Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> Table 1 <br /> Flooclway Data Table <br /> 1989 Versus 1992 Studies <br /> 1989 S t:u11t 1992 Study <br />Cross With \IIi out '-,_Ii Ell ..1ithout <br />Section Floodway Xloodway Diff. Flo~ay Floodway Diff. <br /> (feet)' (feet) <br />12 3930.5 3930.2 0.3 3930..6 3930.2 0.4 <br />13 3931.5 3930.9 0.6 3931.4 3930.9 0.5 <br />14 3932.0 3931.4 0.6 3932..0 3931.4 0.6 <br />15 3933.1 3932.4 0.7 3933.1 3932.4 0.7 <br />16 3933.7 3933.1 0.6 3933..7 3933.0 0.7 <br />Hwy 6-1 3934.8 3934.3 0.5 3934.7 3934.2 0.5 <br />Hwy 6-2 3934.2 3933.8 0.4 393/+.1 3933.7 0,1+ <br />Hwy 6-3 3935.9 3935.1 0.8 3935.9 3935.1 0.8 <br />Hwy 6-4 3938.0 3937.3 0.7 3938.0 3937.3 0.7 <br />17 3938.8 3938.4 0.4 3938.8 3938.4 0.4 <br />18 3939.2 3938.7 0.5 3939.2 3938.7 0.5 <br />19 3939.8 3939.1 0.7 3939.9 3939.1 0.8 <br /> <br />Data generated in this study are based on the assumption that the <br />City will ultimately establish and regulate the floodmy identified in <br />the 1989 study. For this reason, the flow distribution parameters of <br />discharge, velocity, and depth are developed for the "with-flooclway" <br />condition. This information is surrmarized in Appendix B, Flow <br />Distribution Data. The flow distribution data is also plotted from <br />left bank to right bank looking downstream. The stream slope in the <br />reach b01.mded by city property is approximately 0.14 percent, and the <br />average flood velocities per cross section segment in Appendix B <br />associated with a 100-year event varied from 1.8 feet per second <br />(ft/s) to 3.5 ft/s in the overbank areas and from 4.3 ft/s to 8.2 ft/s <br />in the channel. The only exception to this is the U.S. Highway 6 <br />bridge where the av,=rage velocity of the water flowing tmder tbe <br />bridge approaches 12.6 ft/s. If SterlIng plans future construction of <br />a roadway or pedestrian path tmderpass to connect the property on <br /> <br />6 <br />