Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Site Plan - Conservation (82)
TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR NOV 1 6 2004 INLAND WETLANDS, WATERCOURSES AND CONSERVATION APPLICATION Application Date Received INSTRUCTIONS 1. Fifteen applications (15) with map and plans (2 copies) shall be submitted together with the fee set forth in the Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations, Town of South Windsor. (See Regulations, Section VII—X) 2. The South Windsor Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations should be reviewed with respect to the standards and criteria for application Evaluation. (See Regulations, Sections VII—X) 3. The applicant understands that this application is to be considered complete only when all information and documents required by the Agency have been submitted. The applicant shall also complete the state filing form. A. Applicant's Name: John Fitch Partners, LLC & Andre L. Charbonneau Address: 125 Edwin Road South Windsor, Ct. 06074 Phone: (home) (work) 528-7551 (fax) 291-8191 B. Legal owner's name: Same As Above Address Phone (home) (work) (fax) (List additional owners, addresses, and phone numbers on back of application) C. If the applicant is not the owner of the subject property; a letter by the owner(s) authorizing the proposed regulated activity set forth in the application must accompany this form and will be part of the application. D. Project Name(if any) N/A 1. Contact Person(if further information is needed) Dana Steele, J.R. Russo & Associates (work) 623-0569 (fax) 623-2485 E. The geographical location of the property which is to be affected by the proposed regulated activities including a description of the land in sufficient detail to allow identification of the property on the Inland Wetland and Watercourse Map. Assessor's map # 84 Parcel# 49 & 50 Zone I F. Names of all abutting property owners from records in Town Clerk's office. (use separate sheet if necessary) See Attached Sheet G. Have you notified all abutting property owners (from records in Town Clerk's office) by certified letter that an application is pending before the Agency? ** (you are required to supply a copy of the letter with the list of the names of the abutters).** H. Purpose and description of all proposed regulated activity(s) including amount of disturbance in square feet and types of fill and the time element involved: Construct access driveway and extend drainage pipes to new scour hole outlet. Construct 25,200 s.f. industrial building with associates parking and load€1ng= areas : Construct drainage system and detention basin. Total wetlands disturbance less than 5,000 s.f. I. A class A-2 map of the property drawn to 1"=40', showing the area to be developed, extent of the wetlands and watercourses affected, topography, existing and proposed activities and names and locations of adjacent property owners must be submitted. J. Amount of regulated area disturbance and types of fill (including wetlands and regulated buffers). 1.5± Ac. K. Acreage of wetlands and watercourses in regulated areas to be altered: 0.1± Ac. L. Acreage of wetlands and watercourses to be created: 0 M. Lineal feet of proposed stream alteration: N/A N. Total land area of project and percentage,which is wetlands: 3.1± Ac.; 3.7Z wetlands O. Identify all other permits or approvals that have been issued, applied for, or required with respect to the proposed activity set forth in this application. (These may include but not be limited to, local Planning & Zoning, Zoning Board of Appeals, D.E.P., F.E.M.A., D.O.T., The Army Corps of Engineers, and any other State, Local or Federal Permits.) P&X P. The applicant (or designated representative) hereby attests that a sign will be posted at the following location(s) 1249 & 1265 John Fitch Boulevard By Name J.R. Russo & Associates on or before the following date November 19, 2004 8 Signature: These signs must be displayed continuously for at least ten (10) days prior to scheduled meeting (see Regulations, Section 7.3a) The undersigned hereby applies for the regulated activities listed in paragraph H above, for a Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation permit for the property described herein and confirms that: 1. She/he is familiar with the currently effective Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations of the Town of South Windsor. 2. She/he understands that at any time during the review period, the Agency may require the applicant to provide more information about the wetlands and/or watercourses in question and/or any proposed activity. 3. All information submitted in the application for review shall be considered factual, or in the case of anticipated activity, binding. A knowing failure of the applicant or any of her/his agents to provide correct information, or performance exceeding the levels of activity anticipated, shall be sufficient grounds for revocation of any permit under these regulations. 4. By making this application, the applicant gives permission to the Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Commission members and/or its representative to enter the portions of the premises which are subject of the application for the purpose of inspection and investigation and otherwise evaluating the merits of the application both before and after a final decision has been issued. Signature of Owner of Property Date Signature of Applicant Date INZ-pq� 9 CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION GIS CODE#: _ 79 Elm Street For DEP use only — — — — Hartford,CT 06106-5127 Arthur J.Rocque,Jr.,Commissioner Statewide Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Activity Reporting Form Please complete this form in accordance with the instructions. Please print or type. PART 1: To Be Completed By The Inland Wetlands Agency Only 1. DATE ACTION WAS TAKEN: Year Month 2. ACTION TAKEN: 3. WAS A PUBLIC HEARING HELD? Yes No 4. NAME OF AGENCY OFFICIAL VERIFYING AND COMPLETING THIS FORM: (print) (signature) PART II: To Be Completed By The Inland Wetlands Agency Or The Applicant 5. TOWN IN WHICH THE ACTION IS OCCURRING: South Windsor Does this project cross municipal boundaries? Yes No % If Yes, list the other town(s)in which the action is occurring: 6. LOCATION: USGS Quad Map Name: Manchester ARID Quad Number: 38 Subregional Drainage Basin Number: 4000 7. NAME OF APPLICANT,VIOLATOR OR PETITIONER: John Fitch Partners, LLC & Andre L. Charbonneau 8. NAME&ADDRESS/LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: 1249 & 1265 John Fitch Boulevard Briefly describe the action/project/activity: Construct 25.200 s.f building & ]harking ]got 9. ACTIVITY PURPOSE CODE: D 10. ACTIVITY TYPE CODE(S): 1 2 9 12 11. WETLAND/WATERCOURSE AREA ALTERED[must be provided in acres or linear feet as indicated]: Wetlands: 0.1± acres Open Water Body: 0 acres Stream: 0 linear feet 12. UPLAND AREA ALTERED [must be provided in acres as indicated]: 1.5± acres 13. AREA OF WETLANDS AND/OR WATERCOURSES RESTORED, ENHANCED OR CREATED: 0 acres [must be provided in acres as indicated] 0 UNITED STATES <o� DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR �lp� GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 72°37`30" 6 OOOm. THOMPSONVILLE 8 MI. 98 E 3.2 MI. TO INTER TA-E 91 1700 35' 1701 41°52'30" - o 4638000m.N w -oe P �\G x R r = railer �AAA It`r — —_ •• �——— C f� O ?ai�g Qe •57 C oO o o rl h so 4637 li o Ry Rye W ° t indsor0 \ o M fi\ �� do °°• sz E N CENTRA o ' Iwo II East Windso 110 If — o o M 90 84 4636 / � 190 \J � EdVXa7 rickyar ° 0 /tio and 4635 Ro /pp o 0 / • ns�elear is titute Claypit -Ly _ — ° (FIartfor Gr uate Cen \ f • ,,�a ..