DOCSLIB.ORG

I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I III-9 I TABLE 5 Preliminary List I Endangered and Threatened Species I With Possibility of Occurrence in I.B. 635 Study Area I GROUP COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME CLASSIFICATION BIRDS Bald Eagle Haliaeetus 1eucocepha1 us El Interior Least Tern Sterna antillarum athalassos El I Whooping Crane Grus americana E2 White-Faced Ibis Plegadis chihi Tl Arctic Peregrine Falcon Falco pe regrinus tundrius Tl 1 Piping Plover Charadrius melodus Tl Glack-Capped Vireo Vireo atricapillus Tl Wood Stork Mycteria americana Tl American Swallow-Tailed Kite Elanoides forficatus Tl I Golden-Cheeked Warbler Dendroica chrysoparia T3 I REPTILES Texas Horned Lizard Phrynosoma co rnutum Tl Brazos Water Snake Nerodia harteri harteri T2 I Timber Rattlesnake Crotalus horridus T2 I Classification Code E - Endangered 1 — Confi rned I T - Threatened 2 - Probable I 3 - Possible I Source: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 1987 I I I *12r I I I III-10 I According to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Dallas County is within "the migration route/corridor for seven federally threatened or endangered birds" as given in Table 6. However, the FVS stated that the I proposed activity would have no impacts to these species. I TABLE 6 Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species Vhose I Migratory Corridor Includes Dallas County, Texas COMMON SCIENTIFIC STATUS I NAME NAME American peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus anaturn Endangered I Arctic peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus tundrius Threatened Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Endangered I Black-capped vireo Vireo leucocephalus Endangered Interior least tern Sterna antillarum Endangered I Piping plover Charadrius melodus Threatened I Whooping crane Grus americana Endangered I Source: United States Fish and Wildlife Service I J. FLORA/FAUNA Any flora and fauna populations existing in the area shall encounter only short term impacts due to reconstruction of the interchange. These populations I which still exist within the study area have adapted to the urban environment; therefore, no long term effects on local flora and fauna communities are I expected. R. PRIME/UNIQUE FARMLAND I Based on field investigation, there is no farmland adjacent to the I interchange within the limits of the proposed improvements. I I I I III-ll I L. REQUIREMENT FOR SECTION 4(f) STATEMENT The proposed project will not require the use of any publicly owned land from a public park, recreational area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge lands or I historic sites of national, state or local significance as determined by the federal, state or local officials having jurisdiction there of. Consequently, I the preparation of a 4(f) statement will not be required. M. HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES I There is one recorded archaeological site and no known historic structures recorded within the project vicinity, according to the Texas Antiquities Committee. The archaeological site identified is located in White Rock Creek, I north of I.H. 635 and east of Hillcrest Road. No disturbance of this site will occur due to the proposed improvements. Areas where there is a potential for architectural and archaeological sites were identified as those zones associated with points at which the project intersects or closely parallels I creeks or rivers. White Rock Creek, Cottonwood Branch and Floyd Branch are all highly sensitive areas that could contain prehistoric Indian or historic archaeological deposits and may contain historic structures along their banks I and terraces. The St. Paul A.M.E. Church is situated approximately 300 feet from the proposed southbound frontage road of U.S. 75. This site has been identified by I the City of Dallas Historic Preservation office as a site eligible for City of Dallas Landmark status. The site is sufficiently removed from the project limits such that no impact to the church is expected from the proposed action. I Coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) shall precede any construction activities and any additional archaeological or historic evidence discovered in the course of construction shall be protected I and/or salvaged pursuant to any necessary memoranda of agreement reached by the SHPO and TxDOT. I N. FLOOD PLAINS In accordance with the directives of (Executive Order 11988) Flood Plain I Management, an investigation into the extent of the 100-year flood plain within the U.S. 75/1.H. 635 interchange improvement area was conducted. Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) were utilized to delineate the boundary of the 100-year flood plain (Flood Hazard Zone A) in the study corridor. As depicted I in Exhibit 10, several areas of the proposed actions encroach upon and/or traverse 100-year flood plains. Hydrologic and hydraulic modeling will be performed during design to insure the 100-year flood plain will be maintained. I The hydraulic design for this project will be in accordance with current TxDOT and Federal Highway Administration design policies and procedures. The highway facility will permit the conveyance of the 100 year flood, inundation of the roadway being acceptable, without causing significant damage to the highway, I stream, or other property. The proposed project will not increase the base floodplain elevation to a level which would violate applicable floodplain I regulations or ordinances. I Dallas County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program. I I I I I I I I I I B I I I I I ;•, rsiF'iJ*'* SrrVWt' ^r'• '—'=; rrJ;,^ ;'re5: :r£vUrf I FLOODPLAINS I I 111-12 I I 0. WETLANDS In compliance with Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, an I investigation into the extent of wetlands in the proposed interchange area was undertaken. Wetlands are defined as areas which are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically I adapted for life in saturated soil conditions (Federal Register, 1986). The Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands I indicates that wetlands possess three essential characteristics: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. Hydrophytic vegetation is defined as macrophytic plant life growing in water, soils, or on a substrate that is at least periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive I water content. Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (Soil Conservation Service, 1987). An area has wetland hydrology when saturated to the surface or inundated at some point in time I during an average rainfall year. The technical criteria are mandatory and must be satisfied in making a wetland determination (Federal Wetland Delineation I Manual, 1989). Off-site determination for wetlands in the project area were made using the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory maps, Army Corps of Engineers (USAE) delineations or Jurisdictional waters of the United States and the Soil I Conservation Service (SCS) maps delineating locations of hydric soils. On-site determinations were conducted adjacent to Floyd Branch, Cottonwood Creek and I White Rock Creek. Floyd Creek I North of I.H. 635 and adjacent to Floyd Branch, the soil type was identified as Austin series as mapped by SCS. This series is not listed as a hydric soil by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS). The I dominate vegetation was identified as the following: I Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status Ambrosia trifida Great Ragweed FAC Vernonia baldwinii Baldwin's Ironweed NI Zanthoxylum clava-herculis Hercules club FAC Celtis laevigata Sugarberry FAC Sorghum halepense Johnson grass FACU Ulmus americana American elm FAC Toxicodendron querifolia Poison oak FACU Ulmus alata Winged elm FACU I Cratuegus mollis Downy Hawthorn FAC I I 111-13 The indicator status of these species show that the dominate vegetation is mostly facultative (FAC) to facultative upland (FACU) with one being an non Indicator (NI) species. FAC species can be found in wetlands 50% of time, while FACU species are found in wetlands 33% of the time. NI species are plants where botanists are not in agreement on its indicator status for wetland determination. The topography of the area north of I.H. 635 is gently sloping until a sharp drop-off of 10 to 30 feet to the waters of Floyd Branch. Little to no banks are evident in this area. Without hydric soils or wetland hydrology the adjacent areas are not jurisdictional wetlands, only the creek channel up to "ordinary high water mark" would be considered jurisdictional for 404 fill permit under the Clean Water Act. South of I.H. 635, Floyd Branch is still confined in steep channel. A pit was dug for soil evaluation but only fill material was found. The dominant vegetation was S. halepense (Johnson grass) FACU and Celtis laevigata (Sugarberry) FAC. Immediately adjacent to the water, Salix nigra (black willow) FACW, Populus deltoides (Eastern Cottonwood) FAC and Fraxinus americana (White ash) were present. F. americana is not listed as a wetland species for Texas and is a obligate