Rebuilt HTML — PaddleOCR-VL (Baidu)

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT COVERSHEET

650-050-38 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 12/25

LOCATION HYDRAULIC REPORT

Florida Department of Transportation

District 1

PD&E Study - SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge

Limits of Project: SR 72 from CR 661 northeast approximately 0.85 miles to SR 70 and extends on SR 70 from CR 661 southeast approximately 1.05 miles to the Peace River Bridge

DeSoto County, Florida

Financial Management Number: 443123-1-22-01

ETDM Number: N/A

Date: March 2026

The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried out by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) pursuant to 23 U.S.C. § 327 and a Memorandum of Understanding dated May 26, 2022 and executed by the Federal Highway Administration and FDOT.

Florida Department of TRANSPORTATION

LOCATION HYDRAULIC REPORT

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge DeSoto County, Florida

Financial Management Number: 443123-1-22-01

Prepared by The Balmoral Group March 2026

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), District One, conducted a Project Development and Environment (PD&E) study for proposed improvements, including consideration of a single lane roundabout at the intersection of State Road (SR) 70 and SR 72 west of Arcadia in DeSoto County, Florida. This project involves raising and realigning SR 72 for approximately 0.85 miles between County Road (CR) 661 and SR 70. The SR 70 alignment will also be raised above historic flood levels and will require roughly a 1.05 mile of raising and reconstruction of SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge. A roundabout is proposed in lieu of the stop-controlled intersection. The proposed project would improve the overall safety and operations of both roadway facilities by mitigating the risk of flood damage to the road, reducing unplanned road closures due to severe flooding, and improving the overall safety of the intersection. Multi-modal improvements, including a shared use path, are proposed as additional safety improvements.

The purpose of this location hydraulic analysis is to evaluate floodplain encroachments and discuss the proposed measures to avoid or minimize floodplain impacts associated with the project. Proposed improvements are anticipated to mimic existing drainage patterns. A dry retention pond (wide swale) is proposed north of SR 70 between the roundabout and the Peace River relief bridge to provide stormwater management for SR 72 and portions of SR 70 and is discussed in the Conceptual Drainage Report (under separate cover). The project is within the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and will require an individual Environmental Resource Permit (ERP).

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) effective Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), dated November 6, 2013, depict Zone AE, A, and X floodplain limits within the project proximity. The Zone AE floodplains, which are areas that have a 1% chance of annual flooding, are consistent with the Peace River and its overbank area. This riverine floodplain encroaches into the SR 72 and S.R 70 right-of-way and has a Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of 25.0 feet and 26.0 feet. The Zone A floodplains, which are areas that have a 1% annual chance of flooding, but do not have an established BFE are located along the western portion of SR 72 within the project limits. Improvements at the Peace River bridge and relief bridge along SR 70 are discussed in the Bridge Hydraulic Technical Memorandum (under separate cover). The project area is within an open basin where runoff flows via sheet flow to roadside ditches and through existing cross drains in a general southeast direction towards the Peace River. There are four cross drains which convey flow from the north side of SR 72 to the south side, towards the Peace River. Contributing areas were delineated by utilizing CatchmentSIM (CSIM) software and available LiDAR, reviewing existing permits and plans, and field reconnaissance. Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing (ICPR) Model software was used to determine peak flows and peak stages at the existing cross drains. Actual rainfall data from Hurricane Irma (2017) and Hurricane Ian (2022) was used to calibrate the model results.

During the design phase, the proposed cross drain facilities will be prepared in accordance with the FDOT Drainage Manual (Topic No. 625-040-002). Proposed conceptual modeling was performed to estimate proposed cross drain sizes. EX-0 remained unchanged and EX-3 is proposed to be removed (rerouted to CD-2). CD-1 size was increased to provide sufficient capacity for a wildlife crossing. CD-2 was upsized to maintain the upstream stage within the wetland. It is expected that the proposed improvements will include extension, modification, or replacement of existing drainage structures, which will perform hydraulically in a manner equal to or greater than the existing structures, and backwater surface elevations are not expected to increase. Thus, there will be no significant adverse impacts on natural and beneficial floodplain values. As a result, there will be no significant change in flood risk, and there will not be a significant change in the potential for interruption or termination of emergency service or emergency evacuation routes. Therefore, it has been determined that this encroachment is not significant.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | iii

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..... 3

1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..... 1
2. PURPOSE AND NEED ..... 2
3. a.Location Hydraulic Study Purpose ..... 3
3. DRAINAGE CONDITIONS ..... 4
4. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ..... 5
5. a.Roadway Design Considerations ..... 5
6. b.Cross Drain Design Considerations ..... 6
5. EXISTING CONDITIONS ..... 8
6. a.Existing Cross Drains ..... 8
7. b.Existing Flooding ..... 10
8. a.Proposed Conditions Modeling ..... 16
9. b.Proposed Minimal Encroachment Evaluation ..... 19
7. CONCLUSIONS ..... 21

List of Figures

Figure 1 - Project Location Map ..... 1 Figure 2 – Proposed Typical Section of SR 72 ..... 5 Figure 3 - Proposed Typical Section of SR ..... 6 Figure 4- EX-0 (Existing 8'x 8' CBC) (12/18/2017) ..... 8 Figure 5 - EX-1 (Existing 4'x 5' CBC) (1/9/2018) ..... 9 Figure 6 - EX-2 (Existing 30-inch RCP) (12/18/2017) ..... 9 Figure 7 - EX-3 (Double 24-inch) (12/18/2017) ..... 10 Figure 8–Damage to SR 72 due to Hurricane Ian ..... 11 Figure 9 - Hurricane Ian Flooding of SR 70 and SR 72 ..... 11 Figure 10 - USGS Peace River Elevations for Monitoring Period ..... 13 Figure 11 - NEXRAD Rainfall Tiles ..... 14 Figure 12 - Unit Hydrograph Comparisons ..... 14 Figure 13 - Hurricane Ian Inundation Mapping Results ..... 15

