The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDrainage Report (V2) 07-01-19 10505 North College Avenue | Indianapolis, IN 46280 | .www.weihe.net | (317) 846-6611 | (800) 452-6408 | Fax: (317) 843-0546 Allan H. Weihe, P.E., L.S., - Founder STORMWATER TECHNICAL REPORT CARMEL HOTEL SAAMRAJYA, LLC North of Main Street between Illinois Street and US Highway 31 Carmel, IN Project #W190175 Prepared For: Jim Jacob 6809 West St. Andrews Avenue Yorktown, IN 47396 (574) 386-4463 Jim.jacob68@gmail.com Certified By: Russell Webster II, P.E. Reviewed By: Steven Scott Rucker, P.E. Date: May 11, 2019 Revised: July 1, 2019 Project #W190175 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Project Narrative • Existing Conditions • Proposed Conditions • BMP • Location Maps • Soil Map 2. Development Plan • Existing Basin Map • Proposed Basin Map • Supporting Calculations • ICPR Model 3. Existing Storm Sewer Analysis • Sub-basin Map • Supporting Calculations • Storm Sewer Profile with Hydraulic Grade Lines 4. Water Quality • Location Map • Fact Sheet 5. 2001 Master Plan Drainage Report Carmel Hotel Drainage Report Weihe Engineers, INC. 6/28/2019 Prepared For: Stormwater Technical Report Avid Hotel, Saamrajya LLC Carmel, IN Project w190175 Project Narrative: Saamrajya, LLC is proposing to construct a 49,600-square-foot hotel with retail and with expanded parking at the northwest corner of Main Street and US 31, south of Illinois Street in Carmel. The proposed site sits on 3.37 acres and has been designed to conform to the aesthetic that Carmel is seeking for this corridor. The proposed development is on a site at a Latitude of N 39° 58' 43" and Longitude W 86° 09' 32". The site is generally part of the NW/4 of Section 26, Township 18 North, Range 3 East, Clay Township, Hamilton County, Indiana. Flood Zone: The site does not lie in a Special Flood Hazard Area as established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency - National Flood Insurance Program, when plotted by scale on Flood Insurance Rate Map 18057C0206G, effective on11/19/2014. Stormwater Design: The proposed development does not involve any new detention, as detention is provided by the existing onsite pond, which is contained within the J.R. Collins legal drain. This pond was permitted in 2001 and constructed around 2002, as a part of the CMC Properties Business Park. Originally, the intent was to construct 3 office buildings with a central shared parking, but only 1 office building was ever constructed. After discussions with the Carmel Engineering staff, it was recommended the proposed design utilize a process of naturalizing the existing pond banks to serve as a BMP, which has been included in this design. Refer to Sections 2, 3 and 4 of this report for proposed design information, and Section 5 for the 2001 Master Drainage report. Carmel Hotel Drainage Report Weihe Engineers, INC. 6/28/2019 Pre-Developed Conditions: The site is currently vacant and clear of most vegetation. There are two entrances off the private entry drive from Illinois Street. The site is served by an existing wet pond and storm sewer. The existing infrastructure has been modeled in the proposed condition to demonstrate that these facilities are adequate. Aerial photography was used to illustrate the current land-use of the subject tract. Currently the 3.37 acres of development are vacant and contain no buildings. The site runoff generally sheet drains to the south. The existing site outlet is an 18” RCP which discharges into the Main Street ROW storm sewer system. The subject tract consists of the following soil types: Brookston, Crosby, and Miami. A soil map has been included with this report. Curve numbers were assigned using existing land use in conjunction with soils mapping from the Natural Resource Conservation (NRCS). An abbreviated NRCS Soils Report can be found in Section 1. Post-Developed Conditions: In the proposed condition, the site will be drained by existing concrete inlets into existing