Laserfiche WebLink
<br />impacts to the Prebles Meadow Jumping Mouse on Plum Creek, South Platte River and the reservoir <br />areas. There also may be impacts to fisheries by altering the levels of the reservoir. We have also worked <br />on inventorying cultural and archeological resources but the issues will be minor. We will be working on <br />recreational cost impact analysis. The potential costs with raisings the reservoir are: the marina, bike <br />trails, beaches, and road inundation and others. Foster Wheeler will work with State Parks and put actual <br />dollar costs together. We have GIS and aerial maps and have located recreation facilities and <br />underground utilities. GIS maps have shown inundation to 9 feet above conservation pool, but we may go <br />higher if needed. We will work to show facility lost to total inundation and partial inundation. Corps did <br />a remapping of the area and Foster Wheeler incorporated an overlay in GIS to figure out qualitative <br />aspects. This is a working database that is very graphical. Once models are done we can figure out <br />impacts to various resources. <br /> <br />Chatfield Reservoir Reallocation Website (Larry Lang and discussion by all) <br />We will need to post some type of flow chart, scope of work and timelines, adjusted completion dates. <br />Many outside interests have asked us for information and this will help inform them. Meeting dates and <br />minutes need to be put up and we will make it more obvious to find the webpage. Once we get into <br />recreational aspects many will visit the website. We will create links with Corps and State Parks to the <br />study. There will be link to reports and the progress reports (the minutes). The study components need to <br />be shown as a flow diagram. Reports will become available as we progress on the timeline. Published <br />reports will be the cutoff. We need to list contacts with the Corps, CWCB and the general contractor, <br />with logos. This will help interested parties get the feel of the magnitude of the study. Parks will be <br />selected as a contractor for the recreational study. We will need an official project sponsor once the study <br />is done. Study sponsor is CWCB, water interests will get there day. Robert Simons will send CWCB <br />other information for the website. <br /> <br />News release <br />We need a news release regarding study activities after it has been approved by the Corps and DNR. This <br />may stimulate public response and is this will be an opportunity to capture public comment. Someones <br />email will need to be published to keep good records of the comments. <br /> <br />The Hvdrolol!.V Model (George Cotton, Earth Surface systems - subcontractor) <br />Reservoir routing and models ready to get input. There is broad hydrologic modeling for the Project that <br />is driven by Tri lakes, Bear Creek Cherry Creek and Chatfield Reservoir. The proposal is to store <br />additional water at Chatfield. We will have to work with operational rules and flood control manuals for <br />those three reservoirs. By the Denver gauge we notice the influence of all three reservoirs. We have a <br />whole lot of inflows once we leave Chatfield that complicate the model. There are 200 square miles of <br />drainage from Chatfield to Denver gauge. At Chatfield we have added subroutines that address the <br />operational rules that occur at Chatfield in relations to the other dams. What is lacking is the bypasses <br />that are need to be aimed at downstream users and Denver's operations. Denver controls the top 10,000 <br />acre-feet they operate with a trade from Strontia Reservoir, and that is not in the model now. There is <br />whole bunch of water that goes through Chatfield that doesn't stay (90% leaves for other purposes). The <br />model doesn't see downstream water rights right now. Denver Water Board has run detailed analysis from <br />1947 to 1991 years (45 years). They also have conditional decrees and contractual arrangements. We <br />will need a graphic of the acre-feet in the pool. New model will refine the hand written model. We have <br />to determine the level of flood protection required in the reservoir. Do we want to go from 800 years to <br />300 years protection or do we keep it at the present capacity. The questions are: Impacts to flooding, and <br />to water users? What water do we have to play with? Is there a scenario where we could develop and <br />utilize that storage? Do a simple description of downstream flood impacts. Within the safety parameters <br />then we simply reallocate. Downstream of Henderson there are more flood impacts, north of Adams <br />County there are more flood issues, the Denver reach has built up capacity. Presently, these three dams <br />