Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />II condition, or the 2-hour AMC III condition as recommended in <br />the DCM. In order to investigate any trends, data was complied <br />from the studi.es for drainage areas in which detention routing <br />or other flow attenuation factors did not occur. Two sets of <br />flows were used - one for the 2-hour AMC III condition and one <br />for the 24-hour AMC II condition. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />In almost every case, the 2-hour AMC III condition exceeded the <br />24-hour condition for all ranges of flows. This is expected <br />since the AMC III condition utilizes a higher curve number than <br />the AMC II condition used in the 24-hour storm. An interesting <br />point to note is that the highest yield watersheds are basins <br />which are almost fully developed. In these cases, the flows <br />for the 2-hour AMC III and 24-hour AMC II are nearly the same. <br />This should be expected since the higher the curve number of <br />the basin, the less difference in runoff between the AMC II and <br />AMC III condition. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Cenerally, the 2-hour AMC III condition is most closely <br />approximated when a small thunderstorm cell of high intensity <br />occurs. In this case, the rainfall occurs so quickly that <br />nearly instantaneous runoff will result even though the soil <br />may not: be totally saturated. It appears from experience in <br />the Colorado Springs area that these intense thunderstorm cells <br />are not of great areal extent, and therefore would not <br />generally occur on a larger basin area. An undeveloped basin <br />experiencing this type of storm could effeetively produce as <br />much runoff as a similarly developed basin under less intense <br />rainfall conditions. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />In addition, it appears that in fully developed conditions, the <br />storm criteria used for the basin is not as important since the <br />values obtained under both criteria are the same. In fact, the <br />24-hour AMC II storm would probably result in a more severe <br />condition for routing through detention ponds or other <br />structures where runoff volume is a concern. <br /> <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Several meetings were held to discuss these points with the <br />various agencies involved in this study and to select specific <br />flow values to be used in the floodplain mapping. Those <br />attending included the Department of Public Works for both the <br />City of Colorado Springs and El Paso County, the Regional <br />Floodplain Administrator, the Colorado Conservation Board, and <br />FEMA. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Appropriate design storms for each basin were chosen depending <br />primarily upon basin size and level of development. A summary <br />of the lOO.year peak discharge for both the 24-hour AMC II and <br />2-hour AMC III storms is presented in Table 1.2. The <br />recommended values for use in this study are shown underlined <br />for clarity. In the remainder of the report, only those <br />discharge values associated with the design storm of each <br />respective basin are presented. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />RE:SOURCE: CONSUlTI\NTS INC <br /> <br />I <br />