difficult to obtain adequate compaction with the majority of the on-site soils. To facilitate the ease of construction, as well as provide a stronger, more stable subgrade, those soils would also allow a thinner pavement section to be utilized. It is our opinion that fill placed in proposed pavement areas consist of select granular soils. C.2.c. Reuse of Onsite Soils The onsite glacial soils (generally clays) should be suitable for reuse as engineered fill, but most will require moisture conditioning (drying or watering) prior to reuse and compaction. The onsite fill soils, which will compromise a majority of the excavated soils, also generally consist of silty and clayey soils. Based on the borings, portions of the fill appears to be slightly organic to organic. Furthermore, moisture content test results indicate the fill soils range from near to above their estimated optimum moisture contents and they will likely not be directly suitable for reuse unless moisture conditioned prior to reuse. Given the planned construction schedule, moisture conditioning of the silty and clayey soils will likely not be feasible. Without adequate moisture conditioning, the compaction level of those soils will likely be limited. Therefore, it is our opinion the best use of the on-site soils would be to place them in the existing low area/pond. That portion of the site potentially could be developed into a future building pad, however, deeper fills and organic soils exist in that area. We understand that it is not planned to correct that portion of the site during this phase of earthwork, so any future building on that site would likely need to utilize rammed aggregate piers (or a similar ground improvement method) to support the building so the impact of lower compaction in the fill would be minimal. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 9 The contractor should attempt to obtain 95 percent compaction in that area of the site, but that level of compaction may not be attainable, depending upon the weather, time of year and moisture condition of the soils. If 95 percent compaction is not attainable during construction, a meeting should be held with the Owner, contractor and design team to evaluate other acceptance criteria. C.2.d. Impacts of Surface and Groundwater Removal of surface water within the existing low/pond area will be required prior to excavation and backfilling operations. Areas of perched groundwater should also be anticipated within excavations across the site, as indicated by the soil boring results. The contractor should assume groundwater may be present in soil correction or other onsite excavations (including utility) and any water should be immediately removed to facilitate construction and proper backfilling. Sump pumps may be suitable for short term dewatering within the predominant onsite clayey soils. C.2.e. Disturbance of Onsite Soils The contractor should note the onsite clayey soils are susceptible to disturbance due to repeated construction traffic. Disturbance of these soils may cause areas that were previously prepared or suitable for pavement or structure support to become unstable and require addition moisture conditioning, compaction, and/or subcutting. Care should be taken to avoid disturbing the soils. D. Recommendations D.1. Building Subgrade Preparation D.1.a. Excavations For building pad preparation, we recommend removing the topsoil, other organic soils, previously placed fill, swamp deposited and alluvial soils from below the proposed building pad and oversize area. If present, we also recommend removal of all existing utilities and associated backfill from below the proposed building pad. Additional removal of soft to rather soft glacial soils may also be required. After excavation of the unsuitable soils, the foundations and slabs can then be supported directly on suitable native soils or compacted structural fill, however, prior to fill or foundation placement we recommend the excavation bottom be observed by a geotechnical engineer. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 10 Table 5 provides the anticipated soil correction depths at the soil boring locations within or near the proposed building. Table 5. Anticipated Excavation Depths for Soil Correction Boring Ground Surface Elevation Anticipated Depth of Excavation (feet) Approximate Bottom Elevation (Estimated) Approximate Fill Thickness to Achieve FFE (951.5) ST-100 949.4 7 942 9 1/2 ST-101 945.2 7 938 13 1/2 ST-102 940.9 6 934 1/2 17 ST-103 949.0 9 940 11 1/2 ST-1 950.2 1 949 1 ST-2 950.5 5 945 1/2 4 1/2 ST-3 949.2 4 945 5 ST-4 946.1 2 944 6 ST-5 943.9 12 931 1/2 20 1* 941.7 3 938 1/2 13 2* 941.6 12 929 1/2 22 *Previous AET soil boring. Excavation depths will vary between the boring locations. Portions of the excavations may also be deeper than indicated by the borings. Contractors should also be prepared to extend excavations if unstable or additional fill soils are encountered. To provide lateral support to replacement backfill, additional required fill and the structural loads they will support, we recommend oversizing (widening) the excavations 1 foot horizontally beyond the outer edges of the building perimeter footings, or pavement limits, for each foot the excavations extend below bottom-of-footing or pavement subgrade elevations (1:1 oversizing). D.1.b. Groundwater Control Surface water and groundwater should be anticipated and we recommend removing the groundwater from the excavations prior to fill or backfill placement. The contractor should provide a dewatering plan to the owner and design team for review prior to construction. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 11 D.1.c. Selecting Excavation Backfill and Additional Required Fill Due to the planned schedule for construction, the amount of fill/backfill required, potential for groundwater, and ease of compaction in confined spaces, we recommend structural fill within the proposed building pad and oversize areas consist of sands or sandy gravel with less than 12 percent by weight passing the number 200 sieve (MnDOT Specification 3149.2B2). We also recommend that fill placed for the pavement subgrade consist of sand or gravel meeting the same requirements. The onsite glacial soils (generally clays) and fill soils can be reused as fill within the existing pond area, at depths more than 2 feet below the top of subgrade in the pavement areas provided they contain an organic content less than 5 percent and meet moisture and compaction specifications. D.1.d. Placement and Compaction of Backfill and Fill We recommend the backfill and fill be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. We recommend fill soils be compacted to the minimum densities summarized in Table 7, determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 698 (standard Proctor). The fill should be within 3 percentage points of its optimum moisture content. However, clayey fill should be placed within 3 percentage points above and 1 percent below its optimum moisture content. Table 7. Compaction Recommendations Summary Location Minimum Compaction (Standard Proctor) Below Foundations and Interior Slabs (above elevation 941.5) 98% Below Foundations and Interior Slabs (below elevation 941.5) 100% Below Exterior Slabs 95% Backfill Within the Existing Pond Areas 95% Within 3 feet of Pavement Section 100% More than 3 feet below Pavement Section 95% D.2. Spread Footings D.2.a. Embedment Depth and Frost Protection For frost protection, we recommend embedding perimeter footings 42 inches below the lowest exterior grade. Interior footings may be placed directly below floor slabs. