Laserfiche WebLink
<br />damage during the 1984 floods were successfui and were needed <br />since that flood was about a 40-year event. <br /> <br />. Existing flood control conditions at the Riverside <br />community are of concern. The material which was left from the <br />1984 emergency flood fight has been windrowed along the riverbank <br />in about a 4-foot-high and 2-foot-wide (at the crown) berm. This <br />material could be viewed as providing some degree of flood <br />protection by local interests; however, the berm is not <br />engineered, and the stability of the berm during a flood has not <br />been proven. Reliance on this windrowed material for flood <br />protection could provide the area with a false sense of security <br />regarding flood control capability. Should a significant flood <br />breach the berm, a serious event could occur which would not <br />likely to cause loss of life, result in significant damage to <br />structures and contents. <br /> <br />. Potential environmental and health problems could occur <br />during a severe flood at the Rosevale community. The sewerage <br />for over 60 houses in the lOO-year flood plain is handled by <br />septic tanks of suspect stability, reliability, and <br />watertightness. The combination of potential uplift pressures <br />and inundation during a severe flood could compromise the <br />systems, potentially causing environmental and health-related <br />problems from leaking sewage. <br /> <br />. The various alternative plans described in this report <br />are not economically justified. <br /> <br />. Plans outlined in this report have been coordinated <br />throughout the study with representatives of Mesa County and the <br />city of Grand Junction. Representatives from both entities have <br />been informed that no economically viable solution for flood <br />control could be developed. copies of this report will be <br />provided to the local sponsor. <br /> <br />l6 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />