DR9305-CS 921001~VERINE HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS F~
Results (Cont'd)
Is the discharge value used to determine the floodway anywhere
different from that used to determine the natural 100-year flood
elevations?
If yes, explain:
['='] Yes [3~ No
Attach a Floodway Data Table showing data for each-cross section
listed in the published floodway data table in the FIS report.
Do 100-year water surface elevations increase at any location?
Attached
~] Yes [] No
If yes, please attach a list of the locations where the increases occur, state whether or not
the increases are located on the requestor's property, and provide an explanation of the
reason for the increases.
Increases between Bethel Rd. and IH-635 both on & off ~h~
reauestors propmrty. Increases are dum to revts~_d
Please attach a completed comparison table entitled: Water Surface Elevation Check.
Attached
Revised FIRM/FBFM and Flood Profiles
The revised water surface elevations tie into those computed by the effective FIS Model (10-,
50-, 100-, and 500-year), downstream of the project at cross-section 27/*00 within
O. 00 feet and upstream of the project at cross section 38235 within
0.00 feet.
The revised floodway elevations tie into those computed by the effective FIS model, down-
stream of the project at cross section 27400 within 0.00 feet and upstream of
the project at cross section 38235 within 0.00 feet.
Attach profiles, at the same vertical and horizontal scale as the profiles in the effective FIS
report, showing stream bed and profiles of all floods studied (without encroachment). Also,
label all cross sections, road crossings (including low chord and top-of-road data), culverts,
tributaries, corporate limits, and study limits.
Attached
Proceed to Riverine Mapping Form.
October 1992 Page 5 of 5
APlsLICATIObI/C~'RTIIvICATION FORM~ mR CoNDr~ONAL L~'~I~ Or MAP I~'VI~ON. ~ or MJ~ R~V~ION AI~O [sI~ICAI. MAP P.~/~ION
Community Name:
Flooding Source:
Project name/Identifier:
Water Surface Elevation Check
See SeFerate Table
Effective Duplicate Effective Corrected Effective Existing/Pre-Project Revised/Project
SECNO NCWSELt FCWSEL'~ SURC.a NCWSEL FCWSEL SURC. NCWSEL FCWSEL SURC. !NCWSEL FCWSEL SURC. NCWSEL FCWSEL SURC.
)
, )-
Comments:
I - 100-year (natural) Water Surface Elevation ,. 2 - Encroachment (floodway) Water Surface Elevation 3 - Surcharae Value ,
RiVERINE MAPPING FORM
Mapping Changes (Continued)
Flood Boundaries and 100-year water surface elevations:
Has the lO0-year floodplain been shifted or increased or the lO0-year water surface elevation
increased at any location on property other than the requestor's or community's?
~ Yes [-'1 No
If yes, please give the location of shi~t or increase and an expiate, tion for the increase.
Shift upstream of Southwestern Blvd. due to channeltzation by others
Case 86-06-47R. Increase due to revised exisiting cond. hydraulic
modelin~ using new topographic data.
ao
Have the affected property owners been notified of this shift or increase and the effect it
will have on their property? [] Yes [] No
If yes, please attach letters from these property owners stating they have no objections to
the revised flood boundaries.
What is the number of insurable structures that will be impacted by this shift or
increase? ~
Have the floodway boundaries shifted or increased at any location compared to those shown on
the effective FBFM or FIRM? [] Yes [] No
If yes, explain:
Effective FIS i~nored the existtng, naturally created by pass channel
which carries a large part of the discharge but was excluded from the
floodway.
Manual or digital map submission:
[~] Manual
[] Digital
Digital map submissions may bo used to update digital FIRMs (DFIRMs). For updating
DFIRMs, these submissions must be coordinated with FEMA Headquarters as far in advance of
submission as possible.
