Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I will be glad to answer any questions <br />anyone might have concerning our program <br />at the present time." <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br /> <br />"Thank you. How about questions on <br />this report? Quincy." <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />MR. CORNELIUS: <br /> <br />"John, this spillway on Cherry Creek <br />Dam, as I understand it, you are going to <br />raise the spillway to nearly double the <br />flood control capacity without increased <br />recreation storage. Would you like to <br />comment on that?" <br /> <br />MR. VELEHRADSKY: <br /> <br />"Yes. The Cherry Creek spillway <br />would control at the present time a <br />standard project flood. HOwever, if a <br />standard project flood were to occur and <br />then another flood were to occur on top <br />of that, then it would discharge into the <br />Sand Creek basin. Normally our dams are <br />designed to provide a certain flood con- <br />..1:;rol pool plus a surcharge pool for what <br />we call a spillway design flood or a <br />probable maximum flood. The Cherry Creek <br />project does not meet this criteria. It <br />would control the standard project flood. <br />Anything above that would go into the <br />Sand Creek basin. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />So what we are proposing to do is to <br />literally cut the Cherry Creek basin off <br />from the Sand Creek basin. The Cherry <br />Creek project could do this but we would <br />have to acquire additional lands around <br />the reservoir. At the present time the <br />government ownership is about 5625 and <br />the top of the dam is 5645 so there is <br />20 feet vertically that is not owned by <br />the federal government at the present time. <br />We made studies to determine if it would <br />be better to raise the spillway up to 5640 <br />or move up to Castlewood and it appears at <br />the present time that it would be better <br />to go to Castlewood with this storage." <br />