DOCSLIB.ORG

Alluvial Fan Hazards & Design Issues for Design

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alluvial Fan Hazards & Design Issues for Design Presentation Program Outline Overview Countermeasures / Planning Process Levees / Dikes / Diversions Channelization / Conveyance Grade Control Structures Detention Basin / Debris Basin Case Study – Localized Subdivision Protection (THOUSAND PALMS, CA) Case Study – Whole Fan Facilities (INDIAN WELLS, CA) Structural Countermeasures Overview / Planning Process & Design Considerations Alluvial Fan Hazards & Design Issues for Design • Uncertainty of flow depths (R&U analysis) • Inundation extents / flow direction / impingement • Sediment deposition • Scouring and undermining • Impact forces • Channel avulsions and entrenchments • Hydrostatic and buoyant forces • High velocities • Unpredictable flow path (R&U analysis) • Flooding from both debris and water flows “Riverine” vs. “Alluvial Fan” - Structural Countermeasure Design Issues / Considerations • Flow uncertainty • Velocity • Flow duration • Sediment deposition • Seepage control • Impingement • Flow direction and path uncertainty Alluvial Fan Riverine “Whole Fan” Solutions vs. Localized Protection – Structural Countermeasures “Whole Fan” Solutions vs. Localized Protection – Structural Countermeasures Structural Countermeasures for Alluvial Fans – Basic Building Blocks Collection Channels Conveyance Channels Dispersion Channels Structural Countermeasures for Alluvial Fans – Basic Building Blocks - Example Standard Alluvial Fan Structural Countermeasures Effectiveness of Alluvial Fan Structural Countermeasures for Different Hazards Structural Countermeasure – General Design Considerations Hydrology – Bulking Factor (concentration of sediment = ) • “Hyperconcentrated” flows – high suspended sediment concentrations • Typical bulking factor range from 1.1 to 1.5 for semi arid alluvial fans . = . • Sediment concentration can be estimated from calculating sediment transport capacity of self forming channel or HEC-RAS average floodplain hydraulics applied to sediment transport relationships − • Additional simplified empirical methods for bulking factor . = + , Where SY = sediment yield/production in cubic yards per square mile • Sediment yield can be estimated through multiple empirical methods: • US Army Corps of Engineer, Los Angeles District Debris Method (regression equations) • Modified Universal Soil Loss Equation (MUSLE) • Fire and Resource Assessment program (FRAP) Structural Countermeasure – General Design Considerations Freeboard • Additional items: • Surface waves • Sediment accumulation • Bedform • Superelevation • Flow regime change • Sediment ramping • Minimum levee requirements per FEMA • ACOE guideline minimum freeboard . = + ퟓ − Structural Countermeasure – General Design Considerations “Drainage Law” Basic Requirements An upper landowner is entitled to discharge surface water from his land as the water naturally flows. If he modifies the natural flow, he is liable for any damage done to a lower landowner unless the lower landowner had acted “unreasonably” in altering the natural drainage over his land. The determination of reasonable or unreasonable is a question of fact to be determined by the court in each case • No diversion of flows to adjacent or downstream property owners • Cannot increase level of flooding to adjacent property owners • Cannot increase erosion downstream • Must return flows at the downstream end of property to same as the existing conditions (both depth and velocity) Basic Countermeasure Planning and Design Process Baseline Technical Analysis Key Foundation for Engineering Design Countermeasure – Levees / Dikes / Diversions Examples - Alluvial Fan Levee Characteristics Examples - Alluvial Fan Levee Characteristics Examples - Alluvial