Laserfiche WebLink
<br />5) Discussion Item: Water Quality Analysis <br />. Gary sent out an email summarizing the conference call they had with the <br />Chatfield Watershed Authority. They discussed how to tighten the <br />brackets around the water quality issues without having to do a costly <br />modeling study. Rick said that the Cooperators have not had time to form <br />a response to the summary email. He added that he hoped there could be <br />a little more work on the balance between worst case and no affect. Rick <br />told Eric that the Cooperators like what he is proposing but they are not <br />sure if there is money to move forward on anything that was discussed in <br />the conference call. <br />. Eric agreed that funds were dwindling but the additional $100,000 cost <br />share from the CWCB will be used towards resolving the water quality <br />issues. The conference call gave him the feeling that there are not many <br />adverse impacts that would warrant any future detailed studies. Eric <br />added that from a NEPA standpoint the water quality data modelling effort <br />is satisfactory. From a comfort level and the Watershed Authority side it <br />would be good to tighten things up. He feels it makes sense to move <br />forward with a limited scope study but noted that this will trigger a contract <br />modification with Tetra Tech so they can do the extra work. He is thinking <br />in the $20,000 range versus a very detailed study in the $300,000 range. <br />The Chatfield Watershed Authority has 20 years of data to help create a <br />baseline. <br />. Rick said that within two weeks he will get a unified answer from the <br />Chatfield Watershed Authority as to how to proceed with the proposed <br />revisions to the water quality study. <br />. Bill Ruzzo (Denver Botanic Gardens at Chatfield) stated that from his <br />experience with Cherry Creek that it has taken years and thousands of <br />dollars to try to answer water quality issues. He does not think that the <br />Chatfield issues can be answered in the timeframe they are looking at. <br />Eric said that he understands this concern but the brackets they are <br />looking at are very large and thinks that the adaptive management <br />approach will cover the potential upcoming issues. <br /> <br />6) Discussion Item: Public Relations (PR) Firm <br />. Eric does not feel that hiring a PR firm is a conflict with the tasks that Tetra <br />Tech is performing. The information sheet that Tetra Tech put together <br />should be readied for distribution on a bigger scale-20,000 copies will be <br />distributed to Park visitors. <br />. Ann said that she feels the title of the information sheet is unclear and the <br />maps are inadequate. Eric doesn't mind if the document is changed a <br />little but it has to be clear that this is just a study at this point. <br />. Katie said that she has been informed that the City of Brighton believes <br />that it is premature to hire a PR firm and Brighton will not fund the contract <br />at this point. <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />Tetra Tech <br />