The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWPO201700070 Other 2017-09-28Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project # 0250-002-R98 Hydraulic Design Report Albemarle County, Virginia August 24, 2017 Prepared by: Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. 1700 Willow Lawn Dr., Suite 200 Richmond, VA 23230 Owner: Albemarle County nathan H Oliver 17.08.25 13:31:26-04'00' Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Richmond,VA Kimley)))Horn This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS DRAINAGE NARRATIVE APPENDIX A: SITE INFORMATION USDA Soil Survey Map & Data Recommended Maximum Water Velocities per AASHTO Soil Type APPENDIX B: DRAINAGE AREA MAPS Pre -Development Drainage Area Map Post -Development Drainage Area Map APPENDIX C: WATER QUALITY Water Quality Compliance Summary Water Quality Compliance Calculations APPENDIX D: WATER QUANTITY Water Quantity Compliance Summary Applicable Storm Sewer and Hydraulic Grade Line Computations (See Appendix F for Additional Applicable Computations) APPENDIX E: DETENTION PIPE DESIGN Hydraflow Model - Hydrographs and Reports APPENDIX F: STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM CALCULATIONS Storm Sewer and Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Curb Inlet Spread and Throat Length Calculations Grate Inlet Calculations Ditch Calculations INTRODUCTION Project Description Ivy Road is an existing three -lane undivided roadway with a mix of narrow shoulders, curb, and curb and gutter between Old Ivy Road (Route 601) and the Route 29/Route 250 Bypass interchange. Ivy Road generally runs east to west from the Charlottesville Business District to Crozet. Ivy Road is an important transportation corridor, serving as a connection between the Charlottesville Business District and the Route 29/Route 250 Bypass. Ivy Road (Business Route 250) is functionally classified as Urban Principal Arterial and is on the National Highway System (NHS). This project will provide bicycle lanes and concrete sidewalk along the south side of Ivy Road for approximately 1,800 linear feet from the intersection with Old Ivy Road to the intersection with Stillfried Lane. Project Area The applicable project site ("A -Site") is 1.93 acres. This area is likely to be disturbed during construction. There are other sections of the work area on this project that are considered maintenance work. See Appendix B for more information. ExistingDrainage Conditions In the existing condition, all stormwater runoff within the project limits is ultimately captured by curb inlets, grate inlets, or end sections and conveyed via storm sewer systems to outfalls located off -site. Two analysis points ("outfalls") have been identified at locations that collectively include all impacted drainage areas. One analysis point (Outfall A) is located within a storm sewer pipe, immediately upstream of its discharge point. The other analysis point (Outfall B) is located within an existing pipe network that is well upstream of the ultimate discharge point of the storm sewer system. Outfall A is located within the Moores Creek watershed. Outfall B is located within the Rivanna River — Meadow Creek watershed. • Outfall A o This outfall is an existing 36" concrete pipe leaving existing structure #452. The pipe discharges into a channel on the western side of Reed Lane. o In the existing condition, this outfall collects stormwater runoff from along Ivy Road, west of the high point near station 122+00. o Additional off -site runoff reaches this outfall from areas north of the Buckingham Branch Railroad tracks. This runoff crosses the railroad tracks via culverts that discharge into an existing ditch along the north side of Ivy Road. The stormwater in the ditch then enters the existing storm sewer system that leads to the outfall via pipes that cross Ivy Road to the south. There appears to be an existing pipe underneath Ivy Road near station 117+50 that has a washed-out headwall. This likely creates a flooding condition as the backed -up water must then reach the next downstream pipe crossing near station 116+00. 4 o Additional off -site runoff reaches this outfall from the developments to the south of Ivy Road, all the way up to the peak of Lewis Mountain. This runoff enters the existing storm sewer system that leads to Outfall A. o There are anecdotal reports of flooding along the route of the existing storm sewer network leading to Outfall A. Analysis shows that this system is significantly over -capacity in the existing condition with an HGL that is above the ground elevation. See Appendix D for more information. • Outfall B o This outfall is an assumed existing 42" concrete pipe leaving an assumed junction between the existing 30" concrete pipe from existing structure #409 and the existing 42" concrete pipe from existing structure #440. The extension of the existing 42" concrete pipe and the junction were not verified via survey due to inaccessibility. However, the Charlottesville GIS website shows that these two branches of the existing storm sewer network combine and then continue east towards downtown. The assumed junction is noted as existing structure #000 on the plans. This condition is assumed across the existing and proposed analyses and does not influence the outcome of the proposed stormwater management improvements. The 10-year post -development Q is less than the 10-year pre - development Q at the analysis point. o In the existing condition, this outfall collects stormwater runoff from along Ivy Road, east of the high point near station 122+00. o Additional off -site runoff reaches this outfall from areas north of the Buckingham Branch Railroad tracks. This runoff either crosses the railroad tracks via culverts that discharge into an existing ditch along the north side of Ivy Road, or is captured in an existing storm sewer network that runs along Old Ivy Road and enters the survey limits at existing structure #440. The stormwater in the channel along the north side of Ivy Road flows east to the intersection between Ivy Road and Old Ivy Road. An existing culvert or pipe in this area, which would be an inlet for the accumulated ditch stormwater, could not be found. Therefore, it must be buried if it exists (In this case, the stormwater in the ditch would eventually overtop the channel bank along Old Ivy Road and enter the existing storm sewer network at existing structure #439). Anecdotal reports of the existing conditions in this area suggest that this occurs today. o Additional off -site runoff reaches this outfall from the developments to the south of Ivy Road, all the way up to the peak of Lewis Mountain. This runoff enters the existing storm sewer system along Ivy Road that leads to Outfall B. o Analysis shows that the existing storm sewer system that leads to Outfall B is over -capacity in some pipes along Ivy Road, with an HGL that is above the ground elevation. This outfall was only analyzed along the existing storm sewer trunk line on the southern side of Ivy Road that enters the outfall junction via the existing 30" concrete pipe. o Some assumptions were made in this analysis due to inaccessible inverts within some existing structures. o Analysis of the existing storm sewer trunk line along Old Ivy Road was not completed due to the insignificance of project improvements contributing to the drainage area reaching Outfall B from that branch (There is only 0.01 acres of new impervious area within a total drainage area of 39.07 acres). See Appendix D for more information. PROPOSED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Overview In the post -development condition, all stormwater runoff will continue to be captured by either an existing or proposed inlet structure and then conveyed via existing or proposed storm sewer to one of two outfall points. The proposed drainage improvements are as follows: • Outfall A o Proposed curb inlets will be installed to capture runoff from the project site. These inlets are routed via proposed storm sewer to a detention pipe between structures 3-4 and 313-1, which controls the design storm outflow and then discharges into the remainder of the proposed storm sewer network. o A grate inlet and storm sewer crossing of Ivy Road is proposed near station 117+50. This will give any stormwater that was ponding in this area due to the existing headwall blockage an inlet into the storm sewer network it was likely intended to drain into. The proposed grate inlet does not fully mitigate the ponding issue in this area under the design criteria (10-year storm with 50% clogging). However, it improves the existing condition. Also, based on the grading in this area, any ponding water would continue downstream to existing structure #436-A before reaching the roadway elevation, as it would today. o The existing ditch, along the north side of Ivy Road, draining from the high point near station 122+00 west to the proposed grate inlet will be cleared and re -graded with the proposed design to redefine the channel and improve existing drainage conditions. o The existing storm sewer trunk line between proposed structures 313-6 and 313-9 will be re -constructed to increase capacity and address the existing flooding concerns in this area and reduce the stormwater backup into the proposed detention pipe during the design storm. • Outfall B o Proposed curb inlets will be installed to capture runoff from the project site. These inlets are routed via proposed and existing storm sewer to a detention pipe between structures 4-2 and 4-3, which controls the design storm outflow and then discharges into the remainder of the proposed storm sewer network. Shortly thereafter, it ties -in to the existing storm sewer network. o A proposed curb inlet top is to be installed at structure 5-1 to replace the existing grate inlet top at this location. This will allow the inlet to adequately capture runoff from the road based on the proposed design. o A grate inlet and storm sewer connection underneath Old Ivy Road is proposed near station 134+25. This will give any stormwater that was ponding in this area 6 in the existing condition an inlet into the storm sewer network it was likely intended to drain into. The proposed grate inlet does not fully mitigate the ponding issue in this area under the design criteria (10-year storm with 50% clogging). However, it improves the existing condition and gives stormwater runoff an inlet where there is none currently. o The existing ditch, along the north side of Ivy Road, draining from the high point near station 122+00 east to the proposed grate inlet will be cleared and re -graded with the proposed design to define an adequate channel and improve existing drainage conditions. Methodology The proposed drainage system is designed to collect, detain, and convey the stormwater runoff adequately and improve the existing drainage conditions when full improvements are not practical. Inlet and storm sewer capacities and hydraulic grade line calculations were performed using the Rational method. GEOPAK Drainage software was used to analyze curb inlet capacity under a design storm intensity of 4 inches/hour. Grate inlet capacity was