BOARD00021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

lJ,.;lU2 Committee made the statement that he was the only one who held out for flood protection on the Bijou Creek. This, of course, is totally untrue. After we were unable to get enough benefits from the Corps, I instructed our staff to try to come up with some other plans I on the Bijou through the Soil Conservation Service. We did work intensively and spent a lot of money trying to develop further plans on the Bijou. One of the water commissioners on the South Platte also made the statement that had Narrows been there it would never have had any water in the first place, and in the second place the silt that came in there would have destroyed the reservoir. I hesitate to express myself on the opinions of other officials in the State of Colorado but in this case I am constrained to state that these contentions are ridiculous. On this U. S. G. S. map (pointing) is shown the Chatfield Reservoir. Actually, this reservoir was authorized under the Flood Con- trol Act of 1950 and $26 million was author- ized to be appropriated to construct it. The total cost, as I recall, was somewhere in the neighborhood of $31 million." NR. BOYDSTON: " $ 34 million." MR. SPARI<S: "$34 million for this reservoir. I've seen statements in various newspapers of late that the reservoir will inundate the Columbine Country Club and the Nartin Plant. The Colum- bine Country Club is below the reservoir, and the Nartin Plant sits up here (pointing) above the high water line, although the l<1artin Com- pany does own some land which is in the sur- charge area of the proposed reservoir. The surcharge area would also take in the Denver filter plant, and the Denver intake works from the South Platte River. This, of course, pre- sented a great problem, the municipal water works of the city of Denver in the dam as originally planned. I