Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Selection of Appropri... Meaaur.. . <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />5.4 Selection of Appropriate Measures - <br /> <br />As discussed in Chapter IV, identifying the cause(s) of bank loss is the first critical step <br />in the resolution of erosion problems. The purpose of making this identification is to <br />support the second critical step; selection of appropriate remedial measures. Selection of <br />a good alternative requires the evaluation of many factors. It is not always a simple or <br />clear process, but is a necessary one. This section discusses some of the factors to be <br />considered and one procedure for making the selection. <br /> <br />5.4.1 Factors to Consider. <br /> <br />Once several technically feasible solutions have been identified, a final selection is <br />usually made on the basis of other factors. These factors vary with project type, <br />location, and project proponent, but the following is a presentation of some factors <br />which are common to most erosion contrul projects: <br /> <br />a. Cost - The acid test for most projects, economics for each alternative must be <br />evaluated. This includes maintenance as well as design and construction costs. Structure <br />life should be considered as well. <br /> <br />b. Constructability - If a proposed alternative cannot be constructed, there is no reason <br />to consider it further. This can be a limiting factor for many alternatives. <br />Constructability problems may arise due to a poor foundation, high streamflow, <br />inclement weather, lack of equipment or expertise, time requirements, or any of the <br />other reasons listed herein. <br /> <br />c. Material Availability - A good source of inexpensive material can often make an <br />otherwise inferior alternative the most desirable. Conversely, material inaccessibility or <br />cost may make a preferred alternative probibitive. <br /> <br />d. Environmental Affect. Discussed in further detail in Chapter 6, this factor is often <br />the most limiting of all. The proposed alternatives must not adversely effect the <br />environment, or the approval processes will likely kill the projecl. <br /> <br />e. Maintenance Requirements - Often overlooked, maintenance requirements for many <br />alternatives will be significant. If the resources to perform the required maintenance do <br />not exist, a different alternative should be selected Chapter 7 discusses maintenance. <br /> <br />f. Floodplain Restrictions - It is always a good idea to minimize the impact a project <br />may have on flood profiles, In some cases, federal and state regulations limit the <br />permissible backwater affects. The Colorado Water Conservation Board can be <br />contacted for applicable limitations. <br /> <br />It <br /> <br />g. Permit Requirements. Placement of fill material of any type below the ordinary high <br />water mark on a waterway requires a permit. Some alternatives may not be permittable <br />in your area. Conversely, there may be certain types of activities for which general, <br />regional, or nationwide permits have been developed. Alternatives within the <br />framewor\c of these permits have the advantage of pre-approval and streamlined <br />response time. This is discussed further in Appendix E. <br /> <br />COlorado Erosion Control Manual <br /> <br />63 <br />