concrete pipe. The storm sewers discharge into the existing pond. In 2001, this pond served approximately 30.97 acres, according to the existing drainage report. However, redevelopment in the area has drastically changed the drainage patterns of the area. The Goodman Campbell Medical Office Building was permitted in 2017 and was designed with its own onsite detention pond to slow down flows from that area, which eliminated almost 10 acres from directly discharging into the existing pond. We used their 1.81 c.f.s. proposed outlet release rate as a base flow into our model of the existing north pond. Further changes to the 31 ROW, redesign of Main Street, and development along Illinois Street have further reduced the direct discharge into the pond to 8.22 acres, plus approximately 1.2 acres of US 31 ROW. This acreage was modeled as an offsite release into the onsite existing pond. Also, the Indiana Spinal Hospital, which is due east across US 31, has their own detention which now outflows into the US 31 trunk line, which was designed in 2013 and installed during the reconstruction of US 31. In Section 2 of this report, we have modelled the pond and demonstrated that the changes in the surrounding developments have both reduced the staging in the pond and the 100-year outlet release rate. The resulting 100-year release rate of 8.49 c.f.s. is much lower than the originally designed 23.61 c.f.s. from the 2001 drainage report. The existing report does not list 10- or 2-year release rates. Discharge and Stage Summary – Existing Pond in Proposed Conditions: Event: Stage: Release Rate: 2-year 865.19 4.71 c.f.s. 10-year 865.62 6.09 c.f.s. 100-year 866.49 8.49 c.f.s. Spillway 869.00 Carmel Hotel Drainage Report Weihe Engineers, INC. 6/28/2019 Storm Sewers: The storm sewer system is existing for this site and will be utilized after the parking lot is adjusted to grade. The existing storm sewer was modeled for 10-year storm event. One run of the 5 links was installed flatter than what it appears it could have been (the existing drainage report does not contain a sub-basin map, so it is difficult to determine which pipe is which.) We feel though that since this storm sewer is private and has very little other storm sewer upstream, that it should perform without surcharging, as demonstrated by the hydraulic grade line being below grade for the 10-year condition. Refer to Section 3 for further pipe evaluation information. Water Quality: As mentioned above, a naturalized bank approach has been taken to create a BMP for this site, along with the existing wet pond. Refer to Section 4 of this report for the fact sheets and exhibit. LOCATION MAP – NO SCALE DENOTES PROJECT LOCATION 6 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 4425620442565044256804425710442574044257704425800442583044256204425650442568044257104425740442577044258004425830571650 571680 571710 571740 571770 571800 571830 571860 571890 571920 571950 571980 571650 571680 571710 571740 571770 571800 571830 571860 571890 571920 571950 571980 39° 58' 46'' N 86° 9' 39'' W39° 58' 46'' N86° 9' 24'' W39° 58' 39'' N 86° 9' 39'' W39° 58' 39'' N 86° 9' 24'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 16N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 20 40 80 120 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,610 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:15,800. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Hamilton County, Indiana Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 7, 2018 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jun 27, 2014—Aug 28, 2014 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Hydrologic Soil Group 4425620442565044256804425710442574044257704425800442583044256204425650442568044257104425740442577044258004425830571650 571680 571710 571740 571770 571800 571830 571860 571890 571920 571950 571980 571650 571680 571710 571740 571770 571800 571830 571860 571890 571920 571950 571980 39° 58' 46'' N 86° 9' 39'' W39° 58' 46'' N86° 9' 24'' W39° 58' 39'' N 86° 9' 39'' W39° 58' 39'' N 86° 9' 24'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 16N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 20 40 80 120 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,610 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:15,800. