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 />I <br />I <br /> <br />Lower Big Dry Creek Hydrologic Study <br /> <br />property acquisition is completed, preservation of a meander corridor that enables to the <br />stream to adjust geomorphic ally should be strongly considered. <br /> <br />8. The BDCW A should contact and work with the USGS to identify improvements that <br />could be made to the Fort Lupton gage so that more accurate flow data can be obtained in <br />the lower watershed. <br /> <br />9. The BDCW A should consider sponsoring a suitably qualified graduate student to model <br />hydrologic conditions Big Dry Creek and identify the key design storms (e.g., <br />"breakpoint" storm suggested by Nehrke/Roesner) that could be controlled to most <br />benefit the creek. As a companion study, additional geomorphic characterization of the <br />stream would he very beneficial in detemLining the stormwater management practices of <br />most benefit to the stream channel. Such characterization could build upon the habitat <br />characterization work previously completed by Aquatics Associates. <br /> <br />10. The BDCW A should consider sponsoring a stream restoration demonstration project with <br />a university or the NRCS that equips landowners with information on affordable and <br />effective techniques for stream restoration on private property. <br /> <br />11. The BDCW A should explore the feasibility of developing a drainage impact fee, fee in- <br />lieu-of program, or other financial strategy for developments in the Big Dry Creek <br />watershed to help fund downstream improvements. An intergovernmental agreement <br />would like be needed for this type of activity. <br /> <br />971-179.092 <br />June 2005 <br /> <br />Wright Water Engineers, Inc. <br /> <br />Page 9 <br />