My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD00850
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
FLOOD00850
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2009 1:21:24 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 9:32:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
Designation Number
31
County
Arapahoe
Community
Unincorporated Arapahoe County
Title
Major Drainageway Planning - Little Dry Creek, Report, Volume I
Date
2/1/1974
Designation Date
6/1/1974
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.
/
107
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 />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />The designs that have been developed for Little Dry Creek drainageway <br /> <br /> <br />improvements are preliminary. They are considered adequate for esti- <br /> <br /> <br />mating overall costs, but they. are not adequate for construction. Cost <br /> <br /> <br />estimates herein include allowance for estimated administrative and en- <br /> <br /> <br />gineering costs. <br /> <br />Overall Criteria <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />The overall design objective is to obtain the most effective flood drain- <br /> <br /> <br />age at the least cost while best meeting the flood drainage needs of the <br /> <br /> <br />Little Dry Creek basin. This leads to making use of drainage channel types <br /> <br /> <br />in the following order of preference: (l) natural channels, (2) grass- <br /> <br /> <br />lined channels, (3) concrete-lined channels, and (4) closed concrete con- <br /> <br /> <br />duits, Drainage channel size is determined by comparing channel cost with <br /> <br /> <br />the cost of upstream flood reducing detention storage, and selecting the <br /> <br /> <br />most economical combination. It was found that reducing flood flow peaks <br /> <br /> <br />in the lower Little Dry Creek Basin area by providing upstream flood deten- <br /> <br /> <br />tion storage is more economical than providing the greater channel capa- <br /> <br /> <br />cities required if flood detention storage is not provided. Englewood Dam <br /> <br /> <br />and the five proposed flood detention dams are, therefore, essential fea- <br /> <br /> <br />tures of the proposed drainageway improvements. <br /> <br />Specific Design Criteria <br /> <br />Specific design criteria adopted for the Little Dry Creek drainage study <br />are as follows: <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Natural Channels <br /> <br />1. Use natural channels where possible <br /> <br /> <br />2. Channel and overbank capacities must be adequate for 100-year <br /> <br /> <br />flood with six detention dams. <br /> <br /> <br />3. Channel erosion must be minimized. <br /> <br /> <br />4. Hydraulic roughness coefficient is that for a reasonably main- <br /> <br /> <br />tained presently existing channel. <br /> <br /> <br />5. Natural channel area must be in public ownership or designated <br /> <br /> <br />as a flood plain area under an enforceable zoning ordinance to <br /> <br />-50- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.