Laserfiche WebLink
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM <br />TO: <br />JIM STARK <br />FROM: <br />ROB ZUBER <br />CC: <br />COLOWYO FILE <br />SUBJECT: <br />COLOWYO TR -105, 2ND ADEQUACY LETTER <br />DATE: <br />7/7/2015 <br />Please let me know if the following is not clear. <br />18a <br />The response is adequate. <br />18b <br />The response is adequate. <br />18c <br />The sub -watersheds are still not delineated in a conventional way. It appears that the only criterion is <br />curve numbers, and the end result is basins that make no sense in terms of topography and drainage <br />pattern. Please account for topography in your delineations. <br />18d <br />The response is adequate. <br />18e <br />The sub -watersheds are different at the south end <br />Exh. 7-14E. <br />18f <br />The response is adequate. <br />18g <br />The response is adequate. <br />18h <br />The response is adequate. <br />18i <br />The response is adequate. <br />Please compare Figure 1 in Exh. 7 -ST to Figure 1 in <br />18j <br />Please compare the slope from the topography for sub -watershed G in Figure Exh. 7-14PP-8, which is <br />approximately 3%, to the value in the SEDCAD run (structure 22 on page Exh. 7 -PP -343), which is 33%. <br />Can you explain why the slopes appear off by an order of magnitude? <br />