My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE25705
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE25705
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:33:57 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 11:06:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1978052
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
11/13/2001
Doc Name
BULL SEEP MEETING MINUTES
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
• III IIIIIIIIIIIII III • <br />999 <br />BULL SEEP <br />MEETING MINUTES <br />NOVEMBER 13, 2001 1:30 PM <br />(REVISED 11/3O/Ol) <br />MINUTES <br />Attendance: (SEE ATTACHED LIST) <br />Location: Urban Drainage & Flood Control District Board Room <br />Time: 1:30 PM <br />Date; Tuesday, November l3, 2001 <br />Meeting Minutes: <br />1. An attendance list was passed around. Bryan Kohlenberg (UD&FCD) and Craig <br />Jacobson (ICON Engineering) mentioned that comments on the Meeting Minutes <br />from Oct. 29ih have been received and revised minutes will be sent out shortly. <br />2. John Hickman (Lafarge) began the discussion by mentioning that they had taken the <br />comments from the last meeting and had made refinements to the plans. He was <br />looking for a decision regarding the final approach from the group. He mentioned <br />that they focused on a shallower, wider channel for Bull Seep, between the <br />confluence with First Creek and the Bull Seep Slough. 150-cfs and 200-cfs discharges <br />were assumed used for the 100-year flows from the Bull Seep and First Creek Flows <br />respectively. .Abase Flow of ]0-cfs was assumed For the design. According to John, <br />they estimated that typically around 5-cfs is discharged into the channel from <br />dewatering and the historic Bull Seep base flow was around 4-cfs. Ken McIntosh <br />(McIntosh Farms) thought the Bull Seep base flow estimate was low. The plans also <br />included a recommendation for improvements a[ the South Platte bank failure area <br />3. Access to the improvements was discussed. John Hickman stated the conservation <br />easement could be accessed via two structures that currently cross First Creek and the <br />Bull Seep near the First Creek/Bull Seep confluence. He added that these crossings <br />were temporary and would be removed at the end of mining operations. Rick <br />Anderson (Adams County) mentioned that the County would need permanent access <br />to the conservation easement. Bryan Kohlenberg identified that a crossing off of the <br />Hazeltine Pit (over Bull Seep Slough) was not proposed. He mentioned that they <br />would need access for maintenance on the South Platte River in this area and that a <br />low flow crossing could be incorporated upstream of the proposed drop (on Bull Seep <br />Slough). Jim Weldon (Denver Water) asked if a formal access easement had been <br />developed in that area. Bryan said the District has a formal easement that addresses <br />access to the easement but he was unsure whether or not the culvert crossing was <br />specifically addressed in the easement deed, but historically, both the UD&FCD and <br />the Brantner Ditch Company used the old culvert crossing. It was not clear who had <br />maintained the crossing in the past. Jim mentioned that maintenance access <br />agreements through the area should be solidified. <br />4. John Hickman continued discussing the new plans. He mentioned that they had <br />shown an overflow spillway from Reservoir B (Howe/Halter Pit). They haven't <br />C:\R1VU0~4'ti`~II'.\iP\II-I~inceiin~dt~c°"' "''~ ~" ` ~" <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.