Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-07-20 Project Architect Email Forwarding Info Related to Project & Watershed Approval Julie Hultman From: Phil Briggs <phil@insitearchitect.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 10:08 AM To: Julie Hultman Subject: Boutwells Chapel Project - new/updated documents Attachments: Boutwell's Chapel Geotechnical Evaluation - 7.19.16.pdf; Boutwells_Chapel_Project_Review_conditional_7_2016.pdf; Boutwell's Chapel Stormwater Calculations 2016.07.17.pdf; Boutwell's Civil Set 2016.07.17.pdf Julie, Please find attached documents for the Boutwells Chapel project: • the full geotechnical report • the Middle St. Croix Watershed report • updated plans from our civil engineer, in response to the watershed district comments and criteria. The main change is the new filtration pond at the west side of the site on sheet C4. • updated stormwater calcs submitted to the watershed district Steve Preus - the owner's project manager- has arranged for us to meet with Eric Johnson tomorrow at 2:00 to update him on the project: would you like to attend the meeting? Thank you, Phil Phil Briggs, AIA, LEED-AP Project Architect / Manager in site architects 2324 University Avenue West, Suite 105 Saint Paul, Minnesota 551 14 612.252.4828 www.insitearchitect.com 1 (4j) NT1 itotalaumes.u.c GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION AND ENGINEERING REVIEW Boutwell's Chapel 5600 Norwich Parkway Oak Park Heights Minnesota NTI Project No. 16.61562.100 Prepared For: TDB Builders 4455 White Bear Parkway,Suite 600 White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110 NT". 6160 Carmen Avenue East Inver Grove Heights,MN 55076 P:651.389.4191 F:651.389.4190 Unearthing confidence- NECNNOLOORTNE oN 1GIES,LLC www.NTlgeo.com July 19, 2016 TDB Builders 4455 White Bear Parkway,Suite 600 White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110 Attn: Mr. Brian Stollenwerk Subject:Geotechnical Exploration and Engineering Review Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights, Minnesota NTI Project No. 16.61562.100 Dear Mr.Stollenwerk, In accordance to your request and subsequent authorization, Northern Technologies, LLC(NTI) conducted a Geotechnical Exploration for the above referenced project. Our services included advancement of exploration borings and preparation of an engineering report with recommendations developed from our geotechnical services. Our work was performed in general accordance with our proposal of dated June 30, 2016. Soil samples obtained at the site will be held for 60 days at which time they will be discarded. Please advise us in writing if you wish to have us retain them for a longer period. You will be assessed an additional fee if soil samples are retained beyond 60 days. We appreciate the opportunity to have been of service on this project. If there are any questions regarding the soils explored or our review and recommendations, please contact us at your convenience at(763)433-9175. Northern Technologies, LLC Steven D. Gerber, P.E. Senior Engineer Ryan M. Benson, P.E. Regional Manager/Principal Engineer h f v° 1 i (f.Z Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 Contents GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION AND ENGINEERING REVIEW 1 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2 2.1 Site/Project Description 2 2.2 Scope of Services 2 3.0 EXPLORATION PROGRAM RESULTS 3 3.1 Exploration Scope 3 3.2 Subsurface Conditions 3 3.3 Groundwater Conditions 4 3.4 Laboratory Test Program 4 4.0 ENGINEERING REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 4.1 Project Scope 4 4.2 Site Preparation 5 4.3 Shallow Foundations 7 4.4 Bearing Factor of Safety and Estimate of Settlement 8 4.5 Subsurface Drainage 8 4.6 Utilities 8 4.7 Slab-on-Grade Floors 9 4.8 Exterior Backfill 10 4.9 Surface Drainage 10 5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 13 5.1 Excavation Stability 13 5.2 Engineered Fill& Winter Construction 14 6.0 CLOSURE 14 GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION AND ENGINEERING REVIEW Boutwell's Chapel NTI Project No. 16.61562.100 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We briefly summarize below our geotechnical recommendations for the proposed project.The summary must be read in complete context with our report. • We conclude you may support the proposed building upon standard perimeter strip and spread column footings on competent, non-organic natural soil(s)or engineered fill, as recommended within our report. • Building linear strip footings and interior column footings(if required) may be proportioned using the maximum net allowable soil bearing pressures of 3,000 pounds per square foot. • Measurable groundwater was encountered at the time of the field exploration in one boring at a depth of approximately 7 feet below existing grade. This correlates to an approximate elevation of 931.0 feet. In addition, the onsite silt and clay laden soils can be relatively slow draining and conducive to the development of zones of perched water at varying elevations and locations across the project site. • Overall,the site soils are conducive to movement of groundwater both laterally and vertically over time. The moisture content of such soils can vary annually and per recent precipitation. Such soils and other regional dependent conditions may produce groundwater entry of project excavations. We direct your attention to other report sections and appendices attachments concerning groundwater issues and subsurface drainage. Page 1 of 15 (AZ Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 Site/ Project Description The proposed Boutwell's Chapel project is to be constructed as defined within Table 1. Table 1:Project&Site Description Item Description Building Type One to two story of slab on grade construction with no below grade levels planned at this time. Floor Elevations First floor elevation of 944.5 feet. Proposed Maximum Change in Site Elevation NTI assumes that site grades will remain within approximately 5 feet as compared to the grades encountered during the site exploration. Site Description Location of Project 5600 Norwich Parkway in Oak Park Heights, MN. Existing Land Use/Improvements to Parcel The project area is currently an unoccupied lot that has undergone site grading at some point in the past. Current Ground Cover The ground surface is generally covered by maintained grasses with multiple groupings of mature trees. Topography at Site The topography of the project site generally slopes down from south to north with a low point near boring SB-6. Based upon the provided topographic map there appears to be approximately 13 feet of elevation change across the project site. 2.2 Scope of Services The purpose of this report is to present a summary of our geotechnical exploration and provide generalized opinions and recommendations regarding the soil conditions and design parameters for founding of the project. Our"scope of services"was limited to the following: 1. Explore the project subsurface by means of seven standard penetration borings extending to maximum depths ranging from approximately 15 to 25 feet below existing grade, and conduct laboratory test(s)on representative samples for characterizing the index and engineering properties of the soils at the project site. 2. Prepare a report presenting our findings from our field exploration, laboratory testing,and engineering recommendations for foundation types,footing depths,allowable bearing capacity, estimated settlements,floor slab support, excavation, engineered fill, backfill, compaction and potential construction difficulties related to excavation, backfilling and drainage. Page 2 of 15 �-� Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 3.0 EXPLORATION PROGRAM RESULTS 3.1 Exploration Scope Site geotechnical drilling occurred on July 7, 2016 with individual borings advanced at approximate locations as presented on the diagram within the appendices. NTI located the borings relative to existing site features, and determined the approximate elevation of the borings based upon the topographic map provided as part of the request for proposal documents. Please refer to the Boring Loaction Diagram in Appendix C for additional detail. 3.2 Subsurface Conditions Please refer to the boring logs within the appendices for a detailed description and depths of stratum at each boring. The boreholes were backfilled with auger cuttings,or were abandoned using high solids bentonite or neat cement grout as per appropriate local and state statutes. Minor settlement of the boreholes will occur. Owner is responsible for final closure of the boreholes. Based on results of the current geotechnical exploration,Table 2 provides a general depiction of subsurface conditions at the project site. Additional comment on the evaluation of recovered soil samples is presented within the report attachments. Table 2:Typical Subsurface Stratigraphy at Project Site Note 1 Depth to Base of Stratum below Stratum existing grade Material Description Notes Topsoil designation by visual Surface 3 to 4 inches Topsoil observation only and not intended to confer conformance with DOT or other municipal standards. Undocumented/Possible Fill 4.5 Feet Sandy Lean Clay(CL)and Variably compacted. (Borings SB-5 and SB-7 Clayey Sand(SC) Only) Termination depths Sandy Lean Clay(CL), Silty Sand(SM),Clayey Native Glacial Soils of the borings at Sand(SC)and Poorly Cobbles and boulders are present approximately 15 Graded Sand with Silt in the glacial soils. to 25 feet (SP-SM) Note 1 Table summary is a generalization of subsurface conditions and may not reflect variation in subsurface strata occurring on site. The general geologic origin of retained soil samples is listed on the boring logs. Page 3 of 15 r-I Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No. 16.61562.100 3.3 Groundwater Conditions The drill crew observed the borings for groundwater depth (if any)during and at the completion of drilling activities. NTI did encountered observable groundwater at the time of our field exploration in boring SB-6 only. This boring was advanced at the approximate low point of the site and encountered groundwater at approximately 7 feet below existing grade or an approximate elevation of 931.0 feet. In addition, the onsite silt and clay laden soils are relatively slow draining are conducive to the development of zones of perched water at varying elevations and locations across the project site. Overall, the site soils are conducive to movement of groundwater both laterally and vertically over time. The moisture content of such soils can vary annually and per recent precipitation. Such soils and other regional dependent conditions may produce groundwater entry of project excavations. 3.4 Laboratory Test Program Our analysis and recommendations of this report are based upon our interpretation of the standard penetration resistance determined while sampling soils, laboratory test results and experience with similar soils from other sites near the project. The results of such tests are summarized on the boring logs or attached test forms. 4.0 ENGINEERING REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are based on our present knowledge of the project. We ask that you or your design team notify us immediately if significant changes are made to project size, location or design as we would need to review our current recommendations and provide modified or different recommendations with respect to such change(s). 4.1 Project Scope We understand the proposed structure will include concrete foundation walls and footings for support of above grade construction. NTI's assumed foundation loads and change in grade is summarized within Table 3. Our assessment of project soils, opinions, and report recommendations are based directly on application of estimated structural loads to site soils. Page 4 of 15 6-� Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 Table 3: Foundation Loads/Change in Grade/Footing Elevation Building Element Load/Condition Perimeter Strip Footings 5 kips per lineal foot or less Interior Strip Footings 5 kips per lineal foot or less Isolated Interior Column Footings 250 kips or less Exterior Column Footings 250 kips or less Change in Overall Site Grade(from original ground surface) 5 feet or less Basement Excavation No basement level was anticipated. 4.2 Site Preparation Project construction, as proposed,will include site grading,and removal of all existing underground utilities from within the proposed building pad (if encountered). Although not encountered within the proposed building pad, any undocumented, previously placed fill soils that are encountered during site grading should not be considered suitable for direct support of the foundations. NTI recommends that all existing topsoil, buried organic materials, soft clay,very loose sands,and any other manmade structures that are encountered be removed from within the building pad. In addition, NTI recommends that any previously placed undocumented fill encountered be removed from below the foundation elements. We recommend that all earthwork improvements and excavations be oversized where fill materials are placed below foundations. The minimum excavation oversize should extend per the requirements outlined in Appendix B.Table 4 provides a summary of excavation necessary to remove unsuitable materials at respective borings. Page 5 of 15 Boutwell's Chapel t( Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 Table 4:Summary of Soil Correction/Excavation Borin Existing Ground Depth Estimated Number Elevation(feet, feet Unsuitable Soil/Material Excavation NTI Datum) ( ) Elevation(feet) SB-1 948.0 <1/2 Topsoil 947.5 SB-2 949.5 <1/2 Topsoil 949.0 SB-3* 944.5 3.0 Topsoil/Very Loose Sand 941.5 SB-4* 949.0 5.5 Topsoil/Very Loose Sand 943.5 SB-5* 947.0 4.5 Topsoil/Possible Fill 942.5 SB-6* 938.0 6.0 Topsoil/Soft Clay 932.0 SB-7* 944.0 4.5 Topsoil/Possible Fill 939.5 * Soil borings S8-3 through S8-7 were completed within areas outside of the proposed building pad and will not necessarily require full depth corrections. They are included within this table for general reference only. The Geotechnical Engineer of Record or their designated representative should review project excavations to verify removal of unsuitable material(s)and adequate bearing support of exposed soils. All such observations should occur prior to the placement of engineering fill, or construction of footings and floor slabs. We recommend that native soils at the exposed grade(i.e. base of excavations) be compacted until such materials achieve no less than 98%of the standard proctor maximum dry density(ASTM: D 698-96). Sidewalls should be benched or