South Salina Drainage Study
~...
I
tlLSON
COMPANY
ENGINEERS
ARCHITECTS t
ENGINEERS
ARCHITECTS
I
C;>fflce Location...
PLANNERS
91a 827-043B
a81 EAST CRAVV'FORD AVE.
a
SALINA. KANSAS 67401
An Equal Oppor-tuni1:.y
Employer-
a
I Mailing Addre....... P.O. SOX 1648
a
SALINA, KANSAS 67401
I
I
The Honorable Mayor and Commissioners
City of Salina, Kansas
I
Re: South Salina Drainage Study
WCEA File: 77-153
I
Dear Mayor and Commissioners:
I
In accordance with your authorization, we have prepared and submit herewith
the South Salina Drainage Study Engineering Report. The Report and Appendix
(a separate volume of drawings), describe and document the study, discuss
present drainage problems, define recommended. improvements, present estimates
of cost with means of financing and suggest' a program for improvements.
I
I
The recommendations contained in this Report are offered as a practical
plan for achievement of a reasonable degree of relief from internal
flooding, which may be caused by local rainstorms.
I
We shall be most happy to serve.you further in any way we can, whether to
provide assistance in the execution of this plan, or to assist you in ,
other endeavors.
I
WILSON & COMPANY
I
Ji7~ g~
Maurice Bowersox, P.E.
I
Encl.
-cc
I
I
I
SALINA. KS
a
KANSAS CITV. KG
a
VVICHITA, KG
a,
ALBUQUERQUE. NM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF SALINA, KANSAS
******
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
ENGINEERING REPORT
******
CITY COMMISSION
Jack P. Weisgerber - Mayor
Keith G. Duckers
Dan S. Geis
Karen M. Graves
Gerald F. Simpson
CITY OFFICIALS
Norris D. Olson - City Manager
Dean L. Boyer - City Engineer
Keith F. Rawlings - City Planner
"",uun""""
","\.,Ct. L. 80 """
~...;:,~ ......... Jf/~ .., .
~~ ...\CE.NS~.. l'n'~
,!:i~ l v <;C...u~
i 7859 ~ g
~...,':t : ::
-....+ .,f!:;~
.. -~ . c, 0....., ...
\~...""1 A. S ~ ...~4.J $'
"" ""^ 00 " o. '""~....
~<I': "8~ ....... ~\:;" ....
"'" 70 N AL ~ """
. 1"""11""'"
June 1978
77-153
11LSON
COMPANY
EHOINEe.RS
ARC HITEeTS t
I
I
SECTION IV - PRESENT DRAINAGE CONDITIONS
EXTERNAL FLOOD PROTECTION
INTERNAL DRAINAGE - EXISTING SYSTEMS
GENERAL
Plate IV-I. Existing Drainage Systems in
the Study Area
HISTORIC RAINFALL
Table IV-I. Rainfall Amounts Occurring from
August 31 through September I, 1977
Figure IV-I. Hyetographs of Historic Rainfall follows
Table IV-2. Storms in the Vicinity of Salina; Kansas
System A - South Industrial Area
System B - Mentor to Magnolia Road
Figure IV-2. Magnolia Road Ditch,
Looking Southeast Toward Two 70 Inch
RCP-Under Belmont Boulevard
Figure IV-3. Magnolia Road Ditch, Looking
West Toward 1-135, From West of 9th Street follows IV-6
Figure IV-4. Magnolia Road Ditch, Looking
East Toward 9th Street, From West of 1-135
Figure IV-5. Bonnie Ridge Addition, Looking
Southwesterly
Figure IV-6. Bonnie Ridge Addition, Looking
Southeasterly
System C - Knox Road and Outlet
Figure IV-7. Twin 26 x 43 inch CMF Under
Ohio Street, South of Knox Sandpit Road,
Looking West
Figure IV-S. Looking East on the Knox Sandpit
Road from Ohio Street
Figure IV-9. Looking South from Knox Sandpit
Road, Immediately East of Ohio Street
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I - PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
Plate 1-1. Study Areas
SECTION II - SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND COST
RECOMMENDATIONS
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
SECTION III - STUDY AREA
LOCATION AND LAND USE
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY
_ CLIMATE
A
1-1
follows 1-1
II-I
II-I
II-I
11-2
11-3
111-1
-111-1
111-1
111-2
111-2
IV-l
IV-l
IV-l
IV-l
follows IV-l
IV-2
IV-2
IV-2
IV-4
IV-5
IV-5
follows IV-6
follows IV-6
follows IV-6
follows IV-6
IV-S
follows IV-S
follows IV-S
follows IV-8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure IV-lO. Ohio Street, Looking South
from Knox Sandpit Road
Figure IV-II. Existing Condition of
Abandoned Smoky Hill River Channel, South
of East Magnolia Road
Figure IV-12. Flooding at Wayne Avenue
and Fourth Street
System D - Wayne Avenue, Belmont Boulevard, Ohio
Street and the Holmquist Area Outlet
Figure IV-13. Flooding at Ohio Street and
Magnolia Road
Figure IV-14. Flooding on
Figures IV-IS & IV-16. 60
Pipe into Abandoned River
the Holmquist Area
Figure IV-17. Drainage Ditch East of Ohio
Street Between Wayne Avenue and Sarah Lane,
Looking East
Figure IV-lB. Drainage Ditch East of Ohio
Street Between Wayne Avenue and Sarah Lane,
Looking West
Figure IV-19. Abandoned River Channel Near
the Holmquist Area, Looking North from
Albert Avenue
Figure IV-20. Abandoned River Channel
Near the Holmquist Area, Looking South
from Albert Avenue
System E - Dry Creek Outlet
Figure IV-21. Existing Dry Creek Channel
Above the 1-135 Crossing
Figure IV-22. Existing Missouri Pacific
Railroad Bridge over Dry Creek
Figure IV-23. Existing Dry Creek Channel
Looking North from Schilling Road
System F - Slough and 4th Street .
Figure IV-24. 42 Inch Pipe in Slough at
Crawford Street
Figure IV-25. Extent of Flooding in
Slough
Figure IV-26.
Slough System
System G - East of Ohio Street, Between Crawford
Street and Cloud Street
Aurora Avenue
inch Outfall
Channel Near
Typical Structure on the
SECTION V - DESIGN CRITERIA
GENERAL
Figure V-I. Cost Curve
RECOMMENDED CRITERIA
Table V-I. Design Criteria for Outlets into
the Smoky Hill River
..::t~.
I
I
B
follows IV-8
follows IV-8
follows IV-8
IV-9
follows IV-IO
follows IV-lO
follows IV-IO
follows IV-lO
follows IV-IO
follows IV-II
follows IV-ll
IV-ll
follows IV-ll
follows IV-ll
follows IV-13
IV-12
follows IV-13
follows IV-13
follows IV-13
IV-14
V-I
V-I
follows V-I
V-I
V-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION VI - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES
GENERAL
Plate VI-I. System Identification
SYSTEM A - SOUTH INDUSTRIAL AREA
SYSTEM B - WEST MAGNOLIA ROAD AND SCHILLING ROAD SYSTEM
SYSTEM E - DRY CREEK OUTLET, OUTLET FOR SYSTEMS A AND B
SYSTEM C - KNOX OUTLET, OHIO STREET AND SCHILLING ROAD
SYSTEM D - WAYNE AVENUE, BELMONT BOULEVARD, OHIO STREET
AND HOLMQUIST OUTLET
SYSTEM F - 4TH STREET AND THE SLOUGH
SYSTEM G - EAST OF OHIO STREET, BETWEEN CRAWFORD AND
CLOUD STREETS, OR DOW AND FAITH ADDITIONS
MAINTENANCE OF DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
PROPOSED PARK IMPROVEMENTS IN PONDING AREAS
Plate VI-2. Proposed Park on Part of the Gebhart
Tract
Plate VI-3. Proposed Park in the Knox Sand Pit
Area
SECTION VII - IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND FINANCING
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF COST
,RECOMMENDED PRIORITIES AND CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
Table VII-I. Recommended Priorities and Construction
Sequence
Plate VII-I. Construction Sequence
METHODS OF FINANCING ..
Plate VII-2. Drainage System Areas, City Limits,
and Annexation Areas
Table VII-2. Assignment of Total Project Costs
to Benefit Districts by Area Ratios
Table VII-3. Cost Per Lot - Assignment of Total
Project Costs to Benefit Districts
Plate VII-3. Primary Study Area
Plate VII-4. Phase I and 2 Construction and.
Proposed Benefit Districts
Table VII-4. Assignment of Project Costs of
Phase I to Benefit Districts
'Table VII-5. Assignment of Project Costs of
Phase 2 to Benefit Districts
Table VII-6. Cost Per Lot - Assignment of Project
Cost of Phases I and 2 to Benefit Districts
Table VII-7. Summary of Financing Methods
SECTION VIII - PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF CO$T
GENERAL
SUMMARY AND DETAILED ESTIMATES
Summary
System A - South Industrial Area
System B - West Magnolia Road and Schilling Road System
System C - Knox Outlet, Ohio Street and Schilling Road
System D - Wayne Avenue, Belmont Boulevard, Ohio Street
.and Holmquist Outlet .
System E - Dry Creek Outlet, Outlet for Systems A and B
C
VI-l
VI-l
follows VI-I
VI-2
VI-4
VI-12
VI-13
VI-18
VI-24
VI-28
VI-32
VI-32
follows VI-32
follows VI-32
VII -1
VII -1
VII-l
VII-2
follows VII-3
VII-4
follows VII-:-4
follows VII-4
VII-5
follows VII-5
follows VII-6
VII-7
VII-8
VII-9
VII-l1
VIII-l
VIII-I
VIII-I
VIII-2
. VIII-4
VIII-13
VIII-3D
VIII-39
VIII-53
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
System F - 4th Street and the Slough
System G - East of Ohio Street, Between Crawford and
Cloud Streets, or Dow and Faith Additions
SECTION IX - DESIGN METHODS
HYDROLOGY
Figure IX-I. Frequency - Discharge and Frequency
Elevation Curves
Table IX-I. Runoff Coefficients
Figure IX-2. Frequency-Intensity-Duration Curves
Table IX-2. Curve Numbers Related to Land Use
Figure IX-3. Rainfall-Frequency-Duration Curve
RAINFALL
Table IX-3. Probability that a Recurrence Interval
will be Exceeded During Periods Of Various Lengths
HYDRAULIC DESIGN
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
REFERENCES
VIII-54
VIII-59
IX-l
IX-I
follows IX-I
IX-2
follows IX-2
IX-3
follows IX-3
IX-3
IX-4
IX-4
APPENDIX - Master Plan Drawings and Drainage Areas (Separate - not bound herein)
I
I
-- ..'
D
,
l',','r,""'":'<i:_'f')':ff4":C'.~"
SEct?
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF /S1'1
;~f(;I""!;"
rt,~'E;:
i.,'. ",-_ d'
",-"-,""
~~I
~~t1:'.~>-"
bl':
11T;,;,^",,-,
&,C;,;,
,\1~1
[~~~~?~'-" >'"
>,::,
''''"il '
~~;;~?j ;:,
li,:",_/"',.,_
~t~l; "
,a~ "
i'J~;'i'-:':,- ,-
!:>
I
I
SECTION I - PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
I
I
The engineering study described in this report was conducted to develop a
master plan for trunk drainage systems and related facilities in the southern
part of the City of Salina.
I
The primary study area is defined as that part of south Salina from 1-135
highway, on the west, to the flood protection levee on the east, and from
Wayne and Otto Avenues, on the north, to the general vicinity of the Village
of Mentor, on the south. Additional study areas outside the primary area
also include part of the Dry Creek channel south of Cloud Street; the 4th
Street drainage system between Wayne Avenue and Cloud Street and the slough
drainage system from Cloud Street north to the old Smoky Hill River channel;
and an area east of Ohio Street, west of the flood protection levee, south
of Crawford Street, and north of Cloud Street. Plate I-I shows the study
areas.
I
I
I
The study of these areas includes evaluation of existing systems, analysis
of ' problem areas, studies of alternative systems, development of a master
plan for corrective measures, future trunk drainage systems and related
facilities, and estimates of cost and methods of financing.
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
~I
j
I-I
Cf.)
<
w
r:c
<
...
...!.>
LL1Cl
...=
51-
LCf.)
III
>- '"
~
"0 <(
::J
- >-
(/J "0
III J:: ::J
-
'" Cl (/J
~ ::J
<( .2 -
'"
>- (/J '"
"0 ~
olS -
::J (/J
-
(/J J:: 0
~ .~ J::
III olS 0
E - -0
." '"
a.. :;:; ::J
::J 0
- 0 u
0
~ ~ -0
Q)
III '" ~
"0 ~ 0
t) -
c: :;:
::J ~ III
0 ~
al .CL t)..
- . i
-
- .
- -
- I .
-
- .
-
- - .
- I
- .
..
z )----:
z '.
o <C( atu
0. ..
. .
U)~~i
.Joou
-u z.
~ .w"
b;/ .
1-
III
III
IL
~
III
J
<l
o
III
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION II
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I
I
SECTION II - SUMMARY ANn RECOMMENDATIONS
I
GENERAL
I
The locations, sizes, profiles and drainage areas of the proposed improve- .
ments are shown in the Appendix, a separate volume of drawings. The general
locations and system identifications are shown on Plate VI-I in Section VI
of this Report. The methods of financing are discussed in detail in Section
VII of this Report.
I
I
The proposed drainage improvements will reduce the flooding but will not
eliminate flooding from storms of a magnitude greater than that used in the
design of these systems. The recommended design criteria for drainage
systems are intended to achieve a reasonable balance between performance
and cost of improved drainage facilities.
I
To prevent frequent and prolonged flooding with possible property damage,
it is recommended that the City of Salina formally adopt a set of standard
design criteria for storm sewers similar to that of other cities in the
state. It is also recommended that an ordinance be adopted that would
require all future preliminary plats to have a preliminary drainage study
performed by a licensed professional engineer in order that the drainage.
would meet the standard storm drain criteria and would be compatible with
the overall drainage system in the area.
I
I
I
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND COST
I
The proposed improvements consist of seven systems identified as A through
G, having a total drainage area of 12,165 acres or 19 square miles. (See
Plate VI-I.) Improvements in these systems include 110 acres of new ponding
area, about 26 miles of open ditch, 85 road and street crossings and 6
miles of enclosed storm drain. There are five outlets through the flood
protection levee to the east into the Smoky Hill River, four outlets to the
west into Dry Creek, and one outlet to the north into the old river channel
north of Prescott Avenue. The primary study area betwen 1-135 and the
Smoky Hill River, north of Mentor and south of Wayne Avenue has a total
drainage area of 5,390 acres.
)1
I
I
System A will provide basic relief for 1,500 acres in the South Industrial
area with two outlets to Dry Creek. System B will provide relief for 800
acres in the Bonnie Ridge and Key Acres Additions. It has 2 outlets to Dry
Creek. System C will provide a basic drainage system for 2,100 acres south
of Knox Road and east of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks with a ponding
area and outlet into the Smoky Hill River. System D, 950 acres, will con-
sist of a ponding area and outlet to the Smoky Hill River with improvement
of the existing drainage systems on Wayne Avenue, Belmont Boulevard and
Ohio Streets north of Knox Road. System E, the Dry Creek Outlet, will pro-
vide the outlet for Systems A and B. Dry Creek will be improved from Water
Well Road to the 1-135 crossing, a distance of approximately 4 miles. The
Dry Creek Outlet has a total drainage area of 7,940 acres at the 1-135
I
I
I
t
II-I
I
I
I
I
I
crossing. System F, the Slough and 4th Street System, will consist of
improvements to structures on the slough and a new storm sewer on 4th and
Cloud Streets. The total drainage area of System F is 900 acres. System
G, 280 acres, will provide basic relief for the Dow and Faith Additions
east of Ohio Street, south of Crawford Street and north of Cloud Street. .
This system consists of open ditches and ponding areas adjacent to the
flood protection levee east of Ohio Street. The system has two outlets to
the Smoky Hill River.
I
A seven stage improvements program is outlined on the basis of recommended
priorities for 45 individual projects. .Stages of the program may be adjusted
to fit a flexible time schedule, as required by funding limitations. These
45 projects will provide the basic drainage for the existing and ultimate
development of South Salina.
I
I
Priorities, sequence of construction, and project costs are discussed in
Section VII of this Report and summarized below:
I
Phase 1 $ 5,388,500
Phase 2 3,876,500
Phase 3 2,218,700
Phase 4 2,236,500
Phase 5 847,100.
Phase 6 1,640,400
Phase 7 3,235,200
TOTAL $19,441,900
I
I
I
I
Approximately 80 percent of the total project cost is for the drainage
systems north of Schilling Road.
Possible methods of financing the projects, such as special benefit districts
or benefit areas, as well as the impact on the general city tax rates, are
discussed in Section VII of this Report. The possibility of federal, state
or county assistance is also discussed.
I
RECOMMENDATIONS
I
I
It is recommended that Phases 1 and 2 be constructed at the earliest possible
date. The estimated project costs for Phases 1 and 2 are $5,388,500 and
$3,876,500, respectively. These improvements will provide the basic drainage
system for the existing developed areas south of Wayne Avenue and north of
Schilling Road.
I
Phases 3 through 5 will improve the existing drainage systems, not only for
the area south of Wayne Avenue, but also the 4th Street and slough area and
the Dow and Faith Additions east of Ohio Street. Phases 3 through 5 should
be constructed after Phases 1 and 2.
I
Phases 6 and 7 will provide basic relief for the South Industrial area and
the area south of Schilling Road and east of the Union Pacific Railroad
tracks presently used as agricultural land. Phases 6 and 7 would not be
constructed until development occurs in these areas.
I
11-2
I
II
I
I
The Governing Body of the City of Salina should adopt a Standard Design
Criteria Manual for storm drainage in order that future areas of develop-
ment would have an acceptable standard of flood protection criteria. The
design criteria could be similar to that adopted by the Cities of Kansas
City, Kansas, or Topeka, Kansas.
I
It is further recommended the City of Salina develop a Drainage Master Plan
for the. existing and anticipated development of the City in order to improve
or prevent similar problems as now exist in South Salina.
I
I
It is recommended the Governing Body of the City of Salina adopt an ordin-
ance which requires all preliminary plats have a preliminary drainage study
performed by a licensed professional engineer and approved by the City
Engineer. This ordinance would assure the proper drainage of the proposed
development and its compatibility with the Drainage Master Plan. This
ordinance could be similar to that of the City of Kansas City, Kansas.
I
Future flooding and probable property damage may occur on a scale similar
to or greater than past floods in South Salina if the City of Salina does
not provide an improved drainage system.
I
I
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
I
The construction near or through the flood protection levee of the Smoky
Hill River is governed by Federal Regulations. These laws require a Section
404 Permit "be issued by the U. S. Army Corps" of Engineers before construction
is allowed. Construction through the levee should follow the guidelines
set forth in Reference 1.
I
I
In addition to a Corps of Engineers 404 Permit; a State permit from the
Chief Engineer, Division of Water Resources, as defined by KSA 82a-301 et."
seq., must be obtained before construction of the main interceptor ditches.
I
Permit applications should be filed with these agencies in the initial
stage of design. There should be no problem obtaining these permits with
proper project design and construction.
I
I
I
I
. . ~ ..- .
I
II-3
I
-"'i",
<,\
.'.",...,","
"~::\~il:"' "
'M~
).j,';
.,,~
~~{
""1
r~;'
~.. ..:' .
c' 'I
[;;\l
(:i~:~~_" '
,
::..:,;:..,~~:>
;::"1
Z;;:::J
;"~'O/
~':.,~ .
^",
,
;;J;1~1
"'.i\.'
t;<t~'r:
~
~t~i"::"
rll~
~lj"\:..':.,
'!:@rl"
.',,'1 '
[~~';~~} - ':
\::?-i'f:_:''-"
'/,"
I
I
SECTION III - STUDY AREA
I
LOCATION AND LAND USE
I
The primary study area from Wayne Avenue south to the Village of Mentor and'
from 1-135 highway east to the Smoky Hill River Levee contains approximately
5,200 acres (8.1 s.m.*). Approximately 80 percent of the 5,200 acres lies
outside the City Limits of Salina. Of this, about 7 percent is heavy
industrial land, while the remainder is agricultural land with a small
amount of suburban residential use. Approximately 1,000 acres (1.6 s.m.)
or 20 percent of the study area lies within the City Limits. This land can
be categorized as 10 percent public and semi-public use, 13 percent commer-
cial use, 32 percent vacant and agricultural and 45 percent residential
use.
I
I
I
The Dry Creek drainage area, west of 1-135 from Cloud Street south to the
diversion channel near Mentor, is predominantly agricultural land with
about 285 acres of residential land contained in the Schilling Manor housing
area. The Schilling industrial complex and the Salina Municipal Airport
are located west of Dry Creek and the Schilling Manor housing area.
I
I
The 4th Street drainage system, Wayne Avenue to Cloud Street, and the slough
system from Cloud Street to the Old River Channel is fully developed in 82
percent residential use, 4 percent commercial use and 14 percent public and
semi-public use. These systems contain a total drainage area at the outlet
of approximately 900 acres (1.4 s.m.)
I
I
The study area east of Ohio street, west of the flood control levee, south
of Crawford Street and north of Cloud Street contains approximately 300
acres (9.5 s.m.). Anticipated land use in this area will be primarily
residential and attendant uses.
I
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
I
The development of land in the study area has been retarded in the past by
the recognized flood hazard. Development to date has taken place in spite
of an obvious risk of flooding. Future development in south Salina will
probably accelerate after completion of the proposed drainage systems. The
flat topography, excellent transportation access and availability of large
tracts of land contribute to the area's appeal for industrial and commercial
development as well as residential.
I
I
I
The potential for development in the study area must be tempered by a
realistic appraisal of the demand for developable land. Such appraisals
require comprehensive study of social and economic growth and land use
development patterns on a local and regional basis.
I
* square miles
I
III-l
I
I
I
I
Because of the importance of the extent and intensity of development in
determining runoff quantities, it was necessary to estimate' the ultimate
development of all land contributing to runoff in areas where it is desired
to alleviate flooding. For the purpose of this study, estimates of future
growth and land use were determined from City and County land use and
annexation plans.
I
I
The point in the future when the areas in south Salina will be fully or
partially developed can only be estimated. For the purpose of this report,
runoff to the major drainage ditches was calculated assuming ultimate total
development in the drainage areas.
I
SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY
I
The primary study area can be described as flat having an average slope of
about 0.2 percent. A large amount of the soil in the study area is a silty
clay loam with. low permeability. Most of the area is in the alluvial
floodplain of the Smoky Hill River and is protected by the Smoky Hill River
levee of Salina's flood protection system completed in 1961. Most of the
soils in the study area are classified in Hydrologic Soil Groups Band C.
I
I
Dominant topographic features in the old floodplain are old river meander
scars. Most low areas are poorly drained and will require special atten-
tion to the control of street grades and fill areas.
I
CLIMATE
1
Rainfall is the climatic factor of prime importance in this study. The
average annual precipitation in the Salina area is approximately 27 inches,
70 percent of which usually is received during the frost-free period.
1
The most intense rains usually develop from rather short duration thunder-
storms, occurring primarily during the spring and summer. This is the type
of storm most significant to local small area drainage problems.
I
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Data
Service, formerly the U.S. Weather Bureau, has analyzed rain gaging records
thrQughout the nation to define the probabilities of various rainfall
intensities at any given location. This Agency's analyses were used in the
hydrologic studies conducted as a part of this study. Rainfall amounts for
various durations and frequencies (average recurrence intervals) are shown
in the section of this report on design methods.*
I
I
'I
I
*The storm frequency rating (more properly, average recurrence interval)
indicates the amount of rainfall and the intensity of a storm that, in
the past, has been exceeded on an average of once per the number of years
indicated. There is no implication that these storms come at regular
intervals. .
I
111-2
1
PRESENT DRAINAGE
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION IV - PRESENT DRAINAGE CONDITIONS
EXTERNAL FLOOD PROTECTION
Salina's local flood protection works, consisting of levees, channel improve-
ments and associated facilities are operated in conjunction with upstream
reservoir control providing flood protection for the City against inundation
from Dry Creek, Mulberry Creek, and the Smoky Hill River. The above referenced
flood protection works are discussed in more detail in references 2-5.
Solutions of the problems associated with the interior drainge of local
runoff, within the confines of the flood protection system, are the purpose
. of this study.
INTERNAL DRAINAGE - EXISTING SYSTEMS
General
Plate IV-l shows the divides between major drainage basins in the Study
Area. A letter reference code is used to identify existing and proposed
drainage areas and drainage systems in the text of this report. The original
drainage course for local runoff in the primary study area generally flows
north, occasionally combined with overflow from Dry Creek during severe
storms. The original drainage pattern has subsequently been modified
through years by construction of the railroads, highways and by urban
development with its paved streets, drives, parking lots and other arti-
ficial drains.
Surface runoff from the level, mostly cultivated agricultural land south of
Schilling Road is generated when rainfall intensities are great enough to
exceed the infiltration capacities of the soil. When runoff is generated,
it moves slowly across the fields to the north, into the urbanized areas of
the City. . Flow velocities are quite low in most of the drainage courses
because of flat gradients. Large volumes of runoff are stored temporarily
in the natural drainage courses outside the developed urban areas.
A portion of the existing drainage problem results from inadequate outlet
discharge to and through the flood protection levee to the east of Salina
and the inadequate drainage capacity of Dry Creek located to the west of
Salina. Another portion of the problem consists of inadequate drains to
the outlets.
Existing drainage systems within the City limits do not provide protection
for a reasonable runoff rate, therefore, frequent flooding of streets and
isolated vacant land areas occur. More intense storms result in occasional
physical property damage. As the urbanization of the area increases, the
existing drainage systems will become less effective and difficult to main-
tain.
IV-l
z
-
1:1)
:IE
W
I-
1:1)
>
1:1)
c: W
;: 0 c::I
0 :;::; <
u:: '"
() Z
"0 :;:: <
c: :;::;
'" c: =<
;:: Ql ClW
Ql :E =
> '" ..c::I<
0 Ql >~>
- ~
0 <( wl-Cl
c: Ql (1)1:1)=
0 Cl cC>C1-
:;::; '" iEwI:I)
() c:
Ql oOj
~
C ~
0
1
~
.
05
...:
~
nl
"0
c:
::>
0
al
'" c:
Ql OOj
~ ~
<( ~ 0
()
Ql :!:: "0
Cl 0 Ql
'" rn
c: c: .2
OOj Ql ()
~ Co c:
0 0 w
- ~
-
-
-
-
-
- +
-
-
-
-
-
-
z >---:
z ..
o <c( : ~
.. . .
Ul~!i
..J 0 0 U
_ z.
~uuJ<
&>d .
I-
UI
UI
IL
~
UI
J
(
o
tn
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
I
I
During and following more intense storms, most serious flooding occurs on
Neal Street, Aurora Street, Belmont Boulevard and throughout the 4th Street
and Slough system. This flooding is due not only to inadequate drainage
systems, but also from insufficient fill of the unpaved areas which allows
flooding from runoff resulting from severe storms that exceed the capacity
of the primary drainage system.
I
I
More specific problem areas within the existing internal drainage system
are noted in succeeding parts of this Section and in Section VI - Proposed
Improvem~nts and Alternatives.
I
Historic Rainfall
I
The storm occurring August 31 through September 1, 1977, was local in
nature and its intensity varied considerably through the urbanized area ,of
the City. The storm occurred with a high intensity toward the south of,
and in the southern portions of the City, appearing to decrease in intensity
as it proceeded in a northerly direction. Table IV-l shows the rainfall
amounts recorded over the City for the August 31 through September I, 1977
storm. As indicated, the unofficial rainfall amount varied from 2.66
inches recorded on East Iron Avenue to 8.0 inches in south Salina. An
official amount of 6.65 inches was recorded by the Federal Aviation Admini-
stration (FAA) at the Salina Municipal Airport.'
I
I
TABLE IV-1
I
Rainfall Amounts Occurring From
August 31 through September 1, 1977
I
Location
FAA, Salina Municipal Airport1 2
Radio Station KSAL, East Iron A~enue
11th Street and2Franklin Avenue
435 Hart Avenue 2
2340 Wesley Avenue2
2208 Edward Avenue
Rainfall in Inches
I
6.65
2.66
5.50
8.50
8.00
7.50
I
I
~fficial Rainfall Amount
-Recorded by the Public
Figure IV-I, showing the hyetographs of historic rainfall in the South
Salina Drainage area, compares four severe storms occurring in 1963, 1971,
1973 and the storm occurring from August 31 through September I, 1977. The
total rainfall for the latter storm was greater than the former three
storms.
I
I
I
The probability of the latter storm occurring is difficult to determine
because the exact duration of the storm is unknown. The FAA gauge did not
record the hourly rainfall due to a malfunction in the recorder, however,
if the assumption is made that the storm had a 12 hour duration then the
probability of this storm occurring, using the amount of 8 inches of rainfall,
is greater than a 100 year frequency. Using the official rainfall amount
of 6.65 inches, the frequency would equal a 100 year storm.
I
I
IV-2
:l
if
j~
- C/O
I~W
>.....
f!3 -I'!""
"--c f!3 .....fn!!!
0.... ..-=
-c iil"'o
!;:o - ...
"'0""
l&J .... '"
i!~ ..-
,... I:: ~~
... -
CC!lI en en ~!;
....0
l&J ....
Q~ci en l&J en ' . ~~
z t::
.Cl&J :::>
..,::E.... .., l&J
.-0 ..,
=....z
U
~l&J~
"'u
"-flit::
-c!l&J en en
.... u
-co><
OUl&J
..
l&J' '
.... - -
0 <i) ..,
z >- ~
C
0 0 00
CO) ..... CO) .....
~ ~
..a-~ ,...
,... ,...
-oa' en
en '~8 .~
.
>- l:!!ilS C!lI
~ en . :::>
, en .. C
'''''Ill
0 . 0
to '8
. ...
CDO,C",
~~~..
S3H~NI) "Y~NIYlI I!! , (S3H~NI ) 1"Y~NIYlI
0
'"
0 0
CD ~ N 0 CD ~ N 0
~
~
CO) CO)
CD ,...
en '"
-
~ ~ ~ .
....
= u
.., 0
o
o
-
..,
>-
C
o 0
CO) .....
-
..,
>-
-c
00
CO) .....
0 ~
N
CO) CO)
CD ,...
'" '"
l&J .
Z ....
:::> ....
.., l&J
0 ..,
0
S3H~NI) "Y~NIYlI (S3~NI) "Y~NIYll
0 0
CD ~ N 0 CD ~ N 0
I
I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
~ - -
I
I
I
Studies of storm rainfalls in the gen~ral region of Salina have been made
for areas of 100, 500, 1,000 and 5,000 square miles. These data are shown
in Table IV-2.
I
Comparing the rainfall amounts shown by Table IV-2 with the rainfall amounts
of the storm of August 31 to September 1, 1977, it can be observed the
latter storm was one of the most intense storms recorded in the Salina
area, although it was local in nature.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IV-3
I
I
I
System A - South Industrial Area
I
This system collects the runoff from approximately 1,360 acres of land
having flat slopes of 0.2 percent. During extreme storms, overflow to the
north into System B, north of Schilling Road, may occur.
I
The existing drainage structures under old US-81 highway will not discharge
the design storm as described in Section V of this report. These pipes and
small boxes were originally constructed for use as equalizers only.
I
The drainage structures under 1-135 highway north of Water Well Road and
south of Schilling Road were sized for runoff from agricultural areas. The
design capacity of the existing double 7 foot x 7 foot reinforced concrete
box (RCB) under 1-135 is 475 cubic feet per second (cfs), less than half
the required ultimate discharge capacity. The capacity of the 20 foot
bottom channel west of 1-135 to Dry Creek is inadequate.
I
I
I
The Salina South Industrial Area, located north of the Westinghouse Lamp
Plant, south of Schilling Road, east of old US-81 and west of the Union
Pacific Railroad tracks (UPRR) contains many low areas that are subject to
flooding as a result of a prolonged intense storm. Most of the existing
buildings in this area, industrial and otherwise, are sited at elevations
which presently will not flood, unless the existing drainage patterns are
obstructed in the future. As development continues to occur in the South
Industrial Area, serious. flooding could take place unless improvements are
made to the existing drainage systems. The recommended improvements are
discussed in Section VI - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES.
