The URL can be used to link to this page

Staff Report/Spring Prairie Preliminary Plat (B/W)Planning Department 201 I't Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 iannina REPORT TO: Doug Russell, City Manager FROM: Jarod Nygren, Senior Planner SUBJECT: TKG Spring Prairie Development Four - Request for approval of Preliminary Plat, KPP 15-01 MEETING DATE: April 20, 2015 BACKGROUND: TKG Spring Prairie Phase Four is requesting permission to develop a 28 acre site located on the southwest corner of US 93 North and Old Reserve Drive, into 14 building pads to be utilized for general commercial development, similar in nature to phases 1-3 of Spring Prairie to the immediate north. The site is bounded on the north by Reserve Loop and Spring Prairie Phases 1-3, on the west and south by Kidsports, and on the east by US Highway 93 North. This is a multi - application process occurring on State School Trust Lands. The applications for the development will require three different actions to be taken by City Council, which are each addressed in separate memos. The preliminary plat application has been submitted to accommodate 14 building pads associated with the commercial development. The 14 building pads will consist of 10 out -lot parcels and 4 anchor parcels. This process insures the proper planning and oversight of public services such as; water, sewer, storm water, streets, intersections, traffic control, etc., The Kalispell Planning Board held a duly noticed public hearing March 10, 2015, to consider the preliminary plat request. Staff recommended that the Planning Board adopt the staff report KPP-15- 01 as findings of fact, and recommend that the City Council approve the preliminary plat, subject to the conditions. During the public comment portion of the hearing, two members of the public, representing the Kalispell Chamber of Commerce and Kidsports, spoke in support of the project. Another member of the public mentioned that she felt the highest and best use of the property would be for it to remain parkland. A motion was presented to adopt staff report KPP-15-01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council the approval of the preliminary plat for Spring Prairie Phase Four, subject to the thirty (30) conditions listed in the staff report. There was discussion regarding amendments to the language in conditions 21, 24 and 28, specific to the subdivision, and staff had no objections to the proposed language changes. The motion to recommend approval of the preliminary plat, with the amendments to the conditions, passed unanimously on a roll call vote. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Kalispell City Council approve the resolution for the preliminary plat, subject to conditions. FISCAL EFFECTS: Approval of the request will allow the applicant to proceed with commercial development, which in turn will have positive fiscal impact. ALTERNATIVES: Deny the request. Respectfully submitted, Yarod Nygren Senior Planner Report compiled: April 15, 2015 ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 5714, for Preliminary Plat March 10, 2015, Kalispell Planning Board Minutes Staff Report Application Materials & Maps c: Aimee Brunckhorst, Kalispell City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 5714 A RESOLUTION CONDITIONALLY APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SPRING PRAIRIE DEVELOPMENT FOUR, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA. WHEREAS, TKG Spring Prairie Development Four (TKG), the lessor of the certain real property described above, has petitioned for approval of the Subdivision Plat of said property; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on March 10, 2015 on the proposal and reviewed Subdivision Report 4KPP-15-01 issued by the Kalispell Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat of Spring Prairie Development Phase 4 subject to certain conditions and recommendations; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kalispell at its regular Council Meeting of April 20, 2015, reviewed the Kalispell Planning Department Report 4KPP-15-01, reviewed the recommendations of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission, and found from the Preliminary Plat, and evidence, that the subdivision is in the public interest. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, MONTANA AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the Findings of Fact contained in Kalispell Planning Department Report 4KPP-15-01 are hereby adopted as the Findings of Fact of the City Council. SECTION 2. That the application of TKG for approval of the Preliminary Plat of Spring Prairie Development Phase 4, Kalispell, Flathead County, Montana is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: General Conditions: That the development of the site will be in substantial conformance with the preliminary plat documents entitled Spring Prairie 4 and associated submittal drawings which shall govern location of the lots, easements, roadways, signage, landscaping, materials and pedestrian access facilities. Those documents are listed below: • Site plan • Conceptual elevations • Lot layout 0 Site utility layout • Phasing plan • Grading plan • Grading profiles • Landscape plan • Sign Exhibit 2. The preliminary plat approval for the development shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval. 3. All the permitted uses listed under the B-2 (General Business) Zone are permitted except for the sales of auto, boats, motorcycles, etc. In addition, all of the uses which may be permitted by Conditional Use Permit are prohibited. 4. Incidental casino use is permitted provided it is limited to 5% of the gross floor space of a fully bonafide, freestanding restaurant facility. The casino floor plan must be visually separate from the primary use of the building as a restaurant. Exterior signage for the accessory casino is not permitted. The number and location of entrances shall be approved by site plan committee. 5. The landscape berm on the west end of the property located behind the anchor lots must be installed as shown on the grading and landscaped plan. The intent of the landscape berm is to create a baseline height to shield the loading docks behind the anchor stores. The berm will need to be landscaped in accordance with Parks and Recreation's requirements by using conifers and deciduous trees planted at an intensity to create a visual barrier from the commercial development. 6. The recreational area on the south end of the property leading from the development into Kidsports shall include a 10 feet wide pavepath, picnic areas and ,.ung uue ep>taWe to Si(Js gls Pads 1a)I� Pu Hygfk)uufd:..equuupumeni.t. This area shall be landscaped in accordance with the submitted landscape plan. These areas must be implemented to the satisfaction of Parks and Recreation Department and Kidsports. 7. The retention pond on the south end of the property shall be designed in a way that it becomes a visual interest to the development. Chain link fencing surrounding the retention pond as the dominant fixture is prohibited. The developer shall work closely with the Parks Department and Public Works to come up with a design that is both visually appealing and meets the required safety guidelines. It is intended that when the project is developed the pond will act as an entrance feature, rather than a private maintenance utility facility. 8. When looking towards the development from Kidsports, landscaping should be of the intensity to create a visual barrier. 9. Fotau ...ufowe(l sung g 1'or tlue...ppey6V]gnt sluuuii...be eu&uuiuute(l as uu....s11opuM'ng eepjgj,::. klip n ttuuupfo e(l area, sggTMnage....1'or the (pey„6)pum ent may in„iuqpe u,.�pu t�� t�v 10. Architectural design shall be provided as listed below: a. Exterior wall colors should harmonize with the site and surrounding buildings. The predominate tone on building faces should lend toward warm earthy hues, whether in the natural patina or weathered color of the wall surface itself or the color of the paint stain or other coating. The color of concrete products on building fll•ontag ...:I'Hees should not be achieved from painting the surface. The use of materials such as wood, brick or stone for trim material is encouraged. b. Four sided architecture is required for all structures and buildings. Large, rectangular masses should be avoided by incorporating offsets in the wall and roof. A change in the plane of the walls, changing the direction or providing some variety in the roof form gives diversity and visual interest. Facades greater than 120 feet in length shall have variation and interest in the wall. Among other things, major landscaping, significant tree planting, use of color or building materials or architectural treatments will be in order. C. The building should place an emphasis on entry. Entries should be a prominent component of the building face by providing an architectural covered or recessed entry with modified roof accent and increased usage of windows and trim. d. Franchise architecture may be subject to modification to achieve the building style objectives. e. Architectural elements of the front of the building shall be incorporated into the back of the buildings when the back of the building is visually accessible to US Highway 93, Reserve Loop and Kidsports. Walls and surface planes should be broken up in such a manner as to create a visual interest, avoiding monotony. f. All roof mounted equipment, i.e. HVAC, should be shielded from all views. 441e sk)�litll skl:e of t:1le afiellol k�)lealest It) K.i.dsI,:)t)14S IIaN..Ilave.�� k)ffie efilf : ways 4ilegiiated 4ill:) the bii kl�ng..:to avv:)W a W at4 w�fl wliew pedestiia us...v4p.�. .e....w..a,P. ki..g„ 11. Pedestrian access shall be provided as listed below: a. A minimum 10 feet wide pedestrian bike trail shall be constructed along the entire US Highway 93 frontage. The bike path shall be integrally designed into the landscape plan required between the curb line of US Highway 93 and the 20 feet required landscape buffer. The pathway shall be as linear as possible and shall not have any bollards obstructing movement. When a bus stop is installed within the public right-of-way a connectivity trail is required connecting the bus stop to the bike pathway. b. All the required sidewalks shall have a 7 feet landscaped boulevard of sod, street trees and a 6 feet sidewalk. The landscaped boulevard shall be fronting the internal streets to buffer pedestrians from the traffic. The exception to this condition is the sidewalk fronting the anchor stores, which does not require the 7 feet landscaped boulevard. C. Prior to Cerdlicateofl 0ccu,upancY:. uu4Id:4i# enakissIufuree;thetenantsinlots D, E, F, G, H and I shall be responsible for putting in landscape boulevards and sidewalks along the western portions of their lots; outlots A, B, C, E, G and I shall install the landscape boulevards and sidewalks along the south end of their lots and outlots J and B shall install landscape boulevards and sidewalk along the east end of the lots. It is intended that upon full development the outlots will have pedestrian access with boulevards along all three sides of the outlot clusters between the main ingress and egress points. d. Prior to Cerdlicateo1'C)eeu,uVancY:. uu4Id:4i#peniiiIkriii tiee,anyoutlotwitha building on it shall have a minimum 6 feet wide sidewalk connecting it to the bike paths along either Reserve Loop to the north or US Highway 93 to the east. e. Two east -west sidewalk corridors are required through the main parking lot generally as shown on the submitted site plan. Or modified as necessary to achieve better pedestrian flow by site review committee. These sidewalks also need to have a minimum 7 feet landscape boulevard of sod and street trees between the sidewalk and parking access road. f. All sidewalks located within parking lots shall have a raised concrete surface for separation from traffic and parking. Where sidewalks cross traffic lanes, the sidewalk may be at grade but shall be constructed of colored or textured concrete, stone or other contrasting material to visually denote a pedestrian way. Painting the walk area is not adequate. g. In the event a tenant wants to place architectural/visual features within the sidewalk entrances there must be additional space provided. The required sidewalk area should not be blocked by anything that can limit pedestrian movement. h. A pedestrian pathway is required to be placed on the south end of the subject property connecting the commercial development to Kidsports. The pathway directions should generally be north to south and connect the parking facilities of the commercial development to an existing improved pedestrian access way in Kidsports. The pathway from Kidsports as it enters into the development should be redesigned to create a safe and inviting atmosphere. As opposed to the current design where it is situated between the truck turnaround and retention pond. Public utilities within the right of way should be landscaped to shield them from view. 12. Transportation and parking: a. General access to the commercial district from Reserve Loop to the north and US Highway 93 to the east shall be limited to 5 approaches as approved by MDT. b. All uses shall have direct access from the internal road system. No direct access to a particular building shall be permitted from Reserve Loop or US Highway 93. C. All roadway improvements shall be built in accordance with City of Kalispell road design standards. d. Roadway design shall include provisions for landscape boulevards and sidewalks (Refer to condition No. 9). 