HomeMy WebLinkAboutDrainage Report Supplemental
u
[J
J
J
o
U
o
D
U
U
D
U
C
U
D
U
U
U
U
Supplemental Drainage Report
For
103rd St. Medical Building Expansion
Phase 2
200 West 103rd Street
Carmel, Indiana
Prepared for:
Kite Realty Group
30 S. Meridian Street, Suite 1100
Indianapolis, Indiana
Certified By:
DJ O'Toole, PE
Indiana Registration NO.1 0200269
EMH&T Project No. 2007-1927
Prepared by:
EMH&T, Inc.
7400 N. Shadeland Ave., Suite 150
Indianapolis, IN 46250
(31 7) 913-6930
Fax (31 7 ~913-6928
September 28, 2007
u
u
u
o
u
o
u
c
o
U
D
o
U
U
U
o
U
Supplemental Drainage Report
for
103rd Street Medical Building Expansion - Phase 2
I ntrod uction:
This project was designed and submitted through the Carmel Plan Commission
and Permitting processes in the summer of 2002. After obtaining approvals, Kite
Realty Group elected to break the project into two phases and only the first
phase was constructed. This report is a supplement to the original master plan
Drainage Report dated April 1 ,2002.
Site Description:
The project is located at 200 West 103rd Street, in Carmel, Indiana. The project
is zoned B-3 Business district. The project falls within Flood Zone X of the Flood
Insurance Rate Map panel No. 18057C0216F dated February 19, 2003.
Master Plan Description:
The full project includes a 41,000 square foot addition to the existing building and
expansion of the existing parking field from 95 spaces to 424 spaces. The
existing and proposed improvements will be served by the existing on-site storm
water collection system in combination with proposed storm sewer and structures
as well as an in-line 60 inch diameter detention pipe.
The existing development is presently served by an off-site regional stormwater
detention pond located to the south of the site. The pond serves to detain runoff
from the project site and other areas within the Meridian at the Interstate office
park. A copy of the drainage report and design calculations for the existing pond
as prepared by Schneider Engineering Corporation was included in the original
report. The design calculations indicate that the existing pond was sized with an
anticipated eN value of 94 for the project site. This value is consistent with the
amount of impervious surface to be present upon completion of construction.
Per the calculations included in the original report, the existing pipe network
serving the east side of the site is capable of conveying the peak flow rate from a
10-year event for the post-developed site. However, the collection system
serving the west side of the project site and the existing downstream system is
not of sufficient capacity to convey the peak flow from a 1 O-year event via gravity
flow. Therefore, a new parallel storm sewer system and detention structure are
included in the project to serve the west portion of the site and control the outflow
to a reduced rate to avoid surcharging of the downstream system.
D
U
u
o
o
D
D
Supplemental Drainage Report
for
103rd Street Medical Building Expansion - Phase 2
Phase 1 Improvements:
Phase 1 of the project included the expansion of the existing parking field from
95 spaces to 259 spaces. A portion of the proposed parallel storm sewer was
also installed with this phase.
Phase 2 Revisions:
1- -i
U
o
U
U
U
U
o
U
o
o
u
o
u
u
The proposed improvements for Phase 2 vary only slightly from the original
submittal. The drop off lane with canopy on the south side of the proposed
building expansion has now been replaced with additional parking. This change
will increase the total parking count from 424 spaces to 431 spaces. Also, a
loading area and dumpster enclosure have been added to the southwest corner
of the proposed building expansion. These changes do not affect the proposed
drainage basins and result in a net increase of 0.02 acres of impervious surface.
The CN for this site is not affected by this increase.
A water quality treatment unit was also added to treat the runoff from the second
phase of the project. Water quality treatment will be provided by a Stormceptor
Model STC2400. The Stormceptor Sizing Detailed Report is included in
Appendix B.
The revisions to Phase 2 do not change the drainage patterns or runoff rates
from the site.
D
U
o
lJ
D
o
[J
J
LJ
o
D
U
U
U
U
o
D
D
U
Supplemental Drainage Report
for
1 03rd Street Medical Building Expansion - Phase 2
APPENDIX A
EXHIBITS
c=J
c:=
c=J
c=J
c=
l.
c=l
[=:J
CJ
c::J
CJ
~
~
~
103R D
ST
t;;
Z
<l:
Q
2
UJ
~
D
@
ZONE X
Ci ty of Carmel
180081
--'
--'
~
~
:z
a:
....