calculated manually via a spreadsheet using the 10-year design storm and VDOT Drainage Manual practices. StormCAD software was used to analyze storm sewer capacity and the hydraulic grade line under a 10-year design storm. HGL calculations were also performed with VDOT methodology. However, the VDOT numbers were judged to be too extreme based on the nature of the existing storm sewer inadequacies. The StormCAD HGL calculations were used for design purposes, because they more closely resemble observed conditions. Inlet and storm sewer calculations are presented in Appendix F. Times of concentration for overland flow were calculated using the Seelye method. Times of concentration for shallow concentrated flow were calculated using the TR-55 method. Times of concentration for channel flow were calculated using the Kirpich method. Times of concentration for off -site storm sewer were calculated manually, assuming an average velocity of 6 ft/s. Stormwater runoff calculations for the detention pipes were performed using the Rational method. Because the proposed detention pipes are in -line with the rest of the storm sewer networks, Rational methodology was maintained to more accurately analyze the conditions at Outfalls A and B. Detention pipes were designed to detain enough stormwater so that each existing storm sewer pipe downstream of the detention systems would convey a smaller post - development Q than pre -development Q up until, and including at, the analysis points. Detention pipes were also designed to contain the 100-year storm within the pipes and account for the HGL elevation of the downstream storm sewer as the tailwater condition. Detention pipes were analyzed using Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension software. The resulting models and calculations are presented in Appendix E. 7 Design Parameters Design Storms: 2-Year; 10-Year; 100-Year Manning's n-Values: Use n-Value Concrete Pipes 0.013 Pavement/Gutter Flow 0.015 CN Values: Land Cover A -Soils B-Soils C-Soils D-Soils Forest/Open Space 30 55 70 77 Managed Turf 39 61 74 80 Impervious 98 98 98 98 B, D, and E Factors: Return Period B D E 2-Year 49.020 10.500 0.820 10-Year 46.950 9.500 0.730 100-Year 31.090 5.000 0.550 Source: GEOPAK Drainage Library — Rainfall Data for Albemarle County Minimum Pipe Size: 15" Minimum Proposed Pipe Slope: 0.30% WATER QUANTITY COMPLIANCE This project must comply with part IIB of the VSMP regulations, which stipulates post - development stormwater runoff must meet Channel Protection criteria and Flood Control criteria. These criteria are addressed at each outfall as follows: • Outfall A is a man-made existing concrete storm sewer pipe. Therefore, this outfall meets Channel Protection criteria because concrete pipe is non -erosive. Outfall A utilizes a stormwater detention pipe to achieve Flood Protection compliance. The overall 10-year Q in the post -development condition is 143.27 cfs, which is less than the 144.00 cfs in the existing condition. • Outfall B is a man-made existing concrete storm sewer pipe. Therefore, this outfall meets Channel Protection criteria because concrete pipe is non -erosive. Outfall B utilizes a stormwater detention pipe to achieve Flood Protection compliance. The overall 10-year Q in the post -development condition is 79.90 cfs, which is less than the 81.55 cfs in the existing condition. Summary water quantity tables and calculations are presented in Appendix D. WATER QUALITY COMPLIANCE This project meets water quality compliance entirely through the purchase of nutrient credits. No BMPs are proposed to be utilized for water quality compliance. The following table summarizes the pre -development and post -development site conditions and phosphorus loading conditions. Additional water quality calculations are included in Appendix C. "A -SITE" MANAGED FORESTED ADJUSTED IMPERVIOUS Total Load Reduction SCENARIO [AREA] AREA (AC.) TURF AREA AREA P LOAD Required (Ib/yr) 0.78 (AC) (AC.) (AC.) (LB/YR) PRE- Total Load Reduction DEVELOPMENT 1.93 0.72 1.10 0.11 2.02 Provided by BMPs (lb/yr) 0.00 POST- Remaining TP Credits to be DEVELOPMENT 1.93 0.90 1.02 0.00 2.43 Purchased (lb/yr) 0.78 APPENDIX A N 716500 716700 716900 717100 38° 3' 12" N Pa i a 250 .• 0 r` O 29 O o / M ; I• p 0 rWmW WEB M N y j 4VI f11 r. a. N ti O O ti 380 2' 18" N 716500 716700 716900 717100 Map Scale: 1:8,060 i printed on B landscape (17" x 11") sheet. Meters N 0 100 200 400 600 Feet 0 350 700 1400 2100 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: lfrM Zone 17N WGS84 UISDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Hydrologic Soil Group —Albemarle County, Virginia, and Charlottesville City, Virginia 717300 717500 717700 717900 718100 718300 718500 718700 718900 719100 41 it Ft I I I I 717300 717500 717700 717900 718100 718300 718500 718700 718900 719100 Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey L 719300 38° 3' 12" N 0 V i 0 0 N 0 O M V M 0 0 M 38o 2' 18" N 719300 o R 12/16/2015 Pagel of 5 Z O G O LL Z Ca G 0 Z /LU V LU J a O O N O L C H � a� C O — C N O tl) A N U U N U 0-0 O U tl) N N Q (6 N (6 Q NE (6 �p N p 0) E O N .Q E (6 (6 Q M UA E (6 (6 N p C > f p Zi o -0 C C > Q N '6 N N� N� E Q cL N Q (6 O (6 > m E 0) E (u O 'O 6 C 3 O C (6 ~ O cn N p U C O E N N (6 C rn� .� E C (uI U N (6 tl) — W E Q voi 2 O O o N s N ( ) O O >p O U cu > (6 (6 O (n N U N (6 (6 cu N N Q (6 p L N U O 6 U tl) N U) N N N N� N N N _ � Q O N '6 O N N O- N �O U l!i .O N U N w N '( W O N Q � N O O 0 O a� s> N N m a� a� U o rn m vi vi m O O Q N E N W tl) C p 7 3 Q O (n o Qm aoi U U E E > N O ( Cc: OU CN w C 7 U chE chUN CL a) o Epo mN EO N (6 Q N 7 u) U (0 cn N N E N — O O E N O O cn .0 > O ^ L C E U Q O O m m U U C U Q m (u a) — Q U> E .S N o _0 N N Z E N tl) Utl) (p (p N N m N >' N C N Q> >+ > (6 N C (0 N U) m ❑ ❑ C m- E N p C (6 (� 2 � -O O -p Q N Q N N C E U a) E C O '6 a N 2 (6 C~ i a 0 .O 3 (6 .� (OA (n (6 m 2 O U A C L N ) > ( n N O N N Q CQ, 'O E U U Ua 2Q.Q H� U U U U N 7 } (o o .S � v 0) N C I U C 0 O N 0 C a) E d) —_ U O E E � (A -0 O 0 N N N p N Zi N N Q O O w Q O O_ N O O (p E T m Q o m E N N 2 N O tl) Q N N N O O 0) O O ,O) N O 'O �p 0 '6 L C O' O (6 O_ m O -p 'Q 2) p N E m O ❑ ON H U . (4 N 0 y C m U N L L °- 0 0 N o L a E N m o a° a U U ❑ z y in O m w m o m 3 v Q C R r N y f Cu R R F m 0 0 0 w y C 0 y 0 y Q O > N c " m Q o rn a m U z a m U z o a. a m Q m U ❑ Q m U ❑ Q m RIIys❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑oz z z z oe■�� ` Li 'Q Q V1 Tiw. Hydrologic Soil Group -Albemarle County, Virginia, and Charlottesville City, Virginia Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soil Group- Summary by Map Unit - Albemarle County, Virginia (VA003) Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 2C Albemarle fine sandy C 7.8 1.5% loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 2D Albemarle fine sandy C 20.5 3.9% loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 3D Albemarle very stony fine C 1.7 0.3% sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 14C Chester loam, 7 to 15 B 7.4 1.4% percent slopes 14D Chester loam, 15 to 25 B 4.3 0.8% percent slopes 19B Cullen loam, 2 to 7 B 0.4 0.1 % percent slopes 19C Cullen loam, 7 to 15 B 7.2 1.3% percent slopes 21 B Culpeper fine sandy B 44.6 8.4% loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 21 C Culpeper fine sandy B 52.7 9.9% loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 21 D Culpeper fine sandy B 0.4 0.1 % loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 B 5.8 1.1 % percent slopes 36C Hayesville loam, 7 to 15 B 13.9 2.6% percent slopes 36D Hayesville loam, 15 to 25 B 8.1 1.5% percent slopes 40D Hazel very stony loam, B 6.7 1.3% 15 to 25 percent slopes 40E Hazel very stony loam, B 25.7 4.8% 25 to 45 percent slopes 56B Meadowville loam, 2 to 7 A 4.0 0.7% percent slopes 66D Parker very stony loam, A 7.5 1.4% 15 to 25 percent slopes [jSDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 12/16/2015 41� Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 5 Hydrologic Soil Group —Albemarle County, Virginia, and Charlottesville City, Virginia Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit — Albemarle County, Virginia (VA003) Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 66E Parker very stony loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes A 10.4 2.0% 88 Udorthents, loamy 72.8 13.7% 91 Urban land 54.2 10.2% Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 366.2 67.0% Totals for Area of Interest 631.9 100.0% Hydrologic Soil Group— Summary by Map Unit — Charlottesville City, Virginia (VA540) Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 88 Udorthents, loamy 30.6 5.8% 91 Urban land 51.8 9.7% 102C Albemarle - Urban land B 38.9 7.3% complex, 7 to 15 percent slopes 102D Albemarle - Urban land B 24.1 4.5% complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes 119C Cullen - Urban land C 12.9 2.4% complex, 7 to 15 percent slopes 121 B Culpeper - Urban land C 6.1 1.2% complex, 2 to 7 percent slopes 121 C Culpeper - Urban land C 11.2 2.1 % complex, 7 to 15 percent slopes Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 176.7 33.0% Totals for Area of Interest 531.9 100.0% [jSDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 12/16/2015 41� Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 5 Hydrologic Soil Group —Albemarle County, Virginia, and Charlottesville City, Virginia Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long -duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained orwell drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified Tie -break Rule: Higher [jSDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 12/16/2015 41� Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 5 of 5 Chapter 7 - Ditches and Channels Appendix 713-2 Recommended Maximum Water Velocities and Manning's n as a Function of Soil Type and Flow Depth Fortier and Maximum Manning's ASSHTO ASSHTO Scobey Soil Water n Classification Soil Description Description Velocity -Flow (ft/s) Depth 0.5-2.0 ft BROKEN ROCK and COBBLES Cobbles and 5.5 0.030 Shingles A-1-a Stone fragments or GRAVEL, with or Coarse without well -graded' binder gravel, non- 4.5 0.025 colloidal same same Fine gravel 3.5 0.020 Graded loam A-1-b Coarse SAND, with or without well- to cobbles 4.0 0.030 graded' binder when non- colloidal A-2 Mixture of GRAVEL and SAND, with Graded silts (A-2-4. A-2-5. silty or clay fines3, or nonplastic silt to cobbles 4.5 0.030 A-2-6, A-2-7) fines when colloidal same same Sandy loam, 2.0 0.020 non -colloidal A-3 Fine SAND, without silty clay fines; e.g. Fine Sand, beach sand or stream -deposited fine non -colloidal 1.5 0.020 sand same same Silt loam, 2.3 0.020 non -colloidal Non- to moderately plastic SILT; Alluvial silts, A-4 mixtures of silt, sand, and/or gravel, non -colloidal 2.3 0.020 with a minimum silt content of 36% A-5 Moderately to highly plastic SILT. Soil; Ordinary firm mixtures of silt, sand, and/or gravel, loam 2.5 0.020 with a minimum fines3 content of 36% A-6 Plastic CLAY soil; mixtures of clay, Alluvial silts, sand, and/or gravel, with a minimum colloidal 3.5 0.025 fines3 content of 36% A-7 Moderately to highly plastic, CLAY; Stiff clay, mixtures of clay, sand, and/or gravel, very colloidal 4.0 0.025 with a minimum clay content of 36% 1) Well -graded -containing a broad range of particle sizes with no intermediate sizes missing. 