Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Drainage Report 03-20-20
Site Development Hydraulic Report Shrewsberry Project Number 18-0128 Old Town Companies, LLC North End – Phase 1 Smokey Row Road & US 31 (N. Meridian St.) Carmel, Indiana Prepared by: Jeffrey M. Kelly, E.I. Checked by: Keith M. Buck, P.E. Certified by: Keith M. Buck, P.E. Date: 20 March 2020 Revised: Shrewsberry & Associates 7321 Shadeland Station, Suite 160 Indianapolis, Indiana 46256 317.841.4799 Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 February 2020 | Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 6.1 Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................... iv 6.2 Proposed Conditions ..................................................................................................... v 6.3 Storm Sewers .............................................................................................................. vii 6.4 Water Quality ............................................................................................................. vii 6.5 Emergency Flood Routing ........................................................................................... viii TABLES Table 6.1.1 Existing Conditions Runoff Results Table 6.1.2 Summary of Allowable Release Rates per Carmel Stormwater Technical Standards Table 6.2.1 Post -Developed Conditons - Unrestricted Runoff Results Table 6.2.2 Post -Developed Conditons Runoff Results with 6” Orifice Restriction Table 6.2.3 Post-Developed Detention Water Surface Elevations Table 6.4.1 Water Quality Flow Rates APPENDICES Appendix A: Soil Map Appendix B: Existing Conditons Appendix C: Post-Developed Conditions Appendix D: Pipe Network Calculations & Inlet Calculations Appendix E: Water Quality Calculations Appenix F: Wetland Delineation Report & OHWM information for Hunter’s Knoll Drain Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 February 2020 | Page 2 Project Narrative Old Town Companies, LLC is proposing to redevelop approximately 13.6 acres into a 64 parcel mixed used subdivision. The existing site consists mainly of large residential parcels that are a combination of grassed areas and wooded areas. The project is currently referred to as “North End – Phase 1”. The proposed redevelopment project resided at Latitude N 39º 59’ 10” and longitude W 86º 08’ 04”. The site is bounded by US 31 (N. Meridian St) to the northwest, Smokey Row Road to the south and the Hunter’s Knoll Drain to the east. Please refer to the plan sheets, Figures, and calculations that accompany this report for further details on the proposed development. Project Location The site is located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 24, Township 18 North, Range 3 East near the intersection of US 31 (N. Meridian Street) & Smokey Row Road in Carmel, IN. The property is in Clay Township. North End – Phase 1 Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 February 2020 | Page 3 Flood Zone Information Based upon a scaled interpretation of the Flood Insurance Map No. 18057 C0207 G for Hamilton County, Indiana, dated November 19, 2014, the majority of the subject tract (primarily undeveloped) IS NOT located within Zone AE (Special Flood Hazard Area inundated by 100-year flood-Base Flood Elevations determined) or Floodway Area Zone AE. The majority of the subject tract IS located within Zone X. Zone X refers to minimal risk areas between the 1-percent and 0.2 percent-annual-chance floodplains. Portions of this property are located within flood hazard zone AE. These areas are shown on Flood Insurance Rate Map. Soil Information Based on information obtained from the United Stated Department of Agriculture, the soils in the area consist mainly of Miami Silt Loam (MmB2, MmC3) and Shoals Silt Loam (Sh). The Miami Silt Loams are both classified in Hydrologic Soil Group C and the Shoals Silt Loam is classified in Hydrologic Soil Group B/D. Please note, for calculations purposes, each soil will be shown as the next lowest soil group for proposed curve number generation. Please refer to the soils map and listing in Appendix A. North End – Phase 1 Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 February 2020 | Page 4 Overall Stormwater Design Said development will consist of a series of four (4) interconnected detention basins with corresponding flow restricting structures that will store and release the site’s stormwater runoff per the requirements set forth by Carmel’s Stormwater Technical Standards One (1) additional detention basin will detain and release runoff from a portion of remaining onsite flow, Right of Way along Smokey Row Road, and discharge from rear lots along the southern perimeter of the site. Water quality for the site will be served by a series of six (6) proposed offline mechanical BMP’s along with low flow restricting structures. The controlled drainage area transported via the interconnected detention basins will release to Hunter’s Knoll Drain to the East and the controlled drainage area transported via the independently routed fifth detention basin will release to the existing swale located on the northside of Smokey Row Road. Refer to Section 5 and 6 of this Report for the existing and post-developed evaluations for North End – Phase 1. Hydrologic Analysis 6.1 Existing Conditions Old Town Companies, LLC is proposing to redevelop an approximate 13.6 acre subject tract into a 64 parcel mixed used subdivision. The existing site consists mainly of large residential parcels that are a combination of grassed areas and wooded areas. Detailed topography prepared by Cripe in 2018 was used to determine the existing hydrologic conditions. The existing drainage pattern of the site is from west to east via sheet flow and an existing channel that runs from the southeasterly right-of-way of US 31 to Little Cool Creek on the far east end of the site. The channel on the site is referred to Hunter’s Knoll Drain. It is not a regulated drain south of the US 31 right- of-way. Note that site has been evaluated for “Waters of the US” status by another subconsultant of Old Town Companies. A Wetland Delineation Report and information regarding the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) for Hunter’s Knoll Drain provided by Alt & Witzeg is provided in Appendix F of the report. There are no other impacts to environmentally sensitive areas on the site. Offsite Drainage Basins: No offsite drainage reaches the North End – Phase 1 subject tract. Hydrology Calculations: The existing-conditions controlled drainage area has been evaluated as one control basin, matching the limits of the proposed post-developed controlled drainage area (11.36 acres), including the post- developed Drainage Area 6 (Direct Runoff). An additional Smokey Row R.O.W. matching the limits of the proposed post-developed controlled drainage area (1.15 acres) was evaluated for the Existing Conditions calculations, for a total contributing area of 12.51 acres. An ICPRv4 model was established to determine the existing conditions for the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100- year peak release rates. Calculations were evaluated using TR-55 (NRCS) time of concentration and curve number calculation methodologies along with a 24-hour duration NRCS Type 2 storm. A Curve Number, CN of 98 for impervious areas and a CN value of 77 for pervious areas were evaluated. A time of concentration of 20.90 minutes was applied to the existing controlled drainage basin, and a Tc of 15 minutes for the Smokey Row Road Right of Way was applied for the existing conditions hydrologic simulations. See table below and Appendix B of this report for additional information: Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 February 2020 | Page 5 Table 5-1.1 - Existing Conditions – Runoff Rates Scenario Controlled Drainage Area – Onsite (11.36 acres) Runoff Rate (cfs) Controlled Drainage Area – R.O.W. (1.15 acres) Runoff Rate (cfs) Q 2yr 10.63 3.02 Q 5yr 15.81 3.72 Q 10yr 20.90 4.35 Q 25yr 29.39 5.37 Q 50yr 37.32 6.28 Q 100yr 46.83 7.34 Per the City of Carmel’s Stormwater Technical Standards, the allowable runoff from the post-developed site will be limited to 0.10 cfs/acre for the 10-year storm and 0.30 cfs/acres for the 100-year storm. Table 5-1.2 – Allowable Release Rates per Carmel Stormwater Technical Standards Scenario Controlled Drainage Area – Onsite (11.36 acres) Allowable Runoff Rate (cfs) Controlled Drainage Area – R.O.W. (1.15 acres) Allowable Runoff Rate (cfs) Q 0yr - Q 10yr 1.14 0.12 Q 10yr - Q 100yr 3.41 0.35 6.2 Proposed Conditions The proposed post-developed site drainage infrastructure will consist of a series of four (4) interconnected detention basins with corresponding flow restricting structures that will store and release the site’s stormwater runoff per the requirements set forth by Carmel’s Technical Drainage Manual. One (1) additional detention basin will detain and release runoff from a portion of remaining onsite flow, Right of Way along Smokey Row Road, and discharge from rear lots along the southern perimeter of the site. For the post-developed-conditions evaluations, the controlled drainage areas have been evaluated as seven (8) composite controlled basins (10.71 acres onsite), including one (1) drainage basin for the Smokey Row Road Right-of-Way (1.15 acres), and one (1) basin matching the limits of direct runoff for the site (0.65 acres) – for a total of 12.51 acres. Note that the buildings and the walkways around buildings shown on the plans are conceptual at the time of this report. The conceptual areas of building and walk, as shown on the plans, has been included in the storm system and detention calculations. An ICPRv4 model was established to determine the post-developed conditions for the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100-year peak release rates. Calculations were evaluated using TR-55 (NRCS) time of concentration and curve number calculation methodologies along with a 24-hour duration NRCS Type 2 storm. A Curve Number, CN of 98 for impervious areas and a CN value of 80 for pervious areas were evaluated. A conservative time of concentration of 5.0 minutes was applied to the proposed controlled drainage basin(s), and a Tc of 15 minutes for the Smokey Row Road Right of Way was applied for the post- developed conditions hydrologic simulations. Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 February 2020 | Page 6 Table 5-2.1 – Post-Dev Conditions – Unrestricted Runoff Rates Scenario Controlled Drainage Area – Onsite (10.71 acres) Runoff Rate (cfs) Controlled Drainage Area – R.O.W. (1.15 acres) Runoff Rate (cfs) Controlled Drainage Area – Direct Runoff (0.65 acres) Runoff Rate (cfs) Q 2yr 28.97 3.02 1.30 Q 5yr 36.48 3.72 1.75 Q 10yr 43.44 4.35 2.18 Q 25yr 54.59 5.37 2.86 Q 50yr 64.65 6.28 3.49 Q 100yr 76.49 7.34 4.22 Outfall Locations: The controlled drainage area transported via the interconnected detention basins (Detention #1 through Detention #4) will release to Hunter’s Knoll Drain to the East and the controlled drainage area transported via the independently routed fifth detention basin (Detention #5) will release to the southeast via the existing swale located on the northside of Smokey Row Road. 6” Minimum Allowable Orifice Sizing for Low Flow Outlet Control Structures: Per the City of Carmel Stormwater Technical Standards (Technical Standards), the allowable runoff from the developed site will be limited to 0.10 cfs/acre for the 10-year storm and 0.30 cfs/acres for the 100-year storm. However, per section 302.06.7 of the Carmel Stormwater Technical Manual, outlet control structures were limited to use of no less than 6-inch diameter orifices for low-flow restricting outlets. In evaluating the post-developed conditions for the site with the 6” orifice limitation, the resulting post- developed release rates were greater than the 0.1 cfs/acre and 0.3 cfs/acre allowable release rates, though well below the existing conditions release rates for the controlled drainage areas. Detention Basins: Detention #1 and Detention #2 will be served by dry-detention basins limited to a maximum four-foot water depth at the 100-year water surface elevations. Detention #3, #4, and #5 will all be underground detention systems due to site footprint limitations and water quantity amounts. See below for resultant Post-Developed Release Rates and WSEL’s along with Appendix C of this report. As Detention #1 through #4 are interconnected, the table is limited to post-developed release rates for the two detention ponds that outlet to Hunter’s Knoll Creek (Detention #4) and the Smokey Row Road swale (Detention #5) respectively: Table 5-2.2 – Post-Dev Conditions – Runoff Results with 6” Orifice Restriction (except for Direct Runoff) Scenario Controlled Drainage Area – Detention #4 Runoff Rate (cfs) (to Hunter’s Knoll Creek) Controlled Drainage Area – Detention #5 Runoff Rate (cfs) (to Smokey Row Rd. swale) Controlled Drainage Area – Direct Runoff (0.65 acres) Runoff Rate (cfs) Total Combined Post- Developed Release Rate (cfs) Q 2yr 1.50 1.04 1.30 3.84 Q 5yr 1.72 1.18 1.75 4.65 Q 10yr 2.39 1.31 2.18 5.88 Q 25yr 2.90 1.46 2.86 7.22 Q 50yr 3.25 1.57 3.49 8.31 Q 100yr 3.54 1.66 4.22 9.42 Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 February 2020 | Page 7 Table 5-2.3 – Post-Developed Detention Water Surface Elevations Scenario Detention #1 Pond bottom: 841.00 Detention #2 Pond bottom: 827.00 Detention #3 Basin bottom: 821.50; 7.5’ depth Detention #4 Basin bottom: 820.50; 7.5’ depth Detention #5 Basin bottom: 818.50; 5.0’ depth 2yr 841.76 827.70 825.02 823.80 820.85 5yr 842.14 828.07 825.93 824.68 821.25 10yr 842.47 828.41 826.80 825.42 821.64 25yr 842.97 829.00 827.38 826.25 822.18 50yr 843.39 829.52 827.87 826.98 822.59 100yr 843.85 830.10 828.66 827.69 822.96 6.3 Storm Sewers The storm sewer system is designed to convey stormwater runoff at a minimum velocity of 2.5 feet/second through reinforced concrete pipes while maintaining a hydraulic grade line elevation without the storm pipes and structures during a 10-year storm event. For sizing of the storm sewer network, the eight (8) controlled drainage basins were broken down further into forty-one (41) contributing sub-basins based on proposed grading and structure locations Storm pipe networks have been designed using the Rational Method and the rainfall intensities included in the Carmel Stormwater Technical Standards. All drainage catchments that drain to storm pipe networks have been conservatively set to and assumed C values of 0.90 and Time of Concentration of 5 minutes in order to represent the worst-case scenario for each pipe network. See Appendix D for pipe and inlet calculations. 6.4 Water Quality Site runoff for North End – Phase 1 (10.71 acres onsite + 1.15 acres R.O.W.) will be treated by a combination of six (6) mechanical BMP’s (Aqua-Shield Aqua-Swirl XCelerator units) and interconnected detention basins to meet the standards for post-construction stormwater quality management as defined by Chapter 700 of the Carmel Stormwater Technical Standards. A 1” rainfall event along with a 24-hour duration NRCS Type 2 storm was applied to an ICPRv4 model to determine the peak water quality release rates of the contributing controlled water quality basins. A Water Quality Curve Number, CN of 98 for impervious areas and a CN value of 80 for pervious areas were evaluated. A conservative time of concentration of 5.0 minutes was applied to the six (6) contributing controlled water quality drainage basin(s), and a Tc of 15 minutes for the Smokey Row Road Right of Way was applied for the post-developed conditions hydrologic simulations. See the table below and Appendix E for additional information: Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 February 2020 | Page 8 Table 5-4.1 – Post-Developed Detention Water Surface Elevations BMP Location Contributing Drainage Area (acres) % Impervious WQ Curve Number CNwq WQ Runoff Rate (cfs) Proposed Mechanical BMP Unit (Aqu-Swirl Xcelerator – offline unit) Max Treatment Flow based on City of Indianapolis SQU Selection Guide (cfs) BMP B3-1 2.81 85.77 98 2.83 XC-6 3.88 BMP B3-2 4.45 75.28 98 3.97 XC-7 5.17 BMP B4-1 0.79 54.44 98 0.53 XC-2 0.57 BMP B5-1 0.99 74.74 98 0.88 XC-3 1.13 BMP B5-2 1.15 100.00 98 1.14 XC-4 1.86 BMP B5-3 1.66 66.87 98 1.33 XC-4 1.86 6.5 Emergency Flood Routing 100-YEAR FLOOD ROUTING The intent for the 100-year flood routing is to provide adequate storage around sag inlets to allow for local containment of the 100-year runoff such that it will make its way to the appropriate storage area. The 100-year runoff will be contained on the site. Areas where ponding will occur will be limited to 6- inches depth, per the Technical Standards. Inlet calculations to establish 100-year flood inundation boundaries will be provided along with the final grading plan. EMERGENCY FLOOD ROUTING Emergency flood routing from Detention #1 is intended to leave the pond at the northeast corner, near Str. 625A, and flow down Road A (Rohrer Rd) to Hunter’s Knoll Drain. Emergency flood routing from Detention #4 is intended to leave the pond at the northeast corner, near Str. 612, and flow to Hunter’s Knoll Drain. Emergency flood routing for Detention #2 is intended to leave the pond at the south end, flow across Street H, then down Street E to Street D. The route will then follow Street D east to Street B and exit the site through the driveway to Smokey Row Road. Emergency flood routing from Detention #3 is intended to leave the pond at the south end of the pond and follow Street D to Street B, exiting the site through the driveway to Smokey Row Road. Spillways (and a swale for Detention #4), sized for the appropriate drainage area, will be provided in the final deign to accommodate the required emergency flows. All building pads adjacent to emergency flood routes will be situated such that the appropriate flood protection grade will be met. Please see sheet C1.6. Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 APPENDIX A Appendix A: 1 of 23 3/20/2020 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, Indiana NORTH END - PHASE 1 - CARMEL, IN Natural Resources Conservation Service March 16, 2020Appendix A: 2 of 23 3/20/2020 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 2Appendix A: 3 of 23 3/20/2020 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. 3Appendix A: 4 of 23 3/20/2020 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 Soil Map..................................................................................................................5 Soil Map................................................................................................................6 Legend..................................................................................................................7 Map Unit Legend..................................................................................................8 Map Unit Descriptions..........................................................................................8 Hamilton County, Indiana................................................................................11 UcfA—Urban land-Crosby silt loam complex, fine-loamy subsoil, 0 to 2 percent slopes.......................................................................................11 UkbB2—Urban land-Miami silt loam complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded...................................................................................................12 YbvA—Brookston silty clay loam-Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes....................................................................................................14 YclA—Crosby silt loam, fine-loamy subsoil-Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes.......................................................................................15 YmsB2—Miami silt loam-Urban land complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded...................................................................................................16 YmsC2—Miami silt loam-Urban land complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded...................................................................................................18 YmsD2—Miami silt loam-Urban land complex, 12 to 18 percent slopes, eroded......................................................................................19 YshAH—Shoals silt loam-Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded, brief duration..........................................................21 4Appendix A: 5 of 23 3/20/2020 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. 5Appendix A: 6 of 23 3/20/2020 6 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 44265004426600442670044268004426900442700044271004426500442660044267004426800442690044270004427100573400 573500 573600 573700 573800 573900 574000 574100 574200 574300 574400 573400 573500 573600 573700 573800 573900 574000 574100 574200 574300 574400 39° 59' 27'' N 86° 8' 27'' W39° 59' 27'' N86° 7' 40'' W39° 59' 4'' N 86° 8' 27'' W39° 59' 4'' N 86° 7' 40'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 16N WGS84 0 200 400 800 1200 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:5,020 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.Appendix A: 7 of 23 3/20/2020 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 20, Sep 16, 2019 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 1, 2018—Sep 30, 2018 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 7Appendix A: 8 of 23 3/20/2020 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI UcfA Urban land-Crosby silt loam complex, fine-loamy subsoil, 0 to 2 percent slopes 3.4 5.1% UkbB2 Urban land-Miami silt loam complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded 3.9 5.9% YbvA Brookston silty clay loam-Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes 0.4 0.6% YclA Crosby silt loam, fine-loamy subsoil-Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes 4.6 6.9% YmsB2 Miami silt loam-Urban land complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded 20.6 31.0% YmsC2 Miami silt loam-Urban land complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded 18.2 27.4% YmsD2 Miami silt loam-Urban land complex, 12 to 18 percent slopes, eroded 4.2 6.4% YshAH Shoals silt loam-Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded, brief duration 11.1 16.7% Totals for Area of Interest 66.4 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits 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. Custom Soil Resource Report 8Appendix A: 9 of 23 3/20/2020 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, 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 9Appendix A: 10 of 23 3/20/2020 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 10Appendix A: 11 of 23 3/20/2020 Hamilton County, Indiana UcfA—Urban land-Crosby silt loam complex, fine-loamy subsoil, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2y47p Elevation: 600 to 1,260 feet Mean annual precipitation: 36 to 46 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost-free period: 145 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Urban land: 60 percent Crosby and similar soils: 35 percent Minor components: 5 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Crosby Setting Landform: Recessionial moraines, water-lain moraines, ground moraines Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, rise Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Silty material or loess over loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam BE - 8 to 11 inches: silt loam Bt - 11 to 14 inches: silt loam 2Bt - 14 to 28 inches: silty clay 2BCt - 28 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) Depth to water table: About 6 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 50 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w Custom Soil Resource Report 11Appendix A: 12 of 23 3/20/2020 Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Treaty, drained Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Depressions, swales, water-lain moraines 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 UkbB2—Urban land-Miami silt loam complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2y47f Elevation: 180 to 1,040 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: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Urban land: 60 percent Miami, eroded, and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Miami, Eroded Setting Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, footslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loess over loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bt - 8 to 13 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt - 13 to 31 inches: clay loam 2BCt - 31 to 36 inches: loam 2Cd - 36 to 79 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 6 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material Custom Soil Resource Report 12Appendix A: 13 of 23 3/20/2020 Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Low to moderately high (0.01 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 45 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Other vegetative classification: Trees/Timber (Woody Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Crosby Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Other vegetative classification: Trees/Timber (Woody Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: No Treaty Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Other vegetative classification: Mixed/Transitional (Mixed Native Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: Yes Williamstown Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Trees/Timber (Woody Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 13Appendix A: 14 of 23 3/20/2020 YbvA—Brookston silty clay loam-Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2w57n 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: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Brookston and similar soils: 65 percent Urban land: 30 percent Minor components: 5 