Laserfiche WebLink
A cursory review of old and recent topography mapping clearly demonstrates that the <br /> South Boulder Creek had many alignments over recent history enroute to its confluence with <br /> Boulder Creek. Interviews with knowledgeable individuals stated that today's channel alignment <br /> was manmade in the late 1800's. It is difficult to say "where is the historical flow path" due <br /> to the manmade changes. <br /> COMPILATION OF FLOOD-RELATED INFORMATION <br /> Under item no. 5 in the RESEARCH OF THE FLOODPLAIN ISSUES, one can see that <br /> much study has been undertaken in the determination of the 100-year flood hazard/ risk within <br /> the South Boulder Creek Floodplain. The most recently completed analysis was performed by <br /> Love& Associates, Inc. Love evaluated the assumptions and recommendations of the previously <br /> completed study investigations. It appears to us that the Love study included a complete <br /> inventory of all the published floodplain information. <br /> EVALUATION OF THE TECHNICAL INFORMATION/DATA <br /> Surveys and Mapping - The Love investigation appears to use available data with some field <br /> verification. The Flatiron mining operation has greatly modified the lands in and near the gravel <br /> pit area. However, new topographic data does exist which shows more recent topography. <br /> There appears to be some question regarding the accuracy of the centerline profile for U. S. <br /> Highway 36. The Love base data and modifications through field verification are reasonable for <br /> the level of detail which is expected for a flood hazard analysis. <br /> Hydrology - The Love investigation used the Corps of Engineers' 1979 hydrological values <br /> which are consistent with the State's designated ones. Therefore, their values are acceptable. <br /> Hydraulic Routing - The Love investigation used the FEMA and CWCB base hydraulic model <br /> in the preparation of their HEC-2 model for the study reach. The investigation did use state-of- <br /> art assumptions and input coefficients. Two floodplain conditions were analyzed: 1) existing <br /> channel with no FEMA certified levee in place, and 2) existing channel with a FEMA certified <br /> levee in place. These two assumptions may be may be too simplified, considering the large <br /> amount of floodplain lands involved and materials excavated during the gravel mining operation. <br /> A third condition is possible and should be considered. This condition is the relocating of the <br /> channel back to a historic flow path which may place floodwaters through the presently <br /> developed Frasier Meadows and Keewaydin Meadows subdivisions. In addition, there may be <br /> other viable alternatives that could be considered for the site. The HEC-2 model which was <br /> developed by Love appears to be reasonable and is an acceptable hydraulic routing procedure <br /> to us. <br /> Determination of the 100- year Floodplain Areas - For the assumed hydraulic conditions, the <br /> Love 100-year delineations appear to be reasonable and appear to represent the 1996 field <br /> conditions. However, the U.S. Highway 36 roadway embankment elevations may require <br /> further investigation should a project design be considered adjacent to the roadway. We will <br />