Loading...
Billingsley-CS060608 ::: H al ff A s s o c i ate s $ 616 NORTHWEST PLAZA DRIVE FAX (214) 739 -0095 ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • SCIENTISTS • PLANNERS • SURVEYORS June 8, 2006 Ken Griffin, P.E. City Engineer City of Coppell P.O. Box 9478 Coppell, TX 75019 Re: Grapevine Creek LOMR Dear Ken: The attached LOMR request is for the Irving side of a 158.6 acre tract that is covered by the CLOMR (Case # 04- 06- A148R) for the floodplain reclamation project in Coppell approved in January 2006. Construction of that project is being held up by review /approval of the 404 Permit application. The Irving project in essence reflects filling of the non - effective flow areas on the Irving side of Grapevine Creek. In part, the LOMR is necessary because of the very inaccurate depiction of the floodplain and floodway on the current effective FIRM. As a result of the built project, there is a 0.01' rise in the FEMA Base Flood Elevation at Section 14170. This rise is contained entirely within the owner /applicants property as acknowledged in a letter included as an attachment to MT -2 Form 2. For the 100 -year (fully developed landuse condition), there is no rise due to the built project. Valley storage losses in the reach are 3.3% and will be less than 15% when combined with the floodplain reclamation on the Coppell side of Grapevine Creek. Please review and indicate your approval by signing the Coppell version of the attached MT -2 Form 1 (Overview and Concurrence). If you have any questions, do not hesitate to give me a call at (214) 724 -8100. Sincerely yours, HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC. Walter E. Skipwith, P.E. Vice President DALLAS • FORT WORTH • HOUSTON • McALLEN • AUSTIN • FRISCO • SAN ANTONIO TRANSPORTATION • WATER RESOURCES • LAND DEVELOPMENT • MUNICIPAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL • ELECTRICAL • SURVEYING • GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING REQUEST FOR A LETTER OF MAP REVISION For A PORTION OF A 158.6 ACRE TRACT On GRAPEVINE CREEK In the City of Irving Dallas County, Texas Prepared for: BILLINGSLEY COMPANY By: Halff Associates, Inc. 8616 Northwest Plaza Drive Dallas, Texas 75225 AVO 23186 May 2006 • • 8616 Northwest Plaza Drive MEE ■■• Halff Associates Dallas, Texa2 5 143466200 Fax (214) 361 -5573 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: Kenneth Griffin, P.E. DATE: June 8, 2006 Director of Engineering & Public Works Dept. City of Coppell 255 Parkway Blvd. AVO: 23186 Coppell, Texas 75019 PROJECT: Billingsley Co. Reclamation FROM: Brandon A. Luedke, E.I.T. Coppell, TX Email: bluedke @halff.com Sent via: Courier WE ARE SENDING YOU ® ATTACHED ❑ Under separate cover via the following: ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Drawings ❑ Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ® Other: Portion of Hemingway Court (Irving) LOMR Study THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ® For approval ❑ Approval as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution • As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ For review /comment ❑ Other: ITEMS SENT: 1 — Original Signed Letter (Re: Grapevine Creek LOMR) from Walter Skipwith, P.E. (Vice President - Halff Associates, Inc.); 1 — Copy of LOMR Cover Letter; 1 — Copy of LOMR Report Narrative (5 sheets); 1 — Copy of LOMR FIS WSEL Table & Fully Developed Land Use Condition Table (2 sheets); 1 — Copy of LOMR FEMA MT -2 Forms...Forms 1, 2, & 3 (11 sheets); 1 — Copy of Mapsco for LOMR project site; 1 — Copy of Full Size LOMR Fig. 8 Floodplain Delineations 100 -Yr Ultimate Condition; COMMENTS: Ken: The complete LOMR Study has been submitted to the City of Irving for review. Per our conversation, here is the portion of the study you requested along with a letter from Walter Skipwith. Please review the attached documents and sign MT -2 Form 1 Page 2 in the box below where your typed name appears. Once signed, please return the original signed sheet ONLY so we can insert it into the LOMR Study before it is forwarded to FEMA. If you have any questions, please give me a call at (214) 217 -6648. Regards, SIGNED: Brandon A. Luedke I :\23000s\ 23186 \ad m i n \lot \lot060106kg. doc 8616 NORTHWEST PLAZA DRIVE ••• � DALLAS TEXAS 75225 ■■■ Halff Asso ciates (214) 346 -6200 FAX (214) 739 -0095 ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • SCIENTISTS • PLANNERS • SURVEYORS May 25, 2006 AVO 23186 FEMA LOMA Depot 3601 Eisenhower Avenue Alexandria, VA 22304 -6425 Attn.: LOMA Manager Re: Request for a Letter of Map Revision on Grapevine Creek for a portion of a 158.6 -acre tract in the City of Irving, Dallas County, Texas. Dear Sir/Madame: Enclosed you will find a technical report covering site improvements for a portion of a 158.6 -acre tract near the southwest corner of Belt Line Road and MacArthur Boulevard in the Cities of Coppell, Dallas, and Irving, Dallas County, Texas. Grapevine Creek flows through this site. This report, submitted by Halff Associates, Inc. on behalf of the Billingsley Company, contains the technical data required for issuance of a Letter of Map Revision. Hard copies of the required HEC- 2 hydraulic models, a disk containing input data files, and floodplain and floodway mapping can be found in Appendices A through P. Application and Certification forms are included in Section II. The pre - project models are based on the CLOMR (FEMA Case No. 04 -06- A148R) approved May 25, 2005, prepared by Halff Associates, Inc. for a different portion of the 158.6 -acre tract. The analysis updates and refines City of Irving and FEMA's effective models based on the proposed floodplain reclamation in the right overbank along Grapevine Creek. The map revision also reflects reduced floodplain widths, corrected floodway, and no increase in 100 -year flood levels due to the placed fill. If you have any technical questions on this report, please contact either Brandon Luedke, E.I.T. at 214 - 217 -6648 or me at 214 - 346 -6220. Administrative questions should be directed to Mr. Garry Fennell, P.E., Floodplain Manager for the City of Irving at 972 - 721 -3721. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Yours very truly, HALFF ASSOCIATES INC. SE OF'T'',, co;„. 47,cp *• * ' WALTER E $KIPYVITN Walter E. Skipwith, P. ; o ;•• 48752 ter; Vice President o 9F �O �v %,`S ,� ! STE N C' ��5�; Enclosures ... oNA E I•%•.. -r;:; cc: Mr. Garry Fennell, P.E., Floodplain Manager for the City of Irving Mr. Henry Billingsley, Billingsley Company Mr. James Pritchard, P.E., Pritchard Associates, Inc. 1:\23000s\23186 \Word\H &H report\LOMR\Report .doc DALLAS • FORT WORTH • HOUSTON • McALLEN • AUSTIN • FRISCO • SAN ANTONIO TRANSPORTATION • WATER RESOURCES • LAND DEVELOPMENT • MUNICIPAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL • ELECTRICAL • SURVEYING • GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING REQUEST A LETTER OF MAP REVISION BILLINGSLEY TRACT, IRVING, TEXAS I. Narrative REQUEST FOR A LETTER OF MAP REVISION BILLINGSLEY TRACT, IRVING, TEXAS A. General This study was undertaken to provide the necessary technical data for issuance of a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for a floodplain reclamation project along Grapevine Creek in the City of Irving, Dallas County, Texas. A location map for the site is shown on Figure 1. The required forms for this "Request for a Letter of Map Revision" are included in this report. Additional information is provided as Attachments to these forms. Also included in the study are existing and proposed project flood profiles for the 100 year flood based on a