The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutStorm Water Report 1503 Osgood St 7-16-2010 STORMWATER MANA GEMENT RkPOR T Mane Map 34 Lot 7 -- 1503 OsgoodStreet North over, MA 01845 Prepared For: Hera Development Corp® 470 Washington Street Brighton, May 13, 2010 Revised: May 24, 2010 Revised: June 28, 2010 Revised: July 16, 2010 MEOW A OF MHF Design Consultants, Inc. FRANK C. ENGINEERS ® PLANNERS ® SURVEYORS o MONTEIRO CIV 'n i 44 Stiles Road ® Suite One"- Salem, NH 03079 53 TEL (603) 893-0720 ® FAX (603) 893-0733 www.mhfdesign.com AL F Project#: 271710 I TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 Executive Summary Table 1: Drainage Summary Section 2 Narrative a) Project Description b) Methodology c) Existing Conditions Section 3 Post Development Stormwater Management Objectives DEP Stormwater Standards 1-10 o Recharge Calculations o TSS Removal Calculations o Rip Rap Outlet Calculations o Stage Storage Printouts o Drawdown Calculations o DEP Checklist for Stormwater Report o Illicit Discharge Statement&Attachment Appendix A —Maps & Data USGS Map MRCS Soils Maps Stormceptor Sizing Calculations Appendix B — Pre Development Drainage Calculations Appendix C — Post Development Drainage Calculations Map Pockets Pre Development Drainage Plan Post Development Drainage Plan Operation &Maintenance Plan Operation &Maintenance Plan Log Forms Test Pit Log Results Revision 1: (5/24/10) • Add Drawdown Calculations • Add DEP Checklist for Stormwater Report • Add Illicit Discharge Statement&Attachment • Add Operation&Maintenance Plan&Log Forms 271710-Drainage Report-Rev3.doc Revision 2: (6/28/10) • Revise HydroCAD analysis based on VHB&EE review comments&plan revisions • Expand underground infiltration system size&remove above ground infiltration basins • Revise O&M plan&Log Forms based on EE review comments • Add test pit results from previous Design Plans • Revise DEP Checklist, Rip-rap Outlet Apron calculations&Drawdown calculations Revision 3: (7/16/10) • Revise HydroCAD analysis based on EE review comments, septic layout&plan revisions • Add Stormceptor sizing calculations • Revise underground infiltration system based on EE review comments • Revise drawdown calculations • Add test pit results from Pennoni Associates dated July 14,2010 • Revise O&M plan&add a Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan 271710-Drainage Report-Rev3.doc Section 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The stormwater analysis for the proposed commercial development is designed using proven and accepted methods to meet or exceed state and local regulations for stormwater quantity and quality. Treatment, discharge rates and flood control measures have been incorporated to minimize downstream effects on abutting parcels and receiving areas. The study watershed area is approximately 1.9-acres that drains towards a wetland system along the north of the property. This wetland eventually discharges through a headwall along the northeast of the site below Osgood Street. Onsite stormwater controls consist of a closed drainage system consisting of curbing and catch basins and roof runoff discharging to an underground pipe and stone infiltration system. For analysis purposes the site was modeled with two design points; DP#1 &DP #2. Design Point #1 (DP I) is the edge of wetlands along the north of the site and Design Point#2 is the existing closed drainage system along Orchard Hill Road. The summary below shows that there is no increase in the peak rates of runoff to either design point for the 1, 2, 10 & 100-year storm frequencies. Table 1: Drainage Summary Design Storm Pre-Development Post-Development Change cfs) (cfs) (cfs 1-year 0.0 0.0 0.0 2-year 0.1 0.1 0.0 10- ear 0.8 0.7 -0.1 100-year 2.9 2.3 -0.6 1-year 0.2 0.2 0.0 2-year 0.3 0.3 0.0 10-year 0.5 0.5 0.0 100-year 1 0.8 1 0.8 1 0.0 (All values shown are peak rates in CFS) 271710-Drainage Report-Revldoc Section 2 NARRATIVE a) Project Description: This project entitled Proposed Site Development Plans prepared for Hera Development Corp is located on a 6.1-ac parcel of land located at 1503 Osgood Street in North Andover, MA, Assessors Map 34, Lot 7. This site was previously permitted through the Town Planning Board process in 2006 for the construction of a Convenience Store/Donut Shop and Gas Station development. The site is located in the Corridor Development District (CDD3) at the northeast corner of Osgood Street and Orchard Hill Road. Being in the CDD3 district,provisions allow for the use of multiple buildings and uses on one lot. Hera Development Corp is proposing to construct a 16,527 sf contractor's warehouse/office on the eastern portion of the lot. This is located behind the gas station development if looking at the site from Osgood Street. Development includes but is not limited to the building construction, a new parking lot layout, grading and associated utility connections. The proposed development is limited to the work required for the contractor's building development and only minor grading will occur within the limits of the gas station development. The total area of disturbance is approximately 53,000 sf, all of which is related to the construction of the site development and utility connections. In order to control runoff from the proposed developed areas - and to prevent erosion and siltation— the site plan has been designed with a closed drainage system, consisting of curbing, deep sump, hooded catch basins and an underground infiltration system to collect site and roof runoff while recharging the groundwater as required by the DEP Stormwater Policy. The purpose of this report is to determine the pre- and post-development rates of stormwater runoff generated by this site and the impact of that runoff on the surrounding properties. b) Methodology: The drainage system for this project was modeled using HydroCAD, a stormwater modeling computer program that analyzes the hydrology, and hydraulics of stormwater runoff. HydroCAD uses either the Rational steady state method, or SCS hydrograph and routing procedures to estimate stormwater flow and volume. In HydroCAD, each watershed is modeled as a subcatchment, streams and culverts as reaches and ponds, and large wetlands and storage areas as ponds. SCS hydrograph and routing stormwater models were used for both Pre-development conditions and Post-development conditions. The Pre-development and Post-development watersheds and sub-area characteristics were determined using actual ground survey, and through visual inspection of runoff paths by walking the 271710-Drainage Report-Revldoc site. Conservative estimates were used at all times in evaluating the hydrologic characteristics of these watersheds. e)Existing Conditions Map 34 Lot 7 encompasses a 6.1-acre site and is currently occupied by a combination convenience store, drive-thru donut shop and gas station. The portion of the site along Osgood Street, where the gas station development primarily occupies, is considered a developed area with extensive parking, pavement and utilities including but not limited to stormwater controls. At the time of development in 2006, the site was designed to comply with the Standards set forth by the DEP Stormwater Policy. Included in this was the construction of two (2) underground detention systems, one (1) underground infiltration system to capture the convenience store and canopy roof runoff and two (2) above ground infiltration basins, all of which drain to the wetlands system along the north of the site. The area of the site to be developed by Hera Development Corp is partially grass and woodlands. A septic system for the gas station currently occupies the grassed area along the middle of the site. This area is relatively flat with slopes between 2-5%. Surrounding this area are steeper slopes which drop off to the wetland system. The runoff from the parcel generally slopes northerly to the wetland system while a portion of the lot and runoff from Orchard Hill Road drain to a closed drainage system along Orchard Hill Road. The on-site soils consist of Windsor (255B & 255C),Deerfield (256A),Walpole (31B) and Udorthents, and described by Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) as follows: Windsor series (SCS Classification "A") consist of nearly level to very steep, deep (5+ feet), excessively drained soils on glacial outwash plains, terraces, deltas and escarpments. They formed in sandy glacial outwash. Windsor soils have a very friable or loose loamy sand or loamy fine sand surface soil, very friable or loose loamy fine sand to sand subsoil over a very friable or loose sand or fine sand substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more. They have rapid permeability. Major limitations are related to draughtiness and slope. Deerfield series (SCS Classification "A") consists of nearly level gently sloping, deep (5+ feet), moderately well drained soils on glacial outwash plains, terraces and deltas. They formed in sands. Deerfield soils have loamy fine sand to sand surface soil and subsoil with a rapid permeability, over a loamy sand to coarse sand substrata with very rapid permeability. They have a seasonal high water table at 18 to 36 inches. Major limitations are related to wetness. Walpole series (SCS Classification "C") consist of very deep, poorly drained soils that formed in glacial drift. These soils are on the lower parts of upland till plains. Slopes range from 0 to 8 percent. 271710-Drainage Report-Revldoc Walpole soils are associated with Ridgebury, Scarboro and Newfields soils. They have more sand and less silt than Ridgebury soils. They do not have the histic epipedon that is characteristic of Scarboro soils. Unlike New-fields soils, they have dominantly gray matrix colors. Udorthents-Urban band Complex series (SCS Classification "none") consists of areas of soils formed by cutting or filling for construction projects. Udorthents are near or adjacent to most of the soils of the survey area. Because of the extreme variability of Udorthents, a reference is not given. Slopes range from 0 to 25 percent. 271710-Drainage Report-Revldoc Section 3 POST DEVELOPMENT References: 1. SCS - TR55 (Second Ed., 1986) - for runoff curve numbers. 2. SCS - Rainfall Distribution Maps. 3. NRCS Soils Maps - Essex County. 4. DEP—Storm water Management Handbook This project is subject to both the D.E.P.'s Storm water Management Policy and the North Andover Wetlands Protection By-law with work being proposed within 100 feet of a wetland As shown herein, the proposed drainage system would provide the maximum feasible protection of groundwater resources, and prevent possible damage to abutting property or natural features in the area. In order to safeguard against oil or gas introduction into the drainage systems, storm water runoff from parking areas and driveways would be collected into hooded catch basins with deep sumps (see Site Plan Details). Such pretreatment of storm water reduces both suspended solids and oils in the drainage system and is recommended by DEP's Storm water Management Handbook. Water quality would then further be treated by means of Stormceptor unit designed to filter suspended solids/silt/debris. Before being discharged toward the wetland, the flow rate would be controlled by means of an underground infiltration system prior to final discharge. Stormwater recharge is implemented by underground recharge trenches (pipe and stone),which will infiltrate roof and parking lot runoff. Another safeguard against future intrusion of contaminants into the groundwater is the implementation of an Operation & Maintenance Plan and Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan, which would assure proper function of drainage components and reduce TSS entering the system during and post construction. Further safeguards proposed on the Site Plan to prevent erosion include a line of silt fencing & hay bales during construction, and loam and seed for permanent stabilization. If all the proposed erosion control devises and procedures are adhered to, then there should be minimal or no damage to neighboring properties from work on this site. The drainage system was designed utilizing a closed drainage system to achieve reduced rates of runoff at the point of analysis and would maintain a similar drainage pattern to the existing courses. The methodology is SCS TR-20, Type III rainfalls (1, 2, 10 & 100 year events). This is consistent with the requirements of the Town of North Andover and DEP's Storm water Management guidelines. All pertinent calculations represented in the following pages were developed utilizing Hydrocad Storm water modeling software. All pipes used on the project are to be High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) dual-wall (corrugated exterior, smooth interior). Pipe capacities and velocities are included in the Hydrocad printouts (as part of the data for each "pond" in Hydrocad terminology). 271710-Drainage Report-Revldoc The infiltration system was sized to recharge the groundwater, reduce peak rates of runoff for the Post Development conditions and to provide adequate storage capacity for the above referenced design storm events. The storage capacity along with the ability to infiltrate the groundwater reduces the peak flows to the downstream drainage system ensuring adequate pipe capacity. Storm water Quality Controls: l. Street Sweeping - to capture sediment prior to entering the drainage system. This would be done on a scheduled basis. TSS Removal Rate= 5% 2. Hooded Catch Basins with Deep Sumps to capture, treat and redirect storm water toward the proposed underground infiltration system. TSS Removal Rate=25% 3. Stormceptor—which would treat storm water prior to discharge to the infiltration system. TSS removal rate= 30%. (Conservative Estimate based on discussions with Eggleston Environmental) 4. Infiltration 'Trenches—which would recharge all paved areas and rooftop runoff. TSS removal rate = 80% Groundwater Recharge: In order to provide the maximum possible groundwater recharge, the site plans have incorporated an underground infiltration system to capture parking lot and roof runoff. Calculations supporting the rates and capacities are included below. Storm water Quantity Controls: The Underground Infiltration system was designed such that it would control discharges through outlet pipes for the 1, 2, 10 & 100-year events. The overall system thereby achieves the following: • Control of runoff rates to abutting properties. • Water quality maintenance—TSS removal from storm water of more than 80%. • Groundwater Recharge—through the infiltration system. The point of analysis is the wetland boundary and the Orchard Hill Road drainage system. 271710-Drainage Report-Rev'.doc Storm water Management & Water Quality Calculations: Note: All calculations are based on the area of proposed construction activities. Additional improvements to the existing site development are indicated on the Site flan. Standard # 1: Untreated Stormwater No new storm water conveyances are to discharge untreated storm water directly to or cause erosion in wetlands or waters of the Commonwealth. Standard # 2: Post Development Peak Discharge Rates The storm water management system is designed so that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development peak discharge rates. Standard # 3: Groundwater Recharge Proposed recharge system: Infiltration Trenches. In accordance with Massachusetts stormwater policy, A& C soils require a Volume to recharge of 0.60 & 0.25 inches of runoff, respectively. Total Proposed onsite impervious area(within Hera Development proposal) =28,149 sf Volume required to be recharged: A-soils= 0.60 inches x lft/ 12"x 20,598 sf= 1,030 c.f. C-soils= 0.25 inches x lft/ 12"x 7,551 sf= 157 c.f. Total Site Volume required to be recharged = 1,187 c.f. Site Volume recharge provided=Volume stored in trenches (bottom of stone to invert out): =Depth of stone x Length of field x Width of field x Void Ratio Infiltration System#1: = 4,882 c.f. (See attached Hydrocad Stage-Storage figure)* =4,882 c.f. Total Volume Recharged> 1,187 c.f. (�ok) Standard # 4: T'SS Removal Storm water volume required to be treated for quality: = 0.5" x 1 ft/ 12" x 28,149 sf(developed) = 1,173 c.f. Volume stored/treated in BMP's =4,882 c.f. Infiltration System#1)* =4,882 c.f. Total Volume Treated> 1,173 c.f. ok) 271710-Drainage Report-Rev3.doc *Note:Values represent storage volume from bottom of stone to 12"overflow invert out of system. Explanation of systems: Parking and driveway areas would be treated by hooded Catch Basins with deep sumps, prior to discharge into a Stormceptor and then the underground infiltration system. All rooftop runoff would be routed into underground infiltration system for recharge. Drainage Area BMP TSS Removal Rate Driveway/Parking Street Sweeping 5% Driveway/Parking Catch Basin w/sump 25% Driveway/Parking Stormceptor 30% (Conservative Estimate) Driveway/Parking Infiltration System 80% Roof Infiltration System 80% Calculations: TSS Removal System l: Driveway/Parking Areas: Beginning Load: 1.00 x Street Sweeping removal rate (0.05) = 0.05 Load Remaining = 1.00—0.05 = 0.95 Beginning Load: 0.95 x Catch Basin removal rate (0.25) = 0.24 Load Remaining = 0.95 —0.24 = 0.71 Remaining Load: 0.71 x Stormceptor removal rate (0.30) = 0.21 Load Remaining = 0.71 —0.21 =0.50 (50% Pretreatment Prior to discharge into Infiltration System, 44% minimum required by DEP �ok) Remaining Load: 0.50 x Infiltration System removal rate (0.80) = .40 Load Remaining = 0.50—0.40 = 0.10 TSS Removal Rate =(1.00—0.10) =90% System 2: Roof: Average Annual Load: 1.00 x Infiltration System removal rate (0.80) = 0.80 Load Remaining = 1.00—0.80 = 0.20 TSS Removal Rate= (1.00— .20) =80% Standard # 5: Higher potential pollutant loads 271710-Drainage Report-Rev3.doc The site does contain land uses with higher potential pollutant loads for the gas station development only. Since the current proposal is higher in elevation and not hydrologically connected to the gas station development, the design assumes this portion of the site is NOT a Land Use with Higher Pollutant Loads and is designed accordingly. Standard # 6: Protection of critical areas The site does not contain critical areas with sensitive resources. Standard # 7: Redevelopment projects The site is a not a redevelopment project. Standard # 8: Erosion/sediment control Erosion and sediment controls are incorporated into the project design to prevent erosion. Standard #9: Operation/maintenance plan Post-Development Phase See Operation and Maintenance Plan and Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan in the back of this report for additional information. The owner is to be responsible for maintenance of all drainage structures in the project- including drain pipes and infiltration system. Regular maintenance is to include the following: 1) Inspection of all drainage facilities (Stormceptor, catch basins and underground infiltration system). During the first year of operation, all drainage facilities should be inspected after every large storm, and 2-3 days afterward. During these inspections the inspector as designated by the owner shall look for evidence of the following: structural damage, silt accumulation (near inlet inverts on catch basins), and improper function. 