Loading...
Storm Reportu 7 ~ r~ Jt~ are ~r r~ ~~ 7 BC RA ~ TER I -1'R~7EC"I' E~~'ER~IE ~I~TER - E~'ISTIN~ ~C~NI~ITIt~I~TS SLIIVII~I~R~ I~ TER 3 - ~3FF-SITE AI_,I'"SIS TER - E T S'T`S ~~I`I'ER l~TT4~I: PL~~.T ~ TER ~ - I~IS~I.~SSII~ ~JF ~I~ ETS ~ ~ TER - {APE TICS A `TE~TC"E °AI, I I'E I - ~I T E I~ I3 - AI~ I1 EFTS 1'E I - GEt~TE IL I'R'I' ICE L~ I~ - ~ LIl1~I Y" ST I~ ;A,E ~L,I~I.,T`IC?S I'E I~ E - I' LI ~'' INTER LT ~ I,IT~' Pa I.,IJ~r~ TI 2 ~,~?~ ~~r~ P~,~.~EC~`IVERYfE~I a ~. . ~_ m ~' ~ ~ ~~ s ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ To oazr l~nowled~e, there have been no erosion problerxas pertaining to the site, them are no critical or sensitive areas, the project does neat contain difficult site conditions, and there are no specific require. ants included in the basin plan. also tc~ our o~vlede, there are no fuel to s, wells, or septic drain fields located on site. b ~~ , . S~`d :..~:~,"~~~ ,. The site is bordered to the west b~ multi-fanlilg~ residences and a co~nmercia( building. Jefferson .venue borders site to the north, helm r~vexae I~ ~l) borders tlae site to the south. The site is 'bordered by Grove woad to thy; Fast. lased on soils information front tl~e site e believe that most if not all rzzz~off infiltrates. The developed site will use an underground infiltration facility to best n~ziz~zic existing conditions. Since infzltration is utilized a downstream analysis is not provided. C~,A~ ;~~~~ $N~~1T~ S"fC? iNATEFt CaNTR.{3~. PLAN b~, ~ ~..t_~m.., ru._M,a~.,~~~e,~... .as.~. ~.. 3,_.v,~:..u~. r ~ a, ~. Vl/cr~~r- t~crcriit~y System runoff from. the parking lot will be treated using Sto Filter c ridges zuaz~ufactured by ontech Sto water Solutions prior to entering tla to Tech c er system. Runaff from the frontage i prove tints will alssa be treated using Sto ..Filter c ages prior to entering the Stcz Tech chamber system, See Appendix for the water quality calculations. ~~ 4~.,. Ate: e.-„ ,.~.~~a~..r~'Sr.,,f~~. ~w:k.,~ ,s -~.. x~a,, x .~.,.~. ~.~.,~-,~~~~~~~~"~~~.~.sJ~~.,i ` .~ .,,. ..~,'h ".. ~.~. ~`a~ ~u .,.:~._.~. w:`~n mss,...:. n., -. ir~i u equine tint #1: re~a~rc~ticar~ Stogy ate Site [c~~s Final plans and a report will e sub fitted with the final desi Vin. 4 irzi urn Regeeire e'nt #, ~'c~ntructican Star water P~rf(uticzn re~rentic~n Plan (S PPP) ~ S~~I~PP gill lee provided separately alozag with the final report. ~inirrtum Regeeirearaent #3: Sc~ur~e Centres( Po((uticzn Pollution will occur prizaaarity via assengez° vehicles driving and parl~ing on-site. 'There are no applicable source cozatrol pollcition preventioza optiozas relevazat for such modes czf pollution. t'olluted stozTzaawater will be treated y ~ toz~znFilter system. irai um Requirement #4: Preservation cif steers( rainage S~ste s sncf utfatfs This proposal utilizes onsite inliltratiozz, inimu Require ent 5~ n®Site ,tor water snse ent za-site stornawater naazaagement is acconaplislaed with the zzse of pla ed site grading, catch basins, water quality treatzzzent systezaas~ and azz infiltration system. inimu Require ent unr~ff 7`rest ent Tla.e proposal utilizes to Filter systems for treatznezat of reznoff from the paring lot, ini u egeeire ent 7.1~'( ~'oratro Flow control is not applicable since infiltration is utilizedA ini u Require tint titian s rotection o jurisdictional wetlands exist oza the site. ini u equine tint 9e sinl atersireei Pis inq This is not applicable since infiltration is utilized. Minimum Requirement #i0a ®perution snd Nlsintenanee ~n C~peratioza and ainten ce anual will e provided with the final report. operation and aizatenance anual will e provided witia the 1~nal report. ~ ITS . 4~°+ ~ ~., ~ (~LT~ s~IEN~'S STO AEB AGE ~'i~R ~tJGET aQU BASIN Is thds aca draalvdaust Ci 7 fLQ CHART A ~stachsd SFR sar dup9sx? "~ Is !bars sxlstdng YE$ Ca4 T~ &LQ T H A~YOd nt ~~ sits? jj °me, is the ~~ a:.a to ,~c ,ter ~ ~g•i nt `? rt~~ St) AVER N iJ FUR ~'E PtI~E~ SOUND BASIN Fi e I°-,7 F1~~re~:~.r~ Shcaizac~ S dog ~~iid°* Rc~jcts Yaaur pars! is aSm ftz and thers ds 4s~x than fl a~s~s m{ ! and ddstutb6n~g a~tfxltg. [3sasieg+ a LL, F CEL £RQSEE$ RN® ~EDI~EN9' ~®iROI. PEA iSF£~~) s®. sgcca~ra z~a.~ k `t ~-:a tn~ ~ ~ eet ~ r~~n~•in s.~t~mn s-s,ae ~~ tb® ch.ca~ac a~ ~~~u~~ t~,a t~ dsvsEap LAs SF'ESG. ~^` `•, ~,~~.. ~ I-3~~1 FEBRUARY, 1992 ~~C~`TEC' ~'~1I., ~F~'~T PO Box 44890 Tacoma VtilA 98444 253-537-949Q 253-537T94C11 fax ~lan.taary 4, 2446 T6)6397 ehn I=?etal ~'.e~~ter, LI~C X02 ~el~a~ Avenue t~fest ~eljaz, t~TA 98579 Attention; fir. Sarah She an Sbjeot: eoechnical iC~rizteeri~~g ep~-i~t ~3 is pleased to submit this report describing the results of our geotechnicat engineering evaluatian for the residential development pl ed at 502 Yehn vs Nest d 107 Solberg Street in Y'e1rm, ashingtc~n. is report has been prepared far the exclusive use of '`elm Dental tenter, ~~. and their consultants, far specific application to this projeet, in accardanc with generally accepted gecatechnical engineering practice. i?Ians call far the removal oftlie existing home and dental c~ffce and constructian of a new dental offic:,, associated parking, d a storm water infiltration facility, The properties will Dave access from Solberg St. LO TORS' M[E"JC" (DTs ~TVe explored surface and subsurface conditions at the project site on Noverrzer 1$, 2406. Our explaratian progr comprised the following elements: A s ace reconnaissance of the o parcels; • `d'en test pits (designated 'TP-1 throngl~ TP_3~ advanced aa,ross file site; Cane ~~•ain. Size analyses of an-site sails; 7'_ree Inf3itratic~n Tests; and ,J~nuarV 5, ?