Study of water behaviors a must in dam debate

A recent editorial in the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette about the ongoing debate about the future of the Lake Bella Vista Park recognizes that before agreeing to a side-channel lake concept, a hydrology study is a must. As the editorial said, “Nobody in this debate wants to spend millions of dollars on a solution only to find out it doesn’t work.”

The hydrology study is the river project equivalent of a credit report for a bank loan. Before handing over the check, the bank uses the information in the credit report as a part of its basic due diligence. The hydrology study is the due diligence for the design and planning process for water projects because it determines feasibility by addressing important issues like the thermal impact to the water that is discharged from a side-channel lake back into the creek and whether that would impact aquatic life. The information from a hydrology study also shows the flood plain area surrounding the side-channel lake and allows us to better determine maintenance costs. Based on the stream’s composition, a hydrology study would provide important data about sediment transport into the impounded area, which would help us understand how often it might need to be dredged to keep the desired aesthetics of the area.

Since there are no natural lakes in the Ozarks, whenever water is impounded to make a reservoir, some sort of dam, levy or berm is required. A hydrology study would help the city determine if the berms should be earthen or concrete or some combination that would be able to withstand major flood events without being compromised.

A hydrology study before a recommendation ensures that the expenses associated with engineering, permitting, constructing and maintaining an off-channel reservoir are justified and reasonable.

A simple plan, while the hydrologists prepare the report, would be to:

1. Place a new span bridge downstream from the dam to connect the two-mile loop

2. Begin the permitting process for the removal of the remains of the failed dam on Little Sugar Creek.

3. Whatever remains of the 3.5 million in FEMA funding, spend it on park improvements like bathrooms or parking lot repairs.

This would get the project going and provide a basis for adding improved park facilities in future phases of the plan.

GREG VAN HORN

Bentonville