13. Development of an overall landscape plan addressing public and private street boulevards, street trees, perimeter project landscaping, parking lot landscaping and all common area landscaping shall be submitted to the City Parks Director for approval in writing prior to installation. The landscape improvements in the public right-of-way shall be installed or bonded for at time of final plat. The landscape improvements serving individual buildings or tenants shall be addressed at the time of building permit issuance. In particular the landscape plan shall address: a. All landscape buffers, boulevards, tree planters, landscape islands, tree wells, etc. and common areas with live landscape materials shall be provided with adequate irrigation. b. The developer or future leases shall be responsible to insure the live landscaping is maintained in "live" condition. C. An irrigated corridor of at least 20 feet in width shall parallel the road right- of-way of US Highway 93 including undulating topography and have a mix of tree plantings with a ground cover of predominately sod. d. All landscape islands within parking lots shall incorporate predominately living materials including trees. In parking lot islands, shade trees shall be placed in such intensity and location as to form a canopy where they cover or line sidewalks and wherever they are used, a visual break from the open asphalt parking areas surrounding it. e. Landscape boulevards should be planted with street trees every 40 feet. f. The use of any form of bark, mulch, rock, etc. shall not be used as a primary method of landscaping. These materials may be used to augment live landscape features upon approval by the Parks Director. If rock is to be used it must be 1 inch or less fractured. 1-4 inch diameter river rock is prohibited. g. In high traffic areas, an urban design approach to islands (concrete with trees in grates or patterned/colored concrete type designs) is required. Prior to the issuance of a building permit: 14. A development agreement shall be drafted by the Kalispell City Attorney between the City of Kalispell and the developer outlining and formalizing the terms, conditions and provisions of approval. The final plan as approved, together with the conditions and restrictions imposed, shall constitute the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning for the site that shall be completed and signed by the city and owner prior to the issuance of a building permit. 15. A proposed site plan for Spring Prairie Phase 4 PUD is required to be submitted to the Kalispell Site Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit for any structural development. Approval of this PUD does not convey or grant any specific authorization or project pre -approvals relative to the duties of the Site Review committee. 16. Any proposed structure for Spring Prairie Phase 4 PUD is required to be submitted to the Kalispell Architectural Review Committee prior to issuance of a building permit. Approval of this PUD does not convey or grant any specific authorization or project pre - approvals relative to the duties of the Architectural Review committee. 17. New infrastructure required to serve the subdivision shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction and Montana Public Works Standards. All design work shall be reviewed and approved in writing by the Kalispell Public Works Department prior to construction. This infrastructure shall include but not be limited to streets, street lighting, street signage, curb, gutter, boulevard and sidewalks. 18. Water and sewer main extensions shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Kalispell's Standards for Design and Construction and Montana Public Works Standards. The water and sewer main extension plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department. Prior to final plat, a certification shall be submitted to the Public Works Department stating that the water and sewer mains have been built and tested as designed and approved. 19. The developer shall submit to the Kalispell Public Works Department for review and approval a stormwater report and an engineered drainage plan that meets the requirements of the current City standards for design and construction. Prior to final plat, a certification shall be submitted to the Public Works Department stating that the drainage plan for the subdivision has been installed as designed and approved. 20. A stormwater management plan shall be submitted for approval. The plan should highlight how the retention pond will generally be maintained in relation to vegetation, liter, etc. 21. Nior..:to ljnai pate.. aA letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure has been accepted by the City of Kalispell or a proper bond has been accepted for unfinished work. 22. The traffic impact study for the project site shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and where appropriate, the Montana Department of Transportation in order to determine the appropriate mitigation as the project develops. 23. The developer shall obtain an approach permit from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) for approaches onto Reserve Loop and US Highway 93. If any improvements are necessary at the intersection of the roadways, these improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the MDT prior to final plat and MDT shall so certify this in writing to the city. 24. N�u�� ° to ljna� V� at I:All mitigation required as part of the approved traffic impact study � . shall be completed. All improvements shall be reviewed and approved by either the Public Works Department or Montana Department of Transportation. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department or Montana Department of Transportation shall be submitted stating that all new infrastructure has been accepted by the City of Kalispell or State of Montana. If infrastructure work has not been accepted, a letter stating that a proper bond has been accepted for the unfinished work by the appropriate agency is required. 25. The fire access and suppression system shall comply with the Uniform Fire Code and a letter from the Kalispell Fire Department approving the access, placement of the fire hydrants and fire flows within the subdivision shall be submitted prior to final plat. The fire access and suppression system shall be installed and approved by the Fire Department prior to final plat approval. 26. A letter shall be obtained from the Parks and Recreation Director approving a landscape plan for the placement of trees and landscaping materials within the landscape boulevards of the streets serving the subdivision. The approved landscape plan shall be implemented or a cash in lieu payment for installation of the street trees and groundcover provided to the Kalispell Parks and Recreation Department. 27. All easements and/or right-of-ways shall be indicated on the face of the final plat. Utility easements for City water and sewer shall be provided to allow for the logical extension of utilities from this subdivision to adjoining properties. A letter from the Kalispell Public Works Department shall be obtained stating that the required easements are being shown on the final plat. 28. The following statement shall appear on the final plat: "The undersigned hereby grants unto each and every person, firm or corporation, whether public or private, providing or offering to provide telephone, telegraph, electric power, gas, cable television, water or sewer service to the public, the right to the joint use of an easement for the construction, maintenance, repair, and removal of their lines and other facilities, in, over, under, and across each area designated on this plat as "Utility Easement" to have and to hold forever." Cvaiti�)1Cll�leve�t) ei2s sitfiakife (Kalispell Subdivision Regulations, Section 3.21(H)) 29. That a minimum of two-thirds of the necessary public infrastructure for this subdivision shall be completed prior to final plat submittal and that both the water and sewer systems serving this phase be operational. 30. All utilities shall be placed underground and in locations that are approved by the Kalispell Public Works Department in accordance with the Kalispell Standards for Design and Construction. SECTION 3. Upon proper review and filing of the Final Plat of said subdivision in the office of the Flathead County Clerk and Recorder, said premises shall be a subdivision of the City of Kalispell. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL THIS 20TH DAY OF APRIL, 2015. ATTEST: Aimee Brunckhorst, CMC City Clerk Mark Johnson Mayor Planning Department 201 istAvenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 PLANNINiFOR PF=RE�0 *DNA www.kalispell.com1planni MAJOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE: FEE ATTACHED $2.750 Major Subdivision (6 or more lots) $1,000 + $125/lot Mobile Home Parks & Campgrounds (b or more spaces) $1,000 + $250/space (5 or fewer spaces) $400 + $125/space Amended Preliminary Plat Amendment to Conditions Only $400 base fee Re -configured Proposed Lots Base fee + $40/lot Add Additional Lots or Sublots Base fee + $125/lot Subdivision Variance $100 (per variance) Commercial and Industrial Subdivision $1,000 + $125/lot SUBDIVISION NAME: TKG Spring Prairie Development Four OWNER(S) OF RECORD: Name: TKG Spring Prairie Development Four. L.L.C. as ground lessee to the State or Montana Ehone 303 Mailing Address c/o The Kroenke Group, 211 N. Stad*um Blvd., Columbia, MQ 65203, All cor• • •ence related to this • •*ect should be ■ to Flower ..d State ■ 1 TECHNICAL/PROFESSIONAL PARTICIPANTS (Surveyor/Designer/Engineer, etc): a m e & Ad d ress,. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OFPROPERTY: Property Address 2250 Highway 93 N. Kalispell. NIT 59901 Assessor's Tract No(s)2922X36-XXX-3 Lot No(s) 1/a Sec.....................................................................................................Section ak Township. ______-Range , 22W GENERAL DESCRIPTION OFSUBDIVISION: Number of Lots or Rental Spaces 'total Acreage in Subdivision 28,233 Total Acreage in Lots 18.1 Minimum Size of Lots or Spaces 0.5 Acres Total Acreage in Streets or Roads 10.1 Maximum Size of Lots or Spaces 2.3 Acres Total Acreage in Parks, Open Spaces and/or Common Areas 2 1 PROPOSED USE(S) AND NUMBER OFASSOCIATED LOTS/SPACES: Single Family Townhouse Mobile Home Park Duplex Apartment Recreational Vehicle Park Commercial Industrial Planned Unit Development 1 Condominium Multi -Family Other APPLICABLE ZONING DESIGNATION & DISTRICT B-S ESTIMATE OF MARKET VALUE BEFORE IMPROVEMENTS_$3.100.000 IMPROVEMENTS TO BE PROVIDED: Roads: Gravel Paved _X Curb X Gutter X Sidewalks X Alleys Other Water System: Individual Multiple User X Neighborhood Public Other Sewer System: Individual Multiple User X Neighborhood Public Other Other Utilities: Cable TV X_Telephone XElectric Gas _ZC Other Solid Waste: Home Pick Up Central Storage Contract Hauler X_Owner Haul Mail Delivery: Central Individual XSchool District: Fire Protection: Hydrants X__Tanker Recharge —Fire District: Kalispell Fire Department Drainage System: On -site detention and water quality VARIANCES: ARE ANY VARIANCES REQUESTED? No (yes/no) Ifyes, please complete the information below: SECTION OF REGULATIONS CREATING HARDSHIP: EXPLAIN THE HARDSHIP THAT WOULD BE CREATED WITH STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS _N/A PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE(S) TO STRICT COMPLIANCES WITH ABOVE REGULATIONS: Immmmmmrrrmmmmrrr rrr 19 PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS IN THE SPACES PROVIDED BELOW: 1. Will the granting of the variance be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare or injurious to other adjoining properties? N/A 2. Will the variance cause a substantial increase in public costs? N/A 3. Will the variance affect, in any manner, the provisions of any adopted zoning regulations, Master Plan or Growth Policy? N/A 4. Are there special circumstances related to the physical characteristics of the site (topography, shape, etc.) that create the hardship? N/A S. What other conditions are unique to this property that create the need for a variance? N/A K APPLICATION CONTENTS: The subdivider shall submit a complete application addressing items below to the Kalispell Planning Department at least thirty five (35) days prior to the date of the Planning Board meeting at which it will be heard. 1. Preliminary plat application. 2. 