1) Binder - soil particles consisting of fine sand, silt, and clay. 2) Fines - particle sizes finer than 0.074 mm (e.g., silt and clay particles). 3) Plasticity - ability of a soil mass to deform at constant volume without cracking or crumbling. + Relationship between AASHTO classification and Fortier and Scobey description is loosely correlated. 1 of 2 VDOT Drainage Manual APPENDIX B 0 DRAINAGE AREA MAP PRE -DEVELOPMENT 0 I o� flll//I 411111 V, i', - O, Pre- DeveIopment "A -Site" Land Cover OUrFALL A OU FALL 6 AREA (ACRES) ❑.69 123 PRE-DEV.I MP. COVER (ACRES) ❑.17 ❑.54 PRE-DEV. CN 70 77 LEGEND PROJECT AREA ("A -SITE") - - - MAINTENANCE AREA (NOT PART OF "A -SITE") - - - - - OVERALL DRAINAGE AREA - PRE -DEVELOPMENT -A-SITE-IMPERVIOUS LAND COVER , / O O SCALE 6 260' 400' O o Post-Development "A -Site" Land Cover QUrFALL A I OU FALL B AREA (ACRES) 0.69 123 POST-OEV.IMP. COVER (ACRES) ❑20 ❑.71 POST-OEV. CN 72 82 NW, DRAINAGE AREA Man INLET AREA [AQ 3-1 033 3-2 0A0 3-10 031 3B-5 2239 3B-6 0.15 3 B-8 136 3 B-9 1.71 4-1 0188 4-2 038 4-3 025 4-6 0A3 5-1 024 5-2 1729 LEGEND PROJECT AREA ("A -SITE") — — - MAINTENANCE AREA (NOT PART OF "A -SITE") - - - - - OVERALL DRAINAGE AREA — — - INLET AREAS — POST -DEVELOPMENT -A-SITE-IMPERVIOUS LAND COVER �a / _ o 3-/ 3-/O -� 4-2 4-3 .9 2 � �P,✓ \ �,. ,�� 4-/ / J 4-6 C O SCALE 0 260' 400' APPENDIX C Virginia Runoff Reduction Method Worksheet DEQ Virginia Runoff Reduction Method Re -Development Compliance Spreadsheet - Version 3.0 BMP Design Specifications List: 2013 Draft Stds & Specs Site Summary - Linear Development Project*** Total Rainfall (in): 43 Total Disturbed Acreage: 1.93 Site Land Cover Summary Pre-ReDevelopment Land Cover (acresl A soils B Soils C Soils D Soils Totals %of Total Forest/Open (acres) 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.11 6 Managed Turf (acres) 0.00 1.10 0.00 0.00 1.10 57 Impervious Cover (acres) 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.72 37 1.93 100 Post-ReDevelopment Land Cover (acres) A soils B Soils C Soils D Soils Totals %of Total Forest/Open (acres) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Managed Turf(acres) 0.00 1.02 0.00 0.00 1.02 53 Impervious Cover (acres) 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.90 47 1A3 100 Site Tv and Land Cover Nutrient Loads Final Post -Development Past- Post- Adjusted Pre- (Post-ReDevelopment ReDevelopment Development ReDevel opment & New Impervious) p ) (New Impervious) Site Rv 0.55 0.51 0.95 0.51 Treatment Volume (ft) 3,865 3,220 645 3,220 TP Load (lb/yr) 2.43 2.02 0.41 2.02 Total TP Load Reduction Required (lb/yr) 0.78 N/A*** ***This is a linear development project Final Post -Development Load (Post-ReDevelopment & New Impervious) Pre- ReDevelopment TN Load (lb/yr) 117.37 14.77 Site Compliance Summary- ***Linear Development Project Maximum %Reduction Required Below 20% Pre-ReDevelopment Load Total Runoff Volume Reduction (it') 0 Total TP Load Reduction Achieved (Ib/yr) 0.00 Total TN Load Reduction Achieved (lb/yr) 0.00 Remaining Post Development TP Load (lb/yr) 2.43 Remaining TP Load Reduction (Ib/yr) Required 0 78 Pre- Final Post Development Post-ReDevelopment TP ReDevelopment TP Load per acre TP Load per acre (lb/acre/yr) Load per acre (lb/acre/yr) Ib/acre/ r 1.16 1.26 1.16 Summary Print Project Name Ivy Road Sidewalk Imp—ments CLEAR ALL ®_--_ ,final —� results -� Post-DevelopmentVolume __■ Enter Total Disturbed Area (acres) �— _--- BMP Design S actions List. 2013 Draft Stcls & Specs Maximum reduction required: 20%--- The site's net increase in impervious cover (acres) is: 0.186980106 Post -Development TP Load Reduction for Sire lIb/yr): 0.78 PI�Dloprnent Land love, (acres) ■ LAND COVER SUMMARY--PRE-REDEVELOPMENT C LAND COVER SUMMARY --POST ��■�E DEVELOPMENT _ ��■ ■ ■ �� ■ Treatment Volume and Nutrient Load Treatment Volume and Nutrient Load P 0141 Pm �® Post -Development Requirement for Site Area TP Load Reduction Required (lb/yr) Linear Project TP Load Reduction Required (lb/yr(: 0.78 APPENDIX D Stormwater Outfall Table Site Area (Acres) 1.93 Outfall A Outfall B Drainage Area From Site (Acres) 0.6950 1.2344 Overall Drainage Area (Acres) 69.08 70.81 Drainage Area to Existing Detention Systems (Acres) 9.94 3.02 Runoff Reduction (cf) 0 0 Receiving Channel Type (Natural, Restored, or Manmade) Manmade Manmade Channel Protection Compliance Method Non -Erosive Non -Erosive Flood Protection Compliance Method 10-yr QDeveloped < 10-yr QExisting 10-yr QDeveloped < 10-yr QExisting 2-year 10-year 2-year 10-year VExisting (ft/S) 15.33 N/A 14.49 N/A VDeveloped (ft/S) 15.36 N/A 14.49 N/A VAllowed (ft/S) N/A N/A N/A N/A QExisting (CFS) N/A 144.00 N/A 81.55 QDeveloped (CFS) N/A 143.27 N/A 79.90 QAllowed (CFS) N/A 144.00 N/A 81.55 NOTE: All calculations are computed using the rational method due to the site area discharging into existing manmade stormsewer systems. The calculations account for the overall drainage area reaching each outfall. Drainage areas that are assumed to drain to existing detention systems are excluded from the water quantity calculations. NOTE: Proposed detention pipes are used to reduce the 10-yr Q (cfs) in the pipes downstream of the proposed storm sewer improvements. Kimley>Morn Storm Drain Design Calculations VDCIT LD-229 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 2 -year storm Manning n = 0.013 FROM POINT TO POINT DRAINAGE AREA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CA INLETTIME RAINFALL RUNOFF INVERT ELEVATIONS LENGTH SLOPE SIZE PIPE CAPACITY Q/Qi VELOCITY FLOW TIME REMARKS inlet accum upper end lower end incr accum acres C min in/hr cfs ft ft ft % in cfs % fps min #434 #435 28.61 0.50 14.305 14.305 15.20 3.42 49.34 557.84 553.14 181 0.026 24 36.45 135% 15.70 0.19 15.20 SURCHARGED #435 #436 14.64 0.65 9.516 23.821 14.20 3.40 81.66 553.11 545.47 179 0.043 24 46.73 175% 25.99 0.12 15.39 SURCHARGED #436 #437 0.23 0.50 0.115 23.936 5.00 3.39 81.75 545.45 545.57 63 -0.002 24 9.87 828% 26.02 0.04 15.51 SURCHARGED #437 #451 1.36 0.45 0.612 24.548 9.00 3.38 83.74 543.30 538.22 276 0.018 24 30.69 273% 26.65 0.17 15.55 SURCHARGED #451 #452 2.53 0.65 1.645 26.192 8.50 3.37 88.87 537.45 536.83 94 0.007 36 54.17 164% 12.57 0.13 15.72 SURCHARGED #452 #452 (Out) 11.76 0.50 5.880 32.072 11.10 3.35 108.39 536.62 536.02 53 0.011 36 70.96 153% 15.33 0.06 15.84 SURCHARGED Kimley>Morn Storm Drain Design Calculations VDOT LD-229 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/2212017 Locality: Albemarle 2 -year storm Manning n = 0.013 FROM POINT TO POINT DRAINAGE AREA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CA INLETTIME RAINFALL RUNOFF INVERT ELEVATIONS LENGTH SLOPE SIZE PIPE CAPACITY Q/Qf VELOCITY FLOW TIME REMARKS inlet accum upper end lower end incr accum acres C min in/hr cfs ft ft ft % in cfs % fps min #431 #432 1.94 0.75 1.455 1.455 5.00 5.18 7.60 556.78 553.43 112 0.03 15 11.17 68% 9.79 0.19 5.00 #432 #432-A 0.34 0.85 0.289 1.744 5.00 5.13 9.01 553.43 551.00 84 0.029 15 10.99 82% 9.99 0.14 5.19 #432-A #418-A (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 1.744 0.00 5.09 8.95 550.00 545.70 180 0.024 24 34.96 26% 9.31 0.32 5.33 #418-A #418 0.31 0.70 0.217 1.961 5.00 5.01 9.90 544.70 544.43 12 0.023 24 33.93 29% 9.37 0.02 5.65 #418 #415 0.38 0.75 0.285 2.246 5.00 5.00 11.32 542.03 541.34 53 0.013 24 25.81 44% 7.95 0.11 5.67 #415 #400 0.38 0.75 0.285 2.531 5.00 4.97 12.69 541.32 538.37 131 0.023 24 33.95 37% 10.02 0.22 5.79 #400 #401 0.46 0.75 0.345 2.876 5.00 4.92 14.26 538.30 536.77 61 0.025 24 35.83 40% 10.76 0.10 6.00 #401 #421-A 0.93 0.80 0.744 3.620 5.00 4.90 17.87 536.70 535.93 98 0.008 24 20.05 89% 5.69 0.29 6.10 #421-A #405 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 3.620 0.00 4.83 17.62 535.93 535.56 47 0.008 24 20.07 88% 5.61 1 0.14 6.39 #405 #406 0.03 0.55 0.017 3.636 5.00 4.80 17.58 535.52 535.33 24 0.008 24 20.13 87% 5.60 0.07 6.53 #406 #409 23.17 0.60 13.902 17.538 15.13 3.43 60.63 535.05 529.23 185 0.031 24 40.12 151% 19.30 0.16 15.13 SURCHARGED #409 #409 (Out) 0.79 0.50 0.395 17.934 5.00 3.41 61.68 528.19 526.50 73 0.023 30 62.41 99% 14.49 0.08 15.29 Kimley>Morn Storm Drain Design Calculations VDCIT LD-229 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Manning n = 0.013 FROM POINT TO POINT DRAINAGE AREA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CA INLETTIME RAINFALL RUNOFF INVERT ELEVATIONS LENGTH SLOPE SIZE PIPE CAPACITY Q/Qf VELOCITY FLOW TIME REMARKS inlet accum upper end lower end incr accum acres C min in/hr cfs ft ft ft % in cfs % fps min #434 #435 28.61 0.50 14.305 14.305 15.20 4.52 65.15 557.84 553.14 181 0.026 24 36.45 179% 20.74 0.15 15.20 SURCHARGED #435 #436 14.64 0.65 9.516 23.821 14.20 4.50 108.03 553.11 545.47 179 0.043 24 46.73 231% 34.39 0.09 15.35 SURCHARGED #436 #437 0.23 0.50 0.115 23.936 5.00 4.49 108.27 545.45 545.57 63 -0.002 24 9.87 1097% 34.46 0.03 15.43 SURCHARGED #437 #451 1.36 0.45 0.612 24.548 9.00 4.48 110.94 543.30 538.22 276 0.018 24 30.69 361% 35.31 0.13 15.46 SURCHARGED #451 #452 2.53 0.65 1.645 26.192 8.50 4.47 117.92 537.45 536.83 94 0.007 36 54.17 218% 16.68 0.09 15.59 SURCHARGED #452 #452 (Out) 11.76 0.50 5.880 32.072 11.10 4.45 144.00 536.62 536.02 53 0.011 36 70.96 203% 20.37 0.04 15.69 SURCHARGED Kimley>Morn Storm Drain Design Calculations VDOT LD-229 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Manning n = 0.013 FROM POINT TO POINT DRAINAGE AREA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CA INLETTIME RAINFALL RUNOFF INVERT ELEVATIONS LENGTH SLOPE SIZE PIPE CAPACITY Q/Qf VELOCITY FLOW TIME REMARKS inlet accum upper end lower end incr I accum acres C min in/hr cfs ft ft ft % in cfs % fps min #431 #432 1.94 0.75 1.455 1.455 5.00 6.67 9.78 556.78 553.43 112 0.03 15 11.17 88% 10.26 0.18 5.00 #432 #432-A 0.34 0.85 0.289 1.744 5.00 6.61 11.61 553.43 551.00 84 0.029 15 10.99 106% 10.12 0.14 5.18 SURCHARGED #432-A #418-A (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 1.744 0.00 6.56 11.53 550.00 545.70 180 0.024 24 34.96 33% 9.98 0.30 5.32 #418-A #418 0.31 0.70 0.217 1.961 5.00 6.47 12.78 544.70 544.43 12 0.023 24 33.93 38% 10.04 0.02 5.62 #418 #415 0.38 0.75 0.285 2.246 5.00 6.46 14.62 542.03 541.34 53 0.013 24 25.81 57% 8.47 0.10 5.64 #415 #400 0.38 0.75 0.285 2.531 5.00 6.43 16.39 541.32 538.37 131 0.023 24 33.95 48% 10.71 0.20 5.75 #400 #401 0.46 0.75 0.345 2.876 5.00 6.36 18.45 538.30 536.77 61 0.025 24 35.83 51% 5.87 0.17 5.95 #401 #421-A 0.93 0.80 0.744 3.620 5.00 6.31 23.03 536.70 535.93 98 0.008 24 20.05 115% 7.33 0.22 6.12 SURCHARGED #421-A #405 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 3.620 0.00 6.25 22.80 535.93 535.56 47 0.008 24 20.07 114% 7.26 0.11 6.35 SURCHARGED #405 #406 0.03 0.55 0.017 3.636 5.00 6.22 22.79 535.52 535.33 24 0.008 24 20.13 113% 7.25 0.06 6.45 SURCHARGED #406 #409 23.17 0.60 13.902 17.538 15.13 4.53 80.04 535.05 529.23 185 0.031 24 40.12 200% 25.48 0.12 15.13 SURCHARGED #409 #409 (Out) 0.79 0.50 0.395 17.934 5.00 4.51 81.55 528.19 526.50 73 0.023 30 62.41 131% 16.61 0.07 15.25 SURCHARGED Kimley>Morn Storm Drain Design Calculations