Athert & Carvely no Albert B. Cornaby 5757 S. 3200 W Sp. Fork, UT 798-6706 Janiece Tanner antece Tarmer 5,690 s. 1500 W. Sp. Fork, UT 798-7917 Marion brensen Marion Sorensen 5442 So. 1850 West Sp. Fork, UT 798-3645 798-6666 Por: Forman Ron Sorensen RFD #2 Box 56 Sp. Porx.09 798-3645 Clara B. Simmons RFB #2 Sp. Fork, UT ay Clayson 5626 S. 300 W. Sp. Fork, UT 798-3158 Jay Claysanvas Daniel A. Poulsen 431 S. 900 E Sp. Park, UT 798-3307 John D. Youd 5411 S. 3200 V. Sp. Fork, UT 798-6641 In the letter from the Corps of Engineers, we find no commasient at all concerning the fa water in the channel is a foot lower and travels 25% faster. Is this and the guilt property owners missed the point? Do you as elected officials need more imput fre auptomecs? Do we want to turn this job into a $300,000.00 project? As land ower contractors who have done this type of work simos she flood of 1953, we do have adlittle cou sense. We hope you'll stand by us through this very controversial project. We appreciate the time and effect expended by Disk County employees and those from the State Engineer's Office to resolve any of the past and future problems. Serum This letter is in response to your letter of February 17, 1995, in which you outlined eanderns regarding Stream Channel Alteration Permit Number 93-53-01SA to enlarge and dredge the Benjamin Slough Channel. In your letter, you stated that the work done at Benjamin Slough was out of compliance with the GP-040 permit issued. The wwo aspects mentioned were dredged material was discharged into wetlands and an propriate amount of material was dredged from the slough. The county has ed to being out of compliance concerning material placed in wetlands and is rently in the process of removing it to upland areas. Your concern that too much al was dredged from the site is erroneous, as cross-sections of the dredged are basically consistent with areas adjacent to the project. are not considering levying a fine for several reasons. While there certainly were realdowns in communication among the involved pardes, we do not feel Urah County willfully violated conditions of the permit. We believe Utah County is currently enting in good faith to remove the material to an upland site. Secondly, a fine would Recomplish the goal of restoring the wetlands to their original condition and could ply serve to strain the situation without contributing to any real purpose. If the Men should arise wherein Utah County does not remove the material from the wwwlands, we feel it. would then be appropriate for the Corps of Engineers to Intireede. you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me or Greg Medenica at 801-538-7375. |