2) After inspection, if any of the above conditions exist, the inspector shall notify the owner who shall immediately arrange for all necessary repairs and sediment removal. 3) All graded slopes shall be inspected every spring for erosion. Upon discovery of any failure (i.e. erosion) loam and seed shall be put in place and nurtured. 4) During the winter months, all snow is to be stored such that snowmelt is controlled within the paved area and enters the storm water treatment systems. In the event the amount of snow 271710-Drainage Report-Revldoc exceeds such capacity, it is to be removed off-site. The minimum amount of deicing chemicals needed is to be used. No toxic chemicals are to be used for snow or ice control. 5) During the summer months, all landscape features are to be maintained with the minimum possible amount of fertilizers,pesticides or herbicides. The materials used should be organic, biodegradable,non-toxic in nature. If in question, maintenance personnel should check with the Conservation Commission. All personnel involved with the maintenance of landscaping will be informed of this condition. Standard #10: IllicitDischarges: To the best of our knowledge, the site does not contain any illicit discharges, see attached Discharge Statement. 271710-Drainage Report-Revldoc OUTLET APRONDESIGN Project: HERA-N.ANDOVER Job# 271710 r Date: Rev 6-28-10 _ FES#1 OUTLET APRON =_ Outlet# (from HydroCAD POND 4P) MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Qio 0.42 cfs Do= 12 inches ENGINEERS • PLANNERS SURVEYORS Tw= 0.7 feet Design Criteria Apron Dimensions The dimensions of the apron at the outlet of the pipe shall be determined as follows: 1.) The width of the apron at the outlet of the pipe or channel shall be 3 times the diameter of the pipe of width of the channel. W= 3 feet 2.) The length of the apron shall be determined from the following formula when the tailwater depth at the outlet of the pipe or channel is less than one-half the diameter of the pipe or one-half the width of the channel: La=1.8*Q/Do 3/2+7Do La-- 7.76 feet Where: La is the length of the apron Q is the discharge from the pipe or channel Do is the diameter of pipe of width of channel 3.) When the depth of the tailwater at the outlet of the pipe or channel is equal to or greater than one-half the diameter of the pipe or the width of the channel. Then the following formula applies: La=3.0*Qo/Do^1.5+7Do La= 8.26 feet 4.) Where there is no well defined channel downstream of the outlet,the width of the downstream end of the apron shall be determined as follows: a. For minimum tailwater conditions where the tailwater depth is less than the elevation of the center of the pipe: W=3*Do+La W= 10.76 feet b. For maximum tailwater conditions where the tailwater depth is greater than the elevation of the center of the pipe: W=3*Do+0.4*La EaYa4> W= 6.30 feet DMH2- FES 1 5.) Where there is a stable well-defined channel downstream of the apron, the bottom of the apron shall be equal to the width of the channel. 6.) The side of the apron in a well-defined channel shall be 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. The height of the structural lining along the channel sides shall begin at the elevation equal to the top of conduit and taper down to the channel bottom through the length of the apron. 7.) The bottom grade of the apron shall be level(0%grade). No overfall is allowable at the end of the apron. 8.) The apron shall be located so that there are no bends in the horizontal alignment of the apron. Rock Riprap The following criteria shall be used to determine the dimensions of the rock riprap used for the apron: 1.) The median stone diameter shall be determined using the formula: d50=0.02*QA4/3/(Tw*Do) d50= 0.11 inches USE 3 inches d50 minimum 3 inches Where: d50 is the median stone diameter in feet Tw is the tailwater depth above the invert of the pipe channel in feet Q is the discharge from the pipe or channel in cubic feet per second Do is the diameter of the pipe or width of the channel in feet 2.) Fifty percent by weight of the riprap mixture shall be smaller the than median size stone designated as d50. The largest stone size in the mixture shall be 1.5 times the d50 size. 3.) The quality and gradation of the rock,the thickness of the riprap lining, filter material and the quality of the stone shall meet the requirements in the Rock Riprap BMP. The minimum depth shall be 6 inches or 1.5 times the largest stone size in the mixture whichever is larger(d). Thickness of the riprap d= 1.5*(1.5*d5o(largest stone size)) d= 7 inches* *must use a minimum of 6" Rock Rip Rap Gradation %of weight smaller than the given size size of stone in inches 100 4.5 to 6.0 85 3.9 to 5.4 50 3.0 to 4.5 15 0.9 to 1.5 DMH2 - FES 1 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type 11124-hr 100 year Rainfall=6.40" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond IS-l: Prop Underground Infiltration System#1 Elevation Surface Storage Elevation Surface Storage (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) 100.00 2,421 0 102.80 2,421 3,748 100.05 2,421 48 102.85 2,421 3,826 100.10 2,421 97 102.90 2,421 3,904 100.15 2,421 145 102.95 2,421 3,981 100.20 2,421 194 103.00 2,421 4,058 100.25 2,421 242 103.05 2,421 4,133 100.30 2,421 291 103.10 2,421 4,208 100.35 2,421 339 103.15 2,421 4,282 100.40 2,421 387 103.20 2,421 4,355 100.45 2,421 436 103.25 2,421 4,426 100.50 2,421 484 103.30 2,421 4,497 100.55 2,421 528 103.35 2,421 4,565 100.60 2,421 568 103.40 2,421 4,633 100.65 2,421 606 103.45 2,421 4,698 100.70 2,421 641 103.50 2,421 4,762 100.75 2,421 675 103.55 2,421 4,823 100.80 2,421 719 103.60 2,421 4,882 100.85 2,421 770 103.65 2,421 4,937 100.90 2,421 825 103.70 2,421 4,988 100.95 2,421 884 103.75 2,421 5,031 101.00 2,421 945 103.80 2,421 5,066 101.05 2,421 1,009 103.85 2,421 5,101 101.10 2,421 1,075 103.90 2,421 5,139 101.15 2,421 1,143 103.95 2,421 5,179 101.20 2,421 1,212 104.00 2,421 5,223 101.25 2,421 1,283 101.30 2,421 1,355 101.35 2,421 1,428 101.40 2,421 1,502 101.45 2,421 1,578 101.50 2,421 1,654 101.55 2,421 1,731 101.60 2,421 1,809 101.65 2,421 1,887 101.70 2,421 1,966 101.75 2,421 2,045 101.80 2,421 2,125 101.85 2,421 2,206 101.90 2,421 2,287 101.95 2,421 2,368 102.00 2,421 2,449 102.05 2,421 2,531 102.10 2,421 2,613 102.15 2,421 2,695 102.20 2,421 2,777 102.25 2,421 2,859 102.30 2,421 2,941 102.35 2,421 3,023 102.40 2,421 3,104 102.45 2,421 3,186 102.50 2,421 3,267 102.55 2,421 3,349 102.60 2,421 3,430 102.65 2,421 3,510 102.70 2,421 3,590 102.75 2,421 3,669 MEW MHF Project No. 271710 Sheet 1 of 1 ® ONEWProject Description Hera Development Corp. ® Task Pond Drawdown Calculations FIF Design Consultants, Inc. Calculated By CMT Date Rev?-16-10 Checked By Date ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SURVEYORS Drawdown within 72 hours Analysis for Static Method Underground Infiltration System#1 Infiltration Rate: 2.41 inches/hour (From table 2.3.3: Rawls, Brakensiek, Saxton, 1982) Design Infiltration Rate: 2.41 inches/hour Volume Provide for Infiltration: 5,223 cf Basin bottom area: 2,419 sf Time drawdown= (Required Recharge Volume in cubic feet as determined by the Static Method)(1/Design Infiltration Rate in inches per h our)(conversion for inches to feet)(1/bottom area in feet) Time drawdown = ( 5,223 cf) ( 1 / 2.41 in/hr) (1ft/12 in.) ( 1 / 2,419 sf) 10.75 hours 271710 24-hr Pond Drain Calc--Rev2.x1s Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Ll�iBureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Co' hecklist for Stormwater PRep o-r--1 A. Introduction Important:When A Stormwater Report must be submitted with the Notice of Intent permit application to document filling out forms compliance with the Stormwater Management Standards. The following checklist is NOT a substitute for on the computer, (which f d i il t d d ti t b h should hi Report R t St e Stormwater e wc provide more substantive and but is offered use only the tab the p p ) key to move your here as a tool to help the applicant organize their Stormwater Management documentation for their cursor-do not Report and for the reviewer to assess this information in a consistent format. As noted in the Checklist, use the return the Stormwater Report must contain the engineering computations and supporting information set forth in key. Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. The Stormwater Report must be prepared and VQ certified by a Registered Professional Engineer(RPE) licensed in the Commonwealth. The Stormwater Report must include: • The Stormwater Checklist completed and stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer(see page 2)that certifies that the Stormwater Report contains all required submittals.' This Checklist is to be used as the cover for the completed Stormwater Report. • Applicant/Project Name • Project Address • Name of Firm and Registered Professional Engineer that prepared the Report • Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan required by Standards 4-6 • Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan required by Standard 82 • Operation and Maintenance Plan required by Standard 9 In addition to all plans and supporting information, the Stormwater Report must include a brief narrative describing stormwater management practices, including environmentally sensitive site design and LID techniques, along with a diagram depicting runoff through the proposed BMP treatment train. Plans are required to show existing and proposed conditions, identify all wetland resource areas, MRCS soil types, critical areas, Land Uses with Higher Potential Pollutant Loads (LUHPPL), and any areas on the site where infiltration rate is greater than 2.4 inches per hour. The Plans shall identify the drainage areas for both existing and proposed conditions at a scale that enables verification of supporting calculations. As noted in the Checklist, the Stormwater Management Report shall document compliance with each of the Stormwater Management Standards as provided in the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. The soils evaluation and calculations shall be done using the methodologies set forth in Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. To ensure that the Stormwater Report is complete, applicants are required to fill in the Stormwater Report Checklist by checking the box to indicate that the specified information has been included in the Stormwater Report. If any of the information specified in the checklist has not been submitted, the applicant must provide an explanation. The completed Stormwater Report Checklist and Certification must be submitted with the Stormwater Report. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... The Stormwater Report may also include the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement required by Standard 10. If not included in the Stormwater Report,the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement must be submitted prior to the discharge of stormwater runoff to the post-construction best management practices. 2 For some complex projects,it may not be possible to include the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan in the Stormwater Report. In that event,the issuing authority has the discretion to issue an Order of Conditions that approves the project and includes a condition requiring the proponent to submit the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan before commencing any land disturbance activity on the site. 271710-NOlswcheck.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist• Page 1 of 8 L11Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program 1 Checklist for ."430tormwater Rftewp,%ort B. Stormwater Checklist and Certification The following checklist is intended to serve as a guide for applicants as to the elements that ordinarily need to be addressed in a complete Stormwater Report. The checklist is also intended to provide conservation commissions and other reviewing authorities with a summary of the components necessary for a comprehensive Stormwater Report that addresses the ten Stormwater Standards. Note: Because stormwater requirements vary from project to project, it is possible that a complete Stormwater Report may not include information on some of the subjects specified in the Checklist. If it is determined that a specific item does not apply to the project under review, please note that the item is not applicable (N.A.) and provide the reasons for that determination. A complete checklist must include the Certification set forth below signed by the Registered Professional Engineer who prepared the Stormwater Report. Registered Professional Engineer's Certification I have reviewed the Stormwater Report, including the soil evaluation, computations, Long-term Pollution Prevention Plan, the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (if included), the Long- term Post-Construction Operation and Maintenance Plan, the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement(if included) and the plans showing the stormwater management system, and have determined that they have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Stormwater Management Standards as further elaborated by the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. I have also determined that the information presented in the Stormwater Checklist is accurate and that the information presented in the Stormwater Report accurately reflects conditions at the site as of the date of this permit application. Registered Professional Engineer Block and Signature OF ��wPq�yG FRANK C. ,p o MONTEIR0 r„ CIVIL No. 36341 FSS/ONAL 9 0 Signature a Dat Checklist Project Type: Is the application for new development, redevelopment, or a mix of new and redevelopment? ® New development ❑ Redevelopment ❑ Mix of New Development and Redevelopment 271710-NOlswcheck.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 2 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands Program Checklist (continued) LID Measures: Stormwater Standards require LID measures to be considered. Document what environmentally sensitive design and LID Techniques were considered during the planning and design of the project: ® No disturbance to any Wetland Resource Areas ❑ Site Design Practices (e.g. clustered development, reduced frontage setbacks) ❑ Reduced Impervious Area (Redevelopment Only) ❑ Minimizing disturbance to existing trees and shrubs ❑ LID Site Design Credit Requested: ❑ Credit 1 ❑ Credit 2 ❑ Credit 3 ❑ Use of"country drainage" versus curb and gutter conveyance and pipe ❑ Bioretention Cells (includes Rain Gardens) ❑ Constructed Stormwater Wetlands (includes Gravel Wetlands designs) ❑ Treebox Filter ❑ Water Quality Swale ❑ Grass Channel ❑ Green Roof ❑ Other(describe): Standard 1: No New Untreated Discharges ® No new untreated discharges ® Outlets have been designed so there is no erosion or scour to wetlands and waters of the Commonwealth ® Supporting calculations specified in Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook included. 271710-NOiswcheck.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist°Page 3 of 8 LAMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for S.Rormwater Re*V,%o r-I Checklist (continued) Standard 2: Peak Rate Attenuation ❑ Standard 2 waiver requested because the project is located in land subject to coastal storm flowage and stormwater discharge is to a wetland subject to coastal flooding. ❑ Evaluation provided to determine whether off-site flooding increases during the 100-year 24-hour storm. ® Calculations provided to show that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre- development rates for the 2-year and 10-year 24-hour storms. If evaluation shows that off-site flooding increases during the 100-year 24-hour storm, calculations are also provided to show that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development rates for the 100-year 24- hour storm. Standard 3: Recharge ® Soil Analysis provided. ® Required Recharge Volume calculation provided. ❑ Required Recharge volume reduced through use of the LID site Design Credits. ® Sizing the infiltration, BMPs is based on the following method: Check the method used. ® Static ❑ Simple Dynamic ❑ Dynamic Field' ® Runoff from all impervious areas at the site discharging to the infiltration BMP. ❑ Runoff from all impervious areas at the site is not discharging to the infiltration BMP and calculations are provided showing that the drainage area contributing runoff to the infiltration BMPs is sufficient to generate the required recharge volume. ® Recharge BMPs have been sized to infiltrate the Required Recharge Volume. ❑ Recharge BMPs have been sized to infiltrate the Required Recharge Volume only to the maximum extent practicable for the following reason: ❑ Site is comprised solely of C and D soils and/or bedrock at the land surface ❑ M.G.L. c. 21 E sites pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0000 ❑ Solid Waste Landfill pursuant to 310 CMR 19.000 ❑ Project is otherwise subject to Stormwater Management Standards only to the maximum extent practicable. ® Calculations showing that the infiltration BMPs will drain in 72 hours are provided. ❑ Property includes a M.G.L. c. 21 E site or a solid waste landfill and a mounding analysis is included. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 80%TSS removal is required prior to discharge to infiltration BMP if Dynamic Field method is used. 271710-NOlswcheck.