~Q7 ~~~R, lnc. Tfl6~71 Yelrn l~~ntal t1 review ofpublislzed geologic and seismologic onaps and Iiteratttre. Table 1 snrzznzarizes the approximate functional loeatians a.nd tez~zzination depths of our subsurface exploratioizs, anal 1~ i~,ure 2 depicts their approxi~zzate relative locations, `l'Eze following text sections describe the procedures used for excavation of test pits The specific number and locatians afour explaratians were selected u3 relatia to the existing site features, der the constraints of surface access, and underground utility conflicts. a Test Pit Procedures dux exploratory test pits were excavated with ateel-tracked excavator operated. by an independent fiz working under sucon ct to E3 ~1n engineer from our rnz continuously observed tine test pit excavations, logged the subsurface conditions, d collected samples. Ater we logged each test pit, the excavator operator backfilled it whiz excavated soils and t ped the surface, Iitrtiou Test Procedures e performed falling head infiltration tests at a depth ofabout 7 feet within test pits Tl'-l, 2, and 3. All falling React tests were perFarm.ed in general accordance exTith the falling head type iltratiazt testing pracedare described izi the El?A publication. C?~-site ~T~as:ea~vai~~ Ti°ec~trn~nt ~n~ L7is~ac~sal ~yjstet~z 1 ~~Q, described belos~. January ~, 2107 ~~l?A, Inc. T06397 f Y~Itz`t 1:72nta1 ~ ~-iazch-di star PVC pipe was tamped 3 to 5 inches into the sail of the upper part of the infiltration layer, then 2 inches of coarse, clean drain racy was placed at thc, booan of the pipe to prevent scauxing. Soil was placed and tamped outside the pipe far stabilization and to preveazt upwelling oftest `eater around the pipe. The pipe was then filled twice with 1 foot of water to pre-satazrate the test sails. Because, in all cases, i fast of water infiltrated fhe test sails in Less thaza 10 zzzinutes, fuz-ther saturatian was deemed unnecessary and the zltratc?n test praceeded. The pipe was tizen lined with 6 istcizes of °ater, ad> becausc sitc sails e~verc faund to be rapidly pcczueable, the time required far intiltratian cif the entire 6 inch. colua7trz of water was recorded, e repeated tizis procedure three times at cacti test location and used ozaly the slawest of the 3 recorded inliratian rates in ouz° analysis. .0 SITE Ct~I~ITIOPd e following sectiozzs of text present our observations, zneasurezxzents, findings, and interpretations regarda`ng, szzrface, sail, grozzndater, seismic, liquefaction, anal infiltration cozzditions. 3.I nrf'ac Conditions e project site is relatively level with no noticeable change iri elevation. Tine 502 helm Ave west parcel curt°cntly has an existing Ye:izrz I?ental Office and 107 Solberg Street czzrrently has a horse on tine lat. Tlie remainder of the sites arc yard or arltang~ 'vegetation onsite eonsists of grass and same small yard trees. o signs of s ace flow, such as stre ch els or erosional scars, were Hated during our reconnaissance. No panda are osite. I~lo seeps or springs were observed. The enclosed exploratian lags provide a detailed description of flee soil strata izcountered in our subsurface explorations, .Z.l I`.boratary Testing Our Efrain Size Analyses of the s dy gravel zn test pits Tl'-1, found within the zone where infiltration will likely occur "7 feet below czzrrent grades} indicate that the silt content is it3 the range of 5 percent. The zoistaare content of soils withiz~z the zone of int zltratio is sheaf percent as well. ~YTe interpret mast of the upper soils as being dose to olstizrzuzn 3noisture, The enclosed laboratory testing sheets graphically present our test remits, and 'S'able 2 su arizes these results. January 5, 20Q7 E'RA, lnc. ~C~6397 ! Yelr~ l~~nta( 3.~ rc-nnclFVter +~anitias At the tune of our recannaissance (November 1 ~, 2006), we did not observe groundwater in any of our explorations, which extended to depths of up to 10 feet. I'~o sigzlificarzt mottling was observed, It is not anticipated that ground water ~~=ill be encountered during ical canste onstructiozz activities. 