10 copies of the preliminary plat. 3. EIectronic copy of plat. 4. One reproducible set of supplemental information. (See Appendix A of Subdivision Regulations for the city where the subdivision is proposed.) S. One reduced copy of the preliminary plat not to exceed 11" x 17" in size. 6. A bona fide legal description of the subject property and a map showing the location and boundaries of the property. 7. Application fee. 8. A certified list of all property owners within 150 feet of the subject property is required with the information listed below. The list can be obtained from the Flathead County GIS Office (see attached form), or from a title company. Please note: Streets and roads are not included as part of the 150 feet. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury and the laws of the State of Montana that the information submitted herein, on all other submitted forms, documents, plans or any other information submitted as a part of this application, to be true, complete, and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Should any information or representation submitted in connection with this application be untrue, I understand that any approval based thereon may be rescinded, and other appropriate action taken. The signing of this application signifies approval for the Kalispell Planning staff to be present on the property for routine monitoring and inspection during the approval and development process. (Applicant) LJ�o,,,r1 PLC ell ( ate) OWNER: STATE OF MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION FOR: TKG SPRING PRAIRIE DEVELOPMENT FOUR, LLC BY: THOMAS, DEAN AND HOSKINS, INC. 450 CORPORATE DRIVE — SUITE #101 KALISPELL, MT. 59901 PHONE: (406) 751-5246 DATE: JAN UARY, 2015 FIRE STATION NO. 62 SUBDIVISION S P R I N G 2 C E N T E R P H. 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF TKG SPRING PRAIRIE DEVELOPMENT FOUR SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA. 1 P R A I R I E W 11 00 2 00 3 00 '� I�� `� ��r ��A S C A L E r r., r 3 0 I � � 1 I Frj �I / 30os PARCEL 2 C.O.S. 17132 8 HUTTON RANCH RD. cn N O O U) cn U) U) cn En En Ln Ln 15 16 17 Q N Q n z O D TRACT 2A C.O.S. 17132 TRACT 1 C.O.S. 19311 LEGEND PROPERTY BOUNDARY BUILDING ------ EASEMENT CONTOUR LINE— 1 FT. INTERVALS 3035 CONTOUR LINE— 5FT. INTERVALS CONCRETE ASPHALT ------ GRAVEL PAINT STRIPE ® WATER WELL CURB & GUTTER INLET & INLET APRON CURB (STRAIGHT) DRAINAGE STORMDRAIN SD O MANHOLE, OR AS NOTED SANITARY SEWER S WATER MAIN W FIBER OPTIC FIBER FIRE HYDRANT p4 WATER VALVE FROST FREE SPIGOT O SEWER CLEANOUT CHAINLINK FENCE X—X—X—X WIRE FENCE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC E OVERHEAD TELEPHONE TEL EDGE OF WATER LIGHT (LIGHT POLE) UTILITY POLE (� DECIDUOUS TREE ® CONIFEROUS TREE HEDGE -� ELECTRIC PANEL CURB STOP Q STREET SIGN I7 FLAG POLE ----- E ----- BURIED ELECTRIC ❑T TELEPHONE RISER © CABLE TV RISER 0 ELECTRICAL BOX © ELECTRICAL BOX FLUSH RETAINING WALL CULVERT SHEET 1 OF 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS OWNER: STATE OF MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION FOR: TKG SPRING PRAIRIE DEVELOPMENT FOUR, LLC BY: THOMAS, DEAN AND HOSKINS, INC. 450 CORPORATE DRIVE - SUITE #101 KALISPELL, MT. 59901 PHONE: (406) 751-5246 DATE: JANUARY, 2015 FIRE STATION NO. 62 SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT OF TKG SPRING PRAIRIE DEVELOPMENT FOUR SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA. 1 S P R I N G P R A I R I E C E N T E R RESERVE LOOP PUBLIC RIGHT - OF - WAY S89°58'06"E 1249.19' 2 P H. 2 o o� a MLL �oU) W Q(D> o 04 - J 2 m n 8 _ Iu I I viv KANC;H RD. Q � N Q 15 J PHASE IV AREA SUMMARY n 0 17 _ TRACT 2A C.O.S. 17132 TRACT 1 C.O.S. 19311 ANCHOR LOTS 4.64 AC. OUT LOTS 10.93 AC. RETENTION/COMMON AREA 3.45 AC. COMMON AREA 9.21 AC. TOTAL 28.23 AC. SHEET 2 OF 3 LOT LAYOUT OWNER: STATE OF MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION FOR: TKG SPRING PRAIRIE DEVELOPMENT FOUR, LLC BY: THOMAS, DEAN AND HOSKINS, INC. 450 CORPORATE DRIVE — SUITE #101 KALISPELL, MT. 59901 PHONE: (406) 751-5246 DATE: JANUARY, 2015 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF TKG SPRING PRAIRIE DEVELOPMENT FOUR SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 29 RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA. MINI ANCHOR 2 1.16 AC. ANCHOR 2 1.16 AC. ANCHOR 1 1.16 AC. MINI ANCHOR 1 1.16 AC. NORTH, LEGEND WATER MAIN 1 2" W D FIRE HYDRANT SEWER MAIN s" ss m SEWER MANHOLE SERVICE STUB ® STORM DRAIN CURB INLET STORM DRAIN OUTLET O STORM DRAIN MANHOLE SIDEWALK U001 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PARKING ISLAND & PARKING STRIPES HANDICAP PARKING 0 CHAIN LINK FENCE PARKING SUMMARY STANDARD STALLS 636 HANDICAP STALLS 16 TOTAL 652 SHEET 3 OF 3 SITE & UTILITY LAYOUT 0 W Of W V) W Of U) F- S U_ J J Q L O N O n O O J W ry W C) W ry 0 Z U) a a_ J W 0' a_ O U Q U 00 O W V) a a_ I J J W a_ N J a Y H / W Z O w O J L� / a_ U.S. HIGHWAY 93 PHASE 1 OFFSITE GRADING z......................... 0 60 120 1 INCH = 60 FT. IJ LO Q r ti 0 N N O m z Z p O 0 > w w 0 z r PROJECT NO: FL0001.01 DESIGNED BY: JNA DRAWN BY: KNK DATE: 11 01.09,15 5' WIDE CONCRETE WALK o ^� 9' MONUMENT SIGN OUTLOT ACCESS TYP. u— — — — — — — — — — — Of w V) bi OUTLOT E Q OUTLOT D Q, O Za N " k _ 8.1' I 201.3' OUTLOT C �,8 I a O O J w fy w U) w w Z I w F_ Ln J w 0 U U 00 O w a a_ I J J W Q_ N J Y H / W Z 0 � ry w 0 J L� / O Q a A a I I F(e 0 � CO a O I O_ O O I O_ M 1 8 8 $ 11.5' 20' 20' 9 4' 30' 24' 24' 24' 12' 30' 24' 24' 24' 24' 24' 9' 30' 24' 24' TYP. TYP. 0 O O 99 o- 2' 24' n r — rn 0 ® ® ® ® ® ® 0') 636 STANDARD PARKING SPACES o I 16 HANDICAPPED SPACES I `' 0 MINI ANCHOR 2 I ANCHOR 2 I ANCHOR 1 I i,i MINI ANCHOR 1 r r 0 30' TOTAL RETAIL S.F. = 147,454 L N 0 N co r O ® O ® � O ti Il + r 1 OUTLOT J SHARED ACCESS OFF RESERVE LOOP DRIVE KIDSPORTS AND OUTLOT J (SEE GRADING PLAN) ELEVATION: 3006.9 A 0 0 RETENTION n^nininmmki M 24' MONUMENT SIGN EXISTING MDOT POND 0 0 60 120 1 INCH = 60 FT. LEGEND EXISTING PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED LOT LINE PROPOSED 100-YR WSEL EXISTING CURB PROPOSED FLOWLINE EXISTING STORM INLET PROPOSED STORM INLET eca EXISTING STORM MANHOLE ® PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE tlZII EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE ® PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE r EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT D PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT a PROPOSED SITE LIGHT PROPOSED STOP SIGN DEVELOPMENT -PROPOSED CURRENT COMMERCIAL AREA = 263,454 S.F. -GROSS LOT AREA = 28.233 ACRES w LO c� N N 0 m z z O O 0 w w 0 z r PROJECT NO: FL0001.01 DESIGNED BY: JNA DRAWN BY: KNK DATE: 01.09.15 O LL F_ Z W 2 F_ a. � O Z aWz J Z J> Z a a W z02 J a. a W J W Lu a LJ) G Ja Y cl) W w a. a 0 Z w 'a. cl 00 O co co O (h �7 LEGEND EXISTING PROPERTY LINE ® PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE PROPOSED 100-YR WSEL EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE E1025 EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR 30 I EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR � PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE 3025 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR EXISTING EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT 3024 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT EXISTING STORM INLET PROPOSED STORM INLET EXISTING STORM MANHOLE e v _ Q- ... ... u 3025 ` �o�.. 3027 M � — i NI '1028 3029 - - .SVbU J,.... I r 3031� 0 111D RESERVE LOd �c V (2j V , W w Q ti � N N O m z z O O U) w w O PROJECT NO: FL0001.01 DESIGNED BY: JNA DRAWN BY: KNK DATE: 0 W W W 0_' H 0 J J a Ln 0 N U 0 vi D U U z 0 a U J w Q_ N U a U 00 O w V) a w J J w 0- V) J a Y / w z 0 V) w 0 J L� / Q_ 0+00 HOME PLATE 5' TALL BASEBALL PLAYER 0+50 6' TALL PERSON 1+00 1+50 POSED GRADE PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GROUND 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 KIDSPORTS VIEW 2 2+00 2+00 0 2+50 BACK OF ANCHOR BUILDING LII E OF SIGHT IS 28' ABOVE F.F. F.F.=3012.00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 KIDSPORTS VIEW 1 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 a BACK OF ANCHOR BUILDING LINE OF SIGHT IS 9' ABOVE F.F. F.F.=3012.00 7+00 7+50 LEGEND — — EXISTING PROPERTY LINE "3,0 2,13 EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR 3()21,14 EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR 3025 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR 3024 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR w Q � N N O m z z 0 o U) cn > w w o z PROJECT NO: FL0001.01 DESIGNED BY: JNA DRAWN BY: KNK DATE: 0 IJ [' IJ U) IJ U) f- S 0 J J a L 0 N 0 c� 0 z g n J_ D J W 0' a_ O U U 00 O W !n a a_ I J J W 0- V) J a Y H / W Z O V) 0-1 O J L� / n 0 0 J Lll ry LLJ W II ry d''1W M m OUTLOT C 3�RCP OUTLOT B i OUTLOT A 12" W 1 ' W — 8" SS 8" SS — U.S. HIGHWAY 93 OUTLOT F I I I I 12" W 12" W 12" W — 8" SS 8" SS ' SS - 12" W 12" W 12" W ' 12' 12" W 8" SS 8" SS 8" SS ®' S I3 I I N NI I �I I I 13 I 1N NI I I ® g a 11 3 N I I 100 I I o 3 U1 12" W 12" W 12" W 12" W 12" W co 3 � � I N 1 1 0 I 31 1 I I I i OD e 3 MINI ANCHOR 2 I ANCHOR 2 I ANCHOR 1 �I I 1 I I 1 I I N I I I 'I II 31 N 12�W 12 W 8" SS 24" RCP Q N1 L "I12 12 W 12 W SS 8" SS 0. 30" RCP 6" RCF MINI ANCHOR 1 L W 12 12 2 SS 8" S 8" S 8" 36" RCP 36" RCP P/ OUTLOTI 100-YR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION: 3006.9 k F7-1 7 12" W 12" W 12' W 8" SS 8" SS 8' SS o 0 0 3 N fn1 NI IU o c \co 3 I" (I it wo - "a cm RETENTION onniM 3 X Go (n (n LEGEND .. 0 60 120 1 INCH = 60 FT. EXISTING PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED UTILITY EASEMENT PROPOSED 100-YR WSEL EXISTING CURB PROPOSED FLOWLINE EXISTING STORM LINE PROPOSED STORM LINE EXISTING SANITARY LINE PROPOSED SANITARY LINE EXISTING WATER LINE PROPOSED WATER LINE EXISTING TELEPHONE LINE EXISTING FIBER OPTIC LINE EXISTING STORM INLET PROPOSED STORM INLET EXISTING STORM MANHOLE PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT PROPOSED SITE LIGHTING IJ Q ti 0 N N O m z z p O 0 (n > > w w o z PROJECT NO: FL0001.01 DESIGNED BY: JNA DRAWN BY: KNK DATE: 01.09.15 Preliminary Utility Study for TKG Spring Prairie Development Four 2250 Highway 93 N. Kalispell, MT January 9, 2015 Prepared For: TKG Spring Prairie Development Four, L.L.C. Attn: Karen Blumenstein 88 Inverness Circle Drive East Building G, Suite 103 Englewood, CO 80112 Entitlement and Engineering Solutions, Inc. 518 17t" Street, Suite 1575 Denver, CO 80202 Phone: (303) 572-7997 Attn: Amanda M. O'Connor, P.E. Preliminary Utility Report TKG Spring Prairie Development Four Kalispell, MT Table of Contents Tableof Contents................................................................................................... 2 Listof Tables.......................................................................................................... 2 Listof Figures........................................................................................................ 2 Listof Appendices.................................................................................................. 2 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 3 ProjectLocation.......................................................................................................................... 3 GeneralDescription.................................................................................................................... 3 ExistingConditions..................................................................................................................... 3 SANITARY SEWER................................................................................................ 4 DesignCriteria............................................................................................................................ 4 DesignSummary......................................................................................................................... 6 WATER.................................................................................................................. 6 DesignCriteria............................................................................................................................ 6 DesignSummary........................................................................................................................12 STORMWATER....................................................................................................13 Drainage System Description....................................................................................................13 ProposedConditions..................................................................................................................14 WaterQuality.............................................................................................................................14 CONCLUSIONS.....................................................................................................15 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................15 List of Tables 1. 10-Year, 24-Hour Historic Flows 2. Estimate of Wastewater Flow Rates 3. Domestic Water Use 4. Required Fire Flow, Number and Distribution of Fire Hydrants 5. WaterCAD Calibration Exercise Data 6. HGL Profile 7. 