My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 10/27/2015
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2015
>
Agenda - Council - 10/27/2015
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 4:11:49 PM
Creation date
11/20/2015 1:59:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
10/27/2015
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
670
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Yellow — The peak pond elevation is above the emergency overflow spillway <br />Red — The peak pond elevation may threaten structures <br />All red and yellow areas will be "ground truthed" to verify the condition depicted. These <br />maps can be used to evaluate regional pond opportunities. In reviewing these maps, one <br />can easily see where the current ponds or depressions are overtaxed for the 100-year <br />event. <br />Odd numbered figures from Figure 11 through Figure 23 are maps of critical SSA pipe <br />data superimposed on the most recent aerial photo of Ramsey. They are color coded to <br />highlight the 10-year storm conditions as follows: <br />Orange — The pipe is flowing normally <br />Red — The pipe is flowing full <br />The following is a brief discussion of the opportunities and recommendations associated <br />with each watershed: <br />Figures 10 & 11 — D43 Watershed <br />This is the Ditch 43 watershed. From Figure 10, it can be seen that this area is fully <br />developed around a significant amount of existing wetlands. This leaves little <br />opportunity to construct regional ponds. <br />The red areas on Figure 10 indicate ponds that are subject to flooding during the 100-year <br />event. The yellow areas indicate that the emergency overflow is reached during a 100- <br />year event. These ponds should be reviewed relative to the following: <br />• Should the outfall pipe be replaced with a larger one? <br />• Can the pond be enlarged? <br />• Can the overflow spillway be lowered? <br />• Can rain gardens be incorporated into the upstream watershed? <br />• Is the upstream watershed larger than allowed by the original design? <br />• Can some of the upstream watershed be diverted? <br />The two ponds in the southwestern part of the watershed that are highlighted in red, <br />P26308 and P26310, appear to be infiltration ponds with no outlet pipe. Because our <br />model conservatively assumes no infiltration, the threat of flooding from these ponds <br />may be exaggerated. In comparing this area with the historic flooding map of Figure 8, <br />there have been no reports of flooding in this area. <br />Pond P25454 appears to need a raised emergency overflow to the west in order to relieve <br />potential flooding. Our model suggests that a 12-inch outfall culvert under Sunwood <br />Drive with an inlet elevation of 866 will eliminate this threat from a 100-yr rainfall event. <br />Since the D43 watershed is comprised of a significant amount of wetland which acts as <br />satisfactory runoff storage, no other significant designs are necessary with the exception <br />of the localized flooding associated with the red highlighted ponds. Otherwise, upstream <br />watershed review for infiltration/rain garden opportunities is recommended. <br />Figures 12 & 13 — D66 Watershed <br />Section X <br />October 21, 2015 Page 66 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.