Laserfiche WebLink
<br />IUU ~la.U:;; .l.JCuu~ lJ~ <br />IWater Storage'Restricted <br /> <br />DAMS From l-A <br /> <br />- that waler storage has bl>en re- <br />stricted. <br />. Although lhe two calegones of <br />problem dams Sl"t"m to tolal 105, <br />there an! five dams tt.al have the <br />dubious dL'llincbon of being Inchkl. <br />ed on both lb1s: WalK'ka Dam in <br />Bouldl!T County; Mountain lIome <br />Dam in Costilla County; Jlughes <br />Dam in Garfield County, and Co- <br />manche and Chambers dams m <br />l.ar1merCounly. <br />. Dams on lhe,"llIL'lafe" list are <br />con.slderedpotential problems SlIT\. <br />ply because the !iplUW8)'S aren't <br />1.argeenou~ 10 hand1.elllllQJl from <br />a ~vy rain' without floodlng.. <br />SunpsonsaJd <br />They are under study to deter. <br />mIne if lhe potential lhrelll to Ule <br />and property Is scnous enough to <br />ju.ortlfyspehdtngronsiderablemon. <br />ey to enlarge the 5pillways. he <br />,,~ <br />Those dams, howt'n'r, "may DOl <br />be the worst from a structural <br />point of View, wtK>re you nave <br />seepage problems," Simpson said. <br />"We have some that an! under reo <br />s1rlCUon, capadtywi.-.e, ;bt>cause <br />they have problems. We are mak. <br />ing them safe by not allowing them <br />to store water:' <br />naose dams are on the "restrict. <br />ed" Iisl In some cases. walE'r stor. <br />age is slmply limited to minimize <br />possible danger. In others, It is <br />prohibitedalt~elher. <br />Stale records on dams selt'cted <br />at random from among tOO:re on <br />both problt'm lists were exammed <br />by 1be Post in an effort to prome <br />some tnsight Into the dam'lI3.lely <br />system In Colurado, They showed: <br /> <br />"the owners of the reservolIs shaU <br />be Uablt' lor all damages arl'WIg <br />from leakage or overflow of lhe <br />waters therefrom or by floods <br />caused by brE'aklng 01 the embank. <br />mentsol such reservolr'S," <br />Ma.ny of thE' unsafe dams are <br />,owned by Colorado municipaUUes, <br />mcludmglarge c1l1essuch asColo- <br />rado Sprtngs, mKW.ze cities like <br />I.ongmonl and small 10wllS such as <br />Lafayette, <br />TIle Lawn Lake dam, ownl'd by <br />~_ Lovcland.based farmers lnipt. <br />, ing Co" had been inspected just <br />rourtimesm3Iyrars,mostrecent' <br />lylnl978. <br />"By law, wr should visit each <br />one each year," saId lIal D. Simp. <br />son, a~is\anl staleengint't!r. "Bul <br />we can't. So we do our pnonU1Jng <br />by golng to OlE' nigh hitz.ard lirst, <br />lhen lhe moderate, then the low." <br />A Ik'nver Post examination of <br />Insped.ion report.~ on selected <br />dams among Ole lOOraled ashaz. <br />ardous or W'IIHlle, however, shows <br />thal while sutt' l/I.<;p('ctors make <br />rnorefrequentvisltstothem,some <br />have been waLting -two to five <br />years lor new ifL<;pectlon.o;. <br />Although SImpson lnSisls thalln. <br />SflI'ctions - when they can be <br />made_arethorough.dam'llafely <br />m.....pedlon rrports som(!\lme5 are <br />cursory and con.~1Sl of no more <br />than chN:ks on a prepared hst and <br />virtually no f\.iUTIIlIve descnptlon <br />ofconditlOn$. <br />"The reports are as detailed 35 <br />",,~ry:'SimflSOn5llid,"Uhe <br />(anin.'qlCCtOr) St'esaproblcm.he's <br />going to drtail iI, and he's going to <br />put out a 'lfoUer to the owner, say. Stanr Park Rer.tnolr <br />mg. 'You have a problem, and ....e The 3J-.foot.h1gh, 1,500-foot.]ong <br />want )'ou to correct iL' We Issue a earthen dam on Beaver CrCE'k in <br />lotol~kindsof1eUers:' Boulder County was builtin 1881, <br />l-:ngitK't'ring offiCi! hle.~ re(lect UM'n rebuilt in 1895 after It failed lo <br />such wa.rning lellers, but they are hold floodwaters in 1885. ' <br />sometimes senl repellll'dly over a It was fint Inspe<:ied in 1903, <br />pt"riod of years with noUung done then again in 1904. But It was not <br />In response. relIlspeded for another ~7 yea~ - <br />OccasIOnally, Ul.5JX'CUon reports until 1961. Since then. It has ~n <br />on some dam.'