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Brookston Setting Landform: Depressions, till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Concave, linear 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 14Appendix A: 15 of 23 3/20/2020 Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Hydric soil rating: Yes 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 YclA—Crosby silt loam, fine-loamy subsoil-Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2w57p Elevation: 600 to 1,040 feet Mean annual precipitation: 36 to 46 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost-free period: 145 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Crosby and similar soils: 60 percent Urban land: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Crosby Setting Landform: Recessionial moraines, water-lain moraines, ground moraines Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, rise Down-slope shape: Linear, convex Across-slope shape: Convex, linear 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 15Appendix A: 16 of 23 3/20/2020 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) 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 Treaty, drained Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Depressions, swales, water-lain moraines 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 Williamstown, eroded Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Recessionial moraines, water-lain moraines, ground moraines Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder, summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest, head slope, rise Down-slope shape: Convex, linear Across-slope shape: Linear, convex Hydric soil rating: No YmsB2—Miami silt loam-Urban land complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2w586 Elevation: 180 to 1,040 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: Not prime farmland Custom Soil Resource Report 16Appendix A: 17 of 23 3/20/2020 Map Unit Composition Miami, eroded, and similar soils: 50 percent Urban land: 35 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Miami, Eroded Setting Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, footslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loess over loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bt - 8 to 13 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt - 13 to 31 inches: clay loam 2BCt - 31 to 36 inches: loam 2Cd - 36 to 79 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 6 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Low to moderately high (0.01 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 45 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Other vegetative classification: Trees/Timber (Woody Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Crosby Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Other vegetative classification: Trees/Timber (Woody Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 17Appendix A: 18 of 23 3/20/2020 Williamstown Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Trees/Timber (Woody Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: No Treaty Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Other vegetative classification: Mixed/Transitional (Mixed Native Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: Yes YmsC2—Miami silt loam-Urban land complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2w587 Elevation: 400 to 1,200 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: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Miami, eroded, and similar soils: 60 percent Urban land: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Miami, Eroded Setting Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loess over loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Bt - 7 to 13 inches: silty clay loam Custom Soil Resource Report 18Appendix A: 19 of 23 3/20/2020 2Bt - 13 to 31 inches: clay loam 2BCt - 31 to 36 inches: loam 2Cd - 36 to 80 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 6 to 12 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Low to moderately high (0.01 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 45 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Treaty Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Hydric soil rating: Yes Rainsville, eroded Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No YmsD2—Miami silt loam-Urban land complex, 12 to 18 percent slopes, eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2y8lv Elevation: 400 to 1,200 feet Custom Soil Resource Report 19Appendix A: 20 of 23 3/20/2020 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: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Miami, eroded, and similar soils: 60 percent Urban land: 25 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Miami, Eroded Setting Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loess over loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Bt1 - 7 to 13 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt2 - 13 to 31 inches: clay loam 2BCt - 31 to 36 inches: loam 2Cd - 36 to 79 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 12 to 18 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Low to moderately high (0.01 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 45 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Rainsville, eroded Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Custom Soil Resource Report 20Appendix A: 21 of 23 3/20/2020 Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Crosby Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No YshAH—Shoals silt loam-Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded, brief duration Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2w58s Elevation: 340 to 1,040 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: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Shoals, frequent, brief, and similar soils: 60 percent Urban land: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Shoals, Frequent, Brief Setting Landform: Flood plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loamy alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam AB - 8 to 13 inches: loam Bg - 13 to 30 inches: loam Cg - 30 to 79 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: Negligible Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Custom Soil Resource Report 21Appendix A: 22 of 23 3/20/2020 Depth to water table: About 6 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 25 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Sloan, occasional, brief Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Meander scars, flood plains, backswamps Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes Eel Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Flood plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Genesee Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Natural levees, flood plains, flood-plain steps Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 22Appendix A: 23 of 23 3/20/2020 Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 APPENDIX B Appendix B: 1 of 7 3/20/2020 SPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPSPTTEMEMTGMTTEMEMWCWCCOEMCOEMEMGMWCWCEMEMCOWMGMEMTECMWSPVPSTLWCARVFPEMEMEMEMGMGMGMGMWCCOSTLSTLSTLSTL SP SPSP SP SPSP SP SP SPSP SPSP SP SP SP SP SP SP SPSP SP SP SPSP SP SP SPSP SPSP SP SP SPSP SP SP SP SPSP SP SP T T EM EM T GM T T EM EM WC WC CO EM GM WC WC EM EM EM EM EMEM GM GM GM GM WC CO STL STL STL STL N E;,ST,NGCON',T,ONS%AS,NMAP Appendix B: 2 of 7 3/20/2020 Project:North End - Phase ICarmel, IndianaDate:March 15, 2020Job No:18-0128Checked By:Jeff KellyPrepared By:Keith BuckType of Surface Area, A (SFT)Area, A (acres)Curve Number, CNCN*A Manning's C C*A461,233.5 Pervious459,601.5 10.55 77.00812 0.3 3.165TOTAL, SF 461,233.5 Impervious Area35,350.5 0.81 98.0080 0.9 0.730TOTAL AREA494,952.0 11.36Type of Surface Area, A (SFT)Area, A (acres)Curve Number, CNCN*A Manning's C C*APervious- 0.00 77.000 0.3 0.000Impervious Area49,878.8 1.15 98.00112 0.9 1.031TOTAL AREA49,878.8 1.15Basin Sheet FlowManual (L/V)Description n = L =P2 =s =Tt = .007(nL)0.8/(P20.5s0.4)Description V = L = Tt = L/VTc (total)Tc (total)(ft) (in/hr) (ft/ft) (hrs) (ft/s) (ft) (hrs) (hrs)(min)EXISTING Grass/Residential 0.13 100 2.64 0.01 0.2116Gutter / Swale2 980 0.13610.347720.9DRAINAGE AREA 1 Composite Runoff = 78 0.34DRAINAGE AREA (SMOKEY ROW RIGHT OF WAY)AGE AREA SMOKEY ROW R.O.W. Composite Runoff = 98 0.90Existing Conditions CN ValuesCONTROLLED DRAINAGE AREAAppendix B: 3 of 7 3/20/2020 North End- Existing Conditions_2020-03-15 1 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Existing Conditions\3/16/2020 10:09 Manual Basin: BASIN: Existing Cond_Onsite Cntrl Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Existing Cond_Onsite Cntrl Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 20.9000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 11.3600 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 10.5500 Grass_existing 2 0.8100 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA BASIN: Existing Cond_Onsi te Cntrl 100Y-24H 46.83 12.1250 6.46 4.08 11.3600 78.8 7.13 7.13 BASIN: Existing Cond_Onsi te Cntrl 10Y-24H 20.90 12.1333 3.83 1.84 11.3600 79.1 7.13 7.13 BASIN: Existing Cond_Onsi te Cntrl 25Y-24H 29.39 12.1333 4.72 2.56 11.3600 78.9 7.13 7.13 BASIN: Existing Cond_Onsi te Cntrl 2Y-24H 10.63 12.1417 2.66 0.97 11.3600 79.5 7.13 7.13 BASIN: Existing Cond_Onsi te Cntrl 50Y-24H 37.32 12.1250 5.52 3.25 11.3600 78.8 7.13 7.13 BASIN: Existing Cond_Onsi te Cntrl 5Y-24H 15.81 12.1333 3.27 1.41 11.3600 79.2 7.13 7.13 Appendix B: 4 of 7 3/20/2020 North End- Existing Conditions_2020-03-15 2 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Existing Conditions\3/16/2020 10:09 Manual Basin: BASIN: Existing Cond_R.O.W Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Existing Cond_Offsite R.O.W. Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 15.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 1.1500 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 1.1500 Impervious 1 Comment: Tc= 15 minutes for shallow for sheet and concentrated flow Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA BASIN: Existing Cond_R.O. W 100Y-24H 7.34 12.0583 6.46 6.47 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 BASIN: Existing Cond_R.O. W 10Y-24H 4.35 12.0583 3.83 3.84 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 BASIN: Existing Cond_R.O. W 25Y-24H 5.37 12.0583 4.72 4.73 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 BASIN: Existing Cond_R.O. W 2Y-24H 3.02 12.0583 2.66 2.67 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 BASIN: Existing Cond_R.O. W 50Y-24H 6.28 12.0583 5.52 5.53 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 BASIN: Existing Cond_R.O. W 5Y-24H 3.72 12.0583 3.27 3.28 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 Appendix B: 5 of 7 3/20/2020 North End- Existing Conditions_2020-03-15 3 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Existing Conditions\3/16/2020 10:09 Node: Existing Cond_Offsite R.O.W. Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 820.50 ft Warning Stage: 820.50 ft Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 820.50 0 0 0 1.0000 820.50 0 0 0 2.0000 820.50 0 0 0 3.0000 820.50 0 0 0 6.0000 820.50 0 0 0 12.0000 820.50 0 0 0 24.0000 820.50 0 0 0 48.0000 820.50 Comment: CNwq= 98 perv: 0.00 acres impervious: 1.068 acres total: 1.068 ac Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Existing Cond_Offsite R.O.W. 100Y-24H 820.50 820.50 0.0000 7.34 0.00 0 Existing Cond_Offsite R.O.W. 10Y-24H 820.50 820.50 0.0000 4.35 0.00 0 Existing Cond_Offsite R.O.W. 25Y-24H 820.50 820.50 0.0000 5.37 0.00 0 Existing Cond_Offsite R.O.W. 2Y-24H 820.50 820.50 0.0000 3.02 0.00 0 Existing Cond_Offsite R.O.W. 50Y-24H 820.50 820.50 0.0000 6.28 0.00 0 Existing Cond_Offsite R.O.W. 5Y-24H 820.50 820.50 0.0000 3.72 0.00 0 Appendix B: 6 of 7 3/20/2020 North End- Existing Conditions_2020-03-15 4 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Existing Conditions\3/16/2020 10:09 Node: Existing Cond_Onsite Cntrl Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 821.50 ft Warning Stage: 829.50 ft Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 821.50 0 0 0 1.0000 821.50 0 0 0 2.0000 821.50 0 0 0 3.0000 821.50 0 0 0 6.0000 821.50 0 0 0 12.0000 821.50 0 0 0 24.0000 821.50 0 0 0 48.0000 821.50 Comment: CN composite: 81 pervious: 10.59 acres impervious: 0.81 acres Tc: 20.9 minutes Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Existing Cond_Onsite Cntrl 100Y-24H 829.50 821.50 0.0000 46.82 0.00 0 Existing Cond_Onsite Cntrl 10Y-24H 829.50 821.50 0.0000 20.90 0.00 0 Existing Cond_Onsite Cntrl 25Y-24H 829.50 821.50 0.0000 29.39 0.00 0 Existing Cond_Onsite Cntrl 2Y-24H 829.50 821.50 0.0000 10.63 0.00 0 Existing Cond_Onsite Cntrl 50Y-24H 829.50 821.50 0.0000 37.31 0.00 0 Existing Cond_Onsite Cntrl 5Y-24H 829.50 821.50 0.0000 15.81 0.00 0 Appendix B: 7 of 7 3/20/2020 Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 APPENDIX C Appendix C: 1 of 31 3/20/2020 10 84 Required (x4 floors) 92 Provided 36 8 13 14 2 PAD:847.00 PAD:846.00 PAD:846.00 PAD:846.00 PAD:838.00 PAD:837.00 PAD:836.00 PAD:837.00 PAD:832.00 PAD:831.00 PAD:830.00 PAD:831.00 PAD:828.25 PAD:834.45PAD:839.55 PAD:846.50PAD:847.50 PAD:834.00 PAD:834.00 PAD:837.81 PAD:829.00 PAD:829.00 PAD:828.70 PAD:829.15 PAD:828.40 PAD:826.70 PAD:825.00 PAD:825.70 PAD:824.75 PAD:824.00 BP: 1+00.00 EP: 3+58.61 BP: 1+00.00EP: 6+57.46BP: 1+00.00 PC: 2+96.00 Mid: 3+73.75PT: 4+51.51 EP: 7+77.21 E V C : 2 + 5 5 . 0 0 E l e v : 8 5 0 . 0 9 P V I : 2 + 0 5 . 0 0 El e v : 8 5 0 . 2 3 PVI: 3 + 8 4 . 8 6El e v : 8 48 . 8 8 B V C : 1 + 5 5 . 0 0 E l e v : 8 4 9 . 7 0 HP: 2+19.84 Elev: 850.25 B V P : 1 + 0 0 . 0 0 El e v : 8 4 8 . 7 5 BREAK: 3 + 8 4 . 86El e v : 848 . 8 8 PVI: 6+05.75 Elev: 844.35 PVI: 7+54.63 Elev: 838.73 BRE A K : 8 + 4 9 . 1 7El e v : 8 3 5 . 0 0 E V C : 1 1 + 8 9 . 6 3 E l e v : 8 3 1 . 3 1 PV I : 8 + 4 9 . 1 7El e v : 8 3 5 . 0 0 P V I : 1 1 + 3 9 . 6 3 El e v : 8 3 1 . 2 2 Overall HP: 2+19.84 Elev: 850.25 EVC: 6+55 .75Ele v : 842 .63 BREAK: 7+54.63 Elev: 838.73 BVC: 5 + 5 5 . 75El e v : 8 4 5 . 5 7 B V C : 1 0 + 8 9 . 6 3 El e v : 8 3 1 . 6 5 L P : 1 1 + 5 5 . 5 9 El e v : 8 3 1 . 1 9 EV P : 1 2 + 1 0 . 0 0El e v : 8 3 1 . 4 6 O v e r a l l L P : 1 1 + 5 5 . 5 9 El e v : 8 3 1 . 1 9 PC: 1+ 5 0. 8 6 PT: 2+33.15PC: 4+75.25PT: 5+72.90PC: 3+02.75 PT: 3 + 6 2 . 3 8 827.32 832.29 832.39 831.80 831.2 2 830.64830.05829.47828.89828.30827.53831.35???850.21850.20850.13849.67849.21848.5 9 847.6 2 846.6 5 845.6 8 844.5 2 842.85 840.88 838.9 1 836.94834.99834.29833.60832.90832.20831.52831.19831.39STR #630 TC: 835.96 INV. IN 831.99 (15" W) INV. IN 832.13 (12" N) INV. OUT 830.73 (15" E) STR #627 TC: 827.73 INV. OUT 823.98 (12" E) STR #634 TC: 844.61 INV. OUT 840.86 (12" S) STR #621 TC: 838.73 INV. IN 834.58 (15" SW) INV. OUT 834.48 (15" SE) STR #622 TC: 839.69 INV. IN 836.00 (12" SW) INV. OUT 835.77 (15" NE)STR #623 TC: 845.69 INV. IN 839.17 (12" SW) INV. OUT 839.07 (12" NE) STR #633 TC: 842.57 INV. IN 839.93 (12" N) INV. OUT 837.74 (12" SE) STR #631 TC: 840.32 INV. IN 836.57 (12" N) INV. OUT 836.33 (15" E) STR #629 TC: 832.91 INV. IN 828.91 (15" W) INV. OUT 828.81 (18" N) STR #626B TC: 825.04 INV. IN 821.87 (12" W) INV. OUT 821.77 (12" E) STR #620 TC: 834.25 INV. IN 829.90 (15" W) INV. IN 828.55 (12" E) INV. OUT 828.30 (15" N) STR #619 TC: 834.80 INV. IN 828.25 (15" S) INV. OUT 828.15 (18" E) STR #609 TC: 830.23 INV. IN 826.30 (12" S) INV. OUT 826.22 (12" N) STR #608 TC: 830.37 INV. OUT 826.79 (12" N) STR #617 TC: 834.07 INV. OUT 830.76 (12" NE) STR #616 TC: 832.95 INV. IN 829.04 (12" SW) INV. OUT 828.81 (15" NE) STR #615 TC: 831.79 INV. IN 828.01 (15" SW) INV. OUT 827.92 (15" NE) STR #614 TC: 830.97 INV. IN 827.34 (15" SW) INV. OUT 827.24 (15" SE) STR #613 TC: 833.69 INV. IN 827.02 (15" NW) INV. OUT 826.92 (15" S) STR #602 TC: 833.99 INV. IN 820.16 (12" S) INV. OUT 820.07 (12" NE) STR #601 TC: 821.04 INV. IN 819.79 (12" SW) STR #653 TC: 829.55 INV. IN 826.05 (12" N) INV. OUT 825.95 (12" SW) STR #654 TC: 829.10 INV. IN 825.60 (12" NE) INV. OUT 825.50 (12" W) STR #652 TC: 830.61 INV. OUT 827.11 (12" S) STR #647 TC: 824.31 INV. IN 820.31 (15" S) INV. OUT 820.21 (15" N) STR #618A TC: 831.38 INV. IN 826.62 (18" W) INV. OUT 826.52 (18" NE) STR #632 TC: 840.32 INV. IN 836.77 (12" NW) INV. OUT 836.67 (12" S) STR #626 TC: 826.34 INV. IN 822.60 (12" W) INV. IN 822.58 (12" N) INV. OUT 822.48 (12" E) STR #630A TC: 835.95 INV. OUT 832.20 (12" S) STR #629A TC: 832.88 INV. IN 828.59 (18" S) INV. OUT 828.49 (18" NE) STR #626A TC: 826.35 INV. OUT 822.65 (12" S) STR #625 TC: 848.93 INV. OUT 845.18 (12" S) STR #620A TC: 836.45 INV. IN 832.63 (15" NW) INV. OUT 832.66 (15" E) STR #620B TC: 832.17 INV. OUT 828.67 (12" W) STR #610 TC: 830.54 INV. OUT 826.73 (12" N) CATCHMENT STR 625 7,534 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT TO DETENTION #1 53,255 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 623 7,412 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 634 20,403 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 633 15,472 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 632 3,394 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 631 3,748 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 630 9,376 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 630A 16,476 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 620 21,991 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 622 5,684 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 617 7,897 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 629 8,858 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 629A 12,270 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 620B 8,802 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 608 2,559 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 609 5,089 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 610 4,104 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 661 9,865 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 628 4,549 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 627 4,934 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 626 3,123 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 652 15,147 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 653 7,204 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 654 8,913 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 616 11,752 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 615 11,086 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 614 3,610 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 619 1,510 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT TO DETENTION #4 WEST 46,254 SF C = 0.75 Tc = 8.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 647 5,461 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 626A 12,705 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS DRAINAGE AREA 1 60,791 SF 1.40 AC C = 0.80 CN = 95 DRAINAGE AREA 3 122,621 SF 2.81 AC C = 0.81 CN = 95 DRAINAGE AREA 2 133,504 SF 3.06 AC C = 0.73 CN = 93 DRAINAGE AREA 4 34,467 SF 0.79 AC C = 0.63 CN = 90 DRAINAGE AREA 5 WEST 43,086 SF 0.99 AC C = 0.75 CN = 93 DRAINAGE AREA 6 DIRECT RUNOFF 28,174 SF 0.65 AC C = 0.48 CN = 85 POND 3 LOW FLOW STR TC: 831.49 INV. IN 821.49 (36" W) INV. OUT 821.49 (36" E) STR #661 TC: 829.43 INV. IN 821.41 (36" W) INV. OUT 821.31 (36" E) STR #655 TC: 827.74 INV. IN 824.24 (12" E) INV. OUT 824.01 (15" W) STR #663 TC: 828.06 INV. OUT 824.56 (12" N) STR #662 TC: 829.82 INV. IN 821.20 (36" W) INV. IN 824.41 (12" S) INV. OUT 821.20 (36" E)HP: 3+74.29Elev: 833.60CATCHMENT STR 662 11,472 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS STR #664 TC: 827.60 INV. IN 823.85 (15" E) INV. OUT 823.75 (15" S) CATCHMENT STR 664 19,709 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 663 3,829 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 625B 5,165 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 143 42,740 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 8.00 MINS POND 1 LOW FLOW STR TC: 845.94 INV. IN 839.96 (12" SW) INV. OUT 839.86 (12" NE) POND 2 LOW FLOW STR TC: 831.23 INV. IN 826.40 (18" N) INV. OUT 826.30 (18" S) POND 4 LOW FLOW STR TC: 833.54 INV. IN 820.48 (12" S) INV. OUT 820.39 (12" N) CATCHMENT STR 655 11,926 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINSSTR #665A TC: 825.04 INV. OUT 821.54 (12" W) STR #665 TC: 824.65 INV. IN 821.15 (12" E) INV. OUT 821.05 (12" N) CATCHMENT STR 665A 1,905 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS CATCHMENT STR 665 352 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS STR #B3-1D TC: 831.43 INV. IN 827.33 (18" S) INV. OUT 826.00 (18" N) DRAINAGE AREA 5 EAST 72,309 SF 1.66 AC C = 0.70 CN = 92 STR #629B TC: 831.44 INV. IN 827.44 (18" SW) INV. OUT 827.34 (18" N) STR #B3-2A TC: 831.13 INV. IN 826.20 (18" N) INV. OUT 826.10 (18" S) STR #B3-2D TC: 831.60 INV. IN 826.07 (18" N) INV. OUT 826.04 (18" S) STR #B5-1D 36" x 72" PRECAST CONC WATER QUALITY DIVERSION STRUCTURE TC: 825.51 INV. IN 821.76 (12" W) INV. OUT 821.02 (12" E) STR #B5-2D TC: 824.82 INV. IN 820.19 (15" S) INV. OUT 819.52 (15" N) STR #664A TC: 826.01 INV. IN 822.26 (15" N) INV. IN 820.95 (12" S) INV. OUT 820.85 (15" W) STR #B5-3D TC: 826.49 INV. IN 820.83 (15" E) INV. OUT 819.52 (15" W) STR #B4-1D TC: 830.31 INV. IN 821.19 (36" W) INV. OUT 821.19 (36" E) CATCHMENT STR 664A 402 SF C = 0.90 Tc = 5.00 MINS STR #POND 4 LOW FLOW STR TC: 833.54 INV. IN 820.48 (12" S) INV. OUT 820.39 (12" N) DRAINAGE AREA SMOKEY ROW RD R.O.W. 50,094 SF 1.15 AC C = 0.90 CN = 98 0'25'50'100'Scale: 1" = 50'-0" N PROPOSED DRAINAGE BASIN MAP Appendix C: 2 of 31 3/20/2020 Project:North End - Phase I Carmel, Indiana Date:March 15, 2020 Job No:18-0128 Checked By:Jeff Kelly Prepared By:Keith Buck Type of Surface Area, A (SFT) Area, A (acres) Curve Number, CN CN*A Manning's C C*A Pervious 9,636.0 0.22 80.00 18 0.3 0.066 Impervious Area 51,155.0 1.17 98.00 115 0.9 1.057 TOTAL AREA 60,791.0 1.40 Type of Surface Area, A (SFT) Area, A (acres) Curve Number, CN CN*A Manning's C C*A Pervious 38,397.0 0.88 80.00 71 0.3 0.264 Impervious Area 95,107.0 2.18 98.00 214 0.9 1.965 TOTAL AREA 133,504.0 3.06 Type of Surface Area, A (SFT) Area, A (acres) Curve Number, CN CN*A Manning's C C*A Pervious 17,578.0 0.40 80.00 32 0.3 0.121 Impervious Area 105,043.0 2.41 98.00 236 0.9 2.170 TOTAL AREA 122,621.0 2.81 Type of Surface Area, A (SFT) Area, A (acres) Curve Number, CN CN*A Manning's C C*A Pervious 15,712.0 0.36 80.00 29 0.3 0.108 Impervious Area 18,755.0 0.43 98.00 42 0.9 0.388 TOTAL AREA 34,467.0 0.79 Type of Surface Area, A (SFT) Area, A (acres) Curve Number, CN CN*A Manning's C C*A Pervious 11,059.0 0.25 80.00 20 0.3 0.076 Impervious Area 32,027.0 0.74 98.00 72 0.9 0.662 TOTAL AREA 43,086.0 0.99 Type of Surface Area, A (SFT) Area, A (acres) Curve Number, CN CN*A Manning's C C*A Pervious 23,877.0 0.55 80.00 44 0.3 0.164 Impervious Area 48,432.0 1.11 98.00 109 0.9 1.001 TOTAL AREA 72,309.0 1.66 Post-Developed Conditions CN Values DRAINAGE AREA 1 DRAINAGE AREA 1 Composite Runoff = 95 0.80 DRAINAGE AREA 4 Composite Runoff = 90 0.63 DRAINAGE AREA 2 DRAINAGE AREA 2 Composite Runoff = 93 0.73 DRAINAGE AREA 3 DRAINAGE AREA 3 Composite Runoff = 95 0.81 DRAINAGE AREA 4 DRAINAGE AREA 5 WEST DRAINAGE AREA 5 West Composite Runoff = 93 0.75 DRAINAGE AREA 5 EAST DRAINAGE AREA 5 East Composite Runoff = 92 0.70 Appendix C: 3 of 31 3/20/2020 Type of Surface Area, A (SFT) Area, A (acres) Curve Number, CN CN*A Manning's C C*A Pervious 19,842.0 0.46 80.00 36 0.3 0.137 Impervious Area 8,332.0 0.19 98.00 19 0.9 0.172 TOTAL AREA 28,174.0 0.65 11.36 Total CN*A 1057 Total C*A 8.35 CN Manning's C 93 0.74 Type of Surface Area, A (SFT) Area, A (acres) Curve Number, CN CN*A Manning's C C*A Pervious - 0.00 80.00 0 0.3 0.000 Impervious Area 49,878.8 1.15 98.00 112 0.9 1.031 TOTAL AREA 49,878.8 1.15 Type of Surface Area, A (SFT) Area, A (acres) Curve Number, CN CN*A Manning's C C*A Pervious 81,323.0 1.87 80.00 149 0.3 0.560 Impervious Area 270,060.0 6.20 98.00 608 0.9 5.580 TOTAL AREA 351,383.0 8.07 Type of Surface Area, A (SFT) Area, A (acres) Curve Number, CN CN*A Manning's C C*A Pervious 34,936.0 0.80 80.00 64 0.3 0.241 Impervious Area 130,337.8 2.99 98.00 293 0.9 2.693 TOTAL AREA 165,273.8 3.79 DRAINAGE AREA 6 Composite Runoff = 85 0.48 DRAINAGE AREA 6 (DIRECT RUNOFF) INAGE AREA POND 1 THROUGH 4 Composite Runoff = 94 0.77 Total Drainage Area (ac) Overall Initial Runoff Numbers DRAINAGE AREA (SMOKEY ROW RIGHT OF WAY) AGE AREA SMOKEY ROW R.O.W. Composite Runoff = 98 0.90 CONTROLLED DRAINAGE AREA (PONDS 1 THROUGH 4) INAGE AREA POND 1 THROUGH 4 Composite Runoff = 94 0.76 CONTROLLED DRAINAGE AREA (POND 5) Appendix C: 4 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 1 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Node: Detention #5 Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Stage/Volume Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 818.50 ft Warning Stage: 823.50 ft Stage [ft]Volume [ac-ft]Volume [ft3] 818.50 0.00 0 819.50 0.23 10062 820.50 0.46 20125 821.50 0.69 30187 822.50 0.92 40249 823.00 1.16 50312 Comment: 3.79 acres controlled; 1.78 acres (from Basin 5 East and West) + 1.15 acres (Smokey Row Right of Way) Detention#5 West Underground Detention Basin current el. 818.50 to 823.50 5' depth - 45,500 cft of storage required Theoretical inv el. 818.50 (Would require regrading of downstream ditch) Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention #5 100Y-24H 823.50 822.96 0.0010 25.54 1.66 24259 Detention #5 10Y-24H 823.50 821.64 0.0010 14.58 1.31 10758 Detention #5 25Y-24H 823.50 822.18 0.0010 18.28 1.46 13464 Detention #5 2Y-24H 823.50 820.85 0.0010 9.77 1.04 10062 Detention #5 50Y-24H 823.50 822.59 0.0010 21.62 1.57 16949 Detention #5 5Y-24H 823.50 821.25 0.0010 12.27 1.18 10062 Node: Detention#1 Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Stage/Area Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 840.00 ft Warning Stage: 844.00 ft Appendix C: 5 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 2 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Stage [ft]Area [ac]Area [ft2] 840.00 0.0170 741 841.00 0.0278 1211 842.00 0.0410 1786 843.00 0.0560 2439 844.00 0.0740 3223 845.00 0.0920 4008 Comment: Dry detention basin from el. 840 to 845.00 Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention#1 100Y-24H 844.00 843.85 0.0014 10.11 4.36 3108 Detention#1 10Y-24H 844.00 842.47 0.0010 5.83 3.28 2092 Detention#1 25Y-24H 844.00 842.97 0.0011 7.28 3.71 2418 Detention#1 2Y-24H 844.00 841.76 0.0010 3.95 2.60 1650 Detention#1 50Y-24H 844.00 843.39 0.0013 8.58 4.04 2745 Detention#1 5Y-24H 844.00 842.14 0.0010 4.93 2.97 1877 Node: Detention#2 Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Stage/Volume Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 827.00 ft Warning Stage: 832.00 ft Stage [ft]Volume [ac-ft]Volume [ft3] 827.00 0.00 0 828.00 0.10 4182 829.00 0.21 9322 830.00 0.36 15507 831.00 0.53 22869 832.00 0.72 31363 Comment: Detention#2 West Dry Detention Basin currently el. 827 to 832 (31,449 cft storage provided) theoretical outlet el. 827 Appendix C: 6 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 3 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention#2 100Y-24H 832.00 830.10 0.0273 25.81 10.07 6893 Detention#2 10Y-24H 832.00 828.41 0.0273 15.33 8.29 5075 Detention#2 25Y-24H 832.00 829.00 0.0273 18.92 9.01 5659 Detention#2 2Y-24H 832.00 827.70 0.0273 10.57 6.86 4373 Detention#2 50Y-24H 832.00 829.52 0.0273 22.11 9.55 6239 Detention#2 5Y-24H 832.00 828.07 0.0273 13.05 7.76 4727 Node: Detention#3 Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Stage/Volume Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 821.50 ft Warning Stage: 829.00 ft Stage [ft]Volume [ac-ft]Volume [ft3] 821.50 0.00 0 822.50 0.17 7187 823.50 0.33 14375 824.50 0.50 21562 825.50 0.66 28750 826.50 0.83 35937 827.50 0.99 43124 828.50 1.16 50312 829.00 1.32 57499 Comment: Detention#3 West Underground Detention Basin el 821.50 to 829.0 (7,200 sft footprint x 7.5' depth: 54,000 cft) Theoretical outlet el 821.5 Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention#3 100Y-24H 829.00 828.66 0.0015 21.78 0.99 13039 Detention#3 10Y-24H 829.00 826.80 0.0010 12.61 0.00 7187 Detention#3 25Y-24H 829.00 827.38 0.0011 15.74 0.24 7187 Detention#3 2Y-24H 829.00 825.02 0.0010 8.45 0.00 7187 Detention#3 50Y-24H 829.00 827.87 0.0013 18.53 0.71 8528 Detention#3 5Y-24H 829.00 825.93 0.0010 10.64 0.00 7187 Appendix C: 7 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 4 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Node: Detention#4 Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Stage/Volume Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 820.50 ft Warning Stage: 828.00 ft Stage [ft]Volume [ac-ft]Volume [ft3] 820.50 0.00 0 821.50 0.13 5576 822.50 0.26 11173 823.50 0.39 16771 824.50 0.51 22346 825.50 0.64 27878 826.50 0.77 33498 827.50 0.90 39073 828.00 1.02 44649 Comment: Detention#4 West Underground Detention Basin current el. 820.5 to 827.5 (5,600 sft x7.5' depth: 42,000 cft storage) Theoretical inv el. 820.5 Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention#4 100Y-24H 828.00 827.69 0.0011 13.83 3.54 10438 Detention#4 10Y-24H 828.00 825.42 0.0010 10.20 2.39 5597 Detention#4 25Y-24H 828.00 826.25 0.0010 11.51 2.90 5597 Detention#4 2Y-24H 828.00 823.80 0.0010 8.03 1.50 5597 Detention#4 50Y-24H 828.00 826.98 0.0010 12.62 3.25 6926 Detention#4 5Y-24H 828.00 824.68 0.0010 9.32 1.72 5597 Node: Direct Runoff Outlet Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 819.50 ft Warning Stage: 828.00 ft Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 819.50 Appendix C: 8 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 5 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 1.0000 819.50 0 0 0 2.0000 819.50 0 0 0 3.0000 819.50 0 0 0 6.0000 819.50 0 0 0 12.0000 819.50 0 0 0 24.0000 819.50 0 0 0 48.0000 819.50 Comment: Direct runoff from Drainage Basin 6 (0.78 acres) Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Direct Runoff Outlet 100Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 5.05 0.00 0 Direct Runoff Outlet 10Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 2.66 0.00 0 Direct Runoff Outlet 25Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 3.46 0.00 0 Direct Runoff Outlet 2Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 1.64 0.00 0 Direct Runoff Outlet 50Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 4.19 0.00 0 Direct Runoff Outlet 5Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 2.17 0.00 0 Node: Interconnect Pond Outfall_Cntrl Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 819.50 ft Warning Stage: 828.00 ft Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 819.50 0 0 0 1.0000 819.50 0 0 0 2.0000 819.50 0 0 0 3.0000 819.50 0 0 0 6.0000 819.50 0 0 0 12.0000 819.50 0 0 0 24.0000 819.50 0 0 0 48.0000 819.50 Appendix C: 9 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 6 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Comment: Outlet to creek 8.07 acres (cumulative) 1.87 acres pervious 6.20 (onsite) Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Interconnect Pond Outfall_Cntrl 100Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0 Interconnect Pond Outfall_Cntrl 10Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0 Interconnect Pond Outfall_Cntrl 25Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0 Interconnect Pond Outfall_Cntrl 2Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0 Interconnect Pond Outfall_Cntrl 50Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0 Interconnect Pond Outfall_Cntrl 5Y-24H 828.00 819.50 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0 Node: STR 602 Junction Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Stage/Volume Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 820.25 ft Warning Stage: 834.00 ft Stage [ft]Volume [ac-ft]Volume [ft3] 820.25 0.00 0 822.00 0.00 28 834.00 0.01 367 Comment: 4ft diam manhole theoretical elevations: Tc: 834.03 Appendix C: 10 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 7 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Inv: 820.5 Depth 13.75' Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] STR 602 Junction 100Y-24H 834.00 821.93 0.0010 3.54 3.54 107 STR 602 Junction 10Y-24H 834.00 821.15 0.0010 2.39 2.38 107 STR 602 Junction 25Y-24H 834.00 821.50 0.0010 2.90 2.90 107 STR 602 Junction 2Y-24H 834.00 820.86 0.0010 1.50 1.50 107 STR 602 Junction 50Y-24H 834.00 821.74 0.0010 3.25 3.25 107 STR 602 Junction 5Y-24H 834.00 820.92 0.0010 1.72 1.72 107 Node: Smokey Row ROW Outfall Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 819.50 ft Warning Stage: 824.50 ft Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 819.50 0 0 0 1.0000 819.50 0 0 0 2.0000 819.50 0 0 0 3.0000 819.50 0 0 0 6.0000 819.50 0 0 0 12.0000 819.50 0 0 0 24.0000 819.50 0 0 0 48.0000 819.50 Comment: Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Max Stage Min/Max Max Total Max Total Max Surface Appendix C: 11 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 8 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Smokey Row ROW Outfall 100Y-24H 824.50 819.50 0.0000 5.20 0.77 0 Smokey Row ROW Outfall 10Y-24H 824.50 819.50 0.0000 3.69 0.77 0 Smokey Row ROW Outfall 25Y-24H 824.50 819.50 0.0000 4.36 0.77 0 Smokey Row ROW Outfall 2Y-24H 824.50 819.50 0.0000 2.54 0.77 0 Smokey Row ROW Outfall 50Y-24H 824.50 819.50 0.0000 4.82 0.77 0 Smokey Row ROW Outfall 5Y-24H 824.50 819.50 0.0000 2.90 0.77 0 Manual Basin: Drainage Area 6_Direct Runoff Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Direct Runoff Outlet Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 7.5000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 0.7800 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.4600 Grass_post-dev 2 0.3200 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area 6_Direct Runoff 100Y-24H 5.05 12.0083 6.46 5.14 0.7800 88.5 41.03 41.03 Drainage Area 6_Direct Runoff 10Y-24H 2.66 12.0167 3.83 2.70 0.7800 89.3 41.03 41.03 Appendix C: 12 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 9 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area 6_Direct Runoff 25Y-24H 3.46 12.0167 4.72 3.51 0.7800 88.9 41.03 41.03 Drainage Area 6_Direct Runoff 2Y-24H 1.64 12.0167 2.66 1.69 0.7800 90.1 41.03 41.03 Drainage Area 6_Direct Runoff 50Y-24H 4.19 12.0083 5.52 4.25 0.7800 88.7 41.03 41.03 Drainage Area 6_Direct Runoff 5Y-24H 2.17 12.0167 3.27 2.20 0.7800 89.6 41.03 41.03 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_1 Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention#1 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 1.3900 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.2200 Grass_post-dev 2 1.1700 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_1 100Y-24H 10.11 12.0000 6.46 6.12 1.3900 97.0 84.17 84.17 Drainage Area_1 10Y-24H 5.83 12.0000 3.83 3.53 1.3900 97.4 84.17 84.17 Appendix C: 13 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 10 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_1 25Y-24H 7.28 12.0000 4.72 4.40 1.3900 97.2 84.17 84.17 Drainage Area_1 2Y-24H 3.95 12.0000 2.66 2.40 1.3900 97.7 84.17 84.17 Drainage Area_1 50Y-24H 8.58 12.0000 5.52 5.19 1.3900 97.1 84.17 84.17 Drainage Area_1 5Y-24H 4.93 12.0000 3.27 2.99 1.3900 97.5 84.17 84.17 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_2 Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention#2 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 3.0600 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.8800 Grass_post-dev 2 2.1800 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_2 100Y-24H 21.69 12.0000 6.46 5.82 3.0600 94.5 71.24 71.24 Drainage Area_2 10Y-24H 12.23 12.0000 3.83 3.28 3.0600 95.1 71.24 71.24 Drainage Area_2 25Y-24H 15.42 12.0000 4.72 4.13 3.0600 94.8 71.24 71.24 Drainage Area_2 2Y-24H 8.10 12.0000 2.66 2.19 3.0600 95.6 71.24 71.24 Drainage Area_2 50Y-24H 18.30 12.0000 5.52 4.91 3.0600 94.7 71.24 71.24 Drainage Area_2 5Y-24H 10.24 12.0000 3.27 2.76 3.0600 95.3 71.24 71.24 Appendix C: 14 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 11 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_3 Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention#3 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 2.8100 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.4000 Grass_post-dev 2 2.4100 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_3 100Y-24H 20.49 12.0000 6.46 6.15 2.8100 97.3 85.77 85.77 Drainage Area_3 10Y-24H 11.86 12.0000 3.83 3.56 2.8100 97.7 85.77 85.77 Drainage Area_3 25Y-24H 14.78 12.0000 4.72 4.44 2.8100 97.5 85.77 85.77 Drainage Area_3 2Y-24H 8.06 12.0000 2.66 2.43 2.8100 97.9 85.77 85.77 Drainage Area_3 50Y-24H 17.40 12.0000 5.52 5.22 2.8100 97.4 85.77 85.77 Drainage Area_3 5Y-24H 10.04 12.0000 3.27 3.02 2.8100 97.8 85.77 85.77 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_4 Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention#4 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 0.7900 ac Appendix C: 15 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 12 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.3600 Grass_post-dev 2 0.4300 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_4 100Y-24H 5.41 12.0000 6.46 5.44 0.7900 91.2 54.43 54.43 Drainage Area_4 10Y-24H 2.95 12.0000 3.83 2.96 0.7900 92.0 54.43 54.43 Drainage Area_4 25Y-24H 3.78 12.0000 4.72 3.79 0.7900 91.6 54.43 54.43 Drainage Area_4 2Y-24H 1.89 12.0000 2.66 1.91 0.7900 92.7 54.43 54.43 Drainage Area_4 50Y-24H 4.53 12.0000 5.52 4.54 0.7900 91.4 54.43 54.43 Drainage Area_4 5Y-24H 2.44 12.0000 3.27 2.45 0.7900 92.3 54.43 54.43 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_5 East Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention #5 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 1.6600 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.5500 Grass_post-dev 2 1.1100 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Sim Name Max Flow Time to Total Total Area [ac] Equivalent % Imperv % DCIA Appendix C: 16 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 13 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_5 East 100Y-24H 11.66 12.0000 6.46 5.72 1.6600 93.6 66.87 66.87 Drainage Area_5 East 10Y-24H 6.52 12.0000 3.83 3.20 1.6600 94.3 66.87 66.87 Drainage Area_5 East 25Y-24H 8.25 12.0000 4.72 4.04 1.6600 94.0 66.87 66.87 Drainage Area_5 East 2Y-24H 4.28 12.0000 2.66 2.12 1.6600 94.9 66.87 66.87 Drainage Area_5 East 50Y-24H 9.82 12.0000 5.52 4.81 1.6600 93.8 66.87 66.87 Drainage Area_5 East 5Y-24H 5.44 12.0000 3.27 2.68 1.6600 94.6 66.87 66.87 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_5 West Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention #5 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 0.9900 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.2500 Grass_post-dev 2 0.7400 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_5 100Y-24H 7.07 12.0000 6.46 5.90 0.9900 95.2 74.75 74.75 Appendix C: 17 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 14 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA West Drainage Area_5 West 10Y-24H 4.01 12.0000 3.83 3.35 0.9900 95.7 74.75 74.75 Drainage Area_5 West 25Y-24H 5.04 12.0000 4.72 4.21 0.9900 95.5 74.75 74.75 Drainage Area_5 West 2Y-24H 2.67 12.0000 2.66 2.25 0.9900 96.2 74.75 74.75 Drainage Area_5 West 50Y-24H 5.97 12.0000 5.52 4.98 0.9900 95.3 74.75 74.75 Drainage Area_5 West 5Y-24H 3.37 12.0000 3.27 2.82 0.9900 95.9 74.75 74.75 Manual Basin: Smokey Row ROW Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention #5 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 15.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 1.1500 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 1.1500 Impervious 1 Comment: Tc= 15 minutes for shallow for sheet and concentrated flow Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Smokey Row ROW 100Y-24H 7.34 12.0583 6.46 6.47 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 Smokey Row ROW 10Y-24H 4.35 12.0583 3.83 3.84 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 Smokey 25Y-24H 5.37 12.0583 4.72 4.73 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 Appendix C: 18 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 15 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Row ROW Smokey Row ROW 2Y-24H 3.02 12.0583 2.66 2.67 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 Smokey Row ROW 50Y-24H 6.28 12.0583 5.52 5.53 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 Smokey Row ROW 5Y-24H 3.72 12.0583 3.27 3.28 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 Drop Structure Link: Pond 1 to Pond 2 Scenario: Scenario 1 From Node: Detention#1 To Node: Detention#2 Link Count: 1 Flow Direction: Both Solution: Combine Increments: 0 Pipe Count: 1 Damping: 0.0000 ft Length: 205.00 ft FHWA Code: 0 Entr Loss Coef: 0.50 Exit Loss Coef: 1.00 Bend Loss Coef: 0.00 Bend Location: 0.00 ft Energy Switch: Energy Upstream Pipe Downstream Pipe Invert: 840.00 ft Invert: 828.00 ft Manning's N: 0.0130 Manning's N: 0.0130 Geometry: Circular Geometry: Circular Max Depth: 1.25 ft Max Depth: 1.25 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Pipe Comment: 15" pipe between Pond 1 & 2 Weir Component Weir: 1 Weir Count: 1 Weir Flow Direction: Both Damping: 0.0000 ft Weir Type: Sharp Crested Vertical Geometry Type: Circular Invert: 840.00 ft Control Elevation: 840.00 ft Max Depth: 0.83 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Discharge Coefficients Weir Default: 3.200 Weir Table: Orifice Default: 0.600 Orifice Table: Weir Comment: 10" orifice @ inv. 840 Drop Structure Comment: Appendix C: 19 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 16 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Link Min/Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Pipe 100Y-24H 4.36 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Weir: 1 100Y-24H 4.36 0.00 0.02 8.07 8.07 8.07 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Pipe 10Y-24H 3.28 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Weir: 1 10Y-24H 3.28 0.00 0.02 6.06 6.06 6.06 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Pipe 25Y-24H 3.71 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Weir: 1 25Y-24H 3.71 0.00 0.02 6.85 6.85 6.85 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Pipe 2Y-24H 2.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Weir: 1 2Y-24H 2.60 0.00 -0.01 4.81 4.81 4.81 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Pipe 50Y-24H 4.04 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Weir: 1 50Y-24H 4.04 0.00 0.02 7.47 7.47 7.47 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Pipe 5Y-24H 2.97 0.00 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 1 to Pond 2 - Weir: 1 5Y-24H 2.97 0.00 0.02 5.49 5.49 5.49 Drop Structure Link: Pond 2 to Pond 3 Scenario: Scenario 1 From Node: Detention#2 To Node: Detention#3 Link Count: 1 Flow Direction: Both Solution: Combine Increments: 0 Pipe Count: 1 Damping: 0.0000 ft Length: 50.00 ft FHWA Code: 0 Upstream Pipe Downstream Pipe Invert: 827.00 ft Invert: 826.80 ft Manning's N: 0.0130 Manning's N: 0.0130 Geometry: Circular Geometry: Circular Max Depth: 1.00 ft Max Depth: 1.00 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Appendix C: 20 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 17 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Entr Loss Coef: 0.50 Exit Loss Coef: 1.00 Bend Loss Coef: 0.00 Bend Location: 0.00 ft Energy Switch: Energy Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Pipe Comment: 12" pipe between Pond 2 and Pond 3 Weir Component Weir: 1 Weir Count: 1 Weir Flow Direction: Both Damping: 0.0000 ft Weir Type: Sharp Crested Vertical Geometry Type: Circular Invert: 827.00 ft Control Elevation: 827.00 ft Max Depth: 0.50 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Discharge Coefficients Weir Default: 3.200 Weir Table: Orifice Default: 0.600 Orifice Table: Weir Comment: 6" orifice @ inv. el. 827.00 Drop Structure Comment: Link Min/Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Pipe 100Y-24H 1.45 -0.99 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Weir: 1 100Y-24H 1.45 -0.99 -0.02 7.38 7.38 7.38 Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Pipe 10Y-24H 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Weir: 1 10Y-24H 0.87 0.00 0.00 4.41 4.41 4.41 Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Pipe 25Y-24H 1.09 -0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Weir: 1 25Y-24H 1.09 -0.24 0.00 5.55 5.55 5.55 Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Pipe 2Y-24H 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 2 to 2Y-24H 0.51 0.00 0.00 2.58 2.58 2.58 Appendix C: 21 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 18 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] Pond 3 - Weir: 1 Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Pipe 50Y-24H 1.26 -0.71 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Weir: 1 50Y-24H 1.26 -0.71 -0.02 6.42 6.42 6.42 Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Pipe 5Y-24H 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 2 to Pond 3 - Weir: 1 5Y-24H 0.71 0.00 0.00 3.61 3.61 3.61 Drop Structure Link: Pond 3 to Pond 4 Scenario: Scenario 1 From Node: Detention#2 To Node: Detention#4 Link Count: 1 Flow Direction: Both Solution: Combine Increments: 0 Pipe Count: 1 Damping: 0.0000 ft Length: 205.00 ft FHWA Code: 0 Entr Loss Coef: 0.50 Exit Loss Coef: 1.00 Bend Loss Coef: 0.00 Bend Location: 0.00 ft Energy Switch: Energy Upstream Pipe Downstream Pipe Invert: 821.50 ft Invert: 821.10 ft Manning's N: 0.0130 Manning's N: 0.0130 Geometry: Circular Geometry: Circular Max Depth: 3.00 ft Max Depth: 3.00 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Pipe Comment: 36" pipe between Pond 3 & Pond 4 Weir Component Weir: 1 Weir Count: 1 Weir Flow Direction: Both Damping: 0.0000 ft Weir Type: Sharp Crested Vertical Geometry Type: Circular Invert: 821.50 ft Control Elevation: 821.50 ft Max Depth: 0.83 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Discharge Coefficients Weir Default: 3.200 Weir Table: Appendix C: 22 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 19 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Orifice Default: 0.600 Orifice Table: Weir Comment: 10" orif at el. 821.5 Weir Component Weir: 2 Weir Count: 2 Weir Flow Direction: Both Damping: 0.0000 ft Weir Type: Sharp Crested Vertical Geometry Type: Circular Invert: 827.30 ft Control Elevation: 827.30 ft Max Depth: 0.50 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Discharge Coefficients Weir Default: 3.200 Weir Table: Orifice Default: 0.600 Orifice Table: Weir Comment: two (2) 6" orifices @ 827.3 Drop Structure Comment: Link Min/Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Pipe 100Y-24H 8.65 0.00 5.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 1 100Y-24H 5.69 0.00 -0.40 10.52 10.52 10.52 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 2 100Y-24H 3.02 0.00 0.00 7.69 7.69 7.69 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Pipe 10Y-24H 7.43 0.00 5.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 1 10Y-24H 5.73 0.00 -0.40 10.58 10.58 10.58 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 2 10Y-24H 1.76 0.00 0.00 4.47 4.47 4.47 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Pipe 25Y-24H 7.93 0.00 5.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - 25Y-24H 5.71 0.00 -0.40 10.56 10.56 10.56 Appendix C: 23 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 20 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] Weir: 1 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 2 25Y-24H 2.27 0.00 0.00 5.79 5.79 5.79 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Pipe 2Y-24H 6.35 0.00 5.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 1 2Y-24H 5.75 0.00 -0.40 10.63 10.63 10.63 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 2 2Y-24H 0.64 0.00 0.00 1.90 1.90 1.90 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Pipe 50Y-24H 8.30 0.00 5.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 1 50Y-24H 5.71 0.00 -0.40 10.55 10.55 10.55 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 2 50Y-24H 2.65 0.00 0.00 6.75 6.75 6.75 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Pipe 5Y-24H 7.05 0.00 5.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 1 5Y-24H 5.75 0.00 -0.40 10.62 10.62 10.62 Pond 3 to Pond 4 - Weir: 2 5Y-24H 1.36 0.00 0.00 3.46 3.46 3.46 Drop Structure Link: Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction Scenario: Scenario 1 From Node: Detention#4 To Node: STR 602 Junction Link Count: 1 Flow Direction: Both Solution: Combine Increments: 0 Pipe Count: 1 Damping: 0.0000 ft Length: 78.00 ft FHWA Code: 0 Entr Loss Coef: 0.50 Exit Loss Coef: 1.00 Upstream Pipe Downstream Pipe Invert: 820.50 ft Invert: 820.25 ft Manning's N: 0.0130 Manning's N: 0.0130 Geometry: Circular Geometry: Circular Max Depth: 1.00 ft Max Depth: 1.00 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Appendix C: 24 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 21 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Bend Loss Coef: 0.00 Bend Location: 0.00 ft Energy Switch: Energy Pipe Comment: 12" pipe between Pond 4 and Str 602 (Manhole upstream of stream outfall) Weir Component Weir: 1 Weir Count: 1 Weir Flow Direction: Both Damping: 0.0000 ft Weir Type: Sharp Crested Vertical Geometry Type: Circular Invert: 820.50 ft Control Elevation: 820.50 ft Max Depth: 0.50 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Discharge Coefficients Weir Default: 3.200 Weir Table: Orifice Default: 0.600 Orifice Table: Weir Comment: 6" orifice @ el. 820.5 Weir Component Weir: 2 Weir Count: 1 Weir Flow Direction: Both Damping: 0.0000 ft Weir Type: Sharp Crested Vertical Geometry Type: Circular Invert: 824.80 ft Control Elevation: 824.80 ft Max Depth: 0.50 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Discharge Coefficients Weir Default: 3.200 Weir Table: Orifice Default: 0.600 Orifice Table: Weir Comment: 6" orifice @ inv. el. 824.80 Drop Structure Comment: Link Min/Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Pipe 100Y-24H 3.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Appendix C: 25 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 22 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 1 100Y-24H 2.01 0.00 0.00 10.22 10.22 10.22 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 2 100Y-24H 1.53 0.00 0.00 7.81 7.81 7.81 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Pipe 10Y-24H 2.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 1 10Y-24H 1.82 0.00 0.00 9.25 9.25 9.25 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 2 10Y-24H 0.57 0.00 0.00 2.91 2.91 2.91 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Pipe 25Y-24H 2.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 1 25Y-24H 1.87 0.00 0.00 9.51 9.51 9.51 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 2 25Y-24H 1.03 0.00 0.00 5.26 5.26 5.26 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Pipe 2Y-24H 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 1 2Y-24H 1.50 0.00 0.00 7.63 7.63 7.63 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 2 2Y-24H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - 50Y-24H 3.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Appendix C: 26 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 23 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] Pipe Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 1 50Y-24H 1.94 0.00 0.00 9.86 9.86 9.86 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 2 50Y-24H 1.31 0.00 0.00 6.69 6.69 6.69 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Pipe 5Y-24H 1.