V)
ZONE X
f:
z
::J
o
U
z
o
I-
....J
~
....J
l.U
2
a:
c:(
u
I..L
o
~
c=::
c=:J.
c=J
c=J
CJ
CJ
~
APPROXIMATE SCALE
500 0
1---1 I---l I----j
500 FEET
I
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
FIRM
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
HAMILTON COUNTY,
INDIANA
AND INCORPORATED AREAS
(SeE MAF' iNDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTEDI
NUMlER PANEL SUFFIX
IIlCI081 021ft
1~0ll0 0lit5
NQ't\l;r ~o Vw: TN MAP NUMIUI'l IttIlowro ~ thOUk1 b. ....<<l
......IlDn ~"citll'i1 rr.oIIJl o-rdtltl. l~" OOMMUf"IT"f NVMBER SOO\MI
.b<l... clwd be "IIKI 1;1" in"-iflrn:1 l~iiolIiCl'I'I' !'l)r tt'lt II,jejo<J\
9;JITlmul'l~,
MAP NUMBER
18Q57CD216F
EFFECTIVE DATE;
FEBRUARY 19, 2003
Feden! Emergency Management Agency
Thi$ Is an offleial copy of 8 portion 01 the ;above referer-iced nood map_ It
Was extracted using F-MrT On-Une. This map does not renect changes
or amendments which may have been made subseouent to H'le date on the
title block. For the latest product informatjon :a-bouf 'National FlOod Insurance
Program Il'ood maps check the F=MA Fh::md Map Store at \.o'\I\";'N.m~c.rema,gov
'.
.......,_?~C:."
)
,~~
^d.f"'~dF
/,/"
/,4
r
"
/
,/'
ci
~
/
;'
;:.
~'
,~~~W~"""""''''-",,!:'-..,.,.......,
_-"";,;4 ~+-.~
c"~ .,
.,,:J-/ ~;,~
/p/"'\"\ \
;7 \ \
~: 1t. \
" \ "
\ I
\ \
! 1
! I
if I
J' I
;:1 jt
/1
(
'.
ALOC
4'f.22"
,
\
,,""=-
.............
I'it R-
<S't!i'er ~il
......
.....
......
30'1 i..i~J1DSCAPE SUfFER
~'~_'_A~__~
t~OO.QC'CC'T
lH[ ,ESEiM, AT SpeiNGh'ILL
---r
I
UTILITY NOTES
il FlEF[H 10 lv,ec...ANI":n.L, ICLEC,RICAl.. r,NO f'LlJM61"'G- DLAtlS ~OR GGNllNLlA nm~ OF tlnt,IU::.
I \"/lTHIN 5 FEFI UF Slf1UCQ,f<ES
'j\PRE'SSUm, IJTlUT\ "'AIN, SAND SEf.iVICE LINES MJ;l" i'ltEEO TOBE lNSTAlL:EDAT ADEPi'-1 c;~EJ.II::I!
THAN rHt..T 31'"CII ~[O n;<,S>-lQ\-\IN 0'" r....E o-RA~.'HNCS TO CL~ E)(ISHNG ANjJ PROPCSED
, ~~9,~~~g ,~~ I~~~~~;J~NA~~~~~~~;~' Z~:~:~~~~Tr~~:~~~I'~~lO~~~R~~~ 1~;r.VS AS
.) ""IY,INIMUM HO~I:tOt.J11\L SEPAM110N O~ IQ "~r;t BETV';'EEISWAfffiLIHE,;AtluSF.'....'U,S :Sh.l\ll8E
\N'1.JISTAIH':::lJ ,,-, ALL TH.,.IE,S., to. MINIMUIJ '.'ERTICAl SEPAAAllojt-J OF is Irl(;;~f.5 S!:T\"iEEI'J "''''fEF
LINES !\NO :SEWf'KS SHAlL BE MAjNiAiNO':DAT GROSS~{',~, I~. TH(EI/H.n THAI tJ.INI~1..I
S"PAR,'T10;-l REaUIRcMErHsc..."",GT BE 1,IFi. THE CQNTRACIOR SrlAU UIII.I.lI,PRESO'.L,JJ;lE.T'\'PE
W!\EfrPIPE FOR THO:: S.E:......E:RPE.R;C:€.,;.I~ SA.!Jo
~ Wr.1Ei:t 11I1\11'1$ SHA1-l BE. INSTA.LLED WITH ~ MINIMUM OF s.:s lNCHES Oc CDllI:'r~ A!'. .VII':A~,I.)..(n
FROM'THE TDP Q;= Tt,E:,P,FE to HiE: FII'JAl, FINI~ r..AA(')oEAl!O',,'''. tHE PIPE
~ H1f{llliT BLOCKS OF JOINT RESTRAINTS SH..,LL I3E INST.'\LLED C'N N..l ~vATi::I..lIN1::S ~I ,>J.L BIiNrJS
I TEES AHUI'1YlJ."Mt.'rs PEP nil:DHAoILS
5~ prpl.: IfNfJTH3 Sl-'.Owr. ARE otEASUFH,D nw~ C~I\I~EP TOC<'.NIt:H 0::' SIRU''':I'JI!LS '1(1111.0FD TO
r Tt<_E:"'EI\RE:'iTFOOT
,j plf'Lt:r,NGli-tS: S..O""'I\I F"O~,:;rO~M 5<:1."c.f;l;;S AFiE MEASU8:E.DTQT'-lE OGWh''SI m:AM!::tiDOF O':I'iD
I SECTIONS
I , , ,
'I l"Il-il:R_E r.RAD:~ MDOIFICATIONS (CUT 0'1: FILL) ARE SHC',',,'" AllJACENII[:.J !::XIS,HiG V,tJ.'oi€ ao:.;
COVER:$ N->D l't',o,tJHOLt: CP,~TI"",S. THE "AL.....E BOX COVERS AND IY.ANHOI.E C#l.STNC>S s.;-r.......~ 8E.
