Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout005_Simkins_2B_4B_DRAINAGE_REPORT_COMBINED SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B DRAINAGE REPORT Project # 21363.01 Bozeman, Montana 59718 February 2025 SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B BOZEMAN, MONTANA CERTIFICATION I hereby state that this Final Drainage Report has been prepared by me or under my supervision and meets the standard of care and expertise which is usual and customary in this community of professional engineers. The analysis has been prepared utilizing procedures and practices specified by the City of Bozeman and within the standard accepted practices. 2/28/2025 Robert P. Egeberg, P.E. Date February 28, 2025 Project No. 21363.01 DRAINAGE REPORT SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2-B & 4-B NORTH PARK SIMKINS-HALLIN SITE DEVELOPMENT BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59718 OVERVIEW NARRATIVE The purpose of this drainage plan is to present a summary of calculations to quantify the stormwater runoff for the Simkins North Park Tracts 2-B and 4-B site development plan. All design criteria and calculations are in accordance with The City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy, dated March 2004. The site stormwater improvements have been designed with the intent to meet the current drainage regulations for the City of Bozeman. Location The project will be located on Tracts 2-B & 4-B, C.O.S. 2153A. The legal description for the lot is: S36, T01 S, R5 E, C.O.S. 2153A, Parcel Tract 2-B & Tract 4-B, Acres 24.12. The development site is located on the north side of Wheat drive and east of Mandeville Creek in Bozeman, Montana. See Figure 1 on the following page. P:21363_01_Simkins_North_Park_DRAINAGE_REPORT.docx (02/28/25) DME/BE/SG Existing Site Conditions The project site is currently an undeveloped lot with public infrastructure located to the north and east. Wheat Drive borders the site to the south. Mandeville Creek borders the site to the west. In general, the site grades to the north and west. PROPOSED PROJECT This project will include the construction of four buildings, service connections to existing water, sewer, gas, and fiber optic infrastructure near the proposed development, and a new parking lot to access a new Retail/Office building on the southwest side of the project. Two (2) underground retention chamber systems as well as a surface detention pond and four (4) dry wells, are proposed for infiltration/treatment of stormwater runoff. Calculations for each sub-basin are included in this report. Figure 1: Site Location P:21363_01_Simkins_North_Park_DRAINAGE_REPORT.docx (02/28/25) DME/BE/SG HYDROLOGY The modified rational method and rainfall data provided in The City of Bozeman Standard Specifications and Policy was used to calculate the 10-year, 2-hour storm event for the runoff storage facilities and the 25-year storm event for the drainage conveyance facilities. The rational method was used for the calculation of the ponds based on the 10-year storm event. Watershed basins were delineated for proposed conditions and are shown in Appendix A, Exhibit B. The only pre-development drainage areas calculated included basins which historically drain towards Mandeville Creek. The proposed surface pond on the west end of the property limits the discharge to the pre-development flow to Mandeville Creek. The two (2) proposed underground retention chamber systems and four (4) drywells fully retain the 10-year, 2-hour storm event. The existing drainage basin is shown in Appendix A, Exhibit A. The modified rational method incorporates frequency factors linked to storm events, with a runoff coefficient adjustment. For the 10-year recurrence interval, the frequency factor is 1.00, the 25-year recurrence interval, the frequency factor is 1.10, while the 100-year recurrence interval frequency factor is 1.25. Rainfall intensity for each watershed was determined using the intensity-duration-frequency (IDF) table specific to Bozeman, Montana, found in Chapter 7, Appendix C of the MDT Hydraulics Manual. An overview of the hydrologic calculations can be found in Appendix B. Most post-development basins were predominantly impervious, therefore, to be conservative we assumed a time of concentration of five (5) minutes. For impervious surfaces, a runoff coefficient of 0.95 was assumed, and for pervious surfaces, a runoff coefficient of 0.20 was assumed. The two (2) below ground chamber systems and four (4) drywells were designed as retention systems to store the on-site drainage. The required retention volumes were sized for the 10-year, 2-hour storm with an intensity of 0.41 in/hr. Infiltration rates were not considered in the sizing of the retention chamber systems. The storage pond located at the northwest corner of the project was sized to be a detention pond. The required detention volume was sized using a 10-year storm. An orifice and weir have been designed to restrict the release of the pre-development rate from a peak discharge of a 10-year storm into Mandeville Creek. The onsite pre- development peak flow rate was determined to be 0.31 cfs, see Appendix B. Allied Engineering Inc., had calculated an offsite allowable release rate of 0.25 cfs from Wheat Drive, See Appendix E. Offsite drainage from Wheat Drive is conveyed through the Simkin’s property and stored in the proposed onsite detention pond before discharging into Mandeville Creek. The combined pre-development flow rate of 0.56 cfs. An infiltration rate of 2.0 in/hr (i=4in/hr; F.S.=2), was also considered in the sizing of the surface detention pond. The bottom of the pond will be excavated to a native P:21363_01_Simkins_North_Park_DRAINAGE_REPORT.docx (02/28/25) DME/BE/SG gravely sand. From DEQ Circular 8, Table 3, a design infiltration rate of 4.0 in/hr may be used. The bottom pond area was determined to be 13,000 sf. Based on an infiltration rate of 2.0 in/hr, 0.60 cfs discharges through the bottom of the pond via infiltration. Infiltration and allowable release rate from the orifice gave a combined discharge rate of 1.13 cfs (0.53 cfs through the orifice and 0.60 cfs through infiltration. Therefore, the required detention pond storage was 20,822 cf. The designed pond has a volume of 22,950 cf making it ample sized for a 10-year storm. The peak runoff rates for the 25-year design storms were calculated using the following equations: Modified Rational Method Cwd = Weighted Runoff Coefficient A = Area (acres) Cf = Frequency Factor I = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) Q = Peak Runoff (cfs) C’ = Cwd x Cf Q = C x I x A Pre-Development Basins For the following sections, please refer to Appendix A, Exhibit A of this report which graphically shows and labels the existing watershed basin for this project. Existing Basin A Existing Basin A includes 68,358 ft2 of pervious area and has no impervious area. Runoff generated in Existing Basin A sheet flows to the west into Mandeville Creek. Existing Basin A was used in the calculation of the pre-development flow for the sizing calculation of the proposed surface detention pond, see Appendix B. Post-Development Basins For the following sections, please refer to Appendix A, Exhibit B of this report which graphically shows and labels the proposed watershed basins for this report. Refer to Appendix B for the pervious and impervious area of each basin along with the flow rate for the 10-year, 25-year, and 100-year flow rates of each basin. The proposed site has been split into 44 basins. These 44 basins drain to either the proposed surface detention pond or one of the two underground retention chamber systems, or one of the four drywells. To see where basins drain to refer to Appendix A, Exhibit B. P:21363_01_Simkins_North_Park_DRAINAGE_REPORT.docx (02/28/25) DME/BE/SG HYDRAULICS Storm Inlets and Storm Drains All conveyance pipes were sized to handle peak flow from a 25-year storm event with a minimum velocity of 3 ft/sec. Polyvinyl Chloride Pipes (PVC) were utilized in the design of the storm system. Reinforced Concrete Pipes (RCP) are proposed for the storm drain at FETS A, FETS B, FETS C, and FETS D where ground cover becomes less than two (2) feet as pipes near the surface detention pond. Autodesk Storm and Sanitary Analysis 2021 and Excel were utilized to determine conveyance pipe sizes based on the calculated post development flow rates. Inlets were sized to capture a 25-year storm event. Flow intercepted by inlets were determined using Autodesk Storm and Sanitary Analysis 2021. Proposed inlets are both in sag and on-grade conditions. Sag inlets assumed a 50 percent clogging factor while on-grade inlets assumed a 25 percent clogging factor. For further information on storm drain and inlet capacity calculations, see Appendix C. OUTLET STRUCTURES Two identical outlet structures with a slotted weir and overflow weir have been designed to limit the release of flow from the proposed detention surface pond into Mandeville Creek. The weir limits the stormwater peak flow to the pre-development 10-year, 2-hour storm, 0.56 cfs. The weir has been designed for the developed 100-year storm as an emergency overflow. The slotted weir was defined with the following equation: h = Head Water Depth ft CW = Discharge Coefficient L = Length of Weir Q = Flow cfs Q = Cw x L x h1.5 0.53 cfs = 3.1 x 0.1 ft x (0.9 ft)1.5 x 2 (*Multiply by 2 for both structures) 68.3 cfs = 3.1 x 12 ft x (1.5 ft)1.5 Allied Engineering Services Inc, constructed a 30-inch PVC stormwater main that flows north from Wheat Drive through bisecting tracts 2-B & 4-B, see Appendix D. From the proposed ADS B underground retention chamber system, we have designed P:21363_01_Simkins_North_Park_DRAINAGE_REPORT.docx (02/28/25) DME/BE/SG an overflow pipe to flow from ADS B to proposed SDMH L, see Appendix F. In the case of a storm event exceeding the 10-year, 2-hour design storm, runoff would flow into the existing 30-inch PVC pipe and outflow to FETS D that releases into Mandeville Creek. LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS (LID) The City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy states the requirement to capture or reuse the runoff generated from the first 0.5-inches of rainfall from a 24-hour storm. We meet this requirement by retaining all runoff onsite in the proposed underground stormwater chamber systems, drywells, and surface stormwater detention pond. The isolator row, in addition to the sumps in each inlet and manhole prior to the chamber systems, provides treatment before water infiltrates into the ground. The proposed surface detention pond will accumulate sediment and needs to be maintained, per the recommendations in the Operations and Maintenance Manual, see Appendix H. Runoff from the existing 30-inch PVC stormwater main designed by Allied engineering will be rerouted to outflow from proposed FETS D into Mandeville Creek. Runoff from the existing main will be treated by a mechanical separator before entering Mandeville Creek. By utilizing a mechanical separator runoff water quality is improved, with the primary goal of reducing pollution to the surrounding environment. Pollutants typically come from the impervious area; therefore, the unified stormwater equation will be used to calculate the water quality volume: WQV = Water Quality Volume, in cubic-feet P = Water Quality Rainfall Depth, inches (0.5-inches) Rv = the unitless runoff coefficient I = the percent impervious cover draining to the facility, in decimal A = total site area draining to the structure, in feet Rv = 0.05 + 0.9(I) WQV = ((P)x(Rv)x(A))/(12) ADS A Water Quality Volume = (0.5 in x 0.91 x 40,149 ft2)/12 = 1,523 cf 1,523 cf will draw down in 4.44 hrs using the percolation rate of 2.00 in/hr from the bottom of the chamber system excavated to native gravels and will be stored in the bottom 0.74 ft of the chamber system, below all inlets. ADS B Water Quality Volume = (0.5 in x 0.77 x 317,425 ft2)/12 = 9,868 cf P:21363_01_Simkins_North_Park_DRAINAGE_REPORT.docx (02/28/25) DME/BE/SG 9,868 cf will draw down in 11.78 hrs using the percolation rate of 2.00 in/hr from the bottom of the chamber system excavated to native gravels and will be stored in the bottom 1.96 ft of the chamber system, below all inlets. Drywell A Water Quality Volume = (0.5 in x 0.60 x 4,745 ft2)/12 = 119 cf 119 cf will draw down in 5 hrs using the percolation rate of 2.00 in/hr from the bottom of the drywell excavated to native gravels and will be stored in the bottom 0.85 ft of gravel. Drywell B Water Quality Volume = (0.5 in x 0.92 x 4,184 ft2)/12 = 160 cf 160 cf will draw down in 5.38 hrs using the percolation rate of 2.00 in/hr from the bottom of the drywell excavated to native gravels and will be stored in the bottom 0.91 ft of gravel. Drywell C Water Quality Volume = (0.5 in x 0.92 x 4,187 ft2)/12 = 160 cf 160 cf will draw down in 5.38 hrs using the percolation rate of 2.00 in/hr from the bottom of the drywell excavated to native gravels and will be stored in the bottom 0.91 ft of gravel. Drywell D Water Quality Volume = (0.5 in x 0.92 x 4,419 ft2)/12 = 169 cf 169 cf will draw down in 5.68 hrs using the percolation rate of 2.00 in/hr from the bottom of the drywell excavated to native gravels and will be stored in the bottom 0.97 ft of gravel. Detention Pond Water Quality Volume = (0.5 in x 0.83 x 512,192 ft2)/12 = 17,714 cf 17,714 cf will draw down in 8.16 hrs using the percolation rate of 2.00 in/hr from the bottom of the pond excavated to native gravels and will be stored in the bottom 1.36 ft of the pond, 1.14 ft below the inverts of the outlet overflow structures weirs. The provided water quality storage below the outlet weirs is 18,522 CF. Water Quality Flow (WQF) was then used to determine the flow rate associated with the WQV, for sizing the mechanical separator in the storm system. The WQF is P:21363_01_Simkins_North_Park_DRAINAGE_REPORT.docx (02/28/25) DME/BE/SG calculated using the WQV and the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) runoff method. The WQF was calculated using the below equation: WQF = Water Quality Flow Rate, in cfs qu = unit peak discharge, in cfs/mi2/inch (see NRCS Unit Peak Discharge Table) WQV = water quality volume, in acre-feet WQF = ((12)x(qu)x(WQV))/(640) WQF = ((12)x(357)x(0.50))/(640) = 3.35 cfs NRCS Unit Peak Discharge Time of Concentration (minutes)* qu (cfs/mi2/inch) 6 1010 12 800 18 676 24 592 30 529 45 424 60 357 * Either round down to the nearest time of concentration or interpolate for intermediate times of concentration. The Storm Drainage Design Report written by Allied Engineering Services Inc, see Appendix D, was utilized when calculating the Water Quality Volume and Water Quality Flow for the design of the mechanical separator. The mechanical separator was designed to accommodate the drainage to the Offsite Basins/Stub Basins from Appendix D, NORTH PARK DEVELOPMENT – PHASE 1 DESIGN POST DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE OVERVIEW PLAN. After calculations, Subbasins OFF-5 (1.38 ac), OFF-6 (1.82 ac), OFF-7 (3.35 ac), OFF-8 (4.12 ac), CUL-RDA-5+50 (12.16 ac), CUL-RDB19+25 (10.98 ac), AND SUB-4-B (10 ac) from Appendix D, inlet hydraulics, have a total Water Quality Volume (WQV) of 0.50 acre- feet and a Water Quality Flow (WQF) of 3.35 cfs. A Contech CDS3035-6-C, or approved equal, is recommended for this project, see Appendix G. The CDS3035-6-C can treat a WQF up to 3.8 cfs and can handle a bypass flowrate of 20 cfs. The bypass flowrate for the 100-yr storm event will be 17.93 cfs. WQV = Water Quality Volume, in acre-feet P = Water Quality Rainfall Depth, inches (0.5-inches) Rv = the unitless runoff coefficient I = the percent impervious cover draining to the facility, in decimal A = total site area draining to the structure, in feet Rv = 0.05 + 0.9(I) WQV = ((P)x(Rv)x(A))/(12) P:21363_01_Simkins_North_Park_DRAINAGE_REPORT.docx (02/28/25) DME/BE/SG WQV = ((0.5 in x 0.275 x 1,908,363.6 ft2)/12)/43,560 = 0.5 acre-feet CONCLUSION The Drainage Report for the Simkins North Park Tracts 2-B and 4-B project in Bozeman, Montana, outlines a comprehensive plan in accordance with the City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications policy for storm water management. The report comprises of the existing site conditions of North Park Tracts 2-B and 4-B, the proposed construction project, and detailed hydrological calculations. There are three outlet structures proposed for this project. Storms larger than the design storm will overflow the emergency overflow weirs in the proposed surface detention pond, limited to the pre-development flow of 0.56 cfs into Mandeville Creek. The underground retention system near the proposed truss shop building fully retains the post-development 10-yr, 2-hr storm event with no overflow. Storms larger than the 10-yr, 2-hr storm event will overflow into the existing 30” PVC stormwater main and the peak discharge has been limited to 2.52 cfs based on the capacity of the proposed 12” storm drain. The 30” PVC stormwater main will have 5.31 cfs capacity remaining at Peak Flow including the additional 2.52 cfs of overflow from the underground retention system, see Appendix D. The remaining underground retention system to the west of the retail/office building will overflow the inlets and primary flood the parking lot. In a massive flooding event, the parking lot would overtop, and drainage would flow into Mandeville Creek, not impacting buildings. APPENDICES Appendix A – Stormwater Basin Exhibits Exhibit A – Stormwater Pre-Development Basins Exhibit B – Stormwater Post-Development Basin Appendix B – Hydrology Calculations Appendix C – Hydraulic Calculations Appendix D – Storm Drainage Design Report; Allied Engineering Services Inc. Appendix E – Wheat Drive Extension Storm Memo; Allied Engineering Services Inc Appendix F – Sanbell Storm Sheets Appendix G – CS-5 Cascade Separator Standard Detail Appendix H – O&M Plan Appendix I – Geotechnical Report APPENDIX ASTORWATER BASIN EXHIBITSSIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B 21363.01 APPENDIX ANORTH075SCALE:1" = 150'15075 APPENDIX BHYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS21363.01 SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B Project: SIMKINS TRACT 2B/4B Existing Project No.: 21363.01 Date: 08/20/2024 Designer: DME Weighted Area (ft2) RC Area (ft 2 ) RC RC Ex. Basin 1 Total 68,358 0 0.95 68,358 0.20 0.20 ALLIED WHEAT DRIVE 77,001 0 0.95 77,001 0.20 0.20 EXISTING CONDITIONS WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT WORKSHEET Outfall Point/ Major Watershed Paved Roadway BASIN Total Area (ft 2 )Open Space Project: SIMKINS TRACT 2B/4B Existing Project No.: 21363.01 Date: 08/20/2024 Designer: DME Outfall Location/ Major Watershed Sub Watershed Tc (hours) Area (ac) Runoff Coeff. RC With Frequency Factor 10yr RC With Frequency Factor 25yr RC With Frequency Factor 100yr I10 (in/hr) I10 (10 year 2 hr storm) (in/hr) I25 (in/hr)I100 (in/hr) Q10 (Peak discharge) (cfs) Q10 (2 hr storm) (cfs) V10 (Retention volume cf) Q25 (Peak discharge) (cfs) Q100 (Peak discharge) (cfs) EX. Basin 1 Total 0.750 1.57 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.25 1.00 0.41 1.23 1.57 0.31 0.13 926.51 0.42 0.62 ALLIED WHEAT DRIVE 0.833 1.77 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.25 0.91 0.41 1.12 1.44 0.25 0.51 3752.00 0.31 0.64 EXISTING CONDITIONS RATIONAL METHOD WORKSHEET Project: Simkins Project #: 21363.01 Date: 02/28/2025 Design Storm Frequency =10 years Discharge Rate, d =1.13 cfs Input values for runoff coefficients from appropriate tables. Area Area Runoff Coefficient Frequency Factor Calculation Value A A/(43560 ft2/acre)C Cf C x Cf C' C' x A (ft2)(Acres)=(C x Cf) < or = 1 (Acres) 430178.00 9.876 0.95 1 0.95 0.95 9.38 82014.00 1.883 0.2 1 0.20 0.20 0.38 1 0.00 0.00 0 1 0.00 0.00 0 1 0.00 0.00 0 512192 11.7583 9.7583 Weighted Runoff Coefficient, Cwd SCjAj SAj Cwd x Cf x SAj =9.76 Where Cj is the adjusted runoff coefficient for surface type j and Aj is the area of surface type j Rainfall Rainfall Peak Flow Duration, t Intensity, i = Cwd x SAj x i (min) (in/hr)(ft3/s) 1 9.16 89.40 5 3.22 31.41 10 2.05 20.01 15 1.58 15.38 20 1.31 12.76 25 1.13 11.03 30 1.00 9.80 35 0.91 8.87 40 0.83 8.13 45 0.77 7.53 50 0.72 7.03 55 0.68 6.61 60 0.64 6.25 75 0.55 5.40 90 0.49 4.80 105 0.44 4.34 120 0.41 3.98 150 0.35 3.44 180 0.31 3.06 360 0.20 1.95 720 0.13 1.24 1440 0.08 0.79 20,821.50 ft3 31.41 (ft3/s) 27347.67 20520.138136.0028656.13 33025.50 12204.00 20821.50 68380.29 97632.00 ----- 42093.01 53650.09 24408.00 48816.00 17685.01 4834.09 24309.47 5085.00 19224.47 25911.28 6102.00 19809.28 3390.00 17703.25 21808.76 3729.00 18079.76 16549.43 1695.00 14854.43 22483.14 4068.00 18415.14 18617.78 2373.00 16244.78 19508.55 2712.00 16796.55 20329.58 3051.00 17278.58 21093.25 11330.92 13840.00 1017.00 12823.00 15306.10 1356.00 13950.10 = Cwd x SAj x i x t = d x t = Runoff Volume - Discharge Volume (ft3) (ft 3) (ft 3) 5364.19 67.80 5296.39 30983.89 7119.00 10170.00 20228.67 20813.89 17639.92 2034.00 15605.92 9422.01 339.00 9083.01 12008.92 678.00 Impervious RATIONAL METHOD FOR RUNOFF CALCULATIONS POST-IMPROVEMENT CONDITIONS (STORM POND SIZING) Surface Type Pervious Totals = 0.8299 Cwd x Cf =0.83 Runoff Volume Discharge Volume Site Detention = = Project: SIMKINS TRACT 2B/4B PROPOSED Project No.: 21363.01 Date: 08/20/2024 Designer: DME Weighted Area (ft2)RC Area (ft2)RC RC Basin 1 5,776 5,776 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 2 5,436 5,436 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 3 21,946 21,946 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 4 3,558 3,558 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 5 3,979 3,979 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 6 38,607 38,607 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 7 6,250 6,250 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 8 33,231 33,231 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 9 11,401 11,401 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 10 10,459 10,459 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 11 10,459 10,459 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 12 36,087 36,087 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 13 3,430 3,430 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 14 3,424 3,424 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 15 32,407 31,573 0.95 834 0.20 0.93 Basin 18 7,199 7,199 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 20 15,302 15,302 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 21 18,231 18,231 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 22 10,057 10,057 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 23 5,795 4,129 0.95 1,666 0.20 0.73 Basin 24 10,057 6,715 0.95 3,343 0.20 0.70 Basin 25 10,137 7,127 0.95 3,011 0.20 0.73 Basin 26 9,225 5,170 0.95 4,056 0.20 0.62 Basin 27 21,623 17,095 0.95 4,527 0.20 0.79 Basin 28 16,143 12,001 0.95 4,142 0.20 0.76 Basin 32 4,698 4,698 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 33 4,537 4,537 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Total 354,919 337,878 0.95 21,578 0.20 0.92 Basin 16 6,250 6,250 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 17 31,966 31,966 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Total 38,216 38,216 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 FETS C WHEAT DRIVE 74,001 51,602 0.95 22,399 0.20 0.72 DETENTION POND Basin 40 40,518 2,482 0.95 38,037 0.20 0.25 MANDEVILLE CR Basin 39 17,426 0 0.95 17,426 0.20 0.20 DRYWELL A Basin 41 4,745 2,918 0.95 1,827 0.20 0.66 DRYWELL B Basin 42 4,184 4,035 0.95 150 0.20 0.92 FETS B FETS A PROPOSED CONDITIONS WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT WORKSHEET Outfall Point/ Major Watershed Paved RoadwayBASINTotal Area (ft2)Open Space Weighted Area (ft2)RC Area (ft2)RC RC Outfall Point/ Major Watershed Paved RoadwayBASINTotal Area (ft2) Open Space DRYWELL C Basin 43 4,187 4,037 0.95 150 0.20 0.92 DRYWELL D Basin 44 4,419 4,252 0.95 167 0.20 0.92 Basin 19 7,369 7,369 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 29 7,439 7,439 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 30 13,348 12,785 0.95 563 0.20 0.92 Basin 31 11,993 10,193 0.95 1,800 0.20 0.84 Total 40,149 37,786 0.95 2,363 0.20 0.91 ADS A Project: SIMKINS TRACT 2B/4B PROPOSEDProject No.: 21363.01Date: 08/20/2024Designer: DMEOutfall Location/ Major WatershedSub WatershedTc(hours)Area(ac)Runoff Coeff.RC With Frequency Factor 10yrRC With Frequency Factor 25yrRC With Frequency Factor 100yrI10 (in/hr)I10 (10 year 2 hr storm)(in/hr)I25 (in/hr)I100 (in/hr)Q10 (Peak discharge) (cfs)Q10 (2 hr storm) (cfs)V10 (Retention volume cf)Q25 (Peak discharge) (cfs)Q100 (Peak discharge) (cfs)Basin 1 0.083 0.13 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.49 0.05 371.86 0.66 0.96Basin 2 0.083 0.12 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.46 0.05 350.00 0.62 0.90Basin 3 0.083 0.50 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 1.85 0.20 1412.91 2.51 3.64Basin 4 0.083 0.08 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.30 0.03 229.09 0.41 0.59Basin 5 0.083 0.09 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.34 0.04 256.17 0.45 0.66Basin 6 0.083 0.89 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 3.26 0.35 2485.50 4.41 6.41Basin 7 0.083 0.14 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.53 0.06 402.38 0.71 1.04Basin 8 0.083 0.76 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 2.80 0.30 2139.44 3.79 5.52Basin 9 0.083 0.26 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.96 0.10 733.99 1.30 1.89Basin 10 0.083 0.24 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.88 0.09 673.35 1.19 1.74Basin 11 0.083 0.24 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.88 0.09 673.35 1.19 1.74Basin 12 0.083 0.83 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 3.05 0.32 2323.28 4.12 5.99Basin 13 0.083 0.08 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.29 0.03 220.80 0.39 0.57Basin 14 0.083 0.08 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.29 0.03 220.44 0.39 0.57Basin 15 0.083 0.74 0.93 0.93 1.02 1.16 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 2.68 0.28 2043.98 3.63 5.27Basin 18 0.083 0.17 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.61 0.06 463.49 0.82 1.20Basin 20 0.083 0.35 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 1.29 0.14 985.17 1.75 2.54Basin 21 0.083 0.42 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 1.54 0.16 1173.72 2.08 3.03Basin 22 0.083 0.23 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.85 0.09 647.50 1.15 1.67Basin 23 0.083 0.13 0.73 0.73 0.81 0.92 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.38 0.04 288.40 0.51 0.74Basin 24 0.083 0.23 0.70 0.70 0.77 0.88 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.63 0.07 477.60 0.85 1.23Basin 25 0.083 0.23 0.73 0.73 0.80 0.91 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.65 0.07 499.61 0.89 1.29Basin 26 0.083 0.21 0.62 0.62 0.68 0.78 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.51 0.05 387.79 0.69 1.00Basin 27 0.083 0.50 0.79 0.79 0.87 0.99 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 1.52 0.16 1161.95 2.06 3.00Basin 28 0.083 0.37 0.76 0.76 0.83 0.95 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 1.09 0.12 828.77 1.47 2.14Basin 32 0.083 0.11 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.40 0.04 302.44 0.54 0.78Basin 33 0.083 0.10 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.38 0.04 292.07 0.52 0.75Total 0.083 8.25 0.920.921.01 1.153.87 0.414.76 6.0929.27 3.10 22326.8739.60 57.58Basin 16 0.083 0.14 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.53 0.06 402.38 0.71 1.04Basin 17 0.083 0.73 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 2.70 0.29 2057.98 3.65 5.31Total 0.083 0.88 0.950.951.05 1.193.87 0.414.76 6.093.23 0.34 2460.364.36 6.34FETS CWHEAT DRIVE 0.150 1.70 0.720.720.79 0.903.04 0.413.74 4.782.81 0.50 3752.003.35 7.31DETENTION PONDBasin 40 0.083 0.93 0.25 0.25 0.27 0.31 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.89 0.09 675.30 1.20 1.74MANDEVILLE CRBasin 39 0.083 0.40 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.25 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.31 0.03 236.19 0.42 0.61DRYWELL ABasin 41 0.083 0.11 0.66 0.66 0.73 0.83 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.28 0.03 212.61 0.38 0.55DRYWELL BBasin 42 0.083 0.10 0.92 0.92 1.02 1.15 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.34 0.04 261.78 0.46 0.68DRYWELL CBasin 43 0.083 0.10 0.92 0.92 1.02 1.15 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.34 0.04 261.96 0.46 0.68DRYWELL DBasin 44 0.083 0.10 0.92 0.92 1.01 1.15 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.36 0.04 276.01 0.49 0.71PROPOSED CONDITIONS RATIONAL METHOD WORKSHEETFETS AFETS B Outfall Location/ Major WatershedSub WatershedTc(hours)Area(ac)Runoff Coeff.RC With Frequency Factor 10yrRC With Frequency Factor 25yrRC With Frequency Factor 100yrI10 (in/hr)I10 (10 year 2 hr storm)(in/hr)I25 (in/hr)I100 (in/hr)Q10 (Peak discharge) (cfs)Q10 (2 hr storm) (cfs)V10 (Retention volume cf)Q25 (Peak discharge) (cfs)Q100 (Peak discharge) (cfs)Basin 19 0.083 0.17 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.62 0.07 474.40 0.84 1.22Basin 29 0.083 0.17 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.63 0.07 478.93 0.85 1.24Basin 30 0.083 0.31 0.92 0.92 1.01 1.15 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 1.09 0.12 830.73 1.47 2.14Basin 31 0.083 0.28 0.84 0.84 0.92 1.05 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 0.89 0.09 680.64 1.21 1.76Total 0.083 0.92 0.910.911.00 1.133.87 0.414.76 6.093.23 0.342464.70 4.37 6.36ADS A Project: SIMKINS TRACT 2B/4B PROPOSED Project No.: 21363.01 Date: 08/20/2024 Designer: DME Weighted Area (ft2)RC Area (ft2)RC RC Basin 34 147,297 126,513 0.95 20,785 0.20 0.84 Basin 35 25,800 25,800 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 36 28,282 28,282 0.95 0 0.20 0.95 Basin 37 48,115 31,861 0.95 16,254 0.20 0.70 Basin 38 67,931 33,051 0.95 34,880 0.20 0.56 Total 317,425 245,507 0.95 71,918 0.20 0.78 ADS B PROPOSED CONDITIONS WEIGHTED RUNOFF COEFFICIENT WORKSHEET Outfall Point/ Major Watershed Paved RoadwayBASINTotal Area (ft2)Open Space Project: SIMKINS TRACT 2B/4B PROPOSED Project No.: 21363.01 Date: 08/20/2024 Designer: DME Outfall Location/ Major Watershed Sub Watershed Tc (hours) Area (ac) Runoff Coeff. RC With Frequency Factor 10yr RC With Frequency Factor 25yr RC With Frequency Factor 100yr I10 (in/hr) I10 (10 year 2 hr storm) (in/hr) I25 (in/hr)I100 (in/hr) Q10 (Peak discharge) (cfs) Q10 (2 hr storm) (cfs) V10 (Retention volume cf) Q25 (Peak discharge) (cfs) Q100 (Peak discharge) (cfs) Basin 34 0.083 3.38 0.84 0.84 0.93 1.06 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 11.05 1.17 8426.61 14.95 21.73 Basin 35 0.083 0.59 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 2.18 0.23 1661.01 2.95 4.28 Basin 36 0.083 0.65 0.95 0.95 1.05 1.19 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 2.39 0.25 1820.78 3.23 4.70 Basin 37 0.083 1.10 0.70 0.70 0.77 0.87 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 2.98 0.32 2271.52 4.03 5.86 Basin 38 0.083 1.56 0.56 0.56 0.62 0.71 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 3.41 0.36 2600.61 4.61 6.71 Total 0.083 7.29 0.78 0.78 0.86 0.98 3.87 0.41 4.76 6.09 22.00 2.33 16780.52 29.76 43.27 PROPOSED CONDITIONS RATIONAL METHOD WORKSHEET ADS B Min HR 10-yr Min HR 25-yr Min HR 100-yr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0.083 3.87 5 0.083 4.76 5 0.083 6.09 10 0.167 2.83 10 0.167 3.48 10 0.167 4.45 15 0.250 2.29 15 0.250 2.83 15 0.250 3.61 20 0.333 1.84 20 0.333 2.26 20 0.333 2.89 25 0.417 1.56 25 0.417 1.93 25 0.417 2.46 30 0.500 1.38 30 0.500 1.70 30 0.500 2.18 35 0.583 1.22 35 0.583 1.50 35 0.583 1.92 40 0.667 1.09 40 0.667 1.35 40 0.667 1.72 45 0.750 1.00 45 0.750 1.23 45 0.750 1.57 50 0.833 0.91 50 0.833 1.12 50 0.833 1.44 55 0.917 0.84 55 0.917 1.04 55 0.917 1.33 60 1.000 0.79 60 1.000 0.97 60 1.000 1.24 120 2.000 0.41 120 2.000 0.49 120 2.000 0.61 180 3.000 0.29 180 3.000 0.34 180 3.000 0.41 360 6.000 0.17 360 6.000 0.19 360 6.000 0.22 720 12.000 0.10 720 12.000 0.12 720 12.000 0.14 1440 24.000 0.07 1440 24.000 0.08 1440 24.000 0.10 Intensity (in/hr) City of Bozeman APPENDIX CHYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS21363.01 SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B Weir Emergency Overflow (Unknown Q): Weir Limit Pre-Development (Unknown Q): 1.5 ft 0.9 ft 3.1 3.1 Length (L): 12 ft Length (L): 0.1 ft Flow (Q) = Cw ∙ L ∙ h ^ (1.5) Flow (Q) = Cw ∙ L ∙ h ^ (1.5) Flow (Q) = 68.3 cfs Flow (Q) = 0.26 cfs Head Water Depth (h): Discharge Coeff. (Cw):Discharge Coeff. (Cw): Head Water Depth (h): Worksheet for 12" PVC 0.005 Project Description Manning FormulaFriction Method Full Flow CapacitySolve For Input Data 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft/ft0.005Channel Slope in12.0Normal Depth in12.0Diameter cfs2.98Discharge Results cfs2.98Discharge in12.0Normal Depth ft²0.8Flow Area ft3.1Wetted Perimeter in3.0Hydraulic Radius ft0.00Top Width in8.9Critical Depth %100.0Percent Full ft/ft0.006Critical Slope ft/s3.79Velocity ft0.22Velocity Head ft1.22Specific Energy (N/A)Froude Number cfs3.20Maximum Discharge cfs2.98Discharge Full ft/ft0.005Slope Full UndefinedFlow Type GVF Input Data in0.0Downstream Depth ft0.0Length 0Number Of Steps GVF Output Data in0.0Upstream Depth N/AProfile Description ft0.00Profile Headloss %0.0Average End Depth Over Rise %0.0Normal Depth Over Rise ft/s0.00Downstream Velocity ft/s0.00Upstream Velocity in12.0Normal Depth in8.9Critical Depth ft/ft0.005Channel Slope ft/ft0.006Critical Slope Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 3/3/2025 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterUntitled1.fm8 Worksheet for 15" PVC .005 Project Description Manning FormulaFriction Method DischargeSolve For Input Data 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft/ft0.005 Channel Slope in14.0 Normal Depth in15.0 Diameter Results cfs5.81 Discharge ft²1.2 Flow Area ft3.3 Wetted Perimeter in4.4 Hydraulic Radius ft0.62 Top Width in11.7 Critical Depth %93.3 Percent Full ft/ft0.006 Critical Slope ft/s4.87 Velocity ft0.37 Velocity Head ft1.54 Specific Energy 0.621Froude Number cfs5.81 Maximum Discharge cfs5.40 Discharge Full ft/ft0.006 Slope Full SubcriticalFlow Type GVF Input Data in0.0 Downstream Depth ft0.0 Length 0Number Of Steps GVF Output Data in0.0 Upstream Depth N/AProfile Description ft0.00 Profile Headloss %0.0 Average End Depth Over Rise %0.0 Normal Depth Over Rise ft/s0.00 Downstream Velocity ft/s0.00 Upstream Velocity in14.0 Normal Depth in11.7 Critical Depth ft/ft0.005 Channel Slope ft/ft0.006 Critical Slope Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster_Pipes.fm8 Worksheet for 15" PVC .008 Project Description Manning FormulaFriction Method DischargeSolve For Input Data 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft/ft0.008 Channel Slope in14.0 Normal Depth in15.0 Diameter Results cfs7.34 Discharge ft²1.2 Flow Area ft3.3 Wetted Perimeter in4.4 Hydraulic Radius ft0.62 Top Width in13.0 Critical Depth %93.3 Percent Full ft/ft0.009 Critical Slope ft/s6.16 Velocity ft0.59 Velocity Head ft1.76 Specific Energy 0.786Froude Number cfs7.34 Maximum Discharge cfs6.83 Discharge Full ft/ft0.009 Slope Full SubcriticalFlow Type GVF Input Data in0.0 Downstream Depth ft0.0 Length 0Number Of Steps GVF Output Data in0.0 Upstream Depth N/AProfile Description ft0.00 Profile Headloss %0.0 Average End Depth Over Rise %0.0 Normal Depth Over Rise ft/s0.00 Downstream Velocity ft/s0.00 Upstream Velocity in14.0 Normal Depth in13.0 Critical Depth ft/ft0.008 Channel Slope ft/ft0.009 Critical Slope Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster_Pipes.fm8 Worksheet for 15" PVC .0024 Project Description Manning FormulaFriction Method DischargeSolve For Input Data 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft/ft0.002 Channel Slope in14.0 Normal Depth in15.0 Diameter Results cfs4.02 Discharge ft²1.2 Flow Area ft3.3 Wetted Perimeter in4.4 Hydraulic Radius ft0.62 Top Width in9.7 Critical Depth %93.3 Percent Full ft/ft0.005 Critical Slope ft/s3.37 Velocity ft0.18 Velocity Head ft1.34 Specific Energy 0.430Froude Number cfs4.02 Maximum Discharge cfs3.74 Discharge Full ft/ft0.003 Slope Full SubcriticalFlow Type GVF Input Data in0.0 Downstream Depth ft0.0 Length 0Number Of Steps GVF Output Data in0.0 Upstream Depth N/AProfile Description ft0.00 Profile Headloss %0.0 Average End Depth Over Rise %0.0 Normal Depth Over Rise ft/s0.00 Downstream Velocity ft/s0.00 Upstream Velocity in14.0 Normal Depth in9.7 Critical Depth ft/ft0.002 Channel Slope ft/ft0.005 Critical Slope Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster_Pipes.fm8 Calculated at .0024, software rounds to 0.002 Worksheet for 15" PVC .0043 Project Description Manning FormulaFriction Method DischargeSolve For Input Data 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft/ft0.004 Channel Slope in14.0 Normal Depth in15.0 Diameter Results cfs5.38 Discharge ft²1.2 Flow Area ft3.3 Wetted Perimeter in4.4 Hydraulic Radius ft0.62 Top Width in11.3 Critical Depth %93.3 Percent Full ft/ft0.006 Critical Slope ft/s4.52 Velocity ft0.32 Velocity Head ft1.48 Specific Energy 0.576Froude Number cfs5.38 Maximum Discharge cfs5.01 Discharge Full ft/ft0.005 Slope Full SubcriticalFlow Type GVF Input Data in0.0 Downstream Depth ft0.0 Length 0Number Of Steps GVF Output Data in0.0 Upstream Depth N/AProfile Description ft0.00 Profile Headloss %0.0 Average End Depth Over Rise %0.0 Normal Depth Over Rise ft/s0.00 Downstream Velocity ft/s0.00 Upstream Velocity in14.0 Normal Depth in11.3 Critical Depth ft/ft0.004 Channel Slope ft/ft0.006 Critical Slope Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster_Pipes.fm8 Calculated at .0043, software rounds to 0.004 Worksheet for 15" PVC .0069 Project Description Manning FormulaFriction Method DischargeSolve For Input Data 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft/ft0.007 Channel Slope in14.0 Normal Depth in15.0 Diameter Results cfs6.82 Discharge ft²1.2 Flow Area ft3.3 Wetted Perimeter in4.4 Hydraulic Radius ft0.62 Top Width in12.6 Critical Depth %93.3 Percent Full ft/ft0.008 Critical Slope ft/s5.72 Velocity ft0.51 Velocity Head ft1.68 Specific Energy 0.730Froude Number cfs6.82 Maximum Discharge cfs6.34 Discharge Full ft/ft0.008 Slope Full SubcriticalFlow Type GVF Input Data in0.0 Downstream Depth ft0.0 Length 0Number Of Steps GVF Output Data in0.0 Upstream Depth N/AProfile Description ft0.00 Profile Headloss %0.0 Average End Depth Over Rise %0.0 Normal Depth Over Rise ft/s0.00 Downstream Velocity ft/s0.00 Upstream Velocity in14.0 Normal Depth in12.6 Critical Depth ft/ft0.007 Channel Slope ft/ft0.008 Critical Slope Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster_Pipes.fm8 Calculated at ..0069, software rounds to 0.007 Worksheet for 18" PVC .0019 Project Description Manning FormulaFriction Method DischargeSolve For Input Data 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft/ft0.002 Channel Slope in17.0 Normal Depth in18.0 Diameter Results cfs5.82 Discharge ft²1.7 Flow Area ft4.0 Wetted Perimeter in5.2 Hydraulic Radius ft0.69 Top Width in11.2 Critical Depth %94.4 Percent Full ft/ft0.004 Critical Slope ft/s3.37 Velocity ft0.18 Velocity Head ft1.59 Specific Energy 0.374Froude Number cfs5.82 Maximum Discharge cfs5.41 Discharge Full ft/ft0.002 Slope Full SubcriticalFlow Type GVF Input Data in0.0 Downstream Depth ft0.0 Length 0Number Of Steps GVF Output Data in0.0 Upstream Depth N/AProfile Description ft0.00 Profile Headloss %0.0 Average End Depth Over Rise %0.0 Normal Depth Over Rise ft/s0.00 Downstream Velocity ft/s0.00 Upstream Velocity in17.0 Normal Depth in11.2 Critical Depth ft/ft0.002 Channel Slope ft/ft0.004 Critical Slope Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster_Pipes.fm8 Calculated at .0019, software rounds up to 0.002 Worksheet for 24" PVC .0012 Project Description Manning FormulaFriction Method DischargeSolve For Input Data 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft/ft0.001 Channel Slope in22.5 Normal Depth in24.0 Diameter Results cfs9.96 Discharge ft²3.1 Flow Area ft5.3 Wetted Perimeter in7.0 Hydraulic Radius ft0.97 Top Width in13.6 Critical Depth %93.8 Percent Full ft/ft0.004 Critical Slope ft/s3.26 Velocity ft0.16 Velocity Head ft2.04 Specific Energy 0.323Froude Number cfs9.96 Maximum Discharge cfs9.26 Discharge Full ft/ft0.001 Slope Full SubcriticalFlow Type GVF Input Data in0.0 Downstream Depth ft0.0 Length 0Number Of Steps GVF Output Data in0.0 Upstream Depth N/AProfile Description ft0.00 Profile Headloss %0.0 Average End Depth Over Rise %0.0 Normal Depth Over Rise ft/s0.00 Downstream Velocity ft/s0.00 Upstream Velocity in22.5 Normal Depth in13.6 Critical Depth ft/ft0.001 Channel Slope ft/ft0.004 Critical Slope Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster_Pipes.fm8 Calculated at .0012, software rounds to 0.001 Worksheet for 24" PVC .0015 Project Description Manning FormulaFriction Method DischargeSolve For Input Data 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft/ft0.002 Channel Slope in22.5 Normal Depth in24.0 Diameter Results cfs11.14 Discharge ft²3.1 Flow Area ft5.3 Wetted Perimeter in7.0 Hydraulic Radius ft0.97 Top Width in14.4 Critical Depth %93.8 Percent Full ft/ft0.004 Critical Slope ft/s3.64 Velocity ft0.21 Velocity Head ft2.08 Specific Energy 0.361Froude Number cfs11.14 Maximum Discharge cfs10.35 Discharge Full ft/ft0.002 Slope Full SubcriticalFlow Type GVF Input Data in0.0 Downstream Depth ft0.0 Length 0Number Of Steps GVF Output Data in0.0 Upstream Depth N/AProfile Description ft0.00 Profile Headloss %0.0 Average End Depth Over Rise %0.0 Normal Depth Over Rise ft/s0.00 Downstream Velocity ft/s0.00 Upstream Velocity in22.5 Normal Depth in14.4 Critical Depth ft/ft0.002 Channel Slope ft/ft0.004 Critical Slope Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster_Pipes.fm8 Calculated at .0015, software rounds up to 0.002 Worksheet for 30" PVC .0009 Project Description Manning FormulaFriction Method DischargeSolve For Input Data 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft/ft0.001 Channel Slope in28.0 Normal Depth in30.0 Diameter Results cfs15.64 Discharge ft²4.8 Flow Area ft6.5 Wetted Perimeter in8.7 Hydraulic Radius ft1.25 Top Width in16.0 Critical Depth %93.3 Percent Full ft/ft0.003 Critical Slope ft/s3.28 Velocity ft0.17 Velocity Head ft2.50 Specific Energy 0.296Froude Number cfs15.64 Maximum Discharge cfs14.54 Discharge Full ft/ft0.001 Slope Full SubcriticalFlow Type GVF Input Data in0.0 Downstream Depth ft0.0 Length 0Number Of Steps GVF Output Data in0.0 Upstream Depth N/AProfile Description ft0.00 Profile Headloss %0.0 Average End Depth Over Rise %0.0 Normal Depth Over Rise ft/s0.00 Downstream Velocity ft/s0.00 Upstream Velocity in28.0 Normal Depth in16.0 Critical Depth ft/ft0.001 Channel Slope ft/ft0.003 Critical Slope Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster_Pipes.fm8 Calculated at .0009, software rounds up to 0.001 Worksheet for SDI A Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs1.54 Discharge ft1.50 Gutter Width ft/ft0.047 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.015 Road Cross Slope in0.6 Local Depression in31.2 Local Depression Width ft1.50 Grate Width ft6.0 Grate Length P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging ft6.0 Curb Opening Length ft0.3 Opening Height VerticalCurb Throat Type degrees0.00 Throat Incline Angle Options Use BothCalculation Option Results ft7.1 Spread in1.8 Depth in0.6 Gutter Depression in1.2 Total Depression ft²4.1 Open Grate Area ft7.5 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI B Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs2.14 Discharge ft1.50 Gutter Width ft/ft0.047 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.015 Road Cross Slope in0.6 Local Depression in31.2 Local Depression Width ft1.50 Grate Width ft6.0 Grate Length P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging ft6.0 Curb Opening Length ft0.3 Opening Height VerticalCurb Throat Type degrees0.00 Throat Incline Angle Options Use BothCalculation Option Results ft9.2 Spread in2.2 Depth in0.6 Gutter Depression in1.2 Total Depression ft²4.1 Open Grate Area ft7.5 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI C Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.54 Discharge ft1.50 Gutter Width ft/ft0.047 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.010 Road Cross Slope in0.6 Local Depression in15.6 Local Depression Width ft1.50 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging ft3.0 Curb Opening Length ft0.3 Opening Height VerticalCurb Throat Type degrees0.00 Throat Incline Angle Options Use BothCalculation Option Results ft8.1 Spread in1.6 Depth in0.7 Gutter Depression in1.3 Total Depression ft²2.0 Open Grate Area ft4.5 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI D Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.91 Discharge ft1.50 Gutter Width ft/ft0.047 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.023 Road Cross Slope in0.6 Local Depression in15.6 Local Depression Width ft1.50 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging ft3.0 Curb Opening Length ft0.3 Opening Height VerticalCurb Throat Type degrees0.00 Throat Incline Angle Options Use BothCalculation Option Results ft5.4 Spread in1.9 Depth in0.4 Gutter Depression in1.0 Total Depression ft²2.0 Open Grate Area ft4.5 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI E Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.94 Discharge ft1.50 Gutter Width ft/ft0.047 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.020 Road Cross Slope in0.6 Local Depression in15.6 Local Depression Width ft1.50 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging ft3.0 Curb Opening Length ft0.3 Opening Height VerticalCurb Throat Type degrees0.00 Throat Incline Angle Options Use BothCalculation Option Results ft6.1 Spread in2.0 Depth in0.5 Gutter Depression in1.1 Total Depression ft²2.0 Open Grate Area ft4.5 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI F Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.76 Discharge ft1.50 Gutter Width ft/ft0.047 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.015 Road Cross Slope in0.6 Local Depression in15.6 Local Depression Width ft1.50 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging ft3.0 Curb Opening Length ft0.3 Opening Height VerticalCurb Throat Type degrees0.00 Throat Incline Angle Options Use BothCalculation Option Results ft7.0 Spread in1.8 Depth in0.6 Gutter Depression in1.2 Total Depression ft²2.0 Open Grate Area ft4.5 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI G Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs2.08 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.050 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft6.9 Spread in4.2 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI H Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs1.30 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.031 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft7.9 Spread in2.9 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI I Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.37 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.040 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft3.7 Spread in1.8 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI J Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs2.34 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.043 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft8.3 Spread in4.3 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI K Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.57 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.041 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft4.3 Spread in2.1 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI L Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.60 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.041 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft4.4 Spread in2.2 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI N Project Description EfficiencySolve For Input Data cfs1.90 Discharge ft/ft0.006 Slope ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.042 Road Cross Slope 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %25.0 Clogging Options Exclude NoneGrate Flow Option Results %76.09 Efficiency cfs1.44 Intercepted Flow cfs0.45 Bypass Flow ft5.5 Spread in2.8 Depth ft²0.6 Flow Area in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft/s2.97 Velocity ft/s8.64 Splash Over Velocity 1.000Frontal Flow Factor 0.203Side Flow Factor 0.700Grate Flow Ratio ft2.3 Active Grate Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI O Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.89 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.041 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft5.3 Spread in2.6 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI P Project Description EfficiencySolve For Input Data cfs1.90 Discharge ft/ft0.007 Slope ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.043 Road Cross Slope 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %25.0 Clogging Options Exclude NoneGrate Flow Option Results %77.04 Efficiency cfs1.46 Intercepted Flow cfs0.44 Bypass Flow ft5.3 Spread in2.8 Depth ft²0.6 Flow Area in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft/s3.10 Velocity ft/s8.64 Splash Over Velocity 1.000Frontal Flow Factor 0.195Side Flow Factor 0.715Grate Flow Ratio ft2.3 Active Grate Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI Q Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs1.48 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.040 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft6.9 Spread in3.3 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI R Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs1.48 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.040 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft6.9 Spread in3.3 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI S Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs3.65 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.042 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft6.