The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDrainage Report 10-10-19 DRAINAGE REPORT For Intuitive Health Riverview Health Urgent Care & Emergency Room 10830 N Michigan Road Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana Prepared For: EQ Hazel Development, LLC 4653 Trueman Boulevard, Suite 100 Hilliard, Ohio 43026 Prepared By: American Structurepoint, Inc. 9025 River Road, Suite 200 Indianapolis, Indiana 46240 Colin R. Patterson, PE Prepared: October 10, 2019 2018.01057 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT NARRATIVE I. Project Description II. Existing Drainage III. Proposed Drainage IV. Proposed Water Quality V. Summary and Conclusions APPENDICES Appendix A Aerial Site Map Appendix B Soils Map FEMA FIRM Map Appendix C Existing Conditions Existing Conditions Map Existing Runoff Calculations Appendix D Proposed Conditions Developed Conditions Map Developed Runoff Calculations Storm Basins Map C & Cn Calculations Rainfall Data Rational Method Storm Sewer Calculations HGL Pipe Calculations Casting Capacity Calculations Emergency Overflow Calculations Appendix E Proposed Water Quality Calculations Water Quality Treatment Area CNwq Calculation Water Quality Treatment Rate Calculation Appendix F Supplemental Drainage Report for Nottingham, LLC Outlots dated March 21, 2019 by Weihe Engineers 2018.01057 DRAINAGE REPORT For Intuitive Health Riverview Health Urgent Care & Emergency Room 10830 North Michigan Road Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is located in Carmel, Indiana, at the northwast corner of Michigan Road and Nottingham Way within the Pearson Ford Master Plan. The project will consist of constructing a single story medical office building with a footprint of approximately 10,933 square feet and associated pavement and utility service connections. The project’s disturbed area is approximately 1.99 acres. A location map can be found in Appendix A. All of the site is located in Zone “X”, as indicated on the Hamilton County, Indiana, Flood Insurance Rate Map 18057C0205 G, dated November 19, 2014. The FIRM map can be found in Appendix B. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey of Hamilton County, Indiana, indicates Brookston silty clay loam and Crosby silt loam soil types to be on site. A soils map can be found in Appendix B. II. EXISTING DRAINAGE The project is located within the Pearson Ford Master Plan site and was master planned for drainage in 2007. Earlier this year, Weihe Engineers updated the original master plan to include construction of the access road on the west side of the property which will provide access for the property as well as a storm sewer outlet and sanitary sewer access. A storm manhole with a 21 inch rcp outlet will be installed at the southwest corner of the property as part of that project. That storm sewer eventually discharges into a regional wet pond in Boone County. The project site is 1.99 acres is size. The existing CN was found to be 79. The existing time of concentration of the site was found to be 17.0 minutes. The existing conditions map and existing drainage calculations can be found in Appendix D. III. PROPOSED DRAINAGE As previously stated, this project lies within the Pearson Ford Master Plan where the onsite drainage system was master planned in 2007. We are proposing to connect the proposed storm sewers to the 21 inch storm sewer that will be installed with the road extension project along the west side of this project. The project site is 1.99 acres. The proposed CN was found to be 92. The Master Plan design CN for this lot is 93. The time of concentration was found to be 7.4 minutes. Since the project does not exceed the original design CN, no additional detention is proposed. The HGLs were calculated using the 10 year HGL elevation of the connecting 21 inch storm sewer that this project is connecting to. 2018.01057 The proposed storm sewers have been designed for the 10 year storm event using the Rational Method. The Storm Basins Map and proposed storm sewer calculations can be found in Appendix D. Below is a table that summarizes the pre and post developed runoff rates for the 2, 10, and 100 storm events. 2-yr 10-yr 100-yr (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Existing 2.22 4.41 9.85 Proposed 6.00 9.36 16.80 IV. PROPOSED WATER QUALITY The existing offsite regional wet detention facility in Boone County will serve as one of the BMPs for this project. The second BMP is a proposed Aqua-Swirl AS-6. The disturbed area was found to be 1.99 acres and the proposed Time of Concentration is 7.4 minutes. The Water Quality Curve Number for the disturbed area of the project was found to be 95. V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The proposed storm sewer system on this site will connect to existing storm sewers that were designed to accept runoff from this site. Accordingly, we believe the proposed improvements will not adversely affect this site, the overall development, the City of Carmel or Hamilton County. 2018.01057 APPENDIX A Aerial Site Map AERIAL SITE MAP NORTH SITE 2018.01057 APPENDIX B Soils Map FEMA FIRM Map United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Hamilton County, IndianaNatural Resources Conservation Service June 12, 2019 Preface 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://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). 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 Web Soil Survey, the site for 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 2 alternative means 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 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map..................................................................................................................8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Hamilton County, Indiana................................................................................13 Br—Brookston silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes..................................13 CrA—Crosby silt loam, fine-loamy subsoil, 0 to 2 percent slopes...............14 References............................................................................................................16 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 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Soil 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. 8 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 44217904421800442181044218204421830442184044218504421860442187044218804421790442180044218104421820442183044218404421850442186044218704421880564920 564930 564940 564950 564960 564970 564980 564990 565000 565010 565020 565030 565040 565050 565060 565070 564920 564930 564940 564950 564960 564970 564980 564990 565000 565010 565020 565030 565040 565050 565060 565070 39° 56' 40'' N 86° 14' 24'' W39° 56' 40'' N86° 14' 17'' W39° 56' 37'' N 86° 14' 24'' W39° 56' 37'' N 86° 14' 17'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 16N WGS84 0 35 70 140 210 Feet 0 10 20 40 60 Meters Map Scale: 1:730 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 10 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Br Brookston silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 0.4 23.9% CrA Crosby silt loam, fine-loamy subsoil, 0 to 2 percent slopes 1.2 76.1% Totals for Area of Interest 1.6 100.0% 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 for the 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 classes but rather to 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, Custom Soil Resource Report 11 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. Custom Soil Resource Report 12 Hamilton County, Indiana Br—Brookston silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2t98n Elevation: 600 to 1,260 feet Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 46 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost-free period: 145 to 180 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained Map Unit Composition Brookston and similar soils: 95 percent Minor components: 5 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Brookston Setting Landform: Till plains, depressions Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Linear, concave Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Loess over loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 16 inches: silty clay loam Btg1 - 16 to 32 inches: silty clay loam Btg2 - 32 to 44 inches: loam C - 44 to 60 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Runoff class: Negligible Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.60 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: Frequent Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Hydric soil rating: Yes Custom Soil Resource Report 13 Minor Components Crosby Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No CrA—Crosby silt loam, fine-loamy subsoil, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2thy4 Elevation: 600 to 1,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 36 to 44 inches Mean annual air temperature: 49 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 145 to 180 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained Map Unit Composition Crosby and similar soils: 93 percent Minor components: 7 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Crosby Setting Landform: Ground moraines, recessionial moraines, water-lain moraines Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, rise Down-slope shape: Convex, linear Across-slope shape: Linear, convex Parent material: Silty material or loess over loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 