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | iv

List of Tables

Table 1 – Storm Frequency Criteria .....6 Table 2 – Rainfall Depths .....7 Table 3 - Flood Data Box (Existing and Proposed) .....17 Table 4 - Hurricane Peak Flow and Stage Comparison ( Existing and Proposed) .....18

Appendices

Appendix A: Figures Appendix B: ICPR Modeling and Cross Drain Calculations

List of Acronyms

BFE – Base Flood Elevation CR – County Road DEM – Digital Elevation Model ERP – Environmental Resource Permit FDOT – Florida Department of Transportation FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM – Flood Insurance Rate Map FHWA – Federal Highway Administration LOS – Level of Service SWFWMD – Southwest Florida Water Management District OFW – Outstanding Florida Water PD&E – Project Development and Environment R/W – Right-of-Way SR – State Road USGS – United States Geological Survey

WBID – Waterbody Identification Number

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | v

1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), District One, conducted a Project Development and Environment (PD&E) study for proposed improvements, including consideration of a single lane roundabout at the intersection of State Road (SR) 70 and SR 72 west of Arcadia in DeSoto County, Florida. This project involves raising and realigning SR 72 for approximately 0.85 miles between County Road (CR) 661 and SR 70. The SR 70 alignment will also be raised above historic flood levels and will require roughly a 1.05 mile of raising and reconstruction of SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge. A roundabout is proposed in lieu of the stop-controlled intersection. The proposed project would improve the overall safety and operations of both roadway facilities by mitigating the risk of flood damage to the road, reducing unplanned road closures due to severe flooding, and improving the overall safety of the intersection. Multi-modal improvements, including a shared use path, are proposed as additional safety improvements.

The project horizontal datum is Florida State Plane North Zone (NAD 1983), and the vertical datum is NAVD'88, which is 1.10 feet below NGVD'29 (0.00 feet NGVD'29 = -1.10 feet NAVD'88). The project is located in Section 26, 27, and 34, Township 37 South, Range 24 East. See Figure 1, Project Location Map, below and Figure 2 in Appendix A for the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Map.

Figure 1 - Project Location Map

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page|1

2. PURPOSE AND NEED

The purpose of this PD&E is to address safety and flooding identified within the project area. The PD&E evaluated resilient designs to alleviate flooding on SR 72 and SR 70 caused by the Peace River. Severe storms and historic flooding have inundated segments of SR 72 and SR 70. This consequently restricts mobility in the region, making a Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) and Evacuation Route (SR 70) impassable, affecting safety, and reduces emergency response for the local area. SR 70 provides intrastate travel between the City of Fort Pierce, St Lucie County on the east coast to the City of Bradenton, Manatee County on the west coast and spans five counties. SR 72 is an alternative route to the west coast starting from its eastern terminus at SR 70 and is the most direct route to Siesta Key, Sarasota, and Venice in Sarasota County. Maintaining access to this route is crucial for commerce, safety, and the overall transportation network and regional connectivity. The presence of commercial and recreational spaces adjacent to the project area creates pedestrian activity, however there are no existing facilities available and motorists and non-motorists are left vulnerable to crashes. Additionally, the existing driveways within the project area are spaced very close together and increases the risk of crashes in this area.

Demand for Flooding Mitigation: Add Resiliency Measures and Prevent Roadway Closures

The segment of SR 72 between CR 661 and SR 70 has been prone to severe flooding over the years. The Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) effective Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), dated November 6, 2013, depict Zone AE, A, and X floodplain limits within the project proximity. The Zone AE floodplains, which are areas that have a 1% chance of annual flooding, are consistent with the Peace River and its overbank area. This riverine floodplain encroaches into the SR 72 and SR 70 R/W and has a Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of 25.0 feet and 26.0 feet. The Zone A floodplains, which are areas that have a 1% annual chance of flooding, but do not have an established BFE are located along the western portion of SR 72 within the project limits. Several publications and other historical records have shown this portion of the roadway frequently inundating during hurricane season. A shallow base clearance coupled with repeated flooding, decreases the overall service life of the roadway and leads to more unscheduled repairs and maintenance. The project area is within an open basin where runoff flows via sheet flow to roadside ditches and through existing cross drains in a general southeast direction towards the Peace River. There is currently no existing permit for the area and the runoff is untreated prior to discharge. Frequent flooding restricts regional travel as well as adversely affects access and mobility for the local community. Public safety is at notable risk during these flooding events as it can delay emergency response from first responders, restrict access to important shelters, hospitals, or medical facilities and restrict access to other goods and necessities.

Demand for Safety: Enhance Operational Conditions and Establish Multi-Modal Access

The intersection of SR 72 and SR 70 is currently a T-intersection, stop controlled at the terminus of SR 72 where it intersects with SR 70. SR 72 has a high level of truck traffic due to citrus fruit being brought from regional groves to the Peace River Citrus Products facility, located approximately 0.70 miles southwest of the project limits on SR 72. The truck traffic from this facility and other regional agricultural or rural-residential uses creates a high number of large-vehicle turning movements at the intersection of SR 72 and SR 70.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 2

Further complicating the safety of this intersection is the presence of the Sunoco Gas Station at the south corner, with large, full access driveways on SR 72 and SR 70. The driveway apron on SR 72 is located approximately 65 feet from the SR 70 intersection and the apron on SR 70 is located within approximately 10 feet of the return radius of the intersection of SR 72. The proximity of these driveways to the intersection increases the potential for crashes. The spacing between these two driveways are too close together and do not meet the separation requirements per FDM Table 201.4.2. A review of the crash data (2021-2025) indicates a high number of crashes that occur result in injury, and a need for this intersection to be evaluated by this PD&E. Crash data is further discussed in Section 2.2.16.