October 1992 Pafo 2 oi'3
F~.MA ]~. ONLY
'{
FO~ $
RIVERINE MAPPING FORM
Community Name: Coppell ~ Texas
Flooding Source: Grapevine Creek
ProjectName/ldentifier: Grapevine Springs Park
Mapping Changes
o
A topographic work map of suitable scale, contour interval, and planimetric definition must be
submitted showing (insert N/A when not applicable):
A. Revised 100- year floodplain boundaries (Zone A)
B. Revised 100- and 500-year floodplain boundaries
C. Revised 100-year floodway boundaries
D. Location and alignment of all cross sections used in the revised
hydraulic model with stationing control indicated
E. Stream aliamnents, road and dam alignments
F. Current comm--ity boundaries
G. EfFective 100- end 500-year floodplain and 100*year floodway
boundaries from the FIRM/FBFM reduced or enlarsed to the
scaleo(_tlte~opographic work maiL_ (. s. ePe_ re_te map)
H. Ti~-in~ between the efFectiv~ and revised 100- ami M).year
floodplains and 100-year floodway boundaries
Included
[-']Yes ['-] No Pi~ N/A
['X1Yes [] No [] N/A
[] Yes [] No [] N/A
[] Yes [] No [] N/A
[] Yes [] No [-7 N/A
[] Yes [] No fTF[ N/A
IX-! Yes f'-I No f'-] N/A
[] Yes I'X'l No [] N/A
I. The requestor's property boundaries and community e~sements [~] Yes f-'] No f-'] N/A
J. The signed certification of a registered profenional engineer [] Yes [] No
K. Location and description of reference marks [] Yes [] No [] N/A
L. Vertical datum (example: NGVD 1929, NAVD 1988, etc.) ~ Yes ['~ No [~] N/A
of the items above are marked no or N/A, please explain: A.
lfany
NO proposed chgngas
to zonm 'A' floodnlains F. Community boundarl~ un-changed H. Tie-ina
NOT possible since effective FIS map is not up to date L. Vertical datum
is NGVD 1929
What is the source and date of the updated topographic information (example: orthophoto maps,
July 1985: field survey, May 1979, beach orofiles, June 1987. etc }~ Cites Aerial tops
maps dated 2-29-92 and on-site field surveys ~-8~-'&
What is the scale and contour interval of the following workmape?
a. Effective FIS unknown scale unknown Contour interval
b. Revision Request 1"=200' scale 2' Contour interval
Attach an annotated FIRM and FBFM at the scale of the effective FIRM and FBFM showing
the revised 100-year and 500-year floodplains and the 100-year floodway boundaries and how
they tie into those shown on the effective FIRM and FBFM downstream and upstream of the
revision.
Attached
Attach additional pages if needed.
October 199~ P~ 1 ~3
T'
REVISIO~SJSQUESTOR AND COMMUNITY OFFICIAL FORM
Floodway Information
Does the affected flooding source have a floodway designated on the effective FIRM or FBFM?
[-~ Yes [] No
·
If yes, give reason:
Does the revised floodway delineation differ from that shown on the effective FIRM or FBFM?
[] Yes [~ No
Attach request to revise the floodway from community CEO or designated official.
Attach copy of either 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.
Does the State have jurisdiction over the floodway or it's adoption by communities participating in
the NFIP? [] Yes [] No
If yes, attach a copy of a letter notifying the appropriate State agency of the floodway revision and
documentation of the approval of the revised floodway by the appropriate State agency.
With floedways:
lA.
Proposed Encroachments
Does the revision request involve fill, new construction, substantial improvement, or other
development in the flOodway? I~1 Yes [_J No
lB. If yes, does the development cause the lO0-year water surface elevation increase at any
location by more than 0.000 feet? revised existing [] Yes [] No
cond. causes rise
Without floodways:
2A. Does the revision request invOlve fill, new construction, substantial improvement, or other
development in the 100-year floodplain? [-] Yes [~] No
2B. If yes, does the cumulative effect of all development that has occured since the effective SFHA
was originaly identified cause the 100-year water surface elevation increase at any location
by more than one foot (or other surcharge limit if community or state has adopted more
stringent criteria)? ["] Yes ~] No
If answer to either Items lB or 2B is yes, please provide documentation that all requirements of
Section 65.12 ofthe NFIP regulations have been met.
Revision Requestor Acknowledgement
Having read NFIP Regulations, 44 CFR Ch. I, parts 59, 60, 61, 65, and 72, I believe that the
proposed revision [] is [-~ is not in compliance with the requirements of the
aforementioned NFIP Regulations.
Community Official Acknowledgement
· Was this revision request reviewed by the community for compliance with the community's
adopted floodplain management ordinances? ['~ Yes [~ No
· Does this revision request have the endorsement of the community? [1~ Yes ["] No
If no to either of the above questions, please explain:
Please note that community acknowledgement and/or notification is required for all requests
as outlined in Section 65.4 (b) of the NFIP Regulations.
