Laserfiche WebLink
elevations. He believed Lafarge was taking advantage of the situation since the <br />current drainage plan did not address the restoration in the Slough area. <br />26. Scott Franklin recommended that Lafarge present two scenarios at the next meeting. <br />Both scenarios provide a design that reestablishes the channel grades in the Bull Seep <br />Slough to the pre-May 5th elevations. The first analyzes a 250-cfs channel without a <br />spillway. The second incorporates a 4,800-cfs channel downstream of [he spillway. <br />keeping the May 5th elevations as the control. <br />27. Chris Lidstone mentioned that the intent of the current design was to establish a <br />phased system so one section can be constructed in accordance with the DM&G <br />order, while the remaining areas are discussed and designed. Bryan Kohlenberg <br />added that a stable solution still needed to be designed to convey the 250-cfs through <br />the entire Slough reach not just the upper section as was presented earlier in the <br />meeting. <br />28. Jeff Schwarz went through a list of items to be developed and discussed at the next <br />meeting: <br />i. Analyze the scenarios concerning the First Creek spillway and flows through <br />the Bull Seep Slough. It was suggested to establish two Bull Seep Slough <br />drop crest elevations (5023.0 and 5025.0) to compare. <br />ii. Lafarge should show a proposed design conveying 250-cfs through the Bull <br />Seep Slough in a "non-erosive" manner to help the group decide on the scale <br />of structure to be built. <br />29. Jim Weldon asked about responses to Denver Water's Memorandum of <br />Understanding (MOU). In general the group agreed that the MOU was a good idea, <br />but should be addressed at a later date, possibly around mid-January. <br />30. Ken McIntosh added that to help raise [he Bull Seep Slough elevations, he would <br />consider allowing overflows from the spillway to leave the channel banks and sheet <br />flow across his property if it was done in anon-erosive manner. Bryan Kohlenberg <br />suggested Lafarge compare the erosion potential from sheet flow associated with the <br />First Creek overflows and high flow events along the South Platte River. <br />31. Bryan Kohlenberg asked about the improvements to the Bull Seep channel around the <br />exposed gas line upstream of the Bull Seep/First Creek confluence. Jason Murray <br />(Applegate Group) stated that the proposed grades for the Bull Seep would provide <br />cover over the gas lines. Jim Weldon suggested that an easement might be required at <br />the crossing, unless one is already in place. <br />32. Lafarge will provide [he Task Force members with design alternatives and hydraulic <br />calculations for review prior to [he next meeting. <br />33. The next meeting was scheduled for January 7, 2002, 1:00 PM, at UD&FCD <br />Minutes prepared by: <br />Craig D. Jacobson, E.I.T. <br />ICON Engineering, Inc. <br />Date <br />CC: Task Force Members, (email) <br />George McDonald, Fulton Ditch Company (Mail) <br />C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\12-19 meeting.doc <br />