The final element analyzed is the lack of bicycle and pedestrian connectivity in the area. The DeSoto Veterans Memorial Park is located adjacent to the project area on the north side of SR 70 and the Peace River Campground and Canoe Rental business is located the northwest of the project area. Each of these recreation facilities creates non-vehicular demand, primarily for visiting the Sunoco Gas Station. No pedestrian pathways connect to the store and no crossing facilities exist at the SR 72 and SR 70 intersection or within the project area. Crash data shows a pedestrian fatality occurred within the project area along SR 70 in 2016 in an area with no pedestrian facilities. A pedestrian was struck while walking along the westbound SR 70 shoulder.

The project is currently in the design phase, working towards Phase 2 plans.

a. Location Hydraulic Study Purpose

The purpose of this report is to provide a location hydraulic study for the above project, in accordance with 23 CFR 650 Subpart A, Section 650.111. The report utilized the National Flood Insurance Program maps to determine highway location encroachments. This report evaluates risks associated with the implementation of the project, impacts on natural and beneficial floodplain values, the support of incompatible floodplain development, and measures to minimize floodplain impacts. Local, state, and federal water resources and floodplain management agencies were consulted to determine if the proposed project is consistent with existing floodplain management programs.

In addition, this report and associated modeling provides detailed estimates of the design high water elevations at the existing cross drain locations and conceptual sizing for the proposed cross drains.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 3

3. DRAINAGE CONDITIONS

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) effective Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), dated November 6, 2013, depict Zone AE, A, and X floodplain limits within the project proximity. The Zone AE floodplains, which are areas that have a 1% chance of annual flooding, are consistent with the Peace River and its overbank area. This riverine floodplain encroaches into the SR 72 and S.R 70 right-of-way and has a Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of 25.0 feet and 26.0 feet. The Zone A floodplains, which are areas that have a 1% annual chance of flooding, but do not have an established BFE are located along the western portion of SR 72 within the project limits. The FEMA Floodplain Map is included in Appendix A, Figure 3. Improvements at the Peace River bridge and relief bridge along SR 70 are discussed in the Draft Bridge Hydraulic Report (BHR)(under separate cover).

The project area is within an open basin where runoff flows via sheet flow to roadside ditches and through existing cross drains in a general southeast direction towards the Peace River. There are four cross drains which convey flow from the north side of SR 72 to the south side, towards the Peace River.

According to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Water Body Identifications (WBIDs), the study area is within the Peace River Above Joshua Creek (WBID #1623C), which is not listed as impaired for nutrients and is not an Outstanding Florida Water (OFW). The WBID Map is included in Appendix A, Figure 4. The project is wholly contained within the SWFWMD.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 4

4. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

a. Roadway Design Considerations

One Build Alternative was developed for this PD&E Project. The Build Alternative proposes raising the profile of SR 72 and SR 70. A dry retention pond (wide swale) is proposed north of SR 70 between the roundabout and the Peace River relief bridge to provide stormwater management for SR 72 and portions of SR 70. Drainage for the SR 70 portion east of the bridge will remain existing open roadside ditches and existing inlets at the bridges. SR 70 runoff flowing to the north side of SR 70 will be conveyed to the pond via open swale, inlets, and pipes. The remainder of SR 70 will follow existing drainage patterns. Offsite water will utilize existing cross-drains and will bypass the proposed treatment swale.

Another improvement that was adopted from previous traffic studies was introducing a roundabout at the intersection of SR 72 and SR 70. This improvement addresses the safety needs of the project by reducing the overall severity of crashes as well as the overall number of crashes as compared to the current stop control. The roundabout design requires realigning the SR 72 alignment to the west in order to avoid the existing transmission pole.

As shown in Figure 2 & Figure 3, the main typical section for both SR 72 and SR 70 consists of two 12-foot lanes with 10-foot shoulders (5-foot paved) with various configurations of roadside ditches for the conveyance of runoff. The right-of-way varies from 200' to 250'.

Figure 2 – Proposed Typical Section of SR 72

SR 72 TYPICAL SECTION

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 5

Figure 3 - Proposed Typical Section of SR

SR 70 TYPICAL SECTION

b. Cross Drain Design Considerations

Table 1 provides the required storm events to be analyzed for each cross drain, per the FDOT Drainage Manual and Culvert Handbook requirements.

Table 1 – Storm Frequency Criteria

* This is the design storm for this project.

Per the FDOT Drainage Manual, the rainfall depths utilized for the modeling were based on the NOAA Atlas 14 Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates at Arcadia, Florida. For the purposes of the location hydraulic analysis, only the 24-hour duration was reviewed.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 6

Table 2 summarizes the rainfall depths used for the design storm events in the ICPR modeling and compares them to the cumulative rainfall for Hurricane Irma and Hurricane Ian, which were used for calibration events.

Table 2 – Rainfall Depths

For the flood data box evaluation, the overtopping storm event elevation was based on the lowest point along the SR 72 profile using the project Digital Elevation Model (DEM). Overtopping between basins is included in the modeling in the form of overland weirs and is also included in the flood data box. Modeling will be used during design to demonstrate no increase in offsite stages confirming no impacts to offsite properties. Modeled pipe invert elevations, lengths, and sizes are from survey.

