HomeMy WebLinkAboutStormwater Report - 267 CHICKERING ROAD 11/1/1991 HYDROLOGICAL REPORT
PROPOSED "99" RESTAURANT/PUB
267 Chickering Road (Rte 125)
North Andover, Massachusetts
"99" Restaurant/Pub
160 Olympia Avenue
Woburn, Massachusetts 01801
November, 1991
Bernard A. Paquin
Project Engineer
Dana F.Perkins, inc
125 Main Street
Reading, MA 01867
(617) 944-3060
(508) 664-1505
'ZH OF MAssq
BERNARD °y
A
o PAQUIN
No. 29763
1 N
Bernard A. Paquin
Professional Engineer
MA Registration #29763
Page 2
CONTENTS
Description
IPurpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
IIScope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
IIILimitations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
IV General Location and Site Description. . . . . . . . . . 4
V Hydrologic Analysis
A. Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1. Rational Method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2 . Soil Conservation Service Method. . . . . . . . 8
3 . Frequency and Probability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
VI Hydraulic Analysis
A. Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
1 . Channel/Pipe Capacity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2 . Runoff Control and Flood Storage. . . . . . 21
VII Design
A. Criteria/Techniques/Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
VIII Sedimentation and Erosion Protection Measures. . 25
IXConclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
XReferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
XIGlossary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Figures and Tables
Appendix A Existing Runoff Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1
Appendix B Site Developed Runoff Calculations. . . . . . . . . . B-1
Page 3
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to outline the hydrological and hydraulic
aspects and describe the proposed development on the site.
This report considers the overall hydrological impacts of the proposed
development upon the local watershed with specific emphasis directed
toward the adjacent and immediate downstream areas. The hydrologic
evaluation is based upon accepted engineering methods and criteria.
This study also evaluates interior site and pavement drainage and
overall site grading.
II. SCOPE
The scope of this report is limited to an examination of flooding
potentials within the proposed development and an evaluation of
existing (pre-development) and proposed (after-development) rates of
runoff from the site onto adjacent areas for a two (2) , a ten (10) ,
and one hundred (100) year storm. The calculations performed in
conjunction with this report are based on the existing conditions of
the stream channels, drainage systems, and the watershed in terms of
land use and storage areas.
III. LIMITATIONS
The information, plans and calculations contained in this report are
intended to be used only by the 1199" Restaurant/Pub, the North Andover
Conservation Commission, Planning Board, Engineer, Board of Health and
other Town officials as well as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts!
Department of Environmental Protection. Written permission by Dana F.
Perkins, inc. shall be required prior to the use of any of this
material for any other purpose or study.
The flood elevations, surface runoff volumes and surface runoff flow
rates contained herein should not be considered absolute due to the
number of variables involved in their determination (runoff
coefficients, runoff curve numbers, times of concentration, rainfall
patterns, antecedent moisture conditions, roughness factors, etc) . It
should be pointed out that flood elevations and flow rates different
from those predicted by this report could occur if:
a. Channels and/or culverts within the drainage system become blocked
by debris before or during a storm event or if significant
Page 4
siltation of drainage structures should occur.
b. Significant additional development beyond what is presently
proposed (either on-site or off-site) or significant decreases in
surface water storage areas (existing and/or proposed) should
occur.
IV. GENERAL LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION
The site and the local watershed of which it is part are located in
the southeasterly portion of the Town of North Andover, Massachusetts.
The restaurant is located on the easterly side of Chickering Road.
The general topography of the site is moderately sloping (zero to
three percent (3%) slopes) .
The vegetation on the site is a mixture of grasses and weeds. The
northeasterly protion of the site contains mixed hardwood and soft
wood conifer trees.
The soil within the site have been delineated by the U. S.D.A. Soil
Conservation Service as being Woodbridge (S.C. S. ) Hydrologic Soils
Group "C" ,
Surface water runoff leaves the site in one location. Figure "A-1" in
Appendix A details the drainage area and the point where runoff exits
the site.
Mean annual rainfall within this general area is 41 + inches and the
mean annual runoff is 21 + inches. Major runoff events in this area
occur in February and March as the combined result of rainfall and
snow melt and in late summer/early autumn from tropical storms.
V. HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS
A. Methodology
Although it is recognized as the best possible method of hydrological
analysis, obtaining historical data on runoff volumes and peak runoff
for individual small watersheds is generally not possible. The U.S.
Geological Survey, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and NOAA National
Weather Service have their gauging networks on larger streams and
rivers which are considered more important in large scale water
resources planning. The U. S. EPA, USDA Soil Conservation Service and
the ASCE Urban Water Resources Project have gauged small watershed
areas but this information is limited to a few small watersheds across
Page 5
the country. obtaining historical runoff data for the particular
watersheds involved in this study would not be possible because
conditions are constantly changing and many years of data would be
required to provide meaningful results.
Because of this lack of historical data it is necessary to employ
general empirical relationships between watershed parameter known to
affect runoff volume and peak rates of runoff. These empirical
relationships have been utilized for many years and their coefficients
have been refined based on this experience. Although these empirical
methods may not be used to predict the runoff from a particular storm
event long term experience has shown that if properly applied they are
fairly reliable probability models.
In this study all flows tributary to the proposed site drainage
systems (street drains, site drains) were determined using the
Rational Method of Runoff Computation. The hydrographs necessary to
determine the overall impact of site development and to design the
surface runoff control (detention) areas were determined using the
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service Method
implemented by the use of the Hydro Cad stormwater modeling system.
The following is a brief description of the data and techniques used
by Dana F. Perkins, inc. to evaluate surface runoff flows for this
study.
1. Rational Method
The Rational Method, also known as the Lloyd Davies method in the
United Kingdom, was first introduced in the United States in 1889. It
relates runoff to rainfall intensity by the simplified (rational)
formula:
Qp=ciA
3
where: Qp = Peak rate of runoff in cubic feet per second (Ft /sec)
from the area under consideration.
c = Coefficient of runoff, or the ratio of peak runoff to
average rainfall intensity (dimensionless number) .
i = Average rainfall intensity in inches per hour (in/hr) for
the duration and return period under consideration. The
storm durations is assumed to be equal to the "time of
concentration" for the area.
A = Area of watershed (in acres) tributary to the point under
consideration.
Page 6
The Rational Method is based on the following three
assumptions:
(1) The peak rate of runoff at any point is a direct function of the
average rainfall intensity which occurs during the time of
concentration to that point.
(2) The frequency of the peak runoff computed by the formula is the
same as the frequency of the average rainfall intensity.
(3) The time of concentration is the time required for surface runoff
to become established and flow from the most remote part of the
drainage area to the point under consideration.
The latter assumption applies to the most remote area in time, not
necessarily distance.
Investigations made by W.W. Horner and F.L. Flynt (Ref. #12) based on
20 years of rainfall and runoff records for three urban areas have
revealed that although the runoff coefficient varies widely from storm
to storm (due to antecedent moisture conditions, time of year, etc. )
and during a storm (due to soil saturation, variable rainfall, etc. )
if rainfall and runoff are considered independent, then a frequency
analysis of each has shown the ratio:
"c" = park runoff rate for a given frequency
average rainfall intensity for a given frequency
remains reasonably constant for various frequencies. This fact has
been verified by Schakee, et al (Ref. #11) through analysis performed
at Johns Hopkins University. Therefore, although a constant value of
"c" should not be used to predict the runoff from a specific storm
occurrence, it may be used to determine runoff of a particular
frequency if the coefficient is applied to the average rainfall
intensity having the same frequency.
Although the Rational Method involves several assumptions and two
difficult-to-determine variables (runoff coefficient "c" and time of
concentration "t") , long-time experience has resulted in practical
definition of its variables, and its generalized representation of
runoff both requires and allows the designer to use his judgment,
experience and knowledge of the local area in evaluating the
components factors. Thus, the Rational Method has generally been
accepted by more than 900 of the engineering offices in the United
Page 7
States for use on small drainage areas (less than 1280 acres) .
References #9 and #10 give a more complete description of the Rational
Method and its component factors.
A. Watershed Area
The drainage are tributary to any point under consideration in
stormwater runoff calculations must be accurately determined. The
boundaries of the overall watershed area involved in this study have
been established utilizing the site development plans and the U. S.
Coast and Geodetic Survey Topographic Maps, South Groveland, MA
Quadrangle (Ref #1) .
These exterior boundaries of the existing watershed was then verified
by a field inspection of the entire area. The drainage area was then
divided into sub-areas for the purposes of evaluating the peak runoff
tributary to various points in the proposed site drainage system.
B. Rainfall Intensity
Several factors are involved in the determination of average rainfall
intensity, including average frequency of occurrence, local rainfall
intensity-duration characteristics for each average frequency of
occurrence and the time of concentration.
Basic data for rainfall intensity-duration-frequency relationships are
derived from actual gauge measurements of rainfall throughout the
local area . Statistical procedures are then utilized to produce time-
intensity curves for the various frequencies of occurrence. U. S.
Weather Bureau, Technical Paper No. 40 (Ref. #6) and NOAA National
Weather Service Technical Memorandum No. HYDRO 35 (Ref #7) , upon which
all rainfall data utilized herein is based, presents the results of
such a statistical analysis for the local area and contiguous United
States. The rainfall intensities utilized in this report are based
on the analysis for the Town of North Andover/Greater Boston Area.
(See Figure # 3)
C. Time of Concentration
The basic assumption involved in the use of the Rational Method is
that the flow, or discharge at a given point, will be greatest when
that point is receiving flow from the entire watershed tributary to
it. Therefore, it is necessary to establish the time required for a
water particle to flow from the portion of the watershed most remote
in time (not necessarily distance) to the point under consideration.
This time is referred to as the time of concentration and depends on
Page 8
the magnitude of ground slope, amount of surface depression storage
available, shape of the drainage area, character of the soil and
ground cover, antecedent moisture conditions and the length of path of
surface flow.
One of the major problems involved in the use of the Rational Method
is over-estimation of the time of concentration. Since the average
rainfall intensity decreases as the time of concentration increases,
this leads to under-estimation of the peak runoff value. One method
of avoiding this problem is the so-called Rational-Rational Method by
which time area isochromes are constructed for each sub-drainage area
and incremental runoff calculations are performed for all times less
than the longest time. This method is extremely time consuming and
tedious. To avoid the problem of over-estimating the time of
concentration we have elected to use the "average time of
concentration" for each drainage sub-area rather than the longest
time. The peak runoff values obtained using average times of
concentration are always greater than those obtained using the longest
time and therefore considered somewhat more accurate.
Concentration times utilized in this study were developed using charts
and nomographs contained in Reference #10 and the topographic plans of
the proposed development.
a. Coefficient of Runoff
The runoff coefficient, c, utilized in the Rational Method represents
a fixed ratio of average peak rainfall intensity to peak runoff.
Obviously this ratio in reality is not a constant value. It is
influenced by many differing climatological and seasonal conditions
including interception by vegetation, surface depressions, evaporation
and transpiration. General engineering practice utilizes average
coefficients for various surface and soil types. These average
coefficients are assumed not to vary during the storm duration under
consideration. In this study composite runoff coefficients have been
developed, based on the extent of different soil and ground cover
types within each watershed. Soils data for the study was obtained
from the U. S. Department of Agriculture Soils Maps for the Town of
North Andover, Massachusetts, Soil Survey of Essex County
Massachusetts, Northern Part. (Reference #3)
2 . Soil Conservation Service Method
The Soil Conservation Service Method for calculating peak rates of
runoff and complete runoff hydrogrpahs from urban and suburban areas
was first introduced in 1975. This method was a natural outgrowth of
many decades of hydrological research in the Soil Conservation Service
Page 9
which included actual field measurements and observations of rainfall
and runoff from small watersheds throughout the United States. Prior
to introducing this method the SCS had developed many (now considered
standard) methods for computing peak runoff, hydrograph volumes, unit
hydrographs etc.
Effective rainfall is considered to be that portion of the actual
rainfall which produces direct surface runoff. Losses or abstractions
are that portion of the rainfall which does not produce direct surface
runoff (detention and retention surface storage, infiltration,
evapotranspiration etc. ) .
The SCS Method predicts the volume of direct runoff from a watershed
using the following series of equations:
2
(P -Ia)
Q =
(P-Ia ) +S
Q= runoff (in) ,
P= rainfall (in) ,
S= potential maximum retention after runoff
begins (in) , and
Ia= initial abstraction (in) .
Initial abstraction (Ia) is all losses before runoff begins. It
includes water retained in surface depressions, water intercepted by
vegetation, evaporation, and infiltration. Ia is highly variable but
generally is correlated with soil and cover parameters. Through
studies of many small agricultural watersheds, Ia was found to be
approximated by the following empirical equation:
Ia = 0. 2S.