100-Year, 24-Hour Proposed Flows List of Figures 1. Hydrant Locations List of Appendices A Topography Map with Existing Utilities and Proposed Utility Plan B Sanitary Sewer Pipe Calculation C Water system Design Calculations D Storm System Design EES Page 2 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT INTRODUCTION Project Location The proposed project is located in the City of Kalispell and Flathead County Montana. The site is part of the south half of Section 36, Township 29 North, Range 22 West of the Principal Meridian. The site is bounded by Highway 93 on the east, KidSports baseball fields to the south, KidSports future sports fields to the west and Reserve Loop to the north. General Description The site is approximately 28.234 acres. This site is Phase Four of a four phase development. The previous three phases are located to the North of the site. Phase One consists of a Lowe's Home Improvement store with three smaller pads. Phase Two includes a Costco Wholesale store with a gas station and three smaller pads. Phase Three includes a Cabela's anchor and four smaller pads. The proposed development for Phase Four will include multiple commercial lots consisting of large and small retail, restaurants and hotels. The development will include grade changes, parking lots, landscaping and a shared community gathering space and dog parks with KidSports. Existing Conditions Currently, the site consists of an existing parking lot, DNRC office building (which is not in use) and a public trail system. There is also an existing pond on the site which receives the storm flows from the Costco site to the north. The City of Kalispell provides both public water supply and wastewater collection and treatment. Sanitai-y So oi, There is an existing 8-inch PVC line in the site which connects to the existing DNRC building from a 12-inch main in Reserve Loop. This line will be abandoned at the property line and capped. The main in Reserve Loop ties into another 12-inch main on the east side of Highway 93. This main falls as it heads south to a pump station which is located just north of Grandview Drive. a tei, There are two 12-inch water mains located within easy access to the property. There is a 12-inch main in Reserve Loop to the north and a 12-inch main located between the east property line and Highway 93 in the right of way. The existing DNRC building has a water line provided off the 12-inch main in the ROW between the property and Highway 93. This line will be removed and the service tee capped. Stoi-mom. So oi, Currently, the site is mostly vegetation of grass and weeds along the south and west boundaries. The grades onsite generally range between 1 and 5 percent with the north half flowing into the pond in the middle and the south half flowing south to the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) pond next to the baseball fields. The soils in the area are silty type B soils. EES Page 3 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT The existing site contains a pond that currently detains flows from the Costco development to the north and the existing site which includes the aforementioned DNRC building and associated parking. The Costco Development contributes 15.88 acres of developed runoff, while Phase Four and surrounding flows to the west total 38.84 acres of developed and undeveloped runoff, which are both conveyed to the pond. According to Kalispell Criteria (Section 2.2.4), allowable discharge rates for proposed detention are limited to the 10-year 24-hr pre -developed flow. This rate is equal to 26.97 cfs; the pond and outlet structure will be sized according to this flow. Precipitation intensities are based off of Montana's Ch. 7 Hydrology Appendix B for Kalispell (Table B-3). The USDA's TR-55 program was used to model historic conditions. See Appendix D for TR-55 input and output. Table 1 10- ear, 24 hour Historic Flows Property CN Value Tc hr Area ac Flow cfs Costco 96 0.220* 15.88* 16.51 Phase Four Spring Prairie Center 80 0.264 38.84 10.46 Total 54.72 26.97 * From Spring Prairie Center Basis of Design Report Amendment for Phase Two-Costco (July 2004) SANITARY SEWER Design Criteria The Victory Commons Phase Four tenants have not been identified at this point. Therefore, assumptions were made in regards to the size and types of businesses expected in the development. Based on these assumptions, typical flow factors can be used to determine the wastewater flow for the development. Per Table 2 below, the total average daily wastewater flow from the development is estimated to be 98 gallons per minute. EES Page 4 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT Table 2 (Estimate of Wastewater Flow Rates) Assumed Type of Business Assumed Building Square Footage GPD/1000 Gross Building sq. ft. Average Wastewater Flow Rate (GPD) Department Store 1 55,000 200 11,000 Department Store 2 50,454 200 10,091 Neighborhood Store 1 24,000 200 4,800 Neighborhood Store 2 18,000 200 3,600 Neighborhood Store 3 14,000 200 2,800 Neighborhood Store 4 11,000 200 2,200 Hotel 65,000 350 22,750 Restaurant 1 7,000 500 3,500 Restaurant 2 7,000 500 3,500 Fast Food 1 3,000 500 1,500 Fast Food 2 3,000 500 1,500 Fast Food 3 3,000 500 1,500 Fast Food 4 3,000 500 1,500 Total GPD 70,241 Total gal/min 98 * Conversion to gal/min assumed that businesses are open only 12 hours per day The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Circular DEQ-2 Design Standards for Public Sewage Systems 2012, requires that collection systems be designed to carry the peak hourly flow. DEQ Equation 10-1 was used to calculate this flow. The equation is: Design Peak Hourly Flow_ (18+ P) Design Average Flow (4+V/P) Where P = Population in thousands. Per the numbers found in Table 1 above, the Design Average Flow is 98 gal/min (141,120 gal/day). Assuming a residential per capita flow rate of 100 gallons per person per day, the equivalent population for this development is 1,411 people. Based on this population, the Design Peak Hourly Flow is estimated to be 362 gal/min or .806 fOlsec. To find the capacity of the sewer line, the slope, friction factor and pipe diameter are inserted into Manning's Fomula along with the peak flow rate. The minimum pipe slope is 0.004 ft/ft, the friction factor is 0.010 for PVC pipe, and the pipe diameter is 8-inches. Using this information, the velocity in the proposed 8-inch service pipe is 3.17 ft/s. See Appendix B for the results of the calculation. EES Page 5 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT Per discussion with the Kalispell engineering department and subsequent emails, the existing 12- inch main line has a remaining capacity of 400 ERUs or 221 gallons per minute (gpm). Our conservative estimate of 98 gpm for the development is well within the remaining 221 gpm capacity. Therefore, the existing system can handle the additional flows. Design Summary The proposed system will consist of an 8-inch service line tapping off the 12-inch main on the east side of U.S. Highway 93. This line will cross under the highway and into the development. It will split into two 8-service lines, each one servicing the east and west sides of the development. These lines will have 4 or 6-inch service lines tapping off them for each of the proposed outlots/anchor buildings. The size of the outlot/anchor service lines will be determined once each lot/anchor is under contract. All sewer lines will be gravity lines to the main on the east side of U.S. Highway 93 with no lift stations required. WATER Design Criteria The Victory Commons development water distribution system shall provide domestic and fire protection water for the site. Design of the water system was based on a compilation of several agency guidelines. The guidelines include: International Fire Code, City of Kalispell Standards for Design and Construction 2009, City of Kalispell Extension of Services Plan 2004, and Montana Department of Environmental Quality Circular DEQ 1 — Standards for Water Works 2014. The Victory Commons development is south of Reserve Loop Road and west of US Highway 93. The 12-inch water mains in both of these roadways and were constructed in 2005 and 2002, respectively. There are 12- and 14-inch water main loops through the existing Costco and Lowes developments to the north of the Reserve Loop Road. Water improvements for the proposed subdivision include a 12-inch main built to provide domestic, irrigation, and fire service for the Victory Commons anchor and outlot mixed -use commercial buildings. The water main shall connect to the existing water distribution system in Reserve Loop Road at the north end of the project and in US 93 at the south end of the project. The dual connection points provides redundancy and helps to eliminate dead -ends in the water system. Domestic, Cornmei-cial, and li-rigation atoi- Demands The water demands for domestic, commercial and irrigation demands were estimated and incorporated into the design. Future structure use and occupancy quantity is unknown at the time of creation of this report. Assumptions for water demands were made based on structure use and occupancy assumed in the Victory Commons Traffic Impact Study and typical water usage listed in Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation Form No. 615 R03/2012 — Planning Guide for Water Use. Table 3 shows these assumptions and water use. The total assumed domestic, commercial and irrigation demands of 73-gpm can be conservatively rounded EES Page 6 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT up to 100-gpm for the subdivision and included as a single demand in the design of the water system. Table 3 (Domestic Water Usage) Water Total use per Water Unit # Units unit Use Total Water Structure Type per Day (gpd) (gpd) Use (gpm) Outparcel (Assumed 110 room Hotel) Rooms 110 60 6600 4.58 Outlot A (Assumed Fast Food) Patrons 1984 7 13888 9.64 Outlot B (Assumed Sit Down Restaurant) Patrons 763 12 9156 6.36 Outlot C (Assumed Fast Food) Patrons 1984 7 13888 9.64 Outlot D (Assumed Sit Down Restaurant) Patrons 763 12 9156 6.36 Outlot E (Assumed Fast Food) Patrons 1984 7 13888 9.64 Outlot F (Assumed Sit Down Restaurant) Patrons 763 12 9156 6.36 Outlot G (Assumed Fast Food) Patrons 1984 7 13888 9.64 Outlot H (Assumed Sit Down Restaurant) Patrons 763 12 9156 6.36 Toilet Mini Anchor (18,000 SF) Rooms 4 400 1600 1.11 Toilet Mini Anchor (24,000 SF) Rooms 4 400 1600 1.11 Toilet Anchor (50,454 SF) Rooms 4 400 1600 1.11 Toilet Anchor (55,000 SF) Rooms 4 400 1600 1.11 Total 73.04 Table 3 Assumptions: a) # of Patrons per day from Victory Commons Traffic Impact Study, by Abelin Traffic Services, 11/2014 b) Water Use per unit from Form 4615 R03/2012 by MT DNR c) Outparcel and Outlot buildings are future and type of use is assumed EES Page 7 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT Ff -o Flow Fo luh-ernent The fire flow demands are the controlling factor in the design on the Victory Commons water system. The design is focused on providing adequate flow to the building and hydrants under a fire flow event while keeping in mind economic considerations such as water main size, location and number of hydrants. While the future structure use and occupancy is not yet known for the proposed development, approximate building square footage has been determined. Building construction type of each structured proposed at the site is unknown at this time and assumed to be Type V-B. Where two or more seemingly separate buildings share common walls, the structures' square footage is added together to create one larger fire -flow area. Therefore, the anchor and mini -anchor buildings square footage areas shall be added together and treated as one structure. Required fire hydrant and sprinkler flow is determined using the building construction type and square footage and referencing the International Fire Code Appendix B — Table B 105.1. The International Fire Code, Appendix B — Section B 105, allows a reduction in required fire flow of up to 75% is allowed when a building is provided with and approved automatic sprinkler system. The City of Kalispell typically allows a reduction of only 50% in required fire flow. The resulting required fire flow shall not result in fire flows less than 1500-gpm. Quantity and location of fire hydrants for the project are in accordance with International Fire Code Appendix C — Table C105.1. Hydrant locations are shown in Figure 1. Table 4 shows required fire flow and hydrant quantity and location information. EES Page 8 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT Figure 1 (Hydrant Locations) Flower .... ..........: ,tore rtou- Supply Pump and reservoir information was gathered from the City of Kalispell Utility Department and previous Basis of Design reports for Spring Prairie Center (by Morrsion Maierle, February 2004 and July 2004). The data was compiled and added to the model. The project shall receive water supply from the existing distribution system in the south end of the City