Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC DETERMINATIONS <br /> <br />Design Rainstorms <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Basin Parameters <br /> <br />The project lies predominantly in T5S and R69W and extends east and <br /> <br />west into Ranges 68 and 70. The rainfall data for T5S and R69W as <br /> <br /> <br />presented on pages 254 and 255 of the "Project Reuse Report" was used <br /> <br /> <br />for the entire project. These data are presented in Table B-1 of <br /> <br /> <br />Appendix B. The depths and durations were computed for the five <br /> <br /> <br />design rainfalls (2-, 5-, 10-, 50- and 100-year) for a 180 minute <br /> <br /> <br />duration at 10 minute intervals. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Each sub-basin was physically described in terms of tributary area to <br /> <br /> <br />each design point, sub-basin length, distances from sub-basin centroid <br /> <br /> <br />to des.ign point, degree of perviousness throughout the basin and the <br /> <br /> <br />selection of representative coefficients typical of the basin. Numer- <br /> <br /> <br />ous field visits were made to become familiar with the physical charac- <br /> <br /> <br />teristics of each sub-basin, to aid in making necessary judgments con- <br /> <br /> <br />cerning adjustments to coefficients relating peak flows and time to <br /> <br /> <br />peak. All available records of existing storm sewers were gathered from <br /> <br />the jurisdictions in the Basin and were studied to determine the extent, <br /> <br /> <br />capacity and effects on runoff of the existing storm drainage facilities. <br /> <br />Infi ltration Rate/Retention <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Per cent of imperviousness was determined by measuring impervious surface <br /> <br /> <br />areas in each of the sub-basins located within the total basin. The <br /> <br /> <br />various types of existing and future land uses measured within each sub- <br /> <br /> <br />basin were assigned a degree of imperviousness from which a composite <br /> <br /> <br />percentage was computed for each sub-basin. Field visits verified the <br /> <br /> <br />development characteristics of the various sub-basins. <br /> <br />Soil types prevalent within the study area and their characteristics <br /> <br /> <br />were determined from publications of the Soil Conservation Service, <br /> <br /> <br />namely Soil Survey of Arapahoe County; General Soil Map for Jefferson <br /> <br /> <br />County, dated June 1972; and a Table for Soil Characteristics (First <br /> <br />Draft). East of the hogback all of the soils were reasonably similar <br /> <br /> <br />and an infiltration rate of 1/2 inch per hour was used. In Basin D-l, <br /> <br /> <br />west of the Hogback, soils with extremely high infiltration rates are <br /> <br /> <br />present. A composite infiltration rate of 2.1 inches per hour was <br /> <br /> <br />estimated for Basin D-l. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />C (coefficient reflecting time to peak) was determined from Figure 4-2 <br />t <br /> <br />"Relationship between C and Imperviousness", as revised 7/15/1977 from <br />t <br /> <br />the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, and modified where necessary to <br /> <br /> <br />reflect steep slopes and degree of sewering of the basin. <br /> <br />Pervious and impervious retention amounts were obtained from Table 2-2 <br /> <br /> <br />of the Drainage Manual. A value of 0.3 inches was used for pervious <br /> <br /> <br />areas and 0.1 inch for impervious areas. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />C (coefficient related to peak rate of funoff) was determined from <br />p <br />Figure 4-3 "Relationship between C and C " as revised 5/15/1975 and <br />p t. <br />modified to reflect steep slopes and degree of sewering. <br /> <br />Hydrographs <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Table A-I in Appendix A lists the information developed for the various <br />parameters associated with the study Basin hydrologic investigation, <br />based on present and future development within the study area. <br /> <br />Hydrographs were run using a computer program developed by the Urban <br /> <br />Drainage and Flood Control District with the assistance of URS Company. <br /> <br /> <br />Six hydrographs were calculated for each sub-basin, resulting in a <br /> <br /> <br />total of 126 hydrographs covering the 2-, 5-, 10-, 50-, 100-year future <br /> <br /> <br />and 100-year existing conditions. Figure B-2 in Appendix B is an <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />7 <br />