Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00il992 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />4. Review and utilize hydrology developed by U.S. Army Corps of <br />Engineers, and hydraulic calculations for the f10odplain/f100dway by <br />Greiner Engineering Sciences. <br /> <br />5. Complete the hydraulic analysis of Cherry Creek to determine the <br />capacity and general condition of all drainage features. <br /> <br />6. Defi ne drai nage probl ems and flood hazards for the purpose of <br />formulating alternatives. <br /> <br />7. Prepare hydraulic calculations to evaluate the best alternative <br />plans. <br /> <br />8. Rev i ew and evaluate impacts of present Federal Emergency Ma nagement <br />Agency (FEMA) policies. <br /> <br />9. Consider operation and maintenance aspects of the best alternatives. <br /> <br />10. Perform a qual itative analysis of the river morphology and <br />sedimentation characteristics. <br /> <br />11. Consi der impact of each alternative on the water qua 1 ity in the <br />basin. <br /> <br />12. Conduct a benefit/cost analysis for the alternatives. <br /> <br />13. Prepare a report summarizing the above work. <br /> <br />During the course of the work, two major changes to the scope of services <br />occurred. First, the benefit/cost analysis effort (item 12) was reduced from <br />that specified by the contract due to the problems associated with identifying <br />land values for each parcel. Alternatives were compared on the basis of costs <br />and a qualitative analysis for each benefit was performed to aid in the review <br />of the a lternat i ves. Second, due to the potent i al impact of the selected <br />alternative on the existing Aurora well field and other wells in the area, the <br /> <br />-2- <br />