VDOT LD-229 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 2 -year storm Manning n = 0.013 FROM POINT TO POINT DRAINAGE AREA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CA INLETTIME RAINFALL RUNOFF INVERT ELEVATIONS LENGTH SLOPE SIZE PIPE CAPACITY Q/Qf VELOCITY FLOW TIME REMARKS inlet accum upper end lower end incr I accum acres C min in/hr cfs ft ft ft % in cfs % fps min #434 313-6 28.61 0.50 14.305 14.305 15.20 3.42 49.34 557.84 553.14 179 0.026 24 36.66 135% 15.70 0.19 15.20 SURCHARGED 313-6 3B-4 0.48 0.50 0.240 14.545 5.00 3.40 49.86 553.11 546.56 149 0.044 30 85.99 58% 18.17 0.14 15.39 36-4 EX.36-7 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 14.545 0.00 3.39 79.48 546.56 545.47 25 0.044 42 210.07 38% 20.31 0.02 15.53 EX.38-7 38-8 0.23 0.50 0.115 14.660 5.00 3.38 79.84 545.45 544.00 61 0.024 42 155.11 51% 16.24 0.06 15.55 36-8 38-9 1.36 0.45 0.612 15.272 9.00 3.38 81.82 543.30 538.22 272 0.019 42 137.49 60% 14.91 0.30 15.61 313-9 #452 3.51 0.65 2.282 17.553 8.50 3.35 89.03 537.45 536.83 92 0.007 36 54.75 163% 12.59 0.12 15.91 SURCHARGED #452 #452 (Out) 11.76 0.50 5.880 23.434 11.10 3.33 108.56 536.62 536.02 53 0.011 36 70.96 153% 15.36 0.06 16.04 SURCHARGED 313-1 38-2 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 5.18 0.59 551.70 551.60 13 0.008 15 5.67 10% 2.99 0.07 0.00 36-2 3B-3 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 5.18 29.83 548.00 546.80 128 0.009 36 64.58 46% 8.95 1 0.24 0.17 3B-3 38-4 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 5.18 29.83 546.70 546.56 8 0.018 36 88.23 34% 4.22 0.03 0.41 3B-5 313-2 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 5.18 29.24 548.70 548.10 82 0.007 36 57.05 1 51% 8.12 0.17 0.00 Kimley>Morn Storm Drain Design Calculations VDCIT LD-229 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 2 -year storm Manning n = 0.013 FROM POINT TO POINT DRAINAGE AREA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CA INLETTIME RAINFALL RUNOFF INVERT ELEVATIONS LENGTH SLOPE SIZE PIPE CAPACITY Q/Qi VELOCITY FLOW TIME REMARKS inlet accum upper end lower end iZr accum acres C min in/hr cfs ft ft ft % in cfs % fps min 4-3 4-4 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 5.18 6.05 544.60 544.30 24 0.013 24 25.29 24% 6.61 0.06 0.00 4-4 EX. 4-7 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 5.18 6.05 543.20 543.00 11 0.018 24 30.50 20% 7.56 0.02 0.06 EX. 4-7 #415 0.38 0.75 0.285 0.285 5.00 5.18 7.54 542.03 541.34 53 0.013 24 25.81 29% 7.13 0.12 5.00 #415 #400 0.38 0.75 0.285 0.570 5.00 1 5.15 9.01 541.32 538.37 131 0.023 24 33.95 27% 9.13 0.24 5.12 #400 #401 0.46 0.75 0.345 0.915 5.00 5.08 10.74 538.30 536.77 61 0.025 24 35.83 30% 9.96 0.10 5.36 #401 #421-A 0.93 0.80 0.744 1.659 5.00 5.06 14.50 536.70 535.93 98 0.008 24 20.05 72% 4.62 0.35 5.47 #421-A #405 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 1.659 0.00 4.97 14.35 535.93 535.56 47 0.008 24 20.07 71% 4.57 0.17 5.82 #405 #406 0.03 0.55 0.017 1.676 5.00 4.92 14.36 535.52 535.33 24 0.008 24 20.13 71% 4.57 0.09 5.99 #406 #409 1 23.17 0.60 13.902 15.578 15.13 3.43 59.90 535.05 529.23 185 0.031 24 40.12 149% 19.07 1 0.16 15.13 SURCHARGED #409 #409 (Out) 0.79 0.50 0.395 15.972 5.00 3.41 60.98 528.19 526.50 73 0.023 30 62.41 98% 14.49 0.08 15.29 Kimley>)Morn Hydraulic Grade Line Calculations VDOT LD-347 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project M 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Angle 0 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 K 0 0.19 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.43 0.50 0.56 0.61 0.66 0.70 INLET 0.8D+ INV (OUT) ACTUAL OUTLET WSE DESIGN OUTLET WSE Do Qo Lo Sfo Hr JUNCTION LOSS FINALH INLET WSE F/L ELEV Vo (8) Ho (9) Q (10) V; (11) Q;V; (12) z V,. Zg H; Angle Ho H, Surface Runoff Factor? 1.3 H, IS-17 0.5 H, (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) #452 538.42 538.42 538.42 36 144.00 53 0.0466 2.47 20.37 1.61 117.92 16.68 1966.91 4.32 1.51 60 2.42 5.54 YES 7.20 YES 3.60 6.07 542.68 #451 539.23 544.49 544.49 36 117.92 94 0.0313 2.94 16.68 1.08 110.94 35.31 3917.29 19.36 6.78 0 0.00 7.86 N0 7.86 YES 3.93 6.87 546.25 #437 539.82 551.36 551.36 24 110.94 276 0.2406 66.40 35.31 4.84 108.27 34.46 3730.98 18.44 6.45 0 0.00 11.29 NO 11.29 YES 5.65 72.04 551.55 #436 547.17 623.40 623.40 24 108.27 63 0.2291 14.43 34.46 4.61 108.03 34.39 3715.15 18.36 6.43 0 0.00 11.04 N0 11.04 YES 5.52 19.95 553.57 #435 547.07 643.36 643.36 24 108.03 179 0.2281 40.83 34.39 4.59 65.15 20.74 1351.21 6.68 2.34 50 3.34 10.27 YES 13.35 YES 6.67 47.51 ..1 M 558.22 #434 554.74 690.86 690.86 24 65.15 181 0.0830 15.02 20.74 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.67 YES 2.17 YES 1.09 16.10 1. 567.46 Kimley>)Morn Hydraulic Grade Line Calculations VDOT LD-347 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project M 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Angle 0 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 K 0 0.19 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.43 0.50 0.56 0.61 0.66 0.70 INLET 0.8D+ INV (OUT) ACTUAL OUTLET WSE DESIGN OUTLET WSE Do Qo L. Sfo Ht JUNCTION LOSS FINALH INLET F/L WSE ELEV Vo (8) Ho (9) Q (10) V; (11) Q;V; (12) z V,. Zg H; Angle Ho H, Surface Runoff Factor? 1.3 H, IS-17 O.S H, (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) #409 528.50 529.00 529.00 30 81.55 73 0.0395 2.89 16.61 1.07 80.04 25.48 2039.42 10.08 3.53 40 4.33 8.93 NO 8.93 YES 4.47 7.35 534.80 #406 530.83 536.35 536.35 24 80.04 185 0.1252 23.17 25.48 2.52 22.79 7.25 165.23 0.82 0.29 90 0.57 3.38 YES 4.39 YES 2.20 25.36 538.07 #405 536.93 561.71 561.71 24 22.79 24 0.0102 0.24 7.25 0.20 22.80 7.26 165.53 0.82 0.29 90 0.57 1.06 NO 1.06 YES 0.53 0.78 538.36 #421-A 537.16 562.49 562.49 24 22.80 47 0.0102 0.48 7.26 0.20 23.03 7.33 168.81 0.83 0.29 0 0.00 0.50 NO 0.50 YES 0.25 0.73 542.23 #401 537.53 563.22 563.22 24 23.03 98 0.0104 1.02 7.33 0.21 18.45 5.87 108.30 0.54 0.19 15 0.10 0.50 YES 0.65 YES 0.32 1.34 541.39 #400 538.37 564.56 564.56 24 18.45 61 0.0067 0.41 5.87 0.13 16.39 10.71 175.54 1.78 0.62 0 0.00 0.76 YES 0.98 YES 0.49 0.90 543.33 #415 539.97 565.45 565.45 24 16.39 131 0.0053 0.69 10.71 0.45 14.62 8.47 123.83 1.11 0.39 0 0.00 0.84 YES 1.09 YES 0.54 1.23 547.38 #418 542.94 566.68 566.68 24 14.62 53 0.0042 0.22 8.47 0.28 12.78 10.04 128.31 1.57 0.55 0 0.00 0.83 YES 1.07 YES 0.54 0.76 548.56 #418-A 546.03 567.44 567.44 24 12.78 12 0.0032 0.04 10.04 0.39 11.53 9.98 115.07 1.55 0.54 0 0.00 0.93 YES 1.21 YES 0.61 0.64 .: r • 549.94 #432-A 547.30 568.09 568.09 24 11.53 180 0.0026 0.47 1 9.98 0.39 11.61 10.12 117.49 1.59 0.56 15 0.30 1.25 NO 1.25 YES 0.62 1.09 558.28 #432 552.00 569.18 569.18 15 11.61 84 0.0323 2.71 10.12 0.40 9.78 10.26 100.34 1.63 0.57 15 0.31 1.28 YES 1.66 YES 0.83 3.55 556.85 #431 554.43 572.72 572.72 15 9.78 112 0.0229 2.57 10.26 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.41 YES 0.53 YES 0.27 2.83 561.17 APPENDIX E Hydraflow Table of Contents Ivy Detention Pipes-Rational.gpw Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Watershed Model Schematic...................................................................................... 1 Hydrograph Return Period Recap............................................................................. 2 2 - Year SummaryReport......................................................................................................................... 3 HydrographReports ................................................................................................................... 4 Hydrograph No. 1, Rational, Area to Outfall A Detention......................................................... 4 Hydrograph No. 2, Reservoir, Detention Pipe A...................................................................... 5 Pond Report - Outfall A Detention Pipe............................................................................... 6 Hydrograph No. 3, Rational, Area to Outfall B Detention......................................................... 7 Hydrograph No. 4, Reservoir, Detention Pipe B....................................................................... 8 Pond Report - Outfall B Detention Pipe............................................................................... 9 10 - Year SummaryReport....................................................................................................................... 10 HydrographReports................................................................................................................. 11 Hydrograph No. 1, Rational, Area to Outfall A Detention....................................................... 11 Hydrograph No. 2, Reservoir, Detention Pipe A.................................................................... 12 Hydrograph No. 3, Rational, Area to Outfall B Detention....................................................... 13 Hydrograph No. 4, Reservoir, Detention Pipe B..................................................................... 14 100 - Year SummaryReport....................................................................................................................... 15 HydrographReports................................................................................................................. 16 Hydrograph No. 1, Rational, Area to Outfall A Detention....................................................... 16 Hydrograph No. 2, Reservoir, Detention Pipe A.................................................................... 17 Hydrograph No. 3, Rational, Area to Outfall B Detention....................................................... 18 Hydrograph No. 4, Reservoir, Detention Pipe B..................................................................... 19 OFReport.................................................................................................................. 