Fossil House Final Drainage Report.pdf

FOSSIL HOUSE ROAD

FINAL HYDRAULICS REPORT

NV FLAP 200(1)

December 2019

Prepared for:

Federal Highway Administration Central Federal Lands Highway Division 12300 W Dakota Avenue Lakewood, CO 80228

Prepared by:

Muller Engineering Company 777 South Wadsworth Boulevard Suite 4-100 Lakewood, Colorado 80226 303.988.4939

Central Federal Lands Project ID: NV FLAP 300 Muller Project Number: 15-044.02

Central Federal Lands Highway Division Fossil House Road December 2019 Final Hydraulics Report

Table of Contents Page i

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Location

1.2 Project Background and Objectives

1.3 Design Criteria

2 EXISTING CONDITIONS

2.1 General

2.2 Design Intent

2.3 Hydrologic Analysis

3 HYDRAULIC DESIGN

3.1 General

3.2 Fossil House Road

3.3 Union Canyon Road

4 CONCLUSIONS

5 REFERENCES

APPENDICES

Appendices

A. Design Criteria

B. Photographs (from September 2015)

C. Drainage Basin Map Maps & Information NOAA Rainfall Data Hydrology Calculations

D. Proposed Hydraulics

December 2019 Final Hydraulics Report

Introduction

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Location

This project is in the Berlin Ichthyosaur State Park, which lies in the Humboldt Toiyabe National Forest, in Nye County, Nevada. The project will make improvements to both Union Canyon Road (FS 024) and the roadway leading up to Fossil House (Fossil House Road). Refer to the project Location Maps below.

Location Maps

December 2019 Final Hydraulics Report

Introduction

1.2 Project Background and Objectives

Improvements along Union Canyon Road will be spot improvements over a distance of 0.8 miles at four existing low water crossings. One additional location was analyzed for a potential new low water crossing.

There are two locations (Site 1 and 4) where the stream adjacent to the roadway is beginning to encroach and undercut the roadway. These areas will be stabilized, and the channel will be realigned with an armored embankment.

Fossil House Road is a 0.21 mile long segment of narrow gravel roadway with limited sight distance. It was recommended that the entire segment be widened to 18 feet to allow for two vehicles to pass, and a small ditch to catch runoff will be added to the uphill side of the roadway. The existing roadway lies on a narrow bench adjacent to steep cut and fill slopes. In order to accommodate a widened section, a retaining wall will be added to a portion of the roadway, on the downhill side.

The purpose of this hydraulics recommendations report is to present an analysis of the existing drainage patterns and provide a design that minimizes roadway erosion.

1.3 Design Criteria

The drainage design for the proposed roadway improvements is based on the historic drainage patterns, contributing basin peak flows, and the technical criteria outlined in the Federal Highway Administration/Central Federal Lands Project Development and Design Manual. These criteria are summarized in Appendix A. In general, low water crossings will be designed to provide similar flow geometry as the upstream and downstream channel and will be sized to accommodate flows from a 10-year storm event with 1 foot of depth. Low water crossings will also be designed in order to better protect the roadway, and to provide better drivability. Nye County, Nevada does not have applicable drainage design criteria, so the drainage design is based on the CFL Design Manual.

December 2019 Final Hydraulics Report

Existing Conditions

2 EXISTING CONDITIONS

2.1 General

2.1.1 Fossil House Road

Both cut and fill slopes along the existing Fossil House Road are very steep (>1V:2H), and the existing parking area currently drains towards the road, which causes erosion concerns. At the back of the existing building, existing grades slope towards the building. There are also several trees and rock outcroppings directly adjacent to the narrow roadway that make it difficult for two vehicles to pass. At approximately the mid-point of Fossil House Road, there is an existing gully draining from the south/southeast that crosses over the roadway, which will be improved as part of this project. Near the parking area there is an existing pipe of unconfirmed size and material that daylights on the existing roadway embankment at approximately STA 12+70. At the base of Fossil House Road there is an existing low water crossing with gabion walls on both sides of the roadway.

2.1.2 Union Canyon Road

The main canyon drainageway, which collects drainage from a large (3.5 square miles) watershed area, runs adjacent to the existing Union Canyon Road. The drainageway and its tributaries cross over the existing roadway several times. Soils and ground cover information can be found with the Hydrology calculations located in Appendix C. Due to the remote nature of the project site, none of the drainage areas are mapped as a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplains. Project improvements will be evaluated for the following sites:

Site 1:

Site 1 is on the farthest west end of the project. The main Union Canyon drainageway runs adjacent to the roadway to the south. The drainageway is directed by a rock outcropping onto the roadway and then back off on the same side of the road. There are no existing roadway protections in place.

Site 2 and 3:

Union Canyon Road currently intersects the main Union Canyon drainageway with concrete surface low water crossings at Site 2 and Site 3. Both locations have an existing gabion walls on both sides of the low water crossings and have experienced up to 5 feet of head cutting.

Site 2:

The upstream end of the channel is 2 feet higher than the low water crossing elevation and downstream channel invert.

Site 3:

Drivability at this location is the worst within the project limits. Currently, the crossing needs to be filled to allow concrete trucks and other heavy equipment to pass.

December 2019 Final Hydraulics Report

Existing Conditions

Site 4 and 5:

There are two additional unimproved low water crossings where Union Canyon Road intersects tributaries that drain towards the main Union Canyon drainage way. Several areas at Site 4 and 5 have the banks of the main drainage way directly adjacent to Union Canyon Road.

Site 5:

Significant signs of undercutting are present at Site 5. Up to 6’ of erosion has been observed adjacent to an existing gabion wall that protects the roadway. These areas were evaluated for improvements.

2.2 Design Intent

A scoping visit in September 2015 identified the existing drainage issues at the sites listed in the previous section. Identified improvements to the selected locations are detailed below. See Appendix B for site photos from the scoping visit.

2.2.1 Fossil House Road Improvements

Improvements to Fossil House Road will maintain existing drainage patterns along roadway. The proposed roadway will be widened and will include a small roadside ditch on the uphill side of the roadway for the top half of the road. This ditch will convey runoff from the parking area and roadway. A proposed culvert will be located midway along Fossil House Road and will convey runoff from an existing gully, across the road, while also conveying runoff from the proposed roadside ditch. The area behind Fossil House should be graded to drain to the existing gully to limit erosion to the slope between Fossil House and the roadway.

A gabion wall will be installed at an apparent low water crossing on Fossil House Road near the Ranger Station.

2.2.2 Union Canyon Road Improvements

Existing low water crossings will be evaluated hydraulically and replaced to improve performance at Site 2 through Site 5. Erosion will be evaluated at Site 1, 4, and 5, where the main Union Canyon drainageway is directly adjacent to the road. The drainageway at Site 4 and 5 will be pushed back 2 ft from the edge of road, while maintaining the existing width of the channel to prevent embankment erosion.

Please see Section 3 Preliminary Design for a more detailed description of the proposed improvements.

2.3 Hydrologic Analysis

A hydrologic analysis was conducted for each of the drainage basins that impacts either Union Canyon Road or Fossil House Road. The drainage basin for each design point was delineated, and hydrologic calculations were tabulated. See Appendix C for a drainage basin map with contours and basin delineations. Based on drainage area size, either the Rational Method or SCS Unit Hydrograph methodology within HEC-HMS was used to determine the peak flows during 2-year, 5-year, 10-year, 25-year, 50-year, and 100-year storm events. Appendix C identifies which hydrologic method was used for each design point in the hydrology summary and contains the supporting hydrology calculations.

