Loading...
FS9901-CS030203· -, Halff Associates ENGINEERS · ARCHITECTS · SCIENTISTS PLANNERS · SURVEYORS PBS&J, Inc. 12101 Indian Creek Court Beltsville, Maryland 20705 Attn.: Scott Yi Floodplain Engineer Re: Case No. 02-06-1090P Community: City of CoppeH, Dallas County, Texas Community No. 480170 8616 NORTHWEST PLAZA DRIVE DALLAS, TEXAS 75225 (214) 346-6200 FAX (214) 739-0095 February 3, 2003 AVO 17669 Dear Mr. Yi: Enclosed you will find effective and revised HEC-2 models, a water surface elevation summary table and work maps for the above referenced case. The revisions are based on comments contained in your email of January 6, 2003 (attached). The main task was to extend the study (models and workmap) area upstream to the point at which the corrected effective models converge within 0.5 feet of the effective models. Through an extensive review of the study area, we have determined the effective models in this area to be as follows: Multiprofile Model (Section 18440 - 32725): This effective model was from the LOMR for Cambridge Manor by Dowdey, Anderson & Associates, Inc. in March 29, 1995 (Case No. 95-06-019P). Halff Associates, Inc. renamed it as deforest.dat for the CLOMR for this project (Case No. 00-06-276R). This model has been used as the effective floodplain model throughout the CLOMR and LOMR stages of this case. 2. The Effective Floodway Model is composed of four separate models in this area originally from the Cambridge Manor's LOMR as follows: o Downstream Model (Section 18440- 22370) o Split Main Model (Section 22370 - 26830) o Split old channel Model (Section 22370 - 25530) o Upstream Model (Section 25530 - 56940) These models were obtained from the FEMA Project Library. Errors in the effective floodway model were found. Some of these errors were corrected during the preparation of CLOMR Case # 93-06-091R as explained below: DALLAS · FORTWORTH · HOUSTON · McALLEN · AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION ° WATER RESOURCES · LAND DEVELOPMENT · MUNICIPAL · ENVIRONMENTAL · STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL · ELECTRICAL · SURVEYING ° GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE · LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ° PLANNING Ill Ill Halff Associates ENGINEERS ° ARCHITECTS ° SCIENTISTS PLANNERS ° SURVEYORS "Hydraulic models were obtained from Dan M. Dowdy & Associates, Consulting Engineers for the Lake Park Addition, "As Built" conditions, These models are as approved by FEMA (through Dewberry & Davis) and published in the preliminary FIS dated December 18, 1991. However, it was noted during the preparation of this park study that the floodway HEC-2 model's provided did not compute the water surface elevations on file with FEMA. Further investigation found that Section 26830 had been corrected by Dewberry & Davis, in-house, with verbal approval from Dowdy & Associates. This correction is incorporated into the Duplicated Effective Models included in Appendix D and Appendix E. A copy of the Preliminary FIS letter from FEMA with copies of this portion of the mapping is included in Appendix B of this submittal." The referenced "Appendix B" from CLOMR Case # 93-06-091R is attached to this letter. As a result of this and other corrections (described below), the corrected effective floodway model was based on the following: 1. Section 22370 and downstream reaches were based on the effective floodway model (4rstfdwy.dat) with project updates 2. All upstream sections; the effective multi-profile model was used as a base file and ET cards were added based on the above-mentioned effective floodway models 3. The split flow area was updated to be more consistent with current base map. The effective floodway model did not appear to truly reflect split flow. Therefore, the post project floodway model includes both channels as one section through this area. The developed high ground between the split channels is above the base flood elevation and therefore not in the floodway. As a result, the post project floodway model now ties into the effective floodway model within 0.5 feet at section 23800. Although both floodplain and floodway models extend to section 32725, the workmap was not extended upstream of section 26830. The final results have been summarized in Table 1, which lists the base flood water surface elevation from the effective model, corrected effective model and revised (post-project) model. The effective