sloped to provide safe working conditions and stability for engineered fill placement. Any oversizing that is required should be performed in accordance with the diagram and table included in Appendix A. Engineered fill should consist of onsite or imported sand with 100 percent passing the 134 inch sieve and no more than 20 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. Portions of the existing on-site granular soils have the potential to be re-used as engineered fill for preparation of the building pad when such soils are conditioned and placed as presented within this report.Any organic or debris laden soils will need to be sorted and are not considered to be suitable for reuse. In addition, the exact delineation of native versus undocumented fill, in cobble and gravel laden granular soils, in particular, are difficult due to the limited sample size and soil disturbance due the sampling technique. For this reason,the design team should be aware that there is the potential that there may be some variation in the depth of fill encountered during site excavations as compared to the boring logs. If the Owner wishes to refine the understanding of the composition and depths of the undocumented fill soils across the site, NTI suggests that a series of test pits be advanced at the site prior to construction. NTI can also review documentation of the existing fill, if provided, which would also help refine the understanding of the fill materials. Page 6 of 15 AZ Boutwell's Chapel (` Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 Placement of structural fill should be observed and tested by an experienced technician or engineer to criteria described in Appendix B. Structural fill with moisture contents outside of the recommended range should be conditioned (dried or wetted)as appropriate prior to placement. Engineered fill for site corrective earthwork and for support of project footings should be tempered for moisture content and placed and compacted as outlined Appendix B. 4.3 Shallow Foundations The following bearing recommendations are based on our understanding of the project. You should notify us of any changes made to the project size, location, design, or site grades so we can assess how such changes impact our recommendations. We assume foundation elements will impose maximum vertical loads as previously noted within this report. In our opinion,you may support the proposed structure by founding strip footings and interior column footings on competent, non-organic native soils, or engineered fill, providing such construction complies with the criteria established within this report. Design of footings may be based on the Table 5 maximum net allowable soil bearing pressures. Table 5: Recommended Maximum Net Allowable Soil Bearing Pressure-Conventional Shallow Foundation Construction Location Criteria Perimeter Strip Footings,Perimeter Columns:Perimeter strip footings and perimeter column footing supported on documented fill or competent native soils below depth of frost penetration. Interior Strip Footings:Interior strip footings supported on documented fill or competent native soils at a depth that provides no less than 6 inches of clearance Maximum 3,000 psf between the top of footing and underside of floor slab(for sand cushion). (All foundations) Interior Column Footings:Supported on documented fill or competent native soils a depth that provides no less than 6 inches of clearance between the top of footing and underside of floor slab(for sand cushion). 1. Maximum net allowable soil bearing pressure recommendations predicated on footing design and construction complying with recommendations presented within this report. To minimize local failure of supporting soils,it is our opinion footing construction should comply with the International Building Code(IBC)requirements. Foundations in unheated appurtenant areas, such as stoops and canopies, should be based at least 5 feet below the proposed finished grade for frost protection. Footings below structures anticipated to be heated (greater than 60 degrees F) in winter should be constructed at least 3.5 feet below proposed finished grade. Page 7 of 15 Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No. 16.61562.100 Continuous strip footings under bearing walls should be at least 1 foot wider than the walls they support. Interior footings should be based at least 1.5 feet below design floor elevation. 4.4 Bearing Factor of Safety and Estimate of Settlement We estimate that the native soils, or properly compacted backfill,will provide a nominal 3 factor of safety against localized bearing failure when construction complies with report criteria and recommendations and the structural design of the foundations uses the Table 5 maximum net allowable soil bearing recommendation(s). We estimate that footings loaded per report recommendations may experience long term,total settlement of approximately 1/2 to 1 inch. Differential settlement will be on the order of 25 to 50 percent of total settlement. Generally,the greatest differential settlement occurs between lightly loaded and heavily loaded footings, particularly if heavily loaded footings are located adjacent to lightly loaded strip footings. Most of the settlement will occur on first loading,as the structure is erected. Furthermore,total and differential movement of footings and floor slabs could be significantly greater than the above estimates if you support construction on frozen soils,the moisture content of the bearing soils significantly changes from in-situ conditions, and snow or ice lenses are incorporated into site earthwork. 4.5 Subsurface Drainage NTI considers the installation of a subsurface drain system at the interior base of foundation walls to be a preferred practice of construction. The subsurface drain system will help to limit moisture accumulation within granular soils placed below interior floors. You should also consider placement of a separate subsurface drainage system exterior to perimeter foundation walls. As a general guideline, subsurface drainage consists of a geotextile and coarse drainage encased slotted or perforated pipe extending to sump basin(s) We recommend that exterior drainage be separated from interior drainage to reduce risk of cross flow and moisture infiltration below structure interior. The project Architect and/or Structural Engineer of Record should determine actual need for subsurface drainage. 4.6 Utilities Utility trenches should be backfilled in 6-inch maximum depth loose lifts. It is especially important that you compact trench backfill of underground utilities to minimize future settlement of green space and pavement areas. Any existing underground utilities must be removed from within the proposed building pad. Please refer to Appendix B for compaction specifications. Page 8 of 15 ("Z Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota `� NTI Project No.16.61562.100 Utility trenches may encounter cobbles and boulders in the glacial soils. The contractor should be made aware that difficult excavations may occur that require heavy duty excavation equipment. Contract provisions for boulder removal should also be made. The stability of embankments along utility excavations is dependent on soil strength, site geometry, moisture content, and any surcharge load for excavated soils and equipment. Cautionary comment on excavation stability is provided within other report sections. We herein note that the Contractor is solely responsible for assessing the stability of and executing underground utility and project excavations using safe methods. Contractor is also responsible for naming the "competent individual"as per Subpart P of 29 CFR 1926.6(Federal Register-OSHA). 4.7 Slab-on-Grade Floors Floor slabs should be constructed directly over documented engineered fill or non-organic, competent native soil as described in the Site Preparation section. For this option,the design of the floor slab may be based on an estimated modulus of subgrade reaction (k)of 200 pci. Option 2 will be based on a more uniform subgrade compared to the existing undocumented fill. The final 6 inches of fill below the concrete floor slabs should consist of pit run or processed sand (sand cushion)with 100 percent material passing the 1 inch, no more than 40 percent passing the No.40 sieve and no more than 5 percent material passing the No. 200 U.S. Sieve. The moisture content of the sand cushion should be within plus or minus 2 percent of the optimum moisture content determined by the standard Proctor test. All interior at-grade floors with impervious or near impervious surfacing such as, but not limited to, paint, hardening agent,vinyl tile, ceramic tile, or wood flooring, should include provision for installation of a vapor barrier system. Historically,vapor barrier systems can consist of many different types of synthetic membrane, and can be placed either below sand cushion materials or at the underside of the concrete floor. All such issues are contentious and have both positive and negative aspects associated with long term performance of the floor. Overall,we recommend you install some form of vapor barrier below the project floor[for at-grade and basement construction, as appropriate]. We recommend that you isolate floor slabs from other building components by placement of a nominal 1/2 inch thick expansion joint between the floor and walls, and/or columns. This construction must also apply a compatible sealant after curing of the floor slab to reduce moisture penetration though the expansion joint. As a minimum,you should install a bond breaker to isolate and reduce binding of building components. Page 9 of 15 Boutwell's Chapel 1j Oak Park Heights,Minnesota Nil Project No.16.61562.100 4.8 Exterior Backfill Exterior backfill of at-grade foundations walls should consist of non-organic,debris free soils for at-grade construction. Placement of exterior backfill against at-grade foundation walls should be performed concurrent with interior backfill to minimize differential loading, rotation and/or movement of the wall system. The final one foot of exterior backfill for green areas may consist of clay or silt based topsoil. The final exterior backfill for areas supporting sidewalks and/or pavements should consist of a free draining aggregate base as recommended for the respective construction. You should temper all backfill for correct moisture content and then place and compact individual lifts of exterior backfill per criteria presented within the appendix attachment. 4.9 Surface Drainage You should maintain positive drainage during and after construction of project and eliminate ponding of • water on site soils. We recommend that you include provisions within construction documents for positive drainage of site. You should install sumps at critical areas around project excavations to assist in removal of seepage and runoff from site. We understand sidewalks,curbing, pavements,and green space will direct drainage away from the structure. We recommend that you provide a 5 percent gradient within 10 feet of building for drainage from lawn, and 2 percent minimum gradient from building for drainage of sidewalks/pavements. All pavements should drain to on-site storm collection, municipal collection system, or roadside ditching. Roof runoff should be directed away from building by a system of interior roof and scupper drains, or rain gutters, down spouts and splash pads. It is our opinion interior roof drains plumbed directly to the storm water piping system provide the most favorable method of conveying drainage from the roof as interior drains do not freeze or discharge runoff onto exterior sidewalks and pavements. 4.10 Pavement Construction We assume project traffic will be separated into two distinct classes; heavy duty traffic comprised of refuse trucks and occasional delivery trucks and alternatively light duty traffic which will be comprised primarily of passenger vehicles. Our pavement recommendations are predicated on separation of this traffic. The resulting subgrade following site grading should first be scarified and re-compacted to a depth of 12 inches. A proofroll test should then be performed to determine soft or unstable subgrade areas. If rutting or localized unstable subgrade areas are observed,those areas should be subcut, moisture- conditioned, and re-compacted or removed to a stable depth. Excavations for soil corrections (if any) in paved areas should allow for a 2 foot oversize beyond the edges of the pavement. Page 10 of 15 Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 The proofroll should be performed with a tandem axle dump truck loaded to gross capacity(at least 20 tons). Acceptance criteria of the proofroll shall be limited to rut formation no more than one inch (1") depth (front or rear axles) and no pumping(rolling)observed during the visual inspection. Proofroll tests should be observed by an experienced technician or geotechnical engineer prior to placement of the aggregate base course to verify the subgrade will provide adequate pavement support. If fill is required in paved areas,we recommend that it consist of soils similar in composition to the existing subgrade soils. If clean sand materials are utilized as engineered fill overlying clay based soils they will need to be adequately drained as to not create a "bathtub" effect. If not adequately drained there is the potential that groundwater may collect within the void spaces of the sand and result in vertical movements during periods of freeze/thaw. Individual lifts of engineered fill in proposed paved areas should be tempered for moisture content, placed and compacted as listed in the Compaction Guidelines table in Appendix B. We estimate that a properly prepared subgrade would have an average stabilometer R-value of 25. For a 20-year design pavement life and light commercial traffic volumes,Table 6 presents our thickness recommendations for flexible(bituminous) pavement. Table 6: Recommended Flexible Pavement Thickness Design Alternative Pavement Light Duty Heavy Duty Section (Parking Stalls) (Drive Lanes/Truck Areas) Bituminous Wear Course(inches) 1.5 2.0 Bituminous Base Course(inches) 2.0 2.0 Class 5 or 7 Aggregate Base(inches) 6.0 8.0 We recommend rigid Portland cement concrete pavements be constructed at driveway aprons and trash enclosures,and other areas where point loads and turning stresses are more likely to damage the pavement. Based on the performance of concrete pavements at similar sites,we recommend the concrete pavement design alternative listed in Table 7. Page 11 of 15 r�� Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 Table 7: Recommended Rigid Pavement Thickness Design Alternative Pavement Heavy Duty Static Loading Areas Section (Drive Lanes/Truck Areas) (Dumpsters) Unreinforced Concrete(inches) 6.0 7.0 Class 5 or 7 Aggregate Base (inches) 6.0 6.0 The silty sand (SM), clayey sand (SC), and sandy lean clay(CL) near surface soils on this site,are quite susceptible to loss of strength when wet under dynamic loading conditions. The above pavement recommendations assume the subgrade soils and aggregate section below paved surfaces will drain to subsurface piping for eventual discharge into storm sewer,or above grade to ditching,or similar acceptable systems. Lack of surface and subsurface drainage will significantly reduce the capacity and longevity of the pavement systems indicated above. Subgrades that are left exposed to the elements may require stabilization prior to the placement of the pavement materials. Stabilization could consist of scarifying and re-compacting the subgrade, adding crushed rock in addition to the aggregate base section, and/or the placement of a geosynthetic. Stabilization should also be considered in high construction traffic areas, such as lay down yards and around the building perimeter. We recommend pavements receive annual maintenance, as a minimum,to correct damages to the pavement structure, clean and infill cracks which develop, and repair or resurface areas which exhibit reduced subgrade performance. The lack of maintenance can lead to moisture infiltration of the pavement structure and softening of the subgrade soils. This, in turn, can degrade the performance of the pavement system and result in poorly performing pavements with shortened life expectancy. 