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 />SECTII.POUR <br /> <br />Problems and Needs <br /> <br />Table 4 <br />Summary of How Steering Committee Priorities are Currently Met by Each Entity <br /> <br /> Jurisdictional Entity <br /> Activity Grand <br /> Mesa Grand Fruita Palisade Junction <br /> County Junction Drainage <br /> District <br />1. Develop funding to meet planning, <br /> maintenance and Capital Improvement Limited Limited Limited Limited Limited <br /> Program needs <br />2. Perform studies to identify and prioritize Limited Limited Limited Limited Limited <br /> needs and proj ects <br />3. Coordinate floodplain management, <br /> planning, Capital Improvement Program. Limited Limited Limited Limited Limited <br /> and maintenance <br />4. Coordinate representation to involve No No No No No <br /> federal/state agencies in solutions. <br />5. Determine Level of Service No No No No No <br />6. Maintain facilities Limited Limited Limited Limited Limited <br />7. Meet federal regulations Yes Yes Limited Yes Yes <br /> <br />4.2 PROBLEMS WITH PLANNING, COORDINATION AND FUNDING <br /> <br />As illustrated in the discussion on Steering Committee priorities, three of the top priorities - <br />planning, coordination, and funding - are only met to a limited degree by all of the five entities. <br /> <br />Due to the lack of drainage basin planning studies (which identify the problems and needs by <br />basin and present plans for improvements in the most cost-efficient and coordinated manner) the <br />five entities do not know the full extent of their capital and maintenance needs, particularly for <br />regional and cross-jurisdictional problems. Completion of more of these plans in the valley <br />would greatly improve the design and management of the overall drainage system. In addition, <br />of the few existing drainage basin planning studies that do currently exist, many are based on <br />outdated hydrology, and the studies need to be revised or re-done. Furthermore, one of the roles <br />of the five entities is to review development plans for the proper location, design,and <br />coordination of proposed drainage facilities with existing District and other drainage systems. <br />When completing these reviews, the five entities are handicapped by the absence of drainage <br />basin planning studies. The completion of more of these plans would greatly improve the <br />efficiency and coordination of these reviews. <br /> <br />The need for planning studies can be summarized for different levels of development: <br /> <br />1. Developed areas - Serious flooding potential exists, and studies are needed to identify the <br />locations and magnitude of hazards and determine the best solutions. <br /> <br />2. Areas under development pressure - Development is occurring in this area and floodplains <br />and/or improvements need to be identified to alleviate future hazards that would be more <br />expensive to fix after development occurs. <br /> <br />URS <br /> <br />T:\PROJECTS\22236022_GRAND_ VALLEY\SUB_OO\6.0_PROJ_DELlWINAL REPORT\FINAL REPT REV 4.00C\9-JUl-03\\ 4-2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.