I'. 􀁾􀀩 r" ) (214) 450-2886 16801 Westgrove ADDisoN CITY ENGINEER'S OFFICE M E M 0 RAN DUM May 9, 1991 To: Lynn Chandler, Building Official From: John Baumgartner, City 􀁅􀁮􀁧􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁥􀁲􀀱􀁾􀁦􀀱􀀡
RE: Floodplain Construction/Reclamation along White Rock Creek -"The Woods" Subdivision In response to the phone calls regarding the fences/fill placed in the floodway easement, please
consider the following: A. History 1. The City of Dallas issued a permit (FP-79-12) to reclaim 4.37 acres from the White Rock Creek floodplain. 2. The fill was placed in accordance with
the plans developed by the engineers, Hui t t-Zoll ars and accepted by the City of Dallas and the Town of Addison. B. Required information for approving additional improvements to the
floodway easement: 1. All improvements must comply with the City of Dallas' 10 point criteria, which requires no net increase in the floodplain elevation. 2. Prior to constructing any
structures or adding fill to the floodway portion of the lot, the owner should provide provide a detailed survey/drawing indicating the floodway limit; the limits, elevation, and contours
of fill; and the location elevation and details for the proposed improvements. 3. Fill is permitted to bring the lot into conformance with the approved floodplain reclamation plan. Material
in excess of the plan should be removed. 4. Any fill or imp rovements . that further the f 1oodp 1ain reclamation must be approved by the City of Dallas. C. City of Dallas Approval Process
for floodplain reclamation: 1. Fl oodpl ain recl amation is a very technical process in Dallas and requires a detailed engineering study.
) 2. Prel iminary discussions wi th Mike Askew (948-4230) Dall as Stormwater Management indicate that they will need the following to evaluate a request: a) Floodplain review fee -estimated
at $700. b) Detailed engineering study to demonstrate that the reclamation project complies with Dallas' 10 point criteria. If you have any questions or need additional information,
please call me at 450-2886. JRB/rp Attachments: 1. September 18, 1984 letter from the City of Dallas. 2. Procedure for fill ing in a f 1oodp 1ain under the f 1oodpl ain management guidelines
-city of Dallas.
) September 18, 1984 Mr. Wayne Ginn Town of Addison Engineer Town of Addison, Texas Re: Fill Request FP 79-12 Oak Bend Estates Winnwood Lane Dear Mr. Ginn: CITY OF DALLAS , /The engineering
plans for the subject property was reviewed by the City of Dallas in 1979 and approved by the Council on September 26, 1979. Reclamation of land from the flood plain by filling is allowed
by the City of Dallas when the fill meets the la-point engineeri ng criteri a. The maximum recl amati on was 4.269 acres out of the 18.6491 acre tract. The remaining 14.38 acres must
remain Flood Plain Management Area for conveyance of flood waters. No engineering study has been submitted for the tract south of this property, therefore, development or fill would
not be allowed. Sincerely, Tommie McPherson Program Manager Storm Water Management sp DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1500 WEST MOCKINGBIRD DALLAS, TEXAS 75235 TELEPHONE 214/670-6183
oP-J n;l (j) ·.) "'0 􀁾 =""S"a0 CD CD .....,0. -c 􀁯􀁾 cO..CD .(1) --0"0"" 0) 􀁾 _e. :::], 􀁾_. 3 -􀀵􀁾 OJC,O ::J -0) :::J '@O) c3oO--..., :::)0 ""'0.. 􀀧􀂧􀀮􀁾 --0) 􀁾􀀵􀀭 ---c :::J:::)
(Do.. U'J co 􀁾
.«. '" r 􀁾 I\, -, ', procedures for filling in a flood plain under the flood plain management gUidelines prepared by: the department of urban planning june, 1977; revised oct., 1977
PROCEDURES FOR FILLING IN A FLOOD PLAIN UNDER THE FlOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES CONTENTS Introduction Explanation of the Flood Plain Management Guidelines Procedures for Removing
the "FP" Prefix Preapplication 􀁾􀁰􀁰􀁬􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 and review Public hearing Fill operation and verification Engineering Criteria for Fill Requests under Flood Plain Management Guidelines
Data Requirements for Fill Requests under Flood Plain Management Guidelines Appendix: A: Excerpt from Zoning Ordinance Section 10-1100 (flood plain prefix) Appendix B: Council Resolution
762940, 772917 ..
􀀯􀁾 INTRODucnON This booklet provides, for property owners, developers, engineers, and other interested parties, explanations of City of Dallas regulation, guidelines, and procedures
for taking land out of a flood plain. The regulations and guidelines described are part of a larger program of flood plain management, which includes flood plain delineation, the development
of area-specific flood plain management plans,flood insurance, and flood warning systems. The purpose of the City's flood plain management program are to minimize hazards to life and
property, to ensure compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program, and to otherwise promote the 􀁨􀁾􀁡􀁬􀁴􀁨􀀬 safety, and general welfare of the community. Most land in the City
which has a history or a potential for flooding is designated by the Flood Plain ("FP") prefix on the official zoning maps. Section 10-1100 of the Zoning Ordinance describes the uses
permitted on land so designated, and also sets out the conditions for removal of an tlFP" designation by filling. This ordinance has been supplemented by City Council Resolutions 762940,
and 772917 which sets forth guidelines for evaluating the removal of the "FP" prefix and for alteration of flood plains not yet zoned. Land which is not designated "FP", but is found
to be flood-prone by the City staff in the course of reviewing sub-division plats or other development proposals, will also be governed by these criteria. Flood-prone areas which have
specific flood plain management plans will be regulated by the plan requirements rather than the criteria contained in Council Resolutions 762940 and 772917. i. tiII. II ., ./iI 􀁾J
.-.. ,,r--.. EXPLANATION OF THE FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES Filling in all flood plains which do not have adopted management plans is governed by a set of general guidelines or
criteria adopted by City Council resolution in November, 1976. These criteria were formulated to provide a more systematic approach to review of fill requests for all flood plains not
covered by specific guidelines from adopted management plans. The criteria reflect the City's concern that storm water be moved naturally rather than relying on extensive and costly
systems of channel improvements. They also reflect the City's philosophy that fill and development which is not unreasonably damaging to the environment should be permitted where it
would not create other flood problems and where public acquisition is not required for environmental protection or recreation purposes. There are three broad types of criteria: a. Engineering
criteria. based on the hydraulic effects of filling in the flood plain; these are aimed at protecting life and property 􀁾􀁨􀁩􀁬􀁥 preserving natural features where possible. b. Ecological
and scenic resource criteria. which identify areas worthy of preservation as open space and passive recreation. c. Recreation criteria, which identify lanq suitable for meeting the demand
for active recreation space. These criteria are applied by the staff in review of all fill applications outside of management plan areas. Although there may be considerable overlap,
the Department of Public Works (Drainage Division). Urban Planning (Environmental Management Section), and Parks and Recreation assume primary responsibility for applying the engineering,
environmental. and recreation criteria. respectively. Urban Planning is responsible for coordinating all review and recommendations since the fill application is a request to amend the
zoning ordinance. The purpose of the engineering criteria is to assist in determining the merits of the fill request. while the environmental and recreation criteria are used mainly