+.. you WT•° •. d _ hton stati6m- sTR = 4634 _ _ o ow g _ \ x83�- to Cem•• o�\ O to ° ✓ - - ° _ �y clew e ••° oo �o 00 •.' �j o •' 00 per' o o �ROAO - •a 4633 LeF r 0 0 0 8•° EL LILAC' ! SOU � �� �\o ••••• ••. •'• ••�. nino,zn. dsor wR, �\o .•-\'• .�\.4i: oo° O C •..� //�.1 ca If!I November 16, 2004 George Haller Family LLC P.O. Box 32 New Hartford, Ct. 06057 CERTIFIED MAIL Dear Property Owner: Re: Site Plan 1249 & 1265 John Fitch Boulevard South Windsor, CT In accordance with Section 7.3b of the "Town of South Windsor Inland Wetlands, Watercourses, and Conservation Regulations", we are required to notify you that an application has been filed on the property abutting yours and is subject to a hearing by the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission. The application and plans are on file with the South Windsor Planning Department. As an abutting property owner you are invited to the hearing to ask questions and/or give comments, however, you are not required to attend. You may also submit written comments regarding the application prior to the hearing if so desire. For further information regarding the specific date this will be heard please contact Jeff Folger, Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer,Planning Department, 644-2511, ext. 253. Sincerely, Andre L. Charbonneau John Fitch Partners, LLC 100 125 Edwin Road South Windsor, Ct. 06074 0 Inland Wetlands Application For John Fitch Partners, LLC &Andre L. Charbonneau Names and addresses of adiacent property owners Brian Haller George Haller Family LLC P.O. Box 32 P.O. Box 32 New Hartford, Ct. 06057 New Hartford, Ct. 06057 Dale S. &Harriet B. Wilson Richard&Kelly Mellen 72 Ident Road P.O. Box 619 South Windsor, Ct. 06074 South Windsor, Ct. 06074 C&R Ventures, LLC John&Josephine Hughes 55 Glendale Road P.O. Box 357 South Windsor, Ct. 06074 East Windsor Hill, Ct. 06028 Pamela N. Wentworth Frederick H. &Theresa Bitgood 104 Ident Road 110 Ident Road South Windsor, Ct. 06074 South Windsor, Ct. 06074 Dominic Frasca, Jr. John&Mary LeBlanc 90 Ident Road 96 Ident Road South Windsor, Ct. 06074 South Windsor, Ct. 06074 Michael E. &Jennie J. Albert Sartori Associates 80 Ident Road 1239 John Fitch Boulevard South Windsor, Ct. 06074 South Windsor, Ct. 06074 Kasheta Farms, LLC 1300 Main Street South Windsor, Ct. 06074 MICHAEL F. GRAGNOLATI 45 North Street P.O.Box 3127 Windsor Locks,Connecticut 06096-3127 Tel/Fax 860-623-2588 September 2, 2003 Joseph Russo, P.E. J.R. Russo Associates 1 Shoham Road East Windsor, CT 06088 RE: Wetland Delineation 1249 John Fitch Boulevard South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Mr. Russo: This letter is to confirm that in July and August 2003 I examined the above referenced parcel for the presence of wetlands and watercourses as defined by Connecticut State Statutes. My investigations were conducted utilizing a spade and auger. The wetland boundaries were marked with numbered blue flagging in the field to be located by your firm. Regulated areas are associated with a stream that runs from east to west on the site. There is generally a thin band of wetland soils along the stream. There was an isolated area delineated to the west of the site that appears from the spoils adjacent to it to have been an attempt to build a small pond or drainage way. This area was probably uplands prior to the excavation of material. From the amount of miscellaneous material scattered about and the dominance of secondary growth this entire site was most likely historically cleared. Soils within the areas delineated are predominately Walpole fine sandy loams. Walpole soils are very deep(>65 inches)poorly drained soils that form in water sorted glacial outwash and stratified drift. They have an apparent water table that is at or near the surface,much of the year. Permeability of the Walpole soils is moderately rapid in the surface layer and subsoil and rapid or very rapid in the substratum. If you should have any questions,please call this office at your convenience. Sincerely; Michael F. Gragnolati Registered Professional Soil Scientist 03-062 ,t DRAINAGE REPORT New Industrial Building N o V l 8 2004 on Rear Portion of 1249 John Fitch Boulevard, South Windsor, CT Prepared For: John Fitch Partners, LLC 125 Edwin Road South Windsor, CT 06074 November 11, 2004 Prepared By: J.R. Russo & Associates Land Surveyors&Professional Engineers 1 Shoham Road,East Windsor,CT 06088 Phone:(860)623-0569,Fax: (860)623-2485 Project and Site Description John Fitch Partners, LLC proposes to construct a 25,200 s.f industrial building for one or more future tenants to be located in the rear(western)portion of 1249 John Fitch Boulevard. The subject parcel is approximately 9.4 acres in area and is located on the west side of John Fitch Boulevard (Rt. 5) in South Windsor, Connecticut. The front portion of the parcel along Route 5 contains an existing 14,000 s.f. industrial building with associated parking and loading areas. The project area includes approximately 2 acres in the rear portion of the parcel. The project area is bounded to the north by an existing detention area and industrial building at 1265 John Fitch Boulevard and to the east,west and south by tributaries to Stoughton Brook. The tributary between the existing building at 1249 John Fitch Boulevard and the project area receives stormwater discharges from the detention basin and parking area at 1265 John Fitch Boulevard as well as a 36"RCP conveying runoff from the watershed on the east side of Route 5. The Hartford County Soil Survey identifies the soils of the project area as Merrimac sandy loam (MyB), which is classified as a type A soil group. (See attached Soils Map) Soils in the front portion of the property area identified as Windsor loamy fine sand(WvB) and soils to the north are identified as Ninigret fine sandy loam(NnA)while the soils associated with the surrounding tributaries are sand&clay terrace escarpments (Te). Access and utilities for the development will be provided by means of a proposed easement across the existing entrance for 1265 John Fitch Boulevard. The applicant proposes to construct a stormwater management system utilizing a series of best management practices including: 1) annual sweeping and structure maintenance, 2)2-foot catch basin sumps, 3) sediment forebay,4) detention/retention basin, and 5) outlet protection. Pre-Development Runoff Conditions The extremely low curve numbers (CN=30) for existing conditions made the SCS unit- hydrograph method unsuitable for estimating pre-development peak flow rates. The Rational Method is an accepted method for determining peak flow rates and was used for this purpose. The 2.14 acre project area is mostly meadow and woods with slopes ranging from 1 to 5 percent. A runoff coefficient of 0.15 and a time of concentration of 10 minutes were assumed to represent pre-developed conditions. Rainfall intensities for a 10-minute duration were taken from the DOT Drainage Manual, Table B-2.1. Calculated peak runoff rates