My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD04002
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
FLOOD04002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 6:44:58 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 12:16:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Jefferson
Community
Golden, Jefferson County
Stream Name
Clear Creek
Basin
South Platte
Title
Major Drainageway Plan - Clear Creek: Youngfield Through Golden
Date
2/1/1982
Prepared For
UDFCD
Prepared By
Wright-Mclaughlin Engineers
Floodplain - Doc Type
Floodplain Report/Masterplan
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
70
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />'-2 <br /> <br />A-3 <br /> <br />6. Tnefol1owing alternatives shall be considered: <br /> <br />7. The Engineer shall consider presently known Federal Housing and Urban <br />OevelopnentFederallnsuranceAdmini,trationflood insurance policy. <br /> <br />a. Maintain existing configuration. <br /> <br />b. A Mtural type waterOlay following the general existingchanne\. <br /> <br />8. Considerat ion Shell be given to tne operation and maintenanc~ aspects of <br />the best alternotiveplans. <br /> <br />c. The use of lined flood channels. <br /> <br />9. Soil characteristics of tne Clear Creek basin Shull be taken into <br />considerdtion. <br /> <br />d. $elected or limited structure improvements or additions (culverts, <br />bridges, irrigation structures, etc.) and channel improvements <br />(realignment, erosion control, low flow protection, maintenance <br />access, velocity control, etc.). <br /> <br />lO.Thl< Engineer shall consider the impact of each alternative on water <br />quality and the adaptability of each alternative to possible future <br />storm water pollution control meilSUres. <br /> <br />e. Preserviltion of existing flood plilin storilge including the prese rva- <br />tionofthef1ood storage now being provided by the various gravel <br />pits. <br /> <br />1l_TheEngineersha1l conductabenefit/cost analysis of the best alterna- <br />tiveplans. <br /> <br />12. Tne Eng i neer SMa 11 prepare a wr itten report for Ph ~se A. <br /> <br />f. AcquiSition of flood prone properties ilnd relocation of occupants. <br /> <br />g. Non-structural methOds such as flaShflOOd..-arning, flood insura nee, <br /> <br />eva:uatio~ pl a~s, etc. <br /> <br />h. Other. <br /> <br />i. Combiniltion of any of the above. <br /> <br />ENGINEER shill] consider and eval uate the recn~ational trail system and <br />recreational facll1ties as currently exists or planned for bytne LOCAL <br />GOVERNMENTS for use <IS m<lintenance access to the major drainageway. <br />here the recreational trail system fails to prodde reasonable main- <br />tenance access, ENGINEER shall recQllIIlend supplemenLl.l trails. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.