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 12 We recommend embedding building footings not heated during winter construction, and other unheated footings, such as at canopies or stoops a minimum of 60 inches below the lowest exterior grade. D.2.b. Net Allowable Bearing Pressure We recommend sizing spread footings to exert a net allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf), including all transient loads. This value includes a safety factor of at least 3.0 with regard to bearing capacity failure. D.2.c. Settlement We estimate that total and differential settlements among the new footings will amount to less than 1 and 1/2 inch, respectively, under the reported loads. D.3. Interior Slabs D.3.a. Subgrade Modulus The floor slab subgrades are anticipated to consist of compacted granular engineered fill suitable for slab support. We recommend using a modulus of subgrade reaction, k value, of 175 pounds per square inch per inch of deflection (pci) to design the slabs. D.3.b. Moisture Vapor Protection If floor coverings or coatings less permeable than the concrete slab will be used, we recommend that a vapor retarder or vapor barrier be place immediately beneath the slab. Some contractors prefer to bury the vapor retarder or barrier beneath a layer of sand to reduce curling and shrinkage, but this practice risks trapping water between the slab and vapor retarder or barrier. Regardless of where the vapor retarder or barrier is placed, we recommend consulting with floor covering manufacturers regarding the appropriate type, use and installation of the vapor retarder or barrier to preserve warranty assurances. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 13 D.4. Exterior Slabs D.4.a. Subgrade Improvement Though not necessarily designed to accommodate dead and live load surcharges or vehicles, exterior slabs can be subjected to both. Settlement of exterior slabs on poorly compacted foundation backfill, utility backfill and other compressible/unstable soils or fills can also contribute to unfavorable surface drainage conditions and frost-related damage to the slabs and adjacent structures, including buildings and pavements. We recommend subgrades supporting exterior slabs should therefore be prepared in accordance with the excavation, backfilling and compaction recommendations provided in Section D.1. D.4.b. Frost Protection Assuming the building pad and its oversize areas and the upper two to three feet of the pavement areas are prepared as recommended with clean sand, the risk of frost heave will be greatly reduced. To reduce the potential for unfavorable differential heaving between the areas of clean sand and the onsite silty and clayey soils, we recommend tapering the sideslopes at that interface at a 3:1 (H:V) gradient, or flatter. Drainage of the sand fill will be critical to reducing frost heave. To help prevent surface drainage and groundwater from accumulating within the sand backfill, we recommend installing pipe drains below slab areas at the bottoms of the excavations and routing them to available catch basins or other suitable disposal points. Another option for exterior slab support, including at entrances without large slabs or sidewalks, is to support the steps or slabs on frost-depth footings. A void space of at least 4 inches is generally required between the bottoms of the steps/slabs and the subgrade soils to accommodate heaving without affecting the steps/slabs. D.5. Pavements D.5.a. Pavement Subgrade Preparation After stripping of surface vegetation and topsoil and prior to placement of fill, we recommend the subgrade soils be proofrolled with a loaded tandem-axle truck and observed by a geotechnical engineer. This will assist in identifying any soft or weak areas that will require additional soil correction work. Areas that yield or rut more than 2 inches due to wheel traffic should be corrected or additional subexcavation performed. If the failed areas cannot be compacted or dried to pass the proof roll, we recommend an additional subcut equal to the rut depth and then replacment with select granular fill. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 14 Fill and backfill placed 3 feet or more below the pavement subgrade should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of standard Proctor density, at a moisture content within 3 percentage points of optimum. We recommend that at least the upper 2 feet of backfill material consist of MnDOT Select Granular Borrow. D.5.b. Construction Delay Where compressible fill and native soils will be left in place below pavement subgrades, we recommend a construction delay be utilized to reduce the potential for pavement settlement and its subsequent impacts to pavement performance and surface drainage. For a construction delay, we recommend a minimum construction delay from fill placement (up to proposed subgrade) to placement of the pavement or curb of 45 days, however, the longer the fill is in place prior to pavement placement the greater reduction in long term settlement will be realized. D.5.c. Assumed R-value After site grading, we anticipate the pavement subgrades will generally consist of at least 2 feet of select granular borrow. Based on the soil boring results and anticipated graded, it is our opinion that an R- value of 40 can be assumed for pavement design purposes. D.5.d. Bituminous Design Sections For the above subgrade and assumed traffic (Section C.1), we recommend the following minimum section thicknesses be used for design of medium duty and heavy duty pavement sections. We recommend medium duty pavement design sections be used in automobile parking areas and the heavy duty design section be used in drive areas and truck parking areas. Where pavements will be subject to static loading situations, such as the loading dock, we recommend concrete pavement be considered Table 7. Recommended Bituminous Pavement Thicknesses Course Standard Duty (inches) Heavy Duty (inches) Bituminous 3 1/2 4 Gravel Base 6 8 The above pavement designs are based upon a 20-year performance life. This is the amount of time before major reconstruction is anticipated. This performance life assumes maintenance, such as seal coating and crack sealing, is routinely performed. However, the actual pavement life will vary depending on variations in weather, traffic conditions and maintenance. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 15 D.5.e. Concrete Pavement Design Where concrete pavements may be utilized, we recommend concrete pavements be a minimum of 7 inches thick placed over 4 inches of aggregate base. Appropriate panel sizing and jointing are critical to performance of rigid pavements and should be reviewed after design loads are available. Concrete design is based on a modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of 175 pci and a design life of 30 years. D.5.f. Materials and Compaction We recommend specifying crushed aggregate base meeting the requirements of MnDOT Specification 3138 for Class 5. We recommend that the bituminous wear and base courses comply with MnDOT Specification 2360 and utilize the following mixes: Standard Duty –SPWEA340E & SPNWB330E Heavy Duty – SPWEB340E & SPNWB330E We recommend that the aggregate base be compacted to a minimum of 100 percent of its maximum standard Proctor dry density. We recommend that the bituminous pavement be compacted to an average of at least 92 percent of the maximum theoretical Rice density, with no individual test less than 90 percent or greater than 97 percent. We recommend specifying concrete for pavements that has a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,000 psi, and a modulus of rupture (Mr) of at least 650 psi. We also recommend Type V cement meeting the requirements of ASTM C 150. We recommend specifying 5 to 7 percent entrained air for exposed concrete to provide resistance to freeze-thaw deterioration. We also recommend using a water/cement ratio of 0.45 or less for concrete exposed to deicers. D.5.g. Subgrade Drainage We recommend installing perforated drainpipes throughout the pavement areas at spacing not greater than 50 feet and along the perimeter of pavement areas where adjacent surface grades will promote drainage towards the pavement. The drainpipes should be placed in small trenches extended at least 6 inches below the sand subbase. If the storm sewer will not be installed during the initial phase of grading, we recommend sloping the clayey subgrade soils below the sand section to promote drainage to a collection point and/or outside of the pavement areas. This will prevent water snow melt and spring rains from becoming trapped in the granular soils and destabilizing the underlying the clayey subgrade soils. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 16 D.5.h. Pavement Maintenance Regardless of what is done to walkway or pavement area subgrades, it will be critical the end-user develop a detailed maintenance program to seal and/or fill any cracks and joints that may develop during the useful life of the various surface features. Concrete and bituminous will experience episodes of normal thermo-expansion and thermo-contraction during its useful life. During this time, cracks may develop and joints may open up, which will expose the subgrade and allow any water flowing overland to enter the subgrade and either saturate the subgrade soils or to become perched atop it. This occurrence increases the potential for heave due to freezing conditions in the general vicinity of the crack or joint. This type of heave has the potential to become excessive if not addressed as part of a maintenance program. Special attention should be paid to areas where dissimilar materials abut one another, where construction joints occur and where shrinkage cracks develop. The on-going performance of pavements is impacted by conditions under which the pavement is asked to perform. These conditions include the environmental conditions, the actual use conditions and the level of ongoing maintenance preformed. With regard to bituminous pavements in particular, because of normal thermo expansion and contraction, it is not unusual to have cracking develop within the first few years of placement and for the cracking to continue throughout the life of the pavement. A regular maintenance plan should be developed for filling cracks in bituminous pavements to lessen the potential impacts for cold weather distress due to frost heave or warm weather distress due to wetting and softening of the subgrade. It is also not unusual for bituminous pavements to require a seal coat within the first 5 to 10 years to increase the long-term performance. D.6. Utilities D.6.a. Subgrade Stabilization The non-organic fill and glacial soils encountered at typical invert elevations generally appear suitable for pipe support and we anticipate utilities can be installed per manufacturer bedding requirements. If organic or unstable soils are encountered at pipe invert elevations, they should be subcut and replaced with engineered backfill or crushed rock. Typical subcut depths below pipe invert grades are 1 to 2 feet, depending on the geological conditions and proposed construction. We recommend a geotechnical engineer observe all utility trench excavations. If present, groundwater should be removed from utility excavation to facilitate pipe installation and backfilling. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 17 If utilities are planned within pavement areas where a construction delay is utilized, we recommend the utilities be installed after the construction delay is completed. D.6.b. Selection, Placement and Compaction of Backfill We recommend selecting, placing and compacting utility trench backfill outside building areas to a minimum of 95 percent of standard Proctor density. Within 3 feet of pavement subgrades, the minimum compaction level should be increased to 100 percent of standard Proctor design. Utility trench backfill should be within 3 percentage points of the soils optimum moisture content. Exterior utility backfill may consist of non-organic soils that are readily compactable. D.7. Construction Quality Control D.7.a. Excavation Side Slopes The onsite soils generally appear to consist of soils meeting OSHA Type B requirements. We recommend excavation side slopes be constructed to lie back at horizontal to vertical slope of 1 to 1 or flatter. Groundwater could cause sideslopes to lie back flatter than anticipated. An OSHA-approved competent person or professional engineer should review the excavation conditions in the field. All excavations must comply with the requirements of OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations and Trenches.” This document states that excavation safety is the responsibility of the contractor. Reference to these OSHA requirements should be included in the project specifications. D.7.b. Observations We recommend having a geotechnical engineer observe all excavations related to subgrade preparation and spread footing, slab-on-grade and pavement construction. The purpose of the observations is to evaluate the competence of the geologic materials exposed in the excavations, and the adequacy of required excavation oversizing. D.7.c. Subgrade Proof-Roll Prior to placing aggregate base material, we recommend proof-rolling pavement subgrades to determine if the subgrade materials are loose, soft or weak, and in need of further stabilization, compaction or subexcavation and recompaction or replacement. A second proof-roll should be performed after the aggregate base material is in place, and prior to placing bituminous or concrete pavement. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 18 D.7.d. Materials Testing We recommend density tests be taken in excavation backfill and additional required fill placed below spread footings, slab-on-grade construction, behind basement walls, and below pavements. D.7.e. Cold Weather Precautions If site grading and construction is anticipated during cold weather, all snow and ice should be removed from cut and fill areas prior to additional grading. No fill should be placed on frozen subgrades. No frozen soils should be used as fill. D.7.f. Special Inspections of Soils We recommend having the site grading and placement of fill, within the building pad be placed under the direction of Special Inspections as provided in Chapter 17, Section 1704.7 of the International Building Code. This requires observation of soil conditions below fill or footings, to evaluate if excavations extend to the anticipate soils and if fill materials meet requirements for type of fill and compaction condition of fill. This work should be carried out under the direction of a licensed geotechnical engineer. The purpose of these special inspections is to evaluate whether the work is being carried out in accordance with the approved Geotechnical Report for the project. This work should include evaluation of the subgrade, note of preparation of the subgrade such as surface compaction or dewatering, excavation oversizing, placement procedures and materials used for fill, and compaction testing of the fill. E. Procedures E.1. Penetration Test Borings The penetration test borings were drilled with an off-road vehicle-mounted core and auger drill equipped with hollow-stem auger. The borings were performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586. Penetration test samples were taken at 2 1/2- or 5-foot intervals. Actual sample intervals and corresponding depths are shown on the boring logs. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 19 E.2. Material Classification and Testing E.2.a. Visual and Manual Classification The geologic materials encountered were visually and manually classified in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 2488. A chart explaining the classification system is attached. Samples were sealed in jars and returned to our facility for review and storage. E.2.b. Laboratory Testing The results of the laboratory tests performed on geologic material samples are noted on or follow the appropriate attached exploration logs. The tests were performed in accordance with ASTM procedures. E.3. Groundwater Measurements The drillers checked for groundwater as the penetration test borings were advanced, and again after auger withdrawal. The boreholes were then backfilled. F. Qualifications F.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions F.1.a. Material Strata Our evaluation, analyses and recommendations were developed from a limited amount of site and subsurface information. It is not standard engineering practice to retrieve material samples from exploration locations continuously with depth, and therefore strata boundaries and thicknesses must be inferred to some extent. Strata boundaries may also be gradual transitions, and can be expected to vary in depth, elevation and thickness away from the exploration locations. Variations in subsurface conditions present between exploration locations may not be revealed until additional exploration work is completed, or construction commences. If any such variations are revealed, our recommendations should be re-evaluated. Such variations could increase construction costs, and a contingency should be provided to accommodate them. Venture Pass Partners, LLC Project B14-06766 October 8, 2014 Page 20 F.1.b. Groundwater Levels Groundwater measurements were made under the conditions reported herein and shown on the exploration logs, and interpreted in the text of this report. It should be noted that the observation period was relatively short, and groundwater can be expected to fluctuate in response to rainfall, flooding, irrigation, seasonal freezing and thawing, surface drainage modifications and other seasonal and annual factors. F.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility F.2.a. Plan Review This report is based on a limited amount of information, and a number of assumptions were necessary to help us develop our recommendations. It is recommended that our firm review the geotechnical aspects of the designs and specifications, and evaluate whether the design is as expected, if any design changes have affected the validity of our recommendations, and if our recommendations have been correctly interpreted and implemented in the designs and specifications. F.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing It is recommended that we be retained to perform observations and tests during construction. This will allow correlation of the subsurface conditions encountered during construction with those encountered by the borings, and provide continuity of professional responsibility. F.3. Use of Report This report is for the exclusive use of the parties to which it has been addressed. Without written approval, we assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. Our evaluation, analyses and recommendations may not be appropriate for other parties or projects. F.4. Standard of Care In performing its services, Braun Intertec used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable members of its profession currently practicing in the same locality. No warranty, express or implied, is made. Appendix APPENDIX E – WATER QUALITY DEVICE REMOVAL DOCUMENTATION 5/27/2015 Flow­thr ough structures for pr e­tr eatment ­ Minnesota Stor mwater M anual http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Flow­through_structures_for_pre­treatment 1/7 Flow­through structures for pre­treatment Flow­through water quality treatment structures are commonly used for pretreatment to remove coarse sediment (i.e., coarse silts, fine sands and larger particles) and floatables (i.e., debris and oil). These structures vary greatly in size and can include the following categories that are discussed in greater detail below: Underground storage structures Hydrodynamic separators Sump catch basins or manholes Contents 1 Pretreatment considerations 2 Permit applicability 3 Retrofit applicability 4 Cold climate suitability 5 Water quality benefits 6 Water quantity benefits 7 General descriptions 7.1 Underground storage structures 7.2 Hydrodynamic separators 7.3 Sump catch basins and manholes 8 Design considerations 8.1 General guidance 8.2 Design assistance using SHSAM 8.3 Performance Assessment 8.4 Maintenance 9 References Pretreatment considerations Pretreatment is a required stormwater management practice for infiltration practices intended to extend the life of downstream BMPs. Flow­through structures are intended to remove a significant amount of coarse silts and sands during low flows; their removal efficiency often is significantly reduced at high flows. 