fully developed watershed (ultimate conditions). B. Site Description The 158.6 -acre tract is located on Belt Line Road between MacArthur Boulevard and Moore Road. This tract is in City of Coppell north of Grapevine Creek, City of Dallas along Grapevine Creek and City of Irving south of Grapevine Creek. The site (approximately 25- acres) is a portion of the 158.6 acre tract (See Fig. 2 for aerial photograph). The site is a residential subdivision under construction called Hemingway Court in the right overbank of Grapevine Creek and is currently owned by Billingsley Company. The total channel reach length in the study area is approximately 3,500 feet. The project is currently partially located within the FIS (Flood Insurance Study) effective 100 - year floodplain and in the effective floodway for Grapevine Creek (See Fig. 3 for FIRM detail). Fill has been placed in a portion of the 100 -year floodplain for land development purposes. Details of the improvements will be introduced in the hydraulics section of this report. C. Purpose Halff Associates, Inc. was retained by Billingsley Company to develop a LOMR to identify the 100 -year floodplain and correct the 100 -year floodway for Grapevine Creek within the 158.6 acre tract. The objective of this study is to provide all necessary information for obtaining a LOMR from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to identify the 100 -year floodplain and correct the 100 -year floodway due to the placed fill. D. Hydrology No new hydrology was performed for this project. The hydrologic data normally is obtained from the FEMA effective model. However, effective models were requested from the FEMA Project Library but could not be provided. Engineering for the effective Dallas County Flood Insurance Study (FIS, 1999 version) was originally performed in 1970's. The most recent study for Grapevine Creek, "City -wide Storm Water Management Study for the City of Irving ", was performed by Halff Associates, Inc. in 1991. Halff's 1991 study used Halff Associates, Inc. 1 hydrology (ultimate conditions) from a previous study by others. That study was entitled "City of Coppell Drainage Master Plan" performed by Kimley Horn and Associates in 1990. The discharges and their break locations in the Halff 1991 model were used in this study. Table 1 lists the 100 -year flood peak discharges. Compared to the FIS Report Discharge Table, there is a slight discharge difference between Sections 13620 and 15520 (FIS Report reflects a 100 -year discharge 11200 cfs). Table 1 100 -Year Flood Peak Discharges On Grapevine Creek ow, S fl 0 DoS Location Station Q100 (cfs) Location Station 0100 (cfs) Downstream of 7250 -10850 18200 Up to 1600 FT upstream of 7250 -12820 9700 MacArthur MacArthur Up to 2300 FT 10935 -13339 16600 upstream of MacArthur From 2300 FT 13620 -15113 16050 From 1600 FT upstream of 13620 -15520 11000 upstream of MacArthur MacArthur E. Hydraulics 1. Effective Model Duplication (Appendices B and C). Analyses of the floodplain and hydraulic characteristics of the study area were performed using the USACE's HEC -2 hydraulic program, which determines probable water surface elevations along the creek for the 100 -year flood. Normally, the original effective model can be obtained from the 14'EMA Project Library through PBSJ. A formal data request was made to PBSJ, but it was determined that there is no digital or hard copy available in the FEMA Project Library (Contact person for PBSJ is Mr. Venkat Venkatraj). Mr. Venkatraj suggested that the previous study in this area performed by Halff Associates, Inc. should be used as the base model. Therefore, the existing conditions model from Halff's 1991 study was used as the effective model for this study. This model was based on the FEMA effective model at the time of that study (1991). The duplicated Halff 1991 models are attached in Appendix B and C, which contain the FIS multi - profile model and floodway model, respectively. 2. Corrected Effective Models (Appendices D and E). The Corrected Effective models are based on the effective models. Based on field surveys and City of Irving topographic maps, the corrected models have been updated and revised as follows: Halff Associates, Inc. 2 1. Seven cross sections (11453, 11588, 12402, 13339, 13829, 14495, 14820 and 15113) have been added in the model to better describe the proposed plan. 2. Cross section 11303 has been updated and renamed as 11301. 3. Section 11313 has also been updated. 4. The roughness factor "n" values on the overbank between sections 11045 to 15113 have been increased from 0.045 to 0.065 to reflect the current state of vegetation. The corrected effective models are attached in Appendices D and E, which contain the multi - profile model and floodway model respectively. 3. Pre - Project Models (Appendices F and G). The pre - project models are an update of the corrected effective models described above, and incorporate the newly constructed Belt Line Road Bridge per the bridge construction plans (see Appendix H). Because of the bridge replacement, sections 15350, 15440, 15470 and 1552 are replaced with Sections 15160 and 15310. In addition, the repeat section 13670 (50 ft reach length) is no longer necessary. It has been removed from the model. The reach length upstream section 13829 has been adjusted accordingly. The pre - project models are attached in Appendices F and G, which contain the multi - profile model and floodway model respectively. 4. Revised (Post- Project) Models (Appendices I and N). We are aware of the CLOMR (Case No: 04- 06- A148R) approved May 25, 2005 for the portion of the Billingsley Tract north of Grapevine Creek, but the work associated with this CLOMR has not yet been completed. A retaining wall has been constructed in the right overbank and is reflected in the model. The wall height varies along the creek. Photographs of the retaining wall have been included in Section III. The improvements start from Section 12402 and extend through Section 12820. All wall improvements are above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE). The detailed as -built surveyed elevations can be found on the Hemingway Court Retaining Wall As -built Plan (Fig.4). Table 2 summarizes the results for the post - project models. The post - project models are attached in Appendices I, J, and N. 5. Floodway Models (Appendix J) Based on the multi - profile models, the corresponding floodway models were also revised. The floodway results are summarized in Table 2. The final revised floodplain and floodway delineations are shown on Figure 6. The revised (post - project) multiple flood profiles are shown in Figure 7. Halff Associates, Inc. 3 6. Fully Developed Land Use Condition (Appendices K, L, M, and N) Per the requirements of the City Coppell Floodplain Management Ordinance, floodplain analysis based on the fully developed land use condition was also performed. The same geometric data were used in both the existing and proposed models as those presented in the LOMR application. The 100 -year flood peak discharges from the study entitled "City of Coppell Drainage Master Plan" performed by Kimley Horn and Associates in 1990 were used. The 100 -year flood discharges reflect the fully developed land use conditions and are larger than the FIS discharges. These fully developed land use models are described as follows: • Existing Model: Grexult.CH2 attached in Appendix K • Corrected Existing Model: 398Coult.CH2 attached in Appendix L • Pre - project Model: 398Prult.CH2 attached in Appendix M • Post - project Model: 186PropFD.CH2 attached in Appendix N Table 3 summarizes the results for the models under the fully developed conditions. The 100 -Year floodplain delineations under the fully developed conditions are shown on Figure 8. Thus, this project completed with the new Belt Line Road Bridge accomplishes one of the city goals proposed in the 1991 study. 