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft8.6 Spread in4.3 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²5.4 Open Grate Area ft8.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI T Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.69 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.041 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft4.7 Spread in2.3 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI U Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.27 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.041 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft3.2 Spread in1.6 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI V Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs2.14 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.043 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft7.9 Spread in4.1 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI W Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs1.19 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.031 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft7.5 Spread in2.8 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI X Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs1.19 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.029 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft8.0 Spread in2.8 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI Y Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs4.12 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.032 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft9.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft9.6 Spread in3.7 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²8.1 Open Grate Area ft11.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI Z Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.39 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.040 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft3.8 Spread in1.8 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI AA Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.39 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.040 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft3.8 Spread in1.8 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI BB Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs3.64 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.038 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft6.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft9.3 Spread in4.2 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²5.4 Open Grate Area ft8.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI CC Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs0.84 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.041 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft5.2 Spread in2.5 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²2.7 Open Grate Area ft5.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI DD Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs4.23 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.036 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft9.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft8.9 Spread in3.8 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²8.1 Open Grate Area ft11.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI EE Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs3.38 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.039 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft6.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft8.7 Spread in4.1 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²5.4 Open Grate Area ft8.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI FF Project Description EfficiencySolve For Input Data cfs14.53 Discharge ft/ft0.028 Slope ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.028 Road Cross Slope 0.011Roughness Coefficient ft2.00 Grate Width ft3.0 Grate Length P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %25.0 Clogging Options Exclude NoneGrate Flow Option Results %41.88 Efficiency cfs6.09 Intercepted Flow cfs8.44 Bypass Flow ft11.4 Spread in3.8 Depth ft²1.8 Flow Area in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft/s7.96 Velocity ft/s8.64 Splash Over Velocity 1.000Frontal Flow Factor 0.028Side Flow Factor 0.402Grate Flow Ratio ft2.3 Active Grate Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Worksheet for SDI GG Project Description SpreadSolve For Input Data cfs8.44 Discharge ft0.00 Gutter Width ft/ft0.000 Gutter Cross Slope ft/ft0.030 Road Cross Slope ft2.00 Grate Width ft9.0 Grate Length in0.0 Local Depression in0.0 Local Depression Width P-50 mm (P-1 -7/8")Grate Type %50.0 Clogging Results ft15.2 Spread in5.5 Depth in0.0 Gutter Depression in0.0 Total Depression ft²8.1 Open Grate Area ft11.0 Active Grate Weir Length Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 8/19/2024 FlowMaster [10.03.00.03] Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterFlowMaster.fm8 Hydraulic Analysis Report Project Data Project Title: Designer: Project Date: Friday, February 28, 2025 Project Units: U.S. Customary Units Notes: Channel Analysis: Pond Overflow A Notes: Input Parameters Channel Type: Circular Pipe Diameter 2.00 ft Longitudinal Slope: 0.0516 ft/ft Manning's n: 0.0150 Depth 2.0000 ft Result Parameters Flow 44.5365 cfs Area of Flow 3.1416 ft^2 Wetted Perimeter 6.2832 ft Hydraulic Radius 0.5000 ft Average Velocity 14.1764 ft/s Top Width 0.0000 ft Froude Number: 0.0000 Critical Depth 1.9685 ft Critical Velocity 14.2239 ft/s Critical Slope: 0.0467 ft/ft Critical Top Width 0.50 ft Calculated Max Shear Stress 6.4397 lb/ft^2 Calculated Avg Shear Stress 1.6099 lb/ft^2 Channel Analysis: Pond Overflow B Notes: Input Parameters Channel Type: Circular Pipe Diameter 2.00 ft Longitudinal Slope: 0.0418 ft/ft Manning's n: 0.0150 Depth 2.0000 ft Result Parameters Flow 40.0847 cfs Area of Flow 3.1416 ft^2 Wetted Perimeter 6.2832 ft Hydraulic Radius 0.5000 ft Average Velocity 12.7594 ft/s Top Width 0.0000 ft Froude Number: 0.0000 Critical Depth 1.9524 ft Critical Velocity 12.8388 ft/s Critical Slope: 0.0372 ft/ft Critical Top Width 0.61 ft Calculated Max Shear Stress 5.2166 lb/ft^2 Calculated Avg Shear Stress 1.3042 lb/ft^2 APPENDIX DSTORM DRAINAGE DESIGNREPORT21363.01 SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 1 Table of Contents Attachments .................................................................................................................................... 2 1 Project Overview .................................................................................................................... 3 2 Pre-Development Drainage ..................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Off-Site Run On ............................................................................................................... 3 2.2 On-Site Pre-Development ................................................................................................ 4 2.3 Pre-Development Hydraulics ........................................................................................... 5 3 Post Development ................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Development Sites............................................................................................................ 6 3.1.1 Development Sites Summary .................................................................................... 6 3.2 Pipe, Inlet and Street Capacity ......................................................................................... 8 3.3 Pipe Outfall Stability – Ponds .......................................................................................... 9 3.4 Pond Sizing – Current Improvements .............................................................................. 9 4 Maintenance Guidelines ........................................................................................................ 11 Table 1 - Off-Site Run-on Hydrology ............................................................................................. 4 Table 2 - Off-Site Pond Summary .................................................................................................. 4 Table 3 - Pre-Development Hydrology ........................................................................................... 5 Table 4 - Development Site Summary – Pre-Development ............................................................ 7 Table 5 - Gutter Capacity ................................................................................................................ 8 Table 6 - Allowable Discharge Rates ............................................................................................. 9 Table 7 - Riprap Sizing for Pipe Outlets ......................................................................................... 9 Table 8 - Post Development Pond Basins ..................................................................................... 10 Table 9 – Minimum Pond Sizing .................................................................................................. 10 Table 10 - Pond Stage-Storage-Outflow ....................................................................................... 10 Table 11 - Recommended Pond Maintenance .............................................................................. 12 North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 2 Attachments Exhibits: 1.1 – Vicinity Map 1.2 – USGS Quad 1.3 – Existing Conditions 1.4 – Master Site Plan 1.5 – Grading Overview Plan 2.1 – Pre-Development Drainage Overview 2.2 – Pre-Development – Off-Site Drainage Basins 3.1 – Post Development Improvements Overview 3.2 – Post Development Drainage Overview Plan 3.3 – Post Development Model Overview Appendices: A – Pre-Development Hydrology B – Post Development Supporting Calculations -Inlet Sizing Supporting Calculations -Gutter Flow Capacity Supporting Information -Riprap Sizing for Culvert Aprons -Minimum Pond Sizing – City of Bozeman Method -Water Quality Volume Supporting Calculations C – Model Outputs -10-year -25-year D – Storm Drainage Plans North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 3 1 Project Overview The North Park Development is located near the north end of Bozeman just west of North 7th and north of Mandeville Drive. The overall development is bounded by Red Wing Drive to the north, Mandeville Drive to the south, Flora Lane to the east, and Interstate 90 to the west. Most of the development area is state owned land that will be developed as lease sites. A portion of land at the north end of the project is privately owned. The project is under jurisdiction of the City of Bozeman (COB) and is being developed under the Master Site Plan process. The overall development area is roughly divided in half by Mandeville Creek which runs north- south through the project site. Phase 1 of the development consists of the area on the east side of the creek. Land to the west of the creek will be developed as part of a future phase and is not considered with the current design. A flood hazard evaluation dated December 9, 2017 was completed for Mandeville Creek by Allied Engineering Services, Inc. (AESI). Current improvements considered with this report are primarily related to street and conveyance improvements. There are two primary drainage paths and outfall points within the project site for the pre-development and post development conditions. One is to Mandeville Creek to the west; the other is along a natural flow path between Wheat Drive and Flora Lane. There is a portion of off-site drainage that is currently and will continue to be conveyed through the site. Individual site developments will be considered as part of future Master Site Plans and will be responsible for providing their own on-site storm detention or retention. Regional conveyance facilities are provided to serve future site developments. 2 Pre‐Development Drainage Site drainage consist of areas contributed by off-site areas that run onto the site and the areas located within the project site. The areas are broken out separately but are considered with the overall drainage system. An overview off-site and on-site drainage is provided on Exhibit 2.1; a more detailed plan for off-site drainage is provided on Exhibit 2.2. 2.1 Off‐Site Run On A portion of the areas located to the east of the project site drain west and north through the development area. The off-site areas are displayed on Exhibit 2.2. The areas are developed and include ponds to mitigate stormwater runoff. The existing ponds have been surveyed and are included with the model to represent field conditions. Pond stage-storage and stage-outflow tables and on-site pre-development model outputs are included with Appendix A. The pond hydraulics and volumes were completed using Autodesk Civil 3D, and Hydraflow Hydrographs. The existing ponds are modeled with the proposed development network, discussed in sections below. A summary of the pond and basin characteristics are provided in Table 1 and Table 2. North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 4 Table 1 - Off-Site Run-on Hydrology Basin Area (acres) C Tc (min)25-year event Intensity (in/hr) Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) Off-1 2.62 0.8 12 2.19 4.58 Off-2 2.20 0.8 12 2.19 3.85 Off-3 3.22 0.8 12 2.19 5.63 Off-4 0.92 0.8 10.2 2.42 1.78 Off-5 1.38 0.8 13 2.07 2.29 Off-6 1.82 0.8 9 6.23 3.82 Off-7 3.35 0.8 8 2.88 7.71 Off-8 4.12 0.8 7 3.03 9.99 The existing ponds were modeled using Autodesk Storm and Sanitary Analysis 2017. Output summaries are included with Appendix A and in Table 2. Table 2 - Off-Site Pond Summary Existing Pond Contributing Basin(s) Peak Flow In (cfs) 25-year Peak Flow Out (cfs) 25-year Murdoch’s Pond 1 Off-6 3.82 1.72 Murdoch’s Pond 2 Off-5 2.29 2.24 Murdoch’s Pond 3 Off-4 1.78 1.56 Murdoch’s Pond 4 Off-3 5.63 4.46 Space Bank Pond 1 Off-8 9.98 0.00 Space Bank Pond 2 Off-7 7.71 0.00 2.2 On‐Site Pre‐Development The total pre-development area considered for the analysis is approximately 147 acres. The analysis considers 5 separate pre-development basins within the site as shown on Exhibit 2.1. The rational method was applied for the hydrologic analysis as outlined in the City of Bozeman Design Standards. A runoff coefficient (C) of 0.2 was selected for all areas as all areas are currently undeveloped. The time of concentration was determined using the TR-55 within hydrographs. A Manning’s n of 0.17 was assumed for sheet flow. Shallow concentrated flow for an unpaved surface and channel flow was considered and estimated based on the TR55 method. Rainfall intensities for each basin were determined based on the design storm event and the calculated time to concentration. Off-site drainage areas and ponds are included with the model. Table 3 provides a summary of the pre-development hydrology. Hydrographs were routed together to provided totals shown for select areas with off-site contributing areas. An overview showing the routing is provided with Appendix A. North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 5 Table 3 - Pre-Development Hydrology Basin Area (acres) Tc (min) 10-year event 25-year event 100-year event Intensity (in/hr) Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) Intensity (in/hr) Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) Intensity (in/hr) Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) Pre-1 24.0 28.9 1.03 4.9 1.24 6.0 1.64 7.9 Pre-2 42.8 43.4 0.80 6.8 0.97 8.3 1.26 10.8 Pre-3 49.2 42.7 0.80 7.8 0.97 9.5 1.26 12.4 Pre-4 3.7 23.1 1.19 0.9 1.44 1.1 1.92 1.4 Pre-5 10.0 23.9 1.16 2.3 1.40 2.8 1.87 3.7 Pre-3 Combined Pre-3, Off-2, Off-3, Off-4 10.3 12.2 16.3 Pre-5 Combined Pre-5, Off-1 5.0 6.0 8.1 *Combined basins include off-site drainage routing. 2.3 Pre‐Development Hydraulics Pre-development drainage is broken up as discussed in the previous section. The primary outfall points to the north across the Railroad and Frontage Road are Mandeville Creek and a crossing near to the east of Mandeville Creek near the existing water and sewer. The crossings are shown on Exhibit 1.3 with the attachments. The Mandeville Creek crossings consist of a 36” CMP for the Red Wing crossing and 36” RCP’s for the Railroad and Frontage Road Crossings. An analysis of the crossings was completed as part of the North Park Flood Hazard Evaluation to determine the starting water surface elevation for use in the HEC-RAS model. The analysis was completed based on the 100-year design event estimated to be 517-cfs. Overtopping occurs to the west for the culverts prior to overtopping the Railroad or Frontage Road. Refer to the Flood Hazard Evaluation for Mandeville Creek by Allied Engineering Services, Inc. for additional information. The drainage crossing/outfall point for pre-development basin 3 near the existing water and sewer consists of a 24” RCP for Red Wing and a 36” RCP for the Railroad crossing. The existing culverts should be inspected, and maintenance completed if necessary. It should be noted that the existing culverts are located within the railroad right-of-way and maintenance would need to be completed by the railroad or a permit obtained to perform the maintenance. A crossing for the Frontage Road was not observed and drainage appears to flow west to the next major crossing at Mandeville Creek. Drainage from pre-development basins 4 and 5 outfall to the ditch along Red Wing Drive, following the roadway north/west to the pre-development basin 3 outfall point. Near the outfall point for pre-development basin 5, a minor depression can be observed. Ponding along Red Wing Drive is expected and runoff overtopping Red Wing is anticipated to pond under the 7th North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 6 Street/Frontage Road overpass near the Railroad tracks. While a culvert crossing the railroad tracks as this location is possible, one was not able to be observed. Future development of sites discharging to this area should be carefully considered. An improvement to the existing roadside ditch along Red Wing Drive to the northwest could alleviate some of the drainage/ponding concerns. Downstream conveyance as noted above should be maintained to ensure positive drainage throughout the outfall path. Drainage improvements would need to be completed by the railroad or coordinated and permitted through the railroad. 3 Post Development Analysis and sizing of the post development facilities was primarily completed in Autodesk Storm and Sanitary Analysis, 2019. Overviews of the infrastructure, drainage basins, and model are provided with Exhibits 3.1 through 3.3. The model represents inlets, pipes, and ponds. The report breaks the components out separately for simplicity. Refer to the model outputs in Appendix C for detailed input and output information. Storm drainage will be conveyed to a main outfall line running north-south along the eastern portion of the project site. The line will convey runoff from the streets once detained and from the adjacent development areas. Future development areas will be required to include their own storm drainage ponds. Development areas located to the west of Wheat Drive will primarily discharge to Mandeville Creek after being routed through future storm drainage ponds. Some areas will be able to discharge to storm stubs or drain lines. The allowable discharge rates to each of the stubs are provided in the sections below. Temporary grading to the invert of some stubs is provided to convey runoff from low areas prior to development of the site. The storm drainage outfall point for the first phase of street and infrastructure improvements will be to the existing natural drainage/low area of the site. Storm runoff will be treated by the proposed detention pond with limited or no discharge for smaller storm events based on provisions to store the first 0.5-inches of runoff. Runoff that is generated will discharge to the existing natural drainage path. It is anticipated that runoff from smaller events will infiltrate as it crosses the existing field. The existing drainage path continues north to existing Red Wing Drive, from there drainage continues northwest along Red Wing Drive to Mandeville Creek. It is anticipated that additional drainage conveyance and storage improvements will be made as part of future phases of work and street improvements. Once final configurations are determined, additional storm drainage reports and analyses will be provided. 3.1 Development Sites The North Park Development will ultimately consist of several individual site developments required to provide their own on-site detention/retention. Current improvements will include storm drain lines for conveyance of runoff from streets and the future site developments. Other areas of future development will convey runoff to Mandeville Creek or continue to discharge along Red Wing Drive. 3.1.1 Development Sites Summary The future development of some areas will not feasibly be able to discharge to the storm drainage collection and conveyance infrastructure provided as part of the proposed improvements discussed in this report. The development sites will discharge to existing drainage North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 7 features either along Red Wing Drive or to Mandeville Creek. Other areas are provided stubs or can discharge to storm drainage conveyance lines. A summary of the pre-development condition for each of the development sites is outlined in Table 4 below. Each development area will be required to provide storage necessary to limit peak runoff rates to the pre-development rate provided below. The drainage basins and infrastructure are shown on Exhibit 3.2. More information is provided with the following descriptions. Table 4 - Development Site Summary – Pre-Development Basin Area (acres) Tc (min) C 10-yr Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) 25-yr Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) ST-WHT15+30L 10.0 35 0.2 1.8 2.2 ST-WHT23+30L 7.56 22 0.2 1.9 2.2 CUL-RDA-5+50 12.13 24 0.2 2.8 3.4 CUL-RDB-19+25 10.98 21 0.2 2.8 3.4 SUB-4-B 10.00 18 0.2 2.8 3.4 TR-3-Off 10.54 17 0.2 3.1 3.7 TR-5-Off 17.53 24 0.2 4.1 4.9 TR-3-B-Off 7.67 19 0.2 2.1 2.5 TR-2-B-Off 14.27 24 0.2 3.3 4.0 TR-4-B-Off 5.06 13 0.2 1.8 2.1 TR-6-Off 8.93 24 0.2 2.1 2.5 Development Site ~ Pre-Development Basin 1: Development areas that fall within Pre-Development Drainage Basin 1 (shown on Exhibit 2.1) are anticipated to discharge to Mandeville Creek. Development site within the basin include Tracts 3 and 5 on the State-owned lease areas and Tract 3-B and 2B on the privately owned portion of land. Each Tract is anticipated to be broken into subsequent Tracts with as part of future site plans/master site plans. In general, each of the sites will drain to the north and west as to best match the existing ground slope. All developed areas are required to be treated for water quality and peak runoff rates as outlined by the City of Bozeman Design Standards. This may involve multiple small ponds or a single larger pond and the downstream and of the project. Depending on the discharge points to Mandeville Creek, new culverts may be required to cross the proposed public trail. Development Sites ~ Pre-Development Basins 4 and 5: Drainage from a portion of Tract 6 of the State lease site and Tract 4-B of the fee simple lots will continue to outfall along Red Wing Drive as with the pre-development condition. Estimates of the pre-development runoff rates for the development areas were provided in Table 4 above. As part of future individual site plans, a storm drainage plan for treatment and control of peak runoff rates will be required. The outfall points will be to the roadside ditch along Red Wing Drive. Special considerations should be given to maintaining drainage along Red Wing Drive. North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 8 The current/pre-development drainage condition was discussed in the pre-development drainage section above. It is recommended that future improvements involve improvements to the Red Wing Drive roadside ditch in order to maintain positive drainage to the northwest. The final useable or abandonment of Red Wing Drive is currently unknown; however, future abandonment of the road may be an opportunity for coordination with the railroad to include drainage improvements. 3.2 Pipe, Inlet and Street Capacity The COB Design Standards and Specifications require that conveyance facilities be sized for the 25-year design event. Inlets are sized to ensure a maximum depth of 0.30-feet over the gutter flow line. This is based on the typical curb detail and COB criteria of a maximum depth 0.15-feet below the top of curb elevation. The model includes on-grade inlets where appropriate and provides conveyance of bypass flow to the next downstream inlet. Inlet capacity calculations within the model are based on the HEC-22 weir vs orifice method. Sample calculations are provided in Appendix B to support the model. The capacity for a single curb inlet is 2.5-cfs; the capacity of a double curb inlet is 3.7-cfs. Peak flow rates for gutter flow is observed at the point of collection at inlets. The allowable gutter spread is 9.5-feet based on the allowable gutter flow depth and standard cross slope of 3%. Gutter capacity was determined for various longitudinal street grades and is provided in Table 5. The capacity is based on the HEC-22 method for both uniform and composite sections. Refer to Appendix B for supporting information. Table 5 - Gutter Capacity Longitudinal Street Grade (%)Gutter Capacity Uniform Section (cfs) Gutter Capacity Composite Section (cfs) 0.5 3.6 3.8 0.75 4.4 4.6 1.00 5.0 5.3 1.25 5.6 5.8 Storm drain pipes are required to be sized for the 25-year event with no surcharging. Pipes from an inlet will generally be 12-inch while pipes conveying more than one inlet or stub will be a minimum of 15-inch. Summary output data for multiple design events are included with the model outputs in Appendix C. A summary of elevation data is provided for all manholes including the rim, invert, and maximum water surface elevations. A minimum sump of 9-inches from the lowest pipe invert will be provided; junctions in the model may not display a sump. The storm drainage pipes are sized to accept drainage from adjacent development areas post treatment. A summary of the stub sizes and allowable discharge rates are provided in Table 6. The stubs provided in the table do not consider development areas adjacent to the primary conveyance line running north-south through the size. The main conveyance line is sized to convey the development areas; however, specific stub locations have not yet been determined. Each development area will be required to provide detention ponds adequate to meet the City of North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 9 Bozeman detention and water quality volumes. Each development must consider the peak discharge rates from the proposed storm drainage ponds for up to the 25-year event. Table 6 - Allowable Discharge Rates Stub Size/Grade (inches/%) Allowable Discharge (cfs) 25-year event Development Site ST-WHT15+30L 15”/0.57 2.2 Tract/Area 3 ST-WHT23+30L 12”/0.87 2.2 Tract/Area 5 CUL-RDA-5+50 Main line 3.4 Tract 4 CUL-RDB-19+25 Main line 3.4 Tract 6 SUB-4-B Main line 3.4 Tract 4-B 3.3 Pipe Outfall Stability – Ponds Pipe outfalls will need to be armored to prevent erosion. The stability of the outfalls is based on Riprap Sizing for Culvert Aprons from equation 10.4 in HEC-14. A summary of the pipe outfalls and the required rock size is provided in Table 7. Supporting information is included in Appendix B. Table 7 - Riprap Sizing for Pipe Outlets Pipe Outlet Pipe Size (inches)25-year peak flow rate (cfs) Required Rock Size (inches) Pond 1 18 11.8 6 Pond 2 18 6.2 3 Pond 3 15 2.7 1 3.4 Pond Sizing – Current Improvements Pond sizing was completed based on the City of Bozeman methodology described in the City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications – Addendum 6 approved 05/01/2017. The extended detention volume is the storage volume generated from the first 0.5 inches of rainfall from a 24-hour storm. The extended detention volume is based on the curve number equation using a weighted curve number based on open space vs. paved areas. The extended detention volume is for water quality purposes; the volume will be slowly released by a small orifice placed at the pond bottom elevation. The native soils consist of silts and clay leading to relatively slow infiltration rates. Test pits extending roughly 9 to 10 feet did not encounter groundwater, but native gravel if observed were near the bottom of the excavations. The relatively small orifice in the outlet structures will allow for a slow release of runoff not initially infiltrated. The slow outflow will allow for control of sediment and water quality but also provide some means to avoid prolonged standing water within the ponds. The weir control invert is set at or above the elevation providing the water quality volume. The pre-development and post development hydrology for the street basins are provided in Table 8. The resulting minimum volumes and areas are provided in Table 9. Supporting information for the minimum pond sizing is provided North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 10 in Appendix B. Model outputs provide additional information related to observed outlet flow rates and maximum water depths in Appendix C. Table 8 - Post Development Pond Basins Basin Area (acres) Tc (min) Pre Tc (min) Post “C” Pre “C” Post Pre-Development 10-year Post Development 10-year Intensity (in/hr) Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) Intensity (in/hr) Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) 1 6.07 37 19 0.20 0.75 0.88 1.07 1.35 6.19 2 3.60 34 17 0.20 0.74 0.93 0.67 1.43 3.81 3 1.90 23 10 0.20 0.71 1.20 0.46 2.05 2.79 Table 9 – Minimum Pond Sizing Pond Extended Detention Volume (CF) Minimum Detention Volume (CF) Minimum Retention Volume (CF) Minimum Pond Area (SF) 1 1,116 6,682 13,436 155 2 633 3,741 7,811 97 3 312 1,636 3,988 67 A summary of the pond stage-storage and stage-outflow relationships are provided in Table 10. Pond volumes are based on the design graded pond surface; the pond volumes were obtained using Autodesk Civil 3D. The outflow rates are based on weir and orifice calculations and the outlet pipe control for higher flows. Table 10 - Pond Stage-Storage-Outflow Stage (ft) Pond 1 Pond 2 Pond 3 Storage (cf) Outflow (cfs) Storage (cf) Outflow (cfs) Storage (cf) Outflow (cfs) 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.25 - 0.03 - 0.03 - 0.03 0.50 1,935 0.15 3,323 0.15 956 0.15 0.75 - 0.19 - 0.19 - 0.19 1.00 4,188 0.36 7,056 0.22 2,184 0.22 1.25 - 0.64 - 0.46 - 0.36 1.50 6,771 0.99 11,213 0.84 3,725 0.57 1.75 - 1.40 - 1.38 - 0.84 2.00 9,696 1.86 15,805 1.99 5,520 1.16 2.25 - 3.61 - 2.67 - 2.76 2.50 12,975 6.44 20,844 3.42 7,656 5.43 North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 11 Ponds 2 and 3 have been oversized to accept additional drainage from adjacent development sites and to provide additional treatment and control of runoff. The development areas have been designated above with allowable discharge rates to the storm drain network; these areas require stormwater treatment prior to discharge from the site to the storm drainage network. Oversizing the pond will further assist with control of runoff for the overall development area. Small development areas adjacent to ponds 2 and 3 will be able to direct discharge to the ponds without treatment. More information is provided below. The area located at the northeast of the intersection of Wheat Drive and Fauna Street is roughly 1-acre is size. The Phillips 66 pipeline bounds the property to the north. Special considerations will be required along with coordination to cross the gas line. The other area permitting to direct discharge to pond 3 is a small development area located adjacent to the existing cell tower site and along Wheat drive. Both sites will need to consider the actual proposed development and impact to the ponds once final configurations are determined. Capacity is not anticipate to be an issue based on the size of the ponds and contributing areas. Additional analysis for future developments will need to consider the overall storm system; but may demonstrate excess capacity is available for treatment from development areas. Conveyance to the ponds will be a challenge and may not be feasible depending on the site configuration. As a result of the challenges and unknown site configurations, development areas have been left out of the current capacity calculations. A flow diversion is utilized for Pond 1 to direct excess runoff generated by off-site areas and runoff already treated around the pond. This will prevent the pond from becoming inundated and overtopping the banks in high-runoff situations. The flow diversion structure is shown on plan detail sheet C1.5. Initial runoff entering the diversion structure will be routed to the pond. If either the pond is backwatered to a depth of 1.6-ft or the rate of runoff entering the structure becomes excessive, stormwater will overtop the overflow weir and bypass the pond. 4 Maintenance Guidelines Maintenance of the pond and conveyance pipe located outside the public street easement will be the responsibility of the Property Owners Association. The inlets and storm drainage piping within the public street will be maintained by the City of Bozeman. Easements will be provided for access to and maintenance of all facilities. A summary of the recommended maintenance activities for stormwater ponds (extended detention basins (EDB)) is provided in Table 11. The recommendations are from Table 5.7-1 of the Montana Post Construction Storm Water BMP Design Guidance Manual. North Park Development – Phase 1 April 5, 2019; Revised November 29, 2021 Project: 14‐167 12 Table 11 - Recommended Pond Maintenance Activity Frequency Remove litter/debris from all components of the EDB Repair inlet, outlet trick channel, and all other structural components required for the basin to operate as intended Repair and revegetate eroded areas. If turn grass requires replacement, use a species with similar growth requirements. Regularly manage all vegetation and remove all clippings. Where applicable, irrigate during dry weather and replace broken sprinkler heads. Completely drain the irrigation system before the first winter freeze and check for damaged components upon reactivation in the spring. Repair maintenance routes, if applicable Inspect the EDB for signs of mosquito larvae during summer months and provide treatment when breeding is found. If available, a local mosquito control service could be used to carry out these inspections. As needed Trim vegetation for aesthetics and mosquito control. Prevent establishment of woody vegetation on or near bers or embankments. Evaluate the health of vegetation and remove and replace any dead or dying plants. Remove all green waste and dispose of properly. Semiannually Inspect all components of the EDB in accordance with an approved inspection form according to local jurisdiction requirements. Annually Remove sediment from the micropool when the depth has been reduced to approximately 18 inches. Remove sediment from the forebay before it becomes a significant source of pollutants for the remainder of the EDB Typically 1 to 4 years Remove accumulated sediment and re-grade when the accumulated sediment volume exceeds 10 percent of the main treatment cell design volume. Dispose of sediment properly. Typically 10 to 20 years (or as needed) Storm drainage inlets and piping should be inspected to ensure that conveyance is maintained and that accumulated debris and sediment is removed. The sumps located in all storm drainage structures will collect trash and sediment and will need to be periodically cleaned out. Drainage pipes may also collect sediment and may need to be flushed with sediment collected at the next downstream manhole/junction. Appendix A Pre‐Development Space Bank Pond 1 bottom area 2500 sf Outlet overtop around top of bank at 4718.0 Stage Elevation Storage (cy) Storage (cf)long ~50ft Stage Discharge (cfs) 0 4715 0.37 9.99 0 0 0.5 4715.5 28.67 774.09 0.5 0 1 4716 96.02 2592.54 1 0 1.5 4716.5 182.52 4928.04 1.5 0 2 4717 287.74 7768.98 2 0 2.5 4717.5 412.93 11149.11 2.5 0 3 4718.00 556.32 15020.64 3 0 3.5 4718.5 709.97 19169.19 3.2 11.63 3.6 60.42 Space Bank Pond 2 bottom area 627 sf Outlet Stage Elevation Storage (cy) Storage (cf)total of ~30‐ft wide at 4722 Stage Discharge (cfs) 0 4719.5 2.87 77.49 0.00 0.00 0.5 4720 26.59 717.93 0.50 0.00 1 4720.5 71.35 1926.45 1.00 0.00 1.5 4721 132.16 3568.32 1.50 0.00 2 4721.5 208.37 5625.99 2.00 0.00 2.5 4722 300.58 8115.66 2.50 0.00 3 4722.5 407.66 11006.82 2.70 6.98 3.00 27.58 Murdochs Pond 1 bottom area 1590 sf Outlet spill point at 4740.33 Stage Elevation Storage (cy) Storage (cf)15‐ft wide at 4740.5 Stage Discharge (cfs) 0 4739.83 6.03 162.81 use broad crested 0 0 0.5 4740.33 44.49 1201.23 0.5 0 1 4740.83 98.99 2672.73 0.6 1.233 1.5 4741.33 164.21 4433.67 0.9 9.866 1.2 22.84 1.5 39 Murdochs Pond 2 bottom area 100 sf Outlet approx. 20‐ft weir at 4739.2 Stage Elevation Storage (cy) Storage (cf)outlet structure ‐ invert out = 4737.07 Stage Discharge (cfs) 0 4738.5 0 0 discharge to south space bank pond 0 0 0.5 4739 8.79 237.33 Rim may control ‐ 4739.35 0.25 0 1 4739.5 26.87 725.49 3‐ft dia? 0.5 0 1.5 4740 52.79 1425.33 Neehah R‐2557 A = 2.0 P = 8.4 0.85 0 2 4740.5 84.57 2283.39 will spill out of bank first 1 8.545 1.25 21.21 1.5 37.21 1.75 55.95 2 77.08 Murdochs Pond 3 bottom area 37 sf Outlet Overtopping ~4739.50 will be used ‐ Stage Elevation Storage (cy) Storage (cf)likely pond to ~4739.75 or 4740 Stage Discharge (cfs) 0 4738 0 0 before overtopping surrounding area 0 0 0.5 4738.5 2.82 76.14 assume 20‐ft at 39.5 0.25 0 1 4739 8.15 220.05 0.5 0 1.5 4739.5 15.72 424.44 0.75 0 2 4740 25.76 695.52 1 0 2.5 4740.5 37.2 1004.4 1.25 0 1.5 0 1.75 6.5 2 18.38 2.25 33.77 2.5 52 Murdochs Pond 4 bottom area 450 sf Outlet outlet structure Stage Elevation Storage (cy) Storage (cf)invert of 35' 12" RCP = 4732.51 Stage Discharge (cfs) 0 4733.5 0 0 (SAME AS END OF PIPE) 0 1.69 0.5 4734 8.5 229.5 VERIFY IT IS THE INVERT… 0.25 2.64 1 4734.5 20.69 558.63 assume 12" outlet pipe and overtopping 0.5 3.33 1.5 4735 37.04 1000.08 overtopping at 4735 0.75 3.89 2 4735.5 56.74 1531.98 assume 0.5%? 1 4.39 2.5 4736 78.19 2111.13 1.25 4.83 1.5 5.24 1.75 12.12 2 24.35 2.25 40.05 2.5 58.55 Hydrograph Return Period Recap 1 Hyd. Hydrograph Inflow Peak Outflow (cfs)Hydrograph No. type hyd(s)Description (origin) 1-yr 2-yr 3-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 1 Rational ------------- 2.673 ------- ------- 4.928 5.962 ------- 7.891 PRE-1 2 Rational ------------- 3.764 ------- ------- 6.803 8.264 ------- 10.81 PRE-2 3 Rational ------------- 4.327 ------- ------- 7.820 9.499 ------- 12.42 PRE-3 4 Rational ------------- 0.474 ------- ------- 0.883 1.066 ------- 1.421 PRE-4 5 Rational ------------- 1.248 ------- ------- 2.322 2.804 ------- 3.732 PRE-5 6 Rational ------------- 1.982 ------- ------- 3.819 4.580 ------- 6.223 Off-1 7 Rational ------------- 1.680 ------- ------- 3.236 3.880 ------- 5.273 Off-2 8 Rational ------------- 2.436 ------- ------- 4.693 5.628 ------- 7.648 Off-3 9 Rational ------------- 0.776 ------- ------- 1.510 1.807 ------- 2.469 Off-4 10 Rational ------------- 0.995 ------- ------- 1.909 2.292 ------- 3.107 Off-5 11 Rational ------------- 1.636 ------- ------- 3.198 3.824 ------- 5.242 Off-6 12 Rational ------------- 3.232 ------- ------- 6.355 7.591 ------- 10.44 Off-7 13 Rational ------------- 4.307 ------- ------- 8.524 10.17 ------- 14.04 Off-8 14 Reservoir 11 ------- 0.000 ------- ------- 1.328 1.961 ------- 3.344 Murdochs Pond 1 15 Reservoir 10 ------- 0.937 ------- ------- 1.814 2.178 ------- 2.953 Murdochs Pond 2 16 Reservoir 9 ------- 0.311 ------- ------- 1.622 2.030 ------- 2.347 Murdochs Pond 3 17 Reservoir 8 ------- 2.282 ------- ------- 3.870 4.428 ------- 6.255 Murdochs Pond 4 18 Combine 12, 14, 15, ------- 3.232 ------- ------- 6.870 8.577 ------- 12.46 Murdochs Pond 1 & 2 19 Reservoir 18 ------- 0.000 ------- ------- 0.000 0.000 ------- 0.000 Space Bank Pond 2 Comb 20 Combine 13, 19 ------- 4.307 ------- ------- 8.524 10.17 ------- 14.04 SB Pond 1 Comb 21 Reservoir 20 ------- 0.000 ------- ------- 0.000 0.000 ------- 0.000 SB Pond 1 Combined 22 Combine 3, 7, 16, 17, ------- 5.130 ------- ------- 10.30 12.16 ------- 16.25 Pre-3 Combined 23 Combine 5, 6, ------- 2.606 ------- ------- 4.980 5.982 ------- 8.089 Pre-5 Combined Proj. file: Pre-development and offsite.gpw Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Hydrograph Summary Report 2 Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Hyd. Inflow Maximum Total Hydrograph No. type flow interval Peak volume hyd(s) elevation strge used Description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft)(cuft) 1 Rational 4.928 1 29 8,575 ------------------PRE-1 2 Rational 6.803 1 43 17,552 ------------------PRE-2 3 Rational 7.820 1 43 20,177 ------------------PRE-3 4 Rational 0.883 1 23 1,219 ------------------PRE-4 5 Rational 2.322 1 24 3,344 ------------------PRE-5 6 Rational 3.819 1 12 2,749 ------------------Off-1 7 Rational 3.236 1 12 2,330 ------------------Off-2 8 Rational 4.693 1 12 3,379 ------------------Off-3 9 Rational 1.510 1 10 906 ------------------Off-4 10 Rational 1.909 1 13 1,489 ------------------Off-5 11 Rational 3.198 1 9 1,727 ------------------Off-6 12 Rational 6.355 1 8 3,050 ------------------Off-7 13 Rational 8.524 1 7 3,580 ------------------Off-8 14 Reservoir 1.328 1 14 526 11 4740.40 1,396 Murdochs Pond 1 15 Reservoir 1.814 1 14 1,252 10 4739.11 341 Murdochs Pond 2 16 Reservoir 1.622 1 11 482 9 4739.58 455 Murdochs Pond 3 17 Reservoir 3.870 1 14 3,379 8 4734.26 398 Murdochs Pond 4 18 Combine 6.870 1 8 4,829 12, 14, 15,------------Murdochs Pond 1 & 2 19 Reservoir 0.000 1 n/a 0 18 4721.31 4,829 Space Bank Pond 2 Comb 20 Combine 8.524 1 7 3,580 13, 19 ------------SB Pond 1 Comb 21 Reservoir 0.000 1 n/a 0 20 4716.21 3,580 SB Pond 1 Combined 22 Combine 10.30 1 12 26,368 3, 7, 16, 17, ------------Pre-3 Combined 23 Combine 4.980 1 12 6,093 5, 6,------------Pre-5 Combined Pre-development and offsite.gpw Return Period: 10 Year Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 1 PRE-1 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 4.928 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.48 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 8,575 cuft Drainage area = 24.000 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.2 Intensity = 1.027 in/hr Tc by TR55 = 29.