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist°Page 4 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist (continued) Standard 3: Recharge (continued) ❑ The infiltration BMP is used to attenuate peak flows during storms greater than or equal to the 10- year 24-hour storm and separation to seasonal high groundwater is less than 4 feet and a mounding analysis is provided. ❑ Documentation is provided showing that infiltration BMPs do not adversely impact nearby wetland resource areas. Standard 4: Water Quality The Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan typically includes the following: • Good housekeeping practices; • Provisions for storing materials and waste products inside or under cover; • Vehicle washing controls; • Requirements for routine inspections and maintenance of stormwater BMPs; • Spill prevention and response plans; • Provisions for maintenance of lawns, gardens, and other landscaped areas; • Requirements for storage and use of fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides; • Pet waste management provisions; • Provisions for operation and management of septic systems; • Provisions for solid waste management; • Snow disposal and plowing plans relative to Wetland Resource Areas; • Winter Road Salt and/or Sand Use and Storage restrictions; • Street sweeping schedules; • Provisions for prevention of illicit discharges to the stormwater management system; • Documentation that Stormwater BMPs are designed to provide for shutdown and containment in the event of a spill or discharges to or near critical areas or from LUHPPL; • Training for staff or personnel involved with implementing Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan; • List of Emergency contacts for implementing Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan. ❑ A Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan is attached to Stormwater Report and is included as an attachment to the Wetlands Notice of Intent. ® Treatment BMPs subject to the 44%TSS removal pretreatment requirement and the one inch rule for calculating the water quality volume are included, and discharge: ❑ is within the Zone II or Interim Wellhead Protection Area ❑ is near or to other critical areas ® is within soils with a rapid infiltration rate (greater than 2.4 inches per hour) ❑ involves runoff from land uses with higher potential pollutant loads. ❑ The Required Water Quality Volume is reduced through use of the LID site Design Credits. ® Calculations documenting that the treatment train meets the 80%TSS removal requirement and, if applicable, the 44% TSS removal pretreatment requirement, are provided. 271710-NOlswcheck.doc^04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 5 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection LABureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater FRepor-I Checklist (continued) Standard 4: Water Quality (continued) ® The BMP is sized (and calculations provided) based on: ® The '/2" or 1"Water Quality Volume or ❑ The equivalent flow rate associated with the Water Quality Volume and documentation is provided showing that the BMP treats the required water quality volume. ® The applicant proposes to use proprietary BMPs, and documentation supporting use of proprietary BMP and proposed TSS removal rate is provided. This documentation may be in the form of the propriety BMP checklist found in Volume 2, Chapter 4 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook and submitting copies of the TARP Report, STEP Report, and/or other third party studies verifying performance of the proprietary BMPs. ❑ A TMDL exists that indicates a need to reduce pollutants other than TSS and documentation showing that the BMPs selected are consistent with the TMDL is provided. Standard 5: Land Uses With Higher Potential Pollutant Loads (LUHPPLs) ❑ The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit covers the land use and the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) has been included with the Stormwater Report. ® The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit covers the land use and the SWPPP will be submitted prior to the discharge of stormwater to the post-construction stormwater BMPs. ❑ The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit does not cover the land use. ❑ LUHPPLs are located at the site and industry specific source control and pollution prevention measures have been proposed to reduce or eliminate the exposure of LUHPPLs to rain, snow, snow melt and runoff, and been included in the long term Pollution Prevention Plan. ❑ All exposure has been eliminated. ❑ All exposure has not been eliminated and all BMPs selected are on MassDEP LUHPPL list. ❑ The LUHPPL has the potential to generate runoff with moderate to higher concentrations of oil and grease (e.g. all parking lots with >1000 vehicle trips per day) and the treatment train includes an oil grit separator, a filtering bioretention area, a sand filter or equivalent. Standard 6: Critical Areas ❑ The discharge is near or to a critical area and the treatment train includes only BMPs that MassDEP has approved for stormwater discharges to or near that particular class of critical area. ❑ Critical areas and BMPs are identified in the Stormwater Report. 271710-NOlswcheck.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist• Page 6 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program %Checklist for Stormwater Report Checklist (continued) Standard 7: Redevelopments and Other Projects Subject to the Standards only to the maximum extent practicable ❑ The project is subject to the Stormwater Management Standards only to the maximum Extent Practicable as a: ❑ Limited Project ❑ Small Residential Projects: 5-9 single family houses or 5-9 units in a multi-family development provided there is no discharge that may potentially affect a critical area. ❑ Small Residential Projects: 2-4 single family houses or 2-4 units in a multi-family development with a discharge to a critical area ❑ Marina and/or boatyard provided the hull painting, service and maintenance areas are protected from exposure to rain, snow, snow melt and runoff ❑ Bike Path and/or Foot Path ❑ Redevelopment Project ❑ Redevelopment portion of mix of new and redevelopment. ❑ Certain standards are not fully met(Standard No. 1, 8, 9, and 10 must always be fully met) and an explanation of why these standards are not met is contained in the Stormwater Report. ❑ The project involves redevelopment and a description of all measures that have been taken to improve existing conditions is provided in the Stormwater Report. The redevelopment checklist found in Volume 2 Chapter 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook may be used to document that the proposed stormwater management system (a) complies with Standards 2, 3 and the pretreatment and structural BMP requirements of Standards 4-6 to the maximum extent practicable and (b) improves existing conditions. Standard 8: Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan must include the following information: ® Narrative; ® Construction Period Operation and Maintenance Plan; • Names of Persons or Entity Responsible for Plan Compliance; • Construction Period Pollution Prevention Measures; • Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan Drawings; • Detail drawings and specifications for erosion control BMPs, including sizing calculations; ® Vegetation Planning; • Site Development Plan; ® Construction Sequencing Plan; ® Sequencing of Erosion and Sedimentation Controls; • Operation and Maintenance of Erosion and Sedimentation Controls; • Inspection Schedule; Maintenance Schedule; • Inspection and Maintenance Log Form. ❑ A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan containing the information set forth above has been included in the Stormwater Report. 271710-NOlswcheck.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 7 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist (continued) Standard 8: Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control (continued) ❑ The project is highly complex and information is included in the Stormwater Report that explains why it is not possible to submit the Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan with the application. A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control has not been included in the Stormwater Report but will be submitted before land disturbance begins. ❑ The project is not covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit. ❑ The project is covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit and a copy of the SWPPP is in the Stormwater Report. ® The project is covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit but no SWPPP been submitted. The SWPPP will be submitted BEFORE land disturbance begins. Standard 9: Operation and (Maintenance Plan ® The Post Construction Operation and Maintenance Plan is included in the Stormwater Report and includes the following information: ® Name of the stormwater management system owners; ® Party responsible for operation and maintenance; ® Schedule for implementation of routine and non-routine maintenance tasks; ® Plan showing the location of all stormwater BMPs maintenance access areas; ❑ Description and delineation of public safety features; ❑ Estimated operation and maintenance budget; and ® Operation and Maintenance Log Form. ❑ The responsible party is not the owner of the parcel where the BMP is located and the Stormwater Report includes the following submissions: ❑ A copy of the legal instrument(deed, homeowner's association, utility trust or other legal entity) that establishes the terms of and legal responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the project site stormwater BMPs; ❑ A plan and easement deed that allows site access for the legal entity to operate and maintain BMP functions. Standard 10: Prohibition of Illicit Discharges ❑ The Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan includes measures to prevent illicit discharges; ® An Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement is attached; ❑ NO Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement is attached but will be submitted prior to the discharge of any stormwater to post-construction BMPs. 271710-NOlswcheck.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 8 of 8 T�A _® i 44 Stiles Road • Suite One . Salem, New Hampshire 03079 TEL (603) 893-0720 • FAX (603) 893-0733 MHF Design Consultants, Inc. www.mhfdesign.com May 24, 2010 Ms. Jennifer Hughes, Conservation Administrator North Andover Conservation Commission 1600 Osgood Street, Suite 264 North Andover, MA 01845 Re: 1503 Osgood Street Map 34 Lot 7 Hera Development Corp. Sub: Illicit Discharge Statement Standard #10 Dear Ms. Hughes: On behalf of our client, Hera Development Corp., we hereby state that to the best of our knowledge, no illicit discharges exist on the above referenced site and none are proposed with the site development plans as prepared for Hera Development Corp. Implementing the pollution prevention plan measures outlined in the site development plans and SWPPP will prevent illicit discharges to the stormwater management system, including wastewater discharges and discharges of stormwater contaminated by contact with process wastes, raw materials,toxic pollutants, hazardous substances, oil, or grease. Attached is the Grading & Utilities Plan from the site plan set. Sincerely, MHF esi onsultants,Inc. Fra C. onteiro, PE Pr sid t Y:\271710\Drainage\Revised 5-24-10\I1licit Discharge Statement Standardl0.doc ENGINEERS 0 PLANNERS SURVEYORS Af polls 119 — 6 All � ` 8 ,I�� '�• , � � �� y��aQYm a iiii�a= x pga 8prti f. x`y ---------------------------------- I J �apg� i 5 ro € a 9 9 C n a[�e$vg�tls �� ism �� g� g �� g��,�� _ �sg9 ��•� <` �' I ��' ."—'.ru� y'-., m qye `t-- -• ------_---—__ 10, 41 w � a End63 WLgI� Q yyg� AM P ioy Un -4 71 V II low � [ � — � lFisu 1. �•o, �nnvrl. � t- � bl � ,.i � @®eo�t&=%� APPENDIX A MAPS & DATA 7' 30" 327 IHAVERHILL!CITY HALL)4.6 KM. 1 329 51 au'y- Ch OP Chac V� RANGE-- IN V to qw, Vt REN C Al 47T�- ta BM "J -W A 51 L 7 I d Copyright(C)1997,Maptech,Inc. USA United States A product of the National Custom Department of Cooperative Soil Survey, Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for NRCS States Department of Agriculture and other Essex tCountlLff Federal agencies, State Natural agencies including the Resources Agricultural Experiment Conservation Stations, and local Service participants Northern Part OW r May 10, 2010 rft vreface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists,teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,protect,or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses.The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center(http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app? agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist(http://soils.usda.gov/contact/ state_Offices/). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Soil Data Mart Web site or the NRCS Web Soil Survey. The Soil Data Mart is the data storage site for the official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture(USDA)prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information,political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means 2 for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.)should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or(202)720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 SoilMap..................................................................................................................7 SoilMap................................................................................................................8 Legend..................................................................................................................9 MapUnit Legend................................................................................................10 MapUnit Descriptions........................................................................................10 Essex County, Massachusetts, Northern Part................................................12 31 B—Walpole fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes................................12 25513—Windsor loamy sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes....................................13 255C—Windsor loamy sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes..................................14 256A—Deerfield loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes............................15 257E—Hinckley and Windsor loamy sands, steep......................................16 651—Udorthents, smoothed.......................................................................17 Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................19 Soil Properties and Qualities..............................................................................19 Soil Qualities and Features.............................................................................19 Hydrologic Soil Group (271710-Soil Report)...............................................19 References............................................................................................................24 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area.They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock.They observed and described many soil profiles.A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil.The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform,a soil scientist develops a concept,or model,of how they were formed.Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile.After the soil scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the 5 Custom Soil Resource Report individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit.The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil- landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component.Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests.Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and identified each as a specific map unit.Aerial photographs show trees,buildings,fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. 6 boil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 7 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map Zo 327030 327060 327090 327120 327150 327180 327210 327240 327270 327300 327330 42°43'49" 42°43'49" ; 0 o "ua o o � t` m m N N [7 m � r 0 0 1D � m m m N n m � r 0 o m N N M M r V • O O m W m m M r 0 0 o • m m N N m m � r v 0 a� p� N N m ch V 42°43'41"' 1 42°43'41" 327030 327060 327090 327120 327150 327180 327210 327240 327270 327300 327330 Map Scale:1:1,620 if printed on A size(8.5"x 11")sheet. io Meters N 0 20 40 80 120 ,N\ Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(Aol) 4Z Very Stony Spot Map Scale: 1:1,620 if printed on A size(8.5"X 11")sheet. F1 Area of Interest(AOI) Jr Wet Spot The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:15,840. Soils A, Other u Soil Map Units Special Line Features Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate map Special Point Features i Gully measurements. Blowout _ Short Steep Slope Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service ® Borrow Pit Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov .. Other X. Clay Spot Coordinate System: UTM Zone 19N NAD83 Political Features 4 Closed Depression 0 Cities This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of Gravel Pit Water Features the version date(s)listed below. � Gravelly Spot Oceans Soil Survey Area: Essex County,Massachusetts,Northern Part Landfill Streams and Canals Survey Area Data: Version 8,Aug 11,2008 Lava Flow Transportation Rails 4L, Marsh or swamp Date(s)aerial images were photographed: 7/10/2003 Mine or Quarry Interstate Highways The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were US Routes compiled and digitized probably differs from the background p Miscellaneous water imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting L•i Perennial Water Major Roads of map unit boundaries may be evident. .� Rock Outcrop Local Roads + Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot j,. Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area 1) Stony Spot Custom Soil Resource Report Map unit Legend Essex County,Massachusetts,Northern Part;(MA605) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in A01 Percent of A01 31 B Walpole fine sandy loam,3 to 8 percent slopes 1.8 14.1% 2558 Windsor loamy sand,3 to 8 percent slopes 1.6 13.2% 255C Windsor loamy sand,8 to 15 percent slopes 7.6 60.9% 256A Deerfield loamy fine sand,0 to 3 percent slopes 0.9 6.9% 257E Hinckley and Windsor loamy sands,steep 0.0 0.3% 651 Udorthents,smoothed 0.6 4.6% Totals for Area of Interest 12.4 100.0% Map unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits forthe properties of the soils.On the landscape, however,the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management.These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management.These are called contrasting, or dissimilar,components.They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic 10 Custom Soil Resource Report classes but ratherto separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series.The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha- Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management.The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them.Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 11 Custom Soil Resource Report Essex County, Massachusetts, Northern Part 31B-4Walpole fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Map Unit Setting Mean annual precipitation:45to54inches Mean annual air temperature:43toS4 degrees F Frost-free period: 145to24Odays Map Unit Composition Walpole and similar ooiln� 85percent Minor components: 15percont Description ofWalpole Setting Landfonn:Terraces, depressions Laodfonn position (two-dimeno/ona0:Toea|ope Lendfonn position (tho*e-dimeno/ona8:Tread, dip Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Loose sandy glaciofluvial deposits over loose sandy and gravelly g|ooioOuvio\ deposits Properties and qualities Slope: 3to8percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage mhou: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer b`transmit water(Koet): High (2.00to 6.00 in/hr) Depth bo water table: About Oto12inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency ofponding: None Available water capacity: Low(about S.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability(nonirrigabed): 3w Typical profile Obzf0 inches: Fine sandy loam 1Dh»24inches: Fine sandy loam 24 to 60 inches: Stratified gravelly sand to gravelly loamy sand to loamy sand Minor Components Scarbmrw Percent of map un/t1Opercent Lendfonn:Ternanea Sudbury Percent of map unit: 3percent Ninigret Percent of map unit: 2percent 12 Custom Soil Resource Report 255 —Windsor loamy sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes Map Unit Setting Mean annual precipitation:45 to 54 inches Mean annual air temperature:43 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 145 to 240 d ys Map Unit Composition Windsor and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components:20 percent Description of Windsor Setting Landform: Flats, terraces Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread, rise Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loose sandy glaciofluvial deposits derived from granite and gneiss Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): High to very high (6.00 to 20.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water capacity: Low(about 4.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability(nonirrigated): 3s Typical profile 0 to 10 inches: Loamy sand 10 to 16 inches: Loamy sand 16 to 28 inches: Sand 28 to 60 inches: Stratified sand Minor Components Deerfield Percent of map unit: 17 percent Wareham Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform:Terraces 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Pipestone Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform:Terraces 255C—Windsor loamy sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes Map Unit Setting Mean annual precipitation:45 to 54 inches Mean annual air mperature:43 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 145 to 240 days Map Unit Composition Windsor and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Description of Windsor Setting Landform:Terraces Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Riser Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loose sandy glaciofluvial deposits derived from granite and gneiss Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): High to very high (6.00 to 20.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water capacity: Low(about 4.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability(nonirrigated):4s Typical profile 0 to 10 inches: Loamy sand 10 to 16 inches: Loamy sand 16 to 28 inches: Sand 28 to 60 inches: Stratified sand Minor Components Deerfield Percent of map unit: 16 percent 14 Custom Soil Resource Report Pipestone Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform:Terraces Scarboro Percent of map unit. 1 percent Landform:Terraces Swansea Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Bogs Wareham Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform:Terraces 256A—Deerfield loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting Elevation: 0 to 1,000 feet Mean annual precipitation:45 to 54 inches Mean annual air temperature:43 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 145 to 240 days Map Unit Composition Deerfield and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components:20 percent Description of Deerfield Setting Landform:Terraces Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Loose sandy glaciofluvial deposits derived from granite and gneiss Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Moderately well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): High to very high (6.00 to 20.00 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 12 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water capacity: Low (about 3.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability(nonirrigated): 3w 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Typical profile 0 to 9 inches: Loamy fine sand 9 to 33 inches. Loamy fine sand 33 to 60 inches: Stratified sand Minor Components Windsor Percent of map unit: 15 percent Wareham Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Depressions 257E—Hinckley and Windsor loamy sands, steep Map Unit Setting Elevation: 0 to 1,000 feet Mean annual precipitation:45 to 54 inches Mean annual air temperature:43 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 145 to 240 days Map Unit Composition Hinckley and similar soils: 60 percent Windsor and similar soils:20 percent Minor components:20 percent Description of Hinckley Setting Landform: Eskers, kames, terraces Landform position (two-dimensional). Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, riser Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loose sandy and gravelly glaciofluvial deposits Properties and qualities Slope: 25 to 35 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): High to very high (6.00 to 20.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water capacity:Very low (about 3.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability(nonirrigated):7s 16 Custom Soil Resource Report Typical profile 0 to 1 inches: Muck 1 to 6 inches: Gravelly loamy sand 6 to 16 inches:Very gravelly loamy sand 16 to 60 inches: Stratified cobbly coarse sand to very gravelly loamy fine sand Description of Windsor Setting Landform: Eskers, kames, terraces Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional). Side slope, riser Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loose sandy glaciofluvial deposits Properties and qualities Slope: 25 to 35 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class: Excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): High to very high (6.00 to 20.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water capacity: Low(about 4.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability(nonirrigated):7s Typical profile 0 to 3 inches: Loamy sand 3 to 17 inches: Loamy sand 17 to 28 inches: Stratified sand 28 to 60 inches: Stratified sand Minor Components Carver Percent of map unit: 20 percent 651—Udorthents, smoothed Map Unit Setting Elevation: 0 to 3,000 feet Mean annual precipitation:45 to 54 inches Mean annual air temperature:43 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 145 to 240 days 17 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Composition Udorthents and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components:20 percent Description of Udorthents Setting Parent material: Excavated and filled land loamy and/or excavated and filled land sandy and gravelly Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to very high (0.06 to 20.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Interpretive groups Land capability(nonirrigated): 6s Typical profile 0 to 6 inches:Variable 6 to 60 inches:Variable Minor Components Urban land Percent of map unit: 10 percent Beaches Percent of map unit: 8 percent Dumps Percent of map unit. 2 percent 18 bo-il Information for All Uses Soil Propeftiesn ities The Soil Properties and Qualities section includes various soil properties and qualities displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in the selected area of interest.A single value or rating for each map unit is generated by aggregating the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This aggregation process is defined for each property or quality. Soil Qualities and Features Soil qualities are behavior and performance attributes that are not directly measured, but are inferred from observations of dynamic conditions and from soil properties. Example soil qualities include natural drainage, and frost action. Soil features are attributes that are not directly part of the soil. Example soil features include slope and depth to restrictive layer.These features can greatly impact the use and management of the soil. Hydrologic Soil Group (271710-Soil Report) Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long- duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. 19 Custom Soil Resource Report Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. 20 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Hydrologic Soil Group (271710-Soil Report) n 327030 327060 327090 327120 327150 327180 327210 327240 327270 327300 327330 42°43'49" 42'43'49" v� o O ! p ro f M O m O O N m m N r M r O N 01 O N m (h m n N r V O m mO N m N r r V • O m m O N m � m r r v 0 m O N m M r V O M m O N m n v z afr � -42"43'41" t 327030 327060 327090 327120 327150 327180 327210 327240 327270 327300 327330 42°43'41" Map Scale:1:1,620 if printed on A size(8.5"x 11")sheet. " m io Meters 0 20 40 80 120 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) Map Scale: 1:1,620 if printed on A size(8.5"X 11")sheet. Area of Interest(AOI) The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:15,840. Soils Soil Map Units Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate map Soil Ratings measurements. A Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service EJ A/D Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov ME g Coordinate System: UTM Zone 19N NAD83 B/D This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of ED C the version date(s)listed below. C/D Soil Survey Area: Essex County,Massachusetts,Northern Part D Survey Area Data: Version 8,Aug 11,2008 Not rated or not available Date(s)aerial images were photographed: 7/10/2003 Political Features a Cities The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were Water Features compiled and digitized probably differs from the background Oceans imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Streams and Canals Transportation .}� Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Custom Soil Resource Report Table Hydrologic Soil Group (271710-Soil Report) Hydrologic Soil Group—Summary by Map Unit—Essex County,Massachusetts,Northern Part 'Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in A01 Percent of AOI 31 B Walpole fine sandy loam,3 to 8 percent C 1.8 14.1% slopes 255B Windsor loamy sand,3 to 8 percent A 1.6 13.2% slopes 255C Windsor loamy sand,8 to 15 percent A 7.6 60.9% slopes 256A Deerfield loamy fine sand,0 to 3 percent B 0.9 6.9% slopes 257E Hinckley and Windsor loamy sands,steep A 0.0 0.3% 651 Udorthents,smoothed B 0.6 4.6% Totals for Area of Interest 12.4 100.0% Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group (271710-Soil Report) Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified Tie-break Rule: Lower 23 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO).2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt,G.W., and L.M.Vasilas,editors.Version 6.0,2006.Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://soils.usda.gov/ Soil Survey Staff. 1999.Soil taxonomy:A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://soils.usda.gov/ Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to soil taxonomy. 10th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://soils.usda.gov/ Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://soils.usda.gov/ United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.giti.nres.usda.gov/ United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://soils.usda.gov/ United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://soils.usda.gov/ 24 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. 25 Stormceptor Stormceptor Sizing Detailed Report PCSWMM for Stormceptor Project Information Date 7/15/2010 Project Name Hera Development Project Number 271710 Location 1503 Osgood Street, North Andover, MA Stormwater Quality Objective This report outlines how Stormceptor System can achieve a defined water quality objective through the removal of total suspended solids (TSS). Attached to this report is the Stormceptor Sizing Summary. Stormceptor System Recommendation The Stormceptor System model STC 450i achieves the water quality objective removing 86%TSS for a Fine (organics, silts and sand) particle size distribution. The Stormceptor System The Stormceptor oil and sediment separator is sized to treat stormwater runoff by removing pollutants through gravity separation and flotation. Stormceptor's patented design generates positive TSS removal for all rainfall events, including large storms. Significant levels of pollutants such as heavy metals, free oils and nutrients are prevented from entering natural water resources and the re-suspension of previously captured sediment(scour) does not occur. Stormceptor provides a high level of TSS removal for small frequent storm events that represent the majority of annual rainfall volume and pollutant load. Positive treatment continues for large infrequent events, however, such events have little impact on the average annual TSS removal as they represent a small percentage of the total runoff volume and pollutant load. Stormceptor is the only oil and sediment separator on the market sized to remove TSS for a wide range of particle sizes, including fine sediments (clays and silts), that are often overlooked in the design of other stormwater treatment devices. 1 ]IMATEMWA RL-_ Stormceptor" Small storms dominate hydrologic activity, US EPA reports "Early efforts in stormwater management focused on flood events ranging from the 2-yr to the 100-yr storm. Increasingly stormwater professionals have come to realize that small storms (i.e. < 1 in. rainfall) dominate watershed hydrologic parameters typically associated with water quality management issues and BMP design. These small storms are responsible for most annual urban runoff and groundwater recharge. Likewise, with the exception of eroded sediment, they are responsible for most pollutant washoff from urban surfaces. Therefore, the small storms are of most concern for the stormwater management objectives of ground water recharge, water quality resource protection and thermal impacts control." "Most rainfall events are much smaller than design storms used for urban drainage models. In any given area, most frequently recurrent rainfall events are small(less than 1 in. of daily rainfall)." "Continuous simulation offers possibilities for designing and managing BMPs on an individual site-by-site basis that are not provided by other widely used simpler analysis methods. Therefore its application and use should be encouraged." — US EPA Stormwater Best Management Practice Design Guide,Volume 1 —General Considerations, 2004 Design Methodology Each Stormceptor system is sized using PCSWMM for Stormceptor, a continuous simulation model based on US EPA SWMM. The program calculates hydrology from up-to-date local historical rainfall data and specified site parameters. With US EPA SWMM's precision, every Stormceptor unit is designed to achieve a defined water quality objective. The TSS removal data presented follows US EPA guidelines to reduce the average annual TSS load. Stormceptor's unit process for TSS removal is settling. The settling model calculates TSS removal by analyzing (summary of analysis presented in Appendix 2): • Site parameters • Continuous historical rainfall, including duration, distribution, peaks (Figure 1) • Interevent periods • Particle size distribution • Particle settling velocities (Stokes Law, corrected for drag) • TSS load (Figure 2) • Detention time of the system The Stormceptor System maintains continuous positive TSS removal for all influent flow rates. Figure 3 illustrates the continuous treatment by Stormceptor throughout the full range of storm events analyzed. It is clear that large events do not significantly impact the average annual TSS removal. There is no decline in cumulative TSS removal, indicating scour does not occur as the flow rate increases. 2 ] W MATERIALS Mt-- Ceptor® 35 ._.._. ._...._..__........._..__.__._..._......_..._..__.. .._......................_-..-_.___............_........._..__.._._................................_...._.._........._......._..................__.. 30 .. _........................................._..........-_............_....._......___..._..__.... ............_...._...-......._........_..._-._......................-..,................................._..._...._. o_25 ........... .............._.............._....................._._..._._.....-._._._.........._.-..._....._.................................-............................. N E p20- ................................___.._.._....._........_......._...._....-.........._.............._...._....................................._....................................-.......____........................................... °c 15 .............._..__......................................-...........................................................__..._............_.......-..