I
I
System B - Mentor to Magnolia Road and Dry Creek
I
I
This system collects the runoff from a total area of 1,640 acres. The flow
is from the Village of Mentor north and west to Dry Creek. The large
undeveloped area south of Schilling Road, approximately 1,000 acres, contri-
butes a small amount of the peak discharge, except during prolonged intense
storms. Large volumes of ponding in the low areas must be filled before
outflow to the lower reaches is produced. This area has an average ground
slope of 0.2 percent. Overflow into Systems C, D and F can occur during
large storms or when the capacity of the existing drainage system is exceeded.
I
I
The Magnolia Road interceptor ditch is the major outlet of this system.
This ditch parallels. Magnolia Road, proceeding from the east side of the
Union Pacific Railroad tracks at Belmont Boulevard, then west under 1-135
and draining into Dry Creek. This ditch and.related structures were designed
for a 25 year frequency storm with a peak discharge of 260 cfs, or 30
percent of the proposed design discharge.
I
I
The 260 cfs peak discharge was computed using the Rational Method with a
runoff coefficient of 0.2, a drainage area of 1,573 acres and a rainfall
intensity of 0.85 inches per hour. The existing ditch has a 14 to 20 foot
bottom channel with 2 to 1 side slopes and a flowline slope of 0.05 percent.
I
I
IV-5
I
I
I
I
Figures IV-2, IV-3 and IV-4 are typical views of the Magnolia Road ditch.
Since construction, the cross section of the ditch has deteriorated, result-
ing in a reduction of the original design capacity. The Magnolia Road
ditch drainage structures under the two access drives west of 1-135, under
1-135 and the 1,100 feet drainage structure under 9th Street, are all 9 x 7
foot reinforced concrete boxes (RCB).
I
Other drainage structures associated with the Magnolia Road ditch are:
I
1. A double 6 x 5 foot RCB under Magnolia Road, where the ditch
crosses.from the south to the north side of Magnolia Road.
I
2. A double 72-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) under Belmont
Boulevard, shown by Figure IV-2.
I
3. A triple 6 x 4 foot RCB under the Union Pacific Railroad tracks.
I
The structures on the Magnolia Road ditch control the discharge. The
original Magnolia Road ditch construction plans specified a spoil dike on
the north side of the ditch from Dry Creek east to 9th Street. This dike
was not constructed between 1-135 and 9th Street, and as a result, overflow
during severe storms has occurred at this location, flowing in a northeasterly
direction to Wayne Avenue and down 4th Street to Cloud Street. High water
in the Magnolia Road ditch results in the submains and laterals, that
discharge into the ditch, to back up causing local flooding of the streets
and, in some cases, physical property damage.. Under certain storm conditions,
backwater from Dry Creek will reduce the capacity of the Magnolia Road
ditch and in more intense storm conditions, flow from Dry Creek toward the
east into the urbanized area will occur.
I
I
I
The Neal Avenue and South Belmont Boulevard systems drain the west portion
of the Bonnie Ridge Addition and the east portion of Key Acres Addition.
I
The west portion of the Bonnie Ridge Addition is drained by surface street
flow and a small storm sewer parallel to Neal Avenue west to Linda Lane.
The deficiencies of this system are already evident by the frequency with
which flooding occurs at the intersection of Neal Avenue and Linda Lane.
At this intersection, the ratio of required capacity to existing capacity
is about 10 to 1.
I
I
I
Flooding of this area occurs not only from the local runoff but also from
runoff entering the area from the south duri~g severe storms. Once the
capacity of the underground system, at the intersection of Neal Avenue, and
Linda Lane is exceeded, a secondary system to provide overflow to the north
does not exist because of the relatively high street grades existing north
of Neal Avenue. As a result, ponding will occur to an elevation which
stores the runoff volume. In many instances this elevation was above the
basement windows on some of the houses in this area during the storm of
August 31 to September I, 1977. Figures IV-5 and IV-6 show the extent of
flooding in and around the Bonnie Ridge Addition during the storm of August
31 to September I, 1977.
I
I
I
IV-6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure IV-2. Magnolia Road Ditch,
Looking Southeast Toward Two
lO-lnch RCP Under Belmont
Boulevard
Figure IV-3. Magnolia Road Ditch,
Looking West Toward 1.135, From
West of 9th Street
Figure IV.4. Magnolia Road Ditch,
Looking East Toward 9th Street,
From West of 1-135
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure IV.5. Bonnie Ridge Addition, Looking Southwesterly
Figure IV-6. Bonnie Ridge Addition, Looking Southeasterly
I
I
I
I
I
An information gathering meeting held-at the Wilson & Company conference
room on December 18, 1977, had a small response from homeowners in the
area. Approximately 18 homeowners were in attendance, and it was determined
from conversation with these people that a relatively small number of homes
in the area had physical property damage, with only one or two homes suffer-
ing structural damage. Providing the South Salina area is allowed to
develop at the present rate, and provided implementation of the proposed
drainage system is not instituted, an increasing amount of physical property
damage from flooding can be anticipated.
I
Unless an interceptor ditch near Schilling Road is constructed in the
future to divert surface flow from the south, the frequency of flooding for
the Bonnie Ridge Addition will increase. This proposed improvement is
discussed in Section VI - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES.
I
The south part of Belmont Boulevard system intercepts the runoff from the
Neal Avenue system and from the east of the Key Acres Addition. The storm
sewer on Belmont Avenue is grossly undersized, as evidenced by past flooding.
When the capacity of this system is exceeded, large volumes of water flow
through the paved streets and flood low areas in the vicinity of Scott and
Ray Avenues as well as Belmont Boulevard and Hart Avenue. At times, the
ability of this system to function properly is minimized by the presence of
backwater in the Magnolia Road ditch. It was estimated that the high water
level in this system remained for approximately 30 to 48 hours. Using an
average discharge of 100 cfs in the Magnolia ditch and a runoff of 460
acre-feet during the August 31, 1977 storm, it would require 40 hours to
drain the total volume of runoff in this system. The ratio of the required
capacity to existing capacity for the storm sewer on Belmont Boulevard
south of Magnolia Road is 2 to 1.
I
I
I
I
I
The Rockhurst, Simmons, and Highland Avenue systems drain the west portion
of Key Acres Addition, containing approximately 116 acres. Although the
present performance of this system does not constitute a serious flooding
problem, part of the drainage area contributing to this system lies to the
south, is undeveloped and does not produce as much runoff at this time as
may be expected in the future.
I
I
The ,Mid-State Mall system drains approximately 150 acres to the south of
Magnolia Road between Old US-81 and 1-135. This system consists of open
ditches along US-81 with culverts under the highway and streets, a small
storm sewer drains the parking lot of the Mid-State Mall. The drainage
area that this system serves is only partially developed at. this time,
however, the remainder of the area is rapidly being developed into com-
mercial and residential uses, High water in the Magnolia Road ditch will
cause temporary ponding and flooding of th~ parking lot and other low lying
areas. Some of the runoff is stored temporarily in the low lying areas
south of the Mall, with overflow to the culverts under 1-135. The present
performance of this system does not constitute a serious problem, but as
development continues and the runoff rates increase, serious flooding could
occur.
I
I
I
~
I
I
IV-7
I
I
I
The Hageman and Neptune Avenue Systems drain approximately 24 acres north
of Magnolia Road. Although the present performance of this system does not
constitute a serious problem, storm water runoff from future development to
the south will exceed the capacity of the existing storm drain from Saturn
Avenue to the Magnolia Road ditch. At times, the capacity of the lower
reaches of the Saturn Avenue storm drain is minimized due to the high water
accumulated in the Magnolia Road ditch. In this event, surface drainage
from this area, during severe storms, flows toward the northeast, through a
structure under South Ninth Street and into the Gebhart Tract (Meadowlark
Acres Addition).
I
I
System C - Knox Road and Outlet
I
I
This system collects the runoff from approximately 1,120 acres and discharges
this runoff through a 42 inch concrete pipe at the flood protection levee
just north of East Magnolia Road. Two other levee outlets, located north
and south of Schilling Road, drain 16 acres and 33 acres respectively. The
area east of Ohio Street and south of Knox Road is relatively level agricul-
tural land with river meander scars that pond a considerable amount of
runoff. During severe storms, overflow from System C into System D has
occurred near the intersection of Knox Road and Ohio Street.
I
I
The existing drainage ditch parallelling Ohio Street, beginning at Neal
Avenue and extending south, has a low capacity due to poor maintenance and
flat grades in its upper reaches. Some overflow from System B into System
C has occurred in the vicinity of Neal Avenue during prolonged storms.
Flooding of the streets near Ohio and Neal is due to the insufficient
capacity of the ditch paralleling' Ohio Street. The runoff from the area
west of Ohio Street and from the storm sewer draining to the east from the
Twin Oaks subdivision outfalls through a double 43 x 26-inch corrugated
metal pipe (CMP). Figure IV-7 shows the existing structure.
I
I
I
The drainage ditch paralleling the south side of the Knox Sandpit Road from
Ohio Street to the old river channel has a flat gradient with shallow flow
depths. Considerable flooding in this vicinity occurs during prolonged and
intense storms.
I
I
I
The extent of the flooding occurring south of the Knox Sandpit Road, in an
area of approximately 80 acres, during the storm of August 31 to September
1, 1977, is shown by Figures IV-8, IV-9 and IV-lO. This area remained
inundated for approximately 48 hours following the storm. The extent of
flooding in the areas south of the Knox Sandpit Road could have been much
greater, except that overflow into System D northeast of the intersection
of Magnolia Road and Ohio Street occurred, thus reducing the volume of
storage required in System C south and east of Knox Sandpit Road and Ohio
Street.
I
The outlet for Drainage System C is a 42 inch concrete pipe through the
flood protection levee immediately north of Magnolia Road. The City owns
ponding easements in the old abandoned channel of the Smoky Hill River
constituting a capacity of approximately 42 acre feet at bankfull elevation,
with a surface area of 5 acres. Figure IV-II shows the existing condition
of the old river channel.
I
I
IV-8
I
I.
I
.
.
.
I
I
.
I
I
I .
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
---N
SOUTH HIGH SCHOOL
Figure IV-l. Twin 26x43 Inch CMP
Under Ohio Street, South of Knox
Sandpit Road, Looking West
N---
KNOX SANDPIT ROAD
Figure IV-8. Looking East on the Knox Sand pit Road From Ohio Street
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
KNOX SANDPIT ROAD
Figure IV-9. Looking South From Knox Sand pit Road, Immediately East of Ohio Street
OHIO STREET
Figure IV-10. Ohio Street, Looking South From Knox Sandpit Road
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure IV.11. Existing Condition of
Abandoned Smoky Hill River
Channel South of East Magnolia
Road
Figure IV.12. Flooding at Wayne Avenue and Fourth Street
I
I
I
The Knox Sandpit has an existing water surface elevation of 1,218 m.s.l.
(mean sea level) and a potential storage of 114 acre feet at bankfull
elevation with a surface area of 18 acres. The present drainage system is
not connected to the Knox Sandpit, therefore, only the storage in the
abandoned river channel is available.
I
I
The existing outlet pipe through the flood protection levee does not have
the capacity to discharge the design storm. In addition, the outlet can be
blocked by flood stages in the active Smoky Hill River for 1 to 2 weeks,
during periods of large volume internal runoff. During such periods,
internal runoff will pond and back up into the drainage system, flooding
low areas, since the storage capacity in the abandoned river channel is
very low compared to the internal runoff volume. Although the abandoned
river channel capacity has been reduced measurably by vegetation and silt-
ing, the capacity of the channel is, nonetheless, controlled by drainage
structures under the Knox Sandpit Road, Magnolia Road, and the flood pro-
tection levee.
I
I
I
Improvements to this system are discussed in Section VI - PROPOSED IMPROVE-
MENTS AND ALTERNATIVES.
I
o System D - Wayne Avenue, Belmont Boulevard, Ohio Street and the Holmquist
Area Outlet.
I
Two outlets serve this drainage system. The largest is a 78 inch RCP
located at the flood protection levee and the lower reaches of the Holm-
quist Oxbow Area. The smaller is a 42 inch RCP located at the flood pro-
tection levee and the lower reaches of the smaller oxbow located immediately
south of the Holmquist Oxbow and north of Magnolia Road.
I
The small oxbow outlet serves a drainage. area of 32 acres, lying principally
to the south and west of the small oxbow. A drainage area of 883 acreS
discharges into the Holmquist Oxbow ponding area south of the termination
of Albert Street. An additional 202 acres drain into the Holmquist Oxbow
from the north and west. The total drainage area of this system, served by
both the Holmquist Oxbow and the small oxbow ponding areas, is 1,117 acres.
I
I
I
Plate IV-1 shows the existing drainage boundary and the storm sewers in the
drainage system. The direction of drainage flow begins at 9th Street and
flows northeast across the Gebhart Tract. The developed area south of
Cloud Street flows south to Wayne Street.
I
About 50 percent of Drainage System D is undeveloped at this time. During
large storms, ponding occurs, in the Gebhart Tract, to depths of 1 to 2
feet south of Wayne Avenue, east of 9th Street and west of the UPRR tracks.
In addition, ponding occurs in the low lying areas between Magnolia Road
and the Knox Sandpit Road, east of Ohio Street.
I
I
The Wayne Avenue Subsystem has a total drainage area of 470 acres. During
severe storms, 87 acres west of 9th Street and north of Magnolia Road flows
in a northeasterly direction, through the several existing RCB's under 9th
Street, thence flowing to Wayne Avenue immediately west of the UPRR tracks.
Overflow from the Magnolia Road ditch contributes to the runoff volume.
I
IV-9
I
I
I
I
The existing storm sewer under Wayne Avenue varies from a' 21 inch pipe at
Highland Avenue to a 60 inch pipe at Ohio Street. During severe storms,
overflow from south of Wayne Avenue and west of the UPRR tracks will flow
north on 4th Street to Cloud Street, when the capacity of the storm sewer
under Wayne Avenue is exceeded. The natural drainage of the area immediately
west of the UPRR tracks is north to the natural drainage course extending ,
to the north, also known as "the slough."
I
I
The deficiencies of this system are readily evidenced by the frequency of
flooding at the intersection of Ohio and Wayne Streets. The ratio of the
required capacity to the existing capacity at this intersection is about 3
to 1. The average slope on the Wayne Avenue System varies from 0.1 to 0.2
percent. Figure IV-12 shows the extend of the flooding just south of Wayne
, Avenue and west of the UPRR tracks during the storm of August 31 to September
1, 1977.
I
I
I
The Belmont Boulevard drainage system from Magnolia Road to Ohio Street
drains approximately 84 acres. The existing storm sewer varies in size
from a 30 inch pipe at the upper end of , the system to a 48 inch pipe at the
lower end. The average slope of the system is 0.15 percent. No appreciable
increase in development in this 84 acre area is anticipated. Although the
present performance of this system does not constitute a serious problem,
the ratio of the required capacity to existing capacity is 2 to 1. Some
flooding at the intersection of Edward' Street and Belmont Boulevard has
ocurred during severe storms. The proposed improvements to this system are
described in Section VI - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES.
I
I
The Ohio Street and Magnolia Road systems drain 270 acres. Of this area,
approximately 50 percent is developed; 84 acres east of Ohio Street and
north of Magnolia Road drains to the open ditch immediately south of Sarah
Lane. The size of the existing storm sewers varies from an 18 inch pipe at
the upper end of Magnolia Road to a 36 inch pipe near Ohio and Belmont.
This system has a flat gradient of 0.15 percent with a capacity of 4 cfs at
the upper end to 23 cfs at the lower end. The deficiencies of this system
are evident by the frequency with which flooding occurs at the intersection
of Ohio and Magnolia and on Aurora Avenue. Considerable ponding south of
Magnolia and east of Ohio Streets has occurred during severe and prolonged
storms. Figures IV-13 and IV-14 show the extent of the flooding during the
storm of August 31 to September 1, 1977. If the proposed system described
in Section VI of this report is not constructed and the area to the east of
Ohio Street and south of Magnolia Road continues to develo~, the extent of
flooding and property damage will increase considerably.
I
I
I
I
I
I
The outlet for the Wayne Avenue, Belmont Boulevard and Ohio Street drainage
.systems is a 60 inch reinforced concrete pipe which extends from near the
intersection of Wayne Avenue, Belmont Boulevard and Ohio Streets, northeast
to the abandoned river channel near the Holmquist Area. Figures IV-15 and
IV-16 show the present condition of this outfall pipe. The capacity of
this outfall pipe is 64 cfs and it will handle 34 percent of the total flow
draining to this point. The remaining overflow from these systems is
handled by an open ditch located east of Ohio Street between Wayne Avenue
and Sarah Lane. The ditch discharges into the abandoned river channel near
I
I
IV-10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L__
t, ....
.# .
t'
.
Figure IV.13. Flooding at Ohio Street and Magnolia Road
Figure IV-14. Flooding on Aurora Avenue
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure IV-15 Figure IV-16
Present Condition of 60-lnch Outfall Pipe into Abandoned River Channel Near the Holmquist Area
Figure IV-H. Drainage Ditch East
of Ohio Street Between Wayne
Avenue and Sarah Lane, Looking
East
Figure IV-18. Drainage Ditch East
of Ohio Street Between Wayne
Avenue and Sarah Lane, Looking
West
I
I
I
the Holmquist Area. This ditch has a'flat gradient with a capacity of 250
cfs at bankful. Figures IV-17 and IV-18 are views of the existing ditch.
The flowline of the existing 60 inch pipe is 5 feet lower than that of the
open ditch.
I
The outlet for all the storm drainage in System D is the abandoned river
channel near the Holmquist Area and a 78 inch pipe through the levee.
Figures' IV-19 and IV-20 show the condition of the existing channel. Poor
maintenance and encroachment from development have reduced the capacity of
the abandoned channel to a flow of approximately 1,000 cfs. The double 48
inch pipes in the abandoned channel under Albert Street have a capcity of
200 cfs and the 78 inch pipe through the flood protection levee has a
capacity of 480 cfs. The structure through the flood protection levee has
a capacity equal to 45 percent of the 25 year frequency runoff.
I
I
I
The storage capacity of the abandoned river channel is 90 acre feet at an
elevation of 1',228 m.s.l.* with a surface area of 12 acres; this is approxi-
mately 35 percent of the 25 year runoff and 25 percent of the 100 year
runoff. The Corps of Engineers, Design Memorandum No. 1 (Reference No.2)
shows 162 acre feet of storage at an ~levation of 1,231 m.s.l. Elevation
1,231 m.s,l. would result'in flooding of Aurora Street to a depth of 1
foot. The relatively small discharge capacity of the 78 inch pipe through
'the levee in the abandoned channel has caused backwater to reach an ,elevation
that reduces the capacity of the system draining into the channel. The
elevation in the Smoky Hill River during the storm of August 31 to September
1, 1977, was 1,225 m.s.l. This was 5 feet ,lower than the bank elevations
on the abandoned river channel.
I
I
I
I
Proposed improvements to System D are described in Section VI - PROPOSED
IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES.
I
System E - Dry Creek Outlet
Past improvements to Dry Creek are discussed in References 2, 3, 4 and 5.
I
The total drainage area of Dry Creek at 1-135 is 8,628 acres (12.4 s.m.) of
which 3,000 acres, 35 percent, is from Systems A and B east of 1-135. The
drainage area of 5,628 acres (8.8 s.m.) west of I~135 has approximately 1,800
acres south of Water Well Road which is agricultural land. Urban development
constitutes about 50 percent of the land use in the area north of Water
Well Road.
I
I
The existing Dry Creek channel varies in width from 15 feet at its upper
reaches near Water Well Road to 30 feet near the 1-135 crossing. It has a
slope of 0.06 percent or 3 feet per mile.
I
The improved channel north of 1-135 has a 40 foot bottom width and a slope
of 0.08 to 0.1 percent. The capacity of the channel north of 1-135 varies
from 8,000 to 10,000 cfs at bankfull. 'The capacity of the existing channel
south of 1-135 averages 1,000 to 2,000 cfs, approximately equaling a 5 year
I
*Mean Sea Level.
I
IV-ll
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure IV.20. Abandoned River
Channel Near the Holmquist Area,
Looking South From Albert Avenue
Figure IV-19. Abandoned River
Channel Near the Holmquist Area,
Looking North From Albert Avenue
Figure IV.21. Existing Dry Creek
Channel Above the 1-135 Crossing
Figure IV-22. Existing Missouri
Pacific Railroad Bridge Over Dry
Creek
I
I
I
frequency storm. The capacities of the channel were determined from cross
sections and application of the Manning Formula. The relatively low
discharge capacity of the channel south of 1-135 is due to the presence of
trees and shrubs along the channel obstructing the flow. Figures IV-21,
IV-22 and IV-23. show the existing channel above the 1-135 crossing and the
Missouri-Pacific Railroad Bridge.
I
I
To prevent a reduction in the capacity of the Magnolia Road ditch, the
allowable water surface at Magnolia Road and Dry Creek would be an elevation
of 1,235 or a depth of seven feet. This depth would permit a discharge in
Dry Creek of only 200 to 300 cfs, therefore, the full capacity of the Dry
Creek channel cannot be utilized if backwater into the Magnolia Road ditch
is to be prevented. The possibility of flooding the low lying area east of
1-135 prevents using the full depth of flow in Dry Creek.
I
I
The structures at 1-135 and the Missouri Pacific Railroad tracks control
the discharge for large flows on Dry Creek. The double 18 x 18 foot boxes
under 1-135 were designed for 3,400 cfs with a flow depth of 13 feet but
this depth has backed up flows and caused flooding in the low lying areas
east of 1-135 along Magnolia Road.
I
I
The Standard Project Flood on Dry Creek is estimated to rise at an average
rate of 3.0 feet per hour. It would remain out of its banks for about 2
days. (Reference No.4) The 100'year' storm water surface elevation would
be 1,242 m.s.I. at Magnolia Road which is 4 to 5 feet above the intersection
of Belmont Boulevard and Magnolia Road, and 8 to 9 feet above the Gebhart
Tract immediately south of Wayne Avenue. The 100 year storm water surface
elevation at Schilling Road and Water Well Road would be 1,243.6 m.s.l. and
1,245.2 m.s.l., respectively. These elevations are lower than the existing
ground line east of 1-135.
I
I
I
Overflow of Dry Creek to the east floodplain is limited due to the existing
dike along the east bank from 1-135 south to Magnolia Road. During the
storm of August 31 to September 1, 1977, Dry Creek did not overflow its
banks but -the high water reduced the discharge capacity of the Magnolia
Road ditch.
I
I
Further urban development in the drainage area of Dry Creek will cause
increased flooding from Schilling Road south. To prevent backwater flow
into the Magnolia Road ditch, the existing Dry Creek channel should be
widened with a structure constructed near 1-135 to allow overflow to the
north and west of 1-135 or structures constructed on the Magnolia Road
ditch should be flapgated. A detailed discussion of the proposed improve-
ments are discussed in Section VI - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES.
I
I
System F - Slough and 4th Street
I
General. The total drainage area of this system draining into the Old
Smoky Hill River channel on Second Street is 900 acres. Of the 900 acres,
500 acres drain to the south side of Crawford Street where the open ditch
discharges into a storm sewer. As shown on Plate IV-I, runoff begins in
the south reaches of the system near Leslie Street, and flows north to
Cloud Street in a small underground system. From 4th Street, runoff is
I
IV-12
I
I
I
discharged with the underground system
into the "Slough" near Norton Street.
the slough crosses 13 streets. Only 2
streets.
down Cloud Street to the east and
From Cloud Street to Crawford Street
of these 13 streets are not through
I
I
4th and Cloud Streets. The 4th Street system, south of Cloud Street,
consists of a 12 inch pipe with a capacity of 2 cfs. The underground
system on Cloud Street has a 42 inch and a" 36 inch pipe with a total
capacity of 65 cfs. The deficiencies of this system are already evidenced
by the frequency with which flooding occurs at the inlets on 4th Street
south of Cloud Street. During severe storms, overflow from south of Wayne
Avenue flows north on 4th Street to compound the flooding problems. Large
volumes of water pond on 4th Street near Charlotte Street; overflow to the
east and into the slough is prohibited by the higher elevation of the Union
Pacific Railroad tracks and other urban development to the east. Ponding
on 4th Street in the area south of Cloud Street has reached depths of 1 to
2 feet above curb full, causing considerable property damage to low lying
homes. The ratio of the required capacity to existing capacity varies from
30 to 1 on 4th Street, to 3 to 1 on Cloud Street.
I
I
I
I
I
Slough. The capacity of the existing slough from Cloud Street to Crawford
Street, with no overflow of the street crossings, varies from 200 to 500
cfs, or less than a 5 year frequency storm runoff. The channel can.discharge
1,000 cfs (25 year frequency) but the structures at the street crossings
control the discharge and reduce the capacity of the system. The average
flowline slope of the slough is 0.1 percent with a velocity of 3 fps. The
length of the slough from Cloud Street to the Old Smoky Hill River channel
is 1. 25 miles.
I
I
Generally, the structures on this system have only one-tenth the capacity
of the channel. Even with overflow of the streets south of Crawford Street,
the existing 42 inch pipe on the upstream side of Crawford controls the
discharge of the slough in the same manner that an outlet pipe through a
dam reduces the discharge downstream. The 42 inch pipe can discharge 250
cfs, with considerable head at the inlet from the storage capacity of " 50
acre feet in the slough. During the 1977 storm, flooding occurred just
south of Crawford Street due to the low capacity of the 42 inch pipe.
Figure IV-24 shows this structure, and Figure IV-2S shows the extent of
flooding during the storm of August 31 to September I, 1977. The existing
72 inch pipe under Second Street from Crawford Street to the Old Smoky Hill
River channel, has a capacity of 250 cfs, approximately 26 percent of that
required.
I
I
I
I
The drainage structures south of Crawford Street vary in size from 16 to 40
square feet. Figure IV-26 shows a typical , drainage structure on the slough.
'1
I
The storage capacity of the slough is approximately 50 acre feet. In the
past, this storage has prevented overflow of the slough into adjacent
properties. Flooding of the streets adjacent to the slough has been caused
by inadequate storm drains and poor overland street flow. In addition to
the insufficient capacity of the laterals, the major factor contributing to
flooding of the low lying areas to the east and west is the existing high
water in the slough ,resulting from poor outflow conditions at'Crawford
Street.
I
IV-13
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure IV-23. Existing Dry Creek
Channel Looking North From
Schilling Road
Figure IV-24. 42-lnch Pipe in
Slough at Crawford Street Looking
North
Figure IV.25. Extent of Flooding in
Slough
Figure IV.26. Typical Structure on
the Slough System
I
I
In summary, the deficiencies of the slough drainage system have been caused
by inadequate drainage structures south of Crawford Street and undersized
storm drains from Crawford Street north to the river.
I
System G - East of Ohio Street, Between Crawford Street and Cloud Street.
I
This system collects the runoff from approximately 280 acres. For the most
part, the area is relatively undeveloped at this time, and consists mainly
of cultivated agricultural land. Therefore, ponding generally occurs prior
to the time any runoff.is generated. A relatively large portion of the
area, however, is platted and is being developed, eliminating ponding areas
and increasing runoff.
I
I
System G can logically be divided into two drainage areas: the north
drainage area and the south drainage area.
I
I
The north drainage area collects runoff from approximately 75 acres. The
outlet for this area is a 30 inch RCP through the flood protection levee,
located in an abandoned channel of the Smoky Hill River. This abandoned
channel serves as a ponding area, with a storage capacity of 16 acre feet
at bankfull.
I
The south drainage area collects runoff from approximately 205 acres. The
outlet for the south drainage area is a 42 inch RCP through the flood
protection levee. Due to the high flowline of this structure, a large
portion of the south drainage area is usually inundated before any head can
be acquired at the structure. The existing urban development in the area
is drained by overland street flow.
I
I
As the south drainage area in. System G is developed, serious flooding could
occur unless improvements are made to the existing drainage system. The
proposed improvements are discussed in Section IV . PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
AND ALTERNATIVES.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IV-14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
; I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION V
DESIGN CRITERIA
I
I
SECTION V - DESIGN CRITERIA
I
GENERAL
I
The functional requirements of a drainage system depend on the nature of
man's use of adjacent land, and the potential consequences of flooding or
overflow. Elaborate economic studies are sometimes used to estimate the
economic benefits of reduced flood damages which may be obtained by various
degrees of improvement. However, it is usually difficult to evaluate the
damage which may result from a flood of a specified frequency, especially
when the damage is often merely a nuisance or is non-quantifiable in monetary
terms.
I
I
In the absence of detailed economic studies, arbitrary but reasonable
criteria can be applied to assure that systems will perform satisfactorily.
The criteria recommended herein are based on judgment of the suitability
and acceptance of similar installations.
I
I
I
A comparison of unit costs versus the design frequency flood was made for a
typical drainage system in the study area. The results of this study are
shown on Figure V-I. The curve on Figure V-I shows that protection for a
25 year frequency storm can be provided for only a 15 percent cost increase,
compared to the 10 year frequency design. The design frequencies in the
recommended criteria listed below are not only based on the relationship
shown by Figure V-I, but also on the design criteria of other cities with
similar situations.
I
I
It is recommended that the City of Salina formally adopt design guidelines
for storm' sewers, drainage ditches and appurtenances, so' overall coordination
and master planning can preserve and promote the general health, welfare
and economic well being of the area.
I
RECOMMENDED CRITERIA
I
The improvements proposed in this report are designed on the basis of the
following recommended criteria:
I
1. The main interceptor ditches are designed to carry the runoff
from a 25 year frequency storm with no roadway overflows and with a free-
board of 2 feet. This will allow the present system of roads and streets
to be free from overflows of the main interceptor ditches during a storm of
25 year frequency rainfall or less. (See Section IX - DESIGN METHODS.)
I
I
The proposed drainage ditches will substantially reduce the extent of
temporary flooding during the 25 year frequency storm, but they will not
eliminate flooding at all locations, or when the design storm is exceeded.
Some of the extremely low areas, especially those formed by old river
meander scars, would require costly measures to provide such protection.
The proposed drainage improvements will be of substantial benefit in the
low lying areas, since they will assure rapid drainage of the land follow-
ing a storm.
I
I
V-I
I
I
I
2. Outlet drains through the flood protection levees and into the
Smoky Hill River are required to handle the runoff from a 100 year frequency
storm without flooding existing homes or. other buildings, and without
flooding large areas of developable land.
I
I
The discharge of the Magnolia Road ditch into Dry Creek would be prevented
by concurrent high stages in the creek and for prolonged periods during
intense local rainstorms. Proposed solutions to this problem are discussed
in Section VI - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES.
I
I
3. Outlet drains through the flood protection levee are also required
to handle the runoff from a range of smaller storms which may occur at
times when the Smoky Hill River is carrying high flows.
I
Table V-I lists 7 sets of coincident rainfall amounts and river stages
proposed for design of the flood protection levee outlet system.
I
The outlets and ponding areas would be required to handle any of the seven
sets of conditions. They define a range of rainfall-river stage combina-
tions which have a one-percent chance (100 year frequency) of occurring
sometime during the same year. Gravity outflow into the Smoky Hill River
is prohibited when the stage in the river equals or exceeds a 20 year flood
frequency. Therefore, the ponding areas were sized for a 5 year interior
runoff with a 20 year river stage. The proposed systems will pass a 100
year interior storm with the river stage less than a 20 year frequency
using the proposed storage ponds. Dikes constructed around the ponds will
prevent flooding from a 100 year storm with no outflow into the Smoky Hill
River.
I
I
I
TABLE V-I
I
Design Criteria for Outlets
Into the Smoky Hill River
Rainfall
24-Hour
Rainfall
(Inches)
River
Flood
Frequency
(Years)
Coincident
Peak
Dischu,e
Rate
(cis)
River Conditions
I
Rainfall
Frequency
(Years)
Peak
Elevation
@ Knox Outlet
Peak
Elevation
@ Holmquist Outlet
I
1 2.5 100 18,400 1,236 1,234
2 3.1 50 14,300 1,234 1,232
5 4.3 20 10,000 1,231 1,230
10 5.0 10 7,200 1,228.5 1,226.5
25 5.8 4 4,500 1,225 1,223
50 6.5 2 3,200 1,223 1,221
100 7.2 1 1,730 1,221 1,219
(a) As modified by upstream reservoirs.
Total Drainage Area = 8,358 s.m.
