My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD11149
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
DayForward
>
1
>
FLOOD11149
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2010 10:12:12 AM
Creation date
12/26/2007 3:42:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Jefferson
Arapahoe
Basin
South Platte
Title
Chatfield Reallocation Study: Meeting Minutes 06/22/2005
Date
6/22/2005
Prepared For
Meeting Participants
Prepared By
CWCB
Floodplain - Doc Type
Meeting Summary
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />- 3 - <br /> <br />. At the onset of this study the Corps will develop a tour of the South Platte River. They hope <br />that a smaller working group will be formed from the larger group to assist in the final scoping <br />process. <br />. The primary goal is to inventory and forecast natural resources relevant to instream flow and <br />develop a 50-year outlook for the study reach. Any new storage releases for downstream <br />purposes need to be considered to the best of our ability. The work group will help identify <br />habitat types and some sort of ecosystem units affected for the analysis. <br />. A HEC-RAS model was developed as a side product of the study to produce new floodplain <br />information for counties and undeveloped areas that previously had none. There will be a Corps <br />of Engineers presentation to Weld County and the State within the next 30 days. <br />. The Corps will use this HEC-RAS model to evaluate downstream releases to create a depth and <br />velocity grid for analysis. <br />. The 1996 Mayor's Instream Flow Report recommended 60-85 cfs at certain times during the <br />year and alSO cfs flow for special periods. The analysis would study wintertime and <br />summertime goals and tied to wildlife indicator species. <br />. Other data available for this study is the 1990s Audubon Society vegetation survey to <br />determine foliage benefits. <br />. The Corps' Tri Lakes office received a letter from Ray Sperger of South Platte Park that was <br />recommendations that should be considered as well. <br />. In this study there will be a mid point analysis and the study process will strive to find a way to <br />optimize the alternatives. <br />. Rick McLoud stated that this second study would be very detailed and may lower the costs but <br />that the interest parties need to go revisit this, agree, and see if it makes sense to do this. Its <br />possible that for an investment of $561,200 or $857,900 to do the environmental restoration <br />study water users could get some, part, or all of the $24 million in storage space costs that <br />could be waived. The Upstream and Downstream Water Users Groups need a dialogue about <br />the merits and recommendation for going forward with the environmental restoration add on. <br />. This study should be of federal interest and it would be good if evidence of public and <br />environmental support is conveyed for the efforts of the Downstream Group. <br />. Frank McNulty, Assistant Director, Department of natural resources explained that the <br />"Department" oversees the Division of Wildlife, State Parks, and the CWCB and needs to be <br />involved in future meetings and studies. <br />. Marty Timmerwilke, Corps Project Manger, went over the study costs and how the Corps could <br />pay 65% of the storage space costs for the environmental restoration benefit. The Corps is <br />unsure how much of the 10,000 AF can be allocated to ecosystem restoration and they won't <br />know unless the environmental restoration study is funded and completed. <br />. Ralph Roza, Corps Chief of Planning, stated that the Corps would build in decision points or <br />break points in this analysis. The Corps can discontinue the study if deemed that that <br />environmental restoration on the South Platte is not merited for Corps credit. Adding the <br />WRDA language would be helpful to FCSA which has the language "fish and wildlife habitat <br />and enchantment" protection for added clarity regarding Corps authorities. Should the <br />"Environmental Restoration" task be formed under this authority. In the future the Corps will <br />need to ask their lawyers for interpretation. If this new language is added to the 2005 WRDA <br />Bill then we don't have to face that question. By having it defined in WRDA it will save time <br />down the road in the sense that "identified as a project purpose". Then it will only require a <br />letter to the Corps Assistant Secretary for final approval. This will save three to six months in <br />time. However if we are going this route the language in WRDA is not essential just preferable. <br /> <br />Flood Protection . Water Project Planning and Finance. Stream and Lake Protection <br />Water Supply Protection. Conservation Planning <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.