My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-06-30_REVISION - M1981302 (12)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1981302
>
2011-06-30_REVISION - M1981302 (12)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/9/2022 4:42:09 PM
Creation date
8/25/2011 7:56:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1981302
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
6/30/2011
Doc Name
As-Built Drawings of Perimeter Levee- Apps. B-1 to B-11, Part 1.
From
The Regeants of the Univ. of Colorado
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR8
Email Name
MAC
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
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).
View images
View plain text
Flood Control Levee August 24, 1999 Page 1 <br />The h drograph for the 100-year flood at US Highway 36 is shown on Figure 7, and Table <br />summarizes the peak flow and flow on the overbank for the 10-7 --, 100 -,, and Soo -year floods. The <br />10- - 100- and 500-year flood profiles are shown on Figure 2 of the 1 986 G&O report <br />(Appendix . <br />Flood Plain Lfnit <br />The 100-year base flood plain is defined by the 1986 Go flood -plain study. It is shown on <br />Drawings 9A through 12 of 31 of the 1986 G&O report (Appendix . It is also shown on the <br />current FENIA FIRM (Appendix , and on the attached Figure 3 prepared by the Urban Drainage <br />and Flood Control District. <br />Duration <br />One of the most important factors in determining the effectiveness and safety /stability of flood <br />control levees is the amount of time that a flood would be against the levee. It affects both the <br />potential for erosion of the levee, and the potential for seepage through it, Figure 7 is the hydrograpi <br />reportedly used by the USAGE and by G &o in the 1986 study. It is believed to have been generated <br />by the USA E, and it was obtained from Taggart. It has a double peak; the first and highest peal <br />results from runoff below Gross Reservoir, oir, and the second and lower peak is from the basin above <br />Gross Reservoir, ervoir, which 1s attenuated as it passes through the reservoir. In the 1973 R.W. Beck <br />study, the 1 00-year flood hydrograph had only one peals because the flood above Gross Reservoir <br />was assumed to be completely stored in the reservoir, <br />The flood rises and falls steeply. The attached Table 3 and Figure 8 summarize the time %n hours <br />between flogs of various magnitude, ranging from no flow up to 5,900 efs. Based on the <br />information presented M the G&O report, it appears that the l 0-year flood is contained within the <br />South Boulder Creek channel. The I 0-year flood is about 1,750 efs* It is therefore probable that <br />flows must be greater than about 1,75 o efs before any significant flow would occur against the levee. <br />It is estimated that there would be some flow against the levee for a duration of about 1 I to 19 hours . <br />during the loo -year base flood. This includes tin for the flood to rise up the face of the levee and <br />LEONARD RACE CONSULTING WATER TER ENGI EER , INC. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.