under pre- developed conditions for each design storm are listed in the table below: Storm Area Runoff Rainfall Runoff Rate Frequency (acres) Coefficient Intensity(in/hr) Q (cfs) 2 2.14 0.15 3.6 1.16 5 2.14 0.15 4.3 1.38 10 2.14 0.15 4.8 1.54 25 2.14 0.15 5.5 1.76 50 2.14 0.15 6.0 1.93 100 2.14 0.15 6.5 2.09 11/11/04 Page 2 of 4 Pipe Sizing Pipes for conveying roof and pavement runoff were sized by the Rational Method to accommodate a 25-year storm event(see attached Pipe Sizing Chart). For these calculations, a minimum time of concentration of 5 minutes was assumed for all drainage areas. Runoff coefficients were estimated using 0.9 for impervious areas and 0.2 for lawn and landscape areas. Drainage areas for each structure along with their corresponding percentage of impervious area are delineated on the attached Drainage Area Map. Pipe capacities and velocities were calculated by Manning's formula assuming an `n' value of 0.012 for smooth interior(Type S) corrugated polyethylene pipe (CPEP). Outlet Protection Two storm drainage outlets are proposed for this project. The outlet for the access driveway and existing off-site flows will be armored by a preformed scour hole designed in accordance with section 8.7.6 of the DOT Drainage Manual. For design purposes, the 36"outlet pipe was assumed to be flowing full. At a slope of 0.6%the outlet pipe.has a full flow capacity of 56 cfs. The outlet location was selected to provide a minimum slope in the immediate downstream channel to reduce potential erosion beyond the outlet control area. The immediate downstream channel can be approximated as a triangular channel with 2:1 side slopes and a 1% gradient. The attached Manning's formula calculation estimates the tail water to be 2.6 feet @ 56 cfs. However, for a conservative design, we assumed a tail water depth(TW) of 1 foot. The required stone size is therefore: d50=(0.0125Rp2/TW)(Q/Rp2.)1.33 =(0.012502/1)(56/32.5)1.33 =0.62 ft. (intermediate) The scour hole dimensions are taken from table 8-8.1 of the DOT drainage manual(15'W x 18' L x 1.5' D). The 15"outlet from the detention basin will be armored by a Type A(minimum tail water) riprap apron. The 100-year flow rate from the basin is 1.8 cfs. Therefore, the required length (La) of the apron taken from table 8-6.1 of the.DOT Drainage Manual is 10 feet. The required width is: W= 3Sp+0.7La=3x1.25 +0.7x10= 10.75 or 11 feet Assuming a conservative (high) tail water depth of 6", the required stone size was determined to be: d50=0.02/TW(Q/Sp)"" =0.02/0.5 (2.0/1.25)1.33= 07 feet (modified) Post-Development Runoff Conditions Unlike the pre-developed conditions, the curve number(CN) for the proposed development was high enough to model runoff conditions using the SCS unit hydrograph method. This method is an accepted method for generating hydrographs to model post-development runoff conditions and for sizing and designing stormwater detention systems. The SCS type III 24- 11/11/04 Page 3 of 4 hour distribution was utilized for generating the post-development hydrograph model. Time of concentration was assumed to be 5 minutes consistent with the pipe sizing calculations. Runoff curve numbers were selected based on the Merrimac type A soil group. The basin size and outlet structure was designed to hold back a sufficient volume of runoff so as to reduce peak flow rates from the site to be less than or equal to pre-development peak flow rates from the equivalent drainage area. This criterion was applied to the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100-year storm events. Hydrographs for each design storm were routed through the detention basin and outlet structure to determine the post-development peak flow rates for each design storm. The enclosed HydroCad 6.0 report provides the input data and output results for this analysis. The results are summarized in the table below: Design Storm Pre-Development Post-De velo ment (years) Q (cfs) Q (cfs) Pond Elev. (ft) 2 1.16 1.15 51.32 5 1.38 1.38 52.27 10 1.54 1.49 52.74 25 1.76 1.63 53.41 50 1.93 1.74 54.02 100 2.09 1.80 54.39 Summary The decreases in runoff rates from the design area more than compensate for the slight increase in impervious area resulting from the portion of the access driveway outside the design drainage area. The detention basin is designed to provide 12"of infiltration depth below the orifice outlet. This factor was not taken into consideration in the calculations above, therefore the actual peak flow rates will be even less. Infiltration also reduces the volume of stormwater runoff. The proposed forebay is designed to trap suspended sediment and provide treatment for stormwater discharge quality. Periodic cleaning of the forebay and catch basin sumps is critical to the continued effectiveness of the water quality treatment and proper functioning of the proposed stormwater management system. In conclusion, the proposed stormwater management system has been designed in accordance with accepted engineering practices to provide zero increase in peak stormwater runoff flow rates from the site-when compared to pre-developed conditions. Infiltration within the detention/retention basin will reduce the volume of post-development stormwater runoff. The proposed drainage system, sediment forebay and detention basin combined with proper maintenance by the property owner will provide adequate sediment removal and water quality treatment prior to discharging into downstream wetlands and watercourse. In our opinion, the proposed development will not adversely impact downstream properties. 11/11/04 Page 4 of 4 ------------------------- -------------- y 64 1109.16' -____ ' 63.5 6 0 63.2 4 _-- 1 1 ---- 0.22 ac.______-_-- 0.22 ac. _- 1 1 64 79% I ° 1 � � . -" - ► ----- p• 80/O imp. 63.0 60 ---------- ----------------- - ------- -------- i m /4o rA -- O----- ------------- - 3 /� M .20 a 13 9 17 / 1'r -- d'l�0 1 % imp. r - \ t ��r 52 J� ro fA C4 f / ss °/O jtn y I ' .41 ac. ---- ----------- (A/O imp. , _ 62 ; 62 -100% imp- - -- 0°/O r-np-. --- - - - - CJ2/`CL�s IR 56 �� yW! _ -C3f 5 ,' ' 59 ,+ \y ,,�� ` _ ✓i '� .. _ 0.05 pd.' ` ',54 ------ !/� 74%rlmp ' / 52 --- --------- ''.50' __ r ----' �7� 50 �>�----- - - --- _- -- -- - �, '-- --_�-Ea-A G ARA MAP c cs' cry_ cre - c,9 ------ �5;-- ' 0 as a2 \ ----- ` PO�STI Aip SUbCaf Reach on LI'Clk Drainage Diagram for 2002-098 Charbonneau Prepared by J.R.Russo&Associates 11/11/2004 HydroCAD®6.10 s/n 002386 ©1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems 2002-098 Charbonneau 2-Year Storm Type 111 24-hr Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by J.R. Russo & Associates Page 1 HydroCADO 6.10 s/n 002386 © 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems 11/11/2004 Subcatchment POST: POST Runoff = 4.16 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.287 af, Depth= 1.61" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type III 24-hr Rainfall=3.20" Area (ac) CN Description 1.590 98 Roofs & pavement 0.550 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2.140 83 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Pond 1 P: Pond Inflow Area = 2.140 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.61" Inflow = 4.16 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.287 of Outflow = 1.15 cfs @ 12.45 hrs, Volume= 0.270 af, Atten= 72%, Lag= 22.2 min Primary = 1.15 cfs @ 12.45 hrs, Volume= 0.270 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Peak Elev= 51.32' Surf.Area= 2,103 sf Storage= 3,957 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 72.9 min calculated for 0.270 of(94% of inflow) Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 48.00 275 0 0 50.00 1,196 1,471 1,471 52.00 2,569 3,765 5,236 54.00 4,394 6,963 12,199 54.10 5,602 500 12,699 56.00 7,305 12,262 24,960 Primary OutFlow Max=1.15 cfs @ 12.45 hrs HW=51.32' (Free Discharge) L1=Culvert (Passes 1.15 cfs of 8.06 cfs capacity) 3L'2=Orifice/Grate (Controls 1.15 cfs) =Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 48.40' 15.0" x 80.