to identify land which is appropriate for public acquisition. The environmental criteria contain both ecological and scenic factors. Ecological factors include maturity and diversity
of woodland stands. wildlife habitat potential. and finding of some rare or endangered or locally threatened species. Scenic factors include unique views. com-3
/---...... Ii>􀀮􀁴􀀧􀀮􀁾 positional effects, and other visual features. Criteria for recreation involve evaluation of the inherent suitability of the land for active and passive 􀁲􀁥􀁣􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁾􀁮
purposes as well as the demand for recreation facilities in the local community. Resolution 762940 calls for the application of the flood plain criteria to all creeks and streams, not
just those that have flood plain zoning. By amendment in Resolution 772917, the application of the criteria are limited to creeks 􀁡􀁮􀁾 drainage ways with a contributing drainage area
equal to or greater than 130 acres. For affected creeks without flood plain zoning, the staff will require applicants who are subdividing or building along these creeks to comply with
these criteria if any alteration is proposed within that creek's flood plain. For unzoned flood plains, review will take place as part of the subdivision process. PROCEDURES FOR REMOVING
THE·FP' PREAX The sequence and timing of procedures for review of fill requests in areas designated by the tlFP" prefix are outlined in the accompanying chart. The procedures can be
divided into a number of stages: preapplication, application and review, public hearing, fill operation and verification. Preapplication: Particularly in areas not governed by a management
plan, staff encourages the potential applicant to arrange a meeting with representatives from all three departments to discuss the criteria and their relationship to his site prior to
preparing or submitting any documents for his application. This will often reduce the cost and time of his preparation, and the City's review of the application. Public Works will assist
consulting engineers by supplying them with a computer printout of existing hydraulic conditions, if available, and discussing additional crosssections that may be needed to describe
the" fill area. Urban Planning will be able to identify any special environmental features on the proposed site and discuss the nature of environmental concerns in the area. The possibilities
of public acquisition or incentives for preserving the flood plain as private open space could also be explored in this stage; before the applicant invests in detailed engineering design
for his property. Application and Review: When the applicant has all materials necessary for formal applIcation, he submits his materials along with a $600.00 fee to the Department of
Urban Planning, Environmental Management Section. Copies of apprppriate materials are then routed by Urban Planning to the two other departments, as well as to other city agencies that
may be affected by the proposal. The applicant will be promptly notified if his application is incomplete, in which case processing will halt until all additional material required for
adequate staff review has been provided. Ii-Ij-; J J
,-... /----'" 􀁉􀀬􀂷􀁾􀂷􀀮 The complete application is then reviewed by the three departments, using the management plan guidelines or the criteria adopted by the Council in Resolution
762940 for all areas not covered by management plans. In some cases governed by that resolution, the Public Works' Department will have available a computer program to evaluate the hydraulic
effects of the fill proposal. After the official submission, Public Works will punch computer cards which have been coded by the consultant to represent proposed changes, and run it
on the computer. If a second run is necessary, the consultant will punch cards and Public Works will run the computer again. If no major issues are raised in the initial review period,
the Urban Planning staff will coordinate a joint recommendation for submission to the City Council through the City Manager. The applicant will be notified of the joint staff recommendation
and the date for Public Hearing by the City Council. ' If some major issues are raised, such as potential purchase for parkland or non-compliance with one or more of the engineering
criteria, the applicant will be notified and given the opportunity to meet with representatives from one or more of the departments to discuss those issues. !t his option, the applicant
may decide to proceed with his request as originally submitted, or to revise his submission in response to staff comments, or to hold or withdraw his application while exploring possible
parkland acquisition or incentives which would modify or eliminate the need for a fill request. In'all cases the staff recommendation will reflect any problems it sees with the proposal.
If the applicant decides to modify his proposal to overcome problems identified by staff review, scheduling of his case will be delayed at the applicant's request to give him adequate
time to modify his proposal. Such modifications should be submitted to Urban Planning, who will route them to the other two departments for their further comments. Public Hearing: The
Director of Urban Planning will submit the joint staff recommendation to the Council through the City Manager. The Environmental Hanagement Section in Urban Planning will turn its file
on the case over to Planning Operations, who will ensure that the Public Hearing is advertised and notices are sent to all property owners as required by law. Fill operation and verification:
If the application is approved at the Council hearing, the applicant will obtain a fill permit from the Director of Public Works and conduct fill operations. After the fill is completed,
inspected by staff, and elevations are varified by Public Works, Urban Planning is notified to correct the official zoning maps by removing the "FP" prefix from the area removed from
the flood plain. 5
FLOODPLAIN REVIEW PROCESS .'SClflau "llIC tEAII.C•• fiLL O'ERATION IElIFICAT1GfI • STN'F AECOMME DATION TO CITY 􀁾THROUGH CITY IoiAWGEfl ---,.-STAFF WE TO DISCUSS AHD RESCLVE CITY'S
POSITION lJflllAH PlNHNG (EHWlON' MEHTAI,J AEVEW P\JlllIC WCAKS (ENGIE£l'I. INQ) REVIEW fl'AAI(' DEPT. (RECRE' ATlOHAL) REVliEW ..'UCAnOi •• IfYIfW ,.. on ..􀁾􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀡􀁁􀀮􀀮􀀡􀀧􀁟􀁟􀁟
􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁴􀁬􀁩􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁅􀀮􀀮􀀡􀁾􀁾 .__􀁾􀁴..􀀭􀀭􀀡􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁴􀁬􀁌􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀡􀀡􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁴 .i J 􀁾􀁉􀁮 .._.,.t..j..i..'.__􀁾􀁾 􀁮􀁊􀀡􀀡􀁌􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀮􀁵􀁾􀀡􀀡􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁩􀀭􀁾
􀀭􀁾􀀡􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀮􀁉 li..E_!A!S__􀁾􀁝􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁙􀀤 .t II•I I APl>I.JC,t.T1ON sueaMTTED TO UR8AH PlAHHIHQ APl't.JCAHl !.lEETS WI URElAH PlANNING. P\Jlll1C WORKS. AND PJIIAl< DEPT,
TO DlSQJSS HIS PROf'OSAI.. AND THE CAlmA 􀀮􀀿􀁾 MEET WITH APPUCAHT TO 0lsa.6s ISSUES ON FIlL AEOl.EST EXPlORE WITH N'PUCUIT POSSIllIUTIES OF PUllIC I 􀁉􀁾􀁔􀀱􀁏􀁎􀁾 PRESSWIUION OF OP£H
SPIlCE THROUQH IHCEHTNES APf'l1CAHT fN;V WlTH)flAW OR 1.lOll' HIS APf'UCATICH R
,-... ENGINEERING CRITERIA FOR AlL REQUESTS UNDER FlOOO PlAIN MANAGEMENT GUtDELINES Following are the ten engineering criteria which were adopted by the City Council, in Resolution 762940,
for fill requests outside of "management plan" aree-s. along with explanatory text and diagrams. It should be noted that the applicant must meet all ten criteria as aminimum in order
to receive a staff recommendation of approval • ) tAlterations of the flood plain shall result in no increase in water surface elevation 'of the design flood of the creek. p,resent design.
