Loading...
Cambridge Phase 1-CS 940929 DOWDE,, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATE~, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS 16250 DALLAS PARKWAY SUITE 100 DALLAS, TEXAS 75248 (214) 931-0694 FAX (214.'., 931-9538 September 29, 1994 Mr. Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E. City Engineer City of Coppell P.O. Box 478 Coppell, Texas 75019 Re: Floodplain Reclamation for Denton Creek from Section 20980 to Section 21645 City of Coppell, Dallas County, Texas Dear Mr. Griffin: Herewith submitted are the data required for requesting a final Letter of Map Revision as mentioned in the April 19, 1994 letter from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to the Honorable Tom Morton, Mayor of Coppell. The data submitted are the following: · completed application (Form 1) and certification (Form 2) · check for processing fee of $225.00 · as-built plans · compaction certification I respectfully request that you review this data and submit the request to the Federal Emergency Management Agency for their approval. Thank you for your time and cooperation. Sincerely, Teri D. Jones DAN_ M. DOWDEY & ASSOCIAT-CS, INC. ~,~.-~:~=~-d=.~-.~ ,_~ c w. 625o A,,AS ,A,XWAV DALLAS. TEXAS 75248 (~4) ~-06~4 i -94 · ATTE%T'ON T0 ~"~ WE ARE SENDING YOU -- Attached E Under separate cover via the following items: _:-' Shop drawings I- Prints ~ Plans ~ Samples E] Specifications E Copy of letter ~ Change order [] COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: .~-d~or approval r- Approved as submitted ~ Resubmit__copies for approval [] For your use i-' Approved as noted _-- Submit copies for distribution > _-- As requested ,~ Returned for corrections [] Return__corrected prints ~ For review and comment F-- F- FOR BIDS DUE 19 ,r-- PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS 40% Pre-C ....... Content · 10% Pos1-C ....... Content SIGNED: REVISION REQUESTOR AND COMMUNITY OFFICIAL FORM ExDiresJ~iy 31. 1994 PUBLIC BURI)EN I)ISCLOSURE NOTICE Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 2.13 hours per response. The burden estimate includes the time fi>r reviewing instructions, searching' existing data sources, gathering and maintaining' the needed data, and cmnpleting and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy oftl~e burden estimate and any suggestions fi~r reducing this burden, to: Information Collections Management, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20472; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Pr{~c. ct (3067- 0148): Washington, I)C 20503. 1. OVERVIEW I. The basis for this revision request is (are): (check all that apply) [] Physical change [] Existing [] Proposed [] Improved methodoh)gy [] Improved data [] Floodway revision [] Other Explain '2. I"hmding Source: 'E)i~T'Ot4 3. I'roject Name/Identifier: '~)~--XYfOt4 4. FI'iM A zone designations affected: {example: A, A}I, AC, A i-A30, A99, Ak_;, V, VI-30, VE, B, C, D, X) 5. The NFIP mup panel(s} affected for all impacted communities is (are): Community Community Map Panel E~Cqective No. Name County State No. No. Date EX: 480301 Katy,City I larris, Fort Bend TX 480301 000SD 02i08/83 480287 llarris County tlarris TX 48201C 0220G 09/28/90 q~O tWO c ~PPff: I..I.. I5~,.~ J~q;. ~ '~A q~Qi"/O t~t31~ D ~O/ttalgl 6. The area of revision encompasses the roi lowing types of flooding, structures, and associated disciplines: (check all that apply ~ Types of Fhmding Structures Disciolines* ~ [] Riverine [] Channelization [] Water Resources [-I Coastal [] l,evee/Floodwall [] I lydrology [] Alluvial Fan [] Bridge/Culvert [] Ilydraulies I~ Shallow Flooding(e.g. Zones AOandAlh [] Dam [] Sediment Transport [] Lakes [] Coastal [] Interior Drainage [] Fill [] Structural Affected by [] Pump Station [] Geotechnical wind/wave action [] None [] l,and Surveying [] Yes [] Channel Relocation [] Other(describe) [] No [] Excavation [] Other (describe) [] Other(describe) * Attach completed "Certification by Registered Professional Engineer and/or Land Surveyor" Form for each discipline checked. {Form 2) 2. FLOODWAY INFORMATION 7. Ih,es the affected flooding source have a lloodway de~ig'nated on the effective FIICM or FI:~ieM? [] Yes [] No 8. I)oes the revised floodway delineation differ from that shown on the effective I"IRM or FBFM [] Yes [] No Ifyes, give reason: · FEMA Form 81-89, AUG 93 Revision gequestor and Community Official Form Form 1 Page 1 of 4 Attach copy ofeither a public notice distributed by the community stating the community's intent to revise the floodway or a statement by the community that it has notified all affected property owners and affected adjacent jurisdictions. 