Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.J <br />I <br /> <br />J <br /> <br />J <br /> <br />IIvdraulics <br /> <br />Hydraulic .A..nalyses were completed for both the eXlstmg channel conditiol15 and for proposed <br />improvements, The most recem version (4,6,2: May 1991) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' <br />HEC,2 computer program was used to determine water surface profiles for the IO-year. 50, year, and <br />] OO-year flood events, The model used for this study was the same model developed by the SCS as <br />presented in their April 1992 Report, For existing channel conditions. rbis model was duplicated and <br />the resulting water surface profiles matches those ptesented by the SCS, For proposed improvements. <br />some cross-sections and split flow areas were modified I.n order to accurately depict proposed bridge. <br />channel. and levee improvements. A more detailed discussion of these modifications is included in the <br />Project Formulation Section of this repon, <br /> <br />Comparisons of the lOa-year water surface elevations were made for existing and proposed conditions <br />in order to evaluate potential impacts of the proposed improvements, Table 8 presents a summary of <br />the] O-year. 50-year. and ] OO-year flood events for proposed and existing conditiol15. As shown in the <br />wble, nood elevations for the 1 OO'year event west of CR. 35 to just dO'-'"!lstream of CR, 31 increase for <br />the proposed improvements. This can be expected since the proposed levees along the north overbank <br />of Pawnee Creek COnIine the flows to the main channel and increase the discharges through this reach. <br />Map Sheet ! presents the existing tloodplain along Pav.rnee Creek as presented in the SCS April 1992 <br />Report. Also shown are the proposed improvements and resulting residllili 100,year floodplain, Flood <br />proriles depicting the existing and proposed] OO-year warer surface elevanons are presented on Figures <br />8 and 9, A detailed descriprion of the proposed improvements is included in the following section of <br />this report, <br /> <br />Pr<Jiect Formulation <br /> <br />Based on an evaluation of exisring studies and input from the project sponsors. it was detetmined that a <br />s~'ste:n of levees and channel improvements in combination with widening the existing bridges at <br />HWY 6 and the UPRR is the most economical approach 1:0 solving the Pawnee Creek Overflow <br />problems. Deveiopment of the Pawnee Creek improvements began with modiiica:ions to the existing <br />HEC,~ model to analyze the impacts of proposed levees, bEcge, and channel improvements, The <br />rollowing desc~ibes the modifications made to the existing HEC,2 modeL <br /> <br />1. No changes were made to the existing model from the study limits upstream of CR. 3] (cross- <br />section 38391 to just downstream of CR. 31 (cross-section 30,1) since no improvements are <br />proposed in this reach. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />The model was revised to eliminate the existing flow splits in the north o'lerbank downstream of <br />CR, 33 at cross-section 2728, This was accompiished by adding the flows which spiit out of <br />Pa\VTIee '~eek towards the City of Sterling back into the mocel starting at cross,section 26 and <br />continuing to cross-section 21. The discharges were also increased upstream of HWY 6 to account <br />for the !low spins draining from the Town of Atwood and 1:0 eliminate tile existing !lows which <br />currently drain past the bridges at HWY 6 and on towards the City of Sterling, The amount of <br />storm water draining from the Town of Atwood to Pawnee Creek on the northwest side of HWY 6 <br />was determined bv the Colorado Water Conservation Board based on field sur/evs and utilizing a <br />. . <br />weir t10w equation, <br /> <br />27 <br />