If the 500-year discharge did not result in overtopping of SR 72 then the data was entered in the Flood Data Box as the Greatest Flood. If the 500-year discharge did result in overtopping the roadway, then the lowest discharge resulting in overtopping was determined and the frequency of the storm event was calculated using the best fit between a power or linear trend line for the modeled discharges verse frequency probability. This result was recorded as the Basin Overtopping Flood within the Flood Data Box.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 7

5. EXISTING CONDITIONS

a. Existing Cross Drains

Along SR 72, there are four existing cross drains which convey flow from the north side of SR 72 to the south side, towards the Peace River.

1. EX-0: 8-ft high x 8-ft wide concrete box culvert is located approximately 1200 feet south of the begin project limits
2. EX-1: 4-ft high x 5-ft wide concrete box culvert is located 2500 feet northeast of the begin project limits
3. EX-2: 30-inch reinforced concrete pipe located 1000 feet southwest of the SR 70 and SR 72 intersection
4. EX-3: double 24-inch reinforced concrete pipe located 130 feet southwest of the SR 70 and SR 72 intersection

The Balmoral Group performed field visits on December 15, 2017, January 4, 2018, and, January 9, 2018 to review the existing conditions. In general, there did not appear to be any structural deficiencies or erosion at the existing cross drains.

Figure 4- EX-0 (Existing 8'x 8' CBC) (12/18/2017)

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 8

Figure 5 - EX-1 (Existing 4' x 5' CBC) (1/9/2018)

Location Hydraulic Report March 2026

Figure 6 - EX-2 (Existing 30-inch RCP)(12/18/2017)

Page | 9

Figure 7 - EX-3 (Double 24-inch) (12/18/2017)

b. Existing Flooding

One of the driving factors for this project is the flooding experienced from the recent hurricane events. The overtopping of SR 72, caused by Hurricane Irma in 2017, was previously analyzed at this intersection under the Technical Memorandum “Hurricane Irma Flooding Concern on SR 72” by The Balmoral Group. For Hurricane Ian, roadway overtopping of both SR 72 and SR 70 was observed. Refer to Figure 8 and Figure 9 for photos from Hurricane Ian.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 10

Figure 8—Damage to SR 72 due to Hurricane Ian

Figure 9 - Hurricane Ian Flooding of SR 70 and SR 72

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 11

c. Existing Conditions Modeling

The existing peak flows through the cross drains were estimated using the SCS Curve Number method (TR-55) and NOAA rainfall depths (from NOAA Atlas 14 Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates). ICPR software (version 4.07.08) was used to determine peak stages associated with these flows.

Cross drain locations and sizes were estimated based on survey and confirmed based on site visits. There no existing permitted stormwater ponds for SR 72 within the project limits. Roadway runoff is generally conveyed via a roadside ditch, which then discharges to a cross drain. The cross-drain systems discharge to existing outfalls.

CatchmentSim (CSIM) software was used to develop the DEM for the project to serve as the basis of analysis. LiDAR elevation information was obtained from 2018 United States Geologic Survey (USGS) data. Project specific survey data was merged with the LiDAR data to create the projects 3ftx3ft DEM model. Subbasins were delineated in the software and refined using the best available data including existing plans, permits and field review.

An existing conditions model was created in ICPR4 (Version 4.0.03). Inputs including soils and land use data were primarily parameterized in ArcGIS and then imported into ICPR for modeling. Nodes were placed in ICPR to represent basins and links were used to connect basins. Irregular weir cross sections were extracted from the DEM. Node stage-storage was estimated using the DEM at half-foot increments. Initial stages were reviewed based on the presence of water from the field reconnaissance and/or aerial imagery. For the project modeling, the Peace River was assumed to be a constant elevation at the initial stage of 14.49 ft NAVD.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 12

The design tailwater was updated to utilize gage information from the USGS gage 02296750, Peace River at Arcadia, FL to replicate the recorded elevations of the river during the monitoring period. For this study, the time stage curve spans from September 28th, 2022 at 8:30am to October 3rd, 2022 at 8:30am, a total duration of 120 hours. The start time of the simulation was set 12 hours before the calculated time of the eye of the hurricane being over Arcadia, FL which was estimated to be September 28th at 8:30pm. The simulation ended 49.5 hours after the rivers peak was recorded on

Figure 10 - USGS Peace River Elevations for Monitoring Period

October 1st, 2022 at 7:00am. Figure 10 shows the USGS Peace River gage time/stage graph of the river elevations for the monitoring period.

NEXRAD rainfall data was obtained from South West Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) for the monitoring period to set basin specific rainfall throughout the model. Subdivided areas, referred to as tiles, have individual monitoring gages which provide more detailed rainfall estimates across large project areas, as opposed to using a global rainfall estimate in the modeling. Seven NEXRAD tiles spanned the model area, with cumulative rainfalls varying from 17.50 inches to 18.61 inches. It should be noted rainfall was only recorded on September 28th, 2022. See Figure 11 for the NEXRAD tile layout with cumulative rainfall listed. Figure 12 compares the unit hydrograph for each tile. For comparison purposes, this figure also depicts the global rainfall (16.5 inches) Florida Modified (FLMOD) unit hydrograph to show a global modeling approach would have underestimated the storms impacts.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 13

Figure 11 - NEXRAD Rainfall Tiles

Figure 12 - Unit Hydrograph Comparisons

Results of the max stages experienced during the modeled Hurricane Ian simulation were inundated against the DEM to depict where areas of flooding occurred. Figure 13 shows these results. Compared to the photographs provided by FDOT staff of the flooding extents, the areas shown as flooded in the modeling closely resemble reality. Overtopping weir linkages were added across SR 72 and SR 70 to replicate the overtopping that was experienced during the storm and accurately

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 14

represent areas where extensive roadway erosion was recorded.