! simply note there checked by dam.safety iMpedor.s <br />was too much snow to pennlt in. 13 IImcs in 20 years, most. recently <br />Silt'dlOllS and there is no rl'COrd 01 in October 1lJ81. <br />any follow,up visits. Allhough slight erosion was <br />"We'\'e got lop-notch people," noted by an In:qle<:tor in 1961, an. <br />Simpson said. "I don't have any other Inspection was not made for <br />problem with lhe quality of the In. 10 y('ars, when nominal seepage <br />speclIOtl.5." was spotted. <br />Dam.safety Inspe<:tors, he said, In 1973. inspector Loul'! DeGrave <br />lISually take a full day elamirung a noled that "due to lad of time, dId <br />dam In meticulous detail. not spend ('nough time lht're to re. <br />"We have them watll. \b(' slopes ally noti~ all the pot.ential stgns of <br />uptilream and downstream looking ~:' <br />for cracks, looking for misallgn. It was more than a year before <br />ments," Sunpson saki. "They look anolhE'r inspecllon was condurted. <br />for sef'page on tht! abutmenlS, lhi.s time durtng 90me construction <br />They look at the oullet works, ' work Intended to improve the dam. <br />They do a number of things. , . . DC5pite those improvements, how~ <br />"When'you go to the trouble of ' ever, inspeCtions have noted per' <br />going to IlK> site, we're not gOing lo sL'rtent ('rosion, cracks and leaks <br />hllf'T}'uplheproce:;s." : smcel9'16. <br />, Only small farm ann h.'ih ponds In two 19811n1>-pertlons, Ute dam <br />with dams less than 10 feel high or was said to be in "rea9Onably good <br />that contalD reservoirs covering condllion," but an analysis <br />leSll than 20 acres or hold less lnan "showed that if eIther embank. <br />1,000 acre.feel 01 water are not re- ment were to fall, the rontenLs of <br />quired by law lo be in:qll'cted by lhe reservoir woukl jeopardize lire <br />the stale _ unless they bec'ome un. and safety on bolh Reaver Cret'k <br />ufe: and South Sl Vrain Creek." <br />or lhe dams under slale jurisdic: The dam was considered in "fair <br />lion, the stale's 5('ven inspectors strIIctural condillon" but "senous- <br />manage about 1,100 in.'lpt'CUons.a ,1y lnadequ<illte, hydrologically. and <br />year _ less than half of what IS un.<;afe"1x><:ause the sptllway IS too <br />requlred by law. small. <br />Of the 100 dams lhalln"~l'f.'Ctors 1be result: Il is on the "unsafe" <br />have decided are dangerous. ac. list, and thE' owners. llighland <br />cord1ng to most recent record.., 37 Ditch Co. and Supply Dltc.h Co" <br />are termed unsafe SImply 1x><:au.se' both of l.ongmonl, are suppo.'led to <br />of tnadt'Cluate spillways. l1wse are study whether It should be en. <br />cun-enUy under study. larged. <br />Another 6Il are conSidered so 1be reservoir is destgned to hold <br />dangerous because of a variety of . 2,230 acre-reet of waler - the <br />faulls _ from deteriorated em. equivalent of water a fool deep <br />bankmel'ltll to leaking foundations 'covertng :2,230 acres of land. II is <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />\ <br />,. <br /> <br />'-" .........- ---,- <br /> <br />COTlSldered a "modrrate" hazanl <br />be<:au.w lkloding could cost some <br />lives and Wipe out a few houses <br />and a stale highway about Smiles <br />downslream. <br /> <br />LUeMoralnellam <br />The .w.root.high, 57o.foot.long <br />dam on Ruxton Creek, along \.he <br />90uth slope or Ute Pikes Peak sy. <br />tern in E1 Paso County,ls deslltDed <br />to Unpound ll22 acre-feel of waleY". <br />It also is considered a "modt'rate" <br />hazard and Is on the "unsafe" 1Isl <br />_ becall.lJeoranlnadcoquate~, <br />, 'iTtwi'danrwu'iHt~Ied' in..... <br />1910 and found to be In good condi- <br />tion. Although some seepage was <br />detected in an Inspection the fol.' <br />lowing year, planned 1nspecUons In <br />late 1m and early 1974 were aban- <br />dont'd because, InspectorS noted, <br />tflen.o was too