3a5 Seismic Canditios used on our analysis of subsurface exploration lags dour review ofpublislzed geologic maps, e interpret sail condtians on the site to correspond with a seisrrzic site class Sc, as defzned y Table 1615.1.5 afthe 2003 Zrxterrzatiorzcz113uiZdirtg Cade (I13C,?. According to ttze IBC, flee site is Seismic Region 3. I.aigel'actian Patential Liquefaction is a sudden increase u3 pore water pressure and sudden loss of sail shear strength caused by shear strains, as cauld result Pram a ea .quake. Research has shown that saturated, loose, one to meth sands with a fines (silt and c1ay~ content less than about 20 percent are zrzost suscepfiible to liquefaction. Vde did net observe easily liquefiable soils onsite. .'7 Infiltration ondifiams A sta water inltratian facility is pl ed for the site. In our three test pits lacated in the vicinity ofthis facilityp test pits TP-l , 2, and 3, we observed loose silty sandy vei with a es cantent that eve ed ut 5 percent.. According to the IT. S.D.A.. Te ral Triangle, our laboratory analyses of this soil indicate that it is a gravel, course sand type A with azz il•Xltratiozz rate of 1 minute/inch, The results of our inl tiara tests are presezzted in `Pale ~, .Because ' zl tiozz was zxloderately rapid, we recorded the e necessary fora 6 inch high col of water to infiltrate completely as discussed in section. 2.2 a ve. Based on our field testing, the .Average Infzltratiorz Rate for soils at a depth of 7 feet is 3.0 minutes per inch. After incorpara " g a Factor of Safety csf 2, e recozi~end a Design ltration Rate of 6 minutes per inch X10 inches per hour). January ~, 2Ca0~' ~~R~, Inc. T0~397 / Yalm I~ent~l .fl Qtll°dCLUSIl'~ ~(? L ATI(~ Pla€~s call for the preparation of a new dental. office, paved par113 ing, and infiltration of stoma water an site. e offer the fallowing conclusions arrd recatnznendationsa e peasibilitya Based on our faeld explorations, research, d analyses, the propased deveiopmenf appears feasible from a geotecllnical standpaint, pravided that flee reconaxnendations in Section 4 and in this raper[ are followed. p Foundation Captions: ~e recommend canventional spread faotings supported on fuurll` compacted native soils. I~ecan~rnetldatio~as for spread footings are pravided in Section ~. door Captions; e recommend either a concrete slab-on-grade arjois~-supported flaars for the propased camercial structure. Sonic over=excavatian will be necessary for slab-on-grade floors. Recamn~endatians far slab-on-grade floors are included in Section 4. C3nsite Infiltratian: Based on our ansite inl zliratian tests d sails analyses, e race end at Design Infaltratian Rate of inures per inch far sails in the vicinity of the planned infiltration facility. Asphalt Pavement: Structural fill subbases appear da not appear to be necessary pravided that sub-grades are compacted to 95 percent txtax%tzaurn dry density. A pavement section, consisting of inches of asphalt paverent over a ~ inch crushed rock base, is recarrunended for the pl ed par ` g area. e following text sections of this repart present our specific geotechnical anciusions and recd endations cancerrting site preparation, spread footings, slab-on"-grade floors, dr " age, sub e wvalls, ands c fill. The ~VSIaCaT S d Specifications and Standard Plans cited herein refer to PSI?Ca`T publications 41-1 Q, ,~'lada~d Spec~eatiaaa~ fa~° Z2orxd, rz~e, xzcl ~`unzcipal C`aslrctiarz, d 1-01, S`inndard 1'Zas far Z~aa, &rig~, arzd tblutziclpal Cnnstr~tiora, respectivelye 4. Site Pretsratin Preparatian oftlxe praject site should involve erasion contresi, tempo .drainage, clearing, stripping, cu ' g, falling, exeavatians, and subgrade compaction. Tecrzpar Iaraiz°~a~_ We recarned intercepting and divertixag any potential saurces of surface ar near-surface water within the construction zones before strrpph~g begins. Because the selection of an apprapriate drainage system will depend on the water quantity, season. weather conditions, canstruction. January 5, 2~C~7 ~~RA, Inc. TC~6397 9 Yei Dental s~quenee, and contractor's etlaads, final decisions regarding drainage systems are best made ua the field at the t@ e of construction Based on Dear curreaat uaaderstanding of the construction plaaas, sua-face and subsurface conditions, we anticipate that curbs, berms, or ditches placed aroma t[ae work areas will adequately intercept saarface water runoff. W ,~`rezal S'c~d cant To~seail: ~ sad d topsail rnantlixa the site is not suitable for use as s aural fzll under any circ stances, due to hula organic content. consequently, these materials can lee used only for non-structural p Dees, such as in laaadscaping areas. Black ash: The black silty sandy gravel fleet underlies flee site is currently near optimuan moisture content and 'ght possibly be reused ass aural Ile depending an conditions at time of construction. It is arzore moisture sensitive then the outwasll below aaad will be difficult to reuse during wet weather conditions. glacial ~~ta~as: The sandy gravel with cobbles d boulders that underlies the site is currently near optim moisture content d c e reused as structural fill. This soil is less zaaois e sensitive axed can likely be reused in wet weather conditions. .~ Spr~~d Footings In our opiaaion, conventional spread footings will provide adequate support far the proposed structure if the sugrades are properly prepared. ~e offer the following eornents and recommendations for purposes of January ~, 2Jt~7 T{1~3971 ~`o4m Dental ERA. 0nc. footing design and constzaz.ction. Footi~ LJepths and Widths: For fz~ost and erosion. protection, the base of all exterior footings should bear at least 24 inches below adjacent outside grades. To limit post-construction settlements, continuous {wall) and isolated {column} footings should be at least 1 and 24 izrcl-zcs wide, respectively. 