I
I
I
I
Note: September 2, 1977 discharge in Smoky Hill River was 5,040 cfs @
Elev. 1,226.5 m.s.l. or approximately a 5 year frequency discharge when
South Salina recorded a 100 year frequency storm on August 31, 1977.
V-2
I
I
1
4. Open ditch submains and enclosed submains in developed and agri-
cultural areas are designed for a 10 year frequency storm.
1
1
Conventional storm drain collection systems, consisting primarily of small
enclosed laterals in urban residential areas, are designed for a 5 or 10
year frequency storm depending on overflow hazards and potential flood
damage. The streets and other surface flowways carry the excess runoff
during larger storms.
1
5. Generally, the main interceptors and outlets were designed using
the SCS Method (See Section IX); the submains and laterals were designed
using the Rational Method.
1
1
I.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
V-3
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION VI
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
AND AL TERNA TIVES
I
I
SECTION VI - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES
I
GENERAL
I
The locations, sizes, profiles, identification and drainage area map of the
proposed systems are shown on sheets 1 to 30 in the Appendix (a separate
volume of drawings). The general location and identification of the proposed
systems.are also shown on Plate VI-1 in this report.
I
The proposed drainage systems are designed in accordance with the recommended
Design Criteria described in SECTION V, and Design Methods described in
Section IX of this report.
I
I
The proposed systems are preliminary and conceptual in nature and more
detailed design will be required before construction can proceed. The
location and size of the proposed structures and ditches are preliminary
and are subject to change in the final design, as required by unpredictable
circumstances. Any changes should be carefully reviewed in order that they
do not affect the functional requirements of the system. The location of
future street structures should be investigated thoroughly to prevent
unacceptable head loss resulting in overflow of the ditches.
I
I
Several alternate systems were analyzed for each drainage area to determine
the most economical system. Profiles were used to determine the available
hydraulic gradients and to develop comparative cost estimates.
I
I
Three drainage concepts were investigated for the primary study area.
Alternative No.1, described in this Section in detail, consists of draining
approximately 3,000 acres to the Smoky Hill River and 2,200 acres to Dry
Creek. Alternative No.2 drains 3,200 acres and 2,000 acres to the Smoky
Hill River and Dry Creek, respectively. Alternative No. 3 drains approxi-
mately 1,800 acres to the River and 3,400 acres to Dry Creek. After a
preliminary meeting with the City Engineering Staff, Alternative No. 1
was selected to be investigated in further detail.
I
I
The proposed improvements consist of 7 systems and are identified as Systems
A through G, as shown by Plate VI-I. The total drainage area of Systems A,
B, C and D in the primary study area is 5,389 acres. The Dry Creek outlet,
System E, drains 5,623 acres, and combined with Systems A and B, the total
drainage area where 1-135 crosses Dry Creek is 7,941 acres. Systems C and
D drain 3,071 acres to the Smoky Hill River. System F, 4th Street and the
slough, provides ,relief for 900 acres at the outflow of the slough into the
Old Smoky Hill River Channel near Second Street. System G, the Dow-Fait~
Addition area, east of Ohio Street, north of Cloud Street and south of
Crawford Street, drains approximately 280 ~cres.
I
I
I
By no means will the proposed drainage systems completely eliminate the
flooding that will occur during severe storms, but with due consideration
of the type and extent of damage that may result, the proposed systems are
a practical solution to the drainage problems in the study area.
I
I
VI-1
I
III
Q)
<
'"
c:
"
c:
o
a.
c:
.iij
o
"
Q)
III
o
(3
c:
W
:z
I:)
i=
cc
c.:I
i:i:
i=
:z
LLI
5!
'7:E
>LL1
wI-
5~
a..U)
.s:::
()
~
Cl
c:
Q)
Q.
o
t
~ t
E c:
.2
Q) -
- III
III
,., ()
en ~
Q) - c:
c: 0
'" Q) :;::
III
c: :5! III
oiij ~ ()
~ 0 ~
Cl - -
Q. c:
- Q) Q)
0 () :5!
~
~ Q) c:
-
III c: oiij
".
c: c: E
::l oiij .0
0 ::l
CD ::!: en
-
-
-
-
I @ ~
CD
to-
...
-
,.;
z
=>
..,
z >---:
z ..
o <C( G:u
0. ..
. .
Ul~~i
.Joov
~V~:
IlQ .
o
o
o
.,
t-
III
III
IL
Z
III
.J
<l
o
1Il
o
.
0
.s:::
0
" ~
III c:
0 0
II: E
" '" Q;
II: c: CD
'" = 0;-
c: .s:::
() c:
,., III
III .s::: en III c:
Q) () all ~ Q; .2
~ en -
<( all 02 Q; Q) "
.s::: - ~
Oi 2 - "
o!!! 0 - en <(
oc: ::l -
- (5 ~ 0 ::l .s::: .s:::
III 0
::l c: Q) - :;: -
" '" - .!!! -" oiij
c: III ::l Q) all U.
::!: 0 ::l Q)
C" ~ .s::: all
.s::: - x E (.) '"
- III 0 ::l ;:
::l Q) (5 ,., .2
0 ~ c: ~ 0
en :.:: :r Cl en Cl
< Iii (j Ci W Ii: Cl
E E E E E E E
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
- - - - - - -
III III III III III III III
,., ,., ,., ,., ,., ,., ,.,
en en en en en en en
..
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -
-
I
I
SYSTEM A - SOUTH INDUSTRIAL AREA
I
The total drainage area of System A is 1,504 acres. Approximately 40
percent is developed as industrial land use, the remainder is predominantly
agricultural land use. The proposed system has 5.1 miles of main interceptor
ditches and 2.5 miles of submains. The estimated project cost for the '
ultimate development of the drainage system is $3,234,100.
I
I
Main Interceptor Al & Submains - Water Well Road to Dry Creek
The locations, sizes and profiles for the main ditch and submains are shown
on sheets 1,2,7 and 15 in the Appendix arid on Plate VI-1 in this report.
I
I
The total drainage area of Main Interceptor Al at 1-135 south of Schilling
Road is 630 acres. The ditch was designed to handle the discharge of a 25
year frequency storm from ultimate development of the drainage area. The
peak discharge ranges from 800 c.f.s. at the upper end of the ditch to
1,300 c.f.s. at the lower end. The peak discharge for existing development
averages 70 to 75 percent of the peak discharge for ultimate development.
The ditch ranges in size from a 10 foot bottom near Water Well Road to a 24'
foot bottom at the outlet into Dry Creek. The hydraulic data are shown on
sheet 15 in the Appendix.
I
I
I
The location of the ditch follows the natural low area south of the 1-135
off-ramp and west of old US-81. It may be moved to the east to the exis-
ting drainage ditch along US-81, but this may require additional structures
for access to the land to the west when it is developed in the future.
Additional structures under the on and off ramps of 1-135 will be Tequired
as well as an increase in the structure size under 1-135. The existing
structures under the ramps and 1-135 were designed for runoff from agri-
cultural land and the new structures were based on runoff from developed
industrial areas.
I
I
High water in Dry Creek will have only a minimal effect on the capacity of
this system. During storms of a magnitude greater than a 25 year frequency,
overflow of the system with subsequent ponding' in low lying areas will
occur, no flooding of the existing buildings east of US-81 is anticipated
since their floor elevations are 1 foot'above the 100 year storm. The
freeboard on the system averages 2 feet. Main Interceptor Al should be
constructed prior to construction of ditch A2. In the event ditch Al is
constructed without A2, and the area south of the Westinghouse Plant is not
developed, no overflow of Al would occur.
I
I
I
I
Three Submains, AI-I, Al-2, and Al-3, provide relief for the area to the
east of the main interceptor ditch AI. These submains will drain the low
lying area next to the Union Pacific Railroad tracks which now flows north
to Schilling Road. Although thesesubmains were designed for a 10 year
frequency storm, severe storms could cause flooding into the low land along
the drainage course. Although these submains are shown as open ditches in
the Appendix, enclosed drains could be installed to minimize the right-of-way
requirements.
I
I
VI-2
I
I
I
The estimated project cost for the main interceptor ditch Al and the three
submains is $1,441,800.
I
Main Interceptor A2 & Submains - Mentor to Dry Creek
I
The locations, sizes and profiles for the main ditch and submains are shown
on sheets I, 5, 6 and 16 in the Appendix and on Plate VI-1 in this report.
I
The total drainage area of main interceptor A2 at the structure under 1-135
south of Water Well Road is 874 acres. This ditch was designed to accommo-
date a 25 year frequency storm discharging from an area of ultimate development.
The. peak discharge ranges from 400 c.f.s. at the upper end near Mentor, to
1,300 c.f.s. at 1-135. The existing drainage area is agricultural land
having a peak discharge of 70 to 75 percent of the planned ultimate industrial
land use development.
I
I
The hydraulic data for this system are shown on sheet 16 in the Appendix.
Generally the ditch has a 0.1 percent slope with a 20 foot bottom and a
freeboard of 3 feet. High water in Dry Creek during severe storms will
have a minimal effect on this system with completion of the proposed improve-
ments to Dry Creek.
I
I
An alternative of draining this area to the south, and into main inter-
ceptor ditch Al to the north, was investigated, however, due to additional
road crossings completion of this alternative was found to be more expensive.
I
I
Severe storms will cause flooding of. the low land along the ditch and in
the area immediately west of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. None of
this overflow would cause serious damage to the adjacent land in its present
agricultural land use, however before these areas are developed positive
control should be established by setting the minimum floor elevations of
the buildings or with some form of ponding easements or flood plain zoning
restrictions on the low lying land.
I
Two submains, east of the main interceptor, will drain the low lying area
next to the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. Whether these are open ditches
or enclosed drains will depend on future development and the right-of-way
available at the time of construction. The alternative of draining approxi-
mately 150 acres immediately west of the railroad to the north into system
B was investigated, but it proved more expensive due to the additional
expense involved in crossing the feeder tracks into the industrial area.
Submain A2-3, west of Old US-8l, will provide basic relief for approxi-
mately 240 acres to the south of the main interceptor ditch. Extension of
A2-3 to the south of the county road can be made with underground storm
sewers at some future date.
I
I
I
I
The estimated project cost for the main interceptor A2 and submains A2-1,
A2-2 and A2-3 is $1,792,300.
I
I
VI-3
I
I
I
SYSTEM B - WEST MAGNOLIA ROAD AND SCHILLING ROAD SYSTEM
I
The total drainage area of System B is 814 acres. Approximately 60 percent
of the area is developed into principally residential land use. The pro-
posed system consists of 2.8 miles of main interceptor ditches and 2.8
miles of submains and laterals which consist of open ditches and enclosed
drains (See Appendix and Plate VI-I). Alternatives considered for this
system are discussed in the following subsections. The estimated project
cost for ultimate development of System B is $3,681,000.
I
I
Main Interceptor Bl - Magnolia Road
I
The location, size and profile for the main ditch are shown on sheets 3, 4,
8 and 17 in the Appendix and Plate VI-l in this report.
I
The total drainage area of the Magnolia Road ditch is 614 acres. The ditch
was designed to accommodate the runoff from a 25 year frequency storm from
a totally urbanized development of the entire area.
I
High water in Dry Creek affects the capacity of the Magnolia Road ditch,
and as a result, the structures west of 1-135 will need flapgates and pond-
ing areas provided for severe storms, or when the flood stage in Dry Creek
is above the allowable water surface in the Magnolia Road ditch.
I
The Magnolia Road ditch runs from Neal Avenue north and west to its outlet
at Dry Creek. Three solutions to the drainage problem were studied in
sufficient detail to develop comparative cost estimates. The alternate
systems are described below. Pre~iminary estimates of the cost for each
system are detailed in SECTION VIII, PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF COST, of
this report.
I
I
Alternate 1
I
Alternate 1 provides a ponding area of 14 acres west of 1-135 to prevent
overflow from Dry Creek into the interior of the City east of 1-135. The
storage in this pond, 70 acre-feet, and storage in the ditch and street
rights-of-way will prevent flooding of existing homes east of 1-135 from a
100 year frequency storm.
I
I
The ditch along Magnolia Road will vary in size from a 40 foot bottom at
the outlet to a 20 foot bottom near Neal Avenue with a slope of 0.05
percent. The peak 25 year frequency discharge ranges from 1,000 c.f.s. at
1-135 to 250 c.f.s. at the Union Pacific Railroad tracks and 160 c.f.s. at
Neal Avenue.
I
I
Two locations of the ditch near 9th Street were investigated and it was
found that diverting the flow to the north near 9th Street and Magnolia
Road would save approximately 800 feet of structure; the savings outweigh
the additional right-of-way costs. The proposed alignment is shown in the
Appendix. In the event this location is found unacceptable in the final
design, a double 10 x 6 foot box, 1,100 feet long, paralleling the existing
structure will be required.
I
I
VI-4
II
I
I
I
The relatively low hydraulic grade line was the major factor in increasing
the size of the existing ditch and structures on this system. The control-
ling water surface elevation is located east of 9th Street along the Meadow-
lark Acres Addition (Gebhart Tract), Submain Bl-4, and the Belmont Boulevard
submain, Bl-3. These submains are discussed in further detail in this
Section of the Report.
I
I
Overflow of the Magnolia Road ditch to the north between 1-135 and 9th
Street has occurred in past storms. To prevent this, a dike along the
north side of the ditch, between 1-135 and 9th Street, is recommended. A
detailed layout of the main interceptor, B1 is shown in the Appendix.
I
The estimated project cost for alternate 1 is $1,331,000.
Alternate 2
I
Alternate 2 provides a ponding area on the east side of Meadowlark Acres
Addition (Gebhart Tract) east of 9th Street and north of Magnolia Road.
The area of the pond is approximately 60 acres, with storage of 90 acre-
feet. An overflow weir 600 feet in length, located about 1,200 feet east
of 9th street, on the north side of Magnolia Road ditch, was sized to
provide a peak discharge of 350 c.f.s. into the ponding area, with 200
c.f.s. discharging through the existing 9 x 7 foot box under 9th Street.
By providing this storage upstream, the size of the structures from 9th
Street to Dry Creek would be reduced by 50 percent, and the size of the
ditch by 30 percent. A detailed discussion of the ponding area in Meadow-
lark Acres is found in the subsection entitled, "Submain Bl-4".
I
I
I
I
To prevent overflow from Dry Creek into the urbanized areas of the City
east of 1-135, the structures under 1-135 will be provided with flapgates.
The existing outlet, consisting of 9 x 7. foot structures under the two
access roads and 1-135, would be increased in size by adding a 10 x 6 foot
box. The Magnolia Road ditch will vary in size from a 30 foot bottom.near
Dry Creek to a 20 foot bottom near Neal Avenue with a slope of 0.05 percent.
The proposed ditch will be twice the width of the existing ditch.
I
I
The water surface elevation in Dry Creek, without improvements, resulting
from a 100 year storm, is 1,242 m.s.l. This elevation would be 4 to 5 feet
above Belmont Boulevard south of Magnolia Road and 3 feet above 9th Street
at Magnolia Road. With the proposed improvements to the Magnolia Road
ditch and the establishment of the ponding area in the Gebhart Tract, the
water surface elevation in System B resulting from a 100 year storm, would
be approximately 1,237 m.s.l. which would be.below the floor elevations of
existing buildings.
I
I
I
An overflow ditch between the Union Pacific Railroad tracks and Ohio Street,
south of South High School was investigated but due to the existing topography,
this alternative was eliminated.
I
The estimated project cost for this alternate, without the ponding area in
the Meadowlark Acres Addition, is $751,200. With the ponding area in the
Meadowlark Acres Addition (Gebhart Tract) included, the cost is $1,406,800.
I
VI-5
I
I
I
I
Alternate 3
I
Alternate 3 provides for a pumping station located west of 1-135 to alle-
viate flooding of system B during high water stages in Dry Creek. The
pumping station would have a total capacity of 314,300 gpm, pumping against
a total dynamic head of 10 feet. The station would consist of 3 pumps,
powered by combination engine-motor drivers with automatic start and control
systems_ The Magnolia Road ditch and structures would be the same size as
Alternate 1. The 100 year frequency storm would cause some flooding of low
lying areas, however, the extent of the damage would depend on the coincident
stage in Dry Creek.
I
I
The estimated project cost for Alternate 3 is $1,685,300.
Comparison of Alternates 1, 2 and 3
I
The economics of the alternate plans favor Alternate 1, when the cost of
the ponding area is added to Alternate 2. Estimated project costs for the
three alternates are:
I
I
Alternate 1 - $1,331,000
Alternate 2 - 1,406,800
Alternate 3 - 1,685,300
I
Alternate 1 provides a less expensive system and would allow for full
development of Meadowlark Acres (Gebhart Tract) as discussed in the sub-
section regarding Submain Bl-4. Alternate.2 would be more expensive,
however, the additional park and recreation areas, along with reduced
right-of-way and structure sizes on the Magnolia Road ditch, make this
alternate attractive. Alternate 3, as with any system utilizing pumps, has
the possibility of mechanical failure during times of need.
I
I
The recommended System for B1, the Magnolia Road ditch, is Alternate 1.
This Alternate is shown in the Appendix.
Submain B1-1 and Lateral - Neal Avenue and Linda Lane
I
The.1ocations, sizes and profiles for Submain B1-1 and its lateral are
shown in the Appendix on sheets 8 and 18.
I
I
The total drainage area of this system, at its outlet into main interceptor
B1 at Neal Avenue and Linda Lane, is 60 acres. This system provides relief
for most of the Bonnie Ridge Addition. The underground storm sewers on
Neal Avenue and Linda Lane were sized for a 10 year frequency storm with
provisions for temporary storage of the 10Q year frequency storm.
I
I
In the past, flooding on Neal Avenue has been caused by inadequate storm
sewers and the lack of an adequate secondary drainage system of street
overflow and storage for severe storms. The existing storm sewer on Neal
Street ranges in size from a 24 inch at Linda Lane to an 18 inch at Bret
Avenue, with average capacities of 10 c.f.s. The ratio of required capacity
to existing capacity is 7 to 1. The existing storm sewers in this.area
I
VI-6
I
I
I
I
will be used in conjunction with the proposed storm sewers, shown on sheet
18 in the Appendix. A more detailed discussion of the inadequacies of the
existing storm sewers in the Bonnie Ridge Addition are discussed in Section
IV of this report.
I
The proposed storm sewer on Neal Avenue, (B1-1), varies in size from a 30
inch pipe at the upper end, near Bret Avenue, to a 60 inch pipe at Neal
Avenue and Linda Lane. This drain has a slope of 0.15 percent with a 10
year frequency discharge ranging from 20 c.f.s. at the upper end to 80
c.f.s. at the outfall.
I
I
I
~ lateral on Linda Lane and Scott Avenue, (Bl-la), will provide relief for
a 5 year frequency storm with the streets providing additional storage
capacity for runoff from more severe storms. The size of this lateral is a
36 inch pipe with a slope of 0.4 percent.
I
By providing a 60 inch pipe and additional inlets at Neal Avenue and Linda
Lane, it is estimated that the elevation of the accumulated runoff resul-
ting from a 100 year storm will be below the floor elevations of the exis~
tihg buildings, utilizing temporary storage in the streets.
I
An alternative of regrading Neal Avenue from Linda Lane to the Union Pacific
Railroad tracks and providing an overflow chute into main interceptor Bl,
was investigated, but the required street grades and high cost made this
alternative unacceptable.
I
The estimated project costs for Submain Bl-l on Neal Avenue and Lateral
Bl-la on Linda Lane are $176,000 and $73,000, respectively, for a total of
$249,000.
I
Submain Bl-2 - Colonial Lane
I
This small submain will provide relief for 12 acres near Colonial Lane.
I
The 10 year frequency storm discharge is 20 c.f.s., which will require a 30
inch storm sewer. It was proposed this area be drained into main interceptor
Bl, after an investigation showed that draining this area to the east into
System C would require 1,500 feet of new storm sewer.
I
The existing storm sewer on Edward Street will have sufficient capacity to
discharge the 10 year storm runoff into System C to the east, with the
installation of Submain B1-2 which will divert 12 acres to the west.
I
The estimated project cost of this submain is $19,000.
Submain B1-3 and Laterals - South Belmont Boulevard
I
I
Submain Bl-3, South Belmont Boulevard, has a total drainage area of 74
acres at the outfall into Main Interceptor Bl (Magnolia Road ditch). The
locations and profiles of this system are shown on sheets 8 and 18 in the
Appendix.
I
VI-7
II
r--
I
I
I
The 10 year frequency storm peak discharge at the outfall is 140 c.f.s.
This discharge is 4 times larger than the capacity of the existing 42-inch
pipe.
I
The inadequacy of the existing system is evidenced by frequent and pro-
longed flooding of the low lying areas near Hart Avenue and Belmont
Boulevard, Hartland and Ray Avenue. The proposed drains will provide
relief from this frequent flooding.
I
During severe storms, or when the capacity of the proposed Magnolia Road
ditch (B1) is exceeded, flooding of theOlow lying areas south of Magnolia
Road, in the Key Acres Addition, will occur, but the extent of the flooding
will be limited to the street right-of-way, if the proposed drainage system
on Belmont Boulevard is constructed.
I
I
Two small laterals on Key Avenue to Ray Avenue (Bl-3a) and Hartland Avenue
(Bl-3b) will provide relief for the low lying areas on these laterals. The
proposed underground storm sewers are designed for a 5 year frequency storm
with temporary storage in the streets for more severe storms. The ratio of
required capacity to existing capacity of these two laterals is approxi-
mately 3 to 1. Sheets 8 and 19 in the Appendix show these laterals. The
area to the south of Laura Street will drain into Main Interceptor B2 and
not into the lateral on Ray Avenue.
I
I
I
The estimated project cost for Submain Bl-3 is $316,000 and for the two
laterals Bl-3a and Bl-3b, the estimated project cost is $140,900 and
$47,600, respectively, for a grand total of $504,500.
Submain BI-4 - Meadowlark Acres, Gebhart Tract
I
The proposed system is shown on sheets 9 and 19 in the Appendix.
I
The total drainage area of this system is 80 acres with an additional 20
acres of the Meadowlark Acres addition draining to 9th Street on the west
rather than into Submain Bl-4.
I
The peak 10 year frequency discharge at the outlet into the Magnolia Road
ditch is 150 c.f.s. A 10 foot bottom ditch will parallel the Union Pacific
Railroad tracks and drain the low lying area south of Wayne Avenue into the
Magnolia Road ditch.
I
I
Drainage of the Meadowlark Acres Addition to the north into the "slough" or
east into the Wayne Avenue system was investigated, but the cost proved
unacceptable, even though the natural drainage of this system is toward the
north. Once it was decided to drain the area to the south into the Magnolia
Road ditch (Bl), two alternates were investigated. The alternate systems
were studied in sufficient detail to develop comparative cost estimates.
I
Alternate 1
I
This alternate provides drainage for the ofull development of Meadowlark
Acres (Gebhart Tract). A 10 foot bottom ditch will intercept the 10 year
frequency storm runoff from SO acres and discharge it into the Magnolia
I
VI-S
I
I
I
I
I
Road ditch. Small laterals on the future streets to the west of the ditch
were not sized, but should be investigated at the time the streets are
designed. To prevent flooding of this area during severe storms, 16 acre-
feet of temporary ponding should be provided below elevation 1,236.5 m.s.l.,
with a minimum ground line elevation at the buildings of 1,237 m.s.l. This
storage can be provided by a 10 acre ponding area in the northeast corner.
This would require a revised plat of the area to be submitted. An alter-
native to a 10 acre ponding area, is to provide 16 acre-feet of storage in
the street right-of-way below elevation 1,236.5 m.s.l. The amount of fill
required to accomplish the development ~f this area can be reduced from
200,000 cubic yards to 20,000 cubic yards by the construction of a ponding
area in the northeast corner. Sheet 9 in the Appendix shows the proposed
system with the ponding area.
I
I
A dike along the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, at elevation 1,237 m.s.l.,
will prevent overflow to the east, and a dike along the north side of the
area, at elevation 1,236.5 m.s.l., will prevent overflow onto 4th Street
except for storms exceeding a 100 year frequency.
I
I
In either operation, great care should be given to street grades in order
that damage due to high water is minimized.
I
A storage pond in the northwest corner is not recommended due to the
hydraulic gradeline requirements.
I
The estimated project cost for this alternate is $114,800.
Alternate 2
I
Alternate 2 will use the east 80 acres, more or less, of the Meadowlark
Acres Addition (Gebhart Tract) for ponding. A 100 year storm runoff storage
of 150 acre-feet, below elevation 1,237 m.s.l., is required. An overflow
weir, 600 feet in length with a peak 25 year storm discharge of 350 c.f.s.
and a crest at elevation 1,235.5 m.s.l., will be located north of the
Magnolia Road ditch, 1,200 feet east of 9th Street. This weir will allow
flowage into the ponding area. A small ditch along the Union Pacific
Railroad tracks will drain the ponding area after the high water in the
Magnolia Road ditch has receded. This storage pond will allow the reduc-
tion in the structure sizes and ditch on Main Interceptor BI west of 9th
Street by approximately 50 percent.
I
I
I
The proposed park improvements in the ponding area are shown in Plate VI-2
and discussed in the Section on Proposed Park Improvements to Ponding
Areas.
I
I
The estimated project cost of this alternate is $655,600 without park
improvements and $1,756,600 with park improvements.
I
I
VI-9
I
I
I
I
Comparison of Alternates 1 and 2
I
The economics of the two alternates favor Alternate 1 for Submain BI-4. If
a comparison is made of the overall cost of Main Interceptor Bl and Submain
BI-4, Alternate 2 has an estimated project cost of approximately $40,000
less than Alternate I, due to the reduced structure sizes on Main Interceptor
Bl.
I
Alternate 1 is recommended and shown in the Appendix because of the desire
to fully develop the Meadowlark Acres Addition. It is also recommended
that the area be replatted to provide a storage pond in the northeast
COrner. This pond will provide temporary storage during high stages in the
Magnolia Road ditch, Bl.
I
Submain BI-5 ~ Simmons - Highland Streets
I
I
This submain runs on Highland Avenue from Morland Avenue north and east to
Simmons Avenue and into the Magnolia Road ditch. It will provide relief
for approximately 36 acres. Drainage into this system from the south will
be limited to about 500 feet south of Belmont Boulevard. To discharge the
10 year frequency storm peak runoff, a 36-inch pipe from Morland Avenue to
Parkway Avenue, and a 24-inch pipe from Parkway Avenue to Magnolia Road
will be added to the existing drainage system. The average ratio of the
required capacity to existing capacity is 3 to 1. Street storage will
provide a secondary drainage system for severe storms. The remainder of
the existing storm drains in this system have. sufficient capacity to dis-
charge the.design runoff.
I
I
I
Sheets 8 and 20 in the Appendix show the proposed improvements. The
estimated project cost for Submain BI-5 is $160,300.
Submain BI-6 - Ninth Street
I
This submain provides relief for
Street, north of Magnolia Road.
sheets 4 and 20 in the Appendix.
64 acres on the east and west side of 9th
The location and profile are shown on
I
II
I
The.open ditch along 9th Street from Otto Avenue to its intersection with
the Magnolia Road ditch was designed for a 10 year frequency storm peak
discharge of 150 c.f.s. Of the total 64 acres, approximately 42 acres to
the west of 9th Street will be drained into this system. Runoff from 22
acres to the east of 9th Street will drain into this system through the
existing structures under 9th Street.
I
The future access road, west of 9th Street and north of Magnolia Road will
act as a road fill dike to prevent overflow to the west during severe
storms. During prolonged and severe storms, some flooding of the low lying
areas adjacent to 9th Street may occur,
I
The estimated project cost for Submain BI-6 is $71,100.
I
VI-I0
I
I
I
Submain BI-7 - Tulane - Hageman
I
Submain BI-7 will provide relief for a total drainage
72 acres at its outlet into the Magnolia Road ditch.
is shown on sheets 4 and 21 in the Appendix.
area of approximately
The proposed system
I
I
Improvements in this system will consist of increasing the capacity of the
existing storm sewer from Magnolia Road, north to Saturn Avenue near Hageman
Avenue, and increasing the size of the existing pipe on Tulane Avenue from
Saturn Avenue to Otto Avenue. These proposed improvements will have the
capacity to discharge a 10 year frequency storm. The ratio of the required
capacity to existing capacity is 2 to 1.
I
The existing storm sewers on Hageman Avenue north of Saturn Avenue and on
Saturn Avenue west of Hageman presently have sufficient capacity.
I
Future streets- to the west of BI-7 will be graded to drain into this system
by overland street flow or small laterals.
I
Temporary ponding in the streets and low lying areas will occur during
severe storms, but if the-lots are graded to 3 feet above the top of curb
on future streets, no serious flood damage- should occur.
I
The estimated project cost for this system is $292,400.
I
Submain BI-8 - Mid State Mall
I
Submain BI-8 will provide relief for a total drainage area of 60 acres
south of the Mid State Mall and will have a peak 10 year frequency storm
discharge at the outlet of 160 c. f. s.- The proposed system is shown on
sheets 3 and 21 in the Appendix.
I
To prevent flooding during severe storms the low lying area south of the
Mid State Mall should be filled to a groundline elevation for future build-
ings of 1,242 m.s.l.
I
Drainage of this system to the north along 9th Street was investigated, but
the'hydraulic grade line limitations made this alternative unacceptable.
Diverting the runoff from this area to the 1-135 ditch was also investi-
gated but the size of the existing ditch and structures into the Magnolia
Road ditch would need to be increased, in addition, the Kansas Department
of Transportation may have reservations regarding joint use- of their drain-
age ditches.
I
I
The three existing culverts, on the south side of Magnolia Road at 9th
Street, drain an area of approximately 11 acres. The capacity of these
culverts is sufficient, if the proposed submain, BI-8, is constructed. The
existing storm sewer which drains the Mid State Mall Parking lot is also of
sufficient size if the proposed improvements are made on Main Interceptor
Bl-l.
I
I
-The estimated project cost for Submain BI-8 is $215,600.
I
I
VI-l1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Main Interceptor B2 - Key Acres 2nd, North of Schilling Road
Main Interceptor B2 will provide relief for a total drainage area of 200
acres at the 1-135 structure, and will help relieve the existing drainage
problem immediately south of Neal Avenue west of the Union Pacific Railroad
tracks. The location, size and profile of this system is shown on sheets 8
and 22 in the Appendix.
The proposed open ditch would begin immediately west of the Union Pacific
Railroad tracks 1200 feet north of Schilling Road and will divert the local
runoff to the west into Dry Creek. The present drainage area is approxi-
mately 20 percent developed. Future street laterals will drain into the
main interceptor from the south and from the north.
The location of Main Interceptor B2 should be kept as far north as possible
so that future laterals will have sufficient grade.
The 25 year frequency storm runoff from ultimate development of the area at
the 1-135 structure is 560 c.f.s. Peak 25 year storm discharge from exist-
ing development represents 75 percent of the discharge from the ultimate
development.
If the proposed system to the south of Schilling Road, Submain Al-3, is not
constructed at the same time as B2, then Schilling Road should be. raised to
prevent overland flow from reaching Main Interceptor B2, otherwise local
flooding may occur.
The low lying area just west of the Union
of Schilling Road should be filled so that
at the basement windows is 1,243.5 m.s.!.
Pacific Railroad tracks and north
the minimum groundline elevation
(See Appendix Sheet 8.)
Severe storms of a magnitude greater than the 25 year frequency storm, will
CaUse overflow of the main interceptor to the north with some local street
flooding. Dry Creek will have some effect on the capacity of the ditch, but
only for storms of magnitude greater than a 25 year frequency. Generally,
the groundline east of 1-135 is higher than the 100 year storm water surface
elevation in Dry Creek.
The estimated project cost for Main Interceptor B2 is $723,300.
SYSTEM E - DRY CREEK OUTLET, OUTLET FOR SYSTEMS A AND B
System E consists of Dry Creek located on the west side of 1-135 commencing
at a point 1-1/2 miles south of Schilling Road, and extending north to the
1-135 crossing of Dry Creek. The proposed.system basically follows the
existing alignment and grade of Dry Creek. The total drainage area of
System E is 7,941 acres. Approximately 25 percent of the drainage area of
System E is presently committed to urban development. The system consists
of 4.2 miles of existing channel to be widened, shaped and straightened.
The location, size and profile for this system is shown on sheets 1 through
4 and 28 in the Appendix, and Plate VI-l in this Report.
