My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD03253
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
FLOOD03253
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 6:26:44 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 11:34:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Boulder
Community
Boulder
Stream Name
South Boulder Creek
Basin
South Platte
Title
South Boulder Creek Draft Hydrology Study Phase III
Date
2/10/2000
Prepared For
UDFCD
Prepared By
Taggart Engineering Associates, Inc.
Floodplain - Doc Type
Floodplain Report/Masterplan
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
291
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 />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />4. Calibrating the model to the 1969 flood or at least comparing for <br />reasonableness, and spot checking major basin runoff using the UDFCD <br />Colorado Unit Hydrograph Procedure (CUHP) for reasonableness. Also <br />review of the Eldorado stream gage data is included. Efforts to review the <br />Eldorado gage data and calibrate to the 1969 flood are limited. <br /> <br /> <br />5. Preparing basin and model maps, and model documentation such as <br />representative hydrographs and discharge profiles. <br /> <br />6. Agency contact (USACE, USGS, CWCB, NRCS, City, County, Denver <br />Water), <br /> <br />7, General characterization of flow timing, magnitude, and distribution in the <br />South Boulder Creek floodplain below Highway 93. <br /> <br />8. Specific review and effort to comply with CWCB and FEMA requirements. <br /> <br />9. Summary report and technical appendices. <br /> <br />What is not required: Snowmelt hydrology, ifi' tion testing, reservoir operations <br />or storage statistical analysis, long-term rain alh off modeling or statistical <br />analysis using NWS or other long-term rainfal ecords, extensive field surveys, <br />floodplain storage routing, rain gage statistical analysis, hydraulics and split flow <br />analysis beyond specific limits, floodplain hydraulic modeling or mapping. <br /> <br />MODIFICATION OR DEPARTURES FROM SCOPE <br /> <br />As with any study, the investigation raises facts and issues which inevitably lead to <br />modification or departure from the scope. Some of these are as follows: <br /> <br />1. Rainfall. Contacts with NOAA were both helpful and led to some dead ends. <br />We attempted to get better guidance on arranging the temporal (time) pattern <br />of the critical rainfall, and two of the references indicated didn't lead to <br />fruitful results. UDFCD provided consultation with John Henz, meteorologist <br />which provided helpful guidance. We attempted to use a storm pattern he <br />suggested, but were unable to satisfy NOAA statistics. Henz suggested <br />providing a custom rainfall analysis of the UDFCD network and providing <br />design storms that were locally based, but this would require substantial <br />funding and likely depart from NOAA based documentation, so the sponsors <br />decided to not proceed beyond the TEA analysis herein. <br /> <br />2. Eldorado Stream Gaqe Data. The research revealed that the Eldorado Stream <br />Gage had a substantial record of daily flows and was primarily used for <br />management of water distribution to irrigation ditches. While peaks had <br /> <br />1-6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.