By removing Ia as an independent pararmeter, this approximation allows
use of a combination of S and P to produce a unique runoff amount.
Using this relationship the basic runoff equation may be rewritten as:
2
Q = (P-0 . 2xS)
(P + 0. 8xS)
The Soil Conservation Service has developed a system of "Runoff Curve
Page 10
Numbers" relating the potential abstraction from rainfall (S) to the
soil and cover conditions of a watershed by;
1000
CN = s + 10
from which; S= 1000 -10
CN
Numerous tables have been developed by the Soil Conservation Service
to determine runoff curve numbers for all combinations and types of
soil, cover conditions and antecedent moisture conditions generally
encountered (Reference #13) Tables have also been developed by the SCS
relating Curve Numbers, total storm rainfall and direct surface runoff
volumes (References #13 and #15) .
Using the previous runoff equations as well as computer simulation
methods the Soil Conservation Service has developed a set of Tabular
Unit Hydrographs based on a Type III rainfall distribution. These
Unit Hydrographs give various time distributions of runoff on an area
of one square mile (640 acres) having a runoff volume of one inch.
These Unit Hydrographs are related to the times of concentration for
an area and the travel time from that area to the point of interest.
To use the method it is necessary to multiply the unit hydrograph
ordinants by a ratio of the drainage area times inches of runoff to
one square mile inch of runoff.
The SCS Method is based on the following assumptions:
(1) The total volume of runoff from a watershed is a direct
function of the total rainfall and the soil cover complex
which exists over that watershed area.
(2) The frequency of the runoff volumes and peak rates of runoff
computed by the method is the same as the frequency of the
rainfall.
(3) The hydrograph characteristics of a particular area can be
adequately determined by means of the time of concentration,
travel time and the total runoff volume.
These assumptions are much less limiting than those involved in the
Rational Method and more closely describe the actual surface runoff
process. The use of the SCS Method for calculating peak runoff over
Page 11
many years has lead to a well defined system of runoff curve numbers.
Runoff volume and time of concentration determination developed by the
SCS have been compared with theoretical and historical information and
found to be fairly accurate.
Although the SCS Method involves some assumptions and empirical
coefficients, it has been found to be a fairly reliable method of
calculation for circumstances requiring a knowledge of the time
distribution of runoff. The method has been accepted by most federal
and state agencies as well as private engineering firms for use on
small (less than 200 acres) watersheds.
A. Watershed Area
The drainage area tributary to the point of interest (runoff control
area, point of discharge, etc. ) in the hydrograph calculations must be
accurately determine. The boundaries of the existing drainage areas
tributary to and located within the site involved in this study have
been established utilizing the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey
Topographic Maps, (Ref #1) and the site topographic survey plan.
These boundaries were then verified by a field inspection of the
entire watershed. The drainage boundaries for the proposed
(developed) site were determined using the previously referenced
information regarding the boundaries of drainage areas tributary to
the site and an evaluation of the proposed grading and drainage system
layout within the site.
B. Runoff Curve Number
In order to determine the runoff volume, peak rate of runoff and
complete runoff hydrograph from a particular drainage area using the
SCS Method, it is necessary to evaluate the specific combination of
soils, cover and antecedent moisture conditions which exist on the
area under consideration. The
combinations of soil and cover conditions are called, "Hydrologic Soil
Cover Complexes" . The SCS runoff curve number (CN) is a numerical
representation of the runoff potential of a watershed. It is the main
watershed parameter utilized in calculations and its numerical value
depends not only on the hydrologic soil cover complexes but also on
the antecedent moisture conditions.
When studying watershed hydrology the soil, ground cover and
antecedent moisture conditions are considered separately and are
brought together when the determination of a runoff curve number (CN)
is made. A composite runoff curve number may be computed for a
watershed having more than one land use, treatment, ground cover or
soil type using a weighted average of the different hydrologic soil
cover complexes existing in that watershed. The same antecedent
moisture condition is used to calculate runoff from a watershed or
Page 12
group of watersheds for a particular storm. However, the antecedent
moisture condition, and therefore the curve number, may be varied for
the evaluation of different storms.
The following is a summary of the general soils, cover and antecedent
moisture condition considerations involved in using the SCS Method and
the specific data utilized in this study.
(1) Soil Types:
Since the relative hydrologic response of different soils or soil
groups are an essential concern when making runoff determinations, the
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service has
developed a system of classifying the relative surface runoff
potentials of various soil types (irrespective of ground cover) .
This system is based on extensive studies of soils and runoff
throughout the country. The soils are classified into the following
"Hydrologic Soils Groups" on the basis of their ability to intake
water at the end of long duration storms occurring after prior wetting
and the opportunity for swelling without the protective effects of
vegetation.
SCS HYDROLOGIC
SOILS GROUP DESCRIPTION
A Soils having high infiltration rates even when
(low runoff thoroughly wetted. These soils consist
potential) chiefly of deep sands and gravels that are
well to excessively drained. These soils have
a high rate of water transmission.
B Soils having moderate infiltration rates when
thoroughly wetted. These soils consist
chiefly of moderately deep, moderately well to
well drained soils with moderately fine to
moderately coarse textures. These soils have
a moderate rate of water transmission.
C Soils having slow infiltration rates when
thoroughly wetted. these soils consist
chiefly of moderately fine to fine textured
soils with a layer that impedes the downward
movement of water. These soils have a slow
rate of water transmission.
D Soils having very slow infiltration rates when
Page 13
(high runoff thoroughly wetted. These soils consist chiefly
potential) of clay soils with a high swelling potential,
soils with a permanent high water table, soils
with a clay pan or clay layer at or near the
surface, or shallow soils over nearly
impervious materials. These soils have a very
slow rate of water transmission.
More detailed definitions of depth and soil-drainage classes may be
found in Reference #13 . A listing of major soils of the United States
classified by hydrologic soil groups may be found in References #13 .
Soils data for this study was obtained from the U. S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service detailed soil map, Town of
North Andover, Essex County, Massachusetts (Reference #3) . The soils
data obtained is depicted on Figure #2 of this report.
(2) Cover Types :
Cover is defined as any material (usually vegetation) covering the
soil surface and providing protection from the impact of rainfall.
Under ordinary conditions, detailed information about the cover, such
as plant density, plant height, root density, root depth, area extent
of plant cover and the amount of litter or humus, is seldom available.
Even if such detailed information were obtained it must be realized
that the data will vary on a year to year, season to season and almost
day to day basis. Therefore, it is necessary to rely on generalized
land use categories as an index of cover conditions in the hydrologic
analysis of watersheds. The SCS method allows for the use of some
judgment when choosing the condition for a general cover type thus
allowing the engineer to use his experience to better fit local
conditions .
The type of surface or ground cover on a particular drainage area and
its hydrologic condition will affect the rate and volume of runoff
from that area. To some degree the initial abstractions from the
rainfall (Ia) , the surface depression storage, overland flow depths,
times of concentration, (tc) and infiltrations rates (f) all depend on
the ground cover type and condition. These variables and their effect
on runoff form the watershed are numerically represented by the
different curve numbers associated with different cover types.
Cover types and condition data for this study were obtained from field
observations of the existing watershed and a knowledge of what the
proposed development will be.
Page 14
(3) Antecedent Moisture Conditions :
Antecedent moisture condition refers to the total rainfall for the
five day period preceding the design storm. This condition is
important when applying the SCS Method as it affects the initial
abstractions from the rainfall (Ia) , the maximum potential difference
between rainfall and direct runoff volume (S) , and the total runoff
volume (Q) . Since the watershed runoff curve number (CN) is a
representation of all of these variables, the antecedent moisture
condition must be determined to establish the runoff curve number
(CN) .
The following is a listing of the antecedent moisture conditions
utilized by the Soil Conservation Service for performing runoff
computations:
AMC TYPE DESCRIPTION
AMC I A condition of watershed soils where the soils
(Dry Con- are dry but not to the wilting point, and when
dition) satisfactory plowing or cultivation takes
place (lowest runoff potential) . this
condition is not generally considered
applicable to calculations involving other
than common or frequent events.
AMC II The average case for annual floods, that is,
(Average an average of the conditions that have
Condition) preceded the occurrence of the maximum annual
flood on numerous watersheds. This condition
is generally utilized in most flood runoff and
hydrograph calculations involving the design
of minor structures.
AMC III If heavy rainfall or light rainfall and low
(Wet Con- temperatures have occurred during the five
dition) days previous to the given storm and the soil
is nearly saturated (highest runoff
potential) . This condition is generally used
only for the most important structures or for
the analysis of rare events.
The antecedent moisture conditions (AMC) and the corresponding
Page 15
rainfall limits for the five day period preceding the design storm are
as follows:
Antecedent Moisture 5-Day Total Antecedent Rainfall (inches)
Condition Class Dormant Season Growing Season
I Less than 0. 5 Less than 1. 4
II 0 . 5 to 1. 1 1. 4 to 2 . 1
III More than 1. 1 More than 2 . 1
The runoff curve numbers (CN) utilized for the hydrograph computations
for this report are based on AMC II, consistent with normal
engineering practice.
C. Rainfall:
The rainfall data necessary to develop a complete runoff
hydrograph from a particular watershed are the total amount of
rainfall (rainfall depth in inches) and the storm pattern (the
distribution of the rainfall with respect to time) . Rainfall
varies geographically, temporarily, and seasonally. The total
amount of rainfall depends on the geographic location of the
watershed, the storm duration and the average frequency of
occurrence of the precipitation. Rainfall intensity, pattern, and
the accumulated rainfall mass (as a fraction of the total rainfall
mass) will vary within a particular storm event and also from
storm to storm. These variations are extremely important when
computing runoff hydrographs from urban and suburban areas.
Basic data for rainfall depth--duration--frequency relationships
are derived from actual gauge measurements of rainfall. The NOAA
National Weather Service (successor to the U. S. Weather Bureau)
has maintained a network of rainfall gauges throughout the United
States since the late 1800 ' s. Statistical procedures are utilized
to develop depth-duration relationships from this rainfall data
for various (selected) frequencies of occurrence. U.S. Weather
Bureau Technical Paper No. 40 (Reference #6) and NOAA National
Weather Service technical Memorandum No. Hydro 35 (Reference #7)
upon which all rainfall data utilized within this study are based,
present the results of such a statistical analysis for the
contiguous United States (see Figure #4 for rainfall
depth/duration frequency data) .
(1) Rainfall Frequency
Rainfall frequency or return interval is a measure of how often,
on the average, a given total rainfall depth can be expected to
Page 16
occur. Although the precipitation amount is also dependent on
the storm duration (see below) a particular rainfall and the
resulting runoff are referred to as an X-year storm, where X
represents the return interval of the rainfall.
Rainfall probability may also be expressed as a decimal number
between 0 and 1 representing the chance that the rainfall will be
equalled or exceeded in any year. For example, a 100 year storm
has a 0. 01 or 1 percent chance of being equalled in any year.
The rainfall frequency or return period used in the design of
drainage facilities such as cross culverts, open channels and
drainage detention areas or runoff control areas, is determined
according to the potential impact or damage the runoff may have.
The frequency of the storm utilized in a particular design will
determine the degree of protection provided against flooding and
flood damage. The design of all runoff control areas and the
evaluation of the impacts of site development on peak runoff from
the site are based on a one hundred year storm (T = 100, f=0. 01,
R
ten year (T = 10, f = 0 . 10) , two year (T = 2 , f=0. 50)
R R
This criteria is consistent with the recommendations of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, the U.S.
. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Insurance
Administration, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection, and the Town of North Andover Zoning
regulations.
(2) Rainfall Duration:
The duration of the rainfall as well as the average frequency of
occurrence is an important factor in determining the total amount
of rainfall . The rainfall duration also affects the volume and
peak rates of runoff principally by its effect on the amount of
infiltration which can occur during the storm. The SCS Method
requires the use of a twenty-four hour duration rainfall event.
(3) Rainfall Pattern (Hyetograph) :
The rainfall pattern (variation of rainfall intensity with time during
a particular storm) and the accumulated rainfall mass curve will vary
Page 17
greatly from storm to storm. The U. S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service
has analyzed more severe, less frequent storms and have established
four standard patterns or rainfall distributions for design purposes.
These standard distributions are classified as Type I, IA, II and III.
Type I is considered applicable only to southern California while Type
IA is considered applicable only to the Pacific Coastal States. All
calculations of runoff hydrogrpahs contained herein (using the SCS
Method) are based on the Type III rainfall distribution which is
applicable to all other areas in the United States. Figure #5 shows
the accumulated rainfall mass curve for a Type III, twenty-four hour
storm.