􀁾􀁴􀁯􀁯􀁤 elevation 􀁾 ,"-" No alteration of the channel or adjacent flood plain will be permitted which would result in any degree of increased flooding to other properties, adjacent.
upstream. or downstream. Increased flood elevation could cauSe inundation and damage to areas not presently inundated by the "design flood". The "design flood" for a creek is defined
by either the lOO-year flood-the flood having a one percent chance of being equalled or exceeded at least once in any given yearOr the maximum recorded flood, whichever results in the
highest peak flood discharges. 7 􀁰􀁲􀀧􀁦􀁾􀀱\ -1' P-rDfJOsed ..., eXCQwtioo 􀁾􀁳􀁬􀁊􀁬􀀡􀁩􀁮􀁱 rise In elevQtion prohibited
􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳 of the flood plain shall not create an erosive water velocity on" or off site. The mean velocity of stream flow at the downstream end of the site after fill
shall be no greater than the mean velocity of the stream flow under existing conditions.· No alteration to the flood plain will be permitted which would increase velocities of flood
waters to the extent that significant erosion of flood plain soils will occur either on the subject property or on other property up or downstream. Soil erosion results in loss of existing
vegetation as well as augments destructive sedimentation downstream. Eventual public costs in channel improvements and maintenance (such as removal of debris and dredging of lakes) can
be expected as 8 result. Staff's determination of what constitutes an "erosive" velocity will be based on analysis of the surface material and permissible velocities for specific cross-sections
affected by the proposed alter-"" ation, using standard engineering tables as a general general guide. I . 1\ . -I . j ; " I 3.Alterations of the flood plain shall be permitted only
to the extent permitted by equal conveyance on both sides of the natural channel. r-Staff's calculation of the impact of the proposed alteration will be based on the lIequal conveyance"
principle in order to insure equitable treatment for all property owners. Under equal conveyance, if the City allows a change in the flood carrying capacity (capacity to carry a particular
volume of water per unit of time) on one side of the creek due to a proposed alteration of the flood plain, it must also allow an equal change to the owner on the other side. The combined
change in flood carrying capacity, due to the proposed alteration plus a corresponding alteration to the other side of the creek, may not cause either an increase in flood elevation
or an erosive velocity (criteria 1 and 2) or violate the other criteria. Conveyance is mathematically expressed as KD • 1.486 AR 2/3 where n • Manning's friction factor, n A • cross
sectional area. and R • hydraulic radius. ptbposed till <t: I design: potential 􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁬 ,eleVfQlQT9lo0n 􀁾 I _ \ 􀀡􀁾 􀁋􀁉􀁊􀀬􀀺􀁋􀁾􀁾 . I "' _• .1 _, .-.1 __ .,.,,,n,., 8
4.Relocation or alteration of the natural channel shall not be permitted without an Environmental Impact Study and a complete stream rehabilitation program. 􀁾 ... c-Protection of the
natural channel is a prime objective of the fill criteria. Relocation or alteration 􀁾􀁵􀁣􀁨 as widening, deepening, enclosing in 􀁾 pipe, or lining of the natural channel (other than
as necessary to construct a bypass channel or swale) often involves steepening of the gradient and/or increasing velocities, which can cause increased peak discharges, flood elevations.,
and erosion and sedimentation downstream. These effects are covered by criteria 1, 2, and 3. However, some actions may not violate these criteria but may still result in significant
negative environmental impacts. This criterion requires submission by the applicant of an environmental impact study for any proposed channel relocation or alteration. The EIS should
be prepared by qualified experts. The study should focus on the following items: (1) Description of the proposed action and the existing stream-flood plain environment 􀀨􀁰􀁨􀁹􀁳􀁾􀁣􀁡􀁬
and 􀁢􀁩􀁯􀁬􀁯􀁧􀁩􀁾􀁡􀁬􀀩􀀬 (2) Probable impacts of the proposed action (positive and negative; direct and indirect; short term and long term, and upstream and downstream) on the stream
and flood plain, (3) Alteratives to the proposed action, and (4) Mitigating measures designed to minimize negative impacts (the stream rehabilitation program). Areas of specific concern
will include the impacts on stream dynamics (erosional and depositional effects) effects of 􀁲􀁥􀁭􀁯􀁾􀁡􀁬 of streamside vegetation (on erosion, on water temperatures, on detritus input,
on faunal habitats), the alteration of aquatic communities, the loss of aesthetic values, and the implications for public maintenance expenses in the future. Staff is not looking for
mountainous or irrelevant data, but for a concise report on the implications of the proposal and proposed rehabilitation efforts. 9 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁰􀁾􀀵􀁥􀁤 re/ocqt;on reqUlt:es. EIS SUbml5510n
marure streambank. trees
5.The toe of any fill slope shall parallel the.natural channel to prevent an unbalancing of stream flow in the altered flood plain. ,!. ......... -(I ,toe or 􀁾 􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁬 Slope, ,not
􀁬􀀮􀁾􀁲􀁑􀁬􀁬􀁥􀁬 I I tochcrr"e I -toe of .fiII sbPe ralle/s cmmel /'I l .. ,//L.:: l, \,--..._ '----"",.) , , /If the alignment of the proposed fill slope departs from the contours
of the natural flood plain, the flow characteristics of the flood waters may be altered, causing possible damaging 􀁾􀁲􀁯􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁡􀁬 and depositional effects in the altered flood plain.
If the fill slope follows the natural channel it will also tend to minimize the visual impact of the alteration. /",--..... s.ro insure maximum accessibility to the flood plain for maintenance
and other purposes and to lessen the probability of slope erosion during periods of high water, maximum slopes of filled area shall not exceed 3 to 1 for 50 percent of the length of
the fill and 6 to 􀁾 for the remainin r-l of the fill. The s10 e of an excavated area not in rock hall at ex eedr 1\. Vertical walls terracin and other slo e treatments will be considered
on1 􀁾 art of a 1andsca in 1an submission and if no unbalancing of stream flow results. 'b: 1 mQ)(imurn fill slope for at least 􀁹􀁾 the length of fill 3: 1 max. till .slope /fc 􀀷􀁊􀁯􀀱􀁊􀀯􀁉􀁩􀁾
􀁾􀀺􀀺'--􀁣􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁾 ' .. The purposes of the slope restrictions are to maintain stability and prevent erosion of the slopes, to ease maintenance (e.g. mowing) on the slopes themselves,
and to provide accessibility to the areas below the slopes. Being more frequently inundated and therefore subject to greater hazard of erosion, cut slopes must be shallower than fill
slopes.
i ...􀁾􀀭 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁾􀀮 7.The elevation of excavated areas in the flood plain shall not be lower than onethird of the depth of the natural channel as measured from the adjacent
bank or the one (1) year frequency flood. whichever is lower. except for excavation of lakes. No excavation shall be closer than SO feet from the bank of the natural channel except as
necessary to drain. The limitations on excavations are designed to protect the integrity of the natural channel. Natural stream morphology and ecology are protected by preserving the
natural channel cross-section. such that excavation will not alter normal flow and flow from smaller. more frequent (greater than 1 year frequency) storms. .II ..􀁾 The ''buffer'' between
the natural channel and excavated areas is designed to preserve streamside vegetation, whose root systems stabilize the streambanks and which. together with the protection. of surface
cover. helps protect against bank erosion. Excavation should not enter the drip line of any trees whose root systems are important to the stability of the bank. Excavation will only
be permitted within SO feet of the top of the channel bank to permit construction of a bypass channel or swale. A "lake" is a permanent impoundment of water having a relatively constant
depth and perimeter. Lakes may be constructed in-channel or outside. Proposals for in-channel lakes must be acc9mpanied by impact studies as per criterion 4. (Lakes over 200 acre-feet
for all but livestock or domestic uses must also be permitted by the Texas Water Rights Commission. Austin, Texas). 11 ---...\,\ \ \\\_--t----I I I I I \' J I lowest permiHed 􀁥􀁾􀁶􀁡􀁴􀀻􀁯􀁮
for excavation5
,, .1 . ;. i; .. {-, j. \\\\\\\ '"􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀬 "',,"". mainfait1 eXisting grades wifhin dripline. or inlQtall drywall around trees to be . preserved Erosion control plans should demonstrate
how· the developer intends to minimize soil erosion and sedimentation from his site during and after the fill operation. Plans should include a timing schedule showing anticipated starting
and completion dates for each step of the proposed operation. Area and time of exposed soils should be minimized, and existing vegetation cover should be retained and protected wherever
feasible. Disturbed areas should be sodded or covered with mulch and/or temporary vegetation as. quickly as possible. Structural measures (e.g. drop structures, sediment ponds, etc.)
should be utilized where necessary for effective erosion control, but measures should also minimize structures and materials which detract from the natural appearance of the flood plain.