upland species. The topography south of I.H. 635 is gentle to steep slopes. Both east and west of Floyd Branch are drainage ditches that are parallel to I.H. 635 and discharge to Floyd Branch. No signs of wetland hydrology such as water stained leaves, water-borne sediment deposits, or morphological plant adaptations were noted outside of these drainage ditches. Without hydric soils or wetland hydrology, the areas that are adjacent to Floyd Branch and south of I.H. 635 are not jurisdictional wetlands. Only the creek channel up to "ordinary high water mark" would be considered jurisdictional for 404 fill permit under the Clean Water Act. Cottonwood Creek Cottonwood Creek near U.S. 75 and I.H. 635 interchange has been channelized with large adjacent areas that have been filled.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Free Land Attracted Many Colonists to Texas in 1840S 3-29-92 “No Quitting Sense” We Claim Is Typically Texas
    “Between the Creeks” Gwen Pettit This is a compilation of weekly newspaper columns on local history written by Gwen Pettit during 1986-1992 for the Allen Leader and the Allen American in Allen, Texas. Most of these articles were initially written and published, then run again later with changes and additions made. I compiled these articles from the Allen American on microfilm at the Allen Public Library and from the Allen Leader newspapers provided by Mike Williams. Then, I typed them into the computer and indexed them in 2006-07. Lois Curtis and then Rick Mann, Managing Editor of the Allen American gave permission for them to be reprinted on April 30, 2007, [email protected]. Please, contact me to obtain a free copy on a CD. I have given a copy of this to the Allen Public Library, the Harrington Library in Plano, the McKinney Library, the Allen Independent School District and the Lovejoy School District. Tom Keener of the Allen Heritage Guild has better copies of all these photographs and is currently working on an Allen history book. Keener offices at the Allen Public Library. Gwen was a longtime Allen resident with an avid interest in this area’s history. Some of her sources were: Pioneering in North Texas by Capt. Roy and Helen Hall, The History of Collin County by Stambaugh & Stambaugh, The Brown Papers by George Pearis Brown, The Peters Colony of Texas by Seymour V. Conner, Collin County census & tax records and verbal history from local long-time residents of the county. She does not document all of her sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Insurance Study for Dallas County
    * * * * * * * * * * * * Communities Affected This Revised Preliminary FIS report dated August 15, 2012 includes revisions based on detailed studies completed by the City of Dallas as a FEMA Cooperating Technical Partner (CTP). The following document only includes data revised since the September 28, 2010 Preliminary FIS report. City of Dallas CTP Project Streams: Audelia Branch Beards Branch Caruth Creek East Fork of Joes Creek Jackson Branch Jenkins Branch Joes Creek McCommas Branch McCree Branch Royal Branch Rush Creek Skillman Branch West Fork of Joes Creek Williamson Branch Table 1 – Scope of Study Stream Reaches Studied by Detailed Methods Length Stream Name Downstream Limit Upstream Limit (mi) New Detailed Study Streams Confluence with Jackson 250 feet downstream of Audelia Branch 2.78 Branch Buckingham Road Confluence with McCommas Beards Branch Hillside Drive 0.83 Branch Confluence with White Rock Downstream of Shadybrook Caruth Creek 2.03 Creek Lane 200 feet downstream of East Fork of Joe’s Creek Confluence with Joe's Creek 0.71 Beaver Brook Lane Confluence with White Rock Jackson Branch Walnut Street 5.05 Creek Confluence with White Rock Jenkins Branch Boedeker Street 2.14 Creek Confluence with Elm Fork of Joe’s Creek Snow White Drive 6.07 Trinity River Confluence with White Rock Approximately 70 feet East of McCommas Branch 1.92 Creek Oakhurst Street McCree Branch Confluence of Jackson Branch Audelia Road 1.08 Confluence with White Rock Approximately 810 feet East Royal Branch 1.57 Creek of Hillcrest Road Confluence with White Rock Rush Creek Highgate Lane 2.63 Creek 500 feet upstream of Skillman Branch Confluence with Caruth Creek 0.53 Southwestern Boulevard West Fork of Joe’s Creek Confluence with Joe's Creek Webb Chapel Road 3.81 Williamson Branch Confluence with Rush Creek Saratoga Circle 2.5 3.0 ENGINEERING METHODS For the flooding sources studied by detailed methods in the community, standard hydrologic and hydraulic study methods were used to determine the flood-hazard data required for this study.