20 1 Watershed Model Schematic Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.4 1 3 Legend Hvd. Origin Description 1 Rational Area to Outfall A Detention 2 Reservoir Detention Pipe A 3 Rational Area to Outfall B Detention 4 Reservoir Detention Pipe B Project: Ivy Detention Pipes-Rational.gpw Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hydrograph Return Period Rep ra ow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.4 Hyd. Hydrograph Inflow Peak Outflow (cfs) Hydrograph No. type hyd(s) Description (origin) 1-yr 2-yr 3-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 1 Rational ------ ------- 2.824 ------- ------- 3.634 ------- ------- 4.778 Area to Outfall A Detention 2 Reservoir 1 ------- 0.585 ------- ------- 0.944 ------- ------- 3.188 Detention Pipe A 3 Rational ------ ------- 9.937 ------- ------- 12.79 ------- ------- 16.81 Area to Outfall B Detention 4 Reservoir 3 ------- 6.045 ------- ------- 7.265 ------- ------- 12.01 Detention Pipe B Proj. file: Ivy Detention Pipes-Rational.gpw Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hydrograph Summary Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Hyd. No. Hydrograph type (origin) Peak flow (cfs) Time interval (min) Time to Peak (min) Hyd. volume (cuft) Inflow hyd(s) Maximum elevation (ft) Total strge used (cuft) Hydrograph Description 1 Rational 2.824 1 5 847 ------ ------ ------ Area to Outfall A Detention 2 Reservoir 0.585 1 9 409 1 554.42 725 Detention Pipe A 3 Rational 9.937 1 5 2,981 ------ ------ ------ Area to Outfall B Detention 4 Reservoir 6.045 1 7 2,737 3 546.99 1,192 Detention Pipe B Ivy Detention Pipes-Rational.gpw Return Period: 2 Year Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hydrograph Report 4 Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Hyd. No. 1 Area to Outfall A Detention Hydrograph type = Rational Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time interval = 1 min Drainage area = 0.727 ac Intensity = 5.180 in/hr OF Curve = Ivy.IDF Q (cfs) 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 y 0 1 Hyd No. 1 Peak discharge Time to peak Hyd. volume Runoff coeff. Tc by User Asc/Rec limb fact Area to Outfall A Detention Hyd. No. 1 -- 2 Year Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 = 2.824 cfs = 5 min = 847 cuft = 0.75 = 5.00 min = 1/1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q (cfs) 3.00 2.00 1.00 N 0.00 10 Time (min) Hydrograph Report 5 Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 2 Detention Pipe A Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.585 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time to peak = 9 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 409 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 1 - Area to Outfall A Detention Max. Elevation = 554.42 ft Reservoir name = Outfall A Detention Pipe Max. Storage = 725 cuft Storage Indication method used Q (cfs) 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 0 2 4 Hyd No. 2 Detention Pipe A Hyd. No. 2 -- 2 Year 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 Hyd No. 1 0 Total storage used = 725 cuft Q (cfs) 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 30 Time (min) Pond Report s Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Pond No. 1 - Outfall A Detention Pipe Pond Data UG Chambers - Invert elev. = 551.80 ft , Rise x Span = 4.00 x 4.00 ft , Barrel Len = 89.00 ft , No. Barrels = 1 , Slope = 0.34% , Headers = No Stage / Storage Table Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuft) 0.00 551.80 n/a 0 0 0.43 552.23 n/a 35 35 0.86 552.66 n/a 99 135 1.29 553.09 n/a 129 263 1.72 553.52 n/a 144 408 2.15 553.95 n/a 152 560 2.58 554.38 n/a 152 711 3.01 554.81 n/a 144 856 3.44 555.24 n/a 128 984 3.87 555.67 n/a 99 1,083 4.30 556.10 n/a 35 1,119 Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [PrfRsr] [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise (in) = 15.00 5.00 Inactive Inactive Crest Len (ft) = 16.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 Span (in) = 15.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 556.10 554.90 0.00 0.00 No. Barrels = 1 1 1 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 Invert El. (ft) = 551.70 551.70 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = 1 Rect --- --- Length (ft) = 13.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi -Stage = Yes Yes No No Slope (%) = 0.77 0.00 0.00 n/a N-Value = .013 .013 .013 n/a Orifice Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Exfil.(in/hr) = 0.000 (by Contour) Multi -Stage = n/a Yes No No TW Elev. (ft) = 553.62 Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows are analyzed under inlet (ic) and outlet (oc) control. Weir risers checked for orifice conditions (ic) and submergence (s). Stage / Storage / Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Clv A Clv B Clv C PrfRsr Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfil User Total ft cuft ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 0.00 0 551.80 0.00 0.00 --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.000 0.43 35 552.23 0.00 0.00 --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.000 0.86 135 552.66 0.00 0.00 --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.000 1.29 263 553.09 0.00 0.00 --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.000 1.72 408 553.52 0.00 0.00 --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.000 2.15 560 553.95 0.38 is 0.38 is --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.375 2.58 711 554.38 0.57 is 0.57 is --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.569 3.01 856 554.81 0.71 is 0.71 is --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.712 3.44 984 555.24 3.41 is 0.75 is --- --- 0.00 2.67 --- --- --- --- 3.411 3.87 1,083 555.67 7.73 is 0.38 is --- --- 0.00 7.34 s --- --- --- --- 7.728 4.30 1.119 556.10 9.05 is 0.24 is --- --- 0.01 8.80 s --- --- --- --- 9.047 7 Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 3 Area to Outfall B Detention Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 9.937 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time to peak = 5 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 2,981 cuft Drainage area = 2.558 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.75 Intensity = 5.180 in/hr Tc by User = 5.00 min OF Curve = Ivy.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 Q (cfs) 10.00 m 4.00 2.00 0.00 y 0 1 2 Hyd No. 3 Area to Outfall B Detention Hyd. No. 3 -- 2 Year 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q (cfs) 10.00 M . is 4.00 2.00 N 0.00 9 10 Time (min) Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 4 Detention Pipe B Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 6.045 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time to peak = 7 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 2,737 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 3 - Area to Outfall B Detention Max. Elevation = 546.99 ft Reservoir name = Outfall B Detention Pipe Max. Storage = 1,192 cuft Storage Indication method used. Q (cfs) 10.00 m 4.00 2.00 0.00 0 1 2 Hyd No. 4 Detention Pipe B Hyd. No. 4 -- 2 Year 3 4 5 Hyd No. 3 Q (cfs) 10.00 . is 4.00 2.00 0.00 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Time (min) Total storage used = 1,192 cuft Pond Report 9 Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Pond No. 2 - Outfall B Detention Pipe Pond Data UG Chambers - Invert elev. = 544.70 ft , Rise x Span = 4.00 x 4.00 ft , Barrel Len = 191.30 ft , No. Barrels = 1 , Slope = 0.31 % , Headers = No Stage / Storage Table Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuft) 0.00 544.70 n/a 0 0 0.46 545.16 n/a 48 48 0.92 545.62 n/a 196 244 1.38 546.08 n/a 284 528 1.84 546.54 n/a 327 856 2.30 547.00 n/a 347 1,202 2.76 547.46 n/a 347 1,550 3.22 547.92 n/a 327 1,877 3.67 548.37 n/a 284 2,161 4.13 548.83 n/a 196 2,357 4.59 549.29 n/a 48 2,404 Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [PrfRsr] [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise (in) = 24.00 15.00 Inactive Inactive Crest Len (ft) = 20.00 6.17 Inactive Inactive Span (in) = 24.00 15.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 549.29 547.60 0.00 0.00 No. Barrels = 1 1 1 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 Invert El. (ft) = 544.60 544.60 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = 1 Rect --- --- Length (ft) = 24.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi -Stage = Yes Yes No No Slope (%) = 1.27 0.00 0.00 n/a N-Value = .013 .013 .013 n/a Orifice Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Exfil.(in/hr) = 0.000 (by Contour) Multi -Stage = n/a Yes No No TW Elev. (ft) = 545.62 Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows are analyzed under inlet (ic) and outlet (oc) control. Weir risers checked for orifice conditions (ic) and submergence (s). Stage / Storage / Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Clv A Clv B Clv C PrfRsr Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfil User Total ft cuft ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 0.00 0 544.70 0.00 0.00 --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.000 0.46 48 545.16 0.00 0.00 --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.000 0.92 244 545.62 0.00 0.00 --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.000 1.38 528 546.08 3.40 is 3.35 is --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 3.350 1.84 856 546.54 4.88 is 4.88 is --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 4.881 2.30 1,202 547.00 6.15 is 6.08 is --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 6.076 2.76 1,550 547.46 7.11 is 7.11 is --- --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 7.109 3.22 1,877 547.92 10.41 oc 6.77 is --- --- 0.00 3.64 --- --- --- --- 10.41 3.67 2,161 548.37 19.82 oc 5.82 is --- --- 0.00 14.00 --- --- --- --- 19.82 4.13 2,357 548.83 25.19 is 3.92 is --- --- 0.00 21.28 s --- --- --- --- 25.19 4.59 2,404 549.29 27.98 is 2.96 is --- --- 0.01 25.00 s --- --- --- --- 27.98 10 Hydrograph Summary Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Hyd. No. Hydrograph type (origin) Peak flow (cfs) Time interval (min) Time to Peak (min) Hyd. volume (cuft) Inflow hyd(s) Maximum elevation (ft) Total strge used (cuft) Hydrograph Description 1 Rational 3.634 1 5 1,090 ------ ------ ------ Area to Outfall A Detention 2 Reservoir 0.944 1 9 652 1 554.98 899 Detention Pipe A 3 Rational 12.79 1 5 3,836 ------ ------ ------ Area to Outfall B Detention 4 Reservoir 7.265 1 7 3,592 3 547.55 1,602 Detention Pipe B Ivy Detention Pipes-Rational.gpw Return Period: 10 Year Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 1 Area to Outfall A Detention Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 3.634 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 5 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 1,090 cuft Drainage area = 0.727 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.75 Intensity = 6.666 in/hr Tc by User = 5.00 min OF Curve = Ivy.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 Q (cfs) 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 0 1 2 Hyd No. 1 Area to Outfall A Detention Hyd. No. 1 -- 10 Year 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q (cfs) 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 % 0.00 10 Time (min) 12 Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 2 Detention Pipe A Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.944 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 9 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 652 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 1 - Area to Outfall A Detention Max. Elevation = 554.98 ft Reservoir name = Outfall A Detention Pipe Max. Storage = 899 cuft Storage Indication method used. Q (cfs) 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 0 2 4 Hyd No. 2 6 8 Detention Pipe A Hyd. No. 2 -- 10 Year Q (cfs) 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 Time (min) Hyd No. 1 0 Total storage used = 899 cuft 13 Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 3 Area to Outfall B Detention Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 12.79 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 5 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 3,836 cuft Drainage area = 2.558 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.75 Intensity = 6.666 in/hr Tc by User = 5.00 min OF Curve = Ivy.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 Q (cfs) 14.