7. CDC Permit A review of the Elm Fork Trinity River 100 -year and SPF water surface elevations reveal that the proposed reclamation improvements have no impact on Elm Fork Valley Storage, velocity and/or flood elevation. Therefore, a CDC Permit for this proposed project on Grapevine Creek is not needed. 8. Valley Storage Per the City of Coppell Floodplain Management Ordinance, the valley storage reduction shall not exceed 15% for the 100 -year flood and 20% for the standard project flood if the drainage area is less than 100 square miles. The volume calculation indicates that the total storage loss is 12.35 ac -ft compared to total valley storage volume of 373 ac -ft (project site only), or an 3.31 % loss under the 100 -year fully developed land use condition. Therefore, the valley storage loss for this project is within the city allowable limits for a stream of this size. Valley Storage was calculated using GEOPAK's Digital Terrain Modeling Software. 9. Section 404 Permitting Assessment No wetlands or waters of the U.S. will be affected by the proposed project. There will be no discharges in waters of the U.S. and neither a Section 404 permit nor coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is required. Halff Associates, Inc. 4 F. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the analysis in this study as described above, the following conclusions can be made: 1. There is no effective model available from the FEMA Project Library. The base models for this analysis are from the CLOMR Case No. 04- 06 -A148R approved by FEMA on May 25, 2005, which was based on the study entitled "City -wide Storm Water Management Study for the City of Coppell" performed by Halff Associates, Inc. in 1991. The original hydrologic and hydraulic models in Halff's 1991 study are from the study entitled "City of Coppell Drainage Master Plan" performed by Kimley Horn and Associates in 1990. It is our understanding that the Kimley -Horm model was the basis of an update of the Coppell FIS at about that time (1990). 2. The proposed BFEs are the same as the Corrected Effective BFEs throughout the entire study area except for Section 14170, which has a BFE rise of 0.01 -feet. The revised project has no impact on flood levels at upstream or adjacent locations. A Letter of Map Revision is warranted for this project. 3. Most creek channel velocities under the proposed condition are below 6 fps. Higher velocities exist between Section 13829 and 15113, which is just downstream of the Belt Line Road Bridge. However, there is no significant channel velocity increase due to the proposed project. 4. Backwater analyses under the fully developed land use condition were also performed per City of Coppell Ordinance. The study indicates no water surface elevation increase throughout the entire study area for the proposed project condition. 5. The total valley storage loss rate for this project is 3.31 % (12.35 ac -ft total loss from the total valley storage volume of 373 ac -ft under the 100 -year fully developed land use condition), which is allowable per the City of Coppell Floodplain Management Ordinance. 6. Per City of Coppell Floodplain Management Ordinance (and City of Irving), the lowest finished floor has to be a minimum of two (2) feet above the FIS base flood elevation or to one (1) foot above the design (fully developed land use) base flood elevation, whichever is higher. In this study case, 100 -year flood water surface elevations under the fully developed land use condition (see Table 3) should be used to set finished floor elevations. Halff Associates, Inc. 5 U O o 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 to N O O N n n 0 V 0 h 7 r n n O n co 0 0 m 0 N m 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o 0 0 0 0 r 1n 0 N V O m m m m m 7 0 1n m m N V1 O O o O o O O O O 9 o o O o O o O O O O O O O o o O O O O O O O O O O o O F- W,, u j n n m c0 n 2 N U0 n N O N N 0 n V N 0) 0 r N O) 0 cO c 0 ) 0) N )O 0 0 0 cO - '� N 0 0 Q) yy m V 0 0 0 O O n co N h< (0 1 06660 co .- O 0 co O O .- .- O t- 0 CO CO 1 n cs, ¢ 0 ' - V V V V V V V a V V V R V V 7 V d V < V 7 V R V V V o IL V O a V <I' 0 i 0 0 m a 1- 0 Q W N n m c0 n 1n N 0 n n n O n c0 r o m o co co c0 06 N c0 �) o m O) n m 4p r 0 " 0 U co co 0) 0) m m 4 0 0 o co O 0) r V a) h O N 0 (0 N to 0 N c0 co m 00 c0 o co m o v cO W CV N N N m m m m m 0 0 a) N n O O O N V u c0 1- n n n n r n n r 0 0 0 N m (') ,....:E m N a 0 v a yy o v V V V V V 'Q -t V v i0) 0 u0 O N 0) 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 N 0) u1 c0 c0 0 c0 N 0 v v 7 v v v v v a v < a sr 4. o a a a a R V O R O O v V V v v V v O (D m 'o . 0) W z s . _ ¢ > u) E m m E 0 Q Z Q U 0000 00000)0)0) 0 a0 co )0 0 0 In m co co co co V /) h m co N N L t � co � O O O O O O O O Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O cal u) co a c$ J a W m c0 r N N N n N O V 0 N 0 n v n 0 0 n N n 0 N 0 0 O N 0 m m O 0 W 1 N co n con O O m m 7 0 0 0 s � O O O n 0 N n V cp 1 CO 0 c0 07 0) O t� 0 0 0 0 0 c0 c0 m cD n 0) 0 V V 4 V V sr 7 4 a V 7 4 a v a v v V - -I- V- 7 O V O K NV V O V V R V V V O 0 U W O O W n n CO 0 r 6 N 0 n n r O r CO 0 CO 0 0 CO 0 0 0 c!) N CO 0) O O r m 0 n 0 CC c c U CO 0 0) O) CO m 1 1 O O O o) O O N 7 Cr) U " ) N O N N N N u) 0 0 CO co_ 0 O m m O O co <0 M Z a V '7 V V V V 7 4 4 a 7 a V v V 4 o v O v v v v v v V v v 4' '4 7 0 v V v o a ' w :ci tit Y q , w 1.1 it 0 ;a� -ca", "cg Sat 1 -6 . . q p j ' L? * ,. c r y r. ,; 0 t ic- : ' tM N :...., � to- N U Y Z U O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0) o) 0) 0) 0) r N c0 0 a '- v 0 0 N v o v CO n CO 10 1c) CO CO Q V , O 0 0 O o 0 0 O o 9 O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 co F- Z C w O G Q F LL w n n m 0 n to N to n N O V N N 0 n cp 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 m 0 0 0 a 1n h O W U a u) 0 0 0? 0 m m O O O o 0) O O n c0 N r O 1 0 O co 0 0 ' N c N m c O v m W 0 0 0 O O U W U N N N N m m o m m V N 0 c0 ss O) o O N N N 4 c(j n n n O W m 6 O O o O O o O N m ( a 0 { C Q J u- a, U v a V V 4 v V v v-1 a V V V °v V v o V o a v < a V O a a V V v o 0 o V v v V o v Z W W m u' co N Q W o , y W N � } Q V w W r n CO CO n 11') N 0 n n n O n CO O CO CO 0 0 CO CO CO V CO O v CO O CO CO 0 0 c0 CO O) N e{ U O W W u) c0 CO 0) O CO CO V 0 0 0 0 O CO n '- 0) CO N CO CO N 0 1O N N 1 (0 0 CO CO 0 0 0 0) N 0 V V CO r T V 0 Z '- ., Q 0 0 V 4 v v a a 4 4 4 V 7 V V R R O ? V N 1n 0 V 4' c c ) 1 < 7 7 0 0 1 N N N c V < 0 0 c 4' N N 0 c O< 0 m N c ( c0 c c c Q m 0 0 O V U V V 4' V V 'f V V a 7 O O V V R '•t 't < V a V V? V 0 N U O m Z EL F2 F ) rt e A` )x- fi f d I„ ?, , '1'` , . . x a o S yi.. tell W v Q t k� �scx ' z , � r x. F '- - a . "° ( ; 14 n ,,,{ t �' r ) ? J. s} rm' J O '62 ,Fx' s s °.. ^" Y '�i ;rte , r „ m • ILI CI LL �U o 0 o a 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 7 . C CO V CO 0 0 CO CO CO CO 0 0 0 0 0 V W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Q o 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-.- 0 0 o O LL co co 1 J n n CO CO r O CO n CO CO r 0 O N 0 .1 CO n o N CO N CO 0 CO CO 0 co u) CO CO 0 0 N N N CO 0 O 0 n N O CO 0 N/- N N CO CO CO CO CO CO V CO .