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert=48.00' S= 0.0050 '/' n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 49.00' 5.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 54.50' 1.33'x 2.54' Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.670 2002-098 Charbonneau 5-Year Storm Type Ill 24-hr Rainfall=4.10" Prepared by J.R. Russo & Associates Page 2 HydroCADO 6.10 s/n 002386 © 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems 11/11/2004 Subcatchment POST: POST Runoff = 6.14 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.423 af, Depth= 2.37" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type III 24-hr Rainfall=4.10" Area (ac) CN Description 1.590 98 Roofs & pavement 0.550 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2.140 83 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Pond 1 P: Pond Inflow Area = 2.140 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.37" Inflow = 6.14 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.423 of Outflow = 1.38 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 0.406 af, Atten= 77%, Lag= 24.7 min Primary = 1.38 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 0.406 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Peak Elev= 52.27' Surf.Area= 2,812 sf Storage= 6,164 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 69.2 min calculated for 0.406 of(96% of inflow) Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 48.00 275 0 0 50.00 1,196 1,471 1,471 52.00 2,569 3,765 5,236 54.00 4,394 6,963 12,199 54.10 5,602 500 12,699 56.00 7,305 12,262 24,960 Primary OutFlow Max=1.38 cfs @ 12.49 hrs HW=52.27' (Free Discharge) t1=Culvert (Passes 1.38 cfs of 9.73 cfs capacity) L2=Orifice/Grate (Controls 1.38 cfs) =Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 48.40' 15.0" x 80.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert=48.00' S= 0.0050 '/' n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 49.00' 5.5"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 54.50' 1.33'x 2.54' Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.670 2002-098 Charbonneau 10-Year Storm Type 111 24-hr Rainfall=4.70" Prepared by J.R. Russo & Associates Page 3 HydroCAD®6.10 s/n 002386 © 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems 11/11/2004 Subcatchment POST: POST Runoff = 7.49 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.518 af, Depth= 2.90" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type III 24-hr Rainfall=4.70" Area (ac) CN Description 1.590 98 Roofs & pavement 0.550 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2.140 83 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Pond 1 P: Pond Inflow Area = 2.140 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.90" Inflow = 7.49 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.518 of Outflow = 1.49 cfs @ 12.51 hrs, Volume= 0.501 af, Atten= 80%, Lag= 26.1 min Primary = 1.49 cfs @ 12.51 hrs, Volume= 0.501 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Peak Elev= 52.74' Surf.Area= 3,247 sf Storage= 7,822 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 71.3 min calculated for 0.501 of(97% of inflow) Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 48.00 275 0 0 50.00 1,196 1,471 1,471 52.00 2,569 3,765 5,236 54.00 4,394 6,963 12,199 54.10 5,602 500 12,699 56.00 7,305 12,262 24,960 Primary OutFlow Max=1.49 cfs @ 12.51 hrs HW=52.74' (Free Discharge) L1=Culvert (Passes 1.49 cfs of 10.47 cfs capacity) 2=Orifice/Grate (Controls 1.49 cfs) L3=Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 48.40' 15.0" x 80.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 48.00' S= 0.0050 '/' n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 49.00' 5.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 54.50' 1.33' x 2.54' Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.670 2002-098 Charbonneau 25-Year Storm Type /// 24-hr Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by J.R. Russo & Associates Page 4 HydroCAD®6.10 s/n 002386 © 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems 11/11/2004 Subcatchment POST: POST Runoff = 9.31 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.647 af, Depth= 3.63" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type III 24-hr Rainfall=5.50" Area (ac) CN Description 1.590 98 Roofs & pavement 0.550 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2.140 83 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Pond 1 P: Pond Inflow Area = 2.140 ac, Inflow Depth = 3.63" Inflow = 9.31 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.647 of Outflow = 1.63 cfs @ 12.53 hrs, Volume= 0.630 af, Atten= 83%, Lag= 27.5 min Primary = 1.63 cfs @ 12.53 hrs, Volume= 0.630 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Peak Elev= 53.41' Surf.Area= 3,860 sf Storage= 10,161 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 75.5 min calculated for 0.630 of(97% of inflow) Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 48.00 275 0 0 50.00 1,196 1,471 1,471 52.00 2,569 3,765 5,236 54.00 4,394 6,963 12,199 54.10 5,602 500 12,699 56.00 7,305 12,262 24,960 Primary OutFlow Max=1.63 cfs @ 12.53 hrs HW=53.41' (Free Discharge) L1=Culvert (Passes 1.63 cfs of 11.43 cfs capacity) AL. =Orifice/Grate (Controls 1.63 cfs) 3=Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 48.40' 15.0" x 80.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert=48.00' S= 0.0050 '/' n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 49.00' 5.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 54.50' 1.33'x 2.54' Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.670 2002-098 Charbonneau 50-Year Storm Type 111 24-hr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by J.R. Russo & Associates Page 5 HydroCADO 6.10 s/n 002386 © 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems 11/11/2004 Subcatchment POST: POST Runoff = 10.92 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.763 af, Depth= 4.28" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type III 24-hr Rainfall=6.20" Area (ac) CN Description 1.590 98 Roofs & pavement 0.550 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2.140 83 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Pond 1 P: Pond Inflow Area = 2.140 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.28" Inflow = 10.92 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.763 of Outflow = 1.74 cfs @ 12.55 hrs, Volume= 0.746 af, Atten= 84%, Lag= 28.6 min Primary = 1.74 cfs @ 12.55 hrs, Volume= 0.746 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Peak Elev= 54.02' Surf.Area= 4,631 sf Storage= 12,297 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 80.8 min calculated for 0.746 of(98% of inflow) Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 48.00 275 0 0 50.00 1,196 1,471 1,471 52.00 2,569 3,765 5,236 54.00 4,394 6,963 12,199 54.10 5,602 500 12,699 56.00 7,305 12,262 24,960 Primary OutFlow Max=1.74 cfs @ 12.55 hrs HW=54.02' (Free Discharge) L1=Culvert (Passes 1.74 cfs of 12.24 cfs capacity) L.2=Orifice/Grate (Controls 1.74 cfs) 3=Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 48.40' 15.0" x 80.