Fan Levee Characteristics Examples - Alluvial Fan Levee Characteristics Examples - Alluvial Fan Levee Characteristics Example - Alluvial Fan “Dike” vs. “Levee” Example - Alluvial Fan “Dike” vs. “Levee” Critical Design Objectives for Levees on Alluvial Fan • Minimize Potential for Overtopping • Prevent failure of Embankment Slope Revetment • Eliminate failure from Erosion Critical Design calculations: • Levee Height • Revetment Toedown Depth Minimum Applicable FEMA Requirements • Applicable NFIP Regulations • Levees 44 CFR Ch. 1 § 65.1 • Alluvial Fans 44 CFR Ch. 1 § 65.13 • Minimum Riverine Levee Freeboard 3.0 feet and 4.0 feet at Bridge Structures • Supercritical hydraulics • Inspection and Maintenance program • Settlement • Interior drainage • Embankment geotechnical requirements • Embankment protection • Upstream Termination Freeboard 3.5 feet Critical Levee Design Features and Components Additional Critical Levee Design Elements 1. Alignment • Orientation Angle / Horizontal Alignment 2. Termination Points 3. Embankment Cross Section Geometry 4. Levee Height • Levee Vertical Profile 5. Revetment or Armoring Typical Levee Section Design Elements Special Design Considerations for Levees on Alluvial Fans • Variable Flow Paths • Direct Flow Impingement from Alternate Flow Paths • Sediment Ramping • Debris Deposition • Local Scour • Channel Entrenchments • High Velocity and Erosive Flows • Water Surface Runup / Super-elevation on Upstream Side of Levee • Impact Forces from High Velocity Flows Step 1 - Levee Alignment Selection • Levee Orientation Relative to Fan Geometry • Optimum or Maximum Acceptable Divergence Angle • Maximum Horizontal Limits of Levee • Entire Fan • Tie to Limits of Alluvial Fan • Limited by Risk Assessment and Historical Flow Paths Evaluating Effects of Alternate Flowpath Impingement • Direct Impingement Would Result in Alternate flow Path Parallel to Levee • Reduced Slope for Alternate Flow Path and Reduced Sediment Transport Capacity • Aggradation Occurs Along Alternate Flow Path to Re-establish Sediment Equilibrium • Area Between New Bed Profile and Existing Bed Profile Filled from the Differential Sediment Transport Rates Evaluating Effects of Alternate Flow Path Impingement • Calculate the Maximum Deposition Height at Levee: • Calculate the deposition volume from the Sediment transport rates and hydrographs • Deposition width from the self-forming channel width • Applying geometrical relations maximum deposition depth computed at contact point • Trial and Error Procedure Applied to Vary Contact Length along Levee for Maximum Depth Upstream Levee Termination Points • Extend to maximum limits of fan flooding • Increase freeboard per FEMA • Extend to hard-point for tie-in • Potential for “flanking” if Levee cannot be extended to maximum fan flooding limits • May not be economically feasible or environmental / jurisdictional limitations / property ownership • Estimate the amount of flow that will flank upstream limits of levee • Apply French’s procedure or Flowpath Uncertainty Analysis Step 2 - Alluvial of Alluvial Fan Hydraulics For Flood Protection • Limited Procedures Available for Evaluation of Alluvial Fan Hydraulics • Empirical Procedures to Evaluate Self-Forming Channel Hydraulics • Dawdy (Critical depth stabilize where decrease in depth results in two-hundred fold increase in width) W = 9.5 Q 0.4 • Edwards - Thielman (Application of Mannings Equation and Dawdy procedure) W = 17.16 (Qn)3/8 S3/16 • Fixed Bed Water Surface Profile Hydraulic Models (HEC-RAS) • Cross Section Orientation • 2 - dimensional Hydraulic Models (ie. FLO-2D, MIKE, HEC-RAS 2D) Approximating Self-forming Channel Hydraulics of Alluvial Fan • Dawdy Empirical Procedure Alluvial Fan Hydraulics • Channel Width W = 9.5 Q0.4 • Procedure Assumes Critical Depth NF = 1.0 • Can develop the