October 1992 Page 2 of 5
REVISION REQUESTOR AND COMMUNITY OFFICIAL FORM
FORM 1
The basis for this revision request is (are): (check all that apply)
[] Physical change
I'I") Exista~g
['-] ~mproved methodology
[] Improved data
~ Floodway revision
[~ Other
Ezplain
2. Floo~Souree: Grapevine Creek
3. Prejec~Name/[dentL~er: Grapevine Springs Park
4. FEMA zone designations affected: AE
(ex. rmpiw:,A, AH;-~AO; A1-A30vA99;.AE, V, VI-V30, VE;~B; C, D, X)
5. The NFIP map panel(s) affected for ali imlmcted communities is (are):
Community Community Map Panel Effective
NOT Nam9 County State Ng, Ng. Dam-
480301 Katy, City Harris, Fort Bend TX 480301 0005D 02/08/83
480287 Harris County Harris TX 48201C 0220G 09/28/90
480170 Coppell Dallas & Denton .TX 480170 0010D 10/16/91
The submitted request encompasses the following types of flooding, structures, and
associated disciplines: (check all that apply)
Trues of Floodina Structure9 Disciolines*
[] Riverine [] Channelization [] Water Resources
[] Coastal [] Levee/Floodwall [] Hydrology
[] Alluvial Fan [] Bridge/Culvert ~'] Hydraulics
[] Shallow Flooding [] Dam [] Sediment Transport
[] Lakes [] Coastal ~'] Interior Drainage
Affected by [] Fill [] Structural
wind/wave action [] Pump Station '[--[ Geotechnicai
[] Yes [] None [] Land Surveying
['-] No ~ Other (describe) [] Other (describe)
['-] Other(describe)
* Attach completed "Certification by Registered Professional and/or Land Surveyor"
Fora for each discipline checked. (Form 9.)
P~,e 1 oi'5
~ERINE HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS FO~
Results (Cont'd)
mmm
Is the discharge value used to determine the floodway anywhere
different from that used to determine the natural 100-year flood
elevations?
If yes, explain:
[-"l Yes [Y"] No
Attach a Floodway Data Table showing data for each-cross section
listed in the published floodway data table in the FIS report.
Do 100-year water surface elevations increase at any location?
Attached
~ Yes [] No
If yes, please attach a list of the locations where the increases occur, state whether or not
the increases are located on the requestor's property, and provide an explanation of the
reason for the increases.
Increases between Bethel Rd. and IH-635 both on & off ~h~ :~q ...... :. ,
reouestors propmrty. Incrmmses ara du~ to ravt~_d ~tsting
Please attach a completed comparison table entitled: Water Surface Elevation Check.
Attached
Revised FIRM/FBFM and Flood Profiles
The revised water surface elevatiOns tie into those computed by the effective FIS Model (10-,
50-, 100-, and 500-year), downstream of the project at cross-section 27400 within
0.00 feet and upstream of the project at cross section 38235 within
0.00 feet.
The revised floodway elevations tie into those computed by the effective FIS model, down-
stream of the project at cross section 27400 within 0.00 feet and upstream of
the project at cross section 38235 within 0.00 feet.
Attach profiles, at thee ,?ame vertical and horizontal scale as the profiles in the effective FIS
report, showing stream bed and profiles of all floods studied (without encroachment). Also,
label all cross sections, road crossings (including low chord and top-of-road data), culverts,
tributaries, corporate limits, and study limits.
Attached
Proceed to Riverine Mapping Form.
October 1992 Page 5 of 5
APPLICATI ON~J'IlelCATI(~ FOItM~ leOR CONDITIONAL L~. ~-r e.I OF MAP RL~I~ON. L~, ,-~ ~,- OF MA~ ~.~'I/l~Olq AN1) PIq~I~ICAL MAP
Community Name:
Flooding Source:
Project name/Identifier:
Water Surface Elevation Check
See SeFerate Table
Effective Duplicate Effective Corrected Effective Existing/Pre-i'roject itevised/Project
SECNO NCWSELt FCWSEL'~ SURC.3 NCWSEL FCWSEL SURC. NCWSEL FCWSEL 8URC. NCW.qEL FCWSEL SURC. NCWSEL FCWSEL SURC.
Comm,nt~:
i - 10~-yemr (natural) Water Surface Elevation */i 2 - Encroachment (floodway) Water Surface Elevation 3 - Surcharge Value
i ~ i , j j .~.l .... J J J ..... J .... J . J
o
RIVERINE MAPPING FORM
Mapping Changes (Continued)
Flood Boundaries and 100-year water surface elevations:
Has the 100-year floodplain been shifted or increased or the 100-year water surface elevation
increased at any location on property other than the requestor's or community's?
['~ Yes [--1 No
If yes, please give the location of shift or increase and an explan.a, tion for the increase.
Shift u~stream of Southwestern Blvd. due to channelization by others
Case 86-06-47R. Increase due to revised extstting cond. hydraulic
modeltn~ using new topo~raphic data.
ao
bo
Have the affected property owners been notified of this shift or increase and the effect it
will have on their property? [] Yes [] No
If yes, please attach letters from these property owners stating they have no objections to
the revised flood boundaries.
