My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD11197
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
DayForward
>
1
>
FLOOD11197
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2010 10:12:16 AM
Creation date
12/28/2007 3:47:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Jefferson
Arapahoe
Basin
South Platte
Title
Chatfield Reallocation Study: Meeting Minutes 08/09/2007
Date
8/9/2007
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.
/
8
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 />· A series of 1 a-foot high embankments creates six ponds with <br />a total area of 363 acres. <br />· A series of eight-foot high embankments creates 6 ponds <br />with a total area of 230 acres. <br />· A series of six-foot high embankments creates 6 ponds with <br />a total area of 159 acres. <br />· A series of four-foot high embankments creates 6 ponds with <br />a total area of 93 acres. <br />o South Platte River-A berm at the 5,446' contour could be created <br />to protect a large pond and 22 acres of mature trees. The berm <br />would be a maximum of four foot high and 3,900 feet long. It would <br />have to be 2,700 feet long to protect just the pond. This area is <br />classified as critical habitat for Preble's. <br />. Water rights and fish passage are issues with the embankments. <br />. The impacts on Spring Gulch would need to be assessed before the <br />implementation of any of these options. <br /> <br />USACE and Tetra Tech FRlEIS Chapter Updates <br />. Chapter 1 (Purpose and Need) Betty Peake reported that the Corps has <br />a draft of this chapter and is currently checking on a few things before it <br />will be handed over to Tetra Tech for modification. Tom Browning added <br />that the State and Corps will resolve any issues before it is given to Tetra <br />Tech. He reiterated that he is not intending to keep people in the dark- <br />they are just trying to take care of issues before it goes to Tetra Tech. <br />. Chapter 2 (Alternatives) The Water Users revisions to this chapter were <br />recently received by the Corps, and they are reviewing. They are <br />currently working on some economics issues that Gene Sturm addressed <br />later in the meeting. <br />. Chapter 3 (Affected Environment) A draft of this chapter has been sent <br />to Tetra Tech and updates are in progress. Gary Orendel said that Tetra <br />Tech is adding information on the no action alternative and gravel pits. He <br />is looking for GIS files with the locations of the proposed gravel pits. At <br />this point there are no plans to do field work for the no action alternative- <br />they are just asking agencies for existing information. <br />. Chapter 4 (Environmental Consequences) The sections in this chapter <br />are drafted and will be updated when the contract modification is received. <br />This includes a number of sections (water quality, wildlife, fisheries, <br />vegetation). <br />o Participant question: Will Chapter 4 be sent out separately or will it <br />be included in the draft? Tom Browning replied that there is not a <br />general consensus on when it should come out and that the <br />schedule for the release of Chapter 4 will be decided in the August <br />2151 meeting. Katie Fendel proposed to see the chapter separately <br />before the rest of the draft comes out. <br /> <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.