Laserfiche WebLink
<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 />II <br />I <br /> <br />search included the review of the "Floodplain Information Report, Lower <br />South Arkansas River" by Water Resource Consultants, 1979 (Reference 16). <br />This report contains a hydrologic analysis of gage stations in the upper <br />Arkansas River basin (mountain regions), in order to estimate the <br />frequency-discharge relationship for the Lower South Arkansas River. These <br />gages are presented in Table 2. The method applied in this study followed <br />the procedures outlined in Reference 15, and the results were compared to <br />historic flood records. The peak discharges for the 100-year event showed <br />a close comparison to the historic peaks on the South Arkansas River. COM <br />checked the hydrologic procedures by analyzing the records, supplementing <br />the data with additional records, and recomputed a regional discharge-area <br />relationship. The results of COM's regional gage analysis of mountain <br />region streams in the Upper Arkansas River Basin, are in Figure 8. It was <br />therefore recommended that the peak discharges derived for Reference 16 be <br />used in the hydraulic analysis of the South Arkansas River in Salida (refer <br />to COM's letter to FEMA and CWCB, dated May 2, 1980). The peak discharges <br />have been summarized in Table 1. <br /> <br /> <br />The Arkansas River at Salida was also studied by COM in order to develop a <br />100-year floodplain by approximate methods in this reach of the river. No <br />hydrologic data was found during a literature review ans therefore a <br />statistical gage station analysis was performed for the USGS gage on the <br />Arkansas River at Salida was performed as outlined in Reference 15. The <br />peak discharges were estimated for the 10-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year <br />frequencies at the Salida gage and used in the approximate floodplain <br />analysis. The hydrologic results have been tabulated in Table 1. <br /> <br />15 <br />