Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. , <br /> <br />~ II <br /> <br />'DRAA <br />MEETING MINUTES <br /> <br />Cherry Creek Dam Sa1fety Study <br /> <br />Working Group MeE!ting #4 <br />By the Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />January 7, 2000 <br /> <br />These minutes summarize the key issues for the January 5, 2000 Cherry Creek technical <br />meeting #4 located at the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. <br /> <br />Attendance <br />Participants in the fields of meteorology, hydrology, and hydraulics as well as local politicians <br />and interested parties attended the meeting. Attendees were: Larry Lang, Tom Browning, <br />Jack Byers, Bill Miller, Ed Tomlinson, John Henz, and Bob McGregor. Ben Urbonas, Doug <br />Morris, Don Morrison, and Bob Jarrett provided comments via telephone either before or after <br />the meeting. A copy of the Working Group directory can be obtained from the Colorado <br />Water Conservation Board. <br /> <br />Key Discussions <br />Larry Lang explained the contents of the meeting #3 minutes to the group. Comments were <br />noted and recorded. The Corps of Engineers (Bill Miller) provided comments and clarification <br />statements to amend the meeting minutes. Miller's comments were: <br /> <br />1. The Corps has not given up hope that a joint technical review could take place for the <br />Cherry Creek PMP study. The Corps is interested in cooperating with the Working <br />Group. <br /> <br />2. The Corps is bound to rely on the National Weather Service for meteorological analysis <br />and study results under existing policies. <br /> <br />3. Clarification that a "cooperative" independent PMP review could be done and would be <br />acceptable to the Corps. A "joint" review implies joint funding by federal and non-federal <br />interests, which would require a lengthy and inflexible federal contracting process. <br /> <br />4. Bill took exception to the comment about "group members noted that the Corps does not <br />seem to be willing to listen to local concerns." Bm believes that the Corps is indeed <br />listening, however the Corps is simply not in agreement with the Working Group. The <br />Corps was "not convinced" that the local/state opinions were correct. However, the Corps <br />will listen to comments. <br /> <br />1 <br />