Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout14 - Design Report - MSU Innovation Campus Ph I - Storm STORM DRAINAGE REPORT MONTANA STATE INNOVATION CAMPUS - PH I BOZEMAN, MONTANA CTA Architects/Engineers 411 E. Main Street, Suite 101 Bozeman, Montana 59715 LD D. Phone: 406-556-7100 j SON JR Fax: 406-585-3031 s i C► NO- 41 PE r� ZzC NSE N����v aNA,LE October 15, 2014 Copyright 2014 M ilA; PINNOVATI TAN UNIVERSITY ON CAMPUS IAN 17 pE�AS�I �Eki°�i 1,4 �.�Ct��1 C MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I—INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS VICINITYMAP.........................................................................................................................2 DESIGNCRITERIA...................................................................................................................4 DESIGNASSUMPTIONS..........................................................................................................4 SOILINFORMATION...............................................................................................................4 PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS......................................................................................4 POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS....................................................................................5 CONVEYANCE.........................................................................................................................5 STORAGEFACILITIES ............................................................................................................6 MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS.....................................................................................8 SUMMARY................................................................................................................................9 EXHIBITS SWI: MSUIC Pre-Development Conditions SW2: MSUIC Post-Development Conditions APPENDICES Appendix A Detention Pond Sizing and Hydrology Calculations Appendix B Conveyance Calculations GAMSUI004 Design\Stone Design\Report\MSUIC_Stonn_Rpt.doc JaA Page 1 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I—INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT VICINITY MAP a; Ci C C C - J cn i PROJECT SITE rp I •I •r �, fli t i I I I I I ; Not to Scale Page 2 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I—INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT INTRODUCTION This Stormwater Drainage Plan satisfies the City's requirement for the proposed infi-astructure improvements for the Montana State University Innovation Campus (MSUIC) in Bozeman, Montana. At full development the campus will consist of 41.98 acres of buildings, parking, landscaped areas, wetlands, streets, and sidewalks and will serve as a university related research park. A master site plan has been completed to show the MSUIC vision for the property and is attached to this report. The property will be developed in multiple phases as tenants are established. This first phase of construction will only consist of the major infrastructure which includes: water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, gas, power, telephone, streets and sidewalks (South 27`h Street and Technology Boulevard), landscaping, and trails. Site plans for the roads and trails have been included with this report. It is important to note that this plan will only address in detail the proposed stormwater improvements to detain and convey runoff from the new streets(South 271h and Technology). This plan will address the other areas of the site, but only in a preliminary form. Final details and calculations will need to be completed and submitted to the City as each individual site is developed, through the site plan review process. The project is located on the 41.98 acre Tract C-IA of the Amended Plat of West College Minor Subdivision No. 195 located in the Northwest 1/4 and Northeast 1/4, Section 14, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, P.M.,M., City of Bozeman, County of Gallatin, State of Montana. More specifically, the project is located between College and Garfield streets and between Bozeman Gateway Subdivision and Advanced Technology Park. The property is zoned BP (Business Park). Per communications with the City, the property, which also includes the unnamed tributary of Catron Creek, is not within a mapped floodplain. The site is comprised of native grasses and wetlands, an un-named tributary of Catron Creek, an existing gravel roadway, and buildings. The buildings will be demolished before the first phase of construction. The existing buildings were originally used by the Montana State University Agriculture Department. The wetlands within the property have been delineated and are shown on the plans. A report was prepared by Hyalite Environmental, LLP titled "Wetland Delineation Report MSU Innovation Campus Bozeman, MT" dated November 2013. This report can be provided upon request. In addition to the wetland delineation report, Hyalite also prepared an environmental narrative. A nationwide permit will be required for the construction activities that disturb wetlands, specifically the crossing of Technology Boulevard. In keeping with the historic drainage patterns on the property, stormwater will be conveyed to the wetlands at pre-development flow rates. The wetlands are an important feature on the property that provide a means of sediment, nutrient, and pollution removal; and flood control. The wetlands are also a significant feature that the City wants to see implemented into the design of the site. Wetlands and creek corridors are very important to the community and need to, as Page 3 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I—INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT much as possible, be kept in thew natural aesthetic nature. The wetlands corridor, which includes the watercourse setbacks, consists of approximately 13% of the entire site area. This Plan addresses the proposed improvements by examining the pre- and post-developed stormwater runoff characteristics of the site, and providing mitigating measures to compensate for potential impacts resulting fi-om the development. DESIGN CRITERIA Pre and post-development runoff calculations are developed using the methodology found in the City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy, March 2004 with revisions. DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS The topographic survey for the project was completed by CTA Architects Engineers (2013). Excel spreadsheets following the methodology shown in the City of Bozeman Design Standards were used for determining required detentions volumes. Flowmaster and Storm and Sanitary Analysis Extensions for AutoCAD 3D 2014 were the modeling programs used to size the proposed storm water drain pipes and check gutter capacities. Federal Highway's software HY-8 7.2 was used to analyze the proposed culverts for Technology Boulevard. SOIL INFORMATION Soil information at the project site is obtained fi-om a soils report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Report MSU Innovation Campus", prepared by Terracon, on February 13, 2014. According to the report, "the subsurface profile general consists of shallow topsoil overlying lean to fat clay which in turn overlies well graded gravel. The topsoil and lean and fat clay stratums extended to approximate depths of 0.5 to 4.5 feet below the existing grades." PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS The topography of the site slopes to the north toward College Street with an average slope of 1.5%. A majority of the site runoff is conveyed to the wetlands and creek via natural swales and topography. There are two areas of"run-on" drainage (see Exhibit SW1). One area is a nearby existing detention pond, east of the property and adjacent to Technology Boulevard where it terminates. More specifically, it is located on the Yellowstone Center property. The detention pond outlet conveys runoff through the property via a swale. This swale is located in an existing drainage easement and is shown on the attached survey and Exhibit SW1. It should be noted that the existing swale will remain for this phase of construction. The swale may need to be re-routed as that area of the site develops. The other-area is another detention pond that stores and discharges runoff into the creek fi-om a portion of Garfield Street. The detention pond was installed during the last Garfield Street improvement project. An easement was not provided for this detention pond and related structures that takes in City runoff Page 4 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I—INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT On the west side of the property, west of and adjacent to the property line, the Farmers Canal Company, has an easement for an irrigation pipe. The irrigation pipeline easement does not encroach onto MSUIC property. The irrigation pipe conveys water to the north where it is intercepted by a pipe in College Street. In general, College Street runoff does not affect the hydrology of the site. In 2015, College Street will be widened, which will include new stormwater facilities and curb and gutter along the south edge which will help to mitigate the flow of runoff onto the site. A runoff coefficient of C=0.2 was used for pre-development peak runoff rates. POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS The property has been delineated into Minor Basins for the purpose of analyzing required stormwater detention volumes and pipe sizes. Minor Basin's A, B, and C (MB-A though MB-C) consist of the new roadways. Minor Future Basin's FB-I through FB-6 consists of the future areas of development. As stated above, only a preliminary analysis of these basins (FB-I through FB-6) was completed. This report and analysis is primarily for basins MB-A through MB-C. See Exhibit SW2 for a map of the proposed basins. For minor basin MB-A a runoff coefficient of 0.8 was used and for MB-B and MB-C a coefficient of 0.95. These basins primarily consist of asphalt and require higher runoff coefficients. For the future basins, per City BP zoning requirements the total site imperviousness can be no greater than 60%. Using this requirement, a runoff coefficient of C=0.6 was assumed for all the future basins (FB-I through 1713-5). Minor basin FB-6 was not analyzed as it is comprised of wetlands and the creek corridor. Stormwater runoff generated by the proposed roads, minor basins FB-A, B, and C, will be stored and attenuated via detention ponds and outlet structures. Ultimately, runoff will be conveyed towards the creek and irrigation canal or College Street at pre-development conditions. CONVEYANCE As required by the City of Bozeman, storm pipe systems are designed to maintain a minimum velocity of 3-fps for the design storm depth. The City also requires that all proposed conveyances are sized to accommodate the 25-year storm event. Inlets are designed to convey the 25-year storm with a maximum water surface elevation of 0.15' below top of curb and 50 percent clogging factor. Conveyance system sizing calculations are included in Appendix B. There are three separate conveyance systems proposed for the site. Minor Basin A, B, and C each have separate systems due to the grade of the streets. The MB-A system will convey runoff to a detention pond via inlets (CB-1 through CB-4) and storm pipe in Technology Boulevard and South 271" Street. Inlets located in a sag on the north Page 5 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I—INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT end of 2711' at station 7+01 and a sag on Technology Boulevard just east of the intersection at station 18+11 will intercept and convey runoff to a detention pond (DP-1) on the north side of Technology Boulevard. Minor Basin A was delineated in to two separate basins for purposes of inlet calculations. Typical Neenah R-3067 inlets, with diagonal grates, will be sufficient to intercept runoff and keep depths at 0.15' below top of curb. See Appendix B for inlet calculations. MB-A has an approximate 25-yr peak runoff rate of 8.3 cfs. All pipes downstream fiom CB-3 will at a minimum need to be 24" at 0.2% slope (capacity= 10 cfs). All other pipes for the MB-A system can be 18" at 0.2% (capacity= 4.7 cfs). The MB-A system has been sized to account for potential FB-I runoff at the pre-development 25-year storm. The MB-B system will convey runoff via two inlets (CB-5 and CB-6) located in a sag on the westerly portion of Technology Boulevard at station 12+73. The runoff will be conveyed to the north to a temporary detention pond on the north side of the street. Typical Neenah R-3067 inlets will be sufficient to intercept runoff and keep depths at 0.15' below top of curb. See Appendix B for inlet calculations. MB-B has an approximate 25-yr peak runoff rate of 2.8 cfs. All pipes will at a minimum need to be 18" at 0.2% slope (capacity= 4.7 cfs). The MB-B system has been sized to account for potential FB-I runoff at the pre-development 25-year storm. The detention pond (DP-2) will outlet to a temporary Swale that will convey runoff through minor basin FB-4 to a low area at the northwest corner of the site, then to an inlet on College. Due to FB-4, MB-B, and FB-I being within a closed basin, where runoff has historically travelled to this low depression near College Street we are requesting a stormwater stub be installed fiom the College Street storm sewer- main to allow for the conveyance of stormwater from these three combined basins at historical rates fi•om a detention pond. This swale and detention pond (DP-2) will be temporary and will need to be accounted for when development occurs in FB-4. The MB-C system will convey runoff via two inlets (CB-7 and CB-8) located in a sag on the easterly portion of Technology Boulevard at station 24+19. The runoff will be conveyed to the south to a detention pond (DP-3). Typical Neenah R-3067 inlets will be sufficient to intercept runoff and keep depths at 0.15' below top of curb. See Appendix B for inlet calculations. MB-B has an approximate 25-yr peak runoff rate of 3.0 cfs. All pipes will at a minimum need to be 18" at 0.2% slope (capacity= 4.7 cfs). STORAGE FACILITIES&DISCHARGE STRUCTURES Detention ponds have been designed for the 10-year event per the City design guidelines (See Appendix A). Page 6 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I—INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT NIB-A Detention Pond The MB-A detention pond is designed to have an approximate storage capacity of 3,713 cubic feet. This pond will serve as a bio-infiltration system. The detention pond will be a system of two storage areas that will be tiered, where runoff will travel from one storage area over a spillway to the lower storage area then through an outlet pipe. See attached details. Pre-Development Q 10 =0.4 cfs Post-Development Q10= 7 cfs Outlet Pipe=4" PVC @ 1% - Capacity @ 2.5" depth= 0.4 cfs NIB-B Detention Pond (Temporary) The MB-B detention pond is designed to have an approximate storage capacity of 1,256 cubic feet. It is assumed that this pond will be temporary and may need to be relocated as this area of site is developed. Pre-Development Q10= 0.2 cfs Post-Development Q10= 2.5 cfs Outlet Pipe=4" PVC @ 1% - Capacity @ 2.5" depth= 0.4 cfs NIB-C Detention Pond (Temporary) The MB-C detention pond is designed to have an approximate storage capacity of 1,256 cubic feet. It is assumed that this pond will be temporary and may need to be relocated as this area of site/1713-3 is developed. Pre-Development Q 10 = 0.2 cfs Post-Development Q10= 2.5 cfs Outlet Pipe=4" PVC @ 1% - Capacity @ 2.5" depth = 0.4 cfs Future Basins (FB-I through FB-5) Detention ponds for the future basins will need to be installed as each area of the site is developed. Preliminary calculations have been completed for planning purposes. It should be noted the F13-1 basin may require two detention ponds. It is assumed F13-1 detention pond(s) will connect to either the 271" Street Inlet CB-1 or Technology Drive Inlet CB-5 or both. In addition, it is assumed that runoff fiom 1713-1, MB-B, and 1`134 will combine and will ultimately be conveyed to the northwest corner of the site to an existing low area. A stormwater stub from the College Street storm sewer main will be required to prevent the ponding of runoff on the MSUIC property. When analyzing pre-development conditions runoff has historically travelled to this area and towards College Street and will need a means of conveyance from the site. Future basins 1713-2, 1713-3, and 1713-5 will each require detention facilities when the sites are developed. Each detention facility will need to discharge runoff at pre-development rates. Page 7 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I—INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT CULVERTS(TECHNOLOGY BOULEVARD) The two Technology Boulevard 36"x58.5"arch RCP culverts located at station 21+85 have been sized for the 25-year event and a 100 percent overflow capacity. The culverts were sized by delineating the contributing basin using GIS contour data and an aerial photo. The contributing basin has an approximate area of 637 acres (See Exhibit SW3). The basin has an average slope of 1.7% and flow length of approximately 15,241 feet. The peak runoff rate for the basin was calculated using the SCS method, as the basin is too large to use the Rational Method. With the SCS method, a curve number of 69 was used(Type B soils). The curve number 69 assumes open spaces with fair grass cover at 50%-75% and that any future development within the basin will utilize storm water detention systems. Using these assumptions, the 25-year peak runoff rate for the basin is 80 cfs. Using HY-8 7.2, a Federal Highway Administration culvert analysis program, one 36"x58.5" arch RCP pipe has an 85 cfs capacity without overtopping the road. Rip-rap protection was determined by using MDT's procedure for apron design (Appendix I, Chapter 9, MDT Drainage Manual). The procedure recommends rip-rap be used if the 10-year event flow velocity exceeds 10 fps. According to the analysis, the 10-year event of 34 cfs produces a velocity of 9.2 fps. Even though the outlet velocity does not exceed 10 fps, 12-inch rip-rap will still be used at the outlet. The rip-rap will be installed to fit the proposed contours and existing streambed and care will be taken to prevent any unneeded disturbance of the wetlands. See Appendix B for culvert and rip- rap sizing criteria. MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS Catch basins are proposed at each change in horizontal or vertical alignment in the storm drain system. Each of these catch basins contains a minimal sump of 9 inches to collect sediments. Care should be taken to properly clean the catch basins to ensure maximum capacity of the basins. The catch basins should be inspected on a yearly basis during the summer months and sediments removed to allow proper operation of the system. Any sediment removed during this procedure shall be deposed of per the City of Bozeman standards. Storm conveyance pipes should be inspected at the same time as the catch basins. Careful attention should be given to the build up of sediment and debris within the invert (bottom) of the pipe. If more that one-inch of sediment is observed, then the sediments should be removed through cleaning. Any line flushing to remove sediment or debris should only be done during periods of dry weather. The detention ponds should be inspected to determine sediment accumulation. If a large amount of sediment is detected(6 inches),then the sediment must removed from the bottom of the pond. The sediment may contain a significant amount of metals as well as the possibility of pesticides. All sediment removed from the facility shall be deposed of per the City of Bozeman standards. Page 8 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I—INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT Control structures should be inspected at least once per year, preferable in the summer. Any debris collected at the rectangular weir or in the structure should be removed. Structures should be inspected for sediment collection at the bottom and all sediment remove per the City standards. SUMMARY Stormwater from the new roads will be conveyed to detention ponds, stored, and then released at pre-development rates. Bio-infiltration will be utilized to increase the infiltration of stormwater runoff and to mitigate the potential of increased runoff into the creek. The existing wetlands will be utilized as a means of sediment and pollution removal; and flood control. Future site developments on the Innovation Campus will be required to install additional stormwater facilities that fit the "needs of the site" and also meet all City of Bozeman stormwater management standards. Page 9 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I-INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT EXHIBITS DEVELOPMENT DATA SURFACE AREA PERCENT TOTAL SITE 40.7 AAC 100% IMPERVIOUS -- ROAD/PARKING JAC5% 35% BUILDING PADS Z 15% O EXPANSION AREAS BUILDINGS 2% - - SIDEWALKS SHOWN 2% > - OTHER HARDSCAPE AREAS 5% W _ _...._ TOTAL IMPERVIOUS 5996 PERVIOUS \ _, _—._.SMACK_. WETLANDS 5'-------FEFE C WETLANDSETBACK5TORMWATER 1 � �'�� t- � � PARK 2%D"E.1—AREA �"1 C .