Applicant should show in plan the general natural and extent of existing vegetation on the tract, and which areas will be preserved, altered, or removed as a result of the proposed alterations.
Locations and construction details should be provided showing how trees will be preserved in areas which will be altered by filling or paving within the drip line of those trees. Applicant
should also 􀁳􀁵􀁢􀁾􀁴 plans showing location, type, and size of new plant ·materials and other landscape features planned for alte.red flood plain areas. aLandscaping plan submission
shall include plans for erosion control of cut and fill slopes, restoration of excavated areas, and tree protection where possible in and below fill area. Landscaping should incorporate
natural materials (earth, stone, wood) on cut ·or fill slopes wherever possible. 􀀯􀁾 typical erosion control measu res
QThe effects of 􀁥􀁸􀁩􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁮􀁧 or proposed public and private improvements will be used in determining water surface elevations and velocities. Calculations for delineating flood elevations
and evaluating requests for fill and/or excavation will be based on recognition of existing and "conunitted" flood plain improvements (e.g. private fill requests previously approved
by City Council; bridges, channel improvement schemes, etc. with authorized funding). Design of public improvements will also be governed by these criteria to the extent possible. However,
it should be recognized that some proposed public improvements, in order to meet overriding public needs (e.g. a remedy to an existing severe flooding problem) may not be capable of
design in conformance with all the criteria. '",,\•,J 1QAny alteration of the flood plain necessary to obtain a removal of the flood plain zoning shall not cause any additional expense
in any current or projected public capital improvements. 􀁥􀁾 isting .piII 􀁾􀁲􀁢􀁰􀁏􀁳􀁥􀁤 bridje . 􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁩􀁦􀁾􀁆􀁰􀁩􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀀢 . tor eost.tna t .......... ",.. " .... '" 􀁰􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁾􀀧
___---. )r:iemel1s No reclamation request will be approved if it would result in additional burdens to Dallas taxpayers due to probable increased capital improvements costs (e.g. longer
bridges, new channel improvements). 􀁾 13
􀀢􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾 DATA REQUIREMENTS FOR Fill REQUESTS UNDER FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEtJ£NT GUIDELINES In order to adequately review fill requests for compliance with the engineering criteria,
staff has developed standard data requirements to be submitted for all requests. These requirements include a letter of request as well as certain engineering texts and exhibits. LEITER
OF REQJEST (5 COPIES) The purpose of the letter is to identify the applicant and how he can be contacted, and to provide a general description of his plans for fill and development of
the property. The letter should be signed by the owner of record and addressed to the City Council. 1. Stating that he is the owner of the area of request and/or that the request (if
under contract) is made with his consent, 2. Requesting a "Fill Permit" for that area of flood plain to· be filled, including· acreage figures for the entire tract, the area currently
designated as flood plain, and the area pr9posed to be removed from flood plain designation, and 3. Providing a short description of the intended use(s). I, . I .,I . J
􀁾 '0 􀀬􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮 ENGINEERING TEXT (3 COPIES) The purpose of the text is to locate the property, to describe the methodology used in designing the proposed fill. to supplement
the engineering exhibits. and to explain how the fill operation will be handled so as to minimize soil erosion and sedimentation. The text should include the following: 1. Vicinity Map
(1" -800 ft.) 2. Description of Project a. Creek description b. Project description 3. Description of hydrologic and hydraulic analysis a. Method used to determine design and I-year
discharges for project. b. Method used to determine design water surface profile for project. c. Historical stream data hydrographs and high water marks-used to calibrate models. d.
References for erosive velocity values. 4.Landscape and Erosion Control Text a. Development schedule showing anticipated starting and completion dates for each step of fill operation and corresponding erosion control activities.
b. Construction details as appropriate for: Tree protection where grades are to be paved or altered within the drip line of the tree. -Temporary or permanent erosion control structures.
e.g. drop structures, sediment ponds. c. Schedule of long term landscape maintenance for the altered flood plain which applicant will follow or which City should follow if dedicated.
d. References used. e.g. Erosion and Sediment Control, Guidelines for Developing, Areas in Texas, 1976. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. P. O. Box 648. Temple.
Texas. 76501. 15
..-:-.,-.....,. ENGINEERING EXHIBITS (3 COPIES, except 3. bekM: 1 COPIES) These materials are necessary for the staff to adequately and efficiently review the fill request for compliance
with the adopted criteria. They include plans and crosssectional drawings necessary to describe all existing and proposed conditions. All exhibits and text must be certified by a registered
civil engineer. Exhibits should include the following: 1. Table of values for analysis of 􀁦􀁩􀁲􀁳􀁾 3 criteria. 2. Water surface profile a. Scale b. Channel flow line c. Existing design
water surface d. Recorded high water marks -with dates and elevations -used in calibration. e. Cross-sections, labeled and darkened f. Title block 1. Date 2. Tract 3. Creek 4. Design
discharge 5. Consulting engineer seal 6. Reviewed by 3. Plan view (blue or black line prints (24" x 30" paper) a. Scale and north arrow b. Bearings and dimensions on the boundary lines
and to the nearest street intersection for reference. 􀁣􀁾􀀧 EXisting and proposed 2 foot contours (1 foot where available). d. 􀁉􀁮􀁾􀁮􀁤􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 limits, existing and proposed, with
metes and bounds description of that area being "taken out" of Flood Plain. e. Toe of slope, labeled and darkened f. Adjacent stream bank, labeled and darkened g. Slope values and lateral
limits 11' '. ji· l-.' 􀀮􀁾
• & 􀁾 r,,. 􀀬􀁾 h. Cross-sections, labeled and darkened i. Title block (with same data as 2, f) j. Location of existing and proposed dedications and permanent improvements. 4. Plotted
cross-sections a. Scale b. Existing and proposed ground surface c. Rock probes, soil corings d. Existing design and I-year water surface e. Existing and proposed "n" values, labeled
and limits f. Amount of conveyance change by project g. Show equal conveyance removed from opposite side h. Title block (with same data as 2, f) 5. Overall map of project area a. 1"
-200' scale topo b. North arrow c. Existing and proposed improvements with file number d. Title block (with same data as 2, f) 6. Landscape and Erosion Control Plan (Overlay on, or at
same scale as, plans showing existing/proposed contours) a. General nature and extent of existing vegetation, e.g. open-grassland, cultivated, wooded (canopy shown), and areas where
vegetation is proposed to be preserved, altered or removed. b. Location, type, and size of new plant materials on and below proposed fill slopes. c. Location and type of landscape features
other than plant materials, e.g. retaining walls, fences. d. Location of all proposed erosion control measures: -Mechanical measures, e.g. diversion dikes, drop structures, sediment
