Laserfiche WebLink
<br />HEC models and aerial mapping north of the Adams/Weld County Line was done by the CWCB <br />and cross sections and data is new and is done in HEC-RAS format. The areas south ofthe <br />Adams/Weld County line through Denver are much more convoluted and spotty due to site <br />specific studies driven by development done by UDFCD. The key issue here is that the UDFCD <br />is not using the standards ofNGVD 1929 vertical datum or the NA VD 1988 vertical datum. <br />There are roughly 50 bridges that made modeling tougher for George Cotton and he had to fuss <br />with them individually to get the model to work properly. Most agreed that increased flow and <br />flooding potential would have a minimal chance of leaving the channel through the Denver reach <br />but the problems would arise from Henderson gage on downstream. Inflows from Clear Creek <br />and Sand Creek had less effect and impact than George Cotton had initially thought they would <br />and we surmised that inflows were relatively stable from these two tributaries. <br /> <br />Additional Study Investil!ations <br /> <br />. Storal!e Use Patterns Investil!ation The project sponsor, Colorado Water Conservation <br />Board (Board), has a responsibility to perform a storage use pattem study for the project. <br />The fl11dings and recommendations of the study will be the design criteria for the space <br />allocation determinations. The Board will be contracting the services of a consultant for <br />$25,000 for the performance of the certain tasks. The study will evaluate the following <br />assumptions: <br />1. Assume that a maximum of 20,000 acre-feet of water supply will be used; <br />2. Review the Denver Water Board's (DWB) current operations of the 10,000 ac-ft water <br />supply pool; <br />3. Review the annual operations for the 27,000 ac-ft@ 5432 normal pool and 17,000 ac-ft <br />permanent pool; <br />4. Develop new demand curves for wet and dry year conditions; <br />5. Evaluate storage pattem opportunities based on environmental demands and controls <br />"The mouse"; <br />6. Consider that reservoir recreational features are not an operational variable; and <br />7. Compile and evaluate the conditional storage rights and any storage opportunities that <br />may exist in the water community. <br /> <br />. Mappinl! and Floodplain Study An opportunity exists to update and prepare new 100- <br />year floodplain information report for the South Platte River. This study has or will <br />develop new surveys and mapping for the South Platte River Floodplain areas. New <br />software/programs exist now that can cheaply replace the Board's 1970s designation, <br />delineation and reports. <br /> <br />George and Larry met to discuss these additional study tasks and have determined that they can <br />be accomplished within existing funding. The consultant will help us get a better picture ofthe <br />water rights situation on Chatfield and the South Platte. George will subcontract with another <br />consultant to fill in data gaps found between gages along the South Platte River. George told us <br />about additional aerial mapping that UDFCD is doing in Denver for one of their projects. <br /> <br />Fundinl! issues <br />Rick Miner and Larry will work together to come up with a budget picture and project schedule. <br />There are a number of additional study tasks which were identified by the Corps. Additional <br />funds will be requested next fiscal year. We discussed the transition of study fl11dings to the <br />Environmental Impact Statement. We will need to get State Parks involved at the July meeting <br />to get and idea ofa cost/benefit analysis for each level of pool increase regarding recreation. We <br />don't have specific dollar values for the levels of inundation and relocation of State Parks <br /> <br />Flood Protection. Water Project Planning and Financing. Stream and Lake Protection <br />Water Supply Protection. Conservation Planning <br />