model results are based on the four different models as described previously. Hard copy HEC2 results for the effective models are attached. The multi-profile effective model results are from the model, forest.dat. Downstream floodway results (section 18440 - 22370) are from the model, 4rstfdwy.dat. Split floodway information (section 22370 - 25530) was based on the split main model, denmfw2.dat. Upstream floodway information (section 25770 - 26830) was based on the upstream model, dcbfl2.dat mil -- Halff Associates ENGINEERS ° ARCHITECTS · SCIENTISTS PLANNERS ° SURVEYORS In summary, the following revisions to Case # 02-06-1090P have been made: 1. The Corrected Effective and Post Project HEC-2 floodway models have been extended to cross section 268 +30. The corrected effective and post project models now agree with the effective models within 0.5 feet at section 23800. 2. The water surface elevation summary table has been extended to cross section 26830 to reflect those updates. 3. The work map was extended to include cross section 26830. If you have any further questions on this revision, please contact Walter Skipwith at 214- 346-6220 or Allen Xu at 214-217-6657. Thank you very much for your consideration of this request. Very truly yours, HALFF ASSOCIATES, INC. Walter Skipwith, P.E. Vice President cc: Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E., Director of Engineer and Public Works, City of Coppell Kelly Jordan, Coppell Optimum Assets Enclosures File: i:\17000s\17669Xdoc'669LOMR_RESP3.d~c APPENDIX B From CLOMR Case # 93-06-091R Federal Emergency Management Agency Washington, D.C. 20472 I cF~TIFIED I,~IL RETOP~ RECEIF~ REQUESTED DEC 18 1991 (lOO) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Houorable Mark Wolfe Mayor of the City of Co~pell P.O. Box 478 Coppell, Texas 75019 RE: Flood Insurance Study for the City of Coppell, Dallas and D~nton Counties, TX Dear Mayor wolfe: please find enclosed two preliminar~ copies of the revised areas of the Flood Insurance S~udy 'fo~ ~he above referenced communi~y' We have comp!aced our technical evaluation of the available data'and have incorporated the chan~es into the enclosed copies. A description of the change with corresponding affected per:iOn of the Flood Insurance Study ts attached for your information and review, If you have any comments that might Justify modifying our results, please use one copy of the enclosed map(s) to Identify the area of concern and return within 30 calendar days from the da~e of this letter. If you are in agreement with our findings, please respond with a letter stating that you have reviewed the accompanying material. If we do ~ot receive any comments within 30 days, we will continue processing. ~n the near future, we will publish a notice of proposed Base (1CO-year) Flood Elevation (BFE) determinations in your local newspaper- This notice will i~tttate a 90-day period durtng which your community may submit appeals or comments On the proposed BFEs reflected in the revised Flood Insurance $~udyfor your community.. Following the 90-day appeal period and the resolution of any appeals, we will finalize the proposed BFEs and establish an effective date for the revised ~tudy, If yOU have any questions, please ¢ontac~ the Chief, Natural and Technological Hazards DlvisioD of the Federal Emergency Management Agency in Denton, Texas at (817) 898-5127. Sincerely, - Villi&mR. Locke Chief, Risk Studies Division Federal Insurance Administration Enclosures cc: State Coordinating Agency Mr. Ronald W. Horrison, P.E., Senior Hydrologist Mr~ Err A. Meyer, Nathan D. Meier Consulting Engineers, Ioc. MrS! William Al Anderson, P.E., Dan M. Dowdey & AsSociates FEMA Regional Chief. Region VI Ms. [[. bohre Daneshmm~d~'Act~ng City Enginee[ , RussellSR. Doyle, t'.E., City Engineer, i i t ! I: 1 t t ~ity q~ C_._~.P.9~!l, Dallas and Denton Counties, Texaf The Flood Insurance Study (FI$) and Flood Insurance RaCe Map (FIRM) for the City of Coppell have been roviaed to reflect updated hydrologic and hydraulic analysts for Elm Fork of Trinity River and updated hydraulic analyses for Grapevine Creek, Denton Creek, and CottoTlwood Branch. These analyses were prepared for the City of Coppell by Klmley-HorlI and Associates, Inc., and Morrison Hydrology/En§lneering, Inc. Additional updated hydraulic analyses for Denton Creek from th~ diuergenca of Old Denton Creek to Denton Tap Road were prepared by Dan M. Dowdey & Associates, to