1-3earin~Sub~rades and Bearing Pressures: The native ashy layez• and glacial outwash underlying the proposed building footprint at subgrade elevations will adequately support spread footings. In general, before footing concrete is placed, any localized zones of loose soils exposed acz~oss file footing subgrades should be compacted to a ,unyielding condition, and any localized zones of sots, organic, or d.ebz-is-laden soils should be over-excavated and replaced with suitable structural Villa Surrade Qbservation. All footing sugrades should consist of either firm, unyielding, native soils or suitable s aural fill materials. Footings shotzid never be cast atop loose, sot~t, or frozeza soil, slough, debris, existing uneoutrolled fill, or surfaces covered y standing water. We recoznzxzend that the condition of all subgrades be observed by an E3 representative before any concrete is placed. B " _r~ Pressures: In our opinion, for static loading, footings that bear on properly prepared subgrades can be designed for the maximum allowable soil bearing pressures of 2540 psf. Aone-third increase in allowable soil bearing capacity maybe used for abort-term toads created by seismic or wand related activities. Footing Settlements: V1~e estimate that total post-construction settlerrzents of properly designed footings e g on properly prepared subgrades will riot exceed 1 inch. Differential settlements for comparably loaded elements may approach one-half' of this value over horizontal distances of approximately 50 feet. Footing and Stead Bc~Ffili: To provide erosion protection and lateral load resistance, we recommend that all footing excavations be ackf"z11ed on both sides of the footings, retaining walls, and stewalis after the concrete has cured. Either imported. s aural fill or non.-organic on-site soils can ba used for this purpose, contingent on suitable moisture content at the time of placement. Regardless of soil type, all- footing backfill soil should e compacted to a density of at least 4 pexcent {based on AST1~1.D-1557). Lateral Resis ce: Footings that have been properly be died as reco .ended above will resist lateral movements by means of passive earth pressure and. base friction, We reco end using an allowable passive pressure of 300 psf for the ular backfill. '~Ie reco erzd an allowable base friction coefficient of 035 for granular soils. January 5, Zt~Q7 ~'~397 I Yo1n1 mental E~i~A, inc. 4~a4 I~rainae ~~stenrs e of`f'er the following recommendations and co rents for drainage design for construction purposes. erizzreter Drains; ~'e taco. end that the buildings be encircled whiz a perirzaeter drain system to collect seepage eater. This drain should consist of a ~--ilach-diameter perforated pipe within an envelope ofpea gravel or washed rock, extending at least incites on all sides of the pipe. Tl'lze gravel. envelope should be wrapped with filter fabric to reduce the migration offines froze the surrouzzding soils, Ideally, the drain invert would be i;zstalled no more than 8 incites above the base of the periza~eter footizzgs, Subfloor Draurs; Because floor sugrades will on a grazlular material, we do not recomanez2d the use of szzbfloor drains. Discharge Considerations; If possible, ail perilxzetr drains should discharge to a suitable discharge location. Runoff Water; hoof-runoff and surface-runoff water should zac?t discharge into the perimeter drain system. Instead, these sources should discharge into separate titlirze pipes and e routed away from the building to a sto drain or other appropriate location. grading; and Capping; final site grades sizozzld slope do ward away froze the building so that runoff water will flow by gravity to suitable collection points, rather than ponding near the building. Ideally, the area surrounding the building would be capped with concrete, asphalt, or law-permeability (silty} soils to minimize or precludes acerwater infiltration_ 4.a AsphaIt Paveczaent Since asphaltic pavements will be used for the parking area d; possibly, driveways, we offer the following co ants d endatiorzs for pavement design d cores coon. Sub de Pr~aration; All soil subgrades should be thorouglz.ly compacted, then proof-rolled with a loaded d p ck or heavy compactor. y localized zones of yielding subgrade disclosed during this proof-roiling operation should e aver excavated to a maxim. depth of 12 inches d replaced with. a suitable structural. fill material. Pavement Materials; l~ or the base course, we race end using ' ported cr had rock. Native materials shall °ni u Thic ass Pave ant +~onr°sc &'ridng Areas ig 'I"rafc and riveway ~.rcas asphalt Concrete I'avezzzent 2 inelzes `~ inches Crushed Pock Lase ~ inches izaches ~sraaacclaa- Fill Su}~base (if zaeecled~ I `', isaczaes I2 Co~actian and ~?bservation; All subbase and base course material should be cozxzpacted to at least ~S percezzt Jancaan~ 5, 20Q7 ~~RA, lnc. TC}~397 I Ye(m flerstai ofthe 1Vlodificd Proctor ma~imu~n dry density {A S 1=)-157), and all asphalt concz~te sbould be eornpacted to at least 92 percezzt of the Riee value (AST7~1 D-2043). ~e recon~znend that an E3RA representative be retained to observe the compaction of each course before any overlying layer is placed. For the subbase and pavement course, compaction is best observed by means of frequent density testing, For the base course, methodology observations and hand-probing are more appropz°iate than density testing. 