- O 0 N N N N C') c') (0 N N (h e � 0 a0 O CO 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N m V 4 p J > V V V R 7 �' V 0 0 7 R V 0 tO 1O 0 0 0 1O N 0 CO CO CO CO CO 0 CO (0 CO 0 W 0 0 7 v V V O< a 7 V V V v v v v o v v v v v v v v v a v v"0 V v V 0 (0 c 0 E 2 L 0 N W n n CO CD n V CO 0- CO 0) N CO N 0 CO CO V 0 o CO 0 CO T N 0 0 V R m sr N 0 Z CO O CO N N N 0 0 O N n O N CO CO CO 7 m n 0 0 .- O N O cO 1n c0 n 0 x co UI ~ y N y R NN N y V O C V N y N y 4' �} V O 1 10 1O 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 N t 0 0 (0 c 0 0 0 0 0 <0 c co o <00 0 (00 c c 0 0 U V V' < 'V �t V V V C 7 V V d' V O V '7 V C 4' a V V O V V C R V < V C X W W Z N 0 o O o 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 o O o 0 o O o Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o O O o o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n 0) n 0) 0) n r 0) 0) n 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) n O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 cc; 0) CO 0) 0) CO rn 0) 0) rn 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) ' , 4 y,. ,p 6 a 'a3 N 8' A x " 4 i y+ a, z 3 +.�' ,., -iD W O v D b m c f co 7> > w ci m m It X a 3 $ a) v a - o m m ro o ki [C a v o as C Z 2 3 m m 2 7- E .. N E Z 0 0 o .F.2' o J p CO m C p e p c p a v o m m CC 2 T w E 'o c_, LL o a o 0 0 0 b 2 E c 2 o �- J 6 u ro W (6 u) ui u U G o D_ CO - - - - o _ o D - - °' 1 IIIflHIUIiiiIIIIIOhININ011N ;11111111111111111111111111111111111111 U yy N m �, o a m E m i m Q Z 111111111111111111111111111111111111111 U Cp m O d W aD J Q M W L i U to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . J 0 m � U d W � m w Z a 0 U O a Z F O � , p kJ, `r S , y ;�°r. " �e g : @ �` , r �a t gym. L,,, ,„ .,„ i .,d. , , r' ,,,,, Iv, 0,.. I., 1,:;:l.:-.1k- SIP.. ■, ' 1 . s '41'. tAki 4 EaLj'afiL,' ■ ,' `-' ' . m iil c0 p U ro O N i W WO > F i 2 Q J O U j iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii p C LL U r „% �, s� �71 - ±t vs it, nr, � > s t i !a .. ;;;; 1:;.-' gq.."-° '-''' V :,<* s t ate' 1,1 �, E v a ' r` - 1 �5 '4 se F t '' i ' 1 ; e t * i ? ' y r ( ir L � , fi r. �w �, r � �. s a: Li, g U 0 ., 1; J ¢C'3 X W (} J W � � W lialt t l qrr 7 7rlr,7711t. � '# „, � a tI) " Y P ' iI e Y y ? � • ' d 1 L 4 : ' ° % '!",e41`.1%,;:,' r € ` "T y `° ^c ` " - 4 s - t , ` i w % C I � ., r, ,, 2 s v e -Ai',, > . i : 1. w 3 a r c T N 11111111111111 U N m X a To 8 00 WM W o E co S c S 2 p o 111 m 111111111 ~ m Q U m m W >. 'a E m U0 1 `0 0 w g v U J o o OVERVIEW & CONCURRENCE FORM &Firm: L r 312 . J 007 PAPERWORK BURDEN DISCLOSURE NOTICE Jhc reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 1 tour per response. The burden estimate includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and completing, reviewing, and submitting the form. You ere not required to respond to this collection of information unless a valid OMB control number appears in the upper right comer of this form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate end any suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW. Washington DC 20472, Paperwork Reduction Project (1660-0016). Submission of the form Is required to obtain or retain benekts under the National Flood Insurance Program. Please do not send your completed survey to the above address. A. REQUESTED RESPONSE FROM DHS - FEMA This request is fore (check one): { ❑ CLOMR: A letter from DHS-FEMA commenting on whether a proposed project, if but as proposed, would justify a map revision, or { proposed hydrology changes (See 44 CFR Ch. 1, Parts 60, 65 & 72). LOMR: A letter from DHS-FEMA officially revising the current NFIP map to show the changes to floodplains, regulatory loodway or { flood elevations. (See Parts 60 & 65 of the NFIP Regulations.) i \ B. OVERVIEW 1. The NFIP map panel(s) affected for all impacted communities is (are): Community No. Community Name State Map No. Panel No. Effective Date Ex: 480301 City of Katy TX 480301 0005D 0208/83 480287 Harris County TX 48201C 0220G 09830 480180 City of Irving, Dallas County TX 48113C0155J 0155 08/23/01 480170 City of Coppell, Dallas County TX 48113C0155J 0155 08/23/01 480171 City of Dallas, Dallas County 48113CO266J 0155 08/23/01 Flooding Source: Grapevine Creek 3. Project Neme/ldentifier. 158.6 -Acre Billingsley Tract 4. FEMA zone designations effected: AE (choices: A. AH, AO, Al -A30, A99. AE. AR, V. V1 -V30, VE, 8, C. D, X) 5. Basis for Request and Type of Revision: a. The basis for this revision request Is (dleck all that apply) ® Physical Change ❑ Improved Methodology/Data N. Regulatory Floodway Revision ❑ Other (Attach Description) Note: A photograph and narrative description of the area of concern is not required, but is very helpful during review. b. The area of revision encompasses the following types of loading and structures (check all that apply) Types of Flooding: Riverine ❑ Coastal ❑ Shallow Flooding (e.g.. Zones AO and Ali) ❑ Alluvial fan ❑ Lakes ❑ Other (Attach Description) Structures: ❑ Channel¢ation ❑ LeveelFloodwall ® Bridge/Culvert ❑ Dam ❑ Fill M Other, Attach Description Retaining wall along south side of creek (See Section I & III) DHS- FEMA Form 81 -89. FEB 06 Overview & Concurrence Form MT -2 Form 1 Page 1 of 2 C. REVIEW FEE II Has the review toe torthe appropriate request Cate gory been induded9 X. Yes Fee amount: $'/»oa 00 ❑ No, Attach Explanation I Please see the DHS Web site at httpJ/www.fema.govlfhmlfnn fees.shtm for Fee Amounts and Exemptions. _ D. SIGNATURE All documents submitted in support of this request are correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that any false stetemert may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001. Name: 11Gnr 1iiiii) 6 k Company Alloy 5 fe (• /� o• Mailing Address: Daytime Telephone No.: Fax No.: 4100 Sn��trn& ion�.t P34")%1:11 oo Qi2•2o • d 54 4 6 1?2•V •0$40 C A.r+'o I Noon , -7" '1 6o o7 E- McIAddress: h brllt I eg hrlGtlyleyc a. 44,61 Signature of R sr fired). Date: 175 r....." i f IZ5 /ZOO , I 1 As the Communty official responsible for loodp in maragemert, I hereby acknowledge that we have received and reviewed this Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) or conditional LOMR request. Based upon the communitys review. we find the completed or proposed protect meets or is designed to meet el 01 the community 1oodplain management requirements. including the requirement that no ill be pieced in the regulatory toodway. and that di necessary Federal, State. end local permits have been, or in the case of a condtionat LOMR. wil be obtained. In addition, we have determined that the land and eny existing or proposed structures to be removed from the SFHA are or will be reasonably sate from hooding as defned in 44CFR 652(c), and that we have available upon request by FEMA, at analyses and documentation used to make this determination. Communty Official's Name and Tile: Telephone No.: Garry Fennell, Senior Civil Engineer (972) 721 -3721 Communty Name: Community Official's Signature (required): Date: City of Irving CERTIFICATION BY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER AN DIOR LAND SURVEYOR This asr iicetion Is to be signed and seated by a licensed land surveyor, registered professional engineer. or a chited authorized by law to certify elevation information. All documents submitted in support of this request are correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that eny false statement may be punishable by trio or imprisonmert under Ttle 18 of the United States Coda. Section 1001. CsrlaCtarsNffe: , ` / License No.: 4 (3 l 6✓� zi 3// 14CW Company Name:,. A Ha iFt 4-5 5o G! �/ INC, TelePh N0 5 , 4 40220 Fli:4) ?i73" 1.07 Signature: Date: t e. - i/2 (0/10 Ensure the forms that ars appropriate to your revision request are Included In your submittal. Eorm Name trisilthailthEd Reeuired If... ❑ Riverine Hydrology end Hydraulics Forth (Form 2) New or revised discharges or water-surface elevations ❑ Riverine Structures Form (Form 3) Chanel is mod led, addition/revision of bridge/culverts. addrtion/revision of Ieveefiloodwal, addition/revision of dam ❑ Coastal Analysis Form (Form 4) New or revised coastal elevations ❑ Coastal Structures Form (Form 5) Addition/revision of coastal structure ❑ Alluvial Fan Flooding Form (Form 6) Flood control measures on alluvial fans Mk DHS- FEMA Form 81 -89. FEB 06 Overview & Concurrence Form MT -2 Form 1 Page 2 of 2 C. REVIEW FEE Has the review fee for the appropriate request cate gory bDen inducted? 