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 />4. Inspection of the pipelines revealed little sign of abrasion wear. <br />Only in Spring Gulch flume was abrasion actually noted, with <br />cement worn enough in a 12-inch band to expose the aggregate, but <br />no discernable worn depression existed. <br /> <br />These pipelines have been in place for many years; the lack of <br />abrasion would indicate that the infrequent occurrence of high <br />velocities, due to high and low runoff flows, may not appreciably <br />affect the integrity of the pipelines. <br /> <br />Exhibit "G" del ineates 100-year flood areas due to surface flows, and <br />a 1 so Zone X cons i st i ng of 100-year flows contai ned withi n street <br />sect ions and below top of curbs and also 500-year flood areas. <br />Exhibit "H" shows surface flow flood profiles for the 100-year and <br />500-year events. Ten (10) year and (50) year events are not shown as <br />they are fully contained in channels, culverts, pipelines, and <br />streets. Table No.2 presents discharge and elevation values for <br />surface flow. Table No.3 presents a comparison between CWCB and RMC <br />ca 1 cul ated water surface el evat ions, whi ch are different due to <br />different hydrological results, improvements in channelization, and <br />the detention facility. Note that elevations begin at cross section <br />number 1, which is over 100 feet upstream from the City limits where <br />the Black Hawk F.I.S. analysis began. <br /> <br />13 <br />