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0 00 0 1 2 Hyd No. 3 Area to Outfall B Detention Hyd. No. 3 -- 10 Year Q (cfs) 14 00 12.00 10.00 000, 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Time (min) 14 Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 4 Detention Pipe B Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 7.265 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 7 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 3,592 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 3 - Area to Outfall B Detention Max. Elevation = 547.55 ft Reservoir name = Outfall B Detention Pipe Max. Storage = 1,602 cuft Storage Indication method used. Q (cfs) 14.00 12.00 10.00 Am 4.00 2.00 Detention Pipe B Hyd. No. 4 -- 10 Year Q (cfs) 14.00 12.00 10.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Time (min) Hyd No. 4 Hyd No. 3 Total storage used = 1,602 cuft `M Hydrograph Summary Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Hyd. No. Hydrograph type (origin) Peak flow (cfs) Time interval (min) Time to Peak (min) Hyd. volume (cuft) Inflow hyd(s) Maximum elevation (ft) Total strge used (cuft) Hydrograph Description 1 Rational 4.778 1 5 1,433 ------ ------ ------ Area to Outfall A Detention 2 Reservoir 3.188 1 7 995 1 555.26 978 Detention Pipe A 3 Rational 16.81 1 5 5,043 ------ ------ ------ Area to Outfall B Detention 4 Reservoir 12.01 1 6 4,799 3 548.07 1,932 Detention Pipe B Ivy Detention Pipes-Rational.gpw Return Period: 100 Year Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 16 Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 1 Area to Outfall A Detention Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 4.778 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 5 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 1,433 cuft Drainage area = 0.727 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.75 Intensity = 8.762 in/hr Tc by User = 5.00 min OF Curve = Ivy.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 Q (cfs) 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 Area to Outfall A Detention Hyd. No. 1 -- 100 Year Q (cfs) 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 IfI I I I I I I I I N 0.00 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Hyd No. 1 Time (min) 17 Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 2 Detention Pipe A Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 3.188 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 7 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 995 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 1 - Area to Outfall A Detention Max. Elevation = 555.26 ft Reservoir name = Outfall A Detention Pipe Max. Storage = 978 cuft Storage Indication method used. Q (cfs) 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 0 2 4 Hyd No. 2 Detention Pipe A Hyd. No. 2 -- 100 Year 6 8 10 12 Hyd No. 1 14 Q (cfs) 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 Time (min) 0 Total storage used = 978 cuft 18 Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 3 Area to Outfall B Detention Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 16.81 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 5 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 5,043 cuft Drainage area = 2.558 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.75 Intensity = 8.762 in/hr Tc by User = 5.00 min OF Curve = Ivy.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 Q (cfs) 18.00 15.00 flw111l 141111 W111l Area to Outfall B Detention Hyd. No. 3 -- 100 Year Q (cfs) 18.00 15.00 12.00 3.00 0.00 y1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N 0.00 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Hyd No. 3 Time (min) 19 Hydrograph Report Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Hyd. No. 4 Detention Pipe B Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 12.01 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 6 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 4,799 cuft Inflow hyd. No. = 3 - Area to Outfall B Detention Max. Elevation = 548.07 ft Reservoir name = Outfall B Detention Pipe Max. Storage = 1,932 cuft Storage Indication method used. Q (cfs) 18.00 15.00 flW111l 141111 Cc�ilil WIT97 Detention Pipe B Hyd. No. 4 -- 100 Year 1 1 VA 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Hyd No. 4 Hyd No. 3 Total storage used = 1,932 cuft Q (cfs) 18.00 15.00 12.00 3.00 mhh�- 0.00 16 Time (min) Hydraflow Rainfall Report 20 Hydraf low Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D0 2015 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.4 Return Period Intensity -Duration -Frequency Equation Coefficients (FHA) (Yrs) B D E (N/A) 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -------- 2 49.0200 10.5000 0.8200 -------- 3 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -------- 5 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -------- 10 46.9500 9.5000 0.7300 -------- 25 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -------- 50 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -------- 100 31.0900 5.0000 0.5500 -------- File name: Ivy.IDF Intensity = B / (Tc + D)^E Monday, 08 / 21 / 2017 Return Period Intensity Values (in/hr) (Yrs) 5 min 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 5.18 4.12 3.44 2.97 2.63 2.36 2.14 1.97 1.82 1.70 1.59 1.50 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 6.67 5.37 4.55 3.97 3.54 3.21 2.94 2.72 2.54 2.38 2.24 2.12 25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100 8.76 7.01 5.98 5.29 4.79 4.40 4.09 3.83 3.62 3.43 3.27 3.13 Tc = time in minutes. Values may exceed 60. Precip. file name: K:\RIC CIV\113038 - Albemarle Cty On-Call\20 I Rd\En ineerin \Com utations\H draulics\I c Storm Rainfall Precipitation Table (in) Distribution 1-yr 2-yr 3-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr SCS 24-hour 3.04 3.68 0.00 0.00 5.56 6.83 7.92 9.12 SCS 6-Hr 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Huff -1st 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Huff-2nd 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Huff-3rd 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Huff-4th 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Huff-Indy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Custom 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 APPENDIX F Kimley>Morn Storm Drain Design Calculations VDCIT LD-229 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Manning n = 0.013 FROM POINT TO POINT DRAINAGE AREA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CA INLETTIME RAINFALL RUNOFF INVERT ELEVATIONS LENGTH SLOPE SIZE PIPE CAPACITY Q/Q VELOCITY FLOWTIME REMARKS inlet accum upper end lower end Zriaccum acres C min in/hr cfs ft ft ft % in cfs % fps min 3-1 3-2 0.33 0.75 0.244 0.244 5.00 6.67 1.64 564.00 562.50 51 0.029 15 11.08 15% 6.47 0.13 5.00 3-2 3-3 0.40 0.75 0.302 0.545 5.00 6.62 3.64 560.50 559.00 54 0.028 15 10.77 34% 7.92 0.11 5.13 3-3 3-4 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.545 0.00 6.59 3.62 557.20 555.80 74 0.019 15 8.88 41% 6.87 0.18 5.25 Kimley>Morn Storm Drain Design Calculations VDOT LD-229 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Manning n = 0.013 FROM POINT TO POINT DRAINAGE AREA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CA INLETTIME RAINFALL RUNOFF INVERT ELEVATIONS LENGTH SLOPE SIZE PIPE CAPACITY Q/Qf VELOCITY FLOW TIME REMARKS inlet accum upper end lower end incr I accum acres C min in/hr cfs ft ft ft % in cfs % fps min #434 313-6 28.61 0.50 14.305 14.305 15.20 4.52 65.15 557.84 553.14 179 0.026 24 36.66 178% 20.74 0.14 15.20 SURCHARGED 313-6 3B-4 0.48 0.50 0.240 14.545 5.00 4.50 65.96 553.11 546.56 149 0.044 30 85.99 77% 13.44 0.19 15.34 36-4 EX.36-7 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 14.545 0.00 4.48 105.07 546.56 545.47 25 0.044 42 210.07 50% 10.92 0.04 15.53 EX.38-7 38-8 0.23 0.50 0.115 14.660 5.00 4.47 105.51 545.45 544.00 61 0.024 42 155.11 68% 10.97 0.09 15.57 36-8 38-9 1.36 0.45 0.612 15.272 9.00 4.46 108.08 543.30 538.22 272 0.019 42 137.49 79% 11.23 0.40 15.66 313-9 #452 3.51 0.65 2.282 17.553 8.50 4.41 117.43 537.45 536.83 92 0.007 36 54.75 214% 16.61 0.09 16.06 SURCHARGED #452 #452 (Out) 11.76 0.50 5.880 23.434 11.10 4.40 143.27 536.62 536.02 53 0.011 36 70.96 202% 20.27 0.04 16.16 SURCHARGED 313-1 38-2 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 6.67 0.94 551.70 551.60 13 0.008 15 5.67 17% 0.77 0.28 0.00 36-2 3B-3 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 6.67 39.46 548.00 546.80 128 0.009 36 64.58 61% 5.58 1 0.38 0.28 3B-3 38-4 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 6.67 39.46 546.70 546.56 8 0.018 36 88.23 45% 5.58 0.02 0.67 3B-5 313-2 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 6.67 38.52 548.70 548.10 82 0.007 36 57.05 68% 5.45 0.25 0.00 Kimley>Morn Storm Drain Design Calculations VDOT LD-229 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Manning n = 0.013 FROM POINT TO POINT DRAINAGE AREA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CA INLETTIME RAINFALL RUNOFF INVERT ELEVATIONS LENGTH SLOPE SIZE PIPE CAPACITY Q/Q VELOCITY FLOWTIME REMARKS inlet accum upper end lower end incr accum acres C min in/hr cfs ft ft ft % in cfs % fps min 3-10 4-1 0.31 0.75 0.230 0.230 5.00 6.67 1.55 564.70 558.80 172 0.034 15 11.96 13% 6.72 0.43 5.00 4-1 4-2 0.88 0.80 0.702 1.475 5.00 6.53 9.70 554.90 550.00 174 0.028 18 17.63 55% 10.21 0.28 5.43 4-5 4-6 0.31 0.70 0.218 0.218 5.00 6.67 1.46 559.00 558.50 17 0.029 15 11.08 13% 6.26 0.05 5.00 4-6 4-1 0.43 0.75 0.326 0.543 5.00 1 6.65 3.64 558.40 558.00 13 0.031 15 11.33 32% 8.22 0.03 5.05 Kimley>Morn Storm Drain Design Calculations VDOT LD-229 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Manning n = 0.013 FROM POINT TO POINT DRAINAGE AREA RUNOFF COEFFICIENT CA INLETTIME RAINFALL RUNOFF INVERT ELEVATIONS LENGTH SLOPE SIZE PIPE CAPACITY Q/Qi VELOCITY FLOW TIME REMARKS inlet accum upperend lowerend incr accum acres C min in/hr cfs ft ft ft % in cfs % fps min 4-3 4-4 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 6.67 7.27 544.60 544.30 24 0.013 24 25.29 29% 6.96 0.06 0.00 4-4 EX. 4-7 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 0.000 0.00 6.67 7.27 543.20 543.00 11 0.018 24 30.50 24% 7.96 0.02 0.06 EX. 4-7 #415 0.38 0.75 0.285 0.285 5.00 6.67 9.18 542.03 541.34 53 0.013 24 25.81 36% 7.52 0.12 5.00 #415 #400 0.38 0.75 0.285 0.570 5.00 1 6.63 11.08 541.32 538.37 131 0.023 24 33.95 33% 9.66 0.23 5.12 #400 #401 0.46 0.75 0.345 0.915 5.00 6.55 13.31 538.30 536.77 61 0.025 24 35.83 37% 10.56 0.10 5.34 #401 #421-A 0.93 0.80 0.744 1.659 5.00 6.52 18.18 536.70 535.93 98 0.008 24 20.05 91% 5.79 0.28 5.44 #421-A #405 (N/A) (N/A) 0.000 1.659 0.00 6.43 18.03 535.93 535.56 47 0.008 24 20.07 90% 5.74 0.14 5.72 #405 #406 0.03 0.55 0.017 1.676 5.00 6.39 18.06 535.52 535.33 24 0.008 24 20.13 90% 5.75 0.07 5.86 #406 #409 1 23.17 0.60 13.902 15.578 15.13 4.53 78.36 535.05 529.23 185 0.031 24 40.12 195% 24.94 0.12 15.13 SURCHARGED #409 #409 (Out) 0.79 0.50 0.395 15.972 5.00 4.51 79.90 528.19 1 526.50 73 0.023 30 62.41 128% 16.28 0.08 1 15.25 SURCHARGED Kimley>)Morn Hydraulic Grade Line Calculations VDOT LD-347 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project M 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Angle 0 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 K 0 0.19 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.43 0.50 0.56 0.61 0.66 0.70 ACTUAL OUTLET WSE •JUNCTION • • • LOSS Kimley>)Morn Hydraulic Grade Line Calculations VDOT LD-347 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project M 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Angle 0 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 K 0 0.19 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.43 0.50 0.56 0.61 0.66 0.70 INLET 0.8D+ INV (OUT) ACTUAL OUTLET WSE DESIGN OUTLET WSE Do Qo L. Sfo Hf JUNCTION LOSS FINAL INLET WSE F/L ELEV Vo (8) Ho (9) Q (10) V; (11) Q;V; (12) z V,. Zg H; Angle Ho H, Surface Runoff Factor? 