4.~ Structural Fill `a<'he term "structural fill" refers to any placed under fouzadations, xetaizaing walls, slab-on-gade floors, sidewalks, pavements, and others ctures. fur comments, conclusions, d recozzrznendations concerning s aural fzll are presented in the following paragaps. Fill Placement: Clean sand, granuiithic gravel, crushed room, soil zni< res, d recycled materials should be pieced in ho ` nti lifts not exceeding B inches in loose thickness, and cash lift should be thoroughly compacted with a mechanical compactor. Compaction Criteria: Using the modified Proctor test (AS`l°1Vi:1~-1557) as a s lord, we recd end that s aural fill used for v `ous on-site applications e compacted to flee following .minim densities: Fill Applictiozz Footing sub de and bearing pad Foundation backfill Slab-on-gade floor sub de and subbase Pavement Subgrade supper 2 feet) Pavement Subgrade (below 2 feet percent percent 35 percent 5 percent 0 percent Sub~-ade t~bservation and Compaction '1'estin: 12egazdlsss of material or Iocation~ all structural fill sbould be placed over firm, unyielding subgrades prepared in accoraaace with the ~z1 Pr°~~aratir~n section ofthis report. °l'lze condition of all subgades should be osez~ved by geoteclinical personnel before filling or constnzction begins. Also, X11 soil coxnpaetion sbould be verified by means of in-piece density tests performed d g fill placement so that adequacy of soil compaction efforts may be evaluated as e wark progresses. January 5, 2QQ7 ~~i~A, lnc~ T~?6397 ! Yeit~ C1er~tal ~. ~t~14 NEED DITIC3I~T R'6~`ICI~: because the future perfannance and integrity of ttze structural elezrzents will depend lamely an praper site preparation, drainage, fill placezrzent, and cons coon pracedures, n3az~itaring and testizzg by experienced geateclanical ersanel shauld be cansidered an integral part of the car~structian pracess, ~ansequently, eve recczznend that E3 be retained to provide flee fallaing post-repart services: ,l~nuary 5; 2QQ7 `6`t~63~71 Y~;Itn ~?enia€ ERA, inc. 'fie appreciate the opportr ~lnity to be of service ~~~ tP~s project. If yoga hay=e ~n}~ q~esti~a?s regarding t1~is report car any aspects oftlae project, please feel free to contact onr office. sincerely, Casey I~. Lowe, E.I.T. Engineer 3ames E Iirigharn, P.E. Principal Engineer fJEB Enclosures: Pigaare l --- l~c~c~rttt~n ,11~lrxp Pi e - ~`ite c~ ~aplr~ratlr~n Plan .Attac~Zrei; Test Pit Lags TI-'- t tlZrcauh `F-3, aS`i~v~ .r~alyszs January 5, 2Qt37 ~' ~u ~--1lFe~ eLltill {~~~~ depth feet l~']ateriall~escription ERA, Inc. Sample No. S-1 g_~ Depth (feet} N€aterial ]I2escr% t~ ion Sample No. S-I Depth (feet} l~Yateriai Description Sample No. ~-1 Logged bv: c:,z`~I, P~f~£nt ~* ieY~ 7iZ~ PSlnt~ ~°/Q~ 3.0 in. 75.0 100.0 1.5 in. (37.5) 78.5 3f4 in. 19.0) 56.0 368 €r~. 9.5-fnrn X6.6 No. 4 {4.75-rr~m} 30e1 lao.lo 2.o0-mm 10:5 o. 20 .850-mm s.4 No. 40 (.425-nam} 7.7 o, 60 {,250-m~ .2 r~o. t oo ~. ~ sOPomm~ .~ Igo. 200 (.1375-m .2 Percent sy IZ~ FfaCtt~n ~~IIlt ®arse gavel '~~.~ Fine gavel 26.0 hoarse Sande ~ 8.5 ~ I*~Iediunl Sand 2.9 0P._... Fine Sand 25 ~ I~0.0 ASTf~ Ciassificatian fo~ap Name 8rc?wn poofly graded gravel with silt and sand Symbol (~F'-~~ E3R~! ! t31"~ c~ii c~la~ii i~rl rata Si~eet c 0 m a:~ ~ ._ ~~ c ~' ~ ~ s~ .~ ca a~ sa. ~ c~u °' "' i ~. 0 cs 0 c? c~ T- ,-- c3 ~- ca c~ c~ e~ ~ o c3 c~ s~ ~ c} ~' o ess m r.. cfl asa °~ cYi c~3 ~- s- ~~. ~. ~_ I ~:; F- ~. v; ~~, r\ ~ ~ --~- -'_ -_~`__f __ ~ i0. . l~ t ~.F. ~tl, r ,; ;--- °~:~" -- , i ~ __~ Efi7; a~ :yt~°4; i E ~ ~'- I ~ N i€ r 9 c ~3 LL! O_ Lkl li !-^ ~ ~, ~ 6- N ~ ~ ~ _ ~ W c 47 C3 C 0 ! L f1? U? LL. c:3 ~ c ~ Q ~ ~ J ~ Cfl ~ ~ ~ ~,} C3 -3 ~ a m o ~ m ~ ~ Z C? ~- N ~ ~ t~ J G m ~ x o as ~ ~ <t a .- ~ C? U csa j Q O V `r a~i rn L Q] Q 4j {j ~ Q~~~ ~NN CL ~ ~ ~z~, ~~,~w ~,~o~ > m ~ ~~~ c ~ a, > m~,~~ a ~Q~~ `~¢oa ~ W ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ c~.~ 4 E~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ W d ~ k ~ F Q~ a CIJ W = }L' 3-r &- ~~-~ [2 W {~ ~ ~ ~ c>a<c<co :~c~~<~ PE I~{ ~'. L IN ~ T At~~ ~'AL,CLTT A'T~t~I`~~ ~. _ ~, ~_ _ StormSHED Calaulations Job Na.fProiect, E}b?42 Today's Denfal Date; ifl?f07 By; JG r T>vC ©Ut~Ci U 1(}f~ Yr PekQ = ~},~~'~ cfS Peak C>ut C.