much snow covertng <br />lhedam. <br />tn mkH9'14, the first inspection <br />inthree~arsnoledmoreseepage. <br />TIle folJowtng year, the 16-foot. <br />wide spillway was deemed lnade. <br />quate and the dam was considered <br />a moderale rWc be<:all5e of possI' <br />ble "significant property damage" <br />downstN'am. in the event of a <br />bi.oavy lhunderstorm. <br />In 1971, a pnvale ronsultant <br />tured by Ole cIty of Colorado <br />Springs, which o....ns the dam, said <br />flooding "rouid conceIvably result <br />in loss 0' human Ufe," <br />In September 1m, a state in. <br />:;pec1.or cllecked the dam, found <br />nothlng:bad~ndoneandrecom. <br />mended the sptllway be widened <br />bKaU6l' ollhe danger. It was not <br />unWAprill979thatthestaleengi. <br />neer sent Colorado Springs om. <br />clalsawamtngletler. <br />The dam Is now on lhe "unsale" <br />Ii'it, The lasl. lnspecUon. in August <br />1981, found seepage at \hE> rate of <br />up to 8g.alJoll5 per mIflutl', The CIty <br />was planning al the lime to in. <br />crease the reservOir's storagl' ca. <br />padty by raising the heighl of the <br />dam. and plans were approved two <br />monUls ago for a larger. loo-root- <br />wide spillway that would cost <br />1600,000. <br /> <br />Waneka Rnervolr <br />The 3Moot.high, t,44~foot-long <br />earthfill dam on South Bou\dtor and <br />Coal cret'ks in Boulder Count)' was <br />bullt in 1881 and apparenOy ret'OO' <br />strIIcted with ImprovemenLs In <br />1909. II is inlended to hold 710 acre- <br />feet of munJctpaI and Industrial <br />waler for lhe dty of Larayt'lle, <br />It was first In:ipecltod in 1970 and <br />classified as "fair" becau.o;e 01 <br />some eroston and the need of malD- <br />tenanet'. Thert' have been II addl- <br />lionallnspecUons In six of the sue. <br />ceroed 11 years, with suctl pro!). <br />lems as erosion, seepage, leaks, <br />inadequale spillway reported eac.h <br />time, <br />In 1978, an in.o;pector noled "ex. <br />tensive pr-operty damage Is en"';. <br />sIont'd If the dam Wf're to fail ina <br />four.hour per1od." Later the same <br />year, another In.<>pedioo found the <br />dam in "rather poor condition" <br />and reromml'nded complete reba. <br />bilJtallon. <br />Although a $60,000 improvement <br />was made, three In.'lpt''<'IIOn.'l in 1979 <br />sUll found such 'problems as large <br />cracks, poor maUltenance, an Ina(i. <br />equate spillway and a congt'sted' <br />Ilpillway channel. . l <br />" '081. ....P'.. w'" "'0/. <br />alld t~ dam slIll was found to be <br />po,,, ,',ondl,tion, By late 1981, pit <br />were belIlg drawn for a $2.1 mlJ <br />rehabililaUon proJKt becau.'it' <br />dam now IS con.';tdenod al <br />bazard" risk and water sto <br />restricted. .: I <br /> <br />Thirty-seven dam. In l;OlOJ....... .,. ........... w.._._ <br />by the atate engIneer because In~lIqU.te $plllway, <br />could lead to po$Sible noexllng, accordIng 10 the <br />laleslrecordll <br />The 37 problem dam' are listed as unsafe "be- <br />C8U" tile IIPmwayll aren't aolhdenUy large to pall <br />1I'Ie runotllTom a probable maltimum precipitation:' <br />Hal O. Simp$O<'l, aS,lllanl Sllte engineer, I18ld_ <br />Although the engineer', listing Is 1I'Ie mo5t recent <br />contained in Ilale recordl, lhe spillways on some <br />dams may heve been enlarged or the dam repaired <br />so Ihat danger haa been IeMened and the dam no <br />Iooger II considered unll8fe, <br /> <br /> <br />mtwOtJn-'\aqJ~ <br />A 'laapPiJltoo(p.JO.).)J <br />i uoa ll1tll asnoll anlfNt <br />pa.I.UJoJUJ IaA """ II 'a3(] <br />1 ~uoJa~Hlq1JA\~ <br />W B,iliS.lolPi awn uoltU. 'S.t\Clq5 <br />ouo.np """ 'I '>>(1 lnoqB <br />AOU~ lnoqB 1S<H1baJ ~unnOJ _ <br />mu suol1P.U(Wou II!T1u;,lod paJd <br />AUJWI!.llUonnoul!'Jlul!!BaUaq'1 <br />J.J()waw . n Gq-'\ '!UJpfay <br /> <br />'IVNOll VN <br /> <br />. UOIlllUlUION ;lJOJ - <br />: '. ;lg Sl{;l;lM OM~ p;lSI\l~ ;l. <br />~pU3: ~illUJ SU1~~UO;) u <br />~d J8AU9(J e41 <br />