following hydraulic relationships for “self forming” channel • Velocity = 1.5 Q 0.2 • Depth = 0.07 Q 0.4 • Unit Flowrate = q = Q / W = 0.105 Q0.6 1/2 • Shear Velocity = V* = (gRS) Alluvial Fan Water Surface Hydraulics for Flood Protection • HEC-RAS Hydraulics Analysis with Levee System • Mannings roughness value selection • Strickler & Anderson Equations for mannings based on bed material size 1/6 • n = 0.04 ds • Cowan’s procedure • Orientation of HEC-RAS cross sections with Levee 1. Parallel to fan contours 2. Normal to Levee orientation • Intent is to maximize the depth to prevent overtopping for worst case • Compare analysis with empirical fan hydraulics • 2-D analysis for validation only, NOT design Multiple Orientations of HEC-RAS Cross Sections Normal to Contour Orientation Perpendicular Transverse Levee Step 3 - Levee Revetment / Armoring Requirements • Historically Unarmored Levees are Ineffective • Armoring Selection Based Upon Tractive Force or Velocity Requirements • Alternative Revetments Available • Concrete Slope Lining • Grouted Stone • Soil Cement • Rock Rip-Rap • Evaluate Performance and Least Cost Step 4 - Evaluation of Levee Height Requirements • Levee Height Accounts for Moveable Bed and Rigid Boundary Conditions • Calculate Height from Summation of Individual Components: • Bedform Height • Superelevation • Flow Depth Compared to Critical Depth • Deposition from Alternate Flow Path HeightLevee = Depthflow + Z deposition + Y superelevation + 1/2 Antidune Height + F.B. (eqn.1) HeightLevee = Critical Depth + F.B. (eqn.2) • Compare Calculated Height to Total Specific Energy Definition of Levee Design Variables Levee Height Design Variables • Antidune Height: 0.027 V2 (Kennedy) • If Calculated Antidune Height Exceeds Flow Depth, Use Flow Depth • Calculate Hydraulics for (1) Actual Flow Depths and (2) Self- forming Channel • Superelvation: 1.3 V2 (b+2zD) / (gR) • Minimum Radius Calculated From Topwidth Equal to Curve Tangent • Aggradation Potential (see Impingement Analysis) • If Depth plus Superelevation Exceeds
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alluvial Fans in the Death Valley Region California and Nevada
    Alluvial Fans in the Death Valley Region California and Nevada GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 466 Alluvial Fans in the Death Valley Region California and Nevada By CHARLES S. DENNY GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 466 A survey and interpretation of some aspects of desert geomorphology UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1965 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library has cataloged this publications as follows: Denny, Charles Storrow, 1911- Alluvial fans in the Death Valley region, California and Nevada. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1964. iv, 61 p. illus., maps (5 fold. col. in pocket) diagrs., profiles, tables. 30 cm. (U.S. Geological Survey. Professional Paper 466) Bibliography: p. 59. 1. Physical geography California Death Valley region. 2. Physi­ cal geography Nevada Death Valley region. 3. Sedimentation and deposition. 4. Alluvium. I. Title. II. Title: Death Valley region. (Series) For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract.. _ ________________ 1 Shadow Mountain fan Continued Introduction. ______________ 2 Origin of the Shadow Mountain fan. 21 Method of study________ 2 Fan east of Alkali Flat- ___-__---.__-_- 25 Definitions and symbols. 6 Fans surrounding hills near Devils Hole_ 25 Geography _________________ 6 Bat Mountain fan___-____-___--___-__ 25 Shadow Mountain fan..______ 7 Fans east of Greenwater Range___ ______ 30 Geology.______________ 9 Fans in Greenwater Valley..-----_____. 32 Death Valley fans.__________--___-__- 32 Geomorpholo gy ______ 9 Characteristics of fans.._______-___-__- 38 Modern washes____.