-..._...._......................................................... 10 -- -. ......._.................-..__......-._..._...._.....-.....__...__..-............................................................_............__.................-..._._.._......_...---............................................ ..... 0 O O O N pNm� W A (T m V N N N N N Ut A tJ A V !}i O 2 O m m V m . V J A A 1p O Flow(cfs) Figure 1. Runoff Volume by Flow Rate for BOSTON WSFO AP—MA 770, 1948 to 2005 for 0.527 ac, 68.57% impervious. Small frequent storm events represent the majority of annual rainfall volume. Large infrequent events have little impact on the average annual TSS removal, as they represent a small percentage of the total annual volume of runoff. �o ..................................................................................................-_...................-.._...................................-.._......................................--._ --- aso .---.. --.......................................... . .....___._.__._........ -....__..._...._..._..._... ....._.............. .. ---..----- CU m J50 ..__._..._.-__- ........................._._.............._ _......._.._.__.._......___........._..._........-................._.._...-..........._._..._..-......_..............._...................._.... C 9 40 ...._ _.......... ._...... _......... ..___ _._.._...... ........_... ........_. ......_..._ _...__.... _...._... _.....__..__. O d E30 -_._..................._._...-.._..-...-..._._...._..._........._..........._..._._._...__..._..._-...._.__...._....__...._.......-....-__.............-.._._.......-.._..._._..........._._"'.__.......-.._._....._........___-_.. a) F-- rn c, 0 20 _....................._.__........._..._............_-............................._................___......................................._.._.........._...._................_._......._..........._................ .._.._..-.._............._.. 10 .. ........... _.-.. ..................._..............................._.........._...................................................._._ ............................................................................ 0 A N V m J m m W J tD N A IJ A J V, O m W O m J m V Flow(cfs) Figure 2. Long Term Pollutant Load by Flow Rate for BOSTON WSFO AP—770, 1948 to 2005 for 0.527 ac, 68.57% impervious. The majority of the annual pollutant load is transported by small frequent 3 NMATERIAW man Stormceptor" storm events. Conversely, large infrequent events carry an insignificant percentage of the total annual pollutant load. 100 go--...................-........._............. -..__.._..-....-.-.._._._....__.._....._.._..._ _...............-...--....__........_.... 0 5 70 --............._........__..............._.. ................_......_.-... ...................._.....-..._......._._......_._.._...... 60 ................_.....__......................................................._..._..._..._._...._.._..._..--........-...--... ........_................................................._......................._.................................... m E 50 ... __.... a� 40 ._. _...__._.. h 30 ...._....._........._......................_...............__....__._._...._......_..........._.................__..........-.............__..._.........-....__.._....-..................___.............__...._......-....-..._......_...... m E20 ...-----..----...._........................__..._._._..................._..._.__.......__.........._...--..__....--.-....--_......_...._-....-._..__...._......_.-....._ .. ............_.......... v 10 ._. _._.._.._. O 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 Flow(ofs) Stormceptor Model STC 450i Drainage Area (ac) 0.527 TSS Removal (%) 86 Impervious (%) 68.57 Figure 3. Cumulative TSS Removal by Flow Rate for BOSTON WSFO AP—770, 1948 to 2005. Stormceptor continuously removes TSS throughout the full range of storm events analyzed. Note that large events do not significantly impact the average annual TSS removal. Therefore no decline in cumulative TSS removal indicates scour does not occur as the flow rate increases. 4 NMATERWIA RL-- Stormceptoro Appendix 1 Stormceptor Design Summary Project Information Rainfall Date 7/15/2010 Name BOSTON WSFO AP Project Name Hera Development State MA Project Number 271710 Location 1503 Osgood Street, North ID 770 Andover, MA Years of Records 1948 to 2005 Designer Information Latitude 42°21'38"N Company MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Contact Chris Tymula Longitude 71°0'38"W (dotes Water Quality Objective N/A TSS Removal(%) 80 Drainage Area Upstream Storage Total Area (ac) 0.527 Storage Discharge Imperviousness(%) 68.57 (a0ft) (cos) 0 0 The Stormceptor System model STC 450i achieves the water quality objective removing 86%TSS for a Fine (organics, silts and sand)particle size distribution. Stormceptor Sizing Summary Stormceptor Model TSS Removal t STC 900 91 STC 1200 91 STC 1800 92 STC 2400 94 STC 3600 94 STC 4800 95 STC 6000 96 STC 7200 96 STC 11000 98 STC 13000 98 STC 16000 98 5 NMATEPWJA Stormiceptor' Particle Size Distribution Removing silt particles from runoff ensures that the majority of the pollutants, such as hydrocarbons and heavy metals that adhere to fine particles, are not discharged into our natural water courses. The table below lists the particle size distribution used to define the annual TSS removal. Fine(organics, silts and sand Specific Settling Specific Settling Particle Size Distribution Gravity Velocity Particle Size Distribution Gravity Velocity m % ft/s Pm % fus 20 20 1.3 0.0013 60 20 1.8 0.0051 150 20 2.2 0.0354 400 20 2.65 0.2123 2000 20 2.65 0.9417 Stormceptor Design Notes • Stormceptor performance estimates are based on simulations using PCSWMM for Stormceptor. • Design estimates listed are only representative of specific project requirements based on total suspended solids(TSS)removal. • Only the STC 450i is adaptable to function with a catch basin inlet and/or inline pipes. • Only the Stormceptor models STC 450i to STC 7200 may accommodate multiple inlet pipes. • Inlet and outlet invert elevation differences are as follows: Inlet and Outlet Pipe Invert Elevations Differences Inlet Pipe Configuration STC 450i STC 900 to STC STC 11000 to 7200 STC 16000 Single inlet pipe 3 in. 1 in. 3 in. Multiple inlet pipes 3 in. 3 in. Only one inlet pipe. • Design estimates are based on stable site conditions only, after construction is completed. • Design estimates assume that the storm drain is not submerged during zero flows. For submerged applications, please contact your local Stormceptor representative. • Design estimates may be modified for specific spills controls. Please contact your local Stormceptor representative for further assistance. • For pricing inquiries or assistance, please contact Rinker Materials 1 (800)909-7763 www.rinkerstormceptor.com RjMATERIALS" ceptor® Appendix 2 Summary of Design Assumptions Site Drainage Area FTotal Area(ac) 0.527 Imperviousness 68.57 Surface Characteristics Infiltration Parameters Width (ft) 303 Horton's equation is used to estimate infiltration Slope(%) 2 Max. Infiltration Rate(in/hr) 2.44 Impervious Depression Storage (in.) 0.02 Min.Infiltration Rate(in/hr) 0.4 Pervious Depression Storage(in.) 0.2 Decay Rate (s-1) 0.00055 Impervious Manning's n 0.015 Regeneration Rate(s-1) 0.01 Pervious Manning's n 0.25 Evaporation Maintenance Frequency [Daily Evaporation Rate(inches/day) 0.1 Sediment build-up reduces the storage volume for sedimentation. Frequency of maintenance is Dry Weather Flow assumed for TSS removal calculations. Maintenance Frequency(months) 12 [Dry Weather Flow(cfs) No Upstream Attenuation Stage-storage and stage-discharge relationship used to model attenuation upstream of the Stormceptor System is identified in the table below. Storage Discharge ac-ft cfs 0 0 7 W MATERIALS VL— Stormceptor' Particle Size Distribution Removing fine particles from runoff ensures the majority of pollutants,such as heavy metals, hydrocarbons,free oils and nutrients are not discharged into natural water resources. The table below identifies the particle size distribution selected to define TSS removal for the design of the Stormceptor System. Fine(organics, silts and sand Particle Size Distribution Specific Settling Particle Size Distribution Specific Settling Gravity Velocity Gravity Velocity m % fus Pm % ft/s 20 20 1.3 0.0013 60 20 1.8 0.0051 150 20 2.2 0.0354 400 20 2.65 0.2123 2000 20 2.65 0.9417 PCSWMM for Stormceptor Grain Size Distributions 100 _ 90 --- - - - - -- 80 70 LGRAVEL I CLAY SILT SAN CAB 60 - BLES E 40 - - - --- � I 2010 -------- --- - - -- - T 1 0 Ilk 1 10 100 1000 10000 Grain Size(um) +NJDEP - -Fine Distribution -►-OK-110 -*--F-95 Sand -&--Coarse Distribution Figure 1. PCSWMM for Stormceptor standard design grain size distributions. 8 MATERIALS"" RL-- ceptor® TSS Loading Parameters TSS Loading Function I Buildup/Washoff Parameters Target Event Mean Concentration 125 (EMC)(mg/L) Exponential Buildup Power 0.4 Exponential Washoff Exponential 0.2 0931011MG • PCSWMM for Stormceptor calculates annual hydrology with the US EPA SWMM and local continuous historical rainfall data. Performance calculations of the Stormceptor System are based on the average annual removal of TSS for the selected site parameters. The Stormceptor System is engineered to capture fine particles(silts and sands)by focusing on average annual runoff volume ensuring positive removal efficiency is maintained during all rainfall events,while preventing the opportunity for negative removal efficiency(scour). Smaller recurring storms account for the majority of rainfall events and average annual runoff volume, as observed in the historical rainfall data analyses presented in this section. Rainfall Station Rainfall Station BOSTON WSFO AP Rainfall File Name MA770.NDC Total Number of Events 9245 Latitude 42°21'38"N Total Rainfall (in.) 2457.1 Longitude 71°0'38"W Average Annual Rainfall (in.) 42.4 Elevation (ft) 20 Total Evaporation (in.) 158.0 Rainfall Period of Record (y) 58 Total Infiltration (in.) 760.2 Total Rainfall Period (y) 58 Percentage of Rainfall that is 65.1 Runoff(%) 9 NMATERWIA VL,-- Ceptor® Rainfall Event Analysis Rainfall Depth No. of Events Percentage of Total Volume Percentage of Total Events Annual Volume in. % in. % 0.25 6728 72.8 423 17.2 0.50 1052 11.4 387 15.8 0.75 541 5.9 335 13.6 1.00 323 3.5 281 11.4 1.25 192 2.1 217 8.8 1.50 128 1.4 177 7.2 1.75 89 1.0 144 5.9 2.00 52 0.6 97 3.9 2.25 48 0.5 102 4.1 2.50 29 0.3 69 2.8 2.75 14 0.2 37 1.5 3:00 16 0.2 46 1.9 3.25 4 0.0 12 0.5 3.50 5 0.1 17 0.7 3.75 4 0.0 15 0.6 4.00 2 0.0 8 0.3 4.25 4 0.0 17 0.7 4.50 2 0.0 9 0.4 4.75 1 0.0 5 0.2 5.00 4 0.0 20 0.8 5.25 1 0.0 5 0.2 5.50 0 0.0 0 0.0 5.75 3 0.0 17 0.7 6.00 0 0.0 0 0.0 6.25 2 0.0 12 0.5 6.50 0 0.0 0 0.0 6.75 0 0.0 0 0.0 7.00 0 0.0 0 0.0 7.25 1 0.0 7 0.3 7.50 0 0.0 0 0.0 7.75 0 0.0 0 0.0 8.00 0 0.0 0 0.0 8.25 0 0.0 0 0.0 -8.25 0 0.0 0 0.0 Frequency of Occurence by Rainfall Depths 100 80 _................................-___..............._._..._....-......_.._......_ ......._._._.........._......._................................. ._......._.._.___......._...------........___........._._.................. U U D U40 ........ .___.. _._..____ ._._._._ ..._...._ ........... __..._.. ....___._ .._..._. ....._..... ._...._._....... C N Li 20 ............_....................................-__.................................................._.._..........................---................_...__..._......._...._..............__...._....._._..._.._.........._..._. 0 O O O -+ N N N N WP w wA A Rainfall Depth(in.) 10 MATERIALSTM Rt-- C@ptor® Pollutograph Flow Rate Cumulative Mass cfs % 0.035 75.1 0.141 92.2 0.318 98.3 0.565 99.7 0.883 99.9 1.271 100.0 1.73 100.0 2.26 100.0 2.86 100.0 3.531 100.0 4.273 100.0 5.085 100.0 5.96E 100.0 6.922 100.0 7,946 100.0 9.041 100.0 10.206 100.0 11.442 100.0 12.749 100.0 14.126 100.0 15.574 100.0 17.092 100.0 18.681 100.0 20.341 100.0 22.072 100.0 23.873 100.0 25.744 100.0 27.687 100.0 29.7 100.0 31.783 100.0 Cumulative Mass Transported by Flow Rate For area:.527(ac),imperviousness:68.57%,rainfall station:BOSTON WSFO AP 100 90 .....-- ........__..............._.............__.._........_._._...._._........._...-_........_...._....__._._..._..._.......I...._--- ........................................................_........ ^ 80 .._. .__...__....__..._.__._...._......................................__ _ ............._........__.._......_..-....................._..........._...._............._........_._.. ......... 0 v 70 m60 ...._.._.................._..._._........__._.._...._ _--------........_........._..__...._............_._.._.........._........_._............._...._._ m ......._..._........._...._.. ._......... _. c W U! 40 ...._.........................._......_........_.......... ........_ ......._..._..............._................._....._....__.._.........__......_................_.__...............__......__. co30 c c 201..... _.. 10 ......._.........................__.._...................................................__..__........_._..._....__............................................................................................................................. ..--... 0 0.0 0.2 0A 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 Flow(cfs) 11 NMATCIUWA 9 is ) 2S (i Runoff to cb along Runoff to Wetlands Orchardill Subcat Reach Pon Link Drainage Diagram for 271710-Predrain Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc., Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCADO 8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 271710-Predrain Prepared by MIS Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing(all nodes) Area CN Description (sq-ft) (subcatchment-numbers) 11,036 30 Woods,Good,HSG A (2S) 32,549 39 >75%Grass cover,Good,HSG A (1 S,2S) 31,127 70 Woods,Good,HSG C (2S) 4,117 74 >75%Grass cover,Good,HSG C (2S) 4,583 98 Paved parking&roofs (1 S) 83,412 TOTAL AREA 271710-Predrain Prepared by MI IF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Soil Listing(all nodes) Area Soil Subcatchment (sq-ft) Goup Numbers 43,585 HSG A 1 S,2S 0 HSG B 35,244 HSG C 2S 0 HSG D 4,583 Other 1S 83,412 TOTAL AREA 271710-Predrain Type III24-hr ]-year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants,Inc. Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs, 3001 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1S: Runoff to cb along Orchard Hill Runoff Area=6,396 sf 71.65%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.94" Flow Length=107' Tc=4.3 min CN=81 Runoff--O.17 cfs 502 cf Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff Area=77,016 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.04" Flow Length=185' Tc=4.5 min CN=52 Runoff0.01 cfs 278 cf Total Runoff Area=83,412 sf Runoff Volume=780 cf Average Runoff Depth=0.11" 94.51% Pervious=78,829 sf 5.49% Impervious=4,583 sf 271710-Predrain Type III24-hr ]-year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by NU-11'Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pafze 5 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Runoff to cb along Orchard Hill Runoff = 0.17 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 502 cf, Depth= 0.94" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS, Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 1-year Rainfall=2.50" Area(sf) CN Description 4,583 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,813 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 6,396 81 Weighted Average 1,813 Pervious Area 4,583 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.7 25 0.0150 0.11 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.4 37 0.0500 1.57 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.2 45 0.0350 3.80 Shallow Concentrated Flow, _ Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.3 107 Total Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff = 0.01 cfs @ 15.08 hrs, Volume= 278 cf, Depth= 0.04" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 1-year Rainfall=2.50" _ Area(sf) CN Description 30,736 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 11,036 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 4,117 74 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG C 31,127 70 Woods, Good,HSG C 77,016 52 Weighted Average 77,016 Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.3 20 0.0200 0.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.6 100 0.1800 2.97 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.3 40 0.1500 1.94 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Woodland Kv=5.0 fps 4.5 185 Total 271710-Predrain Type III24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by MIIF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCAD88 50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs, 3001 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1S: Runoff to cb along Orchard Hill Runoff Area=6,396 sf 71.65%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.39" Flow Length=107' Tc=4.3 min CN=81 Runoff=0.25 cfs 741 cf Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff Area=77,016 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.15" Flow Length=185' Tc=4.5 min CN=52 Runoff=0.07 cfs 962 cf Total Runoff Area=83,412 sf Runoff Volume= 1,704 cf Average Runoff Depth=0.25" 94.51% Pervious=78,829 sf 5.49% Impervious=4,583 sf 271710-Predrain Type X 24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Runoff to cb along Orchard Dill Runoff = 0.25 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 741 cf, Depth= 1.39" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Area(sf) CN Description 4,583 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,813 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 6,396 81 Weighted Average 1,813 Pervious Area 4,583 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.7 25 0.0150 0.11 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.4 37 0.0500 1.57 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.2 45 0.0350 3.80 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.3 107 Total Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 12.41 hrs, Volume= 962 cf, Depth= 0.15" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Area(sf) CN Description 30,736 39 >75%Grass cover,Good,HSG A 11,036 30 Woods, Good,HSG A 4,117 74 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG C 31,127 70 Woods, Good,HSG C 77,016 52 Weighted Average 77,016 Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.3 20 0.0200 0.