Laserfiche WebLink
<br />"-:1' <br />C\l <br />.... <br />C) <br /> <br />, ; <br /> <br />CHAPTER IV - CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION <br /> <br />-' <br /> <br />Activities SummarY <br /> <br />The FEIS on the Grand valley Unit presents details of public <br />involvement activities for planning the Unit. A Coordinating <br />Committee was formed to coordinate salinity control studies and to <br />disseminate information to the public. Formal environmental <br />scoping meetings were held in 1982 in Fruita and Clifton, Colorado. <br /> <br />In February 1991, Reclamation held two open houses for all <br />landowners adjacent to the Government Highline Canal in the east <br />end of the Grand Valley (Reach 1). Approximately 75 landowners met <br />with Reclamation representatives. Concerns voiced included: the <br />amount of additional fee land to be purchased for the widened, <br />membrane-lined canal, the amount of temporary right-of-way needed <br />to construct the project, discrepancies between Reclamation and <br />landowner's land surveys, impacts of proposed fencing, and bridge <br />removal. <br /> <br />In March 1991, Reclamation issued a news release announcing the <br />start of construction activities on the Government Highline Canal. <br />These activities included appraisers arranging meetings with <br />landowners for the purpose of exchanging information related to <br />their appraisals. <br /> <br />In an April 1991 news release, Reclamation announced that the width <br />of the fee land acquisition requirements for the east end canal <br />lining would be reduced by 20 feet, from 45 feet to 25 feet. This <br />decision followed re-evaluation of the design for the membrane <br />lining within the corridor, and was in response to input from the <br />landowners at the open houses. <br /> <br />Following the above decision to modify design of the lining for the <br />east end to reduce fee land acquisition needs, Reclamation <br />continued to receive letters from state legislators, organizations <br />and individuals (indicated by **'s after their name on Attachment <br />A). These letters requested Reclamation to further evaluate <br />alternatives for the canal lining that would avoid widening of the <br />canal corridor, especially in prime or unique peach orchards and <br />grape vineyards in the palisade area, and concerns with the impacts <br />of fencing and access increased. <br /> <br />On June 21, 1991, a draft EA was distributed to agencies, <br />organizations, and individuals listed in Attachment A. During the <br />30-day comment period, all landowners (approximately 200) adjacent <br />to the east end of the Government Highline canal (Reach 1) were <br />notified by telephone or by letter of the importance of supplying <br />the Bureau of Reclamation with their preferences (including the No- <br />Action Alternative) for lining the canal. In addition, Reclamation <br />participated in a public hearing held by the Mesa County Planning <br /> <br />35 <br />