ADJUS rED FLU!;H II'IIIH IHE PflOf>l::'SEO CFu>ut:.
'j'^". 'U,STMEI'J IS G~ E.~I.'::i IINfi. MANHOJ:E CAS.TI~r,S 10 GflADE TO A MAXl. ,l,1t.."..1 Ol<" II INc:.t-It:S ~HAl..L
8E'MAOE \J$~r1C "qeCA5, ~DNCR.ETE AUJU~ lING I1INCS FP.OYlOFO THE: IOTA.L t-<l;J(;HT O~
tJU"TINr; <liNnr-U;:W 40Jl,J?T1NC ~'NCSOOEsNOr V.CEEO IllNGHES
10, ADJI.ISTI'tIEr'fIs:m=CASTINGSWHCI-1c IHE lDT;IoLHEI(;llTO~'''''l)jtlSTiNC-~It<tGS\'VOO,,-[jEXCEED;2
I INr;:I-1ES SHA.:...l. Ell: MADE: tly REPLACING FHE CONE ......O.VA: ElAftlri::l :>j,C-TlflH QF n,E S'ri..UChlRC
I
".1. PA1..'EMENT5. WALI<5. CURBS "'''''0- DT~f.j! :;LJI,~',o,cf:. IMPROVEIo,'EN1S REOUL"lJliG REMOVAl FOR
I i1r.;STALLATION OF UNDERGROUND UTJUTIES S.MAll fIE Rf:.STUf,lOLI TU 1I11'IR PF:J-=SEl'IT CONDfTOO
l ~r+U:~f, \HfICRWISI: S'jOWN
1l'~~~HOLE CASTINCS- LOCATEO WITHiN AS~HAI. T 1"~'t'lClo'Il:ONl' .t.[IL...... ~;.I4A.LL INCLUDE A CONCRETE
~......'Cu COLLAR EXTHHlING A htlNlMUI.I DF 1 ~ IhlCI1ES It" MoL '[)lflE:::lIOl'-JS FROO THE EUGE DF IHI.'
CASTING PEA rt-lE DETAl.S
LEGEND Of' PROPOSED
UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
.DESCRIPTiON
SMnTAA'r se.YEF{S
S'-RUCT\J~"ijM8E1'<
RIMELE'oIATlOO
I,",VERT' EiEV"'_TIDN
PIPE WITH SIZEAS SHOWI'\I
I=ORCt::h'/i,IrI
Wo4HOLE
U\. ITRAL &IlE K, SH{J'oNN
UEIV-IDUr
St'ORM SEWERS
~'TRLJ(:I1.II:~;E:>Il/Ma.l:R.
RI~ ELEVA.TION
lNVt:.rtf[:,LEVATJOO
PIPi:WlfHS-I1EA$~
SUSSUHf'm;:I::-OFWN' - S./l'E.&...C; <'...4O'M>J
~>[)<J
~
COO
""
~
, .'.
...
-
os
CO,CO
,... .... ......
\l
WH
..,
a
A
V
CH
T
, .
00 DoO
0: ..
lJ
"
Ef..IOSECT\I)N
ROOf 00Ai'N I OOIJw'N"3POOr
SWAlErFl.OWll~IE
UEAJ-01T
W...,TEHI.I~c.
WA1E~Ult-.lr: -SIZE .....'SS"O..VN
FIRE LI~E 5JlE /05 SI-1O".o'.'1'j
"'..os
~'r.J..VES
~T:R
"lEE HYOfW'H
AI~ FlE-LIEFItAL\JC
BJ..O".....!)FF" ASSEJ.uJL ~
rOST INrJl(;l'.rORV.Il"L....EiPWI
FIRE DE"", CO<'IlrECTIQt.j
-::iPAit.jj<.l.Hil-l[N)
OAS
(;^5 UNE - SllI:' .r..s ,-,t.I!lI.'I'N
GAS ME TEF!
GASVALVl::
ELECJRI(';.
8.ul<IEO ELECTRIC UN!::
N:mlloL aECTR~C
TAA'I:s.~~R
F'{J'Wl,R PDtE
F'AAMI'fG LOT UGHTI,'-JG
Afn,.AUGIITJNQ
MOTEP
>N""
TELE?HOM::
AERiAl. TC.LEPHOOE LINE
I:lUI,IU) fElEPHO-N~
PECESl fJJ... At.