=
VI-12
I
I
I
The channel is designed for a 25 year frequency storm from the existing
development. The right-of-way is proposed to accommodate runoff from
ultimate development. The water depth in the channel will be limited to 8
to 10 feet due to the possibility of flooding the low areas east of 1-135.
The bottom width of the channel varies from 50 feet above Water Well Road
to 100 feet at the 1-135 crossing. The average slope of the improved
channel is 0.06 percent. The peak 25-year frequency storm discharge from
existing development ranges from 4,500 c.f.s. at 1-135 to 2,110 c.f.s. at
Water Well Road.
I
I
The design for ultimate urban development ha$ two features different from
the design for existing urban development: 1) a 200 foot channel, instead
of a 100 foot channel, will be required between Magnolia Road and the 1-135
crossing; and, 2) a 100 foot overflow channel. will be required paralleling
the west side of 1-135 beginning at Centennial Road and extending north
approximately 3.5 miles to Mulberry Creek. The channel will be designed
for existing urban development initially because of the high cost of these
two features and the unpredictability of future development.
I
I
I
The improvements to Dry Creek to establish System E consist of: 1) clear-
ing and stripping the existing channel, 2) widening the existing channel as
required, 3) warping the sideslopes to match existing structures, 4) straight-
ening the existing channel and filling abandoned sections of channel; and,
5) constructing a double 12 x 12 foot RCB at Water Well Road. All other struc-
tures.are adequate, except the Missouri Pacific Railroad bridge which will
require improvement of the channel under the railroad bridge and construction
of an overflow channel to another bridge located about 1,000 feet south of
the Dry Creek channel crossing.
I
I
I
Phasing of System E is possible, with Phase 1 including .construction from
the 1-135 crossing to Schilling Road, and Phase 2 including construction
from Schilling Road to the intersection of Main Interceptor A-2. Phase 1
however, amounts to 80 percent of the total cost of System E; therefore,
System E should be constructed as one unit rather than in phases.
I
I
The estimated project cost for System E is $1,b67,200. Preliminary estimates
of cost for this system are detailed in SECTION VIII, PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES
OF COSTS.
I
SYSTEM C - KNOX OUTLET, OHIO STREET AND SCHILLING ROAD
I
The total drainage area of System C is approximately 2,100 acres (3.28
square miles). Of the 2,100 acres, approximately 95 percent presently is
devoted to agricultural use. Ultimate development of the proposed system
will consist of 5.5 miles of main interceptors and 2 miles of submains,
consisting of 95 percent open ditch. (See the Appendix and Plate VI-I in
this report.)
I
Alternatives..considered for each subsystem are discussed in the following
paragraphs. .-,.
I
I
VI-13
[I
I'
I I
I
I
Basically, System C will divert approximately 1,000 acres, south of Bonnie
Ridge, to the east into the proposed ponding area south of Knox Road. The
outlet for this system will consist of enlarged structures at the flood
protection levee, which will discharge into the Smoky Hill River, or will
be temporarily stored in the designated ponding areas during high stages in
the river. The design criteria used for the ponding area and outlet is
discussed in SECTION V, DESIGN CRITERIA.
I
I
The existing drainage conditions in this area are discussed in SECTION IV.
The total estimated project cost for the proposed drains in System C is
$4,200,900.
I
Main Interceptor C1 - Knox Ponding Area and Outlet
I
The location, size, profile and ponding area are shown on sheets 12, 13,
and 23 in the Appendix.
I
Runoff from the area south of Knox Road will flow through the proposed open
ditch south of Knox Road, into the old abandoned river channel at Knox Sand
Pit and through the flood-protection levee. The capacity of the existing
42 inch pipe at the levee is 95 c.f.s. with free outfall into the river and
an allowable water surface elevation of 1,231 m.s.l.
I
I
During the August 31 to September 1 storm of 1977, the maximum stage in the
Smoky Hill River equaled a 5 year frequency flood. This flood stage does
not effect-the outlet capacity of the existing 42 inch pipe in the levee.
I
The existing ditch along Knox Road provides minimal relief for runoff, and
as a result, considerable flooding has occurred in the low lying areas
south of Knox Road. The abandoned river channel north of Knox Sandpit has
considerable capacity, but the structures under Knox Road, Magnolia Road
and the flood protection levee limit the discharge to approximately 15
percent of the old channel capacity. The storage available in the old river
channel is about 42 acre-feet at bankfull. Including Knox Sand Pit, the
total storage is 180 acre-feet covering an area of approximately 20 acres.
The inadequacy of the existing system is evidenced by past flooding in the
area. Further discussion of the present drainage systems are discussed
in SECTION IV of this report.
I
I
I
Two possible solutions to the problem were studied in sufficient detail to
develop comparative estimates of cost. Preliminary estimates of the cost
of each alternate are detailed in SECTION VIII of this report. Any con-
struction at or near the flood protection levee is subject to approval by
the Corps of Engineers, as described in SE9TION II of this report.
I
I
Alternate 1
I
Alternate 1 provides a double 8 x 6 foot structure discharging into the
Smoky Hill River. River stages will reduce the structure capacity during
discharges greater than a 10 year frequency storm and completely block the
discharge of the structure for a river discharge greater than a- 20-year
frequency. _ See Table V-I in SECTION V.
I
[I _
VI-14
The existing storage in the old river channel and Knox Sand Pit will pro-
vide storage for the runoff from storms smaller than a 2-year frequency, 24
hour rainfall. With ultimate development of System C, an additional 55
acres and 250 acre-feet of storage is required to store the 5 year frequency
interior runoff with river stages at or greater than a 20 year frequency
and with no discharge at the levee structure. With this additional storage,
the total proposed ponding capacity would be approximately 430 acre feet
covering an area of 75 acres. The water surface elevation in the ponding
area would be at an elevation 1,231 m.s.l. To provide protection for a
100 year interior runoff with no outflow through the levee structure, a
dike along the north, west and south side of the pond will be required to
contain the water surface at elevation 1,234 m.s.l.
If the river stage is below a 20 year frequency and a 100 year storm occurs
on System C, the proposed structures and ditches will discharge this runoff
using the available storage in the ponds with a maximum water surface
elevation of 1,231 m.s.l.
The runoff volume with existing development is approximately 70 percent of
the ultimate runoff.
When the ponding area is filled and the river stage is less than a 10 year
frequency, the ponding area will empty in 24 hours; otherwise the stage in
the river will control the time required to empty the ponding area, it
could take up to one week, depending on the river stage and location of the
storm on the Smoky Hill River Watershed.
The proposed ponding area may ultimately become part of Salina's park
system. The proposed park improvements are discussed in "Proposed Park
Improvements to Ponding Areas" in SECTION VI of this report. If the City
finds the park improvements unacceptable, it may be possible to lease the
area for agricultural purposes. The expansion of Knox's Sand Pit to the
west could reduce the amount of excavation required, and thus save the City
considerable expense. The estimated project cost for this alternate is
$1,408,400.
Alternate 2
Alternate 2 provides the required outlet capacity with a pumping
instead of a gravity drain and 55 additional acres for ponding.
the old abandoned river channel and Knox Sand Pit would still be
with this alternate.
station
Ponding in
required
The pump station would have a discharge capacity of about 450,000 gallons
per minute, pumping against a head of 10 feet. The station would consist
of at least 4 pumps, powered by combination engine-motor drivers with
automatic start and control systems. The estimated project cost of the
station and related structures is $1,430,100.
Comparison of Alternates
The economics of the alternate plans, for all practical purposes, are
equal. The estimated project costs for the two alternates are:
VI-IS
I
I
I
Alternate 1 - $1,408,400
Alternate 2 - $1,430,100
I
Alternate 1 is a gravity system with no possibility of mechanical failure,
however maintenance of the ponding area, as well as the impact on the tax
base of the City must be considered. One of the major advantages of Alternate
1 is the positive environmental effect and a reduction in the runoff volume
due to the open area of the pond as opposed to urbanized development.
I
I
If Alternate 2 was constructed, the probability of mechanical failure of
the pumps in time of need and the operational cost, must be weighed against
the savings in land acquisition.
I
Recognizing the uncertainties in design and the degree of protection required,
as well as the impact on the economic base of the City, Alternate 1 is the
recommended plan for System C. Sheets 12 and 23 in the Appendix show the
proposed systems.
I
Submain C1-1 - South Ohio Street
I
The location, size and profiles are shown on sheets 8 and 23 in the Appendix
and on Plate VI-1 in this Report.
I
Submain C1-1 will provide relief for a total drainage area of 87 acres west
of Ohio Street. Approximately half of the total area is undeveloped at
this time. The proposed system will run from Neal Avenue, at the upper
end, and discharge into the proposed ponding area east of Ohio Street. The
system will consist of 800 feet of enclosed drain on the east side of
Bonnie Ridge and 1,000 feet of open ditch north to the proposed pond.
I
I
The system is designed for a 10 year frequency storm with discharges
ranging from 30 c.f.s. at the upper end to 140 c.f.s. at the lower end.
Runoff from the undeveloped area north of Bonnie Ridge will be discharged
into this 'system, with only 10 percent of the area .draining to the existing
system on Felton Street.
I
The outlet into the ponding area will have a flapgate to prevent flow from
the ponding area into this system.
I
The proposed storm drain west of Ohio Street at Neal Avenue will drain the
low lying areas to prevent the frequent and prolonged flooding that occurs
during storms.
I
During severe storms, temporary ponding will occur in the streets in the
Bonnie Ridge area with some overflow to the west and into Syste~B.
I
The estimated project cost for Submain C1-1 (South Ohio Street) is $99,000.
I
Main Interceptor C2 - Mentor to Knox Road
I
The location, size and profile are shown on sheets 5, 6, 7, 11, 12 and 23
in the Appendix with the general location shown on Plate VI-1 in this
Report.
VI-16
I
I
I
I
Main Interceptor C2 drains a total area of 1,660 acres (2.59 sq. mi.) at
the outlet, into the ponding area south of Knox Road. The land use of the
drainage area is primarily agricultural, at this time, with many low lying
areaS and a flat topography. The main purpose of the ditch is to intercept
the runoff from south of Schilling Road and divert it to the east into the
proposed ponding ~rea. Low lying areas adjacent to the proposed ditch will
need some type of positive control to prevent flood damage to adjacent
property during severe storms. This could be in the form of easements,
zoning restrictions or earth fill. The proposed ditch provides basic
relief for this area, with laterals and side drains constructed as develop-
ment requires.
I
I
I
The 25 year frequency peak discharge for ultimate development ranges from
. 800 c. f. s. near Mentor to 1,700 c. f. s. at the outfall into the proposed
ponding area. The 25 year peak discharge, with the proposed ditch and
existing development, averages 70 percent of the ultimate peak discharge.
I
The bottom width of the ditch varies from a 50 foot .bottom at the outfall
to a 20 foot bottom near Mentor. The hydraulic data for Main Interceptor
C2 are shown in the Appendix on Sheet 23.
I
I
Phase 1 construction of the ditch would take place from Knox Road south and
west, to approximately 1,500 feet west of and parallel to Ohio Street.
This would divert the runoff to the east and out of the present residential
development north of Schilling Road. Further protection for severe storms
could be provided by raising the elevation of Schilling Road 1 to 2 feet a
distance of 4,000 feet east of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. Timing
qf the construction of the main interceptor ditch to the south of Schilling
Road would depend on the extent of development in this area and the financial
capabilities of the City.
I
I
Construction of detention ponds to the south of Schilling Road would reduce
the peak discharge and structure sizes. Whether or not these storage areas
will be available in the future depends on the extent of development in
this area -and the cost effectiveness of these ponds. The proposed ditch
and structures were sized assuming no detention ponds south of Schilling
Road.
I
I
I
The estimated project cost for Phase 1 construction is $818,900 and for
Phase 2, $1,166,900.
Submain C2-1 - Water Well Road to Schilling Road
I
Submain C2-1 is shown on Sheets 11 and 24 in the Appendix. This system
will provide basic relief for a total drainage area of 270 acres south of
Schilling Road and east of Ohio Street. The area which is presently used
as agricultural land. As this area develops, laterals on future streets
will discharge into this submain.
I
I
The peak 10 year frequency storm discharge varies from 190 to 320 c.f.s.
with ultimate development in the drainage area. The proposed open ditch
has a bottom width of 10 feet. The hydraulic data for the ditch are shown
on Sheet 24 in the Appendix.
I
VI-17
I
I
I
(
The location of this ditch may be moved to the west to accommodate future
street grades and laterals.
I
The estimated project cost for Submain C2-1 is $198,600.
I
Submain C2-2 - South Bonnie Ridge
I
The purpose of this submain is to provide basic relief for the local drain-
age north of Schilling Road and south of Scott Avenue. The total drainage
area of this system at its outfall into C2, is 113 acres. This area is
presently undeveloped, but future growth will require drainage to this
submain by street flow or underground laterals. A shallow dike on the
north side of the ditch will prevent overflow to the north during severe
storms. Sheets 8 and 24 in the Appendix show the proposed system.
I
I
The 10 year frequency peak discharge is 150 c.f.s. at the outfall into C2.
The ditch has a bottom width of 10 feet with storage above the design water
surface for a 100 year storm. If any flooding does occur in this area, it
will be due to the inadequate capacity of the future streets and laterals.
I
The estimated project cost for Submain C2-2 is $246,100.
I
Main Interceptor C3 - Schilling Road to Knox Ponding Area
I
The proposed system is shown on Sheets 11, 12 and 24 in the Appendix. The
purpose of this system is to provide. basic .relief for approximately 292
acres east.of Ohio Street. Development in this area will require special
controls on the future street grades and laterals to prevent flooding in
low lying areas. Construction of Main ,Interceptor C3 will not only provide
relief for the 290 acres, it will also reduce the amount of runoff to Main
Interceptor C2. This area will be difficult to drain at some locations due
to the old river meander scars. At the time the streets are constructed
it may be necessary to purchase an easement or provide zoning restriction
on the land in low lying areas.
I
I
I
The 25 year frequency peak discharge is 650 c.f.s. at the outfall into the
Knox Ponding area. The ditch has a 10 foot bottom width through its entire
reach. The hydraulic data for Main Interceptor C3 are shown on Sheet 24 in
the Appendix.
I
The date at which this ditch is constructed will depend on the rate of
development in the area and the financial condition of the .city.
I
The estimated project cost for Main Interceptor C3 is $276,000.
I
SYSTEM D - WAYNE AVENUE, BELMONT BOULEVARD, OHIO STREET AND THE HOLMQUIST
OUTLET
I
The total drainage area of System D is. approximately 950 acres. Sixty
percent of the area is developed at this time. The systems receive runoff
from an area bounded by Cloud Street on the north, Highland Avenue on the
west, Knox Road on the south and the flood protection levee on the.east.
I
VI-Ill
I
I
I
I
The proposed drainage improvements consist of 2.18 miles of open ditch main
interceptors and 2.88 miles of enclosed submains and laterals. Sheets 9,
13, 25, 26 and 27, in the Appendix, show the proposed system in detail and
Plate VI-1 in this report shows the general location and identification.
Most of the systems in this area are improvements to an existing drainage
system, ex~ept for the Main Interceptor and the ponding area north of Knox
Road and east of Ohio Street.
I
I
The outlet for this system will consist of enlarged structures through the
levee in the Holmquist Area. The proposed system has a drainage area of
828 acres and a ponding area south of Magnolia Road. The second outlet
will be at the farmed oxbow south of Wayne Avenue, and will drain a total
area of 120 acres. The design criteria used for the ponding areas and
outlet are discussed in SECTION V, DESIGN CRITERIA.
I
.The existing drainage conditions in this area are discussed in SECTION IV.
I
The estimated project cost for System D is $3,405,100.
I
Ma~n Interceptor D1 - Old River Channel Holmquist Outlet
I
The .location, size and profile for this system are shown on Sheets 13 and
25 in the Appendix.
I
The total drainage area, at the outlet into the Smoky Hill River, is 828
acres. The abandoned river channel would be cleared of brush and debris,
then shaped and seeded, to provide an open and maintainable channel.
Encroachment on the channel by re~idential development should be prohibited
since this would decrease the capacity of the channel. The old channel has
a storage capacity of 90 acre-feet at bankfull. The existing 78 inch
outlet at the levee has a capacity of 480 c.f.s. with free outflow to the
river, however, it will be blocked during river discharges greater than a
20 year frequency river flood. The old river channel has a capacity of
1,000 c.f.s. with no structures on the channel to obstruct the flow; this
discharge would equal a 2 year frequency flood, if it were part of the
Smoky Hill River.
I
I
I
Flooding of the low lying areas along Magnolia Road, Belmont Boulevard,
Ohio Street and Wayne Avenue has been due in part, to the insufficient
capacity of the existing drainage system and outlet through the le~ee.
I
Two possible solutions to the flooding in this system were investigated for
the outlet in the Holmquist Area. These two solutions were studied in
sufficient detail to develop comparative cost estimates. Preliminary
estimates of cost for each alternate are detailed in SECTION VIII,
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF COST, of this report.
I
I
Alternate 1
I
Alternate 1 requires an increase in the structure size at the outlet and in
the channel under Albert Street. River stages will reduce the capacity of
the outlet structure. No outflow will occur when the river stage is equal
to or greater than a 20 year flood frequency, therefore, additional storage
of the runoff will be required.
I
VI-19
I
! II
,
II
II
The available storage in the old river channel is 90 acre-feet. This will
provide storage for the entire runoff from a storm equal to or less than a
2 year frequency. Additional storage of 100 acre-feet is required to meet
the design criteria discussed in SECTION V of this report. The additional
storage will be provided by a ponding area located in the low lying area
north of Knox Road and east of Ohio Street. The water surface elevation in
the system for a 5 year frequency interior runoff volume with no outflow to
the river would equal 1,228 m.s.l. Dikes around the proposed ponding area
will permit ponding depths for runoff greater than a 5 year frequency
storm. The ponding elevation for a 100 year interior storm with no outflow
into the river would equal 1,230 m.s.l. The connecting ditch, D2, between
the old river channel and the proposed ponding area will carry runoff from
the area north of Magnolia Road into the ponding area. The size of this
ditch was controlled by the flow to the south into the ponding area and not
by the normal flow to the north. The direction of flow in the connecting
ditch, D2, would be toward the south during times of high river stages.
The ponding area north of Knox Road would empty by flowing to the north and
out into the river through the levee structure, since the connecting ditch,
D2, is graded toward the north.
II
II
II
II
II
When the storage in this system is filled, it could take up to one week to
empty the ponding area, depending on the river stages.
II
II
Some of the low lying areas adjacent to Magnolia Road will be below the
water surface elevation in the pond for a 100 year frequency storm with no
outflow to the river, but the existing homes along the streets should not
be flooded"except by the insufficient capacity of the local drainage system.
All new buildings in System D should have a minimum groundline elevation at
the basement windows of 1,233 m.s.l.
II
With free outflow into the Smoky Hill River, the proposed system will
discharge a 100 year frequency storm on the interior with increased
structure sizes at the levee and in the channel under Albert Street.
II
II
An alternate location of the pond, nearer the old river channel, was
investigated, but it would require an additional 260,000 cubic yards of
excavation, plus special treatment for seepage control and approval by the
Corps of Engineers.
II
Proposed park improvements to the ponding area are shown on Plate VI-3 in
this report.
II
The estimated project cost for D1, old river channel and outlet, is $160,200.
If the cost of D2 and the ponding a"rea is added, the total estimated project
cost for D1 and D2 is $1,095,600.
II
Alternate 2
II
Alternate 2 provides the required outlet capacity with a pump station
instead of a gravity drain and additional ponding area. The station would
be located at the flood protection levee near the existing 78 inch pipe.
The station would have a discharge capacity of 224,000 gallons per minute,
pumping against a head of 10 feet. The station would consist "of 2 pumps,
powered by one diesel engine and one electric motor.
I
VI-20
II
I I
I
I
The existing pipe at the levee would remain and the structure at Albert
Street would be increased to the size proposed in Alternate 1. Storage in
the old river channel would be required up to an elevation of 1,228 m.s.l.
I
The estimated project cost for this alternate is $607,500. The total
estimated project cost for Dl and D2 for this alternate would be $975,900.
Comparison of Alternates
I
The economics of the alternates favor Alternate 2, when the cost of Main
Interceptor D2 and its ponding area are' added. The estimated project cost
of the two alternates with and without D2 is shown below:
I
Alternate 1
Alternate 2
Alternate 1
Alternate 2
without
without
with D2
with D2
D2 =
D2 =
$ 160,200
$ 607,500
$1,095,600
$ 975,900
=
I
=
I
The cost advantage of Alternate 2, including system D2, must be weighed
against the possible failure of the pumps in times of need, maintenance and
operation costs, availability of fuel and environmental effects. If Alternate
2 was constructed, and development occurred in the area north of Knox Road
and east of Ohio Street, a large amount of fill would be required to prevent
flooding during severe storms.
I
I
Alternate 1 has no possibility of mechanical failure, since it is a gravity
system. In addition, the volume of runoff will be less due to the 40 acres
of ponding area as opposed to 40 acres of urban development. Another
advantage of Alternate 1 is that it will be environmentally and aesthetically
pleasing if the proposed park improvements are made to the ponding area.
One of the major disadvantages of Alternate 1 is its affect on the tax base
of the City, since 40 acres of land would be taken off the tax role.
I
I
Recognizing the uncertainties in the operation of pumps, and the adverse
social and environnlental effects of Alternate 2, Alternate 1 is the recom-
mended system.
I
Main Interceptor D2 ~ Ohio-Magnolia
I
The proposed ditch and ponding area are shown on Sheets 12, 13 and 25 in
the Appendix.
I
The total drainage area of this system is 465 acres with a peak 25 year
discharge which varies from 200 c.f.s. at Magnolia Road to 1,000 c.f.s. at
the outfall into the old river channel, D1. The size of the ditch was
controlled by the flow from north to south when storage is required in the
ponding area south of Magnolia Road. This ditch acts as a connector between
the storage in the old river channel, D1, and the proposed ponding area
south of Magnolia Road. The ditch is graded to the north so the ponding
area would empty when river stages permit.
I
I
'/
I
VI-21
I
I
I
I
The ponding area will have an area of 40 acres with a storage of 100 acre-
feet below elevation 1,228 m.s.l. Dikes around the ponding area are required
to permit ponding to depths up to the 100 year interior runoff with no
outflow into the Smoky Hill River. The low lying area on Aurora Avenue is
at an elevation below the 100 year water surface in the pond.
I
Main Interceptor D2 will provide relief for the aoea along Magnolia Road
and west of Ohio Street. It will also provide an outlet for the proposed
system on Magnolia Road west of Ohio Street.
I
Proposed park improvements to the ponding area are shown on Plate VI-3 in
this report.
I
The estimated project cost for Main Interceptor D2 and the ponding area is
$935,400. This does not include the proposed park improvements in the
ponding area.
I
Submain D2-1 and Lateral - Wayne Avenue
I
I
This system will provide relief for the existing laterals that drain into
Wayne Avenue from the north and south. Submain D2-1 drains a total area of
254 acres at its outfall into Main Interceptor D2. The location, size and
profile of this system are shown on sheets 9, 13 and 26 in the Appendix.
I
The existing storm sewer on Wayne Avenue varies in size from a 21 inch
near Highland to a 60 inch at Ohio Street. The ratio of required capacity
to existing capacity is 3 to 1.
I
The existing 10 foot bottom ditch east of Ohio Street has a capacity of 250
c.f.s. which is 50 percent of that required. A double 7 x 6 foot box was
proposed, because a 20 foot bottom ditch would require more right-of-way
than that available. The existing 60 inch pipe which runs northeast from
Ohio Street does not have the required capacity, but it will remain as an
overflow outlet when the capacity of the double 7 x 6 foot box east of Ohio
Street is exceeded.
I
I
Frequent and prolonged flooding near Ohio Street and Wayne Avenue and 4th
Street and Wayne Avenue will be reduced by the installation of the proposed
system.
I
A lateral on Leland Way will provide relief for a 5 year frequency storm
with. the streets providing additional capacity for more severe storms. The
existing storm sewer varies in size from an 18 inch to a 21 inch. Its
capacity is only 50 percent of that required, therefore, additional pipes
are proposed.
I
I
The estimated project costs for Submain D2-1 (Wayne Avenue) and lateral
D2-la on Leland Way are $1,270,300 and $99,700, respectively, for a total
of $1,370,000.
I
I
VI-22
I
I
I
Submain D2-2 - Belmont Boulevard
I
This system is shown on Sheets 9 and 26 in the Appendix.
I
The total drainage area of the submain at Ohio Street is 78 acres. In the
past, flooding on Belmont Boulevard has been caused by inadequate storm
sewers and inlets. The existing storm sewer on Belmont Boulevard varies in
size from a 30 inch pipe at the upper end,. to a 48 inch pipe at the lower
end. The ratio of required capacity to existing capacities is 3 to 1. The
proposed system consists of 1,700 feet of 54 inch pipe and 800 feet of 36
inch pipe.
I
I
The existing drainage of the area to the north and south of Belmont Boulevard,
consists of a small lateral on Edward Avenue, with the remaining area
drained by surface flow in the streets.
I
Whether or not the proposed system on Belmont Boulevard is feasible will
depend on the importance of traffic movement on this major arterial during
storms which occur more frequently than once in 10 years.
I
The estimated project cost for Submain D2-2 (Belmont Boulevard) is $294,700.
I
Submain D2-3 and Laterals - Ohio Street and Magnolia Road
I
This system is shown on Sheets 8, 9 and 27 in the Appendix. The proposed
drains provide relief for approximately 103 acres.
I
The proposed storm sewer under Magnolia Road will discharge into the proposed
ponding area east of Ohio Street with overflow into the existing pipe on
Ohio Street. A new storm sewer from Nottingham Drive north to Wayne Avenue
will be required to increase the capacity of the existing storm sewer on
Ohio Street.
I
I
The peak 10 year frequency discharge at Ohio Street and Magnolia Road is
103 c.f.s. A 48 inch pipe into the ponding area east of Ohio Street will
discharge 90 c.f.s. with the remainder discharging on Ohio Street. The
peak 10 year discharge on the Ohio Street storm sewer is 90 c.f.s.
I
Two small laterals on Edward and Aurora Avenues, D2-3a and D2-3b, will
provide relief for a 5 year frequency storm. The existing storm sewers on
these streets have a capacity for less than a 2 year frequency storm.
During severe and prolonged storms, some flooding will occur on Edward and
Aurora Avenues, with possible damage to the existing homes constructed at
or below elevation 1,230 m.s.l. Overall, the proposed storm sewer in this
system will reduce the frequency of floodi~g.
I
I
The estimated project cost for D2-3 is $315,900. The two laterals on
Edward and Aurora Avenues have an estimated project cost of $25,700 and
$26,700, respectively.
I
I
VI-23
I
I
I
Submain D2-4 - Ohio Street - South of Magnolia Road
I
The submain is shown on Sheets 12 and 27 in the Appendix.
I
The open ditch will provide drainage for approximately 28 acres west of
Ohio Street and south of Magnolia Road. The peak 10 year frequency storm
discharge at the outfall into the proposed ponding area is 45 c.f.s.
I
Runoff into Submain D2-4 from south of Felton Street should not occur with
the proposed improvements in System C. Ponding in the area adjacent to
Ohio Street will occur during severe and prolonged storms.
I
The estimated project cost for Submain D2-4 is $58,100.
Main Interceptor D3 - East Magnolia and Outlet Ditch
I
Main Interceptor D3 is shown on Sheets 12, 13 and 27 in the Appendix..
I
The total drainage area at the levee outlet is 120 acres with a peak 25
year frequency discharge of 270 c.f.s.
I
The existing outlet through the levee will be increased in size by adding
double 42 inch pipes. The old abandoned river.channel will be used for
storage during the high stages in the Smoky Hill River. The 100 year
frequency storm runoff, with no outflow into the river, will have a ponding
elevation of 1,231 m.s.l.
I
I
Main Interceptor D3 is required to intercept the runoff that would otherwise
flow to the west into Main Intercrptor D2. Main Interceptor D3 need not be
constructed until development occurs in its drainage area.
The estimated project cost for this system is $219,300.
I
SYSTEM F - 4TH STREET AND THE SLOUGH
I
The total drainage area of System F at the outfall into the old river
channel near Prescott Avenue is 900 acres. The proposed improvements
consist of enlarging 13 structures at the street crossings on the slough
and 1,500 feet of underground storm sewer from Crawford Street to the old
river channel. System F will also include 2,000 feet of underground storm
sewer on 4th and Cloud Streets.
I
I
The proposed systems are shown in the Appendix and on Plate VI-l in this
report.
I
Alternatives considered for each system are discussed in the following
sections with comparative cost estimates for each alternative that was
investigated in detail.
I
The estimated project cost for System F is $2,236,500.
I
VI-24
I
I
I
Main Interceptor F1 - Slough
I
The proposed improvements to the "Slough" are shown en sheets 9, 10 and 29
in the Appendix. F1, the slough, runs from Cloud Street to the old river
channel near Prescott Avenue.
I
I
The drainage area of the slough ranges from 100 acres at Cloud Street to
900 acres at the outfall into the old river channel. The 25 year frequency
peak discharge varies from 270 c.f.s. at the upper end to 950 c.f.s. at the
outfall. The slough acts as the outlet for eight existing storm sewers
that drain into the slough from the east and west.
I
The study of this
street crossings.
sewers that drain
area was limited to the slough and its structures at the
No detailed investigation was made on the existing storm
into the slough from north of Cloud Street.
I
I
Flooding of the areas along the slough has occurred in the past due to the
inadequate capacity of the structures on the slough and the adjacent laterals.
The existin~ ditch has the capacity to discharge the 25 year frequency
storm, but the structures at the street crossings have a capacity for only
a 2 year frequency storm.. The area of the existing structures average 20
square feet, or less than 10 percent of the ditch area. The existing
structures are grossly insufficient, as a result, flooding of the area
adjacent to the slough has occurred frequently, with occasional property
damage. During the August 31 to September 1, 1977, storm it was estimated
that the peak discharge in the slough was equal to or greater than a 25
year frequency runoff.
I
I
I
Four solutions to the drainage problems associated with 4th Street and the
slough were studied in sufficient detail to develop comparative cost estimates.
The alternate systems are described below.
I
Preliminary cost estimates for each alternate are detailed in SECTION
VIII, PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF COST.
Alternate 1
I
Alt~rnate 1 consists of enlarging the existing structures at all the street
crossings from Cloud Street to the old river channel. The proposed improve-
ments would discharge a 25 year frequency storm with no overflow of the
streets, and would provide storage for a 100 year frequency runoff. below
the banks of the slough. This alternate does not require improvements to
the ditch, but the right-of-way north .of Bond Street and south of Crawford
Street would be increased to prevent encroachment on the flowage limits. If
this right-of-way is not obtained, and development proceeds to the east and
west of the slough, the reduction in the area of the ditch will cause
flooding upstream and downstream of Bond Street. The existing right-of-way
south of Bond Street is sufficient.
I
I
I
I
The proposed increases in the structure sizes at the street crossings
range from a single 7 x 4 foot box at Cloud Street to multiple 9 x 6 foot
boxes at Bond Street. The capacity of the existing pipe from Crawford
I
VI-25
I
I
I
I
Street extending down Second Street will be increased by adding a double 8
x 8 foot box. The structure between Crawford Street and the old river
channel, on Second Street, represents 45 percent of the total construction
cost of the slough system. Construction of an open ditch between Second
and Third Streets north of Crawford Street was investigated, but this would
not be feasible unless the existing homes were purchased to provide adequate
right-of-way. The existing drainage system from Crawford Street to the
north can discharge only 20 percent of the. 25 year frequency discharge.
I
I
The proposed improvements to the slough will relieve the drainage problems
that exist to the east and west due to high water in the slough. Flooding
of .the area adjacent to the slough will occur during severe and prolonged
storms when the capacities of. the laterals are exceeded, but it would be of
a local nature and not due to the water surface in the slough.
I
I
I
When and if the proposed improvements are made on the slough, the structures
on the old river channel, downstream of Prescott Avenue, should be increased
to accommodate the additional discharge.
The estimated project cost for Alternate 1 is $1,640,500.
Alternate 2
I
I
This alternate is basically the same as Alternate 1, but the proposed
structure sizes are smaller since the design was based on a 10 year fre-
quency peak discharge. The ditch will store a 50 year frequency runoff
within its.banks. This alternate is'not recommended since it does not
follow the design criteria set forth in Section V of this report.