10 inches: silt loam Btg - 10 to 17 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt - 17 to 29 inches: clay loam 2BCt - 29 to 36 inches: loam 2Cd - 36 to 79 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Low to moderately high (0.01 to 0.20 in/hr) Custom Soil Resource Report 14 Depth to water table: About 6 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 55 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Williamstown, eroded Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Water-lain moraines, ground moraines, recessionial moraines Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder, summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, crest, head slope, nose slope, rise Down-slope shape: Convex, linear Across-slope shape: Linear, convex Hydric soil rating: No Treaty, drained Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Depressions, water-lain moraines, swales Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, dip Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave Hydric soil rating: Yes Custom Soil Resource Report 15 References 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://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 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:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 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://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 16 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 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://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report 17 USGS The National Map: Orthoimagery. Data refreshed April, 2019. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250Feet Ü86°14'35.73"W 39°56'49.19"N 86°13'58.28"W 39°56'21.61"N SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOODHAZARD AR EAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)Zone A, V, A99With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Regulator y Floodway 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areasof 1% annual chance flood with averagedepth less than one foot or with drainageareas of less than one square mile Zone X Future Conditions 1% AnnualChance Flood Hazard Zone XArea with Reduced Flood Risk due toLevee. See Notes.Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D NO SCREE N Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D Channel, Culver t, or Storm SewerLevee, Dike, or Floodwall Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance17.5 Water Surface ElevationCoastal Transect Coastal Transect BaselineProfile BaselineHydrographic Feature Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Effective LOMRs Limit of StudyJurisdiction Boundar y Digital Data Available No Digital Data Available Unmapped This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap accuracy standards The flood hazard information is derived directly from theauthoritative NFHL web ser vices provided by FEMA. This mapwas exported on 6/11/2019 at 7:34:48 AM and does notreflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date andtime. The NFHL and effective information may change orbecome superseded by new data over time. This map image is void if the one or more of the following mapelements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels,legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers,FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images forunmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used forregulatory purposes. Legend OTHER AREAS OFFLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERALSTRUCTURES OTHERFEATURES MAP PANELS 8 1:6,000 B 20.2 The pin displayed on the map is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative proper ty location. 2018.01057 APPENDIX C Existing Conditions Existing Conditions Map Existing Runoff Calculations GGGGGGGGGGGGGT(U)T(U)T(U)T(U)T(U)T(U)T(U)T(U)T(U)T(U)FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM PLOT DATE: 6/17/2019 5:53 PMPLOT SCALE: 1:1EDIT DATE: 6/17/2019EDITED BY: CPATTERSONDRAWING FILE: P:\2018\01057\D. Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\Drainage\2018.01057.CE.3D_Design_2K16.2019-06-17.dwgProject Number CERTIFIED BY ISSUANCE INDEX DATE: PROJECT PHASE: REVISION SCHEDULE NO.DESCRIPTION DATE 6/17/2019 ---- 7260 Shadeland Station | Indianapolis, Indiana 46256 TEL 317.547.5580 | FAX 317.543.0270 www.structurepoint.com EX1 EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP SCALE: 1" = 40' 2018.01057 Type II 24-hr 2YR-24HR Rainfall=2.66"2018.01057.CE.HydroCAD.2018-06-17 Printed 6/17/2019Prepared by American Structurepoint Page 1HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 00818 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 12S: EXISTING Runoff = 2.22 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.157 af, Depth= 0.95" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2YR-24HR Rainfall=2.66" Area (ac) CN Description 1.990 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C 1.990 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 17.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 12S: EXISTING Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420Flow (cfs)2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 2YR-24HR Rainfall=2.66" Runoff Area=1.990 ac Runoff Volume=0.157 af Runoff Depth=0.95" Tc=17.0 min CN=79 2.22 cfs Type II 24-hr 10YR-24HR Rainfall=3.83"2018.01057.CE.HydroCAD.2018-06-17 Printed 6/17/2019Prepared by American Structurepoint Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 00818 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 12S: EXISTING Runoff = 4.41 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.303 af, Depth= 1.83" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10YR-24HR Rainfall=3.83" Area (ac) CN Description 1.990 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C 1.990 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 17.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 12S: EXISTING Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420Flow (cfs)4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 10YR-24HR Rainfall=3.83" Runoff Area=1.990 ac Runoff Volume=0.303 af Runoff Depth=1.83" Tc=17.0 min CN=79 4.41 cfs Type II 24-hr 100YR-24HR Rainfall=6.46"2018.01057.CE.HydroCAD.2018-06-17 Printed 6/17/2019Prepared by American Structurepoint Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 00818 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 12S: EXISTING Runoff = 9.85 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.679 af, Depth= 4.09" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100YR-24HR Rainfall=6.46" Area (ac) CN Description 1.990 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C 1.990 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 17.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 12S: EXISTING Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420Flow (cfs)11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 100YR-24HR Rainfall=6.46" Runoff Area=1.990 ac Runoff Volume=0.679 af Runoff Depth=4.09" Tc=17.0 min CN=79 9.85 cfs Project:By:CRP Date:6/17/2019 Location:Checked:Date: Basin: Present X Developed - Tc X Tt -through subarea Sheet Flow Segment ID Surface description (Table 3-1)Unpaved Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)0.24 Flow Length, L (L < 300 ft)ft 100 Rainfall Calculation Method Entity Rainfall Data Two-year 24-hr rainfall, P2 in 2.64 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.02 Tt = .007 (nL)0.8 hr 0.26 + + = 0.26 (P2)0.5s0.4 Shallow Concentrated Flow Segment ID Surface description, (paved or unpaved)Unpaved - - Flow length, L ft 223 - - Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.030 - - Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1) ft/s 2.79 - - Tt =L hr 0.02 + - + - = 0.02 3600 V Channel Flow Segment ID Channel Geometry -- - Discharge (cfs)-- - Diameter (ft)-- - Bottom Width (ft)-- - Side Slope (x:1) (ft)-- - Slope of Channel (ft)-- - Manning's Roughness Coefficient -- - Depth (ft)-- - Cross Sectional Area (ft2)-- - Wetted Perimeter (ft)-- - Hydraulic Radius (ft)-- - Velocity (ft/s)-- - Flow length, L ft -- - Tt =L hr - + - + - = 0.00 3600 V Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt hr 0.28 min 17.04 Time of Concentration (Tc) or Travel Time (Tt) Intuitive Health - Michigan Road City of Carmel - 2018.01057 APPENDIX D Proposed Conditions Developed Conditions Map Developed Runoff Calculations Storm Basins Map Time of Concentrations Calculations C&CN Calculations Rainfall Data Rational Method Storm Sewer Calculations HGL Pipe Calculations Casting Capacity Emergency Overflow Calculations SANFM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM EEEEPLOT DATE: 6/17/2019 6:00 PMPLOT SCALE: 1:1EDIT DATE: 6/17/2019EDITED BY: CPATTERSONDRAWING FILE: P:\2018\01057\D. Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\Drainage\2018.01057.CE.3D_Design_2K16.2019-06-17.dwgProject Number CERTIFIED BY ISSUANCE INDEX DATE: PROJECT PHASE: REVISION SCHEDULE NO.DESCRIPTION DATE 6/17/2019 ---- 7260 Shadeland Station | Indianapolis, Indiana 46256 TEL 317.547.5580 | FAX 317.543.0270 www.structurepoint.com EX2 DEVELOPED CONDITIONS MAP SCALE: Custom 2018.01057 Type II 24-hr 2YR-24HR Rainfall=2.66"2018.01057.CE.HydroCAD.2018-06-17 Printed 6/17/2019Prepared by American Structurepoint Page 1HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 00818 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 11S: DEV Runoff = 6.00 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.305 af, Depth= 1.84" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 2YR-24HR Rainfall=2.66" Area (ac) CN Description * 1.990 92 1.990 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.4 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 11S: DEV Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420Flow (cfs)6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 2YR-24HR Rainfall=2.66" Runoff Area=1.990 ac Runoff Volume=0.305 af Runoff Depth=1.84" Tc=7.4 min CN=92 6.00 cfs Type II 24-hr 10YR-24HR Rainfall=3.83"2018.01057.CE.HydroCAD.2018-06-17 Printed 6/17/2019Prepared by American Structurepoint Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 00818 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 11S: DEV Runoff = 9.36 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.490 af, Depth= 2.95" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 10YR-24HR Rainfall=3.83" Area (ac) CN Description * 1.990 92 1.990 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.4 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 11S: DEV Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420Flow (cfs)10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 10YR-24HR Rainfall=3.83" Runoff Area=1.990 ac Runoff Volume=0.490 af Runoff Depth=2.95" Tc=7.4 min CN=92 9.36 cfs Type II 24-hr 100YR-24HR Rainfall=6.46"2018.01057.CE.HydroCAD.2018-06-17 Printed 6/17/2019Prepared by American Structurepoint Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 00818 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 11S: DEV Runoff = 16.80 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.916 af, Depth= 5.52" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr 100YR-24HR Rainfall=6.46" Area (ac) CN Description * 1.990 92 1.990 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.4 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 11S: DEV Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420Flow (cfs)18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 100YR-24HR Rainfall=6.46" Runoff Area=1.990 ac Runoff Volume=0.916 af Runoff Depth=5.52" Tc=7.4 min CN=92 16.80 cfs SANFM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM EEE E PLOT DATE: 6/17/2019 6:01 PMPLOT SCALE: 1:1EDIT DATE: 6/17/2019EDITED BY: CPATTERSONDRAWING FILE: P:\2018\01057\D. Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\Drainage\2018.01057.CE.3D_Design_2K16.2019-06-17.dwgProject Number CERTIFIED BY ISSUANCE INDEX DATE: PROJECT PHASE: REVISION SCHEDULE NO.DESCRIPTION DATE 6/17/2019 ---- 7260 Shadeland Station | Indianapolis, Indiana 46256 TEL 317.547.5580 | FAX 317.543.0270 www.structurepoint.com EX3 STORM BASINS MAP SCALE: 1" = 40' 2018.01057 Intuitive Health - Michigan Road 6/17/2019 Runoff Coefficient Runoff Curve Number Roof 0.90 98 Grass 0.25 84 Pavement 0.85 98 Roof Area Pervious Area Pavement Area Total Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Weighted Curve Number (acres)(acres)(acres)(acres)C CN 100 100 0.00 0.07 0.08 0.15 0.56 91 101 101 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.60 92 RD1 RD1 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.90 98 102 102 0.00 0.03 0.14 0.16 0.74 96 RD2 RD2 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.90 98 103 103 0.00 0.04 0.13 0.16 0.71 95 104 104 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.15 0.55 91 109 109 0.00 0.18 0.12 0.30 0.48 89 110 110 0.00 0.16 0.14 0.30 0.53 91 111 111 0.00 0.15 0.08 0.23 0.45 89 112 112 0.00 0.05 0.06 0.12 0.58 92 RD3 RD3 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.90 98 113 113 0.00 0.04 0.05 0.09 0.59 92 TOTAL DEVELOPED 0.29 0.81 0.89 1.99 0.61 92 TOTAL DEVELOPED 0.00 1.99 0.00 1.99 0.25 79 Runoff Coefficient and Runoff Curve Number Calculation Job Information City of Carmel 2018.01057 Basin Structure Description: Entity: Job #: Date: Description:Intuitive Health - Michigan Road Reviewing Entity:City of Carmel Job #:2018.01057 Date:06/17/19 Duration Duration (min)(hr)2-Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year 5 0.083 4.63 5.43 6.12 7.17 8.09 9.12 10 0.167 3.95 4.63 5.22 6.12 6.90 7.78 30 0.5 2.46 2.88 3.25 3.81 4.29 4.84 60 1 1.54 1.80 2.03 2.38 2.68 3.03 120 2 0.83 0.95 1.11 1.37 1.60 1.87 180 3 0.59 0.72 0.84 1.04 1.22 1.42 360 6 0.35 0.43 0.50 0.62 0.72 0.85 720 12 0.20 0.24 0.29 0.35 0.41 0.48 1440 24 0.11 0.14 0.16 0.20 0.23 0.27 Duration Duration (min)(hr)2-Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year 5 0.083 0.39 0.45 0.51 0.60 0.67 0.76 10 0.167 0.66 0.77 0.87 1.02 1.15 1.30 30 0.5 1.23 1.44 1.63 1.91 2.15 2.42 60 1 1.54 1.80 2.03 2.38 2.68 3.03 120 2 1.66 1.90 2.22 2.74 3.20 3.74 180 3 1.77 2.16 2.52 3.12 3.66 4.26 360 6 2.10 2.58 3.00 3.72 4.32 5.10 720 12 2.40 2.88 3.48 4.20 4.92 5.76 1440 24 2.64 3.36 3.84 4.80 5.52 6.48 Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) City of Carmel Data Job Information RAINFALL INTENSITIES & DEPTHS Frequency Rainfall Depth (in) Frequency Description:Intuitive Health - Michigan RoadReviewing Entity:Job #:Date:10-yrEntity DataInvert Drop0.1INLET CASTING TO INLETCASTING INLETc AREA c AREA INLET CASTING CUM. cA Tc Tcum CASTING INLET CASTING INLET Q CUM. QU.S. D.S. U.S. D.S. U.S. D.S(ft)(acres)(acres)(min)(min)(CFS)(CFS)(inches)(%)(cfs)(%)(ft/sec)(ft)(ft/sec)(min)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)100 10150.43RCP 0.56 0.15 - -0.09 0.09 0.095.005.00 - - 6.12 6.12 0.53 0.5312 0.350.013 2.11 25% 2.68 0.34 2.23 0.31899.40898.80 895.71 895.54 2.52 2.10101 10253.57RCP 0.60 0.04 - -0.03 0.03 0.115.005.31 - - 6.12 6.06 0.16 0.6812 0.350.013 2.11 32% 2.68 0.39 2.39 0.33898.80898.76 895.44 895.25 2.20 2.34RD1 RD273.88HDPE - - 0.90 0.160.14 - 0.145.005.00 - - 6.12 6.12 - 0.866 2.200.012 0.90 95% 4.59 0.39 5.23 0.27901.40901.40 897.81 896.19 2.96 4.59102 10384.38RCP 0.74 0.16 - -0.12 0.12 0.235.005.65 - - 6.12 6.00 0.75 1.4112 0.500.013 2.52 56% 3.21 0.53 3.29 0.44898.76898.61 895.15 894.73 2.44 2.72RD2 10375.57HDPE - - 0.90 0.120.11 - 0.255.005.27 - - 6.12 6.07 - 1.528 1.800.012 1.76 87% 5.03 0.48 5.66 0.25901.40898.61 896.09 894.73 4.51 3.08103 10487.66RCP 0.71 0.16 - -0.11 0.11 0.605.006.08 - - 6.12 5.92 0.70 3.5518 0.200.013 4.70 76% 2.66 0.97 2.92 0.55898.61898.88 894.63 894.45 2.28 2.72104 11326.03RCP 0.55 0.15 - -0.08 0.08 0.685.005.55 - - 6.12 6.02 0.51 4.1118 0.200.013 4.70 88% 2.66 1.09 3.00 0.16898.88899.51 894.35 894.30 2.82 3.50109 110144.96RCP 0.48 0.30 - -0.14 0.14 0.145.005.00 - - 6.12 6.12 0.87 0.8712 0.350.013 2.11 41% 2.68 0.45 2.55 0.90899.11899.66 896.02 895.51 1.92 2.98110 111125.92RCP 0.53 0.30 - -0.16 0.16 0.305.005.90 - - 6.12 5.96 0.96 1.7812 0.350.013 2.11 84% 2.68 0.70 3.01 0.78899.66898.86 895.41 894.97 3.08 2.72111 11247.37RCP 0.45 0.23 - -0.10 0.10 0.405.006.68 - - 6.12 5.82 0.64 2.3412 0.550.013 2.64 89% 3.36 0.73 3.80 0.23898.86899.72 894.87 894.61 2.82 3.94112 11387.00RCP 0.58 0.12 - -0.07 0.07 0.475.006.92 - - 6.12 5.77 0.41 2.7115 0.250.013 3.20 85% 2.61 0.88 2.92 0.56899.72899.51 894.51 894.30 3.77 3.77RD3 11365.83HDPE - - 0.90 0.010.01 - 0.015.005.00 - - 6.12 6.12 - 0.054 1.500.012 0.25 20% 2.89 0.10 2.24 0.38901.67899.51 895.29 894.30 5.94 4.77113 12126.45RCP 0.59 0.09 - -0.05 0.05 1.215.007.47 - - 6.12 5.67 0.31 6.8718 0.500.013 7.43 93% 4.20 1.14 4.77 0.10899.51899.96 894.20 894.07 3.60 4.18121 EX 20621.25RCP - - - -- - 1.215.005.10 - - 6.12 6.10 - 7.3918 0.550.013 7.79 95% 4.41 1.17 5.02 0.08899.96- 894.07 893.95 4.18 -ELEV.ELEV.FULL FLOW VELOCITY10/10/19(in/hr)CHEN'S METHODDesign Storm:TO STR.DIRECT TO CASTINGPIPE MATERIALDesign ParametersIntensity Calculation Method:cAInvert Calculation Method:FLOW(in/hr)STR.PROPOSED STORM SEWER SYSTEM STORM SEWER DESIGN TABLE - RATIONAL METHODJob InformationCity of Carmel2018.01057COVERLENGTHDrop Amount:INVERTRIMENTITY DATAiPIPE DIAMETERPIPE SLOPE FULL PIPE CAPACITYTRAVEL TIMEDIRECT TO INLETiFLOW DEPTHFLOW VELOCITYCAPACITY UTILIZATIONMANNING'S N Description:Intuitive Health - Michigan RoadEntity:City of CarmelJob #:2018.01057Date:10/10/1910-yr10-yrPond Discharge 4.39Entity DataTailwaterStructure Coefficient(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft)(min)(in/hr)(cfs)(in.)%(sq. ft)(ft.)(ft.)(ft.)(ft)(ft/s)(ft)(ft)(ft/s)(ft.)(ft.)(ft.)(ft.)(ft/s)(ft)(ft)(ft)(ft.)(ft.)(ft.)101 100 895.54 896.54 - 896.63 5.00 6.12 0.53 12 0.35 0.236 1.246 0.189 0.341 0.301 2.23 50 0.013 0.175 - 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 1.25 2.39 - 0.097 0.272 896.91 899.40 896.71102 101 895.25 896.25 - 896.44 5.31 6.06 0.68 12 0.35 0.284 1.351 0.211 0.391 0.344 2.39 54 0.013 0.187 2.23 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 0.50 3.29 - 0.006 0.192 896.63 898.80 896.44103 102 894.73 895.73 - 895.98 5.65 6.00 1.41 12 0.50 0.426 1.638 0.260 0.534 0.502 3.29 84 0.013 0.420 2.39 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 0.50 2.92 - 0.040 0.459 896.44 898.76 896.15104 103 894.45 895.95 - 895.79 6.08 5.92 3.55 18 0.20 1.215 2.812 0.432 0.974 0.719 2.92 88 0.013 0.174 3.29 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 0.50 3.00 - 0.018 0.192 895.98 898.61 896.13113 104 894.30 895.80 - 895.73 5.55 6.02 4.11 18 0.20 1.372 3.056 0.449 1.087 0.777 3.00 26 0.013 0.052 2.92 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 0.50 4.77 - 0.003 0.055 895.79 898.88 895.85110 109 895.51 896.51 - 896.75 5.00 6.12 0.87 12 0.35 0.340 1.465 0.232 0.447 0.390 2.55 145 0.013 0.504 - 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 1.25 3.01 - 0.127 0.631 897.38 899.11 897.02111 110 894.97 895.97 - 896.29 5.90 5.96 1.78 12 0.35 0.591 1.991 0.297 0.704 0.567 3.01 126 0.013 0.438 2.55 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 0.50 3.80 - 0.020 0.458 896.75 899.66 896.41112 111 894.61 895.61 - 895.99 6.68 5.82 2.34 12 0.55 0.616 2.053 0.300 0.732 0.655 3.80 47 0.013 0.259 3.01 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 0.50 2.92 - 0.042 0.301 896.29 898.86 895.87113 112 894.30 895.55 - 895.73 6.92 5.77 2.71 15 0.25 0.927 2.496 0.371 0.883 0.660 2.92 87 0.013 0.212 3.80 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 0.50 4.77 - 0.046 0.258 895.99 899.72 895.76121 113 894.07 895.57 - 895.50 7.47 5.67 6.87 18 0.50 1.440 3.175 0.454 1.139 1.015 4.77 26 0.013 0.132 3.