~tCTE"S.
~EE E>::I:.tING CO"OITlON5 F'LAN F"OR. i;:);.ISTIr\lC UTILIT'r LE\..I::ND
-E,J\IST,tli.i lJ IlllT't UNE TYPES AHE _'iC,fEC....'I!~c{lror SFV.CKET'S
BENCHMARK DATA
'J Ol_G_S. DAl\Jl.I 8Lf-ICHt.IAAK IN~(lR;.t"..ON: Cui ');' ()N tHE t.'ORTlI R'IJ rll' ... ~N';~",_. 1.4:'1~-lQU:
O"l"Tl1E WT:ST SIDE OF Ill'NQ-!S S"7RrrT ~. SI)IJT,' Of THE :ioun~ Pf,lOPf"IY LlfoE
E.M EL:E'......,IO~= MO_C.o:i 1.o..o-SUdED rlGV1"l192"9j
~iTr ,'."I'-O:'l'tJ.I':'ru<,
c'::?l"t:(J Fl:I';SAI< lOCi-'IED c;N T)I( WCST R:1c.l-tl.::)F.'.....';l" ()= !tLll-ll..".s ~fR([lAfTRO~~ !l.[j 1'"[1':1 S(lJJ1'HNeS.
o~ ':'HE r-JDR'THeAST ~l<:~(~il C~"H" 1:1'0.1' rl....RJ._EC "SCHI-.II';IOCll: r:N~M:l:I'i'~Ki CO"
!lM.ELE'''ATION' [}.IS_,,,
',n" "OlEY' smc..o , ~
.c.flE-ol..sri't....,FLLl
WORi<,'NG [;.o.YS BEFDRf:... 1--800-382--5544
"''''" ,~'"" "", C.Ii.l L Tall I'"RI=I=
IF ,.
1--flOO--428~
~M CJl.l~S OurS:DE or ''''[):...~...
, ~
01
o
..
"
..
CI:
<C
..
..
'"
..
.,
z
:3
..
c~
;:)
~~
!~.
....
"?
r "k'-
~ N'
~ ~2
~",,8
~~~~
;,~~i'?
S;~~~
Q.
~
o
ll::
..,
>-
>-
...
~
ll::
; 111 !~!1!
~ Il!ii:l~
~ H'm:
Q" !;1Cl1
J;~ I~
t::
o
"00
c
if) ro
Z 0.
<( X ;;::
....J W
(L .~ ~
6 ;gN8
i=o&i~2
u- _ (1)"
~ ~if~
cr:: .- I:
I- TI ...i
(J) Q) UJ
z 2 ~
o u
U if)
"E
r<)
a
.......
t-
-
m
-
::c
><
w
tt:
W
~
W
fIJ
::
~
o
I-
U)
EI_IH& r JOB NO.
2007-1927
DATE~
10-0 1-2OC' 1
SCALE:
1~ ,,- 40'
- ----.J
SHEET No.
C2..2
u
u
U
D
D
U
o
D
U
o
U
o
D
D
U
[J
o
u
[J
Supplemental Drainage Report
for
1 03rd Street Medical Building Expansion - Phase 2
APPENDIX 8
STORMCEPTOR SIZING DETAILED REPORT
u
o
~
Stormcepto(
o
Stormceptor Sizing Detailed Report
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis I Marion County
u
o
Project Information
Date 9/24/2007
o
Project Name
Project Number
Location
103rd St. Med ical Building Expansion - Phase 2
N/A
Carmel, IN
D
Stormwater Quality Objective
o
This report outlines how Stormceptor System can achieve a defined water quality objective through the
removal of total suspended solids (TSS). Attached to this report is the Stormceptor Sizing Summary.
o
Stormceptor System Recommendation
The Stormceptor System model STC 2400 achieves the water quality objective removing 830/0 TSS for a
OK-110 (sand only) particle size distribution.
D
The Stormceptor System
u
The Stormceptor oil and sediment separator is sized to treat stormwater runoff by removing pollutants
through gravity separation and flotation. Stormceptor's patented design generates positive TSS removal
for all rainfall events, including large storms. Significant levels of pollutants such as heavy metals, free
oils and nutrients are prevented from entering natural water resources and the re-suspension of
previously captured sediment (scour) does not occur.
[J
Stormceptor provides a high level of TSS removal for small frequent storm events that represent the
majority of annual rainfall volume and pollutant load. Positive treatment continues for large infrequent
events, however, such events have little impact on the average annual TSS removal as they represent a
small percentage of the total runoff volume and pollutant load.
o
[J
U
Stormceptor is the only oil and sediment separator on the market sized to remove TSS for a wide range
of particle sizes, including fine sediments (clays and silts), that are often overlooked in the design of other
stormwater treatment devices.