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert=48.00' S= 0.0050 '/' n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 49.00' 5.5" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 54.50' 1.33' x 2.54' Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.670 2002-098 Charbonneau 100-Year Storm Type /// 24-hr Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by J.R. Russo & Associates Page 6 HydroCADO 6.10 s/n 002386 © 1986-2002 Applied Microcomputer Systems 11/11/2004 Subcatchment POST: POST Runoff = 12.52 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.880 af, Depth= 4.93" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Type III 24-hr Rainfall=6.90" Area (ac) CN Description 1.590 98 Roofs & pavement 0.550 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 2.140 83 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Pond 1 P: Pond Inflow Area = 2.140 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.93" Inflow = 12.52 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.880 of Outflow = 1.80 cfs @ 12.57 hrs, Volume= 0.863 af, Atten= 86%, Lag= 29.9 min Primary = 1.80 cfs @ 12.57 hrs, Volume= 0.863 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 1.00-30.01 hrs, dt= 0.03 hrs Peak Elev= 54.39' Surf.Area= 5,859 sf Storage= 14,548 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 87.1 min calculated for 0.863 of(98% of inflow) Storage and wetted areas determined by Prismatic sections Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 48.00 275 0 0 50.00 1,196 1,471 1,471 52.00 2,569 3,765 5,236 54.00 4,394 6,963 12,199 54.10 5,602 500 12,699 56.00 7,305 12,262 24,960 Primary OutFlow Max=1.80 cfs @ 12.57 hrs HW=54.39' (Free Discharge) L1=Culvert (Passes 1.80 cfs of 12.70 cfs capacity) L2=Orifice/Grate (Controls 1.80 cfs) 3=Orifice/Grate (Controls 0.00 cfs) # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 48.40' 15.0" x 80.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert=48.00' S= 0.0050 '/' n= 0.012 Cc= 0.900 2 Device 1 49.00' 5.5"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 3 Device 1 54.50' 1.33' x 2.54' Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.670 •,��, 3 r ff tk„6-'k.$/f { r iWl t, �li '� T✓ � ' ll "Illt 3 At, �\ '�• � ��`�'� )`Z s�dr kowl 1r / 6��y',C4lF._1 !� Yf WT f zft P t`3 .../ --0 1k V t t`` .; -` i f +a a S_ K�°•v ,,,. s ZUJ7 ` lo �s >F�` —•a t{ 9 �.� ,� '^J ti• r�4 r.�`.J sa(�,�^.n ��,t � W z 't ..r i RA gji r � ♦ j � � Fes, t.. � . \\�,g3�e �u,�JY �F .?n tiY 4 � � o � �i L _'4�sgk4�F��+�. �3e> � t � ,$�n* >`f r :T,t C ems•>;� j •a ze,~� ;> . sk4,��a^ R�^v>*'e��-�-. �^a �� ,. ® -t +.,7.•;v,."s ig ��� 4 S: '. tt{/+v r/l16 \ - 1i' v9 �' s'""N - . j7 fkj L z �=-�� �-.) i'. �� �4i ;y �[4 y" �eq'�•,p3�/t' ^y. �] /y,r! �. a y4 '"�-` �� [ is-.�•�a- � �. vi.yvv�. tk,�•_tit N AM 9��� .,� �It�� �, �'w f E�y:brit� `"4� _ � '�,r;t� �,,,• {"l" t +<.F ,.,� .>,• - a �`>n � � �,�`•_ v 1 J - xt .�- yr�a��� - �,r�afi--• 'F���T.,.e. 6.13-8 Hydrology RAINFALL INTENSITY in/hr DURATION DURATION 2 Yr 5 Yr 10 Yr 25 Yr 50 Yr 100 Yr min 5 0.08 4.6 5.5 6.0 6.7 7.3 7.8 6 I 0.10 I 4.4 I 5.2 5.8 6.5 I 7.0 7.5 7 I 0.12 I 4.2 I 5.0 5.5 I 6.2 I 6.8 7.2 8 I 0.13 I 4.0 I 4.8 I 5.3 I 6.0 I 6.5 I 7.0 9 0.15 I 3.8 4.6 5.1 5.7 � 6.2 6.7 10 0.17 3.6 4.3 4.8 5.5 6.0 6.5 11 0.18 I 3.4 4.2 4.7 5.3 5.8 6.3 12 0.20 I 3.3 4.0 4.5 5.1 5.6 I 6.1 13 I 0.22 I 3.1 I 3.8 I 4.3 I 5.0 5.4 5.9 14 I 0.23 I 3.0 I 3.7 I 4.2 I 4.8 ( 5.3 I 5.7 15 I 0.25 I 2.8 I 3.5 I 4.0 4.6 5.1 I 5.5 16 I 0.27 I 2.8 I 3.5 I 3.9 I 4.5 5.0 I 5.4 17 I 0.28 I 2.7 I 3.4 ( 3.8 I 4.4 4.9 I 5.4 18 I 0.30 I 2.7 I 3.3 I 3.8 I 4.4 4.8 I 5.3 19 I 0.32 2.6 I 3.2 I 3.7 I 4.3 I 4.7 I 5.2 �- 20 I 0.33 2.5 I 3.2 3.6 I 4.2 I 4.6 I 5.1 21 I 0.35 2.5 I 3.1 I 3.5 I 4.1 I 4.5 I 5.0 22 0.37 I 2.4 3.0 I 3.4 4.0 4.4 I 4.9 23 0.38 I 2.3 2.9 I 3.4 3.9 4.3 I 4.8 24 I 0.40 I 2.3 2.9 I 3.3 3.8 4.2 I 4.7 25 I 0.42 I 2.2 2.8 3.2 I 3.7 I 4.2 4.6 26 I 0.43 I 2.2 I 2.7 I 3.1 I 3.7 I 4.1 I 4.5 27 0.45 I 2.1 I 2.7 I 3.0 I 3.6 I 4.0 I 4.4 28 0.47 I 2.0 I 2.6 ( 3.0 I 3.5 3.9 ( 4.3 29 I 0.48 I 2.0 I 2.5 2.9 3.4 3.8 4.2 30 0.50 1.9 2.4 2.8 3.3 3.7 4.1 Rainfall Intensity/Duration/Frequency Relationship for Connecticut(English Units) Table B-2.1 ConnDOT Drainage Manual October 2000 New Industrial Building on Rear Portion of 1249 John Fitch Blvd. PIPE SIZING CHART (25 year storm) Area Area % C' AxC i252 Q25 Pipe Geometry No. Desc. (acres) Imp. Inc. Accum. (in/hr) (cfs) Dia. (in) Slope (%) Vel.3(fps) Qfu11 3(cfs) 1 C13#1 0.22 79 0.75 0.17 0.17 6.7 1.1 15 0.58 3.4 5.3 2 C13#2 0.22 80 0.76 0.17 0.33 6.7 2.2 15 0.53 4.0 5.1 3 CB#3 0.20 87 0.81 0.16 0.49 6.7 3.3 15 0.50 4.3 4.9 4 C13#4 0.13 94 0.86 0.11 0.61 6.7 4.1 15 0.60 4.9 5.4 5 C13#5 0.05 74 0.72 0.04 0.64 6.7 4.3 15 0.60 4.9 5.4 6 C13#6 0.16 100 0.90 0.14 0.79 6.7 5.3 15 0.67 5.3 5.7 7 C13#7 0.17 100 0.90 0.15 0.94 6.7 6.3 15 1.00 6.4 7.0 8 Roof 0.58 100 0.90 0.52 0.52 6.7 3.5 12 1.50 6.6 4.7 9 Pond 0.41 0 0.20 0.08 0.08 6.7 0.5 Notes: 1. Runoff coefficients assume 0.9 for impervious areas and 0.2 for lawn and landscaped areas 2. Rainfall intensity taken from DOT Drainage Manual for assumed 5 minute time of concentration 3. Pipe velocity and full flow capacity calculated by Manning's formula with an 'n'value of 0.012 11/11/04 Page 1 of 1 it ' 1249 John Fitch Boulevard (Rear) channel calculator Given Input Data: shape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trapezoidal solving for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Depth of Flow Flowrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56.0000 cfs slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0100 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0400 Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0000 ft Bottom width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0000 ft Left slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.5000 ft/ft (v/H) Right slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 5000 ft/ft (v/H) computed Results: Depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6081 ft velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1164 fps Full Flowrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81.3434 cfs Flow area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.6042 ft2 Flow perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6637 ft Hydraulic radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1664 ft Top width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4323 ft Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.0000 ft2 Perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.4164 ft Percent full . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86.9360 critical Information critical depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1755 ft critical slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0263 ft/ft critical velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.9159 fps critical area 9.4660 ft2 critical perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.7293 ft critical hydraulic radius . . . . . . . 