~. (}.1373 cfs Peak Stg: 103.50 ft Active Vol: 947,61 ~f roject recips [2 yr] 2.50 in [5 yr~ 0.40 in [1 yr] 3.50 in [25 yra 0.00 in [100 yr] 4.50 in ~6 trio] 1.80 in l~ydll~ Peak _______ (cfs) 140 yr Qut 0.14 rainage tea: nsite l•iy Method; ~ I-iyd Peak Factory 434.00 Storm lour. 24.00 hrs Area Pervious 0.1900 ac Impervious 0.3700 ac Total 0.5600 ac Supporting ata. Pevious Data: Landscaping pervious CN Data; Pavement and Sidewalks Building F2oof Pervious TG ata: Plow type; Description: Fixed Assume 5 min irnperrious TC Data: Flow type: Description; Fixed Assume 5 min asiniC~ Peak _______ (cfs~ Peak ~° Peak Vol font Area (hrs) (ac-ft) (ac) 7.00 4.1701 4,5640 Loss ethod: >G GN number As; 0.20 Into; 10.00 min TC 80,00 0.08 hrs 98.00 0.08 hrs 80.00 0,1900 ac 98n00 0.2400 ac 98.00 0.1300 ac Length: Slope. 0,00 ft 0.00°I° Length: dope: 0.00 ft 0.00°/® Peak T Peak Vol Area (hrs) (ac-ft) ac 8.44 0.1704 4.56 8.04 01.1266 0.56 8.40 4.0841 4.56 8.04 0.4556 4e56 oeff~ Travel Time 5.0000 5.00 min Coeff; Travel Time 5.0000 5,00 min ethod aintype Event lLoss SBUiifS!GS TYPEIA 104 yr BUNtSCS TYP~1,R 10 yr S~UHISCS TYPE1R 2 yr ~i30iH1SCS l'i'PE1A 6 mo X:lStudios\Civi!\u640Q\Q624'2-Todays_pen#allDesir~n\StormlCalcs\0~2~t2PrelimGalcs.doc 4 f 1 1 Mart EI: 1OOA000 ft IVlax EI: 103.5000 ft ~ 4ntri Basin: ontrib Flyd: Stage Input Vcalt~e Vc~lt~rrae 100.00 0.00 cfi 0.00 of 0.0000 acft 100.50 71.00 cf 71,00 cf 0.0016 acft 103.00 876.00 cf 876.00 cf 0.0201 acft 103.50 947.00 cf 947,00 cf 0.0217 acft Based pan 14 Strl~Teeh ehaders. Stage-Storge Table for node StornnTeh Stage Vol ideal Stage {ft~ (cf~ (c-ft~ (ft~ 104.44 4.44 4,4004 141.90 144,14 14.20 0.0403 142.44 140,24 28.44 4.4447 102,14 144.34 42,64 4.4414 142.24 144.40 56.84 4.4413 142,34 104.54 71.44 0.4016 102.44 144.60 103.20 4.0424 142.54 144.70 135.44 4.4031 102.64 144,80 167.64 4,0038 142.70 104.90 199,80 4.0446 102.80 141.00 232,04 4.4453 142.94 °141.14 264,24 4.4061 143.44 14'1.20 296.44 4.4468 143.10 141.30 328.64 4.4475 143,24 141.40 364.84 4.4483 103.30 141.54 393.40 4.4494 143.44 141,60 425.24 4.4098 143.54 101,74 457.44 4.4145 141.84 489.84 4.4112 Veal ~~ 521.84 554.44 586.24 618,44 650.64 682.80 715.44 747,24 779.44 811.64 843.84 876.00 894,24 944.40 91$.60 932,84 947.44 Vol (ac-ft) 0.4124 0,0127 4,4135 4.4142 4.4149 4.415T 0.4164 4.4172 4.4179 4.0186 4.4194 0.4201 4,4244 4.4248 0.4211 4.42'14 4.4217 X:\S t adios\GviE\060©0\Qb242-Tedays_Den; ai\DesignlS f orm\Caies\©b242PrelimCa fcs.dac 2111 StormSHE(~ Caicala#ions Job Na.fProiect: 0b2d2 Today's Denfal Rafe: #f17t07 By: JG trot fracture 1 : Cha er ofo - f~ 'ISC arge ruing cu e C~escri t~~#ltipi~ Qrifice Start Ei Max EI l#~cremer#t 100.0000 ft 103.5000 ft 0.10 Stage l~iseharge 100,0000 ft 0.1373 cfs 103.5000 ft 0.1373 cfs asp on 1 StormTe chambers. I Stage-Discharge Table for control: harnbrottom Stage Discharge Stage [discharge (ft) {cfs) (ft~ {cfs~ 104.00 4.1373 141.90 4.1373 940.10 4.1373 102.40 4.1373 1 40.20 4,1373 102.1 d 4.1373 100.34 4.1373 102.20 4.1373 100.40 4.1373 102.30 4.1373 140.50 0.1373 142.40 4.1373 100.60 0.1373 102.50 4.1373 100.74 0.1373 902.60 0.1373 140.84 0.1373 142.74 4.1373 100.94 4.1373 102,80 4,1373 id1.dd 0,9373 942.90 4.1373 101.10 4,1373 103,44 4.1373 141.20 0.1373 943.10 0,9373 101.30 0,1373 1d3.2d 0.1373 901.40 0.1373 103.34 4.1373 141.54 0.137;1 103.40 0.1373 901.60 4.1373 103.50 4.1373 141.70 4.1373 109,80 0,1373 X:\Stisciios\CiviBl05oo0106242-Todays_DentallDesignlS+arnilCalcs1~362R2~reiiniCaics.doc 3/1 i t~e'sht cif 1r~cremental 1r~crernentai alr~uiativ~ ~urrat~lative iysterr~ (1n} chamber (ft~} 8t ~ft~} Chamber ~ft3} ayste (ft~} 42 0 4.85 67.66 947 41 4 9.86 66.61 965 44 0 4.85 65,97 924 39 4 0.85 65.12 912 38 4 0,$5 64.28 944 37 4 4,85 63.43 888 36 0.05 0.88 62.59 876 35 0.16 0.96 61.71 864 34 4.28 1 a04 60.75 854 33 4,64 1.27 59:74 836 32 0.80 1.41 58,44 818 31 4.95 1.51 57.03 798 34 1.07 1,60 55.52 777 29 1,18 1.67 53.92 755 28 1.27 1,73 52.25 732 27 1.36 1.79 50.52 747 26 1,45 1.86 48.73 682 25 1.52 1..91 46.86 656 24 1.58 1.95 44.95 629 23 1.64 1.99 43.00 642 22 1.74 2.43 41.40 574 21 1.75 2.47 38.97 546 24 1,84 2.11 36.94 517 19 1.$5 2,14 34.79 487 18 1.89 2.17 32.65 457 17 1.93 2.24 34.48 427 16 1.97 2.23 28.28 396 15 2.41 2,25 26.45 365 14 2.04 2.28 23.84 333 13 2.07 2.30 21,52 341 12 2.14 2.32 19,22 269 11 2.13 2.34 16.94 237 14 2.15 2,35 14.57 204 9 2.18 2.37 12.21 171 8 2,24 2.38 9,84 138 7 2,21 2.39 7.46 "104 6 4 Q.85 5.07 71 5 4 0.85 4.23 59 4 4 0.85 3.38 47 3 4 4.85 2.54 35 2 Q 4.85 1 A69 4 1 Q t1,~5 ~.~55 12 Tota! Gharnber Storage = 45.8 ft~ 67.66 GaEculatlons are based upon a 6 inch storm base under the chambers orparate fface 2Q Beaver Road Wethersfield, ~T 06109 {$88p-892-2694 Fax {866} 328-8401 t S#ormSNED Caicula#ians Job No.fProjeci: C1~242 Today's Denial Y~1 ormTeeh satin. a Project F'recips [2 yr] 2.50 in [5 yr] 0.00 in [10 yr] 3A5O in [25 yr] 0.00 in [100 yr] 4,50 in [6 mo] 1.80 in ydlL~ Peak Peak T ------- ~cfs~ {hrs 100 yr C3ut YF (3,05 6.67 rainage rea: Yel Fronts l-9y ethod; SBtlH yd Peak Factor: 4$4.00 Storm lour; 24.00 hrs Area 0tN Pervious 0.03400 ac 803.00 imperu'sous 0.1600 ac 08.00 Total O.2aO ~~ 5~porting Data: e ions CN Data; Landscaping 030.00 Irttervious CiV Data: Pavement and Sidewalk 98.00 Pe ions TC Data: Flow type; Qescription; Fred Assume 5 min impervious l'C atae