|
<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 />
<br />10855 east bethany drive
<br />po. box 22026
<br />denver. colorado 80222
<br />(3031751-0741
<br />
<br />merrick
<br />and company
<br />
<br />meeker, colora(j()
<br />(3031878-,,058
<br />
<br />crested butte, coioraoc
<br />!3031349.5313
<br />
<br />Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
<br />September 24, 1980
<br />Page Two
<br />
<br />September 24, 1980
<br />Ref: 103-3410
<br />
<br />The total construction costs of the drainageway improvements outlined by the plan
<br />has been estimated to be $2,324,000. This figure includes structural and channel
<br />improvements, street improvements, utility relocation, engineering costs, legal and
<br />administrative costs and other contingencies. The estimate reflects Phase I costs in the
<br />lower reaches, as Phase II is considered a condition of the development of adjacent vacant
<br />land and costs are expected to be incurred by the developer.
<br />
<br />In portions of the upper reaches, developers have expressed a willingness to either
<br />dedicate the necessary right-of-way or construct recommended channel improvements, or
<br />both. However, for an overview, these costs are included in the total estimate, but are
<br />broken out so that their magnitude can be determined. If the additional costs, nearly
<br />$800,000, of the plan selected by the sponsors are accounted for, total construction costs
<br />compare favorably with the $1,200,000 estimated projected in the Phase "A" study,
<br />lending some legitimacy to the economic analysis. Including right-of-way acquisition
<br />costs and the present worth of 50 years of operation and maintenance, the total
<br />improvement costs come to $2,875,000. These costs are broken down in the report by
<br />reach, jurisdiction, and a sheet-by-sheet basis in the Drawings.
<br />
<br />Mr. L. Scott Tucker
<br />Executi ve Director
<br />Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
<br />2480 W. 26th Avenue, Bldg. B, Suite 156
<br />Denver, Colorado 80211
<br />
<br />Subject: Phase "B" Report, Direct Flow Area 0054
<br />
<br />Dear Mr. Tucker:
<br />
<br />In accordance with our agreement, Number 78-9.4, we have completed the Phase
<br />"B" portion of the direct Flow Area 0054 Major Drainageway Planning Study and are
<br />submitting the report included herewith. The completion of the Phase "B" report, in
<br />association with the preceding Phase "A" report printed in November, 1979, and the Flood
<br />Hazard Area Delineation report printed in October, 1979, marks the culmination of the
<br />Mastel' Planning effort for the drainageway and concludes the work as set forth under our
<br />agreement.
<br />
<br />This report outlines narratively within the text and schematically on the drawings
<br />the plan for flood control as selected by the study's sponsors, based on Phase "A" study
<br />recommendations and local requirements. The plan calls for increased detention in the
<br />upper channel reaches, substantially reducing the flow magnitudes and, consequently,
<br />costs of construction of drainageway improvements downstream. Improvements in the
<br />lower reaches are to evolve in two phases, with the final phase, Phase II, calling for an
<br />enlargement of channel improvements initially constructed to accommodate the two-year
<br />runoff. The final phase designed for 100-year conveyance capabilities, is to be a condition
<br />of development of adjacent lands. Stretches of channel in the upper reaches utilize
<br />underground conduit in conjunction with street and open channel conveyance abilities to
<br />conduct 100-year flows and mitigate potential flood hazards. Road crossing improvements
<br />and minor measures to check erosion have also been shown for two tributary basins where
<br />major drainageway improvements are not warranted.
<br />
<br />The report also outlines criteria used in the preliminary design and makes specific
<br />recommendations regarding implementation of drainageway improvements, their priority
<br />and interdependence. In addition, secondary benefits, such as increased parks and
<br />recreational opportunities are identified and some of the measures necessary to be
<br />uti! ized as such are addressed.
<br />
<br />We appreciate the opportunity to work with the Urban Drainage and Flood Control
<br />District and the participating local entities on this project. We wish to express our
<br />gratitude to Ben Urbonas of your staff; Eric Pahlke of the City of Thornton; Bud Coleman,
<br />John Kemp, and Ming Yeh of Adams County; and other local citizenry and developers who
<br />greatly contributed to the Master Planning effort. As the needs arise, we remain
<br />available to assist you in implementing this Master Plan.
<br />
<br />Respectfully,
<br />
<br />ME~ICK &~OMPA~Y
<br />
<br />~M.
<br />
<br />Duane M. Johnson
<br />Project Manager
<br />
<br />,\1\\,,"'1111111111111
<br />;,."~ ",M G & 11,~1.
<br />#:\,\..\ .e..... 41"?-:;';
<br />~ ~ .~.b\s Tc.4"'. ~-:'~
<br />;;; .:s;....<<-Y;., I.:o"e l' ~;..
<br />fl .\~
<br />-'*.~ 17270 0:. :=
<br />;:;.:n ' u;.....L::::::
<br />~:o - 1!J:~:;;':
<br />~ (j) ~1I)' .~"':~-<> t ~
<br />~, ,A 10 S ( '^
<br />? -r e. SIr) ..;_v.... --.) ,"
<br />~.. ,,>"-..".' "-1<\'- .(~Q,_ \"' .:'
<br />I_:~ ''::' _~"I"\."''''''' 0"'" ,,:~.'
<br />?'.;h. Gr-- "',01,.. ,;~'.
<br />II/;:I!!I ......,...\t.\.,\,,'\.
<br />
<br />
<br />Y~b.~
<br />
<br />William G. Bates
<br />Project Engineer
<br />
<br />WGB:vw
<br />
|