Laserfiche WebLink
<br />\ <br /> <br />17 <br /> <br />Cherry Creek Dam Reconstruction: <br />Why an Independent Review is Needed <br /> <br />Overview <br />Using studies supplied by the National Weather Service, the U.S. Army Corps <br />of Engineers has concluded that the Cherry Creek Dam must be reconstructed <br />in order to prevent extensive destruction in the event of a massive flood. The <br />proposed modifications to the earthen dam will cost from $50 million to $250 <br />million and displace many residents of Arapahoe and Douglas Counties from <br />their homes and businesses. <br /> <br />The significant costs and substantial public disruptions would, of course, be <br />justified in order to prevent the loss of life and property, But, the problem is <br />this: The probability that Cherry Creek Dam will fail appears to be so remote <br />as to be non-existent. Studies ofthe Cherry Creek Basin by the U.S. <br />Geological Survey conclude that a flood of the magnitude of the one <br />predicted has not occurred in at least the past 10,000 years. (It's impossible <br />for geologists to determine if such a flood occurred earlier than 10,000 years <br />ago.) <br /> <br />The Army Corps of Engineers based its conclusions on a seriously flawed <br />study of rainfall patterns by the National Weather Service. The study is poor <br />science based on faulty and inconsistent assumptions and outdated <br />information. To cause so much disruption and public alarm on the basis of <br />such questionable work is irresponsible. <br /> <br />What is needed is an independent and comprehensive peer review of the <br />National Weather Service study, The highly regarded Colorado Water <br />Conservation Board has offered to oversee and contribute toward the cost of <br />such a study. The State Legislature overwhelmingly approved a resolution <br />backing an independent review and the city of Greenwood Village has already <br />appropriated $25,000 toward the estimated $150,000 cost of the study. <br /> <br />Professional, independent peer reviews are used by the Colorado State <br />Engineer, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and others in such <br />situations. They are common practice, particularly when so much is at stake. <br />It is simply common sense to seek the best professional analysis possible <br />before making a decision that will have such a momentous impact on so many <br />people. <br /> <br />I <br />