ponds. -Vegetative measures, e.g. ground surfaces to be sodded and/or reseeded or protected by some other means such as wood-chips or straw. 17
We hope that this booklet has been helpful to you in describing the regulations and procedures for filling in a flood plain within the City of Dallas. If you have any additional questions
about the flood plain ordinance, the fill criteria and data requirements, specific flood plain management plans, or administrative procedures, we would be glad to speak to you by telephone
or arrange a personal meeting. •" 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀭􀀭 .. .􀀬􀁾, Department of Urban Planning Environmental Planning Program 58-North, City Hall Dallas, Texas 75201 670-4185 Public Works Department
Floodwater Management Program 1500 West MockIngbird Dallas, Texas 75235 630-1111, Ext. 335 j .: I 􀁾 , • j _ JlI _,J .,j _J
rrI -. r-, ,\PPENDIX A: 􀁅􀁘􀁃􀁅􀁒􀁾􀁔 FROM ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 10-1100 (FLOOD PLAIN PREFIX) 10-1100 FLOOD PLAIN PREFIX TO DIS IRKT DESIGNATION 10-1101 To provide for the appropriate
use of land which hos a history of inundation or is determined to he subject to nood' hazard and to promote the health, safety ono general welfare of the community, porlions of cedoin
dist,ich Ote designated with a Flood Plain Prefix "FP" and shall be subject to the following provisions. 10-1110 USES PERMITTED I0-1111 The following are the only uses permitted within
that portion of a district designated with a flood plain "FP" prefix: A. Agricultural activities including the ordinary cultivation of land or legol forms of animol husbandry. 8. Electrical
substation C. All types of local utilities, including but not limited to water distribution and waste water collection systems, water and waste water Ireatment facilities and water quality/monitoring
stations or other structures required to provide water and sewerage services. D. Parks, community centers, playgrounds, public golf courses. E. Private commercial open area omusements
such as golf courses, driving ronges, archery courses and similar uses when approved by specific use pennit as provided by 10-900. F. Private open space os port of a community unit 􀁤􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁾􀁮
􀁴􀀮 G. Helistop when approved by Specific Use Pe,mit as provided in 10-900. H. Sanitary fills for rubbish 􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁐􀀰􀀵􀁡􀁬􀀬 rubbish collection, nnd transfer stations. 10-1112 1'10
building or structure sholl be erected in thai portion of a district designoted with a flood plain "FP" prefix other ,han those listed in Section 10-1111. 10-1 J 13 There sholl be no
dumping, excavation, s'olage or filling ope,alions within that portion of a district having 0 flood plain "FP" prefix designation except for the lise of sanitary fill operations which
have been approved by the DePortment of Planning and Urban Deve topment, the Texas 5t ate Deportment of Health, and other state agencles governing the operations of such sanitary fills
OS set out in the "Municipal Solid Waste Rules, Standards, and Regulations" which were adopted by the Texas Statp. Boord of Health, September 13, 1970', and for the improvement of repair
of levees or drainage facilities when such are located within a locally constituted district charged with such responsibility. 10-1120 CONDITIONS FOR REMOVAL OF A FLOOD PLAIN "FP" PREFIX
DESIGNATION 10-1121 The City Council, in considering and determining irs recommendation ,elative to any application for the removal of the flood plain "FP" prefix designation, requires
Ihe applicant to furnish to the Deportment of Planning and Urban Development, fill and clr.velopment plans, 01ydraulic calculations concerning maximum high water and ,I.eir eHect on
abulling properties, 1and dote concerning lhe operation, location, function Clnd charocteristics of any use of land or bui Iding proposed. 19
10-1122 Each request for the removal of the Flood plain "FP" prefix designation sha 1\ be evaluated as to Its probable effect on the odjacent property upstream and downstreom and the
community 􀁾􀁬􀁆􀁡􀁲􀁥 and may be appl'O'o'ed or denied CD the findlngs Indicate approprIate. 10-1123 The City Council may, after a pdlllc hearing and 􀁾 recommendation of the CltyManoger',
office after a wrl Iten report has been submitted by the Director of Porb and Recreation, Director of Pdllic Works, and the Director of Planning and lkban Developmert , authorize the
removal of the Flood plain "FP· prefix deslptlon From on area. The Director of Pdllic Works will inForm the Director of Planning and lkbon Development to remOve such Flood plain "Fp·
prefix designation From the zoning district mops, after the necessary fill has been placed to the required elevation In keeping with all of the requirements of the city. \0-1124 A fill
permit shall be required from the Director, Department oFPdlllc Works, to conduct dumping, excovotion, storage or filling operation within that portion of a district where the flood
plain "FP" prefix designatiOn has been required to be removed on the basis of the presented Fill and development plan. This per1llit will be issued after requirements 01 Sections 10-1121,
10-1122, and 10-1123 have been cCln1llied wiih. 10-1125 ' Any dumping, eKcavation,Jloroge or filling operations WIthin that portion of a district having a Flood plain "FP" preFiJC prior
to the 􀁬􀁾􀁳􀁵􀁯􀁮􀁣􀁥 of a nil permit is illegal, and such 􀁾􀁲􀀮􀁊􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 shall cecne until such time the flood plain "Fp· deslgnat{on is remoYed in accordance with Section 10-1120.
10-1130 CONDITIONS FOR ADDING A FLOOD PLAIN "FP" PREFIX DESIGNATION 10-1131 The City Council may, after a public hearing, amend the zoning clcnsificatlon of any property by adding the
flood plain '"Fp. prefix designation, upon recommendation of the City Manager's office based upon hydraulic engineering studies Indicating new boundaries of the area that is subject
to inundation inundation by Flood waters. The City Council will by resolution instruct the Director of Planning ond u-ban Development to odd such flood plain "Fp· prefix designation
to the zoning district mapa. 10-1140 RESPONSI81l1TY FOR FLOODING 10-1141 The Fact thot lond or proprty Is or is nat within a district loving a flood plain prefix shall not constitute
assurance that such lend or property I, not subject to local flooding and the designation of the Flood plain prefix In this ordlnonce shall not be so Interpreted. 10-1150 SPfCIAl PROVISIONS
10-1151 The Director of Public Works Department may authorize filling operations to be conducted in any exlsllng excavation, depression, or hole within that portion of a district having
a flood plain "Fp· prefix designation, provided the elevation of the proposed Fill does not exceed the average of the contiguous Flood plain elevations. 10-1152 Improvements to existing
structure located within a dIstrict having a flood plain "FP" prefix may be authorized by the Director d Public Works Department, pl'O'o'ided such improvemenh do not exceed a total of
three hundred dollars (SJOO.OO). Impravement exceeding a total of three hundred dollars ($300.00) nllAt be authorized by the Board of AdIustment • 􀁾 I i􀁾I .1' J• .I"I _J ., .' _J
APPENDIX B: COUNCIL RESOLUTION 762940 a 772917 􀁾 Councl1 Resolutlon 762940 vas Idopted by Councll on Noyeaber 􀀸􀀮􀀱􀁾􀀷􀀶􀀮 The crlterla attached aa part ot thia resolution snd passed
by Councl1 have been included in this brochure. A tull copy of the rasolution Ind attached crlterla IS pasaed by the Council can be obtalned troa the City SecretarY'1 ottica. rooa 200.
