Laserfiche WebLink
<br />impractical. The upstream storage concept was also eliminated from consideration. In spite of the <br />existence of five reservoirs in the lower portion of the South Clear Creek watershed, lack of <br />Town ownership or control and operational constraints resulting from their function as power <br />generating facilitieS,prevent any significant existing storage from being made available for flood <br />control. Construction of new storage space was considered infeasible because of the large amount <br />of storage required, the high cost, and the environmental issues and permit requirements which <br />could substantially delay or ultimately prevent construction altogether. <br /> <br />TABLE 5-1 <br /> <br />STRUCTURES CURRENTLY IN 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN <br /> <br />The alternative preferred by the Town members consists of a combination of dredging and <br />f100dwallllevee concepts. The Griffith Street bypass conduit also received a favorable resonse. <br />Conceptual level analysis of these alternatives for Clear Creek and South Clear Creek is <br />presented in Section 6. <br /> <br /> Total <br /> Single Multi- Square Total <br /> Family Family Foota"e II! Floodproofing <br /> e <br />Flooding Source Residential Residential Commercial (sf) Cost(2) <br />South Clear Creek 17 25,500 $319,000 <br />Clear Creek 52 7 12 138,500 $1,731,000 <br /> <br />Totals <br /> <br />69 <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />164,000 <br /> <br />$2,050,000 <br /> <br />Notes: <br />I. Square footage totals do not include out-buildings <br />2. Total f1oodproofing cost based on raising a wood frame building on concrete foundation walls for $25/sf. <br />Assume half of buildings in IOO-year floodplain would be raised. <br /> <br />5-9 <br /> <br />5-10 <br />