My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD10800
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
11001-12000
>
FLOOD10800
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2009 2:17:47 PM
Creation date
6/12/2007 5:21:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
Designation Number
592
County
Routt
Community
Routt County and Incorporated Areas
Title
FIS - Routt County and Incorporated Areas
Date
2/4/2005
Prepared For
Routt County
Prepared By
FEMA
Floodplain - Doc Type
Current FEMA Regulatory Floodplain Information
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
123
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Thus, it appears that cloudburst floods are possible in the Steamboat Springs area. <br />Cloudburst storm criteria were developed from NWS data (Reference 18). <br />A 40-percent value of the probable maximum precipitation point rainfall for Steamboat <br />Springs, plotted at about the 500-year frequency on a 3-hour rainfall frequency curve <br />for Craig, Colorado (the nearest recorded), was selected for use as a cloudburst <br />standard project storm. Loss rates were identical to those used for general rainfall. <br />The ratio of 1oo-year cloudburst precipitation to the standard project storm precipitation <br />was developed from this frequency curve. <br /> <br />The 10- and 50-year floods were determined to be basically snowmelt events and were <br />modeled after major snowmelt flows that occurred in June 1952, adjusting the 50- and <br />10-day volumes for their corresponding frequencies. The 1-, 5-, and lO-day flows for <br />the tributary creeks were taken from their corresponding frequency curves. This was <br />considered an adequate procedure in that the snowmelt frequency curves appear well <br />defmed below 50-year events, and the results that would be obtained by more complex <br />procedures would not differ appreciably. Flows for streams without frequency curves <br />were derived from frequency curves with streams with characteristics similar to those <br />under study. <br /> <br />Computed standard project floods were used in conjunction with the log-Pearson <br />Type III method statistical analysis (Reference 10) of available streamflow data to <br />develop flow-frequency curves for the four streams. Average stream gradients in the <br />study area, together with approximate drainage areas, are shown in the following table: <br /> <br />Stream <br /> <br />Location <br /> <br />Approximate Gradient <br />Drainage Area (Feet/Miles) <br />(Square Miles) <br />20 70 <br />4 90 <br />8 140 <br /> <br />Soda Creek <br /> <br />Corporate Limit <br /> <br />Butcherknife <br />Creek <br /> <br />Corporate Limit <br /> <br />Spring Creek <br /> <br />Corporate Limit <br /> <br />Fish Creek Gaging Station 25 160 <br />(Upper Station <br />Near Steamboat <br />Springs) <br /> <br />Ratios of the computed standard project flood developed from the flow-frequency <br />curves were used to determine the 10-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year flood events in areas <br />where stream gage data were not available. <br /> <br />The 1oo-year peak flows for streams studied by approximate methods were based on a <br />Frequency-Discharge, Drainage Area Curve prepared from computed standard project <br />floods. Standard project floods from the curve were reduced by approximate <br />percentages to estimate the loo-year flood event. <br /> <br />Peak discharge-drainage area relationships for Butcherknife, Fish, Soda, and Spring <br />Creeks are shown in Table 1. <br /> <br />29 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.