City RaIL, Kain and Karwood, 75201. Councl1 Resolutlon 772917 vas adopted by Council on 􀁓􀁰􀀮􀁰􀁴􀁾􀁢􀁥􀁲 28, 1977. A.endaents II specltled in Relolution 772917 ar. Included in thil
brochure. They viII Ipply to tl11 requelts sub.ttted atter September 28, 1977. ;! , ,􀁾 COUNCIL CH.....eEIt _______􀁾􀁎􀁾􀁯􀁶􀁾􀁥􀀺􀀡􀀡􀀡􀁒􀁉􀁏􀁥􀁲 hlllL-__ WHEREAS, tnere Is a need
to develop an overall flllOd plain IIlanagelllent 􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁧􀁲􀁡􀁾 including a 􀁳􀁹􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁬􀁣 approach to decisions on apolications for removal of the "Fp· zoning Prefix; and WHEREAS,
there Ii a concern on the part of the City that stonn water be 􀀮􀁾􀁶􀁥􀁤 naturally rather than relying on extensive and 􀁣􀁾􀁳􀁴􀁬􀁹 􀁳􀁹􀁳􀁴􀁥􀁾 of cnannel Improvements. that development
be permitted 􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁥 it would not create other flood problel!lS and where acquisition cf property is not required for ecological. scenic, or recreJtional 􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁳􀀬 that the City
lMincains its eligibility in the Federal Flood Insur.nce Program by assurln'] protection against loss of I iyes an'.! propi!rty in the flood plain, that ecologically and scenically valued
areas in the flood plain are preserved ..here possible, and that a reasonable allQunt of the flood plain be p"l)vided in public lMlership to meet the 􀁲􀁾􀁣􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁲􀀮􀁡􀁬 open
space needs of the COIII.llJOlty; Now. Therefore. BE !T 􀁒􀁅􀁾􀁏􀁌􀁖􀁅􀁏 BY THE CITY COOlICIl Of THE CITY Of DALLAS. TEXAS: Sectlon 1. That the City Counctl hereby adopts the 3ttached
engineering criteria, ecological and scenic resource criteria. and recreation criteria, as fnteril1l adAlinistrative 􀁧􀁵􀁬􀁤􀁥􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁥􀁳 to be ap!Jliell to all creeks which do not have
special adopted flood plain 􀁭􀁤􀁮􀁡􀁧􀁾􀁮􀁴 plans. Section 2. That the City Manager and Part Board be and are hereby Instructed to seek all possible sources of revenue for acquisition
of flood plain land for open soace and recreation use 􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁥 warranced. Section 3. That these criteria are to be reviP.'o<e1 perIodically. 􀁾􀁉􀁴􀁨 the first report in six (6) mnths
after 􀁰􀁡􀁳􀁳􀁡􀁾 of this resolution. That the periodic reviP.'ol cover the effectiveness of the criterIa based on experience and their effect on flood plains. and further that the
Department of Urban Planning and Park Department continue 􀁾􀁉􀁴􀁨 current studies, specifically the creek study and the up-date of the recreation of open space plan. These studies will
result In DOre precise standards lnd guidelines as well as the 􀁲􀁥􀁦􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁾􀁮􀁴 of the open space component of 􀁌􀁾 􀁃􀁾􀁲􀁥􀁨􀁥􀁮􀁳􀁬􀁶􀁥 Plan: Section 4. That this resolution shall
take effect illllledlately frono and after its passage in accordance 􀁾􀁉􀁬􀁨 the provisions of the Charter Charter of the City of Dallas. and It Is accordingly so resolved. COUNCIL
«.............1: .. SeD.ter'1ber 28.1977 772917 WHEREAS. on 􀁉􀁾􀁥􀁭􀁢􀁥􀁲 8. 1976. the City Councll oassed Resolution 76-2940 establishing ten criteria as Interl. 􀁡􀁾􀁩􀁮􀁴􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁬􀁶􀁥
gUidelines for evaluating flood plaln alterations; and 􀁾􀁅􀁒􀁅􀁁􀁓􀀮 Resolution 76-2940 called for periodic review of the effectlveness of the criterla based on experience and their
effect on flood plains; and !JHEREAS. the Status Report on the Icplemenlatlon of the Flood Plain Criteria: Resolutlon 76-2940, August 10. 1971. has been transl!lltted to the City Council;
and !iliEREAS, the above oentloned report IIIilkes two reconmendatlons for Increaslng the effectiveness of the flood plaln criterla; Flow, Therdore. 8£ IT RESOlVED 8Y THE CITY COUItCIl
Of mE CITY Of DALLAS. TEXAS: Section 1. That Resolution 76-29"0 be an!1Ided to provlde for the aPlIlication of the flood plaln criteria to 􀁣􀁾􀁫􀁳 and streans with contributing drainage
areas equal to to or greater than 130 acres. Section 2. That Crlterlon Two. Resolution 76-2940 be 􀁡􀁾􀁮􀁤􀁥􀁤 by addlng: The 􀁾􀁡􀁮 volocity of stream flow at the downstrean end of
the site after fill s""l1 b-no 􀀢􀁾􀁬􀀡􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁲 than the llean velocity of t.he 􀁾􀁴􀁲􀁥􀁾 now under existing conditions. Section 3. That this resolutlon shall take effect 11l111l!tllately
from and after Its passage tn accordance wlth the provisions of the Charter of the City of Dallas and lt Is accordingly so resolved. J -,. ApptC'led as to Ionrr: lEE E. HOLT, City Attorney
􀁥􀁹􀁟􀁾􀁊􀀮􀁴􀁳􀀡􀀴􀁫􀁌 􀁏􀀭􀁾􀀻􀀻􀀨􀁬􀁊􀀺City Mlolnex r!t 􀁃􀀱􀁬􀁾 . COUNC1L l«l'f • 19" 􀀢􀁦􀁩􀁊􀁬􀁐􀀮􀀯􀁾 􀁲􀀻􀁡􀁲􀁾 􀁾􀀡􀁴􀀧 err< coUNC\U. fiE' _ \1U 􀁾 􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 --------􀀭􀁾
􀁾 􀁇􀁾
) mq I ! 􀁾 ... .. 􀁾 1 i i 􀁾 1 􀁾 Hif D ..I. 1I 5 c .J. t1i j }. "J! C__ L_ ,..c....=.. l_' r..􀁾 -r ' -, 􀀬􀁾 -􀀮􀁾
B. Resolution No. 76-2940, November 8, 1976: Floodplain Ordinance On November 8, 1976 the City Council passed Resolution No. 76-2940, that established the criteria for filling in the
floodplain. Ten (10) specific criteria were established that apply to all floodplains which do not already have special floodplain management programs such as the Trinity River, Elm
Fork, or Dixon Branch and others. This ordinance has .been termed the ,lTen (10) Point Criteria".' All of the following crit.eria must be met in order to obtain approval by the Director
of Public Works. (1) Alterations of the floodplain area may not increase the water surface elevation of the design flood of the creek. (2) Alterations of the floodplain area may not
create an erosive water velocity on or off site. The mean velocity of stream flow a t the downstream end of the site, after fi 11, may not exceed the mean velocity of the stream flow
under existing conditions. (3) The effects of the existing or proposed public or private improvements will will be used in determining subsequent water surface elevations and velocities.