:J
u
u
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis / Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 1 f11
~
o
u
o
~
Stormceptor~
D
D
Small storms dominate hydrologic activity, US EPA reports
"Early efforts in stormwater management focused on flood events ranging from the 2-yr
to the 100-yr storm. Increasingly stormwater professionals have come to realize that
small storms (i,e. < 1 in. rainfaff) dominate watershed hydrologic parameters typically
associated with water quality management issues and BMP design. These small storms
are responsible for most annual urban runoff and groundwater recharge. Likewise, with
the exception of eroded sediment, they are responsible for most pollutant washoff from
urban surfaces. Therefore, the small storms are of most concern for the stormwater
management objectives of ground water recharge, water quality resource protection and
thermal impacts control."
.. Most rainfall events are much smaller than design storms used for urban drainage
models. In any given area, most frequently recurrent rainfall events are small (less than
1 in. of daily rainfall)."
u
o
u
o
"Continuous simulation offers possibilities for designing and managing BMPs on an
individualsite-by-site basis that are not provided by other widely used simpler analysis
methods. Therefore its application and use should be encouraged."
[J
- US EPA Stormwater Best Management Practice Design Guide, Volume 1 - General
Considerations, 2004
o
Design Methodology
D
Each Stormceptor system is sized using PCSWMM for Stormceptor, a continuous simulation model
based on US EPA SWMM. The program calculates hydrology from up-to-date local historical rainfall data
and specified site parameters. With US EPA SWMM's precision, every Stormceptor unit is designed to
achieve a defined water quality objective.
u
o
The TSS removal data presented follows US EPA guidelines to reduce the average annual TSS load.
Stormceptor's unit process for TSS removal is settling. The settling model calculates TSS removal by
analyzing (summary of analysis presented in Appendix 2):
u
o Site parameters
o Continuous historical rainfall, including duration, distribution, peaks (Figure 1)
o Intereventperiods
. Particle size distribution
. Particle settling velocities (Stokes Law, corrected for drag)
. TSS load (Figure 2)
. Detention time of the system
o
o
The Stormceptor System maintains continuous positive TSS removal for all influent flow rates. Figure 3
illustrates the continuous treatment by Stormceptor throughout the full range of storm events analyzed. It
is clear that large events do not significantly impact the average annual TSS removal. There is no
decline in cumulative TSS removal, indicating scour does not occur as the flow rate increases.
u
o
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis I Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 2/11
~
~I
U
o
o
~
Stormceptor$
u
o
o
r--
is --r
~
16-j
14 -fi
,~
~12
u
Q)
E
.2 10
o
>
~ 0-
C
~
OC 6-
u
o
2-
0- d, d, 6 6 6 .1
~ t .~ ~ en "
OJ -., "
hfu-~-"~-~~"hTTT I
_ I~ ~ W A ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - ~~
-I ~J ~ ~ ~~ 6 ~ ~ ~ b P ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ 0
~ m ill W ~ V .1 ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ - (~ n rn w
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m b
1 1 t1 1
~ I ~~ ~
t:J
0 '" '. en 0
~ ~, "- CD
[J
Flow (cfs)
o
Figure 1. Runoff Volume by Flow Rate for INDIANAPOLIS INTL AP -IN 4259, 1948 to 2005 for 2.66
ac, 67% impervious. Small frequent storm events represent the majority of annual rainfall volume. Large
infrequent events have little impact on the average annual TSS removal, as they represent a small
percentage of the total annual volume of runoff.
'-----,
U
05
o
50
u
oR
-45
"0
OJ
.3 40
+'
~ 35
::J
~ 2.0
Il.
E 25
Q)
f- 20
OJ
c
.3 15
[J
10
Ih_~ : ,;, ~- .
= J d, 66.1 .1 J T J
o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~J ~ ~
~ b ~) -~ ~ -~ w m rn ~
1 t 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 J~ I 1 I 1 J 1 J
1- .\ 1 I I d ~ ~~ I ~~
" ~ co :s: '2 0 N ~ tJ
-I '0 " ~ ": ~ '" 0 '" 'i: D en -, $ '"
c' .0 '" -., ., ~
Flow (cfsj
D
u
Figure 2. Long Term Pollutant Load by Flow Rate for INDIANAPOLIS INTL AP - 4259, 1948 to 2005
for 2.66 ac, 67% impervious. The majority of the annual pollutant load is transported by small frequent
storm events. Conversely, large infrequent events carry an insignificant percentage of the total annual
u
D
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis I Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 3/11
~
LJ
u
u
~
Stormceptor"
pollutant load.
o
D
100
c
90-{
[J
~
8 80-{
o '
" '-
01 '-
() 70i-..
f- '
~ 60
;;;
>
o
E
~
u
50-t:....uu
(/) 40J
~ F
~ 301~
'.g 1-
- L
~ 20-j:
()
,
10funn
o
u
,
o :- I I I I
o
I ; I
I 1_1_1_I_j_I_L~1 I I
234
Flow (efs)
I I 1
I
5
I I I ! I I I b I I I
6 7
I
u1
"I
o
Stormceptor Model
TSS Removal (%)
STC 2400
83
Drainage Area (ac)
Impervious (%)
2.66
67
D
Figure 3. Cumulative TSS Removal by Flow Rate for INDIANAPOLIS INTL AP - 4259,1948 to 2005.