4.11 Stormwater Infiltration NTI understands that the project will incorporate infiltration of stormwater near soil boring SB-6. The following Table 8 provides an estimate of the infiltration rates for the predominant soil types encountered at the site. Boring SB-6 primarily encountered sand clay(CL)to a depth of approximately 7 feet below existing grade and poorly graded sand with silt(SP-SM)soils below that. The upper clay based soils are not generally considered conducive to infiltration. In addition, a clay layer was encountered within the cleaner poorly graded sand with silt(SP-SM) at approximately 12 feet below existing grade. This may impede infiltration if this layer is continuous through out the pond area and left in place. Page 12 of 15 'Ao Boutwell's Chapel t Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 Table 8: Estimated Infiltration Rates for Subsurface Soil at Project NOte 1 Soil Type Estimated Infiltration Rate (inches/hr) Poorly Graded,Coarse Sand with Silt(SP-SM) 0.7 Silty Sand(SM) 0.45 Lean Clay(CL)and Clayey Sand(SC) 0.06 Note 1 All findings are approximate based on correlation of on-site soils to the Minnesota Storm water Manual,or other published literature. We recommend further assessment of soil infiltration rate using"Double-Ring Infiltrometer"evaluation,or other similar approved methods. 5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 Frost Considerations The clayey sand, silty sand and sandy lean clay soils on this site are moderately to highly frost susceptible. Small amounts of groundwater, or infiltrated surface water, can be detrimental to the performance of the slabs and pavements. Exterior slabs and pavements should be expected to heave. If frost action needs to be eliminated in critical areas,then we recommend the use of structurally supported exterior slabs(e.g., as structural stoops in front of building doors), as is common practice in the state of Minnesota. It is our opinion that placing non-frost susceptible material in large areas under exterior pavements and sidewalks would be exceedingly expensive and an unusual design and construction procedure in Minnesota. A transition area between structurally supported slabs or non-frost susceptible materials should be constructed at a 3H:1V back slope to reduce the potential differential frost movements in the slabs or pavements. Draintile should be installed around the foundation perimeter and finger drains should be installed about catch basins and across low points in the pavement grades. Non-frost susceptible fill should consist of sand or gravel with less than 5%material passing the number 200 sieve, and at least 50%retained on the number 40 sieve. 5.2 Excavation Stability Excavation depth and sidewall inclination should not exceed those specified in local,state or federal regulations. Excavations may need to be widened and sloped, or temporarily braced,to maintain or develop a safe work environment. Also, contractors should comply with local, state,and federal safety regulations including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. Temporary shoring must be designed in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements. Page 13 of 15 (AOBoutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 5.3 Engineered Fill &Winter Construction The Geotechnical Engineer of Record or their designated representative should observe and evaluate excavations to verify removal of uncontrolled fills,topsoil and/or unsuitable material(s), and adequacy of bearing support of exposed soils. Such observation should occur prior to construction of foundations or placement of engineered fill supporting excavations. Engineered fill should be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record prior to placement. In addition,the engineered fill should be tempered for correct moisture content and then place and compact individual lifts of engineered fill to criteria established within the appendices attachment. Frozen soil should never be used as engineered fill or backfill nor should you support foundations on frozen soils. Moisture freezing within the soil matrix of fine grained and/or cohesive soils produces ice lenses. Such soils gain moisture from capillary action and,with continued growth, heave with formation of ice lenses within the soil matrix. Foundations constructed on frozen soils have the potential to settle once ice lenses thaw. You should protect excavations and foundations from freezing conditions or accumulation of snow, and remove frozen soils, snow, and ice from within excavations,fill section or from below proposed foundations. Replacement soils should consist of similar materials as those removed from the excavation with moisture content, placement and compaction conforming to report criteria. 6.0 CLOSURE As the widely spaced, small diameter borings provide only a limited amount of data regarding the existing fill,the existing fill may contain soft zones, debris or significantly greater amounts of unsuitable materials than could be reasonably inferred from the boring information. Unsuitable materials may not be discovered during construction and may remain buried within the fill below the slabs and pavements, resulting in greater than anticipated settlements of the slabs and pavements. These risks cannot be eliminated without completely removing the fill, but can be reduced by thorough exploration and testing during site preparation and construction. Our conclusions and recommendations are predicated on observation and testing of the earthwork directed by Geotechnical Engineer of Record. Our opinions are based on data assumed representative of the site. However,the area coverage of borings in relation to the entire project is very small. For this and other reasons,we do not warrant conditions below the depth of our borings,or that the strata logged from our borings are necessarily typical of the site. Deviations from our recommendations by plans,written specifications, or field applications shall relieve us of responsibility unless our written concurrence with such deviations has been established. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. Page 14 of 15 A Boutwell's Chapel t Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of TDB Builders for specific application to the proposed Boutwell's Chapel project in Oak Park Heights, Minnesota. Northern Technologies, LLC has endeavored to comply with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice common to the local area. Northern Technologies, LLC makes no other warranty,expressed or implied. I hereby certify that this plan, Northern Technologies,LLC specification,or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a Duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the Laws of the State of Minnesota. Steven D. Gerber, P.E. Senior Engineer Ryan M. Benson 9,#t Date: 07/19/2016 Reg. No.42724 Ryan M. Benson, P.E. Regional Manager/Principal Engineer RMB/sdg Page 15 of 15 tfA)A Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 APPENDIX A GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION OF RECOVERED SOIL SAMPLES FIELD EXPLORATION PROCEDURES GENERAL NOTES WATER LEVEL SYMBOL DESCRIPTIVE TERMINOLOGY RELATIVE PROPORTIONS PARTICLE SIZES EXCAVATION OVERSIZE (ez Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION OF RECOVERED SOIL SAMPLES We visually examined recovered soil samples to estimate distribution of grain sizes, plasticity, consistency, moisture condition, color, presence of lenses and seams, and apparent geologic origin. We then classified the soils according using the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2488). A chart describing this classification system and general notes explaining soil sampling procedures are presented within appendices attachments. The stratification depth lines between soil types on the logs are estimated based on the available data. Insitu,the transition between type(s) may be distinct or gradual in either the horizontal or vertical directions. The soil conditions have been established at our specific boring locations only. Variations in the soil stratigraphy may occur between and around the borings,with the nature and extent of such change not readily evident until exposed by excavation. These variations must be properly assessed when utilizing information presented on the boring logs. We request that you,your design team or contractors contact NTI immediately if local conditions differ from those assumed by this report,as we would need to review how such changes impact our recommendations. Such contact would also allow us to revise our recommendations as necessary to account for the changed site conditions. FIELD EXPLORATION PROCEDURES Soil Sampling—Standard Penetration Boring: Soil sampling was performed according to the procedures described by ASTM D-1586. Using this procedure, a 2 inch O.D. split barrel sampler is driven into the soil by a 140 pound weight falling 30 inches. After an initial set of six inches, the number of blows required to drive the sampler an additional 12 inches is recorded (known as the penetration resistance(i.e. "N-value")of the soil at the point of sampling. The N-value is an index of the relative density of cohesionless soils and an approximation of the consistency of cohesive soils. Soil Sampling—Power Auger Boring: The boring(s)was/were advanced with a 6 inch nominal diameter continuous flight auger. As a result, samples recovered from the boring are disturbed, and our determination of the depth, extend of various stratum and layers,and relative density or consistency of the soils is approximate. Soil Classification: Soil samples were visually and manually classified in general conformance with ASTM D-2488 as they were removed from the sampler(s). Representative fractions of soil samples were then sealed within respective containers and returned to the laboratory for further examination and verification of the field classification. In addition, select samples were submitted for laboratory tests. Individual sample information, identification of sampling methods, method of advancement of the samples and other pertinent information concerning the soil samples are presented on boring logs and related report attachments. (Ac) Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 GENERAL NOTES DRILLING and SAMPLING SYMBOLS LABORATORY TEST SYMBOLS SYMBOL DEFINITION SYMBOL DEFINITION C.S. Continuous Sampling W Moisture content-percent of dry weight P.D. 2-3/8"Pipe Drill D Dry Density-pounds per cubic foot C.O. Cleanout Tube LL,PL Liquid and plastic limits determined in accordance with ASTM D 423 and D 424 3 HSA 3V I.D.Hollow Stem Auger Qu Unconfined compressive strength-pounds per square foot in accordance with ASTM D 2166-66 4 FA 4"Diameter Flight Auger 6 FA 6"Diameter Flight Auger 2'''AC 21/2"Casing 4 C 4"Casing D.M. Drilling Mud Pq Penetrometer reading-tons/square foot J.W. Jet Water S Torvane reading-tons/square foot H.A. Hand Auger G Specific Gravity—ASTM D 854-58 NXC Size NX Casing SL Shrinkage limit—ASTM 427-61 BXC Size BX Casing Ph Hydrogen ion content-meter method AXC Size AX casing 0 Organic content-combustion method SS 2"O.D.Split Spoon Sample M.A. Grain size analysis 21 2"Thin Wall Tube Sample C* One dimensional consolidation 3T 3"Thin Wall Tube Sample Qc Triaxial Compression *See attached data Sheet and/or graph WATER LEVEL SYMBOL Water levels shown on the boring logs were determined at the time and under the conditions indicated. In sand,the indicated levels can be considered relatively reliable for most site conditions. In clay soils,it is not possible to determine the ground water level within the normal scope of a test boring investigation,except where lenses or layers of more pervious water bearing soil are present;and then a long period of time may be necessary to reach equilibrium. Therefore,the position of the water level symbol for cohesive or mixed soils may not indicate the true level of the ground water table. The available water level information is given at the bottom of the log sheet. DESCRIPTIVE TERMINOLOGY RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY TERM No Value(corrected) TERM No Value(corrected) Very Loose 0—4 Soft 0-4 Loose 5—8 Medium 5-8 Medium Dense 9—16 Rather Stiff 9—15 Dense 16—30 Stiff 16—30 Very Dense Over 30 Very Stiff Over 30 RELATIVE PROPORTIONS PARTICLE SIZES TERMS RANGE MATERIAL DESCRIPTION U.S.SIEVE SIZE Trace 0—5% Boulders Over 3" A little 5—15% Gravel Coarse 3"to%" Some 15—30% Medium %"to#4 Sand Coarse #4 to#10 Medium #10 to#40 Fine #40 to#200 Silt and Clay Determined by Hydrometer Test t i� Boutwell's Chapel 1`/I Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 CLASSIFICATION of SOILS for ENGINEERING PURPOSES ASTM Designation D-2487 and D2488(Unified Soil Classification System) Major Divisions Group Typical Name Classification Criteria Symbol Well—graded gravels and CU c u GW gravel-sand mixtures,little Cu=D60/D10 greater than 4. o > ,,, Cz=(D30)2/(D10 x D60)between 1&3. L or no fines. c m > Poorly graded gravels and tu L7) coo- 12 v v GP gravel-sand mixtures,little v Not meeting both criteria for GW materials. c . —^ $ •o or no fines. o v u Z > u o C a " Atterberg limits a, 0 a, o c Silty gravels,gravel-sand- N Atterberg limits v GM - u N below"A"line,or o o eu " silt mixtures. v, w ro plotting in hatched y o E c N 3 P.I.less than 4. area are borderline 3 d "' w c Atterberg limits — •o o w U, c a u classifications ,5 Z a° Clayey gravels,gravel-sand- ;,. U o a, above"A"line c o > GC .