The calculations indicated that SR 72 will overtop in a storm event slightly over the 100-year event. This is corroborated with the Hurricane Ian Inundation.

Figure 13 - Hurricane Ian Inundation Mapping Results

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 15

6. PROPOSED CONDITIONS

The roadway profile will be increased. As identified in the existing conditions modeling, the current roadway profile of SR 72 is insufficient for being usable during an emergency event. As a result, the roadway profile is proposed to be higher than the recorded stages from the modeling.

a. Proposed Conditions Modeling

For the proposed PD&E model, the existing conditions model was updated to remove the overtopping weirs over the SR 72 roadway (i.e. flow condition was set to none). The cross-drain size for CD-1 was enlarged to an 8'x 8' concrete box culvert for resiliency to add flow capacity during extreme storm events that prevents the roadway from overtopping. The increased culvert size would also provide wildlife connectivity below the roadway. CD-2 was upsized from a single 30-inch cross drain to a double 30-inch cross drain. This sizing maintained the wetland stage upstream (Node 302) with no roadway overtopping. EX-3 was removed from the model (i.e. flow condition was set to none) as this runoff will be conveyed to CD-2 in the proposed condition within the proposed right-of-way and discharge from the right-of-way at the same location as in the existing condition. Table 3 shows a summary of the existing and proposed cross drains for the design storms and Table 4 shows the flows through the simulated hurricanes in the existing and proposed conditions.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 16

Table 3 - Flood Data Box (Existing and Proposed)

Existing Structure No. Cross Drain Size Design Flood Base Flood Overtopping Flood Greatest Flood

2% PROB 50 YR FREQ 1% PROB 100 YR FREQ

Discharge Stage Discharge Stage Discharge Stage PROB % FREQ YR Discharge Stage PROB % FREQ YR

EX-0 1-8'x8' 426.99 48.30 547.15 50.24 581.42 50.67 0.80% 124

EX-1 1-4'x5' 213.20 36.96 245.51 38.53 261.90 39.42 0.51% 197

EX-2 1-30" 38.94 21.81 42.06 22.23 43.21 22.40 0.64% 156

EX-3 2-24" 33.60 21.81 40.93 22.23 42.83 22.40 0.92% 108

Proposed Structure No. Cross Drain Size Design Flood Base Flood Overtopping Flood Greatest Flood

2% PROB 50 YR FREQ 1% PROB 100 YR FREQ

Discharge Stage Discharge Stage Discharge Stage PROB % FREQ YR Discharge Stage PROB % FREQ YR

EX-0 1-8'x8' 427.01 48.30 547.15 50.24 665.89 51.73 0.2% 500

CD-1 1-8'x8' 268.74 34.46 348.87 35.54 587.70 39.01 0.2% 500

CD-2 2-30" 66.28 21.86 73.39 22.25 101.16 24.07 0.2% 500

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge

FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 17

Table 4 - Hurricane Peak Flow and Stage Comparison (Existing and Proposed)

Structure No. Cross Drain Size Irma lan Structure No. Cross Drain Size Irma lan

Existing Proposed

DISCHARGE STAGE DISCHARGE STAGE DISCHARGE STAGE DISCHARGE STAGE

EX-0 1-8'x8' 454.39 47.55 699.69 52.21 EX-0 1-8'x8' 454.39 48.63 699.69 52.21

W-207-113 0.00 100.82

EX-1 1-4'x5' 170.19 35.21 277.15 40.27 CD-1 1-8'x8' 177.89 33.11 649.64 39.80

W-202-208 0.00 92.35

EX-2 1-30" 38.21 23.94 48.65 28.45 CD-2 2-30" 64.14 24.14 121.04 28.45

W-302-305 112.64 481.47

EX-3 2-24" 31.88 23.94 51.76 28.45

W-402-305 4.31 3.17

W-402-407 0.00 0.14

Total Cross Drain Flow (EX-1, EX-2, EX-3) 240.28 377.56 Total Cross Drain Flow (CD-1, CD-2) 242.03 810.48

Overtopping weirs are included in the existing condition to show the peak flow that was occurring over the roadway.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge

FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 18

b. Proposed Minimal Encroachment Evaluation

Per Section 13.2.2.5 of the FDOT PD&E Manual, the Location Hydraulic Report (LHR) has requirements for each level of significance of encroachment. This project qualifies as a Minimal Encroachments level due to minimal impacts to floodplain encroachments. The location of pertinent information and/or discussion of the following items to be contained within the LHR for a project with Minimal Encroachments are summarized below:

• General description of the project: See Section 1. Project Description, Section 4.a. Roadway Design Considerations, Section 5.a. Existing Cross Drains and Appendix A: Figure 1.
• Determination of whether the proposed action is in the base floodplain: See Section 3. Drainage Conditions and Figure 6 – FEMA Map. Most of the project lies within Zone A or AE and floodplain impacts are anticipated in this area.
• History of flooding of the existing facilities and/or measures to minimize any impacts due to the proposed improvements: As discussed, there is a history of flooding of the roadway within the project corridor and was documented for Hurricane Irma and Ian. It is anticipated that the improvements will consist of extension of the existing cross drains and upsize to allow for additional conveyance under the roadway.
• Determination of whether the encroachment is longitudinal or transverse, and if it is a longitudinal encroachment, an evaluation and discussion of practicable avoidance alternatives: The floodplain encroachment is transverse, cutting through the floodplain between 30-90 degrees.
• The practicability of avoidance alternatives and/or measures to minimize impacts: Several alternatives were reviewed as part of the new realignment; all cross the floodplain in similar locations and would have the same impact to the existing floodplains.
• Impact of the project on emergency services and evacuation: The project seeks to increase regional mobility and accommodate the future traffic needs as well as raise the roadway to provide an accessible hurricane evacuation route. The project is anticipated to have a positive impact on emergency services and evacuation.
• Impacts of the project on the base flood, likelihood of flood risk, overtopping, location of overtopping, backwater: A proposed cross drain analysis was performed which sized the proposed cross drains to not have an adverse impact on the 100-year upstream stages. Roadway overtopping will be avoided with the raised roadway profile. Refer to Table 3 and Table 4.
• Determination of the impact of the project on regulatory floodways, it any, and documentation of coordination with FEMA and local agencies to determine the requirements for the project to be developed consistent with the regulatory floodway: The Peace River is a FEMA Regulatory floodway (See Figure 4 – FEMA Map). A Bridge Hydraulics Report will be completed during Final Design to demonstrate no adverse impacts for permitting through the SWFWMD.
• The impacts on natural and beneficial floodplain values, and measures to restore and preserve these values: Generally, the proposed improvements maintain the existing water stages upstream of the cross drains. Additional peak flow downstream of the cross drains is not expected to have an adverse impact given the expansiveness of the Peace River floodplain.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 19

