My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD11206
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
DayForward
>
1
>
FLOOD11206
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2010 10:12:17 AM
Creation date
12/28/2007 3:51:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Jefferson
Arapahoe
Basin
South Platte
Title
Chatfield Reallocation Study: Meeting Minutes 11/06/2007
Date
11/6/2007
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.
/
23
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 />Dan: Need to go back to original 1950 document. <br /> <br />Rick: Weare talking about an authority being formed as well, of the 15 entities. Could <br />that be the entity that the Corps deals with, obtains the storage space, and coordinates the <br />mitigation? <br /> <br />Dan: Then you had better be talking with us. We would contract with the Corps and <br />then contract with the entities. <br /> <br />Rick: There could be several alternative alignments of this group, but we are going after <br />legislation here that has a certain impact statewide as it relates to the overall role the <br />CWCB may play in this and other projects. Time to talk through all the alternatives. <br /> <br />Dan: I'm confused. Are you saying now? <br /> <br />Britta(?) (next to Rod) We are going to be talking more about our thoughts about this <br />entity. <br /> <br />Rod: Are you proposing the same functions Dan is proposing here, a separate entity? <br /> <br />(?) A separate entity could assume some of this. We should toss on table and discuss. <br /> <br />Britta (?) (Woman next to Rod): This is a new entity, group can decide who will fill it, if <br />you don't get the authority will this entity be a safety net behind it? Not assume it <br />automatically asserts this, but it could be a fall back position. <br /> <br />Dan: You need to look at the original statute, any other than the State, an amendment to <br />that original Chatfield document would be needed, and need to alert the Corps, their EIS <br />is based on State being contracting entity. <br /> <br />Rick: Must be involved to end of approval process, whether involved beyond that is the <br />question. All look at this. To the ROD, clearly talks about this will only happen with <br />coordination with DNR. You are the entity that leads the state and local entities to lead to <br />the point of reallocation. <br /> <br />Sandy: Was that a study resolution? That is different from a project authorization? <br /> <br />Rick: Section 808, 1986, specific to Chatfield. 1950 says yes you can do it, 1986 says <br />you can do it, but use State. <br /> <br />Sandy: A sponsor makes the request, they are the one included in the study resolution. <br /> <br />Rick: So does that sponsor have to be the entity to get the storage space? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.