My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE33767
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE33767
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:44:04 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 1:54:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980149
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
10/23/1980
Doc Name
PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT OF MLRB MEETING REGARDING WELD CNTY DEPT OF ENGINEERING FN 80-149
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.
/
24
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
We consider that to be a structure. It is serving the purpose of keeping <br />the river out of the ditch and keep the ditch out of the river. <br />You can consider that a question. If high flows come up and that structure <br />washes out, they have the right, under the clean water exemption, to rebuild <br />that structure to original line without a permit, provided they didn't do it <br />by dozing material out of the river. If the material comes from the pit <br />side over which w2 have no jurisdiction, oc comes from an upland borrow <br />pit, that (inaudible). <br />30kIN WARD: Is it a better process to leave unexcavated material in there to serve <br />as a divider rather than to remove it all and put it back in in the form <br />of fines? or unconsolidated material? <br />XX My own personal opinion, I don't think it makes that much difference. <br />SHERMAN BLACH: High water would wash either one of them out. <br />XX Yes, I think if you have water to the extend that one is going to go <br />either one would. The fact that you are going to have water in each <br />one of these ditches would be the same elevation on both sides <br />(inaudible). <br />DAVE SHELTON: I want to have Larry Lang or Randy, from the Water Conservation Board <br />comment. <br />LARRY LANG: I am Larry Lang of the Water Conservation Board, in 1973 we had a flood <br />on the South Platte River. It went through a number of gravel operations <br />and there axe two law suits that I am personally knowledgeable of <br />on that very question. Property owners are suing gravel pit operators. <br />So there is some (inaudible) on that very topic if you want it researched. <br />LARRY BROWN: I thought you were going to give me an opinion. <br />LARRY LANG: In this particular case the gravel pit has (inaudible). <br />LARRY BROWN: We are really not the experts by any means on this type of thing. <br />But if it is an obvious instance, that is what I want from Brad. <br />If it obvious, if somebody's land is directly downstream and we mine <br />upstream sooner or later the river is going to come through that mine <br />and wash out whats down stream - in a very simplified case. <br />DAVE SHELTON: That is very simplified and this case is very complex by now, the stream <br />has been straightened for quite a distance from I-25 on down so it is <br />not anywhere close to what its natural condition would be, you can see <br />a series of old meanders on the map, air photos, where a stream has been <br />in the past and there is no question in my mind that the next time it <br />floods there are going to be some meanders there. Where those meanders <br />are going to be and who its going to take out...... I don't know. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.