• Consistency of the project with the local floodplain development plan or the land use elements in the Local Government Comprehensive Plan (LGCP), and the potential of encouraging development in the base floodplain: The project has been coordinated with the District One Drainage Engineer. The Build Alternative complies with the DeSoto County Future Land Use Plan and would not encourage any new development in the floodplain.
• Measures to minimize floodplain impacts associated with the project and measures to restore and preserve the natural and beneficial floodplain values impacts by the project: Generally, the proposed improvements maintain the existing water stages upstream of the cross drains. Additional peak flow downstream of the cross drains is not expected to have an adverse impact given the expansiveness of the Peace River floodplain.
• A map showing project, location, and impacted floodplains: See Figure 4 for FEMA Map.
• Results of any risk assessments performed: See Table 3 and Table 4 for the results of the existing and proposed cross drain analysis and 50-Year Design Level of Service.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 20

7. CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this report is to determine the existing condition and location of the cross drains along SR 72 within the study limits, evaluate the capacity of the existing and proposed cross drains based on the design storms and hurricane data, and evaluate the floodplain encroachments.

As shown in the Flood Data box, the existing roadway profile was subject to flooding and was significantly impacted by Hurricane Irma and Hurricane Ian. As a result, the proposed roadway profile is being increased and additional conveyance capacity is being provided with the proposed cross drains.

During the design phase, the proposed cross drain facilities will be prepared in accordance with the FDOT Drainage Manual (Topic No. 625-040-002). Proposed conceptual modeling was performed to estimate proposed cross drain sizes. EX-0 remained unchanged and EX-3 is proposed to be removed. CD-1 size was increased to provide sufficient capacity for a wildlife crossing. CD-2 was upsized to maintain the upstream stage within the wetland. It is expected that the proposed improvements will include extension, modification, or replacement of existing drainage structures, which will perform hydraulically in a manner equal to or greater than the existing structures, and backwater surface elevations are not expected to increase. Thus, there will be no significant adverse impacts on natural and beneficial floodplain values. As a result, there will be no significant change in flood risk, and there will not be a significant change in the potential for interruption or termination of emergency service or emergency evacuation routes. Therefore, it has been determined that this encroachment is not significant.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 21

8. REFERENCES

1. Federal Emergency Management Agency (November 2013). Effective Flood Insurance Rate Maps, DeSoto County, Florida and Incorporated Areas.
2. Florida Department of Transportation. (2024). Drainage Design Guide. Tallahassee: Office of Design, Drainage Section.
3. Florida Department of Transportation. (2025). Drainage Manual. Tallahassee: Office of Design, Drainage Section.
4. Southwest Florida Water Management District (2024). Environmental Resource Permit Applicant's Handbook Volume II.

SR 72 from CR 661 to SR 70 & SR 70 from CR 661 to the Peace River Bridge FM #: 443123-1-22-01

Page | 22

Appendix A - Figures

Legend

Proposed Roadway City Limits

Location Map

Figure 1

Sources: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

S.R. 72 from C.R. 661 to S.R. 70 & S.R. 70 from C.R. 661 to the Peace River Bridge DeSoto County, Florida 443123-1-22-01

The Balmoral Group 200 W Welbourne Ave Winter Park, FL 32789 Phone: (407) 629-2185 www.balmoralgroup.us

Project Location

Legend

— Proposed Roadway

S-T-R Section - Township - Range

Sources: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS , USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

Figure 2 USGS Quadrangle Map

S.R. 72 from C.R. 661 to S.R. 70 & S.R. 70 from C.R. 661 to the Peace River Bridge DeSoto County, Florida 443123-1-22-01

The Balmoral Group 200 W Welbourne Winter Park, FL 32789 Phone: (407) 629-2185 www.balmoralgroup.us

Legend Regulated Floodway Proposed Roadway dfirm_bfe_dec22 FLD ZONE

forall

☐ AE

X

Sources: FEMA Flood Hazard Zones of the Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) in the State of Florida December 2021

Figure 3 FEMA Flood Map

S.R. 72 from C.R. 661 to S.R. 70 & S.R. 70 from C.R. 661 to the Peace River Bridge DeSoto County, Florida 443123-1-22-01

The Balmoral Group 200 W Melbourne Ave Winter Park, FL 32789 Phone: (407) 629-2185 www.balmoralgroup.us

Project Location

Legend

—— Proposed Roadway

☐ Waterbody_IDs_(WBIDs)

Sources:FEMA Flood Hazard Zonesof the Digital Flood Insurance RateMap (DFIRM) in the State of FloridaDecember 2021