    [Show full text]
  • Geomorphic Classification of Rivers
    9.36 Geomorphic Classification of Rivers JM Buffington, U.S. Forest Service, Boise, ID, USA DR Montgomery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA Published by Elsevier Inc. 9.36.1 Introduction 730 9.36.2 Purpose of Classification 730 9.36.3 Types of Channel Classification 731 9.36.3.1 Stream Order 731 9.36.3.2 Process Domains 732 9.36.3.3 Channel Pattern 732 9.36.3.4 Channel–Floodplain Interactions 735 9.36.3.5 Bed Material and Mobility 737 9.36.3.6 Channel Units 739 9.36.3.7 Hierarchical Classifications 739 9.36.3.8 Statistical Classifications 745 9.36.4 Use and Compatibility of Channel Classifications 745 9.36.5 The Rise and Fall of Classifications: Why Are Some Channel Classifications More Used Than Others? 747 9.36.6 Future Needs and Directions 753 9.36.6.1 Standardization and Sample Size 753 9.36.6.2 Remote Sensing 754 9.36.7 Conclusion 755 Acknowledgements 756 References 756 Appendix 762 9.36.1 Introduction 9.36.2 Purpose of Classification Over the last several decades, environmental legislation and a A basic tenet in geomorphology is that ‘form implies process.’As growing awareness of historical human disturbance to rivers such, numerous geomorphic classifications have been de- worldwide (Schumm, 1977; Collins et al., 2003; Surian and veloped for landscapes (Davis, 1899), hillslopes (Varnes, 1958), Rinaldi, 2003; Nilsson et al., 2005; Chin, 2006; Walter and and rivers (Section 9.36.3). The form–process paradigm is a Merritts, 2008) have fostered unprecedented collaboration potentially powerful tool for conducting quantitative geo- among scientists, land managers, and stakeholders to better morphic investigations.
    [Show full text]
  • Fan-Deltas and Braid Deltas: Varieties of Coarse-Grained Deltas
    Fan-deltas and braid deltas: Varieties of coarse-grained deltas John g. Mcpherson \ ,,,.,„ , , GANAPATHY SHANMUGAM > Mob" Research and Development Corporation, Dallas Research Laboratory, P.O. Box 819047 RICHARD J. MOIOLA J Dallas, Texas 75381 ABSTRACT delta sediments; they lack a muddy matrix; ening of the definition of fan-delta to the point of they display size grading and bar migration; confusion over its meaning and sedimentologic Two types of coarse-grained deltas are they commonly have a sheet geometry with implications. The term "fan-delta" is widely recognized: fan-deltas and braid deltas. Fan- high lateral continuity (tens to hundreds of used to describe depositional settings embracing deltas are gravel-rich deltas formed where an square kilometres); and they exhibit moderate a range of coarse-grained delta types other than alluvial fan is deposited directly into a stand- to high porosity and permeability. Valuable that of the fan-delta originally described by ing body of water from an adjacent highland. paleogeographic and tectonic information Holmes (1965). Many descriptions in the litera- They occupy a space between the highland concerning the proximity of highlands and ture of ancient fan-delta sequences contain no (usually a fault-bounded margin) and the major fault zones may be misinterpreted or evidence of the required presence of an alluvial standing body of water. In contrast, braid lost if these two coarse-grained deltaic sys- fan; instead they consist of deltaic deposits com- deltas (here introduced) are gravel-rich deltas tems are not differentiated. prising multilateral channel conglomerates and that form where a braided fluvial system pro- sandstones deposited from braided fluvial dis- grades into a standing body of water.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeomorphic Processes and Torrent Control Works on a Large Alluvial Fan in the Eastern Italian Alps
    Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 10, 547–558, 2010 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/10/547/2010/ Natural Hazards © Author(s) 2010. This work is distributed under and Earth the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. System Sciences Hydrogeomorphic processes and torrent control works on a large alluvial fan in the eastern Italian Alps L. Marchi1, M. Cavalli1, and V. D’Agostino2 1Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche – Istituto di Ricerca per la Protezione Idrogeologica (CNR IRPI), Padova, Italy 2Dipartimento Territorio e Sistemi Agroforestali, Universita` di Padova, Legnaro (Padova), Italy Received: 17 November 2009 – Revised: 26 February 2010 – Accepted: 8 March 2010 – Published: 23 March 2010 Abstract. Alluvial fans are often present at the outlet of 1 Introduction small drainage basins in alpine valleys; their formation is due to sediment transport associated with flash floods and Alluvial fans at the outlet of small, high-gradient drainage debris flows. Alluvial fans are preferred sites for human set- basins are a common feature of alpine valleys. Although de- tlements and are frequently crossed by transport routes. In bris flows commonly dominate the formation and develop- order to reduce the risk for economic activities located on or ment of these alluvial fans, also bedload and hyperconcen- near the fan and prevent loss of lives due to floods and de- trated flows contribute to the transfer of sediment from the bris flows, torrent control works have been extensively car- drainage basin to the alluvial fan and its distribution on the ried out on many alpine alluvial fans. Hazard management fan surface. These flow processes result in major risk when on alluvial fans in alpine regions is dependent upon reliable they encroach settlements and transport routes, which are of- procedures to evaluate variations in the frequency and sever- ten present on the alluvial fans of the European Alps.