December 2019 Final Hydraulics Report

Hydraulic Design

3 HYDRAULIC DESIGN

3.1 General

Runoff will be conveyed through the project area via surface flow, ditches, culverts, and low water crossings. The general design of drainage improvements consists of the following:

• Widen and add a small roadside ditch on the uphill side of Fossil House Road to collect roadway drainage to the proposed culvert. This ditch will only be along the top half of the road length.

• Re-grading of the large pad behind the Fossil House building to direct drainage into the existing gully rather than towards the steep hillside.

• Addition of a new 48” HDPE where an existing gully crosses Fossil House Road.

• Upgraded low water crossing locations to improve drivability and durability.

• Protection of roadway embankment in select locations.

3.2 Fossil House Road

3.2.1 Ditch

Fossil House Road will be widened to 18 feet and will be graded to drain towards a new minor roadside ditch on the uphill side of the road to the proposed culvert at STA 15+70. The proposed ditch and roadway grade in this area reaches 8%, with velocities up to 6 ft/s. Permanent check dams will be installed to mitigate erosion in the ditch. Refer to the Appendix D, FlowMaster calculations for more information on the proposed ditch.

As Fossil House Road continues downstream of the culvert crossing, the roadway will be super elevated left to allow runoff to sheet flow over the roadway to the main Union Canyon drainageway. This design maintains the existing condition, and there are no known existing drainage issues.

There is an apparent existing low water crossing at approximately STA 20+55, with gabion walls on both sides of the roadway. With the roadway widening at this location, a gabion wall is proposed on the downstream side of the roadway (Lt.). Existing gabions will remain in place. The existing roadside ditch on the downhill side of the road will be re-conditioned after the roadway widening.

3.2.2 Culvert

One new culvert is proposed along Fossil House Road. The pad behind the existing Fossil House structure will be re-graded and will drain to the existing gully to the northeast. This gully currently drains to the north/northwest and overtops Fossil House Road near its mid-point (STA 15+70). A new 48” HDPE culvert with toe wall is proposed at this location (STA 15+70), which is designed to have a 25-year capacity and then upsized by one nominal size to mitigate sedimentation. Riprap outlet protection will be installed per the typical riprap apron standard detail. Proposed culvert hydraulics calculations and a drainage summary can be found in Appendix D.

The small 6” plastic pipe at approximately STA. 12+67 will be extended and its vertical alignment modified with elbows to daylight underneath the proposed solider pile wall. The size, material and location of the existing pipe will need to be confirmed prior to construction. It is anticipated that the proposed alignment

December 2019 Final Hydraulics Report

Hydraulic Design of the pipe will need to be adjusted in the field. Because of the small diameter of the pipe, no outlet protection was designed at this outfall.

3.3 Union Canyon Road

3.3.1 Low Water Crossings and Roadway Embankment Protection

Site 1: Proposed Low Water Crossing One new low water crossing (Site 1) is proposed near the west end of the project, where the roadway and drainage path are tightly constrained against an outcropping. This area will be designed similar to the other low water crossings, but instead of conveying water directly across the roadway, water will spill onto the roadway at the constrained area and continue along the roadway and back into the channel on the same side of the road. The roadway will be protected with a concrete pad, concrete barrier, gabion wall, and revet mattress armoring in order to accommodate these flow conditions and will be graded to direct water back towards the channel. Refer to Appendix D, FlowMaster Calculations for spread and depth calculations.

Site 2 – 5: Improved Existing Low Water Crossings The four existing low water crossings (Site 2-5) along Union Canyon Road will be rebuilt with a concrete pad, concrete barrier and gabion wall, and revet mattress armoring. They are designed to increase the drivability and durability of the roadway, while conveying runoff from a 10-year storm event with 1 ft of depth or less. Refer to Appendix D, FlowMaster calculations for spread and depth calculations.

Scour Analysis HEC-23 was used to evaluate longitudinal and transverse scour. Site 1, 4, and 5 have sections where the main Union Canyon drainageway runs parallel to the roadway, where a longitudinal scour analysis was performed. Sites 2-5 low water crossing were analyzed for transverse scour for the condition where the channel flows across the low water crossing. Sites 2, 3, and 5 have observations of scour depths that were present at the time of field visits or have occurred at these locations in the past. Table 1, below summaries the scour analysis. The protection depth recommended by Muller includes a 2 ft factor of safety to the maximum computed depth at each site.

Per direction of the project team, the proposed scour protection measures were designed with the following assumptions:

• Revet mattress will provide necessary protection from transverse scour

• Proposed protection depth will be applied to gabion walls for longitudinal and head cut scour protection and will be limited to the observed scour depth.

From the direction of the Geotechnical Report, gabion wall courses will be installed directly below the concrete barrier. For this reason, the height of the concrete barrier (assumed at 2.5 feet) will be included in the required height of the gabion walls for scour protection. At most sites, this meant that one gabion course (3 feet) will be required below the concrete barrier, for a combined depth of 5.5 feet. Although sites 1 and 4 do not have observed scour depths, the combined depth of 5.5 feet was deeper than the calculated longitudinal scour. The observed scour depth at Site 5 was greater than 5.5 feet, so an

December 2019 Final Hydraulics Report

CONCLUSIONS

additional gabion course was added. No scour analysis was preformed at the apparent low water crossing on Fossil House road because no hydrology or hydraulic analysis was preformed at this location. One gabion course and concrete barrier was assumed for this location. Refer to the calculations in Appendix D for more information.

Table 1. Scour Analysis Summary

Site HEC-23 Calc

Scour Depth

(ft) at

Q10

Observed Scour*

(ft)

Recommended Protection Depth (ft)

Proposed Protection Depth (ft)

Description

Fossil House Road N/A - - - 5.5 Existing Gabion location

1 Longitudinal Scour 3.05 - 6 5.5 Embankment Protection 2 Transverse Scour 7.99 5 12 5.5 LWC 3 Transverse Scour 5.60 5 9 5.5 LWC

4 Transverse Scour 1.48 - 9 5.5 LWC Longitudinal Scour 3.96 - 5.5 Embankment Protection

Transverse Scour 4.42 -

6 LWC

Longitudinal Scour 4.30 6 6 Embankment Protection

* Information provided in the 30% plan and field review

Channel Improvements A berm is proposed at Site 3, on the south side of the roadway, near station 65+75. The berm will help direct runoff over the low water crossing, and reduce the potential for flow to continue along the roadway to the southwest. The channel slope downstream of the low water crossing at Site 3 has a relatively steep drop, therefore Riprap Class 4 will line a section of the channel downstream of the low water crossing to transition back to the existing channel bottom and prevent erosion. Refer to the HEC-15 calculations in Appendix D for more information.

Site 4 and 5 have long sections where the main Union Canyon drainageway runs parallel to the road. In the existing condition, the roadway embankment experiences sever scour. The proposed design will push the channel 2 ft away from the roadway embankment with the proposed armoring described above to mitigate erosion. The existing channel bottom width will be maintained.