� o requiring use of dual a o in m clay mixtures. 0 3 2 o with P.I.greater c v C9 m WW 0° than 7. symbols. C� m c Well-graded sands and c > v �, v d hi a, in Cu=D60/D10 greater than 6. SW gravelly sands,little or no L a' .'n o C fines. d ;,, o 8 Cz=(D30)2/(010 x 060)between 1&3. d N U ion w Ln w p N O m IA > m Poorly-graded sands and H c z m Y o SP gravelly sands,little or no m Z c N Not meeting both criteria for SW materials. d Q0 71 VId H u fines. c o ao v o o 0 ," O. 2 VI a° Z c a* N . Atterberg limits o a Silty sands,sand-silt o N ti a° Atterberg limits ,n Y SM mixtures. . ,n c o below"A"line,or plotting in hatched o CO •3 y, F 5 P.I.less than 4. area are borderline c w. E ` "' 41 Atterberg limits E classifications a, m ii ScClayey sands,sand-clay o 0 o v above"A"line o u , 2 LL o requiring use of dual 2 an mixtures. with P.I.>7. symbols. Inorganic silts,very fine N ML sands,rock flour,silty or 8 a, clayey fine sands.o g u Inorganic clays of low to* v . m edium plasticity,gravelly \\.... S a cco o CL clays,sandy clays,siltycu E clays,lean clays.o .N 6▪p a = Organic silts and organic .c1Dr In Z OLsilty clays of low plasticity. xa,lo y .� v, O tD n t Inorganic silts,micaceous , o �S F MH or diatomaceous fine sands u # v▪ ,on ,� or silts— as ,elastic silts. V.m V C11oa tFI 0 m N CH Inorganic clays of high I �, E plasticity,fat clays. , 11 a Iv I v Organic clays of medium to i f ; cr OH high plasticity. 1 I <l s S N .7 I I o I V T 133 N O C I -c CO S— Peat,muck and other b.0 v0 Pt highly organic soils. mum AiloB�ld AlBoutwell's Chapel `.J Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No. 16.61562.100 EXCAVATION OVERSIZE Excavation oversize facilitates distribution of load induced stress within supporting soils. Unless otherwise superseded by report specific requirements, all construction should conform to the minimum oversize and horizontal offset requirements as presented within the diagram and associated chart. Figure 1: Excavation Excavation Beck Horizontal Offset A Oversize Slope(Refer to • (Refer to Chart) Hotel) Becknll Surface d Soils, Refer to report for specific Oversize Ratio H material type and placement (Refer to Chart) Structure andlor Basement 4\ \Pi Unsuitable Soils(i.e.Excavated Materials),Refer to Chart and report for requirements. Depth D:Engineered - �� Fill,Refer to report for material type and placement criteria. Competent Soils(i.e.acceptable for support of embankment and structure),Refer to report for specific requirements. Definitions Oversize Ratio H: The ratio of the horizontal distance divided by the engineered fill depth (i.e.# Horizontal/Depth D). Refer to Chart for specific requirements. Horizontal Offset A: The horizontal distance between the outside edge of footing or critical position and the crest of the engineered fill section. Refer to Chart for specific requirements. Note 1: Excavation depth and sidewall inclination should not exceed those specified in local,state or federal regulations including those defined by Subpart P of Chapter 27,29 CFR Part 1926(of Federal Register). Excavations may need to be widened and sloped,or temporarily braced,to maintain or develop a safe work environment. Contractor is solely responsible for assessing stability under"means and methods". Condition Unsuitable Soil Type Horizontal Offset A Oversize Ratio H Foundation Unit Load SP,SM soils,CL&CH Equal to or greater than equal to or less than 3,000 soils with cohesion NA one(1)times Depth D psf. greater than 1,000 psf Foundation Unit Load SP,SM soils,CL&CH Equal to or greater than greater than 3,000 psf soils with cohesion less NA one(1)times Depth D than 1,000 psf Foundation Unit Load Topsoil or Peat 2 feet or width of footing, Equal to or greater than equal to or less than 3,000 whichever is greater two(2)times Depth D psf. Foundation Unit Load Topsoil or Peat 5 feet or width of footing, Equal to or greater than greater than 3,000 psf whichever is greater two(3)times Depth D Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights, Minnesota NTI Project No. 16.61562.100 APPENDIX B GROUNDWATER ISSUES PLACEMENT and COMPACTION OF ENGINEERED FILL Boutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 GROUNDWATER ISSUES The following presents additional comment and soil specific issues related to measurement of groundwater conditions at your project site. Note that our groundwater measurements,or lack thereof,will vary depending on the time allowed for equilibrium to occur in the borings. Extended observation time was not available during the scope of the field exploration program and,therefore,groundwater measurements as noted on the borings logs may or may not accurately reflect actual conditions at your site. Seasonal and yearly fluctuations of the ground water level, if any,occur. Perched groundwater may be present within sand and silt lenses bedded within cohesive soil formations. Groundwater typically exists at depth within cohesive and cohesionless soils. Documentation of the local groundwater surface and any perched groundwater conditions at the project site would require installation of temporary piezometers and extended monitoring due to the relatively low permeability exhibited by the site soils. We have not performed such groundwater evaluation due to the scope of services authorized for this project. We anticipate that a well point system would be suitable for control of groundwater if excavations were to be advanced into the ground water table at depth in the free draining granular soils. However,we caution such seepage from such formations and any water entry from excavations below the groundwater table may be heavy and will vary based on seasonal and annual precipitation, and ground related impacts in the vicinity of the project. ( tP) Boutwell's Chapel \am, Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 PLACEMENT and COMPACTION OF ENGINEERED FILL Unless otherwise superseded within the body of the Geotechnical Exploration Report, the following criteria shall be utilized for placement of engineered fill on project. This includes,but is not limited to earthen fill placement to improve site grades,fill placed below structural footings,fill placed interior of structure, and fill placed as backfill of foundations. Engineered fill placed for construction, if necessary should consist of natural, non-organic,competent soils native to the project area. Such soils may include, but are not limited to gravel,sand, or clays with Unified Soil Classification System(ASTM D2488)classifications of GW,SP, or SM. Use of silt or clayey silt as project fill will require additional review and approval of project Geotechnical Engineer of Record.Such soils have USCS classifications of ML, MH, ML-CL, MH-CH. Use of topsoil, marl, peat, other organic soils construction debris and/or other unsuitable materials as fill is not allowed. Such soils have USCS classifications of OL,OH, Pt. Engineered fill, classified as clay, should be tempered such that the moisture content at the time of placement is equal to and no more than 3 percent above the optimum content for as defined by the appropriate proctor test. Likewise, engineered fill classified as gravel or sand should be tempered such that the moisture content at the time of placement is within 3 percent of the optimum content. All engineered fill for construction should be placed in individual 8 inch maximum depth lifts. Each lift of fill should be compacted by large vibratory equipment until the in-place soil density is equal to or greater than the criteria established within the following tabulation. Compaction Criteria(%respective Proctor)' Type of Construction Clay Sand or Gravel General Embankment Fill Min.95 Min.95 Engineered Fill below Foundations NA Min.98 Engineered Fill below Floor Slabs NA Min.98 Engineered Fill placed as Pavement Aggregate Base NA Min. 100 Engineered Fill placed to within 3 feet of pavement Min.95 Min.95 aggregate base Engineered Fill placed within 3 feet of pavement Min.100 Min. 100 aggregate base Note 1 Unless otherwise required,compaction shall be based on the Standard Proctor Test(ASTM D698). Density tests should be taken during engineered fill placement to document earthwork has achieved necessary compaction of the material(s). Recommendations for interior fill placement and backfill of foundation walls are presented within other sections of this report. 1 ABoutwell's Chapel Oak Park Heights,Minnesota NTI Project No.16.61562.100 APPENDIX C SOIL BORING DIAGRAM SOIL BORING LOGS 4'� -0.11 sB-6 t'"14. 1111111111111 --- - - - _----- ill.11-1, A \--VV:.::..::::::::::,:::..:::.:::•.1:.1::i::::.:::::::1:::.::....::•::.::.;::.:.1::.:71);A:::..„ �� , . .. ; SB-1 aliito _ 7.,",, • IN\ 4th. •P4'i L•10 ‘ "to z' ## # s IB-7-aq s6-5 1 s6-2 ti # # lite: *IDA TIM VALLS If * '4 * Illb4 * • 40,..._ A, : Nm BORING NUMBER SB-1 (A) ��'- 6160 Carmen Drive PAGE 1 OF 1 Inver Grove Heights,Minnesota E N P:763-433-9175 TECNNOLOLOGIES.LI[ CLIENT TDB Builders PROJECT NAME Boutwell's Chapel PROJECT NUMBER 16.61562.100 PROJECT LOCATION Oak Park Heights,MN DATE STARTED 7/7/16 COMPLETED 7/7/16 GROUND ELEVATION 948 ft HOLE SIZE 6 1/2 inches DRIWNG CONTRACTOR NTI GROUND WATER LEVELS: DRILUNG METHOD 3 1/4 in H.S.A AT TIME OF DRIWNG —No groundwater encountered LOGGED BY DAS CHECKED BY RMB AT END OF DRILUNG — NOTES Elevation estimated from Client provide Site Plan. AFTER DRIWNG — ATTERBERG a e z W o LIMITS U }�' t�A-W W �'" a J cell- ..., 3j> Yl z NW 0� r_~ Uz Q O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION W re 0 D.-- v I- _ 1=18 LL OC aD o m0 0 , 0 Mz W oz O 0_ (ifs g_, J= I (oz co Ce o- c U o g 0 a ,1.7 11 r TOPSOIL(4.0 Inches) /,0477,1 AU - ": SILTY SAND,(SM)brown,fine to medium grained, 1 �.. moist,loose,trace gravel (Glacial Till) V SS 3-3-356 8 X 2 (6) 5 SS 2-5-3 X3 56 (8) $ {: :.: ;.:7 .0 941.0 — i_ SILTY SAND,(SM)brown,fine to medium grained,dry, X SS 67 4-5-6 5 medium dense,trace gravel 4 (11) 33 (Glacial Till) - - ; 9.5 938.5 10 SILTY SAND,(SM)brown,fine to medium grained, SS 78 5-5-6 moist,medium dense to very dense,trace gravel 5 (11) (Glacial Till) XSS 7-15-20 - - 6 33 (35) 15 ••• SS 10-12-12 e x 7 56 (24) 1 20SS 78 10-15-15 ::,. ( ` 8 (30) 25 25.0 923.0I SS 33 50/6" 4 Bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet. 9 S 8 N_ `R 7y s 8 f 1 I 5 gO W 2 k 6NTI 1 BORING NUMBER SB-2 NTI~ 6160 Carmen Drive PAGE 1 OF 1 Inver Grove Heights,Minnesota TECHriN LO P.763-433-9175 Solimmoe TECHNOLOGIES,LLC CLIENT TDB Builders PROJECT NAME Boutwell's Chapel PROJECT NUMBER 16.61562.100 PROJECT LOCATION Oak Park Heights,MN DATE STARTED 7/7/16 COMPLETED 7/7/16 GROUND ELEVATION 949.5 ft HOLE SIZE 61/2 inches DRIWNG CONTRACTOR NTI GROUND WATER LEVELS: DRILLING METHOD 31/4 in H.S.A AT TIME OF DRILLING —No groundwater encountered LOGGED BY DAS CHECKED BY RMB AT END OF DRILLING — NOTES Elevation estimated from Client provide Site Plan. AFTER DRIWNG — w ATTERBERG c� o. 3 z t ui at LIMITS a+K z 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION m 0 z. i-c t c p te z 8 u w a Z W 0Z Q r 2 F In Z 0 U) r‘ a G o a- JTOPSOIL(4.0 Inches) AU - / CLAYEY SAND,(SC)brown,fine to medium grained, / III 1U1 moist,medium dense to loose,trace gravel (Glacial Till) 44 7-8-7 _ XSs 2 (15) 5 � SS 78 4 _ fir/ (8) - _..:•,./' �{!%7.0 942.5X 3 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT,(SP-SM)brown, X SS 89 5-5-6 5 - -::•::'.1:-.: fine to medium grained,moist,medium dense,trace 4 (11) 11 gravel 1 . (Glacial Outwash) X:.`•.e.: SS78 6-7-7 ::,_ 5 (14) _ •�12.0 937.5 . 15 CLAYEY SAND,(SC)brown,fine to medium grained, SS 7-8-9 moist,medium dense to very dense,trace gravel 78 (17) (Glacial Till) �S 78 8-7-9 9 i- A I- 10 20 /f SSI67 _ 50/6" , - Occasional Cobbles and Boulders 8 / , 25 ;,25.0 824.5 SS 33 50/6" , s Bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet. 9 t i a i 3 S 9 1 i i# 5 g0 9 NTI BORING NUMBER SB-3 (#0:k NTI- 6160 Carmen Drive PAGE 1 OF 1 Inver Grove Heights,Minnesota NORTHERN P:763-433-9175 TECNNOLOGIES,LLC CUENT TDB Builders PROJECT NAME Boutwell's Chapel PROJECT NUMBER 16.61562.100 PROJECT LOCATION Oak Park Heights,MN DATE STARTED 7/7/16 COMPLETED 7/7/16 GROUND ELEVATION 944.5 ft HOLE SIZE 6 1/2 inches DRIWNG CONTRACTOR NTI GROUND WATER LEVELS: D RIWNG METHOD 3 1/4 in H.S.A AT TIME OF DRIWNG —No groundwater encountered LOGGED BY DAS CHECKED BY RMB AT END OF DRIWNG — NOTES Elevation estimated from Client provide Site Plan. AFTER DRILLING — ATTERBERG w at I w ae LIMITS w 5 c-- o_ o_• g 0-0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ela C07 Oz-1 a z I-Z o!= F1= UX z w *J o g OW m0> IL f; D... 121- O� Hw w O O 2z w Uz O rr 2O OZ _J _ NZ 0 Co D: 0_ p U a 7,tt•N1 s r\ TOPSOIL(3.0 Inches) /�1 I AU ' POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT,(SP-SM)brown, 1 fine to medium grained,moist,very loose to loose - -`•. ,..: (GlacialOutwash) SS 3-2-2 - - •• (\ 2 78 (4) 5 :•' V SS 3-2-3 �::: 3 78 (5) 7 8 -r-:.::::•:,-:: NOTE: Clayey Sand(SC)layer at 7.0 feet. X SS4 78 3-(74-3) 10 XSS 2-1-3 5 44 (4) '•••'•'•12.0 932.5 CLAYEY(GlacialTill)SAND,(SC)brown,fine to medium grained, SS 78 8-8-8 - X moist,medium dense,trace gravel 6 (16) 14.5 930.0 15 :• POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT,(SP-SM)brown, v SS 89 15-19-18 •••16.0 fine to medium grained,moist,very dense,trace gravel 928.5 n 7 (37) N (Glacial Outwash) / Bottom of borehole at 16.0 feet. I 1 U 1 I I i P i N S 3 E i i 0 0 - NTI BORING NUMBER SB-4 N T I" 6160 Carmen Drive PAGE 1 OF 1 Inver Grove Heights,Minnesota 76XNOLO NOIITNERNGIES.LLC P.763-433-9175 • CLIENT TDB Builders PROJECT NAME Boutwef's Chapel PROJECT NUMBER 16.61562.100 PROJECT LOCATION Oak Park Herts.MN DATE STARTED 7/7/16 COMPLETED 7/7/16 GROUND ELEVATION 949 ft HOLE SIZE 61/2 inches DRILLING CONTRACTOR NTI GROUND WATER LEVELS: DRILLING METHOD 31/4 In H.SA AT TIME OF DRILLING —No oroundweter encountered LOGGED BY DAS CHECKED BY RMB AT END OF DRILLING — NOTES Elevation estimated from Client provide Site Plan. 'AFTER DRILLING — _ ATTERBERG W z t w ye LIMITS GV O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a= o o m n0> Y s j vK. N w g F L o o z r, z wv Uz O 2g RJ �z 0 N o: o_ o 0 a" TOPSOIL(3.5 Inches) / L AU CLAYEY SAND,(SC)brown,fine to medium grained, I 1 - 0 moist,very loose,trace gravel (Glacial TSI) X 2S 56 2-2-2 55.0 914.0 SS33 2(4)2 11 •:: :,;; SILTY SAND,(SM)brown,fine to medium grained. 