    [Show full text]
  • Request for Proposal No. PWG117-FLOOD-2154 West Fontana Channel Bioswale Improvements
    Request for Proposal No. PWG117-FLOOD-2154 West Fontana Channel Bioswale Improvements County of San Bernardino Flood Control Engineering Division 825 E. Third Street, Rm. 140 San Bernardino, CA 92415 Release Date: August 18, 2016 Deadline Date: September 8, 2016 (Rev 1/30/2015) San Bernardino County Request for Proposal No. PWG117-FLOOD-2154 Flood Control District West Fontana Channel Bioswale Page 2 of 48 Improvements TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION ............................................................................................................................................... 3 B. PURPOSE ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3 C. TERM OF AGREEMENT .................................................................................................................................................. 3 D. QUESTIONS .................................................................................................................................................................. 3 E. CORRESPONDENCE ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 F. ADMONITION TO PROPOSERS ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Moving Water Shapes Land
    KEY CONCEPT Moving water shapes land. BEFORE, you learned NOW, you will learn •Erosion is the movement of • How moving water shapes rock and soil Earth’s surface • Gravity causes mass movements • How water moving under- of rock and soil ground forms caves and other features VOCABULARY EXPLORE Divides drainage basin p. 579 How do divides work? divide p. 579 floodplain p. 580 PROCEDURE MATERIALS alluvial fan p. 581 •sheet of paper 1 Fold the sheet of paper in thirds and tape delta p. 581 • tape it as shown to make a “ridge.” sinkhole p. 583 •paper clips 2 Drop the paper clips one at a time directly on top of the ridge from a height of about 30 cm. Observe what happens and record your observations. WHAT DO YOU THINK? How might the paper clips be similar to water falling on a ridge? Streams shape Earth’s surface. If you look at a river or stream, you may be able to notice something about the land around it. The land is higher than the river. If a river is running through a steep valley, you can easily see that the river is the low point. But even in very flat places, the land is sloping down to the river, which is itself running downhill in a low path through the land. NOTE-TAKING STRATEGY Running water is the major force shaping the landscape over most A main idea and detail of Earth. From the broad, flat land around the lower Mississippi River notes chart would be a good strategy to use for to the steep mountain valleys of the Himalayas, water running downhill taking notes about streams changes the land.
    [Show full text]
  • Biofiltration Media Optimization – Phase I FINAL REPORT
    ST. ANTHONY FALLS LABORATORY Engineering, Environmental and Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Project Report No. 593 Biofiltration Media Optimization – Phase I FINAL REPORT by Andrew J. Erickson, Jessica L. Kozarek, Kathryn A. Kramarczuk, and Laura Lewis St. Anthony Falls Laboratory, University of Minnesota, 2 Third Avenue SE Minneapolis, MN 55455 Prepared for University of Minnesota Water Resources Center, Minnesota Stormwater Research Council December 2020 Minneapolis, Minnesota Cite as: Erickson, AJ, Kozarek, JL, Kramarczuk, KA, and Lewis, L. (2020). “Biofiltration Media Optimization – Phase 1 Final Report.” Project Report No. 593, St. Anthony Falls Laboratory, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. December 2020. Biofiltration Media Optimization – Phase I Final Report – December 2020 This project was supported by the Minnesota Stormwater Research and Technology Transfer Program administered by the University of Minnesota Water Resources Center through an appropriation from the Clean Water Fund established by Minnesota Clean Water Land and Legacy Amendment and from the Minnesota Stormwater Research Council with financial contributions from: ● Capitol Region Watershed District ● Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District ● Mississippi Watershed Management Organization ● Nine Mile Creek Watershed District ● Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District ● South Washington Watershed District ● City of Edina ● City of Minnetonka ● City of Woodbury, and ● Wenck Associates ● Minnesota Cities Stormwater Coalition For more information about the Center and the Council, visit: https://www.wrc.umn.edu/projects/storm-waste-water For more information about the Minnesota Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment, visit: https://www.legacy.mn.gov/about-funds Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Water Resources Center or the Minnesota Stormwater Research Council.