Stormceptor continuously removes TSS throughout the full range of storm events analyzed. Note that
large events do not significantly impact the average annual TSS removal. Therefore no decline in
cumulative TSS removal indicates scour does not occur as the flow rate increases.
u
u
o
u
u
D
D
[J
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis 1 Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 4/11
~
o
u
o
~
Stormceptor41
D
Appendix 1
Stormceptor Design Summary
o
Project Information
Date 9/24f2007
Project Name 103rd SL Medical Building
Expansion - Phase 2
N/A
Carmel, IN
o
u
Project Number
Location
Designer Information
I Company I EMH&T
Contact N/A
Notes
o
o
I NfA
u
Drainage Area
Total Area (ac)
Imperviousness (%)
Length of Overland Flow (ft)
Average Site Slope (%)
2.66
67
140
1.5
o
D
The Stormceptor System model STC 2400 achieves the
water quality objective removing 83% TSS for a OK-11 0
(sand only) particle size distribution.
u
Stormceptor Sizing Summary
u
u
Rainfall
Name INDIANAPOLIS INTL AP
State IN
ID 4259
Years of Records 1948 to 2005
Latitude 39043'54"N
Longitude 86016'44"W
Water Quality Objective
1 T55 Rem",.1 ('I,) 180
Upstream Storage
Storage Discharge
(ac-ft) (cis)
0 0
Stormceptor Model
TSS Removal
0/.
STC 450i
STC 900
STC 1200
STC 1800
69
78
78
79
u
~J1""(,' . STC\24(jO ' J" ',~l~e.~ ~,' "",83', .. -',; if" -,:i
~ n ~"'''''~ ""'"" ...~ ..;.-..~_ _ .Ai . I, ~~""'- '
[J
STC 3600
STC 4800
STC 6000
STC 7200
STC 11000
STC 13000
STC 16000
84
87
87
90
92
93
94
u
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis f Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 5/11
~
o
u
c
u
~
Stormceptor0
o
D
Particle Size Distribution
u
Removing silt particles from runoff ensures that the majority of the pollutants, such as hydrocarbons and heavy
metals that adhere to fine particles, are not discharged into our natural water courses. The table below lists the
particle size distribution used to define the annual TSS removal.
OK-110 sand only)
Particle Size Distribution Specific Settling Particle Size Distribution Specific Settling
Gravity Velocity Gravity Velocity
IJm % fils \.1m % ftJs
1 0 2.65 0.0012
53 3 2.65 0.0083
75 15 2.65 0.0133
88 25 2.65 0.0180
106 40.8 2.65 0.0254
125 15 2.65 0.0343
150 1 2.65 0.0475
o
o
u
D
Stormceptor Design Notes
u
.
Stormceptor performance estimates are based on simulations using PCSWMM for Stormceptor.
Design estimates listed are only representative of specific project requirements based on total suspended
solids (TSS) removal.
Only the STC 450i is adaptable to function with a catch basin inlet and/or inline pipes.
Only the Stormceptor models STC 450i to STC 7200 may accommodate multiple inlet pipes.
Inlet and outlet invert elevation differences are as follows:
u
.
.
[j
Inlet and Outlet Pipe Invert Elevations Differences
STC 900 to STC
7200
Inlet Pipe Configuration
STC 450i
o
Single inlet pipe
Multiple inlet pipes
3 in
1 in.
STC 11000 to
STC 16000
3 in.
Only one inlet
pipe.
3 in.
3 in.
D
Design estimates are based on stable site conditions only, after construction is completed.
Design estimates assume that the storm drain is not submerged during zero flows. For submerged
applications, please contact your local Stormceptor representative.
Design estimates may be modified for specific spills controls. Please contact your local Stormceptor
representative for further assistance.
For pricing Inquiries or assistance, please contact Rinker Materials 1 (800) 909-7763
wvvw.rinkerstormceptor .com
o
u
o
u
PCSWMM for Stormceptor ~ City of Indianapolis I Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 6/11
~
D
D
o
~
Storm ceptor 4t
[J
Appendix 2
Summary of Design Assumptions
o
D
"S~' 1",1:: 'DI::,"'I':}AILS " '", ." . : " 1 " " .,. " ';".' 1 -,.' ..' ".,~. ';, ~',.
III~, . ~;I,;J~ _~~ '" " .. "'. ..' I ,!!'o"'-,.t _ 'If.'" ~"', -.~ .;~ ~: .{ _ ~~."'"!~\ '~..r. IL .'n ,'. ,~~,.~I "~'_ 1_
Stage-storage and stage-discharge relationship used to model attenuation upstream of the Stormceptor System is
identified in the table below.