I
The estimated project cost for Alternate 2 is $1,445,800 or 90 percent of
Alternate 1.
I
Alternate 3
I
This alternate will pass a 25 year frequency peak discharge with low-water
crossings on all the streets except Cloud, Republic and Crawford. Small
pipes under the crossings will provide positive drainage for storms with a
peak runoff of less than a 2 year frequency. The streets will be submerged
with storms greater than a 2 year frequency intensity.
I
The estimated project cost for Alternate 3 is $1,620,800.
I
Alternate 4
I
Alternate 4 will pass a 25 year frequency peak discharge with the removal
of all structures and the closing of all streets except Cloud, Republic and
Crawford. The ditch will not be improved. This alternate will also
provide storage for a 100 year frequency r~noff below the banks of the
slough.
I
The estimated project cost for Alternate 4 is $1,315,800, 80 percent of
Alternate 1.
I
VI-26
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Comparison of Alternates
Alternate 1, although the most expensive, is the recommended alternate. It
will provide adequate drainage and will allow access across the slough at
all existing and future streets.
Alternate 2 was not accepted due to the reduced flood protection at a
minimal savings in cost.
Alternate 3 is not recommended due to the frequent flooding of the low-
water crossings, which will disrupt the'traffic flow, and because the
project cost was approximately the same as Alternate 1.
Alternate 4 was not feasible due to the demand to keep all the street
crossings open.
A comparison of the project costs for each alternate is shown below:
Alternate 1 - $1,640,500
Alternate 2 $1,445,800
Alternate 3 - $1,620,800
Alternate 4 - $1,315,800
One alternate that was pursued, but not studied in detail, was the alter-
native of purchasing all the homes along the slough that have flooded.
Insufficient data were available to establish a cost on this alternative,
therefore, it is not discussed in detail.
Submain F1-1 - Cloud & 4th Street
The proposed system is shown on Sheets 9 and 29 in the Appendix. The total
drainage area of this submain is 95 acres at the outfall into the slough
(F1). Submain F1-1 begins on 4th Street near Charlotte Street then runs
north to Cloud Street, then east to its outfall into the slough.
The peak 10 year frequency discharge ranges from 90 c.f.s. at the upper end
to 220 c.f.s. at the outlet into the slough. The proposed increase in the
capacity of this system is achieved by adding a 7 x 4 foot box on 4th
Street and a 10 x 4 foot box on Cloud Street.
The construction of Submain B1-4 south of Wayne Avenue will prevent over-
flow into 4th Street, which in the past has caused serious flooding near
4th and Cloud Streets.
The major cause of flooding on 4th Street is the grossly inadequate capacity
of the existing 18 inch pipe and the effects of the Union Pacific Railroad
tracks which prevent overflow to the slough and causes ponding on 4th
Street.
The proposed construction of 1,800 feet of underground storm sewer may be
more costly than the purchase of all the ,homes along 4th Street that have
sustained flood damage in the past. During severe and prolonged storms,
flooding of the low lying areas on 4th Street will still occur even with
VI-27
I
I
I
the proposed improvements, because a secondary drainage system does not
exist. The existing grade on the Union Pacific Railroad tracks prevents
overflow to the slough, and as a result, when the capacity of the proposed
system is exceeded, ponding in the streets will occur. The proposed system
will drain a 10 year frequency storm with ponding in the streets to accom-
modate a 25 year frequency storm.
I
I
Locating the proposed improvements to the west of the Union Pacific Railroad
tracks and east of 4th Street was investigated, but the limited right-of-way
made this alternative unacceptable.
The estimated project cost for Submain F1-1 (4th & Cloud Streets) is $596,000.
I
SYSTEM G - EAST OF OHIO STREET, BETWEEN CRAWFORD AND CLOUD STREETS, OR DOW
AND FAITH ADDITIONS
I
The total drainage area of System G is 280 acres. Approximately 25 percent
of the area is presently developed. The proposed system consists of 1.1
miles of main interceptor ditches and enclosed submains. (See the Appendix
and Plate VI-I.) Alternatives considered for each system are discussed in
the following sections. The estimated project cost for ultimate development
of System G is $1,017,000.
I
I
Main Interceptor Gl - Courtney Drive
I
I
The location, size and profile for the main ditch is shown on Sheets 14 and
30 in the Appendix and Plate VI-l in'this report. The total drainage area
of the Courtney Drive ditch is 205 acres. The ditch is designed for a 25
year frequency storm, draining the ultimate urban development in the area.
In the northern portion of the Gl System, Minneapolis and Ellsworth Avenues
have been constructed to Courtney Drive (approximately 1,800 east of Ohio
Street). The street elevation at Minneapolis Avenue and Courtney Drive is
1.7 feet above the existing flowline of the 42 inch outlet structure through
the flood protection levee. Due to the lack of relief in this area, overland
street drainage and open ditches are required to drain .the system.
I
I
Three solutions to the drainage problem were studied in sufficient detail
to ~evelop comparative cost estimates. The alternative systems are described
in the following paragraphs. With regard to all alternatives, any construc-
tion involving or near the flood protection levee is subject to approval by
the Corps of Engineers and Division of Water Resources as described in.
SECTION II, SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS. Preliminary estimates of the cost
for each system are detailed in SECTION VIII, PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF
COSTS, of this report.
I
I
Alternate 1
I
Alternate 1 provides a ponding area of 15 acres in the vicinity of the 42
inch outlet structure at the levee. The 42 inch outlet structure is lowered
two feet to obtain relief for the Courtney Drive ditch, in the vicinity of
Minneapolis Avenue. The ponding area has a storage of 52 acre-feet and
available storage in the ditch and streets will prevent flooding of homes
for the 100 year frequency storm.
I
I
VI-28
I
I
I
I
The ditch along Courtney Drive varies in size from a 60 foot bottom at the
outlet to a 35 foot bottom in the upper reaches of the ditch. The average
slope is 0.05 percent. The peak 25 year frequency discharge ranges from
400 c.f.s. at the outlet to 210 c.f.s. in the upper reaches. The proposed
ditch generally follows an existing low area through the system. Several
existing ponding areas are to be filled, as the area is developed, to allow
positive drainage. The design water surface elevation is approximately 0.5
feet below the street grade at Minneapolis Avenue, however, a freeboard of
two feet is obtained between the house basement window elevations and the
design water surface elevation. Any new development in this area requires
a minimum basement window elevation of 1,225 m.s.l. (Approximately the
basement window elevation of the existing' houses).
I
I
I
A combined ponding area of System G1 and System G2 (North area of System G)
. I .'
was investigated to eliminate the need for lowering the existing 42 inch
outlet structure. The 42 inch outlet structure is basically bypassed and
the majority of runoff must be stored. Due to the additional storage and
ditch right-of-way required, this outlet system would cost approximately
$100,000 more than the separate systems.
I
I
The estimated project cost for Alternate I, Main Interceptor G1, is $672,300.
I
Alternate 2
I
Alternate 2 provides a pumping station in the vicinity of the 42 inch
outlet structure at the levee. The 42 inch outlet structure is lowered 2
feet to obtain relief for the Courtney Drive ditch. The pumping station
has a capacity of 245,200 gpm, pumping against a total dynamic head of 10
feet. The station would consist of 2 pumps, powered by combination engine-
motor drivers with automatic start and control systems. 'The Courtney Drive
ditch and structures are the same size as Alternate 1.
I
I
The estimated project cost for Alternate 2 is $876,900. The estimated
annual operating cost is $900.
Alternate 3
I
I
Alternate 3 provides the combined ponding area and pumping station of
System G1 and System G2 (North area of System G). The existing outlet
structures would not change and a pumping station would be in the vicinity
of the 30 inch outlet structure located in an abandoned portion of the
Smoky Hill River. The 42 inch outlet structure is basically bypassed and
the majority of runoff must be stored or pumped over the levee. The pumping
station has a capacity of 367,800 gpm, pumping against a total dynamic head
of 10 feet. The station would consist of 3 pumps powered by combination
engine-motor drivers with automatic start and control systems. The Courtney
Drive ditch and structures are the same size as Alternate 1.
I
I
I
The estimated project cost for Alternate 3 is $1,158,700. The estimated
annual cost is $1000.
I
VI-29
I
I
I
Comparison of Alternates 1, 2 and 3
I
Estimated project costs for the three alternatives are:
I
Alternate
Alternate
Alternate
1 - $
2 -
3 -
672,300
876,900
1,158,700
I
Alternate 1 is the least expensive and does not depend on pumps to allow
positive drainage of the system. The recommended system for G1, Courtney
Drive ditch, is Alternate 1.
I
Main Interceptor G2 - McAdams Road
I
The location, size and profile for the main storm drain and ditch are shown
on Sheets 14 and 30 in the Appendix and Plate VI-1 in this report". The'
total drainage. area of the McAdams Road system is 75 acres. The ditch is
designed for a 25 year frequency storm with ultimate development in the
area. The outlet structure is a 30 inch RCP .located in an abandoned sec-
tion of the Smoky Hill River. This abandoned section of river channel
serves as a natural ponding area. It has a storage capacity of approxi-
mately 16 acre-feet. An enclosed drain system is allowable due to the
available relief and small peak flows. Two solutions to the drainage of
this system were studied in sufficient detail to develop comparative cost
estimates. The alternative systems are described in the following paragraphs.
Preliminary estimates of the cost for each system are detailed in SECTION
VIII, PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF COST, . of this report .
I
I
I
Alternate 1
I
I
Alternate 1 uses the existing ponding area in the abandoned section of the
river and existing 30 inch outlet structure. The main interceptor is an
open ditch, extending approximately 300 feet west of the south reaches of
the old channel. From this point, the system extends west, as double
enclosed drains, to the intersection of proposed Meadowlark Road, where it
intersects with Submains G2-1 and G2-2. The open ditch has a 20 foot
bottom with a slope of 0.10 percent. The double enclosed drains are a 60
incQ RCP on the south and 48 inch RCP on the north. Both are sloped at
0.20 percent. The peak 25 year frequency discharge is 156 c.f.s. Existing
low areas, where ponding occurs, are to be filled as the area is developed
to allow positive drainage. The ponding area has a storage of 14 acre-feet.
This storage combined with available storage in the ditch and streets will
prevent flooding of homes for the 100 year frequency storm.
I
I
I
The estimated project cost for Alternate 1, Main Interceptor G2, is $109,200.
I
Alternate 2
I
Alternate 2 provides a pumping station. in the vicinity of the 30 inch
outlet structure at the Smoky Hill River levee. The pumping station has a
capacity of 122,600 gpm, pumping against a total dynamic head of 10 feet.
The station would consist of 2 pumps, powered by combination engine-motor
drivers with automatic start and control systems. The open ditch and
enclosed drains are the same as Alternate 1.
I
VI-30
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The estimated project cost for Alternate 2 is $566.900. The estimated
annual operating cost is $900.
Compari~on of Alternatives 1 and 2
Estimated project costs for the two alternatives are:
Alternate 1 - $109,200
Alternate 2 - 566,900
Alternate 1 is the least expensive and it is not.subject to mechanical
failure. The recommended system for G2,McAdams Road, is Alternate 1.
. Submain G2-1 - Williams Drive
The location, size and profile for the enclosed drain are shown on Sheets
14 and 30 in the Appendix and Plate VI-1 in this report. The total drain-
age area of the Williams Drive submain is 38 acres. The enclosed drain is
designed for a 10 year frequency storm, draining the ultimate urban develop-
ment in the area. Overland street flow and street storage will prevent
flooding of homes for the 100 year frequency storm.
The enclosed drain varies in size from a 36 inch RCP at Republic Avenue to
a 60 inch RCP at McAdams Road. The slope varies from 0.10 percent to 0.15
percent. The peak 10 year frequency discharge ranges from 86 c.f.s. at
McAdams Road to 19 c.f.s. at Republic Avenue. Proposed new houses should
have basement window elevations at least 2 feet above the street curb
elevation. This submain is connected to the main interceptor G2 on the
south side of McAdams Road. Preliminary estimates of the costs are detailed
in SECTION VIII, PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF COST, of this .report. The estimated
project cost for Submain G2-1, Williams Drive, is $129,600.
Submain G2-2 - Meadowbrook Road
The locat{on, size and profile for the enclosed drain are shown on Sheets
14 and 30 in the Appendix and Plate VI-1 in this report. The total drain-
age area of the Meadowbrook Road Submain is 15 acres. The enclosed drain
is designed for a 10 year frequency storm with ultimate urban development
in the area. Overland street flow and street storage will prevent flooding
of homes for the 100 year frequency storm. Proposed new houses should have
basement window elevations at least 2 feet above the street curb elevation.
The enclosed drain is a 42 inch RCP with a slope of 0.30 percent. The peak
10 year frequency discharge is 46 c.f.s. This submain is connected to the
main interceptor G2 on the north side of McAdams Road. Preliminary estimates
of the costs are detailed in SECTION VIII, PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF COST,
of this report. The estimated project cost for Submain G2-2, Meadowbrook
Road. is $31,700.
Sumbain G2-3 - West Faith Drive
The location. size and profile for the enclosed drain are shown on Sheets
14 and 30 in the Appendix and Plate VI-1 in this report. The total drainage
area of the West Faith Drive Submain is 20 acres. The enclosed drain is
VI-3l
I I
I
I
.
designed for a 10 year frequency storm with ultimate development in the
area. Overland street flow and street storage will prevent flooding of
homes for the 100 year frequency storm. Proposed new houses should have
basement window elevation at least 2 feet above the street curb elevation.
I
The enclosed drain is a 48 inch RCP with a slope of 0.20 percent. The peak
10 year frequency discharge is 57 c.f.s. This submain is connected to the
open ditch section of main interceptor G2.. Preliminary estimates of the
costs are detailed in SECTION VIII, PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF COST, of this
report. The estimated project cost for Submain G2-3, West Faith Drive, is
$74,200;
I
I
MAINTENANCE OF DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
I
All the proposed channel improvements are sized utilizing grassed earth
channels of trapezoidal section with sideslopes 1 on 3 or flatter, to
permit mowing and other maintenance by machinery. A dense, protective turf
should be established on the channel sides lopes as soon as possible after
construction.
I
I
It is recognized that the.bottoms of the larger channels will be difficult
to maintain to design sections and gradients. Sediment deposition will
probably be the biggest problem because of low flow velocities in the
channels and the predominance of cultivated land in the drainage basin.
I
It may be desirable to give special treatment to open channels in developed
areas. A narrow, paved bottom in the flowline of the channel can prevent
the drain from becoming an environmental nuisance. The paved section would
provide a low-flow channel and a maintainable bottom. The channel sides lopes
can also be flattened and shaped to achieve a more natural or landscaped
effect.
I
I
PROPOSED PARK IMPROVEMENTS IN PONDING AREAS
I
General, or non-specific, park and recreation uses are proposed as one
valid use application for the ponding areas of the various drainage systems.
Nearly all developed park and recreational facilities, excepting toilet
facilities, will withstand inundation for varying lengths of time without
sustaining major damage. In addition, water accumulating in ponding areas
as a result of storm drainage is, generally speaking, non-moving, further
minimizing damage to. park and recreational facilities from inundation.
I
I
Proposed Park in the Knox Sand Pit Area
I
This area is shown on Plate VI-3. The south and east portions of this area
lie in Drainage System C, while the northwest portion lies in Drainage
System D. For the purpose of this part of the report, however, both portions
will be treated as one park area.
I
I
VI-32
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II--
I inr
I
I
I
I
Ju
r-"'- -..
,
I
"
.
.
,
11
...=~..
[0='.
1il
I
~1''''''''''
~DS~p"'"
,.%""~ t",
/<i/'. ~:fP.\
sit RALPH 8. %\
:(; :RlClU.EFS. Jft ;:;:=
~~ 2. Qj
. .
\.~ ~i
..,~... ~~..,
....... Of ",11; ..,....
"''''1'''''--
.!'lr(')l"!")4UO CITY I"J.RK BI l"dT Of' nil;
l";I!IPiIoIAltT T1U.~T It.! '5Y5ftAo\ '"
"0 _"'I_~ "~Nle ~
i=2-...."."-~...,,
u;;u..,....,.........._
i
..
. lll'
~o/
IfL
/Il
-..
III N
I I
I I
1.1
i
PLATE VI.2
PROPOSED PARK ON PART OF THE GEBHART TRACT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I.
I
.
I
I
II
~ W..1.~"'S
Q Wil,\.~"'''
~
,
i
,
.
i
~
~~I/I ~O.l"''''''.1r''' WIVW
..,."noo.ls.
NOI,.",^'f':)X.
D
Z
j
I
[
!
.
"
,
.'.
~l~
m
. u;;)
i~
I!!!!I .
,
!m~
.
i
....~J_.___
,
,
/
,
,
.
<<
.
,
.
.
,
u
.
~
--.'ti
I
,
.
\
,
3
.
i
I
D
Z
.
.
~
.
~
~
o
U
"
~
'2
I 0
. !
I ~
~
--t
u
.
.
~
C
LU
=
C
I-
a:::
CI
Z
C
U)
><
Q
Z
:.::
LU
:c
I-
Z
-
:.::
=
f
CI
...LU
..!.U)
>Q
...A.
5~
...A.
...........",
,'~~t."\1~cr """
..' .'Y-FlJ'''J,'''
!~"~ rD~ ~\
':l;"t ...: 'JI5 ':
:~. ~ ,0:". .
\:~\~i ...;J
~'''.I.;-''':-;,:.'' .~
".,.~lJSI93'll.,.....
"..."......
I
I
I
The total park area is basically divided into a passive recreation area and
an active recreation area. The passive recreation area roughly occupies
the east half of the area, while the active recreation area occupies the
west half of the area, buffered or separated by agricultural land to the
north of the main entry road and by the open space of a golf driving range
to the south of the road. '
I
The passive recreation area occupies most of the area around the sandpit
lake. Lakes created by sandpit operations are traditionally popular as
recreation areas after their productive usefulness is finished. Passive
recreation would also be applied to the remainder of the wooded area associ-
ated with the cutoff river channel in this vicinity.
I
I
Passive recreation facilities would include both individual and group
picnic shelters, picnic tables, cooking grills and refuse receptacles. Also
included as part of the passive recreation facilities would be children's
playground equipment, such as swings, slides, teeters and climbing equipment.
I
I
The active recreation area contains two basic elements: court sports areas
and field sports areas. Both are generally compatible uses within active
recreation areas;
I
Field sports areas recommended for the park are a golf driving range,
archery range, a riding arena, a ballfield complex and three areas for open
field.sports such as football, field hockey and soccer.
I
Court sports recommended for the park are tennis courts, handball courts
shuffleboard, horseshoes and multi-purpose paved area for such court sports
as basketball and badminton.
I
All field and court sports areas would be lighted. Parking in the passive
recreation area would be on-street. Off-street parking areas would be
provided to serve the active recreation areas.
I
Proposed Park on Part of the Gebhart Tract
I
Plate VI-2 shows the proposed park development on part of the Gebhart
Tract. This area is also known as the Meadowlark Acres Subdivision.
I
The southwest portion of this tract is proposed to be protected from future
flooding by a system of levees and developed to retail trade and service
businesses. The remaining area is proposed to be a ponding area for Drainage
System B. As such, it could be developed into a general use park area.
I
This park area, also, is basically divided into a passive recreation area
and an active recreation area. The two areas are separated by access
streets and a parking area.
I
I
Passive recreation facilities would include both individual and group
picnic shelters, picnic tables, .cooking grills and refuse containers. Also
included as part of the passive recreation facilities would be playground
equipment for older children, such as slides, merry-go-rounds and jungle
I
VI-33
I
I
I
I
gyms. Tot lot areas for younger children would also be provided. These
areas characteristically are fenced, or otherwise separated from other park
activities. Facilities include permanent benches for parental supervision,
sand boxes, spring mounted - fixed base toys and low climbing toys.
I
The active recreation facilities would be developed for both court sports
and field sports. Field sports would include an area for open field sports,
such as. football, soccer and field hockey.. A ballfield complex and an
archery range are also part of the field sports development.
I
I
Court sports recommended for this park are tennis courts, handball courts,
horseshoes, shuffleboard, a roque.court and a multi-purpose paved area for
such court sports as basketball, badminton and volleyball.
I
All field and court sports would be lighted. Off-street parking would be
provided to serve the active recreation areas. Parking for the passive
recreation area would be on-street.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
VI-34
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION VII
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
AND FINANCING
I
I
I
SECTION VII - IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND FINANCING
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF COST
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A summary of the preliminary estimates of cost by individual drainage
systems is shown in Section VIII. A detailed plan identifying the indi-
vidual drainage systems is shown by Sheet No. IA of the Appendix and by
Plate VI-I in this Report.
RECOMMENDED PRIORITIES AND CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
The recommended priorities and construction sequence are shown by
Table VII-I. The construction sequence is illustrated by Plate VII-I.
Construction of the 13 individual systems in Phases 1 and 2 will provide
basic flood relief for the existing developed areas south of Wayne Avenue
and north of Schilling Road. Phases 1 and 2 should, by all means, be con-
structed prior to any of the other construction phases.
The construction of Phase 1, Systems 1 through 5, will improve the present
drainage conditions from Magnolia Road to the south, however, it will not
improve the frequent flooding of susceptible areas north of Magnolia Road,
caused by local runoff.
Phase 2 construction is needed to provide the basic system for the existing
and newly developed areas north of Magnolia Road and east of the UPRR
tracks. It will also provide the outlet ditch for the area south at Key
Acres Addition.
Phase 3 construction will provide local drainage for existing streets south
of Wayne Avenue. It will also provide the basic drainage system for the
Dow and Faith Additions, east of Ohio Streets, north of Cloud Street and
south of Crawford Street.
Phase 4 will improve drainage conditions in the slough from Cloud Street to
the system outlet at Prescott Avenue and Second Street. Construction of
this phase will also provide relief from the frequent flooding on 4th
Street south of Cloud Street.
Phase 5 construction will consist of local street storm drains in existing
developed areas in order to meet the design criteria established in Section
V of this Report.
Phases 6 and 7 will provide the basic drainage system for the south indus-
trial area and the present undeveloped area south of Schilling Road.
Phases 6 and 7 need not be constructed until required by future development
or until financing is available.
I
I
VII-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Project
Priority
Nwnber
PHASE 1
1
2
3
4
5
PHASE 2
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
PHASE 3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
PHASE 4
27
28
TABLE VII-1
RECOMMENDED PRIORITIES
AND CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
System
C1
C2 (Ph. 1)
E
B1
B1-1
D1
D2
D2-4
D2-3,-3a,-3b
Bl-4
B2
C2-2.
D2-1
C1-1
Bl-3
Bl-3a
Bl-3b
Bl-2
Bl-6
Bl-7
Bl-8
G1
G2
G2-1
G2-2
G2-3
F1-1
F1
Location & Description
Ponding Area & Outlet
Schilling Rd. to Knox Rd.
Dry Creek
Magnolia Road Ditch
Neal Ave.
TOTAL PHASE 1
Outlet Old River Channel
Ohio St. - Magnolia Rd.
Ohio St. - South of Magnolia Rd.
Ohio St.-Magnolia Rd. Submain &
Laterals
Meadowlark Acres
Key Acres 2 - West
South Bonnie Ridge
Wayne Avenue
TOTAL PHASE 2
South Ohio Street
Belmont Boulevard
Key Avenue
Hartland Avenue
Colonial Lane
.Ninth Street
Tulane - Hageman Avenues
Mid State Mall
Courtney Drive
McAdams Road
Williams Drive
Meadowbrook Road
West Faith Drive
TOTAL PHASE 3
Cloud - 4th Streets
Slough
TOTAL PHASE 4
VII-2
Project Cost
$ 1,408,400
818,900
1,667,200
1,331,000
176,000
$ 5,388,500
$ 160,200
935,400
58,100
368,300
114,800
723,300
246,100
1,270,300
$ 3,876,500
$ 99,000
316,000
140,900
47,600
19,100
71,100
292,400
215,600
672,300
109,200
129,600
31,700
74,200
$ 2,218,700
$ 596,000
1,640,500
$ 2,236,500
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Project
Priority
Number System
PHASE 5
29 BI-5
30 Bl-la
31 D2-1a
32 D2-2
33 D3
Location & Description
Project Cost
Simmons - Highland Avenues $ 160,300
Linda Lane 73 , 000
Raymond Ave., Kensington Rd. &
Leland Way 99,700
Belmont Boulevard 294,700
East Magnolia Rd. & Outlet Ditch 219,400
TOTAL PHASE 5 $ 847,100
PHASE 6
34
35
36
37
38
Al From Waterwell Rd. North &
West to Dry Creek $ 871,900
Al-1 Waterwell Rd. 216,400
AI-2 General Battery 173,600
Al-3 Schilling Rd., South 179,900
C2-1 Waterwell Rd. - Schilling Rd. 198,600
TOTAL PHASE 6 $ 1,640,400
C2 (Ph. 2) Mentor - Schilling Rd. $ 1,166,900
C3 Schilling Rd. ~ Knox Sandpit 276,000
A2 (Ph. 1) South Industrial Area (Outlet
to Westinghouse) 811,100
A2-3 Old U.S. 81 191,000
A2 (Ph. 2) South Industrial Area (Westing-
house to Mentor) 629,600
A2-2 Westinghouse 82,800
A2-1 County Rd. '17 ,800
TOTAL PHASE 7 $ 3,235,200
PHASE 7
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
GRAND TOTAL PHASES 1 through 7
(Without Park Improvements
to Ponding Areas.)
$19,441,900
VII-3
I
J
...
~
:l;
l:j ~ ~
~ ~ [
<!l .. ~
~ (f.l ::
25 ~ UJ
2: ("j ~
~ is 2:
(f.l 2: ~
~ -/ 0
~ ~
25 C'\I ...
~ Q) (3
2: In Ci
a:: ns ~
~ if lU
~ ~
\::/
~ ~~~
"" ...
-
w
u
z
w
:::)
CJ
W
(I)
Z
c
i=
r..:l
-:::)
~a::
>~
w(l)
....Z
SC
a..r..:l
It) <0 .....
(I) (I) (I)
'" '" '"
os os os
.J::: .J::: .J:::
ll. ll. ll.
I - .
. .
- !
-
.
-
- I
.
~
N '"
(I) (I)
'" '"
os os
.J::: .J:::
ll.-----ll.-
~
(I)
'"
os
.J:::
a;
(I)
'"
os
.J:::
ll.
rim :: I .
I~I:
z>--
Z 1Il'~
o <C( lI!u
.. ..
U) < ~!:
< -.
.Joov
~U':::
b;I .
t-
III
III
U.
Z
III
J
(
o
I/)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
I
METHODS OF FINANCING
I
The methods of financing included herein represent a broad spectrum of the
range of financing possibilities for the proposed project available to the
City.
I
Alternative A.
by Area Ratios
Assignment' of Total Project Costs to Benefit Districts
>
I
Plate VII-2 shows the South Salina Drainage Study Area divided into drainage
system areas. Also shown are the present City Limits and City's planned
annexation areas. As shown by Table VII-2, the costs of all construction
phases of the individual drainage systems, Phases 1 through 7, except those
of Systems F and G, are assigned to various systems within the City Limits
or land to be annexed by the City in the near future. Drainage Systems F
and G are proposed to be benefit districts within themselves.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
VII-4
I
o
!::
:E
::::i
>-
!::
c.:l
<0
w<
a:: w
<a::
:E<
wZ
1-0
0-
>-1-
0:1
NW~
..!.=Z
>~<
l!:!CQ
Sa::Z
ca..Q<
., +
~
>- Ul
<? ~
>-
:::. !2.
c: c:
Ul c: 0 0
OS 0 :;:: :;::
~ os OS
:;:: ><
<I: Ul OS ><
:!:: ., .,
>< c:
E E ., c:
c: c:
., ::i c: <I: <I:
- c:
Ul >- <I: ., .,
>-
00 - ., OJ OJ
U - c: c:
., .!!! OS OS
OJ - a: a:
os c: "0
., ., - Ol
c: Ul E ~ -
.OJ ., 0 c:"- .
~ ~ E .t: 0
C a. 00 -l
J ~ ~ F~
",
~~
z >-----.:
z ..
o <I(:~
Ul 0. ..
< z-
< _ z
.Joov
-u Z II!
S: ".I uJ.4.
to
IIJ
IIJ
II.
Z
IIJ
J
cl
o
1Il
00
<I:
w
a:
<I:
:::'!:
w
I-
00
>-
00
W
(!l
<I:
Z
<(
a:
c
<t aJ () C w u. "
^ . JoVe =:=: . . . . . .
, '00, . . . . . .
L J =:=: . . .
. 'ooc ---- . . .
., < )00, =:=: . . . . . .
, ---- . . .
<' )aOe =:=: . . . . . .
~O~( ;:;: . .
> ^ v ......,... . . . .
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TADLE VII-2
ASSIGNMENT OF TOTAL PROJECT COSTS TO BENEFIT DISTRICTS BY AREA RATIOS
ANNEXED ANNEXED
LAND IN LAND IN LAND IN
SYSTEM A SYSTEM B SYSTEM C' SYSTEM 0 SYSTEM E SYSTEM F SYSTEM G
SYSTEM A ($3,m,100)
AREA IN ACRES 612. 81~ 9~
PERCENT OF AREA 22 36 ~2
SNARE OF COST $ 711.600 $I,16~,300 $1,366.300
SYSTEM 9 ($3,681,100) I.
. AREA IN ACRES 81~ 9~8
PERCENT OF AREA ~6 6~
SHARE OF COST $1.693,300 $1.967,600
SYSTEM C ($~,200,900)
AREA I NACRES 81~ 926 9~6
PERCENT OF AREA 31 3~ 36
SNARE OF COST $1,302,300 $1,~26,300 $I,~70,300
SYSTEM 0 ($3,~06, 100)
AREA I NACRES 81~ 9~6
PERCENT OF AREA ~6 6~
SNARE OF COST $1.566,300 $1.638,800
SYSTEM E ($1.667,200)
AREA I NACRES 512 . 81~ 9~ 598
PERCENT OF AREA 18 28 33 21
SNARE OF COST $300.100 $ ~66,800 $ 650,200 $350, roo
SYSTEM F ($2,236,500)
AREA I NACRES 900
PERCENT OF AREA 100
SNARE OF COST $2.236.600
SYSTEM G ($1,107.000)
AREA IN ACRES 280
PERCENT OF AREA 100
SNARE OF COST $1,017.000
TOTAL COST $1.001,600 $6.133,000 $1,~28,300 $7.205.~00 $350,IDO $2.236.500 $1.017.000
TOTAL COST OVER 10 YEAR
PERIOD AT 6% ANNUAL
INTEREST $1.sq5.~28 $8.165.000 $1,899,579 $9.601,035 $~65,633 $2.9rq.5~6 $1.352,690
AREA IN ACRES REDUCED
TO REFLECT PU6LIC
R.O.H. (30%) 358 670 &q8 66~ ~19 630 196
COST PER ACRE $ 3,758 $ 1~.326 $ 2,931 $ 1~,~59 $ 1.111 $ ",792 $ 6.901
COST PER SQUARE FOOT $ 0,09 $ 0.32 $ 0.07 $ 0,33 $ 0.03 $ 0.11 $ 0.16
'ANNEXEO AND IN CITY LIMITS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table VII-3 shows the cost per lot when the total project costs are assigned
to benefit districts used in Table VII-2, above.
TABLE VII-3
COST PER LOT - ASSIGNMENT OF TOTAL
PROJECT COSTS TO BENEFIT DISTRICTS
Annual Cost
on 10 Year
Amortization
at 6 percent
Cost Per
Square Foot
Total Cost Per
7000 s. f. Lot
Benefit District
Annexed Land in System A
All Land in System B
Land in System C*
All Land in System D
Annexed Land in System E
All Land in System F
All Land in System G
$0.09
0.32
0.07
0.33
0.03
0.11
0.16
$ 630
2,240
~O
2,310
210
770
1,120
$ 63
224
49
231
21
77
112
*Includes land planned for annexation and land inside City Limits.
Alternative B. Assignment of All Project Costs, Except Systems F & G, to
the Primary Study Area**
Plate VII-3 shows the primary study area and its relationship to the proposed
drainage system areas. Excepting Systems F and G, which are proposed to be
individual benefit districts, the project cost was assigned to the entire
primary study area. The primary study area contains about 5,200 acres.