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 3 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) PRE-1 Hyd. No. 1 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 1 TR55 Tc Worksheet 4 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Hyd. No. 1 PRE-1 Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.170 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft)= 100.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 1.00 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 5.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min)= 13.43 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 13.43 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft)= 1825.00 0.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%)= 1.49 0.00 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s)=1.97 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min)= 15.44 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 15.44 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) =0.00 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft)({0})0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min)= 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.00 Total Travel Time, Tc .............................................................................. 29.00 min Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 2 PRE-2 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 6.803 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.72 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 17,552 cuft Drainage area = 42.800 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.2 Intensity = 0.795 in/hr Tc by TR55 = 43.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 5 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 7.00 7.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) PRE-2 Hyd. No. 2 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 2 TR55 Tc Worksheet 6 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Hyd. No. 2 PRE-2 Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.170 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft)= 100.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 1.00 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 0.80 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min)= 27.95 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 27.95 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft)= 1500.00 0.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%)= 1.00 0.00 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s)=1.61 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min)= 15.49 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 15.49 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 56.50 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 35.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 1.32 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.025 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) =9.44 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft)({0})0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min)= 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.00 Total Travel Time, Tc .............................................................................. 43.00 min Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 3 PRE-3 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 7.820 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.72 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 20,177 cuft Drainage area = 49.200 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.2 Intensity = 0.795 in/hr Tc by TR55 = 43.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 7 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) PRE-3 Hyd. No. 3 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 3 TR55 Tc Worksheet 8 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Hyd. No. 3 PRE-3 Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.170 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft)= 100.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 1.00 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 0.80 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min)= 27.95 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 27.95 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft)= 685.00 0.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%)= 1.24 0.00 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s)=1.80 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min)= 6.35 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 6.35 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 51.00 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 90.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 1.38 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.025 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) =4.79 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft)({0})2410.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min)= 8.39 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 8.39 Total Travel Time, Tc .............................................................................. 43.00 min Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 4 PRE-4 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 0.883 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.38 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 1,219 cuft Drainage area = 3.700 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.2 Intensity = 1.194 in/hr Tc by TR55 = 23.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.30 0.40 0.40 0.50 0.50 0.60 0.60 0.70 0.70 0.80 0.80 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) PRE-4 Hyd. No. 4 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 4 TR55 Tc Worksheet 10 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Hyd. No. 4 PRE-4 Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.170 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft)= 100.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 1.00 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 1.60 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min)= 21.18 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 21.18 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft)= 296.00 0.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%)= 2.60 0.00 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s)=2.60 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min)= 1.90 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 1.90 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) =0.00 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft)({0})0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min)= 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.00 Total Travel Time, Tc .............................................................................. 23.00 min Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 5 PRE-5 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 2.322 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.40 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 3,344 cuft Drainage area = 10.000 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.2 Intensity = 1.161 in/hr Tc by TR55 = 24.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) PRE-5 Hyd. No. 5 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 5 TR55 Tc Worksheet 12 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Hyd. No. 5 PRE-5 Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.170 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft)= 100.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 1.00 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 2.20 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min)= 18.65 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 18.65 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft)= 900.00 0.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%)= 3.20 0.00 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s)=2.89 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min)= 5.20 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 5.20 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) =0.00 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft)({0})0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min)= 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.00 Total Travel Time, Tc .............................................................................. 24.00 min Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 6 Off-1 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 3.819 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.20 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 2,749 cuft Drainage area = 2.620 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 1.822 in/hr Tc by User = 12.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 13 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-1 Hyd. No. 6 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 6 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 7 Off-2 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 3.236 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.20 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 2,330 cuft Drainage area = 2.220 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 1.822 in/hr Tc by User = 12.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 14 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-2 Hyd. No. 7 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 7 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 8 Off-3 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 4.693 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.20 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 3,379 cuft Drainage area = 3.220 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 1.822 in/hr Tc by User = 12.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 15 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-3 Hyd. No. 8 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 8 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 9 Off-4 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 1.510 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.17 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 906 cuft Drainage area = 0.920 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.051 in/hr Tc by User = 10.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 16 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-4 Hyd. No. 9 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 9 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 10 Off-5 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 1.909 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.22 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 1,489 cuft Drainage area = 1.380 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 1.730 in/hr Tc by User = 13.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 17 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-5 Hyd. No. 10 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 10 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 11 Off-6 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 3.198 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.15 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 1,727 cuft Drainage area = 1.820 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.197 in/hr Tc by User = 9.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 18 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-6 Hyd. No. 11 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 11 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 12 Off-7 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 6.355 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.13 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 3,050 cuft Drainage area = 3.350 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.371 in/hr Tc by User = 8.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 19 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 7.00 7.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-7 Hyd. No. 12 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 12 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 13 Off-8 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 8.524 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.12 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 3,580 cuft Drainage area = 4.120 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.586 in/hr Tc by User = 7.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 20 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-8 Hyd. No. 13 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 13 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 14 Murdochs Pond 1 Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 1.328 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.23 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 526 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 11 - Off-6 Max. Elevation = 4740.40 ft Reservoir name = Murdochs 1 Max. Storage = 1,396 cuft Storage Indication method used. 21 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Murdochs Pond 1 Hyd. No. 14 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 14 Hyd No. 11 Total storage used = 1,396 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 15 Murdochs Pond 2 Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 1.814 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.23 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 1,252 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 10 - Off-5 Max. Elevation = 4739.11 ft Reservoir name = Murdochs 2 Max. Storage = 341 cuft Storage Indication method used. 22 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Murdochs Pond 2 Hyd. No. 15 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 15 Hyd No. 10 Total storage used = 341 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 16 Murdochs Pond 3 Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 1.622 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.18 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 482 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 9 - Off-4 Max. Elevation = 4739.58 ft Reservoir name = Murdochs 3 Max. Storage = 455 cuft Storage Indication method used. 23 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Murdochs Pond 3 Hyd. No. 16 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 9 Total storage used = 455 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 17 Murdochs Pond 4 Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 3.870 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.23 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 3,379 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 8 - Off-3 Max. Elevation = 4734.26 ft Reservoir name = Murdochs 4 Max. Storage = 398 cuft Storage Indication method used. 24 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Murdochs Pond 4 Hyd. No. 17 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 17 Hyd No. 8 Total storage used = 398 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 18 Murdochs Pond 1 & 2 Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 6.870 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.13 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 4,829 cuft Inflow hyds.= 12, 14, 15 Contrib. drain. area = 3.350 ac 25 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 7.00 7.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Murdochs Pond 1 & 2 Hyd. No. 18 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 18 Hyd No. 12 Hyd No. 14 Hyd No. 15 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 19 Space Bank Pond 2 Comb Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.000 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = n/a Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 0 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 18 - Murdochs Pond 1 & 2 Max. Elevation = 4721.31 ft Reservoir name = Space Bank 2 Max. Storage = 4,829 cuft Storage Indication method used. 26 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 7.00 7.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Space Bank Pond 2 Comb Hyd. No. 19 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 19 Hyd No. 18 Total storage used = 4,829 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 20 SB Pond 1 Comb Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 8.524 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.12 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 3,580 cuft Inflow hyds.= 13, 19 Contrib. drain. area = 4.120 ac 27 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) SB Pond 1 Comb Hyd. No. 20 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 19 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 21 SB Pond 1 Combined Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.000 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = n/a Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 0 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 20 - SB Pond 1 Comb Max. Elevation = 4716.21 ft Reservoir name = Space Bank 1 Max. Storage = 3,580 cuft Storage Indication method used. 28 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) SB Pond 1 Combined Hyd. No. 21 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 21 Hyd No. 20 Total storage used = 3,580 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 22 Pre-3 Combined Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 10.30 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.20 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 26,368 cuft Inflow hyds.= 3, 7, 16, 17 Contrib. drain. area = 51.420 ac 29 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 12.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Pre-3 Combined Hyd. No. 22 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 22 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 7 Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 17 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 23 Pre-5 Combined Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 4.980 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 0.20 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 6,093 cuft Inflow hyds.= 5, 6 Contrib. drain. area = 12.620 ac 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Pre-5 Combined Hyd. No. 23 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 23 Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 6 Hydrograph Summary Report 31 Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Hyd. Inflow Maximum Total Hydrograph No. type flow interval Peak volume hyd(s) elevation strge used Description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft)(cuft) 1 Rational 5.962 1 29 10,375 ------------------PRE-1 2 Rational 8.264 1 43 21,320 ------------------PRE-2 3 Rational 9.499 1 43 24,508 ------------------PRE-3 4 Rational 1.066 1 23 1,471 ------------------PRE-4 5 Rational 2.804 1 24 4,038 ------------------PRE-5 6 Rational 4.580 1 12 3,297 ------------------Off-1 7 Rational 3.880 1 12 2,794 ------------------Off-2 8 Rational 5.628 1 12 4,052 ------------------Off-3 9 Rational 1.807 1 10 1,084 ------------------Off-4 10 Rational 2.292 1 13 1,788 ------------------Off-5 11 Rational 3.824 1 9 2,065 ------------------Off-6 12 Rational 7.591 1 8 3,643 ------------------Off-7 13 Rational 10.17 1 7 4,271 ------------------Off-8 14 Reservoir 1.961 1 13 864 11 4740.43 1,490 Murdochs Pond 1 15 Reservoir 2.178 1 14 1,550 10 4739.13 362 Murdochs Pond 2 16 Reservoir 2.030 1 10 661 9 4739.59 463 Murdochs Pond 3 17 Reservoir 4.428 1 15 4,052 8 4734.53 578 Murdochs Pond 4 18 Combine 8.577 1 8 6,058 12, 14, 15,------------Murdochs Pond 1 & 2 19 Reservoir 0.000 1 n/a 0 18 4721.59 6,058 Space Bank Pond 2 Comb 20 Combine 10.17 1 7 4,271 13, 19 ------------SB Pond 1 Comb 21 Reservoir 0.000 1 n/a 0 20 4716.36 4,271 SB Pond 1 Combined 22 Combine 12.16 1 12 32,015 3, 7, 16, 17, ------------Pre-3 Combined 23 Combine 5.982 1 12 7,335 5, 6,------------Pre-5 Combined Pre-development and offsite.gpw Return Period: 25 Year Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 1 PRE-1 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 5.962 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.48 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 10,375 cuft Drainage area = 24.000 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.2 Intensity = 1.242 in/hr Tc by TR55 = 29.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 32 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) PRE-1 Hyd. No. 1 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 1 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 2 PRE-2 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 8.264 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.72 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 21,320 cuft Drainage area = 42.800 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.2 Intensity = 0.965 in/hr Tc by TR55 = 43.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 33 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) PRE-2 Hyd. No. 2 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 2 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 3 PRE-3 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 9.499 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.72 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 24,508 cuft Drainage area = 49.200 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.2 Intensity = 0.965 in/hr Tc by TR55 = 43.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 34 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) PRE-3 Hyd. No. 3 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 3 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 4 PRE-4 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 1.066 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.38 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 1,471 cuft Drainage area = 3.700 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.2 Intensity = 1.441 in/hr Tc by TR55 = 23.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) PRE-4 Hyd. No. 4 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 4 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 5 PRE-5 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 2.804 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.40 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 4,038 cuft Drainage area = 10.000 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.2 Intensity = 1.402 in/hr Tc by TR55 = 24.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) PRE-5 Hyd. No. 5 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 5 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 6 Off-1 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 4.580 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.20 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 3,297 cuft Drainage area = 2.620 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.185 in/hr Tc by User = 12.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 37 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-1 Hyd. No. 6 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 6 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 7 Off-2 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 3.880 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.20 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 2,794 cuft Drainage area = 2.220 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.185 in/hr Tc by User = 12.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 38 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-2 Hyd. No. 7 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 7 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 8 Off-3 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 5.628 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.20 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 4,052 cuft Drainage area = 3.220 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.185 in/hr Tc by User = 12.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 39 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-3 Hyd. No. 8 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 8 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 9 Off-4 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 1.807 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.17 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 1,084 cuft Drainage area = 0.920 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.455 in/hr Tc by User = 10.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 40 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-4 Hyd. No. 9 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 9 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 10 Off-5 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 2.292 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.22 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 1,788 cuft Drainage area = 1.380 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.076 in/hr Tc by User = 13.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 41 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-5 Hyd. No. 10 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 10 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 11 Off-6 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 3.824 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.15 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 2,065 cuft Drainage area = 1.820 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.627 in/hr Tc by User = 9.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 42 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-6 Hyd. No. 11 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 11 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 12 Off-7 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 7.591 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.13 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 3,643 cuft Drainage area = 3.350 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 2.832 in/hr Tc by User = 8.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 43 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-7 Hyd. No. 12 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 12 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 13 Off-8 Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 10.17 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.12 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 4,271 cuft Drainage area = 4.120 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.8 Intensity = 3.085 in/hr Tc by User = 7.00 min IDF Curve = COB Rainfall.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 44 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 12.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Off-8 Hyd. No. 13 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 13 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 14 Murdochs Pond 1 Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 1.961 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.22 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 864 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 11 - Off-6 Max. Elevation = 4740.43 ft Reservoir name = Murdochs 1 Max. Storage = 1,490 cuft Storage Indication method used. 45 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Murdochs Pond 1 Hyd. No. 14 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 14 Hyd No. 11 Total storage used = 1,490 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 15 Murdochs Pond 2 Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 2.178 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.23 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 1,550 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 10 - Off-5 Max. Elevation = 4739.13 ft Reservoir name = Murdochs 2 Max. Storage = 362 cuft Storage Indication method used. 46 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Murdochs Pond 2 Hyd. No. 15 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 15 Hyd No. 10 Total storage used = 362 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 16 Murdochs Pond 3 Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 2.030 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.17 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 661 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 9 - Off-4 Max. Elevation = 4739.59 ft Reservoir name = Murdochs 3 Max. Storage = 463 cuft Storage Indication method used. 47 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Murdochs Pond 3 Hyd. No. 16 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 9 Total storage used = 463 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 17 Murdochs Pond 4 Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 4.428 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.25 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 4,052 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 8 - Off-3 Max. Elevation = 4734.53 ft Reservoir name = Murdochs 4 Max. Storage = 578 cuft Storage Indication method used. 48 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Murdochs Pond 4 Hyd. No. 17 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 17 Hyd No. 8 Total storage used = 578 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 18 Murdochs Pond 1 & 2 Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 8.577 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.13 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 6,058 cuft Inflow hyds.= 12, 14, 15 Contrib. drain. area = 3.350 ac 49 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Murdochs Pond 1 & 2 Hyd. No. 18 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 18 Hyd No. 12 Hyd No. 14 Hyd No. 15 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 19 Space Bank Pond 2 Comb Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.000 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = n/a Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 0 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 18 - Murdochs Pond 1 & 2 Max. Elevation = 4721.59 ft Reservoir name = Space Bank 2 Max. Storage = 6,058 cuft Storage Indication method used. 50 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Space Bank Pond 2 Comb Hyd. No. 19 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 19 Hyd No. 18 Total storage used = 6,058 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 20 SB Pond 1 Comb Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 10.17 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.12 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 4,271 cuft Inflow hyds.= 13, 19 Contrib. drain. area = 4.120 ac 51 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 12.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) SB Pond 1 Comb Hyd. No. 20 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 19 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 21 SB Pond 1 Combined Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.000 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = n/a Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 0 cuft Inflow hyd. No.= 20 - SB Pond 1 Comb Max. Elevation = 4716.36 ft Reservoir name = Space Bank 1 Max. Storage = 4,271 cuft Storage Indication method used. 52 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 12.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) SB Pond 1 Combined Hyd. No. 21 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 21 Hyd No. 20 Total storage used = 4,271 cuft Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 22 Pre-3 Combined Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 12.16 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.20 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 32,015 cuft Inflow hyds.= 3, 7, 16, 17 Contrib. drain. area = 51.420 ac 53 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 12.00 14.00 14.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Pre-3 Combined Hyd. No. 22 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 22 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 7 Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 17 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® 2019 by Autodesk, Inc. v2019.2 Tuesday, 11 / 10 / 2020 Hyd. No. 23 Pre-5 Combined Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 5.982 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time to peak = 0.20 hrs Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 7,335 cuft Inflow hyds.= 5, 6 Contrib. drain. area = 12.620 ac 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 Q (cfs) Time (hrs) Pre-5 Combined Hyd. No. 23 -- 25 Year Hyd No. 23 Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 6 Appendix B Supporting Information and Calculations Job #: 14-167 Engineer: Hunter Morrical Date: 11/17/17 Calculation of Required Volume for Storm Detention Pond Pond ID Pond 1 Accepts flow from basins Basin 1 (Reference: Bozeman Stormwater Master Plan - 1982) Design Rainfall Freq. 10 year (see page III - 5 of master plan) IDF coefficient a 0.64 IDF coefficient b IDF coefficient n 0.65 Pre-development Calculations Post-development Calculations C C Areas (ft2): open space 264,390 0.20 Areas (ft 2): open space 76,673 0.20 med. res.0.35 med. res. 0.35 dense res.0.50 dense res. 0.50 comm. neigh.0.60 comm. neigh. 0.60 comm. down.0.80 comm. down. 0.80 Pavement 0.98 Pavement 187,717 0.98 Total: 264,390 Total: 264,390 total area: 6.07 acres total area: 6.07 acres composite C: 0.20 composite C: 0.75 Overland tc Overland tc average slope: 1 percent average slope:1 percent travel distance: 100 feet travel distance:21 feet tc: 17 minutes tc:3 minutes Channel tc Channel tc channel tc: 19.8 minutes channel tc:16 minutes Total tc: 37 minutes Total tc: 19 minutes intensity at tc (fig 23): 0.88 in/hr intensity at tc (fig 23): 1.35 in/hr pre-devel peak runoff: 1.07 cfs post-devel peak runoff: 6.19 cfs Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Runoff Release Required (minutes)(in/hr) Rate (cfs) Volume (cf) Volume (cf) Storage (cf) 19 1.35 6.19 7044 1218 5826 21 1.27 5.80 7296 1347 5949 23 1.19 5.47 7532 1475 6057 25 1.13 5.18 7756 1604 6152 27 1.08 4.92 7968 1732 6235 29 1.03 4.70 8170 1861 6309 31 0.98 4.50 8363 1989 6374 33 0.94 4.32 8548 2118 6430 35 0.91 4.16 8726 2246 6480 37 0.88 4.01 8898 2375 6523 39 0.85 3.88 9063 2503 6560 41 0.82 3.75 9223 2632 6592 43 0.80 3.64 9379 2760 6618 45 0.77 3.53 9529 2889 6640 47 0.75 3.43 9675 3017 6658 49 0.73 3.34 9818 3146 6672 51 0.71 3.26 9956 3274 6682 required detention storage (ft3) = 6,682 detention pond COB Job #: 14-167 - Pond 1 Engineer: Hunter Morrical Date: 11/17/17 Calculation of Required Volume for Storage of first Half-Inch of Rain Q 0.050641 runoff (inches) P 0.5 Rainfall (inches) S 0.984182 Potential max retention after runoff begins (1 CN 91 I/P should be 0.5 for small rainfalls I 0.25 start with I = 0.2S Area 6.07 acres I/P always between 0.1 and 0.5 I/P 0.5 Volume to Be Retained ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐> Volume 1116 CF CN Area acres open space (boulevards)74 76673 1.76 soil group C Street 98 187717 4.31 Weighted Curve number 91 264390 6.07 1000/CN‐10) Job #: 14-167 Engineer: Hunter Morrical Date: 11/17/17 Calculation of Required Volume for Storm Detention Pond Pond ID Pond 2 Accepts flow from basins Basin 2 (Reference: Bozeman Stormwater Master Plan - 1982) Design Rainfall Freq. 10 year (see page III - 5 of master plan) IDF coefficient a 0.64 IDF coefficient b IDF coefficient n 0.65 Pre-development Calculations Post-development Calculations C C Areas (ft2): open space 156,949 0.20 Areas (ft 2): open space 48,654 0.20 med. res.0.35 med. res. 0.35 dense res.0.50 dense res. 0.50 comm. neigh.0.60 comm. neigh. 0.60 comm. down.0.80 comm. down. 0.80 Pavement 0.98 Pavement 108,295 0.98 Total: 156,949 Total: 156,949 total area: 3.60 acres total area: 3.60 acres composite C: 0.20 composite C: 0.74 Overland tc Overland tc average slope: 1 percent average slope: 1 percent travel distance: 100 feet travel distance: 12.5 feet tc: 17 minutes tc: 2 minutes Channel tc Channel tc channel tc: 17 minutes channel tc: 15 minutes Total tc: 34 minutes Total tc: 17 minutes intensity at tc (fig 23): 0.93 in/hr intensity at tc (fig 23): 1.43 in/hr pre-devel peak runoff: 0.67 cfs post-devel peak runoff: 3.81 cfs Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Runoff Release Required (minutes)(in/hr) Rate (cfs) Volume (cf) Volume (cf) Storage (cf) 17 1.43 3.81 3973 698 3274 19 1.33 3.55 4127 779 3348 21 1.25 3.33 4271 859 3412 23 1.18 3.14 4407 939 3468 25 1.12 2.98 4535 1020 3516 27 1.07 2.83 4657 1100 3557 29 1.02 2.71 4774 1180 3593 31 0.98 2.59 4885 1261 3624 33 0.94 2.49 4992 1341 3651 35 0.90 2.40 5094 1421 3673 37 0.87 2.31 5193 1502 3692 39 0.84 2.24 5289 1582 3707 41 0.81 2.17 5381 1662 3719 43 0.79 2.10 5471 1743 3728 45 0.77 2.04 5558 1823 3735 47 0.75 1.98 5642 1903 3739 49 0.73 1.93 5725 1984 3741 required detention storage (ft3) = 3,741 detention pond COB Job #: 14-167 - Pond 2 Engineer: Hunter Morrical Date: 11/17/17 Calculation of Required Volume for Storage of first Half-Inch of Rain Q 0.04836 runoff (inches) P 0.5 Rainfall (inches) S 1.042399 Potential max retention after runoff begins (1 CN 91 I/P should be 0.5 for small rainfalls I 0.25 start with I = 0.2S Area 3.60 acres I/P always between 0.1 and 0.5 I/P 0.5 Volume to Be Retained ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐> Volume 633 CF CN Area acres open space (boulevards)74 48654 1.12 soil group C Street 98 108295 2.49 Weighted Curve number 91 156949 3.60 1000/CN‐10) Job #: 14-167 Engineer: Hunter Morrical Date: 11/17/17 Calculation of Required Volume for Storm Detention Pond Pond ID Pond 3 Accepts flow from basins Basin 3 (Reference: Bozeman Stormwater Master Plan - 1982) Design Rainfall Freq. 10 year (see page III - 5 of master plan) IDF coefficient a 0.64 IDF coefficient b IDF coefficient n 0.65 Pre-development Calculations Post-development Calculations C C Areas (ft2): open space 82,052 0.20 Areas (ft2): open space 27,898 0.20 med. res.0.35 med. res.0.35 dense res.0.50 dense res.0.50 comm. neigh.0.60 comm. neigh.0.60 comm. down.0.80 comm. down.0.80 Pavement 0.98 Pavement 54,154 0.98 Total: 82,052 Total: 82,052 total area: 1.90 acres total area: 1.90 acres composite C: 0.20 composite C: 0.71 Overland tc Overland tc average slope: 1 percent average slope:1 percent travel distance: 100 feet travel distance:21 feet tc: 17 minutes tc:3 minutes Channel tc Channel tc channel tc: 6 minutes channel tc:6.7 minutes Total tc: 23 minutes Total tc: 10 minutes intensity at tc (fig 23): 1.20 in/hr intensity at tc (fig 23): 2.05 in/hr pre-devel peak runoff: 0.46 cfs post-devel peak runoff: 2.79 cfs Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Runoff Release Required (minutes)(in/hr) Rate (cfs) Volume (cf) Volume (cf) Storage (cf) 10 2.05 2.79 1671 273 1398 12 1.82 2.47 1782 328 1453 14 1.65 2.24 1880 383 1497 16 1.51 2.05 1970 438 1533 18 1.40 1.90 2053 492 1561 20 1.31 1.78 2130 547 1583 22 1.23 1.67 2203 602 1601 24 1.16 1.58 2271 656 1614 26 1.10 1.50 2335 711 1624 28 1.05 1.43 2397 766 1631 30 1.00 1.36 2455 820 1635 32 0.96 1.31 2511 875 1636 34 0.93 1.26 2565 930 1635 36 0.89 1.21 2617 984 1632 38 0.86 1.17 2667 1039 1628 40 0.83 1.13 2715 1094 1621 42 0.81 1.10 2762 1149 1613 required detention storage (ft3) = 1,636 detention pond COB Job #: 14-167 - Pond 3 Engineer: Hunter Morrical Date: 11/17/17 Calculation of Required Volume for Storage of first Half-Inch of Rain Q 0.04526 runoff (inches) P 0.5 Rainfall (inches) S 1.130911 Potential max retention after runoff begins (1 CN 90 I/P should be 0.5 for small rainfalls I 0.25 start with I = 0.2S Area 1.90 acres I/P always between 0.1 and 0.5 I/P 0.5 Volume to Be Retained ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐> Volume 312 CF CN Area acres open space (boulevards)74 27898 0.64 soil group C Street 98 54154 1.24 Weighted Curve number 90 82052 1.88 Riprap Sizing for Culvert Aprons From Equation 10.4 in HEC‐14 Third Edition D50 Riprap size (ft) Q Design Discharge (ft^3/s) D Culvert Diameter ‐ Circular (ft) TW Tailwater Depth (ft) g acceleration due to gravity 32.2 ft/sec^2 D Q TW D50 (ft) D50 (in) 1.5 11.8 0.6 0.52 6 1.5 6.2 0.6 0.22 3 1.25 2.7 0.5 0.11 1 Input Output ܦ 0.2ܦ ܦ . /ܦ Note: Refer to page 10‐17 ofHEC‐14 Third Edition for additional information. Adjustments to be made for supercritical flow in the culvert. Tailwater depth should be limited to between 0.4D and 1.0D. If tailwater is unknown use 0.4D. Appendix C Post Development Model Outputs Post Development Model Outputs 10‐year Design Event Project Options CFS Elevation Rational SCS TR-55 Hydrodynamic YES NO Analysis Options Mar 28, 2017 00:00:00 Mar 29, 2017 00:00:00 Mar 28, 2017 00:00:00 0 days 0 01:00:00 days hh:mm:ss 0 00:05:00 days hh:mm:ss 0 00:05:00 days hh:mm:ss 30 seconds Rainfall Details 10 year(s) Runoff (Wet Weather) Time Step ........................................ Reporting Time Step ............................................................ Routing Time Step ................................................................ Return Period........................................................................ Skip Steady State Analysis Time Periods ............................ Start Analysis On .................................................................. End Analysis On ................................................................... Start Reporting On ................................................................ Antecedent Dry Days ............................................................ Runoff (Dry Weather) Time Step .......................................... Flow Units ............................................................................. Elevation Type ...................................................................... Hydrology Method ................................................................. Time of Concentration (TOC) Method .................................. Link Routing Method ............................................................. Enable Overflow Ponding at Nodes ...................................... Subbasin Summary SN Subbasin Area Weighted Total Total Total Peak Time of ID Runoff Rainfall Runoff Runoff Runoff Concentration Coefficient Volume (ac) (in) (in) (ac-in) (cfs) (days hh:mm:ss) 1 CUL-RDA-5+50 12.16 0.2000 0.48 0.10 1.17 2.68 0 00:26:00 2 CUL-RDB19+25 10.98 0.2000 0.39 0.08 0.85 3.62 0 00:14:00 3 OFF-1 2.62 0.8000 0.36 0.29 0.77 3.82 0 00:12:00 4 OFF-2 2.20 0.8000 0.36 0.29 0.64 3.21 0 00:12:00 5 OFF-3 3.22 0.8000 0.36 0.29 0.94 4.69 0 00:12:00 6 OFF-4 0.92 0.8000 0.34 0.27 0.25 1.49 0 00:10:12 7 OFF-5 1.38 0.8000 0.37 0.30 0.41 1.91 0 00:13:01 8 OFF-6 1.82 0.8000 0.33 0.26 0.48 3.20 0 00:09:00 9 OFF-7 3.35 0.8000 0.32 0.25 0.84 6.46 0 00:07:48 10 OFF-8 4.12 0.8000 0.30 0.24 1.00 8.37 0 00:07:12 11 RDA11+10L 0.89 0.7600 0.38 0.29 0.25 1.17 0 00:13:00 12 RDA11+10R 0.89 0.7600 0.38 0.29 0.25 1.17 0 00:13:00 13 RDB21+50L 0.76 0.7600 0.34 0.26 0.20 1.19 0 00:10:00 14 RDB21+50R 0.76 0.7600 0.34 0.26 0.20 1.19 0 00:10:00 15 RDB7+20L 0.33 0.7600 0.33 0.25 0.08 0.55 0 00:09:00 16 RDB7+20R 0.33 0.7600 0.33 0.25 0.08 0.55 0 00:09:00 17 RDB9+70L 0.28 0.7600 0.32 0.24 0.07 0.51 0 00:08:00 18 RDB9+70R 0.28 0.7600 0.32 0.24 0.07 0.51 0 00:08:00 19 ST-WHT15+30L 10.00 0.2000 0.41 0.08 0.82 2.93 0 00:16:48 20 ST-WHT23+30L 7.56 0.2000 0.41 0.08 0.62 2.20 0 00:17:00 21 Sub-25 0.86 0.8000 0.34 0.27 0.23 1.41 0 00:10:00 22 Sub-4-B 10.00 0.2000 0.41 0.08 0.82 2.91 0 00:17:00 23 WHT15+30L 1.54 0.7000 0.43 0.30 0.46 1.46 0 00:19:00 24 WHT15+30R 1.54 0.7000 0.43 0.30 0.46 1.46 0 00:19:00 25 WHT23+30L 1.08 0.7000 0.39 0.28 0.30 1.19 0 00:15:00 26 WHT23+30R 1.14 0.7000 0.39 0.28 0.31 1.26 0 00:15:00 27 WHT30+70L 0.95 0.7000 0.34 0.24 0.23 1.36 0 00:10:00 28 WHT30+70R 0.95 0.7000 0.34 0.24 0.23 1.36 0 00:10:00 Node Summary SN Element Element Invert Ground/Rim Initial Surcharge Ponded Peak Max HGL Max Min Time of Total Total Time ID Type Elevation (Max) Water Elevation Area Inflow Elevation Surcharge Freeboard Peak Flooded Flooded Elevation Elevation Attained Depth Attained Flooding Volume Attained Occurrence (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft²) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (days hh:mm) (ac-in) (min) 1 Jun-02 Junction 4710.20 4713.14 0.00 4713.14 0.00 2.93 4711.22 0.00 1.92 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 2 Jun-03 Junction 4699.50 4705.00 0.00 4705.00 0.00 2.20 4700.46 0.00 4.54 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 3 Jun-04 Junction 4729.00 4731.00 0.00 9460.00 0.00 2.46 4729.36 0.00 1.64 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 4 Jun-07 Junction 4697.07 4702.06 0.00 4701.00 0.00 12.78 4698.94 0.00 3.12 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 5 Jun-08 Junction 4695.79 4701.32 0.00 4701.00 0.00 12.67 4697.31 0.00 4.00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 6 Jun-09 Junction 4685.57 4690.50 0.00 4691.00 0.00 12.77 4687.23 0.00 3.27 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 7 Jun-10 Junction 4679.90 4684.45 0.00 4685.00 0.00 15.82 4682.27 0.00 2.18 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 8 Jun-12_10+87 Junction 4699.53 4706.60 0.00 4712.00 0.00 9.48 4701.33 0.00 5.28 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 9 Jun-15 Junction 4715.50 4719.50 0.00 4719.50 0.00 0.00 4715.50 0.00 4.00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 10 Jun-21 Junction 4737.00 4742.00 0.00 4742.00 0.00 3.28 4737.47 0.00 4.53 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 11 JUN-MUR-3 Junction 4737.00 4741.00 0.00 4741.00 0.00 1.12 4737.17 0.00 3.83 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 12 RDA10+30 Junction 4705.03 4713.71 0.00 4713.71 0.00 11.90 4706.91 0.00 6.80 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 13 RDA12+00 Junction 4708.61 4713.29 0.00 4713.29 0.00 4.78 4709.80 0.00 3.48 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 14 RDA6+05 Junction 4719.30 4730.19 0.00 4730.19 0.00 10.45 4720.52 0.00 9.67 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 15 RDB19+60 Junction 4696.96 4702.22 0.00 4702.22 0.00 5.17 4698.04 0.00 4.18 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 16 RDB2+60 Junction 4728.76 4733.55 0.00 4733.55 0.00 3.90 4729.45 0.00 4.11 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 17 RDB4+00 Junction 4727.22 4732.