D. Time of Concentration
The time of concentration is the time that it would take for runoff to
travel from the hydraulically most distant part of a watershed to the
point of interest (point of calculation) . In hydrograph analysis the
time of concentration is considered to be the time from the end of
excessive rainfall to the point of inflection on the falling limb of
the hydrograph. Concentration times are dependent on such watershed
parameters as slope, length of travel (watershed shape) , and the type
of surface cover (vegetative retardance) . Concentration times are
computed by means of equations governing overland and open channel
flow or they may be estimated by the use of standard flow velocity
charts. In this study the standard SCS overland flow velocity charts
(Reference #13) were used to compute times of concentrations. As
required by the SCS Method, computed times of concentration were
rounded off to match the available unit hydrogrpahs and a minimum of
time of concentrations of 0 . 10 hours or 6 minutes was used.
1. Watershed Lag Time
In hydrograph analysis lag time is considered the time from the center
of mass of rainfall excess (net rainfall after subtractions for
infiltration, initial abstractions, evaporation and transpiration, and
depression storage) to the peak rate of runoff. Lag time may also be
considered as a "weighted" time of concentration. It is related to
watershed characteristics such as area, shape, length, slope and flow
retardance.
Lag time is generally estimated by analyzing rainfall and runoff
records for historical events. Based on the studies of many
historical rainfall-runoff records for a range of watershed
conditions, SCS has developed the following empirical relationship
between lag time and time of concentration:
L = 0. 6 T
Page 18
c
This relationship is for average natural conditions for approximately
uniform distribution of runoff over the watershed. A further SCS
study of urban and suburban runoff hydrographs has shown that this
relationship does not vary significantly for urban conditions.
Since historical rainfall-runoff data was not available for the
watershed under consideration and since this relationship serves as
the basis for the SCS Method, it has been utilized for all runoff
hydrogrpah computations in this study.
(2) Reach Routing
Hydrographs calculated in the upper portions of a watershed experience
attenuation, reshaping and delay as the water flows downstream through
a section of channel or pipe. This attenuation is due to the time it
takes for the runoff to travel through the area and in part due to the
storage in the channel or pipe. Main channels or tributaries are
divided into sections referred to as "reaches" for such routing.
The Hydro Cad hydrology program calculates reach routing by use of the
storage-indication method. The available outflow is calculated as the
cross-sectional area of the channel or pipe at each depth multiplied
by the length of the reach.
(3) Runoff Volumes and Unit Hydrographs
The volume of runoff from the various drainage areas in this study
were computed using graphs and tables contained in Reference #13 .
These graphs and tables relate total runoff volume (in inches over the
watershed) to total rainfall and runoff curve number.
Unit hydrographs used for computing the actual runoff hydrographs from
the watershed areas were obtained from Reference #13 . These unit
hydrographs are given in CFS/Sq Miles/inch of runoff.
3 . Frequency and Probability
The design and planning of hydraulic structures is concerned with
future events whose time, magnitude and precise conditions cannot be
forecast. In order to perform such analysis and design, engineers
must resort to statements of probability or frequency with which a
specified rate and/or volume of flow will be equalled or exceeded.
Storm frequency or design frequency, as utilized herein, is the
Page 19
frequency with which a given event is equalled or exceeded, on the
average, once in a period of years. Thus, a one hundred year
recurrence interval storm would be expected to occur ten times in a
one thousand year period. It should not however, be assumed that this
storm will occur every one hundred years. During a one thousand year
study period, there could be ten one hundred year storms in the first
year and none for the remaining nine hundred ninety-nine years.
Therefore, it is important to remember the frequencies utilized are
long-term average values.
Probability, which forms the mathematical basis for prediction, is the
reciprocal of frequency. For an exhaustive set of outcomes,
probability is the ratio of the outcomes that will produce a given
event to the total number of possible outcomes. That is, a one
hundred year storm would be expected to occur ten times during a one
thousand year period; therefore, the probability of occurrence is one
percent. As more commonly stated, there is a one percent chance that
runoff expected from a one hundred year storm will be equalled or
exceeded in any particular year.
VI. HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
A. Methodology
The following is a brief description of the methods utilized by Dana
F. Perkins, inc. in the hydraulic design of the site drainage system,
and the flood routing of the proposed runoff control area. These
methods are based upon accepted engineering theory and practice
regarding the flow of fluids in conduits and channels.
1. Channel/Pipe Capacity
In the conveyance of fluids two types of flow may occur. These are
referred to as open channel flow and pressure flow. While the
physical makeup of the conduits conveying the fluid may be the same
for both types of flow (both may be circular pipes) , the hydraulic
function is completely different. Open channel flow is characterized
by a free water surface (such as open stream channel or a partially
filled pipe (in contrast to pressure flow in which the conduits are
always full and under a pressure greater than atmospheric. All street
drainage systems proposed for the development were designed for open
channel (non-pressure) flow.
All hydraulic design calculations of street surface drainage pipes and
open channel capacity included herein were based on the Manning
Equation for open channel and (non-pressure) pipe flow. The Manning
Page 20
Equation is a modification of the original Chezy Equation developed in
France in 1769. The Chezy Equation, which can be derived by the use
of basic principles of fluid mechanics is:
V = C /RS
where: V = The average velocity of flow in feet per second
(ft/sec)
R = The hydraulic radius of the channel or pipe (ratio
of the cross sectional area to the wetted perimeter)
in feet.
S = The slope of the energy grade line (which is equal
to the slope of the water surface and channel or
pipe bottom for uniform open channel flow)
The Chezy coefficient is most frequently expressed as:
1/6
1. 486 R
C = n
'Zere: R = The hydraulic Radius (as above)
n = The channel (or pipe) roughness coefficient
Combining these two equations and multiplying by the channel cross
sectional area (A) , results in what is commonly called the Manning
Equation:
2/3 1/2
Q = A x 1. 486 x R x S
n
Q = The channel (or pipe) capacity in cubic feet
3
per second (ft / sec) .
A = the channel (or pipe) cross sectional area in
2
square feet (ft ) .
n = The channel (or pipe) roughness coefficient
R = The hydraulic radius of the channel or pipe (ratio
of the cross sectional area (A) to the wetted
Page 21
perimeter (wp)
S = The slope of the energy grade line (which is equal
to the slope of the water surface and channel (or
pipe) bottom for uniform flow) .
The average velocity of flow (ft/sec) may be obtained by dividing the
3 2
flow rate (ft /sec) by the cross sectional area (ft ) or;
V= Q
A
Solutions to these equations were formulated using charts and graphs
contained in References #10 and #17 . Where flow in a pipe occurred at
a depth less than full depth the calculations of the flow velocity
were based on the hydraulics of the partial cross-section conveying
the flow.
2 . Runoff Control and Flood Storage Area Flood Routing
Flood routing is the process by which the outflow hydrograph from a
flood storage area and water surface elevations within the storage
area are derived from the know values of the inflow hydrograph,
outflow structure rating curve, storage rating curve, and solutions to
the Basic Storage Equation. In reservoirs, ponds and wetlands, the
storage capacity and outflow rate are closely related to the water-
surface elevation, thus greatly simplifying the procedure.
The continuity equation, which is the basis for all form of reservoir
flood routing, is concerned with the conservation of mass. For a
given time interval, the volume of inflow minus the volume of outflow
equals the change in volume of storage, or more simply stated, if what
goes into the storage area (inflow) does not flow out (outflow) , it is
still there (in storage) . The continuity equation is often written in
this simple form:
t (I-0) = S
where; t = the time interval chosen for the flood
routing computations
3
I = the average rate of inflow (ft /sec)
during the time interval t
3
0 = the average rate of outflow (ft /sec)
Page 22
during the time interval t
3
S = change in volume of storage (ft )
during the time interval t
In most applications of the continuity equation, the flow and storage
variable are expanded as follows:
I =I + I ;
1 2 0=0 +0 S = (S - S )
1 2 2 1
2 2
So the equation becomes:
t (I + I ) - t (0 + 0 ) = S - S ) x2
1 2 1 2 2 1
where: t = (t - t ) = time interval; t is the time at the
2 1 1
beginning of the interval and t is the time at
2
the end of the interval.
3
I = the inflow rate (FT /Sec) at time t ; O = the
1 3 1 2
outflow rate (Ft /Sec) at time t
2
3
0 = the outflow rate (FT /Sec) at time t ;0 =
1 3 1 2
the outflow rate (Ft /Sec) at time t
2
3
S = the storage volume (FT ) at time t S =
1 1 2
3
the storage volume (Ft ) at time t .
2
The average rate of inflow versus time is represented by the inflow
hydrograph, the potential rate of outflow is represented by the outlet
discharge versus water-surface elevation curve (outflow rating curve) ,
and the potential storage is represented by the available storage
Page 23
versus elevation curve (storage rating curve) . Therefore, in order to
actually derive the outflow hydrograph, the water surface
elevation/time curve must be derived ( and since the discharge is
related strictly to water elevation, this is equivalent to the outflow
hydrograph) .
Since the continuity equation is not deterministic, that is, the
dependent variables cannot be expressed as a direct function of the
independent variables, the solution of this equation must be an
iterative (trial and error) procedure. Such a solution procedure is
included in the HydroCAD computer program.
VII. DESIGN
A. Criteria/Technique/Summary
As existing meadow and wooded areas are developed or modified, a
change in the local hydrology will occur. There may be increases in
peak runoff rates, decreases in watershed response time and increases
in runoff volume. These modifications to the local hydrology are due
to the establishment of more efficient and shorter conveyance paths
(resulting in decreases in overall time of concentration) and the
creation of impervious areas (resulting in decreased infiltration) .
The magnitude and effect of these increases in surface runoff should
be carefully evaluated.
We have investigated the surrounding areas carefully and due to the
size and conditions of downstream culverts and channels or topographic
conditions, it was our opinion that increases in runoff form the site
should be minimized, where possible. In order to minimize the
increases in runoff form the site the proposed plans for the
development include the construction of a runoff control or
"detention" area. This area will serve to slow down, detain and
reduce peak runoff from the site by providing a place to store the
runoff temporarily. Runoff Control Areas are commonly referred to as
"dry" ponds because between periods of rainfall they will not contain
water due to the fact that the bottom elevation within the area is the
same as the elevation of the outlet pipe, thus allowing the area to
drain freely. Appendix "AS' contains the detailed calculations for the
existing surface water runoff from the site based on two (2) , ten (10)
and one hundred (100) year recurrence interval storms. Figure # A-1
shows the location of the existing drainage area and the point of
discharge from the site. Appendix "B" contains the detail
calculations of the surface water runoff from the developed (proposed)
site for a two (2) , a ten (10) , and one hundred (100) year storm.
Figure #B-1 shows the locations of the site developed drainage area
Page 24
and the point of discharge from the site.
The following is a summary of the impact of site development on the
peak rates of surface runoff at the point of discharge from the site.
Existing Site Developed
Runoff Runoff
(2) Year (2 Year) Change
Storm (CFS) Storm (CFS) (+/-%)
2 . 3 2 . 4 +4 . 30
Existing Site Developed
Runoff Runoff
(10) Year (10) Year Change
Storm (CFS) Storm (CFS) (+/-%)
4 . 4 3 . 9 -11.4%
Existing Site Developed
Runoff Runoff
(100) Year (100) Year Change
Storm (CFS) Storm (CFS) (+/-%)
8 . 3 7. 5 -9 . 6%
A review of the above results will indicate that by developing the
site as proposed, decreases in runoff for the 10 and 100 year storms
will be experienced. The increase shown by the calculations for the 2
year storm is not of concern. Although the percent of increase
appears high, the magnitude of the increase (0. 1 CFS) is extremely low
and within the round off tolerance of the computer model.
VIII SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION PROTECTION MEASURES
Page 25
Pollution of surface waters due to sedimentation has become one of the
primary environmental concerns when land is developed. Recent studies
have shown that severe increase in the amounts of sediments will occur
while land is being developed if no control measures are utilized.
These increases in sediments are of concern because they may cause
damage to fisheries, wildlife, and plant life along a stream,
therefore, there is good reason to consider controlling siltation
during construction.
The control of surface water sedimentation is a two-fold process. The
first method is to prevent the erosion and subsequent suspension of
soil particles in runoff water. The second method is to remove, or
settle, the earth particles once they have become suspended. Since
the prevention of erosion is not possible on any active construction
site, the following approach will be utilized to control sedimentation
from the proposed subdivision.
To prevent the sedimentation in surface waters during construction,
siltation control fence will be used. The siltation control fence
will be placed where shown on the plans and details. These preventive
measures will remain in effect until vegetative cover is established
on all disturbed areas. In addition to these measures, all catch
basins will have a thirty inch minimum sump to trap eroded material
both during and after construction.
In general, immediately upon completion of surficial grading work, all
disturbed areas will be prepared and sown with a suitable quick
growing grass cover.
