My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1997/02/24
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
Agenda Packets - 1997/02/24
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:34 PM
Creation date
6/28/2018 9:05:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/24/1997
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
2/24/1997
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
298
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Create sump catch basins at each inlet to the pond which drain to the pond. <br /> Excavate the existing pond to native material. <br /> Fill the pond with granular material to elevation 906.0 (elevation of the existing water in the110 <br /> pond) <br /> Connect sump manholes to surge and rate control manhole next to highway ditch <br /> This eliminates standing water. However, it does not eliminate the detention function of the area; <br /> therefore, the existing"hole"would remain. A sump inlet would be provided at the current <br /> discharge point of the two storm sewer system to remove larger sediment particles. This option <br /> allows the pond to be filled an additional 1.5 to 2 feet. This puts the bottom of the pond around <br /> elevation 906.0 which is near existing normal water elevations. The surcharge manhole would <br /> control the water that gets into the highway drainage system. If water cannot flow through the <br /> small 6-inch orifice opening,it would surge out of the manhole and into the detention area. For the <br /> most part the water quality function of the pond would be lost. However, with proper maintenance <br /> of the sump catch basins, an additional water quality pond should not be required. <br /> Project Cost. $27,000 <br /> Benefits: <br /> Cheap option <br /> Easy to construct <br /> Pond Bottom is near existing normal water elevation. <br /> Non-Benefits <br /> Higher maintenance since sump manholes would need to be cleaned annually. <br /> Does not get rid of the existing hole for the pond. <br /> Will have short term ponding during rainfall events. • <br /> Option 3. New Pipes -No Surge Manhole <br /> Remove existing storm sewer and raise the storm sewer which eliminates the need for sump <br /> manholes. <br /> Excavate the existing pond to native material. <br /> Fill the pond with granular material to elevation 904.6(elevation of the outlet in the highway <br /> ditch) <br /> Connect a 12-CMP standpipe to the highway storm sewer to discharge the pond into the <br /> existing system. <br /> This eliminates standing water by raising the storm sewers so the discharge elevation is above the <br /> invert of the outlet pipe in the highway ditch(904.58). However,it does not eliminate the detention <br /> function of the area; therefore, the existing"hole" would remain. The detention pond would be <br /> modified to treat the runoff by use of a CMP standpipe which should compensate for lost water <br /> quality treatment of the site. The pond bottom would be set at elevation 904.6 which is the invert <br /> of the outlet pipe in the highway ditch. Only difference between this option and option 1 is the <br /> maintenance of the sump inlets is eliminated. <br /> Project Cost. $88,500 47q } 4 01) : 1 1 <br /> Benefit(s): <br /> No annual sump maintenance <br /> 1111 <br /> 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.