Laserfiche WebLink
~~ ~iiui~i~i~n~iii~ <br />• 999 <br />BULL SEEP <br />MEETING MINUTES <br />OCTOBER 29, 2001 9:30 AM <br />(REVISED 11/14/01) <br />MINUTES <br />Attendance: (SEE ATTACHED LIST) <br />Location: Urban Drainage & Flood Control District Board Room <br />Time: 9:30 AM <br />Date: Monday, October 29, 2001 <br />Meeting Minutes: <br />1. An attendance list was passed around. Meeting minutes frotn the meeting on Oct 19th <br />and the field meeting on September 26`h were handed out. Electronic copies of the <br />minutes will also be sent out. <br />2. Mike Applegate (Applegate Group) presented their preliminary design plan of the <br />Bull Seep from the First Creek Confluence to the Bull Seep Slough. He stated that <br />the new plan incorporated Lafarge's comments from last week and ICON's <br />preliminary grading plan. The new design included a "V" notch trickle channel, 15' <br />bottom width, and 3:1 sideslopes. Test pits had been dug to find the exact location of <br />the clay pond liner and determined that around 650-If would need to be relocated in <br />order to keep the Seep on Howe/Haller Pit property. The channel has been proposed <br />at a 0.37% slope and is proposed to convey 350-cfs at about 5-ft deep. A composite <br />Manning's "n" value of 0.05 was used to represent the future vegetation growth in a <br />non-maintained channel. Typical channel top widths were estimated to be between 50 <br />and 60-feet. Mike Applegate mentioned that one foot of freeboard was assumed in the <br />design. <br />3. The Bull Seep channel appeared to be deeper at the confluence with the Slough than <br />what was proposed before by ICON. ICON's channel consisted of a 0.2% slope and <br />assumed a maintained channel with a Manning's `n' value of 0.035. <br />4. A discussion concerning the future maintenance of the channel followed. Bryan <br />Kohlenberg (UDFCD) mentioned that he would look into maintenance eligibility <br />from the District, but Lafarge would be required to maintain the channel until the <br />mining operation is completed, then the land owners would be responsible (Denver <br />Water)until District Maintenance Eligibility is approved. <br />5. Rick Anderson (Adams County) mentioned that he would prefer a wider, shallower <br />channel that would better support the trees and other vegetation. <br />6. Scott Franklin (USACOE) asked if anyone knew what the average annual flow in the <br />Bull Seep was. Ken McIntosh (McIntosh Farms) estimated that the flow in the seep <br />was typically around 40 to 50-cfs. Chris Lidstone (Lidstone & Associates) mentioned <br />that he had seen the seep dry, upstream of the confluence with First Creek, last week. <br />Scott reiterated that his concern was whether or not the typical flows in Bull Seep will <br />C:'',~~'[\I)OWS\I_h:\i I'\(0-_'9 mc~ _{inc I_d~~=o,n~~r o~i~,. ~,...,, ~,_ , ,...,.,~• <br />