My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE34312
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE34312
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:44:20 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 2:08:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1978052
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
10/29/2001
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
<br />b. Provide a shallower, wider channel along Bull Seep <br />c. Scott Franklin will provide a draft of an Amendment Letter for the 404-Permit <br />17. Rick Anderson asked about the current plans for the low water crossing that was <br />presented on ICON's plans. He mentioned that the county could use the crossing for <br />noxious weed control on the conservation easement. Jeff said that Lafarge could <br />show the crossing on their plans, but they do not feel that it is their responsibility to <br />fund the crossing. <br />18. Bryan asked about the potential to move the crossing to an area along the Bull Seep <br />350-cfs design channel. No one had any objections to that. However, there was some <br />concern with the number of the entities that would be requiring access. <br />19. Bryan asked if it was a dead issue between Lafarge and McIntosh regarding keeping <br />the Bult Seep flows on McIntosh's property. Ken mentioned that he did see a benefit <br />for keeping the flows on his property and that he was still open for negotiation. <br />However, Lafarge has not contacted him for discussion of the issue. Jeff replied that <br />at this time Lafarge did not see a benefit to the Company for keeping Bull Seep flows <br />on McIntosh's property. Bryan encouraged them to get together and discuss the <br />situation further and added that he hoped negotiations would take place and <br />agreements met. John Hickman mentioned that they would look at making the <br />channel transitions better at the confluence with First Creek. He also mentioned that <br />[he channel upstream of the confluence has not been constructed to the correct size <br />and/or grade to date. He anticipated that more trees in the azea might be lost with <br />final construction of the channel. <br />20. The next meeting was set for Tuesday, Nov. 13'h, 1:30PM at UDFCD <br />Minutes prepared by: <br />Craig D. Jacobson, E.LT. <br />ICON Engineering, Inc. <br />CC: Attendees, (email) <br />Bazry Marrs, Brantner Ditch Company (email) <br />George McDonald, Fulton Ditch Company (Mail) <br />Date <br />C:`.\YI\UON'SCI~1~.~1P\I11-'9 mratinel.d~~dt'.~ n ~ n~7, n ... ., n _u ,. i.,. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.