My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Letter to CWCB Members May 10 2005 Re RICD For Buena Vista and Salida, Caffee County, Arkansas River
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
7001-8000
>
Letter to CWCB Members May 10 2005 Re RICD For Buena Vista and Salida, Caffee County, Arkansas River
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/30/2014 4:55:04 PM
Creation date
5/1/2014 3:15:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Recreational In-channel Diversion
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
5/10/2005
Author
Taggart, Willaim, ASCG Inc
Title
Letter to CWCB Members May 10 2005 Re RICD For Buena Vista and Salida, Caffee County, Arkansas River
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Correspondence
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Colorado Water Conservation Board Members <br />Mr. Thomas Browning, P.E., CWCB <br />Review of Lacy Report for Chaffee County Whitewater RICD <br />May 10, 2005 <br />Page 9 of 9 <br />competitors, with lesser flow than applied for. One objective of a whitewater park should be to provide <br />boating when adjoining natural reaches are less boatable. There is no data or analysis of flows and <br />conditions at other sites along the Arkansas where competition presently occurs. The Salida reach <br />appears to be flat water where artificial impoundments raise water levels to create localized drops. <br />Since no overall plans, analysis or engineering documentation of the whitewater parks is provided, <br />there is no engineering substantiation that two "holes" satisfy competitive criteria and that other viable <br />alternatives that use less flow don't exist. Therefore the design and usage of water for recreational <br />purposes is not optimized and the maximum utilization of Colorado's waters is not achieved by the <br />proposal. <br />We have only been provided with a copy of Lacy's 21 page report. Since that report has no basic <br />survey mapping, hydrology, hydraulics, specific design criteria, preliminary or final engineering design <br />documents, we have not been able to conduct a thorough analysis of suitability, the design, and <br />evaluation of other alternatives. Thus upon the provision of further information, documentation, and <br />analysis our observations and initial conclusions could change. <br />Nevertheless, it is apparent the design is inadequate, that a lesser flow can provide for a reasonable <br />recreation experience, including competition. <br />Sincerely, <br />ASCG Incorporated <br />a4?6� 4�5�,jo2i �� <br />William C. Taggart, P.E. <br />Senior Engineer <br />19.�l <br />12596 WEST BAYAUD AVENUE, SUITE 200, LAKEWOOD, CO 80228 <br />303.458.5550 FAX 303.480.9766 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.