My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00021
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:42:41 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:30:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
7/12/1965
Description
Minutes
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
98
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
<br />I <br /> <br />The Chatfield plan failed. It didn't <br />have the right selling job to begin with, and <br />perhaps the plans were a little over-ambitious <br />also. As contemplated, it would have had a <br />capacity of about 200,000 acre-feet and would <br />substantially inundate all of the South Platte <br />Valley. above the city of Littletcn. The dam <br />is about three miles upstream fr0m Littleton. <br />It would t~,e practically all the highways <br />through that area arid all thc land. !t wonld <br />have controlled, without i'''"(/ 6.:'. ffj.cl1.1ty, the Ph",1 <br />Creek flood. As a matter of fact, that flood <br />\'lould have hit that dain and jus.c flattened out. <br />You wouldn't have known tha'c the flood hardly <br />existed. There would have been zero damages <br />downstream from that dam had it been there. <br /> <br />The status of that dam today is that, as <br />Mr. Slizeskihas alr~ady mentioned, we have <br />requested - everyone has requested, not only <br />us but almost everybody in Denver - that this <br />study be reinitiated. Ne have had some coordi- <br />nating conferences with the corps and with the <br />Bureau on the matter. Chatfield Drum, as origin- <br />ally designed, was to t~,e care of not only <br />Plum Creek but the South Platte River as \'lell. <br />Now with the ~'lo Forks coming on, and we are <br />certain that the Two Forks will be constructed, <br />it is not necessary to build Chatfield to the <br />size as originally planned. Chatfield can be <br />designed to take care only of the inflow belo~'l <br />Two Forks plus plum Creek. Its size can be <br />scaled down considerably. ~Je call eliminate <br />much of the expensive relocation of highways, <br />railroads, etc.. I think on a reduced scale it <br />is a feasible project. ~lis is the type of <br />plan the Corps hopes to proceed with immed- <br />iately if it can get the funds. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />On the Arkansas we have nothing in the <br />mill whatsoever which would have taken care of <br />the floods below John Hartin except again, the <br />Corps of Engineers, under the Flood Control <br />Act of 1960, had commenced general flood plain <br />studies on the ArkansaG. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.