Deducting 30 percent of the area for public right-of-way~ 3,640 acres
remain. The project cost for drainage Systems A,B,C,D and E is $16,188,400.
When amortized over a 10 year period at 6 percent annual interest, the
total amount will become $21,532,172, resulting in a cost of $5,915 per
acre or $0.14 per square foot. The cost of flood protection for a 7000
square foot lot, therefor would be $980, or $98 over a 10 year period.
Alt~rnative c.
Except F and G,
Schilling Road.
Assignment of the Cost of All Systems North of Schilling Road.
to a Benefit District within the Primary Study Area North of
The location of Schilling Road and its extension east to the flood protection
levee is shown on Plate VII-3. This area contains approximately 2,026
acres. Assuming 30 percent of the area is or will be dedicated to public
right-of-way, 1,418 acres would remain. P~oject cost of all systems north
of Schilling Road is $11,588,800. When amortized over a 10 year period at
6 percent annual interest the total amount becomes $15,413,101, costing
$10,870 per acre or $0.25 per square foot. Flood protection for an average
7,000 square foot lot, then, would total to $1,750 or $175 per year over a
ten year period.
I
I
**The primary study area is bounded by 1-135 highway on the west, the flood
control levee on the east and south and Wayne Avenue on the north.
VII-5
cc
w
cc:
cc
>-
CI
::;:)
l-
f/)
"'>-
":"cc:
>cc
W:E
5=
....a..
'"
III
1Il
<
E
1Il
-
'"
>-
Ul
1Il
>- Cl
~ III
III c:
- _E __ -'iij__
"i:: ...
a. 0
III
1Il
~
<l:
>-
"0
::>
(jj
"I"':'"""
.:"..,'
.' '-~'
~"~'
llIj" ,
~i=l
s....
.ra'~~
z >---;;
z ..
o <r:( a: u
Q. ..
. .
U)~!i
..J 0 0 u
~U':::
bd r
o
o
o
or
to
UJ
UJ
II.
~ ~
o UJ
N .J
(
o
I/)
o
-------------------
~-
I
I
Alternative D.
Road. Except F
of Wayne Avenue
Assignment of the Cost of All Systems North of Schilling
and G, to a Benefit District within the City Limits South
I
I
The area within the City Limits south of Wayne Avenue contains about 1,141
acres. Assuming 30 percent of the area is or will be dedicated to public
right-of-way, 799 acres remain. Project ~ost of all systems north of
Schilling Road is $11,588,800. Amortizing this amount over a 10 year
period at 6 percent annual interest would result in a total of $15,413,101.
The cost of flood protection under this method of financing would amount to
$19,289 per acre or $0.44 per square foot. Total protection cost for a
7,000 square foot lot would amount to $3,080 or $308 per year over a 10
year period.
I
I
Alternative E.
Assignment of Total Project Costs to the City at Large
I
I
The area within the City Limits of the City of Salina contains 10,524
acres, more or less. Considering public right-of-way will account for
approximately 35 percent* of the area, about 7,367 acres will remain as
taxable area. Project cost of all systems is $19,441,900. This amount
when amortized over a 10 year period at 6 percent will amount to $25,857,416.
Flood protection under this method of financing would cost $3,510 per acre
or $0.08 per square foot for the City at Large. Protection for a 7,000
square foot lot would cost a total $560 or $56 per year over a 10 year
period. Based on Salina's present and projected assessed tangible valuation,
development of the various flood protection systems described in this
report will amount to an average increase of 24 mils in additional property
taxes.
I
I
I
Alternative F. Assignment of the Project Costs of Phases 1 and 2 to
Separate Benefit Districts
I
Phases 1 and 2 are shown on Plate VII-4 along with the proposed benefit
districts. Table VII-4 shows the assignment of project costs of Phase 1 to
separate benefit districts and the subsequent cost per square foot of
developable land.
I
I
I
I
I
*In this case, 35 percent was used instead of 30 percent, since the City at
Large includes the older areas, in which the old grid systems was a less
efficient user of space than is the newer curvilinear system of subdivision
design.
I
I
VII-6
,
o ~ 0
- -
04> 0
o 0 0
(.)~ 0
00.. '0
Ql~ Ql
'- oc) ''0
0_ ~
~ "Co.
D.."CO
T"" C.c. C\l
CD as Cii (J)
:3U.E :3U.
.c'CC)J::'C
a..Oc:o..O
....c..-
0- (.) o.c:
_4>C_Ci3
~ E ~ Ql E
.0 Q):;: ::c Q)
"en.~ c: "Ci) >
c:-.- c::=
O~U) oas
0....- Q.C
~Q)~ C/jQi
-::: 4>-
a:aso '-cu
- --
000 (0)
.- c: CD .~ c
~.u.eu;'o
i5~a.i5~
_ CN _ c:
;:=-0 :;::;:
Q) c: c: Q) c:
c:._ as C:._
4> 4>
lD lD
~...,.. ~
.......:...
,"......
......,.....
;:':;..'~:
':.;:~,,,:.
c: c:
.2 .2
- -
u U
::J ::J
~ ~
- -
o 0
c: c:
o 0
U U
~ N
4> Ql
o 0
<II <II
-.r:;, _&:._
D.. D..
i
A
m
CI
Z
CC(l)
z...
o~
-a::
......
U(I)
=-
a:: CI
......
(1)-
Z LL.
C1W
uz
N~
~C1
~,...w
= (I)
>WCI
w(l)~
!;rCCO
....I:ca::
A.~~
....
:z:
"'
w ~
'"
~ ~
0. 0.
'" ~
~ "'
(i ~
Q. Q 00;. ~
CI) :z: ~ 0
~'l ~ ~
~ C\I ~ Ci
_ Q) ~ CI)
::!: CI) is ~
ffi as ~ '0:(0
- .s:::.
'II: D.. "' 5
-:,j:: ~:z:
1\ :.j'J
Sm.
I!!!I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
-
-
-
WI
-
z >--:
z ..
0<11( ll:u
0. ..
. .
tn~~x
-Joou
- ..
~UuJ.ct
/;Iol .
o
o
o
It
o
o
o
Cl
~
w
W
IL
Z
W
J
<l
o
(/)
o
-
-
I
I
TABLE VII-4
I ASSIGNMENT OF PROJECT COSTS OF PHASE 1 TO BENEFIT DISTRICTS
I Part of Part of
Annexed Annexed Annexed
I Land in Land in Land in
System A System B System C System D System E
PHASE 1.
I Cl.. Ponding area &
outlet ($1,408,400)
Area in acres 814 592 948
Percent of area 35 25 40
I Share of cost $ 492,900 $ 352,400 $ 563,400
C2 (Ph. 1). Schilling
Rd. to Knox Rd.
I ($818,900)
Area in acres 814 592 948
Percent of area 35 25 40
Share of cost $ 286,600 $ 204,700 $327,600
I E. Dry Creek
($1,667,200)
Area in acres 512 814 592 948 507
I Percent of area 15 24 18 28 15
Share of cost $250,100 $ 400,100 $ 300,100 $ 466,800 $250,100
B1. Magnolia Ditch
I ($1,331,000)
Area in acres 814 948
Percent of area 46 54
Share of cost $ 612,300 $ 718,700
I B1-1. Neal Ave.
($176,000)
Area in acres 814 948
I Percent of area 46 54
Share of cost $ 81,000 $ 95,000
TOTAL COST, PHASE 1 $250,100 $1,872,900 $ 857,200 $2,171,500 $250,100
I
TOTAL COST AMORTIZED
OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD
I AT 6% ANNUAL INTEREST $332,633 $2,490,992 $1,140,076 $2,915,100 $332,633
Area in acres reduced
I to reflect public
R.O.W. (30%) 358 570 414 664 355
Cost per acre $ 929 $ 4,370 $ 2,754 $ 4,390 $ 937
I Cost per square foot $ 0.02 $ 0.10 $ 0.06 $ n.10 $ 0.02
I
I VII -7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table VII-5 shows the assignment of project costs of Phase 2 to separate
benefit districts and the subsequent cost per square foot of developable
land.
TABLE VII-5
ASSIGNMENT OF PROJECT COSTS OF PHASE 2
TO BENEFIT DISTRICTS
PHASE 2 ($3,876,500)
Area in acres
Percent of area
Share of cost
System B
System D
814
46
$1,783,200
948
54
$2,093,300
Share of cost amortized
over 10 year period at
6~ annual interest
$2,371,656
$2,783,549
Area in acres reduced to
reflect public R.O.W. (30%)
570
664
Cost per acre
$
$
0.10
$
$
0.10
4,161
4,192
Cost per square foot
Table VII-6 shows the total and annual cost for flood protection of a 7,000
square foot lot when the project costs for construction phases I and 2 are
assigned to benefit districts.
VII-8
L
I
I
I
TABLE VII-6
COST PER LOT - ASSIGNMENT OF PROJECT COST
OF PHASES 1 & 2 TO BENEFIT DISTRICTS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Annual Cost
on 10 Year
Cost per Total Cost per Amortization
Benefit District Square Foot 7000 s. f. lot at 6% annually
PHASE 1.
Annexed Land in System A $0.02 $140 $14
System B 0.10 700 70
Part of Annexed Land in System C 0.06 420 42
System D 0.10 700 70
Part of Annexed Land in System E 0.02 140 14
PHASE 2
System B 0.10 700 70
System D 0.10 700 70
TOTALS, PHASES 1 & 2
Annexed Land in System A 0.02 140 14
System B 0.20 1,400 140
Part of Annexed Land in System C 0.06 420 42
System D 0.20 1,400 140
Part of Annexed Land in System E 0.02 140 14
Alternative G. Assignment of Project Costs of Phases 1 and 2 to One
Benefit District
Plate VII-4 shows the single benefit district to which the project costs of
both Construction Phases 1 and 2 are assigned. This area contains about
3,290 acres. Assuming 30 percent of the area is or will be dedicated to
public right-of-way, 2,303 acres would remain.
The project cost for Phase 1 is $5,388,500. When amortized over a 10 year
period at 6 percent interest, the total for Phase 1 construction becomes
$7,147,000, costing $3,103 per acre, or $0.07 per square foot. The project
cost for Phase 2 is $3,876,500 and has a total amortized cost of $5,175,450,
costing $2,247 per acre, or $0.05 per square foot.
Project costs of all systems within Phases 1 and 2 are $9,265,000. When
amortized OVer a 10 year period at 6 percent annual interest, the total
amount becomes $12,322,450, costing $5,351.per acre, or $0.12 per square
foot. Flood protection for a 7,000 square foot lot would amount to $840 or
$84 per year over a 10 year period.
The costs are shown in Table VII-7.
I
I
VII-9
I
I
Alternative H.
to the City at
Assignment of Project Costs of Construction Phases 1 and 2
Large
I
I
Financing Alternative Method E indicated about 7,367 acres of taxable area
within the Limits of the City of Salina. Project cost of Construction
Phases 1 and 2 is $9,265,000. This amount when amortized over a 10 year
period at 6 percent annual interest will amount to $12,322,450. Flood
protection under this method of financing would cost $1,673 per acre, or
$0.04 per square foot. Protection cost for a 7,000 square foot lot would
cost $280 or $28 per year over a 10 year period. Based on Salina's present
and projected assessed tangible valuation, development of Construction
Phases 1 and 2 will amount to an average annual tax levy of 11 mils.
I
I
Alternative I. Assignment of the Major Outlets and Systems in Construction
Phases 1 and 2 to the City at Large; All Other Project Costs Assigned to
Phase 1 and 2 Benefit District
I
I
The project costs of the major outlets and systems in Construction Phases 1
and 2 amount to $4,171,200. The major outlets and systems to be paid for
by' the City at Large include Cl, E, Dl and D2. When amortized over a 10
year period at 6 percent annual interest, this amount will become $5,547,696.
This amount proposed to be assigned to the City at Large, would amount to
$730 per acre, or about $0.02 per square foot. Charges to a 7,000 square
foot lot in the City would be $140 or $14 per year over a 10 year period.
Based on Salina's present and projected assessed tangible valuation, develop-
ment of this part of Construction Phases 1 and 2 will amount to an average
increase of 5 mils additional property tax.
I
I
I
The remainder of Construction Phases 1 and 2, to be charged to Phases 1 and
2 benefit districts is $5,093,800. When amortized over a 10 year period,
this amount becomes $6,774,754.
I
As shown in Alternative Method G, Phases 1 and 2 benefit districts contain
about 2,303 taxable acres. The remainder of the cost of Phases 1 and 2
would be $2,942 per acre or $0.07 per square foot. This part of the flood
protection cost for a 7,000 square foot lot would be $490 or $49 per year
over a 10 year period. For property owners within the benefit district, an
additional City at Large charge would be levied in the amount of $14 per
year making a total of $63 per year over a 10 year period for a $7,000
square foot lot.
I
I
Table VII-7 provides a summary of the financing methods to be studied to
accomplish the completion of the South Salina Drainage Study Project.
I I
I
I
I
VII-10
I
I
I
I ...
.. III
.. ... ..
"'0 ..
.... ..
... ...
I III III <l
0.... M..:tO'\1"""l1""'l ...'" CO ... CO '" .....
U \ON...:tMC'I ... .... '" .... 0 III
N N .... '" ....
.... III <n- '"
'" a
;;0
I ~~ <l
I '"
...
<l
..
I u
..
.. ... ..
.. 0 '"
"'....
0 '"
... 0000000 0 III 0 0
I Ill.... ('/")~O'\l"""l"""r---N co ... co '" ...
0 \ON...:tMNt--or-l '" 0 III '"
U , , ....
III N N .... '" ."
.... <n- o
"'0 .....
...0 ..
I 00 ..
...... "'Ill
1;, ...
.. .....
1=1 '" e
0 .. .....
I is >>0.'1
...
f<j 0 0>>
.. 0 III .......
..~ O\N"'('I")('/"l1"""l\O ~ N ~ co .....
... C> '" 0('1"')0'('1")01""'11""'1 .... ~ 0 '" U
J :z; .. 0
I H H ... .. 000 0000 0 o. 0 .. ..
H U III '" <n- ..."
:> ~ o ;; > .....
u o III
~ '" <l
H 1Il .....
~ f<< ...
I Ill'"
... ~ o <l
u '"
.. OO\Qf""'lO\1"""lC'\,J1"""l III 0 '" 0 .....
I .. lflN('/")l/')1"""lNO .... ... co .... ...
"'.. ""'('1')0\,,",-1,....0\ '" co '" III u."
.. . . , , , . . .. <l
I ... u ('I"'l"4"N...:t ....~'" III 0 '" '" ....., '"
III < .... .... .... .... 0
0 <n- .. <l
'" u. "'0
.....
.......
I o '"
x
." III <l ..
C> '" ... ... 0 <l
III <ll 0 ..... u .. ..... <l
." ... ...< r.l "'<ll'" .... ~ .... e .. 00 ... '"
0 u u u .. 0 f<< ...>> 0 I ..... ....., .. '"
I il tI '1"'4 e e ..~ .. U." III 0.'1 o '" N ..
.,.., 1-.1 llJ .. ....., < ... ~..... =' s:: ... ........ "0.'1 ..... 0
.. O<IJ......~ 1=I"'f<<C> o III en 004 """ +J OM III '" 1=1 >>.. I>< .......
'" .. III III III .. e 04-lQJo4o.IUJ1"""l 0.... .. ...;; ... ..
Po. ..... >> e ~c e>>ee 1><..." u 0 u en .... UOU+J.r-l!:: ..... '" 0'"
AtIJ Q) C (lJ [/.) Q) <1J ... ;; X..... ~..... ;<'r-I(.) Q) '" e ..
<l ..... ...u ... ...... ....1Il... ".<:lr.ll=l ..<:l ....<:l r.l.... > ... t' '" <l
I ..... r-1...... c:l tlI ell c:l tIl (f.I .... >>'" ...c::,j..) ~u .d...... Q) Q)-< 0 <l
u < ..... ..... >> e >>..... >> <'" ""'J..i "'+JECf.I ... .. . <l ..<:l ... ..... .. '"
<l 4-1 UJQJl'/J "'''' o "'C 0""..... o "'C (lJ +J .. U ."....
'" '+-lQ)"O ... "'C ....... l.f.4~c04-i$-f~ ....:z;<IIl<l .... ;; ""
<l o d <l <l III <l <l <l <l o '" <II o OC1.l~O o 0 <l o .. .....
..... tI co ..... >- 'M cO ..... 'r-! .. e 1Il~ <l rn P:::; CU'r-! <II ..<:l u."
f<< "'l<lH '" 0.'1 +J U 'M ... e ......<:l ... e ..<:l ~ ...... <l <l
I <l ."."."." <l X .. <l .. Olll<l..<:l'" c:l C1.l 0.0 0 +J <l ..... '"
.. .. 0'" <l <l <l'" <l d .. r.l Po. tI...... c:t ,j.J ""' Q) +J c:l +J ..... .... .. 0 .....
> ~ +oJ Cl.l cO'l"'4 CU llJ cO cO ~ ... ~ III ..... '" 0 ~ III ..... ~ 0 ~ ... III
..... XH HXHH >>..... <l :z; >>..... ' ... III
... 00 en tI 'C llJ 001ll..<:l OCt/) M 0 OM 00 '" .... C> ... ..<:l 00 III III ..
<II '~4JmMd,....4d~r-I ..... +.I +J ..... .1"'4 +J .d CO ..... ..... u... ..... ... 0."
I d U)CIJ I"""tCOr-lc:lr-lr-l III III 1Il.......<:l ... .. co~..dc<:J.r-4 :::1 lIJ lIJ U ;;
.. :!8<<H<<<< III 0 0 to r-I U "'1""1 ).l Ill..... U .. 0 lIJ 0 .....
.. <u... <<"'C>~< <<"'f<<"'''' <u ..... u
... .... <l
.... <H
< . -l< ~
< l<l u 1=1 r.l
I VII-ll
I
I
I
~
. ~. '"
N
... N '"
..'" ..
PoO' \\ ...
..... ..
'" '"
I '" <Xl ...:t 0'\1('t"') <l
0'.... -'I" o 010 '" o 010 -'I" -'I" '" ....-'1"\0 .....
U .... """"-'1" -'I" ,...,...-'1" .... <Xl
. .... .... <n- <n- <n- .....
..... '" <n- <n- <n- <n- ..
.. "
I "0 ~
~~ ..
'"
<l
..
. (J
...
...'" ..
.. 0' Po
Po..... \0
'" 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 o 010
I "'.... -:r 00 0 '" 00 0 -'I" -'I" <Xl -'I" ",,,., '"
0' .... ,...,... -'I" -'I" ,... ,... -'I" .... <Xl '" ....-'1"\0 ..
U
'" .... .... ""
..... <n- <n- <n- <n- <n- <n- <n- O'
..0 .....
"'0 ...
. 0'0 ..
~,... Po'"
'"
... .....
.. 8
.. .....
I >>0-'1
'" o >>
0'
... 0' ....'"
..~ '" o 010 \0 o 010 '" '" -'I" '" ""I~ .....
Po 0 ........'" 0 ........'" 0 .... 0 000 .. U
..
I '" ... 0 000 0 oog. 0 0 0 000 ... ..
'" '" <n- <n- <n- <n- <n- <n- .. ""
0' " :> .....
u 0' '"
<I.l <l
'" .....
'"
I "'''''
0' <l
(J ..
... ~ o~r -'I" 01'" ,... .... '" .....
.. '" ""\0'" .,., ~~<Xl '" .,., ,... o~r '"
Po" ~ "'.....,., ,... "'.....,., ~ '" \0 "'-'1""" (J""
... . . . . ,...~\O .. <l
'. '" (J -'1"-'1"00 '" -'1"-'1"00 .,., .... , .,..., ..
"'< "'''' 0'
0' <n- <n- <n- <n- <n-. <n- ... <l
U PoO'
.....
'" ....'"
I (J 0' ..
..... ><
"'~ -g t <l ..
0' ~
'" , '" <l '" '" .....
"" '" "'< '" '" cu c..ts...... OO-r-I (J '" '"
0' (J 0' (J <l <l (J 0' (J 0' ,....f ......."" ~ ..... '"
I 'il cu .jJ."" e ..... ..... ..'" .. '" .j.J..-t<w ... N ...
.,..., ... .. .,..., .,..., " '" '" '" ..... 0'
.. ON.J-l~ al "" ~ "" 0'''' 0'''' o CI.I .....<.P"'I '" "'....
Xl ... '" '" <l <l ... '" ... .... .... ..... ...
,..., p.. oll ..... >> 8 '" .... 8 '" p..oll (J p..oll ~'" 00 '" .. ~ 0'''''
"" ~<I.l .. 0-'1 .. 14 .... ..... OCC~+J~ 8 ..
.. <l 1l .... '" .. ., .. .... ... .. .... . ,J:I CI3 rn QJ "'., '" <l
I a ..... ., <l '" "" '" '" "" .. .Q ., .Q COP-lHO~ (J ..... <l
(J +J CI.I '1""1 ..-1 >> .. .. >> .. '" ., '" '" '" '" Xl u ..... .... .. '"
..... <l ...... <I.l >< .Q <I.l >< '" .. ..... <l'" '" .. ... .. "".....
~ '" '+-l U) QJ "0 .. p.. <l ".Q ...."'~ ~.r-l CI3 4J 00" <l " Po
<l 0' '" <l <l <l ] <lp.. 0' '" o u <.otS ~ '" .. .....
0' ..... .Q .. .. ..... ...... ~ .Q'" '" ~cu m.r-! al (J""
I u ~ ",p..all4 u .jJ p..'r-I ..,8""''II'''''''IHO <l <l
....., d r-t'l"tjf"'"lN '0....'" f><l <l .... d ClJ ..... 0 <l ..... '"
.. CU '+-I Q) "t:I a .... 8 <l. .... ...... .. C1J.j.JU f,.( QJ.fJ ".;.,.., .....
,... :> ~ O.j.J CI) CU CI3 CU QJ 0' 41 co CU ClJ 0' 8 ~ 0' ~ a f/.l ~ CIJ as.r-I '"
I ..... CI3 >: tIl H III CI.I r-I +J H (f.I CI.I r-I .. >.41 CI3 4-11"""'1 '" '"
..... '" ~CIJ~ClJC13 mmm+JCIJ Cl3C13C13.jJ.jJ OO"'al OO<l.l.Q....Q >>.. '" '" ..
..... '" ..... "'.. ~.Q""'.Q.Q"'" >>......Q.Q.,... '" .,., ., ..... "'.. p.. '" <l'" 0'''''
I ~ <l CI.I (I') Po. P-l r-I j:l.j P-l 0 <<I Cf.l r-I P-l P-l 0 to '" '" .. "''''' .Q .r-l QJ 0 (J "
... "'0'''< < ~p.. < ~p.. <I.l '" 0' <l tf.I. d 0 +oJ 0 U ~ E-t .....
el .. <U<I.l <UO <"''''0''' ..... (J
., ..... <l
~ ..... <.....
< . ole :!:
~ .., Xl .....
I VII-12
I
I
I
ASSISTANCE OR COST-SHARING
I
A few Federal-Assistance or cost-sharing programs could be made available
to the City, or at least, these programs should be explored in greater
detail.
I
Small Watershed ProKram (PL83-566)
I
This assistance program is available through the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation
Service and is generally administered by the State Conservationist. Up to
100 percent assistance may be available for flood prevention.
I
The objective of the program is to provide technical and financial assist-
ance in planning and carrying out works of improvement to protect, develop
and utilize the land and water resources in watersheds not exceeding 250,000
acres.
I
Assistance is provided in planning, designing, installing works of improve-
m~nt, in sharing costs of flood prevention, etc.
I
I
Unfortunately for the City of Salina, committed obligations for monies
available from this program are such as to defer assistance to the City for
a longer period of time than is deemed to be prudent to take action.
Corps of Engineers Public Works Program
I
I
Although the Corps does not generally participate in activities associated
with interior drainage, exploration of the application of their public
works program to the South Salina drainage problem should be pursued.
Generally, the Corps is asked to make a preliminary study, or an analysis
of previous studies made of the problem area. If the study results in a
positive recognition of a problem, the project is placed on their Public
Works Projects priorities. An act of Congress could then authorize the
Corps to proceed with construction of the project. This program, too, is
considered long-term.
I
I
Federal HiKhway Administration
I
Three Federal Aid programs are available for 70 percent Federal - 30 percent
local funding from the Federal Highway Administration, through the Kansas
Department of Transportation, Secondary Roads Department. These funds are
available to enlarge and improve existing drainage structures, construct
new drainage structures and provide grading and paving within existing
roadway rights-of-way. The known programs are:
I
I
1. Federal Aid Urban Roads. The urban area of Salina is designated
by the Kansas Department of Transportation. Improvements to most arterial
roads and some collector roads within the urban area are eligible for
funding under this program. The Department of Transportation deals directly
with the City for Federal Aid Urban funding.
I
I
VII-13
I
I
I
2. Federal Aid Secondary Roads. Improvements to Federal Aid Secon-
dary Roads made outside the Salina urban area are available for funding
under this program. The Department of Transportation would deal with the
City through the cooperation of Saline County for Federal Aid Secondary
funding.
I
I
3. Off-System Funds. A certain amount of Federal funds are available
annually from the Kansas Department of Transportation. These are lump sum
funds, available on a first-come-first-served basis. These funds are
presently unavailable.
I
County Cost Sharing
I
All drainage systems, except System F, exist either totally or partially
outside the Limits of the City of Salina. Those areas which lie outside
the City Limits are legally under the jurisdiction of Saline County. The
County will, therefore, become involved in the formation and levying of
taxes of benefit or special assessment districts. The City of Salina
should explore every possible avenue of funding by the County, particularly
in areas where County Road right-of-way is involved.
I
I
Special Drainage Districts
I
Under the provisions of K.S.A. 24-101 to 24-410, Boards of County Commis-
sioners, Township Trustees or Governing Bodies of Cities have the power,
and it is considered their duty, upon a proper petition being presented for
that purpose, to incorporate and organize drainage districts within their
respective jurisdictions. Each of the individual Drainage Systems would
constitute logical organizational bases for drainage districts.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
VII-14
I
,'''''"''''1
~'\I' .>".
~;'~ ','-'i-"
!*'~::? .
"'~I
'--" "-."
~-'5- '-:>
~. .
~\,:, :":,.-
~"
~i.:,),>h:,t.';'.
~.,..,. .
,.,'..
J}~ :'.
"" -'
~.>
"-(~~~;'; ....::~ .;
.. :.;.....i;a..Y./
.E';', ~
:~: . '. .'. >';:f'~i~:.
;iil~. . \;....
l:}?\ '/~'_" ' _ : '"
j'-~ ,----,
,,"..,- .-
/dl'
'---'..'''' -",
\;":: -'
::.".',
'...;1 '.
,'{-::$ ;;-':-',
....-1... ;.
ri~1 (~:.:; "ih
'''-''''".:';;; "~".. "'.
:':t"'~ "-<';::':','
"';;,.;' "
::,,",- -'
"">1'"
;!~ L~'
;";,',.",,',
,- -' ''''-''''':',7'~'.':'':;-;.;-!''':,'i ' f;"_" -
,-~'1;"'~_ ',-'-,:-<' .
":,,-;-,,,','<
. ,-~~ ,~,
SECTIQ.~
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF .
I
I
SECTION VIII - PRELHlINARY ESTIMATES OF COST
I
GENERAL
I
The following preliminary estimates of cost are based on projected 1980
costs which may be expected for this type of construction. Future budget-
ing beyond 1980 will have to be adjusted at the time for price changes.
I
The detailed estimates are preceded by a summary of construction and project
costs for the proposed improvements.
I
Detailed estimates are presented for segments of each major drainage system
and for alternate systems where appropriate. The contingency item in each
estimate is to provide for minor variations in the scope of the work and
for incidental items of work not otherwise detailed in the estimate.
I
Estimates for box culverts and box drains are based on structural standards
of the Kansas Department of Transportation. Estimates of costs for rights-of-way
and easements were made without the benefit of any formal appraisal by
experts but were determined by similar installation in other cities and by
conversation with City Staff. Expert appraisals should be obtained before
initiating any land procurement proceedings.
I
I
I
Financing alternatives of the proposed improvement program are described in
Section VII of this report.
SUMMARY AND DETAILED ESTIMATES
I
The following tabulations show a summary table of the proposed drainage
improvements and detailed estimates of the proposed 'systems and alternates.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
VIII-l
I
-.--------
1
1 SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
1 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF COST
1 Construction Proj ect
System Project Description Cost Cost
SYSTEM A:
1 Al From Waterwell Rd., North & West
to Dry Creek $ 671,200 $ 871,900
A1-l Waterwell Rd. 157,700 216,400
1 Al-2 General Battery 122,700 173,600
Al-3 Schilling Rd., South 128,200 179,900
A2 (Ph 1) South Industrial Area (Outlet to
1 Westinghouse) 631,300 811,100
A2(Ph 2) South Industrial Area (Westinghouse
to Mentor) 447,500 629,600
A2-1 County Rd. 50,300 77,800
I A2-2 Westinghouse 54,600 82,800
A2-3 Old U.S. 81 133,500 191,000
1 TOTAL SYSTEM A $ 2,397,000 $ 3,234,100
SYSTEM B:
I' B1 Magnolia Road Ditch $ 1,018,300 $ 1,331,000
B1-1 Neal Avenue 153,000 176,000
B1-la Linda Lane 63,500 73,000
1 Bl-2 Colonial Lane 16,600 19,100
Bl-3 Belmont Boulevard 275,000 316,000
Bl-3a Key Avenue 122,500 140,900
1 Bl-3b Hartland Avenue 41,400 47,600
Bl-4 Meadowlark Acres 54,200 114,800
Bl-5 ,Simmons - Highland Avenues 156,400 160,300
Bl-6 Ninth Street 42,300 71,100
1 Bl-7 Tulane - Hageman Avenues 254,300 292,400
Bl-8 Mid State Mall 161,400 215,600
B2 Key Acres 2 - West 542,300 723,300
1 TOTAL SYSTEM B $ 2,901,200 $ 3,681,100
1 SYSTEM C:
C1 Knox Sandpit $ 917,700 $ 1,408,400
C1-1 South Ohio Street 75,200 99,000
1 C2(Ph 1) Schilling Rd. - Knox Rd. 607,700 818,900
C2(Ph 2) Mentor - Shilling Rd. 825,600 1,166,900
C2-1 Waterwell Rd. - Schilling Rd. 120,500 198,600
1 C2-2 South Bonnie Ridge 157,400 246,100
C3 Schilling Rd. - Knox Sandpit 179,100 276,000
TOTAL SYSTEM C $ 2,883,200 . $ 4,200,900
1
VIII-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. I
~u_.
System
SYSTEM D: .
D1
D2
D2-1
D2-1a
D2-2
D2-3
D2-3a
D2-3b
D2-4
D3
SYSTEM E: '
SYSTEM F:
F1
Fl-1
SYSTEM G:
G1
G2
G2-1
G2-2
G2-3
Project Description
Outlet Old River Channel
Ohio St. - Magnolia Rd.
Wayne Avenue
Raymond Ave., Kensington Rd. &
Leland Way
Belmont Boulevard
Ohio St. - Magnolia Rd.
Edward Street
Aurora Avenue
Ohio St. - South of Magnolia Rd.
East Magnolia Rd. & Outlet Ditch
TOTAL SYSTEM D
Dry Creek
Slough
Cloud - 4th Streets
TOTAL SYSTEM F
Courtney Drive
McAdams Road
Williams Drive
Meadowbrook Road
West Faith Drive
TOTAL SYSTEM G
GRAND TOTAL SYSTEMS A, B, C, D, E, F & G
PARK IMPROVEMENTS TO PONnING AREAS:
C South Knox Sandpit Road
D North Knox Sandpit Road
GRAND TOTAL SYSTEMS A, B, C, D, E, F & G
Plus Park Improvements
VIII-3
Construction
Cost
$ 139,300
537,300
1,104,600
86,700
256,200
274,700
22,200
23,200
39,600
153,700
$ 2,635,600
$ 1,074,100
$ 1,416,500
518,300
$ 1,934,800
$ 471,600
90,600
112,700
27,600
64,500
$ 767,000
$14,592,900
$ 956,000
680,000
$16,228,900
Project
Cost
$ 160,200
935,400
1,270,300
99,700
294,700
315,900
25,700
26,700
58,100
219,300
$ 3,405,100
$ 1,667,200
$ 1,640,500
596,000
$ 2,236,500
$ 672,300
109,200
129,600
31,700
74,200
$ 1,917,000
$19,441,900
$ 1,099,000
782,000
$21,322,900
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System A
Main Interceptor Al
(From Waterwell Rd., North and West to Dry Creek)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 Excavation 112,100 C.Y. $ 1.50
2 2 - 7'x7'x286' RCB 1 Each 89,000.00
3 3 - 10'xs'xs4' RCB 1 Each 32,300.00
4 2 - 10'x6'x28' RCB 1 Each 14,400.00
5 4 - 10'x6'xss' RCB 1 Each . 45,300.00
*6 2 - 8'xs'xsO' RCB 1 Each .17,000.00
7 Detours & Pavement Removal
& Replacement 1 L.S. 195,500.00
8 Seeding 20 Ac. 600.00
9 .Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 10,000.00
10 Contingency 1 L.S. 82,600.00
TOTAU ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Ditch Row 20 Ac. @ $s,OOO/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structure @ Sta. 66+50.
