BOARD00325

• Board Meeting Date: 1/30/1980
• Description: Agenda and Minutes
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

.

.

.

49

1 and the other circumstances. We have put where there is no

2 public access--

3 MR. VANDEMOER: But you didn't al~ow subdivision.

4 MR. SPARKS: Those were existing reservoirs where we

5 had to make repairs because of the safety inspections by the

6 State Engineer. There are other cases where we have resisted

7 public access and namely over on the Ute Water Conservation

8 District, for their domestic uses. So you just have to evalu-

9 ate each case. That's what I'm saying. We have built--we

10 have two under construction today where we would have insisted

11 that they be open. But others we may not insist.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

MR. VANDEMOER: But you could have no public access,

and at the same time you would not leave it to the benefit of

the property owners to have the use of the reservoir for pri-

vate use, would you?

MR. SPARKS: If there was recreational potential

there, we would have insisted upon it being open, but this we

do in cooperation with the Division of Wildlife and Parks.

Now, we--say the Division of wildlife has, they've got to put

in some money. As a matter of fact, part of the justification

for this Meadows project is the recreational potential. In

many cases, it is an important part of your benefits to the

project. So you can't have the benefits on the one hand and

deny public access on the other.

MR. KROEGER: Mr. Chairman, I think the recommen-