9. Does the State have jurisdiction over the floodway or its adoption by communities participating in the NFIP? [] Yes [] No Il'yes, attach ti copy of a letter notifying thc appropriate State agency of the floodway revision and documentation of the approva! ,fthe revised floodway by the appropriate State agency. 3. PROPOSED ENCROACHMENTS I0. With Iloodwuys: 1A.Does the revision request involve fill, new construction, substantial improvement, or other development in the floodway? [] Yes [] No I B. lfyes, does the development cause the 100-year water surface elevation t. increase at any location by more than 0.000 feet? [] Yes [] No I1. Without floodways: 2A. Does the revision request involve fill, new construction, substantial improvement, or other development in the 100-year floodplain? []Yes [] No Ifyes, does the cumulative effect flail development that has occurred since thc effective SFIIA was originally identified cause the 100-year water surface elevation to increase at any location by more than one foot (or other surcharge limit if comm unity or state has adopted more stringent criteria)? [] Yes 15~lNo If the answer to either Items 1B or 2B is yes, please provide documentation that all reqt,irements of Section 65.12 of the NFIP regulations have been met, regarding evaluation ofalternatives, notice to individual legal property owners, concurrence of CEO, and certification that no insurable structures are i mpac! ed. 4. REVISION REQUESTOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT 12. ~vingreadNF~Regu~uLi~ns~44~`~.~h.~p~r~s59~6~6~and?2~be~ieveLhaLthepr~pusedrevisi°n [] is [] is not in compliance with thc requirements ofthe aforementioned NFIP Regulations. 5. COMMUNITY OFFICIAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT 1 3. Was this revision request revic~,,wed by the community for compliance with thc community's adopted floodplain management ordinances? [MYes [] No 14. Does this revision request, have the endorsement of the community? [~es [] No If no to either of the above questions, please explain: Please note that community acknowledgment and/or notification is required for all requests as outlined in Section 65.4 (b) of the N I"IP Regulations. ~. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 15. I)oes the physical change involve u flood control structure (e.g., levees, fluodwalls, channelizuLion, baMns, dams)? [] Yes [] No Ifyes, please provide the following information for each of the new flood control structures: A. Inspection ofthe flood control project will be conducted periodically by entity with a maxilnum interval of months between inspections. 13. Based on the results ofscheduled periodic inspections, appropriate maintenance oftl~e flood control facilities will be conducted by (tmtiLy~ to en.~ure the integrity and degree of flood protection of the structure. C. A formal plan ufoperation, including documentation orthe flood warning sy.stem, specific actions and u~signlnents of responsibility by individual name or title, and p,-ovisi(,ns fin' testing thc plan at inte,'vals not less Lhttn one year, [] has [] hits not been prcpitred I'or Uae Iqo,,d t'tmtrol structure. Revision Requestor and Community OtTicIdl kol'm Form 1 Page 2 ol 4 D. The community is willing .ssume responsibi~.ity for [] performing overseeingcompliance with t. he maintenance and operation plans of the flood control struct, ure. Ifnot perfi~rmed promptly by an owner other -'..hun thc communi~v~, '~.he com::'.unit','. will pruvide the necesaary services without cost to the Federal gove,'nment.. A[tuc.~ operation and maintenance plans 7. REQUESTED RESPONSE FROMFEMA 16. After examining the perLinenL NFl P regulations and reviewing the document untiL;ed "Appeals, l{evisior'~s, and Amendments to l"lood Insurance Maps: A guide for Community Officials," da',ed January 1990, this request is for a: a. CI,OMR A letter from FI';M,\ commenting on whether a proposed project, ifbuilt as proposed, would justify a map revision (LOMR or PMR), or proposed hydrology changes (see 44 CFR Ch. I, Parts 60, 65, and 72.). ~ b. I.OMR A letter from FEMA officially revising the current NFIP map to show changes to floodplains, floodways, or flood elevations. LOM[~.s typically depict decreased flood