My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1997-06-07_REVISION - M1981302
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1981302
>
1997-06-07_REVISION - M1981302
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/9/2022 4:18:01 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 9:31:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1981302
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
6/7/1997
Doc Name
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES RAISED BY THE BOULDER CNTY COMMISSIONERS IN CORRESPONDENCE DATED 4-17-97 WESTERN
From
DMG
To
FILE
Type & Sequence
AM2
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Memo to Gregg Squire -2- June 10 , 1997 <br /> unpredicted flood behavior" referenced by Dr. Bunin occurs in the <br /> area north of the Deepe Farm Pit where overbank flows, during the <br /> one percent annual chance flood, on the west side of South Boulder <br /> Creek would approach the turnpike cloverleaf and spill into <br /> developed areas to the north. To my knowledge, the extent of <br /> flooding that may be expected in these neighborhoods has never been <br /> delineated, and certainly wasn' t addressed in the Greenhorne and <br /> O'Mara study. The presence of the Deepe Farm Pit perimeter levee <br /> directs a greater percentage of any South Boulder Creek overbank <br /> flow toward the turnpike bridge over South Boulder Creek, thus the <br /> flood inundation in neighborhoods north of the turnpike would be <br /> less with the levee than without the levee, all other factors <br /> remaining equal . Based on this analysis, the Division' s <br /> preliminary finding is that the operator' s proposal to incorporate <br /> the levee into final reclamation of the Deepe Farm Pit, through the <br /> application for technical revision TR-006 , will not cause damage to <br /> adjoining property. Since this is the finding called for by <br /> statute at 34-32 . 5-116 (4) (b) , and the results of the pending <br /> Taggart study are not needed to make this finding, the above quoted <br /> objection raised by Dr. Bunin does not constitute a basis for <br /> denial of either amendment AM-002 or technical revision TR-006 . I <br /> emphasize that the Division' s finding in this regard is preliminary <br /> because the operator has not yet provided responses to the <br /> Division' s adequacy review of technical revision TR-006 . <br /> Dr. Bunin further states in the letter dated 6/4/97 that : <br /> The proposed berm is not maintenance free, whereas DMG <br /> requires that reclamation features require minimal <br /> maintenance . <br /> The performance standard for earth dams such as the perimeter levee <br /> at the Deepe Farm Pit is that the impoundment will not damage <br /> adjoining property or conflict with water pollution laws (section <br /> 34-32 . 5-116 (4) (b) ) . This performance standard does not require <br /> that earth dams that remain as a component of the reclamation plan <br /> be maintenance free . In fact, it is not possible to construct a <br /> maintenance free earth dam. <br /> Dr. Bunin further states in the letter dated 6/4/97 that : <br /> Federal and state policy do not favor structural flood-control <br /> measures; e .g.berms . <br /> and, <br /> Federal and state policy advocate a landscape approach that is <br /> ecosystem based, or considers watershed function as a whole, <br /> not as artificially fragmented and unrelated pieces. The <br /> health and safety consequences of crippled masterplanning <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.