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 1 5Y-24H 1.72 0.00 0.00 8.74 8.74 8.74 Pond 4 to STR 602 Junction - Weir: 2 5Y-24H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Drop Structure Link: Pond 5 to Outfall Scenario: Scenario 1 From Node: Detention #5 To Node: Smokey Row ROW Outfall Link Count: 1 Flow Direction: Both Solution: Combine Increments: 0 Pipe Count: 1 Damping: 0.0000 ft Length: 120.00 ft FHWA Code: 0 Entr Loss Coef: 0.50 Exit Loss Coef: 1.00 Bend Loss Coef: 0.00 Bend Location: 0.00 ft Energy Switch: Energy Upstream Pipe Downstream Pipe Invert: 818.50 ft Invert: 818.00 ft Manning's N: 0.0130 Manning's N: 0.0130 Geometry: Circular Geometry: Circular Max Depth: 1.00 ft Max Depth: 1.00 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Pipe Comment: 12" pipe from Pond 5 to ROW ditch Weir Component Weir: 1 Bottom Clip Appendix C: 27 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 24 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Weir Count: 1 Weir Flow Direction: Both Damping: 0.0000 ft Weir Type: Sharp Crested Vertical Geometry Type: Circular Invert: 818.50 ft Control Elevation: 818.50 ft Max Depth: 0.50 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Op Table: Ref Node: Discharge Coefficients Weir Default: 3.200 Weir Table: Orifice Default: 0.600 Orifice Table: Weir Comment: 6" orifice @ inv. el. 818.50 Drop Structure Comment: Link Min/Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] Pond 5 to Outfall - Pipe 100Y-24H 1.66 -0.77 -0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 5 to Outfall - Weir: 1 100Y-24H 1.66 -0.77 0.04 8.46 8.46 8.46 Pond 5 to Outfall - Pipe 10Y-24H 1.31 -0.77 -0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 5 to Outfall - Weir: 1 10Y-24H 1.31 -0.77 0.04 6.65 6.65 6.65 Pond 5 to Outfall - Pipe 25Y-24H 1.46 -0.77 -0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 5 to Outfall - Weir: 1 25Y-24H 1.46 -0.77 0.04 7.44 7.44 7.44 Pond 5 to Outfall - Pipe 2Y-24H 1.04 -0.77 -0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 5 to Outfall - Weir: 1 2Y-24H 1.04 -0.77 0.04 5.29 5.29 5.29 Pond 5 to Outfall - Pipe 50Y-24H 1.57 -0.77 -0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pond 5 to Outfall - Weir: 1 50Y-24H 1.57 -0.77 0.04 8.00 8.00 8.00 Pond 5 to 5Y-24H 1.18 -0.77 -0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 Appendix C: 28 of 31 3/20/2020 North End - Post-Developed Integrated Pond Analysis_2020-03-15 25 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-15_North End_Integrated Pond Analysis_w UG Det_6in orifices\3/16/2020 09:35 Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] Outfall - Pipe Pond 5 to Outfall - Weir: 1 5Y-24H 1.18 -0.77 0.04 6.03 6.03 6.03 Pipe Link: STR 602 to Outfall Scenario: Scenario 1 From Node: STR 602 Junction To Node: Smokey Row ROW Outfall Link Count: 1 Flow Direction: Both Damping: 0.0000 ft Length: 93.00 ft FHWA Code: 0 Entr Loss Coef: 0.50 Exit Loss Coef: 1.00 Bend Loss Coef: 0.00 Bend Location: 0.00 ft Energy Switch: Energy Upstream Downstream Invert: 820.25 ft Invert: 819.50 ft Manning's N: 0.0130 Manning's N: 0.0130 Geometry: Circular Geometry: Circular Max Depth: 1.00 ft Max Depth: 1.00 ft Bottom Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Top Clip Default: 0.00 ft Default: 0.00 ft Op Table:Op Table: Ref Node:Ref Node: Manning's N: 0.0000 Manning's N: 0.0000 Comment: 12" pipe from Str 602 to Stream outfall Link Min/Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Link Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Min Flow [cfs] Min/Max Delta Flow [cfs] Max Us Velocity [fps] Max Ds Velocity [fps] Max Avg Velocity [fps] STR 602 to Outfall 100Y-24H 3.54 0.00 -0.03 4.51 5.25 4.88 STR 602 to Outfall 10Y-24H 2.38 0.00 -0.03 3.95 4.35 4.10 STR 602 to Outfall 25Y-24H 2.90 0.00 -0.03 3.95 4.74 4.21 STR 602 to Outfall 2Y-24H 1.50 0.00 -0.01 3.64 4.01 3.82 STR 602 to Outfall 50Y-24H 3.25 0.00 -0.03 4.14 5.00 4.57 STR 602 to Outfall 5Y-24H 1.72 0.00 -0.03 3.84 4.18 4.01 Appendix C: 29 of 31 3/20/2020 Appendix C: 30 of 31 3/20/2020 Appendix C: 31 of 31 3/20/2020 Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 APPENDIX D Appendix D: 1 of 114 3/20/2020 1084 Required (x4 floors)92 Provided36813142PAD:847.00PAD:846.00PAD:846.00PAD:846.00PAD:838.00PAD:837.00PAD:836.00PAD:837.00PAD:832.00PAD:831.00PAD:830.00PAD:831.00PAD:828.25PAD:834.45PAD:839.55PAD:846.50PAD:847.50PAD:834.00PAD:834.00PAD:837.81PAD:829.00PAD:829.00PAD:828.70PAD:829.15PAD:828.40PAD:826.70PAD:825.00PAD:825.70PAD:824.75PAD:824.00BP: 1+00.00EP: 3+58.61BP: 1+00.00 EP: 6+57.46BP: 1+00.00PC: 2+96.00Mid: 3+73.75 PT: 4+51.51EP: 7+77.21EVC: 2+55.00Elev: 850.09PVI: 2+05.00Elev: 850.23PVI: 3+84.86Elev: 848.88BVC: 1+55.00Elev: 849.70HP: 2+19.84Elev: 850.25BVP: 1+00.00Elev: 848.75BREAK: 3+84.86Elev: 848.88PVI: 6+05.75Elev: 844.35PVI: 7+54.63Elev: 838.73BREAK: 8+49.17Elev: 835.00EVC: 11+89.63Elev: 831.31PVI: 8+49.17Elev: 835.00PVI: 11+39.63Elev: 831.22Overall HP: 2+19.84Elev: 850.25EVC: 6+55.75Elev: 842.63BREAK: 7+54.63Elev: 838.73BVC: 5+55.75Elev: 845.57BVC: 10+89.63Elev: 831.65LP: 11+55.59Elev: 831.19EVP: 12+10.00Elev: 831.46Overall LP: 11+55.59Elev: 831.19PC: 1+ 5 0 . 8 6 PT: 2+33.15 PC: 4+75.25 PT : 5 + 7 2 . 9 0PC: 3+02.75PT: 3+62.38827.32832.29832.39831.80831.22830.64830.05 82 9 . 4 7828.89828.30827.538 3 1 . 3 5 ???850.21 850.20 850.13 849.67 849.21 848.59 847.62 846.65 845.68 844.52 842.85840.88838.91 8 3 6 . 9 4 8 3 4 . 9 9 8 3 4 . 2 9 8 3 3 . 6 0 8 3 2 . 9 0 8 3 2 . 2 0 83 1 . 5 2 8 3 1 . 1 9 8 3 1 . 3 9STR #630TC: 835.96INV. IN 831.99 (15" W)INV. IN 832.13 (12" N)INV. OUT 830.73 (15" E)STR #627TC: 827.73INV. OUT 823.98 (12" E)STR #634TC: 844.61INV. OUT 840.86 (12" S)STR #621TC: 838.73INV. IN 834.58 (15" SW)INV. OUT 834.48 (15" SE)STR #622TC: 839.69INV. IN 836.00 (12" SW)INV. OUT 835.77 (15" NE)STR #623TC: 845.69INV. IN 839.17 (12" SW)INV. OUT 839.07 (12" NE)STR #633TC: 842.57INV. IN 839.93 (12" N)INV. OUT 837.74 (12" SE)STR #631TC: 840.32INV. IN 836.57 (12" N)INV. OUT 836.33 (15" E)STR #629TC: 832.91INV. IN 828.91 (15" W)INV. OUT 828.81 (18" N)STR #626BTC: 825.04INV. IN 821.87 (12" W)INV. OUT 821.77 (12" E)STR #620TC: 834.25INV. IN 829.90 (15" W)INV. IN 828.55 (12" E)INV. OUT 828.30 (15" N)STR #619TC: 834.80INV. IN 828.25 (15" S)INV. OUT 828.15 (18" E)STR #609TC: 830.23INV. IN 826.30 (12" S)INV. OUT 826.22 (12" N)STR #608TC: 830.37INV. OUT 826.79 (12" N)STR #617TC: 834.07INV. OUT 830.76 (12" NE)STR #616TC: 832.95INV. IN 829.04 (12" SW)INV. OUT 828.81 (15" NE)STR #615TC: 831.79INV. IN 828.01 (15" SW)INV. OUT 827.92 (15" NE)STR #614TC: 830.97INV. IN 827.34 (15" SW)INV. OUT 827.24 (15" SE)STR #613TC: 833.69INV. IN 827.02 (15" NW)INV. OUT 826.92 (15" S)STR #602TC: 833.99INV. IN 820.16 (12" S)INV. OUT 820.07 (12" NE)STR #601TC: 821.04INV. IN 819.79 (12" SW)STR #653TC: 829.55INV. IN 826.05 (12" N)INV. OUT 825.95 (12" SW)STR #654TC: 829.10INV. IN 825.60 (12" NE)INV. OUT 825.50 (12" W)STR #652TC: 830.61INV. OUT 827.11 (12" S)STR #647TC: 824.31INV. IN 820.31 (15" S)INV. OUT 820.21 (15" N)STR #618ATC: 831.38INV. IN 826.62 (18" W)INV. OUT 826.52 (18" NE)STR #632TC: 840.32INV. IN 836.77 (12" NW)INV. OUT 836.67 (12" S)STR #626TC: 826.34INV. IN 822.60 (12" W)INV. IN 822.58 (12" N)INV. OUT 822.48 (12" E)STR #630ATC: 835.95INV. OUT 832.20 (12" S)STR #629ATC: 832.88INV. IN 828.59 (18" S)INV. OUT 828.49 (18" NE)STR #626ATC: 826.35INV. OUT 822.65 (12" S)STR #625TC: 848.93INV. OUT 845.18 (12" S)STR #620ATC: 836.45INV. IN 832.63 (15" NW)INV. OUT 832.66 (15" E)STR #620BTC: 832.17INV. OUT 828.67 (12" W)STR #610TC: 830.54INV. OUT 826.73 (12" N)CATCHMENTSTR 6257,534 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTTO DETENTION #153,255 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6237,412 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 63420,403 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 63315,472 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6323,394 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6313,748 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6309,376 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 630A16,476 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 62021,991 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6225,684 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6177,897 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6298,858 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 629A12,270 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 620B8,802 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6082,559 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6095,089 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6104,104 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6619,865 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6284,549 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6274,934 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6263,123 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 65215,147 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6537,204 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6548,913 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 61611,752 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 61511,086 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6143,610 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6191,510 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTTO DETENTION #4 WEST46,254 SFC = 0.75Tc = 8.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6475,461 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 626A12,705 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSPOND 3 LOW FLOW STRTC: 831.49INV. IN 821.49 (36" W)INV. OUT 821.49 (36" E)STR #661TC: 829.43INV. IN 821.41 (36" W)INV. OUT 821.31 (36" E)STR #655TC: 827.74INV. IN 824.24 (12" E)INV. OUT 824.01 (15" W)STR #663TC: 828.06INV. OUT 824.56 (12" N)STR #662TC: 829.82INV. IN 821.20 (36" W)INV. IN 824.41 (12" S)INV. OUT 821.20 (36" E)HP: 3+74.29 Elev: 833.60CATCHMENTSTR 66211,472 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSSTR #664TC: 827.60INV. IN 823.85 (15" E)INV. OUT 823.75 (15" S)CATCHMENTSTR 66419,709 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 6633,829 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 625B5,165 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 14342,740 SFC = 0.90Tc = 8.00 MINSPOND 1 LOW FLOW STRTC: 845.94INV. IN 839.96 (12" SW)INV. OUT 839.86 (12" NE)POND 2 LOW FLOW STRTC: 831.23INV. IN 826.40 (18" N)INV. OUT 826.30 (18" S)POND 4 LOW FLOW STRTC: 833.54INV. IN 820.48 (12" S)INV. OUT 820.39 (12" N)CATCHMENTSTR 65511,926 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSSTR #665ATC: 825.04INV. OUT 821.54 (12" W)STR #665TC: 824.65INV. IN 821.15 (12" E)INV. OUT 821.05 (12" N)CATCHMENTSTR 665A1,905 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSCATCHMENTSTR 665352 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSSTR #B3-1DTC: 831.43INV. IN 827.33 (18" S)INV. OUT 826.00 (18" N)STR #629BTC: 831.44INV. IN 827.44 (18" SW)INV. OUT 827.34 (18" N)STR #B3-2ATC: 831.13INV. IN 826.20 (18" N)INV. OUT 826.10 (18" S)STR #B3-2DTC: 831.60INV. IN 826.07 (18" N)INV. OUT 826.04 (18" S)STR #B5-1D36" x 72" PRECAST CONCWATER QUALITYDIVERSION STRUCTURETC: 825.51INV. IN 821.76 (12" W)INV. OUT 821.02 (12" E)STR #B5-2DTC: 824.82INV. IN 820.19 (15" S)INV. OUT 819.52 (15" N)STR #664ATC: 826.01INV. IN 822.26 (15" N)INV. IN 820.95 (12" S)INV. OUT 820.85 (15" W)STR #B5-3DTC: 826.49INV. IN 820.83 (15" E)INV. OUT 819.52 (15" W)STR #B4-1DTC: 830.31INV. IN 821.19 (36" W)INV. OUT 821.19 (36" E)CATCHMENTSTR 664A402 SFC = 0.90Tc = 5.00 MINSSTR #POND 4 LOW FLOW STRTC: 833.54INV. IN 820.48 (12" S)INV. OUT 820.39 (12" N)0'25'50'100'Scale: 1" = 50'-0"NPROPOSED DRAINA*E BASIN MAPAppendix D: 2 of 114 3/20/2020 84 Required (x4 floo 92 Provided 36 13 84 Required (x4 floo 92 Provided 36 13 CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.:DATE: DRAWN BY: SHEET TITLE: SHEET NO.:|TOTAL SHEETS:NO.DATE DESCRIPTION COPYRIGHTED BY SHREWSBERRY AND ASSOCIATESREVISIONS RDR KMB 02/19/2020 18-0128 ----HAMILTON COUNTYCARMEL, INDIANANORTH END - PHASE 1DRAWING STATUS: CONSTRUCTION PLANS IIND ANA T D E REREGIS PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION1 02/19/20 INITIAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN SUBMITTAL TO CARMEL FOR REVIEW2 03/20/20 CITY OF CARMEL RESUBMITTAL BENCHMARK INFORMATION:(NAVD 1988) C1.6 LEGEND: CARMEL GENERAL NOTES LEGEND:Appendix D: 3 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 4 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 5 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 6 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 7 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 8 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 9 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 10 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 11 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 12 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 13 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 14 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 15 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 16 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 17 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 18 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 19 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 20 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 21 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 22 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 23 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 24 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 25 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 26 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 27 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 28 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 29 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 30 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 31 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 32 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 33 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 34 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 35 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 36 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 37 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 38 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 39 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 40 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 41 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 42 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 43 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 44 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 45 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 46 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 47 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 48 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 49 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 50 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 51 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 52 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 53 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 54 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 55 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 56 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 57 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 58 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 59 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 60 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 61 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 62 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 63 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 64 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 65 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 66 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 67 of 114 3/20/2020 Appendix D: 68 of 114 3/20/2020 608 STR #608 - INLET CALCS 609 STR #609 - INLET CALCS 610 STR #610 - INLET CALCS 614 STR #614 - INLET CALCS 615 STR #615 - INLET CALCS 616 STR #616 - INLET CALCS 617 STR #617 - INLET CALCS 622 STR #622- INLET CALCS 623 STR #623 - INLET CALCS 625 STR #625 - INLET CALCS 633 STR #633 - INLET CALCS 608I CB STR #608 609I CB STR #609 610I CB STR #610 614I CB STR #614 615I CB STR #615 616I CB STR #616 617I CB STR #617 622I CB STR #622 623I CB STR #623 625I CB STR #625 633I CB STR #633 Routing Diagram for NORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Prepared by {enter your company name here}, Printed 3/20/2020 HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link Appendix D: 69 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 608: STR #608 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.31 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=98 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 2,559 0.90 STR 608 2,559 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 608: STR #608 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=2,559 sf Runoff Volume=98 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.31 cfs Appendix D: 70 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 13HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 608I: STR #608 Inflow Area = 2,559 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.31 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 98 cf Outflow = 0.31 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 98 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.31 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 98 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 830.48' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 830.37'15.8" x 15.8" Horiz. STR #608 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 22.0" x 26.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.31 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=830.48' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #608 (Weir Controls 0.31 cfs @ 0.54 fps) Pond 608I: STR #608 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Inflow Area=2,559 sf Peak Elev=830.48' 0.31 cfs0.31 cfs Appendix D: 71 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 609: STR #609 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.63 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=194 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 5,089 0.90 STR 609 5,089 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 609: STR #609 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=5,089 sf Runoff Volume=194 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.63 cfs Appendix D: 72 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 14HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 609I: STR #609 Inflow Area = 5,089 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.63 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 194 cf Outflow = 0.63 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 194 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.63 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 194 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 830.31' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 830.14'15.8" x 15.8" Horiz. STR #609 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 22.0" x 26.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.62 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=830.31' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #609 (Weir Controls 0.62 cfs @ 0.68 fps) Pond 609I: STR #609 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Inflow Area=5,089 sf Peak Elev=830.31' 0.63 cfs0.63 cfs Appendix D: 73 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 4HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 610: STR #610 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.50 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=157 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 4,104 0.90 STR 610 4,104 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 610: STR #610 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=4,104 sf Runoff Volume=157 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.50 cfs Appendix D: 74 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 15HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 610I: STR #610 Inflow Area = 4,104 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.50 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 157 cf Outflow = 0.50 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 157 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.50 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 157 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 830.69' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 830.54'15.8" x 15.8" Horiz. STR #610 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 22.0" x 26.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.50 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=830.69' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #610 (Weir Controls 0.50 cfs @ 0.63 fps) Pond 610I: STR #610 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Inflow Area=4,104 sf Peak Elev=830.69' 0.50 cfs0.50 cfs Appendix D: 75 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 5HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 614: STR #614 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.44 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=138 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 3,610 0.90 STR 614 3,610 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 614: STR #614 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.48 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.4 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=3,610 sf Runoff Volume=138 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.44 cfs Appendix D: 76 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 16HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 614I: STR #614 Inflow Area = 3,610 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.44 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 138 cf Outflow = 0.44 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 138 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.44 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 138 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 831.48' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 831.34'15.8" x 15.8" Horiz. STR #614 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 22.0" x 26.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.44 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=831.48' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #614 (Weir Controls 0.44 cfs @ 0.61 fps) Pond 614I: STR #614 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.48 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.4 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Inflow Area=3,610 sf Peak Elev=831.48' 0.44 cfs0.44 cfs Appendix D: 77 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 6HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 615: STR #615 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 1.36 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=423 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 11,086 0.90 STR 615 11,086 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 615: STR #615 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=11,086 sf Runoff Volume=423 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 1.36 cfs Appendix D: 78 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 17HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 615I: STR #615 Inflow Area = 11,086 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 1.36 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 423 cf Outflow = 1.36 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 423 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.36 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 423 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 831.98' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 831.80'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #615 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=1.34 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=831.98' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #615 (Weir Controls 1.34 cfs @ 0.70 fps) Pond 615I: STR #615 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=11,086 sf Peak Elev=831.98' 1.36 cfs1.36 cfs Appendix D: 79 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 7HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 616: STR #616 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 1.45 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=449 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 11,752 0.90 STR 616 11,752 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 616: STR #616 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=11,752 sf Runoff Volume=449 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 1.45 cfs Appendix D: 80 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 18HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 616I: STR #616 Inflow Area = 11,752 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 1.45 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 449 cf Outflow = 1.45 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 449 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.45 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 449 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 832.98' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 832.79'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #616 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=1.42 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=832.98' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #616 (Weir Controls 1.42 cfs @ 0.71 fps) Pond 616I: STR #616 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=11,752 sf Peak Elev=832.98' 1.45 cfs1.45 cfs Appendix D: 81 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 8HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 617: STR #617 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.97 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=302 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 7,897 0.90 STR 617 7,897 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 617: STR #617 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=7,897 sf Runoff Volume=302 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.97 cfs Appendix D: 82 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 19HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 617I: STR #617 Inflow Area = 7,897 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.97 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 302 cf Outflow = 0.97 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 302 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.97 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 302 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 834.30' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 834.07'15.8" x 15.8" Horiz. STR #617 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 22.0" x 26.