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.6 100 0.1800 2.97 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.3 40 0.1500 1.94 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 4.5 185 Total 271710-Predrain Type M 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by MI IF Design Consultants,Inc. Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs, 3001 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1S: Runoff to cb along Orchard Hill Runoff Area=6,396 sf 71.65%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.55" Flow Length=107' Tc=4.3 min CN=81 Runoff0.47 cfs 1,358 cf Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff Area=77,016 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.59" Flow Length=185' Tc=4.5 min CN=52 Runoff--0.78 cfs 3,803 cf Total Runoff Area=83,412 sf Runoff Volume=5,161 cf Average Runoff Depth=0.74" 94.51%Pervious=78,829 sf 5.49%Impervious=4,583 sf 271710-Predrain Type III24-hr I 0-year Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by MI IF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 C 2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Runoff to cb along Orchard Dill Runoff = 0.47 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 1,358 cf, Depth= 2.55" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-year Rainfall=4.50" Area(sf) CN Description 4,583 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,813 39 >75%Grass cover, Good, HSG A 6,396 81 Weighted Average 1,813 Pervious Area 4,583 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.7 25 0.0150 0.11 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.4 37 0.0500 1.57 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.2 45 0.0350 3.80 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.3 107 Total Summary for Subcatchent 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff = 0.78 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 3,803 cf, Depth= 0.59" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-year Rainfall=4.50" Area(sf) CN Description 30,736 39 >75%Grass cover, Good, HSG A 11,036 30 Woods, Good,HSG A 4,117 74 >75%Grass cover, Good, HSG C 31,127 70 Woods Good HSG C 77,016 52 Weighted Average 77,016 Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.3 20 0.0200 0.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.6 100 0.1800 2.97 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.3 40 0.1500 1.94 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Woodland Kv=5.0 fps 4.5 185 Total 271710-Predrain Type X 24-hr 100 year Rainfall=6.40" Prepared by Nff F Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs, 3001 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1S: Runoff to eb along Orchard Hill Runoff Area=6,396 sf 71.65%Impervious Runoff Depth=4.25" Flow Length=107' Tc=4.3 min CN=81 Runoff 0.77 cfs 2,265 cf Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff Area=77,016 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.50" Flow Length=185' Tc=4.5 min CN=52 Runoff2.85 cfs 9,655 cf Total Runoff Area=83,412 sf Runoff Volume=11,920 cf Average Runoff Depth= 1.71" 94.51%Pervious=78,829 sf 5.49% Impervious=4,583 sf 271710-Predrain Type M 24-hr 100 year Rainfall=6.40" Prepared by NIHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 5/13/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Runoff to cb along Orchard Hill Runoff = 0.77 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 2,265 cf, Depth= 4.25" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-year Rainfall=6.40" Area(sf) CN Description 4,583 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,813 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 6,396 81 Weighted Average 1,813 Pervious Area 4,583 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.7 25 0.0150 0.11 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.4 37 0.0500 1.57 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.2 45 0.0350 3.80 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.3 107 Total Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff = 2.85 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 9,655 cf, Depth= 1.50" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-year Rainfall=6.40" Area(sf) CN Description 30,736 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 11,036 30 Woods, Good,HSG A 4,117 74 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG C 31,127 70 Woods Good HSG C 77,016 52 Weighted Average 77,016 Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.3 20 0.0200 0.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.6 100 0.1800 2.97 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.3 40 0.1500 1.94 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 4.5 185 Total APPENDIX C POST DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS 19 29 10 & 100-YEAR STORM EVENTS 2S -D F R Runoff to Wetlands Wetlands Des'gn Point 4S 9S ca 3S Runoff to CB-2 2P Roof Run 4P Runoff to CB- Prop CB Prop DMH-2 S-1 5P Prop CB-1 Prop DMH-1 Prop Underground Prop DMH-3 (Stormceptor) Infiltration System#1 6S Runoff to Existing CB Subcaf Reach Pon Llnk Drainage Diagram for 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc., Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCADO 8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Prepared by Ml-IF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing(all nodes) Area CN Description (sq-ft) (subcatchment-numbers) 6,085 30 Woods,Good,HSG A (2S) 19,376 39 >75%Grass cover,Good,HSG A (2S,3S,4S,6S) 2,000 50 Rip Rap Slope,HSG A (2S) 3,500 55 Rip Rap Slope,HSG C (2S) 15,364 70 Woods,Good,HSG C (2S) 4,283 74 >75%Grass cover,Good,HSG C (2S) 32,804 98 Paved parking&roofs (3S,4S,6S,9S) 83,412 TOTAL AREA 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Soil Listing(all nodes) Area Soil Subcatchment (sq-ft) Goup Numbers 27,461 HSG A 2S,3S,4S,6S 0 HSG B 23,147 HSG C 2S 0 HSG D 32,804 Other 3S,4S,6S,9S 83,412 TOTAL AREA 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type H124-hr]-year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 (02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pa)ze 4 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 3001 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff Area=42,188 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.07" Tc=5.0 min CN=54 Runoff=0.01 cfs 239 cf Subcatchment 3S: Runoff to CB-1 Runoff Area=11,144 sf 71.15%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.94" Flow Length=200' Tc=4.5 min CN=81 Runoff=0.29 cfs 875 cf Subcatchment 4S: Runoff to CB-2 Runoff Area--I 1,825 sf 66.13%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.79" Flow Length=75' Tc=4.0 min CN=78 Runoff=0.25 cfs 776 cf Subcatchment 6S: Runoff to Existing CB Runoff Area=5,855 sf 79.50%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.24" Flow Length=145' Tc=3.8 min CN=86 Runoff=0.21 cfs 607 cf Subcatchment 9S: Roof Runoff Runoff Area=12,400 sf 100.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.27" Tc=0.0 min CN=98 Runoff0.84 cfs 2,346 cf Reach 1R: Wetlands Design Point Inflow=0.04 cfs 489 cf Outflow=0.04 cfs 489 cf Pond IP: Prop CB-1 Peak Elev=102.31' Inflow=0.29 cfs 875 cf 12.0"x 80.0'Culvert Outflow=0.29 cfs 875 cf Pond 2P: Prop CB-2 Peak Elev=101.75' Inflow=0.25 cfs 776 cf 12.0"x 20.0'Culvert Outflow=0.25 cfs 776 cf Pond 3P: Prop D -1 (Stormceptor) Peak Elev=101.24' Inflow=0.54 cfs 1,652 cf 12.0"x 8.0'Culvert Outflow=0.54 cfs 1,652 cf Pond 4P: Prop DNM-2 Peak Elev=100.47' Inflow=0.04 cfs 250 cf 12.0"x 75.0'Culvert Outflow=0.04 cfs 250 cf Pond 5P: Prop DNM-3 Peak Elev=101.84' Inflow=0.29 cfs 875 cf 12.0"x 100.0'Culvert Outflow=0.29 cfs 875 cf Pond IS-1: Prop Underground Infiltration System#1 Peak Elev=101.20' Storage=1,208 cf Inflow=1.17 cfs 3,998 cf Discarded=0.14 cfs 3,749 cf Primary=0.04 cfs 250 cf Outflow=0.17 cfs 3,999 cf Total Runoff Area=83,412 sf Runoff Volume=4,844 cf Average Runoff Depth=0.70" 60.67%Pervious=50,608 sf 39.33% Impervious=32,804 sf 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type III24-hr ]-year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by NIHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff = 0.01 cfs @ 14.56 hrs, Volume= 239 cf, Depth= 0.07" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 1-year Rainfall=2.50" Area(sf) CN Description 8,126 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 6,085 30 Woods, Good,HSG A 4,283 74 >75%Grass cover,Good, HSG C 12,539 70 Woods, Good,HSG C * 2,000 50 Rip Rap Slope,HSG A 2,825 70 Woods, Good,HSG C * 3,500 55 Rip Rap Slope,HSG C 2,830 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 42,188 54 Weighted Average 42,188 Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Runoff to C -1 Runoff = 0.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 875 cf, Depth= 0.94" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 1-year Rainfall=2.50" _ Area(sf) CN Description 3,215 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 7,929 98 Paved parking&roofs 11,144 81 Weighted Average 3,215 Pervious Area 7,929 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.1 15 0.0200 2.12 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 1.1 160 0.0150 2.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.5 200 Total 271710-Postdrain-- ev2 Type 11124-hr ]-year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Runoff to CB-2 Runoff = 0.25 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 776 cf, Depth= 0.79" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 1-year Rainfall=2.50" Area(sf) CN Description 3,465 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 6,620 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,200 98 Paved parking&roofs 540 39 >75%Grass cover, Good HSG A 11,825 78 Weighted Average 4,005 Pervious Area 7,820 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.6 35 0.0200 0.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.1 15 0.0300 3.52 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.0 75 Total Summary for Subcatcent 6S: Runoff to Existing CB Runoff = 0.21 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 607 cf, Depth= 1.24" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 1-year Rainfall=2.50" Area(sf) CN Description 4,655 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,200 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 5,855 86 Weighted Average 1,200 Pervious Area 4,655 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.5 120 0.0350 3.80 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 3.8 145 Total 271710-Postdrain-- ev2 Type M24-hr 1 year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by N1HF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Roof Runoff [46]Hint: Tc=O(Instant runoff peak depends on dt) Runoff = 0.84 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 2,346 cf, Depth= 2.27" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 1-year Rainfall=2.50" Area(sf) CN Description 12,400 98 Paved parking&roofs 12,400 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 1R: Wetlands Resign Point [40]Hint:Not Described(Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 77,557 sf, 36.29%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.08" for 1-year event Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ 12.86 hrs, Volume= 489 cf Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 12.86 hrs, Volume= 489 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Summary for Pond 1P: Prop CB-1 Inflow Area= 11,144 sf, 71.15%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.94" for 1-year event Inflow = 0.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 875 cf Outflow = 0.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 875 cf, Atten=0%, Lag--0.0 min Primary = 0.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 875 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 102.3 P @ 12.07 hrs Flood Elev= 104.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices 91 Primary 102.00' 12.0" x 80.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 101.64' S=0.0045 '/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=0.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=102.31' TW=101.84' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.29 cfs @ 2.12 fps) Summary for Pond 2P: Prop C -2 Inflow Area= 11,825 sf, 66.13%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.79" for 1-year event Inflow = 0.25 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 776 cf Outflow = 0.25 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 776 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 0.25 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 776 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type X 24-hr ]-year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by WIF Design Consultants,Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Peak Elev= 101.75'@ 12.07 hrs Flood Elev= 105.30' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices 41 Primary 101.50' 12.0" x 20.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 101.04' S=0.0230'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=0.25 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=101.75' TW=101.24' (Dynamic Tailwater) Ll=Culvert (Inlet Controls 0.25 cfs @ 1.69 fps) Summary for Pond 3P: Prop -1 (Stormeeptor) Inflow Area= 22,969 sf, 68.57%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.86" for 1-year event Inflow = 0.54 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1,652 cf Outflow = 0.54 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1,652 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 0.54 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1,652 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 101.24'@ 12.07 hrs Flood Elev= 106.10' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100.79' 12.0" x 8.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 100.75' S=0.0050'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max--0.54 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=101.24' TW=100.77' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.54 cfs @ 2.33 fps) Summary for Pond 4P: Prop D -2 Inflow Area= 35,369 sf, 79.59%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.08" for 1-year event Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ 12.57 hrs, Volume= 250 cf Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 12.57 hrs, Volume= 250 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 0.04 cfs @ 12.57 hrs, Volume= 250 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 100.47'@ 12.57 hrs Flood Elev= 105.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100.36' 12.0" x 75.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 100.00' S=0.0048 '/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 12.57 hrs HW=100.47' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.04 cfs @ 1.19 fps) Summary for Pond 5P: Prop D -3 Inflow Area= 11,144 sf, 71.15%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.94" for 1-year event Inflow = 0.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 875 cf Outflow = 0.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 875 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 0.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 875 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type III24-hr]-year Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by MIS Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pasze 9 Peak Elev= 101.84' @ 12.07 hrs Flood Elev= 107.50' _Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 101.54' 12.0" x 100.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 101.04' S=0.0050'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=0.29 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=101.84' TW=101.24' (Dynamic Tailwater) Ll=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.29 cfs @ 2.20 fps) Summary for Pond IS-1: Prop Underground Infiltration System#1 [87] Warning: Oscillations may require Finer Routing or smaller dt Inflow Area= 35,369 sf, 79.59%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 1.36" for 1-year event Inflow = 1.17 cfs @ 12.01 hrs, Volume= 3,998 cf Outflow = 0.17 cfs @ 12.57 hrs, Volume= 3,999 cf, Atten=85%, Lag=33.8 min Discarded = 0.14 cfs @ 11.72 hrs, Volume= 3,749 cf Primary = 0.04 cfs @ 12.57 hrs, Volume-- 250 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 101.20'@ 12.57 hrs Surf.Area=2,421 sf Storage-- 1,208 cf Flood Elev= 103.75' Surf.Area=2,421 sf Storage=5,031 cf Plug-Flow detention time=(not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det.time=53.1 min(850.7-797.6) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 100.00, 2,261 cf 28.82W x 84.00'L x 4.00'H Prismatoid 9,684 cf Overall-4,032 cf Embedded=5,651 cf x 40.0%Voids 92 100.75' 2,827 cf 36.0"D x 80.00'L Horizontal Cylinder x 5 Inside#1 3,848 cf Overall-3.0" Wall Thickness=2,827 cf 43 100.75' 103 cf 36.0"D x 1.83'L Horizontal Cylinder x 8 Inside 41 141 cf Overall-3.0" Wall Thickness= 103 cf #4 100.75' 31 cf 24.0"D x 10.00'L Horizontal Cylinder Inside#1 43 cf Overall-2.0" Wall Thickness=31 cf 5,223 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100.75' 12.0" x 58.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert= 100.46' S=0.0050'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 92 Device 1 100.75' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C=0.600 #3 Device 1 101.75' 4.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C=0.600 #4 Device 1 103.60' 12.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C=0.600 #5 Discarded 100.00' 2.410 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.14 cfs @ 11.72 hrs HW=100.05' (Free Discharge) T 5=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.14 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 12.57 hrs HW=101.20' TW=100.47' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.04 cfs of 0.60 cfs potential flow) P3=Orifice/Grate =Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.04 cfs @ 2.99 fps) (Controls 0.00 cfs) 4=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type HI24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants,Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs, 3001 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff Area=42,188 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.20" Tc=5.0 min CN=54 Runoff=0.07 cfs 691 cf Subcatchment 3S: Runoff to CB-1 Runoff Area=11,144 sf 71.15%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.39" Flow Length=200' Tc=4.5 min CN=81 Runoff--0.44 cfs 1,292 cf Subcatchment 4S: Runoff to CB-2 Runoff Area=11,825 sf 66.13%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.20" Flow Length=75' Tc=4.0 min CN=78 Runoff=0.40 cfs 1,183 cf Subcatchment 6S: Runoff to Existing CB Runoff Area=5,855 sf 79.50%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.75" Flow Length=145' Tc=3.8 min CN=86 Runoff--0.30 cfs 853 cf Subcatchment 9S: Roof Runoff Runoff Area=12,400 sf 100.