Flow type. i_?scription: Fixed Assume 5 min asinil~ Peak Peak T --_-___ ~cfs) (hrs) Yelm Frontage 0.1881 8.00 Yalrro Frontage 03.1419 8,00 Yelm Frontage 0.0964 3.003 Yelm Frontage 0.0653 8.00 Peak Vol 0~ont Area lac-ft} (ac) 0,0650 03.2000 Date: 1 f 17f Q7 Loss Method: dumber SS As; 0.20 into: 10.00 rain TC 0.08 hrs 0.08 hrs 0.0400 ac 0.1600 ac length: Slope; ~oeff: Trauel Tune 0.00 ft 0.00°l~ 5.03000 5.00 min Length: Slope; oeff; Travel Time 0.00 ft 0.00°fa 5.0000 5.00 min Peak Voi Area l~tethod aintype Event (ac-ft} ac /Loss 0.0651 0.20 SStJI-i1SG TYPE1 A 100 yr 0.0490 0,20 Sl3FifSGS TYPl=1A 10 yr 03.03332 03.03 ~E301HIS~~ TYPE1 A 2 yr 0.0225 0.20 SF3llFifSO;S TYPEIA 6 mo ~~ X:\S;udlos\CiuillCt6GOD\66242-Todays_Dental\Design\Storm\Calcs\062A2PrelimCalcs,doc 4/3 ~ Start El: 1Ct.00Q0 ft Il~lax EI: 13,50Q ft ~€~ntrib Basin: ~lntrib I-ty~ St~~ Input Volume ~lltle `lQO.tJO 4.OQ cf .t~(3 of f1.00Qfi acft `1 QCD.St? 34.f<1C} cf 34.070 cf 4.C1f}~8 acft 103.00 341,00 cf 341.00 cf 0.0078 aof# 50 103 374.00 cfi 374.00 cf 0.0083 soft . stage-Storge Table fior node YetmStormTh Stage Vol cll Stage V~11 Vcll Oft} (cf) (ac-ft} {ft) (cf~ (ac-ft} 10(1.40 4.44 4.4404 101.34 205.42 4.4447 140.14 6.80 0.0002 142.44 218.24 0,0054 144.24 13.64 4,4443 102.14 234.48 0.4453 104.34 24.44 4.4445 142.20 242.76 4.4456 144,40 27.20 4.4(146 142.34 255.44 0.4459 104.54 34,44 4.4448 142.44 267.32 4.4461 100.60 46.28 0,0011 102,50 270.60 84064 144.74 5$.56 4,4413 142.64 231.8$ 4.0467 144.80 74.84 4.4016 142,70 344.16 4.0474 104.34 83.12 4.4419 102.84 316.44 0.4473 141.40 35.44 4.4422 102.94 328.72 4.4075 141.14 147.68 4.0425 143.44 341.44 4,4478 141.20 113.96 0.4428 103.14 347.64 4.4084 141.34 132.24 4.0434 143.24 354.20 4,4481 141.44 144.52 0,4033 143.34 360.84 4.4483 101.54 156.84 4,4436 143.44 367.40 0,4484 141.60 169.48 4.4039 143.54 374.44 0.4486 141.74 1$1.36 0.4442 141.80 193.64 4.4044 X:\SiudioslCivi110b~Qb2A2-Todays_Dsntal\Design\Storm\Calcslt3b242Pre1imCaics.dcsc Sli i R StormSNED Calculations .lob hio./Project: Ob242 Today's Denta! Date: 1 f 17fQ7 ontrol Structure I : Yel ottQ - Cage i~c ar ~ ratio curve Descrip: Multiple Orifice Mart E1 Max ~l lrtcrerrterwt 10g.g0f} ft 1 Q3.5Q00 ft 0.1 Q Stage Discharge 1O,tlQ~(l ft .Q514 cfs 13.54flCD ft EI.C~5~4 cfs Stage- ischarge Table ficar corftrel; "6elrnBcatom Stage Discharge Stage CDischarge (ft) {cfs} (ft) ~cfs~ 144.00 0.0514 141.90 [7.0514 100,10 0.4514 102.04 4.0514 104.24 0.4514 142.10 4.4514 104.30 4.0514 102,20 0,4514 104,40 0.0514 102.34 4.0514 100,54 4.4514 102.40 0.0514 100.80 0.0514 142,50 0.0514 140.74 0.0514 102.80 0.0514 104.80 0.4514 102,74 0,0514 100,90 0.0514 102.80 C}.0514 101,40 0.0514 142.90 0.0514 101,10 0.0514 103,00 0.4514 101.20 4.0514 103,10 4.4514 241.34 0.4514 143.24 0.0514 141.44 0.4514 143.30 0.0514 141.50 0.0514 103.40 0.4514 141.80 4.4514 103.50 4.4514 101,74 4.0514 101,80 4.4594 JG X:\5=ud'eos\Civi!\OdooO\X6242-iadays_Denfal\Gtesign\SfiormlCa9cs\~362~d2Prellm(:.alcs.dcac °t F-leight Of incrert~entaB Iraerementai ur~~lul~tive s~umul~tive System (in) Chamber (ft~~ Ch & St (ft~~ chamber (ft~~ System (ft~) 42 4 1,13 74.90 374 41 0 1. ~ 3 73,77 363 40 0 1.13 72.64 363 39 0 1.13 71.52 358 38 0 1.13 70.33 352 37 4 1.13 69.26 346 36 0.45 1.16 68.14 341 35 0,16 1.22 66,98 335 34 0.28 1,34 615,75 329 33 0.69 ~ .43 64.46 322 32 0.80 1,61 62.97 315 31 0.95 1.70 61.36 307 30 1.07 1.77 59.68 298 29 1,18 1.84 x7.89 289 28 1.27 1.89 56,05 280 27 1.36 1.94 54.17 271 26 1.45 2.00 52.23 261 25 1 a52 2.04 50.2.3 251 24 1.58 2,08 48.19 241 23 1.64 2.11 46,11 231 22 1.70 2.15 44.00 220 21 1.75 2.18 41,85 209 20 1,80 2.21 39,67 198 19 1.85 2.24 37.47 187 18 `1.89 2.26 35.23 176 17 1.93 2,29 32.36 165 16 1.97 2.31 30.68 153 15 2.01 2.33 28.36 142 14 2.44 2.35 26.03 130 13 2.07 2.37 23.68 118 12 2.10 2e39 21,31 107 11 2.13 2.41 18.32 35 10 2.15 2,42 16.51 83 9 2.18 2.43 14.09 70 8 2.20 2.45 11.66 58 7 2.21 2,45 3.21 46 6 0 1.13 6,76 34 5 0 1.13 5.63 28 4 0 1.13 4.51 23 3 0 1,13 3.38 17 2 0 1.13 2.25 11 1 0 1,13 1,13 6 Tokal Charr'bsr Storage = 45.9 fE3 74.90 Corporate C?ffice 20 l3ea~er Etoad Wethersfield, CT 06109 (888)-892-2694 l=ax (866) 328-8401 StormSNE~? Calculations lab No./Project: 06242 Today's DentaR efferStorrryTechRouting Summary 1t? yr Peakt~ = 4.1244 cfs Peak ~3ut ; 0.0411 cfs Peak Stg: 102,03 ft Active col; 177.80 cf Project Preips [2 yr] 2,50 in [5 yr] 0.04 in [1 Q yr] 3.50 in X25 yr] 0.00 in X104 yr] 4,50 in [5 aj 1.80 in F~ydID Peak C2 Peak ~ Peak ilol Gant Area -__-___ (cfs) {hrs) (ac-ft) (ac) 100 yr Gut F 0.04 7.33 0.4417 0,1300 raige rea. Je arson Fr nta Cafe; t/17f07 ~~: ~~ Fiyd iv4thod; SBUH ~iyd Loss tod: SGS Gds dumber Peak Factor; 484.44 SGS s: 4.24 Starm Dur; 24.40 hrs Into: 10.04 min Area Gtr TG Pervious 0.0300 ac 30.00 0.00 hrs Impervious 0.10001 ac 08,00 0.08 hrs Tatal 0.1300 ac supporting Data: Pe iaus Ci~i Data: Landscaping 84.40 0.0300 ac 6peious GN Rata: Pavement and sidewalk 98,44 0,1000 ac Pervious TG Data: Flaw type; Description: Length: Slape; Goeff; `Travel Time Fixed surrZe 5 min 0,00 ft 0.00°l~ 5,0400 5.00 min irrrpervious TC Data: Flew type: Description; Length: Slope: Goeff: Travel Time Fred Assume 5 min 0.00 ft 0.00°/a 5.04Q 5,44 min BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak lfol Area ethod l~aintype Event _____-_ (cfs) (rs) lac-ft~ ac /Lass Jefferson Frontage 0.1204 8.00 0.0417 0,13 SBUH/SGS TYPEIA 100 yr Jefferson Frontage 0.0905 8.00 0.0313 0.13 SBUISGS TYPEIA 10 yr Jefferson Frontage 0.0611 8,00 4,4211 0,13 SBUFi1SGS TYPEIA 2 yr Jefferson Frontage 0.