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Hamilton County, Indiana Survey Area Data: Version 19, Sep 7, 2018 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jun 27, 2014—Aug 28, 2014 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 16 Table—Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Br Brookston silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes B/D 2.8 40.6% CrA Crosby silt loam, fine- loamy subsoil, 0 to 2 percent slopes C/D 4.1 59.4% Totals for Area of Interest 6.8 100.0% Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Aggregation is the process by which a set of component attribute values is reduced to a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. A map unit is typically composed of one or more "components". A component is either some type of soil or some nonsoil entity, e.g., rock outcrop. For the attribute being aggregated, the first step of the aggregation process is to derive one attribute value for each of a map unit's components. From this set of component attributes, the next step of the aggregation process derives a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. Once a single value for each map unit is derived, a thematic map for soil map units can be rendered. Aggregation must be done because, on any soil map, map units are delineated but components are not. For each of a map unit's components, a corresponding percent composition is recorded. A percent composition of 60 indicates that the corresponding component typically makes up approximately 60% of the map unit. Percent composition is a critical factor in some, but not all, aggregation methods. The aggregation method "Dominant Condition" first groups like attribute values for the components in a map unit. For each group, percent composition is set to the sum of the percent composition of all components participating in that group. These groups now represent "conditions" rather than components. The attribute value associated with the group with the highest cumulative percent composition is returned. If more than one group shares the highest cumulative percent composition, the corresponding "tie-break" rule determines which value should be returned. The "tie-break" rule indicates whether the lower or higher group value should be returned in the case of a percent composition tie. The result returned by this aggregation method represents the dominant condition throughout the map unit only when no tie has occurred. Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Components whose percent composition is below the cutoff value will not be considered. If no cutoff value is specified, all components in the database will be considered. The data for some contrasting soils of minor extent may not be in the database, and therefore are not considered. Custom Soil Resource Report 17 Tie-break Rule: Higher The tie-break rule indicates which value should be selected from a set of multiple candidate values, or which value should be selected in the event of a percent composition tie. Custom Soil Resource Report 18 FIRM MAP CLIPPING – NO SCALE DENOTES PROJECT LOCATION Project:Carmel Hotel Date:May 11, 2019 Job No:w190175 Checked By:SSR Prepared By:RLW BASIN: PR-1 Soil Group Cover type CN Area (SF) Area (Ac.) D Grass 86 60000 1.38 Impervious 98 86845 1.99 93 146845 3.37TOTAL= Post Developed Runoff Calculations Project: Date: Source: 210‐VI‐TR‐55 Second Ed, June 1986 Job No: Checked By:SSR Prepared By:RLW BASIN: Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc only)Segment ID 1. Surface Description ………………… Grass 2. Manning's roughness coeff., n ……….. 