Laserfiche WebLink
<br />in this publication compute 100-year peak discharge rates and are based upon data from <br />floodplain studies previously designated by the ewes. Regression equations have been <br />developed for nine major river basins within the :;tate and a number of subbasins. The <br />appropriate equation from these guidelines for flooding sources studied in La Plata County is as <br />follows: <br /> <br />Q= 589.2(A)0.512 <br /> <br />A= Drainage area in square miles (kA<760 sq m) <br />Q= 100-year peak discharge in cfs <br /> <br />A LOO-yea' discharge rate for the Florida River dOV/llHream of Lemon Reservoir was computed <br />by three C.ifferent methodologies. Details of these three approaches are provided below along <br />with a recommendation of which to utilize. <br /> <br />1, ~Jage Analvsis. A flow frequency analysis of USGS (J age No. 09363000 (Florida Ri ver Near <br />Durango) has been carried out. This gage has 46 yc ars of record between 1901 and 1960 <br />which is a period before the completion of Lemon Dam in 1963. The gage location is <br />apprmjmately 5.5 miles below Lemon dam dow]~stream of Red Creek and has a drainage <br />area of 97.4 sq mi. Flood frequency analysis of the gage record was carried out using the <br />HEC-l'FA (l.J.S, Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic: Engineering Center, May 1992) <br />software package which utilizes the procedures of United States Water Resources Council <br />Bulletin #1713 (1981). The computed lOO-year dischalW~ rate at the gage using this approach <br />is 3,130 cfs. <br />2, Regional Regression Equation Ana~.!i. Applicatio1 of the previously pre:sented CWCB <br />region al regression equations to the 97.4 sq rni drahage area to the USGS gage location <br />yields a discharge rate of approximately 6,140 cfs, Tb is value is substantially higher than the <br />100-year discharge rate determined by gage analysis. A serious shortcoming of the regional <br />regres~;ion approach is that it does not account for an)' attenuation of peak flows by Lemon <br />Reservoir. Though it has no dedicated flood stora,ge 1)001, the reservoir could provide some <br />flood control benefit depending on storage levels at the time of the event. Because of this <br />possibility, the regional regression approach likely ov'~restimates peak flows below the dam <br />and is not recommended. <br />3. Dam Outlet Capacity + Regional Reg:ressio!l.E.g.m1i~l1LAT]!llysis. The approach adopted by <br />the US ACE in its analysis of the Los Pinos Rivcr below Vallecito Reservoir was to assume a <br />discba~ge rate from the dam equivalent to its outlet works capacity (3,100 cfs) and add to this <br />peak flow rates d(:termined by hydrologic modeLing (HEe-1) of tbe portion of the watershed <br />located below the dam, A similar approach could be adopted for the Florida River below <br />Lemon Dam. The outlet works capacity for L(:mo:1 Dam is 900 cfs. CWCB regional <br />regres~:ion equations could then be applied to drainage areas located below the dam and <br />computed peak flows added to the assumed dam discharge, For the location of the USGS <br />Florida River Near Durango gage, this drainage area is 28.4- sq mi and would generate a peak <br />discharge of 3,270 efs. Including dam reLeases of 900 cfs, the 100-year peak discharge rate <br />computed by this methodology for the USGS gage locntion would be 4,170 cfs. <br /> <br />" <br />