3 (4) moist,very loose to dense,trace gravel $- (Glacial TM) 1 ., ... : SS 78 5-6-6 4 (12) 10 ;: • XSS 44 9-10-10 • •'f•' 5 (20) SS 100 8-9-9 5 — •".: •.,:. n 6 (18) SS 56 14-15-15 •f 16.0 9330 7 (30) 5 Bottom of borehole at 16.0 feet. a 9 I I 1 1 1 s a 9 N li S> 1 3 N V, 1 li i g 5 0 NTI BORING NUMBER SB-5 N T 1- 6160 Carmen hPAGE 1 OF 1 Inver Grove Height s,Minnesota (A) NORTHERNTECHNOLOGIES,N P:763-433-9175 Soiessoge LLC CLIENT TDB Builders PROJECT NAME Boutwell's Chapel PROJECT NUMBER 16.61562.100 PROJECT LOCATION Oak Park Heights,MN DATE STARTED 7/7/16 COMPLETED 7/7/16 GROUND ELEVATION 947 ft HOLE SIZE 6 1/2 inches DRIWNG CONTRACTOR NTI GROUND WATER LEVELS: DRIWNG METHOD 3 1/4 in H.S.A AT TIME OF DRIWNG —No groundwater encountered LOGGED BY DAS CHECKED BY RMB AT END OF DRIWNG — NOTES Elevation estimated from Client provide Site Plan. AFTER DRIWNG — ATTERBERG Lu * z k w 0 LIMITS w Ce . a� =c9 m tWr^o �z� HC ~ z V w Ci- 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION taco tu C7 O a z t o H!= O x z wv �� aD Oce m0> Y= D� 52rw- 5k Nk i-w O O 2z W 0z O 2O g J gm (0z vai a o_ o 0 a g- 0 a 1 TOPSOIL(3.5 Inches) E AU 4•:•:• . 'E• I. •, .rowno •a • . ,moss, 1 ••••••• trace gravel - ••••O• (Possible Fill) X +: 2S 100 11 •ii• _ •••• ••••••4.5 942.5 5 CLAYEY SAND,(SC)brown,fine to medium grained, V SS 78 4-4-5 moist,loose to very dense,trace gravel 3 (9) (Glacial Till) l3- X SS 56 3-2-3 [ io 4 (5) SS 78 7-6-6 i / X 5 (16) - 1:7 X6 78 7-6-8 66I15 • SS100 10-15-16 16.0 931.0X 7 (31) Bottom of borehole at 16.0 feet. 0 I 1 i P 1 8 "a 8 N S 3 s E 1 i g 5 g0 N71 BORING NUMBER SB-6 (A) NTI" T1- 6160 Carmen Drive PAGE 1 OF 1 Inver Grove Heights,Minnesota NORTHERNG1EimC P:763-433-9175 CLIENT TDB Builders PROJECT NAME Boutw Irs Chapel PROJECT NUMBER 16.61562.100 PROJECT LOCATION Oak Park Heights.MN DATE STARTED 7/7/16 COMPLETED 7/7/16 GROUND ELEVATION 938 ft HOLE SIZE 61/2 inches DRILLING CONTRACTOR NTI GROUND WATER LEVELS: DRILLING METHOD 3 1/4 in H.SA AT TIME OF DRIWNG 7.00 ft/Elev 931.00 ft LOGGED BY DAS CHECKED BY RMB AT END OF DRILLING — NOTES Elevation estimated from Client provide Site Plan. AFTER DRILLING — ATTERBERG W X _ z l W at LIMITS _ C... C� W } a e a O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION W m w a ;; J 1--S" ~ z v co o'- agJ a? 8 t mp> Y 210-111 yI- et i=t Uw F- 0 2z 0 t)z O c>2 2O g5 f N2 u_ 0 h W o- 0 0 a 4 ? '" )SANDY LEAN CLAY, GL)brown,moist,soft 1 (Glacial Till) XSS 2-2-2 256 (4) 5 4 SS 3-2-2 3 78 (4) 29 66 3_ a 7.0 7 931.0 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT,(SP-SM)brown, V SS 3-3-3 '� fine to medium grained,saturated,loose to dense,trate A 4 78 (6) 15 11 _ gravel — — J':.:.'. (Alluvial) 10 .• .` `/ SS 5-6-5 `::='.: J( 67 (11) NOTE:Clay(CL)layer at 12.0 feet. AU 6 15 " SS 33 10-10-9 ! _16.0 922.0/\ 7 (19) Bottom of borehole at 16.0 feet. i.1 1 i 1 e m 8 N la 7 3 E F. I i i I 5 0 E F z Nn BORING NUMBER SB-7 (A) NT 1- 6160 Carmen Drive PAGE 1 OF 1 Inver Grove Heights,Minnesota TECH NORTHERN P:763-433-9175 TECHNOLOGIES,iEs uc CLIENT TDB Builders PROJECT NAME Boutwef's Chapel PROJECT NUMBER 16.61562.100 PROJECT LOCATION Oak Park Heights,MN DATE STARTED 7/7/16 COMPLETED 7/7/16 GROUND ELEVATION 944 ft HOLE SIZE 6 1/2 inches DRILLING CONTRACTOR NTI GROUND WATER LEVELS: DRILLING METHOD 3 1/4 in H.S.A AT TIME OF DRIWNG —No groundwater encountered LOGGED BY DAS CHECKED BY RMB AT END OF DRIWNG — NOTES Elevation estimated from Client provide Site Plan. AFTER DRILLING — _ ATTERSERG W a W 3 W re li OMITS}} 0.e. �� MATERIAL DESCRIPTION won �O s z 4 w g z IL z t P z C t F t -x w G J an O . in O> v -a" -I- D IT cp iz w Uz ?,- Q J !J 9a 0 m cc . O U a ;.;•;.; . TOPSOIL(3.0 Inches) ft8A18 II AU ❖:❖ CLAYEY SAND,(SC)brown,fine to medium grained, I I 1 _ •:::::: moist,trace gravel .::: (Possible Fill) XIss56 2-2-2 - ilii 2 (4) - *V4.5 939.5 5 CLAYEY SAND,(SC)brown,fine to medium grained, X SS 78 8-8-7 10 - moist,loose to very dense,trace gravel 3 (15) (Glacial Till) is NOTE:No recovery Sample 7 due to gravel. SS , 0 _ 50/6" , _ 0 � � 4 . 1 0 e SS 78 4-4-4 I- X5 (8) .L.JO X gS78- 0 (4� 8 - ,15 SS 4-5-5 g ;422 16.0 92a.o/\ 7 67 (10) i Bottom of borehole at 16.0 feet. 0 I 1 1 1 e s 8 N is i 3 s E i i I 0 9 nui.•a, MIDDLE ST. CROIX WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION 4 5 5 HAYWARD AVENUE O A K D A L E , MINNESTOA 5 5 1 2 8 ..541‘ Phone0 . 8220 x22 fx22 fax 6 5 1 . 3 3 0 . 7 7 4 7 www . mscwmo . org July 18,2016 Mscw IWO Eric Johnson,Administrator ` land Ee City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd.N. 114 Oak Park Heights,MN 55082 RE: Boutwells Chapel Dear Mr.Johnson, The Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization (MSCWMO) received required submittal items on June 21, 2016 and revised documents on July 17, 2016 for the proposed Boutwells Chapel, located within MSCWMO boundaries and in the City of Oak Park Heights. The proposed project qualifies for full review under the MSCWMO 2015 Watershed Management Plan(WMP). The project,as submitted,meets the Policies and Performance Standards contained within Section 7.0 of the 2015 MSCWMO WMP.The MSCWMO recommends approval of the project,with the following conditions: • Include tabulated quantities of all erosion prevention and sediment control BMPs. • To meet the Minnesota Stormwater Manual Media soil Phosphorous index please change the Bio-Filtration cross section note on sheet C5.1 to read: Mixed soil blend composed of 70% sand/30%peat er-sexpest. Plaisteds Accublended media or Approved Equal. • Submit a maintenance agreement approved by the City. • Provide the dedications or easements for the stormwater management facility areas below the 100 year flood level. The enclosed checklists contain detailed information on project review qualification and the policies and performance standards of the WMP. MSCWMO review process information can be downloaded from www.mscwmo.org. Feel free to contact me at 651-330-8220 x22 or misensee@mnwcd.org if you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, 1(1-4,7.74ter Mikael Isensee Administrator Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Cc: Chuck Dougherty,MSCWMO Board Manager Matt Woodruff,P.E.,Larson Engineering Inc. 3524 Labore Rd.White Bear Lake,MN 55110 Enclosures Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization Member Communities Afton, Bayport, Baytown, Lakeland, Lakeland Shores, Lake St. Croix Beach, Oak Park Heights, St. Mary's Point, Stillwater, & West Lakeland t.. 1 Ili ! NW "SIHO13H>Ie wd >IvO a m g 4,411 A S3WOH NV12131A8S321d -! t nil it a l]d`dH3 SllMl(109 o V f ili 8 F ©2111111 O 0. 1 2 aI 8 9 w s$ e € g h o ff a a a s Phi 8111.11 D i € l C7 8 8 Zs'4ii EB 8I//g J v< Cl) 4 4 4 €6I 14E� III ;"i al iiiiii ai N Y 080^08 W e b 81k 11.6# a 7 -\.\� � i i:-— r:-- -'—'T /' 1 I ! ,.- It F"j - --_ ,off 1 �� \\l 1 yi1�� �—i J� I I 1 I Al ...-, \ irr ‘„ \i,......_41,ok,_:;32;,//, ,14....;,-L-1,_ , t , , 1 , 1 7,, ___4111,!.:z_,0 ,,,,,,,,,, 0 --,..,,, i N . a m 1 I _ /J i1I.I II \ \ \ \ \\ 1 to 1 11 I* / I i / all I i/ • a \ II 11 t y/ I / I /I /I a I. I / I / J III 1j1 /\ fi # / i / I 1 I\ \\ I I/ // / I yL \ 1 \ \ #I / I#ii- I • .'ri I •\\ \\ \ *A \ it- r / a i i/ 4 *; * i /- / /// //// /4**,7_--7-- , / _4,.. \ "/ . . / _, i / / II' i i , ',.. / y// 4titif I 4t* 'Y # pp , \ �''` .� 1 / .- M/ ,� / %. hi NW "S11-19121-1 N2dd )IVO �R <�o NI VaNPi = R S3WOH NYI213119S321d 1 l 1 d F 111/11 a ldbHJ Sll3M11O9 a I6 pt;c�i Sit§ CC 2 ® 1 rm as — $ as wa ht Ion ;g. ss la W ,O 1 a6� nt co c 1 \\\ (9 0 _CD ** - — ..." • *** * 1 \,, --- II 1 II II 11 \ ,s� ____,_,=, _( < ( 41 \i \ '04 I Y/ V l --II �i�i���%r /I Lam, , — 1 \ \ ' I 1/uw�A/����{l/© _ �� \ \ \ \ j \ � i i* w9 k I i 1 i i e \ - I I o I I I I i i 1 # y 1 IL �y z 1 1 # I -0 iilz „4,t- / / i _ _ 3 _* / / 43 " �' _ / ��/ i N n • / 4 z= h III NW 'SIHOIJH)I21Vd)IVO c MI IMOa S3WOH NVI213119S21d N ila IV13dVHO S113M1(lO9;4.1 { � I ;l;1 ; � • ! =8 1 9 O Eiifl Elislp 44 i t s6 t ©o ® w 14 < $ 1i 9 I t$ tl Ili t P' i 3/0 i=q;g !a ti i 14 W II I f9 0 ! it 1 gipip? {e 1I , # F z $iE !Ia. $€�s i? a iI !aII i 3 z 4 f$, 1, tai6i1 Q 41 tt `F ' • K'o p ne¢e it SE 4 1; z ! y4 1[t III Ea Q68 ii ,f O c.{ at ° t U 4t sa 4= LI F l4 4 ➢ !fli Iii i tis q z III j il 6i IN a€: l= t l gl if 4 1a i, .y {g W II ZT S i Z. ll MA ft tint .$!a 1E1 xr / f\ 7 .4Y__ I - 1,,._ - ie.it / . d ,, /44.__ /,:: ' if y ,t � t y - ----- , 1t if !E sl ;uffl la i if II lit 1 1 7 \ Av '_. I I . J 5' 1 Ali f;11 p 4 8 ', -vg IF I i ➢ s slit 4F;,i, if j ° o (��. :g ej� ,�� <\M `� igf f i (ix if ltg2ti_ as a t a 0. . 1 't � ' — . I/I yi, /- hi li. III ;i 7 jzj�h 1 a f e 1 )67'7_ �/ f j y p < -. E 1 ti y . i ,— � "t.� I',11 1-{1 "Ela { fiVi i! b • , MI .____ II �0 ° €igi s 4 a$i$ Ng i`3$s{t3 $9 ra 84 3 v I Al (1) \ ,, \ \ \ l \ \ \ 11 I I 1-1 IF 11 $: 3 ,1 II ie /I 1/ f1 ee is $_ :a t ga 1 . . 1 f ,i / / i ,/ I A I ° 3 LEt II fI 1' Ai 1 r4 ° \ 1 `11 ># L. i / I /1 / d E. at5 Q aM sa pl: y If I i il f t # e$ yt t� if t!: aitl If !1 if Ill te$ I\ \ I 1 / I , 1 at 2 ill is tl a 6# hi I 1 / r I !a id a, la # E a a \ I \\ \ t 1 / / I / .g �'s f ;f ': °lt t: i ;ti 1 I 1 4A, 41 $ 4 i= a /' /\I'l (,3*——7## - 1 tir 4 e� 3Oil f { 1 III t o �_ h i ii / / # _ #� f; �� At, ,., 1 jet `i. z ztt m /d i v i s 3 ° a Fr/ / 'b' \ 4 4 4F� ° d ai !NI gl f if!I s i ; i�' fi yl z i y _ Y \/ f� �i j$s t g f; 1i 6i• etFtsj ° / ' i t ff sat tE qla;e t4� fi t i %f jfi f1 t gill 1111$ r // /�,_ I \ `trilit. W 1ai1got4t , I' Eall41 1 id ' 44 ,� ��� �f,, it-- / '' lk i` !III pis `l ' 11011; 1 / •/ e // `dif �.J i s4 a� 3 it'lla eiaEt�p4 S /- t., if4 II.. i. i! a;1 Eliii t,�n St /`// / ear > � III" e v z =i Ff;= a ;$ ;II tF,snf@il! 3 �/ 4 �1: s e ° +a s ; -11 Gl is =M{( 'fes 4 f f / \ �� .� , (J U [ F as ll i fat : Nil or i *, ,_ 0 6g f illi 3 t` II' ti+aa sst! i! /1• / I' \ _t"N se,.s ## n 1# F 4�i! ° , s!; 36 '11 1$� $ a � � ' d�! !@ 5s3 § hi. :; sF Miitisi j ./' / _ -, ! 8 'gig¢ w - .. ., . . • 1 r t ill NW'S1HOI3H)121Vd NYO ` oI ii/i11 q S3WOH NVI23U.8S21d P Ea r 3dVHD Sl3M1lO9 I 0 I i1,t, p i Noll .5 E. iT j1` 3. - j 5A. . !. $ ea .� I. ire it. lana ! r ill - . b ® E iI. !( Y 1i x gas } z ii. It § ii 1 -' !s 41 €; 1.111 ii i fi sl aa ill i . f fi! s i :; 8 e o. M 1 11 0 1Z:: 1€_ ; 1I Ii }IE ! III alae i i l -i { !.� % { f # � ! �4 IIME�wzl4s lisLS FgSi! s n as6E !� ii is !if S� ftiI.z ; z lag = zAa [ iill II IIs ! S1If! ( . Ii Ito t1 Ilk illi `'i(4� g€: ' i i4E X14 II lig MI ilii #i hl!!IH j Ett 11 III / aA a ai v d - • Se 0 w00®aOVz®# h i ie. 0 11 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 y � i11:1iiIii IIIIi ___ ££ I I I �, il _; 3mm Uzi I �\ me k ��, �9 yrc_ \ s -----`7, ` , A I � I % I \ - \ V la— 131115---- vil 11 10 OW \_ _ 1161‘ N , I \ii 1 i M & y \ 1 1 I• t 1 i * I $ 1 C 1 e i I # 3 r ‘ / / yi _ / a; 4 -: ti * a / !\/ (4/ /7He,3 Th- ir 51 a / fi > / i a< Ntr s. 4 f0`S .a� rr�, ##• R t *' [ i 1 : ) 4 1 {!l a NW"S1HOI3H)I21b'd VIVO C • 111 F!I3u1 i S3WOH NV12131A9S321d Imo J a f F I H_ = e l3d`dH3 Sll3Mlfl09 C.) i01 eo Iiill! 0o : ® Z o <4.— .I II1 -I .-I g 1111 II II II II u U hII 1 4a rre: $ g il �1� <J ' r "G9" E 36 2 z • JI11 Z si3 � � { 0 = a W zI n 7.11E zp Y OA a"_ a � !g r� N • L o 5 �0 _ w U . z Y I � 2W .::-111=11. L23 ME o '•.... i �i i1I1. 3 a LL. 11=11 it JL= ' a` Lai § § II IIS!�= II II'�` �I�: "- re - ZW r` � K \® r a11 a 01 !Vit l 11 -1118 43 gi & 11 o ... r r` �_n flII1111111111I 911 ih kR — ig p gw g o jar fI- H: IIfe ii d ii EIOL 1 g ii....0 g,a, 11..11111111 0_ 1 � rw I! II _ _= s � � ,. g w. - zo 1111111111111M11 J 171 w 11 1 o w 11 : 1-1IIw Z ll r. . ., 11-;= ir) I li I 51 -Inlp1.5 tit 4o cc <a maa 3I b1 a S� .� 1< g 1 / W 4.I. w F ii .' ' IL1 im 0 - F 41'..7.6:7•1" o U h ii.;'"::.'71;11_4V111 Ia WQ ^II g3 ZQ • • . ll �I� Lu Q 1-F---t ZpQ g 2 ii•'-;:-.-11=11=k 20 4 it�ELOSI € Lo $ e.` cif I.4J g ro . ,< °U°0 - u.nZ LZ' >Z �I IZ I�j 8 z / :• D. Z Ir °° tr .. m C -i; ',4:.' 1'11�,'_ a0 -;ling=L•1=1 a0 g ` • -.II- ZW a M in o, rnW ii 1 1• z I�-1•4I II.�J7L� ti . e l ci •. w S , ; 7 Ilgl�l 0z ...1.1111-17L pZ , • m� •NI I• ' o Y_ ii' .I�If�I mU : =I 0 11 II II'.II .>t�• I7� _ U '� - cc 4 � 1 U 1.11=11=11=,-....-. vi aY 3 IIS ,% @ 1111111 ii=!-- II• CJI_- Q •.I L? 1=11=11=11-II ll. r O ,,:..:... 1_1=1 !.. 4 '<f�11 11=11=11 ILI „9 1 3 s ..« n I 1 i � 1 _ilk NW"S1HOI3H)i2IVd )IVO _ 41 ;. $3WOH NVRJ31J.9S321d hi R LAI 1 I iiiiifl 1JdVH3 SlloMl(lO8 `� 0 gill og{{'i'si t. g iloi I® o z �` ?Di IIiiII!tI a Ih k fit'11 g g IIQo x II: ill !� r9 0 Is iri 1! ' 9 all gIi p11;4111 � if �` � il hi .9' c1 eI` 921111111 ; u h 1 I iIp.b .. _ V HUll .� M i. 3 ; it 6 6 m i '. p li 11 e •- 'gyp$p{ f K I- Al ig II II 7 52gg 11 F' a J_ II-1.1=E f'. a g tel G Q IInTRNr E _ < w dIII II 5 < Z Z D Q IPS1.---,71„ En �e O w O J p g1 g e ,. a be i' II it RI-11 I Q f Z 6 CC II d ,,Jf $2=r 51 i O DL l ' i°i ,,_ Z R Z Z seg i s �€ ,q OE ! e { i Q se.W ' 1111 3 ' Ni M9 dZ .\ 1 1 c `— '� III. 3 4. 4 ,'.1,'r' Fl ort \, ilii g� ILII:, ig alp 9 p i �, t114�� a i r d� I �li�ii��ll� ����IIIIn�i�1\. . Y 1 n u,_ 11 i 3 .uu r 4,1 �i ° g I , Ilii I.I i! .illi 11 0 .E `\ II°ia ' e"g j, t 9 r mal X11' li I, �3 $y5 r NO m=1_117111] ge mil [ 1 1- i £Lr' g4 3 ' R ° BOUTWELL'S CHAPEL STORMWATER CALCULATIONS BY LARSON ENGINEERING JULY 17, 2016 CONTENTS: 1. Stormwater Runoff Summary 2. Existing Drainage Map 3. HydroCAD Report for Existing Conditions (2-yr, 10-yr and 100-yr events) 4. Proposed Drainage Map 5. HydroCAD Report for Proposed Conditions (2-yr, 10-yr and 100-yr events) 6. MIDS Calculator Results I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 41885 Matt Woodruff, P.E. Date Registration No. Larson Boutwell's Chapel SUMMARY OF STORMWATER RUNOFF Introduction: This project will consist of the construction of a new chapel, gazebo, parking lot expansion, and sidewalks. The existing and proposed conditions were modeled as a combination of impervious, woods, and grass, all type B, with curve numbers of 98, 55, and 61, respectively. Based on soils information, an infiltration rate of 0.06 in/hr was assumed in the existing and proposed basins located on the site. Per Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization rules, rainfall depths for the 2-, 10-, and 100-year events were 2.80", 4.20", and 7.30", respectively. Per MSCWMO rules, infiltration is not permitted through Type D soils. To comply with this requirement, the existing pond on the east side of the site will be converted to a filtration basin. The runoff from the new parking lot addition will be routed to this basin. The basin will outlet through an existing 15" pipe. A structure with a weir will be installed over the existing outlet to control the runoff and promote infiltration. Runoff Rate Per MSCWMO rules, the peak runoff rates must not increase in the proposed conditions. The existing basin to the east and a new basin to the west will be used to control runoff rate. Existing and proposed runoff rates are as follows. Existing Peak runoff rates (in cubic feet per second): Area North South Total 2-year 0.41 0.07 0.45 10-year 1.36 0.29 1.54 100-year 4.40 0.96 5.06 Proposed Peak runoff rates (in cubic feet per second): Area North South Total 2-year 0.40 0.05 0.41 10-year 1.31 0.15 1.44 100-year 4.15 0.42 4.96 Runoff Volume Per MSCWMO rules, an amount of stormwater equivalent to 0.55" over the new and fully reconstructed impervious, must be retained and infiltrated onsite. There is no fully reconstructed impervious being proposed for this project. The existing basin in the northeast corner of the property will be converted to be used for filtration. The draintile will be elevated from the bottom 0.24' to allow infiltration. This basin will be oversized to treat an equivalent amount of runoff from the roof and sidewalks from the west side of the property. Existing Impervious: 11,901 SF Proposed Impervious:20,204 SF 5 Larson New Impervious: 20,204 SF— 11,901 SF = 8,303 SF Required Infiltration: 8,303 SF * 0.55" = 381 CF Infil. Rate Infil. Volume East Basin 0.06 in/hr 232 CF West Basin 0.45 in/hr 712 CF Total 944 CF Water Quality Per MSCWMO requirements, at least 75% of annual total phosphorous must be removed from the runoff from the new impervious surfaces. MIDS Calculator was used for this analysis. The results are attached. \ . \ N • N EXISTING HYD . • N 4 . N . N„ . -.. •..