    [Show full text]
  • US EPA Stormwater Best Management Practice Design Guide
    United States Office of Research EPA/600/R-04/121 Environmental Protection and Development September 2004 Agency Washington DC 20460 Stormwater Best Management Practice Design Guide: Volume 1 General Considerations EPA/600/R-04/121 September 2004 Stormwater Best Management Practice Design Guide Volume 1 General Considerations By Michael L. Clar, P.E. Ecosite, Inc. Ellicott City, Maryland, 21042 Billy J. Barfield, P.E., Ph.D. Professor Emeritus Department of Agricultural Engineering Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma Thomas P. O’Connor Urban Watershed Management Branch Water Supply and Water Resources Division National Risk Management Research Laboratory Edison, NJ 08837 Order No. 1C-R059-NTSX Project Officer Thomas P. O’Connor Urban Watershed Management Branch Water Supply and Water Resources Division National Risk Management Research Laboratory Edison, NJ 08837 NATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT RESEARCH LABORATORY OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY CINCINNATI, OH 45268 Notice The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development partially funded and collaborated in the research described here under Order Number 1C-R059- NTSX to Ecosite, Inc. It has been subjected to the Agency’s peer and administrative review and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. ii Foreword The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life.
    [Show full text]
  • Alluvial Fans
    GY 111 Lecture Notes D. Haywick (2008-09) 1 GY 111 Lecture Note Series Sedimentary Environments 1: Alluvial Fans Lecture Goals A) Depositional/Sedimentary Environments B) Alluvial fan depositional environments C) Sediment and rocks that form on alluvial fans Reference: Press et al., 2004, Chapter 7; Grotzinger et al., 2007, Chapter 18, p 449 GY 111 Lab manual Chapter 3 Note: At this point in the course, my version of GY 111 starts to diverge a bit from my colleagues. I tend to focus a bit more on sedimentary processes then they do mostly because we live in an area that is dominated by sedimentation and I figure that you should be as familiar as possible with the subject. As it turns out, the web notes are also more comprehensive than what you'll find in your text book A) Depositional/sedimentary environments Last time we met, we discussed how sediment moved from one place to another. Remember that sediment is produced in a lot of different locations, but it seldom stays where it is produced. The action of water, wind and ice transport it from the sediment source to the sediment sink. The variety of sediment sinks that exist on the planet is truly amazing. There are river basins, lakes, deserts, lagoons, swamps, deltas, beaches, barrier islands, reefs, continental shelves, the abyssal plains (very deep!), trenches (even deeper!) etc. As we discussed last time, these places are called depositional environments (also known as sedimentary environments). Each depositional environment may also have several subdivisions. For example, there are open beaches, sheltered beaches, shingle beaches, sand beaches, strandline beaches, even mud beaches.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.5 Bioretention
    4.5. Bioretention (rain gardens) Bioretention Bioretention areas typically are landscaping features adapted to treat storm water runoff. Bioretention systems are also known as Mesic Prairie Depressions, Rain Gardens, Infiltration Basins, Infiltration Swales, bioretention basins, bioretention channels, tree box filters, planter boxes, or streetscapes, to name a few. Bioretention areas typically consist of a flow regulating structure, a pretreatment element, an engineered soil mix planting bed, vegetation, and an outflow regulating structure. Bioretention systems provide both water quality and quantity storm water management opportunities. Bioretention systems are flexible, adaptable and versatile storm water management facilities that are effective for new development as well as highly urban re-development situations. Bioretention can readily adapt to a site by modifying the conventional “mounded landscape” philosophy to that of a shallow landscape “cup” depression. Such landscape depression storage and treatment areas fit readily into: parking lot islands; small pockets of open areas; residential, commercial and industrial