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 0.50 5.02 - 0.107 0.239 895.73 899.51 895.70EX 206 121 893.95 895.45 - 894.97 5.10 6.10 7.39 18 0.55 1.473 3.237 0.455 1.165 1.053 5.02 21 0.013 0.116 4.77 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 1.00 0.50 - 0.391 0.019 0.525 895.50 899.96 895.57U.S. STR. CROWN"D" LOSSOUTLET STRUCTURE COEFFICIENTUPSTREAM STRUCTURE COEFFICIENTEFFLUENT PIPE VELOCITYOUTLET STRUCTURE LOSSUPSTREAM STRUCTURE LOSSU.S. STR. TOR"A" LOSS "B" LOSS "C" LOSSTOTAL LOSSU.S. HGL ELEV.UPSTREAM MAXIMUM INFLUENT VELOCITYFLOW DIAMETER SLOPE AREAWETTED PERIMETERHYDRAULIC RADIUSFLOW DEPTH VELOCITY LENGTH MANNING'S NFRICTION LOSSD.S. STR. U.S. STR.D.S. INV. ELEV.D.S. CROWN ELEV.CRITICAL DEPTH(dc+D)/2 ELEV.STARTING ELEV. Tc ENTITY DATAIntensity Calculation Method:Starting Elevation:Calculation Method:INTENSITYPROPOSED STORM SEWER SYSTEM HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CALCULATIONSJob InformationDesign ParametersDesign Storm: Job Information Description: Reviewing Entity:City of Carmel Job #:2018.01057 Date:10/10/19 10-yr 50% Entity Data SPECIFIED SPECIFIED PIPE STRUCTURE CASTING CASTING CASTING ENTITY DATA CASTING ORIFICE FLOW WEIR FLOW PONDING DEPTH STR. STRUCTURE CASTING COVER DEPTH c A Tc i FLOW DEPTH DEPTH NO. TYPE TYPE (ft) (ft) (acres) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) 100 TYPE ''A'' INLET R-3010 2.52 3.69 0.56 0.15 5.00 6.12 0.53 0.05 0.19 0.19 101 TYPE ''A'' INLET R-3010 2.20 3.36 0.60 0.04 5.00 6.12 0.16 0.00 0.09 0.09 102 TYPE ''A'' INLET R-3010 2.44 3.61 0.74 0.16 5.00 6.12 0.75 0.10 0.23 0.23 103 TYPE ''C'' MANHOLE R-3010 2.28 3.98 0.71 0.16 5.00 6.12 0.70 0.09 0.23 0.23 104 TYPE ''C'' MANHOLE R-3010 2.82 4.53 0.55 0.15 5.00 6.12 0.51 0.05 0.19 0.19 109 TYPE ''A'' INLET R-4342 1.92 3.09 0.48 0.30 5.00 6.12 0.87 0.03 0.22 0.22 110 TYPE ''A'' INLET R-3010 3.08 4.25 0.53 0.30 5.00 6.12 0.96 0.16 0.27 0.27 111 TYPE ''A'' INLET R-3010 2.82 3.99 0.45 0.23 5.00 6.12 0.64 0.07 0.21 0.21 112 TYPE ''C'' MANHOLE R-3010 3.77 5.21 0.58 0.12 5.00 6.12 0.41 0.03 0.16 0.16 113 TYPE ''C'' MANHOLE R-3010 3.60 5.31 0.59 0.09 5.00 6.12 0.31 0.02 0.14 0.14 Design Parameters Design Storm: PROPOSED STORM SEWER SYSTEM ORIFICE FLOW CASTING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Clogging (%): Intuitive Health - Michigan Road Intensity Calculation Method: Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Thursday, Jul 25 2019 STR 100 Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 1.00, 42.74 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 899.86 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.011 Calculations Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 50 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.10 Q (cfs) = 0.563 Area (sqft) = 0.22 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.57 Wetted Perim (ft) = 4.42 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.14 Top Width (ft) = 4.37 EGL (ft) = 0.20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 899.00 -0.86 899.50 -0.36 900.00 0.14 900.50 0.64 901.00 1.14 Reach (ft) 899.96 >0.51 CFS Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, Jun 18 2019 STR 101 Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 26.00, 100.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 899.99 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.011 Calculations Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 50 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.10 Q (cfs) = 1.632 Area (sqft) = 0.63 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.59 Wetted Perim (ft) = 12.60 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.14 Top Width (ft) = 12.60 EGL (ft) = 0.20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 899.00 -0.99 899.50 -0.49 900.00 0.01 900.50 0.51 901.00 1.01 Reach (ft) >1.39 CFS 900.09 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, Jun 18 2019 STR 104 Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 1.00, 256.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 899.60 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.011 Calculations Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 50 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.07 Q (cfs) = 1.284 Area (sqft) = 0.63 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.04 Wetted Perim (ft) = 18.02 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.10 Top Width (ft) = 17.99 EGL (ft) = 0.13 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 899.00 -0.60 899.50 -0.10 900.00 0.40 900.50 0.90 901.00 1.40 Reach (ft) >1.16 CFS 899.67 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, Jun 18 2019 STR 109 Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 100.00, 100.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 900.30 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.011 Calculations Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 50 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.07 Q (cfs) = 1.000 Area (sqft) = 0.49 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.04 Wetted Perim (ft) = 14.00 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.10 Top Width (ft) = 14.00 EGL (ft) = 0.13 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 900.00 -0.30 900.25 -0.05 900.50 0.20 900.75 0.45 901.00 0.70 Reach (ft) >0.88 CFS 900.36 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, Jun 18 2019 STR 110 Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 86.21, 1.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 900.10 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.011 Calculations Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 50 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.10 Q (cfs) = 1.126 Area (sqft) = 0.44 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.58 Wetted Perim (ft) = 8.76 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.14 Top Width (ft) = 8.72 EGL (ft) = 0.20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 899.75 -0.35 900.00 -0.10 900.25 0.15 900.50 0.40 900.75 0.65 901.00 0.90 Reach (ft) >0.97 CFS 900.20 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, Jun 18 2019 STR 111 Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 1.00, 100.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 899.75 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.011 Calculations Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 50 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.12 Q (cfs) = 2.121 Area (sqft) = 0.73 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.92 Wetted Perim (ft) = 12.17 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.17 Top Width (ft) = 12.12 EGL (ft) = 0.25 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 899.00 -0.75 899.50 -0.25 900.00 0.25 900.50 0.75 901.00 1.25 Reach (ft) >2.09 CFS 899.87 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Thursday, Jul 25 2019 STR 112 Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 1.00, 357.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Invert Elev (ft) = 900.22 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.011 Calculations Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 50 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.05 Q (cfs) = 0.729 Area (sqft) = 0.45 Velocity (ft/s) = 1.63 Wetted Perim (ft) = 17.92 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.07 Top Width (ft) = 17.90 EGL (ft) = 0.09 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 899.75 -0.47 900.00 -0.22 900.25 0.03 900.50 0.28 900.75 0.53 901.00 0.78 Reach (ft) >0.43 CFS 900.27 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Thursday, Jul 25 2019 STR 113 Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 66.67, 1.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.20 Invert Elev (ft) = 899.83 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.011 Calculations Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 20 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.07 Q (cfs) = 0.337 Area (sqft) = 0.17 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.03 Wetted Perim (ft) = 4.77 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.10 Top Width (ft) = 4.74 EGL (ft) = 0.13 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 899.00 -0.83 899.50 -0.33 900.00 0.17 900.50 0.67 901.00 1.17 Reach (ft) >0.32 CFS 899.90 2018.01057 AP PENDIX E Proposed Water Quality Calculations Water Quality Treatment Area CNwq Calculation Water Quality Treatment Rate Calculation SAN FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM EEEE PLOT DATE: 6/17/2019 6:01 PMPLOT SCALE: 1:1EDIT DATE: 6/17/2019EDITED BY: CPATTERSONDRAWING FILE: P:\2018\01057\D. Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\Drainage\2018.01057.CE.3D_Design_2K16.2019-06-17.dwgProject Number CERTIFIED BY ISSUANCE INDEX DATE: PROJECT PHASE: REVISION SCHEDULE NO.DESCRIPTION DATE 6/17/2019 ---- 2018.01057 7260 Shadeland Station | Indianapolis, Indiana 46256 TEL 317.547.5580 | FAX 317.543.0270 www.structurepoint.com EX4 DEVELOPED WATER QUALITY TREATMENT MAP SCALE: 1" = 40' Description:Intuitive Health - Michigan Road Reviewing Entity: Job #: Date:06/17/19 CNwq= PARAMETERS P =1 (in.) Pervious Area 0.81 Impervious Area 1.18 Area 1.99 I = 59% (%) Rv = 0.58366834 Qa=0.58 (in.) CALCULATED CNwq CNwq =95 1000 [10+5P+10Qa-10(Qa2+1.25Qa(P))1/2] PROPOSED STORMWATER SYSTEM WATER QUALITY CURVE NUMBER Job Information City of Carmel 2018.01057 Type II 24-hr WQ Rainfall=1.00"2018.01057.CE.HydroCAD.2018-06-17 Printed 6/17/2019Prepared by American Structurepoint Page 1HydroCAD® 10.00-22 s/n 00818 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 9S: WQ Runoff = 1.89 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.093 af, Depth= 0.56" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type II 24-hr WQ Rainfall=1.00" Area (ac) CN Description * 1.990 95 1.990 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.4 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 9S: WQ Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420Flow (cfs)2 1 0 Type II 24-hr WQ Rainfall=1.00" Runoff Area=1.990 ac Runoff Volume=0.093 af Runoff Depth=0.56" Tc=7.4 min CN=95 1.89 cfs 2018.01057 APPENDIX F Supplemental Drainage Report for Nottingham, LLC Outlots dated March 21, 2019 by Weihe Engineers 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 SUPPLEMENTAL DRAINAGE REPORT For: NOTTINGHAM, LLC OUTLOTS Address: 10650 N. Michigan Road, Zionsville, IN Hamilton County Project #W170533 Prepared For: Mr. John Pearson III Nottingham, LLC 10650 N. Michigan Road Zionsville, IN 46077 Phone: 317.873.3333 Ext. 135 Prepared By: Russell Webster, EIT Checked By: Mark Thorpe, RLA Certified By: Steven Scott Rucker, PE Date: August 14, 2018 Revised: March 13, 2019 March 21, 2019 PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION The following report and accompanying computations have been developed by me or under my direct supervision. Prepared For: Stormwater Technical Report Nottingham Outlots Carmel, IN Project #W170533 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Project Narrative • Proposed Conditions • Water Quality • Location Maps 2. Pipe Sizing Calculations • Basin Map • Supporting Calculations • Pipe sizing 3. Water Quality • AS-6 design and details 4. Appendix Nottingham, LLC Supplemental Report Weihe Engineers, INC. 3/13/2019 Report Prepared For: Nottingham, LLC Outlots Project #w170533 Project Narrative: Bank of America has engaged to lease some land from Nottingham, LLC. As such, Nottingham, LLC has asked Weihe Engineers to prepare a plan for the proposed access road and associated utility connections for this project. This area was part of the Pearson Ford Master Plan which was permitted in 2007, and it has been confirmed that the existing detention facility shall be sufficient for detention. Therefore, the purpose of this report is to demonstrate the design for new storm sewer for the proposed site, and to satisfy the requirements and wishes of the City of Carmel and Hamilton County. It shall be noted that since the site is on the western border of Carmel where Carmel meets Zionsville, that the existing pond is in Boone County. Site Location: Part of SW/4, Section 6, Township 17 North, Range 7 East, Clay Township, Hamilton County, Indiana Floodzone: Our site is in Flood Zone X according to the National Flood Insurance Program, on Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 18057C0205G, Panel 205 of 300, dated November 19, 2014. Zone X indicates areas of 0.2% annual chance flood; areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1% annual chance flood. Stormwater Design: As stated above, no detention is proposed for this project due to the sites’ inclusion in the master plan. Refer to Section 3 for the required curve number and time-of-concentration calculations. Currently there is a run of HDPE storm sewer that strings between the two parcels being developed. Section 2 of this report will detail the design of the proposed storm sewer based on a 10-year storm event. Refer to Section 2 for the storm sewer design. The proposed storm sewer will only serve the 2 lots proposed at this time. Any development on the west side will require its own outlet to the existing pond. Water Quality: Water quality will be handled for this site by a single AS-6 inline water quality unit, in addition to the existing constructed wetlands which serves as a wet pond for this site. This constructed wetland was evaluated during the course of the Pearson Ford Parking Expansion project, Docket Number 18010007 DP Amend/ADLS Amend. This was done as a condition of that approval, and Mr. Pearson had maintenance activities performed on the constructed wetland. Refer to Section 3 of this report for the water quality design. LOCATION MAP – NO SCALE DENOTES PROJECT LOCATION United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Boone County, Indiana, and Hamilton County, Indiana Natural Resources Conservation Service July 9, 2018 Soil 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. 5 6 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 442144044215004421560442162044216804421740442180044218604421920442144044215004421560442162044216804421740442180044218604421920564830 564890 564950 565010 565070 565130 565190 564830 564890 564950 565010 565070 565130 565190 39° 56' 41'' N 86° 14' 28'' W39° 56' 41'' N86° 14' 12'' W39° 56' 25'' N 86° 14' 28'' W39° 56' 25'' N 86° 14' 12'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 16N WGS84 0 100 200 400 600 Feet 0 35 70 140 210 Meters Map Scale: 1:2,420 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") 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 scales ranging from 1:12,000 to 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: Boone County, Indiana Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 21, 2017 Soil Survey Area: Hamilton County, Indiana Survey Area Data: Version 18, Oct 2, 2017 Your area of interest (AOI) includes more than one soil survey area. These survey areas may have been mapped at different scales, with a different land use in mind, at different times, or at different levels of detail. This may result in map unit symbols, soil properties, and interpretations that do not completely agree across soil survey area boundaries. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION 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 8 Project:Nottingham Outlots Date:February 27, 2019 Job No:w170533 Checked By:SSR Prepared By:RLW BASIN: 105 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 4500 0.10 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 1500 0.03 0.25 6000 0.14 0.70 BASIN: 106 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 4500 0.10 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 1500 0.03 0.25 6000 0.14 0.70 BASIN: 103 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 50000 1.15 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 9860 0.23 0.25 59860 1.37 0.75 BASIN: 204 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 2041 0.05 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 700 0.02 0.25 2741 0.06 0.70 BASIN: 205 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 2470 0.06 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 850 0.02 0.25 3320 0.08 0.70 BASIN: 206 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 75586 1.74 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 10700 0.25 0.25 86286 1.98 0.78 Cover type 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= 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= BASIN: 207 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 4535 0.10 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 1450 0.03 0.25 5985 0.14 0.70 BASIN: 208 Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C 4304 0.10 0.85 0 0.00 0.90 1400 0.03 0.25 5704 0.13 0.70 Cover type Impervious, Pavement Impervious, Roof Pervious, Grass TOTAL= Cover type Impervious, Pavement Impervious, Roof Pervious, Grass TOTAL= Project:Nottingham Outlots Date:February 26, 2019 Job No:w170533 Checked By:SSR Prepared By:RLW BASIN: PR-1 Soil Group Cover type CN Area (SF) Area (Ac.) C Grass 82 49780 1.14 Impervious 98 126638 2.91 93 176418 4.05TOTAL= Post Developed Runoff Calculations Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® Plan 1 2 Project File: w170533 storm 03.19.2019.stm Number of lines: 17 103 Date: 3/19/2019 Storm Sewers v10.50 Storm Sewer Inventory Report Page 1 Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data Line ID No. Dnstr Line Defl June Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-Loss Inlet/ Line Length angle Type Q Area Coeff Time EI Dn Slope El Up Size Shape Value Coeff Rim El No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) (%) (ft) (in) (n) (K) (ft) 1 End 86.403 -0.725 MH 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 889.15 0.39 889.49 30 Cir 0.013 1.00 898.00 29 2 1 11.993 -88.878 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 889.59 0.42 889.64 24 Cir 0.013 1.00 897.80 99 3 2 105.522 90.094 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 889.74 0.43 890.19 24 Cir 0.013 0.38 897.60 100 4 3 232.331 -19.157 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 890.29 0.41 891.25 24 Cir 0.013 0.97 895.50 101 5 4 53.421 -74.073 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 891.35 0.51 891.62 24 Cir 0.013 0.97 897.55 102 6 5 50.012 -31.219 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 891.82 0.50 892.07 24 Cir 0.013 0.98 897.14 104 7 6 147.735 -9.763 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 892.17 0.50 892.91 24 Cir 0.013 1.00 900.14 201 8 7 99.507 23.664 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 893.90 0.50 894.40 12 Cir 0.013 1.00 899.44 202 9 8 94.185 11.962 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 894.50 0.59 