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.87" Tc=0.0 min CN=98 Runoff=1.04 cfs 2,963 cf Reach 1R: Wetlands Design Point Inflow=0.12 cfs 1,353 cf Outflow=0.12 cfs 1,353 cf Pond 1P: Prop CB-1 Peak Elev=102.38' Inflow=0.44 cfs 1,292 cf 12.0"x 80.0'Culvert Outflow=0.44 cfs 1,292 cf Pond 2P: Prop CB-2 Peak Elev=101.81' Inflow=0.40 cfs 1,183 cf 12.0"x 20.0'Culvert Outflow=0.40 cfs 1,183 cf Pond 3P: Prop DNIH-1 (Stormceptor) Peak Elev=101.63' Inflow=0.84 cfs 2,475 cf 12.0"x 8.0'Culvert Outflow=0.84 cfs 2,475 cf Pond 4P: Prop DMH-2 Peak Elev=100.49' Inflow=0.05 cfs 662 cf 12.0"x 75.0'Culvert Outflow=0.05 cfs 662 cf Pond 5P: Prop DMH-3 Peak Elev=101.92' Inflow=0.44 cfs 1,292 cf 12.0"x 100.0'Culvert Outflow=0.44 cfs 1,292 cf Pond IS-1: Prop Underground Infiltration System#1 Peak Elev=101.63' Storage=1,853 cf Inflow=1.59 cfs 5,438 cf Discarded=0.14 cfs 4,777 cf Primary=0.05 cfs 662 cf Outflow=0.19 cfs 5,439 cf Total Runoff Area=83,412 sf Runoff Volume=6,983 cf Average Runoff Depth= 1.00" 60.67%Pervious=50,608 sf 39.33% Impervious=32,804 sf 271710-Postdrain-- ev2 Type H[24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume= 691 cf, Depth= 0.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Area(sf) CN Description 8,126 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 6,085 30 Woods, Good,HSG A 4,283 74 >75%Grass cover,Good,HSG C 12,539 70 Woods,Good,HSG C * 2,000 50 Rip Rap Slope,HSG A 2,825 70 Woods, Good,HSG C * 3,500 55 Rip Rap Slope,HSG C 2,830 39 >75%Grass cover, Good HSG A 42,188 54 Weighted Average 42,188 Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Runoff to CB-1 Runoff = 0.44 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1,292 cf, Depth= 1.39" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Area(sf) CN Description 3,215 39 >75%Grass cover,Good,HSG A 7,929 98 Paved parking&roofs 11,144 81 Weighted Average 3,215 Pervious Area 7,929 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.1 15 0.0200 2.12 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 1.1 160 0.0150 2.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.5 200 Total 271710-Post rain--Rev2 Type N24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Runoff to C -2 Runoff = 0.40 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 1,183 cf, Depth= 1.20" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,t7H=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Area(sf) CN Description 3,465 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 6,620 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,200 98 Paved parking&roofs 540 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 11,825 78 Weighted Average 4,005 Pervious Area 7,820 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.6 35 0.0200 0.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.1 15 0.0300 3.52 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.0 75 Total Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Runoff to Existing C Runoff = 0.30 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume-- 853 cf, Depth= 1.75" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Area(sf) CN Description 4,655 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,200 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 5,855 86 Weighted Average 1,200 Pervious Area 4,655 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description _ (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.5 120 0.0350 3.80 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 3.8 145 Total 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type III24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Roof Runoff [46]Hint: Tc=O(Instant runoff peak depends on dt) Runoff = 1.04 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 2,963 cf, Depth= 2.87" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Area(sf) CN Description 12,400 98 Paved parking&roofs 12,400 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 1R: Wetlands Design Point [40]Hint:Not Described(Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 77,557 sf, 36.29%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.21" for 2-year event Inflow = 0.12 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume= 1,353 cf Outflow = 0.12 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume= 1,353 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Summary for Pond 1P: Prop CB-1 Inflow Area= 11,144 sf, 71.15%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 1.39" for 2-year event Inflow = 0.44 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1,292 cf Outflow = 0.44 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1,292 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 0.44 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1,292 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 102.38'@ 12.07 hrs Flood Elev= 104.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 102.00' 12.0" x 80.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 101.64' S=0.0045 '/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary Outflow Max--0.44 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=102.38' TW=101.92' (Dynamic Tailwater) t-1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.44 cfs @ 2.36 fps) Summary for Pond 2P: Prop CB-2 Inflow Area= 11,825 sf, 66.13%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 1.20" for 2-year event Inflow = 0.40 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 1,183 cf Outflow = 0.40 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 1,183 cf, Atten=0%, Lag--0.0 min Primary = 0.40 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 1,183 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs 271710- ostdrain--Rev2 Type HI24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by MIIF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCADO 8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 lb*oCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Peak Elev= 10 1.8 P @ 12.06 hrs Flood Elev= 105.30' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 101.50' 12.0" x 20.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 101.04' S=0.0230'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=0.40 cfs @ 12.06 hrs HW=101.81' TW=101.36' (Dynamic Tailwater) 1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 0.40 cfs @ 1.90 fps) Summary for Pond 3P: Prop D -1 (Stormceptor) Inflow Area= 22,969 sf, 68.57%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 1.29" for 2-year event Inflow = 0.84 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2,475 cf Outflow = 0.84 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume-- 2,475 cf, Atten=0%, Lag--0.0 min Primary = 0.84 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2,475 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 101.63' @ 12.78 hrs Flood Elev= 106.10' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100.79' 12.0" x 8.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert= 100.75' S=0.0050'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max--0.84 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=101.36' TW=101.07' (Dynamic Tailwater) 1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.84 cfs @ 2.60 fps) Summary for Pond 4P: Prop D -2 Inflow Area= 35,369 sf, 79.59%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.22" for 2-year event Inflow = 0.05 cfs @ 12.77 hrs, Volume= 662 cf Outflow = 0.05 cfs @ 12.77 hrs, Volume= 662 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 0.05 cfs @ 12.77 hrs, Volume= 662 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 100.49' @ 12.77 hrs Flood Elev= 105.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100,36' 12.0" x 75.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 100.00' S=0.0048 '/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max--0.05 cfs @ 12.77 hrs HW=100.49' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.05 cfs @ 1.33 fps) Summary for Pond 5P: Prop D -3 Inflow Area= 11,144 sf, 71.15%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 1.39" for 2-year event Inflow = 0.44 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1,292 cf Outflow = 0.44 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume- 1,292 cf, Atten=0%, Lag--0.0 min Primary = 0.44 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1,292 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs 271710-Postdrain-- ev2 Type H124-hr 2 year Rainfall=3.10" Prepared by MI IF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Peak Elev=101.92' @ 12.07 hrs Flood Elev= 107.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 101.54' 12.0" x 100.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert= 101.04' S=0.0050'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=0.44 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=101.92' TW=101.36' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Outlet Controls 0.44 cfs @ 2.39 fps) Summary for Pond IS-1: Prop Underground Infiltration System#1 [87] Warning: Oscillations may require Finer Routing or smaller dt Inflow Area= 35,369 sf, 79.59%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 1.85" for 2-year event Inflow = 1.59 cfs @ 12.01 hrs, Volume= 5,438 cf Outflow = 0.19 cfs @ 12.77 hrs, Volume= 5,439 cf, Atten=88%, Lag--45.6 min Discarded = 0.14 cfs @ 11.64 hrs, Volume= 4,777 cf Primary = 0.05 cfs @ 12.77 hrs, Volume= 662 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 101.63' @ 12.77 hrs Surf.Area=2,421 sf Storage= 1,853 cf Flood Elev= 103.75' Surf-Area--2,421 sf Storage=5,031 cf Plug-Flow detention time=(not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det.time=80.2 min(873.9-793.7) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 100.00, 2,261 cf 28.82'W x 84.00'L x 4.00'H Prismatoid 9,684 cf Overall-4,032 cf Embedded=5,651 cf x 40.0%Voids #2 100.75' 2,827 cf 36.0"D x 80.00'L Horizontal Cylinder x 5 Inside#1 3,848 cf Overall-3.0" Wall Thickness=2,827 cf #3 100.75' 103 cf 36.0"D x 1.83'L Horizontal Cylinder x 8 Inside#1 141 cf Overall-3.0" Wall Thickness= 103 cf #4 100.75' 31 cf 24.0"D x 10.00'L Horizontal Cylinder Inside#1 43 cf Overall-2.0" Wall Thickness=31 cf 5,223 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100.75' 12.0" x 58.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert--- 100.46' S=0.0050'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 #2 Device 1 100.75' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C=0.600 #3 Device 1 101.75' 4.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C=0.600 #4 Device 1 103.60' 12.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C=0.600 #5 Discarded 100.00' 2.410 in/hr Enfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.14 cfs @ 11.64 hrs HW=100.04' (Free Discharge) t-5=Enfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.14 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max-0.05 cfs @ 12.77 hrs HW=101.63' TW=100.49' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.05 cfs of 1.89 cfs potential flow) P3=Orifice/Grate =Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.05 cfs @ 4.35 fps) (Controls 0.00 cfs) =Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type 11124-hr 10 year Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 3001 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff Area=42,188 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.69" Tc=5.0 min CN=54 Runoff=0.56 cfs 2,430 cf Subcatchment 3S: Runoff to CB-1 Runoff Area=11,144 sf 71.15%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.55" Flow Length=200' Tc=4.5 min CN=81 Runoff=0.81 cfs 2,366 cf Subcatchment 4S: Runoff to CB-2 Runoff Area--I 1,825 sf 66.13%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.29" Flow Length=75' Tc=4.0 min CN=78 Runoff=0.78 cfs 2,259 cf Subcatchment 6S: Runoff to Existing CB Runoff Area=5,855 sf 79.50%Impervious Runoff Depth=3.00" Flow Length=145' Tc=3.8 min CN=86 Runof--0.51 cfs 1,465 cf Subcatchment 9S: Roof Runoff Runoff Area=12,400 sf 100.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=4.26" Tc=0.0 min CN=98 Runoff=1.53 cfs 4,406 cf Reach 1R: Wetlands Design Point Inflow=0.72 cfs 5,124 cf Outflow=0.72 cfs 5,124 cf Pond 1P: Prop CB-1 Peak Elev=102.56' Inflow=0.81 cfs 2,366 cf 12.0"x 80.0'Culvert Outflow=0.81 cfs 2,366 cf Pond 2P: Prop CB-2 Peak Elev=102.44' Inflow=0.78 cfs 2,259 cf 12.0"x 20.0'Culvert Outflow=0.78 cfs 2,259 cf Pond 3P: Prop DMII-1 (Stormceptor) Peak Elev=102.44' Inflow=1.59 cfs 4,626 cf 12.0"x 8.0'Culvert Outflow=1.59 cfs 4,626 cf Pond 4P: Prop DMH-2 Peak Elev=100.71' Inflow=0.38 cfs 2,695 cf 12.0"x 75.0'Culvert Outflow=0.38 cfs 2,695 cf Pond 5P: Prop DMH-3 Peak Elev=102.44' Inflow=0.81 cfs 2,366 cf 12.0"x 100.0'Culvert Outflow=0.81 cfs 2,366 cf Pond IS-1: Prop Underground Infiltration System#1 Peak Elev=102.43' Storage=3,150 cf Inflow=2.66 cfs 9,032 cf Discarded=0.14 cfs 6,338 cf Primary=0.38 cfs 2,695 cf Outflow=0.51 cfs 9,033 cf Total Runoff Area=83,412 sf Runoff Volume= 12,927 cf Average Runoff Depth= 1.86" 60.67% Pervious=50,608 sf 39.33% Impervious=32,804 sf 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type III24-hr 10 year Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by N4HF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff = 0.56 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 2,430 cf, Depth= 0.69" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS, Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-year Rainfall=4.50" Area(sf) CN Description 8,126 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 6,085 30 Woods, Good,HSG A 4,283 74 >75%Grass cover,Good,HSG C 12,539 70 Woods, Good,HSG C * 2,000 50 Rip Rap Slope, HSG A 2,825 70 Woods,Good, HSG C * 3,500 55 Rip Rap Slope,HSG C 2,830 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 42,188 54 Weighted Average 42,188 Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Runoff to CB-1 Runoff = 0.81 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2,366 cf, Depth= 2.55" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS, Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-year Rainfall=4.50" Area(sf) CN Description 3,215 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 7,929 98 Paved parking&roofs 11,144 81 Weighted Average 3,215 Pervious Area 7,929 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.1 15 0.0200 2.12 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 1.1 160 0.0150 2.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.5 200 Total 271710-Postdrain-- ev2 Type X 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants,Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Runoff to CB-2 Runoff = 0.78 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 2,259 cf, Depth= 2.29" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type HI 24-hr 10-year Rainfall=4.50" Area(sf) CN Description 3,465 39 >75%Grass cover,Good,HSG A 6,620 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,200 98 Paved parking&roofs 540 39 >75%Grass cover,Good,HSG A 11,825 78 Weighted Average 4,005 Pervious Area 7,820 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.6 35 0.0200 0.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.1 15 0.0300 3.52 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.0 75 Total Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Runoff to Existing C Runoff = 0.51 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 1,465 cf, Depth= 3.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-year Rainfall=4.50" Area(sf) CN Description 4,655 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,200 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 5,855 86 Weighted Average 1,200 Pervious Area 4,655 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.5 120 0.0350 3.80 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 3.8 145 Total 271710-Postdrain-- ev2 Type X 24-hr 10 year Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by N4HF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paize 19 Summary for Subcatchent 9S: Roof Runoff [46]Hint: Tc=O(Instant runoff peak depends on dt) Runoff = 1.53 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 4,406 cf, Depth= 4.26" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-year Rainfall=4.50" Area(sf) CN Description 12,400 98 Paved parking&roofs 12,400 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 1R: Wetlands Design Point [40] Hint:Not Described(Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 77,557 sf, 36.29%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.79" for 10-year event Inflow = 0.72 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 5,124 cf Outflow = 0.72 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 5,124 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Summary for Pond 1P: Prop CB-1 Inflow Area= 11,144 sf, 71.15%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 2.55" for 10-year event Inflow = 0.81 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2,366 cf Outflow = 0.81 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2,366 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 0.81 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2,366 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 102.56'@ 12.08 hrs Flood Elev= 104.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 102.00' 12.0" x 80.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert= 101.64' S=0.0045 '/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max--0.78 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=102.56' TW=102.16' (Dynamic Tailwater) t-l=Culvert (Outlet Controls 0.78 cfs @ 2.52 fps) Summary for Pond 2P: Prop CB-2 Inflow Area= 11,825 sf, 66.13%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 2.29" for 10-year event Inflow = 0.78 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 2,259 cf Outflow = 0.78 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 2,259 cf, Atten=0%, Lag--0.0 min Primary = 0.78 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 2,259 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs 271710-Postdrain-- ev2 Type III24-hr 10 year Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by NIHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 20 Peak Elev= 102.44' @ 12.49 hrs Flood Elev= 105.30' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 101.50' 12.0" x 20.