    [Show full text]
  • Determination of Effects Report Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor Draft
    Determination of Effects Report Cotton Belt Regional Rail Corridor Draft Tarrant, Dallas, and Collin Counties November 13, 2017 This Report was prepared for DART General Planning Consultant Six Managed by HDR Determination of Effects Report Document Revision Record Determination of Effects Report—Cotton Belt HDR Report Number: Click here to enter text. Regional Rail Corridor Project Manager: Deborah Dobson-Brown PIC: Victor Palma Revision Number: Click here to enter text. Date: Click here to enter text. Version 1 Date: Click here to enter text. Version 2 Date: Click here to enter text. Originator Name: Deborah Dobson-Brown, MSc Firm: AmaTerra Environmental, Inc. Title: Senior Architectural Historian Date: November 13, 2017 Commenters Name: Click here to enter Name: Click here to enter text. Name: Click here to enter text. text. Firm: Click here to enter text. Firm: Click here to enter text. Firm: Click here to enter text. Date: Click here to enter text. Date: Click here to enter text. Date: Click here to enter text. Name: Click here to enter Name: Click here to enter text. Name: Click here to enter text. text. Firm: Click here to enter text. Firm: Click here to enter text. Firm: Click here to enter text. Date: Click here to enter text. Date: Click here to enter text. Date: Click here to enter text. Approval Task Manager: Click here to enter text. Date: Click here to enter text. Verified/Approved By: Click here to enter text. Date: Click here to enter text. Distribution Name: Click here to enter text. Title: Click here to enter text.
    [Show full text]
  • Dallas Trail Plan
    Dallas Trail Network Plan City of Dallas Park and Recreation Department October 2008 Dallas Trail Network Plan City of Dallas Park and Recreation Table of Contents Summary 1 Trail Maps—Major Loop Trails Bachman Lake Park Trail 65 Active Trail Advocacy Groups and 6 Crawford Mem. Park Trail 66 Partners Inventory Fish Trap Lake Park Trail 67 Major Trails Map 7 Glendale Park Trail 68 Kiest Park Trail 69 Major Trails Inventory White Rock Lake Park Trail 70 Major Linear Trail Inventory 8 Trail Maps—Major Nature Trails Major Loop Trail Inventory 11 Major Nature Trail Inventory 12 Cedar Ridge Preserve Trails 72 Joppa Preserve Trails 73 Neighborhood Trails Map 13 L.B. Houston Park Trails 74 Neighborhood Trails Inventory 14 McCommas Bluff Trails 75 Texas Buckeye Trail 76 Trail Maps—Major Linear Trails Trinity Interpretive Center Trails 77 Bernal Trail 17 Valley View Park Trails 78 Cedar Crest Trail 18 Trail Photographic Documentation Appendix i Chalk Hill Trail 19 Coombs Creek Trail 20 Cottonbelt Trail 21 Cottonwood Trail 22 Dixon Branch Trail 24 Elm Fork Creek Trail 25 Elm Fork Trail 26 Five Mile Creek Trail 28 Great Trinity Forest Trail 30 Highland Hills Trail 31 Interurban Trail 32 John C. Phelps Trail 33 Katy Trail 34 Katy Spur Trail 37 Kiestwood Trail 38 Lake Highlands Trail 39 Matilda Trail 40 Northaven Trail 41 Prairie Creek Trail 43 Preston Ridge Trail 44 Runyon Creek Trail 45 Santa Fe Trail 46 Scyene Trail 48 Seagoville Trail 49 Southwest Dallas Trail 50 Timberglen Trail 51 Trinity Trail 52 Trinity Levee Trail 53 Trinity Strand Trail 56 Turtle Creek Trail 58 Union Pacific Trail 59 White Rock Creek Trail North 61 White Rock Creek Trail South 63 Dallas Trail Network Plan City of Dallas Park and Recreation 1 Introduction Methodology In 2002, the City of Dallas adopted the Park and During the Renaissance Plan process, planners Recreation Department’s Long Range utilized the broad Dallas County Trail Plan and Development Plan, A Renaissance Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail Cultural Resources Existing Conditions
    Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail Cultural Resources Existing Conditions December 2013 Prepared by URS Corporation Prepared for Dallas Area Rapid Transit General Planning Consultant Managed by URS Corporation Cultural Resources Existing Conditions Report for the Proposed Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail Tarrant, Dallas, and Collin Counties, Texas Prepared by: Shelley Hartsfield, MA Kate Singleton, MPA Tanya McDougall, MS Alvin Banguilan, RPA Michelle Davenport, BA Christopher R. von Wedell, RPA Kasey Cox, MS Principal Investigator James Welch, RPA URS Corporation 1950 North Stemmons Freeway, Suite 6000 Dallas, Texas 75207 Prepared for: Dallas Area Rapid Transit 1401 Pacific Ave. Dallas, Texas 75202 URS Project Number 25338842.001UD August 2013 ABSTRACT Under contract to the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), URS Corporation (URS) conducted a Cultural Resources Existing Conditions study for the proposed Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail Project (Cotton Belt Project) in Tarrant, Dallas, and Collin Counties, Texas. The study was completed to assist DART in meeting their anticipated regulatory obligations under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Antiquities Code of Texas. The project consists of approximately twenty-six (26) miles of rail corridor from Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW Airport) to central Plano. An archaeological study area was established by creating a 1-kilometer (km) (3,621-foot [ft]) buffer around the construction footprint of the proposed rail corridor. An area-of-potential-effect (APE) for historic-age architectural resources was established in coordination with the Texas Historical Commission (THC) and defined as 175 ft (53 meters [m]) from the centerline for Cotton Belt Corridor Right-of-Way (ROW).
    [Show full text]
  • Neighborhood Organizations Map
    Neighborhood Organizations Map PRIMARY FIRST PRIMARY SECONDARY SECONDARY SEONDARY TYPE NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION NAME STATUS COUNCIL DISTRICT NORTH BOUNDARY SOUTH BOUNDARY EAST BOUNDARY WEST BOUNDARY WEBSITE MEMBERS PRIMARY POSITION NAME LAST NAME FIRST NAME LAST NAME POSITION NA Beverly Hills NA CONFIRMED 1 W Davis St. W Jefferson Blvd Cavendar Westmoreland Rd 300 Barbara Barbee president Kelly Brodner Secretary NA Bishop Arts NA CONFIRMED 1 Davis Sunset Zang Blvd Polk Street 25 Ryan Hopson President Daniel Quintana Vice President NA BORDELLO COMMUNITY CRIME WATCH NA CONFIRMED 1 Eighth Jefferson Marsalis Zang 11 Lorena Huerta Leader Contact Ana Diaz Leader NA East Kessler Park NA CONFIRMED 1 IH-30 Colorado Blvd Beckley Ave Sylvan Ave www.eastkessler.org 350 Tyler Childs Communications Karen Gough Vice President NA El Tivoli Place NA CONFIRMED 1 Buna St. Avon St. W Davis St Reverchon Dr. Westmount Ave 150 Rebecca Mohr Friesehahn President Mauricio Hernandez Crime Watch Chair NA Elmwood NA CONFIRMED 1 Lanford Illinois Ave S. Polk St Hampton Rd www.elmwoodna.org 30 Janet K. Smith Susan Lee NA Kessler Neighbors United NA CONFIRMED 1 IH-30 Tyler Street Sylvan Ave Stevens Park Golf Course www.kesslerneighborsunited.org 930 Susan Via President Dale Miner VP NA Kessler Plaza/Ravinia Heights Neighborhood Association CONFIRMED 1 Jefferson 12th Street Hampton Ravinia www.kprhna.org 503 Devin Goldsmith President Cherysse Lanns Vice President NA Kidd Springs NA CONFIRMED 1 Colorado Davis Street Zang Blvd Tyler Street kiddspringsna.org 1004 Pam Conley President Elise Faustion VP NA Kings Highway Conservation District CONFIRMED 1 Stwewart St. Davis Tyler St Mary Cliff www.kingshwy.org Zach Skoch President Michelle Powell Secretary NA L.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Drainage Areas of Texas Streams
    TEXAS WATER COMMISSION Joe D. Carter, Chairman 0. F. Dent, Commissioner H. A. Beckwith, Commissioner CIRCULAR NO. 63-01 DRAINAGE AREAS OF TEXAS STREAMS TRINITY RIVER BASIN AND TRINITY-SAN JACINTO COASTAL AREA Prepared in cooperation with the U. S. Geological Survey February 1963 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 ADMINISTRATION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1 TOPOGRAPHY 1 CONCEPTS OF DRAINAGE AREAS 2 METHOD OF DRAINAGE-AREA DETERMINATION 2 TABULATION OF DATA 5 FUNCTION OF COORDINATING OFFICE 5 TRINITY RIVER BASIN 7 TABLES OF DRAINAGE-AREA DATA 3 . Trinity River Basin 8 3a. Trinity-San Jacinto Coastal Area 21 ILLUSTRATIONS Figures 1. Contour map of Texas showing principal physiographic provinces........ 3 2. River basins and coastal areas of Texas 4 DRAINAGE AREAS OF TEXAS STREAMS INTRODUCTION An accurate figure for drainage area is one of the most significant factors used in hydrologic investigations of a river basin and in the hydraulic computa tions for the design of structures on a stream. This report is being compiled so that drainage-area information of uniform accuracy and reliability will be avail able to all users of these data for any foreseeable hydraulic, hydrologic, or gen eral engineering use. In 1951 the Subcommittee on Hydrology, Federal Inter-Agency River Basin Com- m ittee, delegated the U. S. Corps of Engineers as the official coordinating agency for drainage areas in the Arkansas and Red River basins, and the U. S. Geological Survey as the official coordinating agency for all other river basins in Texas. In November 1954 the data for the Red and Arkansas Rivers were published by the Corps of Engineers in a pamphlet entitled "Drainage Area Data, Arkansas, White, and Red River Basins".