0.9729 ft critical top width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.7022 ft specific energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.8714 ft Minimum energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2633 ft Froude number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6355 Flow condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . subcritical Page 1 of 1 Culverts 8.7-3 8.7.5 Apron Dimensions Len2th The length of an apron(La) is determined using the following empirical relationships(Equations 8.9 and 8.10) that were developed for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(1976) and modified by ConnDOT for use in Connecticut. Tables 8-6 and 8-7 show the various lengths of Type A, B and C riprap aprons based on discharge and pipe size. The tables also show the minimum and maximum lengths of aprons to be computed using Equations 8.9 and 8.10. When the table indicates that the required apron length would exceed the maximum shown, a preformed scour hole should be used in lieu of the riprap apron. As previously stated, the design of a preformed scour hole is presented in Section 8.7.6. Type A Riprap Apron Minimum Tailwater Condition) TW< 0.5 Rp LQ — 3.26(Q j 0.142)+3.05 ( La = 1.80(QS 5) +10 ) (8.9) SP SP 1. Type B Apron(Maximum Tailwater Condition) TW> 0.5 Rp L = SP 5.44(Q—0.142)+3.05 ( L — 3'aQ—5)+10 ) (8.10) L. 1.5 a - SP 1.5 Type C Riprap Apron - The length of a Type C Riprap Apron shall be determined using the formula for a Type B Riprap Apron. La = length of apron,m(ft) Sp =. inside diameter for circular.sections or maximum inside pipe span for non-circular sections, m(ft) Q = pipe(design)discharge,cros(cfs) TW = tailwater depth, m(ft) Rp = maximum inside pipe rise,m(ft) Note: Sp=Rp = inside diameter for circular sections Width For Type A or B Riprap Aprons, when there is no well defined channel downstream of the apron, the width of the apron at the pipe outlet, WI, should be at least three times the maximum inside pipe span and the width, W2 of the outlet end of the apron,as shown in Figure 8-9, should be as follows: Type A Riprap Apron(Minimum Tailwater Condition) Wl= 3Sp(min.) W2=3Sp+0.7La for TW < 0.5 Rp (8.11) October 2000 ConnDOT Drainage Manual 8.7-4 Culverts and Type B ftrap Apron(Maximum Tailwater Condition) Wl = 3Sp(min.) W2 = 3Sp+0ALa for TW > 0.5 Rp (8.12) Wl = width of apron at pipe outlet or upstream apron limit W2 = width of apron at terminus or downstream apron limit Type C Riprap Apron For a Type C Riprap Apron when there is a well defined channel downstream of the outlet, the bottom width of the apron should be at least equal to the bottom width of the channel and the lining should extend on the channel side slopes at least 0.3m (1 fl) above the tailwater depth (TW) or at least two-thirds of the vertical conduit dimension(0.7 Rp) above the invert, whichever is greater. (In all cases,the overall width of the apron shall be a minimum of 3Sp). See Figure 8-10. Additional guidelines: • The type of apron to be used and length should be called out on the construction plans. • The side slopes of the Type C riprap apron should be 211:1 V or flatter. • The bottom grade should be level or minimum slope, where practical, for energy dissipation. Where the use of a flat apron is impractical,a preformed scour hole should be considered. • laced between the riprap and the underlying soil to prevent soil Granular fill shall be p p p ymg movement into and through the riprap. Additionally, an appropriately sized geotextile (separation) can be used when field conditions dictate as determined by the engineer. • The location of outlets and outlet protection should be carefully considered to minimize rights- of-way and wetland impacts. 8.7.6 Preformed Scour Hole The preformed scour hole is an excavated hole or depression which is lined with rock riprap of a stable size to prevent scouring. The depression (F) provides both vertical and lateral expansion downstream of the culvert outlet to permit dissipation of excessive energy and turbulence. Equations 8.13 and 8.14 are used to determine the median stone size (d50)required for the lining of the two types of preformed scour holes presented below. The first type, Type 1, represented by Equation 8.13, is depressed one-half the pipe rise and the second type, Type 2, represented by Equation 8.14,is depressed the full pipe rise. A significant reduction in stone size is achieved by the excavation. Therefore, the scour hole depressed the full pipe rise would require a smaller stone size, however the dimensions of the hole would be larger. The type that provides the most economical and practical design given the site conditions should be selected. The dimensions of a preformed scour hole are determined by the set of Equations 8.15 and Figure 8-11. ConnDOT Drainage Manual October 2000 Culverts 8.7-5 Empirical Preformed Scour Hole Equations: Type 1: Scour Hole Depression= one-half pipe rise, m(ft) d50= (0.0276 RP2/TW)(Q/RP2.5)1333 ( d50=(0.0125RP/TW)(Q/RP2)1.333 ) (8.13) Type 2: Scour Hole Depression= full pipe rise,m(ft) d50= (0.0181 RP2/TW)(Q/RP2.5)1.333 (d5o=(0.0082Rp2/TW)(QW.5)1.333) (8.14) d5o=median stone size required, m(ft) For variables Sp, RP,TW and Q, see Section 8.7.5. Type 1 and 2 preformed scour hole dimensions(See Figure 8-11) C =3SP+6F Basin Length m(ft) B=2SP+6F Basin Inlet and Outlet Width m(ft) (8.15) F =0.5RP(Type 1)or RP(Type 2) Basin Depression m(ft) Table 8-8 solves the above set of equations for Type 1 and 2 preformed scour holes for various pipe sizes. The type of riprap required is as follows: Modified d50<0.13m(0.42 ft) Intermediate 0.13m(0.42 ft)<d5o<0.20m 0.67 ft Standard 0.20m 0.67 ft <d5o<0.38m 1.25 ft Special Design 0.38m(1.25 ft)<d5o Reference: Report No. FHWA-RD-75-508 ("Culvert Outlet Protection Design: Computer Program Documentation") October 2000 ConnDOT Drainage Manual a . Culverts 8.7-7 OUTLET PROTECTION-OUTLET VELOCITY<14 feetlsec OUTLET PIPE DIAMETER OR SPAN(in) DISCHARGE 12 15 18 24 30 1 36 42 48 54 60 cfs 0-5 10 10 USEY; 6 12 11 7 13 12 8 14 13 12 MINIMUM 9 14 13 10 15 13 11 16 14 LENGTH 12 14 F 14 16 14 16 17 15 14 OUTLINED 18 18 16 15 20 17 15 14 22 18 16 15 24 17 15 14 26 17 16 15 28 18 16 15 v J 30 19 17 16 �J 35 20 18 17 16 40 f 20 18 17 16 45 21 19 18 16 50 22 20 18 17 55 21 19 18 60 22 20 19 65 24 21 20 .70 25 22 1 20 75 26 23 21 80 24 22 90 26 24 100 28 25 110 27 125 29 130 30 Table 8-6.1- Length-La(feet) Type A Riprap Apron Notes: 1. Bold face outlined boxes indicate minimum La to be used for a given pipe diameter or span. 2.Rounding and interpolating are acceptable. October 2000 ConnDOT Drainage Manual t Y t Culverts 8.7-11 } OUTLET PROTECTION OUTLET VELOCITY>14 feet/sec or Length of Apron exceeds limits shown on Tables 8-6.1 and 8-7.1 Preformed Scour Hole PIPE DIAMETER in (See Figure 8-11) 12 1 15 1 18 1 24 30 36 1 42 48 54 60 Type 1 B 5 6 8 10 13 fl 5 18 20 23 25 C 6 8 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 d Depends on riprap type(see Figure 8-11) 2SP 2.0 2.6 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 3SP 3.0 3.9 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 F=0.5 Sp 0.5 10.6251 0.75 1 1 1 1.25 k 1.5 1.75 1 2 2.25 2.5 Y Type 2 B 8 10 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 C 9 11 14 18 23 27 32 36 41 45 d Depends on riprap size(see Figure 8-11) 2SP 2.0 2.6 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 3SP 3.0 3.9 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 F=SP 1.0 1.3 1.5 2.0 1 2.5 1 3.0 1 3.5 1 4.0 4.5 5.0 Table 8-8.1-Dimensions of Preformed Scour Hole(Feet) October 2000 ConnDOT Drainage Manual A0*N a e -0-aAn O-P SotdA ?