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 101.04' S=0.0230'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=0.68 cfs @ 12.06 hrs HW=102.03' TW=101.84' (Dynamic Tailwater) t-1=Culvert (Outlet Controls 0.68 cfs @ 2.34 fps) Summary for Pond 3 : Prop -1 (Storeeptor) Inflow Area= 22,969 sf, 68.57%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 2.42" for 10-year event Inflow = 1.59 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 4,626 cf Outflow = 1.59 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 4,626 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 1.59 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 4,626 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 102.44'@ 12.48 hrs Flood Elev= 106.10' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100.79' 12.0" x 8.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 100.75' S=0.0050'/' Cc=0.900 n= 0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=1.32 cfs @ 12.06 hrs HW=101.86' TW=101.74' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 1.32 cfs @ 1.68 fps) Summary for Pond 4P: Prop D -2 Inflow Area= 35,369 sf, 79.59%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.91" for 10-year event Inflow = 0.38 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 2,695 cf Outflow = 0.38 cfs @ 12.48 hrs, Volume= 2,695 cf, Atten=0%, Lag--0.0 min Primary = 0.38 cfs @ 12.48 hrs, Volume= 2,695 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 100.71' @ 12.48 hrs Flood Elev= 105.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100.36' 12.0" x 75.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert= 100.00' S=0.0048'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max--0.38 cfs @ 12.48 hrs HW=100.71' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.38 cfs @ 2.31 fps) Summary for Pond 5P: Prop D -3 Inflow Area= 11,144 sf, 71.15%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 2.55" for 10-year event Inflow = 0.81 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2,366 cf Outflow = 0.81 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2,366 cf, Atten=0%, Lag--0.0 min Primary = 0.81 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2,366 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type I1124-hr 10 year Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by NIHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD@ 8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 21 Peak Elev= 102.44'@ 12.48 hrs Flood Elev= 107.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 101.54' 12.0" x 100.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 101.04' S=0.0050'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=0.74 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=102.16' TW=101.88' (Dynamic Tailwater) t-1=Culvert (Outlet Controls 0.74 cfs @ 2.05 fps) Summary for Pond IS-1: Prop Underground Infiltration System#1 [87] Warning: Oscillations may require Finer Routing or smaller dt Inflow Area= 35,369 sf, 79.59%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 3.06" for 10-year event Inflow = 2.66 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume= 9,032 cf Outflow = 0.51 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 9,033 cf, Atten=81%, Lag--27.1 min Discarded = 0.14 cfs @ 11.25 hrs, Volume= 6,338 cf Primary = 0.38 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 2,695 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 102.43'@ 12.49 hrs Surf.Area=2,421 sf Storage=3,150 cf Flood Elev= 1.03.75' Sur£Area=2,421 sf Storage=5,031 cf Plug-Flow detention time=(not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det.time=92.0 min( 878.2-786.2) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 100.00, 2,261 cf 28.821W x 84.00'L x 4.00'H Prismatoid 9,684 cf Overall-4,032 cf Embedded=5,651 cf x 40.0%Voids 42 100.75' 2,827 cf 36.011D x 80.00'L Horizontal Cylinder x 5 Inside#1 3,848 cf Overall-3.0" Wall Thickness=2,827 cf #3 100.75' 103 cf 36.0"D x 1.83'L Horizontal Cylinder x 8 Inside 41 141 cf Overall-3.0" Wall Thickness= 103 cf #4 100.75' 31 cf 24.0"D x 10.00'L Horizontal Cylinder Inside 41 43 cf Overall -2.0" Wall Thickness=31 cf 5,223 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100,75' 12.0" x 58.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert= 100.46' S=0.0050 7' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 #2 Device 1 100.75' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C=0.600 #3 Device 1 101.75' 4.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C=0.600 44 Device 1 103.60' 12.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C=0.600 #5 Discarded 100.00' 2.410 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max--O.14 cfs @ 11.25 hrs HW=100.04' (Free Discharge) t-5=Exfltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.14 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max--0.38 cfs @ 12.49 hrs HW=102.43' TW=100.71' (Dynamic Tailwater) t--1=Culvert (Passes 0.38 cfs of 3.55 cfs potential flow) P3=Orifice/Grate =Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.08 cfs @ 6.12 fps) (Orifice Controls 0.30 cfs @ 3.44 fps) =Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type X 24-hr 100 year Rainfall=6.40" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 22 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 3001 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff Area=42,188 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.67" Tc=5.0 min CN=54 Runoff--1.76 cfs 5,868 cf Subcatchment 3S: Runoff to CB-1 Runoff Area=11,144 sf 71.15%Impervious Runoff Depth=4.25" Flow Length=200' Tc=4.5 min CN=81 Runoff-1.33 cfs 3,947 cf Subcatchment 4S: Runoff to CB-2 Runoff Area=11,825 sf 66.13%Impervious Runoff Depth=3.93" Flow Length=75' Tc=4.0 min CN=78 Runoff=1.34 cfs 3,877 cf Subcatchment 6S: Runoff to Existing CB Runoff Area=5,855 sf 79.50%Impervious Runoff Depth=4.79" Flow Length=145' Tc=3.8 min CN=86 Runoff---0.79 cfs 2,337 cf Subcatchment 9S: Roof Runoff Runoff Area=12,400 sf 100.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=6.16" Tc=0.0 min CN=98 Runoff--2.18 cfs 6,367 cf Reach 1R: Wetlands Design Point Inflow=2.27 cfs 12,333 cf Outflow=2.27 cfs 12,333 cf Pond 1P: Prop CB-1 Peak Elev=103.82' Inflow=1.33 cfs 3,947 cf 12.0"x 80.0'Culvert Outflow=1.33 cfs 3,947 cf Pond 2P: Prop CB-2 Peak Elev=103.80' Inflow=1.34 cfs 3,877 cf 12.0"x 20.0'Culvert Outflow=1.34 cfs 3,877 cf Pond 3P: Prop DMFI-1 (Stormceptor) Peak Elev=103.79' Inflow=2.67 cfs 7,824 cf 12.0"x 8.0'Culvert Outflow=2.67 cfs 7,824 cf Pond 4P: Prop DMH-2 Peak Blev=101.01' Inflow=1.18 cfs 6,466 cf 12.0"x 75.0'Culvert Outflow=1.18 cfs 6,466 cf Pond 5P: Prop DMH-3 Peak Elev=103.81' Inflow=1.33 cfs 3,947 cf 12.0"x 100.0'Culvert Outflow=1.33 cfs 3,947 cf Pond IS-1: Prop Underground Infiltration System#1 Peak Elev=103.74' Storage=5,021 cf Inflow=4.20 cfs 14,191 cf Discarded=0.14 cfs 7,726 cf Primary=1.18 cfs 6,466 cf Outflow=1.32 cfs 14,192 cf Total Runoff Area=83,412 sf Runoff Volume=22,396 cf Average Runoff Depth=3.22" 60.67% Pervious=50,608 sf 39.33% Impervious=32,804 sf 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type III24-hr]00 year Rainfall=6.40" Prepared by MHF Design Consultants,Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 23 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Runoff to Wetlands Runoff = 1.76 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 5,868 cf, Depth= 1.67" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-year Rainfall=6.40" Area(sf) CN Description 8,126 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 6,085 30 Woods,Good,HSG A 4,283 74 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG C 12,539 70 Woods, Good,HSG C * 2,000 50 Rip Rap Slope,HSG A 2,825 70 Woods, Good, HSG C * 3,500 55 Rip Rap Slope,HSG C 2,830 39 >75%Grass cover, Good HSG A 42,188 54 Weighted Average 42,188 Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Runoff to C -1 Runoff = 1.33 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume-- 3,947 cf, Depth= 4.25" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-year Rainfall=6.40" Area(sf) CN Description 3,215 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 7,929 98 Paved parking&roofs 11,144 81 Weighted Average 3,215 Pervious Area 7,929 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.1 15 0.0200 2.12 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 1.1 160 0.0150 2.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.5 200 Total 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type HI24-hr 100 year Rainfall=6.40" Prepared by NfHF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 24 Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Runoff to CB-2 Runoff = 1.34 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 3,877 cf, Depth= 3.93" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-year Rainfall=6.40" Area(sf) CN Description 3,465 39 >75%Grass cover, Good,HSG A 6,620 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,200 98 Paved parking&roofs 540 39 >75%Grass cover, Good HSG A 11,825 78 Weighted Average 4,005 Pervious Area 7,820 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.6 35 0.0200 0.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.1 15 0.0300 3.52 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 4.0 75 Total Summary for Sucatchment 6S: Runoff to Existing CB Runoff = 0.79 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 2,337 cf, Depth= 4.79" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-year Rainfall=6.40" Area(sf) CN Description 4,655 98 Paved parking&roofs 1,200 39 >75%Grass cover, Good HSG A 5,855 86 Weighted Average 1,200 Pervious Area 4,655 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.3 25 0.0200 0.13 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.10" 0.5 120 0.0350 3.80 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps 3.8 145 Total 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type X 24-hr 100 year Rainfall=6.40" Prepared by MIIF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 c0 2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 25 Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Roof Runoff [46] Hint: Tc=O(Instant runoff peak depends on dt) Runoff = 2.18 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 6,367 cf, Depth= 6.16" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-year Rainfall=6.40" Area(sf) CN Description 12,400 98 Paved parking&roofs 12,400 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 1 : Wetlands Design Point [40] Hint:Not Described(Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area= 77,557 sf, 36.29%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 1.91" for 100-year event Inflow = 2.27 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 12,333 cf Outflow = 2.27 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 12,333 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Summary for Pond 1P: Prop CB-1 Inflow Area= 11,144 sf, 71.15%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 4.25" for 100-year event Inflow = 1.33 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 3,947 cf Outflow = 1.33 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 3,947 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 1.33 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 3,947 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 103.82' @ 12.36 hrs Flood Elev= 104.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 102.00' 12.0" x 80.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert- 101.64' S=0.0045 '/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=0.77 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=103.3 F TW=103.26' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Outlet Controls 0.77 cfs @ 0.98 fps) Summary for Pond 2P: Prop CB-2 Inflow Area= 11,825 sf, 66.13%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 3.93" for 100-year event Inflow = 1.34 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 3,877 cf Outflow = 1.34 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 3,877 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 1.34 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 3,877 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs 271710-Postdrain-- ev2 Type III24-hr I00 year Rainfall=6.40" Prepared by MI IF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 02007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pale 26 Peak Elev= 103.80' @ 12.36 hrs Flood Elev= 105.30' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 101.50' 12.0" x 20.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 101.04' S=0.0230'/' Cc=0.900 n= 0.012 Primary Outflow Max=0.64 cfs @ 12.06 hrs HW=103.14' TW=103.1 P (Dynamic Tailwater) t-1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 0.64 cfs @ 0.82 fps) Summary for Pond 3P: Prop -1 (Storeeptor) [80] Warning:Exceeded Pond 2P by 0.05'@ 12.02 hrs(0.80 cfs 195 cf) Inflow Area= 22,969 sf, 68.57%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 4.09" for 100-year event Inflow = 2.67 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 7,824 cf Outflow = 2.67 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 7,824 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 2.67 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 7,824 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 103.79' @ 12.35 hrs Flood Elev= 106.10' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100.79' 12.0" x 8.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 100.75' S=0.0050'/' Cc=0.900 n= 0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=2.45 cfs @ 12.06 hrs HW=103.13' TW=102.71' (Dynamic Tailwater) 4-1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 2.45 cfs @ 3.12 fps) Summary for Pond 4P: Prop D -2 Inflow Area= 35,369 sf, 79.59%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 2.19" for 100-year event Inflow = 1.18 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 6,466 cf Outflow = 1.18 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 6,466 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 1.18 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 6,466 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 101.0E @ 12.35 hrs Flood Elev= 105.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100.36' 12.0" x 75.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 100.00' S=0.0048'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary Outflow Max=1.18 cfs @ 12.35 hrs HW=101.01' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Barrel Controls 1.18 cfs @ 3.09 fps) 271710-Postdrain--I2ev2 Type III24-hr 100 year Rainfall=6.40" Prepared by N4 iF Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 27 Summary for Pond 5P: Prop D -3 Inflow Area= 11,144 sf, 71.15%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 4.25" for 100-year event Inflow = 1.33 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 3,947 cf Outflow = 1.33 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 3,947 cf, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min Primary = 1.33 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 3,947 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method,Time Span--0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 103.81'@ 12.35 hrs Flood Elev= 107.50' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices 41 Primary 101.54' 12.0" x 100.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert-- 101.04' S=0.0050'/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 Primary OutFlow Max=0.99 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=103.26' TW=103.16' (Dynamic Tailwater) t--1=Culvert (Outlet Controls 0.99 cfs @ 1.26 fps) Summary for Pond IS-1: Prop Underground Infiltration System#1 [87] Warning: Oscillations may require Finer Routing or smaller dt Inflow Area= 35,369 sf, 79.59%Impervious, Inflow Depth= 4.81" for 100-year event Inflow = 4.20 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume= 14,191 cf Outflow = 1.32 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 14,192 cf, Atten=69%, Lag-- 18.9 min Discarded = 0.14 cfs @ 10.32 hrs, Volume= 7,726 cf Primary = 1.18 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 6,466 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span---0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 103.74'@ 12.35 hrs Sur£Area=2,421 sf Storage=5,021 cf Flood Elev= 103.75' Surf.Area=2,421 sf Storage=5,031 cf Plug-Flow detention time--(not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det.time=91.8 min(870.3 -778.6) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 100.00, 2,261 cf 28.82'W x 84.00'L x 4.00'H Prismatoid 9,684 cf Overall-4,032 cf Embedded=5,651 cf x 40.0%Voids #2 100.75' 2,827 cf 36.0"D x 80.00'L Horizontal Cylinder x 5 Inside#1 3,848 cf Overall -3.0" Wall Thickness=2,827 cf #3 100.75' 103 cf 36.0"D x 1.83'L Horizontal Cylinder x 8 Inside#1 141 cf Overall-3.0" Wall Thickness= 103 cf #4 100.75' 31 cf 24.0"D x 10.00'L Horizontal Cylinder Inside#1 43 cf Overall-2.0" Wall Thickness=31 cf 5,223 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 100.75' 12.0" x 58.0' long Culvert Ke=0.500 Outlet Invert- 100.46' S=0.0050 '/' Cc=0.900 n=0.012 #2 Device 1 100.75' 1.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C=0.600 #3 Device 1 101.75' 4.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C=0.600 #4 Device 1 103.60' 12.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C=0.600 #5 Discarded 100.00' 2.410 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area 271710-Postdrain--Rev2 Type III24-hr 100 year Rainfall=6.40" Prepared by MIS Design Consultants, Inc. Printed 7/16/2010 HydroCAD®8.50 s/n 001710 ©2007 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 28 iscarded Outflow Max=0.14 cfs @ 10.32 hrs HW=100.04' (Free Discharge) =Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.14 cfs) Primary Outflow Max=1.18 cfs @ 12.35 hrs HW=103.74' TW=101.01' (Dynamic Tailwater) t--1=Culvert (Passes 1.18 cfs of 5.44 cfs potential flow) !3=Orifice/Grate =Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.10 cfs @ 7.94 fps)(Orifice Controls 0.57 cfs @ 6.50 fps) 4=Orifice/Grate (Weir Controls 0.52 cfs @ 1.21 fps) -I iI i HI JCV ^— .. - _- 1 1: 1 CA a. F ' -.�._.,.__. � � � 'sue •,.� ;' �..._ i. i I i I I -- - _ -. ---------__,_-_. _ i � I I a I --rill