IX. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Dana F. Perkins, inc. has considered carefully the
hydrological effects of the proposed development on the adjacent and
downstream areas. The overall impact of the development upon
downstream areas has been minimized by the construction of a runoff
control area on the site as outlined herein. Therefore, the effects
of the project on FLOOD CONTROL will be minimal. For the same reason
the project will have a minimal effect on STORM DAMAGE PREVENTION.
Page 26
X. REFERENCES
1. U.S. Department of the Interior, Coast and Geodetic Survey Topographic Maps -- South
Groveland, Mass. Quadrangle (1966-Photorevised 1979)
2. Deleted
3. U.S. Department of the Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Essex
County Massachusetts, Northern part.
4. Average Annual Runoff and Precipitation in the New England - New York Area, U.S.
Department of the Interior Geological Survey. Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA 7,
Washington, D.C. , 1951
5. Recommended Engineering Outlines for the Preparation of Plans and Hydraulic
Computations, Commonwealth of Massachusetts Water Resources Commission, Boston,
Mass. , February 12, 1975.
6. Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the United States for Durations from 30 Minutes to 24
Hours and Return Periods from 1 to 100 years, D.M. Hershfield, U.S. Weather Bureau
Technical Paper No. 40, Washington, D.C. 1961
7. Five to 60 Minutes Precipitation Frequency for the Eastern and Central United
States, U.S. Department of Commerce, N.O.A.A. National Weather Service Technical
Memorandum #HYDRO-35, Silver Springs, MD, June, 1977.
8. Guidelines for Soil and Water Conservation in Urbanizing Areas of Massachusetts,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Amherst, Mass. , April,
1975.
9. Design & Construction of Storm and Sanitary Sewers, American Society of Civil
Engineers, ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 37, New York, NY
1974.
10. Data Book for Civil Engineers--Design--Volume one, Third Edition, Elywn E. Seelye,
John Wiley and Sons, Inc. , New York, NY, 1960
11. Experimental Examination of the Rational Method, J.C. Schakee, J.C. Geyer, J.W.
Knapp, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, Proceeding of the American Society of
Civil Engineers, Paper No. 5607, New York, NY November, 1967.
12. Relation Between Rainfall and Runoff from Small Urban Areas, W.W. Horner and F.L.
Flynt, Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Paper No. 1926, New
York, NY, October, 1934.
Page 27
13. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, Technical Release No. 55, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Engineering Division, Washington, D.C. ,
Second edition June 1986.
14. Design of Small Dams, Second Edition, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Reclamation, Washington, D.C. , 1974.
15. Introduction to Hydrology, Second Edition, Viessman, Knapp, Lewis and Harbaugh,
Harper and Row, New York, NY, 1977.
16. Hydraulic Charts for the Selection of Highway Culverts, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Hydraulic Engineering Circular No.
5, Washington, D.C. , December, 1965.
17. Handbook of Hydraulics for the Solution of Hydrostatic and Fluid-Flow Problems,
Fifth Edition, Horace w. King and Ernest F. Brater, McGraw Hill Book Company, New
York, NY, 1963. XI.
XI. Glossary
Acre-foot - An engineering term used to denote a volume I acre in area and
1 foot in depth. (43560 Ft3 or 325,829 U.S. Gallons)
alluvial - Pertaining to material that is transported and deposited by running water.
Angle of Repose - Angle between the horizontal and the maximum slope that a soil assumes
through natural processes.
Apron - A floor or lining to protect a surface from erosion, for example, the pavement
below chutes, spillways, or at the toes of dams.
Aquifer - A Geologic formation or structure that transmits water in sufficient quantity to
supply the needs for a water development. The term water-bearing is sometimes used
synonymously with aquifer when a stratum furnishes water for a specific use. Aquifers are
usually saturated sands, gravel, fractures, cavernous and vesicular rock.
Base Flow - The stream discharge from groundwater runoff.
Bedding - The process of laying a drain or other conduit in its trench and taping earth
around the conduit to form its bed. The manner of bedding may be specified to conform to
the earth load and conduit strength.
Bedrock - The more or less solid rock in place either on or beneath the surface of the
earth. It may be soft or hard and have a smooth or irregular surface.
Berms - A shelf that breaks the continuity of a slope.
Page 28
Blind Drain - A type of drain consisting of an excavated trench refilled with previous
materials, such as coarse sand, gravel or crushed stones, through whose voids water
percolates and flows toward an outlet. Often referred to as a French drain because of its
initial development and widespread use in France.
Borrow Area - A source of earth fill materials used in the construction of embankments or
other earth fill structures.
Cascades - Section of stream without pools consisting primarily of bedrock, rubble,
gravel, or other such material. Current usually more swift than in riffles.
Channel - An open cut in the earth's surface, either natural or artificial, that conveys
water.
Conduit - A closed facility used for the conveyance of water.
Contour - 1. : An imaginary line on the surface of the earth connecting points of the same
elevation.
2: A line drawn on a map connecting points of the same elevation.
Cubic Foot per Second - Rate of fluid at which 1 cubic foot of fluid passes a measuring
--int in 1 second. Abbr. cfs. Syn. Second-foot, CUSEC.
Cut-and-Fill - Process of earth moving by excavating part of an area and using the
excavated material for adjacent embankments of fill areas.
Dam- A barrier to confine or raise water for storage or diversion, to create a hydraulic
head, to prevent gully erosion, or for retention of soil, rock, or other debris.
Design Highwater - The elevation of the water surface as determined by the flow conditions
of the design floods.
Design Life - The period of time for which a facility is expected to perform its intended
function.
Diversion - A channel with or without a supporting ridge on the lower side constructed
across or at the bottom of a slope for the purpose of intercepting surface runoff.
Drainage Area - The land area from which water drains to a given point. Syn. Watershed
Area
Drawdown - Lowering of the water surface (in open channel flow) , water table, or
piezometric surface ( in groundwater flow) resulting from a withdrawal of water.
Drop-Inlet Spillway - overfall structure in which the water drops through a vertical riser
connected to a discharge conduit.
Page 29
Drop Spillway- Overfall structure in which the water drops over a vertical wall onto an
apron at a lower elevation.
Dry Well - A pit or hole in the ground walled up with unmortared stone, concrete blocks,
etc. so as to permit drainage into the ground. Normally dry.
Embankment - A man-made deposit of soil, rock, or the other materials used to form an
impoundment.
Emergency Spillway - A vegetated earth channel used to safely convey flood discharge in
excess of the capacity of the principal spillway.
Energy Dissipator - A devise used to reduce the energy of flowing water.
Erosion - Detachment and movement of soil or rock fragments by water, wind, ice and
gravity.
Filter Blanket - A layer of sand and/or gravel designed to prevent the movement of fine-
grained soils.
Filter Strip - A long, narrow vegetative planting used to retard or collect sediment for
the protection of diversions, drainage basins, or to other structures.
ood Plain - The relatively flat area adjoining the channel of a natural stream which has
been, or may be hereafter, covered by flood water.
Flood Routing - Determining the changes in the rise and fall of flood water as it proceeds
downstream through a valley or a reservoir.
Freeboard - The vertical distance between the elevation of the design highwater and the
top of the dam, dike, levee, or diversion ridge.
Gradient - Change of elevation, velocity, pressure, or other characteristics per unit
length; slope.
Grading - Any stripping, cutting, filling, stockpiling, or combination thereof which
modifies the land surface.
Hydrograph - A graph showing for a given point on a stream or drainage system, the
discharge, stage velocity, or other property of water with respect to time.
Impact Basin - A device used to dissipate the energy of flowing water. Generally
constructed of concrete in the form of a depressed and partially submerged vessel and may
utilize baffles to dissipate velocities.
Land - Any ground, soil or earth including marshes, swamps, drainageways, and areas not
permanently covered by water.
Page 30
Level Spreaders - A shallow channel excavation at the outlet end of a diversion with a
level section for the purpose of diffusing the diversion outflow.
Mulching - The application of plant residue or other suitable materials to the land
surface to conserve moisture, hold soil in place, aid in establishing plant cover, and
minimize temperature fluctuation.
Organic Soil - A soil containing at least 20% organic matter, and at least sixteen inches
thick, measuring from the ground surface. Muck and peat are organic soils.
Outlet - Point of water disposal from a stream, river, lake, tidewater or artificial
drain.
Peak Discharge - the maximum instantaneous flow from a given storm condition at a specific
location.
Pool - Section of stream deeper and usually wider than normal with appreciably slower
current than immediate upstream or downstream areas, and possessing adequate cover ( sheer
depth or physical condition) for protection of fish. Stream bottom usually a mixture of
silt and coarse sand.
Principal Spillway - Generally constructed of permanent material and designed to regulate
*he normal water level, provide flood protection and reduce the frequency of operation of
e emergency spillway.
Ridge - The bank or dike constructed on the downslope side of a diversion.
Riprap - Broken rock, cobbles, or boulders placed on earth surfaces, such as the face of a
dam or the channel of a stream, for protection against the action of water.
Riser - The inlet portion of a drop inlet spillway that extends vertically from the pipe
conduit and controls the water surface elevation.
Runoff - That portion of the precipitation that makes its way toward stream channels,
lakes or oceans as surface or subsurface flow. When the term "runoff" is used alone,
surface runoff usually is implied.
Sediment - Solid material, both mineral and organic, that is in suspension, is being
transported, or has been moved from its site of origin by air, water, gravity or ice and
has come to rest on the earth's surface either above or below sea level.
Sediment Basin - A depression formed by the construction of a barrier or dam built at
suitable locations to retain rock, sand, gravel, silt or other material.
Sheet Flow - Water, usually storm runoff, flowing in a thin layer over the ground surface.
Syn. overland flow.
Page 31
Side Slopes (engineering) - The slope of the sides of a canal, dam or embankment. It is
custormary to name the horizontal distance first, as 1.5 to 1, or frequently 1 1/2:1,
meaning a horizontal distance of 1.5 feet to 1 foot vertical.
Soil - the unconsolidated mineral and organic material on the immediate surface of the
earth that serves as a natural medium for the growth of land plants.
Stabilized Center Section - An area in the bottom of a grassed waterway protected by
stone, asphalt, concrete or other materials to prevent erosion.
Temporary Protection - Stabilization of erosive or sediment-producing areas.
Trash Rack - A structural device used to prevent debris from entering a spillway or other
hydraulic structure.
Vegetative Protection - Stabilization of erosive or sediment producing areas by covering
the soil with:
a. Permanent seeding, producing long-term vegetative
cover,
b. Short-term seeding, producing temporary vegetative
cover,
C. Sodding, producing areas covered with a turf or
perennial sod-forming grass.
Velocity - The rate or speed of flow measured in feet per second.
Watercourse - A natural or constructed channel for the flow of water.
FIG. — 1
t
Hi 1 F°
190 O 3'
-. S hi aop •'�'° aC�o -23< '�`\.�- �1\
• � - 'JCR\� f � O T\ � //, �. 9� � L\l� —_
`! 0
SITE-
hem, 6fr� O
•.:�)jai I .4i1 over _
y ° A
pALE
k, cecrl�
CD I
ranklin
- Sch`�
LOCUS MAP
SCALE 1" = 2083'
REFERENCE: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
FIG. -2
L.S.D.A. SOILS MAP
SCALE 1" = 1320' .
R4�tc i.i`~. ® s J PaB
co
Ur
/ 4
+ p 'S•
^ a
P
PaB Sts s
Wh
Ar-
' � iy. ��ii ` 1 •
. � +, Wl$ r-. ` "�f �� •t- ,rte
R
4.
dA^.
' �R
LEGEND
WrA = Woodbridge fine sandy loam 0 - 3% slopes
FIGURE P3
RAINFALL/INTENSITY/DUP.ATION/FREQUENCY CURVE
GREATER-BOSTON, MASS..
.........,
c, _ — —— —------ - - - — — t- - - —_
- .
—
l _
-:---4.- _ .-_-..._- -.�_ .,WE-
- ..-. _
z
F-7
5 10 15 30 60
DURATION (minutes) -
FIGURE
RAINFALL/ DEPTH/DURATION/FREQUENCY CURVE
GREATER BOSTON, MASS.
-- --- - -----
I
- - : -
- _:.__.::.
,n -- - - - - - _ _ _
.............
---�- -- -__ _—--- Ip
CL
I 3 6 12 24
DURATION (hours )
i101 s OOT (sayauz) TTeJuzeg
L 9 S £ Z T 0
N
O
PQ
H -- —_ --_ - — ----- --- --- — --- -- - -
- - 1 _.
tr.
Ca O ---
wc� a H E { i r t �., x
-- 1 .- - G .. j H
f
H i f.. .• �. .
Q, t.. i
r-
t ..
i
r
.. . �.
