My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00961
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD00961
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:56:18 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:47:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
9/22/2003
Description
Flood Section - Probable Maximum Precipitation Site-Specific Study for the Cherry Creek Reservoir-Study Findings and Recommendations
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
75
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 />.J <br /> <br />Executive Summary <br /> <br />4. Leave local services and funding for those services at the local level where they are most <br />efficient and responsive to the community. Local services include such activities as catch <br />basin and inlet cleaning, repair oflocal storm sewers and channels, review and approval of <br />subdivision drainage plans, and construction oflocal projects. <br /> <br />5. Use the Grand Junction Drainage District as the "operating arm" of a Drainage Authority. <br />This will maintain the operational expertise that already exists, minimize the extent of new <br />administrative staff, and prevent creation of a huge new bureaucracy. <br /> <br />6. Valley-wide stormwater management should include close coordination with the irrigation <br />compames. <br /> <br />7. Engage federal agencies to address issues with federal land upstream of the Valley. <br /> <br />POSSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION EXAMPLE <br /> <br />Table ES-l presents a Phase 1 budget for an example stormwater program. The budget was <br />prepared by project staff and consultants. The Steering Committee did not make a <br />recommendation on expenditure or funding levels. <br /> <br />The example is presented to inform elected officials and others of the approximate magnitude of <br />the needs. The actual needs will not be known until the drainage basin planning studies are <br />complete. The program below would cost the property owners in the Valley approximately <br />$2.75 per month for the average household. <br /> <br />Phase 2 of the program would begin when the results of the drainage basin planning studies for <br />the primary urbanized basins and the basins that are under the greatest development pressure are <br />known, and when elected officials provide direction to the stormwater program based on these <br />results. <br /> <br />Actual priorities would be established by elected officials and the board of the drainage <br />authority. <br /> <br />URS <br /> <br />T:\PROJECTS\22236022_GRAND_VAlLEY\SUB_OO\6.0_PROJ_DELIVIFINAl REPORT\FINAL REPT REV 4.DQC\9-JUL.03\\ ES-6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.