which is supplied by EES Page 9 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT four wells with pumps that have the capability to run simultaneously. The four pump stations have capacities of 250-gpm, 700-gpm, 1000-gpm, and 1250-gpm. In addition to the wells, there is a natural spring with pumping station that supplies water to the city water mains. Water storage tanks are used to equalize the pressure throughout the 77-mile long water distribution system and provide emergency supply. atoi- Dish-ibution Sy tern Modeling The proposed water main system for the project was analyzed using Bentley WaterCad V8i water distribution modeling software. All new mains were assumed and modeled to be PVC with a Hazen Williams coefficient of C=140. The model was checked against fire hydrant flow test data provided by the City of Kalispell. The flow test data was performed on April 17, 2012 and can be found in Appendix C. Table 4 shows that the model results are representative of the existing conditions. The dynamic pressure calculated in the model is higher for the discharging hydrants. However, the residual pressure calculated in the model for the fire hydrant at the southwest corner of the Costco retail store (FH 41) corresponds with the flow test data. EES Page 10 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT Table 4 (Required Fire Flow, Number and Distribution of Fire Hydrants) Maximum Distance from any Average Point on Building With 50% Use Minimum Spacing Street or Square Fire Flow reduction Fire number Between Road Footage Building Flow Duration for Flow of Hydrants Frontage to Structure (sf) Type (gpm) (hrs) sprinklers (gpm) hydrants (ft) Hydrant (ft) Outparcel (Assumed 110 room Type V- Hotel) 65,000 B 7000 3 3500 3500 4 500 250 Outlot A (Assumed Type V- Fast Food) 3000 B 1500 2 750 1500 1 500 250 Outlot B (Assumed Sit Down Type V- Restaurant) 7000 B 2250 2 1125 1500 1 500 250 Outlot C (Assumed Type V- Fast Food) 3000 B 1500 2 750 1500 1 500 250 Outlot D (Assumed Sit Down Type V- Restaurant) 11000 B 2750 2 1375 1500 1 500 250 Outlot E (Assumed Type V- Fast Food) 3000 B 1500 2 750 1500 1 500 250 Outlot F (Assumed Sit Down Type V- Restaurant) 7000 B 2250 2 1125 1500 1 500 250 Outlot G (Assumed Type V- Fast Food) 3000 B 1500 2 750 1500 1 500 250 Outlot H (Assumed Sit Down Type V- Restaurant) 14000 B 3250 3 1625 1625 1 500 250 Mini Anchor (18.000 SF) ivuni Anchor (24,000 SF) 147,454 Type V 8000 4 4000 4000 4 400 225 Anchor(50,454 SF) Anchor (55,000 SF) EES Page 11 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT Table 4 Assumptions a) Types of Construction are assumed and based on Building Code b) Fire flow is measured at 20 psi and shall not be less than 1500-gpm c) Reduce "Average Spacing between Hydrants" by 10-ft for dead-end streets or roads d) Reduce "Maximum Distance from any Point on Street or Road Frontage to Hydrant" by 50 ft. for dead end streets or roads. e) Outparcel and Outlot buildings are future and type of use is assumed Table 5 (WaterCAD Calibration Exercise Data) Residual/Dynamic Hydrant Hydrant Location Flow (gpm) Pressure (psi) FH #3 H-21 Model Results FH #2 H-22 FH #1 H-23 1,986 1,986 FH #3 S.W. Corner of Lowes 1,986 49 50 55 35 Field Test FH #2 S.W. Corner of Costco 1,986 35 Results S.W. Corner of Costco N. FH #1 Parking Lot 57 Design Summary A 12-inch PVC water main is proposed for the Victory Commons development and is found to be of adequate size. The water main shall connect to the existing City -owned mains in Reserve Loop Road at the north end of the site and along the west side of US Highway 93 at the south end of the project. The proposed main shall loop through the site to prevent dead -ends, provide adequate amount of fire hydrants, provide fire service and protection coverage for all buildings, and deliver domestic services. The anchor and mini anchor grouping of buildings is the largest structure on the site and consequently requires the most fire flow. With application of the City of Kalispell required fire flow reduction of 50% and conservative assumptions made for the structure type, the anchor and mini -anchor grouping of buildings require ample fire flow equal to 4000-gpm. A domestic demand of 100-gpm was applied to the model during a fire event. Upon modeling the water distribution under fire flow conditions, it was found that adequate fire flow can be obtained with two hydrants flowing at 2000-gpm each with a pressure of about 56 psi - greater than the minimum pressure allowed of 20 psi. WaterCAD model distribution calculations summarize the findings and are included in the Appendix C. EES Page 12 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT STORM WATER Drainage System Description The stormwater conveyance system consists of two branches: System A (on the east) and System B (on the west), which each discharge to the triangular -shaped pond downstream. The conveyance system was analyzed using the hydraulic modeling software "Hydraflow Storm Sewers for AutoCAD", which utilizes the Rational Method. The main trunk of pipes and structures were imported into the software and were analyzed for the 10 and 100-year storms. Precipitation Intensity Values were obtained from the State of Montana Hydrology Manual (Chapter 7, Table B-3) for Kalispell, and input to Hydraflow to generate an Intensity -Duration - Frequency (IDF) curve. The following variables were assumed: • Manning's n = 0.013 (concrete pipe) Runoff Coefficient (composite values): CIO = 0.87 Cioo = 0.95 Time of Concentration: Tc = 5 min for all basins, except for the most upstream pipe in Basin A-1 Tc = 13 min for the most upstream pipe in Basin A-1 The sub -basins were delineated and entered into the model per drawing D.1 — Proposed Drainage Map. Profiles containing the Hydraulic Grade Line (HGL) have been generated using the Hydraflow software, and are contained in this report. The following Table 6 summarizes the results of the HGL Profiles: Table 6 (HGL Profile Results) System Storm Results 10-year The HGL is contained within the pipes and does not surcharge the system. A (East) 100-year The HGL is contained within the pipes and does not surcharge the system. 10-year The HGL is contained within the pipes and does not surcharge the system. The HGL rises above the pipes at the upstream reaches, B (West) but does not surcharge the system. The minimum 100-year freeboard is 1.5-feet, which meets the minimum criteria (0.5-feet) per City of Kalispell Stormwater Design Manual. In conclusion, the conveyance system that has been proposed and analyzed for this report demonstrates that the pipe sizes are able to contain the flows for the specified storms. As design continues, the pipes may be resized in order to match the HGL and freeboard requirements most efficiently. EES Page 13 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT Proposed Conditions Per Kalispell Flow Control Criteria (Section 2.2.4), the NRCS Type I 24-hour storm even was used for design. The USDA's TR-55 program was used to model proposed conditions. See Appendix D for TR-55 input and output. Table 7 (100-year, 24-hour Proposed Flows) Property CN Value* Tc hr Area ac Flow cfs Costco 92 0.220 15.88 22.78 Phase Four Spring Prairie Center 92 0.187 35.87 53.61 Total 54.72 76.39 *CN value is based on assuming Urban District (Commercial and Business) which equates to 85% Imperviousness Detention volume occurs within two ponds from elevation 5003 to 5006. The ponds will essentially act as one pond as they are both at relatively the same elevation. The detention pond volume provided by the two proposed ponds is equal to 1.99 ac-ft (see Detention Spreadsheet Appendix D). The detention volume required to maintain the 10-year historic runoff rate is 1.82 ac-ft. The 100-year WSEL is at 3004.8 and the 10-year WSEL is at 3004 (see Structure Output Table Appendix D). The 18" outlet pipe limits the discharge from the ponds to 20.64 cfs, which is below the maximum rate of 26.97 cfs. This outlet is located at 3003 with WQ volume occurring below this elevation. Figure 7-1 from the Kalispell Design Criteria Manual will be followed for outlet control structure and emergency spillway design. According to the criteria, the spillway provides 1' of freeboard and is designed to pass the 100-year post -developed discharge rate (76.39 cfs). With final design, the ponds will be fine graded to meet minimum criteria as follows. The outlet (downstream pond) will be a minimum of 6" above the pond bottom and the pond bottoms will be sloped at 0.5% to 1". The ponds will be designed to drain completely within 72 hours and an 8' wide access ramp will be provided to the pond bottom for maintenance purposes. A berm of minimum 4' width will be provided at the spillway elevation. The 18" outlet pipe will discharge into the existing Swale south of the site which will convey the flow to the existing downstream pond. Water Quality The intent of the proposed development is to use an Infiltration Basin within the proposed ponds below the storage volume elevation to treat the developed runoff. Per Kalispell Water Quality Treatment Design Criteria (Section 6.3.1), pretreatment volume is equal to 20% of the WQ EES Page 14 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT volume required. Per the criteria, the snowmelt event is the most restrictive runoff condition due to its higher initial moisture content, so the WQ volume required is for 1.1 inches of moisture. Groundwater levels are not available, but preliminary analysis indicated that these are well below the required 3' minimum. Initial assessment of soils indicated that the infiltration rate is within the required 0.5 in/hr (min) to 2.5 in/hr (max) required for effective infiltration basin. The existing site including the Costco development is 54.7 acres. At a 10% reduction for snowmelt, this yields a volume of 0.51 ac-ft. Adding 20% to this yields 0.60 ac-ft required for WQv. The water quality volume occurs within the two ponds from elevation 5001 to 5003. The WQ volume provided by the two proposed ponds is equal to 0.846 ac-ft (see WQ Volume Spreadsheet Appendix D). CONCLUSIONS The proposed sanitary, water and storm facilities were designed in accordance with the District's criteria. The proposed water system shall be a 12-inch looped system, utilizing the existing two points of connection to the existing system. The proposed sanitary sewer shall be an 8-inch service pipe, connecting to the existing 12-inch stub across Highway 93. The required improvements recommended by this study for the storm system are designed to control damage from storm runoff and downstream property. The proposed ponds are designed to capture and release the EURV and 10-year events at or below the historic levels and account for both ofsite basins and offsite basins. REFERENCES 1. City of Kalispell Standards for Design and Construction. Kalispell. November 2009. 2. Spring Prairie Center — Basis of Design Report Amendment For Phase II — Costco. Morrison Maierle, Inc. July 2004. 3. Circular DEQ-2 — Design Standards for Public Sewage Systems. Montana Department of Environmental Quality. October 2012. 4. Circular DEQ-1 — Standards for Water Works. Montana Department of Environmental Quality. February 2006. 5. International Fire Code. 2006. 6. City of Kalispell Extension of Services Plan Kalispell. 