4 CONCLUSIONS

The preliminary design for drainage improvements along Union Canyon Road and Fossil House Road includes roadway grading, a new roadside ditch, a pipe extension, and one new culvert along Fossil House Road, five improved low water crossing locations along Union Canton Road and improved scour protection at one low water crossing location along Fossil House Road. The proposed culvert will have a 25-year storm and sedimentation capacity, and low water crossings will be designed to convey a 10-year storm at one foot of depth or less. The project aims to continue historic drainage patterns, while reinforcing and protecting the roadway at key locations.

December 2019 Final Hydraulics Report

REFERENCES

5 REFERENCES

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Lands Highway (FLH)

Hydraulics Engineering Circular No. 15, Third Edition Design of Roadside Channels with Flexible Linings. Sept. 2005.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Lands Highway (FLH) Hydraulics Engineering Circular No. 23, Bridge Scour and Stream Instability Countermeasures:

Experience, Selection, and Design Guidance-Third Edition. Volume 1, Sept. 2009.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Lands Highway (FLH) Project Development and Design Manual (PDDM), Chapter 7 Hydrology and Hydraulics, 2011.

APPENDICES

A. Design Criteria

B. Photographs (from September 2015)

C. Drainage Basin Map

Soils Map & Information

D. Proposed Hydraulics

December 2019 Final Hydraulics Report

Appendix A Design Criteria

Hydrologic Criteria Federal Lands Highway (FLH)

Project - Applied Criteria

PDDM

Rainfall

Depth N/A NOAA Atlas 14

Design Frequency

Cross Drainage

Low-Standard road (Local Road) 25-year

Exhibit 7.1-A

25-year

Check Flood Overtopping Flood Overtopping Flood

Floodplain encroachments 100-year 100-year

Outlet Protection

For >/= 48” design flood (25-yr) (reference: HEC-14)

For <48” use detail C251-50

For >/= 48” design flood (25-yr) (reference: HEC-14)

For <48” use detail C251-50

Headwater Maximum HW/D = 1.5 for 48” or smaller; HW/D = 1.2 larger than 48”.

Maximum HW/D = 1.5 for 48” or smaller; HW/D = 1.2 larger than 48”.

Minimum cross culvert size 24” 24”

Pavement Drainage

Capacity (low-standard road, local road) 10-year. 50-yr in sump

Exhibit 7.1-A

10-year. 50-yr in sump

Spread (Low-Standard road, local road) On grade and sags: half of travel lane, not to exceed curb height.

Sumps and Parking areas: 6” depth.

On grade and sags: half of travel lane, not to exceed curb height.

Sumps and Parking areas: 6” depth.

Ditches

Capacity Design 10-year

Exhibit 7.1-A

10-year

Ditch Linings Temporary:

2-year Permanent: 10-year

Temporary:

2-year

Permanent: 10-year

Storm Drains

Capacity Design 10-year

(50-year in sumps) 7.3.4.2.1

10-year (50-year in sumps)

Minimum pipe size 15” 15”

Low-Water Crossings

Capacity Design Vented:10-year Exhibit 7.1-A

Vented:10-year

Stability Design 25-year 25-year

Hydrologic Procedure Selection

Un-gaged Watershed Peak Flow Methods

Based on drainage area (DA)

DA < 200 acres: Rational Method

DA > 200 acres: NRCS TR 55 or Regression Equations

7.2.4.3

DA < 200 acres: Rational Method

DA > 200 acres: NRCS TR 55 or Regression Equations

Gaged Watershed Peak Flow Methods

Minimum 10-year period of record Flood Frequency Analysis 7.2.4.3 Flood Frequency Analysis

Hydraulic Criteria Federal Lands Highway (FLH)

Project - Applied Criteria

PDDM

Erosion Control

Scour Analysis

Embankment Protection Longitudinal Scour (HEC-23)

CFL

Hydraulics

HEC-23

Low Water Crossing Protection Transverse Scour (HEC-23)

CFL

Hydraulics

HEC-23

Appendix B Photographs (from September 2015)

Figure 1. Steep Slopes above Roadway Figure 2. Soft Shoulders and Limited Sight Distance

Figure 3. Eroded Slope above Roadway Figure 4. Channel behind Fossil House

Figure 5. Channel near Roadway Figure 6. Eroded Slope above Roadway

Site 1

Figure 7. Rock outcropping on northside of roadway

Figure 9. Channel downstream of Site 1

Figure 8. Site 1 low water crossing

Site 2

Figure 10. Looking downstream at LWC

Figure 12. Upstream channel at LWC

Figure 11. downstream channel at LWC

Figure 13. LWC at Site 2

Site 3

Figure 14. Downstream channel of LWC

Figure 15. Upstream channel of LWC

Figure 16. Sediment filled LWC

Site 4

Figure 16. Upstream main channel adjacent to roadway

Figure 17. Upstream tributary channel to LWC

Site 5

Figure 18. Existing gabion wall at Site 5

Figure 20. Upstream main channel adjacent to roadway

Figure 19. Upstream tributary channel to LWC

Figure 21. Downstream mail channel adjacent to roadway

Appendix C Drainage Basin Map Soils Map & Information

Fossil House Road

Hydrology Summary

Roadway

Station Design Pt ID

Scope ID

(Sites ordered West-East)

Hydrologic method Basin Area Basin Area

2-Year

Flow

5-Year

Flow

10-Year

Flow

25-Year

Flow

50-Year

Flow

100-Year

Flow

MILES SQ FT ACRE

15+60 P15R Fossil House Road Ditch Rational 64,668 1.5 0.5 0.7 1.1 1.6 2.2 2.9

15+70 P16R Fossil House Road Culvert Rational 1,190,111 27.3 8.1 12.3 18.5 27.5 36.7 47.8

54+00 P54R Site 1 SCS 98,690,712 2265.6 104.6 149.6 204.2 304.2 402.9 518.4

60+70 P61R Site 2 SCS 90,366,800 2074.5 98.5 140.7 191.9 285.8 378.7 487.5

65+85 P66R Site 3 SCS 89,843,673 2062.5 100.3 143.1 195.0 291.2 386.1 497.1

85+05 P85L Site 4 Rational 168,457 3.9 1.1 1.6 2.5 3.7 4.9 6.4

89+30 P89L Site 5 Rational 3,582,281 82.2 17.6 26.7 40.1 59.6 79.6 103.7

CFS

Hydrologic Soil Group—Nye County, Nevada, Northwest Part; and Toiyabe National Forest, Nevada, Central Part, Parts of Eureka, Lander and Nye Counties

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

8/5/2019

446000 447000 448000 449000 450000 451000 452000 453000 454000 455000

446000 447000 448000 449000 450000 451000 452000 453000 454000 455000

38° 54' 9'' N

7°

7'

4' ' W

38° 54' 9'' N

7°

0'

6'

' W

38° 50' 47'' N

7°

7'

4'

' W

38° 50' 47'' N

7°

0'

6'

' W

N

Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 0 2000 4000 8000 12000

Feet 0 500 1000 2000 3000

Meters Map Scale: 1:43,900 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI)

Soils Soil Rating Polygons

A

A/D

B

B/D

C

C/D

D

Not rated or not available

Soil Rating Lines A

A/D

B

B/D

C

C/D

D

Not rated or not available

Soil Rating Points A

A/D

B

B/D

C

C/D

D

Not rated or not available

Water Features Streams and Canals

Transportation Rails

Interstate Highways

US Routes

Major Roads

Local Roads

Background Aerial Photography

The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL:

Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)

Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: Nye County, Nevada, Northwest Part Survey Area Data: Version 12, Sep 14, 2018

Soil Survey Area: Toiyabe National Forest, Nevada, Central Part, Parts of Eureka, Lander and Nye Counties Survey Area Data: Version 1, Dec 4, 2013

Your area of interest (AOI) includes more than one soil survey area. These survey areas may have been mapped at different scales, with a different land use in mind, at different times, or at different levels of detail. This may result in map unit symbols, soil properties, and interpretations that do not completely agree across soil survey area boundaries.