� aIIOTHER OPEN SPACE SHOWN 2% D TOTAL PERVIOUS 41% //'"'�� BOZEMAN Er UVN I.d... CHRONICLE L. OPENEN TE.PORA y"s 'II 75 sram DNAPARKING SCE / --------------------\ 12'GRANULARAREA f— t �_�' i� p �I +•../ 1— f�� IIIi. I ♦ 1 I_ .._ TRAIL s•CONCRETE • I II ...-I �� 1 °.�•, ( .30'ACCE55 PATrAS wmu - 1 ,1 1 ( EASEMENT ,"� I �RerErm—All 30'EAEENCNT siDE rA�s ,.�1 , ! ( oc11x1+nAL i 81N4 NlP.1 \�'�I _—PARKING `. ! I i I "� � Z 11 nu aux 1 AREA-_-, �. / i i L!J WETLAND'1-_I 1 PARKING 5� e��. I ; � I STOiMWATER / AREA RETEN MAREa X EXISTING '-i L�[" °'Y�.r�."P�L '.. .r A _ - ' / ,�j REPARK H i sroamwArER =� '! •�. �<-�- , ; '.. DETENT ION ARea-�`�-� TECH LOUlY BOULEVARD Not 1 i EASE CRE 1, 1 t 4 '', ..a„ -i'v I II \° ♦\ O, VVvvVV.. z .. �y C1) CENTRAL -,r:. 1113 SETBACK(TYP) {/ ( 7 L� �✓ L. �,Y �I PARKING C /�' P.AF'fK (— j GREEN 1��z'gEaav ;�I AREA ry PARKING AREA T. ATCR ry >_ KIM �= UC) i � • � � I �. ;�`�.��u 1 �' .��kISrING 1���. i ): k'�� 'x ,''.1 ���"� k.:-_r, ���Y-.., "� i i / '� � ('+ p, 1�l/'+ lJ� T 1ER -- --- WA Al �I ALL DBY DRAWN BY: RESERVEDKA !< i ---../�� .- ( •...-I �. j"y CHECKE TS ,,,`: ,� ROWaYP.I 00 PARKING � I DATE: 10-01-14 AREA 1TYP.) L� c 'gmvgg.g TAu MSUIC CADFILE: 171 DIR:441 1J'SUEV S1SIMLx I I „ s � / s EeALK \ ------- PROJECT —------ I LO __ ENTRY FEAJ DUPPE— zsPRON Aao OTE:NO LuR K SMACK ODPLAINONSITEE- - - - - — — — -- ___ _ _ _ ___ —� .. sw —__ _. �., � «����rt sa try'i-:1.• - -^'s.'��'�R}fO4cTFfifttF.- .. .I CONTOUR INTERVALI MASTER SITE PLAN o so' ,00• 200' L00i NORTH SCALE:1'=100' MASTER SITE PLAN SHEET L001 I I I GRAPHIC SCALE i ( IN FEET I Z 1 Inch= 00 N., q r.5]s am,aPP (c} /INV OUT 4e a za c) I I�/�� APPROXIMATE uu°en i rE PLUGGED WITH CONTOUR INTERVAL=1 FOOT > I, LU CONCRETE µqn- y - 1 _(c) ---- - - �-I�----wm- -wm -- v,n i In- µ4T COLLEGE ST t C f .I INVERTED-INVERTEoz a O"- --�-U-- NV-4asas EXISTING LEGEND ,�;,-_ - ---- au_�q I is f -= ro- --0-�- • ® SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE ..___ ._ _ LOW STRUCTURE ® STORM DRAIN OPEN GRATE 1' WATER 48901 vnuLr eOTTOM4 ' m IRRIGATION ION DITCH MA NHOLE � ( -\ I z4•f,Iw l„ _--..1 ,,-,,I, \ p IN a•wC ® MONITORING WELL-6"PVC P ® STORM DRAIN INLET v J M WATER VALVE FIRE HYDRANT WITH WATER VALVE t WELL WATER SHUTOFF 75 L� I - �. F, - l ®EDGE OF CONTROL POINT Q ; S OowFERs 'Z � 7 �'� �'� �, • FOUND PROPERTY CORNER AS NOTED G^ °-0 LIGHT POLE-ONE LIGHT AND DIRECTION i wnTER6iEVELmaso.z9 s �0 LIGHT POLE-THOUGHTS AND DIRECTIONS Z O 1fl - VAULTBOTTOM�*M.19 I �1 �� UTILITY POLE O SATELLITE Q -. /14 / :r'-"� T A� - GUYWIRE W Olsn i __._.- f ❑ TRANSFORMER ����^,/, � FIBER OPTIC PEDESTAL OR VAULT RIM=4A6].Afr / I (. N.✓ © < O -R LEVEL=tas9s3 .I �' I, ' tI GAS METER BOTTOAI=409B.BS ' --•-- _ TELEPHONE PEDESTAL m "'°� " , 1r cmP 'T I CV TELEVISION PEDESTAL O _!/�' I© IRRIGATION CONTROL VALVE STORM SINGLE POLE SIGN I , ORnN - ° BOLLARD OR AS NOTED PONo _ r / O CONIFEUOUS ROUS TIRE 9'D14M EE �' t MOTOR INSIDE STALL }{ FEROU S E INVERTED 48-CUP I PORTS U I 'k - _ / L.,,.,.. O CONCRETE ZQ I"C o ONCRETE - � I- ASPHALT O VAIAi-r-1191, GRAVEL >-086G WATER LEVEL60.U, l{� ©VAULT BOTTOM-48 .38 I I I 4 ❑- 2 J B j„ / I LANDSCAPING ON f -ss-SANITARY SEWER LINE NRIE SILVE GAB - // RIM=4Bi1,2a �-.1 ( SERVICE PERILS t \ / / ' \\ / NUT=48fis.st --. ;�,PILe I ,-' SCRAP / '� - '/ � =sI-STORM GRAIN LINE CONCRETE ' RIMW87 \ ,✓ 4�2T' R1M 8)1.09 J WATERLINE �!R OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE "' Rg NV IN BEI-4881.t4 �wm -sP-UNDERGROUND POWER INV N((wyga6l,)a yG� -gas-UNDERGROUND GAS INv our NE)=1061.]3 eI-UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE z 1 �: �. F o _ 1=4a)aza � b ® ,' �� TER VALVE �G�� -ro-UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC ouT(WW863.i6�_ I WM=4071.93 ,<TG� -an-UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC-AT&T ioP NUT=aebe as /••� -Iv-UNDERGROUND TELEVISION 1 ' w/ _ # j +"" "" \ >�•¢ Ce, -kr-UNDERGROUND IRRIGATION DITCH-PIPE SIZES VARY OuoasBl NUTS - -. \ ' °�,Q -GAS-PROPOSED LOCATION OF NEW GAS LINE m O 10 �/ - C s A\\Sk ----0-FENCELINE-WOVEN WIRE (,u FENCELINE BARBED WIRE > \�Q BUILDING r/ "..` - ' `Op?<�VfA' TOP .17\O,Q EDGE OF VEGETATION AT DR{PLINE O PROPERTY BOUNDARY-APPROXIMATE-SUBJECT B _ --- '"- ` FOUND MONUMENT Y H 2O130 z CTA,INC/ + UNDERGROUND PUBLIC UTILITIES WERE LOCATED FROM MARKS ALL RIGHTSRESEC 10 I F= / e.THE q'I" - 1 // PRO LOCATION UND IN RESPONSEITO TICKET I30 BB ON OF ANEW GAS LINE IS BASED ON DRAWN BY: COK F NO MARKINGS ON THE GROUND AND PORTIONS THAT WERE CHECKED BY. ESE "` ' •' I „ ALREADY INSTALLED DURING THE TIME OF THE SURVEY.THE DATE:E 11119H3 I r - I t - 7' CARSO TTE ACTUAL NEW GAS LINE LOCATION MAY DEVIATE FROM THE CTA# MSUIC 6 I# j ouoesET HUT s1Eos / ' wood ,„/ '1 '' POST Ij� Q LOCATION THAT IS SHOWN,THERE MAY BE OTHER EXISTING CAD FILE: MSIDSVa1 I i• NA - UTILITIES NOT INDICATED ON THIS DRAWING. Y1LA POND AREA NOT suavEveo' -. /©UTILITY QUALITY GH THE LOCATED FROM INFORMATION TREES' � 'c � / � B--. `----� _..�' � OBTAINED THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF APPROPRIATE BRIDGE DIR' 1, SURFACE GEOPHYSICAL METHODS TO DETERMINE THE I -� EXISTENCE AND APPROXIMATE HORIZONTAL POSITION OF SUBSURFACE UTILITIES. �C , I��STORM �UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL'C'LOCATED FROM INFORMATION DRAIN! OBTAINED BY SURVEYING AND PLOTTING VISIBLE utv OUT-)o g1 i� 'per I ABOVE-GROUND UTILITY FEATURES AND BY USING OLU�� - -v, / •- PROFESSIONAL JUDGEMENT IN CORRELATING THIS INFORMATION 19'cmp STRUCTURE IRa TO QUALITY LEVEL'D'INFORMATION. I / STRUCTURE .. GAS / / u° RIM=g8)4.01 RIM4a)a 26 /// / s` ° '�+N� �7 �s p I /O DERI RIVED FROM EXISTING RECORDS OR ORAL RECOLL LIT LITY QUALITY LEVEL 0'LOCATED FROM IECTIONS, RIMW8)a39 SERVICE/ / 4�,f,, i w °I II / INVeefl]112 .. ATER LER""'80.59 I ON VALVE / ") rc 5 ` L JI 1 STORM INV IN-4tl]1.24 INV INUS)°4B)2.1t] STEEL _ ULT BOTTOM:g959J2�I- B �5 / -UT""" u - D T87I'J311'91I CALL TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG B -IP --�D c, 1w00D )f 0z uMProe]t.2 I'LL�POST 11 cuaa � _. j� m b _,:. _�. POSTS(5)I I '�'-- ---__ 12'- SERVICE? pPOH ITE BENCHMARK: R - - ....-. ..- L, a .- -.- S V FL=4874.46 rINV OUT=48 SO!'I CUTS c .- ....\.. s 1rP INV OUT N=4•812.12 I CPI-SET SPIKE-ELEVATION GENERATED BY NGS OPUS SOLUTION REPORT. ELEVATION=4667.66 FEET(NAVD88- • W GARFIE D ,e COMPUTED USING GEOIDI2A) °h oavweu z POET °n CONTROL POINT TABLE RIM:48]4.70 WATER SUMP=4B68.9 SERVICE? POINT OESCRIPRON NORTHNG EASTING ELEVATION 1 1 CP SPOT 2MM.W 3-.W 4MI.. i 3 CP SPNE 20229.% 30437.39 4864.67 OVERALL CP SPME 1MSBIS 31.3.09 4871.00 SITE 5 CP SPKE 19DC4.6o 30051.66 4019.a4 6 CP SPIKE 19231.77 30902.94 40)6.30 CP BPIKE 19N1. 3m31.BB 487883 SHEET 1 OF 1 THE AMENDED PLAT OF TRACT C-I A OF THE AMENDED PLAT 0 F WEST COLLEGE MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 195 LOCATED IN THE NW IA &NEI/4,SECTION 14,T2S,R5E,P.M.,M.,CITY OF BOZEMAN,COUNTY OF GALLATIN,STATE OF MONTANA SURVEY COMMISSIONED BY:MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION. 38 PURPOSE OF SURVEY:TO CREATE AND DEDICATE RIGHT-OF-WAY. X4861.45 X486%M. SS CAP X 1t,STONE C.,SEC I 47 4 86_ 'M BENT TO N 17 36 RP M — — — 4862.03 I Will REBAR 8742-6MEFT—CP— — — — — — S19'411VE 1155.5_1' _r — —— — — — — LEGEND 8 R__Y INS IF.SURVEY 48 72 2 1 AC TD&H RM-2 2006 12251S P—UBLIC—ACC—ESS EASEMENT IT PI OTHER LOT LINE ei PER DOC.NO.2364299 FELINE EASEMENT TO NORTHWESTERN ENERGY-TEN(10) FEET IN WIDTH TO BE LOCATED SIRIETI—TERUNE C IMMEDIATELYADJA ENT TO THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF THE OLD BOUNDARY LINE(RELOCATED By THIS SUNVEY) o COLLEGE TO HUFFINE BICYCLE PATH AS IT IS NOW LOCATED" FOUND�UWNT PER DOC. NO.2470211,RECORDED 12113/13. SET WIFRESARWITHI 2-ALUE11HUNICAR&IMKID-CTA INC 18019LS" (732'HIT RECORD DISTANCE PER ORIGINAL TOMSITE OF LIYUGSTON M.ki 14406 31 X4867.66 7.17 R2 RECORD DISTANCE PER-QED PLAT NO.491(HALU CP 1 R ARPCSSTGENG Sfl9'52'33'E 29,99' 44 RPC M+ eo 866.95 RPC M*M TRACTC-IA OF THE AMENDED PLAT OF 4'869.19 WEST COLLEGE MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 195 RPC M+M 11573 W OS 0.58 NE 2 2 4870.25 3 4871.33 Ypc M-M c� 870.96 6SO46'27'23'E 0f, T 4870.11 Ss c GPG M. 46 1=11,19%R=271,00` 4871.44 STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT PER FINAL C SSG ENG PLAT OF MINOR SUBDIVISION NO.273 L=118.28', =330. '872.95 1 L-138,84',R=330,00' A 20'32'11" RPC M+M A=24'0671 d4 NBZ2L46"Iy 290'.. S00'32'14"W 20.00'—E — NOO'05'19'E 75.00' seg-2T4tFE 2975 16- L=1 11.92',R=350.00' '—S89'54'41'E 50.09 N00'US'I9*E 31.92'-1 L=27.84',R=30,00' 6 A.�1112' 41 877.15 RPC M+M p 32.5'PUBLIC STREET AND UTILITY 32,5'PUSLIC STREET AND UTILITY —EASEMENT PER DO. C NO.2127250 EASEMENT PER DOC.NO.2127250 r ——— — —— —— ——— 6951 � 3175' RPC M'M — — — ... . . . . . ... .. . . . 412 S69'49'37"W 270.57* M�m9 N89*54'05'W 1311.68' 11041 DRAWN BY GSB sEE. T R (7,HFCKFDf]Y. PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN A DATE: 12L212M [1 14 2S �E MONTANA CIA 9 N'Sotc CADD FILE: - CITY OFBOZEMAN INNOVA"FION CANIMIS K:IMSUIC/SURVEY fft. GALLATIN COUNTY B()ZFN4/\N, N/I()N']',,\NA sill LI 01: . 'tithes �` f W FARMERS CANAL W PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT 10 PIPELINE EASEMENT TO r� t PER DOO.NO.2364 NORTHWESTERN ENERGY"TEN(10)IMM EDIATELY FEET IN WIDTH TO BE LOCATED SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE T TOTE ' COLLEGE TO HUFFINE BICYCLE PATH- `\L \'��>,1• ' AS IT IS NOW LOCATED"PER DOC. rr LL NO.2470211,RECORDED 12l13113. z Q _ Q z z Q ' /`~�` ® z Q 2 ,` W t vn� I Q O co r � a > j z i RACT C-1 /, � ` LLI GAS OF THE AMENDED PLAT OF \ / ` SERVICE ` WEST COLLEGE MINOR SUBDIVISION I9S ,�-v v° r BASIN A-2 .� v�T ��o z Z `r 's BASIN A-1 1919 AC. 11.8 AC. ' moo° z z ri J BASIN A-3 1 9.4 AC. r �Als - '�Tl RA4 DRAINAGE EASEMENT PER FINAL • s ( PLAT OF MINOR SUBDIVISION NO.273 W V ` COPYRIGHT ' - /` � .. - gym✓ 14 CTA,INC ALL RIGHTS RESERVED }� DRAWN BY: EV CHECKED BY: TRS LL DATE: tP01_14 XISTING DETENTION POND L.L. CTAq MSUiQ CAD FILE:_ MSICC400 FF-SITE"RUN-ON" DIR: _- -- DRAINAGE i 40 x f,2 XISTING DETENTION POND 32.E PUBLIC STREET AND UTILITY40 32.5'PUBLIC STREET AND UTILITY *L_ EASEMENT PER DOONQ.2727250 -- -- EASEMENT PER DOGNO.2127250 VICC GAS - i GAS .. } 9ER ] - l I 1 VALVE 7/ O rffA i -. t M pop V t;nS SERVICE-�l ... �-.��-. -.��.Y... ., r�.�... ;>,5J W RHIELO ST _—___—__._T i;_— �____T_____—Ti�__ ___.__�.T�al ____--_T___._ .__T—__-_.--__—T_ —T--- `lam 11J ARFIELD STREET DRAINAGE. EXISTING SAG/LOW POINTS. i -DEVELOPMENT ARFIELD STREET DRAINAGE. PRE FLOWS TO THE WEST. CONDITIONS FLOWS EAST TO A SAG. E a �i SHEET 0 4U' HU' 1tiU' CALL 1-8 0.424-5555 TNOTE TO TWWO WORKING ///'''��� ///��� a i PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS �_�J DAYS PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION TO ��/\/� NORTH SWi SCALE:1"=SO' V V HAVE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES ATE O 0 Z--HIGH POINT s _ W COLLEGE ST u .iA65 — \\\ + W EOUESTED IoOR FUTURE BASIN FB-6 (/) STORM 173582 SF OR W D s II STUB CL 3.98 AC. INOR FUTURE BASIN FB-5� f < 75; 357378 SF OR / co 8.20 AC. ; �; L!J t � Q z Q o W C=0.6 \ � Q 50'WETLAND SETBACKF— N m INOR FUTURE PASIN FB-4_ 192131 S OR MINOR BASIN A-2 WETLANDSLam, 4.41 C: 35045 SF OR 0.80 AC ;! ;' z C7.6 C=0.95 D P-2 , J s, ' ,% CB- - - z CB- r MINOR BASIN B z 33061 SF OR 0.76 AC. o �� rB-8 coa J — - INORBN FB-2ti MINOR A-1 3673 SF OR 9AC. UH DP-3 56,702 SF OR 1.30 AG C=O. C=0.80 -- -- � DRAWN BY R N i B-7 �� f"�1 CHECKED BY: TRS MINOR BASIN C \ L� DATE: 1.22-14 36901 SF OR 0.85 AC. I CAD TA# MSDIC INOR FUTURE BASIN FB-3 FF-SITE RUN-ON"\\ i DRAINAGE INTO 40, 273624SF OR °bs 6.28 AC. BASIN FB-3 r " INOR FUTURE BASIN FB-1 i ''' t C=0.6 ' 417281 SF OR 9.58 AC. C=0.6 a V) . N <x7s i 1 IIGH i ' I ----W GARFIELD ST ---- _ ----- ---- -------.— ------------- POST E ARFIELD STREET DRAINAG XISTING SAG/LOW POINTS. oCVEl CONDITIONS FLOWS TO THE WEST, ARFIELD STREET DRAINAGE. FLOWS EAST TO A SAG. N POST DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS SHEETS,n,� c sw2 stole r=ro o VV 0 IEi�f111�UIfJ��IRN — f'�+i1 i'uri1T7,�h �•I � 2 M CULVERT LO AIC I 6 .77 cj „ { - t r LPL I - J � 2 B BASIN AREA = 673 A. . R-2 cr�lt V� 51 n _ u �I;I< a IL A-2 Ni c y. 1,•1-@ I':tl .i,,,;1 -KI:. T. •I?L.1. 1`0 1 IUD ti sm , h✓ 335 .1676 2514 33 TAG# REVISION DATE MONTANA STATE NA NA 09/29/14 INNOVATION CAMPUS REF SHEET# BOZEMAN,MT NA (406)556-7100 BOZEMAN<MT SHEET# Fax(406)585-3031 SW3 KEY NOTES: O NEW 12'GRAVEL FINES l' h J PATHWAY.SEE 6/0400 FOR W COLLEGE ST '' CROSS SECTION AND 2/C301 FOR Z ENLARGEMENT. O - EXISTING VEGETATION NEW CURB AND GUTTER,SEE 3/C401 AND 4/C4 3 ' - Ot. EXISTING DELINEATED WETLAND. 30.00 PROPERTY LINE EXISTING / 1 r/1 I. WALKWAY EASEMENT EASEMENT. ACCESS ( 1\� V) O$ NEW STORM DETENTION POND 1' ti AND SWALE.SEE SHEET C200. I I I 7 , ��-•1 1 O NEW STORM DETENTION PONDS, W 5 \ ... ! ` `I SEE SHEET C200. C701 I �1� \ O NEW 5'CONCRETE PATHWAY,SEE GS SHEET C400 FOR DETAIL SECTION. O NEW 6'GRAVEL PATHWAY,SEE r/•► U SHEET C400 FOR DETAIL SECTION. V/(�q O0 CONNECT TO EXISTING Q z z ROADWAY,TYPICAL PER CITY OF 40.00' �) BOZEMAN, z f i r SIDE SETBACK PRO POSED 30.0'PUBLICUTILITY _ AND PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT EXISTING CENTERLINE FOR A 25' Q PUBLIC TRAIL EASEMENT, Cam,/ N NEW ASPHALT PATH,DETAIL \ O 1/C401. zZONE 2 > W _ i_/���� 5 / /• / / 12 BOUNOARYTTYP.WATERCOURSE z T. 25.0'FRONTTyp /• / �� - SETBACK C701 r _.. - 1 2 C701 PUBLIC UB L-IC • ,_ C101 0UTLTY EASEMENT�- 60.0'RIGHTOFWAY Y va • TECH _ _ _ \7100 3•E "�_. .----._-- � S6" �-•�.. 1�I '/ ` C7 V z Z �r R1000,00'(EXIST RAD) / / \`�/ \, '\� 70.D'PUBLIC 3 1 :A TI• UTILITY 0 I1 60.0'RIGHT 59 WATERCOURSE ' '/ - S`�f• \ EAT PENT 1 I OF WAY SETBACK TYP. - 1 I 15.0'SIDE SETBACK N \ \ �`o \ / l � i �•-. \ � 'S' �/ �°} COPY H 201 D 78347 30 0 O� �,t CTA ING AIL RIGHTS RESERVED >_... rc-...--,• / _`. .� L� DRAWN BY: EV ------------- 4 STORM DRAINAGE ! CHECKED BY: TRS 6� DATE: 10-01.14 IC1 a //�/�) / ( EASEMENT CAD FILE: MS CC100 >I \\ ? F \ 10.0'PUBLIC �'--�V_ ` 1F- UTILITY / �'/�. \ \ I DIR: la) \ N EASEMENT / / �(�� l PROPOSED TYP INAGE j 12 DRA EASEMENT ; I 15.0'SIDE 1 _ -: ( I (�.._ \ .J N> \ ; `• 1^� J� SETBACK__.., If clot 10 . . 10 41 3 T I '� ' clot cn 1 3 I 'I L— IRREVOCABLE EASEMENT -- —_ __- w ,I � —-— -- I V __— :.� -sr-�•'-se--"-'try- �"Bc—�H-- _ —__- _ -_-_ __�._ ____ _ .. . • IRREVOCABLE EASEMENT PRQPE.^RTV IiNF 52964• OVERALL E SITE - NEW ROAD STRIPING,TYP PLAN m SEE SHEET C101 NOTE TO CONTRACTOR CALL 1-800-4245555 TWO WORKING SHEET m 1 SITE PLAN 0 40' B0, 160' DAYS PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION TO C 100 SCALE:1'=80' w � HAVE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES w oo p NORTH ' I LOCATED. 0 W COLLEGE ST _. i ! 1 - 7+34 SITE KEY NOTES: ......._... - S/ <, ,• O CONSTRUCT DETENTION POND WITH 3:1 SIDE SLOPES. n POND DEPTH=2.5.POND VOLUME=1600 CUBIC FT. ••�v •• •• •••�iiliiil�• •a���.�s �r••�.r.•r•�•r�r����••.rr•••rr••�••..+�••• ...• ,J).. Z .� ••+�••..•i,. ., .. - - O CONSTRUCT RETENTION POND WITH 3:1 SIDE SLOPES. O v POND DEPTH-2.5•.POND VOLUME=1300 CUBIC FT. (n OCONSTRUCT 2 RETENTION PONDS WITH 3:1 SIDE UJ 14865 5 I I SLOPES,POND DEPTH=3'.COMBINED POND VOLUME_ 3700 CUBIC FT. CONSTRUCT 441•LONG SWALE WITH 2:1 SIDE SLOPES. r� n 1 O5 INSTALL 20 LF OF 6°HDPE CULVERT.MINIMUM V v! 1 C400 - - i I •: \ \ GROUND COVER. �1 \ O6 INSTALL 121E OF 6 HOPE CULVERT.MINIMUM 6- I.{• GROUND COVER 5 O7 CONSTRUCT WEIR FOR 2.5•DEEP DETENTION POND.SEE I,., DETAIL 6/C201 AND 7IC201. (ti(D 1 0 CONSTRUCT WEIR FOR 3 DEEP DETENTION POND.SEE ( ) l � v� J O DETAIL 6 CZ01 AND B C201..I _ SEE SHEET ' - Z s � z 0 2 W 2 O--. •Jf - C201 C400 zI 1=857.317,R=110o.OD0 1 1 a ---- G,. — p————— I // j� f G z 8+49.56 i m :1 N80°OT 47'E 2028.10' / I\iva' _.. ( -- .. _ 3 •; 4'.,. 8 </ i \ z o , -,-. ... SEE SHEET L--.. -4--J t7 ., _ s , \ J 1 0�1 ' C302 8 C304 A�1 SEE SHEETS / / \ NO°00'00'E 649.56' G303 8 C305 \. + +``- i J r•^, PT:6 3Bp p 6 _ --. S5S°12 5WE 202B.10' ��� /.. �c .ls G120 \\� LL - C201 4. AB40 SIDEWALK ' L=410.226,R=300.O0 RAMPSEE \ 'I - C400 d=78.3475 j6/C5o1 l I �. •' t /� / .�QCy U-210539,R=400.00D.. 3 sC400 ,, 0°9s 2rE sees PYRGH id s3 v 4J _. 1 CTA, INC 2 {m) g �f ALL RIGHTS RESERVED C400 t L� DRAWN BY: EV q&T6 0 CHECKED BY: TRS LLDATE: 10-Dl-14 CTA# MSUIC CAD FILE: I AgT� MSICC101 DIR: z L=210.539,11-400000 I �I 3 I NO`00'OD-E 849.56' I. -. lPC:1 a I i 1 1 ° — v _ M __.. ... �.�r:'eal .--xO��•• •� _"_L�" .'r94�.� • • _ '_�ar.ww••+� - ��• ___._ _. 1AME__ -.. - - Nil -----=---i ---------1 -------- --`—L------------------------ --------- --------J OVERALL E ROAD AND a DRAINAGEO N T'llROAD AND DRAINAGE PLAN 0 40' 80• 160' NOTE TO CONTRACTOR- PLAN NORTH C200 SCALE:1-=89 CALL 1-800-424-5555 TWO WORKING SHEET DAYS PRIOR TO ANY F%CAVATION TO O HAVE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES /�O O c LOCATED. LJ 0 MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I-INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT Appendix A Detention Pond Sizing and Hydrology Calculations MINOR BASIN A-STORM WATER DETENTION REQUIREMENT(ROADS) Existing Land Use: A riculture/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Roads Existing Drainage Area: 2.10 acres Proposed Drainage Area: 2.1 acres Existing Slope: 1.6 % Proposed Slope: 2 Overland Flow Distance: 840 feet Overland Flow Distance: 1282 feet Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: 44.0 minutes Time of Concentration: 5.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Frequency: 10 year 10 yr Intensity at To; 0.782950033 in/hr 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 3.218457539 in/hr Peak Runoff Rate:1 0.38 cfs Peak Runoff Rate: 6.96 crs Runoff Coefficient Area SF C able 1.1 Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0,80 Neighborhood Commercial: 0 0.60 cons/paved area: 0 0.95 conc/aved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 streets: 104,728 0.90 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 104.728 0.20 open space. 0 0.20 Total: 104.728 Total: 104,728 total area: 2.40 acres total area: 2.40 acres composite C: 0.20 composite C: 0.90 Event Desi n Flowr!