„„..•.•......:•.•.,., N. N. N -.---- x,,,7\'N''''\.„,, ,x, • . . \ \ \ \ 7-*.- . \� \ ..... ,,.,.„... \, \ ‘.. Nx - -N . . N , ---,....,..„„„ c . ., NN ,.. \ \ NN • --t/st.... 7 4 i i A 111100,10. (§) / %~%,„ - _ `�.� '< \ N. .....' ` • --� i ——saw --1. r.. 1.�--. N ....1—... 4 z N N eaa-- "`\ \N\ \�\• I/ ` / \\I I co; I I �V \\� \�� h \� \�/ ( B, , I ., /� /� f/ \—sas-—...� \\ '` : \ ! ` i `L / \` / J/ / // ` -� \\ \ 1 \I \ I /� . 1 / 1 \ /1 \ j / ! I! // �s.4 i ( // ' I i \ \ 1 `jam / \ / - J \ I� ._—r.— \\ mesas J N / // /_\ : -I N _� / �—/ --�- '�3 ..�'` �s� .--..E.: -ss .._.._..ice—••— �•— \N \ Boutwell's Existing 0 Conditions I 1R > 3R Q 2R site No Total Offsite South B /1ND < A Existing Pond --\\.,-- Subcat Reach on. Link Routing Diagram for Boutwells Existing Prepared by Larson Engineering, Printed 7/17/2016 ` HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Summary for Subcatchment A: Runoff = 0.23 cfs @ 12.71 hrs, Volume= 1,454 cf, Depth= 0.61" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 7,665 98 Pavement 4,957 55 Woods, Good, HSG B 16,164 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 28,786 70 Weighted Average 21,121 73.37% Pervious Area 7,665 26.63% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 110 0.0454 0.15 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 34.3 110 0.0363 0.05 Sheet Flow, Woods: Dense underbrush n= 0.800 P2= 2.75" 46.3 220 Total • Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Summary for Subcatchment B: Runoff = 0.26 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 1,367 cf, Depth= 0.35" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 3,343 98 Pavement 161 98 Building 7,408 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 35,653 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 46,565 63 Weighted Average 43,061 92.48% Pervious Area 3,504 7.52% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 13.3 106 0.0896 0.13 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 8.8 50 0.0200 0.09 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 22.1 156 Total Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment C: Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 12.28 hrs, Volume= 295 cf, Depth= 0.35" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 256 98 Pavement 476 98 Building 2,590 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 6,716 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 10,038 63 Weighted Average 9,306 92.71% Pervious Area 732 7.29% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.6 67 0.0627 0.10 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 3.5 35 0.1000 0.17 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 14.1 102 Total Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Reach 1R: Offsite North [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 75,351 sf, 14.82% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.45" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.41 cfs @ 12.61 hrs, Volume= 2,813 cf Outflow = 0.41 cfs @ 12.61 hrs, Volume= 2,813 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Reach 2R: Offsite South [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 10,038 sf, 7.29% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.35" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.07 cfs @ 12.28 hrs, Volume= 295 cf Outflow = 0.07 cfs @ 12.28 hrs, Volume= 295 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Reach 3R: Total [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=lnflow) Inflow Area = 85,389 sf, 13.94% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.44" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.45 cfs @ 12.56 hrs, Volume= 3,107 cf Outflow = 0.45 cfs @ 12.56 hrs, Volume= 3,107 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Pond 1P: Existing Pond Inflow Area = 28,786 sf, 26.63% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.61" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.23 cfs @ 12.71 hrs, Volume= 1,454 cf Outflow = 0.23 cfs @ 12.78 hrs, Volume= 1,454 cf, Atten= 1%, Lag= 3.7 min Discarded = 0.00 cfs @ 12.78 hrs, Volume= 8 cf Primary = 0.23 cfs @ 12.78 hrs, Volume= 1,446 cf Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 938.22' @ 12.78 hrs Surf.Area= 325 sf Storage= 39 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 3.5 min calculated for 1,453 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 3.5 min( 887.8 - 884.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 938.00' 11,752 cf Custom Stage Data(Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 938.00 35 0 0 939.00 1,355 695 695 940.00 2,673 2,014 2,709 941.00 4,456 3,565 6,274 942.00 6,500 5,478 11,752 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.00' 15.0" Round Culvert L= 31.0' RCP, end-section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Inlet/Outlet Invert= 938.00' /937.44' S= 0.0181 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean, Flow Area= 1.23 sf #2 Secondary 941.50' 30.0' long x 5.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.34 2.50 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.66 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.67 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.74 2.79 2.88 #3 Discarded 938.00' 0.060 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area piscarded OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 12.78 hrs HW=938.22' (Free Discharge) 3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.00 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.23 cfs @ 12.78 hrs HW=938.22' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) ,Primary (Inlet Controls 0.23 cfs @ 1.60 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=938.00' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Summary for Subcatchment A: Runoff = 0.63 cfs @ 12.70 hrs, Volume= 3,514 cf, Depth= 1.46" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Description 7,665 98 Pavement 4,957 55 Woods, Good, HSG B 16,164 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 28,786 70 Weighted Average 21,121 73.37% Pervious Area 7,665 26.63% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 110 0.0454 0.15 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 34.3 110 0.0363 0.05 Sheet Flow, Woods: Dense underbrush n= 0.800 P2= 2.75" 46.3 220 Total Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Summary for Subcatchment B: Runoff = 1.04 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 3,991 cf, Depth= 1.03" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Description 3,343 98 Pavement 161 98 Building 7,408 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 35,653 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 46,565 63 Weighted Average 43,061 92.48% Pervious Area 3,504 7.52% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 13.3 106 0.0896 0.13 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 8.8 50 0.0200 0.09 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 22.1 156 Total Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment C: Runoff = 0.29 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 860 cf, Depth= 1.03" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Description * 256 98 Pavement * 476 98 Building 2,590 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 6,716 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 10,038 63 Weighted Average 9,306 92.71% Pervious Area 732 7.29% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.6 67 0.0627 0.10 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 3.5 35 0.1000 0.17 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 14.1 102 Total Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Reach 1R: Offsite North [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=lnflow) Inflow Area = 75,351 sf, 14.82% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.19" for 10-Year event Inflow = 1.36 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 7,494 cf Outflow = 1.36 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 7,494 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Summary for Reach 2R: Offsite South [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 10,038 sf, 7.29% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.03" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.29 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 860 cf Outflow = 0.29 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 860 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Summary for Reach 3R: Total [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=lnflow) Inflow Area = 85,389 sf, 13.94% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.17" for 10-Year event Inflow = 1.54 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 8,354 cf Outflow = 1.54 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 8,354 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Summary for Pond 1P: Existing Pond Inflow Area = 28,786 sf, 26.63% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.46" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.63 cfs @ 12.70 hrs, Volume= 3,514 cf Outflow = 0.63 cfs @ 12.73 hrs, Volume= 3,514 cf, Atten= 1%, Lag= 1.7 min Discarded = 0.00 cfs @ 12.73 hrs, Volume= 11 cf Primary = 0.63 cfs @ 12.73 hrs, Volume= 3,503 cf Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 938.37' @ 12.73 hrs Surf.Area= 523 sf Storage= 103 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 3.1 min calculated for 3,513 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 3.1 min ( 865.5 -862.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 938.00' 11,752 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 938.00 35 0 0 939.00 1,355 695 695 940.00 2,673 2,014 2,709 941.00 4,456 3,565 6,274 942.00 6,500 5,478 11,752 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.00' 15.0" Round Culvert L= 31.0' RCP, end-section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Inlet/Outlet Invert= 938.00' /937.44' S= 0.0181 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 1.23 sf #2 Secondary 941.50' 30.0' long x 5.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.34 2.50 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.66 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.67 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.74 2.79 2.88 #3 Discarded 938.00' 0.060 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Qscarded OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 12.73 hrs HW=938.37' (Free Discharge) 3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.00 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.63 cfs @ 12.73 hrs HW=938.37' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 4-1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 0.63 cfs @ 2.07 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=938.00' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Summary for Subcatchment A: Runoff = 1.75 cfs @ 12.65 hrs, Volume= 9,281 cf, Depth= 3.87" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Area (sf) CN Description 7,665 98 Pavement 4,957 55 Woods, Good, HSG B 16,164 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 28,786 70 Weighted Average 21,121 73.37% Pervious Area 7,665 26.63% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 110 0.0454 0.15 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 34.3 110 0.0363 0.05 Sheet Flow, Woods: Dense underbrush n= 0.800 P2= 2.75" 46.3 220 Total Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Summary for Subcatchment B: Runoff = 3.50 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume= 12,135 cf, Depth= 3.13" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Area (sf) CN Description * 3,343 98 Pavement * 161 98 Building 7,408 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 35,653 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 46,565 63 Weighted Average 43,061 92.48% Pervious Area 3,504 7.52% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 13.3 106 0.0896 0.13 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 8.8 50 0.0200 0.09 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 22.1 156 Total Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 Summary for Subcatchment C: Runoff = 0.96 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 2,616 cf, Depth= 3.13" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Area (sf) CN Description 256 98 Pavement 476 98 Building 2,590 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 6,716 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 10,038 63 Weighted Average 9,306 92.71% Pervious Area 732 7.29% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.6 67 0.0627 0.10 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 3.5 35 0.1000 0.17 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 14.1 102 Total Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pape 19 Summary for Reach 1R: Offsite North [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 75,351 sf, 14.82% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.41" for 100-Year event Inflow = 4.40 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume= 21,398 cf Outflow = 4.40 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume= 21,398 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 20 Summary for Reach 2R: Offsite South [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 10,038 sf, 7.29% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.13" for 100-Year event Inflow = 0.96 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 2,616 cf Outflow = 0.96 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 2,616 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 21 Summary for Reach 3R: Total [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=lnflow) Inflow Area = 85,389 sf, 13.94% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.37" for 100-Year event Inflow = 5.06 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 24,014 cf Outflow = 5.06 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 24,014 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Existing MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 22 Summary for Pond 1P: Existing Pond Inflow Area = 28,786 sf, 26.63% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.87" for 100-Year event Inflow = 1.75 cfs @ 12.65 hrs, Volume= 9,281 cf Outflow = 1.73 cfs @ 12.70 hrs, Volume= 9,281 cf, Atten= 1%, Lag= 3.3 min Discarded = 0.00 cfs @ 12.70 hrs, Volume= 18 cf Primary = 1.73 cfs @ 12.70 hrs, Volume= 9,264 cf Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 938.64' @ 12.70 hrs Surf.Area= 882 sf Storage= 294 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 2.9 min calculated for 9,280 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 2.9 min ( 844.8 - 841.