    [Show full text]
  • Species Occurrence and Habitat Relationships the Geological
    CHAPTER III: RESULTS Species Occurrence and Habitat Relationships The geological, topographic, and climatic diversity of Nevada County contribute to its high plant and animal diversity. The county contains a complete east-west transect of the northern Sierra, from just above the Central Valley grasslands to the Great Basin vegetation on the Nevada border. The extent, elevation range, and numbers of Redlist and Yellowlist plants and animal species with documented occurrence in each of Nevada County’s 27 large-patch ecosystems are summarized in Table 3-1. Discussions of plant and animal occurrence in large-patch ecosystems of the county are provided in the following sections. Plant Diversity Nevada County supports a rich flora, with 1,814 taxa of California’s approximately 7,000 species, subspecies, and varieties documented within the county’s boundaries (Appendix I, CalFlora 2002). This represents about 26% of the California flora growing on <0.6% of the state’s total land area. A total of 115 plant families, representing 582 genera, are included in the flora of Nevada County. Of the 1,814 plant taxa found in Nevada County, about 19% are naturalized non-native species. Native taxa are those believed to have existed in California before initial visitation and colonization by Europeans (Hickman 1993). Ferns and fern-allies make up a little over 2% of the local flora; gymnosperms (conifers) total only 1% of the total number of taxa. Flowering plants make up over 96% of the taxa, which includes 22% monocots (i.e., grasses and lilies) and 74% dicots (other flowering plants). Fifty-six species of Redlist or Yellowlist plants have documented occurrences in Nevada County (Appendix II).
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Watershed Management a Watershed Is an Area of Land That Water Flows Across, Through, Or Under on Its Way to a Common Point in a Stream, River, Lake, Or Ocean
    1. Watershed Management A watershed is an area of land that water flows across, through, or under on its way to a common point in a stream, river, lake, or ocean. Watersheds not only include water bodies such as streams and lakes, but also all the surrounding lands that contribute water to the system as runoff during and after rainfall events. The relationship between the quality and quantity of water affects the function and health of a watershed. Thus, significant water removals (such as irrigation) or water additions (such as permitted discharges) are important. Watersheds can be extremely large, covering many thousands of acres, and often are subdivided into smaller subwatersheds for the purposes of study and management. WATERSHEDS AND WATER QUALITY To effectively address water issues, it is important to examine all natural processes and human activities occurring in a watershed that may affect water quality and quantity. Runoff that eventually makes it to a water body begins as surface or subsurface water flow from rainfall on agricultural, urban, residential, industrial, and undeveloped areas. This water can carry pollutants washed from the surrounding landscape. In addition, wastewater from various sources containing pollutants may be released directly into a water body. To better enable identification and management, potential contaminants are classified based on their origin as either point source or nonpoint source pollution. Point source pollution is discharged from a defined location, such as a pipe, ditch, or drain. It includes any pollution that may be traced back to a single point of origin. Point source pollution is typically discharged directly into a waterway and often contributes flow across all stream conditions, from low flow to high flow.
