FLOOD01374

• Designation Number: 521
• County: Weld
• Community: Erie, Firestone, Dacono
• Stream Name: Tri-town drainageway, Godding Hollow Basin
• Title: South Weld I-25 Corridor Master Drainage Plan
• Date: 9/8/1999
• Prepared For: Weld County
• Prepared By: Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc.
• Floodplain - Doc Type: Floodplain Report/Masterplan

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(g) provide a recommendation related to a financing and funding mechanism.

Sensitivity to these objectives was an important consideration during the preparation of the master
drainage plan; however, the primary focus of the planning efforts was the reduction of both
existing flooding and the potentiaUor future flooding problems within the Godding Hollow and
Tri-Town Basins.

1.2 Scope of Work

The scope of work followed during the development of the master drainage plan included
the tasks described below.

1. Scoping and Coordination Meetinl;s, This task included a scoping meeting to
discuss project goals and objectives, schedule, deliverables, modeling criteria and
level of detail, and planning concepts and evaluation procedures. Coordination
meetings were also conducted to discuss project status, overall direction of the
project and promote the exchange of information. Workshops were held with
members of the 1-25 Corridor MDP Task Force which included representatives
from the five governing bodies (Towns of Erie, Frederick, and Firestone, The City
of Dacono, and Weld County), the Tri-Area Sanitation District, Colorado Water
Conservation Board, several irrigation companies, and various other entities.
During the coordination meetings, the scope of the project was often slightly
modified to reflect information and results generated during the completion of the
planning effort.

2. Data Collection and Field Investigation A detailed review of all available reports,
mapping and data pertinent to the planning efforts was conducted. This
information included but was not limited to: (a) existing drainage criteria and
policies; (b) existing and ongoing drainage studies; (c) zoning data; (d) pertinent
soils, rainfall and runoff data; (e) inventories of existing facilities; (f) available
mapping and utility data bases; and (g) agreements with various entities including
ditch companies and Weld County. In conjunction with the collection and review
of available data, a field reconnaissance was conducted to further define and verify
locations of existing drainage or flooding problems and formulate plans for
concepmal improvements at these locations. Survey requirements were identified
along with all existing facilities earmarked for evaluation during the hydraulic
evaluation,

3, Mapping and Surveying All available mapping sources were investigated. These
sources included USGS quadrangle maps and mapping generated from existing and
ongoing drainage smdies, To facilitate the master planning efforts, aerial

T'lOPENlCoweldOllct)~ldOl pI rpl. wpd

1.2

Seplember 8. /999