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Feb 11, 2015—Oct 22, 2017

The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Hydrologic Soil Group—Nye County, Nevada, Northwest Part; and Toiyabe National Forest, Nevada, Central Part, Parts of Eureka, Lander and Nye Counties

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

8/5/2019

Hydrologic Soil Group

Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

1226 Stewval-Bellehelen- Rock outcrop association

D 73.1 0.9%

1451 Grassval-Zaidy-Alley association

C 504.1 6.0%

Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 577.1 6.9%

Totals for Area of Interest 8,400.8 100.0%

Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

NOTCOM No Digital Data Available

7,823.6 93.1%

Subtotals for Soil Survey Area 7,823.6 93.1%

Totals for Area of Interest 8,400.8 100.0%

Hydrologic Soil Group—Nye County, Nevada, Northwest Part; and Toiyabe National Forest, Nevada, Central Part, Parts of Eureka, Lander and Nye Counties

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

,-..�./012�345�67089:�35�6:;2<7=�>�?7@1/<7=�=19:A�B1CC25�,:D1E15�FG.H�?1/</8E:A�IJKJJILM5�?7=N</8E:A�O33PK>PL3M�Q0:D1/<7=A�PR>LK4�S/HHT�����

�e���������

��e����������#���

����rstte�r�

�j�#���v���!������ �#�v�X���!'!� ���#�[̀ �/1C801;[wGOC12:E�x7<=/�x;:@<x</1/<7=�S;:y8:=@z�:2/<91/:2�{</|�}~��@7=S<E:=@:�<=/:;D102��<=�<=@|:2�3w8;1/<7= .D:;1N:�;:@8;;:=@:�<=/:;D10��z:1;2�3 R > 3~ R> >~ 3~~ R~~ >~~ 3~~~>O9<= ~K~}4�����������+� ~K3R~����������+*� ~K3LL����+�������� ~KR~J����)+����+�� ~KRPI�����������&� ~KIIR����&+�����)� ~K4~~���������+)�� ~K4J~����&����*)�� ~KL~J���+�����)+�� ~KPRI���*�������+�3~O9<= ~K34I����������)+� ~K3JI����*&������� ~KR>I�����������+� ~KI3P����&*����)�� ~K43L����+����+�*� ~K>~>���+�����&��� ~KL~}���+)����)��� ~KPI3���**�������� ~K}R4���&&&������ 3K3~���)&�����&�3>O9<= ~K3PJ����*������&� ~KRRP����������)+� ~KI3I����&+����))� ~KI}I���������+)�� ~K>3>���+�����&�+� ~KLRL���+�����)+)� ~KP>>���*�*�����+� ~K}~L���&�������� 3K3>�����*���+�� 3KIL����+����&��I~O9<= ~KRI}�����+������� ~KI~>����&�����&�� ~K4RR����*&���*��� ~K>R}���++����&��� ~KL}I���*&)�����&� ~KJ4I���&)������� 3K~R���)�������� 3KRR���������+)� 3K>4����������� 3KJ4����)����)�L~O9<= ~KR}L����*�����*�� ~KIPJ���������+*)� ~K>RR���++����&��� ~KL>4���*+)���)��� ~KJ>J���)�������� 3K~4����������*� 3KRL����)*���*�� 3K>3����+������ 3K}3����������� RKRP���*)������RO|; ~KI}~�����&���+&�� ~K4}4���+�)���*�*� ~KL>4���*&����)&�� ~KP}P���&)&�����+� 3K~3����+*������ 3KR~�����+���+�� 3K4R����+���&�� 3KLP����������� RK~P���*&���+�� RK4I���))����&�IO|; ~K4>~�����+���*��� ~K>L}���+�)���&&�� ~KP43���&+�����*�� ~KJ}~���)&������� 3K3R����+������� 3KI3��������*�� 3K>R����+���))� 3KPP���+�����)� RK3>���&)���*&� RK>~�����������LO|; ~K>}3���*�����&��� ~KP4R���&*�����*�� ~K}>~������������ 3K3I������������ 3KI}��������&�� 3KL3����&����*� 3KJ4���*������� RK3~���)����+*� RK4J����)����+� RKJ3�����������3RO|; ~KPLL���&)+����)�� ~K}P3����*+������ 3KR>��������+�� 3K4J��������)�� 3KJ~���*&����)� RK~P���)&������ RKI4����)���)�� RKLI���������)� IK~I���+&���*�� IKIP���&��+����R4O|; ~K}3R������������ 3K3L����*������ 3K>~����&���&&� 3KPP���&�����&� RK3>����������� RK4L��������)�� RKPJ���+*����&� IK3~���)����+�� IK>L���������+� IK}I����)�+��)�ROE1z 3K~L����*������� 3KI>��������*�� 3KPL���*)����)� RK3~����&����+� RK>P����)����)� RK}4���*������� IKI4��������)�� IKPL����*�+���� 4KIL���)��+���� 4KJ4�+����*�+��IOE1z 3K3>����������� 3K4L��������&�� 3K}~���)������� RKR>��������*�� RKP>���++����&� IK34���))���+�� IK>L���������&� 4K~~���+)�+�+*� 4KL3����&�*��&� >K33�+��+�*�)��4OE1z 3KRI���������)� 3K>L���+����)+� RK~4���������&� RK43����&���&�� RK}I���&�����*� IKI>����&���)�� IKPJ������+���� 4KRI���&��+�&�� 4KJL�+����*�+�� >KIP�+�&��*����POE1z 3K4P��������&+� 3KJJ���&������� RK4>��������)�� RK}~���*������� IK>I����������� 4K~R���*��+�+�� 4K>>����&�*��)� >K~}�+�+��*�&�� >KJ>�*����&�*+� LK4>�*�+)�)��+�3~OE1z 3KL4���+)����+� RK33���������+� RKP>���+)����)� IKRL��������&�� IK}P���*��+�+�� 4K>R������*��+� >K3~�+�+)�*�&�� >KP3�+��)�&��)� LK>>�*�&+�)���� PKR3�&��&������R~OE1z RK34����������� RKP4���+&����+� IK>P���������)� 4KRR���))�+�&�� >K~J�+�*��*�&*� >KP>�*����&�+�� LK4>�*�&)�)���� PK3L�&��*������ JK34�)��*������ JK}3�)�&*������I~OE1z RK>>���������+� IKRP����+���&+� 4KR>������+�)�� >K~~�+�+)�*�*&� LK~~�*����&�&�� LKPP�*����)�*+� PK>L�&�&*���+�� JKIP�)�������+� }K4L���������&� 3~KI����)����&�4>OE1z IK33��������+)� IK}}���&��+�++� >K3P�+�&+�*�)*� LK~P�*�+��&�))� PKRJ�&�+)����+� JKRI�)��)������ }KR3����������� 3~KR���������*� 33KL����������� 3RKJ�������+�*�L~OE1z IKL~����������� 4KLR�+��&�*���� LK~~�*����&�&)� PK~R�&����)���� JK4~�)�+&����*� }K44����&����*� 3~K>����)������ 33KL����������� 3IKR����+��+��� 34K4�������&�������

�j# ��� �j�� ����� � �� �

� ���� ��j���������# ��� � �#�� ��j���������*���U�

������X��� � ������"���j ����� ��

��rstt�t

���� p� m� ��l��[̀ �N;1x|<@10 chenkel Callout For rational method calculations chenkel Rectangle chenkel Rectangle chenkel Callout For NRCS Curve number calculations in HEC-HMS

��.��/012�3�045607289077�2:074�;45506<

,-./0�12-30�40..-56

,-./0�12-30�7-8

,-./0�12-30�-0.5-3

9:;<7=75 9:>??<7@?75 9:>??<7@?75

Fossil House BY: MAS

Basin Calculations - Rational Method DATE: 8/5/2019

Muller Engineering Company, Inc. CHECKED BY: WMG

Muller Project Number: 15-044.02 DATE: 8/20/2019

Land Use Types Percent Impervious

STREETS: PAVED 100

UNDEVELOPED AREAS (OFFSITE

UNDEFINED)

NO LAND USE DEFINED 12

(sq ft) (acre) (sq ft) % of Basin 2 (sq ft) % of Basin

2 (sq ft) % of Basin

FOHO Culvert 15+70 1,190,111 27.3 0 1,190,111 100 0 45 55

SITE 4 85+05 168,457 3.9 0 168,457 100 0 45 55

SITE 5 89+30 3,582,281 82.2 0 3,582,281 100 0 45 55

FOHO D15R 15+60 64,668 1.5 0 64,668 100 0 45 55

% Impervious values for different land uses obtained from CDOT Drainage Criteria Manual, 2004

Percent of sub-basin containing land use - basin land use obtained from aerial photo of existing area and survey information.

PERCENT IMPERVIOUS VALUES

TOTAL AREA

WEIGHTED

PERCENT

PERVIOUS

WEIGHTED PERCENT

IMPERVIOUS

DESGIN POINT ID STATION

STREETS: PAVED

UNDEVELOPED AREAS

(OFFSITE UNDEFINED)

NO LAND USE DEFINED

Q:\2015 Projects\15-044.02 Fossil House Road - Design - CFLHD\Drainage\Hydrology\Proposed Rational Method - Fossil House 1 of 1

Muller Engineering Company, Inc. CHECKED BY: WMG

Muller Project Number: 15-044.02 DATE: 8/20/2019

Storm Event One-Hour Point Rainfall Values

(P1)

2-Year 0.38

5-Year 0.52

10-Year 0.65

25-Year 0.86

50-Year 1.04

100-Year 1.26

INTENSITY VALUES

I = (28.5 x P1) / (10 +Tc)^0.786 , Eq. (RA-3) (USDCM), NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2

Q:\2015 Projects\15-044.02 Fossil House Road - Design - CFLHD\Drainage\Hydrology\Proposed Rational Method - Fossil House 1 of 1

Fossil House BY:

Basin Calculations - Rational Method DATE:

Muller Engineering Company, Inc. CHECKED BY:

Muller Project Number: 15-044.02 DATE:

A B C/D C2 C5 C10 C25 C50 C100 %

FOHO Culvert 15+70 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711 100 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711

SITE 4 85+05 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711 100 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711

SITE 5 89+30 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711 100 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711

FOHO D15R 15+60 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711 100 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711

Soil Group based on NRCS Soil Classification Map

WMG

C5 C10 C100

RUNOFF COEFFIECIENTS FOR 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, AND 100 YEAR STORM EVENTS

8/20/2019

SOIL GROUP (%)

DESIGN POINT ID

MAS

C50STATION

NRCS HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP

C2

SOIL GROUP C/D

(CLAYEY SOIL)

C25

Q:\2015 Projects\15-044.02 Fossil House Road - Design - CFLHD\Drainage\Hydrology\Proposed Rational Method - Fossil House 1 of 1

Muller Engineering Company, Inc. CHECKED BY: WMG

Muller Project Number: 15-044.02 DATE: 8/20/2019

TOTAL

ELEV.

START

ELEV. END

ELEV.

START

ELEV. END

(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Type Cv

FOHO Culvert 15+70 0.44 27.32 7680.00 7500.00 0.10 500 36.0 12.4 2295 7500.00 6951.00 549.0 0.2392 BG 10 4.9 7.8 20.2

SITE 4 85+05 0.44 3.87 6995.00 6955.00 0.10 500 8.0 20.5 489 6955.00 6881.00 74.0 0.1513 BG 10 3.9 2.1 22.6

SITE 5 89+30 0.44 82.24 7685.00 7580.00 0.10 500 21.0 14.9 4760 7580.00 6903.00 677.0 0.1422 BG 10 3.8 21.0 35.9

FOHO D15R 15+60 0.44 1.48 7005.00 6981.00 0.10 250 9.6 13.6 459 6981.00 6951.00 30.0 0.0654 BG 10 2.6 3.0 16.6

Ti = 0.395(1.1-C5)L0.5 / S1/3 (UDFCD, June 2001)

Tt = Length/60Vel, WHERE Vel = CV*Slope^0.5 and CV = 20 (Paved), 15 (Grass Waterway), 10 (Bare Ground)

Initial C5 = Runoff coefficient for overland flow component of time of concentration, assuming 0.1 for Unimproved areas (HDS-2 - Highway Hydraulics)

VEL.

(fps)

SLOPE

(Si)%

SUB-BASIN DATA INITIAL/OVERLAND TIME (Ti)

LENGTH

(ft)

STANDARD FORM SF-2

TIME OF CONCENTRATION

DESIGN POINT ID Tt (Min) 2 Ti+Tt

(Min.)

INIT.

C5

REMARKSAREA

(acre)

LONG.

SLOPE

(ft/ft)

TRAVEL TIME (Tt)

DELTA

ELEV.

(ft)

LENGTH

(ft) STATION COMP. C5 Ti (Min)

Conveyance Coefficient

Q:\2015 Projects\15-044.02 Fossil House Road - Design - CFLHD\Drainage\Hydrology\Proposed Rational Method - Fossil House 1 of 1

Fossil House BY:

Basin Calculations - Rational Method DATE:

Muller Engineering Company, Inc. CHECKED BY:

Muller Project Number: 15-044.02 DATE:

DESIGN POINT ID STATION

AREA

(acre) C2 C5 C10 C25 C50 C100

I2

(in/hr)

I5

(in/hr)

I10

(in/hr)

I25

(in/hr)

I50

(in/hr)

I100

(in/hr)

Q2

(cfs)

Q5

(cfs)

Q10

(cfs)

Q25

(cfs)

Q50

(cfs)

Q100

(cfs)

FOHO Culvert 15+70 27.32 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711 0.74 1.02 1.27 1.68 2.03 2.46 8.1 12.3 18.5 27.5 36.7 47.8

SITE 4 85+05 3.87 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711 0.70 0.96 1.20 1.58 1.92 2.32 1.1 1.6 2.5 3.7 4.9 6.4

SITE 5 89+30 82.24 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711 0.54 0.73 0.92 1.21 1.46 1.77 17.6 26.7 40.1 59.6 79.6 103.7

FOHO D15R 15+60 1.48 0.401 0.444 0.533 0.598 0.661 0.711 0.82 1.12 1.40 1.86 2.25 2.72 0.5 0.7 1.1 1.6 2.2 2.9

Intensity values taken from NOAA Atlas 14 Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates

MAS

8/5/2019

WMG

8/20/2019

RATIONAL FLOWS

Q:\2015 Projects\15-044.02 Fossil House Road - Design - CFLHD\Drainage\Hydrology\Proposed Rational Method - Fossil House 1 of 1

Basin ID Sta. Area (sq. ft) Area (sq.

mi)

Watershed

Length

(feet)

Watershed

Length

(miles)

Upstream

El

Downstrea m El.