:-.:�....�._.:�_:.. .. ......t: I.. : . ......... .--
001 08 09 0+7 OZ 0
TUIOI 30 Z s2 TTUJUTPU
APPENDIX A
EXISTING RUNOFF CALCULATIONS
Data -for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA Pa'_a': 1
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc . 5 Nov °'
Hy d r n C A D Release 2-4 0 (C19 8 6 1.9 9 0 �� 11 e d__M i c r-o g�m p � y sh e m s. ......_. .......-... ......_ ..._ ...._._..... _ .).....__ x._...._ . ' . ..... _
DRAINAGE BASIN FLOW DIAGRAM
i
i
EXISTING
i
I
i
! j
j
i
DEVELOPED
LEGEND
Subcatchment Area
Pond
r12] Reach
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
TBCATCHMENT 1 EXISTING RUNOFF 2 Year Storm
PERCENT CN
21 .00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
33 .00 79 FAIR OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
46 .00 72 FAIR/GOOD WOODS RAINFALL= 3 . 1 IN
100 . 00 80 PEAK= 2 . 3 CFS @ 12 . 28 HRS
AREA= 2 . 40 AC Tc= 22 MIN VOLUME= . 24 AF
SUBCATCHMENT 1 EXISTING RUNOFF
RUNOFF PEAK= 2 . 3 CFS @ 12. 28 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 .60 . 70 .80 . 90
10. 00 0 .0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 .0 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 6
12 . 00 ; . 9 1 . 6 2 . 2 2. 3 2 .0 1 . 7 1 . 3 1 . 0 . 8 . 6
13 . 00 . 5 . 5 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
14.00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
15 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
16 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
17 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20. 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc . 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
IND 1 existing catch basin
STARTING ELEV= 93 . 9 FT
FLOOD ELEV= 97 . 0 FT
ELEVATION CUM. STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (CF) PEAK ELEVATION= 95 .0 FT
93 . 9 0 PEAK STORAGE = 0 CF
96 . 4 1 Qin = 2 . 3 CFS @ 12 . 28 HRS
96 . 5 5 Qout= 2 . 3 CFS @ 12 . 28 HRS
96. 6 28 ATTEN= 0 % LAG= 0 .0 MIN
96 . 7 79 IN/OUT= . 24 / .24 AF
96 . 8 168
96 . 9 298
97. 0 482
INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES
93 . 9 12" CULVERT
n= . 024 L=20' S= . 01 ' 1' Ke= . 2 Cc= . 9 Cd= . 75 TW=1 '
96 . 5 overflow HEAD(FT) DISCH(CFS )
0 . 0 0 . 0
. 1 . 3
. 2 1 . 4
. 3 4 . 0
. 4 8 . 5
TOTAL DISCHARGE vs ELEVATION
FEET 0 .0 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . 8 . 9
93 . 9 0 . 0 0 . 0 . 1 . 2 . 4 . 6 . 9 1 . 1 1 .4 1 . 7
94 . 9 2 . 0 2 . 3 2 . 5 2 . 6 2 . 7 2 . 9 3 . 1 3 . 3 3 . 5 3 . 6
95 . 9 3 . 8 3 . 9 4 . 1 4. 2 4 . 4 4. 5 4. 6 5 . 1 6 . 3 9 . 0
96 .9 13 . 6 18. 2
POND 1 existing catch basin
OUTFLOW PEAK= 2. 3 CFS @ 12 . 28 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10. 00 0 . 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0.0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 3 .4 . 6
12 . 00 . 9 1 . 6 2 . 2 2 . 3 2 . 0 1 . 7 1 . 3 1 .0 .8 . 6
13. 00 . 5 . 5 . 4 .4 . 4 . 3 . 3 .3 . 3 . 3
14 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2
15 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2
16 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
17 .00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 ; . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20. 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
BCATCHMENT 1 EXISTING RUNOFF 10 Year Storm
PERCENT CN
21 .00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
33 .00 79 FAIR OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
46 . 00 72 FAIR/GOOD WOODS RAINFALL= 4 . 5 IN
100 . 00 80 PEAK= 4.4 CFS @ 12 . 26 HRS
AREA= 2 . 40 AC Tc= 22 MIN VOLUME= . 45 AF
SUBCATCHMENT 1 EXISTING RUNOFF
RUNOFF PEAK= 4 . 4 CFS @ 12 . 26 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 .70 . 80 .90
10 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
11 . 00 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 9 1 . 3
12 . 00 2 .0 3 . 2 4 . 3 4 . 4 3 . 7 3. 0 2 . 4 1 . 8 1 . 4 1 . 1
13 . 00 . 9 . 8 . 7 . 7 . 6 . 6 .6 . 5 . 5 . 5
14 . 00 . 5 . 5 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4
15. 00 . 4 . 4 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
16 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
17 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
18 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 . l . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20. 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS , inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
)ND 1 existing catch basin
STARTING ELEV= 93 . 9 FT
FLOOD ELEV= 97 . 0 FT
ELEVATION CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (CF) PEAK ELEVATION= 96 . 3 FT
93 . 9 0 PEAK STORAGE = 1 CF
96. 4 1 Qin = 4 .4 CFS @ 12 . 26 HRS
96 . 5 5 Qout= 4. 4 CFS @ 12 . 26 HRS
96 . 6 28 ATTEN= 0 % LAG= 0. 0 MIN
96 . 7 79 IN/OUT= .45 / . 45 AF
96. 8 168
96 . 9 298
97. 0 482
INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES
93 . 9 12" CULVERT
n= . 024 L=20' S= .01 ' 1' Ke= . 2 Cc= . 9 Cd= . 75 TW=1'
96 . 5 overflow HEAD(FT) DISCH(CFS )
0 . 0 0 . 0
. 1 . 3
. 2 1 . 4
. 3 4 . 0
. 4 8 . 5
TOTAL DISCHARGE vs ELEVATION
FEET 0. 0 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 .8 . 9
93 . 9 0.0 0 . 0 . 1 . 2 . 4 .6 . 9 1 . 1 1 . 4 1 . 7
94 . 9 2 . 0 2 . 3 2 . 5 2 . 6 2 . 7 2 .9 3 . 1 3 . 3 3 . 5 3 .6
95 .9 3 . 8 3 .9 4 . 1 4 . 2 4 . 4 4 . 5 4 . 6 5 . 1 6 . 3 9 .0
96 . 9 13 . 6 18 . 2
POND 1 existing catch basin
OUTFLOW PEAK= 4 . 4 CFS @ 12 . 26 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 .60 . 70 . 80 .90
10. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 .2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2
11 . 00 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 .4 . 5 .6 .9 1 . 3
12. 00 2 .0 3 .2 4. 3 4 .4 3 . 7 3 .0 2 . 4 1 .8 1 . 4 1 . 1
13. 00 .9 .8 . 7 . 7 . 6 .6 .6 . 5 . 5 . 5
14 . 00 . 5 . 5 . 4 . 4 . 4 .4 . 4 . 4 . 4 .4
15. 00 . 4 .4 . 3 . 3 . 3 .3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
16 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2
17 .00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
18.00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 ; . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20. 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
-IBCATCER4EW 1 EXISTING RUNOFF- 100 Year Storm
PERCENT CN
21 . 00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
33 .00 79 FAIR OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
46 .00 72 FAIR/GOOD WOODS RAINFALL= 7 .0 IN
100 .00 80 PEAK= 8 . 3 CFS @ 12 .25 HRS
AREA= 2 . 40 AC Tc= 22 MIN VOLUME= . 85 AF
SUBCATCHMENT 1 EXISTING RUNOFF
RUNOFF PEAK= 8 . 3 CFS @ 12 . 25 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 .60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10. 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5
11 . 00 .6 . 6 . 7 . 7 . 8 . 9 1 . 1 1 . 3 1 .9 2 . 7
12. 00 4 .0 6 . 2 8 . 2 8 . 2 6 . 9 5 . 5 4 . 3 3 .2 2. 4 2 . 0
13. 00 1 . 7 1 . 4 1 . 3 1 . 2 1 . 1 1 .0 1 . 0 1 .0 . 9 . 9
14. 00 . 8 . 8 . 8 . 8 . 7 . 7 . 7 . 7 . 7 . 6
15 . 00 . 6 . 6 . 6 . 6 . 6 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5
16 . 00 . 5 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 .4 . 4 .4 . 4 . 4
17 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
18. 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2
19 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
20. 00 . 2
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, NA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
)ND 1 existing catch basin
STARTING ELEV= 93 .9 FT
FLOOD ELEV= 97 .0 FT
ELEVATION CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (CF) PEAK ELEVATION= 96 . 8 FT
93 . 9 0 PEAK STORAGE = 143 CF
96 . 4 1 Qin = 8. 3 CFS @ 12 . 25 HRS
96 . 5 5 Qout= 8 . 3 CFS @ 12 . 26 HRS
96 . 6 28 ATTEN= 0 % LAG= . 6 MIN
96 . 7 79 IN/OUT= . 85 / . 85 AF
96 . 8 168
96 . 9 298
97 . 0 482
INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES
93 . 9 12" CULVERT
n= . 024 L=20' S= . 01 ' 1 ' Ke= . 2 Cc= . 9 Cd= . 75 TW=1 '
96 . 5 overflow HEAD(FT) DISCH(CFS)
0 . 0 0 . 0
. 1 . 3
. 2 1 . 4
. 3 4 . 0
. 4 8 . 5
TOTAL DISCHARGE vs ELEVATION
FEET 0. 0 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 .7 . 8 . 9
93 . 9 0. 0 0 . 0 . 1 . 2 . 4 .6 . 9 1 . 1 1 . 4 1 . 7
94 .9 2 . 0 2 . 3 2 . 5 2.6 2 . 7 2 .9 3 . 1 3 .3 3 . 5 3 .6
95 .9 3 . 8 3 .9 4 . 1 4. 2 4.4 4 . 5 4. 6 5 . 1 6 . 3 9 . 0
96 .9 13 . 6 18.2
POND 1 existing catch basin
OUTFLOW PEAK= 8. 3 CFS @ 12 . 26 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 .60 . 70 .80 .90
10. 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 .4 . 4 . 5 .5 . 5 . 5
11 .00 . 6 . 6 . 7 . 7 .8 .9 1 . 1 1 .4 1 . 9 2. 7
12 .00 4. 0 5 . 9 8. 1 8. 2 7 . 1 5 . 7 4. 4 3 .0 2 . 6 1 . 8
13 .00 1 .8 1 . 3 1 . 4 1 .0 1 . 2 .9 1 . 1 .8 1 . 1 . 7
14 .00 1 .0 . 7 .9 .6 .9 .6 . 8 .5 . 8 . 5
15 . 00 .8 . 5 . 7 . 4 . 7 . 4 . 7 .4 . 6 . 3
16 . 00 .6 . 3 .6 . 3 . 5 .2 . 5 .2 . 5 . 2
17 . 00 . 5 . 2 . 5 . 2 . 5 . 2 . 4 .2 . 4 . 1
18. 00 . 4 . 1 . 4 : 1 .4 . 1 . 4 . 1 . 4 . 1
19 .00 ; . 4 . 1 . 4 . 1 . 4 . 1 . 4 . 1 . 3 . 1
20. 00 . 3
APPENDIX B
DEVELOPED RUNOFF CALCULATIONS
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, 14A
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HvdroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
TBCATCHMENT 11 DEVELOPED SITE RUNOFF AREA 1 2 Year Storm
PERCENT CN
38 . 00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
10 .00 74 GOOD OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
52 . 00 72 FAIR/GOOD WOODS RAINFALL= 3 . 1 IN
100 .00 82 PEAK= 2 . 4 CFS @ 12 . 11 HRS
AREA= 1 .68 AC Tc= 10 MIN VOLUME= . 19 AF
SUBCATCHMENT 11 DEVELOPED SITE RUNOFF AREA 1
RUNOFF PEAK= 2 . 4 CFS @ 12 . 11 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 .60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 4 . 6 .9
12 . 00 1 . 7 2 . 4 1 . 9 1 . 4 1 . 1 . 8 . 5 . 4 . 4 . 3
13 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2
14. 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2
15 . 00 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
16 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
17 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20. 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, 14A
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
JBCATCE94ENT 12 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 2
PERCENT CN
82 .00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
18 . 00 74 GOOD OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
100 . 00 94 RAINFALL= 3 . 1 IN
AREA= . 49 AC Tc= 6 MIN PEAK= 1 . 2 CFS @ 12. 03 HRS
VOLUME= .09 AF
SUBCATCB14ENT 12 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 2
