Laserfiche WebLink
<br />With regard to impacts to the aesthetic resources, the channel diversion and <br />training levees would appear regular and unnatural; however, at the same time, they <br />would offer landscapc diversity and provide overlook areas for viewing adjacent view- <br />scapes. The most noticeable impact would occur where the channel diversion would <br />discharge into the Caeht: La Poudre River. This impact could be minimized by over- <br />designing the width of the channel diversion at the confluence to reduce thenccd for <br />frequent clearing and to allow some aesthetically pleasing, natural vegetation to occur. <br /> <br />If either plan were implemented, additional, more detailed investigations would <br />need to necessary. These in\'estigations should include consultations WIth individuals <br />qualified to evaluate the historic aspect of engineering structures associated with <br />irrigation.. It would also include consultation with an historic architect to evaluate the <br />effect of either plan on Alta Vista. <br /> <br />ECONOMIC I"IPACTS <br /> <br />Ofconcem to environmental health is the potential for contaminated soil to be <br />disturbed appro~imatdy at the midpoint of the channel diversion. If contaminated soils <br />were found, they would have to be removed and properly dispo,edof. <br /> <br />Table 6-3 presents the residual damages for the \OO~year and the 30-year plans. <br />With the loo-yearplan in place. Dry Creek dis.charges would be significantly reduced <br />from Larimer and Weld Canal to it's confluence with the Cache La Poudre RiVer, The <br />plan would rectucethe lOO-ycarflood stagt:on Dry Creck by about 1.5 - 2.0 feet from <br />Larimer and Weld Canal to College Avenue and 1.5 - 0.5 feet from College Avenue to <br />East Vine Drive, The lOO~ycar plan would reduce th.: EAD on Dry Creek from <br />$65~,700 to $214,500, or a reduction of 67 percent. <br /> <br />The channel diversion would involve the disposal ofa sizeable quantity of excess <br />exeavatedmateria1. Il isassumcd that noncontroversial disposal sites could be found that <br />would have minimal or mitigat.1ble impacts on ecological and aesthetic resources. <br /> <br />CllLTURAL IMPACTS <br /> <br />The 30'year plan would reduce the estimated annual damag.:s (EAD) on 01)' Creek <br />fwm $658,700 to $288.500, or a rcduC(lOO of 56 percent. The 30'y~"r pl~n would <br />reduce the lOO-year flood stage on Dry Cn:ck by about 0,5 foot from Larimer and Wdd <br />Canal to East Vine Drive. <br /> <br />A brief cultural resources field reconnaissance study was completed on a portion <br />of thc study area. There is a low possibility of encountering intact prehistoric site:; <br />becauseofpreviomdlsturbancesinth':~lWdyareacausedbyextcnsivefluvial erosion and <br />construction associated with the creeks. <br /> <br />ESTIMATE OF COST <br /> <br />Both plans would affect L'lrimer and Weld Irrigation Canal, which is liste<! on the <br />National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). It would also affect the Josh Ames Ditch <br />aod :he UPRR, two sites of potential historical importance for ",hidl no infmmation is <br />:Jsailablc. <br /> <br />The e~til1latcd cost to COnSlnlcl the 30-year plan is S3,4911,500, and Ihe cost to <br />construct the lOO-yearplan is $,'i,927,200. Th.isdoes not include the Federal.md 11011- <br />federal sponsorc0sts associalcd with the feasihiliw stl,dics, Thecnst estimate for the <br />fcasibilitv.ltudiesis presemc.d in Chapter 9. <br /> <br />6-13 <br /> <br />6-1-'l <br />