Watershed

Slope

(ft/ft)

Curve

Number

(CN)

Impervious Storage (S)

Initial

Abstraction

(Ia)

Lag Time

(hours)

Lag time

(minutes)

54R (Site 1) 54+00 98,690,712 3.5400 18,899 3.58 8600.00 6720.00 0.10 70 15 4.29 0.86 1.41 84.70

61R (Site 2) 60+70 90,366,800 3.2415 18,188 3.44 8600.00 6760.00 0.10 70 15 4.29 0.86 1.36 81.45

66R (Site 3) 65+85 89,843,673 3.2227 17,652 3.34 8600.00 6780.00 0.10 70 15 4.29 0.86 1.31 78.77

*Weighted-Average Curve Numbers Calculated using TR-55

**Lag time calculated per SCS equations in NRCS TR 55

***Imperviousness of 15% assumed

HEC-HMS Inputs

CHH Fossil House Curve Number Calculations

County, Sub-Area Land Use and Curve Number Details

Sub-Area Hydrologic Sub-Area Curve Identifier Land Use Soil Area Number

Group (ac) 54R (PR LWSagebrush (w/ grass understory) (fair) D 171.05 70

Total Area / Weighted Curve Number 171.05 70

66R (EX LWSagebrush (w/ grass understory) (fair) D 1976.42 70

Total Area / Weighted Curve Number 1976.42 70

WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 4/12/2018 3:02:46 PM

Project: Fossil House Simulation Run: 2-Year

Start of Run: 13Jul2015, 00:00 Basin Model: Fossil House Road Basins End of Run: 14Jul2015, 12:00 Meteorologic Model: 2-Year Compute Time: 24May2019, 10:46:29 Control Specifications: Control 1

Hydrologic

Element

Drainage Area

(MI2)

Peak Discharge

(CFS)

Time of Peak Volume

(IN)

P54R (Site 1) 3.5400 104.6 13Jul2015, 13:15 0.19

P66R (Site 3) 3.2227 100.3 13Jul2015, 13:10 0.19

P61R (Site 2) 3.2415 98.5 13Jul2015, 13:15 0.19

Project: Fossil House Simulation Run: 5-Year

End of Run: 14Jul2015, 12:00 Meteorologic Model: 5-Year Compute Time: 24May2019, 10:46:30 Control Specifications: Control 1

Hydrologic

Element

Drainage Area

(MI2)

Peak Discharge

(CFS)

Time of Peak Volume

(IN)

P54R (Site 1) 3.5400 149.6 13Jul2015, 13:20 0.30

P66R (Site 3) 3.2227 143.1 13Jul2015, 13:15 0.30

P61R (Site 2) 3.2415 140.7 13Jul2015, 13:20 0.30

Project: Fossil House Simulation Run: 10-Year

End of Run: 14Jul2015, 12:00 Meteorologic Model: 10 Year Compute Time: 24May2019, 10:46:28 Control Specifications: Control 1

Hydrologic

Element

Drainage Area

(MI2)

Peak Discharge

(CFS)

Time of Peak Volume

(IN)

P54R (Site 1) 3.5400 204.2 13Jul2015, 13:25 0.40

P66R (Site 3) 3.2227 195.0 13Jul2015, 13:20 0.40

P61R (Site 2) 3.2415 191.9 13Jul2015, 13:20 0.40

Project: Fossil House Simulation Run: 25-Year

End of Run: 14Jul2015, 12:00 Meteorologic Model: 25-Year Compute Time: 24May2019, 10:46:29 Control Specifications: Control 1

Hydrologic

Element

Drainage Area

(MI2)

Peak Discharge

(CFS)

Time of Peak Volume

(IN)

P54R (Site 1) 3.5400 304.2 13Jul2015, 13:25 0.58

P66R (Site 3) 3.2227 291.2 13Jul2015, 13:20 0.58

P61R (Site 2) 3.2415 285.8 13Jul2015, 13:20 0.58

Project: Fossil House Simulation Run: 50-Year

End of Run: 14Jul2015, 12:00 Meteorologic Model: 50-Year Compute Time: 24May2019, 10:46:30 Control Specifications: Control 1

Hydrologic

Element

Drainage Area

(MI2)

Peak Discharge

(CFS)

Time of Peak Volume

(IN)

P54R (Site 1) 3.5400 402.9 13Jul2015, 13:25 0.74

P66R (Site 3) 3.2227 386.1 13Jul2015, 13:20 0.74

P61R (Site 2) 3.2415 378.7 13Jul2015, 13:20 0.74

Project: Fossil House Simulation Run: 100-Year

End of Run: 14Jul2015, 12:00 Meteorologic Model: 100-Year Compute Time: 24May2019, 10:46:28 Control Specifications: Control 1

Hydrologic

Element

Drainage Area

(MI2)

Peak Discharge

(CFS)

Time of Peak Volume

(IN)

P54R (Site 1) 3.5400 518.4 13Jul2015, 13:25 0.92

P66R (Site 3) 3.2227 497.1 13Jul2015, 13:20 0.92

P61R (Site 2) 3.2415 487.5 13Jul2015, 13:20 0.92

Appendix D Proposed Hydraulics

Label Roughness Coefficient

Channel Slope (ft/ft)

Normal Depth

(ft)

Left Side Slope

(ft/ft (H:V))

Right Side Slope

(ft/ft (H:V))

Discharge (ft³/s)

Top Width (ft)

Velocity (ft/s)

Froude Number

Flow Type

FOHO D15R - 10 Year 0.020 0.08000 0.31 2.00 2.00 1.10 1.25 5.65 2.52 Supercritical

Fossil House Roadside Ditch Report

8/20/2019 1:58:28 PM

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 1of1Page

HY-8 Culvert Analysis Repor t

-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Crossing - 15+70, Design Discharge - 27.5 cfs Culvert - Culvert 15+70, Culvert Discharge - 27.5 cfs

E le v a ti o n ft

Station (ft)

Crossing Discharge Data

Discharge Selection Method: Specify Minimum, Design, and Maximum Flow

Minimum Flow: 0 cfs

Design Flow: 27.5 cfs

Maximum Flow: 47.8 cfs

Table 1 - Summary of Culvert Flows at Crossing: 15+70

Headwater Elevation

(ft) Total Discharge (cfs) Culvert 15+70

Discharge (cfs) Roadway Discharge

(cfs) Iterations

6945.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 1

6946.39 4.78 4.78 0.00 1

6946.78 9.56 9.56 0.00 1

6947.12 14.34 14.34 0.00 1

6947.46 19.12 19.12 0.00 1

6947.75 23.90 23.90 0.00 1

6947.97 27.50 27.50 0.00 1

6948.31 33.46 33.46 0.00 1

6948.60 38.24 38.24 0.00 1

6948.91 43.02 43.02 0.00 1

6949.25 47.80 47.80 0.00 1

6950.73 64.77 64.77 0.00 Overtopping

Table 2 - Downstream Channel Rating Curve (Crossing: 15+70)

Tailwater Channel Data - 15+70

Tailwater Channel Option: Trapezoidal Channel

Bottom Width: 5.00 ft

Side Slope (H:V): 3.00 (_:1)

Channel Slope: 0.3300

Channel Manning's n: 0.0240

Channel Invert Elevation: 6942.48 ft

Table 3 - Culvert Summary Table: Culvert 15+70

* Full Flow Headwater elevation is below inlet invert.