What is the number ofirmurable structures that will be impacted by this shift or
increase? ~
Have the floodway boundaries shift~ or increased at any location compared to those shown on
the effective FBFM or FIRM?
Ifyes, explain:
Effective FIS
which carries
floodway.
[] Yes ['-] No
t~nored the exisitng, naturally created by pass channel
a large part of the dischar~e but was excluded from the
Manual or digital map submission:
[] Manual
[] Digital
Digital map submissions may be used to update digital FIRMs (DFIRMs). For updating
DFIRMe, these submissions must be coordinated with FEMA Headquarters as far in advance of
subm_J~ion as possible.
October 199~ Page2~3
o
FEMAr--~ ONLY
']
FORM
RIVERINE MAPPING FORM
Community Name: Coppell~ Texas
FloedingSourc~: Grapevine Creek
ProjectName~dentffier: Grapevine Sprin{~s Park
Mapping Changes
A topographic work map of suitable scale, contour interval, and planimetric de/tuition must be
submitted showing (insert N/A when not applicable):
A. Revised 100- year floodplain boundaries (Zone A)
B. Revised 100- and 500-year floodplain boundaries
C. Revised 100-year floodway boundaries
D. Location and alisnment of all cross sections used in the revised
hydrautic model with stationing control indicated
E. Stream alii~ments, road and dam alignments
F. Current community boundaries
G. Effective 100- and 500-year floodplain and 100-year floodway
boundaries from the FIRM/FBFM reduced or enlarged to the
Included
I-'l Yes I~l No ~ N/A
l-X1 Yes [-7 No [] NIA
I~! Yes f--! No r-I N/A
I~1 Yes [] No [] N/A
f'x-lyes [-']No I'"IN/A
f--! Yes [-'1 No [] N/A
scaleof_~o3opos~ph~c work maik. (.~s_e.P~ra~e~ map) ..... [X-] Yes i-'l No I--7 N/A
H. Tic-ins between the effective and revised 100- and 500-year
floodplains and 100-year floodway boundaries [--] Yes [] No [] N/A
I. The requestor's property boundaries and community easements ~ Yes [] No [] N/A
J. The signed certification ora registered professional engin~,r 1-21 Yes I--I No i"-I N/A
K. Location and description of reference marks ~ Yes ["-[ No [] N/A
L. Vertical datum (example: NGVD 1929, NAVD 1988, etc.) [--I Yes ~ No I--I N/A
ofthe items above are marked no or N/A, please explain: A.
If any
No DrOOOSed changas
to znn~_ 'A' flnodnlmtns F. Community boundaries un-chanKed H. Tie-inn
NOT possible since effective FIS map is not u~ to date L. Vertical datum
is NGVD 1929
What is the source and date of the updated topographic information (example: orthophoto maps,
July 1985: field survey. May 1979, beach vrofiles. June 1987, etc.)? Cit¥ Aerial topo
maps dated 2-29-92 and on-site field surveys 5-89 & 9-92
What is the scale and contour interval of the following workmaps?
a. Effective FIS unknown scale unknown Contour interval
b. Revision Request 1 "=200° scale 2' Contour interval
Attach an annotated FIRM and FBFM at the scale of the effective FIRM and FBFM showin~
the revised 100-year and 500-year floodplains and the 100-year floodway boundaries and how
they tie into those shown on the effective FIRM and FBFM downstream and upstream of the
revision.
Attached
Attach additional pages if needed.
October 1992 Pqm 10[3
e
e
If yes, give reason:
REVISION~=~REQUESTOR AND COMMUNITY OFFICIAL FORM
Floodway Information
Does the affected flooding source have a floodway designated on the effective FIRM or FBFM?
[] Yes [] No
Does the revised floodwa~y_delineation differ from that shown on the effective FIRM or FBFM?
[] Yes []No
Attach request to revise the floodway from community CEO or designated official.
Attach copy of either 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.
Does the State have jurisdiction over the floodway or it's adoption by communities participating in
the NFIP? [] Yes [] No
If yes, attach a copy of a letter notifying the appropriate State agency of the floodway revision and
documentation of the approval of the revised floodway by the appropriate State agency.
With floodways:
lA.
