FLOOD07503 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

\, \ . . . CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC. CDM environmental engif)BiJfS, scientists, planners. & management consultants Writer's Tower, Suite 1100 1660 South Albion Street, Denver, CaJoraoo 80222 303 758-4351 March 16, 1981 Dr. John Li ou Federal Emergency Management Agency Denver Federal Center Building 710 Lakewood, CO 80225 ,,~ CONSERVA I '_ l. Dear John, In reference to our preliminary Hydrologic Review for Nine Colorado Communities, and our discussion concerning this summary, we have com- pleted the hydrologic anaylsis for the City of Canon City, Colorado. This analysis is summarized below: Peak Discharges(cfs) Stream Method Used Developed by 10-yr. 50-yr. 100-vr. 500-vr. Arkansas Log-Pearson COE 8850 16,500 20,500 32,200 River Type I II Forked Soil Conser- CD~1 960 2,290 2,790 5,490 Gulch @ vation Ser-- Confluence vice (SCS) S.E. Canon SCS CDM 170 400 500 920 Drainage Sand Creek SCS Cot'! 1660 4,060 5,400 9,800 @ Confluence N.c. Canoll ~r~ Great Divide 1485 2,275 2,380 3,575 ~LJ Drainage Engineerin9 @ Confl uence The discharg6 shown for the Arkansas River are a result of a station gage analysis of the gage at Canon City performed by the Corps of Engineers. This analysis was checked by COM using a station gage analysis with a Log-Pearson Type III distdbution. These discharges fell within the 90% confidence limits of the COE discharges. The discharges for North East Canon Drainage were performed by Great Divide Engineering, for CHCB, using the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) method. The discharges for Forked Gulch, Sand Creek and South East Canon Drainage were performed by CDM using the SCS method as used in the North East Canon Drainage report.