�2yr Intensity at Tc=1 3.83 n/hr 10 Year Storm-Required Stora a Calculations Table 1.3 25 r Tc= 5.00 minutes Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Future Runoff Release Required Q=1 8.28 1 cts min in/hr Rate cfs Volume ft, Volume ,3 Stora a ft� 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.2 26.0801 56.43 677.19 4.52 672.7 MAXIMUM STORAGE= 3712.7 0.4 16.6203 35.96 863.11 9.04 854.1 0.6 12.7697 27.63 994.72 13.55 981.2 DEPTH= 1.5 0.8 10.5918 22.92 1100.09 18.07 1082.0 SOT SIDE 1= 75 1 9.1617 19.82 1189.45 22.59 1166.9 BOT SIDE 2= 25 1.2 8.1379 17.61 1267.83 27.11 1240.7 TOP SIDE 1= 87 1.4 7.3620 15.93 1338.11 31.62 1306.5 TOP SIDE 2= 37 1.6 6.7499 14.61 1402.13 36.14 1366.0 TOTAL STORAGE= 3820.5 1.8 6.2525 13.53 1461.14 40.66 1420.5 2 5.8386 12.63 1516.03 45.18 1470.9 2.5 5.0503 10.93 1639.18 56.47 1582.7 3 4.4859 9.71 1747.19 67.77 1679.4 3.5 4.0582 8.78 1844.04 79.06 1765.0 4 3.7208 8.05 1932.27 90.35 1641.9 6 2.8588 6.19 2226.90 135.53 2091.4 6.5 2.7138 5.87 2290.1E 1 146.83 2143.3 7 2.5862 5.60 2350.34 158,12 2192.2 7.5 2.4728 5.35 2407.79 169.41 2238.4 81 2.3712 5.13 2462.80 180.71 2282.1 10 2.0511 4.44 2662.85 225.89 2437.0 12 1.8218 3.94 2838.31 271.06 2567.3 14 1.6481 3.57 2995.66 316.24 2679.4 16 1.5111 3.27 3138.98 361.42 2777.6 18 1.3998 3.03 3271.09 406.60 2864.5 20 1.3071 2.83 3393.97 451.77 2942.2 22 1.2286 2.66 3509.09 496.95 3012.1 24 1.1610 2.51 3617.60 542.13 3075.5 26 1.1022 2.38 3720.38 587.30 3133.1 28 1.0503 2.27 3818.14 632.48 3185.7 30 1.0043 2.17 3911.46 677.66 3233.8 32 0.9630 2.08 4000.62 722.84 3278.0 34 0.9258 2.00 4086.62 768.01 3318.6 36 0.8920 1.93 4169.20 813.19 3356.0 38 0.8612 1.86 4248.85 1 858.37 3390.5 40 0.8330 1.80 4325.82 903.55 3422.3 42 68070 1.75 4400.32 948.72 3451.6 44 0.7830 1.69 4472.55 993.90 3478.7 46 0.7607 1.65 4542.68 1039.08 3503.E 48 0.7399 1.60 4610.85 1084.26 3526.6 50 0.7205 1.56 4677.21 1129.43 3547.8 52 0.7024 1.52 4741.85 1174.61 3567.2 54 0.6854 1.48 4804.90 1219.79 3585.1 56 0,6694 1.45 4866.46 1264.96 3601.5 58 0.6543 1.42 4926.59 1310.14 3616.5 60 0.6400 1.38 4985.40 1355.32 3630.1 62 0.6265 1.36 5042.94 1400.50 3642.4 64 0.6137 1.33 5099.29 1445.67 3653.6 66 0.6016 1.30 5154.51 1490.85 3663.7 68 0.5900 1.28 5208.65 1536.03 3672.6 70 0.5790 1.25 5261.76 1581,21 3680.6 72 0.5685 1.23 5313.90 1626.38 3687.5 74 0.5584 1.21 5365.10 1671.56 3693.5 76 0.5488 1.19 5415.41 1716.74 3698.7 78 0.5397 1.17 5464.67 1761.91 3703.0 80 0.5308 1.15 5513.51 1807.09 3706.4 82 0.5224 1.13 5561.37 1852.27 3709.1 84 0.5143 1.11 5608.47 1897.45 3711.0 86 0,5065 1.10 5654.85 1942.62 37122 66 1.08 5760,54s 712.7 90 0,4917 1.06 5745.55 2032.98 3712.6 MINOR BASIN B -STORM WATER DETENTION REQUIREMENT (ROADS) Existing Land Use: A ricullure/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Roads Existing Drainage Area: 0.76 acres Proposed Drainage Area: 0.76 acres Existing Slope: 1.6 % Proposed Slope: 2 % Overland Flow Distance: 280 feet Overland Flow Distance: 280 feet Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: 37.1 minutes Time of Concentration: 5.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Frequency: 10 year 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 0.874752607 in/hr 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 3.218457539 in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: 0.15 cfs Peak Runoff Ratej 2.50 cfs Runoff Coefficient Area SF C Table 1.1 Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: 0 0.60 conc/aved area: 0 0.95 conc/aved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 streets: 37,619 0.90 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 37,619 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 37,619 Total: 37,619 total area: 0.86 acres total area: 0.86 acres -composite C: 0.20 com osite C: 0.90 Lffyr Event Desi n Flow Intensity at Tc= 3,83 i1r 10 Year Storm•Re uired Stora a Calculations Table 1.3 25 r Tc= 5.00 minutes Storm Duration Intensify Future Runoff Future Runoff Release Required Q=1 2.97 cfs min in/hr Rafe cfs Volume ft Volume ft Stora eft 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.2 26.0801 20.27 243.25 1.81 241.4 MAXIMUM STORAGE= 1256.3 0.4 16.6203 12.92 310.04 3.63 306.4 0.6 12.7697 9.93 357.31 5.44 351.9 DEPTH= 1.5 03 10.5918 8.23 395.16 7.25 387.9 BOT SIDE 1= 95 1 9.1617 7.12 427.26 9.07 418.2 BOT SIDE 2= 32 1.2 8.1379 6.33 455.41 10.88 444.5 TOP SIDE 1= 107 1.4 7.3620 5.72 480.66 12.69 468.0 TOP SIDE 2= 44 1.6 6.7499 5.25 503.66 14.50 489.2 TOTAL STORAGE= 5760.5 1.8 6.2525 4.86 524.85 16.32 508.5 2 5.8386 4.54 544.57 18.13 526.4 2.5 5.0503 3.93 588.80 22.66 566.1 3 4.4859 3.49 627.60 27.20 600.4 3.5 4.0582 3.15 662.39 31.73 630.7 4 3.7208 2.89 694.08 36.26 657.8 6 2.8588 2.22 799.92 54.39 745.5 6.5 2.7138 2.11 822.64 58.92 763.7 7 2.5862 2.01 844.26 63.46 780.8 7.5 2.4728 1.92 864.89 67.99 796.9 8 2.3712 1.84 884.65 72.52 812.1 10 2.0511 1.59 956.51 90.65 865.9 12 1.8218 1.42 1019.54 108.78 910.8 14 1.6481 1.28 1076.06 126.92 949.1 16 1.5111 1.17 1127.54 145.05 982.5 18 1.3998 1.09 1175.00 163.18 1011.8 20 1,3071 1.02 1219.14 181.31 1 1037.8 22 1.2286 0.95 1260.49 199.44 1061.1 24 1.1610 0.90 1299.47 217.57 1081.9 26 1 A 022 0.86 1336.39 235.70 1100.7 28 1.0503 0.82 1371.50 253.83 1117.7 30 1.0043 0.78 1405.02 271.96 1133.1 32 0.9630 0.75 1437.12 290.09 1147.0 34 0.9258 0.72 1467.94 308.22 1159.7 36 0.8920 0.69 1497.61 326.35 1171.3 38 0.8612 0.67 1526.21 344.48 1181.7 40 0.8330 0.65 1553.86 362.62 1191.2 42 0.8070 0.63 1580.62 380.75 1199.9 44 0.7830 0.61 1606.57 398.88 1207.7 46 0,7607 0.59 1631.76 417.01 1214.8 48 0.7399 0.58 1656.25 435.14 1221.1 50 0.7205 0.56 1680.08 453.27 1226.8 52 0.7024 0.55 1703.31 471.40 1231.9 54 0.6854 0.53 1725.95 1 489.53 1236.4 56 0.6694 0.52 1748.06 507.66 1240.4 58 0.6543 0.51 1769.67 525.79 1243.9 60 0.6400 0.50 1790.79 543.92 1246.9 62 0.6265 0.49 1811.46 562.05 1249.4 64 0.6137 0.48 1831.70 580.18 1251.5 66 0.6016 0.47 1851.53 598.31 1253.2 68 0.5900 0.46 1870.98 616.45 1254.5 70 0.5790 0.45 1890.06 634.58 1255.5 72 0.5685 0.44 1908.79 652.71 1256.1 76 0.5488 0.43 1945.25 688.97 1256.3 78 0.5397 0.42 1963.02 707.10 1255.9 80 0.5308 0.41 1980.49 725.23 1255.3 82 0.5224 0.41 1997.68 743.36 1 1254.3 84 0.5143 0.40 2014.60 M1.49 1253.1 86 0.5065 0.39 2031.26 779.62 1251.6 88 0.4990 0.39 217.67 797.75 1249.9 90 0.4917 0.38 2063.84 1 815.88 1248.0 MINOR BASIN C-STORM WATER DETENTION REQUIREMENT(ROADS) Existing Land Use: A ricullure/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Roads Existing Drainage Area: 0.85 acres Proposed Drainage Area: 0,85 acres Existing Slope: 1.6 % Proposed Slope: 2 Overland Flaw Distance: 280 feel Overland Flow Distance: 280 feel Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: 37.1 minutes Time of Concentration: 5.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Frequency: 10 year 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 0.874752607 in/hr 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 3.218457539 in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: 0.15 cis Peak Runoff Rate: 2.50 cis Runoff Coefficient Area S C able 1.1 Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: 0 0.60 cons/paved area: 0 0.95 concl aved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 streets: 37.619 0.90 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 37,619 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 37,619 Total: 37,619 total areal 0.86 acres total areal 0.86 iacres composite C:1 0.20 composite C:1 0.90 25 Year Event Design Flaw 25yr Intensity at Tc=1 3.83 jlnlhr 10 Year Storm-Re uired Stom a Calculations Table 1.3 25yrTc=l 5.00 Iminutes Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Future Runoff I Release Required 0= 2.97 c/s min in/hr Rate cls Volume ft3 Volume R' Stora a 0 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.2 26.0801 2027 243.25 1.81 241.4 MAXIMUM STORAGE= 1256.3 0.4 16.6203 12.92 310.04 3.63 306.4 0.6 12.7697 9.93 357.31 5.44 351.9 DEPTH= 1.5 0.8 10.5918 8.23 395.16 7.25 387.9 BOT SIDE 1= 40 1 9.1617 7.12 427.26 9.07 418.2 BOT SIDE 2= 13 1.2 8.1379 6.33 455.41 10.88 444.5 TOP SIDE 1= 52 1.4 7.3620 5.72 480.66 12.69 468.0 TOP SIDE 2= 25 1.6 6.7499 5.25 503.66 14.50 489.2 TOTAL STORAGE= 1388 1.8 6.2525 4.86 524.85 1 16.32 508.5 2 5.8386 4.54 544.57 18.13 526A 2.5 5,0503 3.93 588.80 22.66 566.1 3 4.4859 3.49 627.60 27.20 600.4 3.5 4.0582 1 3.15 662.39 31.73 1 630.7 4 3.7208 2.89 694.08 36.26 657.8 6 2.8588 2.22 799.92 54.39 745.5 6.5 2.7138 2.11 822.64 58.92 763.7 7 2.5862 2.01 844.26 63.46 780.8 7.5 2.4728 1.92 864.89 67.99 796.9 8 2.3712 1.84 884.65 72.52 812.1 10 2.0511 1.59 956.51 90.65 865.9 12 1.8218 1.42 1019.54 108.78 910.8 14 1.6481 1.28 1076.06 126.92 949.1 16 1.5111 1.17 1127.54 145.05 982.5 18 1.3998 1.09 1175.00 163.18 1011.8 20 1.3071 1.02 1219.14 181.31 1037.8 22 1.2286 0.95 1260.49 199.44 1061.1 24 1.1610 0.90 1299.47 217.57 1081.9 26 1.1022 0.86 1336.39 235.70 1100.7 28 1.0503 0.82 1371.50 1 253.83 1117.7 30 1.0043 0.78 1405.02 271.96 1133.1 32 0.9630 0.75 1437.12 290.09 1147.0 34 0.9258 0.72 1467.94 308.22 1159.7 36 0.8920 0.69 1497.61 326.35 1171.3 38 0.8612 0.67 1526.21 344.48 1181.7 40 0,8330 0.65 1553.86 362.62 1191.2 42 0.8070 0.63 1580.62 380.75 1199.9 44 0.7830 0.61 1606.57 398.88 1207.7 46 0.7607 0.59 1631.76 1 417.01 1214.8 48 0.7399 1 0.58 1656.25 435.14 1221.1 So 0.7205 0.56 1680.08 453.27 1226.8 52 0.7024 0.55 1703.31 471.40 1231.9 54 0.6854 0.53 1725.95 489.53 1236.4 56 0.6694 0.52 1748.06 507.66 1240.4 58 0.6543 0.51 1769.67 525.79 1243.9 60 0.6400 0.50 1790.79 543.92 1246.9 62 0.6265 0.49 1811.46 562.05 1249.4 64 0.6137 1 0.48 1831.70 580.18 1251.5 66 0.6016 0.47 1851.53 598.31 1253.2 68 0.5900 0.46 1870.98 616.45 1254.5 70 0.5790 0.45 1890.06 634.58 1255.5 72 0.5685 0.44 1908.79 652.71 1256.1 74 5 1 76 0.5488 0.43 1945.25 688.97 1256.3 78 0.5397 0,42 1963.02 707.10 1255.9 80 0.5308 0.41 1980.49 725.23 1255.3 82 0.5224 0.41 1997.68 743.36 1254.3 84 0.5143 0.40 2014.60 761.49 1253.1 86 0.5065 0.39 2031.26 779.62 1251.6 88 0.4990 0.39 2047.67 797,75 1249.9 90 0.4917 0.38 2063.84 815.88 1248.0 MINOR BASIN FB-1 -STORM WATER DETENTION REQUIREMENT Existing Land Use: A riculture/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Univ.Research Park Existing Drainage Area: 9.58 acres Proposed Drainage Area: 9.58 acres Existing Slope: 1.6 % Proposed Slope: 2 Overland Flow Distance: 643 feet Overland Flow Distance: 630 feel Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: 38.0 minutes Time of Concentration: 20.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Frequency: 10 year 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 0.851229602 in/hr 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 1.307099924 in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: 1.65 cis Peak Runoff Rate: 7.51 cis Runoff Coefficient Area SF C Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: 417.282 0.60 conc!aved area: 0 0.95 concl aved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0,95 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 417,282 1 0.20 open space; 0 0.20 Total: 417.282 1 Total: 417,282 total area: 9.56 acres total areal 9.58 1 acres composite C:j 0.20 1 i I composite C:1 0.60 25 Year Event Design Flow 25 yr Intensity at Tc= 1.58 jin1hr 10 Year Storm-Required Stor a Calculations 25yrTc=l 20.00 I minutes Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Fulure Runoff Release Required Q=I 9.0E 1 cis min ir1/hr Rafe cfs Volume R' Voluma R' Stora a R' 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.2 26.0801 149.90 1798.80 19.80 1779.0 MAXIMUM STORAGE= 7530.6 0.4 16.6203 95.53 2292.68 39.60 2253A 0.6 12.7697 73.40 2642.26 59.40 2582.9 DEPTH= 1.5 O.B 10.5918 60.88 2922.16 79.20 2843.0 BOT SIDE 1= 115 1 9.1617 52.66 3159.53 99.00 3060.5 BOT SIDE 2= 38 1.2 8.1379 46.77 3367.72 116.80 3248.9 TOP SIDE 1= 127 1.4 7.3620 42.31 3554.41 138-60 3415.8 TOP SIDE 2= 50 1.6 6.7499 38.80 3724.47 158.40 3566.1 TOTAL STORAGE= 8100.5 1.8 6.2525 35.94 3881.22 178.20 3703.0 2 5.8386 33.56 4027.01 198.00 3829.0 2.5 5.0503 29.03 4354.13 247.50 4106.6 3 4.4859 25.78 4641.04 297.00 4344.0 3.5 4.0582 23.33 4898.31 346.51 4551.8 4 3.7208 21.39 5132.67 396.01 4736.7 6 2.8588 16.43 5915.28 594.01 5321.3 6.5 2,7138 15.60 6083.34 643.51 5439.8 7 2.5862 14.86 6243.19 1 693.01 5550.2 7.5 2.4728 14.21 6395.79 742.51 5653.3 8 2.3712 13.63 6541.90 792.01 5749.9 10 2.0511 11.79 7073.31 990.02 6083.3 12 1.8218 10.47 7539.39 1188.02 6351.4 14 1.6481 9.47 7957.33 1386.02 6571.3 16 1.5111 8.69 8338.05 1584.02 6754.0 18 1.3998 1 8.05 8688.96 1782.03 6906.9 20 1.3071 7.51 9015.36 1980.03 7035.3 22 1.2286 7.06 9321.17 1 2178.03 7143.1 24 1.1610 6.67 9609.41 2376.04 7233.4 26 1.1022 6.33 9882.42 2574.04 7308.4 28 1.0503 6.04 10142.10 2772.04 7370.1 30 1.0043 5.77 10389.99 2970.05 7419.9 32 0.9630 5.54 10627.35 3168.05 7459.3 34 0.9258 5.32 10855.26 3366.05 7489.2 36 0.8920 5.13 11074.61 3564.06 7510.6 38 0,8612 4.95 11286.18 3762.06 7524.1 .O 42 0.8070 4.64 11688.53 4158.0E 7530.5 44 0.7830 4.50 118BO.40 4356.07 7524.3 46 0,7607 4.37 12066.68 4554.07 7512.6 48 0.7399 4.25 12247.77 4752.07 7495.7 50 0.7205 4.14 12424.02 4950.08 7473.9 52 0.7024 4.04 12595.74 5148.08 1 7447.7 54 0.6854 3.94 12763.22 5346.01 7417A 56 0.6694 3.85 12926.72 5544.09 7382.6 58 0.6543 3.7E 13086.47 5742.09 7344.4 60 0.6400 3.68 13242.67 5940.09 7302.6 MINOR BASIN FB-2-STORM WATER DETENTION REQUIREMENT Existing Land Use: A ricullure/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Univ.Research Park Existing Drainage Area: 3.99 acres Proposed Drainage Area: 3.99 acres Existing Slope: 1.3 % Proposed Slope: 2 Overland Flaw Distance: 684 feet Overland Flow Distance: 765 feet Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: 42.0 minutes Time of Concentration: 24.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Frequency., 10 year 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 0.80698646 in/hr 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 1.161023418 in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: 0.64 GIs Peak Runoff Rate: 2.78 cis Runoff Coefficient Area SF C Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: 173,673 0.60 concl aved area: 0 0.95 concl aved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 173,673 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 173.673 Total: 173,673 total area: 3.99 1 acres total area: 3.99 acres composite C: 0.20 composite C: 0.60 25 Year Event Design Flow 25yr Intensity at Tc= 1.40 in/hr 10 Year Storm•Required Slorage Calculations 25 yr Tc= 24.00 minutes Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Future Runoff Release Required 0= 3.35 c!s min in/hr Rate cis Volume ft3 Volume ff' Store a fts 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.2 26.0801 62.39 748.66 7.72 740.9 MAXIMUM STORAGE= 3246.1 0A 16.6203 39.76 954.21 15.44 938.E 0.6 12.7697 30.55 1099.71 23.17 1076.5 DEPTH= 1.5 0.8 10.5918 25.34 1216.20 30.89 1185.3 BOT SIDE 1= 70 1 9.1617 21.92 1315.00 38.61 1276.4 BOT SIDE 2= 23 1.2 8.1379 19.47 1401.65 1 46.33 1355.3 TOP SIDE I= 82 1.4 7.3620 17.61 1479.35 54.05 1425:3 TOP SIDE 2= 35 1.6 6.7499 16.15 1550.13 61.77 1488.4 TOTAL STORAGE= 3398 1.8 6.2525 14.96 1615.36 69.50 1545.9 2 5.8386 13.97 1676.05 77.22 1598.8 2.5 5.0503 12.08 1812.19 96.52 1715.7 3 4.4859 10.73 1931.60 115.83 1815.8 3.5 4.0582 9.71 2038.68 135.13 1903.5 4 3.7208 8.90 2136.22 154.44 1981.8 6 2.8588 6.84 2461.94 1 231.66 2230.3 6.5 2.7138 6.49 2531.89 250.96 2280.9 7 2.5862 6.19 2598.42 270.27 2328.2 7.5 2.4728 5.92 2661.93 289.57 2372.4 8 2.3712 5.67 2722.74 308.87 2413.9 10 2.0511 4.91 2943.91 386.09 2557.8 12 1.8218 4.36 3137.90 463.31 2674.6 14 1.6481 3.94 3311.85 540.53 2771.3 16 1.5111 3.61 3470.30 617.75 2852.6 18 1.3998 3.35 3616.35 1 694.97 2921A 20 1.3071 3.13 3752.20 772.19 2980.0 22 1.2286 2.94 3879.48 849.40 3030.1 24 1.1610 2.78 3999.44 926.62 3072.8 26 1.1022 2.64 4113.07 1003.84 3109.2 28 1.0503 2.51 4221.15 1081.06 1 3140.1 30 1.0043 2.40 4324.32 1158.28 3166.0 32 0.9630 2.30 4423.11 1235.50 3187.6 34 0.9258 2.21 4517.96 1312.72 3205.2 36 0.8920 2.13 4609.26 1389.93 3219.3 38 0.8612 2.06 4697.31 1467,15 3230.2 40 0.8330 1.99 4782.40 1544.37 3238.0 42 0.8070 1.93 4864.77 1621.59 3243.2 44 0.7830 1.87 4944.63 1698.81 3245.8 z 5022.10 3 48 0.7399 1.77 5097.53 1853.25 3244.3 50 0.7205 1.72 5170.88 1930.47 3240.4 52 0.7024 1.68 1 5242.35 2007.68 3234.7 54 0.6854 1.64 5312.06 2084.90 3227.2 56 0.6694 1.60 5380.11 2162.12 3218.0 58 0.6543 1.57 5446.59 2239.34 3207.3 60 0.6400 1.53 5511.61 2316.56 3195.0 MINOR BASIN FB-3 -STORM WATER DETENTION REQUIREMENT Existing Land Use: A riculture/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Univ.Research Park Existing Drainage Area: 6.28 acres Proposed Drainage Area: 6.28 acres Existing Slope: 1.75 % Proposed Slope: 2 Overland Flow Distance: 641 feet Overland Flow Distance: 670 reel Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: 37.0 minutes Time of Concentration: 21.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Fre uenc: 10 year 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 0.876288609 in/hr 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 1.266297487 in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: 1.10 CIS Peak Runoff Rate: 4.77 cis Runoff Coefficient Area SF C Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: 273.624 0.60 concl aved area: 0 0.95 cons/paved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 273,624 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 273,624 Total: 273.624 total area: 6.28 1 acres I total aread 6.28 acres -composite C:j 0.20 1 1 com osite C:j 0.60 M2a5ryr Event Desi n Flow Intensity at Tc= 1.53 jin1hr 10 Year Storm-Required Storage Calculations 25 yr Tc= 21.00 Iminutes Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Future Runoff Release Required 0= 5.76 cls min in/hr Rafe cls Volume{t' Volume ft Stora a ft° 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.2 26.0801 98.29 1179.53 13.21 1166.3 MAXIMUM STORAGE= 4892.6 0.4 16.6203 62.64 1503.38 26.42 1477.0 0.6 12.7697 48.13 1732.61 39.63 1693.0 DEPTH= 1.5 0.8 10.5918 39.92 1916.15 52.84 1863.3 BOT SIDE 1= 90 1 9.1617 34.53 2071.80 66.05 1 2005.7 BOT SIDE 2= 30 1.2 8.1379 30.67 2208.31 79.26 2129.0 TOP SIDE 1= 102 1.4 7.3620 27.75 2330.73 92.47 2238.3 TOP SIDE 2= 42 1.6 6.7499 25.44 2442.24 105.69 2336.6 TOTAL STORAGE= 5238 1.8 6.2525 23.57 2545.03 118.90 2426.1 2 5.8386 22.01 2640.63 132.11 2508.5 2.5 5.0503 19.03 2855.13 165.13 2690.0 3 4.4859 16.91 3043.26 198.16 2845.1 3.5 4.0582 15.30 3211.97 231A9 2980.8 4 3.7208 14.02 3365A4 264.21 3101.4 6 2.8588 10.77 3878.82 396.32 3482.5 6.5 2.7138 10.23 3989.03 429.35 3559.7 7 2.5862 9.75 4093.85 462.37 3631.5 7.5 2.4728 9.32 4193.90 495.40 3698.5 8 2.3712 8.94 4289.72 528.43 3761.3 10 2.0511 7.73 4638.17 660.53 1 3977.6 12 1.8218 6.87 4943.80 792.64 4151.2 14 1.6481 6.21 5217.85 924.75 4293A 16 1.5111 5.70 5467.50 1056.85 4410.7 18 1.3998 5.28 5697.61 1188.96 4508.6 20 1.3071 4.93 5911.63 1321.07 4590.6 22 1.2286 4.63 6112.16 1453.17 4659.0 24 1.1610 4.38 6301.17 1585.28 4715.9 26 1.1022 4.15 6480.19 1717.39 4762.8 28 1.0503 3.96 6650.47 1849.49 4801.0 30 1.0043 3.79 6813.02 1981.60 4831.4 32 0.9630 3.63 6968.67 2113,71 4855.0 34 0.9258 3.49 7118.11 2245.81 4872.3 36 0.8920 3.36 7261.95 2377.92 4884.0 38 0.8612 3.25 7400.68 2510.03 4890.6 30 26alll 42 0.8070 3.04 7664.51 2774.24 4890.3 44 0.7830 2.95 7790.32 2906.35 4884.0 46 0.7607 2.87 7912.47 3038.45 4874.0 48 0.7399 2.79 8031.22 3170.56 4860.7 50 0.7205 2,72 8146.79 3302.67 4844.1 52 0.7024 2.65 8259.40 3434.77 4824.6 54 0A854 2.58 8369.22 3566.88 4802.3 56 0.6694 2.52 8476.43 3698.99 4777.4 58 0.6543 2.47 8581.18 3831.09 4750.1 60 0.6400 2.41 8683.60 1 3963.20 4720.4 MINOR BASIN FB-4-STORM WATER DETENTION REQUIREMENT Existing Land Use: A ricullure/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Univ.Research Park Existing Drainage Area: 4.41 acres Proposed Drainage Area: 4.41 acres Existing Slope: 1.4 % Proposed Slope: 1.4 Overland Flow Distance: 517 feet Overland Flow Distance: 517 feet Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: 32.0 minutes Time of Concentration: 20.