Proposed Encroachments
Does the revision request involve fill, new construction, substan~ improvement, or other
development in the floodway? I~l Yes [._] No
lB. If yes, does the development cause the 100-year water surface elevation increase at any
location by more than 0.000 feet? revised exts ting [] Yes [-~ No
Withoutfloodways: cond. causes rise
2A. Does the revision request involve fill, new construction, substantial improvement, or other
development in the 100-year floodplain? [-'] Yes ~ No
2B. If yes, does the cumulative effect of all development that has occured since the effective SFHA
was originaly identified cause the 100-year water surface elevation increase at any location
by more than one foot (or other surcharge limit if community or state has adopted more
stringent criteria)? [~ Yes [~ No
If answer to either Items lB or 2B is yes, please provide documentation that all requirements of
Section 65.12 of the NFIP regulations have been met.
Revision Requestor Acknowledgement
Having read NFIP_~gulations, 44 CFR Ch. I, parts 59, 60, 61, 65, and 72, I believe that the
proposed revision [] is [] is not in compliance with the requirements of the
aforementioned NFIP Regulations.
e
e
Community Official Acknowledgement
Was this revision request reviewed by the community for compliance with the community's
adopted floodplain management ordinances? ['~ Yes ['-] No
Does this revision request have the endorsement of the community? [] Yes ['"] No
If no to either of the above questions, please explain:
Please note that community acknowledgement and/or notification is required for all requests
as outlined in Section 65.4 (b) of the NFIP Regnlation~.
October 1992 Pa~e 2a~5
FEM~--'~E ONLY
REVISION REQUESTOR AND COMMUNITY OFFICIAL FORM
FORM
1. The basis for this revision request is (are): (check all tht apply)
~-] Phyelcal change
[] Improved methodology
[X-[ Improved data
[X-[ Floodway revision
["-] Other
EX:
Explain
2. FloedinfSour~e: Grapevine Creek
3. ProjectNameYldent~er: Grapevine Springs Park
4. FEMA zone designations affected: AE
(exRmple~:A,AH;-,AO; A1-A30~A99;.AE, V, VI-V30, VE~'B; C, D, X)
5. The NFIP map panel(s) affected for ell impacted eommtmitie! is (are):
Community Community Map Panel EfFective
Ng, Name County State Ng, No. Date -
480301 Katy, City Harris, Fort Bend TX 480301 000SD 02/08/83
480287 Harris County Harris TX 48201C 0220G 09/28/90
480170 Coppell Dallas & Denton TX 480170 0010D 10/16/91
6. The submitted request encompasses the following types of flooding, structures, and-
associated disciplines: (check all that apply)
Twes of Flooding
['X"] Riverine
[] Coastal
~-] Alluvial Fan
[] Shallow Flooding
[] Lakes
Afl'ected by
wind/wave action
[] Yes
I--I ~o
[] Other (describe)
Structures
[] Channelization
['~ Levee/Floodwall
[] Bridge/Culvert
[] Dam
[] Coastal
[] Fill
[] Pump Station
[] None
~-~ Other(describe)
Disciulines*
[=~ Water Resources
[-] Hydrology
[] Hydraulics
[] Sediment Transpart
[] Interior Drainage
[] Structural
'[--] Geotechnica!
[-] Land Surveying
[] Other(describe)
* Attach completed *Certification by Registered Profmional and/or Land Surveyor"
Form for each disc/pline checked. (Form 2)
Octobe"199~ Pa~e I of 5
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
TO: KEN GRIFFIN DATE
CITY OF COPPELL
P.O. BOX 478
255 PARKWAY BOULEVARD
COPPELL, TEXAS 75019
GRAPEVINE SPRINGS PARK
FEMA SUBMITTAL
6-7-93
W.O. No. 9062-2448
WE ARE ENCLOSING:
No. Copies 9es'cript'£on ,
2 HYDKAULIC STUDY
For Your Use
As Requested
For Your Approval
Approved as Noted
REMARKS:
PLEASE REVIEW AND FORWARD TO FEMA - DENTON ASAP. NOTE THAT YOUR SIGNATURE IS
REQUIRED ON PEMA FORM #1 BOUND IN THE REPORT AND FEMA REQUIRES $560.00 AS A
MINIMUM REVIEW FEE. PLEASE ENCLOSE A CHECK MADE PAYABLE TO "THE NATIONAL
Sig -~.~' . CC tO. JACK HEDGE - DALLAS CO. PUBLIC
FLOOD INSURANCE PROGP~iM". (THIS WILL SPEED PROCESSING). ALSO, AT SOME POINT,
WE WILL HAVE TO PRINT A LEGAL NOTICE OF OUR INTENT TO REVISE THE FLOODPLAIN
AND FLOODWAY ON GRAPEVINE CREEK. CALL IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
616 Six Flags Dr., Suite 400 Arlington. Texas 76011 (817)640-8535