Source: http://cdm16944.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/winsor/id/48
Timestamp: 2019-05-25 19:28:05
Document Index: 28147771

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art-  77', 'art 1', 'art- 77', 'art 1', 'art 1']

Proposed drainage improvements, Chapter 6, part 1, 1964 :: L.M. Winsor Papers and Photographs Digital Collection
Home L.M. Winsor Papers and Photographs Digital Collection Proposed drainage improvements, Chapter 6, part 1, 1964
Proposed drainage improvements, Chapter 6, part 1, 1964
CHAPTER VI PROPOSED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Storm drainage improvements proposed herein for the Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood drainage areas, and proposed improvements on the Jordan River have been designed to recognize all local controlling conditions and allow for the various factors set forth in the preceding chapters.  Construction costs have been estimated on the basis of calculated quantities and upon unit prices believed to be sufficient and applicable to work to be performed in the near future.  For stated rainfall conditions, the size and location of storm drainage facilities are controlled by topography.  Pipelines and channels generally follow the course of natural drainage and pumping is resorted to only where the area is extremely flat or is below high water.  In this study, it was not found necessary to pump any storm drainage in order to dispose of it.  The only case in which pumping will be necessary as a result of this Master Plan is the removal of irrigation dams when channels are enlarged, and the need to satisfy the water rights of those using the dams to divert irrigation water from the streams including the Jordan River.  In general, the job of developing a solution to a drainage problem usually consists of defining main drainage areas and sub-areas, of locating routes of trunk drains, and of designing the drains to convey runoff from each area and sub-area to nearby water courses.  In addition, an analysis is required of all factors relating to functional suitability, future development, maintenance cost, and total cost.  As set forth in the preceding chapters, all storm drain conduits have 75 been designed for a 10-year storm.  The Jordan River capacities and right-of-way studies anticipate a 100-year storm. Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood are being designed for flows to be expected once in 100 years, in accordance with recommendations of the U.S. Army Engineers.  Drainage Areas and Proposed Drainage Facilities  A complete system of storm drainage has been developed for that portion of Salt Lake County tributary to Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood Creek, comprising the area bounded roughly by Salt Lake City on the north, the Jordan River and Murray City on the west, the Wasatch Mountains on the east, and 6400 South on the south.  The northeast section of Murray drains into Big Cottonwood.  The proposed storm drainage system for the subject area is shown in FIGURES 20, 21, 22 and 23.  On these maps is shown the size and location of each pipe conduit making up the Master Plan.  Also shown on the maps are the boundaries of the major drainage systems, the boundaries of the sub-areas, and the designation of each sub-area.  All individual drainage areas which discharge directly into natural channels or which combine with others to discharge into a common drain are shown on the maps.  For the purpose of conveniently identifying these individual areas, each separate system having an independent outlet is designated by a letter prefix. The sub-areas are designated by the letter prefix and a number.  Generally the numbering starts at the highest elevation in each drainage improvement system and proceeds consecutively downstream.  The acreage in each sub-area, and the product of that acreage times the estimated average runoff coefficient (CA) have been tabulated and can be found in the Appendix.  Information on the slope, length, design flow, etc., can be obtained from the Design Tabling Sheets, also included in the Appendix.  76  The proposed drainage facilities will provide for conditions at ultimate development of the tributary areas, and are based on coefficients of runoff applicable to the ultimate land use.  The location of new catch basins and manholes has not been shown on the maps, but the cost of these items has been included in the estimate.  As was mentioned in Chapter 5, existing facilities will be utilized to the fullest extent possible.  A detailed determination of location for new catch basins, and possible use of existing ones is beyond the scope of this report.  These must be studied during final design of the individual storm drains when accurate field surveys of topography and elevation are carried out.  Minor variations and relocation of some of the proposed drains may be found advisable.  It is not expected that these relocations will materially effect [affect] the costs of the proposed improvements.  It is strongly advised that the County acquire all necessary easements for construction and operation of the drainage system.  In most cases, the proposed conduits are located in county roads, but in a few systems portions of the pipe lines follow natural drainage courses traversing private property.  Sections of Drainage Systems “GG”, “HH”, “JJ”, and “PP”, in the Big Cottonwood Creek Area, are examples of this condition.  Where channels are to be enlarged, it is recommended that, where practicable, the easements be of sufficient width to provide a maintenance roadway on each side.  Fencing of all open channels should also be considered.  Easements for the drains and channels should be obtained at the earliest possible date.  The should be provided by the owners in all new subdivisions as a condition precedent to subdivision approval.  A comparison of the existing drainage facilities shown in Chapter 5 with the proposed new facilities shown in this chapter will reveal several areas where existing storm drains, constructed by the Utah Highway Depart-  77  ment in cooperation with Salt Lake County, will require enlargement.  