hazards. (See 44 CFR Ch. ! Part.,; 60 and65.) c. PMR A reprinted NFIP map incorporating changes to floodplains, floodways, or flood elevations. Because oft. he time and cost involved to change, reprint, and redistribute an NFIP map, a I)MR is usually processed when a revision reflects increased flood hazards or large-scope changes. (See 44 CFR Ch. I, Parts 60 and 65.) d. Other: Describe 8. FORMS INCLUDED !?. Form 2 entitled, "CertificaLion By Registered I)rol'essional Engineer and/or 1.and Surveyor" mu~t be submitt, ed. The following forms should be included with this request if(check the included forms): · Itydrologic analysis rot flooding source differs from that [] Hydrologic Analysis For~n used Lo develop FIRM (Form 3) · l lydraulic analysis for riverine flooding differs from thaL [] Riverine I l ydraulic Analysis Form used to develop FIRM (Form 4) · The request is based on updated topographic [] Riverine/Coastal Mapping Form information or a revised floodplain or Floodway (Form 5) delineation is requested · The request, involves any type ol'channel modification [] Channelization Form (Form · The request involves new bridge or culvert or revised [] Bridge/Culvert Form analysis oran existing bridge or culvert (Form 7) · The request involves a new revised levee/floodwall [] l,cvee/Floodwall System Ana!ysis Form system (Form 8) · The request involves analysis ofcoastal flooding [] Coastal Analysis Form (Form 91 · The request involves coastal structures credited as [] Coastal Structures (Form 10) providing protection from the 100-year flood · The request involves an existing, proposed, or modified [] Dam Form (Form 1 1) dam · The request, involves structures credited as providing [] Alluvial Fan Flooding Form protection from the 100-year flood on an alluvial lan (l"orm 12) Revision Requestor and Commumty Ol'f~c~al Form Fo~m 1 Pacje 3 of 4 9. INITIAL REVIEW FEE 1~. The minimum initial review fee for the appropriate request category has been included- [] Yes [] No Initial tee amount: $ M I".T! IOO OF PAYMENT (Check one box) CARD NUMBER [] PAYMENT [] VISA []MASTERCARD ENCLOSED Chock or money order only. Make payable to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 t0 11 12 13 14 15 National Flood Insurance Program EXP. Date or 19. This request is for a project that is for public benefit and is intended to reduce the flood hazard to existing development in identified flood hazard areas as opposed to planned floodplain development [] Yes [] No or 20. This request is to correct an error or to include the effects or natural changes within the areas ofspecial flood hazards. [] Yes [] No Note: I understand that my signature indicates that all Note: Signature indicates that the community information submitted in support of this request is understands, from the revision requester, the correct. , [ impacts of the revision on flooding conditions ff/~~ ./~/ in~ the ~ communityg~natur} . %lcjnature of Rews,on Requester of Commumty Ofhc~al Printed Name and T~tle of Revision Requester Printed Name and T~t!e of Commumty Offioal Company Name Commumty Name Date Does this request impact any other communities? [] Yes [] No If yes, attach letters from all affected jurisdictions acknowledging revision request and approving changes to floodway, if applicable. - Note: Although a photograph orphysical changes is not reqt~ired, it may be helpful for FEMA's review. Revision Requestor and Community Official From Form I Page a of ~ FEDERAL EMERGENCY MAN~, ,~MENT AGENCY O.M.B. Burden No 3067-0148 FEMA USEONLY CERTIFICATION BY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER Expires July 31, 1994 AND/OR LAND SURVEYOR FORM PUBLIC BURDEN DISCLOSURE NOTICE Public reporting burden for this £orm is estimated to average. 23 hour per response. The burden estimate includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the needed da[a, and completing and reviewing the form. Send comments regarding the accuracy of the burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Information Collections Management, Federal Emergency Manvgement Agency, 500 C Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20472; and to ~.he Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (3067- 0148), Washington, DC 20503. 1. This certification is in accordance with 44 CFR Ch. I, Section 65.2 2. I am licensed with an expertise in I~q-~-Y~ ~~'r-~-.c.~ (~ [example: water resources ('hydrology, hydraulics, sediment transport, interior drainage)* structural, geotechnical, land surveying.] 