My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD11630 (2)
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
DayForward
>
1100
>
FLOOD11630 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 10:25:17 AM
Creation date
1/5/2009 12:18:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Basin
Arkansas
Title
Post Flood Assessment Report - Arkansas River
Date
9/15/1999
Floodplain - Doc Type
Flood Documentation Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
187
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
the Arkansas River. Between the time of the Phase I General Design Memorandum effort in the <br />area and the 1993 investigation, the drainage inlets to the Arkansas River which had been above <br />the normal water elevation of the river had become submerged. <br />Stormdrain backup is the primary cause of flooding in the south portion of La Junta and is <br />especially frequent along U.S. Highway 50 (First Street). Local afficials and residents have also <br />indicated that backwater effects from the John Martin Dam reservoir and percolation from the <br />Fort Lyons irrigation channel have surchazged groundwater levels and made some lands unusable <br />for agricultural use. Others contend that backwater effects on the groundwater from the dam <br />may he influencing river stage and flaod frequencies as well. <br />A pilot project to mine river sediments downstream of La 3unta is expected to start soon. It may <br />prove to have a beneficial effect on the channel aggradation problem upstream in La Junta. A <br />commercial river mining venture would provide the least cost alternative for the City of La Junta <br />to regain channel capacity lost over the years to aggradation in the river. However, a without a <br />comprehensive sediment transport study, it is difficult to determine the long-term benefits and <br />other effects of such a venture. <br />FLOOD MANAGEMENT SYSTEM DEFICIENCIES <br />Fountain Creek and Tributaries <br />Fountain Creek: ~'here are no flood managernent systems along Fountain Creek upstream of <br />Pueblo. The bankfull capacity of the creek near Colorado Springs was estimated to be 4,470 <br />c.f.s. in April 1994. Furthez'downstream near the City of Fountain the bankfull capacity of the <br />creek was estimated to be only 2,450 c.f.s. Damages in Fountain aze estimated to begin at a flow <br />of 3,890 c.f.s. which is something less than a 10-year event. The Fountain Creek I,evees and <br />Channelization project in Pueblo provides flood pratection up to the 200-year event. <br />Templeton Gap Floodway Diversion Channel: This project was constructed in 1949 by the <br />Corps of Engineers on this left bank tributary to Monument Creek downstream of Colorado <br />Springs. The confluence enters from a much higher elevation than the Monument Creek channel <br />invert. As a result, a large plunge pool has formed. Although an exit channel cutoff wall was <br />included, the plunge pool has begun to undermine the e~t channel cutoff wall and invert. <br />Continued erosion could cause cantilever failure of the channel within the confluence area. <br />Large scale undermining could threaten commercial properties on the right overbank of <br />Templeton Gap and residential properties on the left overbank. <br />Manitou Springs: Fountain Creek is constricted through the city of Manitou Springs by <br />encroaching developments. The channel ca~acity is extremely low at about 1,000 c.f.s. <br />Damages begin to occur above this flow capacity which is about a 5-year flood event. <br />Recommendations have been pursued to enhance flaod warning systems; however, the speed at <br />which flood flows reach and exceed channel capacity is so fast that flood warning systems are <br />~ Chapter S- Flood Risk Assessment <br />Post Flood Assessment Report ~ 37 Draft Revised 09/09/99 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.