    [Show full text]
  • Floods on White Rock Creek Above White Rock Lake at Dallas, Texas
    UNITED STATES DEPARMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FLOODS ON WHITE ROCK CREEK ABOVE WHITE ROCK LAKE AT DALLAS, TEXAS I' Prepared in cooperation with the City of Dallas OPEN FILE No. 66 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FLOODS ON WHITE ROCK CREEK ABOVE WHITE ROCK LAKE AT DALLAS, TEXAS C. R. Gilbert Prepared in cooperation with the City of Dallas "by the Surface Water Branch U. S. Geological Surrey Trigg Twichell, District Engineer Open file No. 66 July 1963 CONTENTS Page Introduction--- ---- _____ _ _ _ _ __ ______________ i Cooperation and acknowledgment-- - - ---- - 2^ Physiography 2 Data available---------- _--- ____ ____ __ _ _ - 3 Flood history - - - - 3 Upper White Rock Creek ---- 3 Cottonwood Creek and Floyd Branch--- -- ______ - 5 Magnitude and frequency of floods-- - - _--- -_ 5 Inundation "by White Rock Creek-- -- -- -___ -_ _ ---- 6 Method of computation and assumptions-- - - - - - 6 Description of constrictions - - 7 Flood profiles -- - 9 Areas and depths of inundation - - 9 Velocity of flow 10 Effects of alterations 11 Channel and flood plain-- -- ____ -_- - 11 Watershed drainage area- _____ _- _______ n Inundation on tributary streams-- - - 12 Summary------- - - -- - ---_ -- -- -__ _______ 12 ILLUSTRATIONS Plate 1. Area inundated April 19-20, 19^-2, White Rock Creek at Dallas, Texas- - _-_--_ __ _--- in pocket 2. Area inundated July 27 and October 8, 1962, White Rock Creek at Dallas, Texas - - In pocket Figure 1. Profiles of floods on upper 'White Rock Creek at Dallas, Texas- ---- - _________ ___ 15 TABLES Table 1. Geometry of vehicular bridges over upper White Rock Creek- - ---- - _- ----- -_ - -.
    [Show full text]
  • Lavon Lake Watershed Protection Plan
    Lavon Lake Watershed Protection Plan Developed by The Lavon Lake Watershed Partnership June 2017 Cover photo of Lavon Lake. Lavon Lake Watershed Protection Plan Prepared for the Lavon Lake Watershed Partnership by North Texas Municipal Water District Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board Funding for the development of this Watershed Protection Plan was provided by the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board’s State Nonpoint Source Grant Program and the North Texas Municipal Water District. Page i Acknowledgements This document and the efforts behind its completion are the result of collaboration and cooperation between many different groups and individuals. These stakeholders have played an important role in the Lavon Lake Watershed Partnership. First and foremost, the Partnership wishes to express thanks to the members of the Steering Committee for their investments of time and energy in participating throughout the process. Without their direction and support, development of this plan would not have been possible. Through the Lavon Lake Watershed Protection Plan, their efforts serve as an example to all stakeholders of the importance of active stewardship of water resources. The Lavon Lake Watershed Partnership also would like to thank the members of the Technical Advisory Group for their assistance and advice: North Texas Municipal Water Texas Department of Agriculture District Texas State Soil and Water Texas Commission on Conservation Board Environmental Quality U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Texas Farm Bureau Texas Parks & Wildlife Department USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USDA Farm Service Agency Texas A&M AgriLife Research and U.S.
    [Show full text]