(4) The floodplain area may be altered only to the extent permitted by equal conveyance on both sides of the natural channel with separate owners. (5) An environmental impact study and
a complete stream rehabilitation program must be approved prior to any relocation or alteration of a natural channel. natural altered the the parallel flow in (6) The toe of any fill
slope must channel to prevent an unbalanced stream floodplain ar.ea. .. (7) To insure maximum accessibility to the floodplain area for maintenance and other purposes and to lessen the
probability of slope erosion during periods of high water, maximum Slopes of fi lled areas sha 11 not exceed 3 to 1 for SO percent of the length of the fill and 6 to 1 for the remaining
length of the fill. The slope of any excavated area not in rock may not exceed 4 to 1. Vertical walls, terracing and other slope treatments may be considered prOViding no unbalancing
of stream flow results and only as a part of a landscaping plan submission. A-2 ijLII
(8) The elevation of excavated areas in the floodplain area may not be lower than one-third of the depth of the natural channel, as measured from the adjacent bank or the one (1) year
frequency flood, whichever is lower, except for excavation of lakes. No excavation shall be closer than 50 feet to the bank of the natural channel except as necessary to drain. (9) A
landscaping plan submission must include plans for erosion control of cut and filled slopes, restoration of excavated areas, and tree protection where possible in and below the filled
area. Landscaping must incorporate natural materials (earth, stone, wood) on cut or fill slopes whenever possible. (10) Any alteration of the floodplain area necessary to obtain removal
of an FP prefix may not cause any additional expense in any current or projected public improvements. Compli ance wi th the "Ten (lO) Point Cri ter i a" is requi red prior to submission
to City Council for consideration and approval. C. January 3, 1977: Storm Drainage Policy Resolution No. 77005 On January 3, 1977, the City Council adopted a storm drainage policy that
provided five (5) Policy statements and six (6) design criteria to govern the construction of drainage facilities and their accessories. Five (5) process. Policy statements are provided
to guide the development Highlights of these Policies are: -When enclosed storm sewers are required, based on a five year storm, emergency overflow provisions of paved streets, paved
alleys or paved easements will be provided, that will, combined with the storm sewer, provide for a 100-year storm. -When the creek is to remain open, that adequate access is provided
for maintenance operations. -When there is an existing pattern of streets paralleling one side of the creek, every effort shall be made to continue the same on the other side of the
creek. -Whenever possible, adequate access for maintenance of the floodplain shall be permitted from one side only. -When there is an entity of record capable of maintaining the floodplain,
the floodplain may be dedicated as common open space or as a floodway easement so long as no alterations of the floodplain occur and a satisfactory development and maintenance plan is
filed with the Department of Public Works. A-3
􀁄􀁩􀁣􀁥􀁣􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀧􀁲􀀢􀁯􀁦 􀀭􀀿􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁩 1(" 􀁾􀀻􀀶􀁛􀀮􀁴􀀼􀁓 1;12,3:;"; SqlJare f€'Et or lb.b";Yl hr....·t.;.;i of L.:H:d, -'.--.' ;,,," -'Q--, • I 0>: 􀁾.􀀺 IIII i' -r 􀀻􀁾 -􀀮􀀺􀀧􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀻􀀻
􀀧 /0 I; c . .00· i N E. t-/I .' i>. easeme:;ts 'J 􀁾..\ 􀁟􀀮􀀭􀁾 i, '0 .... ,21 􀀡􀀿􀁾 :;;il;; "q:'o''q'' 􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀀧􀀡􀁾􀀧 􀁾 . I 􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁉􀁄 , 􀁾 􀀺􀁾 r 0,'" a • I 􀁾 􀀻􀁾􀁟I Q i < •
. o! 􀁾􀁩 􀁾􀁉 BLOCK 􀁾 A/B/72 JJ t: ,j -'t. SANI. 5EI+', E5M '+!l a WHITE ROCK 􀁚􀁒􀂣􀁾􀁟􀀾􀁟__􀁾􀀬􀁟􀀬􀀮 . 􀁜􀀺􀁾􀁾 '-,-, -, S /--,) -_ ' '.. '2 61 ,00 4 ° /5'0" ' '+.-'!!! <:, 'l.X"'
502030'OO"w ° 0'00 £:0--",Ow '1 %-"....􀁄􀀬􀀢􀀧􀁏􀁾 <> " s ,0 3 .-::;.---::::--'..... -.)1:, =t 􀁾􀁊􀀮 ." Bon. I; 􀀱􀀷􀁾􀀬􀁏􀁏􀀧􀀬 '. , , 5 􀁉􀁾􀀭 , 0,." 􀁉.,􀀧.i?? 0􀀮• 􀀧􀁾......􀂷.....
;..-􀁾 r------.•􀁟􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭 o,O'oo"E -:_ $,.,., <1:. r-.-; . 0 . 􀁾􀀬􀀮􀀮􀀮 '00• ! c r s,o ;----􀀩􀀮􀁣􀀬􀀱􀀵􀁬􀁾 --4 00-􀁾 I ,;:-_ 􀁾 ... "", ._,°0°' 􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀻􀀭􀀭􀁟􀁾􀀢􀁉􀁉􀀮􀂷􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀺
__•· __ C"'SE... 􀁾􀀯􀁏􀀧􀀭􀀭 􀀯􀁉􀁾 􀁾􀀢􀁜􀀧􀀧􀀡􀁐􀀧􀀢 􀁾􀀮 'vi )0'00". I • ---.: .1'" .---;i,6 􀀢􀁊􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾 £",1' 􀁾􀀣 f. ..􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀀮 L:-r < --r 14 OO",r--__􀀮􀁾􀀭 >••􀀺􀀱􀁾􀀮
• ' 􀀬􀁾􀀮􀁾 /______• ,,0 DO -. I. __' () 􀀰􀀰􀁾􀀴􀀢􀀮 S 00 , ."'.::'; :-: .-wr:;-OOCl*"i"""""""'i"i'",""'7""=""'-:--""'O ' .•/............ /00 ". -<0'0 6 . 􀁾 .' . .,.. 􀀣􀁾 􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀮􀁚􀀺
􀁾􀀬􀁯 􀀬􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁉􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀺􀀭􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀭 􀁾 _ .-:..􀀢􀁾􀁾 -<'J,6 . , ••8-#, N 􀁏􀁏􀀬􀁯􀀬􀀰􀀧􀀺􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀺 􀁾 ____ ,-' ;','1f;' . •. . P R IV AT £ " 'it' , 5 􀀻􀀩􀁉􀁊􀁾􀀢􀁟􀁴􀁬􀀮 W S
.. '\l ... o 0 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀺􀀺􀁡􀀬􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁬􀁴􀀬􀁾 o /8649/􀁾􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁔􀀺􀀺􀀩􀁔􀀻􀀯􀁌 􀁾􀀧 􀀺􀁾􀁁􀁃􀀧􀀾􀁾 :;:;0 􀁾 .: I -.. to" _I . 􀀮􀀮􀁾..: 􀁾􀁾􀀱 ·tj:' 􀁳􀂷􀁯􀁯􀁥􀀮􀁏􀂷􀀲􀁾􀂷􀂷􀀮
. 􀀭􀀾􀀼􀂷􀁁􀁾 􀁾􀀮􀁯 .. (. 􀀧􀀿􀁾􀀮􀀢􀁬􀁬􀀧􀀩 S 􀁉􀁾􀁏􀁏􀁏􀀧 , ., 􀀬􀁾􀀻􀀺􀀮􀁾 􀁾􀁩􀁉􀁄􀀢􀀧􀀢 ';r.􀀧􀁾􀂷􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀮 '2 􀂷􀀮􀁯􀀮􀁾􀁯􀀢􀁣􀀭􀁾 􀀬􀀮􀁾 􀁾 -01.. : 􀁾 'S 􀀧􀁊􀁾 ItJIN FILL '60
60 3 􀀺􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀺􀁟􀁾􀁟􀀧 􀁾􀁯 .: G MIN f F' .56/0 . 􀀮􀀮􀁾 .. 0'-,p,..<p'''':'' m'"I?: 2 􀁴􀁾 d0 􀁾.• " 0 40.2.-.....1": • 􀁾 􀀧􀀸􀀧􀁴􀀭􀀴􀀱􀁾􀀺􀀮 􀁬􀁾 : -"8(, 78" 􀀾􀁴􀀭􀁟􀁾 Jrw')C J
40':i:6"( I '.. 􀁾 ' ..u 􀂷􀀢􀀱􀁾􀀸􀀮􀀡􀀶 :c_..' 􀁾􀀺 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀻􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁾 o " R [ C :.. M 􀁾 􀁾L ._ :' I \7 ;6 I! 􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁉􀁎 /'ILL 􀁾􀀶􀀰 60· ;: 12 ' 􀁾 //􀀮􀁾 􀁾 .. 􀁟􀁺􀀮􀀮􀀻􀀬􀀺􀀬􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁟􀀺􀁾􀀮􀀩
􀁉􀁉􀁎􀀮􀁆􀀧􀁆􀀧􀂷􀁡 Jj t 􀀮􀁾 :.:..----:-'------00"'· ... -"-ot: I,;,: _. 0_ 􀁾 , ...........,;" ..... ".,.... _ 􀁌􀁾 􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀮 .• 􀁾􀀬􀁻􀀻􀁴􀀮􀀮􀀮 J! ,E-,·:, r: 2" 􀁾􀀧􀀺􀀿 _.:. :