5/27/2015 Flow­thr ough structures for pr e­tr eatment ­ Minnesota Stor mwater M anual http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Flow­through_structures_for_pre­treatment 2/7 Frequent maintenance and cleaning is required as these structures are prone to exhibit washout during high flows, where the previously­accumulated sediment is resuspended and carried out of the structure. Washout concerns can be mitigated through frequent maintenance; appropriate sizing; high­flow bypass; and scour­reducing screens, baffles or protective measures. Permit applicability Many communities have water quality goals that target a specific reduction in total suspended solids (TSS). Because flow­through structures cannot effectively remove clays and most silts, these BMPs cannot meet water quality goals without additional downstream primary treatment. If sized appropriately, flow­through structures can effectively extend the life of downstream primary treatment systems by removing coarser sediments. Similarly, flow­through structures cannot remove dissolved phosphorus. Many communities have specific phosphorus reduction goals that are not possible to meet with use of these structures alone. While these structures alone do not meet the stormwater runoff volume performance goals or the stormwater runoff phosphorus removal performance goal developed as part of Minimal Impact Design Standards (MIDS), flow­through structures do qualify as pretreatment under the Minnesota Pollution Control agency (MPCA) Stormwater Construction Permit. Retrofit applicability Flow­through structures are often used in retrofit situations or in denser development (or redevelopment) where surface treatment is not feasible or cost­effective due to competing land demands. Flow­through structures generally have a smaller footprint than other treatment approaches and due to their placement underground, their use can allow the surface to be used for other purposes, such as parking or greenspace. Sump catch basins and manholes are a relatively common BMP; however, testing has shown that these BMPs are prone to washout, limiting their effectiveness. Sump catch basins and manholes that have already been constructed present a unique opportunity for retrofit with porous baffles that can prevent or limit washout (e.g., SAFL Baffle). If the characteristics of the existing sump catch basin or manhole are consistent with the design considerations for the installation of porous baffle retrofit, a retrofit may effectively, and inexpensively, improve the removal efficiency of the BMP. Cold climate suitability Flow­through structures are appropriate for usage in Minnesota and other cold climates. They are placed belowground, often below the frostline. Flow­through structures are particularly effective at capturing sediment from late­winter or early­spring snowmelt events that are often sediment­laden. Water quality benefits 5/27/2015 Flow­thr ough structures for pr e­tr eatment ­ Minnesota Stor mwater M anual http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Flow­through_structures_for_pre­treatment 3/7 Flow­through structures can remove nutrients that are attached to larger particles (coarse silts and sands) or nutrients that are attached to floating trash or debris. These BMPs are not effective at removing dissolved nutrients or nutrients attached to silts or clays. Water quantity benefits Flow­through structures do not promote volume reduction; however, stormwater reuse could be incorporated into the design, allowing reuse of the permanent pool in the BMP. General descriptions Underground storage structures Underground storage structures (also called underground settling devices) typically contain multiple chambers to remove sediment and floatables. The first chamber serves as a forebay, promoting settlement of suspended sediment, generally coarse silts and sands in a permanent pool with a minimum depth of 4 feet. The second chamber serves a skimming function, removing oils, grease, and floating debris. A baffle or submerged inverted pipe separates the second and third chambers, trapping floatables. The third chamber can be used for additional settlement of large particles, before the cleaner water is discharged from the structure. A permanent pool totaling 400 cubic feet per acre of tributary impervious surface should be provided throughout the entire structure.The footprint of these systems is generally much larger and they are typically more expensive than hydrodynamic separators. Hydrodynamic separators Due to the large size required to remove suspended solids in the underground storage structures, smaller­ footprint proprietary systems have become more common. The internal components of these devices create flow patterns and flow conditions that help remove suspended sediments during low flow conditions. Several of these hydrodynamic separators have been full­scale tested by the St. Anthony Falls Laboratory (SAFL) at the University of Minnesota, including BaySaver, CDS, Downstream Defender, ecoStorm, Environment 21, Stormceptor, and the Vortechs System (Wilson et al., 2009). Similar to underground storage structures, hydrodynamic separators include a permanent pool for sedimentation and a solid baffle or inverted outlet pipe to provide skimming to trap floatables. These systems vary in size and may contain several chambers. The manufacturers of the hydrodynamic separators provide product­specific design guidance, but rarely do the guidelines include considerations for high flows and associated washout. Sump catch basins and manholes A sump is a standard catch basin or manhole constructed with part of the structure located below the outlet, creating a permanent pool. Catch basins and manholes are not made for pretreatment of storm water; however, they can potentially function as pretreatment structures when the bottom of the structure is 5/27/2015 Flow­thr ough structures for pr e­tr eatment ­ Minnesota Stor mwater M anual http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Flow­through_structures_for_pre­treatment 