VIII-4
Extension
$168,200
89,000
32,300
14,400
45,300
17 ,000
195,500
12,000
10,000
82,600
$671,200
$671,200
100,000
100,700
$871,900
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System A
Submain A1-1
(Waterwell Rd.)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 Excavation 23,8.0.0 C.Y. $ 1.5.0
2 4 - 6'x6'x6.o' RCB 1 Each 3.0,2.0.0..0.0
*3 4 - 5'x5'x5.o' RCB 1 Each 2.0,.0.0.0.0.0
Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 5,0.0.0..00
q Detours & Pavement Removal &
Replacement 1 L.S. 42,.0.0.0..0.0
5 Seeding 7 Ac. 6.0.0..0.0
6 Contingency 1 L.S. 2.0,6.0.0..0.0
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 7 Ac. @ $5,.o.o.o/Ac.
Engineering Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structure @ Sta. 19+5.0.
VIII-5
Extension
$ 35,7.0.0
3.0,2.0.0
2.0,.0.0.0
5,.0.0.0
42,.0.0.0
4,2.0.0
2.0,6.0.0
$157,7.0.0
$157,7.0.0
35,.0.0.0
23,7.0.0
$216,4.0.0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System A
Submain Al-2
(General Battery)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 Excavation 9,000 C.Y. $ 1.50
2 3 - 6'x6'x150' RCB 1 Each 54,300.00
Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 10,000.00
3 Seeding 6.5 Ac. 600.00
4 Detours & Pavement Removal &
Replacement 1 L.S. 25,000.00
Contingency 1 L.S. 16,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 6.5 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-6
Extension
$ 13,500
54,300
10,000
3,900
25,000
16,000
$122,700
$122,700
32,500
18,400
$173,600
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System A
Submain A1-3
(Schilling Rd. South)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Extension
1 Excavation 11,400 C.Y. $ 1.50 $ 17,100
2 Seeding 6.5 Ac. 600.00 3,900
3 1 - 5'x3'x100' RCB 1 Each 9,900.00 9,900
4 1 - 5'x3'x59' RCB 1 Each 6,300.00 6,300
Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 5,000.00 5,000
*5 36" RCP 700 L.F. 40.00 28,000
*6 End Section 36" RCP 18 Each 350.00 6,300
8 Detour & Pavement Replacement &
Removal 1 L.S. 35,000.00 35,000
7 .Contingency 1 L.S. 16,700.00 16,700
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $128,200
PART B - PROJECT COST
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
$128,200
32,500
19,200
$179,900
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 6.5 Ac. @ 5,OOO/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
*For Future Structures @ Sta. 17+00, Sta. 25+00 and Sta. 30+00.
VIII-7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System A
Main Interceptor A-2 (Ph I)
(From Mentor North & West to Dry Creek)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 Excavation 165,600 C.Y. $ 1.50
2 Seeding 17 Ac. 600.00
3 Detours & Pavement Removal
& Replacement
4 4 - 7'x7'x150' RCB 1 Each 87,800.00
*5 4 - 7'x7'x50' RCB 2 Each 32,600.00
6 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 5,000.00
7 Contingency 1 L.S. 82,400.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 17 Ac. @ 5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Includes Future Structure @ 46+50.
VIII-8
,
Extension
$248,400
10,200
132,300
87,800
65,200
5,000
82,400
$631,300
$631,300
85,000
94,800
$811,100
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LI
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System A
Main Interceptor A-2 (Ph 2)
(South Industrial Area)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
163,400 C.Y. $ 1.50
23 Ac. 600.00
2 Each 28,800.00
2 Each 26,;1.00.00
1 Each 15,200.00
1 L.S. 5,000.00
1 L.S. 58,400.00
1 Excavation
2 Seeding
*3 3 - 8'x7'x50' RCB
**4 3 - 8'x7'x50' RCB
5 2 - 6'x6'x50' RCB
6 Utility Modifications
7 Contingency
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 23 Ac. @ 5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Includes Future Structure @ Sta. 61+50.
**Future Structures @ Sta. 110+00 and Sta. 144+50.
VIII-9
,II
Extension
$245,100
13,800
57,600
52,400
15,200
5,000
58,400
$447,500
$447,500
115 ,000
67,100
$629,600
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System A
Submain A2-1
(County Rd.)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
.No.
Description
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
27,500 C.Y. $ 1.50
4 Ac. 600.00
1 L.S. 6,600.00
1
2
3
Excavation
Seeding
Contingency
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
.Construction Costs.
Right-of-Way 4 Ac. @ $5,000jAc;
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-IO
Extension
$41,300
2,400
6,600
$50,300
$50,300
20,000
7,500
$77,800
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
1 Excavation
2 Seeding.
3 Utility Modifications
4 Contingency
PART B - PROJECT COST
System A
Submain A2-2
(Westinghouse)
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
23,400 C.Y. $ 1.50
4 Ac. 600.00
1 L.S. 10,000.00
1 L.S. 7,100.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
Construction Costs
Right-of-Way 4 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
il
il
II
II
II
II
11
~I
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-ll
Extension
$35,100
2,400
10,000
7,100
$54,600
$54,600
20,000
8,200
$82,800
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
1 Excavation
2 Seeding
*3 1 - 7'x5'x50'
4 Utility Modifications
5 Contingency
PART B - PROJECT COST
System A
Submain A2-3
(Old U.S. 81)
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
55,200 C.Y. $ 1.50
7.5 Ac. 600.00
2 Ea. 9,400.00
1 L.S. 10,000.00
1 L.S. 17,400.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 7.5.Ac. @ 5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
,
*Includes Future Structure @ Sta. 12+50.
VIII-12
Extension
$ 82,800
4,500
18,800
10,000
17 ,400
$133,500
$133,500
37,500
20,000
$191,000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
,I
,I
~I
il
II
I
I
I
!
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
Q
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Alternate 1, Main Interceptor Bl
Magnolia Road Ditch
(Detention Storage Pond West of 1-135)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 2 - 10x6x40 RCB 1 Each $ 19,100.00
2 2 ~ 10x6x40 RCB 1 Each 19,100.00
w/Flapgates (incls . Exist.
9x7 RCB) 3 Each 10,000.00
3 2 - 10x6x200 RCB 1 Each 81,600.00
4 2 ~ 7x6x200 RCB 1 Each 57,700.00
*5 2 - 10x6x60 RCB 1 Each 26,900.00
6 1 - 6x5x80 RCB 1 Each 11,900.00
7 1 - 72"xl00' RCP 1 Each 10,800.00
8 1 - 10x6x50 RCB 1 Each 13,700.00
9 Remove & Replace Pavement 5,000 S.Y. 13.00
10 Pond Excavation 205,000 C.Y. 1.00
11 Ditch Excavation 82,000 C.Y. 1.50
12 Seeding 25 Ac. 600.00
13 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 40,000.00
14 Detours, Pavement Removal &
Replacement 1 L.S. 132,300.00
15 Contingency 1 L.S. 165,600.00.
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Pond Right-Of-Way 14 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Ditch Right-of-Way 12 Ac. @ $7,500/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structure Sta. 3+00 Bl Bypass.
VIII-13
Extension
$ 19,100
19,100
30,000
81,600
57,700
26,900
11,900
10,800
13,700
65,000
205,000
123,000
15,000
40,000
132,300
167,200
$1,018,300
$1,018,300
70,000
90,000
152,700
$1,331,000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Alternate 2, Main Interceptor Bl
Magnolia Road Ditch
(Detention Storage Pond in Gebhart Tract)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 1 - 10x6x40 RCB 1 Each $ 11,500.00
2 1 - 10x6x40 RCB 1 Each 11,500.00
3 1 - 10x6x200' RCB 1 Each 45,800.00
4 1 - 6x5x80 RCB 1 Each 11,900.00
5 1 - 72"xl00' RCP 1 Each 10,800.00
6 1-10x6x50 RCB 1 Each 13,700.00
7 Flapgate 2 Each 10,000.00
8 Ditch Excavation 80,000 C.Y. 1.50
9 Seeding 15 Ac. 600.00
10 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 40,000.00
11 Remove & Replace Pavement 5,000 S.Y. 13.00
12 Detours, Pavement Remove &
Replace 1 L.S. 132,300.00
13 Contingency 1 L.S. 96,500.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Ditch Right-of-Way 10 Ac. @ $7,500/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-14
Extension
$ 11 ,500
11,500
45,800
11,900
10,800
13,700
20,000
120,000
9,000
40,000
65,000
132,300
96,500
$588,000
$588,000
75,000
88,200
$751,200
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Alternate 3, Main Interceptor B1
Magnolia Road Ditch
(314,000 gpm Pumping Station, No Ponding)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit. Price
1 2 - 10x6x40 RCB 1 Each $ 19,100.00
2 2 - 10x6x40 RCB 1 Each 19,100.00
w/Flapgates (incls . exist.
9x7 RCB) 3 Each 10,000.00
3 2 - 10x6x200 RCB 1 Each 81,600.00
4 2 - 7x6x200 RCB 1 Each 57,700.00
5 2 - 10x6x60 RCB 1 Each 26,900.00
6 1 - 6x5x80 RCB 1 Each 11,900.00
7 1 - 72"x100' RCP 1 Each 10,800.00
8 1 - 10x6x50 RCB 1 Each 13,700.00
9 Remove & Replace Pavement 5,000 S.Y. 13.00
10 Pwnps (314,000 gpm) 3 Each 170,000.00
11 Ditch Excavation 82,000 C.Y. 1.50
12 Seeding 25 Ac. 600.00
13 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 40,000.00
14 Detours, Pavement Removal &
Replacement 1 L.S. 132,300.00
15 Contingency 1 L.S. 231,200.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Ditch Right-Of-Way 12 Ac. @ $7,500/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-IS
Extension
$ 19,100
19,100
30,000
81,600
57,700
26,900
11 ,900
10,800
13,700
65,000
510,000
123,000
15,000
40,000
132,300
231,200
$1,387,300
$1,387,300
90,000
208,100
$1,685,400
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Submain B1-1
Neal Avenue
PART A ~ CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 60" RCP 330 L.F. $ 75.00
2 42" RCP 730 L.F. 50.00
3 30" RCP 400 L.Y. 32.00
4 24" RCP 120 L.F. 25.00
5 Manholes & Inlets 10 Each 1,500.00
6 60" End Section 1 Each 800.00
7 24" End Section 1 Each 300.00
8 Pavement Removal & Replacing 1,100 S.Y 13.00
9 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 20,000.00
10 Contingency 1 L.S. 25,500.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-16
Extension
$ 24,800
36,500
12,800
3,000
15,000
800
300
14,300
20,000
25,500
$153,000
$153,000
23,000
$176,000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Lateral B1-la
Linda Lane
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 36" RCP 370 L.F. $ 40.00
2 24" RCP 250 L.F. 25.00
3 Manholes & Inlets 10 Each 1,500.00
4 Pavement Removal & Replacing 400 S.Y. 17.00
5 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 10",000.00
6 Contingency 1 L.S. 10,600.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-17
Extension
$14,800
6,300
15,000
6,800
10,000
10,600
$63,500
$63,500
9,500
$73,000
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
)
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Submain Bl-2
Colonial Lane
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 30" RCP 300 L.F. $ 32.00
2 Manholes & Inlets 2 Each 1,500.00
3 Pavement Removal & Replacing 10 S.Y. 17 .00
4 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 1,000.00
5 Contingency 1 L.S. 2,800.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-18
Extension
$ 9,600
3,000
200
1,000
2,800
$16,600
$16,600
2,500
$19,100
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Submain Bl-3
Belmont Boulevard
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 60" RCP 1,130 L.F. $ 75.00
2 48" RCP 890 L.F. 60.00
3 Manholes & Inlets 10 Each 1,500.00
4 Utility Modifications 1 1.S. 50,000.00
5 Pavement Removal & Replacing 2,000 S.Y. 13.00
6 Contingency 1 L.S. 45,800.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative and Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-19
Extension
$ 84,800
53,400
15,000
50,000
26,000
45,800
$275,000
$275,000
41,000
$316,000
r-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Lateral Bl-3a
Key Avenue
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 36" RCP 290 L.F. $ 40.00
2 30" RCP 1,100 L.F. 32.00
3 24" RCP 290 L.F. 25.00
4 Manholes & Inlets 10 Each 1,500.00
5 Pavement Removal & Replacing 1,000 S.Y. 13.00
6 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 20,000.00
7 Contingency 1 L.S.
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering & Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
'...
VIII-20
Extension
$ 11,600
35,200
7,300
15,000
13,000
20,000
20,400
$122,500
$122,500
18,400
$140,900
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Lateral Bl-3b
Hartland Avenue
PART A ~ CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No.
Description
Quantity Unit
1 27" RCP
2 Manboles.& Inlets
3 Pavement Removal & Replacing
4 Utility Modification
5 Contingency
640
4
400
1
1
L.F.
Each
S.Y.
L.S.
L.S.
Unit
Price
$ 30.00
1,500.00
13.00
10,000.00
1,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-21
Extension
$19,200
6,000
5,200
10,000
1,000
$41,400
$41,400
6,200
$47,600
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Alternate 1, Submain Bl-4
Meadowlark Acres
(Detention Storage Pond West 1-135)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Extension
1 1 - 8x4x50 RCB 1 Each $ 9,400.00 $ 9,400
*2 1 - 5x4x50 RCB 1 Each 6,400.00 6,400
*3 2 - 36"x50 RCP 2 Each 2,700.00 5,400
w/Flapgates 2 Each 2,500.00 5,000
4 Ditch Excavation 11 ,000 C.Y. 1.50 16,500
5 Seeding 5 Ac. 600.00 3,000
6 Contingency I L.S. 8,500.00 8,500
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ 54,200
PART B - PROJECT COST
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
$ 54,200
52,500.
8,100
$114,800
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way - 7 Ac. @ $7,500/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
*Future Structure Sta. 17+00 and Sta. 28+00.
VIII-22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Alternate 2, Submain BI-4
Meadowlark Acres
(Detention Storage Pond in Gebhart Tract)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No.
p
Description
Unit
Quantity Unit. Price
22,000 C.Y. $ 1.50
10 Ac. 600.00
1 Each 2,700.00
1 L.S. 6,600.00
1
2
3
4
Ditch Excavation
Seeding
36"x50' RCP
Contingency
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost ~
Right-of-Way 80 Ac. @ $7,500/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-23
Extension
$ 33,000
6,000
2,700
6,600
$ 48,300
$ 48,300
600,000
7,300
$655,600
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Submain BI-5
Simmons - Highland Avenues
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 36" RCP 1,510 L.F. $ 40.00
2 24" RCP 720 L.F. 25.00
3 Manholes- & Inlets 10 Each 1,500.00
4 Pavement Removal & Replacing 1,300 S.Y. 13.00
5 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 20,000.00
6 Contingency 1 L.S. 26,100.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VUI-24
Extension
$ 60,400
18,000
15,000
16,900
20,000
26,100
$156,400
$156,400
3,900
$160,300
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
1 2 - 36"x50 RCP
2 36" Flapgate
3 Ditch Excavation
4 Utility Modification
5 Contingency
PART B - PROJECT COST
System B
Submain BI-6
Ninth Street
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
1 Each $ 4,000.00
3 Each 2,500.00
2,500 C.Y. 1.50
1 L.S. 20,000.00
1 L.S. 7,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 3 Ac. @ $7,500/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-25
Extension
$ 4,000
7,500
3,800
20,000
7,000
$42,300
. $42,300
22,500
6,300
$71,100
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Submain Bl-7
Tulane - Hageman Avenues
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
Unit
Quantity Unit. Price
1,180 L.F. $ 90.00
1,340 L.F. 40.00
1 Each 10,000.00
15 Each 1,500.00
1 L.S. 20,000.00
1 L.S. 42,000.00
1 1 - 72"x44" CMAP
2 36" RCP
3 72"x44" F1apgate
4 Curb Inlets
5 Utility Modifications
6 Contingency
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-26
Extension
$106,200
53,600
10,000
22,500
20,000
42,000
$254,300
$254,300
38,100
$292,400
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Submain Bl-8
Mid State Mall
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quant'ity Unit Price
-
1 2 - 60"x120' RCP 1 Each $ 21,200.00
w/F1apgates 2 Each 4,700.00
2 1 - 8x4x300' RCB 1 Each 46,400.00
3 Remove & Replace Pavement 500 S.Y. 17 .00
4 Ditch Excavation 24,000 C.Y. 1.50
5 Seeding 5 Ac. 600.00
6 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 10,000.00
7 Contingency ~. L.S. 26,900.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 5 Ac. @ $6,OOO/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-27
Extension
$ 21,200
9,400
46,400
8,500
36,000
3,000
10,0"00
26,900
$161,400
$161,400
30,000
24,200
$215,600
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System B
Main Interceptor B2
Key Acres 2 - West
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 2 - 10x5x190 1 Each $ 77,700.00
*2 2 - 10x5x80 1 Each 34,700.00
3 2 - 9x5x150 1 Each 51,500.00
*4 2 - 9x5x60 1 Each 22,200.00
*5 2 - 9x5x60 1 Each 22,200.00
*6 1 - 10x5x50 1 Each 12,300.00
7 Detours, Pavement Removal
& Replacement 1 L.S. 42,000.00
8 Ditch Excavation 111 ,500 C.Y. 1.50
9 ,Seeding 20 Ac. 600.00
10 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 10,000.00
11 Contingency 1 L.S. 90,400.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 20 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structures @ Sta. 25+00, Sta. 42+00, 'Sta. 47+00 and Sta. 57+00.
VIII-28
Extension
$ 77,700
34,700
51,500
22,200
22,200
12,300
42,000
167,300
12,000
10,000
90,400
$542,300
$542,300
100,000
81,000
$723,300
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
PROPOSED CITY PARK .IN THE GEBHART TRACT AREA
IN SYSTEM B
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No.
Description
1
Asphalt roads wfconcrete headers
& asphalt walks
Asphalt parking areas wfconcrete
headers
Tot lots, picnic & playground
equipment
Lighted ballfield complex
Lighted open field sports
Lighted court sports
2
3
4
5
6
Quantity Unit
1 L.S.
1 L.S.
1 L.S.
1 L.S.
1 L.S.
1 L.S.
Unit
Price
$ 289,000.00
116,000.00
92,000.00
124,000.00
40,000.00
296,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-29
Extension
$ 289,000
116,000
92 ,000
124,000
40,000
296,000
$ 957,000
$ 957,000
144,000
$1,101,000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System C
Alternate 1, Main Interceptor Cl
Knox Sandpit
(Detention Storage Pond South of Knox Road)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
~ Description Quantity Unit Price Extension
-
1 Excavation (ponding) 621,200 C.Y. $ 1.00 $ 621,200
2 Seeding 55 Ac. 600.00 33,000
3 Clearing, Stripping & Grubbing 9.5 Ac. 1,000.00 9,500
4 Pavement Removal & Replacement 150 S.Y 17.00 2,600
5 2 - S'x6'x170' RBW/Flapgate 1 Each 64,000.00 64,000
6 2 - S'x6'xl00 RCB 1 Each 34,400.00 34,400
7 2 - 8'x6'x80' RCB 1 Each 28,300.00 28,300
8 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 5,000.00 5,000
9 'Contingency 1 L.S. 119,700.00 119,700
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ 917,700
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Ponding Easement 13 Ac. @ $1,OOO/Ac.
Right-of-Way (Ponding) 55 Ac. @ $5,OOO/Ac.
Stockpile Easement 26 Ac. @ $2,500
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
$ 917 , 700
13,000
275,000
65,000
137,700
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
,
.$1,408,400
VIII-30
r- --------- - ----------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System C
Alternate 2, Main Interceptor C1
Knox Sandpit
(449,000 gpm Pumping Station, No Ponding)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 Pump Station Structure, Gates,
Pumps, Drivers & Controls 1 L.S. $781,000.00
2 Excavation 106,700 C.Y. 1.50
(3 Clearing, Stripping & Grubbing 9.5 Ac. 1,000.00
4 Seeding 22 Ac. 600.00
5 Pavement Removal & Replacement 150 S.Y. 17.00
6 2 - 8'x6'xl00' RCB l Each 34,400.00
7 2 - 8'x6'x80' RCB 1 Each 28,300.00
8 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 5,000.00
9 Contingency 1 L.S. 155,100.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 12.5 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-31
Extension
$ 781,000
160,100
9,500
13,200
2,"600
34,400
28,300
5,000
155,100
$1,189,200
$1,189,200
62,500
178,400
$1,430,100
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System C
Submain C1-1
South Ohio Street
PART A ~ CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Extension
1 Excavation 7,900 C.Y. $ 1.50 $11,900
2 Seeding 2.5 Ac. 600.00 1,500
3 Pavement Removal & Replacement 150 S.Y. 17.00 2,600
4 60"x80' RCP W End Section Head-
wall & Flapgate 1 Each 16,500.00 16,500
*5 60" RCP W 2 End Sections 60 L.F. 75.00 6,100
6 Inlets Type 22 6 Each 1,500.00 9,000
7 Pavement Removal & Replacement 150 S.Y. 17.00 2,600
8 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 15,000.00 15,000
9 Contingency 1 1.S. 10,000.00 10,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $75,200
PART B - PROJECT COST
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
$75,200
12,500
11 ,300
$99,000
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 2.5 Ac. @ $5,000jAc.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
*Future Structure @ Sta. 5+00.
VIII-32
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System C
Main Interceptor C2 Ph. 1
Schilling Rd. to Knox Rd.
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Extension
-
1 Excavation 140,700 C.Y. $ 1.50 $211,100
2 Seeding 24 Ac. 600.00 14,400
3 Pavement Removal & Replacement 400 S.Y. 17.00 6,800
4 3 - 9'x6'x150' RCB 1 Each 79,200.00 79,200
*5 3 - 9'x6'x60' RCB 1 ,Each 34,000.00 34,000
6 5 - 7'x6'xl00' RCB 1 Each 45,700.00 45,700
**7 5 - 7'x6'x80' 1 Each 37,400.00 37,400
***8 5 - 9'x6'x50' 2 Each 44,900.00 89,800
9 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 10,000.00 10,000
10 Contingency 1 L.S. 79,300.00 79,300
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $607,700
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 24 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
$607,700
120,000
91,200
$818,900
*Future Structure @ Sta. 62+00.
**Future Structure @ Sta. 47+25.
***Future Structures @ Sta. 14+00 and Sta. 30+00.
VIII-33
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System C
Main Interceptor C2 Ph. 2
Mentor to Schilling Rd.
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
~tem Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
-
1 Excavation 256,200 C.Y. $ 1.50 $
2 Seeding 43.5 Ac. 600.00
*3 3 - 9'x5'x50' RCB 1 Each 26,800.00
4 3 - 9'x5'x60' RCB 1 Each 31,500.00
**5 5 - 8'x5'x50' RCB 3 Each 37,400.00
***6 4 - 8'x5'x50' RCB 3 Each 30,700.00
7 4 - 8'x5'x60' RCB 1 Each 36,100.00
8 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 10,000.00
9 Contingency 1 L.S. 106,500.00
Extension
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
384,300
26,100
26,800
31,500
112,200
92,.100
36,100
.10,000
106,500
$ 825,600
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 43.5 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
$ 825,600
217 ,500
123,800
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
$1,166,900
*Future Structure @ Sta. 192+00.
**Future Structures @ Sta. 79+00, Sta. 92+00 and Sta. 117+00.
***Includes Future Structures @ Sta. 133+00 and Sta. 146+00.
/
VIII-34
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System C
Submain C2-1
Waterwell Rd. - Schilling Rd.
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
48,100 C.Y. $ 1.50
12 Ac. 600.00
2 Each 10,200.00
1 L.S. 5,000.00
1 L.S. 15,700.00
1 Excavation
2 Seeding
*3 1 - 9'x4'x50' RCB
4 Utility Modifications
5 Contingency
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 12 Ac. @ $5,OOO/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structure @ Sta. 25+50.
VIII-35
Extension
$ 72,200
7,200
20,400
5,000
15,700
$120,500
$120,500
60,000
18,100
$198,600
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System C
Submain C2-2
South Bonnie Ridge
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 Excavation 43,690 C.Y. $ 1.50
2 Seeding 13 Ac. 600.00
*3 1 - 5'x5'x150' RCB 1 Each 18,000.00
**4 60 RCP 210 L.F. 75.00
***5 30" RCP 60 L.F. 32.00
6 24" RCP w/End Section Headwall
& Flapgate 1 L.S. 7,300.00
*7 60" RCP End Section 4 Each 800.00
***8 30" RCP End Section 2 Each 300.00
9 Pavement Removal 400 S.Y. 17 .00
10 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 10,000.00
11 Contingency 1 L.S. 20,500.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 13 Ac. @ $5,OOO/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structure @ Sta. 7+20
**Includes Future Structure @ Sta. 22+20
***Future Structure @ Sta. 39+50
VIII-36
Extension
$ 65,400
7,800
18,000
15,800
2,000
7,300
3,200
600
6,800
10,000
20,500
$157,400
$157,500
65,000
23,600
$246,100
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System C
Main Interceptor C3
Schilling Rd. - Knox Sandpit
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No.
Description
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
-
58,800 C.Y. $ 1.50
14 Ac. 600.00
1 Each 19,900.00
2 Each 24,600.00
1 L.S. 5,000.00
1 L.S. 23,400.00
1
2
3
*4
6
7
Excavation
Seeding
2 - 6'xS'x80' RCB
3 - 7'xS'x60' RCB
Utility Modifications
Contingency
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 14 Ac. @ $S,OOO/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structures @ Sta. 9+00 and Sta. 25+00.
VIII-37
Extension
$ 73,200
8,400
19,900
49,200
5,000
23,400
$179,100
$179,100
70,000
26,900
$276,000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
PROPOSED CITY PARK IN THE KNOX SANDPIT AREA
SOUTH & EAST PARTS IN SYSTEM C
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No.
Description
Quantity
1
Asphalt roads wfconcrete headers
& crossing structure
Asphalt parking areas wfconcrete
headers
Picnic & playground equipment
Lighted golf driving range
Toilet & equipment building
Lighted archery range
Lighted open field sports area
Lighted riding area
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
1,
5
6
7
8
Unit
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
Unit
Price
$361,000.00
280,000.00
41,000.00
92,000.00
17,000.00
34,000.00
51,000.00
80,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-38
Extension
. $ 361,000
280,000
41 ,000
92,000
17 ,.000
34,000
.51,000
80,000
$ 956,000
$ 956,000
143,000
$1,099,000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Alternate I, Outlet D1
Outlet Old River Channel
(Holmquist Sandpit Area - Pond North Knox Rd.)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No.
Description
Unit
Quantity Unit" Price
-
360 L.F. $ 100.00
2 Each 1,150.00
2 Each 10,900.00
1 Each 25,000.00
10 Ac. 1,000.00
10 Ac. 600.00
1 L.S. 18,200.00
1 2 - 78"x180' RCP
2 78" RCP End Section
3 Headwall wjflapgates
4 2 - 10'x7'x50" RCB
5 Clearing, Stripping & Grubbing
6 Seeding
7 Contingency
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-39
Extension
$ 36,000
22,300
21,800
25,000
10,000
6,000
18,200
$139,300
$139,300
20,900
$160,200
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Alternate 2, Outlet D1
Outlet Old River Channel (Holmquist Sandpit Area)
(224,400 gpm Pumping Station, No Ponding)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
. No.
Description
Unit
Quantity Unit. Price
-
1 ]':ach $418,400.00
1 Each 25,000.00
10 Ac. 1,000.00
10 Ac. 600.00
1 L.S. 68,900.00
1
Pump Station Structures, Gates,
Pumps, Drivers & Controls
2 - 10'x7'x50 RCB
Clearing, Stripping & Grubbing
Seeding
Contingency
2
3
4
5
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-40
Extension
$418,400
25,000
10,000
6,000
68,900
$528,300
$528,300
79,200
$607,500
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Alternate 1 Main Interceptor D2
Ohio - Magnolia
(Ditch & Ponding Area North Knox Rd.)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Extension
1 Excavation (Ditch) 99,700 C.Y. $ 1.50 $149,600
2 Excavation (Ponding) 210,000 C.Y. 1.00 210,000
3 2 - 8'x8'x50' RCB 1 Each 23,800.00 23,800
*4 2 - 8'x8'x50' RCB 2 Each 23,800.00 47,600
5 Seeding 52 Ac. 600.00 31,2.00
6 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 5,000.00 5,000
7 Contingency 1 L.S. 70,100.00 70,100
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $537,300
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-Of-Way (Ponding) 40 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Right-of-Way (Ditch) 12 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Easement for Stockpile 23 Ac. @ $2,500/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
$537,300
200,000
60,000
57,500
80,600
$935,400
*Future Structures @ Sta. 15+00 and Sta. 25+00.
VIII-41
,
_______-.J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Alternate 2, Main Interceptor D2
Ohio Street - Magnolia Road
(Ditch & Ponding Area in Holmquist Oxbow Area)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit. Price
1 Ditch Excavation 69,500 C.Y. $ 1.50 $
2 Ponding Excavation 340,000 C.Y. 1.00
3 1 - 6'x6'x50' RCB 1 Each 15,200.00
*4 1 - 6'x6'x50' RCB 2 Each 15,200.00
5 Seeding 50 Ac. 600.00
6 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 5,000.00
7 Contingency 1 L.S. 80,900.00.
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-Of-Way (Ponding) 40 Ac. @ $5;000/Ac.
Right-of-Way (Ditch) 10 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Easement for Stockpile 23 Ac. @ $2,500/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative and Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structures @ Sta. 15+00 to Sta. 25+00.
VIII-42
Extension
104,300
340,000
15,200
30,400
30,000
5,000
80,900
$ 605,800
$ 605,800
200,000
50,000
57,500
90,900
$1,004,200
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Alternate 3, Main Interceptor D2
Ohio Street - Magnolia Road
(224,400 gpm Pumping Station, No Ponding)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
-
99,700 C.Y. $ 1.50
1 Each 23,800.00
2 Each 23,800.00
12 Ac. 600.00
1 L.S. 5,000.00
1 L.S. 35,000.00
1 Excavation
2 2 - S'x8'x50' RCB
*3 2 - 8'x8'x50' RCB
'4 Seeding
5 Utility Modifications
6 Contingency
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 12 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-43
Extension
$149,600
23,800
47,600
7,200
5,0.00
35,000
$268,200
$268,200
60,000
40,200
$368,400
:.~'~'
,,""'f.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OY COST
System D
Submain D2-1
Wayne Avenue
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
. No. Description Quantity Unit Price
-
1 2 - 7'x6'x1,270' RCB 1 Each $347,800.00
2 66" RCP 3,940 L.Y. 82.00
3 72" RCP 750 L.Y. 90.00
4 54" RCP 1,100 L.Y. 68.00
5 42" RCP 1,150 L.Y. 50.00
6 Inlets Type 22 26 Each 1,500.00
7 Pavement Removal & Replacement 1,500 S.Y. 17.00
8 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 25,000.00
9 Contingency 1 L.S. 144,100.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-44
Extension
$ 347,800
323,100
67,500
74,800
57,500
39,000
25,800
25,000
144,100
$1,104,600
$1,104,600
165,700
$1,270,300
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Lateral D2-1a
Raymond Ave,. Kensington Rd. & Leland Way
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
-
1 30" RCP 700 L.F. $ 32.00
2 36" RCP 630 L.F. 40.00
3 Inlets Type 22 7 Each 1,500.00
4 Pavement Removal & Replacement :; 420 C.Y. 17 .00
5 Utility Modifications J L.S. 10,000.00
6 Contingency 1 L.S. 11,500.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-45
Extension
$22,400
25,200
10,500
7,100
10,000
11,500
$86,700
$86,700
13,000
$99,700
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Submain D2-2
Belmont Boulevard
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Extension
1 36" RCP 950 L.F. $ 40.00 $ 38,000
2 54" RCP 1,720 L.F. 68.00 116,700
3 Inlet Type 22 24 Each 1,500.00 36,000
4 Pavement Removal & Replacement 760 S.Y. 17.00 13,000
5 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 20,000.00 20,000
6 Contingency 1 L.S. 33,500.00 33,500
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $256,200
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
$256,200
38,500
$294,700
VIII-46
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Submain D2-3
Ohio Street - Magnolia Road
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
. No. Description Quantity Unit Price
-
1 54" RCP 500 L.F. $ 68.00
48" RCP w/end section 50 L.F. 60.00
2 76"x48" HE RCP 650 L.F. 80.00
3 60"x38" HE RCP 1,500 L.Y. 55.00
4 Pavement Removal & Replacement 760 S.Y. 17 .00
5 Inlets Type 22 24 Each 1,500.00
6 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 20,000.00
7 Contingency 1 L.S. 36,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-47
Extension
$340,000
1,200
52,000
82,500
13,000
36,000
20,000
36,000
$274,700
$274,700
41,200
$315,900
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Lateral D2-3a
Edward St.