reflect, the completed Lake Park Addition. In addition, detailed flood hazard information was prepared for Tributary G-1 of Grapevine Creek. The hydrologic and hydraulic analyses for Tributary G-1 of Grapevine Creek ware prepared by Goodwin and Marshall, Inc. Tile following is a summary of the chan~es to the FI~M and FIS Report: ~IRM 9u~hqr eSQ,?O, panel 0010 The 100- and 500-year floodplain boundaries, Base (100-year) Flood Elevations (BFEs), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (F!MA)-dcsi~nated floodway for Elm Fork of Trinity River, Denton Creek, and Cottonwood Branch have been modified for their entire length within the community, and Grapevine Creek has been modified from its confluence with Elm Fork of Trinity River to approxl- ma=ely 125 feet upstream of Southwestern Boulevard. In addition, a designated floodway has been added for the Old Denton Creek channel jus~ south of the levee on Denton Greek. Corporate limits have been revised in northwest portion of the city to reflect recent deannexaticn~. For Tributary G-1 of Grapevine Creek, the 500-year floodplain was changed to lOO-year floodpla£n, and BFEs and a FEMA-desi~nated floodway were added from ~he confluence with Grapevine Creek to approximately 0.6 mile upstream of Bethel School Road. An approximate 100-year (Zone A) floodplain has been determined for the remaining port/on of Tributary G-1 of Grapevine Creek. lIS The ~I$ Report. including Tables 1 and 2 (Sun~ary of Discharges and Floodway Data) and Flood Profiles 01P-05P. O?P-09P, and ]IP-laP have been revised to reflect ~h~ aforementioned updated flood hazard information. In addition. flood profiles 06I' and 10P have been added t. 0 reflect the new de,ail'ed flood information for Tributary G-1 of Grapevine Creek and Old Denton Creek, respectively. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP and ~TREET INDEX .. CIT~ OF '. ' ' COPPELL," TEXAS DALLAS AND DENTON COUNTIES ONLY PANEL PRINTED DEC 1 8 ~ COMMUNITY-PANEL HUMBER 480170 0010 E MAP REVISED: l~ederal Emersency Management Asency .t FOL'D. ' D£WBI:::RRY & DAVi'$ TRIM. i~OLO IE FOLD ZONE X ZONE X INDREW BROWN oMMi~NITY. PARK ZON~ 'ZOxNE X M 196 THiS AREA PROTECTED FROM THE 100-YEAR FLOOD BY LEVEE. DIKE, OR OTHER 6TRUCTURES SUBJECT TO FAILURE OR oVERTOPPiNG DURING LARGER FLOODS CounTY ~,OUNDARY Table I FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY WATER SURFACE ELEVATION CHECK .~ommunity Name lFIooding Source lProject Name/identifier City of Coppell I Denton Creek I w/ndsor Estates & DeForest Court REVISED (POST-PROJECT) LOCATION ~DUPLICATED MODEl. ~CORRECTED EFFECTIVE ~ forest see notes' ~ rvexd4st rvxfdwy2 7669remk 7669fwn , ~ ......... NCWSEL~ FCWSEL~ SURC.3 ~::~-::: :~.:;-.~.--' NCWSEL~ FCWSEL2 SURC.3 NCWSEL~ FCWSEL2 SURC.3 ~CWSEL :CWSEL SURC.3 · 446.56 447.56 1 .~0 446.56 447.56 1 .O 447.77 448.16 0.4 447.'~"'-~- ~448.16 04 ~~ T 449.07 o.t 449.92 ~ ~ ~ 449.94 0 .'~"--~'~ 450,43 ~ ~- --~0.43 450.42 0.0 ~~--'-~- 450.6--'--9- 450.7'----;-- 0.0 o.s__o,w~,,E,._~__,,_ ~~ ~~ 450.8"---~ 450.70 o.t ~ ~ ~-- .- 450.87 ~ o,t 453.12 1.0 ~ 452 .-"~.-.-.-.-.-~ ~--~'~ -- '- 452.8~ 452.90 --0.1 [ ~ ~i 452.95 452.96 - 452.91 452.98 0.1 ~-- - ~~ 453.00 453.0f - 45~.99 453.05 o.f ~ 452.23 453,23 1~0 ......... ........... ;I 453.08 453.09 0.0 453.06 453.13  453.11 453.12 -- 453.1'1 453.17 0.1 r Estate~ and D®Fora ~ '~---~3.13 -- 453.13 4------53.19 0.1 - ~ 0.0 4'--s3.14 ~ -- J S °f DeF°fes' C°ur~ ~ 453'26 1.0 ~ -- ~3.--"~-- 0.0 453.17 ~- 453.27 1.0 ~- ~ 452.40453.37 1.0 ~ 453.29__ 0.0 453.2.___L ~ ~ __ ~ 452.404~3.~ t.o ~ 453~7 453.2~ ___0.0 453.2____!_7 ~ "--o.t -- ~ - 452.40 453.36 1.0 ~ 453.28 453.29 0.0 453.27 453.35 0.1 ~ ~ 452.64 453.57 0.9 I 453.49 453,50 0.0 453.48 453.56 0.1 MODEL CONVERGE HERE [~_.,,, ........ 453.56 453.57 0.0 ~,~ 453.85 453.86 0.0 453.85 453.92 0.1 I 453.92 454.02 0.1 ,,,,"~ . 454.20 454,20 0.0 454.19 454.26 0.1 454.09 454.23 0.0 454.16 454.22 0.1 454.35 454.35 454.16~__'0.1.~_.__ 454.2~4 454.22- 0.0 454.73 454,73 --~54,62 0.0 '--'454.63 454.6.~__L6 0.0 455.38 455.28 ~ -- 0.1 455.28 --455.43 0.2 I~OMMENTS: Effective floodway model results are from the three different models: Section 18400-22370 from 4rstfdwy.dat, Section 23800-25530 from denthfw2.dat, Section 25770*26830 from dcbfl2.dat 1-100-year (natural) Water Surface Elevation 2-Encroachment (floodway) Water Surface Elevation 3-Surcharge Value I-9 Sheet I of I 7669heCasum. XLSLOMR Halff Associates, Inc. Z/10/031:29 PM