4/7 significantly below the invert of the outlet pipe. Similar to the proprietary hydrodynamic devices, standard catch basins and manholes with deep sumps have a smaller footprint than an underground storage structure. Sumps are generally less expensive are more readily available than the hydrodynamic separators. Standard sumps have one chamber and sedimentation occurs due to flow patterns resulting from water plunging into the sump. Sedimentation in standard sumps occurs in the permanent pool. Sumps should be designed with a permanent pool of at least 3 feet. The outlet from the sump sometimes incorporates an inverted pipe to allow skimming of floatables such as debris and oil. As with proprietary systems, washout is a concern with sump catch basins and manholes (Saddoris et al., 2011; Howard et al., 2012). To mitigate the effects of washout, the University of Minnesota developed a porous baffle, called the SAFL Baffle, to modify the flow characteristics through sump manholes and reduce resuspension of previously­accumulated sediment. Full­scale testing determined that the SAFL Baffle proved quite effective at reducing resuspension and washout while adding very little head loss (Howard et al., 2012). The SAFL Baffle was tested with sump manholes and sump catch basins. Sump catch basins (receiving flow through a grate above and from an inlet pipe) present a different flow pattern than a sump manhole which does not receive flow from above. Based on research performed at SAFL, washout and resuspension is mitigated when the drainage area of the inflow pipe is at least three times greater than the drainage area of the grate above the catch basin. High flows from an inlet grate into a catch basin can plunge deeper into the sump and cause washout when horizontal flows from an inlet pipe are too low (McIntire et al., 2012). Therefore, porous screen/baffle retrofits, such as SAFL Baffle, are not recommended for headwater catch basins or when the depth of the sump is less than three feet. Design considerations General guidance Flow­through structures should be selected and designed to maximize suspended sediment removal given the treatment drainage area and its land use characteristics, available space for the structure, and presence of other stormwater BMPs in series. Design assistance of proprietary systems is generally provided by the manufacturer of the flow­through system. All flow­through structures have some propensity to washout during high flow conditions. Installation of a high­flow bypass can mitigate washout, essentially designing the systems to function as offline treatment devices, primarily treating low flows. Design assistance using SHSAM The Saint Anthony Falls Laboratory (SAFL) of University of Minnesota has performed extensive full­scale testing of many different types of flow­through structures to determine their removal efficiency functions that can assist the designer in selecting the appropriate type of flow­through structure and size the selected structure to meet the sediment removal goals. In 2012, ASTM International developed standards in testing removal efficiency of hydrodynamic separators (ASTM C1746/C1746M–12). The standard is primarily based on the testing conducted at the University of Minnesota. In addition to sediment removal, SAFL performed testing to determine the propensity for sediment washout under high flows for different structures. 5/27/2015 Flow­thr ough structures for pr e­tr eatment ­ Minnesota Stor mwater M anual http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Flow­through_structures_for_pre­treatment 5/7 The results of SAFL’s full­scale testing were used to build a computer program to predict the removal efficiency and washout for various flow­through devices under different conditions. The program is called SHSAM (Sizing Hydrodynamic Separators And Manholes). SHSAM is a computer program for predicting the amount of suspended sediments removed from stormwater runoff by a given hydrodynamic separator/standard sump over a given period of time, e.g., 15 years. SHSAM is comprised of a simple continuous runoff model, a generic sediment removal response function, and a generic sediment washout function. The table below summarizes the flow­through structures available for water quality modeling by SHSAM and whether the model is able to determine sediment removal efficiency and/or washout. SHSAM can be downloaded at [1]. Device Removal efficiency considered Washout considered BaySaver X CDS X Downstream Defender X X ecoStorm X X Environment 21 X X Stormceptor X X Vortechs System X Standard Sumps X X Standard Sumps with SAFL Baffle X X In order to assess the performance of hydrodynamic separators and sump manholes, the user of SHSAM should select local weather data and silica sand OK110 particle size distribution (PSD). The silica sand OK110 is a commercial particle size distribution used in testing these devices. This gradation has a median size of110 microns with 90 percent of particles between 100 and 240 microns, which represents fine sands in stormwater runoff. OK110 does not represent a typical particle size distribution of suspended sediments; rather, it provides an appropriate range of particle sizes that are expected to be removed by flow­through structures. The removal efficiencies achieved by flow­through structures using OK110 are not the removal efficiencies that these devices will achieve for a typical range of suspended sediment particle sizes. OK110 allows the designer to determine how well the pretreatment structure can remove coarse silt and sand which would in turn decrease the maintenance frequency of the downstream primary BMP. Note that an ASTM standard is currently being developed for a consistent type of particle­size­distribution to be used for testing hydrodynamic separators. Performance Assessment The SHSAM software provides a useful tool for assessing the performance of a limited number of hydrodynamic devices and standard sumps. All these devices have been tested based on a mass­balance approach with repeatable results. To assess the performance of hydrodynamic separators which are not included in the SHSAM software, the devices should be evaluated using the testing methods described in ASTM Standards C1746 and C1745. Subsequently, the device performance can be assessed based on the site specific conditions. 