0.13 3. Flow length, L (total L < 300 ft) ……….ft 45 4. Two-yr 24-hr rainfall, P2 ……………..in 2.64 5. Land slope, s ………………………ft/ft 0.005 6. Tt = 0.007 (nL)0.8 Compute Tt …hr 0.1474 = 0.1474 P20.5 s0.4 Shallow Concentrated Flow Segment ID Gutter 7. Surface Description (paved or unpaved) …Paved 8. Flow length, L ……………………….ft 50 9. Watercourse slope, s ………………..ft/ft 0.01 10. Average velocity, V ………………….ft/s 2.03 11. Tt = L Compute Tt …hr 0.0068 = 0.0068 3600 V Channel Flow Segment ID 18" RCP 12. Cross sectional flow area, a …………..ft2 1.767 13. Wetted Perimeter, pw …………………ft 4.712 14. Hydraulic radius, r = a/pw Compute r …ft 0.375 15. Channel slope, s …………………….ft/ft 0.01 16. Manning's roughness coeff., n …………0.012 17. V = (1.49 r2/3 s1/2) / n Compute V … ft/s 6.46 18. Flow length, L ……………………….ft 233 19. Tt = L Compute Tt …hr 0.0100 = 0.0100 3600 V 20. Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19) ………………………hr 0.1642 min 9.85 Time of Concentration Carmel Hotel May 11, 2019 w190175 PR-1 Avid Hotel Max Time Max Warning Max Delta Max Surf Max Time Max Max Time Max Name Group Simulation Stage Stage Stage Stage Area Inflow Inflow Outflow Outflow hrs ft ft ft ft2 hrs cfs hrs cfs Main St. Bndry BASE 100Y-24H 0.00 862.810 870.000 0.0000 2 12.63 8.487 0.00 0.000 Main St. Bndry BASE 10Y-24H 0.00 862.810 870.000 0.0000 2 12.68 6.094 0.00 0.000 Main St. Bndry BASE 2Y-24H 0.00 862.810 870.000 0.0000 2 12.69 4.712 0.00 0.000 North Pond BASE 100Y-24H 12.10 867.150 870.000 0.0050 7961 12.00 19.302 11.98 11.520 North Pond BASE 10Y-24H 12.07 866.534 870.000 0.0050 7755 12.00 11.915 12.07 8.101 North Pond BASE 2Y-24H 12.07 866.272 870.000 0.0050 7551 12.00 8.577 12.07 5.882 South Pond BASE 100Y-24H 12.62 866.493 870.000 -0.1800 50066 12.00 59.991 12.62 8.487 South Pond BASE 10Y-24H 12.67 865.624 870.000 -0.1800 45481 12.00 35.091 12.67 6.094 South Pond BASE 2Y-24H 12.68 865.187 870.000 -0.1800 43020 12.00 23.539 12.67 4.712Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc.Page 1 of 1 Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc.NodesA Stage/AreaV Stage/VolumeT Time/StageM ManholeBasinsO Overland FlowU SCS Unit CNS SBUH CNY SCS Unit GAZ SBUH GALinksP PipeW WeirC ChannelD Drop StructureB BridgeR Rating CurveH BreachE PercolationF FilterX Exfil TrenchA:ROW ManholeA:North PondU:EX-1A:South PondU:PR-1U:US 31 ROWT:Main St. BndryP:24" RCP ROWP:24" RCPP:18" RCP 1 Avid Hotel Max Time Max Max Max Time Max Max Time Max Name Group Simulation Flow Flow Delta Q US Stage US Stage DS Stage DS Stage hrs cfs cfs hrs ft hrs ft 18" RCP 1 BASE 100Y-24H 12.62 8.487 -0.050 12.62 866.493 12.63 865.357 24" RCP BASE 100Y-24H 11.98 11.520 0.045 12.10 867.150 12.62 866.493 24" RCP ROW BASE 100Y-24H 12.63 8.487 0.028 12.63 865.357 12.63 864.559 18" RCP 1 BASE 10Y-24H 12.67 6.094 0.034 12.67 865.624 12.68 865.038 24" RCP BASE 10Y-24H 12.07 8.101 0.042 12.07 866.534 12.07 864.235 24" RCP ROW BASE 10Y-24H 12.68 6.094 -0.022 12.68 865.038 12.68 864.393 18" RCP 1 BASE 2Y-24H 12.67 4.712 -0.048 12.68 865.187 12.69 864.837 24" RCP BASE 2Y-24H 12.07 5.882 0.037 12.07 866.272 12.07 864.063 24" RCP ROW BASE 2Y-24H 12.69 4.712 0.025 12.69 864.837 12.69 864.284Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc.Page 1 of 1 Avid Hotel Input Report============================================================================================== Basins ======================================================================================================================================================================== Name: EX-1 Node: North Pond Status: Onsite Group: BASE Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph CN Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Rainfall File: Storm Duration(hrs): 0.00 Rainfall Amount(in): 0.000 Time of Conc(min): 6.50 Area(ac): 2.400 Time Shift(hrs): 0.00 Curve Number: 95.00 Max Allowable Q(cfs): 999999.000 DCIA(%): 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: PR-1 Node: South Pond Status: Onsite Group: BASE Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph CN Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Rainfall File: Storm Duration(hrs): 0.00 Rainfall Amount(in): 0.000 Time of Conc(min): 10.00 Area(ac): 5.820 Time Shift(hrs): 0.00 Curve Number: 93.00 Max Allowable Q(cfs): 999999.000 DCIA(%): 0.