My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD10420
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
10001-11000
>
FLOOD10420
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2010 10:15:26 AM
Creation date
8/16/2007 10:57:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Adams
Broomfield
Weld
Community
Broomfield, Westminster and Thornton
Stream Name
Lower Big Dry Creek
Title
Lower Big Dry Creek Hydrology Study
Date
6/1/2005
Prepared For
Big Dry Creek Watershed Association
Prepared By
Wright Water Engineers, Inc.
Floodplain - Doc Type
Floodplain Report/Masterplan
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
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
<br />- <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />- <br />- <br />- <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />- <br />- <br />I <br />I <br />II <br /> <br />Lower Big Dry Creek Hydrologic Study <br /> <br />The drainage plan discusses the Big Dry Creek channel, describing it as relatively similar in <br />nature from below Standley Lake to the Weld County line. The channel includes a normal flow <br />channel between 15 and 40 feet wide and between 3 and 10 feet deep. The banks of the normal <br />flow channel are steep and sometimes vertical. Erosion of the banks is common and may be seen <br />along the entire reach of Big Dry Creek. The normal flow channel meanders through a wide <br />floodplain which is as much as a half-mile wide at the Weld County line. The floodplain is <br />generally uninhabited, except for a few homes and farm buildings. The channel appears to be in <br />a relatively active me~mdering state, exhibiting numerous horse-shoe bends which appear to be <br />migrating in typical stream fashion. Flood flows exceeding the normal flow channel can spread <br />over pasture and crop1.mds in the wide floodplain to depths varying from a few feet to as much as <br />20 feet, depending upon constrictions at the various road and railroad crossings (Muller 1989). <br /> <br />Muller (1989) summarized three general problems identified in the Greiner (1986 and 1988) <br />flood hazard studies: <br /> <br />1. Channel bank e:rosion and migration of channel meanders, <br /> <br />2. Several homes or businesses located in the 100-year floodplain, and <br /> <br />3. A large number of street and highway crossing structures which have inadequate capacity <br />to carry the fully developed lOO-year flood. <br /> <br />To address these problems, Muller (1989) recommended a floodplain regulation approach that <br />relied on floodplain ;and floodway ordinances to control the location of development. In <br />addition, improvements to crossing structures and erosion control structures within the channel <br />and a levee around thl~ Broomfield Wastewater Treatment Plant were also recommended. The <br />study recommended that the channel of Big Dry Creek be maintained in its present and natural <br />state, including maintenance of the meandering channel pattern. However, as development <br />increases upstream, greater and more frequent flood flows and greater sustained low flows will <br />be experienced, increasing the rate of channel bank erosion. The study indicated the general <br />degradation of the channel bed will be relatively minor, because the channel is already at a very <br />flat slope (Muller 1989). <br /> <br />971-179.092 <br />June 2005 <br /> <br />Wright Water Engineers, Inc. <br /> <br />Page 35 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.