Laserfiche WebLink
• iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii • <br />.., sss <br />BULL SEEP <br />FIELD MEETING MINUTES <br />SEPTEMBER 26, 2001 10:00 AM <br />MINUTES <br />Attendance: Bryan Kohlenberg, UDFCD <br />Matt Ursetta, ICON Engineering, Inc. <br />Ken McIntosh <br />Rick Anderson, Adams County Parks <br />Marc Pedrucci, Adams County Parks <br />Don Kennedy, Denver Water <br />George McDonald, Fulton Ditch Company <br />Barry Marrs, Brantner Ditch Company <br />John Hickman LaFazge <br />Location: Lafarge Property /Howe-Haller Pit at 112'h Avenue and Riverdale Road <br />Time: 10:00 AM <br />Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 <br />Meeting Minutes: <br />1. The group met at the weigh station at the Howe Haller Pit and watched a short safety <br />video. Afterwazds, the group met at the confluence of the Bull Seep and First Creek. <br />The group walked along the Bull Seep on Lafarge property discussing the advantages and <br />disadvantages of the alignment alternatives shown on the drawing presenting alternative <br />3a. Bryan would like for LaFazge, Adams County, and the Corps of Engineers (plus <br />other interested parties- Denver Water, etc.) to reach an agreement on the Bull Seep <br />channel from the First Creek confluence to the McIntosh property. <br />2. Bryan noted that from a construction standpoint the eastern alignment might be preferred. <br />A contractor could utilize the existing bull seep to dewater while the new bull seep was <br />constructed on the eastern alignment. The excavated material from the new bull seep <br />could be used to fill in the existing bull seep <br />3. Bryan also noted that the required top width of the Bull Seep Channel to convey 350 cfs <br />would be around 50-ft. This does no[ account for a maintenance access road. <br />4. John Hickman said that he did not think that the eastern alignment had a conswction <br />advantage since eventually the mining operations, including dewatering would most <br />likely be ending prior to construction of the Bull Seep /First Creek Channel. John also <br />said that Lafarge is not against the eastern alignment even if it is somewhat more <br />expensive but John feels that a long administrative delay would be incurred with this <br />alignment. His primazy concern was with the DMG regulatory process and that either of <br />the proposed re-alignments may require an amendment to the reclamation plan which <br />would take 3 - 4 months. The delay would be related to a revision in the DMG <br />reclamation plan. John indicated that actually doing the work and the cost associated with <br />[hat work was not a big concern. <br />5. Bryan asked who would be responsible to maintain the Bull Seep Channel. George <br />McDonald indicted that while he was not sure if the Fulton Ditch Company is responsible <br />C'\W INDOWS\lEMP\9-26 meeting tloc <br />