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: US 31 ROW Node: South Pond Status: Onsite Group: BASE Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph CN Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Rainfall File: Storm Duration(hrs): 0.00 Rainfall Amount(in): 0.000 Time of Conc(min): 5.00 Area(ac): 1.200 Time Shift(hrs): 0.00 Curve Number: 98.00 Max Allowable Q(cfs): 999999.000 DCIA(%): 0.00 ============================================================================================== Nodes ========================================================================================================================================================================= Name: Main St. Bndry Base Flow(cfs): 0.000 Init Stage(ft): 862.810 Group: BASE Warn Stage(ft): 870.000 Type: Time/Stage 42" PIPE STOPPING POINT Time(hrs) Stage(ft)--------------- --------------- 0.00 862.810 48.00 862.810------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Name: North Pond Base Flow(cfs): 1.810 Init Stage(ft): 865.060 Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc.Page 1 of 6 Avid Hotel Input Report Group: BASE Warn Stage(ft): 870.000 Type: Stage/Area Stage(ft) Area(ac)--------------- --------------- 865.060 0.1400 870.000 0.2400------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Name: ROW Manhole Base Flow(cfs): 0.000 Init Stage(ft): 863.200 Group: BASE Warn Stage(ft): 870.000 Type: Stage/Area Stage(ft) Area(ac)--------------- --------------- 863.200 0.0050 870.000 0.0050------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Name: South Pond Base Flow(cfs): 0.000 Init Stage(ft): 863.030 Group: BASE Warn Stage(ft): 870.000 Type: Stage/Area Stage(ft) Area(ac)--------------- --------------- 863.430 0.7150 864.000 0.8230 865.000 0.9550 866.000 1.0840 867.000 1.2120 868.000 1.3430 869.000 1.4890 870.000 1.6050============================================================================================== Operating Tables ============================================================================================================================================================== Name: Group: BASE Type: Bottom Clip Function: Time vs. Depth of Clip Time(hrs) Clip Depth(in)--------------- ---------------============================================================================================== Pipes ========================================================================================================================================================================= Name: 18" RCP 1 From Node: South Pond Length(ft): 119.00 Group: BASE To Node: ROW Manhole Count: 1 Friction Equation: AutomaticInterconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc.Page 2 of 6 Avid Hotel Input Report UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM Solution Algorithm: Most Restrictive Geometry: Circular Circular Flow: Both Span(in): 18.00 18.00 Entrance Loss Coef: 0.00 Rise(in): 18.00 18.00 Exit Loss Coef: 1.00 Invert(ft): 863.430 863.230 Bend Loss Coef: 0.00 Manning's N: 0.013000 0.013000 Outlet Ctrl Spec: Use dc or tw Top Clip(in): 0.000 0.000 Inlet Ctrl Spec: Use dc Bot Clip(in): 0.000 0.000 Stabilizer Option: NoneUpstream FHWA Inlet Edge Description:Circular Concrete: Square edge w/ headwallDownstream FHWA Inlet Edge Description:Circular Concrete: Square edge w/ headwall---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: 24" RCP From Node: North Pond Length(ft): 392.00 Group: BASE To Node: South Pond Count: 1 Friction Equation: Automatic UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM Solution Algorithm: Most Restrictive Geometry: Circular Circular Flow: Both Span(in): 24.00 24.00 Entrance Loss Coef: 0.00 Rise(in): 24.00 24.00 Exit Loss Coef: 1.00 Invert(ft): 865.060 863.210 Bend Loss Coef: 0.00 Manning's N: 0.013000 0.013000 Outlet