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.96 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=834.30' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #617 (Weir Controls 0.96 cfs @ 0.79 fps) Pond 617I: STR #617 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=7,897 sf Peak Elev=834.30' 0.97 cfs0.97 cfs Appendix D: 83 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 9HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 622: STR #622- INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.70 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=217 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 5,684 0.90 STR 622 5,684 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 622: STR #622- INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=5,684 sf Runoff Volume=217 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.70 cfs Appendix D: 84 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 20HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 622I: STR #622 Inflow Area = 5,684 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.70 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 217 cf Outflow = 0.70 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 217 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.70 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 217 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 840.21' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 840.09'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #622 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.69 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=840.21' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #622 (Weir Controls 0.69 cfs @ 0.56 fps) Pond 622I: STR #622 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Inflow Area=5,684 sf Peak Elev=840.21' 0.70 cfs0.70 cfs Appendix D: 85 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 10HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 623: STR #623 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.91 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=283 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 7,412 0.90 STR 623 7,412 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 623: STR #623 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=7,412 sf Runoff Volume=283 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.91 cfs Appendix D: 86 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 21HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 623I: STR #623 Inflow Area = 7,412 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.91 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 283 cf Outflow = 0.91 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 283 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.91 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 283 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 845.04' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 844.90'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #623 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.90 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=845.04' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #623 (Weir Controls 0.90 cfs @ 0.61 fps) Pond 623I: STR #623 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=7,412 sf Peak Elev=845.04' 0.91 cfs0.91 cfs Appendix D: 87 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 11HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 625: STR #625 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.93 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=288 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 7,534 0.90 STR 625 7,534 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 625: STR #625 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=7,534 sf Runoff Volume=288 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.93 cfs Appendix D: 88 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 22HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 625I: STR #625 Inflow Area = 7,534 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.93 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 288 cf Outflow = 0.93 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 288 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.93 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 288 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 847.05' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 846.91'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #625 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.91 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=847.05' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #625 (Weir Controls 0.91 cfs @ 0.61 fps) Pond 625I: STR #625 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=7,534 sf Peak Elev=847.05' 0.93 cfs0.93 cfs Appendix D: 89 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 12HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 633: STR #633 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 1.90 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=591 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 15,472 0.90 STR 633 15,472 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 633: STR #633 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hr Runoff Area=15,472 sf Runoff Volume=591 cf Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 1.90 cfs Appendix D: 90 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 10-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 10-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=6.12 in/hrNORTH END - 10-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 23HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 633I: STR #633 Inflow Area = 15,472 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 1.90 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 591 cf Outflow = 1.90 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 591 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.90 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 591 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 843.25' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 843.02'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #633 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=1.87 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=843.25' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #633 (Weir Controls 1.87 cfs @ 0.78 fps) Pond 633I: STR #633 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 Inflow Area=15,472 sf Peak Elev=843.25' 1.90 cfs1.90 cfs Appendix D: 91 of 114 3/20/2020 608 STR #608 - INLET CALCS 609 STR #609 - INLET CALCS 610 STR #610 - INLET CALCS 614 STR #614 - INLET CALCS 615 STR #615 - INLET CALCS 616 STR #616 - INLET CALCS 617 STR #617 - INLET CALCS 622 STR #622- INLET CALCS 623 STR #623 - INLET CALCS 625 STR #625 - INLET CALCS 633 STR #633 - INLET CALCS 608I CB STR #608 609I CB STR #609 610I CB STR #610 614I CB STR #614 615I CB STR #615 616I CB STR #616 617I CB STR #617 622I CB STR #622 623I CB STR #623 625I CB STR #625 633I CB STR #633 Routing Diagram for NORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Prepared by {enter your company name here}, Printed 3/20/2020 HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link Appendix D: 92 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 608: STR #608 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.47 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=146 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 2,559 0.90 STR 608 2,559 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 608: STR #608 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.52 0.5 0.48 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.4 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=2,559 sf Runoff Volume=146 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.47 cfs Appendix D: 93 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 13HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 608I: STR #608 Inflow Area = 2,559 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 0.47 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 146 cf Outflow = 0.47 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 146 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.47 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 146 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 830.51' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 830.37'15.8" x 15.8" Horiz. STR #608 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 22.0" x 26.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.46 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=830.51' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #608 (Weir Controls 0.46 cfs @ 0.62 fps) Pond 608I: STR #608 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Inflow Area=2,559 sf Peak Elev=830.51' 0.47 cfs0.47 cfs Appendix D: 94 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 609: STR #609 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.93 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=290 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 5,089 0.90 STR 609 5,089 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 609: STR #609 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=5,089 sf Runoff Volume=290 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.93 cfs Appendix D: 95 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 14HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 609I: STR #609 Inflow Area = 5,089 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 0.93 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 290 cf Outflow = 0.93 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 290 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.93 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 290 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 830.37' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 830.14'15.8" x 15.8" Horiz. STR #609 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 22.0" x 26.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.92 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=830.36' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #609 (Weir Controls 0.92 cfs @ 0.78 fps) Pond 609I: STR #609 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=5,089 sf Peak Elev=830.37' 0.93 cfs0.93 cfs Appendix D: 96 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 4HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 610: STR #610 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.75 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=234 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 4,104 0.90 STR 610 4,104 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 610: STR #610 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=4,104 sf Runoff Volume=234 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.75 cfs Appendix D: 97 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 15HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 610I: STR #610 Inflow Area = 4,104 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 0.75 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 234 cf Outflow = 0.75 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 234 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.75 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 234 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 830.74' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 830.54'15.8" x 15.8" Horiz. STR #610 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 22.0" x 26.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.74 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=830.73' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #610 (Weir Controls 0.74 cfs @ 0.72 fps) Pond 610I: STR #610 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Inflow Area=4,104 sf Peak Elev=830.74' 0.75 cfs0.75 cfs Appendix D: 98 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 5HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 614: STR #614 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 0.66 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=205 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 3,610 0.90 STR 614 3,610 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 614: STR #614 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=3,610 sf Runoff Volume=205 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 0.66 cfs Appendix D: 99 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 16HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 614I: STR #614 Inflow Area = 3,610 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 0.66 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 205 cf Outflow = 0.66 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 205 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.66 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 205 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 831.52' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 831.34'15.8" x 15.8" Horiz. STR #614 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 22.0" x 26.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.65 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=831.52' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #614 (Weir Controls 0.65 cfs @ 0.69 fps) Pond 614I: STR #614 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Inflow Area=3,610 sf Peak Elev=831.52' 0.66 cfs0.66 cfs Appendix D: 100 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 6HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 615: STR #615 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 2.03 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=631 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 11,086 0.90 STR 615 11,086 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 615: STR #615 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=11,086 sf Runoff Volume=631 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 2.03 cfs Appendix D: 101 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 17HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 615I: STR #615 Inflow Area = 11,086 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 2.03 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 631 cf Outflow = 2.03 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 631 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 2.03 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 631 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 832.04' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 831.80'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #615 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=2.00 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=832.04' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #615 (Weir Controls 2.00 cfs @ 0.80 fps) Pond 615I: STR #615 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 Inflow Area=11,086 sf Peak Elev=832.04' 2.03 cfs2.03 cfs Appendix D: 102 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 7HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 616: STR #616 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 2.15 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=669 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 11,752 0.90 STR 616 11,752 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 616: STR #616 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=11,752 sf Runoff Volume=669 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 2.15 cfs Appendix D: 103 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 18HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 616I: STR #616 Inflow Area = 11,752 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 2.15 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 669 cf Outflow = 2.15 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 669 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 2.15 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 669 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 833.04' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 832.79'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #616 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=2.12 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=833.04' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #616 (Weir Controls 2.12 cfs @ 0.81 fps) Pond 616I: STR #616 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 Inflow Area=11,752 sf Peak Elev=833.04' 2.15 cfs2.15 cfs Appendix D: 104 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 8HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 617: STR #617 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 1.45 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=449 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 7,897 0.90 STR 617 7,897 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 617: STR #617 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=7,897 sf Runoff Volume=449 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 1.45 cfs Appendix D: 105 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 19HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 617I: STR #617 Inflow Area = 7,897 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 1.45 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 449 cf Outflow = 1.45 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 449 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.45 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 449 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 834.37' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 834.07'15.8" x 15.8" Horiz. STR #617 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 22.0" x 26.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=1.43 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=834.37' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #617 (Weir Controls 1.43 cfs @ 0.90 fps) Pond 617I: STR #617 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=7,897 sf Peak Elev=834.37' 1.45 cfs1.45 cfs Appendix D: 106 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 9HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 622: STR #622- INLET CALCS Runoff = 1.04 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=323 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 5,684 0.90 STR 622 5,684 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 622: STR #622- INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=5,684 sf Runoff Volume=323 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 1.04 cfs Appendix D: 107 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 20HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 622I: STR #622 Inflow Area = 5,684 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 1.04 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 323 cf Outflow = 1.04 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 323 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.04 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 323 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 840.24' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 840.09'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #622 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=1.03 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=840.24' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #622 (Weir Controls 1.03 cfs @ 0.64 fps) Pond 622I: STR #622 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=5,684 sf Peak Elev=840.24' 1.04 cfs1.04 cfs Appendix D: 108 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 10HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 623: STR #623 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 1.36 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=422 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 7,412 0.90 STR 623 7,412 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 623: STR #623 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=7,412 sf Runoff Volume=422 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 1.36 cfs Appendix D: 109 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 21HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 623I: STR #623 Inflow Area = 7,412 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 1.36 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 422 cf Outflow = 1.36 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 422 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.36 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 422 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 845.08' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 844.90'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #623 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=1.34 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=845.08' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #623 (Weir Controls 1.34 cfs @ 0.70 fps) Pond 623I: STR #623 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=7,412 sf Peak Elev=845.08' 1.36 cfs1.36 cfs Appendix D: 110 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 11HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 625: STR #625 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 1.38 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=429 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 7,534 0.90 STR 625 7,534 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 625: STR #625 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=7,534 sf Runoff Volume=429 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 1.38 cfs Appendix D: 111 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 22HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 625I: STR #625 Inflow Area = 7,534 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 1.38 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 429 cf Outflow = 1.38 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 429 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.38 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 429 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 847.10' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 846.91'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #625 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=1.36 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=847.09' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #625 (Weir Controls 1.36 cfs @ 0.70 fps) Pond 625I: STR #625 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=7,534 sf Peak Elev=847.10' 1.38 cfs1.38 cfs Appendix D: 112 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 12HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 633: STR #633 - INLET CALCS Runoff = 2.84 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume=880 cf, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Area (sf) C Description 15,472 0.90 STR 633 15,472 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Tc FROM STORM CALCS Subcatchment 633: STR #633 - INLET CALCS Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)3 2 1 0 IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hr Runoff Area=15,472 sf Runoff Volume=880 cf Runoff Depth=0.68" Tc=5.0 min C=0.90 2.84 cfs Appendix D: 113 of 114 3/20/2020 N. END 100-YR INLET CALCS IN-Carmel 100-Year Duration=5 min, Inten=9.12 in/hrNORTH END - 100-yr Inlet Calcs Printed 3/20/2020Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 23HydroCAD® 10.00-25 s/n 10118 © 2019 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 633I: STR #633 Inflow Area = 15,472 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for 100-Year event Inflow = 2.84 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 880 cf Outflow = 2.84 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 880 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 2.84 cfs @ 0.08 hrs, Volume= 880 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 843.32' @ 0.08 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 843.02'31.6" x 31.6" Horiz. STR #633 X 0.50 C= 0.600 in 44.0" x 52.0" Grate (22% open area) Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=2.79 cfs @ 0.08 hrs HW=843.32' (Free Discharge) 1=STR #633 (Weir Controls 2.79 cfs @ 0.89 fps) Pond 633I: STR #633 Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=15,472 sf Peak Elev=843.32' 2.84 cfs2.84 cfs Appendix D: 114 of 114 3/20/2020 Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 APPENDIX E Appendix E 1 of 49 3/20/2020 84 Required (x4 floors)92 Provided3613SPSPSPBENCHMARK INFORMATION:(NAVD 1988)NLEGEND:CARMEL GENERAL NOTESAppendix E 2 of 49 3/20/2020 North End- Post-Developed Water Quality Calculations_2020-03-15 1 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-13_North End_Water Quality Sizing\3/15/2020 16:05 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_1 Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention#2 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 1.3900 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.2200 Grass_post-dev 2 1.1700 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_1 1in-24H 1.37 12.0000 1.00 0.86 1.3900 98.7 84.17 84.17 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_2 Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention#2 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 3.0600 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.8800 Grass_post-dev 2 2.1800 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Appendix E 3 of 49 3/20/2020 North End- Post-Developed Water Quality Calculations_2020-03-15 2 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-13_North End_Water Quality Sizing\3/15/2020 16:05 Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_2 1in-24H 2.60 12.0000 1.00 0.74 3.0600 97.4 71.24 71.24 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_3 Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention#3 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 2.8100 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.4000 Grass_post-dev 2 2.4100 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_3 1in-24H 2.83 12.0000 1.00 0.87 2.8100 98.8 85.77 85.77 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_4 Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention#4 Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 0.7900 ac Appendix E 4 of 49 3/20/2020 North End- Post-Developed Water Quality Calculations_2020-03-15 3 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-13_North End_Water Quality Sizing\3/15/2020 16:05 Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.3600 Grass_post-dev 2 0.4300 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_4 1in-24H 0.53 12.0000 1.00 0.58 0.7900 95.3 54.43 54.43 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_5 East Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention #5 East Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 1.6600 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.5500 Grass_post-dev 2 1.1100 Impervious 1 Comment: Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_5 East 1in-24H 1.33 12.0000 1.00 0.70 1.6600 96.9 66.87 66.87 Manual Basin: Drainage Area_5 West Scenario: Scenario 1 Appendix E 5 of 49 3/20/2020 North End- Post-Developed Water Quality Calculations_2020-03-15 4 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-13_North End_Water Quality Sizing\3/15/2020 16:05 Node: Detention #5 West Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 5.