Storage Discharge
ac-f1 cfs
0 0
o
Site Drainage Area
Total Area (ac)
Length of Overland Flow (ft)
2.66
140
D
Surtace Characteristics
Width (ft)
Slope (%)
Impervious Depression Storage (in.)
Pervious Depression Storage (in)
Impervious Manning's n
Pervious Manning's n
828
1.5
0.0197
0.185
0.015
0.25
[J
o
o
Maintenance Frequency
Sediment build-up reduces the storage volume for
sedimentation. Frequency of maintenance is
assumed for TSS removal calculations
Maintenance Frequency (months) I 12
o
u
u
Upstream Attenuation
u
u
o
[J
Imperviousness ('Yo)
Average Site Slope (%)
67
1.5
Infiltration Parameters
Horton's equation is used to estimate infiltration
Max. Infiltration Rate (in/hr) 2.44
Min. Infiltration Rate (in/hr) 0.394
Decay Rate (s.1) 0.00055
Regeneration Rate (5-1) 0.01
Evaporation
IDailY Evaporation Rate (inches/day)
0.1
Dry Weather Flow
IDry Weather Flow (cfs)
No
o
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis f Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 7/11
~
D
u
D
~
Storm ceptor fI
u
n'~/RT:-IC-'i: 'E" '8- I~'-E;\ D'IS'''''~I'BuiTl~a- N' ".. '. ,,~ ,,'" ,.' " .".,~ "I ,-",j., "."' J . .,'..- -=;';,' '.-;; .:, ~ . ,,'
11'-::7.1-\: ,:.I~;_ ~~_ t ~_ d _'_ _~',I~"~ '-'- :~I ,~'>;...... ',_ ~ 113 l{I...: '\J.I 0h. ,,'d'liI ~~. ~
o
Particle Size Distribution
D
Removing fine particles from runoff ensures the majority of pollutants, such as heavy metals, hydrocarbons, free oils
and nutrients are not discharged into natural water resources. The table below identifies the particle size distribution
selected to define TSS removal for the design of the Stormceptor System.
OK-110 sand only)
Particle Size Distribution Specific Settling Particle Size Distribution Specific Settling
Gravity Velocity Gravity Velocity
fJm % ftIs jJm % fils
1 0 2.65 0.0012
53 3 2.65 0.0083
75 15 2.65 0.0133
88 25 2.65 0.0180
106 40,8 2.65 0.0254
125 15 2.65 0.0343
150 1 2.65 0.0475
u
o
o
u
PCSWMM for Stormceptor
Grain Size Distributions
o
1:: 1
u
10
CLAY
SILT
"-GRAVE[--
.,&... .--"
COBBLES
u
80
LJ
~ 70
'-
Q)
c
lL
Q)
:>
M
::::l
E
::::l
U
60
u
04
~.
50 -.-.-...
1
I
i
",
!
40 ---.-. -..- -.......-.-..
30
_ r. _ ~~ _ __ __ _ .__.~ ..,__1
!
i
I
u
20
!---
o
,
o
10
100
1000
10000
Grain Size (um)
-+- r'J.lDEP -:'- Finl! Dlstl illlllioll -- OK-11 0 -r- F -95 Sili1cl ....... CO(lr~,c Dls1rlblltlor1
u
Figure 1. PCSWMM for Stormceptor standard design grain size distributions.
o
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis I Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 8/11
~
u
u
u
~
Stormceptor(O
o
o
,.Sgb-'()A-'DI-~-G--" ~, . ,." -~,; "'--.' ..... ,- ,;:-.^i_....---~.."'-.7.~.,'.i
, ~ " J.I 1':10 lJh.. ~-"~J;f,.~" ~ ')-0, ' ' l.~ .' : ~\ ..,.'Ii ~ ~ If "" . " <; ~II'~",
.,~~ ___~_ _," ,;,,_ _ :.~I _"- _ n'~' ~F-<._ _ '. '~-E.. L~J] "'*L _.' r.-il tL I 11_.... '_ft/J.~ I'. -,:<",;:.t., !.. ~'-'"
u
TSS Loadin Parameters
TSS Loading Function
Parameters
Buildup I Washoff
u
125
o
Target Event Mean Concentration
(EMC) (mg/L)
Exponential Buildup Power
Exponential Washoff Exponential
0.4
0.2
u
.H~Ji),~f1)LQG't A.,NAL'(SI'g, . '.;-. ~.' _"~., ,': ,=~~, ~"". ^ ." ,:. " ,J~, ,,' f. ,,'~:.J_, ,c. "<'.."< ~;"
o
PCSWMM for Stormceptor calculates annual hydrology with the US EPA SWMM and local continuous historical
rainfall data. Performance calculations of the Stormceptor System are based on the average annual removal of TSS
for the selected site parameters, The Stormceptor System is engineered to capture fine particles (silts and sands) by
focusing on average annual runoff volume ensuring positive removal efficiency is maintained during all rainfall
events, while preventing the opportunity for negative removal efficiency (scour).
u
Smaller recurring storms account for the majority of rainfall events and average annual runoff volume, as observed in
the historical rainfall data analyses presented in this section.