Ctrl Spec: Use dc or tw Top Clip(in): 0.000 0.000 Inlet Ctrl Spec: Use dc Bot Clip(in): 0.000 0.000 Stabilizer Option: NoneUpstream FHWA Inlet Edge Description:Circular Concrete: Square edge w/ headwallDownstream FHWA Inlet Edge Description:Circular Concrete: Square edge w/ headwall---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: 24" RCP ROW From Node: ROW Manhole Length(ft): 40.00 Group: BASE To Node: Main St. Bndry Count: 1 Friction Equation: Automatic UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM Solution Algorithm: Most Restrictive Geometry: Circular Circular Flow: Both Span(in): 24.00 24.00 Entrance Loss Coef: 0.00 Rise(in): 24.00 24.00 Exit Loss Coef: 1.00 Invert(ft): 863.230 863.520 Bend Loss Coef: 0.00 Manning's N: 0.013000 0.013000 Outlet Ctrl Spec: Use dc or tw Top Clip(in): 0.000 0.000 Inlet Ctrl Spec: Use dc Bot Clip(in): 0.000 0.000 Stabilizer Option: NoneUpstream FHWA Inlet Edge Description:Circular Concrete: Square edge w/ headwallInterconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc.Page 3 of 6 Avid Hotel Input ReportDownstream FHWA Inlet Edge Description:Circular Concrete: Square edge w/ headwall============================================================================================== Rating Curves ================================================================================================================================================================= Name: From Node: Count: 1 Group: BASE To Node: Flow: Both TABLE ELEV ON(ft) ELEV OFF(ft) #1: 0.000 0.000 #2: 0.000 0.000 #3: 0.000 0.000 #4: 0.000 0.000 ============================================================================================== Hydrology Simulations ========================================================================================================================================================= Name: 100Y-24H Filename: S:\Water Resources\ICPR\Hamilton County\100Y-24H.R32 Override Defaults: Yes Storm Duration(hrs): 24.00 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount(in): 6.46 Time(hrs) Print Inc(min) --------------- ---------------30.000 5.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: 10Y-24H Filename: S:\Water Resources\ICPR\Hamilton County\10Y-24H.R32 Override Defaults: Yes Storm Duration(hrs): 24.00 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount(in): 3.83 Time(hrs) Print Inc(min) --------------- ---------------30.000 5.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: 2Y-24H Filename: S:\Water Resources\ICPR\Hamilton County\2Y-24H.R32 Override Defaults: Yes Storm Duration(hrs): 24.00 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount(in): 2.66 Time(hrs) Print Inc(min) --------------- ---------------Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc.Page 4 of 6 Avid Hotel Input Report30.000 5.00 ============================================================================================== Routing Simulations =========================================================================================================================================================== Name: 100Y-24H Hydrology Sim: 100Y-24H Filename: S:\Water Resources\ICPR\Hamilton County\100Y-24H.I32 Execute: Yes Restart: No Patch: No Alternative: No Max Delta Z(ft): 1.00 Delta Z Factor: 0.00500 Time Step Optimizer: 10.000 Start Time(hrs): 0.000 End Time(hrs): 30.00 Min Calc Time(sec): 1.0000 Max Calc Time(sec): 100.0000 Boundary Stages: Boundary Flows: Time(hrs) Print Inc(min) --------------- ---------------30.000 10.000 Group Run --------------- -----BASE Yes ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: 10Y-24H Hydrology Sim: 10Y-24H Filename: S:\Water Resources\ICPR\Hamilton County\10Y-24H.I32 Execute: Yes Restart: No Patch: No Alternative: No Max Delta Z(ft): 1.00 Delta Z Factor: 0.00500 Time Step Optimizer: 10.000 Start Time(hrs): 0.000 End Time(hrs): 30.00 Min Calc Time(sec): 1.0000 Max Calc Time(sec): 100.0000 Boundary Stages: Boundary Flows: Time(hrs) Print Inc(min) --------------- ---------------30.000 