Straight Culvert

Inlet Elevation (invert): 6945.50 ft, Outlet Elevation (invert): 6941.95 ft

Culvert Length: 59.11 ft, Culvert Slope: 0.0602

Total Discharge

(cfs)

Culvert Discharge

(cfs)

Headwater Elevation

(ft)

Inlet Control

Depth (ft)

Outlet Control

Depth (ft) Flow Type

Normal Depth (ft)

Critical Depth (ft)

Outlet Depth (ft)

Tailwater Depth (ft)

Outlet Velocity

(ft/s)

Tailwater Velocity

(ft/s)

0.00 0.00 6945.50 0.000 0.000 0-NF 0.000 0.000 0.530 0.000 0.000 0.000

4.78 4.78 6946.39 0.892 0.0* 1-S2n 0.328 0.680 0.328 0.113 11.041 7.941

9.56 9.56 6946.78 1.284 0.0* 1-S2n 0.461 0.974 0.505 0.170 11.807 10.222

14.34 14.34 6947.12 1.621 0.0* 1-S2n 0.561 1.201 0.625 0.215 12.961 11.802

19.12 19.12 6947.46 1.955 0.0* 1-S2n 0.647 1.402 0.735 0.254 13.769 13.037

23.90 23.90 6947.75 2.254 0.0* 1-S2n 0.723 1.573 0.833 0.289 14.389 14.070

27.50 27.50 6947.97 2.466 0.0* 1-S2n 0.777 1.692 0.906 0.314 14.743 14.748

33.46 33.46 6948.31 2.813 0.0* 1-S2n 0.859 1.875 1.018 0.351 15.279 15.737

38.24 38.24 6948.60 3.101 0.0* 5-S2n 0.921 2.007 1.104 0.379 15.655 16.447

43.02 43.02 6948.91 3.409 0.0* 5-S2n 0.979 2.134 1.186 0.405 15.992 17.083

47.80 47.80 6949.25 3.745 0.021 5-S2n 1.035 2.249 1.268 0.430 16.269 17.677

Flow (cfs) Water Surface

Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Shear (psf) Froude Number

0.00 6942.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4.78 6942.59 0.11 7.94 2.32 4.30

9.56 6942.65 0.17 10.22 3.50 4.57

14.34 6942.70 0.22 11.80 4.43 4.73

19.12 6942.73 0.25 13.04 5.24 4.85

23.90 6942.77 0.29 14.07 5.96 4.94

27.50 6942.79 0.31 14.75 6.46 4.99

33.46 6942.83 0.35 15.74 7.23 5.07

38.24 6942.86 0.38 16.45 7.80 5.13

43.02 6942.89 0.41 17.08 8.34 5.17

47.80 6942.91 0.43 17.68 8.85 5.22

Site Data - Culvert 15+70

Site Data Option: Culvert Invert Data

Inlet Station: 0.00 ft

Inlet Elevation: 6945.50 ft

Outlet Station: 59.00 ft

Outlet Elevation: 6941.95 ft

Number of Barrels: 1

Culvert Data Summary - Culvert 15+70

Barrel Shape: Circular

Barrel Diameter: 3.00 ft

Barrel Material: Smooth HDPE

Embedment: 0.00 in

Barrel Manning's n: 0.0120

Culvert Type: Straight

Inlet Configuration: Square Edge with Headwall

Inlet Depression: None

Roadway Data for Crossing: 15+70

Roadway Profile Shape: Constant Roadway Elevation

Crest Length: 50.00 ft

Crest Elevation: 6950.73 ft

Roadway Surface: Paved

Roadway Top Width: 15.00 ft

-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Crossing - 15+70 Sedimentation, Design Discharge - 27.5 cfs Culvert - Culvert 15+70 Upsized for Sedimentation , Culvert Discharge - 27.5 cfs

E le v a ti o n ft

Station (ft)

Crossing Discharge Data

Discharge Selection Method: Specify Minimum, Design, and Maximum Flow

Minimum Flow: 0 cfs

Design Flow: 27.5 cfs

Maximum Flow: 47.8 cfs

Table 4 - Summary of Culvert Flows at Crossing: 15+70 Sedimentation

Headwater Elevation

(ft) Total Discharge (cfs)

Culvert 15+70 Upsized for

Sedimentation Discharge (cfs)

Roadway Discharge (cfs) Iterations

6945.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 1

6946.32 4.78 4.78 0.00 1

6946.67 9.56 9.56 0.00 1

6946.95 14.34 14.34 0.00 1

6947.19 19.12 19.12 0.00 1

6947.40 23.90 23.90 0.00 1

6947.57 27.50 27.50 0.00 1

6947.85 33.46 33.46 0.00 1

6948.06 38.24 38.24 0.00 1

6948.26 43.02 43.02 0.00 1

6948.46 47.80 47.80 0.00 1

6950.73 102.93 102.93 0.00 Overtopping

Table 5 - Downstream Channel Rating Curve (Crossing: 15+70 Sedimentation)

Tailwater Channel Data - 15+70 Sedimentation

Tailwater Channel Option: Trapezoidal Channel

Bottom Width: 5.00 ft

Side Slope (H:V): 3.00 (_:1)

Channel Slope: 0.3300

Channel Manning's n: 0.0240

Channel Invert Elevation: 6942.48 ft

Table 6 - Culvert Summary Table: Culvert 15+70 Upsized for Sedimentation

* Full Flow Headwater elevation is below inlet invert.

Straight Culvert

Inlet Elevation (invert): 6945.50 ft, Outlet Elevation (invert): 6941.95 ft

Culvert Length: 59.40 ft, Culvert Slope: 0.0599

Total Discharge

(cfs)

Culvert Discharge

(cfs)

Headwater Elevation

(ft)

Inlet Control

Depth (ft)

Outlet Control

Depth (ft) Flow Type

Normal Depth (ft)

Critical Depth (ft)

Outlet Depth (ft)

Tailwater Depth (ft)

Outlet Velocity

(ft/s)

Tailwater Velocity

(ft/s)