... 􀁩􀀶􀁾􀀱􀀬􀀧􀀱 .....,.+--'tl ..'..' .. ::\ ,.c J N 00°4028 E 923.92 _' &' -zo'",,,, rs,,'T 1l=4°33 􀁾􀀴 􀀮􀁒􀀻􀁾􀀰􀀹􀁉􀀬􀀸􀀳􀂷 _ -----,-,---'" '0 -------.----.--'WTNNWOOD--y:;-1.ANF:--------T:!62
,99---L=325.81 ----... J ..)0: ,9'J . .,(,· 􀀬􀁾􀀮 :,,'! . 􀁾 .:..' . l ;T.: ;.-J l '6; .. " r" A PRICE GEIVTRY'_-A.PRICE GENTRY! ROWLETT c.HAF</.-ES c,d:· BELL SR, -EeL C-0 ..'" BEATY
I Gw. 􀀢􀀧􀁕􀁾􀁎􀀵􀀶􀁎 • ; r!". : 􀀱􀂷􀁾 :'1' I .Or l 􀁉 􀁉􀁾 .. BLOCK 817/' CO " I I _I ", Bb' I 50' 􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 I NOTE: Access' to all lots mL:Jst be from the common 􀁾􀁲􀁩􀀧􀁊􀁥 a'ccess
􀁾􀁾 --"':' ;:'" 􀁾􀀻􀀮􀀮􀀮 " ',.,,', ,-\-. ::>. r:CK 􀁾􀀲􀀲􀀱􀀭 ;.'. 􀁴􀁾 , 􀀺􀁾􀀮􀀻 􀁾..: .i';} 􀁾􀀭 􀁾􀁾􀁆􀁾􀀬􀀧
GI :"'N'l INC. November 15, 1985 Mark Hill, P & Z Coordinator Town of Addison Post Office Box 144 Addison, Texas 75001 Re: "The Woods" Subdivision Addison, Texas Dear Mark: C();\SI :LrrI'(;
􀁅􀀮􀁾􀁇􀁉􀁎􀁅􀁅􀁮􀁓 Please note the final paragraph of the letter from Huitt-Zollars concerning existing fill at "The Woods" development along Winnwood Road. We recommend that the building
permit be issued subject to the following: 1) the final slope on Lot 6 be prepared to a 6:1 slope and, 2) the existing slope of 2.5:1 on Lots 1 and 8 be prepared to a final slope of
3:1. Before final approval of any buildings or homes, the grading of these lots should conform to the slopes just mentioned. In addition, we recommend that the developer have Huitt 􀁚􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁲􀁳􀀬
Inc. certify that the final grading on the remaining lots in "The Woods" subdivision conforms to the flood study which was prepared for this project. This letter of certification should
be received by the Town of Addison or Ginn, Inc. prior to issuing approval of final inspection. Sincerely, 12.c·/HP R. C. Hill, P.E. RCH: jc Enclosures cc: Dennis Pitts, Plans Examiner
. : !' ."...;:.. '. • ...... ' '. 'i 1(· • ;'" 􀀺􀀮􀁾 -.1 􀀮􀁟􀁾􀀭􀀧 􀁾 .... Pi .
, , . . i \! ! , /' , I \\ , , I '-, \ , " " Huin-Zollars, Inc, 1Consulling Engineers 13131 McKinney lWenue 1 Suite 6001 LB 1051 Dallas. Texas 75204/214-871-3311 November 13, 1985 Mr.
Randy Hill, P.E. Ginn, Inc. Consulting Engineers 16135 Preston Road, Suite 106 Dallas, TX 75248 Re: "The Woods" SUbdivision, Addison, Tx Huitt-Zollars Project No. 1-0438-01 Dear Mr.
Hill: This is to verify that the placement of fill material for floodplain reclamation purposes at the above referenced subdivision is in compliance with the reclamation proposals developed
by floodplain modeling. In general, the As-Built contours shown on the individual lot boundary surveys prepared for Michael Hall, Inc. by Huittzollars, Inc., for Lots 1, 6, 7, 8, 9,
and 10, reflect that the fill material has been adequately placed for flood conditions to respond hydraulically as modeled. We must, however, point out that the filIon Lot 6 exceeds
the maximum 6:1 slope in a localized area. But the As-Built 5:1 slope in that location will not have any adverse effect on the hydraulic conditions in flood stage. In addition, the maximum
3:1 slope permitted along the rear of Lots 1 & 8, exists as 2.5:1 in the As-Built condition. Again, hydraulically this will have no effect but it is our jUdgement that from an erosion
point of view, this could create problems in the future if the soil is not adequately protected. Sincerely yours, HUITT-ZOLLARS, INC. Consulting Engineers /</1/' /) .II /I t 􀁬􀁾 1"
! 􀀡􀀻􀀧􀀱􀁾􀁻􀁬􀁌 ,_ Art K. Umble Project Manager cc: James Clark AKU: rkj
CITY OF DALLAS April 8, 1985 Mr. -Mark J. Hi 11 Zoning Administrator City of Addison P. O. Box 1444 Addison, Texas 75001 Dear Mr. Hill: We have recently received from Huitt-Zollars Consulting
Engineers the results of a floodplain reclamation analysis for lot 6, block 8172, on WinnwoodRoad. This lot borders White Rock Creek in the City of Addison. In September, 1979, the City
of Dallas issued a permit to fill 4.37 acres of this tract. The present request is to fill and reclaim an additional 100 square feet from the White Rock Creek floodplain. We have reviewed
this request and found it to meet the City of Dallas criteria for filling in a floodplain. If you have any questions, please call l\1r. l\1ike Askew in Storm Water Management at 670-6188.
Sincerely, Works ri DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1500 WEST MOCKINGBIRD DALLAS. TEXAS 75235 TELEPHONE 214/670-6183
HLllTI􀀭􀁚􀁏􀁌􀁬􀁁􀁦􀁾 Huitt-Zollars, Inc. /Consulting Engineers /3131 McKinney Avenue /Suite 600 /Dallas, Texas 75204 /214-871-3311 .---------------------_._--March 21, 1985 Michael
Hall Enterprises, Inc. 4488 Spring Valley Road Suite 101 Dallas, Texas 75234 Attention: Reference: Mr. James Clark The Woods Huitt-Zollars, Inc. Project No. 1-0438 Dear Mr. Clark: At
your request, today I personally made a field observation of The Woods, an addition to the Town of Addison, to view the extent of which fill has occurred and formulate an opinion with
regard to whether the fill is consistent with approved plans and permits. I found lots 6 thru 10 of the approved final plat to be complet.ed to rough grade. Lots 1 thru 5 and 11 still
require additional fill to bring them to rough grade. A field surveY,of the subject property will be required in order to verify and certify the completed reclamation to be in compliance
with the approved plat and fill permit. However, at this time, it is my opinion that the work completed to date is in substantial compliance with the requirements of the approved plat
and City of Dallas fill permit #FP79-12. If additional information is needed at this time, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, HUITT-ZOLLARS, INC. Consulting Engineers Tedde R.
Blunck, P.E. Technical Vice President TRB/lkp cc: Mr. Wayne Ginn -----------_. __ ._._.._-----_._--------_._-
--..... 'ID: FRCM: SUBJECT: DATE: W3.yne Ginn, City Engineer Mark J. Hill, Zoning Administrator Final Plat/'1he WJods April 10, 1985 • Last night, the City Council approved the final
plat for The W:xXls subject to the following conditions: -a letter fran the City of Dallas confinning canpliance with permit #FP79-l2 b9 received by the city prior to the issuance of
any building pennit, and -the city Engineer also sulmit a letter confinning canpliance. Following the hearing, Mr. James Clark gave me the attached letter from the City of Dallas. As
the second condition above indicates, 􀁾 will need a letter fran your office confirming compliance. Please contact me if you need further informa.tion. 􀀭􀀭􀁾 􀁾.􀁟.,􀁾,"􀀺-􀀮􀀭􀀮􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭
cc: Ron \'bitehead, CityManager Janes Clark File P.O. Box 144 Addison, Texas 75001 214-450-7000