My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD11154
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
DayForward
>
1
>
FLOOD11154
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2010 10:12:13 AM
Creation date
12/28/2007 3:39:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Jefferson
Arapahoe
Basin
South Platte
Title
Chatfield Reallocation Study: Agenda 09/23/2007
Date
9/23/2007
Prepared For
Meeting Participants
Prepared By
CWCB
Floodplain - Doc Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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 />. Corps involvement with environmental and recreation mitigation <br />o 100% non-federal expenditures for mitigation <br />implementation <br />o Corps will need to be involved, at minimum, for approval <br />and oversight <br />o Corps may not need to direct or lead the mitigation <br />activities <br />o Corps basic duty is to ensure that mitigation happens, not <br />necessarily implement <br />o O&M funding may be used to pay Corps staff for their <br />involvement <br />o Corps costs could be wrapped up into the Water User costs <br />for total, long-term O&M <br />o PDT RECOMMENDATION - Corps involvement in <br />mitigation should be limited to oversight, review, and <br />approval, funded by the sponsor, although this may need <br />further review by Corps Office of Counsel, especially as <br />related to the relocation or modification of Corps facilities. <br />It is unlikely that Corps O&M funding would be provided <br />for Corps participation until reallocation and mitigation <br />activities are complete. The Reallocation Study would lay <br />out a conceptual plan for mitigation, detailed enough to <br />highlight the acres that would be rnitigated, where they <br />most likely would be mitigated, what the estimated cost <br />would be for the mitigation, and the type of OMRR&R that <br />would be required to ensure mitigation is sufficiently <br />completed. A highly detailed plan for mitigation would not <br />be cornpleted until the design phase is cornpleted, at 100% <br />non-Federal expense. <br /> <br />. Timing of mitigation actions and ability to store water <br />o What amount of storage, if any, can take place before <br />mitigation is completed? <br />o Can Water Users take advantage of some space concurrent <br />with mitigation? <br />o Recreational features will need to be moved before they are <br />flooded in the 12' zone <br />o Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliance to ensure <br />critical habitat replacernent prior to inundation <br />o PDT RECOMMENDATION - So long as recreational <br />features (buildings, etc) are removed from flooding hazard, <br />mitigation construction activities are not hindered by the <br />water in the reallocated space, and we can maintain <br />compliance with ESA, and there would be no adverse <br />impacts on other project purposes, water storage should be <br />allowed to occur if the opportunity arises. We should also <br /> <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.