0, Yes Fee amount. $ *Da 00 ❑ No, Attach Explanation lease see the DHS -FEMA Web site at httpJl'Ww.femat.goVlfhm/frm fees.shtm for Fee Amounts and Exemptions. D. SIGNATURE All doaxnents submitted in support of this request are correct to the best my knowledge. I understand that any false statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under Title f 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001. Name: I4 en r lit i h11'f ' b iG Company: /3 ri 616 Co. Mailing Address: Daytime Telephone No.: Fax Na.: 4100 rn {- �trnafion" Pkwy I1oo a'2• • o 544 eilz.vAo .0540 & n-° 11-ion oo' E-Mal Address: t1 b J i ng '? 1 eg bl ifiri(e /c o. co'n Signatyr of R- ••e er •.wired): Date: 06 j ; ,`II:A. J 25 /ZOO As the community of dal responsi • e for toodp :in management, I hereby acknowledge that we have received and reviewed this Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) or conditional LOMR request. Based upon the community's review, we find the completed or proposed project meets or is designed to meet et of the community floodplain management requirements, including the requirement that no fill be placed in the regulatory loodwey, and that aft necessary Federal. State. and local permits have been, or in the case of a conditional LOMR, wit be obtained. In addition. We have determined that the land and any existing or proposed structures to be removed from the SFHA are or will be reasonably safe from looding as defined in 44CFR 85.2(c), and that we have available upon request by FEMA, el analyses and documentation used to make this determination. Community Official's Nana and Title: Tel one No.: Steve Parker, Floodplain Manager ( 14) 948 -4666 Community Name: Community Official's Signature (required): Date: City of Dallas CERTIFICATION BY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER AND/OR LAND SURVEYOR This cedilication Is to be signed and sealed bya licensed land surveyor, registered professional engineer. or architect authorized by law to certify elevation information. XI documents submitted in support of this request are correct to the best of my knowledge. !understand that any false statement may be punishable by tine or imprisonment under Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001. CeMNpgie: 5k/17141/Y1 License No.: 7`J1.. Expiration fZ 1J494 Company SQ a e---S I y1C, Teleph 7`C�'" (9`2,20 Fex 4) �i7�7_ J 3 Signature: `J% Date: Z/6 qa.4.11.006. p_ Ensure thsffoorms that are appropriate to your revision request are included In your submittal. Form Name and (Number/ Raoulred K... ❑ Riverine Hydrology and Hydraulics Form (Form 2) New or revised discharges or water-surface elevations ❑ Rivenne Structures Form (Form 3) Channel is modified, additiontrevision of bridge/culverts. addition/revision of Ieveelloodwal. additicnitevisron of darn ❑ Coastal Analysis Form (Form 4) New or revised coastal elevations ❑ Coastal Structures Form (Form 5) Addition/revision of coastal structure ❑ Alluvial Fan Flooding Form (Form 6) Flood control measures on alluvial tans DHS- FEMA Form 81 -89, FEB 06 Overview & Conarrence Form MT -2 Form 1 Page 2 of 2 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY - FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY O.MB No. 1660 - 0016 RIVERINE HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULICS FORM Expires August31, 2007 PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT Jblic reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 3.25 hours per response. The burden estimate includes the time for reviewing instructions. searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and completing, reviewing, and submitting the form. You are not required to respond to this collection of information unless a valid OMB control number appears in the upper right comer of this form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street. SW, Washington DC 20472. Paperwork Reduction Project (1660-0016). Submission of the form is required to obtain or retain benefits under the National Flood Insurance Program. Please do not send your completed survey to the above address. Flooding So ur ce: Note Fill out one form for each flooding source studied A. HYDROLOGY 1. Reason for New Hydrologic Analysis (check all that apply) ID Not revised (skip to section 2) ❑ No existing analysis ❑ Improved data ❑ Alternative methodology ❑ Proposed Conditions (CLOMR) ❑ Changed physical condition of watershed 2. Comparison of Representative 1%- Annual- Chance Discharges Location Drainage Area (Sq. MI.) FIS (cfs) Revised (cfs) 1 . Methodology for New Hydrologic Analysis (check all that apply) 8 Statistical Analysis of Gage Records PrecipitatiorvRunoff Model [TR -20, HEC -1, HEC -HMS etc.] Regional Regression Equations 8 Other (please attach description) Please enclose all relevant models in digital format, maps, computations (including computation of parameters) and documentation to support the new analysis. The document, "Numerical Models Accepted by FEMA for NFIP Usage" lists the models accepted by DHS -FEMA. This document can be found at: http:/ /www.fema.gov/thm/en_modt.shtm. 4. Review /Approval of Analysis If your community requires a regional, state, or federal agency to review the hydrologic analysis, please attach evidence of approval/review. 5. Impacts of Sediment Transport on Hydrology Was sediment transport considered? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, then fill out Section F (Sediment Transport) of Form 3. If No, then attach your explanation for why sediment transport was not considered. B. HYDRAUUCS \ 1. Reach to be Revised Description Cross Section Water - Surface Elevations (ti.) Effective Proposed/Revised Downstream Limit U. S . of MacArthur Blvd. 10936 442.67 442.67 Upstream Limit 2200 L.F. U.S. of Belt Line Rd. 17600 462.53 462.03 '. Hydraulic Method Used Hydraulic Analysis [HEC -2 , HEC -RAS, Other (Attach description)] HEC -2 DHS - FEMA Form 81 -89A, FEB 06 Riverine Hydrology & Hydraulics Form MT -2 Form 2 Page 1 of 2 Billingsley Company 972.820.2200 phone Billi ngsley 4100 International Parkway, Suite two 972.820.2201 fax Carrollton, Texas 75007 www.billingsleyco.com May 25, 2006 FEMA LOMA Depot 3601 Eisenhower Avenue Alexandria, VA 22304 -6425 Re: 158.6 ac. Billingsley Tract LOMR Study Dear LOMA Manager: Billingsley Company is the sole owner of property in and on both sides of Grapevine Creek. We have reviewed the results of the hydraulic study prepared by Halff Associates, Inc. for the as -built retaining wall located in Irving, Texas. The project includes a retaining wall along a portion of the south side of Grapevine Creek for a residential subdivision called Hemingway Court. We recognize that the project will cause a 0.01 -foot rise in water surface elevation for the base hydraulic flood (the 100 -year flood) over a small area on our property along Grapevine Creek. We approve and authorize the rise. Sincerely, TOL Henry Billingsley Partner /br