895.06 12 Cir 0.013 0.97 900.24 203 10 9 4.750 74.490 MH 0.00 0.07 0.70 5.0 895.16 1.05 895.21 12 Cir 0.013 0.15 899.64 204 11 10 30.000 0.000 MH 0.00 0.07 0.70 5.0 895.31 1.00 895.61 12 Cir 0.013 1.00 899.64 205 12 8 4.589 96.009 MH 0.00 0.14 0.70 5.0 894.71 1.09 894.76 12 Cir 0.013 0.24 898.83 207 13 12 30.000 11.310 MH 0.00 0.14 0.70 5.0 894.86 1.13 895.20 12 Cir 0.013 1.00 898.83 208 14 7 54.946 89.261 MH 0.00 1.98 0.78 15.0 893.65 0.36 893.85 21 Cir 0.013 1.00 900.24 206 15 6 5.500 78.864 MH 0.00 0.14 0.70 5.0 893.00 1.09 893.06 12 Cir 0.013 0.15 896.52 105 16 15 30.000 0.002 MH 0.00 0.15 0.70 5.0 893.16 1.00 893.46 12 Cir 0.013 1.00 896.52 106 17 5 41.841 74.073 MH 0.00 1.37 0.75 10.0 891.72 0.50 891.93 24 Cir 0.013 1.00 897.58 103 Project File: w170533 storm 03.19.2019.stm Number of lines: 17 Date: 3/19/2019 Storm Sewers v10.50 DETERMINATION OF KNOWN Q AT LINE 1: 2007 DESIGNED FLOW AT LINE 1 16.77 CFS. REMOVED 8 CFS, RESULTING IN APPX. 8.77 OR 9 CFS TO BE CONSERVATIVE. THEN ADDED PROPOSED FLOW RATE FROM PROPOSED STORM SEWER, AS DISCUSSED WITH WILLIE HALL AND BOB BLEICH MARCH 19, 2019. Storm Sewer Summary Report Page 1 Line Line ID Flow Line Line Line Invert Invert Line HGL HGL Minor HGL Dns Junction No. rate Size shape length ELDn EL Up Slope Down Up loss Junct Line Type (cfs) (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) No. 1 29 21.96 30 Cir 86.403 889.15 889.49 0.393 890.74 891.31 0.51 891.82 End Manhole 2 99 12.98 24 Cir 11.993 889.59 889.64 0.417 891.82* 891.86* 0.27 892.13 1 Manhole 3 100 13.11 24 Cir 105.522 889.74 890.19 0.426 892.13* 892.48* 0.10 892.58 2 Manhole 4 101 13.41 24 Cir 232.331 890.29 891.25 0.413 892.58* 893.40* 0.27 893.68 3 Manhole 5 102 13.48 24 Cir 53.421 891.35 891.62 0.505 893.68* 893.87* 0.28 894.14 4 Manhole 6 104 9.03 24 Cir 50.012 891.82 892.07 0.500 894.14* 894.22* 0.13 894.35 5 Manhole 7 201 8.32 24 Cir 147.735 892.17 892.91 0.501 894.35 894.52 0.15 894.66 6 Manhole 8 202 1.74 12 Cir 99.507 893.90 894.40 0.502 894.66 894.99 0.20 895.19 7 Manhole 9 203 0.59 12 Cir 94.185 894.50 895.06 0.595 895.19 895.38 n/a 895.38j 8 Manhole 10 204 0.60 12 Cir 4.750 895.16 895.21 1.054 895.43 895.53 n/a 895.53 9 Manhole 11 205 0.30 12 Cir 30.000 895.31 895.61 1.000 895.53 895.84 n/a 895.84 10 Manhole 12 207 1.19 12 Cir 4.589 894.71 894.76 1.089 895.19 895.22 n/a 895.22j 8 Manhole 13 208 0.60 12 Cir 30.000 894.86 895.20 1.133 895.22 895.52 n/a 895.52j 12 Manhole 14 206 7.03 21 Cir 54.946 893.65 893.85 0.364 894.77 894.97 0.29 895.26 7 Manhole 15 105 1.22 12 Cir 5.500 893.00 893.06 1.091 894.35* 894.36* 0.01 894.36 6 Manhole 16 106 0.64 12 Cir 30.000 893.16 893.46 1.000 894.36 894.37 0.01 894.38 15 Manhole 17 103 5.37 24 Cir 41.841 891.72 891.93 0.502 894.14* 894.17* 0.05 894.21 5 Manhole Project File: w170533 sto rm 03.19.2019.stm Number of lines: 17 I Run Date: 3/19/2019 NOTES: Return perio d= 10 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; j -Line co ntains hyd. jump. Storm Sewers v10.50 Storm Sewer Tabulation Page 1 Station Len Drng Area Rnoff Area x C Tc Rain Total Cap �el Pipe Invert Elev HGL Elev Grnd / Rim Elev Line ID coeff (I) flow full Line To Iner Total Iner Total Inlet Syst Size Slope Dn Up Dn Up Dn Up Line (ft) (ac) (ac) (C) (min) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/s) (in) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 End 86.403 0.00 4.06 0.00 0.00 3.07 0.0 17.9 4.2 21.96 25.73 6.20 30 0.39 889.15 889.49 890.74 891.31 0.00 898.00 29 2 1 11.993 0.00 4.06 0.00 0.00 3.07 0.0 17.9 4.2 12.98 14.60 4.13 24 0.42 889.59 889.64 891.82 891.86 898.00 897.80 99 3 2 105.522 0.00 4.06 0.00 0.00 3.07 0.0 17.5 4.3 13.11 14.77 4.17 24 0.43 889.74 890.19 892.13 892.48 897.80 897.60 100 4 3 232.331 0.00 4.06 0.00 0.00 3.07 0.0 16.6 4.4 13.41 14.54 4.27 24 0.41 890.29 891.25 892.58 893.40 897.60 895.50 101 5 4 53.421 0.00 4.06 0.00 0.00 3.07 0.0 16.4 4.4 13.48 16.08 4.29 24 0.51 891.35 891.62 893.68 893.87 895.50 897.55 102 6 5 50.012 0.00 2.69 0.00 0.00 2.04 0.0 16.1 4.4 9.03 15.99 2.88 24 0.50 891.82 892.07 894.14 894.22 897.55 897.14 104 7 6 147.735 0.00 2.40 0.00 0.00 1.84 0.0 15.2 4.5 8.32 16.01 2.86 24 0.50 892.17 892.91 894.35 894.52 897.14 900.14 201 8 7 99.507 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.0 6.1 5.9 1.74 2.52 3.16 12 0.50 893.90 894.40 894.66 894.99 900.14 899.44 202 9 8 94.185 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.0 5.2 6.1 0.59 2.75 1.88 12 0.59 894.50 895.06 895.19 895.38 899.44 900.24 203 10 9 4.750 0.07 0.14 0.70 0.05 0.10 5.0 5.2 6.1 0.60 3.66 3.08 12 1.05 895.16 895.21 895.43 895.53 900.24 899.64 204 11 10 30.000 0.07 0.07 0.70 0.05 0.05 5.0 5.0 6.1 0.30 3.56 2.30 12 1.00 895.31 895.61 895.53 895.84 899.64 899.64 205 12 8 4.589 0.14 0.28 0.70 0.10 0.20 5.0 5.2 6.1 1.19 3.72 3.28 12 1.09 894.71 894.76 895.19 895.22 899.44 898.83 207 13 12 30.000 0.14 0.14 0.70 0.10 0.10 5.0 5.0 6.1 0.60 3.79 2.55 12 1.13 894.86 895.20 895.22 895.52 898.83 898.83 208 14 7 54.946 1.98 1.98 0.78 1.54 1.54 15.0 15.0 4.5 7.03 9.56 4.34 21 0.36 893.65 893.85 894.77 894.97 900.14 900.24 206 15 6 5.500 0.14 0.29 0.70 0.10 0.20 5.0 5.6 6.0 1.22 3.72 1.55 12 1.09 893.00 893.06 894.35 894.36 897.14 896.52 105 16 15 30.000 0.15 0.15 0.70 0.11 0.11 5.0 5.0 6.1 0.64 3.56 0.84 12 1.00 893.16 893.46 894.36 894.37 896.52 896.52 106 17 5 41.841 1.37 1.37 0.75 1.03 1.03 10.0 10.0 5.2 5.37 16.02 1.71 24 0.50 891.72 891.93 894.14 894.17 897.55 897.58 103 Project File: w170533 storm 03.19.2019.stm Number of lines: 17 Run Date: 3/19/2019 NOTES:lntensity = 337.41 / (Inlet time+ 28.70) A 1.14; Return period =Yrs. 1 O ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Storm Sewers v10.50 Hydraulic Grade Line Computations Page 1 Line Size Q Downstream Len Upstream Check JL Minor coeff loss Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Invert HGL Depth Area Vel Vel EGL Sf Ave Enrgy elev elev head elev elev elev head elev Sf loss (in) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (sqft) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (%) (%) (ft) (K) (ft) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) 1 30 21.96 889.15 890.74 1.59 3.30 6.66 0.69 891.43 0.532 86.403 889.49 891.31 1.82 3.83 5.74 0.51 891.82 0.371 0.451 0.390 1.00 0.51 2 24 12.98 889.59 891.82 2.00 3.14 4.13 0.27 892.09 0.329 11.993 889.64 891.86 2.00 3.14 4.13 0.27 892.13 0.329 0.329 0.039 1.00 0.27 3 24 13.11 889.74 892.13 2.00 3.14 4.17 0.27 892.40 0.336 105.52 D890.19 892.48 2.00 3.14 4.17 0.27 892.75 0.336 0.336 0.355 0.38 0.10 4 24 13.41 890.29 892.58 2.00 3.14 4.27 0.28 892.87 0.352 232.33 891.25 893.40 2.00 3.14 4.27 0.28 893.68 0.352 0.352 0.817 0.97 0.27 5 24 13.48 891.35 893.68 2.00 3.14 4.29 0.29 893.96 0.356 53.421 891.62 893.87 2.00 3.14 4.29 0.29 894.15 0.355 0.355 0.190 0.97 0.28 6 24 9.03 891.82 894.14 2.00 3.14 2.88 0.13 894.27 0.160 50.012 892.07 894.22 2.00 3.14 2.88 0.13 894.35 0.160 0.160 0.080 0.98 0.13 7 24 8.32 892.17 894.35 2.00 3.14 2.65 0.11 894.46 0.135 147.73 D892.91 894.52 1.61 2.70 3.08 0.15 894.66 0.140 0.138 0.204 1.00 0.15 8 12 1.74 893.90 894.66 0.76 0.64 2.70 0.11 894.78 0.274 99.507 894.40 894.99 0.59 0.48 3.62 0.20 895.19 0.562 0.418 0.416 1.00 0.20 9 12 0.59 894.50 895.19 0.69 0.22 1.03 0.12 895.31 0.000 94.185 895.06 895.38 j 0.32** 0.22 2.74 0.12 895.50 0.000 0.000 n/a 0.97 n/a 10 12 0.60 895.16 895.43 0.27* 0.17 3.43 0.12 895.55 0.000 4.750 895.21 895.53 0.32** 0.22 2.74 0.12 895.65 0.000 0.000 n/a 0.15 n/a 11 12 0.30 895.31 895.53 0.22 0.13 2.33 0.08 895.61 0.000 30.000 895.61 895.84 0.23** 0.13 2.26 0.08 895.91 0.000 0.000 n/a 1.00 n/a 12 12 1.19 894.71 895.19 0.48 0.35 3.19 0.18 895.37 0.000 4.589 894.76 895.22j 0.46** 0.35 3.38 0.18 895.40 0.000 0.000 n/a 0.24 0.04 13 12 0.60 894.86 895.22 0.36 0.22 2.36 0.12 895.34 0.000 30.000 895.20 895.52j 0.32** 0.22 2.75 0.12 895.64 0.000 0.000 n/a 1.00 n/a 14 21 7.03 893.65 894.77 1.12* 1.62 4.34 0.29 895.06 0.364 54.946 893.85 894.97 1.12 1.62 4.34 0.29 895.26 0.363 0.363 0.200 1.00 0.29 15 12 1.22 893.00 894.35 1.00 0.79 1.55 0.04 894.39 0.117 5.500 893.06 894.36 1.00 0.79 1.55 0.04 894.39 0.117 0.117 0.006 0.15 0.01 16 12 0.64 893.16 894.36 1.00 0.79 0.82 0.01 894.37 0.033 30.000 893.46 894.37 0.91 0.75 0.86 0.01 894.38 0.028 0.030 0.009 1.00 0.01 17 24 5.37 891.72 894.14 2.00 3.14 1.71 0.05 894.19 0.056 41.841 891.93 894.17 2.00 3.14 1.71 0.05 894.21 0.056 0.056 0.024 1.00 0.05 Project File: w170533 storm 03.19.2019.stm I Number of lines: 17 I Run Date: 3/19/2019 Notes:* depth assumed;** Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump ; c = cir e = ellip b = box Storm Sewers v10.50 USED AS TAILWATER ELEVATION Hydraflow HGL Computation Procedure General Procedure: Hydraflow computes the HGL using the Bernoulli energy equation. Manning's equation is used to determine energy losses due to pipe friction. In a standard step, iterative procedure, Hydraflow assumes upstream HGLs until the energy equation balances. If the energy equation cannot balance, supercritical flow exists and critical depth is temporarily assumed at the upstream end. A supercritical flow Profile is then computed using the same procedure in a downstream direction using momentum principles. Col. 1 The line number being computed. Calculations begin at Line 1 and proceed upstream. Col. 2 The line size. In the case of non-circular pipes, the line rise is printed above the span. Col. 3 Total flow rate in the line. Col. 4 The elevation of the downstream invert. Col. 5 Elevation of the hydraulic grade line at the downstream end. This is computed as the upstream HGL + Minor loss of this line's downstream line. Col. 6 The downstream depth of flow inside the pipe (HGL -Invert elevation) but not greater than the line size. Col. 7 Cross-sectional area of the flow at the downstream end. Col. 8 The velocity of the flow at the downstream end, (Col. 3 / Col. 7). Col. 9 Velocity head (Velocity squared / 2g). Col. 10 The elevation of the energy grade line at the downstream end, HGL + Velocity head, (Col. 5 + Col. 9). Col. 11 The friction slope at the downstream end (the S or Slope term in Manning's equation). Col. 12 The line length. Col. 13 The elevation of the upstream invert. Col. 14 Elevation of the hydraulic grade line at the upstream end. Col. 15 The upstream depth of flow inside the pipe (HGL -Invert elevation) but not greater than the line size. Col. 16 Cross-sectional area of the flow at the upstream end. Col. 17 The velocity of the flow at the upstream end, (Col. 3 / Col. 16). Col. 18 Velocity head (Velocity squared / 2g). Col. 19 The elevation of the energy grade line at the upstream end, HGL + Velocity head, (Col. 14 + Col. 18) . Col. 20 The friction slope at the upstream end (the Sor Slope term in Manning's equation). Col. 21 The average of the downstream and upstream friction slopes. Col. 22 Energy loss. Average Sf/100 x Line Length (Col. 21/100 x Col. 12). Equals (EGL upstream -EGL downstream) +/-tolerance. Col. 23 The junction loss coefficient (K). Col. 24 Minor loss. (Col. 23 x Col. 18). Is added to upstream HGL and used as the starting HGL for the next upstream line(s). Page 1 Project:Nottingham Outlots Date:February 1, 2019 Job No:w170533 Checked By:SSR Prepared By:RLW Street Width (ft) 30.00 Clear Lane (ft) 13.00 Inlet Q (cfs) Transverse Slope (%) Longitudinal Slope (%) Gutter Flow Depth Gutter Spread Clear Lane (single) Clear lane total (ft) 105 0.64 2.08% 2.60% 0.09 4.33 10.67 106 0.64 2.08% 2.60% 0.09 4.33 10.67 204 0.30 2.08% 1.00% 0.08 3.89 11.11 205 0.30 2.08% 1.00% 0.08 3.89 11.11 207 0.60 2.08% 1.00% 0.11 5.05 9.95 208 0.60 2.08% 1.00% 0.11 5.05 9.95 19.90 Gutter Spread Calculations Gutter Flow Depth Calc = (1.79*Q*n*St/Sl^0.5)^3/8 21.35 22.21 SANSANEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEGGG G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W T(U) T(U) T(U) T(U) T(U) T(U) T(U) T(U) T(U) T(U) T(U) T(U) T(U)WFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFM1.38 ACRES1.99 ACRES3.41 ACRESEEEEEEEEEDO NOT INSTALL SIDEWALK BEYOND THIS POINTUNTIL PIPE RUN TO THE NORTH IS INSTALLED.GENERAL GRADING NOTES1. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLANAND DETAILS FOR CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULING AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURESTO BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO EARTHMOVING ACTIVITIES.2. REFER TO THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (INDOT) STANDARDSPECIFICATIONS, LATEST EDITION, FOR BASIC MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTIONMETHODS. THE SECTIONS BELOW FOR VARIOUS ITEMS ARE TO CLARIFY THE INTENTOF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT. PLEASE NOTE THAT OTHER SECTIONSOF THE INDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS MAY ALSO BE APPLICABLE.3. TOPSOIL SHALL BE STRIPPED FROM ALL AREAS TO RECEIVE PAVING AND FROMWITHIN THE LIMITS OF PROPOSED BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES. TOPSOIL SHALL BESTRIPPED TO THE DEPTH AS NOTED IN THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT.4. AFTER STRIPPING TOPSOIL, PROOFROLL AREAS TO BE FILLED WITH A MEDIUMWEIGHT ROLLER TO DETERMINE LOCATIONS OF ANY POCKETS OF UNSUITABLEMATERIAL. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DRYING, AMENDING AND/OR REMOVAL OF ANYUNSUITABLE MATERIAL WITHIN THE PROPOSED PAVED AND/OR BUILDING AREASWILL BE DETERMINED AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION BY THE OWNER'SGEOTECHNICAL TESTING REPRESENTATIVE.5. TOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED IN MOUNDING AREAS, NONSTRUCTURAL FILL AND/ORPLANTING AREAS TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6". EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE REMOVEDFROM THE SITE.6. WHEN PERFORMING GRADING OPERATIONS DURING PERIODS OF WET WEATHER,PROVIDE ADEQUATE DEWATERING, DRAINAGE AND GROUND WATER MANAGEMENTTO CONTROL MOISTURE OF SOILS. REFER TO GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND/ORCONSULT WITH OWNER'S GEOTECHNICAL TESTING REPRESENTATIVE FORRECOMMENDATIONS.7. FILL MATERIAL SHALL CONSIST OF EARTH OBTAINED FROM CUT AREAS, BORROWPITS OR OTHER APPROVED SOURCES. EARTH SHALL BE FREE FROM ORGANICMATTER AND OTHER DELETERIOUS SUBSTANCES AND LARGE ROCKS. THE FILLMATERIAL SHALL BE PLACED IN LAYERS NOT TO EXCEED SIX INCHES FOLLOWINGCOMPACTION, PROPER MOISTURE CONTENT OF FILL MATERIAL WILL BE SUCH TOACHIEVE SPECIFIED COMPACTION DENSITY. ALL FILL BENEATH PAVED AREAS,FLOOR SLABS AND FUTURE BUILDINGS SHALL BE COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 95% OFTHE MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY PER ASTM D-1557. FIELD COMPACTING TEST SHALL BERUN ON EACH LIFT, IN FILL SECTIONS, AND THE REQUIRED COMPACTION ON EACHLIFT SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH INDOT SECTION 211.8. MAXIMUM LAWN SLOPE IS 3:1.9. THE PLANS SHOW THE LOCATION OF ALL KNOWN UTILITIES LOCATED WITHIN THELIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION ACCORDING TO INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THEVARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES, PREVIOUS CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND AS EVIDENCEDBY OBSERVATION OF ABOVE GROUND CONDITIONS BY THE SURVEYOR. THEACCURACY OF THIS INFORMATION IS NOT GUARANTEED.10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL UTILITY COMPANIES TO LOCATE MAINS,CONDUITS, SERVICE LINES, ETC. WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS. THE LOCATIONAND PROTECTION OF UTILITY STRUCTURES, THEIR SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCEDURING CONSTRUCTION (IN COOPERATION WITH APPLICABLE UTILITY COMPANY) ISTHE EXPRESSED RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.11. ALL SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED GRADE.12. COMPACTED "B" BORROW BACK FILL REQ'D. OVER ALL UTILITIES IN PAVED AREAS.13. ALL GRADES AT BOUNDARY SHALL MEET EXISTING. CONTRACTOR SHALL ADJUSTAND/OR CUT EXISTING PAVEMENT AS NECESSARY TO ASSURE A SMOOTH FIT ANDCONTINUOUS GRADE. BUTT JOINTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT TRANSITIONAL AREASBETWEEN PROPOSED AND EXISTING PAVEMENT.14. ANY PART OF SANITARY OR STORM SEWER TRENCHES RUNNING UNDER OR WITHIN5' OF PAVEMENT TO BE BACKFILLED WITH GRANULAR MATERIAL.15. ALL CONSTRUCTION ON THIS SITE TO BE PERFORMED IN COMPLIANCE WITH O.S.H.A.STANDARDS FOR WORKER SAFETY.16. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFIRM ALL EARTHWORK QUANTITIES PRIOR TO THESTART OF CONSTRUCTION. IF AN EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF EARTH ISENCOUNTERED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFIRM WITH THE OWNER ANDENGINEER THE REQUIREMENTS FOR STOCKPILING, REMOVAL OR IMPORTING OFEARTH.17. PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE WITHOUT PONDING IN ALL AREAS AFTERINSTALLATION. CONTRACTOR TO TEST FOR AND CORRECT ANY PONDINGCONDITIONS. ANY AREAS THAT HOLD WATER MORE THAN 1/8" DEEP SHALL BE CUTOUT AND CORRECTED TO POSITIVE DRAINAGE AT NO COST TO THE OWNER/DEVELOPER OR ENGINEER.18. ADA ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES, RAMPS, AND ROUTES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCEWITH THE LATEST ADA STANDARDS FOR ACCESSIBLE DESIGN.19. VERTICAL CURVES, WITH A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 50', SHALL BE USED WHEREPOSSIBLE BETWEEN VERTICAL CHANGES IN DIRECTION (SLOPE) TO ALLOW FORPOSITIVE DRAINAGE AND SMOOTH TRANSITIONS.20. CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL CONCRETE CRADLES WHEN THE VERTICAL SEPARATION(AS MEASURED FROM THE EXTERIOR OF THE PIPES) BETWEEN SANITARY SEWERFACILITIES, WATER MAIN, AND STORM SEWERS IS 18" OR LESS.21. ALL DISTURBED AREA SHALL BE STABILIZED IN ACCORDANCE TO THE STORM WATERPOLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN.GENERAL NOTESTHE SITE DOES NOT LIE IN A SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA ASESTABLISHED BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENTAGENCY - NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM, WHENPLOTTED BY SCALE ON FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP#18057C0205G, DATED NOVEMBER 19, 2014.24" OUTLETDISCHARGE SUMMARYPEAK DISCHARGE (CFS)RETURN PERIOD10 YR.100 YR.N/A14.71ALLOWABLEACTUAL W/OFFSITEN/AN/ANET SITE ACREAGE (MINUS ROW)OFF-SITE ACREAGE3.65 ACRES0 ACRESC300w170533-C300 gradELECTRICAL RISERGUY ANCHORORNAMENTAL LIGHTGENERATORSTREET LIGHTELECTRIC MANHOLEELECTRIC OUTLETUTILITY POLETRANSFORMERCOMMUNICATIONS JUNCTION BOXCOMMUNICATIONS MANHOLECOMMUNICATIONS PEDESTALFENCEGUARD RAILBOUNDARY LINECISTERNDRINKING FOUNTAINFIRE DEPT HOOKUPFIRE HYDRANTWATER MANHOLESPRINKLERSPIGOTWELL HEADWATER METERWATER VALVEGAS METERGAS VALVEELECTRIC METERTRAFFIC SIGNAL POLETRAFFIC SIGNALDOWN SPOUTCOMMUNICATIONS RISERSTORM CLEANOUTBEEHIVE INLETCURB INLETFLOOR DRAINROUND INLETSQUARE INLETSTORM MANHOLESANITARY SEWER CLEANOUTLIFT STATIONSANITARY SEWER MANHOLESANITARY STUB MARKERROW RIGHT OF WAYESMT EASEMENTD.&U.E. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTFFE FINISH FLOOR ELEVATIONTOC TOP OF CASTINGTC TOP OF CURBGUT GUTTERCMP CORRUGATED METAL PIPERCP REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPEPVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PIPEVCP VITRIFIED CLAY PIPEHDPE HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PIPEDIP DUCTILE IRON PIPESSD SUB SURFACE DRAIN PIPESTM STORMSAN SANITARYSTR STRUCTURECO CLEANOUTGRADING PLAN LEGENDUTILITIESABBREVIATIONSOTHERLINE TYPESEXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONCURB & GUTTER ELEVATIONPAVEMENT SPOT ELEVATIONGROUND SPOT ELEVATIONFLOW LINEINDEX CONTOURFORCE MAINGGGWWE(A)E(A)EEECCCC(A)C(A)OHUOHUFMFMFO(A)FO(A)FOFOEMERGENCY FLOOD ROUTESANSANROOF DRAINSTMSTMCARMEL REQUIREMENTS1. NO EARTH DISTURBING ACTIVITY MAY TAKE PLACEWITHOUT AN APPROVED STORM WATER MANAGEMENTPERMIT.2. DECORATIVE SIGNS, SPRINKLER SYSTEMS, TREES,LANDSCAPING MOUNDS, FENCES, LIGHT POLES OR OTHERSUCH AMENITIES ARE NOT PERMITTED WITHIN THERIGHT-0F-WAY.3. M.F.P.G. = MINIMUM FLOOD PROTECTION GRADE M.F.P.G.OF ALL STRUCTURES FRONTING A POND OR OPEN DITCHSHALL BE NO LESS THAN 2 FEET ABOVE ANY ADJACENT100-YEAR LOCAL OR REGIONAL FLOOD ELEVATIONS, OR 12INCHES ABOVE THE ADJACENT ROADWAY, WHICHEVER ISGREATER, FOR ALL WINDOWS, DOORS, PIPE ENTRANCES,WINDOW WELLS, AND ANY OTHER STRUCTURE MEMBERWHERE FLOOD WATERS CAN ENTER A BUILDING.4. M.L.A.G. = LOWEST ADJACENT GRADE IS THE ELEVATION OFTHE LOWEST GRADE ADJACENT TO A STRUCTURE WHENTHE SOIL MEETS THE FOUNDATION AROUND THE OUTSIDEOF THE STRUCTURE. (INCLUDING STRUCTURAL MEMBERSSUCH AS BASEMENT WALKOUT, PATIOS, DECKS, PORCHES,SUPPORT POST, OR PIERS, AND RIM OF THE WINDOWWELL.FLOW DIRECTION AND SLOPEGRADING PLANREVISIONS AND ISSUESPart of SW/4, Section 6, Township 17 North, Range 7 East, Clay Township, Hamilton County, IndianaW17.0533PREPARED FOR:10650 N MICHIGAN RD, ZIONSVILLE, IN 46077PROJECT NO.SHEET NO.CHECKED BY:DRAWN BY:RLWDESIGNED BY:DWG NAME:PROJECT NO.:W17.0533DATE BY03.08.2019SSRDATE:RLWKnow what'sRAPPROVAL PENDINGNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONNOTTINGHAM, LLC OUTLOTSSUBMITTED FOR TAC REVIEW10.19.2018 RLWWSNESTEVEN SCOTT RUCKER P.E. 11300279WEIHELandscape ArchitectureADDRESSING TAC COMMENTS03.08.2019 RLWBENCHMARK INFORMATIONSOURCE BENCHMARK:NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY MONUMENT: PID KA2086ABOUT 0.2 EAST ALONG 121ST STREET FROM ITS JUNCTIONWITH SR 421 (AKA MICHIGAN ROAD), AT THE INTERSECTIONWITH DAUGHERTY DRIVE, IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THEINTERSECTION. A STANDARD DISK, STAMPED BOO 54 1989, SETIN THE TOP OF A CONCRETE POST LEVEL WITH THE GROUND.ELEV = 900.76 (NAVD 88)TBM-1:CUT "X" IN SOUTH BONNET NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT, LOCATED188 FEET NORTH OF 106TH STREET AND 27 FEET WEST OF THECENTER OF NOTTINGHAM WAY.ELEV = 897.71 (NAVD 88)TBM - 2:NORTH BONNET NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT, LOCATED 62 FEETWEST OF CENTER OF MICHIGAN ROAD AND 104 FEET NORTH OFCENTERLINE OF NOTTINGHAM WAY.ELEV = 901.01 (NAVD 88). 1 - WQ-1 Watershed Model Schematic Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2020 Project: H:\2017\W170533\Engineering\design\site design\drainage\pond modeling\W170533 WQ.gpwTuesday, 02 / 5 / 2019 Hyd.Origin Description Legend 1 SCS Runoff WQ-1 Hydrograph Return Period Recap Hyd. Hydrograph Inflow Peak Outflow (cfs)Hydrograph No. type hyd(s)Description (origin)1-yr 2-yr 3-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 1 SCS Runoff ------ 2.254 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- WQ-1 Proj. file: H:\2017\W170533\Engineering\design\site design\drainage\pond modeling\W170533 WQ.gpwTuesday, 02 / 5 / 2019 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2020 Hydrograph Summary Report Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Hyd. Inflow Maximum Total Hydrograph No. type flow interval Peak volume hyd(s) elevation strge used Description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft)(ft)(cuft) 1 SCS Runoff 2.254 2 722 6,360 ------ ------------ WQ-1 H:\2017\W170533\Engineering\design\site design\drainage\pond modeling\W170533 WQ.gpwReturn Period: 1 Year Tuesday, 02 / 5 / 2019 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2020 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2020 Tuesday, 02 / 5 / 2019 Hyd. No. 1 WQ-1 Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 2.254 cfs Storm frequency = 1 yrs Time to peak = 12.03 hrs Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 6,360 cuft Drainage area = 3.990 ac Curve number = 93 Basin Slope = 0.0 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = User Time of conc. (Tc) = 15.00 min Total precip. = 1.00 in Distribution = Type II Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) WQ-1 Hyd. No. 1 -- 1 Year Hyd No. 1 City of Indianapolis Stormwater Quality Unit (SQU) Selection Guide Pg. 1 7/12/18 Version 12.2 (Check http://www.indy.gov/eGov/City/DPW/Business/Specs/Pages/UpdatedStormWaterManual.aspx for current Selection Guide) Table 1 Rate Based SQUs Performance Matrix for Manufactured SQUs that remove 80% or more of Test Particles PLEASE NOTE: All SQUs shall be configured as off-line units unless approved for on-line use. On-line units must document the peak 10-year flow (per the Stormwater Design and Construction Specification Manual) is less than the approved maximum10-yr flow rate. Table 1 Manufactured SQU SQU System Model Max Treatment Flow (cfs) Max 10-yr On-Line Flow Rate (cfs) Stormceptor® 2,3 STC 450 0.37 N/A STC 900 0.83 N/A STC1200 0.83 N/A STC 1800 0.83 N/A STC 2400 1.38 N/A STC 3600 1.38 N/A STC 4800 2.30 N/A STC 6000 2.30 N/A STC 7200 3.22 N/A STC 11000 4.59 N/A STC 13000 4.59 N/A STC 16000 6.43 N/A Downstream Defender® 2 4 Foot Diameter 1.3 N/A 6 Foot Diameter 3.58 N/A 8 Foot Diameter 7.35 N/A 10 Foot Diameter 12.85 N/A VortSentry®2,3 VS30 0.28 N/A VS40 0.58 N/A VS50 1.01 N/A VS60 1.60 N/A VS70 2.35 N/A VS80 3.28 N/A Vortechs®2,3 1000 0.49 N/A 2000 1.00 N/A 3000 1.75 N/A City of Indianapolis Stormwater Quality Unit (SQU) Selection Guide Pg. 2 7/12/18 Version 12.2 Manufactured SQU SQU System Model Max Treatment Flow (cfs) Max 10-yr On-Line Flow Rate (cfs) 4000 2.76 N/A 5000 4.05 N/A 7000 5.66 N/A 9000 7.59 N/A 11000 9.88 N/A 16000 15.59 N/A PC1319 or 1319 CIP 19.04 N/A PC1421 or 1421 CIP 22.92 N/A 1522 CIP 27.23 N/A 1624 CIP 32.00 N/A 1726 CIP 37.24 N/A 1827 CIP 42.96 N/A 1929 CIP 49.17 N/A 2030 CIP 55.90 N/A 2131 CIP 63.15 N/A 2233 CIP 70.94 N/A 2334 CIP 79.28 N/A 2436 CIP 88.18 N/A 2538 CIP 97.66 N/A 2639 CIP 107.72 N/A 2740 CIP 118.37 N/A 2842 CIP 129.64 N/A 2943 CIP 141.53 N/A 3045 CIP 154.05 N/A 3146 CIP 167.21 N/A 3349 CIP 195.49 N/A 3958 CIP 296.83 N/A 4060 CIP 316.23 N/A Aqua-Swirl™ 2,3 AS-2 0.26 N/A AS-3 0.50 N/A AS-4 0.98 N/A AS-5 1.47 N/A AS-6 2.32 N/A AS-7 3.40 N/A AS-8 4.75 N/A AS-9 6.38 N/A AS-10 8.30 N/A AS-11 10.54 N/A AS-12 13.10 N/A AS-13 16.00 N/A City of Indianapolis Stormwater Quality Unit (SQU) Selection Guide Pg. 3 7/12/18 Version 12.2 Manufactured SQU SQU System Model Max Treatment Flow (cfs) Max 10-yr On-Line Flow Rate (cfs) CDS Technologies2,3 Offline CDS4 1.10 N/A CDS5 1.10 N/A CDS6 3.85 N/A CDS7 4.49 N/A CDS8 6.60 N/A CDS10 16.02 N/A ADS / Hancor Stormwater Quality Units2 3620WQB 0.7 N/A 3640WQB 1.6 N/A 4220WQB 0.86 N/A 4240WQB 1.83 N/A 4820WQB 1.13 N/A 4840WQB 2.39 N/A 6020WQB 1.47 N/A 6040WQB 3.12 N/A KriStar FloGard2 DVS -36 0.24 N/A DVS -48 0.50 N/A DVS -60 0.87 N/A DVS -72 1.38 N/A DVS -96 2.83 N/A DVS -120 4.94 N/A DVS -144 7.79 N/A Baysaver2 0.5K 0.22 N/A 1K 0.28 N/A 3K 0.92 N/A 5K 1.90 N/A 10K 3.43 N/A StormTrap®2 SSWQ-2x4 0.36 N/A SSWQ-3x6 0.80 N/A SSWQ-3x8 1.07 N/A SSWQ-4x8 1.43 N/A SSWQ-4x9 1.61 N/A SSWQ-5x10 2.23 N/A StormTrap®2 SSWQ-5x12 2.68 N/A SSWQ-6x12 3.21 N/A STWQ-2 3.52 N/A STWQ-3 5.29 N/A STWQ-4 7.05 N/A STWQ-5 9.03 N/A STWQ-6a 10.80 N/A STWQ-6b 10.76 N/A STWQ-7a 12.78 N/A STWQ-7b 12.89 N/A STWQ-8 15.10 N/A STWQ-9 16.86 N/A STWQ-10 19.00 N/A City of Indianapolis Stormwater Quality Unit (SQU) Selection Guide Pg. 4 7/12/18 Version 12.2 Manufactured SQU SQU System Model Max Treatment Flow (cfs) Max 10-yr On-Line Flow Rate (cfs) STWQ-12 22.97 N/A STWQ-55 109.57 N/A STWQ-105 211.16 N/A STWQ-153 308.99 N/A STWQ-200 403.80 N/A STWQ-I 4.12 N/A STWQ-II 1.95 N/A STWQ-III 3.93 N/A STWQ-IV 1.85 N/A STWQ-V 1.85 N/A STWQ-VI 3.75 N/A STWQ-VII 1.76 N/A Prinsco2 WQU3620 0.6 N/A WQU3640 1.28 N/A WQU4220 0.70 N/A WQU4240 1.49 N/A WQU4820 0.92 N/A WQU4840 1.95 N/A WQU6020 1.18 N/A WQU6040 2.51 N/A First Defense 2,3 4 Foot Diameter 0.70 N/A 6 Foot Diameter 2.00 N/A Haviland2 SWQU 36X20-B 0.75 N/A SWQU 36X40-B 1.5 N/A SWQU 42X20-B 0.8 N/A SWQU 42X40-B 1.8 N/A SWQU 48X20-B 1.1 N/A SWQU 48X40-B 2.4 N/A SWQU 60X20-B 1.4 N/A SWQU 60X40-B 3.1 N/A First Defense High Capacity1,2,3 3 Foot Diameter 0.73 N/A 4 Foot Diameter 1.50 N/A 5 Foot Diameter 2.62 N/A 6 Foot Diameter 4.13 N/A 7 Foot Diameter 6.07 N/A 8 Foot Diameter 8.49 N/A Suntree Nutrient Separating Baffle Box – Hydro- Variant Technology (NSBB-HVT) 2-4 0.49 2.12 3-6 1.35 5.83 3-8 1.93 8.34 4-8 2.77 11.97 5-10 4.84 20.91 6-12 7.64 33.00 6-13.75 9.1 39.31 7-14 11.2 48.38 7-15 12.2 52.70 City of Indianapolis Stormwater Quality Unit (SQU) Selection Guide Pg. 5 7/12/18 Version 12.2 Manufactured SQU SQU System Model Max Treatment Flow (cfs) Max 10-yr On-Line Flow Rate (cfs) 8-14 13.3 57.46 8-16 15.7 67.82 9-18 21.0 90.72 10-17 22.4 96.77 10-20 27.4 118.37 12-21 36.6 158.11 12-24 43.2 186.62 1 Temporary Approval 2 Off-line use only 3 Not Approved for use with an open grate top (i.e. an inlet) Volume Based SQUs* Table 2 Manufactured SQU SQU System Model Max Treatment Flow (cfs) Stormvault®2 N/A N/A* *Storage volume to be calculated per Chapter 700, Section 701.04 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060MAXIMUM POND STORAGEPROVIDED FOR 100 YEAR This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060 This copy is from the Digital Archive of the Hamilton County Surveyor's Office; Noblesville, In 46060