FIRM Case#92-06-006P-911115o� FILE GOP.
Federal Emergency Managemen
Washington, D.C. 20472
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. M. Shohre Daneshmand, P.E.
Acting City Engineer
255 Parkway Boulevard
P.O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
Dear Mr. Daneshmand:
NOV i 110
encv
ey: Engineering
(202) 646 -3403 F
XC : Jew.., tt-
C'1
IN REPLY REFER TO:
65 -PRE
Date: November 15, 1991
Case Number: 92- 06 -006P
Re: Grapevine Creek, Southwestern
Boulevard to Interstate 635
Community: City of Coppell,
Texas
This is in regard to your request for a revision to the Flood Insurance Rate
Map and /or Flood Boundary and Floodway Map for the referenced community. Our
preacceptance review indicates that we do not have the minimum data we need
to begin our evaluation of your request. The required data are described on
the enclosed checklist and must be submitted to the following address before
we can accept your request:
Michael Baker Jr., Inc.
1420 King Street, Sixth Floor
Alexandria, Virginia 22314 -2788
Attention: Mr. David P. Preusch, P.E.
Unless otherwise directed by you in writing, we will keep the submitted data
in our files. We will not begin a detailed review of the submitted data
until we receive the requested data.
When you write to us about your request, please include the case number
(shown above) in your letter. If you have any questions about the requested
data, please call Michael Baker, Jr., Inc., our Technical Evaluation
Contractor, at (703) 838 -0400, and ask for the Revisions Coordinator for your
state.
Sincerely,
William R. Locke
Chief, Risk Studies Division
Federal Insurance Administration
Enclosure
cc: The Honorable Mark Wolfe
Mayor, City of Coppell
`V�G��Y Mgn,9C�
Federal Emergency Management Agency
a Washington, D.C. 20472
O O
DATA REQUEST CHECKLIST FOR REVISION TO
FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY (FIS) /FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM)
BY LETTER OF MAP REVISION (LOMR) OR PHYSICAL MAP REVISION
Date: November 15, 1991
Requestor: Mr. M. Shohre Daneshmand, P.E. Community: City of Coppell,
Texas
Re: Grapevine Creek, Southwestern Case Number: 92- 06 -006P
Boulevard to Interstate 635
The data identified below as "Required" must be submitted for our review.
The data identified as "Received" should not be resubmitted. References to
the sections of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulations that
establish specific requirements for supporting data are included as
appropriate in the checklist entries. All analyses submitted must be
certified by a registered professional engineer. All topographic data
submitted must be certified by a registered professional engineer or licensed
land surveyor. The meaning of "certification" as it applies to the types of
required supporting data is given in Paragraph 65.2(b) of the NFIP
regulations.
The required data should be submitted to the following address:
Michael Baker Jr., Inc.
1420 King Street, Sixth Floor
Alexandria, Virginia 22314 -2788
Attention: Mr. David P. Preusch, P.E.
1.
2.
3.
Description of Data
A concise description of the nature and extent
of the requested revision.
Evidence that the Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
of the affected community, or an official
designated by the CEO, was asked to submit the
revision request. (See Section 65.4 of the
NFIP regulations.)
A general description of the changed hydrologic
Required
Received
X
X
conditions on which the revision request is
based. (See Paragraph 65.6(c)(1)(i) of the
NFIP regulations.)
N/A
4.
A general description of the changed hydraulic
conditions, including channel modifications or
other projects, on which the revision request
is based. (See Paragraph 65.6(c)(2)(i) of the
NFIP regulations.)
X
5.
New hydrologic analysis, including a brief
description of the methodology used, for the
-year flood(s) for
(See Paragraph 65.6(a)(7) of the NFIP
regulations.)
N/A
6.
Evidence that the appropriate local, State, or
Federal agency (i.e.,
) has approved the new
hydrologic analysis, including the resulting
peak discharge values.
X
7.
Printouts (including full input and output
listings) from a calibration model, produced by
the requestor, that duplicates the hydraulic
computer model used to determine the 10 -, 50 -,
100 -, and 500 -year water- surface elevations
shown for Grapevine Creek in the effective FIS
report and on the effective FIRM. (See
Paragraph 65.6(a)(8) of the NFIP regulations.)
The calibration model may be either the FIS
Model, reproduced on the requestor's equipment,
or a model that yields computed water- surface
profiles that duplicate the flood profiles
shown for Grapevine Creek in the effective FIS
report.
X
Description of Data Required (Received
8. Printouts (including full input and output
listings) from a calibration model, produced by
the requestor, that duplicates the hydraulic
computer model used to determine the limits of
the 100 -year floodway shown for Grapevine Creek
on the effective Flood Boundary and Floodway Map
(FBFM) /FIRM. (See Paragraph 65.6(a)(8) of the
NFIP regulations.) The calibration model may be
either the FIS floodway model, reproduced on the
requestor's equipment, or a model that yields the
computed floodway widths and water- surface
elevations presented in the Floodway Data Table
for Grapevine Creek in the effective FIS report.