campus landscaping; and, urban and suburban green spaces and corridors. Bioretention works by routing storm water runoff into shallow, landscaped depressions. These landscaped depressions are designed to hold and remove many of the pollutants in a manner similar to natural ecosystems. During storms, runoff ponds above the mulch and Engineered Soil Mix in the system. Runoff from larger storms is generally diverted past the facility to the storm drain system. The runoff remaining in the bioretention facility filters through the Engineered Soil Mix. The filtered runoff can either be designed to enhance groundwater infiltration or can be collected in an underdrain and discharged per local storm water management requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Flooding Dynamics in a Large Low-Gradient Alluvial Fan, the Okavango Delta, Botswana, from Analysis and Interpretation of a 30-Year Hydrometric Record
    Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 10, 127–137, 2006 www.copernicus.org/EGU/hess/hess/10/127/ Hydrology and SRef-ID: 1607-7938/hess/2006-10-127 Earth System European Geosciences Union Sciences Flooding dynamics in a large low-gradient alluvial fan, the Okavango Delta, Botswana, from analysis and interpretation of a 30-year hydrometric record P. Wolski and M. Murray-Hudson Harry Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre, Maun, Botswana Received: 11 August 2005 – Published in Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions: 6 September 2005 Revised: 29 November 2005 – Accepted: 3 January 2006 – Published: 21 February 2006 Abstract. The Okavango Delta is a flood-pulsed wetland, tem, and the flood frequency distribution itself can change, which supports a large tourism industry and the subsistence compared to that at upstream locations (Wolff and Burges, of the local population through the provision of ecosystem 1994). The ecological role of the channel-floodplain interac- services. In order to obtain insight into the influence of var- tion is expressed by the flood pulse concept (Junk et al., 1989; ious environmental factors on flood propagation and distri- Middleton, 1999). According to this concept, floodplain wet- bution in this system, an analysis was undertaken of a 30- lands and riparian ecosystems adjust to, and are maintained, year record of hydrometric data (discharges and water lev- by the pulsing of water, sediment and nutrients that occurs els) from one of the Delta distributaries. The analysis re- during over-bank flow conditions. Odum (1994) addition- vealed that water levels and discharges at any given channel ally identifies flood pulsing at various spatial and temporal site in this distributary are influenced by a complex interplay scales as an energy subsidy to wetland ecosystems, explain- of flood wave and local rainfall inputs, modified by channel- ing in part the high ecological productivity associated with floodplain interactions, in-channel sedimentation and techni- such systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Evaluation Report
    Stormwater Evaluation Report Prepared for City of Davis September 2017 011-10-17-55 REPORT | SEPTEMBER 2017 Stormwater Evaluation Report ———— Prepared for City of Davis Project No. 011-10-17-55 9/5/17 Project Manager: Kristen Whatley, PE 9/5/17 QA/QC Review: Doug Moore, PE W E S T Y O S T A S S O C I A T E S Carlsbad 2173 Salk Avenue, Suite 250 Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 795-0365 Davis 2020 Research Park Drive, Suite 100 Davis, CA 95618 (530) 756-5905 Eugene 1650 W 11th Ave. Suite 1-A Eugene, OR 97402 (541) 431-1280 Irvine 6 Venture, Suite 290 Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 517-9060 Pleasanton 6800 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 150 Pleasanton, CA 94566 (925) 426-2580 Portland 4949 Meadows Road, Suite 125 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 (503) 451-4500 Sacramento 2725 Riverside Boulevard, Suite 5 Sacramento, CA 95818 (916) 504-4915 Santa Rosa 2235 Mercury Way, Suite 105 Santa Rosa, CA 95407 (707) 543-8506 Sunnyvale 1250 Oakmead Parkway, Suite 210 Sunnyvale, CA 94085 (408) 451-8453 Walnut Creek 1777 Botelho Drive, Suite 240 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 949-5800 W E S T Y O S T A S S O C I A T E S Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Available Workhour Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 1
    [Show full text]