U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY - FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY OMB No. 1660 - 0016 RIVERINE STRUCTURES FORM I : Axgusi3I, 2007 PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT 'ublic reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 7 hours per response. The burden estimate includes the time for reviewing instructions, rerching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed data, and completing, reviewing. and submitting the form. You are not I , equired to respond to this collection of information unless a valid OMB control number appears in the upper right comer of this form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collections Management. U.S. Department of Homeland Secuity, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW, Washington DC 20472. Paperwork Reduction Project (1660 -0016). Submission of the form is required to obtain or retain benefits under the National Flood Insurance Program. Please do not send your completed survey to the above address. I Flooding Source: Grapevine Creek Note: Fill out one form for each flooding source studied p A. GENERAL ' Complete the appropriate section(s) for each Structure listed below: Channelization ............... complete Section B Bridge/Cutvert ................ complete Section C Dam . ............................... complete Section D Levee/Floodwall ............. complete Section E Sediment Transport........ complete Section F (if required) Description Of Structure Belt Line Road Bridge over Grapevine Creek 1. Name of Structure: Type (check one): ❑ Channelization W Bridge/Culvert ❑ Levee/Floodwall ❑ Dam Location of Structure: 1400 LF Upstream of the study site. Downstream Limit/Cross Section: 15160 Upstream Limit/Cross Section: 15310 2. Name of Structure: Type (check one): ❑ Channelization ❑ Bridge/Culvert ❑ Levee/Floodwall ❑ Dam Location of Structure: Downstream Limit/Cross Section: Upstream Limit/Cross Section: 3. Name of Structure: Type (check one) ❑ Channelization ❑ Bridge/Culvert ❑ Levee/Floodwall ❑ Dam Location of Structure: Downstream Limit/Cross Section: Upstream Limit/Cross Section: NOTE: For more struchres, attach additional pages as needed. DHS - FEMA Form 81 -89B, FEB 06 Riverine Structures Form MT -2 Form 3 Page 1 of 10 Flooding Source: Name of Structure: This request is for (check one): ❑ Existing dam ❑ New dam ❑ Modification of existing dam The dam was designed by (check one): ❑ Federal agency ❑ State agency ❑ Local govemment agency ❑ Private organization Name of the agency or organization: 3. The Dam was permitted as (check one) ❑ Federal Dam ❑ State Dam ❑ Local Government Dam ❑ None Provide the permit or identification number (ID) for the dam and the appropriate permitting agency or organization Permit or ID number Permitting Agency or Organization 4. Does the project involve revised hydrology? ❑ Yes ❑ No If Yes, complete the Riverine Hydrology & Hydraulics Form (Form 2). 5. Does the submittal include debris/sediment yield analysis? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, then fill out Section F (Sediment Transport). If No, then attach your explanation for why debris/sediment analysis was not considered. 6. Does the Base Flood Elevation behind the dam or downstream of the dam change? ❑ Yes ❑ No If Yes, complete the Riverine Hydrology & Hydraulics Form (Form 2) and complete the table below. ytillwater Elevation Behind the Dam FREQUENCY (% annual chance) FIS REVISED 10 -year (10%) 50 -year (2%) 100 -year (1 %) 500 -year (0.2 %) Normal Pool Elevation Please attach a copy of the formal Operation and Maintenance Plan i DHS - FEMA Form 81-89B, FEB 06 Riverine Structures Form MT -2 Form 3 Page 3 of 10 2. Freeboard (continued) Please note, occasionally exceptions are made to the minimum freeboard requirement. If an exception is requested, attach documentation addressing Paragraph 65.10(b X 1)(ii) of the NFIP Regulations. If No is answered to any of the above. please attach an explanation. b. Is there an indication from historical records that ice - jamming can affect the BFE? ❑ Yes ❑ No If Yes. provide ice -jam analysis profile and evidence that the minimum freeboard discussed above still exists. 3. Closures a. Openings through the levee system (check one): ❑ exists 0 does not exist If opening exists, list all closures: Channel Station Left or Right Bank Opening Type Highest Elevation for Type of Closure Device Opening Invert (Extend table on an added sheet as needed and reference) Note: Geotechnical and geologic data In addition to the required detailed analysis reports, data obtained during field and laboratory investigations and used in the design analysis for the following system features should be submitted in a tabulated summary form. (Reference U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE] EM- 1110 -2 -1906 Form 2086.) 4. Embankment Protection a. The maximum levee slope landside is: b. The maximum levee slope fl•odside is: c. The range of velocities along the levee during the base flood is: (min.) to (max.) d. Embankment material is protected by (describe what kind): e. Riprap Design Parameters (check one): ❑ Velocity ❑ Tractive stress Attach references Stone Riprap Reach Sideslope Flow Velocity Curve or Depth of Depth Straight Dim D50 Thickness Toedown Sta to Sta to Sta to Sta to Sta to Sta to (Extend table on an added sheet as needed and reference each entry) DHS - FEMA Form 81 -89B, FEB 06 Riverine Structures Form MT -2 Form 3 Page 5 of 10 E. LEVEFIFLOODWALL (CONTINUED) 1 6. Floodwall And Foundation Stability a. Describe analysis submittal based on Code (check one): ❑ UBC (1988) or ❑ Other (specify): b. Stability analysis submitted provides for ❑ Overturning ❑ Sliding If not, explain: c. Loading included in the analyses were: ❑ Lateral earth @ P,, = psf; P, = psf ❑ Surcharge -Slope @ , ❑ surface psf ❑ Wind @ P = psf ❑ Seepage (Uplift); ❑ Earthquake @ P. = %g ❑ 1%-annual-chance significant wave height: ft. ❑ 1%- annual- chance significant wave period: sec. d. Summary of Stability Analysis Results: Factors of Safety. Itemize for each range in site layout dimension and loading condition limitation for each respective reach. Criteria (Min) Sta To Ste To Loading Condition Overturn Sliding Overturn Sliding Overturn Sliding Dead & Wnd 1.5 1.5 Sad &Soil 1.5 1.5 mad, Soil, Flood, & 1.5 1.5 ,rpact Dead, Soil, & Seismic 1.3 1.3 (Ref: FEMA 114 Sept 1986; USAGE EM 1110 -2 -2502) (Note: Extend table on an added sheet as needed and reference) e. Foundation bearing strength for each soil type: Bearing Pre ssure Sustained Load (psf) Short Term Load (psf) Computed design maximum Maximum alowabie f. Foundation scour protection ❑ is, ❑ is not provided. If provided, attach explanation and supporting documentation: Attach engineering analysis to support construction plans. DHS - FEMA Form 81 -89B, FEB 06 Riverine Structures Form MT -2 Form 3 Page 7 of 10 E. LEVEE /FLOODWALL (CONTINUED) 8 . Interior Drainage (continued) i. Will pumping plants be used for interior drainage? ❑ Yes ❑ No If Yes, include the number of pumping plants: For each pumping plant, list: Plant #1 Plant #2 The number of pumps The ponding storage capacity The maximum pumping rate The maximum pumping head The pumping starting elevation The pumping stopping elevation Is the discharge facility protected? Is there a flood warning plan? How much time is available between warning and flooding? Will the operation be automatic? ❑ Yes ❑ No If the pumps are electric, are there backup power sources? ❑ Yes ❑ No (Reference: USAGE EM- 1110 -2 -3101, 3102, 3103, 3104, and 3105) Include a copy of supporting documentation of data and analysis. Provide a map showing the flooded area and maximum ponding elevations for all interior watersheds that result in flooding. 