Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-25- <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />- SUMMARY - <br /> <br />the location of the one reservoir upstream of Ward <br />Road will greatly enhance the degree of flood control <br />and protection and reduce the frequency of flooding <br />to the City of Arvada from high intensity rainstorms <br />occurring in the upper part of the basin, or that <br />part of the basin upstream of the reservoir. This <br />plan will also provide many benefits along Ralston <br />Creek due to reduced flooding, not accounted for in <br />this report. <br />3. By prvoiding protection from the lOa-year flood, this <br />plan greatly reduceS the potential flood damage <br />through the expansive commercial area downstream of <br />Kipling Street. <br />4. The plan calls for limited channel improvements <br />through the publiclY owned County Maintenance Yard. <br />The plan encourages the elimination of the conduit <br />through this reach of the channel, and promotes future <br />consideration of channelization and park related <br />development through the reach. Such improvements <br />would reduce expected flooding through the downstream <br />plaza area. <br />5. The plan provides the -least costly solution to the <br />flooding problems in both Arvada and Jefferson County. <br />6. The plan provides the maximum ratio of benefit to <br />cost in both entities. <br /> <br />This report represents the culmination of many studies concerned <br />with the flooding potential on Van Bibber Creek. The studies <br />have included hydrologic studies, hydraulic studies, soils <br />studies, potential flood damage studies, legal evaluation, <br />flood plain improvement studies and cost evaluations. <br /> <br />The primary objective of all the studies was to develop feasible <br />alternatives for consideration by the City of Arvada and Jefferson <br />County, as well as the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, <br />for possible implementation to eliminate the existing and increasing <br />flood hazards associated with van Bibber Creek. Preliminary design <br />has been completed for one of these alternatives and is included <br />as a part of this report. <br /> <br />The plan selected consists of a major flood control reservoir <br /> <br /> <br />located upstream of Ward Road as well as various drainageway <br /> <br /> <br />improvements consisting of enlarged culverts, protective dikes <br /> <br /> <br />and embankments, flood proofing, and minor channelization and <br /> <br />velocity control structures in the reaches upstream and downstream <br /> <br /> <br />of the proposed reservoir. This plan does not propose any <br /> <br />enlargement or alteration to the existing concrete conduit which <br /> <br /> <br />traverses the lower reaches of the stream through the Arvada Plaza <br /> <br /> <br />commercial area. <br /> <br />Certain facts and figures are tabulated below to provide justifi- <br />cation and rationale for the selection of this plan as the <br />recommended drainageway plan. <br /> <br />1. This plan has a substantial impact on the lOa-year <br />flood flow through the City of Arvada, reducing <br />the peak flood flow from 3450 cfs to approximately <br />1100 cfs at the confluence with Ralston Creek. <br />2. Even though this studY considers the effects of the <br />lOa-year storm over the entire Van Bibber Creek basin, <br /> <br />The present worth of benefits for the City of Arvada is <br />$3,160,000, while the total net benefits for Jefferson County <br />amounted to $5,967,000. These figures lead to a benefit cost <br />ratio for the City of Arvada of 1.07, for Jefferson County, <br />3.94, and a total benefit cost ration of 2.04, thus justifying <br />the project from an economic standpoint. <br />