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Frequency: 10 year 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 0.963010009 in/hr 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 1.307099924 in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: 0.85 cis Peak Runoff Ratej 3.46 cis Runoff Coefficient Area SF C Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0.80 -Neighborhood Commercial: 192,137 0.60 cone/paved area: 0 0.95 cone/paved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 192,131 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 192.131 Total: 192,131 total area: 4.41 acres I total area: 4.41 acres composite Cj 0.20 1 1 com osile C:j 0.60 M2ryr Event Desi n Flow Intensity at Tc= 1.58 fn/hr 10 Year Storm-Re uired Stora a Calculations 25 r Tc= 20.00 minutes Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Future Runoff Release Required 0=1 4.17 1 cis min inmr Rale cfs Volume ft3 Volume ft' Stora a Its 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.2 26.0801 69.02 828.23 10.19 818.0 MAXIMUM STORAGE= 3265.1 0.4 16.6203 43.98 1055.63 20.39 1035.2 0.6 12.7697 33.79 1216.59 30.58 1186.0 DEPTH= 1.5 0.8 10.5918 28.03 1345.46 40.78 1304.7 SOT SIDE 1= 70 1 9.1617 24.25 1454.76 1 50.97 1403.8 BOT SIDE 2= 23 1.2 8.1379 21.54 1550.61 61.16 1489.4 TOP SIDE 1= 82 1.4 7.3620 19.48 1636.57 71.36 1565.2 TOP SIDE 2= 35 1.6 6.7499 17.86 1714.87 81.55 1633.3 TOTAL STORAGE= 3398 1.8 6.2525 16.55 1787.05 91.75 1695.3 2 5.8386 15.45 1ti54.18 101.94 1752.2 2.5 5.0503 13.37 2004.79 127.43 1877.4 3 4.4859 11.87 2136.89 152.91 1984.0 3.5 4.0582 10.74 2255.35 178.40 1 2077.0 4 3.7208 9.85 2363.26 203.88 2159.4 6 2.8588 7.57 2723.60 305.82 2417.8 6.5 2.7138 7.18 2800.98 331.31 2469.7 7 2.5862 6.84 2874.58 356.80 2517.8 7.5 2.4728 6.54 2944.84 382.28 2562.6 8 2.3712 6.28 3012.12 407.77 2604.4 10 2.0511 5.43 3256.79 509.71 2747.1 12 1.8218 1 4.82 3471.39 611.65 2859.7 14 1.6481 4.36 3663.83 713.59 2950.2 16 1.5111 4.00 3839.13 815.53 3023.6 18 1.3998 3.70 4000.70 917.47 3083.2 20 1.3071 3.46 4150.98 1019.42 3131.6 22 1.2286 3.25 4291.79 1121.36 3170.4 24 1.1610 3.07 4424.50 1223.30 3201.2 26 1.1022 2.92 4550.21 1325.24 3225.0 28 1.0503 2.78 4669.77 1427.18 3242.6 30 1.0043 2.66 4783.91 1529.12 3254.8 32 0.9630 2.55 4893.20 1631.07 3262.1 2.43 4998.13 1 36 0.8920 2.36 5099.13 1834.95 3264.2 38 0.8612 2.28 5196.54 1936.89 3259.7 40 0.8330 2.20 5290.68 2038.83 3251.8 42 0.8070 2.14 5381.80 2140.77 3241.0 44 0.7830 2.07 5470.14 2242.72 3227.4 46 0.7607 2.01 5555.92 2344.66 3211.3 48 0.7399 1.96 5639.29 2446.60 3192.7 50 0,7205 1.91 5720.45 2548.54 3171.9 52 0,7024 1.86 5799.51 2650.48 3149.0 54 0.6854 1.81 5876.63 2752.42 3124.2 56 0.6694 1.77 5951.91 2854.37 3097.5 58 0.6543 1.73 6025.46 2956.31 3069.2 60 0.6400 1.69 6097.38 3058.25 3039.1 MINOR BASIN FB-5-STORM WATER DETENTION REQUIREMENT Existing Land Use: A ricullure/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Univ.Research Park Existing Drainage Area: 8.20 acres Proposed Drainage Area: 8.2 acres Existing Slope: 0.7 % Proposed Slope: 1.5 Overland Flow Distance: 883 feet Overland Flow Distance: 883 feet Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: 44.0 minutes Time of Concentration: 28.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Frequency: 10 year 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 0.782950033 in/hr 10 yr Intensity at Tc: 1.050329507 in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: 1.28 CIS Peak Runoff Rate:1 5.17 cfs Runoff Coefficient Area SF C Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: 357,378 0.60 concl aved area: 0 0.95 conc/aved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 357,378 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 357.378 Total: 357,378 total area: 8.20 acres total area: 8.20 acres composite C:1 0.20 1 composite C:1 0.60 25 Year Event Design Flow 25 yr Intensity at Tc= 1.27 in r 10 Year Storm-Required Storage Calculations 25 r Tc= 28.00 minutes Storm Duration Intensity Future Runoff Future Runoff Release Required I Q=1 6.25 ICIS min in1hr Rate cls Volume ft Volume 0'r Slora a 0 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.2 26.0801 128.38 1540.57 15.42 1525.2 MAXIMUM STORAGE= 6789.6 0.4 16.6203 81.81 1963.55 30.83 1932.7 0.6 12.7697 62.86 2262.94 46.25 2216.7 DEPTH= 1.5 0.8 10.5918 52.14 2502.66 61.67 2441.0 SOT SIDE 1= 105 1 9.1617 45.10 2705.96 77.08 2628.9 SOT SIDE 2= 35 1.2 8.1379 40.06 2884.26 92.50 2791.8 TOP SIDE 1= 117 1.4 7.3620 36.24 3044.15 107.92 2936.2 TOP SIDE 2= 47 1.6 6.7499 33.23 3189.79 123.33 3066.5 TOTAL STORAGE= 6880.5 1.8 6.2525 30.78 3324.04 138.75 3185.3 2 5.8386 28.74 3448.90 154A6 3294.7 2.5 5.0503 24.86 3729.06 192.71 3536.4 3 4.4859 22.08 3974.78 231.25 3743.5 3.5 4.0582 19.98 4195.12 269.79 3925.3 4 3.7208 18.32 4395.84 1 308.33 4087.5 6 2.8588 14.07 5066.10 462.49 4603.6 6.5 2.7138 13.36 5210.03 501.04 4709.0 7 2.5862 12.73 5346.94 539.58 4807.4 7.5 2A728 12.17 5477.62 578.12 4899.5 8 2.3712 11.67 5602.76 616.66 4986.1 10 2.0511 10.10 6057.88 770.82 5287.1 12 1.8218 8.97 6457.05 924.99 5532.1 14 1.6481 8.11 6815.00 1079.15 5735.8 16 1.5111 7.44 1 7141.06 1233.32 5907.7 18 1.3998 6.89 7441.60 1387.48 6054.1 20 1.3071 6.43 7721.14 1541.65 6179.5 22 1.2286 6.05 7983.05 1695.81 6287.2 24 1.1610 5.72 8229.90 1849.98 6379.9 26 1.1022 5.43 8463.72 2004A4 6459.6 28 1.0503 5.17 8686.12 2158.31 6527.8 30 1.0043 4.94 8898.43 2312.47 6586.0 32 0.9630 4.74 9101.71 2466.64 6635.1 34 0,9258 4.56 9296.90 2620.80 6676.1 36 0.8920 4.39 9484.77 2774.97 6709.8 38 0.8612 4.24 9665.96 2929A3 6736.8 40 0,8330 4.10 984t.06 3083.30 6757.8 42 0.8070 3.97 10010.55 3237.46 6773.1 44 0.7830 3.85 10174.88 3391.63 6783.3 46 0.7607 3.74 10334.42 3545.79 6788.6 0.7399 1 3 09.96 6789.6 50 0.7205 3.55 1 10640.46 1 3854.12 1 6786.3 52 0.7024 3.46 1 10787.53 1 4008.28 1 6779.2 54 0.6854 3.37 10930.97 4162.45 6768.5 56 0.6694 3.29 11070.991 4316.61 1 6754.4 58 0.6543 3.22 11207.80 4470.78 6737.0 60 0.6400 3.15 11341.58 4624.94 6716.E MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I-INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT Appendix B Conveyance Calculations GUTTER FLOW CALC MINOR BASIN A-1: 25-YR Q Existing Land Use: A ficulture/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Roads Existing Drainage Area: acres Proposed Drainage Area: 1.3 acres Existing Slope: % Avg.Proposed Slope; 2 Overland Flow Distance: feet Overland Flow Distance: 647 feet Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: minutes Time of Concentration: 5.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Frequency: 25 year 10 yr Intensity at Tc: #DIV/0! in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: #DIV/0! cfs Runoff Coefficient Area SF C Table 1.1 Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: 0 0.60 cone/paved area: 0 0.95 cone aved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 streets: 47,317 0.95 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 9,385 0.10 open s ace: 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 0 Total: 56.702 total area: 0.00 acres total area: 1.30 acres com osite C: #DIV/0! com osite C: 0.81 25 Year Event Design Flow 25 r Inlensit at Tc= 3.83 in/hr 25 yr Tc= 5.00 Iminutes Q=1 4.03 Icrs GUTTER FLOW CALC MINOR BASIN A-2: 25-YR Q Existing Land Use: _Agriculture/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Roads Existing Drainage Area: acres Proposed Drainage Area: 0.8 acres Existing Slope: % Proposed Slope: 0.5 Overland Flow Distance: feet Overland Flow Distance. 316 feet Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: minutes Time of Concentration: 5.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency; 10 year Design Storm Frequency: 25 year 10 yr Intensity at Tc: NDIV/0! in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: NDIV/0! cfs Runoff Coefficient Area SF C(Table 1.1 Runoff Coefficient Area SF_ C ravel area: 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: 0 0.60 cone aved area: 0 0.95 cone/paved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 streets: 35,045 0.95 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0A0 open s ace: 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 0 Total: 35,045 total areaA UT total area: 0.80 acres composite C:I SDIV/0! com osite C:1 0,95 25 Year Event Design Flow 25 r Intensity at Tc= 3.83 jin1hr 25 yr Tc= 5.00 minufes Q=1 2.92 cf. GUTTER FLOW CALC MINOR BASIN B -25-YR Existing Land Use:_ Agricullure/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Roads Existing Drainage Area: acres Proposed Drainage Area: 0.76 acres Existing Slope: % Proposed Slope: 0.5 Overland Flow Distance: feet Overland Flow Distance: 269 feet Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: minutes Time of Concentration: 5.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Frequency, 25 year 10 yr Intensity at Tc: #DIV/O! in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: #DIV/01 cfs Runoff Coefficient Area SF C Table 1.1 Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: 0 0.60 conc/ aved area: 0 0.95 conc/aved area: 0 0.95 roof. 0 0.95 streets: 33,061 0.95 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 0 Total: 33,061 total area: 0.00 acres total area: 0.76 acres composite C: #DIV/O! composite C: 0.95 25 Year Event sign Flow 25 r Intensit at Tc= 3.83 in/hr 25 r Tc= 5.00 minutes Q=1 2.76 Icis GUTTER FLOW CALC MINOR BASIN C: 25-YR Existing Land Use: A ricullure/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Roads Existing Drainage Area: acres Proposed Drainage Area: 0.85 acres Existing Slope: % Proposed Slope: 0.5 Overland Flow Distance: feet Overland Flow Distance: 306 feet Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: minutes Time of Concentration: 5.0 minutes Design Storm Frequency: 10 year Design Storm Frequency: 25 ear 10 yr Intensity at Tc: #DIV/0! in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: #DIV/01 cfs Runoff Coefficient Area SF C Table 1.1 Runoff Coefficient Area SF C ravel area: 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: 0 0.60 cone/paved area: 0 0.95 cone/paved area: 0 0.95 roof: 0 0.95 streets: 36,901 0.95 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 0 Total: 36,901 total area: 0.00 acres total area: 0.85 acres composite C: #DIV/0! -composite C: 0.95 25 Year Event Design Flow _ 25 yr_Intensity al Tc= 3.83 in"" 25 r Tc= 5.00 minutes 0=1 3 1 cts HOME i:4UNICIPAL ENGMEERING TOOLS &CALCULATORS OVEIR AND ORIFICE CALCULATOR WEIR & ORIFICE CALCULATOR -he Fleir and Orifice Calculator is used to determine the inlet c:apacitr in sag fponding',conditions ty use of the l eir and Orifice equations. Knov.ing this information % ill allcvr you to select the proper oratet;.ype and si_e for;your specificjob or project. Weir Flow Calculations Orifice Flow Calculations L1+eir Equation: 0.=3.3P(h)1.5 Orifice Flo- Equation: 4.=MA 2gh . O.= Capacity in CFS . 0.= Capacb-in CFS ■ P= Feet perimeter A = Free open area of grate in sq. ft. • In = Head in feet g= 22.2(feet per secisec'; • ',r eir Information h = Head in feet • Orifice Information Instructions: 1. Select a catalog number i';;ill automatically fill in Open. rea and Perimeter;or enter your e,;:n values Enter head -ralue Click-calculate" he results % ill determine automatically if;,your situation falls into a Yveir,7 ransiticnal or Orifice flea,..Additienally; Neenah grates hich fall v.ithin the parameters chosen v.,ill appear Celov; the calculator. Catalog tlun-tber and Grate Type: R-3067:Diagonal Fee_perinle_er(P): Head in fee'(h): Free open area in sq.f. (A): 3h 96) .Telr capacl'Pt Ill CTS: Transitional flo,.v in cfs: Orl'Ice capaci-ll In c`S: 27 For additional information regarding Neenah Inlet Grate Capacities, please contact Steven.:.kkala P.E.. at(920)729.3w63 or email at ste�.e.akkalaic-�neenahenterorises.com. HOME - NIUNICIPAL ?? ENGINEERING TOOLS &.CALCULATORS ; VVEIR AND ORIFICE CALCULATOR WEIR & ORIFICE CALCULATOR -he , elr and Orifice Calculator is used to determine the inlet capacity in sac ponding conditions by-use of the',Veir and Orifice equations. Kne,;aing this information ill allcvr vcu to select the proper grate t;pe and size fervour specific jot: or project. Weir Flow Calculations Orifice Flow Calculations rdeir Equation: 0..= 3.3P(h)1-5' Orifice Flov., Equation: 0.=MA 2gh . Q= Capact, in CFS Q= Capackc in CFS • P = Feet perimeter A = Free open area of grate in sq. ft. h = Head in feet g = 22.2 (feet per sec;'sec • 'rdeir Information h = Head in feet • Orifice Information Instructions: -1. Select a catalog numt;er r;;ill automaticalh., fill in i ipen A-rea and Perimeter; cr enter;:our ov n -.alues 2. Enter head value '. Click"calculate" -he results ill determine automaticalt-,e if your situation falls into a )) eir,—ran siticnaI or Orifice flog;.A-dditionally, Neenah grates ,a hick fall v ithin the parameters chosen vrill appear helcv the calculator. Catalog Number and Orate T;rpe, R-3067-Di2gonal Fee.perimeter(P): Head in feet (h): Free open area in sq. ft. (A): -- _---- �I .36 'Areir capacivy In cfs: Transitional flow in efs. Orifice capacitrr in cfs: - - - - -------I - -- -- Project Description File Name............................._....................MSUIC_Technology Blvd Culvert.SPF Project Options FlowUnits.................................................. CFS Elevation Type............................................ Elevation Hydrology Method....................................... SCS TR-55 Time of Concentration(TOC)Method........ Kirpich Link Routing Method.......................... Kinematic Wave Enable Overflow Pending at Nodes............ YES Skip Steady State Analysis Time Periods... NO Analysis Options Start Analysis On........................................ Sep 26,2014 00:00:00 End Analysis On..........................................Sep 28,2014 00:00:00 Start Reporting On...................................... Sep 26,2014 00:00:00 Antecedent Dry Days.;................................ 0 days Runoff(Dry Weather)Time Step................ 0 01:00:00 days hh:mm:ss Runoff(Wet Weather)Time Step............... 0 00:05:00 days hh:mm:ss Reporting Time Step................................... 0 00:05:00 days hh:mm:ss Routing Time Step...................................... 30 seconds Number of Elements Oty RainGages................................................. 2 Subbasi n s.................................................... 1 Nodes........................................................... 1 Junctions............................................ 0 Outfalls............................................... 1 Flow Diversions.................................. 0 Inlets................................................... 0 Storage Nodes................................... 0 Links.............................................................0 Channels............................................ 0 Pipes.................................................. 0 Pumps................................................ 0 Orifices............................................... 0 Weirs.................................................. 0 Outlets................................................ 0 Pollutants.................................................... 0 LandUses...................................................0 Rainfall Details SN Rain Gage Data Data Source Rainfall Rain State County Return Rainfall Rainfall ID Source ID Type Units Period Depth Distribution (years) (inches) 1 Time Series 10-yr Intensity inches Montana Gallatin 10 1.90 SCS Type II 24-hr Subbasin Summary SN Subbasin Area Weighted Average Flow Total Total Total Peak Time of ID Curve Slope Length Rainfall Runoff Runoff Runoff Concentration Number Volume (ac) (/) (ft) (in) (in) (ac-in) (cfs) (days hh:mm:ss) 1 Sub-01 673.00 69.00 1,7000 15241.00 1.90 0.18 123.16 34.02 0 01:02:16 Node Summary SN Element Element Invert Ground/Rim Initial Surcharge Fended 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) (fl) (ft) (ft') (cfs) (ft) (it) (ft)(days hh:mm) (ac-in) (min) 1 Out-01 Outfall 100.00 0.00 0.00 Subbasin Hydrology Subbasin :Sub-01 Input Data Area(ac)..................................................... 673.00 Weighted Curve Number............................ 69.00 Average Slope(%)...................................... 1.7000 Flow Length(it)........................................... 15241.00 Rain Gage ID...............................................25-yr Composite Curve Number Area Soil Curve Soil/Surface Description (acres) Group Number 50-75/grass cover,Fair 673.00 8 69.00 Composite Area&Weighted CN 673.00 69.00 Time of Concentration TOC Method:Kirpich Sheet Flow Equation: Tc=(0.0078'((Lf^0.77)'(Sf^-0.385))) W here: Tc=Time of Concentration(min) Lf=Flow Length(ft) Sf=Slope(fUft) Flow Length(it)........................................... 15241.00 Slope(%).....................................................1.7 Computed TOC(min)..................................62.27 Subbasin Runoff Results Total Rainfall(in)......................................... 1.90 Total Runoff(in).......................................... 0.18 Peak Runoff(cfs)........................................ 34.02 Weighted Curve Number............................ 69.00 Time of Concentration(days hh:mm:ss)..... 0 01:02:16 HY-8 Analysis Results Culvert Summary Table- Culvert 1 Culvert Crossing: Technology Blvd_10yr Total Culvert Headwa Inlet Outlet Flow Normal Critical Outlet Tailwate Outlet Tailwate Dischar Dischar ter Control Control Type Depth Depth Depth r Depth Velocity r e(cfs) ge(cfs) Elevatio Depth(ft)Depth(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) Velocity n(ft) (ft/s) 5.00 5.00 4867.34 0.62 0.0* 1-S2n 0.34 0.44 0.34 0.54 6.27 2.29 7.90 17.90 4867.5310.81 0.0* 1-S2n 10.42 0.59 10.43 0.65 15.78 2.57 10.80 110.80 4867.6810.96 0.0* 1-S2n 0.49 0.68 0.51 0.74 .22 2.78 13.70 13.70 4867.821.10 0.0* 1-S2n 0.57 0.78 0.57 0.82 6.84 2.95 16.60 16.60 4867.951.23 0.0* 1-S2n 0.63 0.87 0.63 0.88 7.27 3.09 19.50 19.50 4868.071.35 0.0* 1-S2n 0.68 0.95 0.69 0.94 7.63 3.22 22.40 22.40 4868.181.46 0.0* 1-S2n 0.73 1.03 0.74 0.99 7.98 3.33 25.30 25.30 4868.301.58 0.0* 1-S2n 0.78 1.10 10.79 11.04 8.30 3.44 28.20 28.20 4868.421.70 0.0* 1-S2n 0.83 1.17 .83 11.09 8.67 13.53 31.10 31.10 4868.531.81 0.0* 1-S2n 0.88 E1.24 0.88 1.13 8.96 3.6234.00 34.00 868.651.93 0.0* 1-S2n 0.92 0.92 14.17 9.23 1,.70 Autodesk0 Storm and Sanitary Analysis 2014 - Version 8.1.46 (Build 1) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ******************* Project Description ******************* File Name . ..... . .... .... .. MSUIC_Technology Blvd Culvert.SPF **************** Analysis Options Flow Units ................ cfs Subbasin Hydrograph Method. SCS TR-55 Time of Concentration.. . ... Kirpich Storage Node Exfiltration. . None Starting Date .. .... . ...... SEP-26-2014 00:00:00 Ending Date .. ... . ... .. .... SEP-28-2014 00:00:00 Report Time Step ... ... .. . . 00:05:00 ************* Element Count ************* Number of rain gages ... . .. 1 Number of subbasins . . .. . .. 1 Number of nodes . .... .... .. 1 Number of links ..... . ... .. 0 **************** Raingage Summary **************** Gage Data Data Recording ID Source Type Interval min ------------------------------------------------------------ 25-yr 25-yr INTENSITY 6.00 **************** Subbasin Summary Subbasin Total Flow Average Raingage Area Length Slope ID acres ft % ---------------------------------------------------------------- Sub-01 673.00 15241.00 1.7000 25-yr ************ Node Summary ************ Node Element Invert Maximum Ponded External ID Type Elevation Elev. Area Inflow ft ft ftz ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Out-01 OUTFALL 100.00 100.00 0.00 ************************** Volume Depth Runoff Quantity Continuity acre-ft inches Total Precipitation . .. ... 130.705 2.331 Surface Runoff ........... 1.869 0.033 Continuity Error (%) ..... -0.001 Autodesk Storm and Sanitary Analysis ************************** Volume Volume Flow Routing Continuity acre--ft Mgallons - External Inflow . . .. . .. .. . 0.000 0.000 External Outflow . . .. .. . . . 18.689 6.090 Initial Stored Volume . . . . 0.000 0.000 Final Stored Volume . .. .. . 0.000 0.000 Continuity Error (%) .. . . . 0.000 ****************************************** Composite Curve Number Computations Report -------------------- Subbasin Sub-01 ------------------ Area Soil Soil/Surface Description (acres) Group CN 50 - 75% grass cover, Fair 673.00 B 69.00 Composite Area & Weighted CN 673.00 69.00 Kirpich Time of Concentration Computations Report Tc = (0.0078 * (L^0.77) * (S^-0.385)) Where: Tc = Time of Concentration (min) L = Flow length (ft) S = Slope (ft/ft) ------------------- Subbasin Sub-01 Flow length (ft) : 15241.00 Slope (a) : 1.70 Computed TOC (minutes) : 62.27 Subbasin Runoff Summary *********************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subbasin Total Total Peak Weighted Time of ID Precip Runoff Runoff Curve Concentration in in cfs Number days hh:mm:ss Sub-01 2.30 0.33 80.22 69.000 0 01:02:16 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Analysis began on: Fri Sep 26 11:13:41 2014 Analysis ended on: Fri Sep 26 11:13:42 2014 Total elapsed time: 00:00:01 Autodesk Storm and Sanitary Analysis HY-8 Culvert Analysis Report Site Data - Culvert 1 Site Data Option: Culvert Invert Data Inlet Station: 0.00 ft Inlet Elevation: 4866.72 ft Outlet Station: 102.00 ft Outlet Elevation: 4865.72 ft Number of Barrels: 1 Culvert Data Summary- Culvert 1 Barrel Shape: Pipe Arch Barrel Span: 58.50 in Barrel Rise: 36.00 in Barrel Material: Concrete Embedment: 0.00 in Barrel Manning's n: 0.0120 Inlet Type: Conventional Inlet Edge Condition: Square Edge with Headwall Inlet Depression: NONE Table 1 - Culvert Summary Table: Culvert 1 Total Culvert Headwater Inlet Control Outlet Flow Normal Critical Outlet Depth Tailwater Outlet Tailwater Discharge Discharge Elevation(ft) Depth(ft) Control Type Depth(ft) Depth(ft) (ft) Depth(ft) Velocity Velocity (cfs) (cfs) Depth(ft) (ftls) (ftts) 5.00 5.00 4867.34 0.625 0.0' 1-S2n 0.341 0.443 0342 0.541 6.265 2.288 12.50 12.50 4867.76 1.041 0.0' 1-S2n 0,536 0.740 0.539 0.786 6.686 2.881 20.00 20.00 1 4868.09 1.366 0.0' 1-S2n 0.686 1 0.966 0.695 1 0.950 7.714 3.241 27.50 27.50 4868.39 1.667 0.0` 1-S2n 0.814 1.155 0.815 1.078 8.670 3.510 35.00 35.00 4868.69 1.975 0.0- 1-S2n 0.935 1.322 0.936 1.186 9.332 3.728 42.50 42.50 4869.00 2.285 0.0' 1-S2n 1.041 1.481 1.091 1.260 9.427 3.914 50.00 50.00 4869.32 2.601 0.0` 1-S2n 1.148 1.623 1.155 1.365 10.380 4.077 57.50 57.50 4869.65 2.927 0.0' 1-S2n 1.251 1.762 1.322 1.441 10.250 4.222 65.00 65.00 4869.99 3.266 0.0" 1 5-S2n 1.353 1.888 1.433 1.512 1 10.601 4.353 72.50 72.50 1 4870.34 3.621 0.0' 5-S2n 1 1.454 1 2.009 1.540 1.578 10.927 4.474 80.00 80.00 1 4870.72 1 3.996 0.0' 5-S2n 1 1.557 1 2.125 1.657 1.640 11.200 4.586 .................,..,...,«..,.....