Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />,I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br />pond that. according to the 1986 study, would be 25 feet deep at the time the peak <br />discharge rate was approaching the culvert. <br /> <br />However, this is not what would physically occur at the site. The depth of water <br />upstream from the culvert entrance will only rise to the height necessary to permit <br />the peak outflow rate to pass throuah the culvert as lIlustrated in Figure 5, I. e., <br />the peak of the outflow hydrograph. The shaded area is the volume of storage up- <br />stream of the culvert being utll1zed. The greater the available volume of storage, <br />the greater will be the reduction In peak flow rate. <br /> <br />Total ExIsting Volume <br /> <br /> <br />Using the available topographic mapping, the total volume of storage presently <br /> <br />existing upstream of the culvert was determined. The total available storage at <br /> <br />2-foot Intervals is l1sted In Table 2. If the water surface elevation upstream of the <br /> <br /> <br />railroad culvert were 5364, about 300 acre feet of runoff would be temporarily <br /> <br /> <br />stored upstream of the culvert. <br /> <br />Existing Volume Within the F100dway <br /> <br />At some point In the future, the land outside of the floodway upstream of the <br /> <br />railroad culvert could be filled. This would reduce the amount of storage available <br /> <br />for the temporary detention of flood water. For this reason, the volume of avail- <br /> <br /> <br />able storage upstream of the railroad culvert was recalculated, assuming that the <br /> <br /> <br />land outside the floodway had indeed been filled. These results are also l1sted in <br /> <br />Table 2. <br />