It is believed that the difference in required pipe size to serve these areas is due to the criteria of “ultimate development” upon which this report is based.  Undoubtedly, the present facilities were based more on present conditions or a lesser projection of development.  For example, the storm drain in 7th East north of 3700 South, and the storm drain in 20th East between 33rd South and Mill Creek, which are expected to require 60” pipe to satisfy the Master Plan, but which are presently only 36”.  Today, these storm drains are adequate, but at some time in the future, they may have to be enlarged to provide the necessary protection for the tributary areas.  Two of the most critical storm runoff problems which the County faces are the discharge of storm water into irrigation canals, and the means of providing storm runoff protection for the hillside developments.  The irrigation canal situation has been adequately covered in Chapter 5.  A brief discussion of the latter problem will be undertaken here.  Just as the provision of drainage for flat, low-lying areas presents certain challenges, the engineering of storm drainage for hillside areas requires special considerations.  A great deal more control of runoff waters is necessary because of the increased velocities created by building houses and streets on slopes where previously vegetation helped to absorb and lessen the runoff from a rain storm.  Salt Lake County has allowed some hillside development without adequate provision for storm drainage.  Subdividers have been permitted to fill in natural drainage courses and construct homes on the fill, without installing culverts or storm drain systems.  In the area near 4500 South and Wasatch Boulevard, much damage has taken place during and following rainstorms, due to lack of adequate drainage facilities.  In 1962 a large  78  section of Bernada Drive above Wasatch Boulevard was washed away following a rainstorm, because of the steep grade, high velocity, and lack of disposal facilities to intercept  and dispose of the runoff.  This is only one example.  The construction of proposed Storm Drain “GG” is intended to relieve this situation.  Construction of the Belt Route within the next 5 years will result in the relocation of Wasatch Boulevard to the east of its present location between Oakcliff Drive and Bernada Drive.  Early construction of this portion of System “GG”, in cooperation with the Utah Highway Department should have high priority.  We have been informed by a representative of the Utah Highway Department that construction of the Interstate Belt Route between Parleys Canyon and 4500 South is programmed for the year 1965.  This freeway is not under construction, and as a means of intercepting freeway drainage as well as all storm runoff above present Wasatch Blvd., the State plans storm drainage systems north of 33rd South, south from 33rd South into Mill Creek, and probably from 41st South northerly to Mill Creek.  As soon as the Master Plan of Storm Drainage has been accepted by Salt Lake County, the information should be made available to the Utah Highway Department so that the proposed storm drains will adequately meet the County’s overall plans.  It will be noted that on FIGURES 20 and 21 we have shown a proposed Salt Lake City storm drain in 2700 South St., and that Mill Creek Area Storm Drains “B”, “C”, and “D” are tributary to it.  Our analysis of the Master Storm Drainage Plan of Salt Lake City, prepared for the City by Edwards & Kelcy-Western Engineers in 1960, indicates that all of the County area east of Highland Drive and north of 33rd South was included in the design of the storm drain known as Project 28 in the Salt Lake City Master Plan.  We have also determined that the natural drainage is in that direc-  79  tion and that the pipe sizes at the lower ends of proposed Salt Lake County Storm Drains “B”, “C” and “D”, correspond to the sizes designed for the Salt Lake City system.  Project No. 28 has its outlet into Mill Creek at 300 East Street.  The construction schedule for this storm drain is not know, but it will require a cooperative effort by both the City and the County to bring these proposed storm drainage facilities to a realization.  The 300 East Street section of Project 28 also passes through South Salt Lake City.  This will require cooperation with that entity also.  The Jordan River No detailed discussion of the proposed improvements on the Jordan River will be presented here.  The proposed channel sections and required right-of-way have been presented in CHAPTER 3.  The reader is referred to that chapter and to FIGURES 6 through 11, and TABLES 4 and 5.  The typical cross-section of the Jordan River which was used as a basis for determining the necessary right-of-way width, contains a berm of 10 to 20 feet on both sides of the channel.  This berm provides enough right-of-way width so that should future flood flows on the Jordan River between the Narrows and Great Salt Lake exceed the design flow of 5000 cfs, and even approach 10,000 cfs, adequate capacity could be obtained by elimination of the berms and the installation of “rip-rap” along the channels.  Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood Creek Frequently the solution to community drainage problems requires the construction of relatively long and costly trunk drains to convey accumulated storm flow to an appropriate point of disposal.  Salt Lake County is fortunate to have several streams which traverse the valley in a east-west direction, and the Jordan River in the center of the valley to receive and carry off storm water.  Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood Creek have been relied  80
Title Proposed drainage improvements, Chapter 6, part 1, 1964
Description Ten pages of Chapter VI: Proposed drainage improvements. Includes topics on drainage areas and proposed drainage facilities, the Jordan River, Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood Creek, and maps of the area.