10.000 Group Run --------------- -----BASE Yes ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: 2Y-24H Hydrology Sim: 2Y-24H Filename: S:\Water Resources\ICPR\Hamilton County\2Y-24H.I32 Execute: Yes Restart: No Patch: No Alternative: No Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc.Page 5 of 6 Avid Hotel Input Report Max Delta Z(ft): 1.00 Delta Z Factor: 0.00500 Time Step Optimizer: 10.000 Start Time(hrs): 0.000 End Time(hrs): 30.00 Min Calc Time(sec): 1.0000 Max Calc Time(sec): 100.0000 Boundary Stages: Boundary Flows: Time(hrs) Print Inc(min) --------------- ---------------30.000 10.000 Group Run --------------- -----BASE Yes Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc.Page 6 of 6 Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Avid Hotel Node South PondTotal Inflow(cfs)Time(hrs)051015202530350102030405060100Y-24H10Y-24H2Y-24H Avid Hotel Simulation Basin Group Time Max Flow Max Volume Volume hrs cfs in ft3 100Y-24H EX-1 BASE 12.00 17.498 5.860 51056.090 100Y-24H PR-1 BASE 12.02 39.867 5.629118931.663 10Y-24H EX-1 BASE 12.00 10.112 3.259 28392.272 10Y-24H PR-1 BASE 12.02 22.505 3.051 64447.162 2Y-24H EX-1 BASE 12.00 6.777 2.115 18428.786 2Y-24H PR-1 BASE 12.02 14.657 1.928 40729.282Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc.Page 1 of 1 Project: Date: Job No: Checked By: Prepared By: Elevation Area (sf) Area (ac) Volume (cf) Volume (ac-ft) 863.4 31,157 0.715 0 0.00 864.0 35,850 0.823 19,097 0.44 865.0 41,588 0.955 57,816 1.33 866.0 47,212 1.084 102,216 2.35 867.0 52,800 1.212 152,222 3.49 868.0 58,488 1.343 207,866 4.77 869.0 64,860 1.489 269,540 6.19 870.0 69,900 1.605 336,920 7.73 Stage Storage Avid Hotel June 27, 2019 w190175 SSR RLW Emergency Overflow Calculations Project:Avid Hotel Date:June 4, 2019 Job No:w190175 Checked By:SSR Prepared By:RLW Peak Inflow 60.00 cfs Peak Inflow (125%) 75.00 cfs Cw (Coefficient of Weir) 3.33 h (Flow depth over Weir)1 ft Width of Weir 22.52 ft L = Q/ (Cs * H ^ (3/2))Free Discharge SuppressedPOND 1 A-A Project:Carmel Hotel Date:May 11, 2019 Job No:w190175 Checked By:SSR Prepared By:RLW BASIN: 5256 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 2428 0.06 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 0 0.00 0.25 2428 0.06 0.85 BASIN: 5254 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 1500 0.03 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 0 0.00 0.25 1500 0.03 0.85 BASIN: 5255 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 19360 0.44 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 1640 0.04 0.25 21000 0.48 0.80 BASIN: 5254 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 8368 0.19 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 1332 0.03 0.25 9700 0.22 0.77 BASIN: 5250 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 8829 0.20 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 0 0.00 0.25 8829 0.20 0.85 Cover type Impervious, Pavement Impervious, Roof Pervious, Grass TOTAL= Cover type Impervious, Pavement Impervious, Roof Pervious, Grass TOTAL= Cover type Post Developed Runoff Coefficient Calculations Impervious, Pavement Impervious, Roof Pervious, Grass TOTAL= Cover type Impervious, Pavement Impervious, Roof Pervious, Grass TOTAL= Cover type Impervious, Pavement Impervious, Roof Pervious, Grass TOTAL= Project:Avid Hotel Date:June 27, 2019 Job No:w190175 Checked By:SSR Prepared By:RLW Area (ft2)Perimeter (ft) Neenah R-3403-F 1.60 5.30 Neenah R-4342 1.00 3.00 Neenah R-4343 1.20 4.10 Neenah R-3405 0.75 3.95 *Calculations are shown fo a 50% clogged condition per ordinance i Inlet # Q (cfs) Type of Casting Perimeter h Above inlet Flow Allowable Inlet Type 6.10 5256 0.31 Neenah R-3405 3.95 0.50 4.61 Single 6.10 5024 0.16 Neenah R-3405 3.95 0.50 4.61 Single 5.60 5255 2.15 Neenah R-3405 3.95 0.50 4.61 Single 6.10 5254 1.03 Neenah R-3405 3.95 0.50 4.61 Single 6.10 5250 1.04 Neenah R-3405 3.95 0.50 4.61 Single 50% Clogged Grate Capacity Calculations Type of Casting Gravel Area Bee Hive Bee Hive Square Inlet