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 938.00' 11,752 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 938.00 35 0 0 939.00 1,355 695 695 940.00 2,673 2,014 2,709 941.00 4,456 3,565 6,274 942.00 6,500 5,478 11,752 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.00' 15.0" Round Culvert L= 31.0' RCP, end-section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Inlet/Outlet Invert= 938.00' /937.44' S= 0.0181 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 1.23 sf #2 Secondary 941.50' 30.0' long x 5.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.34 2.50 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.66 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.67 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.74 2.79 2.88 #3 Discarded 938.00' 0.060 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Qiscarded OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 12.70 hrs HW=938.64' (Free Discharge) 3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.00 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=1.73 cfs @ 12.70 hrs HW=938.64' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 1.73 cfs @ 2.73 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=938.00' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) . \ \ \.... .. . \ N. PROPOSED H \ .. N. \\ \ \. \\... ..,.. N. N. • 4 , ---.........,...„,, N „ „..,.„..„...„.,...,..„, N.. . :„. ... •. „ . , , _ .,.., NN , • .,...,... . .... ...... . -------,...,.... , � \. , � �� ......... . . ........,. . ___ • _. . , ..... \, \ • N • *-- ----....„....,......„ , •, „ ,,,...,. , _. \ •. , ....- .,,....., --- \ N, ----,.....„....,..„„, (/c\) , ...... , , X1'1, / , , `;` „�� i Off\ �� 1 ��00I '=v•. '' © RIM 943.1 o Ii►- \ 4417 ...,,, . r AIL 916' - -51o„ Air N, '`\ 1. , b *k - .. P art I / _ Nlik- -moi'< 9- I` \, 9 \I , 40,,,,Nittiktil” /7 \ --. . \\ i' pie c CH,4,oF�\ ` I I I•• .00 T11II• // will111*"1111r — --moi—� a5 •' •,;,,,,, / -1-: i--: ---„. / ; ?�/...........71:-, --i" • . Sq, / ' �.—. \ N Boutwell's Proposed /3ND Conditions D D 1R D 4R 1 2R 1111 site No Total Offsite South ( B ) /2NDQ < A > East Pond {Subcat Reach on Link Routing Diagram for Boutwells Proposed Prepared by Larson Engineering, Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Summary for Subcatchment A: Runoff = 0.36 cfs @ 12.64 hrs, Volume= 1,956 cf, Depth= 0.78" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 11,293 98 Pavement 4,957 55 Woods, Good, HSG B 13,683 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 29,933 74 Weighted Average 18,640 62.27% Pervious Area 11,293 37.73% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 110 0.0454 0.15 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 30.6 100 0.0400 0.05 Sheet Flow, Woods: Dense underbrush n= 0.800 P2= 2.75" 42.6 210 Total Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pape 3 Summary for Subcatchment B: Runoff = 0.33 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 1,535 cf, Depth= 0.42" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 4,222 98 Pavement 1,611 98 Building 6,294 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 31,971 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 44,098 65 Weighted Average 38,265 86.77% Pervious Area 5,833 13.23% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 13.3 106 0.0896 0.13 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 8.8 50 0.0200 0.09 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 22.1 156 Total Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment C: Runoff = 0.05 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 164 cf, Depth= 0.53" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 304 98 Pavement 476 98 Building 587 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 2,369 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 3,736 68 Weighted Average 2,956 79.12% Pervious Area 780 20.88% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.6 67 0.0627 0.10 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 3.5 35 0.1000 0.17 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 14.1 102 Total Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Subcatchment D: Runoff = 0.19 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 439 cf, Depth= 0.69" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Area (sf) CN Description 1,989 98 Pavement 309 98 Building • 5,322 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 7,620 72 Weighted Average 5,322 69.84% Pervious Area 2,298 30.16% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 8.3 78 0.0577 0.16 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Reach 1R: Offsite North [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 81,651 sf, 23.79% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.41" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.41 cfs @ 12.83 hrs, Volume= 2,803 cf Outflow = 0.41 cfs @ 12.83 hrs, Volume= 2,803 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Reach 2R: Offsite South [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 3,736 sf, 20.88% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Reach 4R: Total [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 85,387 sf, 23.66% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.39" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.41 cfs @ 12.83 hrs, Volume= 2,803 cf Outflow = 0.41 cfs @ 12.83 hrs, Volume= 2,803 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Summary for Pond 2P: East Pond [87]Warning: Oscillations may require smaller dt or Finer Routing (severity=243) Inflow Area = 29,933 sf, 37.73% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.78" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.36 cfs @ 12.64 hrs, Volume= 1,956 cf Outflow = 0.28 cfs @ 12.90 hrs, Volume= 1,956 cf, Atten=22%, Lag= 15.4 min Discarded = 0.04 cfs @ 12.90 hrs, Volume= 1,127 cf Primary = 0.24 cfs @ 12.90 hrs, Volume= 829 cf Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 938.42' @ 12.90 hrs Surf.Area= 3,553 sf Storage= 414 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 47.0 min ( 916.0 -869.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 938.00' 12,868 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Voids Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (%) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 938.00 3,108 0.0 0 0 938.01 3,108 30.0 9 9 938.24 3,340 30.0 222 232 939.00 4,259 30.0 866 1,098 940.00 4,975 30.0 1,385 2,483 940.50 5,615 30.0 794 3,277 940.51 5,615 100.0 56 3,334 941.00 6,254 100.0 2,908 6,241 942.00 7,000 100.0 6,627 12,868 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.00' 15.0" Round Culvert L= 31.0' RCP, end-section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Inlet/Outlet Invert= 938.00'/937.44' S= 0.0181 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 1.23 sf #2 Secondary 941.50' 30.0' long x 5.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.34 2.50 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.66 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.67 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.74 2.79 2.88 #3 Discarded 938.00' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #4 Device 1 938.24' Custom Weir/Orifice, Cv=2.62 (C=3.28) Head (feet) 0.00 0.70 0.70 2.00 Width (feet) 1.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 #5 Secondary 940.00' 24.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Discarded OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 12.90 hrs HW=938.42' (Free Discharge) t3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.24 cfs @ 12.90 hrs HW=938.42' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L =Culvert (Passes 0.24 cfs of 0.78 cfs potential flow) =Custom Weir/Orifice (Weir Controls 0.24 cfs @ 1.37 fps) econdary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=938.00' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) 5 Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 2-Year Rainfall=2.80" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Pond 3P: Inflow Area = 3,736 sf, 20.88% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.53" for 2-Year event Inflow = 0.05 cfs @ 12.25 hrs, Volume= 164 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 14.37 hrs, Volume= 164 cf, Atten= 93%, Lag= 127.2 min Discarded = 0.00 cfs @ 14.37 hrs, Volume= 164 cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 941.25' @ 14.37 hrs Surf.Area= 354 sf Storage= 81 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 242.8 min calculated for 164 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 242.8 min ( 1,103.9 - 861.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 941.00' 1,992 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 941.00 296 0 0 942.00 528 412 412 943.00 816 672 1,084 944.00 1,000 908 1,992 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 942.50' 5.0' long x 5.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.34 2.50 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.66 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.67 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.74 2.79 2.88 #2 Discarded 941.00' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Qiscarded OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 14.37 hrs HW=941.25' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.00 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=941.00' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 4-1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Subcatchment A: Runoff = 0.85 cfs @ 12.63 hrs, Volume= 4,352 cf, Depth= 1.74" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=.0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Description 11,293 98 Pavement 4,957 55 Woods, Good, HSG B 13,683 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 29,933 74 Weighted Average 18,640 62.27% Pervious Area 11,293 37.73% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 110 0.0454 0.15 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 30.6 100 0.0400 0.05 Sheet Flow, Woods: Dense underbrush n= 0.800 P2= 2.75" 42.6 210 Total Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Summary for Subcatchment B: Runoff = 1.13 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 4,213 cf, Depth= 1.15" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Description 4,222 98 Pavement 1,611 98 Building 6,294 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 31,971 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 44,098 65 Weighted Average 38,265 86.77% Pervious Area 5,833 13.23% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 13.3 106 0.0896 0.13 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 8.8 50 0.0200 0.09 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 22.1 156 Total Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Summary for Subcatchment C: Runoff = 0.15 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 415 cf, Depth= 1.33" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Description 304 98 Pavement 476 98 Building 587 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 2,369 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 3,736 68 Weighted Average 2,956 79.12% Pervious Area 780 20.88% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.6 67 0.0627 0.10 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 3.5 35 0.1000 0.17 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 14.1 102 Total Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Summary for Subcatchment D: Runoff = 0.47 cfs @ 12.16 hrs, Volume= 1,017 cf, Depth= 1.60" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Area (sf) CN Description 1,989 98 Pavement 309 98 Building 5,322 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 7,620 72 Weighted Average 5,322 69.84% Pervious Area 2,298 30.16% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 8.3 78 0.0577 0.16 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Summary for Reach 1R: Offsite North [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 81,651 sf, 23.79% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.18" for 10-Year event Inflow = 1.44 cfs @ 12.50 hrs, Volume= 8,045 cf Outflow = 1.44 cfs @ 12.50 hrs, Volume= 8,045 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Summary for Reach 2R: Offsite South [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=lnflow) Inflow Area = 3,736 sf, 20.88% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 Summary for Reach 4R: Total [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=lnflow) Inflow Area = 85,387 sf, 23.66% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.13" for 10-Year event Inflow = 1.44 cfs @ 12.50 hrs, Volume= 8,045 cf Outflow = 1.44 cfs @ 12.50 hrs, Volume= 8,045 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 19 Summary for Pond 2P: East Pond [87] Warning: Oscillations may require smaller dt or Finer Routing (severity=60) Inflow Area = 29,933 sf, 37.73% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.74" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.85 cfs @ 12.63 hrs, Volume= 4,352 cf Outflow = 0.79 cfs @ 12.74 hrs, Volume= 4,352 cf, Atten= 7%, Lag= 6.8 min Discarded = 0.04 cfs @ 12.74 hrs, Volume= 1,537 cf Primary = 0.75 cfs @ 12.74 hrs, Volume= 2,815 cf Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 938.61' @ 12.74 hrs Surf.Area= 3,793 sf Storage= 633 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 38.0 min ( 888.8 -850.