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 0.9900 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 0.2500 Grass_post-dev 2 0.7400 Impervious 1 Comment: Drainage area 5 Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Drainage Area_5 West 1in-24H 0.88 12.0000 1.00 0.77 0.9900 97.7 74.75 74.75 Manual Basin: Smokey Row ROW Scenario: Scenario 1 Node: Detention #5_ROW Hydrograph Method: NRCS Unit Hydrograph Infiltration Method: Curve Number Time of Concentration: 15.0000 min Max Allowable Q: 0.00 cfs Time Shift: 0.0000 hr Unit Hydrograph: UH484 Peaking Factor: 484.0 Area: 1.1500 ac Area [ac]Land Cover Zone Soil Zone Rainfall Name 1.1500 Impervious 1 Comment: Tc= 15 minutes for shallow for sheet and concentrated flow Manual Basin Runoff Summary [Scenario 1] Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow Total Rainfall Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve % Imperv % DCIA Appendix E 6 of 49 3/20/2020 North End- Post-Developed Water Quality Calculations_2020-03-15 5 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-13_North End_Water Quality Sizing\3/15/2020 16:05 Basin Name Sim Name Max Flow [cfs] Time to Max Flow [hrs] Total Rainfall [in] Total Runoff [in] Area [ac] Equivalent Curve Number % Imperv % DCIA Smokey Row ROW 1in-24H 1.14 12.0583 1.00 1.00 1.1500 100.0 100.00 100.00 Node: Detention #5 East Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 820.50 ft Warning Stage: 820.50 ft Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 820.50 0 0 0 1.0000 820.50 0 0 0 2.0000 820.50 0 0 0 3.0000 820.50 0 0 0 6.0000 820.50 0 0 0 12.0000 820.50 0 0 0 24.0000 820.50 0 0 0 48.0000 820.50 Comment: CNwq= 98 perv: 0.55 acres impervious: 1.11 acres total: 1.66 ac Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention #5 East 1in-24H 820.50 820.50 0.0000 1.33 0.00 0 Node: Detention #5 West Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 820.50 ft Warning Stage: 824.50 ft Appendix E 7 of 49 3/20/2020 North End- Post-Developed Water Quality Calculations_2020-03-15 6 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-13_North End_Water Quality Sizing\3/15/2020 16:05 Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 820.50 0 0 0 1.0000 820.50 0 0 0 2.0000 820.50 0 0 0 3.0000 820.50 0 0 0 6.0000 820.50 0 0 0 12.0000 820.50 0 0 0 24.0000 820.50 0 0 0 48.0000 820.50 Comment: CNwq= 98 perv: 0.25 acres impervious: 0.74 acres total: 0.99 ac Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention #5 West 1in-24H 824.50 820.50 0.0000 0.88 0.00 0 Node: Detention #5_ROW Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 820.50 ft Warning Stage: 820.50 ft Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 820.50 0 0 0 1.0000 820.50 0 0 0 2.0000 820.50 0 0 0 3.0000 820.50 0 0 0 6.0000 820.50 0 0 0 12.0000 820.50 0 0 0 24.0000 820.50 0 0 0 48.0000 820.50 Comment: CNwq= 98 perv: 0.00 acres impervious: 1.068 acres Appendix E 8 of 49 3/20/2020 North End- Post-Developed Water Quality Calculations_2020-03-15 7 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-13_North End_Water Quality Sizing\3/15/2020 16:05 total: 1.068 ac Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention #5_ROW 1in-24H 820.50 820.50 0.0000 1.14 0.00 0 Node: Detention#2 Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 827.00 ft Warning Stage: 832.00 ft Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 827.00 0 0 0 1.0000 827.00 0 0 0 2.0000 827.00 0 0 0 3.0000 827.00 0 0 0 6.0000 827.00 0 0 0 12.0000 827.00 0 0 0 24.0000 827.00 0 0 0 48.0000 827.00 Comment: CNwq= 98 perv: 0.94 acres impervious: 2.03 acres total: 2.97 ac Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention#2 1in-24H 832.00 827.00 0.0000 3.97 0.00 0 Node: Detention#3 Scenario: Scenario 1 Appendix E 9 of 49 3/20/2020 North End- Post-Developed Water Quality Calculations_2020-03-15 8 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-13_North End_Water Quality Sizing\3/15/2020 16:05 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 821.50 ft Warning Stage: 829.50 ft Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 827.00 0 0 0 1.0000 827.00 0 0 0 2.0000 827.00 0 0 0 3.0000 827.00 0 0 0 6.0000 827.00 0 0 0 12.0000 827.00 0 0 0 24.0000 827.00 0 0 0 48.0000 827.00 Comment: CNwq= 98 perv: 0.43 acres impervious: 2.56 acres total: 2.98 ac Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention#3 1in-24H 829.50 827.00 0.0000 2.83 0.00 0 Node: Detention#4 Scenario: Scenario 1 Type: Time/Stage Base Flow: 0.00 cfs Initial Stage: 820.50 ft Warning Stage: 827.50 ft Boundary Stage: Year Month Day Hour Stage [ft] 0 0 0 0.0000 820.50 0 0 0 1.0000 820.50 0 0 0 2.0000 820.50 0 0 0 3.0000 820.50 0 0 0 6.0000 820.50 0 0 0 12.0000 820.50 0 0 0 24.0000 820.50 0 0 0 48.0000 820.50 Appendix E 10 of 49 3/20/2020 North End- Post-Developed Water Quality Calculations_2020-03-15 9 C:\Users\jkelly\Desktop\NORTH END ICPR\2020-03-13_North End_Water Quality Sizing\3/15/2020 16:05 Comment: CNwq= 98 perv: 0.41 acres impervious: 1.29 acres total: 1.70 ac Node Max Conditions [Scenario 1] Node Name Sim Name Warning Stage [ft] Max Stage [ft] Min/Max Delta Stage [ft] Max Total Inflow [cfs] Max Total Outflow [cfs] Max Surface Area [ft2] Detention#4 1in-24H 827.50 820.50 0.0000 0.53 0.00 0 Appendix E 11 of 49 3/20/2020 City of Indianapolis Stormwater Quality Unit (SQU) Selection Guide Pg. 1 02/11/2020 Version 17.0 (Check http://www.indy.gov/eGov/City/DPW/Business/Specs/Pages/UpdatedStormWaterManual.aspx for current Selection Guide) Performance Matrix for Manufactured SQUs that are approved for use as post-construction water quality units in the City of Indianapolis and in compliance with the Stormwater Design and Construction Specifications Manual 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. Rate Based SQUs - Table 1 Manufactured SQU SQU System Model Max Treatment Flow (cfs) Max 10-yr On-Line Flow Rate (cfs) Cleanout Depth (Inches) SC-3 0.39 N/A 9 SC-4 0.70 N/A 9 SC-5 1.09 N/A 9 SC-6 1.57 N/A 9 SC-7 2.14 N/A 9 SC-8 2.80 N/A 9 SC-9 3.54 N/A 9 SC-10 4.37 N/A 9 SC-11 5.29 N/A 9 SciClone1 SC-12 6.30 N/A 9 CDS-3 0.52 1.04 9 CDS-4 0.93 1.86 9 CDS-5 1.5 3.00 9 CDS-6 2.1 4.2 9 CDS-7 2.8 5.60 9 CDS-8 3.7 7.4 9 CDS-10 5.8 11.6 9 CDS Technologies1 CDS-12 8.4 16.8 9 DVS-36C 0.56 1.12 9 DVS-48C 1.00 2.00 9 DVS-60C 1.56 3.12 9 DVS-72C 2.25 4.50 9 DVS-84C 3.06 6.12 9 DVS-96C 4.00 8.00 9 DVS-120C 6.25 12.50 9 DVS1 DVS-144C 9.00 18.00 9 Appendix E 12 of 49 3/20/2020 City of Indianapolis Stormwater Quality Unit (SQU) Selection Guide Pg. 2 02/11/2020 Version 17.0 Manufactured SQU SQU System Model Max Treatment Flow (cfs) Max 10-yr On-Line Flow Rate (cfs) Cleanout Depth (Inches) 4-ft 1.12 2.95 9 6-ft 2.52 6.63 12 8-ft 4.49 11.81 15 10-ft 7.00 18.40 18 Hydro International Downstream Defender1 12 ft 10.08 26.51 21 3-ft 0.85 1.84 9 4-ft 1.5 3.24 9 5-ft 2.35 5.08 9 6-ft 3.38 7.30 9 7-ft 4.60 9.94 9 Hydro International First Defense High Capacity1 8-ft 6.00 12.96 9 HS-3 0.50 1.00 6 HS-4 0.88 1.76 6 HS-5 1.37 2.74 6 HS-6 1.98 3.96 6 HS-7 2.69 5.38 6 HS-8 3.52 7.04 6 HS-9 4.45 8.9 6 HS-10 5.49 10.98 6 HS-11 6.65 13.3 6 HydroStorm by Hydroworks, LLC1 HS-12 7.91 15.82 6 XC-2 0.57 1.16 6 XC-3 1.13 2.30 6 XC-4 1.86 3.79 6 XC-5 2.78 5.66 6 XC-6 3.88 7.90 6 XC-7 5.17 10.52 6 XC-8 6.64 13.51 6 XC-9 8.29 16.87 6 XC-10 10.13 20.62 6 XC-11 12.15 24.73 6 XC-12 14.35 29.20 6 AquaShield Aqua-Swirl Xcelerator1 XC-13 15.53 31.60 6 CS-4 1.80 4.03 9 CS-5 2.81 6.29 9 CS-6 4.05 9.07 9 CS-8 7.20 16.1 9 CS-10 11.3 25.3 9 Contech Cascade Separator CS-12 16.2 36.3 9 Appendix E 13 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 14 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 15 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 16 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 17 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 18 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 19 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 20 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 21 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 22 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 23 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 24 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 25 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 26 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 27 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 28 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 29 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 30 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 31 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 32 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 33 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 34 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 35 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 36 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 37 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 38 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 39 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 40 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 41 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 42 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 43 of 49 3/20/2020 Appendix E 44 of 49 3/20/2020 2733 Kanasita Drive, Suite 111, Chattanooga, TN 37343Phone (888) 344-9044 Fax (423) 826-2112www.aquashieldinc.comStructure #:Drawn By:Scale:Date:1/30/2020RvwedRvw. DateU.S. Patent No. 6524473 and other Patent PendingAqua-Swirl XCeleratorAs ShownOFloresAqua-Swirl Stormwater Treatment SystemStandard DetailXC-2 CCW STDXC-2 STDAqua-Swirl Polymer Coated Steel (PCS)Stormwater Treatment System12 in[305 mm]Manhole Frame & Cover DetailFor Non-Traffic Areas OnlyNTS48 in[1219 mm] Min.Gravel BackfillConcreteWrap Compressible ExpansionJoint Material to a minimum1/2-inch [13 mm] thickness aroundtop of riser to allow transfer ofinadvertent loading frommanhole cover to concrete slab.RiserSoilCoverFrame1/2 in[13 mm]1/2 in[13 mm]Place small amount ofconcrete [3,000 psi [20MPa] (min)] to supportand level manhole frame.DO NOT allow manholeframe to rest upon riser.Backfill (90%Proctor Density)8 in[203 mm]4 1/2 in[114 mm]Unless other traffic barriers are present,bollards shall be placed around access riser(s)in non-traffic areas to prevent inadvertentloading by maintenance vehicles.Manhole Frame & Cover DetailFor Traffic Loading AreasNTSCoverFrame48 in[1219 mm] Min.Backfill (90%Proctor Density)3,000 psi [20 MPa](min) Concrete#4 [13 mm] Rebar@ 6 in [152 mm]Each Way30 in [762 mm]Riser1/2 in[13 mm]4 1/2 in[114 mm]14 in[356 mm]1/2 in [13 mm] ThickExpansion JointMaterialIf traffic loading (HS-25) is required or anticipated, a 4-foot [1.22 m]diameter, 14-inch [356 mm] thick reinforced concrete pad must beplaced over the Stormwater Treatment System Riser to support andlevel the manhole frame, as shown. The top of riser pipe must bewrapped with compressible expansion joint material to a minimum1/2-inch [13 mm] thickness to allow transfer of wheel loads frommanhole cover to concrete slab. Manhole cover shall bear on concreteslab and not on riser pipe. The concrete slab shall have a minimumstrength of 3,000 psi [20 MPa] and be reinforced with #4 [13 mm]reinforcing steel as shown. Minimum cover over reinforcing steel shallbe 1-inch [25 mm]. Top of manhole cover and concrete slab shall belevel with finish grade.Please see accompanied Aqua-Swirl specification notes. See SitePlan for actual System orientation. Approximate dry (pick) weight:1000 lbs [500 kg].Backfill shall extend at least 18inches [457 mm] outward fromSwirl Concentrator and for thefull height of the SwirlConcentrator (including riser)extending laterally toundisturbed soils. (See MHDetail Below)BackfillBeddingUndisturbed soil18 in[457 mm]6 in[152 mm]11As an alternative, 42 in [1067 mm] diameter, HS-20/25rated precast concrete rings may be substituted. 14 in[356 mm] thickness must be maintained.XC-2 inlet/outlet pipe size ranges up to 15 in [381 mm].XC-2 chamber height may vary up to 64 in [1626 mm],depending on inlet/outlet pipe size.Orientation may vary from a minimum of 90° to amaximum of 180°. Clockwise or counterclockwiseorientation as needed.2332Plan ViewSCALE 1:40 42 in[1067 mm] 42 in[1067 mm] n15 in[381 mm]2Octagonal Base Plate Ø30 in[Ø765 mm]Elevation ViewSCALE 1:40 64 in[1626 mm]VariesVaries 5 MH Frame[127 mm] n30 in[762 mm]Band Couplerby Manufacturer.(as needed)RiserManhole Frame andCover by Manufacturer.(See Details)Rim elevations tomatch finish grade. n15 in[381 mm] 40 in[1014 mm]Pipe couplingby Contractor.12 in [305 mm]long Stub-outby Manufacturer.Pipe couplingby Contractor.12 in [305 mm]long Stub-outby Manufacturer.44el. VariesInlet/Outlet Invertel. Variesel. VariesGrade (Rim) el. VariesOptional inletorientations available(See note 4) n30 in[762 mm]Projected ViewSCALE 1:70180°Appendix E 45 of 49 3/20/2020 2733 Kanasita Drive, Suite 111, Chattanooga, TN 37343Phone (888) 344-9044 Fax (423) 826-2112www.aquashieldinc.comStructure #:Drawn By:Scale:Date:1/30/2020RvwedRvw. DateU.S. Patent No. 6524473 and other Patent PendingAqua-Swirl XCeleratorAs ShownOFloresAqua-Swirl Stormwater Treatment SystemStandard DetailXC-3 CCW STDXC-3 STDAqua-Swirl Polymer Coated Steel (PCS)Stormwater Treatment System12 in[305 mm]Manhole Frame & Cover DetailFor Non-Traffic Areas OnlyNTS48 in[1219 mm] Min.Gravel BackfillConcreteWrap Compressible ExpansionJoint Material to a minimum1/2-inch [13 mm] thickness aroundtop of riser to allow transfer ofinadvertent loading frommanhole cover to concrete slab.RiserSoilCoverFrame1/2 in[13 mm]1/2 in[13 mm]Place small amount ofconcrete [3,000 psi [20MPa] (min)] to supportand level manhole frame.DO NOT allow manholeframe to rest upon riser.Backfill (90%Proctor Density)8 in[203 mm]4 1/2 in[114 mm]Unless other traffic barriers are present,bollards shall be placed around access riser(s)in non-traffic areas to prevent inadvertentloading by maintenance vehicles.Manhole Frame & Cover DetailFor Traffic Loading AreasNTSCoverFrame48 in[1219 mm] Min.Backfill (90%Proctor Density)3,000 psi [20 MPa](min) Concrete#4 [13 mm] Rebar@ 6 in [152 mm]Each Way30 in [762 mm]Riser1/2 in[13 mm]4 1/2 in[114 mm]14 in[356 mm]1/2 in [13 mm] ThickExpansion JointMaterialIf traffic loading (HS-25) is required or anticipated, a 4-foot [1.22 m]diameter, 14-inch [356 mm] thick reinforced concrete pad must beplaced over the Stormwater Treatment System Riser to support andlevel the manhole frame, as shown. The top of riser pipe must bewrapped with compressible expansion joint material to a minimum1/2-inch [13 mm] thickness to allow transfer of wheel loads frommanhole cover to concrete slab. Manhole cover shall bear on concreteslab and not on riser pipe. The concrete slab shall have a minimumstrength of 3,000 psi [20 MPa] and be reinforced with #4 [13 mm]reinforcing steel as shown. Minimum cover over reinforcing steel shallbe 1-inch [25 mm]. Top of manhole cover and concrete slab shall belevel with finish grade.Please see accompanied Aqua-Swirl specification notes. See SitePlan for actual System orientation. Approximate dry (pick) weight:1500 lbs [700 kg].Backfill shall extend at least 18inches [457 mm] outward fromSwirl Concentrator and for thefull height of the SwirlConcentrator (including riser)extending laterally toundisturbed soils. (See MHDetail Below)BackfillBeddingUndisturbed soil18 in[457 mm]6 in[152 mm]11As an alternative, 42 in [1067 mm] diameter, HS-20/25rated precast concrete rings may be substituted. 14 in[356 mm] thickness must be maintained.XC-3 inlet/outlet pipe size ranges up to 21 in [533 mm].XC-3 chamber height may vary up to 86 in [2184 mm],depending on inlet/outlet pipe size.Orientation may vary from a minimum of 90° to amaximum of 180°. Clockwise or counterclockwiseorientation as needed.2332Plan ViewSCALE 1:40 54 in[1372 mm] 54 in[1372 mm] n21 in[533 mm]2Octagonal Base Plate Ø42 in[Ø107 mm]Elevation ViewSCALE 1:40 86 in[2184 mm]VariesVaries 5 MH Frame[127 mm] n30 in[762 mm]Band Couplerby Manufacturer.(as needed)RiserManhole Frame andCover by Manufacturer.(See Details)Rim elevations tomatch finish grade. 53 in[1346 mm]Pipe couplingby Contractor.12 in [305 mm]long Stub-outby Manufacturer.Pipe couplingby Contractor.12 in [305 mm]long Stub-outby Manufacturer.44el. VariesInlet/Outlet Invertel. Variesel. VariesGrade (Rim) el. Varies n42 in[1067 mm]Projected ViewSCALE 1:70Optional inletorientations available(See note 4) n21 in[533 mm]180°Appendix E 46 of 49 3/20/2020 2733 Kanasita Drive, Suite 111, Chattanooga, TN 37343Phone (888) 344-9044 Fax (423) 826-2112www.aquashieldinc.comStructure #:Drawn By:Scale:Date:1/30/2020RvwedRvw. DateU.S. Patent No. 6524473 and other Patent PendingAqua-Swirl XCeleratorAs ShownOFloresAqua-Swirl Stormwater Treatment SystemStandard DetailXC-4 CCW STDXC-4 STDAqua-Swirl Polymer Coated Steel (PCS)Stormwater Treatment System12 in[305 mm]Manhole Frame & Cover DetailFor Non-Traffic Areas OnlyNTS48 in[1219 mm] Min.Gravel BackfillConcreteWrap Compressible ExpansionJoint Material to a minimum1/2-inch [13 mm] thickness aroundtop of riser to allow transfer ofinadvertent loading frommanhole cover to concrete slab.RiserSoilCoverFrame1/2 in[13 mm]1/2 in[13 mm]Place small amount ofconcrete [3,000 psi [20MPa] (min)] to supportand level manhole frame.DO NOT allow manholeframe to rest upon riser.Backfill (90%Proctor Density)8 in[203 mm]4 1/2 in[114 mm]Unless other traffic barriers are present,bollards shall be placed around access riser(s)in non-traffic areas to prevent inadvertentloading by maintenance vehicles.Manhole Frame & Cover DetailFor Traffic Loading AreasNTSCoverFrame48 in[1219 mm] Min.Backfill (90%Proctor Density)3,000 psi [20 MPa](min) Concrete#4 [13 mm] Rebar@ 6 in [152 mm]Each Way30 in [762 mm]Riser1/2 in[13 mm]4 1/2 in[114 mm]14 in[356 mm]1/2 in [13 mm] ThickExpansion JointMaterialIf traffic loading (HS-25) is required or anticipated, a 4-foot [1.22 m]diameter, 14-inch [356 mm] thick reinforced concrete pad must beplaced over the Stormwater Treatment System Riser to support andlevel the manhole frame, as shown. The top of riser pipe must bewrapped with compressible expansion joint material to a minimum1/2-inch [13 mm] thickness to allow transfer of wheel loads frommanhole cover to concrete slab. Manhole cover shall bear on concreteslab and not on riser pipe. The concrete slab shall have a minimumstrength of 3,000 psi [20 MPa] and be reinforced with #4 [13 mm]reinforcing steel as shown. Minimum cover over reinforcing steel shallbe 1-inch [25 mm]. Top of manhole cover and concrete slab shall belevel with finish grade.Please see accompanied Aqua-Swirl specification notes. See SitePlan for actual System orientation. Approximate dry (pick) weight:2000 lbs [900 kg].Backfill shall extend at least 18inches [457 mm] outward fromSwirl Concentrator and for thefull height of the SwirlConcentrator (including riser)extending laterally toundisturbed soils. (See MHDetail Below)BackfillBeddingUndisturbed soil18 in[457 mm]6 in[152 mm]11As an alternative, 42 in [1067 mm] diameter, HS-20/25rated precast concrete rings may be substituted. 14 in[356 mm] thickness must be maintained.XC-4 inlet/outlet pipe size ranges up to 27 in [686 mm].XC-4 chamber height may vary up to 99 in [2515 mm],depending on inlet/outlet pipe size.Orientation may vary from a minimum of 90° to amaximum of 180°. Clockwise or counterclockwiseorientation as needed.2332Plan ViewSCALE 1:40 66 in[1676 mm] 66 in[1676 mm] n27 in[686 mm]2Octagonal Base Plate Ø54 in[Ø1375 mm]Elevation ViewSCALE 1:40 99 in[2515 mm]VariesVaries 5 MH Frame[127 mm] n30 in[762 mm]Band Couplerby Manufacturer.(as needed)RiserManhole Frame andCover by Manufacturer.(See Details)Rim elevations tomatch finish grade. 57 in[1448 mm]Pipe couplingby Contractor.12 in [305 mm]long Stub-outby Manufacturer.Pipe couplingby Contractor.12 in [305 mm]long Stub-outby Manufacturer.44el. VariesInlet/Outlet Invertel. Variesel. VariesGrade (Rim) el. Varies n54 in[1372 mm]Projected ViewSCALE 1:70Optional inletorientations available(See note 4) n27 in[686 mm]180°Appendix E 47 of 49 3/20/2020 2733 Kanasita Drive, Suite 111, Chattanooga, TN 37343Phone (888) 344-9044 Fax (423) 826-2112www.aquashieldinc.comStructure #:Drawn By:Scale:Date:1/30/2020RvwedRvw. DateU.S. Patent No. 6524473 and other Patent PendingAqua-Swirl XCeleratorAs ShownOFloresAqua-Swirl Stormwater Treatment SystemStandard DetailXC-5 CCW STDXC-5 STDAqua-Swirl Polymer Coated Steel (PCS)Stormwater Treatment System12 in[305 mm]Manhole Frame & Cover DetailFor Non-Traffic Areas OnlyNTS48 in[1219 mm] Min.Gravel BackfillConcreteWrap Compressible ExpansionJoint Material to a minimum1/2-inch [13 mm] thickness aroundtop of riser to allow transfer ofinadvertent loading frommanhole cover to concrete slab.RiserSoilCoverFrame1/2 in[13 mm]1/2 in[13 mm]Place small amount ofconcrete [3,000 psi [20MPa] (min)] to supportand level manhole frame.DO NOT allow manholeframe to rest upon riser.Backfill (90%Proctor Density)8 in[203 mm]4 1/2 in[114 mm]Unless other traffic barriers are present,bollards shall be placed around access riser(s)in non-traffic areas to prevent inadvertentloading by maintenance vehicles.Manhole Frame & Cover DetailFor Traffic Loading AreasNTSCoverFrame48 in[1219 mm] Min.Backfill (90%Proctor Density)3,000 psi [20 MPa](min) Concrete#4 [13 mm] Rebar@ 6 in [152 mm]Each Way30 in [762 mm]Riser1/2 in[13 mm]4 1/2 in[114 mm]14 in[356 mm]1/2 in [13 mm] ThickExpansion JointMaterialIf traffic loading (HS-25) is required or anticipated, a 4-foot [1.22 m]diameter, 14-inch [356 mm] thick reinforced concrete pad must beplaced over the Stormwater Treatment System Riser to support andlevel the manhole frame, as shown. The top of riser pipe must bewrapped with compressible expansion joint material to a minimum1/2-inch [13 mm] thickness to allow transfer of wheel loads frommanhole cover to concrete slab. Manhole cover shall bear on concreteslab and not on riser pipe. The concrete slab shall have a minimumstrength of 3,000 psi [20 MPa] and be reinforced with #4 [13 mm]reinforcing steel as shown. Minimum cover over reinforcing steel shallbe 1-inch [25 mm]. Top of manhole cover and concrete slab shall belevel with finish grade.Please see accompanied Aqua-Swirl specification notes. See SitePlan for actual System orientation. Approximate dry (pick) weight:2200 lbs [1000 kg].Backfill shall extend at least 18inches [457 mm] outward fromSwirl Concentrator and for thefull height of the SwirlConcentrator (including riser)extending laterally toundisturbed soils. (See MHDetail Below)BackfillBeddingUndisturbed soil18 in[457 mm]6 in[152 mm]11As an alternative, 42 in [1067 mm] diameter, HS-20/25rated precast concrete rings may be substituted. 14 in[356 mm] thickness must be maintained.XC-5 inlet/outlet pipe size ranges up to 30 in [762 mm].XC-5 chamber height may vary up to 116 in [2946 mm],depending on inlet/outlet pipe size.Orientation may vary from a minimum of 90° to amaximum of 180°. Clockwise or counterclockwiseorientation as needed.2332Plan ViewSCALE 1:40 78 in[1981 mm] 78 in[1981 mm] n30 in[762 mm]2Octagonal Base Plate Ø66 in[Ø168 mm]Elevation ViewSCALE 1:40 116 in[2946 mm]VariesVaries 5 MH Frame[127 mm] n30 in[762 mm]Band Couplerby Manufacturer.(as needed)RiserManhole Frame andCover by Manufacturer.(See Details)Rim elevations tomatch finish grade. 