Source Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections & Archives, L. M. Winsor papers, 1912-1964, COLL MSS 98 Box 3 Folder 5
Call Number COLL MSS 98 Box 3 Folder 5
File Size 2666003 Bytes
Identifier SCAMSS0098Bx003Fd05.pdf
ARK ID ark:/85142/t4360727160952
ARK URL http://n2t.net/ark:/85142/t4360727160952
What do you know about this item? Click this link to tell us more about this item : http://library.usu.edu/main/forms/diginfo.php?id=48&collection=winsor
Transcript CHAPTER VI PROPOSED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Storm drainage improvements proposed herein for the Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood drainage areas, and proposed improvements on the Jordan River have been designed to recognize all local controlling conditions and allow for the various factors set forth in the preceding chapters. Construction costs have been estimated on the basis of calculated quantities and upon unit prices believed to be sufficient and applicable to work to be performed in the near future. For stated rainfall conditions, the size and location of storm drainage facilities are controlled by topography. Pipelines and channels generally follow the course of natural drainage and pumping is resorted to only where the area is extremely flat or is below high water. In this study, it was not found necessary to pump any storm drainage in order to dispose of it. The only case in which pumping will be necessary as a result of this Master Plan is the removal of irrigation dams when channels are enlarged, and the need to satisfy the water rights of those using the dams to divert irrigation water from the streams including the Jordan River. In general, the job of developing a solution to a drainage problem usually consists of defining main drainage areas and sub-areas, of locating routes of trunk drains, and of designing the drains to convey runoff from each area and sub-area to nearby water courses. In addition, an analysis is required of all factors relating to functional suitability, future development, maintenance cost, and total cost. As set forth in the preceding chapters, all storm drain conduits have 75 been designed for a 10-year storm. The Jordan River capacities and right-of-way studies anticipate a 100-year storm. Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood are being designed for flows to be expected once in 100 years, in accordance with recommendations of the U.S. Army Engineers. Drainage Areas and Proposed Drainage Facilities A complete system of storm drainage has been developed for that portion of Salt Lake County tributary to Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood Creek, comprising the area bounded roughly by Salt Lake City on the north, the Jordan River and Murray City on the west, the Wasatch Mountains on the east, and 6400 South on the south. The northeast section of Murray drains into Big Cottonwood. The proposed storm drainage system for the subject area is shown in FIGURES 20, 21, 22 and 23. On these maps is shown the size and location of each pipe conduit making up the Master Plan. Also shown on the maps are the boundaries of the major drainage systems, the boundaries of the sub-areas, and the designation of each sub-area. All individual drainage areas which discharge directly into natural channels or which combine with others to discharge into a common drain are shown on the maps. For the purpose of conveniently identifying these individual areas, each separate system having an independent outlet is designated by a letter prefix. The sub-areas are designated by the letter prefix and a number. Generally the numbering starts at the highest elevation in each drainage improvement system and proceeds consecutively downstream. The acreage in each sub-area, and the product of that acreage times the estimated average runoff coefficient (CA) have been tabulated and can be found in the Appendix. Information on the slope, length, design flow, etc., can be obtained from the Design Tabling Sheets, also included in the Appendix. 76 The proposed drainage facilities will provide for conditions at ultimate development of the tributary areas, and are based on coefficients of runoff applicable to the ultimate land use. The location of new catch basins and manholes has not been shown on the maps, but the cost of these items has been included in the estimate. As was mentioned in Chapter 5, existing facilities will be utilized to the fullest extent possible. A detailed determination of location for new catch basins, and possible use of existing ones is beyond the scope of this report. These must be studied during final design of the individual storm drains when accurate field surveys of topography and elevation are carried out. Minor variations and relocation of some of the proposed drains may be found advisable. It is not expected that these relocations will materially effect [affect] the costs of the proposed improvements. It is strongly advised that the County acquire all necessary easements for construction and operation of the drainage system. In most cases, the proposed conduits are located in county roads, but in a few systems portions of the pipe lines follow natural drainage courses traversing private property. Sections of Drainage Systems “GG”, “HH”, “JJ”, and “PP”, in the Big Cottonwood Creek Area, are examples of this condition. Where channels are to be enlarged, it is recommended that, where practicable, the easements be of sufficient width to provide a maintenance roadway on each side. Fencing of all open channels should also be considered. Easements for the drains and channels should be obtained at the earliest possible date. The should be provided by the owners in all new subdivisions as a condition precedent to subdivision approval. A comparison of the existing drainage facilities shown in Chapter 5 with the proposed new facilities shown in this chapter will reveal several