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 938.00' 12,868 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Voids Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (%) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 938.00 3,108 0.0 0 0 938.01 3,108 30.0 9 9 938.24 3,340 30.0 222 232 939.00 4,259 30.0 866 1,098 940.00 4,975 30.0 1,385 2,483 940.50 5,615 30.0 794 3,277 940.51 5,615 100.0 56 3,334 941.00 6,254 100.0 2,908 6,241 942.00 7,000 100.0 6,627 12,868 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.00' 15.0" Round Culvert L= 31.0' RCP, end-section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Inlet/Outlet Invert= 938.00' /937.44' S= 0.0181 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 1.23 sf #2 Secondary 941.50' 30.0' long x 5.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.34 2.50 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.66 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.67 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.74 2.79 2.88 #3 Discarded 938.00' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #4 Device 1 938.24' Custom Weir/Orifice, Cv=2.62 (C= 3.28) Head (feet) 0.00 0.70 0.70 2.00 Width (feet) 1.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 #5 Secondary 940.00' 24.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 20 piscarded OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 12.74 hrs HW=938.61' (Free Discharge) 3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.75 cfs @ 12.74 hrs HW=938.61' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L =Culvert (Passes 0.75 cfs of 1.60 cfs potential flow) =Custom Weir/Orifice (Weir Controls 0.75 cfs @ 2.00 fps) econdary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=938.00' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) 5 Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 10-Year Rainfall=4.20" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 21 Summary for Pond 3P: Inflow Area = 3,736 sf, 20.88% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.33" for 10-Year event Inflow = 0.15 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 415 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 15.32 hrs, Volume= 415 cf, Atten= 97%, Lag= 185.3 min Discarded = 0.00 cfs @ 15.32 hrs, Volume= 415 cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 941.72' @ 15.32 hrs Surf.Area= 463 sf Storage= 273 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 640.9 min calculated for 415 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 641.0 min ( 1,477.8 - 836.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 941.00' 1,992 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recaic) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 941.00 296 0 0 942.00 528 412 412 943.00 816 672 1,084 944.00 1,000 908 1,992 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 942.50' 5.0' long x 5.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.34 2.50 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.66 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.67 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.74 2.79 2.88 #2 Discarded 941.00' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area iscarded OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 15.32 hrs HW=941.72' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.00 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=941.00' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) II Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 22 Summary for Subcatchment A: Runoff = 2.15 cfs @ 12.59 hrs, Volume= 10,738 cf, Depth= 4.30" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Area (sf) CN Description 11,293 98 Pavement 4,957 55 Woods, Good, HSG B 13,683 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 29,933 74 Weighted Average 18,640 62.27% Pervious Area 11,293 37.73% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 110 0.0454 0.15 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 30.6 100 0.0400 0.05 Sheet Flow, Woods: Dense underbrush n= 0.800 P2= 2.75" 42.6 210 Total Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 23 Summary for Subcatchment B: Runoff = 3.55 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume= 12,260 cf, Depth= 3.34" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Area (sf) CN Description 4,222 98 Pavement 1,611 98 Building 6,294 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 31,971 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 44,098 65 Weighted Average 38,265 86.77% Pervious Area 5,833 13.23% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 13.3 106 0.0896 0.13 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 8.8 50 0.0200 0.09 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 22.1 156 Total Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 24 Summary for Subcatchment C: Runoff = 0.42 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 1,138 cf, Depth= 3.65" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Area (sf) CN Description * 304 98 Pavement * 476 98 Building 587 58 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG B 2,369 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 3,736 68 Weighted Average 2,956 79.12% Pervious Area 780 20.88% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.6 67 0.0627 0.10 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.75" 3.5 35 0.1000 0.17 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" 14.1 102 Total Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 25 Summary for Subcatchment D: Runoff = 1.20 cfs @ 12.16 hrs, Volume= 2,595 cf, Depth= 4.09" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Area (sf1 CN Description 1,989 98 Pavement 309 98 Building 5,322 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 7,620 72 Weighted Average 5,322 69.84% Pervious Area 2,298 30.16% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 8.3 78 0.0577 0.16 Sheet Flow, Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.75" Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 26 Summary for Reach 1R: Offsite North [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 81,651 sf, 23.79% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.47" for 100-Year event Inflow = 4.95 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 23,594 cf Outflow = 4.95 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 23,594 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 27 Summary for Reach 2R: Offsite South [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 3,736 sf, 20.88% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.52" for 100-Year event Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ 13.24 hrs, Volume= 161 cf Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 13.24 hrs, Volume= 161 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 28 Summary for Reach 4R: Total [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 85,387 sf, 23.66% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.34" for 100-Year event Inflow = 4.95 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 23,755 cf Outflow = 4.95 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 23,755 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD® 10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 29 Summary for Pond 2P: East Pond Inflow Area = 29,933 sf, 37.73% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.30" for 100-Year event Inflow = 2.15 cfs @ 12.59 hrs, Volume= 10,738 cf Outflow = 2.09 cfs @ 12.67 hrs, Volume= 10,738 cf, Atten= 3%, Lag= 4.6 min Discarded = 0.04 cfs @ 12.67 hrs, Volume= 1,998 cf Primary = 2.04 cfs @ 12.67 hrs, Volume= 8,739 cf Secondary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 938.96' @ 12.67 hrs Surf.Area= 4,213 sf Storage= 1,050 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 25.0 min ( 857.3 -832.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 938.00' 12,868 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Voids Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (%) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet 938.00 3,108 0.0 0 0 938.01 3,108 30.0 9 9 938.24 3,340 30.0 222 232 939.00 4,259 30.0 866 1,098 940.00 4,975 30.0 1,385 2,483 940.50 5,615 30.0 794 3,277 940.51 5,615 100.0 56 3,334 941.00 6,254 100.0 2,908 6,241 942.00 7,000 100.0 6,627 12,868 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 938.00' 15.0" Round Culvert L= 31.0' RCP, end-section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Inlet/Outlet Invert= 938.00' /937.44' S= 0.0181 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 1.23 sf #2 Secondary 941.50' 30.0' long x 5.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.34 2.50 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.66 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.67 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.74 2.79 2.88 #3 Discarded 938.00' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #4 Device 1 938.24' Custom Weir/Orifice, Cv=2.62 (C= 3.28) Head (feet) 0.00 0.70 0.70 2.00 Width (feet) 1.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 #5 Secondary 940.00' 24.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 30 piscarded OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 12.67 hrs HW=938.96' (Free Discharge) 3=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=2.04 cfs @ 12.67 hrs HW=938.96' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) L =Culvert (Passes 2.04 cfs of 3.39 cfs potential flow) =Custom Weir/Orifice (Weir Controls 2.04 cfs @ 2.59 fps) econdary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=938.00' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) =Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Boutwells Proposed MSE 24-hr 3 100-Year Rainfall=7.30" Prepared by Larson Engineering Printed 7/17/2016 HydroCAD®10.00-15 s/n 01934 ©2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 31 Summary for Pond 3P: Inflow Area = 3,736 sf, 20.88% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.65" for 100-Year event Inflow = 0.42 cfs @ 12.23 hrs, Volume= 1,138 cf Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 13.24 hrs, Volume= 951 cf, Atten= 90%, Lag= 61.0 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 13.24 hrs, Volume= 790 cf Primary = 0.04 cfs @ 13.24 hrs, Volume= 161 cf Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 942.52' @ 13.24 hrs Surf.Area= 678 sf Storage= 726 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 733.3 min ( 1,548.4- 815.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 941.00' 1,992 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 941.00 296 0 0 942.00 528 412 412 943.00 816 672 1,084 944.00 1,000 908 1,992 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 942.50' 5.0' long x 5.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.34 2.50 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.66 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.67 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.74 2.79 2.88 #2 Discarded 941.00' 0.450 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Qiscarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 13.24 hrs HW=942.52' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 13.24 hrs HW=942.52' TW=0.00' (Dynamic Tailwater) 4-1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 0.04 cfs @ 0.34 fps) Project Information Calculator Version: Version 2:June 2014 Project Name: Boutwell's User Name/Company Name: Larson Engineering,Inc. Date: 07/13/2016 Project Description: Boutwell's Village Green Site Information Retention Requirement(inches): 0.55 Site's Zip Code: 55082 Annual Rainfall (inches): 32 Phosphorus EMC(mg/I): 0.3 TSS EMC (mg/I): 54.5 Total Site Area Land Cover A Soils B Soils C Soils D Soils Total (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected 0 forest/open space or reforested land Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or 0 other turf to be mowed/managed Impervious Area (acres) 0.191 Total Area (acres) 0.191 Site Areas Routed to BMPs Land Cover A Soils B Soils C Soils D Soils Total (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected 0 forest/open space or reforested land Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or 0 other turf to be mowed/managed Impervious Area (acres) 0.191 Total Area(acres) 0.191 Summary Information Performance Goal Requirement Performance goal volume retention requirement: 381 ft3 Volume removed by BMPs towards performance goal: 381 ft3 Percent volume removed towards performance goal 100 % Annual Volume and Pollutant Load Reductions Post development annual runoff volume 0.4355 acre-ft Annual runoff volume removed by BMPs: 0.1936 acre-ft Percent annual runoff volume removed: 44 % Post development annual particulate P load: 0.2 lbs Annual particulate P removed by BMPs: 0.14 lbs Post development annual dissolved P load: 0.16 lbs Annual dissolved P removed by BMPs: 0.13 lbs Percent annual total phosphorus removed: 75 % Post development annual TSS load: 65 lbs Annual TSS removed by BMPs: 50 lbs Percent annual TSS removed: 77 % BMP Summary Performance Goal Summary BMP Volume Volume Volume Volume Percent BMP Name Capacity Recieved Retained Outflow Retained (ft3) (ft3) (ft3) (ft3) (%) 1- Bioretention basin(with underdrain) 891 345 345 0 100 1-Infiltration basin/Underground Infiltrati 726 36 36 0 100 Annual Volume Summary Volume Volume From Volume Volume Percent BMP Name From Direct Upstream Retained outflow Retained Watershed BMPs (acre-ft) (acre-ft) (%) (acre-ft) (acre-ft) 1- Bioretention basin(with underdrain) 0.3944 0 0.1525 0.2419 39 1-Infiltration basin/Underground Infiltrati 0.041 0 0.041 0 100 Particulate Phosphorus Summary Load From Load From Load Outflow Percent BMP Name Direct Upstream Retained Load Retained Watershed BMPs (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (%) 1 - Bioretention basin (with underdrain) 0.18 0 0.12 0.06 66 1 -Infiltration basin/Underground Infiltrati 0.02 0 0.02 0 100 Dissolved Phosphorus Summary Load From Load From Load Outflow Percent BMP Name Direct Upstream Retained Load Retained Watershed BMPs (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (%) 1 - Bioretention basin (with underdrain) 0.14 0 0.11 0.03 75 1-Infiltration basin/Underground Infiltrati 0.02 0 0.02 0 100 TSS Summary Load From Load From Load Outflow Percent BMP Name Direct Upstream Retained Load Retained Watershed BMPs (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (%) 1- Bioretention basin (with underdrain) 58 0 44 14 75 1 -Infiltration basin/Underground Infiltrati 6 0 6 0 100 BMP Schematic I 1-Infiltration basin/ 1-Bioretention basin(with Underground Infiltration underdrain)