&U&ot s � 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 soR.CO TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511 Date: November 23, 2004 To: J.R. Russo &Associates 1 Shoham Road East Windsor, CT 06088 From: Jeffrey H. Folger Environmental Planner Town of South Windsor Re: Appl#04-83P -Review of John Fitch Partnership site plan, 1249 & 1265 John Fitch Blvd. - Plans dated 11/15/04. I have reviewed the site plans for the proposed John Fitch Partnership site plan with the following initial comments: 1. Please provide test pit information to determine if roof runoff can be successfully infiltrated. 2. Maximize infiltration on the site. 3. Details of the proposed detention basin must be shown, including a planting plan, and soil amendments. 4. A stormwater inspection and maintenance plan should be included on the plan. Currently, there is nothing on the plan that addresses post construction stormwater structures. 5. Perimeter plantings should include more low growing habitat shrubs. 6. The area designated for the topsoil stockpile appears to be slated to be cleared of vegetation just to accommodate the stockpile. This area should be undisturbed and accommodations for the stockpile should be made elsewhere. 7. The proposed catchbasins should have 4-foot sumps for maximum storage of sediments and be equipped with trap-hoods to contain floatables. The detail for trap-hoods shown on the plan should be altered to state the all catchbasins will be equipped with trap-hoods. 8. The construction narrative should include the detention/water quality basin. This should occur prior to construction of the building. cc. Town Engineer Town Planner IWA/CC MEMORANDUM To: South Windsor Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission. From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Date: December 1, 2004 Re: Review of the proposed John Fitch Partnership site plan at 1249-1265 John Fitch Blvd. Plans dated 11/15/04 The project is to create a 25,000-sgft industrial building on the rear portion of an existing lot. Stormwater is proposed to be discharged into a water quality/detention basin, which will empty into a small watercourse area south of the property. Proposed activity within regulated areas equal 400 sgft,proposed activity within the URA equal 60,000 sgft. Site: The site is located in the Stoughton Brook watershed. The site is comprised ed of a lot g p totaling 9.4 acres. Currently the site has a 14,000-sgft building and parking lot located in the eastern 115 of the site. The western portion of the site is mixed hardwood forest with both mature and pole-sized trees on the site. A small portion of this area has been cleared of brush and small trees approximately two years ago. Sapling regeneration is occurring in this area at the present. A north/south watercourse divides the site into two portions with 80% of the property in the western portion. The watercourse merges with a larger watercourse in the southern portion of the property and flows west adjacent to the southern property boundary. Proposed impervious coverage is estimated at 27.9%. Regulated areas on the site consist of the watercourse that flows through the property and borders it on the south and a small wetland area in the northwest portion of the property. The watercourse originates from drainage(detention swale and catchbasins) of the property to the north and exits from a pipe and culvert to an open channel. The portion of the channel where the disturbance is proposed consists of a riprapped channel exiting the culvert to the northwest and a dug channel to the east. These merge to form a larger channel oriented north-south that bisects the site. This channel empties into the larger perennial watercourse to the south. This watercourse heads west and merges with other watercourses to form the Main channel of Stoughton Brook prior to it's merging with Bancroft Brook east of Main Street. The channel is within a large gully, which serves as a wildlife corridor. The watercourse portion that is proposed to be piped is of low functional value, with the primary function being stormwater conveyance, and sediment trapping. As the watercourse heads to the south, the functional values increase to include wildlife habitat due to the dense shrub growth on the banks. The larger watercourse to the south has higher habitat value due to the continuity of the gully. This area remains relatively undisturbed from either the residential development to the west or the industrial development to the east. The gully has a significant amount of debris from the industrial development. The watercourse channel in the disturbed area is approximately 1-foot wide and less than 3 inches deep, with evidence of prior disturbance. It widens somewhat as it flows to the south, and merges with the larger stream. The meandering watercourse channel is 2-4 feet wide and less than 6 inches deep. There is a well-defined floodplain associated with this watercourse. The sandy soil erodes easily and creates a significant sediment load along the stream channel. The second regulated area on the property is a small wetland that appears to be man- made. Piles of excavated soil are present around the perimeter of this area. The soil in this area is saturated near the surface, with ponding only during storm events and with frost present. It would be classified as a wooded wetland type with sweet pepperbush as the dominant plant species. The small size of this area and lack of diverse vegetation limits the functional value of this wetland. The main function of this wetland would be ground water recharge, although there is a very small drainage area associated with it. Detention is not planned with the construction of a detention/water quality basin. Impacts: The soils listed on the site report are Ninagret(NnA) 0 to 3% slope and Walpole(WdA) 0 to 3% slopes. Perimeter erosion controls appear to be adequate to contain sediments from construction activities. Interior and slope controls will have to be added to insure proper and swift vegetative establishment. Stormwater quality management in the long term is proposed to be handled by the construction of a wet-bottomed basin, deep sumps on catchbasins, and traphoods. The proposed structures should adequately address anticipated water quality and quantity issues. Mitigation: No mitigation has been proposed for the wetland disturbances. J.R. RUSSO & ASSOCIATES Land Surveyors &Professional Engineers REGEN ED December 14, 2004 DEC 14 2004 South Windsor Inland Wetlands LANDAGENCY INLAND W E-' iD Attn. Jeff Folger CoNSERVA00N COMMISS10N 1340 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Revised Site Plans Appl# 04-83P 1249 & 1265 John Fitch Boulevard Dear Jeff: Attached please find four (4) revised sets of the Site Plans for the above referenced project prepared by J.R. Russo &Associates on behalf of the John Fitch Partnership. The revisions