2004 7. Montana Public Works Standard Specifications. Montana Contractors' Association. April 2010. EES Page 15 of 15 TKG Spring Prairie Development Four PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT APPENDIX A A.1 Topographic Survey with Existing Utilities A.2 Master Utility Plan OWNER: STATE OF MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION FOR: TKG SPRING PRAIRIE DEVELOPMENT FOUR, LLC BY: THOMAS, DEAN AND HOSKINS, INC. 450 CORPORATE DRIVE — SUITE #101 KALISPELL, MT. 59901 PHONE: (406) 751-5246 DATE: JANUARY, 2015 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF TKG SPRING PRAIRIE DEVELOPMENT FOUR SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA. PARCEL 2 C.O.S. 17132 8 HUTTON RANCH RD. W N O O Ln Ln cn Ln U) N En Ln Ln 15 16 17 z O _ TRACT 2A C.O.S. 17132 TRACT 1 C.O.S. 19311 LEGEND PROPERTY BOUNDARY BUILDING ------ EASEMENT CONTOUR LINE— 1 FT. INTERVALS 3035 CONTOUR LINE— 5FT. INTERVALS CONCRETE ASPHALT ------ GRAVEL PAINT STRIPE ® WATER WELL CURB & GUTTER INLET & INLET APRON CURB (STRAIGHT) � DRAINAGE STORMDRAIN SD O MANHOLE, OR AS NOTED SANITARY SEWER S WATER MAIN W FIBER OPTIC FIBER (' FIRE HYDRANT >< WATER VALVE 2:� FROST FREE SPIGOT G SEWER CLEANOUT CHAINLINK FENCE X—X—X—X WIRE FENCE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC E OVERHEAD TELEPHONE TEL EDGE OF WATER LIGHT (LIGHT POLE) UTILITY POLE DECIDUOUS TREE ® CONIFEROUS TREE HEDGE ELECTRIC PANEL CURB STOP Q STREET SIGN p FLAG POLE ----- E ----- BURIED ELECTRIC 0 TELEPHONE RISER © CABLE TV RISER 0 ELECTRICAL BOX © ELECTRICAL BOX FLUSH RETAINING WALL CULVERT EXISTING CONDITIONS 0 w w U) w U) 0 J J Q L O N 0 j 11 c� 0 z g n J_ H D J W 0' a_ O U Q U 00 O W a a_ I J J W 0- V) J Y H / W Z O V) w O J L� / n O O J w ry ui �i ry I m OUTLOT C 3LRCP OUTLOT B OUTLOT D U.S. HIGHWAY 93cn OUTLOT E 12" W 1T, W — 8" SS 8" SS= kS=L' =12 W 12 W 12 W 12 W 12 W 12 12 W 12 W 12 11299 ^I � I3 I 3 MINI ANCHOR 2 MINI ANCHOR 1 ANCHOR 2 ANCHOR 1 N cv I I� I I IN 31 I 1 1 N I I I OUTLOT A 31 112 W 12 W rx 8" SS 36" RCP Q 2�` 3 �I M � M + 1 1 +1 1 OUTLOT J 1 +1 1 IL Yy IL ry lY w " SS 8" SS 36" RCP 48" RCF L N . W 12 12 4 2 - SS 8" S 8" SS 8" SS 48" RCP 48" RCP Lij 8" tl U LEGEND .. EXISTING PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED UTILITY EASEMENT PROPOSED 100-YR WSEL EXISTING CURB PROPOSED FLOWLINE EXISTING STORM LINE PROPOSED STORM LINE EXISTING SANITARY LINE PROPOSED SANITARY LINE EXISTING WATER LINE PROPOSED WATER LINE EXISTING TELEPHONE LINE EXISTING FIBER OPTIC LINE EXISTING STORM INLET PROPOSED STORM INLET EXISTING STORM MANHOLE PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT PROPOSED SITE LIGHTING IJ Q 0 m z O (n w Of 0 z PROJECT NO: FL0001.01 DESIGNED BY: JNA DRAWN BY: KNK DATE: 01.09.15 APPENDIX B: Sanitary Sewer System Calculations B.1 Flowmaster Report Worksheet for Circular Pipe - 1 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Project Description Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Normal Depth Input Data Roughness Coefficient 0.010 Channel Slope 0.00400 ft/ft Diameter 0.67 ft Discharge 0.81 ft3/s Results Normal Depth 0.46 ft Flow Area 0.25 ftz Wetted Perimeter 1.30 ft Hydraulic Radius 0.20 ft Top Width 0.62 ft Critical Depth 0.42 ft Percent Full 68.4 % Critical Slope 0.00487 ft/ft Velocity 3.17 ft/s Velocity Head 0.16 ft Specific Energy 0.61 ft Froude Number 0.87 Maximum Discharge 1.07 ft3/s Discharge Full 0.99 ft3/s Slope Full 0.00263 ft/ft Flow Type SubCritical GVF Input Data Downstream Depth 0.00 ft Length 0.00 ft Number Of Steps 0 GVF Output Data Upstream Depth 0.00 ft Profile Description Profile Headloss 0.00 ft Average End Depth Over Rise 0.00 % Normal Depth Over Rise 68.39 % Downstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Sd&aiimYa�PfNmtWaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 1/6/2015 3:25:51 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 Worksheet for Circular Pipe - 1 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... GVF Output Data Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Normal Depth 0.46 ft Critical Depth 0.42 ft Channel Slope 0.00400 ft/ft Critical Slope 0.00487 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Sd&aiimYa�PfNmtWaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 1/6/2015 3:25:51 PM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 2 of 2 APPENDIX C: Water System Design Calculations C.1 Costco Hydrant Fire Flows C.2 Junction Locations C.3 Pipe Locations CA WaterCAD Reports Hydrant Flow and Fire Flow SOP 0 Equipment Required: 1. Fire Hydrant (FH) Pressure Gauge 4. FIA Chart 2. 2.5" FH Nozzle S. Flow GPM Graph 3. Hydrant Key Two FHs are required to perform the flow test. For the purpose of this SOP, FH1 will be designated as the fire hydrant for reading static and residual pressure. FH2 will be designated as the fire hydrant for reading dynamic flow pressure. FHI and F112 shall be located on the same main water line. 1. Record field data: City Staff � � .. w e- Date FH1 Location WeD AA 0910ra 1*4 FH1 # 2? Z Location a o' FH2 # 1 1 FH2 5 "d O 1 ZZ3903y 2. Attach static cap with gauge to FH1. Open the hydrant slowly. Read and record the static pressure. Static Pressure FH1= r 3. Remove cap and install 2.5" nozzle on FH2. Be cautious of flow location, discharge flow in a direction where no damage is done to personal or public property. 4. Open FH2 and read and record dynamic pressure from nozzle gauge. Dynamic Pressure FH2 = ; 5. Read and record the residual pressure from FH1 Residuai Pressure FH1= 11 Ensure there Is a pressure drop between the static and residual pressures. If the difference is minimal open the other hydrant cap. 6. Compute Hydrant Flow, Use FIA Chart, locate row for outlet pressure (PSI) recorded from the Dynamic Pressure FH2, folio o the right to the 21/2" Outlet Diameter in inches column. N L FIR Is Flow igpm)_,._1 , �� c If two 2.5" caps were flowed note and double the flow rate.. 7. Compute Fire Flows.. Plot on Flow GPM Graph- a. Y-axis --Static Pressure from FH1, X axis GPM = 0 b Y-axis Residual Pressure from FH1, X.axis GPM = from #6 c. Connect plot points and extend line line to 20 psi. Record flow from X-axis at 20 psi. Flow (gpm) @ 20 psi PRESSURE- P.S.I. I rlm a E m -0 TutNm m J-51 ,�-50 .,% ram,. ,�— 52 �..�-1. ... ......., ........ ,�..._.. 7. 2 ,�-4 9................... ........ ., N IL'S Alppeeyy fin, LLZ �1 did ... ... ... ... ... . r 0 P m —48 aw a� ,,,,,,---------------- — � 4 a� ... ....... .- ----------- P !N .-U mm „11!k ' "'YM'�" a _... .................. .__ .., ...-..-..-.-..-.-.. =--- �... AM...., .-...-....-.......... '.:,,. •� ...., _ ..., .,.W ..., ..., ...._,._,._,._,._,._,._,._� .... ., ...., n p p 1 0 1 I 0 B 1 1 J 3J-31 1-15; - ..6 J-2U �27- g J- = J-25. -4 ��-17 J-41 32 -33Y .. p -6�� J-65 -3"4 J-6 ,IJ-63 i -35 j-42 � w -36 -37 -43 J=1.9 J-20 j-21 1 -22 �-38 -39 I U-40 OW FI o we r & Stone m 0 0 P-7 N CL A � ryry � —�r .... LLZ did Y v "0 ,6 ell, 1�7........� v N, n .. 'N: �� , ,�. �. � , � ,,,,, M, n, ....... .. � .. � . ---- .......... ._W . .M .... .' ...........,W .':,W.I ,., kJ0., Y ,.. P-53 Lr- p --a m 0 B 001 LO � I P —2 4 cn I —1 — 5 .... P — 2 8, 3 P-5 P-106 P—S9 �,,.�..,,., P — Y u �u �w P-113w P-110t- ," W, P-4 � P-107 P-60 � i —61 —46 11111 P-4 I P-64-0 pia�..._.. RMIMON OW FI o we r & Stone Victory Commons Junction Report - Domestic Demands Label Elevation (ft) Demand (gpm) Pressure (psi) J-1 3,017.00 0 146 J-2 3,016.00 0 147 J-3 3,015.00 0 147 J-4 3,013.00 0 148 J-5 3,015.00 0 147 J-6 3,015.00 0 147 J-7 3,015.00 0 147 J-8 3,017.00 0 146 J-9 3,019.00 0 145 J-10 3,009.00 0 150 J-11 3,006.00 0 151 J-12 3,006.00 0 151 J-13 3,025.00 0 143 J-14 3,011.00 0 149 J-15 3,010.00 0 149 J-16 3,008.00 0 150 J-17 3,008.00 0 150 J-18 3,007.00 0 151 J-19 3,007.00 0 151 J-20 3,006.00 0 151 J-21 3,006.00 0 151 J-22 3,005.00 0 151 J-23 3,003.00 0 152 J-24 3,008.00 0 150 J-25 3,008.00 0 150 J-26 3,008.00 0 150 J-27 3,008.00 0 150 J-28 3,008.00 0 150 J-29 3,009.00 0 150 J-30 3,010.00 0 149 J-31 3,010.00 0 149 J-32 3,008.00 0 150 J-33 3,008.00 0 150 J-34 3,007.00 0 151 J-35 3,007.00 0 151 J-36 3,005.50 0 151 J-37 3,005.00 0 151 J-38 3,005.00 0 151 J-39 3,005.00 0 151 J-40 3,003.00 0 152 J-41 3,007.00 0 151 J-42 3,007.00 0 151 J-43 3,006.00 0 151 J-45 3,014.00 0 148 Victory Commons, aparker Page 1 1/7/2015 Victory Commons Junction Report - Domestic Demands Label Elevation (ft) Demand (gpm) Pressure (psi) J-47 3,015.00 0 147 J-48 3,015.00 0 147 J-49 3,016.00 0 147 J-50 3,017.00 0 146 J-51 3,017.00 0 146 J-52 3,017.00 0 146 J-58 3,025.00 0 143 J-59 3,025.00 0 143 J-60 3,025.00 0 143 J-63 3,007.00 0 151 J-64 3,007.00 0 151 J-65 3,007.00 0 151 J-66 3,007.00 100 151 Victory Commons, aparker Page 2 1/7/2015 Victory Commons Fire Flow Report - Fire Flow Demands Label Elevation (ft) Demand (gpm) Pressure (psi) H-2 3,007.00 2,000 58 H-3 3,007.00 0 59 H-4 3,007.00 2,000 56 H-5 3,008.00 0 58 H-6 3,014.00 0 56 H-7 3,015.00 0 56 H-8 3,008.00 0 59 H-9 3,008.00 0 59 H-10 3,010.00 0 58 H-11 3,008.00 0 59 H-12 3,007.00 0 60 H-13 3,005.50 0 61 H-14 3,005.00 0 61 H-15 3,003.00 0 62 H-16 3,005.00 0 60 H-17 3,009.00 0 60 H-18 3,015.00 0 56 H-19 3,017.00 0 55 H-20 3,019.00 0 54 H-21 3,017.00 0 55 H-22 3,016.00 0 56 H-23 3,015.00 0 56 H-24 3,007.00 0 59 H-25 3,007.00 0 59 J-1 3,017.00 0 56 J-2 3,016.00 0 56 J-3 3,015.00 0 57 J-4 3,013.00 0 57 J-5 3,015.00 0 56 J-6 3,015.00 0 56 J-7 3,015.00 0 56 J-8 3,017.00 0 55 J-9 3,019.00 0 54 J-10 3,009.00 0 60 J-11 3,006.00 0 62 J-12 3,006.00 0 64 J-13 3,025.00 0 69 J-14 3,011.00 0 57 J-15 3,010.00 0 58 J-16 3,008.00 0 59 J-17 3,008.00 0 58 J-18 3,007.00 0 58 J-19 3,007.00 0 59 J-20 3,006.00 0 59 Victory Commons, aparker Page 3 1/7/2015 Victory Commons Fire Flow Report - Fire Flow Demands Label Elevation (ft) Demand (gpm) Pressure (psi) J-21 3,006.00 0 59 J-22 3,005.00 0 60 J-23 3,003.00 0 62 J-24 3,008.00 0 59 J-25 3,008.00 0 59 J-26 3,008.00 0 59 J-27 3,008.00 0 59 J-28 3,008.00 0 59 J-29 3,009.00 0 58 J-30 3,010.00 0 58 J-31 3,010.00 0 58 J-32 3,008.00 0 59 J-33 3,008.00 0 59 J-34 3,007.00 0 60 J-35 3,007.00 0 60 J-36 3,005.50 0 61 J-37 3,005.00 0 61 J-38 3,005.00 0 61 J-39 3,005.00 0 61 J-40 3,003.00 0 62 J-41 3,007.00 0 59 J-42 3,007.00 0 59 J-43 3,006.00 0 59 J-45 3,014.00 0 56 J-47 3,015.00 0 56 J-48 3,015.00 0 56 J-49 3,016.00 0 56 J-50 3,017.00 0 55 J-51 3,017.00 0 55 J-52 3,017.00 0 56 J-58 3,025.00 0 69 J-59 3,025.00 0 73 J-60 3,025.00 0 73 J-63 3,007.00 0 59 J-64 3,007.00 0 59 J-65 3,007.00 0 59 J-66 3,007.00 100 59 Victory Commons, aparker Page 4 1/7/2015 APPENDIX D: Storm System Design D.1 Soils Map D.2 FIRM D.3 Existing Drainage Basins Information DA Proposed Drainage Basins Information D.5 HGL Profiles 10 and 100 year D.6 Current Data Description Existing 2 and 10 D.7 Hydrograph Peak Time Table Existing 2 and 10 D.8 Watershed Peak Table Existing 2 and 10 D.9 Output Hydrograph Existing 2 D.10 Current Data Description Proposed 10 and 100 D.11 Hydrograph Peak Time Table Proposed 10 and 100 D.12 Structure Output Table Proposed 10 and 100 D.13 Watershed Peak Table Proposed 10 and 100 D.14 Output Hydrograph Proposed 100 D.15 UD-Detention_v2.34 Kalispell PH 4 Preliminary WQ D.16 UD-Detention_v2.34 Kalispell PH 4 Preliminary WQ USDA United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Upper Flathead Valley Area, Montana November 13, 2014 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://wwwenreseusdaegov/wps/portal/ nres/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (httpe// offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://wwwenreseusdaegov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nres12p2®053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey orwet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is ajoint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 SoilMap..................................................................................................................7 SoilMap................................................................................................................8 Legend..................................................................................................................9 MapUnit Legend................................................................................................10 MapUnit Descriptions........................................................................................10 Upper Flathead Valley Area, Montana............................................................12 Bs —Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes.......................12 Bt—Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes......................13 Kb —Kalispell gravelly loam, moderately deep over gravel, 3 to 7 percent slopes....................................................................................................14 Ke—Kalispell loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes...................................................15 Kza—Kalispell-Tuffit silt loams, 0 to 3 percent slopes.................................16 Kzb—Kalispell-Tuffit silt loams, 3 to 7 percent slopes.................................17 Ms —Muck and peat....................................................................................19 References............................................................................................................22 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the Custom Soil Resource Report individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil - landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 697880 697950 698020 698090 698160 698160 a m 698230 48° 14' 0" N 0 m V M MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons PI Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout �p Borrow Pit Clay Spot by" Closed Depression Gravel Pit A Gravelly Spot Landfill A,, Lava Flow Marsh or swamp a Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water 1'0; Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot 4g, Severely Eroded Spot 0 Sinkhole Ap Slide or Slip oa Sodic Spot Custom Soil Resource Report MAP INFORMATION Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:20,000. Stony Spot Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause Other misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting Special Line Features soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Water Features Streams and Canals Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Transportation Rails Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Interstate Highways Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) US Routes Major Roads Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator Local Roads projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Background Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate so Aerial Photography 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: Upper Flathead