9. Other Design Criteria a. The following items have been addressed as stated: Liquefaction ❑ is ❑ is not a problem Hydrocompaction ❑ is ❑ is not a problem Heave differential movement due to soils of high shrink/swell ❑ is ❑ is not a problem b. For each of these problems, state the basic facts and corrective action taken: Attach supporting documentation c. If the levee /floodwall is new or enlarged, will the structure adversely impact flood levels and /or flow velocities floodside of the structure? ❑ Yes ❑ No Attach supporting documentation d. Sediment Transport Considerations: Was sediment transport considered? ❑ Yes ❑ No If Yes, then fill out Section F (Sediment Transport). If No, then attach your explanation for why sediment transport was not considered. DHS - FEMA Form 81 -89B, SEP 05 Riverine Structures Form MT -2 Form 3 Page 9 of 10 „, • �/ ' SC yOO � O o '” lilt _ EN� L LT O N CT , A IA.RD G D BANGTON e l HAM N 9 a --I m o C E Good a! HOLLO N CT Soccer Complex omplen 1 • o o? v RIVERCHASE a+►` v _• �` � �CR r_S I e� —_ .t fliverchase _ . Mclnnish TT � r � r -. — _ GoH Club Pe k B ELTIIS r p� ��p T �—_ ELM FORK DARE 7 5 0 xi ?le°1-Ec--r--- C O P PE L L IJ ! 8 ath ® Cha VALLEY VISTAS . P �/ 2 Perk ¢ TAN �0PS� tip • P ?. z AIJDRF C CT ♦ E NE r : 1 LL D s y, E OSBI -a p �j T �— o.. . m 0 A • CT� , .DRY 4 ` ;, HAR60::r p N 11 • • 1 c :• C•:AY O q �n C 9,, O RI V� Ledbetter m 1 LAK •0 5', CLIF SIDE x x V CT % L O �n r ,1• ,? IRS ,iCT - o ==Ey_ MERED . CT .F.., � � WitaK, �L q LLEyR L Ey n P iC� O ® ND see De *ui LW P T ,te HolL O W 9 6` � to Valley r,ocx PAZ m ,F, E6 CI AMA'ff ,SPRIN � 4 b w m ; Ii . `- 114: 7 .I. 99 �4Y -7 B 11 ° z Bg A / r UND• , I• 4 H• I L ` Z _ II) T. Lti; ;�`''OM''BBB.; : : • R R 0 L LT O N FF-- , 'g . CANYON PL I • TA TRAIL ° Tom Landry r 0 ei ♦ i - S TR > I i 0 � RI � GE M N A N ,e 9y `t1 V.N•r z " DRNER •. O f II f � � z S T A Q Sam Houston \ , — O a r' v v c At - m `! • • TRAIL s I ` �� �jZ��1• , : y z O Mapaco, Inc. • ♦ MO.." ILL W� ° - t �. 40 c,' 0 . I♦ ( L l p OLD YORK ■i`J,' � 1 p 4 v - . r - 43 '�4lSlL_ I ' II 1q :.'1 ``� 0e E KN O '.2. d`. O P T'4E MEADOWS Pr g .' R VINGm � 6 � o �6t ! yy ss��[� f! Cy - or z M WO I O 2 1 d. VALLEY ' I IN(iY VALLE 750 I � T F .r "r - < < I MARK p Cg C m oil �a ` $ -< n .� ,, it, 4, .„4,...„ U L....._......_:- E - s 5 v RaI, 1 V oQ � e` m x A I �� ANCH4IEW D . o 1 � 11 ' °N ` " FARMERS ig I , �u e j i' uL1 lrrPa4 z; 635 .110; BRANCH 01 �`;�. m LAS CO 5 ° GE ' 1 1 ► � � :,,'a, L a MaCk 76 BLVD '9 (/ '' �L • Eg o Park `` G � — _ 4\ Pa l Shoppirp S �`_���` 6- 7 5 0 ; _ esr Blv Cem Q1 . Z 3 . Keenan Crossing Park ( rei 1 , SCALE IN MILES SCALE IN FEET ( f O 1 CONTINUED ON MAP 21B [ O 0 COPYRIGHT 2003 by MAPSCO, INC. - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 0 1000 2000 3000 ! '1 BOOK PAGE 1020 �l fia,LA42 1 ' 1_ OCATiO/.) PI (DA LL�ks MA rsc o -200 -f) Page 1 of 2 Ken Griffin - RE: Hemingway Court LOMR Letter Draft From: "Luedke, Brandon" <bLuedke @Halff.com> To: "Ken Griffin" <kgriffin @ci.coppell.tx.us> Date: 7/5/2006 3:14 PM Subject: RE: Hemingway Court LOMR Letter Draft CC: "McGraw, Mark" <MMcGraw @Halff.com> Ken, Attached is a copy of the signed letter from Spiars Engineering per your request as a pre- requisite for approval of the Hemingway Court LOMR. Just FYI....Friday, we sent you soil density test reports and retaining wall plans via courier for Hemingway Court. Upon receipt of this letter, we've passed on to you all the information you've requested. Please review provided information and contact us if you have any questions. Also, once you've approved the LOMR and sent us a signed copy of the FEMA MT -2 form, we will submit a Floodway Change Notice (attached) to the Dallas Morning News - Coppell /Valley Ranch Edition as required by FEMA. Just wanted to give you a heads up about this. I believe we have to run this in the paper for 1 week (or 2 editions of the Coppell/Valley Ranch Edition). Thanks, Brandon From: Ken Griffin [ mailto :kgriffin ©ci.coppell.tx.us] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 8:34 AM To: Luedke, Brandon Subject: Re: Hemingway Court LOMR Letter Draft Brandon The letter is ok. Once I receive the signed letter, along with the other requested information, I will sign the necessary FEMA forms. Ken Griffin, P. E. »> "Luedke, Brandon" <bLuedke @Halff.com> 6/28/2006 5:42 PM »> Ken, Attached is a draft of the example letter we put together per your request to give to the design engineer(s) for Hemingway Court. Please review this attachment and make revisions or reply with comments. We've inquired about the other information you requested (i.e. retaining wall plans, soil density test reports), and should be receiving those items tomorrow. We'II forward those on to you as quickly as possible. If you have any questions, please give either me or Mark a call Mark McGraw © 214.346.6244 Me 214.217.6648 Regards, Brandon A. Luedke, E.I.T. file : / /C: \ Temp \GW} 00002.HTM 7/6/2006 Page 2 of 2 Project Engineer M Raiff Assoc ate HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC. 8616 Northwest Plaza Drive Dallas, Texas 75225 Phone 214 - 217 -6648 Fax 214 - 361 -5573 www.halff.com file: / /C: \Temp \GW} 00002.HTM 7/6/2006 HP LaserJet 3330 HP LASERJET 3200 i n v e n t Jul -6 -2006 8:18AM Fax Call Report Job Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result 627 7/ 6/2006 8:17:16AM Send 2143615573 1:25 2 OK T X C I T Y •O P.O. Box 079 COPPELL CaoPen ;9 Phone: (972)30.3696 Fax (972)30 -701 T o C X n x T r - e a • ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FAX COVER SHEET [� To: .. ,- _ U " •� From. Fax: aly 3 L -5 Y 7 oat.: 7/6 /!)ev Phone: Pegs: (including cover sheet) Rs: CC: ❑ Urgent ❑Foe Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ddu Xp u.st.d •Comments: IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES PLEASE CALL (972) 304 -3686 "City fCoppell Engineering- Excellence By Derive' C. REVIEW FEE airrir Has the review fee forth° appropriate request category included? Yes Fee amount i 17117°°' 00 ❑ No, Attach Explanation .ease see the DRS -FEMA We site at http:ftwww.fema.gov/fhm/frm fees.shtm for Feee mounts and Exemptions. D. SIGNATURE All documents submitted in support of this request are correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that any false statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001. Name: (-4t Yt rq Ibilitilyky spa Allirnq s ic too• Mailing Address: Daytime Telephone No.: Fax No.: 4100 r 4. ur onRJ Pkwy . -1. IN) c o t .q0.0 • d 54 Q12 •V o .0540 G'arro if-fan ,1 '7O01 E-Me" Address: h i l f; ti51e.# htlliry lc Ic o. 4061 Signature otR• .e:- er r aired): Date: 05 i • I 25 /Zoo tp .:--- e f 4, As the c o m munity of5dal responsi • e for foodp :in managemertit, I hereby acknowledge that we have received and reviewed this Letter of Map Revision (LOMR} or conditional LOMR request. Based upon the community's review. we find the completed or proposed project meets oils designed to meet et of the community ltoodplain management requirements. including the requirement that no till be placed in the regulatory toodway. and that a1 necessary Federal. State. arxt local permits have been, or in the case of a conditional LOMR. wit be obtained. In addition, we have determined that the land and any existing or proposed structures to be removed from the SFHA are or will be reasonably safe from food ng es deemed in 44CFR 65.2(c), and that we have available upon request by FEMA. et analyses and documentation used to make this determination. Communty Official's Name and Tile: Telephone No.: Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E. Director of Engineering & Public Works (972) 304 -3679 Community Name: Community Official' gnature (required): Oats: City of Coppell 9c 011,1"--- -- 1 . 