«,.«.,.....,«..,,««......................... Inlet Elevation(invert):4866.72 ft, Outlet Elevation(invert):4865.72 ft Culvert Length: 102.00 ft, Culvert Slope:0.0098 Culvert Performance Curve Plot: Culvert 1 Performance Curve Culvert:Culvert 1 Inlet Control Elev Outlet Control Elev 4870.5 4870.0 c 0 4869.5 a� w 4869.0 a� 'g 4868.5 cU = 4868.0 ! i 4867.5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Total Discharge (cfs) Water Surface Profile Plot for Culvert: Culvert 1 Crossing - Technology Blvd, Design Discharge - 80.0 cfs Culvert- Culvert 1. Culvert Discharze- 80.0 ds 4871 - 4870- 4869- ---------------- > 4868- ------- LU -----------------x 4867- 4866- A-I I I 1 11 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Station (ft) Table 2 - Downstream Channel Rating Curve (Crossing: Technology Blvd) Flow(cfs) Water Surface Depth(ft) Velocity(ft/s) Shear(psf) Froude Number Elev(ft) 5.00 4866.26 0.54 2.29 0.36 0.74 12.50 4866.51 0.79 2.88 0.53 0.78 20.00 4866.67 0.95 3.24 0.64 0.80 27.50 4866.80 1.08 3.51 0.73 0.82 35.00 4866.91 1.19 3.73 0.80 0.83 42.50 4867.00 1.28 3.91 0.86 0.84 50.00 4867.08 1.36 4.08 0.92 0.85 57.50 4867.16 1.44 4.22 0.97 0.86 65.00 4867.23 1.51 4.35 1.02 0.86 72.50 4867.30 1.58 4.47 1.06 0.87 80.00 4867.36 1.64 4.59 1.11 0.88 Tailwater Channel Data - Technology Blvd Tailwater Channel Option: Trapezoidal Channel Bottom Width: 0.80 ft Side Slope (H:V): 6.00(_:1) Channel Slope: 0.0108 Channel Manning's n: 0.0300 Channel Invert Elevation: 4865.72 ft Roadway Data for Crossing: Technology Blvd Roadway Profile Shape: Constant Roadway Elevation Crest Length: 50.00 ft Crest Elevation: 4871.00 ft Roadway Surface: Paved Roadway Top Width: 45.00 ft MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY INNOVATION CAMPUS PHASE I-INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS BOZEMAN,MONTANA STORM DRAINAGE REPORT Appendix C Wetlands Wetland Delineation Report MSU Innovation Campus Bozeman, MT Prepared for: CTA Architects Engineers Bozeman, MT Nita.. •,�rl",�? b',�i, '��`i ti ^l.(b��l!►���1'� ��iM.twt . 7 WIT Prepared by: Hyalite Environmental, LLP P.O. Box 90 Gallatin Gateway, MT 59730 (406) 763-4228 November 2013 Table of Contents List of Figures 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Site Description 1 3.0 Methods 2 4.0 Results and Discussion 2 4.1 Results and Discussion—Hydrology 3 4.2 Results and Discussion—Soils 3 4.3 Results and Discussion—Vegetation 4 5.0 Wetlands/Waters of the U.S. Summary 5 6.0 References Cited 6 Table 1. Summary of Wetlands /Waters of the U.S. 5 Figures Appendix A: Representative Site Photographs Appendix B: Delineation Data Sheets Appendix C: Additional Methodology Information Appendix D: Functional Assessment Wetland Delineation Report j Hyalite Environmental,LLP MSU Innovation Campus November 2013 List of Figures Figure 1. Site location Figure 2. 2011 Aerial photo of site Figure 3. Extent of delineated wetlands Figure 4.a Final National Wetlands Inventory wetland areas Figure 4.b Gallatin Local Water Quality District map of wetlands Figure 4.c Natural Resources Conservation Service map of artificial wetlands Figure 5. Soil map of site Wetland Delineation Report jj Hyalite Environmental,LLP MSU Innovation Campus Novetnber2013 1.0 Introduction A wetland delineation was conducted by Hyalite Environmental, LLP (Hyalite), at the request of Todd Swinehart, CTA Architects Engineers, for the MSU Innovation Campus property in Bozeman, MT. The purpose of the wetland delineation was to identify and delineate wetland boundaries that are within the parcel of interest. Hyalite conducted the wetlands delineation during mid-October of 2013, with the field work done on October 16th and 22nd. Hyalite personnel performing the work were Chris Thelen, P.E., and Carol Lee-Roark, Ph.D. 2.0 Site Description A location map of the site and 2011 aerial photo of the site are shown in Figures 1 and 2. The subject property is located within Section 14 of Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Montana Principal Meridian. The legal description of the parcel is Tract C-IA of Minor Subdivision 195A, geocode 06-0798-14-1-01-01-0000 (MDOA, 2013). The area, originally agricultural, has been surrounded by commercial and residential development and is included within the city limits of Bozeman. The vicinity of the site is shown on Figure 2. The site is bound on the east by the first phase of the Montana State University (MSU) Innovation Campus (formerly known as Advanced Technology Park) and on the west by the Bozeman Gateway development. A multi-use pathway and West College Street border the northern boundary of the property, with residential and commercial properties across the street to the north. The land immediately south of the subject parcel is agricultural land owned by the Montana Agriculture Experiment Station. An un-named tributary to East Catron Creek flows north through the property. The channel is considered a stream in the National Hydrology Database (NRIS, 2013). The stream corridor is an area of groundwater discharge (seepage)that drains both upstream surface flows and captured groundwater. The area of delineated wetlands is shown in Figure 3. Representative photos of the proposed project area are presented in Appendix A. The Bozeman weather station at Montana State University has recorded the average annual total precipitation at 18.48 inches (Western Regional Climate Center, 2013). The average maximum temperature is 81.4°Farenheit ff) in July and an average minimum temperature of 12.0°F in January. The total average annual snowfall is approximately 86.0 inches, and average snow depth for January is 5 inches. The average last killing frost in spring in Bozeman at the MSU weather station is May 241h, and first fall killing frost September 16th, so that the growing season averages 115 days(MSU Extension, 2013). Wetland Delineation Report I Hyalite Environmental,LLP MSU Innovation Campus November 2013 3.0 Methods The field investigation and delineation of wetland areas followed the methods of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) as authorized by 1977 Executive Order and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and explained in the 1987 COE Wetlands Manual (COE, 1987; WTI, 1999). The updated methods of the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region (Version 2.0) were followed (COE, 2010). Hyalite used aerial photos, site survey maps, field measurements, and GPS to delineate wetland boundaries. Previous adjacent and on-site investigations were researched in order to help establish historical trends of hydrology for the area. Impacts (fill placement) to jurisdictional wetlands require Section 404 permitting with the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE). The field delineation forms from Hyalite's field investigations are included in Appendix B. Additional methodology information describing the delineation process and indicators, jurisdictional determination, and specific references used, are included in Appendix C. 4.0 Results and Discussion Three wetland areas were identified during the delineation. Wetland 1 consisted of slope, depressional, and riverine wetlands associated with an un-named drainage to East Catron Creek that flows north through the property. An man-made excavated pond located on the northern portion of the drainage contains emergent fringe wetlands along the edges of the open water. The creek channel contains both in-channel aquatic and emergent vegetation and emergent fringe wetlands along the edge. Slope wetlands that reside adjacent to the creek channel contain wet meadows and swales that are mainly fed through surface runoff and high groundwater during spring and early summer. Wetland 2 and 3 are man-made excavated stormwater detention / retention ponds that reside on the southern and northern portion of the property and contain emergent wetlands. The delineated wetlands are shown on Figure 3. Previous/alternative identifications of wetlands in the parcel and vicinity are shown in Figure 4a through 4c. Field delineation and site data did not confirm these alternative wetland identifications by the Final National Wetland Inventory(Figure 4a) or 2004 Gallatin Local Water Quality District (Figure 4b), which are primarily based upon aerial photo interpretation mapping with little or no ground-truthing. The National Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) wetland map (Figure 4c) is based upon soil units and their hydrologic properties. The categorization of "artificial" wetland by NRCS indicates that in their interpretation, the presence of wetlands at this site is dependent upon irrigation. The Final National Wetland Inventory wetlands are from the Wetland Division of the Montana Natural Heritage Program (MNRHP, 2013). The Gallatin Local Water Quality District and NRCS wetland maps were retrieved from the City of Bozeman interactive online geographic information system (Bozeman, 2013). Discussion of the site hydrology, vegetation and soils that characterize the delineated wetlands shown on Figure 3 are presented in the following sections. Wetland Delineation Report 2 Hyalite Environmental,LLP MSU Innovation Campus November 2013 4.1 Results and Discussion -- Hydrology The hydrology of the wetlands and stream are closely tied to the level of the groundwater table through the parcel of interest. Groundwater seepage within the area and surface runoff from the surrounding watershed are the main source of hydrology for the wetlands and the stream. Groundwater flow supplemented by surface water drainage and upstream flows (possibly irrigation return flows) feed the stream seasonally and during spring thaw and storm runoff events. On October 16, 2013, there was stream flow within the stream channel for the entire length of the property. On October 22, 2013, there was stream flow entering the site through the culvert under Garfield Street on the southern boundary, and live flow out of the pond. However, approximately 400 feet south of West College Street, the stream bed was only damp, with no live water flows. At this point of the low-flow season, the groundwater levels are apparently lower than the stream on at least the northern portion of the site and there is stream lose to groundwater. Although there are monitoring wells installed on the parcel, we were unable to find any record or data from these wells. The closest data relevant to the depth of groundwater at the site is primarily the elevation of surface water in the stream, ponds, and ditches on the site. Records from the well installed adjacent to the cinderblock building 600 feet west of the stream corridor indicate that ground water was eight feet below the ground surface when that well was drilled in 1957 (MBMG, 2013). Other wells on adjacent parcels have encountered groundwater anywhere from two to nine feet below the ground surface (MBMG, 2013). Monitoring wells on the Bozeman Gateway development, on the west boundary of the parcel of interest, showed fluctuations of groundwater from 2.00 to 2.5 feet over the February 2004 to August 2004 interval of monitoring (records from subdivision files from the City of Bozeman, 2013). However, wells in the Bozeman Gateway development parcel are likely influenced by water lost from the Farmers Canal where it flows through that property. Hydrographs of groundwater wells in the Bozeman area show that there is typically an approximately two-foot annual fluctuation in the groundwater table in the vicinity of the site(MBMG, 2013). The COE wetland hydrology criterion is that in an area identified as a wetland, soils must be saturated within one foot of the land surface for a portion of the growing season. The wetland delineation boundaries enclose the areas in which it may be anticipated that a two-foot annual fluctuation in the groundwater table would meet the COE wetland hydrology criterion. 4.2 Results and Discussion-- Soils The soils for this site have been mapped (MRCS, 2013a), and are shown on Figure 5. The soils within the areas of the delineated wetlands consisted of the Blossberg loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes. The Blossberg loam is classified as very deep, poorly drained soils that form on stream terraces and floodplains. The Blossberg loam is listed as a hydric soil (MRCS, 2013b). Wetland Delineation Report 3 hyalite Environmental,LLP MSU Innovation Campos November 2013 Soil test pits were dug within and adjacent to the delineated wetland boundary. Attempts to dig soil test pits within wetland 1 were limited as large cobbles were encountered at approximately four to six inches below ground surface within the entire length of the creek corridor. SP-1 was obtained from a previously dug pit located adjacent to the west side of the creek on the north end. A representative soil sample was taken to a depth of about twenty inches. The test pits confirmed the existence of hydric soils as indicated on the soil survey maps. Evidence supporting that these soils were hydric included low-chroma colors and redox features. The wetland delineation field data sheets are included in Appendix B. 4.3 Results and Discussion—Vegetation Throughout Wetland 1 there are areas in which there is zonation of sub-dominant species that reflects the gradient of soil saturation. For example, in the northernmost part of the site, there are Typha latifolia (broadleaf cattail, OBL) in areas adjacent to the stream; surrounded by a zone comprised of Carex spp (sedge, FAC to OBL) and Phalaris arundinacea (reed canary grass, FACW); and an outermost, driest zone of Juncus balticus (Baltic rush, FACW) with reed canary grass. Reed canary grass is an aggressive colonizing grass that requires wet soils but can tolerate periods of dryness. In minor areas along the stream (primarily the office/tech park east of the stream) there is woody vegetation. Dominant woody species are Populus balsamifera (black cottonwood, FAC); Polulus deltoides (eastern cottonwood, FAC) and Salix spp(willows, FAC to FACW). There are additional wetland species close to the stream, including Alopecurus aequalis (short awn foxtail, OBL); Beckmannia syzigachne (American slough grass, OBL); Eleocharis palustris (common spike rush, OBL); Epilobium ciliatum (fringed willowherb, FACW); and Metha arvensis (American wild mint, FACW). In an overflow swale downstream of the pond the reed canary grass community is accompanied by Rumex salicifolius (willow dock, FACW). There are minor areas along the stream where the Priority 2a aggressive noxious weed Iris pseudacorus (yellow flag, OBL) has become established. There are also large stands of Cirsium arvense (Canada thistle, FACU, Priority 2b) in the uplands adjacent to the wetland corridor. Weed species classifications are available from the Center for Invasive Species Management (2013). Wetland 2 is a stormwater detention pond that is also dominated by reed canary grass. Although there are reeds and sedges as minor members of the vegetation community, there are none of the more diverse wetland / stream species present in this wetland, such as slough grass, willow herbs, spike rushes, etc. Wetland 3 is a stormwater detention pond that has been excavated into groundwater so that there is commonly standing water in the wetland. The wetland is characterized on the edges by the same aggressive reed canary grass community. However, the portions of this wetland that have standing water are characterized by Typha latifolia (broadleaf cattail, OBL) and Scirpus spp (bulrushes, OBL). Wetland Delineation Report 4 Hyalite Environmental,LLP MSU Innovation Campus November2013 5.0 Wetlands / Waters of the U.S. Summary Wetland 1 is a wetland developed at the point where groundwater discharges (seepage), depending upon fluctuation of the ground water table. Additional surface water flows are channelized to and through the site by swales, ditches and the stream channel. Wetland 2 is a stormwater detention structure constructed when Garfield Street was built. It is connected to the pond system through a vault and overflow pipe structure. Wetland 3 is a stormwater detention/ retention structure adjacent to the developed office park, but has been excavated deep enough that there is normally standing water in the pond. All of the wetlands are considered palustrine emergent seasonally flooded. The wetland boundaries and areas of the wetlands within the parcel of interest are shown on Figure 3. The jurisdictional status of delineated Wetland 1 is likely "Jurisdictional" since East Catron Creek flows into the East Gallatin River. Wetlands 2 and 3 may be considered non jurisdictional since they are isolated, although adjacency to water features may lead the COE to determine that they are "Jurisdictional." Table 1 provides a summary of the wetlands delineated within the property boundaries. Table 1. Summary of Wetlands/Waters of the U.S. Wetland Type Size Likely Jurisdictional (acres) Status Wetland 1 Water of U.S. 1.92 Jurisdictional Wetland 2 Water of U.S. 0.03 Isolated (COE to determine) Wetland 3 Water of U.S. 0.02 Isolated (COE to determine) Any waters or wetlands that are considered waters of the U.S. as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Appendix C) fall under the jurisdiction of the COE. Any impacts (fill placement) to jurisdictional wetlands will require Section 404 permitting and possible mitigation though the COE. It is important to note that the COE makes the final determination regarding the status of waters of the U.S. and jurisdictional wetlands. Wetland Delineation Report 5 Hyalite Environmental,LLP MSU Innovation Campus November 2013 6.0 References COE—see U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Bozeman, 2013, "City of Bozeman -- GIS Division". Retrieved October from http://www.bozeman.net/DepArtinents-(1)/Public-Works/GIS/Hoine.aspx Center for Invasive Species Management, 2013. "State and Province Noxious Weed Lists." Retrieved October 2013 from http://www.weecicenter.org/resources/state.httnl MBMG—see Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology MDOA—see Montana Department of Administration MNRHP—see Montana Natural Resource Heritage Program Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, 2013. "Ground Water Information Center." Data retrieved October 2013 from http://mbmggwic.mtech.edu/. Montana Department of Administration, 2013. "Montana Cadastral Database." Retrieved October 2013 from http://svc.mt.gov/msl/mtcadasti-al/ . Montana Natural Resource Heritage Program, 2013/"Wetland Map Viewer." Retrieved October 2013 from littp:Hmtnhp.org/mapviewer/?t=8 Montana State Library Natural Resource Information System, 2013. "National Hydrology Database." Retrieved October 2013 from http://nris.mt.gov/gis/ Montana State University Extension Service, 2013. "Montana Climate Summary by County— Gallatin." Retrieved October 2013 from http://www.mtmastergai-dener.org/climate data.httnl#Gallatin MSU Extension—see Montana State University Extension Service NRCS—see Natural Resource Conservation Service NRIS —see Montana State Library Natural Resource Information System Natural Resource Conservation Service, 2013a. Soil Map for Gallatin County. Retrieved October 2013 from http://mis.mt.gov/gis/ Natural Resource Conservation Service, 2013b. "Hydric Soils for Gallatin County, MT." Retrieved October 2013 from http://www.mt.nres.usda.gov/soils/mtsoils/hydric/ Wetland Delineation Report 6 Hyalite Environmental,LLP MSU Innovation Campus November 2013 USDA—see United States Department of Agriculture US Army Corps of Engineers, 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual." US Army Corps of Engineers Technical Report Y-87-1: Vicksburg, MS. US Army Corps of Engineers, 2010. "Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region (Version 2.0)". March 2010. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, 2006. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, A guide for identifying and delineating hydric soils. Version 6.0. G.W. Hurt and L.M Vasilas. USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. Western Regional Climate Center, 2013, 'Bozeman Montana St Univ, Montana (241044)," retrieved October 2013, from http://www.wrce.dri.edu/. WTI, 1999. Wetland Training Institute, Inc. "Wetland Delineation Lecture Notes Based on Corps of Engineers 1987 Manual." With revisions through 2001, WTI 99-1: Glenwood, NM. Wetland Delineation Report 7 Hyalite Environmental,LLP MSU Innovation Campus November 2013 FIGURES - 'i IC�r /� IJ • �t r �, E° aJ I L .1..� ¢�, 'F rr'' � �•, 3 ...1t k� 'firJt,��ir "Jt r':�' r -0'a--f _ s � ;�h` 1� �,' t17 0 �- a cs , t;-1p + r,• o y^ r� R ,'�'..'.�' +all• +/?fP��+--�1 + �r' _ '�.• J•.6-I�';r. t I ai�a�� � .. ��Jf�-� O �' u}., �0. �:' __ ty �•� i • 1 :r Y '• -'7\��.o rL'►�r•� �'t't_.'�._.� N 7 >. �� t _ t _. r■ .) F , + r !, �„• °�{_ter 1 IN— '/ I •••� F, ,_. -- _ `� �-�tar r •� ._. E. MIL CIS 7 er�t t--� L -_ w i �7_. + ? ���w..� 1f. rtt��yl -•� • ,r� ----__1 :+,�,. j. _ + ( I___.�1• L-_( _-f I ""�{ '-_T'.�... 11� ._f�; ��y i�•+ �..___ - j i j \ i N •� 1r1 ; � 1_-, i I ICI" �+-.��-v`4j, t ,. .�' .:. :�:- •_ \L._. � J la I I r _'_ I: _..�• -,- _ _. _� - •--- --- -'; � b � �,: i' �° o ' off, L ca � i `Iy \ o� �� e 'lam- (•»�.' •' ;'`^ 1 •• � et Research r °: y 1 Li �i lk South AveLa T., 1, + t;� r r• 7" ri T F" 1. ow . ` ��M.• , 1 y - .�� - (3 Q LL •� O t0 South24th Ave ! CA AS w Delineation only to parcel boundaries. Feet 0 50 100 200 300 400 r SJr ♦ Jt. SPI Potentially nor-juriidictional wetland �J-- Wetland 3 Vyuntic not rrrlbmd 1,097 square feet k, Island--not wetland rri (0.02 acres) ® Likely jurisdictional wetland Parcel boundaries Wetland 1 �� 84,079 square feet (1.92 acres) t SP4 1F � S ,► �� 1 Wetland 2 1,147 square feet (0.03 acres) Natural color aerial photo from City of Bozeman; SP d flown July 2012. Wetland delineation and figure compiled by flyalite Environmenial,_LLP Figure 3. Extent of delineated wetlands � _ u I i C r.; '• r, CO L- t F-- Pull '' _'4 ••4` • , P {n a as , �i � + - -e .,;t•,r w � °�." �� a" tu To cc t 4 2 w21❑ I�HOISS��O'Jd wcq +»�i ...,a�y � ... .�, �tt",'•"r a�i AM 'r.' �, .� 'ifs t i• � � .� n,1 `l r. Co , t w { 3 t OD40 w a T 4 ; A A ,y� u u 1. rn I` ,. a .,.•.. f I - 1 i 1 Y1. i 1 � I 1'. � I I- R, Cj c ca � 1 1 u O ca A ++ oo CN �Fi, cA z b u 71 u c. 5 'c. O L:.. 1 _ T s. APPENDIX A Photographs III � M III •4 .\•. ,� � dry • : L rt. Photo 1. Wetland 1,looking W where the stream runs between the vacant field and the office park. .ffr �"�� 1 � � �43 yr• l 44 j 1gY�"�$�TM�/YI ': * �-�+ a. ,fir Y• ifr Photo 2. Wetland 1,looking SSW. .r.`-T.P 1 NO 1�� � 41������ /`�a*{O+*sZAs ��' ; � , F �v vy�•r�l�\ f,s ��/`a �� rt toi�� ir " 'dfi ypra rj'�� 'i ;i IN N I:; s r V f; 1210�SASY�iI ✓ �1 �':`�!' iw ,�r.',�r�s�'�Q:�}�P,a, ��i'h1 R:Lw�c ta`r+�i �� •s� �,� r� '�s. ,S'+/'-��'t' G,a�'�'.�°`� .. �"iFa�`"� _..: v:T„o �s s., 1• D ti� '0 � ", y'r.r.�s�'. i'S jj+gam �,�p2 , YJ'1r�► ✓!r 1 1. 1. rtofR a Photo 3. Wetland 1,thick Phalaris aruudinacea(reed canary grass)community. . I I r Photo 4. Wetland 1 and pond showing overflow channel wetland, looking S. r r' 7 �` � ♦�� ,J ram\ ,�' �✓'�`i T � �Irk a f Photo 7. Pond and Wetland 1, looking N. Photo 8. Wetland 2,looking ESE. Overflow structure on the left. J %C Photo 9. Wetland 3, looking NW. j Photo 10. Wetland 1,looking W. Very little of this willow thicket portion of the wetland is on the parcel of interest. �.;�t ,I �� t ���s .,� `�Y��g ►fit' yj l�r.� " �`, ' •• ^';�,y�t, .�'/, �„� .ram..,•`..; •'+bl'�a+•'fie i ,`Axk 1 t�I l ` rw^t,� ff r f:I o Al Jr rJ Photo 11. Large soil pit located within Wetland 1 adjacent to creek on north end of property. 46. -.. ,. ... . 1h.4 �� '*+J;�j+ST .`.r.K, .T 7 at ��, 1• Jf JJ t�yy►� f,f_ Y• I CYO � �♦ tI` .'� Iy=• 1::� i L.vim. virj� 4 _ �� y } v may' � ` . . / f{ 4V t �• CC � t 4 ♦y �'j S Photo 12. SP-1 was taken from excavated soil pit,cobbles were encountered at approximately 4 inches below ground surface,redox mottles were noted at approximately 8 inches below surface. APPENDIX B Delineation Data Sheets WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: MSU Innovation Campus City/County.-Bozeman/Gallatin Sampling Date:10/22/13 Applicant/Owner: MSU State: MT Sampling Point: WL-1 Investigator(s): Carol Lee-Roark Chris Thelen Section,Township,Range: Section 14, T2S, R5E Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): stream terrace Local relief(concave,convex,none): Slope(%): 0-2 Subregion(LRR): E-Rocky Mountain Lat: 45.6692 Long: 111.0693 Datum: UTM12 NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: 542A-Blossberg loam, 0-2 percent slopes NWI classification: PEMA Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS— Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes x No Remarks: Wetland 1 consists of slope wetlands, depressional, riverine fringe and in-channel wetlands. Surface observed within channel and depressional (pond) areas. VEGETATION—Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: full site ) %Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Populus balsamifera(black cottonwood) 0.5 y FAC That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 9 (A) 2. Populus deltoides(eastern cottonwood) 05 _�' — Total Number of Dominant 3. galix sp=n(willnws) 1 FAQ Species Across All Strata: 9 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 10 =Total Cover That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 0 (A1B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: fiall site ) 1. Salix spp(willows) 2 v FAC to FACW Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total%Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2= 5. FAC species x 3= 2 Total Cover FACU species x 4= = Herb Stratum (Plot size: full site } UPL species x 5= 1. Pj Anrig anindinAcen(Feed rannq grass- 25— � FAC [ Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Juncus balticus(baltic rush) 20 ,V FACW Prevalence Index =B/A= 3. Carex spp (sedges) 15 yAC to OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Alo ecurus pratensis(field meadow foxtail) 15 y FAC _ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5• _ 2-Dominance Test is>50% 6. _ 3-Prevalence Index is<_3.0' 7. _ 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting g, NOTE:could not find sedge seed heads due to season data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) g. _ 5-Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' 10. _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation'(Explain) 11. 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 75 =Total Cover be present,unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Solanum dulcamara(climbing,nightshade) 0.5 y FAC Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0.5 =Total Cover Present? Yes x No %Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Wetland indicator plants present in limited areas: Typha latifolius(broadleaf cattail,OBL); Alopecurus aequalis(short awn£oxtail,OBL);Beckmannia syzigachne (American slough grass,OBL);Iris pseudacorus(yellow flag,OBL);Eleocharis palustris(common spike nish,OBL);ltumex salicifolius(willow dock,FACW); Epilohionin c.4hatnin(fronged willowherh,FACW)- Mentha arven-is(American wild mint FACW)- US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast-Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point:WL-1,S P-1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks 0-2 root zone 2-8 10YR 2/1 100 loam many fine/med roots 8-20 10YR 3/2 80 10YR 5/6 10 C M loam many med/large cobbles 'Type: C=Concentration,D=De letion,RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining,M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': _ Histosol(Al) _ Sandy Redox(S5) _ 2 cm Muck(A10) _ Histic Epipedon(A2) _ Stripped Matrix(S6) _ Red Parent Material(TF2) _ Black Histic(A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(except MLRA 1) _ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12) _ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _ Depleted Matrix(F3) _ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) x Redox Dark Surface(F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) _ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) wetland hydrology must be present, _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) _ Redox Depressions(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks: Hit large cobbles at approximately 6 inches deep in multiple locations within WL-1, prevented further hand digging. Soil sampled at depth of 20" from previous dug pit located within WL-1 adjacent to creek on north end of site. Soil blocky/friable and dry. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(2 or more required) x Surface Water(Al) _ Water-Stained Leaves(139)(except _ Water-Stained Leaves(69)(MLRA 1,2, High Water Table(A2) MLRA 1,2,4A,and 4B) 4A,and 4B) _ Saturation(A3) _ Salt Crust(1311) X Drainage Patterns(B10) _ Water Marks(131) _ Aquatic Invertebrates(B13) X Dry-Season Water Table(C2) _ Sediment Deposits(132) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9) _ Drift Deposits(63) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3) X Geomorphic Position(D2) _ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) _ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _ Shallow Aquitard(D3) _ Iron Deposits(135) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) X FAC-Neutral Test(D5) _ Surface Soil Cracks(136) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)(LRR A) _ Raised Ant Mounds(D6)(LRR A) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(87) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Frost-Heave Hummocks(D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes x No Depth(inches): within channel Water Table Present? Yes x No Depth(inches): below 12 Saturation Present? Yes No x Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available: monitoring wells at site Remarks: C2- water observed in adjacent ponds and creek channel provide data points for groundwater elevations. D2- wetland area located along drainage way and in area of groundwater seepage during spring/summer. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast—Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM—Western Mountains,Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: MSU Innovation Campus City/County:Bozeman/Gallatin Sampling Date:10/22/13 Applicant/Owner: MSU State: MT Sampling Point: WL-2 Investigator(s): Carol Lee-Roark Chris Thelen Section,Township,Range: Section 14, T2S, R5E Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): stream terrace Local relief(concave,convex,none): Slope(%): 0-2 Subregion(LRR): E-Rocky Mountain Lat: 45.667 Long: 111.070 Datum: UTM12 NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: 542A-Blossberg loam, 0-2 percent slopes NWI classification: PEMA Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS— Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features,etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No Remarks:This wetland is a surface water settling pond with overflow structure to pond VEGETATION—Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: full site ) %Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. not present That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 4 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species =Total Cover That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: full site ) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total%Cover of: Multiply by: 3 OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2= 5. FAC species x 3= 2 Total Cover FACU species x 4= = Herb Stratum (Plot size: full site ) UPL species x 5= 1. P ar,� d ca—ar3�gm--) 25— FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) hal antndinacPa(reed n v 2. Juncus balticus(baltic rush) 20 y FACW Prevalence Index =B/A= 3. Carex spp (sedges) 15 yFAC to OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Aloperunis pratensis(field meadow foxtail) 15 y FAC'_ _ 1-Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5• _ 2-Dominance Test is>50% 6. _ 3-Prevalence Index is s3.0' 7• _ 4-Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting g NOTE:could not find sedge seed heads due to season data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) g. _ 5-Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' 10. _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation'(Explain) 11. 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 75 =Total Cover be present,unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1 Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation =Total Cover Present? Yes x No %Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast—Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: SP-2 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks 0-2 root zone 2-12 10YR 2/1 100 loam many fine/med roots 'Type: C=Concentration,D=De letion,RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': _ Histosol(Al) _ Sandy Redox(S5) _ 2 cm Muck(A10) _ Histic Epipedon(A2) _ Stripped Matrix(S6) _ Red Parent Material(TF2) _ Black Histic(A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(except MLRA 1) x Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface(Al 1) _ Depleted Matrix(F3) _ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _ Redox Dark Surface(F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) _ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) wetland hydrology must be present, _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) _ Redox Depressions(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks: Soil blocky/friable. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators(minimum of one required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(2 or more required) _ Surface Water(Al) _ Water-Stained Leaves(69)(except _ Water-Stained Leaves(89)(MLRA 1,2, High Water Table(A2) MLRA 1,2,4A,and 4B) 4A,and 46) _ Saturation(A3) _ Salt Crust(B11) X Drainage Patterns(610) _ Water Marks(131) _ Aquatic Invertebrates(B13) _ Dry-Season Water Table(C2) _ Sediment Deposits(132) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9) _ Drift Deposits(B3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3) X Geomorphic Position(D2) _ Algal Mat or Crust(134) _ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _ Shallow Aquitard(D3) _ Iron Deposits(135) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) X FAC-Neutral Test(D5) _ Surface Soil Cracks(B6) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)(LRR A) _ Raised Ant Mounds(D6)(LRR A) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Frost-Heave Hummocks(D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(68) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast—Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM—Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: MSU Innovation Campus City/County:Bozeman/Gallatin Sampling Date:10/22/13 Applicant/Owner: MSU State: MT Sampling Point: WL-3 Investigator(s): Carol Lee-Roark, Chris Thelen Section,Township,Range: Section 14, T2S, R5E Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): stream terrace Local relief(concave,convex,none): Slope(%): 0-2 Subregion(LRR): E-Rocky Mountain Lat: 45.6708 Long: 111.0681 Datum: UTM12 NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name: 542A-Blossberg loam, 0-2 percent slopes NWI classification: PUBF Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (if no,explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS— Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes x No Remarks: This wetland is a pond with standing water at edge of office park VEGETATION—Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: full site ) %Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1• Populus balsamifera(black cottonwood) 10 y FAC That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 12 (A) 2. Populus deltoides(eastern cottonwood) 10 FAC Total Number of Dominant 3. Ralix cpp_Avillnwq 90 _ FAC to FAC Species Across All Strata: 12 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species full site 40 =Total Cover That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100 (A1B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1. Salix spp(willows) 20 y FAC to FAC 2. Populus balsamifera(black cottonwood) 5 y FAC Total%Cover of: Multiply by: 3. Populus deltoides(eastem cottonwood) 5 y FAC OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2= 5. FAC species x 3= 30 Total Cover FACU species x 4= = Herb Stratum (Plot size: full site ) UPL species x 5= 1. Phalg•jg aninclinarea(reed rangy grass) 15— y FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Juncus balticus(baltic rush) 10 ,v FACW Prevalence Index =B/A= 3. Carex spp (sedges) 5 y FAC to OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4_ Typha latifolia (broadleaf cattail) 20 OBL _ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. Scimus spp(bulmshes) 5 y OBL _ 2-Dominance Test is>50% 6. Beckmannia syzigachne(,American slough grass)5 y OBL _ 3-Prevalence Index is s3.0' 7• _ 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting g. NOTE:could not find sedge seed heads due to season data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) g. _ 5-Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' 10. _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation'(Explain) 11. 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 60 Total Cover be present,unless disturbed or problematic. = Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1• Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation =Total Cover Present? Yes x No %Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: pondweed and elodea present in water US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast—Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: SP-3 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks 'Type: C=Concentration,D=De letion,RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining,M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': _ Histosol(Al) _ Sandy Redox(S5) _ 2 cm Muck(A10) _ Histic Epipedon(A2) _ Stripped Matrix(S6) _ Red Parent Material(TF2) _ Black Histic(A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(except MLRA 1) _ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12) _ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface(Al 1) _ Depleted Matrix(F3) _ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _ Redox Dark Surface(F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) _ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) wetland hydrology must be present, _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) _ Redox Depressions(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks: pond contained standing water, no soil pit was dug HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators(minimum of one required check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(2 or more required) x Surface Water(Al) _ Water-Stained Leaves(139)(except _ Water-Stained Leaves(139)(MLRA 1,2, High Water Table(A2) MLRA 1,2,4A,and 4B) 4A,and 4B) _ Saturation(A3) _ Salt Crust(1311) _ Drainage Patterns(1310) _ Water Marks(131) _ Aquatic Invertebrates(B13) X Dry-Season Water Table(C2) _ Sediment Deposits(132) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9) _ Drift Deposits(133) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3) X Geomorphic Position(D2) _ Algal Mat or Crust(134) _ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _ Shallow Aquitard(D3) _ Iron Deposits(B5) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) _ FAC-Neutral Test(D5) _ Surface Soil Cracks(136) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)(LRR A) _ Raised Ant Mounds(D6)(LRR A) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Frost-Heave Hummocks(D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes x No Depth(inches): Water Table Present? Yes x No Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available: monitoring wells at site Remarks: C2- water observed in adjacent ponds and creek channel provide data points for groundwater elevations. D2- wetland area located within depression. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast—Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: MSU Innovation Campus City/County:Bozeman/Gallatin Sampling Date:10/22/13 Applicant/Owner: MSU State: MT Sampling Point: upland Investigator(s): Carol Lee-Roark Chris Thelen Section,Township,Range: Section 14, T2S, R5E Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): stream terrace Local relief(concave,convex,none): Slope(%): 0-2 Subregion(LRR): E-Rocky Mountain Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: 542A-Blossberg loam, 0-2 percent slopes NWI classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS— Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No x Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No �� within a Wetland? Yes No X Remarks: VEGETATION—Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: full site ) %Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. not present That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: I (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 7 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species =Total Cover That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 14% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: full site � 1. not present Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total%Cover of: Multiply by: 3 OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2= 5. FAC species x 3= Total Cover FACU species x 4= = Herb Stratum (Plot size: full site ) UPL species x 5= 1. Phleum naratense(common timothy) 10 y FACU Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Bromis inermis(smooth brome) 10 y NI Prevalence Index =B/A= 3. Elvmus trachycaulum es slender wheat grass �0 y FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4.__Routelnun gracilis hie grama gins-) _I SIT _ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. Dactylis glomerata(orchard grass) 10 y FACU _ 2-Dominance Test is>50% 6. EI m�pens(quack grass) 10 � FAC _ 3-Prevalence Index is 153.0' 7. Poa secunda(Sandberg bluegrass) 10 V FACU _ 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting g, data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) g, _ 5-Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' 10. _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation'(Explain) 11. 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 70 =Total Cover be present,unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1, not present Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation =Total Cover Present? Yes No x %Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 2 Remarks: lots of Cirsium arvense(Canada thistle) US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast-Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: SP-4 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks 0-2 root zone 2-14 10YR 3/2 50 sandy loam cobbles at 14" 2-14 10YR 4/3 50 'Type: C=Concentration,D=De letion,RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining,M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': _ Histosol(Al) _ Sandy Redox(S5) _ 2 cm Muck(A10) _ Histic Epipedon(A2) _ Stripped Matrix(S6) _ Red Parent Material(TF2) _ Black Histic(A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(except MLRA 1) _ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12) _ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface(Al 1) _ Depleted Matrix(173) _ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _ Redox Dark Surface(F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) _ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) wetland hydrology must be present, _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) _ Redox Depressions(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No x Remarks: Hit large cobbles at approximately 14 inches deep, Prevented further hand digging. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators(minimum of one required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(2 or more required) _ Surface Water(Al) _ Water-Stained Leaves(139)(except _ Water-Stained Leaves(139)(MLRA 1,2, _ High Water Table(A2) MLRA 1,2,4A,and 48) 4A,and 413) _ Saturation(A3) _ Salt Crust(B11) _ Drainage Patterns(1310) _ Water Marks(131) _ Aquatic Invertebrates(1313) _ Dry-Season Water Table(C2) _ Sediment Deposits(132) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9) _ Drift Deposits(63) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3) _ Geomorphic Position(D2) _ Algal Mat or Crust(134) _ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _ Shallow Aquitard(D3) _ Iron Deposits(B5) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) _ FAC-Neutral Test(D5) _ Surface Soil Cracks(66) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)(LRR A) _ Raised Ant Mounds(D6)(LRR A) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Frost-Heave Hummocks(D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No x Depth(inches): Water Table Present? Yes No x Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Yes No x Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast—Version 2.0 APPENDIX C Additional Methodology Information METHODOLOGY The Section 404 definition of the Clean Water Act for a wetland is "an area that is inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions" (33 CFR 328.3, 40 CFR 230.3). For an area to be classified as a Jurisdictional wetland, it must be considered a water of the US and meet the criteria for hydrology, vegetation, and soils as set by the US Army Corps of Engineers. The following methodology for determining if an area meets the four criteria is presented below (WTI, 1999). Water of the US Section 404 of the Clean Water Act defines waters of the US to include: waters which were or could be used for interstate or foreign commerce; all interstate waters including interstate wetlands; all other waters including intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use of degradation of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce; all impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the US; tributaries of aforementioned waters; territorial seas; and wetlands adjacent to aforementioned waters (other than wetlands). According to 33 CFR 328.4(c), the limits of jurisdiction in non-tidal waters are as follows: • In the absence of adjacent wetlands, the jurisdiction extends to the ordinary high water mark, or • When adjacent wetlands are present, the jurisdiction extends beyond the ordinary high water mark to the limit of the adjacent wetlands, • When the water of the US consists only of wetlands the jurisdiction extends to the limit of the wetland. Waters of the US are regulated by the US Army Corps of Engineers. Any impacts to waters of the US (including jurisdictional wetlands) require review and approval (Section 404 permitting)by the Corps. Final jurisdictional determination is always made by the Corps. Methods -- H dy rologY The technical criterion for wetland hydrology has been established as permanent or periodic inundation, or soil saturation for a significant period during the growing season (5% - 12.5% continual duration dependent upon certain conditions). Soils saturated greater than 12.5% of the time are considered wetlands. Areas saturated to the surface for less than 5% of the growing season are non-wetlands. Wetland hydrology exists if field indicators are present as indicated on the field delineation sheets. C-1 Appendix C Site-specific resources used to identify site hydrology following the technical criteria of the COE Wetland Delineation Manual (COE, 1987) include: • Topographic maps and digital aerial orthophotos from the US Geological Survey(USGS,NRIS); • Hydrological data from the Montana Department of Natural Resource Conservation (DNRC), Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, and Montana Department of Environmental Quality(KRIS); • Water rights data from DNRC (DNRC); • National Wetland Inventory data(USFWS); • Ground water information from the Local Water Quality District(LWQD); • Ground water information from the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology (MBMG); • Published ground water research and/or published reports with ground water data. In addition, the following guidance and supplements issued by the COE and Montana Natural Heritage Program may have been used to help assess the project specifics: • Jones,W.M. (2004) "Ecologically Significant Wetlands in the Missouri Headwaters: Jefferson,Lower Madison,Lower Gallatin, and Upper Red Rock River Watersheds." Montana Natural Heritage Program. Retrieved from http://nhp.nris.mt. og v/Reports List.asp?kev=4 • Jones, W.M. (2001) "Ecologically Significant Wetlands in the Upper Yellowstone River Watershed, including the Boulder, Clarks Fork Yellowstone, Shields, and Stillwater River Drainages." Montana Natural Heritage Program. Retrieved from http://nhl2.nris.mt.gov/Reports List.asp?kev=4 • Kudray, G.M. and T. Schemm. (2006) "Yellowstone River Wetland/ Riparian Change Detection Pilot Study." Montana Natural Heritage Program. Retrieved from http://nhp.nris.mt.gov/Repoi-ts List.asp?kev=4 • US. Army Corps of Engineers. (2008). "Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0)", US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg,MS. September 2008. • US. Army Corps of Engineers. (2010). " Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains Region (Version 2.0)", US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. March 2010 C-2 Appendix C • US. Army Corps of Engineers. (2010). "Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region(Version 2.0)"; US At-my Engineer- Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. May 2010 Methods -- Soils Wetlands soils are soils that have been classified as hydric, or have characteristics that are associated with reducing soil conditions. A hydric soil is a soil that has formed under conditions of saturation, ponding or flooding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil profile. Hydric indicators include mottles, sulfidic odor, organic soil material, saturation, and gleyed or low-chroma color as determined by a Munsell Soil Color Chart (Munsell, 1994). Site-specific resources used to identify hydric soils, following the technical criteria of the COE Wetland Delineation Manual (COE, 1987) include: • The published soils survey for the area(MRCS and MAES). • Published soil research and/or published reports with soil data. Additional soil identification and technical resources routinely used include: • Hurt, G.W., P.M. Whited and R.F. Pringle (eds.), 1996. "Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States." US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Wetland Science Institute and Soils Division, in cooperation with National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, version 3.2: Washington, DC. • Pierce, Gary J., 1989. "Chapter 6: Wetland Soils." In S.K. Maiumdar, R.P. Brooks, F.J. Brenner and R.W. Tiner, Jr. (eds.), "Wetlands Ecology and Conservation: Emphasis in Pennsylvania," Pennsylvania Academy of Science: Philadelphia, PA. • US Department of Agriculture, 1999. "Soil Taxonomy and Keys to Soil Taxon". Agriculture Handbook, 1999 revision: Washington, DC. • US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, 1981. "Soil Survey Manual 430-V." Issue 1, Washington, D.C. • Vepraskas, Michael J., 1999. "Redoximorphic Features for Identifying Aquic Conditions." North Carolina Agricultural Research Service, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Technical Bulletin 301: Raleigh,NC. • NA?Bozeman, MT, no date, "Welcome to the Geographical Information System (GIS)", http://www.bozeman.net/gisweb/default.htm. C-3 Appendix C Methods -- Ve 7ett ation Plants must be physiologically or morphologically adapted for life under saturated or anaerobic soil conditions to grow in wetlands. Plant species have been assigned a wetland indicator status by geographic region based on their probability to occur in a wetland. Plants are categorized as obligate wet (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), facultative (FAC), facultative upland (FACU), or upland (UPL). An area is considered to have wetland vegetation if more than 50% of the dominant plant species have an indicator status of FAC, FACW or OBL. Site-specific resources used to identify plants and plant communities, following the technical criteria of the COE Wetland Delineation Manual (COE, 1987) include: Field survey and identification of dominant plant species in tree, sapling/shrub, herbaceous and woody vine strata; • Use of the online database of the Natural Heritage Program to identify plants that have been previously identified in this area(MNHP); and • Online plants database for wetlands indicator status (USDA NRCS). Additional plant identification and technical resources routinely used include: • Dorn, Robert D., 1984. "Vascular Plants of Montana." Mountain West Publishing: Cheyenne, WY. • Gage, Edward and David J. Cooper. 2010. "Vegetation Sampling for Wetland Delineation". US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center: ERDC/CRREL CR-10-2. • Hitchcock, A.S., 1971. "Manual of the Grasses of the United States, 2"d ed." Revised by Agnes Chase, in two volumes. Dover Publications: New York,NY. • Hurd, Emerenciana G., Nancy L. Shaw, Joy Mastrogiuseppe, Lynda C. Smithman and Sherel Goodrich, 1998. "Field Guide to Intermountain Sedges." General Technical report RMRS-GTR-10, US Department of Agricullure Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station: Ogden, UT. • Lackschewitz, Klaus, 1991. "Vascular Plants of West-Central Montana -- Identification Guidebook." General Technical Report INT-277 US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Intermountain Research Station: Ogden, UT. • Lesica, Peter, and Peter Husby, 2001. "Field Guide to Montanan's Wetland Vascular Plants." Montana Wetlands Trust: Helena, MT. C-4 Appendix C • Montana Natural Heritage Program. "Wetland Indicator Category and County Search." http://nhp.nris.state.mt.us/plants/index.html?guidebook.asp retrieved 9/15/2004. • US Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service. The PLANTS Database, Version 3.5 (http://i)lants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA. 0 Weber, William A., 1976. "Rocky Mountain Flora, 51h ed." University Press of Colorado: Boulder, CO. Using the COE Routine Wetland Determination Method (COE, 1987), field investigations will determine pertinent vegetation, soil and hydrology characteristics throughout the proposed project site. If all three parameters exhibit wetland characteristics, a positive wetland determination will be made for the area represented by each sampling location. If any one of the parameters does not exhibit positive wetland indicators, the area will be determined to be non-wetland. Delineation data sheets from field investigations are included in the final delineation report. If a wetland is also considered a water of the US, then that wetland would be considered "jurisdictional" under the US Army Corps of Engineers and subject to Section 404 permitting requirements. C-5 Appendix C APPENDIX D Functional Assessment MDT Montana Wetland Assessment Form (revised March 2008) 1.Project Name: MSU Innovation Campus 2.MDT Project#: Control#: 3.Evaluation Date: 10/22/13 4.Evaluator(s): Chris Thelen,Carol Lee-Roark 5.Wetlands/Site#(s): WL-1,WL-2,WL-3 6.Wetland Location(s):I.Legal: T2S,RSE,NE 1/4 of Section 14; ii.Approx.Stationing or Mileposts: iii.Watershed: 10020008 Watershed Name,County: Upper Missouri, Gallatin 7. a.Evaluating Agency:Hyalite Environmental 8.Wetland size: 1.9 acres(measured) b.Purpose of Evaluation: 1. Wetlands potentially affected by MDT project 9.Assessment area(AA): 2.3 acres(estimated) 2. X Mitigation wetlands;pre-construction 3. _ Mitigation wetlands;post-construction 4. Other: 10.Classification of Wetland and Aquatic Habitats in AA Abbreviations:(see manual for definitions) HGM Class(Brinson) Class Modifier Water Regime %of AA HGM Classes: Riverine(R),Depressional(D),Slope(S), (Cowardin (Cowardin) Mineral Soil Flats(MSF),Organic Soil Flats(OSF),Lacustrine R AB E SI 10 Fringe(LF); Cowardin Classes:Rock Bottom(RB),Unconsolidated D UB E,A PP 5 bottom(UB),Aquatic Bed(AB),Unconsolidated Shore(US), S EM NA SI 85 Moss-lichen Wetland(ML),Emergent Wetland(EM),Scrub- Shrub Wetland(SS),Forested Wetland(FO) Modifiers:Excavated(E),Impounded(1),Diked(D),Partly Drained(PD),Farmed(F),Artificial(A) Water Regimes:Permanent/Perennial(PP),Seasonal/ Intermittent(SI),Temporary/Ephemeral(TE) 11.Estimated relative abundance:(of similarly classified sites within the same Major Montana Watershed Basin,see definitions) ABUNDANT 12.General condition of AA: I. Disturbance:(use matrix below to determine[circle]appropriate response—see instructions for Montana-listed noxious weed and aquatic nuisance vegetation species(ANUS)lists) Predominant conditions adjacent to within 500 feet oo AA Managed in predominantly natural state; Land not cultivated,but may be moderately Land cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; Conditions within AA is not grazed,hayed,logged,or grazed or hayed or selectively logged;or subject to substantial fill placement,grading, otherwise converted;does not contain has been subject to minor clearing;contains clearing,or hydrological alteration;high road roads or buildings;and noxious weed or few roads or buildings;noxious weed or or building density;or noxious weed or ANVS ANVS cover is 515%. ANVS cover is 530%. cover is>30%. AA occurs and is managed in predominantly natural state;is not grazed,hayed,logged,or otherwise converted;does not contain low disturbance low disturbance moderate disturbance roads or occupied buildings;and noxious weed or ANVS cover is sty%. AA not cultivated,but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged;or has been subject torelatively minor moderate disturbance moderate disturbance high disturbance. clearing,fill placement,or hydrological alteration; eration;contains few roads or buildings;noxious weed or ANVS cover is 530%. AA cultivated or heavily grazed or logged;subject to relatively substantial fill placement,grading,clearing,or hydrological high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance alteration;high road or building density;or noxious weed or ANVS cover is>30%. Comments:(types of disturbance,intensity,season,etc.): Disturbance within the assessment area includes past agricultural use. The area has been altered in order to drain and direct groundwater seepage within the property,including the installation of ditches and ponds. ii.Prominent noxious,aquatic nuisance,&other exotic vegetation species: Canada thistle,yellow flag iris III.Provide brief descriptive summary of AA and surrounding land use/habitat: Roads and commercial/residential development is adjacent to assessment area on north,east and west side. Road borders south side of assessment area. 13.Structural Diversity: based on number of"Cowardin" ve etated classes resent do not include unve etated classes),see#10 above Initial Is current management preventing(passive) Existing#of"Cowardin"Vegetated Classes in AA Ratinci existence of additional vegetated classes? Modified Rating 2:3(or 2 if 1 is forested)classes H NA NA NA 2(or 1 if forested)classes M NA NA NA 1 class,but not a monoculture M +—NO YES— L 1 class,monoculture(1 species comprises>90%of total cover) L NA NA NA Comments: 1 SECTION PERTAINING to FUNCTIONS &VALUES ASSESSMENT 14A. Habitat for Federally Listed or Proposed Threatened or Endangered Plants or Animals: i. AA is Documented(D)or Suspected(S)to contain(circle one based on definitions contained in instructions): Primary or critical habitat(list species) Secondary habitat(list species) Incidental habitat(list species) No usable habitat S ii. Ratio use the conclusions from i above and the matrix below to arrive at[circle]the functional poin s and ratio Highest Habitat Level I doc/ rimar sus/primary doc/seconda sus/seconda doc/incidental sus/incidental None Functional Points and Ratio 1 H .9H .8M .7M .31- -1 1- OL Sources for documented use(e.g.observations,records,etc): U.S.Fish and Wildlife Services list of T&E,consultation with Montana Heritage Program, and observations 14B.Habitat for plant or animals rated S1,S2,or S3 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program:(not including species listed in14A above) i. AA is Documented(D)or Suspected(S)to contain(circle one based on definitions contained in instructions): Primary or critical habitat(list species) Secondary habitat(list species) Incidental habitat(list species) Bobolink(S); No usable habitat ii. Ratio (use the conclusions from i above and the matrix below to arrive at[circle]the functional points and rating) Highest Habitat Level doc/ rima sus/prima doc/seconda sus/secondary doc/incidental sus/incidental None S1 Species: 1 H .81-1 .7M .6M .21- .1 1- OL Functional Points and Ratio S2 and S3 Species: 91-1 .7M .6M .5M .2L AL OL Functional Points and Ratio Sources for documented use(e.g.observations,records,etc.): NMHP records and observations 14C. General Wildlife Habitat Rating: L Evidence of overall wildlife use in the AA(circle substantial,moderate,or low based on supporting evidence): Substantial (based on any of the following[check]): Minimal (based on any of the following[check]): observations of abundant wildlife#s or high species diversity(during any period) few or no wildlife observations during peak use periods _ abundant wildlife sign such as scat,tracks,nest structures,game trails,etc. X little to no wildlife sign presence of extremely limiting habitat features not available in the surrounding area X sparse adjacent upland food sources interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA X interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA Moderate (based on any of the following[check]): observations of scattered wildlife groups or individuals or relatively few species during peak periods _ common occurrence of wildlife sign such as scat,tracks,nest structures,game trails,etc. adequate adjacent upland food sources interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA ii.Wildlife habitat features(Working from top to bottom,circle appropriate AA attributes in matrix to arrive at rating. Structural diversity is from#13. For class cover to be considered evenly distributed,the most and least prevalent vegetated classes must be within 20%of each other in terms of their percent composition of the AA(see#10). Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows:P/P=permanent/perennial;S/I= seasonal/intermittent;T/E=temporary/ephemeral;and A=absent see instructions for further definitions of these terms Structural diversity(see#13) High Moderate Low Class cover distribution(all Even Uneven Even Uneven Even vegetated classes Duration of surface water in_> P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A 10%of AA Low disturbance at AA(see E E E H E E H H E H H M E H M M E H M M #12i Moderate disturbance at AA H H H H H H H M H H M M H M M L H M L L see#12i High disturbance at AA(see M M M L M M LIT M M L L M L L L L L L L #12i ] I I iii. Rating(use the conclusions from i and ii above and the matrix below to arrive at[circle]the functional points and rating) Evidence of wildlife use(i) Wildlife habitat features ratio (ii) Exceptional High J1 Moderate Low Substantial 1 E .91-1 .8H .7M Moderate .91-1 .7M .5M .31- Minimal .6M AM .21- .1 L Comments: 2 14D.General Fish Habitat Rating:(Assess this function if the AA is used by fish or the existing situation is"correctable"such that the AA could be used by fish[i.e.,fish use is precluded by perched culvert or other barrier,etc.]. If the AA is not used by fish,fish use is not restorable due to habitat constraints,or is not desired from a management perspective[such as fish entrapped in a canal],then mark_NA and proceed to 14E.) Type of Fishery: Cold Water(CW) X Warm Water(WW)T Use the CW or WW guidelines in the user manual to complete the matrix I. Habitat Quality and Known/Suspected Fish Species in AA use matrix to arrive at[circle]the functional points and rating) Duration of surface water in AA Permanent/Perennial Seasonal/Intermittent Tern orar /Ephemeral Aquatic hiding/resting/ Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor escape cover Thermal cover optimal/ O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S suboptimal FWP Tier I fish species 1 E .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M AM .7M .6M .5M AM .3L .3L FWP Tier II or Native 9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .5M .8H .7M .6M .5M AM AM .6M .5M AM .3L .2L .2L Game fish species FWP Tier III or 8H .7M .6M .5M .5M AM .7M .6M .5M AM AM .3L .5M AM .3L .2L .2L AL Introduced Game fish FWP Non-Game Tier IV .5M .5M 5M AM AM .3L AM AM AM .3L .3L .2L .2L .2L .2L .1 L .1 L 1 L or No fish species Sources used for identifying fish sp.potentially found in AA: Fish were observed in excavated pond located in southern portion of property. Likely trout. if. Modified Rating (NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1 or be less than 0.1) a)Is fish use of the AA significantly reduced by a culvert dike,or other man-made structure or activity or is the waterbody included on the current final MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development with listed"Probable Impaired Uses"including cold or warm water fishery or aquatic life support,or do aquatic nuisance plant or animal species(see Appendix E)occur in fish habitat? X If yes,reduce score in i above by 0.1. b)Does the AA contain a documented spawning area or other critical habitat feature(i.e.,sanctuary pool,upwelling area, etc.-specify in comments)for native fish or introduced game fish? _ If yes,add 0.1 to the adjusted score in i or fla. iii. Final Score and Rating: 0.21- Comments: Pond is an artificial excavated depression. Outlet and downstream channel is shallow with minimal flows during most of the growing season. Flows downstream of the pond can cease during late fall and winter. 14E. Flood Attenuation:(Applies only to wetlands subject to flooding via in-channel or overbank flow. If wetlands in AA are not flooded from in- channel or overbank flow,mark _ NA and proceed to 14F.) i. Rating(working from top to bottom,use the matrix below to arrive at circle the functional points and rating Slightly entrenched-C, Moderately entrenched- Entrenched-A,F,G stream Estimated or Calculated Entrenchment Ros en 1994, 1996L D, E stream types B stream type types of flooded wetland classified as forested and/or scrub/shrub 75% 25-75% <25% 1 75% 1 25 75% <25% 75% 25 75% <25% AA contains no outlet or restricted outlet J 1 H I .9H 6M .8H .7M .5M AM .3L .2L AA contains unrestricted outlet .9H .8H 5M .7M .6M AM .3L .2L AL Entrenchment ratio(ER)estimation-see User's Manual for additional guidance. Entrenchment ratio=(flood-prone width)/(bankfull width) Flood-prone width=estimated horizontal projection of where 2 x maximum bankfull depth elevation intersects the floodplain on each side of the stream. 50 feet / 3 feet = 16.67 Flood-prone Bankfull Entrenchment ratio width width (ER) �� Dept . Slightly Entrenched Moderately Entrenched Entrenched ER=>2.2 ER=1.41-2.2 ER=1.0-1.4 C stream type D stream type E stream type B stream type A stream t o F stream type G stream tVpe ii. Are>_10 acres of wetland in the AA subject to flooding AND are man-made features which maybe significantly damaged by floods located within 0.5 mile downstream of the AA(circle)? _ Comments: 14F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage:(Applies to wetlands that flood or pond from overbank or in-channel flow,precipitation,upland surface flow,or groundwater flow. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to flooding or ponding,mark _ NA and proceed to 14G.) L Rating(Working from top to bottom,use the matrix below to arrive at[circle]the functional points and rating.Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows:P/P=permanent/perennial;S/I=seasonal/intermittent;and T/E=temporary/ephemeral[see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) Estimated maximum acre feet of water contained in wetlands >5 acre feet 1.1 to 5 acre feet <_1 acre foot within the AA that are subject to periodic floodin or ponding Duration of surface water at wetlands within the AA P/P S/I 7 T/E P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E Wetlands in AA flood or pond>-5 out of 10 years 1 H .9H .8H .8H .6M .5M AM .3L .2L Wetlands in AA flood or pond<5 out of 10 years .9H .8H .7M .7M .5M AM .3L .2L AL Comments: 3 14G. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Retention and Removal:(Applies to wetlands with potential to receive sediments,nutrients,or toxicants through influx of surface or ground water or direct input. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to such input,mark NA and proceed to 14H.) i. Rating(working from top to bottom,use the matrix below to arrive at[circle]the functional points and rating[H=high,M=moderate,or L=low]) Sediment,nutrient,and toxicant Waterbody on MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of input levels within AA TMDL development for"probable causes"related to AA receives or surrounding land use with potential to sediment,nutrients,or toxicants or AA receives or deliver levels of sediments,nutrients,or compounds surrounding land use with potential to deliver high levels at levels such that other functions are not of sediments,nutrients,or compounds such that other substantially impaired.Minor sedimentation,sources functions are substantially impaired.Major of nutrients or toxicants,or signs of eutrophication sedimentation,sources of nutrients or toxicants,or signs resent. of eutro hication resent. %cover of wetland vegetation in AA >70% <70% >70% <70% Evidence of flooding1ponding in AA Yes No Yes No Yes I No Yes No AA contains no or restricted outlet 1 H .8H .7M .5M .5M 4M .3L .2L AA contains unrestricted outlet .9H .7M .6M AM AM .3L .2L AL Comments: 14H Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization: (Applies only if AA occurs on or within the banks or a river,stream,or other natural or man-made drainage,or on the shoreline of a standing water body which is subject to wave action. If 14H does not apply,mark X NA and proceed to 141.) i. Rating(working from top to bottom,use the matrix below to arrive at[circle]the functional points and rating) %Cover of wetland streambank or Duration of surface water adjacent to rooted ve etation shoreline by species with stability Permanent/Perennial Seasonal/Intermittent Temporary/Ephemeral ratings of>_6 see Appendix F. p ry p >_65% 1 H .9H .7M 35-64% .7M .6M .5M <35% 3L .2L AL Comments: 141. Production Export/Food Chain Support: i. Level of Biological Activity(synthesis of wildlife and fish habitat ratings[circle]) General Fish Habitat General Wildlife Habitat Ratio 14C.iii. Ratio 14D.iii.) E/H 1 M L E/H H H M M H M M L M M L N/A H M L ii. Rating(Working from top to bottom,use the matrix below to arrive at[circle]the functional points and rating.Factor A =acreage of vegetated wetland component in the AA;Factor B=level of biological activity rating from above(141.i.);Factor C=whether or not the AA contains a surface or subsurface outlet;the final three rows pertain to duration of surface water in the AA,where P/P,S/I,and T/E are as previously defined,and A="absent" see instructions for further definitions of these terms. A Ve etated component>5 acres Vegetated component 1-5 acres Vegetated component<1 acre B Hi ph Moderate Low High Moderate Low Hi ph Moderate Low C Yes I No Yes I No Yes I No Yes I No Yes I No Yes I No Yes No Yes I No Yes I No P/P 1 H .7M .8H .5M .6M AM .9H .6M .7M AM .5M .3L .8H .6M .6M .4M .3L .2L S/I .9H .6M .7M AM .5M .3L .8H .5M .6M .3L .4M .2L .7M .5M .5M 3L 3L .2L T/E/A .8H .5M .6M .3L AM .2L .7M .4M .5M .2L .3L AL .6M .4M .4M 2L 2L AL iii. Modified Rating (NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1 or be less than 0.1.) Vegetated Upland Buffer(VUB):Area with?30%plant cover,<_ 15%noxious weed or ANVS cover,and that is not subjected to periodic mechanical mowing or clearing(unless for weed control). a)Is there an average>_50 foot-wide vegetated upland buffer around>_ 75%of the AA circumference? X If yes,add 0.1 to the score in Y above. iv. Final Score and Rating: 0.5M Comments: 14J. Groundwater Discharge/Recharge:(check the appropriate indicators in i&ii below) i. Discharge Indicators ii. Recharge Indicators X The AA is a slope wetland Permeable substrate present without underlying impeding layer X Springs or seeps are known or observed Wetland contains inlet but no outlet Vegetation growing during dormant season/drought Stream is a known'losing'stream;discharge volume decreases Wetland occurs at the toe of a natural slope X Other: stream ceases to flow during late fall/winter Seeps are present at the wetland edge AA permanently flooded during drought periods X Wetland contains an outlet,but no inlet Shallow water table and the site is saturated to the surface Other: 4 iii. Rating (use the information from i and ii above and the table below to arrive at(circle)the functional points and rating) Duration of saturation at AA Wetlands FROM GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE OR WITH WATER THAT IS RECHARGING THE GROUNDWATER SYSTEM Criteria P/P S/I T None Groundwater Discharge or Recharge 1 H .7M AM 1 L Insufficient Data/information N/A Comments: 14K.Uniqueness: i. Rating(working from top to bottom,use the matrix below to arrive at[circle]the functional points and rating) AA does not contain previously cited AA contains fen,bog,warm springs rare types and structural diversity AA does not contain previously Replacement potential or mature(>80 yr-old)forested (#13)is high or contains plant cited rare types or associations wetland or plant association listed association listed as"S2"by the and structural diversity(#13)is as"S1"by the MTNHP MTNHP low-moderate Estimated relative abundance #11 rare common abundant rare common abundant rare I common abundant Low disturbance at AA(#12i) 1 H .9H .8H SH .6M .5M .5M AM .3L Moderate disturbance at AA(#12i) .9H .8H .7M .7M .5M AM AM .3L .21- High disturbance at AA(#12i) .8H .7M .6M .6M AM .31- .3L .2L AL Comments: 14L.Recreation/Education Potential:(affords"bonus"points if AA provides recreation or education opportunity) i.Is the AA a known or potential rec./ed.site:(circle) X (if'Yes'continue with the evaluation;if'No'then mark _ NA and proceed to the overall summary and rating page) ii. Check categories that apply to the AA:_Educational/scientific study;_Consumptive rec.; X Non-consumptive rec.;_Other ill. Rating(use the matrix below to arrive at[circle]the functional points and rating) Known or Potential Recreation or Education Area Known Potential Public ownership or public easement with general public access(no permission required) .2H .15H Private ownership with general public access(no permission required) .15H AM Private or public ownership without general public access,or requiring permission for public access AM .05L Comments: General Site Notes 5 FUNCTION &VALUE SUMMARY& OVERALL RATING FOR WETLAND/SITE#(S): WL-1,WL-2,WL-3 Indicate the Functional four most Actual Possible Units: prominent Functional Functional (Actual Points x functions with Estimated AA Function &Value Variables Rating Points Points Acreage) an asterisk(*) A. Listed/Proposed T&E Species Habitat L 0.0 1 0.00 B. MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat L 0.1 1 0.23 C. General Wildlife Habitat L 0.1 1 0.23 D. General Fish Habitat L 0.2 1.0 0.46 E. Flood Attenuation M 0.5 1.0 1.15 F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage M 0.6 1.0 1.38 G. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Removal H 0.9 1.0 2.07 H. Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization NA I. Production Export/Food Chain Support M 0.5 1 1.15 J. Groundwater Dischar e/Rechar e M 0.7 1.0 1.61 K. Uni ueness L 0.1 1 0.23 L. Recreation/Education Potential bonuspoints) M 0.10 NA 0.23 Totals: 3.80 10.0 8.74 Percent of Possible Score 38% Category I Wetland: (must satisfy one of the following criteria;otherwise go to Category 11) Score of 1 functional point for Listed/Proposed Threatened or Endangered Species;or Score of 1 functional point for Uniqueness;or Score of 1 functional point for Flood Attenuation and answer to Question 14E.ii is"yes";or Percent of possible score>80%(round to nearest whole#). Category II Wetland: (Criteria for Category I not satisfied and meets any one of the following criteria;otherwise go to Category IV) Score of 1 functional point for MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat;or Score of.9 or 1 functional point for General Wildlife Habitat;or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Fish Habitat;or "High"to"Exceptional" ratings for both General Wildlife Habitat and General Fish/Aquatic Habitat;or Score of .9 functional point for Uniqueness; or Percent of possible score>65%(round to nearest whole#). Category III Wetland: (Criteria for Categories 1, 11,or IV not satisfied) Category IV Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I or 11 are not satisfied and all of the following criteria are met;otherwise go to Category III) X "Low" rating for Uniqueness;and Vegetated wetland component< 1 acre(do not include upland vegetated buffer); and Percent of possible score<35%(round to nearest whole#). OVERALL ANALYSIS AREA RATING: 6 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk@ AutoCAD®Civil 3D®by Autodesk, Inc. Wednesday,Dec 6 2017 <Name> Circular Highlighted Diameter (ft) = 1.50 Depth (ft) = 1.05 Q (cfs) = 3.053 Area (sqft) = 1.32 Invert Elev (ft) = 1.00 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.31 Slope (%) = 0.12 Wetted Perim (ft) = 2.98 N-Value = 0.013 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.67 Top Width (ft) = 1.37 Calculations EGL (ft) = 1.13 Compute by: Known Depth Known Depth (ft) = 1.05 .............. ERIK D.GA BERG No. '14108 F :-v IZ. ICENS Elev (ft) Section 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0 1 2 3 Reach (ft) GUTTER FLOW CALC MINOR BASIN C: 25-YR Existing Land Use: A ricullure/Pasture Proposed Land Use: Roads Existing Drainage Area: acres Proposed Drainage Area: 0.85 _ acres Existing Slope: % Proposed Slope; 0.5 Overland Flow Distance: feet Overland Flow Distance: 306 feet Channel Time: minutes Channel Time: minutes Time of Concentration: minutes Time of Concentration: 5.0 minutes Design Storm FrequtnSL 10 year Design Storm Frequency: 25 year 10 yr Intensity at To; #DIV/01 in/hr Peak Runoff Rate: #DIV/01 cfs Runoff Coefficient Area(SF) Ce 1.1 Runoff Coefficient A j-„_ C (Table Area SF ravel area:_ 0 0.80 Neighborhood Commercial: _ 0 0,60 conc/aved area: 0 0.95 cone/paved area: _ 0 __ 0.95 roof: 0 _ 0.95 streets: 36.901 0.95 lawn: 0 0.10 lawn: 0 0.10 open s ace: 0.20 open space: 0 0.20 Total: 0 Total: 36,901 total area: 0.00 acres total areal 0.85 acres composite Q1 #DIV/0! I composite Cj 0.95 25 Year Event Design Flow 83 Snu�es O 3. _ 25 Intensity att Tc- 25 r To- —5.00 i i _-44IGH POINT - - - - - i-M- -�.- w� ,� „_. ,�,. - �a - - -- LLEGE ST i ___._ , ,; r I�IOR FUTURE BASIN FB-6 U) y EQUESTED 173582 SF OR ,� 3.98 AC. STOUBM ., w ti Ix INOR FUTURE BASIN FB-5� /, 1" U # #,; /' _SF OR L r 8.20 AC. i �`w Q Z d .< . F , t a ` uJ a r;' 50'WETLAND SETBACK—=-.,.�.�„ �"' � ry Z Q O -' -- MINOR-FUTURE SINE 4 A 2 �` !'�92131 OEMMINOR BASIN N A WETLAND? �� � � � ` � � �� Z r �,350A�5 SF OR 0:80 AC � - Z 6=0.95 -_- ', W ry 41, �. cIf _ f Z,, C& Z y" MINOR BASIN Bi' � .` 95 3306`t SF OR 0.76 aG. ___ _.., � �"� � �` �' � W � y1 -gam . - a B x MINOR%"BASI(J A-1 r \ _ IM1IOR FUTURE B � —_ 56,742 SF OR,r`.30 AC:-._ - �,1N 173673`SF`OR " G-p F U DP- -� : , DATE: ,a>.N : CHECKED BY'. TRS MINOR BASIN C CAA� � LL Msur . 36909.5E OR 0.$5.AG \ aDFILE: 77 a -OFF-SITE"RUN-ON"\\ O INOR FUTURE BASIN.FB= DRAINAGE INTO 273628 SFOF2 BASIN FB 3 y .2 AC (� �INOR FUTURE ASIN G FB-9 0 6 497289 SF OR9.58AC. q }. u r , - POST �w ARFIELD STREET DRAINAG XISTING� r, SAG/LOW POINTS. FLOWS TO THE WEST. ARFIELD STREET DRAINAGE. FLOWS EAST TO A SAG. SHEET �1 POST DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS �+1A7� SW2 S E:V-W �7 VV VV