Figure 4WBID Map

S.R. 72 from C.R. 661 to S.R. 70 &S.R. 70 from C.R. 661 to thePeace River BridgeDeSoto County, Florida443123-1-22-01

The Balmoral Group200 W Welbourne AveWinter Park, FL 32789Phone: (407) 629-2185www.balmoralgroup.us

Appendix B – ICPR and Cross Drain Calculations

Appendix B Page 1

The Balmoral Group 200 W Melbourne Ave Winter Park, FL 32789 Phone: (407) 629-2185 www.balmoralgroup.us

SR 72 FROM CR 661 TO SR 70 (MP 9.856) TO (MP 10.991) Desoto County, Florida Financial Project ID 443123-1-52-01

je, Geographnic, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Communit

Figure 5 ICPR Nodal Diagram

Stage Area Time Stage Channel Drop Structure Pipe Weir Pre-Development Bas

Legend

Project Location

Project Location

Legend

Stage Area

Time Stage

▶ Channel

→ Drop Structure

▶ Pipe

Weir Pre-Development Basin Pre-Development Basin

Pre-Development Basin Pre-Development Basin

CROSS DRAIN

Sources: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

Figure 6 ICPR Nodal Diagram (Zoomed)

SR 72 FROM CR 661 TO SR 70 (MP 9.856) TO (MP 10.991) Desoto County, Florida Financial Project ID 443123-1-52-01

The Balmoral Group 165 Lincoln Avenue Winter Park, FL 32789 Phone: (407) 629-2185 www.balmoralgroup.us

Appendix B, Page 2 of 443

S.R. 72 Model Results Comparison

Node Peak Stage (ft NAVD) Difference (PD&E - Pre) Remarks

Pre-Development PD&E LHR 50-yr 100-yr Irma Ian

101 54.09 54.15 54.00 54.28 54.09 54.15 54.00 54.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

102 48.30 50.24 48.63 52.21 48.30 50.24 48.63 52.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

102A 49.61 49.85 49.09 51.99 49.61 49.85 49.09 51.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

102B 49.65 50.25 49.63 52.21 49.65 50.25 49.63 52.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

102C 50.85 50.94 50.86 52.22 50.85 50.94 50.86 52.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

102D 50.90 51.01 50.93 52.24 50.90 51.01 50.93 52.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

103 54.74 54.78 54.65 54.87 54.74 54.78 54.65 54.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

104 51.66 51.73 51.67 52.29 51.66 51.73 51.67 52.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

105 52.59 52.74 52.53 53.32 52.59 52.74 52.53 53.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

106 54.26 54.30 54.26 54.44 54.26 54.30 54.26 54.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

107 54.37 54.39 54.34 54.45 54.37 54.39 54.34 54.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

110 52.53 52.67 52.47 53.23 52.53 52.67 52.47 53.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

111 52.90 52.93 52.77 53.01 52.90 52.93 52.77 53.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

112 44.20 44.27 44.22 44.70 44.20 44.27 44.22 44.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

113 46.47 48.52 46.81 50.51 46.47 48.52 46.81 50.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

114 52.28 52.31 52.27 52.44 52.28 52.31 52.27 52.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

180 53.82 53.91 53.90 54.35 53.82 53.91 53.90 54.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

181 55.51 55.53 55.53 55.62 55.51 55.53 55.53 55.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

198 52.63 53.01 52.67 53.84 52.63 53.01 52.67 53.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

199 52.62 53.01 52.66 53.84 52.62 53.01 52.66 53.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

200 50.90 51.03 50.73 51.28 50.90 51.03 50.73 51.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

201 37.92 38.66 37.57 40.46 37.92 38.26 37.57 40.04 0.00 -0.40 0.00 0.00 -0.42

202 36.96 38.53 35.21 40.27 34.46 35.54 33.11 39.80 -2.50 -2.99 -2.10 -0.47

203 36.65 37.78 36.29 39.08 36.99 37.18 36.40 39.60 0.34 -0.60 0.11 0.52 R/W EL = 38.07

204 43.49 43.72 41.78 44.76 43.49 43.72 41.78 44.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

205 46.81 46.86 46.61 47.90 46.81 46.86 46.61 47.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

206 49.25 49.35 48.39 50.89 49.25 49.35 48.39 50.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

207 49.51 49.71 48.66 51.54 49.51 49.71 48.66 51.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

208 31.80 31.86 31.71 32.21 31.90 32.03 31.73 32.52 0.10 0.17 0.02 0.31

209 40.50 40.60 40.21 44.28 40.50 40.60 40.21 44.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

300 21.82 22.23 23.94 28.45 21.86 22.25 24.15 28.45 0.04 0.02 0.21 0.00

302 21.81 22.23 23.94 28.45 21.86 22.25 24.14 28.45 0.05 0.02 0.20 0.00

303 25.45 25.48 25.32 28.45 25.45 25.48 25.32 28.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

304 33.19 33.25 32.53 34.19 33.27 33.36 32.57 34.94 0.08 0.11 0.04 0.75

305 19.63 19.65 23.94 28.45 19.61 19.63 23.94 28.45 -0.02 -0.02 0.00 0.00

306 19.45 19.46 23.94 28.45 19.45 19.46 23.94 28.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

308 31.06 31.17 30.62 35.31 31.06 31.17 30.62 31.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4.25

400 33.77 33.85 33.60 34.22 33.77 33.85 33.60 34.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

401 21.82 22.23 23.94 28.45 21.86 22.25 24.15 28.45 0.04 0.02 0.21 0.00

402 21.81 22.23 23.94 28.45 21.86 22.25 24.15 28.45 0.05 0.02 0.21 0.00

403 41.09 41.22 40.69 42.11 41.09 41.22 40.69 42.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