6. 6 CERTIFICATION BY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER AND/OR LAND SURVEYOR This certification is to be signed and seated by a licensed land surveyor, registered professional engineer. or architect authorized by law to certify elevation information. All documents submitted in support of this request are correct to the bast of my knowledge. I understand that any WS e statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001. Ca is N e. 51417.144 License No.: Expiration te: a 4 0 7S•2.- 121;V'tclo Company Na e: / Telep ,) , Fax ti , 14) 1,73~ r3 Signature: Date: (/it—e• e 19----• fria- 6 /IVO& Ensure the forms that are appropriate to your revision request are Included In your submittal. Form Name and (Numbed R eaulred If,., ❑ Riverine Hydrology end Hydraulics Form (Form 2) New or revised dscharges or water - surface elevations ❑ Riverine Structures Form (Form 3) Channel is modifed. edddiorl/revision of txidga/culverts. adddtionhevision of levee/ltoodwal. additiontrevision of dam ❑ Coastal Analysis Form (Form 4) New or revised coastal elevations ❑ Coastal Structures Form (Form 5) AdcfitiorVrevision of coastal structure ❑ Alluvial Fan Flooding Form (Form 6) Flood control measures on alluvial fans DHS- FEMA Form 81 -89. FEB 06 Overview & Concurrence Form MT -2 Form 1 Page 2 of 2 JUL -05 -2006 09:32 From:SPIARS ENGINEERING 9724220875 To:97 P,2/2 .holy 5, 2006 Kenneth M, Griffin, p.E. Director of Engineering and Public Works City of C.oppell 255 Parkway i3lvd. P.O. Box 478 Coppell, Texas 75019 Dear Mr, Griffin, Based upon my review as the engineer responsible for design of the Hemingway Court development for Billingsley Company in Irving, Texas!, C SP�•9res...._, certify that all fill placed and retaining wall constructed for the Hemingway Court development is reasonably are l om flooding as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in 44CFR 65.2(c) shown below: FEMA :Definition 44CFR 65.2(c) . Por the purposes of this part, "reasonably safe from flooding" means base flood waters will not inundate the land or damage structures to he removed from the SEIIA (Special Flood hazard Areas) and s hot any subsurface waters related to the base flood will not damage existing or proposed buildings. For any questions regarding design of this development, please contact me at (972)422 -0077. Sincerely, • • Tim C Spiars , Project Manage Engineering, Inc. �� aF r8� 7301x. Park Blvd., Suite 210 $�'' " "��� Plano, Texas 75074 r r' N-4 \ * (972)422 -0077 % r * TIM C. SPIAR$ r (972)422 -0075 1 .43;,, 64017 , tim{a spiarsengincering com 1 lhC N 8 �p\'C . k �k;)aiva�: �� iliji -05 -2006 09:32 From:SPIARS ENGINEERING 9724220075 4111 i a r s To:9728202202 P. 1'2 ENGINEERING 730 E. PARK BLVD , SUITE 210 • PLANO, TEXAS 75074 • (972) 422 -0077 • FAX (972) 422 -0075 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: Bill Walker Tim Spiars COMPANY: DATE: Billingsley Company July 5, 2006 FAX NUMBER: TOTAL. NO OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: (972) 820-2202 2 RE: JOB NUMBER: Hemingway Court 04 -121 0 URGENT 0 FOR REVIEW O PLEASE COMMENT ❑ PLEASE REPLY NOTES: Requested letter follows. 1;,. J I L --- ,k,,,,,,,LyI> 6) „,) . ZF f . ...... ..... ..... W V > Z It Ile 71, -Ail -4 . .. . . .... ....... In .5 0 so 100 150 ­200 300 0 - 100 ' z SCALE IN FEET I X -Z .. ...... ... . .. ....... 1 0, .... ...... .... . .... . ..... . .... ..... ..... .... .... . .. . ..... .. ....... . .... .... ... . ...... .... ...... ....... ....... ... C . ...... 4a 1 , 1, N. ...... .... ...... ..... ... ....... - - _ - `,= ", / - ._ - ­_f ...... . .... . . .... -77 77 9 - . ...... .... .. ...... ...... Z� . ....... .. "Doi. f .. . ......... n ..... ..... . ...... ... . ...... . . ... . ............. .. . ...... . .... ................ . ....... . IV. ... ....... . Mi � - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . ........ ............ . ........ . . .............. . . .......... . ......... . . . .......... .... ...... .. ......... . ... ........ . . ..... ............ . . ............ .. . ......... ... ... ..... . . ............. --- - ------ - . . .......... . ... . . .... . . .... - - _-__- --- . ............ ..... . .............. . .. . ...... .... . ....... .... ............. .......... . ............. . ......... .......... IF . ........... . . ............ . . ...... . ...... ........... . ............... ...... . . . ....... . . . ....... . .......... ........... ......... . ......... ..... . ........ . ............. .............. . . ............ .. . ...... ......... . . ....... .. . ............ . ...... . ..... . .......... -- - - - - - - - - -- . . . . . ............. - 1 - ....... . . ...... . ... . ............ . ............. . ........ --- - - - - __5 - - - - - -- 01 . ... . ..... CID 00 .... ....... . I . .......... . .. . ...... ...... Fly N" /* . ....... . .... ....... ...... . X: ........... It . ....... FROXIMAT AP E 'LINE PqOPERTY- 'o e >1 .... .. .... - 7� 40 . ... ...... .... ...... (LOMR) T 450.51 Bu 45&.1VTW . ...... ... .... .. 49 B P- 45&.?l TW 45 LEGEND: 45 39T lop 58 TV . ..... . ...... 1 79 TW'j, 451.50 . ...... ... . ........ . . . ..... 1457. ... . ...... . ...... ... . ...... 1455 1 4 17 0_ . . ..... . ......... . ........ . . .... .. . ....... 44 .. . ......... .. . ... ... ........ . ....... , 1 i, ..... . ........ ..... PRO AS`-BUILT 444.36 BW - plain Ultimate 457.6 TW Hydraulics Cross Section Existing I 00-vr Flood 457 '4 . 4 SED 44 .3j ;T JW 45426!' W 100" \\1 JAINING WALL Proposed 100-yrFloodplainUltitnate(LOMR) FLO LAI ULTIMATE L�57.15 BIN 1458.1 AS-BUILT RETAINING WALL (LOMR . .. . ..... . ...... 0 I 04 BV 45 .2 y (LONM) Proposed Floodwa 48 .04 BV 450.10 T�W- 7. 6 9� 3W W86 3W 8.29 -ruil I ROJECT BENCHMARKS (SET BY HALFF ASSOCIATES) f46 EXISTING JO 7 O-YR. FLOODPLAIN W IM*1 11 0" CUT ON INLET 1-7034087.8966 -ULTIMATE W !W :-2441079.6408 1-452.17 J ON TOP OF EXIST. CONIC. CURB INLET �4 - --------------- -- IM PPROX.760'WEST OF MACARTHUR BLVD 0 T ,'ENTERUNE ON SOUTH SIDE OF BELT LINE RD. T IM*2 "[3 CUT ON INLET .... . ...... Y 1-7034104.9428 :-2440816.7226 .00ATED ON TOP OF EXIST.�CONC. CURB INLET f 4 % ENTERLINE ON SOUTH SIDE OF BELT LINE RD. kPPROX. 1030 WEST OF MACARTHUR BLVD. ? NEI HE.6 r, Sol ALL ITY OF COPPELL GPS Proi ct No: Issued: N P.S. PT. *3 (BL03), EL-473.96 . ......... iA 611+30.32, RT. 112.70 . LOCATED . ...... Revisions: No. Date N EXISTING CONIC. INLET ON THE WESTERLY SIDE OF .4 "ILL . ........ IOORE ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY 26.70 FEET NORTH IF THE NO RTH R.O.W. OF BELTLINE ROAD. ;TA 88+21.06, LT. 88.38 ,.P S. PT. #5 (BL05), EL-462.113 1-70,34711.4419 :-24387251548 LOCATED 18.29 FEET EAST OF THE EXISTING CENTER INE OF MOCKINGBIRD LANE AND 15.38 FEET NORTH OF BELTLINE ROAD. 'HE EXISTING NORTHERLY R.O.W. LINE OF ,'.P.S. PT. 0 7 (BL07), EL-449.16 + I I ;TA 119 68.31 RT. 8.38 Drawn by: . ....... Checked by: 1-7034099.2239 SheetTitle :-2441777.4077 LOCATED 13.98 FEET WESTERLY OF THE PROJECTED V VEST R.O.W. LINE OF UacARTHUR BLVD., AND 8.38 FEET FL.00DI IORTH OF THE NEW CENTERLINE OF BELTLINE ROAD. 100-YEAR LL G.P.S. POINTS ARE SET AS 3 ALUMINUM DISKS, ;TAMPED, BLO3,05 OR 07 /V Sheei Numbe )lift i i 1jr. ft\230008\23186\d OM9 It I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - --- - - - - - -