Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />with local contractors revealed that actually disconnecting <br />utilities, raising the structure from the foundation, and <br />reconnecting utilities would be a relatively constant cost for a <br />typical frame structure regardless of the amount of elevation <br />needed. The variable costs would be incurred due to the <br />extension of the foundation or stemwall to the level needed. <br />Residual damages with this alternative would include damages to <br />streets and utilities and cleanup of sediment and debris after a <br />flood. <br /> <br />(2) Rosevale. - <br /> <br />Alternative #l. - Alternative #l consists of <br />elevating Rosevale Road to serve as a flood protection levee for <br />the bulk of the Rosevale community and tying the westerly end of <br />Rosevale Road to high ground via a 700-foot-Iong tieback levee. <br />Rosevale Road would need to be raised a maximum of about 6 feet <br />at one point. Total length of modification would be about 3,500 <br />feet. The maximum height of the tieback levee would be about <br />5 feet. The tieback levee would also protect properties from No <br />Thoroughfare Canyon Creek which typically floods due to <br />thunderstorms near the Colorado National Monument. Further <br />studies may reveal that additional diking along the westerly side <br />of No Thoroughfare Canyon Creek may also be needed, or the <br />structures on that side of the creek may also need to be <br />elevated. In addition to the raised road and levee, the <br />structures on the riverside of Rosevale Road would need to be <br />elevated above the 100-year flood level. Analysis indicates that <br />elevating structures is more economical than outright purchase. <br />This structural/nonstructural solution would protect the Rosevale <br />community from inundation only. Concern has been expressed by <br />Mesa County that continued erosion of the riverbank could reach <br />inhabited areas. Therefore, it may be more desirable in the long <br />run to purchase the structures on the riverside of Rosevale Road <br />to allow the river to migrate without endangering structures. <br /> <br />Alternative #2. - Alternative #2 consists of <br />purchasing all structures in Rosevale which are located within <br />the 100-year flood plain. This nonstructural alternative was <br />developed to determine the cost of acquiring structures in an <br />area where the utility infrastructure is incomplete. Potential <br />environmental problems in addition to flood damages could be <br />faced in a severe flood in the Rosevale community. currently, <br />all residential structures in Rosevale by the river are serviced <br />by individual septic tanks. Most of the residential structures <br />in the area are very modest, with owners generally earning modest <br />incomes. Local agencies have expressed concern about the level <br />of maintenance of sanitary facilities in the Rosevale area. <br />Concern has also been voiced about the potential environmental <br />and health problems which could occur if a large flood inundates <br />the Rosevale area, which has numerous suspect sanitary <br />facilities. <br /> <br />l3 <br />