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 />approximately the corporate limit line near river station 270+00 and <br />the State Street bridge. Also, the river was cleaned near Cole Park <br />and upstream and downstream of the rail road bri dge. The Ci ty is <br />committed to maintaining the channel in a vegetation free cOndition. <br /> <br />The HEC-2 model was rerun to measure the change from the regul atory <br />condition of 1976 and the encroached condition of 1986, usin9 the <br />favorable downstream hydraulic condition. The starting water surface <br />elevation of 7544.4 at Section 28.0 and channel roughness values of <br />0.03 were used. <br /> <br /> <br />Since this maintenance has been completed in 1985 and 1986 and a <br />commi tment is made to conti nue thi s effort, the downstream f1 oodway <br />profile is lower than that calculated in the FIS. The 1985 <br />Reconnaissance Study calculated a water surface elevation at Section <br />28.0 of 7544.4, for the 10,900 cfs flow rate, using a roughness value <br />of 0.03, characteristic of the vegetation free river section. This <br />elevation is 0.4-feet lower than the FIS floodway elevation for that <br />section. <br /> <br />Figure 4 shows the calculated floodway profile (G) for this condition. <br />The profile is lower than the base condition profile (C), except at <br />Section 29.5 where the profiles are concurrent. Table 3 lists the <br />comparative elevations for. each section. Clearing and maintaining the <br />channel in a comparative clear condition, as the City has done, shows <br />a lower floodway profile of 0.0- to 0.4-feet to be characteristic of <br />the study reach. <br /> <br />-15- <br />