RUNOFF PEAK= 1 . 2 CFS @ 12 .03 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 .90
10. 00 0.0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 .00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 .6
12 . 00 1 . 2 1 .0 . 6 . 5 .4 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1
13 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
14. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
16 . 00 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
17 . 00 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
18 . 00 0. 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0
19 . 00 0. 0 0.0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
20. 00 0. 0
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
JBCATCHMENT 13 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 3
PERCENT CN
76 . 00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
24 . 00 74 GOOD OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
100 .00 92 RAINFALL= 3 . 1 IN
AREA= . 35 AC Tc= 6 MIN PEAK= . 8 CFS @ 12 . 03 HRS
VOLUME= . 06 AF
SUBCATCHNENT 13 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 3
RUNOFF PEAK= . 8 CFS @ 12 . 03 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 .60 . 70 . 80 .90
10 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 .2 . 3 . 4
12 . 00 . 8 . 7 . 4 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
13 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
14 . 00 . 1 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0
15 . 00 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0
16 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 .0
17 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0 0.0
18. 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0 .0 0. 0 0 . 0
19 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 .0 0. 0 0 . 0
20. 00 0 . 0
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc . 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
:ACH 11 DRAIN 1
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 MAX. DEPTH= . 41 FT
. 1 0 .0 . 1 n= .011 PEAK VELOCITY= 3 . 3 FPS
.2 . 1 . 2 LENGTH= 306 FT CONTACT TIME = 94 SEC
. 3 . 2 . 5 SLOPE= . 004 FT/FT Qin = 1 .0 CFS @ 12 .42 HRS
. 7 . 6 2 . 2 Qout= 1 .0 CFS @ 12 . 44 HRS
. 8 .7 2 .6 ATTEN= 0 % LAG= 1 . 2 MIN
. 9 . 7 2 .8 IN/OUT= . 18 / . 18 AF
.9 . 8 2 .9
1 .0 . 8 2 . 8
1 .0 . 8 2 . 7
REACH 11 DRAIN 1
OUTFLOW PEAK= 1 . 0 CFS @ 12 . 44 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 .90
10 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0
11 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0.0 0 . 0 0. 0 0.0 . 1 . 1 . 2
12 . 00 . 3 . 6 . 9 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 .0 . 9 . 8 . 7
13 . 00 . 7 . 6 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 4 .4 . 4 . 3 . 3
14. 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2
15 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 1
16 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
17 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . l
18 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20 . 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, AAA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS , inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
:ACH 12 DRAIN 2
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS ) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 . 0 0 .0 0 . 0 MAX. DEPTH= . 41 FT
. 1 0 .0 . 1 n= . 011 PEAK VELOCITY= 3. 6 FPS
. 2 . 1 . 3 LENGTH= 114 FT CONTACT TIME = 31 SEC
. 3 .2 . 6 SLOPE= .005 FT/FT Qin = 1 . 2 CFS @ 12 . 04 HRS
. 7 .6 2 . 5 Qout= 1 . 2 CFS @ 12 .05 HRS
. 8 . 7 2 . 9 ATTEN= 2 % LAG= . 9 MIN
.9 . 7 3 . 2 IN/OUT= . 09 / .09 AF
. 9 .8 3 . 2
1 .0 .8 3 . 2
1 . 0 .8 3 . 0
REACH 12 DRAIN 2
OUTFLOW PEAK= 1 . 2 CFS @ 12 . 05 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 .60 . 70 . 80 .90
10 . 00 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 6
12. 00 1 . 1 1 . 1 . 6 . 5 . 4 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1
13. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
14.00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 0 .0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
16 . 00 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0.0
17 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 .0
18 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0
19 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0
20. 00 0 . 0
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, ILIA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS , inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
1ACH 13 DRAIN 3
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 . 0 0.0 0.0 MAX. DEPTH= . 53 FT
1 0 .0 . 1 n= . 011 PEAK VELOCITY= 4.0 FPS
: 2 . 1 . 3 LENGTH= 20 FT CONTACT TIME = 5 SEC
. 3 . 2 .6 SLOPE= .005 FT/FT Qin = 1 . 7 CFS @ 12. 11 HRS
. 7 .6 2 . 5 Qout= 1 . 7 CFS @ 12. 11 HRS
.8 . 7 2 . 9 ATTEN= 0 % LAG= 0. 0 MIN
.9 . 7 3 . 2 IN/OUT= . 26 / . 26 AF
.9 .8 3 . 2
1 .0 .8 3 . 2
1 . 0 . 8 3 . 0
REACH 13 DRAIN 3
OUTFLOW PEAK= 1 . 7 CFS @ 12 . 11 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 .40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10 . 00 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 4 . 5 . 7
12 . 00 1 . 4 1 . 7 1 . 5 1 . 5 1 . 4 1 . 3 1 . 1 1 . 1 1 . 0 . 9
13 . 00 . 8 . 7 . 7 . 6 . 6 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 4 . 4
14. 00 . 4 . 4 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
15 . 00 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
16 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1
17. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 ; . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . l
20. 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS , inc . 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
,ACH 14 EXISTING DRAIN
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 .0 0 .0 0 . 0 MAX. DEPTH= . 73 FT
. 1 0 .0 0 . 0 n= .024 PEAK VELOCITY= 2 . 8 FPS
.2 . 1 . 2 LENGTH= 100 FT CONTACT TIME = 36 SEC
. 3 . 2 . 4 SLOPE= . 01 FT/FT Qin = 1 . 7 CFS @ 12 . 11 HRS
. 7 . 6 1 .6 Qout= 1 . 7 CFS @ 12 . 12 HRS
.8 . 7 1 . 9 ATTEN= 0 % LAG= . 4 MIS
.9 . 7 2 . 1 IN/OUT= . 26 / . 26 AF
.9 .8 2 . 1
1 .0 . 8 2 . 1
1 .0 . 8 1 . 9
REACH 14 EXISTING DRAIN
OUTFLOW PEAK= 1 . 7 CFS @ 12 . 12 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10. 00 0 . 0 . l . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 5 . 7
12. 00 1 . 3 1 . 7 1 . 5 1 . 5 1 . 4 1 . 3 1 . 2 1 . 1 1 .0 . 9
13. 00 . 8 . 7 . 7 . 6 . 6 . 5 . 5 . 5 .4 . 4
14. 00 . 4 . 4 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
15 . 00 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2
16 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1
17 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20. 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, 14A
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
AND 11 CATCH BASIN 1
STARTING ELEV= 94 . 7 FT
FLOOD ELEV= 98 . 8 FT
ELEVATION CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (CF) PEAK ELEVATION= 95 . 4 FT
94. 7 0 PEAK STORAGE = 2616 CF
95 . 9 4500 Qin = 2 .4 CFS @ 12 . 11 HRS
97. 8 4644 Qout= 1 .0 CFS @ 12 .42 HRS
98 . 0 5073 ATTEN= 58 % LAG= 18 . 7 MIN
98. 2 5950 IN/OUT= . 19 / . 18 AF
98 . 4 7283
98. 6 9158
98. 8 11680
INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES
94. 7 8" ORIFICE
Q= . 6 PI r"2 SQR( 2g) SQR(H-r)
TOTAL DISCHARGE vs ELEVATION
FEET 0 . 0 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 .8 . 9
94 . 7 0. 0 0 . 0 . 1 . 3 . 5 . 7 . 9 1. 0 1 . 1 1 . 3
95 . 7 1 . 4 1 . 5 1 . 6 1 . 7 1 . 7 1 .8 1 . 9 2 . 0 2 .0 2 . 1
96 . 7 2 . 2 2 . 2 2 . 3 2 . 4 2 . 4 2 . 5 2 . 5 2. 6 2 . 6 2 . 7
97 . 7 2 . 7 2 . 8 2 . 8 2 . 9 2 . 9 3 .0 3 .0 3 . 1 3 . 1 3 . 2
98 . 7 3 . 2 3 . 3
POND 11 CATCH BASIN 1
OUTFLOW PEAK= 1 . 0 CFS @ 12 . 42 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10. 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 .0 0.0 0.0 0 .0 0. 0
11 . 00 0.0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0 .0 . 1 . 1 . 2
12 . 00 . 3 . 6 . 9 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 .0 1 .0 .9 .8 . 7
13 . 00 . 7 .6 . 5 . 5 . 4 .4 .4 . 4 . 3 . 3
14 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
15 .00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1
16 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
17.00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20. 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, 14A
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
ND 12 CATCH BASIN 2
STARTING ELEV= 97 .0 FT
FLOOD ELEV= 97 .8 FT
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (SF) (CF) (CF) PEAK ELEVATION= 97 . 1 FT
97 . 0 0 0 0 PEAK STORAGE = 14 CF
97 . 2 197 20 20 Qin = 1 . 2 CFS @ 12 .03 HRS
97. 4 789 99 118 Qout= 1 . 2 CFS @ 12 . 04 HRS
97. 6 1776 256 375 ATTEN= 1 % LAG= . 3 MIN
97 . 8 3158 493 868 IN/OUT= .09 / . 09 AF
INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES
97 . 0 grate capacity HEAD(FT) DISCH(CFS )
0.0 0. 0
. 1 . 6
. 2 1 . 8
. 3 3 . 3
. 4 5 . 0
. 5 5 . 8
. 6 6 . 3
TOTAL DISCHARGE vs ELEVATION
FEET 0 . 0 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 .6 . 7 .8 . 9
97 .0 0 . 0 .6 1 . 8 3 . 3 5 . 0 5 .8 6 . 3 6 . 8 7 . 3
POND 12 CATCH BASIN 2
OUTFLOW PEAK= 1 . 2 CFS @ 12 . 04 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 .60 . 70 . 80 .90
10 . 00 0. 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 3 .4 . 6
12.00 1 . 2 1 . 1 .6 . 5 . 4 .2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . l
13 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
14 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 0 . 0 0 .0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0
16 . 00 0. 0 0 .0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 0.0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0
17 .00 0.0 0. 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 .0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 .0 0. 0
18 . 00 0.0 0.0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0.0 0.0 0. 0 0.0 0. 0
19 . 00 0.0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0.0 0 .0 0. 0 0 .0 0. 0
20. 00 0 . 0
H Cl) b b
O C O O
H w z z
0 t) CJ
ti >
H F- H
rT+
z
H
FJ
w
N O H O N
% W 0o N W O
H
O
rt H
N O N O N
N
d x-
(D H
C H O
(D F-' O O O N H
H >'
O l0 A 0� l0 N r
b
(D d
�+ N M
b N tij N
(D w v, o w t-+
°' °
z ro t7i
H O r3d >
O O H N ci t) ',d
G F' �d
�J N A O P td cn
O rn td H
II N 9d
N N O Ln
N .P
O
H
O O N N f
C) FJ
'TJ N N O O)
cn W C�
nn N Ul
N N N N to �4
N
N
O F" N 0o 0o
N
O O O O N
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
JBICATCHMENT 11 DEVELOPED SITE RUNOFF AREA 1 Ten Year Storm.