have been made to address the comments issued in your review letter dated November 23, 2004. Each of your comments is addressed below: • Items 1 and 2—A series of Stormtech Chambers have been added to the drainage system for the purpose of infiltration of roof runoff. The infiltration system includes 23 chambers which have a storage capacity of approximately 1,056 cubic feet which is the equivalent of%" of roof runoff. According to the USGS Soil Survey, the soils in the vicinity of the proposed infiltration system are Ninigret soils. The characteristics of these soils appear to be suitable for infiltration, although a seasonal high water table may preclude infiltration at certain times of the year. The Plan calls for the contractor to perform a test pit in the vicinity of the proposed infiltration system to confirm that the soils are suitable for proposed infiltration system. • Item 3 —The landscape plan has been revised to provide additional detail of the plantings and soil amendments proposed for the stormwater management basin. A sediment forebay spillway detail is provided on sheet 8 of 8. • Item 4 —An inspection and maintenance schedule for the site has been added to sheet 3 of 8 of the plan set. • Item 5 —The landscape plan has been modified to provide more low growing shrubs around the perimeter. • Item 6 —The topsoil stockpile area has been relocated to eliminate the need for clearing near the northwest corner of the site. 1 Shoham Road • East Windsor, CT 06088 • TEL: (860) 623-0569 • FAX: (860) 623-2485 Page 2 of 2 ' December 14,2004 • Item 7 — The catch basin detail has been modified to show that four (4) foot sumps are required in each catch basin. In addition, per your letter and our subsequent phone conversation, the trap hood detail has been modified to note that hoods are required in the last two catch basins in the series (CB's 6 &7). • Item 8 — The construction of the stormwater management basin prior to the construction of the building has been added to the construction sequence on sheet 6 of 8. If there are any questions, or you require further information, please call our office at (860) 623- 0569. Sincerely, t Timothy . Coon, P.E. J.R. Russo &Associates Attachments 2002-0098 Revision 12-14-04.doc 1249& 1265 John Fitch Blvd. r' �SowM sf� � v � n 0 �• 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE• SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 SOR•CO TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511 December 23, 2004 Certified #70020460000197443906 J. R. Russo&Associates 1 Shoeham Road East Windsor, CT 06088 RE: Appl. #04-83W—John Fitch Partnership, easterly of Nevers Road and southerly of Miller Road, AA-30 Residential zone Dear Mr. Ursery: At the December 15, 2004 regular meeting, the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission approved application #04-83W—John Fitch Partnership— 1249-1265 John Fitch Blvd. — Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission application for regulated activities in connection with the construction of a 25,000 sq. ft. Industrial building, parking, stormwater system, and associated improvements on property located westerly of John Fitch Blvd. (Rte. 5). I-Industrial zone. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. One blueprint copy of the entire set of plans and this letter reproduced thereon, must be submitted to this Commission. This must be completed within 65 days of approval prior to any construction activity on the site. Plans submitted to Planning &Zoning Commission shall be considered having met this requirement. 2. The application shall indemnify and hold harmless the Town of South Windsor against any liability, which might result from the proposed operation or use. 3. The permit is valid for five years and shall expire on December 15, 2009. It is the landowner(s)/applicant(s) responsibility to track expiration dates and notify the Commission of a renewal request at least 65 days prior to expiration. 4. All approvals required must be obtained and submitted prior to any activity on the site. 5. A contact person shall be identified on the plans. 6. All debris and solid waste should be removed from the property. 7. Field location of the outlet structure for the detention basin should be approved by Town staff. John Fitch Partnership December 23, 2004 Page 2 8. Establishment of a conservation easement along the limit of clearing on the western side of the property, eastern limit of clearing and around the detention basin. 9. The drainage area associated with the watercourse to the south should be monitored on an annual basis. Any solid waste that surfaces should be removed. 10. We recommend a bond in the amount of$15,000 be submitted to the Planning &Zoning Commission to ensure compliance with the erosion and sediment control measures. 11. We recommend a bond in the amount of$10,000 be submitted to the Planning &Zoning Commission to ensure the establishment of the detention basin and biofilter structure. Very truly yours, INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY/ CONSERVATION COMMISSION Elizabeth A. Warren, Chairperson EW:dr cc: Chief Building Official SpW N SfT-0� O-P S-0� ?()&U&Ot C :J a 5 ,t 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 APR G °SOR•CO TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511 nl/�H Ir��p��jr�,l'1 Fr�ifri� t7�-n April 20, 2005 John Fitch Partners, LLC&Andre L. Charbonneau Attn:Andre Charbonneau 125 Edwin Road South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: 1249 John Fitch Blvd. South Windsor, CT Dear Mr. Charbonneau: The South Windsor Water Pollution Control Authority, at its special meeting of April 12, 2005, gave approval,for the connection to the Town's sewerage system for a proposed commercial building at 1249 John Fitch Boulevard, South Windsor, CT as more specifically shown on plans entitled "John Fitch Partners, LLC & Andre L. Charbonneau, 1249 & 1269 John Fitch Blvd., South Windsor, Connecticut", Prepared by J.R. Russo&Associates, East Windsor, CT: Drawing No. 3/9, Dated 11/15/04, with revision dated 12/10/04, 2115/05, 2/21/05, with the understanding that any change in the project, other than originally presented, must be brought back to the Authority for further approval; and subject to the following conditions: 1. .An external electrical outlet be provided for the connection of an auxiliary power generator in the event of a commercial power outage. 2. Technical approval of the Town Engineering Department. 3. Final Authority approval and acceptance of the sanitary sewerage connection will be given once the sewer line has been installed and inspected by the Town staff, and based upon the written verification of the Town staff that said sanitary sewer line was installed in substantial conformance with the design plans previously approved by the Authority, and meeting all Town regulations and appropriate technical specifications relating to sanitary sewer construction. .This approval letter must be superimposed on the final approval plans. Very truly yours, JaXeph J. Carino, Chairman Water Pollution Control Authority JC:ead Cc: Matthew Galligan,Town Manager Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works Jeff Doolittle,Town Engineer Marcia Banach, Director of Planning Chris Dougan, Chief Building Inspector J. R. Russo&Associates