D
Rainfall Station
Rainfall Station
u
Rainfall File Name
Latitude
longitude
Elevation (ft)
Rainfall Period of Record (y)
Total Rainfall Period (y)
u
INDIANAPOLIS INTL AP
IN4259.NDC
39"43'54"N
86"16'44"W
790
58
58
Total Number of Events
Total Rainfall (in.)
Average Annual Rainfall (in.)
Total Evaporation (in.)
Total Infiltration (in.)
Percentage of Rainfall that is
Runoff (%)
10061
2304.9
39.7
151.2
736.5
63.5
u
o
D
u
u
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis I Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 9/11
o
Dinlro'li"
..~
u
u
~
Stormceptor~
o
Rainfall Event Analysis
u
Rainfall Depth No. of Events Percentage of Total Volume Percentage of
Total Events Annual Volume
in. % in. %
0.25 7433 73,9 467 20.3
0.50 1246 12.4 457 19.8
0.75 599 6.0 370 16.1
1.00 329 33 284 12.3
125 167 17 186 6.0
150 108 1.1 147 6.4
1.75 50 0.6 98 4.2
200 37 0.4 69 ;~.O
225 20 02 43 1.8
2.50 21 0,2 SO 2.2
2.75 12 0.1 :]2 1.4
3,00 13 0.1 :]8 1.5
3.25 2 0.0 6 0.3
3.50 3 0,0 10 0.5
3.75 1 0.0 4 02
4.00 5 0.0 19 0.8
4,25 2 0.0 8 0.4
4,50 1 0.0 4 0.2
4,75 0 0.0 0 0.0
5.00 0 0.0 0 0.11
5,25 1 0.0 5 0.2
5.50 0 0.0 0 0.0
5,75 0 0.0 0 00
6,00 0 0,0 0 0.0
6.25 0 0.0 0 0.0
6.50 0 0.0 0 00
6.75 0 0.0 0 0.0
7.00 0 0.0 0 0.0
7.25 0 0.0 0 0.0
7.50 1 0.0 7 0.3
7.75 0 0.0 0 0.0
8.00 0 0,0 0 0.0
8.25 0 0,0 0 0.0
>B,25 0 0.0 0 0.0
o
o
o
u
o
u
u
lJ
Frequency of Occurence by Rainfall Depths
o
':)
i=
r
BO-~'.
;j F.
-;' 70-1 -
u
c
m 60
:0
u
u
o 60
-.-
o '
fJ 40-1
c .
OJ .
~ 30~
OJ ,
U: t
u
u
~O!.
o
10
o~ 0 0 J'~-t'-T t t .l ,l
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~
I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I J~',:'=J.J
.~ J J, J 1 1 1 c; I J. I d, J, J
c, ~
en ~f 'n ~: ~ t.1'I ~ b~ '" ~ '"
"' '" '"
Rainfall Depth (in.)
[J
u
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis j Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 10/11
~
u
u
[J
~
Stormceptor~
u
POllutograph
[J
u
o
u
u
o
o
D
100 ~
90 -tn
SOl
;f<
"tl 70
ID C
t I-
a 60 [
D-
In i:
to
'" 50-~
1-'=
In
In 40~-
'"
:;:
'" 30-t-
:l
c
c 20f
<(
10-r
t::
o l:-
I
0.0
u
u
D
u
D
u
u
J
I I
Flow Rate Cumulative Mass
ds %
0.Q35 59,4
0.141 76.2
0.318 84.6
0.565 89.8
0.883 93.4
1_2i'i 95.8
1.73 97.4
22B 98A
2.86 99.1
3.531 99A
4.273 99.7
5.085 99.8
5.988 99.9
6.922 99.9
7.946 1000
9.041 100.0
10206 100.0
11.442 100.0
12.749 100.0
14126 100.0
15.574 100.0
17.092 100.0
18.561 lQO.O
20.341 100.0
n072 1000
23.873 100.0
25.744 100.0
27.687 100.0
297 100,0
31.783 100.0
Cumulative Mass Transported by Flow Rate
For area' 2.66 (at). imperviousness: 67%, rainfall station INDIANAPOLIS INTL AP
I 1 I I I
I
0.5
I I I
I
1.0
I I
I I I
I
1.5
I I '---:-'-L-I_I_I---L-I_I_/
2.0 2.5 3.0
Flow (cfs)
PCSWMM for Stormceptor - City of Indianapolis I Marion County
Stormceptor Design Summary - 11 f11
I I
I
3.5
~