PERCENT CN
38 .00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
10 .00 74 GOOD OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
52 . 00 72 FAIR/GOOD WOODS RAINFALL= 4 . 5 IN
100 .00 82 PEAK= 4 . 4 CFS @ 12 . 10 HRS
AREA= 1 . 68 AC Tc= 10 MIN VOLUME= . 34 AF
SUBCATCHMENT 11 DEVELOPED SITE RUNOFF AREA 1
RUNOFF PEAK= 4 . 4 CFS @ 12 . 10 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 .80 . 90_
10. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2
11 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 4 . 4 . 5 . 8 1 . 2 1 . 8
12 . 00 3 . 1 4 . 4 3 . 3 2 .4 1 . 8 1 . 3 .9 . 7 .6 . 6
13 . 00 . 5 . 5 . 4 . 4 . 4 .4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 3
14 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
15 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
16 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1
17 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20 . 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
JBCATCHMENT 12 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 2
PERCENT CN
82 .00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
18 .00 74 GOOD OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
100 .00 94 RAINFALL= 4. 5 IN
AREA= . 49 AC Tc= 6 MIN PEAK= 1 . 8 CFS @ 12 . 03 HRS
VOLUME= . 13 AF
SUBCATCHMENT 12 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 2
RUNOFF PEAK= 1 . 8 CFS @ 12 . 03 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 5 . 7 1 . 0
12 . 00 1 . 8 1 . 6 1 . 0 . 7 . 5 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2
13 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
14. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
16 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
17 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0
18 . 00 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0
19 . 00 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
20 . 00 0 . 0
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc . 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
JBCATCHMENT 13 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 3
PERCENT CN
76 .00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
24 .00 74 GOOD OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
100 .00 92 RAINFALL= 4 . 5 IN
AREA= . 35 AC Tc= 6 MIN PEAK= 1 .3 CFS @ 12 .03 HRS
VOLUME= .09 AF
SUBCATCHMSNT 13 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 3
RUNOFF PEAK= 1 . 3 CFS @ 12 . 03 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 .60 . 70 .80 . 90
10. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 5 . 6
12 . 00 1 . 2 1 . 1 . 7 . 5 .4 4 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1
13 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
14. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 0 . 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0
16 . 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0.0 0.0 0 .0 0.0 0.0 0. 0 0 .0
17 .00 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0.0 0.0 0. 0 0.0 0.0 0. 0 0 .0
18. 00 0.0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0 0 .0 0 .0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 .0
19 . 00 0.0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 0 .0 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0
20. 00 0 . 0
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, HA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
3ACH 11 DRAIN 1
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS ) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 MAX. DEPTH= .69 FT
. 1 0 . 0 . 1 n= . 011 PEAK VELOCITY= 3 . 8 FPS
. 2 . 1 . 2 LENGTH= 306 FT CONTACT TIME = 81 SEC
. 3 . 2 . 5 SLOPE= .004 FT/FT Qin = 2.2 CFS @ 12 . 35 HRS
. 7 . 6 2 . 2 Qout= 2 . 2 CFS @ 12. 38 HRS
.8 . 7 2 .6 ATTEN= 0 % LAG= 1 . 9 MIN
. 9 . 7 2. 8 IN/OUT= . 32 / . 32 AF
.9 . 8 2 . 9
1 .0 . 8 2 . 8
1 .0 . 8 2 . 7
REACH 11 DRAIN 1
OUTFLOW PEAK= 2 . 2 CFS @ 12 . 38 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10. 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0 0. 0 0 . 0
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 4 . 5
12 . 00 . 8 1 . 2 1 . 4 2 .0 2 . 2 1 . 7 1 . 5 1 . 5 1 . 4 1 . 3
13 . 00 1 . 2 1 . 2 1 . 1 1 .0 . 9 . 9 .8 . 7 . 6 .6
14. 00 . 5 . 5 . 5 .4 . 4 . 4 .4 . 4 . 3 .3
15 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 .2
16 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 .2
17 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20. 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
sACH 12 DRAIN 2
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 .0 0 . 0 0 . 0 MAX. DEPTH= . 53 FT
. 1 0 .0 . 1 n= . 011 PEAK VELOCITY= 4 . 0 FPS
. 2 . 1 . 3 LENGTH= 114 FT CONTACT TIME = 29 SEC
. 3 . 2 . 6 SLOPE= . 005 FT/FT Qin = 1 . 8 CFS @ 12 .03 HRS
. 7 . 6 2 . 5 Qout= 1 . 8 CFS @ 12 . 05 HRS
. 8 . 7 2 . 9 ATTEN= 2 % LAG= 1 . 0 MIN
. 9 . 7 3 . 2 IN/OUT= . 13 / . 13 AF
.9 . 8 3 . 2
1 .0 . 8 3. 2
1 . 0 . 8 3 . 0
REACH 12 DRAIN 2
OUTFLOW PEAK= 1 . 8 CFS @ 12 . 05 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 5 . 7 . 9
12 . 00 1 . 7 1 . 7 1 . 0 . 7 . 5 . 4 .3 . 2 . 2 . 2
13 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
14. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
16 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 0. 0 0 . 0 0 .0
17 . 00 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 .0 0. 0 0 .0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 . 0
18 . 00 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 .0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0
19. 00 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 .0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
20. 00 0 . 0
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS , inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
!ACH 13 DRAIN 3
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
_(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS ) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 MAX. DEPTH= . 79 FT
. 1 0. 0 . 1 n= . 011 PEAK VELOCITY= 4 . 3 FPS
. 2 . 1 . 3 LENGTH= 20 FT CONTACT TIME = 5 SEC
. 3 . 2 . 6 SLOPE= .005 FT/FT Qin = 2 .9 CFS @ 12 .09 HRS
. 7 . 6 2. 5 Qout= 2 .9 CFS @ 12 . 09 HRS
. 8 . 7 2.9 ATTEN= 0 % LAG= . 1 MIN
.9 . 7 3 . 2 IN/OUT= . 46 / . 46 AF
. 9 . 8 3 . 2
1 . 0 . 8 3. 2
1 . 0 . 8 3 . 0
REACH 13 DRAIN 3
OUTFLOW PEAK= 2 . 9 CFS @ 12 . 09 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2
11 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 7 1 .0 1 . 5
12 . 00 2 . 5 2 . 9 2 . 4 2 . 7 2 . 7 2 . 1 1 . 7 1 . 7 1 . 6 1 . 5
13 . 00 1 . 4 1 . 3 1 . 2 1 . 1 1 . 1 1 . 0 . 9 . 8 . 8 . 7
14 . 00 . 7 . 6 . 6 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 .4 . 4
15 . 00 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
16 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
17 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
18 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20 . 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, HA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
iACH 14 EXISTING DRAIN
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS ) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 . 0 0 .0 0. 0 MAX. DEPTH= 1 .00 FT
. 1 0 . 0 0. 0 n= . 024 PEAK VELOCITY= 2.8 FPS
. 2 . 1 . 2 LENGTH= 100 FT CONTACT TIME = 36 SEC
. 3 . 2 . 4 SLOPE= . 01 FT/FT Qin = 2 .9 CFS @ 12.09 HRS
. 7 . 6 1 .6 Qout= 1 .9 CFS @ 12.00 HRS
. 8 . 7 1 . 9 ATTEN= 33 % LAG= 0.0 MIN
. 9 . 7 2 . 1 IN/OUT= . 46 / . 46 AF
. 9 . 8 2 . 1
1 .0 . 8 2 . 1
1 . 0 . 8 1 .9
REACH 14 EXISTING DRAIN
OUTFLOW PEAK= 1 . 9 CFS @ 12 . 00 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10. 00 0 . 0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2
11 .00 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 7 1 .0 1 . 4
12 . 00 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 .9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 .9 1 . 9 1 .9 1 . 9
13 . 00 1 . 9 1 .9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 . 1 1 . 0 .9 . 8 .8 . 7
14. 00 . 7 . 6 . 6 . 6 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 4 . 4
15 . 00 .4 .4 . 4 . 4 .4 . 3 . 3 . 3 .3 . 3
16 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 .3 . 3 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2
17 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
18 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1
19. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20 . 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS , inc . 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
)ND 11 CATCH BASIN 1
STARTING ELEV= 94 . 7 FT
FLOOD ELEV= 98 . 8 FT
ELEVATION CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (CF) PEAK ELEVATION= 96 . 6 FT
94. 7 0 PEAK STORAGE = 4554 CF
95 .9 4500 Qin = 4 . 4 CFS @ 12 . 10 HRS
97. 8 4644 Qout= 2 . 2 CFS @ 12 . 35 HRS
98. 0 5073 ATTEN= 50 % LAG= 14. 7 MIN
98. 2 5950 IN/OUT= . 34 / . 32 AF
98 . 4 7283
98 . 6 9158
98. 8 11680
INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES
94. 7 8" ORIFICE
Q= .6 PI r"2 SQR( 2g) SQR(H-r)
TOTAL DISCHARGE vs ELEVATION
FEET 0 .0 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 .6 . 7 . 8 . 9
94. 7 0 . 0 0 . 0 . 1 . 3 . 5 . 7 . 9 1 . 0 1 . 1 1 . 3
95 . 7 1 . 4 1 . 5 1 . 6 1 . 7 1 . 7 1 . 8 1 .9 2 . 0 2 . 0 2 . 1
96 . 7 2 . 2 2 . 2 2 . 3 2 . 4 2. 4 2 . 5 2 . 5 2 .6 2 . 6 2 . 7
97 . 7 2 . 7 2 . 8 2 . 8 2 . 9 2 .9 3 .0 3 .0 3 . 1 3 . 1 3. 2
98 . 7 3 . 2 3. 3
POND 11 CATCH BASIN 1
OUTFLOW PEAK= 2 . 2 CFS @ 12 .35 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 .80 .90
10. 00 0 . 0 0.0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0. 0 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 .2 . 3 . 4 . 6
12 . 00 . 9 1 . 2 1 . 5 2 . 1 2 . 1 1 .6 1 . 5 1 . 4 1 . 4 1 . 3
13 . 00 1 . 2 1 . 1 1 . 1 1 . 0 . 9 . 8 .8 . 7 . 6 .6
14. 00 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 3 . 3
15 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 .2
16 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
17 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
20.00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER., MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
)ND 12 CATCH BASIN 2
STARTING ELEV= 97 .0 FT
FLOOD ELEV= 97 . 8 FT
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (SF) (CF) (CF) PEAK ELEVATION= 97. 2 FT
97 . 0 0 0 0 PEAK STORAGE = 19 CF
97 . 2 197 20 20 Qin = 1 . 8 CFS @ 12 . 03 HRS
97 . 4 789 99 118 Qout= 1 . 8 CFS @ 12 .03 HRS
97. 6 1776 256 375 ATTEN= 1 % LAG= . 3 MIN
97 . 8 3158 493 868 IN/OUT= . 13 / . 13 AF
INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES
97 . 0 grate capacity HEAD(FT) DISCH(CFS )
0 . 0 0 . 0
. 1 . 6
. 2 1 . 8
. 3 3 . 3
. 4 5 .0
. 5 5 . 8
. 6 6 . 3
TOTAL DISCHARGE vs ELEVATION
FEET 0 . 0 . 1 . 2 . 3 .4 . 5 .6 . 7 .8 . 9
97 . 0 0. 0 . 6 1 . 8 3 . 3 5 .0 5 . 8 6 . 3 6 .8 7 . 3
POND 12 CATCH BASIN 2
OUTFLOW PEAK= 1 . 8 CFS @ 12 . 03 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 5 . 7 .9
12. 00 1 . 8 1 . 6 1 . 0 . 7 . 5 . 4 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
13. 00 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
14.00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
16. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 0.0 0 .0 0 . 0
17. 00 0 .0 0 .0 0. 0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 .0 0 . 0
18. 00 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0 0.0 0 .0 0.0 0. 0
19. 00 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0.0 0 .0 0. 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 0
20.00 0. 0
0) M N r-I l0
N ri O O ri
r-I
CO
N r-I O O ri
ri
H
�. N H O O ri
Cl1 ri LoJ
W
U CA
10 Ln N N 0) W
U
fZ4 N r4 O O r-I
44 r-1 0)
O
z M
aLn 110 d N N II
�y N ri O O N
W
O W O
�
w rx r-I Ln d o
W O N o C� m a
w o x
>+ Ln Cl) O
w w
O 'a N N O O Cl)
r-I W r 1
❑ O
a N Ln O ("q O
• r1
H N ra ri o Cl) O
E-1 N
r-I N l0 r-I 0)
r4 .4
ri
N rI M RS
r-I +-)
O
H
O 0) 00 N Ol
N O ri r 1 Cl)
H
M
H
H '
z
w
x
r-I N U
H H H
� a
zz z H
O o x o
a a U H
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
IBCATCEDURNT 11 DEVELOPED SITE RUNOFF AREA 1 - 100 Year Storm
PERCENT CN
38 . 00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
10 . 00 74 GOOD OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
52 .00 72 FAIR/GOOD WOODS RAINFALL= 7 .0 IN
100 . 00 82 PEAK= 8 .0 CFS @ 12 . 10 HRS
AREA= 1 .68 AC Tc= 10 MIN VOLUME= .62 AF
SUBCATCHMENT 11 DEVELOPED SITE RUNOFF AREA 1
RUNOFF PEAK= 8 . 0 CFS @ 12 . 10 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 .80 . 90
10. 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 .4 . 4 . 4 . 5