68 in[1727 mm]Pipe couplingby Contractor.12 in [305 mm]long Stub-outby Manufacturer.Pipe couplingby Contractor.12 in [305 mm]long Stub-outby Manufacturer.44el. VariesInlet/Outlet Invertel. Variesel. VariesGrade (Rim) el. Varies n66 in[1676 mm]Projected ViewSCALE 1:70Optional inletorientations available(See note 4) n30 in[762 mm]180°Appendix E 48 of 49 3/20/2020 2733 Kanasita Drive, Suite 111, Chattanooga, TN 37343Phone (888) 344-9044 Fax (423) 826-2112www.aquashieldinc.comStructure #:Drawn By:Scale:Date:1/30/2020RvwedRvw. DateU.S. Patent No. 6524473 and other Patent PendingAqua-Swirl XCeleratorAs ShownOFloresAqua-Swirl Stormwater Treatment SystemStandard DetailXC-7 CCW STDXC-7 STDAqua-Swirl Polymer Coated Steel (PCS)Stormwater Treatment System12 in[305 mm]Manhole Frame & Cover DetailFor Non-Traffic Areas OnlyNTS48 in[1219 mm] Min.Gravel BackfillConcreteWrap Compressible ExpansionJoint Material to a minimum1/2-inch [13 mm] thickness aroundtop of riser to allow transfer ofinadvertent loading frommanhole cover to concrete slab.RiserSoilCoverFrame1/2 in[13 mm]1/2 in[13 mm]Place small amount ofconcrete [3,000 psi [20MPa] (min)] to supportand level manhole frame.DO NOT allow manholeframe to rest upon riser.Backfill (90%Proctor Density)8 in[203 mm]4 1/2 in[114 mm]Unless other traffic barriers are present,bollards shall be placed around access riser(s)in non-traffic areas to prevent inadvertentloading by maintenance vehicles.Manhole Frame & Cover DetailFor Traffic Loading AreasNTSCoverFrame48 in[1219 mm] Min.Backfill (90%Proctor Density)3,000 psi [20 MPa](min) Concrete#4 [13 mm] Rebar@ 6 in [152 mm]Each Way30 in [762 mm]Riser1/2 in[13 mm]4 1/2 in[114 mm]14 in[356 mm]1/2 in [13 mm] ThickExpansion JointMaterialIf traffic loading (HS-25) is required or anticipated, a 4-foot [1.22 m]diameter, 14-inch [356 mm] thick reinforced concrete pad must beplaced over the Stormwater Treatment System Riser to support andlevel the manhole frame, as shown. The top of riser pipe must bewrapped with compressible expansion joint material to a minimum1/2-inch [13 mm] thickness to allow transfer of wheel loads frommanhole cover to concrete slab. Manhole cover shall bear on concreteslab and not on riser pipe. The concrete slab shall have a minimumstrength of 3,000 psi [20 MPa] and be reinforced with #4 [13 mm]reinforcing steel as shown. Minimum cover over reinforcing steel shallbe 1-inch [25 mm]. Top of manhole cover and concrete slab shall belevel with finish grade.Please see accompanied Aqua-Swirl specification notes. See SitePlan for actual System orientation. Approximate dry (pick) weight:3800 lbs [1700 kg].Backfill shall extend at least 18inches [457 mm] outward fromSwirl Concentrator and for thefull height of the SwirlConcentrator (including riser)extending laterally toundisturbed soils. (See MHDetail Below)BackfillBeddingUndisturbed soil18 in[457 mm]6 in[152 mm]11As an alternative, 42 in [1067 mm] diameter, HS-20/25rated precast concrete rings may be substituted. 14 in[356 mm] thickness must be maintained.XC-7 inlet/outlet pipe size ranges up to 42 in [1067 mm].XC-7 chamber height may vary up to 156 in [3962 mm],depending on inlet/outlet pipe size.Orientation may vary from a minimum of 90° to amaximum of 180°. Clockwise or counterclockwiseorientation as needed.2332Plan ViewSCALE 1:40 102 in[2591 mm] 102 in[2591 mm] n42 in[1067 mm]2Octagonal Base Plate Ø90 in[Ø2289 mm]Elevation ViewSCALE 1:40 156 in[3962 mm]VariesVaries 5 MH Frame[127 mm] n30 in[762 mm]Band Couplerby Manufacturer.(as needed)RiserManhole Frame andCover by Manufacturer.(See Details)Rim elevations tomatch finish grade. 90 in[2286 mm]Pipe couplingby Contractor.12 in [305 mm]long Stub-outby Manufacturer.Pipe couplingby Contractor.12 in [305 mm]long Stub-outby Manufacturer.44el. VariesInlet/Outlet Invertel. Variesel. VariesGrade (Rim) el. Varies n90 in[2286 mm]Projected ViewSCALE 1:70Optional inletorientations available(See note 4) n42 in[1067 mm]180°Appendix E 49 of 49 3/20/2020 Shrewsberry Proj. Num. 18-0128 APPENDIX F Appendix F: 1 of 78 3/20/2020 WETLAND DELINEATION SMOKEY ROW & THE MONON WEST SMOKEY ROW ROAD CARMEL, INDIANA PROJECT NO.: 19IN0303 PREPARED FOR: OLD TOWN COMPANIES CARMEL, INDIANA PREPARED BY: Alt & Witzig Consulting Services Carmel, Indiana June 19, 2019 Appendix F: 2 of 78 3/20/2020 Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 West 99th Street Carmel, Indiana 46032 (317) 875-7000 Fax (317) 876-3705 June 19, 2019 Old Town Companies 31 1st Avenue SW Carmel, Indiana 46032 Attn: Mr. Curtis Sattison RE: Wetland Delineation Smokey Row & The Monon West Smokey Row Road Carmel, Indiana Alt & Witzig Project No.:19IN0303 Dear Mr. Sattison: In compliance with your request, we have completed a Wetland Delineation at the above referenced Site. The purpose of our investigation was to identify jurisdictional areas associated with the Site by evaluation of potential wetland areas or other "Waters of the United States". If you have questions or comments regarding our findings, please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you for the opportunity to offer our services. Sincerely, ALT & WITZIG CONSULTING SERVICES Clayton Heavin Project Manager Environmental Division John C. Flannelly Senior Project Manager Environmental Division Appendix F: 3 of 78 3/20/2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY ......................................................................................................... 2 REGULATION DEFINITION .......................................................................................................... 3 DESCRIPTION OF SITE .................................................................................................................. 5 WETLAND DELINEATION ............................................................................................................ 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................... 11 APPENDICES Appendix A FIGURES B WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS – MIDWEST REGION C SOIL REPORT D SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Appendix F: 4 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 1 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a Wetland Delineation performed on approximately 21-acres of primarily residential land with a small wooded area located north of West Smokey Row Road and west of the Monon Trail in Carmel, Indiana (Site). The purpose of our investigation was to determine if portions of the Site are regulated under Sections 401 and/or 404 of the Clean Water Act. Sections 401 and 404 were established to control activities in “State Regulated Wetlands” and regulated "Waters of the United States." An Alt & Witzig Consulting Services (Alt & Witzig) Wetlands Scientist performed a Site reconnaissance on June 11, 2019. Soil and vegetation samples collected on the Site during the investigation were inspected to determine whether wetland soils or hydrophytic vegetation were present. Wetland hydrological indicators were also investigated. This investigation was performed for Old Town Companies. Authorization to perform this assessment was in the form of a written agreement between Mr. Curtis Sattison of Old Town Companies and Alt & Witzig. Appendix F: 5 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 2 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY This report has been prepared in accordance with an agreement between Old Town Companies and Alt & Witzig. The services performed by Alt & Witzig have been conducted in a manner consistent with the level of quality and skill generally exercised by members of its profession and consulting practices. This report is solely for the use of Old Town Companies. Any reliance of this report by third parties shall be at such party's sole risk as this report may not contain sufficient information for purposes of other parties or for other uses. This report shall only be presented in full and may not be used to support any other objectives than those set out in the report, except where written approval and consent are provided by Old Town Companies and Alt & Witzig. Appendix F: 6 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 3 REGULATION DEFINITION Definition of “Waters of the U.S.” “Waters of the U.S.” is a broad term that includes intrastate lakes, rivers, perennial and intermittent streams, mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, wet meadows and natural ponds, which could affect interstate or foreign commerce. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has jurisdiction over any “Waters of the U.S.” under the Clean Water Act. Definition of “State Regulated Wetlands” and “Isolated Wetland” According to Indiana state regulatory changes, the definition of a “State Regulated Wetland” is described as an isolated wetland located in Indiana that is not an exempt isolated wetland. Isolated wetlands consist of wetlands that are not subject to regulation under section 404(a) of the Clean Water Act, regulated by USACE. Exempt isolated wetlands are generally wetlands that are voluntarily created, exists as an incidental feature, is a fringe wetland associated with a private pond, is associated with a manmade body of surface water, is a Class I isolated wetland with a delineation of 0.5-acre or less, is a Class II isolated wetland with a delineation of 0.25-acre or less, or is constructed for reduction or control of pollution. Definition of Wetlands The following definition of a wetland is taken from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (USACE, 1987). Wetlands are "…those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas." Listed below are the three criteria used to classify wetlands. All three wetland criteria must be present for an area to be classified as a regulated wetland under normal circumstances. 1. The site must have hydric soil. A hydric soil is defined as a soil that is saturated, flooded or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the near surface zone. 2. The area must have a predominance of hydrophytic or wetland vegetation (e.g., sedges, cattails, reed-canary grass, water tolerant trees) or be capable of supporting this vegetation. 3. The site must have evidence of wetland hydrology. Wetland hydrology is defined as periodic inundation or saturation of soils to the surface at some time during the growing season. Drainage patterns, drift lines, and watermarks are examples of hydrological indicators used if soils are not saturated or inundated at the time of inspection. It should also be noted that the Corps distributed the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region, Document ERDC/EL TR-10-16 (USACE, 2010). This document is one of a series of Regional Supplements to the USACE Delineation Manual. The development of the Regional Supplements is part of a nationwide effort to address regional wetland characteristics and improve the accuracy and efficiency of wetland delineating procedures. All wetland delineations submitted to the USACE after November 30, 2008 must follow the procedures listed within the supplement that includes the geographic region in which the subject property is located. Appendix F: 7 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 4 Regulation of Wetlands Wetlands are regulated "Waters" under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Section 404, administered by the USACE, requires permits for discharges of dredged or fill material into regulated "Waters." Regulated “Waters” subject to jurisdiction by the USACE includes navigable “Waters of the United States” and wetland areas determined by the USACE as possessing a significant nexus to a regulated "Waters". A Supreme Court case in 2001 determined that the USACE does not have jurisdiction over isolated wetlands under the Section 404 Clean Water Act. The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) also regulates any activities in wetlands or other "waters" (e.g. streams, ponds, and lakes) under Section 401, Water Quality Certification (WQC). Regulatory laws have further identified IDEM as having regulatory jurisdiction over isolated wetlands. Appendix F: 8 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 5 DESCRIPTION OF SITE Site Location The Site is located approximately one and a quarter (1.25) miles north-northwest of downtown Carmel in Hamilton County, Indiana. The Site is further located on the USGS 7.5-Minute Series Topographic maps of Carmel, Indiana (Figure 1, Appendix A) in the southeast quarter of Section 24, Township 18 North, Range 3 East. Coordinates for the approximate center of the Site are 39.591361 North Latitude and -86.080116 West Longitude. General Site Description The Site consists of an approximately 21-acres of residential land containing a small wooded area on the northern portion. A small unimproved area, which was located on the northeast Site boundary, appeared to consist of a man-made drainage basin. Multiple single-family residences with associated outbuildings and drives were observed throughout the Site. North Meridian Street (a.k.a. US 31) and Rohrer Road adjoin the Site to the north. The Monon Trail, unimproved land and residential land adjoin the Site to the east. Residential land, West Smokey Row Road and unimproved land adjoin the Site to the south. Residential land adjoins the Site to the west. Based on the review of historical aerial photographs, it appears the Site has consisted of residential and unimproved land from at least 1936 through the present (Figures 5 - 15, Appendix A). The small wooded area on the northern portion of the Site became prominent by the mid-1970s. Appendix F: 9 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 6 WETLAND DELINEATION Methodology Prior to mobilizing to the Site, multiple historical resources were reviewed in an effort to gain better understanding of the history of the Site. The Carmel (1967 [Revised 1988]), Indiana USGS 7.5-Minute Series Topographic map was reviewed, which did not indicate the presence of wetland areas, streams or water features on the Site (Figure 1, Appendix A). A United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil survey for the Site was also reviewed, and the soil survey indicated the potential exists for hydric soils to be located on the Site (Figure 2, Appendix A). A United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) map was also reviewed, and the NWI map did not indicate the presence of potential wetland areas, streams or water features located on the Site (Figure 3, Appendix A). An initial reconnaissance was performed at the Site in order to determine sampling data points. Data Points were selected based on the potential for that area to be identified as a wetland. Areas that were not sampled were located on upland terraces, exhibited a dominance of upland plant species and/or a lack of hydrology indicators. A total of six (6) Data Points were collected at the Site in order to obtain a representative sample of the vegetation, soils and hydrology (Figure 4, Appendix A). A collection of aerial photographs of the Site obtained from the Hamilton County Geographic Information System (GIS) website were also reviewed (Figures 5 – 15, Appendix A), which indicated the Site has historically consisted of residential and unimproved land. Wetland determination activities were performed in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (USACE, 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region, Version 2.0 (USACE, 2010). At each data point, vegetation was identified, a soil test pit was excavated to determine if hydric soils were present, and visual observations were made to determine if hydrology indicators were present. For vegetation, each data point consisted of a 30-foot radius for the tree and woody vine stratum; a 15-foot radius for the sapling and shrub stratum; and a five-foot radius for the herbaceous plants stratum. The following is a summary of the data that was collected from the data points. Copies of the Wetland Determination Data Forms – Midwest Region are provided in Appendix B. Vegetation The dominant vegetation within a wetland must have greater than 50 percent hydrophytic species by evaluation with the 50/20 rule. In addition, if hydric soils and wetland hydrology are observed on the Site, but the vegetation does not pass the dominance test by use of the 50/20 rule, then a prevalence index value greater than three must be shown to indicate the lack of dominance of wetland vegetation. If the vegetation does not meet the prevalence index requirements indicating a dominance of hydric vegetation, then morphological adaptations (adventitious roots, multi-stemmed trunks, shallow root systems, tree buttressing, etc.) must be noted to indicate if the upland vegetation on the Site are functioning as hydrophytes. The dominance of plants classified as Obligate Wetland (OBL), Facultative Wetland (FACW) and/or Facultative (FAC) are necessary to meet the wetland vegetation criteria. The indicator status of a plant species is expressed in terms of the estimated probabilities of a species occurring in a wetland within this region. The indicator categories as defined by the USACE Midwest Regional Supplement are as follows: Obligate Wetland (OBL): Occur almost always (> 99%) under natural conditions in wetlands. Facultative Wetland (FACW): Usually occur in wetlands (67%-99%), but occasionally found in non-wetlands. Appendix F: 10 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 7 Facultative (FAC): Equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands (34%-66%). Facultative Upland (FACU): Usually occur in non-wetlands, but occasionally found in wetlands (1%-33%). Obligate Upland (UPL): Occur almost always (>99%) in uplands Plants that are OBL, FACW and FAC are considered to be wetland species. The type of soil and the duration of standing water and/or saturated soil determine the plant species composition of an area. The Site was investigated for the presence and dominance of hydrophytic vegetation. Vegetation was identified and recorded on the data forms. Vegetation identities were confirmed using references entitled Wetland Plants of Indiana (Chadde, 2011) and Peterson Field Guides® Eastern Trees (Petrides/Wehr, 1988). Identified vegetation was then compared to the Midwest 2016 Regional Wetland Plant List (USACE, 2016) and assigned the appropriate classification (i.e., FAC, FACW). Table 1 summarizes dominant vegetation identified at each data point. TABLE 1 – VEGETATION Data Point Dominance of Hydrophytic Vegetation Vegetation (Classification) 1 Y Salix nigra (OBL), Populus deltoides (FAC) 2 N Gleditsia triacanthos (FACU), Populus deltoides (FAC) 3 Y Ulmus rubra (FACW), Fraxinus pennsylvanica (FACW), Acer saccharinum (FACW), Celtis occidentalis (FAC), Lonicera morrowii (FACU), Pilea pumila (FACW), Geranium maculatum (FACU), Leersia virginica (FACW), Carex grayi (FACW), Toxicodendron radicans (FAC), Parthenocissus quinquefolia (FACU) 4 N Picea glauca (FACU), Fraxinus pennsylvanica (FACW), Pinus resinosa (FACU), Lonicera morrowii (FACU), Festuca spp. (FACU), Trifolium repens (FACU), Parthenocissus quinquefolia (FACU) 5 Y Salix babylonica (FACW), Juncus tenuis (FAC), Agrostis gigantea (FACW) 6 N Picea glauca (FACU), Festuca spp. (FACU) Y = 50% or more wetland species N = Less than 50% wetland species A dominance of wetland/hydrophytic vegetation was observed at Data Points 1, 3 and 5. The vegetation observed on the remaining portions of the Site consisted primarily of upland tree and herbaceous species. Hydrology Wetland hydrology consists of water that is on or near the surface of the soil for a significant period of time during the growing season. Evidence of hydrology indicators can be observed beyond the growing season, or during times in the growing season that actual hydrology is not present. Many factors determine wetland hydrology such as topography, soil type, depth of the water table, and drainage. A summary of the hydrological indicators observed at the data points is summarized in Table 2. Appendix F: 11 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 8 TABLE 2 – HYDROLOGY Data Point Wetland Hydrology Hydrological Indicators Field 1 Y Saturation, Drift Deposits, Crayfish Burrows, Geomorphic Position, FAC-Neutral Test 2 N None Observed 3 Y Saturation, Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface, Water- Stained Leaves, Crayfish Burrows, Geomorphic Position, FAC-Neutral Test 4 N None Observed 5 Y Surface Water, High Water Table, Saturation, Crayfish Burrows, Geomorphic Position, FAC-Neutral Test 6 N None Observed Y = Hydrology indicators indicate wetland hydrology N = Hydrology indicators are not present or sufficient for wetland hydrology The Site was investigated for the presence of wetland hydrology and/or hydrological indicators noted in the USACE Midwest Regional Supplement. Evidence of wetland hydrology was observed at Data Points 1, 3 and 5. Wetland hydrology was not observed at the remaining Data Points. Soils Hydric soils, as defined by USDA, are soils that are saturated, flooded or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions. Indications of hydric soils can be documented in the field any time of the year. A hydric soil is different from a non-hydric soil due to the anaerobic conditions, which change the soil color, mottling, structure and chemistry. Soils must be hydric for an area to be considered a wetland. A custom soil report for the Site was generated using the USDA web soil survey (Appendix C). Based on the report, it appears three (3) soil associations are present on the Site (Figure 2, Appendix A). Two (2) of the three (3) soil associations on the Site, which were identified Miami silt loam and Shoals silt loam, were classified as non-hydric soils. It should be noted however, that soil surveys act as a guide to the general types of soil in an area and field observations take precedent. One (1) of the soil associations, which was identified as Brookston silty clay loam, was identified as having the potential to be hydric. In order to determine if hydric soils were present, a soil test pit was excavated to approximately 18-inches below ground surface (bgs) at each data point. Soil horizons were observed and soil colors were determined using the Munsell Soil Color Chart (Munsell, 2000). Soil colors observed included the matrix and any mottling, if present. In addition, texture, redox features (if present) and any other characteristics were observed. These data were recorded on the data forms (Appendix B). The USACE Midwest Regional Supplement has included numerous additional soil indicators to aid in identifying hydric soils and this was referenced during data collection. In addition, the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, A Guide for Appendix F: 12 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 9 Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils, version 7.0, 2010 was referenced. A description of the soils is provided in Table 3. TABLE 3 – SOILS Data Point Hydric Soils Depth (inches) Soil Color Soil Texture 1 Yes 0 - 18 Matrix: 10YR 4/3 85% / Mottling: 10YR 5/1 15% Silt loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Depleted Matrix 2 No 0 - 18 10YR 4/3 Silt loam Hydric Soil Indicators: None Observed 3 Yes 0 - 18 Matrix: 10YR 3/2 80% / Mottling: 7.5YR 5/8 20% Silt loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Redox Depressions 4 No 0 - 18 10YR 3/3 Silt loam Hydric Soil Indicators: None Observed 5 Yes 0 – 18 Matrix: 10YR 5/1 (90%); Mottling: 2.5YR 4/4 (10%) Silt loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Redox Depressions 6 No 0 - 18 10YR 4/3 Silt loam Hydric Soil Indicators: None Observed Yes = The soils are classified as hydric based upon field conditions No = The soils are not classified as hydric soils Hydric soil indicators were observed at Data Points 1, 3 and 5. The remaining Data Point locations did not demonstrate hydric soil indicators. The Site soils consisted of relatively homogenous textures including silt loams. National Wetland Inventory Map An NWI map was reviewed for the Site (Figure 3, Appendix A), and no wetland areas, streams or water features were depicted on the Site. It should be noted the NWI map does not preclude the results of a wetland assessment. As previously stated, the NWI maps are created by the USFWS. The USFWS’s objective of mapping wetlands and deep-water habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high-altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis. The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems. Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery and/or field work. Appendix F: 13 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 10 There may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site. Identified “Waters of the U.S.” Vegetation and soil data were collected at six (6) data points. In addition, visual observations were made to determine the presence of hydrology indicators. A total of two (2) wetland areas (Wetlands A and B) and sections of three (3) streams (Streams 1, 2 and 3) were identified on the Site (Figure 4, Appendix A) during the course of the investigation and are further described below in the Conclusions and Recommendations Section. Appendix F: 14 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 11 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report presents the results of a Wetland Delineation performed on an approximately 21-acres of primarily residential land with a small wooded area located north of West Smokey Row Road and west of the Monon Trail in Carmel, Indiana. The Wetland Delineation was performed to determine if potential “Waters of the U.S.” and/or “State Regulated Wetlands” exist on the Site. Photographs taken during this assessment are provided in Appendix D. Based on this investigation, it appears there are two (2) wetland areas (Wetlands A and B) and sections of three (3) unnamed streams located on the Site (Figure 4, Appendix A). Wetland A is located on the northeast Site boundary within the man-made drainage basin immediately west of the Monon Trail (Data Point 1). Information obtained during the course of this investigation indicated this area of the Site is likely consistently inundated/saturated during the wet season. Wetland A consists of approximately 0.15-acres and appears to have formed as drainage originating from the adjoining upland areas to the north, east and west consistently inundated/saturated this portion of the Site. In addition, observations made during the Site reconnaissance indicated any water flowing from Stream 1 would eventually discharge into the man-made drainage basin and possibly Wetland A. It is A&W's opinion that this wetland should classify as a freshwater emergent wetland. Observations made during the Site reconnaissance indicated that water within Wetland A would likely flow in a southerly direction and discharge into Stream 2, which discharges into Little Cool Creek. Little Cool Creek flows in an easterly direction and eventually discharges into Cool Creek. Cool Creek flows in a southeasterly direction and eventually discharges into the White River, which is considered a Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) by the USACE. Therefore, Wetland A appears to demonstrate a significant nexus to a TNW. It is Alt & Witzig’s opinion that Wetland A is anticipated to be regulated by the USACE as a “Waters of the U.S”. Wetland B is located on the northwest portion of the Site partially within the wooded area and partially within a grassy lawn area (Data Points 3 and 5). It should be noted that Wetland B was observed to consist of a western portion and an eastern portion connected via an underground plastic drainage pipe. Information obtained during the course of this investigation indicated this area of the Site is likely consistently inundated/saturated during the wet season. Wetland B consists of approximately 0.32-acres and appears to have formed as drainage originating from the upland areas to the west, north and south consistently inundated/saturated this portion of the Site. It is A&W's opinion that different portions of this wetland should classify as freshwater emergent (central), shrub/scrub (west) and forested wetland (east). Observations made during the Site reconnaissance indicated that water within Wetland B would likely flow/discharge into Stream 2 and/or Stream 3. Streams 2 and 3 flow in an easterly direction and eventually discharge into Little Cool Creek, which discharges into Cool Creek and finally into the White River. Therefore, Wetland B appears to demonstrate a significant nexus to a TNW. It is Alt & Witzig’s opinion that Wetland B is anticipated to be regulated by the USACE as a “Waters of the U.S”. Stream 1 appears to originate northwest of the Site and was observed to first emerge on the Site via a drainage culvert situated underneath North Meridian Street (a.k.a. US 31). Stream 1 flows on-Site for approximately 550-feet in a southeasterly direction and eventually discharges into the man-made drainage basin located on the northeast portion of the Site and also east adjoining to the Site. Water flowing from Stream 1 was observed to eventually discharge into Stream 2. Stream 2 continues to flow in an easterly direction and eventually converges with Little Cool Creek. As previously discussed, Little Cool Creek discharges into Cool Creek and eventually into the White River, which Appendix F: 15 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 12 is considered a TNW. The section of Stream 1 located on the Site demonstrated an Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM), a defined bed and bank and a significant nexus to a TNW; therefore, the section of Stream 1 located on the Site is anticipated to be regulated by the USACE as a "Waters of the U.S.". It is A&W’s opinion that this stream should be classified as an intermittent stream, meaning the stream has flowing water during certain times of the year and may not have flowing water during dry periods. Stream 2 appears to originate northwest of the Site and was observed to first emerge on the Site via a drainage culvert situated underneath Rohrer Road. Stream 2 flows on-Site for approximately 475- feet in an easterly direction and eventually discharges into Little Cool Creek. As previously discussed, Little Cool Creek discharges into Cool Creek and eventually into the White River, which is considered a TNW. The section of Stream 2 located on the Site demonstrated an OHWM, a defined bed and bank and a significant nexus to a TNW; therefore, the section of Stream 2 located on the Site is anticipated to be regulated by the USACE as a "Waters of the U.S.". It is A&W’s opinion that this stream should be classified as an intermittent stream, meaning the stream has flowing water during certain times of the year and may not have flowing water during dry periods. Stream 3 appears to originate from the southeast boundary of Wetland B-East. Stream 3 flows on- Site for approximately 70-feet in an easterly direction and eventually discharges into Stream 2. Stream 2 eventually discharges into Little Cool Creek. As previously discussed, Little Cool Creek discharges into Cool Creek and eventually into the White River, which is considered a TNW. The section of Stream 3 located on the Site demonstrated an OHWM, a defined bed and bank and a significant nexus to a TNW; therefore, the section of Stream 3 located on the Site is anticipated to be regulated by the USACE as a "Waters of the U.S.". It is A&W’s opinion that this stream should be classified as an ephemeral stream, meaning the stream flows only briefly during and following a period of rainfall in the immediate locality. A Regional General Permit and Water Quality Certification will likely be required for impacts to identified jurisdictional wetlands (Wetlands A and B) and streams (Streams 1, 2 and 3). Impacts to “Waters of the U.S.” which total less than 0.1-acre do not require mitigation. If impacts are anticipated to be 1.0-acre or greater, or exceed 1,500-linear feet of stream, then an Individual Permit may be necessary. Mitigation for impacts is required at a 1:1 ratio for drainage features and open water features; 4:1 for forested/shrub wetlands; 3:1 for scrub/shrub wetlands; and 2:1 for emergent wetlands if verified as a USACE jurisdictional “Waters of the U.S.” Stream 1 and Stream 2 may drain more than one (1) square mile; therefore, coordination with Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) for a Construction-in-a-Floodway may be required. Prior to any development and/or permitting activities, A&W believes a jurisdictional determination (JD) would be required to be performed by USACE to ensure they concur with our findings. Appendix F: 16 of 78 3/20/2020 Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel, Indiana Project No.: 19IN0303 13 REFERENCES Chadde, Steve W. 2011. Wetland Plants of Indiana. Lexington, Kentucky: Steve W. Chadde. Hamilton County GIS website. Aerial photographs dated 1936, 1941, 1956, 1962, 1976, 1985, 1994, 2000, 2005, 2015 and 2018. Munsell Color Book. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Gretag Macbeth, New Windsor, New York. Petrides, A. George and Wehr, Janet. 1988. George Peterson Field Guides® Eastern Trees. New York, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87- 1, Vicksburg, MS. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region, Version 2.0. 2016. Midwest 2016 Regional Wetland Plant List. United States Department of Agriculture, National Resource Conservation Service. 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, A Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 7.0. United States Department of Agriculture, National Resource Conservation Service. 2019. Custom Soil Resource Report for Hamilton County, Indiana. Generated from the USDA on-line web soil survey. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2019. National Wetlands Inventory Mapper. United States Geological Survey (USGS), Carmel, Indiana 7.5-Minute Topographical Map, 1967 (Revised 1988). Appendix F: 17 of 78 3/20/2020 APPENDIX A Figures Appendix F: 18 of 78 3/20/2020 FIGURE 1: SITE LOCATION MAP USGS Topographic Map: Carmel Quadrangle Township: T 18 N. Range: R 3 E. Section: 24 Site Location N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Appendix F: 19 of 78 3/20/2020 Site Location FIGURE 2: SOILS MAP N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Appendix F: 20 of 78 3/20/2020 Site Location FIGURE 3: NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAP N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Appendix F: 21 of 78 3/20/2020 Site Location FIGURE 4: DATA POINT & WETLAND LOCATION MAP N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 PIPED DRAIN STREAM 1 WETLAND A WETLAND B-WEST WETLAND B-EAST STREAM 3 STREAM 2 Appendix F: 22 of 78 3/20/2020 FIGURE 5: 1936 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Site Location Appendix F: 23 of 78 3/20/2020 FIGURE 6: 1941 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Site Location Appendix F: 24 of 78 3/20/2020 FIGURE 7: 1956 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Site Location Appendix F: 25 of 78 3/20/2020 FIGURE 8: 1962 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Site Location Appendix F: 26 of 78 3/20/2020 FIGURE 9: 1976 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Site Location Appendix F: 27 of 78 3/20/2020 FIGURE 10: 1985 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Site Location Appendix F: 28 of 78 3/20/2020 FIGURE 11: 1994 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Site Location Appendix F: 29 of 78 3/20/2020 FIGURE 12: 2000 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Site Location Appendix F: 30 of 78 3/20/2020 FIGURE 13: 2005 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Site Location Appendix F: 31 of 78 3/20/2020 Site Location FIGURE 14: 2015 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Appendix F: 32 of 78 3/20/2020 Site Location FIGURE 15: 2018 AERIAL N Alt & Witzig Consulting Services 4105 W. 99th Street ·Carmel, IN 46032 TEL (317)875-7000 · FAX (317) 876-3705 www.altwitzig.com PROJECT: Smokey Row & The Monon LOCATION: Carmel, Indiana CLIENT: Old Town Companies A&W File No.: 19IN0303 Appendix F: 33 of 78 3/20/2020 APPENDIX B Wetland Determination Data Forms – Midwest Region Appendix F: 34 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI or WWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is 3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) 19IN0303 / Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel / Hamilton 6/11/2019 Old Town Companies IN 1 Alt & Witzig Consulting Services Section 24, T 18 N, R 3 E Unimproved Area (Drainage Basin)Concave 39.59162 N -86.07534 W Miami silt loam None 30' None observed 2 2 100% 15' Populus deltoides 5 5 10 Y Y OBL FAC Salix nigra 15 15 15 30 15 45 0 5' 0 Juncus tenuis Bidens frondrosa Equisetum arvense Typha spp. Aster lanceolatus Agrostis gigantea 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 35 N N N N N N N OBL FAC FACW FAC OBL FACW FACW 45 90 Scirpus atrovirens 2.00 30' None observed Print FormReset Form Appendix F: 35 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 2 cm Muck (A10) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 1 0 - 18 10YR 4/3 85 10YR 5/1 15 D M Si L Surface Appendix F: 36 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI or WWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is 3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) 19IN0303 / Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel / Hamilton 6/11/2019 Old Town Companies IN 2 Alt & Witzig Consulting Services Section 24, T 18 N, R 3 E Unimproved Area (Drainage Basin)Sloped 39.59164 N -86.07539 W Miami silt loam None 30' None observed 1 2 50% 15' Populus deltoides 5 5 10 Y Y FACU FAC Gleditsia triacanthos 0 10 20 5 15 25 100 5' 5 25 Solidago canadensis Trifolium pratense Bidens frondrosa Trifolium repens Cirsium vulgare Daucus carota 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 35 N N N N N N N FACW FACU FACU FACW FACU FACU UPL 45 160 Aster lanceotatus 3.56 30' None observed Print FormReset Form x Appendix F: 37 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 2 cm Muck (A10) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 2 0 - 18 10YR 4/3 100 Si L Appendix F: 38 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI or WWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is 3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) 19IN0303 / Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel / Hamilton 6/11/2019 Old Town Companies IN 3 Alt & Witzig Consulting Services Section 24, T 18 N, R 3 E Wooded Area None 39.59139 N -86.080500 W Miami silt loam None 30' Fraxinus pennsylvanica Acer saccharinum Celtis occidentalis 10 10 10 10 40 Y Y Y Y FAC FACW FACW FAC Ulmus rubra 10 13 77% 15' Fraxinus pennsylvanica Acer saccharinum 10 5 5 20 Y Y Y FACU FACW FACW Lonicera morrowii 0 45 90 30 90 25 100 5' 0 Geranium maculatum Leersia virginica Carex grayi 5 5 5 5 20 Y Y Y Y FACW FACU FACW FACW 100 280 Pilea pumila 2.80 30' Toxicodendron radicans Parthenocissus quinquefolia 10 10 20 Y Y FAC FACU Print FormReset Form Appendix F: 39 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 2 cm Muck (A10) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 3 0 - 18 10YR 3/2 80 7.5YR 5/8 20 D M Si L Surface Appendix F: 40 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI or WWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is 3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) 19IN0303 / Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel / Hamilton 6/11/2019 Old Town Companies IN 4 Alt & Witzig Consulting Services Section 24, T 18 N, R 3 E Unimproved/Wooded Area None 39.591390 N -86.080570 W Miami silt loam None 30' Fraxinus pennsylvanica Pinus resinosa 10 10 10 30 Y Y Y FACU FACW FACU Picea glauca 1 7 14% 15' 10 10 Y FACULonicera morrowii 0 10 20 0 140 560 5' 0 Trifolium repens 75 25 100 Y Y FACU FACU 150 580 Festuca spp. 3.87 30' Parthenocissus quinquefolia 10 10 Y FACU Print FormReset Form Appendix F: 41 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 2 cm Muck (A10) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 4 0 - 18 10YR 3/3 100 Appendix F: 42 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI or WWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is 3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) 19IN0303 / Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel / Hamilton 6/11/2019 Old Town Companies IN 5 Alt & Witzig Consulting Services Section 24, T 18 N, R 3 E Unimproved/Wooded Area None 39.59125 N -86.08064 W Miami silt loam None 30' 5 5 Y FACWSalix babylonica 3 3 100% 15' None observed 0 45 90 25 75 10 40 5' 0 Agrostis gigantea Lysimachia nummularia Portulaca oleracea 25 25 10 10 70 Y Y N N FAC FACW FACW FACU 80 205 Juncus tenuis 2.56 30' None observed Print FormReset Form Appendix F: 43 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 2 cm Muck (A10) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 5 0 - 18 10YR 5/1 90 2.5YR 4/4 10 D M Si L Appendix F: 44 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI or WWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is 3.01 Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) 19IN0303 / Smokey Row & The Monon Carmel / Hamilton 6/11/2019 Old Town Companies IN 6 Alt & Witzig Consulting Services Section 24, T 18 N, R 3 E Unimproved/Wooded Area None 39.59121 N -86.08058 W Miami silt loam None 30' 10 10 Y FACUPicea glauca 0 2 0% 15' None observed 0 0 0 110 440 5' 0 Trifolium repens 90 10 100 Y N FACU FACU 110 440 Festuca spp. 4.00 30' None observed Print FormReset Form Appendix F: 45 of 78 3/20/2020 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Interim Version SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Histic Epipedon (A2) Sandy Redox (S5) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Black Histic (A3) Stripped Matrix (S6) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 2 cm Muck (A10) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (B5) Thin Muck Surface (C7) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Other (Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 6 0 - 18 10YR 3/3 100 Si L Appendix F: 46 of 78 3/20/2020 APPENDIX C Soil Report Appendix F: 47 of 78 3/20/2020 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 17, 2019Appendix F: 48 of 78 3/20/2020 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 2Appendix F: 49 of 78 3/20/2020 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. 3Appendix F: 50 of 78 3/20/2020 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 MmB2—Miami silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded..............................14 MmC2—Miami silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded............................15 MmD2—Miami silt loam, 12 to 18 percent slopes, eroded..........................17 Sh—Shoals silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded, brief duration.................................................................................................18 References............................................................................................................21 4Appendix F: 51 of 78 3/20/2020 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 5Appendix F: 52 of 78 3/20/2020 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 6Appendix F: 53 of 78 3/20/2020 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 7Appendix F: 54 of 78 3/20/2020 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. 8Appendix F: 55 of 78 3/20/2020 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 44264804426550442662044266904426760442683044269004426480442655044266204426690442676044268304426900573640 573710 573780 573850 573920 573990 574060 574130 574200 574270 573640 573710 573780 573850 573920 573990 574060 574130 574200 574270 39° 59' 20'' N 86° 8' 16'' W39° 59' 20'' N86° 7' 47'' W39° 59' 6'' N 86° 8' 16'' W39° 59' 6'' N 86° 7' 47'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 16N WGS84 0 150 300 600 900 Feet 0 45 90 180 270 Meters Map Scale: 1:3,120 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Appendix F: 56 of 78 3/20/2020 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 10Appendix F: 57 of 78 3/20/2020 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 0.1 0.3% MmB2 Miami silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded 11.3 54.0% MmC2 Miami silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded 8.4 40.5% MmD2 Miami silt loam, 12 to 18 percent slopes, eroded 0.1 0.7% Sh Shoals silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded, brief duration 1.0 4.6% Totals for Area of Interest 20.9 100.0% 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 11Appendix F: 58 of 78 3/20/2020 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, 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 12Appendix F: 59 of 78 3/20/2020 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 13Appendix F: 60 of 78 3/20/2020 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 MmB2—Miami silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2rkb2 Elevation: 180 to 370 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: All areas are prime farmland Map Unit Composition Miami, eroded, and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Miami, Eroded Setting Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loess over loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bt - 8 to 13 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt - 13 to 31 inches: clay loam 2BCt - 31 to 36 inches: loam 2Cd - 36 to 79 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 6 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained Runoff class: High 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 14Appendix F: 61 of 78 3/20/2020 Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 45 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Other vegetative classification: Trees/Timber (Woody Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Crosby Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Other vegetative classification: Trees/Timber (Woody Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: No Treaty Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Other vegetative classification: Mixed/Transitional (Mixed Native Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: Yes Williamstown Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Other vegetative classification: Trees/Timber (Woody Vegetation) Hydric soil rating: No MmC2—Miami silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2rkb5 Custom Soil Resource Report 15Appendix F: 62 of 78 3/20/2020 Elevation: 400 to 1,200 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: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Miami, eroded, and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Miami, Eroded Setting Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loess over loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Bt - 7 to 13 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt - 13 to 31 inches: clay loam 2BCt - 31 to 36 inches: loam 2Cd - 36 to 80 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 6 to 12 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Low to moderately high (0.01 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 45 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Rainsville, eroded Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Custom Soil Resource Report 16Appendix F: 63 of 78 3/20/2020 Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Treaty Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Hydric soil rating: Yes Crosby Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No MmD2—Miami silt loam, 12 to 18 percent slopes, eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2t680 Elevation: 400 to 1,200 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: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Miami, eroded, and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Miami, Eroded Setting Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loess over loamy till Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: silt loam Bt1 - 7 to 13 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt2 - 13 to 31 inches: clay loam 2BCt - 31 to 36 inches: loam Custom Soil Resource Report 17Appendix F: 64 of 78 3/20/2020 2Cd - 36 to 79 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 12 to 18 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Low to moderately high (0.01 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 45 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Rainsville, eroded Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Crosby Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No Sh—Shoals silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded, brief duration Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2t68y Elevation: 340 to 1,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 46 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Custom Soil Resource Report 18Appendix F: 65 of 78 3/20/2020 Frost-free period: 145 to 180 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained and either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season Map Unit Composition Shoals and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Shoals Setting Landform: Flood plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loamy alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam AB - 8 to 13 inches: loam Bg - 13 to 30 inches: loam Cg - 30 to 79 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: Negligible Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 6 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 25 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Eel Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Flood plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Sloan Percent of map unit: 4 percent Custom Soil Resource Report 19Appendix F: 66 of 78 3/20/2020 Landform: Flood plains, meander scars, backswamps Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: Yes Genesee Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Flood-plain steps, flood plains, natural levees Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 20Appendix F: 67 of 78 3/20/2020 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 21Appendix F: 68 of 78 3/20/2020 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 22Appendix F: 69 of 78 3/20/2020 APPENDIX D Site Photographs Appendix F: 70 of 78 3/20/2020 Photograph # 1 Description: Viewing Data Point #1. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Photograph # 2 Description: Viewing Wetland A. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Appendix F: 71 of 78 3/20/2020 Photograph # 3 Description: Viewing Scirpus atrovirens located near Data Point #1. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Photograph # 4 Description: Viewing Data Point #3. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Appendix F: 72 of 78 3/20/2020 Photograph # 5 Description: Viewing Wetland B-East. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Photograph # 6 Description: Viewing Pumila pilea located near Data Point #3. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Appendix F: 73 of 78 3/20/2020 Photograph # 7 Description: Viewing Data Point #5. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Photograph # 8 Description: Viewing Wetland B-West. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Appendix F: 74 of 78 3/20/2020 Photograph # 9 Description: Viewing Wetland B-West. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Photograph # 10 Description: Viewing hydric soils observed at Data Point #5. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Appendix F: 75 of 78 3/20/2020 Photograph # 11 Description: Viewing drainage pipe connecting sections of Wetland B. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Photograph # 12 Description: Viewing Stream 1 on the northeast portion of the Site. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Appendix F: 76 of 78 3/20/2020 Photograph # 13 Description: Viewing Stream 2 on the north central portion of the Site. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Photograph # 14 Description: Viewing Stream 3 on the north central portion of the Site. Project # 19IN0303 Project Name: Smokey Row & The Monon Date: 6/11/19 Appendix F: 77 of 78 3/20/2020 PAD:837.81TOP OF DECK 820.5017 LF OF CULVERTTO BE REMOVEDTOP OF DECK 825.75OHWMOHWMSHREWSBERRY AND ASSOCIATES7321 SHADELAND STATION,INDIANAPOLIS IN 46256(p) 317.841.4799 (f) 317.841.4790shrewsusa.comAppendix F: 78 of 78 3/20/2020