1.3 H, IS-17 0.5 H, (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) #452 538.42 538.42 538.42 36 143.27 53 0.0462 2.45 20.27 1.60 117.43 16.61 1950.51 4.28 1.50 60 2.40 5.49 YES 7.14 YES 3.57 6.02 542.68 36-9 539.23 544.44 544.44 36 117.43 92 0.0310 2.85 16.61 1.07 108.08 11.23 1213.74 1.96 0.69 0 0.00 1.76 YES 2.28 YES 1.14 3.99 548.30 36-8 541.02 548.43 548.43 42 108.08 272 0.0115 3.14 11.23 0.49 105.51 10.97 1157.44 1.87 0.65 0 0.00 1.14 NO 1.14 YES 0.57 3.71 552.11 EX.36-7 546.80 552.14 552.14 42 105.51 61 0.0110 0.67 10.97 0.47 105.07 10.92 1147.36 1.85 0.65 15 0.35 1.47 NO 1.47 YES 0.73 1.40 553.55 553.57 36-4 548.27 553.55 553.55 42 105.07 25 0.0109 0.27 10.92 0.46 65.96 13.44 886.50 2.80 0.98 90 1.96 3.41 NO 3.41 YES 1.70 1.98 554.85 36-6 548.56 555.52 555.52 30 65.96 149 0.0259 3.85 13.44 0.70 65.15 20.74 1351.21 6.68 2.34 50 3.34 6.38 NO 6.38 YES 3.19 7.04 558.81 #434 554.74 562.57 562.57 24 65.15 179 0.0830 14.85 20.74 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1.67 YES 2.17 YES 1.09 15.94 567.46 36-3 548.96 555.52 555.52 36 39.46 8 0.0035 0.03 5.58 0.12 39.46 5.58 220.19 0.48 0.17 80 0.32 0.61 NO 0.61 YES 0.30 0.33 555.40 313-2 549.20 555.86 555.86 36 39.46 128 0.0035 0.45 5.58 0.12 38.52 5.45 209.93 0.46 0.16 90 0.32 0.61 NO 0.61 YES 0.30 0.75 556.61 558.85 36-1 552.60 556.61 556.61 15 0.94 13 0.0002 0.00 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 YES 0.00 YES 0.00 0.00 556.61 559.36 38-5 550.50 556.61 556.61 36 38.52 82 0.0033 0.27 5.45 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.12 YES 0.15 YES 0.07 0.35 554.50 Kimley>)Morn Hydraulic Grade Line Calculations VDOT LD-347 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project M 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Angle 0 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 K 0 0.19 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.43 0.50 0.56 0.61 0.66 0.70 INLET O.SD+ INV (OUT) ACTUAL OUTLET WSE DESIGN OUTLET WSE Do Qo Lo Sfo Hf JUNCTION LOSS FINAL H INLET WSE F/L ELEV Vo (8) Ho (9) Q; (10) V; (11) Q;V; (12) z V. Zg H; Angle Ho H, Surface Runoff Factor? 1.3 H, IS-17 0.5 H, (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) 4-1 551.20 551.20 551.20 18 9.70 174 0.0085 1.48 10.21 0.40 3.64 8.22 29.92 1.05 0.37 90 0.73 1.51 YES 1.96 YES 0.98 2.46 553.66 562.32 3-10 559.80 553.66 559.80 15 1.55 172 0.0006 0.10 6.72 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.18 YES 0.23 YES 0.11 0.21 560.01 568.14 4-6 559.00 553.66 559.00 15 3.64 13 0.0032 0.04 8.22 0.26 1.46 6.26 9.14 0.61 0.21 50 0.30 0.78 YES 1.01 YES 0.51 0.55 559.55 561.50 4-5 559.50 559.55 559.55 15 1.46 17 0.0005 0.01 6.26 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.15 YES 0.20 YES 0.10 0.11 559.66 563.20 Kimley>)Morn Hydraulic Grade Line Calculations VDOT LD-347 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project M 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/22/2017 Locality: Albemarle 10 -year storm Angle 0 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 K 0 0.19 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.43 0.50 0.56 0.61 0.66 0.70 INLET 0.8D+ INV (OUT) ACTUAL OUTLET WSE DESIGN OUTLET WSE Do Qo L. Sfo Hf JUNCTION LOSS FINALH INLET F/L WSE ELEV V. (8) Ho (9) Q (10) V; (11) Q;V; (12) z V,. Zg H; Angle Ho H, Surface Runoff Factor? 1.3 H, IS-17 0.5 H, (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) #409 528.50 529.00 529.00 30 79.90 73 0.0380 2.77 16.28 1.03 78.36 24.94 1954.30 9.66 3.38 40 4.15 8.56 NO 8.56 YES 4.28 7.05 r 534.80 #406 530.83 536.05 536.05 24 78.36 185 0.1200 22.20 24.94 2.41 18.06 5.75 103.85 0.51 0.18 90 0.36 2.95 YES 3.84 YES 1.92 24.12 537.57 #405 536.93 560.18 560.18 24 18.06 24 0.0064 0.15 5.75 0.13 18.03 5.74 103.49 0.51 0.18 90 0.36 0.67 NO 0.67 YES 0.33 0.49 538.36 #421-A 537.16 560.66 560.66 24 18.03 47 0.0064 0.30 5.74 0.13 18.18 5.79 105.26 0.52 0.18 0 0.00 0.31 NO 0.31 YES 0.16 0.45 542.23 #401 537.53 561.11 561.11 24 18.18 98 0.0065 0.63 5.79 0.13 13.31 10.56 140.55 1.73 0.61 15 0.33 1.07 YES 1.38 YES 0.69 1.33 541.39 #400 538.37 562.44 562.44 24 13.31 61 0.0035 0.21 10.56 0.43 11.08 9.66 107.03 1.45 0.51 0 0.00 0.94 YES 1.22 YES 0.61 0.82 543.33 #415 539.97 563.26 563.26 24 11.08 131 0.0024 0.31 9.66 0.36 9.18 7.52 69.03 0.88 0.31 0 0.00 0.67 YES 0.87 YES 0.44 0.75 r 547.38 EX. 4-7 542.94 564.01 564.01 24 9.18 53 0.0016 0.09 7.52 0.22 7.27 7.96 57.87 0.98 0.34 0 0.00 0.56 YES 0.73 YES 0.37 0.45 548.56 4-4 544.60 564.47 564.47 24 7.27 11 0.0010 0.01 7.96 0.25 7.27 6.96 50.60 0.75 0.26 30 0.26 0.77 NO 0.77 YES 0.39 0.40 550.63 4-3 545.90 564.86 564.86 24 7.27 24 0.0010 0.02 1 6.96 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.19 YES 0.24 YES 0.12 0.15 r 551.10 StormCAD HGL Computations - Proposed -10yr - Upstream of Detention Pipe A Label Downstream Conduit Downstream Conduit Flow (cfs) Downstream Conduit Velocity (ft/s) Downstream Conduit Velocity Head (ft) Hydraulic Grade Line (Out) Energy Grade Line (Out) (ft) Contraction Loss Coefficient (AASHTO) Contraction Loss (AASHTO) (ft) Bend Loss Controlling Pipe (AASHTO) Bend Loss Pipe Angle (AASHTO) (degrees) Bend Loss Conduit Flow (AASHTO) (cfs) Bend Loss Pipe Velocity (AASHTO) NO Bend Loss Pipe Velocity Head (AASHTO) (ft) Bend Loss Coefficient (AASHTO) Bend Loss (AASHTO) (ft) Expansion Loss Controlling Pipe (AASHTO) Expansion Loss Pipe Flow (AASHTO) (cfs) Expansion Loss Pipe Velocity (AASHTO) NO Expansion Loss Pipe Velocity Head (AASHTO) (ft) Expansion Loss Coefficient (AASHTO) Expansion Loss (AASHTO) (ft) Is Non -Piped Flow Significant? (AASHTO) Non -Piped Flow Correction Factor (AASHTO) AASHTO Shaping Method Correction factor for shaping (AASHTO) Unadjusted Headloss (AASHTO) (ft) Adjusted Headloss (AASHTO) (ft) Hydraulic Grade Line (In) (ft) Energy Grade Line (In) (ft) 3-3 3-3 to 3-4 3.62 4.57 0.3 557.9683838 558.29 0.25 0.08 3-2 to 3-3 5.74 3.64 2.97 0.14 0.073 0.01 3-2 to 3-3 3.64 2.97 0.14 0.35 0.05 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 0 0 557.97 558.94 3-2 3-2 to 3-3 3.64 4.58 0.3 561.2706299 561.6 0.25 0.08 3-1 to 3-2 14.62 1.64 1.33 0.03 0.185 0.01 3-1 to 3-2 1.64 1.33 0.03 0.35 0.01 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0 0 561.27 561.92 3-1 3-1 to 3-2 1.64 3.5 0.2 564.5077515 564.7 0.25 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0.05 0.03 564.54 564.73 StormCAD HGL Computations - Proposed - 10yr - To Outfall A Bend Loss Expansion Bend Loss Bend Loss Expansion Expansion Non -Piped Downstream Contraction Contraction Bend Loss Pipe Loss Pipe Expansion Expansion Is Non -Piped Correction Unadjusted Adjusted Hydraulic Energy Downstream Downstream Conduit Hydraulic Energy Loss Loss Bend Loss Pipe Angle Conduit Pipe Velocity Bend Loss Bend Loss Expansion Loss Loss Pipe Loss Pipe Velocity Loss Loss Flow Flow AASHTO factor for Headloss Headloss Grade Grade Label Downstream Conduit Conduit Flow Conduit Grade Line Grade Line Controlling Pipe Flow Velocity Coefficient (AASHTO) Controlling Pipe Flow Velocity Correction Shaping Velocity Head Coefficient (AASHTO) (AASHTO) Head Head Coefficient (AASHTO) Significant? shaping (AASHTO) (AASHTO) Line (In) Line (In) (cfs) Velocity (ft/s) (Out) (Out) (ft) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (ft) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) Factor Method (ft) (AASHTO) (ft) (degrees) (cfs) (ft/s) (AASHTO) (cfs) NO (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (ft) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) #452 #452 to#452(Out) 143.27 20.27 6.4 541.456665 547.84 0.25 1.6 3B-9to#452 57.94 117.43 16.61 4.29 0.548 2.35 3B-9to#452 117.43 16.61 4.29 0.35 1.5 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 SAS 3.54 545 549.29 3B-9 3B-9to#452 117.43 16.61 4.3 545.5318604 549.82 0.25 1.07 3B-8to3B-9 5.05 108.08 11.23 1.96 0.064 0.13 3B-8to3B-9 108.08 11.23 1.96 0.35 0.69 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 1.88 1.22 546.76 548.72 3B-8 3B-8 to 3B-9 108.08 11.23 2 549.8959961 551.86 0.25 0.49 EX. 3B-7 to 3B-8 2.35 105.51 10.97 1.87 0.03 0.06 EX. 3B-7 to 3B-8 105.51 10.97 1.87 0.35 0.65 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 1.2 0.6 550.5 552.37 EX. 3B-7 EX. 3B-7 to 3B-8 105.51 10.97 1.9 551.1669922 553.04 0.25 0.47 3B-4 to EX. 3B-7 7.54 105.07 10.92 1.85 0.096 0.18 3B-4 to EX. 3B-7 105.07 10.92 1.85 0.35 0.65 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 1.29 0.65 551.81 553.67 3B-6 3B-6to 3B-4 65.96 13.44 2.8 556.8276367 559.63 0.25 0.7 #434to 3B-6 51.38 65.15 20.74 6.68 0.508 3.4 #434to 3B-6 65.15 20.74 6.68 0.35 2.34 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 6.44 3.22 560.05 566.73 #434 #434to3B-6 65.15 20.74 6.7 567.460022 574.14 0.25 1.67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 1.67 1.09 568.55 575.23 3B-4 3B-4 to EX. 3B-7 105.07 10.92 1.9 552.0861206 553.94 0.25 0.46 3B-3 to 3B-4 85.23 39.46 5.58 0.48 0.681 0.33 3B-6 to 3B-4 65.96 13.44 2.81 0.35 0.98 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 1.78 0.89 552.97 553.46 3B-3 3B-3 to 3B-4 39.46 5.58 0.5 553.00177 553.49 0.25 0.12 3B-2 to 3B-3 82.36 39.46 5.58 0.48 0.669 0.32 3B-2 to 3B-3 39.46 5.58 0.48 0.35 0.17 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 0.61 0.31 553.31 553.79 3B-2 3B-2 to 3B-3 39.46 5.58 0.5 553.7572021 554.24 0.25 0.12 3B-5 to 3B-2 89.47 38.52 5.45 0.46 0.698 0.32 3B-5 to 3B-2 38.52 5.45 0.46 0.35 0.16 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 0.6 0.3 554.06 554.52 3B-5 3B-5 to 3B-2 38.52 5.45 0.5 554.3330688 554.79 0.25 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0.12 0.07 554.41 554.87 3B-1 3B-1 to 3B-2 0.94 0.76 0 554.0623169 554.07 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0 0 554.06 554.07 StormCAD HGL Computations - Proposed - 10yr - Upstream of Detention Pipe B Label Downstream Conduit Downstream Conduit Flow (cfs) Downstream Conduit Velocity (ft/s) Downstream Conduit Velocity Head (ft) Hydraulic Grade Line (Out) Energy Grade Line (Out) (ft) Contraction Loss Coefficient (AASHTO) Contraction Loss (AASHTO) (ft) Bend Loss Controlling Pipe (AASHTO) Bend Loss Pipe Angle (AASHTO) (degrees) Bend Loss Conduit Flow (AASHTO) (cfs) Bend Loss Pipe Velocity (AASHTO) NO Bend Loss Pipe Velocity Head (AASHTO) (ft) Bend Loss Coefficient (AASHTO) Bend Loss (AASHTO) (ft) Expansion Loss Controlling Pipe (AASHTO) Expansion Loss Pipe Flow (AASHTO) (cfs) Expansion Loss Pipe Velocity (AASHTO) NO Expansion Loss Pipe Velocity Head (AASHTO) (ft) Expansion Loss Coefficient (AASHTO) Expansion Loss (AASHTO) (ft) Is Non -Piped Flow Significant? (AASHTO) Non -Piped Flow