PART A ~ CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
1 24" RCP
2 Inlets Type 22
3 Pavement Removal & Replacement
4 Utility Modifications
5 Contingency
Quantity Unit
310 L.F.
2 Each
200 S.Y.
1 L.S.
1 L.S.
Unit
Price
-
$ 25.00
1,500.00
17 .00
5,000.00
3,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-48
Extension
$ 7,800
3,000
3,400
5,000
3,000
$22,200
$22,200
3,500
$25,700
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Lateral D2-3b
Aurora Avenue
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No.
Description
1
2
3
4
5
24" RCP
Inlets Type 22
Pavement Removal & Replacement
Utility Modifications
Contingency
Quantity
350
2
200
1
1
Unit
L.F.
Each
S.Y.
L.S.
L.S.
Unit
Price
$ 25.00
1,500.00
17. 00
5,000.00
3,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative. & Legal
. TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIlI-49
Extension
$ 8,800
3,000
3,400
5,000
3,000
$23,z"00
$23,200
3,500
$26,700
I
I
I
I I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Submain D2-4
Ohio St. - South of Magnolia Road
.
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
. No. Description
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
-
100 L.F. $ 60.00
1 L.S. 13,000.00
6,700 C.Y. 1.50
1 L.S. 5,000.00
1 L.S. 5,500.00
1 48" RCP
2 Headwall w/2 flapgates
3 Excavation Ditch
4 Utility Modifications
5 Contingency
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way (Ditch) 2.5 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-50
Extension
$ 6,000
13 ,000
10,100
5,000
5,500
$39,600
$39,600
12,500
6,000
$58,100
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System D
Alternate 1 Main Interceptor D3
East Magnolia Road & Outlet Ditch
PART A ~ CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
-
1 Ditch Excavation 43,400 C.Y. $ 1.50
*2 1 - 8'x5'x50' 1 Each 17,500.00
3 1 - 5'x5'x50' 1 Each 11,800.00
4 2 - 42" RCP 340 L.F. 50.00
5 Headwall w/2 flap gates 1 L.S. 11 ,300.00
6 42" End Section 2 Each 450.00
7 Seeding 8.5 Ac. 600.00
8 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 5,000.00
9 Contingency 1 L.S. 20,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 8.5 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structure @ Sta. 34+50.
VIII-51
Extension
$ 65,100
17,500
11 ,800
17,000
11 ,300
900
5,100
5,000
20,000
$153,700
$153,700
42,500
23,100
$219,300
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
PROPOSED PARK IN THE KNOX SANDPIT AREA
NORTHWEST PART IN SYSTEM D
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
-
1 Asphalt parking lot w/concrete
header 1 L.S. 220,000
2 Lighted court sports 1 L.S. 296,000
3 Lighted open field sports 1 L.S. 40,000
4 Lighted ballfield complex 1 L.S. 124,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
Pi\l(T B - PROJECT COST
Const~uction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-52
Extension
$220,000
296,000
40,000
124,000
$680,000
.
$680,000
102,000
$782,000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System E
Dry Creek Outlet E
From 1-135 South to County Road
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
. No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 2 - 12x12x50 RCB 1 Each $43,000.00
2 Clearing, Stripping & Grubbing 55 Ac. 1,000.00
3 Compacted Fill for Abandoned
Channel 125,000 C.Y. 0.50
4 Linear Grading & Surfacing
Waterwell Rd. 1 L.S. 10,000.00
5 Ditch Excavation 450,000 C.Y. 1.50
6 Seeding 66 Ac. 600.00
7 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 10,000.00
8 . Contingency 1 L.S.
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 108 Ac. @ $4,000jAc.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
Extension
$ 43,000
55,000
62,500
10,000
675,000
39,600
10,000
179,000
$1,074,100
$1,074,100
432,000
161,100
$1,667,200
Note: The project cost from Schilling Rd. to 1-135 is approximately 80% of
the total project cost shown above.
VIII-53
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System F
Alternate 1, Slough (From Cloud Street to Old River Channel)
(25 Year Design)
PART A ~ CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
-
1 3 - 7'x7'x79' RCB (Bond St.) 1 Each $ 38,000.00
2 3 - 9'x6'x69' RCB (Rahm St.) 1 Each 38,800.00
3 3 - 9'x6'x60' RCB (Anderson St.) 1 Each 35,000.00
4 3 - 8'x6'xl12' RCB (Wilson St.) 1 Each 55,000.00
5 3 - 9'x6'x68' RCB (Republic St.) 1 Each 38,800.00
6 3 - 9'x6'76' RCB (Beloit St.) 1 Each 42,500.00
7 3 - 8'x5'x72' RCB (Minneapolis St. ) 1 Each 34,800.00
8 2 - 7'x5'x73' RCB (Ellsworth) 1 Each 21,300.00
9 3 - 9'x4'x73' RCB (Jewell &
Kirwin) 2 Each 36,250.00
10 3 - 9'x4'x70' RCB (Claflin) 1 Each 36,000.00
11 3 - 7'x4'x60' RCB (Russell) 1 Each 23,800.00
12 7'x4'x78' RCB (Cloud) 'I Each 10,000.00
13 ' 2 - 8'x8'X1+,720' RCB (2nd & Crawford) 1 Each 625,000.00
14 Pavement Removal & Replacement 5,350 S.Y. 13.00
15 Pavement Removal & Replacement 3,330 S.Y. 17 .00
16 Curb & Gutter 3,440 L.F. 5.50
17 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 70,000.00
18 Contingency 1 L.S. 130,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 2 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMA~ED PROJECT COST
VIII-54
Extension
$ 38,000
38,800
35,000
55,000
38,800
42,500
34,800
21,300
72 ,500
36,000
23,800
~~ 000
rp :000 ~
69,500
56,600
18,900
70,000
130,000
$1,416,500
$1,416,500
10,000
214,000
$1,640,500
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System F
Alternate 2, Slough (From Cloud Street to Old River Channel)
(10 Year Design)
PART A . CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 2 . 8x7xl,720 RCB 1 Each $577 ,500.00
2 2 . 8x7x79' RCB (Bond) 1 Each 31,300.00
3 3 - 7x6x69, RCB (Rahm) 1 Each 31,300.00
f. 3 - 7x6x60' RCB (Anderson) 1 Each 27,500.00
5 3 - 6x6x112' RCB (Wilson) 1 Each 42,000.00
6 3 - 7x6x68, RCB (Republic) 1 Each 31,000.00
7 3 - 7x6x76' RCB (Beloit) 1 Each 34,000.00
8 3 - 7x4x72' RCB (Minneapolis) 1 Each 27,500.00
9 2 - 5x5x73' RCB (Ellsworth) 1 Each 16,300.00
10 3 - 7x4x73, RCB (Jewell) 1 Each 27,500.00
11 3 - 7x4x73' RCB (Kirwin) 1 Each. 27,500.00
12 3 - 7x4x70' RCB (Claflin) 1 Each 27,300.00
13 2 - 7x4x60' RCB (Russell) 1 Each 16,400.00
14 1 - 5x4x78' (Cloud) 1 Each 9,500.00
15 Pavement Removal & Replacement 5,350 S.Y. 13.00
16 Pavement Removal & Replacement 2,870 S.Y. 17.00
17 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 70,000.00
18 Curb & Gutter 3,440 L.F. 5.50
19 Contingency 1 L.S. 113,400.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 2 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-55
Extension
$ 577,500
31,300
31,300
27,500
42,000
31,000
34,000
27,500
16,300
27,500
27,500
27,300
16,400
9,500
69,500
48,800
70,000
18,900
113,400
$1,247,200
$1,247,200
10,000
188,600
$1,445,800
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System F
Alternate 3, Slough (From Cloud Street to Old River Channel)
(25 Year Design with Low-water Crossings)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No.
Description
Quantity
1
Street Lowering (Bond, Rahm &
Anderson)
Street Lowering (Wilson, Beloit,
Minneapolis, Ellsworth, Jewell,
Kirwin, Claflin & Russell)
2 - 8'x8'x1,720 RCB
7'x4'x78' RCB
3 - 9'x6'x68' RCB
Curb & Gutter
.Pavement Removal & Replacement
Utility Modifications
Contingency
8
1
1
1
3,440
5,350
1
1
3
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Unit
Each
Each
Each
Each
Each
L.F.
S.Y.
L.S.
L.S.
Unit
Price
$ 30,000.00
33,000.00
625,000.00
10,000.00
38,800.00
5.50
13.00
50,000.00
234,500.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-56
Extension
$ 90,000
264,000
625,000
10,000
38,800
18,900
69,500
50,000
234,500
$1,400,700
$1,400,700
10,000
210,100
$1,620,800
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
[I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System F
Alternate 4, Slough (From Cloud Street to Old River Channel)
(25 Year Design with Closings of Minor Roadways)
PART A ~ CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
Quantity
1 Street Removal & Storm Sewer
Modification (Claflin, Min-
neapolis, Beloit, Wilson &
Bond)
2 Street Removal (Russell, Kirwin,
Jewell, Ellsworth, Anderson &
Rahm)
3 2 - 8'x8'x1,720' RCB
4 42'x78' RCP
5 2 - 9'x6'x68' RCB
Pavement Removal & Replacement.
6 Pavement Removal & Replacement
7 Curb & Gutter
8 Utility Modifications
9 Contingency
5
6
1
1
1
4.00
5,350
3,440
1
1
Unit
Each
Each
Each
Each
Each
S.Y.
S.Y.
L.F.
L.S.
L.S.
Unit
Price
$ 16,200.00
11,200.00
625,000.00
2,000.00
27,500.00
17.00
13.00
5.50
50,000.00
189,600.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
,
VIII-57
Extension
$ 81,000.
67,200
625,000
2,000
27,500
6,800
69,500
18,900
50,000
189,600
$1,135,500
$1,135,500
10,000
170,300
$1,315,800
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System F
(Cloud - 4th Streets)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No.
1
2
3
4
5
'6
Description
+;<F'
1 - 7x4x760 RCB - l\' y
1 - 10x4xl,120 RCB ~~
Pavement Removal & Replacement
Utility Modifications
Inlets Type 22
Contingency
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
1 Each $100,000.00
1 Each 213,800.00
7,110 S.Y. 13.00
1 L.S. 50,000.00
10 Each 1,500.00
1 L.S. 47,100.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative, Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-58
Extension
$100,000
213,800
92,400
50,000
15,000
47,100
$518,300
$518,300
77 ,700
$596,000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System G
Alternate 1; Main Interceptor Gl
Courtney Drive
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
.-
1 2 - 10x4x50 RCB 1 Each $20,000.00
2 2 - 9x4x50 RCB 1 Each 17,800.00
3 2 - 9x4x50 RCB 1 Each 17,800.00
*4 1 - 10x4x50' RCB 1 Each 11 ,400.00
5 Inlet Structures & Flumes 1 L.S. 8,000.00
6 Pond Excavation 146,900 C.Y. 1.50
7 Ditch Excavation 42 ,700 C.Y. 1.50
8 Seeding 26 Ac. 600.00
9 Structure thru Dike 1 L.S. 25,000.00
10 . Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 10,000.00
11 Contingency 1 L.S. 60,500.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Ditch Right-of-Way 11 Ac. @ $5,000fAc.
Pond Right-of-Way 15 Ac. @ $5,000fAc.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structure @ Sta. 130+60.
VIII -59
Extension
$ 20,000
17,800
17,800
11,400
8,000
220,400
64,100
15,600
25,000
10,000
60,500
$471,600
$471,600
55,000
75,000
70,700
$672,300
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System G
Alternate 2; Main Interceptor Gl
Courtney Drive
(245,200 gpm Pumping Station @ 42"
Outlet Structure, No Ponding)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 Pump Station Structures, Gates,
Pumps, Drivers & Controls 1 L.S. $414,900.00
2 2 - 10x4x50 RCB 1 Each 20,000.00
3 2 - 9x4x50 RCB 1 Each 17,800.00
4 2 - 9x4x50 RCB 1 Each 17,800.00
*5 1 - 10x4x50' RCB 1 Each 11 ,400.00
6 Inlet Structures & Flumes 1 L.S. 8,000.00
7 Ditch Excavation 42,700 C.Y. 1.50
8 Seeding 11 Ac. 600.00
9 Structure thru Dike 1 L.S. 25,000.00
10 Utility Modifications -1 L.S. 10,000.00
11 Contingency 1 L.S. 119,100.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Ditch Right-of-Way 11 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structure @ Sta. 130+60.
VIII-60
Extension
$414,900
20,000
17,800
17,800
11,400
8,000
64,100
6,600
25,000
10,000
119,100
$714,700
$714,700
55,000
107,200
$876,900
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System G
Alternate 3; Main Interceptor G1
Courtney Drive
(367,800 gpm Pumping Station @ 30"
Outlet Structure, Existing Ponding)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
1 Pump Station Structures, Gates
Pumps, Drivers & Controls 1 L.S. $593,600.00
2 2 - 10x4x50 RCB 1 Each 20,000.00
3 2 - 9x4x50 RCB 1 Each 17 , 800.00
4 2 - 9x4x50 RCB 1 Each 17 ,800.00
*5 1 - 10x4x50' RCB 1 Each 11 ,400 .00
6 Inlet Structures & Flumes 1 L.S. 8,000.00
7 Ditch Excavation 73,600 C.Y. 1.50
8 Seeding 12 Ac. 600.00
9 Utility Modifications 1 L.S. 10,000.00
10 Contingency 1 L.S. 159,200.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B ~ PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Ditch Right-of-Way 12 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
*Future Structure @ Sta. 130+60.
VIII-61
Extension
$ 593,600
20,000
17 ,800
17 ,800
11 ,400
8,000
110,400
7,200
10,000
159,200
$955,400
$955,400.
60,000
143,300
$1,158,700
,-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
.
System G
Alternate 1; Main Interceptor
McAdams Road
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
1 60" RCP
2 48" RCP
3 Inlet Type 22
4 60" End Section
5 48" End Section
6 Excavation
7 Seeding
8 Utility Modification
9 Contingency
G2
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
400 L.F. $ 75.00
400 L.F. 60.00
4 Each 1,500.00
1 Each 800.00
1 Each 700.00
5,600 C.Y. 1.50
1 Ac. 600.00
1 L.S. 5,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-of-Way 1 Ac. @ $5,OOO/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-62
Extension
$ 30,000
24,000
6,000
800
700
8,400
600
5,000
15 , 100
$ 90,600
$ 90,600
5,000
13,600
$109,200
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
System G
Alternate 2; Main Interceptor G2
McAdams Road
(122,600 gpm Pumping Station, No ponding)
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item Unit
No. Description Quantity Unit Price
-
1 Pumping Station Structure, Gates,
Pumps, Drivers & Controls 1 L.S. $331,700.00
2 60" RCP 400 L.F. 75.00
'3 48" RCP 400 L.F. 60.00
4 Inlet Type 22 4 Each 1,500.00
5 60" End Section 1 Each 800.00
6 48" End Section 1 Each 700.00
7 Excavation 5,600 C.Y. 1.50
8 Seeding 1 Ac. 600.00
9 Utility Modification 1 L.S. 5,000.00
10 Contingency 1 L.S. 81,400.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
PART B - PROJECT COST
Construction Cost
Right-Of-Way 1 Ac. @ $5,000/Ac.
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-63
Extension
$331,700
30,000
24,000
6,0.00
800
700
8,400
600
5,000
81,400
$488,600
$488,600
5,000
73,300
$566,900
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
. No.
Description
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
60" RCP
54" Rep
48" RCP
36" RCP
Inlet Type 22
Utility Modifications
Contingency
PART B - PROJECT COST
System G
Submain G2-1
Williams Drive
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
-
300 L.F. $ 75.00
320 L.F. 68.00
300 L.F. 60.00
290 L.F. 40.00
10 Each 1,500.00
1 L.S. 5,000.00
1 L.S.
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-64
Extension
$ 22,500
21,800
18,000
11 ,600
15,000
5,000
18,800
$112,700
$112,700
16,900
$129,600
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
1 42" RCP
2 Inlet Type 22
3 Utility Modifications
4 Contingency
PART B - PROJECT COST
System G
Submain G2-2
Meadowbrook Road
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
-
300 L.F. $ 50.00
4 Each 1,500.00
1 L.S. 2,000.00
1 L.S. 4,600.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
~onstruction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-65
Extension
$15,000
6,000
2,000
4,600
$27,600
$27,600
4,100
$31,700
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA, KANSAS
SOUTH SALINA DRAINAGE STUDY
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST
PART A - CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
No. Description
1 48" RCP
2 48" End Section
3 Inlet Type 22
4 Utility Modifications
5 Contingency
PART B - PROJECT COST
System G
Submain G2-3
West Faith Drive
Unit
Quantity Unit Price
650 L.F. $ 60.00
1 Each 700.00
6 Each 1,500.00
1 L.S. 5,000.00
1 L.S.
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
Construction Cost
Engineering, Administrative & Legal
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
VIII-66
Extension
$39,000
700
9,000
5,000
10,800
$64,500
$64,500
9,700
$74,200
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
! I
I
.
I
. .
..
I
.
,
: I
I
SECTION IX
DESIGN METHODS
I,
I
I
SECTION IX - DESIGN METHODS
HYDROLOGY
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
General
The basic methods used for estimating peak runoff rates were the Rational
Method and the Soil Conservation Service Hydrograph Method. The necessary
coefficients and time functions for various basins were selected only after
study of the results of applying several different hydrologic methods. The
methods also included, in addition to those above, runoff methods of the
U.S. Bureau of Public Roads, U.S. Geological Survey, and the Corps of
Engineers. (References 6-10.)
Results of the Rational Method and the Soil Conservation Service Hydrograph
Method produced the most reasonable range of runoff rates and volumes. The
Rational Method was used for the design of the submains and laterals where
relatively small drainage areas were involved. The Soil Conservation
Service Hydrograph Method was used to determine the runoff rates and volumes
to the main interceptors, outlets, and ponding areas. Flood routing through
ponding areas was accomplished by approximate routing methods described in
Technical Release No. 55 of the Soil Conservati~n Service and by graphical
methods.
Hydrology studies were limited to local runoff problems. Data and reports
furnished by the Corps of Engineers were used to evaluate streamflow condi-
tions in the Smoky Hill River and.supplement the study on Dry Creek. Figure
IX~l shows the Frequency-Discharge and Frequency-Elevation curves for the
Smoky Hill River at the Mentor Gage. .
Rational Method
The formula for the Rational Method is commonly written as Q = CIA, in
which Q is the peak rate of runoff in cubic feet per second from a drainage
area (A) in acres, which receives rainfall at a uniform intensity (I) in
inches per hour, for a duration of time equal to the time it takes for
runoff from the most distant point in area (A) to concentrate at the point
in consideration (time of concentration), (C) is the runoff factor dependent
upon precipitation, soil type and cover, antecedent moisture conditions,
percent of area that is impervious and slope of the terrain. Table IX-!
shows the range of runoff coefficients (C) used in the Rational Method.
I
I
IX-l
(SHV3A) A3N3n03H~
o
",.
(SHV3A) A3N3no3H~
o
'"
~
N ..
C>
~
<
>
CI) ~ >-
CC e
... 1=
CI) I
UJ z: l:; .,
'" CC
.. ('I) (!) ... ...; C5f5~
C> ~ J a.~~
!c 0: ~ - 1.I.ICll:'-
> <( "" '" <
~ J: 0 ... .......'"
I- '" ....e
... Co) z: G ...:z:<
... (I) "'" '" ..
<> ::E ... ~~~
i:! Q "" ~i~
'"
::0 0 cc
., ('I) I "'" e i!'
'" N z: I ::0
I!! >- >- ~
"" <>
~ Co) "'" ~
Z > ::0
0-
UJ "" ...
'"
::;) ...
0 .....
.....
'" UJ -
N 0: ::
N
II- >-
...
0
::E
CI)
(SHY3A) A3N3no3H~ 0
N
N
0 0 0 ~ ~ 0
0 ao '"
0
.('1)
N
..
C>
~
<
>
...
....
...
'"
N
N
g
o
.
~
0
0
0
.
'"
~
12
<>
- 0
... 0
'" 0
'"
< .
:z: 0
<>
.,
e
CI)
CC
CI)
z:
UJ CC
(!) ...
0: ~
<( ""
J: ~
Co) z:
"'"
(I) ::E
-
Q ""
~
I z:
>- ""
Co) "'"
Z >
UJ ""
::;) .....
0 .....
UJ ::
0:
II- >-
... ... ...
5! >-
>- ta
CI) '"
II II
&0.
......
'" '"
... ...
'" 8
~ ...
~ ....
II II
....i ....i
... ...
~
N
o
(SHY3A) A3N3no3H~
o
o
o
ao
o
'"
~
o
N
o
o
o
'"
o
o
.,
~~
:i. <>
.;~~
t!~"'o
Cf) II -
N rD 00 II
II 11 II C>
'" i::l I:: II
1.I.ICll:a><<t
><-1;;
"'l!I..;-
... < .
oz. -'
-J=~g:
LL. Q (I) C
-----------------
8
o
~
., 0
t; 0
- 0
'"
0-
o
o
- -
I
I
I
TABLE IX-1
RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Type of Area
Runoff Coefficient, "c"
Moderately flat, rural
floodplain land, cultivated
Varying from 0.17 for 5 year
frequency, to 0.21 for 100
year frequency
Fully developed urban area,
primarily residential
0.4
Business:
Downtown
Neighborhood.
0.7 to 0.95
0.5 to 0.7
Industrial:
Light
Heavy
0.5 to 0.8
0.6 to 0.9
The Rational Method is based on a number of assumptions:
1. The runoff volume resulting from any rainfall intensity lasts as long
or longer than the time of concentration.
2. The maximum runoff resulting from a rainfall intensity, with a duration
equal to or greater than the time of concentration, is a simple fraction of
the rainfall intensity; it assumes a straight line relation.
3. The frequency of peak discharges is the same as that of the rainfall
intensity for the given time of concentration.
4. The relationship between peak discharges and size of drainage area is
the same as the relationship between duration and intensity of rainfall.
One pf the most common mistakes in using the Rational Method is the value
used for "I". The rainfall intensity for a given design frequency is a
function of the time of concentration which in turn is a function of the
total area being drained above any inlet point under consideration. There-
fore, as the design of a particular drainage area proceeds downstream and
contributing sub-areas are added to the drainage system, the time of concen-
tration (t ) increases. As t increases, the "I" for a duration equal to
t must degrease for the sameCdesign freque~cy. The rainfall intensity for
aCgiven duration is shown on Figure IX-2.
I
I
I
I
IX-2
-------
1:--
I
I
I :t-
N
I
N
I "
I UJ
>-
'"
~
<..> <0
:z:
I 0(1)0
-...:t-
I- (I) ""
N ... :z:
I "'... 0
X ~""....
I Q .;:.,...:
I
UJ >- ...
'" <">:Z:::E Ln',
~ :z:-o
<l>, UJ -' '"
~... u. 0
I u. C> (I) ~ ~
UJ ... .:: ".. 0 ~ '" (I)
"''''I- ~ ~ ".. ,.. '"
U.O'" ".. ~ ".. .. ~
I U. Q $ ,.. '" 0
-' :I:
-' 0 ~
-
I ...
U. :t- :z:
:z: 0
... I-
'" ...
I '"
~
Q
I <'>
I
N
I
I
I
I
0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0
0 0 0
I "- <0 III ... CI) N
(0 NI) llV.:lNIVlI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SCS Hydrograph Method
"Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds", Technical Release No. 55, by the
Soil Conservation Service describes the method used in computing the peak
rate and volume of runoff.
Generally, the SCS Hydrograph Method requires estimation of a time of con-
centration, a design storm duration and an estimate of the amount of runoff
based on the soil type and ground cover. The curve number (CN) is used to
determine the amount of runoff from any given drainage area. Table IX-2
shows a .range of typical curve numbers that were used in this study as they
relate to land use. Another important aspect in determining the curve
number is to find the hydrologic soil group in the area of interest. This
was accomplished with the aid of the Saline County Soil Survey Report.
TABLE IX-2
CURVE NUMBERS RELATED TO LAND USE
Land Use
CN
Residential
Industrial
Cultivated Land
Pasture or Range Land
Commercial & Business Areas
75-85
80-90
62-81
60-80
85-95
Curve numbers for existing developed areas were determined following visual
inspection of the area and by use of aerial photos. Future curve numbers
for undeveloped areas were determined from the City and. County Land Use
Plans.
A 24 hour, Type II rainfall distribution was used with the SCS Hydrograph
Method. The 24 hour rainfall amount for a range of frequencies is shown on
Figure IX-3.
One of the main advantages in using the SCS Hydrograph Method is that it is
a r~lative1y easy method for analyzing complex drainage systems by hydro graphs
and will give the necessary data for analysis of ponding areas and coincident
flow in streams.
A detailed discussion of the SCS hydrograph method can be found in References 6
and 7.
RAINFALL
I
I
I
I
Rainfall data used in this study were taken from Technical Paper No. 40,
U.S. Weather Bureau, and are shown in Figures IX-2 and IX-3 as Frequency-
Intensity-Duration and Rainfall-Frequency-Duration, respectively. The storm
frequency rating (more properly, average recurrence interval) indicates the
IX-3
I
C'l
I
I "" CD
...
:>
l>=:
I :::>
(.)
Z
0""0
-<:::t-
1-"""'"
, < Z U)
l>=:< 0
:::> "" <>-
c ....:
I
... >-<
l>=: I-ZX
I --0 ~
""-'l>=:
Z<u. CI)
... "" l>=:
I- < :::>
Zl>=:1- 0 :::t-
-0< ~
I I U. C
>-
(.) Z
Z 0
...
:::> l-
I C> <
... l>=:
l>=: ::>
u. c
'"
I
:::t-
C'l
I
N
o
......
o
...
o
U)
o
:::t-
o
o
'"
~
C'l
o
o
o
I
(OHH/ONlf A1ISN31NI
I
-J;!>
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
amount of rainfall and the intensity of a storm that, in the past, has been
exceeded on an average of once per the number of years shown. There is no
implication that these storms come at regular intervals. The probability
that a given recurrence interval will be exceeded during periods of various
lengths is shown in Table IX-3.
TABLE IX-3
PROBABILITY THAT A GIVEN RECURRENCE INTERVAL
WILL BE EXCEEDED DURING PERIODS OF VARIOUS LENGTHS
Recurrence Probabili ty, in Percent, for Indicated Periods, in Years
Interval
(Years) 5 10 50 100 500
2 97 99.9 a a a
10 41 65 99.5 a a
50 10 18 64 87 a
100 5 10 40 63 99.3
a - Probability greater than 9.9.9 but less than 100 percent.
The selection of a design storm for drainage improvements is primarily a
matter of judgment, based on the performance and cost of previous instal-
lations. The design frequencies used in this study are discussed in Section
V of this report.
HYDRAULIC DESIGN
Drainage channels were designed on the basis of uniform flow; with local
head losses from culverts or other sources superimposed to estimate back-
water effects on the channel flow or upstream structures. Step-method
backwater computations were used to design Dry Creek and the Magnolia Road
ditch in System B.
The Manning equation was used to compute uniform flow conditions. The
Manning retardance coefficient (n) was taken as 0.015 for concrete culverts
and pipes, 0.03 for grass lined prismatic channels, 0.05 for natural channels,
0.015 for concrete lined channels, and 0.025 for corrugated metal pipe.
Capacities and flow conditions at culverts were determined with the use of
appropriate culvert flow nomographs and charts published by the U.S. Bureau
of Public Roads.
Generally a freeboard of 1 to 2 feet was used to prevent overflow of the
channels and to provide a margin of safety for future structures and other
unknowns that are present in this study.
IX-4
I --
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
REFERENCES
~--
I
I
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I
I
We gratefully acknowledge the assistance and cooperation of the Salina
Engineering and Planning Department personnel. All records and information,
were readily available for use. All personnel, knowledgeable in their
fields, were willing to assist in the compilation of data and in discussing
the drainage problems.
I
\
Some of the photographs in this report were furnished by the Salina Journal.
Their cooperation is gratefully acknowledged.
I
The residents of South Salina furnished valuable information for rainfall
amounts and extent of flooding in past storms.
I
The Kansas City District Corps of Engineers furnished valuable information
and assistance.
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
l
REFERENCES
1. "Guide Book", General Information for Sponsors of Flood Protection
Projects Contributed by the Corps of Engineers; Department of the
Army, Kansas City District, Corps of Engineers, April 1974.
2. "Design Memorandum No.1", Flood-Protection Project, Kansas River
Basin; Smoky Hill River; Salina, Kansas. U.S. Army Engineer Dis-
trict, Kansas City, Corps of Engineers, April 1956.
3. "Flood Plain Information", Smoky Hill River, Kansas, Salina to the
Mouth Near Junction City~ Department of the Army Kansas City
District, Corps of Engineers, 1967.
4. "Flood Plain Information"; Mulberry Creek and Dry Creek. Salina,
Kansas, March 1972.
5. "Salina, Kansas Construction Plans For Channel Cutoffs and Levees".
Sections II, III, and IV. U.S. Army Engineer District, Kansas City
Corps of Engineers, 1958-1959. .
6. "Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds", Technical Release No. 55,
Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, January 1975.
7. "National Engineering Handbook", Section 4, Hydrology, Soil Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agr1culture.
8. "Peak Rates of Runnoff from Small Watersheds", Hydraulic Design Series
No.2, Division of Hydraulic Research, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Bureau of Public Roads, April 1961.
9. "Study of Runoff from Bottomland and Hillside Terrain", Civil Works
Investigations Project ES-180, U.S. Department of the Army, Kansas
City District, Corps of Engineers, January 1966.
10. "Magnitude and Frequency of Floods in Kansas", Technical Report No. 11,
U.S. Geological Survey, February 1975.
11. "Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the United States", Technical Paper No. 40,
U.S. Department of Commerce, May 1961.
12. "Drainage Manual", Kansas Department of Transportation.
13. "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual'~, Volume I & II, Denver Regional
Council of Governments, Wright-McLaughlin, Denver, Colorado.
14. "Design Criteria for Storm Sewers and Appurtenances", Kansas City
Metropolitan Chapter of the American Public Works Association, 1973.
15. "Standards and Criteria Manual", City of Topeka, Kansas, January 1974.
1
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
16. "Water Resources Data for Kansas", Surface Water Records, Part 1,
1976.
17. "Interior Drainage of Leveed Urban Areas": Hydrology, EM 1110-2-1410,
Corps of Engineers, May 1965.
18. "Hydraulic Charts for the Selection of Highway Culverts", Hydraulic
Engineering Circular No.5, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1965.
19. "Design Charts for Open-Channel Flow", Hydraulic Design Series No.3,
Bureau of Public Roads, U.S. Department of Commerce.
20. Open-Channel Hydraulics, Ven Te Chow, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1959.
21. Handbook of Steel Drainage & Highway Construction Products, American
Iron & Steel Institute, 1967.
22. Handbook of Concrete Culvert Pipe Hydraulics, Portland Cement
Association, 1964.
2