areas where existing storm drains, constructed by the Utah Highway Depart- 77 ment in cooperation with Salt Lake County, will require enlargement. It is believed that the difference in required pipe size to serve these areas is due to the criteria of “ultimate development” upon which this report is based. Undoubtedly, the present facilities were based more on present conditions or a lesser projection of development. For example, the storm drain in 7th East north of 3700 South, and the storm drain in 20th East between 33rd South and Mill Creek, which are expected to require 60” pipe to satisfy the Master Plan, but which are presently only 36”. Today, these storm drains are adequate, but at some time in the future, they may have to be enlarged to provide the necessary protection for the tributary areas. Two of the most critical storm runoff problems which the County faces are the discharge of storm water into irrigation canals, and the means of providing storm runoff protection for the hillside developments. The irrigation canal situation has been adequately covered in Chapter 5. A brief discussion of the latter problem will be undertaken here. Just as the provision of drainage for flat, low-lying areas presents certain challenges, the engineering of storm drainage for hillside areas requires special considerations. A great deal more control of runoff waters is necessary because of the increased velocities created by building houses and streets on slopes where previously vegetation helped to absorb and lessen the runoff from a rain storm. Salt Lake County has allowed some hillside development without adequate provision for storm drainage. Subdividers have been permitted to fill in natural drainage courses and construct homes on the fill, without installing culverts or storm drain systems. In the area near 4500 South and Wasatch Boulevard, much damage has taken place during and following rainstorms, due to lack of adequate drainage facilities. In 1962 a large 78 section of Bernada Drive above Wasatch Boulevard was washed away following a rainstorm, because of the steep grade, high velocity, and lack of disposal facilities to intercept and dispose of the runoff. This is only one example. The construction of proposed Storm Drain “GG” is intended to relieve this situation. Construction of the Belt Route within the next 5 years will result in the relocation of Wasatch Boulevard to the east of its present location between Oakcliff Drive and Bernada Drive. Early construction of this portion of System “GG”, in cooperation with the Utah Highway Department should have high priority. We have been informed by a representative of the Utah Highway Department that construction of the Interstate Belt Route between Parleys Canyon and 4500 South is programmed for the year 1965. This freeway is not under construction, and as a means of intercepting freeway drainage as well as all storm runoff above present Wasatch Blvd., the State plans storm drainage systems north of 33rd South, south from 33rd South into Mill Creek, and probably from 41st South northerly to Mill Creek. As soon as the Master Plan of Storm Drainage has been accepted by Salt Lake County, the information should be made available to the Utah Highway Department so that the proposed storm drains will adequately meet the County’s overall plans. It will be noted that on FIGURES 20 and 21 we have shown a proposed Salt Lake City storm drain in 2700 South St., and that Mill Creek Area Storm Drains “B”, “C”, and “D” are tributary to it. Our analysis of the Master Storm Drainage Plan of Salt Lake City, prepared for the City by Edwards & Kelcy-Western Engineers in 1960, indicates that all of the County area east of Highland Drive and north of 33rd South was included in the design of the storm drain known as Project 28 in the Salt Lake City Master Plan. We have also determined that the natural drainage is in that direc- 79 tion and that the pipe sizes at the lower ends of proposed Salt Lake County Storm Drains “B”, “C” and “D”, correspond to the sizes designed for the Salt Lake City system. Project No. 28 has its outlet into Mill Creek at 300 East Street. The construction schedule for this storm drain is not know, but it will require a cooperative effort by both the City and the County to bring these proposed storm drainage facilities to a realization. The 300 East Street section of Project 28 also passes through South Salt Lake City. This will require cooperation with that entity also. The Jordan River No detailed discussion of the proposed improvements on the Jordan River will be presented here. The proposed channel sections and required right-of-way have been presented in CHAPTER 3. The reader is referred to that chapter and to FIGURES 6 through 11, and TABLES 4 and 5. The typical cross-section of the Jordan River which was used as a basis for determining the necessary right-of-way width, contains a berm of 10 to 20 feet on both sides of the channel. This berm provides enough right-of-way width so that should future flood flows on the Jordan River between the Narrows and Great Salt Lake exceed the design flow of 5000 cfs, and even approach 10,000 cfs, adequate capacity could be obtained by elimination of the berms and the installation of “rip-rap” along the channels. Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood Creek Frequently the solution to community drainage problems requires the construction of relatively long and costly trunk drains to convey accumulated storm flow to an appropriate point of disposal. Salt Lake County is fortunate to have several streams which traverse the valley in a east-west direction, and the Jordan River in the center of the valley to receive and carry off storm water. Mill Creek and Big Cottonwood Creek have been relied 80
Add tags for Proposed drainage improvements, Chapter 6, part 1, 1964
Post a Comment for Proposed drainage improvements, Chapter 6, part 1, 1964