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.21 4727.94 0.00 4.06 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 18 RDB-5+00 Junction 4726.67 4731.51 0.00 4731.51 0.00 6.85 4727.49 0.00 4.02 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 19 SWL-1_MH2+32 Junction 4713.10 4717.75 0.00 4717.00 0.00 0.00 4713.10 0.00 4.65 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 20 SWL-2_6+28 Junction 4710.31 4714.47 0.00 4716.00 0.00 0.00 4710.31 0.00 4.16 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 21 SWL-3_8+37 Junction 4709.61 4714.14 0.00 4715.00 0.00 2.68 4710.12 0.00 4.02 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 22 SWL-5_9+25 Junction 4700.90 4710.57 0.00 4713.00 0.00 9.14 4702.90 0.00 7.79 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 23 WH-15+75 Junction 4709.31 4712.02 0.00 4712.02 0.00 4.80 4710.35 0.00 1.67 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 24 WH23+70 Junction 4697.93 4702.46 0.00 4702.46 0.00 4.40 4699.01 0.00 3.44 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 25 OFFSITE-11 Outfall 4674.51 0.44 4674.64 26 OFFSITE-12 Outfall 4675.09 0.38 4675.21 27 Out-01 Outfall 4679.00 15.41 4680.49 28 Diversion-01 Flow Diversions 4704.85 4709.00 0.00 12.00 18.27 4706.42 0.00 0.00 29 MurdPond1 Storage Node 4739.83 4742.00 0.00 0.00 3.20 4740.44 0.00 0.00 30 MurdPond2 Storage Node 4738.50 4741.00 0.00 0.00 1.91 4739.38 0.00 0.00 31 MurdPond3 Storage Node 4738.00 4741.00 0.00 0.00 1.49 4739.77 0.00 0.00 32 MurdPond4 Storage Node 4733.50 4736.00 0.00 0.00 4.69 4734.26 0.00 0.00 33 POND-1 Storage Node 4704.50 4707.00 0.00 0.00 10.50 4706.28 0.00 0.00 34 POND-2 Storage Node 4689.50 4693.00 0.00 0.00 5.17 4690.34 0.00 0.00 35 POND-3 Storage Node 4682.50 4685.00 0.00 0.00 2.25 4683.25 0.00 0.00 36 SBPond1 Storage Node 4715.00 4718.50 0.00 0.00 8.36 4716.18 0.00 0.00 37 SBPond2 Storage Node 4719.50 4722.00 0.00 0.00 6.46 4721.18 0.00 0.00 Inlet Summary SN Element Inlet Manufacturer Inlet Number of Catchbasin Max (Rim) Initial Ponded Peak Peak Flow Peak Flow Inlet Allowable Max Gutter Max Gutter ID Manufacturer Part Location Inlets Invert Elevation Water Area Flow Intercepted Bypassing Efficiency Spread Spread Water Elev. Number Elevation Elevation by Inlet during Peak during Peak during Peak Inlet Flow Flow Flow (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft²) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 RDA11+10N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4707.91 4712.54 0.00 0.00 1.17 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 5.44 4712.75 2 RDA11+10S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 2 4708.15 4712.54 4708.29 0.00 1.82 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 5.64 4712.75 3 RDA8+30 FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4716.50 4724.07 0.00 N/A 2.99 1.98 1.01 66.25 9.50 5.52 4724.28 4 RDB20+55N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4698.03 4700.72 0.00 0.00 1.18 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 5.48 4700.93 5 RDB20+55S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4697.36 4700.72 4697.86 0.00 1.18 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 5.48 4700.93 6 RDB7+20E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 2 4719.71 4729.64 0.00 N/A 4.19 2.97 1.22 70.88 9.50 8.33 4729.94 7 RDB7+20W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4720.58 4729.73 0.00 N/A 0.55 0.49 0.07 88.12 9.50 3.47 4729.88 8 RDB9+70E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4722.55 4727.57 4722.55 0.00 0.50 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 2.49 4727.67 9 RDB9+70W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4723.00 4727.18 4723.00 0.00 0.50 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 2.49 4727.27 10 WH-15+35E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4709.45 4712.27 4709.25 N/A 1.46 1.05 0.41 71.93 9.50 5.42 4712.48 11 WH-15+35W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4710.03 4712.27 4709.40 N/A 1.46 1.05 0.41 71.93 9.50 5.42 4712.48 12 WH23+35E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4698.07 4702.97 4698.07 N/A 1.53 1.09 0.44 71.11 9.50 5.54 4703.18 13 WH23+35W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4698.39 4702.96 4698.39 N/A 1.46 1.05 0.41 71.86 9.50 5.43 4703.18 14 WH30+70N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4684.51 4688.22 4684.51 N/A 1.53 1.09 0.44 71.13 9.50 5.54 4688.44 15 WH30+70S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4685.09 4688.22 4685.09 N/A 1.52 1.08 0.44 71.27 9.50 5.52 4688.43 Junction Input SN Element Invert Ground/Rim Ground/Rim Initial Initial Surcharge Surcharge Ponded Minimum ID Elevation (Max) (Max) Water Water Elevation Depth Area Pipe Elevation Offset Elevation Depth Cover (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft²) (in) 1 Jun-02 4710.20 4713.14 2.94 0.00 -4710.20 4713.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Jun-03 4699.50 4705.00 5.50 0.00 -4699.50 4705.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 Jun-04 4729.00 4731.00 2.00 0.00 -4729.00 9460.00 4729.00 0.00 0.00 4 Jun-07 4697.07 4702.06 4.99 0.00 -4697.07 4701.00 -1.06 0.00 0.00 5 Jun-08 4695.79 4701.32 5.52 0.00 -4695.79 4701.00 -0.32 0.00 0.00 6 Jun-09 4685.57 4690.50 4.93 0.00 -4685.57 4691.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 7 Jun-10 4679.90 4684.45 4.56 0.00 -4679.90 4685.00 0.55 0.00 0.00 8 Jun-12_10+87 4699.53 4706.60 7.08 0.00 -4699.53 4712.00 5.40 0.00 0.00 9 Jun-15 4715.50 4719.50 4.00 0.00 -4715.50 4719.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 Jun-21 4737.00 4742.00 5.00 0.00 -4737.00 4742.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11 JUN-MUR-3 4737.00 4741.00 4.00 0.00 -4737.00 4741.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 RDA10+30 4705.03 4713.71 8.68 0.00 -4705.03 4713.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 13 RDA12+00 4708.61 4713.29 4.68 0.00 -4708.61 4713.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 14 RDA6+05 4719.30 4730.19 10.89 0.00 -4719.30 4730.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 RDB19+60 4696.96 4702.22 5.26 0.00 -4696.96 4702.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 16 RDB2+60 4728.76 4733.55 4.79 0.00 -4728.76 4733.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 17 RDB4+00 4727.22 4732.00 4.78 0.00 -4727.22 0.00 -4732.00 0.00 0.00 18 RDB-5+00 4726.67 4731.51 4.84 0.00 -4726.67 4731.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 SWL-1_MH2+32 4713.10 4717.75 4.65 0.00 -4713.10 4717.00 -0.75 0.00 0.00 20 SWL-2_6+28 4710.31 4714.47 4.16 0.00 -4710.31 4716.00 1.53 0.00 0.00 21 SWL-3_8+37 4709.61 4714.14 4.53 0.00 -4709.61 4715.00 0.86 0.00 0.00 22 SWL-5_9+25 4700.90 4710.57 9.67 0.00 -4700.90 4713.00 2.43 0.00 0.00 23 WH-15+75 4709.31 4712.02 2.71 0.00 -4709.31 4712.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 24 WH23+70 4697.93 4702.46 4.52 0.00 -4697.93 4702.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 Junction Results SN Element Peak Peak Max HGL Max HGL Max Min Average HGL Average HGL Time of Time of Total Total Time ID Inflow Lateral Elevation Depth Surcharge Freeboard Elevation Depth Max HGL Peak Flooded Flooded Inflow Attained Attained Depth Attained Attained Attained Occurrence Flooding Volume Attained Occurrence (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (days hh:mm) (days hh:mm) (ac-in) (min) 1 Jun-02 2.93 2.93 4711.22 1.02 0.00 1.92 4710.22 0.02 0 00:17 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 2 Jun-03 2.20 2.20 4700.46 0.96 0.00 4.54 4699.52 0.02 0 00:17 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 3 Jun-04 2.46 1.41 4729.36 0.36 0.00 1.64 4729.01 0.01 0 00:05 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 4 Jun-07 12.78 3.62 4698.94 1.87 0.00 3.12 4697.91 0.84 0 00:15 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 5 Jun-08 12.67 0.00 4697.31 1.52 0.00 4.00 4696.61 0.82 0 00:16 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 6 Jun-09 12.77 0.00 4687.23 1.66 0.00 3.27 4686.43 0.86 0 00:16 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 7 Jun-10 15.82 2.91 4682.27 2.37 0.00 2.18 4680.80 0.90 0 00:18 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 8 Jun-12_10+87 9.48 0.00 4701.33 1.80 0.00 5.28 4700.38 0.85 0 00:24 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 9 Jun-15 0.00 0.00 4715.50 0.00 0.00 4.00 4715.50 0.00 0 00:00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 10 Jun-21 3.28 0.00 4737.47 0.47 0.00 4.53 4737.01 0.01 0 00:14 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 11 JUN-MUR-3 1.12 0.00 4737.17 0.17 0.00 3.83 4737.01 0.01 0 00:17 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 12 RDA10+30 11.90 0.00 4706.91 1.88 0.00 6.80 4705.12 0.09 0 00:13 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 13 RDA12+00 4.78 0.00 4709.80 1.19 0.00 3.48 4708.63 0.02 0 00:18 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 14 RDA6+05 10.45 0.00 4720.52 1.22 0.00 9.67 4719.32 0.02 0 00:13 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 15 RDB19+60 5.17 0.00 4698.04 1.08 0.00 4.18 4696.98 0.02 0 00:16 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 16 RDB2+60 3.90 0.00 4729.45 0.69 0.00 4.11 4728.77 0.01 0 00:14 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 17 RDB4+00 3.21 3.21 4727.94 0.72 0.00 4.06 4727.23 0.01 0 00:12 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 18 RDB-5+00 6.85 0.00 4727.49 0.82 0.00 4.02 4726.69 0.02 0 00:12 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 19 SWL-1_MH2+32 0.00 0.00 4713.10 0.00 0.00 4.65 4713.10 0.00 0 00:00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 20 SWL-2_6+28 0.00 0.00 4710.31 0.00 0.00 4.16 4710.31 0.00 0 00:00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 21 SWL-3_8+37 2.68 2.68 4710.12 0.51 0.00 4.02 4709.63 0.02 0 00:26 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 22 SWL-5_9+25 9.14 0.00 4702.90 2.00 0.00 7.79 4701.69 0.79 0 00:14 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 23 WH-15+75 4.80 0.00 4710.35 1.04 0.00 1.67 4709.33 0.02 0 00:18 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 24 WH23+70 4.40 0.00 4699.01 1.08 0.00 3.44 4697.95 0.02 0 00:17 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 Pipe Input SN Element Length Inlet Inlet Outlet Outlet Total Average Pipe Pipe Pipe Manning's Entrance Exit/Bend Additional Initial Flap ID Invert Invert Invert Invert Drop Slope Shape Diameter or Width Roughness Losses Losses Losses Flow Gate Elevation Offset Elevation Offset Height (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (in) (in) (cfs) 1 CUL-RDA5+50 88.00 4709.61 0.00 4708.69 7.79 0.92 1.0500 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 2 CUL-RDB19+25 108.00 4697.82 0.75 4696.71 0.92 1.11 1.0300 CIRCULAR 30.000 30.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 3 Link-05 370.00 4696.54 0.75 4686.52 0.95 10.02 2.7100 CIRCULAR 30.000 30.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 4 Link-06 461.00 4686.32 0.75 4680.65 0.75 5.68 1.2300 CIRCULAR 30.000 30.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 5 Link-07 400.00 4713.10 0.00 4710.81 0.50 2.29 0.5700 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 6 Link-08 513.00 4680.65 0.75 4677.50 -1.50 3.15 0.6100 CIRCULAR 30.000 30.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 7 Link-09 508.00 4700.28 0.75 4697.90 0.83 2.37 0.4700 CIRCULAR 30.000 30.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 8 Link-10 73.48 4707.91 0.00 4705.07 0.22 2.84 3.8600 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 9 Link-11 10.00 4704.85 0.00 4704.80 0.30 0.05 0.4800 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 10 Link-12 19.00 4705.50 0.65 4705.00 4.10 0.50 2.6300 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 11 Link-16 6.78 4715.50 0.00 4715.00 0.00 0.50 7.3700 Dummy 0.000 0.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 12 Link-28 420.00 4737.00 0.00 4720.00 0.50 17.00 4.0500 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 13 Link-30 209.00 4710.31 0.00 4709.67 0.06 0.64 0.3100 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 14 SD-RDA-1 190.00 4719.30 0.00 4716.70 0.20 2.60 1.3700 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 15 SD-RDA-2 230.00 4716.50 0.00 4705.53 0.50 10.97 4.7700 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 16 SD-RDA-3 60.00 4705.03 0.00 4704.85 0.00 0.18 0.3000 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 17 SD-RDA-5 33.01 4708.41 0.27 4708.06 0.15 0.36 1.0800 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 18 SD-RDA-6 83.91 4708.61 0.00 4708.31 0.17 0.30 0.3500 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 19 SD-RDA-7 159.59 4709.30 -0.01 4708.61 0.00 0.69 0.4300 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 20 SD-RDB-1 155.00 4728.76 0.00 4726.67 0.00 2.09 1.3500 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 21 SD-RDB-10 167.47 4697.93 0.00 4697.36 0.00 0.57 0.3400 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 22 SD-RDB-11 22.00 4727.22 0.00 4726.99 0.32 0.23 1.0500 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 23 SD-RDB-2 285.00 4726.67 0.00 4720.71 1.00 5.96 2.0900 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 24 SD-RDB-3 33.00 4721.33 0.75 4720.96 1.25 0.37 1.1200 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 25 SD-RDB-4 56.00 4720.46 0.75 4719.50 0.20 0.96 1.7100 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 26 SD-RDB-5 214.19 4722.55 0.00 4719.50 0.20 3.05 1.4200 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 27 SD-RDB-6 33.00 4723.00 0.00 4722.80 0.25 0.21 0.6300 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 28 SD-RDB-7 67.00 4696.96 0.00 4696.60 7.10 0.36 0.5400 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 29 SD-RDB-8 92.83 4697.36 0.00 4696.96 0.00 0.41 0.4400 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 30 SD-RDB-9 51.67 4698.03 0.00 4697.86 0.50 0.17 0.3200 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 31 SD-SWL-4 149.00 4701.65 0.75 4700.90 1.38 0.74 0.5000 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 32 SD-WH-10 46.07 4685.09 0.00 4684.76 0.25 0.33 0.7200 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 33 SD-WH-3 30.00 4710.20 0.00 4710.03 0.00 0.17 0.5700 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 34 SD-WH-4 45.99 4710.03 0.00 4709.64 0.19 0.39 0.8400 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 35 SD-WH-5 33.78 4709.45 0.00 4709.31 0.00 0.14 0.4300 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 36 SD-WH-6 69.84 4699.50 0.00 4698.89 0.50 0.61 0.8700 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 37 SD-WH-7 46.00 4698.39 0.00 4698.07 0.00 0.32 0.7000 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 38 SD-WH-8 36.10 4698.07 0.00 4697.93 0.00 0.14 0.3800 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 39 SD-WH-9 37.66 4684.51 0.00 4684.06 1.56 0.45 1.2000 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No No. of Barrels 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Pipe Results SN Element Peak Time of Design Flow Peak Flow/ Peak Flow Travel Peak Flow Peak Flow Total Time Froude Reported ID Flow Peak Flow Capacity Design Flow Velocity Time Depth Depth/ Surcharged Number Condition Occurrence Ratio Total Depth Ratio (cfs) (days hh:mm) (cfs) (ft/sec) (min) (ft) (min) 1 CUL-RDA5+50 2.65 0 00:26 23.19 0.11 4.57 0.32 0.48 0.24 0.00 Calculated 2 CUL-RDB19+25 12.67 0 00:15 41.66 0.30 6.61 0.27 1.03 0.41 0.00 Calculated 3 Link-05 12.65 0 00:16 67.50 0.19 10.16 0.61 0.75 0.30 0.00 Calculated 4 Link-06 12.74 0 00:16 45.51 0.28 5.38 1.43 1.26 0.50 0.00 Calculated 5 Link-07 0.00 0 00:00 7.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Calculated 6 Link-08 15.41 0 00:18 23.24 0.66 4.80 1.78 1.56 0.62 0.00 Calculated 7 Link-09 9.48 0 00:15 28.04 0.34 4.99 1.70 1.04 0.42 0.00 Calculated 8 Link-10 6.48 0 00:15 20.64 0.31 5.46 0.22 0.98 0.66 0.00 Calculated 9 Link-11 10.50 0 00:13 15.67 0.67 4.60 0.04 1.46 0.73 0.00 Calculated 10 Link-12 7.77 0 00:13 36.70 0.21 6.97 0.05 0.77 0.38 0.00 Calculated 11 Link-16 0.00 0 00:00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.77 0.38 0.00 Calculated 12 Link-28 3.26 0 00:14 7.17 0.45 5.86 1.19 0.71 0.71 0.00 Calculated 13 Link-30 0.00 0 00:00 12.52 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.11 0.00 Calculated 14 SD-RDA-1 10.34 0 00:13 12.29 0.84 7.21 0.44 1.14 0.76 0.00 Calculated 15 SD-RDA-2 11.90 0 00:13 22.94 0.52 9.94 0.39 1.07 0.72 0.00 Calculated 16 SD-RDA-3 11.86 0 00:13 12.39 0.96 4.12 0.24 1.72 0.86 0.00 Calculated 17 SD-RDA-5 5.71 0 00:18 10.91 0.52 5.30 0.10 0.88 0.59 0.00 Calculated 18 SD-RDA-6 4.77 0 00:18 6.25 0.76 3.34 0.42 1.14 0.76 0.00 Calculated 19 SD-RDA-7 4.78 0 00:18 6.94 0.69 3.40 0.78 1.12 0.74 0.00 Calculated 20 SD-RDB-1 3.90 0 00:14 7.50 0.52 5.23 0.49 0.75 0.60 0.00 Calculated 21 SD-RDB-10 4.40 0 00:18 6.14 0.72 3.21 0.87 1.12 0.74 0.00 Calculated 22 SD-RDB-11 3.20 0 00:12 10.74 0.30 4.46 0.08 0.64 0.43 0.00 Calculated 23 SD-RDB-2 6.82 0 00:13 9.34 0.73 7.18 0.66 0.92 0.73 0.00 Calculated 24 SD-RDB-3 0.48 0 00:09 3.77 0.13 2.61 0.21 0.58 0.58 0.00 Calculated 25 SD-RDB-4 9.95 0 00:12 13.75 0.72 6.94 0.13 1.14 0.76 0.00 Calculated 26 SD-RDB-5 0.97 0 00:08 7.70 0.13 2.65 1.35 0.61 0.49 0.00 Calculated 27 SD-RDB-6 0.50 0 00:08 2.83 0.18 2.50 0.22 0.30 0.30 0.00 Calculated 28 SD-RDB-7 5.17 0 00:16 7.68 0.67 4.23 0.26 0.98 0.65 0.00 Calculated 29 SD-RDB-8 5.17 0 00:16 6.94 0.74 4.00 0.39 1.13 0.75 0.00 Calculated 30 SD-RDB-9 1.16 0 00:10 2.02 0.58 2.60 0.33 0.61 0.61 0.00 Calculated 31 SD-SWL-4 9.13 0 00:14 16.00 0.57 4.82 0.52 1.16 0.58 0.00 Calculated 32 SD-WH-10 1.12 0 00:10 3.03 0.37 3.28 0.23 0.45 0.45 0.00 Calculated 33 SD-WH-3 2.92 0 00:17 4.89 0.60 2.77 0.18 1.01 0.81 0.00 Calculated 34 SD-WH-4 3.86 0 00:17 5.92 0.65 3.67 0.21 1.00 0.80 0.00 Calculated 35 SD-WH-5 4.80 0 00:17 6.86 0.70 3.41 0.17 1.12 0.75 0.00 Calculated 36 SD-WH-6 2.17 0 00:17 3.33 0.65 3.33 0.35 0.77 0.77 0.00 Calculated 37 SD-WH-7 3.27 0 00:17 8.76 0.37 2.39 0.32 1.08 0.72 0.00 Calculated 38 SD-WH-8 4.40 0 00:17 6.51 0.68 3.08 0.20 1.13 0.76 0.00 Calculated 39 SD-WH-9 2.25 0 00:10 7.07 0.32 4.51 0.14 0.53 0.43 0.00 Calculated Inlet Input SN Element Inlet Manufacturer Inlet Number of Catchbasin Max (Rim) Inlet Initial Initial Ponded Grate ID Manufacturer Part Location Inlets Invert Elevation Depth Water Water Area Clogging Number Elevation Elevation Depth Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft²) (%) 1 RDA11+10N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4707.91 4712.54 4.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 RDA11+10S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 2 4708.15 4712.54 4.39 4708.29 0.14 0.00 0.00 3 RDA8+30 FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4716.50 4724.07 7.57 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 4 RDB20+55N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4698.03 4700.72 2.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 RDB20+55S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4697.36 4700.72 3.36 4697.86 0.50 0.00 0.00 6 RDB7+20E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 2 4719.71 4729.64 9.93 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 7 RDB7+20W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4720.58 4729.73 9.15 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 8 RDB9+70E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4722.55 4727.57 5.03 4722.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 RDB9+70W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4723.00 4727.18 4.17 4723.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 WH-15+35E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4709.45 4712.27 2.82 4709.25 -0.20 N/A 0.00 11 WH-15+35W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4710.03 4712.27 2.24 4709.40 -0.63 N/A 0.00 12 WH23+35E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4698.07 4702.97 4.90 4698.07 0.00 N/A 0.00 13 WH23+35W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4698.39 4702.96 4.57 4698.39 0.00 N/A 0.00 14 WH30+70N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4684.51 4688.22 3.71 4684.51 0.00 N/A 0.00 15 WH30+70S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4685.09 4688.22 3.12 4685.09 0.00 N/A 0.00 Roadway & Gutter Input SN Element Roadway Roadway Roadway Gutter Gutter Gutter Allowable ID Longitudinal Cross Manning's Cross Width Depression Spread Slope Slope Roughness Slope (ft/ft) (ft/ft) (ft/ft) (ft) (in) (ft) 1 RDA11+10N N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 2 RDA11+10S N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 3 RDA8+30 0.0470 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 4 RDB20+55N N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 5 RDB20+55S N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 6 RDB7+20E 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 7 RDB7+20W 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 8 RDB9+70E N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 9 RDB9+70W N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 10 WH-15+35E 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 11 WH-15+35W 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 12 WH23+35E 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 13 WH23+35W 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 14 WH30+70N 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 15 WH30+70S 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 Inlet Results SN Element Peak Peak Peak Flow Peak Flow Inlet Max Gutter Max Gutter Max Gutter Time of Total Total Time ID Flow Lateral Intercepted Bypassing Efficiency Spread Water Elev. Water Depth Max Depth Flooded Flooded Inflow by Inlet during Peak during Peak during Peak during Peak Occurrence Volume Inlet Flow Flow Flow Flow (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (days hh:mm) (ac-in) (min) 1 RDA11+10N 1.17 1.17 N/A N/A N/A 5.44 4712.75 0.21 0 00:15 0.00 0.00 2 RDA11+10S 1.82 1.17 N/A N/A N/A 5.64 4712.75 0.22 0 00:18 0.00 0.00 3 RDA8+30 2.99 0.00 1.98 1.01 66.25 5.52 4724.28 0.21 0 00:13 0.00 0.00 4 RDB20+55N 1.18 1.18 N/A N/A N/A 5.48 4700.93 0.21 0 00:10 0.00 0.00 5 RDB20+55S 1.18 1.18 N/A N/A N/A 5.48 4700.93 0.21 0 00:16 0.00 0.00 6 RDB7+20E 4.19 4.19 2.97 1.22 70.88 8.33 4729.94 0.30 0 00:12 0.00 0.00 7 RDB7+20W 0.55 0.55 0.49 0.07 88.12 3.47 4729.88 0.15 0 00:12 0.00 0.00 8 RDB9+70E 0.50 0.50 N/A N/A N/A 2.49 4727.67 0.10 0 00:08 0.00 0.00 9 RDB9+70W 0.50 0.50 N/A N/A N/A 2.49 4727.27 0.10 0 00:08 0.00 0.00 10 WH-15+35E 1.46 1.46 1.05 0.41 71.93 5.42 4712.48 0.21 0 00:17 0.00 0.00 11 WH-15+35W 1.46 1.46 1.05 0.41 71.93 5.42 4712.48 0.21 0 00:17 0.00 0.00 12 WH23+35E 1.53 1.26 1.09 0.44 71.11 5.54 4703.18 0.21 0 00:17 0.00 0.00 13 WH23+35W 1.46 1.19 1.05 0.41 71.86 5.43 4703.18 0.21 0 00:17 0.00 0.00 14 WH30+70N 1.53 1.36 1.09 0.44 71.13 5.54 4688.44 0.21 0 00:10 0.00 0.00 15 WH30+70S 1.52 1.36 1.08 0.44 71.27 5.52 4688.43 0.21 0 00:10 0.00 0.00 Post Development Model Outputs 25‐year Design Event Project Options CFS Elevation Rational SCS TR-55 Hydrodynamic YES NO Analysis Options Mar 28, 2017 00:00:00 Mar 29, 2017 00:00:00 Mar 28, 2017 00:00:00 0 days 0 01:00:00 days hh:mm:ss 0 00:05:00 days hh:mm:ss 0 00:05:00 days hh:mm:ss 30 seconds Rainfall Details 25 year(s) Runoff (Wet Weather) Time Step ........................................ Reporting Time Step ............................................................ Routing Time Step ................................................................ Return Period........................................................................ Skip Steady State Analysis Time Periods ............................ Start Analysis On .................................................................. End Analysis On ................................................................... Start Reporting On ................................................................ Antecedent Dry Days ............................................................ Runoff (Dry Weather) Time Step .......................................... Flow Units ............................................................................. Elevation Type ...................................................................... Hydrology Method ................................................................. Time of Concentration (TOC) Method .................................. Link Routing Method ............................................................. Enable Overflow Ponding at Nodes ...................................... Subbasin Summary SN Subbasin Area Weighted Total Total Total Peak Time of ID Runoff Rainfall Runoff Runoff Runoff Concentration Coefficient Volume (ac) (in) (in) (ac-in) (cfs) (days hh:mm:ss) 1 CUL-RDA-5+50 12.16 0.2000 0.58 0.12 1.40 3.24 0 00:26:00 2 CUL-RDB19+25 10.98 0.2000 0.46 0.09 1.01 4.35 0 00:14:00 3 OFF-1 2.62 0.8000 0.44 0.35 0.92 4.58 0 00:12:00 4 OFF-2 2.20 0.8000 0.44 0.35 0.77 3.85 0 00:12:00 5 OFF-3 3.22 0.8000 0.44 0.35 1.13 5.63 0 00:12:00 6 OFF-4 0.92 0.8000 0.41 0.33 0.30 1.78 0 00:10:12 7 OFF-5 1.38 0.8000 0.45 0.36 0.50 2.29 0 00:13:01 8 OFF-6 1.82 0.8000 0.39 0.32 0.57 3.82 0 00:09:00 9 OFF-7 3.35 0.8000 0.38 0.30 1.01 7.71 0 00:07:48 10 OFF-8 4.12 0.8000 0.36 0.29 1.19 9.99 0 00:07:12 11 RDA11+10L 0.89 0.7600 0.45 0.34 0.30 1.40 0 00:13:00 12 RDA11+10R 0.89 0.7600 0.45 0.34 0.30 1.40 0 00:13:00 13 RDB21+50L 0.76 0.7600 0.41 0.31 0.24 1.42 0 00:10:00 14 RDB21+50R 0.76 0.7600 0.41 0.31 0.24 1.42 0 00:10:00 15 RDB7+20L 0.33 0.7600 0.39 0.30 0.10 0.66 0 00:09:00 16 RDB7+20R 0.33 0.7600 0.39 0.30 0.10 0.66 0 00:09:00 17 RDB9+70L 0.28 0.7600 0.38 0.29 0.08 0.60 0 00:08:00 18 RDB9+70R 0.28 0.7600 0.38 0.29 0.08 0.60 0 00:08:00 19 ST-WHT15+30L 10.00 0.2000 0.49 0.10 0.99 3.52 0 00:16:48 20 ST-WHT23+30L 7.56 0.2000 0.50 0.10 0.75 2.64 0 00:17:00 21 Sub-25 0.86 0.8000 0.41 0.33 0.28 1.69 0 00:10:00 22 Sub-4-B 10.00 0.2000 0.50 0.10 0.99 3.50 0 00:17:00 23 WHT15+30L 1.54 0.7000 0.52 0.36 0.56 1.76 0 00:19:00 24 WHT15+30R 1.54 0.7000 0.52 0.36 0.56 1.76 0 00:19:00 25 WHT23+30L 1.08 0.7000 0.47 0.33 0.36 1.43 0 00:15:00 26 WHT23+30R 1.14 0.7000 0.47 0.33 0.38 1.51 0 00:15:00 27 WHT30+70L 0.95 0.7000 0.41 0.29 0.27 1.63 0 00:10:00 28 WHT30+70R 0.95 0.7000 0.41 0.29 0.27 1.63 0 00:10:00 Node Summary SN Element Element Invert Ground/Rim Initial Surcharge Ponded Peak Max HGL Max Min Time of Total Total Time ID Type Elevation (Max) Water Elevation Area Inflow Elevation Surcharge Freeboard Peak Flooded Flooded Elevation Elevation Attained Depth Attained Flooding Volume Attained Occurrence (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft²) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (days hh:mm) (ac-in) (min) 1 Jun-02 Junction 4710.20 4713.14 0.00 4713.14 0.00 3.52 4711.47 0.00 1.67 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 2 Jun-03 Junction 4699.50 4705.00 0.00 4705.00 0.00 2.64 4700.63 0.00 4.37 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 3 Jun-04 Junction 4729.00 4731.00 0.00 9460.00 0.00 3.08 4729.38 0.00 1.62 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 4 Jun-07 Junction 4697.07 4702.06 0.00 4701.00 0.00 15.45 4699.09 0.00 2.97 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 5 Jun-08 Junction 4695.79 4701.32 0.00 4701.00 0.00 15.39 4697.40 0.00 3.91 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 6 Jun-09 Junction 4685.57 4690.50 0.00 4691.00 0.00 15.53 4687.33 0.00 3.17 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 7 Jun-10 Junction 4679.90 4684.45 0.00 4685.00 0.00 19.21 4682.54 0.00 1.92 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 8 Jun-12_10+87 Junction 4699.53 4706.60 0.00 4712.00 0.00 12.67 4701.53 0.00 5.08 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 9 Jun-15 Junction 4715.50 4719.50 0.00 4719.50 0.00 0.00 4715.50 0.00 4.00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 10 Jun-21 Junction 4737.00 4742.00 0.00 4742.00 0.00 4.46 4737.57 0.00 4.43 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 11 JUN-MUR-3 Junction 4737.00 4741.00 0.00 4741.00 0.00 1.56 4737.21 0.00 3.79 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 12 RDA10+30 Junction 4705.03 4713.71 0.00 4713.71 0.00 13.44 4707.09 0.00 6.62 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 13 RDA12+00 Junction 4708.61 4713.29 0.00 4713.29 0.00 5.61 4709.98 0.00 3.31 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 14 RDA6+05 Junction 4719.30 4730.19 0.00 4730.19 0.00 12.29 4720.99 0.00 9.20 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 15 RDB19+60 Junction 4696.96 4702.22 0.00 4702.22 0.00 6.22 4698.20 0.00 4.02 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 16 RDB2+60 Junction 4728.76 4733.55 0.00 4733.55 0.00 4.46 4729.51 0.00 4.04 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 17 RDB4+00 Junction 4727.22 4732.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.84 4728.02 0.00 3.98 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 18 RDB-5+00 Junction 4726.67 4731.51 0.00 4731.51 0.00 7.97 4727.60 0.00 3.91 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 19 SWL-1_MH2+32 Junction 4713.10 4717.75 0.00 4717.00 0.00 0.00 4713.10 0.00 4.65 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 20 SWL-2_6+28 Junction 4710.31 4714.47 0.00 4716.00 0.00 0.00 4710.31 0.00 4.16 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 21 SWL-3_8+37 Junction 4709.61 4714.14 0.00 4715.00 0.00 3.24 4710.17 0.00 3.97 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 22 SWL-5_9+25 Junction 4700.90 4710.57 0.00 4713.00 0.00 11.73 4703.14 0.00 7.55 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 23 WH-15+75 Junction 4709.31 4712.02 0.00 4712.02 0.00 5.65 4710.55 0.00 1.47 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 24 WH23+70 Junction 4697.93 4702.46 0.00 4702.46 0.00 5.32 4699.27 0.00 3.19 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 25 OFFSITE-11 Outfall 4674.51 0.60 4674.65 26 OFFSITE-12 Outfall 4675.09 0.51 4675.23 27 Out-01 Outfall 4679.00 18.77 4680.70 28 Diversion-01 Flow Diversions 4704.85 4709.00 0.00 12.00 21.10 4706.55 0.00 0.00 29 MurdPond1 Storage Node 4739.83 4742.00 0.00 0.00 3.82 4740.46 0.00 0.00 30 MurdPond2 Storage Node 4738.50 4741.00 0.00 0.00 2.29 4739.39 0.00 0.00 31 MurdPond3 Storage Node 4738.00 4741.00 0.00 0.00 1.78 4739.77 0.00 0.00 32 MurdPond4 Storage Node 4733.50 4736.00 0.00 0.00 5.63 4734.54 0.00 0.00 33 POND-1 Storage Node 4704.50 4707.00 0.00 0.00 11.73 4706.46 0.00 0.00 34 POND-2 Storage Node 4689.50 4693.00 0.00 0.00 6.22 4690.50 0.00 0.00 35 POND-3 Storage Node 4682.50 4685.00 0.00 0.00 2.65 4683.39 0.00 0.00 36 SBPond1 Storage Node 4715.00 4718.50 0.00 0.00 9.98 4716.30 0.00 0.00 37 SBPond2 Storage Node 4719.50 4722.00 0.00 0.00 7.71 4721.44 0.00 0.00 Inlet Summary SN Element Inlet Manufacturer Inlet Number of Catchbasin Max (Rim) Initial Ponded Peak Peak Flow Peak Flow Inlet Allowable Max Gutter Max Gutter ID Manufacturer Part Location Inlets Invert Elevation Water Area Flow Intercepted Bypassing Efficiency Spread Spread Water Elev. Number Elevation Elevation by Inlet during Peak during Peak during Peak Inlet Flow Flow Flow (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft²) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 RDA11+10N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4707.91 4712.54 0.00 0.00 1.40 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 6.12 4712.77 2 RDA11+10S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 2 4708.15 4712.54 4708.29 0.00 2.37 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 6.75 4712.79 3 RDA8+30 FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4716.50 4724.07 0.00 N/A 3.46 2.19 1.26 63.45 9.50 5.86 4724.29 4 RDB20+55N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4698.03 4700.72 0.00 0.00 1.42 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 6.16 4700.95 5 RDB20+55S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4697.36 4700.72 4697.86 0.00 1.42 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 6.16 4700.95 6 RDB7+20E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 2 4719.71 4729.64 0.00 N/A 5.14 3.49 1.64 67.97 9.50 9.04 4729.96 7 RDB7+20W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4720.58 4729.73 0.00 N/A 0.66 0.56 0.10 84.71 9.50 3.75 4729.89 8 RDB9+70E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4722.55 4727.57 4722.55 0.00 0.60 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 2.97 4727.69 9 RDB9+70W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4723.00 4727.18 4723.00 0.00 0.60 N/A N/A N/A 9.50 2.97 4727.29 10 WH-15+35E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4709.45 4712.27 4709.25 N/A 1.75 1.20 0.55 68.50 9.50 5.85 4712.50 11 WH-15+35W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4710.03 4712.27 4709.40 N/A 1.75 1.20 0.55 68.50 9.50 5.85 4712.50 12 WH23+35E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4698.07 4702.97 4698.07 N/A 1.88 1.27 0.62 67.28 9.50 6.03 4703.20 13 WH23+35W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4698.39 4702.96 4698.39 N/A 1.81 1.23 0.58 67.99 9.50 5.93 4703.19 14 WH30+70N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4684.51 4688.22 4684.51 N/A 1.86 1.25 0.60 67.52 9.50 6.00 4688.45 15 WH30+70S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4685.09 4688.22 4685.09 N/A 1.84 1.25 0.60 67.65 9.50 5.98 4688.45 Junction Input SN Element Invert Ground/Rim Ground/Rim Initial Initial Surcharge Surcharge Ponded Minimum ID Elevation (Max) (Max) Water Water Elevation Depth Area Pipe Elevation Offset Elevation Depth Cover (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft²) (in) 1 Jun-02 4710.20 4713.14 2.94 0.00 -4710.20 4713.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 Jun-03 4699.50 4705.00 5.50 0.00 -4699.50 4705.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 Jun-04 4729.00 4731.00 2.00 0.00 -4729.00 9460.00 4729.00 0.00 0.00 4 Jun-07 4697.07 4702.06 4.99 0.00 -4697.07 4701.00 -1.06 0.00 0.00 5 Jun-08 4695.79 4701.32 5.52 0.00 -4695.79 4701.00 -0.32 0.00 0.00 6 Jun-09 4685.57 4690.50 4.93 0.00 -4685.57 4691.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 7 Jun-10 4679.90 4684.45 4.56 0.00 -4679.90 4685.00 0.55 0.00 0.00 8 Jun-12_10+87 4699.53 4706.60 7.08 0.00 -4699.53 4712.00 5.40 0.00 0.00 9 Jun-15 4715.50 4719.50 4.00 0.00 -4715.50 4719.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 Jun-21 4737.00 4742.00 5.00 0.00 -4737.00 4742.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11 JUN-MUR-3 4737.00 4741.00 4.00 0.00 -4737.00 4741.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 RDA10+30 4705.03 4713.71 8.68 0.00 -4705.03 4713.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 13 RDA12+00 4708.61 4713.29 4.68 0.00 -4708.61 4713.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 14 RDA6+05 4719.30 4730.19 10.89 0.00 -4719.30 4730.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 RDB19+60 4696.96 4702.22 5.26 0.00 -4696.96 4702.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 16 RDB2+60 4728.76 4733.55 4.79 0.00 -4728.76 4733.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 17 RDB4+00 4727.22 4732.00 4.78 0.00 -4727.22 0.00 -4732.00 0.00 0.00 18 RDB-5+00 4726.67 4731.51 4.84 0.00 -4726.67 4731.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 SWL-1_MH2+32 4713.10 4717.75 4.65 0.00 -4713.10 4717.00 -0.75 0.00 0.00 20 SWL-2_6+28 4710.31 4714.47 4.16 0.00 -4710.31 4716.00 1.53 0.00 0.00 21 SWL-3_8+37 4709.61 4714.14 4.53 0.00 -4709.61 4715.00 0.86 0.00 0.00 22 SWL-5_9+25 4700.90 4710.57 9.67 0.00 -4700.90 4713.00 2.43 0.00 0.00 23 WH-15+75 4709.31 4712.02 2.71 0.00 -4709.31 4712.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 24 WH23+70 4697.93 4702.46 4.52 0.00 -4697.93 4702.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 Junction Results SN Element Peak Peak Max HGL Max HGL Max Min Average HGL Average HGL Time of Time of Total Total Time ID Inflow Lateral Elevation Depth Surcharge Freeboard Elevation Depth Max HGL Peak Flooded Flooded Inflow Attained Attained Depth Attained Attained Attained Occurrence Flooding Volume Attained Occurrence (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (days hh:mm) (days hh:mm) (ac-in) (min) 1 Jun-02 3.52 3.52 4711.47 1.27 0.00 1.67 4710.22 0.02 0 00:17 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 2 Jun-03 2.64 2.64 4700.63 1.13 0.00 4.37 4699.52 0.02 0 00:17 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 3 Jun-04 3.08 1.69 4729.38 0.38 0.00 1.62 4729.01 0.01 0 00:05 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 4 Jun-07 15.45 4.35 4699.09 2.02 0.00 2.97 4697.92 0.85 0 00:16 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 5 Jun-08 15.39 0.00 4697.40 1.61 0.00 3.91 4696.61 0.82 0 00:16 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 6 Jun-09 15.53 0.00 4687.33 1.76 0.00 3.17 4686.43 0.86 0 00:17 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 7 Jun-10 19.21 3.50 4682.54 2.64 0.00 1.92 4680.82 0.92 0 00:18 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 8 Jun-12_10+87 12.67 0.00 4701.53 2.00 0.00 5.08 4700.38 0.85 0 00:19 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 9 Jun-15 0.00 0.00 4715.50 0.00 0.00 4.00 4715.50 0.00 0 00:00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 10 Jun-21 4.46 0.00 4737.57 0.57 0.00 4.43 4737.01 0.01 0 00:13 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 11 JUN-MUR-3 1.56 0.00 4737.21 0.21 0.00 3.79 4737.01 0.01 0 00:16 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 12 RDA10+30 13.44 0.00 4707.09 2.06 0.00 6.62 4705.13 0.10 0 00:13 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 13 RDA12+00 5.61 0.00 4709.98 1.37 0.00 3.31 4708.64 0.03 0 00:18 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 14 RDA6+05 12.29 0.00 4720.99 1.69 0.00 9.20 4719.33 0.03 0 00:14 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 15 RDB19+60 6.22 0.00 4698.20 1.24 0.00 4.02 4696.98 0.02 0 00:16 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 16 RDB2+60 4.46 0.00 4729.51 0.75 0.00 4.04 4728.78 0.02 0 00:14 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 17 RDB4+00 3.84 3.84 4728.02 0.80 0.00 3.98 4727.23 0.01 0 00:12 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 18 RDB-5+00 7.97 0.00 4727.60 0.93 0.00 3.91 4726.69 0.02 0 00:13 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 19 SWL-1_MH2+32 0.00 0.00 4713.10 0.00 0.00 4.65 4713.10 0.00 0 00:00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 20 SWL-2_6+28 0.00 0.00 4710.31 0.00 0.00 4.16 4710.31 0.00 0 00:00 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 21 SWL-3_8+37 3.24 3.24 4710.17 0.56 0.00 3.97 4709.63 0.02 0 00:26 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 22 SWL-5_9+25 11.73 0.00 4703.14 2.24 0.00 7.55 4701.69 0.79 0 00:18 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 23 WH-15+75 5.65 0.00 4710.55 1.24 0.00 1.47 4709.33 0.02 0 00:18 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 24 WH23+70 5.32 0.00 4699.27 1.34 0.00 3.19 4697.96 0.03 0 00:17 0 00:00 0.00 0.00 Pipe Input SN Element Length Inlet Inlet Outlet Outlet Total Average Pipe Pipe Pipe Manning's Entrance Exit/Bend Additional Initial Flap ID Invert Invert Invert Invert Drop Slope Shape Diameter or Width Roughness Losses Losses Losses Flow Gate Elevation Offset Elevation Offset Height (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (%) (in) (in) (cfs) 1 CUL-RDA5+50 88.00 4709.61 0.00 4708.69 7.79 0.92 1.0500 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 2 CUL-RDB19+25 108.00 4697.82 0.75 4696.71 0.92 1.11 1.0300 CIRCULAR 30.000 30.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 3 Link-05 370.00 4696.54 0.75 4686.52 0.95 10.02 2.7100 CIRCULAR 30.000 30.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 4 Link-06 461.00 4686.32 0.75 4680.65 0.75 5.68 1.2300 CIRCULAR 30.000 30.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 5 Link-07 400.00 4713.10 0.00 4710.81 0.50 2.29 0.5700 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 6 Link-08 513.00 4680.65 0.75 4677.50 -1.50 3.15 0.6100 CIRCULAR 30.000 30.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 7 Link-09 508.00 4700.28 0.75 4697.90 0.83 2.37 0.4700 CIRCULAR 30.000 30.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 8 Link-10 73.48 4707.91 0.00 4705.07 0.22 2.84 3.8600 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 9 Link-11 10.00 4704.85 0.00 4704.80 0.30 0.05 0.4800 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 10 Link-12 19.00 4705.50 0.65 4705.00 4.10 0.50 2.6300 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 11 Link-16 6.78 4715.50 0.00 4715.00 0.00 0.50 7.3700 Dummy 0.000 0.000 0.0150 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 12 Link-28 420.00 4737.00 0.00 4720.00 0.50 17.00 4.0500 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 13 Link-30 209.00 4710.31 0.00 4709.67 0.06 0.64 0.3100 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 14 SD-RDA-1 190.00 4719.30 0.00 4716.70 0.20 2.60 1.3700 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 15 SD-RDA-2 230.00 4716.50 0.00 4705.53 0.50 10.97 4.7700 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 16 SD-RDA-3 60.00 4705.03 0.00 4704.85 0.00 0.18 0.3000 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 17 SD-RDA-5 33.01 4708.41 0.27 4708.06 0.15 0.36 1.0800 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 18 SD-RDA-6 83.91 4708.61 0.00 4708.31 0.17 0.30 0.3500 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 19 SD-RDA-7 159.59 4709.30 -0.01 4708.61 0.00 0.69 0.4300 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 20 SD-RDB-1 155.00 4728.76 0.00 4726.67 0.00 2.09 1.3500 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 21 SD-RDB-10 167.47 4697.93 0.00 4697.36 0.00 0.57 0.3400 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 22 SD-RDB-11 22.00 4727.22 0.00 4726.99 0.32 0.23 1.0500 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 23 SD-RDB-2 285.00 4726.67 0.00 4720.71 1.00 5.96 2.0900 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 24 SD-RDB-3 33.00 4721.33 0.75 4720.96 1.25 0.37 1.1200 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 25 SD-RDB-4 56.00 4720.46 0.75 4719.50 0.20 0.96 1.7100 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 26 SD-RDB-5 214.19 4722.55 0.00 4719.50 0.20 3.05 1.4200 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 27 SD-RDB-6 33.00 4723.00 0.00 4722.80 0.25 0.21 0.6300 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 28 SD-RDB-7 67.00 4696.96 0.00 4696.60 7.10 0.36 0.5400 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 29 SD-RDB-8 92.83 4697.36 0.00 4696.96 0.00 0.41 0.4400 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 30 SD-RDB-9 51.67 4698.03 0.00 4697.86 0.50 0.17 0.3200 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 31 SD-SWL-4 149.00 4701.65 0.75 4700.90 1.38 0.74 0.5000 CIRCULAR 24.000 24.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 32 SD-WH-10 46.07 4685.09 0.00 4684.76 0.25 0.33 0.7200 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 33 SD-WH-3 30.00 4710.20 0.00 4710.03 0.00 0.17 0.5700 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 34 SD-WH-4 45.99 4710.03 0.00 4709.64 0.19 0.39 0.8400 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 35 SD-WH-5 33.78 4709.45 0.00 4709.31 0.00 0.14 0.4300 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 36 SD-WH-6 69.84 4699.50 0.00 4698.89 0.50 0.61 0.8700 CIRCULAR 12.000 12.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 37 SD-WH-7 46.00 4698.39 0.00 4698.07 0.00 0.32 0.7000 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 38 SD-WH-8 36.10 4698.07 0.00 4697.93 0.00 0.14 0.3800 CIRCULAR 18.000 18.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No 39 SD-WH-9 37.66 4684.51 0.00 4684.06 1.56 0.45 1.2000 CIRCULAR 15.000 15.000 0.0130 0.5000 0.5000 0.0000 0.00 No No. of Barrels 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Pipe Results SN Element Peak Time of Design Flow Peak Flow/ Peak Flow Travel Peak Flow Peak Flow Total Time Froude Reported ID Flow Peak Flow Capacity Design Flow Velocity Time Depth Depth/ Surcharged Number Condition Occurrence Ratio Total Depth Ratio (cfs) (days hh:mm) (cfs) (ft/sec) (min) (ft) (min) 1 CUL-RDA5+50 3.20 0 00:26 23.19 0.14 4.79 0.31 0.53 0.27 0.00 Calculated 2 CUL-RDB19+25 15.39 0 00:16 41.66 0.37 6.92 0.26 1.16 0.46 0.00 Calculated 3 Link-05 15.38 0 00:16 67.50 0.23 10.69 0.58 0.84 0.33 0.00 Calculated 4 Link-06 15.52 0 00:17 45.51 0.34 5.57 1.38 1.45 0.58 0.00 Calculated 5 Link-07 0.00 0 00:00 7.