3. I have [~ years experience in the expertise listed above. 4. 1 have ~repared ~ reviewed the attached supporting data and analyses related to my expertise. 5. i ~ave ~ have not visited and physically viewed the project. 6. In my opinion, the following analyses and/or designs, is/are being certified: 7. Base upon the following review, the modifications in place have been constructed in general accordance with plans and specifications. Basis for above s~tement: (check all that apply) a. ~ Viewed all phases of actual construction. b. ~ Compared plans and specifications with as-built survey information. c. ~ Examined plans and specifications and compared with completed projects. d. ~ Other 8. All inBrmation submitted in sup~rt ofthis request is correct Lo the best o[ my knowledge. 1 understand that any false statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under Title ! 8 of the U nj ted States Code, Section 1001. Name: MICLI~ ~. ~qD~M ~,~. (please printor Iplease print or type) Registration No. Expiration ante: S~te *Specify Subdiscipline Note: Insert not applicable (N/A} when statement does not apply. F£MA Form 81-89A. AUG 9:3 Certification Dy Registered Professional Engineer and/or Land Surveyor Form Form 2 G [ GEE Consultants, inc. E INVIRO\ME~'TAL 2540 Glenda Lane * Suite 108 · Dallas, Texas 75229 · ~214~ 620-9791 · Fa~ :214,620-9794 September 13, 1994 Federal Emergency Management Agency Revisions Fee-Collection System Administrator P.O. Box 3173 Merrifield, Virginia 22116 RE: Floodplain Fill Compaction Estates of Cambridge Manor, Phase I Coppell, Texas Dear Sir: In accordance with the request of Mr. David Carlton of Dowdey Anderson and Associates, we have reviewed the field and laboratory analyses performed on fill material placed at the above referenced site between May and September, 1994. The field testing and inspection were necessary to ensure that the fill materials placed on the referenced lots met the project requirements. Accordingly, the following comments and recommendations are warranted at this time: A. Site inspections were made by representatives of GEE Consultants, l::c. to evaluate existing conditions and areas which would require additional fill material. A field testing inspection program was then established to evaluate existing conditions and to ensure proper placement Of additional fill material. Existing structures, unsuitable materials, stockpiled fill, and vegetation were removed from the referenced areas prior to additional fill placement. Areas requiring additional fill were scarified, water added as required, and properly recompacted prior to placement of additional fill. Fill soils on the referenced areas were inspected and approved by a representative of GEE Consultants, Inc. and then In-Place Moisture/Density tests were performed on lots requiring additional fill. B. Based on the types of material used as fill soils along with the types of lnaterial encountered during project construction, the following moisture content and compaction requirements were used for earth-fill placement: Natural and Fill Soils - Moisture Content: Between optimum and five (5) percent above the optimum value for clay soils and with plus or minus three (3) percent of optimum for sandy soil as defined by the Standard Proctor Test, ASTM D 698. - Compaction: Between 95 anO 105 percent of the maximum density as defined by the Standard Proctor Test, ASTM D 698. C. After the earth-fill placement operations were completed, all test results were then checked for accuracy and locations. All discrepancies encountered were then retested and/or corrected. Based on the information obtained from our field inspection and testing, the fill materials, as placed under direct supervision of GEE Consultants, Inc. in the currently effective 100 year flood plain and below the proposed base flood elevation have been compacted in accordance with the above referenced requirements. If subsequent fill material is required, it should be placed and compacted in accordance with previous recommendations. We trust the information contained herein is sufficiently detailed for your needs. When we may be of further service, please do not hesitate to call us. Sincerely, GEE Consultants, Inc. · ~..... Gary G. Huang, Ph.D. R,chard W. ~..Pe. tg'~ ....~.~::i.~.. Project Manager President RWG/Iej ~.c,,~:: WA¥~iE GEE . '- t 57238 .' -.:.:,.. . .-,,::.:,"~.'.