Laserfiche WebLink
t <br />Greg Walcher I understand that maybe my question isn't clear what I am suggesting is that you have <br />the ability to design something that works in Golden with the amount of water that's there without saying <br />this won't work unless we stop something that's already happening upstream. <br />Gary Lacy Again I don't know what's upstream I don't know going to happen upstream or what's <br />happening now it's just looking at the flow and that gradient that stream channel that width and picking <br />that design flow and how that water gets there I am usually not involve with that one. <br />Bill Brown I think the real essence of the problem we are struggling with is the fact that without some <br />kind of protection be it the CWCB, minimum stream flow or some kind or a recreational flow there is a <br />possibility under Colorado water law that that stream will be totally dewatered. Therefore the recreational <br />amenity that you would be able to would be a roller skating rink or something. And so that would be, <br />what you are looking, you are going to have to have some amount of water and we are wrestling with the <br />way to make sure that amount of water can be there without impacting, in my view, traditional concepts <br />of Colorado water law. <br />Eric. Wilkinson — I have got Patti next. <br />Patty Wells To clarify, I think let me ask this as my understating. When you go in to design a water <br />feature you look at the river as it exists at the time you are asked to design...you look at the hydrograph <br />and I would assume you wouldn't design something for a flow that doesn't exist. <br />Gary Lacy Correct. <br />Patti Wells Because you would have built something and it wouldn't do anybody any good you look at <br />the existing hydrograph, generally speaking, which is not how it µ in 1850 let me just clarify that. <br />Gary Lacy Correct. <br />Patty Wells So that you try to build something that's useful to the entity that's paying you to design it <br />and that would be based on the existing hydrograph then the question then the issues as Bill points out is <br />what happens next, after it's designed. Does something happen upstream does something happen <br />downstream and so on and so forth. But you as a designer have to look at the existing today conditions <br />today and I am going to design to that trying to maximize the best days so that this water course will have <br />good days as often as possible. <br />Gary Lacy That's accurate. <br />Eric Wilkinson We have time for I think two more questions, Steve. <br />Steve Glazer To get Gary to get at what I think Greg Walcher was talking about was that if there is a <br />certain type of characteristic of a stream segment and there is x amount of water in it. It would create a <br />class three type of rating on that stream where as if there µ•as v amount of water in it, it might create a <br />class five character stream. I mean, I think that's what, I think µ•hat Greg is talking about....and you <br />know if there's a certain amount of water in stream what's the minimum that needed to not be in conflict <br />with other uses? We need to figure out what kind of experience µ are talking about where is if there's <br />more water in the stream it would create a different experience. Unless I don't understand how <br />recreational classifications of streams are determined as far as Class ? or Class 5. I mean doesn't the <br />amount of water in it change the experience. <br />