Correction Factor (AASHTO) AASHTO Shaping Method Correction factor for shaping (AASHTO) Unadjusted Headloss (AASHTO) (ft) Adjusted Headloss (AASHTO) (ft) Hydraulic Grade Line (In) (ft) Energy Grade Line (In) (ft) 3-10 3-10to4-1 1.55 3.44 0.2 565.1928101 565.38 0.25 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0.05 0.03 565.22 565.41 4-1 4-1 to 4-2 9.7 6.39 0.6 556.102417 556.74 0.25 0.16 4-6 to 4-1 92.57 3.64 2.97 0.14 0.71 0.1 4-6 to 4-1 3.64 2.97 0.14 0.35 0.05 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0 0 556.1 556.86 4-6 4-6 to 4-1 3.64 4.58 0.3 559.1708984 559.5 0.25 0.08 4-5 to 4-6 50.26 1.46 1.89 0.06 0.502 0.03 4-5 to 4-6 1.46 1.89 0.06 0.35 0.02 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0.13 0.08 559.25 559.31 4-5 4-5 to 4-6 1.46 3.38 0.2 559.4785156 559.66 0.25 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0.04 0.03 559.51 559.69 StormCAD HGL Computations - Proposed -10yr - To Outfall B Bend Loss Expansion Bend Loss Bend Loss Expansion Expansion Non -Piped Downstream Contraction Contraction Bend Loss Pipe Loss Pipe Expansion Expansion Is Non -Piped Correction Unadjusted Adjusted Hydraulic Energy Downstream Downstream Conduit Hydraulic Energy Loss Loss Bend Loss Pipe Angle Conduit Pipe Velocity Bend Loss Bend Loss Expansion Loss Loss Pipe Loss Pipe Velocity Loss Loss Flow Flow AASHTO factor for Headloss Headloss Grade Grade Label Downstream Conduit Conduit Flow Conduit Grade Line Grade Line Controlling Pipe Flow Velocity Coefficient (AASHTO) Controlling Pipe Flow Velocity Correction Shaping Velocity Head Coefficient (AASHTO) (AASHTO) Head Head Coefficient (AASHTO) Significant? shaping (AASHTO) (AASHTO) Line (In) Line (In) (cfs) Velocity (ft/s) Ift) (Out) (Out) (ft) (AASHTO) (ft) (AASHTO) (degrees) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (ft) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (AASHTO) (ft) (AASHTO) Factor Method (AASHTO) Ift) (ft) (ft) (ft) (cfs) (ft/s) (cfs) (ft/s) (AASHTO) (ft) (ft) 4-3 4-3to4-4 7.27 4.89 0.4 545.5575562 545.93 0.25 0.09 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0.09 0.06 545.62 545.99 4-4 4-4 to EX. 4-7 7.27 4.89 0.4 544.1575317 544.53 0.25 0.09 4-3 to 4-4 31.95 7.27 10.68 1.77 0.366 0.65 4-3 to 4-4 7.27 10.68 1.77 0.35 0.62 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 1.36 0.68 544.84 545.49 EX. 4-7 EX. 4-7 to #415 9.18 5.29 0.4 543.1124878 543.55 0.25 0.11 4-4 to EX. 4-7 0.16 7.27 10.21 1.62 0.002 0 4-4 to EX. 4-7 7.27 10.21 1.62 0.35 0.57 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0.68 0.44 543.55 544.22 #415 #415 to #400 11.08 5.66 0.5 542.5139771 543.01 0.25 0.12 EX. 4-7 to #415 3.17 9.18 4.17 0.27 0.04 0.01 EX. 4-7 to #415 9.18 4.17 0.27 0.35 0.09 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0.23 0.15 542.66 542.93 #400 #400 to #401 13.31 6.09 0.6 539.6134033 540.19 0.25 0.14 #415 to #400 1.77 11.08 4.65 0.34 0.022 0.01 #415 to #400 11.08 4.65 0.34 0.35 0.12 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0.27 0.17 539.79 540.12 #401 #401 to #421-A 18.18 5.79 0.5 539.447937 539.97 0.25 0.13 #400 to #401 8.28 13.31 4.24 0.28 0.105 0.03 #400 to #401 13.31 4.24 0.28 0.35 0.1 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 0.26 0.17 539.61 539.89 #421-A #421-A to #405 18.03 5.74 0.5 538.6585083 539.17 0.25 0.13 #401 to #421-A 0.52 18.18 5.79 0.52 0.007 0 #401 to #421-A 18.18 5.79 0.52 0.35 0.18 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 0.31 0.16 538.82 539.34 #405 #405 to #406 1 18.06 5.75 0.5 538.2230225 538.74 0.25 0.13 #421-A to #405 87.85 18.03 5.74 0.51 0.691 0.35 #421-A to #405 18.03 5.74 0.51 0.35 0.18 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 0.66 0.33 538.55 539.07 #406 #406 to #409 78.36 24.94 9.7 538.0700073 547.74 0.25 2.42 #405 to #406 90.17 18.06 5.75 0.51 0.701 0.36 #405 to #406 18.06 5.75 0.51 0.35 0.18 TRUE 1.3 Full 0.5 2.96 1.92 539.99 540.51 #409 #409 to #409 (Out) 79.9 16.28 4.1 531.7703247 535.89 0.25 1.03 #406 to #409 43.84 78.36 24.94 9.67 0.461 4.45 #406 to #409 78.36 24.94 9.67 0.35 3.38 FALSE 1 Full 0.5 8.87 4.43 536.2 545.87 Road: Ivy Project #: 0250-002-R98 VDOT ROADWAY SPREAD ANALYSIS REPORT Units: U.S. Customary Metric (SI) Sheet: of Prepared by: MRM Date: 8/22/2017 Checked by: BAM Date: 8/22/2017 Drainage Composite Rainfall Inlet Previous Total Cross Logitudinal Gutter/Local Gutter Calculated Allowable ComputedSlot Sumped Ponded Intercepted Bypass Flow Bypass to Structure Station Offset VDOT Area Runoff Intensity Discharge Inlet Bypass Discharge Slope Slope Depress. Width Slope Manning's Spread Spread Length (100 % Eff.) Spread Depth Flow to Next Inlet Structure No. Standard acres Coefficient in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs ft/ft % ft ftlft n ft ft ft ft ft) (cfs) (cfs No. 3-2 120+00.00 21.50 DI-3B 18 No Gutter 0.40 0.75 4.00 1.21 0.00 1.21 0.020 2.9294 1.0000 0.0200 0.015 6.19 8.00 16.65 N/A 0.12 1.21 0.00 3-1 120+54.00 21.50 DI-3B 16 No Gutter 0.32 0.75 4.00 0.97 0.00 0.97 0.020 2.8784 1.0000 0.0200 0.015 5.73 10.00 14.77 N/A 0.11 0.97 0.00 Remarks: HEC-12 is used for spread and bypass computations All other computations done using GEOPAK Drainage Road: Ivy Project #: 0250-002-R98 VDOT ROADWAY SPREAD ANALYSIS REPORT Units: U.S. Customary Metric (SI) Sheet: of Prepared by: MRM Date: 8/22/2017 Checked by: BAM Date: 8/22/2017 Drainage Composite Rainfall Inlet Previous Total Cross Logitudinal Gutter/Local Gutter Calculated Allowable ComputedSlot Sumped Ponded Intercepted Bypass Flow Bypass to Structure Station Offset V Area Runoff Intensity Discharge Inlet Bypass Discharge Slope Slope Depress. Width Slope Manning's Spread Spread u Length (100 /o Eff.) Spread Depth Flow to Next Inlet Structure No. Standard acres Coefficient in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/ft % (ft) (ft/ft n ft ft ft ft ft) (cfs) (cfs No. 4-3 128+72.00 32.50 DI-4E 16 No Gutter 0.25 0.85 4.00 0.97 0.13 1.10 0.020 3.1648 1.0000 0.0200 0.015 5.62 8.00 15.06 N/A 0.11 1.10 0.00 4-2 126+77.00 21.50 DI-4EE 16 No Gutter 0.38 0.85 4.00 1.85 0.55 2.40 0.020 2.8069 1.0000 0.0200 0.015 7.32 8.00 20.68 N/A 0.15 2.27 0.13 4-3 4-1 125+00.00 21.50 DI-3B 16 No Gutter 0.88 0.80 4.00 2.81 0.00 2.81 0.020 3.3109 1.0000 0.0200 0.015 8.30 10.00 26.91 N/A 0.17 2.25 0.55 4-2 3-10 123+25.00 21.50 DI-3B 14 No Gutter 0.31 0.75 4.00 0.92 0.00 0.92 0.020 2.4730 1.0000 0.0200 0.015 5.77 8.00 13.83 N/A 0.12 0.92 0.00 4-1 Remarks: HEC-12 is used for spread and bypass computations All other computations done using GEOPAK Drainage Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Grate Inlet Calcs 8/24/2017 Area, A Perimeter, P Ponding Depth Allowable, d Weir Control Flow, Q. Orifice Control Flow, Qo Design Capacity, Qdes Actual Flow, Qamai Structure Type ft2 ft ft cfs cfs cfs cfs Qde:>Qanuai 3B-5 Std. DI-5; Grate A Type I; Std. PG-2A Type A2 Cover 6.00 12.80 5.44 243.61 37.62 37.62 38.25 NO 3B-6 Std. DI-7; Grate A Type I 6.00 12.80 N/A - Existing Condition N/A - Existing Condition N/A - Existing Condition N/A - Existing Condition 1.61 OKAY 3B-8 Std. DI-7; Grate A Type 1 6.00 12.80 N/A - Existing Condition N/A - Existing Condition N/A - Existing Condition N/A - Existing Condition 3.44 OKAY 313-9 Std. DI-7; Grate A Type 1 6.00 12.80 N/A - Existing Condition N/A - Existing Condition N/A - Existing Condition N/A - Existing Condition 13.09 OKAY 4-6 Std. DI-7; Grate A Type III 3.25 12.80 1.56 37.41 10.91 10.91 2.19 OKAY 5-2 Std. DI-7; Grate A Type 1 6.00 12.80 1.71 42.93 21.09 21.09 50.69 NO Kimley>>>Horn Roadside Ditch Calculations VDOT Form LD-268 Project: Ivy Road Sidewalk Improvements Project #: 0250-002-R98 Date: 8/21 /2017 Locality: Albemarle i = B / (Tc+ D)E INTENSITY FACTORS STORM EVENT B D E 2 -year 10 -year 49.02 10.50 0.82 46.95 9.50 0.73 Protective Covering* C o Station to Station Area Area of CA-inc. CA - accum. Left Side Sloe p Right Side Sloe p Bottom Width tc 2 Year Slope Type n Hydraulic Radius Allowable Shear Calculated Shear Allowable Velocity** Calculated Velocity 10 Year Depth Qlo De p Provided Depth C = 0.9 C = 0.5 C = 0.3 I Q I Q acre acre acre acre ft min in/hr cfs ft/ft ft lb/ft' lb/ft' fps fps in/hr cfs ft ft LT 122+00 LT 121+00 0.09 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.06 0.06 4:1 4:1 0.0 5.0 5.18 0.33 0.0240 Bare Earth 0.02 N/A N/A NA 2.3 1.39 6.67 0.43 0.21 0.96 LT 121+00 LT 120+00 0.24 0.06 0.09 0.10 0.12 0.19 3:1 3:1 14.5 6.2 4.87 0.92 0.0570 Bare Earth 0.02 N/A N/A NA 2.3 1.85 6.29 1.18 0.04 2.56 1 LT 120+00 LT 119+00 0.17 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.10 1.76 6:1 3:1 11.5 7.1 4.67 8.24 0.0165 EC-2 TYPE 1 0.04 0.28 1.5 0.3 1 N/A 2.04 6.04 10.66 0.36 0.91 LT 119+00 LT 118+00 0.16 0.03 0.08 0.04 0.08 1.85 8:1 3:1 2.2 7.9 4.50 8.31 0.0285 EC-2 TYPE 1 0.04 0.34 1.5 0.6 N/A 3.03 5.83 10.78 0.60 1.8 LT 118+00 LT 117+58 0.07 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.03 8.27 20:1 3:1 0.0 14.2 3.53 29.24 0.0548 EC-2 TYPE 1 0.04 0.37 1.5 1.3 N/A 4.50 4.66 38.52 0.83 1.50 LT 122+00 LT 123+00 0.10 0.03 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.06 6:1 4:1 0.0 5.0 5.18 0.32 0.0190 Bare Earth 0.02 N/A N/A N/A 2.3 2.01 6.67 0.41 0.20 1.22 LT 123+00 LT 124+00 0.13 0.05 0.08 0.00 0.08 3.12 10:1 10:1 0.0 5.8 4.96 15.46 0.0300 EC-2 TYPE 1 0.04 0.35 1.5 1 0.7 N/A 3.18 1 6.40 19.94 0.77 0.87 LT 124+00 LT 125+00 0.15 0.07 0.08 0.00 0.11 3.22 5:1 6:1 0.0 6.4 4.84 15.58 0.0360 EC-2 TYPE 1 0.04 0.42 1.5 0.9 N/A 3.94 6.25 20.11 0.93 1.22 LT 125+00 LT 126+00 0.12 0.04 0.08 0.00 0.08 3.30 6:1 6:1 0.0 6.8 4.74 15.63 0.0290 EC-2 TYPE 4 0.02 0.33 2.25 0.6 N/A 5.98 6.13 20.21 0.73 0.85 LT 126+00 LT 127+00 0.11 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.07 3.37 2.5:1 8:1 1.5 7.1 4.68 15.75 0.0260 EC-2 TYPE 4 0.02 0.34 2.25 0.6 N/A 5.88 6.05 20.38 0.66 0.66 LT 127+00 LT 128+00 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.08 3.45 2:1 6:1 1.5 7.3 4.62 15.94 0.0300 EC-2 TYPE 4 0.02 0.37 2.25 0.7 N/A 6.59 5.98 20.64 0.69 0.70 2 LT 128+00 LT 129+00 0.11 0.04 0.07 0.00 0.07 3.52 2:1 10:1 1.5 7.6 4.56 16.08 0.0290 EC-2 TYPE 4 0.02 0.32 2.25 0.6 N/A 5.96 5.91 20.83 0.62 0.62 LT 129+00 LT 130+00 0.47 0.03 0.44 0.00 0.25 11.34 6:1 8:1 1.5 15.7 3.37 38.19 0.0320 EC-2 TYPE 4 0.02 0.42 2.25 0.8 N/A 7.46 4.45 50.49 0.85 1.14 LT 130+00 LT 131+00 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.07 11.41 2:1 2:1 1.5 15.9 3.34 38.17 0.0340 EC-2 TYPE 4 0.02 0.62 2.25 1.3 N/A 9.92 4.42 50.48 1.21 1.64 LT 131+00 LT 132+00 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.07 11.49 2:1 2:1 2.0 16.1 3.33 38.22 0.0320 EC-2 TYPE 4 0.02 0.62 2.25 1.2 N/A 9.62 4.40 50.57 1.14 1.19 LT 132+00 LT 133+00 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.03 11.51 2:1 2:1 2.0 16.3 3.31 38.11 0.0270 EC-2 TYPE 4 0.02 0.64 2.25 1.1 N/A 9.03 4.38 50.45 1.19 1.35 LT 133+00 LT 134+00 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.12 11.63 2:1 2:1 3.5 16.4 3.29 38.28 0.0200 EC-2 TYPE 4 0.02 0.64 2.25 0.8 N/A 7.83 4.36 50.69 1.06 1.63 LT 134+00 LT 134+25 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.02 11.65 2:1 2:1 5.3 16.5 3.29 38.27 0.0200 EC-2 TYPE 4 0.02 0.59 2.25 0.7 N/A 7.42 4.35 50.69 0.89 1.64 = Additional CA added via incoming culverts * Temporary linings designed for 2-year storm