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Calculated 6 Link-08 18.77 0 00:19 23.24 0.81 4.97 1.72 1.80 0.72 0.00 Calculated 7 Link-09 12.61 0 00:19 28.04 0.45 5.34 1.59 1.22 0.49 0.00 Calculated 8 Link-10 7.91 0 00:14 20.64 0.38 5.74 0.21 1.09 0.73 0.00 Calculated 9 Link-11 11.73 0 00:14 15.67 0.75 4.79 0.03 1.64 0.82 0.00 Calculated 10 Link-12 9.59 0 00:17 36.70 0.26 7.30 0.04 0.87 0.44 0.00 Calculated 11 Link-16 0.00 0 00:00 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.87 0.44 0.00 Calculated 12 Link-28 4.43 0 00:13 7.17 0.62 6.71 1.04 0.78 0.78 0.00 Calculated 13 Link-30 0.00 0 00:00 12.52 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.13 0.00 Calculated 14 SD-RDA-1 11.50 0 00:12 12.29 0.94 7.31 0.43 1.33 0.88 0.00 Calculated 15 SD-RDA-2 13.44 0 00:12 22.94 0.59 10.04 0.38 1.16 0.78 0.00 Calculated 16 SD-RDA-3 13.43 0 00:13 12.39 1.08 4.44 0.23 1.85 0.92 0.00 > CAPACITY 17 SD-RDA-5 6.87 0 00:17 10.91 0.63 5.52 0.10 0.99 0.66 0.00 Calculated 18 SD-RDA-6 5.63 0 00:18 6.25 0.90 3.50 0.40 1.30 0.86 0.00 Calculated 19 SD-RDA-7 5.61 0 00:18 6.94 0.81 3.44 0.77 1.31 0.87 0.00 Calculated 20 SD-RDB-1 4.46 0 00:14 7.50 0.59 5.50 0.47 0.83 0.67 0.00 Calculated 21 SD-RDB-10 5.33 0 00:17 6.14 0.87 3.29 0.85 1.36 0.91 0.00 Calculated 22 SD-RDB-11 3.83 0 00:12 10.74 0.36 4.67 0.08 0.71 0.47 0.00 Calculated 23 SD-RDB-2 7.86 0 00:13 9.34 0.84 7.26 0.65 1.09 0.87 0.00 Calculated 24 SD-RDB-3 0.52 0 00:08 3.77 0.14 2.64 0.21 0.96 0.96 0.00 Calculated 25 SD-RDB-4 11.69 0 00:12 13.75 0.85 6.94 0.13 1.50 1.00 0.00 Calculated 26 SD-RDB-5 1.16 0 00:08 7.70 0.15 2.70 1.32 0.74 0.59 0.00 Calculated 27 SD-RDB-6 0.59 0 00:08 2.83 0.21 2.62 0.21 0.33 0.33 0.00 Calculated 28 SD-RDB-7 6.22 0 00:16 7.68 0.81 4.45 0.25 1.11 0.74 0.00 Calculated 29 SD-RDB-8 6.22 0 00:16 6.94 0.90 4.00 0.39 1.32 0.88 0.00 Calculated 30 SD-RDB-9 1.38 0 00:10 2.02 0.69 2.62 0.33 0.82 0.82 0.00 Calculated 31 SD-SWL-4 11.67 0 00:18 16.00 0.73 5.14 0.48 1.36 0.68 0.00 Calculated 32 SD-WH-10 1.32 0 00:10 3.03 0.44 3.40 0.23 0.50 0.50 0.00 Calculated 33 SD-WH-3 3.49 0 00:17 4.89 0.71 2.85 0.18 1.24 0.99 0.00 Calculated 34 SD-WH-4 4.56 0 00:17 5.92 0.77 3.75 0.20 1.22 0.98 0.00 Calculated 35 SD-WH-5 5.65 0 00:17 6.86 0.82 3.47 0.16 1.32 0.88 0.00 Calculated 36 SD-WH-6 2.64 0 00:17 3.33 0.79 3.63 0.32 0.87 0.87 0.00 Calculated 37 SD-WH-7 3.95 0 00:17 8.76 0.45 2.37 0.32 1.35 0.90 0.00 Calculated 38 SD-WH-8 5.32 0 00:17 6.51 0.82 3.11 0.19 1.39 0.93 0.00 Calculated 39 SD-WH-9 2.65 0 00:10 7.07 0.37 4.68 0.13 0.59 0.47 0.00 Calculated Inlet Input SN Element Inlet Manufacturer Inlet Number of Catchbasin Max (Rim) Inlet Initial Initial Ponded Grate ID Manufacturer Part Location Inlets Invert Elevation Depth Water Water Area Clogging Number Elevation Elevation Depth Factor (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft²) (%) 1 RDA11+10N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4707.91 4712.54 4.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 RDA11+10S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 2 4708.15 4712.54 4.39 4708.29 0.14 0.00 0.00 3 RDA8+30 FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4716.50 4724.07 7.57 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 4 RDB20+55N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4698.03 4700.72 2.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 RDB20+55S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4697.36 4700.72 3.36 4697.86 0.50 0.00 0.00 6 RDB7+20E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 2 4719.71 4729.64 9.93 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 7 RDB7+20W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4720.58 4729.73 9.15 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 8 RDB9+70E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4722.55 4727.57 5.03 4722.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 RDB9+70W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Sag 1 4723.00 4727.18 4.17 4723.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 WH-15+35E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4709.45 4712.27 2.82 4709.25 -0.20 N/A 0.00 11 WH-15+35W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4710.03 4712.27 2.24 4709.40 -0.63 N/A 0.00 12 WH23+35E FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4698.07 4702.97 4.90 4698.07 0.00 N/A 0.00 13 WH23+35W FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4698.39 4702.96 4.57 4698.39 0.00 N/A 0.00 14 WH30+70N FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4684.51 4688.22 3.71 4684.51 0.00 N/A 0.00 15 WH30+70S FHWA HEC-22 GENERIC N/A On Grade 1 4685.09 4688.22 3.12 4685.09 0.00 N/A 0.00 Roadway & Gutter Input SN Element Roadway Roadway Roadway Gutter Gutter Gutter Allowable ID Longitudinal Cross Manning's Cross Width Depression Spread Slope Slope Roughness Slope (ft/ft) (ft/ft) (ft/ft) (ft) (in) (ft) 1 RDA11+10N N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 2 RDA11+10S N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 3 RDA8+30 0.0470 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 4 RDB20+55N N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 5 RDB20+55S N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 6 RDB7+20E 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 7 RDB7+20W 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 8 RDB9+70E N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 9 RDB9+70W N/A 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 10 WH-15+35E 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 11 WH-15+35W 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 12 WH23+35E 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 13 WH23+35W 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 14 WH30+70N 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 15 WH30+70S 0.0120 0.0300 0.0130 0.0620 1.50 0.0000 9.50 Inlet Results SN Element Peak Peak Peak Flow Peak Flow Inlet Max Gutter Max Gutter Max Gutter Time of Total Total Time ID Flow Lateral Intercepted Bypassing Efficiency Spread Water Elev. Water Depth Max Depth Flooded Flooded Inflow by Inlet during Peak during Peak during Peak during Peak Occurrence Volume Inlet Flow Flow Flow Flow (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (%) (ft) (ft) (ft) (days hh:mm) (ac-in) (min) 1 RDA11+10N 1.40 1.40 N/A N/A N/A 6.12 4712.77 0.23 0 00:16 0.00 0.00 2 RDA11+10S 2.37 1.40 N/A N/A N/A 6.75 4712.79 0.25 0 00:17 0.00 0.00 3 RDA8+30 3.46 0.00 2.19 1.26 63.45 5.86 4724.29 0.22 0 00:12 0.00 0.00 4 RDB20+55N 1.42 1.42 N/A N/A N/A 6.16 4700.95 0.23 0 00:15 0.00 0.00 5 RDB20+55S 1.42 1.42 N/A N/A N/A 6.16 4700.95 0.23 0 00:16 0.00 0.00 6 RDB7+20E 5.14 5.02 3.49 1.64 67.97 9.04 4729.96 0.32 0 00:14 0.00 0.00 7 RDB7+20W 0.66 0.66 0.56 0.10 84.71 3.75 4729.89 0.16 0 00:14 0.00 0.00 8 RDB9+70E 0.60 0.60 N/A N/A N/A 2.97 4727.69 0.12 0 00:08 0.00 0.00 9 RDB9+70W 0.60 0.60 N/A N/A N/A 2.97 4727.29 0.12 0 00:08 0.00 0.00 10 WH-15+35E 1.75 1.75 1.20 0.55 68.50 5.85 4712.50 0.22 0 00:18 0.00 0.00 11 WH-15+35W 1.75 1.75 1.20 0.55 68.50 5.85 4712.50 0.22 0 00:17 0.00 0.00 12 WH23+35E 1.88 1.51 1.27 0.62 67.28 6.03 4703.20 0.23 0 00:17 0.00 0.00 13 WH23+35W 1.81 1.43 1.23 0.58 67.99 5.93 4703.19 0.23 0 00:17 0.00 0.00 14 WH30+70N 1.86 1.63 1.25 0.60 67.52 6.00 4688.45 0.23 0 00:10 0.00 0.00 15 WH30+70S 1.84 1.63 1.25 0.60 67.65 5.98 4688.45 0.23 0 00:10 0.00 0.00 Appendix D Storm Drainage Plans APPENDIX EWHEAT DRIVE EXTENSIONSSTORM MEMO21363.01 SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B Page 1 of 4 MEMO 32 Discovery Drive                Bozeman, MT  59718                (406) 582‐0221                 Fax (406) 582‐5770 Project Name: North Park Development Project Number: 14‐167 Date:January 25, 2024 Re:Wheat Drive Extension – Stormwater Pond Sizing MEMO DETAILS: The following outlines the storm drainage impacts associated with the proposed extension of Wheat Drive at the North Park Development site. Wheat Drive is proposed to be extended to the northwest towards Mandeville Creek. The purpose of the street extension is to provide multiple approach locations and vehicle circulation for proposed site development of Tracts 2‐B and 3‐B. A more detailed storm drainage report will be provided with the engineering submittal for the infrastructure improvements necessary for the proposed Wheat Drive extension. The purpose of this memo is to identify rough stormwater pond sizing. The project site is defined by Tracts 2‐B and 3‐B of COS 2153A, located in Section 36, Township 01 South, Range 05 East, City of Bozeman, Montana. Overall drainage for the development to the south of the proposed Wheat Drive  extension  has  been  previously  outlined  as  part  of  a  drainage  report  for  the  overall  development.  The previous overall report can be provided upon request. The proposed extension of Wheat Drive is approximately 710 feet in length. Out of the total length, 480 lineal feet will be fully paved road. The remaining 230 feet of street improvement is anticipated to be left gravel for a fire  truck  turnaround.  The  current  improvements  will  extend  Wheat  Drive  close  to  Mandeville  Creek.  Future development  on  the  west  side  of  Mandeville  Creek  will  involve  extension  of  Wheat  Drive  across  Mandeville Creek  using  a  box  culvert.   The  creek  crossing  was  evaluated  as  part  of  the  updated  flood  hazard  evaluation dated 6/20/2023 and provided as part of the previous MSP submittal. Once extended across the creek, Wheat Drive will have a low point in the road just west of the creek. Treatment for stormwater runoff will be provided adjacent to the low point and will be addressed by a future MSP for development on the west side of Mandeville Creek. January 25, 2024 Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Memo Page 2 of 4 The current improvements will involve collection of runoff from the street surface using curb inlets. Runoff will be routed to a proposed treatment pond which will share treatment with the runoff from the development of Tract 2‐B. A current temporary and anticipated future configuration for the conveyance facilities and pond are provided  with  the  attachments.  The  temporary  pond  will  be  large  enough  for  road  drainage  only  and  is anticipated to be re‐graded once the site is developed to accommodate runoff from both the street improvements and the site. About 850 lineal feet of Wheat Drive will contribute runoff to the proposed pond (not considering bypass flow from the existing set of on‐grade inlets at station 30+69.55). The final set of storm drain inlets on the east side of Mandeville Creek will likely be placed at station 38+50 on Wheat Drive. When Wheat Drive is extended across Mandeville Creek in the future, runoff generated after station 38+50 will be carried across the creek to inlets at the low point of a proposed sag curve (approximate station 41+66). See the attached preliminary design sheet for the Wheat Drive Extension titled C2.1 Wheat Drive & Storm Drainage. In summary, the stormwater collected by the road between stations 30+69.55 and 38+50 (and the bypass flow) will need to be captured and treated. Hydrology: Included  with  the  attachments  are  exhibits  showing  the  pre‐development  and  post‐development  conditions and  drainage  patterns.  A  summary  of the  pre‐development  and  post‐development drainage  basins  and peak runoff rates are provided in Table 1. For the sake of pond sizing, we have simplified the drainage areas – primarily for  pre‐development,  to  provide  a  basis  of  pond  sizing.  From  these  assumptions  and  simplification,  the  pre‐ development basin size matches the post‐development basin. Runoff from area outside of the road ROW will be treated by the adjoining sites Tract 2‐B and 3‐B with their own on‐site treatment facilities. Runoff from the sites  will  then  be  able  to  discharge  to  Mandeville  Creek  post  treatment  and  will  not  impact  conveyance  or treatment facilities associated with Wheat Drive. Determining the travel distance for the pre‐development basin is  difficult  because  the  outfall  point  is  changed  by  the  proposed  post‐development  basin.  A  travel  distance matching the post‐development travel distance was conservatively assumed for the pre‐development condition. The actual pre‐development flow path would realistically be shorter. However, as previously mentioned,  the  pre‐development  basin  was  assumed  primarily  for the  basis of  sizing.  Because  hydrology has been  simplified,  conservative  assumptions  for  pre‐development  are  used  to  ensure  we  meet  minimum  pond sizing. Time  of  concentration was  estimated  based  on  Figure  I‐1  from  the COB  Design  Standards.  Because  the  post‐ development travel distance is primarily along curb and gutter, a weighted C value of 0.95 was assumed for time to concentration. Table 1 ‐ Hydrology Summary Basin Total Area (acres) Impervious (sf) Open Space (sf) Weighted C Tc (min) 10‐yr Peak Runoff (cfs) 25‐yr Peak Runoff (cfs) Pre‐Dev. 1.77 0 77,001 0.20 50 0.25 0.31 Post‐Dev. 1.77 51,602 22,399 0.72   0.95 assumed for Tc calculations 9 2.81 3.35 Hydraulics: January 25, 2024 Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Memo Page 3 of 4 Treatment for stormwater runoff will be accomplished using a surface pond located at the northwest corner of Tract 2‐B. We have been coordinating with the Development Engineer for the Tract 2‐B site development for allocated  volume  in  the  final  pond.  Prior  to  development  of  Tract  2‐B,  a  temporary  pond  will  be  provided specifically for the street improvements. Once Tract 2‐B is developed, the pond will be reconstructed to serve both  the  site  and  the  street  improvements.  The  final  pond  configuration  may  be  detention  or  retention; therefore,  sizing  requirements  have  been  provided  for  both  options.  The  site  development  for  Tract  2‐B  will need to include this pond sizing requirement in addition to their own site. The attached exhibits (EX‐2.3 and EX‐ 2.4) show configurations for the temporary condition and anticipated final configuration. Minimum pond volumes are provided in Table 2. The required retention storage was calculated based on the runoff volume from a 10‐year, 2‐hour event as outlined by the COB Design Standards. The detention volume is based on the method outlined in the COB design standards, calculations are included with the attachments. A portion of runoff will bypass upstream on‐grade inlets. To account for the additional volume bypassing the inlets, the  bypass  rate  from  the previous  report  was  taken  over  the  duration  equal  to  the  inlet  basin  time  to concentration. Longer duration storms would result in a much smaller volume bypassing inlets so this method seemed appropriate for pond sizing. The water quality volume represents the total impervious area multiplied by 0.5‐inches of rainfall. The water quality volume must be retained and infiltrated. Q ൌ CIA V ൌ 7200Q Where:  C ൌ Weighted C Factor    I ൌ 0.41 in/hr   A ൌ Area ሺacresሻ   Q ൌ runoff   V ൌ volume Table 2 – Minimum Required Storage Volumes and Allowable Release Rate Basin Minimum Required Detention Storage (cf) Water Quality Volume (cf) Minimum Required Retention Storage (cf) Allowable Release Rate (Pre‐Development Peak Runoff) (cfs) Post‐Dev. 2,656 2,150 3,752 0.25 Preliminary site plans for Tract 2‐B provide a pond with a bottom area of approximately 19,960 square feet. The storage  volume  at  an  assumed  depth  of  1.5  feet  is  approximately  29,940  cubic  feet  conservatively  assuming vertical  side slopes.  The  required  retention  storage volume  of  3,752  cubic  feet  is  approximately 12.5%  of the assumed pond capacity. Because this additional required storage volume is a small percentage of the assumed preliminary pond capacity, we feel it is feasible for the final pond design to accommodate the stormwater from the Wheat Drive extension. January 25, 2024 Allied Engineering Services, Inc. Memo Page 4 of 4 Attachments: EX‐1.1 Vicinity Map   EX‐1.2 USGS Quad Map   EX‐2.1 Pre‐Development Hydrology   EX‐2.2 Post‐Development Hydrology   EX‐2.3 Temporary Storm Drain Configuration   EX‐2.4 Anticipated Final Storm Drain Configuration   C2.1 Wheat Drive and Storm Drainage   Detention Pond Sizing Calculations (COB Spreadsheet)   Storm Drain and Pond Maintenance P:\2014\14‐167 North Park\05 Design\H & H\Storm Drainage Memo ‐ Wheat Drive Extension\1 Storm Drainage Report\Wheat Drive Extension ‐ Storm Pond Sizing Memo.docx Job #: 14-167 Engineer: Eric Foss Date: 1/24/2024 Calculation of Required Volume for Storm Detention Pond Pond ID Wheat Drive Extension Accepts flow from basins Basin (Reference: Bozeman Stormwater Master Plan - 1982) Design Rainfall Freq. 10 year (see page III - 5 of master plan) IDF coefficient a 0.64 IDF coefficient b IDF coefficient n 0.65 Pre-development Calculations Post-development Calculations C C Areas (ft2): open space 77,001 0.20 Areas (ft2): open space 25,399 0.20 med. res.0.35 med. res. 0.35 dense res.0.50 dense res. 0.50 comm. neigh.0.60 comm. neigh. 0.60 comm. down.0.80 comm. down. 0.80 Pavement 0.98 Pavement 51,602 0.98 Total: 77,001 Total: 77,001 total area: 1.77 acres total area: 1.77 acres composite C: 0.20 composite C: 0.72 0.95 assumed for tc calculation Overland tc Overland tc average slope: 1 percent average slope: 0.77 percent travel distance: 883 feet travel distance: 883 feet tc: 50 minutes tc: 9 minutes Channel tc Channel tc channel tc: minutes channel tc: minutes Total tc: 50 minutes Total tc: 9 minutes intensity at tc (fig 23): 0.72 in/hr intensity at tc (fig 23): 2.20 in/hr pre-devel peak runoff: 0.25 cfs post-devel peak runoff: 2.81 cfs 10 year bypass flow to include from previous phase inlets: 0.88 cfs total post-devel peak runoff: 3.69 cfs Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Runoff Release Required (minutes) (in/hr) Rate (cfs) Volume (cf) Volume (cf) Storage (cf) 9 2.20 2.81 1515 138 1378 11 1.93 2.46 1626 168 1457 13 1.73 2.21 1723 199 1525 15 1.58 2.01 1812 229 1583 17 1.45 1.86 1893 260 1633 19 1.35 1.73 1968 290 1678 21 1.27 1.62 2038 321 1717 23 1.19 1.52 2104 351 1753 25 1.13 1.44 2167 382 1785 27 1.08 1.37 2226 413 1813 29 1.03 1.31 2282 443 1839 31 0.98 1.26 2336 474 1862 33 0.94 1.21 2388 504 1883 35 0.91 1.16 2437 535 1903 37 0.88 1.12 2485 565 1920 39 0.85 1.08 2531 596 1936 41 0.82 1.05 2576 627 1950 43 0.79 1.02 2620 657 1962 45 0.77 0.99 2662 688 1974 47 0.75 0.96 2702 718 1984 49 0.73 0.93 2742 749 1993 51 0.71 0.91 2781 779 2001 53 0.69 0.89 2818 810 2008 55 0.68 0.87 2855 841 2015 57 0.66 0.85 2891 871 2020 59 0.65 0.83 2926 902 2025 61 0.63 0.81 2961 932 2028 63 0.62 0.79 2994 963 2031 65 0.61 0.78 3027 993 2034 67 0.60 0.76 3059 1024 2035 69 0.58 0.75 3091 1054 2037 Detention Pond COB - Wheat Drive Extension 71 0.57 0.73 3122 1085 2037 73 0.56 0.72 3153 1116 2037 75 0.55 0.71 3183 1146 2036 77 0.54 0.70 3212 1177 2035 required detention storage (ft3) = 2,037 add'l required detention storage from bypass flow based on tc = 10 minutes (ft3) = 528 total required detention storage inculding bypass flow (ft3) = 2,565 Detention Pond Calculations:Retention Pond Calculations: design depth of pond 1.50 feet Q = CIA max side slope 4.00 horizontal to 1.00 vertical C = 0.72 (post-development) length/width ratio 3.00 I = 0.41 in/hr (10-yr, 2-hr storm) min. particle removed 40 microns (1 micron = 1 x 10 -6 meters)A = 1.77 acres settling velocity of particle 0.0069 feet/second Q = 0.52 cfs min. pond to settle particle 37 square feet required retention storage (ft3) = 3,752 ft3 pond dimentions assuming vertical side slopes (actual pond footprint will be larger)design depth 1.00 feet width 21 length/width ratio 1.00 length 64 pond dimensions assuming vertical side slopes Volume held between contours:(actual pond footprint will be larger) Cumulative width 61 Contour Area (ft2) Delta V (ft3) Volume (ft3)length 61 100.0 100.5 500 125 125 101.0 1,000 375 500 101.5 1,500 625 1,125 Design storage at 1.5' depth (ft3) = 1,125 Detention Pond COB - Wheat Drive Extension 1 StormDrainandStormPondMaintenanceGuidelines Maintenance of the pond and conveyance pipe located outside the public street easement will be the responsibility of the Property Owners Association. The inlets and storm drainage piping within the public street will be maintained by the City of Bozeman. Easements will be provided for access to and maintenance of all facilities. A summary of the recommended maintenance activities for stormwater ponds (extended detention basins (EDB)) is provided in Table 1. The recommendations are from Table 5.7-1 of the Montana Post Construction Storm Water BMP Design Guidance Manual. Table 1 - Recommended Pond Maintenance Activity Frequency Remove litter/debris from all components of the EDB Repair inlet, outlet trick channel, and all other structural components required for the basin to operate as intended Repair and revegetate eroded areas. If turn grass requires replacement, use a species with similar growth requirements. Regularly manage all vegetation and remove all clippings. Where applicable, irrigate during dry weather and replace broken sprinkler heads. Completely drain the irrigation system before the first winter freeze and check for damaged components upon reactivation in the spring. Repair maintenance routes, if applicable Inspect the EDB for signs of mosquito larvae during summer months and provide treatment when breeding is found. If available, a local mosquito control service could be used to carry out these inspections. As needed Trim vegetation for aesthetics and mosquito control. Prevent establishment of woody vegetation on or near bers or embankments. Evaluate the health of vegetation and remove and replace any dead or dying plants. Remove all green waste and dispose of properly. Semiannually Inspect all components of the EDB in accordance with an approved inspection form according to local jurisdiction requirements.Annually Remove sediment from the micropool when the depth has been reduced to approximately 18 inches. Remove sediment from the forebay before it becomes a significant source of pollutants for the remainder of the EDB Typically 1 to 4 years Remove accumulated sediment and re-grade when the accumulated sediment volume exceeds 10 percent of the main treatment cell design volume. Dispose of sediment properly. Typically 10 to 20 years (or as needed) Storm drainage inlets and piping should be inspected to ensure that conveyance is maintained and that accumulated debris and sediment is removed. The sumps located in all storm drainage structures will collect trash and sediment and will need to be periodically cleaned out. Drainage pipes may also collect sediment and may need to be flushed with sediment collected at the next downstream manhole/junction. APPENDIX FSANBELL STORM SHEETS21363.01 SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B FILE:PROJECT NO:CAD:QUALITY ASSURANCE:DRAWING HISTORYDATE DESCRIPTIONWHEAT DRIVEDRAINAGE PLANSIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2-B & 4-BNORTH PARK SIMKINS-HALLIN SITE DEVELOPMENTBOZEMAN, MTC5.1 RPE/TRP21363_01_DRAINAGE_PROD.DWGCS/DME08/30/2024SP1 SUBMITTAL03/05/2025-----SP2 SUBMITTAL-------21363.01 NORTH 0 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' 401020 FILE:PROJECT NO:CAD:QUALITY ASSURANCE:DRAWING HISTORYDATE DESCRIPTIONWHEAT DRIVEDRAINAGE PLANSIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2-B & 4-BNORTH PARK SIMKINS-HALLIN SITE DEVELOPMENTBOZEMAN, MTC5.2 RPE/TRP21363_01_DRAINAGE_PROD.DWGCS/DME08/30/2024SP1 SUBMITTAL03/05/2025-----SP2 SUBMITTAL-------21363.01 NORTH 0 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' 401020 FILE:PROJECT NO:CAD:QUALITY ASSURANCE:DRAWING HISTORYDATE DESCRIPTIONWHEAT DRIVEDRAINAGE PLANSIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2-B & 4-BNORTH PARK SIMKINS-HALLIN SITE DEVELOPMENTBOZEMAN, MTC5.3 RPE/TRP21363_01_DRAINAGE_PROD.DWGCS/DME08/30/2024SP1 SUBMITTAL03/05/2025-----SP2 SUBMITTAL-------21363.01 NORTH 0 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' 401020 NORTH 0 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' 401020 FILE:PROJECT NO:CAD:QUALITY ASSURANCE:DRAWING HISTORYDATE DESCRIPTIONWHEAT DRIVEDRAINAGE PLANSIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2-B & 4-BNORTH PARK SIMKINS-HALLIN SITE DEVELOPMENTBOZEMAN, MTC5.4 RPE/TRP21363_01_DRAINAGE_PROD.DWGCS/DME08/30/2024SP1 SUBMITTAL03/05/2025-----SP2 SUBMITTAL-------21363.01 FILE:PROJECT NO:CAD:QUALITY ASSURANCE:DRAWING HISTORYDATE DESCRIPTIONWHEAT DRIVEDRAINAGE PLANSIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2-B & 4-BNORTH PARK SIMKINS-HALLIN SITE DEVELOPMENTBOZEMAN, MTC5.5 RPE/TRP21363_01_DRAINAGE_PROD.DWGCS/DME08/30/2024SP1 SUBMITTAL03/05/2025-----SP2 SUBMITTAL-------21363.01 NORTH 0 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' 401020 FILE:PROJECT NO:CAD:QUALITY ASSURANCE:DRAWING HISTORYDATE DESCRIPTIONWHEAT DRIVEDRAINAGE PLANSIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2-B & 4-BNORTH PARK SIMKINS-HALLIN SITE DEVELOPMENTBOZEMAN, MTC5.6 RPE/TRP21363_01_DRAINAGE_PROD.DWGCS/DME08/30/2024SP1 SUBMITTAL03/05/2025-----SP2 SUBMITTAL-------21363.01NORTH 0 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' 401020 FILE:PROJECT NO:CAD:QUALITY ASSURANCE:DRAWING HISTORYDATE DESCRIPTIONWHEAT DRIVEDRAINAGE PLANSIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2-B & 4-BNORTH PARK SIMKINS-HALLIN SITE DEVELOPMENTBOZEMAN, MTC5.7 RPE/TRP21363_01_DRAINAGE_PROD.DWGCS/DME08/30/2024SP1 SUBMITTAL03/05/2025-----SP2 SUBMITTAL-------21363.01NORTH 0 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' 401020 FILE:PROJECT NO:CAD:QUALITY ASSURANCE:DRAWING HISTORYDATE DESCRIPTIONWHEAT DRIVEDRAINAGE PLANSIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2-B & 4-BNORTH PARK SIMKINS-HALLIN SITE DEVELOPMENTBOZEMAN, MTC5.8 RPE/TRP21363_01_DRAINAGE_PROD.DWGCS/DME08/30/2024SP1 SUBMITTAL03/05/2025-----SP2 SUBMITTAL-------21363.01NORTH 0 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' 401020 FILE:PROJECT NO:CAD:QUALITY ASSURANCE:DRAWING HISTORYDATE DESCRIPTIONWHEAT DRIVEDRAINAGE PLANSIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2-B & 4-BNORTH PARK SIMKINS-HALLIN SITE DEVELOPMENTBOZEMAN, MTC5.9 RPE/TRP21363_01_DRAINAGE_PROD.DWGCS/DME08/30/2024SP1 SUBMITTAL03/05/2025-----SP2 SUBMITTAL-------21363.01NORTH 0 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' 401020 APPENDIX GCS-5 CASCADE SEPARATORSTANDARD DETAIL21363.01 SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B 1 SECTION (_____) STORM WATER TREATMENT DEVICE 1.0 GENERAL 1.1 This item shall govern the furnishing and installation of the CDS® by Contech Engineered Solutions LLC, complete and operable as shown and as specified herein, in accordance with the requirements of the plans and contract documents. 1.2 The Contractor shall furnish all labor, equipment and materials necessary to install the storm water treatment device(s) (SWTD) and appurtenances specified in the Drawings and these specifications. 1.3 The manufacturer of the SWTD shall be one that is regularly engaged in the engineering design and production of systems deployed for the treatment of storm water runoff for at least five (5) years and which have a history of successful production, acceptable to the Engineer. In accordance with the Drawings, the SWTD(s) shall be a CDS® device manufactured by: Contech Engineered Solutions LLC 9025 Centre Pointe Drive West Chester, OH, 45069 Tel: 1 800 338 1122 1.4 Related Sections 1.4.1 Section 02240: Dewatering 1.4.2 Section 02260: Excavation Support and Protection 1.4.3 Section 02315: Excavation and Fill 1.4.4 Section 02340: Soil Stabilization 1.5 All components shall be subject to inspection by the engineer at the place of manufacture and/or installation. All components are subject to being rejected or identified for repair if the quality of materials and manufacturing do not comply with the requirements of this specification. Components which have been identified as defective may be subject for repair where final acceptance of the component is contingent on the discretion of the Engineer. 1.6 The manufacturer shall guarantee the SWTD components against all manufacturer originated defects in materials or workmanship for a period of twelve (12) months from the date the components are delivered to the owner for installation. The manufacturer shall upon its determination repair, correct or replace any manufacturer originated defects advised in writing to the manufacturer within the referenced warranty period. The use of SWTD components shall be limited to the application for which it was specifically designed. 1.7 The SWTD manufacturer shall submit to the Engineer of Record a “Manufacturer’s Performance Certification” certifying that each SWTD is capable of achieving the specified removal efficiencies listed in these specifications. The certification shall be supported by independent third-party research 2 1.8 No product substitutions shall be accepted unless submitted 10 days prior to project bid date, or as directed by the Engineer of Record. Submissions for substitutions require review and approval by the Engineer of Record, for hydraulic performance, impact to project designs, equivalent treatment performance, and any required project plan and report (hydrology/hydraulic, water quality, stormwater pollution) modifications that would be required by the approving jurisdictions/agencies. Contractor to coordinate with the Engineer of Record any applicable modifications to the project estimates of cost, bonding amount determinations, plan check fees for changes to approved documents, and/or any other regulatory requirements resulting from the product substitution. 2.0 MATERIALS 2.1 Housing unit of stormwater treatment device shall be constructed of pre-cast or cast-in-place concrete, no exceptions. Precast concrete components shall conform to applicable sections of ASTM C 478, ASTM C 857 and ASTM C 858 and the following: 2.1.1 Concrete shall achieve a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,000 pounds per square-inch (psi); 2.1.2 Unless otherwise noted, the precast concrete sections shall be designed to withstand lateral earth and AASHTO H-20 traffic loads; 2.1.3 Cement shall be Type III Portland Cement conforming to ASTM C 150; 2.1.4 Aggregates shall conform to ASTM C 33; 2.1.5 Reinforcing steel shall be deformed billet-steel bars, welded steel wire or deformed welded steel wire conforming to ASTM A 615, A 185, or A 497. 2.1.6 Joints shall be sealed with preformed joint sealing compound conforming to ASTM C 990. 2.1.7 Shipping of components shall not be initiated until a minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi is attained or five (5) calendar days after fabrication has expired, whichever occurs first. 2.2 Internal Components and appurtenances shall conform to the following: 2.2.1 Screen and support structure shall be manufactured of Type 316 and 316L stainless steel conforming to ASTM F 1267-01; 2.2.2 Hardware shall be manufactured of Type 316 stainless steel conforming to ASTM A 320; 2.2.3 Fiberglass components shall conform to applicable sections of ASTM D-4097 2.2.4 Access system(s) conform to the following: 2.2.5 Manhole castings shall be designed to withstand AASHTO H-20 loadings and manufactured of cast-iron conforming to ASTM A 48 Class 30. 3.0 PERFORMANCE 3.1 The SWTD shall be capable of achieving an 80% reduction of a particle size distribution having a mean particle size (d50) of 125 microns unless otherwise stated. 3.2 The SWTD shall be capable of capturing and retaining 100 percent of pollutants greater than or equal to 2.4 millimeters (mm) regardless of the pollutant’s specific gravity (i.e.: floatable and neutrally buoyant materials) for flows up to the device’s rated-treatment capacity. The SWTD shall be designed to retain all previously captured pollutants addressed by this subsection under all flow conditions. The SWTD shall be capable of capturing and retaining 3 total petroleum hydrocarbons. The SWTD shall be capable of achieving a removal efficiency of 92 and 78 percent when the device is operating at 25 and 50 percent of its rated-treatment capacity. These removal efficiencies shall be based on independent third-party research for influent oil concentrations representative of storm water runoff (20 ± 5 mg/L). The SWTD shall be greater than 99 percent effective in controlling dry-weather accidental oil spills. 3.3 The SWTD shall be designed with a sump chamber for the storage of captured sediments and other negatively buoyant pollutants in between maintenance cycles. The minimum storage capacity provided by the sump chamber shall be in accordance with the volume listed in Table 1. The boundaries of the sump chamber shall be limited to that which do not degrade the SWTD’s treatment efficiency as captured pollutants accumulate. The sump chamber shall be separate from the treatment processing portion(s) of the SWTD to minimize the probability of fine particle re-suspension. In order to not restrict the Owner’s ability to maintain the SWTD, the minimum dimension providing access from the ground surface to the sump chamber shall be 16 inches in diameter. 3.4 The SWTD shall be designed to capture and retain Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons generated by wet-weather flow and dry-weather gross spills and have a capacity listed in Table 1 of the required unit. 3.5 The SWTD shall convey the flow from the peak storm event of the drainage network, in accordance with required hydraulic upstream conditions as defined by the Engineer. If a substitute SWTD is proposed, supporting documentation shall be submitted that demonstrates equal or better upstream hydraulic conditions compared to that specified herein. This documentation shall be signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of the work. All costs associated with preparing and certifying this documentation shall be born solely by the Contractor. 3.6 The SWTD shall have completed field testing following TARP Tier II protocol requirements 4.0 EXECUTION 4.1 The contractor shall exercise care in the storage and handling of the SWTD components prior to and during installation. Any repair or replacement costs associated with events occurring after delivery is accepted and unloading has commenced shall be borne by the contractor. 4.2 The SWTD shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations and related sections of the contract documents. The manufacturer shall provide the contractor installation instructions and offer on-site guidance during the important stages of the installation as identified by the manufacturer at no additional expense. A minimum of 72 hours notice shall be provided to the manufacturer prior to their performance of the services included under this subsection. 4.3 The contractor shall fill all voids associated with lifting provisions provided by the manufacturer. These voids shall be filled with non-shrinking grout providing a finished surface consistent with adjacent surfaces. The contractor shall trim all protruding lifting provisions flush with the adjacent concrete surface in a manner, which leaves no sharp points or edges. 4 4.4 The contractor shall removal all loose material and pooling water from the SWTD prior to the transfer of operational responsibility to the Owner. TABLE 1 Storm Water Treatment Device Storage Capacities CDS Model Minimum Sump Storage Capacity (yd3)/(m3) Minimum Oil Storage Capacity (gal)/(L) CDS2015-4 0.9(0.7) 61(232) 83(313) CDS2015-5 1.5(1.1) 83(313) CDS2020-5 1.5(1.1) 1.5 99(376) CDS2025-5 1.5(1.1) 116(439) CDS3020-6 2.1 (1.6) 184(696) CDS3025-6 2.1(1.6) 210(795) CDS3030-6 2.1 (1.6) 236(895) 263(994) CDS3035-6 2.1 (1.6) 263(994) CDS4030-8 5.6(4.3) 426(1612) CDS4040-8 5.6 (4.3) 520(1970) CDS4045-8 5.6 (4.3) 568(2149) CDS5640-10 8.7(6.7) 758(2869) CDS5653-10 8.7(6.7) 965(3652) CDS5668-10 8.7(6.7) 1172(4435) CDS5678-10 8.7(6.7) 1309(4956) CDS9280-12 16.8(12.8) N/A N CDS9290-12 16.8(12.8) N/A CDS92100-12 16.8(12.8) N/A END OF SECTION PLAN VIEW B-B NOT TO SCALE FIBERGLASS SEPARATION CYLINDER AND INLET CENTER OF CDS STRUCTURE, SCREEN AND SUMP OPENING (2'-0" [610])1'-9" [533] ELEVATION A-A NOT TO SCALE FIBERGLASS SEPARATION CYLINDER AND INLET SOLIDS STORAGE SUMP SEPARATION SCREEN INLET PIPE (MULTIPLE INLET PIPES MAY BE ACCOMMODATED) OUTLET PIPE (4'-0" [1219])FLOW PERMANENT POOL ELEV. OIL BAFFLE SKIRT A VARIES+/-135°MAX.+/-65° MAX. FLOW 4'-1" [1245](6'-9" [2058])72" [1829] I.D. MANHOLE STRUCTURE TOP SLAB ACCESS (SEE FRAME AND COVER DETAIL) TOP SLAB ACCESS CONTRACTOR TO GROUT TO FINISHED GRADE GRADE RINGS/RISERS BB A FRAME AND COVER (DIAMETER VARIES) NOT TO SCALE www.ContechES.com ® 800-338-1122 513-645-7000 513-645-7993 FAX 9025 Centre Pointe Dr., Suite 400, West Chester, OH 45069 CDS3035-6-C ONLINE CDS STANDARD DETAIL I:\COMMON\CAD\TREATMENT\22 CDS\40 STANDARD DRAWINGS\ONLINE (CDS-C)\PDF WITH TREATMENT FLOWS\DWG\CDS3035-6-C-DTL.DWG 6/9/2021 12:21 PMTHIS PRODUCT MAY BE PROTECTED BY ONE OR MORE OF THEFOLLOWING U.S. PATENTS: 5,788,848; 6,641,720; 6,511,595; 6,581,783;RELATED FOREIGN PATENTS, OR OTHER PATENTS PENDING. STRUCTURE ID WATER QUALITY FLOW RATE (CFS OR L/s) PEAK FLOW RATE (CFS OR L/s) RETURN PERIOD OF PEAK FLOW (YRS) SCREEN APERTURE (2400 OR 4700) PIPE DATA:I.E.MATERIAL DIAMETER INLET PIPE 1 INLET PIPE 2 OUTLET PIPE SITE SPECIFIC DATA REQUIREMENTS WIDTH HEIGHTANTI-FLOTATION BALLAST NOTES/SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: RIM ELEVATION * PER ENGINEER OF RECORD * * * * *** *** *** * ** www.contechES.com CDS3035-6-C DESIGN NOTES CDS3035-6-C RATED TREATMENT CAPACITY IS 3.8 CFS [107.6 L/s], OR PER LOCAL REGULATIONS. IF THE SITE CONDITIONS EXCEED MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC CAPACITY, AN UPSTREAM BYPASS STRUCTURE IS REQUIRED. CDS3035-6-C STANDARD CONFIGURATION IS SHOWN. GENERAL NOTES 1.CONTECH TO PROVIDE ALL MATERIALS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 2.FOR SITE SPECIFIC DRAWINGS WITH DETAILED STRUCTURE DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHT, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CONTECH ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS LLC REPRESENTATIVE. www.ContechES.com 3.CDS WATER QUALITY STRUCTURE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL DESIGN DATA AND INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING. CONTRACTOR TO CONFIRM STRUCTURE MEETS REQUIREMENTS OF PROJECT. 4.STRUCTURE SHALL MEET AASHTO HS20 LOAD RATING, ASSUMING EARTH COVER OF 0' - 2', AND GROUNDWATER ELEVATION AT, OR BELOW, THE OUTLET PIPE INVERT ELEVATION. ENGINEER OF RECORD TO CONFIRM ACTUAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION. CASTINGS SHALL MEET AASHTO M306 AND BE CAST WITH THE CONTECH LOGO.. 5.IF REQUIRED, PVC HYDRAULIC SHEAR PLATE IS PLACED ON SHELF AT BOTTOM OF SCREEN CYLINDER. REMOVE AND REPLACE AS NECESSARY DURING MAINTENANCE CLEANING. 6.CDS STRUCTURE SHALL BE PRECAST CONCRETE CONFORMING TO ASTM C-478 AND AASHTO LOAD FACTOR DESIGN METHOD. INSTALLATION NOTES A.ANY SUB-BASE, BACKFILL DEPTH, AND/OR ANTI-FLOTATION PROVISIONS ARE SITE-SPECIFIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND SHALL BE SPECIFIED BY ENGINEER OF RECORD. B.CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT WITH SUFFICIENT LIFTING AND REACH CAPACITY TO LIFT AND SET THE CDS MANHOLE STRUCTURE. C.CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL JOINT SEALANT BETWEEN ALL STRUCTURE SECTIONS AND ASSEMBLE STRUCTURE. D.CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE, INSTALL, AND GROUT INLET AND OUTLET PIPE(S). MATCH PIPE INVERTS WITH ELEVATIONS SHOWN. ALL PIPE CENTERLINES TO MATCH PIPE OPENING CENTERLINES. E.CONTRACTOR TO TAKE APPROPRIATE MEASURES TO ASSURE UNIT IS WATER TIGHT, HOLDING WATER TO FLOWLINE INVERT MINIMUM. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT ALL JOINTS BELOW PIPE INVERTS ARE GROUTED. APPENDIX HO&M PLAN21363.01 SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B February 2025 Project No. 21363.01 STORM DRAINAGE FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR SIMKINS HALLIN TRACTS 2-B & 4-B BOZEMAN, MONTANA OVERVIEW NARRATIVE The purpose of this maintenance plan is to outline the necessary details related to ownership, responsibility, and cleaning schedule for the storm drainage facilities for Simkins-Hallin. This plan has been completed in accordance with The City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy, dated March 2004. The site stormwater improvements have been designed with the intent to meet the current City of Bozeman drainage regulations for the entire site to the extent feasible. Specific site information and criteria are described below: I. Ownership of Facilities Simkins-Hallin Simkins-Hallin will own all stormwater facilities which includes the chamber systems, surface pond, catch basins, manholes, and piping within the site boundary. II. Inspection Thresholds for Cleaning Infiltration Chamber If sediment in isolator row exceeds three (3) inches or grate is more than 25% clogged with debris, clean grate and/or structure and vacuum isolator row. Catch Basins If sediment fills 60% of the sump or comes within 6-inches of a pipe, clean sump with vacuum. P:21363_01_Simkins_Tract2B_4B_O&M 2 (02/28/25) DME/RPE Surface Pond If sediment reduces pond volume by 25%, clean pond banks and bottom manually or mechanically. Drywells If sediment fills three (3) inches of open bottom of manhole or grate is more than 25% clogged with debris, clean grate and sump with vacuum. III. Cleaning Infiltration Chamber To clean grate of structure, remove and dispose of debris clogging the grate. To clean the structure, use catch basin vacuum to remove sediment and debris. To clean isolator row, use a JetVac. Catch Basins To clean grate of structure, remove and dispose of debris clogging the grate. To clean the structure, use catch basin vacuum to remove sediment and debris. Surface Pond To clean the pond manually or mechanically and remove sediment and debris from the pond banks and bottom. Drywells To clean grate of structure, remove and dispose of debris clogging the grate. To clean the structure, use catch basin vacuum to remove sediment and debris. IV. Inspection, Maintenance, and Replacement Schedule Infiltration Chamber Inspection: Every six (6) months and after storm events larger than 0.5 inches of precipitation Maintenance: Vacuum isolator row every five (5) years or as needed based on inspection Design Life/Replacement Schedule: 50 years Catch Basins Inspection: Every six (6) months and after storm events larger than 0.5 inches of precipitation Maintenance: Clean grate of structure and vacuum sediment and debris out of the sump every five (5) years or as needed based on inspection Design Life/Replacement Schedule: 50 years Surface Pond Inspection: Every six (6) months and after storm events larger than 0.5 inches of precipitation P:21363_01_Simkins_Tract2B_4B_O&M 3 (02/28/25) DME/RPE Maintenance: Remove sediment accumulation from the pond bottom, remove trash, undesirable vegetation, and noxious weeds. Repair pond area such as sidewalls due to erosion, settlement, or rodent damage. Design Life/Replacement Schedule: 100 years Drywlls Inspection: Every six (6) months and after storm events larger than 0.5 inches of precipitation Maintenance: Clean grate of structure and vacuum sediment and debris out of the sump every five (5) years or as needed based on inspection Design Life/Replacement Schedule: 50 years V. Responsible Party Simkins-Hallin Simkins-Hallin will be responsible for the inspection, maintenance, and replacement of all stormwater facilities located within the project limits. I agree to the above inspection, maintenance, and replacement schedule detailed above. Signature: __________________________________________ Simkins-Hallin Representative APPENDIX IGEOTECHNICAL REPORT21363.01 SIMKINS NORTH PARK TRACTS 2B & 4B July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Mr. Sean Potkay Project Manager Simkins – Hallin, Inc 326 N. Broadway Avenue Bozeman, Montana 59771 Via Email: spotkay@simkins-hallin.com Dear Mr. Potkay: Re: Geotechnical Evaluation, Proposed North Park Simkins-Hallin Development, Bozeman, Montana We have completed the geotechnical evaluation you authorized on March 17, 2023. This work was performed in general accordance with our proposal to you, dated March 3, 2023. This report presents the findings of the subsurface exploration, and laboratory testing as well as provides geotechnical recommendations to assist in design of site grading, utilities, foundations, floor slabs and pavements for the proposed project. Please refer to the attached report for more detailed results of our fieldwork, laboratory testing, and engineering analysis and recommendations. Thank you for using SK Geotechnical. If you have any questions regarding this report, or require our services during the construction phase of this project, please call Cory Rice at (406) 652-3930. Sincerely, Cory G. Rice, PE Senior Geotechnical Engineer Gregory T. Staffileno, PE Reviewing Engineer Attachment: Geotechnical Evaluation Report 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, Montana 59108-0190 p: 406.652.3930; f: 406.652.3944 www.skgeotechnical.com Table of Contents Description Page A. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 A.1. Project ............................................................................................................................................ 1 A.2. Purpose of this Evaluation ............................................................................................................. 1 A.3. Scope ............................................................................................................................................. 1 A.4. Documents Provided ...................................................................................................................... 2 A.5. Locations and Elevations ............................................................................................................... 2 B. Results ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 B.1. Logs ............................................................................................................................................... 3 B.2. Site Conditions ............................................................................................................................... 3 B.3. Soils ............................................................................................................................................... 3 B.4. Groundwater Observations ............................................................................................................ 5 B.5. Laboratory Tests ............................................................................................................................ 7 C. Analyses and Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 8 C.1. Proposed Construction ................................................................................................................... 8 C.2. Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 9 C.3. Site Preparation ............................................................................................................................ 10 C.4. Foundations .................................................................................................................................. 