Valley Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 12, Sep 3, 2014 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 11, 2011—Jul 30, 2011 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 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Upper Flathead Valley Area, Montana (MT617) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Bs Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 2.1 4.5% 0 to 7 percent slopes Bt Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 4.1 8.8% 7 to 12 percent slopes Kb Kalispell gravelly loam, 1.2 2.6% moderately deep over gravel, 3 to 7 percent slopes Ke Kalispell loam, 0 to 3 percent 10.4 22.5% slopes Kza Kalispell-Tuffit silt loams, 0 to 3 11.8 25.7% percent slopes Kzb Kalispell-Tuffit silt loams, 3 to 7 15.2 33.0% percent slopes Ms Muck and peat 1.4 3.0% Totals for Area of Interest 46.1 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits forthe properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, ordissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with 10 Custom Soil Resource Report some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complexthat it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but ratherto separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha - Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 11 Custom Soil Resource Report Upper Flathead Valley Area, Montana Bs —Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vp3 Elevation: 1,800 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 90 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Blanchard and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Blanchard Setting Landform: Dunes Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: very fine sandy loam C - 7 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 7 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 15 percent High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Bt—Blanchard very fine sandy loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vp4 Elevation: 1,800 to 3,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 90 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Blanchard and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Blanchard Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Wind reworked alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: very fine sandy loam C - 7 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand Properties and qualities Slope: 7 to 12 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 20 percent 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Kb —Kalispell gravelly loam, moderately deep over gravel, 3 to 7 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vgd Elevation: 2,600 to 3,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 105 to 125 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Kalispell and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: gravelly loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: gravelly loam Bk - 13 to 30 inches: gravelly loam C - 30 to 60 inches: stratified gravelly loamy fine sand to gravelly silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 7 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) 14 Custom Soil Resource Report Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 15 percent Ke—Kalispell loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vgh Elevation: 2,600 to 3,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 105 to 125 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Kalispell and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: silt loam Bk - 13 to 30 inches: silt loam C - 30 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 10 percent Kza—Kalispell-Tuffit silt loams, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vr0 Elevation: 2,600 to 3,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 105 to 125 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Kalispell and similar soils: 60 percent Tuffit and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: silt loam C - 13 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 inches) 16 Custom Soil Resource Report Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Description of Tuffit Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 4 inches: silt loam Btn - 4 to 12 inches: silty clay Bkn - 12 to 29 inches: silty clay loam C - 29 to 60 inches: stratified very fine sandy loam to silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to strongly saline (8.0 to 32.0 mmhos/ cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Claypan (cp) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW147MT) Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 10 percent Kzb—Kalispell-Tuffit silt loams, 3 to 7 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vrl 17 Custom Soil Resource Report Elevation: 2,600 to 3,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 105 to 125 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Kalispell and similar soils: 60 percent Tuffit and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Kalispell Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Ap - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bw - 8 to 13 inches: silt loam C - 13 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 7 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (2.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW184MT) Description of Tuffit Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 4 inches: silt loam Btn - 4 to 12 inches: silty clay Bkn - 12 to 29 inches: silty clay loam C - 29 to 60 inches: stratified very fine sandy loam to silty clay loam 18 Custom Soil Resource Report Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 7 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to strongly saline (8.0 to 32.0 mmhos/ cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 30.0 Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Claypan (cp) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW147MT) Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 10 percent Ms —Muck and peat Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 4vry Elevation: 4,500 to 5,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost -free period: 70 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Muck and peat and similar soils: 45 percent IMnginaw and similar soils: 40 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Muck And Peat Setting Landform: Flood plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear 19 Custom Soil Resource Report Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 6 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Ecological site: Wet meadow (wm) 15-19" p.z. (R044XW188MT) Description of Winginaw Setting Landform: Flood plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Organic material over alluvium Typical profile Oil - 0 to 8 inches: peat Oi2 - 8 to 28 inches: peat 2Ak - 28 to 32 inches: loam 2Bkgl - 32 to 40 inches: gravelly loam 2Bkg2 - 40 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: Frequent Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 35 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very high (about 12.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Minor Components Nonhydric Percent of map unit. 15 percent 20 Custom Soil Resource Report 21 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydricsoils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://wwwenreseusdaegov/wps/portal/nres/ detail/national/soils/?cid=nres12p2®05262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://wwwenreseusdaegov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres12p2®053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://wwwenreseusdaegov/wps/ portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid®n res12p2®053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://wwwenreseusdaegov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nres12p2®05337 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://wwwenreseusdaegov/wps/portal/nres/ detail/national/landuse/rangepastu re/?cid=stelprdb10308 22 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department nfAgriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 43O'V|. htt»://www.nros.usdm.gov/wps/portaV United States Department nfAgriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nros.usdm.gov/wps/portaVnros/detmiVnmtionmVsoi|s/? oid=nms142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.8.Department nfAgriculture Handbook 21O. hftp1Y 23 0 w a' w U) w a' U) 0 a' J J Q L 0 N 0 DRAINAGE LEGEND PROPERTY LINE 7 151 EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR 71 ^ EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR EXISTING MAJOR, BASIN BOUNDARY LINE ST.......................................................... EXISTING STORM LINE 00 EXISTING STORM INLET Olp EXISTING STORM MANHOLE 0111110. FLOW ARROW BASIN DESIGNATION A-1 A BASIN AREA IN ACRES CD 3 0 a_ a w 0 a z Q 0 ca z X W I O Q U 00 O W U) a a_ I J J W a_ V) J a Y f- / W Z O V) w O J L� / a_ w Q 0 m Z O w 0 z PROJECT NO: FL0001.01 DESIGNED BY: JNA DRAWN BY: KNK DATE: 0 w a' w U) w a' U) 0 a' J J Q L O N 0 c� 0 a w ca a z a 0 0 w V) O a_ O or I 0 0 Q U 00 O W V) a a_ I J J W 0- V) J a Y H / W Z O V) w O J L� / 3019 DRAINAGE LEGEND 715 717 PROPERTY LINE EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MAJOR BASIN BOUNDARY LINE .. EXISTING STORM LINE PROPOSED STORM LINE EXISTING STORM INLET PROPOSED STORM INLET EXISTING STORM MANHOLE PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE FLOW ARROW BASIN DESIGNATION 6A)::— BASIN AREA IN ACRES w Q 0 m Z O w Of 0 PROJECT NO: FL0001.01 DESIGNED BY: JNA DRAWN BY: KNK DATE: Storm Sewer Profile Proj. file: Kalispell Storm Model.stm 0 r Elev. (ft) FLi OR Ma 3027.00 1 Storm System A (East): HGL Profile for 1 0-year Storm qq= W rft;�j V ftac:�, M—tv 0.9 OMIM— 0; FA!—" Q CPMM 0 V� Rog W In'W RD .L IR `7 V4 Re 2 M mr� ME Mp SC3 M V) A C39, M= 0 A S CAM 0 M V% 0 M 0 g K5 M M to W CI MM, to C� Q M 61 UJ LLI + WUJW + C% W F unj + 1* W UJ u F—" + in iu- ujW + P.- W UJLLI + go iu- , —" Uinj 4 IM — C —, LU UM - W Fu F" + W Fu F" W Fu Ir G..E tp Ir G..E 0 W —r-.E M NCH W NCH in W—r.E W W—CH W er—CH W W—C.E W WS�s M WE -- L 150.389Lf - 54" @ 0. 169.648Lf-54L@0,30% L 60.810U 60"@0M% 2997.06 0 100 200 300 400 500 — HGL— EGL .................. L-- 139.275U - 36'@ 030% 35,851U-36"@031% 154.042U: 36" @ Q.qPN 3003.00 - 54" @ 0.30% 142.343Lf - 48" @ 0.30% % — 88.999Lf - 48" @ 0.29% — 150.397U-54"@0.31% - 128.000U - 54" @ 0.30% .2997.00 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 Reach (ft) Storm Sewers Storm Sewer Profile Proj. file: Kalispell Storm Model.stm 0 Elev. (ft) jig 53' Ma 3027.00 1 Storm System A (East): HGL Profile for 1 00-year Storm qq= V4 M* Nt ftac:�, M—tv 1 0.9 OMIM— 0; FA!_" Q 0 92 F� S;g RD .L IR A R A 4 Ran �; V, z; "? M CIO 88VO C:1 99" Mp r3g cz$ M3 C31 8 r3 M C� M 4 A UJ LLI + (M di _...: UJ W + iu- ujuj + W UJ u + iu- uj "I + iu- ui al + iu- ui W3 4 LU iij FA + W Fu F" + W Mu W 1; W Fu J� Ir G..E tp Ir G..E 0 W _Cs M W—CH W W—CH M W—r.E W W—CH W er—CH W W—CH W WS�s M WE 150.389Lf - 54" @ 0. 169.648Lf-54L@0,30% L 60.810U 60"@0M% 2997.06 0 100 200 300 400 500 - HGL- EGL .................. L-- 139.275U - 36'@ 030% 35,851U-36"@031% 154.042U: 36" @ Q.qPN 3003.00 - 54" @ 0.30% 142.343Lf - 48" @ 0.30% % 88.999Lf - 48" @ 0.29% — 150.397U-54"@0.31% - 128.000U - 54" @ 0.30% .2997.00 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 Reach (ft) Storm Sewers Storm Sewer Profile Proj. file: Kalispell Storm Model.stm OTIMIt 2997.00 Storm System B (West): HGL Profile for 1 0-year Storm J MCA7 -5 Vag to a Cd V32 0 MR CA ui g MI �;z C3 Wig" cp agc�$ jg M g Qc,- M90 'UJUI r- C3 M94" ii V,823 M in :9 4 U—j W! Q uj + iLi ui L" + iu- ujW W 4 i-u M + i-u ui W F- + iu-uj"j In 2 � E E z; A E M E �;:p; jEar q E M tr G'.E Ir G..E W W—CH W W—CH W cr—CH W Ss 13.E OE -j Q.S -j 0 WOOD go— ; US a to U3 ; raw F- co C) 00 16 a QO 0i a a C� 'i + ;:: LU N j-u LU Uj "j LU Fu 19 -E A E E �:;,; E z; W cr—CH M cr—C.E W W —r-.E M WE 1=10AW9619, - 48" @ 0.31% 70,152L - k 24" @ 0.30% 0% 10M28Lf L 36" CQ O� : 30.00 127.218Lf - 36" @ 0,30% — 219.787Lf - 42" @ 0.30% 11 1.044Lf - 48" @ 031 % �� 2997.00 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 Storm Sewers Storm Sewer Profile Proj. file: Kalispell Storm Model.stm 7 -5 wDZ Vag U-j W! g Q M MW 2 E �P; �,; A M tr G'.E Ir G..E OTIMIt 2997.00 Storm System B (West): HGL Profile for 1 00-year Storm M a Cd 0 CA ui x U3 C3 cp ig aRC3 M M '. r- VQA CI M= ;9 T �c WUJLU + he In ui W 4 M iL-i ui "I + 1�- . iL-i ui W + M iu-uj"j W W W W SH W W —CH W W S E W W Ss -i ag OE JCS -j 0 WOOD go— ; US a to U3 ; raw vp�-� F- M co C) 00 16 a QO 0i a a k7 C� 'i + ;:: LU N j-u LU Uj "j r LU Fu 19 -E A E E :;,; E z; W cr —C.E M cr —C.E W W —r-.E M WE 1=10AW9619, - 48" @ 0.31% 70,152L - k 24" @ 0.30% 0% 10M28Lf L 36" CQ O� : 30.00 127.218Lf - 36" @ 0,30% — 219.787Lf - 42" @ 0.30% 11 1.044Lf - 48" @ 031 % �� 2997.00 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 Storm Sewers WinTR-55 Current Data Description --- Identification Data --- User: EES Date: 1/7/2015 Project: Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Units: English SubTitle: Kalispell, MT (Undeveloped) Areal Units: Acres State: Montana County: Flathead Filename: P:\Flower & Stone\MT, Kalispell - Phase 4\07 Design\Drainage\TR-55\Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 exist --- Sub -Area Data --- Name Description Reach Area(ac) RCN Tc ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Costco Costco Site Reach 1 15.88 96 0.220 Phase 4 Phase 4 Undeveloped Reach 1 38.84 80 .264 Total area: 54.72 (ac) --- Storm Data -- Rainfall Depth by Rainfall Return Period 2-Yr 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr -Yr (in) (in) (in) (in) (in) (in) (in) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.4 1.8 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.0 .0 Storm Data Source: User -provided custom storm data Rainfall Distribution Type: Type I Dimensionless Unit Hydrograph: <standard> WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 6:05:16 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Developed) Flathead County, Montana Hydrograph Peak/Peak Time Table (Trial #1) Sub -Area Peak Flow and Peak Time (hr) by Rainfall Return Period or Reach 2-Yr 10-Yr Identifier (cfs) (cfs) (hr) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBAREAS Costco 7.26 12.92 10.03 10.02 Phase 4 17.07 30.38 10.00 9.99 REACHES Reach 1 24.26 43.17 10.01 10.00 Down 12.15 19.18 10.19 10.20 OUTLET 12.15 19.18 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 8:57:08 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Developed) Flathead County, Montana Hydrograph Peak/Peak Time Table (Trial #2) Sub -Area Peak Flow and Peak Time (hr) by Rainfall Return Period or Reach 2-Yr 10-Yr Identifier (cfs) (cfs) (hr) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBAREAS Costco 7.26 12.92 10.03 10.02 Phase 4 17.07 30.38 10.00 9.99 REACHES Reach 1 24.26 43.17 10.01 10.00 Down 15.63 28.11 10.14 10.13 OUTLET 15.63 28.11 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 8:57:08 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Developed) Flathead County, Montana Hydrograph Peak/Peak Time Table (Trial #3) Sub -Area Peak Flow and Peak Time (hr) by Rainfall Return Period or Reach 2-Yr 10-Yr Identifier (cfs) (cfs) (hr) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBAREAS Costco 7.26 12.92 10.03 10.02 Phase 4 17.07 30.38 10.00 9.99 REACHES Reach 1 24.26 43.17 10.01 10.00 Down 18.18 32.56 10.12 10.11 OUTLET 18.18 32.56 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 8:57:08 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Undeveloped) Flathead County, Montana Watershed Peak Table (Trial #1) Sub -Area or Reach Identifier SUBAREAS Costco Phase 4 REACHES Reach 1 Down OUTLET Peak Flow by Rainfall Return Period 2-Yr 10-Yr (cfs) (cfs) ------------------------------------------ 10.55 16.51 2.72 10.46 12.73 26.40 3.39 6.87 3.39 6.87 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 6:05:37 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Undeveloped) Flathead County, Montana Watershed Peak Table (Trial #2) Sub -Area or Reach Identifier SUBAREAS Costco Phase 4 REACHES Reach 1 Down OUTLET Peak Flow by Rainfall Return Period 2-Yr 10-Yr (cfs) (cfs) ------------------------------------------ 10.55 16.51 2.72 10.46 12.73 26.40 4.29 8.77 4.29 8.77 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 6:05:37 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Undeveloped) Flathead County, Montana Watershed Peak Table (Trial #3) Sub -Area Peak Flow by Rainfall Return Period or Reach 2-Yr 10-Yr Identifier (cfs) (cfs) -------------------------------------------------------- SUBAREAS Costco 10.55 16.51 Phase 4 2.72 10.46 REACHES Reach 1 12.73 26.40 Down 5.03 10.34 OUTLET 5.03 10.34 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 6:05:37 AM ObTR-Sf Wpu Wrograph Project Spring Prairie feu Ph 4 1AC1816 Subareas: iCos co, Phose 4 Mll Ron Mr PCon 8Sto011Kalispell -Phase4 78esigoCraioageliRSB8priogPrairieBevPh9eai�iogdrainageRdHw58 — Costso (ds) i WinTR-55 Current Data Description --- Identification Data --- User: EES Date: 1/7/2015 Project: Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Units: English SubTitle: Kalispell, MT (Developed) Areal Units: Acres State: Montana County: Flathead Filename: P:\Flower & Stone\MT, Kalispell - Phase 4\07 Design\Drainage\TR-55\Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 propc --- Sub -Area Data --- Name Description Reach Area(ac) RCN Tc ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Costco Costco Site Reach 1 15.88 92 0.220 Phase 4 Phase 4 Development Reach 1 35.87 92 .187 Total area: 51.75 (ac) --- Storm Data -- Rainfall Depth by Rainfall Return Period 2-Yr 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr 1-Yr (in) (in) (in) (in) (in) (in) (in) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.4 .0 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.0 .0 Storm Data Source: User -provided custom storm data Rainfall Distribution Type: Type I Dimensionless Unit Hydrograph: <standard> WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 5:47:58 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Developed) Flathead County, Montana Hydrograph Peak/Peak Time Table (Trial #1) Sub -Area Peak Flow and Peak Time (hr) by Rainfall Return Period or Reach 10-Yr 100-Yr Identifier (cfs) (cfs) (hr) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBAREAS Costco 12.92 22.78 10.02 10.01 Phase 4 30.38 53.61 9.99 9.99 REACHES Reach 1 43.17 76.09 10.00 10.00 Down 19.18 20.64 10.20 10.36 OUTLET 19.18 20.64 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 5:49:58 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Developed) Flathead County, Montana Hydrograph Peak/Peak Time Table (Trial #2) Sub -Area Peak Flow and Peak Time (hr) by Rainfall Return Period or Reach 10-Yr 100-Yr Identifier (cfs) (cfs) (hr) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBAREAS Costco 12.92 22.78 10.02 10.01 Phase 4 30.38 53.61 9.99 9.99 REACHES Reach 1 43.17 76.09 10.00 10.00 Down 28.11 34.46 10.13 10.19 OUTLET 28.11 34.46 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 5:49:58 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Developed) Flathead County, Montana Hydrograph Peak/Peak Time Table (Trial #3) Sub -Area Peak Flow and Peak Time (hr) by Rainfall Return Period or Reach 10-Yr 100-Yr Identifier (cfs) (cfs) (hr) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBAREAS Costco 12.92 22.78 10.02 10.01 Phase 4 30.38 53.61 9.99 9.99 REACHES Reach 1 43.17 76.09 10.00 10.00 Down 32.56 50.68 10.11 10.13 OUTLET 32.56 50.68 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 5:49:58 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Developed) Flathead County, Montana Structure Output Table Reach Peak Flow (PF), Storage Volume (SV), Stage (STG) Identifier by Rainfall Return Period Structure Identifier 10-Yr 100-Yr Reach: Reach 1 Pipe : Pond 1 18 (in) PF (cfs) 19.18 20.64 SV (ac ft) .83 1.82 STG (ft) .87 1.68 24 (in) PF (cfs) 28.11 34.46 SV (ac ft) .60 1.25 STG (ft) .64 1.23 30 (in) PF (cfs) 32.56 50.68 SV (ac ft) .46 .85 STG (ft) .49 .88 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 5:50:15 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Developed) Flathead County, Montana Watershed Peak Table (Trial #1) Sub -Area Peak Flow by Rainfall Return Period or Reach 10-Yr 100-Yr Identifier (cfs) (cfs) -------------------------------------------------------- SUBAREAS Costco 12.92 22.78 Phase 4 30.38 53.61 REACHES Reach 1 43.17 76.09 Down 19.18 20.64 OUTLET 19.18 20.64 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 5:49:05 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Developed) Flathead County, Montana Watershed Peak Table (Trial #2) Sub -Area Peak Flow by Rainfall Return Period or Reach 10-Yr 100-Yr Identifier (cfs) (cfs) -------------------------------------------------------- SUBAREAS Costco 12.92 22.78 Phase 4 30.38 53.61 REACHES Reach 1 43.17 76.09 Down 28.11 34.46 OUTLET 28.11 34.46 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 5:49:05 AM EES Spring Prairie Dev Ph 4 Kalispell, MT (Developed) Flathead County, Montana Watershed Peak Table (Trial #3) Sub -Area Peak Flow by Rainfall Return Period or Reach 10-Yr 100-Yr Identifier (cfs) (cfs) -------------------------------------------------------- SUBAREAS Costco 12.92 22.78 Phase 4 30.38 53.61 REACHES Reach 1 43.17 76.09 Down 32.56 50.68 OUTLET 32.56 50.68 WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 Page 1 1/7/2015 5:49:05 AM ObTR-SfeulpufWrograph Project Spring Prairie feu Ph 4 1AC1816 al #8 Suhareas:(Wco, Phose4 N10) Ron M-Yr P,Tlower8IuWli,halispell-Phase4Y] Nile gevPh4proposeddraioageU71 w55 — ostco .... final #2 f uua 4 i STAGE -STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS Project: Flower & Stone - Kalispell - Spring Prairie Center Phase IV - WQ Basin Basin ID: D— RL. Sue slope z Sia nam wee= A F1_ Flaw � ' Flow A W v W Slope Z SSde Slope x p% < L ) Sides Z Design Information (input): Check Basin Sha e Width of Basin Bottom, W ft Right Triangle OR... Length of Basin Bottom, L = ft Isosceles Triangle OR... Dam Side -slope (H:V), Zd = ft/ft Rectangle OR... Circle / Ellipse OR... Irregular (Use Overide values in cells G32:G52) I114111140'R IIImA,POlIR Storage Requirement from Sheet'Modified FAA' EE��acre-ft. Stage -Storage Relationship: Storage Requirement from Sheet'Hydrograph' acre-ft. Storage Requirement from Sheet 'Fu I I-Spectru m':acre-ft. Labels Water Side Basin Basin Surface Surface Volume Surface Volume Target Volumes for WQCV, Minor, Surface Slope Width at Length at Area at Area at Below Area at Below for WQCV, Minor, & Major Storage Elevation (H:V) Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage & Major Storage Stages ft ft/ft ft ft W ft2 Ijsi,cu' W acres acre-ft Volumes 1111-uR 117.;�uR Below El. u[1-,u u[1-,uf 1:1uRJUR Ovvu'idtad i:�u[1-,uR 1Iu[1-,u 1Iu[1-,u fi i i:w r1 so,* 5001.00 117.:�uR 15,074 0.346 0.000 5002.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 18,292 16,683 0.420 0.383 5003.00 4.00 0 00 0 00, 22,020 „36,839 0.506 0.846 0.60 WQv - ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A - ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- - ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A - ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A - ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A ...- ...- ...- ...- #N/A #N/A.......... UD-Detention_v2.34 Kalispell PH 4 Preliminary WQ, Basin 1/7/2015, 9:04 AM Project: Basin ID: STAGE -STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS ��EwN&Ito] :11AC]MKIII1i1JUVAM01M9:1419]kiIII 5003.50 5003.00 5002.50 5002.00 N N w N CD 5001.50 5001.00 5000.50 5000.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 Storage (acre-feet) UD-Detention_v2.34 Kalispell PH 4 Preliminary WQ, Basin 1/7/2015, 9:04 AM STAGE -STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS Project: Flower & Stone - Kalispell - Spring Prairie Center Phase IV Basin ID: D— RL. Sue slope z Sia nam wee= A F1_ Flaw � ' Flow A W v W Slope Z SSde Slope x p% < L ) Sides Z Design Information (input): Check Basin Sha e Width of Basin Bottom, W ft Right Triangle OR... Length of Basin Bottom, L = ft Isosceles Triangle OR... Dam Side -slope (H:V), Zd = ft/ft Rectangle OR... Circle / Ellipse OR... Irregular (Use Overide values in cells G32:G52) I114111140'R IIImA,POlIR Storage Requirement from Sheet'Modified FAA' EE��acre-ft. Stage -Storage Relationship: Storage Requirement from Sheet'Hydrograph' acre-ft. Storage Requirement from Sheet 'Fu I I-Spectru m':acre-ft. Labels Water Side Basin Basin Surface Surface Volume Surface Volume Target Volumes for WQCV, Minor, Surface Slope Width at Length at Area at Area at Below Area at Below for WQCV, Minor, & Major Storage Elevation (H:V) Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage & Major Storage Stages ft ft/ft ft ft W ft2 Ijsi,cu' W acres acre-ft Volumes 1111-uR 117.;�uR Below El. u[1-,u u[1-,uf 1:1uRJUR Ovvu'idtad i:�u[1-,uR 1Iu[1-,u 1Iu[1-,u fi i i:w r1 so,* 5003.00 117.:�uR 22,020 0.506 0.000 5004.00 0.00 0.00 26,388 24,204 0.606 0.556 5005.00 0 00 0 00 31,101 52,949 0.714 1.216 5006.00 0.00 0.00 36,097 86,548 0.829 1 987 1.82 100- r 5007.00 0.00 0.00 52,368 132,780 1.202 3.002 - .- ..- .- #N/A #N/A - ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A - ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A - ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A - ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A - ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A ...- ...- ...- - #N/A- ...- ...- ...- - #N/A #N/A #N/A ...- ...- ...- ...- #N/A #N/A.......... UD-Detention_v2.34 Kalispell PH 4 Preliminary, Basin 1/7/2015, 6:42 AM Project: Basin ID: STAGE -STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS �.']EwN&Ito] :11AC]MKIII1i1JUVAM01M9:1419]kiIII 5007.50 5007.00 5006.50 5006.00 N 5005.50 N w N 13) 5005.00 5004.50 5004.00 5003.50 5003.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 Storage (acre-feet) UD-Detention_v2.34 Kalispell PH 4 Preliminary, Basin 1/7/2015, 6:42 AM