5/27/2015 Flow­thr ough structures for pr e­tr eatment ­ Minnesota Stor mwater M anual http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Flow­through_structures_for_pre­treatment 6/7 Flow­through structures cannot remove fine silts and clays, and thus generally can only remove a small fraction of presumed suspended solids particle size distribution. As such, their primary purpose is pretreatment and removal of coarse silts and sands. If properly designed and maintained, flow­through structures can remove up to 70 to 80 percent of coarse silts and sands, which can be represented by OK110 particle size distribution. This removal efficiency for coarse sediment equates to approximately a 20 percent removal of TSS using a particle size distribution with a broader range of sizes (e.g., EPA NURP particle size distribution). Removal of 20 percent TSS results in approximately a 10 percent reduction in total phosphorus. The nutrient loading removal of the downstream primary treatment BMP typically assumes pretreatment; therefore, the nutrient removal from the pretreatment device (such as a flow­through structure) cannot typically be added to the nutrient removal of the downstream primary treatment BMP. Attaining typical TSS and nutrient removal goals will require treatment by a downstream primary BMP. Removing a greater fraction of coarse sediments with pretreatment structures will allow the primary treatment structure to meet or exceed its anticipated design life. Maintenance Frequent maintenance of flow­through structures is essential to prevent resuspension of settled particles in subsequent storms. Ideally, structures would be cleaned out after each water quality rain event (described as 0.5 inches of precipitation by the Minnesota Stormwater Manual), although that may not be practical or even necessary, given the drainage area characteristics and resulting sediment load. Manufacturers of hydrodynamic separators recommend a frequency of once a year, which is most effective if it is done before the beginning of winter. However, through frequent inspection of accumulated sediment and screen/baffle clogging over the first two years following installation, a structure­specific maintenance program can be developed. The SHSAM software provides site­specific guidance on frequency of cleaning to mitigate resuspension, which can be implemented during the inspection/monitoring period and modified after obtaining more precise and distinct results on the performance of the device during the inspection/monitoring period. Note that most devices have a maximum capacity of 1 foot in the sump, i.e., the pretreatment device shall be cleaned before 1 foot of sediment accumulates in the sump, however, if the sump is shallow (less than 3 feet), the sump may reach maximum capacity before 1 foot of sediment accumulation and require more frequent maintenance. All flow­through structures should be constructed to facilitate access of maintenance vehicles and equipment. Proprietary devices may have additional maintenance requirements that should be followed. At a minimum, structures and screens/baffles should be fully cleaned once a year. Vacuum trucks can be used to remove accumulated sediment and oils/grease, although compacted sediments may require full dewatering and manual removal of sediments. Currently, sediment removed from flow­through structures is not generally considered to be potentially hazardous and is not subject to testing for proper disposal. All applicable local, state and federal laws should be followed in the disposal of accumulated sediments and floatables, including hydrocarbons. References Howard, A.K., O. Mohseni, J.S. Gulliver, and H.G. Stefan (2012). Hydraulic Analysis of Suspended Sediment Removal from Storm Water in a Standard Sump. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering. ASCE. June 2012. 138(6): 491­502. McIntire, K. D., Howard, A. K., Mohseni, O., and Gulliver, J.S. (2012). Assessment and Recommendations for the Operation of Standard Sumps as Best Management Practices for Stormwater Treatment, Volume 2. Final Report. Minnesota Department of Transportation. May 2012. 5/27/2015 Flow­thr ough structures for pr e­tr eatment ­ Minnesota Stor mwater M anual http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Flow­through_structures_for_pre­treatment 7/7 MPCA (2005). The Minnesota Stormwater Manual. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. November 2005. Saddoris, D. A., McIntire, K. D., Mohseni, O., and Gulliver, J. S. (2010). Hydrodynamic Separator Sediment Retention Testing. Final Report. Minnesota Department of Transportation. March 2010. Wilson, M.A., and O. Mohseni, J. S. Gulliver, R.M. Hozalski, and H.G. Stefan (2009). Assessment of Hydrodynamic Separators for Storm­Water Treatment. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering. ASCE, May 2009. 135(5): 383­392. Retrieved from "http://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Flow­through_structures_for_pre­ treatment&oldid=18077"  Search This page was last modified on 25 February 2015, at 09:34. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency | 651­296­6300, 800­657­3864 | Assistance | Web site policy © 2015 by Minnesota Pollution Control Agency • Powered by MediaWiki Jellyfish® Filter Solutions Guide ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS 2 © 2015 Contech Engineered Solutions LLC UrbanGreen® Stormwater Solutions from Contech Selecting the Right Stormwater Solution Just Got Easier... It’s simple to choose the right low impact development (LID) solution to achieve your runoff reduction and treatment goals with the Contech UrbanGreen® Staircase. First, select the runoff reduction practices that are most appropriate for your site, paying particular attention to pretreatment needs. If the entire design storm cannot be retained, select a best management practice (BMP) to treat the balance. Finally, select a detention system to address any outstanding downstream erosion. Learn more about all of our stormwater technologies at www.ContechES.com/urbangreen Learn About the Jellyfish® Filter Go online and watch our animation to learn how the Jellyfish Filter works. The animation also highlights important features of the Jellyfish Filter including… • Applications • Performance test results • Inspection and maintenance • Regulatory approvals To view the Jellyfish Filter animation, visit: www.conteches.com/jellyfish Filter 3 Learn more at www.ContechES.com/jellyfish Filtration as a Stormwater Management Strategy Stormwater regulations are increasingly calling for more robust treatment levels. In addition to the removal of suspended solids, many regulations now require best management practices to remove significant amounts of nutrients, metals, and other common pollutants found in stormwater runoff. Meeting these regulations often requires the use of a filtration solution. Low Impact Development (LID) and Green Infrastructure (GI) are complimented by filtration solutions. Benefits of LID and GI systems include retaining runoff and aesthetic appeal. Keeping LID and GI sites free from fine sediments, oils, trash, and debris while functioning as designed can be time consuming and costly. As a result, the practice of combining LID and GI with filtration is becoming more common. Providing a single point of maintenance promotes proper system functionality and increases the aesthetic appeal by removing unsightly trash and debris. The Jellyfish Filter is a stormwater quality treatment technology featuring high surface area and high flow rate membrane filtration at low driving head. By incorporating pretreatment with light-weight membrane filtration, the Jellyfish Filter removes floatables, trash, oil, debris, TSS, fine silt-sized particles, and a high percentage of particulate-bound pollutants; including phosphorus and nitrogen, metals and hydrocarbons. The high surface area membrane cartridges, combined with up flow hydraulics, frequent backwashing, and rinseable/reusable cartridges ensures long-lasting performance. The Jellyfish® Filter - Setting New Standards in Stormwater Treatment A Jellyfish Filter Curb Inlet pretreats runoff entering a bioretention system The Jellyfish Filter. 