14 C.5. Cast In-Place Retaining Walls and Loading Dock Walls ............................................................ 16 C.6. Earth-Supported Floors ................................................................................................................ 16 C.7. Variable Height Retaining Walls ................................................................................................. 17 C.8. Exterior Slabs ............................................................................................................................... 18 C.9. Site Grading and Drainage ........................................................................................................... 19 C.10. Building Utilities ........................................................................................................................ 19 C.11. Pavement .................................................................................................................................... 19 C.12. Concrete ..................................................................................................................................... 21 D. Construction .......................................................................................................................................... 22 D.1. Excavation and Dewatering ......................................................................................................... 22 D.2. Observations ................................................................................................................................ 22 D.3. Moisture Conditioning ................................................................................................................. 22 D.4. Subgrade Disturbance .................................................................................................................. 23 D.5. Testing ......................................................................................................................................... 23 D.6. Cold Weather Construction ......................................................................................................... 23 E. Procedures ............................................................................................................................................. 24 E.1. Drilling and Sampling .................................................................................................................. 24 E.2. Soil Classification ........................................................................................................................ 24 E.3. Groundwater Observations........................................................................................................... 24 F. General Recommendations .................................................................................................................... 25 F.1. Basis of Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 25 F.2. Review of Design ......................................................................................................................... 25 F.3. Groundwater Fluctuations ............................................................................................................ 25 F.4. Use of Report ............................................................................................................................... 25 F.5. Level of Care ................................................................................................................................ 25 Table of Contents (continued) Professional Certification Appendix Site Location Sketch Partial Geologic Map Geotechnical Boring Layout Preliminary Overall Grading and Drainage Plan Preliminary Overall Schematic Landscape Plan Descriptive Terminology 2023 Log of Borings and Lab Tests 2022 Log of Borings and Lab Tests A. Introduction A.1. Project Simkins-Hallin, Inc. is planning on developing a thirty-two-acre parcel on the north side of Bozeman, Montana for their building product operations. The approximate location of the site is shown on the Site Location Sketch included in the appendix of this report. The overall extent of the site development is shown on the Geotechnical Boring Layout drawing in the appendix. A.2. Purpose of this Evaluation The purpose of the geotechnical evaluation was to assist Simkins-Hallin, Inc., Stahly Engineering (structural engineer), Sanderson Stewart (civil designer), and Sunbelt Rack (racking and pre-engineered metal building designer), in designing site grading, utilities, foundations, slabs, and pavements and in preparing plans and specifications for the proposed development. Our firm completed a preliminary geotechnical evaluation for the site in 2022 for Sanderson Stewart and this work was summarized in our report dated July 25, 2023, and this information has also been incorporated into this report. A.3. Scope The desired scope of services was developed between conversations and emails with Sanderson Stewart and Simkins-Hallin. Our proposed scope of services was outlined in our proposal dated March 3, 2023. Mr. Sean Potkay, the project manager with Simkins-Hallin, authorized us to proceed in accordance with the proposal on March 17, 2023. Our scope of services was limited to: • Developing a proposed boring plan and providing this to Sanderson Stewart for staking. • Coordinating the locating of underground utilities near the boring locations. • Conducting 32 penetration test borings to depths ranging from 10 to 25 feet, or auger refusal, whichever was encountered first. • Taking thin-walled tube samples of clayey soils to provide relatively undisturbed samples for consolidation tests. • Collecting larger bag samples of the potential pavement subgrade soils to provide samples for moisture-density relationship (Proctor) and California bearing ratio (CBR) tests. • Returning the samples to our laboratory for visual classification and logging by a geotechnical engineer or geologist. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 2 • Conducting laboratory tests consisting of moisture content, classification, Proctor, CBR and corrosion tests. • Analyzing the results and formulating recommendations for utilities, earthwork, spread footing foundations, slabs, and pavements. • Discussing the project with the project designers and Mr. Potkay. • Submitting a geotechnical evaluation report containing logs of the borings, our analysis of the field and laboratory tests, and recommendations for earthwork, spread footing foundations, slabs, and pavements. Although not anticipated at the time of our proposal, two retaining walls are also being considered for the project. Therefore, preliminary recommendations for foundations support and design parameters are being provided. However, a global stability analysis will likely be required for the larger variable height retaining wall planned near the southeast corner of the site once design is more complete. A.4. Documents Provided The following most recent documents were provided for our use: • Geotechnical Boring Layout drawing prepared by Sanderson Stewart, dated June 2023 • Preliminary IMF Submittal Plans prepared by Sanderson Stewart, dated June 28, 2023 • Plan mark-ups showing areas of larger forklift traffic. • Equipment Data Sheets for the C-14,000 and C-26,000 combilift forklifts A.5. Locations and Elevations The preliminary boring locations were shown on a Preliminary Boring Plan prepared by our personnel. This information was provided to Sanderson Stewart. Their personnel staked the boring locations in the field, and then provided the surveyed locations and surface elevations to us. The locations of the borings are shown on the Geotechnical Boring Layout drawing included in the Appendix. The borings performed for our preliminary evaluation in 2022 are designated by the prefix "ST-," and the borings completed in 2023 are designated by the prefix # symbol. These recent boring will be referred to by the prefix “B-,” in this report. Borings B-6, B-7, B-11 and B-14 could not be completed since they were located on railroad property, and access was not authorized at the time of our fieldwork. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 3 B. Results B.1. Logs Log of Boring sheets indicating the depth and identification of the various soil strata, the penetration resistances, laboratory test data, and water level information are attached. It should be noted the depths shown as boundaries between the strata are only approximate. The actual changes may be transitions and the depths of the changes vary between borings. Geologic origins presented for each stratum on the Log of Boring sheets are based on the soil types, blows per foot, and available common knowledge of the depositional history of the site. Because of the complex glacial and post-glacial depositional environments, geologic origins are frequently difficult to ascertain. A detailed evaluation of the geologic history of the site was not performed. B.2. Site Conditions The site is located on the north side of Bozeman, Montana. At the time of our fieldwork, the majority of the site was an agricultural field. However, the hillside on the southeast corner of the site had been partially cut down and several feet of material had been removed from this area. A cell tower exists near the south center portion of the property. The utilities and street construction for Wheat Drive, which bisects the site, was also currently being constructed. A City of Bozeman utility easement also travels through the center portion of the site consisting of buried watermain, sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems. These items are shown on the attached Overall Grading and Drainage Plan drawing. As indicated by the boring surface elevations, the site generally slopes down to the northwest, with a high elevation of about 4707 at the southeast corner of the site, and a low elevation of about 4672 at the extreme northwest corner of the site. The western side of the site is also bounded by Mandeville Creek, which drains to the north. As indicated on the attached Partial Geologic Map, the general geology in the area consists of alluvial braid plain deposits-boulder (Qab). Our borings generally encountered these soils and consisted of more recent alluvial deposits overlying older tertiary age deposits. B.3. Soils The soil borings generally encountered a fairy similar profile consisting of about 2 to 5 feet of surficial clayey soils overlying primarily coarser sand and gravel deposits. The exception was four borings performed on the eastern side of the site in the future truss building and pavement area where the clay extended to depths ranging from about 6 1/2 to 21 feet below the current ground surface. Boring ST-7 which had the deepest clay thickness was located at a much higher elevation on the east end of the site. After the area has been cut to proposed finished grade, it is anticipated that the depth of the clay soils in this area will generally be less than about 3 feet below finished grade. Two borings performed in the millwork building area, B-30 and B-31 encountered clays to a depth of about 5 to 6 feet below existing grade. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 4 Also, the site was previously an agricultural field, and the approximate 1 to 2 feet of the clay surface was tilled soil and contained organics, and should generally be considered topsoil. The clayey soils consisted primarily of sandy lean clays, lean clays with sand and sandy silty clay with some silt. The gravels ranged from poorly graded gravels to silty gravels to clayey gravels and often contained cobbles. Some layers of clayey sand and lean clay with sand were encountered within the gravels at depth, which is typical of the alluvial braid plain deposits. The penetration resistances recorded in the upper clayey soils generally indicated the soils ranged from a soft to medium stiff consistency. Penetration resistances recorded in the sands and gravels generally indicated they were medium dense to very dense and often contained cobbles. Penetration resistances recorded in the clayey layers buried within the gravels indicated they were generally rather stiff to very stiff. Table 1 below summarizes the boring surface elevations as well as the depth and corresponding elevation to the top of the coarser sand or gravel and the sand or gravel. Table 1. Summary of Depth to Sand or Gravel Boring Surface Elevation Depth to Sand or Gravel Sand or Gravel Elevation Preliminary Borings - 2022 ST-1 4671.0 2 1/2 4668 1/2 ST-1A 4671.0 2 1/2 4668 1/2 ST-2 4681.5 4 4677 1/2 ST-3 4679.2 3 4676 ST-4 4683.9 3 4681 ST-5 4692.0 4 1/2 4687 1/2 ST-6 4689.5 2 1/2 4687 ST-7 4709.5 21 4688 1/2 Final Borings - 2023 B-1 4691.9 3 1/2 4688 1/2 B-2 4702.2 10 4692 B-3 4691.2 2 1/2 4688 1/2 B-4 4692.8 8 1/2 4684 1/2 B-5 4689.5 4 4685 1/2 B-8 4696.4 8 1/2 4688 B-9 4686.8 2 4685 B-10 4687.3 6 1/2 4681 B-12 4678.7 3 1/2 4675 Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 5 Table 1. Summary of Depth to Sand or Gravel Continued. Boring Surface Elevation Depth to Gravel Gravel Elevation B-13 4677.7 3 1/2 4674 B-15 4677.7 3 1/2 4674 B-16 4677.8 3 4675 B-17 4679.2 2 1/2 4676 1/2 B-18 4678.5 1 1/2 4677 B-19 4682.4 4 4678 1/2 B-20 4681.7 3 1/2 4678 B-21 4681.4 2 1/2 4679 B-22 4680.8 2 4679 B-23 4682.5 3 4679 1/2 B-24 4683.0 3 4680 B-25 4683.3 4 4679 1/2 B-26 4684.5 3 1/2 4681 B-27 4685.4 4 4681 1/2 B-28 4685.9 4 1/2 4681 1/2 B-29 4685.8 2 4684 B-30 4688.2 5 4683 B-31 4690.6 6 4684 1/2 B-32 4684.5 3 4681 1/2 B-33 4687.3 3 4684 1/2 B-34 4687.9 2 1/2 4685 1/2 B-35 4690.0 3 4687 B-36 4689.4 4 4685 1/2 B.4. Groundwater Observations Groundwater was encountered in the majority of the borings, and was generally observed at depths ranging from about 6 to 15 feet with some as deep as 24 feet. The depths to groundwater and groundwater surface elevations at the borings are summarized in Table 2 following this page. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 6 Table 2. Summary of Groundwater Level Measurements Boring Surface Elevation Depth to Groundwater Groundwater Elevation Preliminary Borings - 2022 ST-1 4671.0 N/E N/E ST-1A 4671.0 N/E N/E ST-2 4681.5 7 4674 1/2 ST-3 4679.2 9 4670 ST-4 4683.9 8 4676 ST-5 4692.0 17 1/2 4674 1/2 ST-6 4689.5 7 4682 1/2 ST-7 4709.5 24 4685 1/2 Final Borings - 2023 B-1 4691.9 N/E N/E B-2 4702.2 24.0 4678 B-3 4691.2 14.0 4677 B-4 4692.8 13.0 4680 B-5 4689.5 13.5 4676 B-8 4696.4 18 4678 1/2 B-9 4686.8 N/E N/E B-10 4687.3 10 1/2 4677 B-12 4678.7 7 4671 1/2 B-13 4677.7 8 1/2 4669 B-15 4677.7 N/E N/E B-16 4677.8 9 4669 B-17 4679.2 8 4671 B-18 4678.5 7 4671 1/2 B-19 4682.4 9 1/2 4673 B-20 4681.7 9 4673 B-21 4681.4 7 1/2 4674 B-22 4680.8 6 1/2 4674 1/2 B-23 4682.5 9 4673 1/2 B-24 4683.0 7 4676 B-25 4683.3 7 1/2 4675 1/2 B-26 4684.5 7 1/2 4677 B-27 4685.4 9 4676 1/2 B-28 4685.9 8 1/2 4677 1/2 B-29 4685.8 8 4678 B-30 4688.2 8 1/2 4680 B-31 4690.6 N/E N/E B-32 4684.5 6 4678 1/2 B-33 4687.3 6 1/2 4681 B-34 4687.9 7 4681 B-35 4690.0 6 4684 B-36 4689.4 6 4683 1/2 Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 7 It should be noted, the period of observation was relatively short, and seasonal and annual fluctuations in the groundwater levels should be anticipated. It was indicated that monitoring wells were installed by others across the development to monitor groundwater levels, and this information should be reviewed to better determine seasonal and annual fluctuations. B.5. Laboratory Tests The results of the laboratory tests are presented on the boring logs, tables and graphs in the Appendix. The laboratory tests consisted of classification, consolidation, Proctor, CBR and corrosion tests. The results of these tests are summarized in Table 3 and Table 4 below. The corrosion test results are attached. Table 3. Summary of Soil Classification and Consolidation Tests Boring Depth (ft) ASTM Symbol Moisture Content LL PL PI Percent Passing 200 Sieve Dry Density (pcf) Moist Density (pcf) Percent Swell (+) or Collapse (-) Percent Consolidation at 2,000 psf* ST-2 3-4 CL-ML 18.2 25 20 5 52.8 90 106.4 -3.1 10.2 ST-2 11 1/2-13 CL 27.7 34 22 12 52.9 -- -- ---- ST-4 14-15 1/2 CL 33.5 29 18 11 74.7 -- -- ---- ST-5 3-4 CL 24.1 30 21 9 71.7 83.6 103.8 -3.2 6.3 ST-6 6 1/2-8 SM 6.8 21 19 2 12.7 -- -- -- -- B-1 2-3 CL 20.1 30 19 11 90.2 100.1 120.2 -1.9 4.7 B-4 18 1/2-19 1/2 SC 15.5 30 20 10 38.1 110.0 127.0 -0.2 3.8 B-5 0-3 CL-ML 19.3 26 19 7 83.1 -- -- -- -- B-5 3-5 GP-GM 5.7 NP NP NP 5.7 -- -- -- -- B-5 16-17 CL 30.2 35 21 4 74.0 -- -- -- -- B-21 23-24 CL 30.9 43 23 20 61.9 89.5 117.2 0.2 4.2 B-22 25 1/2-26 1/2 CH 38.9 53 22 31 70.2 -- -- ---- B-24 0-3 CL 21.8 26 19 7 86.2 -- -- ---- B-24 3-5 GP-GM 5.7 NP NP NP 5.9 -- -- ---- B-25 3-4 CL 16.1 30 17 13 55.1 106.9 124.1 0.1 4.5 *Excluding the collapse Table 4. Summary of Proctor and CBR Tests Boring Depth (ft) ASTM Symbol Moisture Content LL PL PI Percent Passing 200 Sieve Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (percent) CBR Value B-5 0-3 CL-ML 19.3 26 19 7 83.1 108.9 18.9 4.0 B-5 3-5 GP-GM 5.7 NP NP NP 5.7 140.0 9.1 9.1 B-24 0-3 CL 21.8 26 19 7 86.2 102.3 22.0 3.5 B-24 3-5 GP-GM 5.7 NP NP NP 5.9 131.8 8.3 15 Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 8 The laboratory tests generally indicate that the clayey soils are low plasticity, weak and potentially collapsible when inundated with water. Therefore, these soils are generally considered poor for foundation and slab support. Once excavated and recompacted, they are not anticipated to undergo significant volume changes with changes in moisture content, so could be used for lightly loaded structures, if desired. The clayey soils are also considered to be highly corrosive to buried steel conduits and corrosion protection or non-corrosive materials are recommended. The CBR tests performed on the gravel soils were somewhat low, and it is our opinion that this may be a reflection of the rounded and silty/clayey gravel material which can sometimes perform poorly in a CBR test. It is our opinion that the gravels will likely have a field CBR value of at least 10. C. Analyses and Recommendations C.1. Proposed Construction A general layout of the proposed construction is shown on the attached Overall Grading and Drainage Plan and Overall Schematic Landscape plans. In summary, the development will consist of regrading the property to a gently sloping surface ranging from about elevation 4668 near the southeast corner to about 4677 at the northwest corner. To facilitate these grade changes, it is planned to construct a variable height retaining wall along the south and southeast corner of the site with an unbalanced earth height of about 10 feet with a sloping hillside above the retaining wall. A small retaining wall with a maximum height of about 5 feet is planned between Wheat Drive and the retail parking area. Across the remainder of the site, cut and fill depths will generally be less than about 5 feet and will generally follow existing grade. The development will then consist of primarily five larger buildings and multiple exterior sheds, material storage racks and product storage areas. A summary of the proposed construction is summarized in Table 5 following this page. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 9 Table 5. Summary of Proposed Building Construction Structure Construction Type Proposed Finished Grade Maximum Anticipated Column Loads (kips) Maximum Anticipated Wall Loads (kips/lineal foot) Comments Retail/Office Building Pre-Cast Tilt Up Panels 4680.25 100 6 Truss Manufacturing PEMB 4689.00 200 5 Sheetrock Warehouse PEMB 4677.50 100 5 Drive – Thru Building PEMB 4678.75 100 5 Millwork Building PEMB 4690.25 100 5 Loading dock walls on west side of building Mechanic Shop PEMB 4692.00 100 5 Material Racks, Sheds, Material Storage Steel Frame Varies 200 5 The majority of the site will then be covered with an asphalt pavement surface. The pavement use will vary across the site ranging from light car and truck parking around the retail/office building to heavy forklift traffic near the truss manufacturing building. The limits of the heavier forklift traffic areas are outlined on the attached Geotechnical Boring Layout drawing. These areas were provided by Simkins- Hallin. If the proposed loads exceed the values indicated in Table 5, or if the proposed grades differ by more than 1 foot by the values indicated, or if there are changes to the design, we should be informed. Additional analysis and recommendations may be necessary. C.2. Discussion The site is covered by a relatively thick topsoil zone overlying weaker clays that are potentially collapsible. The thicker topsoil will need to be stripped from the site prior to development. A portion of the topsoil has already been removed from the partial cut area. The underlying clays are generally considered weak and are unsuitable for direct foundation or slab support, in our opinion. After the topsoil has been stripped and the site has been graded to future subgrade elevation beneath pavement areas, little clay would remain over the underlying sands and gravels, which are considered a much better subgrade for foundation, slab and pavement support. Therefore, we recommended in our preliminary report that consideration should be given to removing all of the clays down to the underlying Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 10 sands and gravels and replacing them with imported sandy gravel. We understand this approach has been selected for the northern portion of the site, Tract 2-B and Tract 4-B. For the southwestern Tract 3-B, the clays are thicker and about 2 to 5 feet of fill is needed to establish proposed finished floor elevation for the millwork and mechanic shop buildings. While we still recommend subexcavating the clayey soils from beneath the building areas in Tract 3-B, the clays can be left in place beneath the future pavement areas in Tract 3-B. However, thicker pavement sections and some soft, wet subgrades should be anticipated. After the clayey soils have been subexcavated and replaced with imported sandy gravels, it is our opinion the structures can be supported on conventional spread footings. The future retaining walls can also be supported directly on the compacted sandy gravels or underlying native gravels. As indicated previously, a global stability analysis will need to be conducted for the larger variable height retaining wall planned near the southeast corner of the site. Temporary shoring may also be needed in this area. We anticipate the majority of the utilities can be supported on the native sands or gravels, as well as compacted sandy gravel. However, dewatering should be anticipated for the majority of the deeper site utilities. Recommended alternatives for flexible asphalt pavement surfaces are included later in this report. The combilift forklifts will be very abrasive to flexible asphalt pavements, and consideration should be given to using Portland cement concrete pavement in areas of more severe forklift traffic and turning loads. C.3. Site Preparation C.3.a. Mass Grading. We recommend all vegetation, topsoil, and root zone be removed from beneath the proposed development area. The topsoil was relatively thick, ranging in thickness from about 1 to 2 feet. With the exception of the areas that had recently been cut down, and the topsoil had been removed. We recommend assuming an average thickness of about 18 inches across the site, however, actual depth of removal should be determined by observations during stripping. To provide a more stable subgrade, we also recommend removing the clay and silt soils down to the underlying sands and gravels. This should be completed across the entire areas of Tracts 2-B and 4-B and building slabs and foundation areas in Tract 3-B. The anticipated depth of subexcavation are summarized in Table 6 following this page. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 11 Table 6. Anticipated Subexcavation Depths Boring Surface Elevation Anticipated Depth to Sand or Gravel below Existing Grade Sand or Gravel Elevation Preliminary Borings - 2022 ST-1 4671.0 2 1/2 4668 1/2 ST-1A 4671.0 2 1/2 4668 1/2 ST-2 4681.5 4 4677 1/2 ST-3 4679.2 3 4676 ST-4 4683.9 3 4681 ST-5 4692.0 4 1/2 4687 1/2 ST-6 4689.5 2 1/2 4687 ST-7 4709.5 21 4688 1/2 Final Borings - 2023 B-1 4691.9 3 1/2 4688 1/2 B-2 4702.2 10 4692 B-3 4691.2 2 1/2 4688 1/2 B-4 4692.8 8 1/2 4684 1/2 B-5 4689.5 4 4685 1/2 B-8 4696.4 8 1/2 4688 B-9 4686.8 2 4685 B-10 4687.3 6 1/2 4681 B-12 4678.7 3 1/2 4675 B-13 4677.7 3 1/2 4674 B-15 4677.7 3 1/2 4674 B-16 4677.8 3 4675 B-17 4679.2 2 1/2 4676 1/2 B-18 4678.5 1 1/2 4677 B-19 4682.4 4 4678 1/2 B-20 4681.7 3 1/2 4678 B-21 4681.4 2 1/2 4679 B-22 4680.8 2 4679 B-23 4682.5 3 4679 1/2 B-24 4683.0 3 4680 B-25 4683.3 4 4679 1/2 B-26 4684.5 3 1/2 4681 B-27 4685.4 4 4681 1/2 B-28 4685.9 4 1/2 4681 1/2 B-29 4685.8 2 4684 B-30 4688.2 5 4683 B-31 4690.6 6 4684 1/2 B-32 4684.5 3 4681 1/2 B-33 4687.3 3 4684 1/2 B-34 4687.9 2 1/2 4685 1/2 B-35 4690.0 3 4687 B-36 4689.4 4 4685 1/2 Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 12 As indicated in Table 6, the depth of subexcavation will generally range from about 2 to 5 feet below existing grade with some areas as deep as about 10 feet. However, actual depth of subexcavation below finished grade will generally range from about 2 to 4 feet on Tracts 2-B and 4-B. Even so, it is an alluvial environment and clay and silt overburden depths will vary and could be deeper in ancient channel and pond areas. On Tract 3-B, the depth of subexcavation below finished floor grade will be greater. Borings in the millwork building and mechanic shop indicate clay and silt overburden was encountered to depths ranging from about 3 to 6 feet. Then, additional fill will be necessary to raise grades even higher to achieve floor elevation. Based on the water levels at the time of our evaluation, it appears that groundwater will generally be at least 2 to 3 feet below the anticipated subexcavation bottom. However, groundwater levels do fluctuate, and if the earthwork is conducted during a period of seasonally high groundwater, some groundwater could be encountered. If groundwater is encountered, we recommend it be drawn down a minimum of 2 feet below the anticipated subexcavation bottom prior to excavation. The method of dewatering will need to be determined by the contractor based on their past experience and available equipment. After the clayey soils have been subexcavated and removed, we recommend they be replaced with imported structural backfill consisting of 3-inch minus sandy gravel with the following recommended gradation requirements. Table 7. Standard Backfill Requirements. Sieve Size % passing 3-inch 100 No. 4 25-60 No 200 < 12 Plasticity Index <6 Prior to placing the structural backfill, we recommend scarifying, moisture conditioning and recompacting the exposed native sand and gravel subgrade and compacting it to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density determined in accordance with American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) Method of Test D698 (Standard Proctor). We recommend structural backfill be placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts thicknesses, moisture conditioned to a moisture content within 2 percent of optimum and compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of its standard Proctor density. C.3.b. Site Utilities. C.3.b.1. Dewatering. Groundwater was commonly encountered at depths ranging from about 6 to 10 feet below existing grade. Therefore, dewatering should be anticipated for site utilities. We recommend groundwater be drawn down a minimum of 2 feet below the trench bottom prior to excavation. The method of dewatering will need to be determined by the contractor based on their past experience and available equipment. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 13 C.3.b.2. Trench Subgrade. We anticipate the trench subgrade will be primarily medium dense to dense sandy gravels with cobbles. We anticipate these soils will generally be suitable for direct bedding support. Even so, the site does have clayey soils, and soft, wet clayey soils could be encountered in areas. Therefore, we recommend providing a small quantity of Type 2 bedding material for support of pipes when soft, wet, clayey areas are encountered. C.3.b.3. Materials. We recommend the utilities be installed in general accordance with Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS). MPWSS indicates Type 1 bedding is to be 1 1/2-inch minus gravel with no requirement on the percent passing the No. 200 sieve (fines). Type 2 bedding is to be 3-inch minus aggregate material with no more than 25 percent passing the No. 4 sieve and no more than 10 percent passing the No. 8 sieve. These gravels are considered open-graded materials and are susceptible to piping of fines. To reduce the risk of piping fines within an open-graded bedding, we recommend completely wrapping the open-graded Type 1 and Type 2 bedding with a 6-ounce nonwoven geotextile fabric. Another alternative is to provide well-graded Type 1 and Type 2 bedding as described in Montana Public Works Drawing Number 02221-2. Placing well-graded bedding which contains fine- to coarse-grained sands will reduce the risk of fines piping due to groundwater fluctuations or infiltrated water flowing within pipe bedding. It is our opinion this is the preferred approach if the trench is free of water, and the bedding can be compacted. However, if water will saturate the bedding prior to compaction, then the open-graded bedding completely wrapped in non-woven fabric is more constructible, in our opinion. C.3.b.4. Backfilling and Compaction. It is our opinion the on-site sand and gravel soils excavated from the trenches can generally be reused as compacted backfill. We recommend the clayey soils only be used in areas where the clayey soils have been left in-place for the development area, such as Tract 3-B. In all areas, the excavated soils should be replaced in kind, i.e., gravels with gravels and clays with clays. We anticipate soils excavated from below groundwater will be wet, and will need to be spread out and dried or mixed with drier soils to obtain a moisture content near optimum. On-site clayey soils will also likely be wet, and will also need to be spread out and dried, if reused. Imported materials will likely be below optimum moisture content and will require additional moisture prior to placement. Gravels from the excavation to be reused as trench backfill will likely need to be screened to remove oversized materials greater than 6-inches prior to placement. Oversized materials larger than 6 inches can hinder compaction efforts and create voids, which causes segregation and eventually settlement. All backfill should be placed in accordance with MPWSS requirements. We recommend backfill be placed and compacted in accordance with MPWSS Section 02201 for Type A backfill. To reduce settlement, it is critical that backfill be moisture conditioned to a moisture content near optimum, placed in uncompacted (loose) lifts of 8 inches of less, and compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of its standard Proctor density. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 14 If smaller remote-controlled walk behind compaction equipment is used, lifts should then be reduced to 4 inches (loose) to aid in achieving compaction. It is also critical that backfill adjacent to manholes, vaults, and valves be adequately compacted or the risk of surface water infiltration is much higher. Hand operated equipment with thinner 4-inch lifts is recommended for compaction in tight spaces. Surface water can saturate backfill and cause excessive settlement if backfill is inadequately compacted. Qualified personnel should closely observe backfill placement, lift sizes and compaction effort around manholes, vaults and valves as well as trench backfill above utilities. We recommend full time observations be performed to confirm lift thickness and consistent compaction effort being applied to each lift. Compaction testing must be performed during placement of backfill in accordance with project specifications and City of Bozeman requirements. C.3.b.5. Trench Settlement. Trench settlement of utility excavations is a common problem and it is often difficult to avoid. Even well compacted backfill (98 percent) will settle some, in our opinion, we anticipate trench settlement will be approximately 1/2 to 1 percent of the total trench depth, if well compacted. For backfill compacted to only 90 percent, we anticipate trench settlement in the range of 3 percent of the trench depth. If the backfill is poorly compacted, excessively thick lifts are placed, large oversized materials are left in place, contains frozen materials, or surface water infiltrates into the trench, several inches of settlement could occur. C.4. Foundations C.4.a. Depth. We recommend footings for heated structures bear a minimum of 4 feet below exterior grades for frost protection. Interior footings for heated structures may be placed immediately beneath the slabs. Footings for exterior, unheated structures should bear a minimum of 5 feet below exterior grade. Sunbelt Rack indicates that many of the exterior rack systems are designed to accommodate movement associated with frost and can generally bear at relatively shallow depths below the finished ground surface. If movement from frost can be tolerated, it is our opinion that this is acceptable, but movement from frost should be anticipated. Since the structures will bear on a relatively uniform subgrade of compacted sandy gravel overlying the native sands and gravels, we anticipate the movement between surrounding pavements and shallow foundations will be relatively uniform. However, it should be noted that the underlying sands and gravels are frost susceptible and up to about 1 to 2 inches of seasonal frost movement should be anticipated. The thickened edge slab foundations may also be used for different structures. We recommend thickened edge slab foundations have a minimum turn down edge thickness of 2 feet and bear a minimum of 18 inches below grade. Extruded polystyrene foam insultation should be provided around the foundations in accordance with American Society for Civil Engineers (ASCE) 32-01 Design and Construction of Frost-Protected Shallow Foundations. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 15 C.4.b. Subgrade. After the recommended clay and silt overburden subexcavation and replacement has been completed, we anticipate that footing subgrades will consist of native sands and gravels or recompacted structural backfill placed over native sands and gravels. The soils loosened during excavation should be recompacted prior to placement of foundations. C.4.c. Bearing Pressure. It is our opinion footings may be designed for a net allowable bearing pressure up to 4,000 psf (4,000 pounds per square foot). (Net allowable bearing pressure is defined as that bearing pressure in excess of the final minimum overburden pressure.) This bearing pressure includes a factor of safety of at least 3.0 against bearing capacity failure. C.4.d. Anticipated Settlement and Heave. Based on the indicated building loads, we anticipate total and differential settlement and heave of foundations designed and placed as recommended above will generally be less than 1 inch for heated structures under the assumed loads. We estimate differential movement will be less than 3/4 inch. Building of this type can generally tolerate movements of this magnitude. As indicated above, shallow foundations that are not placed below frost depth will experience more movement, and we estimate total movement up to 2 inches could occur. C.4.e. Reinforcement. Sufficient reinforcing steel should be placed in the foundation walls to span isolated zones where foundation support could be lost due to localized settlement or heave of the soils or installation of subsurface utilities. This will also reduce the widths of cracks created by shrinkage of the concrete, and local settlement and heave of the soils. The amount of reinforcing should be determined by the project structural engineer. C.4.f. Foundation Wall Backfill. We recommend all backfill placed on the interior and exterior sides of the foundation walls be compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density beneath slabs and pavements and to a minimum of 90 percent in landscaped areas. Soils from the footing excavations can generally be used, except where frost protection beneath exterior slabs is desired as discussed later in this report. The levels of the exterior and interior backfills should not differ by more than 8 inches during placement or the walls should be braced, otherwise the foundation walls may be displaced. C.4.g. Seismic Design Considerations. Based on the results of our soil borings and review of available geologic information, we recommend using a "Stiff soil profile, Site Class D," as defined by the 2021 International Building Code (IBC) for design. Loose, waterbearing soils were not encountered. Therefore, it is our opinion that the soils are not potentially liquifiable under the anticipated seismic forces. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 16 C.5. Cast In-Place Retaining Walls and Loading Dock Walls C.5.a. Backfill. We recommend placing 5 feet (horizontal) of nonfrost-susceptible sand or sandy gravel backfill behind the retaining walls for three reasons: (1) to provide a relatively free-draining backfill, which will not impede downward percolation of water to seep holes, (2) to reduce the lateral earth pressures on the wall, and (3) to reduce the risk of frost penetrating the backfill behind the wall, causing it to move outward. Imported sand or sandy gravel with less than 5 percent of its particles by weight passing a 200 sieve is generally considered nonfrost-susceptible. Backfill behind the retaining walls should be placed in lifts and at a moisture content at or slightly above optimum moisture content. The backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density. C.5.b. Lateral Earth Pressures. Assuming nonfrost-susceptible sand or sandy gravel backfill compacted to 98 percent will be placed behind retaining walls, we recommend using the following parameters for estimating lateral forces. •Active earth pressure (wall free to move away from backfill): 35 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (psf/ft) plus 0.31 times surcharge load. •At-rest earth pressure (wall restrained): 55 psf/ft plus 0.5 times surcharge load. •Passive earth pressure: 650 psf/ft plus 5.8 times surcharge load. •Coefficient of sliding friction: 0.55. The values indicated above do not include factors of safety. Appropriate factors of safety should be included when designing retaining walls to resist lateral earth forces. C.6. Earth-Supported Floors C.6.a. Subgrade. After the recommended clay and silt overburden subexcavation and replacement, we anticipate floor subgrades will consist of compacted structural backfill placed over the native sands and gravels. It is our opinion that these soils will be suitable for floor slab support. However, a leveling course of 3/4-inch minus crushed gravel base is recommended beneath floors for finished grading. C.6.b. Backfill. We recommend backfill in footing and mechanical trenches also be moistened to a moisture content near or slightly above the optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 98 percent. C.6.c. Vapor Retarder. If floor coverings or coatings less permeable than the concrete slab will be used, or if moisture is a concern, we recommend a vapor retarder/barrier be placed directly beneath the slab. (Some coverings, coatings or situations may require a vapor barrier, i.e., a membrane with a permeance less than 0.01 perm.) We recommend placement of the vapor retarder/barrier be located in accordance with American Concrete Institute (ACI) 302.1R-15. Some contractors and designers prefer to place a sand or gravel cushion course between the slab and vapor retarder in an effort to reduce curling. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 17 However, this practice increases the risk of trapping water between the slab vapor retarder, which can significantly delay placement of some floor coverings. If the cushion course does become wet prior to concrete placement, it is critical the excess moisture be removed prior to slab placement. It should be noted that placement of a gravel cushion course for the structural backfill, even though it is granular, should not be considered adequate as a vapor retarder/barrier. Due to the relatively high groundwater, it is critical that vapor barriers/retarders be installed beneath floors, where floor covers and coatings are planned. C.6.d. Subgrade Modulus. Assuming the slabs will be placed on a minimum of 6 inches of compacted crushed gravel road base placed over the compacted structural backfill or native sands and gravels, it is our opinion a modulus of 300 pounds per square inch per inch of deflection (pci) may be used to design the floors. C.7. Variable Height Retaining Walls C.7.a. General. The wall type for the variable height retaining walls has not yet been determined, but will likely consist of a modular block or gravity block wall system. Design of these systems is generally provided by the wall manufacturer and only recommendations for bearing capacity, settlement and global stability are generally provided by the geotechnical engineer. Since the wall type has not yet been selected, a global stability analysis will need to be conducted at a later date after the wall system has been better defined. General recommendations to assist the wall manufacturer and design of their wall system are provided below. C.7.b. Embedment Depth. We recommend all walls bear a minimum of 2 feet below finished grade. To provide frost protection, we recommend providing a minimum of 2 feet of non-frost susceptible sandy gravel beneath the wall. Sandy gravel with a maximum of 5 percent of its particles by weight passing a No. 200 sieve is generally considered non-frost susceptible. C.7.c. Subgrade Preparation. Similar to the majority of the development area, we recommend the on- site clay and silt soils be subexcavated from beneath the proposed walls down to the underlying sands and gravels. Subexcavated soils should be replaced with imported non-frost susceptible sandy gravel compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of its standard Proctor density. C.7.d. Wall Design Parameters. Recommended design parameters to be used by the wall manufacturer for design are summarized in Table 8 below. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 18 Table 8. Summary of Retaining Wall Design Parameters Total Unit Weight, pcf Drained Angle of Internal Friction, degrees Undrained Cohesion, psf Allowable Bearing Capacity, psf Reinforced Soil 130 34 ------------ Retained Soil 125 30 ------ Foundation Soil* 115 30 4,000 It should be noted that the above-values are ultimate values, except where noted, and appropriate factors of safety should be provided to limit movement. The allowable bearing capacity includes a minimum factor of safety of 3.0 against bearing capacity failure. C.7.e. Seepage Control. We recommend a perforated drain pipe be provided behind the retaining wall to collect seepage and route it down and away from the proposed wall. The drainage system should consist of a minimum 6-inch diameter perforated pipe surrounded by drainage aggregate and burrito wrapped with a geotextile filter fabric. The pipe should be placed within 4 inches of the bottom of the retaining wall and then routed down and away from the proposed wall. C.8. Exterior Slabs C.8.a. Subgrade. Non-critical exterior slabs may be supported on undisturbed natural soils and compacted structural backfill after the vegetation, topsoil, and root zone have been removed. Critical exterior slabs, such as those at entrances, will likely require some additional subgrade preparation as described below. C.8.b. Backfill and Fill. Backfill and fill beneath proposed exterior slabs and their oversize zones should be placed in lifts and at a moisture content near or slightly above optimum moisture content. We recommend all fill and backfill beneath exterior slabs be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density. C.8.c. Frost Protection. The on-site soils, including the sands and gravels are frost-susceptible soils. The imported structural backfill will also likely be frost-susceptible, if it contains more than 5 percent of its particles passing a 200 sieve. If these soils become wet and freeze, up to about 2 inches of frost heave should be anticipated. Heaving of slabs during the winter can be a nuisance or hazard where doors open outward and at other critical grade areas. To reduce this heave, we recommend removing the frost susceptible soils down to the bottom of frost- depth footing level (4 feet) and replacing them with clean (nonfrost-susceptible) sand or sandy gravel. Sand or sandy gravel with less than 5 percent of their particles by weight passing a 200 sieve are generally considered nonfrost-susceptible. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 19 Another method of reducing frost heave is to place a minimum of 2 inches of extruded polystyrene foam insulation beneath the slabs and extending about 4 feet beyond the slabs. Insulation will reduce frost penetration into the underlying subgrade and thereby reduce heave. A leveling course of sand is generally required to seat the insulation panels. Eight to twelve inches of crushed road base material should be placed over the panels to protect them during construction. C.9. Site Grading and Drainage We recommend the site be graded to provide positive run-off away from the proposed buildings. We recommend landscaped areas have a slope of at least 5 percent for the first 10 feet away from the buildings, then 2 percent to carry run-off away. To maintain this slope, it is essential that backfill against the foundation walls be adequately compacted. If it is not adequately compacted, exterior foundation wall backfill will likely consolidate and water may pond and soak into the soil, causing settlement. In addition, we recommend gutters and downspouts with long splash blocks or extensions. Good site drainage is of paramount importance for the proposed buildings and site improvements. Underground sprinkler systems near the building should be avoided, if possible. C.10. Building Utilities C.10.a. Materials. Silty and clayey soils were commonly encountered by the borings. These soils are generally corrosive to metallic conduits. We recommend specifying non-corrosive materials or providing corrosion protection unless additional tests are performed to demonstrate the soils are not corrosive. We recommend using crushed gravel road base with a maximum particle size of 3/4 inch as bedding material. Site soils screened to less than 6 inches in diameter from the trench excavations may be used as backfill above the bedding. C.10.b. Backfilling and Compaction. We recommend bedding material be thoroughly compacted around the pipes. We recommend trench backfill above the bedding be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent in landscaped areas and 98 percent beneath proposed footings, slabs, and pavements. Backfilling around and above utilities should meet the requirements of Montana Public Works Standard Specifications. C.11. Pavement C.11.a. Subgrade Preparation. After the mass grading has been completed, we anticipate that the subgrade will generally be compacted structural backfill, the exception being the pavement areas in Tract 3-B. In areas where the structural backfill has been placed, we anticipate subgrade should consist of scarifying, moisture conditioning and recompacting the exposed subgrade. The subgrade should be compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 20 In Tract 3-B, where clayey subgrade is anticipated, we recommend the subgrade be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moistening to a moisture content near optimum and compacting the clayey subgrade to a minimum of 95 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density prior to placement of additional fill. Due to the weak clays, some unstable areas should be anticipated where they are excessively soft and wet. Where unstable clayey soils are encountered, we recommend that they need to be subexcavated down to the underlying sands and gravels or to a maximum depth of 2 feet below subgrade elevation and replacing them with compacted structural backfill. In Tract 3-B, we also recommend placing a 6-ounce non-woven geotextile filter fabric across the clayey subgrade directly beneath the planned subbase or base course. This fabric provides separation to help prevent contamination of clayey fines into the subbase and base course. C.11.b. Pavement Sections. Alternative pavement sections for clay and gravel subgrades were developed for light duty, heavy duty and extra heavy-duty pavement areas. It is our opinion light car and pickup parking areas can be considered light duty. The areas where heavy forklift traffic is anticipated, should be considered extra heavy-duty pavement areas. All other areas should be considered heavy-duty pavement areas. These sections are summarized in Table 9 below. Table 9. Alternative Flexible Pavement Sections Pavement Layer Light Duty Pavement (ESAL’s <10 Daily) Heavy Duty Pavement (ESAL’s <200 Daily) Extra Heavy-Duty Pavement (ESAL’s <500 Daily) Clay Subgrade Asphalt Pavement 3” 3” 4” 4” --- --- Crushed Base Course 13” 6” 16” 9” --- --- 3-Inch Minus Subbase --- 14” --- 14” --- --- Total 16” 23” 20” 27” --- --- Gravel Subgrade Asphalt Pavement 3” 3” 4” 4” 5” 5” Crushed Base Course 6” 4” 9” 4” 12” 6” 3-Inch Minus Subbase --- 6” --- 9” --- 12” Total 9” 13” 13” 17” 17” 23” C.11.b.1. Methodology. The pavement sections were determined utilizing an Excel spreadsheet developed by the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT), which is based on the American Association for State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) 1993 Pavement Design Methodology. The pavement sections for the forklift traffic areas was also further evaluated with the PCASE Program developed for the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for unusual traffic loading such as forklifts. C.11.b.2. Traffic. The estimated traffic values are summarized in Table 9 above. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 21 C.11.b.3. Subgrade. We anticipate the majority of the subgrades will consist of the native sands and gravels or compacted structural backfill placed over the native sands and gravels. The clay subgrade may be encountered in areas of Tract 3-B, where less than about 2 feet of fill is required to establish grades. Please note, we have assumed extra heavy-duty pavement areas will all have a gravel subgrade and the weak clays will have been removed. C.11.b.4. Portland Cement Concrete. We recommend consideration be given to utilizing Portland cement concrete pavement (PCCP) where heavier forklift traffic and turning movements are anticipated. The concentrated turning action from the forklift will be very abrasive to asphalt pavement. we recommend providing a PCCP thickness with a minimum of 9 inches of PCCP placed over a minimum of 12 inches of crushed gravel base. C.11.b.5. Gravel Surface Areas. We recommend providing a minimum of 9 inches of crushed gravel base for light duty areas and a minimum of 18 inches in heavy duty areas. Periodic regrading will be required to maintain good drainage and repair soft areas which will inevitably develop. Use of a geogrid or high-performance geotextile beneath the gravel surfacing is recommended to reduce rutting and extend the service life. They also bind the aggregate together (aggregate interlock) improving strength in all types of weather. Crushed top surfacing, Type 2, Grade 3 in accordance with the Montana Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (MSDTSS) Table 701-11 should be used for the top 6 inches. Since it has more fines, this will reduce wash boarding and promote better drainage. C.11.c. Materials and Compaction. We recommend specifying crushed gravel base and sandy gravel subbase courses meeting the requirements of Montana Public Works Standard Specification (MPWSS), Sixth Edition, April 2010, Sections 02235 and 02234. We recommend the gravel base and subbase be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density. We recommend the asphaltic concrete meet the requirements of Section 02503. We recommend the asphaltic concrete pavement be compacted to an average density of 93 percent or greater of the maximum density as determined by ASTM D 2041 (Rice's) and no individual sample shall be less than 92 percent. As indicated above, we recommend the gravel surfacing and gravel surfaced areas meet the requirements of MDTSS Type 2, Grade 3. Portland cement concrete pavement should meet the requirements of Section 02515. All materials should meet the requirements of MPWSS or the most recent City of Bozeman modifications, whichever is more stringent. C.12. Concrete We recommend using cement meeting the requirements of ASTM C 150 Type II to provide moderate resistance to sulfate attack. We recommend specifying 5 to 7 percent entrained air for exposed concrete to provide resistance to freeze-thaw deterioration. We recommend using a water-cement ratio of 0.50 or less for exposed concrete and a water-cement ratio of 0.45 or less for concrete exposed to deicers. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 22 D. Construction D.1. Excavation and Dewatering It is anticipated that groundwater will likely be encountered in the deeper utility excavations. There is also some risk, that groundwater could be encountered in areas of deeper subexcavation, depending on the time of construction. Where groundwater is anticipated, we recommend it be drawn down a minimum of 2 feet below future excavation bottoms, prior to excavation. The method of dewatering should be determined by the contractor based on their past experience and available equipment. It is our opinion the soils encountered by the borings can be excavated with a backhoe, front-end loader or scraper. The use of heavy rubber-tired equipment, such as scrapers or front-end loaders is discouraged in the areas where clay soils are to be left in place, as this equipment will quickly destabilize the clay soils, particularly if they are wet. A better choice, in our opinion, is to utilize low ground pressure track equipment with smooth bladed buckets to remove the initial fill lifts over the clay soils without causing excessive disturbance. The borings indicate the clay soils in the sidewalls of the excavations will likely be Type B soils under Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines and the sands and gravels will be Type C. All earthwork and construction should be performed in accordance with OSHA guidelines. Excavation for the future variable height retaining wall planned at the southeast corner of the site will be completed fairly close to existing utilities, such as fiber optic, power and communication lines. Depending on the final wall location, temporary shoring may be required to complete the excavation. Temporary shoring will need to be designed by the contractor and their engineer Shoring designs should be submitted for review and comment. D.2. Observations We recommend the mass grading and removal of the clay soils be observed by a geotechnical engineer or an engineering assistant working under the direction of a geotechnical engineer to see if the subgrade soils are similar to those encountered by the borings. Observations at footing, slab and pavement subgrade should also be performed to confirm overburden removal to the proper depth. During excavation for footings, we recommend tests be conducted on the subgrades to evaluate if the bearing capacity is at least 4,000 psf. Typical instruments used for these tests include hand augers, penetrometers, and sample tubes. D.3. Moisture Conditioning Site soils that will be excavated and reused as backfills and fills appeared to be near or above of optimum. We anticipate it will be necessary to spread these soils out to dry them to achieve a moisture content near or slightly above optimum. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 23 It should also be anticipated that imported fill and backfill materials will be below optimum moisture content and additional moisture will be necessary to achieve a moisture content near or slightly above optimum. D.4. Subgrade Disturbance Weak, clayey soils will be present in areas where clay soils will be left in place, such as Tract 3-B. These fine-grained soils are considered to be moisture sensitive and are easily disturbed when wet. We therefore recommend good drainage of surface water in all areas be provided during construction to help avoid ponding areas. Ponding water will result in saturation of the subgrade soils, creating soft spots. Construction traffic driving across these soft spots can create large ruts and excessively disturb the areas. It is then very difficult to recompact these areas to specification, and they can result in construction delays. D.5. Testing We recommend density tests of fills and backfills placed beneath footings, slabs, and pavements. Density tests should also be performed utility trench on foundation wall backfill. We also recommend density testing of the compacted pavement subgrade and gravel base course. We recommend slump, temperature, air content, and strength tests on Portland cement concrete. Samples of proposed backfill and fill materials should be submitted to our testing laboratory at least three days prior to placement on the site for evaluation and determination of their optimum moisture contents and maximum dry densities. The project will be relatively large with multiple construction activities occurring simultaneously. A high level of observations, testing and inspection are recommended to better ensure the success of the project. We recommend full-time testing and inspection during the site utility, mass grading and building pad construction. Testing and inspection should be completed in strict accordance with project specifications. We recommend density testing of the asphaltic concrete pavement (cores and nuclear density gauge). The maximum density of the asphaltic concrete mix should be determined by ASTM D 2041 (Rice). We also recommend Marshall tests of the asphalt mix to evaluate strength and air voids. D.6. Cold Weather Construction If site grading and construction is anticipated during cold weather, we recommend good winter construction practices be observed. All snow and ice should be removed from cut and fill areas prior to additional grading. No fill should be placed on soils that have frozen or contain frozen material. No frozen soils should be used as fill. Concrete delivered to the site should meet the temperature requirements of ASTM C 94. Concrete should not be placed on frozen soils or soils that contain frozen material. Concrete should be protected from freezing until the necessary strength is attained. Frost should not be permitted to penetrate below footings bearing on frost-susceptible soil since such freezing could heave and crack the footings and/or foundation walls. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 24 If the earthwork and site preparation is planned during the winter and early spring, additional work will be required due to the inherent wetter ground conditions, increased rain or snow fall, frozen ground, lack of drying weather and shorter work days. This additional work often includes, but is not limited to, subexcavation of unsuitable material, imported suitable fill, geosynthetics, ground heaters, waste of frozen or wet material and higher testing and observation costs. The additional work can delay the contractor’s schedule and result in substantial additional costs that are often passed onto the owner. E. Procedures E.1. Drilling and Sampling The penetration test borings were performed between May 15 and May 26, 2023 with a truck-mounted core and auger drill. Sampling for the borings was conducted in accordance with ASTM D 1586, "Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils." Using this method, we advanced the borehole with hollow-stem auger to the desired test depth. Then a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches drove a standard, 2-inch OD, split-barrel sampler a total penetration of 1 1/2 feet below the tip of the hollow-stem auger. The blows for the last foot of penetration were recorded and are an index of soil strength characteristics. Eleven 3-inch diameter thin-walled tube samples were taken in clayey soils in general accordance with ASTM D 1587, "Thin-walled Tube Sampling of Soils." The tubes were slowly pushed into undisturbed soils below the hollow-stem auger. After they were withdrawn from the boreholes, the ends of the tubes were sealed and the tubes were carefully transported to our laboratory. Very dense sands and gravels were encountered in the borings. When the sampler could not be driven 6 inches with 50 blows of the hammer, the distance the sampler was advanced with 50 blows was recorded. When this situation occurred during the first 6 inches of the drive, it was noted as occurring within the "set." E.2. Soil Classification The drill crew chief visually and manually classified the soils encountered in the borings in accordance with ASTM D 2488, "Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedures)." A summary of the ASTM classification system is attached. All samples were then returned to our laboratory for review of the field classifications by a geotechnical geologist or geotechnical engineer. Representative samples will remain in our office for a period of 60 days to be available for your examination. E.3. Groundwater Observations About 10 minutes after taking the final sample in the bottom of a boring, the driller probed through the hollow-stem auger to check for the presence of groundwater. Immediately after withdrawal of the auger, the driller again probed the depth to water or cave-in. The boring was then backfilled. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 25 F. General Recommendations F.1. Basis of Recommendations The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the soil borings performed at the locations indicated on the attached sketch. Often, variations occur between these borings, the nature and extent of which do not become evident until additional exploration or construction is conducted. A reevaluation of the recommendations in this report should be made after performing on-site observations during construction to note the characteristics of any variations. The variations may result in additional foundation costs, and it is suggested a contingency be provided for this purpose. It is recommended we be retained to perform the observation and testing program for the site preparation phase of this project. This will allow correlation of the soil conditions encountered during construction to the soil borings, and will provide continuity of professional responsibility. F.2. Review of Design This report is based on the design of the proposed structure as related to us for preparation of this report. It is recommended we be retained to review the geotechnical aspects of the designs and specifications. With the review, we will evaluate whether any changes in design have affected the validity of the recommendations, and whether our recommendations have been correctly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications. F.3. Groundwater Fluctuations We made water level observations in the borings at the times and under the conditions stated on the boring logs. These data were interpreted in the text of this report. The period of observation was relatively short, and fluctuation in the groundwater level may occur due to rainfall, flooding, irrigation, spring thaw, drainage, and other seasonal and annual factors not evident at the time the observations were made. Design drawings and specifications and construction planning should recognize the possibility of fluctuations. F.4. Use of Report This report is for the exclusive use of Simkins-Hallin, Stahly Engineering, Sanderson Stewart and Sunbelt Rack to use to design the proposed structure and prepare construction documents. In the absence of our written approval, we make no representation and assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. The data, analyses, and recommendations may not be appropriate for other structures or purposes. We recommend parties contemplating other structures or purposes contact us. F.5. Level of Care Services performed by SK Geotechnical Corporation personnel for this project have been conducted with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in this area under similar budget and time restraints. No warranty, express or implied, is made. Simkins-Hallin, Inc.July 26, 2023 Project 23-4278G Page 26 Professional Certification I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Montana. Cory G. Rice, PE Senior Engineer License Number 9914PE July 26, 2023 Appendix SITE LOCATION SKETCH Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed North Park Simkins-Hallins Development Bozeman, Montana Drawn by: USGS/SK Date 7/18/22 Project: 23-4278G Scale: None FIGURE Sheet 1 of 1 1 Site Location Geologic Map of The Bozeman 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, Southwestern, Montana, Vuke, Lonn, Berg and Schmidt, 2014 PARTIAL GEOLOGIC MAP Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed North Park Simkins-Hallins Development Bozeman, Montana Drawn by: MBMG/SK Date 7/18/22 Project: 23-4278G Scale: None FIGURE Sheet 1 of 1 2 SITE Site Geology - Qabo – Braid Plain Deposits - Older Descriptive Terminology Standard D 2487 Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System) Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A Soil Classification Group Symbol Group Name B Coarse- Grained Soils More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve Gravels More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Clean Gravels Less than 5% fines C CU ≥ 4 and 1 ≤ CC ≤ 3 E GW Well graded gravel F CU < 4 and/or 1 > CC > 3 E GP Poorly graded gravel F Gravels with Fines More than 12% fines C Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F, G, H Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F, G, H Sands 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Clean Sands Less than 5% fines D CU ≥ 6 and 1 ≤ CC ≤ 3 E SW Well graded sand I CU < 6 and/or 1 > CC > 3 E SP Poorly graded sand I Sands with Fines More than 12% fines D Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G, H, I Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G, H, I Fine- Grained Soils 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve Silts and Clays Liquid Limit less than 50 Inorganic PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" line J CL Lean clay K, L, M PI < 4 or plots below "A" line J ML Silt K, L, M Organic Liquid limit – oven dried < 0.75 Liquid limit – not dried OL Organic clay K, L, M, N Organic silt K, L, M, O Silts and Clays Liquid limit 50 or more Inorganic PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clay K, L, M PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic siltK, L, M Organic Liquid limit – oven dried < 0.75 Liquid limit – not dried OH Organic clayK, L, M, P Organic siltK, L, M, Q Highly Organic Soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat A B C D E F G Based on the material passing the 3" (75 mm) sieve. If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name. Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols. SW-SC well-graded sand with clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay CU = D60 / D10 CC = (D30) 2 / (D10 x D60) If soil contains ≥ 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name. If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM or SC-SM. H I J K L M N O P Q If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name. If soil contains ≥ 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name. If Atterberg limits plot in hatched area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay. If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is predominant. If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. PI ≥ 4 and plots on or above "A" line. PI < 4 or plots below "A" line. PI plots on or above "A" line. PI plots below "A" line. Particle Size Identification Boulders .......................................... over 12" Cobbles .......................................... 3" to 12" Gravel coarse ......................................... 3/4" to 3" fine ........................................ No. 4 to 3/4" Sand coarse ................................ No. 4 to No. 10 medium ........................... No. 10 to No. 40 fine ................................ No. 40 to No. 200 Silt ................................. No. 200 to .005 mm Clay ................................ less than .005 mm Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils very loose ..................................... 0 to 4 BPF loose ........................................... 5 to 10 BPF medium dense .......................... 11 to 30 BPF dense ........................................ 31 to 50 BPF very dense ................................. over 50 BPF Consistency of Cohesive Soils very soft ....................................... 0 to 1 BPF soft ............................................... 2 to 3 BPF rather soft ..................................... 4 to 5 BPF medium ........................................ 6 to 8 BPF rather stiff ................................... 9 to 12 BPF stiff ........................................... 13 to 16 BPF very stiff ................................... 17 to 30 BPF hard ........................................... over 30 BPF Moisture Content (MC) Description rather dry MC less than 5%, absence of moisture, dusty moist MC below optimum, but no visible water wet Soil is over optimum MC waterbearing Granular, cohesionless or low plasticity soil with free water, typically near or below groundwater table very wet Cohesive soil well over OMC, typically near or below groundwater table Drilling Notes Standard penetration test borings were advanced by 3¼" or 4¼" ID hollow-stem augers, unless noted otherwise. Standard penetration test borings are designated by the prefix "ST" (split tube). Hand auger borings were advanced manually with a 2 to 3" diameter auger to the depths indicated. Hand auger borings are indicated by the prefix "HA." Sampling. All samples were taken with the standard 2" OD split-tube sampler, except where noted. TW indicates thin-walled tube sample. CS indicates California tube sample. BS indicates bulk sample. BPF. Numbers indicate blows per foot recorded in standard penetration test, also known as "N" value. The sampler was set 6" into undisturbed soil below the hollow-stem auger. Driving resistances were then counted for second and third 6" increments and added to get BPF. Where they differed significantly, they were separated by backslash (/). In very dense/hard strata, the depth driven in 50 blows is indicated. WH. WH indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of hammer and rods alone; driving not required. Note. All tests were run in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. Laboratory Tests DD Dry density, pcf WD Wet density, pcf OC Organic content, % LL Liquid limit PL Plastic limit PI Plasticity index P200 % passing 200 sieve MC Natural moisture content, % MDD Maximum dry density (Proctor), pcf OMC Optimum moisture content (Proctor), % qu Unconfined compressive strength, psf UCS Unconfined compressive strength, psi qp Pocket penetrometer strength, tsf October 30, 2018 2023 Log of Borings and Lab Tests 4690.4 4688.4 4678.9 SILT, non-plastic, brown, moist, loose. LEAN CLAY, trace salts, low plasticity, brown, moist, medium. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, subrounded to subangular, grayish brown, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) -trace lean clay at 7' END OF BORING Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 6.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.5 3.5 13.0 11 59 44 64 5 19.6 20.1 1.9 6.0 3.0 5.8 FF Truss Building = 4689.0 Surface elevations provided by Sanderson Stewart LL=30, PL=19, PI=11 P200= 90.2% ML CL GP GM 4691.9 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/16/23 LOCATION: B-1 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Truss Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-1 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4692.2 4687.9 4676.2 4671.7 LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, few organics, trace salts, yellow brown, moist, soft to rather soft. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, non-plastic, trace FeOx and salts, light brown to black, moist, medium dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, fine-grained, non-plastic, trace lean clay, light brown, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) SILTY GRAVEL with SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, yellow brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING 10.0 14.3 26.0 30.5 2/4 5 2/4 4 20 42/50-5" 50-4",set 60 50-5½",set 53 22.6 24.3 21.0 25.3 10.4 5.3 4.7 10.3 FF Truss Building = 4689.0 Water observed at a depth of 24' with 24' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 23' with 29' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 19' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. CL GP GC GP GM GM 4702.2 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/9/23 LOCATION: B-2 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Truss Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-2 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4690.2 4687.7 4684.2 4678.2 4675.7 TOPSOIL SILT, non-plastic, brown, moist, loose. POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, GRAVEL, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, brownish gray, rather dry, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, grayish brown, moist, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, yellow staining, brown, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 14' with 14' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 6.8' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.0 3.5 7.0 13.0 15.5 5 10 76 50-3" 43 50-3",set 50-4",set 21.4 24.5 1.4 2.6 5.0 7.0 FF Truss Building = 4689.0 ML SP SM GP GM GP GC 4691.2 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/16/23 LOCATION: B-3 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Truss Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-3 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 2¼ ¼ 4690.8 4689.8 4686.8 4684.3 4674.8 4673.3 4667.3 LEAN CLAY, low to medium plasticity, trace roots, dark brown, moist, medium. SILTY CLAY, low plasticity, brown, moist, loose. SILT, non-plastic, brown, moist, loose. (Alluvium) LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, brown, moist, medium. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, subangular to subrounded, layers of silty gravel, daark grayish brown, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, fine- to coarse-grained, low plasticity, brown, wet, medium. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, trace silt, grayish brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 14' with 15' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water down 13' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Water not observed to wet cave-in depth of 14.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. 2.0 3.0 6.0 8.5 18.0 19.5 25.5 6 5 5 6 80 54 88 85 21.0 19.3 16.9 16.5 24.2 9.7 4.9 10.1 15.5 9.8 FF Truss Building = 4689.0 LL=30, PL=20, PI=10 P200= 38.1% Boring then backfilled. CL CL ML ML CL GP GC SC GP GC 4692.8 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/17/23 LOCATION: B-4 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Truss Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-4 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 3½ ½ 4685.8 4674.5 4672.8 4669.0 SILTY CLAY, low plasticity, trae gravel, FeOx staining, brown, moist, soft to stiff. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, salts, trace lean clay, angular to subrounded, brownish gray, moist, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, FeOx staining, brown, wet, medium. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace lean clay, brown, waterbearing, dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 13.75' with 14' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 13.5' with 19' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 9.75' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 3.8 15.0 16.8 20.5 2/4 14 37 17/50-5" 32 30/50-4" 30/7 47 20.4 20.9 16.0 2.0 2.8 4.1 4.3 17.5 30.2 12.7 FF Truss Building = 4689.0 LL=35, PL=21, PI=14 P200= 74.0% CL ML GP GM CL GP GM 4689.5 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/16/23 LOCATION: B-5 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Truss Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-5 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/26/23 4687.9 4682.9 4679.4 4673.9 4670.9 SILT, non-plastic, trace salts and lean clay, brown, moist, very loose to loose. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace lean clay, subangular to subrounded, brown, moist, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, tuffaceous, grayish brown, moist, dense. (Tertiary Sediment) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, angular, olive brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Sediment) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, some silt, olive brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Sediment) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 18.1' with 19' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 18.5' with 24' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. 8.5 13.5 17.0 22.5 25.5 2/1 5 1/2 6 50-5" 63 44 75 35/50-5" 17.0 18.4 19.9 22.7 14.5 8.9 7.0 15.1 9.3 Parking FG = 4688.0 Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 14' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. ML GP GM GP GM GP GM GP GC 4696.4 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/16/23 LOCATION: B-8 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Storage Yard Pavement, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-8 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4684.8 4676.3 TOPSOIL, Lean Clay, low plasticity, with roots, dark brown, moist, very soft to soft. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, subangular to subrounded, trace lean clay, grayish brown, moist, medium dense to very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 4' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 2.0 10.5 1/2 28 32/50-5" 83 5/20 23.0 11.4 4.5 6.1 7.5 Pavement FG = 4688.0 GP GM 4686.8 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/16/23 LOCATION: B-9 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Storage Yard Pavement, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-9 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 1¾ ¼ 4685.3 4680.8 4671.8 FILL: Sandy Lean Clay with Gravel, brown, moist, loose. LEAN CLAY with SILT, low plasticity, trace sand, brown, moist to wet, medium to stiff. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace silt, subangular, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 11' with 11.5' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water down 10.4' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Water not observed to wet cave-in depth of 10.9' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 2.0 6.5 15.5 6 4/9 7 37/50-5" 37/50-2" 50-4" 83 14.1 15.2 23.5 3.1 4.3 10.8 9.0 Pavement FG = 4682.0 CL GP GC 4687.3 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/17/23 LOCATION: B-10 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Product Storage, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-10 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 2 4677.4 4675.2 4663.2 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, silty, roots, fibers, brown, moist, medium. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, lenses of sandy clay, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 7' with 6.5' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 10.7' with 14' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 6.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.3 3.5 15.5 6 7 85 67 39 45 34 17.4 19.1 3.9 6.6 7.6 9.1 9.2 Pavement FG = 4679.0 CL GP GC 4678.7 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/17/23 LOCATION: B-12 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Storage Yard, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-12 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4676.2 4674.2 4671.7 4662.2 TOPSOIL SILTY CLAY, low plasticity, trace gravel and roots, brown, moist, medium. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace clays, brown, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 8.5' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 4' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.5 3.5 6.0 15.5 6 7 50 80 33 36 33 16.8 18.2 5.0 7.1 15.4 9.4 13.8 Umbrella Shed FG = 4677.5 CL ML GP GM GP GC 4677.7 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/17/23 LOCATION: B-13 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Umbrella Shed, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-13 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4676.4 4674.2 4667.2 TOPSOIL SILTY CLAY, low plasticity, trace salts, brown, moist, medium. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, non-plastic, trace clays, grayish brown, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 3.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.3 3.5 10.5 7 7 93 46/50-4" 50-4" 20.6 15.9 4.8 2.5 6.6 FF Sheetrock Warehouse = 4677.5 CL ML GP GM 4677.7 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/17/23 LOCATION: B-15 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Sheetrock Warehouse, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-15 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4676.6 4674.8 4664.8 4662.3 TOPSOIL SILTY CLAY, low plasticity, brown, moist, rather stiff. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND and COBBLES, grayish brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 8.8' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 13' with 13' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 6' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.3 3.0 13.0 15.5 5 3/8 41/50-5" 50-3",set 48 39/50-2" 50-1",set 20.1 18.2 2.3 3.0 17.1 7.3 13.1 FG Sheetrock Warehouse = 4677.5 CL ML GP GM GP GC 4677.8 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/17/23 LOCATION: B-16 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Sheetrock Warehouse, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-16 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4677.4 4676.7 4670.7 4663.7 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY with SILT and SAND, low plasticity, brown, moist, soft. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, grayish brown, moist, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, sandy, olive brown, waterbearing, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 8.1' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 9.75' with 14' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 4' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.8 2.5 8.5 15.5 5 3/18 50/50-3" 45 36 44 55 15.0 23.0 3.1 5.7 8.7 10.3 12.2 FG Drive-Thru Building = 4678.75 CL GP GM GP GC 4679.2 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/19/23 LOCATION: B-17 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Drive-Thru Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-17 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4677.0 4666.8 TOPSOIL POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace clays, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING - Auger refusal Water observed at a depth of 6.75' with 6.5' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 11.7' with 11.5' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 3.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.5 11.7 3/10 50-5" 50-5" 38 90 50-2" 19.8 3.3 1.5 7.4 7.3 Pavement FG = 4678.5 GP GM 4678.5 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/17/23 LOCATION: B-18 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Product Storage, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-18 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4680.4 4678.4 4671.4 4666.9 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, trace fibers, roots and sand, brown, moist, medium. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace clays and plastic, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, medium dense to very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, sandy, olive brown, waterbearing, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 9.5' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 11.8' with 14' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 2.0 4.0 11.0 15.5 5 7 86 43 19 55 40 19.9 21.6 3.7 4.4 9.0 9.9 14.0 Drive-Thru Building FG = 4678.75 CL GP GM GP GM 4682.4 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/18/23 LOCATION: B-19 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Drive-Thru Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-19 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 1½ 4680.7 4678.2 4670.7 4665.2 4656.2 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY with SILT, low plasticity, trace roots and fibers, brown, moist, rather soft. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, some clays, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, brown, waterbearing, dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, very altered, olive brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Deposits) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 8.75' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 9.3' with 24' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water down 8.75' immediately after withdrawal of auger. 1.0 3.5 11.0 16.5 25.5 4 5 82 67 87 35 31 96 50-4" 22.4 21.3 3.3 5.5 7.7 9.4 15.3 11.9 13.0 Retail/Office Building FF = 4680.25 Water not observed to wet cave-in depth of 9' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. CL GP GM GP GC GP GC 4681.7 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/18/23 LOCATION: B-20 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Retail/Office Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-20 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4680.4 4678.9 4670.4 4664.4 4659.4 4650.9 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY with SILT, low plasticity, trace roots and fibers, brown, moist, rather soft. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, olive brown, moist to waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, lenses of clayey sand, brown, waterbearing, medium dense to dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, grayish olive brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) SANDY LEAN CLAY with GRAVEL, low to medium plasticity, olive brown, wet, very stiff to hard. (Alluvium) END OF BORING 1.0 2.5 11.0 17.0 22.0 30.5 6 4/25 50 63 43 26/12 44 20/50-6" 19 41 22.7 22.0 6.3 5.9 12.9 16.0 12.0 11.9 30.9 33.0 24.5 Retail/Office Building FF = 4680.25 LL=43, PL=19, PI=11 P200= 61.9% Water observed at a depth of 7.3' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 23.5' with 29' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water down 7.7' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Water not observed to wet cave-in depth of 18' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. CL GP GM GP GC SC CL 4681.4 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/19/23 LOCATION: B-21 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Retail/Office Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-21 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4680.3 4678.8 4667.3 4663.3 4657.8 4654.8 4650.3 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY, brown, moist, medium. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, lenses of silty sand, brown, moist to waterbearing, very dense to medium dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED SAND with CLAY, GRAVEL and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, reddish brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, very altered, black and white speckled brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Sediment) FAT CLAY with SAND, fine- to medium-grained, high plasticity, trace gravel, brown, waterbearing, dense. (Tertiary Sediment) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, sandy, olive brown to gray, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Sediment) END OF BORING 0.5 2.0 13.5 17.5 23.0 26.0 30.5 2/8 50-4" 50-2" 57 23 18/50-5" 66 34 50-5",set 20.0 19.2 4.4 6.9 9.8 16.6 15.4 14.4 21.1 38.9 11.9 Retail/Office Building FF = 4680.25 Water down 3.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Water not observed to wet cave-in depth of 3.1' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Water observed at a depth of 6.5' with 6.5' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 7.75' with 29' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. LL=53, PL=22, PI=31 P200= 70.2% Boring then backfilled. CL GP GC SP SC GC CH GP GC 4680.8 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/18/23 LOCATION: B-22 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Retail/Office Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-22 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4681.7 4679.5 4669.5 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, silty, brown, moist, rather soft. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, lenses of sandy clay, some silt, olive brown, moist to waterbearing, medium dense to dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 8.8' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 3.4' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 0.8 3.0 13.0 5 5 50 40/50-3" 26 65 22.9 20.5 3.3 2.6 7.8 Retail/Office Building FF = 4680.25 CL GP GC 4682.5 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/18/23 LOCATION: B-23 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Retail/Office Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-23 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4681.5 4680.0 4677.0 4676.0 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, fibers, brown, moist, loose. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, with salts, gray to brown, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, organic, dark brown to black, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING - Auger Refusal Water observed at a depth of 7' with 7' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 3.2' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.5 3.0 6.0 7.0 5 7 44/50-5" 60 20.4 22.9 2.7 3.8 PAvement FG = 4680.6 CL GP GM GP GM 4683.0 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/10/23 LOCATION: B-24 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Parking Area, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-24 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/26/23 4682.3 4681.8 4680.3 4679.3 4674.8 4665.8 4659.8 4658.8 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY, low to medium plasticity, fibers, dark brow, moist, medium. LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, with silts and fibers, light brown, moist, rather soft. (Alluvium) GRAVELLY LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, grayish brown, moist. (Alluvium) CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, fine- to coarse-grained, grayish brown, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace FeOx, plastic and fibers, dark brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY GRAVEL, fine- to coarse-grained, low plasticity, with sand and cobbles, brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, yellow brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 8.1' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 7.7' with 24' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to wet cave-in depth of 6.