9. Printouts (including full input and output
listings) from a revised hydraulic model for the
10 -, 50 -, 100 -, and 500 -year water- surface
elevations on Grapevine Creek. The revised model
must be created from the calibration model (Item
7) and must meet the requirement(s) listed below.
X The model must be based on the same peak
discharge values used in the calibration
model (Item 7).
The model must be based on the peak
discharge values determined in the new
hydrologic analysis (Item 5).
X The model must account for the effects of
the changed hydraulic conditions on which
the revision request is based.
In addition, the revised model must account for
the effects of any encroachments that have
occurred in the 100 -year floodplain since the FIS
hydraulic model was developed and must cover a
sufficient Length of Grapevine Creek so that the
water- surface elevations computed at cross
sections upstream and downstream of the revised
reach will match those shown at the same cross
sections on the Flood Profiles in the effective
FIS report within approximately 0.5 foot. All
changes to the input data in the calibration
model (Item 7) must be highlighted on the
printouts. (See Paragraph 65.6(a)(8) of the NFIP
regulations.)
X
KI
Description of Data Required
10. A hydraulic analysis, including a brief
description of the methodology used, for the 100 -
year flood on Grapevine Creek. (See Paragraph
65.6(a)(9) of the NFIP regulations.)
11. Printouts (including full input and output
listings) from a revised hydraulic model for the
100 -year floodway on Grapevine Creek. The
revised model must be created from the
calibration model (I em 8) and must meet the
requirements listed below.
X The model must be based on the 100 -year
peak discharge value(s) used in the
calibration model (Item 8).
The model must be based on the 100 -year
peak discharge value(s) determined in the
new hydrologic analysis (Item 5).
X The model must account for the effects of
the changed hydraulic conditions on which
the revision request is based.
In addition, the revised model must account for
the effects of any encroachments that have
occurred in the 100 -year floodplain since the FIS
floodway model was developed and must cover a
sufficient length of Grapevine Creek so that the
water- surface elevations and floodway widths
computed at cross sections upstream and
downstream of the revised reach will match those
shown at the same cross sections on the Flood
Profiles and Floodway Data Table in the effective
FIS report. The revised model must be based on
the equal conveyance reduction method unless
agreements have been made with affected property
owners that an alternative method would be used.
The net effect of the changed hydraulic
conditions, the encroachments that have occurred
since the FIS floodway model was developed, and
the revised floodway limits must not increase the
computed 100 -year water- surface elevations by
more than 1.0 foot above those computed in the
calibration model (Item 7) or those computed in
the revised model (Item 9), whichever are lower.
(See Paragraph 65.7(b)(4) of the NFIP
regulations.)
Received
M
F;1
Description of Data Required (Received
12. Documentation, as shown below, concerning the
approval of the revised floodway. (See Paragraphs
65.7(b)(1), (2), and (3) of the NFIP regulations.)
Copy of the 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.
Copy of a letter notifying the appropriate
State agency of the floodway revision.
Documentation of the approval of the
revised floodway by the appropriate State
agency. N/A
13. Corporate limit map and /or annexation ordinances
that reflect the current community boundaries. N/A
14. A topographic map that shows the revised 100 -year
floodplain and floodway boundaries, the locations
and alignments of all cross sections used in the
revised hydraulic models (Items 9 and 11), stream
alignments, road alignments, and the community
boundaries. The revised 100 -year floodplain and
floodway boundaries must tie into those shown on
the effective FIRM and FBFM upstream and
downstream of the revised reach. The scale and
topographic definition of the map must be
sufficient to provide reasonable accuracy, and the
map must be certified by a registered professional
engineer. (See Paragraphs 65.6(a)(11) and
65.7(b)(5) of the NFIP regulations.)
15. "As- built" plans, certified by a registered
professional engineer, for all project elements,
specifically channel realignment and channel drop
structure. X
the City With A Beautiful Future
P.O. Box 478
Coppell, Texas 75019
214 - 462 - 0022 1UL)
FACSIMILE NO. 214/393 -0948
FAX MAIL COVER PAGE
PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING PAGES TO:
NAME: Z�Z— —e I C4ZSe—�:7 P1 FIRM: b'0- r 4- � i,
Y i" FAR r0: -7
E%TENTION: <
TRANSMITTED BY: OUR FAX NO.:214/393 -0948
NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET:) -
REMARKS
Y
YOU DO
THANK YOU.
ALL
SOOK AS
SF.1�IW THIS