4 Jellyfish® Filter Features and Benefits Jellyfish® Filter Applications • Urban development • Highways, airports, seaports, and military installations • Commercial and residential development, infill and redevelopment, and stormwater quality retrofit applications • Pretreatment for Low Impact Development (LID), Green Infrastructure (GI), infiltration, and rainwater harvesting and reuse systems • Industrial sites A Jellyfish Filter pretreats a bioretention/ bioswale system at a commercial site in Ontario, Canada. A Jellyfish Filter provides treatment at an Industrial Park in Lake Tahoe, Nevada. A catch basin Jellyfish Filter is installed in a commercial development in Virginia. Features BeneFits 1. High surface area, high flow rate membrane filtration 1. Long-lasting and effective stormwater treatment 2. Highest design treatment flow rate per cartridge (up to 80 gpm (5 L/S) 2. Compact system with a small footprint, lower construction cost 3. Low driving head (typically 18 inches or less (457 mm)) 3. Design Flexibility, lower construction cost 4. Lightweight cartridges with passive backwash 4. Easy maintenance and low life-cycle cost 5. 3rd party verified field performance per TARP protocol 5. Superior pollutant capture with confidence 5 Learn more at www.ContechES.com/jellyfish Jellyfish® Filter Field Performance Test Results The Jellyfish Filter is approved through numerous state and federal verification programs, including: • New Jersey Corporation for Advanced Technology (NJCAT) – Field Performance Verification per TARP Tier II Protocol • New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) – Certification • Washington State Department of Ecology (TAPE – CULD) • Maryland Department of the Environment (MD DOE) • Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) • Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ) • Ontario Ministry of the Environment – New Environmental Technology Evaluation (NETE) – Certification Sources: TARP II Field Study – 2012 JF 4-2-1 Configuration MRDC Floatables Testing – 2008 JF6-6-1 Configuration Jellyfish® Filter Approvals The pleated tentacles of the Jellyfish Filter provide a large surface area for pollutant removal. Pollutant oF ConCern % removal Total Trash 99% Total Suspended Solids (TSS)89% Total Phosphorus (TP)59% Total Nitrogen (TN)51% Total Copper (TCu)>80% Total Zinc (TZn)>50% Turbidity (NTU)<15% 6 Jellyfish® Filter Configurations The Jellyfish Filter is available in a variety of configurations. Typically, 18 inches (457 mm) of driving head is designed into the system. For low drop sites, the designed driving head can be less. Manhole Curb Inlet Grated Inlet Vault Lightweight Jellyfish Filter Configurations Custom configurations include Jellyfish Filter tanks made from fiberglass for site specific applications. A Jellyfish Filter was constructed from fiberglass to reduce the weight of the system, allowing for a suspended installation above an underground parking structure. The reduced weight eliminated the need for structural changes, and suspending the Jellyfish resulted in no loss of parking space, maximizing real-estate value. Other custom configurations include: • On-line capability (internal bypass) • Peak Diversion Vault Configurations 7 Learn more at www.ContechES.com/jellyfish Jellyfish® Filter Maintenance Inspecting and maintaining the Jellyfish Filter is easier than you may think. Watch the Jellyfish inspection and maintenance video at www.ContechES.com/jellyfish Jellyfish® Filter Inspection and Maintenance Video The Jellyfish Filter cartridge is light and easy to clean. Inspection and maintenance activities for the Jellyfish Filter typically include: • Visual inspection of deck, cartridge lids, and maintenance access wall. • Vacuum extraction of oil, floatable trash/debris, and sediment from manhole sump. • External rinsing and re-installing of filter cartridges. • Replacement of filter cartridge tentacles as needed. Cartridge replacement intervals vary by site; typical replacement is anticipated every 2-5 years. We print our brochures entirely on Forest Stewardship Council certified paper. FSC certification ensures that the paper in our brochures contain fiber from well- managed and responsibly harvested forests that meet strict environmental and socioeconomic standards. FSC Jellyfish Brochure (5M) PDF Revision 4/15 NOTHING IN THIS CATALOG SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS AN EXPRESSED WARRANTY OR AN IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. SEE THE CONTECH STANDARD CONDITION OF SALES (VIEWABLE AT WWW.CONTECHES.COM/COS) FOR MORE INFORMATION. ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS ©2015 Contech Engineered Solutions LLC 800-338-1122 | www.ContechES.com All Rights Reserved. Printed in the USA. Get Social With Us! ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS PiPE SoLUtionSMeeting project needs for durability, hydraulics, corrosion resistance, and stiffness • Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP) • Steel Reinforced Polyethylene (SRPE) • High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) • Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) tREAtmEnt SoLUtionSHelping to satisfy stormwater and wastewater management requirements on land development projects • Stormwater & Wastewater Treatment • Detention/Infiltration • Rainwater Harvesting • Biofiltration/Bioretention StRUCtURES SoLUtionSProviding innovative options and support for crossings, culverts, and bridges • Plate, Precast & Truss bridges • Hard Armor • Retaining Walls • Tunnel Liner Plate ComPLEtE SitE SoLUtionS LEARn moRE • Access project profiles, photos, videos and more online at www.ContechES.com/jellyfish ConnECt With US • Call us at 800-338-1122 • Contact your local rep at www.ContechES.com/localresources StARt A PRojECt • Submit your system requirements on our product Design Worksheet www.ContechES.com/start-project USE oUR onLinE tooLS • Low Impact Development Site Planner www.ContechES.com/LiDsiteplanner