0.00 0.00 6945.50 0.000 0.000 0-NF 0.000 0.000 0.530 0.000 0.000 0.000

4.78 4.78 6946.32 0.820 0.0* 1-S2n 0.306 0.628 0.320 0.113 9.824 7.941

9.56 9.56 6946.67 1.173 0.0* 1-S2n 0.424 0.895 0.457 0.170 11.722 10.222

14.34 14.34 6946.95 1.451 0.0* 1-S2n 0.516 1.105 0.567 0.215 12.645 11.802

19.12 19.12 6947.19 1.689 0.0* 1-S2n 0.592 1.281 0.668 0.254 13.330 13.037

23.90 23.90 6947.40 1.904 0.0* 1-S2n 0.659 1.441 0.754 0.289 14.042 14.070

27.50 27.50 6947.57 2.066 0.0* 1-S2n 0.708 1.548 0.818 0.314 14.343 14.748

33.46 33.46 6947.85 2.352 0.0* 1-S2n 0.778 1.717 0.914 0.351 14.896 15.737

38.24 38.24 6948.06 2.565 0.0* 1-S2n 0.833 1.844 0.990 0.379 15.218 16.447

43.02 43.02 6948.26 2.765 0.0* 1-S2n 0.882 1.961 1.061 0.405 15.558 17.083

47.80 47.80 6948.46 2.956 0.0* 1-S2n 0.931 2.070 1.131 0.430 15.784 17.677

Flow (cfs) Water Surface

Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Shear (psf) Froude Number

0.00 6942.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4.78 6942.59 0.11 7.94 2.32 4.30

9.56 6942.65 0.17 10.22 3.50 4.57

14.34 6942.70 0.22 11.80 4.43 4.73

19.12 6942.73 0.25 13.04 5.24 4.85

23.90 6942.77 0.29 14.07 5.96 4.94

27.50 6942.79 0.31 14.75 6.46 4.99

33.46 6942.83 0.35 15.74 7.23 5.07

38.24 6942.86 0.38 16.45 7.80 5.13

43.02 6942.89 0.41 17.08 8.34 5.17

47.80 6942.91 0.43 17.68 8.85 5.22

Site Data - Culvert 15+70 Upsized for Sedimentation

Site Data Option: Culvert Invert Data

Inlet Station: 0.00 ft

Inlet Elevation: 6945.50 ft

Outlet Station: 59.29 ft

Outlet Elevation: 6941.95 ft

Number of Barrels: 1

Culvert Data Summary - Culvert 15+70 Upsized for Sedimentation

Barrel Shape: Circular

Barrel Diameter: 4.00 ft

Barrel Material: Smooth HDPE

Embedment: 0.00 in

Barrel Manning's n: 0.0120

Culvert Type: Straight

Inlet Configuration: Square Edge with Headwall

Inlet Depression: None

Roadway Data for Crossing: 15+70 Sedimentation

Roadway Profile Shape: Constant Roadway Elevation

Crest Length: 50.00 ft

Crest Elevation: 6950.73 ft

Roadway Surface: Paved

Roadway Top Width: 15.00 ft

Label Roughness Coefficient

Channel Slope (ft/ft)

Water Surface Elevation

(ft)

Elevation Range Discharge (ft³/s)

Top Width (ft)

Normal Depth

(ft)

Velocity (ft/s)

Froude Number

Flow Type

Site 3 LWC Spread - 10 Yr 0.013 0.01000 6781.35 6780.70 to 6785.00 ft 195.00 77.31 0.65 6.25 1.73 Supercritical

Site 3 LWC Spread - Capacity 0.013 0.01000 6781.90 6780.70 to 6785.00 ft 735.30 121.77 1.20 8.85 1.89 Supercritical

Site 2 LWC Spread - 10 Yr 0.013 0.02000 6758.24 6757.60 to 6761.80 ft 191.90 52.56 0.64 8.91 2.46 Supercritical

Site 2 LWC Spread - Capacity 0.013 0.02000 6758.70 6757.60 to 6761.80 ft 586.28 87.43 1.10 11.37 2.61 Supercritical

Site 4 LWC Spread - 10 Yr 0.013 0.02000 6879.47 6879.40 to 6880.47 ft 2.50 14.39 0.07 2.65 1.82 Supercritical

Site 4 LWC Spread - Capacity 0.013 0.02000 6880.45 6879.40 to 6880.47 ft 368.98 72.96 1.05 10.15 2.54 Supercritical

Site 5 LWC Spread - 10 Yr 0.013 0.02000 6902.34 6902.00 to 6903.20 ft 40.10 27.16 0.34 6.21 2.24 Supercritical

Site 5 LWC Spread - Capacity 0.013 0.02000 6903.20 6902.00 to 6903.20 ft 569.27 78.70 1.20 11.72 2.63 Supercritical

SIte 1 LWC Spread - 10 Yr 0.013 0.04000 6718.78 6717.70 to 6732.90 ft 204.20 21.10 1.08 16.02 3.63 Supercritical

SIte 1 LWC Spread - Capacity 0.013 0.04000 6719.90 6717.70 to 6732.90 ft 1208.55 26.87 2.20 29.07 4.12 Supercritical

Site 5 Trans Scour - 10 Yr 0.035 0.06700 6905.13 6904.20 to 6908.40 ft 40.10 13.17 0.93 6.53 1.69 Supercritical

Site 4 Trans Scour - 10 Yr 0.035 0.09800 6880.71 6880.40 to 6885.90 ft 2.50 4.20 0.31 3.80 1.70 Supercritical

Site 3 Trans Scour - 10 Yr 0.035 0.04500 6783.92 6782.70 to 6784.60 ft 195.00 29.67 1.22 7.88 1.52 Supercritical

Site 2 Trans Scour - 10 Yr 0.035 0.06000 6760.74 6759.10 to 6765.00 ft 191.90 14.08 1.64 11.33 1.82 Supercritical

Site 1 Long Scour - 10 Yr 0.035 0.04400 6721.37 6719.70 to 6725.90 ft 204.20 14.07 1.67 10.52 1.58 Supercritical

Site 4 Long Scour - 10 Yr 0.035 0.04300 6877.30 6875.10 to 6880.40 ft 195.00 12.01 2.20 10.82 1.56 Supercritical

Site 5 Long Scour - 10 Yr 0.035 0.06600 6901.53 6899.70 to 6902.90 ft 195.00 12.56 1.83 12.24 1.92 Supercritical

Low Water Crossign Analysis Report

8/29/2019 3:58:25 PM

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

Project Description

Friction Method Manning Formula

Solve For Normal Depth

Input Data

Channel Slope 0.04000 ft/ft

Normal Depth 1.08 ft

Discharge 204.20 ft³/s

Cross Section Image

Cross Section for SIte 1 LWC Spread - 10 Yr

8/29/2019 4:00:01 PM

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

Solve For Normal Depth

Input Data

Channel Slope 0.02000 ft/ft

Normal Depth 0.64 ft

Discharge 191.90 ft³/s

Cross Section Image

Cross Section for Site 2 LWC Spread - 10 Yr

8/29/2019 4:01:13 PM

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

Solve For Normal Depth

Input Data

Channel Slope 0.01000 ft/ft

Normal Depth 0.65 ft

Discharge 195.00 ft³/s

Cross Section Image

Cross Section for Site 3 LWC Spread - 10 Yr

8/29/2019 4:02:57 PM

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

Solve For Normal Depth

Input Data

Channel Slope 0.02000 ft/ft

Normal Depth 0.07 ft

Discharge 2.50 ft³/s

Cross Section Image

Cross Section for Site 4 LWC Spread - 10 Yr

8/29/2019 4:03:31 PM

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

Solve For Normal Depth

Input Data

Channel Slope 0.02000 ft/ft

Normal Depth 0.34 ft

Discharge 40.10 ft³/s

Cross Section Image

Cross Section for Site 5 LWC Spread - 10 Yr

8/29/2019 4:04:06 PM

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

Solve For Normal Depth

Input Data

Channel Slope 0.06700 ft/ft

Normal Depth 0.93 ft

Discharge 40.10 ft³/s

Cross…