404 41.16 41.20 41.10 41.41 41.16 41.20 41.10 41.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

406 25.00 25.06 24.89 28.45 25.00 25.06 24.89 28.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

407 21.23 21.36 23.94 28.45 20.32 20.36 23.94 28.45 -0.91 -1.00 0.00 0.00

500 49.61 49.63 49.61 49.71 49.61 49.63 49.61 49.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

501 42.78 43.51 42.77 44.75 42.78 43.51 42.77 44.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

502 43.67 43.68 43.63 44.75 43.67 43.68 43.63 44.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

503 50.12 50.18 49.65 51.21 50.12 50.18 49.65 51.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

600 49.84 50.09 49.67 51.22 49.84 50.09 49.67 51.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

601 49.82 50.08 49.65 51.21 49.82 50.08 49.65 51.21 0.00 0.

50-yr 100-yr Irma Ian 50-yr 100-yr Irma Ian 50-yr

100 55.00 55.04 54.85 55.14 55.00 55.04 54.85 55.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Appendix B. Page 3 of 443

Project Location

Legend

Pre-Development Basin

50y/24hr Inundation

100yr/24hr Inundation

Hurricane Irma Inundation Hurricane Ian Inundation High : 61.9678

Low: 5.09331

Sources: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

Figure 7 Inundation Map (Pre-Development)

SR 72 FROM CR 661 TO SR 70 (MP 9.856) TO (MP 10.991) Desoto County, Florida Financial Project ID 443123-1-52-01

The Balmoral Group 165 Lincoln Avenue Winter Park, FL 32789 Phone: (407) 629-2185 www.balmoralgroup.us

Appendix B, Page 4 of 443

Node Max Conditions [Existing]

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 5 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• Peace River 050YR24HR 50.00 48.50 0.0000 136.10 0.05
• Peace River 050YR24HR 39.00 39.00 0.0000 27.74 0.00
• Peace River 050YR24HR 18.70 18.70 0.0000 2.80 0.00
• Peace River1 050YR24HR 18.70 18.70 0.0000 700.99 0.00
• TW-North 050YR24HR 54.00 54.00 0.0000 0.12 0.00

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 6 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• TW-West 050YR24HR 49.00 49.00 0.0000 60.76 0.00
• TW-south 050YR24HR 54.00 54.00 0.0000 8.48 4.10

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 7 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• Peace River 100yr24h 50.00 48.50 0.0000 161.77 0.05
• Peace River 100yr24h 39.00 39.00 0.0000 36.24 0.00
• Peace River 100yr24h 18.70 18.70 0.0000 7.82 0.00
• Peace River1 100yr24h 18.70 18.70 0.0000 876.91 0.00

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B, Page 8 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• TW-North 100yr24h 54.00 54.00 0.0000 1.32 0.00
• TW-West 100yr24h 49.00 49.00 0.0000 111.47 0.00
• TW-south 100yr24h 54.00 54.00 0.0000 13.84 4.10

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 9 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• Peace River 500 yr 50.00 48.50 0.0000 238.97 0.05
• Peace River 500 yr 39.00 39.00 0.0000 45.47 0.00
• Peace River 500 yr 18.70 18.70 0.0000 37.50 0.00

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 10 of 443

7

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 11 of 443

8

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 12 of 443

9

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 13 of 443

10

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 14 of 443

11

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 15 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• Peace River Hurricane 50.00 48.50 0.0000 124.78 0.09
• Peace River Hurricane 39.00 39.00 0.0000 27.54 0.00
• Peace River Hurricane 18.70 23.94 0.0008 6.85 26.84
• Peace River1 Hurricane 18.70 23.94 0.0008 707.87 32.91
• TW-North Hurricane 54.00 54.00 0.0000 0.61 0.00
• TW-West Hurricane 49.00 49.00 0.0000 58.30 0.00
• TW-south Hurricane 54.00 54.00 0.0000 12.77 4.10

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 16 of 443

Node Max Conditions [PD&E]

13

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 17 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• Peace River 100YR24HR 50.00 48.50 0.0000 161.76 0.05
• Peace River 100YR24HR 39.00 39.00 0.0000 36.24 0.00
• Peace River 100YR24HR 18.70 18.70 0.0000 7.82 0.00
• Peace River1 100YR24HR 18.70 18.70 0.0000 859.63 0.00
• TW-North 100YR24HR 54.00 54.00 0.0000 1.32 0.00

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 18 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• TW-West 100YR24HR 49.00 49.00 0.0000 111.47 0.00
• TW-south 100YR24HR 54.00 54.00 0.0000 13.84 4.10

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 19 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• Peace River 500YR24HR 50.00 48.50 0.0000 238.98 0.05
• Peace River 500YR24HR 39.00 39.00 0.0000 45.47 0.00
• Peace River 500YR24HR 18.70 18.70 0.0000 37.50 0.00
• Peace River1 500YR24HR 18.70 18.70 0.0000 1672.76 0.00

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 20 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• TW-North 500YR24HR 54.00 54.00 0.0000 14.36 0.00
• TW-West 500YR24HR 49.00 49.00 0.0000 369.66 0.00
• TW-south 500YR24HR 54.00 54.00 0.0000 37.01 4.10

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 21 of 443

• Node Maximum Results

• Peace River 50YR24HR 50.00 48.50 0.0000 136.10 0.05
• Peace River 50YR24HR 39.00 39.00 0.0000 27.74 0.00
• Peace River 50YR24HR 18.70 18.70 0.0000 2.80 0.00

T:\01440.00\zTBG\drainage\Calcs\ICPR\SR 72

5/16/2023 17:32

Appendix B. Page 22 of 443