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. 1.0 1.5 3.0 4.0 8.5 17.5 23.5 24.5 7 5 44/50-5" 35/50-4" 62 51 30 50-4" 50-5½",set 20.5 18.0 16.1 3.4 6.2 8.1 12.5 11.5 13.5 12.7 Retail/Office Building FF = 4680.25 LL=30, PL=17, PI=13 P200= 55.1% Boring then backfilled. CL CL CL SC GP GC GC GP GM 4683.3 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/10/23 LOCATION: B-25 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Retail/Office Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-25 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4683.5 4681.0 4676.0 4672.0 4669.0 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, trace roots, fiber and gravel, dark to light brown, moist, medium. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, gray to brown, moist, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, dark brown to black with yellow, waterbearing, dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, seams of lean clay, yellow brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 7.7' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 8.1' with 14' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 6.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.0 3.5 8.5 12.5 15.5 7 7 34/50-4" 50-6" 46 26/12 56 15.5 20.0 3.4 4.1 12.3 19.0 17.8 Retail/Office Building FF = 4680.25 CL GP GM GC GC 4684.5 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/10/23 LOCATION: B-26 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Retail/Office Building Storage Rack, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-26 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4683.9 4681.4 4677.4 4674.9 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, trace roots, brown, moist, soft to rather soft. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, gray brown, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) SILTY GRAVEL, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, yellow brown, waterbearing, dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 9' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 5.3' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.5 4.0 8.0 10.5 7 2/4 68 50 44 22.0 22.5 3.8 5.3 11.0 Pavement FG = 4686.0 CL GP GM GM 4685.4 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/10/23 LOCATION: B-27 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Parking Area, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-27 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 1¼ 4684.4 4683.4 4681.4 4675.4 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY with SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, low plasticity, light brown, moist, rather soft to medium dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, brown, moist, very loose to medium dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, clay filled voids, coarse grained gravel, grayish brown, rather dry to waterbearing, very dense. (Teritary Sediment) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 8.5' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 2.75' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.5 2.5 4.5 10.5 4 4/15 50-3" 50-5",set 79 21.2 20.3 2.0 1.5 4.9 Driveway FG = 4686.0 CL SC GP GM 4685.9 DRILLED BY: E. Hollibaugh SCALE: 5/15/23 LOCATION: B-28 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Driveway, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: CME 75HT B-28 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4684.8 4683.8 4668.8 4660.3 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, trace gravel, lenses of silty clay, brown, moist, medium. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, lenses of poorly graded gravel with sand, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, lenses of sandy clay, olive brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 8.1' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 16' with 24' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water down 8' immediately after withdrawal of auger. 1.0 2.0 17.0 25.5 5 46 50-5" 60 50-2",set 52 61 50-5" 50-5" 16.0 2.9 4.9 7.2 14.4 16.7 6.7 8.5 16.7 Millwork Building FF = 4690.25 Water not observed to wet cave-in depth of 12.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. CL GP GC GP GC 4685.8 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/18/23 LOCATION: B-29 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Millwork Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-29 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4686.7 4683.2 4678.2 4674.7 4672.7 TOPSOIL SILT with SAND and GRAVEL, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace roots and salts, brown, moist, very loose. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, grayish brown, moist, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, olive brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED SAND with CLAY, GRAVEL, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, olive brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 8.4' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 8.5' with 14' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 6.4' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.5 5.0 10.0 13.5 15.5 2/4 2/1 14/37 34/50-4" 94 67 49 23.0 22.1 10.1 4.1 9.3 14.9 10.5 Millwork Building FF = 4690.25 ML SP SM GP GC SP SM 4688.2 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/15/23 LOCATION: B-30 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Millwork Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-30 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4688.6 4684.6 4680.1 TOPSOIL SILT, non-plastic, trace gravel and sand, brown, moist, loose. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, GRAVEL, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, grayish brown, dry, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 4' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 2.0 6.0 10.5 7 6 8 80 50-5",set 22.3 19.8 24.8 3.0 3.9 Pavement FG = 4691.0 ML SP SM 4690.6 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/15/23 LOCATION: B-31 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Pavement Area, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-31 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4683.2 4681.5 4676.0 4674.0 TOPSOIL SILT, non-plastic, lenses of lean clay and roots, light brown, moist, very loose. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, non-plastic, trace lean clay, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, medium dense to very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, brown, waterbearing, dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 6' with 6.5' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 6.5' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to wet cave-in depth of 4.2' with 10' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Water not observed to wet cave-in depth of 4.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.3 3.0 8.5 10.5 5 4 51 28 36 23.1 23.8 6.4 8.8 10.2 Pavement FG = 4691.0 ML GP GM GP GC 4684.5 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/15/23 LOCATION: B-32 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Pavement Area, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-32 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4686.1 4684.5 4678.8 4671.8 TOPSOIL SILT, non-plastic, trace clay, brown, moist, very loose. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, GRAVEL, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace clay, reddish gray brown, moist to waterbearing, medium dense to very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, and SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace clay, brown, waterbearing, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 6.6' with 6.5' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 6.5' with 14' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 4.5' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.2 2.8 8.5 15.5 3 2/16 64 26 49 66 90 21.7 21.3 5.0 7.1 6.1 10.1 11.3 Millwork Building FF = 4690.25 ML SP SM GP GM 4687.3 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/15/23 LOCATION: B-33 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Millwork Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-33 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 1¼ 4686.7 4685.4 4672.4 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY with GRAVEL, low plasticity, with silt and roots, brown, moist, loose. POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, GRAVEL, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, seams of lean clay and clayey sand, brown, moist to waterbearing, medium dense to very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 6.9' with 6.5' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 7.5' with 14' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 3' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.3 2.5 15.5 6 5/26 50-5" 27 52 44 37 23.6 21.4 4.0 11.2 10.1 14.5 12.0 Millwork Building FF = 4690.25 CL SP SM 4687.9 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson SCALE: 5/15/23 LOCATION: B-34 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Millwork Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: Diedrich D120, Automatic B-34 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 4688.4 4687.1 4678.9 4676.4 4673.4 4664.4 TOPSOIL SILT, non-plastic, trace roots and clay, grayish brown, moist, loose. POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, GRAVEL, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace clays, olive brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with CLAY, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, olive brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 5.75' with 6.5' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 20.5' with 24' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to wet cave-in depth of 4.25' immediately after withdrawal of auger. 1.5 2.8 11.0 13.5 16.5 25.5 5 6 65 43 39 14/50-5" 60 34/50-4" 42/50-4" 24.6 24.1 3.3 8.1 10.5 12.6 12.5 18.0 10.5 18.8 Millwork Building FF = 4690.25 Boring then backfilled. ML SP SM GP GM GP GC SC 4689.9 DRILLED BY: E. Hollibaugh SCALE: 5/15/23 LOCATION: B-35 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Millwork Building, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: CME 75HT B-35 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 1¼ 4688.4 4685.4 4675.9 4673.9 TOPSOIL LEAN CLAY, medium plasticity, trace roots, brown, moist, soft. (Alluvium) CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, trace silt, grayish brown, moist to waterbearing, medium dense to very dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND, and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, non-plastic, olive brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water observed at a depth of 5.75' with 6.5' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water observed at a depth of 9' with 14' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 5.2' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 1.0 4.0 13.5 15.5 5 2 65 38 50-4",set 29 62 24.1 26.0 7.6 9.0 11.4 8.3 Mechanic Shop FF = 4692.0 CL SC GP GM 4689.4 DRILLED BY: E. Hollibaugh SCALE: 5/15/23 LOCATION: B-36 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G 23-4278G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Simkins - Hallin Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) Mechanic Shop, See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 WL MC Description of Materials 23-4278G METHOD: CME 75HT B-36 1" = 4'DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4278.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/20/23 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Depth B-1 B-21 B-22 B-24 B-24 B-25 B-4 B-5 B-5 B-5 Legend Sample No. 2'-3' 23'-24' 25½'-26½' 0'-3' 3'-5' 3'-4' 18½'-19½' 0'-3' 3'-5' 16'-17' Boring TW TW TW Bulk Bulk TW TW Bulk Bulk TW Liquid Limit (LL) 7/26/23 30 43 53 35 NP 30 30 26 NP 35 19 23 22 18 NP 17 20 19 NP 21 20.1% 30.9% 38.9% 21.8% 7.9% 16.1% 15.5% 19.3% 5.7% 30.2% ML-CL Project Number: 23-4278G LL MC Classification CL ML or OL PL PI MH or OH CH 11 20 31 17 NP 13 10 7 NP 14Plasticity Index (PI)North Park Simkins - Hallin Development P 200, % 90.2 61.9 70.2 86.2 10.4 55.1 38.1 83.1 5.9 74.0 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 CL CL CH CL GP-GM CL SC CL-ML GP-GM CL Atterberg Limits Tests Bozeman, Montana 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 23-4278G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2"3/8" #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: 99 Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CL #20 99 #40 7/26/23 coarse 99 Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 96 LEAN CLAY Sieve Size 11Plasticity Index: 19 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:2'-3' TW 90.2 fine 20.1% #200 coarse Sample: 97 North Park Simkins - Hallin Development 30 Sieve Analysis B-1 #4 100 #10 medium 90.2 9.8 0.0 Date Received: 5/30/23 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 23-4278G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2" 100 85 3/8" 77 #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: 64 Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: SC #20 57 #40 7/26/23 coarse 50 Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 43 CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL Sieve Size 10Plasticity Index: 20 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:18½'-19½' TW 38.1 fine 15.5% #200 coarse Sample: 45 North Park Simkins - Hallin Development 30 Sieve Analysis B-4 #4 72 #10 medium 38.1 33.9 28.0 Date Received: 5/30/23 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 23-4278G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2" 100 99 3/8" 99 #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: 98 Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CL-ML #20 98 #40 7/26/23 coarse 96 Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 91 SILTY CLAY with SAND Sieve Size 7Plasticity Index: 19 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:0'-3' Bulk 83.1 fine 19.3% #200 coarse Sample: 92 North Park Simkins - Hallin Development 26 Sieve Analysis B-5 #4 99 #10 medium 83.1 15.8 1.1 Date Received: 6/7/2023 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 23-4278G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2" 84 68 3/8" 59 #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: 38 Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: GP-GM #20 28 #40 7/26/23 coarse 18 Percent Passing96 Particle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 9 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND Sieve Size NPPlasticity Index: NP Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:3'-5' Bulk 5.9 fine 5.7% #200 coarse Sample: 10 North Park Simkins - Hallin Development NP Sieve Analysis B-5 #4 47 #10 medium 5.9 41.2 48.6 Date Received: 6/7/2023 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 23-4278G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2"3/8" 100 #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: 94 Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CL #20 92 #40 7/26/23 coarse 89 Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 82 LEAN CLAY with SAND Sieve Size 14Plasticity Index: 21 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:16'-17' TW 74.0 fine 30.2% #200 coarse Sample: 83 North Park Simkins - Hallin Development 35 Sieve Analysis B-5 #4 95 #10 medium 74.0 21.0 5.0 Date Received: 5/30/23 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 23-4278G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2" 100 3/8" 94 #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: 93 Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CL #20 92 #40 7/26/23 coarse 90 Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 77 SANDY LEAN CLAY Sieve Size 20Plasticity Index: 23 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:23'-24' TW 61.9 fine 30.9% #200 coarse Sample: 80 North Park Simkins - Hallin Development 43 Sieve Analysis B-21 #4 94 #10 medium 61.9 32.1 6.0 Date Received: 5/30/23 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 23-4278G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2"3/8" 98 #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: 95 Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CH #20 94 #40 7/26/23 coarse 92 Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 81 FAT CLAY with SAND Sieve Size 31Plasticity Index: 22 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:25½'-26½' TW 70.2 fine 38.9% #200 coarse Sample: 84 North Park Simkins - Hallin Development 53 Sieve Analysis B-22 #4 96 #10 medium 70.2 25.8 4.0 Date Received: 5/30/23 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 23-4278G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2" 100 3/8" 96 #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: 96 Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CL #20 96 #40 7/26/23 coarse 94 Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 91 LEAN CLAY Sieve Size 17Plasticity Index: 18 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:0'-3' Bulk 86.2 fine 21.8% #200 coarse Sample: 92 North Park Simkins - Hallin Development 35 Sieve Analysis B-24 #4 96 #10 medium 86.2 10.1 3.7 Date Received: 6/7/2023 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 23-4278G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2" 80 60 3/8" 45 #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: 29 Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: GP-GM #20 23 #40 7/26/23 coarse 21 Percent Passing100 Particle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 15 POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND Sieve Size NPPlasticity Index: NP Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:3'-5' Bulk 10.4 fine 7.9% #200 coarse Sample: 16 North Park Simkins - Hallin Development NP Sieve Analysis B-24 #4 37 #10 medium 10.4 26.1 63.5 Date Received: 6/7/2023 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 23-4278G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2" 100 76 3/8" 73 #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: 68 Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CL #20 67 #40 7/26/23 coarse 66 Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 61 GRAVELLY LEAN CLAY Sieve Size 13Plasticity Index: 17 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:3'-4' TW 55.1 fine 16.1% #200 coarse Sample: 62 North Park Simkins - Hallin Development 30 Sieve Analysis B-25 #4 70 #10 medium 55.1 14.9 30.0 Date Received: 5/30/23 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106 108 110 112 114 116 118 120 10 15 20 25 Density, pcf Content % 108.9 3/8" #4 1 0 of Soil (Proctor) PROCTOR 6/16/23 6/7/2023 Zero Air Voids Curves Curves of 100% Saturation for Specific Gravity Equal to: 2.80 2.70 2.60 Simkins - Hallin North Park Development Project No.: 23-4278G % Retained 3/4" Laboratory Compaction Characteristics Bozeman, Montana P-1 Moisture Content % Sample No: Drill Crew Date Sampled: Date Received: Performed by: Sampled By: Maximum Dry B-5Dry Density, pcfOptimum Moisture Sieve Size Soil Description (Visual-Manual) Preparation Method: Moist Lab Sample No: Date Performed: 0'-3' 6/6/2023 Sampled From: SKG Lab Depth: 6/12/2023 ASTM D 698 Method A 18.9 Rammer Type: Mechanical P-1 B-5 Bulk 1 1 1 1/2" Silty Clay With Sand [CL-ML] Comments 2611 Gabel Road P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 120 122 124 126 128 130 132 134 136 138 140 142 144 146 148 150 0 4 8 12 16 20 16 % Retained B-5 Bulk 6/12/2023Date Performed: Comments Additional Remarks SKG Lab P-2 Optimum MoistureMaximum Dry 6.6 ASTM C 127 Density, pcf Content % Lab Sample No: 3/8" #4 53 3'-5' 6/6/2023 Sampled From: Maximum Dry Absorption = 0.61% 131.6 9.1 Depth: Fine Portion ASTM D 698 Method C with Correction 1 1/2" Coarse Specific Gravity = 2.64 Dry Density, pcf32 41 Rammer Type: Mechanical Laboratory Compaction Characteristics Bozeman, Montana P-2 Moisture Content % Sample No: Date Sampled: Date Received: Optimum Moisture Sieve Size 140.0 Soil Description (Visual-Manual) Preparation Method: Moist of Soil (Proctor) PROCTOR 6/16/23 6/7/2023 Zero Air Voids Curves Curves of 100% Saturation for Specific Gravity Equal to: 2.80 2.70 2.60 Simkins - Hallin North Park Development Content % Project No.: 23-4278G B-5 ASTM D 4718 Oversize Correction Density, pcf Performed by: Drill CrewSampled By: 3/4" Poorly Graded Gravel With Silt And Sand [GP-GM] 2511 Holman Avenue P.O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 86 90 94 98 102 106 110 114 118 15 20 25 30 Density, pcf Content % 102.3 3/8" #4 0 0 of Soil (Proctor) PROCTOR 6/16/23 6/7/2023 Zero Air Voids Curves Curves of 100% Saturation for Specific Gravity Equal to: 2.80 2.70 2.60 Simkins - Hallin North Park Development Project No.: 23-4278G % Retained 3/4" Laboratory Compaction Characteristics Bozeman, Montana P-3 Moisture Content % Sample No: Drill Crew Date Sampled: Date Received: Performed by: Sampled By: Maximum Dry B-24Dry Density, pcfOptimum Moisture Sieve Size Soil Description (Visual-Manual) Preparation Method: Moist Lab Sample No: Date Performed: 0'-3' 6/6/2023 Sampled From: SKG Lab Depth: 6/12/2023 ASTM D 698 Method A 22.0 Rammer Type: Mechanical P-3 B-24 Bulk 4 4 1 1/2" Lean Clay [CL] Comments 2611 Gabel Road P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 120 122 124 126 128 130 132 134 136 138 140 142 144 146 148 150 0 4 8 12 16 20 20 % Retained B-24 Bulk 6/12/2023Date Performed: Comments Additional Remarks SKG Lab P-4 Optimum MoistureMaximum Dry 6.0 ASTM C 127 Density, pcf Content % Lab Sample No: 3/8" #4 63 3'-5' 6/6/2023 Sampled From: Maximum Dry Absorption = 0.59% 131.8 8.3 Depth: Fine Portion ASTM D 698 Method C with Correction 1 1/2" Coarse Specific Gravity = 2.63 Dry Density, pcf40 54 Rammer Type: Mechanical Laboratory Compaction Characteristics Bozeman, Montana P-4 Moisture Content % Sample No: Date Sampled: Date Received: Optimum Moisture Sieve Size 140.1 Soil Description (Visual-Manual) Preparation Method: Moist of Soil (Proctor) PROCTOR 6/16/23 6/7/2023 Zero Air Voids Curves Curves of 100% Saturation for Specific Gravity Equal to: 2.80 2.70 2.60 Simkins - Hallin North Park Development Content % Project No.: 23-4278G B-24 ASTM D 4718 Oversize Correction Density, pcf Performed by: Drill CrewSampled By: 3/4" Poorly Graded Gravel With Silt And Sand [GP-GM] 2511 Holman Avenue P.O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 California Bearing Ratio ASTM D1883 /AASHTO T 193 Project: Date: 07/26/23 Simkins-Hallin North Park Development, Bozeman, Montana Boring: Sample: Depth: Sample Description: MDD: 108.9 pcf OMC: 18.9 % Procedure: Compaction Moisture Point grams MC% Dry pcf Comp% grams MC% Dry pcf Comp% Optimum 4187.0 18.9% 103.6 95.1% 4340.1 23.2% 103.3 94.9% Swell CBR Moisture Initial Final Swell Surcharge CBR @ CBR @ Equiv. Point lbs psf Dial " Dial " % psf 0.1 in. 0.2 in. R-value Optimum 24.2 127.4 0.4842 0.4965 0.3% 128.7 4.6 4.0 8.9 Design CBR @ 0.1 in. 4.6 Design CBR @ 0.2 in. 4.0 2511 Holman Avenue, P. O. Box 80190, Billings, Montana 59108-0190 ASTM D698 Initial Final Surcharge Phone (406) 652-3930; Fax (406) 652-3944 23-4278G Geotechnical Evaluation B-5 Bulk 0 - 3 ' Silty clay with sand (CL-ML) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600Stress, psiPenetration, inch 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%CBR @ 0.2 in.Moisture Content, % California Bearing Ratio ASTM D1883 /AASHTO T 193 Project: Date: 07/26/23 Simkins-Hallin North Park Development, Bozeman, Montana Boring: Sample: Depth: Sample Description: MDD: 131.6 pcf OMC: 9.1 % Procedure: Compaction Moisture Point grams MC% Dry pcf Comp% grams MC% Dry pcf Comp% Optimum 4634.0 9.1% 124.9 94.9% 4665.4 9.9% 125.0 95.0% Swell CBR Moisture Initial Final Swell Surcharge CBR @ CBR @ Equiv. Point lbs psf Dial " Dial " % psf 0.1 in. 0.2 in. R-value Optimum 22.3 117.5 0.4680 0.4635 -0.1% 117.5 9.1 15.1 39.0 Design CBR @ 0.1 in. 9.1 Design CBR @ 0.2 in. 15.1 2511 Holman Avenue, P. O. Box 80190, Billings, Montana 59108-0190 23-4278G Geotechnical Evaluation B-5 Bulk 3 - 5 ' Poorly graded gravel with silt and sand (GP-GM) ASTM D698 Initial Final Surcharge Phone (406) 652-3930; Fax (406) 652-3944 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600Stress, psiPenetration, inch 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%CBR @ 0.2 in.Moisture Content, % California Bearing Ratio ASTM D1883 /AASHTO T 193 Project: Date: 07/26/23 Simkins-Hallin North Park Development, Bozeman, Montana Boring: Sample: Depth: Sample Description: MDD: 102.3 pcf OMC: 22.0 % Procedure: Compaction Moisture Point grams MC% Dry pcf Comp% grams MC% Dry pcf Comp% Optimum 4034.0 22.0% 97.3 95.1% 4153.9 25.6% 96.9 94.7% Swell CBR Moisture Initial Final Swell Surcharge CBR @ CBR @ Equiv. Point lbs psf Dial " Dial " % psf 0.1 in. 0.2 in. R-value Optimum 22.7 119.7 0.5285 0.5461 0.4% 120.0 3.7 3.5 7.7 Design CBR @ 0.1 in. 3.7 Design CBR @ 0.2 in. 3.5 2511 Holman Avenue, P. O. Box 80190, Billings, Montana 59108-0190 23-4278G Geotechnical Evaluation B-24 Bulk 0 - 3 ' Lean clay (CL) ASTM D698 Initial Final Surcharge Phone (406) 652-3930; Fax (406) 652-3944 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600Stress, psiPenetration, inch 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%CBR @ 0.2 in.Moisture Content, % California Bearing Ratio ASTM D1883 /AASHTO T 193 Project: Date: 07/26/23 Simkins-Hallin North Park Development, Bozeman, Montana Boring: Sample: Depth: Sample Description: MDD: 131.8 pcf OMC: 8.3 % Procedure: Compaction Moisture Point grams MC% Dry pcf Comp% grams MC% Dry pcf Comp% Optimum 4613.0 8.2% 125.4 95.1% 4622.1 8.4% 125.4 95.2% Swell CBR Moisture Initial Final Swell Surcharge CBR @ CBR @ Equiv. Point lbs psf Dial " Dial " % psf 0.1 in. 0.2 in. R-value Optimum 22.3 117.5 0.3000 0.2992 0.0% 117.5 15.2 15.5 40.1 Design CBR @ 0.1 in. 15.2 Design CBR @ 0.2 in. 15.5 2511 Holman Avenue, P. O. Box 80190, Billings, Montana 59108-0190 ASTM D698 Initial Final Surcharge Phone (406) 652-3930; Fax (406) 652-3944 23-4278G Geotechnical Evaluation B-24 Bulk 3 - 5 ' Poorly graded gravel with silt and sand (GP-GM), trace clay, trace plasticity 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600Stress, psiPenetration, inch 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%CBR @ 0.2 in.Moisture Content, % Initial Dry Initial Moisture Density (pcf) Content (%) Boring No. B-1 Depth: 2 - 3 '100.1 20.1 Sampled By: Drill Crew Date Received: 5/30/23 Soil Description: 7/26/23 P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 Lean clay (CL), low plasticity, trace sand, mottled light to dark brown, moist, medium. Bozeman, Montana Consolidation/Swell Test Project Number: 23-4278G Simkins-Hallin North Park Development 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 10 100 1000 10000Strain, %Stress, psf Inundated @ 1000 psf collapse = 1.88% Initial Dry Initial Moisture Density (pcf) Content (%) Boring No. B-4 Depth: 18½ - 19½ '110.0 15.5 Sampled By: Drill Crew Date Received: 5/30/23 Soil Description: 7/26/23 P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 Clayey sand (SC) with gravel, low plasticity, brown, moist, medium Bozeman, Montana Consolidation/Swell Test Project Number: 23-4278G Simkins-Hallin North Park Development 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10 100 1000 10000Strain, %Stress, psf Inundated @ 1000 psf collapse = 0.24% Initial Dry Initial Moisture Density (pcf) Content (%) Boring No. B-21 Depth: 23 -24 '89.5 30.9 Sampled By: Drill Crew Date Received: 5/30/23 Soil Description: 7/26/23 P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 Sandy lean clay (CL), medium plasticity, trace gravel, brown, wet, medium Bozeman, Montana Consolidation/Swell Test Project Number: 23-4278G Simkins-Hallin North Park Development 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 10 100 1000 10000Strain, %Stress, psf Inundated @ 1000 psf swell = 0.15% Initial Dry Initial Moisture Density (pcf) Content (%) Boring No. B-25 Depth: 3 - 4 '106.9 16.1 Sampled By: Drill Crew Date Received: 5/30/23 Soil Description: 7/26/23 P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 Gravelly lean clay (CL), low plasticity, light brown, moist, medium Bozeman, Montana Consolidation/Swell Test Project Number: 23-4278G Simkins-Hallin North Park Development 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 10 100 1000 10000Strain, %Stress, psf Inundated @ 1000 psf collapse = 0.12% 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, Montana 59108-0190 p: 406.652.3930; f: 406.652.3944 www.skgeotechnical.com Corrosivity of Soil ASTM G162/G187, AASHTO T 88 Date: Project: 23-4278G Geotechnical Evaluation Simkins-Hallin North Park Development Bozeman, Montana Mr. Sean Potkay Client: Simkins-Hallin 326 N. Broadway Bozeman, Montana 59715 spotkay@simkins-hallin.com Date sampled: 5/9-5/16/23 Date tested: 6/1/23 Sampled by: Drill Crew Tested by: MW B-2 6½-8 1018 0.982 8.63 8.65 0.0065 NT NT B-24 4-5½ 4000 0.250 8.95 8.91 0.0009 NT NT B-5 6½-8 8990 0.111 8.62 8.57 0.0035 NT NT Remarks: ND = non-detect NT = not tested Sulfate result is E300.0 water soluble method from Energy Labs. Sulfide (mg/kg) Oxid- Reduc (mV) July 26, 2023 Boring Depth (feet) Resistivity (Ω•cm) Soil Box Conductivity (m.mhos/cm) Calculated pH Marble pH Sulfate (wt %) 2022 Log of Borings and Lab Tests Boring offset 10' and redrilled. See Boring ST-1A for soil information below 6½'. 1.0 2.5 6.4 6 18 50-2" 50-5", Set CL CL GP LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, trace roots, brown to dark brown, moist, medium stiff. (Tilled Soil) LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, brown, moist, medium stiff. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, gray, moist, medium dense to very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING - AUGER REFUSAL Water not observed with 6' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Boring then backfilled. 21.3 14.3 4.9 4670.0 4668.5 4664.6 SCALE: 6/9/22 1" = 4' LOCATION: ST-1 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G Description of Materials 4671.0 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson 22-4187G METHOD: Diedrich D-120, Automatic ST-1 Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: 22-4187G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Industrial Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) WL MC BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4187.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/25/22 See Boring ST-1 for Soil Data above 6½'. 6.5 7.5 11.0 15.9 32 55 54 50-3" 50-5", set SC GP GC See Boring ST-1 for soil information above 6½'. CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, low plasticity, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, waterbearing, dense. (Tertiary Deposit) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Deposit) CLAYEY GRAVEL with SILT, SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Deposit) END OF BORING Water down 6½' with 6½' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 3' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 19.6 10.1 17.0 19.5 4664.5 4663.5 4660.0 4655.1 SCALE: 6/9/22 1" = 4' LOCATION: ST-1A page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G Description of Materials 4671.0 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson 22-4187G METHOD: Diedrich D-120, Automatic ST-1A Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: 22-4187G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Industrial Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) WL MC BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4187.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/25/22 2½ 2½ 1¼ ½ LL=25, PL=20, PI=5 P200= 52.8% LL=34, PL=22, PI=12 P200= 52.9% 0.5 4.0 6.0 10.0 11.0 12.5 15.0 20.3 5 4 67 56 54 25 17/41 47/50-3" CL CL ML GP GC GC CL SC GC LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, trace roots, dark brown to brown, moist, rather soft. (Tilled Soil) SANDY SILTY CLAY, low plasticity, trace roots, brown, moist to wet, rather soft. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, gray, rather dry to moist, very dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, low plasticity, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, wet to waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, low plasticity, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Deposit) SANDY LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, trace gravel, light brown to brown, very wet, very stiff. (Tertiary Deposit) CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, low plasticity, brown, waterbearing, medium dense to dense. (Tertiary Deposit) CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, low plasticity, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Deposit) END OF BORING Water down 7' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Boring then backfilled. 20.0 22.2 18.2 2.5 8.5 10.1 27.7 11.0 15.8 4681.0 4677.5 4675.5 4671.5 4670.5 4669.0 4666.5 4661.2 SCALE: 6/9/22 1" = 4' LOCATION: ST-2 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G Description of Materials 4681.5 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson 22-4187G METHOD: Diedrich D-120, Automatic ST-2 Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: 22-4187G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Industrial Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) WL MC BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4187.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/25/22 2½ 2 0.5 3.0 8.5 11.2 6 6 43 68 50-2" 50-2" CL GP GC Topsoil: (6") LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, trace roots and salts, light brown to brown, moist, medium stiff. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, gray, rather dry to moist, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, low plasticity, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING - AUGER REFUSAL Water down 9' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 4' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 21.9 19.5 4.1 4.3 15.1 4678.7 4676.2 4670.7 4668.0 SCALE: 6/9/22 1" = 4' LOCATION: ST-3 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G Description of Materials 4679.2 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson 22-4187G METHOD: Diedrich D-120, Automatic ST-3 Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: 22-4187G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Industrial Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) WL MC BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4187.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/25/22 2¾ LL=29, PL=18, PI=11 P200= 74.7% 1.0 3.0 8.5 11.0 13.5 17.5 20.5 6 8 40 43 64 23-50-4" 9 62 CL CL GP GP GM GC CL GM LEAN CLAY with SAND, some organics, dark brown, moist to wet, medium stiff. (Tilled Soil) LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, trace roots, brown, moist, medium stiff. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, brown to gray, rather dry to moist, dense. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND, SILT and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, low plasticity, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Deposit) LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, brown, very wet, rather stiff. (Tertiary Deposit) SILTY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Deposit) END OF BORING Water down 8' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 2½' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 22.6 19.8 2.9 3.8 7.7 10.3 33.5 9.5 4682.9 4680.9 4675.4 4672.9 4670.4 4666.4 4663.4 SCALE: 6/8/22 1" = 4' LOCATION: ST-4 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G Description of Materials 4683.9 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson 22-4187G METHOD: Diedrich D-120, Automatic ST-4 Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: 22-4187G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Industrial Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) WL MC BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4187.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/25/22 3 1¾ LL=30, PL=21, PI=9 P200= 71.7% Proposed Grade / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / 1.0 4.5 13.5 17.0 17.9 5 3 42 50-5½" 50-5" 50 13 50-5", set CL CL GP SC GP LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, trace roots, dark brown, moist, rather soft. (Tilled Soil) LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, trace roots, brown, moist, rather soft to soft. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, brownish gray, moist, dense. (Alluvium) - Trace clays at 7½'. CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL, low plasticity, fine- to coarse-grained, moist, medium dense. (Tertiary Deposit) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, gray, wet to waterbearing, very dense. (Tertiary Deposit) END OF BORING - AUGER REFUSAL Water down 17½' with 17½' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 10' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 22.5 22.5 24.1 5.4 8.8 4.1 2.9 8.1 4691.0 4687.5 4678.5 4675.0 4674.1 SCALE: 6/8/22 1" = 4' LOCATION: ST-5 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G Description of Materials 4692.0 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson 22-4187G METHOD: Diedrich D-120, Automatic ST-5 Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: 22-4187G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Industrial Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) WL MC BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4187.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/25/22 1 Proposed Grade / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / LL=21, PL=19, PI=2 P200= 12.7% 1.0 2.5 6.5 13.5 20.5 7 8/18 44/50-5" 50/50-4" 58 35/50-4½" 47 44/50-5½" CL CL GP GM GM GC LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, trace roots, dark brown, moist, medium stiff. (Tilled Soil) LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, dark brown to brown, moist, medium stiff. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT, SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, moist, dense to very dense. (Alluvium) SILTY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, low plasticity, fine- to coarse-grained, brown, moist to waterbearing, very dense. (Alluvium) CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, low plasticity, slightly cemented, olive brown, waterbearing, dense to very dense. (Tertiary Deposit) END OF BORING Water down 7' with 9' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 3½' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 25.4 18.9 4.8 6.8 11.1 16.5 15.2 14.7 4688.5 4687.0 4683.0 4676.0 4669.0 SCALE: 6/8/22 1" = 4' LOCATION: ST-6 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G Description of Materials 4689.5 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson 22-4187G METHOD: Diedrich D-120, Automatic ST-6 Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: 22-4187G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Industrial Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) WL MC BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4187.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/25/22 2¼ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 2½ Proposed Grade / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / 2.0 13.5 21.0 25.2 6 8 5 5 4 4 8 9 30/50-2" CL CL GP FILL: Lean Clay with Sand, low plasticity, brown to dark brown, moist, medium stiff. LEAN CLAY with SAND, low plasticity, light brown to brown, moist, medium stiff to rather soft. (Alluvium) SANDY LEAN CLAY, low plasticity, trace salts, moist, medium stiff to rather stiff. (Alluvium) POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SAND and COBBLES, fine- to coarse-grained, brown to gray, moist, very dense. (Alluvium) END OF BORING Water not observed with 24' of hollow-stem auger in the ground. Water not observed to dry cave-in depth of 13' immediately after withdrawal of auger. Boring then backfilled. 22.3 15.4 19.2 20.9 20.3 21.0 19.9 24.6 2.9 4707.5 4696.0 4688.5 4684.3 SCALE: 6/8/22 1" = 4' LOCATION: ST-7 page 1 of 1 L O G O F B O R I N G Description of Materials 4709.5 DRILLED BY: S. Robertson 22-4187G METHOD: Diedrich D-120, Automatic ST-7 Symbol BORING: Depth 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 DATE: Remarks 0.0 Elev. See Attached Sketch BPF PROJECT: 22-4187G GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION North Park Industrial Development Bozeman, Montana qp (tsf) WL MC BORING BPF WL-MC QP ELEV ~ 4187.GPJ LAGNNN06.GDT 7/25/22 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Liquid Limit (LL) 7/13/22 25 34 29 30 21 20 22 18 21 19 18.2% 27.7% 33.5% 24.1% 6.8% ML-CL Project Number: 22-4187G LL MC Classification CL ML or OL PL PI MH or OH CH 5 12 11 9 2Plasticity Index (PI)North Park Industrial Development P 200, % 52.8 52.9 74.7 71.7 12.7 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 CL-ML CL CL CL SM Atterberg Limits Tests Bozeman, Montana Depth ST-2 ST-2 ST-4 ST-5 ST-6 Legend Sample No. 3'-4' 11½'-13' 14'-15½' 3'-4' 6½'-8' Boring TW Jar #45 Jar #32 TW Jar #13 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2"3/8" #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CL-ML #20 #40 7/13/22 coarse Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 SANDY SILTY CLAY #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 22-4187G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 18.2% #200 coarse Sample: North Park Industrial Development 25 Sieve Analysis ST-2 #4 #10 medium 52.8 0.0 0.0 6/23/2022 Date Received: Sieve Size 5Plasticity Index: 20 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:3'-4' TW 52.8 fine 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2"3/8" #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CL #20 #40 7/13/22 coarse Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 SANDY LEAN CLAY #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 22-4187G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 27.7% #200 coarse Sample: North Park Industrial Development 34 Sieve Analysis ST-2 #4 #10 medium 52.9 0.0 0.0 6/23/2022 Date Received: Sieve Size 12Plasticity Index: 22 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:11½'-13' Jar #45 52.9 fine 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2"3/8" #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CL #20 #40 7/13/22 coarse Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 LEAN CLAY with SAND #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 22-4187G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 33.5% #200 coarse Sample: North Park Industrial Development 29 Sieve Analysis ST-4 #4 #10 medium 74.7 0.0 0.0 6/23/2022 Date Received: Sieve Size 11Plasticity Index: 18 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:14'-15½' Jar #32 74.7 fine 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2"3/8" #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: CL #20 #40 7/13/22 coarse Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 LEAN CLAY with SAND #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 22-4187G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 24.1% #200 coarse Sample: North Park Industrial Development 30 Sieve Analysis ST-5 #4 #10 medium 71.7 0.0 0.0 6/23/2022 Date Received: Sieve Size 9Plasticity Index: 21 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:3'-4' TW 71.7 fine 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.1110 Bozeman, Montana Sample No.: 1 1/2"3/8" #100 Sand 3/4" Percent Gravel: Percent Silt + Clay: Gravel ASTM Group Name: Percent Sand: SM #20 #40 7/13/22 coarse Percent PassingParticle Size in Millimeters 3" 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 SILTY SAND #200 fine #80 Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit: Classification: Moisture Content: Project Number: 22-4187G 3"1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #40 #100 #20 #10 6.8% #200 coarse Sample: North Park Industrial Development 21 Sieve Analysis ST-6 #4 #10 medium 12.7 0.0 0.0 6/23/2022 Date Received: Sieve Size 2Plasticity Index: 19 Percent Passing U.S. Standard Sieve Size Depth:6½'-8' Jar #13 12.7 fine Initial Dry Initial Moisture Density (pcf) Content (%) Boring No. ST-2 Depth: 3 - 4 '90.0 18.2 Sampled By: Drill Crew Date Received: 6/23/22 Soil Description: 7/26/23 P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 Sandy silty clay (CL-ML), slightly plastic, tracel gravel and roots, brown, moist, rather soft Bozeman, Montana Consolidation/Swell Test Project Number: 22-4187G North Park Industrial Development 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 20.0 21.0 22.0 10 100 1000 10000Strain, %Stress, psf Inundated @ 500 psf collapse = 3.12% Initial Dry Initial Moisture Density (pcf) Content (%) Boring No. ST-5 Depth: 3 - 4 '83.6 24.1 Sampled By: Drill Crew Date Received: 6/23/22 Soil Description: 7/26/23 P. O. Box 80190 Billings, MT 59108-0190 Phone: 406.652.3930 Fax: 406.652.3944 Lean clay (CL) with sand, low plasticity, trace gravel and roots, brown, moist, raher soft Bozeman, Montana Consolidation/Swell Test Project Number: 22-4187G North Park Industrial Development 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 10 100 1000 10000Strain, %Stress, psf Inundated @ 500 psf collapse =3.17% 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, Montana 59108-0190 p: 406.652.3930; f: 406.652.3944 www.skgeotechnical.com Corrosivity of Soil ASTM G162/G187, AASHTO T 88 Date: Project: 22-4187G Geotechnical Evaluation North Park Industrial Development Bozeman, Montana Client: Mr. Bobby Eggeberg, PE Sanderson Stewart beggeber@sandersonstewart.com Date sampled: 6/8-6/9/22 Date tested: 7/11/22 Sampled by: Drill Crew Tested by: AB ST-2 3-4 1000 1.000 8.28 8.36 0.0023 NT NT ST-5 3-4 1000 1.000 8.28 8.37 0.0024 NT NT Remarks: ND = non-detect NT = not tested Sulfate result is E300.0 water soluble method from Energy Labs. Sulfide (mg/kg) Oxid- Reduc (mV) July 26, 2023 Boring Depth (feet) Resistivity (Ω•cm) Soil Box Conductivity (m.mhos/cm) Calculated pH Marble pH Sulfate (wt %)