11 . 00 . 5 . 5 .6 . 7 . 8 . 9 1 . 1 1 . 7 2 . 5 3 . 4
12 . 00 5 . 9 8.0 5 . 9 4 . 2 3 . 2 2 . 2 1 . 5 1 . 2 1 . 1 1 . 0
13. 00 . 9 . 8 . 8 . 7 . 7 . 7 .7 . 6 . 6 . 6
14 . 00 . 6 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 4 . 4
15 . 00 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
16 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2
17. 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
18. 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2
19 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 1 . 1
20. 00 . 1
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
93CATCE94ENT 12 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 2
PERCENT CN
82 . 00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
18 . 00 74 GOOD OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
100 . 00 94 RAINFALL= 7 . 0 IN
AREA= .49 AC To= 6 MIN PEAK= 2. 9 CFS @ 12 .03 HRS
VOLUME= . 21 AF
SUBCATCHMENT 12 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 2
RUNOFF PEAK= 2 . 9 CFS @ 12 .03 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 .40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10. 00 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
11 . 00 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 .6 . 8 1 . 1 1 . 5
12 .00 2 .9 2 . 5 1 . 5 1 . 1 . 8 . 5 .4 . 4 . 3 . 3
13 .00 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
14 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
16 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
17. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19 . 00 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0.0 0. 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
20 . 00 0 . 0
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc . 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
JBCATCHNENT 13 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 3
PERCENT CN
76 . 00 98 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SCS TR-20 METHOD
24 .00 74 GOOD OPEN SPACE TYPE III 24-HOUR
100 . 00 92 RAINFALL= 7. 0 IN
AREA= . 35 AC Tc= 6 MIN PEAK= 2 . 1 CFS @ 12.03 HRS
VOLUME= . 15 AF
SUBCATCHMENT 13 DEVELOPED RUNOFF AREA 3
RUNOFF PEAK= 2 . 1 CFS @ 12 .03 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 .90
10. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
11 . 00 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 4 .6 .8 1 . 1
12 . 00 2 . 0 1 .8 1 . 1 . 8 . 6 . 4 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2
13 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
14 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
16 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
17 . 00 . 1 . 1 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
18 . 00 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
19 . 00 0 . 0 0.0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 .0 0 . 0
20 . 00 0 . 0
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
H.ydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
:ACH 11 DRAIN 1
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 MAX. DEPTH= 1 .00 FT
. 1 0 .0 . 1 n= . 011 PEAK VELOCITY= 3 . 9 FPS
. 2 . 1 . 2 LENGTH= 306 FT CONTACT TIME = 79 SEC
. 3 .2 . 5 SLOPE= . 004 FT/FT Qin = 3 . 1 CFS @ 12 . 41 HRS
. 7 . 6 2 . 2 Qout= 2 . 7 CFS @ 12 . 20 HRS
.8 . 7 2 .6 ATTEN= 15 % LAG= 0. 0 MIN
.9 . 7 2 . 8 IN/OUT= . 60 / . 60 AF
.9 . 8 2 . 9
1 .0 .8 2 . 8
1 .0 . 8 2. 7
REACH 11 DRAIN 1
OUTFLOW PEAK= 2 . 7 CFS @ 12 . 20 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 .90
10. 00 0 .0 0. 0 0 . 0 0. 0 0 .0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2
11 . 00 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 4 .4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . 9 1 . 1
12 . 00 1 . 5 2 . 6 2 . 7 2 . 7 2 . 7 2 . 7 2 . 7 2 .7 2 . 7 2 . 7
13. 00 2 . 7 2 . 7 2 . 7 2 . 7 2 . 2 1 . 1 1 . 3 1 . 1 1 . 1 1 . 1
14. 00 1 .0 .9 . 9 .8 . 8 . 7 . 7 .6 . 6 .6
15 . 00 . 6 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 .4 . 4 . 4 .4
16 . 00 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
17 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
18. 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
19 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2
20. 00 .2
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
lACH 12 DRAIN 2
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 MAX. DEPTH= . 77 FT
. 1 0 . 0 . 1 n= . 011 PEAK VELOCITY= 4. 3 FPS
. 2 . 1 . 3 LENGTH= 114 FT CONTACT TIME = 27 SEC
. 3 .2 . 6 SLOPE= . 005 FT/FT Qin = 2 . 8 CFS @ 12. 05 HRS
. 7 . 6 2 . 5 Qout= 2. 9 CFS @ 12. 06 HRS
.8 . 7 2 .9 ATTEN= 0 % LAG= . 9 MIN
.9 . 7 3. 2 IN/OUT= . 21 / . 21 AF
.9 . 8 3 . 2
1 .0 . 8 3 . 2
1 .0 . 8 3 . 0
REACH 12 DRAIN 2
OUTFLOW PEAK= 2 . 9 CFS @ 12 . 06 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 .60 . 70 . 80 .90
10. 00 . 1 . 2 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2
11 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 8 1. 1 1 . 5
12 . 00 2 . 6 2 . 8 1 . 6 1 . 1 .9 . 6 . 4 . 3 . 3 .3
13 . 00 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
14. 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
16. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . l . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
17 .00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19. 00 . 1 0 . 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 .0 0.0 0 . 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
20. 00 0 .0
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
3ACH 13 DRAIN 3
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS ) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 .0 0 . 0 0. 0 MAX. DEPTH= 1 .00 FT
. 1 0 . 0 . 1 n= .011 PEAK VELOCITY= 4 . 3 FPS
. 2 . 1 . 3 LENGTH= 20 FT CONTACT TIME = 5 SEC
. 3 . 2 . 6 SLOPE= .005 FT/FT Qin = 5. 4 CFS @ 12. 10 HRS
. 7 .6 2. 5 Qout= 3 . 0 CFS @ 12 . 00 HRS
.8 . 7 2. 9 ATTEN= 45 % LAG= 0. 0 MIN
.9 . 7 3 . 2 IN/OUT= . 81 / . 81 AF
.9 .8 3 . 2
1 .0 .8 3 . 2
1 .0 .8 3 .0
REACH 13 DRAIN 3
OUTFLOW PEAK= 3 . 0 CFS @ 12 .00 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 . 40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 . 90
10 . 00 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 . 4
11 .00 . 5 . 5 . 6 . 7 . 8 . 9 1 . 1 1 . 5 2 . 0 2 . 6
12 . 00 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 .0 3 . 0 3 .0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0
13 . 00 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 .0 3 .0 3 .0 3 . 0 3 .0 3 .0 2 . 3 1 . 2
14.00 1 . 2 1 . 1 1 .0 1 .0 . 9 . 9 .8 .8 . 7 . 7
15 .00 . 7 . 7 . 6 .6 . 6 . 6 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5
16 . 00 . 5 . 5 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 .4 . 4 . 4
17 . 00 ; . 4 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
18 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
19 . 00 ; . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2
20.00 . 2
Data fo.r 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, PRA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
3ACH 14 EXISTING DRAIN
DEPTH END AREA DISCH
(FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS) 12" PIPE STOR-IND METHOD
0 . 0 0. 0 0 . 0 MAX. DEPTH= 1 .00 FT
. 1 0 .0 0.0 n= .024 PEAK VELOCITY= 2. 8 FPS
. 2 . 1 . 2 LENGTH= 100 FT CONTACT TIME = 36 SEC
. 3 . 2 . 4 SLOPE= . 01 FT/FT Qin = 3.0 CFS @ 12 . 00 HRS
. 7 . 6 1 . 6 Qout= 2. 0 CFS @ 11 . 84 HRS
. 8 . 7 1 . 9 ATTEN= 32 % LAG= 0. 0 MIN
. 9 . 7 2 . 1 IN/OUT= . 81 / . 81 AF
.9 .8 2. 1
1 . 0 . 8 2 . 1
1 .0 . 8 1 . 9
REACH 14 EXISTING DRAIN
OUTFLOW PEAK= 2 . 0 CFS @ 11 . 84 HOURS
HOUR 0 . 00 . 10 . 20 . 30 .40 . 50 .60 . 70 .80 .90
10 . 00 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 4 . 4
11 . 00 . 5 . 5 . 6 . 7 . 8 . 9 1 . 1 1 . 5 2 . 0 1 .9
12. 00 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 .9 1 .9 1 . 9 1 .9 1 .9 1 . 9 1 . 9
13 . 00 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 .9 1 .9 1 . 9 1 .9 1 .9 1 . 9 1 . 9
14. 00 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 .9 1 . 9 1 .9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 . 9
15 . 00 1 .9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 . 9 1 .9 . 7 . 4 .6
16. 00 . 4 . 5 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 . 4 .4 . 4 .4
17 . 00 . 4 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
18. 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2
19 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 .2
20. 00 . 2
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, HA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc. 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
JND 11 CATCH BASIN 1
STARTING ELEV= 94 . 7 FT
FLOOD ELEV= 98.8 FT
ELEVATION CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (CF) PEAK ELEVATION= 98 . 5 FT
94. 7 0 PEAK STORAGE = 8362 CF
95. 9 4500 Qin = 8 .0 CFS @ 12 . 10 HRS
97 . 8 4644 Qout= 3 . 1 CFS @ 12 .41 HRS
98. 0 5073 ATTEN= 61 % LAG= 18. 5 MIN
98. 2 5950 IN/OUT= .62 / .60 AF
98 . 4 7283
98 . 6 9158
98. 8 11680
INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES
94. 7 8" ORIFICE
Q=.6 PI r"2 SQR( 2g) SQR(H-r)
TOTAL DISCHARGE vs ELEVATION
FEET 0.0 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 .6 . 7 .8 . 9
94 . 7 0 . 0 0.0 . 1 . 3 . 5 . 7 .9 1 .0 1 . 1 1 . 3
95 . 7 1 . 4 1 . 5 1 . 6 1 . 7 1 . 7 1 . 8 1 . 9 2. 0 2 .0 2. 1
96 . 7 2 . 2 2 . 2 2 . 3 2 . 4 2 . 4 2 . 5 2 . 5 2 .6 2 .6 2. 7
97 . 7 2 . 7 2 . 8 2 . 8 2 .9 2.9 3 . 0 3 .0 3 . 1 3 . 1 3. 2
98 . 7 3 . 2 3 . 3
POND 11 CATCH BASIN 1
OUTFLOW PEAK= 3 . 1 CFS @ 12 . 41 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 .40 . 50 . 60 . 70 . 80 .90
10 . 00 0. 0 0. 0 0 .0 0 .0 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 2 . 2
11 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 .4 .4 . 5 .6 . 7 1 .0 1 . 2
12 . 00 1 . 5 3 . 0 3 . 1 3 . 1 3 . 1 3 . 1 3 . 1 3 . 1 3 .0 3.0
13 . 00 2 .9 1 . 7 1 . 5 1 . 4 1 . 4 1 . 3 1 .2 1 . 2 1 . 1 1.0
14 .00 1 .0 . 9 .9 .8 .8 . 7 .7 .6 .6 . 6
15 . 00 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 .4 .4 . 4 . 4 . 4
16 . 00 .4 . 4 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3
17 . 00 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 2 .2 .2 .2 . 2
18.00 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 .2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2
19 . 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2
20. 00 . 2
Data for 99 RESTAURANT NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Prepared by DANA F. PERKINS, inc . 5 Nov 91
HydroCAD Release 2 . 40 (c) 1986 , 1990 Applied Microcomputer Systems
3ND 12 CATCH BASIN 2
STARTING ELEV= 97 .0 FT
FLOOD ELEV= 97 .8 FT
ELEVATION AREA INC.STOR CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD
(FT) (SF) (CF) (CF) PEAK ELEVATION= 97 .3 FT
97 .0 0 0 0 PEAK STORAGE = 50 CF
97 . 2 197 20 20 Qin = 2 . 9 CFS @ 12 .03 HRS
97 . 4 789 99 118 Qout= 2 . 8 CFS @ 12 .05 HRS
97 . 6 1776 256 375 ATTEN= 3 % LAG= 1 . 2 MIN
97 . 8 3158 493 868 IN/OUT= . 21 / . 21 AF
INVERT (FT) OUTLET DEVICES
97 . 0 grate capacity HEAD(FT) DISCH(CFS)
0.0 0. 0
. 1 . 6
. 2 1 . 8
. 3 3 . 3
. 4 5 . 0
. 5 5 . 8
. 6 6. 3
TOTAL DISCHARGE vs ELEVATION
FEET 0 .0 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 .6 . 7 . 8 .9
97 .0 0. 0 . 6 1 . 8 3 . 3 5 . 0 5 .8 6 . 3 6 . 8 7 . 3
FOND 12 CATCH BASIN 2
OUTFLOW PEAK= 2 . 8 CFS @ 12 .05 HOURS
HOUR 0 .00 . 10 . 20 . 30 .40 . 50 . 60 . 70 .80 . 90
10. 00 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2
11 . 00 . 2 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 3 . 4 . 6 . 8 1 . 1 1 . 5
12 .00 2. 7 2 . 7 1 . 5 1 . 2 . 8 . 6 . 4 . 4 . 3 . 3
13. 00 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 .2 . 2 . 2 . 2
14. 00 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
15 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
16 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
17 . 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . l . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
18. 00 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1
19.00 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 0 0.0
20.00 0. 0
Ol O M N In
N M O O M
r-I
OO O M N Ll
N M O O M
r-I
rl
l� ri d' M CD N
.. N Cl) O O M
U] '-i @�
w
U 00
l0 r-I 'ct' M rZ4
• M U
(s+ N M O O
O r4 LO
ri t�
LO �
x ri ko
o � M o O
U) a aa � H m �'
N o � r4 o o a
>4 O x rI
o w Cl) co
H N a
O > N M r- O
r-I w r{ rd
O �
a N H to H O
�i r-I
E-4 C4 C4 ll N
O
P
is q
r-I o r, W LO
N M N 1- !,
O
E-+
O U1 1, O N is
N ri N N 10
ri
M
r--1
E1
z
w
rl N U
ri H E+
z z CUA H
O O �D O
P4 a P
i
I
I
i
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
I
i
E
t
i
i
I
i
I
I
I
i
i
i
I