My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD04119
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
FLOOD04119
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 6:45:21 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 12:21:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Larimer
Community
Estes Park
Basin
South Platte
Title
Flood Insurance Study - Town of Estes Park
Date
5/4/1987
Prepared For
Estes Park
Prepared By
FEMA
Floodplain - Doc Type
Historic FEMA Regulatory Floodplain Information
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
70
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 />3.2 Hydraulic Analyses <br /> <br />Analyses of the hydraulic characteristics of flooding from the <br />sources studied were carried out to provide estimates of the eleva- <br />tions of floods of the selected recurrence intervals. <br /> <br />Water-surface profiles were developed using the U.S. Army Corps of <br />Engineers step-backwater computer model (Reference 8). <br /> <br />Cross section data for the Big Thompson River and Black Canyon <br />Creek were obtained from aerial topographic maps at a scale of <br />1:1,200, with a contour interval of 2 feet (Reference 9). All <br />bridges and culverts were measured to obtain structural geometry. <br /> <br />Cross sections along the Fall River were surveyed because of the <br />channel changes after the Lawn Lake Dam failure of July 1982. <br /> <br />Cross section data on Dry Gulch were obtained from aerial topo- <br />graphic maps at a scale of 1:2,400, with a contour interval of 2 <br />feet (Reference 10). <br /> <br />Locations of selected cross sections used in the hydraulic analyses <br />are shown on the Flood Profiles (Exhibit 1). For stream segments <br />for which a floodway was computed (Section 4.2), selected cross <br />section locations are also shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map <br />(Exhibit 2). <br /> <br />Roughness coefficients (Manning's ann) for all streams were esti- <br />mated by field inspection. The roughness coefficient for the stream- <br />bed was generally 0.04, and roughness values in the overbank areas <br />ranged from 0.03 to 0.08 (Reference 11). <br /> <br />Flood profiles were drawn showing computed water-surface elevations <br />to an accuracy of 0.5 foot for floods of the selected recurrence <br />intervals (Exhibit 1). <br /> <br />The starting water-surface elevations for the Big Thompson River <br />and Fish Creek were the maximum normal operating level of Lake <br />Estes, obtained from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Starting <br />water-surface elevations for the Fall River and Black Canyon Creek <br />were computed using the slope-area method. Starting water-surface <br />elevations for the Big Thompson and Fall River Overflows were taken <br />from the main stem. <br /> <br />The hydraulic analyses for this study were based on unobstructed <br />flow. The flood elevations shown on the profiles are thus con- <br />sidered valid only if hydraulic structures remain unobstructed, <br />operate properly, and do not fail. <br /> <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.