(D411 .4Q C3.t~142 ~P.1~ UIifSGS TYPEIA 6 rno X:lStudios~~ivi11L16~Qd'42-TOdays_OenfaB~Desi~n ,StarmlCaics\06242PreGmCalcs.doc 7! i t i e S#orsnSNED Ca€culafions Job No,lProjec#: 06242 Tcaday's Dental Date: 1117107 By: 1G ', (? E?CS'~r E t~esc: Manhole structure Start 1=1: 10OOQ ft ~C2rltrlt? F..3C~$In; Stage Input VOIUn1e 1OE2.00 fJ.tlO cf 0.00 cf 10(3.50 27.OQ cf 27.00 cf 103.00 273.00 cf 273.00 cf 103.54 300.00 cf 300.00 cf Stage-Storge Table for node ~PefferStorrraTeoh Stage Vt~l Vol Stage (ft {cf) (ac-ft) (ft~ 100.00 Q.00 0.0000 101.90 100.10 5.40 0.0001 102.00 100.20 10,80 0.0002 102,'10 100.30 16.20 {1.0004 102.20 100.40 21.60 0.0005 102.30 100.50 27.00 (1.0006 102.40 100.60 36.84 0.0008 102.50 100.70 46.68 0.0011 102.60 100.80 56.52 0.0013 102.70 100.90 66.36 0.0015 102.80 101.00 76,20 0.0017 102.90 101.10 $6,04 0.0020 103.00 101.20 96.88 0.0022 103,10 101.30 105.72 0.0024 103.20 101.44 115.56 0A027 103.30 101.5p 125.40 0.0029 103.40 101,60 135.24 0.0031 103.50 '101.70 145.08 0.0033 101.80 1x4.92 0.0036 Vol (cf} 164.76 174.60 184.44 194.28 204,12 213.96 223.80 233.64 243.48 253.32 263.16 273.00 278.40 283.80 289.20 294.60 300.00 Vol lac-ft) 0.0038 0.0040 0.0042 0.0045 0,0047 0.0049 0.0051 0.0054 0.0056 0.0058 0.0060 OA063 OA064 0.0065 0.0066 0.0068 0,0069 X. ;StudioslCiviR060t3Q106242-Tadays_D°ntailDeslgn\StcxmlCaScslo6242PrelimCalcs.d~?c a7 X.\Skudios\Civil\ObOQO\QG242-Todays_pentallDesign\Sforen\Calcsl~?62d2PrelimCalcs,d<?c ~~ Height of incremental Incremental Caamuiative Gumt~Eative System fin} Chamber fft~} Ch St fft~} Chamber fft~} System fft~} 42 0 1,13 74°90 300 43 0 3.13 73.77 295 40 0 1.13 72.64 291 39 0 1.13 71,52 286 38 0 3.3 3 70.39 282 37 0 1.13 69,26 277 36 0.05 '1.16 68.14 273 35 0.16 1,22 66.98 268 34 0.28 1.30 65.75 263 33 0.60 3 ,49 64.46 258 32 0.80 1.61 62.97 252 33 0.95 1.70 61,36 245 30 3.07 1.77 59.66 239 29 1, 3 8 1.84 57.89 232 28 3.27 1.89 56.05 224 27 1.36 1.94 54,17 217 26 1.45 .2.00 x2.23 209 25 3.52 2.04 50.23 203 24 1,58 2.08 48.39 193 23 3.64 2,13 46.31 184 22 3.70 2e35 44.00 376 23 3.75 2.38 43,85 367 20 1,60 2.23 39.67 159 3 3.85 2,24 37.47 350 3 8 3.89 ,2.26 35.23 3 41 3 7 1.93 2.29 32,96 132 16 1.97 2.31 30.68 3 23 3 5 2.01 2.33 28.36 313 3 4 2.04 2.35 26.03 3 04 3 3 2.07 2.37 23.68 95 32 2.30 2.39 21.33 85 3 3 2..13 2.43 18.92 76 10 2,35 2.42 36.53 66 2.18 2.43 14.09 56 8 2.20 2.45 13.66 47 7 2,21 2.45 9.23 37 6 0 1,13 6.76 27 5 D 1.13 5.63 2 ~. 0 3.33 4.53 38 3 0 3.33 3.38 14 2 0 1.13 2,25 ~ 3 0 3.33 3.33 5 ~'ota! Chamber Storage = 45.9 ft~ 74.90 Corporate C?ffice 20 Beauer Road ether~fleld, CT 06109 (888}-892-2654 fax (866) 328-8401 a Q --~---~- ~~« _ ~' `~ ~`- + i J ~ ° ~, , ; ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~ I ~naea erw ro ~.9nr.~,~-a a~i+~^s'.€a;,is,~w,rA~»;-~c~oce:r!^„i.w€^s\~x a,., w3 _-_ r ~~w~ ~_. A .. L1.~.1~E AT YY ATAr.C~ US"$3~I 1 .L i.: A~l~~ V Lel'A A Al.,7N1..? ....r_. e.v_,_ _._ . -- ~_ Total 0,4300 ac - -- upparting Data; I~er(fol1S ~ Data: Landscaping $0.00 0.1900 ac ', Impervious C Data: Paument and Sidewalks 9$.00 0.2400 ac ~ervit?!iS ~ Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope; Fixed Assume 5 min 0.00 fk 0,00°f~ Impervious i'C Data: Flow type; Description: Length: >lopea Fixed Assume 5 min 0.00 ft O.OO~f~ asinlD Peak Q beak T Peak Vol Area _______ (cfs} (rs} lac-ft~ ac OnsiteWQ 0.1456 3.00 Q.Q386 0.43 wQ = Ia56 cfs ~ e tOrmFilter cartridges. X:1S t ud ioslCiv it1060(kJ\Qb242-Todays_Dentall DesignlStcarm\C~lcs\062~2PrelimCalcs.cioc ~oeff: Trauel Tune 5.0000 5.00 shin oeff. Trauei Time 5.0000 5.00 min Ittiethod Raintype Event !Loss 5~11lif sCS TYPEIA 6 mo ~~ taf, t . ve........._~;,.. _.____ _._ ~, = 0.0653 cfs ~ use tormFilter cartridges riaa raa: Ja arson Fronts e i~yd Iviefhod: SBU €~yd Loss kVlthod: Ca ~N f~umber Peak Factor: ~4~,00 i~ As; 0,20 #orm Dur: 24.00 hrs Into: `10.00 min Area ~ T~ Pervious 0.000 ac 80,00 0.0 hrs Impervious 0.1000 ac 98,00 0.08 rs Total 0.1300 ac supparting ata: Pervious GiV Data: Landscaping 80.00 0.0300 ac impervious CN Data: Pavement and sidewalk 98.00 0,1000 ac Pervious TC Data: Flow #ype: Description: Length: dope: Doeff: Travel Time Fixed Assume 5 min 0.00 ft O,OO~Io 5.0000 5.00 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Leng#h: dope: Doeff: Travel Time Fixed Assume 5 min 0,00 fit O.OOGI® 5,0000 5.00 ruin Easinll Peak Peak T Peak 1/0l Area e#hod aintype Event (cfs) iEhrs) (ac-ft) ac fiLoss Jefferson Frontage 0.0411 ~.~0 fi_f~~l42 C1.1~ ~Blli-I{SCS TY€~E1A 6 ma wa = 0.0411 cfs ~ use 2 ~torFilter cartridges x:iStudioslCivil`~Q6Q4t~10 ;2A2-Tadays_Qenaa!\Design\5 tormlCalcs1Q62R2r relimCalcs.doc 11 ~` 11